S/PV.2069 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken by the Council at the last meeting, I invite the representative of Zambia to take a place at the Council table and the representatives of Botswana, Cuba, Egypt, Mozambique, the United Republic of Tanzania and the Upper Volta to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mwale (Zambia) took a place at the Council table and Mr. Tlou (Botswana), Mr. Alarcdn (Cuba), Mr. Abdel Me&d (Egypt), Mr. Lob0 (Mozambique), Mr. Salim (United Republic of Tanzania) and Mr. Bamba (Upper Volta) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of the German Democratic Republic, Ghana and Jamaica in which they request that they should be invited to participate in the discussion. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, At the invitation of the President, Mr. Florin (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Boaten (Ghana) and Mr. Mills (Jamaica) took the places reserved for they ,@, the side of the Council chamber. “”

Members of the Council have before them in document S/12601 the text of a letter dated 15 March from the representatives of Gabon, Mauritius and Nigeria which reads as follows: “We, the undersigned members of the Security Council, have the honour to request that, during its meetings devoted to consideration of the ‘Complaint by Zambia’, the Council extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Mr. George Silundika, representative of the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe.”

It is a sad comment on the present state of international life that, almost every time I have had to speak in the debates of the Council, I seem to have been moved to deplore loss of human life and destruction of property. Once again, the deplorable events of 6 March in Zambia bring to the attention of the Council the disastrous consequences of the inability of the international community to fmd an adequate solution to the 13-year-old illegal seizure of power by the white minority of Southern Rhodesia. 6. We all, know that this most recent incursion into Zambia by the armed forces of Ian Smith is not an isolated incident but only one in a long series of provocations and hostile acts against the sovereignty and territorial ‘integrity of Southern Rhodesia’s neighbours-not only Zambia, which suffered a similar attack in 1973, but also Botswana and Mozambique, We all know that these irresponsible raids are the result of the senseless determination of a repressive administration to maintain its privileges at whatever cost, be it in terms of internal suffering or regional instability. 7. There is no doubt in our minds that such actions must be deplored and condemned, But it must also be our duty to seek ways to eliminate the causes of such a serious situation. In recent days, the Council debated this very 8. We deplore this latest hostile act against Zambia and we believe that the Council should put clearly on record its condemnation of all such acts, whether perpetrated against Zambia or any other State in southern Africa. We hope that such a condemnation will make clear to the illegal minority rdgime of Salisbury that its purported change of heart with respect to majority rule cannot be given credence if its practice perpetuates human suffering. 9. Mr. N’DONG (Gabon) (interpretation from Bench): Mr. President, it is an irony of fate that at the very time when we were examining the situation in Southern Rhodesia-a situation made very explosive by the so-called internal settlement agreement, which has been purely and simply rejected by the international community-the ignoble Ian Smith did not hesitate for a single instant about launching his mercenary troops against an independent and peaceful State, the Republc of Zambia, member of the Organization of African Unity and Member of the United Nations. IO. We have heard the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Zambia [2068th meeting], whose presence here we welcome, give a clear and concise description of the barbarous attack of which his country was the victim. Furthermore, he set forth the deep reasons that led his Government to request that the Security Council should be convened urgently. The facts he described are particularly serious and, in my delegation’s opinion, point to a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a State Member of the Organization. They also clearly constitute a threat to international peace and security in that part of Africa. For all those reasons, the Council should give this question the serious examination that it requires. 11. I do not need to recall that this is not the first time that Smith’s hordes have embarked on such sanguinary expeditions against independent African countries neighbours of Zimbabwe. The list of these heinous actions is well known and becomes longer each day. Mozambique, Eotswana and Zambia have one after the other been the victims of these dastardly attacks by Smith’s mercenaries. 12. An awareness of the deep and true meaning of the aggression against. the Republic of Zambia leads inexorably to an examination of the particularly alarming situation existing in Zimbabwe. Indeed, the question that we are discussing today is but one of the consequences of the tragic situation in which the people of Zimbabwe have been living since 11 November 1965, the date of the unilateral proclamation of independence by a handful of white racist settlers. 14. Banished by the international community, unable to repel the offensive of the Zimbabwean patriotic forces, strangled by an economy that has been disorganized by the strict application of the sanctions decreed by the Security Council, the Smith &ime, its back against the wall, is forced to resort to acts of premeditated aggression agaimt the neighbouring independent and sovereign States, under the false pretext of the use of its so-called right of hot pursuit against the freedom fighters of Zimbabwe. There can be no doubt but that these explanations amount 110 delaying manoeuvres designed to seek at all costs to internationalize the conflict through attempts to destabilize the regimes of the neighbouring countries. Thus, from 6 lto 8 March this year, Zambia was the victim of cowardly aggression on the part of Smith’s mercenary forces. Thtls was a genuine military expedition using a large amount of equipment: artillery, fighter aircraft, helicopters, infantry. These troops of faithless and lawless mercenaries pitilessly massacred peaceful and innocent persons and went about their cynical work of destruction in the Luangwa district to their heart’s content. 15. The means that were used show very eloquently that this was a premeditated attack and that the ignoble Iian Smith regime is no longer confining itself to minor incursions by commandos across the Zambian frontiers or to simple violations of Zambian air space. This is now a reai war of aggression using the most deadly means for the purpose of weakening the African countries in general and the so-called front-line countries in particular and making them renounce their sacred duty of resolutely assisting the Zimbabwean nationalists in their just struggle against the oppression of the white racist settlers, in conformity wj.th the relevant resolutions of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity. 16. These measures of intimidation will never prevail over the unwavering determination of the Republic of Zambia and of all the independent African States members of the Organization of African Unity to give unreserved support to the Zimbabwean nationalists in their struggle against this bastion of colonialism and racism in that part of Africa. In this connexion I should like to recall that independent Africa has pledged its faith before the General Assembly through the voice of the President of the Republic of Gabon, His Excellency El Hadj Omar Bongo, who, spealoing “Our peoples will spare no effort to assist their unfortunate brothers. Their fate involves not only justice but the security of the continent. That security will remain uncertain, vulnerable and illusory as long as such a source of international crisis remains at our very doorstep.“’ The militant commitment of Africa as a whole to this just struggle cannot be a matter of indifference either to the international community or to the Security Council. 17. Today the Republic of Zambia is the target of Ian Smith’s mercenary forces, because of its determination to apply scrupulously the decisions of the Organization. The repeated attacks by the Smith forces against that brother country can be interpreted only as defiance of the international community as a whole. Confronted by that defiance, the reaction of the peace-loving and justice-loving world must be firm. Thus, the Security Council must once again demonstrate its effectiveness by unanimously and solemnly condemning the barbarous, unjustified aggression of which the Republic of Zambia has been the victim and which is a serious threat to international peace and security. The Council must also take adequate measures to put an immediate and final end to these repeated aggressions by Smith; it should not merely adopt resolutions of condemnation. To that end, the Council needs the active co-operation of the United Kingdom, the aclministering Power for Southern Rhodesia. In the view of my country, Southern Rhodesia is a British colony. Hence, the United Kingdom remains responsible at the international level for the criminal acts of its colony. It is therefore for the United Kingdom to assume all its responsibilities by removing Smith and his cohorts from the political life of Zimbabwe, and to do so with authority, by the effective transfer of power to the black majority. The United Kingdom can do that; it has done it in other places and at other times. We sincerely believe that Ian Smith’s eviction from the Zimbabwean political scene is a sine qua non for a return to genuine peace in that subregion of Africa, That seems to US to be one of the constructive solutions to the problem with which we are concerned. 18. In conclusion, the delegation of Gabon firmly condemns, as it has always done, the dastardly aggression by the Ian Smith rebel regime against the sister Republic of Zambia and takes this occasion to express to the people and Government of Zambia Gabon’s active solidarity with them.

Thirteen years ago, the Security Council unanimously determined that the illegal regime in Rhodesia constituted a threat to international peace and security and all States were called upon to lend their active support towards bringing about its downfall. Since then, the Council has had to deal with innumerable complaints arising not only from the regime’s tyrannical 1 O#icial Recoj-ds of the General Assembly, Thiwsecond Ses- Sh, Plenary MeetingJ, 34th meeting, paras. 80 and 81. 20. Yesterday we heard the statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Zambia [2068th meeting] giving the details of the latest act of aggression committed against the people and territory of his country. While I listened to his description of the attacks I was saddened not only by the brutality with which they had been carried out and the great number of casualties they had caused buy also by the fact that the Council has not been able to deal with a problem of which it has been seized for so many years. The whole situation becomes farcical and, indeed, a sad commentary on the effectiveness or credibility of this supreme organ which has assumed a responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. 21. Foreign Minister Mwale said that, in the aggression launched against Zambia by the illegal regime in Rhodesia, the enemy had employed 10 fighter aircraft, seven helicopters and more than 600 troops. These attacks and the battle which ensued lasted for three days. Twenty-two Zambians lost their lives and 19 were injured. Hundreds of people in the area were obliged to flee their homes for safety and were currently without food, shelter or clothes. 22. A few weeks ago, Botswana was subjected to a further act of aggression by troops of the same illegal regime which resulted in many casualties. Before then, the world had been shocked by the vicious assault by the armed forces of the Smith regime against refugee camps and villages in the border areas of Mozambique, resulting in over a thousand deaths. 23. Surely the time has come for the Security Council to bring an immediate halt to such wanton acts of aggression. Surely the time has come when the Council should execute the judgement it passed against the illegal regime in 1967 when it declared that it was a threat to international peace and security and should be brought to an end. 24. Neither peace nor stability can be restored to southern Africa so long as Smith and his racist minority group continue in power. This has been made clear by the liberation movements of the region through the accredited leadership of Mr. Joshua Nkomo and Mr. Robert Mugabe. Their position-and in this they speak for the people of Zimbabwe-is that the armed struggle will continue SO long as the Smith regime continues in power and so long as the will of the majority is denied expression and sovereignty. 25. It is not comforting to learn from the information that has been given to us by the Foreign Minister of Zambia that compliance with mandatory sanctions against Rhodesia has been honoured more in the breach than in the observance. 26. There is no doubt in my mind that there is an international conspiracy to maintain and to perpetuate the rule of the Smith regime indefinitely or until such time as conditions are created that would ensure the protection of certain interests. It is quite evident that the aircraft and arms which keep the Smith regime in power are being 27. Very soon the Council will be considering the report of its Committee on Sanctions and will again, I hope, discuss areas in which sanctions can be extended and tightened. While my delegation recognizes that some useful purpose has been served by the application of sanctions, the measures we have proposed do not go far enough to influence the situation, and procedures for obtaining strict compliance in their application have fallen far short of the requirements. 28, I could not agree more with what the Foreign Minister of Zambia said when he raised the question Of tightening oil sanctions against Southern Rhodesia. Furthermore, since the oil which keeps the Smith military machine in operation is supplied by South Africa, the time is certainly appropriate for the Council to take more effective action against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter as a form of pressure to ensure its compliance with the decision of the Council. 32. The attacks by Smith are not directed against the liberation movement, as has been reported in some quarters of the international media and in particular by Smith, but are deliberately planned to destroy the communications system in the border areas of Zambia, to spread fear and alarm among the Zambian border population and to pressure Zambia into changing its policy towards the illegal regime. 33. President Kaunda is a man of peace, a leader of great humanity, a statesman who has explored every possible avenue, even to the extent, as we were reminded by Foreign Minister Mwale, of having discussed the problem directly with Smith and Vorster in an effort to bring about a just and lasting solution, a solution that would ensure for the oppressed majority in Zimbabwe their inalienable right to self-determination and genuine independence. 29. The aircraft, the helicopters, the tanks and armoured cars, the guns and the ammunition being employed by the Smith regime are all manufactured abroad. Surely the Governments of the countries of origin can, if they SC desire, and if they have the political will, institute within their countries the measures necessary to halt the sale of arms to Rhodesia and the supply of vital spare parts. 30. Throughout the years in which the United Nations has been seized of the problem of Southern Rhodesia we have always supported the position-insisted upon by the administering Power-that the United Kingdom had legal authority over Rhodesia and therefore had the ultimate international obligation of restoring constitutional rule to the Territory. We had hoped that it would be able to cope with the rebellion, as it had promptly and firmly done in other parts of its former empire. Unfortunately it has prevaricated and been apathetic whenever faced with the root question of the interests of the white minority. This indeed has been tragic, because, had it acted with resolution soon after the rebellion took place, the internal situation in Rhodesia would have been such as to spare that country the great loss of life it suffered and the infinite harm that has been done to relations between the black and white populations. But there is still time for the United Kingdom to make a positive contribution to the long delayed settlement of this problem, The Anglo-American plan, which was favourably received by all parties, of course with the exception of Smith, provides the best basis for a solution. But until a just and lasting solution to the Rhodesian problem is found we must not fail in our responsibility to provide countries with the assistance necessary for them to defend themselves against aggressive actions of the Smith regime. Zambia, as well as Botswana and Mozambique, must be provided with the means to act in self-defence against the incursions of the Smith regime, Zambia must be given economic assistance to enable it to cope with the special economic hardships it continues to 34. It is important and indeed necessary for the,Security Council and for the United Kingdom to co-operate closely with President Kaunda and other front-line leaders in the collective effort of establishing a firm basis for a settlement. We must not allow the Anglo-American plan for Rhodesia to lose its momentum because of the unacceptable Salisbury agreement.

The next speaker is the representative of Jamaica. 1 invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr, President, first I should like to thank you and, through you, the other members of the Council for affording my delegation the opportunity of participating in this important debate, called at the request of the Government of Zambia to consider the latest premeditated and unprovoked attack perpetrated against Zambia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by forces of the rebel minority regime of Southern Rhodesia on 6,7 and 8 March last. 37. I would also associate myself with previous speakers in congratulating you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of March. Your abilities and experience as a diplomat, politician and jurist, as well as your well-known skill in the art of negotiation, amPlY qualify you to guide the Council’s deliberations during this month. In the debate on the Rhodesian question Wh.kll was just concluded, you fully demonstrated those qualities. 44. Members of the Council are not unaware of the additional price which Zambia has had to pay for its principled and courageous stand against the forces of reaction in southern Africa. It has suffered considerable material hardship by reason of the imposition of economic sanctions against the illegal Smith regime. 39. Within the past 27 months, the Council has had on four occasions to consider cases of aggression by the white minority regimes against sovereign and independent African nations: in March 1976, there was the case of South African aggression against Angola, in July 1976, there was the South African aggression against Zambia, in January 1977, the Southern Rhodesian aggression against Botswana, in June 1977, the Southern Rhodesian aggression against Mozambique, Members of the Council are also aware of the aggression committed by that same illegal regime on 27 February 1978 against Botswana, 45. The intentions of the Smith and Vorster regimes are all too clear. As the Foreign Minister of Zambia and other speakers have pointed out, such acts of aggression are intended to achieve two purposes: first, to demoralize Zambia and its neighbours and to dissuade them from pursuing the principled stands they have taken; secondly, to internationalize the conflict by drawing Zambia and other front-line States into direct conflict with the racist and oppressive regimes. 46. Repeated aggressive acts of that nature pose a threat not only to the peace and security of independent sovereign nations of southern Africa, the peace and security of the region and, indeed, international peace and security, but also to the authority and competence of the Security Council, the organ primarily responsible for peace and security. The question with which the Council is faced is not only what response it should make in connexion with this latest act of aggression, but also what its long-term response will be, considering the record of unprovoked aggression committed by the illegal Smith regime against the front-line States, 40. Now the Council meets once more to consider aggression by the illegal Smith regime against Zambia. In this connexion, my delegation wishes to thank the Foreign Minister of Zambia for his lucid exposition given yesterday [206&h meeting] when he furnished members of the Council with specific details of the attack, The delegation of Jamaica fuIly supports the statement made by him. 41. It is clear that the existence of the white minority regimes in southern Africa constitutes a grave threat not only to peace and security of independent African nations in southern Africa but also to the peace and security of the entire region. 47. We join in demanding that the Council should strongly condemn this recent armed invasion and demand of the illegal regime respect for Zambia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We also ask the Council to consider whether such repeated acts of aggression do not warrant strong and effective measures consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter. 42, Zambia’s geographical and geo-political situation, its commitment to the cause of human dignity, brotherhood and equality and freedom, its commitment to the forces of liberation and justice, and its dedicated commitment to the task of ensuring that all the indigenous peoples of southern Africa freely and totally participate in the affairs of their countries have made both that country and its neighbours-Botswana, Mozambique and Angola-targets of attack by the racist regimes. 48. We are sure that arguments will be adduced-as they have been in the past whenever the questions of Namibia or Zimbabwe have been raised and in response to demands for strong measures against the white minority regimes in southern Africa-to the effect that delicate negotiations are either under way or will shortly be under way, and that to consider strong and effective action would be to jeopardize such negotiations. We are afraid that such arguments have been used much too often without the slightest shred of justification and have thus lost whatever little validity they may originally have had. What we will say is that, unless the racist white minority regimes-in particular the Smith regime-are removed, the root-cause of the problem of aggression in southern Africa will not be eradicated. 43. My Government has pledged and will continue to pledge ‘its support for the peoples of southern Africa struggling against those racist regimes. Here, with the Council’s permission, I shall quote from a message sent by my Prime Minister, the Honourable Michael Manley, to His Excellency President Kaunda: “The Government and people of Jamaica are gravely concerned at the attack on Zambia by Rhodesian forces. The unprovoked hostility against your country is yet another indication that the domination of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa by racist regimes is a threat to international peace and security. 49. The Council concluded a most important debate on Southern Rhodesia last Tuesday and adopted resolution 423 (1978), by which it condemned all attempts and manoeuvres by the illegal regime aimed at the retention of power by a racist minority and at preventing the achieve- “We condemn this wanton act of aggression by the illegal Smith regime and express our firm support for the 50. The delegation of Jamaica is grateful for having been privileged to participate in this debate. Our participation must be viewed as an expression of our solidarity with the Government and people of Zambia as they pursue their principled stand against the white racist minority regimes in southern Africa. 51. It would seem, then, that the termination of this intolerable situation calls for action from a number of directions. First, we hope that the Council will not only condemn the recent aggression committed by the illegal Smith regime against Zambia, but will give serious consideration to other strong and effective measures consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter. Secondly, the international community must increase the pressure on the illegal regime, and those countries which have afforded direct or indirect support to it must now seek to place the interests of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe above their own material interests. Again, the Government of the United Kingdom, which has failed to exercise its authority in an effective way in respect of the illegal regime, must now be fully convinced that strong and immediate action on its part towards the removal of that regime is necessary. Finally, those who have struggled and those who have fought in the battlefield to free the people of Zimbabwe will no doubt continue that struggle until the issue of liberation and freedom is settled.

The next speaker is the representative of Egypt, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Sir, allow me first of all to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I am convinced that your vast political experience will be of great value in helping the Council to find a wise solution to the important question of which it is seized. I should also like to express my delegation’s gratitude to you and to the other members of the Council for having given us the opportunity to participate in this debate. 54. The Council is meeting for the second time this week to discuss another irresponsible act committed by the illegal racist minority regime in Southern Rhodesia. At a previous meeting, the so-called internal settlement was considered unacceptable by the Council and by all peace-loving countries. This time, the illegal racist minority regime has resorted to its usual practice of international terrorism by invading the territory of an independent African State. 56. Egypt has been following with great concern and indignation the news of the intensified attacks by the Rhodesian army against the sister African State of Zambia, President Sadat expressed Egypt’s concern over the criminal invasion in his message to President Kaunda. The Egyptian Government issued a statement in the wake of the criminal act which said: “The Arab Republic of Egypt received with great concern the report of the military aggression perpetrated today by the racist regime of Rhodesia, on land and by air, against the sisterly Republic of Zambia. The Arab Republic of Egypt, while strongly condemning this aggression against a brotherly African people and one of the African front-line States, considers this aggression a grave challenge to the whole African continent and that it unmasks the true intentions of the racist regime of Ian Smith to abort all efforts for a peaceful and just settlement and for the realization of majority rule which the world community is striving to achieve in Zimbabwe, The Arab Republic of Egypt also condemns the efforts of the racist regime in Salisbury to maintain its racist control over the national majority through the so-called internal settlement. Egypt once again reiterates its solidarity with its sister African countries for the support and assistance of the struggle of the people of Zimbabwe under the leadership of the Patriotic Front for the liberation of Zimbabwe in accordance with the resolutions of the Organization of African Unity and of the United Nations. Egypt will continue to shoulder its responsibilities for the support and consolidation of the African front-line States to resist the colonial and racist attacks of the racist regimes of Salisbury and Pretoria. On the instructions of President Sadat, Egypt’s Foreign Ministry will continue to follow closely the situation and to make the necessary contacts in this regard in order to face the grave situatior! resulting from the aggression committed by the Ian Smith regime .” 57. The racist regime of Ian Smith has been given many opportunities to change its attitude and to comply with United Nations resolutions, but it has opted not only to perpetuate the illegal status qua but also to attack African States. Furthermore, the Anglo-American initiative, which constitutes a good basis for negotiation, has been rejected by the illegal racist minority regime. 58. The latest manoeuvres clearly show that the regime’s objectives are to deceive world public opinion, maintain its control over the black majority, disrupt the unity of national liberation organizations and sow the seeds of disunity between the African countries and the freedom fighters. To achieve those ends, the racist rdgime declared the so-called internal settlement, strengthened its ties with its traditional supporter in South Africa and expanded the policy of “hot pursuit” and premeditated acts of aggression against neighbouring States. 40. The complaint before the Council is very clear and concerns a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of one of the States Members of the Organization. The Council should be able to deal firmly with this ignominious act. It should not only condemn the racist regime at Salisbury but should also take all appropriate measures to remove this regime, which constitutes a threat to international peace and security. 61. We strongly condemn the illegal racist minority regime of Southern Rhodesia for its act of aggression against our brothers in Zambia. 62. Egypt appreciates the heroic resistance of the frontline States and their unwavering support of the struggle of liberation movements against the illegal regimes of Salisbury and Pretoria. We will continue to shoulder our responsibility of supporting and consolidating the African front-line States until our brothers in Zimbabwe and in Namibia attain their independence.

The next speaker is the representative of Cuba. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and make his statement.

Mr. President, may I first of all express to you and, through you, to the other members of the Council my gratitude for allowing me to participate in the present debate. I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate Mr. Troyanovsky, the representative of the Soviet Union, on the wise and effective manner in which he directed the work of the Council during the month of February. Likewise, I should like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on your assumption of the presidency of this body. In the performance of this function, you are once again displaying your recognized experience and ingenuity. 65. We have asked to be allowed to speak before the Council to bear witness to our solidarity with the people and Government of the Republic of Zambia. They have for many years valiantly resisted provocations and acts of aggression and hostility constantly being committed against them by the racist r6gimes in southern Africa. 66. The statement made yesterday in the Council by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Zambia [206&h meeting] clearly showed the premeditated, criminal and wanton nature of the most recent aggression committed against the territory of Zambia by the Rhodesian troops from 6 to 8 March. In his statement, the Minister correctly placed this latest crime of the Salisbury rt?gime within the context of the present situation in southern Africa and of the manoeuvres of the racists and their Western allies to perpetuate in the region the system of exploitation to which the majority of the people of Zimbabwe and of South Africa are subjected, and to threaten and to attack independent African States, above all, the front-line States, 68. It is obvious that the fundamental cause of thk problem that the Council is now analysing is the persistence in Rhodesia of a minority and illegal regime whose existence has been condemned by the United Nations and which has been neither recognized or accepted by any member of the international community. With the connivance or support of several Western countries, this regime has continued to exist since 1965 in defiance of the innumerable resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and by the Security Council. Its existence has meant for millions of Africans in Zimbabwe the perpetuation of not only colonial exploitation but of an iniquitous system of racial oppression and discrimination. Some Western countries, insincerely alleging a desire to prevent violence, first allowed Mr. Sinith illegally to seize control of a Territory that is still a British colony and later tolerated his remaining in power, in spite of the fact that for millions of Africans in Zimbabwe and in the neighbouring countries it meant the systematic imposition of the cruellest forms of violence reflected daily in the assassination of innocent civilians, the destruction of African hamlets and villages and the constant threat to the peace and security of the inhabitants of the region. Those who have thus allowed the racists to win time so as to engage in one manoeuvre after another are the ones who are mainly responsible for a situation that is constantly deteriorating and that threatens international peace and security. That situation would not exist were it not that the Smith clique was receiving military, political and financial assistance from several Western countries, and above all from those who pretend to play the role of sponsors of deceptive initiatives supposedly designed to solve the problems in that part of the world. 69. Some felt the need hastily to declare that the latest manoeuvre of the Salisbury regime, the so-called internal settlement, was a “step in the right direction”. Events have nevertheless clearly demonstrated the direction in which Mr. Smith’s steps were moving. Shortly before the opening of the talks on the so-called internal settlement, Rhodesian troops launched a wanton large-scale attack against the territory of Mozambique. Only hours after this settlement was reached at Salisbury, Rhodesian forces attacked the territory of Zambia and, on the very eve of the convening of the Security Council in order to consider the situation in Rhodesia, racist commandos attacked Botswana. The Governments that are to blame for all those aggressive acts and for each and every one of their victims are those that have tolerated with irritating moderation the existence, of the illegal dgime, allowed it to manoeuvre politically and diplomatically and even encouraged its most recent attempt to prolong a system based on the oppression of the great majority by a handful of white settlers. 70. But the blame is not merely political or moral. The helicopters used by the Rbodesian commandos were not manufactured in Rhodesia but in the United States. The 71. It is for this reason that it has become essential to mob&e the international community to make effective the sanctions against the Rhodesian regime and to compel all States to respect and to comply with them. In this context, it is essential for the Security Council to adopt the necessary measures, in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter, against the South African regime, so as to guarantee that the sanctions imposed against Rhodesia are really effective. As the Foreign Minister of Zambia has said, the imposition of an effective oil embargo has become a matter of particular importance and urgency. It is inadmissible that those who in the United Nations speak and vote against colonialism and racism should continue to supply the Smith rt?gime, through South Africa, with the oil which enables it to mobilize its war machinery against the African peoples. It is time that these hypocritical attitudes were denounced and unmasked. At the present stage, when the African peoples are waging the decisive battle in the culmination of the century-old struggle against colonialism and racism, there is no room for duplicity or equivocal attitudes: either you stand with the aggrieved people and the national liberation movements or you stand with those who make victims of them and oppress them. 72. In order to speed the coming of peace and justice to that part of the world, support must be increased for the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe and for the armed struggle it is carrying on, until the Smith clique has been completely eliminated. Effective assistance must also be provided to the front-line countries, which firmly and with dignity are resisting the aggression and provocation of the racists. The valiant and effective response of Zambia to the aggressor reveals the determination of those countries to defend their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and to continue their support of the national liberation movements. In that struggle, the people and Government of the Republic of Zambia have held and continue to hold a place of honour, On this occasion we renew to them the assurance of the complete and militant solidarity of the people and Government of Cuba.

The next speaker is the representative of the German Democratic Republic. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 74. Mr. FLORIN (German Democratic Republic) {interprefution from Russian): Mr. President, permit me to congratulate you on your assumption of the important post of President of the Security Council for March and to express my conviction that under your presidency the Council will make a contribution to the solution of the problems under discussion, in the interests of international peace and security. Your great and long experience as a diplomat will undoubtedly play its part. I should like to thank you and the other members for allowing the delegation of the German Democratic Republic to address the Council. 76. The Foreign Minister of Zambia has given us a detailed picture [2068th meeting] of the course of the dastardly attack by Smith’s mercenaries and has described it as an unprovoked assault by the illegal rdgime on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a State Member of the United Nations. Responsibility for this crime lies with the illegal racist regime at Salisbury. My delegation is sure that the Security Council will formulate an appropriate condemnation. We hope that the Council will decide to take further measures, for example, the adoption of sanctions in accordance with the Charter to meet the need that has arisen. My delegation firmly supports the demands made by the Foreign Minister of Zambia and the representatives of other free States of Africa. 77. The blatant violation of the borders of Zambia by Smith’s armed forces is not the first act of aggression undertaken by the ruling circles in Southern Rhodesia. The Security Council has had occasion more than once in the past to deal with such occurrences. This has already been mentioned here, and I have no intention of going into, detail with regard to well-known facts. 78. A number of representatives have drawn attention to the fact that the recent act of aggression by the Smith regime against Zambia was committed literally only a few hours after the signing in Salisbury of the so-called internal agreement, an illegal document which contains certain elements of the so-called Anglo-American proposals, as we have heard here from the very lips of the authors of those proposals. Accordingly, our doubts about the so-called Anglo-American proposals were not as unjustified as ali that. Rut both before and after the signing of the notorious internal agreement which the Security Council has quite rightly repudiated, one thing has been unambiguously clear: the racist regime at Salisbury poses a constant threat to peace and security. Moreover, this is something which has been indicated repeatedly in Council resolutions, ‘Illis is clearly a case of a policy of steadily expanding aggression, a visible increase in the threat not only to the peace and security of the peoples of southern Africa but to that of the world as a whole, 79. If we bear in mind in this connexion the close links between the Vorster regime and the racist regime of Smith and also the alarming reports with regard to developments in South Africa in the nuclear field, thanks to the support of Western monopolies, we cannot but conclude that there is an urgent need for energetic measures to avert ;1 catastrophe. 80. In this serious situation, we have had occasion over and over again to note that in certain circles there is no interest in fundamental changes but instead an attempt, 81. We now find that, in order to camouflage this policy, a new phrase has crept into the statements of the representatives of an imperialist State-it is what they cdl “colonialism on the basis of ideology”, which is something we should be afraid of. We already heard these words at the thirty-second session of the General Assembly and now we hear them again in the Security Council. But it is not clear at all what is meant by this, since we cannot suppose that what is meant is criticism of the policy of neo-colonialism, which, as we know, of course embraces non-recognition of the sovereignty of developing countries over their raw materials. They have deliberately chosen a nebulous form of words in order to divert attention from their own sins and the neo-colonialist ambitions of imperialist policy. 82. Regardless of geography, whether it be in southern Africa or the Middle East, racist regimes are also attempting to camouflage their aggression by talking about “acts of retaliation”. We find the same thing repeating itself. At one time Hitler’s Fascists also described their punitive expeditions against the anti-Fascists fighting for liberation and against the populations of other European countries as “acts of retaliation”, One need only recall the beginning of the Second World War, when Hitler’s propaganda concocted terrifying tales about the murders of Germans in Poland and alleged violations of the frontier by Polish citizens. In an address to the German people on 1 September 1939, Hitler stated that, as of that morning, German troops have been carrying out a retaliatory strike, That was how the Second World War began, 83. It might be argued that today we have a completely different situation. That is true up to a point. At that time the aggressors had recourse to lies, and they have recourse to lies today too, in order to camouflage their crimes. What is new, however, is the fact that today there exists a new Africa with trustworthy allies; and the peoples have acquired experience and it is not so easy to dupe them. In this regard I should like to recall the words of a joint statement issued by the Presidents of the five front-line States dated 6 November 1979: “Coming at the same time as imperialism is speaking about a peaceful settlement, the present escalation in attacks and provocations unmasks the true imperialist intentions of gaining time to consolidate the white racist regimes and diverting our attentiou from the m:lin issue, Which is majority rule and independence no~~..“~ 2 Quoted in English by the Speaker.

The next speaker is Mr. George Silundika, to whom the Council has extended an invitation under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 86. Mr. SILUNDIKA: Mr. President, I should like sincerely to thank you and the other members of the Council for having allowed me to speak here on the crucial subject before the Council, namely, the aggression against Zambia committed by the Rhodesian illegal r&me on 6 March last. I represent the struggling masses of the people of Zimbabwe under the leadership of the Patriotic Front. It is our sad historical lot to live with this British creation, the Rhodesian Fascist regime, and it is our life-given determination to overthrow it at all costs. We and the front-line States in the liberation struggle in southern Africa are therefore the direct witnesses of these events of blatant aggression. 87. The real issue is not whether aggression took place. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Zambia yesterday [2068th meeting/ placed irrefutable proof before the Council and referred to several other incursions perpetrated by the Rhodesian regime such as have so often occurred on the sovereign territory of his country. The Governments of Botswana and Mozambique have also placed before the Council proof of serious acts OC aagression in their territories. The Council has had to deal SCVCRI~ times before with grave reports of aggression which has COST. hundreds of lives of women, children and aged Zimbabwean refugees at Nyazonia and Chimoio in Mozambique. 88. The real issue before the Council, therefore, is why the illegal, Fascist and racist rkgime of Rhodesia feels free to carry out these acts of aggression ever more frequently and with such blatant impunity. What must be done to bring these acts of aggression to an end? The answer lies in the origin and nature of the regime. It is our view that the Council should put aside diplomatic niceties and nail responsibility for these acts of aggression squarely and unsparingly on the United Kingdom Government. The British Government should not be allowed to get away with such serious crimes against humanity by playing merry-goround with international opinion. It cannot carry colonial responsibility for Rhodesia and, at the same time, reserve to itself the option to choose what is or is not convenient to its responsibility in the conduct of a l:ascist rCgimc whose existence it has always encouraged. Nvl.hing h:n encouraged the Rhodcsian r6gime more in its Ptidst acts of opprt%%ion and aggression than the growing trend towards support for it in the British House of Commons and the consequent policy of successive British Governments of refusing to take direct action to remove that rbgime. 90. Today the Smith regime has sought-with impunityto legitimize itself by wearing a black mask, through the so-called internal settlement. What has this Council heard? As in 1965, the Government of the United Kingdom and the United States have encouraged the racist regime to believe that the only hurdle it needs to cross before gaining international legitimacy is to contrive what can be labelled “one man, one vote” elections. Balthazar Vorster could as well have come to impress on the Council the fruits of his apartheid policies in his bantustan homelands of the Transkei and Bophuthatswana. The people of Zimbabwe are being persuaded to see merit in the conspiracy of a criminal racist regime. How else could the Rhodesian regime see this approach of the United Kingdom and United States Governments than as encouragement, as a further lease on life? The people of Zimbabwe are being asked to lay down their weapons in order to count the beautiful teeth of a beast that is pouncing upon them to tear them to pieces. Is that friendly advice? Can the front&re States be expected to wait and watch as the beast jumps across its borders? 91. There is more to it. The mass killings of the people of Zimbabwe, the aggressions on Botswana, Mozambique and Zambia are being carried out by racist Fascist forces which comprise mercenaries being recruited continuously from the United Kingdom, the United States, West Germany, France, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, How do these mercenaries escape the efficient security network of countries which profess so much love for freedom, peace and security? Is the recruitment of these mercenaries to commit aggression in Africa an expression of democracy? From where does the Rhodesian regime obtain its materials of war and the foreign currency to pay into these mercenaries’ foreign accounts? Is it by accident that these mercenaries, and the transnational corporations which finance the Rhodesian regime, come from the white West that enslaved and colonized and has continued to exploit black Africa for so long? The oppression of the apeople of Zimhabwe and the frequent aggressions of Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana are not just isolated acts of the i&gal regime of Ian Smith; they are a co-ordinated wholesale assault by economic, political and racist forces against the independence struggle of the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa. 98. For our part in Zimbabwe, we should like to assure our brothers and sisters of Zambia, Botswana and Mozam. bique that we are resolutely committed to bringing down the Rhodesian Fascist regime by armed struggle. We call upon the Council to urge its members and the Membersof the Hmted Nations as a whole-except South Africa, ef course-to give the Patriotic Front moral, material and diplomatic support to bring down the Fascist regime of Rhodesia by armed struggle. The downfall of the regime will automatically mean genuine freedom for the people of Zimbabwe, the end of all aggressions against neighbau~g States and a step towards the freedom of southern Africa,

I am sure that Mr. Silundika would not expect me, in my capacity as the representative of the United Kingdom, to agree with some of the more florid parts of the statement he has just made. We shall, however, consider his statement carefully and, if necessary, reply to it in due course. 95. Mr, BISHARA (Kuwait): I should like first of all, Mr, President, to express my admiration for your patience. I can imagine how tedious and demanding this month has been for you, and we do not know what is in store for you in the coming few days, 96. This is not the first time that acts of aggression committed by the illegal regime in Southern Rhodesia against neighbouring States have been brought to the attention of the Security Council. As early as January 1973 the Council considered a complaint by Zambia against the Smith regime for acts of aggression in flagrant violation of its territorial integrity. In fact, Zambia has not been the only victim of aggression perpetrated by the illegal Smith regime. The Council has had the opportunity of discussing similar complaints from Botswana, Angola and Mozam bique . 97. Zambia, Botswana, Angola and Mozambique are newly independent States which need peace to consolidate their independence. They need security, which is a prerequisite for the immense tasks ahead of them in accelerating the pace of economic and social development in their countries. Yet Zambia, Botswana, Angola and Mozambique, and other front-line States, do not want peace at any price. TW do not want to compromise on principles. They cannot eajoY freedom while they see their brethren, their kith and kin, languishing in the chains of bondage in Southern Rhodesia. These countries have a moral obligation, and indeed an international responsibility, to help their less fortunate brethren in Southern Rhodesia. Clearly, the aim of the Smith regime in intensifying its raids of terrorism and intimidation against these countries is to force them to abandon their opposition to apartheid, oppression and white-minority rule in Rhodesia. 98. The Smith regime is a rebel regime that has bee* outlawed and declared outcast by the international corn 99. It is patently clear that Smith wants to maintain the stUh”lrS DUO in Southern Rhodesia at any price, It is also evident that he will stop at nothing to prolong the life of his decaying and decrepit regime even for one day. 100. The recent flagrant aggression by the Smith r&gime against Zambia is a challenge not only to the front-line countries, not only to Africa, but, indeed, to the whole world. 101. The international community is fully aware of the fact that one of the main causes of conflict in southern Africa is the existence of the illegal minority racist regime in Southern Rhodesia. The only guarantee against the repetition of acts of aggression against Zambia and the front-line States is the downfall of Mr. Smith and his lieutenants. 102. It is really sad to see that Zambia has to become the target of constant aggression merely because it upholds the principles enshrined in the Charter and champions the cause of freedom and independence. 103. The Security Council must strongly condemn the illegal minority regime in Southern Rhodesia for its acts of aggression, which pose a threat to international peace and security. The Council must also uphold the rights of Zambia and the front-line States to help their unfortunate kith and kin in Southern Rhodesia. 104. The Government and people of Kuwait resolutely support Zambia and hail its firm stand in upholding the principles of the Charter and the resolutions of the United Nations, Zambia is indeed risking the lives and Property of its citizens in its determination to resist the forces of colonialism, racism and oppression. 105. The atrocities committed by the Smith racist regime not only cause tremendous loss of life and property in front-line States but are flagrant violations of the Charter, serious encroachments upon the sovereignty and territorial integrity of those States and pose a serious threat to international peace and security. 106. Ian Smith is very much mistaken if he believes that by wantonly sending troops into the sovereign States of Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana he can coerce them into abandoning their support for the just struggle of the people of Zimbabwe. 107. The Government and people of Kuwait strongly condemn the minority racist regime in Southern Rhodesia for its brutal aggression against Zambia, firmly suPPort Zambia in its valiant struggle against colonialism and racism and express great admiration for the fortitude of Zambia and its unwavering determination to SupPOrt the just struggle of the people of Zimbabwe in defiance of brute force, 109. It is ironical that by concluding the Safisbury agreement the Smith regime was desperately attempting to give itself a semblance of legality. However, the nature of the illegal regime has not changed in spite of its deceptive mask and its abuse of the concept of majority rule. 110. The most recent example of the true nature of the illegal regime is provided by the wanton and barbarous acts carried out inside Zambia by the forces of Ian Smith from 6 to 8 March. Naturally, the object of such attacks is to face the world with a fait accompli by isolating the people of Zimbabwe from the rest of Africa and imposing the internal settlement on them by force of arms, Seen in its proper perspective, the aggression against Zambia is an attempt to suppress the cause of freedom and to cement the foundations of apartheid. 111. Most States have communicated with the Secretary- General and with you, Mr. President, to demonstrate their outrage at the murderous acts of the illegal minority regime, expressing their solidarity with the Government and people of Zambia and thus treating all the evil emanating from the illegal regime as the collective responsibility of the international community. 112. The difficult geographical position of Zambia makes it particularly vulnerable to attacks by the racist regime. It is our duty to help Zambia to stand firm in its commitment to the cause of freedom, It has already made great sacrifices in implementing resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council and in its resolute stand against foreign aggression. The Council must commend the Government and people of Zambia for their dedication to the cause of freedom and human dignity in spite of the difficult circumstances prevailing in their country. Commendation, however, is not enough. The security of Zambia can be guaranteed only by the downfall of the Smith regime and the pillars of colonialism and racism on which it was founded. The time has come to take decisive measures against the illegal minority regime at Salisbury. 113. The delegation of Kuwait calls UpOIl th3 SeCUritY Council to consider the extension of sanctions to cover all measures p,ovided for under Article 41 of the Charter. We alsO call upon countries which have treated the sanctions with levity to reconsider their position and to realize how much evil and suffering is caused by their reluctance to comply wit11 the sanctions imposed by the Council. 114. In conclusion, my delegation would like to voice its support for any measure that may be taken by the Council to curb the excesses of the Smith regime and eventually lead to its overthrow. It would also support additional meaSureS designed to rescue Zambia from its exrstmg 116. We listened with close attention to the statement made yesterday by the Foreign Minister of ZambiaP2068th meetirzgJ+ We were shocked to learn of the details of the attack mounted against Zambia by Ian Smith’s forces with aircraft and paratroopers from 6 to 8 March. The timing of that act of aggression by Smith lvas, as it were, a perverse sort of celebration of the Salisbury agreement, which the Security Council has rightly reje,q+ted as illegal and unacceptable. 117. ‘Ihis is not the first time that Smith has taken SUC~I liberties with the sovereignty of the neighbouring Statesexcept of course the, Pretoria regime which provides solace and support for him. Smith’s provocative actions are clearly designed to create in the region a conflict situation in which others would become involved. There is no doubt that those attacks by Smith’s illegal and unrecognized group against independent African States constitute a threat to internation al peace and security. Our sympathies are with the people and Government of Zambia and also of Botswana, which was similarly attacked recently by Smith’s forces. We congratulate both Zambia and Botswana for their display of extraordinary restraint and patience in the face of those unwarranted attacks. 118. The Foreign Minister of Zambia has said that “it is within the power of the United Nations to help” in finding a solution [ibid., para. 321. He is quite right. He has also drawn attention to the root cause, namely, the continued existence of the iilegal factor in Southern Rhodesia. He has called upon the United States and the United Kingdom to take steps, through negotiations and other means, to liquidate the illegal force in Southern Rhodesia and to replace it by a democratic majority Government of the people, We fully endorse his appeal. 119. Until there is an agreed negotiated settlement, something has to be done by the United Nations to ensure that there will be no more attacks by Smith’s forces. Some form of effective deterrent has to be applied against Smith and his group. Zambia and Tanzania have both advocated oil sanctions against Southern Rhodesia and South Africa. We agree with them, and we feel that the Security Council should seriously examine that course of action. 120. As the representative of Tanzania said the other day, it is not enough to adopt resolutions that only condemn the attacks by Smith’s forces [ibid., para. 761. Smith has got used to such condemnations and he will continue his predatory attacks against his neighbours, since he thinks they are a means of maintaining his group in power. The so-called internal settlement has evidently had no effect whatsoever on Smith in the matter of his relat,ions with his African neighbours. He continues to show a lack of respect or regard for the sovereignty of the neighbouring African States. 121, But Southern Rhodesia continues to remain within the system of international peace and security, and the 122. We are dealing here with a group of armed persons who have usurped power and are using it to maintain themselves in power. According to the statistics available in the Secretariat, when that usurpation took place in 1965 the white population of Southern Rhodesia was 210,000; since 1965 and up to 1977, the total number of new white immigrants amounted to 130,000, that is, an increase of 62 per cent-all of them illegal. If we were to exclude the white immigration that took place after 1965, as well as women and children, we should find that less than 50,000 white men are lording it over 6 million Africans and defying the United Kingdom as well as the United Nations. That is not only illegal but it is also quite an intolerable situation, 123. The Council has been seized of similar erosions of legality in regard to other matters-in Namibia, in the Middle East and in Cyprus. Should it not do more than adopt a resolution condemning the armed attacks by Smith’s forces? 124. The draft resolution which I have the honour to introduce on behalf of six members of the Council in document S/12603 follows the beaten path of previous resolutions in strongly condemning the armed attack by Smith’s forces and in commending Zambia for its continued support of the people of Zimbabwe in their legitimate struggle for independence, It also calls upon the United Kingdom to take prompt and effective measures to bring the illegal situation to a speedy end. 125. I should like to say that the sponsors clearly expected a much stronger resolution and would have preferred to specify themselves certain types of effective action within the purview of the Charter; but they have deliberately decided, for the present, to leave the choice of effective measures to the administering Power, namely, the United Kingdom, They reserve their position, however, to revert to this question in the Council in order to consider more effective measures in accordance with the Charter, including additional action under Chapter VII. 126. We the sponsors had hoped that, in our consideration of attacks by Smith’s forces, those who did not join in sponsoring the draft would come up with their own suggestions as to how the Council might deal with those attacks. In our opinion, it is not enough to leave it to the complainant to suggest remedial action or to the non. aligned members of the Council to draft resolutions. The responsibility for remedying the illegal situation in Southern Rhodesia and its consequences has to be shared by all members. We hope that those who have not joined in sponsoring the draft resolution that I have introduced will fiid it possible, even at this stage, to strengthen our draft with a view effectively to restraining Mr. Smith’s forces, It is in that sense that I commend the draft to them for their support with a view to strengthening our initiative. The meetingrose at 5.50 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Unite-l Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences depositaires du mondc entier. Informez-vous aupr& de votre libraire oo adressex-vous 1 : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou GenBve. EAIC IIOKY’IEIT~ ZIBAAHHJK OPl-AHZI 3Al(HtiOWbE~MHEHHbIX HAyHH COMO CONSEGUIR PLJBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas est.&n en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase a: Naciones Wnidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litbo in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 1.00 (or equivalent in other currencies)