S/PV.2078 Security Council

1 wish also to inform members of the Council that 1 have received a letter dated 6 May from the Chairman of the United Nations Council for Namibia, Ambassador Konie, which reads as follows: Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2078) 1. Adoption of the agenda 2. Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter dated 5 May 1978 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/l 2690) l%e meeting was called to order at I2.10 p.m. Adoption of the agenda 27te agenda was adopted. 4. On previous occasions, the Security Council has extended invitations to other relevant bodies of the United Nations when considering questions on its agenda. Therefore, if I hear no objection, I shall extend an invitation to the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter dated 5 May 1978 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/12690) 1. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish)’ In accordance with the decision taken by the Council at its 2077th meeting, I invite the representative of Angola to take a place at the Council table, and the representatives of the United Republic of Tanzania and Zambia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

Members of the Council have before them document S/12692, ,which contains the text of a draft resolution sponsored by Bolivia, Gabon, India, Kuwait, Mauritius, Nigeria and Venezuela. I wish also to draw the attention of members of the Council to document S/l 2688, which contains the text of a letter dated 4 May addressed to the Secretary-General by the representative of Sri Lanka. At the invitation of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola) took a place at the Council table and M,r. Salim (United Republic of Tanzania) and Miss Konie (Zambia) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 6. I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution in document S/l 2692.

I wish to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Algeria, Benin, Cuba and Mozambique requesting that they should be invited to participate in the debate. Consequently, I propose, in conformity with past practice and with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the debate, without the right to vote, in accordance with the I “The Security Council is now considering the complaint of the People’s Republic of Angola concerning the acts of aggression committed against the People’s Republic of Angola by South Africa, which apparently used for this purpose the Territory of Namibia. “I wish to convey to you the desire of the United Nations Council for Namibia to participate in this debate, without the right to vote, and to be represented by me in my capacity as President of the Council for Namibia.” It was so decided. A vote was taken by show of hands. Z’he draft resolution was adopted unanimously. 1 1 See resolution.428 (1978). 9. My delegation has studied the draft resolution and, while its content reflects in part the realities of the events to which my country has been subjected by the malicious, vicious, racist South African Government and its cohorts, I should indeed have liked to have had the words “armed aggressions” included in that resolution.

The delegation of Kuwait is very happy that the draft resolution has been adopted unanimously. This is a positive response to the unmistakable drift towards lawlessness in the world today. Member States take the law into their own hands and violate the Charter of the United Nations, and yet they get away with it. Unless this drift is arrested and, indeed, reversed towards the right direction, there will be a descent into international anarchy which will make this earth a jungle of adventurism in which muscle rather than reason will prevail. The dastardly attack by South Africa on Angola is nothing but an outcome of this drift towards lawlessness. South Africa called its invasion against the sovereignty of Angola a “mopping up operation”. This term was used recently by its twin sister, Israel, to describe its aggression against Lebanon. These twin sisters have contributed enormously to the state of lawlessness which characterizcs the present world. Both sisters subsist on .aggression, apartheid and racism and on the intimidation of their neighbours. il. The complaint before the Council is not Angola’s or Africa’s, It is a complaint of the whole civilized world against the absence of respect for international law and for the purposes and principles of the Charter which all of US rave so much about. And the sad point in this unwholesome state of affairs is that aggressors go Scot-free. The inability of the Council, the supreme body for the maintenance of world peace and order, to take corresponding measures to check aggression has encouraged irresponsible Member States to pursue their violent course of destruction with impunity. On the other hand, this inability of the Council has left the victims of such aggression with no choice except to rely on whatever means are available to defend themselves. It has bred extremism that thrives on the agonizing despair of the defenceless. For who can blame Mr. Sam Nujoma, the leader of the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO), when last night [2077th meeting] he articulated the agony of his people in stating that the only road the Narnibians had in order to free themselves from the oppressive occupation of South Africa was the costly road of armed struggle. 13. The attack on Angola is designed to ostracize that young republic and to discourage it from assisting its kith and kin in Namibia in their struggle for emancipation, The South African Government’s intention is also to dislocate the economic plans for development in Angola and to disrupt its social fabric in order to create an atmosphere of anxiety from which South Africa benefits. 14. The international Territory of Namibia was used in this aggression as a staging post from which South Africa’s troops took off in their mission of destruction. The fact that this international territory is used for aggression makes it tnore urgent to secure the termination of South Africa’s illegal occupation of the Territory. The attack by itself is a challenge to the Security Council, but the use of Namibia makes it more challenging and therefore the demand for drastic action in this case is more justified. 15. The delegation of Kuwait is in favour, as it has always been, of the adoption of punitive measures in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter. A comprehensive set of sanctions to be adopted by the Council in the future is necessary and advisable. This should not exclude an oil embargo, especially with the present composition of the Council, of which four members are members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. The Council already invoked Chapter VII of the Charter when it adopted resolution 418 (1977) on an arms embargo. 16. The delegation of Kuwait would like to assure Angola of its support for its efforts for economic and social progress and for the preservation of its territorial integrity and independence. This dastardly act of aggression by South Africa should in no way detract from the determination of the Angolan people to achieve social and economic progress. It is in this spirit that Kuwait co-sponsored and voted for the draft resolution.

We have heard the account given to us by the representative of Angola of the tragic 18. The Security Council should have no hesitation, and has shown no hesitation, in condemning this armed incursion. No matter what is alleged to be justification for such action, the responsibility of the South African Government is undeniable. Canada, for its part, acted immediately to advise the South African Government of its deep concern and dismay and the Secretary of State for External Affairs stated in the House of Commons that such actions, at a time when restraint ought to be exercised, couId only have an unsettling effect in the prospects for peace in the region. 19. But what we must all realize is that the Namibia- Angola border area will never become a zone of peace and tranquillity until such time as the international community has succeeded in restoring to the Namibian people their full sovereign rights over their own land. 20. The escalation of violence which we have witnessed in recent weeks is bound to become irreversible unless the prevailing political situation is totally reversed. The five Western members of the Council have proposed a plan which would have this effect, and I can but stress once again that the early implementation of this plan is, in our view, the only practical means at our disposal to lead the Namibian people to independence and bring peace along the border between Angola and Namibia. 21. We, for our part, have continuously urged the principal parties concerned with the Namibian problem of the need for restraint, even in the face of perceived provocations, in order to allow the negotiating process to follow its course to a final solution. We have been encouraged by much that has happened around the negotiating table, and we feel, along with a large number of Members of the United Nations, that success is close at hand. 22. We appeal once again to all concerned to direct all their efforts towards peace and to renounce resort to violence. There cannot be any winners in violent confrontation of this sort, and human rights and justice are certainly the losers. 23. My delegation has given its support to the resolution just adopted by the Council. In doing so, we are not only condemning what must be condemned, but also indicating that the path to peace in Namibia cannot be found in violence. It is our most fervent hope that, in the very near future, the Council will be able to meet under more auspicious circumstances to take definitive action SO as to enable the United Nations to play its rightful part in the achievement of independence by Namibia. 25. This is not the first time that the People’s Republic of Angola has been subjected to aggression by the South African rkgime. The 4 May invasion of the territory of Angola is but the latest in a series of incessant and premeditated acts of aggression by the South African racists, who, violating the peace and security of southern Africa, pose a constant threat to the freedom and national independence of peace-loving neighbouring countries. Systematically expanding their acts of aggression, the South African racists are attempting to intimidate Angola and other African States and to compel them to give up their support for the just struggle of the people of Namibia and its liberation movement, SWAPO. 26. The barbarous invasion by the South African regime of a Member State of the Organization, coming as it did just after the ninth special session of the General Assembly called upon South Africa to put an end forthwith to its occupation of Namibia and thereby provide an opportunity for the Namibian people to exercise its inalienable right to freedom and genuine independence, represents an open, naked act of defiance of all the Members of the Organization. 27. The act of aggression committed against Angola demonstrates once again that the South African racists have no intention of withdrawing voluntarily from Namibia, nor have they any intention of agreeing to a peaceful settlement of the Namibian problem, as some people have recently tried to convince the international community. In actual fact, all their actions are designed to annihilate SWAPOwhich has been recognized by the Organization as the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people-and in this way to create conditions for imposing upon the Namibian people a so-called internal settlement designed to ensure their domination over the Territory. 28. The bandit attack on the refugees from the Territory of Namibia, in which South Africa used that Territory as a spring-board, only aggravates the dangerous situation in Namibia itself. In the circumstances, can anyone possibly be surprised by the fact that SWAP0 is displaying a great deal of caution with regard to the various kinds of proposals attempting to impose upon the people of Namibia various deals with South Africa? 29. The continuing acts of aggression committed by the South African rCgime can be explained by the very fact of the existence of that regime and by its attempts, at any price, to preserve its illegal domination over Namibia. Naturally, therefore, peace and security in that part of the world can be ensured only by the immediate elimination of the occupation of Namibia by the racists, and only by the eradication of the very system of apartheid in South Africa “It urges all States Members of the United Nations urgently to take effective measures to terminate South Africa’s illegal occupation of Namibia and put an end to its acts of aggression against neighbouring independent African States. It calls upon the Security Council Urgently to consider the imposition of mandatory and comprehensive economic sanctions, an oil embargo and an arms embargo against South Africa, in accordance with the Programme of Action in Support of Self-Determination and National Independence for Namibia”” adopted by the General Assembly at its ninth special session [resolution S-9/2]. 31. The Czechoslovak delegation at the same time supports the Security Council’s strong condemnation of the act of aggression committed by the racist regime of South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola, which represents a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that country, and calls for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all South African armed forces from Angola. We firmly support the demand that South Africa should put an immediate end to its illegal occupation of Namibia and comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council, particularly resolution 385 (1976). 32. Mr. N’DONG (Gabon) (interpretation from French): Yesterday [2077th meeting] we listened with emotion to the representative of the People’s Republic of Angola describing in a clear and concise manner the barbarous attack of which his country has once again been the victim. The means used in this military expedition give the most eloquent proof that it was without a doubt a deliberate attack in a true war of aggression with the most devastating weapons, including attack aircraft, helicopters and airborne troops. 33. The facts described by the representative of the People’s Republic of Angola-to whom I convey my country’s solidarity-are especially serious and, in my delegation’s view, constitute a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a State Member of the Organization. It is not only an obvious threat to international peace arid security but also undeniable proof that the Security Council will always be seized of such base acts SO long as Fascist minority regimes persist in southern Africa. 34. To understand the true and profound meaning of South Africa’s aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola is to speak of the particularly troubling situation “For what are we dealing with unless it is a special aspect of a general problem which has Confronted tfle United Nations for more than a decade, of a tragedy which pierces the heart of H3l Africans and wounds the spirit of all men of goodwill, just as it insults the honour of peoples who love the cause of justice and freedom, This justice and freedom for which man has always fought in all places and at all times must also triumph today throughout the African continent. For-and we can never repeat this often enough--it is unacceptable that peoples in their own country, and especially when they form the majority, should see their legitimate aspirations to dignity, freedom, justice and happiness trampled underfoot by minority governments which base their political, economic and military supremacy solely on the mere colour of their skin.“3 35. Only three days ago the Gcncral Assembly concluded its special session devoted to the problem of the indepen. dence of Namibia-to the problem of the independence of a Territory which South Africa continues to occupy despite numerous resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council calling upon it to withdraw. During that special session, all States unanimously called for a speedy solution to that problem, through peaceful means if possible. Even though the Declaration and the Programme of Action drawn up by the United Nations Council for Namibia were not adopted unanimously by all the Members of the Organization, no State-not even one of the States most closely linked to the Pretoria r@gime-voted against them. That proves, if proof were necessary, that the initiative which led to the convening of the special session was well founded. And then, the very next day, we learned that South Africa had violated the territory of a sovereign State Member of the Organization in order to commit acts of aggression and vandalism there, which are all the more regrettable since many States believe in the need to arrive st a solution of the Namibian problem through peaceful means. Are we to believe that there is no way to br@ South Africa to reason other than violence, which mY country deplores but which we believe to be necessary ifnc other way is available. 36, Experience has shown that it is easier to start a fire than to put it out and, even though the inherent differences between the forces in play would not be in favour of those who defend their rights on their territory and who stra%‘le for their independence, there are objective criteria in the situation which the various parties to the canflict must take 3 Ibid., Ninth Special Session, Plenary Meet&x 5th mee’ings para. 9. 38. In conclusion, I wish to express my delegation’s satisfaction that the draft resolution was adopted unanimously. I wish to thank all the members of the Council for having unambiguously condemned South Africa’s base aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola.

On 4 May the South African racist authorities flagrantly invaded Angola, savagely raiding the Namibian refugee camps at Kassinga and brutally slaughtering the people of Namibia and Angola. This is an act of gross trampling upon the Charter of the United Nations, a new grave crime committed by the Vorster racist r&gime against the people of Namibia, Angola and the rest of Africa. The Chinese delegation expresses utmost indignation and strongly condemns it, 40. Recently the Namibian people have stepped up the armed struggle, under the leadership of SWAPO, dealing increasingly heavy blows at the handful of South African racists. The General Assembly at its ninth special session, which has just concluded successfully, adopted a declaration and programme of action, giving firm support to the Namibian people’s struggle for national independence and liberation and thus landing the South African racist rBgime in greater isolation. 41. In these circumstances, while advertising its so-called peaceful settlement, the South African racist regime, defying universal condemnation, has flagrantly perpetrated the latest barbarous act of armed aggression. This is‘by no means accidental, but is yet another glaring manifestation of the habitual counter-revolutionary dual tactics it has been using over a long period, its criminal purpose being obviously to exert pressure on the people of Namibia and the whole of Africa so as to weaken and stamp out the armed struggle of the Namibian people and realize its wild ambition of continuing its illegal occupation of Namibia. The inevitable result will be “lifting a rock only to drop it on one’s own feet”, It is bound to arouse the people of Namibia and the rest of Africa to greater indignation and still more resolute resistance, bringing about the complete isolation of the South African racists. 42. We are convinced that, with the support of the African people and the people of the whole world, the Namibian people, who have been tempered through protracted 43. We maintain that the Security Council should condemn the South African racist rdgime in the strongest terms, give resolute support to the just struggle of the Namibian people and take effective measures to make the South African authorities withdraw from Namibia irnmediately and unconditionally and put a definitive end to its colonialist domination over Namibia.

The Security Council has just taken a unanimous decision on the complaint by Angola against South Africa, presented clearly, sincerely and with justified emotion by Mr. de Figueiredo, the representative of the People’s Republic of Angola. My Government shares the feelings of indignation expressed here by previous speakers at the armed attacks perpetrated inside Angolan territory, and at the loss of life and the wounds inflicted, which we deplore-in a word, at this flagrant violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a State Member of the Organization. 45. Immediately upon hearing about this South African attack against Angolan territory, my country unambiguously expressed its reprobation, in the following terms: “The Government of France regards the action undertaken in Angola by South Africa as reprehensible. At a time when the five Western Powers are intensifying their efforts towards a peact;fui settlement of the Namibian question that would be in:crnationally acceptable, the Government of France cannot but find reprehensible the action undertaken in Angola by South Africa.” My country wishes to express deep sympathy to the victims and their families. 46. France, fully committed like other Member States to the principles of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, can find no excuse for those who violate the territory of a sovereign State. My Government condemns such acts and demands that the South African authorities should immediately and unconditionally withdraw their troops from Angola. 47. At this stage I shall endeavour to go to the root causes of the necessity of convening the Council to condemn such acts. I cannot but recall the Council’s debate in July 1976 on the complaint by Zambia against South Africa, As we said then, an immediate end must be put to the abnormal, unjustifiable and politically unacceptable situation to which the Namibian people is subjected. It is the maintenance in Namibia of a South African occupatiori totally devoid of any legal basis that is the cause of the events that we meet today to consider. Namibia must accede to independence as quickly as possible, after free elections under United Nations control and supervision. It seems to us that the only chance we have of achieving that goal as quickly as possible is to ensure the implementation without delay of a 49. My country wishes to assure members of the Council that, for its part, it will continue, along with all those whose aim is to search for a just and lasting solution to the question of Namibia, to act in such a way as to ensure that a settlement in conformity with resolution 385 (1976) will be found as soon as possible.

The Nigerian delegation expresses its condolences to the peoples of Angola and Namibia, which, in their solidarity, have lost kith and kin as a result of South Africa’s wanton and reckless aggression launched last Thursday against Namibian refugee camps situated about 155 miles inside the People’s Republic of Angola. Without doubt, Angolans and Namibians have suffered together. Nigeria stands by them. Africa stands by them. It is our hope that the international community also stands by them, to condemn South Africa and to take remedial action against the racists. 51. Once again the Council is seized of one of the more serious facets of the problem being created in southern Africa by the racist rCgime at Pretoria, the continued existence of which constitutes, in African eyes, a threat to international peace and security in the region. The apartheid re’gime and its oppressive and repressive machine must be dismantled, and dismantled they will be in due course. 52. At regular intervals we have witnessed with horror the manifestation of the panic syndrome of the Vorster regime of South Africa. That regime, oblivious to the outcry of the international community and with impunity, has again spread its reign of terror beyond its own borders into another independent and sovereign State of our continent. 53. We heard last night the detailed account of the atrocities committed in Kassinga and its environs by the racist air force and paratroops launched against Angola from the morning of 4 May. This invasion of Kassinga by South Africa is not only a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People’s Republic of Angola, but also an act of armed and premeditated aggression. Moreover, this invasion again reflects South Africa’s basic insensitivity to the outcry of the international community, which has detnanded again and again that the racist rCgime at Pretoria should accord respect for human dignity in its conduct both of its domestic and of its international relations. When South African forces penetrate more than 155 miles into the territory of another independent African State to attack innocent and unarmed refugees who have fled, in the first place, from the racist reign of repression and illegal occupation in Namibia, the Council not only should condemn such acts but should urgently prescribe action against such a rCgitne under the relevant provision of the Charter of the United Nations. 55. My delegation again states that the lack of effective and prompt action against South Africa over Namibia has given the racist rCgime the nerve to perpetrate this latest act of aggression against Angola. South Africa must not be allowed the continuous use of the United Nations Territory of Namibia as a spring-board from which to launch unprovoked attacks against independent African countries and cause untold suffering to innocent civilians and immense damage to property. 56. We all recall South Africa’s earlier military adventurism in Angola in the wake of that country’s independence. South Africa unleashed a massive military offensive on Angola on the pretext, in the words of Mr. P. W. Botha, the racist Defence Minister, that this was “to safeguard her security interest” and was also “responding to a call from the workers on the Calueque-Ruacana scheme”. Mr. Botha continued that statement to the racist Parliament on 28 March 1976 by saying: “the military intervention was then extended in order to deflect the effects of the Angolan civil war frotn the northern border of South West Africa and to inhibit SWAP0 efforts”. And he added: “The other aspects where military forces were involved concerned the protection and administration of civil war refugees.” 57. What security interest does the racist rdgime of South Africa have in an independent African country? What responsible Government would commit a sizeable portion of its armed forces in response to a call from workers in ‘another independent country? Would not such action constitute direct interference in the internal affairs of another State? Whatever way the racist rigime may see it, we all know how well the racists care for the welfare of African workers under their own rCgimc. The pretence of the racists that they were acting for the protection and administration of civil war refugees in Angola, an independent African country, is beyond our comprehension. 58. The continued machinations of South Africa aimed at the destabilization of the People’s Republic of Angola are clearly an attempt to blunt the thrust of the liberation struggle in southern Africa and in particular to inhibit the valiant liberation efforts of SWAPO, nobly and steadfastly supported by the Government and people of Angola. The 65. In conclusion, I wish to quote from the state!ni:nt made by my head of State when he opened the World Conference for Action against Apartheid at Lagos last August. He said: “It will no longer help for our so-called friends to adopt pious postures and preach non-violence when our enemies are busy inflicting mental and physical violence on us. We shall no longer just watch the racists of Pretoria devise improvements to their machinery of terror and repression. We should no longer just be outraged-we must act to discourage the enemies of Africa and humanity.“4 It is thus in keeping with the spirit of this message that the Nigerian delegation has joined in sponsoring and voted in favour of the resolution which has just been adopted. We also hope that the Council will move fast and act firmly and decisively should the racists persist in their acts of wanton aggression and brutal oppression. 60. The protection of South Africa from sanctions by some Western members of the Council has made it possible for the racist r&ime to flex its muscles, as it has just done in Kassinga.

The Soviet delegation has listened with the closest attention to the statement of the representative of the People’s Republic of Angola, Ambassador de Figueiredo, who informed the Security Council /2077th meeting] of the aggression of the racist re’gime of Pretoria against the independence and sovereignty of his country. We entirely share the assessments that he gave of those criminal acts on the part of the South African racists, as well as those given by the Chairman of the Group of African States, Ambassador Konie of Zambia, Ambassador SaIim, representative of the United Republic of Tanzania and Mr.,Nujoma, the leader of SWAPO, as well as the assessments we found in the statement on this question issued by the Co-ordinating Bureau of Non-Aligned Countries on 4 May [S/12688/. 61. During the delicate negotiations which the five Western members of the Security Council undertook, action under the provisions of the Charter was suspended in the hope that the racists of South Africa would retrace their steps and abandon the present disastrous course. We also believed that the five Western members of the Council had the appropriate leverage to make their protegee appreciate the advantages of a negotiated settlement. That leverage stems from their known connexions with the racist re’gimc. It was our understanding that they had put their prestige, power and credibility into resolving the Namibian question. 62. The Kassinga episode, in the view of my delegation, appears to put that credibility of the five Western members to its greatest test to date. The Kassinga episode indicates once again South Africa’s utter disregard for the international community, which, by implication, includes its Western friends, It also indicates the inbuilt violence of the apmtheid system, the dangers of which my delegation, among others, has been bringing to the attention of’the Council, for years. 67. This further act of aggression by the South African racists which took the form of an armed attack by aircraft and paratroopers on the Angolan town of Kassinga, situated at a distance of 155 miles inside the frontier, and on the refugee camp in that area containing refugees from Namibia, is one further example of the crimes committed by the Vorster rggime against the People’s Republic of Angola and other African States. As a result of that barbarous act of aggression, peaceful inhabitants of the area were killed in large numbers, Armed bands from South Africa continue to operate on Angolan soil, as confirmed to us today by the representative of Angola. The naked act of aggression on the part of the racists against a sovereign African State once again confirms the truth of the repeated statements of the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola that South Africa is continually carrying out acts of aggression against Angola, intensifying tension, aggravating 63. The obvious choice before the Security Council in the face of South Africa’s persistent defiance of its decisions and resolutions is to take effective measures against the racist regime. The Council can ill afford to delay action unless it is prepared to compromise its credibility as mankind’s custodian of international peace and security. We have long passed the stage of mere verbal condemnation and denunciation of South Africa’s inhuman and repressive policies and practices. The Council, including the five Western members, should, as a matter of priority, take immediate steps concerning the imposition of comprchensive sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter. 4 United Nations publication, Sales No. E.77.XIV.3, annex IV. A11gola. 69. In undertaking a direct act of armed aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola, the Pretoria regime was at the same time striking a blow against the Namibian refugee camps which are in the region of Kassinga. Those camps contained refugees who fled from the terror of the South African racists. As was correctly pointed out by the JornaZ & Angola, the attack by the punitive expedition sent by Vorster against the Namibian refugee camps is evidence of the criminal intent of the racists to deal brutally with the Namibian patriots headed by SWAPO. Thus, the Pretoria regime demonstrated its total contempt for the decisions with regard to the liberation of Namibia adopted at the ninth special session of the General Assembly. 70. The dispatch of South African bombers and paratroopers from air fields situated in Namibia confirms once again the fact that the Pretoria regime does not intend to discontinue using Namibian territory as a spring-board for exerting pressure on the independent African States and for purposes of direct military intervention in their internal affairs. 7 I. The Territory of Namibia has repeatedly been used by the South African re’gime for acts of armed provocation against neighbouring sovereign States and it has more than once directed armed aggression against Angola from that Territory. All this provides ample evidence of the fact that there can be no peace and security in that part of Africa as long as South African troops are still to be found on Nnmibian territory, Therefore, any neo-colonialist plans for settlement in Namibia which provide for the possibility of the stationing of those forces on Namibian soil are fraught with the most serious consequences both for the Namibian people and for the independent development of the liberated countries of Africa. 72. In conditions where the racists of Pretoria are continuing their aggression against African States, it becomes particularly clear that it is a matter of urgent necessity immediately to call a halt to the illegal occupation by that regime of the Territory of Namibia. The United Nations is obliged to ensure the transfer of power in that country to the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people, SWAPO. Recent events in Angolan territory have confirmed the correctness of the stand taken by SWAPO, which has been extremely cautious and vigilant in its approach to plans for a settlement in Namibia acceptable to the South African racists. 74. The Soviet delegation calls for the intensification of efforts designed to produce additional effective measures which are likely to compel the racists to bow to the will of the international community. We have in mind the measures which, in particular, were provided for in decisions on Namibia taken at the recent special session of the General Assembly. The Soviet Union whole-heartedly supports the well justified demands of the African countries for the immediate introduction of additional sanctions against South Africa in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter, a demand for the cessation of all economic co-operation with South Africa and the establishment of a state of diplomatic isolation for the Pretoria regime. As we have repeatedly stated, it can be said with confidence that the taking of those measures would be the shortest and most effective way of ensuring early victory, independence and freedom for the Namibian people and of deterring the South African racists from committing further acts of aggression against African States. 75. The incessant acts of aggression committed by the Pretoria regime against Angola and other African States are the result of the direct connivance with that regime of certain imperialistic circles which are striving to preserve their positions in southern Africa. We believe that the Western countries bear a considerable share of the responsibility for the dangerous situation which has now arisen in southern Africa. Their active support of the racist regime has led to virtual immobility on the part of international organizations and has led to their inability to take genuinely effective measures against the racist upartheid regime. 76. The draft resolution just adopted by the Security Council calls for the immediate cessation of aggression by the racists and the withdrawal of their troops from the territory of Angola. The Soviet delegation supported and voted in favour of that draft resolution although it does consider that it should have provided for considerably more effective measures in order to put an end to the policy Of brigandage and aggression carried out by the South African regime. We believe that the Council should take a most serious view of the need for the Pretoria regime to comply with the demands of the United Nations and, if necessary, to meet urgently once again in order to take measures against the aggressor which would prevent it from further defying the whole of peace-loving mankind. 77. The Security Council has been meeting year after year to discuss the aggressive actions of the Pretoria regime against neighbouring African States, and year after year it has been unable to take effective measures because of the position of Western States. The question therefore arises: How many more times do the South African racists have to invade their neighbours’ territories and how many more peaceful inhabitants have to be killed before the Council takes effective measures against the South African regime? 79. The Soviet delegation would like to confirm once again the whole-hearted solidarity of the Soviet Union with the People’s Republic of Angola in its struggle for the strengthening of its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. As was stated on 19 April this year by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Leonid Llyich Brezhnev, at a meeting in Moscow with the President of the People’s Republic of Angola, Agostinho Neto, the Soviet Union has been providing and will continue to provide every possible support to the heroic people of Angola. 80. We express our solidarity, too, with the Namibian people, which, under the leadership of SWAPO, has been waging a struggle for national liberation. The Soviet Union wishes the people of Namibia early victory in its just struggle.

As we meet today, it is clear to all of us that peace in southern Africa hangs in the balance. South Africa has once again invaded Angola and carried us into a new and much more dangerous phase of the conflict over Namibia. The whole of central and southern Africa could be affected by South Africa’s actions. Indeed, it would not be too much to say that South African lawlessness now imperils the peace of the entire world. 82. On Thursday morning, South African Mirage jets bombed the mining town of Kassinga, in the Cunene Province of Angola, 155 miles north of the Namibian border. South Africa then landed paratroops in the area and proceeded to fly in reinforcements from Namibia. At the same time, South African land forces appear to have crossed into Angola from several points along the length of the border from the western Ovambo region to the Caprivi. According to reports from Africa, South African troops were continuing to move northwards across the border yesterday, a day and a half after the occupation of Kassinga. South African forces were reported to be carrying out military operations in various parts of southern Angola, where they were meeting strong resistance from the armed forces of the People’s Republic of Angola and from SWAP0 forces. 83. The South African attack was not aimed exclusively at military targets; it was also clearly aimed at sowing terror among the civilian population in Angola. A SWAP0 refugee camp at Kassinga was attacked and men, women and children were killed or wounded. 84. As of this moment, the military situation remains unclear. We do not know whether South African forces are 85. We must, of course, also consider the possibiliry :hat South Africa is seeking to precipitate an international conflict by invading Angola, and tllat it intends to press forward with its attack in order to force Angola to call for assistance. 86. It is too early to attempt an assessment of the situation. My delegation believes that the Council must follow the matter closely over the next days and be prepared to meet again on short notice. South Africa’s rash action and brutal truculence have made an already tense and dangerous situation quite unpredictable. 87. The delegation of Mauritius, however, does draw three conclusions from the facts as we know them today. 88. The first is that the whole extremely delicate Western diplomatic initiative which began last March to force a “peaceful settlement” of the Namibian problem has so far proved to be ill-fated, as far as SWAP0 is concerned, and dangerous, as far as South Africa is concerned, in view of the latter’s current acts of aggression. My delegation warned in the General Assembly debate in October last year that the Western proposals on Namibia, as they then were, could not bring peace and independence to the long-suffering people of that country. It was clear from the nature of those proposals at that time that South Africa intended to retain control over Namibia. The proposals did not sufficiently conform to the terms of resolution 385 (1976). For example, they did not call for the total withdrawal of South African troops; they did not call for the dismantling of South Africa’s administration in the Territory; they did not clearly and unambiguously establish a United Nations presence which would assure supervision and control of elections. 89. SWAP0 has shown its willingness to negotiate in good faith, Any proposal, however, should ensure the free and fair elections called for in resolution 385 (1976). 90. South Africa has sought to use this Western Powers’ diplomatic effort to elect a client regime in Namibia and to avoid the awkwardness of an “internal settlement” by administrative fiat. We recall that Mr. Nujomn pointed out in his statement at the ninth special session of the General Assembly the other day that, if SWAP0 should sign the Western proposals, it would be signing its own death warrant. 91. Furthermore, the prolongation of the Western Powers’ effort has proved positively dangerous; for South Africa seems to have gained the impression that the international community is willing to tolerate its refusal to conform to Security Council resolutions. And this has encouraged it to reinforce its position in Namibia and to believe that it can 92. The second conclusion which my delegation draws from the facts is that the Security Council must now come to terms with a new danger. By attacking Angola, the racist rCgitlle in South Africa has shown what it thinks of negotiations. When it cannot have “negotiations” which give it control over Namibia, it does not want negotiations at all: it resorts to force. And, indeed, force-as has already been observed-is the only way that an arbitrary and oppressive colonialism can be kept together. 93. SWAPO’s refusal to accept the terms of the Western proposals has caused South Africa to drop the pretence that it is interested in the independence of Namibia. The fact that South Africa has taken the offensive when it did not get what it wanted proves what it wanted all the time. Now, however, when it cannot achieve its ends by diplomatic ambiguities, it finds itself on the defensive. And, in keeping with the military doctrine which it has adopted, it carries out the “defence” of its interests by attacking other countries. 94. This is a lesson which Africa must now ponder. For South Africa, by virtue of the financial aid accorded it by its supporters, and by virtue of secret arms shipments worth hundreds of millions of dollars, has been able to build a frightening military capability. The assistance of certain Powers has created a military imbalance in Africa. South Africa has overwhelming power in relation to its neighbours. It has hundreds of combat aircraft, tanks, armoured personnel carriers, armoured cars and self-propelled artillery of various origins. Jts power has loomed in Africa as a constant menace over the last decade. Now, however, South Africa has shown that it will use that power to try to overwhelm those States which support the liberation of southern Africa. Indeed, it has shown that it will use that power aggressively to attack States seeking to do no more than press for a resolution of the kmibian question according to terms decided upon by the Security Council. 95. The new danger in this situation is in the combination of South African power and the so-called forward defence poficy. My delegation called attention to the danger of increasingly aggressive South African actions during the debate on South Africa in the Security Council in March last year. We pointed out at that time that the international community could find itself confronted with a situation in which South Africa would seek to intimidate the nations of central and southern Africa by a repeated and aggressive use of its military power. That situation is no longer just a possibility: we confront it today. 96. Any reading of South African tnilitary writings will convince an impartial observer that South Africa believes in its power. Events now make it clear that, in a situation in 97. Clearly, the Council must now take drastic action to force South Africa to change its posture-l repeat, to force South Africa to change its posture. If the Council does not take such action in the near future, there is a danger that South Africa will carry out further and more damaging attacks on independent African countries. The Council cannot tolerate such a prospect. 98. The third conclusion which my delegation draws from the events of the last few days is that the major Western Powers must reconsider their attitude towards South Africa. We realize that these Powers do not wish to support the status quo in southern Africa. However, they have in effect tolerated South Africa’s efforts to perpetuate it. Some groups and organizations in certain countries have even actively and deliberately sought to strengthen South Africa. The time has come to end confusion and to resolve ambiguities in policies towards the Pretoria regime. Western countries can no longer afford to be seen to tolerate or to assist South Africa, for that regime has now embarked on a new path in the defence of apartheid. It is a path which will lead either to war and devastation or to the isolation of South Africa and the dismantling of apartheid. 99. To an important extent, it will be up to the major Western Powers as to how long the present phase will last, for it is only with their assistance and their tolerance that South Africa can survive as an apurtheicl State. If they withdraw the support which they have in various forms being giving South Africa, Pretoria will have no choice but to enter into a process of peaceful settlement in Namibia and in South Africa itself. If they do not withdraw that support, the consequences could be incalculable. 100. In conclusion, I should like, since the Council has aIready unanimously adopted the draft resolution contained in document S/12692, to thank, on behalf of the sponsors, the other members of the Council for their co-operation and prompt action. 101. My delegation would also like to extend its condolences to the delegation of Angola and the representative of SWAP0 for the loss of lives and the destruction of property their respective people have sustained as a result of the unprovoked, wanton, brutal, savage and barbarous aggression perpetrated against them by the racist rigime of Pretoria.

I should like to begin by reading into the record the statement made by my Minister for External Affairs on the South African armed invasion of Angola on 4 May. “I have seen news agency reports regarding the dastardly attack by South African troops based in Namibia “The obduracy and conduct of South Africa, as typified by such acts, strengthens the conviction of those who are sceptical about a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the Namibian question. “The Government of India condemns this treacherous act of aggression by South Africa. We extend our heartfelt sympathies to the affected families and hope that before long the whole of southern Africa will be freed from the scourge of colonialism and apartheid. “This event underlines once again the need and urgency for the Security Council to apply measures necessary to terminate forthwith South Africa’s illegal occupation of Namibia and ensure its complete and unconditional withdrawal from the whole of Namibia.” 103. What happened on 4 May is not an isolated incident; neither is it the first nor will it be the last. It is one of several manifestations of the declared policy of South Africa to attack any African country of its choice in the pursuit of its aim of perpetuating its racist domination of southern Africa. It is a manifestation of its external intimidation and internal oppression. It is a manifestation of its hostility towards the neighbouring African States and its objective of destabilizing them through all possible means. Unfortunately, it is also a manifestation of the vulnerability of the newly independent African States. 104. Where else could Angola go with its complaint except to the Security Council in the first instance? Are we going to be satisfied with yet another condemnation of South Africa for its latest act of aggression? The catalogue of South African sins against humanity is so long that the nations of the world are clearly expected to do more than be ashamed of them, And yet, whenever there is any mention of further mandatory action against South Africa, we are faced with expressions of pious horror. Surely there is an element of doubtful piety in joining the chorus of condemnation while continuing to maintain diplomatic and economic relations with South Africa. 105. It is no wonder that South Africa feels secure enough to launch its invasions when and where it likes. It is clear that the arms embargo is no more than a belated and futile gesture. If the Security Council does not use all the powers at its command to deter South Africa, will not the victims of aggression be obliged to seek help from wherever they can get it? What other choice do they have? And if they are driven to seek help outside the Council, the responsibility for it will rest on the Council, particularly on those who prevent it from taking effective mandatory action. Unfortunately, the veto has turned out to be a most useful political cover for South Africa. 106. The timing of the latest South African attack against Namibian political refugees is not without significance. Let 107. I have no doubt that, by this invasion of Angola and this attack on Namibian refugee camps, South Africa hopes to wreck the prospects of the Western proposals for self-determination of the Namibian people under United Nations supervision. Let us remind ourselves-especially those who set store by the law of nations-that Namibia has the status of an international Territory and that the people of Namibia and their rights, including their right to self-determination and independence, constitute a sacred trust of the United Nations and, consequently, our common responsibility. Those who have relations with South Africa cannot evade their special responsibility for securing its peaceful withdrawal from Namibia if they are opposed to further mandatory measures under Chapter VII of the Charter. However, if they are unable to discharge the responsibility which they have voluntarily assumed, we have every right-moral and legal-to expect them to support mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa.

The promptness with which the Security Council has met to consider another act of aggression by the South African rggime-this time against the People’s Republic of Angola, from the illegally occupied Territory of Namibiademonstrates the deep concern of the President of the Council that, finally, a situation of peace may reign in southern Africa. His prompt action, in exercise of the highest responsibilities of this body, is also proof of the effectiveness of the United Nations and the Council. The resolution adopted unanimously today is another reflection of that effectiveness. 109. Because of the constant contempt shown for the international principles enshrined in the Charter, one could almost use the word “monotonous” to describe the repeated aggression by a colonialism whose characteristic features are racism, armament and international economic speculation; many other speakers have referred to this. 110. I do not know what else can be said on this subject, except to suggest practical and reasonable remedies. The delegation of Bolivia, in its quest for such remedies, co-sponsored the draft resolution which has just been adopted unanimously and which we trust wiil successfully call a halt-with its allusion to the chapter of the Charter related to sanctions-to a situation which has become dangerously endemic. 111. Bolivia’s attitude is that all forms of colonialism must be rejected and that all territorial depredations must be condemned. This position, like that of our colleagues, is a consistent position, in the General Assembly, in connexion with the liberation of Namibia, and in the Security Council, in connexion with the painful and constantly repeated acts of armed invasion, which are grave threats to world peace.

I shall be brief. This does not seem to me to be an occasion for polemics or disputation-despite some of the quite extraordinary dlegations made in the course of speeches this morning by certain delegations, including some that are African, some that are quasi-African, and some that are nowhere-near- African. 114. On 4 May South Africa attacked a SWAP0 base near Kassinga, over 1.50 miles into the territory of the People’s Republic of Angola, On 5 May the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London summoned the South African Chargh d’Affaires to express my Government’s concern and dismay, and to seek an explanation. Later that same day my Foreign Secretary made clear our view that South Africa should take no further action of that kind. We condemn the South African attack on Angola as an inadmissible act of armed force which must not recur. We naturay deplore any action of this sort, causing casualties and loss of life. 11.5. We are often accused by both SWAP0 and South Africa of showing insufficient sympathy or concern for their respective views and actions. I do not want today to get involved in a long argument about whether acts of violence or of military repression can ever be justified and, if so, in what circumstances. Our commitment to an early peaceful settlement in Namibia is well known, and representatives of our five Governments are meeting SWAP0 on Monday, 8 May, for important talks which we hope will pave the way for an honourable negotiated settlement consistent with resolution 38.5 (1976). As my Foreign Secretary said yesterday, stability in southern Africa is poised on a knife-edge. 116. I should like to refer briefly to the terms of the resolution just adopted. In the ninth preambular paragraph and in paragraphs 5 and 6 there are references to the legitimate struggle of the people of Namibia. My Government has always supported the struggle of the people of Namibia. My Government has always supported the struggle for self-determination, but our views on the limits of legitimate struggle and our commitment under the Charter to peaceful means are, I think, well known. In paragraph 7 the Council demands that South Africa should put an end without delay to its illegal occupation of Namibia. In our view that paragraph is entirely consistent with the provision in the proposal transmitted to the Council on 10 April [S/12636] which seeks the independence of Namibia by the end of this year. 117. I hope that members of the Council will not lose sight of our main objectives. The recent escalation of force by all sides in Namibia has underlined the urgent, the almost desperate, need to secure an early agreement which 118. 1 therefore appeal today to all sides to show restraint and avoid further actions which can only undermine efforts to achieve a peaceful transition to majority rule in Namibia. The early adoption and implementation of the proposal transmitted to the Council on 10 April, contrary to what has been said here today, constitute the best and almost certainly the only way of overcoming the cycle of Violence and attacks within Namibia or on neighbouring countries. It is also the only way of achieving the aims of the United Nations in relation to Namibia. We want elections to take place there in a stable and peaceful atmosphere, and Namibia to emerge as a free, democratic and independent State, It is not always easy to remain calm, but calmness and a determination not to allow Namibia’s prospects of attaining peaceful independence to be sacrificed are what is now needed. A settlement in Namibia would have immense positive repercussions elsewhere in southern Africa. Let us never forget that we are all here to help the people of Namibia enjoy the rights which all of us here already enjoy.

WC welcome the unanimous decision by the Council in adopting the resolution. We are gratified that members were able to take quick action once again. 120. My delegation has listened with great attention to the statements made by the representative of Angola, the President of SWAP0 and others on the South African attack on Angofan territory on 4 May. Angola indeed has every reason to seize the Council of its complaint and to ask us to pronounce judgement on these latest developments, which have again highlighted the danger to peaceful development in that part of Africa. 121. We have time and again voiced our conviction that acts of violence only bring about new violence, and aggravate rather than alleviate the conflict. We deeply deplore the human suffering and the damage inflicted upon the people of Angola and Namibia, and emphatically denounce this new armed invasion. 122. I need not reiterate the position taken by the Federal Republic of Germany against those who disregard the integrity of neighbouring sovereign countries and the right of all peoples to self-determination and independence. We can only repeat that we strongly condemn such aggressive acts, which endanger our serious efforts to bring about the necessary political changes in southern Africa by peaceful means. Immediately after being informed of the attack on Kassinga, my Government officially expressed its shock and dismay in the strongest possible terms to the Government of South Africa. We have deep sympathy with the people of Angola and the numerous Namibians who have again been the victims of an armed attack by South Africa. 124. We fully share the view expressed by the President of SWAPO, Mr. Sam Nujoma, in his statement yesterday (2077th meeting], that conditions for holding free, fair and democratic elections leading to genuine independence for Namibia have to be ensured. Having voted for the resolution just adopted, we want to urge South Africa to withdraw immediately from Angolan territory. In joining all other members in our unanimous decision, we also want to issue a most serious warning to the South African Government to refrain from further aggressive acts against neighbouring countries.

The Security Council is considering today a matter of utmost gravity. South Africa has crossed an internationally recog nized border and attacked Angola. The action taken is particularly reprehensible in that South Africa launched its attack from Namibia, a Territory which it illegally occupies, and from which it should Iong ago have withdrawn. This massive attack on a site located some 155 miles north of the Angolan/Namibian border cannot be considered anything other than a serious escalation of the level of violence at precisely the time when South Africa, above all others, should be demonstrating its desire for peace. Consequently, the United States joins the other members of the Council in condemning South Africa’s action and in warning South Africa against any repetition of such action. 126. In speaking on this issue, I must express my deep dismay at the senselessness of the action which we meet today to discuss. 127. After more than a year of intensive discussions, a solution to the Namibia question is nearer than ever before. South Africa has been commended publicly and privately for its acceptance of the proposal of the Five. The Five have been encouraged to redouble their efforts to persuade SWAP0 also to accept the proposals for settlement. HOW then is an already sceptical world to judge an action such as we have just witnessed on the eve of further and, we hope, decisive talks? South Africa must be under no illusions. Its commendable agreement to leave a Territory in which it has no right to remain and under terms which it has no right to demand has made no more legitimate its illegal presence in Namibia. Nor does it now have any licence to resort to 128. At the same time, I wish to recall that only a few days ago the United States representative in the special session of the General Assembly debate on Namibia called attention to the possibility of escalated violence if agreement was not reached soon. I wish to repeat those remarks here today: “Our considerations here do not take place in a vacuum. In recent weeks the cycleaf repression, violence and the resulting bitterness and distrust has continued in Namibia at a disturbing pace. The level of fighting along Namibia’s borders has increased markedly and from all indications it will increase more. There is an increasing tendency to resolve differences within the Territory through the barrel of a gun, rather than through democratic processes. Scores have been killed. “In addition, while the South African Government is commendably engaged in discussions which might lead to a peaceful settlement, it has once again resorted to the deplorable practice of politically based arrests without charge or trial, so that today virtually the entire leadership of SWAP0 in Namibia is in detention. “It is of little value to engage in sterile arguments over which of the parties should first cease its actions. We can and should call upon all parties to exercise restraint and to give the forces of peace a chance. However, it is clear that the cycle of repression and violence, violence and repression and the inevitable hatred to which they give birth will not end until a comprehensive resolution is found, We in the international community must therefore redouble our efforts to find a solution if we are to avert the addition of further complexities to an already complex task.“S 129. It is with these considerations in mind that the United States is determined to press forward in the Namibia initiative which we have undertaken with our colleagues. We are more convinced than ever that the goal of peace in that area, the realization of the hopes of the people of Namibia, can only be achieved by the decision of the parties to make peace now. We intend to use every practical means at our disposal to create conditions in the area wIJ.M~ would prevent the kind of tragic acts of violence we have today joined in condemning. We welcome the surge of desire for peace represented in the action we have taken today in the Council.

1 should now like to make a statement in my capacity as representative of VENEZUELA. 13 1. My delegation has listened carefully to the statement made by the representative of Angola (2077th meeting] on 132. We have just conchlded a special session of the General Assembly on Namibia, a Territory which has been subjected to South African colonialism. At that special session WC were not able to obtain the necessary guarantees to promote and speed up Namibia’s achievement of self-determination, Today, we are again faced with an act of disregard for the most basic principles of the Organization and its authority. My country, therefore, cannot but reaffirm at this time its rejection of the acts which South Africa continues to commit to consolidate and maintain its presence in those territories which it illegally occupies in that part of the world, despite our condemnation, despite our disapproval of those acts and in flagrant disregard of the international community. 140. But today, particularly, we are at the moment of truth: the act of armed aggression being committed against the People’s Republic of Angola is provided for in the secret clauses of the “peace plans” of the strategists of international imperialism against SWAPO. Deciphered, that means the military elimination of SWAP0 to facilitate the installation in Namibia of a puppet rggime in the pay and at the service of imperialist interests in the area. It is a matter of sounding out the situation in Angola in order to pave the way for political subversion and to use puppets and other gangsters to recover Angolan territory, which was so hard won, and at the cost of great sacrifices by the Angolan people. 133. I do not wish to conclude this statement without conveying to the noble and courageous people of Angola and its Government, represented by Ambassador de Figueiredo, our heartfelt sympathy and condolences at the loss of human life and the material losses which have been the tragic outcome of the most recent act of colonial aggression by South Africa. 141. The People’s Republic of Benin will never cease to denounce in this forum the imperialist manoeuvres in our continent and the dangers they pose to international peace and security. The Security Council, faced with these serious threats, should take effective measures to block the way to these neo-colonialist adventures. 134. To SWAPO, represented by its President, Mr. Sam Nujoma, we convey our solidarity and support in its heroic struggle for the independence of Namibia. 135. Speaking again as PRESIDENT, I invite the representative of Benin to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 142. The continued illegal occupation of Namibia, which is being used as a base for aggression by the inhuman Pretoria re’gime, is a defiance of the international community and a particular challenge to Africa. But what the henchmen of Pretoria and their masters in the West are lacking is a sense of history, and history indicates that our liberation from the yoke of imperialist oppression and exploitation is inevitable.

Mr. President, the delegation of the People’s Republic of Benin is grateful to you and the other members of the Council for having invited us to participate in this important debate on the act of armed aggression committed by the Pretoria racist rCgime against the free African land of the People’s Republic of Angola. 143. My delegation wishes to declare its active and militant solidarity with the Angolan people, which has been subjected to such trials and tribulations, and to demand that the Council should take the measures provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter. My delegation also demands the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all South African troops which have invaded Angola. It wishes to make it absolutely clear that the establishment of peace and security in Africa involves the total elimination of the minority racist and colonialist r&gimes of Pretoria and Salisbury, and the unconditional exercise of the right to self-determination and independence by the oppressed peoples of Zimbabwe and Namibia engaged in an armed struggle for their national independence. 137. My delegation wishes to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of May. Your qualities as a skilled diplomat and the proven experience of your dynamic team of assistants, particularly with the question before us, are a guarantee of a successful and equitable conclusion to this series of meetings of the Council. Your beautiful and great country, Venezuela, plays an important and positive role in the concert of nations, 138. The frequency with which the Security Council has had to deal with acts of armed aggression committed every day against independent African front-line countriesparticularly Angola, Zambia and Botswana-by the minority racist and colonialist regimes of Pretoria and Rhodesia is clear proof of the actual existence of plans for the colonial reconquest of the African continent by international imperialism. 144. The resolution just adopted by the Council certainly does not ljve up to our expectations, because it postpones effective and specific measures properly provided for by the Charter to counter such criminal actions. Indeed, the repetition of these acts of aggression fraught with danger by 145. In spite of the acts of intimidation and aggression which have been repeated so often by the Pretoria and Salisbury regimes against neighbouring countries and the positions of the freedom fighters, the front-line countries and Africa as a whole are more determined than ever to help the liberation movements in their struggle against the oppressive rCgintes of southern Africa until final victory has been achieved.

The next speaker is the representative of Algeria, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 147. Mr, BOUAYAD-AGHA (Algeria) (interpretation porn French): Once again the Security Council is meeting to consider a complaint by Angola against South Africa. Once again the international community is confronted by a premeditated criminal attack of the outlaw South African r6gimc. Its forces have launched a premeditated savage attack against the People’s Republic of Angola, where the Namibian refugee camps have been systematically bombed. 148. It is upon you, Mr. President, that the weighty privilege falls of conducting the proceedings of the Council at the very time when we are receiving alarming news following the violation by the racist rCgime of Pretoria of the integrity and sovereignty of an African country, a Member of the Organization. I should like, therefore, to convey to you our pleasure at seeing the representative of Venezuela discharging the functions of the presidency of the Council and to express to you the great esteem in which we hold you. This is a well-deserved tribute to a friendly country and to the Latin American continent and its active role in efforts being made by Africa to do away with the last vestiges of colonialism and intransigent apartheid. 149. The Council is meeting today at the request of Angola, which has been the victim of a new act Of aggression by the South African racist rCgime. It is our duty to say here that this aggression makes a mockery of certain initiatives recently taken in order to bring about a negotiated settlement of the Namibian question. Who can still believe that it is possible to associate the Pretoria racists with any settlement of the problems of southern Africa? It is therefore no accident that this aggression began at the very time when the work of the successful special session of the General Assembly devoted to Namibia was drawing to a close. Nor is it a coincidence that this special session was a kind of continuation of the eighth special session, because both highlighted the kinship between the Zionist entity, which has robbed the Palestinian 150. The integrity and sovereignty of the People’s Republic of Angola have been violated by the racist forces of Pretoria operating from illegal military bases established in Namibia, which were the subject of shameless expropriation by South Africa. This invasion of a Member State is a grave violation of the Charter. This evokes in us certain reactions which are reminiscent of the worst moments of colonization. Using the paths blazed by tlte colonial Powers long before it, the racist rrSgime of Pretoria has adopted a posture of intolerable defiance of the international cornmunity. But this path will lead it inevitably to the same result, because, in its turn, it will have to bow to the winds of change which in recent years have been sweeping across the African continent. But South Africa persists in ignoring developments in the world around it. Its arrogance stems from the fact that it does not feel alone, because, as we have already had occasion to say in other circumstances, there are certain countries which offer it open assistance. These countries condemn colonialism and associate themselves with us to reaffirm the right of peoples to selfdetermination and independence. However, they still continue to provide military and economic assistance, without which South Africa could not continue its aggression and apartheid policy, for it is the apartheid system existing in South Africa which, in our view, underlies all the tensions affecting southern Africa. It is this system of injustice and oppression imposed upon a people in the name of the superiority of one race over another which we have to destroy. The illegal occupation of Namibia and the acts of aggression against neighbouring countries-and Angola is the principal target here-can only delay the real battle which will inevitably be waged against the white racists inside South Africa itself. We certainly do not want t0 arouse any sjlmpathy among those who are not embarrassed by considerations of principle to come to the assistance of Pretoria when this regime becomes an outlaw. What we fail to understand is that the supporters of the system of apartheid should be involved in settling problems whose origin resides only in the apartheid rCgime itself. We therefore call upon those countries to review their position. 151. lt is time for the Security Council to give serious thought to the danger represented by the aggressiveness of the Pretoria re’gime in southen Africa and the conduct which today is being manifested directly and brutally against the People’s Republic of Angola. The obstinate arrogance, the intemperate arrogance displayed by South Africa towards the United Nations should give food for thought to those who are so imprudent as to give it their 1.52. Yesterday [2077th meeting] we listened with strong feeling to the President of SWAPO, Mr. Sam Nujoma, and through him it was the Namibian people who spoke. Let those who still rely upon the Pretoria racists show some far-sightedness, because Africa belongs to the Africans, who are already in a position to distinguish between hostile forces and those which are favourable to their liberation. 153. The aggression to which the people of the People’s Republic of Angola has fallen victim today is further proof of the disarray in which the South African racist rdgime finds itself, isolated more and more in the international community. The recourse of the Pretoria r6gime to territorial invasion of neighbouring independent countries, the massacre of civilians and innocent refugees, like measures of intimidation against the international community, strengthen Us in our conviction that, in spite of its open arrogance, this regime will not escape its final destiny and that the forces of national freedom and independence will succeed finally in destroying this bastion of imperialism, racism and exploitation, 154. In these difficult times for the People’s Republic of Angola, the people and the Government of Algeria, as we have always done in any struggle for freedom, are rallying alongside the people of Angola, and we should like to assure them of our unswerving solidarity !n their struggle for the preservation of their national independence and against any attempt to jeopardize their sovereignty and territorial integrity. 15.5. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): The next speaker is the representative of Cuba. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

I am pleased indeed to see a representative of the “pure land of Venezuela”-as it was called by the illustrious poet and fighter And& Eloy Blanco-presiding over these meetings of the Council. Coming from the country of the liberator Simbn Bolivar, who travelled throughout America “distributing freedom to the peoples”, he is aware, I am sure, that the spirit of Santos Luzardo is today fighting in Africa against the centuries-old foothold of conquest to which R6muIo Gallegos, almost 50 years ago, gave the unforgettable name of ‘<Mr. Danger”. 158. Above all, we must make it clear that the people of Cuba regard any act of agitression committed against the fraternal people of Angola as :m act of aggression against our own people. 159. For more than a decade, WC have been discussing the so-called question of Namibia. I state once again that the people of Cuba, their Communist Party and their Government have supported and will continue to support SWAPO, the sole authentic representative of the people of Namibia, and we shall continue to give it our unconditional support until every single inch of the territory of Namibia is free from the South African presence. Cuba has been and is in favour of the complete independence of Namibia and the full exercise of its sovereignty in the entire country, including Walvis Bay. 160. This new act of aggression by South Africa, like those perpetrated against Zambia and Mozambique by the hired assassins of Ian Smith-a monstrous creation of apartheid and monopolistic capital, that is to say, of the transnational companies which today squeeze and bleed the peoples of South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia-is but the logical concrete form of the intentions of those who refuse to recognize Walvis Bay as an integral part of Namibia, those who extract enormous dividends from the natural wealth and resources which by right are and must be the exclusive heritage of the people of Namibia. 161. The people of Angola, under the leadership of MPLA [Movimento Popular de Libertaciio de Angola] and its President, Comrade Agostinho Neto, won national independence after a hard battle. They successfully dealt with the racist aggression by South Africa and the slavery movements established, financed and armed by those who today support the degenerate apartheid rCgime and answer to the names of UNITA [ Uniao National para a, Independ&cia Total de Angola] and FNLA [Frentc National para a 163. The Vorster minority rigime, which is carried against wind and tide on the shoulders of imperialist monopolies and known financial groups, armed by the very Powers which try to disguise themselves as white innocents before the international community, proclaiming their “good faith” and their “desire to put an end to violence” in Namibia, Zimbabwe and wherever else a good blow is being struck, can never subjugate or deter, much less vanquish, the heroic people of Angola. 164. It is deeds, not words, which influence history. It was not by chance that the people of Angola won their freedom in full fight. The peoples have never feared reactionary violence; it is only the well-spoken hypocrites, the fainthearted and the false apostles of freedom who preach pacification at any price in the face of the fierce attacks of racist barbarism. But there can be no peace, nor,wi!l there be, as long as the barbarian Vorster, the barbarian Smith and their Hitlerian followers and supporters continue to deny the millions of Africans in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia the right to be human beings. 165. The pious messengers of neo-colonialism appeal daily for calmness and docility. Like good pharisees they like to bring their sardines close to the fire. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that they will be swept out of their banking and transnational temples. As Jod Marti said, “a just idea from the depths of a cave is more powerful than an army”. 166. I shall not trouble the Council with what in fact would be no more than an incomplete repetition of the denunciations here, in the General Assembly and in various international forums and conferences of the crimes, betrayals and depredations of the South African racists and their imperialist masters directed against the peoples of Africa. On 16 June it will be precisely two years since the horrible Soweto killings. The revolting criminal remains unpunished. 167. My delegation deems it essential that the Security Council should firmly condemn the South African aggression against the peaceful people of Kassinga and that it should apply with the utmost strictness against the Fascist Vorster rkgime, the sanctions provided for in Chapter VII 6 Ibid., 6th meeting. 168. Fascism will not return to Angola. Zimbabwe and Namibia will inevitably become genuinely independent. The Kassinga crime will not go unpunished, whatever may be the manoeuvres and the schemes of those who strive to go against the current of history. South Africa and its allies will therefore have to face the consequences of their gross violation of the most elementary Standards of international law. 169. With the conviction of the internationalist Cuban fighters we raise our voice to utter here the watchword of our Angdan brothers: the struggle continues, victory is certain.

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

It is a great honour and privilege, for which I am profoundly grateful, to speak in the Security Council today as it meets to carry out one of its most challenging tasks: that of coping with the problems which threaten international peace and security, such as the recent armed aggression by the apartheid regime of South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. 172. Similarly, it is both an honour and a privilege to congratulate you, Mr. President, and the other members of the Council, as well as the peoples you represent, on the dedication you have demonstrated and the efficiency you have applied in handling the business of the Council, to which the People’s Republic of Mozambique reaffirms its total commitment and support. 173. Less than 24 hours had elapsed since the conclusion of the ninth special session of the General Assembly, devoted to the question of Namibia, when the blood-thirsty guns of aggression resumed fire on the downtrodden and oppressed people of Namibia and violated the territorial integrity of the neighbouring independent State of the People’s Republic of Angola. 174. The sudden and unjustified military incursion by Pretoria’s racist forces, fully armed with modern weaponry, both on the ground and in the air, in order to massacre civilian refugees, the victims of apartheid and injustice, could only be the act of a re’gime seeking to satisfy its colonialist and expansionist ambitions at all costs, including that of the very stability of international peace and security. Sudden as it may have seemed, however, it was not surprising; such an unprovoked attack on the sovereignty of the peaceful and independent territory of Angola is but the natural consequence of the latest display of armament build-up now in progress in Namibia. “We have gathered irrefutable evidence through our own sources inside Namibia and from the combatants in the People’s Liberation Army of Namibia of extensive enemy military build-up and activities in Namibia. For exatnple, the regime has embarked on a reinforcement of its already huge army in Namibia. Concurrently, it is deploying new types of heavy and sophisticated armaments. This scheme involves the shipment into Namibia of large numbers of tanks, combat aircraft and artillery pieces and large quantities of ammunition. To facilitate this ever-expanding military build-up in Namibia, new bases, barracks and military airfields are being built in stiategic areas in the country for offensive purposes against SWAP0 and the Namibian revolution.“’ 176. The horrible effects of this new South African Iggression into Angola leaves no room to tolerate whatever Imount of justification may be left in the imagination of the racists. The fact is that South Africa’s persistence in not only illegally occupying Namibia but also terrorizing the neighbouring countries and defying the international community has provided that racist Government with a convenient outlet to perpetrate wanton aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola as well as the Republic of Zambia throughout all these years. Such attacks are simply another clear manifestation of the continuing expansive militarization of South Africa and the attendant show of force, and are desperately designed to neutralize the increasing determination of Namibians to gain their Iong overdue independence, even to the extent of internationalizing the contlict. 177. The People’s Republic of Mozambique, which is a front-Iine State, as is the People’s Republic of Angola, aside from also being a victim of armed aggression by Pretoria’s racist ally at Salisbury, vehemently condemns such action as being a direct provocation to escalate the conflict into international proportions. Moreover, South Africa’s latest crime against innocent Namibians is a frontal assault against and an insult to the sincerity and dedication of the efforts of the international community over the last decade, which only two days logo were highlighted by the overwhelming adoption of the Declaration and Programme of Action for Namibia [General Assembly resolution S-9/2]. Therefore, no amount of provocation should be allowed to obstruct Namibia’s inevitable achievement of independence and freedom from colonial domination and oppression, an obstruction which the South African Government intends to bring about through its aggression. The intolerable situation in Namibia, which has been repeatedly stressed in the General Assetnbly, both in regular and in special sessions, can no longer be permitted to pass through 7 Ibid., 1st meeting, para. 117. 179. Decolonization efforts in Africa during the Iast few years have seen great advances both regionally and internationally with the positive gains demonstrated’by the newly independent States of Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Angola, Cape Verde and Sao Tome. Those countries that made extreme sacrifices to win freedom and independence from colonial oppression are now forging ahead in the areas of reconstruction and development, as well as co-operation, to share further their experience with their oppressed brother Africans. It is against this background of potential peace and tranquillity in the region that South Africa has intruded with another act of aggression. 180. The People’s Republic of Mozambique, having known the price of freedom as it now experiences the fruits of its own struggle, can do no more than strongly condemn that aggression, which is without question intended to weaken the independence of the Republic of Angola and destroy the collective efforts of the rest of the international community in general as well as the efforts of the five permanent members of the Security Council to make possible the achievement of a peaceful independence by Namibia. 181. South Africa’s recent aggressive acts clearly prove that it is a real threat to southern Africa. South Africa’s continued presence in Namibia with the blessings of its allies, which provide material and military support, can only sow further destruction not only in Namibia and Angola but also in the rest of Africa and in the world. 182. The People’s Republic of Mozambique, greatly apprehensive Over this grim reality, insists that the only way to achieve peace in our area is to stop the military collaboration between South Africa and the Western Powers that assist that apartheid country.. At the same time, we repeat our constant appeal that all efforts should be exerted and exhausted to end the evil character of the apartheid rCgimes in South Africa and Namibia. 183. Accordingly, the People’s Republic of Mozambique, as a front-line State, a people who have shed their blood with the blood of the oppressed peoples of southern Africa, particularly in Zimbabwe, recommits its support to the Angolan people and to the Namibian people under the

The next speaker is the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia, Ambassador Gwendoline Konie, representative of Zambia. Under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure, I invite her to take a place at the Council table and to make her statement. 185. Miss KONIE (President of the United Nations Council for Namibia): Sir, 1 should like to congratulate you on your accession to the presidency of the Security Council, I am certain that you bring to this difficult post the well-known political skills of the diplomacy of your country. 186. I should also like to thank the members of the Council for this opportunity to participate in their deliberations concerning the attack against the People’s Republic of Angola by the colonialist and racist Pretoria regime. This is a fitting recognition of the Council for Namibia, the organ established by the General Assembly with the mandate to administer Namibia until independence. 187. 1 wish at the outset to draw attention to the statement issued yesterday by the Council for Namibia expressing its indignation at the invasion of Angola by South Africa, and condemning the Pretoria regime in the strongest terms for this blatant act of aggression. The statement has been circulated as a document of the Security Council [S/12691], and of the General Assemb1y.s 188. The vicious and irresponsible attack of South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola is a clear confirmation of the hegemonic ambitions of the reckless colonialists and racists of Pretoria in southern Africa. It is, furthermore, another instance of its systematic policy of intimidation through military incursions against neighbouring independent African countries from its illegal military bases in Namibia, 189. What is profoundly disturbing about the criminal policies of the Pretoria regime is that such policies reflect the utter contempt of Afrikaner racism and colonialism for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, of which South Africa is a signatory, and for the systematic condemnation of its actions by the international community throughout recent decades. 190. As if to underline its criminal disregard for the well considered views of the international community, South Africa unleashes a brutal attack against the People’s Republic of Angola shortly after a special session of the General Assembly in which an overwhelming majority of the Members reaffirmed their demands for the immediate withdrawal of South Africa from Namibia, a Territory which it occupies illegally, and in which it pursues systematic policies of exploitation of its people and 8 A/.33/95. 19 1. While these lines were being written, plans were being made for a brutal assault in violation of the principles and purposes of the United Nations. For how long can a regime which practices such duplicity endure? For how long can the international community tolerate the flouting of all standards of civil&d behaviour by a band of colonialist and racist exploiters claiming to constitute a responsible member of the international community? Their policies of apartheid and bantustanization are a denial of all principles of human dignity and solidarity. Their ruthless exploitation of the African people is an intolerable affront to all standards of human justice. Their acts of military aggression are a continuous threat to international peace and security. 192. Peace and security will prevail in southern Africa only after the complete withdrawal of South Africa from Namibia and after the dismantling of the institutions of upartheid and bantustans in South Africa. Member States must endeavour by all means at their disposal, in accordance with the Charter and all other international instruments in force, to bring South Africa to its senses. 193. In its reckless assault against the People’s Republic of Angola, South Africa has once again used its illegal military bases in Namibia for its policies of permanent aggression against the peoples of southern Africa. In order to continue using Namibia to fulfil its hegemonic obsessions, South Africa continuously fabricates criminal schemes to deprive the people of Namibia of their inalienable rights to self-determination, freedom and national independence in a united Namibia. Its security police is constantly harassing, detaining, torturing and murdering men, women and children in Namibia in a vain attempt to break the will of the people. The Namibian people, under the leadership of their sole and authentic liberation movement, SWAPO, must receive from all Member States full support in their struggle to liberate their country from the illegal occupation of the colonialist and racist Pretoria regime. It is clear that the puppets of the Turnhalle Alliance, who are subservient to the treacherous policies of South African domination, cannot and must not be allowed to represent the Namibian people, whom they betray by serving the interests of the colonialist oppressor. 194. It is claimed in certain quarters that South Africa has expressed its willingness to reach a negotiated settlement on its withdrawal from Namibia. The credibility of such claims is seriously undermined by the brutality of South African military adventurism as expressed in its recent incursions deep into Angolan territory. The ninth special session of the General Assembly, on Namibia, clearly was more realistic in its appraisal of the situation in Namibia today. The Security Council, in carrying out its solemn deliberations, should bear in mind the collective ‘wisdom as expressed both in the debate of the ninth special session as well as in the Declaration on Namibia and Programme of 196. Lives cannot be restored, but South Africa must be made to suffer the penalties at the disposal of the international community. In the Programme of Action adopted at its ninth special session, the General Assembly strongly urged the Security Council to take the most vigorous measures, including sanctions provided for under Chapter VII of the Charter, particularly comprehensive

1 now call on the representative of Angola, who wishes to make a brief statement.

Mr. President, it was thanks to your brilliant talents that you were able to convene this august Council. I hope that, with the same brilliance, you will be able to implement immediately the resolution just adopted by the Council. I should like to express to you and to the members of your delegation my delegation’s sincere gratitude for the efficient, swift aad brilliant manner in which YOU have conducted the Council’s deliberations. The meeting rose at 3.15 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United 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 monde entier. Informez-vous aupres de votre libraire ou adressez-vous a : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Geneve. ECAFl l-IOJI;YZIMTb HBAAHLIR OPI’AHH 3AI4MH OlThE~MHEHHMX HAlJ$fH COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas e&in en venta en librerfas y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Section de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra.