S/PV.2122 Security Council

In accordance with the,decisions taken at the preceding meetings, I invite the representatives of Angola, Benin, Botswana, Cuba, Ethiopia, Ghana, Sri Lanka and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. At tk invitation of the Presfclnt. Mr. a% Figueltedo (Angola). Mr. Houngavou (Benin), Mr. Modisi (Botswana), Mr. Rua Kouri (Cuba), Mr. Setfk (Ethiopiq), Mr. Sekyi (Ghatw), Mr. Fernando (Sri Lanka) and Mr. Komatina p;&m;Jz places reserved for tkm at tk side of . 9. My Government also considers illegal the regime in Southern Rhodesia. We also deem it a duty of the international community to support the fight of the Patriotic Front for a free and independent Zimbabwe. Likewise, the Government of Portugal is fully conscious of the need to comply, in the strictest form, with the sanctions decreed against the Southern Rhodesian regime. Nor are we less conscious of the imperative of denouncing-in the United Nations and in any other international forums-its illegality, its injustice, its racism and repressive policies, its intolerable lack of respect for the most elementary human rights, as well as for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of neighbouring States.

Members of the Council have before them the revised text of the draft resolution sponsored by Bangladesh, Bolivia, Gabon, Jamaica, Kuwait, Nigeria and Zambia, contained in documentS/13140 &ted 7 March. It is my understanding that members of the Council are ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution. 3. The representative of Portugal has asked to speak before the vote, and I now call on him. 11. The Portuguese Government indeed cannot consider as valid the elections scheduled to take place next April in Southern Rhodesia, in which the Patriotic Front will not be allowed to participate, which will take place. under martial law, and which will be promoted under a constututionai law devised to continue to ensure all sorts of unjustified priviledges to a small minority-the same minority that 14 years ago seized power and has since used all kinds of unacceptable means to retain it, against the wil! of the very peoples upon whom it imposed its rule, and totally indifferent to its condemnation by the world. 12. From the exnerience of a not too distant past, we know well enough in Portugal-without needing other countries as examples-what .value to attribute to elections in which only a single political force can participate, where censorship makes impossible the free expression of opinion and the aim of which is only to consecrate and maintain a state of affairs, dictated by a political minority, transformed into absolute master of a collective destiny. 13. From all that I have already said, it can of course be righty inferred that we shall vote in favour of the draft resolution submitted by Bangladesh, Bolivia, Gabon, Jamaica, Kuwait, Nigeria and Zambia [S/23140]. 14. Portugal will not accord any kind of recognition to the forthcoming elections to be heldin Southern Rhodesia. However, I should like to point out that, although we do not know of any Portuguese entity that might intend to send observers to follow those elections, there is no law in my country preventing anyone-from doing so. My Government will not fail to make it known that, should such an action be envisaged, it would meet with its strongest disapproval, but can hardly go further. 15. We hope that the draft resolution on which we are about to vote will be adopted by a significant majority, whatever difficulties some countries might encounter in its formulation. 16. We shall then be entitled to say that we have performed our duty. But have we really performed it to the very end7 Have we indeed exhausted all the possibilities available to us in trying to contribute in a positive way to finding a lasting solution for the tragedy of Zimbabwe? Once again we have denounced the regime ofIan ‘Smith as illegal and his so-called internal settlement as null and void. Once again we have condemned all its evil aspects and actions and expressed our,indignation at them. Is there anyone around this table who might sincerely believe that. what we have achieved does correspond to what the world at large expected from us? Let us not delude ourselves by believing 17. For its part, my delegation fully shares the point of view expressed here last Monday by the representative of Bangladesh [ZlZOth meeting,f, when he said that the Council should once again press forward towards new efforts and new initiatives at the diplomatic level, not only to preserve human lives but also with a view to achieving a lasting and peaceful settlement of, this question. 18. The Council should not, in our view, condone violence, and we feel that it would even betray the very ideals of the Charter of the United Nations were it to encourage the use of force to achieve the restoration oflegality in Southern Rhodesia. Force might indeed overthrow the illegal Smith regime. But this-achievement, although the first and basic condition for the self-determination and independence of Zimbabwe, will not by itself ensure the lasting solution which it remains our duty to seek. I 19. With deep dismay, we heard the representative of the United Kingdom declare here that, following his visit to southern Africa and various African States, Mr. Cledwyn Hughes, special representative of the British Prime Minister, had come to the conclusion that at. the present stage there seemed to be not prospect of convening a successful meeting of all the parties to the conflict to. negotiate a new settlement. It might well be so. But that can,never serve any one of us or the Council as an excuse to give up. 20. The best way to prevent the present escalation of violence and to try to ensure an independent Zimbabwe; where all its nationals will be able to live freely and peacefully, is, in our view, the one referred to by the representative of the United Kingdom in the same statement and I quote: < / ” . .’ j 6‘ . . . the best prospect of ending the.conllictand of achieving a return to legality and a peaceful settlement in Rhodesia lies in an attempt to find a wider agreement involving both sides in the conflict and incorporating such essential features of the Anglo-American proposals as a cease-tire and a neutral administration for the conduct of free and fair elections under. United Nations supervision. Such elections, held under.impartial control, should determine the wishes of thepeople of Rhodesia as a whole and be conducted in a manner which would command the acceptance of’ the international community.” [Ibid.. para. 19.1 ’ I,‘, 21. We are well.aware of the dif%ultie&such a task. But it seems to us to .be the duty of the ‘,Council to appeal endlessly to the parties and to exert uponthem whatever‘ Pressure might prove necessary to mak$ them come to an agreement on those bases. I

I shall now put ,the draft resolution in document S/l3140 to the vote. A vote was taken by show of hands. . In favour: Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Czechoslovakia, Gabon, Jamaica, Kuwait, Nigeria, Norway, Portugal, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Zambia Against: None

A number of representatives have asked to be allowed to speak following the vote, and I shall now call on them.

We abstained in the vote on this draft resolution although there are some parts with which we are in agreement. But, regrettably, the text. contains features which make it impossible for us to vote for it. Indeed, had it not been for the fact that some changes had been made to make it less objectionable, we should have had to vote against it. 25. The United Kingdom’s position on the matters dealt with in the resolution is clear. In the first palce,’ as I stressed in my ‘statement of 5 March 12220th meeting,?, we wholly condemn the attacks made by the illegal regime on the territory of neighbouring States, just as we condemn all violence within Rhodesia, which has such tragic effects on the civilian population, both African and European. We deplore both the shooting down of civil aircraft and the threats which have been made to do so outside Rhodesia. 30. In these circumstances we must make it absolutely clear that we do not intqrpret or accept the operative paragraphs of this resolution as precluding visits to Rhodesia by private persons or Members of Parliament to observe the elections, ‘or by anyone to inform themselves about the situation in that country: or as in any way circumscribing the rights of the United Kingdom Parliament freely to exercise its responsibilities in relation to Rhodesia, having regard to its own judgement of the wishes of the people of Rhodesia as a whole. . 26. We share the view expressed in the resolution on the resumption of executions by the illegal r&me. These are, in our view, abhorrent to all civilized opinion. We condemn such executions in the strongest terms and have made this clear to the Salisbury regime. Although so long as that regime exists there are no practicai steps which the United Kingdom Government can take to prevent them, we join with other members of the Council and with the whole international community in expressing our utter condemnation. j 27. In my last statement I also set out the British Govemment’s views ‘on how best to continue trying to achieve a settlement incorporating such essential features of the Angl+American proposals as a cease-fire and a neutral administration for the conduct of free and fair elections under international supervision. It is a major defect of the resolution that it does not include a renewed call for a settlement along these lines. The absence of such a call leaves the resolution ‘wholly unbalanced, and this is one of the reasons why we’ have not been able to support it. . li,. 31. It remains my Government’s overriding concern to continue to work for a settlement on lines which could end the war and command the acceptance and support of the international community, and which would offer hope for the stability and the economic and social prosperity of an independent Zimbabwe. We will do nothing which is counter to this broad objective or which in any way represents a concession to racism, violence or illegality.

Norway voted in favour of the draft resolution just adopted by the Council. I should like, however, to emphasize in relation to paragraph 3 that the Norwegian Government, is accordance with its longstanding policy, will continue to provide only humanitarian and economic assistance. 28. Certainly the’. elections which the Salisbury regime proposes to hold in April are unlikely to bring a peaceful solution. It is hard to see how it is possible to talk of holding free and fair elections in present circumstances in Rhodesia. We have made clear-and I reiterate it-that we have no intention of being oflicially involved as a Government in sending observers’ to .monitor the elections. The British Government has not accepted that the internal settlement holds out any real prospect of peace and the orderly and genuine transfer of power in Rhodesia. The fighting is likely to continue and the need for negotiations will remain. The British Council believes that after any elections are held there will be a need to bring the internal and external leaders together around a negotiating table. We intend to continue our work with all the parties for real peace.

In a few moments the United States delegation will be making available to members of the Council copies of testimony provided yesterday by the United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. That testimony contains a full explanation of our views on the issues discussed in the resolution just adopted. 34; However, the position of the United States on the question of Zimbabwe has been stated and restated. The United States, together with the United Kingdom, has participated in a sustained effort, spanning several years, to bring about a negotiated settlement leading to genuine inde- ’ See resolution A5 (1979). 35. The internal elections scheduled to take place in Rhodesia in April will not end the conflict or provide a just and lasting solution, nor will they meet the test of intemational acceptability. These elections will take place on the basis of a constitution on which recognized political groups were in no way consulted and which has been approved only by a white minority that has sought to preserve a disproportionate share of power and influence. The April elections are the result of a process in which prmcipal political groups have not been allowed to participate on an equal basis. The United States will not give its support to the Salisbury parties in their efforts to institute arrangements which do not appear to meet the criteria for a genuine transfer of power to majority rule and from which recognized political groups are effectively excluded. 36. Turning to the resolution. the United States SUDDO~~S its over-all thrust and in particular its condemnationof the raids into Zambia and Angola. However, there are various aspects of the resolution regarding which my Government has reservations, and the United States therefore abstained in the vote. We recognize that the majority of the Council are interested in expressing a point of view regarding the important issues involved with which in the main we sympathize. 37. I wish to make it clear that, in the view of the United States, this is not a mandatory resolution; it does not give rise to binding obligations. The resolution’s references to the responsibilities of Member States refer, in my Govemment’s view, to the enforcement measures decided upon by the Council in the past. Those provisions of the resolution having to do with observers must be considered in the light of the arrangements, limitations and responsibilities defined by the Constitution and the public and legal practice of each Member State. 38. We do not believe that this resolution is intended to raise obstacles or barriers to the negotiation of a peaceful and just settlement of the Rhodesian problem. The United States does not interpret this resolution as endorsing the use of force from any quarter or approving measures that sup port the use of force. This resolution must be interpreted in the light of Charter obligations to settle international disputes by peaceful means and to ensure that armed force shall not be used save in the common interest. 39. Mr. LEPRE’ITE (France) (intetprez&onfimFrencA): As I emphasixed in my statement on 5 March [212Oth meeringj, France unreservedly condemns the raids carried out by Southern Rhodesian forces against the neighbouring States. Hence, the provisions regarding those actions that are contained in the draft resolution submitted to the Council today meet with our full approval. Similarly, France considers that the consultation envisaged by Ian Smith for 20 April is ‘not truly democratic-and only a democratic consultation could transfer power to the majority inRhodesia. Therefore, we cannot approve the sending of observers to those elections. 41. Finally, and above all, the call made on all States in paragraph 7 ‘to take appropriate action to discourage organizations and institutions within their respective areas of jurisdiction” is contrary to the freedoms expressly guaranteed by the Constitution of the French Republic. 42: In those circumstances, my cot&y was regretfully unable to vote in favour of the draft resolution, although we approved of its spirit and motivations. i

I have the honour-and, I might say, the unpleasant duty-of speaking after the vote to try to make the situation clear. I am speaking on behalf of the delegations of Bangladesh, Bolivia, Jamaica, Kuwait and Nigeria, as well as on behalfof my own delegation. All these delegations are among the sponsors ,of the draft resolution just adopted. 44. We are disappointed that in these extremely critical times in the situation in Southern Rhodesia such a mild draft resolution has not commended itself to unanimous adoption by the Security Council. We note in particular that two of the countries that abstained on the draft resolution are the proponents of what are called the Anglo- American proposals, proposals that have been on the table for a long time and are rapidly losing, if they have not already lost, their relevance because they have not been pursued with the necessary vigour and determination. 45. I listened to the explanations of vote. Three points were stressed: one was the absence of a reference to the Anglo-American proposals, the second was the condemnation of all violence in Southern Rhodesia; the third was the need for certain countries and their publics to inform themselves of the situation in Southern Rhodesia. 46. Let me take the last point. The situation in Rhodesiais not a new one. What is involved is obvious. There is an illegal regime that has, for the last 14 years, entrenched itself in power. No other information can be required. All that is required is for us to address ourselves to the reality that the problem of Southern Rhodesia can be solved only through the removal of the illegal regime and the return of Rhodesia to legality, or, indeed the granting of genuine independence to Southern Rhodesia. 47. It is therefore amazing that now, in the light of specific Anglo-American proposals that are on the table, emphasii should be placed on the need for people to inform themselves, when theyknow that the Anglo-American proposals have not gone anywhere because of the intransigence of the Ian Smith regime. 48. One would have wanted and expected the draft resolution that has been adopted by the Council to be cosponsored by the very proponents of the Angl+American proposals. That is an initiative that they, not we in the Group of Non-Aligned States, should have taken, because the events in Southern Rhodesia, the so-called elections that are to take place next month and the violence that is going on are contrary to the Anglo-American proposals.

It. really should not be necessary to add this, but I think that what we tried to say in our explanation of vote was that our objection was essentially to the idea that the Council could decide for citizens of the United States where and when they should travel. ,I .&ink that one of the things that my country has always stood for-and we get into trouble when we depart from thii-is that we should not restrict the rights of our citizens to go anywhere in the world they want, to see anything in the world they want to see. We usually find that the democratic process works for us. This does not influence policy negatively. In fact, 1 think it creates what is an enlightened and progressive policy. So it is one thing for the Council to take decisions that would advise and govern the travel of our citizens and another for us, in the debate, within our form of government, to decide what our policy is. Our abstention is essentially related to protecting those elements of our national sovereignty and our democratic process which we feel to be very important and is in no way a determination of the legality or illegality of the regime in Rhodesia. 50. We hope that the delegations that abstained on this resolution will still, nevertheless, take seriously the important elements contained in it, especially the need for Member States to refrain from sending observers to Southem Rhodesia to observe the so-called elections, because the Security Council has already taken a position on the fact that the so-called elections are contrary to the very purposes of the United Nations and the genuine aspirations of the people of Zimbabwe. 51. It should be borne in mind that the war in Southern Rhodesia is escalating. The front-line countries, and my country is one of them, have exercised much restraint in the situation, but it is quite clear that the Smith @me is seeking to general& the conflict in southern Africa and to involve the front-line countries in the conflict directly. The question is for how long the front-lime countries can allow their people to be maimed, to be bombed and to be killed. For how long can the front-line countries allow their sovereignty and their territorial integrity to be violated with impunity by the Smith r&me? The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m. ., I : .,‘,(I’ ‘. . _‘. . .‘. ., ‘., ‘. : ,a. ; .b , . ’ _‘. . . ., * ‘, 1 . .. ‘., . . . ” -< HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Unite 1 Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and disttibutors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, Neti York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES L.es publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences depositaires do monde entier. Informez-vous aupr&s de votre iibraire ou adressex-vous a : Nations Unies. Section des ventes. New York ou Geneve. KAK IfOJIYVHTb H3fiAHKR OPI-AHK3AlUiK OIi-bElUfHEHHhIX HAWfR H3naHHn ODraHHsaqm 06’bemiHeAHblx HaqnR ~omxo KynHrb a KHH~~KH~IX Maraamfax H arenmmax so acex pafionax raspa. HasonxTe cnpaaxa 06 xwamixx a *amen x~xxwo~ narasxxe mm nkmmfe no axpecy : Oprami3aurix OtVbenxxexxbrx Hauxg. Cexuun no npoxame xsnanxfi. Hbm-Hopx xxx )KeHeBa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estan en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Cons&e a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Section de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Lftho in United Nations, New York Price: SU.S. 1.50 79-70002-December 1981-2.250