S/PV.2132 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken by the Council at its 2130th meeting, I invite the representative of Angola to take a place atthe Council table -and the representatives of A&r@, Bulgaria, Ethiopi?, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for tnem at the side of the Council chamber. At the invitation of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola) took a pIace at the Council table and Mr. Bouayad- Agha (Algeria), Mr. Yankov (Btdgaria), Mr. Worku (Ethicpi@! I& -&a Van--Van Lau (Viet Nam) and Mr. Komatina (Yugoslavia) took the places reservedfor them at the side of the Council chamber.

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Benin, Botswana, the Congo, Cuba, the German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Guinea, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sri Lanka and the Sudan in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the question on the agenda. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional ‘rules of procedure.

I should also like to inform members of the Council that I have received a letter dated 19 March from the representatives of Gabon, Nigeria and Zambia [S/13181] which reads as follows: “We, the undersigned members of the Security Council, have the honour to request that, during its meetings devoted to the consideration of the item ‘Complaint by Angola against South Africa’, the Council should extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Mr. Mishake Muyongo, Vice-President of the South West Africa People’s Organization.” If I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Council agrees to the request. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Muyongo (South West Africa People’s Organization) took a place at the Council table.

I wish to draw the attention of members of the Council to document S/13180, which contains the text of a letter dated 19 March from the ChargC d’Affaires of the Permanent Mission of South Africa to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Council.

The recent attacks carried out by South African forces against Angola and Zambia constitute serious violations of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of those countries and must be condemned by the international community. 6. Angola and Zambia have, together with the other front-line States, always been in the forefront of the liberation struggle in southern Africa. They have for a long time carried an unreasonably heavy burden politically, materially and financially. The recent armed attacks against the two countries by South Africa add to this burden through further human suffering and destruction of property. In this connexion, the Norwegian Government wishes to reiterate its view that it is the responsibility of the international community to provide effective economic and humanitarian assistance to the front-line States. 8. In this connexion, the Norwegian Government would like to commend the Secretary-General and his staff for their untiring efforts in pursuance of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). We should like also to express our support for the efforts by the Western contact group to break the present impasse in the negotiations. 9. It is imperative that the negotiating process now under way should be allowed to be concluded successfully. We therefore urge the parties concerned to contribute to an internationally acceptable solution in Namibia in accordance with resolution 435 (1978). Inconclusive negotiations over the Namibia question may have far-reaching consequences for the whole region and may represent a serious threat to international peace and security. The South African Government, as the illegal occupying force in Namibia, bears a main responsibility for future developments in Namibia and southern Africa as a whole.

I should like to make the following brief statement on behalf of the Government of Kuwait. 11. The situation in southern Africa is in a critical stage now. The efforts of the Western five-some of them members of the Security Council-towards the attainment of Namibia’s independence are at the stage of make or break. The fact that South Africa chose this time to launch its attack on Angola casts serious doubts on its sincerity concerning the independence of Namibia. My delegation supported the request by Angola for the convening of the Council to consider the implications of this brutal attack. My Government condemns in the strongest terms South Africa’s cowardly aggression against Angola. 12. It has been stated during this debate that the reason behind this attack is the desire to intimidate the neighbouring African States and to frighten them, so as to make them discontinue their assistance to the freedom lighters of Namibia. No doubt South Africa wants to surround itself with docile, obedient African States that would not oppose its inhuman policy of apartheid 13. Angola is a republic that has sworn to give its full support to the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO). It is being punished and subjected to brutal aggression because it does not follow a policy that tallies with South Africa’s But Angola, in its support of SWAPO, is in our view implementing what the majority of the Members of the United Nations have called for-that is, the offer of all forms of assistance to the freedom fighters in Namibia and in Zimbabwe. It is unfortunate that those who act in accordance with United Nations resolutions and out of their convictions suffer for their sincerity and dedication. 14. But the attacks on Angola and on other front-line States will not put an end to the determination of the 15. On 6 May 1978 the Security Council adopted resolution 428 (1978), in which it warned South Africa that it would take drastic measures against it if it continued its aggression on the neighbouring States. South Africa chose this time for its attack on Angola because it thought that the Council would not be in a position to act in view of the proximity talks on Namibia, which are actually being held now. It is an irony of the day that such talks, held with the intention of attaining a peaceful settlement in Namibia, should be used as an excuse for South Africa’s aggressive policy. 16. Some speakers have stated that the kid-glove treatment’ given South Africa by some Members encourages its Government in its course of destructive attacks on neighbouring States. It is doubtful that the power of persuasion could prevail on South Africa to see reason. We believe that the power of confrontation will bring better results. 17. South Africa is the most powerful country in Africa. It is armed to the teeth, notwithstanding Security Council resolution 418 (1977), on an arms embargo against South Africa. I have a feeling that many of us pay lip service to the observance of this resolution, for, in reality, arms have never stopped reaching South Africa. The fact that Member States, particularly those in a position to do so, have refrained from supplying the relevant committee with information on the violation of the resolution bears witness to the indifference and apathy with which Council resolutions are always met. We realize that Angola and other front-tine States are facing impossible odds. But they may derive a little consolation from the fact that the overwhelming number of Member States are steadfastly behind them politically, morally and materially. 18. Destruction is awful, particularly when it takes place in small and developing countries whose primary concern is social and economic progress. But that is the price Angola and others are paying for their unswerving dedication to their convictions and principles. They are engaged in a battle of patience and a battle of sacrifice. We believe that the outcome of that battle will be victory-triumph. 19. My delegation whole-heartedly supports the young Republic of Angola, and also whole-heartedly supports the application of the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter against South Africa.

The delegation of Jamaica listened with great attention to the eloquent presentation yesterday by the representative of Angola [213Oth meeting,?, in which he gave a detailed account of the recent barbarous acts of aggression carried out by South African armed forces against his country. It is painful to recall that, from its 21. Jamaica strongly condemns this latest series of armed attacks, which should be viewed by the Security Council with the utmost gravity. They involve the violation of the territorial integrity of a sovereign African State and represent a territorial extension of the tactics of violence and terror which the South African regime relentlessly perpetrates against the African majority in Namibia and in South Africa itself. These unprovoked acts of aggression, involving the use of napalm, have caused considerable loss of life and untold suffering among civilian populations, and have also caused immense damage to property. 26. The failure of the Council in the past to take the necessary measures provided for in the Charter has no doubt encouraged the Pretoria r6gilr.e to persist in committing acts of aggression. These acts should not only be condemned; they have to be stopped. The Council must begin the process whereby effective enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter may be applied against South Africa to halt these acts of aggression. This is the only way that we can hope to deal with South African defiance, and thii is the only way that the Council can fulfil its responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security. 22. These acts are a serious violation of the principles of the Charter, international law and accepted norms of international conduct. Once again, they demonstrate the grave danger to international peace and security posed by the racist regime of Pretoria. It cannot escape the attention of the Council that the in-built violence of the apartheidsystem and South Africa’s persistent and contemptuous disregard of international opinion and the Charter’s principles are inimical to the creation of conditions conducive to peace in southern Africa. 27. Mr. HULINSKi’ (Czechoslovakia) (interpretation fi-om Russian): Just a few days ago the Security Council considered the bloody acts of aggression of the illegal regime of Southern Rhodesia undertaken with the support of the South African racists against Angola, Mozambique and Zambia. Today it is discussing a further series of aggressive attacks on the People’s Republic of Angola undertaken by the apartheid r&me of South Africa from the intemational Territory of Namibia. 23. It must also be a matter of grave concern to the Council that, in addition to its other atrocities, South Africa continues to use the United Nations Territory of Namibia as a spring-board for launching unprovoked attacks against independent African States. And the timing of these attacks is not without significance. It is a further indication of the extent of South Africa’s sincerity in cooperating with efforts by the United Nations to bring genuine independence to Namibia. It has proved difficult for South Africa to mask its real intention of pursuing its neocolonialist designs on Namibia. Its sustained campaign to destroy SWAPO, which is the sole authentic representative of the people of Namibia, as well as the current wave of armed aggression, only demonstrates that South Africa is determined to sabotage the process of bringing about genuine independence for Namibia in accordance with the provisions of resolution 435 (1978). South Africa’s actions stand in clear contrast to the constructive attitude taken by the front-line States and SWAPO, which have in good faith given their co-operation and have exercised considerable restraint in the face of intense and persistent provocation. 28. South Africa’s attack on Angola once again demonstrates that the racist regimes have no intention of complying with the repeated demands of the Council for the immediate cessation of their aggressive actions against independent African States. 29. My delegation shares the ‘view of these criminal actions of the South African racists expressed by the representative of Angola, Ambassador de Figueiredo, by the Chairman of the African Group, the representative of Ethiopia, Mr. Worku, and by the representatives of other African States who have already addressed the Council. 30. The Territory of Namibia has repeatedly been used by the South African r&me for acts of armed aggression against Angola and against other sovereign States. This shows that as long as South Africa continues illegally to occupy Namibia, as long as South African troops are on Namibian territory, there will be no tranquillity or security for the countries of that part of Africa. 24. I wish to make it clear that Jamaica would like to see the current proximity talks succeed in reaching agreement on the outstanding issues in the United Nations plan for Namibia. But for thii result to be achieved, pressure must be brought to bear on the recalcitrant party, namely South Africa, to co-operate and to desist from provocative actions that jeopardize the implementation of resolution 435 (1978). 31. By its repeated acts of aggression the Pretoria r&me has constantly been flagrantly violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of neighbouring African States and the security of their inhabitants, and at the same time it has been undermining all the efforts aimed at bringing about a just solution to the Namibian problem in accordance with the will and aspirations of the people of that country. 25. South Africa should have learnt by now that its violent tactics cannot shake the determination of the African States, in particular the front-line States, to continue to support the cause of freedom and liberation in southern Africa. This determination rests on their unshakeable commitment to the principles of the Charter and to the justice of 32. Its criminal actions clearly demonstrate ‘that South Africa is stubbornly pursuing one objective only in Namibia: the creation of conditions for imposing upon the Namibian people a neocolonialist solution by carrying out a so-called internal settlement. In order to achieve this, the racists have been attempting to bring to bear brutality and 33. It is the South African racists, and they alone; who have been threatening international efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement of the Namibian problem. It is no accident that the most recent acts of aggression by the Pretoria r&me have coincided with the racists making a number of arrogant demands with regard to the settlement plan for the Namibian problem, demands which are aimed at ensuring that the proposed United Nations operation in Namibia will be carried out exclusively on terms advantageous to the Pretoria regime and to the traitors connected with the Turnhalle group. . 34. The schemes of the racists must be decisively repudiated. Any further talks with the South African Republic can be fruitful only if they are used to exert the necessary pressure on the Pretoria r&gime and prevail upon it to agree unconditionally with the settlement in Namibia on the basis of the relevant decisions of the Security Council. We cannot for a moment permit these talks to be abused for the purpose of exerting pressure on SWAP0 and the front-line African States in order to prevail upon them to make further concessions to the arrogant demands of the occupiers from Pretoria. At the same time, in view of the constant attempts by the South African regime to change or place their own private interpretation upon the provisions of a Namibian settlement, we find entirely justified and legitimate the demands that the special reports of the Secretary-General presented for the approval of the Council should contain all the specific provisions affecting the implementation of the proposed United Nations operation in Namibia. 35. The question of the acts of aggression by the Pretoria regime against neighbouring African States has already been frequently discussed in the Security Council. As a result of the direct connivance with that regime by certain Western circles which have vested interests in preserving their economic, political and strategic positions in southern Africa, the Council has so far found itself unable to take effective measures against the South African r&ime. The active support of the racist r&ime by certain Western countries is the reason for the virtual inaction of international bodies and has hindered adoption of genuinely effective measures against the racists. Similarly, as has often been repeated and stressed by African representatives, these countries bear quite a large share of the responsibility for the dangerous situation existing in southern Africa, which is fraught with the most serious consequences both for the people of Namibia and for the independent development of the liberation countries of Africa. At the same time, the policy of betrayal practised by the Maoists with regard to the national liberation struggle of the peoples of Africa, as we have noticed, for example, in Angola, pursues the same goal. 36. The threat to peace and security that exists in the south-western part of Africa can be eliminated only if a just solution to the problem of Namibia is ensured. And such a solution can be achieved only on the basis of strict compliance with the relevant resolutions of theGeneral Assembly and the Security Council. 38. That is why the Czechoslovak delegation once again wishes to express its unreserved support for the demands that the Council should take effective measures against the South African racists, including sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. These demands are contained in the numerous decisions of the General Assembly which were supported by the overwhelming majority of Members of the Organization. Furthermore, we are under the obligation to do this under resolution 428 (1978), in which the Council decides to “meet again in the event of further acts of violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People’s Republic of Angola by the South African racist regime in order to consider the adoption of more effective measures, in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, including Chapter VII thereof”. 39. In the communiqut issued by the Miniitry of Defence of the People’s Republic of Angola, issued in document S/13177, the words of the President of Angola, Mr. Agostinho Neto, are recalled, and I quote: ‘I.. . the imperialists can come with their planes, their tanks, their cannons and their warships, but they will not be able to prevent our heroic people from fulfilling their sacred internationalist duty towards the peoples of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa, to whom we once again reiterate our militant solidarity. Let them come from where they may, how they may-the racists and their overlords will run into the impenetrable barrier of the determination of an Angolan people ready to defend its liberty, the integrity of its fatherland and socialism”. 40. In their just, heroic struggle, the people of Angola are not alone: they are supported by the progressive forces of the whole world, including the people of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. Indeed, my country has always consistently favoured and supported the struggle of the African peoples against colonialism, racism and upmheid and for freedom and national independence. We shall continue to do so.

Bangladesh has strongly supported the request of the Government of Angola to convene this urgent meeting of the Council to consider acts of aggression launched by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. We have done so to express our indignation and condemnation of these attacks which violate the most rudimentary principles of international law respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States. 42. The extent of South Africa’s aggressive actions is spelled out unambiguously in the communiqub issued by 43. These attacks on Angola are not new. Previous speakers have vividly alluded to past acts of aggression perpetrated by South Africa on Angola inimical to its very emergence as a sovereign State and, thereafter, to the continued viability and consolidation of its political independence. The Council itself, by its resolution 428 (1978), strongly condemned Pretoria for acts of aggression committed against Angola and warned that further aggression could lead to adoption of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter. 44. Nor have these acts been restricted to Angola: they have been perpetrated on all the front-line States. The representative of Zambia, Ambassador Paul Lusaka, in his statement yesterday /ibid./, referred to attacks against Zambian sovereignty only last week, when South African troops terrorized and tortured innocent villagers, and also planted line-mines and set up road blocks. The resulting toll was four dead and five wounded, all civilians. Moreover, these attacks were preceded two weeks ago by aerial bombardment and raids which killed 9 innocent Zambians and wounded 14 others. 45. Twelve days ago the Council adopted resolution 445 (1979) strongly condemning the racist minority r&me of Ian Smith for committing acts of aggression against Angola, Mozambique and Zambia. It did not escape the Council’s notice during the debate that acts against distant Angola involved something more than purely white Rhode- Sian action. South Africa’s complicity and collusion were an ever-present consideration. 46. These attacks clearly are not isolated instances. They are not simple reprisals in the face of alleged provocations. They are not spontaneous counteractions. They appear to form part of a larger design, a persistent, premeditated pattern of action executed in accordance with a calculated plan of escalating aggression. The indications are obvious and manifold, the timing precise and the objectives transparent. 47. The crux of the matter, the central problem in this region around which all other problems revolve, is the determination of the white minority settler regimes to maintain their privileged status quo at any cost. The front-line States have demonstrated conspicuous restraint and extended maximum co-operation by seizing all initiatives for a peaceful settlement in Rhodesia which could lead to an independent Zimbabwe in accordance with fundamental principles universally accepted by the international community. Despite these efforts, the ‘end result was impasse and circumvention. The dateline for the sham. elections, already declared null and void and invalid and illegal by the Council, now looms large. 48. The problem of Namibia is integrally connected to the latest acts of aggression launched on Angola by South Africa. While Angola remains a permanent target of South 49. For over a year South Africa has played the game of co-operation in international efforts to effect a genuine, free and democratic transition to independence in Namibia under United Nations supervision and control. Having failed in its attempts to exercise direct control over that Territory, South Africa’s intent has been to fashion a solution that would perpetuate its indirect rule with the added incentive of securing international legitimacy. To achieve that end, the primary objective has been to negate and exclude the presence and influence of SWAPO, recognized by the overwhelming majority of nations of the world as the’ sole and legitimate representative of the Namibian people. 50. Maximum concessions were extracted: South Africa’s illegal presence in Namibia was ignored defacro; the status of Walvis Bay left in abeyance; a South African Administrator-General exercising significant jurisdiction and powers was installed; the right of South Africa to .maintain a significant military presence was accepted; its retention of powers over law and order and policing functions, even during the transition period, acknowledged; enforced registration of voters within South West Africa preceded a socalled internal election, despite international condemnation and its rejection as null and void. Nevertheless, there has now emerged a puppet South West African representative element recognized by South Africa ‘as a veritable “national” presencewhose wishes South Africa must take into account. Having done all in its power to circumscribe, contain and dilute any possible role for SWAP0 in the future of Namibia, .one would have -thought South Africa would be content to let the long-awaited process towards transition begin. 5 1. Not SO. South Africa does not believe merely in hedging its bets, it is determined to eliminate the least shadow of a threat. Thus the rejection of the latest report of the Secretary-General, dated 26 February /S/13120], the de+ picable attack on his impartiality and the quibbling over inconsequential details regarding modalities for initiating the transition process, constitute sufficient camouflage to launch unprovoked attacks against Angola in order to rain death and destruction on Namibians and Angolans alike. 52. The position of Bangladesh on the proximity talks is unequivocal. We have supported the initiative to clear the ground for a decisive breakthrough on the Namibian settlement issue. It is our understanding, however, that the latest report of the Secretary-General represents the maximum degree of compromise and that his proposals can be neither diluted nor revised. The purpose of these talks must be directed at securing South African realization and acceptance of this fact and at pinpointing the consequences of its refusal to accept the proposals. It cannot be forgotten that in law South Africa has no standing in Namibia. Its presence there is illegal. Its position can in no way be equated to the legitimate status of SWAP0 as the sole representative of the people of Namibia. South Africa, as the representative of Zambia unequivocally stated, “is not the custodian of the interests of the Namibian people and cannot be the voice through which they will air their aspirations” [213Oth meeting, para. 321. . 54. Bangladesh believes that the Security Council must condemn the racist regime of South Africa for its continuing aggression against all front-line States and, in particular,. Angola. The time has come for the Council to move beyond mere condemnation and to consider further measures, including those under appropriate provisions of the Charter. There is an imperative need also to render moral and material assistance to the front-line States to enable them to maintain their resistance against South African aggression and to support the liberation struggle. The Council must thereby demonstrate forcefully that the process towards peace in southern Africa cannot be wilfully impeded by South Africa. 55. In conclusion, I wish to reaf%rn my Government’s full suppo, t for the just struggle of the oppressed peoples of Namibia and Rhodesia for national liberation and genuine independence and our firm solidarity and support for all the front-line States in their determined sacrifices to aid their cause.

The delegation of Bolivia wishes to express its most energetic condemnation of the attacks being perpetrated by the South African armed forces against the frontline States. The complaint by the Government of Angola opens up a new and painful chapter in the already long history of misdeeds by the Government of Pretoria. My Government supports the Government of Angola and expresses to it its most sincere solidarity. 57. As for the attacks themselves, it would seem that in South Africa there is a deliberate intent to place obstacles in our path and to prevent the success of the negotiations being so laboriously carried out with the assistance of the Secretary-General and the Western Powers members of the Security Council which formulated the proposals contained in document S/12636 of 10 April 1978. 58. Aggression against Angolan populations is from every point of view reprehensible. It runs counter to,the alleged good faith of the Pretoria Government, which says that it is co-operating in the search for negotiated formulas but at the same time does not hesitate to add new factors of concern by using its well-supplied arsenal against defenceless populations in neighbouring countries. 59. Thus the attitude of South Africa is inconsistent. Its Government cannot but be aware that the measures that it has so far used have created for it an image which is not at all enviable and have led to its isolation in the international community. To add yet new reasons for grievance to those already accumulated can only be interpreted as’an unex- 60. But this same reflection leads us to think that the crimes such as those perpetrated in the implacable raids against Angola and Zambia might be governed by another psychological factor. Here one could apply what the Secretary-General said in one of his oral reports, revealing so much understanding of human nature and the inevitable course of history, about the syndrome of distrust within the Pretoria Government. Its intransigence and rebellion have created for it a grave crisis of anguish and isolation which makes it see attacking enemies even in its own shadow. 61, South Africa knows that it is out in the cold and alone. With its guilty conscience, isolation becomes a fence and, being fenced in, it feels threatened on all sides. It is an obsession which has a grain of truth, and we should bear it in mind so that the resolution which will contain the Council’s decisions will not neglect the inclusion of a new appeal to the Government of Pretoria. The Council must again appeal to it to abandon its suicidal arrogance bordering on paranoia and bear in mind that there is but one way to redemption from the responsibility which overwhelms it. That is the way offered to it in the proposals of the Western Powers, which SWAP0 has accepted, thus eloquentlyproving its moderation and spirit of peace. 62. It is in the light of these brief reflections that my delegation believes that the draft resolution setting down our concerns should be as concise and pragmatic as possible. To this end, it should be neither extensive nor repetitious, since, in the case of the suffering inflicted on the people of Angola, we find all the characteristics of arrogance and treachery of past deeds, which have already met with the unanimous repudiation of the international community. Let us avoid what has become common and routine in United Nations resolutions: the rhetoric of recrimination, the punitive action which would appear to have no other purpose than self-indulgence, thus diluting its substantive effect in mere words which do not solve anything. It is not a matter of condoning abuses and injustices by silencing truth. It is a matter of eradicating evils by applying a, pragmatic therapy, even though the audible resonance with which we at times try to attenuate our frustrations is absent. Let us avoid the rhetoric of injury, the daily exercise of which clouds the immediate perspectives, confuses minds and makes the paths to peace less accessible. 63. To attain this objective, we believe the action of the Council could be summarized as follows: --Fist, to condemn the acts of violence committed by South Africa against the populations of Angola in all their gravity. -Secondlv. to make a final anneal to the Pretoria Govemmenito refrain from any a; of provocation which might be interpreted as yet another mockery and defiance of not only the authority of the Council but also the mediating efforts of the Western Powers and the relevant resolutions, which we unhesitatingly consider to be the final choice for the peacefui transition of South Africa to legitimacy.’ -Thirdly, to reatlirm our confidence in the co-operation of the Secretary-General and to encourage the efforts .at persuasion of the Western Powers, which are determined to 6. 64. Before concluding, I should like to say that the Government and the people of Bolivia fervently hope that we shall shortly see an end to the bloody price which the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe are paying for their freedom, and that hatred will cease to dim the halo of joy which we all hope will crown the birth of these future States.

At the beginning of this month, the Security Council considered the question of the series of frenzied armed attacks on and invasions of the African front-line States by the Smith racist regime in Rhodesia. In recent days, the Botha racist authorities in South Africa also dispatched aircraft and troops to launch armed attacks on Angola, Zambia and other African front-line States. It is reported that, within the short space of eight days, from 6 to 13 March, the South African racist authorities carried out armed invasions of Angola on eight occasions. On 14 March, they sent large numbers of aircraft to bomb Kahama, in the province of Cunene, and the Catengue area, in the province of Benguela. These invasions and attacks have seriously infringed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola and other front-line States, and have brought inestimable loss to the lives and property of the peoples there. This is yet another sanguinary crime committed by the South African Botha racist r&me against the African peoples. The Chinese Government and people express the utmost indignation and strongest condemnation at this. 68. While the racist authorities are puttingup a last-ditch fight, the super:Powers. which are external forces in the area, have also stepped up their rivalry in Africa. They are actively engaged in interfering in the liberation struggles of southern Africa to fish in troubled waters, therefore throwing the African continent into greater turbulence. However, neither the racists’ dying kicks nor the super-Powers* foul deeds can stem the southern African peoples’ forward march. 66. The South African racist r&me and its internal and external policies are a scourge on the African people and constitute a grave threat to world peace and international security. Over a long period, the South African racist regime has consistently spumed the relevant resolutions of the United Nations. At home, it practises a Fascist tyranny, carrying out inhuman policies of apartheid and racial discrimination. Abroad, it colludes with the Rhodesian Smith racist regime to suppress the national liberation struggles of the peoples of southern Africa, ceaselessly carrying’ out armed provocations and military invasions against neighbouring African States and posing a serious threat to their independence and security. The South African racist r&me has illegally occupied Namibia for a long time. It has also resorted to various schemes and stratagems to resist any measure adopted by the United Nations aimed at putting an end to its illegal occupation. It is impossible to keep count of the South African racist authorities’ crimes. It is entirely legitimate for the African countries to demand that the Security Council should condemn South Africa and adopt effective measures to check its acts of aggression. This just demand of the African countries has the Chinese delegation’s firm support. 69. The Chinese Government and people firmly support the just struggles of the peoples of Azania, Namibia and Zimbabwe against imperialism, colonialism and racism. We firmly support the just struggle of the African front-line States to repulse the armed provocations and aggression of the South African racist authorities. The Chinese Govemment has consistently maintained that the racist rule of South Africa and Rhodesia must be terminated, that Zimbabwe and Namibia must achieve genuine national independence free from outside intervention and on the basis of territorial integrity and unity; South Africa’s system of racial discrimination and upqrtheid must be smashed, all outside intervention must be stopped. We are convinced that, although the struggle is complex and the path tortuous, so long as the peoples of southern Africa and of the entire African continent heighten their vigilance and foil the schemes and sabotage of the racists and outside forces, uphold unity and persevere in struggle, with the support of the world’s people, they will surely win final victory in their struggle for national independence and liberation.

I call on the next speaker, the Vice-President of the South West Africa People’s Organization, Mr. Mishake Muyongo. 67. The South African racist r&ime’s obstinacy and arrogance in no way prove its strength, but its essential weakness. ‘Fragile internally while keeping a ferocious front, it is putting up a death-bed struggle. At present, the 71. Mr. MUYONGO: Mr. President, I wish to apoiogize for not having been present in the Council chamber 73. Mr. President, it is also with a sense ofsatisfaction that we acknowledge your assumption ofthe Presidency of the Council for the month of March. It is more than a mere coincidence that a representative of Nigeria, a country which has now courageously assumed its role of leadership in African affairs, especially in regard to the struggle for liberation in southern Africa, should preside over the deliberations of the Security Council when it is seized of the complaint by the People’s Repubhc of Angola resulting from the unprovoked, armed invasion of its territory by the military forces of racist South Africa. 74. We are sure that the deliberations of the Council will culminate in a decision that will once and for all prevent the Fascist fanatics of Pretoria from continuing to carry out murderous acts and attacks against the Angolan people and Namibians who are enjoying political asylum in that country. 75. The Council has listened to 13 speakers since it began the consideration of the complaint launched by Ambassador Elisio de Figueiredo, the Permanent Representative of the People’s Republic of Angola to the United Nations, regarding the recent military attacks against his country. 76. It is a well-known fact that since its achievement of independence under the leadership of MPLA /Movimento Popular de Liberta@io de Angola], Angola has been repeatedly subjected to military attacks, political and economic sabotage by the racist regime of South Africa and its imperialist allies. Pretoria has never reconcileditselfto the reality of a revolutionary People’s Republic of Angola, which is committed to the liberation struggle of the peoples of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa. 77. Moreover, in spite of its many public pronouncements and pretences that it is prepared to accept the Namibian people’s demands for genuine independence, Pretoria has absolutely no intention of abandoning its control over our country. In tine with its imperialist and neocolonial designs in Africa, Pretoria wants to keep Namibia and use it as a neocolony under a puppet administration and as a springboard for its aggressive military attacks against independent African States. 78. Since it is the fundamental policy objective of racist South Africa to undermine and destabilize Angola and other front-line States, and also to deny the Namibian people the opportunity to achieve genuine independence under the auspices of the United Nations, Pretorialaunched its Iatest series of attacks into Angola and Zambia in order to sabotage the efforts of the international community to accelerate the decolonization process leading to genuine independence in Namibia. 79. These premeditated attacks, coming as they do at the time when proximity talks are being held, are an ample proof that South Africa does not want a negotiated solution 80. A year ago this august body met to condemn a similar premeditated invasion of Angola by the same racist South African troops who savagely, brutally and murderously massacred women, children, elderly and bed-ridden Namibians at Kassinga. That attack, like the latest ones, came at a’ time when SWAP0 and the international community were on the verge of working out final details for the implementation of United Nations supervised and controlled elections. 81. Furthermore, the Security Council is aware that racist South Africa contrived and conducted bogus elections in ‘Namibia during the month of December of last year. The intentions of those bogus elections were the same as those of the Kassinga massacre and the latest series of military violations of Angolan and Zambian territories and air space. The bogus elections were also aimed at imposing on the Namibian people Pretoria’s own chosen Turnhalle stooges and renegades. 82. South Africa is perpetrating acts of aggression and military attacks against neighbouring African States on the pretext of protecting the lives and property of the people of Namibia. That is obviously wrong and insulting to the heroic Namibian people and must be rejected with contempt. South Africa’s continued illegal occupation of Namibia has no other aim than to protect Pretoria’s colonial interest; as such, the latter has no political or moral right to speak on behalf of the very people it oppresses. In carrying out its acts of aggression against Zambia and Angola and also in conducting its massacre against the Namibian civilian population in those countries, South Africa tries to hide its ugly face behind the words of its stooges. By virtue of their shameless collaboration with the enemy in its massacring of Namibians, the puppets who are now being paraded in the corridors around here as representatives of the Namibian people are equalIy guilty of these heinous crimes and their hands are dripping with the blood of the Namibian patriots. 83. I should like on this occasion to reaflirm our militant and fratemai solidarity with the heroic people of Angola and Zambia under the leadership of the MPLA-Workers’ Party and UNIP [United National Independence Party], .sspectively, for the priceless sacrifices that they are making in support of the cause of the liberation of our people. The sacrifices that they are making will for ever remain fresh in our memories. 84. We pledge our renewed commitment to co-operate with the peoples of Angola and Zambia and other front-line States in defence of their territorial integrity and national security and further to ensure the Namibian people’s final victory over colonialism, imperialism and the forces of death and darkness. 85. In conclusion, we should like to reiterate before this august body that no amount of intimidation and harassment will deter us in our noble struggle to liberate OUT beloved fatherland. 86. As a movement fighting’for a just and noble cause, we are assured of continued and increased support and assistance from anti-imperialist countries and peoples. We also 92. At this point it is necessary to stress once again the links connecting the aggressive activities of racist regimes. The synchronized and well-prepared armed attacks of the Pretoria and Salisbury regimes against Angola, Zambia, Botswana and Mozambique, which are the expression of a deliberate and elaborate plan of aggression against independent African countries, constitute an attempt, on the one hand, to destabilize those countries and, on the other, to perpetuate domination and exploitation in the whole region of southern Africa, primarily in Zimbabwe and Namibia, to inhibit the liberation struggle for genuine independence under the leadership of SWAP0 and the Patriotic Front as the only legitimate representatives of the peoples of their countries, and to break up the unity and solidarity of African countries and weaken international solidarity with and support for the struggle against the oppressive regimes of aparrheid, racism and racial discrimination.

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

I wish to thank the Security Council for again giving me the opportunity to express my country’s views at yet another serious moment for world peace and security. 89. Rare are the months when the Council has been called upon to deal with so many grave problems at the same time. This, in itself, testifies to the seriousness of the situation in which we find ourselves and to the responsibilities with which all of us are confronted. This makes the Council’s task of finding the right answers and solutions even more urgent and complex. 93. We are also faced with provocation aimed at undermining all the efforts that the international community has been exerting so far with a view to enabling the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa to realize their fundamental human rights and their inalienable right to freedom and independence. Finally, what is in question is no longer individual and isolated cases of State terrorism, but major military operations involving all branches of the armed forces and a vast amount of war mattfriel. We are confronted with an overt military campaign whose consequences cannot be visualized at the present moment. 90. Two weeks ago we spoke in a debate dealing with identical questions concerned with the negative develop ment of the situation in and regarding Southern Rhodesia. Today we are dealing with a similar problem having the same roots and consequences, that is, South Africa’s aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola. Actually identical problems are involved: threats to the freedom, independence and security of sovereign African countries, particularly in southern Africa, where the racist regimes are maintaining a real state of war against all the neighbouring countries and have imposed on the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa a system of terror and oppression unheard of in modem times; an attack against authentic national forces tending towards the liberation of southern Africa from colonial and racial domination; an interventionism that South Africa is no longer trying to conceal under a cloak of legitimacy, in the name of its own allegedly endangered security, endeavouring, rather, to obtain broader international support for it by invokmg the ghost of rhe cold war and to “intemationalize” thereby the “defence” of racist regimes. 94. The present as well as all past attempts by colonialist forces to break the back of the liberation struggle in southem Africa have proved to be futile, because experience has clearly shown that nothing can break the will of a people to fight for its freedom, if it has a clear perception of the objectives it wishes to achieve, if it pursues an independent course and if its struggle is integrated into the general tight for all-round emancipation, to which all the peoples of the world aspire today. Comtemporary history provides endless proof to that effect. Let us take only the liberation struggle of the Angolan people, which lasted longer than any other struggle in Africa. There are few better examples in modern history of the fact that no aggression, conspiracy or terror can suppress such a long rebellion, nor deflect it from its basic objective of achieving the independence of the country, as the sole way of ensuring free national and social development. 91. Those who would be inclined to think along those lines even for a single moment should be reminded of the aggression committed against independent Angola in 1975, aggression whose object was not only the so-called destruction of the bases of liberation movements in Angola but also the conquest of Luanda and. the overthrow of the legal Government of Agostinho Neto. Let us also remember the recent bombing of refugee camps, villages, the Calueque Dam, the burnt huts and frightened faces of women and children. In actual fact, the objective of the racist regime is not to destroy the camps of liberation forces but to destabilize an L‘unpleasant” neighbour, a champion of the idea of liberation. Both the attacks against Mozambique and Zambia yesterday, and against Angola today, are the result of a permanent situation of war in southern Africa, a situation due to the existence of racist regimes and threatening world peace and security. Those neo-Nazi regimes, in collaboration with the forces that are extracting huge profits from the exploitation of southern Africa or are trying to secure per- 95. My delegation is taking part in this debate not so much for the purpose of saying anything that is not already known. This problem, as well as similar ones, has been repeatedly debated in the world Organization, and at gatherings of African countries within the non-aligned movement, so that there is actually nothing that should not be clear in this case. 96. We are taking the floor, in the first place, to condemn energetically, -once again, the aggression against African countries and peoples perpetrated by the racist regimes of southern Africa and, in particular, the most recent aggression against non-aligned Angola, whose freedom and independence constitute a solid basis for the liberation struggle 97. Secondly, we wish to reaffirm our solidarity with Angola and, through it, with all the liberation forces in southern Africa. My country is linked to Angola by strong ties of friendship and solidarity engendered and forged at the height of the liberation struggle of the Angolan people and consolidated and substantively enriched through peaceful and equal co-operation during the last few years, both in bilateral relations and in co-operation within the framework of the non-aligned movement. 98. Thirdly, we wish to lay stress once again on the dangers emanating from the existence of racism and on its connexion with imperialist forces, which make its existence possible, and to emphasize the need for the rapid elimination of this system of slavery and humiliation of the human person. In this connexion I wish to point to the grave responsibility of countries which continue to maintain political, diplomatic, economic and military ties with the racist regimes and to call upon them to get actively involved in preventing the rampaging of racism and to contribute to the elimination of this constant threat to world peace and security and to the elementary freedoms of nations, countries and peoples-that being the very reason for which the United Nations was founded and for which it exists. 99. Finally, my delegation wishes to draw the attention of the Security Council to the fact that the present aggression by the racist South African regime against Angola is not a mere episode, but amounts to systematic threatening of the territorial integrity of a sovereign country, a State Member of the United Nations, by the militarist apparatus of the racist regime. It is absurd, and at the same time tragic, that this should occur at a time when efforts are being exerted towards a peaceful settlement of the problem of Namibia. The response of the racist regime in Pretoria to these efforts, taking the form of ruthless aggression against the country that has made a decisive contribution to the creation of conditions in which the United Nations could fulfil its role as protagonist of a peaceful settlement, constitutes a challenge to the whole international community. Let us hope that this will have a sobering effect on all international factors, and that all will join in exerting indispensable pressure on South Africa with a view to compelling it to comply with the decisions of the United Nations. 100. The Security Council must take action against such behaviour on the part of South Africa, in accordance with the Charter and its mandate to safeguard peace and security. Such action would enjoy the broad .support of the international community, as shown by the decisions adopted by all the gatherings of non-aligned countries, including the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries held at Belgrade in July 1978 and the Ministerial Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of Non-Aligned Countries held at Maputo. Both gatherings emphasized the imperative need for all States Members of the United Nations, and in particular members of the Security Council, “to undertake effective measures, taking into consideration all relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular Chapter VII, to deal decisively with the aggressive actions of the racist regimes which 102. For the non-aligned countries, the anti-colonial struggle and decolonization have never been an end in themselves, but have always meant a continuation of efforts to consolidate and safeguard independence, to free it from all forms of dependence. Simultaneously, support for the liberation struggle of peoples against colonialism, foreign domination and aggression not only has been elevated to the level of a moral obligation but has also become a basic principle of international relations, in the same way as the continuation of colonialism, foreign occupation and intervention have been condemned as acts of aggression contrary to the elementary norms governing relations among sovereign States. It is for that reason that non-aligned policy has been able to provide the broadest and most solid foundation for the achievement and strengthening of the genuine independence of all countries. 103. The aggressive acts of southern African regimes and their co-ordinated armed attacks against the front-line States have been condemned, in particular, in the statements of the African Group and the United Nations Council for Namibia, which have drawn attention to the dangers arising out of the continued deterioration of the situation in southern Africa. The Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, has himself also expressed deep concern at the military actions taking place at a time when efforts for a peaceful settlement of the question of Namibia are being made. 104. Consequently, we think that the Security Council must react unequivocally, resolutely and promptly against the newest acts of aggression perpetrated by the regimes at Pretoria and Salisbury. The decision taken at the end of the current debate must be in harmony with the unanimous desire of almost the whole of the international community. Mere condemnations are no longer sufIicient, as the racist regimes do not abide by moral norms and standards. It is also indispensable to impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter and to implement them consistently. Failure to take such a decision, or disapproval of it, at this moment and in this forum could have far-reaching negative consequences for the development of the situation in the region and beyond. 105. My country will lend its whole-hearted support to such decisions, in the same way as it will lend its support both to Angola and to the other front-line States &Ithe defence of their national independence. We have always considered that the liquidation of the system of racism and colonialism in southern Africa is a question of the highest priority, just as we believe that any expansion of the zone of freedom and independence in the world is one of the prerequisites of the freedom and independence of every people and a decisive contribution to peace and security in general.

The delegation of the People’s Republic of Benin is happy once again to have been invited to participate in this debate over which you, Mr. President, are presiding with so much talent. I should like to thank you for that. 108. The Security Council is again-and I am sure it will not be the last time-considering a case of aggression by the colonialist and racist r&me of South Africa. Ever since its foundation in 1975, the young People’s Republic of Angola has been the prime target of the colonialists, racists and militarists of South Africa. To this very day there have been acts of aggression, invasions, armed raids and violations of the territory and air space of Angola by reconnaissance aircraft of Western manufacture, amounting to hundreds of incidents, and there exist in the region permanent risks of war with the possibility of the extension of hostilities. 114. The white Republic of South Africa-racist, colonialist and anti-black regime that it is-along with the system it has constructed, apartheid and its determination to play a great-Power role and dictate to African States, is seeking to mislead international public opinion with regard to the question of the decolonization of Southern Rhodesia and, principally, the question of the decolonization of Namibia. 115. My delegation has had many occasions to denounce the tremendous confidence trick being played with regard to the question of the decolonization of Namibia. The racist leaders of Pretoria, who know no scruples, often go back on what they have said or promised, leaving a trail of selfcontradiction behind them. Thousands of pages of documents published by the United Nations make that amply clear, but I shall not tax the Council on that score. 109. The so-called Republic of South Africa, white in colaur, with its white institutions, is a foreign element on our continent. Furthermore, its backward ideology, the background of which is the defence of Western and supposedly Christian civilization in our continent, has absolutely nothing in common with the brilliant African civilizations, which are profoundly humane. Our ancestral customs have nothing in common with an anti-black racist ideology. 116. The Namibian affair, as it has been conducted, and as it is understood by thePretoria racists, remains confused, and any African State, no matter how “moderate” it may be, finds it dificult to follow the white racist adventurers of Pretoria in their madness, military adventures and acts of aggression throughout Africa. 110. The white Republic of South Africa, the racist Republic of South Africa, makes it absolutely clear by its militarist and belligerent activities against the People’s Republic of Angola today, and against other African countries tomorrow, that it is a foreign entity, a hideous excrescence, which has never been accepted and will never be accepted by an independent Africa. We can understand how irritating this total repudiation is, but it will grow with every succeeding African generation. The struggle of the whole of Africa for its survival against this foreign entity, which is rejected in every part of Africa, will only become fiercer, and the protectors of that pernicious, oppressive and aggressive regime should be well aware of that. 117. What is the meaning today of these armed attacks and the constant threat posed by Pretoria to the People’s Republic of Angola and Zambia, to SWAP0 bases, and to Namibian refugee camps? What is the reason for these military expeditions which take the lives of innocent victims? 118. In the territory of Angola, Pretoria is seeking to crush SWAPO, which is the very vanguard of the armed active struggle for the liberation and true independence of Namibia. If the Pretoria racists could reason, be it ever so little, they would surely have realized that the People’s Republic of Angola and the other four front-line countries and SWAP0 had shown a great deal of moderation and flexibility. 111. Thus, by its very existence in southern Africa, and primarily because of its oppressive and colonialist nature, the white South African Republic constitutes a constant and serious threat in Africa, a threat directed against more than 20 million indigenous inhabitants, who have been transformed into slaves on the soil of their ancestors, and against independent Africa as a whole, which rejects it. 119. The People’s Republic of Angola, in particular, has taken grave risks, and that shows that even those who are as determined to fight as they are should seize every opportunity for peaceful settlement. SWAPO, which has made serious concessions, has demonstrated the same flexibility, without losing its determination. But what a high price has been demanded of it and of the People’s Republic of Angola by South Africa and the four front-line countries by aggression, by massacre, by the savage slaughter of women and children, by the destruction of the economic and social infrastructure, by lying slander and squalid manceuvres that have been mounted to wring other concessions from Africa in an attempt to place Namibian puppets in power to preserve those interests that are in contradiction with the interests of the oppressed people of Namibia! That is the real problem. 112. But neither oppression nor the slavery practised inside the country-which we call apartheid-nor acts of armed aggression and other warlike acts against independent African States, against the front-line States, Angola and Zambia, and against the SWAP0 bases will ever succeed in imposing this foreign offshoot of intemational imperialism upon Africa. The racist and colonialist r&ime of South Africa, even with all its sophisticated weapons, will never be able to haltthe march of history towards the total liberation of the peoples of Africa. 113. The People’s Republic of Angola has freed itself from foreign domination, but it has paid a very heavy price: the 121. The imperialists, who spawned apartheid, should never lose sight of the truth that the liberation of Africa, the liberation of Namibia, is absolutely inevitable. The imperialist Powers, which are aiding and abetting apartheid, and which live on pillage, exploitation, oppression, massacre and slaughter, should never forget that the liberation of our continent is inevitable. 122. The People’s Republic of Benin once again condemns vigorously the Pretoria racists and all their protectors for their policy of aggression, adventurism and lies against our people. This policy of diplomatic manceuvring jeopardises peace and security in our continent. My country, the People’s Republic of Benin, will never cease to call for strict measures by the Security Council, particularly the implementation of all the measures provided for under Chapter VII of the Charter.

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

The question the Council is seized of today-that of yet another dastardly attack by the armed forces of apartheid South Africa against our neighbour, the People’s Republic of Angola, an attack which has further exacerbated the situation of tension and insecurity already existing in our unhappy war-torn region-is a very grave one indeed. After hearing the lucid statement by the representative of Angola yesterday /213Oth meetingl, and after reading the communique released by the Ministry of Defence of the People’s Republic of Angola, no one can be in doubt about the urgency, the precariousness and the gravity of the situation, nor can any one fail to be deeply moved and acutely concerned. We are confident that the Council, therefore, will treat this matter with the seriousness and urgency it deserves. 125. My delegation, Sir, is therefore pleased to see you presiding over this crucial debate, for not only do you possess immense diplomatic skill that will enable you to guide this debate to a successful conclusion, but you also derive inspiration from your great country, Nigeria, whose dedication to the liberation of southern Africa is beyond reproach. . 126. I should like, at this point, to pay a tribute to the Government and people of Angola for remaining calm and for standing firm in the face of naked aggression. Our condolences go to the bereaved families that have lost their beloved ones in the recent atrocious bombings. To my brother and colleague, the representative of Angola, I would say that I need not reassure him here of Botswana’s total support for the People’s Republic of Angola at this 127. It will not be necessary for me to narrate the details of the attack I perpetrated by South Africa during the past several days: the representative of Angola has amply and eloquently done so. Suffice it to say that, quite clearly, the attacks were on a large scale and very serious-indeed. We have here not just another skirmish, but a major conflagration involving highly sophisticated war machinery, including weapons of mass destruction, unleashed against a young country that has only recently emerged from along; devas-. tating colonial war, and is only now trying to reconstruct its war-shattered economy for the good of its people. Its scarce human and material resources are continual1 being diverted to the defence of its sovereignty an ci+ territorial integrity in the face of numerous unprovoked attacks, both against itself and against the innocent Namibian refugees whose only desire is to liberate their country from brutal South African occupation. 128. This latest attack cannot be viewed in isolation. Its broader context is the over-all critical situation in southern Africa, some of whose major features are as follows: the intensification of the liberation struggle in South Africa itself, in Namibia and in Zimbabwe, the increased oppression of the peoples of these countries by the racists, the persistent efforts by the front-line States to find ways to resolve the situation peacefully, the desperation of the racist regimes in South Africa and Rhodesia, which have united to wreak havoc in our area, and the repeated attacks by one or both of these minority r&imes against the front-line States of Angola, Botswana, Mozambique and Zambia, whose only crime, one might say, in the eyes of those who violate the basic human rights of their fellow men, is their untiring search for genuine peace in the region and their unflinching support for those who are struggling to free themselves from oppression. This, then, is the context, and these events ought to be viewed together if their real import is to be fully grasped. 129. The coordinated and premeditated strategy of the white minority regimes has been clearly illustrated by the recent events. The pattern is now clear: while South Africa and Southern Rhodesia were attacking both Angola and Zambia, Mozambique was also being attacked by the illegal regime in Southern Rhodesia. But then, this is not new. It has been so for a very long time now. On countless occasions before, these countries have been similarly attacked, and my own country, Botswana, has been attacked by Southern Rhodesia on numerous occasions. 130. Our countries are the props of peace and the only islands of sanity in southern Africa, and those who attack us demonstrate their desire for war rather than for peace. But we remain, despite all this, committed to peace rather than to war. How else can we interpret, for instance, this latest attack against Angola, when it is known that Angola has played, and is playing, so vital a role in the search for peace in Namibia? What of the timingof this attack as compared to the earlier one on Kassmga? Both were launched just at a time when possibilities seemed bright for a peaceful solution of the Namibian problem. 135. The Security Council should unequivocally condemn the attack against Angola and take whatever action it deems necessary to stop a recurrence of such flagrant aggression. Those who wield influence over South Africa as a result of their history and other relations with that country should use the leverage at their disposal to stay the murderous hand of the apartheid @me. The Council should also redouble its efforts to resolve the Namibian independence issue for indeed most of Angola’s problems stem from the occupation of that international Territory by South Africa. The quicker the marauding South African troops of occupation vacate Namibia the better for the future of our people in southern Africa. 132. Therefore, those who want genuine peace in southem Africa should take note of thii situation and use their influence and the means at their disposal to stop South Africa from standing in the way of peace in our region. For so long as South Africa and its tottering little satellite, Southern Rhodesia, continue to resort to war, so long will peace in the region remain illusory; so long will our region remain poised on the edge of a dangerous precipice. 133. The international community must now, more than ever before, rally behind the people of Angola, for the days ahead could be even more dangerous and perilous as a result of these aggressive acts. Certainly Angola should be enabled to increase its defence capacity in order to withstand these dastardly attacks. 136. Members of the Council, let your decision this day be worthy of the trust the people of Angola have always had in this august body. 134. The international community should unequivocally condemn South Africa for its aggression. For its part, Bot- The meeting rose at 6.15 p.m. . Litho in United Nations, New York Price: ws. 1.50 7%70002-January 1982-2.250