S/PV.2136 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken at the 2132nd meeting, I invite Mr. Mishake Muyongb, Vice-President of the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO), to take a place at the Council table. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2136) At the invitation of the President, Mr. Muyongo (South West Africa People’s Organization) took a place at the Council table. 1. Adoption of the agenda 2. Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter ‘dated 16 March 1979 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/13176) j. The PRESIDENT: The first speaker is the representative of Togo. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, I should like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to participate in the important debate which is now taking place. The delegation of Togo is happy to congratulate you most warmly on your accession to the presidency of the Security Council for this month and for the competent manner in which you have been guiding the present debate. This is also an opportunity for us to recall with pleasure the excellent relations which exist between Nigeria and Togo and to emphasize the particularly constructive nature of the co-operation between our two countries within our subiegion and within the West African Economic Community. The meeting was called to order at 5.35 p.m. Adoption of the agenda The agenda )vas adopted. Complaint bjr $ngola against South Africa: Letter dated 16 March 1979 from the Permanent Represelative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/13176)

In accordance with the decisions taken by the Cbuncil at previous meetings f213Oth. 2132nd, 2133rd and 2135th meetings], I invite the representative of Angola to take a place at -the Council table, and the representatives of Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Bulgaria, the Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, the German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Guinea, Guyana, India, Liberia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Romania, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, the Sudan, Togo, the United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 5. Thus, the racists who colonized the southern tip of the African continent and who are adamant in illegally occupying Namibia, in their deadly rage and bloodcurdling frenzy, have yet again mobilized against the People’s Republic of Angola a part of the substantial military potential that they acquired with what they gained from pillaging the natural resources of our continent and from the shameless exploitation of the indigenous populations reduced to slavery in the context of the policy of apartheid that th$y have set up to perpetuate their infamous domination. Once again there have been bloodshed and mourning. The list is long, too long, of the acts of aggression continually and with impunity perpetrated by the Pretoria racists and the Salisbury rebels against the countries which surround the territories which they seek to maintain under the yoke of their domination. At the invitation of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola) took a place at the Council table and Mr. Bouayad- Agha (Algeria); Mr. Houngavou (Benin), Mr. Thou (Batswana). Mr. Yankov ~(Bulgaria), Mr. Mon&o (Congo), Mr. Roa Kouri (Cuba), Mr. Abdel Meg&d (Egypt), Mr. Worku (Ethiopia), Mr. Florin (German Democratic Republic). Mr. Sekyi (Ghana), Mr. Yansant (Guitiea), Mr. Sinclair (Guyana). Mr. faipai (India), Mr. Tubman (Liberia), Mr. Rabetafika (Madagascar), Mr. Honwona (Mozambique), Mr. Marinescu (Romania), Mr. Gelaga-King (Sierra Leone), Mr. Hussen (Somalia), Mr. Rodrigo (Sri Lanka), Mr. Sal$oul (Sudan), Mr. Koaovi (Togo), Mr. Chafe 6. In this forum, the -delegation of Togo wishes to reaffirm the indignation felt by the Togolese people at the deadly and co-ordinated attacks that Pretoria and Salisbury have constantly been launching against the brother frontline countries, in particular against Zambia, Mozambique 7. For us Africans, as for all peoples which really love peace and justice, the hateful acts of violence, barbarism and aggression are signs of the decline of those who believe that they can build their lasting power and prosperity on racial hatred, on the practice of slavery, on the brutal force of arms, on the horror of massacres and on wanton and repeated acts of aggression against young nations. Although weak, those young nations are entitled to have their sovereignty respected; because they are weak, they need to have their sovereignty protected. 8. I hardly need to remind this assembly-whose members are perfectly aware of the heavy responsibilities incumbent upon them-that it is for the Security Council to organize international security by prohibiting war, by eradicating its causes and by setting in motion appropriate measures, on the basis ,of the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, to neutralize the racist minorities whose villainous deeds jeopardize the dignity and territorial integrity of sovereign States and pose a serious threat to international peace. 9. The Charter, as everybody knows, provides for specific sanctions to be applied against States guilty of acts of aggression, particularly when those acts of aggression are deliberate and repeated. We fully share theconviction of the vast majority of United Nations Members which believe that the only means to bring to ‘heel the sinister and warmongering regimes of Vorster-Botha and Smith is to apply against them the enforcement measures laid down in the Charter so as to render harmless those inveterate sources of conflict. 10. Those regimes have flouted the Organization for many years and trampled underfoot the decisions of the Security Council and the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly. By committing acts of armed aggression against sovereign countries time and time again and by maintaining a state of war in southern Africa, they have given proof that they are as impervious to the efforts undertaken so far to make them repent as granite is to oil. Their pirouettes prevent the process of a negotiated settlement from being successfully conducted. By nature and doctrine, those regimes are essentially rebellious to dialogue and, because they are fundamentally warmongering and inhuman, it is an illusion to expect that they will stop bombing, destroying and killing or that they will cease stifling the legitimate aspirations for independence and freedom of the peoples which they keep in slavery. It is fruitless to expect a hungry wild beast to release its prey. 11. It is a known fact that the Salisbury and Pretoria warmongers will continue to thwart any possibility of a negotiated and just settlement. A failure of the efforts undertaken to arrive at such a negotiated settlement cannot but strengthen the liberation movements in their determination to pursue their just struggle by all means available, with the conviction that, while the force of oppression is in 12. Faced with that situation, the members ofthe Council must arrive at the appropriate conclusions and take adequate measures, bearing in mind resolution 428 (1978) which was adopted on 6 May 1978 and not forgetting that threats which are brandished about but not carried out when the circumstances demand they should be weaken those who make them, particularly when they are levelled at dangerous fanatics who are determined not, to understand. 13. For our part, we Togolese wish to reaffirm here that we believe in the virtues of dialogue and that we remain firmly devoted to the peaceful settlement of international disputes; in that, we are faithful to the doctrine that the Association of the Togolese People-our movement-has established on the basis of the political philosophy of its founder and guide, General GnassingbC Eyadema. But all the parties must accept dialogue, or be prepared to accept it and to make it useful and put it into effect:There must be a will to resolve conflicts, and not inhuman oppression that is deliberately prolonged. The parties must be prompted by good faith; they must heed or be able to heed the voice of reason; they must respect or be capable-of ‘respecting the rules whose observance is a precondition for the survival of the human community. As we all know, .that is not true of the fanatics of racism, slavery and warmongering. For that reason we shall continue to guarantee our’support for the liberation movements and our active ,and unwavering solidarity with our brother front-line countries until the inevitable final victory, that is, until the cdmptete liberation of the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa. .

The next speaker’is‘the representative of Sierra Leone. I invite him to take, a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 1

As 1 am now addressing the Council, Sir, for the first time since your assumption of offtce as President for the month of March, allow me to proffer to you my sincere congratulations and to associate myself with all the worthy sentiments expressed by previous speakers about your diplomatic skill and panache in conducting the nerve-racking affairs of this august body. ‘ 16. Coming as I do from Sierra Leone,-which is on the same side of Africa as your great country, Nigeria, and with which your country has had not only great historical bonds in the educational, social and economic spheres and in our nostalgic fight for freedom and independence, but also wellcemented ties of kinship and friendship ,which have been fostered and strengthened through the ages, my delegation feels a particular and unique closeness to you at this time and pledges our full support in making your arduous task a bearable one. I have no doubt that, with your experience as a seasoned diplomat and with your acknowledged abilities, your month in oflice will be a successful one. 17. I wish also to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Bishara of Kuwait, for the tine way in which he presided over the Council as it dealt with the turbulent affairs of the month of February. 19. One would have expected that at this time, when new proximity talks have been foisted on us as a result of South Africa’s intransigence, sanity would prevail over Botha and his racist clique. One would have expected them, if they were reasonable human beings, to co-operate peacefully with the international community and the Western five in their efforts to solve the problem of Namibia, which has plagued the United Nations for such a long time. But unfortunately South Africa continues to show itself in its true colours. Pretoria’s continued acts of aggression against the States of southern Africa are an open manifestation of that r&ime’s.desire to frustrate all genuine efforts by this world body. to ,bring about the peaceful transition of Namibia to independence. 20. In his letter of 19 March addressed to you /S/13180, apex], Mr. P&lent, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of South Africa portrayed the arrogance and impudence of his Government by. stating in the fourth paragraph: “SWAP6 cattempting to take over by force political power in South West Africa, thus depriving the inhabitants of’South West Africa of their right of selfdetermination‘ and making impossible their quest for independence through constitutional means.” 21. How ludicrous can the South Africans deliberately make themselves? Here we have the racist regime, illegally occupying Namibia and arrogantly flouting the numerous resolutions of the United Nations requesting that regime to terminate its illegal occupation, glibly and nonchalantly but falsely accusing SWAPO, the sole authentic representative of the heroic peoplebf Namibia, of*‘attempting to take over by force political power”. Who has in fact taken over political power by force: SWAP0 or the racists? The facts speak for themselves. :. 22. What SWAP0 is doing-and in this it has the wholehearted support of my Government-is using every means at its disposal to end the illegality by trying to root out the racist militarists of South Africa from its country, Namibia. The South Africans, for their part, have shown and continue to show that they have,no wish to implement the agreement reached with the five Western Powers. They have made known to the world by their fraudulent manceuvres aimed at SWAPO, by their barbarous and perfidious attacks on the newly independent Republic of Angola and other front-line States, by their double-dealing and doubletalking, that they have no intention whatsoever of abandoning their illegal hold on mineral-rich Namibia. 24. On 6 May 1978 the Council adopted resolution 428 (1978), which, inter a&a, admonished South Africa and gave notice that, in the event of further acts of violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola, the Council would meet again in order to consider more effective measures in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Charter, including Chapter VII thereof. 25. We believe that the time has now come to proceed from words to deeds, to move away from hortatory resolutions and take such decisive and resolute actions as would compel the white minority racist regime of South Africa to comply with the resolutions of this world body, stop its unprovoked attacks against neighbouring States and allow United Nations-supervised elections in Namibia. ‘26. Accordingly, Sierra Leone will support any draft resolution in terms of Chapter VII of the Charter requesting mandatory action to bring about cessation of the following: supplies of petroleum, petroleum products or other strategic materials to South Africa; loans to and investments in South Africa; guarantees or other inducements for investments in South Africa; tariff and other preferences for imports from South Africa; all trade with South Africa, 27. South Africa is not beyond coercion. The Fascist minority racialists have been successful in ridiculing international public opinion because they are convinced that they have powerful Western backers who because of their huge investments and equally huge profits would turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed by that racist regime. But perhaps the time is fast approaching when the credibility of those States that would have us believe that they are sincere and genuine in their abhorrence of apartheid and racial discrimination will be put to the test for the world to see and judge.

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

Mr. President, permit me to express on behalf of my delegation particular satisfaction at seeing a distinguished representative of Nigeria presiding over this meeting of the Security Council. The qualities that have always distinguished you, which are a credit to your country and to the whole of Africa, are for us a guarantee of harmonious conduct of the proceedings of the Council. I would also take this opportunity on behalf of my delegation to thank you, and through you the other members of the Council, for permitting us to take part in this important debate. 30. The timing of the most recent acts of armed aggression committed by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola is not without its significance. It is, indeed, striking 31. One might have thought that the imminence of these discussions would perhaps encourage the Pretoria leaders to be more moderate and to curb, if only for a short period, their instincts of rapine and their disregard for the life and property of Africans, whether they be Namibians, Angolans or South Africans. One might have thought also that, in order to justify the confidence and credence. which some persist in according them, and in order to facilitate the consummation of a settlement process-which, incidentally, is an extremely good deal for them-the South Africans would be more careful in their international conduct and would show more respect for the norms governing inter-State relations. One might have thought that, in order to echo the appeals of interested bodies for respect for human rights, particularly when it is a question of nationals of countries with which it would appear to share the same political, economic and other concerns, the South’African regime might, as a sign of go.odw$l, have decided to free 51 prisoners, including Nelson Mandela of the African National Congress, Toevo of SWAP0 and John Pokeila of the Pan Africanist Congress. That the champions of human rights should not have called for this as a prerequisite for taking into account the alleged interests of South Africa. in Namibia is to say the least surprising. 32. On behalf. of my Government I repeat the proposal made by the President of the Democratic Republic of Madagascar on 21 March 1979, through the Secretary- General, on the occasion of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, namely, that: 6‘ . . . in tribute to the heroism of the‘ thousands of fighters and nationalists against apartheid and for the triumph of their cause, .the mercenaries legitimately detained in Madagascar, those enemies of progress, freedom and justice should be freed-and some people seem to be aiming at their liberation-provided that 51 prisoners who have been condemned to death and disgrace in South Africa are freed.” 33. Whether we like it or not, there is a link between this debate and the proximity talks inasmuch as the acts of which. South Africa is accused affect its good faith as a partner in the negotiations. The acts which the Pretoria leaders do not even take the trouble to deny sbow that, in replying by force of arms to the aspirations of the Namibian nationalists, the apostles of upurrheici-are against the true liberation of those nationalists. That is precisely what we would expect to be the result of the negotiations taking place at present. 34. In challenging the right to political asylum enjoyed by nationalists and in violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the. People’s Republic of Angola, the South African regime has shown us its true face and has unmasked its blind hostility to Africans. 36. The armed aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola is further proof of South Africa’s “intention of establishing a permanent presence in Namibie and simply represents one further episode in its policy of creating a buffer zone which would isolate the count$of apbrrheid from the rest of independent Africa. And.whp is unaware that the active support given by Pretona,,,to the illegal Salisbury regime and the futile attempts to oppose change in Zimbabwe all fall within the framework ofthis policy, for whose,triumph the minority and racist regime would stop at nothing? ‘. 37. In the light of the recent armed incursions by South African ,armed forces into Angola, and in; the light particularly of the military means used, there are grounds for supposing that the South African authoritieslare counting more on, the physical elimination of the ‘members of SWAP0 than on negotiations, concerning which the possibilities of a peaceful settlement are entertained only in order politically to demobilize the nationalists, to divide them and to lull their vigilance in order to strike a moresevere blow at them. , , ‘, 1 . as. I 38. South Africa can get along very nicely with this process of negotiation,’ whose end is ceaseressly postponed, where the good faith of one of the parties, is’more than suspect and where it seems to have beerradopted as a rule that only the most vulnerable party, SWAPO, has to make concessions. Indeed, some members of the Council have invoked the continuance of these negotiation.& oppose the adoption of effective sanctions provided for under Chapter VII of the Charter, and this in spite of the seriousness of the accusations against South Africa. This B all the more intolerablebecause independent African -countries such as Angola, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia .and Botswana, which have assumed the historic responsibility of serving as a rear base for the liberation movements, are considered by Pretoria as being completely without rights and fair game to be attacked at will and with impunity. ,1 ~ .I 39. Certainly, the Security Council, which has not manifested sufficient authority in order to ensure the success of its sanctions policy against Rhodesia, which has been prevented from discharging its responsibility for ensuring the security of the front-line countries victims of aggression, intimidation ;and acts of internal destabilizauon, and which as yet has not been able to live up to the hopes of the liberation movements, bears a large share of the responsibility for the strengthening of this feeling of impunity which, without doubt, constitutes a major strategic factorin South African policy; .; , 40. Quite obviously, the much discussed -arms embargo which was adopted a few months ago was too little and too late, a measure which eased the consciences of those who had armed the racist regime to the teeth, but which did nothing to alter either that country’s military capacity ‘or its warlike aims. 41. It is never too late to move forward, and ifthose here who have dangled the possibility of a negotiated settlement 42. The ‘Madagascar delegation associates itself with all those who have already recalled here the terms of paragraph 8 of resolution 428 (1978). adopted in the wake of similar acts of aggression committed by South Africa against the People’s Republic’of Angola. The conditions have been,met today, it seems to us, for seeing to it that the sanctions ‘which have constantly been threatened against South Africa, without being either real or effective, can finally be’brought to bear against it. Otherwise, we could only draw the inescapable conclusions about the si.ncerity of the promises made in the Grganization, and it would no longer be possible to reproach us forequatingopposition to the taking of. a decision which is politically necessary for the Council :with the veritable protection of the racist regime at the expense of the liberation movements, to which we preach patience and moderation. 43. South: Africa, in its communique of 19 March /S/13180], ,would have had the Council condemn SWAPO, but nothing done by a regime which is past worrying about one more or .one less contradiction can surprise us any more. However, the experience we all have had with the Council would tend to suggest that in similar cases there has all too often been a tendency to place the aggressor and the victim on. an equal footing by referring to them in mealymouthed fashion as ‘.‘interested parties**. _ ,<. 44. In this particular case we do not believe the Council will go that-far, but we should like to say right now that we categoricz#y repudiate, in the name of a morality which is as valid as the supposedly democratic principles. which people invoke hollowly, any attempt, from whatever source and no matter what form it may take, which wouldtend to call into question the legitimacy of SWAPO’s struggle until the total liberation of Namibia and the courageous commitment of .Angola to internationalist solidarity. ,i.: : 45. We back fully the cause of our brothers and sisters in southern Africa and the front-line countries. They may rest assured of.our wholehearted militant solidarity. , . ‘ 46. The PRBSIDENT: The next speaker is the representative of Liberia, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to’ make his statement. . 47. Mr. :TUBMAN (Liberia): Mr. President, my delegation is proud to extend congratulations to you, a brother African, for, the able manner in which during this month you are presiding over the affairs of the Security Council. Africa, our great motherland, has many friends indeed,and in our fight against racism in Southern Africa many opportunities have been afforded and are still occurring for those friends to show by their deeds no less than by their words meaningful suppdrt for Africa. Support from friends, especially in times of need ordifficulty, in Africa as elsewhere,. is always to be.welcomed. Yet, we Africans have always known that only Africa can save itself, and by its own exertions. This is why, Sir, seeing you playing so effective a role in advancing African interests, not only on the Council but on other United Nations bodies, particu- 49. South Africa’s armed attacks against Angola are not new, nor is this the first time that those attacks have been brought to the attention of this body. Only last year, in its resolution 428 (1978) the Council, having condemned South, Africa for its savage bombing of Angolan territory, warned that in the event of further attacks by South Africa against Angola enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter would be con$dered for possible application against the Pretoria regime. In’spite of that solemn warning, South Africa’s attacks upon Angola have, in fact, been intensified. 50. The Pretoria Government’s disregard for African lives and world opinion, plus its contemptuous treatment of the United Nations, continue to be demonstrated over and over again with impunity. 51. My delegation could, as others have done before us, consider these attacks by South Africa against Angola as attacks against all independent African States-and indeed they are. 52. My delegation could go on, as others before us have done, and term these attacks by South Africa against Angola as attacks against all countries of the non-aligned movement-and indeed they are. 53. My delegation could go even further, as others have already done, and condemn these attacks by South Africa ‘against Angola as attacks against the Organization and against world peace-and in truth they are. 54. But were we to arrive at such awesome conclusions, what would we then do? The whole world knows that neither my country nor, unfortunately, the collectivity of independent African countries are at the present time 55. In any case, the Charter of the United Nations, under which we have lived for more than 33 years, provides for collective security. Under the Charter, the view that might makes right has been expunged absolutely from international relations. Countries that are the victimsof aggression are not left by the Charter to rely only on their own strength to repel aggression. The Charter places primary responsibility upon the Security Council to curb aggression and to maintain worid peace. For this reason, it is not enough that the Council should repeatedly condemn South Africa’s continuing aggression while at.the same time doing nothing to halt it. The aggression that has occurredand that continues to be perpetrated by South Africa in Namibia, against Angola and throughout southern Africa threatens international peace. The Council is therefore duty-bound to take urgent and effective measures to remove those threats. The discharge by the Council of its most important responsibility to protect peace depends cruciallyupon the positions taken by those States whose membership in this body is permanent and in whom the power of veto has been vested. Unfortunately, quite often the power of veto has been used to frustrate the Council’s search for peace. We realize that when use of the veto is threatened or when the veto is actually used this is because there exists a clash between the interests of the States which have this power to veto. Such, often very selfish, uses of the veto are most dismaying, but they are none the less understandable. But here we are dealing with racism. Is there any member of the Council that considers the protection of racism to be in its interest? Racism is in nobody’s interest. In fact, racism in the long run can only jeopardize the interests of even the white minorities in southern Africa that practise it today. Why then is this body not being encouraged-especially by those noble and enlightened States, champions of fair play, liberty and human rights-to take effective measures to root out the cancerous aberration of apartheid which menaces Africa’s progress and threatens the peace of the world? Regrettably, it is becoming increasingly difficult to escape the conclusion that the Council’s failure to act effectively in the face of repeated acts of aggression by racist South Africa is not because certain friends of South Africa are unable to act but because they are unwilling. 56. Racist South Africa has made no secret of the fact that it would sooner engulf the whole of southern Africa in war, even a nuclear war, rather than abandon apartheid. Why should people with such fanatical notions be humoured? Why should they, as a result of that humouring, be allowed to weaken the Council, a vital organ of the Organization, upon whose enduring credibility the future of mankind depends? 57. My delegation cannot commend too highly the Western Powers for the pains they have taken and the patience they have demonstrated to resolve conflicts in southern Africa peaceably, but, because of South Africa’s continued intransigence, these Powers may wish to consider whether the time has not come for South Africa to be told squarely that enough is enough. The fact that proximity talks on Namibia-not on Angola-are taking place at this time is really no reason why the Council should go back on

The representative of Angola has asked to speak, and I now call on him.

I have requested permission to speak briefly merely to reiterate a few points. I am quite sure that my colleagues do not need to be reminded of certain facts; however, the racist reach is as notoriously long as its memory is conveniently short. 60. The People’s Republic of Angola is the plaintiff in this case before the Security Council. It is Angolan territory and Angolan nationals who are the victims of the ceaseless armed attacks being carried out by the racist, Fascist, minority regime of South Africa, It is Angolan borders that are daily being violated and crossed. It is sovereign Angolan air space that is being constantly violated. It is Angolan land that is being trodden by the racist boot. And it is Angolan lives that are being sacrificed on the altar of racism, aparfheid and imperialism. 61. It is the racist South African junta that isin the dock, charged with crimes against humanity, for thus has the United Nations defined apartheid. And it is not we who have put the South African racists on the stand. That was done by the international community a long time ago. We are bringing yet another set of charges, one in a long series. However, Africa feels that the racist regime of South Africa has not yet been brought to trial. It has never been seriously convicted for its crimes. Or should I say that, ,though the Fascist junta has been convicted, it has not served a single day of its sentence-saved by its friends in high.places, by allied imperialist interests. 62. Were it not for the countless lives lost, were it not for the deaths of my brothers and my comrades, I might have permitted myself some slight amusement over the letter addressed to you, Sir, by the racist Foreign Minister of South Africa [S/13180]. This is the essence of racism-the utter disregard for black lives, the transformation of their murder into jest and cynicism, and the gall in presenting the ‘draft” of a “resolution” which seeks to castigate and condemn SWAPO. 63. Furthermore, the racist Foreign Minister of South Africa has the. temerity to link these meetings of the Security Council to the proximity talks. We requested the convening of the Council to protest against the armed ground and air attacks on our territory and our people by the white, minority regime of Pretoria. If this debate is seen as having any peripheral effect on the talks across the street, that effect has to be attributed to the sabotage planned and carried out by the racist Pretoria junta-again, classic Kassinga tactics calculated to force the victim to appear. to be in the wrong! 65. I should like to ask the racist South African Foreign Minister whether he has ever seen the bodies of napalmed children? I am quite sure of the answer, because lily-white children play in safety in all-white playgrounds in South Africa; guarded from harm by black nannies. I am truly sorry when I think that these privileged white children may one day perpetuate their racist, uparrheidsystem. It is tragic when anyone, especially youth, grows up alienated from what the world could offer to all its inhabitants. The tragedy is compounded by the fact that the collusion of Western imperialism keeps those playgrounds segregated, the sup port of Western transnationals keeps the ghettos alive, and the supplies, of Western arms merchants keep our graveyards in a state of perpetual expansion. 66. On an allied matter, I should like to state that it is evident from South Africa’s behaviour and from its statements that it has already created the outline of a neocolonial “internal settlement” such as that imposed by its Salisbury allies. South Africa has pushed its puppet groups into prominence-with which the West acquiesced-all in preparation ‘for a possible “unilateral declaration of independence”: South Africa has already announced that its civil servants “will stay on in Namibia after independence’*. And a miraculous “development corporation” has surfaced to demand economic planning for labour-intensive projects in the region to provide “better opportunities for the people of the Territory*‘. Read that to mean “perpetuation of the economic privileges enjoyed by South African and other transnational corporations”: in short, the survival and growth of economic imperialism, for whose support a politico-military imperialism must be maintained. 67. I need hardly remind my colleagues here of resolution 428 (1978); adopted by this very Council on 6 May 1978, which not ‘only strongly condemned South Africa for its aggression against my country and demanded an end to the illegal South African occupation of Namibia, but also unequivocally decided “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’. 68. South Africa has continued to attack my country since the adoption of the aforementioned resolution. That is why the Council is meeting on the issue. But the aforementioned resolution would make a mockery of the Council if we did 69. I wait to see whether some of my colleagues in the Security Council will continue merely to pay lip-service to the ideals of international law, justice and freedom, or whether they are finally ready to translate some of their words into action by voting afIirmatively on the draft resolution which we hope will come before the Council very soon. 70. I should also like to refer here to the news reports of the electronic monitoring of certain borders in southern Africa. On this matter, I wish to state that, although the Western five and the United Nations are certainly free to reach whatever accommodation they are able to work out with the parties concerned, the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola will not allow even a single strand of barbed wire to be placed even one inch inside our borders. Monitoring of our borders, electronic or otherwise, will have to take place outside our borders, not inside them. We reiterate our willingness to cooperate fully with the Secretary-General’s plan for Namibia, but we insist on the full exercise of our sovereignty-political, military, diplomatic or territorial. In this matter, we will admit of no compromise and accept no betrayal of our revolution. 71. Africa has pride, dignity and courage. It has an intense desire for freedom, self-determination and independence. It has solidarity for those who seek self-rule, majority rule. And Africa has sons and daughters enough to tight long and hard, till racism and imperialism are uprooted from southern Africa. The “population option” is ours. And the history of southern Africa will be written in blood, since that is the only language imperialists and racists employ. It may be the only language they understand. 72. Every moment of our lives history is being made;and, when it is finally recorded, it will be remembered that we rejected colonialism, racism and imperialism. It will be remembered that we all along sought to negotiate, for life is precious. But freedom is dearer; for that we will fight in any and every language and on any and every battlefield. 73. The dialectics of the situation demand that history be written on our terms. 74. The struggle continues; victory is certain. The meeting rose at 6.45 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Unite 1 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 deposit&es du monde entier. Informer-vous aupres de votre libraire ou adresser-vous a : Nations Unies. Section des ventes. New York ou Geneve. HAK HOJIYVZiTb LI3flAHSfZ-I OPI-AHH3AUFiM OIYbEAHHEHHhIX HAWfR HJ~~HHR OwaxwaauHw 06Tbe~mre~ma HaunR ~oauro rcynn~b a ~XH~~KHLIX xara- JHHBX H arenrcraax 60 Bcex paRO??a% mapa. HaBonn% cnpamw 06 HsAaHHRX a eaule~ KHW~HOM htarasme ww nmimre no aapecy: Oprannaaqua 06’bennnerinbrx Harm& C~KIXHR no nponame u~nannR. Hwo-Flop% HJIH Xerieaa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estin en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase a: Naciones Unidas, Se&on de Ventas. Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations. New York Price: sus. 1.50 79-70002-December 1981-2.250