S/PV.2298 Security Council

The first speaker is the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 2, Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter dated 26 August 1981 from the Charge d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (S/14647) 4. Mr, van WELL (Federal Republic of Germany): Mr. President, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to present my Government’s position in this important debate of the Security Council. It is a great pleasure to do this under the presidency of the Minister for External Relations of Panama, a country with which the Federal Republic of Germany has very close traditional ties of friendship. The meeting was called to order at 5,lS p.m. Adoptlon of the agenda The agetrda wus udopted. Complaint by Angola against South Africa: Letter dated 26 August 1981 from the Charge d’affalres a.:. of the Permanent MIssion of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary- General (5114647) 5. The latest events in southern Africa, which the Council has been considering over the past two days, represent a grave challenge to all those trying to contribute to a peaceful solution of the serious problems endangering the region of southern Africa as a whole and particularly Namibia. 1, The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanfsh): In accordance with decisions taken at the 22%th and 2297th meetings, I invite the representative of Angola to be seated a1 the Council table and the representatives of Brazil, Cuba, the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Kenya, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, South Africa, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia and Zimbabwe to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 6. It is with the greatest dismay that the Federal Government has learned of the intervention and armed attack of South African troops in Angola, This major operation, which represents a clear-cut breach of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and can have far-reaching consequences for international peace and security is, in the view of the Federal Government, absolutely unacceptable. Not only does it represent a threat to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a State Member of the United Nations; it furthermore heightens tensions throughout the whole region and impedes the process leading to the independence of Namibia. At the invitatiott of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola), took u place at the Coutrcil ruble; Mr. Bueno (Bruz.il), Mr. Rou Kourl (Cubu), Mr. vutt Well (Federal Republic of Gertttotry), Mr. Krishnatt (India), Mr. Maitta (Kenya), Mr. Burwitt (Libyutt Arab Jattiahiriyu), Mr. Eksteetl (South Africa), Mr. Ha Vatt Lau (Viet Nom), Mr. Luzurevic< (Yugosluviu) uttd Mr. Mashittguidze (Zimbabwe) took the places reserved for thetn ut the side of the Couttcil chamber. 7. The Government of the Federal Republic ol Germany, which values its good relations with the People’s Republic of Angola, has been directly informed by the Angolan Government of the serious events which have occurred. In view of the gravity of

I should like to inform members of the Security 8, The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany most strongly condemns the South African intervention in Angola and joins in the demand expressing during the present debate that South African troops be withdrawn from Angolan territory without any further delay, 9. Together with Caanda, France, the United Kingdom and the United States, my Government has actively contributed to the settina UP of the oroaosed plan adopted by the Council in order to ensure a peaceful solution for Namibia. We are resolved to continue to work towards that goal. It is our firm opinion that Council resolution 435 (1978) should remain the solid basis for all our endeavours in that direction We are convinced that the efforts to reach a peaceful solution, to which we feel strongly committed, can only be successful if all parties concerned exercise the utmost restraint and desist from any action which is likely to endanger peace and security in that region. IO, We deplore the heavy losses in human lives as well as the destruction of civil installations essential for the economic welfare of Angola. The Federal Government will continue to do its share in bringing about an immediate end to the dangerous situation that has developed. I I. The PRESIDENT (interpretafiott from Spanish): The next speaker is the representative of Soulh Africa. 1 invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement. 12. Mr. EKSTEEN (South Africa]: Mr. President, may I join other representatives in extending congratulations to you on your accession to the presidency of the Security Council for this month. 13, South Africa has come to the Council to state its case on the recent developments in southern Angola. After all, South Africa is one of onlv two or three countries which actually know what has been happening in that part of Africa, so our views could presumably be of some interest to the Council. The rest of the world has had to rely on the extravagant and imaginative reports emanating from Luanda, 14. In presenting South Africa’s case, I wish to emphasize several of the points made by my Minister of Foreign Affairs in his letter of 27 August 1981 addressed lo the Secretary-General lsc~e S//4652]. 15. Firstly, a choice has to be made urgently in southern Africa between peaceful coexistence and escalating con!Iicl. For its part, South Africa is determined in its choice. Peaceful coexistence and 16, However, we have been equally adamant that such co-operation cannot take place if our neighbours allow terrorists to use their territories as sanctuaries from which to attack the civilian population of South West Africa/Namibia. We have warned that should such attacks be permitted across international borders we shall carry out our responsibility to defend the civilian population under our protection and we shall pursue their attackers wherever and whenever we can find them. 17. In his letter of 27 August libid.1. mv Minister referred to the premeditated attacks from across the border conducted by the SWAP0 against the civilian population of South-West Africa/Namibia. He pointed out that those attacks of aggression had escalated to new levels of intensity during the past few weeks. Let me point out in graphic terms what the effect of those attacks has been on the people of the Territory, the people for whom the United Nations claims to care so much. 18. Andreas Ndentwa owned a little general store 12 kilometres north-east of Oshakati. One November morning, SWAP0 terrorists arrived at his store and robbed him and his wife. After the robbery, they drove Mr, and Mrs. Ndentwa to a place a few kilometres away where they shot Mr. Ndentwa and set his truck alight. Mrs. Ndentwa managed to escape. No doubt the Ndentwas were categorized as “middle class” by the ideologists in SWAP0 and were therefore slated for liquidation. There were no stories in the world press; there were no consultations of the Security Council or angry protests outside embassies; simply a dead shopkeeper, a burnt-out truck, another widow. The perpetrators immediately fled back across the border into Angola. 19. Gne December day, two SWAP0 terrorists attacked a little village 22 kilometres south-east of Nkongo. The villagers were celebrating a wedding when that attack occurred. The guests were terrorized and the headman, Mr. Malaka Rarnabas, was shot and killed-no doubt because he belonged to a group of which the SWAP0 ideologists disapproved. The murderers fled northward towards their sanctuaries across the Angolan border. 20. On 6 November 1979. early in the morning, a civilian truck was driving along a road 28 kilometres north-east of Ondangwa when it detonated a Soviet 26. We sought to state our case and express our concerns in this regard in the General Assembly, but the latter, in blatant contravention of the Charter and its own rules of procedure, refused to allow us to speak. And in April of this year when democraticallyelected representatives of the very people which are currently being terrorized by SWAP0 sought to lay their concerns before the Council, their reauest to do so was summarily dismissed. We have now even invited the members of the Council to visit South West Africa/Namibia to gain first-hand knowledge of the situation on the border with Angola. What more can we do? -- ~~ ~~ 21, During the period from July 1978 to September 1980. the Mission of South Africa addressed 54 letters to the Secretary-General in which it brought to his attention almost 1.000 such incidents. The incidents involved the murders of almost 300 citizens of South West AfricdNamibia, the abductions of 390 schoolchildren and serious injuries to 2.50 inhabitants of the Territory. Without exception, the perpetrators of those crimes fled back to their sanctuaries in Angola after carrying out those actions in their so-called struggle for liberation. From whom is SWAP0 supposed to be liberating itself? From shopkeepers, from village headmen, from workers travelling innocently to their place of employment? 27. What has the United Nations response been to all those attempts to solve the problem of the South West African-Angolan border in a peaceful fashion? Its response has been persistently to extend aid and succour to the very organization which is responsible for threatening international peace. The United Nations, which was established to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes, has repeatedly encouraged SWAPO’s “armed struggle” and has lavished upon SWAP0 every conceivable form of political, propaganda and material assistance. 22. The truth of the matter is that SWAP0 has not been conducting a “liberation” struggle at all; it has, on the contrary. been conducting a systematic campaign to terrorize and intimidate theinhabitants of South West Africa/Namibia with a view to taking over the Government of the Territory by armed for& This should come as no surprise. After all it is quite consistent with the Leninist formula for seizing and retaining power. It was Lenin himself who said: 28. What recourse does South Africa and the aggrieved people of the Territory then have? We have received a great deal of pious advice concerning the necessity for restraint. Rut what restraint has SWAP0 shown? “We have never rejected terror on principle, nor can we do so . . , We would not for one moment assert that individual strokes of heroism are of no importance at all . . . [Marxism] organizes tactics of strife and renders them suitable for general use , + . As the economic and political crises become more intense, ever new and different methods of defence and attack will be used in [guerrilla] combat. Hence, Marxism never will reject any particular combat method, let alone reject it for ever.” 29. As my Minister of Foreign Affairs has pointed out in his letter to the Secretary-General, South Africa stated as long ago as 20 September 1978 that it was willing to confirm that the moment SWAP0 undertook to stop violence and in fact carried out its undertaking, action against SWAP0 by the South African forces would cease [S/12854]. My Minister repeated that offer the day before yesterday [see S/146521. 23. What alternatives are open to South Africa in reacting to the unprovoked attacks mounted by SWAP0 against the civilian population of the Territory’! 30. There are those who say that the solution of this problem lies in the immediate implementation of Council resolution 435 (1978). But it is precisely SWAPO’s terrorist attacks and the fear that they would continue after implementation of the plan that constitute one of the main obstacles to imp!ementation. Apart from anything else, if SWAP0 continues its present policy of assassination there will be few democratic politicians left in the Territory to contest an election, SWAP0 has already murdered more than 20 leading politicians. including such men as 24. The Charter of the United Nations enjoins Member States to settle their international disputes by peaceful IrledI1S. WC have tried this: we have repeatedly informed neighbouring States of our wish to live in neace with them: we have rcueatedlv asked them not to harbour terrorists or to allow terrorists to attack South West Africa/Namibia from their territories: we have repeatedly offered to discuss these nratters with them. Mr. Clemens Kapuuo, Mr. Shiagaya and Chief Mip ister Elifas of Ovambo. Those men were widely respected and authentic leaders of their people, 31, Clemens Kapuuo was a frequent petitioner before the United Nations in the cause of Namibian iudeoendence. No one can auestion the dedication of thosk leaders to the people bf the Territory. And yet thev were cut down by SW,QPO bullets. assassinated in their prime by that party which now pretends to be willing to bubniit to the democratic process. 32. Soulh Africa’s response to SWAPO’s campaign of’ terrorism and intimidation is clear. It was once again stated unequivocally by my Prime Minister in Parliament last Wednesday, 26 August 1981: “The Government of South Africa has in the recent past unfailingly and seriously requested our neighbouring States and other countries in Africa to work together in the pursuit and achievement of peaceful economic prosperity, welfare and stability for all. At the same time, the Government has warned these countries and requested them not to harbour communist-supported terrorists who operate against South West Africa/Namibia and the Republic of South Africa, or to allow them to operate against us from neighbouring territories, “It therefore obviously follows that we cannot sit and wait on our side of the border for terrorists to come across to commit murder, plant land-mines and to intimidate. “I trust that the MPLA Government will now take heed of our request for non-interference and of our ideal to live in peace with our neighbours, and will cease their involvement in operations which are not aimed against them, but against terrorism, and that they will comply with our requests to engage in discussions with us.” 33. At the outset of my statement, 1 referred to the letter from my Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Secretary-General [ihid.] to the effect that a choice has to be made urgently in southern Africa between peaceful coexistence and escalating conflict and that South Africa for its part was determined that peaceful cocxistencc and economic stability should supersede ;ill other ronsidcralions. 34. ‘I‘hc countries of Africa need fear nothing from South Africa if they dccidc to make a similar choice. If they should so decide, we would gladlyjoin hands with them in combating the continent’s real problems: hunger. disease. ignorance and lack of economic &v~lolmcnl. Those arc the ghosts which haunt the Jay-lo-day lives of hutrdrcds of millions of ordinary Africans-those and the spectre of Soviet imperialism. Africa needs greater food production; it needs schools and colleges: it needs hospitals and clinics; it needs t:dctorics atld industries. It dots not need Kalashnikovs, political commissars and the alien ideologies of Marx and Lenin, 35. The Council is at present engaged in a debate on allegations of what is called aggression by South Africa against Angola, South Africa emphatically rejects that accusation. South Africa harbours no aggressive intentions against Angola and its people. 36. The problems on the border are, as in the past, the direct result of SWAP0 activity. The Angolan authorities are also aware that any action on the part of the South African security forces is aimed solely at SWAP0 and not at Angola and its people. 37, The Council has heard a great deal of extravagant rhetoric during this debate. The imagination of the Angolan representative, for example, was unrestrained in his descriptions of recent events in southern Angola. But those were merely words signifying nothing, completely detached from reality. 38. Let me instead quote from a wire service report which was filed today by an international .;Durnalist who actually visited the scene of South Africa’s recent operation in Xangongo, a town which Angola claims was bombed by South Africa: “The townspeople appeared to be going about their normal business. Pigs and goats ran through the streets ahead of us. “The town, populated by about 2,000 people, was obviously run down and it was difficult to decide between decay and military damage. But it appeared that the centre had been hardly touched by war, with just a few bullet holes in the walls . . . “Parts of the town were scattered with South African leaflets, dropped before the attack, urging civilians to evacuate. One old man, asked why he had come back while the South Africans were there, said, ‘I have lived here for 34 years. Why should I stay away?’ ” The reporter continues: “We arrived at the football stadium, where a match watched by some 200 spectators, military and civilian, was being organized between South African soldiers and a local team.” ‘I’hat is the sort of scene that the representative of Angola has described in the Council as “a massacre not too far from genocide” [2296r11 meeting, patu. 81. 39. General Constand Viljoen, Chief of the South African Defence Force, announced yesterday that the security forces which had been involved in follow-up operations against SWAP0 elements in southern Angola had complettd their limited task and were now returning to their bases. Advance groups are already back in South West AfricalNamibia. 41. Mr, MORDEN (Canada): Mr. President, on behalf of the Government of Canada I should like through you to thank the Security Council for allowing me to participate in this debate. “I have learned from the President of the People’s Republic of Angola as well as from information by news agencies and other reuorts that the racist r6gime if South Africa has lauhched an unprovoked attack on the Peonle’s Republic of Angola, As current Chairman of OAU, I ‘have the responsibility to bring to your notice the gravity of this act by the South African rdgime, The attack is not only a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola, a member State of OAU, but it also constitutes a grave threat to peace in the southern African region and indeed the whole world. For this reason 1 must register on behalf of my country and on behalf of -0AU our strong condemnation of the barbarous attacks by South Africa on the sovereign State of Angola, The South African racist r6gime stands condemned by all OAU member States and, on my own behalf, I would like not only to express indignation at those attacks but also to appeal to the United Nations, and the Security Council in particular, to take appropriate action against the South African regime so that such actions are never repeated again. As a priority, the South African regime must first and immediately withdraw its forces from Angola and stop any further attacks.” 42, It was with the deepest regret that the Canadian Government learned of the incursion into Angola by armed forces of South Africa. The eloquent and moving statement by Mr. de Figueiredo has fully expressed the distress and plight of the people of Angola, and my Government extends its deepest sympathy to those who are suffering at the hands of the South African armed forces. 43. On 26 August 1981, the South African Ambassador in Ottawa was called in and Canada’s profound concern over the situation in Angola was expressed to him. He was informed that the Canadian Government deeply deplored the escalation of violence, which could only serve to heighten tension in the area and Dut in serious .ieooardv the negotiations for Namibia’s independence-fofo; which the tiestern contact group, in&dine Canada. had been strivinn. The Canadian GovernGent hop& that the Republic of South Africa will terminate its incursions into Angola and avoid any further escalation of the conflict. 44. Repeated South African violations of Angolan sovereignty are totally unacceptable and the current military activity poses a grave escalation of the conflict, which must be unreservedly condemned. 50. As we all know, the world of the racist r&gime of South Africa has been shrinking-nay, crumblingfast. Before the collapse of the Portuguese empire seven years ago, the world of the racist regime looked solid and secure. There was still some hope left when the other racist regime in Zimbabwe existed. Now, in desperation. the racist regime is hopelessly clinging to Namibia and has adopted a policy of lashing out at its neighbours which oppose the evil policies of that regime. The tactics are not new and it is an illusion to believe that they will succeed in stopping the march to freedom of the people of southern Africa. 45. The situation emphasizes once more the acute need for a solution to the Namibian issue. Canada calls for an immediate withdrawal of South African forces from Angola and for South Africa’s full and genuine co-operation with international efforts to bring about a peaceful negotiated settlement in Namibia.

The next speaker is the representative of Kenya who will be speaking as representative of the current Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). 1 invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make a statement. 51. The latest invasion of Angola by South Africa is only one in a series going back to the time Angola was struggling for its freedom from the colonial Power some six years ago. Each time the invasion is mounted, a-pack of-lies are put out to cover the real reasons for the attack. This time, hot pursuit of the freedom fighters of Namibia and destr&tion of their alleged bases are given as the reasons. We know from the press and other sources that the invasion took a long time to plan and that Angola, not SWAPO, was the target.

Mr. President, I thank you and the members of the Security Councfl for granting me this opportunity to address the Council. 48. You, Mr. President, bring to your office very wide experience gained over the long period of your distinguished career. Coming as you do from Panama, a country that has been struggling to consolidate its territorial integrity and freedom, you are in a better position than most to appreciate the problems facir - the peoples of southern Africa. 52. In this situation, the Council has a straightforward duty, in our view, to condemn the unprocoked aggression and breach of international peace and security. We listened with dismay to the state- 53. We think that the world security situation is rapidly deteriorating. Instead of a calm handling of accidental breaches of international peace and security there is discernible jubilation in certain quarters. This is a dangerous new development and unless the Council can speak out loud and clear against the forces that encourage war, it will not be long before those forces plunge the world into untold misery and destruction. 54. One does not justify a breach of peace in one part of the world by citing a breach of peace elsewhere. If you are responsible, you condemn all such breaches of peace, wherever they may occur. That is why we appeal strongly to all members of the Council to join in condemning South Africa for unleashing this unprovoked attack against Angola. 55. We listened with interest io the statement made by the representative of the racist rCgime in the hope that we could find some real justification for the attack mounted by his country against Angola, but unfortu- 56. South Africa has claimed’and arrogated to itself the right to determine the kind of peaceful coexistence that should exist in its region with its neighbours and is determined to lay down the terms. 57. I listened carefully to learn whether there was any reason given why South Africa had not quit Namibia, but I did not hear any. His whole statement was based on the assumption that South Africa has some right to be in Namibia. WC do not accept that assumption and any claims for the possibility of a peaceful coexistence with the racist-regime are an illusion. Certainly, if South Africa is looking for support and acceptance of its policies. whereby it regards freedom fighters elsewhere as terrorists while terrorist activities in South Africa itself are supposed to be ignored and not looked at by anybody who is opposed, then the grounds for co-operation or peaceful coexistence referred to are no more than an illusion. 58. We trust that the Council will join together, as it has done in the past, to condemn the actions of South Africa and demand the complete withdrawal of its forces from Angola. 59. The PKESIDENT (interpretcrtion from Spanish): I should like to inform the Council that the Secretariat has received a draft resolution sponsored by the delegations of Mexico, Niger, Panama, the Philippines, Tunisia and Uganda, which will be officially circulated to members of the Council. The meeting rose NI 6 p.m.