S/PV.2365 Security Council

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Kenya, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mauritius and the Syrian Arab Republic in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council’s 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 accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. The tnecting was called to order at 4.25 p.m. Adoption of the agenda The agenda IIUS adopted. Complaint by Seychelles: Report of the Security Council Commission of Inquiry established under resolution 496 (1981) (S/14905/ Rev.1) At thr invilcrtiou of the President, Mr. Maina (Kenya), Mr. Burwin (Libyan Asab Jnmahiriya), Mr. Ramp/w1 (Mauritius) and Mr. El-Fattal (Syrian Arab Republic) took the places reserved for them at the side of the CounL’il chamber. I. The PRESIDENT (interpretation porn Chinese): In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings on this item [2359th and 236lst meetings], I invite the representative of Seychelles to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Barbados, Benin, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, the German Democratic Republic, Grenada, Honduras, Hungary, India, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Sao Tome and Principe, the United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 3. Mr. de PINI& (Spain) (interpretation fi-om Spanish): I should like first to extend a special greeting to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Seychelles, Mr. Jacques Hodoul, and thank him for his presence at this debate, which naturally enhances our deliberations. 4. We are met here to consider the report of the Security Council Commission of Inquiry established under resolution 496 (1981), report contained in document, S/14905/Rev. 1. As the members of the Council know, after considering the complaint presented by Seychelles we decided to send a Commission of Inquiry made up of three members of the Council to consider the origin, background and financing of the 25 November 1981 mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles, as well as to assess and evaluate economic damages, and to i-eport to the Council with recommendations [resolutiun 496 (/98/j, paw. 31. Ar the invitation of the President, Mr. Hodoul (Scyc~hellc~s) took a place at the Councii table; Mr. Zarif (Afghanistail), Mr. Ahada (Algeria), Mr. de Figueircdo (Angola), Mr. Rota (Argentina), Mr. Moseley (Barkudos), Mr. Soglo (Benin), Mr. Mogl~le (Botsllwncr), Mr. Tsvetkov (Bulgaria), Mr. Lbpez del Atno (Cubu), WI.. S&I (Czechoslovrrkia), Mr. Abdel Mcguid (Egypt), 6. We have studied with particular care the Commission’s findings and conclusions, and WC are concerned that, as the representative of Panama, who introduced the report, said in his statement [2359rh meeting], the Commission is not fully informed about the origin of or background to the mercenary aggression. Furthermore, the Commission points out that it would be premature to make a final assessment of the damage to the economy of Seychelles, but the figures for the damage given in the report and the loss of income to the tourist industry. with its multiplier effect on the rest of the economy. seem to us serious enough to justify our support for action in this respect. 7. As the representative of Panama said in his statement. although the Commission received the full cooperation of the Governments of Seychelles and Swaziland, it was not, unfortunately, allowed to interview the group of mercenaries who fled the country and returned to South Africa in the hijacked Air India aircraft. Since the Commission itself says that it cannot reach final conclusions for that reason, and since important further information may emerge in the future, especially from the trials being held in South Africa. we fully support the suggestion that the report be completed when appropriate and then presented to the Council. 8. My delegation fully supports the Commission’s recommendations. We listened with great interest to the statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles, who. in his conclusion, summed up those recommendations as follows: there should be an appeal to the Members of the United Nations to provide. through an appropriate fund. financial, technical and material assistance to the Republic of Seychelles to enable it to deal with the problems arising from the mercenary aggression: Member States should be called upon to co-operate fully in the preparation of an international convention against the recruitment. use, financing and training of mercenaries: and the mandate of the Commission 9. In conclusion, my delegation wishes to support the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and most vigorously to reject the actions of the mercenary forces. against whom the international corn. munity as a whole must adopt measures of all kinds so that such forces cannot continue to disrupt the peaceful development of nations. IO. Mr. WYZNER (Poland): The Council is reconvening today to consider the report of the Commission of Inquiry it has established under its unanimously adopted resolution 496 (198 I), following the complaint by the Republic of Seychelles that a band of mercenaries invaded its territory on 25 November. 11. The circumstances of that abortive invasion were outlined by the representative of Seychelles at the 2314th meeting of the Council. preceding the adop. tion of resolution 496 (1981). Further details are given in paragraphs 60-65 of the Commission’s report. WC have also listened with great interest to the succinct summary of events presented on 20 May by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles. Mr. Jacques Hodoul [235(lrh ~nrcfirza]. 12. A careful study of the main body of the reporl and of the annexes thereto makes it abundantly clear to an objective reader who the real culprit is. Addi. tional light on this point has been shed by the press dispatches on the invasion and its aftermath: here I shall mentioqjust three of them, which appeared in The Nell York Tijnes of 22 April, 4 May and 10 May 1982. under the respective headings of *.South Africa Tied to Abortive Coup’:. “Testimony Links South African Arms to Coup” and “Trial Gives Peek at South Africa Intelligence Web”, plus those attached to Press Release No. 5 of the Permanent Mission of Seychelles dated 29 March. 13. It is evident that the racist rkgime of South Africa knew well in advance of the plans to invade Seychelles in order to overthrow its legitimate Government. explicitly approved those plans and provided substantial material assistance for their realization-in short. it had orchestrated this criminal act of armed aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of a State Member of the United Nations. in flagrant violation of the provisions of Artitle 2, paragraph 4 of the Charter. 14. In this context, one understands why, as stated in paragraph 272 of the report, the Commission was unable to have an interview with the leader of the invading mercenaries. “Mad” Mike Hoare, although we do not believe that the handicap thus created should have been very serious in view of other testimony available.

Mr, President, I should like at the Outset to eXprk%S the gratitude of my delegation to the members of the Council for having allowed us to participate in this important meeting. 16. I might add at this juncture that we see a clear organic link between the case of aggression against Seychelles and another matter regarding South Africa which the Council is bound to take up soon: namely, the question of implementation of its resolution 418 (1977) imposing a mandatory arms embargo against the upurtheid rCgime. 25. we are naturally glad to see you assuming the presidency at a time when the world is beset with profound conflicts. We have been impressed by the able and exemplary manner in which YOU have conducted the work of this body during this month. For Tanzania, which maintains steady and close relations with the People’s Republic of China, your presidency gives us confidence. 17. My delegation has studied with interest the Commission’s report, which we consider to be comprehensive, enlightening and useful. We appreciate the efforts of the Commission to produce as balanced and objective a document as possible. We also understand its cautious and dispassionate approach to certain very sensitive issues and its unwillingness to depart from two fundamental legal principles: uudiinm et altera pars and in dubio pro reo. We would be remiss if wk failed to express our gratitude to its members for their dedication and toil. At the same time, I would be less than completely candid if I did not also say that we would have wished the Commission to Ibe less circumspect in some of the findings and conclusions contained in Chapter VI of the report. 26. I should equally like to congratulate Mr. Kamanda wa Kamanda who. as President for the month of April, so ably presided over the work of the Council. I pay a tribute to him, as I have had the personal privilege of working with him and have appreciated his distinguished contribution in the service of Africa. 27. The Council is once again meeting to consider the complaint by Seychelles arising out of the naked act of aggression committed by the crpat~lzeid regime of South Africa against the pence-loving people of Seychelles. In that regard, my delegation is most appreciative of the lucid, factual and informative statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles [ihid. 1. The Council has before it the report of the Security Council Commission of Inquiry established under resolution 496 (1981) and contained in document S/l4905/Rev. I, We commend the members of the Commission, Mr. Ozores Typaldos of Panama, Mr. Sezaki of Japan and Mr, Craig of Ireland, for compiling such important data. 18. My delegation can easily endorse the part of the report concerning the assessment and evaluation of economic damages, based as it is on information provided by the most knowledgeable source, namely, the Government of Seychelles. 19. We also wish to join others in supporting the extension of the Commission’s mandate in order to enable it to prepare an update which would take into account the additional evidence now available and, in particular, that which emerged the mercenaries involved. during the trials of 28. The events of 25 November 1981 epitomized South Africa’s unfolding general policy of aggression against independent African States. Hence, for the Republic of Seychelles. a non-aligned country, an ardent supporter of the liberation struggle against lrpaUhcid, to be targeted as a victim of the mercenary adventure was not inconsistent with that policy, Seychelles, strategically located in the Indian Ocean, has taken on added significance, especially in the wake of the resurgence of the so-called strategic alliance with South Africa. 20. We likewise consider the second recommendation, in paragraph 293 of the report, calling for a speedy conclusion of the work on an international convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries, to be very useful and timely. 21. The Council can surely take all the necessary steps, long overdue as they are, in order once and for all to bring South Africa and its “dogs of war” to heel in order to prevent it from launching yet another aggression in the future. 29. South Africa, which has arrogated to itself the role of gendarme in the region, has committed numerouS: acts of aggression against the neighbouring States of Angola, Zimbabwe. Botswana, L,esotho, Mozambique and Zambia. Therefore for South Africa the toppling of the revolutionary Government of Seychelles. leading to the installation of a puppet regime, was Part of the grand design against the opponents 22. MY delegation stands ready to contribute to whatever action the Council might decide to take in this respect. 30. The extent to which South Africa can go against the opponents of apnrtheid is unparalleled. Its constant armed incursions into Mozambique and its perpetual policy of intimidation and blackmail of the neighbouring States, including its continuing occupation of southern Angola, using the international Territory of Namibia, which is occupied illegally, as a platform for that aggression and for numerous other terrorist activities, are all part of that policy. This should not be allowed to continue, least of all to find sympathy in certain quarters of the Council. The arguments adduced to prevent indictment of South Africa cannot be considered as sound propositions in the light of the overwhelming amount of evidence which is before the world and which places South Africa squarely in the guilty position. Since that heinous act against Seychelles, the revelations through the international press and the testimonies of the mercenaries themselves have all been self-evident. What happened in Seychelles on 25 N,ovember 1981 is a continuation of South Africa’s policy of installing well-tailored puppet regimes in order to enhance the destabilization of independent African States. The use of puppets in such criminal adventures did not start with Seychelles. The traitor Savimbi, who has been on the pay-roll of South Africa since before Angola gained its independence, has not stopped his conduit role against his own country. The Savimbis and Manchams pride themselves on being on the same pay-roll as the internationally acknowledged soldiers of fortune led by Mike Hoare. As far as we are concerned, all puppets stand as condemned as their masters and co-conspirators-the third dogs of war. We should like to submit as forcefully as we possibly can that the Seychelles dlbicle of 25 November 1981 was the work of the uprwtheid regime of South Africa. 3 1 1 The international community is being presented with evidence to prove that South Africa was privy to, and actually sanctioned, the expedition. The behaviour. of the South African authorities and their uneven-handedness in the handling of the whole affair leave no doubt that they were involved. The mercenaries came from South Africa and most of them are members of the security forces. That is why, when in the face of defeat at the hands of the gallant Seychelles defence forces and in their panic retreat and the subsequent hijacking of the Air India airliner, the mercenaries did not hesitate to go to South Africa, where they had come from. The swift act of clemency and the prompt release of most of the mercenaries cast initial light on the total involvement of the South African Government in the whole affair. The subse- 32. Evidently the racist Government could not charge the mercenaries with illegal possession of firearms, because it supplied them. It could not charge them with conspiracy to commit an offence outside South Africa, because the whole expedition was planned and financed by that regime. 33. Taking all these factors into account, my delegation wonders whether what is going on now in South Africa is anything like a trial, for what can be expected of a system which is itself an accomplice in the crime? What can be expected of a system which, in the first instance, chose to ignore the crime altogether and set the mercenaries free? Obviously, the South African “legal” system, being the total embodiment of the obnoxious system of aprrrtheid, cannot be expected to punish those who commit offences in the service of the racist regime. 34. The Seychelles raid by a band of mercenaries is not the first raid on an independent, peace-loving African country. Since the early 196Os, numerous mercenary plots have been hatched and carried out. To date, the possibility of mercenary aggression remains a serious threat to the sovereignty and independence of many small States in Africa, and indeed elsewhere in the developing world; therefore the Council must categorically pronounce itself against mercenarism. It must condemn South Africa. Short of that, the Council may run the risk of appearing to be acquiescing in this evil system. 35. The Government of Tanzania opposes all mercenary activities, since we believe they are manifestations of crimes against peace. The international community must urgently enact an internationally accepted instrument that will proscribe all acts leading to the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries. 36. We have noted with distress the counter-initiatives by some countries during the consideration of this item both in the Sixth Committee and in the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of a International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. We find it strange that the very countries that have labelled the national liberation movements “terrorist groups” have found logic in going into partnership with regimes that finance and use mercenaries in Africa and elsewhere. 37. Let US therefore come to grips with the realities of the day and declare that the activities of mercenaries are contrary to the fundamental principles of inter- 43. In the past few days, speaker after speaker has praised the valour of the people and Government of Seychelles. Speaker after speaker has condemned the mercenary attack which shattered the peace, disturbed the life, damaged and destroyed the property and disrupted the economy of this island State of some 63,000 people. And that is not all, for the attack also resulted in injuries and loss of life. 38. As the Commission anticipated, there is a strong need for the Council to examine once again the complaint submitted by the Government of Seychelles as more evidence comes to light, and indeed, to issue a supplementary report. This is especially necessary in view of the inadequate probe into the political aspects, for they relate significantly to the background and financing of the mercenary aggression, which were part of the Commission’s mandate under Security Council resolution 496 (1981). 44. The valiant people of Seychelles stood up, fought against aggression and made short work of the attack in defence of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of their country. Botswana salutes them; the OAU Council of Ministers congratulates them. As the current Chairman of that Council, I am particularly gratified that the solidarity displayed in the condemnation of the mercenary aggression against this African country transcended whatever differences there might be in other areas of our political endeavours. 39. My delegation, however, welcomes the economic aspects of the recommendations, especially those which relate to the serious economic dislocation caused by the mercenary aggression. We hope the international community will respond positively to the appeal for assistance to Seychelles, ‘to enable it to rebuild its damaged structures and equipment and, more significantly, to rehabilitate its economy, by contributing generously to the special fund. In this regard we note with appreciation the willingness expressed by the Government of France to play a special role in co-ordinating the resource mobilization for this purpose, 45. The world has been informed that the objective of the sinister and ignominious plot foiled on 25 November 1981 was to capture the entire leadership of the country, overthrow the Government and reinstate the former head of State. “Capture the entire leadership”, I said. Bloodless coups are a rarity and, let us admit, the adventure would have resulted in loss of life. 40. W’e cannot conclude this statement without paying special tribute to the gallant people of Seychelles for what they have done on behalf of Africa. South Africa’s defeat at the hands of the revolutionary forces of Seychelles is the act of a courageous people who love their independence and are willing to defend it. Tanz:ania has already pledged total solidarity with the people of Seychelles. We would like to assure them that we will always be with them, even during these difficult moments of economic reconstruction. To that end Tanzania is ready to make a modest contribution to the voluntary fund to be established by the Council. 46. The Government of Seychelles, the members of the Security Council Commission of Inquiry in their report and the news media have all identified the mercenaries, their country of permanent or temporary residence, their designations, their mode of operation and the haven of their escape. The roll of dishonour names, among others, the notorious mercenary Mike Hoare, Dolinschek-by his own account an intelligence officer in the National Intelligence Service of South Africa-and Puren, a Congo-crisis graduate. There are others, too, who seem to be associated with South African security forces in roles that go beyond the concept of mere involvement in the. military routine of compulsory National Service. What about Mr. Steyn de Wet and Mr. van Huysteen? What about the statement by Commandant van der Spuy concerning his unit? These questions cry out for answers. 4 I. The PRESIDENT (interpretcrtior? from Chinese): The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Botswana, Mr. Archibald Mogwe, who wishes to make a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). I welcome him and invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

The first paragraph of resolution CM/Res. 906 (XXXVIII) on the mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles, which was adopted by the Council of Ministers of the OAU at its thirty-eighth session, held at Addis Ababa from 22 to 28 February 1982, reads: 47. We have here not just a motley group of louts, but experienced mercenaries, professional men, some still in the active service of their country. And the holding of regular planning meetings: the assembling of exotic military hardware: the issuing of passports under false names and the promptness with which Puren’s was issued; the use of the firing range to test weapons: the ease with which such a large body of men passed through customs, immigration and security without being searched-in short, the facility, blatancy and brazenness with which the mercenaries “Co/zRnctl//ates the valiant people of Seychelles and their Government on their resounding victory over the vile mercenaries in the pay of international imperialism.“’ 48. We recognize and appreciate the unanimity with which the Council supports the recommendation that the present report should be considered an interim one and that the mandate of the Commissioners be extended in order for them to pursue their meticulous and methodical search for truth and to prepare and submit a supplement, a complementary report. The area of investigation has now been narrowed down to mercenaries inside South Africa itself. The Council should expect from the Government of South Africa all the possible assistance the Commissioners may require. It should seek South Africa’s co-operation and facilitation of the inquiry. . 49. Our concern here at this moment is tirst and foremost the question of Seychelles. But the larger question of mercenarism is a matter of concern to nations across the African continent. 50. The GAU has adopted a Convention which, by definition, excludes members of the enlarged international community. Our ultimate objective, however, is the adoption by the international community of a global convention. Mercenaries from other nations and continents can best be dealt with under a United Nations convention. We are aware that some Western countries have enacted legislation forbidding the recruitment of their nationals for foreign wars. However, the fact that mercenaries are still being recruited openly in the West through magazine advertisements shows that legislative measures such as the Neutrality Act in the United States and the Foreign Enlistment Act in the United Kingdom, to mention but two examples, are extremely inadequate, For that reason we welcome the recommendation relating to the establishment of an international convention against mercenarism I 51. Yesterday mercenaries were in the Congo and Angola, in Benin and Zimbabwe. Today they are in Seychelles. Tomorrow is anybody’s guess. 52. What is no guess, however, is that if the international community genuinely accepts and upholds the principle of the inalienable right of peoples to selfdetermination and their right to embrace, without let or hindrance, the ideological and socio-economic systems of their choice; if the fundamenta1 prerequisites of statehood-independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States-are held sacrosanct and inviolable; if the hegemonistic designs and hankering after spheres of imperialist influence cannot merely be curbed, but completely outlawed: and if no country provides a haven for mercenaries and each enacts legislation prohibiting its nationals from enlisting for mercenary service, then the death knell of mer-cenarism will have tolled. 54. It has been reported by the Commissioners and acknowledged by all speakers that the Republic of Seychelles has, as a result of the invasion, suffered extensive material damage. The Foreign Minister of Seychelles has catalogued his country’s requirements. What must be said, and said very loudly for even the deaf to hear, is that as a result of the repro. hensible attack on Seychelles, the Government of that country is being compelled to divert its slender le. sources from essential development projects to the work of repairing the damage done and to strengthening its security and defence systems. 55. The international community is renowned for its generosity in times of dire need. We have no reason to believe that the plea of the people and Government of Seychelles will go unheeded and their valour unsung and unrewarded. We therefore support the recommendation that a voluntary fund be set up with the objective of alleviating in some measure the plight and suffering of the people of Seychelles. 56. On behalf of the OAU Council of Ministers, and on behalf of my own country, Botswana, I thank the Council for having permitted me to participate in this debate. I violated convention by not congratulating you, Sir, on your occupancy of the presidency for the month of May. This was no oversight on my part, but a deliberate act-not because you are not worthy of the kind words that have been addressed to you, but because all of the distinguished personalities who have preceded me have paid you every tribute in the book and left none for me, save to associate my delegation and the OAU Council of Ministers with everything that has been said here about your person, your country and the confidence you enjoy from US all.

The next speaker is the representatrve of Vitd Nam. I invite her to take a place at the Council table and to make her statement. 58. Mrs. NGUYEN NGOC DUNG (Viet Nam) (irttoprefrttion f,.c.)nz French): The delegation of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam would like, first of all, to extend to you, Mr. President, and to the other members of the Council, its sincere thanks for providing it with this opportunity to participate in the work of the Council on the important subject of the attempted armed corfp d’c’rar against the Republic of Seychelles in November 198 1. 59. My delegation listened attentively to the clear and convincing statement of Mr. Jacques Hodoul, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Seychelles [ikid.], and we fully share his evaluation of the results of the investigation by the Commission of Inquiry and (he measures to be taken in the future. 61. This obstructive attitude on the part of South Africa did not succeed in suppressing the truth. The press, despite its limitations, has already made cleal the essential fact-that those in charge of this oper- <ation intended to overthrow the Government of Sey- Ichelles-with information about the plan which had lbeen drawn up, the source of financing, the supply of arms-everything, including details as to the undeniable role of a service of the South African armed forces, the Military Intelligence Service, and of the National Intelligence Service. 66. That is why Viet Nam is acting, in full awareness, in fully endorsing the proposal of Foreign Minister Jacques Hodoul for the preparation and rapid adoption of an international convention with effective provisions to combat this infernal scourge of the mercenary. 67. It is to be hoped that this juridical instrument will be drafted in such a way as to be applicable not only to mercenaries but especially to States which recruit them, finance them and use them and which have on their territory training camps disguised in various ways. We would hope that this convention would provide for severe punishment both of the mercenaries and of the States which employ them as an instrument of their policy of interference in the internal affairs of other States. 62. International public opinion is agreed that the abortive act of armed aggression was indeed planned and prepared in South Africa and that most of the mercenaries had served in the armed forces of South Africa. This revelation is a surprise to no one, since this is a racist rCgime which persists in pursuing its odious policy of npurrheid and oppression against neighbouring countries, despite the chorus of international condemnation. 63. This abortive act of force against the young Republic of Seychelles is not an isolated case; far from it. In terms of the African continent alone, the same scenario has been acted out, with some variations, in Conakry, in Cotonou, in the Congo, in Zaire, im Zimbabwe, in the Comoros and against Angola, Mozambique, Togo and so on. In other continents t(Do, this form of armed intervention, of destabilizatlion by means of mercenaries, has become a dangerous scourge to the young, newly independent States already sorely tried by so many years of effort in the liberation struggle. 68. We consider mercenarism to be an international crime, an act of international terrorism which poses a grave threat to sovereignty, the territorial integrity and, in some cases, the very existence of many newly independent States. 69. With regard to the case of the Republic of Seychelles which is now before this Council, my delegation would like to associate itself with all non-aligned and other countries in expressing our respect and admiration for the people and Government of Seychettes, who dare to defy all imperialist intrigues, firmly and valiantly supporting all just causes, in spite of all threats, and who work so tirelessly and so consistently to make the Indian Ocean a zone of peace, a nuclear-free zone without military bases. Perhaps it is this courageous position of the Republic of Seychelles that has made it such a thorn in the side of the warmongers whose target it has become. The Republic of Seychelles may be sure that all those who cherish justice are on its side. 64. This proliferation of violent attempts at coups d’c’tar, political attacks and armed interventions, which are now becoming more generalized, is no accident. It is to be explained by the plans for stemming the tide of the national liberation movements and by the hegemonistic policies pursued by international imperialist and reactionary forces that cannot tolerate the idea of their former colonies or vassal States becoming independent, enjoying self-determination and daritig to choose a path of development which is not their own. In the world context where acts of open war are not always rewarding, those in imperialist, colonialist and reactionary circles often have recourse to underhand and disguised methods such as the use of mercenaries. 70. We should like to take this opportunity to quote a passage from the telegram sent by the President of the Council of State of our country, Mr. Truong Chinh, to the President of the Republic of Seychelles, “Viet Nam reaffirms its whole-hearted solidarity with and its energetic support for the people and Government of Seychelles in their fight for the defence and construction of a developed and prosperous Republic of Seychelles.” 71, My delegation, in conclusion, urges members of the Council to follow up appropriate1y the just and logical proposals submitted by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles, in particular these concerning the establishment of a special emergency assistance fund to compensate for the considerable damage caused by this aggression, the preparation as soon as possible of an international convention on mercenarism and the prolongation of the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry in order to create the necessary conditions for bringing this case to trial, as the international community has the right to expect.

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

First of all, Sir, I should like to congratulate You warmly on your assumption of the presidency for the month of May and to express my conviction that under your competent leadership the work of the Council will prove successful, 74. 1 wish also to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Kamanda wa Kamanda of Zaire, for the competence with which he carried out his functions. 75. 1 am very grateful for this opportunity to take Part in this debate on behalf of the Bulgarian delegation. 76. The Council has already had occasion once l2314rh ~n~~etiflgl to deal with the question of the attack bY a EYouP of terrorists against the Republic of Seyche11es3 an attack that failed thanks to the vigilance of and the effective measures taken by the armed forces of that country. 77+ MY delegation notes with profound concern that cases of the use of mercenaries in pursuit of a policy of destabilization and terror against newly liberated ‘ountries and national liberation movements, partic- 79. My delegation has carefully examined the report of the Commission of Inquiry and found it to be a very useful one. At the same time, we associate ourselves with the view expressed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles, Mr. Jacques Hodoul, when he emphasised in his clear and precise statement that “the report, in spite of the evident desire of the Commission fully to carry out the mandate entrusted to it, does not wholly elucidate the origin, background and financing of the aggression against the Republic of Seychelles” [2359rh meeting, partr. 461, 80. In this regard, I should like to express the hope of the Bulgarian delegation that these omissions will be repaired and that the Council will give the Cornmission a mandate to supplement its report by new facts, thus making it possible to obtain a full picture of the situation. Nevertheless, the facts available have demonstrated undeniably that the attack against Seychelles was inspired, organized and carried out with the direct participation of the racist regime of Pretoria. It was prepared with the approval of the South African Special Services and carried out with weapons supplied and mercenaries recruited by the South African armed forces. According to the revelations of the gang’s leader, the racist Government had decided in principle in September 1981 to carry out this invasion plan, the specific objective of which Was the overthrow of the legitimate Government of Sey chelles. 81. What is particularly serious is that this act is not an isolated one. It falls within the framework of an extremely dangerous pohcy on the part of Pretoria which is well-known to the international community. It is one more link in a long chain of crimes committed by the racists, who are continuing their illegal &cupation of Namibia and their acts of aggression against neighbouring States. 82. In the circumstances, there can be no doubt that the full and direct responsibility for the mercenary 90. I should like also to express my gratitude to the members of the Council for allowing me to present my country’s views regarding the complaint by Seychelles on the assault against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that small non-aligned State. 83. Examination of the report of the Commission of Inquiry provides further confirmation of the fact that the attack committed against Seychelles constitutes a flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international law. The racist rigime of Pretoria is politically and juridically fully responsible for these illegal acts. 91. We listened attentively to the detailed account of the event and its consequences presented to the Council by Mr. Jacques Hodoul, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Seychelles, for which we are grateful. 92. A particular tribute goes to the members of the Security Council Commission of Inquiry for the work accomplished and the comprehensive and detailed report prepared pursuant to resolution 496 (1981), which was ably presented by the representative of Panama. 84. In the context, it is clear that all those that encourage that country in its policy of international adventurism and terrorism by openly demonstrating their friendship with it also bear their share of the responsibility. 93. I shall now comment briefly on the basic results of the work of the Commission of Inquiry and the messages emanating from its report, which is contained in document S/14905/Rev. 1, 85. I should like to reaffirm here the whole-hearted support of my Government and the Bulgarian people for the just cause of the Government and the people of Seychelles. We hope that, on the basis of the report of the Commission of Inquiry and the conclusions that will emerge from this debate, the Council will take appropriate effective measures to compile an even more complete record of all the aspects of the events of 25 November 1981, with a view to the final elimination of the negative consequences of this barbarous attack. 94. It is obvious that the action carried out by mercenaries on 25 November 1981 in Seychelles represents a classic example and an illustration of the manner in which acts of aggression and overthrowing of so-called undesirable Governments are performed, especially against small, independent and, most frequently, non-aligned countries. We have witnessed similar cases in Africa, Latin America, Asia and elsewhere. During the talks with the members of the Commission of Inquiry, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Information of the Republic of South Africa stated that in Africa itself there had been 55 coups &&tat in the last 30 years [S/14905/Rev.I, pm-a. 1861. Mr. Botha forgot to state how many of them were inspired and assisted by his country. 86. The mercenary attack against Seychelles is further proof that it is necessary to complete work on an international convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries. 87. In the Bulgarian delegation’s view, appropriate and effective action by the Council would undoubtedly contribute decisively to the prevention of similar acts in the future; it would also help to strengthen the Charter of the United Nations and the effectiveness of the Organization. 95. The goal of the mercenary action in Seychelles, covertly planned, organized and equipped by the country which has so many times in this forum been condemned for the use of force and acts of aggression against its neighbours, was evidently aimed at overthrowing the legal Government of Seychelles. In our view, the report of the Commission of Inquiry and the talks held by the members of the Commission with the South African authorities unequivocally reveal that the mercenary action was planned in South Africa itself. There is no doubt that the South African racist rigime was not only aware of the action and made it possible but was also directly involved in its organization and performance. Official denials made by ministers and officials of South Africa during the

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

Sir, at the outset 1 should like to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency for the month of May. I am convinced! that your known skill and vast experience will significantly contribute to the work of the Council, 96. The mercenary attack on Seychelles is a Case Of a double crime, a twofold Violation Of illkIwdiOnid law: first, the aggression against the sovereignty of a country, and secondly, the hijacking of an aircraft and the taking of hostages. Neither of them can nor should be tolerated by the international community, and particularly by this United Nations forum. The Council should react in fulfilment of its responsibilities and finally make South Africa obey the norms of international behaviour. 97. Yugoslavia cannot remain passive when a small, non-aligned country becomes’ the victim of outside aggression and the flagrant use of force. This act of terrorism constitutes aggression not only against the people of Seychelles and its legal Government but also against all freedom-loving peoples in the world, against the basic principles and norms of international conduct and against the Charter of the IJnited Nations. 98. The aggression against Seychelles cilused considerable material. financial and economic damage, which should be compensated. Undoubtedly. South Africa bears full responsibility for this damage. 99. We support the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry calling for financial. technical and material assistance to Seychelles by Member States and the specialized agencies in order to eliminate the consequences of the aggression, and for such assistance to be directed through a special fund. The Yu.goslav delegation considers that international assistance to Seychelles should in no way lessen South Africa’s obligation to compensate the damage caused by its subversive and illegal activities, not only in Seychelles but also in other neighbouring countries which have become victims of the impudence and brutality of the racist rCgime. 100. In this context, the Yugoslav delegation would like Particularly to underline the need for speedier and more efficient work on the finat elaboratioa of an international Convention against the recruitment, use financing and training of mercenaries. We hope that thi attack on Seychelles and the report of the Commission of Inquiry will stimulate the exertion of utmost efforts in this direction and that an agreed text of the convention will be adopted as soon as possible, lOI* The Yugoslav delegation expects that, after consideration of the report of the Commission of Inquiry, the Council will take the necessary measures to Prevent similar attempts aimed at destabjlizjng and

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

I should like to begin by thanking you, Sir, and through you the other members of the Council, for affording me the oppor. tunity to address the Council. I also wish to add my ‘- own expression of pleasure at seeing you preside over the Council’s affairs during the month of May, At: this most trying time we have seen ample evidence: that the Council’s work benefits from your widely demonstrated diplomatic skills and the wisdom for which your country has been renowned from time immemorial. 104. My country has been faced on more than one : occasion with threats of insurrection and invasion by : mercenary forces. In consequence, the Governmenl of’ Barbados feels a special sympathy with Seychelles with respect to the traumatic ordeal experienced by. that country on 25 November 1981. 105. Barbados has at every possible opportunitg made it quite clear that it abhors mercenary activity in any form or guise. Barbados was one of the dele. gations calling on the General Assembly, at its thirty. fourth session [wsolution 341140 of I4 Dcwrnbrr 19791 to include the item “Drafting of an international T convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries” in the agenda of its thirty fifth session. Barbados was among the sponsors of: General Assembly resolution 3.5/48 of 4 December 1980, which established the Ad Hoc Committee. Barbados has been an active member of that Corn-, mittee. 106. The Government and people of Barbados regard mercenarism as a crime against humanity. It is a crime which, in my country’s view, ought to be regarded as being the more dangerous because of the legalistic loopholes that tend to frustrate its punish. merit. Barbados is convinced that peace-loving na. tions and civilized peoples everywhere should take all possible action to eliminate this menace from the international arena. 107. The dastardly assault on the Republic of Seychelles by a band of marauders operating out of South Africa underscores the vulnerability of small Stales to attacks by mercenaries. I need not belabour this. point. since the arguments in support of this contem: tion have been clearly enunciated by several delega tions time and again. It is the hope of my delegation, however, that heed will be paid to the second recom mendation in paragraph 293 of the report of the Come IO 108. My delegation unreservedly supports that recommendation. We feel very strongly that every effort must be made to complete the convention with as little delay as possible, and certainly no later than the end of next year. 109. We appreciate the concerns of those delegations wishing to avoid the complications that would inevitably flow from the existence of more than one definition of “mercenary” in international law. We also appreciate the concerns of those delegations that seek to ensure that those of their nationals who might be eng,aged in mercenary activities are guaranteed humane treatment if and when captured. My delegation is not unaware that some delegations-even some of those serving on the r/d hoc Committee-would prefer that a convention not be elaborated at all. My delegation once again appeals to all members of the international community to safeguard the principle of sovereign equality by taking necessary action to eliminate mercenary activity by their nationals and from within their borders. 110. In its issue of March 1982, the magazine NU AjXcnn quotes British journalist and author Tony Ger,aghty as having said: “it is doubtful whether any military entrepreneur, however influential, could engineer a risky political venture without Government help”. The article in the magazine then proceeds to cite instances in which Mr. Geraghty has uncoveredl governmental links of one kind or another with mercenary activities perpetrated in African and Arab countries, 1 II. It is not enough for delegations to pay lip service on such an important matter: it is not enough for Governments of powerful nations to shed crocodile tears when mercenary activity, such as was attempted in Seychelles, results in failure; nor is it enough for the international community to turn a blind eye in cases in which mercenary activity does in fact succeed. 112. It is my delegation’s view that States must assume some responsibility for eliminating mercenary activity, and we also believe that in this case the international responsibility must override the State’s resp~onsibility to protect its citizens when they are planning to commit, are in the process of committing or have already committed any form of mercenary activity.

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

Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure to extend to you our most sincere congratulations on your assumption of the presidency for the month of May. We deeply cherish our ties of close friendship with your great country which, upholding principle, has always stood by Pakistan in its hour of crisis. Relations between our two countries are an example of good neighbourliness and a most positive factor for the peace and stability of our region. I am confident that your wide experience and understanding of international relations and your sagacious leadership will enable the Council to carry out its important responsibilities during this month with distinction and success. 116. I also wish to avail myself of this opportunity to express the deep appreciation of my delegation for the admirable manner in which Mr. Kamanda wit Kamanda of Zaire guided the work of the Council during the past month. 117. In its resolution 496 (198l), the Council condemned the mercenary aggression of 25 November 1981 against the Republic of Seychelles and established a commission to investigate the origin, background and financing of this aggression as well as to assess and evaluate the resulting economic damages. 118. We now have the report of the Commission of Inquiry before us, in document S/14905/Rev. 1. On behalf of the Pakistan delegation, I should first like to pay a sincere tribute to the Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Ozores Typaldos of Panama, and to its two members, Mr. Craig of Ireland and Mr, Sezaki of Japan, for the detailed report they have presented on the various aspects of the mercenary aggression against Seychelles. We have noted with dismay, however, that owing to the refusal of South Africa to permit it to interview the mercenaries, the Commission has been unable to provide complete information on the origin and background of thk mercenary aggression. We therefore feel that the mandate of the Com- 120. The report has highlighted revealing information about the planning of the mercenary aggression, the recruitment of mercenaries and their background. A number of the recruited persons were reservists in the South African defence forces under call-up notice. The weapons were delivered to and tested by them in South Africa. One of the mercenaries, now in custody in Seychelles, is a serving member of the National Intelligence Service of South Africa. Accordingly, in paragraph 282 of its report, the Commission has rightly concluded that: 126. The mercenary aggression has underlined the urgent need for the speedy conclusion of an international convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries. This convention would no doubt address itself, among other matters, to the recommendations of the Commission that States make every effort to prevent mercenary operations and that Member States having information relating to mercenary activities should without delay communicate the same to the Governments concerned. The Committee’s recommendation that the ICAO should give further consideration to preventive measures against the clandestine transportation of arms in baggage checked on commercial airlines also needs urgent attention. A concerted effort is required to bring under control the scourge of terrorism and mercenary activity in the world. “Given the tight and effective control exercised by the security authorities in South Africa, and the nature of the preparations for the mercenary operation of 25 November I98 1 in South Africa, particularly the procurement and test-firing of the weapons. the Commission finds it difficult to believe that the South Africsn authorities did not at least have knowledge of the preparations in this matter.” 121. Subsequent to the compilation of the report by the Commission, more light has been shed on the matter, particularly at the trial of the 43 mercenaries in South Africa accused of hijacking the Air India plane. The testimony of mercenary leader Mike Hoare is particularly revealing. 122. The findings of the Commission based on the available information and the testimony of the mercenaries in their hijacking trial clearly point to the complicity of South African authorities in this sordid episode. We feel that at the appropriate time the Council should have no hesitation in clearly placing the responsibility for this aggressive act on the racist rkgime in South Africa, 127. Before I conclude, I should like to extend to the people and the Government of the Republic of Seychelles-a sister Republic of the Indian Oceanthe full support of the people and the Government of Pakistan in safeguarding their territorial integrity, national sovereignty and political independence. 123. South African involvement in the mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles should be seen in the context of the racist rtgime’s policy of ruthless aggression, interference and destabilization perpetrated against neighbouring independent African States. 124. In conformity with Pakistan’s total opposition to mercenary activities anywhere in the world. we condemn South Africa for its abetting of the mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles. Such acts of violence and overt or covert attempts aimed at undermining the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of States constitute serious contraventi.ons of the Charter of the United Nations. I2 128. The PRESIDENT (interpwttrtion ,fhm Chi- ~PSLJ): The next speaker is the representative of Sao Tome and Principe. I invite him to take a’ plrce at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, first of all I am grateful to you and to the other members of the Council for giving my delegation this opportunity to participate in this important debate, 130. Since it is the first time that I have addressed the Council, I should like, on behalf of my delegation, to extend to you our congratulations on your assumption of the presidency for this month and to wish you success. 138. First, information about the extent and character of mercenary activity should be centralized and disseminated. 132. ‘The question under consideration is very clear, and I am not going to recall the facts because they have been amply and exhaustively set forth in the relevant documents before the Council. However, my delegation would like simply to note that the conduct of the mercenary operations, their careful preparation and their timing and objectives all strongly indicate the direct or indirect responsibility and involvement of South Africa. 139. Secondly, action should be taken to outlaw the operations of mercenaries in an effective manner. In this regard we should like to draw attention to OAU resolution CM/Res. 906 (XXXVIII) on mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles, adopted by the Council of Ministers at its thirty-eighth session, held at Addis Ababa last February which, in paragraph 9, appeals: 133. Sao Tome and Principe, like many other African countries, is profoundly concerned by this aggression against. our sister islands of Seychelles, not only because we are both small and economically fragile but also because evidence is mounting to suggest that this type of mercenary aggression forms part of a world-wide strategy by international reactionary forces to destabilize and reconquer independent and sovereign States, especially in Africa. We are concerned also because we were very nearly the victim of a mercenary mission in 1977, and because we recognize that the rapidly growing mercenary trade challenges national sovereignty in a fundamental way. “to the United Nations to speed up the drafting of the International Convention against the security, financing and granting of hospitality to mercenaries and guarantee its subsequent signature and ratification by all Member States;“’ 140. The third type of action my delegation supports is the commissioning of a more detailed followup report by the Commission of Inquiry which on 15 March issued its findings concerning the mercenary invasion of Seychelles. The follow-up report should, in our view, aim at determining the financial backing enjoyed by the mercenaries in question and the sources and implications of such aggression, 134. National sovereignty in a democratic system is really the sovereignty of the people. The covert use of mercenaries for foreign-policy goals undermines the public’:s hard-won right openly to govern the conduct of international affairs. I should like to cite a good example: in 1976, representatives of the American people in the United States Congress passed the Clark Amendment, which makes it illegal for United States agencies to aid rebels in Angola without the prior public ,approval of Congress. My delegation believes that the use of mercenaries undermines national sovereignty in a most dangerous and unlawful way in both the perpetrating and the victimized countries. Hence it is the responsibility of the Security Council, the OAU a,nd our Governments to take concrete action on the Seychelles question in order drastically to increase the risks and costs of using mercenaries in the future. 141. In conclusion I wish to say that my Government condemns that act of piracy which aimed at destabilization and the attempt at a u~up d’Ptat in Seychelles. We believe that what happened on that day in Seychelles could happen to us tomorrow, and the only effective way of stopping that is for each country to have laws which clearly prohibit those activities and unequivocally demonstrate the political will to enforce them.

The next speaker is the representative of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr, President, I should like first of all to address to you and to all members of the Council my sincere thanks for allowing me to participate in the debate on the question of the armed aggression against the Republic of Seychelles. 135. A great deal of information on mercenaries exists. ‘These data need to be centralized and disseminated so as to leave absolutely no loopholes for those Governments which are using mercenaries or allowing them ta’ be recruited within their frontiers. 136. It could hardly be argued that a mercenary is capable of fighting for a good cause. However, one should contrast the sinister image of the mercenary with that of the freedom-fighter-the man or woman who takes up arms only when convinced that all else has failed and when the unbearable oppression of others compels the moral decision to use retaliatory force, 144. The severe condemnation by the Council on 15 December 1981 [resolution 496 (198/)] of the shameless aggression by a gang of mercenaries against the Republic of Seychelles, a non-aligned sovereign country, clearly reflects the serious concern of the international community regarding the dangerous spread of the scourge of the criminal activities of merce- 14s. Although at that time no official proof had yet been established, my delegation expressed the certainty that this criminal coup was part of a cynical plot by the clprrrthcid authorities of South Africa in connivance with certain imperialist circles. As regards the aEiies of the racist rdgime in Pretoria, while pretending to ignore the origin of the aggression, they tried to juggle all kinds of suppositions, such as: .‘Was this a purely internal affair? Is it legitimate for a Government surviving a cwp d’btcu to ask that an inquiry be conducted by the United Nations?“, and so on. They do that in order to minimize the importance of armed aggression and to play it down as an internal affair of the country against which aggression was committed. 146. However, these attempts have come to naught, for the statements by the leader of the mercenaries during his trial for the hijacking of an aeroplane that was held recently in South Africa have clearly revenled that the authorities in Pretoria and the imperialists are directly implicated. 147. This testimony has made it perfectly clear that the plan for invasion by the mercenaries against Seychelles had been decided by high governmental authorities in South Africa and executed with the full knowledge of the intelligence services of that country and its defence forces, which had supplied the personnel and weapons necessary for the carrying out of the operation. This revelation should dispel any lingering doubts for those who might still hold them regarding the danger of the South African Government’s policy of qmrrhrid to the territorial integrity and political independence of the countries of the area and regarding its role as a faithful executing agent for the sinister designs of imperialist circles. Relevant to this is the report that, according to Thr Neltg York Times of 10 May, the leader of the mercenaries had kept the agent of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) informed of the plan of aggression and that he had played an important role in the carrying out of the plan against the Republic of Seychelles. If that is true it should surprise no one, considering the important geographical position of Seychelles for United States strategy in the Indian Ocean. 148. The mercenary aggression of 25 November 1981 against the Republic of Seychelles not only caused loss of human life and considerable material destruction but also had serious repercussions on the economic situation of this developing country. In this connection, my delegation wishes to pay a tribute to the 149. However, we must note that the Commission of Inquiry confined itself to an account of the facts preceding and following the aggression without carrying out a thorough inquiry, in accordance with its mandate, into its origin, background and financing. It follows that it presented to the Council, as it pointed out, a report containing incomplete information, and consequently it was not possible for it to formulate concrete political recommendations that would have enabled the Council to take the necessary action against those responsible for the criminal coup. 150. For this reason, my delegation fully supports the \ proposal in the report that the Commission of Inquiry should continue its work until resolution 496 (1981) [ has been fully implemented and that it should present ; i a further report to the Council as soon as possible. 15 1. There is much irrefutable proofjustifying severe condemnation of the South African rigime of trl~rrtht>id for its political aggression and policies of destabilizatron against the Republic of Seychelles and other countries in the area. Failure by the Council to take such action would only encourage the Pretoria authorities and their accomplices to commit similar acts in the future. 152. The Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic wishes to pay a tribute to the people and the Government of Seychelles for the vigilance and courage with which they successfully thwarted this criminal action, and we would assure them of out unshakeable solidarity in their struggle to defend their national independence and their sovereignty. 153. The PRESIDENT (irztc~p,.Pt~ltic)l? from Chi- ULJS~): The next speaker is the representative of Grenada. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr, President, at the outset I wish to congratulate you on your accession to the presidency for the month of May and to express the hope that under your wise leadership the COUP cil will successfully carry out its onerous duties. I am grateful to you, Sir, and the other members of the Council for affording my delegation this opportunity to make a statement during the discussion of the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the mercenary attack against the Republic of Seychelles. 156. My delegation decided to address the Council on the item before us not only because the sovereignty and political independence of a sister country is threatened but also because it is evident that the phenomenon of mercenarism is exercising the minds of peace-loving peoples of conscience the world over. 162. The Grenada delegation listened very attentively to the statement made to the Council by the Ministerfor Foreign Affairs of Seychelles [2359th meeting]. At this juncture, we wish to associate ourselves with the Minister’s appeal to the United Nations and other organizations to provide without delay, through an appropriate United Nations fund, financial, technical and material assistance to the Republic of Seychelles to enable it to deal with the problems arising from the mercenary aggression. The Government of Grenada will contribute to such a fund. 157. Today soldiers of fortune are virtually holding their guns at the heads of legitimate Governments in various parts of the world. Furthermore, the ability of such vagabonds to wreak havoc is enhanced by the fact that they are invariably in the service of powerful interests. 158. Several of the mercenary attacks in the recent past appear both ludicrous and comical. They therefore have elicited gargantuan laughter in some quarters. For millions of people, however, the threat of mercenary invasion is not a laughing matter. The presence of a single mercenary, even in an obscure corner of the world, destabilizes and intimidates certain Governments and peoples. The apprehensions of those Governments and peoples are justifiable and legitimate when we consider the fact that the use of mercenaries appears to be an instrument of foreign policy of certain Governments. I wish to point out also that it is the view of my delegation that the mercenary is the product of a certain political and economic environment. 163. In addition, however, we call upon the United Nations to make an inventory of individuals and groups that support, equip, hire, train or encourage mercenarism. Special note must be made of Governments that might allow the training or hiring of mercenaries to be carried out in any territory under their jurisdiction or in any place under their control, or that afford facilities for transit, transport or other operations of mercenaries. 164. In conclusion, I wish to recommend to this body the words written by Machiavelli on the question of mercenarism. Some 500 years ago he wrote: “The mercenary and auxiliary are unprofitable and dangerous, and that Prince who founds the duration of his Government upon his mercenary forces shall never be firm or secure. For they are divided, ambitious, undisciplined, unfaithful, insolent to their friends, abject to their enemies, without fear of God or faith in men . . . In time of war they desert you, and the reason is because it is not love, or any principle of honour, that keeps them in the field; it is only their pay, and that is not a consideration strong enough to prevail with them to die for you. Whilst you have no service to employ them in, they are excellent soldiers, but tell them of an engagement and they will either disband before, or run away in, the battle.” 159. It is no accident that the racist Government of South Africa has connived with mercenaries to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Seychelles. The Government of the Republic of Seychelles, by virtue of its militant and uncompromising stand against the genocidal system of clpcrrtheid, constitutes a pebble in South A:frica’s boot. 160. Mercenarism is as immoral as it is criminal. The practice is a cardinal transgression agarnst the Charter of the United Nations. The Organization must therefore adopt a convention that stipulates very harsh measures against those who organize, finance, train, equip, promote, support or employ mercenaries. We cannot go on piously reaffirming our undying faith in the principles of the Charter, nor can we uphold the Charter as sacrosanct, if we fail to punish the paymasters of these modern-day buccaneers. The support of mercenarism is an invitation to revert to the law of the jungle.

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

I should like al the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency for the month of May. We are hopeful that the Council, under your able guidance, will achieve positive results. Our words of appreciation go to you] predecessor, Mr. Kamanda wa Kamanda of Zaire, fol the manner in which he conducted the work of the Council during the turbulent month of April. 161. My delegation speaks on the matter under consideration with some measure of authority because we know how debilitating it is to live in fear of mercenary invasion. Some months ago, one of the leaders of a mercenary group that planned the overthrow of the Government of Dominica pointed out, in an inter- 168. Because of its aggressive nature, international imperialism, headed by United States imperialism, is nurturing and hatching various plots and conspiracies through its intelligence services in various parts of the world, which are designed to aggravate tension and to fish in troubled waters. In order to implement their heinous designs, the imperialists have recourse not only to their own means but also to those available to their surrogates around the world. They extend financial, political and military support to the antipeoples’ regimes and forces and use them as a tool to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, to destabilize and overthrow their progressive and independent Governments and to suppress national liberation movements. 169. The racist rtgime of South Africa is one of the stooges of imperialism in this chain, assigned the task of toppling the legal Government of the young Republic of Seychelles. 170. The reasons this small but awakened nation appears on the imperialist hit-list are quite obvious: because Seychelles has adopted a socialist path for its socio-economic development; because, out of a firm commitment to peace and to the relaxation of international tension, the Government of Seychelles vigorously supports the turning of the Indian Ocean into a zone of peace and calls for the immediate dismantling of the imperialist military bases there: because, as a non-aligned and anti-imperialist nation, it stands by the side of all nations and liberation movements in their struggle to attain and preserve theii independence; and because it opposes imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, npa/*theid and Zionism. 171. AS a matter of fact, this is not the first time that the imperialists have attempted to overthrow the Government of Seychelles. Following its independence, Seychelles faced a series of conspiracies engineered by the imperialists and the racist regime of South Africa. On 29 April 1978, a coup was attempted against the Government, which was successfully suppressed% Only seven months later, another attempted coup was discovered. On 16 November 1979, the Government of the Republic of Seychelles, with the direct participation of the Seychellois people, foiled another collp which was attempted with the help of mercenaries. Thus, the last mercenary invasion did not come as a surprise at all. 172. The dogs of war had been unleashed before in many countries, as well as against many liberation movements. The hounds of imperialism followed the bloody trail left by their masters in Congo a]I the way to the assassination of African leader Patrice Lumumba. 174. Scores of identified criminals and professional terrorists from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, Australia, Italy, Israel and Chile have quite openly participated in similar operations. 17.5. The notorious 32nd Special Battalion of the South African forces, the so-called Buffalo Battalion, is made up of veterans of the dirty war of Viet Nam, former soldiers of the “Green Berets”, the special subversion units of the United States Army, and of men from punitive detachments of the former Rhode. sian regime. 176. It is a thief shouting “Thief!” when the imperialists and their assorted allies raise a boring chorus about “international terrorism”. It is they who increasingly resort to terrorism in defence of their last crumbling bastions. It is terrorism on an international scale, which respects no national boundaries and whose practitioners have taken up arms against progressive, peace-loving countries. Examples of the crude terrorism practised as a fine art by these forces are too numerous to need listing. But one among them that is perhaps most illustrative of the utter unscrupulousness of its nature is the increasing, and increasingly open, employment of mercenaries in the last-ditch battles against national liberation movements. 177. The topic at present under discussion is but the latest major instance of mercenary aggression. The details of the story bring out the diabolical nature of the operationdoubly so because of the open official Pretoria admission of the regular use of Western mercenaries by the racist regime in its bid to stifle all African protests, 178. It is significant that the “free world”, far from cutting it off, actually encourages aid to the gangsters of the allied racist regime. Recruitment of the dogs of war is openly conducted in the Western press. The only pretext that Western officials use in their defence is that there is no legislation barring the citizens Of their countries from service in the armies of other States. The medieval throwback to the recognition of the right to kill for money is thus sanctified as an integral part of the philosophy of the ‘*free world” that is hardly negotiable. Presumably it is the “freedom of the individual” that provides for a free play of market forces with which considerations of other nations’ freedom cannot interfere. 180. Hoare’s connection with the CIA of the United States is a matter of record and goes as far back as the early 1960s when he was commander of the mercenary forces in the Belgian Congo. According to him, the CIA had been consulted about the plan and was following it through one of its agents in South Africa. Eschel Rhoodie, former Information Secretary of South Africa, stated in an interview with the Durban Srrrzday &p~c.ss that “no one will believe that the secret services of South Africa did not co-ordinate with across-the-ocean partners in the landing of mercenaries in Seychelles”. Perhaps the Reagan administration’s policy of “constructive engagement” between South Africa and the United States could best find its explanation in this context. Rhoodie said that in the framework of the existing so-called “gentleman’s agreement”, the British, French and American secret services have constantly exchanged information of mutual interest. He also pointed to the role being played in the invasion by British, French and Netherlands firms which have interests in Seychelles. 181, The more time that elapses, the more evident it becomes that the intelligence services of the imperialist,s, in close collaboration with the National Intelligence Service of the apartheid regime of South Africa, master-minded the whole operation, which was intended to install in power their subservient puppet, James Mancham. 182. It did not surprise anybody when it became known that Petty, a leading official of the Peace Corps of the United States, had been staying in Seychelles at the moment of the aggression, The Peace Corps is known to provide a cover for the subversive activities 183. The overwhelming majority of nations have condemned in the strongest terms the aggression of imperialist hirelings against Seychelles. The massive march of thousands of people through the streets of Victoria served as a true demonstration of the indignation of that people at, the evil designs of imperialism. According to the newspaper Beeid, published in the Transvaal, the organizers of the attack on Seychelles have not relinquished their ominous plots. There is yet another large group of mercenaries in South Africa being trained for another attack on Seychelles. It is eloquent testimony to the desperation of the imperialists that they should cherish the illusion that hired professional terrorists can halt the advance of a whole nation. 184. It is time that an international initiative was taken to end this medieval practice which the world is being made to accept as a fact of modern life. We strongly call for the speedy preparation of an international convention against the use of mercenaries. 185. With regard to the report submitted by the Commission of Inquiry, all we can state at this stage is that the mandate of the Commission should be extended in order to enable it to gather more facts about the imperialist South African involvement in the aggression and to report on the implementation of the decisions of the Council pertaining to economic assistance to Seychelles. 186. The people and Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan are on the side of the people and Government of Seychelles. We strongly demand the extradition of all mercenaries to the Government of Seychelles. We support the setting up of an international tribunal to consider the crimes committed by the gang of hooligans. We support also the establishment of a special fund to assist the Government of Seychelles in repairing the damage caused by the invasion. For our part, we are prepared to make a contribution, though very modest, to this fund.

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

Mr. President, at the outset, the delegation of the People’s Republic of Mozambique wishes to congratulate you on the skilful manner with which you have conducted the work of the Council during the month of May, In addressing the Council today, my delegation cannot but recall here the bonds of friendship and solidarity that have united our two peoples in the course of many years of struggle. The People’s Republic of China has 190. It is the feeling of our delegation that we are facing a threat to international peace and security resulting from the violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Seychelles by a band of mercenaries based in the Republic of South Africa. That country, South Africa, has let loose a flood of threats, provocations and acts of destabilization throughout the entire southern African region. 191. The aggression by the mercenaries, aiming at the overthrow of the progressive Government of President France Albert Reni, constitutes the most recent of a series of acts of destabilization undertaken over the past four years by the Republic of South Africa. 192. Since the People’s United Party of Seychelles took power on 5 June 1977, the archipelago has been the target of several attempts of aggression by mercenaries based in South Africa. 193. In April 1978 and November 1979, there were attempts to overthrow the Government 3f Seychelles. Those attempts failed because of the pre-emptive actions taken by the local authorities, On both occasions, large quantities of weapons and ammunition were found in the possession of the elements arrested by the authorities. Those weapons were smuggled into Seychelles from South Africa. James Mancham’s complicity became evident. The aggression of 25 November 1981 was the largest and best planned operation carried out by the enemies of the Republic of Seychelles and reflected the increasing aggressiveness of imperialism in the region, It was the third attempt to install in Seychelles a pro-Pretoria rkgime since 1977, when the present Government achieved power, 194. It is not by mere coincidence that the Republic of Seychelles has been the victim of attempts at cor,ps d’4tat and destabilization. The strategic location of the ~mhipelago, placed at the crossroads of the Indian Ocean. the Persian Gulf and the southern African region-the routes of the oil tankers-has transformed that region of the world into one of the major hotbeds of tension confronting the international community today. ‘95. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Republic of Seychelles, a country in the forefront of the Non- Aligned Movement, should be the target of imperialism in the Indian Ocean region, 196. Of the countries of the Indian Ocean the Republic of Seychelles is one of the most co;eted on 197. The case of Seychelles must also be viewed from a political perspective. The constant attempts at destabilization of the Republic and the ever-increasing pressures on the Government of President France Albert Reni are but a response to the progressive policies in every domain, domestic and external, carried out by President Reni since he took office. The political orientation of the Government of Seychelles, if seen against the historical background marked by the last four years of British colonial rule in Seychelles along with attempts at neo-colonialism and dismembering of SeychelIes, is necessary for its own survival as an independent sovereign State, 198. The encouragement and organization of mercenary activities against sovereign States is a breach of the principles of international law and runs counter to the purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, which enshrines the aspiration of all States to live in peace and security, free from threats by outside forces. 199. Our own experience of revolutionary struggle and the history of resistance by the Mozambican people have taught us to respect the dignity of other nations, because for us freedom is not a giA or a paternalistic concession. Freedom is a conquest achieved through the immense sacrifice and bloodshed of the peoples in the struggle against oppression. 200. This being so, the People’s Republic of Mozambique vehemently condemns South Africa and its collaborators for planning, organizing and financing the mercenaries’ aggression against the Government of President France Albert Ren6. Mozambique reiterates once more its profound support and solidarity with our valiant brothers, the people of Seychelles, who are fighting with the rest of Africa and the progressive people of the world against every concept and objective for which npartheid stands. The victory of Seychelles last 25 November is considered a victory for Mozambique as well. The mercenary attack at the airport in Seychelles is an extension of the cowardly and criminal attacks in Matola on 30 January 1981 and in Ponta de Ouro on 17 March 1981. The victory there represents a priceless contribution to the combat in which we are all engaged on a broad front in that confrontation zone between freedom and oppression in southern Africa. 202. We view the 25 November aggression against the Republic of Seychelles as a direct serious threat against the territorial integrity of a State Member of the Unit’ed Nations and against the internal security of other countries of the region. The mercenary invasion of the Republic of Seychelles was an act of armed aggression against a State Member of the United Nations. Therefore, we call upon the international community to take the appropriate action provided for in the Charter. 203. The international community cannot stand idly by when an act of armed aggression is perpetrated by a band of international outlaws against a non-aligned country, State Member of the United Nations. The judicial organs of South Africa have proved to be a docile instrument in the hands of the crpo/.thc~id rdgime. The criminal aggressors who violated South Africa’s own dom#estic laws were set free after a farcical trial, which has only further blackened the reputation of South Africa for its grotesque involvement in the mercenary invasion of the Republic of Seychelles. 204. The Government of South Africa continues to pretend that it was not aware of the plans of the mercenaries. The Commission of Inquiry was not given access to the mercenaries in South Africa. The South African Government failed to co-operate with the Council. This can only stand as proof that the Government of South Africa had full knowledge of, and indeed co-operated in, the abortive invasion of the Republic of Seychellles. 205. The Mozambican delegation registers its appreciation of the Commission’s report and fully supports its recommendations. In this context, we join in the appeal for financial, technical and material assistance to redress the considerable material damages resulting from the mercenary aggression against the Republic of Seychelles, 206. A Ir~i’rr continltrr. 21 I. It is fitting to recall that the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry was to investigate the origin, background and financing of the 2.5 November mercenary aggression, as well as to assess and evaluate the economic damages sustained by Seychelles as a result of that aggression. While we commend the Commission for its recommendation relating to the damages incurred by the Republic of Seyclielles-a recommendation which has been accepted by the victim-the ‘/ 19

(intcJrprctr!tion jwm Chi- IWSPJ: The next speaker is the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Sir, I should like first of all to convey our heartiest congratulations to you and to your great country on 209. My delegation has asked to speak not only to condemn the armed aggression against the Republic of Seychelles but also to express its solidarity with the Government and the people of Seychelles. In the light of the report before us and the additional information published since I5 March, we hold the Pretoria rigime responsible for the 25 November 1981 mercenary invasion. This invasion constitutes a grave breach of the Charter of the United Nations, for it was perpetrated in stark violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a non-aligned and developing country. The purpose of the invasion was definitely to topple the Government of the Republic of Seychelles and to reinstate a puppet rlgime subservient to the racist rigime of Pretoria and its allies. Thanks to the vigilance and the resistance of the Republic of Seychelles. the mercenary expedition was unable to realize its sinister designs, concocted in the dark and carried out in the open. 210. We cannot make a sound assessment of the motives behind this open act of aggression against a small State in a strategic area unless we remember the wider strategic context as well as the timing of the invasion. for it coincided with United States military activities within the framework of a major master plan called the “strategic alliance”, and the activation of the rapid deployment forces in the area stretching from South Africa to the Middle East. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Seychelles drew the attention of the Commission of Inquiry established under resolution 496 (1981) to a possible link between the military operation against his country which took place on 25 November 1981 and the “Bright Star” operation carried out by United States armed forces on Egyptian soil. This is stated in paragraph 129 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry as follows: “The Minister suggested that perhaps the Commission could ask the intelligence services of some of the big Powers if they had any knowledge about it. especially since the attempt had taken place while the -Bright Star’ operation was still on.” ~~~~~~~~~~ in the view of my Govemment3 the report, in spite of the evident desire of the Commission fully to carry out the mandate entrusted to it, does not wholly elucidate the origin, background and financing of the aggression against the Republic of Seychelles, For that matter. the Commission is well aware of this, as can be seen in paragraph 274 of its report, which states: . I . the information available to the Commission is far from complete. The Commission does not have full knowledge of the origin and background of the mercenary aggreSSiOn'." [2-75!&/? V?PPti/Z\q, ptllw . 46.1 212. The Commission itself has never claimed that it has discharged all its fact-finding responsibilities. paragraph 274 of its report to the Council reads as follows. in its entirety: “In these circumstances, the information available to the Commission is far from complete. The Commission does not have full knowledge of the origin and background of the mercenary aggression. The Commission cannot exclude that further significant information relating to its mandate may become available. particularly during the course of the trial on the hijacking charges under way in South Africa.” 213. It is therefore incumbent upon the Council to request the Commission. which has exerted its best possible efforts, to continue its search in order to establish the origin. background and financing of the 25 November mercenary aggression against the Rep~blk of Seychelles. The pursuance of the inquiry is imperative. for since 15 March 1982, many new elcmcnts have come to the surface, including the testimony of Colonel Michael Hoare. the leader of the mercenaries. who is on trial in South Africa, but only on hijacking charges. According to T/rr ,vrJr,# yo,.k T~u~P.v of 4 May. Michael Hoare is reported to have testified that: “the South African Government had approved the attempted takeover and supplied the weapons (HeI submitted as evidence an invoice . . , from’the South African Dcfense Force certifying the delivery to his home Of weapons and ammunition to be used in the COQJ.” l&c S//SOS~, IIIIIzc.r, J There are other press reports relating to possible involvement of foreign Powers. In order not to prejudge the issue, it SUffiCeS to recall the article published by T~JC Nell’ Yolk Times of 10 May, which reported hat the mercenary [Hoare]: 2 1 4. The question before us is not a perfunctory one, .-. _ _ . for South Aft-ma has made the use of mercenaries an institution to carry out armed aggression not only against Seychelles but against a number of African countries. South Africa encourages mercenaries as a means to promote its aggressive designs against neighbouring countries. The Minister of Justice of South Africa is reported to have said that he was not aware of any law, either statutory or common, which as such prohibited people from conspiring against another Government. Such statements prove beyond any doubt that South Africa was and remains a haven of mercenary activities. Therefore, the full responsibility of the South African white minority regime should be in the forefront of the priorities of any investigation. An organized international riposte to the constant challenges of the trparthcid regime is more than a necessity for the survival of small States in those parts of Africa which are vulnerable to the long-arm policies and practices of the Pretoria regime. 215. Mercenarism must be eradicated once and for all. Therefore, we support the second recommendation in paragraph 293 of the Commission’s report, that: *-the work at present under way on an international convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries be brought to a speedy conclusion so that the convention may be opened for signature as soon as possible.” 216. Meanwhile, nothing prevents the Council from addressing a demand to the Pretoria regime to extradite forthwith to Seychelles all those who participated in the mercenary attack against the Republic of Seychelles. We firmly believe that the ongoing trial in South Africa of the hijackers is but an attempt at circumventing the real issue-that is, the original crime, the crime of mercenarism. 217. Let me conclude by repeating what was said in the Council a few days ago by the representative of Benin [2359th mreting, pmo. 1381, that we consider mercenaries to be anonymous special units, part of the regular troops of the imperialist armies, because they are recruited. financed, led, trained and armed by officers of the regular army of South Africa, and that we. cannot denounce and fight international mercenarism without exposing those forces that organize it and set it in motion. The use of armed mercenary groups is a new weapon of mass destruction which has entered into the global strategy of international imperialism for the colonial reconquest of the third world States. 219. We should all remember Viet Nam. We should remember the Zionist gangsterism against the people of Palestine as well as against the people of Syria, carried out by Zionist gangs collected from the four NOTE ’ A/37/161, annex. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations. Sales Section. New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dam les librairics et Its agences depositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous aupr&de votre libraire ou adressez-vous B : Nations Unies. Section des ventes. New York ou Centre. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS LAS publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estan en vcnta en lib&as y casas distribuidoras en todas panes de1 mundo. Cons&e a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas. Seccibn de Ventas. Nueva York o Gincbra. Litho in United Nations. New York 00400