S/PV.2597 Security Council

Inaccotdancewithsde&iitaken at the 2396th meeting, I i&e the Minister for Foreign AffaiRofAn~totaLcaplaccattheCouneillablcandI invitethcrcprwntativcPofA~tina,thc~,Cuba, the German &tnoemtic Republic, Liberia, Pakbtan. Sao Tome and Rincipe, South Africa. the Sudan, the United Republic of Tsnzania and Yugodevia to take the places re5med for them at the side of the Council chamber. At the bwitatkm &he hskhwr. Mr. win Dunem (AQ&I), rook a pkw at the CoPPscUleblr Mr. Mdilt (Argentha), Mr. Hepbwn flbhamm), Mr. Chtntw OUw(Cn&), Mr. Schkgd (German Lbnacratk Rep&c), Mr. Kofa (Dberkg, Mr. Shah Nomu (Pakiuan), M. Ranco (Sao Tome and MRcipe), Mr. HIM Schhd4g (South @tco), Mr. Birk& (SW&M), Air. hm (iinr~d &public sf Tmtumfo) and Mr. Golob !&~T~~~& pIacts reserved fi tkm at the st& of

i should like to inform the Council that I have received a ktter from the representative of the Congo in which he reque5ts to be invited to participate in I the discussion of the item on the agenda. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote. in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and under rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. A[ the inviration of rite &esk&?nt. Mr. tiayama (Congo) took ffie place reserwd for him 01 dte side of the Council chamber.

The first speaker is the representative of the Bahamas, who wishes to make a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States for the month of June. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

I happily uphold the tradition of the timt-time speaker5 to pay tribute to you. Sir, and to commend you for the efficient manner in which you are fulfilling your duty as current Resident of the Council, and also to endorse the just compliments apportioned to your predecwwor for his pertotmance last month. 5. In my capacity as pmrnt Chairman of the Group of Latin Ant&an and Caribbean State% I take this opportunitytoexpressontheirbebatfttsen5eofmoftiBcationat the ptmilhtg situation in southern Africa, which continues to become inemasingly grim bceatwe of the tutrelentingnrakvd#rcoftherodrt~trtahtSotttbAf~.Not 3lly dots the Rnoria dgime flspdy t35regd the ~xbonstiotw of the international eommurtity for fleaibRity andcomprmnise.btaitfwrsiswinvtok5tingtbet&tor&l integrity of nei#rbouriyr 5overeigrt State5 in its determirtatkmtopeqetuatetheheinow3sy5wtnof~~ti 6, The Minister for Fc&gn Affairs of Anftola, in his reports and his 5tatement tbi5 morning [25m m&f&g], outlined the event5 of21 May 1985, when a group of South African conwnandos was appmMr&d within the border5 of Aqpia. In e&t. bad thb mirrion to robotage an oil company in the province of Cabhlda been succe5sful, once againtherewouldhaHCkcntbe~ dUK~le5s lorsoTinnoccntl~ar#II~ara~k16thccconomi?r rtabihty of the An& State a5 a whole. We in tbe region rhare the indignation and fnwtration that the Angolan Govemrnent and people must feel as a re5ult of thrae unwarranted violation5 of their territorial integrity. 7. It is not the intention of the Member State5 of Latin America and the Caribbean to make any judgement on the 8. Further, it is also of utmost importance to recall that a short time ago both the Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of South Africa had given publicly what turned out to be lip service to the idea of participating in serious and positive negotiations with the aim of establishing a peaceful, fair and permanent solution to the problems in southern Africa. It is cleat. although not surprising, none the less. that the words of the representatives of this perplexing taeist r&me are not in accord with its actions. This kind of duplicity does not and cannot enhance the peace and security of southern Africa oc. for that matter. of the continent and the entire international community. 9. The most disturbing aspect of all these incidents is that the unique nature of the apurdwid system prevails, and it is on that offensive and abhorrent system that the entire legal. political, economic and social structure of the Remria Government is based. Consequently. unless the Government of South Africa continues to hear statements of condemnation of its violation of human rights, territotial integrity and selfdetermination of peoples. it is probable that even greater atrocities would occur. 10. Finally, I wish to thank you, Mr. Resident, and the members of the Council for this invitation to speak, and I also wish to reiterate that the Member States of Latin America and the Caribbean condemn the insurgence of South African commandos into Angolan t&toy and consider eotnments about linkage and so on as excuses and delaying tactics. We further consider the acts as a calculated effort on the part of the Pretoria r&ime to bolster and maintain this evil system. In this regard, we express our determination not to stand idly by and allow our silence to be misconstrued. Whik we cannot claim to be privy to all of the facts, we know enough to deplore and condemn these actions as ilkgal and in direct contravention of the principles and Articles of the Chatter of the United Nations. Il. It is along those lines that we register our opposition and recommend that the entire international community act accordingly.

The international community is in duty bound to denounce tti behaviour of a State that does not comply with rhe r&s of inicmaiionai iaw and pursues a poiicy of force against its neighbours. 1 note with regret that this is yet again the case with South Africa. The States of southem Africa are the victims of its aggressive behaviout: Botswana, where last Friday South African commandos carried out a bloody operation. has brought to the Security Council a complaint that we shall be considering shortly 13. The signing of the Lusaka agreement by South Africa and Angold in February 1984 had afforded grounds for hope that there might be a genuine regional detente. Although South Africa implemented it only after some delay and with a certain reluctance, Ihe agreement none the less led to the withdrawal of the South African troops that had been occupying southern Angola since August 1981. No sooner had that withdrawal taken place than the Pretoria Government launched a commando raid in Cabin& Province in the far north of Angola. 14. Tite facts, as stated by the representative of Angola and borne out by the statements of the South African prisoner. are overwhelming. They show that South Africa is pursuing a policy of brutal pressure against the countries of the region and that it is bznding its efforts towards weakeniblg their already shaky economies. France unreservedly condemns that effort to create destabilisation being made in disregard of international law and in flagrant violation of Angolan sovereignty. i5. The attitude of the South African Government is a source of very great concern. The Angolan Government has drawn attention to other recent actions. It has also told us of its fear that South Africa is preparing another invasion of its territory. The South AMcan authorities must be made to undenrtand that that policy. which cannot fail to lead to further deaths and suffering, will in no way solve the problems of southern Africa. 16. When he spoke last week during the debate on the question of Namibia [2583rdmeering]. the representative of South Africa enumerated the ground rules that the Statesof southern Africa should abide by. He pointed out, lnrpr&, that the problems of conflict in that region should be solved by peaceful means rather than by violence. That principle is actually universal. The peaceful settlement of disputes and refraining from the threat or use of force are, indeed, the very foundations of the Charter of the United Nations. France hopes to see them applied everywhere. 17. My dekgation therefore urges South Africa to bring its deeds into line with its commitments and, by renouncing its present course of conduct, further. through dialogue. the solution of the probkms of the region.

It is distressing to note the persistence of three phenomena in southern Africa which are interrelated because of crpcshetiand which, in spite of OUT collective of individual stands, seem to find the Council increasingly powerless. They are the repression of democratic liberation .--. --..--. -a._ !,a_..-, _______* !__ -A--- : l____l: ---, -a-*- III”*CnKI,U, L‘K UKga, uw.UyaU”‘, “I 01, 111, S‘,,(I,,“,u)I 1c,- ritory and acts of aggression against States in the region. acts foor which, as all the world clearly sees, the racist r&imc of South Africa alone bears the guilt. 19. We keep being tokl that thanks lo the criticismswhich are preferred to condemnations-to the suitable and 20. The pity is that, rightly or wrongly, we have held back from strict application of the Charter to counter that imperial will, and some circles claim that the attitude of the apartheid regime can be justified, or at least understood, without reference to the strict framework required by respect for international law. Yet is is clear that whatever the actual situation in the region may be-which is all too basic and obvious-South Africa cannot place itself above the law and base itself on rules grounded solely on the contumely with which they are vaunted. 21. We are all bound by the provisions of the Charter, which in this case are fleshed out by the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. None of those provisions-whether they involve the non-use or threat of force against the territorial integrity or independence of any State, the settlement of disputes by peaceful means, non-interference in the internal affab of States or the sovereign equality of States-has been tespected by South Africa. 22. Thus, blithely and with virtually assured impunity, South Africa sent a special forces commando unit against the Malongo oil installations in Angola. Thus it pfovkies military mut&le/ and explosives to UNITA (Narlonol Uniun for the Tofu/ lndoppndnrce qf&oh), which is cornpktely in its pay and which ix devoted to its wretched cause. Thus, it has massed troops and logistic support along the northern border of Namibia. AII thasc measures of intimidation are intended, it exams, to ettxure peace and security in the region through the use of State tcrrorIsm, repeatcd acts of sabotage and political and aeonornic de+ tabiition; but the I&t ix, they are e~re@s acts of aggm&m,withinthemamIngolartIck3oftheDcfiion “N A= ;ii$ruI ,ixmtbfy rao&un 3314 (XX&I qf 23. In an attempt to justify itx depredations. South Africa puts forward the suppoeed need to save Namibia in spite of the Namibians and evineg the determinatii to give chase to those terrorIs& who dare to speak out in favour of freedom, equal political participation, justice and social progress. Certain -not to say fascist--circles gladly go along with thix, for it is considered necessary that the m&t regime of South Africa entrench its domination in southern Africa and become, in - __-. .-L-I-L __- L- A:.- L!-- L ..- 24. The People’s Republic of Angola, with which, of course, we feel solidarity, continues to pay the high cost of thatpotiey. Wetderstandwhyithasbccnobt&dtotum to the Security Council for the ninth time in its IO years of 25. But what assurances do we have that such actions will not be repeated? To what extent can we trust the apartheid regime. which has constantly reneged on its obligations? Are we to continue counting on the pragmatic gradualism of some and the reformism of others? We cound have found refuge in Article 6 and Chapter VII of the Charter had we been clear that the racist regime of South Africa could be considered as the enemy not only of ~‘fricans but of all mankind. Then international public opinion would no longer be abused by the impenitent defenders of universalism and persuasion. 26. We may be accused of being unrealistic, but at least our lack of realism will have the a vantage of being based on the provisions of the Charter, which remains the sole valid basis for the decisions which the Council must take one day in order to carry out its responsibilities and its obligations towards the African people, and in particular the Angolan people, which also is entitled to security and development in a country whose sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity will finally be respected.

I should like first to thank you, Sir. for the ideal way in which you are conducting our deliberations and for the great eIfortx you made during the recant series of meetings on the question of Namibia, Zs. Unfortunately, the Council is meeting for the fourtenth time within a few days to discuss yet another of the grave problems caused by the abhorrent upwthetd regime andthcthrrattopcaceandsccurity~bytheactionsof that r&gime towards nrighbouring States, particularly the front-Itne States. 29. Thismorning~heardthestatementoftkMiniater for Foreign Affairs of Angola, who once again told of the actsofaggm&nagainsthIscountryperpetratedbyracist South Africa. If these actx ofaggreasion show anything, they show, first and f memost, the extent ofreckkssnesx the updeid r&me has reached, and why it is mjectal by the international community and by the e~nscience of mankind, 30. It is ckar to everyone that this aggressive r&ime has decided to chalky the entire international community. Even knowing that the Security Council was to meet to eor&kr the question of Namibix, the fap&teidt-igim did nothaltitsactsof aggmsbn; indeed, it began to carry out raids against sovereign States, first on the pretext of “hot pursuit” and then on other pretexts familiar to us all. 31. The fact is that from the international point of view that regime is an illegal on. It does not conform to inter- 32. The world has just witnessed another flagrant attack against the sovereignty of the territory of Angola, In the face of this aggression the Council cannot fail to condemn South Africa for penisting in its acts of aggression against Angola and for the threat it poses to peace and security, With increasing urgency, we ask when the international community will act. When will the Council adopt the enforcement measures for which we have asked time and again? 33. We say that the time has come for the Council decisively to shoulder its responsibility to deal with those who insist on defying the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The issue is crystaltlear. Angola’s appeal is a rightful one. The pretences of the Pretoria regime are totally invalid. In our opinion, the path the Council must take is also clear. There must be no compromise, no doubt. We are prepared to go along with the Council as far as it wishes to go. We hope that this will be sufficient to make the abhorrent Pretoria r&me aware of the tmequivocal stand of the international community.

I had occasion recently. Sir, to extend my delegation’s warmest congratulations to the Minister for Foteip AtTairs of your country and to evince our sincere admiration for the way in which the Council’s recent delikrations pmomded to a satisfactory conclusion. It is now my great pleasure, Sir, to say how happy we are to see you in the Chair at this important meeting. 35. Last week. during the Council debate on the question of Namibia, my delegation learned with indignation of the renewed aggremlon of South Africa against a neighbottring country, which took the form of the commando incursion at Cabittda, deep inside the People*8 Rep&hi of Aneole*onthe momingof21 May.Mydel~tion&o tooknotewithgraveeoneem oftbernesmtgefromthe Minister of Drfencc of tM Pkopk’s Republic of Angola, annexed to -1 S/V263. That mavlg stated tbttt South Africa had increamd its violations of Angobn sovereignty and territoriai integrity, in parti&ar its violations of Angob’s national airspace. 36. During tbe debate on Namibia my delegation expressed its gmw concern before. and strongly amdemned the aggressive acts of Soutb Africa. Hence my delegation has felt compelled to make a statement in today’s meeting of the Council to consider the complaint made by Angola against Soutb Africa. 37. Thailand shares the view of the otber Member States which condemn the racist regime of South Africa for its renewed escabtion of unprovoked, predatory and prsistent acts of aggtession against Angola. including the continued military occupation and violation of Angola% sovereignty, territorial integrity, and airspace. This unprovoked aggression by South Africa is not only in complete 38, The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Angola informed the Council this morning that: “If the operation had succeeded, the toll would have been dozens dead, some of them American nationals. Damage would have amounted to at least $I billion . . . United States dollan. including a $216-million reconstruction of the onshore installation. It would have taken over a year to rebuild the Malongo oil installations. and the halt in production would have caused a loss of at least $770 million, in addition to stock worth $30 million.” [259&h Mf?&rg, pfrru. II. ] Furthermore, the aggressive act by South Africa would have had widespread repercussions in other provinces of Angola. All that would mean heavy losses, particularly for a developing economy. In addition to the economic and financial costs must be mentioned the serious impact of political destabilisation. 39. My delegation’s position in this regard is clear and consistent: Thailand has consistently and in the strongest possible terms opposed and condemned South Africa’s acts of aggression. as well as any foreign occupation and violation by one country of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of another country. Hence my delegation demands that the racist Pretoria &time desist from such lawless acts and immediately and unconditionally withdraw its occupation forces from the territory of Angola, compensate Angola for all the damage incurred and cease all further violations against the People’s Republic of Angola. My delegation will therefore vote in support of the draf resolution in document S/I72&. 40. Mr. ARIAS STELLA (Peru) (inle?prelation from S@af.s& First, I extend to yott Sir, my most sincere personal congtatulations and the appreciation of my country fortheefTortsmadebythepresidencydtheCouncilduringthepastMckswbenwecu&lemdtJtequestionof Namibia. Thanks to your skilb and fine diplomacy and those of the Minister for Foreign Alfairs of Trinidad and Tobago, if has proved possible to achieve testtlts in keep ing with the direct nsponsibilities of the Organisation and in harmony with the human values and legal principles it is required to uplwld. 41. MycounttybverydiuurbedbythcwaytheCouncil’s attention is constantly requited by the situation in southern Africa owing to South Africa’s obstinate reliance on forrc in that te-+I. 42. From the dawn of its existence as an independent nation, he People’s Republic of Angolo has known the trauma of violence and occupation. This fate of Angolan history has still not chat@, despite the express pr;z of the Charter of the United Nations and - tioIt3 of the security Council. 44. Peru, in keeping with its dedication to the cause of peace and its full adherence to the principles of intemational law as enshrined in the Charter, condemns South Africa’s armed aggression in violation of the sovereignty, independence and integrity of Angola and the inviolability of that country’s frontiers. We support Angola’s right to demand adequate amends and compensation for the huge economic losses that it has suffered. 45 Lastly, my country cannot fail to express its deep disquiet at acts of aggression that undermine the atmosphere necessary for the machinery of dialogue and negotiation to stand some chance of success and for all States of the region that are neighbours of South Africa to be able to live in peace and devote their efforts to the arduous task of promoting the well-being of their peoples.

First, I congratulate you, Sir. on the excellent way in which you have been guiding the Council’s work and the great patknce you have shown throughout our deliktetiotts. 47. It is sad to note that for a whole week the racist r&g& of Pretoria has been at the centre of the attention of the Security Council and the international community. Indeed, the way in which that r&ime mocks the intemational community can only be attributed to one logic: to perpetuate 4mrfheri+in South Africa and illegally maintain its colonial Pmmnce in Namibia ittdeftrtitely. 48. Once again, the Council has heard Angola complain about the same aggmaor. The facts are well established, and no one. here or elsewhere, can deny their veracity. Since the commando unit was caught red-handed, its own kaderadmitteditscrime.Asweheardinthesuuemem made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Angola this mornin& if the operation had ulccdcded it would have cost the lives of a number of Americans, among others. vene to hear the same complaint from the same plaintilf. The resolutions have grown in number, but not even their number or their content has led the South African racists to see reason. 50. ‘The evidence is so persuasive that we have no doubt 57. The fact of the matter is that the MPLA (fop&r as to the outcome of our discussion, We are certain that Movementfor l& L.d&mtlott ofAngola) is providing facilities 51. Such conduct is possible only with the suppott, whether avowed or not, of those who, again yesterday, refused in the Council to impose sanctions on the Pretoria regime under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations which has so often been violated by that same regime. 52. We address ourselves to those who assure impunity to Pretoria and who sit around this table with us. We appeal to their conscience, over and above machiavellian political calculations, so that they will linally dare to put an end to a r@ime which has been utterly rejected by the international community. We call upon them to ensure that the countries neighbouring on South Africa will at long last be able to live free and in peace within secure boundaries and will also be able to devote their resources to their economic and social development.

The next speaker is the representative of South Africa. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 54. Mr. von SCHIRNDING (South Aftica): During my statement to the Council on IO June on the question of South West Africa [2&&j ##tee&g], I dealt at length with the Cabinda incident. I should like today to expand on some of the Points 1 made on that occasion. 53. Iat me Iirst of all restate once again what we have termed the ground ruks for coexistence in southern Africa: lint. no State should make its territory available to individuals and organiratiorm wishing to promote or prepare violence against othar States in the mglon; secondly, no fomign forces should be permitted to intervene in the region; thirdly, the probletne of con&t in the region should be sol& by peaceftd mfans rather than by violence; foutthly, thesepmblemexhouIdks&edonaregionaIbasBbythe leaders of the region themeelvcr; and ERhly, although the Statesofourreglonh.awdilferentrocicnconomicand political systems, we can live together in peace and harmony and work mgether in the pursuit ofcommon interests. Each country of the tegiott has the right to order its alfaiairs as it deems tit, and inter-State relations. in particular between neighbours, should not be disturbed by differing internal policies. This is only sensible and pm&al, as recognition is accorded to the fact that each country has its own set of conditions for which it must seek its own solutions in the intetests of its citizens. Divergent outlooks should not be allowed to distract Governments from carrying out their duty to accord their first priority to the welfare and prosperity of t-heir peopks. 56. Is there anything unreasonabk or unrealistic about these ground NkS? Surely tbey provide the minimum busis for healthy intergovernmental relations anywhere. 58. In accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, South Africa has sought a peaceful resolution of its dispute with Angola. In a number of ministerial meetings last year, it sought to persuade the MPLA regime to accept the advantages of peace. South Africa expressed its grave concern to the MPLA government over the activities of a large number of ANC terrorists in various parts of Angola. The South African Government repeatedly urged the MPLA government to remove these terrorists from its territory and to cease assisting them with ttaining and equipment and by making ita territory available to them for the furtherance of their violent activities. On 21 May 1954 the South African Government proposed that both South Africa and Angola should issue a joint declaration that they would not a!low any person or organisation to be trained or accommodated on their sovereign territory to operate against one another or to practise violence against one another. Huts far, the MPLA government has failed to respond to these representations. 59. As I have demonstrated, the South African Government has tried all peaceful channels in its endeavours to solve this problem. Having done so, it has no intention of apologizing for having taken appropriate action to counteract this threat. I stated in the Council as recently as last week, and I repeat today: we will not allow ouraelvea to be attacked with impunity. We shall take whatever action is necessary and appropriate to defend ourselves. 60. South Africa is confiit that its actions have been in accordance with international law. It is an established principle tbat a State may not permit of encourage on its territoty activities for the purpose of carrying out acts of violethze on the territory of another State, and it is equally well established that a State has a right to take appropriate steps to protect its own security and territorial integrity against such acts. 61. As for the so-called testimony of Captain Du Toit. I do not believe that it would stand up in any reputa& court of iaw. it is ciear irom the interview that Captain Du Toit was under the inflwnce of drugs when he delivered his statement, which he was forced to read from a carefully edited text. Doer any representative on the Council imagine that that statement represents anything like the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Captain LIu Toit’s statement ditTers in important respects from the actual events surrounding the incident, especially with 62. Ihe Minister for Foreign Affairs of the MPLA regime had a great deal to say this morning about South Africa’s alleged violation of Angolan territory. I have no intention of replying to his distortions, but let me once again remind members of the Council of the facts. 63. In terms of the Alvor Agreement, Portugal recognized three movements: FNLA (NatiottaI Rant for the Liberarion ofAng&), MPLA and UNITA. Those movements, together with Portugal, were to have formed a transitional government which would have held nation-wide elections for a constituent assembly before the end of October 1975. Those elections were never held, because the MPLA imported foreign troops into Angola to impose its rule over the country. That is a fact. There have never been free elections in Angola. Ever since then there has been a civil war in Angola, which is still far from being resolved. At the moment the MPLA controls the cities, but UNITA controls the countryside, where most of the people of Angola live. 64. For very good reasons, South Africa has not ruzognixed the MPLA government, inter a&a. because it was responsible for the collapse of the Alvor Agreement, because it is not in effective control of the greater part of Angola and because it would be incapable of maintaining itself without the support of foreign troops. 65. llte South African Government believes that the people of Angok should themselves decide who their government should be. But the MPLA government has denied them the tight so to decide in free elections. I should like to know which metnbe~ of the Cotmcil believe that the Alvor Agreement has been honoured. I should like to know which members support the principle that there should be ftee and fair elections in Angola, and that theprob&msofthatcountryshouJdbemsolvedbyrcconciliation rather than violence. 66. Finally, I should like to call on all the members of the Council to join South Africa in calling for an international agteement for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Angola.

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

Speaking on khalf of African countries whose official languar is Portuguese-the Republic of Cape Verde, the Republic of Guinea-B&au. the People’s Republic of Mozambique and my own country-l should like to offer you, Sir, our most sincere congtntul?thr on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of June. 1 should abo like, through you, to thank all members of the Council for giving us this opportunity to take part in the debate on the question now before it. 70. In January 1984, the Council met to consider the item entitled “Complaint by Angola against South Africa” and adopted resolution 546 (1984). In that resolution the Council expressed its grave concern about persistent acts of aggression, including military occupation, committed by the racist r&me of South Africa, in violation of the sovereignty, airspace and territorial integrity of Angola. After condemning those barbaric acts, the Council demanded that the racist r&me should cease immediately its acts of aggression and unconditionally withdraw its occupation forces from Angola and scrupulously respect the sovereignty. airspace, territorial integrity and independence of Angola. The Council reaRirmed in the same ICSOlution the right of Angola, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and in particular Article 51, to take all the measures necessary to defend and safeguard its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. 71. In spite of the demonstrations of good will on the part of the People’s Republic of Angola with a view to finding a peaceful, just and lasting solution in southern Africa, in spite of its readiness to participate in complex and serious negotiations in order to end the impasse created with regard to the problem of Namibia, in spite of the willingness of other states to help in the scar& for realistic sohltions, South Africa haa given striking proof by its most recent actions of its lack of good will and its desire to perpetuate its domination in Namibia by putting forward unacceptable pretexts, creating false obstacles and using armed bands against the neighbouring countries that support the just cause of the Namibian people. 72. We completely share the corr~ms of the international community in connection with thb added dimension in the escalation of acts of aggression committed by the racist South African r&gime in the region. Proof of that esaiatim, ii any were W, ha.5 .kn pruvi&d 0siCe again through the acts of terrorist intervention against Angola and Botswana. We firmly condemn those acts, all the more so since we have links of solidarity with those countries developed during our shared fight against colan&+&m and well understand the An&an people’s desire for peace following the decades of war impo5ed upon it. We call for the cessation of all acts of violence against the 73. The policy of our tive States has always been based on unswerving defence of and respect for the principles of sovereignty, national independence. territorial integrity and non-interference in the affairs of States. 74. As was reaffirmed once again by the heads of State of the People’s Republic of Angola, the Republic of Cape Verde, the Republic of Guinea-Bissau, the People’s Hepublit of Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe in the Declaration of Sao Tome, adopted at the Fifth Summit of Heads of State of the African countries whose offkial language is Portuguese+ “The summit declares its unconditional support for all the initiatives and measures that have been and will be taken by the People’s Republic of Angola and by the People’s Republic of Mozambique to defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity, national unity and accomplishments of the peoples of those respective countries. “Within its means, and bearing in mind the historic tradition of shared struggle and sacrifices, the summit reaffirms its resolve to give multifaceted support to the People’s Republic of Angola and the People’s Republic of Mourmbique.” 75. loyal to that tradition and aware of the need once and for all to put an end to acts of aggression perpetrated by South Africa against the neighbouring States of the region, we ask the Council to take appropriate action. We hope that the Council will assume the responsibilities assigned to it by the Charter, which in our view remains the most appropriate means of strengthening international peace and security. 76. Mr, OUDGVENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (/nterpmat/on /mm R&an): For 10 years now, starting in 1975, the racist South African r&time has been waging war against Angola. Numerous nsolutions have been adopted by the Security Council emphatically demanding that South Africa immediately and unconditionally withdraw its occupation troops from the tertitory oTche~sRcptWicoTAlleda,thatitput~etndtoall acts of aggres&m and other subversive actions against that State and that it strictly respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola. 77. However, today the Council is obliged yet again to consider the question of new aggressive military actions by South Africa against Angola whiih constitute a gross &.-&+, “< .L.. ^-.--L.-A.. . . .-L.-A., :..au.i*.. A- “Ic Jacrcay#r, oov WC(I.,“,Ia. . . . ..~l.J “1 Angola and seriously jeopardise international peace and security. 78. The racist South African r&me is at all costs and in every pm&k way clinging to its policks in southern Africa, It is seeking to pcrpetuate its rule in Namibia, to intimidate An& and the other front-line States and to I 79. As has already been pointed out, the fundamental reason for this aggressive, reactionary position of South Africa and the principal obstacle to the elimination of colonialism, racism and qmrtheld in southern Africa, as well as to a just and effective solution of the problems of the cxurity of the peace-loving independent African States, is the close so-called constructive engagement which links the United States and a number of other Western countries and Israe: with that r4gime. and their sup port for it. 80. By its most recent acts the Pretoria regime has yet again quite clearly shown its true aggressive nature. While hypocritically holding forth about the need for a peaceful settlement of the problems of-outhem Africa, Pretoria has worked unceasingly to destaHlize the situation in Angok. South Africa’s declaration oi its so-called peaceful intentions towards Angola is but the latest in a number of mendacious and propagandistic manouevres. 81. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic wishes to declare its full solidarity with the valiant people of Angola, which has taken up arms to defend its freaiom and independence. We resohttely condemn South Africa’s conthuting a88ression against Angola, including the act of aggression it has perpetmted in Cabinda Rovince, and we demand its immediate cessation, the unconditional and prompt withdrawal of all South African troops from Angolanterritotyandthecusationofallactsofa8grcssion a8ainst that country. . 82. In our opinion, it is neecssay for the Courril to take resohuemeasurestoputanendtothaaggmasinactionsof South Africa against Angola. In paragraph 7 of its rmohtlion 475 (1980), the colmil decided “tomaetagainintheevwntoffurtberausofvi&ion of the sovereignty and writorial integrity of the Paupie’s Republic of A@a by the South African racist r@ime,inordertocuns&rthead@onufmoreeffective measures in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, including chapter VII thereof.” 83. ‘kadoptionofsucbmcaswes bythecolmcil against the racists is in our opinion hmg overdue. The Council must most msdutely condemn the racist Pretoria d&su fne ha .-m&u&w aam* a8 'Y rm.L-4 h---L. .-we..- .". .u-..Y..YI.*nwu". aggEs~lra#w~wr"l&uIa and demand that it immediately put an end to &em. The Council must oblige South Africa unconditionally to respect the soweignty, indeprrdence and territorial integrity of Angola. 84. The dekgation~k;,iiia,BR suppom the draft resolution in

As a fellow inliabitant of Latin America and the Caribbean, 1 should like to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. Your proven talents and diplomatic skills promise that the work of the Council will be characterised by your well-established dedication to the freedom and independence of peoples. 87. May I also express my appreciation to the representative of Thailand for his dedicated work at the head of the Council last month. 88. The People’s Republic of Angola, in the person of its President, Mr. Jose Eduardo dos Santos, has been compelled to request this urgent meeting of the Council to denounce another repugnant and cynical act of aggression by the racist Government of Pretoria against his country. 89. On 21 May, South African commandos landed in Cabin&, more than 2.50 kilometres from the South African border, and, in a clash with a small patrol of Angolan forces, were defeated in a matter of minutes; two South African soldiers died and their leader, a captain, was taken prisoner. Two other captains and five soldiers from the group escaped into the forest. 90. A few days later, the leader of the commando group acknowledged before journalists in Luanda that the instructions he had received had been to destroy the oil installations of Cabinda Oulf Oil at Malongo, in Cabinda Province. The startling thing is that those installations belong to an American tr8nsnationial corporation--Oulf oil. We hop that the Government of the Unhed States will take vigorous measures in tesponac to this otTence by lhON&fkffSCiStS.M~~inthiUCO~lUVCUOSIUIY 91. Surprised by thedefeat and taken aback by the irrefutabk evkknce held by the Angolan authorities, Pretoria, through the Chief of Stad of its fascistic army, General Viljoen, stated that the mimion of the infiltrators was to gather intelligence on SWAP0 and ANC bases in Cabinda. In other words, the South African racists bad to acknowledge that they were violating the sovereignty of a State, in this case Angola, and that they were sending a unit of their regular army into the territory of that country. What right allows racist South Africa to violate the most basic norms of international law? 92. TbeperliiyoftheracistleadenofPretoriacouldnot be more insolent and @grant. The mcirt authorities said that they were seeking information on ANC and SWAPS camps in Cabinda, These emulators of Hitler are cynical andbrazen,sinatheyknowrhattbemhaveneverbeen ANC or SWAPS camps or group in Cabinda. Only the oil installations are there. 94. The racists learned a powerful lesson at Malongo, and the fighting spirit of FAPLA (People’s Armed Forces for the Liberation of Angola) has strengthened considerably. 95. The South African racis@ are among the best disciples of Goebbels. Lying is one of their most frequently used tools, which is why we must refer to what was stated in the Jomai & Angola of 24 May: ‘The attempt to sabotage the Malongo oil installations, carried out directly by the regular army of Pretoria, is part of a vast plan of political and economic destabilisation of Angola, in which the racist r&gime of Pretoria is deeply involved. It should be mcatled that it was with the same objective that the Pretoria commandos carried out another sabotage operation against the installations of the Petfitngol retinery at Luanda, the Giraul Bridge, the I.&to oil tanks and two ships that were moored in the port of Luanda. It has now been proven that all of this was the work of elements of the same unit found in Cabinda.” 96. Had the sabotage of the Gulf al installations at Malongo been smzcssful, the Angolan economy would have suBered losses calculated at almost 81 billion and dozens. perhaps even hundreds. of foreign and Angolan techniciins would have l-1 their lives, including the 178 American technicians. It must k borne in mind that the oil tanks are some 108 metm away from the housing complexes of those technicians and that, bad the tanks exploded, those homes and compkxes would have been destroyed as well. 97. Is it not clear that those who support Pmtoria are encouraging the racists in these criminal practices? Is it not time ior those who advocate the p&y of constructive engagement to put an end to that honeyed rhetoric and stop supporting a Government which is as irresponsible and criminal as is that of Pretoria? Everyone is familiar with the aggressive policy of South Africa against neightlwring countries. which has caused the loss of thousands of lives and countless material datnae. Who violates human rights so systematically as South Africa? 99. This demonstrates the synicism and duplicity of the Washington authorities when they speak out against what they describe as international terrorism. And how are we to interpret the fact that they have just repealed the Clark amendment? In all logic, South Africa is today more aggressive than it was when the Constructive engagement policy oif Washington did not exist. 100. It is clear that there is a sharp contrast, if not an abyss, between the position of Angola and that of South Africa. Angola has been flexible, reasonable and constructive on all aspects leading towards peace, independence and security in south-western Africa, in its well-known platform, the supplementary text to that platform, and in its daily attitude. 101. South Africa has responded to Angola’s attitude by policy of State terrorism and by deceptions. The racist Government announced one year after the deadline set in the Lusaka agreement that it had withdrawn its troops from the south of Angola, but the truth is that some unitsarestill in Calueque. This recalls the pretext used to invade Angola in 1975. since now, as then, they use thesame pretext, that it is “to safeguard the Calueque Dam”. Since when have the Pretoria racists acted with such generosity towards tlie black Africans? The ill-famed Butfalo Battalion is stationed with the troops of UNITA in the vicinity of the Namibian border. in the Angolan province of Cuando Cubango. 102. South Africa has been using negotiations with Angola to gain time iu which to prepare new commando sabotage forces and to create conditions for a so-called internal settlement in Namibia, 103. It is imperative for the Council to assume its responsibilities visd-v/s the international community and to adopt the measures needed to put an end to racist South Africa’s insane policy against its neighbours and to require its allies to stop their honeyed conduct, which only fuels the criminal and fascistic attitude of the upurtheid leaden. 104. Cuba believes that the Council must take the following steps: first. demand the unconditional withdrawal forthwith of all South African occupation troops from southern Angola; secondly, strongly condemn South Africa for its violation of the sovereignty of Angola, which the South Africans themselves admit when they state officially that the group that was at Malongo was on an inteiiigence-gathering mission; thirdiy. condemn South Africa for its attempt to attack and destroy the Gulf Oil installations in Cabinda. which would have cost the lives of Angolan and foreign technicians; fourthly. demand that South Africa implement. without further &lay. resolution 435 (197R). and thus resmre a climate of peace to which the peoples of southern Africa keenly aspire: and. tifthly. demand that South Africa’s allies cease all forms of sup- LOS. The Pretoria Government must be given a deadline for the implementation of those steps, and ifthat deadline is not met, the Council will have no alternative but to adopt the comprehensive and mandatory sanctions set forth in Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. 106. At the very moment we were meeting to consider the question of Namibia here in the Council, the Pretoria racists, in a demonstration of their proverbial contempt for justice and for the sovereignty of other States, launched a criminal commando incursion into the capital of Botswana on the pretext of eliminating freedom-fighters of the ANC, causing the deaths of a number of civilians and the destruction of several buildings. Because it is a repeated practice and an outrage on the part of Pretoria, more than by statements, that crime alone deserves to be met with severe sanctions. 107. The racists and those who support them must not forget that the patience of peoples has its limits.

The next speaker is the representative of the German Democratic Republic, who has asked to make a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Group ot Eastern European Socialist States for the month of June. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 109. Mr, SCHLEGEL (German Democratic Republic): Allow me to convey through you, Sir, to your Minister for Foreign Affairs, our high approval for the manner in which he conducted the work of the Council during the debate on the question of Namibia. We are sure that you will spare no efforts to reach a successful conclusion to this present debate. I should like to thank you and the members of the Council for giving me the opportunity to speak in my capacity as Chairman of the Group of Eastern European Socialist States on the continued policy of aggression and destabilization by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. 110. In the course of the Councilf debate on the question of Namibia, so&Iii States uttquivocally co&mned the racists’ manoeuvres to bring about an “internal settlement” and further to miwae Namibian territory for military acts against neighbouring States. Now the 4xtrtM regime is again in the pillory. White tbb body was considering steps for settling the question of Namibia and thus to improve the situation in the entite region of southern Africa, the rulers in Pretoria again had the audacity brutally to express their cynical contempt for the will of (hc international public. They launched an attack against Gaboronc. ihc capiiai of Eomvana, and tbcy itave escaiatcd their permanent attacks and acts of interference against sovereign Angola. I I I. A few days ago [258&/r mreti~g), during the debate on Namibia. end again today. the Minister for Fore&t Affain of Angola furnished impmeive proof of the continti acts of aggression and destabilisation perpetrated IO 112. Angola, with which the socialist countries are linked by fraternal bonds, was for centuries oppressed under the colonial yoke. Over the past decade it has made great efforts, with the diligence and commitment of its citizens, to construct a new, humanist society, for which endeavour it needs peace more than aything else. It needs peace for the accomplishment of social progress and for economic development. During the first decade of its independence, Angola has not experiencedthat badly needed peace. 113. Acts of sabotage against Angola, violations of its airspace, continued occupation of Angolan territory and outside support for counter-revolutionary UNITA gangs are only a few of the tesserae in the blood-stained mosaic of Pretoria’s subversion and aggression against the young People’s Republic. During the IO years of its existence, Angola, jointly with Cuban internationalists, has repeatedly had to repulse direct armed attacks of the racists. Because of the concentration of troops on its southern border, the danger of new, large-scale South African acts of aggression is imminent. It thus becomes clear that the so-called linkage is intended only to diven attention from the real causes of the dangerous situation in the region. 114. Angola is compelled to spend huge sums of money on the maintenance and strengthening of its defence capacity, sums that must be diverted from the implementation of tasks in the field of its domestic policy and economy. Further, it is almost daily challenged by irreplaceable kxnes of human life and immense material damages because Of Pretoria% war. That is Pretoria’s precise aim: to weaken the progressive system and thereby be able to impose its will upon that country. 115. The bomb attack attempted by a South African commando unit against the plant at Malongo in Cabinda at the end of May is the latest of many links in the chain of acts of systematic tabota~. The criminal attempt against the economic bean of Angola would, had it not been foiled, have resulted in the loss of at least $I billion to the country, as the Minister for Foreign Affairs told us this morning. President dos Santos has stated that half of that amount of money would be sufficient to provide food for one year to the entire population of Angola. 116. Rut there is more to it than that. In their attempted bomb attack, the South African terrorists unscrupulously and in cold blood were aware of the possibility of the death of many more people, since there is a large inhabited area in the vicinity of the tanks. Who, in view of the revelation by the leader of the terrorist group of the aims of this latest act of sabotage, is not disgusted at the response of the racists? They have had the impudence cynically to attempt to justify that action by citing an alleged search for members of the ANC and SWAPO, I 18. We vigorously condemn the racists’ policy of terror, especially the continuation of their undeclared war against the People’s Republic of Angola. 119. Condemnation alone, however, is not sufficient. Pretoria’s acts Of aggression, violating international law. must be given a proper answer in the form of resolute measures. In common with the majority of non-aligned States, we call for the imposition of comprehensive mat&- tory sanctions against South Africa. Any prevention of such measures by members of the Council is only bound to encourage the frenzied racists to commit new crimes, and will make those members accomplices in those crimes. There is no doubt that the policy of Pretoria has hecome a serious threat to international peace and security. 120. One point must be clear: if there is anyone who believes that, having thrown off the yokeofeoloniallsm, the African States can be blackmailed, that ptxon is mistaken. Historical progrem can for a certain time be impeded, perhaps even halted, but it can never be prevented. I21. The Eastern European socialist States stand in Arm aoUdarity at the side of the Angokwt people and the p pies of the other front-line States in their stnt& against the aggr&w and colonialist qponltpidr6ginte and for the maintenaneeofi lx@&nce,~andtmhorial integrity. Wesupporttheeomnu&epoIleyofAngoIa dimetedtowardspeaceandsecurityintheregion.Tha pfopu&submittedbythePeopIe%Repub8eofAng& and contained in the letter dated I7 November 1984 front President dos Santos to the !Ief3etary=Geneml [g/1- makeitcIearagainwhoisreallyintematedinaata& situation in southern Africa, 122. Let me themfore express the hope that by an unambiguous decision the Council will support those who are thevictimr,ofthtpolicyofapmrlrPid.ItisuptothcCouncil to see to it that the IO.year war in AngoIa is RnalIy followed hy the peace which that country has been kmging for so eagerly.

The next speaker is the repmentative of Argentina. I invite him to take a plaee at the Council table and to make his statement. 124. Mr. MI,%IZ (Argentina) (MerRrerurfox from Spmrfd)i Only a few days ago I conveyed our congrattdations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Trinidad and 125. Before I set out the particular position of my eountry, I want to say that we are in complete agreement with the settlement made by the representative of the Bahamas, which was a precise i&ction of the clear and unanimous position on this issue of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States. 126. The repeated violations of the territorial sovereignty of Angola by South African armed forces and intelligence personnel deserve the unanimous condemnation of the international community and an appropriate response on the part of the Council. llte events that led to t!tis meeting are all the more serious as they violate agreements painstakingly negotiated between Angola and South Africa and constitute dangerous new obstacles to the search for bdanee and barntony in south-western Africa. 127. Only a few days ago, during the Council’s consideration of the situation in Namibia, my delegation stated that brettuse of its racist, colonialist and violent nature the fore@ policy of South Africa is largely incompatible with an intematlonaI order based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and intended to ensure the tnainknance of intematlonal peace and security and the devcloptnent of harmonious relations and eu-operation among States. We rrpat this today. 128. In something Icss than one week, South Africa has takenthrucactionsc+3nWarytoapceiIicpfovisionsofdte Chatter and &vmt United Nations ratohttions. The ittCtUEiOttbyimc~folasifltOAtlgOl8,thC~C anduajurtifIaMeaaac&onBotowanaMdthe~ of an interim admInistnttlon in Namibia ati~umd ttbkt#stocheemdiiandefr~ NlMiOttC.LbgCltbfIlntlycarkmIlEthOCC8UiOllS.d beIievesutattIteQntnciIeJtouIdnotremalnlndiIremntin thefacrofthip~tion,~~fucthcrendan~trathepros pattsforpsaceinscmtbemAfriea. 129. Argmhta lily wpports the quest for peaceful andncgotiatedsohttiomtotheditrcTmtpr~of southem AfIb -I%e CompIexity of the conflicts to be mttdvedinthatreg&nbsuchthistonlydiilogueandConeertalactifmamongaIIthepartieseanensureastabIe future. It would seem c&af that there is no room for solotions imposed uni&tm~Ily or that disregard the kgithnate interests of given sectors or countries. Insistence on extfemeeourusofactionandproposalswouldonlycontribute to an indetinite extension of the confrontations and tragedy in southern Africa. 130. That is why we have observed with renewed interest the diplomatic proceum that in meent days seem to give hope for prompt and genuine i&pe&nce to Namibia 131. At this advanced stage of a century which has seen unprecedented progress in human and international nlations. Pretoria’s policies represent a dangerous moral and political anachronism, incompatible with the very values that the South African Government afirms or claims to defend. Evidence of that is the increasingly active and concrete opposition to those policies in regions that have traditional links with South Africa. Pretoria should not ignore or underestimate the importance of clear signs that point to its growing isolation at the international level. Iltose who continue to link their destiny to uporrkold should understand that rigidity and intransigence are the worst enemies of their own interests. It is time for the South African leaders to awaken to the truth and carry out the profound changes so justly dentanded by Africa and the rest of the international community. 132 The PRESIDENT: ‘Ihe next speaker is the mpresentative of Yugoslavia. I invite him to take P place at the council table and to nulkc his statematt. 133. Mr. GGLGB (Yugo&via)~ For the second timt in scmalda)9,thcCounCiliSdclibtratingOntbGaoneequcntea of military aggression and occupation by fioutb Africa. Fortbesecondtbnetbe&uncilbttyingtofindattadequate response to gouth Africa’s poucy of agg=ion, whieb is threatening intematiottal pa80c and rscurily. 135. AConfarenceoftbcForei~~ofNon- AlignalC+untrimwillbcbeblattbekginningofSPtmtberofthisyearat Juanda, WeundemtMdtheoograrion andsubvenionbysoutbAfrica~~tok mew,, a plcawrc apbI&m au - --- - - - --. --.- - --I--. -I. && ia.J& -** z well. This attempt to intimidate the non-ah&ted countries will fail, as have other such attempu. 136. JtwillhemcalledtbattheScventhConferenoeof He4dsofsteteoraovrnrmsnr OfJvon-wcotmtti, held at J&w Delhi from 7 to I2 JHurch 1983, stmngly condemnedtbccontinualmititmyoccupationofpartof 137. Military aggression against Awzola violates the basic norms of international conduct and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Tht use of force, occupation, intervention, interference in internal affairs and destabilisation of Governments of independent countries are ctimm in southern Afka just as they are in the rest of the world. We believe it is the obligation of the Council to respond adequately to such behaviour. 13s. The countries maintaining relations and c-+ operating with South Africa should heed Ute voice of teason and underutand that any co-operation with South Africa is detrimental to peace and atability in the region and blocks international efforts aimed at eliminating qpmr- &/d and achieving indeJsett&nce and selfdetermination for the Jreop!e of Namibia, aa well as the liberation of the opprreged black population of fioutlt Africa. ‘Ihose ormntries should use tbe weigbt tbat they carry with South Affiea to make it change its policy. 139. This time, the Council should find and adopt a&- qtuw mtasurca to pwmn&n;ym~t d&ndlheindepmdmcc rity of AngoJa and other front-line states, it abould strongly condemn Soulh Africa; and it should use all tnatnaatltsdisposalutt&theCJmrtertomakeJ!kntth Africa Wltluknw unroaditianally from Angola, ratpct its fiov-ty and t4nitoM intcgrlty, and apptopriauly rw drcsstbedamagcshbM~. 140. We bdievc that the Catncil tdtould eend a dear lttemptDsoktulAfricathatthe~connawiy thaunitadNotiorrrandtJJe&!urityCo#cJlwJllnolos& pdcyofnwcssiml,ocoupationmbd 14;. TttaPRE!3IDENT:‘IJrenextrpeoLeristJterepmsmtatkaftbeSucfPn,wbowifbeatomabeaatatemcntinbis es~asChmmtanoftbeGroupofArub!3tatesfortbe tnontbofJunc.1fnvitehimtotakeaplaccattbeCou&l tabkadtomakctlisItetemen1. 142 Mr. FJUUDO (Sudan) (b#crprro#an porn-& Mr.kJident,ItbankyouandthernembemdtbeCouncllforaffordingmydek&ontheopporntnityto8peakort L . .” .a _. anmuoltncGioup&irrPbStascsonthcimucudcr . . dnamon Wedoroontbcbaisofso&ityandtbc jointMrt&khytbeArabandAfricanStatesagaitmttbe gy-&lfe-~&=g-nY”““““““” 143. wlehueundcrdbcurrionietheeurnsntriturtionin Angolareutltin8fromtbeact8ofPslpcrioneommittedby I2 144. This morning we listened to the comprehenmve statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Angola, and we have read document S/17263, reproducing the text d a message from the Minister of Defence of the People’s Republic of Angola to the Council in which he reviewed the chain of acts of aggression and provocation directed by the South African Government against his country. 145. One of the most dangerous acts of aggresr: .- was the attempt to attack the oil installations in Cabindao~ .‘I May this year, including overflights by South ti+~ ;;eto planes over various regions of Angola. There if 31:-d tfi:, fat. that South Africa is tnaintining along its bort’cr . u: Angola armed forces totalling more than 2O,ooO, which shows that the Pretoria r&me is indeed preparing for a new invasion of Angola. 146. South Africa’s repeated acts of aggression against Angola re?zsent a Ragrant bn%ch of Angola’s independencq temtorial integrity and sovereignty and arc, furthermore, a fidgrant violation of United Nations resolutions and the principles of international law. These acts of aggression threaten international peace and security. For bse mums the Arab States have strongly c0ndemne.f *he laist acts of aggression -ted by South Afri~ againa: Angola, and we call upon the Ccmcil strong;y to condemn such acts. We call upon it to demand that bath Afrieawhhdrawit&fore%fKmlAngolaandcaBeallaus of aggression against Angob as well as against all other front-line State& 147. Yesterday the council concluded long and fruitful &tiberations in which more than 80 reptusatativrj wpted, including a farge number of Foreign Minis&m of non-a&ed countries. All those speakers condam& the practiccsandactsof~earrkdotttby~8outh AfrieainNtldbismldwitkin~AfrieaitaeJf,Thcy funhere&emnedSouthAfrica’saetsdsggmdoasd continuedprovecatkmamlmiMdagain8ttk~balur. ing front-line African States. Following these deliturations andcottsttltacionr,theCounciladopted~566 (IpS5.AFtt&mtom,on3Maylast,the-oftbs CuuncilissuedastatementonthedechiontakeninRetoria to estdish a so-called interim government in Namibia [s/I7f5f).Ontheotherhand,theunitalNationsCowch for Namibia held a special meeting on 17 June, on which theActingFmsidentofthatCouncifmportedtottsin detail ysterday [2ll9sh mecrb& 14P nesfmuilycMurilwiumeet~yfy~ SouthAfrica%actsofaggra&n cmmttcd cgaimt another imkpemknt African State, the Republic 0’ 8olawana. I49 Allthescfactsrevealthestateofdesp&~~ tion d the Pretoria r&me owing to tbs incr&ng opposition Campaigns in tk interior undertaken by the vahnnt I3 150. However. despite this growing denunciation, the Pretoria r&gime continues to obtain assistance from some Western States and Israel. Cver the years this situation has led to strengthening the security and military institutions of South Africa and to enhancing the economic potential of the racist r&&me. This economic potential has grown ~ntinuou?-@ ,,nd thr monopolistic interests and Western fl.+~.!Ls have prospcted despite the opposition cipublic q*ul’til0n in their countries. 1.41. nte negative role assumed by ..nme pem!anent members of the Security Council and other States-&her to protect ecclnomic interests binding them to the racist @me in South Aftiea or to further individual strategic ambitions by providing assistance to a regime that has heen rejected by the international community in both form and substance--hae -ted the Council from fully undertaking its responsibilities in maintaining intemational peace and security, achieving independence for Namibia and eradicating u&&i in South Africa, as well as in putting an end to the acts of aggression and military incursions carried out by South Africa against neighbouring stltw. 152. A&African &id&y has a very strong basis of many pars’ standing This solidarity has been m&et& in the staggks umkd out jointly for liberation from colattidii, racism and 7.ionkm, in -tar where cc+ oprmtionbenwsm&uthAfr&aandfsrnelhasincmasedat the economk, military and t+ological levels, thus help irtgbothraeistr@irnestoamttnuatheirpoliiofoceupadonbNamib&,Pale&s~ndthemupiedArab tcniti. For that ICIWWI, the Arab Statea have always pgfpd&mL”fhys mgionaf or intematiar&-in their just struggle against & Pmoriar@ime.lnthiscctntext,theCouneiloftheArab I.#agueofStateaatitsmostrecentmeeting,hekiatTunis, isst&aqeeialdecisioninsuftportofliturationmovemerits in southem Afti, in terms of which it: “First,&easestbefumpo&ionoftheArabStatesin tharcondemMtkmofdtepolkydapanirrldpmctiscd bytbemci8t&imeofSoutPAfricaandtheirsuppcrt anda&tanceforthe&ratfonsttugtdeofthepe&es of southern Africa to attain setfdetermination, freedom and dignity, and calls for pra&cal steps to eradicate the policy of awthd4 “&ondly,renewsfullsupportforthepeopkofNamibia in their struggk br indeper&nce and calls for the irrwte. uneonditianal implementation of Secu- “Fourthly, emphasixes the solidarity with the popu- Jar, intensifying struggle of the majority in South Africa against the unjust racist laws, and condemns the South African racist rtgime’s attempt to impose military conscription on black citizens; “Fifthly, condemns the recent barbaric massacres perpetrated by the racist r6gJme in South Africa, in which a large number of black citixens fell victim; ‘Sixthly, salutes those political militants who are langttishing in the prisons of the racist r&imes, pattJcuJarly Nelson Men&la, and calls for tJteir immediate, umnditional release,” 1%. Finally, we should like to renew the Arab States’ pledge of full suppott for Utc people’s Republic of Angola in its sttuggJe to defend its independence. sovereigttty and terrJtorbl integrity. we FurtJler umesewdy condemn the acts of aggression of the racJst Government of J?~utJt Africa agahtst Angola. We call upon it to put an end to aJI its aggressive acts and to respect Namibia’s sovereignty and htdependence.

The next spcakcr is tJte m~nesetttathe d the Catgo. I invite hJm to take a m at the C3xtncll tabJe aud to make hJs statemeut. J55. Mr. GAYAMA (Congo) (b-W jlum ncwch) nte congoke dekgation Is pitdaddy pkascd. Mdyt&odfhavashowno;;tstandingsk~lntJleoonductoftkdebtueonJ%mJbJa.In&ct.wwshouJdhave bsengbdJfptlCOUldhWCCttjOpdatVCtl~not, buttkrebahvayathettqdkwelaolorofsouth Afrkatokmkenhttott4xmtnt. I56 It Is not stuprb@tJutttberackt,~aacktIutd cokmi&tPmtoriar&hneisouceagaJuthefocuaofour debtste.IftheoppodkwerethecrfaeJtwouldmeanthat therhgimehadknam~totheirkabofpeoccMd goahteighbouri~andtotheprlnciJtksofnottinterferenceintheaJf&ofotJteiuaudrcrpeafortlte ~ereignty8ltdMto&¶Jhttcgrityofirsn&hbotlr&WC doubtthatJtashappewd,notdelibemtely,butotttbebmii ..fobsenQttionssuJ@nlalbytJtef~,whiehtellusmore shltthenaturedthesouthAfrkanfCgimcthanauthe is *ym &&G .&-#~; & g@@ av&<~i* A f& QLi *, whik the Council was conskkriug a plceise item on its agenda, nmeJy, the rituatlon in Namibia, with tlte object d evahwting the situation mtdting from tlte fpihrre to impkment its resoJution 435 (1978), tJte repracntativc d theraciurkgimeputfiJw#dan~~oR the intemd situadoo in Angob. Gbviody, in order to 157. South Africa’s occupation of part of southern Angola &rives, as everyone knows, from a premeditated act of aggression about three years ago. TJu.t occupation was preceded by numerous armed raids, causing many casualties and very heavy damage to property, and was to all intents and purposes a genuine, unprovoked war. The stated purpose of the racist Pretoria Government was to guarantee a so&led defence of Namibia against SWAFG, overlooking the fact that SWAPfIt’s principal strength comes from inside the country, from the Namibian people opposed to South Africa’s illegal colonial presence, and not from outside. In fact, as far as one can tell, the South African regime’s demonstrations of force have not at all weakened the resistance and the struggle against that miserable regime and the undesirable power that it embodies. 158. Wishing to be helpful to certain of its allies in the Western world and seeking to please so-called modemte sections of opinion, the South African Government is anxious to depict itself as a reliable bulwark against what some describe as tJte expansion of communism. Therefore. tJtrougJt ha occupation of pan of Angolan territory, it has been able to conclude a marriage of convenience with tJte UNITA rebels, who were disconsolate at having been rejected by the Angolan people JO years ago, at tJte moment of independence, despite the intervention of South Africa itself. 159. There was even some question recently of tJte cmadon of a socaJled JMtoeratJc Jnternational grouping toge&er, under the aegis of South Africa and witJt the bkssittg of a super-Power, a ragtag band of embittered reactionaries, ready to sacrifw the least negouable interests of Africa, such as Ute swggJe against ~rfheld and colonJalJsm-Jn other words, ready even to ally dtemselves with the dev8 JrJm:lf in order to tealize tJteir wve imJntJses. As, moreover, that pJan requited a symbol, an “Open sesame”, SoutJt Africa found it stdfii to uucnpctthemfraJn,uothtAftica,buteJuMere,ofasup JmeeddaugercausedbytJteptwfsnoeofCubantmoJrsin AngoJa.ItwastotJtesoundofthatrefraintJtattJuhnpkmenmuon of tJte United NatJous setdement plan for Namibia was boycoUed, dgating to obscurity the only questhmthattruJyremainedtoJsenegotiatal-thatofthe ekctoral system. 160. Apart from the gmve infrhtgement of tJte ~&cJpJes d non-interference and respect by States for the soverelgrtty dothers represented by South Africa’sdiiion uf problems coming within the sole competence of tJre Angolan Government at Luanda, such a&on clearly showstJtewmemptinwhiihthemcistr6gifneJtoJdsthe Aftican pec@es. JBemonstrating that contempt, the regime that invented in its own country the phenomenon of bantustans would like to extend that experiment outside South Africa, by denying to sovereign countries, members of tJte GrgnnimtJon of African Unity and Members of the United Nations, tJte right to govern themselves as they pleaK and 161. South Africa therefore cannot seek to impose its will on the rest of Africa and the rest of the world. It is up to South Africa to adapt itself-and not by surprising us with picturesque details of so-called opendoor operations in restaurants, hotels and other public places or by the imminence of mixed marriages. South Africa will represent nothing. whatever its brutality, if it deliberately turns its back on justice and morality. both against the majority of people within its borders and outside them, 162. A few days ago, within this very chamber, we emphasized that South Africa, because of the values it represents, was incapable of inspiring and promoting even the most insignilicanl peace policy. On the contrary, it constitutes a permanent source of insecurity for its neighbours, with clear dangers to international peace and security. How else can one explain the defiance Pretoria has shown to the world and to the Organization by otBanidng and perpetrating acts of aggression, first against Angola and then against Botswana, on 14 June last, at the very moment when the Council was discussing the subject? 163. Aggression is an intrinsic part of the political behaviour of South Africa. That is what explains the permanent danger hanging over virtually all the front-line States. Without drawing up a complete list, I would observe that the acts of aggression against Lesotho, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique are too fresh in the memories of all of us for me to need to refer to them individually. 164. In de&ring recently that it regarded itself a9 a regional Power, South Africa was saying nothing new to thOsetphoreU&Xlitsactto5intervcMion8tttRtbneOfthe wars of liberation in Angola, Zimbabwe and b bique, when it tried, albeit uns~~&uSy, to altar the come of history in its favour. just as it is trying to do today.Toshowitsintentiom,itdedareditsdfreadyto intervene wherever and whenever it saw fit south of the Equator, which it regards as irs zone of influma, hs living space. as it were, in terms of sound expansionist k#e. Thus South African participation in the mcrocnary aggression against the Seychelks. out in the Indian Ckcan, in November 19111 wasnosurpriseeithet.Evenkssofasurprise was the bizarre commando raid that took place this month in Cabinda, in northern Angola, on 21 May. 165. The message is clear: South Africa till shrink from nothing in order lo cast its sinister shadow over southem Africa. As if open aggression were not enough, it has resor&d to infiltration for purposes of sabotage, spreading disorder ard genznl insecurity in order to destabilize plb gressive Angola, whose a-ion to i&ependence it never accepted. I5 167. We therefore fail to understand why certain members of the Security Council are so reluctant to endorse collective sanctions against a notorious troublemaker. How can one guarantee and justify the adoption in other circumstances of preventive measures. or even unilateral sanctions, as some have been doing outside the context of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations? 168. My delegation would fail to express the essence of its feelings if it did not take this opportunity to reiterate the unswerving support of the Congo for Angola in the struggle it has been obliged to wage to protect its independence, tmitorial integrity and sovereignty. We wish to thank the Angolan Minister for Foreign Affairs for the information and first-hand analysis he gave us in the Council on the cxwcerm of the Angolan Government in connection with the provoa&e sets of South Africa. 169. I also wish to refer to the statement which the heads of State of the Congo and Angola, President Denis Bassou-Ngucsso and Resident Jo& Eduardo dos Santos, published a few days ago after the working visit Mr. DOS Santos made to Braazaville, in which the two heads of stateconfhmedtbeeQmmon determination of their eountries to fight colonielism, imperialism and sqpen)rpld, for pcaceinsouthemAfGcaandthrou@uttheworld. 170, It is our duty to extend this assistance to Angola. It iethtdutyaftheSccuriryCounciltodox,alro.Thatir why we hope the council will adopt a draft mlution at least condtmning South Africa for its *3s of aggres&n, demanding that it pay just compensation to Angola for the damage continuously in&ted upon the people of that country for the last IO years and that it unconditionally withdraw its forces from Angolan territory, prohibiting it from ever returning there. As fct the rest, we have full confidence that the council will consider appropriate ways and means of ensuring implementation of its decisiofts. 171. Tbe PRESIDENT: 1 shall now make a brief statement in my capacity as the representative &TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO. 172. For the IO years of its life as an independent State, Angola has had to endure the travails of South Africa’s 173. The raid by South Africa’s racist military forces at Malongo. in the province of Cabinda. is but the latest in a long chain of aggressive acts and territorial intrusions by the apartheid regime of South Africa. It is as if South Africa were working to some evil design. It is obvious that in view of this persistent aggression Augola will have to continue relying on international support to resist the upurtheid rigime’s flagrant violations of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. These unprovoked and persistent acts of aggression against Angolan territory constitute blatant and totally callous violations of international law and elementary principles of justice. In these circumstances, it is clear that the actions of the racist Pretoria regime are a threa* to international peace and security and should be condemned by the Council. Any country that is a producer or refiner of petroleum understands the enormous impact on a country and on its economy of any act-and in particular a foreign incursion-leading to the destruction of its petroleum installations. Such an event would strike at the very heart of any economically weak developing country. 174. The statement of 17 May 1985 by the South African Government has led international public opinion to believe that South Africa has disengaged its military forces from Angolan territory. llte capture of the South African commando, the seizure of military equipment parachuted from aircraft coming from South Africa and from the occupied Territory of Namibia. the increased violatron of Angolan national airspace by South African reconnaissance flights and the concentration of South African military and logistic units along the border with Namibia all belie Pretoria’s assertion and underline its deceit. It is clear that, contrary to its pronouncements, the South .Afrimn r&me is continuing its policy of destabilization and uccupation of Angola. 175. llte Council has the responsibility of ensuring respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of A&a. The Council must therefore call for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Pretoria% military fonm from the territory of Angola. The Council must also seek topcrauedeSwthAfricalhattherrseofforadocsnol resolve political problems, but only exacerbates them, South Africa’s policies of destabilisation and aggression towards Angola must be condemned unanimously by the Council. A strong signal would thereby be sedt to that r6gime of the international community’s determination not to allow one State, on the basis of a destorted. archaic and abhorrent theory of human relat’ tOllSdptd&-CO disrupt international Peace and security. .-- 1 lb. Tile use of Namibia by tbe mast r&me ot South Africa as a springboard for perpetrating Lstabilization. armed attacks and the occupation of parts of the territory of Angola compounds South Africa’s aggression, That a Territory for which the United Nations is responsible should be used in this manner by South Africa shows the insensitive nature of the racist South African imperialists. 178. I now resume my function as PRESIDENT of the Council. 179. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to vote on the draft resolution before it [S/17286j. Unless I hear an objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote. A vote wus raken by show of hands. l7te &oft resolution was odoped wunbnously [resolution 567 (1985)].

I have not spoken up to now, first because it was the wish of the delegation of Angola and of other members of the Council that this debate should be concluded rapidly, and secondly, because I registered my Government’s views on the Cabinda incident fully in my statement in the Council on 14 June [254@Ir me&g]. As I said then, the United Kingdom unequivocally condemns this violation of Angola’s sovereignty and regards the involvement of South African military personnel in Cabinda as indefensible. 181. In accordance with these views. my delegation considered that the Council should express strong condemnation of South Africa’s illegal and totally unjustifmble act of force in Cabin&t. We ha= accordingly voted in favour of the resolution. In so doing, we do not endorse every formulation in the present text. We do not Eonsider that the third prezunbular pansgraPh and paragraphs I and 3 fall within the provisions of Chaptet VII of the Charter of the United Nations or constitute a finding or decision which has spm+f= connsquences under the Charter. Our intention is simply to express our vkws in the &rarest Possible manner to the OovmvDcnt of South Africa, and our sympathy to the Government of Angola.

The United States deplores the South African action in Cabin& We havlz made our deep disPkasure known both in public statements and directly to the Government of South Africa. We have received no satisfactory explanation from that Government for its conduct. Naturally, we are Particularly disturbed by evidence that the South African military action in Cabinda posed a threat to the lives of United States citizens in that province, and a danger to the property of United States companies there. In view of .I.,, r:---r--- -- ____. ._ -- rL-- -..A- :--:A-->- “,CL .,,CYIIWO‘~*, WC WO‘,, L” scs ,aIQ, .ucu IIH.8uI;,,ta* which violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola, do not recur. 183. The views of my Government on cross-border vialence in southern Africa are well known to members of the Council and were reiterated in this chamber most recently respect for national sovereignty and the inviolability of international borders. It is clear that any South African military activities inside Angola-includirrg itnclligcutrgathering operations which South African Governmom spokesmen have said are continuing-run directly contrary to thu goals and objcctivcs of the United States. 184. My Government has been in the forefront of efforts to bring about a pcaccful negotiated solution to the conllicts in southern Africa. it was this effort that resulted over a year ago in the signing of the Lusaka accord, which Icd to the progressive withdrawal of South African occupation force! from southcrn Angola. Despite continuing problems in the region, this agreement produced over 12 months of effective peace and practical co-operation bctwecn South African and Angolan military forces along the Namibian border. We are encouraged that South Africa has completed the disengagement process and heartened by its announcement of the withdrawal of its troops from the dams at Ruacana and Caiuequc. In view of this positive development. my Government does not understand, nor does it accept, the use in the resolution of the term “occupation forces” to describe any continued South African military presence in Angola. 185. In light of the progress represented in the Lusaka accord, my Government was particularly disturbed to learn of the incident in Cabinda. In our view, this incident. and other reeent instances of violence in South Africa, Angola. Botswana and elsewhere in the region. underscore the importance of moving rapidly IO a negotiated settlement in the region. We are committed to this goal, and we will continue to pursue it. 186. Despite our objections to the reference to South Aft&n “occupation” forces in Angola, and our objections lo the implicit references to Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations contained in several paragraphs of the resolution. our strong feelings on the question of crossborder violence led us to vote in favour of this resolution. I7 heard terminological inexactitudes from the very lips of the racist rcprcsentative of South Africa. 189. Mr. President, allow me to express my Government’s appreciation for the skilful manner in which you have handled Angola’s complaint, yet another instance of South African aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola. The people of Angola bear the warmest fraternal regard for the people of Trinidad and Tobago. 190. I also wish to thank all those who have once again spoken out in support of the position of the Government and the people of Angola, and all our non-aligned friends who sponsored the resolution just adopted by the Council and, indeed, all those who voted in favour. 191. The representative of the racist regime has blatantly and shamelessly obfuscated the truth and misrepresented reality. The only ideology completely foreign to the continent of Africa is that of apartheid, introduced into southern Africa by the minority racist regime of South Africa, perpetuated by it, constitutionalized by it, institutionalized by it. It is the apartheid regime which is the threat to peace and security in our region, leading it to disastrous consequences because the people of southern Africa refuse to succumb IO the tyranny which has been imposed on them by the minority racist regime of South Africa. 192. The oflicial position of the Angolan Government and its offer are contained in the letter addressed by the President of my country to the Secretary-General on I7 November 1984 [S/16838].

There are no further speakers for this meeting. The Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda. Thp meeting rose at 7.03 p.m. Lub in United Na~tcm. New York m4rm 90-61439-April I994-2.050