S/PV.2631 Security Council

At the outset, I should like, on behalf of the Council, to pay a tribute to my predecessor, Mr. Richard A. Woolcott, Permanent Representative of Australia to the united Nations, for the competence with which, as President of the Security Council for the month of November, he guided the work of the Council. I am sure that I express the feelings of all members of the Council when I convey to Ambassador Woolcott fly profound gratitude for the consummate diplomatic skill with which he conducted the proceedings of the Council. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA The agenda was adopted. COMPLAINT BY ANGOLA AGAINST SOUTH AFRICA REPORT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION ESTABLISHED UNDER RESOLUTION 571 (1985) (S/17648)

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Angola, Burundi and South Africa in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the debate , without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided. At the invitation of the President, Mr. de Figueiredo (Angola) took a place at the Council table; Mr. Bwakira (Burundi) and Mr. von Schirnding (South Africa) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber. The PR.BSIDBNT (interpretation from French): The Security Council will now resume its consideration of the item on its agenda. I would recall that when the Council considered this item at its 2606th and 2607th meetings, on 20 September 1985, it adopted resolution 571 (1985), in which it decided to send to Angola a Commission of Investigation composed of three members of the Security Council to evaluate the damage resulting from the invasion by South African forces and to report to the Coundil not later than 15 November 1985. When the Security Council again considered this item, at its 2612th, 2614th, 2616th and 2617th meetings, held between 3 and 7 October 1985, it adopted resolution 574 (1985), in which it requested the Commission to include in its investigations the latest bombings carried out by South Africa. Subsequently, at the request of the Commission, the Council extended to 22 November 1985 the deadline for the submission of the Commission's report to the Council, and the President of the Council so informed the Chairman of the Commission. The Commission of Investigation, which was composed of Mr. Mohamed Kamel Amr of Egypt, Chairman, Mr. Leslie Rowe of Australia and Mr. Felipe Beraun of Peru, visited Angola from 13 to 23 October 1985 and on 22 November 1985 submitted its report (S/17648). I wish to draw the attention of members of the Council to document S/17662, November 1985 from the Permanent which contains the text of a letter dated 28 Nations addressed to.the Representative of South Africa to the United Secretary-General, and to document s/17645, which contains the text of a letter dated 20 November 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Angola to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. MT. KHALIL (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): I wish to begin my statement by expressing our Pleasure that Youl Sir, are presiding over the Security Council. you have presided over the Council’s meetings in the Past and we are aware of your competence and skill. We are confident that your assumption once again of the presidency of the Council, the highest organ of this Organization for the maintenance of peace, is a guarantee of the smooth conduct of our deliberations, I would also like to take this opportunity to express our thanks and appreciation to your predecessor, Ambassador Woolcott, Permanent Representative of Australia, a country with which Egypt has ties of friendship, for the manner in which he conducted the business of the Council during the past month. Members of the Security Council have before them the report of the Commission of Investigation, of which Egypt was Chairman. with the Council's permission, I will ask my colleague, Mr. Mohamed Kamel Amr, who served as Chairman of the Commission, to introduce the Commission's report. Mr. AMR (Egypt): I have the honour to submit to the Security Council the report (S/17648) of the Commission of Investigation established under resolution 571 (1985). Members of the Council will recall that the Commission's mandate was to evaluate the damage resulting from the invasion of Angola by South African forces in September 1985. In its resolution 574 (1985), the Council subsequently requested the Commission to include in its evaluation the damage resulting from South Africa’s further aggression in October 1985. I should like at the outset to express my deep thanks and appreciation tomy fellow members of the Commission, Mr. Leslie Rowe of Australia and Mr, Felipe Beraun of Peru, whose assistance and counsel were invaluable throughout the Commission's work. (Mr. Amr, Egypt) The COnu&sSiOn visited the People’s Republic of Angola from 13 to 24 October 1985. During its stay in Angola the Commission held meetings in Luanda with Mr. Afonso van Dunen (Mbinda), Minister for External Relations, Colonel Pedro Maria Tonha “Pedal&“, Minister of Defence, Dr. Fernando Frany;a van Dunen, Deputy Minister for External Relations; Colonel Antonio Santos Franga van Dunen, Deputy Minister of Defence and Chief of Staff of the Angolan Armed Forces, Mr. Desiderio Costa, Deputy Minister for Petroleum, Colonel Henrique Teles Carreira “fko”, Commander of the Angolan Air Force, as well as officials from the Ministries of External Relations, Defence, Planning, Energy and Construction, the Secretariat of State for Social Affairs and the Central Committee of the MPLA-PT. The Commission also held consultations with representatives of six of the United Nations organizations and agencies operating in Angola, as well as with representatives of the diplomatic community in Luanda. The Commission visited the township of Cazombo, the scene of South African intervention in September 1985. Because of ongoing military operations, the ~OlNllission was unable to visit Mavinga , where the south African defence forces had been involved in combat operations in October 1985. The Commission also benefited considerably from its visits to the provinces of Cuando Cubango, Cunene, Huila and Benguela , which had previously borne the brunt Of South African military incursions and sabotage. The Commission visited the town of Ondjiva, occupied by South African forces from August 1981 to April 1985, which had been almost completely destroyed. It also visited the rail depot and oil-storage facilities at Lobito, which had been the target of various acts of sabotage. In Luanda, the Commission visited the oil refinery that had been attacked and partially destroyed by a sea-borne force in November 1981. During those visits, the Commission held discussions with . provincial and other officials, as well as with representatives of the local (Mr. Amr, Egypt) population. The visits and discussions revealed something of the Overall impact Of South African actions against Angola in previous years. The Angolan Government submitted a memorandum setting out its views concerning the effects of South African actions against Angola since independence. The memorandum appears as annex I to the report. The Commission itself did not make any assessments of the situation in the past decade as this was outside its mandate,' and in any case it did not have either the means or the time needed to carry out such assessments. At Cazombo the Commission was able to inspect the damage to buildings, the electricity generating system and water supply equipment, as well as damage to the airstrip. The Commission was also able to conduct an aerial inspection of the bridge over the Zambezi River on the outskirts of Cazombo, which was destroyed just before the recapture of the town by Angolan Government forces in September 1985. The Commission also conducted interviews with provincial and other officials and Was able to interview some of those wounded in the battle to recapture Cazombo. In relation to Mavinga, which it was unable to visit, the Commission had the opportunity to interview some of the Angolan military personnel who had been travelling in helicopters when they were shot down by south African planes at Mavinga and who were hospitalized in Menongue. It was also able to interview refugees at Menongue who had been forced to relocate from Mavinga because of the hostilities in that area. In arriving at an evaluation of the damage in Mavinga, the Commission relied principally on assessments of the losses to military equipment provided by the Angolan Government , which it was able to check against information from other sources , as set out in detail in paragraphs 90 and 91 of the Commission’s report, One of the more tragic aspects of the situation resulting from south African actions which it way difficult to reflect fully in the report was the plight Of the civilian population, which has had to endure considerable suffering and hardship. This was particularly evident among the people of Cazombo and among refugees and displaced persons elsewhere in Angola. The international community has responded, inter alia, through the efforts of various United Nations bodies, as well as bilaterally, in an attempt to alleviate the suffering of those displaced or otherwise affected by the war. The Commission believes that there is a need for further humanitarian assistance. (Mr. Amr, Egypt) . The Commission is also of the view'that any assistance which may be provided by the international community in no way diminishes South Africa's obligation to pay compensation, as called for in the Commission's report. As a result of its meetings in Angola, its field visits, its interviews with witnesses of events at Cazombo and Mavinga, as well as other information available to it, the Commission is convinced of South Africa's direct involvement in the military actions that took place at Cazombo and Mavinga in the months of September and,October 1985. The Commission estimates that the damage suffered by Angola as a result of South Africa's invasions in September and October 1985 is of the order Of $36,688,508. Inevitably, that estimate is incomplete , as it takes no account of injuries and loss of life or the effects of South Africa's actions on the AngOlan ecbnomy, for reasons that were elaborated in the Commission's report. Before ending, I should like to express, on my own behalf, and on behalf of my fellow members of the Commission, our thanks to, and sincere appreciation of, the members of the Secretariat who worked with the Commission for' their dedication, professionalism and devotion to duty. Their help, both in the field and at Headquarters, was essential to the success of the Commission's work. I also wish to express our deep appreciation of the full co-operation and assistance the Commission received from the Government of Angola, which enabled it to carry out its task. We particularly welcomed the frank and open manner in which Ministers and officials conducted their dealings with the Commission. We were all : touched by the warmth and sincerity of the Angolan people,

I wish on behalf of the,, Council to thank the Chairman and other members of the Commission of Investigation for the willingness and conscientiousnetis with which they discharged the duties, entrusted to them by the Council. s I also thank the representative of Egypt for his kind words addressed to me. Mr. KRISHNAN (India): I naturally begin, Sir, by congratulating you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for December. It is with particular pleasure that I do s01 since your country and mine have a history of c,operatj.on in the United Nations, here in the Security Council and in the Non-Aligned Movement, to which we both belong. Your patience, perseverance and ,.. diplomatic skills are too well known to need repetition. We have already had ample evidence of those qualities on the earlier occasions when you were called upon to assume the presidency. Suffice it to say that we are confident that under your able guidance the Council will be able to arrive at a speedy and satisfactory outcome on the item before us. I wish also'to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Ambassador Woolcott, of lustralia, for the dynamic and skilful way in which he directed the Council's affairs during November. We are meeting today to consider the report of the Security Council Commission ,f Investigation established under resolution 571 (1985). That resolution, which ras unanimously adopted following the attack by South African armed forces on lngola on 16 September 1985, str0ngl.y condemned the racist regime of South Africa %r its premeditated, persistent and sustained armed invasions of the People's tepublic of Angola , and demanded that South Africa withdraw forthwith and Inconditionallyall its military forces from Angolan territory. It called for jaYsent of full and adequate compensation to the People's Republic of Angola for :he damage to life and property resulting from those acts of aggression, and lecided to send to Angola a Security Council Commission of Investigation to !valuate the damage. .As we all know,, even before the Commission could proceed to Angola, South Nfrican forces attacked Angola once again, and there was yet another meeting of the 'ecuritY Council on the question. Resolution 574 (1985), also adopted unanimously, :: (Mr. Krishnan, India) on 7 October, reiterated the Council's strong condemnation of the racist regime Of South Africa, and the Council decided to meet again to consider the adoption of more effective measures, in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Charter, in the event of non-compliance by South Africa with that resolution. The hope that all of us have so frequently expressed that South Africa will comply with United Nations resolutions , .including Security Council resolutions, whether in regard to Angola or any other areas, has yet to be realized. with its customary arrogance, South Africa has repeatedly defied the call of the international community and moved on from one aggression to another, whether against neighbouring States or against its own people. we remain convinced that comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter are the Only effective international answer to that racist r6gime's obstinacy. We trust that the few remaining members of the Council that have so far opposed mandatory sanctions will soon come round to this view. We have before us today the report of the Security Council Commission Of Investigation, which was composed of the representatives of Australia, Egypt and Peru. We wish first to express our appreciation to those three members for their excellent work. I also wish to associate myself with your remarks, Mr. President, in thanking the representative of Egypt, Mr. Amr, Chairman of the investigation team, for his presentation of the report. It is clear that the Commission had the opportunity of useful meetings with i' senior Angolan leaders and visits to the areas that suffered from the South African attacks. It is significant that the Commission noted that the real cost of damage suffered by Angola as a result of South Africa's invasions in September and October 1985 is substantially higher than the figure of some $36 million, estimated (Mr. Krishnan, India) as the cost only of buildings and equipment destroyed. The estimates do not include Compensation for lOSS of human life and injuries nor the consequences of the South African attacks on the livelihood of the people in the regions affected or on the economy as a whole. The Commission further noted that the long history of South African ViOlatiOnS of Angola's sovereignty has had serious long-term effects on the country's economy and on the well-being of its people. We support the Commission's conclusion that there is need for international assistance t0 alleviate the sufferings of the Angolan people who have been affected by the South African aggression and, in particular, the conclusion that this call to the international community does not in any way replace or diminish South Africa's responsibility to pay full compensation to the Angolan Government, as called for in resolution 571 (1985). It is regrettable and yet typical, that South Africa should already have rejected the Commission's report. Angola*was the venue in August this year of the Conference of the Foreign Kinisters of non-aligned countries. we were able to witness for ourselves the damage and suffering caused to Angola by the continuing pressure exerted by South Africa against Angola. We were also able to experience at first hand the indomitable courage of the people of Angola and its Government, and their unswerving determination to protect and preserve the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Angola against all attacks and threats emanating from South Africa. The Won-Aligned Movement has been unanimous in expressing, and committing itself to, firm solidarity with the Government and people of Angola. The non-aligned countries have stood by Angola steadfastly, and will continue todo so. The Council, too, has in the past stood by this beleaguered Member State, We hope that it will do so again this time, not merely by condemning South African aggression and calling for its immediate and unconditional Vacation, not (Mr. Krishnan, India) only by requesting Member States to assist Angola in its economic reconstruction and in strengthening its defence capability, but also by demanding that South Africa pay full and adequate compensation to the People's Republic of Angola for the damage that it has caused. (Mr. Krishnan, India) The report of the Security Council Commission of Investigation is clear in its Conclusions. The Council should be equally categorical in calling for action in terms of this report. It is self-evident that greater pressures need to be brought on that recalcitrant racist rCgime in Pretoria. We hope that all members of the Council will rise to the occasion.

I thank the representative of India for the kind words he addressed to me. 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. Mr. von SCHIRNDING (south Africa): Permit me at the outset, Sir, to convey to you on behalf of the South African delegation our best wishes on your assumption of the presidency for December. In a statement dated 27 November 1985, which was circulated as Security Council document S/17662, the South African Minister of Foreign Affairs rejected the report of the Security Council Commission of Investigation, which Was established in terms of resolution 571 (1985). The rejection of the repor.t by the South African Government should come as no surprise to the members of the Council. Its authors have made no attempt to present an accurate, objective assessment of the situation prevailing in Angola. Instead they have compiled a biased account which attempts to lay the blame for the calamitous situation in Angola at South Africa’s door and, predictably, the report is liberally sprinkled with unsubstantiated allegations. The truth of the matter is that the situation in Angola is the result of the current civil war between the MFJLA and UNITA. It is common knowledge that the MPLA pseudo-regime was able to install itself in power only with the help of Cuban troops and Soviet advisers, who continue to this day to prop it up, and that the (Mr. von Schirnding, South Africa) free and fair elections which were to be held before independence never took place. Why were those elections never held? The answer is clear: because the totalitarian Luanda regime knows full well that it would lose a free and fair election to UNITA. Why, one may ask, does the Commission make no mention of the 35,000 Cuban troops and the thousands of Soviet surrogates which the Luanda r6gime has imported into Angola. to protect itself against its own people? why has the Commission not addressed the suffering and the exploitation which those elements have inflicted on the people of Angola , which have resulted in the devastation of Angola's economy and the plundering of its natural resources? And what of the damage inflicted on South West Africa by the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO) terrorists operating from Angola? None of those issues, which are the root causes of the conflict in Angola, has been addressed in the Commission's report because the United Nations and the MPLA regime hope to persuade the international COmmUnitY that it is South Africa which is somehow respdnsible for the catastrophic situation in Angola. The Commission's report is nothing more than an unvarnished attempt to lend credence to the MPLA's propaganda campaign against South Africa. HOW otherwise is one to interpret, for example, the conclusion in paragraph 98 of the report that the Commission was unable to visit Mavinga because of the ongoing military operations there, yet it “believes that the Angolan Government's assessment ..# accurately reflects the situation". (S/17648, para. 98) I would submit that no court of law would accept such hearsay evidence at face value. It is a pity that the Security Council did not choose to respond to South Africa's suggestion to send a fact-finding mission to the area to establish who is fighting whom, who is directing the operations and what armaments are being used0 (Mr. von Schirnding, South Africa) In that case, we might have had an objective report for consideration by the Council. As it is, the report before us is simply a further instalment in the united Nations and Angola's transparent propaganda campaign against South Africa. It is a travesty, it will not wash and we reject it.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Angola. Mr. de FIGDEIREDO (Angola): Xt gives my delegation great pleasure, Sir, to see the representative of a fraternal African State, one with which my Government has close relations , presiding over the meetings of the Security Council in December, In particular, it is a sourtie of personal gratification to have you as President while the Council is dealing with an Angolan issue, for you have always been helpful and supportive. I should like at the outset to thank the representatives of Egypt, Australia and Peru for their tireless attention to the task mandated to them by the Security Council, that of visiting the People's Republic of Angola, making a first-hand survey of the devastation wrought by the racist South African regime and reporting to the Security Council on their findings. The Commission has performed admirably in the circumstances, and I wish to convey to them, to'their missions and to their Governments Angola's sincere appreciation for the manner in which it has fulfilled its mandate, that of evaluating the damage resulting from the invasion by the South African armed forces. The Commission's findings are,contained in a report to the Council. May I state for the record that no report can ever adequately and completely convey to the world the catastrophic dimensions of the lo-year onslaught by the racist regime against the people and territory of Angola. NO description, eValUatiOn, tabulation, computation, assessment, can even begin to take into account the losses (Mr* de Figueiredo, ~~~~~~~ the Angolan nation has suffered - the deaths, the destruction, the sabotage, the horror of a national trauma caused by the incessant South African attacks in so many varied forms. The people of Angola have hardly had time to enjoy the fruits of liberation, our earth has been reddened by the blood of Our fallen heroes and Our wells have been poisoned by the racists. The Angolan people have lived in a State Of war for 10 years,.and nothing can capture their misery and their loss, much less put a price on it. (Mr. de Figueiredo, Angola) Never the1 ess f my Government once again demands the justice it is owed, that has been promised under the United Nations Charter and safeguarded by the Council. security COUnCil resolution 571 (1985) : “Calls for paWent of full and adequate compensation to the People’s &public of Angola for the damage to life and property resulting from these acts of aggr es s ion’ (Security Council resolution 571 (1985)) para.6) The Commission’s report States categorically that the real cost of the damage auf&red by Angola aS a reSUlt of SOUND Africa Is invasions in &pte&er and &t&er 1985 is substantially higher than the total estimate of $36.6 million nentioned in the report. And the report equally clearly refers to south Africa’s responsibility to pay full compensation to the Angolan Government. My Government requests, as a matter of justice and under the provisions of international law, that the Security Council demand that the racist regime make 1 full and immediate reparation to the Government of Angola. In this connection, allow me to remind the Council that this is the second such report requested by and prepared for the Council. In 1978, after the South African genocide at Cassinga , a similar assessment of damage and losses was compiled. To this day, the Pretoria rdgime has Yet to pay a penny. However , simply because the racist re’gime has still not liquidated all its debts does not Wan that it should escape the legal responsibility accruing from its subsequent actions, The statement by the Foreign Minister of South Africa, circulated as document s/17662, is the type of xenophobic , paranoid, propagandistic stuff that is standard for a regime under siege by its own people , a regime mistrusted by the continent on which its territory is situated, a r&gime castigated by the international CQMNlnity, a regime suspended by the United Nations General Assembly, a rQgime at lar “ith its own children, a r&gime whose word is good for nothing, as the violation of the Nkomari Accords has Proved! in addition to the violation of the countless assurances given by the racist r6gime to the many brokers Of the politics of southern Africa, a regime that is a pariah, an outcast from the world community, a regime which bases its Policies and politics On the C0lCN.K Of a PerSOn'S Skin,a re'gime that was told on 3 December, by a banned but fearless Black woman “Amandla” (Power) and the crowds roared back “Awetu” (it shall be ours). *. From such a re'gime, we none of us need to hear lessons on distorted history, manufactured to support its pathetic claims. A regime that has lost the trust of its own 23 million majority inhabitants, a regime that is in outright violation of so many articles of the United Nations Charter , a rdgime that is, the subject of an ouster from a treaty, that rigime should first apply the principles of freedom and dignity and justice within its own borders before its racist leaders make patently false claims outside. If further proof were needed of the truth and validity of Angola's claim, and the pathetic absurdity of Pretoria's allegations, the Commission's report has provided it. The international community is aware of the fact that if it were not for the overt and covert support, both direct and indirect, both official and silent, to the racist South African Government by its allies and friends, its hegemonistic designs in southern Africa would not be carried out. In this cOnnection, let me also state that overt and covert support by the United States to destabilization attempts against legitimate Governments iS a Policy indeed that has already caused a great deal of alarm among friends of the United States. If this policy is put into action against Angola, as has been threatened, then all Of Africa will be bound, in the interests Of self-preservation, vOCiferOUsly to oppose such action. (Mr. de Figueiredo, Anqola) My Government appeals to the Security Council to.condemn strongly South African aggression against Angola, and demand that it pay full and adequate compensations for the damage, destruction and losses it has caused. Failure to indict, punish and penalise the aggresor will only embolden the racist regime to continue its aggression, and all that the Charter stands for. It remains for me t0 thank the members of the Security Council for their prompt attention and action.

I thank the representative of Angola for his kind words addressed to me, The next speaker is the representative of Burundi. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. BWAKIRA (Burundi) (interpretation from French): I should first like to convey my thanks to the Security Council for permitting me to speak on behalf of my delegation and the Group of African States of which I have the honour to be Chairman this month, on the item under discussion today, namely, consideration of the report of the Security Council Commission of Investigation established under paragragh 7 of resolution 571 (1985). Mr. President, I am gratified to see you presiding at the Security Council because your experience in the conduct of its affairs is a guarantee of a calm consideration of the situation in Angola and that the deliberations of the Council Will be held in a constructive spirit which the international community and' Africa require to put an end to South Africa's threat to peace and security in southern Africa, and particularly in Angola. The diplomatic skills and ability of the Australian Ambassador, Hr. Richard Woolcott, deserve special mention. we congratulate him on his usual excellent conduct of the affairs of the Council last month, All international bodies continue to express their grave concern at,the Pretoria racist regime's use of force in international relations, its military (Mr. Bwak ir a, Burundi) interventions against the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and violation of air space of neighbouring States in southern Africa which aspire to peace and tranguility., Angola is one of the victims of South Africa’s blatant violation of international law of which it boasts open1.y. Barely had an end been put to the colonial war in 1975 when Angola was subjected to an uninterrupted state of war by the Pretoria racist regime. The international community is aware that the basic reason’ for this is the apartheid system which is a source of insecurity , repeated acts of aggression, permanent tension and conflict in southern Africa. (Mr. Bwakira, Burundi) Apartheid, which has rightly been declared to be a crime against mankind, is an affront to the universal conscience. Until it is abolished there can be,no pea-, stability or security in South Africa itself or in neighbouring States. International peace and security will be continually threatened. The acts of aggression, destabilization and terrorism inflicted on Angola are part of a policy of similar acts carried out against Mozambique, Botswana and Lesotho. 4 The African States, as well as the whole international community, have always condemned the policy and practices of State terrorism employed by the racist Pretoria rigime against the front-line States and other neighbouring countries. They condemn the acts of sabotage against the economies of those countries, whose legitimate Governments the apartheid re'gime is attempting to overthrow by employing mercenaries and armed bands trained, financed, dispatched and generally nursed by Pretoria, That is true of UNITA in Angola, which has no popular backing. The Angolan Government has given every proof of good will and diplomatic flexibility in the search for a peaceful negotiated solution to the problems of southern Africa. In February 1984 it signed the Lusaka Agreement with South Africa, because its foreign policy is based on the search for peace through dialogue . That same year it presented a detailed negotiating platform that could constitute an equitable basis for the establishment of peace and security in the region. The racist Pretoria regime, on the other hand has always remained arrogant and intransigent. It showed obvious bad faith in its negotiations with the People's Republic of Angola. It is still illegally occupying a part of Angolan territory. It is continuing its destructive operations against the inhabitants and the economic infrastructure, and is causing many deaths and serious damage to property. (Mr. Bwakira, Burundi) Any negotiated solution in that region must come through solution of the probem of Namibia on the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). Any negotiated solution requires a desire for peace on both sides. On 20 September last, this Council unanimously adopted resolution 571 (1985), which strongly condemns the racist re'gime for its premeditated, persistent and sustained armed invasions of the People's Republic of Angola, which constitute a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that countrYI as well as a serious threat to international peace and security. The Council decided to send immediately to Angola a Commission of Investigation in order to evaluate the damage resulting from the invasion by South African forces and to report to the Council not later than 15 Novetier 1985. On 7 October 1985, after hearing the complaint by the representative of the People's Republic of Angola and the alleged justifications put forward by the representative of.South Africa, the Council unanimously adopted resolution 574 (1985), in which it once again strongly condemned the racist rhgime Of South Africa for its latest premeditated and unprovoked acts of aggression against the People's Republic of Angola. In the two resolutions I have just recalled, the Security Council called on South Africa to withdraw forthwith and unconditionally all military forces from Angolan territory and scrupulously respect the sovereigpty and territorial integrity of that State. The report of the Commission of Investigation is quite unequivocal; in the conclusions it is stated: “The Co~iSSiOn was unable to visit Mavinga, where South African forces had been engaged in September and October, because of ongoing military operations in the region during its visit to Angola." (S/17648, para. 98) (Mr. Bwakira, Burundi) That is striking proof of the fact that South Africa is still Occupying part of the territory of the People's Republic of Angola, despite the Council's demand for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of such troops and the fact that two years ago Angola and South Africa signed the Lusaka Agreement, which provided for the withdrawal of South African troops. It is clear from the Commission's report that Angola has suffered considerable human and material losses, as paragraph 99 makes clear: "It must be emphasized that the above estimates of damage at Cazombo and Mavinga do not fully reflect the extent of damage suffered by Angola as a result of South Africa's actions in September and October 1985. They do not include compensation for losses to human life and injuries as was called for in Security Council resolution 571 (1985) because relevant data for civilian casualties were not available," (S/17648, para. 99) The African States are grateful to the international organizations that have given assistance to Angola, and urgently appeal to the whole international Community to increase aid to help the work of reconstruction, It goes without saying tht South Africa has an obligation to compensate the Angolan Government in full in accordance with Security Council resolution 571 (1985). The estimated damage caused by South Africa's incursions into Angola are well in excess of $36 million. It should be noted that the total damage caused to Angola by South Africa from 1975 to 1985 is estimated as some 510 billion. South Africa must pay Angola adequate compensation. In the circumstances the Security Council should act swiftly and firmly to Stop the activities of the racist regime of South Africa. The Group of African States looks to the Council to condemn once again South Africa's armed invasion Of the People's Republic of Angola and call again on the Pretoria re'gime to respect Angola's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is, time for the Council to ensure respect for its resolutions and authority by implementing resolution 435 (1978) , which defines the plan for Namibia's accession to independence. It would thus prevent the apartheid regime from making use of the Territory of Namibia - a Territory placed under the direct responsibility of the United Nations - for armed invasions and acts Of destablization against the People's Republic of Angola and other neighbouring countries. The international community must redouble its efforts to assist the Namibian people to fight against the illegal occupation of Namibia. It is unacceptable for South Africa to continue to occupy a portion of Angolan territory, and the Security Council must meet that challenge. International peace and security are being threatened in Angola through the illegal acts of the racist rigime of South Africa. The *CuKity Council has responsibility for safeguarding international peace and security and it cannot remain indifferent or display weakness when confronted by the acts of aggression of a re'gime that is flouting international law. South Africa must be condemned, and it must compensate the People's Republic of Angola for the human losses and material damage that it has caused. In conclusion, I should like to thank and congratulate the members of the Commission of Investigation for the thorough and objective repoKt (s/17648) submitted to the Security Council and, on behalf of the African States, I request the Council to adopt the report.

I thank the representative E Burundi for the kind words he addressed to me. The members of the Council have before them the text of a draft resolution ubmitted by Burkina Faso, Egypt, India, Madagascar, Peru and Trinidad and Tobago, n document S/17667. I understand that the Council is ready to vote on the draft esolution. If there is no objection, I shall put it to the Vote. Mr. OKUN (United States of America): My delegation requests a Separate lte on operative paragraph 6 of the draft resolution before us. As in preVi.OUS ilnilar situations, our request, if acceded to, will, we believe, facilitate the roadest possible support for the draft resolution as a whole.

The representative of the nited States has requested a separate vote on operative paragraph 6 of the draft esolution. Unless I hear any objection, I shall first put operative paragraph 6 o the vote. There being no objection, it is so decided. A vote was taken by show of hands. In favour: Australia, Burkina Faso, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, Madagascar, Peru, Thailand, Trinidad,and Tobago, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Against: None Abstaining: United States of America

The result of the voting is 16 follows: 14 votes in favour, none against and 1 abstention. Operative Wagraph 6 has been adopted. I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document i/17667, including operative paragraph 6, on which the Council has just taken a A vote was taken by show of hands. In favour; Australia, Burkina Faso, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, Zndia, Madagascar, Peru, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States Of America

There were 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has therefore been adopted unanimously as resolution 577 (1985). I shall now call on members of the Council who wish to be allowed to make statements after the voting. Sir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): It is my pleasure, Sir, to welcome your return to the presidency of the Council. YOU have already shown how efficiently and impartially you conduct our business and we know you will continue in this excellent tradition. In congratulating your predecessor, Ambassador Woolcott, perhaps I may be allowed to continue my cricketing metaphors. Ambassador Woolcott showed that he has 'a safe pair of hands" and that he is an "imaginative skipper" and we thank him. MY delegationls views on this matter were expressed in our statements in the Security Council on 20 September and on 3 and 7 October, which I need not repeat. We all owe a debt of gratitude to the three members of the Security Council Commission of Investigation for carrying out this difficult task, and I should like t0 express my delegation's appreciation personally to them. It is in no sense their fault that, for the reasons which axe given in the report, the team was unable to visit some of the worst affected areas and to give a first-hand impression of the situation there. We have voted for the resolution because the United Kingdom condemns unequivocally South Africa's incursions into Angolan territory. And I must ask the South African Ambassador to make this absolutely clear to his Government. We (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) do not interpret anything in the resolution as endorsing the intervention of foreign combat troops, as encouraging a policy of armed struggle, or as falling within the provisions of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. We would like to see the earliest possible withdrawal of all foreign forces from Angola and the beginning of reconciliation and reconstruction after years of conflict there. We would like to see the implementation forthwith of the peaceful solution of the Namibian problem as contained in the United Nations settlement proposal and in resolution 435 (1978). We are glad that the Security Council has 'been able again to act unanimously on the question of Angola, as it did with the adoption of resolutions 571 (1985) and 574 (1985). Credit, once again, is due to the Permanent Representative of Angola. Our unanimity is of the greaest importance in demonstrating the total inadmissibility of South African attacks upon Angola.

I thank the representative of the United Kingdom for his kind words to me. Mr. OKUN (United States of America): My delegation would like to take this opportunity to state its pleasure at seeing you, Sir, presiding once again. We are confident that, under your wise, tactful and gracious leadership, this Council will have a fruitful month's work before it. We regret that, in the course of remarks about the situation before us, the representative of Angola chose to engage in some uncalled-for speculation about American policy. Since we believe these remarks are not relevant to the current debate, we will confine ourselves at this time to recording our rejection of them. I turn now to our vote on the resolution. Our delegation voted in favour of Security Council resolution 571 (19.85), condemning South Africa for its violation Of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Angola. As in the case of the South Africa raid on Gaborone, Botswana, this body elected to send a Commission of (Mr. Okun, United States) Investigation to Angola Itto evaluate the damage resulting from the invasion", NY Government has carefully read the resulting report of the C~~iSSiOn and finds that we can endorse it. We could not, however, support, nor have we supported in the past, any request for assistance to strengthen the military structure of Angola. AS We have remarked in this body on previous occasions, what the southern Africa region needs is fewer guns and more negotiation. It is the track of diplomacy that my Government is actively pursuing and will continue to pursue. For the above reasons, my Government, while voting in favour of the draft ' resolution as a whole, has abstained in the vote on operative paragraph 6.

I thank the representative of the United States for his kind words to me. There are no further names on the list of speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the current stage of its consideration of the item on the agenda. The meeting rose at 1 p.m.