S/PV.2685 Security Council

In accordance with decisions taken by the Council at its 2684th meeting, I invite the representative of Senegal to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representative of Zambia to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Cuba, India, south Africa and the United Republic of Tanzania to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Sarre (Senegal) and Mr. Ngo (Zambia) took places at the Council table; Mr. Oramas Oliva (Cuba), Mr. Krishnan (India) I Mr. von Schirnding (South Africa) and Mr. Chagula (United Republic of Tanzania) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber.

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Argentina, Botswana, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in conformity 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. MuKiz (Argentina), Mr. Legwaila (Botswana), Mr. Cesar (Czechoslovakia), Mr. Ott (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Treiki (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber. .-

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received a letter dated 23 May 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations, which reads as follows: "I have the honour to request the Security Council to invite His ,Excellency Mr. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, to address the Security Council under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure , in the course of its current meeting." The letter will be published as Security Council document S/18088. If I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 to His Excellency Mr. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada. There being no objection, it is so decided. The Security Council will now resume its consideration of the item on the agenda. Members of the Council have before them document s/18087, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by the Congo, Ghana, Madagascar, Trinidad and Tobago and the United Arab Emirates. I should like to draw the attention of members of the Council to the following documents: S/18079, letter dated 21 May 1986 from the Charge d'affaires ad interim of the Permanent Mission of Japan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/18080, letter dated 22 May 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Uruguay to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/18082, letter dated 21 May 1986 from the Chargi d'affaires ad interim of the Permanent Mission of Uganda to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/18083, letter dated 23 May 1986 from the ChargG d'affaires ad interim of the Permanent Mission of Saint Christopher and Nevis to the United Nations addressed to the secretary-General; S/18085, letter dated 22 May 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Yugoslavia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; and S/18086, note verbale dated 22 May 1986 from the Permanent Mission of Brazil to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. The first speaker is the representative of Australia. Mr. HOGUE (Australia): Mr. President, it is a cause of particular satisfaction to my delegation to see a representative of Ghana, a country with which Australia has long standing and very friendly ties, guiding the Security Council. My delegation extends its congratulations to you, personally, on your assumption of the presidency. It also extends its appreciation to Ambassador Claude de Kemoularia, the Permanent Representative of France, for the most effective and vigorous manner in which he discharged his functions as President during the month of April. In the 17 months since Australia joined the Security Council, the Council has been called into session on four occasions to consider the situation arising from South African aggression against its neighbours. The latest instance before the Council is a particularly flagrant one, involving as it does South African armed attacks on three neighbouring States. These outrageous and deplorable violations of the sovereignty of three independent countries deserve the closest examination by the Council. The South African incursions against targets in Zimbabwe, Zambia and Botswana are an affront to the norms of civilized behaviour which are fundamental to any decent society. They are totally unacceptable to the Australian Government. The Acting Foreign Minister of Australia, Senator John Button, issued a statement on behalf of the Government on 20 May. It condemned in the strongest possible terms the South African incursions and made clear Australia's complete and uneauivocal rejection of South Africa's resort to armed aggression within the (Mr. Hogue, Australia) region. Australia sees the latest attacks as a flagrant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our fellow Commonwealth countries, countries which were engaged with other Commonwealth members in an initiative to establish peace and stability in the southern African region. My Government believes that the South African incursions undermine the whole credibility of South Africa's often repeated willingness to move towards genuine reforms and a peaceful resolution of the problems of South Africa. My Government has conveyed to the South African Government its absolute rejection of the actions taken by South Africa. It has also conveyed to the Governments of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe its sympathy for the loss of life and damage to property and its condemnation of the violation of the sovereignty of those countries. My delegation sees these latest actions by South Africa as particularly worrying. All indications are that they were carefully planned and premeditated. The attacks against targets in Harare and Lusaka are the first occasion on which So,uth Africa has admitted to mounting operations against Zimbabwe or Zambia, and they represent a dangerous escalation in tension in the region. The raid against Botswana is even more inexplicable given the very recent discussions between the GovernmentS of Botswana and South Africa on mutual security concerns. A source of particular preoccupation to my Government is the timing of these attacks. They coincided with efforts by the Commonwealth to try to facilitate a peaceful transition to universal suffrage in South Africa. The Commonwealth group of eminent persons was in the process of holding discussions with the Governments of the front-line States, the African National Congress (ANC) and the South African Government. These discussions had as their central objective the promotion of dialogue and negotiation, leading to peaceful change in South Africa. (Mr. Hogue, Australia) MY delegation is sure that the south African Government could not be ignorant of the very damaging effect its actions against its neighbours would have on those efforts. The South African actions will do incalculable harm to hopes for peaceful change in the region. The aggression perpetrated by South Africa points to the insensitivity of a Government which not only continues to flaunt its armed force but puts might before right. It can only set back efforts to foster negotiation and undermine moves that would lead to the suspension of violence in South Africa. These attacks are a salutary reminder that apartheid remains the underlying cause of violence in the region and that its abolition and the establishment Of a multiracial democratic society in South Africa is a vital necessity, not only for that country but for the world at large.

I thank the representative of Australia for the kind words he addressed to me. Mr. OKUN (United States of America): As with past resolutions condemning South Africa for its violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other States, the United States looks for a similar consensus again on this occasion. The reason we seek such a consensus is that the message from this body to the South African authorities must be unanimous and uneauivocal. The recent attacks On Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe are reprehensible, irresponsible, inexcusable. The United States condemns them without reservation and calls upon Pretoria to examine the consequences of its latest aggression. These raids are a body blow to the efforts of the United Nations, the Commonwealth, the front-line States and my own Government to bring about a political system in South Africa based upon the consent of the governed, to bring independence to Namibia under Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and to end the domestic strife in certain nearby States. Instead of taking steps to bridge the gaps separating these neighbours, which have so many reasons to live in peace, South Africa has chosen to lash out at sovereign States. Nor is South Africa, by so doing, attempting to preserve a besieged democracy. It is, rather, employing these strong-arm tactics to prop up apartheid, a system my Government is committed to eliminate by every peaceful appropriate measure at our disposal. Let me quote from a statement issued by the White House in the hours following news of the raid: "We vigorously condemn these attacks by South Africa. Our diplomacy in South Africa has been aimed at stopping cross-border violence. such efforts have had results. We would note that senior officials of South Africa and its neighbours have held regular and productive consultations on issues of security and respect for international borders. We believe these military actions to be particularly inexplicable in light of ongoing efforts among these neighbours to maintain good working relations and communication on security problems. That ongoing process had clearly not exhausted all possibilities for peaceful remedy of the issues." 'ieved Deliberations are under way within my Government, and with with the aggr Governments, to determine what steps may be taken to reduce violence in the region, As we have publicly stated , the United States stands firmly with the Governments and peoples of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe in expressing our outrage over the South African attacks and our condolences to the families of the victims. We reject utterly the recent threats on the part of South Africa to repeat such attacks, and we appeal to Pretoria to give peace a chance, to give political efforts the opportunity they deserve. It is a fact that the Governments of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe have made efforts to limit cross-border violence directed at South Africa. It is the more (Mr. Okun, United States) Unjust, then, that they should be subjected to attack by the very State with which they are trying to reach peaceful solutions to urgent problems. In a few days the United Nations begins an important special SeSSiOn devoted to the search for solutions to AfKica!s pressing economic and developmental problems. Let us, in anticipation of that special session, focus this important debate on the task at hand: sending a united message to South Africa that by resorting to violence against peaceful neighbours it will further isolate itself, thereby disrupting chances for peace and harming its long-term interests. Mr. TSVETKOV (Bulgaria) (interpretation from French): It gives me particular pleasure to congratulate you, Sir, on the occasion of your succession to the presidency of the Security Council for the month of May. we should like to congratulate, through you, the Republic of Ghana, with which the People's Republic of Bulgaria maintains friendly relations. my delegation is firmly convinced that your political and diplomatic experience and your ability will enable you to guide the work of this Council during the month of May to fruitful results. I wish also to convey the congratulations of my delegation to Ambassador de K&moulaKia, Permanent Representative of the French Republic, on the competent way he presided over the work of the Council last month, The Security Council is meeting, at the reouest of the Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), to consider a new act of blatant violation of international law and the United Nations Charter that constitutes a true danger for international peace and security. Once again the international community is witness to a dangerous escalation of world tension brought about by new aggressive actions which nothing can justify, this time in the southern part of Africa, against independent, sovereign States Members of the United Nations. (Mr. Tsvetkov, Bulgaria .) This latest unprovoked aggression perpetrated by South Africa against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe is fresh proof that South Africa, relying on force and brutality, is pursuing a policy of destablization in southern Africa with the aim of imposing Pretoria's diktat in that part of the world and maintaining the influence of imperialism and neo-colonialism in free, independent Africa. Since the creation of our Organisation the problems emanating from South Africa's aggressive policy have remained at the centre of the attention of the United Nations because, as a policy that genuinely jeopardizes peace and security in Africa and constitutes a constant threat to international peace and security. For over a quarter of a century the Security Council has had to deal with the dangerous consequences of the policy of apartheid, aggression and State terrorism practised without scruple by the racist regime of Pretoria. (Mr. Tsvetkov, Bulgaria) Not only have the racists so far ignored all the appeals and decisions by the Security Council, but, what is more, they continue unshamedly and with scorn for international public opinion to trample them underfoot. The Security Council cannot remain indifferent to the brutal violation by Pretoria of all the rules and commitments of international law. As we have realized from the statements made by representatives who have spoken so far, South Africa's aggression has struck a vicious blow at the territorial integrity Of these countries. Barely three months ago the Security Council considered the dangerous situation that had developed in southern Africa as a result of South Africa's Policy of apartheid and terror against the neighbouring independent countries, ,.. against the People's Republic of Angola and occupied Namibia, and against the legitimate aspirations of millions of inhabitants of South Africa itself. At that time, the Security Council adopted resolution 581 (1986), which strongly condemned the racists for their constant threats and warned Pretoria to put an end to all acts of aggression, terrorism and destabilization against independent and sovereign African States. This latest aggression against Botswana , Zambia and Zimbabwe is Pretoria's answer to resolution 581 (1986). The daily murder of dozens of men and women, the rightful representatives of the people of South Africa who have dared to speak out against the heinous apartheid regime; the monstrous repression to which they are subjected; these are events which we are witnessing and on which information reaches us daily from south Africa. We all know that the fundamental cause of the continuing tension in southern Africa is the system of apartheid , which still exists in south Africa, and the fact that South Africa is carrying out the strategic tasks of imperialism and neo-colonialism in Africa. The true face of apartheid, which long since was (Mr. Tsvetkov, Bulgaria) declared a crime against mankind, cannot be hidden behind Pretoria's political manoeuvres or behind the smoke-screen which sOme of its protectors have tried to put around it. To stamp out, once and for all, the constant threats to international peace and security, the world Organization should without delay take decisive action t0 eliminate apartheid, this anachronism confronting mankind. The Security Council has so far been prevented from adopting effective measures under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter by those who, practically speaking, are the most consistent defenders of the Pretoria racists. There iS no doubt but that the so-called policy of constructive engagement pursued by the United States Administration and the recent armed aggression by Washington against Libya have in the final analysis encouraged the racist leaders in South Africa to perpetrate the aggression against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe. During the meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of Non-Aligned Countries in New Delhi a month ago, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Movement strongly condemned this policy of "constructive engagement", which encourages "the infamous acts of aggression against the States neighbouring South Africa". The position of principle of the People's Republic of Bulgaria has been set forth repeatedly in this body. We believe that in order to eliminate the primary source of tension, to remove the threats to international peace and security in the southern African region as well as outside that region, and to put an end to all acts of aggression and repressive operations by South Africa, the very system of apartheid must be stamped out, once and for all. AS a result of South Africa's constant and brutal violation of the United Nations Charter and its refusal to co-operate with the Security Council, the Council must, in conformity with Chapter VII of the Charter, impose comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against (Mr. Tsvetkov, Bulgar ia) South Africa. If the Security Council were once again to be prevented from adopting these measures, the full responsibility for the consequences would fall squarely on the shoulders of those placing obstacles in the way of such action. In conclusion, I would express in this body the deep solidarity and heartfelt sympathy which the people and Government of the People 1s Republic of Bulgaria feel towards the peoples and Governments Of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe in their struggle against the aggressive onslaughts by South Africa. The People’s Republic Of Bulgaria will continue in the future as well to give many forms of assistance to the peoples of southern Africa as they struggle heroically to eliminate, once and for all, apartheid, racism, colonialism and neo-colonialism and to counter the onslaughts of imperialism. The PRES IDENT : I thank the representative of Bulgaria for the very kind words addressed to me. Mr. LIANG Yufan (China) (interpretation from Chinese) : At the outset, I wish to congratulate you warmly, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. Your outstanding talents and rich diplomatic experience have convinced me that you will smoothly guide the Count il to the successful completion of its work for the month of May, I should like to take this opportunity also to express my appreciation to your predecessor, Ambassador de Kemoular ia of France, for the excellent manner in which he dealt with the heavy workload last month. On the morning of 19 May, South Africa dispatched aircraft, armed helicopters and ground forces to launch raids on the capitals of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, destroying several buildings and causing casualties to dozens of peaceable inhabitants and refugees, including women and children. Such barbarous acts on the part of the South African authorities constitute a gross encroachment on the (Mr, Liang Yufan, China) sovereignty and territory of those three independent countries and a wanton trampling upon the United Nations Charter and the norms governing international relations. They also constitute crimes committed against the people of southern Africa; they have proved once again that the policy of racism stubbornly pursued by the South African authorities is the root cause of the disrupted peace and stability in the southern part of Africa. The Government and people of China are extremely indignant at and strongly condemn these acts of aggression by South Africa. The new acts of aggression committed by the South African authorities have further laid bare the fact that they are still obdurately pursuing the System of apartheid and that they have no sincerity whatsoever regarding the peaceful settlement of the southern Africa question. Their so-called ~~reforms” and “dialogue with the Black people” and the professed abolition of the “Emergency Act” and the “Pass Lawsn are designed only to whitewash themselves. The south African authorities’ raids on three neighbouring African countries and their war hysteria are indicative of their intransigence in pursuing the system of apartheid that has been universally condemned and their refusal to abandon the policy of violating the sovereignty and territory of the countries neighbouring it and disrupting peace and stability in the region. (Mr. Liang Yufan, China) The recent flagrant attack on Botswana, Zambia and 'Zimbabwe, three sovereign States, launched by South Africa only shows that it is beset with difficulties both at home and abroad and has to resort to force in order to maintain its rule. Over the past two years the mass movement of the South African people against the racist rule has developed with great momentum and the international community has called upon the South African authorities to abolish the policy of racial discrimination and Fartheid. In its efforts to hold out for the apartheid system, the Botha regime has on the one hand intensified its sanguinary repression of the South African people and on the other attempted to intimidate and threaten its neighbours by force, in the hope that they will stop supporting the people in South Africa. All these manuoevres have been in vain. The recent atrocities by the South African authorities have met with universal condemnation by the international community, which amply demonstrates how isolated the South African regime is, bearing out the saying "An unjust cause has little sympathy". On the other hand, the South African people are fighting a just cause and winning widespread support. In view of the obstinate position of the South African authorities in refusing to implement Security Council resolutions, we maintain that the Security Council should adopt a resolution enforcing appropriate mandatory sanctions against South Africa, in order to bring greater pressure to bear on that country and to compel it to cease its criminal actions. The Chinese Government and people will, as always, continue to render resolute support to the South African people's just struggle against apartheid and for racial eauality. We firmly support the front-line States in their just struggle against South African aggression and for the defence of their State sovereignty and territorial integrity. We are convinced that the South African people will certainly win the final victory in their struggle.

I thank the representative of China for the kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker is Mr. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Secretary-General of the organisation of the Islamic Conference, to whom the Council has extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. PIRZADA: I should like to begin by congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. I am addressing the Security Council today on South Africa's acts of aggression against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which has always kept a close watch on developments in Africa, since 24 of its members belong to that great continent. The most recent outrage committed by the Pretoria regime against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe is a link in the chain of cowardly acts of aggression perpetrated over the years by that illegal racist white-minority rigime against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its small, weak, vulnerable but courageous and valiant neighbours, which have refused to be cowed by its military might and have remained steadfast in their opposition to its detestable policy and practice of apartheid and denial of rights to the people of Azania and Namibia, in gross violation of international law and norms of behaviour. The record of the Pretoria rQgime is a shameful litany of unlawful and uncivilised behaviour. It practises the hateful system of apartheid in South Africa; it resorts to repression and murder inside South Africa against the majority community. It continues its illegal occupation of Namibia, in defiance of the will of the international community and the people of Namibia. It has promoted subversion against the legal Governments of its neighbours with money1 weapons, (Mr. Lianq Yufan, China) The recent flagrant attack on Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, three sovereign States, launched by South Africa only shows that it is beset with difficulties both at home and abroad and has to resort to force in order to maintain its rule. Over the past two years the masa movement of the South African people against the racist rule has developed with great momentum and the international community has called upon the South African authorities to abolish the policy of racial discrimination and apartheid, In its efforts to hold out for the apartheid system, the Botha rt$gime has on the one hand intensified its sanguinary repression of the South African people and on the other attempted to intimidate and threaten its neighbours by force, in the hope that they will stop supporting the people in South Africa. All these manuoevres have been in vain. The recent atrocities by the South African authorities have met with universal condemnation by the international community, which amply demonstrates how isolated the South African r&qime is, bearing out the saying “An unjust cause has little sympathy”. On the other hand, the South African people are fighting a just cause and winning widespread support. In view of the obstinate position of the South African authorities in refusing to implement Security Council resolutions, we maintain that the Security Council should adopt a resolution enforcing appropriate mandatory sanctions against South Africa, in order to bring greater pressure to bear on that country and to compel it to cease its criminal actions. The Chinese Government and people will, as always, continue to render resolute support to the South African people's just struggle against apartheid and for racial eauality. We firmly support the front-line States in their just atruggle against south African aggression and for the defence of their State sovereignty and territorial inteqrity. We are convinced that the South African people will certainly win the final victory in their struggle.

I thank the representative of China for the kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker is Mr. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Secretary-General of the organization of the Islamic Conference, to whom the Council has extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. PIRZADA: I should like to begin by congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. I am addressing the Security Council today on South Africa's acts of aggression against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which has always kept a close watch on developments in Africa, since 24 of its members belong to that great continent. The most recent outrage committed by the Pretoria rQgime against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe is a link in the chain of cowardly acts of aggression perpetrated over the years by that illegal racist white-minority r6gime against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its small, weak, vulnerable but courageous and valiant neighbours , which have refused to be cowed by its military might and have remained steadfast in their opposition to its detestable policy and practice of apartheid and denial of rights to the people of Azania and Namibia, in gross violation of international law and norms of behaviour. The record of the Pretoria regime is a shameful litany of unlawful and uncivilized behaviour. It practises the hateful system of apartheid in South Africa; it resorts to repression and murder inside South Africa against the majority community. It continues its illegal occupation of Namibia, in defiance of the will of the international community and the people of Namibia. It has promoted subversion against the legal Governments of its neighbours with money, weapons, (Mr. Pirzada) logistic support and training. It has committed acts of aggression against all its neighours - Angola, Mozambique, Lesotho, Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe - and is in physical occupation of parts of Angola. It has consistently reneged on its solemn international commitments. It is without any shadow of doubt an outlaw r6gime indulging in admitted acts of State terrorism in arrogant disregard of international public opinion. The timing of these attacks is also instructive. They were perpetrated at a time when the Commonwealth goodwill mission of eminent persons was in South Africa in pursuit of its efforts to set up negotiations between the Pretoria rggime and the African nationalists. The attacks were therefore a clear message to the Commonwealth group to take its good offices elsewhere. They were also meant to serve notice that the Pretoria rCgime is determined to continue its abominable policies - which are doomed to failure - of apartheid and the suppression of the majority community by the naked and brutal use of force, as well as of trying to impose its will on its neighbours by threats and the use of force. In the face of all this, what have the soothsayers of the west, who talk of constructive engagement and refuse the imposition of mandatory sanctions against the Pretoria regime, to offer? Their desire to reap the profits of exploitation Of the manpower and resources of South Africa seems far stronger than their outpourings in support of human rights and their condemnation of terrorism. The great defenders of human rights and civilized behaviour fall strangely silent when it comes to Pretoria's uncivilized and inhuman policies and conduct. They are not prepared even to consider economic sanctions against the Pretoria regime. They arm and support that illegal, racist, minority, cowardly regime which kills its own people and those of other countries indiscriminately, which puts civilization to shame, which revels in openly trampling on human rights, for it is in their view the bastion of civilization in Africa. (Mr. Pirzada) The Organization of the Islamic Conference condemns in uneauivocal terms the acts of aggression by the Pretoria rbgime against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe. We demand that the Security Council exercise the powers entrusted to it under the Charter of the United Nations to impose mandatory sanctions against the racist rQgime of Pretoria as provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter. We hope that the Security Council will not once again find itself powerless to act in the face of blatant acts of aggression by a renegade State because that State has veto-wielding supporters in the Council. I should like to conclude my statement by expressing our admiration for the courageous stance adopted by the African States that have been subjected to aggression and to assure them that the entire membership of the Islamic Conference - indeed, the entire international community - stands by their side to repel the aggressive Pretoria rdgime.

The next speaker is the representative of Cuba. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. I Mr. 0-S OLIVA (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): I congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of May. We have no doubt that your acknowledged diplomatic talents and your devotion to the struggle for just causes will contribute to the success of the Council's work. I also wish to express our gratitude to your predecessor, Ambassador Claude de Kemoularia. Once again the Security Council has to meet to consider an act of aggression committed by the racist regime of south Africa against a front-line State. we have had to meet so often on the matter that it seems to be a permanent item on the Council's agenda. We wonder how long we shall have to continue to tolerate the policy of State terrorism that the racists have been pursuing against all the countries of the area. We have met to consider acts of aggression against Mozambique, Botswana, Lesotho and Angola. Even today we well remember the dastardly terrorist attempt to blow up the oil installations in Cabinda, which could have caused the death of hundreds of people, including United States technicians. Pretoria flaunts its policy of State terrorism, and yesterday its representative unashamedly told the Council that it would continue to act as it had so far. Thus, cynicism is compounded by the most overweening arrogance. (Mr. Oramas Oliva, Cuba) These meetings have been convened to deal with simultaneous acts of -aggression against three countries; Zambia, Botswana and Zimbabwe. We wonder what the motive was for those acts. Could it be that South Africa is trying to show the world community that it has no interest in seeking a negotiated settlement to end a system that constitutes a crime against humanity? Could it be that the Pretoria racists are seeking to damage and diminish the prestige of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) in the international arena? South Africa's barefaced arrogance makes it essential for us all to think about ways and means to put an end to a r6gime that is a blot on the human conscience. Yesterday the racist representative described as terrorists the ANC militants, who are fighting so selflessly for the elimination of the abominable apartheid rigime, the establishment of racial equality and the right of all to live the sort of life envisaged in the United Nations Charter. For how long shall we have to continue to come here and complain, when every day it becomes more evident that Botha and company are disciples of Hitler? We cannot forget that Nazi Germany acted in the same way, with invasions and massive surprise attacks without any previous declaration of war against neighbouring States, and the pursuit of a systematic policy of State terrorism. There is no other way to describe such acts. In order to find a parallel between the present situation and the bloody ordeal of the Europeans in the 1930s and 194Os, one has only to read the famous book "The Nightmare", in which one sees a clear analogy between the actions of south Africa and some of its Western allies and what the Hitlerites did during the war. It may be better understood today that when Cuban internationalist forces went to Angola we knew that with the sacred blood of our sons we were fighting against fascism. Therefore we shall stay in Angola until apartheid is no more. (Mr. Oramas Oliva, Cuba) I have already said that now is the time for reflection. It is a time when all those who in one way or another encourage Pretoria should search their consciences and reconsider their policies. Those that proclaim themselves champions of human rights should make a gesture of historic grandeur by solemnly declaring in the Council that they have scrapped the misnamed policy of constructive engagement. It is not enough that a large part of the human race repeats insistently that the United States policy of constructive engagement only encourages Pretoria; it must be understood that the elimination of that policy is essential. Why does the United States Government say that it wants peace in southern Africa and at the same time send Stinger missiles to the terrorist savimbi? We should not be surprised if we had to meet here one day in the Council to condemn some savage act of aggression by the UNITA bandits with those notorious Stingers. On that day we shall have to recognize that those who gave the criminal Savimbi those sophisticated weapons are just as responsible as he is. We have come to the Council to call for justice, in the name of peace. We appeal to all members to apply, without further procrastination or subterfuge, the comprehensive mandatory sanctions that Chapter VII of the Charter prescribes for States that behave in such a criminal fashion as does South Africa. On this occasion we find extremely relevant Jose Marti's maxim that calmly to watch a crime being committed is to commit it.

I thank the representative of Cuba for the kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker is the representative of the German Democratic Republic. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. OTT (German Democratic Republic): I should like at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council this month. We are firmly convinced that under your able guidance this august body will take decisions that will contribute to limiting the power of the Pretoria rCgime, YOUr great diplomatic skill and your personal commitment to the right5 Of the oppressed South African people and to the breaking up of the racist regime that is threatening peace guarantee the bringing about of such decisions. Ghana's firm position in the struggle against apartheid is well known, and this is a factor in the close relations between the German Democratic Republic and Ghana. I am proud to point to our constructive co-operation with you, Mr. President, in the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid. We wish also to express our appreciation of your predecessor, His Excellency Ambassador Claude de Kbmoularia, who presided over the Council in the month of April. Progressive world public opinion has fully registered its indignation over the new barbaric aggression by the South African racists against peaceful, sovereign neighbouring States. In a statement published on Tuesday the Government of the German Democratic Republic clearly and most strongly condemned that criminal act. attacks on Zimbabwe, Zambia and Botswana, the murder Of The carefully planned innocent people and the destruction of residential areas are without precedence in the history of the apartheid regime - a history that is certainly not lacking in bloody deeds. Those who have taught that regime such atrocious acts through so-called constructive engagement are only too well known. And the leader of the racists himself - as reported in The New York Times of 21May 1986 - referred directly to those he regards as having set the example. What other proof is needed to show that Pretoria has the backing of those imperialist circles that have opted for a policy of violence and military adventurism? The attacks on Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia, which were committed in flagran. violation of international law, once more clearly show the growing danger to peace emanating from the South African apartheid regime - and not only in southern Africa. This outrageous act of State terrorism has further aggravated the prevailing tense situation in southern Africa and once again exposed the policy of apartheid as the main cause for conflict in the region. The racist regime has beeI shaken to its very foundations. Doomed historically, it can no longer resist the united struggle of the majority of the South African people for a democratic and non-racist society. In addition, there is growing internatoinal pressure on the white minority regime in Pretoria and the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against it has been called for. The overwhelming majority of States agrees that as a crime against humanity and a threat to international peace and security the apartheid regime must be eliminated once and for all. We are committed to that aim. But we are also aware that a wounded beast is dangerous. The latest raids have furnished clear proof of this; they are the expression of the policy of terror and sheer force Pretoria has adopted in a futile attempt to prolong the existence of the hated apartheid regime and to destabilize and intimidate sovereign neighbouring States. For it is those States that through their own example of national independence and freedom, of equality in the life of their population groups and of their fruitful co-operation in the interest of the people provide the essential impetus to the struggle of the oppressed masses in South Africa. It is those States that are "punished" because they are not willing to suffer the degradation of being puppets of Pretoria. The apartheid clique does not even take pains to disguise its demagogy, and the truth is simply perverted into its (Mr. Ott, German Democratic Republic) opposite. with unsurpassed cynicism, the victims are declared the "guilty". A camp for South African refugees established by this Organisation - the United Nations - is simply called a "terrorist transit camp"; the exiled executive of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) is defamed as a "terrorist operation centre". And the United Nations is, according to Botha's insulting remarks, the "guardian of the international terrorist movement". HOW long will the United Nations - indeed the Security Council - continue to tolerate these provocations of Pretoria? How many more innocent human lives have to be sacrificed and how many more destructive acts of aggression take place before recourse is at last had to Chapter VII of the Charter - something which this body is not only authorised but, given the facts, in duty-bound to do? AS it was underlined at the Eleventh Congress of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, the German Democratic Republic consistently stands for the immediate elimination of the criminal system of apartheid. That position has been reaffirmed in a statement of the German Democratic Republic on the occasion of the week Of Solidarity with the Anti-imperialist Struggle Waged by the Peoples of Africa. In concluding, I auote the following from that statement: "We are firmly at the side of the African peoples in condemning the political, economic and military collaboration of leading NATO countries, particularly the United States and Israel, with the South African racist regime. This reactionary alliance constitutes a threat to peace and security in Africa and the world at large. "We endorse the demand made by the majority of countries, peoples and public organisations that comprehens ive and binding sanctions be imposed on the South African racist rhgime. (Mr. Ott, German Democratic Republic) "The people of the German Democratic Republic will continue to display active solidarity with the struggle waged by the African peoples for national and social liberation and against imperialism, colonialism, racism and apartheid."

I thank the representative of the German Democratic Republic for the very kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker is the representative of Argentina. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. MUNIZ (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): I should like first of all to express our pleasure at seeing you, Sir, p residing over these meetings of the Security Council. Since we all know you very well, we are fully aware of the professional qualities, tact and ability with which you have always acted over the long years you have spent at the United Nations. I am quite convinced that these major attributes will ensure that in the course of your presidency the meetings of the Council will be conducted in the best possible manner. (Mr. MuRiz, Argentina) At the same time, we should like to express our appreciation of the outstanding way in which the representative of France, Ambassador de Kgmoularia, presided over the meetings of the Security Council last month. Argentina views with great alarm and indignation the recent acts of aggression by the South African Government against the territories of Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Together with the overwhelming majority of the international community, we vigorously condemn those unjustifiable attacks, which confirm that the behaviour of Pretoria in that region is contrary to the United Nations Charter and constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security. We affirm our solidarity with the countries victims of that aggression. Those new, serious manifestations of the racist, expansionist policy of South Africa emphasize the need to ensure that, at this crucial time for the future of southern Africa, the international community increases effectively, urgently and in practical form its pressure on Pretoria. The major responsibility for such measures naturally falls on those that have the closest and most substantive links with South Africa. Furthermore, as has been repeatedly stated by the General Assembly, the Security Council should broaden the scope of the present sanctions against South Africa in conformity with Chapter VI of the Charter. Actions such as those which have led to the convening of this series of meetings clearly show that the Security Council must act rapidly and energetically, as requested by the General Assembly. The continued inaction of the principal organ responsible for maintaining international peace and security is not conducive to a peaceful and speedy Solution of the serious problems in southern Africa. On the contrary, it encourages the Continuance of the prolonged and dangerous crisis in that area. (Mr. Muf'iii, Argentina) It is in this context that my Government, convinced that the behaviour of South Africa constitutes a violation of the United Nations Charter and of international law, has decided to break off diplomatic relations, effective yesterday, between my country and South Africa. This measure is in conformity with our firm condemnation and repudiation of apartheid and with our determined support of the oppressed peoples of South Africa in their just struggle for the establishment of a free, democratic society, based on equality, in their country. It also constitutes an expression of solidarity with the States of southern Africa which have been the target of repeated and unjustifiable armed attacks by South Africa. We are convinced that my Government's action will help to make those responsible for the present South African policy understand that persistence in their present behaviour will lead only to the increasing isolation of Pretoria and violence and chaos in southern Africa. In conclusion, I should like to read out a few paragraphs from two press releases issued by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Argentina on 20 and 22 May, explaining the reasons for and scope of the measures adopted by my country. In the first of these two press releases reference is made to the inadmissible acts of aggression against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, which are violations of the Charter and part of a far broader framework of institutionalised discrimination which has been imposed by the State by force on the South African nation. Furthermore, it recalls that "The Government of Argentina has consistently advocated the adoption of measures that will ensure the full exercise of basic human rights as the sole guarantee of peace and the comprehensive development of the South African (Mr. Mufiiz, Argentina) nation in harmony with its neighbours. We have also requested the release Of Nelson Mandela, the leader of the African National Congress, and of other political prisoners, representatives of the aspirations to freedom of the whole South African nation." In yesterday's press release, we reiterate the fact that the acts carried out by south Africa "are a direct consequence of an institutionalized regime of racial discrimination, which is totally inadmissible in the overall framework of today's international community. The persistence of such a regime is a threat to international peace and security, as reflected in the repeated acts Of aggression against neighbouring nations and by the illegal occupation of Namibia. "In these circumstances, the Government of Argentina has taken the decision to break off diplomatic relations with the Republic of South Africa. This measure will take effect on 22 May 1986 at 1800 hours Argentine time . . . The people and Government of the Argentine Republic continue to be the friends of all the South African people, without discrimination of any kind, and we fervently wish for them a future based on justice and freedom, which are the sole guarantees of a true peace."

I thank the representative of Argentina for the kind words he addressed to me. There are no further speakers for this meeting. The next meeting of the Security Council to continue consideration of the item on its agenda will take place this afternoon at 3 o'clock. The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m.