S/PV.2693 Security Council

In accordance with decisions taken by the Council at the 2692nd meeting, I invite the repreaeatative of Angola to take a Place at the Council tables 1 invite the representatives of Cuba, the German Delaocretio riepublic, Nicaragua, South Africa, the Syrian Arab IlepUbliC, the Ukrainian &viet Socialist I&public, Wet Tao, Zaire and ZaaWa to take the plaoes reserved for them at the eide of the Council Chamber. At the invimtiar of the President, c4r. de Piqueire& (Angola) took a place at . the Council table; Mr. Velaeco San Jase (Cuba), Mr. Richter (German Deasocratic Republic), Mrs. Astorga Gadea (Nicaragua), Mr. von 6chirndins (South Africa), Mr. Al-Ataesi (Syrian Arab F&public), Mr. Skofenko (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Replblic) , Mr. Buf Xuan Nhat (Viet Bala), nr. wdunqe Radahi Chir i+¶waek (Zaire) and Hr. Mfula (Zaubia) to_dc the &tees reserved for them at the side of the Council ChaDlber . The PRBIDWP (interpretation from French)4 I should like to inform member0 of the Council that I have received letters fram the representitives of India, Monqolia and Czeahoslovakie in which they request to be invited f participate in the discussion of the item on the Council*e agenda. In acCOtdanCe with the ueual practice, I propxe, with the coneent of the Council, ti invite (The Pree ident) theme represatetivea to prtioipte in the disouoaiun, without the right to voter in conformity with the relevant provirims of the Chuter end rule 37 of the c4mwil*8 ptovirimal ruloa of procedwr. Tbero being no objectic% it to l o decided. At the fnvitatbn of the President, Hr Rriahnan (India), Hr. Nyambo (MQnqolia) and Mr. ibvacio (Caechcelcvakia) teck the places reeerved for them at the sAde of the Council chamber.

The Security Council will l now resume consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them document S/18163, which sets forth the text of a draft resolution sponsored by Congo, Ghana, Wdagascar, Trinidad and mbago and the United Arab hirates. I should also like to draw the attention of members of the Council to document S/18167, which contains the text of a letter dated 17 June 1986 from *he Permanent Representative of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic to the United Rations addressed to the Secretary-General. The first speaker is the representative of Czechoslovakia. I invite him +x, take a place at the Council table and to make his Statement. Mr. KOVACIC (Czechoslovakia) : First of all, I wish to thank the members Of the Security Council for allowing our delegation to speak at this meeting and to address the question under consideration. I also wish to congratulate you , Sir, upon your accesnfon to the office of President of the Security Council. your country is well known for its active Support of the national liberation movement, for its stzuggle to prevent interference in the internal affairs of African nations, for the development of relations among states, for peace and disarmament and for the security of nations. I am convinced that your exper fence, wisdom and principled action in implementing the policy of your country will make an effective contribution to the SWUrity Council’s discharge of its duties and that under your leadership the work of the Council will be successful. I should also like to express appreciation of the work of your predecessor in office, Ambassador Gbeho, the Permanent Pepresentative of the Pepublic of Ghana, which was character ized by competence, objectivity and reeponsibility. (Mr. Kovacic, Cze&oslovakia) The memory of the Security Council’s deliberations on the aggression by South Africa against three frcet-line States is still fresh, and the Council is already discussing yet another act of aggression coranittea by South Africa. This time it is an attack On the port of Namibe and upan unarmed merchant ships of the Soviet Union and Cube in that port. This act constitutes a further degree in the escalation of the violence prohibited in international relatians. The racist regime has expanded its aggressiveness to other countries. The threat to peace and SeCUrity, not only On the African continent but war Id wide, has increased. The aggressive terrorist act of the apartheid regime that is now being discussed has once again confirmed the correctness of the conclusion that the policy of apartheid pcees a lasting danger, in terms of both domestic and foreign policy, and that, as such, it is incompatible with the norms of international law. The aggressiveness, terrorism and destabilisation pursued by Pretoria serve as the lPain instrments Of that inadmissible policy, which has been sharply criticized and rejected by the relevant organs of the United Nations. Such conclusions of United Nations organs are even follared by new threats against neighbouring countries by the racist rdgiufe. In other cases, United Nations decisions are viewed as a threat to the stability and developPent of all of southern Africa. In this connection, it ie only natural to ask how Pretoria can dare act in this way. We join the numerous delegations that see the roots of that atti tuds in the practical support providsd South Africa by certain imperialist States. lo be more Precise, the srtheid regime is well aware of the military, political, economic ttnd id@OlOgicai interests of imperialism in soue,ern Africa. ‘i+rst fS w it is absolutely sure Of substantial support from imperialism, through both governmental and non-governmental channels. Sufficient evidence of the close relations between imperialiom and prtheid is axtained in factual United Nations documentation. No wonder thc~e imperialist stateo with the strongest interests in (Hr. KWaCiC, Csechoslovak ia) such celations have been trying to divert attention fraa 60uth Africa and t0 prevent the adoptiof mmsures that would co-1 the apartheid regime to tespeot the legitimate interests of the nations of souUlern Africa. We regard the imposition ageinet South Africa of effeCkiVe sanctiars under Chapter VII of the Ihitad Nations Charter as ate such measure. Kowever, we have no illusians about the possibility of such sanctions being a&pted. The growing financial and strategic PnJolvement of the Chited Stetes end Greet Britain in South Africa will undoubtedly result, nar as before, in a vew of proposals for the adoption of such sanctions. On the other hand, such an approach gives the international oo~~~ity Md each of its members the right to gut in the pillory, beside the Administration in &uth Afeiaa, the Mtninistrations of the tkaited 8mtes and the United Kingddom. &I imp6rtant part of the United States overall approach to the developing world is e-died in the con&et of assistance. thited States sttategiats see the advantsge of that concept in separating euonomic cmd technical mnetratian from State-based forms of domination. The grantfng of such assistance is based on the benefite it pray bring in strengthening the Uniigd Stateer that ie, the granting of such assistance is designed to assist the du~or itself. An estraordinarily telling example of such assistance is given by the practical involvement of the Lbrited States in the activities of UNITA, whose evil practices are knam to CZechclelolvakis. Pbt esumg&e, in 1983, that gtoup, in an aot of bandi try, abducted 64 Czechoslavak citiaeno - 28 menn. 17 women end 21 children fr- , +fi 19 .ym*m #No ati - Ormln-a..---*- A- ----=- ~. __- - -- ,-v-- -- Y=” LC “m a w weLy-o&o .I, m,yv&a. i&r citizen6 had gone to Angola to help build that developing country and thereby secure it0 independence from any external Paver . No won&r that uoqpratian was a thorn in the ffeah of those who have a different lpodel of azsiotence and Q&O have not reconciled themselves to Angola ‘8 struggle for true independence. Not only did UNITA’ (Mr. Kovacfe, Csechoslovakia) terrorist action halt the uork of the afore8entiawd Czedroslwak nations designed to provide developrtent aid) it also exposed our citiaeno to physical and psychological pressure for almost a year. Thirty-seven-year-d Jaroslav Navratil, who had helped to build, in Alto Catuabela, a paper and pulp mill, one of the most so~iaticated cmplexes of its kind on the African continent, fell viatim to that deliberate and gangster-like act. UNITA terrorists viztually pushed Janoslav Navratil to hia death. The &mined beahotslovak citkans suffered from patasitia disease& pneumnia md joint and livex disorders. some of them contracted malaria. (Mt. Kovacic, Czechoslovakia) Having had that experience, the Czechoolovak people asks how the United State5 Administration dares to speak about human rights in other countries when, through its policy of constructive engagement, it shares in the blame, among other thin95r for terrorising people, which resulted, inter alia, in the death of the father of two children, aged 15 and 8 years. There is only one explanation: the double dealing of United States representatives, which has had a long tradition in this country. For exanple, the ams Pens that signed the Declaraticm of Independence also signed agreements for the purchase of slaves. Another case in point which illustrates such practice8 is the political declarations and the actual deed5 of President Lincoln, who wa8 quoted by the representetive of the whited State5 in connection with human rights. Warning aremorials of this hyprocritical policy can be found in numerous places in the united States. Our delegation reaffirm5 its condsmnation of all forms of direct or indirect oo-operation with the South African rdgixe and with the bands that disrupt peaceful develognent in the front-line statea. The countries and nations in southern Mr ica mu8t feel effective support on the part of the United Nations in their legitimate struggle against the aggressiveness of South Africa and against oppression and racial dtecrimination, a struggle which is aimed at the true elimination of oolonialism in all it8 forms and manifeetations. The S8ourity Council should continue to seek ways and means of taking effective a&ion to imprave the situation in southern Afr tea until a just settlement of relations is achieved in that part of the world. Cur delegation etiongly demands that the Security Council adopt concrete measures aimed at eliminating the aggreesivefiess of &uth Africa, preventing subversive acts by &uth Africa designed to undermine condition8 for the social (MI. Wwacic, Czedmslovak ia) development of the front-line States md the promotion of humanitarian and other assistance granted by a number of United Nations Member States to the front-line States which are confronted with the rejected palicy of the apartheid r&iIze= The Czedmslovak Socialist l&public resolutely condemns the terrorist act committed by South Africa in the Angolan port of Namibe and demand8 that the aggressor provide Compensation for the damage caused. Czechoslovakia also calls upon those States that have !A-til now given the apartheid rdgime assistance - assintance al50 given in the United mticns - to abandon that dangerous policy. Indeed, the experience gained so fat shows Vh-het that palicy directly encourages the apartheid rdgime to escalate further its aqgresaiveness beyond the borders of South Africa. In OOnCfW4C% I feel compelled to respond to the statement made by the representative of the United States, who cnentioned my country. I agree that the year I.966 entered the ilietbry of Czechoslovakia as a year of invasions an invasicn of agent8 and subversive elements, mostly directly financed by the tlhfted States. Their aim was W change the social system in Czedmslovakia to conform to the ideas of imperialist circles. The calculationo of those subverter5 were wrong: they did not take into consideration the force stemming from the experience of the Czechoslavak people during the period of capitalist development of the cOun try l Cur people8 did not give up the certainties gained Under socialiom, and that invasion of thho subverters thus ended in a fiaoco.

I thank the representative of Czechoelwakfa Paz his kind words about my country and about me personallY. Hr. GAY&IA (Congo) (interpretaticn from French): W. President, my *delegation ie mcmt pleased to see you presiding wer the Security Council for this month. Your exper fence and great oour teesy have always been of benefit to ua and, at the same time, have aluaye commanded the respct due you aa an outstanding diplanat. very clcue relations unite our tuo 8tb35icx~s, juet a8 they do our respective countries - the Congo and E(adagascar - in the solidarity with which they strive for the liberation of the African Qpntinent, in particular its southern part from the WouKge of awtheid, which justifiee the full confidence that we have in you at this decisive amment in the history of South Africa. Furthermore, Sk, you have auoceeded another distinguished representative of Africa, Ambasaadrbr Viotor Gbebo of Ghana, whose effective discharge of the funetione of President laet ~18th war our esteem aud admiration. We are at au indeed decisive moment, dmrac;teriaetd by the conjunoticn of such major event8 as the cawmoration of ale &wet0 massacre oh 16 June 1976 and the opening iu Paris, last Ebnday, of the @xld Conference on 9anctions egainet South Africa, on the ae hand, and the development of the etruggle within that country, with the unprecedented awueneee of the international oommnity, of the moral. &allenge pceed by the system of apartheid, on the other. Gno muld have thought that, in order to met this situation which is becoming sore untenable each day, the neo-Was1 rsciet minority in met in Pretoria might comait ttaelf courageously to acceding to the aepiratious of the gr-eat majority of the South Afrioan people, which enjoy the eupport of the international cornunity. a.. L&-L A- -c W.QL LO ti3 ~iiiOui1ciirCt3tdhd the eituaticn. In ita e8Bence as in its muifea~tione, apartheid is not, nor can it be anything other than, a phenomenon devoid of any positive aepects. It ie an evil in iteelf. (Hr. Gayama, Cargo) Apartheid cannot be conceived or mintafned without oppreesion end tyrenlry. The number of viotims that have fallen under the bullets of the police and array of the racLt regime hao read& almaet 2,000 over the past year and a half. The existence of the amrtbeid syetem fe amditiared upon injustice, necessary for ite developatent, and upon violence and hatred, useful to just?fy it. It is a system based m illegality 8nd the denial of law; it feeds on the unending tla~ of the blood of its v&time, which watere its perched structures and is Its very reason fbr aniotencet. Thus the apartheid system operatea entirely by scheaing and bad faith. Its mnifestationo exe intimidation and atasasrrlnation, aggression and terrore The attack of 5 June on the People’s F&public of Angola follows that logic, which was reoponeible for the unwarranted provocations in Hay against Botswana, l ZalEbie and Zhbabw@. ft i8 almat a Year to the day since the apartheid regime launched a commauilo raid agaiuet the Angolan province of Cebinda, in the extreme north of that countcy. lt ehould be emphasieed #at all the aggressions and f&e violations of Angola’s territorial integrity have tahen place even while Pretoria’8 troops have heen occuayingr aa they have for many years , the eouthern part of Angola, which they have attacked without prwocation eince 1978. That does not include their involvemmt alangeide UNSTA in 1975 in the war for JLngola*a liberation, which was dare in disregard of the elementary principle of respect for States’ swereigntyr independence and territorial integrity, whi& it is the duty of all Statas to o&ewe. Those oocupation troops strove to bring about, through the UNITA puppeti, the destabilkzation of the legal Angolan authorities, a goal that they have had great Bifficulty in realising, despite their powerful euppmtt 2or the traitor Jonas &vi&i, their ally. All of that has happened ae if, being incapable of having the slightest oredibility within iti own borders, the racist Power had found an easy way out by gaining a few Pyrrhic victories outside the country. It could thus integrate iteelf within the strategy of &at ie described as the auti-communist struggle, in order to gain for itself, at little coet, some semblance of recognition and reopectebility. 1c 4I -- -- ~2s: ‘ii& is -crying out its aggreaeian againet the port of Nemfbe, even demging Bhips of third countries , Scuth Africa ie seeking to balance its renewed awreheid policy0 a threat to international peace and security , against the Support and good will of certain powers, through *constructive engagement” of declared opposition to all forma of sanctions against it. (Mr. Gayama, Congo) The Congolese Government has always said that it is fallacious and dangerous for States worthy of the naum to turn the policy of aggtessicn against other States into a principle of normal conduct in international relations. The fact that Angola% political institutions are not to Pretiria’e liking in no way gives Pretoria a mission to attack or occum Angola - orI for that lrstterr any other front-line State. State terrorism is an odious policy, and Congo has always condelmed it, in keeping with the noms and principles of international law. South Africa has for long benefited from the immobility of the intern&i-al ccmmunity, and especially the Gacurity Council, thus carrying out at will its policy of aeartheid and aggression against its neighbours, as well as its illegal occugatfon of Namibia. The negative vote often cast by certain permanent meders of the Council, which has meant that the amrtheid regime has had no cauee for concern, has always had in Pretoria the ef feet that it was bound to have - open encouragement to persist in its policy and its actiars, even though they have baen cardearned by mat Govermmnts and by public opinion in lPcret countries. The Security Council has already issued repeated warnings to Pretoria. Is it not time to act? At this decisive stage in the struggle of the &uth African people to eradicate apartheid, all tie peoples of the world, in whclee name the United N8fdOne Charter sets out its principles, have taken an unambiguous positicn. All that is needed to speed the end of the tragedy auf fered by the south African and Namibian peoples end the front-lirre countriee is the determination of saw comtries, including the most powerful ones, to end economic , military and political support for South Africa. The decision that it is open for tie Council to take new, a6 eet out in the deaft resolution, of whi& my delegation is a sponsor, could usher in fat 6outh (Mr. asyalaap conqa) Africa and the uholo of southern Africa in games1 8 new am, whose main l baneficiaeies would be intae uational peaa and 8ecue ity . The PRESIOEl4T (interpretation feaa Fran&) I I thank the eepeeeontative of the Congo for the kind words he addressed to ma. Me. RA9PHSARN (Thailand): On behalf of the Thai dolegation, I wish to join othae dalegations in extendtug to you, Sir, my congeatulatiars on ymu asmmption of tha presidency of the &ouefty Council for the #nth of Juue. Wa ae0 delighted to see a true non of Africa, whone prwen ability, WSSQR and diplomatic skill are well eeooghisad, presiding wee the Couuoil~e work foe this mth. Allow ms also to convey my delegatim’s deep appteoiation to youe predaassae, AWaf#sador James Victor Gb&o of Gbaua, foe his diplomatic skill and the exaaplaey manner tn which he oonductod the Couucil~s bueinesas la8t mnth. My dolegation listened with cmcern to the statemant of the Petmment Repeesonhtive of the Psop10~s &public of Angola, who apgmaeed before the CotmaiL for the fifth time in the past l2 mmthe as a easult of South Africa@8 CaMnUd and premeditated &ate of aggression agaiust his country. The &test naval attack on the Angolan port of Uawibo on 9 Juue, desteoyiag meeohunt ship, fuel and port iusbllations, cmm only three week. after &uth Afeice*s armed aggremion against Botewana, WIpIDia aud Ziubabue. It dunonatrated the intransigence and arrogance of the Peetoe ia dgime as wall as its lack ef roepact for the puepoaeo aud principles of the calted Nations charter and nom of international law. *3--- ,4*p v A.-IA LL- “- --.. LL -a v-I-“m -II a LYLY u.w QWlG&A UI(IC .any foreign aocupatiou ahd violation by cme country of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of another country constitutes a gross violatitm of international law and the whited Nations Charter.” (s/PV.2612, p. 42) (Mr. Kaeemsar n, Thailand) Suutb Africa deeervee to be condemed by the world camunity, not only for its &teot act of aggreeoion against the Angolan port of Namibe, but, even more, for itu cantinwd oacupation of Namibia and the presence of its troops on Angolan mail. In the light of the continuing situation in south Atria, the Pretoria regime al.80 deserves to be cmdemned for its policy of apartheid, which is the root cause that has exacerbated tbe tendan and conflicts in the southern Aft ican region. In c~)clu6ion, my delegation believes that stranger measures by the international cornunity are required to convince the Pretiria &g&m that sggresmton doea not pay and that it8 repugnant policy of apartheid must end if it wishes to live in wace with its neighbours. The Thai delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution. The PRgBIDENT (irrterpretatiion from French)% I thank the representative of Thailand for the kind words be sddreesed to me* Nembera of the Counail bave received a copy of the text of a comunicatian fra eio Exeellccncy Mr. Allan Wagner, Poreign Minister of Peru and President of the World CO8lfatetWe on BrmOtiOM ageinst South Aft ice, whioh ie naJ meeting in Par is. That communication will be publiehed tomorrow aa a Ceourity council dmxinent 846166. Hr. PABON GARCIA (Venezuela) (interpretation from Spanish): At the l outset I should like to express the great pleasure of thy delegation of Venesuela at eaeing you, Sir, presiding crver the work of the Security Council this month. your long experience, your dedication and your devotion to the United Nations and it8 principles guarantee that you will conduct the affairs of the Council QUCCQSS f Uuy . My delegation would also like sincerely to congratulate Aebaseador Jaroee Victor Gbeho, Pentaanent I&prQeo;;';;tP~e of Ghana, on the wise and effective manner in which he cou3ucted the affairs of the Council last month. The delegation of Venezuela cannot fail to speak as the Council considers yet anothar conplaint by Angola, against the most recent aggression by Ruth Africa. This is are more act of aggression to be added to the long and apparently endless list of acts of aggreeeiar end State t~rrories cornPitted by the racist regime again& thQ SOVeCeignty, territorial integrity and political fn(lependQnCQ Of the '-- - front-line Statse. The attack of 5 June 1986 in Namtbe against port installations, oil depot8 and veaeele belonging to countries friendly with the People's ~&public of Angola took PlQcQ a few weeks after opn acts of aggression againet Botswana, Zambia end Zimbabwe in open violation of the elementary norme of intern8 tional law and thQ reeolutiare of the Security Council and in undisguised defiance of world public opinion, uhicb is constantly demanding that the Pcetorra autioritiee put an end to part of the world: the eyetern of the real caueeQ of all the problems of that seat theid. ALthough it might seem that everythtng has already been said about apartheid, the ccmtinuation of a regime of that kind, which is an affrart to human dignity and a violetian of fun&mental human rights, forces us repeatidly and tirelessly to stite how abominable, intolerable and hateful that rdgime truly is* (Mr. Paban Garcia, Venezuela) As a result of the obstinate, perverse and cynical aations of the minority racist regime of South Africa and its policies of internal repression and external aggreasdon, the situation in southern Africa is becoming worse day by day, and South Africa represents an increasing threat to peace and security in that part of the world. The rebellion and virtual civil war that exists in South Africa as a result of its policies of bloody internal repression has taken the form of acts of aggression against neighbouring countries in vain attempts to justify beyond its borders the racial discrimination and the abject system of apartheid prevailing within it6 Own terrfbry. At the beginning of this week, in South Africa and throughout the world, another anniversary of the Soweto mesaacre was commemorated. The declaration Of a state of emergency and the restrictions placed on the media could not prevent the black people from cxxnmemorating the date peacefully, nor could it prevent the world from receiv&ng Information about events called subversive or the deaths that occurred 88 a reeult of represSton. But the oppreesed people of South Africa are not alone in their struggle. The World Conference on Sanctions against South Africa is now being held in Paris. Eceoently too there have been meetings on an arms and oil embargo, and soon the International Conference for the Immediate Independence of Namibia will take place in Vienna. For my delegation it is at the very least disappointing that the Council has --A .hL k--r dm,- ,A ,rnn,sm. .n#L JOC YFiSI. WCG -” --h --.--w-v..- -- -==-, ----b4rmo fit nn4~ PPQ~~~u~ ~~8o~~f48 against a -------. - Government that so brazenly, repeatedly and persistently violates the Charter, the principles governing relations among States and the rights of all citizens. (Mr o Pabon Geraie, Venezuela) We firmly reiterate our belief that the time hao ccme to apply enforcement action - effeotive action that will without delay lead to a chenge in the conduat of the Pretoria Government and the dismantling and eradication of apartheid. The international oo101unity~ with vaey few and regret-able exceptions, agrees that more effective action must be taken against South Africa. Appeals are not enough) nor ace negotiations or coqwomises , though they might be called constructive - for the regime will no longer heed wen its allies. All effort& though made with the best of intentions, have yiel&d not the slightest result. Now there must be binding eanctfous in accordance with the provisions of tie Organisation% Charter. We have recently all too frequently heard that the applicatiar of binding sanctions in accordance with Chapter VII io not advisable, because that could delay the efforts’ being made by the racist tbgime. Frankly, that tdgime deserves not the slightest credibility, especially since, while it pramiees a dialogue with the black majority, it get seestem their genuine leaders even outside ite burders and does not csase its aate of aggreosion against neighbours. Furthermors it is also argued that bLding sanctions would have an impact mainly on mast of the black population of South Africa and would iudireotly damage the weak ewnomles of neighbouring owereign States. But it ie obvious that the defendere of tie dispossessed and the weak are precisely those with the greatest economic investments in South Af c ice. Recently, 12 vote6 in this Council aontradicted that singular excessive mel. 24hw~t~~~y, tz y=tc= --a*--- ‘L CIII...LIupu IL. & &cra iPjiiclrity doee not seem to undereiand that the human pereoo and the desire for free&a are aore important thau wmmeraial advantage or economic profit. (Mr. Pabm Garais, Venezuela) IQr delegation ie canfitlent that on this occasion the &aft resolution Wl6163) will obtain favourable votes from all the wabers of the council. The attach the armed invasions and violations by South Africa of the territory, tmritmrial waters and airspace of Angola and the military oocupatian of part of its territory, even with ;he establishntent of so-called linkage and ctmditionsp a& the use of the territory of #amibis ae a launching pa& must not go unpunished. ihnce we must condemn them as vigorously as possible. They are deeds that must reaeive due plniehmnt. The impoitian of selscrtive eoonmio a other sanotiars would be an appropriate first step t.owaW~ focdng that rbgiae to abandon the Wertheid 8ystem, and vould oontribute to tbe establtihmnt of peaae and stability in tbe region. In thio teqmet the reoent reaomnrndatiom by the Group of IQhent PUsaM of the British Canonvralth are mmat important. If draft resolution6 cantinue to be vetoed in the Council and Ulare aBoNed oontinue to be ignoced~ if the South African tdgime continues to folla its wayward tiioiu with the support of its dliest if there is no real desire to isolate mouth Atrim, to force it to respect the stcmdatds of internatiaml life and to pit an end to aeartheid - then it should not cum as a surpise if the opprewed slrjority uses other means to ewes8 its desire to survive, to change the inferior statue arraigned to it by South Africa. Veneamla is proud md honoured to aontinue participating in the emcees of bcolanioation mankind has undertaken. we have mintertuptedly and irPpartiallY ww-ed the noble cause of the peoples of Aft icy. (Mr. Pabon Garcia, Venezuela) So long as the apartheid regime continuea to eXiSti, and until the desire for an independent and sovereign Nedbfa is realised and South Africa’s aggression against its neighbours ceases, Venezuela will continue the political, diplomatic and humanitarian efforts to which it is Committed in a just and legitimate cause. We cannot be passive witnesses to the serious events which take place daily in southern Africa. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French)t I thank the representative of Venezuela for the kind words he 8ddreSeed to me- Mr. DuHEVI (Ghana)8 Your personal eminence and wisdom, sir, coupled with your remarkable eenss of humour are qualities we in the Ghana delegation have come to edrire. My oountry, Ghana, has excellent relations with Madagasoar, which you represent. For those reasons it is a great pleaSUre for US to see you presiding over the affairs of the Security Council for the month of June. We are confident that under your guidance we shall be able with resolve and purpose to addresa the aerioue issue before us today. The seciarity Counoil is meeting again to focus on South Africa. In his statement on Monday, 16 June, the representative of Angola conplafned about aggression by South Africa against his country. Specifically, he stated that on 5 June 1986 South African commandos attacked the Angolan port: of Nandbe, causing eoneiderable damage to property, including three cargo ships, one of which was runk . seven battalions of South African soldiers, he disclosed, are now on Angolan territory and are reported to have carried out, jointly with the Savimbi guerrillas, a series of attacks against Angola in M&y 1906, killing 53 Angolan soldiere. (Mr. Dumevi,. Zhena) The representative of South Africa has denied the involvement of South Afcicen force* in the 5 June attacks, attributing them to forces opposed to the Angolan Government. Significantly, the representative of Sooth Africa made no mention Of the reported presence on Angolan soil of South African forces seven l%ttaliohe in strength; nor did he refer to the eerie6 oi’ 8 C”kc!ks against Angola im May, in which South African l;iJrcee are reported to have c~~\‘..:t~cW& with Rw?-sbi’a UNITA guerrillas. Suuth Africa’s repeated acte of aggrecreion against rr.kgola are well documents ’ in the recorde of the Security Council. The objective in all case8 is to dentabilize Angola and thereby preeeure fto Government rnto denying eupDort to the B,,Mb west Africa People*e Organisation (SWWG) ad other liberation tnmmteM8. Indeed, that is the cardinal principle of South Africa’s policy toward8 the other countries in the reg?on. The South African representative’ s denials cannot therefore co~vinco anybody except the racist white minority r6giw.e that he reprefente. Ghana condemns this unabaehed act of aggreeeion against Angola, which totk place barely three week8 after the air raidrs on Zmbia, Zimbabwe amd Botswana - perticulat’ly since the sinking of one cargo ship :9d the aomage 0ausea to two other8 could have the effect of widening the conflict in the area. fn a etatement issued on ;l Jane 1986 and Cmued as a security Council dmment doted 13 June, the Government of Ghana was uneguzLvoca1 in its condemnation of the recent aggreeeion, an8 particularly of the fact that the attitude of 6ome men&-m of the Sfxxarity Council has been the principal factor encouzacing the racist regime to treat the Council with contempt. I wish to read out an extract from that document2 *The latert aggre8aial by PretOtia is an act of det3peratiOn of a rdgime clearly on its last legs. This misguided display of arrogant power ie made possible by the support, both direct and indirect, which the south African authorities enjoy from certain Weetern Power8 which have peraietently thwarted action by the international cammunity to impose comprehensive mandatory esnctione against Pretoria for continuing to violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbours.’ (S/18152, p. 2) The 5 June aggression brings into sharp focus fundamental outstanding issues that should be aaatemd in order to eliminate hostility and instability from the area. The first is the abolition of apartheid through the economic isolation of South Africa. There i6 growing acceptance within the international community of manetiune as an effective weapon to bring Botha and hia rdgirte to their knees. Yet when the ioeue of sanctions is raised 801oe permanent members of the Council prefer to mttle for verbal conderaatione. Even the selective sanctions proposed three uaeklr 490 when the Security Council fomd itself in a similar situation met with a Uouble veto. Such attitudes have only helped to harden the intransigence of the apartheia r&&m. Aa the Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Ghana, Mr. Obed Asamoah, @aid this morning in Paris at the World Conference on Sanction6 against South Africa, *In thta light of the failure to get the South African regime to negotiate for the tranofer of power to the black majority in South Africa, the world hae no other option but to impose comptehe,;leive mandatory sanction8 against that r&gime, * We urge those who prafeee Is1 their wore4 to be against apartheid, but who by their deeds have prot>nged the life of that evil eystei-. to change. (Mr, Dumevi, Ghana) The second fundamental matter we nead to eddress relsteo to overcoming the current political impasse on the question of Namibia’o independence. A framework for Namibia’8 independence.exists, in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). It is therefore a matter of deep regret that resolution 439 (1978) has remained unimlemented for over eight years because the racist rdgime - regrettably with the tacit support of a permanent member of this Counuil - want8 Namibia’s independence to come about on its own terns, namely, the withdrawal of Cuban troape frost Angola. IR his statement on Monday, 16 June, the representative of South Africa, apparently playing to the gallery, made a fetish of the preeence of Cuban troops in Ango2e and of the iarportation of goviet-made weapons by the Government of Angola. As a sovereign, independent country, Angola is free to make any praatical arrangements it may deem appropriate for the defence of ite territorial integrity. Furthermore, a6 a developing country which does not manufacture weapon& Angola has the eovereign right to import its weapons from any country It chooses. In any case, if Angola met its weapons requirements from a western Ruropean country, would anyone be raising a hue and ory? Ghana totally rejects any attempt e0 link the independence of Namibia to the presence of Cuban troop8 in Angola. (M& Dumevi, Ghana_) The third basic issue is that an urgent review of attitudes, particularly by permanent members of the Council, towards the Savimbi guerrilla movement is necessary, for there can be no moral or political justification for putting weapons worth millions of dollars into the hands of the Savimbi group to enable it to kill its own compatriots. It is well known that South Africa has been aiding Savimbi to prosecute internecine war against his own people; this is deplorable. It is even more so, as reports indicate, for a permanent me&r of the Council to have decided to supply Savimbf with sophisticated anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles. The decision does not only imply open alliance with the racist regime in destabilizing Angola but seriously undermines prospects for peace in that country. The support of a rebel group attempting to overthrow a legally constituted Governme;it is a flagrant violation of every known principle of international law. The principal conoern of the peopZan8 the Government of Angola, as the representative of Angola himself said on Monda- , 16 June, is a peaceful atmosphere which will enable them to rebuild their country. The members of the Security Council collectively have a responsibility to en3ure Angola the peace and stability it needs. The tasks before the Council are clear. Raving regard to the seriousness of thu Matter, it should proceed beyond the verbal condemnations of the past; it can do this by sending the appropriate messaqe to the apartheid regime. The message should not only be unequivocal in condemnation of the recent violation of Angola’s sovereignty contrary to conduct of civilized behaviour, but it should take the form of firm commitments to apply punitive measure8. In doing so* the Council would not only be reflecting the mood and feeling of the international community but also demonstrating to the Eotha r&Me that even traditional allies have now come to view its policies as an embarrassment. (Mr. Dumevi, Ghana) Let me now turn briefly to the draft resolution before the Council (S/18163). It is modest in its objectives. Xt calls upon Member States to refrain from any action that would undermine the independence and territorial integrity of Angola, and also calls for the imposition of selective sanctions as minimum punitive measures against the racist rdgime. The proposed measures are already being applied by national Governments and multinational organizations. In particular, they form pact of the specific measures agreed upon in the Nassau Accord at the end of the Novembex 1985 Commonwealth Slumnit in the Bahamas. What the draft resolution seeks to do is merely to bring these measures under the ambit of the Security Cooncil. My delegation reccmntende the draft resolution for Support. The PR8sIDENT (interpretation from French): I thank the representative of Ghana for the kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker ie the representative of India. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. KRISRDAD (India): At the outset, may I thank you, Sir, and the other members of the Council for having made it possible for my delegation to participate in this meeting of the Security Council. day I also extend to you our congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for June. We are pleased to see you in this capacity for the second time during the current term on the Council of your country, Madagascar, with which lndia has historical ties and friendly and co-operative relations. It ie difficult to be objective in speaking about you - a widely reapeoted and highly regataed colleague who is also a cl080 personal friend. Therefore, I shall not go beyond expreseing our confidence that your impartial stewardship and wise guidance will sustain the capacity of the Council to act effectively and oxpeaitiously. Way I also pay tribute to your predecessor, the Perumnent ReErasentative of Ghana, for the eresplary manner in which he cosduoted the affairs of the Council during Hay. Ironicallyy, the subject of discussion at that time wss what it is today - as, indeed, it has been on occasions beyond memory’s ready computation in the Council - h the arrclgance and perfidy of a recalcitrant r&giirae in South Africa towarda its own people, towards its neighbours and towards the whole world. WS18ib6 jOfIN the litany of places on Angola’s sovereign soi1 which have been ohosen by Pretoria as its laboratories of State terroriss. We have not forgotten ths attack6 on Luanda and Lobito or the attempts tu raid Cabinda. Nor oan we forget this outrage. In a statement issued on 6 Juue 1986 the Government of India dwI.srsdt ‘We are shocked et South Africa’s brazen and unprovoked attack on the Angolan port of Wamlb8, which reportedly resulted in the sinking of an Angolan ship and damage to its oil asd harbour installations. Some other ships were also damage& *The latest instance of Pretoria’s aggression, by instalments, against a peaceful, independent non-aligned country shaws’that the racist rdgime will Stop at nothing to destabilize by all possible means neighbouring sovereign African States. It also shows that South Africa is extending its aggression to various parts of Angola, including its economic infrastructure, in clear violation of its own cbligations under the Lusaka amor of 1984 with Angola. The Governsent of India strongly condemns South Aftiea*s continuing acts of aggression against Angola and calle upon the international comunity to talcs effective action to stop these outrages. There is so other alternative but to apply comprehensive mandatory can&ion& against the Pretoria r6gise. We extend our Jeep eyxpathy to Angola and express our solidarity and muppott to its Government and people in the face of these heavy odde. we ere aoafidant that the otruggle against apartheid 411 be intensified and that the people of South Africa will 6oon he able to put an end to this hated system which has been at the root of 6o much oppression end injustice within South Attic8 and aggreaoion in the region.. Only days hefore the attack on Wamibe , the ninietar of External Relations of tha People’e ~epubliu of Angola addressed a letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nation& which has been ciraUlated 88 a document of the Security Council (s/lSl29, an 5 June 1986 - the very day of the moot recent act of aggrseeian by Pretor i8, In hi@ letter the senior government leader of Angola ha6 reaounted box tbr wnth of May 1986 %a8 marked by alaant daily violations of Angola”s sir6pace and the build-up of South Afriaen regular troops inside it0 nstional territory*. (S/19129, annex) The Iinieter bar drawn specific attention to the attacks near Xangongo, in the south of Mgolr, where S3 lives were eaceiticed on the altar of Pretoria*8 pathetio attoqu to rurtein its own immoral and constitutionally offenoive r6gime by brute phyrfcal torch (Mr. Kc ishnan, India) The Angolah Foreign Minister ‘d letter is not only an indictment of a wrong that ye) are all able to discern but whi& we seem powerless to remedy; it is also an appeal for f3UppOCt in the face of the increase in hum and material 1oSSeS incurred by a Member State. The report of the United Nations Resident Co-ordinatot in Luanda chat Angola used almost half a billion dollars of its foreign exctranye to ptWhaSe food last year ie a pointer to the grim Situation in a land ravaged two years ago by drought. It is a situation that south Afrioa has exploited with care and selectivity. Attacks have been targeted on civilian areas, on medical centres and clinics, on water wells and even on schools. Instances have been documented of the effort and expense with which seeds and fertilizer have been pcovidled to farmere who have Seen unable to market their produce because of the mining of roads by criminals nurtured by the Pretoria rt$gime. We ace awase that the Seccetery-General is even now engaged in preparing his report to the Council on the implementation of resolution 577 (19851. India and our fellow members of the Wvemant of Non-Aligned Countries will continue to do whatevec our tesoucces allaw to assist in the reamstruction of fraternal Angola. This was reaff irU@ at the highest level by the Chairman of the Movement, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India, &ring his visit to Wands last month. The me&erS of the Non-Aligned Movement eaw the heroism end resolve of the brave Angolan people at the time of the Coordinating Bureau.8 meeting in Luanda last autumn. SOUth Afcica has dared to ignore canons of international law, but we have Seen proof of its failure to break Angola’s spirit and will. The statement wa heard at the start of this debate from the Permanent Representative of Angola is a reaffirmation Of this spirit, whkh the international oomunity salutes. This debate began on a poignant annivereacy. Even ae we speak here today we have little knowledge about what precisely is happening in &uth Africa at the (Mt. Rrishnan, India) mcment . A shroud of secrecy, wreathed in barbed-wire and gunshot, emergenay decrees, press gags and media blackouts, has been cast over a proud people by a regime that has imposed itnelf by brutality and terror upon them. These solemn meetings of the Security Council are a reaffirmaticn of the will of the overwhelming nrajority of the United Wations to act with decision and spsed. Through ita failure in the past, the Council has sent the wrong signals to south Africa. Clinging to life cnly by the thread leased to it by its protectcrs outside, the Pretoria rdgime tramples mercilessly and Uefiantly upon tnose within South Africa whose colour and courage it finds impossible to harmarize in a single, democratic society. Never has the chasm between professed values and practised politics been greater or more ludicrous. Never have beliefs universally cherished and respected been so easily flout?d by a small coterie of entrenched interests. Never has the stereotype satire of the United Nations as a forum immensely capabl? of speech but flaccid and shy of action been truer than in the chronicle of its failure in south Africa. And, let us not forget, never has the chance to redeem our pranise besn greater than it is now, if we can Only sumpun the courage and united purpase that we need. The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries has long since pointed the direction - imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions. In a message to the World Conference on Sanctions against South Africa being held at Paris, the Chairman of the EIovement of Won-Aligned Countriee, Prbae Minister kjiv Gandhi of India, reaffirmed: ‘@The time for verbal denunciation ia over. The time for concrete immediate action has come. There should not and cannot be any encouragement to efforts for the errcalled reform of the evil system of apartheid; it hes to be totally uprooted and destroYed~ (Mr. Kr ishnan, India) aIndia has been in the forefront of the struggle against raaiam even before its indegendsnce. We have consisttlntly held the view in aomum with the non-aligned countries and the enlighted sections of world opinion that the Only peaceful way to end apartheid Is to enforce mandatory sanctions against Pretaria. The alternative is violence and bloodshed. %e cannot wait indefinitely and helplessly in the face of daily destruction of the real values of civillzatian. Breedan and raofal eguality cannot be sacrificed at the alfar of economic and comercisf inteteots.m The PReSlDI)ENT (interpretation fran French) t I thank the repreeentative of India for the very kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker ie the representative of Wongolia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make hia statement. Ht. WYllMwo (Mongolia) (interpretation from Russian)t pirate mY &legation heartily congratulates you, Sir , on your aseulPgtfa, of the duties of Oresident of the &curity Council for the aronth of June. We hope &at under put skilful guidance and with your many years’ diplomatic expsr ience the Counoil will weceosfully discharge its functions. Also, ous delegation expresses deep gratitude to yo;rr predecessor, Aaae~dor Gbeho, Pernurnent lbapesantative of Ghana, for the ekflful day it% whiah he guided the Counoil ‘8 war k last month. @sin we are witness to the fact that the racist South African rigime has comitted yet awthx crime against the People's Rspuhlic of Angola. The faot5 Prove iIU%JntrcUer tibly that on 5 June this year South African for-6 car rid out armd attacks against the oil depot in the port of Wamibe in the Peoplewe hepubliu of Angola as well as agalnet civilian merchant vessels of the Soviet Union and (Mr. Wadco, Hongolie) Cuba which were unloading augo there. & a remit of thae barbaric attacks great da-go was &me not only to Angola but also to the Soviet Union and Cuba, it io also a fast that abe ship was aatually sunk. Thae and many other eulier act0 0P aggressim by South Mriaa againtst neighbouring oovereign Afriaan Stabs have puowd the omaifia goal0 of arusbing ths people% struggle, impoeiwy its will on othera and perpetuating the ariminal l y8tem of epartheid, which ie the mot cause of the mutable 8ituation An muthern Africa. Tbe current aatiane of the reai8t &utb hfr:iaan dgime are illegal, since South Africa ie dalibuatoly viohting generally aaapted gtinaiples end norms of interwkimal law rmrdin) tha invitiability of the territorial integrity of Btrtea and diueguding the ire&&m of navigation. (Mr. Nyamdm, Mongolia) Consequently, such actions are subject to strict condemnation and appropriate punidment . From that viewpoint, Pretoria’s actions are rightly condemned by the overwhelming majority of the world’s States. The question of the situation in southern Africa is the focus of attention by many international organizations, both intergovernmental and social. Were, it is appropriate to mention the World Conference on Sanctions against South Africa that is now being held in Paris. The international cmmunity as a whole demands an immediate end to such acts of aggression by the Pretoria rbgixe. Aowver, South Africa f reguently resorts to acts of aggression against neighbouring African States without heed to the voice of the international ccmunity. One wonders: Why dues South Africa behave in such a manner? fn the opinion of our delegation, and others, the principal cause of such behaviour by the racist regime is the policy of ccnnivance with the racists being followed by’the united States and some other Western countries. In that connection, we should bluntly state that the recent thwarting by the united States and the United Ringdcun of the adoption of effective measures against South Africa for its aggression against three front-line State6 clearly served to encourage the racist dgime to centinue its policy of t.zor ar? z’t qafnst neighlscuring African States. Such terrorist acts by th- Cdei;o: ,I :gime are creating a serious threat to international peaa. ma ~-+cur~.ty. Expressing the will and the aspiratiouc of its pecp‘a, +. d People’s Republic ’ of Mongolia categorically condeme Soolxh P: ‘-Lc;-\‘c cr;einaP acts an3 damr.ds that they cease forthwith. We feel that South Afffica sf?ulA b&r f 11 respmsibility +r chnrtn -rnaxluo +szt,P g&-i:rinpr: .*'.:?..-*~pT QMr .:- -_---- -~=- ---- -- iru~ak..,r, CnL;w &,h4a N-_YI-P~-~+_~ e+ -;i-%.E-.- vs. -- -,.-e TFT-- --. exprsm once again its solidarity with *hose S - XD and penr ‘er: dfrcctly affected by South Africa’5 aggression. We call upon th+d S,~~rit- L~u:xi:I. strongly to condemn the attack on the port cjf Wamf.ho an@ t ci fimpv mr~~ti~~! m08~Ufe~ to ena (Mr. Nyamdoo, MongoliaZ South Africa.8 aggression against neighbouring States, including the impositioa of conprehensive mandatory aanctione under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. The PRRSIDRNT (interpretation from French): I thank the representative of the Mongolian People’s Republic for the kin6 words he addressed to me. I should now like to make a brief statement in my capacity ae tepreee.. . .:ive of Madagascar. For the thirteenth time since 1976 the Security Council has before it a complaint by the People’ 8 Republia of Angola against South Africa. As the repreeentative of Angola stated, einae 1981 South African troops have been illegally uxwpying parte of Anqolan territory and 7 battalions are still stationed in Angola. Those 8aam troops, allied with bandits in the pay of Pretoria, have killed more than 53 Angolan soldiers and wounded dozens of others near Xangogo, in Cunene Province, iu late Ray 1986. On S June 1966 South African commandos attacked the port of Namibe, f&inking a Cuban merchant ship, damaging two Soviet merchant ships and striking at three oil Storage tanks, two of which uere destroyed. In 11 year6 of independence the People’s Republic of Angola, although it has no aoamw border with South Africa, hao been the victim of premeditated and persistent armed attacks by the South African racist r&girae. Xangogo, in Cunene Province, ie located &me 100 miles north of the border between Angola and the t -ternational Territory of Namibia, illegally occupied, Istlitxtzed and uaeff a6 a base for Bouth Africa’s armed attacks and deatabilizing acttons. M&ta of the Security Council bore all of those geopolitical factors in mfnd when they adopted 12 earlier resolutions on this subject - resolutione that condemn South Africa, demand that it withdraw its troops from Angolan territory and cease (The President) the use of Namibia for it8 aggremcive deaigno against Angola, and call for redresi3 . and uxapeneatfon for the material damage suffered by the victim Speaking in the Council on 20 Juue 1989, prior to the unaniraous adoption of resolution 967 (198S), I had an opportunity to uprers my delegation’s concern at the scope of the condemnations, appeale and warning8 addresued to South Africa. At that time, I aeked what aeeurancea we had that such reprehensible actious on the part of Pretoria rrould not be repeated? To what extent can we trust the apartheid r&ime, which hae conetantly ignored itm obligstione? Are we to continue counting on the pragmatic gradualim of auue and the reformism of Others? Since I put those querrtione, which sowe might describe aa peorriaietic and others as disillueioned, the Council has adopted three Iy)re reuolutione m&ming South Africa for renewed acts of aggreerioh against the People’e Republic of Angola. Indeed, the a&rtheid rdgime, a l pecialirt in State terrorism, cure Of *unity and of being protected within the Security Council iteelf, albeit on the baeis of shoddy pretests, rpecioue argument8 and pm&lo-humanitarian considerations, ha8 publicly threatened to continue to comait acts of aggression against front-line State8 and other countries in southern Afriua. Pretoria98 ruler& rrtubbornly determined to represa, destroy end subject by violence, if not by deceit, did not heeitate to carry out their threats by ordering three eimltaneoue military rat& againrt BotawanaI e&is and zimbabwe on 19 my 1986. Such gratuitous acts of aggreseion, vhich form a uyrtematic pattern of violations of international law, aze aimed at influencing the policiee of the front-line States in a manner favourable to south African deeignu. They were perpetrated in defiance of resolution 581 (1996), adopted on 13 February !996, which condeumd the threats of South Africa and strongly warned the racist rBg6We Of South Africa against committing any act8 of aggression, terrorism and dertabilieatia~ against independent African States. (The President) (The President) For reasons of which we are all aware but which we do not endorse, the Security Council has not been in a position to censure the wanton acts of 19 Hay 1986 of which Botswana , Zambia and Zimbabwe were the victims. lbrning now to the People’s Republic of Angola , the systematic destruction of its eccrranic infrastructure and the cessation of its support to the Namibian people in their struggle for free&m and national liberaticm are two priority objectives of the apartheid rdgime. The attainment of those objectives would make it possible for the racist regime of Pretoria, on the one hand, to affirm, as its represen.tative did with impudence in the Council last Monday, that the internal difficulties in Angola para&xically constitute a threat to the security of the region and therefore justify intervention by South Africa and, on the other hand, to challenge the political and international commitment of the People’s Republic of Angola, regionally and internationally l Angola, whose only defence against might is the rightness of its cause, has cane to the Security Council for the thirteenth time to ask for assistance and protectian. The time for procrastination has passed. Severe condemnations and SOlemIt warning8 have been issued in vain. There is a general outcry on all sides against the racist rdgime of South Africa and a concerted effort is being made to put an end to the unlawful occupation of Namibia and to apartheid with its violence and human suffering. I might note, in particular, the appeal pub1 ished in Harftre on 20 day 1986 by the Ministers of the Front-line States, as well as the unequivocal conclusions of the Group of EMnent Persons of the Commonwealth recommendinq l sueedv and broad eancticns by the international community* since continuaticn of the discussions would lead to nothing in the present circun~~tances. I might also mention the message that was sent by Mr. Allan Wagner, Foreign Minister of Peru, addressed to (The President) the President of the Council in his cspacity as President of the World Conference on Sanctions against South Africa. The Democratic &public of Madagascar , steadfastly behind the People’s Republic of Angola in the many trials that it has undergone since independence, dOinS once again in the demand for global and biding sanctions against South Africa. The draft resolution introduced to the Council by the representative of Ghana, of which my delegation is a co-sporsor , meets the expectations of the international comunity. If we are to enter into a constructive commitment with respect to the peoples of southern Africa, it is our common duty not to disappoint the international conununity once again. I nw resume my functions as President of the Secuc ity Council. It is my understanding that the Council is prepared to vote on the draft resolution before it. If thete is no objecticn, I shall put the draft tesoluticn to the vote. Since there is no objection, it is so decided. First, I shall call on these members of the Council who wish to make a statement before the vote. Mr. de KEMOULAMA (Prance) (interpretation from French): Mr. President, there is no need for me to tell you that , with the greatest pleasure, I join Our colleagues who have paid a tribute to you. We often speak here of diplomatic exper ience. I should simply like to recall that when we are speaking about YOU that expressiar is completely valid. Moreover, I would recall the very deep links which exist between your country and mine. There is therefore no need to say that your presidency gives my delegation great pleasure and that we are assured on all eideo of complete objectivity during your presidency. I should also like to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Ambassador Gbdro, who ,abO demonstrated great diplomatic talent in the difficult debates that took plaza lant month. Prance deeply deplores South Africa’s persfstsnce in its polfoy of acmed actions against the territory of neighbouring countries and condemn8 thase attacks -t strongly. I should like to repeat once again that the mvernmmt of South Africa is in error and that such an attitude on its part cantsibutes nothing to 8ettling the true problems which it hae to confront. The Fren& delegation would have dse&ily wished that the international OoDIunity’s oondamnation of those repeated acts might be translated into a vats not tarred by reservations on the part of Council metiers. France, like other countries, has not hesitated to take measures against South Africa, at the natiunal level, following the adoption of Security Council re8olutiab 569 (1985) e My delegation does not think it appropriats to transform those volunbry measures into mandatory sanctions as provided for in the draft resolution before UO. Bbr this essential teasand, moreoverr because the draft contains car-in formulatians that we canuot accept, my delegation will abstain in the Vote-

I thank f&e representative of Prance for his very kind worde addressed to me* I shall nao put to the vote the draft resolutiar contained in documsnt Wl6163. A vote was taken by show of hands. In favour: Australia, Bulgaria, China, Congo, l&nmark~ Ghana, Madagaecar, Thailand. Trinidad artd Tobago, Union of Soviet Socialiet Republics, United Arab EMrates, Venezuela Against: Unitsd Kingdom of Great Britain end Northern Ireland, United States of America Abstaining-: France

The resrlt of the voting ie a5 follows: I.2 in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention. The &aft resolution has not been adopted owing to the negative vote of a permanent member of the Council. I shall now call on thase members who wish to make a statement after the vote. Mr. MAXEY (United Kingdom) : My country en joys friendly relations with Angola. Wo one1 I feel sure, is more conscious of this than Angola’s Permanent Representetive, who is also his oountry’s Ambassador to the Court of St. James. We deplore violations of Angolan terci tory. We joined in ccndemring South African incursitaw into Angola on four occasicns last year. There is no room foe doubt as to where the united Kingdom stands on this issue. But my delegatiar was unable to support the draft resolution just put to the vote for reasons which are familiar to the Council. The draft resolution, like that submitted follcwing the South Aftfoan raids on Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe last mcnth, to whidr it bears a strong ceseablance, calls for the impcsition of mandatory smctione based on Chapter VII of the Uni’ted Uaticns Charter. This is unacceptable to us. we remain oppceed to economic boycotts because they do not work. (Mr. Maxey, United Kingdom) The Council* 8 condemnation of South Africa’s actions last month was strong and . unambiguous. In his statement on 23 May Sir John Thomson observed that the raids on the three front-line States could only deepen South Africa’s isolation. He stressed that South Africa must understand that we would never in any circumstances countenance cross-border violations by South Africa againat its ‘3 ighbours. There was no disagreement that South Africa had committed an illegitimate and unprovoked act of force agaihst three neighbouring States. There was no question but that South Africa had acted in violation of one of the fundamental principles of the Charter - the obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force in international relations. Those same considerations remain valid in the case before the Council today, a case, I am afraid, of a depressingly familiar kind. Let me reiterate that we see absolutely no justification for this latest armed attack on an Angolan port facility. We utterly condemn all violations of Angola’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is a matter of very considerable regret to my delegation that the Council’s repeated calls upon South Africa to withdraw completely it8 forces from Angola and to respect that country’s sovereignty have gone unheeded, aa have the Council’s assertions that acts of force cannot but undermine the prospects for peace and stability in the southern African region. We have heard the categorical denial by the representative of South AftiCa of any responsibility for the latest military operation. To that I can only respond that admitted armed incursions into Angola caused the convening of the Council no fewer than four times last year. Actions speak louder than words. Let South Africa give practical effect to its declarations of peaceful intent. (Mr. Ma%ey, United Kingdom) It is tragic that on an issue where we have always stood at one with other Council members we should on this occasion be faced with language that the sponsors knew was unacceptable to us , even before they drafted their resolution. I refer, of course, to the proposal in operative paragraph 7 of the draft resolution that selective econcmic sanctions should be imposed on South Africa urder Chapter VII: of the Charter. My Government has shown itself willing to implement a range of measures against South Africa. We are looking now, with our partners in the Comnwnwealth and the European Community, at what further effective steps we can all take to increase the pressure on South Africa to put an end to apartheid and its policy of destabilization. But cur aim is to bring down apartheid, not the South African economy, and we are not prepared to be pushed into adopting particular measures in advance of such consultations. We made our position clear last month, when we voted against precisely the same provisions in the draft resolution tabled by the non-aligned countries. It is hard to see what is gained by submitting a draft resolution that is certain to be vetoed. Of course, there are those on the Council who welcome what they see as an opportunity to encourage divisions between ua and our African friends, but we are bound to ask whether a draft resolution that contained language acceptable to all would not have served far Better as a signal to the South African Government of the international community’s paaition than no resolution at all, which is now, unfortunately, the outcome. Mr. OKUK (United States of America) : There is much in the draft resolution that the United States supporta. -.. --.--&L1--- LlKe othec aerayarruim .GeatGZ tZGX? this table, the United States is concerned about the military escalation in the southern Af c ican region. We have in the past joined other Council members in condemning South Africa’8 aggression against its neighbours. we have gone along with demands that, pursuant to the findings of a United Nations Commiseion of Investigation, the South African authorities pay appropriate compensation for the damage caused by their defence forces. There are, however, a number of elements in the draft resolution that my Government finds unacceptable. First, we note the difficulty in ascertaining the truth in a part of the world largely inaccessible to independent and unbiased fact-f indfng. The South African Government has denied that it carried out the military actions of which it hae been accused. It would perhaps have been worthwhile to consider dispatching a fact-finding commission to investigate thoroughly the Angoian charge. Secondly, a8 my Government has so often stated in the past, the United States continue8 to condemn cross-horder violence, whatever its origin. we welcome unreeervedly the operative paragraph that ‘Calls upon all Member States to desist from any action which would undermine the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of . . . Angola”, (S/18163, para. 5) But we would go further and urge restraint on all parties. The only way to put an end to the cycle of violence is through peaceful negotiations, a process that the United states has supported and will continue to support. The Council’s goal ebould be to quell intransigence, not fuel it. With that in min8, the United States cannot accept the call to aeaist the military capabilities of the Angolan Government. We have rejected this call to arma in the pact, ii) the conviction that the region is in need of fewer guns and more cOnCerted efforts to resolve disputes through peaceful means. (Mr. Okun, United States) Finally, we cannot go along wfth the i~sition of mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. We acknowledge that much of the unrest in the southern P,frican region can be attributed to South Africa’8 system of apartheid. With that clearly in mind we have over the years taken a number of unilateral steps to accelerate the disuantling of apartheid. We instituted an arms embargo in 1962, fully 15 years before the Security Council voted a mandatory arms embargo, which we supported. Our current laws are etr icter than those of Securtty Council reecluticne 418 (1977) and 556 (1954) , and those laws are being strictly enforced. Beginning in 1981, we have carried out assistance and scholarship programmes for deprived South Africans. These have included human rights grants and legal aseistance. Tcenty million dollars has been budgeted for such prcgraumes in the fiscal year 1986. We have enacted numerous measures curtailing credit asaietance to thoee organs of the Scuth African Government that serve to support apartheid. We enforce regulations to ensure that treatment of black workers employed by American companies in South Africa ie equal to that accorded white workers. President Reagan’s Executive Order of 9 September 198s implemented additional restrictive meaeures agsinet South Africa to express our diesatisfaction with the pace of reform. Our aim is thus to promote the end of amwtheid in South Africa through peaceful means. Our policy is designed to help all forces of justice and progress within South Africa to promote the early emergence of a non-racial form of government through appropriate pressures. (Mr. Okun, United States) The united States, however, has long opposed mandatory economic sanctions for reasons we have outlined in the Council on numerous occasions in the past. Our view has not changed. Punitive economic sanctions against South Africa would represent an abdication of our responsibility to support the efforts of those in South Africa who are seeking to bring about a peaceful end to apartheid. It would foster even greater intransigence on the part of extremists in South Africa and impede the path to negotiations between the Government and its opponents. Such negotiations are essential to any peaceful outcome of the struggle against racism in South Africa. Further, sanctions would damage both South Africa’s economy and the economies of the region, which should not be victimized because of apartheid. Broad sanctions would result in indiscriminate damage to the entire South African economy. Such sanctions target not apartheM per se but 28 million people. Other sovereign States are free to enact the measures they deem most appropriate in the common effort to bring about a Csvernment in South Afr ice based upon the consent of the governed. The United States asks other States to respect our deeply held conviction that comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa are flatly inimical to peaceful change. The United States voted against the draft resolution with regret. I am hopeful, however, that I have made our reasons clear to Council member5 and to other delegation& We are working to help the forces of reason in South Africa prevail in time to prevent increased bloodshed and chaos. The United States r+n+!n+ nnmfied tra mandatory nnnctiann. .I WQ nhall not turn our backs on the innocent in order to punish the guilty.

The representative of Angola wishes to speak. I call upon him. Mr. de FIGURIREDO (Angola) : Mr. President, please accept my delegation’s deep appreciation for the extremely able manner in which you have handled the proceedings of this debate. I have asked to speak once again also to express the appreciation of my Government and my delegation to those of our friends here at the United Nations who have responded with statements of solidarity during the Council’s deliberation of our complaint on South African racist aggression against the territory and the people of the People’s Republic of Angola. While I wish to express the gratitude of Angola to those members of the Council that have supported my country’s quest for justice and respect for the United Nations Charter in the form of a condemnation of the violation of Angolan sovereignty and territorial integrity by the racist imperialist minority r&ime of Pretoria, I would like to point out that this expression of support is primarily for the principles and the work of the United Nations and the Security Council. The position of the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States Should come as no surprise. But I must admit to a feeling of frustration and even despair of the usefulness of the Council, indeed of the raison d*&re of the united Nations itself, when two of the permanent members of the Council, virtually guardians of the United Nations Charter, see fit to defy it and to violate their mandate. The poeition nf the t+ver~mm+g nf tk rtni+na CC,.C~~ -nrl &ha r~..ae~a ~;~~a-.,. - .*.-P-v- --w-.*-- s..- “..L “a.*..,.” .\*..yb.Y.l* “L. all the troubling and urgent issues that plague southern Africa at present is well known. No amount of pontification on the evils of apartheid will have any effect (Ht. de Figueftedo, Angola) ot catty any weight when those two Power& tefuae to join in the international . CCmmunity*s otherwise unaniamm call for Cauutions against the sole plague of erauthetn Africa: the racist tdgim in Pretoria. A report was compiled towards the end of last year by the Secretary-General based on infotsation from the Security Council Corrrission of Investigation established untlet resolution 971 (1985). It is contained in document S/17648, and it outlines the human, material and financial losses suffered by Angola ae a result of the various South AfriCan attacks. However, no amount of statistics, reports, frets or figures can fully relate to the sum tot81 of what these constant racist attacks mean in terms of the national life of my cmntcy, in tetme of Angola’s efforts to ovetcaue the hsndicape of its past and the immense difficulties of its pteeent . An% figures certainly do no juetice in terms of the human euffeting the people of Angola uudetgo as their loved one8 die or the fruit of their labour is destroyed time and time again, with the conetant threats of the troops and aerial tmbardmente of racist Bouth Africa. What doea civilized society do when its ariaAnal ate guarded by gaolers who are thewelvee corrupt? Who guer&e the gaolers? Or perhaps M are not still living in a civilizea world, for thst term cannot be applied as long as apartheid . and its collaborators exiat and are free to do ae they pleaee, when proteet is suted and effective action ie disbarred. All thet is allme& in the way of dissent is siuply platitudes. Laws and principles ate supposed to apply to all segments of society, to the ..* . . ,-- VbCGblt), to t.lic ariP:iia:P, a.- .&a ---*-rrd Lhr. r..rrAl am. C” .a.- y’“.‘.’ . ..U b..W J’w’w-““. Tkp I+tter aannot have a different set of rules for thesselves. I do not wish to sound unnecessarily pessimistic, but I cannot help feeling that we have not seen the last of South African irPpetialiet military adventurism, (Mr. de Figueiredo, Angola) and therefore I do not feel that this is my last appearance before the council on this particular issue. Not Until South Africa is made to change its imperialist posture, not until South Africa is truly decolonised and has a majority Government freely elected - not until then will peace and stability come to southern Africa. We have pride fn being what we are in dignity and courage. We have an intense desire for freedom, for we fought for it, and self-determination and independence. Africa has sons and daughters enough to fight long and hard until racism and iEPperialism are rooted out from southern Africa. The population option is ours , and the history of southern Africa will be written in bloGd since that Is the only language the racists employ. It may be the only language they underatanil. In every moment of our lives history Is being made. And when it is finally reoorded it will be remembered that we rejected colonialism, raciem and imperialiI3m. fl: will be remembered that we all along sought to negotiate, for life i6 preCfOU8. But free&ii! ie dearer. For that, we will fight in my and every language, on alby and every battlefield. The dialectica of the situation demand that history will be written on our terms. If I may quote Burke, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. I hope all of us sitting here are gcod men. The PReSfC6lt~~ (interpreta,ton from French): There are no further names on the list of speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the Ltem on the agenda. The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m.