Security Council resolution 311 (1972) [on policies of apartheid in South Africa]
Symbol: S/RES/311(1972)
Date: 1972-02-04
Meeting record: S/PV.1639
Subjects: POLITICAL PRISONERS|NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS|DETAINED PERSONS|ARMS EMBARGO|SOUTH AFRICA|APARTHEID|HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE|EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
Notes: Concerns policies of apartheid in South Africa.
In: Resolutions and decisions of the Security Council, 1972. - S/INF/28. - 1973. - p. 10. - (SCOR, 27th year).
Also published in: The United Nations and apartheid, 1948-1994 (United Nations blue book series, v. 1) - [ST/]DPI/1568 - 1994 - p. 316 (document 64).

Resolution 311 (1972)
of 4 February 1972

The Security Council,

Noting with grave concern the aggravation of the
situation in South Africa resulting from the continued
intensification and expansion of the policies of apartheid and repression by the Government of South
Africa,

Having heard the statements of those individuals
invited to address the Council on this question,

Taking note of the statement of the representative
of the Special Committee on Apartheid, 42

Deploring the persistent refusal of the Government
of South Africa to implement the resolutions adopted
by the Security Council in order to promote a peaceful solution in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations,

Gravely concerned that the situation in South Africa
seriously disturbs international peace and security in
southern Africa,

Noting the continued military build-up and strengthening of its military capability by the Government
of South Africa,

Convinced that urgent measures must be taken by
the Security Council to secure implementation of its
resolutions and thereby promote a solution to the
grave situation in South Africa and southern Africa,

1. Condemns the Government of South Africa for
continuing its policies of apartheid in violation of its
obligations under the Charter of the United Nations;

2. Reiterates its total opposition to the policies of
apartheid of the Government of South Africa;

3. Recognizes the legitimacy of the struggle of the
oppressed people of South Africa in pursuance of their
human and political rights, as set forth in the Charter
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;

4. Urgently calls upon the Government of South
Africa to release all persons imprisonned, interned or
subjected to other restrictions as a result of the policies
of apartheid;

5. Calls upon all States to observe strictly the arms
embargo against South Africa;

6. Urges Governments and individuals to contribute
generously and regularly to the United Nations funds
which are used for humanitarian and training purposes
to assist the victims of apartheid;

7. Commends the inter-governmental organizations,
non-governmental organizations and individuals for
assisting in the education and training of South Africans
and urges those who do not to begin and those who
do to expand their efforts in this field;

8. Decides, as a matter of urgency, to examine
methods of resolving the present situation arising out
out of the policies of apartheid of the Government of
South Africa,

Adopted at the 1639th meeting by 14 votes to none,
with I abstention (France).

 
42 See Official Records of the Security Council, Twentyseventh Year, 1628th meeting.

Texto español (official Spanish version): LA CUESTION DEL CONFLICTO RACIAL EN SUDAFRICA RESULTANTE DE LA POLITICA
DE APARTHEID DEL GOBIERNO DE LA REPUBLICA DE SUDAFRICA*

Durante sus reuniones en Africa*!, el Consejo de
Seguridad aprobó la siguiente resolución relativa a esta
cuestión.

Resolución 311 (1972)
de 4 de febrero de 1972

El Consejo de Seguridad,

Observando con grave preocupación la agravación
de la situación en Sudáfrica resultante de la continua
intensificación y expansión de la política de apartheid
y de represión del Gobierno de Sudáfrica,

Habiendo oído las declaraciones de las personas invitadas a dirigirse al Consejo sobre este tema,

Tomando nota de la declaración del representante
del Comité Especial del Apartheid”,

Deplorando la persistente negativa del Gobierno de
Sudáfrica a aplicar las resoluciones aprobadas por el
Consejo de Seguridad, con objeto de promover una

solución pacífica con arreglo a la Carta de las Naciones
Unidas,

Gravamente preocupado porque la situación en Sud-
áfrica perturba seriamente la paz y la seguridad internacionales en el Africa meridional,

Observando la continua escalada militar y el fortalecimiento de la capacidad militar por parte del Gobierno de Sudáfrica,

Convencido de que el Consejo de Seguridad debe
tomar medidas urgentes para garantizar la aplicación

40 El Consejo adoptó también resoluciones o decisiones sobre
esta cuestión en 1963, 1964 y 1970.

41 Véase supra, págs. 2 a 3.

42 Véase Actas Oficiales del Consejo de Seguridad, Vigésimo
Séptimo Año, 1628a. sesión.

de sus resoluciones y promover así una solución a la
grave situación en Sudáfrica y en el Africa meridional,

1. Condena al Gobierno de Sudáfrica por continuar
su política de apartheid en violación de sus obligaciones
en virtud de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas;

2. Reitera su total oposición a la política de apartheid del Gobierno de Sudáfrica;

3. Reconoce la legitimidad de la lucha de los pueblos oprimidos de Sudáfrica por sus derechos humanos
y políticos tal como se enuncian en la Carta y en la
Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos;

4. Pide urgentemente al Gobierno de Sudáfrica que
deje en libertad a todos las personas presas, internadas
o sujetas a otras medidas restrictivas como resultado
de la política de apartheid;

5. Pide a todos los Estados que observen estrictamente el embargo de armas contra Sudáfrica;

6. Insta a los Gobiernos y a los particulares a que
contribuyan generosa y regularmente a los fondos de
las Naciones Unidas destinados a fines humanitarios y
de formación con objeto de asistir a las víctimas del
apartheid;

7. Encomia a las organizaciones intergubernamentales, organizaciones no gubernamentales y personas
individuales que prestan asistencia en la educación y
formación de sudafricanos e insta a las que no lo hayan
hecho a comenzar sus esfuerzos en este campo y a
ampliarlos a las que ya lo hagan;

8. Decide, como cuestión de urgencia, examinar los
métodos para resolver la actual situación creada por
la política de apartheid del Gobierno de Sudáfrica.

Aprobada en la 1639%a. sesión por 14 votos contra
ninguno y 1 abstención
(Francia).

CUESTION CONCERNIENTE A LA SITUACION EN LOS TERRITORIOS BAJO
ADMINISTRACION PORTUGUESAS

Durante sus reuniones en Africa*, el Consejo de
Seguridad aprobó la siguente resolución relativa a esta
cuestión.

43 El Consejo adoptó también resoluciones o decisiones sobre
esta cuestión en 1963.
41 Véase supra, págs. 2 a 3.

Resolución 312 (1972)
de 4 de febrero de 1972

El Consejo de Seguridad,
Habiendo estudiado la situación en los territorios

africanos bajo administración portuguesa,

Texte français (official French version): QUESTION DU CONFLIT RACIAL EN AFRIQUE DU SUD RESULTANT DE LA POLITIQUE
D’APARTHEID DU GOUVERNEMENT DE LA REPUBLIQUE SUD-AFRICAINE*’

Au cours de ses réunions en Afrique*!, le Conseil de
sécurité a adopté la résolution ci-après concernant cette
question :

Résolution 311 (1972)
du 4 février 1972

Le Conseil de sécurité,

Notant avec une grave préoccupation l’aggravation
de la situation en Afrique du Sud résultant de l’intensification et de l’élargissement continus de la politique
d’apartheid et de répression poursuivie par le Gouvernement sud-africain,

Ayant entendu les déclarations des personnes qui ont
été invitées à prendre la parole devant le Conseil sur
cette question,

Prenant acte de la déclaration du représentant du
Comité spécial de l’apartheid*?,

Déplorant le refus persistant du Gouvernement sudafricain d'appliquer les résolutions adoptées par le
Conseil de sécurité en vue de favoriser une solution
pacifique conformément à la Charte des Nations Unies,

Gravement préoccupé par le fait que la situation en
Afrique du Sud trouble sérieusement la paix et la sé-
curité internationales en Afrique australe,

Notant l’accroissement constant de l’arsenal militaire et le renforcement continu de la puissance militaire du Gouvernement sud-africain,

40 Question ayant fait l’objet de résolutions ou décisions de
la part du Conseil en 1963, 1964 et 1970.

41 Voir ci-dessus, p. 2 et 3.
42 Voir Documents officiels du Conseil de sécurité, vingtseptième année, 1628e séance.

Convaincu qu’il incombe au Conseil de sécurité
d'adopter d'urgence des mesures pour assurer l’application de ses résolutions et favoriser ainsi le dénouement de la situation grave qui règne en Afrique du Sud
ct en Afrique australe,

1. Condamne le Gouvernement sud-africain, qui
poursuit sa politique d’apartheid en violation des obligations qui lui incombent aux termes de la Charte des
Nations Unies;

2. Réitère son opposition totale à la politique
d’apartheid du Gouvernement sud-africain;

3. Reconnaît la légitimité de la lutte que mène le
peuple opprimé de l’Afrique du Sud pour s’assurer les
droits de l’homme et les droits politiques énoncés dans
la Charte et dans la Déclaration universelle des droits
de l’homme;

4. Demande instamment au Gouvernement sudafricain de libérer toutes les personnes emprisonnées,
détenues ou soumises à d’autres mesures de restriction
résultant de la politique d’apartheid;

S. Invite tous les Etats à respecter strictement l’embargo sur les armes destinées à l’Afrique du Sud;

6. Engage les gouvernements et les individus à contribuer généreusement et régulièrement aux fonds des
Nations Unies destinés à aider, à des fins humanitaires
et de formation, les victimes de l’apartheid;

7. Félicite les organisations intergouvernementales
ct non gouvernementales ainsi que les particuliers de
contribuer à l’éducation et à la formation des Sud-Africains et invite instamment ceux qui ne le feraient
pas encore à commencer à prêter leur concours et ceux
qui le font déjà à redoubler d’efforts dans ce domaine;

8. Décide d’examiner d’urgence les moyens de ré-
soudre la situation actuelle résultant de la politique
d’apartheid du Gouvernement sud-africain.

Adoptée à la 1639e séance par
14 voix contre zéro, avec une
abstention (France).

QUESTION CONCERNANT LA SITUATION DANS LES TERRITOIRES
SOUS ADMINISTRATION PORTUGAISE*

Au cours de ses réunions en Afrique**, le Conseil
de sécurité a adopté la résolution ci-après concernant
cette question :

43 Question ayant fait l’objet de résolutions ou décisions de
la part du Conseil en 1963.
44 Voir ci-dessus, p. 2 et 3.

10

Résolution 312 (1972)
du À février 1972

Le Conseil de sécurité,
Ayant examiné la situation dans les territoires africains sous administration portugaise,

Русский текст (official Russian version): ВОПРОС О РАСОВОМ КОНФЛИКТЕ В ЮЖНОЙ АФРИКЕ, ВОЗНИКШЕМ В РЕЗУЛЬГАТЕ
ПОЛИТИКИ АПАРТЕИДА, ПРОВОДИМОЙ ПРАВИТЕЛЬСТВОМ ЮЖНО-АФРИКАНСКОЙ

РЕСПУБЛИКИ *°

В ходе своих заседаний, проходивших в Афри-
ке *', Совет Безопасности принял следующую ре-
золюцию по этому вопросу:

Резолюция 311 (1972)
от 4 февраля 1972 года
Совет Безопасности,

с глубокой озабоченностью отмечая ухулшенис
положения в Южной Африке в результате про-
лолжающейся интенсификации и расширения по-
литики апартеида и репрессий правительством
Южной Африки,

заслушав заявления лнц, приглашенных высту -
пить в Совете по этому вопросу,

принимая к сведению заявление представителя
Специального комитета по апартеиду *?,

выражая сожаление в связи с упорным отка-
зом правительства Южной Африки осуществить
резолюции, принятые Советом Безопасности с
целью способствовать мирному урегулированию
в соответствии с Уставом Организации Объеди-
ненных Наций,

будучи глубоко озабочен тем, что положение в
Южной Африке создает серьезную угрозу меж -
дународному миру и безопасности на юге Аф-
рики,

отмечая продолжающееся военное строительст-
во ин наращивание военной мощи правительством
Южной Африки,

будучи убежден в том, что Совет Безопасност!
должен принять срочные меры с целью обеспе:
чить осуществление своих резолюций и тем са-
мым способствовать урегулированию серьезного
положения в Южной Африке и на юге Африки,

+9 Резолюции нли решения по этому вопросу были таб-
же приняты Советом в 1963, 1964 н 1970 годах.

4 См. выше стр. 2 и 3.

** См. Официальные отчеты Совета
дцать седьмой год, 1628-е заседание.

Безопасности, дви-

|. осуждает правительство Южной Африки, ко-
горое продолжает проводить политику анартеидл
в нарушение своих обязательств по Уставу Орга-
низации Объединенных Наций;

2. вновь заявляет о своем резко отрицательном
отношении к политике апартеида, проводимо::
правительством Южной Африки;

3. признает законность борьбы угнетенного на.
рода Южной Африки за свои права человека ::
политические права, как они изложены в Уставе
и во Всеобщей декларации прав человека;

4. настоятельно призывает правительство Юж -
ной Африки освободить всех лиц, заключенных

тюрьмы, интернированных или подвергающихся
другим ограничениям в результате политики
апартеида;

5. призывает все государства строго соблюдат:
эмбарго на оружие Южной Африке;

6. настоятельно призывает правительства
отдельных лиц делать щедрые и регулярные
взносы в фонды Организации Объединенных На-
ций, которые используются для гуманных целей
и дпя подготовки кадров, с тем чтобы оказыват,
помощь жертвам апартенда;

7. выражает признательность межправительст-
венным организациям, неправительственным 0ор-
ганизациям и отдельным — лицам, оказывающих
помощь в области образования и профессиональ
ной подготовки южноафриканцев, и настоятель-
но призывает тех, кто не предпринимает усилиг
в этой области, предпринять их, а тех, кто пред-
принимает такие усилия, расширить их;

8. постановляет в срочном порядке изучить
методы разрешения нынешней ситуации, возник-
шей в результате политики апартеида, проводи-
мой правительством Южной Африки.

Принята на 1639-м: засеби-

нии 14 голосами при 1 во з-
державшемся (Франция }.
причем никто не голосовал
против.

ВОПРОС О ПОЛОЖЕНИИ В ТЕРРИТОРИЯХ, НАХОДЯЩИХСЯ
ПОД УПРАВЛЕНИЕМ ПОРТУГАЛИИ *5

В ходе своих заседаний, проходивших в Афри-
ке “, Совет Безопасности принял следующую ре-
золюцию по этому вопросу:

3 Резолюции или решения но этому вопросу были также
приняты Советом в 1963 году.
“См. выше стр. 2 и 3.

Резолюция 312 (1972)

от 4 февраля 1972 года

Совет Безопасности,
рассмотрев положение в африканских террито-

中文文本 (official Chinese version): 南非 共和 国政 府 种 族 隔 离 政策 在 南非 引起 的 种 族 冲 突 问 题 ?

安全 理事 会 在 非洲 开会 期 间 @ 就 此 问题 通过 下 列
决议 。

一 九 七 二 年 二 月 四 日
第 311(1972) 号 决议

安全 理事 会 ，

注意 到 由 于 南非 政府 继续 加 紧 并 扩大 推行 种 族 隔
离 和 镇 压 政策 而 造成 的 南非 局 势 的 恶化 ， 表 示 严 重 关
切 ，

已 经 听取 了 理事 会 邀请 列席 就 本 问题 讲话 的 诸 人
发 言 ，

注意 到 种 族 隔离 问题 特别 委员 会 代表 的 发 言 ,@

对 于 南非 政府 坚持 拒绝 执行 安全 理事 会 为 了 促成
依照 宪 章 规定 的 和 平 解决 办 法 而 通过 的 各 项 决议 ， 礁
示 遗 恨 ，

对 于 南非 境内 的 局 势 严 重地 扰乱 南部 非洲 的 国际
和 平 与 安全 ， 囊 示 严 重 关切 ，

注意 到 南非 政府 继续 扩军 并 加 强 其 军事 力量 ，

四 一 九 六 三 年 、 一 九 六 由 年 和 一 九 七 O 〇 年， 安理会 也 曾
就 此 问题 通过 决议 或 决定 。

@@ 参 看 上 文 第 2 页 和 第 3 页 。

@ 参 看 《安全 理事 会 正式 记录 ， 第 二 十 七 年 ?， 第 一 六 二
八 次 会 议 。

深信 安全 理事 会 必须 采取 紧急 措施 ， 确 保 理 霄 会
决议 的 执行 ， 从 而 促成 南非 及 南部 非洲 严重 局 势 的 解
决 ，

1. 谴责 南非 政府 违反 该 国 在 宪章 下 的 义务 ， 继
续 推 行 其 种 族 隔离 政策 ;

2. 重申 理事 会 完全 反对 南非 政府 的 种 族 隔离 政
策 ;

3. 确认 南非 被 压迫 人 民 为 实现 其 载 于 联合 国 宪
章 及 世界 人 权 宣 言 的 人 权 和 政治 权利 而 进行 的 斗争 是
合法 的 ;

4 追 切 要 求 南非 政府 释放 一 切 因 推 行 种 族 隔离
政策 结果 而 被 监禁 、 拘 留 或 受 其 他 限制 的 人 们 ;

5 要 求 所 有 国家 严格 遵守 对 南非 的 军火 禁 运 ;

6. 促请 各 国政 府 和 个 人 向 充 作 人 道 及 训练 用 途
以 协助 种 族 隔离 政策 受害 者 的 联合 国 基金 ， 经 常 怀 慨
捐 输 ;

7. 对 协助 南非 人 教育 和 训练 的 各 个 政府 间 组
织 、 非 政府 组 织 及 个 人 硝 示 导 许 ， 并 促请 在 此 方面 未
着 手 努 力 者 ， 开 始 努力 ， 已 开始 努力 者 ， 加 紧 努 力 ;

8 决定 ， 作 为 紧急 事项 ， 检 查 如 何 解决 因 南 非
政府 种 族 隔 离 政策 而 起 的 目前 局 势 的 方法 。
第 一 六 三 九 次 会 议 以 十 四
标 对 零 标 、 一 票 弃 权 ( 法
国 ) 通 过 。

葡 管 领土 局 势 问 题 ”

安全 理事 会 在 非洲 开会 期 间 @ 就 此 问题 通过 下 列

决议 。

轩 一 九 六 三 年 安理会 也 得 就 此 问题 通过 决议 或 决定 。
四 参看 上 文 第 2 页 和 第 3 页 。

一 九 七 二 年 二 月 四 日
第 312(1972) 号 决议
安全 理事 会 ，

已 经 讨论 了 葡萄 牙 管 理 下 各 非洲 领土 的 局 势 ，


Draft resolution (S/10609/Rev.1):
Ziotre

GENERAL

UNITED NATIONS 5/10609/Rev. 1

4 February 1972
SECURITY ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COUNCIL

Guinea, India, Somalia, Sudan and Yugoslavia: revised draft Resolution

The Security Council,

Noting with grave concern the aggravation of the situation in South
Africa resulting from the continued intensification and expansion of the

policies of apartheid and repression by the Government of South Africa,

Having heard the statements of those individuals invited to address
the Council on this question,

Taking note of the statement of the representative of the Special
Committee on Apartheid,

Deploring the persistent refusal of the Government of Scuth Africa to
implement the resolutions adopted by the Security Council in order to promote

a peaceful solution in accordance with the Charter,

Gravely concerned that the situation in South Africa seriously disturbs
international peace and security in southern Africa,

Noting the continued military build-up and strengthening of its military
capability by the South African Government,

Convinced that urgent measures must be taken by the Security Council to
secure implementation of its resclutions and thereby promote a solution of

the grave situation in South Africa and southern Africa,

1. Condemns the Government of South Africa for continuing its policies
of apartheid in violation of its obligations under the Charter;

T2-033T9
5/10609/Rev. 1
English
Page 2

2, Reiterates its total opposition to the policies of apartheid of
the South African Government;

3. Recognizes the legitimacy of the struggle of the oppressed people
of South Africa in pursuance of their human and political rights as set
forth in th2 Charte:» of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights;

4. Urgently calls upon the Government of South Africa to release ail
persons imprisoned, interncd or subjected tc other restrictions as a result

of the policies of apartheid;

5. Calls upon all States to observe strictly the arms embargo against
South Africa;

6. Urges Governments and individuals to contribute generously and
regularly to the United Nations Funds which are used for humanitarian and
training purrosas to assist the victims of apartheid;

7+ Commends the inter-—govermmental crganizations, non-governmental
organizations and individuals for assisting with the education and training
of South Africans and urges those who do not to begin and those who do to
expand their efforts in this field;

8. Decides, as a matter of urgency, to examine methods of resolving

‘the present situation arising out of the policies of apartheid of the Government
of South Africa.

an Kai

TCE raga

i IR tr SUR angen
- AT a,

Bor

2

Meeting record:
UNITED NATIONS Ld 26 50

UN/SA COLL ZH

SECURITY COUNCIL
OFFICIAL RECORDS

TWENTY-SEVENTH YEAR

th
1 639 MEETING: 4 FEBRUARY 1972

ADDIS ABABA

CONTENTS

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1639) ....... viii ee
Adoption of the AZENAA Lee eee eas

Consideration of questions relating to Africa of which the Security Council is
currently seized and implementation of the Council's relevant resolutions . . . . 1

S/PV, 1639
NOTE

Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with
figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document.

Documents of the Security Council (symbol §/. . .) are normally published in quarterly
Supplements of the Official Records of the Security Council. The date of the document
indicates the supplement in which it appears or in which information about it is given.

The resolutions of the Security Council, numbered in accordance with a system
adopted in 1964, are published in yearly volumes of Resolutions and Decisions of the
Security Council. The new system, which has been applied retroactively to resolutions
adopted before 1 January 19635, became fully operative on that date.

SIXTEEN HUNDRED AND THIRTY-NINTH MEETING
Held in Africa Hall, Addis Ababa, on Friday, 4 February 1972, at 8.30 p.m.

President: Mr, Mansour KHALID (Sudan).

Present: The representatives of the following States:
Argentina, Belgium, China, France, Guinea, India, Italy,
Japan, Panama, Somalia, Sudan, Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland, United States of America and Yugoslavia.

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1639)
1. Adoption of the agenda.

2, Consideration of questions relating to Africa of which
the Security Council is currently seized and implementation of the Council’s relevant resolutions.

The meeting was called to order at 9.40 p.m.
Adoption of the agenda
The agenda was adopted,

Consideration of questions relating to Africa of which the
Security Council is currently seized and implementation
of the Council's relevant resolutions

1. The PRESIDENT: At the outset I wish to outline the
procedure which it is my intention to follow. It is based, on
the one hand, on the order in which documents have been
submitted and, on the other, on the actual availability of
the documents. Our discussion and voting will relate first to
the question of Southern Rhodesia and the three-Power
draft resolution contained in document S/10606, which
was distributed two days ago. As the revised draft resolution on Portuguese Territories is not yet available, it is my
intention to take up the second topic, concerning the
question of apartheid in South Africa, and the five-Power
draft resolution contained in document S/10609/Rev.1. We
shall then take up, as the last issue, the topic concerning
Territories under Portuguese administration, and we hope
to have received in due time the revised text of the
three-Power draft resolution originally circulated in document S/10607.

2. As I hear no objection, I take it that the Council wishes
to follow the procedure which I have outlined.

3. We shall therefore begin with the draft resolution on
Southern Rhodesia.

4. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to
speak in explanation of vote before the vote.

5. Mr. MOJSOV (Yugoslavia): My delegation thinks that
the draft resolution on Southern Rhodesia [S/10606]
introduced by three African members, in expressing the
views and demands of the whole African Group, merits our
support and enables the Council to take a favourable
decision. Addressing itself both to the topical phases of the
current situation in Southern Rhodesia and to the basic
requirements of a just solution, the draft resolution, in its
preambular paragraphs, states some of the major reasons
and the basic starting positions for the Council’s action.

6. We are all indeed gravely concerned at the dangerous
political situation in Southern Rhodesia, including the
latest brutal acts of suppression. Both the overwhelming
opposition of the African people of Southern Rhodesia to
the proposals for a settlement! and the further dangerous
aggravation of the situation in Rhodesia and, subsequently,
in the whole of Africa, because of the attempt to present
these proposals as the only future that the people of
Zimbabwe must accept, are the basic realities of the
situation.

7. The draft resolution rightly notes all the resolutions
that this" Council has adopted concerning Rhodesia so far,
resolutions in which we have many times asked for specific
measures, acts and restraints mandatory upon the administering Power and other Member States. They have postulated inalienable political principles which must be observed

“in bringing about majority rule in Rhodesia~-principles

firmly enshrined in all our basic documents and decisions.
The draft resolution notes also that the decisions of the
Council forbidding trade with the illegal régime are being
violated.

8. In its operative paragraphs, the draft resolution commends itself by its requests, which are at once firm,
responsible . and realistic. It inter alia repeats former
resolutions in reaffirming that the present situation in
Southern Rhodesia constitutes a threat to international
security. It calls upon the United Kingdom to take all
appropriate measures to safeguard the people of Zimbabwe
against further brutal acts. It urges the United Kingdom, as
a matter of urgency, to desist from implementing the
settlement proposals and expresses the firm belief that a
constitutional conference should be convened, descri'es
this constitutional conference and urges the United Kingdom to convene it, again as a matter of urgency, It calls
upon all of us to take more stringent measures in order to

1 See Official Records of the Security Council, Twenty-sixth
Year, Supplement for October, November and December 1971,

document S/10405.
assure the full implementation of sanctions. I shall not, of
course, enumerate here all the other elements of the draft
resolution which we support.

9, We also think that this draft resolution merits our
favourable decision because of its restraint, especially
considering the dangerous situation, aggravation and provocation to which the people of Southern Rhodesia and the
whole of Africa are currently being submitted by the whole
approach and prospects concerning the so-called proposals
for settlement.

© 10, What the draft resolution is asking for is really the
barest minimum, It shows the realism and statesmanship of
the African delegations.

11. We have heard here many angry statements and many
demands which go much beyond what we have here in the
draft resolution. The Council was asked to condemn
directly the proposals for settlement; to condemn the
United Kingdom for its failure to protect African populations in Southern Rhodesia; to ask the United Kingdom
directly to withdraw the Pearce Commission immediately,
and so forth. By being just and addressing itself to the basic
requirement of the situation created by the latest action of
the United Kingdom and the Smith régime, the draft
resolution does reflect a spirit of flexibility as well,

12. In concluding this short statement in explanation of
my vote, ] should like to mention briefly just a few guiding
considerations that motivate our delegation in dealing with
the current Rhodesian situation and in considering it.

13. Firstly, we reject absolutely the false dilemma that the
people of Zimbabwe either have to accept the proposals for
settlement or otherwise must be visited by the horrors of
apartheid, To agree to that proposition, directly or by
implication, is to suggest to the people of Southern
Rhodesia to stop struggling, to stop believing in the rights
of man. It is to deny the whole raison d’étre of the United
Nations and the Security Council, which exists just in order
not to permit the peoples of the world to be confronted
with such dilemmas,

14. Secondly, we fully understand and support the people
of Southern Rhodesia when they ask for the Pearce
Commission to leave their country. They have already paid
too much in blood and lives and in suffering in prisons.
From the beginning of its work it demonstrated what we
already knew anyway —that the people of Zimbabwe would
not want to sign for their own further enslavement. They
must look upon the Pearce Commission as part and parcel
of the whole structure of the proposals for settlement, We
understand their unwillingness to entrust their whole future
to a commission and test of that kind, to the interpretation
of its findings by the United Kingdom Government and the
Smith régime,

15. Thirdly, in permitting the approach exemplified by
the proposals for a settlement to become acceptable in any
of its major elements we should gravely risk setting a
precedent contrary to the spirit and letter of all our basic
documents and decisions, contrary to the minimum basic
requirements of justice, contrary to the minimum basic

rights and demands of the people of Zimbabwe, of Africa,
and, indeed, of the whole world. We must not even by
implication become a party to that.

16. Fourthly, in the meantime the entire international
community, especially States Members of the United
Nations, should rigorously continue to apply political,
economic and diplomatic sanctions against the régime in
Southern Rhodesia until its racist rule is brought to an end.
On this occasion we wish to express the hope that
the Governments of all countries will do their utmost to
exercise strict sanctions against the Ian Smith régime.

17. Finally, we share an inescapable obligation—the duty
to make it impossible for any people of the world, and not
just the 'people of Southern Rhodesia, to be confronted
with the dilemma I have mentioned, For us, there is no
dilemma here. That is why the Yugoslav delegation will
vote in favour of the draft resolution now before the
Council,

18. Mr. HUANG Hua (China) (translation from Chinese):
I should like to state our views in regard to the draft
resolution on Southern Rhodesia /S/10606]. The Chinese
delegation has studied the draft resolution which will be
put to the vote. Our opinion is as follows.

19. First, with regard to operative paragraphs 6 and 7 of
the draft resolution, about urging the United Kingdom
Government to convene a constitutional conference, the
Chinese Government has consistently held that Britain
should immediately end the colonialist rule of the white
racist régime of Southern Rhodesia so that the Zimbabwe
people may achieve national independence without any
outside interference. This is the universal desire and sacred
right of the Zimbabwe people. Therefore, we have reserva
tions about these paragraphs.

20. Secondly, the heroic struggle now being waged by the
Zimbabwe people is entirely just. The Security Council
should call on the Governments and peoples of all countries
to give active support and solidarity to the just struggle of
the Zimbabwe people. Moreover, it must be pointed out
that the barbarous repression of the Zimbabwe people by
the’ Smith white racist régime is being carried out with the
connivance of the British Government with the very aim of
forcibly pushing through their fraud of the so-called
settlement proposals. Therefore the Council should not
only condemn the Smith racist régime of Southem
Rhodesia but also condemn its accomplice, the British
Government. In addition, the Council should condemn the
United States Government and other countries for violating
the sanctions against Southern Rhodesia. The draft resolu
tion is not satisfactory since it fails to include the above
contents. ‘

21. With these reservations, the Chinese delegation will
vote in favour of the draft resolution.

22. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
(translation from Russian); The Soviet delegation supports
the proposals made by the three African delegations in the
Security Council, which have been submitted on behalf of

all the African States and are designed to put an end to the
monstrous crimes, violence and terror perpetrated by the
racist Salisbury régime against the Zimbabwe people.

23. We do not feel this draft resolution /S/10606] to be
sufficient. It has gaps. The major gap is that it does not
stress the responsibility of the United Kingdom and its
Government for everything that is happening in Southern
Rhodesia, and for the fact that this problem has not yet
been solved and that the Zimbabwe people is deprived of its
freedom and independence and still remains in colonialist
and racist slavery.

24. In the past few days dozens of African patriots have
died in Southern Rhodesia, and a large number of participants in demonstrations have been wounded while justly
and legitimately demanding freedom and independence for
their country. The bloody reprisals taken by the racists
against peaceful demonstrations in the Rhodesian towns of
Shabani, Salisbury, Umtali and Gwelo and the mass arrests
of patriots have again shown the bestial face of the racist
fascist régime at Salisbury.

25. For everything which is now happening in Southern
Rhodesia the Government of the United Kingdom bears a
direct and first-hand responsibility; after a number of
manoeuvres, it embarked last November on a course of
direct collusion with the handful of colonists and racists
who have unlawfully usurped power in Southern Rhodesia
and are cruelly oppressing the indigenous population of the
Country.

26, The events now occuring in Southern Rhodesia leave
no doubt as to the attitude of the Zimbabwe people to the
so-called Home-Smith agreement. Every day reports come
in—and they can also be read on the pages of the English
press, particularly in The Times—that in spite of the terror,
threats and persecution, the African population of the
country is by all the means available to it demonstrating its
negative attitude to the collusion between the Conservative
Government of the United Kingdom and the Southern
Rhodesian racists. It is in vain that the colonialists and
racists, together with their imperialist friends and protectors, have attempted to confuse the Zimbabwe people and
trick it into agreeing to the so-called “proposals for a
settlement”.

27. The reaction of the Zimbabwe people to this agreement is fully justified. The Zimbabwe people have seen
without any difficulty that this shameful racist-imperiatist
deal between the Government of the United Kingdom and
the Southern Rhodesian racists aims at consolidating for an
unspecified period the domination of the racist régime in
Southern Rhodesia, which is pursuing a policy of racial
discrimination, segregation and apartheid against the
5S million indigenous people of Southern Rhodesia, the
Zimbabwe people. The agreement is a direct encroachment
on the inalienable rights of the Zimbabwe people to
freedom and independence, an open challenge to African
peoples and to all of world public opinion, and a gross
violation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and a whole series
of other United Nations resolutions.

28. The Home-Smith agreement is based on the theory of -
racial supremacy, the imperialist “theory” that the African
population is purportedly not ready or able to run its own
country or decide its own destiny. This is clear from
statements by the héad of the Southern Rhodesian racists
himself.

29. On 1 December 1971, Smith, replying in a television
interview to the question when in his opinion the Africans
would be able to take over the government of the country,
cynically stated: “At the moment, I don’t believe they are
fit to govern the country. What the position will be in 100
years’ time or 1,000 years’ time isn’t easy to predict ... .”.
Apparently the racist Smith is dreaming of a thousand years
of domination by the Southern Rhodesian racists over the
Zimbabwe people. These dreams are as ephemeral and as
unrealizable as Hitler's dreams and plans for establishing a
thousand-year racist empire of the “Third Reich”, dominating the peoples of the whole world, turned out to be,

30. Representatives of African countries have stated at
Security Council meetings, both in New York and at Addis
Ababa, that after a detailed study of the Home-Smith
agreement they have reached the conclusion that the
political essence and the foundation of this agreement are
clearly racist and imperialist. This deal was rejected by the
vast majority of Members of the United Nations at the
twenty-sixth session of the General Assembly, Of 102
delegations participating in the voting, 94 voted for a
resolution resolutely condemning this racist-imperialist
deal. Consequently, the vast majority of the United Nations
will not accept this colonialist deal, which was concluded at
the expense of the interests of the Zimbabwe people. The
Organization of African Unity has described the deal as
open treason against future generations of 5 million Africans by 243,000 white Rhodesians connected with white
domination and apartheid.

31. In order to give this shameful deal a semblance of
legality, London has with cynical hypacrisy established a
special commission, headed by Lord Pearce and consisting
wholly of experienced United Kingdom colonial officials
who have stifled the freedom and independence of colonial
peoples, for the alleged purpose of ascertaining the *“acceptability” of the Anglo-Rhodesian agreement to the
various racial groups in Rhodesia. However, when the
Commission arrived at Salisbury, it was met by disturbances
and protests on the part of the African population of
Rhodesia, which in spite of the terror and intimidation said
a clear and categorical “No” to the Home-Smith deal.

32. While representatives of the United Kingdom, under
the leadership of Sir Alec Douglas-Home, were conducting
talks on the consolidation of the racist ranks in Southern
Rhodesia, the United States was adopting the decision to
remove the ban on imports of chrome ore from Southern
Rhodesia which has already been referred to more than
once during these meetings. This is a direct violation of the
obligations incumbent upon all Members of the United
Nations under Security Council resolutions concerning the
application of strict sanctions against the Southern Rhodesian racist régime.
33. The actions of the United Kingdom and the United are the friends and allies of the African people and who is
States with regard to Southern Rhodesia and the other the ally, friend and protector of the colonialists and racists
colonialist and racist régimes in southern Africa have a in Africa. For the United Kingdom, we said, the vote on
common basis; they are directly linked with the plans of these draft resolutions would be a test of the acceptability
the imperialist Powers for uniting and consolidating the to that country of the freedom and independence of the
militarist colonialist bloc in southern Africa, in order to bar peoples enslaved by racist colonists in southern Africa, The
the way of the national liberation movements among the whole world will realize where the United Kingdom stands,
African peoples which are still oppressed by colonialists and ~~ whose side it is on; on the side of the enslavers of the
racists and to threaten the independence of sovereign African peoples or on the side of the enslaved African
African States. peoples. This is a test for the United Kingdom and its
Conservative Government of the acceptability of freedom
34. We should like to emphasize here again, as clearly as and independence for Africa.
possible, that the Soviet Union resolutely condemns the
United Kingdom deal with the racist Smith régime which 39. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): My delegation is deeply
has usurped power in Southern Rhodesia. We reject any disturbed by the recent turbulence in South Rhodesia and
manoeuvres designed to lend that illegal racist régime 2 fully shares the concern expressed by African leaders in this
semblance of “legality”. Council. Therefore, we firmly support operative paragraphs
1,2, 3 and 4 of the draft resolution contained in document
35. The Soviet delegation, like the vast majority of  $/10606. I should also like to express the support of my
Members of the United Nations, firmly and resolutely delegation for operative paragraph 8 calling for the full
advocates the adoption of the most effective and efficient implementation of sanctions decided upon by the Security
measures to remove the racist régime in Southern Rhodesia Council and I should also like to reiterate the determination
and to transfer power to the country’s lawful owners, the of my Government to apply faithfully the provisions of the
Zimbabwe people. relevant Security Council resolutions until the rebellion has
i . been brought to an end and the illegal situation has been
36. In view of the fact that the three African representaminated in Southern Rhodesia. In particular, Japan has
tives on the Security Council, Supp orted by the Vast peen fully and faithfully applying the economic sanctions
majority of African delegations, have introduced this draft mandated by the relevant Council resolutions. Japan
resolution and consider it acceptable at the present stage, yy erefore has no trade or any other economic relations with
the delegation of the Soviet Union will support the draft gern Rhodesia in contradiction of the decisions of the
resolution and will vote for it. We consider it the YeLY Council. However, we have certain reservations about
minimum which the Council should do at the present time. operative paragraph 5.

37. Under operative paragraph 6, the Security Council
would advocate that a constitutional conference should be
convened, without delay, in which the African people,
through their genuine representatives, would be able to
participate in the formulation of new proposals for the
political and constitutional advancement of their country,
In view of the position of the United Kingdom Government, and of its deal with the Southern Rhodesian racists,
it is difficult to count on such an approach producing
positive results acceptable to the Zimbabwe people. However, if this paragraph is adopted by the Security Council,
the Soviet delegation will feel it necessary to insist on it,
and to stress that the outstanding leaders of the ZANU
(Zimbabwe African National Union) and ZAPU (Zimbabwe
African People’s Union) parties, who are known throughout
the world, and who have now been thrown in gaol by the
Southern Rhodesian racists and are under arrest, should
patticipate in the conference. We are referring to Nkomo
and Sithole. If this paragraph of the draft resolution
submitted by the African delegations is adopted, and if
such a conference takes place, an essential condition for it
must be the participation of these outstanding leaders of
the Zimbabwe people.

40. Last December, when the Security Council considered
the question of Southern Rhodesia, I expressed the view
[1623rd meeting] that it was not appropriate for the
Council to reject the so-called proposals for a settlement
before the will of the Zimbabwe people had been ascertained, as proposed by the Government of the United
Kingdom, the administering Power. Although the so-called
test of acceptability which is now being conducted by the
Pearce Commission is faced with much difficulty, and
opposition to the proposals for settlement seems to be
prevalent, my delegation believes that the Council should
not prejudge the issue before the work of that Commission
is terminated. For that reason, and solely for that reason,
my delegation is constrained to abstain from the voting on
the draft resolution contained in document S/10606.

41. At the same time, | strongly urge the Government of
the United Kingdom to respect fully the wish of the
Zimbabwe people as demonstrated during the process of
the test of acceptability. Meanwhile, my Government fully
reserves the right to render its own judgement with regard
to the result of the so-called test of acceptability.

38. In conclusion, I should like to recall what was said in /42. Sir Colin CROWE (United Kingdom): The Security
the Soviet delegation’s statement yesterday [1637th meer- /,” Council has already heard me on a number of occasions and
ing]: that voting on the draft resolution submitted to the at considerable length on the question of Southern Rho-Security Council by three African delegations, and also on desia so I will not go into detail again, But, as I said in my
that submitted by the delegations of India and Yugoslavia speech in the general debate on Wednesday [1635th
during the Council's meetings in Africa, would show not meeting], my delegation regards it as natural that the
only the peoples of Africa, but also the whole world, who ~~ Council should view recent developments in Rhodesia with

4
concern, We can understand this as we ourselves view them
with great concern.

43. But from my speech last Wednesday, the Council will
realize that my Government cannot accept a directive to
change its policy while it is in process of being worked out.
It may indeed in due course, depending on the results of
the Pearce Commission, wish to review its policy, but until
the Pearce Commission has reported and has given its
verdict, my Government cannot accept such a directive. It
not only would prejudge the result of the investigation, but
would seriously prejudice the work of the Commission. The
same also applies to operative paragraph 6 of draft resolution S/10606.

44. Subject to these reservations we were ready to reach
an understanding with the authors of this draft resolution.
We made suggestions to this effect but they were rejected.
We have offered compromises which in our view would
have met the purposes of the sponsors. But the draft
resolution, on the contrary, insists on ignoring our present
efforts except in so far as to demand that they should be
abandoned. It prejudges their outcome and it recommends
alternative courses which in the present circumstances are
unrealistic and impracticable. My delegation therefore does
not find this draft resolution acceptable,

45. Mr. BOYD (Panama) (interpretation fron Spanish):
Consistent with what was said in its statement of 31
January last [1631st meeting], the delegation of Panama
announces that it will vote in favour of the draft resolution
contained in document S/10606 submitted by Guinea,
Somalia and Sudan, in which the actions of the illegal
Government of Southern Rhodesia are condemned and
other measures are taken.

46. It is not in our mind to mortify Great Britain with this
type of measure since my Government has most cordial
relations with Great Britain and we have the greatest
admiration for the British people. In voting in favour of this
important draft resolution, the delegation Panama would
like to demonstrate that it is behind any new formula
which may be sought to put an end to this bastion of
racism in Africa, which oppresses the long suffering people
of Zimbabwe. :

47. Simply stated, by our attitude we are trying to say to
Africa that in the field of colonialism and neo-colonialism
Latin America and Africa should always be united because,
as the Spanish proverb says: “Today it is you, tomorrow it
is us”.

48. The PRESIDENT: I take it that the Security Council
is ready now to proceed to the vote. Accordingly, I shall
put to the vote the draft resolution on Southern Rhodesia
contained in document S/10606.

a

A vote was taken by show of hands.

In favour: Argentina, China, Guinea, India, Panama,
Somalia, Sudan, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,
Yugoslavia.

Against: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland.

Abstaining: Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, United States
of America.

The result of the vote was 9 in favour, 1 against, and
5 abstentions,

The draft resolution was not adopted, the negative vote
being that of a permanent member of the Council.

49. The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who have expressed the wish to explain their votes
after the vote.

50, Mr. GHALIB (Somalia): I have asked for the floor not
so much to make an explanation of vote after the vote, but
merely to express, on behalf of my Government and
people, a relevant concluding note and a serious observation
of the events which have taken place in this Council this
evening, Before I go any further I should like to express
deep gratitude, on behalf of my Government and people
and on behalf of our African brothers who are suffering
humiliation in their own homes, to these who supported us
on this draft resolution. We shall never forget that gesture
of goodwill they have shown us.

51. The draft resolution in document S/10606 on Southern Rhodesia, which has been destroyed by the application
of the United Kingdom veto this evening, expressed the
wish of the African States—in fact the minimum which we
hoped the United Kingdom should conveniently be able to
do without hitch or hindrance—on behalf of the millions of
Zimbabweans, whose fate unfortunately hangs today in a
precarious balance. This draft resolution also carried the
least guarantees for the future of Zimbabwe and contained
a genuine, sincere and practicable measure to ensure
peaceful political settlement in that Territory. This was the
only alternative to the already unacceptable “test of
acceptability”. The consequences of “the action of the
British on the agreement and of their obstinacy and their
action here tonight will lie squarely on the United Kingdom
Government, and history surely will record this addition of
ill will to Britain’s already long list of betrayals.

52. Having in mind similar attitudes shown by that
Government in the past, my delegation was not surprised at
the British veto today. Members of the Council will recall
that in Mogadiscio last weekend my President referred to
the use of the veto by those permanent members who apply
it to defend their selfish interests. I wish to amplify that
statement. It was the understanding of my Government
that the veto was intended to protect one major Power
against the other, particularly in the field of peace and
security. It is being used for other purposes as well. It has
become a power in itself—a power which, when so
indiscreetly used against the powerless, demonstrates a
serious lack of responsibility.

53. While my Government realizes the difficulties involved
in amending the Charter, it nevertheless holds the belief
‘that some restriction on the usage of this privilege, or at
least some modification of its application, is decidedly
timely and desirable, The veto should—without even
changing or amending the Charter—be understood to serve
positively, not negatively, the interests of the international
community. It must be used with restraint and with a sense
of justice and sincerity. My delegation believes that the last
few vetoes applied against African interests have been most
unfortunate. Even if those draft resolutions had been
adopted, their implementation would as usual, by the same
token of ill will, have stood very little chance of success.

54. Africa is awake, and, veto or no veto, nothing will
deter or diminish the pace of march towards our freedom,
our development and our socio-economic salvation and the
inevitable African revolution.

55. Some quarters cynically stated that the meeting of the
Security Council in Africa would achieve nothing even by
the adoption of some resolutions. That is not the way that
Africa had viewed this historic event. Africa has been
watching us very closely, Our people have been listening to
our deliberations and debates in their own local languages.
The Council was definitely being weighed, its members
were being tried by the tribunal set up in the African mind,
and through standards of morality and human conscience
they believed in the Council and expected much. This
expectation sometimes even slowed down their pace and
arrested their initiatives.

56. Today, at the grassroot level, every African will realize
that the Security Council has once again failed, He knows
that he need not expect too much from this organ.

57. A new page has been turned in the African’s struggle
for freedom. Today he has learned that he must rely on
himself, his initiative, his wit, his strife, and his blood. The
African, guided by the spirit of the Lusaka Manifesto,? has
advocated peaceful methods for political settlement. We all
here know that this spirit of goodwill has not been heedad
by the minority régimes in southern Africa and their allies
who have connived with or condoned the stubborn attitude
of these racist régimes.

58. Out of this dismal situation was born the Mogadiscio
Declaration, which updates the Lusaka Manifesto and
endorses the position that freedom can be won only at the
high price of losing or destroying lives, Only through this
unavoidable action can the African attain his freedom.
Some members of this Council may dismiss this statement
as a mere emotional outcry, but I can assure them that they
will realize the force and truth of this assertion when it is
too late for anyone to chart a different course.

59. Mr. VINCI (Italy): I wish to explain very briefly the
vote of my delegation on the draft resolution concerning
Rhodesia, contained in document S/10606. But let me first
of all make a general remark, The result of the vote that has
just taken place might give, and in fact seems to give, public
opinion not conversant with our work the unfortunate
impression that the Council is fundamentally divided on
essential principles with regard to the Rhodesian question.
That, 1 believe, is not the case, although we fully
understand the disappointment of our African colleagues.

60. I should like simply to draw the attention of members
to the fact that out of 19 paragraphs contained in the draft

2 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-fourth
Session, Annexes, agenda item 106, document 4/7754,

13, which in the main are statements of principles and
purposes or non-controversial assertions of fact, merely
reproduce provisions of resolutions already adopted by the
Security Council, particularly the provisions of resolution
277 (1970), which was adopted unanimously. That means
that most of what is contained in the draft resolution just
voted upon can still stand in spite of the vote.

61. The real new point of the draft was paragraph 5,
whereby the United Kingdom was requested “to desist
from implementing the ‘settlement’ proposals”. This gave
the draft the very special nature of a specific request to a
Member State to reverse its policy with regard to certain

‘obligations. That left to it no other choice than to reply

“yes” or “no”, since an abstention in this case would also
represent an acceptance of the request.

62. The only possible way to deal with this sort of specific
situation, in our view, is through negotiation and not
through the procedure of voting. If the negotiation leads to
an agreement, then a resolution might formalize this
agreement. If agreement is not reached and the Council
member concerned does not accept the request in question,
then the voting on the request becomes pointless, It is
certainly pointless when, as in the present case, the member
to which it is addressed is a permanent member whose
negative vote, whatever its intentions might be, have the
inescapable effect of a veto,

63. Fully convinced that in the present special case the
only way out was through negotiation, my delegation
actively participated in consultations, in and out of the
contact group, to reach agreement on the basis of a
compromise and to introduce some new ideas which, in our
opinion, were most constructive. I should like to add that
other delegations shared our conviction and worked skilfully and constructively with the same purpose in mind, In
this connexion I wish to express my sincere appreciation to
those delegations.

64. In the very short time at our disposal, it was not
possible, however, to work out a compromise or to find
another way out of the present deadlock. My delegation
was therefore obliged to abstain on the draft resolution, If
for lack of agreement the veto could not have any practical
result, the casting of an affirmative or a negative vote by a
delegation like my own, which was not a direct party in the
negotiations, would have meant an expression of blame
for one or the other of the parties concerned, for not
having done its utmost in such negotiations.

65. Let me conclude by saying that the result of the vote
is, as I said in the introductory remarks, less negative than
would appear to be the case. In the course of our intense
consultations, most delegations realized the difficulty of
bluntly asking a Government, which had publicly taken a
position a few days before, radically to reverse that
position. On the other hand, it is clear from the statement
made by Sir Alec Douglas-Home in the House of Commons
on 26 January that the United Kingdom Government will
not fail to draw the necessary conclusions from the work of
the Pearce Commission and from the events taking place in
Rhodesia. We have been strengthened in this opinion by the
explanation of vote made by the representative of the

i
United Kingdom and we are confident that this expectation
will somehow materialize when this matter is taken up
again, as it undoubtedly will be, in due course in the
Council.

66. Mr. HUANG Hua (China) (translation from Chinese):
The holding of the current Security Council meetings in
Africa is an event of great significance in the history of the
Council. The African countries and peoples, and the people
of the whole world, attach great importance to, and place
high hopes in, these meetings, Like all the African
representatives and peoples, the Chinese delegation hopes
that at these meetings in Africa the Council will fulfil its
responsibilities and then make positive contributions in
solving the urgent problems now facing Africa, particularly
the question of Southern Rhodesia, in accordance with the
principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The draft
resolution on the question of Rhodesia just put to the vote
only contains a number of minimum propositions and
demands and, as a matter of fact, is not satisfactory.
However, the British representative once again abused the
veto even on such a minimum draft resolution, thus once
again rendering the Council impotent and helpless in face of
a major question of right and wrong.

67. We cannot but feel deep regret and indignation at this.
The British Government bears the unshirkable responsibility for obstructing the Security Council from performing
its duties, for trampling underfoot the principles of the
Charter and sabotaging the current Council meetings in
Africa and for the consequences arising therefrom.

68. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
(translation from Russian): The Soviet delegation cannot
but express its dissatisfaction and indignation at the way in
which the United Kingdom delegation has thwarted the
adoption by the Security Council of even such a weak
resolution on Southern Rhodesia as the one submitted for
its consideration. By its vote against this draft resolution,
the United Kingdom has shown its repugnant imperialist
face as an enemy of freedom and independence not only
for the Zimbabwe people, but for all the. people of Africa.
This is yet another utterly shameful page in the history of
British imperialism. But this action, the improper use of the
veto by the United Kingdom, will not stop the heroic
struggle of the Zimbabwe people for their lawful rights to
freedom and independence, whose legitimacy has been

recognized by the United Nations in its many resolutions

and in the Programme of action for the full implementation
of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples [General Assembly resolution 2621 (XXV}] adopted at the twenty-fifth anniversary
session of the General Assembly.

69. The Security Councils meetings in Africa made it
possible to realize at first hand who is a friend of Africa and
the peoples of Africa, who is their supporter and ally in
providing assistance and in co-operating with the just
struggle of the African peoples for their freedom and
national independence, and who is their enemy, continuing
to create and set up obstacles in their path to freedom and
independence. The peoples of Africa have been convinced
by the example of the Security Council’s meetings that the
vast majority of members of the Security Council, like the

vast majority of States Members of the United Nations,
support, sympathize with and are ready to provide assistance and support to the Zimbabwe people in its just and
lawful struggle for its freedom and national independence
against the Southern Rhodesian racists and the British
imperialists.

70. The African peoples also ascertained something else,
namely that certain delegations of member States of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization abstained in the vote
on this resolution. Yesterday [1637th meeting], the delegation of the Soviet Union had occasion to explain the
essence of the practice of abstaining in votes in the Security
Council during the cold war years, and this practice still
continues. When votes are taken on such important draft
resolutions in the Security Council on such acute international political problems affecting the fate of millions, such
abstention is equal in force to a veto and to solidarity with
those who use the veto and prevent the adoption of just
resolutions in the Council, The peoples of Africa saw this
duting these meetings and learned at first hand who uses
such voting methods, and how and why they do so.

71. Mr. TOURE (Guinea) (interpretation from French):
The Security Council has just voted on the draft resolution
that the African members of the Council on behalf of all of
Africa submitted to this Council on a painful problem
which afflicts deeply all Africans, that is, the question of
Zimbabwe, The British veto, which we expected, has not
surprised us at all, but we did learn some lessons from that
vote.

72. We learned first that the British Government by no
means intends to draw the consequences of a lesson based
on experience which Africa is trying to teach it.

73, The second thing we learned is solidarity—the solidarity of justice which Africa has demonstrated. That solidarity has been met with the solidarity of injustice and
inequity. :

74. The third thing we learned is that it is Africa itself that
will have to find the lessons to be drawn from all of the
situations of injustice imposed on it, and we are happy to
note that the people of Zimbabwe are no longer on their
knees but are standing upright ready to take up the
challenge of injustice from the British Government and its
allies,

75. The PRESIDENT: The Council will now take up the
next topic, which is apartheid in South Africa, The first
name on my list is that of the representative of India, who
wishes to introduce the five-Power draft resolution contained in document S/10609/Rev.1.

76. Mr. SEN (India): After the dramatic events of the last
few minutes it does seem a little anticlimactic to talk about
apartheid, But I do believe, as indeed I suggested before,
that the root of all that is happening now—all that
happened a few minutes ago—is the policy of apartheid of
the South African Government. That Government has
created the poison, is continuing to spill it over its own
territories and is spreading it all over southern Africa, and
unless we can eradicate this particular poison, whether it is
in Southern Rhodesia, Namibia, the Portuguese colonies or
South Africa itself, we shall not be able to make any
Progress.

77. With those introductory remarks I should like to draw
the attention of the Council to document S/10609/Rev.1,
which contains the joint proposal of five delegations—
Guinea, India, Somalia, Sudan and Yugoslavia—for the
Council's action on the evils of apartheid. This is a revision
of an earlier document, which I introduced yesterday
[1637th meeting], and there are not very many comments
I have to make on it, Most of the paragraphs—in fact, all the
paragraphs of the preamble—are unchanged.

78. However, when we come to operative paragraph 5 we
find a slight change. The original paragraph read as follows:

“Calls upon all States to observe strictly the arms
embargo against South Africa and to deny all military
co-operation to the South African Government”,

The last few words, “and to deny all military co-operation
to the South African Government”, have been dropped in
the revised text, The reason is that we came across a view
that to the extent that the South African Government is
entitled to defend its own territories against external
aggression or attack, military co-operation should not be
denied that Government. And since the main purpose of
our draft resolution was to deprive South Africa of all
means of creating further oppression of its own black
people we thought that in a spirit of compromise it would
not do us any harm to delete those few words.

79. Operative paragraphs 6 and 7 are identical with the
old document. Operative paragraph 8 has now been deleted.
That paragraph called for a committee of the Security
Council to study further all matters relating to apartheid
most urgently. Again in the process of consultation, it was
pointed out to us that so long as the Asian members, and
the African members particularly, are keen to keep this
subject under continuous study there is no reason whatever
to fear that the Council will return to a state of doldrums
and not continue its efforts to pursue its objectives, and
therefore a separate committee was not considered to be
particularly necessary. That is the honest explanation, and I
hope that with that explanation the Council will have no
difficulty in approving our draft resolution unanimously,

80. Since I have the floor and I have already warned the
Council that I shall take advantage of this intervention to
make some general comments on behalf of the Indian
delegation, I shall, with permission, make those comments
now rather than speak on each draft resolution separately.

81, To begin with, on these draft resolutions there have
been continuous consultations between some of the
Western members of the Council and ourselves, and
especially with our African colleagues, concerning the
wording of all of them and the factors, elements and
principles underlying these documents, these pieces of
paper, or these declarations of intent. In the course of
consultations and negotiations it has sometimes appeared
that the Western Powers have felt that we were pressuring
or pushing them, All I can say is that none of us, including

our African colleagues, has in the expression of the idealism
of humanity said or written anything more radical, more
progressive or more poetic than what has been said by
Abraham Lincoln, Albert Schweitzer or even Bertrand
Russell, each one of whom is quoted with reverence and
approval by some representatives,

82. However, in the course of the debate three points have
been brought out which I fear have not been fully
answered. I shall not attempt to answer them fuily now,
but I shall mention them briefly. It has been suggested that
a peaceful solution must be found. We agree. But there
must be an inducement for both the Africans and their
white rulers in southern Africa to seek such a solution. The
trends of international politics over the last 25 years have
been such as to encourage the whites in every possible way
and to discourage the blacks in many ways. We would hope
that all countries, all States, all peoples of goodwill will
help in reversing this trend so that peaceful solutions can
indeed be found without further delay.

83. Secondly, on Rhodesia it has been suggested that at
long last we shall know what the Africans think, that they
have now an opportunity to communicate with the outside
world and that we should finally be guided by the wishes of
the ‘people. Now, to us this seems rather sophisticated, if
not cynical. Assuming that the black Rhodesians are human
beings—and I have not yet heard any contradiction of that
assumption—their reaction to oppression, repression and’
suppression does not require any elaborate, dilatory or
complicated machinery to determine. A British wit—I think
it was Dr. Johnson—once said that you do not have to eat a
whole ox to krow what the beast is like. That observation
truly applies to the so-called test of acceptability.

84. Thirdly, much has been said about the process of
decolonization since the end of the Second World War, but,
as has been admitted, the situation in Rhodesia is a very
special one. Its special nature lies in the fact that Rhodesia
is the only existing and significant colony where a local
white minority rules over a black majority many times the
size of the white colony. The process of decolonization has
not been applied in a territory of this type. Indeed, we
doubt whether the world has yet adjusted itself to the idea
of a State in which the non-whites can exercise political
power over minority white settlers. In such examples as we
have Australia, New Zealand, Canada and. elsewhere—the
white settlers could not tolerate even a few coloured people
who had lived there for thousands of years. It is this
dimension of the problem that is a source of concern fo
many of our black fellow-citizens—among whose number I
may be permitted to presume to be counted.

85. In spite of those firmly held beliefs we have already
voted in favour of three draft resolutions and shall vote in
favour of the other two in a spirit of compromise and hope.

86. Further, I do not believe that we are united in our
objectives and differ only on timing and method. I believe
that this assertion is false. We are divided in our objectives.

87. Finally, much. responsibility has been placed on our
new Secretary-General for the entire. range of problems we
have been discussing for the last week and indeed for the
last 26 years or more: We have every confidence in him and
shall look forward to a fruitful conclusion to his efforts.

88. I have already mentioned a number of concrete
measures which can. be taken. I am gratified that some of
those ideas have found some support even at this preliminary stage. We must continue our efforts in spite of all
difficulties and frustrations. In the end truth will prevail
and we shall win.

89, India believes—and it has always functioned at home
and abroad, in its own Parliament and in the United

Nations, on this basis—that liberty on our small planet is
indivisible; it is stored in the minds and hearts of men and is

achicved by the determination and perseverance of human
eings.

90. The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote.

91. Mr. KOSCIUSKO-MORIZET (France) (interpretation
from French): There is no need for me to repeat here what
everyone knows. By nature, by education, the French are
unaware of prejudices of race or colour. This attitude flows
from a centuries-old tradition. We condemn any racial
discrimination and in particular apartheid, an outrageous
doctrine whose application is revolting. Therefore France
will vote in favour of this draft resolution [S/10609/
Rev.1], It establishes, however, a link which is not obvious
between apartheid, the violation of human rights and what
has been called the problem of the sale of weapons to
South Africa.

92. This draft resolution offers me the opportunity, in
explaining our vote, to answer certain misunderstandings
and sometimes real distortions concerning our position on
this question.

93. I should like first of all to point out that for some
time we have proposed international general control,
applying to all countries, on international trade in weapons,
but we have not received very much support for this
proposal. Moreover, when the Middle East war broke out,
we were the only Power immediately to declare an embargo
on the shipment of arms to the theatre of operations, and
that did cause some stir. These decisions ought to suffice to
show, if need be, that we do not hesitate to accept material
sacrifices when political and moral considerations are at
stake. Nor shall we try to sidestep the question by dealing
with what others do. Everyone knows that, in the absence
of this international control of the sale of weapons, there
are throughout the world a host of intermediaries, States or
private individuals, who engage in all forms of traffic. We
are not part of this,

94. I should also like to emphasize that we take the
United Nations seriously. We are often asked: “Why do you
not vote in favour of such and such a resolution? It is of no
importance, and you know very well that it will not be
applied, and you will have made a gesture for which people
will be grateful.” But that is not our concept of inter-

national morality. One of the reasons for the crisis of

confidence in the United Nations is precisely this gap
between what is said and what one is ready to do.

Sometimes we are reproached for excessive legalism, but it
is simply a question of scruples, honesty and faithfulness to
our word. When we undertake a commitment, we abide by
it, but we do not have to abide by what we have not
committed ourselves to.

95. That is our position, and 1 clearly reaffirm it. As early
as 1962 the French Government decided to prohibit the
sale to South Africa of weapons which could be used for
so-called internal police operations dictated by racial
prejudices. This restriction was announced by our permanent representative in the Security Council on 6 August
1963 [1054th meeting]. To that end a list of weapons, the
sale of which to South Africa was prohibited, was drawn up
by the French Government, It was later supplemented, as
the Security Council was informed on 4 December 1963
[1078th meeting], by the prohibition of the sale of
matériel and equipment designed for the manufacture of
the weapons in question.

96. In the application of these decisions there is a ban on
the sale of light weapons which could be used in so-called
police operations, such as slow observation aircraft, ground
attack aircraft, automatic weapons, light mortars, flame-

throwers, and ammunition for these weapons, including

napalm bombs and grenades. It was explained in connexion
with the visit to Paris of some African personalities,
including President XKaunda, who was then President of the
Organization of African Unity, that these prohibitions
would be extended to helicopters and to light armoured
vehicles. We have strictly abided by this embargo.

97. However, South Africa can obtain, on the same
conditions as any other State, including of course the other
African States, the weapons which are necessary for
external defence and which are usable only in conflicts
involving regular armies. This difference has sometimes
been questioned by some but is none the less the reflection
of the realities of common sense, and anyone who has the
slightest military experience will recognize that it is
perfectly well founded. We have heard a lot of talk about

submarines, but I am unaware that they can impede -

guerrilla operations. The Mirage is a famous aircraft, and
rightly so. Unquestionably these are high performance
devices fundamentally conceived for interception and air
combat, but owing to their high minimum speed, they are
totally inappropriate for any use in repression operations. If
I dare to give a few personal reminiscences—I really do not
like to cite my own experiences—having had in the course
of my career the need to fight in two types of war, war on
the battlefield and underground war, resistance war, I can
attest to the fact that it is not submarines or combat
aircraft that can impede resistance fighters or underground
fighters.

98, In truth, none of the deliveries made to South Africa
by French companies can be of any use to that country in
any possible repression operations within the country. This
difference between the various categories of weapons in
terms of their use has indeed been admitted implicitly by
the Security Council itself, which, when it referred in
resolution 181 (1963) of 7 August. 1963 to weapons held
by South Africa, ‘mentioned expressly ‘some’ which
helped it to apply its racial policy. Noting with appreciation
on 4 December 1963 [resolution 182 {1963)] the replies
given by Governments within the framework of that
resolution, the Council included in that expression of
appreciation all of the statements, including France's reply,
which expressly distinguished the two categories of
weapons,

99, In September 1970 in New York, in the General
Assembly, the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirmed our
position. I can say that we abide by resolution 182 (1963),
for which we voted, and [ can reaffirm that we will abide
by the current resolution, with the reservations that I have
just expressed, We would have been able to vote for it if
certain members of the Council had not given an interpretation to paragraph 5 that we cannot go along with. But we
are grateful for the efforts at conciliation that have been
made, I must say that, as far as we are concerned, the
paragraph on military co-operation was no problem for us:
we have no such co-operation with South Africa.

100. But we do not like ambiguities. Ambiguity in words
has weighed heavily on certain resolutions of the Council,
in particular on the Middle East. We prefer clarity and
frankness, We would of course not place obstacles in the
path of or vote against a draft resolution which as a whole
meets with our full consent, but everyone would recognize
that in the course of this session we have gone to the
extreme limits in our spirit of conciliation, It is the strictest
honesty and! frankness which compels us to abstain on this
draft resolution.

101. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): My delegation will vote in
favour of the draft resolution contained in document
S/10609/Rev.1. 1 wish to reiterate that Japan is second to
none in its strong opposition to the abhorrent policies of

. apartheid pursued by the Government of South Africa. I

will not waste the time of the Council by explaining the
position of my Government on this problem because I
believe that I have already made it clear in my general
statement.

102. 1 simply wish to add that the Government of Japan
has been supporting humanitarian and educational assistance to the victims of apartheid, Deeply concerned with the
plight of the victims of their policies and desirous of taking
part in the international efforts to relieve this suffering, the
Government of Japan has contributed annually to the
United Nations Trust Fund for South Africa and to the
United Nations Educational and Training Programme for
Southern Africa.

103. Mr. BOYD (Panama) (interpretation from Spanish):
Panama will vote in favour of the draft resolution contained
in document S/10609/Rev.1 which condemns South Africa
for continuing its policy of apartheid in flagrant violation
of the precepts laid down by the United Nations Charter.
My country would like to speak out against the white
minorities who are trying to impose the policy of apartheid
to the detriment of the vast national majority of the
African peoples. Panama would like to avail itself of this
opportunity to reaffirm by its vote that it will always
combat any political or governmental system which denies

3 Ibid., Twenty-fifth Session, Plenary Meetings, 1842nd meeting.

equal opportunities and treatment for racial reasons or for
any other subterfuge.

104. The PRESIDENT: As no other representative wishes
to speak at this time I shall put to the vote the draft
resolution contained in document S/10609/Rev.1.

A vote was taken by show of hands.

In favour: Argentina, Belgium, China, Guinea, India,
Italy, Japan, Panama, Somalia, Sudan, Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, United States of America, Yugoslavia,

Against: None.

Abstaining: France.

The draft resolution was adopted by 14 votes in favour,
nose against, with 1 abstention.4

105. The PRESIDENT: We have now concluded the
second topic on our agenda for this evening,

106. I understand that a revised version of the three-Power
draft resolution concerning Territories under Portuguese
administration has been handed in and is in the process of
translation and reproduction. We are not yet in a position
to examine this new text, which I am informed cannot be
ready for circulation before 11.55 p.m. It is my intention,
once other business which we have is disposed of, to
suspend this meeting briefly and reconvene it if the draft
resolution is before us then. Before doing so, and since the
hour is late, I believe that I should inform the members of
the Council that it is my intention to continue the meeting,
complete the voting on the draft resolutions and conclude
our work tonight before we adjourn. If I hear no objection,
I shall consider that this course coincides with the wishes of
the Council. 1t is so agreed.

107. There is a small financial problem I should like to
take up at this stage. It relates to the question of assessing
amounts of money to be devoted to the Office of Public
Information (OPI), The members of the Council will recall
that the Committee on Council Meetings away from
Headquarters recommended that the Council consider,
during its meeting in Addis Ababa, the question on the
production by OPI of an illustrated pamphlet on the
session. This recommendation is contained in paragraph
29 (g) of the Committee’s report [S/10514, of 18 January
1972]. The members of the Council are also aware that the
cost of issuing a 32-page special illustrated pamphlet
covering the discussions and decisions of the special session
of the Security Council for wide distribution was estimated
at $25,000. It appears from the inquiries I have made that
an appropriation of $10,000 would be sufficient if, instead

- of issuing a special pamphlet on this occasion, a special

10

issue of the publication Objective: Justice were printed and
given the widest circulation. Unless there is any objection I
shall take it that the Council accepts this proposal.

108. We should bear in mind that the first series of
meetings of the Council in Africa was an historic event

4 See resolution 311 (1972).
which increased understanding of the United Nations
among the Governments and peoples of Africa and that it
would therefore be appropriate if wide publicity were given
to this event. I believe that a special issue of Objective:
Justice would fulfil this purpose and I would therefore urge
the members of the Council to support this idea.

109. Mr. BUSH (United States of America): I understand
that the cost involved will be provided out of the regular
budget as opposed to being assigned to the special trip. If
that is correct we certainly commend you, Mr. President,
on your judgement here and I would certainly support your
position on that.

110. The PRESIDENT: I do not know whether I am ina
position to make such a commitment. All I can say is that
every effort should be made to see to it that it is covered
from the regular budget.

111, Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
translation from Russian): As far as | know, the Office of
Public Information has special allocations under the United
Nations budget for its work. Presumably, the Office of
Public Information will cover the payment for this publication from its estimates under the regular budget. Perhaps it
may also be necessary to make cuts somewhere under
another part of the budget, but this necessary and
important publication should be paid for from the Office’s
own estimates.

112. The PRESIDENT: Unless there is any objection I
take it that the suggestion is acceptable, taking into account
the statements made in the Council, It is so agreed.

113. Since there is no further business immediately at
hand, and as we are still awaiting the last draft resolution, I
suggest we postpone our meeting and reconvene at
11.55 p.m.

114. Mr. SEN (India): I admire your skill and precision,
sir, but why 11.55 p.m., why not a little before or after?
and could you give us some indication of how long it will
take?

115. The PRESIDENT: I have said that the documents
will be ready by 11.55 p.m., and I should like to adhere to
my decision. We cannot of course finish in five minutes if
we receive them at five minutes before midnight. If it suits
the convenience of the members we could postpone the
meeting until 12 midnight.

116. Mr. BUSH (United States of America): I remember
Mr. Malik exhorting the Council at various times, telling it
how difficult it was to get instructions. Now being far
removed from Washington, I have something to be grateful
for in being here, but it is perhaps easier to get instructions
when one is close to one’s home base, as the Soviet
Ambassador has told us over and over again. Here we are
going to be asked to vote on a draft resolution that we have
not seen, and we have a time-limit coming up. I wonder
whether, in order to save some precious time the sponsor
could read out the text of the draft resolution so that we
might understand what we are going to be asked to vote on.
I think that would be appropriate. In that way we would

11

not just be standing around the camp fire, but could get to
work and study the draft.

117. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
(translation from Russian): 1 admit that I have raised this
question on a number of occasions, that I have envied
Ambassador Bush in New York for being so close to the
White House. But in this case Ambassador Bush's position is
somewhat easier. The draft we are discussing has already
been published and distributed to members of the Security
Council. They have studied it. Now, as a result of
consultations during the day it has, as [understand it, been
somewhat watered down. It has not been strengthened but,
regrettably, it has been weakened. Therefore I do not think
that Ambassador Bush will require special instructions from
the White House in order to vote on a weakened draft with
which he is familiar.

118. Mr. BUSH (United States of America): I simply
raised the question. The draft might be too weak for us. I
simply ask whether somebody could read out the text of
the draft about which we are speaking, We have 30 minutes
left, and I should like to know what the draft states. I do
not think that this is an unreasonable request. The draft is
being typed and somebody has sponsored it. Would the
sponsor please read out the draft and thereby give us time
to think about it. Then we would be perfectly agreeable to
a suspension of the meeting. Otherwise we shall have a
suspension and then return and go through the same thing
over again. Are we talking about the draft that we saw at
noon? Ambassador Malik, are you a sponsor of the draft?
Perhaps you could explain this to us.

119. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
(translation from Russian): On a point of information, I am
not a sponsor. However, I take note of the fact that for the
first time the United States delegation has expressed the
desire to have a stronger resolution on the struggle against
colonialism and racism. I welcome this. I have no objection
to his proposal that we should hear the resolution read out,

120. Mr. TOURE (Guinea) (interpretation from French):
Tt would be, perhaps, useful to make some clarifications.
The draft resolution submitted by the three African
members of the Council and contained in document
$/10607 was, as everyone knows, the subject of consultations which were carried out up to this evening. The draft
as it will be presented will have certain substantial changes
both in the preamble and in the operative part. As the
President has requested at this stage of our work the draft
resolution as revised is being processed and will be ready in
a few minutes, when all the members of the Security
Council will have it before them. What we can say is that
the changes included in the revised text were the subject of
numerous consultations, and those consultations caused the
delay in distributing the document.

121. The PRESIDENT: Having heard the representative of
Guinea, I still stand by my ruling that the meeting be
suspended for half an hour. The representative of the
United States will have the opportunity of seeing the draft
resolution outside the meeting room. We shall resume the
meeting at midnight.

The meeting was suspended at 11.25 p.m. and resumed
on Saturday, 5 February, at 12.25 a.m.
122. The PRESIDENT: I intend now to proceed to the
next topic, the three-Power draft resolution on the Portuguese-administered Territories. I understand that the
representative of Guinea wishes to speak on the draft
resolution, but first I call on the representative of India.

123. Mr. SEN (India): Mr. President, before you give the
floor to the representative of Guinea, I should like to take
one minute of the Councils time to bring to its attention
some disturbing news we have just received. According to a
message received from Reuters just now, the Secretary-General has received a complaint that South African forces
murdered 90 Africans, including 11 women and 4 children,
in Ovamboland during the last five days of January. I
thought 1 should let the Council know about this information.

124, Mr. TOURE (Guinea) (interpretation from French): 1
have the honour, in the name of the three African
countries, Guinea, Somalia and Sudan, to submit the draft
resolution contained in document S/10607/Rev.1, which
has been the object of fruitful discussion between all the
members of the Security Council. Members will remember
that when we submitted the initial draft it included nine
operative paragraphs, The new draft has only seven. We
preferred also in a spirit of close and fruitful collaboration
and in a desire for harmony in this Council, to give up
certain phrases in the preamble and to use more general
expressions. That is why the new text that the Council has
before it includes mainly points which seem to us from our
consultations to reflect the feeling of a great majority of
the members of the Council.

125, In order to allow members to follow the revised text
and to compare it with the initial draft, as well as to point
out to them the very important effort for co-operation that
the three sponsors have made during their discussions in
order to present the fruit of this effort, I should like to
submit to the Council the following considerations.

126. In the preamble the first paragraph remains the same.
There are no changes. In the second preambular paragraph
we have the following wording, which was accepted in the
previous resolutions and therefore should not be a source of
any disagreement:

“Having heard the statements of those individuals
invited to address the Council on this question,”.

The third paragraph of the preamble remains the same, as
does the fourth. In the fifth paragraph there is a slight
change, and it now reads:

“Deploring the refusal of the Government of Portugal
to implement the pertinent resolutions of the Security
Council, adopted on the question of the Territories under
Portuguese administration, in accordance with the purposes and. principles of the Charter of the United
Nations,”.

127. That stipulation, in our opinion, does not make any
allusions, insinuations, or reservations, as we had been told,
and, as members will observe, the sponsors have taken into
consideration this suggestion.

12

128. The sixth prambular paragraph, which was not
subject to disagreement, and the seventh remain the same in
the revised draft resolution. However, we have the following provision in the eighth preambular paragraph:

“Deeply disturbed at the reported use of chemical
substances by Portugal in its colonial wars against the
peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau),”.

Considerations were put forward that some members of the
Council could not in any way rely on this information, but
it seems to us pertinent that all the reports which were sent
to the Security Council and the General Assembly indeed
mentioned the concern at the use of such weapons—even
bacteriological weapons—by the colonial Portuguese forces.
But we limited ourselves to mentioning those reports—
which, for us, cannot be doubted in their morality and
veracity. In the English text there is a sight error, which
members are asked to correct: “reputed” should read
“reported”.

129. In the ninth paragraph, on which consultations were
also held, we mention the legitimacy of the struggle of the
liberation movements in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea
(Bissau), and their demands for self-determination and
independence. I should like to make a short observation
here. No member of the Council contests the legitimacy of
the struggle of the peoples still under foreign domination
that aspire only to their legitimate rights proclaimed by the
Charter, namely, recovery of their right to self:
determination and independence. Having thus drafted this
text, the sponsors feel that they are only recognizing an
obvious fact which, in itself, has already been recognized as
legitimate by the United Nations.

130. I come now to the operative part of our draft
resolution. In operative paragraph 1 the Security Council

“Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of
Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) to selfdetermination and independence, as recognized by the
General Assembly in its resolution 1514 (XV) of 14
December 1960, and recognizes the legitimacy of their
struggle to achieve that right;”.

131. In operative paragraph 2 the Council

“Condemns the persistent refusal of the Government of
Portugal to implement General Assembly resolution
1514 (XV) and all other relevant resolutions of the
Security Council ;”.

Here the members of the Council will recall the lack of
co-operation and the systematic refusal of Portugal in
respect of all the resolutions of the General Assembly and
the Security Council, Of course, we are told often—even
privately and in the corridors—that Portugal's lack of
co-operation and. stubbornness in maintaining under its
domination Territories which it considers as an extension of
its own territory are regretted. But if we stipulate, in the
operative part, that we condemn Portugal's persistent
refusal we are thereby only proving a fact—if it is still
necessary to prove it.
132. In operative paragraph 3, we reaffirm that the
situation resulting from the policy of Portugal in its
colonies constitutes constant provocations against neighbouring States and that that seriously disturbs international
peace and security on the African continent. That is no
longer in doubt, in view of the repeated aggressions and
violations of air space of the territories of sovereign States
committed by Portuguese colonialist forces.

133. In operative paragraph 4, which is the main part of
the complaints—complaints which are also demands to find
a constructive and even a final solution to the persistent
maintenance of Portuguese colonialism in African countries—Portugal is called upon:

fa} To recognize immediately the right of the peoples of
the Territories under its administration to self
determination and independence in accordance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV);

(b) To cease immediately the colonial wars and all acts of
repression against the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and
Guinea (Bissau);

{c) To withdraw all its armed forces;

(d) To promulgate an unconditional political amnesty
and the restoration of democratic political rights;

{e) To transfer power to political institutions freely
elected and representative of the peoples, in accordance
with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV).

134. In operative paragraph 5 the draft resolution again
calls upon Portugal ‘‘to refrain from any violations of the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of African States;”.

135. In paragraph 6, the Council

“Calls upon all States to refrain forthwith from offering
the Portuguese Government any assistance which would
enable it to continue its repression of the peoples of the
Territories under its administration, and to take all the
necessary measures to prevent the sale and supply of arms
and military equipment to the Portuguese Government
for this purpose, including the sale and shipment of
equipment and materials for the manufacture and maintenance of arms and ammunition to be used in the
Territories under Portuguese administration”.

136. Finally in paragraph 7, the draft resolution

“Requests the Secretary-General to follow the implementation of the present resolution and report to the
Security Council from time to time.”

137. This draft resolution, as revised, is the fruit of
consultations and hard work and also of the wide comprehension of its sponsors. We should like to say that we hope
that this draft resolution will not meet with the fate
reserved for the one on Rhodesia presented by three States.
We feel that the vote on the draft resolution concerning
Rhodesia constitutes a bitter lesson for Africa. But we hope
it will not escape the notice of the international community

13

that the persistence of Portuguese colonialism and the war
of repression being waged by Portugal is a danger to peace
and international security. In the light of these observations
the African countries, trusting in the United Nations
organs, and in particular, the Security Council, can hope
that this draft resolution will receive broad and unanimous
support and that the whole world—the liberation movements, those who have faith in universal justice and the
noble ideals of the Charter—will not be disappointed by the
vote the Council is soon to take.

138. The PRESIDENT: Some members have indicated a
desire to speak in explanation of their votes before the
vote. I shall now call upon them.

139. Mr. KOSCIUSKO-MORIZET (France) (interpretation
from French): We too have some friends in Africa—old
friends, new friends, there are many of them—and we are
always receptive to their appeals. We should note, however,
that in the course of this session of the Security Council we
have found among them—and particularly among the three
African members of the Council—a tremendous amount of
understanding, and I believe that they, similarly, have
found understanding in our delegation, and, indeed, in all
the Western European delegations that have come here with
a desire to make this session successful.

140. We have considerable grounds for having reservations
on the draft resolution [S/10607/Rev.I] before us—
reservations of detail and also of substance—and we have
some doubts about the methods or certain solutions
advocated here. However, going beyond details and certain
of these provisions, we feel we must consider the substance
and also the hopefulness shown by the representative of
Guinea.

141. We regard two provisions as essential. First, the
protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of
African States. We are all attached to that principle. And,
secondly, the inalienable right of the peoples of Angola,
Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) to choose their own
destiny freely—a. principle which goes well beyond any
resolution, even one with a Roman figure, and dates back
centuries. That is, simply, the right to independence—that
independence to which peoples are so attached.

142. That is what is important for us about this draft
resolution. It quite clearly enunciates these principles. We
know that the African States legitimately cherish these
principles, and it is in response to their appeals that we shall
not oppose this draft resolution. No doubt a great deal of
further discussion would have been necessary before we
could be in a position to vote in its favour. But time is
short, and such discussion cannot take place. None the less
in a spirit of understanding which I hope its sponsors will
appreciate, and in spite of our reservations, we shall not
vote against it, but will confine ourselves to abstaining.

143. Mr. MOJSOV (Yugoslavia): My Government’s position on the question of the Portuguese colonial occupation
and oppression of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea
(Bissau) is well known and has been clearly stated many
times. We are, indeed, observing the phenomenon of a
Government deaf and blind to the forces of history, a
Government able to postpone the inevitable tide of change
because of the help it gets from outside. We are quite
confident that. the peoples of those Territories will finally
succeed in their liberation struggles. We shall vote in favour
of the draft resolution contained in document Sf
10607/Rev.1, although we should have preferred a stronger,
more concrete draft, because we believe that even as it now
stands it will be helpful to those peoples valiantly struggling
in their liberation movements, the legitimacy of whose
struggle and objectives this draft resolution recognizes. As
far as the Yugoslav Government is concerned, it will
continue to support and assist those movements morally,
politically and materially in all possible ways.

144. Mr. SEN (India): I should like to deal particularly
with paragraph 6 of this draft resolution [S/10607/Rev. 1].
We in India have more than adequate knowledge and
experience of Portuguese colonialism. I shall not at this late
hour weary the Council with our experience, but we are
rather concerned about paragraph 6, because the way it has
been put does not seem to us sufficiently strong or specific.
Open accusations have been made that NATO arms are
going to the colonial Territories. Open denials also have
been made. This obviously will require investigation. There
are, apart from NATO arms, other arms under the control
of the Government of Portugal and we are most anxious
that these arms, however procured—bought in the open
market and sold for reasons of profit—are finding their way
into these colonial Territories. We are anxious that all
sources of supplies to Portugal which can be diverted to
these colonial Territories should somehow or other be
stopped. It should be possible, therefore, for the Security
Council—if not tonight, at least at a later stage—to
investigate all these complaints and denials about the source
of supply of arms to the colonial Territories.

145. The representative of France drew a distinction
between the arms for external use and the arms for internal
use. Whatever might be the position in South Africa, it is
quite clear that any consideration of arms for external use
cannot apply in Portuguese colonies.

146. Lastly, we should like to ensure that no arms
supplied to Portugal, Rhodesia or South Africa are used for
aggression against neighbouring territories or for the suppression of liberation movements.

147. Those specific considerations do not find, in the view
of my delegation, sufficient reflection in paragraph 6 of this
draft. This does not mean to say that we shall vote against
this draft resolution or abstain on it. We shall certainly vote
for it, but at the same time I should like the Council to
keep these considerations in mind when we come back to
this subject in New York as soon as possible.

148. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): In connexion with this
new draft resolution submitted by Guinea, Somalia and
Sudan, [S/10607/Rev.1], 1 wish to ask the sponsors for
clarification with regard to the amendment of this text. In
operative paragraph 4 (c) as now drafted it is stated, “to
withdraw all its armed forces”, whereas the original draft
said, “the withdrawal of all military and other forces at
present employed for that purpose”. In the original text it
is quite clear that the armed forces required to be

14

withdrawn are those forces which are at present employed
for the purpose of the repression of the people of Angola,
Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), while in the new text
there is no qualification, but we ask for the withdrawal of
“all its armed forces” from those Territories. Perhaps it
may be argued that the armed forces which now exist in
those Territories are solely used for the repression of the
people of those Territories, but even so, theoretically, it can
be argued that there must be a distinction between asking
for the withdrawal of all armed forces of the countries at’
present administering Territories and asking them to with.
draw the armed forces used for certain aims which are
contrary to the purposes of the Charter.

149. Therefore, if the text stands as revised, my delegation
has certain reservations on this part of this draft, and I
think that I must ask for new instructions from my
Government, for which, unfortunately, we have no time. So
we hope the sponsors will revise this new text so that there
will be no misunderstanding.

150. Mr. BOYD (Panama) (interpretation from Spanish):
Even though some may think that the draft resolution in
document S/10607/Rev.1 is not very specific, my delegation wishes to state that it will vote in favour of it since the
text is designed to lend support to the independence
movements of the Portuguese colonies in Africa. Panama
states decisively and unequivocally that it sympathizes with
the peoples that are fighting for their independence from
colonial domination in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea
(Bissau). Portugal’s policy concerning the colonial Territories that it controls is not shared by my Government, which
on various occasions has expressed itself in favour of
self-determination and freedom for these peoples.

151. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
(translation from Russian): 1 should like to draw the
attention of the Secretariat to the fact that there is an
inaccuracy in the Russian translation of paragraph 4 {c).
The English text reads “to withdraw all its armed forces”,
whereas in the Russian the word “all” is omitted. I request
the inclusion of the word “all”.

152. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): I asked the sponsoring
countries just now whether they might be able to make a
slight amendment to the text. I have explained the position
of my delegation quite frankly before the Council. If there
is no amendment of the new text, my delegation, with great
reluctance, will have to abstain from voting.

153. Mr. TOURE (Guinea) (interpretation from French):
On behalf of the sponsors, I would say that we were very

much impressed by the appeal made by the representative

of Japan. We know the deep ties of friendship and

solidarity which Japan has with the African peoples. But the

operative part of our text is sa concise, clear and precise

that we would have hoped that the representative of Japan

would make a specific proposal which the sponsors would

be prepared to examine.

154. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): In reply to the statement
made by the representative of Guinea 1 would suggest that
subparagraph 4 (c) be redrafted to read as follows:
1

“To withdraw all its armed forces as presently employed for the purpose of the repression of the peoples of
Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau);”,

155. Mr. GHALIB (Somalia): I should like to thank the
representative of Japan for his constructive suggestion. But
before we agree to this amendment, can he assure us that he
has no other suggestions or amendments in mind?

156. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): I can say that I have no
other amendments or suggestions.

157. Mr. GHALIB (Somalia): Therefore, although we have
not had time to consult each other, I can safely accept, on
behalf of the sponsors of the draft resolution and on behalf
of the people concerned, that proposal because it conforms
to the explanations which I have given.

158. The PRESIDENT: In my capacity as representative
of SUDAN, I can say that as a sponsor of the. draft
resolution, my delegation is also ready to go along with this
amendment in a spirit of conciliation, although we could
never think that any Portuguese forces in those Territories
are there for an excursion; they are there for repression.

159. Mr. TOURE (Guinea) (interpretation from French):
It goes without saying that, since we are the third sponsor,
my delegation fully supports the position expressed by the
two African members of the Council.

160. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): I should like to thank the
countries sponsoring the draft resolution for accepting my
suggestion.

161. The PRESIDENT: I shall now put to the vote the
draft resolution contained in document S/10607/Rev.1, as
amended,

A vote was taken by show of hands.

In favour: China, Guinea, India, Japan, Panama, Somalia,

. Sudan, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Yugoslavia,

Against: None.

Abstaining: Argentina, Belgium, France, Italy, United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United
States of America.

The draft resolution, as amended, was adopted by 9 votes
to none, with 6 abstentions.’

162. The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those members
of the Council who have asked to be allowed to explain
their votes after the vote.

163. Mr. HUANG Hua (China) (translation from Chinese):
The Chinese delegation has just voted in favour of
the two draft resolutions: one on the question of the
Portuguese colonies and the other on the question of
apartheid in South Africa. But we deem it necessary to

point out that those resolutions have failed to call upon all

5 See resolution 312 (1972).

15

countries and peoples of the world to voice solidarity and
support for the just struggles of the peoples of Angola,
Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), and have failed to
condemn the United States, the United Kingdom and other
countries for their acts violating the arms embargo and
supporting the Portuguese colonial authorities and the
racist regime of South Africa in various fields. Therefore,
this is not satisfactory.

164, The current meetings of the Security Council in
Africa are drawing to a close. Owing to obstructions by
certain big Powers, the meetings have failed to achieve the
expected results. Nevertheless, it is clear to all that the just
struggles of the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Guinea
(Bissau), Zimbabwe, Namibia, Azania and other African
countries against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism
and racism have formed a surging torrent. They will rely on
their own unity and struggles, overcome all obstacles on the
road of advance, completely shatter imperialism, colonialism and neo-colonialism, and win their national independence and liberation. No force on earth can thwart the
forward strides of the people of the whole African
continent, No matter what may happen in the world, the
Chinese Government and people will, as always, unswervingly stand together with the African people and firmly
support their just struggle until they win final victory.

165, Mr. VINCI (Italy): My delegation shares the motives
and objectives that prompted Guinea, Somalia and Sudan
to introduce the draft resolution concerning the Portuguese
Territories which the Council has just adopted.

166. As I stated in explaining the general position of the
Italian delegation on all the issues discussed in this special
series of meetings of the Council in Africa, my delegation
maintains that the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and
Guinea (Bissau) should be allowed to exercise freely their
right to self-determination and independence. We did agree,
therefore, on this point, which is affirmed in the three-Power draft resolution. We also agreed on some other
points, as did the delegation of France. However, the draft
resolution in its revised form has been introduced only this
evening, and my delegation was not in a position to study
all its provisions, some of which raise delicate legal
problems, and to seek instruction from my Government.
We certainly appreciate the efforts made by the sponsors to
improve some parts of the text, However, lacking instructions, we had to abstain from voting, as we would have
done on the original text.

167. Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): My delegation voted in
favour of the draft resolution because we fully support the
legitimate aspirations of the peoples of these Territories to
self-determination and independence.

168. I wish to point out that, consistent with the relevant
resolutions of the Security Council and the General
Assembly, the Government of Japan has maintained and
will continue to adhere to the policy of not granting
approval to any sale or supply to the Government of
Portugal of arms and military equipment and materials,
Moreover, Japan has never offered, nor has it any intention
of offering in the future, the Portuguese Government any
assistance which would enable it to continue its repressive
colonial policies.

169. The PRESIDENT: Since there are no more names on
the list of speakers, I wish to make the following
concluding statement.

170. As this last in the series of Security Council meetings
held in Addis Ababa, in Africa, draws to a close I should
like to sum up very briefly what I feel to be the outcome of
our historic decision to hold meetings away from the
United Nations Headquarters devoted to consideration of
questions related to Africa of which the Security Council is
currently seized and implementation of the Council’s
relevant resolutions.

171. These meetings have been unprecedented not only
because of the locale in which they took place, but also
because for the first time the Security Council has been
able to devote its undivided attention to a global review of
the grave political problems which are currently of great
concern to the Governments and peoples of the African
continent. I feel also that through our meetings here, we, as
members of the Security Council, have derived individually
and collectively a greater depth of understanding of these
problems and of the extent to which they are a source of
deep concern and preoccupation to those African Governments and peoples.

172. We have also seen how fervently determined Africa is
through its Governments and liberation movements in the
captive Territories to recapture the independence of those
Territories and erase the tottering edifice of colonialism
from its soil. No force on earth can freeze history.

173. As an African, as well as President of the Security
Council, I am grateful to feel that by coming here and
holding its meetings in Africa the Security Council has also
served reciprocally to arouse in the African Governments
and their peoples a greater interest in and understanding of
the United Nations and of the Council in particular.

174. In having responded to the request of the Organization of African Unity by holding these meetings on African
soil, the Council has helped to bring to the Governments
and peoples of Africa a heightened awareness of the
functioning and the purposes of the United Nations and a
renewed resolve to make full use of the Organization as an
instrumentality against the ruthless intent of colonialism,
against the petrified dogmas of racial prejudice and against
the exploitation of man by man.

175. Inasmuch as we are gratified that the Council was
able to adopt positive resolutions concerning some of the
major African problems and thankful to those who found it
possible to support them, we regret the failure to do the
same in relation to some of the most burning issues in our
continent. The logic that some among us have advanced to
justify their inaction or frustration of action on those issues
eludes our trust. There are issues on which no fair-minded
person can be neutral, and I feel that the English-speaking
among us should have been the first to learn from the
historian of the English-speaking people, Sir Winston

16

Churchill, that it is immoral to be neutral between the fire
and the fire brigade.

176. Africa has its realities and problems and, as I said
yesterday, those realities and problems can never be
properly seen through the distorting prism of self-interest.
Our problems are human and let us not delude ourselves—
man can only engage in humanity through self-surrender
and not self-interest.

177. 1 wish also on behalf of the Council to thank the
Secretariat for its dedicated and efficient help, and the
Secretary-General for the statesmanship, sagacity and devotion demonstrated throughout our deliberations and
consultations here. We all wish him success in his new
thankless job, which experience has proven to be something
akin to the interminable labour of Sisyphus. Some of the
sad experiences of tonight are a case in point.

178. Before closing this meeting, I wish to turn to yet
another matter, namely, the feelings of gratitude of
members of the Council for the hospitality which has been
enjoyed here in Addis Ababa. In this connexion, I have
been. authorized to make the following statement on behalf
of all members of the Council, a statement of consensus
expressing gratitude to the host country:

“On 19 January 1972 the Security Council adopted
resolution 308 (1972) in which it decided to hold
meetings in Addis Ababa from 28 January to 4 February
1972, devoted to the consideration of questions relating
to Africa of which the Security Council is currently
seized and implementation of the Councils relevant
resolutions.

“In accordance with that resolution, the Security
Council held its 1627th to 1639th meetings in Addis
Ababa. During the course of these meetings, the members
of the Council have listened with great interest to
addresses by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of
Ethiopia and by the President of the Islamic Republic of
Mauritania, the current Chairman of the Assembly of
Heads of State and Government of the Organization of
African Unity as well as to the statements made by the
representatives of States Members of the United Nations
invited to participate in the Council’s discussions pursuant to rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure and
by 13 persons invited in accordance with rule 39 to
supply the Council with information relating to the
questions under consideration,

“During their . stay in Africa, the members of the
Security Council also accepted with gratitude the invitation of the Government of the Somali Democratic
Republic to visit its capital of Mogadishu and meet with
the President and leading members of that Government.

“Before concluding their meetings in Addis Ababa, the
members of the Security Council have requested the
President of the Security Council to convey tc His
Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of Ethiopia, and to the
Government of Ethiopia their respectful gratitude for the
invitation issued to the Security Council and the generous
hospitality and unfailing courtesy and helpfulness ex-
tended to them at all times during their visit to Addis
Ababa. They have further requested the President to
assure the Government and people of Ethiopia, and in
particular the authorities and populace of Addis Ababa,

that the members of the Council and all those who

accompanied them carry away with them an abiding
memory of the warm welcome extended to them.

“In addition, the members of the Security Council wish
to convey to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
their sincere appreciation for the outstanding contribution made by him and his staff to ensure a smooth and
efficient functioning of the services required for the
meetings of the Council. The members of the Council also
wish to express their appreciation and gratitude to the
Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic
Commission for Africa and his staff for their invaluable
assistance in that regard.”

179. This would normally conclude our business for this
meeting. However, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Ethiopia has indicated that he wishes to make a statement.

Accordingly, and with the consent of the Council, I now .

invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make
his statement.

180. Mr. Minasse HAILE (Ethiopia): It was not my
intention to intervene at this moment, but after having
heard so many generous words of thanks addressed to the
person of His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie I, my august
Sovereign, and to the Government and people of Ethiopia, I
thought I would be less than grateful if I did not respond to
all those kind sentiments.

181, I should like to assure the members of the Council
that we have considered it a privilege to play host to these
historic meetings of the Security Council, the first ever held
in Africa. When we expressed our readiness to receive the
Council here in our capital we were very conscious of the
special significance and the consequence that it might have
for developments in Africa. I believe that the United
Nations has never before come as close to the African

17

peoples, who need its assistance most, as it has in the last
week when the Council has been meeting here.

182. We believe that the achievements of the Council at
the end of these meetings were not as much as had been
hoped for by Africans in general and particularly by those
who are still under colonial domination. The fact that the
Council in its wisdom has found it possible to meet on
African soil is in itself, as the Secretary-General put it, an
achievement, It will no doubt further encourage the African
peoples under alien domination to feel that their problems
are finally getting the attention they have deserved for far
too long. It is also a clear warning to the colonialist régimes
that there is increasingly an open mind in the United
Nations to examine critically, and from very close quarters,
the system of oppression they have created.

183. In this connexion, the fact that the Security Council
has been able to hear at first hand from the representatives
of independent African States, as well as from the African
liberation movements, cannot be over-emphasized.

184. 1 have also no doubt that settler groups in Rhodesia,
South Africa and Portugal, who because of lack of
information have been prepared to believe the worst about
African aspirations, will have learned something about the
truth from the news that may have filtered through the
concrete walls of censorship that their régimes have erected
as a barrier to a free interplay of ideas.

185. For all these reasons, I should like to salute the
wisdom shown by the members of the Security Council
when they agreed to meet on African soil to discuss
questions relating to independence and peace in Africa.

186. 1 should like once again to acknowledge with
gratitude and heartfelt thanks the generous words addressed
to my august Sovereign and to the Government and people
of Ethiopia.

The meeting rose on Saturday, 5 February at 1.30 a.m.

acl oY Shien Jo J pant LiS
bon Jr 2) 0 Le nel Hall sb en 6 isl sag lal pn Small a) Sl stan ha J and) Kes
skin al ong oped) ee dead (Ne J) ST]
A017 MIS 2 ELL Ri
BRO BIHAR rE HFA BRE IR Mr abiA RW. BIE FIR SETI RB RAR A EAE,

HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS

United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors
throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales
Section, New York or Geneva.

COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES

Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences
dépositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous auprés de votre libraire ou adressez-vous
a : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Genéve,

KAR IONXYYHTH H3XAHHI OPTAHH 3AXHH OB'BEAMHEHHBIX HAIIMMX

Hopnauna Oprauusanud Of begMHeRHBIX HALHE MOMXHO KYIHUThL B KHHXXHBIX Mara-3HHAX M areHTCTBAX BO BcexX pafionax mupa. HasoguTe crpaBky 006 H3IZAHUAX B

A BallleM KHIUKHOM MATasHHe HJM NMUIINTE no ajgpecy: Opranusanis O6beguHeHHLIX
Hanu#t, Cerna no npoAaxe rananui, Huro-¥lopk nin ¥enesa,

COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS

Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estdn en venta en librerfas y casas distribuidoras en todas partes del munde. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones
Unidas, Seccién de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra.

Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $ U.S, 1,00 (or equivalent in other currencies) 72-82076~0ctober 1975—~1,925 |

Voting Summary
Yes: 014 | No: | Abstentions: 001 | Non-Voting: | Total voting membership:
Y ARGENTINA
Y BELGIUM
Y CHINA
A FRANCE
Y GUINEA
Y INDIA
Y ITALY
Y JAPAN
Y PANAMA
Y SOMALIA
Y SUDAN
Y USSR
Y UNITED KINGDOM
Y UNITED STATES
Y YUGOSLAVIA