Mr. President,
Your Excellency Dr. Alex Ekwueme, Vice-President of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria,
Your Excellency Mr. Edem Kodjo, Secretary-General of the OAU,
Your Excellency Mr. Issoufou Djermakoye, Secretary-General of the International
Conference,
Your Excellency Mr. Jesus Montane Orposa, Representative of the Chairman
of the Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries,
Honourable Ministers, Your Excellencies,
Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen, Comrades,
The African National Congress greets you all in the name of the people of South Africa, whose relentless struggle for liberation is the fundamental justification for this august assembly of the representatives of concerned humanity.
Allow me also to greet you especially in the name of Nelson Mandela and other national leaders and political activists held in prisons of apartheid, and also in the name of Petros Mashigo, Naphtali Manana and Johnson Lubisi who, at this very moment, are sitting in death cells in Pretoria, awaiting their turn - but also prepared, if need be - to be hanged by the apartheid fascist regime, for their role in the fight to end the apartheid crime against humanity.
Mr. President, your election to preside over and guide the proceedings of this crucial conference accords not only with your own talent and vast experience, but also with the shining example of dedication to the cause of liberation which has been the hallmark of the African and foreign policy of your country, Tanzania, from the earliest moments of her independence. We congratulate you!
When the General Assembly decided to call this conference in cooperation with the OAU, it had in view that "urgent action must be taken by governments and organisations towards the imposition and full implementation of mandatory and comprehensive sanctions".
This view was arrived at on the basis of the repeated determination of the General Assembly that within the meaning of the United Nations Charter, apartheid constitutes a threat to international peace and security, and that in the maintenance of this system, peace had in fact been breached. This is also the position which accords both with our own view as the oppressed people of South Africa and with the actual realities of the situation in southern Africa.
We therefore believe that it is one of the principal tasks of this conference to reaffirm the determination of the General Assembly, and accordingly reiterate the call for the imposition of mandatory and comprehensive sanctions against apartheid South Africa under the provisions of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.
It would then become the responsibility of the Conference to discuss and agree on the means and methods that the world community must adopt to ensure the imposition and full implementation of these sanctions. In these deliberations, we must necessarily take into account the abuse of their veto powers by some permanent members of the Security Council and commit ourselves to the adoption of measures which will bring to a halt this unacceptable frustration and blocking of the will of the rest of the world.
New Voice of France
I am certain that we are all greatly strengthened in our resolve to achieve progress by the fact that we meet on French soil in the fortunate circumstance that the people of France have just elected a new President, bringing to an end more than two decades of rule by governments that have collaborated closely with the racist South African regime.(2)
By their vote the French people have shown that they do not want to supply nuclear reactors, Mirage planes, submarines and other war materials to defend apartheid; they do not want technology and licences, skilled personnel and finance to flow to assist the apartheid regime; they do not want their rugby teams to tour South Africa, their cities, such as Nice, to be twinned with apartheid cities such as Cape Town; they do not wish to warm themselves with South African coal extracted under conditions no better than those so vividly described by Emile Zola. This momentous step by the French people heralds, we hope, the death knell of the monstrous alliance with the self-confessed successors of the Nazi regime which but a short forty years ago occupied this city and this country.
We wish to reiterate our congratulations to Francois Mitterrand on his election, and express the hope and conviction that the new Government of France will respond by bringing to an end the self-seeking alliance that has thwarted international action against apartheid for so long, so that France can join the overwhelming majority of nations which has in fact already imposed sanctions against apartheid South Africa.
In this regard the statement to the Conference made by the First Secretary of the Socialist Party of France, M. Lionel Jospin, is the new voice of France signalling the dawn of a new era in the relations between the French Government and the peoples of Africa in general, and of southern Africa in particular.
Purpose of sanctions
Mr. President, the issue to which this Conference must address itself has a long history, for the question of white South Africa`s treatment of the black people is older than the United Nations itself. Since 1946, no other question has appeared so often on the United Nations agenda, or remained there for so long.
We have, today, to deal with a rogue regime that has repeatedly, consistently, and deliberately violated almost every single norm recognised by the international community.
Let us, therefore, at the outset of this Conference be very clear about the nature of the problem with which we are dealing. We are not discussing a normally law-abiding member of the international community that has had a momentary lapse. We are dealing with an outcast, one who continues to follow policies that have been declared a crime against humanity, a regime that has repeatedly acted in defiance of United Nations resolutions.
Sanctions are not to be seen as a way of reforming apartheid, nor merely as a gesture of disapproval. Sanctions are a weapon that the international community can and must use against the racist regime - a weapon that can weaken Pretoria`s capacity to maintain its aggressive posture. Sanctions are a way of cutting off support for racist South Africa, and denying the regime the means through which it can sustain and perpetuate itself.
Sanctions will not and cannot be expected in themselves to bring down the apartheid system. They are not an alternative to struggle by the South African and Namibian people, but an important complement to it.
The effect of sanctions, properly implemented, will be to limit the scope, scale, and duration of the war that is now raging in southern Africa. Unless the international community can do this, the repercussions of the conflict will almost certainly engulf us all.
Sharpening Conflict in South Africa
As we meet here, the widest coalition in South African history has come together to boycott the celebrations marking the 20th anniversary of the white Republic. The degree of polarisation in South Africa is revealed in the differing perspectives towards these celebrations.
To the majority of the population the regime and its supporters are celebrating two decades of the most brutal repression, oppression and exploitation that our people have ever known. The regime is celebrating the establishment of the death camps which it calls homelands. It is rejoicing in the fact that the entire African people have been made aliens in their own country. It is celebrating the fact that apartheid has brought unemployment to nearly one half of the working population of the country. It is dancing a victor`s dance to express its satisfaction that it has removed by assassination such patriots as Vuyisile Mini, Joseph Mduli, Steve Biko and Solomon Mahlangu; that it has incarcerated for long terms and for life national leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Ahmed Kathrada, Dennis Goldberg, Harry Gwala, Zephaniah Mothopeng and others, and that it is today poised to assassinate more freedom fighters, adding to the thousands it has killed in Soweto, Langa, Elsie`s River, Matola, Kassinga and elsewhere.
The conflict inside South Africa is sharpening. At every level, the mass of the population is finding ways to show its opposition to the apartheid system. In schools, factories, rural settlements, squatter camps and townships, in every walk of life, the people have taken action to show that they are not prepared to acquiesce in the designs of the Botha regime, that they are determined to take upon themselves the burden of their liberation, and to use every weapon at their disposal to bring about a democratic nonracial South Africa.
In the face of this growing threat to its power, the regime has resorted to greater repression and more brutality. Today power is exercised by the oppressor, overtly and unashamedly, through the violence of a particularly brutal authoritarian and militarist State. It is the resolute determination of the people of South Africa and Namibia to seize power, to wrest it from their oppressors. Combined with the victories of the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, that has provoked a crisis for apartheid South Africa. In its frenzied efforts to preserve the apartheid system, the regime has extended its long war against the South African people to an undeclared war against independent Africa.
These past twenty years have witnessed an unprecedented level of militarisation. The armaments being deployed, the sophisticated military technology in use in the burgeoning military-oriented sectors of the economy, and the scale of manpower mobilisation for military purposes, all attest to the fact that South Africa is now in the control of a particularly dangerous politico-militarist clique. This makes a race war an imminent possibility, and the resolution of the conflict in South Africa therefore becomes a major issue in international relations.
Allies of Apartheid Regime
It is twenty years since South Africa was expelled from the Commonwealth and in the period that has followed it has been ejected from almost every international organisation. But even as it has been isolated it has received increased economic and military support from some Western countries. This collaboration has been central to the development of South African militarism and the self-confidence with which it has been demonstrated in an escalating war of aggression against neighbouring States, and in shackling Namibia into the apartheid nexus in gross violation of decisions of the world community.
The countries that have built the South African war machine and buttressed apartheid have also deployed every political and diplomatic tactic in an effort to shield the regime from international action. Despite the clearly expressed desire of the international community they have acted to block action by the Security Council.
Their repeated frustration of the attempts by the Security Council to act in response to General Assembly resolutions as most recently in the exercise of the triple veto(3), the persistent thwarting of the will of the international community, now lays these countries open to the charge of abusing their powers in the Security Council. They have perverted the historic responsibility given to them as permanent members by using their power to promote rather than remove the threat to, and the breach of, international peace and security.
It is important to know why they have acted in this way. Why do these countries fly in the face of world opinion and remain adamant in their claim that dialogue rather than isolation is the correct policy against apartheid South Africa?
For us, the answer is obvious. The dispossession of the African people took place in the large measure during the period when South Africa was a colony of Britain. Capital, technology and skills from all three veto casters participated in laying the foundations of the apartheid economy. They helped to shape the institutions and mechanisms for the exploitation of labour that make investment in apartheid so uniquely profitable. Links with these three countries have helped to ensure that apartheid remains profitable. Not surprisingly, therefore, these three wish to preserve apartheid.
Moreover the so-called Union of South Africa was created as an imperialist outpost and remains today as an agent of the imperialist design. Its role was to dominate and control the economies of the southern half of the African continent, its function to ensure that the vast natural resources of the area were protected and reserved for exploitation by imperialism. Today, the role and function of apartheid South Africa are seen in a similar light, and the regime that is assigned the responsibility of acting as NATO's gendarme in the Indian and South Atlantic Oceans, must itself be protected by its imperialist masters.
Had there been any doubts about this, they have been rapidly dispelled by the Reagan Administration. The President of the United States has publicly described apartheid South Africa as a friendly country, a wartime ally, and a partner in the defence of United States strategic interests.
We are astonished at the conscious distortion of historical fact to justify embracing the Botha regime. Far from being a wartime ally, Botha and the party he leads allied themselves with the Nazis and opposed South Africa`s entry into the war. The Nationalist Party shares with the Nazis a common ideology and brutality, and has taken upon itself the mantle of Hitler. It has become a fountain of that ideology and maintains close links with fascist and racist groups in many countries, including the United States.
Common Objectives of Botha and Reagan
Since Botha and Reagan have proclaimed themselves as allies we must consider what are their common objectives in southern Africa. What interests, and most importantly whose interests, will this alliance promote?
For the imperialists and racist South Africa alike, the ultimate objectives are: to regain economic, political and military control over the entire southern African region and to perpetuate the plunder of the region`s mineral resources. The strategy applied in order to secure these objectives includes:
Firstly, the denial of the legitimacy of the liberation struggle and the attempted isolation of the liberation movement.
Secondly, the isolation of independent African countries from the world progressive forces in order to weaken them, the destabilisation and the overthrow of their legal governments.
Thirdly, the attempt to transform the Indian and South Atlantic Oceans into military zones as an extension of the NATO alliance.
Within this strategy the maintenance of the apartheid system is an a priori condition and its success requires, as an indispensable element, the strengthening of the apartheid regime.
The arrogant assumption of the paramountcy of outside interests above those of Africans is but one aspect of the ideology that unites Pretoria and Washington. The inevitable victory of the liberation struggle will teach them that it is the interests of sovereign governments and of the majority of the people that need to be taken into account when considering our countries, our future, and, need I emphasise it, our minerals and wealth.
So-called Changes in Apartheid
Though Mr. Reagan was frank about the motivations of the alliance with racist South Africa, other statements by the veto casters cloak their real motives with a veneer of concern for the peoples of southern Africa.
Thus, we are told that armed struggle and sanctions are unnecessary, because Mr. Botha is and can be further persuaded to bring about changes in the apartheid system: where is the evidence that the apartheid regime can be persuaded to turn against itself, that the transgressor against international law and violator of the international peace can somehow be talked into joining the forces that are determined to end both the transgression and the system that initiated it?
What change there has been in South Africa has not been initiated by our oppressors, but by the nationwide upsurge of our people and their determination to resist apartheid. The change that has taken place is that the tide has turned irreversibly in our favour, and the forces of liberation now pose a very real and invincible challenge to the wielders of power in Pretoria.
Faced with this reality, the apartheid regime has been prospecting frantically for new ways of securing apartheid domination. Thus any move made by Botha is a reaction to the strengthening forces of liberation and is a defence of apartheid. Such moves are a justification not for relaxation, but for the intensification of the offensive, both domestically and internationally.
Specious Arguments against Sanctions
The alleged concern of the veto casters for the interests of the black population is also expressed in the argument that sanctions will harm the black people of South Africa and be disastrous for the independent States neighbouring South Africa.
The call for sanctions was initiated inside the country by the majority of the people of South Africa, and has since been reiterated on a number of occasions. The OAU and other progressive forces responded to this call from the South African people, and we now have the support of the overwhelming majority of the nations of the world as expressed in the General Assembly.
There is no possibility of the people of South Africa ever accepting the status quo and acquiescing in their own oppression and exploitation. There should no longer be any doubt that nothing can deter the South African people from continuing the liberation struggle until victory is won. To achieve this objective no sacrifice is too great, no price too high.
We know that a bitter struggle lies ahead. We can see that already the war has spilt over our borders as Pretoria threatens and attacks our neighbours. The OAU, and the Frontline States, and I mean all, including Lesotho and Swaziland, without exception, are committed to our liberation struggle and to the eradication of apartheid. It is therefore inconceivable that there can be peaceful development and security anywhere in southern Africa as long as apartheid continues to exist.
Without action by the international community the war will continue to spill over, and larger areas and more people will be sucked into it. No State on the border or within the range of Pretoria`s war machine will be able to escape the consequences. Concern for the suffering peoples of the Frontline States can therefore best be manifested by taking urgent steps to limit the Pretoria regime`s aggressive capacity, to act to weaken it by effective comprehensive sanctions.
It is significant to note that pleas on behalf of the southern African countries are made not by those who it is claimed will suffer from the imposition of sanctions, but are put forward by those who have extracted super-profits from the exploitation of black labour in the apartheid economy and wish to continue doing so.
These countries opposed sanctions initially because they claimed concern for the black people of South Africa. Now they claim to be acting in the interests of the people in the countries neighbouring South Africa. The net result of their activity, of the failure to impose sanctions, has been that apartheid repression and brutality have grown, and the only people not to have suffered in the process has been the white minority.
Mr. President, the evidence is incontrovertible. Opposition to sanctions in the Security Council or in the Parliaments of Western Europe is based not upon concern for the peoples of Namibia, South Africa or southern Africa. The 12 vetoes were cast quite simply to protect the Botha regime and to preserve apartheid.(4)
The specious arguments have been put up to justify this action and to try and deter action by those countries which support the liberation struggle.
Appeal by ANC
At this International Conference on Sanctions against South Africa, the African National Congress appeals to the international community:
In making these appeals to States to act without waiting for the Security Council decision, we do not suggest that the attempt to secure mandatory sanctions be abandoned. On the contrary, our efforts in that direction must be increased. One of the principal issues to which this Conference must address itself is what steps the world community should take to ensure that the Security Council discharges its proper function and brings to an end the breach of the peace and threat to international security that now exists in southern Africa. Inasmuch as the Security Council has failed to act, the members of the General Assembly should now "unite for peace" and make appropriate recommendations.
By imposing sanctions and simultaneously pursuing the goal of mandatory action, we will expose the veto casters and other collaborators as the allies and protectors of apartheid.
Mr. President, since the opposition to sanctions is based upon a determination to preserve the apartheid system, we must expect that every device will be used to make sanctions ineffective. After all, it was Britain who both asked the United Nations to impose sanctions on the rebel Smith and who was one of the chief offenders in breaching oil sanctions - so there is a lot of experience there. But we should not be deterred. Let us remember that if it is inevitable that sanctions won`t work and are ineffective, there would have been no need to cast vetoes: why flog a dead horse? The veto was used precisely because sanctions can be made effective and can have an impact. The Conference must therefore concern itself with the task of mobilising the international community to ensure that sanctions are made effective.
Collaborators Must be Forced to Choose
Apartheid`s collaborators must be made to realise that they cannot defend racists and claim to be non-racist. They cannot support apartheid and preach freedom. They cannot exploit cheap labour in South Africa and continue to trade with Africa and the non-aligned countries. They cannot seek concessions and licences in countries supporting the liberation struggle and participate in the profits from apartheid. They cannot be involved in repression in South Africa and in development elsewhere. They cannot allow their arms and products to be used in aggression against South Africa`s neighbours and expect to be absolved from blame and accepted as friends.
So I make this final appeal to all those who support the liberation struggle: put these choices before the collaborators. They must be forced to choose between links with apartheid and relations with the majority of the international community, between links with apartheid and links with Africa. Collaboration must be made unprofitable, and it will cease.
I have made these appeals on behalf of the oppressed people of Namibia and South Africa, and all the peoples in the war zones of southern Africa. But this is not a selfish appeal. The establishment of the United Nations stemmed from the desire to bring an end to wars, to stop aggression, to eradicate racism. Collective security is of concern not only to the nations of southern Africa but to all peoples and countries, and sanctions are the primary means available to that end.
Action under Chapter VII is the ultimate peaceful sanction provided for in the United Nations Charter. If sanctions are not imposed on so blatant an offender and so persistent a violator of the Charter as apartheid South Africa, then the efforts of the international community towards a peaceful resolution of international problems will have proved an exercise in futility.
Finally, Mr. President, we pledge the solidarity and support of the ANC and the fighting people of South Africa to SWAPO, the PLO and all peoples fighting against fascism, racism, and imperialism. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the governments and peoples of southern Africa, and the OAU, as well as that of progressive countries, organisations and peoples throughout the world. We reiterate our pledge to rid humanity of the scourge of racism and apartheid-colonial domination in South Africa.
Victory is Certain! 1 The International Conference was organised by the United Nations, in cooperation with the Organisation of African Unity, at UNESCO House, Paris. Mr. Salim Ahmed Salim, Foreign Minister of the United Republic of Tanzania, was President of the Conference.
2 M. François Mitterand, leader of the Socialist Party, was elected President of France in May 1981
3 On April 30, 1981, France, the United Kingdom and the United States vetoed four draft resolutions introduced in the United Nations Security Council, following recommendations of the General Assembly on the question of Namibia, calling for sanctions against South Africa.