I have not had occasion to study thoroughly this voluminous document, but I feel a few general remarks are in order.
Contrary to the reports in the press, this Expert Committee did not indicate that economic sanctions against South Africa are not feasible and effective, or even cast doubt on economic sanctions. All three sets of conclusions show that they are feasible and will be effective. Even the conclusions of the so-called majority show that economic sanctions will be effective if, of course, they are applied universally. They stated that there are several areas of vulnerability in the South African economy.
What has happened, in fact, is that some of the members of the Committee, notably the United Kingdom, were disturbed to find evidence that economic sanctions would be effective. Not willing to subscribe to this conclusion, they have tried various tactical moves.
Thus we find the United Kingdom, the United States and others voting against the very moderate draft submitted by Ivory Coast and Morocco in a spirit of conciliation.
In the so-called majority draft, they laid disproportionate emphasis on the need for a blockade to prevent evasion by other States. One wonders as to which are the States against which the blockade would be directed. Certainly not against the great majority of States which support economic sanctions and are already implementing them at considerable sacrifice. A blockade will be needed, presumably, against the major trading partners who happen to be, almost all of them, friends and allies of the United Kingdom and the United States. One wonders whether they are casting doubts on economic sanctions because they cannot be certain of the co-operation and good faith of their friends and allies.
Then there is a reference in the so-called majority conclusions to the hardships which may be faced by individual countries as a result of economic sanctions - with particular reference to the United Kingdom. Basutoland is thrown in to make the statement look more palpable. The so-called majority did not accept the simple statement suggested by Ivory Coast and Morocco to express belief that a spirit of sacrifice should prevail in a matter so important to the international community as that of eliminating apartheid.
Presumably, according to the United Kingdom, the whole world should compensate the losses of those countries which now profit tremendously from the system of apartheid and which may lose these profits if there are economic sanctions.
The more we wait, the more these interests will build up their stake in South Africa, and the more "compensation" will they expect.
The truth is not that economic sanctions are difficult - and difficulties themselves should not deter the world on this grave matter - but that the United Kingdom and others are so attached to the profits they make from apartheid that they do not want to make the necessary sacrifices to deal with this grave problem. They are drifting in the face of a fire which may consume more than a few interests in South Africa.
I felt constrained to make these remarks because we have to dispel the misunderstanding created in public mind by erroneous reports. We should put a stop to equivocation on this grave issue. We should tell the world that all the experts of the Great Powers in the Expert Committee have found not a single effective peaceful measure to deal with this situation except economic sanctions. At the same time, they not only oppose economic sanctions, but, even while the Expert Committee was sitting, poured capital and technical aid into South Africa.
We should fully expose the economic links which inhibit action against apartheid, encourage public opinion to understand the ramifications of apartheid and, thus, help persuade the major trading partners to act in accordance with their responsibilities under the Charter.