Mr. President, I want, before saying anything further, to congratulate you, together with the Vice-President and all other officers of this General Assembly, on your well-deserved elevation to the high offices of this great Organization. Knowing you, Sir, for three years now, I am sure the Organization, the Assembly and its work, will be very well and ably directed, and I am equally sure that the Assembly, in this eighteenth session, will bear very fruitful results.
60. I want also to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Secretary-General and the permanent staff of the United Nations. During the session that has just ended we had some moments of excitement; indeed, there was a time when we were asking whether the world was not on the verve of complete annihilation. But due to the skillful intervention of the Secretary-General and of Members of this great Organization, and thanks to the good-will and sanity that prevailed and to the fact that the two most powerful nations in the Organization rose to the occasion and showed a great sense of leadership and appreciation of the yearning of all men and women of this globe, disaster was averted. I think we should all congratulate ourselves for showing that we had the capacity, as human beings, to apply the brakes and to pull ourselves back from the yawning chasm into which it would have been our lot to fall.
61. Tomorrow, 1 October 1963, will mark the third year of independence of Nigeria, as a free and independent African State in the twentieth century. On that day, tomorrow, Nigeria will become a republic and, consequently, will change its status, but not necessarily its stature.
62. Although Nigeria has been for only three years an independent African nation of the twentieth century, it is not as young as all that. The area of the African continent called Nigeria has a tradition and a cultural heritage that goes further than 2,000 years and, consequently, the country came to independence with a certain amount of majority and a certain amount of realism in the conduct of its affairs.
63. By becoming independent and assuming new status, Nigeria, in order to fulfil its destiny on the continent of Africa, will naturally have to think again and to review its record of the past three years so as to have a clear vision of the direction in which it must move. Consequently, at this eighteenth session of the General Assembly, before I enter into the discussion of the more pressing problems that face us as Africans, it may be necessary for me to remind this Assembly of the role which our country has played during these three years as a Member of the Organization of the principles that have guided it and of how it has been consistent with those principles, which were enunciated here on 7 October 1960 [893rd meeting] by the Prime Minister of the Federation of Nigeria, Alhaji Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa.
64. In these three years Nigeria has played some part in international affairs and in world affairs consistent with its resources and talent. It has also played some part in African, affairs —and the role played in African affairs has had repercussions and ramifications outside Africa. Nigeria looks to the future with hope and expectation.
65. I want to say here that the Federation of Nigeria, having accepted obligations under the Charter, has done everything possible within its power to discharge its obligation honourably and honestly. Nigeria has tried, as its record shows, to fulfil whatever obligations might be imposed upon it by virtue of its membership of this Organization.
66. Now, consistent with the statement that my Prime Minister made on 7 October 1960, on the occasion of the admission of Nigeria to the General Assembly and to this Organization, we have made our views known and expressed our opinions, when necessary, very strongly, based on conviction. If I may remind this Assembly, at that time the Prime Minister said: "Each representative should be strong enough to resist all efforts to deflect him from the path of truth as he sees it" [893rd meeting, para. 200]. All along, the Nigerian delegation in this Assembly has never hesitated to state the truth as we saw it, fearlessly and boldly, but politely —although our politeness sometimes may be hurtful in some quarters.
67. Now it becomes necessary for me to make a statement as a result of some rumours that have been circulating in connexion with African States. I have heard it said that the African States have come to the eighteenth session to wreck this Organization. I want to say categorically that that is not true. It is true that, since the seventeenth session of the Assembly, certain changes have taken place and African States have taken certain courses of action in order to persuade certain Members of this Organization to recognize certain existing facts and such changes as have taken place in our world. But that does not mean that, because of certain actions that have been taken, the African countries, or my own country, have decided in any way to wreck the Organization. May I remind this body again about the statement which was made here by my Prime Minister on 7 October 1960 on our admission. I shall not bother the Assembly very much, but it is there in the printed records of plenary meeting of that year.
68. While he made it clear that he thought of the United Nations "as providing perhaps the only effective machinery for inducing world peace", he further stated: "I do not think that it was ever the intention of any of those countries which were responsible for the creation of this Organization to turn it into an arena where party politics could be played on the highest level, and where ideological differences would obscure the main objective of securing peace among the nations and stability in the world at large.” [Ibid., para. 198.]
69. In that statement it is made clear that, while we recognize and support the General Assembly of the United Nations, there are certain facts which must also be recognized, in particular that the Organization is not a place for playing party politics or for peddling ideological conflicts. The United Nations was created as one of the instruments for disarmament and the maintenance of peace. After the First World War, as an effort towards the maintenance of world peace and disarmament, the League of Nations was created. Unfortunately, bad faith ruined that organization and then man learned bitter lessons by destroying so many millions of human beings in many countries. Another effort was made which resulted in the establishment of this Organization. This is a continuing process in the maintenance of world peace. One would have thought that man, having suffered so much, would think twice before trying to lead humanity to the abyss. That is why my Prime Minister made that statement on the very day when Nigeria was admitted to this Organization.
70. We in Africa regard the United Nations as one of the finest institutions that have been created by modern man to bring various States together and to rally international opinion, in order that the world at large might have a centre once a year for exchanging thoughts and for knowing how the various sections of the world are thinking. It may well be that the views expressed here appear to pass unnoticed; but sooner or later somebody somewhere does take note of much that has been said. Even if the United Nations enables us simply to let off steam, to let off bottled energy which might have resulted in something more dangerous, then the Organization serves a useful purpose. I am sure that all the African States are grateful that such an institution does exist, because it helps them steadily to achieve the objectives which the African States and other weaker and younger States have set as their targets.
71. The rumour I mentioned earlier has arisen because it has been stated that the African States want to expel South Africa and Portugal from the United Nations. I think I can say categorically that, as far as I know, the African States are very reasonable States and that they have reasonable representatives. Certainly the African States want to apply the strongest possible pressure on those two States to make them reasonable, but I do not know of any positive decision to expel those two Members from this Organization. Their expulsion would serve no useful purpose at all. It would be a sheer waste of time. It is better to bring them here and keep on whipping them until they have learned their lesson. To throw them outside and leave them in the cold would just relieve them of this real burden. If members of an organization do not want to observe the rules of the organization, the only way you can teach them a lesson is to bring them up every time and expose them to a certain amount of humiliation and indignity, and one day they will learn some sense. So I want to make it clear that my delegation does not know of any agreed plan to expel either Portugal or South Africa from this Organization, and I do not think my country would even support such a plan.
72. South Africa has eleven million people of African descent who are suffering. If we expel South Africa, it means that we are just locking those people up in prison and handing them over to be suppressed and destroyed. At the present time there is a case against South Africa in the International Court, with Ethiopia and Liberia representing the African States. What is going to happen to that, if we do not wait for the adjudication of the case? If South Africa is expelled, what happens to the people of South West Africa, which it has Illegally appropriated? It is not in our Interest to expel South Africa at all. It is not in the interest of the majority of African people in South Africa to expel them. It is not even in the interest of the minority to expel them. It is not in the interest of the minority of three million Africans. They say they are Africans, and we in Nigeria accept them as Africans, because their forebears came to Africa and settled. An accident and circumstance of history have made it so. We recognize that fact. These descendants know no other place they may call their home but South Africa. All we say is: "If you say you are Africans, behave as Africans and conduct yourselves as Africans. You are not the only Africans. There are many millions of other Africans. Therefore you must have a basic working relationship that is consistent with human dignity." That is all we require.
73. Therefore I want to emphasize the fact that there is no intention to expel South Africa or Portugal from this Organization. Portugal is living in a world of fiction, and we have to get it out of the cloud cuckoo land in which it has lost itself and bring it back to earth. In dealing with this African aspect of our policies and the conduct of our affairs, perhaps I shall deal more fully with that particular topic.
74. In international relations, Nigeria has done what is required of it as a member of the United Nations Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament. I remember that, when addressing that Committee in Geneva, we said that previously it had always been a matter of the great Powers, of one power bloc negotiating with another power bloc, and naturally suspecting one another and never coming to any agreement; but that now, for the first time, this Organization, with the concurrence of the two power blocs, had brought in the non-aligned countries. In Geneva, we suggested that the eight non-aligned countries must hold together and must on no account side with one or the other bloc, but must continue to whisper into the ears of the members of these powerful blocs the voice of reason, a reflection of the yearning of the ordinary people —a yearning for peace, a yearning for understanding.
75. There again, we made it clear that, as far as our delegation was concerned, there was no need for any particular ideological bloc to think that its views or its own ideology could possibly be the ideology that would be acceptable to all humanity. That would be self-deception. Even members of the same family do not think alike. It is much more unlikely that I will accept the view that what may be good for you, in your own area, is necessarily also good for me. Unless the spirit of accommodation is engendered in all, it will be impossible to attain general and complete disarmament.
76. It appears that, through the efforts of the eight and the good sense of the two power blocs, we achieved something. Before the opening of this eighteenth session of the General Assembly, we saw a nuclear test-ban treaty signed in Moscow between the three nuclear Powers —the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States. Demonstrating the spontaneous reaction of the minority of human beings and States in the world, many more States have since signed that treaty. This shows in no uncertain terms that, for once, the great Powers have done what we would like them to do. I want to put it on record that we do congratulate the great Powers for exercising this initiative and realizing this objective —it does not matter how small it may be— and we wish also to encourage them to attain more.
77. My country thought that the signing of that treaty was so important a move in the right direction that we decided to sign it in three places —and I had the privilege of visiting Moscow, London and Washington to append the name of Nigeria to that treaty.
78. In Washington, after signing the treaty, we made a short statement, and I think I should like to read it now for purposes of the record. It reads as follows: "The nuclear test-ban treaty, viewed in the context of complete and total disarmament, to some people may appear insignificant. On the other hand, if the test-ban treaty is viewed in the context of an outward and practical manifestation of the growing faith and confidence of the great nuclear Powers in the genuine, sincere and good intentions of one another to achieve the goal of total and complete disarmament, this treaty becomes more significant. I would describe it as a right step in the right direction and at the right time. "I wish, on behalf of my Government and the people of Nigeria, to congratulate the three Powers for this initiative and this achievement. It is because my Government attaches such importance to this achievement, and to encourage those great Powers to do more and have more, faith and confidence in themselves and humanity and save the world from annihilation, that my Prime Minister has commissioned me to visit all the three capitals of Moscow, London and Washington to sign the treaty on behalf of the Government and people of Nigeria. "In signing this treaty today on behalf of my Government, I am constrained to remind the great Powers of what they already know —that is, that we have confidence that, in signing the nuclear test-ban treaty, they remember at all times and have at the back of their minds the sacredness of the pledged word, the sanctity of treaties, and will not give any cause to Nigeria, an independent African State, to regret our signing this treaty."
79. The last portion of that statement Is, to us, very Important, because we know very well the bitterness that was caused when one Power was accusing the other of breaking the moratorium. We in Nigeria —and I believe I will be supported by the other African States— say that these Powers must remember the sacredness of the pledged word and of treaties once entered into, and there should be no backing out, no excuse for making this treaty a scrap of paper. We do not want to have any bickering at one of the sessions of the General Assembly, with one Power saying that the other has not done what it had agreed to do, and "therefore we are not going to be bound by anything".
80. Now that more than 100 States have been induced, by what appears to be a sign of good faith, to affix their signatures to this nuclear test-ban treaty, let us hope that the great Powers will show us by example that they are really great, and not small.
81. We read in the newspapers that the Foreign Ministers of the three great Powers have been meeting to see whether they can find some further area of agreement. From the speeches we have been hearing and from what we have been reading in the newspapers, it appears that one of the questions causing friction among the three great countries is the question of Berlin. It will be remembered that on a previous occasion when I spoke from this rostrum I made a suggestion to the great Powers. The suggestion was that they should face the reality that Germany is today divided into two parts, two ideological areas. Whether one may wish to build a stone wall or a bamboo wall or a tin wall in Berlin, the fact is that one set of human beings has adhered to one ideology and another set of human beings, of the same nationality, has adhered to another ideology. On the basis of the lesson of my own country, I think that the only way to bring this country together is to start with federation; later, if good will prevails, the people will work out the final solution. To avoid a conflagration in that country, thought could be given to the solution of converting Berlin and its environs into a federal territory of Germany. One of the two organized States could transfer its headquarters to some other city, just as West Germany has transferred its headquarters to Bonn. Berlin and its environs would then become a federal territory and could be handed over to the United Nations, for a short period at least. Once, as a result of consultations, a feasible federal constitution had been worked out. Berlin and its environs would become the federal capital. Let us see whether peace in that area could be secured in this way.
82. Of course, we come from young States; our views may not make any impression. But we are anxious that no one should use Berlin as a pretext in order to throw hydrogen bombs on us. Thus, anyone who has views or suggestions to put forward for the consideration of the great Powers should put them forward. As we have made absolutely clear, we do not want atom bombs, or any other kind of bombs, falling on our continent. We believe that we are voicing the views of ordinary people all over the world when we say that no human being wants to be bombed out of existence. To bomb human beings is an act of insanity, and the sooner we curb that insane nature in man, the better it will be for humanity.
83. I shall not bother the Assembly with comments on international affairs in general. But there is an aspect of international relations that is very important to my country and my delegation and to all the countries of Africa. I am referring to matters pertaining to Africa.
84. Since Nigeria became independent, on 1 October 1960, its policy has been consistent with that stated to the General Assembly by my Prime Minister. Referring to both international affairs and African affairs, he said; "Before proceeding to deal in detail with the many questions which are of interest to my country, it is better to state briefly the principles which we have accepted as the basis of our policies in international relations. First, it is the desire of Nigeria —as I have said already— to remain on friendly terms with all nations and to participate actively in the work of the United Nations Organization, Secondly, Nigeria, a large and populous country of over 35 millions, has absolutely no territorial or expansionist intentions. Thirdly, we shall not forget our old friends, and we are proud to have been accepted as a member of the British Commonwealth. But, nevertheless, we do not intend to ally ourselves as a matter of routine with any of the Power blocs. We are committed to uphold the principles upon which the United Nations is founded. Fourthly, Nigeria hopes to work with other African States for the progress of Africa and to assist in bringing all African territories to a state of responsible independence." [893rd meeting, para. 173.]
85. My Prime Minister used the words "responsible independence"; he did not mean "a state of irresponsible independence". That is important, because many of the upheavals in our world, the wars of annihilation, have been caused by States that did not have a responsible independence; they were States with an irresponsible independence, because they would not confine themselves to their territories and to their own needs and requirements; they were interested in territorial expansion, in dominating and exploiting others, in expropriating the property of others. A State with that kind of ambition certainly must be regarded as a State with irresponsible independence.
86. Guided by that principle, my country in 1961 initiated a move, supported by other African countries, which resulted in the first Conference of twenty African States in Monrovia. This is very important, because at that time African countries were regarded as immature, inexperienced and even unintelligent. Liberia offered to play host to the twenty African States, which therefore met for the first time in Monrovia, and took political, economic, social and cultural decisions. That Conference gave rise to the term "Monrovia Powers."
87. The circumstances behind that Conference were that before the independence of Nigeria there were groups of States in Africa that called themselves by different names, and there was the yearning of the African people that such a division should not continue to exist. Before May 1961 there had been a series of meetings and conferences at which high-sounding resolutions were passed, but nothing came of them, and the conference at Monrovia marked the beginning of the great events which have led to what we are seeing today.
88. Following that meeting in May, the Heads of States decided that there should be a Conference of Experts of the African and Malagasy States in Dakar in July 1961 to deal with all the economic, social, cultural and other technical matters, and that there should then be held a conference at Lagos.
89. The Lagos Conference continued the succession of meetings, and again the twenty Head§ of States met in January 1962 and for the first time agreed upon the principles of a charter that will bind them together. The report of the expert committee that met in Dakar was considered and approved, and there was born the organization called the Inter-African and Malagasy Organization and the beginning of the institution of the Council of Ministers and the Assembly of African States.
90. The principles of the Charter were agreed upon, and the Foreign Ministers were commissioned to meet within three months to finalize the Charter. This they did in May and June 1962, and in December 1962 they met again and the Charter of the Inter-African and Malagasy Organization was signed.
91. In January of this year we suffered a casualty, and then the new Organization was tested. Another conference was summoned under that Charter, and the twenty States answered and arrived at certain decisions and enunciated certain principles. It was in Lagos also that the African States decided that the next meeting of the Heads of States should be held in Addis Ababa, When the Heads of States of the African countries were summoned, the door was left open for all to be there, because it was found that there was a common yearning in the hearts of all the leaders to come together. So, at Addis Ababa for the first time, with the exception of two States because of circumstances beyond everybody's control, all the States met. There were thirty States represented, and so we have today the Organization of African Unity. Now the thirty-two independent African States are members of that Organization, and for the first time those thirty-two States decided to solve the problem that every African country had decided to solve individually, and they decided to solve it collectively. From this rostrum, we have stated that our independence is meaningless if the rest of Africa is not free. At Addis Ababa, the African countries collectively decided that the problem of decolonizing Africa had become a collective matter and must be solved collectively.
92. I have gone into this question because it is important for this Organization. When people suggest that we want to wreck the United Nations or that we have some ulterior motive in our conduct or course of action, they should understand what has led us to these things.
93. It is not our fault that other States cannot appreciate the necessity of sinking their differences and thinking in terms of their immediate problems. The African States realized that if there is to be peace In this world, while it is all very well to meet in Geneva and talk about general and complete disarmament, disarmament will be impossible if Africa is still in bondage. Those who are trying to disarm in one area are arming to conquer Africa, and the only way to make disarmament complete and effective is to decolonize Africa completely. When there are no more areas for exploitation, when there are no more areas for conquest, when there are no more areas for experimentation on an ideological basis, then everybody will be at peace in his own home. Therefore, the African States have decided that all this ideological experimentation should be confined to their respective areas. The Africans must be given an opportunity to experiment on their own home grounds to show that it is possible for independent States of goodwill to work together.
94. We believe that if we succeed in getting Africans to work together in harmony, we will be opening a new chapter in international relations. Consequently, since the last session and since the Addis Ababa Conference, what has been going on for years in this Assembly and this Organization —the attempts of Africans in the Fourth Committee to become free— has gathered a new momentum and a new impetus. It is no longer a question of the nationalist leaders of South West Africa coming here to ask to be heard as petitioners; it is no longer a question of the nationalists of Angola coming here and asking the Chairman of the Fourth Committee to put their case before the Assembly; it is no longer a question of the nationalists of Northern Rhodesia or Southern Rhodesia coming here and roaming in the lobbies asking for somebody to present their case. It is now the case that the thirty-two African States have decided that their continent must be free and independent, with responsible independence, not irresponsible independence.
95. If this Organization accepts us as Members, genuine Members, entitled to all the rights and privileges, if all the Members of this Organization accept their obligations and agree that this Organization is an instrument of peace and understanding among the various States and among human beings, it is only fair, right and proper that all the countries should give the African States wholehearted support in their just endeavours to unite the continent and in their effort to remove all the vestiges of the humiliation of the African people and all the vestiges of colonialism,
96. It will be noticed that I am not speaking with a sense of bitterness. We on the African continent do realize the facts of history. With thirty-two independent African States, we feel that we can afford to have a spirit of accommodation. We feel that we can afford to appeal to a sense of reasonableness on the part of those who are still holding a section of Africa in a state of bondage. But I know from the look of things: today there are thirty-two independent African States. By the end of this year there may be about thirty-four or thirty-five, and by next year there will be many more. Surely that should be enough writing on the wall for anybody to see that the time for colonialism on the continent of Africa is up and that the time is up also for discrimination on the continent of Africa.
97. And so it is Nigeria, my country —I say this because Nigeria has pledged itself to work with the rest of the African countries to achieve the objective— that has been in the forefront, knowing that its territory contains the largest aggregate of the black population in one area in the world. It is its duty, whether it likes it or not —it is an obligation— to do everything possible within its power, in conjunction with the other African States, to see that the continent of Africa is liberated as quickly as possible; there will be no turning back.
98. Sometimes we Nigerians have been accused of not being dynamic, but we in Nigeria believe in peaceful and orderly development. If we can get that we will, but if our patience becomes completely exhausted nobody should blame us. The African people have a forgiving nature. I believe that if this Organization continues to give the States of Africa the support it has given them in the past, I have no doubt that within the shortest possible time the question of decolonization will be solved as quickly as possible.
99. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Scandinavian countries. I read the other day that the Foreign Ministers of the Scandinavian countries were invited by South Africa to visit that Territory but that they had refused to go, not because they hate South Africa, but because they disagree with its policy. Without saying so, by that act they are showing us that they wholeheartedly support us. They agree with us that the policy of South Africa is wrong and that it must change, I believe that if other countries acted and behaved in that manner, sooner or later South Africa will learn that ostracism, which was started by the Greeks, is still continuing in the twentieth century. They continue to be ostracized. When the Scandinavian Foreign Ministers refuse to answer their invitation, the South Africans must soon learn that there must be something wrong with them. Once they discover what is wrong and remedy the situation, they will find that everybody will accept their invitation. So I am most grateful, and I want to put It on record that my country appreciates very much indeed the co-operation that the Scandinavian countries have been giving to the African cause, and also this latest action as a manifestation of the wholehearted support they are willing to give us.
100. With regard to Portugal and decolonization, we have said here before what our position is and we continue to say it. But the thing that amazes me —I read Mr. Salazar's book as a student in political science and legal science— is that a very brilliant man, who was able to rescue his own country from bankruptcy, acts in this way. What has happened to him that he cannot now appreciate that by letting Angola, Mozambique and others go as independent countries, Portugal has an opportunity of establishing a firmer relationship between Angola, Mozambique and other African countries, firmer economic, social and cultural relations not only with those territories but with the rest of Independent Africa. I think that this will yield him greater dividends. If he would only perform this little act, he would find that he not only has the goodwill of these areas but that he also has the goodwill of the whole continent. I think it is as simple as all that. But I cannot understand why; I do not know what is wrong; something must be very wrong.
101. We have suggested from this rostrum that Portugal must accept the principle of independence. That is simple —self-determination for the people, recognize these people as the legitimate leaders of their people. Whether you like it or not, nationalism has taken root and Is bound to win. Once nationalism grows and germinates there is nothing you can do about it; it is bound to win. It may take some years, but it is bound to win and imperialism is bound to lose. They are not bandits, they are nationalists, followed by thousands and millions of their people. So acknowledge that fact. Throw away the fiction of 1884 or 1885, the Berlin Conference and its fiction; throw those things away as they do not apply, and then be prepared to meet these nationalists to discuss the manner in which you transfer power to them so that they remain your partners and friends. Britain has done so, and France has done so although it still has secret intentions of coming back. Portugal should learn that lesson, and it will finally yield it a dividend.
102. I may recall to the memory of Portugal that in the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, when Portugal and Spain were the most powerful States, they dealt with the African kingdoms on terms of equality. The King of Dahomey exchanged ambassadors with the court of Portugal; the same thing happened with the King of Benin. The Queen of Angola exchanged ambassadors with them. They dealt in terms of equality. Just because an industrial revolution produced a change in the nineteenth or twentieth century, they have forgotten that part of their history. At that time they had harmonious relationships. Why not go back and think again? Portugal and Spain, particularly Portugal, had a very harmonious relationship with the African States. Before It is too late It is necessary for them to rethink their thoughts.
103. I am using this opportunity to appeal to Dr. Salazar and his cabinet to go back in the archives of Portugal where they will find these documents and treaties of friendship, written by their predecessors, with the Kings and Chiefs of Africa, and with the Queen of Angola, before she was succeeded by a weak King who enabled them to infiltrate. I believe that if Portugal pursues that course it will live to establish a new and happier relationship with the rest of Africa, not only with Angola and Mozambique; as long as Portugal remains an independent Western Europe country on the Iberian Peninsula, we have no quarrel with it.
104. But the moment Portugal tells us that in spite of the Atlantic Ocean and the Strait of Gibraltar which separates Africa from Europe, Angola Is a province of Portugal, then, naturally, that is where the quarrel starts. Portugal is just on the same side as Togo in West Africa. Have we ever heard anything at any time where Togo would say that Ghana is a part of the province of Togo, or that Dahomey is a province of Togo, or that Nigeria is a province of Togo, or that Niger is a province of Togo? These are areas which are close to Togo. But the moment Togo would say such a thing, there would be a quarrel. The moment Togo remains as an independent African State, a member of the Organization of African Unity, there is brotherhood, friendship and mutual assistance.
105. Surely if Portugal wants to be an African country —I read in one of the documents that it claims it is an African country— it should come forward now and sign the Charter of the Organization of African Unity. We will admit Portugal, then Portugal could come before the Council of Ministers and we would be able to settle the dispute between the nationalists of the Iberian Peninsula and the nationalists of Angola. We would be able to use our good offices to settle the dispute between them. But Portugal cannot continue to be a member of NATO, and not a member of the Organization of African Unity, and then claim that it is an African country, or that it wants to hold Angola and Mozambique in thraldom. That is an impossible situation.
106. Therefore I take this opportunity to appeal to Portugal to think again how to find a way of holding a discussion with the nationalists and the leaders of African thought. Nobody wants to destroy Portugal. We would like to save the bloodshed if it is possible. Nobody wants to destroy Africans, nobody wants to destroy Portuguese. We feel that the Portuguese have contributed something in that area. It may be an accident of history, but we must face realities in our time. Nobody wants to destroy anybody else, unless they just cannot help it.
107. Some people may think that it is a sign of weakness, but Nigeria wants a peaceful and orderly development of Africa. Wherever we can, we wish to avoid the avoidable; unless the African States are compelled to do what they would not like to do normally.
108. With regard to South Africa and the question of apartheid, what is this all about, this discrimination? In diagnosing the case of South Africa we find that it is living in a state of fear, in a kind of neurosis. All the statements that Mr. Verwoerd and Mr. Louw have been making, and some of the Ministers of Justice, are preaching hate; they sing the hymn of hate to children.
109. What is it all about? They are frightened people. I want to assure them that what they are thinking about is not true. I read some letters in The Times of London where some people suggested that if the majority in South Africa have control of the Government in that area, they are going to exterminate these people or drive them into the sea, or expropriate their property.
110. That is not true. It is just not true. We have been in touch with the leaders and all they want is justice. The rule of law must prevail. They do recognize that the settlers have brought some technical skill. They have been able to bring some development in that area; they accept the fact that they are Africans. Therefore, they must recognize that they are Africans and they must be ready to have the spirit of accommodation in order to work out a system that will be congenial to all concerned. I think that is only fair. But in a situation where a minority wants the majority to go down the mine, because of cheap labour, to bring up gold, diamonds and copper, and where they want them to go to their farms and cultivate, and bring in the food and cook it and bring it to their table, and where they want them to nurse their children, and at the same time saying that they do not recognize them as human beings, where is the justice In that?
111. These are the things that created the difficulties. It is necessary that the leaders of South Africa should emulate what is happening in the United States today. It will be noticed that we do not come to the rostrum here to condemn the United States, not because there is no discrimination here. Here it is the leader of the Government of the country, and the responsible leaders of the country, who are going out of their way to use the law, all the instruments —social, economic and others— to remedy the situation. How can one come forward and condemn people who have done something to change the situation that was created because of history? Rather than condemn them, one will have a sympathetic understanding of the course they are following and will try to appreciate the difficulty, and to assist in whichever way one can: quietly, gently, without acrimony.
112. But as regards South Africa, the leaders of the new Africa are making all efforts to have the South Africans see reason before It is too late. They do not even remember that they will die some day and that their children will be left with these sins of omission and of commission. How many more years will Mr. Verwoerd live in this world? How many more year swill Mr. Louw continue to exist in this world? Yet they forget the children just born and the ones unborn. There is the sin of omission and commission, the fire and brimstone is being heaped on the heads of those innocent ones.
113. Therefore I take this opportunity, on behalf of my country and the organization we represent in Africa, to appeal to South Africa and to the leaders of South Africa to stop being afraid. The ghost that is haunting them is of their own creation, not the creation of the African. The African majority is not going to destroy them. I never heard at any time, in the decolonization Committee, that there has been counsel by an African or an African leader, or an African State, to plan to destroy these people. I can say this authoritatively and categorically. They should stop being afraid of their shadows and behave as reasonable men and women.
114. I know that there are some reasonable men and women who have been prevented by the use of law, by the use of arbitrary injustice, from sharing the real and genuine intention of the people of South Africa. That is why we do not want to jettison South Africa. If you expel them, you are throwing them into the Atlantic or the Pacific.
115. I want to say something now, Mr. President, with your permission. I know that this may not be very popular, but, as I said, we should not be afraid to tell the truth. As a student in a university abroad, I used to be Secretary of the Association of Students of African Descent, At that time, on our very continent, there were some people from those areas who said that they were not Africans and who would not associate with us because we were black people. But we carried on,
116. History has been moving on and on, until today those people who at one time, because of difference in colour, said they were not Africans, are acknowledging that they are Africans and are working with their fellow Africans as Africans. Why cannot South Africa do that? Why cannot South Africa learn from Kenya's experience just recently? Those people were given money to settle there and cultivate the area. Those who could not stay went away. But the majority of the settlers in Kenya today have decided to stay, seeing that the Government is changing. And it is gratifying. I went to Nairobi myself and I found a lot of these people fraternizing with the new leaders, and these leaders themselves have of their own volition taken some representatives of this minority and put them in Parliament.
117. Have we not eyes to see? Can we not read? Why is South Africa frightened? Why are the leaders of South Africa making things more difficult for the more responsible opinion in African countries?
118. As I said before, my country tomorrow becomes a Republic, and certainly we are going to pursue the course of independence and the establishment of the dignity of man in the African countries with greater vigour than ever before. There will be no turning back. And if the present leaders of South Africa will not listen to reason, will not hearken to the voice of justice, will not be honest, will not allow their conscience to affect their thinking, then they will go under and the younger generation will find a solution to their problems.
119. But I want to put it on record here: Nobody, as far as I know, is planning the destruction of the settler minority in South Africa. We recognize that they have contributed certain things, that they have aided development. We know that a lot of damage was done in the Rhodesias, both North and South, that a great deal was destroyed by Rhodes and others. Rhodes is regarded in England as a great builder, but I regard him as the architect of African misery. However, that does not make me hate those people who are now settled there. It was not of their own doing; it was part of the history of man. I do not hate the descendants of the settlers and I do not think anyone else hates them. We disagree with them very violently and fundamentally, but that disagreement does not mean hate.
120. Therefore we take this opportunity, from this rostrum, to call upon the leaders of South Africa to think again, and we appeal to those friends of theirs who prefer to arm them instead of talking sense into their heads, to desist from arming them. Let the better nature of man prevail and you will find that the South African minority will enjoy life more abundantly. You will find that the African people, having suffered so much all over the world, has a spirit of accommodation and a forgiving nature, The African has a capacity to laugh at himself and to enjoy a joke. When the African laughs, he laughs; he does not open his mouth and close it suddenly. I do not think I need labour this point, but I have said this because Nigeria, as the country with the largest concentration of black men anywhere in the world, owes a duty to all the black people of the earth to do everything possible to eradicate the humiliation of the black man anywhere in the world. Whether Nigeria likes it or not, it is its duty, it is part of Nigeria's destiny. If Nigeria does not do this, then it has failed in its mission. I am happy to note that the United States, with the largest concentration of black people anywhere outside Africa, is making some effort to eradicate this humiliation of the black man. After all, when you talk of "colour discrimination", "racial discrimination", what does that mean? It means discrimination against the black man, that is all. We must call a spade a spade, not an instrument for digging. I can take a pick-axe and dig, I can take a hoe and dig, I can take a knife and dig or I can take a piece of wood and dig; but it is not a spade that I am digging with. A spade is a spade; otherwise there would be no distinction between "a spade" and "a shovel".
121. Racial discrimination today means simply discrimination against the black man. I am saying this here and I want it recorded. It does not come to us as an issue here in that form, but unless all countries of the world, in writing, in their constitutions, begin to change these things —this discrimination against the black man— we can talk about disarmament and all the rest but we shall be just wasting our time; for until we are morally disarmed, until these injustices are rectified, the job of disarmament will be only half done; it will not be completely done.
122. The fear of the South Africans is that the black people, who are in a majority, will dominate them. Again we may learn by an example from Nigeria. There are three million white South Africans. They wish to preserve their identity, and so on. Now South Africa is already a federation, though it is not the kind of federation that we have. If they want to be by themselves, if they do not wish to be exterminated, why not set aside one area sufficient for three or four million people, an area with sufficient room for expansion, for this group, dividing the rest of the country into other states each with its own provincial legislature. Then, in a federation, in the federal houses, all will be represented. That would be a solution. They are afraid that this might deprive them of all power; but if they like, there could be a senate in which there would be equal representation, and they would thus be represented in the central legislature. In their own area they would always have complete control. If they want it that way, if they do not want to mix freely, they can do that; that will be a way out if they want to continue to be isolated. But to say that the minority will continue for ever to rule the majority —that is impossible. I would like that to be recorded today.
123. What we want to avoid is violence, Africa has suffered so much violence and destruction that we do not want any more. We would like Africa to be able to use the abundant resources that it has for the good of its sons and daughters, of all races, that have contributed to making Africa what it is in the twentieth century; and to be able to utilize those resources —intellectual, moral and material— for the good of humanity at large. We cannot do this if we continue warring amongst ourselves. We should be able to arrive at the decision that an African is an African regardless of the colour of his skin. I think that is possible, that in the African States the majority have sufficient spirit of accommodation to be able to arrive at that conviction, I want South Africa to think of these things.
124. There is one other matter which is of great concern to African States, and that is the question of representation in the various organs of the United Nations. You will remember, when we became independent, in 1960, in the Special Political Committee [197th meeting] we did not hesitate to demand representation, and we then and there made it clear that we did not like the idea that the two oldest African Member States here had never been called upon to be represented in any important organ of this Organization; and in that year, with the collaboration of the various States, the African-Asian group in particular, we succeeded in having Liberia share, with Ireland and Ethiopia, a seat on the Economic and Social Council.
125. We have tried to ask for an amendment of the Charter to increase the number of members in the Security Council —to increase the number, that is all. We do not want a total overhaul of the Charter. Everybody agrees that that would be a good thing except certain Powers that say it would be only if China comes in. We say this is irrelevant to the issue. Then, in the absence of an amendment which would enlarge the Security Council to enable us to have our representation, to reallocate the existing seats. With respect to the 1946 "gentleman's agreement", again the answer is "No". May I ask the Assembly, does this Organization want thirty-two African States just to be vocal Members, with no right to be able to express their views on any particular matter in the important organs of the United Nations? Are we only going to continue to be veranda boys? This matter must be settled at this session one way or the other.
126. Thirty-two independent African States want their own representation in these various organs. We fought last year on principle. At one time we were told that Africa and the Middle East had a seat. We tested that. And this Assembly decided that that seat was a Middle Eastern seat. We have decided not to look to any other seat as belonging to Africa. Africa has none.
127. Today the position is that Europe has three permanent seats and two non-permanent seats. Asia has one permanent seat. The Americas have one permanent seat and two non-permanent seats. The Middle East has one non-permanent seat. The Commonwealth has one non-permanent seat. Africa, with thirty-two States: nil.
128. I read a suggestion which had been made by the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union that in order to get two seats for Africa we should take one from the Commonwealth and one from Latin America. I want to say here, as far as I know, speaking for my own delegation, and I think, as far as I know, the Africans do not want to take any seat from Latin America. And let nobody cause any conflict between us and the Latin American countries. We do not want their seats. They have enjoyed their two seats for so long that now we say it is their right, it should be given to them. The Middle Eastern countries have now taken this one as theirs. Asia has one permanent seat. Europe has three permanent seats and two non-permanent seats.
129. I am appealing to the Europeans, both East and West. This division of Eastern Europe and Western Europe is unreal. There is only one Europe —we all learn geography— there is only one Europe. I am appealing to you, Europe, to give us two non-permanent seats. One permanent seat is more powerful than twenty non-permanent seats because it has the right of veto.
130. When everybody agreed in the Security Council the other day, what did the United Kingdom do? It is true it had not been exercising its right of the veto all the time. But that day on Southern Rhodesia, despite what everybody said, the United Kingdom applied the veto, and that was the end of that. All we want is for you to give us these two non-permanent seats and let us have an opportunity to express our views, whether you agree with us or not.
131. Europe is very effectively represented by three permanent seats in the Security Council: one, the United Kingdom; one, France; and one, the Soviet Union. The group of Powers that associate with the Soviet Union can "be adequately represented, as everyone knows in the Assembly, by the Soviet Union. The six Common Market countries, among whom is France, can be adequately represented by France in the Security Council. And the other Free Trade Association countries in Europe can be adequately represented by the United Kingdom because the United Kingdom is a member of the Free Trade Association; surely you have a common meeting ground for deciding your views. Therefore, nobody should give us the excuse, "What of the representation of the others?" You have your areas of representation: Common Market, Free Trade Association; you have the other European communities; and the other free areas are adequately represented.
132. Therefore, I am saying here —I want it on record— that my delegation feels Europe is more than adequately represented in the Security Council. And if they are not prepared to agree to amend the Charter, just to enlarge it to give us our seat, then be gracious enough to surrender those two non-permanent seats to Africa so that we may have a voice in this organ of the United Nations.
133. We do not want any conflict with Latin America, Latin America, like Africa, is one of the underdeveloped areas, or developing countries as they call us; we have a common disability. Why should we go and rob them of their seats? We do not want to take anything from Latin America. They are twenty States. They have occupied the seats. Therefore, no one should play us against anyone.
134. My delegation strongly feels that the "gentleman's agreement", if we are not going to amend the Charter for the purpose of enlarging it, should be changed at this session. If it is not a gentleman's agreement, let it be a lady's agreement. We have ladies in various delegations at this time. If the gentlemen will not agree, I am sure the ladies will agree that Africa is entitled to these seats.
135. I have tried to speak in the vein I have spoken in because a peculiar atmosphere has prevailed during the eighteenth session. It looks as if we are settling down to construction instead of destruction. It looks as if reasonableness is beginning to prevail in this Assembly. I sincerely hope that throughout this session all delegations will forget the fifteenth session and the sixteenth session and remember that, in this jet age, the various continents of the world are drawing together, with the free movement of persons from one area to the other, humanity gradually becoming one. If that is so, I do not see any problem which cannot be solved amicably if there is goodwill to solve it.
136. The only last remark I want to make is one which I am sure everybody in the Assembly knows, and that is with regard to our attitude to the Congo question. The Assembly, in the course of this session or very soon, may be presented with a request to postpone the departure of the United Nations forces from the Congo. I want to say here that my country strongly supports postponement until Junel964. Also, I have the authority of the thirty-two African States in support of that view. The Organization has done excellent work in the Congo. By helping the Congolese people the United Nations has helped Africa. We do not like to see anything that will destroy all that everybody has contributed to build. Many countries made sacrifices, not only in money but in the lives of their peoples; those sacrifices must not be in vain. My delegation will always be grateful to the Organization —and I am sure that the other African States will be most grateful— for the effort that has been made collectively to bring stability in that area of Africa. I hope that, when this request comes before the General Assembly, even those who opposed it before will not, in the name of Africa and in the interests of Africa and the African States, oppose our legitimate wish and desire. Give support to the request of the Congolese Government, which is an expression of the wishes of the Congolese people, so that the work which we have begun so well should end well, and then we can say: all's well that ends well.