206. From this rostrum, which I mount for the first time since the welcome changes which have taken place in my country, I wish to offer you my sincere congratulations on your very well-deserved election to the Presidency of the United Nations General Assembly. Speaking for myself, I feel particularly proud, because you have been and still are truly one of us. You are one of us as a worthy representative of your country, Afghanistan, which forms part of the great family of non-aligned countries. Your admirable qualities, which have secured your elevation to the supreme post in this world organization, will, I am certain, enable you to direct the debates of this session with the skill, balance and impartiality that have always distinguished the representatives of the third world who have succeeded one another on this rostrum.
207. On behalf of my Government, I welcome the return of Indonesia to the fold as a triumph of reason and common sense over passion. This is a personal success for the able diplomacy of the man who has devoted himself body and soul to the cause of world peace and of harmony and concord among nations — H.E. U Thant, Secretary-General of the United Nations.
208. At the outset of my statement I should also like to extend a welcome to the youngest member of the Organization, Guyana, which has now cast off its fetters in order to make its contribution to the world as a sovereign and independent State.
209. My sole reason for wishing to speak today is to voice my Government's anxiety at the international situation. This has been described as extremely serious by the very person who has been privileged to preside over the destinies of nations with an intelligence, wisdom and unselfishness which will remain an example to us all, U Thant, the Secretary-General. At the same time a moving appeal has been launched by one of the world's spiritual leaders. Pope Paul VI. Shortly before this, the President of the French Republic voiced his distress in the message he addressed to the conscience of the world from Pnom Penh. Everyone knows that the peace of the world is seriously threatened. Throughout Africa there are centres of disturbance.
210. The distinguished speakers who have preceded me on this rostrum have condemned the seizure of the Territory of South West Africa by South Africa in the most vigorous terms. The racist leaders at Pretoria wish to perpetuate the traditions of their Boer ancestors. These "conquistadors", who only yesterday were engaged in a veritable crusade to exterminate the black man in the Orange and Transvaal districts and thus reap the spoils of the land they had plundered, not content with imposing the criminal practices of apartheid on those coloured brethren who are our kinsmen by blood or adoption, have now extended the refinements of Hitler's Nazism to the mandated territory of South West Africa in violation of the mandate obligations. These "supermen", who deny the status of humanity to other human beings, know no other law than that of force no morality other than that of self-interest and no religion other than that of race. To Justify themselves they have fabricated a whole structure of monstrous ideology which they have euphemistically termed "the theory of separate development". From Malan to Vorster, the implacable and merciless theory of segregation, in other words the policy of the whip, the concentration camp, the reservation, the sewn-up mouth and the severed hand has prevailed. It is therefore only right that this policy, which calls for universal reprobation should always have been condemned by every United Nations body.
211. It is revolting, and even heart-breaking, to find that such cynical individuals, who kill with a Bible in their hand, believe themselves to be invested with a sacred mission in the name of the racial superiority and infallible reason which they brandish before the world. Because they think they have a monopoly of truth and that the rest of the world wallows in error and ignorance, they have no scruples in braving the universal conscience and defying the world organization itself. That is why they have not hesitated to annex the internationally mandated Territory of South West Africa.
212. Yet one South African statesman. General Smuts, the promoter of the idea of the international mandate at the 1919 Peace Conference, saw things differently. He regarded the mandate as investing the League of Nations with the role of "trustee" for such communities and as temporarily entrusting the administration of the territories to certain of the great Powers under the League's supervision. The institution was based on the fact that the territories concerned were not yet capable of governing themselves under the particularly difficult conditions of the modern world. The League of Nations therefore believed that it had a sacred trust of civilization to confer the tutelage of such peoples on advanced nations who, by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position were able to undertake that responsibility. Hence the territories subject to this system were never intended to pass under the sovereignty of the mandatory Power. The mandate could not therefore be construed as involving any form of domination, nor could it be confused with any kind of annexation or protectorate. I conclude that the mandate was a mission of honour, a moral obligation, an international function, and not a title of ownership.
213. Even if we admit the distinction drawn at the time between the various types of mandate. South Africa's bad faith is still patent. It will be recalled that under an "A" Mandate the role of the administering Power was limited and short-lived, being confined to the rendering of advice during the transitional period preceding independence. Under a "B" Mandate, the administering Power had the more concrete responsibility of administering the territory. Under the "C" Mandate conferred on South Africa, the role of the mandatory, pursuant to Article 22, paragraph 6, of the Covenant of the League of Nations, was to assume the administration of the area under its own laws "as integral portions of its territory".
214. South Africa's rapacious instinct obviously singled out the phrase "as Integral portions of its territory" as a pretext for the annexation it wished to accomplish when the League of Nations, the Commission and the Trusteeship Council disappeared. Was this a reason for subjecting this Territory to the infamous laws of South Africa? Fortunately, despite South Africa's obstinate refusal to agree to the trusteeship system and its desire to maintain the status quo, a Special Committee for South West Africa was set up by the United Nations General Assembly [resolution 449A (V)]. The bridges were not broken — South Africa thus remained under United Nations supervision and was bound to administer the Territory — in accordance with the terms of the mandate and with the ideals of the United Nations.
215. With regard to the Judgement given by the International Court of Justice at The Hague on 18 July 1966, my Government wishes to recall one or two fundamental principles before stating its position. First, the system of mandates provided for under the Covenant established jurisdictional supervision by attributing compulsory competence to the Permanent Court of International Justice in any dispute regarding the interpretation or application of the provisions of the mandate. The International Court of Justice, as its worthy heir, has now succeeded to the rights and duties of its predecessor.
216. Although South Africa was not strictly bound by Article 77 of the Charter of the United Nations to convert the mandatory regime into one of international trusteeship, the Statute of the International Court of Justice continued and still continues to apply to it. The procedural alibi it has invoked is regarded by my Government as nothing less than a denial of justice intended to cover the odious practices of South Africa.
217. The plea of lack of legal interest invoked against the applicants seems to be motivated by a desire not only to prevent the shameful acts of the Mandatory Power from obtaining publicity but to attempt to justify the unjustifiable by sheltering behind a procedural barrier reminiscent of the puritanical, narrow-minded and essentially iniquitous principle of "summum jus, summa injuria".
218. How can anyone claim in good faith that Ethiopia and Liberia, as members of the League of Nations, the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity, or simply as African States, had no legal interest entitling them to apply to the International Court of Justice? Those conditions being fulfilled, it is hard to imagine a better qualification or a more obvious interest in the maintenance of peace, based on respect for the inalienable rights of the individual and the right of peoples to decide their future. We are Africans, and nothing which is African can be alien to us.
219. It will thus be seen that the Judgement clearly exposes not only the weakness of a no doubt respectable institution but also the need to ensure that the States of the Third World are more fairly represented in the world Organization and its subsidiary bodies, and especially in the seat of international judicature. Far from wishing to cast doubts on the eminent abilities of the members of the Court, we are simply confining ourselves to noting a fact, namely that the international Judges, who are distinguished and respected jurists as required by Article 2 of the Court's Statute, are influenced by different schools of thought and subject to different political tendencies. Despite their great knowledge and extreme probity, they have not succeeded in excluding personal factors in playing the game of the conservative Powers. Clearly the presence of African Judges would have tipped the balance in the right direction, that of reason and justice.
220. Crucial as it maybe, the South African problem must not distract us from other questions equally vital to us. Another centre of anxiety in Africa, as we all know, is Rhodesia. Despite Great Britain's solemn promises, despite repeated condemnation by the Organization of African Unity, despite the vehement appeals from all pacific forces, the racist regime in Salisbury becomes more deeply entrenched and consolidated every day. It represents an extension of the policy of apartheid which has its seat at Pretoria and has already invaded South West Africa. Logically it is to be feared that the contagion of apartheid will carry beyond these pockets of privilege, spreading its infection throughout Zambia and then passing on to Katanga. The progress of the mercenaries recruited in these areas for service in the Democratic Republic of the Congo marks the path of the invasion which, unless we are careful, threatens to realize on the racist level the ancient dream of Cecil Rhodes—from the Cape to Cairo via Katanga. One centre of subversion has just been rooted out at Kisangani, thanks to the determination of President Mobutu. The danger is therefore imminent. We confine ourselves to drawing attention to it, in the expectation that practical measures to repel the aggressor will be devised by the Organization of African Unity.
221. These trouble spots are so fertile, so infectious and so prolific that we have been tempted to forget a number of them. With the connivance of international financial groups, to whom a grain of copper is worth more than a black man's head, a veritable arsenal of war is stored on the Congo-Angola border, whilst mercenaries are recruited in Europe, Rhodesia and South Africa with the blessing of the bloodthirsty State of Portugal. The threat is not merely to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Every African is involved; it is our future which is at stake in the Congo. Its victory is our victory and its defeat our defeat. We have not lost sight of the fact that Portugal is pursuing an evil and murderous policy in Angola and Mozambique, and we should redouble our efforts to free these two territories with the help of friendly Powers and the assistance of the United Nations.
222. Before dealing with the problem which divides international opinion on the thorny question of China, I should like to ask this Assembly if the presence of these two countries, which constantly and with disconcerting unrepentance violate the aims of the United Nations and the fundamental rights of man, does not shock the very conscience of humanity, which is the universal conscience. The representatives of those two countries are here to defy the world. They are guilty of contempt of mankind. We could tolerate their presence as long as we were in a position to recall them to reason by argument, but unfortunately their obstinacy and bad faith leave us no hope. Both of them come within the provisions of Article 6 of the Charter, and should be expelled from the United Nations as authors of crimes against peace and humanity.
223. As regards the responsibility of South Africa, my Government is of the opinion that it is the Organization's duty to revoke the mandate hitherto exercised in a manner contrary to the aims of the United Nations and either to transform it into a trusteeship system under the direct administration of the United Nations or to internationalize the Territory under the protection of the Security Council until it has acquired independence.
224. With regard to the question of Rhodesia, my Government urgently appeals to the United Kingdom to show proof of its good faith and sincerity concerning its undertaking to crush the Rhodesian rebellion and to ensure the triumph of democratic principles, that is to say, the rights of the majority in this part of Africa.
225. Although, as was only logical, I have dwelt at length on the trouble centres in Africa, I have not lost sight of the dire threat to peace hanging over the world in South East Asia. This blind and ruthless war, which, if it continues, can only lead to the annihilation of a whole nation, is a matter of constant concern to my Government. As a small country, Burundi cannot pretend to impose a solution on the great Powers, but it can and does appeal to reason and common sense in denouncing the stupidity of this steadily expanding war which threatens to plunge mankind into appalling peril.
226. The delegation of Burundi is firmly convinced of the need for a dialogue between the belligerents. Whatever good reasons may exist on either side, I am certain that a military solution will inevitably entail the slaughter of the entire Viet-Namese people, if it does not cause the outbreak of a third world war. To be effective, the dialogue presupposes that weapons will be silenced and the conditions of an honourable armistice negotiated for all parties to the conflict.
227. The Burundi delegation believes that in order to achieve this, the parties must submit to the provisions of the Geneva Agreements, which have proved themselves in two States of former FrenchIndo-China which accepted them, namely Cambodia and Laos. It is nevertheless difficult to expect enemies to sit at a table when they only see each other on the battlefield and only speak the language of the rifle and the machine-gun.
228. It is urgent to acknowledge the facts and give due weight to reality, common sense and reason. All the belligerents must be brought on to neutral ground. No better oasis of peace for this purpose can be imagined than these precincts of discussion at the United Nations. China and Viet-Nam should therefore join us so that a fruitful dialogue can be instituted in the presence of witnesses and possible arbitrators. China must resume her place in the concert of nations, because in one way or another we must sooner or later bow to the obvious. Without being untrue to itself, the world organization cannot allow the lawful rights of such a major nation as China to be disregarded any longer. If it does, it will condemn itself to impotence and will fail in its vocation as a universal organization and in its mission of peace, equilibrium and harmony in the world, because whether we like it or not, the solution to the problem of Viet-Nam is closely linked with that of China. These realities must be recognized today; tomorrow it will be too late,
229. We can now appreciate the full value of the courageous decision of the Secretary-General, who, despite his formidable abilities and his steadfast devotion to the cause of peace, has refused to seek a further term of office at the head of the Organization. His succession gives rise to many difficulties and will lay a heavy responsibility on those who are attempting to transform the international organization into an instrument of their foreign policy in the service of their expansionist aims and in defiance of the principles of the Charter.
230. This feudal attitude on the part of certain Powers is highly prejudicial to world peace and to the advancement of mankind. Untold sums are vainly sunk in the needs of war when they could be utilized for peaceful ends in the service of co-operation or assistance to poor nations. How can we accept a civilization which is digging its own grave and cold-bloodedly preparing for its own destruction?
231. It seems a shameful state of affairs that present-day mankind, which has vanquished space, mastered the atom and triumphed over matter, and is now seeking to conquer the heavenly bodies, should still be incapable of resolving the more mundane problems of hunger, poverty, ignorance and disease. At one time we congratulated ourselves on the promotion of an international conference on trade and development, but the results have belied our hopes. Although the active "Kennedy Round" negotiations would undoubtedly strengthen the already over-developed world, they offer no prospects of recovery to the developing world.
232. The big nations overwhelm us with speeches on disarmament whilst continuing to increase their own armaments. This hypocrisy and lack of realism are the keynotes of the present state of international relations. That is why the delegation of Burundi is in favour of any initiative, whatever its source, designed to strengthen the powers of the United Nations for the consolidation of peace.
233. It records its preference in all fields for the multilateral form of assistance, which stands a greater chance than bilateral aid of achieving development under conditions of co-operation and freedom from political pressures. It is to this peace and this co-operation that Burundi, in absolute respect for different social systems, intends to devote its efforts so as to build a better, more fraternal, more united and more human world.