Before addressing the Assembly and in exercising my right of reply, I wish to refer to a statement made by the Foreign Minister of Ghana when he participated in this debate on 26 September. He alleged that an official document of the United Nations had not been allowed to enter South Africa. He said:
"...the Government of ... South Africa has now embarked upon a policy to undermine the authority and prestige ... of the United Nations ... and. has started to classify certain types of United Nations documents, which are unpalatable to them, as 'objectionable literature'.'1 [1015th meeting, para. 72.]
He then referred to a speech made by President Nkrumah on 23 September 1960, and he went on to say:
"This speech of President Nkrumah appears in document A/PV.869, in the Official Records of the United Nations."
"Any person in ... South Africa ... who is found in possession of a copy of this official document of the United Nations, which contains President Kwame Nkrumah's speech, is liable to ... imprisonment ..." [Ibid., paras. 72 and 73.]
53. It will be noted that the Foreign Minister of Ghana specifically refers to an "official document" of which he also quoted the official number, that is, A/PV.869.
54. To make it quite plain to the Assembly what he had in mind, the Foreign Minister then proceeded:
"This is the first time that an official document of the United Nations which contains a statement made by a representative of a Member State has been treated by the Government of another Member State with such contempt." [Ibid., para. 74.]
He went further, and stated:
"... the delegation of Ghana will insist that the General Assembly should consider whether, in the circumstances ... South Africa should not be expelled from membership of the United Nations." [Ibid., para. 75.]
55. Mr. President, you will, I am sure, agree that this is a very serious charge, particularly coming from the Foreign Minister of a Member State, I was quite certain that false information had been given to the Assembly, but I nevertheless cabled to South Africa for full information.
56. What are the facts? 1 have received the document which was sent to South Africa by the Ghanaian Information Office, and which has been falsely represented as being an official document of the United Nations.
57. May I repeat the statement made from this rostrum by the Foreign Minister of Ghana. He said, inter alia:
"This speech of President Kwame Nkrumah appears in document A/PV.869, in the Official Records ..."
"Any person in ... South Africa ... who is found in possession ... of this official document of the United Nations ... is liable to imprisonment . .." and so on. [Ibid., paras, 72 and 73.]
Later is his speech he said, I would remind you again:
"This is the first time that an official document of the United Nations ... has been treated by the Government of another Member State with such contempt." [Ibid., para. 74.]
58. There can .therefore not be the least possible doubt that the Foreign Minister of Ghana was untruthfully informing the Assembly that an "official document" of the United Nations had been barred from entering South Africa. I have here what the Foreign Minister of Ghana described as an "official document A/PV.869 of the United Nations". It is a booklet inscribed as follows: "Issued by the Permanent Mission of Ghana to the United Nations, 144 East 44th Street, New York 17 ...". This document is nothing more than a reprint in English and in French of Mr. Nkrumah's speech before the General Assembly, with his photograph on the front page, and issued by the Ghanaian delegation. In view of the attacks and the vilification of South Africa in that speech, this booklet was naturally and correctly classified as objectionable literature by the South African customs authorities.
59. I also have, here the official document, A/PV.869, to which the Foreign Minister of Ghana referred. As can be seen, it is something entirely different. This official document has at no time been barred from entering South Africa.
60. It is difficult to believe that anyone holding the position of Foreign Minister of his country could make a statement to this Assembly which is devoid of all truth, and which, as leader of his delegation, he should have known was a fabrication. The Foreign Minister of Ghana owes this Assembly an apology for this attempt to mislead his fellow delegates.
61. I hope that after I have completed this statement which I am about to make, the Foreign Minister of Ghana will come to this rostrum and apologize to the South African Government, and to my delegation, for these untrue and insulting allegations. It is this sort of conduct which, to use his own words, is likely "to undermine the authority and prestige ... of the United Nations ..." [Ibid., para. 72,]
62. The sixteenth session of the General Assembly opened with the United Nations facing the most crucial test of its chequered career. The world is in a state of turmoil and many people are living in fear. There are trouble spots in many parts of the world, the most dangerous being the Berlin situation which has become linked with uncontrolled nuclear testing. The prospects of securing disarmament are daily receding into the background.
63. To add to this state of international tension there came the tragic death of the Secretary-General, which gave an impetus to the campaign launched last year against Mr. Hammarskjold personally by the Soviet Union and its Satellite States. After his death, attempts were immediately made to exploit this tragic event for the purpose of creating geographical and particularly ideological differences in the United Nations Secretariat. The Soviet delegations are continuing in this campaign and no settlement is as yet in sight.
64. The peoples of many countries are asking where and how the United Nations fits into this somewhat depressing and dismal picture. They want to know what has happened to the lofty sentiments and the noble purposes set out in Chapter I of the Charter.
65. What does the record of the past fifteen years show? Instead of "harmonizing the actions of nations" and achieving "international co-operation", the annual sessions of the General Assembly very soon became battlegrounds for conflicting national interests and rival ideologies. The annual sessions provided opportunities for international intrigue and for the formation of racial, geographical and ideological blocs. Not content with an East-West rivalry, a so- called third world seems to be in process of establishment. All this is a far call from the injunction of the Charter to harmonize the actions of nations. Delegations give prior consideration to their own national interests, or to the interests of the group to which they belong, rather than judging issues on their merits. Caucus meetings of the different groups or blocs have assumed greater importance than meetings of the Assembly or the different Committees.
66. The purposes and ideals set out in the Preamble to the Charter and in Chapter I are relegated to the background, and delegations are increasingly interfering in the domestic affairs of Member States, generally for the purpose of serving their own selfish ends.
67. There are Member States which, at meetings of the General Assembly and elsewhere, pose as the champions of human rights and human dignity, but which close their eyes to the fact that these principles are not honoured in their own countries. Among these
are the delegations of the Soviet Union and its satellite countries, which conveniently ignore conditions existing in Hungary and in the Soviet Union's occupied or colonial territories. So, also, they strongly urge the right of self-determination, provided it is applied only to territories which are not under their control. They vigorously protest when an attempt is made to apply the principle of self-determination to the millions who are living in Soviet-dominated countries, or when the right of self-determination is claimed by the Naga people or the Sikhs in India. So much for the political conditions obtaining in this Organization,
68. No organization, political or otherwise, can hope to survive if its financial position is unsound. The last financial report issued by the late Secretary- General revealed an unsatisfactory state of affairs. This was recently summarized and commented upon by one of the world's best-known newspapers, The Times of London, which, in an authoritative article, described the United Nations as bordering on bankruptcy. I cannot do better than to quote from that interesting article. The writer, who is the United Nations correspondent of The Times of London, opens his article with this question: "How long can the United Nations go on supporting its military operations in the Congo ... without going bankrupt?". After pointing out that, at the time of writing, the Congo and Middle East Emergency Forces were costing $140 million per year, which is more than twice the United Nations normal annual budget, the writer asks: "How can the Organization hope to extricate itself from this extraordinary expenditure?". He adds that already a considerable number of States are 7,n arrears of their annual payments. He points out feat with the exception of South Africa, the twenty-six African States together contribute only 2 1/4 per cent of their annual budget. He could also have pointed out, had he had the information at the time, that on the normal United Nations budget the total arrears exceed $83 million, and that for the maintenance of the United Nations Force in the Suez the arrears amount to approximately $21 million. About seventy States are in arrears of their contributions to the Congo adventure.
69. The writer" dismisses the suggestion of internal economies, which he says "would not make the difference between solvency and bankruptcy". He deals with the suggestion of tiding us over the trouble by raising loans from banks and from financial institutions, but he does not find that suggestion very helpful. He writes: "To keep going, the United Nations has been borrowing from its working capital, its Special Fund and its Children's Fund (UNICEF)". I wonder if representatives here appreciate what is going on.
70. The writer in The Times of London suggests remedial action, such as "liquidating both its Congo and Middle East operations". Another suggestion, he says, is "to divide the normal budget into Secretariat expenses," on the one hand, to which all Members would continue to contribute and, on the other hand, operational expenses, "to be financed by those Members who favoured them, and were willing to pay for them". He concludes with this statement: "The United Nations cannot be kept going for many more months at its present rate of income and expenditure, without becoming bankrupt. When the General Assembly meets on 19 September"-this article was written early in September—"it will be confronted with the urgent need to scale down the Congo operation. After October the operation may have to be wound up".
71. I may mention that, in dealing with unnecessary and what one might call fruitless expenditure incurred by the United Nations-, the writer in The Times of London did not refer to the cost incurred by Mr. Fabregat's party, which attempted to enter South West Africa illegally and, after having been thwarted in that attempt, proceeded to wander about the rest of the African continent-at United Nations expense.
72. The writer of the article from which I have just quoted is particularly concerned about the alarming financial aspect of United Nations action in the Congo— and so, I am sure, are delegations here. When this matter was discussed at the special session of the General Assembly last year, I warned against precipitate action. The history of the United Nations actions in the Congo is not a happy one, and no one knows where it is going to end.
73. Recently, there has also been the action taken by the United Nations Forces against President Tshombe of Katanga. Conditions in Katanga have been relatively stable, both politically and economically. Instead of appreciating those conditions, the United Nations military forces, acting under the Security Council resolution of 21 February 1961, swooped down on Katanga, thereby creating those very conditions which the Organization was supposed to present.
74. At last year's special session, I stated from this rostrum that, quite apart from the doubts which existed as to whether action taken by the United Nations, primarily for the purpose of restoring internal order, was in all respects justified, there was the important question whether the Unit ed Nations had the right to intervene in the internal conflicts of the Congo or in political conditions in the Congo, as provided for in the resolution before the Assembly last year. I said at that time: "This raises the further question as to whether the type of State which will eventually emerge in the Congo is any concern of this Organisation". [862nd meeting, para. 120.] I referred to the fact that the leaders of Katanga had expressed the desire to have a different constitutional arrangement, and I then said:
"This surely is a matter for the Congolese themselves, whose decision, I submit, should not be influenced either by resolutions of this Organization or by the actions of this Organization or any other State."
That was the view which I expressed on behalf of the South African delegation more than a year ago. That is still our view, which has been justified and further strengthened by recent events in Katanga,
75. Military action was obviously taken for the purpose of forcing a political arrangement on the people of Katanga, and, incidentally, securing the mineral wealth of the Province. It was not taken for the purpose of maintaining order, and is in conflict with the Security Council resolution of 21 February 1961 which, inter alia, expressed the conviction that "the solution of the problem of the Congo lies in the hands of the Congolese people themselves without any interference from outside".
76. As I have said, conditions in Katanga have been relatively stable, both politically and economically. As a result of orders, for which Mr. O'Brien may,
or may not, have been responsible, military action was taken, action which I am personally inclined to describe as aggression, with resultant conditions of chaos.
77. When I spoke on this matter on 19 September 1960 [862nd meeting, para, 122], I said that South Africa reserved its position with regard to expenditure to be incurred in the Congo. I now give formal notice that South Africa is not prepared to contribute to the expenditure already incurred, or to be incurred, by the United Nations in the Congo.
78. In that connexion may I remind the Assembly that the Republic of South Africa—unlike a number of other members of this Organization—is not in arrears either with the payment of its annual dues to the United Nations, or with its contribution to the upkeep of the United Nations troops in Suez.
79. May I say, in passing, that my Government has serious doubts as to whether the United Nations Force should continue to be maintained in the Suez area. It is surely not intended that it should be kept there indefinitely, and for all time. I would add that, in view of the difficult financial situation now facing this Organization, the time would seem to have come when those who favour projects entailing extraordinary expense should also be willing to pay for them, and not merely to vote for them in the Assembly.
80. As the representative of an African State, I naturally would like to review the African scene. What is happening in this vast continent, which occupies the strategic position of being situated between the West and the East?
81. The outstanding feature of events in Africa has been the large number of African territories that
- have attained independence during these past two or three years. At the beginning of 1958 there were only three independent States in Africa. Today there are twenty-eight—and more are to follow,
82. While the attainment of full national independence is a matter for congratulation, the question must inevitably arise whether the country concerned is ready or able to assume the responsibilities of independent statehood. The question has arisen, and will arise again, in connexion with the Soviet item on the agenda calling for a time-table for independence for all dependent countries—except, of course, their own occupied territories.
83. In August of last year no less a person then Sir Abubakar Balewa, the Prime Minister of Nigeria, stated in a television interview here in New York:
"I do not believe Africa's Non-Self-Governing territories will benefit from the immediate granting of independence. I don't think there are enough trained people to man the civil service."
Sir Abubakar speaks from experience. Under the system of "colonial oppression", as it is sometimes termed, the British not only prepared his country for independence, but were good enough on their departure to leave a large number of civil servants and technicians to assist Nigeria during the first years of independence.
84. In view of this statement, one wonders whether the Prime Minister of Nigeria approves of the highhanded action of the United Nations in arresting and deporting European civil advisers of President Tshombe
of Katanga, who was anxious—as were the Governments
of Ghana and Nigeria—to retain the services of trained advisers for the purpose of ensuring the continuation of the stable economic conditions which have prevailed almost ever since the United Nations General Assembly decided to take action in the Congo.
85. Mr. Iain McLeod, the new Leader of the British House of Commons, who certainly cannot be described as being antagonistic to the aspirations of the Africans, recently stated: "There is considerable anxiety about the pace of events in Africa ... I share these anxieties. I think that the pace of events in Africa, and elsewhere in the Colonial Territories, is dangerously fast".
86. The leaders of the anti-colonial campaign here in the United States, in Europe and also in the General Assembly, laboured under the mistaken impression that the parliamentary system of government, born in Britain and adopted by other Western countries, including the United States of America, could be grafted on to the traditional customs and practices of the African peoples—or, shall I say, transplanted to the alien soil of age-old African tradition. It simply does not work that way. One reason is that the masses in many African countries are still illiterate, and in some cases are told to vote for a symbol, for instance, an animal, printed on the voting paper. In any case, even the educated Africans do not appear to be interested in, or are not enamoured of, the Western system of political parties that compete with each other for the governing of the country. It is a foreign plant that will not thrive on African soil. This system has recently been criticized by Sobhuza, the Paramount Chief of the British-protected Swazis; also by Mr. Chimpembere, one of the Nyasaland leaders.
87. Mr. John Tettegah, the Secretary-General of the Ghana Trade Union Congress, was equally emphatic when he told a gathering in Ghana in December last:
"Africa does not need a Westminster-type parliamentary system, in which two or more political parties compete with each other for authority ... Africa cannot afford to accept foreign systems which are incompatible with the African way of life, thought and practice."
In speaking thus, Mr. Tettegah was echoing the sentiments of his leader, Dr. Nkrumah, who, soon after achieving independence, rid himself of an effective parliamentary opposition, and further threw overboard the democratic principles which had been preached in Ghana by a succession of British administrators and governors. Only about ten days ago further steps were taken to convert Ghana to an authoritarian State. The ruler of Ghana is flirting with Moscow and Peking. Guinea, soon after being given its independence, promptly became a disciple of Moscow. Mali appears to be going the same way, and others are likely to follow. The Congo (Leopoldville)—not Brazzaville—may well be the next. In past years, when the United States and other Western delegations were taking the lead in attacking colonialism, and urging the African States to become independent, they little thought that they were securing further recruits for Moscow and Peking.
88. As I shall show later in my address, South Africa has profited by the mistakes made by some of the colonial Powers, and in its Bantu legislation is building up a system of self-government for the different Bantu ethnic groups, which, while observing democratic principles, takes account of Bantu tradition and custom.
89. Let us take a look at my country. The first thing that strikes one is that, "while there is unrest and turmoil in several other African countries—from what used to be the United Arab .Republic and from Ethiopia in the north, and Ghana in the west, to Northern Rhodesia, in the middle-south—quiet conditions prevail in South Africa, in spite of strenuous efforts by subversive elements in London, New York, Accra and Cairo, acting in concert with subversive elements in South Africa, to stir up trouble in the Republic. The activities of these organizations and of expatriate Bantu agitators has had little influence on the South African Bantu, who prefers satisfactory social conditions and economic progress.
90. In connexion with this matter of the economic position, 1 should like to mention that a recent dispatch in a leading New York newspaper from its representative in Johannesburg, supposedly based on a speech by the Minister of Economic Affairs of South Africa, not only gives a false impression of that speech but also gives a distorted picture of South Africa's economic condition. This particular reporter is in the habit of sending biased dispatches from South Africa.
91. In common with certain other Western countries South Africa has experienced a drop in its exchange and currency reserves. In order to forestall a further drop, it was decided to exercise the right of members to draw on the International Monetary Fund. As is usual in such cases, permission was granted to draw one-half of the requested amount immediately. It is known to us that an influential member of the Fund, later expressed doubts as to whether alleged conditions in South Africa would justify permission to draw the second half—or "tranche", as it is called—at a later date. It gives me pleasure to inform the Assembly and particularly those who were inclined to have doubts about South Africa's political and economic stability, that it has not been necessary to draw even the first "tranche", owing to the progressive increase in our currency reserves and because of South Africa's basically sound economic position.
92. According to United Nations statistics, the annual per caput income of the South African Bantu alone—that is, apart from the Coloureds and Indians—has, during the five years from 1953 to 1958, increased by more than 64 per cent. Those are United Nations statistics. This increase is progressively being maintained. The Bantu is living in a well-laid-out Bantu township, in a neat home, provided with the necessary amenities, electric light, drinking water, satisfactory sanitary arrangements.
93. Judging from an article in yesterday afternoon's New York World-Telegram, we in South Africa have reason to. be satisfied with the manner in which the needs of "our non-White workers are attended to. The children of the Bantu receive both primary and secondary education, and the elders of his community draw old-age pensions at the end of each month.
94. Medical and social services are provided for the physically unfit. In respect of social and medical services, housing and education, South Africa, per caput of its non-White population, spends considerably more than any other State on the whole of the continent of Africa—approximately five to six times more.
95. This particularly applies to health services. The Baragwanath Hospital, which serves the Bantu and Coloured population only of Johannesburg and its environs, is the largest and best equipped on the Continent of Africa, and in fact ranks among the best in the world. There are 46 wards and 10 operating theatres. Beds are available for 2,500 patients. The hospital is served by 182 full-time medical doctors, of whom half are specialists. At present 15 of them are Bantu doctors, and this number is being progressively increased. There are 1,000 Bantu nurses, and all the ward sisters are Bantu.
96. Six hundred thousand Bantu out-patients receive medical attention annually. No African country can boast of anything nearly approaching a hospital of this size, which serves the non-Whites of only one of South Africa's large cities. There are large hospitals for non-whites also in many other centres, particularly the huge Edward VIII Hospital at Durban.
97. These facts are, of course, never disclosed by South Africa's enemies and critics. The totally false impression is given, again in the course of the present general debate, that the non-Whites in South Africa are ill-treated and oppressed, and that they have to be "saved" by the United Nations.
98. I have said that the non-Whites in South Africa share in the growth and prosperity of the country. I have also indicated the extents to which the needs of the Bantu are being attended to by way of housing, social and medical services,.
99. But South Africa's growth and the advanced state of its industrialization could also be of great benefit to the emergent African States. In support of this contention, I quote a statement made on 20 August last by Mr. Tom Mboya, the African leader in Kenya. After violently attacking South Africa because of what he termed "South Africa's policy of racial discrimination", he said:
"With its high degree of industrialization, technical progress, manpower, resources and materials, South Africa could have been a pillar of the new and independent Africa. The emergent nations of Africa would have looked to South Africa as a sister nation, before anyone else, for aid and guidance,"
Not only has Mr. Mboya correctly described what South Africa has achieved, but I fully endorse his opinion that the new States of Africa could look to South Africa for substantial aid and for guidance in regard to industrial, scientific and other matters— provided, of course, that the African States wish to make use of that aid.
100. I myself, in my capacity as Foreign Minister, and also the present and previous Prime Ministers of my country, have in the past expressed our real desire to co-operate with other African States in matters of common concern and to give advice and practical assistance where necessary, as indeed we have frequently done through the medium of the CCTA, the Council for Technical Co-operation, and FAMA, the Foundation for Mutual Assistance in Africa South of the Sahara, which is a body for giving mutual assistance.
101. On many occasions, and again this year, we have willingly acceded to requests from African States and territories to supply vaccines and other remedies for animal diseases from the world famous Onderstepoort Veterinary Research Institute. We have done so also in cases where the African country concerned has taken up an actively hostile attitude towards South Africa.
102. South Africa has played a leading part in the CCTA, and yet at the Abidjan Conference this year, several African delegates demanded South Africa's expulsion from that body. We are a founder member of that body. One of the delegates even walked out whenever a South African delegate participated in the discussions. Similar hostility to the South African delegation was shown at the Conference of the Economic Commission for Africa which was held at Addis Ababa.
103. On the other hand, where certain South African countries have taken measures to boycott imports from South Africa we have not retaliated and their exports are still freely admitted to South Africa.
104. Mr. Tom Mboya is quite right, South Africa can give aid and guidance to other African countries, and is willing to do so, as we have done in the past. What, then, is his reason for declining assistance from South Africa?
105. I have already referred to the reason which he gave in the first part of his statement, namely what he called South Africa's policy of racial discrimination. May I say that African leaders who, I am sure, keep in touch with happenings in other parts of the world, are, of course, aware of the fact that colour and racial discrimination are practised in certain Western and also in certain Eastern countries that are Members of this Organization.
106. The reply is generally: "Yes, but in those countries discrimination and segregation are not sanctioned by law, as in the case of South Africa". Leaving aside for the moment the question, whether South Africa's policy of differentiation and separate development is the same as discrimination and segregation practised in other countries, that reply
. offers little comfort to the non-Whites in those countries who are the victims of racial discrimination and segregation. Does it help them in any way if the central government of a particular country frowns" against racial discrimination, while it is sanctioned and not prohibited by municipal, provincial and state authorities of that country? Have the leaders of the African delegations in this Assembly taken note of this "unofficial" type of racial segregation?
107. And what about the almost criminal neglect of the needs of small non-White communities in certain Western countries? Why pick on South Africa? Are there perhaps political and particularly economic and financial considerations which induce the leaders of African States to close their eyes to the actual practice of colour discrimination as well as religious, caste and other forms of discrimination, in certain countries, while threatening sanctions against South Africa? I want to inform the Assembly, as I did on a previous occasion, that never in the history of the Union of South Africa, now the Republic of South Africa, has there ever yet been a single -instance of organized attacks by Whites on non-Whites. Again I ask, why pick on South Africa?
108. The main complaint is that the large non-White majority does not share full political equality with the Whites, that the principle of "one man one vote" is not applied. It is not seriously contended by our critics and enemies that the non-Whites in South Africa are oppressed—they say so but they do not seriously mean it—or that their material needs, housing, social services and education, are not attended to. On the contrary, as I have pointed out, in these respects far more is done in South Africa for the
Bantu and other non-Whites than in any other State in the whole African continent,
109. In order to appreciate the position in South Africa, the following basic facts must be borne in mind.
110. First, the White population of South Africa is a permanent one whose ancestors came to the country more than three hundred years ago. We are not "colonists", as is so often erroneously alleged. We cannot return to the countries of our forefathers. We are strangers in those countries, just as the Roosevelts, the Eisenhowers, the Diefenbakers and the Vanderoilts are today strangers in the countries of their forebears.
Hi. Secondly, the Bantu, or black, peoples of South Africa are not the original inhabitants of the country. Their ancestors moved southwards from East and Central Africa and crossed the Limpopo River at about the same time as the original Dutch settlers arrived at the Cape. At that time the only inhabitants of the southern end of Africa were nomadic groups of Hottentots and Bushmen. The Bantu living in South Africa today, therefore, have no greater claim to the southern end of the African continent than the White population.
112. Thirdly, as was correctly stated by Mr. Tom Mboya, South Africa is today a highly developed and industrialized country—the most highly industrialized country on the continent of Africa. This was accomplished against tremendous odds with considerable sacrifices, and by the initiative of South Africans of European descent. By providing the necessary labour, non-Whites contributed their share to the development of the country.
113. Fourthly, the White population of South Africa is now being told by African countries and by some of the Asian countries, and also by the delegations of certain Western countries, that what has been built up over three centuries by their forebears and by successive generations of White South Africans, must be placed under the control of the non-Whit^ majority. That will be the logical consequence of the demand for full political equality in the same State. But then I would add, there can be full political equality if each of the races in the State is to have its own separate political development, which is the policy of the present Government.
114. Would the United States of America, Canada, the Latin American countries—all countries whose respective early histories of colonization are similar to that of South Africa—be prepared, if their relative proportions of White to non-White populations were the same as in South Africa, to hand over the control of their countries to Negro or to Indian majorities? That, I think, is a pertinent question which demands an answer.
115. Why is it that certain Western countries with large White populations are taking steps to limit the quotas of non-White immigrants? Is it because in those countries racial friction has already manifested itself and they are taking timely precautions to prevent the extension of such friction? Are they perhaps worried about the formation of racial political blocs or pressure groups, particularly in the larger centres? I do not for a moment criticize those countries for taking timely precautions. But then they, and particularly their Press and some of their clerics, should not criticize and attack South Africa for taking similar precautions, and for far more valid and far more urgent reason?.
116. Let me remind our critics and enemies that if the system of differentiation practised in South Africa is to be regarded as discrimination, then it is practised also against the White population. Whites are not allowed to enter the Bantu residential areas without permits; they enjoy no trading rights in Bantu townships. Similarly, Whites are debarred from land ownership in the Bantu homelands or territories and they, are not permitted to participate in the Bantu Authorities. Eventually Whites will be barred from trading in the Bantu homelands.
117. There is discrimination equally against the Whites in so far as concerns the Black territories, the Native territories.
118. What exactly is South Africa's policy of apartheid which has become almost a swearword in many countries? How many of those who attack South Africa and who attacked South Africa again in the course of this general debate, how many of those—and those who are threatening to apply sanctions—have any conception as to what our policy is? Few know that the word apartheid is in fact an abbreviated form of "aparte ontwikkeling", which means separate development, with emphasis on the word "development".
119. This policy has been cruelly, and, I may add, maliciously misrepresented in Press dispatches which have been appearing in the newspapers of many countries over a number of years. It is on the basis of those malicious misrepresentations that these attacks are based. I dealt fully with this aspect of the anti-South African campaign when I addressed the Assembly last year, and I do not intend to repeat what I said on that occasion; I leave it at that.
120. South Africa's policy of separate development is not, as is generally supposed, the creation of the present Government. When speaking from this rostrum two years ago [811th meeting, para. 34], I quoted from a speech delivered by General Smuts, one of the founders of the United Nations, more than forty years ago, in which he referred to "the practice that has grown up in South Africa of giving the natives"—the Bantu—"their own separate institutions on parallel lines". General Smuts went on to say in a speech delivered in London:
"It is useless to try to govern black and white in the same system ... In land-ownership and forms of government our policy is to keep them apart"— apartheid—"... Thus in South Africa you will eventually have large areas cultivated by blacks and governed by blacks, while in the rest of the country you will have whites who will govern themselves according to accepted European principles."
121. The policy of separate development, also known as apartheid, is thus clearly the traditional policy of South Africa. It is not a new creation and is not as is generally alleged, the evil conception of the present Government and particularly of the present Prime Minister, Dr. Verwoerd. It is a policy which is equally in the interests of the White and of the Bantu population,. It is intended to safeguard what has been built up over three centuries by the Whites, and at the same time to take account of the political aspirations, as well as of the traditions, cultures, and also the material needs of the Bantu peoples,
122. The Bantu Self-Government Act provides for progressively increased legislative, judicial and administrative powers for the Bantu authorities in their own territories. There are huge territories reserved only for use and occupation by the Bantu. These territories, mostly situated in some of the most fertile areas of South Africa, where voluntarily occupied the Bantu which, at the time of the arrival of the first Dutch immigrants, were themselves migrating, as I said, from East and Central Africa. These territories were subsequently reserved for the Bantu only. Not only are the laws excluding White occupation strictly applied, but huge tracts of adjacent land have subsequently been acquired by expropriating the White owners and being handed over to the Bantu. The Bantu Self-Government Act avoids the mistakes made in other parts of Africa of over-haste growth and of creating independent territories which are not yet ripe for self-government.
123. By this legislation eight Bantu national units are established on an ethnic basis, and provision is made for the corresponding Bantu authorities. Experience in South Africa and elsewhere in Africa has shown that the splitting or the mixing of ethnic groups leads to clashes and internecine warfare.
124. Under this system of self-government, the Bantu have since 1951 increased their governing Councils from about sixty, with about 300 individual members, to 445 councils with no less than 6,550 individual members in 1961. This shows that the system is not only democratic, but also that it has been well received by the Bantu in spite of attempts by subversive organizations and by White agitators to discredit this policy and to create unrest.
125. South Africa's policy is not, as is sometimes alleged, one of "back to the tribe" or "back to the bush". The object is to start with a system of government which is based on Bantu custom and tradition and which will be further developed by the progressive introduction of fully representative self-government.
126. I do not want to quote the testimonies—it would take too much time—but I would mention that the under-mentioned leaders of Bantu Territorial Authorities have in public statements during the past year or more signified their unqualified acceptance of the Government's policy of separate development and have also expressed their appreciation of what is being done to develop self-government in the different Bantu ethnic areas. They are: Chief Botha Sigeau, Presiding Territorial Chief of the Transkeian Territorial Authority; Chief M. C. Chuene, Chairman of the Pietersburg Regional Authority; Regent P. M. Shilubane, of the Banuna Tribal Authority; Cyprian Bhekuzulu, Paramount Chief of the Zulus, a well-known Bantu race; Paramount Chief Victor Poto, of Western Pondoland.
127. Among the most interesting of these testimonies is that which came from the leader of the Bantu in Ovamboland, in South West Africa, who stated in August of last year:
"The Ukuanyama"—the name of these people— "have never been betrayed by the Union Government and have retained their country intact. This applies to the whole of Ovamboland and after forty years under Union administration the vast majority of the people are content that it should continue, despite agitation for changes from small and unrepresentative sections at home and abroad."
This testimony, this statement, coming from the outstanding leader of Ovamboland in South West
Africa, is an effective reply to Mr, Fabregat and his fellow-members of the Committee on South West Africa who have been grievously misled by a small group of agitators from South West Africa.
128. Earlier in my address, X quoted from statements by African leaders to show that the Western system of parliamentary government simply cannot be transplanted to the African soil. This is further proved by the testimony of the Bantu leaders to which I have referred. We in South Africa, with our experience and knowledge of Bantu life and traditions extending over a period of more than 200 years, have always realised that fact, which is the basis of the policy we have evolved, and which will eventually give to our Bantu fellow citizens in their respective homelands full self-government in accord with their own customs and traditions, and which is best suited to their own outlook, culture and temperament.
129. A Bantu Industrial Development Corporation has been created for the establishment of industries in those areas. The Government of the Republic is providing the initial capital and will continue to assist financially. These industries will ultimately be wholly owned and controlled by the Bantu themselves. I wish to emphasize—and this is an important point—that these industries will not, as in the case of some of the African territories, be controlled by financial interests operating from other countries that pocket the profits and at the same time detract from the political independence of those States.
130. Industries are also being established near the borders of these Bantu Authority Territories, thus providing employment for Bantu across the border, where they are living in their own country with their families, in their own homes, under their own form of government.
131. The Government of the Republic is meanwhile undertaking the task and the expense of developing the Bantu territories; for example, irrigation projects, fencing and soil erosion. The younger Bantu are being instructed in the latest agricultural methods and are being provided with stud cattle to improve their herds. I would add that the Bantu areas are in no way inferior to the corresponding areas occupied by Whites, and in fact in some cases—particularly in the eastern Transvaal—they are superior and able to support a larger population per acre than in most other" parts of South Africa.
132. A commissioner-general for each of the ethnic groups serves as a link between the Government of the Republic and the relevant Territorial Authority. He must reside at the headquarters of the Territorial Authority, and it is his duty to bring to the attention of the central government the political, economic and social needs of the ethnic group to which he has been assigned. It should be emphasized that the commissioner-general is not an administrator but that his post is analogous to that of an ambassador to another country.
133. I would add here that, in order to accelerate the transfer of administrative and judicial functions to the recognized leaders of the Bantu, special schools have been established and more are in the process of being established, in the different ethnic areas, for the training of young men who are likely to be leaders of their people, in modern methods of administration and also, in economic and business principles. These are facts which are not known to those who attack South Africa.
134. I come now to the position of the urban Bantu, there are 2.5 million Bantu who work and live in the European urban areas. Another 3 million are scattered in other European areas. It has been urged here and elsewhere that they should receive full political equality with the Whites. I have already explained that the Bantu who live in the White areas will retain their voting rights in the self-governing areas from which they come, and they can return there for that purpose, as is done by many of the 400,000 Bantu from the neighbouring British Protectorate of Basutoland who are working in the Republic. In passing I would mention that there are altogether about 1 1/3 million Bantu who are not of South African origin. Our policy aims at maintaining the unity of each of the Bantu ethnic groups, whether living in their homelands or living in the urban areas. It regards the Bantu living in the European area as part of the particular ethnic community in the Bantu homelands. This policy is appreciated by the Bantu themselves and leads to a greater measure of co-operation with the Government in the European area.
135. It is, however, recognized that provision must be made for Bantu living in cities and in the large towns to have a voice in municipal and other local affairs which affect their living conditions. The system of advisory boards which has been in practice for decades was recently extended so that the Bantu in urban residential areas will now be able to form urban councils to which are entrusted specific duties and responsibilities.
136. While on the subject of urban Bantu, I would repeat that the 11/3 million Bantu from neighbouring territories who have come to live in South Africa evidently do not mind the alleged oppression. On the contrary, they share in the many benefits—for example, social and medical services, housing and education- provided by the Government of South Africa and by municipal authorities for their own South African non-White citizens. One of our problems is to deal with the continually increased crossing of natives from other neighbouring territories into South Africa who want to come there to be oppressed.
137. One hears and reads much of illiteracy. This is not only an African problem. It is found also in many Western countries and is rife, I understand, in the Middle East and in some Asian countries. I need hardly remind the Assembly of conditions existing in many of the independent African States. Having had experience of the way in which false information is spread about, my own country, I do not unreservedly accept what I read about other countries. It is, however, interesting to note that more than one book, authoritatively written, dealing with conditions in two of the oldest independent African States, namely Liberia and Ethiopia, tells of the appalling state of living conditions and also of illiteracy among the masses in those States. Even more interesting is the fact that it is these two States that have taken proceedings against South Africa in the International Court of Justice in which inter alia the Republic is charged with not having promoted to the utmost the welfare of the inhabitants of South West Africa!
138. In fairness I must point out that illiteracy is a feature not only of Liberia and Ethiopia. According to a literacy map of the world, only a few African States or territories show an illiteracy rate below 80 per cent. I may add that the South African Bantu have an illiteracy rate well below that figures namely, 65 per cent.
139. The great progress made in Bantu education in South Africa is considerably in advance of that made by many other African countries. The success obtained is due to the fact that an educational system has been evolved which recognizes that educational methods designed for European or American children cannot simply be grafted on to the methods used for African children who have grown up under entirely different circumstances. In most cases these children are acquainted only with values, interests and behaviour patterns learned from a Bantu mother and more often than not are living in surroundings still in an early stage of civilization. Too often, missionaries from Europe or America have tried to transplant their systems of education to African countries, with very unsatisfactory results. That mistake has been avoided in the system employed in South Africa, with the result that about 80 per cent of Bantu children in South Africa up to the age of fourteen years are attending 7,412 primary schools. Eight years ago the percentage was only 58.
140. But similar progress has also been made in the secondary or higher schools which are providing higher education to almost 50,000 pupils. There are forty-eight institutions for the training of 4,500 teachers, and also thirty technical schools where at present 1,850 young Bantu are being trained. There are 27,800 teachers in Bantu schools, of whom only about 1 per cent are Whites. This year at least 10,500 Bantu students will be writing the standard VIII (junior certificate) examination, and 2,000 will be taking the matriculation examination, which is necessary for entrance to a university.
141. Also in the field of higher education considerable progress has been made. There are three Bantu university colleges where at present 1,580 students are enrolled.
142. In accordance with South Africa's policy of separate development, the primary and secondary schools are controlled by Bantu parents—and not by Whites—who serve on 500 school boards and 4,500 school committees.
143. Finally, there are also Bantu agricultural schools where training is provided to enable the Bantu to improve their agricultural methods.
144. I suggest that the progress made in South Africa in the field of Bantu primary, secondary and university education far exceeds that of any other African State or territory. And yet, the leaders of those States accuse the South African Government of neglecting, and even of oppressing, the Bantu people.
145. I have referred to political and economic conditions prevailing in most of the States and territories of Central and North Africa—conditions of political unrest and of economic instability. By contrast, there is peace, prosperity any economic stability in South Africa, in spite of attempts by agitators and subversive elements, inside and outside of South Africa, to stir up trouble among the non-Whites and to harm South Africa's economy. Inside South Africa there are subversive Bantu organizations, aided and abetted by certain overseas ultra-liberalistic organizations, such as the American Committee on Africa in New York and Christian Action in London, and by certain sections of the Press in those countries. They are further actively encouraged by the leaders of certain
African States. An interesting feature of this latter type of encouragement is that it is an important factor in the keen competition among certain leaders to assume the leadership of the African States. In bidding for that honour, the idea is that the one that hits South Africa hardest is likely to gain the favour of the smaller African States. The leaders are of course not really worried about the Bantu in South Africa because they know that they are far better cared for and better treated than the masses in their own countries.
146. We firmly believe that the course upon which we have embarked in South Africa will ultimately solve the problem of relations between White and non-White races in our country. It is a policy which aims at progressively giving to the Bantu the complete control of his own homelands and which, by means of urban councils, will provide the urban Bantu with the means to promote their material welfare and social needs. Similar steps have been taken and will be further developed also in the cases of the Coloured and the Indian population. At the same time, this policy will ensure to South Africans of European descent control of their homeland, which over the past three centuries has been opened up and developed by their forebears and by succeeding generations of white South Africans.
147. In conclusion, I want to say that we believe this policy of peaceful but separate coexistence will provide the solution of our racial problems and ensure the happiness and prosperity of all South Africans- White, Black, Coloured and Indian.
148. All that we ask is that we be permitted to carry out our policy of looking after the interests of our Bantu and other non-European peoples without interference from outside, be it from Western, Eastern or African countries.