zn4 C‘hAptcr VIII. Xlaintenancu of in(trnatiooal peace and security

3. Co//s upon the administering Power IO ensure the full and developments in Southern Rhodesia, but that his dclcga- impartial imp(emcn~ation of the letter and spirit of the Lancaster tion had trust in the ability of the United Kingdom to House agreement; implement the London agreement impartially.l*‘~ 4. Calls upon the Governmenl of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. while noting its announcement that the THE SITUATION IN SOUTH AFRICA: KILLINGS ANI) VIO- South Afriun troopa have ken withdrawn from the Beit Bridge. to ensure Ihe immbdi;tc, complete and uncondilional withdrawal of any LENCE BY THE AfARTHEfD RctilME IN SOWET AND OTHER AREAS other South African forces, repular or mercenary. from Southern Rhodesia: 5 Co/is upon the Government of the United Kingdom lo take all Decision of 19 June 1976 (1930th meeting): rc.wIulion nary steps in order to cnsutc that eligible Zimbabwe nution& 392 (1976) WIII freely participele in the forthcoming elccloral prwess. indudin8. By lettcr’*‘4 dated I8 June 1976 addressed to the (0) The speedy and unimpcdcd return of Zimbabwe erilcs and President of the Security Council, the rcpreaentutivcs of refqces in conformily with Ihe Lancaslcr House a8reemcnl; Benin, the Libyan Arab Republic and the United (b) The rclusc of all political prisoners; Republic of Tanzania. in accordance with the decision (c) The strict compliance by all the forces with the terms of Ihe of the African Group, requested an emergency meeting Lancaster House l srccmcnl and the confinement forthwith of the Rhode&an and auxiliary forces IO their bases in conformity with the! of the Security Council to consider the measures of agreement; repression, including wanton killings, perpetrated by the (d) The according of cqual treatment to all pprtics lo Ihe apartheid rtgime in South Africa against the African agreement; people in Sowcto and other areas in South Africa. (c) The rescinding of all emcrlcncy musura and rcplations tclegram~~~5 inconsistent with the conduct of free and fair elections; By dated 18 June 1976 addressed to the Secretary-General, the President of Madagascar, in 6. Culls upon the Government of the United Kingdom lo create conditions in Southern Rhoduia which will ensure free and fair view of the outburst of violence in Sowcto and several clecrions and thereby avert the danger of the collap~ of the Lancaster other places in South Africa, requested the Sccretary- House agrcemcnl. which could have serious consequences for intcrna- General to convene the Security Council as a matter of tional peace and security; urgency and to call upon all nations, particularly the 7. Calls upon the Government of the United Kingdom to release developed countries, to implement the relevant resolu- any South African polilical prisoners, including captured freedom filhtcrs. in Southern Rhodesia and to ensure their safe passage lo any tions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. country of their choice; At the 1929th meeting on 18 June 1976, the Council 8. Strongly condemns the rrcist rdgime in South Africa for included the item in its agenda.l*W In the course of the interference in the internal affairs of Southern Rhodesia: discussions the President, with the consent of the 9. Calls upon all Member State lo respect only Ihc free and fair Council, invited the representatives of Algeria, Cuba, choice of the people of Zimbabwe; India, Liberia, Madagascar, South Africa, the United IO. L4cldrs to keep Ihe situation in Southern Rhodesia under review until the Territory attains full independence under genuine Republic of Cameroon, Yugoslavia and Zambia, at their majority rule. request, to participate in the discussion without the right to vote.‘*“ Following the vote the rcprcsentative of the United Kingdom explained his delegation’s non-participation in The Council also extended invitations under rule 39 the vote, explaining that the draft resolution was of the provisional rules of procedure to Mr. Trami unbalanced and selective, and purported to give guid- Mhlambiso of the African National Congress of South ance on the United Kingdom’s administration of its Africa and Mr. David Sibeko of the Pan Africanist colonial territory otherwise than in accordance with the Congress of Azania.‘*“ terms of the London agreement; the United Kingdom The question was considered at the 1929th and delegation could not associate itself with such a resolu- 1930th meetings, held on I8 and I9 June 1976. tion.b2s’ At the 1929th meeting the rcpraentativc of Liberia, The representative of the United States said that, speaking on behalf of the African Group, stated that the although difficulties had occurred during the implemen- events in Sowcto were reminiscent of what took place in tation of the London agreement, it was necessary for the Sharpeville in 1960, constituted a violation of human parties concerned to build on the positive elements that rights and had become the concern of the international had so far emerged. He exhorted all others not party to community. She pointed out that the African States the agreement to exercise patience and exhibit forbear- condemned the atrocities by the Pretoria rtgimc, which ance in their criticism. In explanation of vote he said had resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent that he understood that the resolution just adopted people, including children. and calltd on the Security called on the United Kingdom and the parties concerned Council to take bold and positive action against South to play their part in implementing the agreement, but Africa which for the past 30 years had flouted resolu- his delegation did not accept charges of violations of lions of both the Security Council and the General that agreement.ln* Assembly.‘*‘*

The representative of Portugal said that his deicga- ‘1” Ibid. prar 72 and 73 tion had rupported the resolution because it reflected In’ S/IZlOO. OR. Jlrf .vr. Suppl /IW Aprtl-lunr 1976. p 64 the apprehension of the world community about the ““‘S:I2IOI,thrd ‘J’* 1929th mtg , preceding para I ID For detatls. KC chapter III ‘*‘I 2196th ml&. paras. 5 and 6 “U Ibrd. ‘*” /hid. paras 34-43 lr”o 1929th mtg.. parar 6- 17 Parr II

At the same meeting the rcprcscntative of Algeria Panama. Romania. Sweden and the Unit4 Republic of called on the Council to reaffirm unanimously the Tanzania. condemnation of apartheid. to express the solidarity of In explaining his participation in the debate the the Council with the African people in South Africa and rCprCSCtttgtiVC of South Africa statad that it should not to issue an absolute prohibition of any political, econom- be construed as modifying in any way the well-known ic or military relations with the Pretoria rtgimc.rzW position of his delegation on Article 2, paragraph 7, of The representative of the United Republic of Tanza- the Charter, which was documented in the records of nia reviewed the developments in South Africa which he the Organization.‘m called a direct threat to international peace and security In the course of the 1929th and 1930th meetings a and expressed his belief that the Council had to do number of speakers called for the imposition of ma- everything within its power, in accordance with the sures stipulated in Chapter VII of the Charter of the appropriate provisions of the Charter, to ensure that an United Nations.r2*’ end was put to the apartheid system.‘zP1 The representative of Italy proposed to adopt the The representative of the USSR agreed with the press draft resolution by consensus.‘“’ statement issued on 17 June 1976 by the Acting The representative of Benin, on behalf of the sponsors Chairman of the United Nations Special Committee of the draft resolution, said that there were no objec- against Apartheid in which an appeal had been made tions to the Council proceeding in the manner proposed for a total embargo on all supplies to the armed forces by the representative of Italy. and police of South Africa and for the complete The President announced that inasmuch as draft international isolation of the South African racist resolution S/I 2103 had unanimous support in the Coun- rCgimc. and supported the strongest sanctions against cil, there appeared to be no need to vote upon it South Africa, as provided for in the Charter.‘*** formally. At the same meeting. the President informed the At the same meeting draft resolution S/12103 was Council of a letter dated I8 June 1976 from the unanimously adopted by consensus as resolution 392 Rapporteur of the Special Committee against Apartheid ( I 976).lzw with a request to address the Council on the item. In The resolution reads as follows: accordance with previous practice, the President pro- Thr Srcurify Council. posed that the Council extend an invitation, under rule Having ronsidcrrd the letter of the representatives of Renin. the 39 of the provisional rules of procedure, to the Rappor- Libyan Arab Republic and the United Republic of Tanzania, on teur of the Special Committee against Apartheid. In the behalf of the African Group at the United Nations, concerning the absence of objections, it was so decided.‘“’ mcawm of repression. including wanton killings. perpetrated by the oparrhrid regime in South Africa against the African people in The Rapporteur of the Special Committee against Sowcto and other areas in South Africa, Apartheid reiterated the Committee’s appeal for a total Having conridrrrd also the telegram from the President of the embargo on all supplies for the armed forces and police Democratic Republic of Madagascar to the Secretary-General, in South Africa, and for the total isolation of the South Derply shocked over large-scale killings and wounding of Africans African racist rCgime and, expressed its view that the in South Africa, following the callous shooting of African people Council should not only condemn the latest atrocities in including schoolchildren and students demonstrating against racial South Africa, but also demand that the rtgime end discrimination on 16 June 1976, forthwith its violence against innocent black Africans Convinrrd that this situation has been brought about by the continued imposition by the South African Government of apurrheid and take immediate steps to abolish the system of and racial ducrimination. in defiance of the resolutions of the Security aparlhrid and racial discrimination.ll+’ Council and the General Assembly. The Prccidcnt informed the Council that the sponsors I Sfrongl,v condrmm the South Afriun Government for its of IIIC drrtft resolution contained in document S/I2103 rcvort IO massive violence agamrt and killings of the African people includmg schoolchildren and students and others opposing racial had uskcd to make the following additions: at the end of dtrcriminatton; the second preambulur paragraph, “1976”, was added; a 2. Exprrssts its profound sympathy to the victims of this new second preambular paragraph was inserted before violence: the existing second preambular paragraph reading as 3. Rro/lirmJ that the pohcy of uparrhcid is a crime against the follows: “Having considered also the telegram from the conscience and dignity of mankind and seriotuly disturbs international President of the Democratic Republic of Madagascar peace and security; addressed to the Secretary-General (S/I 2 IO1 )“. 4. Rrcognirer the legitimacy of the struggle of the South African people for the elimination of apartheid and racial discrimination; At the 1930th meeting on I9 June 1976. the rcprcsen- 5. Cd//r upon the South African Government urgently to end tativc of the United Republic of Tanzania introduced violence against the Afrtcan people and to take urgent step to the draft resolution’” on behalf of the delegations of eliminrte aporrhrid and racial discrimination; Benin, Guyana, the Libyan Arab Republic, Pakistan, 6. &rtdrs to rematn seized of the matter.

‘No lhrd. prrss. 19-30 I* 1930th mtg.. parar. 150-179. I:*’ Ibid.. pnras. 85- I2 I. 1fl’ 1929th mtg., para. 127 (Rerun). pars. I59 (Rapportcur of the I182 /bid. purar. 133-145. Special Committee against Aporfhcid). 1930th mtg.. para. 43 (Yugo I:*’ lhrd. prar 146 and 147 sirvIa). psra. 98 (Zambia). para I43 (United Rcpubhc of Tanzania). ‘W lbrd. parnr. 149-160. para 2lg(Mr Sikto) I’“’ 1910th mcg., parrr. 135-147 S/12103 was adopted wtthout I*** 1930th mtg . parar 219-283 chrn#c ~1; rcwlufion 392 (1476) Im Rrsolurions and Lkrcsiotu of rhr Srcurity Council. 1976. p. I I. Malntcnrncr of InIcrrullond pmcr and wcurlty 286 Chapter VIII.

Speaking in explanation of joining the consensus the invasion of Uganda by Israeli commandos and had rcpracntativc of the United States of America stated decided to request the Security Council to meet urgently that he did so on the understanding that the language of to consider that wanton act of aggression against a the resolution fell under Chapter VI of the Charter and Member State of the United Nations. did not imply any Chapter VII determination. HC By lettertW’ dated 6 July 1976 addressed to the emphasized the sensitiveness of the United Stales to the President of the Security Council the representative of limits of the Security Council’s jurisdiction imposed by Mauritania, as Chairman of the African Group for the Article 2, paragraph 7, of the Charter under which no month of July, requested the President to convene a organ of the United Nations was authorized to intervene meeting of the Council as a matter of urgency to in matters which were essentially within the domestic consider the contents of the telegram of 6 July from the jurisdiction of any State, except where enforcement Chairman of OAU. measures under Chapter VII were to be applied. He By earlier letter Ia dated 4 July 1976 addressed to the added that that resolution before the Council was not Secretary-General, the representative of Israel transmit- providing for enforcement mcasures.lOo ted excerpts from a statement made by the Prime The representative of the United Kingdom explained Minister of Israel with regard lo an operation conducted that his support for the resolution in no way indicated by the Israeli Defcncc Forces at Entebbe international any diminution of the importance the United Kingdom airport in Uganda. The Prime Minister stated that the attached to the strictest adherence to Article 2, para- decision to undertake the operation had been taken by graph 7, of the Charter and that Article 2, paragraph 7, the Government of Israel on its sole responsibility and was qualified by the parallel duty of the United Nations described it as an achievement in the struggle against under Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter to concern itself terrorism. with questions of human rights and fundamental frtc- By another letter ‘10’ dated 5 July 1976 addressed to doms.r”’ the President of the Security Council the representative At the end of the meeting the President noted that in of Uganda transmitted the text of a message dated 4 accordance with tbt resolution adopted by the Council it July from the President of the Republic of Uganda remained seized of the mattcr.rM* charging that the Israeli invasion had been well-planned On 3 August 1976, the Special Committee against with the full co-operation of some other countries, Aporrheld transmitted a special reportrJOl entitled “The including Kenya and the Western Powers. Uganda Soweto massacre and its aftermath”. The Special Com- requested that Israel be condemned in the strongest mittee recommended that the Security Council again possible terms for its aggression.‘” consider the situation in South Africa in the light of the At the 1939th meeting on 9 July 1976 the Council defiance by the South African rtgime of the relevant included the four letters in its agendalOp and considered resolutions of the Council, in particular resolution 392 the item from the 1939th to 1943rd meetings between 9 (1976), and the continued aggravation of the situation and I4 July 1976. by massive repression. The Special Committee further In the course of its deliberations the Council invited recommended that the Security Council declare that the the representatives of Cuba, the Federal Republic of rapidly worsening situation in South Africa resulting Germany, Guinea, India, .Isracl, Kenya, Mauritania, from the policies of upurrheid of the Pretoria rdgime Mauritius, Qatar, Somalia, Uganda, the United Rtpub- was a grave threat to international peace and security, lit of Cameroon and Yugoslavia at their request to take and that the Council take early action under Chapter part in the discussions without the right to v~te.“‘~ VII of the Charter of the United Nations.

COMPLAINT BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF MAURITIUS, 1*1Sl12128. ibid.. p. 7. CURREM CHAIRMAN OF THE OAU, OF THE “ACT OF Im S/l 2123. ibid.. pp. 3. 4. AGGRESSION” BY ISRAEL AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF I~‘Sl2124. ibid.. pp. 4. 5. UGANDA I- In a letter dabxl 7 July (S/12131. OR. fist July-Srppr. 1976. p. 9) the representative of Kenya Decision of 14 July 1976 (1943rd meeting): rejection of charges made by Uganda, denying that Kenya ever had the two-Power draft resolution would be used as a base for aggression against any other country. The Israeli aircraft had been permItted to land at Nairobi airport purely By Ieltcr~YY dated 6 Jut!1 1976 addressed lo the on humanitarian grounds and in accordana with international law. President of the Security Council, the Assistant Exccu- live Secretary of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) transmitted the text of a telegram by the Prime Minister of Mauritius, the current Chairman of the OAU. The telegram stated that on 4 July, the Assembly of Heads of Slate and Government of the OAU in Mauritius had received information concerning the USSR expressed the understanding that the words in inverted commas, “act of a ression”. were taken from the telegram from the Chairman of the 8 AU. the Prime Minister of Mauritius (S/12126. annea). which referred IO “rhl\ unprcccdcnled aggression against Uganda by Israel” (1939th mtg para 4) “‘O For delatls. see chJprcr III