9. Letter Dated 17 June 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Botswana to the United Nations Addressed to the President of the Security Council
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Pm-t II 269 9. LETTER DATED 17 JUNE 1985 FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF BOTSWANA TO THE UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL INITIAL PROCEEDINGS Council also extended an invitation, as requested, under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Security By a letter! dated 17 June 1985 addressedto the President Council, to the Vice-Chairman of the Special Committee of the Security Council, the representative of Botswana re- against Apartheid? quested that an urgent meeting of the Council be convened to consider the serious situation that was arising as a result Decision of 2 I June 1985 (2599th meeting): resolution 568 of South Africa’s military attack on Gaborone, the capital (1985) city of Botswana, on 14 June 1985. At the 2598th meeting, on 2 1 June 1985, at the outset of In a previous letter2 dated 14 June 1985 addressedto the the discussion, the President of the Security Council drew President of the Security Council, the representative of the attention of the membersof the Council to a draft reso- Botswana had transmitted the text of a press releaseissued lution6 submitted by Burkina Faso, Egypt, India, Madagas- on the same date by the Office of the President of the Re- car, Peru and Trinidad and Tobago. public of Botswana describing the loss of lives and mate- rial damage inflicted during the raid early that morning by At the opening of the discussion, the Minister for For- members of the South African Defense Force. The Gov- eign Affairs of Botswana recalled the events of 14 June ernment of Botswana strongly condemned the raid, which 1985 when, at 0140 hours, Botswana had been invaded by had been the most seriousof the incidents that had occurred South African refugees, two residents, two visitors, includ- since March 1985 and had been carried out despite the re- ing a six-year-old child, and two nationals of Botswana. peated assurancesthat had been given that Botswana did The invasion had been unprovoked and had been the cul- not permit its tenitory to be used for launching attacks mination of the aggressive South African attitude that had against neighbouring countries. progressively deteriorated as the agitation for change had intensified inside South Africa. Because South Africa and By a letter3 dated 17 June 1985, the representative of Botswana were geographically bound to live together, South Africa transmitted to the Secretary-General the text her country had never allowed opposition to apartheid to of a statement of 14 June I985 by the Minister for Foreign undermine its commitment to the principle of peaceful Affairs of South Africa. Commenting on the events at Ga- coexistence. Her Government had refused to sign a non- borone on 13114June 1985, the Minister had stated that the aggression pact as demanded by South Africa, since such Government of Botswana had been repeatedly warned by a pact, other than compromising its sovereignty, could not South Africa to curtail the activities of the African National enhance its capacity to be any more vigilant than it cur- Congress of South Africa (ANC) inside Botswana, and in rently was against guerrilla infiltration into South Africa. particular the planning and execution of terrorist activities As a humanitarian and moral obligation and in fulfilment in South Africa from Botswana. He had also recounted a of its statutory obligations as a party to the 1951 Geneva number of meetings between the Ministers for Foreign Af- Convention relating to the Status of Refugees as well as fairs and relevant security forces of the two countries that the 1969 Convention of the Organization of African Unity had been held at various times between 21 April 1983 and Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in 2 February 1985, and had charged that, since August 1984, Africa, her Government gave political asylum to refugees ANC had been responsible for 36 acts of violence which fleeing the brutalities of apartheid in South Africa, and it had been planned and executed from Botswana. Further- would continue to do so regardless of the consequences. more, he had referred to an “established” principle of in- She referred to the statement3of 14 June 1985 by the Min- ternational law that a State may not permit on its territory ister for Foreign Affairs of South Africa and said that the activities for the purpose of carrying out acts of violence allegation about “ANC terrorist activities” in Botswana had on the territory of another State, and declared that it was been based on “mere suspicion” or had been fabricated in equally well established that a State had a right to take ap- order to force Botswana to get rid of genuine refugees. It propriate steps to protect its own security and territorial was South Africa, not Botswana, that was responsible for integrity against such acts. the crimes committed in South Africa by the policies of At its 2598th meeting, on 12 June 1985, the Security apartheid. She asked the Security Council to strongly con- Council included in its agenda the item entitled “Letter demn South Africa’s terrorist act against Gaborone and dated 17 June 1985 from the Permanent Representative of against refugees in Botswana. She also appealed to the Botswana to the United Nations addressedto the President Council to demand that South Africa desist from further of the Security Council” and considered the item at the attacks on Botswana and ensure security in the region. Fi- 2598th and 2599th meetings, on 21 June 1985.’ nally, she requested the Council to dispatch a mission to In the course of its deliberations the Council invited, at assessthe damage caused by South Africa’s invasion and their request, the representatives of the Bahamas, Benin, to examine the need for possible assistance.’ the German Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Sey- At the same meeting, the representative of the United chelles and the United Republic of Tanzania to participate, Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland empha- without the right to vote, in the Council’s discussion? The sized that the explanations that had been given by the Gov- ernment of South Africa regarding its attack on Gaborone on 14 June 1985 were entirely unsatisfactory and in no way ‘s/17279. 2S/1 7274. ‘917282. %A729 1, subsequently adopted, as orally revised, as resolution ‘For the adop tion of the agenda, see SPV.2598, p. 2. 568 (1985). jFor details, see chap. III of the present Srcpplemenf. 7SfPV.2598, pp. 4-l 9. justified the violation of sovereignty and the killing or Expressing its shock and indignation at the loss of human life, the wounding of innocent people. While the United Kingdom injuries inflicted, and the extensive damage as a result of that action, was aware of the complexities of the internal situation in Affirming the urgent need to safeguard the territorial integrity of South AfYica, his Government was nevertheless opposed to Botswana and maintain peace and security in southern Africa, violence; South Africa must recognize that a solution to its Reuffirming the obligation of all States to refrain in their interna- internal problems would not be found by attacking neigh- tional relations from the threat or use of force against the sovereignty bouring countries. It was for all the people of South Africa and territorial integrity of any State, to resolve their own future and it was within South Africa, hpressing its profound concern that the racist regime resorted to not outside it, that apartheid must be dismantled to enable the use of military force against the defenceless and peace-loving na- different groups and races to live together in justice and tion of Botswana, equity.8 Gravely concerned that such acts of aggression can only serve to aggravate the already volatile and dangerous situation in southern At the 2599th meeting, on 21 June 1985, the repre- Africa, sentative of South Africa said that the “true state of affairs” Bearing in mind that this latest incident is one in a series of pro- that had led to the events in Gaborone was contained in vocative actions carried out by South Africa against Botswana and the statement of his Foreign Minister3 on 14 June 1985. that the racist regime has declared that it will continue and escalate Subsequently, on 20 June 1985, the Minister for Foreign such attacks, Affairs of South Africa had dispatched a message to the Commending Botswana for its unflagging adherence to the conven- Minister of External Affairs of Botswana informing her tions relating to the status of refugees and of stateless persons and for that, since the Nkomati Accord, ANC had focused on Bo- the sacrifices it has made and continues to make in giving asylum to tswana to establish new bases for its attacks on South Af- victims of apartheid, rica and all ANC members in Botswana had been secretly 1. Strongly condemns South Africa’s recent unprovoked and un- warranted military attack on the capita1 of Botswana as an act of ag- placed on full-scale armed alert. The South African For- gression against that country and a gross violation of its territorial in- eign Minister had further asserted that evidence of the vio- tegrity and national sovereignty; lent intentions of ANC operating from Botswana was pro- 2. Further condemns all acts of aggression, provocation and har- vided by the discovery of a huge arms cache in Gaborone assment, including murder, blackmail, kidnapping and destruction of and that that had been confirmed subsequently by the Gov- property committed by the racist regime of South Africa against ernment of Botswana on 26 April 1985. Finally, the rep- Botswana; resentative of South Africa quoted extensively from an 3.