S/1 1594/Rev.1

S/1 1594/Rev.1 SEVENTH REPORT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED IN PURSUANCE OF RESOLUTION 253 (1968) CONCERNING THE QUESTION OF SOUTHERN RHODESIA SECURITY COUNCIL OFFICIAL RECORDS THIRTIETH YEAR SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT No. 2 Volume II UNITED NATIONS New York, 1975

NOTE Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. Documents of the Security Council (symbol S/...) are normally published in quarterly Supplements of the Official Records of the Security Council. The date of the document indicates the supplement in which it appears or in which information about it is given. The resolutions of the Security Council, numbered in accordance with a system adopted in 1964, are published in yearly volumes of Resolutions and Decisions ofkhe Security Council. The new system, which has been applied retroactively to resolutions adopted before I January 1965, became fully operative on that date. E S/11594/Rev. 1

CONTENTS VOLUME I Chapter INTRODUCTION I. WORK OF THE COMMITTEE A. General information concerning the Committee (a) Terms of reference and membership (b) Working procedures B. Consideration of cases carried over from previous reports and new cases concerning possible violations of sanctions C. Imports of chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia into the United States of America II. ACTION TAKEN BY GOVERNMENTS TO ENSURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SANCTIONS A. Action taken by Governments to prevent sanctions violations B. Action taken by Governments with respect to specific violations of sanctions C. Transactions conducted with the consent of reporting Governments D. Responsibility of Governments regarding sanctions violations by their nationals abroad III. ACTION TAKEN IN CONNEXION WITH SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 333 (1973) A. Action taken by the Committee B. Action taken by the Secretary-General in connexion with the work of the Committee C. Replies received from Governments with respect to paragraph 8 of Security Council resolution 333 (1973) and paragraphs 10, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17 of the second special report of the Committee IV. CONSULAR, SPORTING AND OTHER REPRESENTATION IN SOUTHERN RHODESIA AND REPRESENTATION OF THE ILLEGAL REGIME IN OTHER COUNTRIES A. Consular offices in Southern Rhodesia B. Southern Rhodesian offices abroad and foreign representation in Southern Rhodesia C. Sporting activities and other international competitions -iii-

CONTENTS (continued) Chapter V. AIRLINES OPERATING TO AND FROM SOUTHERN RHODESIA A. Sale of three Boeing aircraft to Air Rhodesia (Case No. 144) B. Flights by private companies: Tango Romeo - Sanctions-breaking activities via Gabon (Case No. 154) C. Air Rhodesia and International Air Transport Association agreements (Case No. INGO-4) VI. IMMIGRATION AND TOURISM A. Immigration B. Tourism C. Cases connected with tourism VII. RELATIONS WITH THE ORGANIZATION OF AFRICAN UNITY VIII. COMMENTS ANNEXES Explanatory note Complete list of cases currently under consideration I. Comments and views of various Committee members on the seventh report and on the work of the Committee in 1974 II. Cases carried over from previous reports and new cases -iv-

CONTENTS (continued) VOLUME II ANNEXES (continued) III. Imports of chrome, nickel and other material:3 from Southern Rhodesia into the United States of America ...... IV. Cases of transactions conducted with the consent of reporting Governments V. Cases opened from information supplied by individuals and non-governmental organizations ...... Appendix. List of individuals and non-governmental organizations from which communications have been received in 1974 VI. Replies received from Governments concerning the implementation of paragraph 21 of the Committee's second special report approved by Security Council resolution 333 (1973) ...... VII. Note and statistical data prepared by the Secretariat on Southern Rhodesian trade for 1973 ...... Appendix I. Imports of all ciommodities from Southern Rhodesia Appendix II. Exports of all commodities to Southern Rhodesia . Appendix III. (a) External trade of South Africa (Customs Union) Tobacco ...... (b) External trade of Mozambique - Tobacco . . . (c) External trade of Angola - Tobacco ...... Appendix IV. External trade of South Africa (Customs Union) Asbestos...... Appendix V. External trade of Mozambique - Asbestos ...... Appendix VI. External trade of South Africa (Customs Union) Chrome ore ...... Appendix VII. External trade of Mozambique - Chrome ore ...... VIII. List of experts ...... Page . . 1 * . 34 35 **91. 92**98 * 128 * 132 * * 135 * 136*.137* 138..14o * 141 * 142 * 143

Annex III IMPORTS OF CHROME, NICKEL AND OTHER MATERIALS FROM SOUTHERN RHODESIA INTO THE UNITED STATES OF AREFICA A. SPECIFIC CASES (32) Case No. 130. Chrome ore - "Agios Giorgios": information submitted by Somalia on 27 March 1972 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A reply dated 8 January 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see annex II, serial No. (62) Case No. 114, paragraph 3. 4. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 13 February 1974 to Greece, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 4, in annex II. 5. A comprehensive note dated 28 May 1974 was sent to Greece, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. l14, paragraph 5, in annex II. 6. In the absence of a reply from Greece, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which was issued as a press release on 29 May 1974. 7. A reply dated 27 August 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 114, paragraph 8, in annex II. 8. A reminder was sent to Greece on 24 October 1974, requesting the results of the judicial investigations, in view of the fact that more than a month had elapsed since receipt of the Government's last reply. 9. A reply dated 30 October 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 114, paragraph 12, in annex II. 10. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. l14, paragraph 13, in annex II. (33) Case No. 135. Chrome ore - "Santos Vega": information submitted by Somalia on 20 March 1972 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the fifth report. -1-

B. QUARTERLY REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE BY THE UNITED STATES OF AIERICA 1. Previous information concerning this matter is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on this matter since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A letter dated 25 January 1974 addressed to the Chairman of the Committee was received from the representative of the United States, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "In conformity with the statement made by the United States representative on 22 March 1972 at the Committee's 68th meeting, I am submitting for the information of the Committee a report on shipments of strategic materials that have been imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 October 1973 to 1 January 197h. Attached please find a list of these imports." a/ 4. Following informal consultations, the Committee decided, in accordance with past procedure, to publish the letter from the representative of the United States and its attachment as a press release and to send to the Governmentsof the States of registry of the vessels concerned, except the United States /see S/11178/Rev.1, annex II, sect. B, paras. 9 and 10/, the standard note of inquiry, as indicated in the text of the press release below. 5. The text of the press release was adopted by the Committee at the 184th meeting on 6 February and the press release itself was issued on 7 February 1974. The text of the press release reads as follows: "By a report dated 25 January 197h the Permanent Mission of the United States to the United Nations submitted to the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia a list of shipments of chrome ore, nickel and other materials that were imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 October 1973 to 31 December 1973. "After examining that report, the Security Council Committee, at its 184th meeting, expressed its concern about this continued violation of sanctions. It also decided to ask the Secretary-General to request the Governments of the countries of registration of the ships concerned to investigate the circumstances in which cargoes of Southern Rhodesian origin, the carriage of which is also prohibited by Security Council resolution 253 (1968), were carried on their vessels. "The text of the United States report, which includes the quantities involved, is reproduced below: a/ The lists referred to in this and subsequent communications from the United States are contained in the pages following para. 11 of this section.

/See para. 3, above, for the text of the letter from the representative of the United States .7" 6. A letter dated 9 May 1974 addressed to the Chairman of the Committee was received from the representative of the United States, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "In conformity with the statement made by the United States representative on 22 March 1972 at the Committee's 68th meeting, I am submitting for the information of the Committee a report on shipments of strategic materials that have been imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. Attached please find a list of these imports." 7. Following informal consultations, the Committee decided, in accordance with past procedure, to publish the letter from the representative of the United States and its attachment as a press release, the text of which is reproduced below, and to send to the States of registry of the vessels concerned the standard note of inquiry, as indicated in paragraph 4 above. Text of the press release issued on 24 May 1974 "By a report dated 9 May 1974 the Permanent Mission of the United States to the United Nations submitted to the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia a list of shipments of chrome ore, nickel and other materials that were imported in violation of the Security Council resolution 253 (1968) into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. "After examining that report, the Committee expressed once again its deep concern at this continued violation by the United States Government of the sanctions provisions, especially paragraph 3 (a), of Security Council resolution 253 (1968) by its continuous importation of chrome ore, nickel and other materials from the illegal regime in Southern Rhodesia; and it appealed to the United States Government to take the appropriate and necessary measures and actions to terminate this flagrant violation. "The Committee also decided to ask the Secretary-General to request the Governyents of the countries of registration of the shins concerned to investigate the circumstances in which cargoes of Southern Rhodesian origin, the carriage of which is also prohibited by paragraph 3 (c) of Security Council resolution 253 (1968), were carried on their vessels. "Furthermore, recalling that paragraph 18 of the first special report of the Committee /S1106327, which was approved by Security Council resolution 318 (1972), stated, inter alia, that as part of the need to keep the international community regularly informed the Committee should consider the issuance of press releases covering its work and matters of topical interest, the Committee decided to make the matter public. "Accordingly, the text of the United States report which includes, inter alia, the quantities involved is reproduced below: /See para. 6, above, for the text of the letter from the representative of the United States./" r) A letter dated 6 September 1974 addressed to the Chairman of the Committee was subsequently received from the representative of the United States, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "In conformity with the statement made by the United States representative on 22 March 1972 at the Committee's 68th meeting, I am submitting for the information of the Committee a report on shipments of strategic materials that have been imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 April to 21 June 1974. Attached please find a list of these imports." 9. Following informal consultations, the Committee decided, in accordance with past procedure, to publish the letter from the representative of the United States and its attachment as a press release, the text of which is similar to that reproduced in paragraph 7, above, and to send to the States of registry of the vessels concerned the standard note of inquiry, as indicated in paragraph 4 above. The press release was issued on 27 September 1974. 10. A letter dated 14 November 1974, addressed to the Chairman of the Committee, was received from the representative of the United States, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "In conformity with the statement made by the United States representative on 22 March 1972 at the Committee's 68th meeting, I am submitting for the information of the Committee a report on shipments of strategic materials that have been imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia in the period 1 July to 30 September 1974. Attached please find a list of these imports." 11. Following informal consultations, the Committee decided, in accordance with past procedure, to publish the letter from the representative of the United States and its attachment as a press release, the text of which was similar to that reproduced in paragraph 7 above, and to send to the States of registry of the vessels concerned the standard note of inquiry, as indicated in paragraph 4 above. The press release was issued on 2 December 1974. -4-

Ø0 020 c20 c22 00 c $ 000 0 0 0 0 0 4>+ 4.>0J410 401 4J .3*4.1 > \.0 ON .5. ci 4>0>0>a>>44>4 4> 4.)403 0 0.C 4>o 44 0 .02.0.0< I.020 .0 02-,0 e 0. ej4. $_ 0 4 184 JIJ 0 02 tU £! 0200 >4 Q) P4 0 000 0 0ø 0gil+ 44 * 00 $414 940 v 1 4>4 0YC 0ý0 o ø 0 . *4> 4>4.C.434J0 421 04>~~~4 ø. .-I 41- * .~ V2.CýU~2 m8 Oý 14 4, 140 11 14*». 4" 143 + -P014 +>1440øio>c i-

O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .' J4J 4> 42> 4J 4- 42 4J 4.> 4> 4> * ý30 0\ 0\ L^ cmC 7N 4 m <'t- CO t 74 4 ~ ø4 a oWo. 0000000 0r ø0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 450 00 0 0 0 0 0 4a4ll 4 1 4 4 1 1 4 1 114 01 0 0. 0. ø 00 .0 4 04 t- e d)-r0OCr4 1,1,1- oý 0v 0 i i m t-0 0 4 0 .714) 451 :2 0 0 0 0 0 0- to a P-10 0 0 to 0 CO~14)0 0m4c1ø 0) 44>t»

*0\* C- v\ 9~-4 8- 0 0 43 43 ej 0\ -w k 000 0 6 0 .00 19 t~ .4 14 ma 00 qs4 A .2 4; 00 2,4 ,2 -4 0 0 0 0 ~6 ~; i 0 0 cp cp o 00 0 4.> 43 0 0 0 -4 43 ~I .. 0 ~ Ii ii 1~ 8. 8. 0 0 0 0 cp cp * * 0 0 4>* 0 I~s ,~ -40~ Is Is. Is 0 -- c, 0 *, * ..~ T - *. -0 -4 '4. 01 01 ~ >i> 44 43 Iii -0 0> * 14 oä 8I -- co I ~~ m~. ~4 4 43 A1 > 43 4 0 ej UN% Är 0 00I 40 04>N1 60W 0 '4 -7-

.333 3 33* 44 .! -~ oj ~i .I~ ~ -~ - '4'454 ~ g '~ ~3 * * 0 3 *3 .3 4~ .I~ .~ .e4 -~ *~ '4 L>see c~ 5 fl se 1-4 ~~*4 '4 '4 0 0 0 88 ii *fl 'fl fl fl .4 el cot ki kl 0 4>\0 l 0 .0 * .* -* ~z ~z 00 - .* V't u~ Ui UN Ui U% ~O it % k k N0uI (~ Al " m * -4c i~I.i.i i0 %10 klo 0 tu 0 <~t 00 2: 00 *u 4.0~ 0 U 4 mdi0<4000 002k i 09, lo i la4 ~ 4 4 2ý R M8 N

* u - - *~ ~ ~ .~ .~ 0~ ~ ~ .~ .~ .~ ~ u $1 S i i ~ J u ~ g 4 *< 4 >4 k* k4 I- ~ - co * , * 6> ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ g i i >4 >4>4 >4>4 4 I.> I-; k k k 4ý 44ý 4-4t~z:~ co C D c aj .- - t> ~1 fl g~ *1 i ~ 4, m~ ~ ,~ '~ ~fII-il U U * u m * ~ i ~' jul iu3 ~ MI' h u 111111 ~ I.i00 && i I~ Q. ci. ~ fl - fl fl0' 4 -4 ti .~ * 4 3 g '-I g $4 ~ -4 *4d ø 4.4U ~$4 ~i ~mo 0 4>U g ~,' 0 0 ~ -~ - 0~ ~ U$40.~.II'$4ii~ g * :~ iLq~ ~4 LI ~ 4, ~ ~ *%S 0 0 * 44 I.- I,-~ ss.ON ON 5.- 5ON ON 43

C. CASES OPENED FROM INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE UNITED STATES IN ITS QUARTERLY REPORTS TO THE COMMITTEE Case No. USI-1. Ferrochrone silicon - "La Chacra": United States quarterly report dated 11 October 1972 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 3 April 197h to Canada, stating that the Committee had noted from the Government's reply of 12 September 1973 that investigations by the Canadian authorities had yielded no evidence that the shipment in question was of Southern Rhodesian origin. The Committee drew the Government's attention to the fact that the importing country (the United States) had reported to the Committee that the shipment was from Southern Rhodesia; consequently, the Committee requested the Government to pursue the matter and to forward to it copies of the documentation examined by the investigating authorities. 4. A reply dated 3 June 1974, also covering Case No. USI-3, was received from Canada, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations has the honour to refer to /the Secretary-General's/ note of 3 April 1974, requesting further information on the investigations conducted by the Canadian Government on the La Chacra and Bris cases. "As requested, the Permanent Representative of Canada is pleased to forward herewith copies of the documentation related to these investigations. The Canadian authorities have concluded that, on the basis of the evidence available in these two cases, it was not considered that a successful prosecution could be carried out against the companies involved. This position is not altered by the US confirmation that the shipments in question were, in fact, of Rhodesian origin. "The Permanent Representative of Canada however, wishes to advise the Committee that the appropriate Canadian authorities will be advising the companies of the origin of the shipments and that steps will continue to be taken with a view to ensuring that witting or unwitting violations of the sanctions will not occur in the future." 5. The following documents relating to the La Chacra were attached to the Canadian reply: (a) Charter party agreement between Burier Marker, Ltd., London, the owners of the La Chacra, and Dundas Shipping and Trading Co., Ltd., Montreal, the agents; -10-

(b) Certificate of origin issued by the Chamber of Commerce of Lourenqo Marques, specifying that the goods, said to weigh 500 tons, were of South African origin and that they arrived at the port of loading by train; (c) United States Custom inwards foreign manifest, specifying that the goods weighed 500 tons. Case No. USI-2. Ferrosili.on chrc: - ,Trautf United States quarterly eport dated 9 January 1973 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the sixth report. Case No. USI-3. High-carbon ferrochromium - "Bris": United States report dated 10 July 1972 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 187th meeting on 6 March, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 29 March 197h to Canada, referring to the Government's reply of 12 November 1974, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. USI-1, paragraph 3, above. 4. A reply dated 3 June 1974 was received from Canada, for the substantive part of which see Case No. USI-1, paragraph 4, above. 5. The following documents relating to the Bris were forwarded by the Government of Canada: (a) Notice of readiness dated 22 March 1972 and addressed to Freight Services Ships Agency Co., agents for charterers, by Rennies' Consolidated (LM), Lda., agents for owners of the ship; (b) Three bills of lading dated 23 March 1972 in respect of cargoes of high-carbon ferrochrome (total weight: 497.312 metric tons) shipped by Palmiet Chrome Corp. (Pty), Ltd., and destined for Oakland, California (USA); (c) Captain's manifest dated 16 April 1972; (d) Cargo manifest dated 25 March 1972; (e) United States Customs inwards foreign manifest, which specified that the goods weighed 1,997.312 metric tons; (f) Charter party agreement between North Pacific Shipping Co., Vancouver, time-charter owners of the ve - c-QnapA 6 hi I Lt* -. T.nranw charterers. _11- Case No. USI-4. Nickel cathodes, asbestos fibre, ferrosilicon chromium and high-carbon ferrochronme - "African Sun; "Moormacove", "Moormacargo", African Moon", "African Lightning', Moormacbay , "African Mercury', "African Dawn" and 'Moormactrade": United States quarterly reports dated 10 July and 11 October 1972 and 9 January 1973 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the sixth report. Case No. USI-5. Nickel cathodes and ferrochrome - "Hellenic Leader", "North Highness" "Venthisikimi" and "Ocean Pegasus": United States quarterly reports dated 10 July and 11 October 1972 and 9 January 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A comprehensive note dated 28 May 1974 was sent to Greece, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 5, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 4. A reply dated 11 June 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part, of which see Case No. 138, paragraph 8, in annex II (serial No. (64)). 5. Further replies dated 27 August and 30 October 1974 were received from Greece, for the substantive parts of which see Case No. 114, paragraphs 8 and 12, respectively, in annex II. 6. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II. Case No. USI-6. High-carbon ferrochrome - "S.A. Huguenot" and "ederburg": United States quarterly reports dated 11 October 1972 and 9 January 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. In the absence of a reply from South Africa, the Committee decided to include that Government again in the quarterly lists of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which were issued as press releases on 28 February, 29 May and 17 September 1974. -12-

Case No. USI-7. High-carbon ferrochrom - "An elo Scinicariel!o" and "Alfredo Primo": United States quarterly re ortS dated 11 October 1972 and 9 January 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 4 February 1974 to Italy, asking if the investigations undertaken by the authorities were completed and the results could be communicated to the Committee. 4. A note dated 4 April was sent to Italy, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. 5. A reply dated 29 April 1974 was received from Italy, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of Italy to the United Nations ... referring to /the Secretary-Generalts/ note of 4 April 1974, has the honour to inform him that the competent Italian authorities have ascertained, on the basis of their inquiry, that: "(I) The SS. Alfredo Primo loaded about 7,713 tons of various minerals in Durban on 25 November 1972 for transport to Houston, USA; "(2) The SS. Alfredo Primo loaded the above minerals, inasmuch as the documents issued in Durban showed that they were not of Rhodesian origin." 6. Following informal consultations, the Committee decided that the same procedure as that adopted at the 188th meeting on 13 March 1974 should be followed in this case, namely, that in view of the apparent discrepancies between the information supplied by the Government concerned and the original report submitted by the United States, representatives of the two Governments should be requested to hold consultations, together with the Committee's economic expert, in an attempt to resolve the discrepancies. Furthermore, the representative of the replying Government should be requested to submit copies of any supporting documentary evidence. 7. A further reply dated 10 May 1974 was received from Italy, the substantive Part of which reads as follows: "The Chargg d'affaires, a.i., of Italy to the United Nations ... following the note of 29 April 1974, has the honour to transmit to -13-

Lthe Secretary-General! the following documentation concerning the case of the SS. Alfredo Primo (Case No. USI-7): 1. A statement by the captain of the ship; 2. A statement of the Freight Services Ship Agency of Lourengo Marques of 24 November 1972, guaranteeing that the minerals loaded by the ship and destined to the United States were not of Rhodesian origin; 3. A copy of the cargo manifest; 4. A copy of the pages of the journal of the ship relating to the cargo; 5. A copy of the page of a book of the ship relating to the cargo. "The port where the minerals in question were loaded was erroneously indicated as Durban in the above-mentioned note of 29 Arril 1974. The cargo was actually loaded in Lourengo Marques on 18-25 November 1972. The ship arrived in that port from Durban." 8. For further information concerning the action taken on this case with regard to Liberia, see paragraphs 4 and 6 of Case No. 6 in annex II (serial No. (4)). 9. At the 207th meeting on 12 September 1974, the representative of the United States made the following statement concerning the case: "Counsellor Ruggiero of the Italian Mission, Mr. Katzen of the United States Mission and the Committee's economic expert met at the United States Mission on 11 July 1974 to discuss Case No. USI-7, relating to the Alfredo Primo. "The documentation discussed brought out the point that the Italian captain of the vessel involved had accepted the cargo in question after requiring appropriate documentation that attested to the fact that the cargo was not Southern Rhodesian in origin. The Italian Consulate-General in Lourengo Marques gave approval for the transportation, in accordance with appropriate United Nations resolutions, after checking on the basis of the available documentation. "The United States representative agreed, after studying the attestation made by the captain of the vessel to the Italian Consul-General in Lourengo Marques, that the captain was acting in good faith. Further, the United States representative believed that the captain and the Consulate-General had no reason to doubt the authenticity of the documents presented them. -14-

"The United States Government continues to believe that the cargo was Southern Rhodesian in origin. "Mr. Katzen could not understand why a United States company importing minerals from South Africa would testify to the United States Government and to the United Nations Sanctions Committee that the cargo, in fact, was from Southern Rhodesia. "The United States representative suggested that the Committee study means whereby information might be made available to shipping companies engaged in trade in southern Africa regarding the advice of the SecretaryGeneral concerning the suspect nature of Mozambican documents. The United States representative expressed the belief that another means whereby such determination of origin might be improved would be through chemical analysis. The United States representative expressed the hope that the Committee would move forward in its study of a manual which would institutionalize such laboratory work." Case No. USI-8. Nickel cathodes - "Marne Lloyd", "Musi Lloyd" and "Merwe Lloyd" United States quarterly reports dated 10 July and 11 October 1972 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 189th meeting on 3 April, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 4 April 1974 to the Netherlands, requesting copies of the documents referred to in the Government's reply of 5 July 1973. 4. A reply dated 27 June 1974 was received from the Netherlands, the substantive part of which, as subsequently amended by a note dated 22 July 1974, reads as follows: "The Acting Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's! note of 11 April 1974, concerning consignments of-nickel cathodes reported to be of Southern Rhodesian origin aboard the vessels Marne Lloyd, Musi Lloyd and Merwe Lloyd, has the honour to inform him of the following. "The Netherlands Government, having considered the request of the Security Council Committee ... to receive copies of the relevant documentation covering the consignments, regrets that it is unable to comply with that request. "In this connexion, it should be borne in mind that the documents requested by the Committee are company data belonging to the Netherlands shipping company Royal NedLloyd N.V. -15-

"Under the law of the Netherlands, private enterprises cannot be compelled to make public such data. "The Acting Permanent Representative wishes to point out that the Netherlands authorities have made the most careful inquiry into the documents covering the shipments. "On the basis of this inquiry, the Netherlands Government wishes to reassure the Security Council Committee that the documents in question reveal that the shipping agents of the NedLloyd Company had no reason whatsoever to assume that the consignments in question originated in Southern Rhodesia. "In the light of this explicit statement, the Netherlands Government is confident that the Committee will not consider it necessary to make inquiries into the documents concerned and that, as the Netherlands Government has done, it will consider the matter closed." Case No. USI-9. Low-carbon ferrochrome, ferrochrome silicon - "Aktion", "Pholegandros", "Mexican Gulf" and "Trade Carrier": United States quarterly reports dated 11 October 1972 and 9 January 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A note dated 26 March 1974 was sent to Liberia, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. 6, paragraph 3, in annex II (serial No. (4)). 4. For further information concerning this case with regard to Liberia see paragraphs 4 and 6 of Case No. 6 in annex II. 5. In the absence of a reply from Liberia, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which were issued as press releases on 29 May and 17 September 1974. Case No. USI-IO. Ferrochrome - "Trade Carrier": United States quarterly report dated 9 April 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A note dated 26 March 1974 was sent to Liberia, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. 6, paragraph 3, in annex II.

4. For further information concerning this case with regard to Liberia, see paragraphs 4 and 6 of Case No. 6 in annex II. 5. In the absence of a reply from Liberia, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which were issued as press releases on 29 May and 17 September 1974. Case No. USI-II. Nickel cathodes - "Hellenic Destiny": United States quarterly report dated 9 April 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A note dated 1 March 1974 was received from the United States, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The United States Mission to the United Nations ... has the honour to inform the Committee of certain new information concerning the shipment of cargo aboard the SS Hellenic Destiny (Case No. USI-II). The United States Department of the Treasury has verified that the cargo originated in Durban, rather than Lourengo Marques, and that its weight was 37,490 pounds." 4. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 189th meeting on 3 April, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 12 April 1974 to Greece, transmitting to the Government the new information supplied by the United States. 5. A reply dated 11 June 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 138, paragraph 8, in annex II (serial No. (64)). 6. A further reply dated 30 October 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 114, paragraph 12, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 7. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II. Case No. USI-12. High-carbon ferrochrome - "Costas Franos": United States quarterly report dated 9 April 1973 I. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the 188th meeting on 13 March 1974, the Committee, during its consideration of this case, took a decision similar to that indicated in Case No. USI-7, -17- paragraph 6, above, in respect of a reply from a Government that appeared to be at variance with the original information submitted by the United States in its quarterly reports, namely, that there should be consultations between the Greek and United States authorities with a view to explaining the discrepancies in the figures reported by their respective Governments. 4. A reply dated 11 June 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 138, paragraph 8, in annex II (serial No. (64)). 5. At the 207th meeting on 12 September 1974, the representative of the United States made the following statement concerning the case: "The United States Department of State has agreed with the Embassy of Greece in Washington to consult on a continuing basis, concerning any involvement of Greek vessels in transporting 'strategic materials' imported into the United States from Southern Rhodesia' 6. A further reply dated 30 October 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 114, paragraph 12, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 7. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II. Case No. USI-13. High-carbon ferrochrome, chrome ore and ferrosilicon chrome "Adelfoi"': United States quarterly report dated 9 April 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A note dated 26 March 1974 was sent to Liberia, the substance of which is indicated in Case No. 6, paragraph 3, in annex II (serial No. (4)). 4. For further information concerning this case with regard to Liberia, see paragraphs 4 and 6 of Case No. 6 in annex II. 5. In the absence of a reply from Liberia, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which were issued as press releases on 29 May and 17 September 1974. Case No. USI-l4. Low-carbon ferrochrome and high-carbon ferrochrome - "Costas Frangos" and "Nortrans Unity", respectively: United States quarterly report dated 2 July 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. -18- 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 28 January 1974 to Norway, drawing the attention of the Government to, and requesting it to comment upon, the information supplied by Greece in its reply of 8 November 1973 that the vessel Nortrans Unity was, at the time of the transportation of the Southern Rhodesian chrome in question, under time charter to a Norwegian company, Skjelbreds Rederi, AS. 4. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 183rd meeting on 30 January and following informal consultations, the Secretary-General sent notes dated 12 February 1974 to Canada and Greece. With regard to Canada, the note drew the attention of the Government, and requested it to investigate the circumstances relating, to the information supplied by Greece in its note of 8 November 1973 that the vessel Nortrans Unity, since 1969 under time charter by the Norwegian company, Skjelbreds Rederi, AS, Kristiansand, was subsequently chartered on 23 January 1973 for one trip to the Dundas Shipping and Trading Company, Ltd., Montreal, Canada. With regard to Greece, the note reminded the Government that bills of lading and Chamber of Commerce certificates issued in Portuguese Territories and in South Africa should not be regarded as sufficient proof of origin, a matter that was particularly relevant in view of the fact that the importing country (the United States) had reported the shipment to be of Southern Rhodesian origin; the note requested the Government to pursue the matter and to report to it any additional, relevant information. 5. An acknowledgement dated 19 February 1974 was received from Canada. 6. A note dated 28 May 1974 was sent to Canada, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Goverrents that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. A comprehensive note of the same date was sent to Greece, the substance of which is indicated in Case Io. 114, paragraph 5, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 7. A reply dated 11 June 1974 was received from Greece for the substantive part of which see Case No. 138, paragraph 8, in annex II (serial No. (64)). 8. A reminder dated 21 August 1974 similar to that indicated in paragraph 6, above, was sent to Norway. 9. Replies were received from Canada, Greece and Norway. For the substance of the Greek reply, see Case No. 114, parar-raph 8, in annex II. The substantive parts of the Canadian and Norwegian replies read as follows: (i) Note dated 14 August 1974 from Canada "The Acting Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations -19- has the honour to refer to the following notes of the Secretary-General involving alleged violations of the sanctions against Southern Rhodesia with regard to the shipment of cargoes of high-carbon ferro-chrome in vessels chartered by the shipping company, Dundas Shipping and Trading Co., Ltd., Montreal: (a) PO 230 SORH (1-2-1) (Case No. USI-22) of 8 August 1974; (b) PO 230 SORH (1-2-1) (Case No. USI-24) of 24 July 1974; (c) PO 230 SORH (1-2-1) (Case No. USI-16) of 1 July 1974; (d) PO 230 SORH (1-2-1) (Case No. USI-22) of 6 June 1974; (e) PO 230 SORH (1-2-1) (Case No. USI-14) of 12 February 1974. @IThe Acting Permanent Representative wishes to inform the SecretaryGeneral that the various cases brought to the attention of the Canadian Government regarding possible violations of the Rhodesia sanctions by Dundas Shipping are now being actively investigated by the appropriate Canadian authorities. The purpose of this investigation is to ascertain the extent and scope of Dundas operation, both within and outside Canada, as well as to decide whether there is a basis for a prosecution under the Canada United Nations Rhodesia regulations (P.C. 2339-1968). The complexity of these alleged violations has made an early substantive answer impossible. The Canadian Government, however, is very concerned and is proceeding as expeditiously as possible in the circumstances. The Secretary-General will be informed of the results of the investigation as soon as a report has been compiled." (ii) Note dated 3 September 1974 from Norway "The Permanent Representative ofNorway to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ notes of 28 January 1974 and 21 August 1974 has the honour to submit the following information: "(a) The alleged violation of the sanctions on Southern Rhodesia by the vessel Nortrans Unity, a vessel under the registry of Greece, occurred in connexion with a voyage from Louren~o Marques in Mozambique to Burnside (La.) in the United States. During this period, the vessel was sailing under a five- year time charter concluded on 17 November 1969 between the owners of the ship and the Norwegian company Skjelbred Rederi, AS, Kristiansand S. "(b) On the voyage from Lourengo Marques to Burnside the vessel Nortrans Unity was operating under a voyage charter party concluded on 24 January 1973 between the above-mentioned Norwegian company Skjelbred Rederi AS as time charter owners, and Dundas Shipping and Trading Co., Ltd., Montreal, as agents. A copy of this charter is enclosed. -20-

,'(c) During the negotiations preceding the conclusion of the abovementioned voyage charter party, the Norwegian company Skjelbred Rederi AS stipulated that the cargo should not be of Rhodesian origin. This will be seen from the telegraphic communications between Skjelbred Rederi AS and its brokers Joachim Grieg and Co., and Peraco, New York, which acted as brokers for Dundas Shipping Trading Co., Ltd. Copies of these communications are enclosed. "(d) According to a telegram dated 18 January 1973, the text of which is enclosed, Peraco informed the Norwegian brokers, Joachim Grieg and Co., that the requested guarantee with regard to the non-Rhodesian origin of the cargo would be covered by a side letter, in which the charterers state that no cargoes shipped under the charter party are of Rhodesian origin. This was furthermore repeated in a telegram dated 25 January 1974 containing a so-called fixture memorandum for the journey. The text of this memorandum is enclosed. Skjelbred Rederi AS, however, did not receive the above-mentioned side letter. " (e) In view of the information set forth above, the Norwegian authorities are confident that Skjelbred Rederi AS acted in good faith with regard to the above-mentioned voyage charter party as far as the Security Council sanctions on Southern Rhodesia are concerned." 10. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the Secretary- General sent a note dated 1 October 1974 to Canada, transmitting a copy of the note from Norway, the information in which might be of help to the Canadian investigating authorities, and requesting the Government's comments on the case as soon as possible. 11. An acknowledgement dated 9 October 1974 was received from Canada. 12. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 24 October 1974 to Greece, requesting the results of the judicial investigations, in view of the fact that more than a month had elapsed since receipt of the Government's last reply. 13. A reply dated 30 October 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 114, paragraph 12, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 14. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974 the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II. 15. A reminder was sent to Canada on 11 December 1974. Case No. USI-15. High-carbon ferrochrome - "Weltevreden": United States quarterly report dated 2 July 1913 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. -21-

2. Additional information regardLng the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. In the absence of a reply from South Africa, the Committee decided to include that Government again in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which was issued as a press release on 28 February 1974. 4. A second reminder was sent to South Africa on 28 May 1974. 5. Further to paragraph 3 above, the Committee again included South Africa in the quarterly lists issued as press releases on 29 May and 17 September 197h. Case No. USI-16. Ferrochrome- "Steinfels": United States Quarterl report dated 9 October 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A reply dated 18 January 1974 was received from the Federal Republic of Germany, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ note of 5 December 1973 (Case No. USI-16), has the honour to communicate the following: "Although the contents of the above-mentioned note had been transmitted to the competent German authorities immediately after receipt the necessary investigations have been initiated only recently due to the Christmas holidays. Information concerning the results of these investigations will not be available therefore until the end of February 1974." 4. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 29 March 1974 to the Federal Republic of Germany, inquiring whether the investigations were now completed and the results could be transmitted to the Committee. 5. A reply dated 24 February 1974 but received by the Committee secretariat after the dispatch of the Secretary-General's note was received from the Federal Republic of Germany, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations ... with reference to Lthe Secretary-General's/ note of 5 December 1973, has the honour to communicate the following: -22-

"As has been ascertained by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, the ferrochromium cargo of SS Steinfels of the shipping company Deutsche DampfschiffahrtgeselIschaft Hanse constitutes part of a total consignment of 13,000 tons, to be shipped under a charter party. The shipping company had requested and received from the charterer, Dundas Shipping and Trading Co., Ltd., Montreal, a written guarantee to the effect that no goods originating from Southern Rhodesia would be loaded under the charter party. During the loading process, the responsible agents of the shipping company were unable to ascertain the alleged Southern Rhodesian origin of the cargo." 6. A further reply dated 19 June was received from the Federal Republic of Germany, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Acting Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ notes of 8 and 29 March 1974 - Case Nos. USI-24 and USI-16, respectively - and his own notes of 24 January b/ and 15 March 1974, c/ has the honour to communicate the following: "The cargoes of high-carbon ferrochrome discharged in the port of Burnside, La. (USA), on 2 October and 13 December 1973 by the vessels Wildenfels and Steinfels, respectively, and suspected to be of Southern Rhodesian origin constitute part of the same consignment of 13,000 tons to be shipped under charter to the Dundas Shipping and Trading Co., Ltd., Montreal. So far the information supplied in the Permanent Representative's note of 24 February 1974 continues to apply. "The relevant documentation is now available for perusal at the Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations." 7. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 1 July 1974 to Canada, drawing the attention of the Government to the information supplied by the Federal Republic of Germany and requesting the Government to investigate the circumstances in which a Canadian company might have permitted vessels under the company's charter to engage in the transportation of a cargo, the carriage of which is prohibited by paragraph 3 (c) of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). 8. A reply dated 14 August 1974 was received from Canada, for the substantive Part of which see Case No. USI-14, paragraph 9 (i), above. 9. A reminder was sent to Canada on 11 December 1974. Case No. USI-17. Nickel cathodes - "Nedlloyd Kingston": United States quarterly report dated 9 October 1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. bJ Probably a reference to the reply dated 24 February 197h see para. 5, above. cJ See Case No. USI-24, para. 3, below. -23-

2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A reply dated 20 February 1974 was received from the Netherlands, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The investigation by the Netherlands authorities has disclosed that lie vessel Nedlloyd Kingston discharged a cargo of 10 pallets nickel cathodes (42347 LBS/19 long ton) on 23 July 1973 in the port of Seattle. "The above-mentioned shipment was presented for transport to the Royal Nedlloyd Company at the port of Durban. Judging from the documents covering the consignment, the company agents had no reason to assume that this shipment originated from Southern Rhodesia. "To ensure the correct implementation of Security Council resolution 253 (1968), the Netherlands Government pays close attention to the strict compliance with the sanctions." 4. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 3 April 1974 to the Netherlands, pointing out that the importing country (the United States) had actually reported the shipment to be of Southern Rhodesian origin. The Committee therefore requested the Government to pursue the matter and submit to it any further, relevant information, together with copies of the documents examined by the investigating authorities. 5. A reply dated 22 July 1974 was received from the Netherlands, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Netherlands Government, having considered the request of the Security Council Committee ... to transmit to it copies of the documentation pertaining to the transport of nickel cathodes aboard the MV Nedlloyd Kingston, regrets that it is not in a position to comply with that request. "In this connexion, the Netherlands Government wishes to draw the attention of the Secretary-General to the fact that the relevant documents are company data, belonging to the Netherlands shipping company 'Royal Nedlloyd N.V.'. "Under the law of the Netherlands, private Netherlands companies cannot be compelled to make public such data. "Finally, the Acting Permanent Representative wishes to inform the Secretary-General that the Netherlands Government is currently considering the possibility of adapting existing legislative measures in order to insure a more rigorous implementation of Rhodesia sanctions." -24-

Case No. USI-18. Low-carbon ferrochrome - "Sun Ri It report dated 9 October v1973 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. For additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report, see Case No. USI-22, below. d/ Case No. USI-19. Nickel cathodes - "Nedlloyd Kembla": United States Cuarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Netherlands registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 2. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 184th meeting, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to the Netherlands, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. A reply dated 23 May 1974 was received from the Netherlands, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations ... with reference to the /Secretary-Generals7/ note dated 8 March 1974, (Case No. USI-19) concerning the alleged discharge by the vessel Nedlloyd Kembla of 20 tons of nickel cathodes on 18 December 1973 in the port of Seattle/Tacoma (USA) wishes to state the following. "The Netherlands authorities have carried out an investigation of this matter. It has been determined that the said vessel of Netherlands registration on the given date was in Singapore and that consequently the alleged discharge cannot be attributed to it." 4. In view of the reply from the Netherlands, the Committee, following informal consultations, decided to request the representative of the United States to check the original information contained in the United States quarterly report of 25 January 1974 and submit to the Committee, if possible, documentary evidence relating to the shipment by the vessel in question. d/ Case Nos. USI-18 and USI-22 concerned three cargoes imported in the same shipment aboard the same ship but unloaded at two different ports. Because the Unloadings were reported by the United States at different times, each was assigned a separate case number. To correct the matter the two cases have been consolidated under Case No. USI-22. -25-

5. At the 207th meeting on 12 September 1974, the representative of the United States made the following statement to the Committee concerning the case: "The Sanctions Committee has received information to the effect that the SS Nedlloyd Kembla was in Singapore, rather than in Seattle, at the time of an arrival of Rhodesian-origin nickel on 18 December 1973. As the Committee will recall, this shipment was reported to the Committee by my Government. "Our check of thia discrepancy has disclosed that the Nediloyd Kembla did not arrive in Seattle on 18 December 1973, as the importer had reported to us and as he had expected to be the case, but was delayed until 1 February 1974. United States Customs records confirm that this vessel did, in fact, enter Seattle on that date, carrying 41,992 pounds of Rhodesian-origin electrolytic nickel. Other particulars of this shipment correspond to the information contained in the importer's report to the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the United States Department of the Treasury." 6. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 1 October 1974 to the Netherlands, transmitting the new information supplied by the United States and requesting the Government to reopen its investigation of the case. 7. A note dated 4 November 1974 was sent to the Netherlands, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. Case No. USI-20. Nickel cathodes - "Morganstar": United States quarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of South African registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 2. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 184th meeting, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to South Africa, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. A note dated 19 June 1974 was sent to South Africa, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. -26-

4. A second reminder was sent to South Africa on 8 August 197h. 5. In the absence of a reply from South Africa, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list issued as a press release on 17 September 1974. Case No. USI-21. Asbestos fibre, chrystoline asbestos fibre and ferrochrcre "Hellenic Destiny", "Ocean Pegasus", "Venthisikimi", "Costas Frangos" and "Nortrans Unity": United States quarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 197h, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessels, given as being of Greek registration, were some of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 2. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 184th meeting, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to Greece, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. A reply dated 11 June 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 138, paragraph 8, in annex II (serial No. (64)). 4. At the 214th meeting on 13 November, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II (serial No. (62)). Case No. USI-22. Silicon, low- and high-carbon ferrochrome - "Sun River": United States quarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. Previous information relevant to this case is contained in the sixth report under Case No. USI-18 (see also Case No. USI-18, above). 2. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Norwegian registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 3. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to Norway, requesting that the matter be investigated. 4. A reply dated 13 May 1974 was received from Norway, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of Norway to the United Nations ... -27- with reference to the /Tecretary-General's/notes of 5 December 1973 and 8 March 1974, has t-he honour to submit the following information: "1. The alleged violation of the sanctions on Southern Rhodesia by the vessel Sun River occurred in connexion with a voyage from Lourengo Marques in Mozambique to Burnside in the United States in the period from 17 August to 16 September 1973. During this period, the vessel was sailing under a time charter concluded on 28 October 1972 between the owners of the ship and the Danish shipping company A. H. Basse A/S, 3 Sundkrogsgade, 21800 Copenhagen, Denmark. A copy of this time charter is enclosed. "2. On the voyage from Lourenqo Marques to Burnside, the vessel Sun River was operating under a voyage charter party concluded on 24 July 1973 between the above-mentioned Danish company A. H. Basse A/S, as disponent owners, and Dundas Shipping and Trading Company, Ltd., Montreal, as agents. A copy of this charter is likewise enclosed. "3. According to the above-mentioned time charter concluded on 28 October 1972, the vessel was placed at the disposal of the charterers, who were also to have liberty to sublet the vessel for all or any part of the time covered by the charter. Furthermore, as stipulated in the charter (para. 36, No. 8) the captain was under the orders and directions of the charterers. "4. In view of the fact that the charterer, in accordance with the terms of the charter party, is granted the right to issue the necessary orders and directions with regard to the use of the vessel for normal commercial purposes, it is the opinion of the Norwegian Government that the charterer is the person responsible for the operations of the vessel during the time covered by the charter. Reference is made in this connexion to paragraph 3 (c) in Security Council resolution 253 (1968), where the formulation 'or under charter to their nationals' is directly applicable to this case. Based on these considerations, it is the charterer - in casu the Danish shipping company A. H. Basse A/S - which is responsible for the direction and use of the vessel during the period in question. "5. Against the baukground of the alleged violations of the sanctions by the vessel Sun River, the Norwegian Government has again impressed on the Norwegian shipowners - represented by the Norwegian Shipowners Association the seriousness with which the Norwegian authorities would view any possible violations of the sanctions on Southern Rhodesia and has again stressed the imperative need to respect the sanction policy." 5. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 6 June 1974 to Canada, transmitting the information supplied by Norway and requesting the Government to undertake the necessary investigations. 6. A note -dated 8 August 1974 was sent to Canada, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the -28-

Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. 7. A reply dated 14 August 1974 was received from Canada, for the substantive part of which see Case No. USI-14, paragraph 9 (i), above. Case No. USI-23. High-carbon ferrochrome - "Safina E. Nalam": United States quarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Pakistan registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to Pakistan, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. A note dated 19 June was sent to Pakistan, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. 4. A second reminder was sent to Pakistan on 8 August 1974. 5. In the absence of a reply from Pakistan, the Committee decided to include that Government in the quarterly list issued as a press release on 17 September 1974. 6. A reply dated 24 September 1974 was received from Pakistan, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations ... has the honour to state that the Government of Pakistan has investigated the matter and found that the Pan Islamic Steamship Company (owners of the MV Safina E. Naam) was not aware that the said cargo was of Southern Rhodesian origin. Copy of the shipping company's letter with its enclosures is enclosed. The Government of Pakistan, to ensure that any incident of the above nature does not recur, has reiterated its instructions on this matter to the Controller of Shipping, prohibiting Pakistan's steamship companies from carrying cargo of Southern Rhodesian origin. Similar action is being taken with regard to air cargo." 7. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 16 October 1974 to Pakistan, expressing the Committee's appreciation for the Government's co-operation in the matter and informing it that the Committee had decided that the case should be considered closed. -29-

Case No. USI-24. High-carbon ferrochrome - "Wildenfels" and ftSteinfels": United States quarterly report dated 25 January 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 25 January 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessels, given as being under the registry of the Federal Republic of Germany, were among the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 October to 31 December 1973. 2. At the Committee's request, following its decision at the 184th meeting, the Secretary-General sent a note dated 8 March 1974 to the Federal Republic of Germany, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. An acknowledgement dated 15 March 1974 was received from the Federal Republic of Germany. 4. A reminder was sent to the Federal Republic of Germany on 10 June 1974. 5. A reply dated 19 June 1974 was received from the Federal Republic of Germany, for the substantive part of which see Case No. USI-16, paragraph 6, above. 6. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 24 July 1974 to Canada, drawing the attention of the Government to the original United States report and to the information supplied by the Federal Republic of Germany and requesting the Government to investigate the circumstances in which a Canadian company permitted vessels under the company's charter to engage in the transportation of a cargo, the carriage of which is prohibited by paragraph 3 (c) of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). 7. A reply dated 14 August 1974 was received from Canada, for the substantive part of which see Case No. USI-14, paragraph 9 (i), above. 8. A reminder was sent to Canada on 11 December 1974. Case No. USI-25. Chrysotile asbestos - "Hellenic Destiny": United States quarterly report dated 9 May 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 9 May 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Greek registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. 2. At the Cormittee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note to Greece, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974, the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II (serial No. (62)). -30-

Case No. USI-26. Nickel cathodes - "Western Express": United States quarterly report dated 9 May 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 9 May 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of the registry of the Federal Republic of Germany, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note to the Federal Republic of Germany, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. An acknowledgement was received from the Federal Republic of Germany. Case No. USI-27. Ferrochrome silicon - "Stockenfels": United States quarterly report dated 9 May 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 9 May 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of the registry of the Federal Republic of Germany, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note to the Federal Republic of Germany, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. An acknowledgement was received from the Federal Republic of Germany. Case No. USI-28. Nickel cathodes - "S.A. Huguenot": United States quarterly report dated 9 May 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 9 May 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of South African registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 January to 31 March 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note to South Africa, requesting that the matter be investigated. Case No. USI-29. Asbestos fibre and chrysotile asbestos fibre - "Hellenic Laurel": United States quarterly report dated 6 September 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 6 September 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Greek -31- registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 April to 21 June 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 29 October 1974 to Greece, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974 the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 4. Meanwhile, a reply dated 21 November 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 193, paragraph 5 (serial No. (49)). Case No. USI-30. Electrolytic nickel cathodes - "Nedlloyd Kimberly": United States quarterly report dated 6 September 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 6 September 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Netherlands registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 April to 21 June 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 29 October 1974 to the Netherlands, requesting that the matter be investigated. Case No. USI-31. Electrolytic nickel cathodes - "Nedlloyd Kembla": United States quarterly report dated 6 September 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 6 September 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Netherlands registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 April to 21 June 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 29 October 1974 to the Netherlands, requesting that the matter be investigated. Case No. USI-32. Chrysotile asbestos fibre - "Hellenic Carrier": United States quarterly report dated 6 September 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 6 September 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Greek registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 April to 21 June 1974. -32-

2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 29 October 1974 to Greece, requesting that the matter be investigated. 3. At the 214th meeting on 13 November 1974 the Committee took the decision concerning all the cases involving Greece as indicated in Case No. 114, paragraph 13, in annex II (serial No. (62)). 4. Meanwhile, a reply dated 21 November 1974 was received from Greece, for the substantive part of which see Case No. 193, paragraph 5, in annex II (serial No. (49)). Case No. USI-33. Electrolytic nickel cathodes - "Nedlloyd Kyoto": United States quarterly report dated 14 November 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 14 November 1974, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Netherlands registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period 1 July to 30 September 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 5 December 1974 to the Netherlands, requesting that the matter be investigated. Case No. USI-34. Electrolytic nickel cathodes - "Diana Skou": United States quarterly report dated 14 November 1974 1. In its quarterly report dated 14 November 19T4, the United States informed the Committee that the above-mentioned vessel, given as being of Danish registration, was one of the vessels used to transport chrome, nickel and other materials from Southern Rhodesia to the United States during the period I July to 30 September 1974. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 5 December 1974 to Denmark, requesting that the matter be investigated. -33-

Annex IV CASES OF TRANSACTIONS CONDUCTED WITH THE CONSENT OF REPORTING GOVERNMENTS GRAPHITE (66) Case No. 38. "Kaapland": United Kingdom note dated 27 August 1969 (67) Case No. 43. "Tanga": United Kingdom note dated 18 September 1969 (68) Case No. 62. "Transvaal", "Kaapland", "Stellenbosch" and "Swellendam" United Kingdom note dated 22 December 1969 There is no new information concerning these cases in addition to that contained in the fourth report. MEAT (109) Case No. 33. Meat - "Taveta": United Kingdom note dated 8 August 1969 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the fifth report. (110) Case No. h2. Meat - "Polana": United Kingdom note dated 17 September 1969 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the fifth report. OTHER (177) Case No. 133. Supply of medical equipment to the University of Southern Rhodesia: Swedish note dated 7 June 1972 There is no new information concerning this case in addition to that contained in the fifth report. -34-

Annex V CASES OPENED FROM INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY INDIVIDUALS AND )OII-GOVERNKENTAL ORGANIZA\TIONS a/ Case No. INO-1. Southern Rhodesia and the World Ploughing Chan pionships in Ireland: information supplied by the Anti-Apartheid Movement of Dublin, Ireland 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A reply dated 4 January 1974 was received from Ireland, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The contest in question was held on 5 and 6 October 1973. In so far as the Irish Government are aware, there were two competitors and a coach from Southern Rhodesia. The organizers of the contest have indicated that all competitors who participated in the contest did so as individuals and not in a representative capacity, that team awards to a country or State were not made, that national flags were not flown (other than that of the host country) and that national anthems were not played. "The Irish Government regret that no official information is available on the method of transport or the kind of travel documents used by the competitors from Southern Rhodesia. Nor is official information available on the route by which the Southern Rhodesians came to Ireland or departed therefrom. Persons entering Ireland from outside the common travel area, i.e., from any place other than Northern Ireland or Great Britain, are subject to passport control at the port or airport of entry. No one arriving at an Irish port or airport from outside the common travel area with a Southern Rhodesian travel document would be admitted to Ireland in contravention of resolution 253 (1968). "With regard to the question as to the criteria upon which the individuals concerned were selected in Southern Rhodesia, the Irish Government have no means available to them to ascertain these criteria. "The Irish Government trust that the foregoing information will prove of assistance to the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia. The Irish Government will be glad to furnish any further information which the Committee consider may be required." a/ The list of individuals and non-governmental organizations that addressed communications to the Committee during 1974, referred to in paragraph 103 of the present report, is appended to this annex. -35- h. At the 195th meeting on 21 May 197h, the Committee considered the matter and decided to close the case. Case No. INGO-2. Joba/Etb. Zephyr Co., Amsterdam: information supplied by the Anti-Apartheid Movement of the Netherlands Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. At the 194th meeting on 17 May 197h, the Committee requested the economic expert to summarize the available information listing, in particular, the companies in the Zephyr network, on the basis of which the Committee could establish its ,- ,'.-orities for dealing with the case. 4. The summary of information subsequently submitted to the Committee contained ,he following points: (a) The Zephyr network was initially exposed in the Volkskrant, a Dutch daily newspaper, and the Daily Mirror, an English newspaper. More detailed information was published and submitted to the Committee by the Stichting Anti- Apartheids Beweging Nederland (AABN). According to the information at hand, the Dutch firm known as Joba/Etb. Zephyr Co., Amsterdam, was channelling goods from, or destined for, Southern Rhodesia in violation of United Nations economic :-actions against that regime. In particular, the firm was said to maintain liaison with various firms in Europe, Japan and southern Africa for the purpose of -,acilitating the supply of those firms' products to Southern Rhodesia or the sale of Southern Rhodesian products abroad. (b) It was characteristic of the Zephyr network operations that a supplier 1,Tas never aware of the ultimate destination of his goods. He was instructed to send his goods to the Rhodesian clients through an intermediary address. For example, if an order from Zephyr Amsterdam was accepted by a company, the goods had to be delivered to the Zephyr support firm, Sabal, in Rotterdam. Payment was customarily made through the Dutch banker, Van Lanschot, but, occasionally, through the United Overseas Bank in Geneva. (c) The problem was not merely one of halting the Zephyr Amsterdam operations but of checking the entire Zephyr network, which was helping the flow of illicit trade to and from Southern Rhodesia, and preventing firms like Societe commerciale d'affretements et de combustibles (SCAC), in France, and Lemano, in Switzerland, from acting as front organizations for that international network. (d) Breaking the Zephyr network should also serve to expose more of the Affretair network activities, which had been receiving widespread publicity and much of the Committee's attention. There was evidence that the two networks were linked. It was known, for instance, that the French firm SCAC played an important supplementary role for the Affretair flights and also served as the French front for the Zephyr network. -36-

(e) Joba Chemicals, an international trader in light chemicals and pharmaceuticals, established around 1948, eventually became deeply invulvcd in trade of general merchandise with Southern Rhodesia after sanctions had been instituted against that country. By 1970, a number of rationalizations were made to integrate Joba's client and supplier structure, as far as these involved Rhodesia trade, into the international Zephyr network. The Rhodesian clients were consolidated into two main groups, Central African Pharmaceuticals (CAPS) and Aromex. Those in the CAPS group were consistently involved as buyers of foreign light and heavy chemicals and a small amount of medicals, and Aromex group as buyers of a large range of general merchandise, industrial tools and spares. Zephyr Amsterdam was established in 1970 by the owners/directors of Joba Chemicals and, in actual fact, was no more than a paper organization to cover up Joba's illicit trade with Southern Rhodesia. (f) Another innovation in 1970 was the creation by the owners/directors of Joba Chemicals of a Zephyr support firm called Sabal, in Rotterdam. A transport and shipping firm, Sabal was set up as a sister organization of Zephyr Amsterdam to carry out the actual physical handling of goods. (g) Goods destined for Southern Rhodesia were forwarded by Sabal, on instructions from the Zephyr network, to intermediary destinations. If the intermediary destination was Beira, the goods were either collected or directly forwarded to the Rhodesian client. Mostly, however, the goods were forwarded to the well-established French shipping firm SCAC, operating from Rouen. SCAC then forwarded the goods to a final intermediary in either Beira or Lourenqo Marques. Instructions to ship invariably came from the office of Joba Chemicals, with explicit reminders that goods were to be "neutralised" , i.e., the packaging should in no way indicate the supplier and under no circumstances was the client in Rhodesia to learn the origin of his goods. 5. Attached to the summary were two tables. The first was a listing of all countries or areas in which Zephyr Amsterdam had dealings ranked according to the number of suppliers and clients, as follows: Table 1 Supplier and client structure Suppliers Number Federal Republic of Germany ...... 61 United Kingdom ...... 24 Italy ...... 21 Belgium ...... 17 Japan ...... l. .. 14 United States of America ...... 14 Switzerland ...... 12 China ...... l. .. 11 France ...... 10 Finland ...... 9 -37-

Table 1 (continued) Suppliers Number Chile ...... 7 Israel ...... 6 Hungary ...... 5 Czechoslovakia ...... 4 Romania ...... 4 Sweden...... 4 Yugoslavia ...... 3 Bulgaria ...... Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ...... 2 Cuba ...... German Democratic Republic ...... 1 Client Nigeria...... 64 India ...... 5 Pakistan ...... 9 Malaysia ...... 8 Argentina ...... 5 Mexico ...... 5 Republic of Viet-Nam ...... 5 Zambia...... 5 Canada ...... 4 Sri Lanka ...... 4 United Republic of Cameroon ...... 4 Ethiopia ...... 3 Peru ...... 3 South Africa ...... 3 Venezuela 3...... 3 United Republic of Tanzania ...... 2 Client/Supplier Hong Kong ...... 22 Turkey ...... 13 Spain ...... 9 Denmark ...... 6 Portugal ...... 3 Diverse Netherlands ...... 170 The second table listed all firms, by country or area, with which the Zephyr Amsterdam had regular dealings, together with the goods or services and dollar value involved in the illicit transactions and the dates of those transactions, as follows: -38-

Table 2 Trading Connexions involved in illicit transactions with Southern Rhodesia Value Establishment Goods or servicer Tf11 Austria Biochemie Gesellschaft, m.b.h. Trodat-Werke Rubber stamps Be]&iu Kerplas, Service admintratif du comercial United Watch Factories Czechoslovakia Motokov Foreign Trade Corporation Unicoop, Coop Elport and Import Enterprise France Eta tanc8me Saint Gobain, Desjongueres SCAC Geruam (Federal Republic of) Braun, AG Braun Aktiengeselschaft Carl Felik theao-Plast Ottokas Hermann K.G. Engen Lutz L. Geissinger Heittmann and Brueur Hoepfner Gebr. Hoppenstedt Verlag Karl Gerhards Nachf. Paul and Co. SE Fshrzeugwerke G.m.b.H. Vollmer Werke Hong Xong Eric Beare Hong Kong Trade Development Council Messrs. Yang and Co. Perfect Products Co., Ltd. Quality Products Corporation, Ltd. Strat Kobe Ankerfarm, S.p.A. Carrara and Matta, S.p.A. Gruppo Lepetit Montecatini Edison latale Mcchine Plerrel, S.p.A. * ... Indicates not available. Credit note Intermediary Machine parts Rubber ware Motor parts Aluminum hydroxide Costume jewellry Machine parts -39- Date of Transaction 18 April 73 1 006 909 3 155 86 1 422 777 442 4& 727 500 895 19 524 29 May73 18 May 73 4 June 73 April 73 15 Mayr 73 April 73 April 73 4 June 73 April 73 April 73 28 May 73 4 June 73 25 May 73 2 560

Establishment Howa Textile Co. Kamiya Tsusan Kaisba, Ltd. Kindai Sansyo, Ltd. Lobstcr Tools Price Mason and Co., Ltd. Sanbo Trading Co., Ltd. Sanyo Hibiya, Limited Schneider Engineering, Ltd. The Fair Company, Ltd. Mozambique AroIRox (Pvt), Ltd. J.M. Barnett and Co.# Ltd. Companhia Dlistributiva da Hatola Companhia Industrial da Mtola Evrorstola (Moo.), Ida. Netherlands Ahrend American Consulate General Bank Meer and Hope, N.V. D.C. Beest Comercial Section of Australian Embassy (Comercial Counsellor of the Embassy) Costra, N.V. Printers Dongen Leather Import and Export, A.A.V. Fallek Chemical (Europe), Ltd. Hear Simons Agencies, B.V. Holland Bolinder Jumbo PlateelbakkeriJ Kaha, N.V. Lebmsann and Weber, N.V. Nehatex, N.V. Sabal Samson Schenker, N.V. and Co. Tokyo Capital Holdings, N.V. Spain Patriclo Echeverria, S.A. Sweden Perrtorp in Perrtorp Switzerland Altradico, S.A. J.G. Nef and Co., Ltd. Sublistatic, S.A. Sublistica Table 2 (continued) Goods or service Christmas decoration Textile piecegoods Shackles, thimbles Tools Delftware Buttons Textiles Intermediary Tools Beechwood creosotes Cotton synthetics Printed paper Value ($1U5 Date of Transaction 14 June 73 14 June 73 2321443651614 April 73 April 73 25 May 73 18 JuI7 72 18 August 71 6 July 72 3 900 800 369 k 288 12 252 5 June 73 April 73 27 May73 11 Feb. 73 2 320 28 421

Establishment United Kingdom Abboflex, Ltd. BEA Fabrics Birmingham Blyth Bond Worth (Exports), Ltd. Coventry Easterbrook Footprint Tools, Ltd. Haddon, Aird and crerar, Ltd. Mamelock Press, Ltd. Pictures and Prints Thipps-Faire, Ltd. Randells, Ltd. Record Ridgay Robinson and Sons, Ltd. Royle Sheffolk Siebe Gorman Spear and Jackson, Ltd. Stratford Sutton The De Vilbiss Company, Ltd. Wadkin, Ltd. William Blythe and Co. Win. Whitehouse and Co. (AF), Ltd. United States of America B.F. Goodrich Chemical Co. House of Weastmore Tuftane Film and Sheet Table 2 (continued) Goods or service Toys Freight-handling charges to Rouen Value 1 905 1 330 Date of Transaction 4 June 73 April 73 16 Nov. 73 OoO

6. At the 217th meeting on 4 December 1974, the Committee decided that a note to the Netherlands should be prepared for its consideration, inquiring to what extent the Government's investigations of the company's activities, already said to have becr brought to the Government's attention by the organization in Amsterdam, had verified the accuracy of the information in the Committee's possession. At the time of preparation of the present report, the text of the proposed note to the Netherlands was still under consideration. Case No. INGO-3. Tour of certain African countries, including Southern Rhodesia: information supplied by the Mouvement pour la d~fense de la paix en Finlande 1. Previous information concerning this case is contained in the sixth report. 2. Additional information regarding the action taken on the case since the submission of that report is given below. 3. A reply dated 17 January 1974 was received from Finland, the substantive part of which read as follows: "The Charge d'affaires, a.i., of Finland to the United Nations ... has the honour, in reference to /the Secretary-General's note of 13 December 1973/, to inform him that the Government of Finland has launched a thorough investigation of the matter. The Government will report on its findings as soon as possible." 4. A reminder was sent to Finland on 11 March 1974, inquiring whether the investigation had been completed and whether the Government was in a position to inform the Committee of the result. 5. A reply dated 22 March 1974 was received from Finland, the substantive part of which read as follows: "The Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ note of 11 March 1974, has the honour to inform him-that the case has been--left to the ombudsman (attorney-general) of Finland. "The Government of Finland will report to the Secretary-General on the investigation as soon as it is concluded." 6. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent a note dated 18 June 1974, pointing out that five months had elapsed since the matter had been drawn to the attention of the Government and that the Committee was very eager to determine the circumstances in which the tour, if it took place, had been permitted, as it considered that organized tours of Southern Rhodesia might be contrary to the provisions and spirit of the Security Council resolutions establishing sanctions against that Territory. -42-

7. A note dated 23 August 1974 was sent to Finland, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. 8. A second reminder was sent to Finland on 26 November 1974. Case No. INGO-4. Air Rhodesia and IATA agreements: information supplied by the Center for Social Action of the United Church of Christ, New York 1. A letter dated 31 March 1974 addressed to the Chairman of the Committee was received from the Reverend Donald J. A. Morton of the Center for Social Action of the United Church of Christ, New York. The text of the letter is reproduced below: "I refer to the Committee's request (press release SC/3470 of 4 September 1973) for non-governmental organizations to submit information on sanctions violations. I should like to bring to the Committee's attention the fact that, in consultation with Ms. Barbara Rogers, the Center for Social Action of the United Church of Christ has for some time now been working on evidence of the apparent violations of sanctions by means of interline traffic and cargo agreements between various international carriers and Air Rhodesia. We would respectfully request permission to circulate a preliminary document to the Committee and to appear before it on Wednesday 10 April 197h, to present what we now believe to be the full facts of the case and to answer any questions that may arise." 2. In accordance with the Committee's established procedure, an acknowledgement was sent to Mr. Morton on 2 April 1974. 3. At the 189th meeting on 3 April, the Committee decided to invite Mr. Morton and Ms. Rogers to participate in its next meeting. 4. At the 190th meeting on 10 April 197h, the Committee heard testimony by Rev. Morton and Ms. Rogers. Mr. Morton's statement is summarized in the Committee's records as follows: The Reverend Donald Morton said that his organization was concerned very deeply with issues of justice and liberation, and, since its concern extended to the issues of human rights in southern Africa, one top item on its agenda was the implementation of sanctions against the illegal Smith regime. His statement was, he believed, the first complete presentation that had been made by a concerned non-governmental organization to the Sanctions Committee in response to its appeal for individuals and organizations to forward to it any knowledge of sanctions violations. He hoped that a pattern would thus be established for useful co-operation iv the future. He and his colleagues had made a concerted effort to follow the Committee's procedures by the circulation of an information note, and oral presentation and the submission -43- of evidence. It was also their intention to make the information available publicly in the near future, in the hope that various concerned groups in the different countries involved could both use the information and conduct further investigation. The Center for Social Action had a great deal of additional information in fields other than sanctions violations by airlines that could be presented to the Committee for its due consideration. The particular issue of the involvement of airlines in tourist traffic to and from Southern Rhodesia was a vital one, since tourism was the second largest foreign exchange earner in that country. Tourism from western Europe and North America was continuing to rise steadily, although there was some decline from South Africa because of its awareness of the increasing level of armed conflict in Rhodesia. Of course, the concern of his organization was expressly with the financial, commercial and other transactions involved in tourism, since they were in violation of explicit provisions of Security Council resolutions, not with access to Southern Rhodesia or communication with individuals as such, which might be justified by humanitarian considerations. Many of the airlines involved in commercial transactions with Rhodesia had concluded their agreements since the adoption of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). It would be useful, with regard to those agreements, for the Sanctions Committee to approach the International Air Transport Association (IATA), in order to verify the allegations which he and his colleagues had made about their possible involvement in setting up interline agreements on behalf of Air Rhodesia and to enlist their help in ensuring that every member carrier was warned of the violations involved in continuing to operate the agreements already on record. Furthermore, since IATA was subject to Canadian law, it should be investigated by the Canadian Government. In addition to the information previously circulated to the Committee in the organization's information note, Mr. Morton said that certain international airline representatives were actually based in Southern Rhodesia allegedly for information and public relations purposes only, although his information was that they were engaging in commercial transactions. Moreover, the British Airways office in Salisbury was a key element in Air Rhodesia's reservations system, since British Airways' offices in New York, London and Salisbury were involved in regular transmittal of telex traffic concerning reservations and other messages on behalf of Air Rhodesia, which, of course, paid British Airways for that service. British Airways' facilitation of transactions, which were themselves violations of sanctions, should be investigated immediately by the British Government. Moreover, he had presented evidence to the delegation of the United Kingdom concerning the transfer of funds for commercial airlines services between British Airways and Air Rhodesia. However, there were other airlines with offices in Rhodesia itself, ostensibly for information purposes, which should be investigated. -44-

It was important to understand that Air Rhodesia was an integral part of the re6gime and that, under the terms of the Air Rhodesia Act, the aircraft and services and total resources of the Air Rhodesia fleet could be put at the disposal of the illegal regime at any time. Since it was a public utility, Air Rhodesia's profits went directly to the regime. In order to illustrate the way in which the interline agreements between Air Rhodesia and other airlines operated, his organization had confirmed reservations involving travel on Air Rhodesia flights with certain airlines. In those ticket operations, if the tickets were paid for, the following violations would have occurred: the sales agent would collect money from the individual for the entire journey, including the Rhodesian portion; in the case of a travel agent, he or she would transfer the money, including the Rhodesian portion, to the airline whose ticket stock he had used, receiving a commission on the total payment, including the Rhodesian portion. The commission on the Rhodesian portion represented the payment of services to a Southern Rhodesian company in violation of resolution 253 (1968). The airline involved would transfer to Air Rhodesia in Salisbury the money collected on its behalf, in violation of paragraph 6 of the resolution; and finally, Air Rhodesia would pay the airline a further commission for its services as sales agent, again a violation involving commercial services to a Rhodesian company. To illustrate his point, he read out a letter concerning interline billing arrangements from the Tariffs Manager of Air Rhodesia in Salisbury to the Manager of Palomar Travel Inc., in California. After checking extensively with both United States and international airline authorities, his organization was fairly sure that Air Rhodesia dealt only through direct payment with other airlines, and did not use either of the two airline clearing houses in Geneva and New York. Violations were also involved in other types of agreement, such as cargo agreements, entailing the carriage of commodities to and from Southern Rhodesia as well as direct commercial dealings with Air Rhodesia, and in interline pass agreements, of which three aspects should be particularly stressed. First, some deals were concluded by individuals in airlines without authorization from headquarters, a practice which must be stopped by ensuring that all airline employees were specifically instructed not to deal with Air Rhodesia at all. Secondly, employees of almost all airlines were allowed to travel free or at a reduced rate to Southern Rhodesia, specific evidence of which had been referred to the Australian delegation only. Air Rhodesia crganized cut-rate tours of Southern Rhodesia available only to airlines sales, reservations and traffic staff (passenger and cargo) who had completed at least one year of continuous service with a carrier having an interline agreement with Air Rhodesia. Thirdly, airlines were granting completely free services, such as free travel, to agents of the illegal regime in direct furtherance of their attempt to organize sanctions evasions. Interline pass agreements, therefore, involved multiple violations of sanctions and, incidentally, saved the r6gime much valuable foreign exchange which it must otherwise spend on the purchase of transportation at the standard rate. -45-

Many airlines sponsored package tours for travel agents, involving travel to Southern Rhodesia. Indeed, some specifically mentioned Air Rhodesia flights, and all required prepayment. Therefore, all package tours involved financial transfers direct from the tour wholesaler to the tourist enterprise in Rhodesia, which handled all the ground services, in direct violation of paragraph 4 of resolution 253 (1968). Those involved in violations outside Rhodesia would probably be the sponsoring airline, the tour wholesaler, who received a commission on the total cost of the package, part of which would then be passed to the tour retailer, who actually sold the package to the customer. He and his colleagues had, in the course of their investigations, produced lists of tours to Southern Rhodesia for 1974, some of which had already left, but many of which could still be prevented by the prompt action of the Sanctions Committee in co-operation with Governments. It was interesting to note that such tours might not even be legal, since apparently no steps had been taken by any of the tour operators, airlines or agents to obtain licences for the requisite transfer of funds. Sales from the United States alone of the package tours on the lists he had distributed involved 16,406 people travelling to Southern Rhodesia, a further 8,831 from some countries in western Europe, a total of 25,237. On the basis of the roundtrip cost, he had made a cautiously conservative estimate of the total expenditure on those tours amounting to approximately $6.3 million, which, of course, represented only a small part of the income to Rhodesia from tourism in 1974. It did not include other forms of travel, such as cruise ships, individual travel arrangements for business or pleasure or excursion trips. His organization had been rather disappointed at the follow-up action taken by the Sanctions Committee in the past and felt that if no action was taken concerning the vast tourist industry in Rhodesia, then the work of the Sanctions Committee would be further discredited, particularly since Rhodesia was fast becoming an international conference centre. There were new conference facilities at Victoria Falls which had been used for an international congress in 1973 and were scheduled for use in 1974. He suggested that other Governments, when seeking to prevent airlines sanctions violations, might usefully take as a model for legislation the United States regulations cited in the information note that expressly prohibited any "connecting flight, interline agreement, block booking, ticketing or any other method of linking up". In conclusion, he wished to make it clear that his purpose in raising an issue which had already received some attention from the Committee was to draw attention to the loss of revenue suffered by the east African countries as a direct result of sanctions violations, to reply to the recent complaint made by the Swedish Government and to urge the Committee to bring the violations to the attention of IATA and the Governments concerned, so that all dealings with Air Rhodesia could be broken off. -46-

5. At the same meeting, iKr. Morton also circulated to the Ccrrmittee a number of documents relating to his statement, with particular reference t.o facilities for - ir travel, tourism and package tours to Southern Rhodesia. b/ 6. The Chairman then expressed the Committee's appreciation for the information given to it. The Committee decided to request the opinion of the Legal Counsel concerning the legal status of IATA. 7. At the 191st meeting on 17 April 1974, the Committee heard statements from the representatives of Australia, France, Kenya and the United Kingdom in connexion with the testimony given by Mr. Morton and r4s. Rogers: (a) The representative of Australia said that Mr. Renton Cowley, manager of the Air Rhodesia office in New York, had, in fact, been given a free ticket to Australia by Qantas in 1971, as had all the other interline representatives who had attended the interline sales managers' conference in that country. Stricter instructions had since been issued, and Qantas would not in future offer free travel to any employee of Air Rhodesia. Qantas had also issued specific instructions to its staff to the effect that where no agreement for staff travel existed with another airline, the approval of a superior officer must be obtained before an employee accepted free or reduced-fare travel by another carrier. As a matter of policy, Qantas would not approve applications for such travel with Air Rhodesia. With regard to the allegations concerning airline staff travel made at the last meeting, the documents which had been given to his delegation were a handwritten letter from a Qantas employee to Air Rhodesia soliciting free tickets and the reply from that airline enclosing 1ihe tickets. The action appeared to be a breach of Qantas' internal regulations, and the matter had been referred for possible disciplinary action. That was, however, an isolated example and was contrary to the policy of both Qantas and the Australian Government. Referring to IATA resolution 200 concerning free and reduced-fare transportation, the Australian representative drew attention to paragraph 2, which stated that an IATA member might issue a pass for such transportation to an employee of an air carrier only where a request had been made in accordance with the procedures established by the general officers of the air carrier by whom such employee was employed. The implication was that any airline which had properly given such transportation to employees of Air Rhodesia was in official contact with Air Rhodesia. If normal procedures had not been followed, then resolution 200 had been breached, and the airline, if an IATA member, could be subject to a fine of up to $50,000 per offence. Neither Qantas nor its domestic airlines had interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. In fact, at the time IATA had notified them of Air Rhodesia's wish to become a party to such agreements, they had declined to concur. b/ Subsequently, the Committee obtained further information on the matter from Published sources, in particular documents and pamphlets issued by IATA.

(b) The representative of France said that his delegation was not able at the moment to give any information concerning the allegations made with regard to the airlines Air France and UTA; he pointed out, however, that the airline Air Afrique listed as belonging to "France et al.", was, in fact, a multinational corporation and should not be ascribed to one country. (c) The representative of Kenya said that, with reference to the allegation made at the previous meeting concerning the possibility of interline agreements between East Africa Airways and Air Rhodesia, he had made inquiries and had found that there might be reason to believe that such interline agreements did exist between the two airlines. An instruction issued by East Africa Airways in April 1971 stated that agents could sell tickets which would permit travel on sectors involving carriage by Air Rhodesia. He had also investigated the allegation that a group of 42 persons had been booked by the East Africa Airways (EAA) office in Athens to travel in Rhodesia on Air Rhodesia. That allegation had, unfortunately, been confirmed; the number of persons booked on the tour, which was scheduled for August 1974, was 63, not 42. That was a very serious violation of sanctions, and he had brought it to the attention of his own Government and the Governments of Uganda and Tanzania, since all three jointly ran the East Africa Airways Corporation, and had asked them to instruct the Director-General of East Africa Airways to look into the matter immediately and inform them of what action had been taken to terminate any link between the two carriers. The EAA office in New York had cabled its head office to find out whether the April 1971 directive was still in effect, and the missions of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda had undertaken to ask the Director-General of the airline for further classification to find out how the situation had arisen. (d) The representative of the United Kingdom said that he had reported to his Government the allegations made by Mr. Morton but was not yet in a position to provide any information. 8. At the same meeting, the Committee decided that a note should be prepared for its consideration for transmission to the Governments of the countries of registration of the airlines involved, as listed in the IATA manual, except those Governments represented on the Committee, to whose attention the matter had been drawn through their representatives, and those of Uganda and Tanzania, in view of the statement made by the representative of Kenya. It was further decided that a letter of similar content should be prepared for transmission to IATA and that all the information available to the Committee should be properly arranged to indicate clearly the identity of the airlines involved and the lists of countries to which the proposed note should be sent and not sent. 9. As requested, the information was compiled and presented to the Committee as follows:

Table 1 IATA agreements with Air Rhodesia (as indicated on page 16 of the IATA Interline Agreements Manual, sixth edition) Two-letter designators AO IC NZ OR AE AL AT LY ND TS WC FT SB AA AC AF Al AMq AR AS AVAYAZBNBPCOCP cx CY Name of airline Aviaci6n y Comercio, S.A. Indian Airlines New Zealand National Airways Corporation Air Comores Air Ceylon, Ltd. Allegheny Airlines, Inc. Compagnie nationale de transports aeriens - Royal Air Maroc El Al Israel Airlines Nordair, Ltd. Aloha Airlines, Inc. Wien Air Alaska, Inc. The Flying Tiger Line, Inc. Seaboard World Airlines, Inc. American Airlines, Inc. Air Canada Air France Air India Aeronaves de Mexico, S.A. Aerolineas Argentinas Alaska Airlines, Inc. Aerovias Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. (AVIANCA) Finnair OY ALITALIA, Linee Aeree Italiane Braniff Airways, Inc. Air Botswana (Pty) Limited Continental Airlines, Inc. CP Air, Canadian Pacific Air Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. Cyprus Airways, Ltd. -49-

Table 1 (continued) Two-letter designators DL DT EA FI GA HA IB IH IT JL JM KE KL KU LG LH LI LM LO MD ME MH NA NW OA OK OS 0Z PA PK Name of airline Delta Air Lines, Inc. Empresa de transportes aereos de Angola, SARL Eastern Air Lines, Inc. Flugfelag Islands H.F. (ICELANDAIR) P.N. Garuda Indonesian Airways Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. IBERIA, Lineas Aereas de Espafia, S.A. Aerolinee ITAVIA Air Inter, Lignes a6riennes int~rieures Japan Air Lines Co., Ltd. Air Jamaica (1968), Limited Korean Air Lines, Inc. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Kuwait Airways Corp. LUXAIR (Societe anonyme luxembourgeoise de navigation aerienne) Deutsche Lufthansa AG Leeward Islands Air Transport Services, Ltd. (LIAT) ALM-Dutch Antillean Airlines Polish Airlines (LOT) Air Madagascar - Societ6 nationale malgache de transports aeriens Middle East Airlines AIRLIBAN Malaysian Airline System National Airlines, Inc. Northwest Airlines, Inc. Olympic Airways S.A. Ceskoslovenske Aerolinie Austrian Airlines Ozark Air Lines, Inc. Pan American World Airways, Inc. Pakistan International Airways Corp. -50-

Table 1 (continued) Two-letter designators PR QM QZ RBRGRKRWSASN So SQ SR SVTGTKTLTMTPTWTZUA UM UT WA KP DM Name of airline Philippine Air Lines, Inc. Air Malawi, Limited Zambia Airways Corporation Syrian Arab Airlines VARIG, S.A. (Viacao Aerea Rio-Grandense) Air Afrique Hughes Air Corp. (d/b/a Air West) South African Airways Socigte anonyme belge d'exploitation de la navigation aerienne (SABENA) Southern Airways, Inc. Singapore Airlines, Limited (SIA) Swiss Air Transport Co., Ltd. (SWISSAIR) Saudi Arabian Airlines Thai Airways International, Ltd. Turk Hava Yollari (Turkish Airlines) Trans-Mediterranean Airways DETA- Linhas Aereas de Mogambique Transportes Aereos Portugueses SARL-TAP Trans World Airlines, Inc. Transair, Ltd. United Air Lines, Inc. Air Manila, Inc. Union de transports a6riens (UTA) Western Airlines, Inc. Air Cape (Pty.), Ltd. Maersk Air -51-

Table 2 Countries indicated in the IATA list to which a note should be sent Country Argentina Belgium Botswana Brazil Canada Colombia Cyprus Czechoslovakia Denmark Finland Germany, Federal Republic of Greece Iceland India Israel Italy Ivory Coast Jamaica Japan Kuwait Lebanon Airline Aerolineas Argentinas Societe anonyme belge d'exploitation de la navigation a~rienne (SABENA) Air Botswana (Pty.) Limited VARIG, S.A. (Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense) Transair, Ltd. Nordair, Ltd. CP Air, Canadian Pacific Air Air Canada Aerovias Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. (AVIANCA) Cyprus Airways, Ltd. Ceskoslovenske Aerolinie Maersk Air FINNAIR OY Deutsche Lufthansa AG Olympic Airways S.A. Flugfelag Islands H.F. (ICELANDAIR) Air India Indian Airlines El Al Israel Airlines ALITALIA, Linee Aeree Italiane Aerolinee ITAVIA Air Afrique Air Jamaica (1968), Limited Japan Air Lines, Co., Ltd. Kuwait Airways Corp. Trans-Mediterranean Airways Middle East Airlines (AIRLIBAN) Head office Buenos Aires Brussels Gaborone Porto Alegre Winnipeg Roberval, Quebec Vancouver Montreal Bogota Nicosia Prague Copenhagen Helsinki Cologne Athens Reykjavik Bombay New Delhi Tel Aviv Rome Rome Abidjan Kingston Tokyo Kuwait Beirut Beirut -52-

Table 2 (continued) Country Luxembourg Madagas car Malawi Malaysia Mexico Morocco Netherlands New Zealand Pakistan Philippines Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Switzerland Syria Thailand Turkey Zambia Airline LG LUXAIR (Societ6 anonyme luxembourgeoise de navigation adrienne) MD Air Madagascar - Societe nationale malgache de transports aeriens QM Air Malawi, Limited MH Malaysian Airline System AM Aeronaves de Mexico, S.A. AT Compagnie nationale de transports aeriens Royal Air Maroc LM ALM-Dutch Antillean Airlines KL KLM Royal Dutch Airlines NZ New Zealand National Airways Corporation PK Pakistan International Airways Corp. UM Air Manila, Inc. PR Philippine Air Lines, Inc. LO Polish Airlines (LOT) TP Transportes Aereos Portugueses SARL-TAP TM DETA-Linhas Aereas de Moqambique DT Empresa de transportes aereos de Angola, SARL KE Korean Air Lines, Inc. Saudi Arabian Airlines Singapore Airlines, Limited (SIA) Air Cape (Pty.), Ltd. South African Airways IBERIA, Lineas Aereas de Espafia, S.A. Aviacion y Comercio, S.A. Air Ceylon, Ltd. Swiss Air Transport Co., Ltd. (SWISSAIR) Syrian Arab Airlines Thai Airways International, Ltd. Turk Hava Yollari (Turkish Airlines) Zambia Airways Corporation Head office Luxembourg Tananarive Blantyre Kuala Lumpur Mexico City Casablanca Curaqao Amsterdam Wellington Karachi Pasay City Manila Warsaw Lisbon Lourengo Marques Luanda Seoul Jeddah Singapore Cape Town Johannesburg Madrid Madrid Colombo Zurich Damascus Bangkok Istanbul Lusaka -53-

Table 3 Countries to which no note should be sent,- in accordance with the decision taken by the Committee at its 191st meeting Country Austria France Indonesia Kenya ) Uganda) United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Airline OS Austrian Airlines OR Air Comores AF Air France IT Air Inter, Lignes aeriennes interieures UT Union de transports aeriens (UTA) GA P.N. Garuda Indonesian Airways EC East African Airways LI Leeward Islands Air Transport Services, Ltd. (LIAT) CX Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd. EC East African Airways WA Western Airlines, Inc. Head office Vienna Moroni/Paris Paris Paris Paris Djakarta Nairobi St. John's, Antigua Hong Kong Nairobi Los Angeles United Air Lines, Inc. Trans World Airlines, Inc. Southern Airways, Inc. Hughes Air Corp. (d/b/a Air West) Pan American World Airways, Inc. Ozark Air Lines, Inc. Allegheny Airlines, Inc. Aloha Airlines, Inc. Wien Air Alaska, Inc. The Flying Tiger Line, Inc. Seaboard World Airlines, Inc. American Airlines Inc. Alaska Airlines, Inc. Chicago New York Atlanta San Francisco New York St. Louis Pittsburgh Honolulu Anchorage Los Angeles New York New York Seattle -54-

Table 3 (continued) Country Airline Head office United States BN Braniff Airways, Inc. of America Dallas (continued) CO Continental Airlines, Inc. Los Angeles DL Delta Air Lines, Inc. Atlanta EA Eastern Air Lines, Inc. New York NW Northwest Airlines, Inc. Minneapolis-St. Paul NA National Airlines, Inc. Miami HA Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. Honolulu 10. In reply to the request decided upon by the Committee at the 190th meeting, the following memorandum dated 16 April 1974 was submitted by the Director of the General Legal Division, Office of Legal Affairs. Legal status of IATA (1) The following is in reply to the questions addressed to the Office of Legal Affairs at the 190th meeting of the Committee, concerning the legal status of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) in connexion with the "Information note on international airline agreements in violation of Security Council resolution 253" submitted by The Center for Social Action, United Church of Christ. (2) IATA is an association of airline companies, whose articles of association were originally adopted by the International Air Transport Operators Conference (Havana, 16-19 April 1945); a copy of the articles, as amended and currently in force, is attached. According to article II thereof, the head office of the Association is to be maintained in the city in which the headquarters of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) would be located, and after ICAO was established in Montreal the Association moved there also. Thereupon, IATA was incorporated by a private act of the Canadian Parliament (9-10 George VI, Chapter 51, 18 December 1945), a copy of which is attached. (3) Neither the articles of association nor the act of incorporation expressly provides that IATA should be subject to the laws of Canada. However, as a general rule, an associaticn incorporated by the law of the State where it has its hgadquarters is normally subject to the laws and jurisdicticn of that State, unlt.E-bpecific exception is made by law. The Secretariat of the United Nations has not been able to find any direct evidence of special -55- privileges, immunities and exemptions being granted to IATA under Canadian legislation. While most of the members of IATA are Government -sponsored airlines, the Association is technically a non-governmental organization, which would not per se have a privileged position. Regulation 37 of the IATA clearing house regulations provides that they "shall be interpreted in accordance with the Laws of Canada for the time being in force". While the regulation in question does not subject IATA as such to Canadian law, it would appear to furnish evidence of IATA's recognition of special links with the State of its incorporation, particularly as the clearing house is located in another State. (4) Even if, as appears quite possible, IATA is subject to Canadian jurisdiction, it does not necessarily follow that a particular piece of legislation applies to a particular transaction. Only a competent Canadian court could hand down an authoritative decision on whether or not any Canadian legislation regarding sanctions against Southern Rhodesia applied to IATA's role in the conclusion of interline traffic agreements. IATA acts in this matter as a conduit for information on airlines wishing to apply the agreements and the Association is not itself a party to the agreements. (5) With respect to the United Nations, IATA is a non-governmental organization in category II consultative status with the Economic and Social Council. It may accordingly be anticipated that it will reply to inquiries concerning its activities and its field of work. (6) The IATA Manual referred to in paragraph 6 of the "List of Air Rhodesia's interline agreements" in the above-mentioned information note is the IATA Interline Agreements Manual. A copy of the relevant part of that Manual is attached /2nd revised page (i), revised page (ii) and 33rd revised page 16 (1 December 1973)7, together with a list of the airline abbreviation codes used in the Manual. The texts of the "Interline Traffic Agreement Passenger" and the "Interline Traffic Agreement - Cargo" are attached. Article IX (2) of each of these agreements provides the procedure for an airline to become a party to them, and article IX (4)(a)(i) provides for the possibility of withdrawal by any party with respect to all parties or with respect to a particular party, by giving 30 days' written notice. Under this procedure, any airline being bound by the agreements in respect of Air Rhodesia could within 30 days terminate the agreement as between itself and Air Rhodesia. 11. The Committee was also in possession of the text of an explanatory note obtained from IATA concerning IATA agreements and Canadian law vis-a-vis Security Council resolution 253 (1968), as well as the text of the United Nations Rhodesia Regulations issued by the Government of Canada on 20 December 1968 under that Government's United Nations Act. 12. In accordance with the Committee's decision at the 191st meeting, the following list was compiled concerning the other matters mentioned in the testimony of the Reverend Donald Morton and Ms. Barbara Rogers, about which the Committee might -56- wish to initiate inquiries with the appropriate Governments or international organizations. (a) The possibility that the International Air Transport Association (IATA) promoted and'facilitated the conclusion of agreements in violation of the sanctions, a service for which Air Rhodesia is said to pay a fee. (b) The position and responsibility of the Government of Canada vis--vis the activities of IATA that may be contrary to the resolutions of the Security Council, bearing in mind the provisions of regulation 37 of the IATA Interline Agreements Manual (6th edition) and the provisions of the Canadian Parliament Act of 1945 by which IATA was incorporated in Canada. (c) Allegations of deals by major credit card companies with Southern Rhodesia, apparently not investigated by the United States Government. (d) Resumption or continuation of operations in Southern Rhodesia by Hertz Car Rental Co. and possibly by other companies named in the Carnegie Endowment study. (e) The existence of certain international airlines' "information offices" in Southern Rhodesia, which are, in fact, alleged to be engaging in commercial activities. (Mentioned in this connexion were: British Airways, Alitalia, Lufthansa, Pan American World Airways, South African Airways and Transportes Aereos Portugueses.) (f) The existence of interline pass agreements (said to be often applied without authority) by which officials of various international airlines are given free or reduced-rate tickets to Southern Rhodesia and Air Rhodesia personnel are given tickets on similar terms to travel to various countries. It was alleged that such travel to and from Southern Rhodesia facilitates, among other things, the promotion of tourism and subsequent foreign exchange earnings for the illegal regime. (g) The operation of "package tours" to Southern Rhodesia by various airlines, which it is estirqeted will earn about $US 6.3 million for the rggime during the year 1974. (The airlines involved were said to be: Air Afrique, Air France, British Airways, Ethiopian Airlines, Iberia, Lufthansa, Olympic Airways, Pan American World Airways, South African Airways, Transportes Aereos Portugieses and Union de transports a6riens.) (h) The presence of airline representatives, sales and tourist agencies in many countries outside Southern Rhodesia that, through issuance of brochures, showing of tourist films, lectures and other means, promote travel to that country. 13. At the 192nd meeting on 1 May 1974, the Committee adopted the following text of a note to be addressed to the States of registration of the airlines concerned, as listed in table 2 above. "The Secretary-General ... at the request of the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the -57- question of Southern i ho!e-{'a, has the honour to draw his attention to the enclosed list from the International Air Transport Association Interline Agreements Manual (6th edition). "On page 16 of the Manual are listed those airlines which appear to have entered into IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements, or parts thereof, with Air Rhodesia. Among these airlines is/are "/n--ame of airline/airlines concerned/"The Committee recalls that in paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968), the Security Council decided that 'all States Members of the United Nations shall prevent airline companies constituted in their territories and aircraft of their registration or under charter to their nationals from operating to or from Southern Rhodesia and from linking up with any airline company constituted or aircraft registered in Southern Rhodesia'. "The Committee would be grateful if His Excellency's Government would investigate the information contained in the IATA Manual. If the information made available to the Committee is confirmed, it would appear that a serious breach of the sanctions imposed by the Security Council is occurring. The Committee takes the view that there is a clear obligation on States Members of the United Nations, as on other States, under the terms of paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968), to prevent the conclusion and fulfilment of interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. "The Committee would therefore be grateful if His Excellency's Government would investigate the matter urgently and take all necessary action, in particular by ensuring the termination of any agreement between its airlines, or airline companies constituted in its territory, and Air Rhodesia, informing the Committee within two months if possible. "In addition, the Committee would welcome the texts of legislation or administrative orders relevant to the implementation of paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968)." 14. The note was transmitted to the Governments concerned on 13 May 197h. 15. At the 193rd meeting on 8 May 197h, the Committee adopted the text of a special statement on the matter, which it decided to request the Secretary-General of the United Nations, under his personal authority, to transmit to the DirectorGeneral of IATA. The Committee also decided that a further note should be sent to the Government of Canada, requesting it to investigate the matter. The texts of the Secretary-General's transmittal note and of the Committee's statement read as follows: (i) Text of the Secretary-General's transmittal note "I have been requested by the Security Council Committee established in -58- pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia to transmit to you the attached statement concerning interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. "The Committee emphasized the seriousness with which it views this case of suspected violation of the mandatory sanctions established by the Security Council. The Committee would be grateful if you were to give this matter your most careful and urgent attention." (ii) Text of the Committee's statement "(1) It has been drawn to the attention of the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia that, according to the IATA Interline Agreements Manual, Air Rhodesia has entered into interline agreements with a large number of other airlines. '(2) A copy of Security Council resolution 253 (1968) is attached and the Committee would draw the attention of IATA to paragraph 6, which reads: 'Decides that all States Members of the United Nations shall .prevent airline companies constituted in their territories and aircraft of their registration or under charter to their nationals from operating to or from Southern Rhodesia and from linking up with any airline company constituted or aircraft registered in Southern Rhodesia /emphasis added/'. "(3) Paragraph 6 is not limited by the provisions of paragraph 3 of the resolution, as the explanatory note presented by IATA to the Committee implies. It stands on its own. The Committee takes the view that there is a clear obligation on States Members of the United Nations, as on other States, to prevent the conclusion and fulfilment by their airlines and aircraft of interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. The Canadian Regulations which are cited in the note do not deal only with the carriage of goods. In particular, the relevant part of paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968) is reflected, although not ipsissimis verbis, in section 12 of the Regulations, which contains no such limitation. "(4) The Committee would draw the attention of IATA also to operative paragraph 4 of resolution 253 (1968), which relates to the remittance of funds to persons or bodies within Southern Rhodesia and to Security Council resolution 277 (1970), also attached, in particular to paragraph 9 (b), which reads: '9. Decides, in accordance with Article 41 of the Charter and in furthering the objective of ending the rebellion, that Member States shall: -59-

'(b) Immediately interrupt any existing means of transportation to and from Southern Rhodesia.' "(5) If the information contained in the IATA Manual is confirmed, it would appear that a serious breach of the sanctions imposed by the Security Council is occurring. "(6) The Committee would be grateful, therefore, if IATA would, as a matter of urgency, inform it of the date on which IATA was approached by Air Rhodesia under article IX (2) of each of the interline traffic agreements, when IATA informed the parties to those agreements of the approach and when and how each of the airlines listed in the IATA Interline Agreements Manual signified its concurrence, in accordance with article IX (2) (b). "(7) IATA will understand that the Committee is bound also to send a copy of this letter to the Government of Canada. IATA is incorporated by act of the Canadian Parliament, and the possibility has arisen of IATA at least having facilitated, through the interline agreements system and the agency programmes, the commission of acts by others which entail serious breaches of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia. There is, indeed, a possibility that IATA itself may have acted contrary to Canadian law in this matter. "(8) The Secretary-General of the United Nations has already written to a number of Governments whose airlines appear to be involved. The Committee has asked him, in addition, to seek IATA's active co-operation in investigating this matter and, if the facts are as they appear to be, in putting an end to Rhodesia's participation in these arrangements. As a first step, it would request IATA to bring to the attention of its member airlines the facts of the situation, to stop any correspondence with Air Rhodesia and to terminate forthwith all dealings with it, directly or indirectly. In doing so, the Committee appeals to IATA particularly, having in mind the purposes, objects and aims of IATA, set out in its articles of association, of which article III (3) reads: 'To co-operate with the International Civil Aviation Organization and other international organizations'. "(9) The Committee looks forward to an early reply, if possible within two months." 16. Accordingly, the Secretary-General transmitted the Committee's statement as requested, as well as the note to Canada, enclosing a copy of the SecretaryGeneral's letter and its enclosure to the Director-General of IATA. 17. An acknowledgement dated 16 May 197h was received from the Ivory Coast, and replies were received from Kuwait, Italy and Syria, the substantive parts of which read as follows: -60-

()Note dated 15 May 1974 from Kuwait "The competent authorities in Kuwait, after making an appropriate investigation, are convinced that there is no truth whatsoever in the allegation that Kuwait Airways Corporation entered into IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements, or parts thereof, with Air Rhodesia. "The Kuwait Airways Corporation, like all other Kuwaiti nationals and corporations, are not operating in Southern Rhodesia; nor have they any dealings with the racist regime in it. "The Government of Kuwait, its nationals and corporations strictly comply with the sanctions imposed by the Security Council and will refrain from taking any action which might confer a semblance of legitimacy on the illegal racist minority regime. "Moreover, the Kuwait Airways Corporation had already informed IATA that they have no dealings whatsoever with Air Rhodesia and do not accept airline tickets issued by it. "The Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait would like to commend the Security Council Committee for its vigilance and would like to pledge maximum co-operation with the Committee so that it may fulfil the great objectives for which it was established. The Permanent Representative will be always pleased to receive information on matters within the purview of the Committee and to hold an appropriate investigation. However, in the present instance, the Committee can rest assured that no breach of the sanctions imposed by the Security Council is occurring." (ii) Note dated 20 May 1974 from Italy "In this connexion, the Permanent Representative of the Italian Republic has the honour to state that the contents of the above note have already been communicated to the Italian Government. "With regard to the request of the Committee on sanctions concerning the texts of legislation or administrative orders relevant to the implementation of paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968), the Permanent Representative of the Italian Republic has the honour to draw the attention of the Committee on sanctions to the fact that the Italian Government has taken all the necessary action for giving full and entire effect to resolution 253 by the decree-law of 3 October 1968, published in the Official Gazette of the Italian Republic on 3 October 1968. The text of the decree-law, communicated at the time to the United Nations Secretariat, has been published by the Secretariat in document S/8786/Add.3, dated 1 November 1968." (iii) Note dated 21 May 1974 from Syria "The Syrian Arab Airlines has never entered into IATA passenger and/or -61- cargo agreements, or parts thereof, with Air Rhodesia and therefore it has no connexion with it whatsoever, directly of indirectly. The allegations contained in the International Air Transport Association Interline Agreements Manual are completely untrue." 18. On 21 May, the Secretary-General received the Director-General of IATA for a meeting, in the course of which the Director-General gave assurances that he would do his best to assist the Committee in every way possible. 19. A letter dated 30 May 1974 addressed to the Secretary-General was received from the Director-General of IATA, the substantive part of which is reproduced below: "I have brought your letter and the Security Council's statement to the attention of the Executive Committee of IATA at their recent mid-year meeting. "As set out in our explanatory note /see para. 11 above!, which is in your possession, this Association is a Canadian corporation subject to the United Nations Rhodesia Regulations (20 December 1968) promulgated by the Canadian Government to give effect to resolution 253 (1968) of the Security Council. The Executive Committee has been advised that IATA, in carrying out certain purely administrative functions under the Traffic Conference resolutions, has not contravened these Regulations. This is, of course, a question of interpretation of the Canadian law, and my General Counsel is available to give the United Nations Legal Counsel any required explanation. I should emphasize that Traffic Conference resolutions are approved by all Governments concerned. "Nevertheless, and although the resolution of the Security Council is in its terms directed to States Members of the United Nations, I am pleased to be able to assure you that you will have the co-operation of IATA with the United Nations and its specialized agencies in the terms of our articles of association. I shall, within the course of the next month, be in a position to let you have the information requested in paragraph 6 of the Sanctions Committee's statement and to advise you of the action taken in response to paragraph 8 of the statement. "Finally, I must thank you for your courtesy in giving me the opportunity to discuss with you personally the various aspects of this matter when I was in New York last week." 20. Replies were received from Pakistan and Japan, the substantive parts of which read as follows: (i) Note dated 11 June from Pakistan "The Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations ... with -62- reference to /the Secretary-General's7 letter dated 13 'ay 1974 concerning passenger and/or cargo agreements between Pakistan International Airways Corporation and Air Rhodesia, has the honour to inform him that the Government of Pakistan, after due investigation of the matter has communicated the following: "'Pakistan International Airways (PIA) has been a member of IATA since 1955. Air Rhodesia entered in to this multilateral agreement in 1968. It appears that PIA's concurrence to Air Rhodesia joining the IATA multilateral interline agreement was inadvertently conveyed by some official, despite the Government's notification concerning sanctions against Southern Rhodesia. A letter was sent by PIA to IATA Secretariat on 20 May 1974, withdrawing our interline agreement in so far as Air Rhodesia is concerned.' (ii) Note dated 21 June 1974 from Japan - The Permanent Representative of Japan ... with reference to the /Secretary-General's/ note dated 13 May 1974, regarding Japan Air Lines involvement in IATA interline agreements with Air Rhodesia, has the honour to inform the Secretary-General of the investigation undertaken by the Government of Japan and of the subsequent action by Japan Air Lines which was undertaken in response to the Secretary-General's aforementioned note, as follows: "(1) Japan Air Lines entered into IATA interline agreements in February 1954. Since Air Rhodesia entered into IATA interline agreements in March 1968, Japan Air Lines, under standard IATA arrangements, was placed in a position where it had to conclude interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. "(2) In an immediate response to the Secretary-General's note, which had been communicated by the Government of Japan, Japan Air Lines, in a cable dated 3 June 1974, took the necessary action by notifying IATA and Air Rhodesia of its decision to terminate the IATA interline traffic agreements on passenger and/or cargo with Air Rhodesia, which will become effective 2 July 1974. The text of this cable is attached. "The Permanent Representative of Japan has further the honour to state as follows: "(1) The Government of Japan had decided at a Cabinet meeting in 1968 to take necessary measures to implement Security Council resolution 253 immediately after its adoption. "(2) In accordance with this decision, the Ministry of Transportation had sent a letter, in June 1968, to Japan Air Lines, the only national airline operating international regular air service, in which it called the attention of Japan Air Lines to the relevant provisions of Security Council -63- resolution 253 (1968) and requested Japanese Air Lines not to engage in the air transportation of goods to and from Southern Rhodesia or the operation of services to and from Southern Rhodesia, and also not to link up with airlines of Southern Rhodesia. "(3) In purcuance of this request by the Government of Japan, Japan Air Lines has never sold tickets to passengers or agreed to transport cargoes destined for Southern Rhodesia. "The Permanent Representative of Japan assures the Secretary-General that the Government of Japan intends to continue to co-operate fully with the United Nations in implementing Security Council resolution 253 (1968). Text of the cable from Japan Air Lines "This is to inform you that, in accordance with article IX, subparagraph (4) (A) (I) of the IATA interline traffic agreements passenger and cargo, Japan Air Lines withdraw from these agreements in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned with effect from 2 July 1974." 21. At the 201st meeting on 27 June 1974 the representative of France made the following statement: "My delegation informed the French authorities of the statements made to the Committee in April 1974 by the Reverend Donald Morton and 11s. Rogers concerning the agreements which a great many airlines, some of them French, had allegedly entered into with Air Fhodesia through IATA. "I am able to advise the Committee that, during a meeting at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it was decided that the supervisory authorities of the French airlines would request the latter to observe the sanctions regime laid down by Security Council resolution 253 (1968), which would involve, inter alia, terminating the IATA agreements. "With regard to the 'package tours', which were also discussed in the Committee, the French companies have been requested to refrain in the future from arranging such tours." 22. At the same meeting, the representative of the United States of America read out a letter addressed by the Chief Counsel of the United States Federal Aviation Administration to the presidents of all United States airlines operating large aircraft and to the appropriate agencies. The text of the letter reads as 7 follows: "We are writing to you, as well as the presidents of all United States. air carriers operating large aircraft. Our attention has been drawn to a number of alleged violations of Special Federal Aviation Regulation 21 -64-

(SFAR 21). SFAR 21 implemented Executive Order 11419 (29 July 1968) which was itself promulgated pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolution 253 (1968), adopted on 29 May 1968. SFAR 21 deals with certain prohibited transactions with Southern Rhodesia and provides in section 2: '(c) No US air carrier may operate any aircraft, and no person may operate any aircraft owned or chartered by any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or registered under the laws of the United States: '(1) To or from Southern Rhodesia; or '(2) In co-ordination with any airline company constituted, or aircraft registered, in Southern Rhodesia, whether by connecting flight, interline agreement, block booking, ticketing or any other method of linking up. '(d) The prohibitions in this section apply to the owner, lessee, operator or charterer of the aircraft and any other officer, employee or agent of any of them who participates in the prohibited carriage or operation. '(e) Any carriage or operation the purpose or effect of which is to evade any prohibition of this section is also prohibited.' "Executive Order 11419, dated 29 July 1968, assigns the responsibility to enforce this provision to the Department of Transportation, which, in turn, has delegated it to the Federal Aviation Administration. "We are particularly concerned with interline agreements, both bilateral and multilateral, with Air Rhodesia. We are equally concerned with the activities of airline travel agents which ticket on Air Rhodesia. A series of investigations has been initiated. "We solicit your assistance in ensuring that /airline or agency concerned/ operates in full conformity with SFAR 21. "If you have any questions or we can be of any assistance, please advise US. i 23. At the same meeting, the Committee decided that the Secretary of the Committee should communicate with i4r. Morton to obtain further clarification concerning the other aspects of his testimony as listed for the Committee and reproduced in paragraph 11, above. The Committee also decided that notes should be prepared for its consideration for transmission to the appropriate Governments with respect to the items mentioned in subparagraphs (e) and (g) of that list. 24. A letter dated 2 July 1974 was addressed to Mr. Morton by the Committee Secretary. 25. Replies were received from the Director-General of IATA, Iceland, the Federal Republic of Germany, Colombia, Czechoslovakia, Thailand, Luxembourg, Poland, Turkey and Austria, the substantive parts of which read as follows:

(i) Letter dated 1 July 1974 from the Director-General of IATA "May I refer to your letter of 9 May 197h and my interim acknowledgment of 30 May 1974 on the subject of a statement by the United Nations' sanctions committee of the Security Council established under resolution 253 (1968). "In accordance with the decision taken by the Executive Committee's mid-year meeting in Colorado Springs, I have advised airlines participating in the IATA interline agreement and IATA agency programme that IATA will, with effect from 1 July 197h, cease to carry out any function assigned to it under the applicable IATA Traffic Conference resolutions with respect to Air Rhodesia and agents located in Rhodesia. "I have also requested IATA members and non-IATA carriers who have concurred with Air Rhodes' a in the interline agreement to withdraw their concurrence, and further requested members who have agents appointed in Rhodesia under the IATA agency programme, to withdraw their appointments. "Appropriate inst-uctions have been issued to the IATA departments concerned with these matters. "You will appreciate that IATA has taken this action pursuant to its policy of co- operation with the United Nations and its specialized agencies although, as I have previously mentioned, I am satisfied that IATA's involvement in the administration of these programmes was carried out at all times in accordance with the applicable Canadian law to which this Association is subject. "In response to the request contained in paragraph 6 of the Security Council Committee's statement, I am attaching a document which answers in detail the questions which have been asked." ATTACHmeNT "A. Date on which IATA was first approached by Air Rhodesia for participation in the multilateral interline traffic apreements (passenger and cargo) 30 October 1967. "B. Date on which IATA informed parties to the agreements that Air 'Rhodesia had applied for participation - 23 November 1967. "C. The following airlines became parties to the agreements with respect to Air Rhodesia on the dates set opposite their names as the result of notifications of concurrence by them (or by Air Rhodesia). Such notifications were by letter or telex addressed to TIATA, usually with copy to the other party. -66-

"?Group Countries or areas* "1. Aviacion y Comercio, S.A. Indian Airlines New Zealand National Airways Air Comores "2. Air Ceylon Ltd. Allegheny Airlines, Inc. Royal Air Maroc EL AL Israel Airlines Ltd. Nordair Ltd. Aloha Airlines, Inc. Wien Air Alaska, Inc. "3. The Flying Tiger Line, Inc. Seaboard World Airlines, Inc. "4. American Airlines, Inc. Air Canada Air France Air India Aeronaves de Mexico, S.A. Aerolineas Argentinas Alaska Airlines, Inc. Aerovi'as Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. (AVIANCA) FINNAIR Oy ALITALIA, Linee Aeree Italiane Braniff Airways Ltd. Air Botswana (Pty) Limited Continental Airlines, Inc. CP Air (Canadian Pacific-Air) Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. Cyprus Airways Ltd. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Empresa de Transportes Aereos de Angola, SARL Eastern Air Lines, Inc. Flugfelag Islands H.F. (ICELANDAIR) P.N. Garuda Indonesian Airways Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. Spain India New Zealand Comoro Islands Sri Lanka United States Morocco Israel Canada United States United States United States United States United States Canada France India Mexico Argentina United States Colombia Finland Italy United States Botswana United States Canada Hong Kong Cyprus United States Angola United States Iceland Indonesia United States 1 September 10 ' 2 March 1968 1 May 1968 1 January 1.*l 1 July 1968 1 May 1968 1 May 1968 1 May 1968 1 July 1969 1 September 1968 3 March 1969 1 January 1971 2 March 1--8 March 19Ft; May 1968 May 1960 March 19( July 196 May 1968 May 197' July l! 1 Sep-t .,.,1 JulyI- 1 May 19 " 1 July 195Y 1 January 1972 March 19,8 2 March 1068 1 May 1968 2 March 1968 1 JuJ - 1968 2 March 1968 2 March 1968 3 March 1971 1 January 1969 * The column showing countries for ease of reference. or areas has been added by the Secretariat -67-

"tGroup "4. IBERIA, Lineas Aereas de Spain Espafia, S.A. Aerolinee ITAVIA Italy Air Inter France Japan Air Lines Co Ltd. Japan Air Jamaica (1968) Ltd. Jamaica Korean Air Lines, Inc. Republic of Korea KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Netherlands Kuwait Airways Corp. Kuwait LUXAIR Belgium Deutsche Lufthansa AG Federal Republic of Germahy Leeward Islands Air Transport Antigua-West Services Ltd. Indies ALM - Dutch Antillean Airlines Netherlands Antilles Polish Airlines (LOT) Poland AIR MADAGASCAR Madagascar Middle East Airlines Airliban Lebanon Malaysian Airlines System Malaysia National Airlines, Inc. United States Northwest Airlines, Inc. United States Olympic Airways S.A. Greece Ceskoslovenske Aerolinie Czechoslovakia Austrian Airlines Austria Ozark Air Lines, Inc. United States Pan American World United States Airways , Inc. Pakistan International Pakistan Airways Corp. Philippine Air Lines, Inc. Philippines Air Malawi Limited Malawi Zambia Airways Corporation Zambia Syrian Arab Airlines Syria VARIG, S.A. Brazil Air Afrique Ivory Coast Hughes Air Corp. United States (d/b/a Air West) South African Airways South Africa SABENA Belgium Southern Airways, Inc. United States Singapore Airlines Limited Singapore Swiss Air Transport Co. Ltd. Switzerland Saudi Arabian Airlines Saudi Arabia Thai Airways International Ltd. Thailand Turk Hava Yollari Turkey Trans-Mediterranean Airways Lebanon 1 September 1968 2 March 1968 3 March 1969 2 March 1968 3 March 1971 1 January 1970 2 March 1968 1 July 1968 1 January 1969 2 March 1968 1 January 1969 1 January 1971 1 May 1968 1 May 1968 2 March 1968 1 July 1972 1 May 1968 1 May 1968 1 May 1968 1 September 1970 3 March 1971 1 July 1968 2 March 1968 1 May 1968 September 1969 March 1968 May 1968 November 1968 March 1968 November 1968 September 1968 March 1968 March 1968 July 1968 July 1972 March 1968 July 1968 July 1968 July 1968 July 1968 A

"Group "4. DETA - Linhas Aereas de Mogambique Transportes Aereos Portugueses SARL Trans World Airlines, Inc. Transair Ltd. United Air Lines, Inc. Air Manila, Inc. Union de transports aeriens (UTA) Western Airlines, Inc. "5. Air Cape (Pty) Ltd. Countries or areas Mozambique Portugal United States Canada United States Philippines France United States South Africa 1 May 1968 2 March 1968 2 March 1968 1 May 1972 1 May 1968 1 November 1972 2 March 1968 1 July 1971 1 July 1971 MaersK Air Denmark rE: BOTH THE PASSENGER AND CARGO AGREEMENTS EXCEPT FOR in force between the two carriers concerned. (This former basic IATA Interline Traffic Agreement only) 1 January 1973 ARTICLE III OF EACH is the equivalent of "2: THE PASSENGER AGREEMENT AND THE CARGO AGREEMENT (EXCEPT FOR ARTICLE III THEREOF) is in force between the two carriers concerned. (This is the equivalent of the former basic IATA Interline Traffic Agreement plus the Supplemental Baggage Agreement) "3: THE PASSENGER AGREEMENT (EXCEPT ARTICLE III THEREOF) AND THE CARGO AGREEMENT is in force between the two carriers concerned. (This is the equivalent of the former basic IATA Interline Traffic Agreement plus the Supplemental Cargo Handling Agreement) "4: BOTH THE COMPLETE PASSENGER AGREEMENT AND THE COMPLETE CARGO AGREEMENT are in force between the two carriers concerned. (This is the equivalent of the former basic IATA Interline Traffic Agreement plus the Supplemental Baggage Agreement and the Supplemental Cargo Handling Agreement) "5: ONLY THE PASSENGER AGREEMENT is in force between the two carriers concerned. (No concurrences under the former Agreements are strictly equivalent to this, but it is tantamount to the passenger aspects only of the former basic IATA Interline Traffic Agreement plus the Supplemental Baggage Agreement. If a carrier code is underlined, Article III is not in effect between the two parties.) "6: ONLY THE CARGO AGREEMENT is in force between the two carriers concerned. (No concurrences under the former agreements are strictly equivalent to this, -69- '02 "NOT Grou "I1: are the Itz but it is tijantamount to the o aspects only of the former basic IATA Intexline Traffic Agreement - Is the Supplemental Cargo Handling Agreement)." (ii) Note datel 1 July i274 fronr'Iceland "The Permanent Mission of-Iceland to the United Nations .... has the honour, with 'eference to Lthe Secretary-General's/ note of 13 May 1974 to inform him that on 5 June I974 Icelandair terminated the IATA interline traffic agreement between Icelandair and Air Rhodesia Corporation. No agreement is therefore in existence at present between Icelandair and Southern Rhodesia." (tii) Note dated a July 1974 from the Federal Republic of German.y "The Acting Permanent Reprepentative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ note of 13 May 1974 and further to his own note of 6 June 1974 concerning the International Air Transport Assoeiation Interline Agreements Manual (6th edition), has the honour to inform the Secretary-General of the following: "The conclusion of interline agreements in general is not subject to the approval of the Federal Government. Thus the interline agreement between Deutsche Lufthansa AG and Air Rhodesia had, prior to the note of the Secretary-General, not come to the knowledge of the Federal Government. The Federal Government has, however, on receipt of the information of the Security Council Committee immediately taken the necessary steps to check the compatibility of the sa d agreement wth the sanctions of the Security Council. As soop as the final result' of this investigation is available, it will be conveyed- promptly." (iv) Note dated 8 July, 174 f rm Coiombia'" "The Permanent Mission of Colombia tothe United Nations ... with reference tofthe Secretary-Genexpl's pote/ of 13 May 1974, has the honour to state that Dr. Ernesto Vasquez Rocha, Secretary-General of Aerovias Nacionales de Colombia IAVIANCA), S.A., has indicated that the enterprise has duly notified the International Air Transport Association (IATA) of the termination of the passenger and/or cargo agreements entered into with Air Rhodesia." (v) Note dated 9 July 1974 from Czechoslovakia "The Permanent Representative of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic to the United Nations ... with reference to the Secretary-General's note dated 13 May 1974 concerning the IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements with Air Rhodesia has the honour to advise the following: -70-

"The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic does not recognize the illegal r~gime in Southern Rhodesia, does not maintain either any diplomatic or any other relations with it and consistently imglements all provisions of the resolution 253 (1968) of the Security Council, which the Government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic has had the honour to communicate in its preceding responses to the notes of the Secretary-General. "The investigations undertaken by the competent Czechoslovak authorities with regard to the information contained in the above note of the SecretaryGeneral dated 13 May 1974, have established that no interline transport between the Czechoslovak Airline Company, CSA, and Air Rhodesia has ever taken place. The Czechoslovak Airline Company, CSA, is one of the l.arties to the multilateral IATA interline traffic agreement, which was joined by the airline company Air Rhodesia. The Czechoslovak Airline Company, CSA, has, as of 19 April 1974, declared the said multilateral agreement invalid in relation to Air Rhodesia. "The Government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic wishes to take this opportunity to reiterate its full support of all measures adopted by the United Nations assisting the people of Southern Rhodesia to achieve the implementation of its inalienable rights, confirmed in the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples." (vi) Note dated 10 July 1974 from Thailand "The Charge d'affaires, a.i., of the Permanent Mission of Thailand to the United Nations ... has the honour to refer to /the Secretary-General's! note dated 13 May 1974, drawing the attention of His Thai Majesty's Government, upon the request of the Security Council Committee concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia, to page 16 of the International Air Transport Association Interline Agreements Manual (6th edition), which listed, among Others, Thai Airways International, Ltd., as appearing to have entered into IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements, or parts thereof, with Air Rhodesia. "The Charge d'affaires, a.i., has the honour to inform the SecretaryGeneral that the matter was duly conveyed to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bangkok and the following reply has now been received: "l. His Majesty's Government has cohsistently and fully complied with the United Nations Security Council resolutions concerning Southern Rhodesia, including resolution 253 (1968). "2. Investigations have been conducted as to the nature and substance of the information as contained in page 16 of the Manual. The facts are as follows: "2.1 Thai Airways International, Ltd., has for many years been a Party to the multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo of IATA. However, Air Rhodesia thereafter also became a party to the said agreement. -71-

"2.2 Upon receipt of the allegation, and taking into account His Majesty's Government's policy and unequivocal position in this matter, Thai Airways International, Ltd., on 3 June 1974, notified the International Air Transport Association (IATA) of its decision to withdraw with immediate effect from IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned. "2.3 The above decision of Thai Airways International, Ltd. was then conveyed in a memorandum (TY-52/1502) dated 12 June 1074, from Traffic Service Administrator of IATA to all members and non-IATA parties to interline agreements." (vii) Note dated 11 July 1974 from Luxembourg "The Permanent Representative of Luxembourg to the United Nations ... has the honour to refer to /the Secretary-General's note7 of 13 May 1974 concerning certain airlines-which have entered into agreements with Air Rhodesia. "It should be noted in this connexion that the interline- agreement between the Luxembourg LUXAIR Company and Air Rhodesia was cancelled with effect from 1 July 1974." (viii) Further note from Thailand dated 12 July 1974 "The Charge d'affaires, a.i., of the Permanent Mission of Thailand to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's note/ dated 10 July 1974 in which, inter alia, the memorandum (TS-52/1502) Eated 12 June 1974, from the Traffic Service Administrator of IATA to all members and non-IATA parties to interline agreements, on the withdrawal of Thai Airways International, Ltd. from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements passenger and cargo, in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned, iiith immediate effect, is referred to, has the honour to forward to the Secretary- General herewith a copy of the text of the said memorandum, with the request that the Secretary-General be so good as to have it transmitted to the Security Council Committee concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia for its information." ENCLOSURE Text of memorandum dated 12 June 1974 from the Traffic Service Administrator of IATA "By letter dated 3 June 1974 Thai Airways International. Ltd. advised IATA that they withdraw from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo, in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned, with immediate effect. -72-

"2. By letter dated 5 June 1974, Flugfelag Islands, H.F. (ICELANDAIR) advised IATA that, in accordance with article IX, subparagraph (4) (a) (i) of the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo, they withdraw from these agreements in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned with effect from 5 July 1974. "3. By letter dated 6 June 1974, Turk Hava Yollari A.O. advised IATA that they withdraw from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements passenger and cargo, in so fr as Air Rhodesia is concerned with effect from I July 1974. "4. By letter dated 7 June 1974, Hughes Air Corp. (d/b/a Airwest) advised IATA that they withdraw from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo, in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned with immediate effect. "5. By telex dated 10 June 1974, Aerovf as Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. advised IATA they withdraw from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo, in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned with immediate effect." (ix) Note dated 15 July 1974 from Poland "The Permanent Mission ofthe Polish People's Republic to the United Nations ... referring to the /Secretary-Generalls note/ of 13 May 1974 concerning the IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements with Air Rhodesia, has the honour, on instruction from its Government, to state the following: "The State authorities responsible for civil air transportation in the Polish People's Republic, after being informed by Polish Airlines LOT of the passenger and cargo agreement concluded with Air Rhodesia within the framework of IATA multilateral arrangements, immediately rejected the said agreement and declared it null and void. Polish Airlines LOT has terminated the agreement with an immediate effect and after an earlier termination of interline general sales agreement does not maintain any contacts whatsoever with Air Rhodesia." (x) Note dated 15 July 1974 from Turkey "Referring to your communication of 13 May 1974 concerning the IATA interline traffic and cargo agreements between Turkish Airlines and Air Rhodesia, I have the honour to inform you that Turkish Airlines, effective from 1 July 1974, withdrew from these agreements as far as Air Rhodesia is concerned. A copy of the letter dated 6 June 197h by Turkish Airlines, Inc., informing its Rhodesia counterpart of the situation is enclosed. "I take this opportunity to put on record that the Turkish Government is determined to continue to implement the measures so far taken by the Security -73-

Council

26. By a letter dated 23 July 1974, the Reverend Donald Morton supplied additional information as requested by the Committee at the 201st meeting. The information was from the United Touring Company Southern Africa Agents' Manual: 1973/74, which indicated that there were an operating company in Malawi, overseas offices in Australia, the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Kingdom and overseas representation in Canada, Japan, Mexico, Singapore and the United States of America, all engaged in promoting tourism in Southern Rhodesia. The overseas representation in each of the countries concerned was listed under the name of WDI Mundy, Inc., which Mr. Morton stated was just another name for Rhodesian tourist promotion. 27. The additional information supplied by Mr. Morton was incorporated into the text of the note proposed for transmission to the appropriate Governments as indicated in paragraph 23, above. At the time of preparation of the present report the full text of the note was still under consideration. 28. Replies were received from Denmark, the Republic of Korea, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, India, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Italy and Kenya (also on behalf of Uganda and the United Republic of Tanzania), the substantive parts of which read as follows: (i) Note dated 24 July 1974 from Denmark "Investigation carried out by the Danish Foreign Ministry has shown the following: "The private Danish Airline, Maersk Air, entered into IATA interline traffic agreements with respect to Air Rhodesia in October 1972, when Maersk Air was recognized as associate member of IATA and participant in IATA interline cargo agreements. In accordance with the rules of IATA, Maersk Air at that time distributed a stenciled note to those airlines which were listed as members of IATA, requesting their consent that Maersk Air was accepted as participant in the above-mentioned IATA agreements. Maersk Air received, inter alia, the consent of Air Rhodesia, but has never operated to or from Southern Rhodesia or at any time issued or accepted tickets or consignment notes which have concerned Air Rhodesia or in any form made economic transactions with Air Rhodesia. "Maersk Air, on 27 May 1974, informed IATA that it was terminating its participation in the interline agreements in so far as these concerned Southern Rhodesia. "With reference to the request of the Security Council Committee ... to receive the texts of legislation or administrative orders relevant to the implementation of paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968), the Acting Permanent Representative of Denmark has the honour to inform the Secretary-General that the royal decree of 18 September 1968 is still the foundation for the Danish implementation of the sanctions imposed by the Security Council against Southern Rhodesia. The text of the royal decree was forwarded to the Security -75-

Council with the note of 9 October 1968, from the Permanent Representative of Denmark. The note has been reproduced in document S/8786/Add.3, of 1 November 1968. "Considering the above-given information, the Danish Foreign Ministry wishes to note that it finds that the private airline, Maersk Air, has acted in good faith by entering into the interline agreements in question." (ii) Note dated 24 July 1974 from the Republic of Korea "Korean Airlines Co., Ltd., withdrew from the International Air Transport Association interline traffic agreements - complete passenger and cargo, in so far as Air Rhodesia Corporation is concerned, effective 15 July 1974." (iii) Note dated 26 July 1974 from the Federal Republic of Germany "The Acting Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations ... has the honour to inform the Secretary-General of the following: "Security Council resolution 253 (1968), paragraph 6, has been transformed into German law by article 21 of the Air Transport Act and article 44a of the Foreign Trade Ordinance. "The Federal Government has requested the Deutsche Lufthansa A.G. to terminate its interline agreement with Air Rhodesia. The Lufthansa intends to take this step in the near future, after co-ordinating it with the neighbouring European airline companies." (iv) Note dated 29 July 1974 from the Netherlands "During the month of April of this year, the Netherlands Government gained knowledge of the existence of an interline traffic agreement between KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and Air Rhodesia Corporation. "The Netherlands Government, thereupon, pointed out to KLM that the agreement concerned constituted a breach of paragraph 6 of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). "In the meantime, KLM has informed the Netherlands Government of the termination of the aforesaid agreement with Air Rhodesia Corporation as of 9 May 1974. KLM, furthermore, notified the Netherlands Government that it has given unequivocal instructions to all KLM establishments, and in particular those based in the United States, to cease giving any co-operation whatsoever with regard to organized vacation travel to Southern Rhodesia. "As far as it concerns questions related to AtM Dutch Antillean Airlines the Netherlands Government will revert to this matter after the results of -76- consultations being held in this respect with the Government of the Netherlands Antilles are known." (v) Note dated 30 July 1974 from New Zealand "The Charge d'affaires, a.i., is pleased to inform the Secretary-General that, as a result of inquiries made by the New Zealand Government in compliance with the Committee's request, the IATA interline traffic agreement (passenger and cargo) between the New Zealand National Airways Corporation and Air Rhodesia has now been terminated. "A copy of the United Nations Sanctions (Southern Rhodesia) Regulations 1968 (New Zealand), of which regulation 6 implements paragraph 6 of resolution 253 (1968), is attached." (vi) Note dated 31 July 1974 from India "The Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations ... has the honour to state that Indian Airlines and Air India have already withdrawn their concurrence in the IATA interline agreement with Air Rhodesia." (vii) Note dated 1 August 1974 from Morocco "The Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United Nations with reference to /the Secretary-General's note- of 13 May 1974 commenting to the effect that Royal Air Maroc (RAM) is one oT several airlines which appear to have signed agreements with Air Rhodesia, has the honour to inform him that, following investigations by the competent authorities, the Moroccan Government has assured it that RAM has not signed any agreement with Air Rhodesia. The list in question refers to a multilateral agreement entitled 'Interservice agreementt, concluded on the initiative of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and designed primarily to ensure the interchangeability of traffic documents between operators. Considering the date of entry into force of that agreement (1947), which was prior to independence, the agreement must have been signed by Air Atlas. "In view of Morocco's policy of solidarity with and support for the liberation movements in southern Africa, Royal Air Maroc has never concluded any agreement with Air Rhodesia. "Furthermore, to avoid any misunderstanding, Royal Air Maroc will officially notify IATA of its intention to terminate the interservice agreement in respect of Air Rhodesia." *iii) Iote dated 5 August 1974 from Saudi Arabia "The Permanent Mission of Saudi Arabia to the United Nations ... has the honour to convey the following explanation as received from the Government of Saudi Arabia: -77-

"When the Saudi Arabian Airlines 'Saudia' joined IATA in 1967, it became a party to certain multilateral agreements in force at the time, as is the case with several other airlines, and Air Rhodesia seems to have been a party to those agreements. "However, the Government of Saudi Arabia have officially informed IATA on 18 June 1974 that they have withdrawn from the joint transport agreement with Air Rhodesia and that this decision has been communicated to all 'Saudia' offices at home and abroad, it includes non-acceptance of Air Rhodesia tickets or shipping documents and non-transferability of 'Saudia' tickets to Air Rhodesia. "It may be mentioned in this respect that since March 1972 there have been no accounts or funds between the two airlines or any other transaction." (i,:) Note dated 22 August 1974 from Italy "The Permanent Representative of Italy to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's7 note of 20 May 1974, has the honour to inform His Excellency that ALITALIA (the Italian national airline) has decided to withdraw from the agreement that, on a multilateral basis and under IATA sponsorship, it had previously acceded to with Air Rhodesia." (x) Note dated 26 August 1974 from Kenya "The Permanent Representative of the Republic cf Kenya to the United Nations ... has the honour to state that the Governments of the Republic of Kenya, the Republic of Uganda and the United Republic of Tanzania have carefully examined allegations that East African Airways Corporation may have had some interline agreements with Air Rhodesia. "The three Governments have now been assured by the Chairman of the Corporation that the Board of East African Airways Corporation has, with effect from 27 May 1974, issued directives to stop forthwith all kinds of dealings with Air Rhodesia and emphasized that the illegal regime's airlines flight coupons or any other travel warrants will not be accepted for travel on East African Airways services. "The three Governments have, in turn, instructed the Chairman of East African Airways Corporation to exercise utmost vigilance to ensure that no co-operation of any kind is extended to Air Rhodesia and that all currently outstanding bookings made on behalf of Southern Rhodesia are cancelled forthwith. "The Permanent Representative of the Republic of Kenya to the United Nations is forwarding this communication on behalf of the three Governments, partner States in the East African Airways Corporation." -78-

29. A note dated 29 August 1974 was sent to Canada, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the case was still outstanding and informing it that the Committee, in accordance with the provisions of Security Council resolution 333 (1973), would soon publish the next quarterly list of Governments that failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months. 30. A reply dated 5 September 1974 was received from Madagascar, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Representative of the Republic of Madagascar to the United Nations ... has the honour to communicate /to the Secretary-General7 the observations of his Government: "With regard to relations between Air Madagascar and Air Rhodesia, the interline air transport agreement to which the Security Council Sanctions Committee referred is not a bilateral agreement; it is a multilateral agreement concluded through IATA to which approximately i00 airline companies are party and which is concerned principally with the acceptance of transport documents of one company by the others. "Air Madagascar, in the hope that all the other airline companies will do likewise, has requested the IATA secretariat to cancel all reciprocal arrangements between Air Madagascar and Air Rhodesia laid down in the multilateral transport agreement." 31. Two replies dated 11 September we:e received from Canada, the substantive parts of which read as follows: (W First note "The Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations ... has the honour to refer to /the Secretary__General's7 note of 13 May 1974 concerning airlines which appeared to have entered into IATA passenger and/or cargo agreements, or parts thereof, with Air Rhodesia. Among these airlines, which were listed on page 16 of the International Air Transport Association Interline Agreements Manual, were Transair Limited, Nordair Limited, Canadian Pacific Air and Air Canada. "The Permanent Representative of Canada is pleased to advise the Secretary-General that, as a result of the Canadian Government's inquiries pursuant to the Secretary-General's note, all Canadian airlines involved, namely, Transair Limited, Nordair Limited, Canadian Pacific Air and Air Canada, have terminated interline ticketing and agency agreements with Air Rhodesia." (ii) Second note "The Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations ... has the honour to refer to /the Secretary-General's7 notes of 15 May and 29 August 1974 concerning the question of airline agreements between a number -79- of airlines and Air Rhodesia. In these notes it was pointed out that the agreements in question are arranged through IATA, which is incorporated by act of the Canadian Parliament and which also administers passenger and cargo agency programs under which agents in Rhodesia have been approved. "The Permanent Representative of Canada is pleased to advise the Secretary-General that, as a result of the Canadian Government's inquiries pursuant to the Secretary-General's notes, IATA, as of 1 July 1974, has ceased to carry out any function as liaison, contact or medium for conclusion of agreements between member airlines and Air Rhodesia. 32. Replies were also received from Finland, the Ivory Coast, Lebanon, the Netherlands and Italy, the substantive parts of which read as follows: (i) Note dated 12 September 1974 from Finland "The Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations ... has the honour to inform /the Secretary-General_ of the following: "As IATA has ceased to carry out the functions assigned to it under the IATA interline agreements with respect to Air Rhodesia, the question of any IATA interline agreements which would link Finnair Oy and Air Rhodesia has thus immaterialized." (ii) Note dated 18 September 1974 from the Ivory Coast "The Permanent Mission of the Ivory Coast to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's! note concerning agreements said to have been concluded by Air-Afrique with Air Rhodesia, has the honour to inform him that on receipt of his note an inquiry was carried out by the Government and that it has been established that up to 7 June 1974, the date on which Air-Afrique terminated it, Air-Afrique was linked commercially with Air Rhodesia by an interline agreement within the framework of the TATA interline agreement. "Although Air-Afrique was a party to this international arrangement of IATA from its inception, the amount of business done with Air Rhodesia has remained very small. "Since the termination of the agreement, which took effect on 7 July 1974, Air-Afrique has had no further relations with Air Rhodesia." (iii) Note dated 16 October 1974 from Lebanon "The Permanent Mission of Lebanon to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's/ note dated 13 May 1974, has the honour to request him to inform the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia that Trans-Mediterranean Airways and Middle East Airlines do not fly -80- to or from Southern Rhodesia and do not provide connexions with airline companies incorporated in Southern Rhodesia or with aircraft registered in that country. "The Permanent Mission of Lebanon also has the honour to transmit herewith to the Secretary-General a copy of the note from Middle East Airlines concerning that company's withdrawal in so far as Air Rhodesia is concerned from the IATA intercompany agreement to which it had subscribed." _kCLOSUR.I Letter dated 17 May 1974 from the Interline Manager addressed to all managers and sales managers, all station managers and station representatives and heads of sections of the Middle East Airline 'This is to advise of our withdrawal from the IATA multilateral interline traffic agreements - passenger and cargo, in as far as Rhodesia Corporation is concerned. "Please cross out the name of Air Rhodesia Corp. from page 1 of the interline agreements list covered by our Circular TSD/INT-1728, dated 27 December 1973. "The G.S.A. Agreement between MEA and Air Rhodesia Corporation, whereby Air Rhodesia acted as our GSAs in Rhodesia, was also cancelled. "Both cancellations, of the interline agreement and GSA, come into effect as of 15 June 1974, after elapse of the 30 days notice period." (iv) Note dated 7 November 1974 from the Netherlands "The Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations ... further to his note of 29 July 1974, concerning interline agreements entered into by KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and ALM Dutch Antillean Airlines with Air Rhodesia (Case No. INGO-4), has the honour to inform the Secretary- General that ALM Dutch Antillean Airlines has terminated its interline agreement with Air Rhodesia." (v) Note dated 5 December 1974 from Italy "The Permanent Representative of Italy to the United Nations ... with reference to his note of 22 August 1974, has the honour to inform His Excellency that also 'ITAVIA', the Italian Air Company - as previously done by ALITALIA - has decided to withdraw from the agreement that, on a multilateral basis and under IATA sponsorship, it had previously acceded to with Air Rhodesia." -81-

33. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the Chairman sent a letter dated 11 September 1974 to the Director-General of IATA, the substantive text of which reads as follows: "You will no doubt recall that, at the request of the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia, the Secretary-General of the United Nations sent to you, in a letter dated 9 May 1974, the text of a statement expressing our concern over the existence of IATA intercompany agreements with Air Rhodesia. 'In return, the Secretary-General transmitted to the Committee your replies dated 30 May and 1 July 1974, in which you explained the circumstances in which the agreements had been concluded and the measures that had just been taken by your Association to end them. "The Committee, which took note of those measures with satisfaction at the time, is now preparing its annual report to the Security Council and will certainly mention, in connexion with this case, the co-operation of your Association. "In instructing me to inform you of this decision, the Committee has also asked me to express its appreciation for your effective assistance." 34. At the 221st meeting, the representative of the United Kingdom informed the Committee that the question of the reported existence of interline agreements between Cathay Pacific Airways Limited and Air Rhodesia had been investigated and that Cathay Pacific Airways had cancelled all its interline agreements with Air Rhodesia as from 1 July 1974. Case No. INGO-5. Ferrcchrc:e imported into Spain: information obtained from non-governmental sources 1. Confidential information was received from non-governmental sources concerning various transactions of ferrcchrome between Rhodesia and Spain. On instructions from the Chairman, the communication submitting the information was acknowledged; a summary of the information was made for the Committee as follows: Summary of the information Cargoes of ferrochrcme of Southern Rhodesian origin are being imported into Spain with documents issued in South Africa by the Chamber of Commerce of Johannesburg. In particular, the Spanish Department of Commerce authorized the following imports: (a) 175,930 kilos of ferrosilicon chror:; (b) 141,620 kilos of ferrosilicon chCroe; (c) 200,020 kilos of low-carbon ferrochrcrte. The three imports above were authorized on 15 November 1973. -.82-

(d) 200,000 kilos of low-carbon ferrochrome, licence No. 4592000; (e) 500,000 kilos of ferrochrome with a maximum of 0.05 per cent carbon. The two imports above were authorized on 29 March 1974. In all the above cases the importer was the firm Cometal, S.A., Jose Lazaro Galdiano 4, Madrid 16, and the seller was Handelsgesellschaft in Zilrich, A.G., Kreuzstrasse 26- CH-8034, Zurich. 2. At the Committee's request, following informal consultations, the SecretaryGeneral sent notes dated 22 May 1974 to Spain and Switzerland, transmitting the information thus received and requesting comments thereon, as well as copies of any documents that might be given to the investigating authorities. 3. In the absence of replies from Spain and Switzerland, the Committee decided to include those Governments in the quarterly list of Governments that had failed to respond to its inquiries within the prescribed period of two months, which was issued as a press release on 17 September 1974. 4. A reply dated 25 September 1974 was received from Switzerland, the substantive part of which reads as follows: "The Permanent Observer of Switzerland to the United Nations ... with reference to /the Secretary-General's7 note of 22 May 1974 concerning Case No. INGO-5 ... has the honour to inform him of the following: "Although imports of chrome into Spain are basically the concern of that State, the Federal authorities have nevertheless carefully examined the case drawn to their attention by the Secretary-General in view of the reference to a Swiss company in connexion with the transactions in question. "The Handelsgesellschaft in ZMrich, AG, acknowledges that the Cometal, SA, company in Madrid is, in fact, one of its clients and asserts that its dealings with it are, in the present instance, restricted to South African products guaranteed as such both by the certificates of origin and by the actual nature of the merchandise." 5. A reminder was sent to Spain on 29 September 1974. Case No. INGO-6. Tobacco report: Report submitted by the Anti-Apartheid Movement of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, Netherlands 1. By a communication dated 17 May 1974 the Anti-Apartheid tovement of the Ietherlands (AABN) submitted to the Committee a report on transactions involving tobacco of Southern Rhodesian origin. 2. At the 205th meeting on 28 August 1974, the Committee decided that a case Should be opened on the matter; the economic expert should prepare a summary of -83- the report; i note should be sent by the Chairman to the Anti-Anartheid Movement, expressing the Committee's gratitude to that organization; and an appropriate note should be sent to the Netherlands on the matter. 3. A summary of the report prepared ty the economic expert is reproduced below: Summary of the tobacco report (1) The high degree of organization of the tobacco industry is the reason why the smuggling of Rhodesian tobacco has been able to flourish for so long - undetected but not unsuspected. The Netherlands is massively involved in the Southern Rhodesian tobacco trade. The smugglers have developed considerable sophistication in camouflaging the physical movement of Rhodesian goods, especially with false certificates of origin. (2) After two years of effective campaigning to support the liberation struggle in southern Africa, with little official response, the AABN presented to the press on 17 May 1974 its tobacco report. (3) Work on the tobacco issue was initially published in June and July 1973 by the Dutch newspaper Het Vrije Volk, which has consistently devoted coverage to the United Nations sanctions campaign. The newspaper's reports on the Rhodesian tobacco imports into the Netherlands sparked enough public interest to prompt the Dutch Minister of Economic Affairs to state in Parliament that he would inquire into the need for a close check on the origin of the tobacco being traded. The statistics presented in Het Vrije Volk were flawless; the findings staggering: one third of Dutch tobacco imports come from Southern Rhodesia - 6,000 metric tons per year. It is no wonder that the AABN was stunned when the Economic Control Service, the Dutch Government's organ for investigating economic offences, at the beginning of May 1974, reported to the authorities that no trace of tobacco smuggling could be found in the Netherlands and that further investigation would be uncalled for. (4) During the research carried out by the AABN into the tobacco trade, a number of documents linked Joba Chemicals/Etb. Zephyr Co., Amsterdam, to the importation of large amounts of cigarettes from the Mozambique port of Beira. The company in question had access to vast quantities of cigarettes that were warehoused in Beira from late 1972 until early 1973. It was shown that there were 4.8 million State Express 555 cigarettes in Beira and 1 million of the same brand, as well as supplies of Embassy, Lucky Strike and Life (king-size filter tip), in the free port area of Amsterdam. Furthermore, there were supplies of Peter Stuyvesant, Rothman and Benson and Hedges available from Beira, and prospective clients were requested to sample Gold Leaf, Embassy, Lucky Strike, Benson and Hedges and State Express before sale. Offerings of those cigarettes were made to the following companies: (a) Messrs. Calimex, P.O. Box 100631 565 Solingen-l, Federal Republic of Germany

(b) Zerss and Co. Scheeps Hakelaar Hamburg, Federal Republic of Germany (c) Avimar Antwerp, Belgium (d) Briders Heineman Hamburg, Federal Republic of Germany Stocks of the cigarettes were held at the firm Datema Rotterdam. All of the above companies asked for and actually received samples. (5) The following additional firm was sent samples of State Express: UBSD, Private Entrepot 30 Merhemse 2000 Antwerp, Belgium (6) The Joba cigarette business was highly suspect, and the Zerss firm requested Joba in a letter to give the origin of the cigarettes, especially the Peter Stuyvesant brand, before any serious consideration could be given to the offerings. Joba apparently never replied. (7) Three Dutch companies, Tobacco Export Import Compagnie-TEIC (a Rothman subsidiary), A.L. van Beek International, B.V., and Oskar Rohte Jishoot, are the basic organizers, according to the documents. These three deal mainly with Salisbury Tobacco Exporters (Saltobex), which is jointly owned by Oskar Rohte Jishoot and TEIC. Documents from these companies show that on 31 March 1974, TEIC received $R 74,554.50 (f. 383,955.68) in dividends. Texport Holdings and Texport and Tobacco Exporters (Private), Ltd. (with addresses in Malawi), of which 25 per cent and 50 per cent, respectively, are held by TEIC, contributed $R 11,220 (f. 54,947.61) and Malawi K 6,812 (f. 21,679.19) of the total dividends. (8) The annual report of TEIC of 1969 called the progress of the Rhodesian connexion satisfactory. Other documents revealed that Saltobex has a current loan account with TEIC amounting to f. 566,105.10. (9) The international corporate structures of the two companies (A.L. van Beek International, B.V., and TEIC) are vast and complicated. The following list represents the subsidiaries of A.L. van Beek International: (a) Balkan Tabakhandelgesellschaft, mbH, Federal Republic of Germany (b) A.L. van Beek (Onroerend Goed), N.V. (c) Comercial Overbeck Cia., Brazil (d) Hobeeka-Lancaster C por A (A), Dominican Republic (e) Hofor Tobacco Corporation, United States of America (f) Hollandsch Turksche Tabak Mij, N.V., Izmir, Turkey (g) Hollandsch Turksche Tabak Mij, N.V., Samsun, Turkey -85-

(h) "Holtab" Hollandsche Tabak Mij (i) "Holtab" Hollandsche Tabak Mij, N.V., Greece (j) F.C. Martfeld and Cia, Ltda. (A), Brazil (k) Reneman and Van der Heijden, N.V. (A) (1) Rhodesian Tobacco Suppliers (Pty), Ltd., Rhodesia, (RTS) (m) Rhodesian Tobacco Packers (Pty), Ltd. (A), Rhodesia (n) Tobacco del Caribe (Colombia), Ltda., Colombia (o) Tobacco Suppliers, Ltd., Malawi (p) Tobacco Suppliers (Zambia), Ltd., Zambia (10) TEIC is one member of a corporate family numbering around 83 firms, stretching from Jamaica to Fiji. (11) There is regular briefing between A.L. van Beek Rotterdam and the Hofor Corporation in New York. It was indicated in some documents that A.L. van Beek reports on the quality of produce available at the Rhodesian tobacco auctions and instructs Hofor to use the information as a basis for making offers to American customers. (12) TEIC organizes its smuggling in a manner similar to that of A.L. van Beek. From Amsterdam there is communication with other Rothman connexions throughout the world. For instance, Verafumos (a Brazilian company) is one extremely important link. Verafumos keeps Saltobex in Rhodesia briefed on the Brazilian situation in weekly reports. Types of tobacco, mainly Virginia flue- cured, from Verafumos and Saltobex correspond closely, and both companies largely supply the same clients. (13) Minutes of a meeting held on 28 February 1974 at Verafumos, Vera Cruz, Brazil, illustrated the intense degree of international organization of the tobacco trade. Present at that meeting were the top leaders of the industry: (a) J. A. Rupert - Executive Director of Rupert International, South Africa (b) A. V. Guimaraes - Chief Executive of A. Tabaqueira, Sarl, Portugal (c) F. P. Noqueira - Chief Engineer of A. Tabaqueira, Sarl, Portugal (d) Mario Soares - Chief Executive, Cia Industrial de Fumos Lopes, Brazil (e) F. W. van Zyl - Chief leaf buyer and an Executive Director of Rupert International, South Africa (f) P. P. Bing - President, Verafumos, Brazil At that meeting, Mr. F. A. G. Jansen of Saltobex was also present. (14) The meeting demonstrated the high degree of vertical and horizontal organization of Rothman International. All persons at the meeting represented firms affiliated with the multinational corporation, and the scope of operations extends all the way from planting to packing, producing and dealing in cigars and cigarettes. Within an organization of this nature, it becomes relatively simple to camouflage Rhodesian smuggling. To trace the path of one bale of tobacco from Rhodesia is almost an impossibility. (15) Examination of the turnover figures of TEIC would give rise to suspicions. In 1970, the total amounted to f. 10 million. Of this, f. 3 million was from -86-

Mozambique. A further f. 2 million was from "Virginia Laurens", which could represent Rhodesian trade, since Laurens is a Rothman affiliate in Switzerland, where Rhodesian tobacco is allowed. Thus one half of TEIC imports are from southern Africa, with no specific reference in its internal records to South Afric or Southern Rhodesian tobacco. It is even more difficult to explain these totals when one notes that, according to the FAO export statistics, Mozambique, in 1970, exported only 932 tons of tobacco, but TEIC imported more than twice that amount from Mozambique. (16) Nevertheless, even more direct evidence of Rhodesian smuggling exists. For example, the following types of communications occur. On 28 March 1974, TEIC received a telex from the Einkauforganisation der Oesterreichischen Tabakregie (Austrian State tobacco monopoly), ordering a large quantity - 100 to 200 tons of South African "X40"-grade tobacco. TEIC confirmed the order and sent the following telex to Saltobex on the same day. "For Jansen dogs give boxing order x four 0 bunnyballs at a/00 award provisional quantity 100/200 groups subject boxing items definite price require weekly report re purchase basis total boxing-weight total sales price." Nowhere else in the normal trade does such coding appear. In TEIC communications it is used only to the Rhodesian affiliate. More such codes appear in the report. (17) The codes were broken by the AABN when it came across an incoming message of the same date that was not in code and had a few features in common with the coded message. The decoded telex is as follows: "For F. A. G. Jansen (of Salisbury Tobacco Exporters). Austrian State tobacco monopoly given an order for a consignment of X40-grade tobacco, bundled and bale-packed at our normal commission. Quantity required, 100 to 200 tons. Subject to the tobacco price being right, we require it to be shipped in weekly consignments and would like you to advise us on cheapest way to buy." (18) Besides the coded messages and the very close financial and technical links that exist between TEIC and Saltobex, there also appear in TEIC administration numerous cost-price calculations for tobacco f.o.b. Beira, including railage, all in Rhodesian dollars. (19) A.L. van Beek's communications with its Rhodesian connexions raised a great many suspicions. For instance, certain documents stated that an overdraft had been made by the Rhodesian Banking Corporation in favour of the A.L. van Beek Rhodesian subsidiary, Cosmos, amounting to R 1,030,310.70. This amount has also been reflected in the weekly reports of A.L. van Beek. (20) Other documentations included a report by Mr. van Meeteren of A.L. van Beek on a trip to the Canary Islands. He stated in that report that he was approached with requests for Southern Rhodesian tobacco, for which there was great demand but little supply. -87-

(21) The documents showed that a plan for the distribution of 605 tons (valued at f. 2.7 million) of Southern Rhodesian tobacco to six Dutch tobacco companies (van Nelle, van de Bigg, Niemeijer Gruno, Heepink and Reinders and Turmac) and three Danish ones (Tiedeman, Haberg and P and S) was drawn up by A.L. van Beek International for the year 1974-1975. (22) The major Dutch consumers, Philip Morris and Douwe Egberts, were not included in that plan. These firms have direct links to Rhodesia through TEIC. (23) According to FAO estimates, Southern Rhodesia produced about 62,000 tons of tobacco in 1972 and exported nearly 3,000 tons in that year. This estimate is remarkable, because all countries in the world - except South Africa, the Portuguese Territories and Switzerland - deny any Rhodesian tobacco imports. Since the above figures do not appear in the statistics of the reporting countries the conclusion is that shipment documents in respect of tobacco are largely falsified. Comparison of the above estimated export figure with the information given by the customs authorities of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (Australia, Canada, Japan, United States and Western Europe) shows that total export of tobacco reported by Angola, Mozambique and South Africa was 13,180 tons but the total import published by the OECD countries was 38,281 tons. The difference of 25,101 tons probably did not come from the official exporting countries but from Southern Rhodesia. (24) The Netherlands is by far the biggest southern Africa tobacco importer in the European Economic Community (EEC), for it imports about 17,364 tons out of 34,416, i.e., nearly 50 per cent of the total EEC imports. Furthermore, it is luite remarkable that the Netherlands imports three times as much tobacco from H1ozambique as Mozambique exported to the world in 1972; i.e., the reported Mozambique export was 1,940 tons and the reported Netherlands import was 6,833 tons. According to South African statistics, exports to the Netherlands were 2,000 tons in 1971, though the Netherlands had reported imports of about 8,000 tons from South Africa. (25) Consequently, communications between the Netherlands-based importers and their Rhodesian affiliates traced by the AABN prove that there exists a strong relationship. There is proof enough in the AABN report of the devious tactics employed to cover up current illicit trade. The international tobacco trade has many links, exposed in the report in question which are being used to distribute Rhodesian tobacco on a world-wide scale. From all the available information, the following observations can be made concerning the final destination of the illicit Rhodesian tobacco handled through the various international connexions described above: (a) There is enough circumstantial evidence to at least justify a thorough investigation of the Austrian tobacco monopoly's dealings with the TEIC; (b) There is close collaboration between the United States Hofor Corporation and A.L. van Beek on Rhodesian tobacco trading; -88-

(c) Similarly, there appear to be efforts by TEIC to promote trade in Rhodesian tobacco with the CIET Import en Export Blad N.V. in Antwerp; (d) Mitsui, of Japan, is involved in receiving Rhodesian tobacco via Rothmans' Verafumos connexion and discussions on commissions between Mitsui and Jansen of Saltobex have taken place. (26) On the basis of the AABN report, it appears that Security Council resolutions 217 (1965), 253 (1968) and 333 (1973), which prescribe sanctions against Southern Rhodesia, are being heavily violated in the Netherlands. The urgency of halting these violations requires an immediate action by the Netherlands and other Governments involved in the matter. (27) The concerns mentioned in this report are directly linked to Rhodesian tobacco. There are probably many more which may be blending a quantity of Rhodesian tobacco into their products. Documentation suggests that this may be the case with firms that are supplied mainly by firms in Brazil, Colombia and Paraguay. h. Also Rt thtz 205th meeting the representative of Austria informed the Committee that, since some of the alleged facts in the report referred to the subsidiary of the Austrian tobacco monopoly, Austria Einkaufsorganisation, his Government had immediately taken the matter up with the company concerned and had received a statement from it. The company stated that in 197h it had not concluded any sales contract for South African tobaccos with the Tobacco- ExportImport Company (TEIC) of Amsterdam. Austria Einkaufsorganisation had merely, in conformity with the common practice in the raw tobacco trade, expressed interest in purchasing up to 200 tons of South African X40-grade tobacco, subject to acceptance of samples and price quotations. In 1973 it had received more than 400 such sample offers. In the case under consideration, samples subsequently submitted showed that the tobacco was not of the required quality and therefore no contract for purchase was signed. The company stated that in order to comply with the recommendations of the Austrian Mission to the United Nations, it would refrain from buying South African tobacco from TEIC until further notice, although TEIC was a renowned tobacco firm with which it had had business relations for over 20 years in connexion with the purchase of raw tobacco from various parts of the world. Austria Einkaufsorganisation required certificates of origin for all purchases of tobacco from southern Africa and its sales contracts contained the clause that the tobaccos bought must not originate in Southern Rhodesia. It was, however, difficult for the company to find adequate substitutes for Rhodesian tobacco and it would be impossible to exclude offers of supplies from all other African States if quality standards were to be maintained. It would also be unwarranted on general grounds, since in recent years, the company had imported tobacco from a number of independent African States. With regard to the particular supply of tobacco referred to in the report, the Austrian company stated that it had been Offered by TEIC as tobacco originating from the Republic of South Africa and that -89- TEIC was fully aware that the Austrian company did not buy Southern Rhodesian tobacco. It was regrettable that misleading conclusions had been drawn from an incomplete presentation of information by a group which was not in a position to judge customary trade practices. The Austrian company had in fact suffered a financial loss over recent years owing to its agreement not to buy Rhodesian tobacco. 5. Further to paragraph 2, above, the Secretary-General sent a note dated I October 1974 to the Netherlands, the text of which had been adopted by the Committee following informal consultations. The substantive part of the note is reproduced below: "The Committee has received communication of a report on tobacco prepared by the Anti-Apartheid Movement of the Netherlands, a copy of which is attached. "'The Committee, noting in that report that allegations were made according to which part of the tobacco imported into the Netherlands was of Southern Rhodesian origin, decided to bring the matter to the attention of the Netherlands Government for any action it might deem appropriate to take and for any comment it might wish to make to the Committee. In particular, the Committee expressed concern regarding the allegations contained in the last page of the report that, according to the figures available, the amount of tobacco reported to be imported from Mozambique to the Netherlands was higher than the total amount of tobacco exported from that Territory. "The Committee indicated also that it would appreciate receiving a reply from His Excellency's Government on the matter at its earliest convenience, if possible within one month." 6. Similarly, the Chairman of the Committee sent a letter dated 12 September 1974 to the Chairman of the Anti-Apartheid Movement of the Netherlands, among other things, expressing the Committee's gratitude for that organizationss report. 7. A note dated 4 November 1974 was sent to the Netherlands, reminding that Government that a reply concerning the matter was still outstanding. -90-

Appendix LIST OF INDIVIDUALS AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS FROM WHICH COMMUNICATIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN 197h Individuals Mr. Darcy (USA) Non-governmental organizations African Liberation Support Committee (USA) Afro-Asian Peoples' Solidarity Organization (Egypt) American Comnittee on Africa (USA) Anti-Apartheid Committee (New Zealand) Anti-Apartheid Movement (Ireland) Anti-Apartheid Movement (Netherlands) Anti-Apartheid Movement (United Kingdom) Center for Social Action of the United Church of Christ (USA) Episcopal Churchmen for South Africa (USA) Halt All Racist Tours Movement - HART NEWS (New Zealand) International Air Transport Association (IATA) International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (Belgium) International Confederation of Free Trade Unions/World Confederation of Labour (Belgium) International Organization of Journalists (Czechoslovakia) International Shipping Federation, Ltd. (United Kingdom) Joint Task Force against Rhodesian Imports (USA) National Board of the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) (USA) United Nations Association of the United States of America (USA) -91-

Annex VI REPLIES RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENTS CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 21 OF THE COMMIITTEE'S SECOND SPECIAL REPORT APPROVED BY SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 333 (1973) As indicated in paragraph 111 of the present report, the following are the substantive parts of replies received from Governments in 1974: AUSTRALIA The Australian Government wishes to make the following comments on the breakdown of figures concerning the external trade of South Africa, Mozambique and Angola with Australia in respect of certain commodities listed in the attachment to His Excellency's note of 3 August under reference. South Africa Asbestos The United Nations publication Commodity Trade Statistics 1971 (Australia, Hong Kong, Thailand) a/ shows imports to Australia of this commodity from South Africa in 1971 as being 8,663 metric tons. Assuming that the United Nations Secretariat, in compiling the lists attached to His Excellency's note of 3 August, drew on this source, which is based in respect of Australian trade on information supplied by the Australian Bureau of Census and Statistics, it would appear that the figure 8.7 (in '000 metric tons), appearing in the column "Exports reported by South Africa", should instead have appeared in the column "Imports reported by partner countries", in place of the figure 6.0 (in '000 metric tons). A comparison of a selection of figures for other countries in respect of this and of the other relevant commodities, as well as the consistency of these figures throughout both the United Nations Statistical Papers and the attachment to His Excellency's note of 3 August, appears to support this explanation. Tobacco The Australian Government is unable to account for the apparent discrepancy of 8 tons but wishes to point out that the figure is relatively insignificant in comparison with the total trade reported for this item. Mozambique Tobacco The Australian Government wishes to point out that the United Nations publication Commodity Trade Statistics 1971 reveals that, in that year, Australia, in fact imported from Mozambique only 124 tons of tobacco, and not 124,000 tons, as stated in the annex to the note of 3 August. a/ Statistical Papers, series D, vol. XXI, Nos. 1-12. -92-

As in the foregoing case, investigations have not revealed any explanation for the apparent discrepancy of 124 tons, but the Australian Government considers that this amount is quite small in relation to the total imports of tobacco to Australia of 10,962 metric tons in the financial year 1971/72. In conclusion, the Australian Government wishes to make the following information available in response to the request contained in paragraph 8 of Security Council resolution 333 (1973) of 22 May. Australian imports of chrome, asbestos, nickel, pig iron, tobacco, meat and sugar 1972/73 Source 000kg $A'000 Chrome ore South Africa 586 16 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 8,154,000 kg; value $A 127,000) Ferrochrome South Africa 5,456 2,190 Sweden 535 139 Japan 1,634 538 Other 20 11 TOTAL 7,645 2,878 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 1,808,000 kg; value $A 458,000) Asbestos Austria 1 0.3 Canada 55,038 8,720.8 South Africa 7,809 1,177.2 Swaziland 2 0.4 Britain 0.6 1.8 United States 53 8.9 TOTAL 62,903.6 9,909.4 -93- 1972/73 Source 000 k.1 $A '000 AsbestGs (continued) (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 were 682,000 kg; value $A 83,000) Nickel Matte etc. Canada 928 2,021 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) Nickel and Nickel Alloys NewZealand 26 14 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) Ferronickel New Caledonia 1,337 671 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) Piz-iron (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) Tobacco, unmanufactured Brazil 217 153 China 178 81 Greece 722 1,028 Indonesia 49 67 Korea 587 424 Malawi 656 638 -94-

1972/73 Source Tobacco, fumanufactured (continued) 000 kg $A '000 Mo zambique Philippines 178 133 South Africa 14o 252 Thailand 400 596 Turkey 295 24 9 Tuky173 187 United States 6199 12,789 Zambia 44 2 Other 4 42 156 89 TOTAL 10,295 16,725 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 3,344,000 kg; value $A 2,855,000) Meat (fresh, chilled or frozen) New Zealand 71 114 (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) Sugar (Imports from Southern Rhodesia 1964/65 nil) BELGIUM Difficulties in comparing statistics published by -xporting countries and importing countries are not new. The disparities noted may be accounted for by various factors, such as the different periods to which these data refer. Furthermore, Belgium regularly furnishes the United Nations Secretariat with the statistics relating to its foreign trade. The figures relating to Belgian imports usually refer to trade with the countries of origin. On the other hand, the corresponding figures of the exporting countries refer to the countries of first destination. It frequently happens that this country is merely a broker and that the goods transported are not entered in the name of the final consignee. -95-

The regulations in force are such as to prohibit all trade with Southern Rhodesia, with the exception of the export for humanitarian purposes of certain products which appear on the list drawn up by the Security Council. Any false declaration by exporters is punishable by penal sanctions in Belgium. ISRAEL Regulations are in existence in Israel which clearly and unequivocably prohibit all imports whatsoever from Southern Rhodesia. Every care is taken to ensure that these regulations are duly complied with, and the competent authorities will also in the future take all necessary steps with this object in view. In so far as the aforementioned statistical discrepancies are concerned, which, in some instances, show higher export figures, and, in others, show higher import figures, no substantive reason for these discrepancies could be discovered in respect of the figures concerning Israel which appear in the relevant tables, mentioned in the notes under reference. It would appear that the discrepancies must have been caused by different systems of recording imports and exports, the time lag involved between the date of recording the exportation of a certain cargo (e.g., towards the end of a year) and the date of its arrival at its final destination in the beginning of the next year and other matters of similar technical nature. NEW ZEALAND The delay in responding to the Secretary-General's inquiry is regretted. The New Zealand authorities have now provided the following information on the conditions which New Zealand applies to the imports of the commodities mentioned in the Secretary-General's note of 3 August 1973. It is confirmed that these conditions were met in the case of the imports from South Africa and Angola referred to in the trade returns attached to the Secretary-General's note. Tobacco may be imported from South Africa only when accompanied by the appropriate certificate of origin. In the case of Virginian leaf tobacco, the Central Co-operative Tobacco Company is the sole agency through which the tobacco should be exported, and the certificate of origin must be made by this company. Western Province Co-operative Tobacco Growers Co., Ltd. is the sole agency through which all Turkish leaf tobacco should be exported, and the certificate of origin must be made by this company. All shipments of tobacco from South Africa, including those delivered from intermediate suppliers, must be accompanied by certificates of origin issued by the appropriate co-operative. Shipments from Angola may not be delivered unless: -96-

(a) The invoice is completely formal in preparation; (b) The goods are certified as "wholly the produce of" the country concerned or certified as to manufacture (and satisfactory evidence provided that any possible prohibited materials did not originate in Southern Rhodesia); (c) Examination of the goods shows no evidence of Rhodesian origin; and (d) There is no other evidence to suggest that the goods may be of Southern Rhodesian origin. These provisions apply equally to exports of asbestos from South Africa. As regards the discrepancies noted between statistics of exports from South Africa and Angola and those for New Zealand's imports from these sources, the New Zealand authorities have commented that these are due to the time lag between the dates of export of the goods and of their entry into New Zealand. For example, exports of South African tobacco to New Zealand in 1971 are recorded as nil, but New Zealand's import statistics for the first three months of 1972 show imports of 74 tons. The explanation is that the tobacco in question was exported in 1971 but did not arrive in New Zealand until early 1972. The same explanation would apply to the statistics for Angola tobacco. As regards imports of asbestos from South Africa, New Zealand's figures have been checked for 1971 and are confirmed as 1.3 thousand tons. -97-

Annex VII NOTE AND STATISTICAL DATA PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT ON SOUTHERN RHODESIAN TRADE FOR 1973 Southern Rhodesian exports 1. Southern Rhodesia's merchandise exports in 1973 were estimated to be $640 million a/ (compared with $474 million in 1972). The 70 odd countries whose import statistics are set out in appendix I show that Southern Rhodesian exports to them were distributed as follows: United States $26 million, Malawi $21 million, Zambia $12 million, Switzerland $8 million, other countries (shown in appendix I) $1 million, making a total of about $68 million (compared with $65 million in 1972). In addition to this recorded trade, it has been estimated that South Africa, together with Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland, b/ received Southern Rhodesian exports amounting to about $103 million. It would appear, therefore, that some $470 million of Southern Rhodesian exports have not been reflected in the corresponding 1973 import figures of world trade. This amount of exports appears to have reached world markets via Southern Rhodesia's neighbouring countries and most of the exports have been reflected in world trade as imports of the reporting countries from these neighbouring countries. 2. Evidence of the existence of these indirect exports is shown by a comparison of imports of 23 reporting countries c/ from S. Africa Customs Union, Mozambique, Zambia and Malawi, with the corresponding exports of these four countries for the period 1965-1973. The results are shown in table 1 below: a/ Up to 1972, Southern Rhodesia published figures for total exports and imports without analysis by either commodities or direction of trade. Beginning in 1973, however, Southern Rhodesia even suppressed publication of total trade figures. In the April 1974 issue of the Economic Survey of Rhodesia published by the Ministry of Finance, the following note appears immediately after the table of contents: "It is regretted that because of the United Nations' intensification of hostility towards Rhodesia and the consequent use to which certain statistical data can be put, it has been necessary to limit the amount of detail given in both the narrative and the tables to the Survey." b/ South Africa, Lesotho, Botswana, Swaziland and Namibia constitute the Customs Union of Southern Africa, hereinafter referred to as S. Africa Customs Union. c/ Market economy countries in Western Europe and Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. The United States has not been included in this investigation because its statistical treatment of some strategic commodities, such as uraniium ore, differs from that of South Africa. -98-

0\ V\r- 4-, (fl Q) cd 0-'C r: r41 C)>0 le C$ r41 0 oD O E i:: 41 r ~ 0 (1H 00 <443 cdý 1-o co H_ CM -4 CM t co ON U'\CO 0~ CM r-A 00 -4i -1 -:-:i--_ 0 r-i CM ,-1 U~0 Lr\ MI CMj 000 CM -:* - 0 COMc (fl t- -:a CO >0 0 NL l t- 0 ts- ;4 0 CM C UNO '.0 «4 -~ -~ 00~C fl efln ON1 0 ,XO c) "0CO(CDCM CM 0 - i-I nf CMJ CM ei t- (\J CM CM t~- 0 fl CMi -CM-JH- 1.0 CD CM efl CMICM fn CM 4 ;_i 0i 4 w~ 4>0 P4 r-4 P4 W cd cd m Z :,e ON\ 0 coI cM -ý <-i <-I ---.t W\ t-CMW\ U l -> cd 0 4-1 0 E-, -99- 4-) ,c: -4 ,0 0 4-, 4Q) c) C)

3. It will be noted from the data shown above that in 1965 there was a discrepancy of $73 million, representing imports received from S. Africa Customs Union and Mozambique by the 23 reporting countries over and above the exports that Mozambique and S. Africa Customs Union declared to have sent. These imports were generally known as shipments dispatched overseas by exporters in S. Africa Customs Union and Mozambique, handling merchandise of the former Federation of Rhodesia, which were treated as goods in transit by them but were treated as imports from Mozambique and S. Africa Customs Union by the reporting countries. This explanation is substantiated in the table above by the excess of the declared exports in 1965 of Zambia and Malawi to the 23 reporting countries over the reported corresponding imports. This explanation also implies that in 1965 an amount of merchandise in this trade valued at $24 million was of Southern Rhodesian origin. If this reasoning is accepted, it would mean that, during 1970-1973, exporters in S. Africa Customs Union and Mozambique were handling merchandize of Southern Rhodesia of the following values: 1970, $317 million; 1971, $243 million; 1972, $310 million; 1973, $4ll million. 4. On statistical evidence, it is possible to analyse Southern Rhodesian exports in 1965-1973 as follows: Table 2 Southern Rhodesian exports: 1965-1973 (in millions of US dollars) 1965196619671968196919701971 19721973 Domestic exports (excludinggold)!.... 399 238 238 234 297 346 379 474 640 Toreportingcountries/.. 343 181 96 68 48 50 48 60 63 ToS.AfricaCustomsUnion!/ 41 60 80 80 85 95 90 100 103 To non-reporting countries . 15 ------To world markets via indirect trade...... - -3 62 86 164 201 241 314 474 Re-exports./...... 43 24 17 12 10 8 9 9 12 a/ Southern Rhodesian figures except for 1973, which is an estimate. b/ 1966-1973: import data, mostly c.i.f., less 10 per cent allowance for freight etc. c/ 1966-1973: estimates derived from published data for imports of S. Africa Customs Union from "Africa" less exports to S. Africa Customs Union reported by African countries. -100-

5. In comparing Southern Rhodesian exports to world markets via indirect trade, shown in table 2, with the figures shown in table 1 as "Excess of imports over exports", the amount of re-exports should be added to the former because the importing countries identify the sources of supply without any distinction between national exports and re-exports. The comparison is shown below: Table 3 Indirect exports by Southern Rhodesia (in millions of US dollars) Excess of reported imports Indirect exports by by 23 countries over Southern Rhodesia, exports by four neighbours including of Southern Rhodesia re-exports Difference (A) (B) (A) - (B) 1965 24 43 -19 1966 -3 21 -24 1967 102 79 23 1968 122 98 24 1969 195 174 21 1970 317 209 108 1971 243 250 -7 1972 310 323 -13 1973 411 486 -75 The substantial agreement shown above for years 1967-1969 and 1971-1972 indicates implicitly that since the imposition of United Nations sanctions, Southern Rhodesia has been able to send its exports to world markets indirectly via S. Africa Customs Union and Mozambique. The sizable discrepancy for the year 1970 does not detract from the validity of that contention, as the figure in column A is bigger than that in coluin B.. For 1973 the fi 'Aure 411 million in colurn A uPpears a little small to cover the indirect exports of Southern Rhodesia of $486 million in column B. However, it should be noted that the 1973 Southern Rhodesian exports were estimated at $166 million higher than the 1972 exports. Considering the "time lag" involved due to transportation and other time-consuming factors, it appears conceivable that perhaps $4o-$50 million of the total annual growth could be reflected only in the early part of 1974's trade returns of the 23 importing countries. It is also Possible, of course, that a small portion of the 1973 exports from Southern Rhodesia was of such a clandestine nature that it would not be reflected at all in any recorded imports of any country. -101- Southern Rhodesian imports 6. Southern Rhodesia's imports in 1973 were estimated to be $480 million (compared with ,40 4 million in 1972). The 70 odd countries whose export statistics are set out in an-enJi-v II show. that imports fror, them by Southern Phodesia were distributed as follows: i[alavi . 6 million, 'Switzerland r.4 million, United Kingdom ",2 million, Federal Republic of Germany '1;2 million, United States ";1 million, other countries (also in appendix II) 4Ui million, making a total of about :16 million (compared with 4i i19 million in 1972). In addition to this recorded trade, it has been estimated that S. Africa Customs Union sent to Southern Rhodesia $180 million worth of goods. It would appear, therefore, that some $290 million of Southern Rhodesian imports have not been reflected in the corresponding 1973 export figures of world trade. The over-all situation of Southern Rhodesian imports for 1965-1973 is as follows: Table 4 Southern Rhodesian imports: 1965-1973 (in millions of US dollars) 19652J1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Imports-/...... -...... 334 236 262 290 278 329 395 44 480 From reporting countries-/ 253 79 63 44 15 16 18 19 16 From S. Africa Customs Union c/ ...... 78 110 135 150 155 160 170 165 180 Unspecified origin .... - - - - - Unaccounted for ..... - 47 64 96 108 153 207 220 284 a/ Southern Rhodesian figures except for 1973 which is an estimate. b/ 1966-1973: exports to Southern Rhodesia reported by reporting countries. c/ 1966-1973: estimates derived from published data for S. Africa Customs Union exports to "Africa" less imports from S. Africa Customs Union reported by African countries. 7. It is not possible, at the present time, to investigate the true situation concerning the unaccounted portion of Southern Rhodesian imports for the years following the imposition of sanctions. However, in view of the fact that there has been considerable expansion of the import trade of S. Africa Customs Union, Mozambique and Angola (see table 5 below), it remains to be determined whether part of this expansion has been in the form of goods that ultimately reached Southern Rhodesia. -102-

Table 5 Imports by selected countries adjacent to Southern Rhodesia (in millions of US dollars) S. Africa Customs Union 24612307269o26382983356540393657 4 964 Angola 173 207 199 234 260 326 335 327 466 195 208 275 308 323 368 422 392 542 Exports of specific commodities Tobacco 8. The most important Southern Rhodesian export commodity was and probably still is tobacco, exports of which amounted to $132 million in 1965. Normally, Southern Rhodesian exports of tobacco accounted for approximately 13 per cent of all world exports of unmanufactured tobacco and for over 25 per cent of flue-cured tobacco. In 1973, Switzerland, which took $1.6 million worth of tobacco (1.0 thousand metric tons), appeared to be the only reporting country of significance. 9. Increases over the levels of the earlier periods in tobacco imports by the reporting countries by the countries adjacent to Southern Rhodesia during recent years are of such magnitude as to call for investigation. For this reason, an analysis was made, in terms of quantities, of the imports by the reporting countries from the neighbours of Southern Rhodesia, namely, Mozambique, Malawi, Zambia, Angola and S. Africa Customs Union, compared with corresponding exports of these neighbouring countries by direction. The result of this analysis is shown in table 6 below: -103- 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Table 6 Trade in tobacco of countries idjacent to Southern Rhodesia with reporting countri--s. -Tiiich toolk more than 90 per cent of the tobacco z:cr-orts of Southern Rhodesia in 1965 (in thousand metric tons) S. Africa a/ Imports from: Customs Union- 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Exports by: 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 8.4 7.4 11.5 13.5 21.8 24.2 18.9 19.0 21.7 S. Africa a/ Customs Union7.6 7.5 9.0 10.0 12.8 11.1 9.1 10.3 10.02/ Mozambique1.6 2.1 5.8 7.0 7.9 10.8 14.6 19.3 23.8 Mo zambiquea/ 0.8 0.7 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.9 1.3 2.4 1.8 Malawi and Zambia 18.8b/ 16.1 15.8 17.1 17.9 14.6 16.3 17.5 25.8 Mal awi and Zambia 12.7 16.6 12.8 13.4 13.1 16.o 20.0 23.7 32.5 a/ Data on analysis by country for the years 1965, 1971, 1972 and 1973 are given in appendix III. b/ In 1965 Zanbia exported to Southern Rhodesia 9,31 " tons, the bulk of which was destined for countries overseas. This fact is substantiated by the evidence that the reporting countries declared 7,950 metric tons as imports from Zambia while Zambia did not record exports of tobacco to the reporting countries. Beginning 1966 Zambia has sent most of its tobacco to Malawi for export overseas. c/ Estimated information. -104- Angolaa/ 2.0 2.1 2.7 3.4 2.8 2.7 3.7 4.1 5.3 Angola-/ 2.3 2.9 2.6 3.2 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 6.8 Total 30.9-/ 27.8 35.7 41.o 50.4 52.3 53.5 59.9 76.6 Total 23.4 27.7 25.6 27.9 28.6 29.6 32.2 38.2 51.1 10. It will be noted from table 6 that the imports for 1966 agreed with the corresponding exports. For 1965, agreement was also good, when account is taken of the fact that the reporting countries received 8,000 tons of tobacco from Zambia which were not reflected in the export statistics of Zambia (see foot-note b of table 6). However, in 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 the imports of the reporting countries from the neighbours of Southern Rhodesia exceeded the corresponding exports of these neighbours by 10.1, 13.1, 21.8, 22.7, 21.3, 21.7 and 25.5 thousand tons, respectively. These amounts may represent Southern Rhodesian tobacco which was able to reach world markets through false declarations of origin. ii. By incorporating the information given above with other elements relating to Southern Rhodesian tobacco, the over-all situation may be summarized as follows: Table 7 Tobacco situation in Southern Rhodesia (in thousand metric tons) Imports by reporting countries (a) Directly from Southern Rhodesia 8 (b) Via neighbouring countries Recorded imports by S. Africa Customs Union believed to be of Southern Rhodesian origin 1 Total 87 Tobacco crop ill Southern Rhodesian exports 120 Tobacco estimated held in stock from current year's production a/ Estimated. 965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 5.3 36.7 8.6 4.0 2.3 1.2 - 10.1 13.1 21.8 22.7 -.7 T.0 113 .7-/ N.A. 11.3 9.1 3.9 3.7 8.9 6.027.821.027.832.828.394 6o 62 62 65N.A.N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 1.0 1.0 1.0 21.3 21.7 25.5 11.4 1.51/ 34.1 37.0 73 56 N.A. N.A. 65 66 39 34 29 37 39 19 b/ 9.7 thousand tons representing the shortfall of the 1965 tobacco crop in meeting current export requirements were probably made good by Zambian tobacco (see foot-note b of table 6). c/ Excess of Southern Rhodesian official exports of 120.7 thousand tons over the imports of 87 thousand tons is explained by: 20.4 thousand tons as stocks held in bond by importing countries and failure to record as Southern Rhodesian tobacco on account of multilateral trade patterns; 8 thousand tons of Zambian tobacco as part of Southern Rhodesian exports; 5.5 thousand tons as exports of non-reporting countries. -105-

12. In examining the data given above, it becomes apparent that during the seven years following the initiation of sanctions, 1967-1973, over 40 per cent (209 thousand tons) of Southern Rhodesian tobacco crops reached world markets. However, a substantial amount of tobacco could have reached world markets in various clandestine ways that cannot be detected statistically. This possibility is revealed by the United Kingdom estimate of 126 thousand tons (or 4'.[, 7 million) as being stock held by Southern Rhodesia at the end of 1968. According to the data set out in table 7, the corresponding stock figure should have been 163 thousand tons, representing the tobacco accumulated during the period 1966- 1968. If the United Kingdom estimate is correct, it would mean that an average of about 12 thousand tons of tobacco was being shipped out annually from Southern Rhodesia in addition to those recorded and inferred in table 7 above. If, on the other hand, the tobacco stock in Southern Rhodesia at the end of 1970, 140 thousand tons as revealed by the press in South Africa, is to be considered realistic, then an average of 17 thousand tons of tobacco, instead of 12, was being shipped out annually in various clandestine ways that cannot be detected statistically. Furthermore, there have been an increasing number of reports d/ to the effect that Southern Rhodesia has been able, during the past few years, to dispose of the entire stockpile of old crops in the world market. If this is true, the clandestine trade in Rhodesian tobacco must have been extremely active. As may be inferred from table 7 above, since the imposition of United Nations sanctions such trade could amount to 330 thousand tons, which are not recorded in any importing country's trade returns. Asbestos 13. Another important commodity is asbestos, Southern Rhodesian exports of which amounted to $30 million in 1965. There were almost no imports from Southern Rhodesia by the reporting countries in the period 1969-1973. In 1968, the recorded imports of the reporting countries amounted to 1 l.7 million (compared with $24 million in the year 1965 and $3.4 million in 1967). This amount was accounted for by the Federal Republic of Germany ($1.2 million) and the United States ($0.5 million). The United States explained its imports as shipments before 16 December 1966, the effective date of resolution 232 (1966). Similar to the case for Southern Rhodesian tobacco, there appear to be strong possibilities that Southern Rhodesia is sending asbestos to world markets via its neighbouring countries, chiefly South Africa. In these circumstances, an analysis "ras made (in terms of quantities) of the imports of the reporting countries from S. Africa Customs Union, together with the corresponding exports of S. Africa Customs Union for the period 1965-1973. The results of the analysis are shown in table 8 below: d/ For instance, on p. 31 of the September 1974 issue of Tobacco Situation published by the Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the following findings are recorded: "The 1974 Rhodesian crop suffered from rain but is estimated about one-half above last season's 110 million pound outturn. With the large stock pile from earlier years virtually gone, no quota applies for 1975." It should be noted that 110 million pounds mentioned above is the equivalent to approximately 50 thousand tons. "Quota" means acreage allowed to produce tobacco. The last sentence means that no government restriction on the production of tobacco is to be applied to the size of the 1975 crop. -lO6-

Table 8 Trade in asbestos by S. Africa Customs Union with reporting countries which took about 80 per cent of the asbestos exports of Southern Rhodesia in 1965 (in thousand metric tons) Imports from S. Africa Customs Union by: All reporting countries Japan Spain 201 234 300 317 355 356 351 354 445_ / 26.3 67.9 65.2 79.8 94.o 99.5 100.2 112.2 16.6 20.2 25.3 30.5 39.4 43.7 32.1 34.4 50.9 Exports by S. Africa Customs Union to: All reporting countries Japan Spain 207 214 215 233 252 258 254 274 280o-/ 27.1 27.4 29.4 33.4 43.5 63.5 65.3 63.2 N.A. 10.9 13.2 8.0 10.0 11.0 11.6 8.8 10.7 N.A. a/ For more detailed analysis by country see appendix IV. b/ Estimated on the basis of value data; the 128.8 thousand metric tons given by Japan appears c/ Estimated. official quantity figure of to be a printing error. 14. It will be noted from table 8 above that, while the imports for 1965 agreed, by and large, with the corresponding exports, those for 1966 and 1967 exceeded the corresponding exports by 20 and 85 thousand tons, respectively. For 1968, imports of the reporting countries exceeded South African exports by 84 thousand tons; for 1969, by 103 thousand tons; for 1970, by 98 thousand tons; for 1971, by 97 thousand tons; for 1972, by 80 thousand tons; and for 1973, by 165 thousand tons. In view of the fact that the exports of S/ Africa Customs Union are consistent with the amount of asbestos produced within the Union, these excesses of imports may possibly be exports of Southern Rhodesian asbestos via the Union. By incorporating this information with other elements relating to Southern Rhodesian exports, the over-all situation may be summarized as follows: -107- 19652a! 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971,1/ 19721/ 1973

Table 9 Asbestos situation in Southern Rhodesia (in thousand metric tons) 1965 19661967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Imports by reporting countries (a) Directly from Southern Rhodesia (b) Via S. Africa Customs Union Recorded imports by S. Africa Customs Union believed to be of Southern Rhodesian origin Imports by reporting countries from Mozambique b/ Total exports sent to reporting countries 114.6 53.7 14.8 - 20.0 85.0 8.6 11.2 l4.o 3.5 126.7-: 6.7 0.2 0.2 0.8 84.0 103.0 98.0 97.0 80.0 165.0 1'.i 15.4 17.2 3.7 2.7 3.9 5.1 5.5 88.6 116.5 11.8 16.0 21.06.1 8.0 lh.o 107.7 123.5 120.9 114.9 107.2 200.8 a/ Estimated. b/ For country analysis appendix V. for the years 1965, 1971, 1972 and 1973 see c/ Corresponding exports reported bv Southern Rhodesia as 131.2 thousand tons. Chrome ore 15. The chief importer of Southern Rhodesia's chrome ore has been, traditionally, the United States, to which Southern Rhodesia sent $5 million worth of chrome ore out of total exports of $10.7 million in 1965. In 1967, the United States imported $3.4 million worth of chrome ore, which was explained by the authorities as goods shipped from Southern Rhodesia before 16 December 1966, and by 1968, imports of Southern Rhodesian chrome ore appear to have virtually ceased until 1971, when $0.8 million were imported. In 1972, such imports reached $2.8 million while in 1973 they dropped to $1.5. The possibility of Southern Rhodesian chrome ore being exported to the neighbouring countries was investigated. For this purpose an analysis was made (in terms of gross quantities) of the imports of the reporting countries from S. Africa Customs Union, together with the corresponding exports of S. Africa Customs Union for the period 1964- 1973. The results of the analysis are shown in table 10 below: -108-

Table 10 Trade in chrome ore by S. Africa Customs Union with reporting countries,which took about 85 per cent of the chrome ore exports of Southern Rhodesia in 1964 (in thousand metric tons gross) All reporting United Western countries States Japan Europe Imports from S. Africa Customs Union 1964 671 432 40 199 1965 a/ 715 437 52 222 1966 1037 723 67 245 1967 822 433 183 206 1968 863 385 179 295 1969 1 082 363 246 466 1970 1607 376 710 520 1971 a/ 1 618 383 720 508 1972a_/ 1010 238 445 338 1973 a/ 1 296 244 619 420 Exports by S. Africa Customs Union 1964 637 386 33 216 1965 a/ 776 396 109 264 1966 856 580 32 240 1967 656 292 ill 246 1968 817 358 135 318 1969 908 369 154 379 1970 1033 361 274 392 1971a/ 1210 377 355 473 1972 a! 871 284 253 317 1973 1 120 b/ N.A. N.A. N.A. a/ For complete country analysis see appendix VI. b/ Estimated. 16. It will be noted that, for 1964 and 1965, the sum of the total imports and exports for the two years agree well, but there were significant excesses of the total imports over the total exports for most of the following years. These excesses could quite possibly represent chrome ore of Southern Rhodesian origin. By incorporating these excess tonnages with other elements relating to Southern Rhodesian exports, the over-all situation may be summarized as follows: -109-

Table 11 Chrome ore situation in Southern Rhodesia (in thousand metric tons gross) 196419651966 196719681969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Imports by reporting countries (a) Directly from Southern Rhodesia (b) Via S. Africa Customs Union Recorded imports by S. Africa Customs Union believed to be of Southern Rhodesian origin Imports by reporting countries from Mozambique b/ Total exports by Southern Rhodesia 406 397 179 136 22 68 35 - - 181 166 46 174 574 408 139 176 49 84 98 75 23 32 22 21 124 a001/16 20 52 30 41 21 13 20 18 80 471 501 510 407 110-/ 227-1 609 471 349 391 a/ Estimate. b/ For complete country analysis see appendix VII. c/ Data on production, imports and exports of chrome ore by South Africa suggest that, during 1968 and 1969, a substantial amount of Southern Rhodesian ore (probably 200-300 thousand tons per year) could have entered South Africa without being recorded in the regular trade returns. If such unrecorded imports were included, the figures would probably be in the 400-thousand-ton range. copper 17. Southern Rhodesia's copper exports in 1965 amounted to $18.3 million. Of this amount, $10.6 million were exports to the Federal Republic of Germany, $1.8 million went to Poland, '1.5 illion to the United Kingdom, 1.4 million to Italy, $1 million to West Malaysia and $2 million were distributed among other countries. The recorded imports of the reporting countries amounted to $19 million in 1966, $11 million in 1967 and $10 million in 1968. The reporting countries show only $4 thousand worth of copper imports from Southern Rhodesia in 1969 and almost nothing in 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973. Since the adoption of resolution 232 (1966) of 16 December 1966, the Federal Republic of Germany appears to have been the sole importer of Southern Rhodesian copper in 1967 and 1968. -110-

18. In terms of quantities, the annual curtailment of Southern Rhodesian copper exports for the period 1966-1968 was gradual, namely, from a level in 1965 of 18.4 thousand metric tons to 13.3 in 1966, 10.0 in 1967, 7.8 in 1968 and almost nil during the period 1969-1973. In view of the fact that both S. Africa Customs Union and Zambia are heavy exporters of copper and that both, in varying degrees, together with Southern Rhodesia, use the transport facilities in Mozambique, it is very difficult to determine the true situation. Pig-iron and ferroalloys 19. Southern Rhodesia's exports of these commodities in 1965 amounted to $11.7 million of which $4.7 million were ferrochrome. In that year, the important receivers of such exports were Japan (208 thousand metric tons of pig-iron ($6.7 million)) and the United Kingdom (7.7 thousand tons of ferrochrome ($2.1 million)). Imports of these commodities from Southern Rhodesia in 1966, as reported by the reporting countries, amounted to $9.6 million, of which the United States share was $3.6 million ($2.3 million of pig-iron and $1.3 million of ferroalloys). By 1969, imports of these commodities by reporting countries had almost ceased, although there were small amounts of imports in 1969 ($0.9 million) and in 1968 ($0.2 million), which were explained by importers as shipments before December 1966. However, it should be noted that in 1972 the United States imported from Southern Rhodesia $4.9 million of ferroalloys (21.7 thousand metric tons) and $12.7 million in 1973. Other commodies 20. Other commodities exported by Southern Rhodesia are meat and meat products, sugar, hides and skins, leather and iron ore. Imports of these commodities into the reporting countries from Southern Rhodesia in 1973 amounted to $7.2 million (compared with $34 million in the year 1965, $3 million in the year 1970, $3.1 million in the year 1971 and $3.5 million in the year 1972). Because of the small magnitude of the trade involved in each commodity it is not possible to make a comprehensive analysis for each commodity. The difficulty lies in the fact that S. Africa Customs Union and some of the other neighbours are much more important exporters of the same commodities. As in the case of copper, it is possible for Southern Rhodesia to export at least some part of these commodities under false declarations, using its neighbours as the origin of these goods. In these circumstances, the inflation of the imports recorded by importing countries in comparison with the corresponding exports by Southern Rhodesia's neighbours would probably not be marked enough to allow any meaningful conclusion to be drawn. In addition to the possibility described above, S. Africa Customs Union is understood, based on the statistical information relating to its over-all "imports from Africa", to be taking significant amounts of these commodities as imports. These imports are estimated to be at the level of $2 million worth of meat products annually for the period 1967-1969 and $1 million of sugar. Furthermore, it is conceivable that, because of the heavy traffic of ocean transport via Mozambique and South Africa since the closure of the Suez Canal, the demand for meats and other provisions in the form of ships' stores could have provided an important outlet for the produce -111- of Southern Rhodesia. Indeed, available statistics regarding South African meat in the form of ships' stores registered important increases in recent periods. It is possible that Southern Rhodesia, whose produce is more competitive, may very well have benefited from the expansion of this market. Maize 21. Southern Rhodesia normally produced a little over 800 thousand metric tons of maize, mainly for domestic consumption. Its exvorts of this commodity were insignificant. In fact, it was necessary to import a small amount (23 thousand tons in 1965) to supplement the locally produced maize for domestic consumption. However, as a result of the regime's attempt to encourage agricultural diversification to compensate for the reduction in tobacco exports owing to sanctions, there has been a substantial increase in the acreage under maize. According to the most recent information, Southern Rhodesia produced the following quantities of maize during the period 1965-1973. Table 12 Production of maize in Southern Rhodesia (in thousand metric tons) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 822 952 1000 950 1020 700 1179 1540 635 22. If the annual domestic requirement was of a magnitude of 800-850 thousand tons, the production data shown above would imply that there should have been about 1.6 million tons available for export during the years 1967-1973. This amount may indeed have reached world markets via Mozambique, as explained in the following paragraphs. 23. Mozambique normally produced about 400 thousand tons of maize, also mainly for domestic consumption. It also imported a small amount to supplement its locally produced maize. Table 13 below describes the situation of maize in Mozambique for the period 1965-1973. -112-

Table 13 Production, trade and apparent consirition of maize in Mozambique (in thousand metric tons) Production Imports Exports Apparent consumption 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970390 44o 500 430 410 310 43 7 - - - 25 122 1971 310 - 35 24 3 1972 430 1973 5ooa-/ 25 12 - 92 19 433 447 475 308 385 333 334 341 481 a/ Estimated. 24. In spite of the fact that, during the period covered in table 13, production of maize in Mozambique did not increase, some countries began importing from Mozambique in the year 1967. Mozambique's declared exports are shown in table 13. Declared imports of the maize-importing countries from Mozambique are considerably higher. Details of these imports are given in table 14 below. Table 14 Imports of maize from Mozambique (in thousand metric tons) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Reporting countries BelgiumLuxembourg Egypt France Germany, Fed. Rep. of Italy Japan Netherlands Portugal Switzerland Total Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 42 32 105 93 14 20 11 99 59 26 40 30 145 184 149 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil - 4o 59 - N.A. N.A. - - 15 24 - - - 12 21 10 261 6 12 15 78 25 16 30 458 509 188 2 5 37 67 420 37 67 420 125 -113- N.A. 0 58 125

25. As may be seen from the data shown above, maize-importing countries received 1,805,000 tons of maize from Mozambique during the period 1967-1973. Bearing in mind the modest amount of Mozambique's own declared exports, this figure accommodates the possibility that the amount of Southern Rhodesia's exportable maize for the same period, namely 1.6 million tons (see para. 22 above), could have been channelled to importing countries via Mozambique. Table 15 Production and trade in maize of S. Africa Customs Union (in thousand metric tons) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 197I 1972 1973 Production- 4 490 50569762 5316 495364238600 9630 4160 Exports: calendar year12months 326 46 20012949 760 12011466 3155 N.A. December- b/ NDvember-b/ 345 591667 3078 911 12071252 3lO4 N.A. Derived exports-/ 325 581477302310311371 136332701487 a/ Excluding non-commercial production in villages. b/ Twelve months ending November of year stated. Allowance of one month for ocean transport is made in order to make export figures more comparable to the reported import figures. c/ Imports from S. Africa Customs Union by reporting countries. 26. A study of production and trade in maize of the S. Africa Customs Union, the results of which are given in table 15 above, also shows increased trade activity beginning in 1967. A comparison of reported exports with derived exports, however, shows substantial agreement. A similar pattern is observed in a study of the trade in maize of Angola and Malawi. Nickel and nickel alloys, unwrought 27. Southern Rhodesia mined small amounts of nickel ore prior to 1969 but has greatly increased its production since 1969 as shown below, together with similar data for South Africa for comparison.

Table 16 Production of nickel ore (metal content) and unwrought nickel and nickel alloys (in metric tons) Southern Rhodesia Metal, unwrought 2,500 5,000 7,000 8,ooo 8,000 South Africa Ore 3,000 5,4oo 5,40O 5,500 11,000 11,557 12,761 11,656 19,426 Metal, unwrought 2,500 2,500 3,000 8,000 8,500 9,000 9,000 8,8oo 15,000 28. Japan reports that it imported 3,982 tons (gross) e/ of nickel ore ($674 thousand) from Southern Rhodesia in 1965, 3,888 tons in 1966 and 1,812 tons in 1967. In its published trade data for 1965, Southern Rhodesia did not report exports of nickel ore separately because of their relative insignificance but included them in the item 'metallic ores, concentrates etc. n.e.s.". Under this heading, it sent $833,000 to Japan, with no quantity information. Those shipments to Japan accounted for 92 per cent of the 1965 exports under this heading. It is likely therefore that during the period 1965-1968 all the nickel ore mined was exported. Beginning with 1969, however, Southern Rhodesia apparently exported almost its entire production of nickel mainly in the form of unwrought metal via South Africa until 1972, during which period the United States imported directly from Southern Rhodesia $4.5 million worth of metal (1,634 tons). In 1973 the United States imported $11 million worth of metal (3,577 tons). e/ Nickel ores of 1.5 per cent metal content and above are considered rich and those below 1 per cent are considered as low grade. -115- Ore 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 754 700 700 1,000 11,000 11,600 12,000 12,000

Table 17 S. Africa Customs Union exports of unwrought nickel and nickel alloys and corresponding imports as reported by reporting countries (in metric tons) 14 important reporting countries UK Germany Belg.USA Italy (Fed. Rep.) Japan Lux. Sweden Spain Imports from S. Africa Customs Union 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Exports by S. Africa Customs Union 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1o941286400397795167345448oo10371N.A. 139 4o8 033 699 856 018 063 622 237 1 139 1 294 205 203 455 745 1 778 375 161 33 247 217 263 89 843 532 755 81 551 553 644 926 875 128 727 010 686 582 329 160 945 647 25 308 2 346 1 245 588 1 470 92 265 170 284 362 346 717 264 420 861 55 266 26o 768 41o N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N. A. 171 309 6o8 766 1 645 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 197 780 1 387 125 402 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 559 56o 737 981 853 N.A. N.A. N .A. N.A. 303473721593 23 86 N.A. N.A. 563 371 48 N. A. N.A. 107 98 53 N.A. N.A. 56 91 N.A. N.A. 97 54 198 N.A. N.A.

29. Since South Africa and Southern Rhodesia are the only two countries in Africa that produce nickel in significant amounts and since their close co- operation in political and economic matters has been evident especially since the application of the United Nations sanctions, it would be appropriate to study the production and trade of nickel of these two countries jointly. As may be seen from table 16 above, Southern Rhodesia did not produce any metal prior to 1969. Most of the small amounts of ore produced were probably sent to South Africa for smelting. During the period 1965-1968, the production of ore in the two countries amounted to 22,500 tons and 16,000 tons of metal were produced in South Africa. During the period 1969-1973, the corresponding figures for ore and metal are 117,000 and 80,800 tons respectively. 30. Turning to the problem of disposal of the metal produced, the juxtaposition of the export figures of South Africa and the corresponding import figures as reported by 14 important reporting countries in table 17 above confirms the earlier statement in paragraph 28 above that Southern Rhodesia apparently exported almost its entire production of nickel via South Africa. For the period 1965-1968, South Africa reported to have exported 16,162 tons of metal while the 14 reporting countries claimed to have received 14,279 tons. The discrepancy of 1,883 tons probably is mainly due to the fact that part of the extraordinarily large volume of 1968 exports (9,779 tons) reached the importing countries or cleared through the customs of importing countries only in the early part of 1969. Small amounts exported to countries other than the 14 reporting countries could be another reason, although minor, for the discrepancy. 31. During the period 1969-1973, table 17 reveals massive discrepancies in 1970 and 1971 between South Africa's declared exports and the 14 reporting countries' corresponding imports (8,254 tons of exports against 22,081 tons of imports). It becomes therefore quite clear that, of the 22,000 tons of metal imported from South Africa, a major portion must be of Southern Rhodesian origin. Table 18 below represents a statistical analysis of the nickel situation in South Africa and Southern Rhodesia during the period 1969-1973 in which a good agreement is discernible between the amount of metal available for exports and the actual imports received by reporting countries. -117-

Table 18 Production and trade of unwrought nickel and nickel alloys in S. Africa Customs Union and Southern Rhodesia (in metric tons) 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Production Consumptiona/ Metal available for export Reported imports 14 countries from S. Africa Netherlands imports from Mozambique US imports from S. Rhodesia 11000 1400o 16000 16800 23000 80800 4 0oo 4 ooo 4 000 4 000 4 000 20 000 7000 10000 12000 12800 19000 60800 4875 11351 12740 14732 17059 60757 4 856 11 018 11063 11622 12237 50796 333 1 677 1 476 1 634 1 245 3 577 4 750 5 211 a/ Annual domestic consumption in recent years 3-5 thousand tons. is estimated to amount to Imports of specific commodities 32. Exports of the reporting countries to Southern Rhodesia of the four commodity groups specified in resolution 232 (1966), paragraph 2 (d)-(f), namely, motor vehicles and their parts, petroleum products, crude petroleum, and aircraft and their parts, are estimated to have amounted to approximately $0.08 million in 1973 (compared with $36 million in the year 1965, $1.2 million in the year 1967, $0.5 million in the year 1971 and $0.5 million in the year 1972). Motor vehicles and their parts 33. Among the four commodity groups, motor vehicles and their parts is the most important. In 1973, the reporting countries' exports of these commodities to Southern Rhodesia was $0.11 million (compared with $34 million in the year 1965, $6.1 million in the year 1966, $1.0 million in the year 1967 and $0.3 million in the year 1972). -118- Total 5 Years

Table 19 Trade of S. Africa Customs Union in motor vehicles and their parts with reporting countries, which provided about 93per cent of imnports of motor vehicles and their parts bySouthern Rhodesia in 1965 (in millions of US dollars) All reporting countries Germany (Fed. UK Rep..) USA Canada Japan France Italy Exports to S. Africa Customs Union 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 Imports from S. Africa Customs Union 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 a/ Estimated. 289 288 310 331 444 537 614 530 717 128 120 112 96 121 145 176 112 148 289 273 305 318 411 496 575a/ 580a/ 130 ll 1O4 93 106 127 157 N.A. N.A. 56 6o 67 84 1o6 136 133 140 249 55 56 64 79 96 122 127 N.A. N.A. 16 16 27 30 63 73 124 103 132 38 44 55 51 71 65 61 N.A. N.A. 21 21 20 18 13 18 15 N.A. N.A. 18 15 27 29 60 70 117 N.A. N.A. 9 10 121719333739 50 9 10 11 13 15 20 24 N.A. N.A. 8 8 11 11 16 23 23 13 9 8 12 17 20 22 N.A. N.A. Australia 5 6 7 13 28 41 46 50 64 5 5 7 14 26 43 42 N.A. N.A. 34. There appears to be a strong possibility that Southern Rhodesia may be receiving motor vehicles and their parts through neighbouring countries. This possibility is strengthened by the fact that Southern Rhodesia is maintaining its exporting pattern Of this commodity group to its neighbouring countries. Malawi, for instance, reported annual imports of $0.4 million from Southern Rhodesia of motor vehicles and their parts during the period 1967-1969 (compared with $1.3 million in 1965). For -119- that reason, an analysis was made (in terms of value) fl of the exports of the reporting countries to S. Africa Customs Union and also to Mozambique, Angola, Malawi and Zambia, together with the corresponding imports by the above- mentioned countries from the reporting countries. The results of the analysis are shown in tables 19 above and 20 below. Table 20 Trade of Mozambique, Angola, Malawi and Zambia in motor vehicles and their parts with the reporting countries (in millions of US dollars) Exports of reporting countries to Mozambique, Angola, Malawi and Zambia 48 73 125 140 Imports of Mozambique, Angola, Malawi and Zambia from reporting countries 49 62 100- / 1 3621 a/ Estimated. 35. It may be noted from tables 19 and 20 above that in the year 1965 exports agree well with the corresponding imports. However, in the years 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1972, exports by the reporting countries to South Africa and to the four countries of Angola, Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia exceeded the corresponding imports reported by these five countries by a larger discrepancy. In 1973 the discrepancy between exporting countries and these four neighbours of Southern Rhodesia was very low. However, the discrepancy between these countries f/ It is not possible to make a comprehensive study in terms of quantities because of the heterogeneous nature of this group of commodities. Countries use different units of quantity to express the physical volume of imports and exports. -120- 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 and South Africa was extremely high if the estimate for South Africa is correct. Following are the actual discrepancies in $US million: 1966 1967 1968 S. Africa Customs Union The four countries Total 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 15 5 13 33 41 39 8 137 11 6 10 9 26 29 25 26 11 23 42 67 68 33 141 36. S. Africa Customs Union (not a reporting country) traditionally exported a substantial amount of motor vehicles and their parts to Southern Rhodesia. The amount of $2.2 million was reported by Southern Rhodesia for 1965. Although S. Africa Customs Union has not released a meaningful analysis by country of destination for this commodity group since 1964, a study of its partner countries' data makes it possible to estimate the approximate amount that Southern Rhodesia has received from S. Africa Customs Union. Table 21 Exports of motor vehicles and their parts of S. Africa Customs Union (in millions of US dollars) Total exports2/ (of which re-exports)2/ To reporting, countries To neighbouring countries other than Southern Rhodesia c/ To Southern Rhodesia Unknown destination a/ Reported by S. b/ Estimated. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 12.2 17.3 22.0 24.4 20.0 20.4 1971 1972 1973 24.0 24.9 25.oll (4.7) (7.3) (10.5) (6.1) (13.4) (13.5) (16.3) (16.5) (16.6)1.8 2.1 3.3 3.4 4.2 1.6 2.9 3.0-/ 3.2-/ 4.4 5.4 5.1 2.24-/ 6.0b/) )13.6 3.8 3.8 ) 3.4 3.8 2.9 3.-o/ 3.0-/ 3.9-/ 17.6 12.0 15.9 18.1 18.9 17.9 Africa Customs Union. c/ Reported by partner countries. d/ Reported by Southern Rhodesia. -121-

Petroleum 37. There is little information regarding petroleum supplies to Southern Rhodesia. it is known that Southern Rhodesia's only oil refinery at Umtali was -losed in Janu-ry 1966 and that, therefore, no further imports of crude petroleum ,1ere required after that date. Prior to 1966 Iran, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia had been su,.pllers of petroleum products to Southern Rhodesia as they had been to its nei67,hbourin countries as well. Since the introduction of the United Nations sanctions i ),'66 no statistical evidence can be found that any country has been sending petro.lum products of any meaningful magnitude to Southern Rhodesia. Yet there has not been any report that any significant petroleum shortage has existed in Southern Rhodesia during all these years of the sanctions. It is therefore reasonable to assume that a steady flow, in sufficicient quantity, of petroleum products to Southern Rhodesia through her neighbours has been efficiently arranged. In order to study how an arrangement of this type has worked, it is necessary to examine the petroleum situation of Southern Rhodesia's neighbours. 38. Table 22 below gives tonnage data in yearly averages for the periods 1962- 1965 and 1966-1973 and annual figures for 1972 and 1973 on production, trade and apparent consumption of petroleum products for S. Africa Customs Union, Mozambique and Angola. It will be noted that production of petroleum products during the period 1966-1973 in these three neighbours of Southern Rhodesia was more than twice that of the earlier period of 1962-1965, thanks to the great expansion in refining capacity in South Africa. Thus the need for importing gasoline, for instance, was rather reduced in the latter period (510 thousand tons per year in comparison with 970 thousand tons per year in the earlier period). However, relatively heavy imports of fuel oil (1,860 thousand tons per year) were still needed in order to satisfy the bunkering requirements of ships that had been diverted from the Suez Canal route since the closure of the Canal in June 1967. 39. There have been small amounts of petroleum products exported by Southern Rhodesia's neighbours but hardly anything significant sent to Southern Rhodesia. According to the "Annual Statement of External Trade" for 164 and 1965 published by Southern Rhodesia, most of the imports of gasoline, kerosene and fuel oils were imported from the Persian Gulf area and practically nothing was imported from its neighbours. The only significant amounts of petroleum products imported from South Africa were lubricating oils and greases. Exports of Mozambique which amounted to an annual average of about 300 thousand tons since the early 1960s. were mainly destined for S. Africa Customs Union with only marginal amounts sent to Southern Rhodesia, as indicated below: 2,542 tons of gasoline and 2,350 tons of distilled fuels in 1965; the corresponding amoun ts in 1966 (1967) are 7,007 (19,987) and 576 (13,303). Since 1967 no exports to Southern Rhodesia have been recorded. -122-

Table 22 Production, trade and apparent consumption of petroleum products for S. Africa Customs Union, Mozambique and Angola (in thousand metric tons) Apparent Country, product and year Production Imports Exports Bunkers consumption South Africa Gasoline 1962-65, yearly average 985 937 3 6 1 913 1966-73, yearly average 2 318 457 40 6 2 729 1972 2893 202 43 31 3021 1973 2999 250E 40E 10E 3199 Kerosene and jet fuel 1962-65, yearly average 206 410 9 18 588 1966-73, yearly average 388 366 20 44 690 1972 556 166 5 24 693 1973 652 200E 5E 25E 822 Fuel oils 1962-65, yearly average 2 026 653 255 670 1 754 1966-73, yearly average 5 352 1 572 156 2 882 3 886 1972 7265 1766 42 3352 5637 1973 6834 1760E 40E 3300E 5254 Mozambique Gasoline 1962-65, yearly average 100 20 82 - 38 1966--73, yearly average 130 25 74 - 81 1972 120 14 44 - 90 1973 120 15 37 - 98 Kerosene and jet fuel 1962-65, yearly average - 19 - - 19 1966-73, yearly average 26 23 4 4 41 1972 32 28 - 8 52 1973 60 19 - 5 74 Fuel oils 1962-65,yearlyaverage 369 36 182 119 1o4 1966-73, yearly average 538 104 225 172 245 1972 525 126 184 166 301 1973 504 136 139 185 316 -123-

Table 22 (continued) Apparent Country, product and year Production Imports Exports Bunkers consumption Angola Gasoline 1962-65, yearly average 56 10 12 -- 54 1966-73, yearly average 58 24 - 82 1972 48 86 134 1973 64 52 - 116 Kerosene and jet fuel 1962--65, yearly average 24 7 - 13 18 1966--73, yearly average 71 10 - 52 29 1972 93 15 70 38 1973 91 8 - 65 34 Fuel oils 1962--65, yearly average 365 23 55 114 219 1966-73, yearly average 490 180 88 190 392 1972 482 331 127 137 549 1973 539 273 96 199 517 E = estimate. 40. The annual gasoline consumption of Southern Rhodesia during 1962-1965 was reported as approximately 150 thousand tons. Based on the available data on motor vehicles in use, which in general determines gasoline consumption, the annual requirement of this product during 1966-1973 could amount to about 180 thousand tons. As may be seen from Table 22 above, South Africa did not export any significant amount of gasoline during 1962-1965 but did export about 40 thousand tons Jer year during 1966-1973. The bulk of this amount could have been sent to Southern Rhodesia. This amount together with the possible supply from Mozambique (see 1966-1967 recorded exports in para. 39 above) would probably meet one third of Southern Rhodesia's annual requirement of gasoline. The balance would have to have come from South Africa's gasoline stock which was more than adequate to meet Southern Rhodesia's needs, as explained in the following paragraphs. 41. Gasoline is mostly consumed by road motor vehicles. According to a survey of fuel consumption in 1972 for European countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, made by the Secretariat of OECD, more than 97 per cent of the total consumption of 83.7 million tons of gasoline was consumed by passenger road motor vehicles. Table 23 below shows the consumption of gasoline in 1972 by passenger motor vehicles in selected countries. It shows a marked difference between the maximum amount of gasoline that South Africa could have consumed compared with the amount actually available as represented by the apparent consumption shown in Table 22. -124-

Table 23 Consumption of gasoline by passenier motor vehicles in use in selected countries 1972 Passenger Kilometers-/ Gasoline-/ Consumption Total apparent-/ vehicle in run per consumed per vehicle consumption thousand vehicle in thousand in tons in thousand units tons tons Belgium-Lux. 2300 N.A. 268o 1.16 2994/ Denmark 1 206 16 210 1 566-/ 1.30 2 107Finland 818 17115 1075 1.31 1166 France 13900 N.A. 14522 1.O4 15511 Germany, FR of 15 615 N.A. 17 950 1.15 17 659 Italy 12484 12441 10522 0.82 10826 Netherlands 3 050 16 059 3 418 1.12 3 460 Norway 854 10566 902 1.06 1082 Portugal 697 N.A. 580 0.83 676 Sweden 2458 15033 2923 1.19 2954 Switzerland 1 567 N.A. 2 416 1.54!1/ 2 569 U.K. 12 881 14306 15898 1.28 15810 South Africa CustomsUnion 1664 IT.A. 2500E 1.50E 3021 Angola 116 N.A. 134E 1.06 134 Mozambique 85 N.A. 90 E 1.16 90 E = estimate. a/ Results of survey by Economic Commission for Europe. b/ Derived from production and imports less exports and bunkers. c/ The consumption in agriculture of 100 thousand tons explains a part of the discrepancy shown here. d/ The exceptionally high figure is probably due to a disproportionate amount of tourist vehicles from abroad 42. It will be noted that in Table 23 "passenger motor vehicles in use" is used to relate gasoline consumption. The reason is that few passenger vehicles using diesel fuel are in use in Europe nor are commercial gasoline vehicles popular. There is no doubt that gasoline is mostly consumed by passenger vehicles in Europe and only very marginally by other types of road vehicles. -125-

43. As indicated in Table 23 above the armount of gasoline which S. Africa Customs Union could have possibly consumed in 1972 would be about 2.5 million tons which would mean 1.5 tons consumed by each vehicle. This per- vehicle consumption is perhaps too high in view of the fact that most European countries had much lower figures. There is no reason to believe that the average pdssengcr motor vehicle in South Africa was larger or the vehicles in South Africa travelled longer distances or were used more extensively. Nevertheless even with this high per-vehicle consumption, South Africa would still have over one-half of one million tons of surplus gasoline (apparent consumption 3,021 thousand tons less estimated consumption of 2,500 thousand tons) for stock and supply to Southern Rhodesia. 44. Turning to the fuel oil requirements of Southern Rhodesia, no detailed analysis similar to the one made above for gasoline is possible because the end uses of fuel oils are numerous and background data for various consumers (mostly different types of industries) are lacking. However a casual glance over the following figures on the amrounts of available fuel oils for consumption in 1965 and 1972 in S. Africa Customs Union and some selected industrialized countries will convince the readers that South Africa had ample stock to satisfy the requirements of Southern Rhodesia which probably would only amount to less than 300 thousand tons per annum (165 thousand tons in 1965). Table 24 Apparent consumption of fuel oils (in thousand tons) 1965 1972 1972as%of1965 South Africa 2 166 5 637 260 U.S.A. 187 319 279 717 149 W. Europe 239183 433535 181 Germany, F.R. of 51 756 93 788 181 United Kingdom 44 066 67 843 154 Sweden 14 o42 21 382 152 Japan 50336 124191 247 45. The consumption of fuel oils has a high correlation with the growth of industry. Since there is no reason to believe that the rate of industrialization in South Africa was the highest in the world in recent years, the high rate of the availability of fuel oil for consumption in South Africa could only mean that an ample stock of this fuel was being accumulated. Some of the stock could certainly have been supplied to Southern Rhodesia to meet its requirements more than amply. -126-

46. Southern Rhodesia's requirements per year for other types of petroleum products are small: 70-100 thousand tons of kerosene, 15-20 thousand tons of lubricating oils and 13-15 thousand tons of lubricating greases. In the years prior to the introduction of the sanctions against Southern Rhodesia, South Africa exported hardly any significant amount of kerosene. However in the years 1966- 1968 it recorded in its trade returns an average of 40 thousand tons per year, most of which was probably sent to Southern Rhodesia. Since then the recorded exports were drastically reduced to less than 10 thousand tons per annum, possibly for the purpose of avoiding any implication or suspicion that South Africa was sending kerosene to Southern Rhodesia. In any case, because of South Africa's more than adequate refining capacity, to satisfy the small requirement of kerosene in Southern Rhodesia is not a ,utter of any serious concern. As to lubricating oils and greases, South Africa has been the traditional supplier of Southern Rhodesia's needs and there is no reason to believe that any significant change in the situation has taken place. 47. In summarizing the somewhat elaborate analysis given above regarding how Southern Rhodesia's needs for petroleum products were met, it becomes evident that, aside from a marginal amount that Mozambique was able to supply, South Africa probably furnished the bulk of the petroleum products. It has been reported that "Southern Rhodesia has been purchasing oil and petroleum products from the Republic of South Africa through its purchasing agency, GENTA". 9/ These Rhodesian purchases presumably were not recorded in any official trade returns. Other commodities 48. In evaluating the import pattern of Southern Rhodesian trade for the periods following the application of economic sanctions, it is not possible to give a commodity analysis as comprehensive as that for its export pattern for the reason that Southern Rhodesia's exports are concentrated in a few primary commodities, but its imports are much more diversified. For instance, the export commodities discussed in this paper accounted for 59 per cent of total Southern Rhodesian exports in 1965, but the four import commodities referred to in paragraph 32 accounted for only 16 per cent of total Southern Rhodesian imports in 1965. Furthermore, with the prevailing severe restrictions on the publication of external trade and other related statistics imposed by Southern Rhodesia, as well as, in a lesser degree, by South Africa, attempts at making meaningful evaluations of Southern Rhodesia's import commodities, other than those discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, have proven to be fruitless. 9/ See document A/AC.109/L.4h5, of 5 March 1968, para. 99. GENTA is the code name of an agency established by the illegal regime to purchase petroleum and petroleum products from South Africa and to control its distribution in Southern Rhodesia. -127-

A-pe nd i I LYPORTS OF ALL CO,'N4ODITIES FROM SOURERN RHiODESIA* (AS REPORTED BY COUNTRIES LISTED) (in thousands of US dollars) Imrting count or area United States Canada 19265_166 1961 _,6 1i056-/9,559 6 463 1 599 68 15 1 087 4 2 1 Argentina 377 Brazil 55 Chile 4 Colombia 185 Mexico Belgium-Luxembourg2806Francek/ 2873 Germany, Fed. Rep.of 35112 Italy Netherlands United Kingdom Denmark Norway Sweden Austria Portugal Switzerland-/ Iceland Ireland Greece 62 62 230 3 54 1 1,856 1 30 525 15 9 166668554 2598757222.4837111280912,21 205 1 713 664 1.96o 182 44361673 22927a2.,148565.6784.15539 967 142 2 581-a5 644a/ 10 -- --100 -.... -.... N.A. _ 1w-a _ 998 829 477 142 059 1 171 50 61 6 13 298 1 138 542 215 9 55 5 25 e/ 95 582S/ 120 27 156 163 26 N.A. 572 59 21 117 97 130 485 2 2 129 10 907~ 9 13 - 259 222 147 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 483 e/. 625/4 296-"4 511e/4582e/7 749 70 32 4 Turkey Spain Finland Yugoslavia 3,543 2,288 845 290 677 a _ 115 1 i2In 807 2 2i1 12 4o0 5 25 67o 5 156 3 -128- J I4 59 )6 05 4

Appendix I (continued) Im~oftrt in-coxL-t=. or area Jordan Cyprus Libyan Arab Rep. Israel Iran Lebanon Egypt Ethiopia Australia New Zealand Botswana Uganda Ghana Mauritius Nigeria Zambia Malawi Ivory Coast Senegal Angola Mozambique Liberia Tunisia Japan Sri Lanka India Pakistan Malaysia, West Singapore Sarawak Brunei 19-65 ;966 598 81 N.A. 1 241 N.A. 526611785432 561 1 ?9 ?0 2 26 6 3 2 470 260 156 N.A. 189 15 787 999 N.A. 25 ;16a 1968 1969 12YQ D2I- M2 12U~ 201 2 129 1 149 6o 4 8264/~ N.A. 1 N.A. 1 - - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. - - N.A. N.A. N.A. 12 94 N.A. 1 1 N.A. - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 21 2178 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 242 8 ..... N.A. 017a/ 507a/ 9 - - N.A. N.A. N.A. 507 64 904 45 129 51 602 30 481 32 473 29 540 16 240 805 17 267 14 732 12 588 12 554 15 505 15 89&V21077 ------N.A. N.A. 1- .. N.A. N.A. 61A'6891157 374-/ N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 991 5 862 4 458 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. NA. 5 9 9 - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 236-/.- -. N.A. N.A. 497137811266 822 - - 20 87 79 2 - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 503 166 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 291 a-/ . . . . N.A. N.A. 569-a/1 125 5 . . . . N.A. 1.9a .. N.A. N.A...... N.A 21 ------N.A. N.A* -129- m

Appendix-I (continued) Importing country or area Sabah Hong .Zong Laos Viet-nam, Rep. of Indonesia Korea, Rep. Philippines Thailand Jamaica Trinidad and Tobago Barbados . . . ..1966 1961 1968 1262 MO 27-1 --- - - N.A. N.A,. 2,3132,082 22 - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. - N.A. N.. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. _ - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A...... N.A . - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 566a/ 89 22 -.. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 456 - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 36 8 - - - N.A. N.A. N.A. - ... .A. N.A. N.A. - Guyana Neth. Antilles Fiji Western Samoa Malta 168 127 222 125 217 88 l - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. -c W.A. N.A. N.A. - - N.A. N.A. N.A. - - - N.A. * Exports to the countries of the total exports of Southern listed accounted for approximately 86 per cent Rhodesia in 1965. a/ Refers to trade with the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. _/ Merchandise trade excludes capital transfers (e.g., movement of monetary gold) between monetary authorities of Governments. Although transactions in nonmonetary gold (gold bought or sold by parties other than monetary authorities) should be included in merchandise trade, the current practice of most countries is to exclude from their external trade statistics all forms of gold except those constituting parts of made-up articles, such as jewellery, in which the value of the gold content is less than 80 per cent. However, it should be noted that significant amounts of non-monetary gold are exported by Southern Rhodesia each year (e.g., $16. million in 1970. $17.9 million in 1971 and $25.5 million in 1972). According to Statistiques du commerce extrieur de la France published by the Direction gfinrale des douanes et droits indirects, France imported gold for (continued on next page) -130- N.A. N.A. 1248'/ 335&/ 58A/

Appendix I (continued) industrial purposes from Southern Rhodesia in 1970 ($2.3 million); these imports increased to $17.9 million in 1971, $19.8 million in 1972; for the years 19651969, there was no evidence of such imports, nor for the year 1973. c/ January-June. I/ See the official declaration of the Swiss Government contained in document S/7781, annex II, dated 21 February 1967. e/ "The Swiss importer is authorized to make use of his yearly quota any time of the year, e.g., in the early months of the year 1967. The quotas are compounded on the basis of the average import quantity of the commodity during the previous three years. Fluctuations are furthermore possible between the years, as the use of a yearly quota requested in December may only appear in the trade statistics of the first three months of the following year, the reason being that the import licences granted within the quota are generally valid for three months." _/ January-February. ,/ March-December. h/ January-September. !/ January-November. 2/ 1971 figure has been recorded on a c.i.f, basis. W January4ay. -131-

Apperdtx !I EXPORTS OF ALL COMMODITIES TO SOUTHERN RHODESIA* (AS REPORTED BY COUINrRIES LISTED) (in thousands of US dollars) Exoortinq oy E_ c.,s- =or area United States Canada Argentina Brazil Chile 965 i 1967 19681262 2I 22 982P/7 491 3-625 575 1 86-OJ20 3 757 89 2 024 22 455 2 514 16 652 1272IM 2 7OO 17 581 - - m - -m - 24 15 4 - - N.A. - - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Colombia 2 Mexico 207a/ Belgium-Luxembourg 6 8323France 5.8504 Germany, Fed. Rep.of 1090311 Italy 6 518 5 Netherlands 7 291 5 United Kingdom 88 808 7 Denmark 667 Norway 1 527 Sweden 3 413 Austri:. 800 i. Portugal 559'1 Switzerlandc-/ 1 641 1 Iceland 246 186 010 748 648 31 760 51 256 055 890 103 a/ 922 976 305 1 135946992877 57 183 1 1 252 1 824 1,939 58f--J 312 38o 6-a 139 200 2 914 1 234 1.295 735000 5719461958 29 29 1 1 - 2 1082 87 87 '/ N.A. 2,513 1 540 ,-a/ _ / 82 286 1 176 63 278 1,206 51 N.A. 1.969 51 49 181 537 488 451 1 552 21 255 1 698 19 1 2 00o4 42 261 1 796 57 N.A. N.A. 2,851 3.230 2 229 127 259 1 947 5,854 Ireland Greece 37 6 3 193 492 Turkey Spain Finland Yugoslavia Jordan 9 4 .... - - - - Ii.A. 14 81a/_ -132- li

Atoendix 11 (continued) ExDort ing count.ry or area 12L 19a !a6 1 1969 1212 1MZ 12Z2 Cyprus Libyan Arab Rep. Israel Iran Lebanon Egypt Ethiopia Australia New Zealand Uganda Ghana Mauritius Nigeria Zambia Malawi Ivory Coast Senegal Angola Mozambique Liberia Tunisia Japan Sri Lanka India Pakistan Malaysia, West Singapore Sarawak Brune i Sabah 1 482" 2 821a/ N.A. N.A. 1 N.A. 4 510 237e 412 17 6 129 '/1 517 7 359 2 .532 304A/~ 3 2417 16 184 11 4 1 it A . Ao 072 5 37e/ 82# 018 951 ) 122 154 698 3 26-a/ 110 13, - N.A. 5 N.A. N.A. - N.A. 937 4 840 .A. N.A. 6535 851 5.539 4 7 c_ /18 / - N.A. N.A. N 2 - N.A. N.A. N.A. 6 - - N.A. N.A. 850 1 332 613 1.032 560 ,735 2 872 3 804 5 148 5,315 - - - - N.A. - - N.A. N.A. N.A. 214 658/ N.A. N.A. N.A. 818 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. - 3 N.A. N.A. N.A. - - N.A. 597 4 525 4 4 6 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 4 1.o6o N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 1 540 4 297 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 2 288 - - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 526 16 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 448 /- - - N.A. N.A. 61 12 . . ..1 N.A. 217aJ...... N.A. - N.A. - N.A. N.A. N.A. 4 -133- 5 5 14 1 1 1 19M N.A. 25 N.A. N.A. N.A. 5 588 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. .

A-p-endix II (continued) Exoort ing country or area Hong Kong Laos Viet-nam, Rep. of Indonesia Korea, Rep. Philippines Thailand Jamaica Trinidad and Tobago Barbados Guyana Netherlands Antill Fiji Western Samoa Malta 2 -3j1966 1967 196-8 199 191-0~ T197 Z7_ 1M 1328 318 139 2 - - .... - N.A. N.A...... - N.A. NA. N.A. - N.A. - N.A. N.A. 2P/ 26/ 3a_ - _ - N.A...... N.A. N.A. / - N.A. N.A. N.A. 7 4 8 - - - N.A...... N.A. N.A. .. .. N.A. N.A. N.A. es - - 1 - - - N.A. eis// N.A...... N.A. 9 5 7 3 - - - N.A. N.A. N.A. N.AP N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N .A. W.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 1 N.A. N.A. Nq.A. N.A. * Imports from the countries listed above accounted for approximately 75 per cent of the total imports of Southern Rhodesia in 1965. I/ Refers to trade with the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. b_/ January-June. c/ See the official declaration of the Swiss Goverment contained in document S/7781, annex I, dated 21 February 1967. 4./ January-March. e/ Domestic exports. U/ January-November. g/ January-May. h_/ July-December. i/ january-September.

H 0 co ~ 0 >44 3 0 0 0 P., 5 ,-_iI ul% o C 'j l ' i N t< g.4 ij O 0 r-f IN~g ?<~1 II -* 0 'hr-i r4CO .-4 N P*r- lA1 coDc WN K'* - l i i i i i UN - NUN KN o\~ gI Iau u-,.c'j M~i L- 1 N N C c4> 0 0 <0 0 E-#~ ca. 4 col 0> V0 UN f -4 -*i t4 yæC lAV I~ c øNT g-4005 clia 4> r0< 4-4~ 0 -135- RN

00 r4 0d .0 JO .0 0 w4 0 0 pj2l, (j~ r-I~ Iý C NCOC«"\ L* -- CO G01 COG WN t Ný g4. r4. Cy r-41 liiir i r4r- t- 0.1~ 0 rr4 - .NN.%I r CO C\ C\t- e-\0 4» 01 f-4 CO CV- t- U4 * 1 r4- UN"OO I- Iý N \I I ej1 - 0 (V CC NNa ()N ~-4 CO -t I 7 0NjN 1Cur4r4 10N Ar~ \0 ct- L-i .\O 0\ i ii I l I: 1-4 N'- K4CO N1 1 N NID N C'Y\ 0 l l l ro Ar4o COON\CO COlNO 0 N I \i 80D I II 0 UN [ I l t l i l l i -i l coI 0 ND l l l l l i i l i lli CD O #__i 4- 'III', 618111 ''III' "tt -I (IN CO F 1-41 0 1E-4 .< 5 « Q 0 II, 0 ~ E 1.- E- -136-

Id 0 0r1+ 0l 11 0 0 04> t -r- Icu~4~~*g Ti t~-~J H~0 lf4~NJ9~ 1-4 G' r-I ~ -* I~CI

N1~ 06't:_ -i or0 ON CI '-i Ir4 rHO0CY r-4 * 0 ri (13 t. t. . 1 -4 1 < i t- Ck MIN UN l0- t-0 I. V-1 0Y ~--.\0 '.O-..-N C 0 . l oot-4 9?0 i li ('i 0 * 4 10 iS- I æ ~" * i IOIHi H 0 N'N * 4 ir4,* I '.0 icI g 0 o P-i w P44 m f-40aC 0 0\0.\0 0cxi L^ 0-*\O l I"Uril OLrNt-Ot-8 f-4 t1~ PNO N P N K 4 C 4 .Y ti i m , 0o*t- CDo N J0*< 0 Ni <_ -4 co o J IHH; - i 1*6 tt-0JI Cu *u 4 4 rCJ h UN N C otr4N u~C~d 4 4 o oæ * 4 Ic'J('J £ -ti-I * 4 * ('I IH *Jt.t- \0Ou-% \0 r4 il0 o _t -4 K UN- *_ 4 4 m u~æ æ ~ * 4 4 * 4 * *~*0u'C'J<-400 I liii * * . g 4 4 * <-i S-**'0-* ~ * * i * g * g IS-00'r-4* I Hit~ I u~cOæu'<æ o~ * i 4 * * * * IS-0~r-I* 10 I'..0 I 0 wco Cd~ 0 P4< 0 P4 498 004>4 ZX -138-

0 o 0 0t x ( C -4 0 co 0 12 U A . U% - ~ C'J' o 1 C) "' 11 0% % m -4 r% A (6 S a 0I I '-4 0\ 0 NN0 t- co I I \z I C'Jt I -2 P-4 Lr\ Cu t-0 H rico w tr% 0 U% r r'4 LII rI CM 4-% I j . 1 14 a %H O ! H- I0 3 0 0 I\ N w CxJ-*?-I 14* 1 4 1 C\* 1 0*-t r-4OIHC'JIO\ CDOli H Ic? P4 \0 ^ 9 r4 N cU \0J'~ *4 94 1 9~ HHIHI.O 0Oatr-i HP IN I Scu IN1C*1 A i r- Al 0 U,\ 1 HO 1U Al I CU.*a * 9 1 O -4 I a~ 9I cu \0 I e.0 te1 0 U% -139- 41 0 0 V-4 40% 14 U H 0 u) S cs o 5.0 ' 41 - VQ U3 > >4 Q 0 P :1 2 SO.lPr4go 0

0\~ '-o 0' U'\ 0 aN -%1 cmJ 0 t- ( ÄI'IN~ II al -- I t'-N'-4 w. HU~r4 0 i3trc02 t l- l i HrN O0cD' t-c it0i0 1* cyt-KCN 0~' (y c\ P-1 C MN o-UN coc' CY cY .-mco MN LIN 1-] F-' m-~ ~ mM~u 00 CDrtc, r \ ON a0c-1 0 %Ot- Ur-4 ir4St~N~ i aý .-ioom 4e H O 0 0 1-4 1 it.. 104 04 \> '4 00 0 ~ 0 -4 tI! co~ cv 1-4 g 112 (0 0 4 0' 1 0 001w 01 g P' i

-ti '4 0 0 ti0 \'JD r-N t- C'J irN.-j <-411 l l t t-*4 U) co Z 0 <-43 0 ~~0 <-4 00 1 r-lo ,4. .-41 4-4 u -4 *0 t E4 3 l l

0 N co i l 0 CY r-4 . I-i -142- 0 I-. ~4IZ >1 .~I0 t~IM i I 4> $4 I> $4 41 '~ p4c> 4> ss. I> '.4

Annex VIII List of experts In accordance with the Committee's decision, as indicated in paragraph 93 of the present report, the following is the list of experts and relevant institutions established by the Committee from replies received from Governments: France JeanClaudePERTUS Refrigeratirn enigineer, veterinarian Expert attached to the Paris Courts 4 avenue de Friedland, Paris 8 Specialist in fresh, chilled or frozen meats (tariff heading No. 02-01) Marcel QUIBLIER President and Director-General of Societ6 Quiblier Fils 236 rue Merieux, Lyons Specialist in fresh, chilled or frozen reats (tariff heading No. 02-01) Gilbert CAFFIN Chenical expert working at the Laboratoire de Centrale M6tallurgique, 16 rue Barbette, Paris 3 Specialist in com=mon retals and mineral products (chapters 73- 81 and 26 of the Customs Tariff) Edmond PARLY Mining agent working at Etablissements Taly, 10 rue de la Pgpiniare, Paris 8 Specialist in asbestos (tariff heading No. 25-24) New Zealand H. V. BREWERTON Chemistry Division (food and agricultural products) C. A. CHALLIS Geological Survey (minerals) M. WHITEHEAD Institute of Nuclear Sciences (application of nuclear techniques) -143-

Thailand M. L. DEREKRIT SNITWONGSE Deputy Director-General Department of Customs Ministry of Finance United Kingdom Agricultural products The Tropical Products Institute, 56 Grays Inn Road, London, W.C.1 Mineral products Geo-Chemical Division The Institute of Geological Sciences, 64 Grays Inn Road, London, W.C.I Customs Procedures HM Customs and Excise Atlantic House Holborn Viaduct, London, EClN, 2PP United States of America James M. ADAMS Customs Laboratory, United States Customs Service 103 South Gay Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Yugoslavia Asbestos: Ing. Moco SUMBULOVIC D. Bogdanovic'a 2a, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in co-operation with the Zavod za raziskavo materijal in Konstrukcij (Institute for Materials and Construction Research), Dimiceva 4, Ljubljana, Yugoslavia Tobacco: Ing. Stanislav MIHAJLOVIC Expert of the enterprise Centroprom, Belgrade, in co-operation with the Institut za duvan (Tobacco Institute), Zagreb, Yugoslavia Sugar: Ing. Ljubisa MIHAILOVIC Dimitrije Tucovi6 Sugar Refinery, Belgrade, Yugoslavia -144-

Yugoslavia (cont.) Maize: Dr. Vlada TRJFi.jNOVIC Expert in co-cT-r'-tion1 with the Institut za kukuruz (Maize Institute), at Zemun Polje, Belgrade, Yugoslavia Meat products: Dr. Velimir OLUSKI Expert in co-operation with the Yugoslav Institute for the Tel:' - . of Meat, of which he is director