~~~~~~~~~ the principle that no State or group of Slalcs has the On 15 December I Y75 the Security C’ouncil (‘otnrr~it rlRh[ 10 iilcrucnc, directly or indrrcctly. for any rcawn whatcvcr. in tee established in pursuance of rcsoluticbn !$ I ( I’)(rX) the rnrcrnal or external affarrs of any other State. concerning the question of Southern Rhodcsi;r suhrnil- Rrco//ing o/ro the inherent and lawful right of every State. in the ted to the Security Council a spcci;r) rcpclrt (S/l IYI !) ckcrcrsc of its sovereignty. IO rcqucst assistance from any other State containing a recommendation for the expnnsion of or group of Stales. ~co,,ng in mrnd that all Mcmbcr States must refrain in their sanctions against the illegal regime in Southern Rhtdc- international rclatrons from the thrcar or use of force against the sia. The report stated that the Committee had consid- tcrritoria) integrity or politrcal independence of any State. or in any ered a wide range of proposals IO that end, but had other manner inconsrstcnt with the purposes of the United Nations. managed to reach agreement, subject to rescrvntions GIUV~/Y roncrrnrd at the acts of aggression committed by South entered by certain delegations, on the rccommend;rtion Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola and the violation of 11s that insurance, trade names and franchises should bc sovcrcignty and territorial integrity. Condrmning the utilrzation by South Africa of the international included within the scope of mandatory sanctions Territory of h’amibra IO mount that agprcssion. against Southern Rhodesia.“‘” (;raw/,r concrmrd o/so at the damage and destruction done by the At the 1907th meeting on 6 April 1976. IIIC Scctrrity South African n-wading forces in Angola and by their scirurc of Council decided to include the (‘ornmittcc.‘\ ~~CCI.I\ Angolan cqurpmcnt and matcrral~. report in its agend;t. which was adop~cd without objcc- ~Vorrng the letter of the Pcrmancnt Rcprcwntativc of South Afrrcu lion.ll” regarding the withdrawal of South African troops. I Condrmns South hfrrca’s aggression against the Pcoplc’s At the same meeting the President of the Security Rcpublrc of Angola; Council announced that, as a result of intensive consul- 2 Drmundl that South Africa ssrupulourly rcspcct the indcpcn- tations on certain recommendations contained in the dcncc, sovcrcignty and territorial integrity of the Pcoplc’s Republic of special report, agreement had been reached on the text Angola; of a draft resolution (S/12037). which had been spon- 3. Drmonds o/so that South Africa desist from the utilization of sored and submitted by all I5 members of the Security the international Territory of Namibra IO mount provocative or Council. The draft resolution was adopted unanimously aggressive acts against the People’s Republic of Angola or any other ncighbouring African State: at that meeting as resolution 388 (1976). The text of the 4. Calls upon the Government of South Africa to meet the just resolution reads as follows: claims of the People’s Rcpubhc of Angola for a full compensation for Thr Srcuriry Council, the damage and destruction inflicted on its State and for the RruJTrming its resolutions 216 (1965) of I2 November and 217 restoration of the equipment and materials which its invading forces (1965) of 20 November 1965. 221 (1966) of 9 April and 232 (1966) seized; of 16 December 1966. 253 (1968) of 29 May 1968 and 277 (1970) of 5 Rrpurrrl the Secretary-Gcncral IO follow the implcmcntation 18 March 1970. of the present resolution Rra/firmi& that the measures provided for in those resolutions. as Explaining the reason why he had abstained in the well as the measures initiated by Mcmbcr States in pursuance thereof. vote the representative of the United Kingdom said that shall continue in effect. his Government had consistently opposed all forms of Tu&ing in/o uccoun/ the rccommcndatrons made by the Sccurrty Council Committee established in pursuance of rcsolutwn 253 ( 1961) external intervention. South African intervention was concerning the quc*tion of Southern Rhodccra rn its \pcct~l report of rightly condemned in the draft resolution. But in his 15 Dcccmbcr 1975 (S/I 1913). view all foreign intervention in Angola was wrong and Rrcrl;lirnring that the present wtuarron rn Southern Rhodcw should be condemned. Therefore, he found the draft co,n<titutc\ ;I threat IO rnrcrrurtronal pcacc and rccurlly. unbalanced. He also had reservations concerning the use .Icring under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United N;IIIo~\. of the term “aggression” since, with the withdrawal of I. DrridrJ that all Member SI~ICS shall take approprratc mea- South African troops from Angola, it applied to a sures IO ensure that thcrr n~~wnah and persons rn thcrr tcrrrtorrcs do not Insure: situation in the past. As to the questions of restitution ((1) Any commoditrcs or products cxporrcd from Southern Rho- and compensation for damages the Security Council was dcsra after the date of the prcscnt rcsolutwn in contravcnrron of not the appropriate forum for such consideration.“” Security Council rcsolutron 253 (1968) which they know or have Similar views were expressed by the representative of rcasonablc cause IO bclicvc IO have been so exported; France.ll?’ (b) Any commodities or products whrch they know or have rcasonablc cause IO bclicvc arc dcstrncd or mtcndcd for rmportatron At the end of the meeting a procedural discussion into Southern Rhodcsra after the date of the prcscnt rcsolutwn rn concerning the presidency over the Security Council contravention of rcsolutron 253 (1968): tooh place, since the meeting continued beyond mid- fc) Commodrtics. products or other property in Southern Rhodc- night ending on I April 1976 at 12.15 a.m.11~9 sra of any commcrcral. rndustrral or publrc u1111ty undertaking In Southern Rhodcsra. rn contravention of rcsolutron 253 (l96H). THE SITL’ATlO;hi IN SOCTHERN RHOUESlA 2 Drridrs that all Member States shall take approprlatc mca- surcs IO prevent thcrr wrtonals and persons in thcrr Tcrrrrorrcs from Dccisioi of 6 April 1976 (1907th meeting): resolution grdntrng IO any commcrcral. indusrrurl or publrc utrlity undcrtakrng rn 388 (1976) Southern Rhodcsra the rrght to USC any rradc name or from cntcrrng inlo any franchrsrng agreement rnvolvrng rhc USC of any trade name. “‘O For the nalurc Jnd full cxrcnt of rhc ranctron, cnvrwgcd under those Items. see the rclcbant opcrarwc pdrrgraphs of rcsolutron 3x8 ‘I:’ 1906th mrg.. paras. 245.252 (1976) subscgucntl) adopted by rhc Sccurrry C‘ouncll on rhc subject I’)” /bid, paras 2S3-254 and rcproduccd bclou “?’ For dctarl\. see chapter I “‘I 1907th mtg . prcccdlng pdr.r 2 Part II -- ,ndc mark u, rcp,slcred dcwgn ,n connc~~on \*llh the UIC or crumble the economy of the illegal rlgime if only they dls,,,bu,,on o[ an) prduc~\. comn’d~l~~\ or \crb,cc\ Of such .t” had been more efficiently and universally applicd.“J undcrrakmg: The representative of the United States said that his 3 L!,R~J, having regard IO the prlrwplc ,ta[cd I” Artlclc 2 of the un,tcd kalions Charler. Star-z\ nol Mcmbcrr of the lJnl\cd Na~~onr IO country had always scrupulously enforced the sanctions acl I” accc)&ncc with the provisions of the prc\cnl resolution against Southern Rhodesia with the exception of the importation of certain minerals from that territory Following the vote the representative of the United under United States domestic law. He stated, however, Republic of Tanzania expressed his delegation’s satis- that the United States Government of the day was faction at the unanimous sponsorship and adoption of committed to repealing that piece of enabling lcgisla- the draft resolution by the Council, which he believed tion. which should increase economic pressure against was a precedent. Nevertheless, he observed that while the illegal rCgimc and restore the position of the United the agreed recommendation from the Committee was a States vis-8-vis its international obligations.“)> step in the right direction. it did not go far enough; the The representative of the USSR expressed regret that provisions of Article 41 of the Charter had not yet been despite the binding nature of the sanctions imposed by exhausted. and his delegation maintained that the the Security Council they had not been fully complied sanctions would never achieve the desired purpose of with by certain countries. some of which were violating toppling the illegal rCgimc in Southern Rhodesia unless them overtly. It was the duty of the Security Council to they were made fully comprehensive and effectively put an end to such violations and to intensify the supervised, and were also extended to South Africa. He sanctions against the illegal rtgimc in Southern Rhode- recalled that the heads of Commonwealth countries at sia. Unfortunately. he said, the Council had on several theit-summit meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, in 1975 had occasions been frustrated in its efforts to that end by the agreed to recommend the expansion of the scope of use of the veto by certain Western Powers. His dclega- sanctions and that the United Nations General Asscm- tion believed that the situation in Southern Rhodesia bly and the Special Committee on the Situation with justified the application of the full measures stipulated regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the in Article 41 of the Charter. and had voted for the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and present resolution on the basis that it was an interim Peoples had repeatedly taken the same position. Still, he measure pending the adoption soon of more