Ethiopia, 1969

1. Madam President, your election

to the Presidency of the twenty-fourth session of the

General Assembly is a fitting recognition of your exceptional

contributions as a diplomat of your country and as an

untiring and devoted worker for the cause of the United

Nations. During a distinguished service, spanning a period

of fifteen years, you have acquired rich and varied

experiences from which, I am sure, the Assembly will

greatly profit. That the second woman President of the

General Assembly should be found in your person, an

illustrious daughter of Africa, is a source of great pride to

all of us.

2. Having had the opportunity of working with you in the

various halls of the United Nations, you may well understand

how happy I am that a friend of long standing, as well

as a great friend of my country, should be in the Chair

today as I speak.

3. May I also avail myself of this opportunity to extend

the sincere condolences of my Government to the family of

Mr. Emilio Arenales, and to the Government of Guatemala,

in whose untimely death they have sustained a great loss.

4. The year 1969 will go down in the history of mankind

as an important watershed. Future historians will, no

doubt, record that by first setting foot on the moon, man

not only realized an age-old dream, but also, with that

achievement, opened up entirely new horizons for his

imagination. It will also be said that that achievement

dramatically transformed man’s perspective of himself.

5. If it has been true in the past that man has made

progress by constantly holding out visions of his future and

by acting out those visions, it should now be clearer than

ever that never before in human history has man’s future

looked brighter, his challenge nobler, his means greater. If

we were thus to be led today by our past, we should have

every reason to be optimistic about our future. Can we,

however, in point of fact, look to the future with such firm

optimism?

6. The paradox today is that we have entered a qualitative

new age, in which our past has become increasingly

irrelevant to our future. Up to very recently man never

possessed the technical capability to commit mass suicide.

So long as he had not reached that point man was capable

of seeing his future without the spectre of total destruction

impairing his vision or limiting his imagination. Now that

that point has been passed, a dark shadow has been cast

over man’s imagination; a sort of terminal point to his

vision seems to have been reached.

7. Above everything else, the extraordinary feat of man’s

landing on the moon has vividly underscored the dramatic

scientific and technical achievements mankind has made in

all areas and on all fronts of knowledge. The latest

achievements of man should leave no-one in doubt that

man has now the means to eradicate from the face of the

earth his age-old Nemesis of ignorance, poverty and hunger.

If man does not soon do away with those evils which still

plague two thirds of mankind, it certainly will not be for

lack of know-how but for lack of will, and the inability to

organize and order his efforts and goals.

8. The other side of the picture is not, however, so

hopeful. The same scientific and technical capability which

put men on the moon can also be used for total

self-destruction. Thus, in that sense, man’s landing on the

moon was as much as demonstration of the frightening

power he has acquired for self-destruction as it is of the

many promising things these latest achievements hold out

for mankind. Even as we rejoice and marvel at man’s

fantastic voyage to the moon, the lesson of what it all

means should not be lost on us. More than ever, it should

now be clear to us that, in the interest of the survival of

mankind, the destructive uses to which these dramatic

scientific and technological achievements can be put should

be controlled, and their application for economic and social

development accelerated.

9. This brings me directly to the two important questions

which we have debated for many years here at the United

Nations. These are, first, the question of disarmament, and

second, the problem of economic and social development.

10. The Secretary-General is quite right when he says with

respect to disarmament that “the world is standing at what

may be regarded in the perspective of history as one of the

decisive moments in the grim challenge of the nuclear arms

race” [A/7601/Add.1, para. 26]. Yet, we must all agree

that the choice available seems to be very clear, nor should

the present situation require unusually sophisticated understanding.

There are at least two States which have enough

power to destroy each other and, in the process, the rest of

the world. In pursuit of an illusory concept of superiority

those same countries have unleashed a feverish arms race.

They are also acquiring at an alarming rate “over-kill

capacity”, that is, the capability to destroy each other

several times over. The end result of this process has been

graphically described by the Secretary-General in the

following terms: “As the spiral of the nuclear arms race

goes up, the spiral of security goes down.” [Ibid., para. 28.]

11. In this situation, the choice that the two super-Powers

will have to make is not the classical dilemma of the lesser

of two evils: they will either have to give up their nuclear

weapons entirely and place under effective control the

development of science and technology for weapons purposes,

or they will immeasurably enhance the risk of total

destruction and the sense of insecurity to the point where,

even if one day the big Powers wanted to, so complicated

would be the problem of inspection that they would no

longer be able to reduce their nuclear arsenals. This is not

idle speculation; already we see the handwriting on the wall

with plans for anti-missile defence and missiles with

multiple warheads. If science and technology have, throughout

history, found immediate application in weapons of

war, the present rate of application is unprecedented. With

every advance, man’s chances of controlling the use of these

weapons has gradually diminished to a point where a totally

uncontrollable stage will soon be reached.

12. This problem seems to be even more urgent with

regard to chemical and bacteriological weapons. For one

thing those weapons are cheaper than nuclear weapons to

develop and one can more effectively conceal their development.

Secondly, more countries, about thirty by the latest

estimate, have the potential to develop chemical and

bacteriological agents into lethal and uncontrollable

weapons of war.

13. The Secretary-General’s report on this aspect, drawn

up with the assistance of fourteen eminent scientists,

confirms our worst fears. The report stated: “Were these

weapons ever to be used on a large scale in war, no one

could predict how enduring the effects would be and how

they would affect the structure of society ... in which we

live.”

14. Unless the international community, and particularly

the super-Powers, summon their last effort of will, the

chances for mankind’s winning. the race for time will be

soon out of the question. At any rate, there does not seem

to be very much time left; considering the alarming rate of

scientific and technological development, at the most we

only have ten years.

15. It is thus with an apprehensive understanding of what

has been often described as the “mad momentum” of the

ever escalating arms race that my delegation enthusiastically

welcomes the Secretary-General’s proposal that the seventies

should also be declared a Disarmament Decade. We also

agree with him that, similar to the exercise presently under

way to establish goals and specific objectives for common

action with respect to economic and social development in

the decade of the seventies, specific objectives and

timetables should be established in the field of disarmament.

16. Science and technology are also exerting a decisive

influence on economic and social development. The growing

scientific and technological gap between the developed

and the developing countries is the root cause of the

widening disparity in their development. The present

unequal sharing of the benefits of international trade

between them, a factor which the developing countries

consider one of the most restrictive to their economic

development, can, in large measure, be explained by the

uneven distribution of the benefits of modern science and

technology. New scientific advances have enabled many a

developed country to produce comparable, even at times

better, substitutes for some of the commodities which they

have traditionally imported from the developing countries,

and their ability and efficiency in this regard has also

increased.

17. The impact of science and technology on agriculture

in the already developed countries has been so spectacular

that many of them find it today cheaper and more

convenient to produce their own food and other agricultural

commodities which they can use for industrial purposes.

In many a developed country the agricultural revolution

not only preceded the industrial revolution but, in fact,

made their industrialization possible. Except for a handful

of countries, the result of this historic development has

been to make the developing countries uncompetitive

vis-a-vis the developed countries in the production of

almost every agricultural commodity and industrial product.

In the few instances where the developing countries

have still preserved certain advantages, it has not been

because of any advantages resulting from efficiency of

techniques or organization, but from such factors as climate

and unusually generous gifts of nature. Those exceptions

are countries which produce some tropical agricultural

products which are needed in the industrialized countries,

rare countries which dispose of such valuable wealth as oil

or other precious minerals which are in short supply in the

developed countries themselves.

18. The application of science and technology in production

also means, in the immediate sense, capital and trained

manpower — two resources which the developing countries

have in such pitifully limited supply. However, the fact that

there is not enough capital or trained scientific and

technical manpower, severely limits the development of

science and technology in those countries. Whereas countries

which are at an advanced stage of scientific development

have an increasing ability to develop their science and

technology at a much higher rate, the developing countries

are caught in a vicious circle. The net result of this

phenomenon is to make the importation of scientific and

technical know-how into the developing regions exorbitantly

expensive. Even more serious, because of the disparity in

the level of their development, and therefore in their

problems, the development of science and technology in

the advanced countries is turning away from the needs of

the developing countries.

19. We have today reached a stage where even if the

developing countries were to do all that they should in

order to develop with optimum efficiency — which they are

not doing for reasons which must be obvious—they simply

cannot go anywhere, for such external factors as the

widening technological gap, the unequal division of the

benefits of trade over which they have no control, have a

more decisive influence on their economic development

than the decisions that they themselves can make. To

assume, on the other hand, that the developing countries

will be doing all that they can or to demand that they

should do all that they must, is an idea bordering on the

unrealistic. It should be obvious that the fact that the

developing countries are under-developed means in a large

measure that they simply do not have the ability to do

things right; if they had that ability, they would not be

under-developed countries in the first place.

20. Given the present historical circumstance and the built-in

and widening technological gap, there is no substitute for

well-ordered and mutually beneficial international co-operation,

based on the understanding that we have reached a

point in history where the action of one country not only

affects others indirectly, but also that the actions of the

rich and industrialized countries vitally affect the destinies

of the developing countries; so much so that for many a

developing country what the advanced countries choose to

do or not to do at a given moment spells the difference

between economic development or stagnation.

21. It is against this background that we should approach

our task of elaborating specific goals and objectives for the

Second United Nations Development Decade. Unless we are

able to agree on what the developing and the developed

countries should do separately or jointly for the fulfilment

of certain mutually agreed minimum objectives on this

uphill and difficult road of economic development, we

might not only be cancelling the benefits which may come

about from the efforts of each one of us, but we could even

be working at cross-purposes. It seems to my delegation

that before we can hope to establish a framework for

collective action for the Second United Nations Development

Decade, we must learn how far the world has become

interdependent. There should be a profound understanding

of that basic truth, which for the first time in history has

posed urgent problems. Now that mankind has begun to

share a common destiny, a solution to the development

problem should be foreseen, not on altruistic motives but

on the enlightened self-interest of all members of the

international community.

22. Changing the call for international co-operation in the

economic and social field from one of appeal to humanitarian

instinct to that of a plea for enlightened self-interest

in which the benefits to all concerned would be emphasized,

will, however, require a fundamental change of

attitude. In this regard, the United Nations has a useful role

to play in shaping man’s new conscience for this historically

unprecedented age. Member Governments, in particular,

should take it upon themselves to inform their peoples of

the advantages that they could have from an effective

system of international co-operation.

23. Obviously, the United Nations does not have the

means to undertake, in this respect, a massive campaign on

all fronts. However, it seems to us that a limited but

effective campaign to reach opinion leaders in the Member

countries, through their universities, Press, business and

public life, especially in the advanced countries, is indispensable

if the Second United Nations Development Decade is

to achieve anything.

24. I now wish to turn my attention to some of the

outstanding political problems that are before us.

25. A candid appraisal of the record of the United Nations

in these troubled times inescapably leads one to the

conclusion that the United Nations is undergoing a “crisis

of confidence”. Our diagnosis may, differ but today no one

can seriously deny that fact. There seems to be a general

weakening of idealism. People everywhere simply do not

believe any more that the promise which the Charter of the

United Nations held out for mankind will ever be realized.

In recent times, even those of us who are fortunate enough

to work in diplomacy, in these halls and elsewhere, have

had difficulty to come up with anything that we can call

progress, even to satisfy our self-esteem.

26. Various reasons have been advanced to explain why

this has come about. One school of thought, which has

gained wide acceptance in certain well-known quarters,

holds the Afro-Asian countries responsible. By making

impossible demands which they know that the United

Nations cannot meet, these critics assert that the Afro-Asian

countries are slowly wrecking the Organization and

they contend that the Afro-Asian countries are relying

more on their mechanical majorities rather than on serious

negotiation.

27. Another school of thought attributes the prevailing

ineffectiveness to the fact that the United Nations, particularly

the General Assembly, is too idealistic an Organization

to really reflect in its actual working the realities of the

world; it cannot, therefore, be expected to act responsibly

and realistically. Yet to another group the United Nations is

an Organization designed to maintain the status quo of a

world which in 1945 was emerging from the holocaust of a

devastating war. Hence, according to this point of view, it

cannot now be expected to accommodate the revolutionary

changes that took place in the last quarter of a century,

thus making the present contradictions and deadlock

inevitable.

28. No one, of course, can claim that he and he alone has

the correct diagnosis for this malaise of the will. All these

explanations may have, in their own ways and in varying

degrees, something of the truth. We must all agree,

however, that whatever is said of the United Nations, no

one can seriously suggest that something is wrong with the

principles which inspired the Charter; the weak point has

always been in the realm of implementation of those

principles by Members of the Organization.

29. It should be clear in this respect that if all of us, as

Members of the United Nations, were to accept a certain

amount of responsibility for having made the United

Nations less effective than it is capable of being, it should

be equally obvious that some Members would, in this

regard, assume more responsibility than others.

30. Let us, for example, review the record with respect to

colonialism. Although the Charter of the United Nations

held out the promise of self-determination to all subjugated

peoples, the Organization did little about decolonization

until the beginning of the sixties. The failure to involve the

United Nations in the decolonization of most of South-East

Asia, North Africa and other parts of Africa led, as we all

know, to bloodshed which conceivably could have been

avoided. The record of the United Nations in the field of

decolonization in the first fifteen years of its existence can,

in fact, be summed up appropriately as one of a string of

missed opportunities. On the part of some influential

Members, their records amount to a complete abdication of

their responsibilities and obligations under the Charter.

31. What we are today witnessing, with respect to the

remaining colonial questions in Africa, is the continuation

of the same pattern; a group of countries which have either

been invested by the Charter of the United Nations with

great responsibility for the fulfilment of its principles, or

which circumstances have given the power to effect

improvement in all critical colonial situations, still persist in

their refusal to live up to the full measure of their

responsibility.

32. Be it with respect to the Portuguese Territories in

Africa, or to Rhodesia or the question of Namibia, or

apartheid in South Africa, any prospect of evolving

satisfactory solutions through persuasion or negotiation is

ended. The record shows that in most cases for over ten

years, all the available means of United Nations diplomacy

have been used to that end repeatedly, but to no avail. If

one were to be candid in one’s appraisal of this record, I

cannot see for a moment how one could still harbour the

hope that somehow the colonial régimes in southern Africa

will be persuaded to change their policies. Under the

circumstances, the only conclusion that logically presents

itself is that those who still entertain further hope on this

score are either indulging in wishful thinking, or simply

trying to justify their failure to act in a manner required by

their responsibility.

33. It should be clear by now that we have reached a

position in which, if any plea for a change of course is to be

addressed, it should be addressed not to the colonial

régimes in southern Africa — for we know they cannot

hear — but to a handful of Governments whose failure to act

forthrightly and in accordance with their responsibility has

made it possible for those colonial interests to persist in

their defiance of the United Nations.

34. It should surprise no one, therefore, that no improvement

has been seen in any one of the critical colonial

situations in southern Africa. The colonial wars which

Portugal is waging in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea

(Bissau) have increased in savagery and in repercussions; yet

the world seems to hear little or nothing about them. Those

Member States whose generous gift or sale of arms has

made it possible for Portugal to sustain those wars have

lately intensified their efforts so as to increase their share of

the spoils of war by helping Portugal to tap the resources of

those Territories. In this respect the long-term implications

of the massive influx of South African and Western capital

into Angola and Mozambique should not be lost on anyone.

35. With respect to Rhodesia, even the most optimistic

advocates of mandatory economic sanctions should see by

now that those measures which have been in force since

June 1968 have failed to bring down the illegal rebel régime

of Ian Smith. The reports that have been submitted by the

Security Council committee on the implementation of

sanctions have proved demonstrably that those sanctions

are not in general being complied with. If the sanctions

were fully implemented, a small country such as Southern

Rhodesia, which depends entirely on import and export for

its life sustenance, could not possibly have survived such a

severe punishment to its economy.

36. On our part, we have never had any illusion that South

Africa and Portugal would co-operate in this respect with

the United Nations despite the fact, of course, that under

Article 25 of the Charter they have an obligation to abide

by the decisions of the Council. What has surprised us,

however, is what the reports of the Security Council’s

committee have shown by implication; that is the fact that

a number of countries, while giving the formal appearance

of implementing the sanctions, have not prevented some of

their nationals from buying and selling to Rhodesia through

intermediaries.

37. In this connexion the fact that some important

members of the international community are still maintaining

consular representation in Rhodesia should not be overlooked.

38. Assuming that their hope has always been genuine, to

those who have hoped against hope that by some miraculous

process the Salisbury régime would be prevailed upon

to change its course, the imposition on the Territory of a

system of apartheid and the increasing repressive measures

which that régime has taken against the freedom fighters

should now be the last straw. By those actions the régime

of Ian Smith seems t have burned all the remaining bridges

that linked it to the international community and those

who had persisted in giving it the benefit of the doubt.

39. South Africa has also continued to tighten its hold on

Namibia. Since, at the same time, Namibia is being

progressively integrated into the apartheid system of South

Africa, policies designed to break up the territorial integrity

of the Territory are being implemented. In the meantime

no action has been taken to give effect to the United

Nations assumption of administrative responsibility for the

Territory; all that the United Nations has done over the

past year has been to address several pleas to South Africa

to spare from execution some of the freedom fighters who

have been sent to goal for resisting oppression — please no

sooner made than they were rejected by the South African

régime.

40. With respect to the remaining colonial questions in

southern Africa the following conclusions must therefore

emerge. First, the totally inadequate response of the United

Nations to the defiance of the colonial régimes in southern

Africa has contributed much to dampening enthusiasm for

the United Nations. Secondly, by now it should be clear

that no further pleas would make the colonial régimes

change their course of action. Thirdly, if there is any hope

for improvement in all those critical areas, that improvement

will have to come as the result of the more influential

Members of the Organization taking effective action

commensurate with their responsibility under the Charter.

41. There is also some scepticism, especially among the

small countries, about the United Nations being able to

respond to their security needs. As is well known, because

of the impasse in the Security Council, the hope of

collective security under the Charter has never been

realized. On the other hand, the increasing role of the

United Nations in peace-keeping has been nipped in the bud

as a result of the big Powers’ refusal to share responsibility

with the smaller countries for the maintenance of peace and

security.

42. I regret to say that the Special Committee of

Thirty-three, which has been charged with the task of

studying the various aspects of peace-keeping, has not been

able to tackle the fundamental questions. I believe the time

has come for the General Assembly to examine new ways

of keeping alive the peace-keeping role of the United

Nations which, it must be emphasized, grew, in the first

place, in response to the demands of the smaller countries

of the Organization.

43. In Viet-Nam, the Middle East and Nigeria the guns

have not been stilled; even as we deliberate here at the

United Nations, men are killing one another in all those

places.

44. If there is anything we can call progress, it is the fact

that, at least with respect to Viet-Nam, the Paris talks are

still continuing. There have also been some indications

lately that the level of fighting could be de-escalated. Even

if there have been serious snags in putting into motion a

process of de-escalation which could lead to a cease-fire, at

least with respect to Viet-Nam, the key to the final solution

is very clear. That solution lies in the prospect that the

people of South Viet-Nam will be able to determine,

without foreign interference, the political and social system

under which they wish to live.

45. With regard to the Middle East, I said last year: “It

almost seems as if the preservation of the fragile cease-fire

arrangements is consigned to a blind interplay of incidents

rather than the dictates of international obligations or even

of self-interest.” [1683rd meeting, para. 14.] Since that

time, such has been the extent of deterioration of the

situation that I regret I cannot even repeat those words this

year, for the fact today is that the cease-fire arrangements

have collapsed in many sectors. Instead premeditated,

highly planned and large-scale violations of the cease-fire

have become daily occurrences. Along the Suez Canal and

the Jordan-Israeli cease-fire sector the violations have

assumed the dimensions of continuing warfare.

46. My Government believes that the main impetus for a

solution of the problem of the Middle East should come

from the big Powers within the framework of the United

Nations. The problem in the immediate sense being one of

turning the course of this continuing warfare, the big

Powers have, under the Charter of the United Nations, an

inescapable responsibility to act. Because of the fact that

the big Powers are vitally involved, either economically or

as suppliers of arms to the parties in conflict, and because

of the danger in this situation of big-Power confrontation,

those powers, as permanent members of the Security

Council, also have the added responsibility to act urgently

and forthrightly.

47. The basis for both the intermediate and the long-term

solution to the conflict is contained in the Security Council

resolution of 22 November 1967 [242 (1967)]. As I said

last year, that resolution contains a delicately balanced

mutual set of obligations. The problem has been with

regard to the timing of the implementation by the parties

concerned of the various components of those obligations.

If the big Powers were to give a guarantee under the

umbrella of the United Nations, that problem, we believe,

should pose no insurmountable difficulty.

48. However, time seems to be of the essence in the

situation; the more the solution is delayed the more

intractable will the problem become. Foreign occupation of

a territory cannot be tolerated without also generating

resistance from the occupied people; the longer the

occupation lasts the stronger will that resistance be. The

prolonged occupation is already bringing unpredictable and

uncontrollable elements into the Middle East situation.

49. The fact that the Nigerian civil war is continuing

unabated is a matter of grave concern to my Government.

As Chairman of the Organization of African Unity Consultative

Committee on Nigeria, my own Sovereign has

devoted much of his valuable time to trying to find a

solution to that situation, which can only be described as a

great tragedy for the people of Nigeria and of Africa.

Undaunted by the lack of progress, my Sovereign will

continue his efforts until a solution is found to that

conflict.

50. if progress has not been made so far, it is, above all,

because of the deep-seated and delicate nature of the

conflict. The civil war in Nigeria was born of the complications

and frictions that accompany nation-State building.

Such a problem is not uniquely Nigeria’s. In varying degrees

many countries have problems of minorities and nationalities.

Because of the changes and readjustments brought

about by the necessity of creating organizations and

institutions that cut across the old fabrics of tribal and

national loyalties in the newly independent States of Africa

and Asia, this problem has acquired new dimensions, and in

some places has led to intermittent conflicts. Nigeria has to

solve this problem of nation-State building as other nations

have solved it or at least succeed in reasonably holding the

inevitable friction to the minimum. In the final analysis, the

solution to the present conflict will have to be based on a

restoration of confidence in the future of one national

Nigerian body politic, in which the peoples that constitute

that nation must learn to minimize the inevitable friction

that nation-State building involves. The problem will not be

solved if one of the constituent parts chooses to renounce a

common destiny, because in the African context that could

be an endless process.

51. Finally, as the United Nations is approaching the

threshold of the quarter-century mark we have to look

forward. If the forthcoming commemorative session of the

General Assembly is to fulfil a valuable function for the

international community, it should offer all of us an

opportunity for a painstaking assessment of the events and

developments of the past quarter of a century and of the

role of the United Nations in a world which, as I said

earlier, has become, for the first time in history, inextricably

interdependent. The time between now and the next

session should, therefore, be used in our capitals for such a

critical assessment. The planned commemoration should

also provide an opportunity for Heads of State and

Government of Member States of the United Nations to

meet here in order to rededicate themselves to the

fulfilment of the principles of the Charter. Above all, the

commemorative session of the twenty-fifth anniversary of

the United Nations should inspire Member Governments to

come forward with new and bold ideas that could hopefully

answer some of the crying needs of the international

community for security and justice and for economic and

social development.

52. Already a group of Member States of the United

Nations that are not members of any military alliances

have, last week, held a conference, of which I was privileged

to be Chairman, to address themselves to the question of

how Members of the United Nations could effectively

co-operate in solving some of the outstanding problems that

have for long bedevilled the international community. The

participants in that conference have also agreed to hold

meetings in the future at various levels, including a

conference of Heads of State and Government, with a view

to enhancing their contributions in the fulfilment of the

principles of the United Nations Charter; they have also

created a committee which would enable them to contribute

useful ideas towards making the forthcoming commemorative

session a worth-while exercise in stocktaking

and in mapping out new approaches.

53. Speaking of commemoration, I feel it to be quite

appropriate that at a time when we are planning to

celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the United Nations,

we should also take cognizance of the centennial of

the birth of Mahatma Gandhi, and stop to ponder over the

significance of his life and the examples that he has set. It is

particularly befitting, because in all respects the life of

Mahatma Gandhi was one long struggle for the fulfilment of

the principles which inspire the Charter of the United

Nations. It should also be of particular significance to the

United Nations that Mahatma Gandhi started his fight for

human rights in South Africa where the future effectiveness

of the United Nations still hangs in the balance.

54. Finally, before I end my statement, I should like to

refer to a declaration known as the Lusaka Manifesto on

Southern Africa to which all African Governments have

subscribed and which, in accordance with the recent

decision of the Heads of State and Government of the

Organization of African Unity at its sixth session will soon

be introduced in the General Assembly by the President of

Cameroon, His Excellency Ahmadou Ahidjo, who is the

current Chairman of the Organization of African Unity

Assembly. That Manifesto sets out in poetic majesty the

aspirations and the hopes of the peoples of Africa for

freedom, justice and progress. While aware that those ideals

have not found fulfilment in their respective countries, the

African States have let it be known that they are entirely

committed to their full realization. They have demanded of

the world that there should be such a commitment,

especially with respect to the granting of the right of

self-determination to the peoples of southern Africa. I

believe this is not asking too much.