• 001_Krishnakath.jpg
  • 002_Vividhangi-Vyaktimatva-1.jpg
  • 003_Shabdhanche.jpg
  • 004_Mazya-Rajkiya-Athwani.jpg
  • 005_Saheb_14.jpg
  • 006_Yashodhan_76.jpg
  • 007_Yashodharshan.jpg
  • 008_Yashwant-Chintanik.jpg
  • 009_Kartrutva.jpg
  • 010_Maulik-Vichar.jpg
  • 011_YCHAVAN-N-D-MAHANOR.jpg
  • 012_Sahyadricheware.jpg
  • 013_Runanubandh.jpg
  • 014_Bhumika.jpg
  • 016_YCHAVAN-SAHITYA-SUCHI.jpg
  • 017_Maharashtratil-Dushkal.jpg
  • Debacle-to-Revival-1.jpg
  • INDIA's-FOREIGN-POLICY.jpg
  • ORAL-HISTORY-TRANSCRIPT.jpg
  • sing_3.jpg

India Foreign Policy - १३९

Process of Decolonisation

The process of decolonisation has maintained its momentum everywhere except in southern Africa. We had hoped that, after the withdrawal of Portuguese colonialism, white minority rules elsewhere in southern Africa would quickly yield to majority rule. But it would seem that our hopes were based on wrong premises. The national liberation movements have been left with no option but to resort to armed struggle. It is particularly sad that the peoples of southern Africa should have to make many more sacrifices before winning their freedom, because it is within the competence of the United Nations to help them by taking enforcement action.

In Zimbabwe the time is overdue for the introduction of majority rule. The question of a constitutional safeguard for minorities must follow the establishment of majority rule. Diplomatic efforts are being made by frontline African States and others to resolve the problem democratically and peacefully through negotiations. The regime of Ian Smith clearly has no basis in law or in the will of the people, and it must yield to majority rule without any delay, if further bloodshed is to be avoided. The United Kingdom, whose legal responsibility continues in this regard, could play a helpful role at the present juncture.

It is necessary to remind ourselves that the territory of Nami­bia has international status and that South Africa's presence there is illegal. South Africa's open challenge to the authority of the United Nations has remained unanswered in effective terms. Almost every member of this organisation agrees that steps should be taken to retrieve in practice what the United Nations legally holds in trust, which is the territory of Namibia and the destiny of its people. But nothing has been done so far except to adopt recommendatory resolutions. Nothing could cause greater harm to the credibility of the United Nations than its failure to assume responsibility in practice for what belongs to it in law. The implications of this should be squarely faced by those countries that support the legal position but are not pre­pared to enforce it.

Here again, diplomacy seems to be at work to bring together representatives of the people of Namibia to discuss and agree upon the process toward their independence within a short period of time. The United Nations cannot afford to fail in Namibia because the members of this organisation have a collective legal responsibility for its independence.