Vol. 399 No. 12
7 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will call on the EC, as a matter of urgency to make representations to the South African Government regarding the reintegration into Namibia of the Walvis Bay Enclave and the 12 offshore islands in accordance with United Nations Security Council Report 432; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
11 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in the context of the Irish Presidency, he will call on the EC to make representations to the South African Government to take full responsibility for the Namibian debt which was accrued by South Africa's occupation of Namibia; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 11 together.
The Government fully support the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 432 of 1978, in particular its call for the "initiation of steps necessary to ensure the early integration of Walvis Bay into Namibia". We understand by this the initiation of negotiations between the elected Government of Namibia and the Government of South Africa, in the spirit of the provisions of the United Nations Charter on the settlement of disputes by peaceful means. We are hopeful that both countries may enter into negotiations without delay. The member states of the Twelve will be supportive of any such negotiations.
Namibia is attempting to come to terms with the financial and budgetary problems of an independent state. This includes a relatively low public foreign and domestic debt amounting according to recent figures prepared by the Namibian Government in conjunction with the United Nations, to 13.2 per cent of GDP on independence. Though I believe South Africa has a duty to assist Namibia to achieve genuine independence, I consider it to be unrealistic to suppose that South Africa would be prepared to assume full responsibility for Namibia's debt. With a view, therefore, to mobilising financial, material and technical support to help the young Namibia in its efforts towards reconstruction and rehabilitation, the United Nations Secretary General has called a United Nations Donors' Pledging Conference for 21 to 22 June in New York. It is hoped that pledges made there will considerably ease that burden.
I am grateful for the Taoiseach's reply. Would he not agree that the so-called Namibian debt was not incurred by Namibian citizens but by the South African authorities who legally ran that country and ran up those debts? If he accepts that, would he therefore not agree that it is absolutely essential that combined sanctions and pressure of all kinds be maintained on the South African authorities, because the Namibian problem, including the Walvis Bay one, is a subsidiary problem of the general difficulties in the maintenance of an apartheid system?
I do not disagree with the Deputy's general thesis except to say that perhaps it is better at this stage at any rate to try to proceed by way of negotiation and discussion under the general auspices of the UN. Perhaps we could look forward to some useful assistance emerging from the United Nations Donors' Pledging Conference which is being held very soon now in New York. On the figures, the debt is not all that great; it is only 13.2 per cent of GDP whereas our own is infinitely greater than that.
At least we ran up our own debt.
We could start distributing responsibility for that too.
The people who ran up our debt are all inside this assembly and were freely elected.
Even though 13.2 per cent of GDP is not that onerous a figure, it is short term and therefore represents a major difficulty for the new Government of the young State. I assure the Deputy, however, that we will keep an interest in the situation and be of any help we can in seeing that every assistance is given to Namibia to get on its feet.
Do the Irish Government, as distinct from the current EC Presidency, accept that South Africa are primarily responsible for that Namibian debt?
I do not know if I would help the situation by giving a verdict on that. One way of looking at it is that because they had responsibility for the territory up to now they were responsible for it.
It was not run up by SWAPO.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that without the existence and availability of Walvis Bay to the Namibian Government their chances of development are seriously hampered? For that reason will the Taoiseach ensure that on the occasion of any Troika visits to South Africa the issue of Walvis Bay will be high on the agenda for discussions with Mr. de Klerk and any other contacts they may make with South Africa?
It must be and I accept that it is crucial.
They are landlocked.
Exactly.
