text: ful nations shy away from facing this historic responsibil- ity, the more our daily existence will continue to underline the nature of the evil, with its lamentable predictability. 61. For the rest, we offer our fraternal condolences to our brothers and sisters of Angola, reaching out to those others who bear the oppressive burdens of the deprivations induced by the apartheid system. Our sense of solidarity grows stronger with each grief provoked by the calculated mischief of collaborators in crime in that region. Our frus- trations must lead us to greater endeavours, knowing that we cannot lose, because God and truth are on the side of those who have a just cause. 62. We look forward to the day when we can all assem- ble here to hail the dawn of peace, real peace, lasting peace and progress in southern Africa, peace designed and achieved through the leadership of the Security Council- leadership over which you, Sir, as a distinguished represen- tative of a super-Power, presided. 63. Sir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): I intervene on the question of the South African attack on Angola for the second time in two weeks and with a deep sense of indignation. During the Council’s debate on 20 September [2607th meefing], I stated in the clearest possible terms the British Government’s condemnation of South African incursions into Angola and repeated violations of Angolan sovereignty. I spoke against intervention by combat troops from other countries. It is our firm belief that it should be left to the people of Angola to resolve their internal affairs without such external intervention. Intervention from whatever quarter carriers an obvious risk to regional stabil- ity and cannot but impede efforts to resolve the urgent problems of southern Africa. 64. While I do not wish to repeat what I have so recently 
analysis: This text appears to be a speech or statement by a representative of a country in the United Nations Security Council, condemning the actions of South Africa and expressing solidarity with Angola. The language used is diplomatic and formal, with references to international law, human rights, and the need for peaceful resolution of conflicts. The focus is on the political and humanitarian aspects of the situation, rather than economic or environmental concerns.