text: path of negotiation, and its representative had the effron- tery in the Council today to try to justify South Africa’s action against Angola on the grounds that it was necessary to maintain stability in Namibia-a Territory which South Africa occupies illegally. 14. South Africa’s actions in southern Angola must be deplored by the international community. Australia unre- servedly condemns these actions and calls on South Africa to cease all aggression against its neighbours. 15. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker is the represen- tative of Zambia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 16. Mr. SIKAULU (Zambia): I should like to congratu- late you, Sir, on your assumption of the high offtce of President of the Council for the month of September. I also thank you and your colleagues on the Council for allowing my delegation to participate in this debate con- cerning yet another act of aggression by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. there was no contact at all between the SWAP0 freedom fighters and the South African troops of aggression, because the SWAP0 freedom fighters were simply not in the area invaded. South Africa attacked, killed and wounded Angolan soldiers. Its mission was to render sup- port to the UNITA (National Union for the Total Indepen- dence of Angola) forces fighting against the legitimate Government of Angola. That is, indeed, in keeping with the well-known position of South Africa in support of UNITA in Angola, the so-called Mozambique National Resistance Movement in Mozambique and other dissident elements in front-line and other independent States in the region. 22. But South Africa would still be guilty of aggression against Angola even if it had sent its troops to attack SWAP0 freedom fighters more than 200 kilometres inside 
analysis: The text appears to be a political statement or a diplomatic declaration, discussing a specific conflict between South Africa and Angola, and expressing condemnation and condemnation of South Africa's actions. The language used is formal and official, with references to international organizations and countries. The focus is on the political and military aspects of the conflict, rather than on economic, social, or environmental issues.