All these things, in the view of my delegation, do not enhance the seriousness of the United Kingdom, either in enforcing sanctions, or in terminating the state of rebellion in Southern Rhodesia or in observing the spirit of the Charter and General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960. 16. The Southern Rhodesian question cannot be divorced or examined in isolation from the southern African question. It is an integral part of that area. Thus, the Council should recall that the southern African question, be it the apartheid r&me of South Africa, the Namibia11 question, the brutal colonial policies of Portugal, or the Rhodesian rebellion, has, taking its aspects individually or together, been rightly determined as constituting ,.. threat to international peace and security. The special responsibility to maintain international peace and security and to arrest situations that may threaten them falls on the Security Council, with the permanent members assuming a major role in this. 17. Yet, what is the posture of some key permanent tnembers on the question before the Council? 1 will be disclosing no secrets in pointing out that short-term economic benefits in trade and investments, with cheap labour, amounting to a new form of slavery under the capitalism of the twentieth century, and military strategy juxtaposed with dying colonialism have regrettably, in the short run, won over principle!;, the Charter of the United Nations, international law, justice and morality. These are the overriding forces of the United States and the United Kingdom in their mis-exercise of the privilege of the veto, and hence perpetuation of the racial policies of South Africa, Southern Rhodesia, and Portuguese colonialism in Africa. 18. May f remind the Council, however, that Africa, and Kenya for that matter, shall not give up until all Africa is free, and until a just order reigns in Southern Rhodesia, in 
**Analysis**
The text appears to be a diplomatic speech or statement, discussing the situation in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and its relation to international peace and security. The author is criticizing the United Kingdom and the United States for their handling of the situation, citing their economic interests and military strategies as the reasons for their inaction. The text also mentions the broader context of colonialism and apartheid in southern Africa. Given the focus on international relations, politics, and diplomacy, it is likely that the text falls under the category of...

**Category**
International trade, Humanitarian aid and relief