Because of the ominous implications of a showdown in the United Nations over South West Africa, and in view of its uncertain outcome, it is of the highest importance that U.S. policy be actively directed to averting such a confrontation (Nielsen, 1965: 123).

A perennial of international diplomacy—the question of Namibia (South West Africa—remains unresolved. South Africa maintains military and political control while diplomats come and go. United Nations' resolutions go unheeded, and war devastates northern Namibia and adjacent southern Angola. A substantial body of literature on the international legal dispute over the territory has existed for some time. In recent years there has also been much research on Namibia's political economy and on the dominant role of foreign investment there. A few works also have appeared on internal political developments and on the liberation movement, the South West African People's Organization (SWAPO).

Observers familiar with the issue have repeatedly noted the main features of Western policy: the Western powers, including United Nations Security Council members Great Britain, France, and the United States, have often concurred in stronger and stronger international condemnations of South African rule, but those same countries have consistently balked at agreeing to sanctions on South Africa. Western representatives again and again have rebuffed African pleas for effective action to compel compliance with UN resolutions. Such a contrast between rhetoric and practice is not unusual in foreign policy, of course. In the Namibian case, however, the contradiction is unusually explicit.