U.N. Decision Questioned

The United Nations vote to impose economic sanctions on South Africa because of its apartheid race policies will undoubtedly have little practical effect, two Government professors have maintained.

"I think the South Africans had it coming to them," said Rupert Emerson '22, professor of Government, "but I'm skeptical if it will have much real effect." Emerson added that many of the Afro-Asian bloc nations who voted for the resolution have already applied boycotts of South African goods and that three quarters of that nation's trade is with countries who voted against ti.

Commenting on the resolution's request that the Security Council consider the expulsion of South Africa, Stanley H. Hoffmann, associate professor of Government, stressed that there was no basis in the charter for such action. "The General Assembly may eventually say that it will not recognize South Africa's vote, but even that action would be, legally speaking, pretty shaky."

Hoffmann and Emerson agreed that the Afro-Asian countries were inconsistent in seeking South Africa's expulsion from the U.N. at the same time that they sought to obtain Red China's admission. "However," said Hoffmann, "consistency has never been a forte of the Afro-Asian nations." Emerson felt that "South Africa is obviously a state in existence just as Red China is. They should both be in the United Nations." Hoffmann maintained that "If South Africa were the only problem on the U.N.'s shoulders, things would be all right."