S/PV.1033 Security Council

In acoordance withthe decisions taken at the 1027th and 1028thmeetings of the Security Council. 'r shall now invite the representatives of Senegal. portugal. Congo (Brazzaville) andthe Republic of Gabon to take seats at the Council table. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Amadou Cissé Dia (SenegaI), Mr: Vasco Vieira Garin (Portugal), Mr. Emmanuel Daciet (Congo, Brazzaville), alld Mr. Jean-Marie Nyoundot! (Gabon)took places at the Security Council table.

The Councilwillnowcontinueits consideration of the matter befo:re itand of the joint clraft resolution submitted by the delegations ofGhana and Morocco [8/5292]. 3. Ml'. SOSA RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela) (translated from Spanish): Before beginning my statement on the matterat present under discussion by the Security Councü. 1 should liketo express the profound regret of .. my delegation and myselfat the unexpected death of Mr. Evgeny D~ Kiselev. the late Under-8ecretary for Political andSecurity Council Affairs.lt so haPIlens that in March 1962. being President of the Security Council at that time. 1 had the privilege ofexpressing the Council's we1come to Ml'. Kiselev. andfrom that time on Ialways fQund lùm not only an able official and a man of understanding. but alsoawarmfriend. always affable and helpfu!. His dea~hhas left a great void in tr.e United Nations. wlùle for the Soviet Union it has meallt the loss of one of itsoutstanding men. On behalf of the Venezue,lan delegation and myself. 1 repeat my 5. l would also extend my warmest welcome to Ambassador Fedorerlli.o. the new representative of the Soviet Union in the Counci!. 6, Turning to the question before the Secu:r-ity Council. l should like to make it plain that my delegation will confine itself strictly to the matter on the agenda. thatis to say, the complaint by the Republic of Senegal contained in the letter dated 10 April 1963 from the representative of that country {S/5279 and Corr.1]. Although the background to this whole affair is the general problt;lm of Portuguese colonialism in Africa, l shall not deal with that subject, on which VenezuelaIS position is well known, since that is not the item now b~fore the Security Counci,!. 7. In this letter of 10 ,April 1963, the Government of Senegal complains of four Î!lcursions into its territory by Portuguese forces from portuguese Guinea. one recently on 8 Aprillast, against the village of Bouniak, and three others which took place in December 1961. 8. No doubt the'incidents complained of are not very serious when considered in isolation; but because they have been repeated and because they occurred in an atmosphere of tension between portugal and the independent states of Africa dueto portugal's colonial policy, they acquire greater signliica.l1ce and require very, special consideration by the Security Council. It is obvious that any incident involving anincursioninto the territory or air space of astate is a matter which cannot be ovetlooked.and Where it cannot'be settled amicably between the parties concernedit mustbe considered by theSecurity Council if itis referred to this organ byone of the parties; That.unfortunately.is the case here. 9. Because there are no diplomatic relations between portugal and the Republic of Senegal and because tension has arisen 'between them as a result of the nationalist 'movements in Portuguese Guiilea, which have the sympathy of Senegal and of all the African States in their desire that the principleof self-determination for. the peoples of all African territories should be implemènted, it has not been possible for the incident to be settledthroughfriendly talks between the two countries. ' 10. In these circumstances.our task is simply to verify the facts of the compla.int so that we can take a decision in the matter. l shall notrefer to the incidents which occurred in 1961. since they have beenredressed 12. In these circumstances, my delegation considers that the Security Council should deplore the incidents which have occurred and sho\'\d request the Government of Portugal to take every precautionin the future to avoid a repetition of similar incidents. My delegation is therefore infull agreementwiththe draft resolution submitted by Ghana and Morocco and will vote for it. 13. Ml'. STEVENSON (United States of America): Personally, and on behalf of the United States delegation, 1 want first to express our sorrowand our sense of loss at the death of Under-Secretary Kiselev. He served us all well and earned the respect and the friendship of all who came to know him personally, myself and many of my colleagues in the United States delegation included. We will long remember him and his skill, his industry, his graceful manners andwarm good humour. 1 1...>pe, Ambassador Fedorenko, that you will l10nvey to his wife and family and to the Government of the Soviet Union our sympathy, and at the same time please accept, Ambassador Fedorenko,our warm. welcome to the Security Coullcil as the .representative of your great country. Your distinction as a diplomat and as a scholar long preceded your arrivaI here in New York and we look forwardwith sincerity to friendly and fruitful co-operation with you andyour colleagues. 14. Like Ambassador Sosa Rodrfguez and the other members of the Council who have spoken previously, it is a pleasure to me ta.welcome to our table the new members of. the Council, aU of them. representing countries with which the United. States, 1 aPI happy to say, has had long andfriendly relations andthe closest associations. Brazil, our great neighbour to the south, has been one of the United States' mQst intimate partners in war and peace, a country of enormouspotential with which we share the excitingtask of building a new order in this hemisphere. In welcoming the distinguished delegate of Morocco, my friend Ambassador Benhima, l' ~m movedto recall that the first treaty that our infant Republic signed. after its fight for in- 15. FinaIly, as we go around our table, is the delegation of the Philippines. The American and the Philippine peoples have shared a common destin}' for over sixtY years and we count them among our closest friends. Looking back, we are proud of our role in the emer-_ genoe of the Philippine nation and we hail the giant steps it has made since the war in enriching the culture, the .oonditions of !ife and the liberty of the Philippine people. Looking ahead we aIl, I am sure, can count on the Philippine delegation for wise cooperation and for good sense both here and in the warld-wide counoils of freedom. 1Ô. To turn to the subject under discussion, we have listened oarefully to the statements of Portugal and Senegal, those o~ other members of the Counoil, including the representative of France, and those of representatives of other delegations. Since theunderlying cause of tension between Portugal and the states contiguous to Portuguese Guinea-the question of self- âeterminatioIi-is not likely to be resolved here and now, we believe that the best course to pursue in this particular case is to help to reduce the current tensions. We hope that the Security Counci! can take a prompt decision, as further lengthy discussion isonly likely to add further contradictory statements to those on the record and to prolong rather than toease these tensions. 17. Our views are the following. The Councilhas been primarily asked to deal with one specific incident. The incident has been presented against the background of previous sUnHar problems in 1961. In aU cases the incidents were minor, and on some previous occasions the Govermnent of Portugal aoknowledged that an unintentional violation had occurred, expressed regret, reiterated its policy of respecting Senegalese sovereignty, and showed awillingness ta take measures to try to avoid further difficulties. Therefol'e. we do notbelieve that there is any evidence of a pattern of incursions into Senegalese ter.ritory. 18. The contention has been made, and we agree, tr.at under Article 35 of the Charter of the United Nations 19. Senegal has complained of an ,incursion into its territory OP 8 April. The representative of Portugal has informed us that on that date military exercises involving aireraft were taking piace in Portuguese Guinea. We understand that these were in the neighbourhood of the Portuguese village,of Bouniak, only a few ,kilometres from the Senegalese village of the same name across t4e border. The geographical. relationship between the two villages and the configuration of the poorly demarcate,d 1:l0rder in thts area lend themselves to a high degree of risk of accidentaI violation during air operations conducted in the immediate area. Given this situation, the rep9rts of eye-witnesses circulated hereand the other evidence made available to us, we must conclude that something aloilg the !ines alleged did in fact happen. Ev€)rything we have heard leads us to conclude also that no incursion was intended. sillce it would havebeen contrary tothe announced policy of Portugal. 20. The representative ofPortugal, bothin his written communication and in his statemelltbefore the Council, has reaffirmed the policyofhisG6vernrilentofscrupulously respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Sanegal. He has stated that Portuguese forces have been'giventhe strictestorders to this effect. TheBe commendable stàtements putinto perspective the limited character of theevent,and,we give them, as we believe, others should do, full fait4 and credit. .., , 21. .The suggèstions' for impartial investigations, while presenting difficulties 'in rriodalïties.demori.:.. strated modération and g60d faith; 'The' Governmerit of Senegal, as the Ministèr()ftheArmed Forces pointed out, does nothave elaborate mbdern militaryequipment with which to protect the' integrity of its ôwn borders. It has expressed itsdesire ta utilize pèaëeful ap'· proacnes and the machinery of the Cha.'rter to help provide it with assuranceagainStinf:ringetnent ofUs terri'- tory. This is apropeJ"md constructive approach. • • .. ' i .. 22. .The drl:J,ft :resolut~on pres~nied ta theCoooqil by thedelegations ofQhanll, an.o.Morocco iS,intendedto express the secu,rity Council's recognitionofit;sproper l'ole in respondi,ng tOJhis appeal., Itkeeps the incident concerned within an acceptable perspective, including recogn,ition, ofPortugal's statedpolicy, andit açlequately responds, in our,Ïudgement. to the.complaintbefocl'è us. TherElfore, j;he delegatio.~ ,oft4eUriited states will support the draft refjolution pI.'oposedbythe delegations of Ghanaâ.n;d Morocco; ..,. -

Sincethisis the,first opportunity that l 'hàve"had; Ishouldlike to begin by· sayïng hoVl' very sorry weinthi~delegation were·· ta· hear .of thesuddendeath'of oMri, Kiselev, with whom we havé aIl worked 8oclosely. In the compara- 24. If l may now turn to a hàppier subject, l should like on hehalf of my delegation andGovernmentbriefly, though none the less wai'mly for that, to join those who have already paid tribute to the representatives who left the Councn at the end oflast year. 'We admired and were grateful for the contributions made by the representatives of ChUe, Ireland, Romania and the United Arab Republic. l also give a very warm welcome to the new members elected to this Counéil, our. colleagues from Brazil, Morocco, Norway and the Philippines who are attending this first series of meëtings of the new year. We aIl know their great ability. We shallenjoy workingwith them in the future, as we have in the past, and l am sure' that they will have much to contribute to our deliberations. Finally, . l should like formally to welcome here the new permanent representative of the Soviet Union who is taking lIis place in this Council at the head of a delegation for the first time,as mynèighbour, be it noted, at one place Îurther ta the right. 25. l now turn to the subject of our agenda. It relates primarily to anincident alleged to havetakenplace on 8 April of this year at a village very close to the frontier between Portuguese Guinea and Senegal. 1 think that !thas been accepted by most members who have already .spoken that, in terms of damage done and of loss of life or injlury, the resuUs of this alleged incident were, most fort1.Ulately, very small. The representative of Senegal himself sa1d this in his opening statément. TheCouncil has,however, been quite properly reminded that other incidents. have taken place in the past eighteen months involving transgr~s­ si()ns of Senegal's territorial sovereignty by Portuguese armed forces. The representative of Senegal and the Minister for the Armed Forées intheir respective statements also explained how, in the wider context, even a sman incident of this sort couldlead to serious tension. For. our part, my dj;l~egation understands the apprehension on the part of the Senegal Government and .people, and. their feeling that, in these circumstaIlces, their protection li.és with the United Nations. We. dO· not .question the .right, under the Charter, of any .•country to. bring its .. anxietiesand complaints to the.. United Nations or to the Seçurity Counçil, if they sa decide. Size is not the only relevant consideration ili asseSsing the importance of.an event. Mydelegation considers,therefore, that we have under discussion acomplaint about an incident,. minor .in .itself, .but nevertheless one· which could lead to larger things, ami which is thus a question of importance. .'." 27. In this situation,. therefore, the function of the SElcurity Council is twofold: first, to establish the facts and to form an opinion on them, and secondly, to see what can be done to remedy the situation and to reduce the tension which has resulted from it. As regards the investigation of the facts, 1 believe that the Security Council has to exercise a quasi-judicial function. It would be wrong of course to be unduly legalistic and this Council is not a court of la-w; but it has a grave responsibility before world opinion to be seen ta be conducting its affairs with accuracy and impartiality, and with a scrupulous regard to the evidence which ls put beforeIt. As in judicial proceediugs, we cannot avoid the fact that theonus of proof must be on the party which brings the complaint, particularly a complaint involving an alleged violent incursion across an international frontier. 28. Thus, what we have to consider here is whether on the evidence put forward by the representatlves of Senegal, their case can be taken as .substantially proven or not. Rere 1 mustadIIlit thatmy delegation still finds itself insome up.certainty as to aIl that really happened on 8 April and 1thinkthat this feeling is shared by some othersof my colleagues round this" table. We accept, of course, what has been said by the representatives of Senegalabout the difficulties in transmitting information from an area comparatively remote and unknown. We would not wish, therefore, to lay undue stress on the·, fact that the date of the inCident was changed from 9 April t0 8 April, oron the uncertainty about whether the explosivesallegedly used on the village of Bouniak were grenades, bombs or ,rockets. AlI these deScriptions havebeen usedbut we aIl know from our ever)Tday ex})erience that this sort of discrepancy in theevidence is .coml11only met with when an unexpected avent suddenlyoc.curs~Inou!' view these amendments to the story as originally told 29. In accordance with our obligations as a member of the Security Council, my delegation has done its best carefully to weigh the evidence which has been produced here in the Counci!. We have also taken into account the other evidence to whichreference has been made here. Though, as l have said. the evidence as a whole is unfortunately incomplete and we cannot feel entirely certain about all that happened, our conclusion is that we are inclined to accept that a minor incident did occur .on 8 April at the village of Bouniak in Senegalese territory. For this reason my delegation can accept operative paragraph l of the draft resolution which we have before us, though in doing so we remain conscious of the incompleteness of the supporting evidence and of some contradictions about points of detail. As to the nature of the incident, my delegation is in ~ven greater uncertainty. There is certainly nothingto show thatit was an act of deliberate aggression or a deliberate violation of Senegalese sovereignty, and my delegation is inclined to the opinion that what occurred was in aUprobabilitythe result of a genuine error or miscalculation. 30. So much for the first dutY of the Security Council inestablishing and pronouncing on the facts as presented. l now come to the second dutY of the Security Council. which is to recommend what should be done to ease the situation. It seems to my delegation that the essential point to get accepted when faced with a pl'dblem of an ill-defined frontier of this kindin difficult terrain. is that great efforts should be made by aU conoerned scrupulously to avoid any trespass or incursion or any action which could lead to a frontier incident..My Government yery much welcomed, therefore. the statemen.t of the Portuguese Government. put out immèdiately after the Senegalese complaint and repeated by the representative of Portugal in this Council, that his Government would respect scrupulously the sovereignty and territorial illtegrity of Senegal and that Portuguesè forces in the area had the strictest instructions to do so. We hope that the Government of Portugal. as suggested in the draIt resolution before us. will take aU measures in its power to preventany incidents on this difficultfrontier;and from the statement made by the representatives of Senegat. who stressed that Senegal wished to live in peace wi~h her neighbours. we cano l feel sure. rely. on the senegalese to do the same. This should augur weIl for the future. And if in the future any minor incidents arealleged n.onetheless to have occurred.;wewouldhope that, in spite ofthe difficulties involved. the two Govel'1.lme.lJ.ts would feei able to consult together with aview to taking any further necessary measures toprevent thissort of occurrence which can .only damage relations between themselves and heighten tension in Africa as a whole. This seems ta lî.e. thetllOught l1llder1ying the third preambular paragraph of the resohltiontabledby the representatives of Morocc9and Ghana. 1 r 34. The matter brought before the Security Council by the letter dated 10 April 1963 from the Permanent Mission of Senegal pertains to a number of incidents on the border between Senegal and Portuguese Guinea. Such border incidents f'.i'e particularly dangerous, alm0st regardless of cheir scopa, when they occur on borders where the neighbours are at odds with each other. When that is the tmfortunate state of affairs, it is more than ever incumbent upon the parties to make certain that their forces shall not be the cause of border incidents. 35. The Norwegian delegation has .listened with attention to the statements of the representatives of Senegal. Itwas made clear that the Government of Senegal is concerned not only with the incident of 8 April at the Senegalese village of Bouniak and with previous incidents in Deceniber 1961, but also withthe general tension in the border area. There is a fear that if this tenSlion continues unabated, it might result in aggravating the situ.ation at the border. 37. The Norwegian delegation has understanding and sympathy for the position of Senegal and has the hope that the Security Council action may ease the tension and relieve the Senegalese fears of repetition. 38. The Norwegian delegation has listened with eqllUl attention to the statements by the Permanent Representative of Portugal. \Ve welcome the assurance in his letter of 10 April, assurance repeated in this COlillCil, that the Portuguese forces have the strictest orders to scrupulously respect the sovereignty, the integrity and the air space of the Republic of SeneF;al. \Ve take this to mean that the Portug:uese authorities will take the necessary steps to contr0~ their military forces along the border of Senegal and therabyprevent any action that might increase the tension in the area. 39. As isfrequentlythe case in disputes ofthis nature, contrasting. viewpoints and interpretations have been presented to the Council. In the present conflict the very topography of the border region, its relative inaccessibility and the sparseness of its population make it even more than usually difficult to reconstruct past events and assess the general situation. Itseems to the Norwegian delegation, nevertheless, that it has clearly been brought out that there actually exists tension along the border between Senegal and Portuguese Guinea, and we deem this very unfortunate. 40. Furthermore, a number of members who have already spoken in this debate have maintained that they are satîsfied that a Portuguese incursion in fact took place at the Senegalese village of Bouniak on 8 ApriL On the basis of the material presented to the Council, the Norwegian delegation for its part shares this viewpoint. 41. We have taken into consideration the fact that it was stated to the Security Councilby the representative of Portugal that military exercises of air aid land forces were carried out in the area on that day. Further details of these military operations were issuedby the local military authorities in Bissau. We have also had in mind the topographical nature of the border region and especially the circumstance that the Senegalese village of Bouniak is situatedvery close to the frontier. Dnder thesecircumstances, it is however, a reasonfor relief to the Norwegian delegation that the damage caused in the village of Bouniak, according to the Senegalese statements, was fortunately limited both with :;:-egard to casualities and to material destruction. 42. Turning now to discuss what should be the action of the Security Council in the present case, the Norwegian delegation is of the opinion that the Council should focus its attention on the preventive aspect of the' matter before it. It should endeavour to take such steps as would alleviate the natural anxiety of the Government of the Republic of SenegaL In so doing it would make a constructive effort towards establish- 44. The Norwegian delegation believes that a Security CouncH resolution of such nature would go a long way towards preventing further episodes along the frontier, and that the request to the SecretarY-General to keep the situation under review will have a particularly beneficial effect. This draft. resolution looks to the future and charts a constructive way towards a solution rather than looking backwards to the past through the establishment of a commission of inquiry. 45. We also believe that when the Council notes the declared intention of the Portuguese Government to take whatever action may be necessary to prevent any violation of Senegal's sovereignty and territorial integrity, it should serve as an inspiration to the Government of Portugal to do everything in its power to contribute to the general relaxation of the tension. 46. For these reasons the Norwegian delegation will vote for the draft resolutionpresentedjointlybyGhana and Morocco. 47. Ml'. JIMENEZ (Philippines): 'Before speaking on the matter on our agenda, l should like to express my delegation's sorrow at the death of the Under-Secretary for Political and Security Council Affairs, Ml'. Evgeny Kiselev. His skill and ability as an international civil servant will be sorely wissed. We join others in conveying our heartfelt sympathy to Ml'. Kiselev' s family. 48. We also wish to thank delegations which have welcomed us to this Council and have had kind words to say about my country. 49. My delegation has listened withgreatinterestand deep concern to the debate on Senegal's complaint of repeated violations of Senegalese air space andterritory by Portugal. l think we have now arrived at a stage in our deliberations when the Council can take proper action, based on the statements we have heard. My delegation has wanted, above aIl, ta arrive at a fair and effective solution to the dispute between two Member States of the United Nations. Our task, when the dispute was first put before us, was to find the exact proportions of the problem in order that we could determine in what way the maintenance ofinternational peace and security was threatened. We had to avoid the danger of exaggerating the gravity of the situation as well as the danger of minimizing its implications. 51.. After a careful evaluation of the problem before us, my delegation has decided to support the draft resolution sponsol'ed by the delegations of Ghana and Morocco. l should like to set forth our reasons for so deciding. 52. Inthefirst place, some responsible statements have been made before the Council which affirm that the incident in question did take place. l make special reference to the statement made yesterday morning by the representative of France. The basic fact that the incident did happen is important. It shows that the air space and territory of a Member State has been violated. This, in our view, is tobe deplored, particularly' when the country affected is one which, like Senegal, has shown Us respect for international law and order and has eonsistently manifestedin the United Nations its ~)eaceful intentions. While it may be said that the damage done was comparatively small~the faet that the violation of a country's sovereignty has taken place is reason for us to take action. 53. Secondly, my delegation feels that if this dispute is Dot properly settled it couldlead to some disastrous con8equences. We have stated earlier that it is the Council's duty to find the exact proportion of the problem before us. The draft resolution, onthe whole. limits the dispute to tIlis specifie issue. On the other hand, it would be unrealistic merely to localize the Senegalese-Portuguese dispute and say that it could have no repercussions, direct or indirect, on other parts of Africa. For this reason, my delegation has attached to Senegal's complaint the importance that it deserves, particularly in the light oftense Portuguese- African relations. 54. My delegation feels that this is not the occasion to go into the problem of Portuguese territories. but we would say in passing that my delegation has also taken into account the larger issues involved in Senegal'5 complaint.· Hence. we approvè of the inclusion of paragraph 3 in the draft resolution. the paragraph which requests the Secretary-General to keep the situation under· review. 55. My delegation feels that draft resolution deals adequately with the specifie problem before us. We hope that it will help put an immediate end to 'further incidentsbetween the two countries and will help remove tensions between them. We also hope that Portugal will continue to apply its declared policy of respecting Senegalese sovereignty and territory. My delegation hopes that this draft resolution will help to establish peaceful relations between these two Member states, since the absence of such relations could adversely affect peace and security in Africa. 57. 1 should also like to thank the representatives of Ghana, France, Venezuela, the United States and the United Kingdom for their kind words welcoming Brazil to this Council. 58. At the outset the Brazilian delegation wishes to place on record its intention to confine itself to the limits of the question which motivated the convening of the present series ofmeetings ofthe Security Council. The scope of the question is clearly presentedin the letter of 10 April 1963 [S/5279 and Corr.1] addressed by the Chargé d'affaires of Senegal to the President of the Security Council. Thefirst paragraph of that letter reads: "In view of the repeated violations of Senegalese air space and territory that have taken place, 1have the honour to request you, on instructions from my Government, to call a meeting of the Security Council to discuss this matter. ft , The issue is, therefore, a clearly restricted one, concerning, namely, repeated violations of the air space and territory of Senegal, as alleged by the Senegalese Government, violations which the Portuguese Government denies. ;. 59. 1 am not mal'dng a judgement on the veracity of the allegation or the denial of the allegation, but am characterizing the nature of the question under discussion, which, in the view of my delegation, should not be extended to the discussion of the status of one of the parties involved. Regarding this statuG, my delegation would like to limit itself to recall mg that the Brazilian position has been one of adhe·.'ence to the letter and spirit of the Charter, to CharJter XI of the Charter, and to General Assembly res'1lutions 1514, (XV) 1541 (XV) and 1654 (XVI). 60. But here and now we are confrontedwith a matter of the alleged violation of the air space and territory of a Member State by the armed forces of another Member State. 61. 1 have carefully studied the statements made before the Council by the representatives of Senegal and Portugal, and 1 have also studied with equal care the documents submitted to us by the Government of Senegal. After examining the statements and the documents, 1 came to the conclusion thatthe Security Council is confronted with diametrically opposed versions ofthe nature of some incidents which tookplace in the frontier area between Senegal and Portuguese Guinea. The very occurrence of one ofthese incidents has been challenged by one of the parties. 62. In my opinion, the Council is not in a position to take a substantive decision based solelyon the allegations of one or the other ofthe parties concerned. The Security Council-if it deems it necessary to take a decision on the substance of a matter-should try to obtain impartialfindings on the disputed question and then to examine the case in the light of what has been 64. On the other hand, it is quiteproperfor the Council, without making any judgement or taking any decision on the substance of the question brought to its attention, to recommend that the parties resort to the other means of peaceful settlement set forth in Article 33. In making such a recommendation, the Council must be extrernely cautious, for the sUghtest indication of any opinion on the substance ofthematter might contribute to worsening the situation, thereby frustrating its own intentions. 65. We are fully aware that for the maintenance of international peace and security, States must maintain among themselves relations inspired by a strong desire for mutual understanding and, if possible, for mutual co-operation, even when the States themselves are separàted by fundamental differences ofprinciple. In view of this, we are deeply convinced that strict adherence to the Charter of the United Nations by all Member States is the path that should be followed by all. In the question now before us, it seems to me that the Security Council should act in accordance with Chapter VI of the Charter which aims at the peaceful settlement of disputes. To this end, several means have proved effective in the past and are still relevant and valide The United Nations and this Council have, in this respect, the necessary experience to enable us to take the proper decisions to solve the problemnow confronting the Council. 66. These represent the general views of my delegation on the subject at issue. 67. 1 come now to the draft resolution submitted by Ghana and Morocco. My delegation understands, ab initio, that the draft under consideration .seeks to confine itself to the issue at hand and, above aU, is imbued with the spirit of Chapter VI of the Charter, namely, it envisages apeacefulsettlementoftheexisting differences. 68. We have only one reservation with regard to this draft. 1 refer to the first operativeparagraphwhich is worded in such a way that it might be interpreted as representing a decision by theCouncil on the substance of the matter, without the previous internat.ional and objective verification to which 1 referred in the first part of my statement. While notwishingto obstruct the consensus of agreement which seems to have been achieved by the members ofthe Council, my delegation feels it necessary to request that this first pal'agraph be voted on separately, so that we may abstain on its vote. 69. Once having expressed this reservation, my delegation would be able to vote in favour of the cIraft as a 71. My delegation has listened with great attention to the statements made by the representatives ofSenegal and Portugal. The repr€lsentative ofSenegalhas spelled out in some detail his Government's complaint andhas also called attention to the fact that at present there exists an atmosphere oftensio.n betweenthepopulations residing on both sides of the border between Senegal and Portuguese Guinea. 72. On the other hand, these charges have been denied by the representative of Portugal. While admittingthat on 8 April "there were some routine small-scale mili~ tary exercises in which air and land forces participated", he categorically denied that any overflights or bombings of any sort "of any partofSenegalese territory took place". 73. The statements of the two parties apparently contradict each other. Coming, however, as they do from the responsible representatives of Member States, there is no reason to believe that they have not been made in good faith. 74. In his intervention yesterday (1032nd meeting) the representative of France shed considerable light on what might have happened on 8 April. The information available to his Government has established the fact that in the course of the manoeuvres on that date, bullets and at least one rocket were fired by planes based on Portuguese Guinea. Since the. village of Bouniak is situated close to the border, bullets and fragments from the rockets might have accidentally CHen on Senegalese territory, resulting inthewound- .,ng of a Senegalese national and some damage to property. The Portuguese authorities might not have been in a position to know this. Thus, the two versions of the incident are not infact incompatible. Each party is trying to tell the truth according to its own light. 75. But for the Senegalese authorities, the incident is a matter ofgravity•States whichhave recently achieved independence are understandably ever vigilant in safe~ guarding their sovereign rights and territorial integrity. This concern is evident in the statements of the representatives of Congo (Brazzaville) and Gabon, who spoke in support ofthe Senegalese case. In normal circumstances, such an incident could have been amicably disposed of by direct negotiations between the parties involved. Unfortunately, in the present instance, conversations between theparties were difficult on account of the strained relations which, as the representative of Senegal explained in his statement the other day, had "many and deep roots". 76. We are gratified to note, however, that since 8 April no further incidents have taken place, and in the border area between Senegal and PortugUese Guinea a state of relative calm has been restored. The fact that the situation has not deteriorated and the presentincident, regrett,able as it is, has not been allowed to assume morè alarming dimensions, shows that the 78. My Government maintains cordial relations with both Senegal and Portugal, and it is our hope that the . two countries will be able to settle their differences in a spirit of conciliation. 79. In the meantime, the draft resolution tabled by Ghana and Morocco seeks to effect an immediate relaxation of the existing tension, which 1 believe i~ uppermost in the minds of aIl members ofthe Councll. My delegation will vote for it. 80. Ml'. FEDORENKO ,Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): 1 should like first of aIl to thank the distinguished representatives of France, Morocco, the Congo (Brazzaville), Gabon, Venezuela, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Norway, the Philippines, Brazil and others for their expressions ofcondolence to us on the untimely death of ambassador Evgeny Dimitrievich Kiselev, Under-Secretary at the United Nations. May 1 assure them that the sympathy and condolences they have expressed will be transmitted by us to the Soviet Government and to the fami\y of the deceased. 81. The discussion in the Security Council of the aggressive aets ofthe Portuguese armedforces against Senegal has shown that the aggressive policy followed by Portuguese colonialism in Africa is causing serious alarm and concern among the Member States of the United Nations,especially those primarily concerned- Senegal and other African countries. The statements made by the representatives of Senegal, Ghana, Morocco, the Congo (Brazzaville) and Gabon, who harshly but justly criticized the barbarouspolicies of Portuguese colonialism, which is the cause ofserious tension and dangerous conflict in Africa, havé clearly demonstrated that the young African States do not intend to yield to the threats of the colonialists, but are fully resolved to continue the struggleforthefinal and complete abolition of the shameful colonial system. . 82. After the convincingproofgivenhere, particularly by the representative of Senegal, of the violation by Portuguese military aircraft of Sanegal's air space on 8 April this year, andthe bombing and strafing by them of theSenegalese village of Bouniak, the fact of new aggressive action against Senegal onthe part of Portugal is soincontrovertible that, as we have heard, ft cannotbutbe recognized here·even by the representatives of countries which are allies of Portugal. 84. Verbal gymnastics of this kind from the Portuguese representative, who tried in vain to exonerate Portugal for the acts of aggression committed by it against Senegal. were rightly ridiculed in the statement by the distinguished representative of the Congo (Brazzaville). Ml'. Dadet. who said: "Whenever the Portuguese army has entered Senegal, we have been told thatitwas a mistake. and whenever a Portuguese jet plane has flown over Senegalese territory. that it was a minor incident resuIting from the great speed of modern aircraft. We are told that one incident did take place, but is excusable, that another did not ocCUl' exactly as described, or did not occur at all. No attempt, however, is made to explain to us in detail why, in this remote part of Africa, itshouldbenecessaryto send out so many patrols, aircraft andmotorizedcolumns that frontier violations becomecommon incidents•••" [1030th meeting, para. 80]. 85. It is clear to all those who do not wish to close their eyes to the real situation that all these violations by the Portuguese armed forces of the frontiers of Senegal are by no means isolated acts or minor incidents, as sorne would have us believe, but the outcome and the practical manifestation ofthe inhumane. racist and aggressive nature of Portuguese colonialism. F~.r its part, the Soviet delegation strongly supported that evaluation of Portugal's actions, as given inthe state-. ments of the representatives 0::: African countries. 86. We understand, of course. that ,such a turn of events in the Security Council was not at all to the liking of the Portuguese representative. Expressing himself in his colonialist jargon, he told us at length that there was some sortof a "carefully prepared plot" against Portugal on the part of the Soviet Union and the African countries, ofwhich. accordingtè:> his words, the present statements by the Soviet delegation and the delegations of the African countries inthe Security Council form only part. 87. Where the Soviet Union isconcerned.ithasnever concealedits solidaritywithpeoplesfightingfor liberation from colonial domînation and, in the case of those African countries which haye already won their freedom in thefight againstcolonialism, ta strengthentneir independence.~May l recall that, speakingfromthe rostrum of the General Assembly on October 12, at the 88. It is common knowledge that the SovietUnionis a loyal friend of the peoples which Cast off the shackles of colonialism, in particular the peoples of Africa. Every year, moved hy afeeling of solidarity, the Soviet people celebrate as a great holiday the Day of African Freedom. This day, by the way, was observed in our country on 15 April this year, that is, only a few dàys ago. !?9. The Soviet Union firmly supports the juststruggle for national liberation of the peoples and countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. We are proud that it was the Soviet Union that initiated the adoption by the General Assembly of the Dt'claration 1514 (XV) on the granting of independence 10 colonial cou.l'J.tries and peoples. We are happy too that these countries understand our position and are grateful to the Soviet Union for it. As Mr. Nkrumah, the Presidentof Ghana, stated: "If it was not for the Soviet Union, the movement for freedom from the colonial yoke in Africa would have feU the full force of cruel and brutal suppression." 90. The Soviet people realize that colonialismwillnot yield willingly. Every day the young States must beat off the attacks· of the colonialists and neo-colonialists, including the Portuguese colonialist. That is why the country which l have the honour to represent in the United Nations renders all possible support tothejust cause of strengthening the independence of the young States and curbing the colonialists. 91. The representative of Portugal deplored the fact that the Soviet Union came resolutely to the support of India over the question of the reunification ofGoa with its mother country, and that the position it took on this matter in the Security Council had frustrated the schemes of the coionialists. Butthe nervousness of the colonialists is the best procif that we are rignt. In the future too, in the Security Council as elsewhere, the Soviet Union will defend the just cause of the peoples which abhor the colonial system, inparticular the truly barbarous portuguese form of colonialism, and which are fully determined to put an end to it. 92. l should now like to speak on the draft resolution submitted for the consideration ofthe Security Council on the particular question the Councilhas been discussing at its last seven meetings. The Sovietdelegation, . in common with the sponsors of the draftthemselvesthe represeiltatives of Ghana and Morocco-and the representative of Senegal, considers it essential to point out thatitregards the present draft as very weak. !ts principal shoxt\.;:oming lies inthe fact thatit does not reflect the whole situation created by the repeated aggressive acts of the portuguese colonialists against JJ Official records of the General Assembly. Fifteenth Session (part Il, Plenary Meetings, Vol. Il 902nd meeting, para. 24. 93. At th,;: sarne time, the SovietdelegationcalInotbut be aware of the endeavours of many members of the Security Council, particularly the African countries,to reach an understanding in the Couneil and find a generally acceptable solution to the question under discussion. We respect these positive and constructive attempts by the representatives of the AfriCali countries and share their desire to achieve a solution which wouldreceive wide support among the members ofthe Security Council. Moreover, despite its failings, which we have already mentioned, the draftresolutionnevertheless clearly and unequivocably expresses the unfavourable view taken by the Security Councilof Portugal's hostile actions against Senegal. 94. The Soviet delegation considers it necessary to stress that the Security Council CalIDot ignore the appeal addressed to itby the representatives ofa country which is the victim ofnew aggressive action on the part of portugal. The Security Council also cannot ignore the appeal from Ghana, Morocco, the Congo (Brazzaville), Gabon and the other African countries on whose behali they spoke. The fundamental interests of the peoples of Africa-and not only of Africa-and the lofty principles of the United Nations Charter require that the struggle.of the peoples of the. African countries for their freedom and independence and against colonialism and aggressionshould be supported by deeds. 95. For its part, the Soviet delegationexpresses its firm conviction that the day is notfar distant when the colonial régime sa hateful to a11 peoples will be wiped from the face of the earth once and for aIl. 96. l should like in conclusionto express myheartfelt gratitude to my co11eagues, Mr.Seydoux, the representative of France, Ml'. Sosa Rodr!guez, the repre... sentative of Venezuela, Ml'. stevenson, the representative of the United States of America, and Sir Patrick Dean, the representative of the United Kingdom, who, however paradoxical it may be, showed himself tobe further to the left than the Soviet representative. l should like to thank themfor ;"he ·,'tords of welcome and good wishes which they havI:> expressed in connexion with my appointment as representative of the Soviet Union in the Security Council. 97. May l in turn express the hope that in this principal body of the United Nations we sha11 be able, through our joint efforts, to continue our co-operation in a spirit of mutual understanding, profound respect, and awareness of the great responsibility entrusted to the Security Council for the maintenance of peace and securityamong peoples. 98. Ml'. GARIN (Portugal): l feel compe11edto take the floor once again in order to make a few observations and to correct certain misrepresentations concerning the Portugues~ stand in this debate. 100. Despite everything that has been said here with a "liew to magnifying and exaggerating this supposed incident, the fact remains that,evenifithad occurred, it would have ,iJeen of a very minor character, and certainly far from constituting a. threat to international peace and security. Nothing, in fact, justifies this baseless contention of sorne delegations. Even after a. week of debate in the 8ecurity Council, it would appear that nothing has been able to alter Ws conclusic:n in the minds ofthe generalpublic, and even the great international Press, radio and television have paid practicaIly no attention to it. Thus, generalpublic opinion persists in its originalbelief that what is being so solicitously debated in the Security Council over such a prolonged period of time is but an artificial issue whicn has nothing to do with threats to peace. The real threats to international peace to which these media of information devote the major part of their time and space every day are to befound in places like Laos, Viet-Nam, Berlin, Kashmir, the Middle East and the Caribbean. 101. AIl of which may weIl l'aise in discerning minds a serious· preoccupation as to whythe Security Council is wasting so much time and precious money of our 01'ganization on this minor case, which 1 have already heard referred to as the "mud hut case" when such vexing and difficult problems are afflicting the world. 102. My delegation wishes to reaffirm here the statements that were made in the course of my previous interventions. The resuUs of investigations carried out at different stages bythe portuguese Government ataIl levels in the administration of the Province of Guinea concerning the subject matter of the Senegalese complaint-investigations that involve civilian as weIl as military officials-make it impossible for the. Portuguese Gove1'nment to accept responsibility for any incident alleged to have occurred in the village of Bouniak, even il itwere disposed to accept such a findingoutof goodwill. There were no overflights ofSenegalese territory, nor any bombing of Senegalese villages or populations. No internationalnews agencies have reported any such action. 103. An allegation has been made that there is a contradiction between the version of events issued from Lisbon and that givenout at Bissauon 13 April. This is not correct. The delegation of Senegal came to the Security Council with a complaint that an incidenttook place in the village of Bouniak on 9 AI!ril. The Portuguese Government at Lisbon issueda statement saying that nothing like that cOllld have takenplace because of the result of its investigations. Then the portuguese authorities in Bissau, also denyingthe Senegalese allegations, volunteered the information that military 104. In a skilful move the Senegalese delegation has altered the date of the alleged incident oomplained of in its original letter of 9 April to 8 April, and that too only after seven days. And by a curious process of reasoning, it is now argued that thus the complaint of Senegal has been substantiated and proved. AS a great English thinker once said. "They have inferred much from slender premises, and conjecturad when they could not proven. 105. There is yet on6 other point on which my delegation would like to be clear. With regard to the case of the two truck drivers which was mentioned here by the representative of Senegal. my delegation has been able to obtain details that go to confirmwhat had been stated by me on 17 April. [1027th meeting]. The men in question appear to have been concerned in a police incident involving the theft of goods-which the trucks carried-by a group of miscreants. In the encounter which ensued when the portuguese police came to their rescue. there were casualtiesamongthepoliceandone of the drivers lost his life. The loss of lUe. in any circumstances, is a matter to be sincerely regretted. It is. however. definitely not true that the manwas killed by the portuguese military or police. as it has been alleged here. That the portuguese authorities were not responsible for any such excesses is indicated by the readiness with which they set at liberty the remaining truck driver and the four apprentices. even while a complaint of the Senegalese Government against Portugal was pending before the Security Conncil. 106. 1 wish the delegation of Senegal had been as solicitous in obtaining facts concerning the many Senegalese violations in Portuguese Guineamentioned here. as my delegation has been in this instance. 107. The representative rf Ghana. in order to reinforce his arguments while moving the cilraftresolution before the Council[1032nd meeting] hadthe callousness to refer to the seizure of the enclave of Sao Joao Batista de Ajuda and to the tragedy of Goa, contending that justice had been done in these two instances by simply agreeing through a unilateral and dishonest proce~'J of reasoning to remove the names of these Po:.:tuguese averseas Provinces from the list maintained by the Committee of Seven L"'1 their report.Y 108. Of course. no one would expect the representa-' tive of Ghana to come here and question a shameful act of unprovoked military aggression to which he himself has beconle a party by reason of his vote in the Secu.rity Council. But in this laboured attempt to bring that aggression within the terms of the Charter. he has gone further than the aggressor. The aggressor himself had publicly and solemnly disownedthe Charter in this very Council. before proceeding to violate it. 11 Ibid•• Seventeenth Session. Annexes. point54 ofthe agenda. document A/5160 and Add.l and 2. 110. It was not a surprise to my delegation that the representative of the very successful colonial Soviet empire should again take the floor to attack my country. It is true that Portugal is not a military Power and actuaUy the only weapon we have to oppose the Soviet charges are our moral and legal rights and our conscience. These are factors for wbich the Soviet representative has apparently no respect and it would result to our disadvantage to even attempt a thorough reply to bis slanderous and false accusations. 111. Obviously the Soviet representative and myself live in an entirely different world. with entirely different values. values ofalmostimpossible communication of mind. For example. the Soviet r-epresentative probably believes that the tyranny. the oppression.the atrocities of Soviet communistcolonialismare beautifuI roses on bis lapel; whereas the honest efforts of Portugal to build true human solidarity and a multiracial society are to bim an ugly sin. 112. 1 fully reject bis charges and 1 wish to remind him that the Berlin wall of shame is a standing monument to the continuous Soviet policies ofimperialism. 113. It is a matter of extreme regret that the suggestion for the appointment of a commission of inquiry, put forward by my delegationon 19 April [1030th meetting), on behalf of the Portuguese Government, in a spirit of good faith and out of a desire to bring about conciliation in the matter before tbis Council. has not deserved the attention that was expected from aIl concerm~d. 114. Unfortunately. against aIl normal expectations. an inordinate desire on the part of certain Member States has persisted to try to place portugal in the wrong. For it is not by deploring incidents that are far from proved to be true. nor by a!iopting an approach animated by pi'econceivedideas. that reconciliationcan be brought about. 115. It is undeniable that the allegations as ta facts said to have occurred in the village ofBouniak are full of contradictions which cannot be lightly passed over. On our side, my delegation has clearly demonstl'ated that even the claimed documentary evidence and 117. In this connexion, my delegation welcomes the stand taken by the delegation of Brazil that for this reason they would abstain in the voting on operative paragraph 1, in Hne with the statement made by the representative of Brazil. 118. Instead of a commission of inquiry, as we had suggested, a resolution has been drafted and circulated which prejudges the main issue before the Council, without even making an effort to appreciate the Portuguese side of the question. In the process, express provisions laid down in the Charter for the settlement of disputes have been disregarded; procedural regulatians consecrated by many longyears ofpractice in the Security Council are by-passed, and other irregularities allowed. Representatives from Member States which are not parties to this alleged dispute nor even specifically interested in any way in the subject matter under consideration have beenpermittedtoparticipate in the debate and to indulge in a spate of aIlegations and vilifications against my country, while atthe same time my delegation was denied the courtesy ofplacing on record a formai protest at the proper time. 119. AU the arguments that have been presented so far on behalf of the Portuguese delegation have been directed to prove that it was not possible to arrive at a correct decision as to the facts àlleged to have taken place at Bouniak without a proper inquiry. Here again the commission of inquiry suggested by my Government would serve the ends of justice. 120. The representative of France, in the course of his intervention, explainedthat his Government hadreceived some special information aboutthe matter under discussion. My delegation respects his sentiments and understands the position which the representative of France may for this reason be disposedto tSke. We are not, however, in a position to evaluate the information in his hands, which appears to have influenced the statements of other members ofthe Council, and1 trust that the representative of France will in turn understand our estimation of his statement in this regard. Portugal places very high the traditional ties offriendship that link it to France, andwhich are so important for thepreservationofthe Westernworld andits civilization. 121. It is disappointing that besides indulging inwhat are by now certain routine excesses of language, the 122. Much as my delegation regrets aU this, we cannot in fairness deny that the terms ofthe draft resolution reflect in a given measure my Government's repeatedly declared policies based on respect for the sovereignty of Senegal and its desire for élose CQoperation and understallding with all neighbouring Governments. It is against the hackground of all these considerations that my delegation views the draft resolution before the Security Council.

Some members have askedfor the floor to make a reply. As the hour is getting late, and .the Chair knows that members of the Council would not lilre to detain the Minister of the Armed Forces of Senegal who. 1 understand, wiU be leaving this evening for his country, may 1 ask that members who take the floor will make their statements as brief as possible.

It was not the intention of my delegation to intervene again in tbis debate, but for the second time the representative of Portugal, for whom 1 have always expressed bigh regard, has had the audacity to attackmy delegation. He charged my delegation withcallousness and dishonesty beca:Use we have raised the issue of Goa here. In the first place, Ghana was not a member of the Security Council when the Council debated the issueofGoa and, therefore, we did not cast any vote in the Security Council~ Here is a clear indication of a lack of knowledge of.what is happening in the United Nàtions. 125. To us it is amatterofgreathonour that we mak~ very clear what our position is on the issue of Portuguese territories. We do not tlûnk that Portugal has any role to play in Africa, and we think that what happened in Goa is an example of exactly what will happen in Africa if they do notmend their ways and leave Africa as quickly as possible. 126.. l'lie representative of Portugal is desperate. He is fighting a losing battl~ and he is behaving like àn oldnian who is senile in that he is trying to bide the' senility of bis miild bebind the audacity of his language. 1 must take objection to what he has said here against my delegation. 127. Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)(trans~atedfrom Russian): 1 shall be as brief as possible.' Igather that we shall have an opportunity later .to speak at greater length. For the moment 1 should just like to remind the representative ofPortugal, with whose colonialist and misanthropic philosophy, God knows, we have and can have absolutely nothing in common, that he is in the Security Council and not inthe provincial offices ofa Portuguese colony.

So far as my remarks concerned Ghana's Il}embership of the Security Council, 1 stand corrected. For the l'est, 1 emphasize and reiterate my statement.

The Council willnow proceed to vote on the joint draft resolution presented by Ghana and Morocco [S/5292]. The representative of Brazil has requested that a separate vote be taken on the first operative paragraph, and in this connexion 1 wish to calI attention to rule 32 of our provisional rules of procedure, the relevant part of which states: "Parts of a motion or of a draft resolution shall be voted on separately at the request of any representative, nnless the original mover objects." 131. Ml'. BENHIMA (Morocco) (translated from French): 1 should like to make it cIeal', Ml'. President, in the light of your reference to article 32 of the provisional rules of procedure, that my statement should not be interpreted as a formal objection to the request made by the representative of Brazil. The spirit of co-operation with which bath our delegations have always been imbued and which the delegationofBrazil has always shown in its activities in the United Nations will, 1 am sure, always preclude me from adopting an attitude of formal opposition to any proposaI of the Brazilian delegation. 132. Nevertheless, aIthough we have listened most attentively to the arguments put forward by my friend Ml'. Carvalho Silos to explain his Government's attitude to the paragraph in question, and although we have the greatest respect for this attitude, we feel. as explained by the representative of Ghana and myself when presenting the draft resolution. that its text accurately refiects our true feelings and the actual situation. Our colleague from Gabon and the representative of Congo (Brazzaville), in the statements which the Security Council permitted them to make, also expressed all the sentiments feIt by Africans about this incident. The unanimity which has so far been displayed on the subject of this draft resolution ought to lead us tQ regard it. not as an exact formulation of the situation, but as a spirit expressed by a comprehensive text which we have set our hearts on keeping as an integral whole. That is why, although recogp.izing that the representative of Brazil wished to express his country's deeply feIt views on certain parts of the text, 1 would appeal to Brazil's great tradition of anti-colonialism and to Ml'. Carvalho Silos' own personal attitude in our debates, andwould ask him to be so good as to refrain from pressing his request, so that we can reach unanimity here. 133. Ml'. CARVALHO SILOS (Brazil): 1 wish to thank my friend and colleague from Morocco for hi.s kind words ccncerning my delegation and myself. In view of the appeal made by him, 1 will not insist on my request. However, 1 wish it present in the record that

1 give the floor to th.e Minister of the Armed Forces of Senega!. 136. Mr. CI8SE DIA (Senegal) (translated from French): The Security CouncilhasfinallY'concluded its deliberations. It is the pleasant dutYof mydelegation. which haUs with enthusiasm the unanimous adoption of the drait resolution put forwardby the representatives of Morocco and Ghana, to express the sincerestthanks of the Government and people of 8enegal to you, Mr. President. andto all the members of the Security CouncU. 137. As the Permanent Representative ofSenegalhas already said, we had of course hoped for sterner condemnation of th.e Portuguese Government and more concrete action against the aggression which it has deliberately committed. Yet, when it is analysed. the resolution adopted by the Security CouncU does unequivocally acknowledge that there has been a violation of Senegalese territory by Portuguese forces. particularly that perpetrated on 8 AprU1963 at Bouniak. and in it the Security Council: "Hequests the Government of Portugal .•. to take whatever action may be necessary to prevent any violation of Senegal's sovereignty and territorial integrity". and concludes with a sentence which is of very great significance to us: "Reguests the Secretary-General to keep the development of the situation under review" [8/5292]. 138. That is a caution and a solemnwarningfrom the Security Council to the Portuguese Government and a tacit acknowledgement of the justice of the Senegalese complaint. 139. By this positive action the Security Council. following its decision to meet and considerthe Senegalese complaint despite the invocation by Portugal of the provisions' of Article 33 of the United Nations Charter. deserves the thanks of the Government of Senegal to all its members. and very special thanks. with your permission. to the delegations of Morocco and Ghana. which have not only given us the unconditional support of their Governments but have also translated this support into intelligent. dynamic and singularly effective efforts. 140. These considera~~ionsstrengthen our conviction that today more than ever the safeguardingofinternational peace calls for co-operation between the nonaligned countries and the great Powers. Thus the Security Counci! has not disappointed the young and weak states. which hoped thatitwould safeguardinternational moraUty against temptations to aggression and deliberate violations of their territory. In this way the 8ecurity Council is carrying out fully and objectively its true mission. which is to safeguard and ensure respect for the fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter so that peace and justice may The meeting rose at 6.55 p.m. AFRICA/AFRI )';...: CYPRUS/CHYPRE: PAN 10 Alexander the Great CZECHOSLOVAKIA/TCHÉCOSLOVAQUIE: ~RTIA LTD.. 30 v~ sme~kâch, CEsKOsLOVENSKY sPlsOVATEL Nàrodnl T'rida 9, Praha, DENMARK/DANEMARK: N.rreRade 6, K.benhavn, FINLAND/FINLANDE: 2 Keskuskatu, Helsinki. FRANCE: ÉDITIONS A. 13. rue Soufflot, Paris (V,,). CAMEROON/CAMEROUN, LIBRAIRIE DU PEUPLE AFRICAIN La Gèrante. B. P. 1197. Vaoundê. DIFFUSION INTERNATIONALE CAMEROUNAISE DU LIVRE ET DE LA PRESSE, sangmehma, CONGO (L'opoldvllle), INSTITUT POLITIQUE CONGOLAIS, B, P. 2307, L'opoldvllle, ETHIOPIA/ÉTHIOPIE: INTERNATIONAL PRESS AG,ENCY, P. O. Box 120, Addis Ababa. GHANA: UNIVERSITY BOOKsHOP University College of Ghana. Legon, Accra. KENYA: THE E.s.A. BOOKsHOP Box 30167, Nairobi. MOROCCO/MAROC: CENTRE DE DIFFUSION OOCUMENTAIRE OU B.E.P.J. 8, rueMlchaux·Sellaire, Rabat. SOUTH AFRICA/AFRIQUE DU SUD: VAN sCHAIK's BOOK STORE (PTY.l, LTD. Church Street, Bax 724, Pretoria. SOUTHERN RHODESIA/RHODÉSIE DU SUD: THE BOOK CENTRE. First Street, Salisbury. UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC/RÉPUBLJQUE ARABE'UNIE: LIBRAIRIE "LA RENAISSANCE D'EGYPTE" 9 Sh. Adly Pasha, CQiro. ~~~:M":C:N~~~~:C~..':~~~B~~~ÉC:l[E R. ElsENsCHMIDT Schwanthaler Str. 59, Frankfurt/MalO. ELWERT UND MEURER Hauptstrasse lOI, Berlin·SchoneberR. ALEXANDER HORN Spiegelgasse 9, Wiesbaden. W. E. sAARBACH Gertrudenstrasse 3D, Kain GREECE/GRÈCE: LIBRAIRIE 28. rue du Stade, Athènes. HUNGARY/HONGRIE: P. O. Box 149. Budapest ICELAND/lsLANDE, B6KAVERZLUN EYMUNOssONIIR H. F. Austurstraeti 18, Reykjavik. IRElAND/IRLANOE: sTATIONERY OFFICE, ITALY/ITAlIE: lIBRERIA COMMlsslONARIA Via Gino Capponi 26, Firenze. & Via Paolo Mercuri 19/B, LUXEMBOURG, LIBRAIRIE J. TRAUsCHsCHUMMER Place du Théâtre,Luxembourg. NETHERLANDS/PAYS·BAS, N. V. MARTINUs NIJHOFF lange Voorhout 9, ·s·Gravenhage. NORWAY/NORV1GE: JOHAN Karl Johansgate, 41, Oslo. POLANO/POLOGNE: PAN, Warszawa. PORTUGAL, LIVRARIA 186 Rua Aurea. Lisboa. ROMANIA/ROUMANIE: Str. Aristide Briand 14·18, P. O. Box 134·135. Bucuro~li. SPAIN/ESPAGNl!": L1BRERIA BOSCH 11 Ronda Universidad, LIBRERIA MUNDI·PRENsA Castell6 37, Madrid. SWEDEN/SUÈDE: C. E. KUNGL. HOVBOKHANDEL Fredsgatan 2, Stockholm. SWITZERLAND/SUISSE, LIBRAIRIE PAVOT, S. A., HANS RAUNHARDT, K;rchgasse TURKEY/TURQUIE, LIBRAIRIE 469 Istiklal Caddesi, Beyoglu. UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST UNION DES RtPUBLIQUES SDVltTIQUES: MEZHOUNARODNAYA KNVIGA. Smolenskaya UNITED I:UNGDOM/ROYAUME·UNI: H. M. sTATIONERY OFFICE P. O. Box 569. London. (and HMSO branches in Bristol, Cardiff, EdlOburgh. YUGOSLAVIA/YOUGgSLAVIE: CANKARJEVA ZALOZBA ASIA/ASIE BURMA/BIRMANIE, CURATOR. GOVT. BOOK DEPOT, Rangoon. CAMBODIA/CAMBODGE, ENTREPRISE KHMÈRE OE LIBRAIRIE Imprimerie & Papeterie, S. à R. L.. Phnom-Penh. CEYLON/CEYLAN, LAKE HOusE BOOKsHOP Assac. News~apersof Ceylon, P. O. Box 244, Colombo. - CHINA/CHINE, THE WORLD BOOK COMPANY. LTO. 99 Chung King Raad, 1st Sec«on. Taipeh, Taiwan. THE COMMERCIAL PRESS, LTD. 211 Honan Raad, Shanghai. HONG KONG/HONG.KONG: THE SWINDON BOOK COMPANY 25 Nathan Raad, Kowloon. INDIA/INDE: ORIENT LONGMANs . 'Bombay, Calcutta, Hyderabad, Madras & New Delhi. OXFORD BOOK & sTATIONERY COMPANY Calcutta & New Delhi. P. VARADACHARY & COMPANY, Madras. INDONEsIA/INDONÉSIE: PEMBANGUNAN, LTD. Gunung Sahari 84. Djakarta. JAPAN/JAPON, MARUZEN COMPANY, LTD. 6 Tori·Nichome, Nihonbashi, TOkyo. KOREA (REP. OFl/CORÉE (RÉP. DE), EUL'YOO PUBLIsHING CO.. LTD. S, 2-KA, Chongno, Seoul. PAKiSTAN: THE PAKISTAN CO·OPERATIVE BOOK SOCIETY Dacca. East Pakistan. PUBLIsHERs UNITED, LTD.. Lahore. THOMAS & THOMAS, Karachi. PHILIPPINES: AlEMAR'S BOOK STORE, 769 Rizal Avenue, Manila. POPULAR BOOKsTORE, 1573 Dorotea Joso, Manila. SINGAPORE/SINGAPOUR: THE CITY BOOK STORE, LTO.. Collyer Quay. THAILAND/THAïLANDE: PRAMUAN MIT, LTD. 55 r.hakrawat Road. Wat Tuk. Bangkok. NIBONDH & CO.• LTD. New Raad. Sikak Phya Sri, Bangkok. sUKsAPAN PANIT Mansion 9, Rajadamnern Avenue, Bangkok. "IET.NAM (REP. OF/RÉP. DU): L1BRAIRIE·PAPETERIE XUÂN THU 1B5. rue Tu·do, B. P. 283, Saigon. ~i~~~~~6s~~v~~~iEéE Jugoslovenska Knjiga, Terazije PROsVJETA S, Trg Bratstva i Jedinstva, PROsVETA PUBlIsHING Import-Export Division, Terazije 16/1, Be0!!Erad. EUROPE AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE: GEROLD & COMPANY, Graben 31, Wien, 1. B. WULLERsTORFF Markus Sittikusstrasse ID, Salzburg. GEORG FROMME & CO.. spengergasse 39, Wien, V. BElGIUM/BELGIQUE: AGENCE ET MESSAGERIES DE LA PRESSE, S. A. 14·22. rue du Persil, Bruxelles. BULGARIA/BULGARIE, RAZNOÎZNOs l, Tzar Assen, Sofia. LATIN AMERICA/ AMÉRIQUE LATINE ARGENTINA/ARGENTINE, SUDAMERICANA, S. A•• BOLIVIA/BOLIVIE, LIBRERIA CaSIlla 972. la Paz. Orders and mquiries tram countrles where sales agencies have not yet bee" Sales Section, United Nations. Palais Les commandes et demandes de renseignements émanant de pays où il n'existe ONU, New York (É.-U.), ou à la Section des