S/PV.1200 Security Council

In accordance with the prevIous decisiou of the Couucil 1 propose to invite the representatiw of Cuba to take a Seat at the Council table. At tbe invitation of the Presideat, Mr. Alvaraz Tabio (Cuba) took a place at the Couacil table. 2. Mr. RIFA’I (Jordan): At the peak of events in the world today which are arousinggrave international concern, the authority of the Unlted Nations is unforhmately unable to operate at a tiie when its maximum efforts should unceasingly be deployed in the cause of peace. lt is inde&d a bitter fact tbat mili&y actions are being carried out every day without any measure to control them except the power of destiny. Small nations that find in the United Nations a shelter to safeguardtheirnationl independenceandterritorial iutegrity are witnesslng nowadays a show of mlght whlch bringe them back in memory to the earlier days whenpowerhrl States used to dlspatch their armies t0 otber lands sud other peoples to deliver a message or to raise a flag. 3. In the world there is. therefore. a growingamdety about how the national independence of small countries sud their territorial fntegrity canbe protected and how international peace cari be preserved. As in the past, it is today, and SO it shall be tomorrow-force of 4. 1 turn now to the item under discussion. In the opsning days of this debate, much of what has been said has been devoted to the interna1 state of affairs in the Dominican Republic. Domlnicans involved in the events there have been glvenavarietyof identities in this debate: nationalists, constitutionalists, Communists. Castroists. rebels, and others; with some of these 1 am familiar. with otbers 1 sm not, 1 do not thlnk that any of us here, or anyone else, cari determine the quality of the people taklng part in the events related in the Dominican situation, except to say that they are definitely Dominioan citizens. We cannot attach a label to their ideologles or tbeir political tendencles. It is too soon to judgs what the future Will hold. 5. Above ail, this is an interna1 movemsnt aimed, as has been proved. at changing the Government, for certain domestic reasons, in a mariner that is not unusual in present-day political life. One may Count many examples of attempts to change ruling Governments, either by force, or by a coup, or hy a national uprising, in various parts of the worldand espscially in small countries, where citizens have more direct contact wîth the central Government and more dealinga with it and are thus able to evaluate the adequacy of the ruling authority. 6. But whatever ths case may be. we :n the Security Council and in the Unitsd Nations are suppcsed to 9. We wonder whether the events in the Dominican Republic would bave taken the present acute turn or would bave become SO complicated had they been left to take their natural course and allowed t0 attain their limited objectives-if those objectives are attainable. 8. Explanations bave been given to justify the United States military intervention. whatever the explanations may be. the only right course of action would bave been to bring the matter to the attention of the Security Council. What happened was a swift armed intervention by the United States in response to a report or an appraisal of the situation from United States authorities in Santa Domingo. The question that one is bound to ask in such a case is whether any Government under similar circumstances inany other country oould feel free to take similar action. That course, if condoned, Will undermine the basic principles of the sovereignty and security of States and international order. 9. We also oannot overlook the fact tbat the Security Council was notified of the United States military intervention in the Dominican Republic only after it had taken place-and the same is truc of the Organisation of American States. 10. Nevertheless, and since the first meeting of the Organisation of American States whose efforts we are following with interest, the situation in Sauta Dondru@ has remained serious and grave. We therefore feel that the United Nations must intervene and place matters under its control; quiet and normal life must be restored to the Dominican Republic. and to that end the Security Council must act, especially since the question has now been brought to its attention. 11. In stressing that line of action, 1 do not intend to underestimate the role of regional organisations. Far from it. Regional organisations cari play a useful and effective role. Eut in my delegation’s opinion, it is the Security Council. which is entrusted witb the prfmary task of maintaining peace and security, that should shoulder the responsibility for a problem of such magnitude. 1 say that while representmg a country belonging to a regional organizatien wbich we endeavour to strengthen and to whose charter we adhere.

We bave heard in the past few days a complete catalogue of a11 of the past sins, relevant and irrelevant, real and imaginary, committed by the United States Government over the past Century or SO. 13. There is something ludicrous and transparently fame in the spectacle of Ambassador Fedorenko, the “Active aid should be glven to those who are subject atpresenttocruelrepressions-forinstance, the freedom fighters invenezuela, Colombia.Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay and Haiti. *An active movement of solidarity of a11 the Latin American countries wlth the liberation struggle of the people of Venezuela should be organized on a continent-wlde scale. “It is necessary to intensify the movements of solidarity wlth the people of Panama whoare waging a struggle against imperialism in diffioult conditions.” 14. Those exoerpts reoall the opening statement of the representative of Cuba, in whioh he expressed wlth moving eloquence his passionate devotion to international law and international organization and non-intervention. That display of feeling cornes from the representative of a tivernment whlch, 1 repeat, invited Soviet missiles into Cuba. whiohhas ostraoized itself from the peaceful society of the Western hsmisphere, whioh has proclaimed its contempt for the Organization of American States and a11 of its activities, which works to subvert the Governments and destroy the machinery of the inter-American community. 15. 1 suggest that we bave had enough of this sort of talk. The Security Counoil is not seiaed of the subject of Viet-Nam or the Congo, nor of the responsibility for passing historioal judgements on eventsthat occurred in the last Century or even in the last generation. The Security Council is seiaed of the subject of the Dominican Reuublic in thc here and now. I therefore propose to’address myself once again to the situation in the Dominican Reaublic and to revlew once more in simple and faotual form the aotivities of my Government in connexion with those sad events. 1 hope that we can then recognize that effective action is currently being taken by the proper reglonal body, the Organisation of Amerioan States, andpermit it to continue its work. 16. The basic nature and the overridingpurpose of mi Government’s action cari be summed up in one simple sentence: the United States action in the I Dominican Republic was emrrgenoy action taken to protect lives and to glve the inter-American system a chance to deal wlth an emergency situation within its competence. On 28 April unburied bodies lay in the streets of Santo Domingo, while unorganised and rival bands roamed the City committing murder and 17. On the same day, 28 April. the only apparent responsible authority in Santa Domingo addressed a request to the United States Government to send in armed forces. At this point the United States Covernment had three choices of action: first, we could have decided net to do anything, at least for the time being, but the lives of thousands of people from nearly forty countries hung in the balance: second, we could bave recognized the military junta claiming to be the government and we could have responded to its request for military support, butthis would bave amounted to taking sides in an internai, unresolved strugge among Dominican political factions and such a course of action would bave been inconsistent with the principles that govern the inter- Americsn system: tbird. we could have sent in our 0~11 security forces on a provisional basis until the Organisation of American States could meet and consult and decide what to do. 18. It is at moments like this that nations which possess the capacity to a& must make theirdecisions to exercise or net to exercise the unwanted responsibility that sometimes devolves upon them suddenly and unexpectedly. In this case when heurs, even minutes, counted, tbere was no time for deliberate consultation and for the organtzation of international machinery which did net exîst. My Ciovernment elected the third alternative. 19. The United States initially landed troops under these emergency conditions to preserve the lives of foreign nationals-nationals of the United States and of many other couutries, as 1 have said. Such action is justified both on humanitarian and on legal grouuds. 1 am aware that some have felt that PerhapS we moved too hastily, that more time should have been allowed for the OAS to go into action. My rePly is Ws: try to imagine, if you cari, the fate of Santa Domiugo if the United States had not acted when it did. A full week has now passed since 28 April, and the only effective forces of law and order in and around the capital City of Santa Domingo this afternoon are still. much to our regret, the United States forces dispatched there during the past week. As it turned out, the emergency dispatch of these forces was undertaken just in time to avert whosesale 20. By now, it may interest some of you to know. 4,067 persans bave been evacuated, of whom 2,694 are United States citiaens and 1,373 are citizens of forty-one other nations and four stateless persons. Emergency shipments of medical supplies and of focd bave also been rushed to the scene. They are now being distributed to all persons in need, without regard to their political affiliation, by the Domhdcan Red Cross, by the CARE organisation, by a relief organisation of the Catbolic Church and by United States forces. This morning food from the United States was distributed in the so-called rebel-held area by clergymen and officia& of the Dominican Red Cross. 21. This is a task of considerable magnitude and of great urgency. Economie activity bas been at a standstill now for ten days. People inSanto Domingo are not working, and they are not beingpaid. Increasing numbers of them are hungry. We are now bringing in sixty tons of rice alone each day, which is barely enough to feed about one-quarter of a million ptople. Distribution is being made from checkpoints around the neutral security zone, and three food distributing centres are today being established in areas outside the centre of the City to b=e manned by Dominican businessmen and clergymen. Twenty-five trucks bave been borrowed to handle thefoodsuppliesfordistribution in Santa Domingo andalsoinareas of the countryside which are dependent upon the City for their supply of food. 22. The existing hospitals had become unable to tope with the waves of victims who sought medical attention. Accordingly, the rescue mission bas now established two field hospitals, one with 100 beds and another with fifty, for the tare and treatment of wounded and sick civilians. 23. SO 1 leave it to the conscience of every fair and humane person to decide for himself whether the United States acted in precipitate haste a woek ago tonight. 24. 1 am aware that some bave also questioned the need for as large a force as the one the United States bas dispatched to the Dominioan Republic. Perhaps a few words on this point would be enlightening. In times of peace and tranquillity the police force of Santa Domingo numbers 8,000 to maintain law and order in that city alone. 1 ask the question: is it surprising that roughly twice that many men would be needed to restore order in circumstances that amounted to civil war? Would a larger or a smaller force minimise the number of casualties on a11 sides? Moreover, this force has many tasks. It has the task of evacuating civilians. Despite the speed at which it has worked, several thousand foreign residents have 25. That concludes my review of the basic facte witb respect to the first of tbe two yurposes of the action undertaken by my Government, tb.at is to say, to prote& lives and sustain life in a large City paralysed by violence and anarchy. The mission has been carried out with ski11 and bravery, and we s-9 rewarded by the gratitude of those wbo have beet protected and guided to safe havens. We feel we bave done our lmmaae cluty by supplying the emergency needs of the wounded. the sick and the huugry, in tbe tbousands. 26. 1 mlght mention in passing that the representative of the Soviet Union has tried to make something of the fact tbat not a slngle Citizen of the Unlted States has been killed in Santa Domingo. Let me inform Horn. if 1 may. that not a single other foreign resident has been lost in the evacuation. 1 do not suppose that Ambassador Fedorenko would have insisted on either United States citiaens or other foreign nationals being killed as a conditionprecedet to our action. The reason why no one was killed obvious. Their rescuers got there in time, in blfficient force, and aoted with sufficient dispatoh to get them to safety. 27. Now for the second purpose for wbich we acted, that is to say, to glve the inter-American system an opportunity to deal with a situation within its competence. The United States continues its presence in the Dominican Republic for this additioual purpose of preservlng the capacity of the OAS to function in the manner intended by its charter-t0 achieve peace and justice by securing a cesse-fire andthere-estab- Rshment of processes within which Dominicans cari choose their own Covernment free from interference. The primary purposes for which the Organisation of American States was established. as set forth in article 1 of the charter of the OAS, read aa follows: 1, . . . to acbieve au order of peace and justice. to promote their solidarity, to stren 28. su%?, of c*urse. certain basic principles tbe OAS seeh to pmmote tbraughout tbe hemis- One of tbese is respect for tbe fondamental of tbe individusl And in Santa Domin@ Pas’& were tbese rigbts being obliterated, l were being 03Merated. 29. A?&ber amental principle of the inter- America system is the effective exercise of reprele is set for& in of Rio de &.aeiro, for Prcgress. But for sepresentative obalhqp3. After the United States fomes mrived, it became apparent tbat the structure of the Government bad broken down to a point wbere #em was net onPy RO autbority capable of preserving law md order, but a.ho no mecbanism wbkb the Daminiean people cotid freely choose ir owa Government. Tbe obligations of nonintervention contained in articles 15 and 17 of tlte ter did net prechrde tbe use of armed forces anitarian purpose of saving tbe lives of obUgations require the its forces immediately, wben it was anparent tbat there was no local means of keeping order gertding tbe ereation of a Ciovermnent capable of heeping order. Lt would have been irresponsible for tbe United States to witbdraw its forces Ben SUC~ a course would bave endangered the lives of those net yet evacuated and would bave led to fuRseale sesumptfon of Woody warfare among the contending Dcminiean factions. The United States bas acted $0 preserve the situation SO that the organs of the inter-American system may carry out their Weaded responsibilities under inter-Americantreaties and assist tlm peuple of the Dominfcan Republic inre-establisbing democratic governrnentunder condltèom of public order. 3% On tbe same evening, 28 April. when the Umted ~‘des initkdy dispatcbed forces to Santa Domingo, mY GOVermeat also requested an urgent meeting of tbe Council of the Organisation of American St&% A meeting of tbe Council was held onthe mOrtiaing Of 29 April, and organs of the OAS proceeded to meet in conkmuing session thereafter. 31. The OAS first issued a cal1 for a cesse-fire and appeafed to the Papal Nuncio in Santa Domingo t0 use bis good offices in an effort to belp bring it about. Tben it called for the establisbment of the neutral international safety zone. Then it dispatched its Secsetary General to g%e assistance on the scene. Then it sent a five-nation committee to tbeDominioan a 32. In the COUI'S~ of these proceedings. the United States delegate, in addition to supporting the resolutiens adopted. has reaffirmed our adherence to the inter-American system, including the doctrines of nonintervention and of self-determination. He has urged the OAS to help restore constitutionaI Government by free ch, lce, deplored the lack of available inter- American machinery to deal wlth such emergencies, and approved the establishment of such machinery as soon as possible. 33. We bave asked the OAS repeatedly to assume responsibility in the Dominican Republic as a common duty and a common task, and we bave earnestly requested the Organization to act with a sense of urgency to relieve the United States of an umvanted burden. 34. As things stand now, the Special Committee of the OAS is on the scene and appears to be making hopeful progress. Although it has net been fully respected SO far by a11 hands. an initial cesse-fire was arranged on 30 April; and yesterday the Committee reported by table that agreement had been reached with the contending parties on confirmation of the cesse-fire, on demarcation and enlargement of the security zone to include a11 embassies, on evacuation of asylees and refugees, and on distribution of food, medicine and medlcal equipment to all sectors of the population without regard to party or political affiliation. 35. And today 1 am happy to be able to report that the Organization of American States has announced that both sides bave now signed a firm truce in the civil war. The agreement, which is called the Act of Santn Domingo, has, inter alia four provisions: first, it formalizes the cease-fire’already partially in effect; second, it demarcates an enlargement of the security zone carved out by American forces to include ail foreign embassies; third, it provides for evacuation of persans who bave taken asylum in various embassies and refugees caught up in the fighting; and fourth, it provides for distribution of food. medicine and medical equipment to both sides, regardless of political beliefs. 36. The Committee also has informed the TenthMeeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Aftâirs of the OAS as follows: “We consider that it would be useful, in order to aid in bringing a return of the Dominican situation t0 normality, for the member States that are in a position to do SO to establish a combined inter-American military fcrce under the Organiza- 31. hesident Johnson has stated: “AR we are in tbe Dominican Republic for is to preserve freedcbm and to save tbose peuple fmm uest. The moment that the Organization of ican F&ates cari present a plan tbat will bring peaee on tic is d, and permit us to evacuate sur people, and us some bope of stability in Qermnent, we be tbe first to corne back me.” It is evident on tbe face of things tbat tt is only the temporary presence of tbese forces in Santa Dcmingo wbicb bas made it possible fortbeOrganization of American States to carry out its consultations, to organize its macbinery, and to take its proper place on tbe scene of tbe fighting in tbe Dominican Republic. 39. These are the essential facts of tbe situation in the matter before us. Obviously the situation is still from clear, and there are unknowns and tmderables in tlae swlrling affairs of the Dominican Republic in recent days and weeks. fndeed, wberever conspiracy lurks tbere are hidden factors and there are secret forces at work-a fact which no doubt bas mucb to do witb some of tbe an-T distortions and malicious allegations whichwehaveheardfromspeakem at this table in recent days. 49. The fact of tbe matter is chat it appears that what began as democratic revolution was quickly penetratsd by a gmup of trained Communists. If tbat movement bad succeeded in establishtng itself as tbe Government of the Dominican Republic, tbe event would have been trreversible. Tbe OAS would bave been deprived of any realistic possibility of assisting tbe Dominicac people to determine their political future by thefreeexerciseof self-determinatien. 1 say tbat itis net the %ogey of ami-communism*, or a “time-worn record”, or an imaginary danger, witb wbich we are concerne&-to borrow some of Ambassador Fedorenko’s phrases. 41. In the Dominican Republic, there are three Communist political organisations. First, there isthe Partido Socialista Popular Dominicano (PSPD), whicb folfows Moscow’s direction. Then there is the Movhniento Popular Dominicano (MFD), a small bu1 aggresstve Marxist-Leninist revolutionary party whicb follows tbe Cbinese Communist ideological line, FinaRy, there is tbe large& of the tbree, the Agrupa- 42. AH three of hese parties bave representatives in Cuba and have received trainhig and financial support from abroad. Al1 bave participated in armed revolutionarJ7 attempts-the PSPD in tbe invasion of 1959, the MPD in guerrilla fightiig in 1963, and tbe APCJ in the unsuccessful guerrilla attempt of late 1963. 43. Direct involvement ofcastro inDominicana&irs is also of long standing. As long agc as 1959, Castro organised, trained and equipped an expedition wbich invaded the Dominican Republic, an expedition whose leadership included a Cuban Army officer and wbich was escorted to Dominican shores by the CubanNavy. In November of 1963, Castro launched another action against the Dominican Republic, unsuccessfully sending a paramilitary team wlth supplies snd weapons to the north toast of the island. In 1963, also, the Castro-oriented. and the Chinese-oriented communist parties launched an open guerrilla warfare movement in the hinterland of the Dominican Republic. Dominicaris known to have received training in Cuba took part in that abortive effort. The bulk of the captured rebels were deported in May of 1964 and most of them became political exiles in France. From there, many have since travelled in tbe Soviet bloc countries, includtng Cuba and Communist China. 44. Last year, Dominican Communists Gublished the Marxist justification for their revolution in terms of national liberation-a handbook@itled Seven Themes of Study. Later, in September, they issued a cal1 for unity of the forces of the left under tbe leadership Of the Dominican Communist Party; and in November the Havana Conference of the Communist Parties of Latin America, to which 1 have already referred, called for active aid to the so-called freedomfighters in Latin America. 45. Beginning in late 1964, various of the exiled Castro and Chinese party leaders began to corne back into the Dominican Republic, very clandestinely, to rejoin their respective political organizations. 46. Then, on the very evening of the army officers’ revolt inspired by tbe Partido Revolucionario Dominicana (PRD)-the party of former President Juan Bosch-on 24 April, tbese top-level leaders, especially those of the Moscow-oriented Party, the PSPD, seized upon the unstable situation as ripe for subversive exploitation. 4’7. Word was issued to party members and to other extremist groups calling for agitation in the streets and the staging of “spot rallies and demonstrationsv, to quote the language of their appeal in the streets. Within one or two hours of the first rebel moves, Members of the Castroist movement were busy in f tbe leaders of the PSPD-tbat oscow-orientedparCy--and tbe members quickly fmmed into armed parach fsmed out in the downtown, and in tbe bm or slum, areas, taldng control of semndary targets aod organizing tlae inhabitants. 48. At the same tinre a par@ mifitary headqusrters was ~sta~is~~ and arms colleoted from loyslist onnel wew stored tbere. Witb ine and effective organisation, partieularly the PSPD, but afso prominently tbe MPD and the Castro movement, were soon providing a signifioant Portion of tbe rebel forces and were decisively infbxencing the political leadership of tbe rebellion, wbicb in tbe beginninghad beea in tbe hands of tbe democratic leaders of the Juan Bosch party. 49. Thés was tbe complexion of tbe rebellion wben tbe key PRD leaders, wlm bad organfzed tbe revoit to restore Bosch, began to take asylum. 50. New wbo are some of these leaders who bave songht to turn this democratic rebellion into a communist takeover? Perhaps 1 cari tel1 you about a few of them. Playing a key role in the tactical direction of the rebel forces is Manuel Gon&lea Gons&lez. an experienced Spanish Communist Party activist wbo bas been in the Dominican Republic since 1940 and is a member of the Moscow Party and a purported Cuban intelligence agent. Other PSPD leaders active in tbe revolt include Buenaventura Johnson, whose house is one of theparty% munition dumps and strongholds; sud Fidelio Despradel who received guerilla traiuing in Cuba in 1963. Leading the organisation of paramilitary units were Jaime Dur&, whoreceived paramilitary training in Cubain1962; JuanDucoudray, wbo bas been a liaison Ii& between Cuba and the Dominican Repnblic for the supply of weapons. Also participating actively, among others, is Rafael de la Aftagracia Mejia Lluberes. an APCJ leader, a long-time communist revolutiouary. He was involved in a 1963 attempt to overtbrow Venezuelan President Betaucourt and bas had guerrilla trainingandpolitical indoctrination courses in 1963. Then there is Nicol& Quirico Vald8s Conde, a high-level PSPD member who bas lived in Moscow, speaks Russian fluently and was Russian interpreter for Fidel Castro in Cuba. Tbere is Miguel Ange1 Deschamps Erickson, and MPD member, who received guerrilla warfare trainiug and explosives courses in Cuba in 1962, and carried instructions from Cuba to the Dominicar Republic for tbe MPD in 1963. There is Juan Miguel Rom& Dfas, a high-level member of the APCJ WhO was key mari in the guerrilla activities of the 51. One could m on enumerating these people for some time. 1 think it could be said, andperhaps aocurately. that the bulk of the participants in the rebelllon are not Communists and that even in the present leadership non-Communlsts are active. cannot purport to presume or predict wbat the future may have in store, how the wheel may turn, what may develop tomorrow. But 1 would remind you that only twelve men went to tbe hills with Castro in 1956 and that only a hamiful of Castro’6 own supporters were Communists. 1 would also remind you that Castro, too, came into power undercoverofconstitutionalism, moderation and co-operation with others. But within months the true complexion appeared and the list of leaders imprisoned, expelled or forced to flee once control was achieved is well known. It is an impressive list: the first Provlsional President ofthe Revolutionary Government, Dr. Manuel Urrutia; the first Prime Minister, Dr. Jo& Mir6 Cardona: the first President of the Supreme Court, Dr. Emilio Menéndes; nearly two-thirds of Castro% first cabinet, including the Minister of Fore@ Affairs. theMinister of Treasury, the Minister of Labour. the Mlnister of Agriculture, and the Minister of Public Works. And then there were companions-in-arms of the leader Fidel Castro, such as Sierra Maestra Commanders Hubert Matos, Mino Dfaz and Jorge Sotus. Then there were labour leaders such as David Salvador and Amaury Fraglnals; edltors and commentators suoh as Miguel AngelQuevedo, Luis Conte Agilero; even Juan Orta. the head of the Prime Minister’s own office; and then, ultimately, Castro% own sister. 52. Participation in the inter-American system, to be meaningful, must take into account the modernday reality that an attempt by a conspiratorial group to seize control by force cari be an assault upon the independence and integrity of a State. The rigbts and obligations of a11 members of the OAS must be seen in the light of this reality. But the fact remains that the action of the United States in the Dominican Republic was not for the purpose of intervening in the affairs of the Dominican Republic or for the purpose of occupying that country. There is no new “doctrine” at work in that part of the world. 53. The fact remains tbat the United States forces are not asserting any authority to govern any part of the Domlnican Republic, nor do we want any such authority even in that neutral zone within the City of Santo Domingo. The fact remains tbat United States 54. Wlratever else has been said around tbis table, that is the wboIe story as far as it oao be knOw+ and these are tbe relevant facts in the matter before tbis Council. The case is now in the bands of tbe competent regional organisation. Tbere is an officiai Committee of that Organisation on the scene actively engaged in negotiations wbicb appear to havs reached an advanced stage. Tbe Council of the OAS is in session today. 1 tberefore trust that this Council Will keep the question of the Dominican Republic under reviaw until the Organisation of AmericanStates completes its worh and tbe people of tbe Dominiqan Republic bave been able to exercisetheirownpolitical cboice. 58. Tbe PRESIDENT: 1 cal1 on the representative of Cuba.

The other day, tbe United States representative sareastically observed that the reprssentative of the Soviet Union apparently prepared a number of different replies for eacb occasion. 57. On listening to tbe statements made today before the Security Council by the United States representative I cannot belp thinhing that Mr. Stevenson, on taking up his position five years ago, merely piclred up three or four yellowed pieces of paper inberited from his predecessor, containingthe same monotonous statements that United States representatives have been making to tbis body from time immemorial. Since that time Mr. Stevenson bas confined himself, as be has done today, to repeating the same lies and tbe same empty phrases. The United States representative has again falsely insinuated tbat events in Santo Domingo were supposedly instigated by Communists, togeether witb the familiar lies about agents from Cuba and otber countries. 58. Tbe United States representative is trying to COnfuSe the members of this Council with a worn out tiSSUe of lies and is using tbis forum for propaganda purposes, as though tbe shameless and criminal action of his Government could thereb be justified. 59. I bave repeatedly stated in tbis COU&~ that sueh accusations by Mr. Stevenson and otber spokesment of the Government which he represents are notbing more than attempts to conjure up ghosts, 60. Yesterday 1 mentioned the establisbment of a constitutionalist Government in the Ik~minican Republic, headed by Colonel Francisco Caamtio, and a number of statements by Colonel Caamaiïo and other constitutionalist leaders, as additional proof of the falsity of the statements which we bave heard and to which we bave been obliged to continue listening. The escalation of lies acquires the character of infamous calumny when an attempt is made to introduce a new element: the presenoe of Cuban arms and agents among the constitutionalists. Cuba, which is vlrtually blockaded by the Unlted States Navy and Air Force, has allegedly sent srms and men to tbe Dominican patriots! 61. Accordlng to today’s New York Herald Tribune, it was at the outset simnlv a “small orivate revoit” withln the army, but today &t movemeni. aimed only at restoring the 1963 Constitution, bas been transformed into a grim struggle against foreign intervention, owlng to the presence of the Yankee Marines. lf yesterday the only ory heard in the streets of the Dominlcan capital was flDown wlth the gorillas!“, today they echo with the old slogan SO often heard in the Caribbean area, “Yankee go home!“. 62. Mr. Stevenson’s tedious account of supposed subversive activites-an account no doubt supplied to him by the Central Intelligence Agency-leads us to conclude that the CIA is still determlnedto emulate the James Bond novels, weaving in the air the same fantasies that led the late President Kennedy to the crushing defeat at the Bay of Pigs. 63. The United States Government. wlth the belp of an automatic majority, is trying to legaliae a socalled right of intervention; it is trying to set itself up simultaneously as legislator, judge, attorney and executioner. Already, at another meeting in Washlngton, it has tried to define the communist ideoloa;y as aggression, identifying it with subversion and this, in turn, with aggression, with the abject of defining the armed invasion of Cuba a nlegitimate collective self-defencev. As fa? as tbe Washington Government is concerned, “subversion” means opposing the establlshed order which is based on terrer and persecution and fighting for tbe liberation of the people. 65. TO paraphrase the lenrned Mexican jurist, Don Isidro Fabela, who died only recently. we cari say that Johnson intends to mock freedom, having killed it. 66. The so-called “Johnson doctrinen and Mr. John- ~0x1’s reeent sfatements are ample proof that tbe people of tbe United States were not given a real cboice last November. The big stick then wielded by Goldwater has been passed, like the torch in an infamous relay race, to Mr. Johnson, who in sedulous emulation bas left tbe fascist ex-Senator from Arizona far bebind. 67. The United States representative has also employed the argument, which has heen used adnauseam by various Washinuton snokesmen since the announcement of the dispatCh of the first troops to the Dominicari Republic, that they were sent to protect the lives of foreign citiaens, at tbe request of the competenl authorities. 68. We have deah fully witb the first pretext, tbai of protectinglives andproperty, onpreviousoccasions, Furthermore, the facts and subsequent statements by some of the spokesmen themselves have demonstrater that tbis was simp1y.a fallacious pretext. 69, 1 should, however, like to say something aboul the second point, that is, about the “competen authoritiesQ. 1 would venture to quote the very wordr used by President Johnson in the radio and televisioi statement in which he announced the landing of thc Marines in Santa Domingo. IIe said: “The Unitec States Government has been informed by militari authorities in the Dominican Republic”, 1 repeat “by militai-y authorities in the Domimcan Republic that American lives are in danger”. In other words 70. Mr. Stevenson naively insists that his Government’6 aim is to restore freedom and democracy in Santa Domingo in order to avoid a new Castroist tyranny. The freedom wbich the UnitedStates Government is defending is the freedom to appropriate tbe natural resources and fore@ trade of Latin America; it is the freedom to seize ourbestland: it is the freedom to impose docile military juntas; it is the freedom to land Marines whenever it is desired. 71. As for the representative democracy envisaged for Santa Domingo, this is a new mythology with its Olympus, its oracles and its fables: imperialism, tame gorillas and hypocritical statements about democracy. Representative democracy, which is falsely defended, cari no longer serve toprotect theprivileges of those who monopolise the great wealth of our continent. In a society in which economic power is vested in ambitious oligarchies at the service of United States imperialism, who identify their world of leisure with the common welfare, the word Ofreedom” means only freedom within the law which protects this intolerable social order. 72. As for the vaunted democracy of the United States, it is well known that the concept of the great American, Abraham Lincoln, SO forgotten by the present United States leaders, of “government of the people, by the people, for the people” has been degenerated into a doctrine of monopolistic capitalism which is tantamount to “govermnent ofthe monopolies, by the monopolies, for the monopolies”. 73. 1 should like to cal1 Mr. Stevenson% attention to the statement-which he has apparently overlookedwhich has just been made by the spokesman of the State Department in Washington, Mr. McCloskey. who said that the United States did not as yet have candidate for the presidency of the Dominican Republic; 1 consider this statement worth repeating: “The United States did not as yet have a candidate for the presidency of the Dominican Republic.” 74. The United States representative has defended two particularly dangerous theses which are devoid of any legal foundations. First, he maintained that his Government’s invasion of the Domlnican Republic did not constitute a violation ofArticle 2, paragraph 7, of the Charter of the United Nations, IIe alleged tbat this Article only establishes limits to United Nations intervention in the interna1 affairs of StateS and that consequently it was not relevant to the case before us. 75. We presume that the United States representative, in his disrespect for this Council, Will not go SO far as to imply-quite absurdly-that, because it was the United States and not the United Nations 76. Later, be also told us tbat v. . . the United States bas oommitted no aggression agaïnst the Dominican ublic, aor does it intend to commit any aggression” tbat W-e United States bas not vïolated ArticL 2. paragraph 4. of tbe CharterA. Nevertheless, 1-z facts speak for tbemsdves. Ne told us that “the United States is net employing force against tbe territorial integrity of tbe Domfnican Republic”. But, what are tic facts? There is no need for me to repeat before tbe Coumil wbat tbe news reports in tbis country itself teR us every day: that United States troops contml the territory between the air base of San Isidro and tbe SO-called %me of refuge” in the embassy district. Cari tbese and other facts be reconciled witb the statement wbich Mr. Stevenson wfsbes to palm off 0x1 us to tbe effect tbat the territory of the Dominican Republic is not tbe abject of mflitary occupation or of other measures of force, or when be says that the United States is asseraogno authority as an occupying Power? 76. “les dans l’intention pas violé le paragraphe Or. “les Etats-Unis grité Mais au Conseil ce pays nous apprennent les troupes situé dite Ce fait aveo répète n’est autre en fait l’autorité 77. calme qu’étant préssnce de “protéger. droit sa propre n’ont qu’il ne vont pas a l’encontre qui s’abstenir la force th&.e est absolument avec subtilités Etats-Unis. clairs dont l’appartenance pour cette dé18gation. 77. Finally, Mr. Stevenson calmly implies that accordiig to bis Government thepresence of United States troops is designed to “prote& lives” and to prrserve tbe rigbt of tbe Dominican people “freely to choose their own form of government”. tbat they were net sent there against the wiB of what be cal16 %he Wminican authoritiesv. and tbat tbese actions do not violate tbe Arttcle of t.be Charter which imposes upon Rlember States the obligation to refrain in their international relations fmm the threat or use of force. Titis argument is completely -untenable and should be vshementlv dsnounced. in order to demolish the LegaI. jugglmg inwhich the U&dStatesdelegation is engaged. The precepts of tbe Charter are clearly expressed, and this bas been acknowledged even by jurists wbose political affiliations should leave no doubts in tbe mind of the United States delegation. 78. Thus. Eduardo Jim&ea de Ar&baga, the Uruguayan expert on international law. who was Cbairman of the International Law Commission, when analysing Article 2. paragraph 4. of the Charter, in his book on constitutional law of tbe United Nations says: nationale, prgsident proc&kmt de I’Article constitutionnel “In this Article of tbe Charter, the use of force in international relations has been centralized for tbe first time.. . If force is used illegally by the members of the community, it constitutes a crime of aggression.. . . The use of force by members Of the community remains provisionally authorised only in cases of self-defence.“V Can the United States representative tel1 us that in this case his country acted in exercise of the right of 79. In hls book, Jiménes de Ar&chaga includes aquctation from Hans Kelsen’s interpretation of tbe precept in his Principles of International Law which is particularly clear: ” . . . any use of force wbichhas not the characier of a ‘collective’ measure is forbidden by the Charter”.2/ 80. 1 do not believe that the United States delegation cari submit to the Council ay justification of the collective character of its intervention, even if it succeeds or has succeeded in getting tbe OAS rubber stamp applied to its unilateral aggression. 81. In the same chapter of hi6 book, Mr. Jim&ies de Argchaga devotes several subsequent paragraphs to demolishing the argument defended yesterday by Mr. Stevenson. IIe refutes authors such as Alfred Verdross who justify military measures for tbe protection of the lives of citizens abroad whicb. as is well know, was te original argument adduced.by the United States Covernment tc iustifv the aresence of the first l.;arine units in ~Dominican~ territory. Mr. Jim&nee de Argchaga concludes by saying that the history of the principle and its context in the Charter clearly show that any use of force whicb is incompatible with the aims of the United Nations is forbidden. If the Preamble to the Charter states that %rmed force sball net be used, save in the common interest”, and Ar&cle 1, paragraph 1, refers to “effective collective measuresa to maintain peace, then %at means that armed force is only compatible with the purposes of the United Nations when it is employed collectively, i.e. armed force employed as a political sanction and on the basis of a decision by the Organisation, except when it is used in selfdefenoe against an armed attack’.g 82. The thesis expounded here yesterday 11198th meeting] is dlsproved by the conclusions of the Committee which drafted tbls principle in San Francisco. They are included in its officiai report and quoted by Jimgnes de Ar&chaga on page 88 of his book. The Committee statedthat a. . . tbe unilateral use of force or similar ccercive measures is not authorised or admitted. The use of force, therefore, remains legltimate only to back up the decisions of the Organieation”. 83. After these words 1 wonder whetber further proof is needed to demonstrate the dlstcrted interpretation whlch was advanced yesterday afternoonanc today. Nevertheless, 1 should not wish to leave thc juridical aspect of the problem without mentioning tbe statement made by the representative of Mexico in the debates which took place inthe Sixth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly during its eighteenth session: 84. 1 consider tht the ody correct course open to the members of this Conncil is to condemn in pig~r~us terms the actions oftbe UnitedStates Government in Santa Domingo and to insist uponthe immediate titbdrawd of the invadïng troops. 1 consider that the draft resolution along those Unes submitted by the Soviet Union @/632Sj 3 sbould be supported by the members of this Comm& The undisguised use of force by the United States Government should be coudemned immediately md in the strongest possible terms. li tbis is net don@, andiftbis Patest aggression by tbe United States imperialists is aUowed to take place witb impunity. the people of Latin America and all the small nations of the world wfU once again bave to live under the exil shadow of the big stick POliCY. 85. I should like to conclude ~6th a historical reference. Today. 5 May, th@Mesieannaeop~ecelebrate tbe anniversary of one of the most glorious eqloits of their bistory, the battle of Puebla, in which Ihe inmding tmops of the Second Empire of France were decisively defeated by tbe soldiers of the Mexican Republic, SO tbat the independence and the territorial integrity of the great Mexican nation remained intact. h invoke this fact in the bope that this day will also be remembered in the future as the anniwrsary of nnother great event, namely, the condemnation by the Security Council of the aggression committed by tbe United States Govermnent in the Ihminicaa Republic.

The Secu&y Council’s discussion of the question of United States armed intervention in the Dominican Republic, the flagrant interference by the United States in tbe domestic affairs of that country, is reachinga decisive phase. We cari now see, with particular clarity, the fuR ludicrousness of the attempts made by the United States representative to cloak the essentially imperialist nature of the United States military invasion of the territory of the Dominican Republic with aR kinds of diversionary manoeuvres. 67. lu tbis connexion we would inform our United States colleague that we are always ready to counter any intervention, to parry any attack from the United States, and that we always bave enougb prepared speeches, enough arguments and enough convincing evidence, from which the accused country will net succeed in escaping. When the texts run out, ;he brain cornes into operation: and I do net think that our 89. Members of the Security Council have also seen how the United States representative has repeatedly tried to divert the discussion from the question wbich is on the Security Council’s agendatbe question of the flagrant armed intervention by the United States in the domestic affairs of the Dominican Republic. He very readily discussed any number of subjects, but not the crime for which United States imperialism stood in the dock. 90. Pinding itself in thatvery uncomfortableposition, before the eyes of the entire United Nations and faced with the indignation of a11 world opinion, the United States has tried to find some vent or crack through which to escape. Al1 &his recalls the attempts of a reptile, after completion of its dark deed, to avoid the light of day, crawl away into a crevice, and escape its just retribution. But this soological tactic only confirms once more tbe severity and universality of the condemnation which aggression by United States imperialism against a small Latin American country has encountered. The ZTnited States is forced to listen to severe condemnation of its criminal actions. 91. Pesterday in the Security Council we heard one of the Latin American countries, Uruguay, speak out against the monstrous lawlessness and arbitrariness now being engaged in by United States imperialism in open defiance of the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter and the elementary rules of international law. As we noted yesterday, the representative of Uruguay, Mr. Vel&ques, rightly stressed in his statement that the WJohnson doctrine. . . osnnot be regarded as a legal doctrine”. He then continuea: “This doctrine-like its remote predecessor. the Monroe Doctrine, and like the first corollaries to that doctrine, the Olney corollary and the Roosevelt corollary-is a statement . . . of a purely unilateral policy formulated on its own responsibility by tbe Government of the United States.” [1198th meeting, para. 19.1 On behalf of his Government, the representative of Uruguay resolutely condemned this new edition of the old imperialist doctrine. 92. The representative of Uruguay clearly and unequivocally stated that the Security Council should demand the immediate cessation of the arbitrary and unilateral actions of the United States, and that 93. The representatives of otber States intbe Security courncip Lave a&0 expressed serious amiety in COnnexrference by the United States of the Dominicau Republic. past, tbe only 01~2 to basten t&e United States aggressor was tbe ative of tbe Uni m Labour Governr. be uoted tbat the United in particdar, from tbe most statements of the United States representative Security Council=-continues to beham as the Bourbons used to belme: it bas forgotten nothïng and bas Iearnt n~thiag. 95. 3% Soviet delegation is bound to draw the attention of the Security Council to one very important circumstance. The concentration of United States interventionist troops in the Dominican Republic and around its shores continues unintem-uptedly. Their numbers are now beginning to be reckoned not in bundreds nor even in thousands, but in tens of tJmu%nds. A speoial United States military command bas been set up to control invasion operations in the Domiaican Republic and to direct the army of occupation in tbe area of military operations. Numerous reports are available concerning tbe actual numbers of the United States forces sent into the Dominican Republic. According to press reports, there are 18,500 troOps; accordii to a State Department statement, there are 19,366; and accorchng to certain unpuhlished figures, there are almost twice as many. 96. The Security Council bas a right to an explanation Emm tbe United States representative in this matter. Would the United States representativetberefore be SO kind as to furnishtbeCouncil with accurate information on United States armed forces wbichhave Pandeci in the Dominican Republic? 1 would not wish to protract matters, and wouldaskyou, Mr. President, t0 give tbe floor to the United States representative for bis answer t0 tbis question; tben we sball be able to continue our statement. 1 should like to dispense with the consecutive interpretation, so tbat we may bave tbe answer of the United States representative more quickly. $7. Mr. STEVENSON (United States of America): If I bave anythïng to say, Iwill say it at the conclusior of my colleague’s remarks.

Am 1 righi in thinking that the Pnited States representatiw bas no data on this question, and is evading 811 answer? In that case, if he has notbing tc say, ma> 1 Continue?

1 tbought my answer was quite clear: tbat 1 woulc 101. It is evldent tbat United States diplomacy, in its efforts to caver up with digressive speeches the intervention of United States militarists in a small Latin American country, has now becorne the “emperor without any clothesv. It is obvlous to the whole world that the armed intervention by United States imperislism in the domestic affairs of a sovereign State Member of the United Nations is a most flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, a document of which the United States was one of the original signatories. 102. In this connexion, we cari only sympathise with the United States representative at his being obliged to demonstrate what is “patently undemonstrable” and at his being called upon to defend a cause which is “indefensible” since it is quite impossible to justify open piraiy, the doing of clear violence to the United Nations Charter, and gross interference in the domestic affairs of a sovereign country. 103. TO tel1 the truth, anyone in the United States who has retained even an elementary abiiity to reflect upon where the present course of open interference in the domestic affairs of other countries has led the United States cannot fail to conclude that the United States Government has embarked on a path of jungle law and open arbitrariness, which have no justification and no basis whatever other than the frensied aspiration of United States imperialism. 104. The New York Times, for instance, wrote yesterday in one of its articles: “The decision to control the small Caribbean country militarily until a viable government cari be established-a task that under thepresent conditions may tske many months-results from the conclusion reached by the Johnson Administration in the last forty-eight heurs that the rebel movement has fallen under the domination of communist forces. ” 105. It is thus stated with the utmost clarity that the present criminal actions of the United States in the Dominican Republic are based on the personal and subjective desires of the United States Government, on the arbitrary decision of tbat Government. 106. Furthermore, as the samearticlelnyesterday’s New York Times makes clear, the thinking of the United States Government, as the newspaper delicately put6 it, “does net exclude the possiblityn ofestablishing “a form of temporary trusteeship over the Dominican Republic”. This is how open the thoughts of the United States Government have become today. This shows how far-reaching are the aims of United States intervention against this small country. 108. T United States imperislisrn is openlytrying to torn k the C~~CL of history. It would Rhe to turn independent Latin American countries into its own trust territories, id0 its own colonies. In tbis connexion, tbe Soviet delegation cannot fail to draw tbe special attention of members of the Council to the obvious readiness witb wbich United States imperialism now grasps every opporhmity to ldde its military occupation 0f tbe territory of tbe Dominican RepubIic bebind a façade of certain “joint actions” by the Orgauiaation of American States. which in correct translation would be called tbe vOrganization of American Mistalces”. 109. We bave already pointed out tbat in present circumstances-wben tbe one and only master of tbis regionaI agency is United States imperialism, wbich bas made aIl other Latin American countries in that Organizati0n subordinate to itself-tbe Organisation Of Americau States csn be used, snd is used, solely for the imperialist interests of tbe United States. In tbis connexion may I repeat once more tbat the representative of Uruguay, in his speech in tbe Council yesterday, sbowed convincingly enough how carefully tbe Latin American States, wiser now tbrougb bitter experience of their North American neighbour’s behaviour had tried to draw up, for instance, th0 provision of the Charter of the Organisation of American States dealing with the principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of other States. Ambassador Vel&quez convincingly showed what bas in fact resulted: tbe United States, scorning the principle of that Organization’s Charter, is doing as it pleases in the OAS and is using t,hat Organization solely as acoverforitsownpredatory imperialist plans. 110. In this regard, mention must also be made of the informa1 proposa1 lut forward yesterday in the Council by tbe representative of Bolivia. We bave studied this proposai, and certainlegitimatequestions occur to us. Wbich, for example, are the “parties” referred to in it? What sort of parties are mey? “Irely the occupation forces of the United States _ in tbe Dominican Republic bave net become a “partyn, which will “maintainorder” inthe Dominican Republic, eitber alone or as part of certain joint forces of the Organisation of American States, engaged in some hind of operation for the maintenance of peace? It is ail the more important to clarify this point, in chat the United States itself is merely seeking 111. The cynicism of United States imperiallst plans cannOt fail to Croate astonishment. We bave before us the Unlted Press International communiqu6 to which my Cuban colleague has just referred. I venture to draw the Councll’s attention again to thls UP1 communlqu6, No. 100 of 5 May 1965. This is what it says: “And whlle the State Department is withboldlng recognition of the rebel ‘provisional government’ created by Colonel Franciso Caamtio Deiio, the representative of the State Department said that in the Domlnican Republic ‘in our opinion, for the time being there is no effective government’. The State Department Press Chief, Robert McCloskey, said also that the United States has, as yet, ‘no candidateto head the Dominicanréglme’.” 112. Mr. Stevenson has no information concerning the actual number of United States troops occupying the Dominican Republic, and the White House has net yet found the proper candidate for the office of dictator of the Dominican Republic. It follows that the country’soccupationmustbeprolonged. Meanwhile, the representative of the Untted States, here in the Security Councll, read out haltingly-very baltingly for he had obvlously net had time to rehearse them-the names of certainDominicanpolitical parties and persons. But, if you Will allow me, Mr. Stevenson: what has any of this tc do witb you? What business is it ofyours, since these are Dominican parties and Dominican persons? Tels is purely the domestic sffair of the Dominican people. It is part of the inter& political life ofthe DominicanRepublic. 113. 1 believe that comments on this subject were also made here by the representative of Jordan, who likewise emphasized theneedforrespectingthewishes of the Dominican people themselves-that is, what they themselves want and do net want. 1 tbink it is well know that in many countries, includlng the United States, there is aCommunist Party. The representative of the United States, by referring to matters that are the sole concern of the Dominlcan people and the domestic affair of a sovereign country, in an effort to justify the United States intervention, betrayed himself and exposed the flimsiness of this false thesis of a %umanitarian missions. 114. Of the persons who bave been abroad, and particularly in Moscow, and who for that reason, as we gather from the United States representative, are gullty of all earthly sins, Mr. Stevenson forgot to naine a few. That is a pity, because these persons are also apparently involved in the “communlst conspiracy”. In. confidence we shall reveal to Mr. Stevenson that, for instance, Mr. Nixon, the former Vice-President of the United States-and do net fail to note this, Mr. Stevenson-has already been in Moscow twlce, and on the last occasion-perhaps you 115. &fr. Stevenson% arguments sound unconvincing. and often they sound simply laughable. One mightask. in&ed. wbetber he hiself believes what he bas been reading out here. We bave some doubts on this score, ht we shall leave it to his own conscience. 116. Tbe plana which United States imperalism is now mounting for Latin America are far fiûm new. Tbis frank credo of United States imperialism was formulated by United States Secretary of State Olney as long ago as tbe end of the nineteenth centmy, when be stated: “Today the United States is prnctically sovereign on tbis continent, and its fiat is law upon the subjects to wbïch it confines its interposition.” SO you see that wbat the Unîted States Government is now trying to achieve is something which has been known for a long time-except that earlier the statesmen of the United States spoke of it more openly, whereas today they eitber use obscure language or lose the use of their tongues altogether. 117. R is apparently no accident, however, that the representative of the United States in one of his statements in tbis Council spoke SO warmly of the colonial Past of Great Britain. Tbe question of British colonial policy arose, it is trne, at quite a different meeting dewted to a different item. But the fact tbat the United States representative SO directly-and we would say SO earnestly-linked the history of the British Empire wtth the question of tbe present unpardonable actions of the United States in Latin America, is something whichdeserves attention. ln any event, he made it unneoessary for the Soviet delegation to Point out this obvious analogy, since he was qutck to do SO himself. For that, we tialk him. 118. We might also congratulate AmbassadorStevenson on the famous and higbly colourful figures included among those Pe*sons in tbe United States who net only support the present armed intervention by the United States in the domestic affairs of the Dominican Republic but are loudly enthusiastic about it. Ne could, for instance, proudly mention that the current line of action of the United States in Latin America bas been warmly welcomed by tbe leader of tbe United States “hmatic fringen, the former %%&Or Barry Goldwater. This odfous individuaI s0undly declares tbat, in substance, tbe present policy of the UnitedStates with regardto the Domimcan Republic is notbing but a new version of the famons policy of the “big stick”. As youknow, only a few days ago, when asked by a correspondent wbether he thought chat tbe current United States policy whtch he supported was the “big stick” policy, Goldwater was reported in the United States Press as saying tbat ‘We don% CaB it that”-in otber words, they do not cal1 it that opemY. “But 1 like that idea of the big stick”, he continued. “It’s always worked. I’m gladthe President 119. It will be interesting to see how the United States representative Will now prove the accusation that the United States is reverting to the times of the abig stick” to be nothing but communist plotting. Perhaps Goldwater has now secretly entered the ranks of the Communist Party? 120. The Soviet delegation has alre*dy drawn the attention of members of the Security Council to the confusion, the frenzied changing of reasons and pretexts in the officiai propaganda of tire Unfted States, resulting from the futile attempt to caver up in some way the glaring fact that the armed interventionby the United States in the domestic affairs of a small Latin Ameriean country is guided by purely imperialist aims. 121. We have pointed out, among other things, that only a few days ago the officiai vcover-up” version, SO to speak, given out by the United States Government was that the sole reason for Landing United States Marines in Santa Domingo was “to protect the lives of United States citizens”. 122. We bave also pointed out tbat, before tbe United States had time to finish playing this worn-out record, which we remember it played SO resoundingly just a few months ago in connexion with the United States-Belgian intervention in the Congo, another equally worn-out record appeared-namely, the “communist threatv in the Dominican Republic. As we observed, the United States is playing this second record ‘Tu11 blasta while muffling the first. 123. Today we have heard Ambassador Stevenson play the same tune. But now the situation is somewhat different. 124. We have some doubt whether the United States representative in the Security Council knows what he should say. We have already seen that he does net know wbat to reply to one of tbe basic questions. He bas shown that himself. 125. The day before yesterday in Washingtonastatement was made in which, as The New York Times reported, there was actually a slight softening of the description of the Communists’ role in the Dominican Republic-a description which, 1 might add, had corne from the same source. The New York Timesto quote a United States source once again-stated that aother officiais were also hacking away somewhat from the firm conclusion that Communists had become the principal element on the rebel side”. The newspaper went on to say that those officiale “Commuoists”. but Qndesirables”. Undesirable t0 ~&XII? UmlesirabIe to the Dominicans, or to the Latin Amerlcaus? No. undesirable to United Stah imperiallsm. We cari go very far iudeed if the Uuited Smtes proposes to intervene in ail countries where tbe leaders include persans whom it regards as %odesirableR! 127. Let me give you an example of the absurdities to wbich some Unlted States newspapers bave been reduced in tbeir efforts to caver up the armed intervention by tbe Uuited States in the domestic affairs of the Dominican Republic wlth the notion of *plots by Communists” and other “left-wingelements”. On 39 April. The Wal Street Journal wrote tbe following: ” . . . figbting at the American embassy [in Santo Domingo] suggested the possiblity of a calculated effort by leftist extremists to provoke the US. into takiug sides”. 128. You see what craft was employed: the United States was deliberately drawn into 1andingitsMarines on the island. 129. But these are absurd fables, tales for schoolcblldren, SUC~ silly inventions that those wbo produced them yesterday shrink from them today like the devil from intense. if you Will pardon the expression. 130. There remains, in the end, only one possible motive-the overriding imperialist interests of the United States. Indeed, wherever the Americans are. they bave behind them the United States flag and also the United States Marines. 131. The representative of the United States has asserted that the only force mnintaining order in the Dominicnn Republic is the United States occupation force. Rut this. Mr. Stevenson, is. asthey say. strictly your own private opinion. There is auother opinion, that of the Dominican people nnd that of many members of the Security Council-which is that the United States troops are interventionists repressing. by force of arms, a people that has risen up against a bloody dictatorsbip. According to such a philosophy, United States imperialism could justify any arbitrary action it might take. any violation of the sovereign rights and independence of peoples. imposing with fire and bloodshed the “way of life” and despotism of the Unlted States. 132. If you are SO firm in your own ideals. Mr. Ambassador, why net first bring order into your owr bouse-for instance along the Mississippi, where ar inhuman world of racism and obscurantism is perpetuated by tbe Ku Klux Klan and others of that ilki Establish your ideal order there, SO that others mighl : 28 133. h% a Word, if the United States openly interferes in the domestic affairs of other countries simply because it wants to, the Unitqd States representative in the United Nations should not in his statements depart from this line which his Government now officially proclaims. Otherwise there is aglaringdiscrepancy between what he says within the walls of the United Nations and what his Government says outside those walls. As one might say, in Washington the sign advertises “mutton” while inside the shop they sell dog-meat! 134. We for our part are prepared to repeat once again to the representative of the United States the generally known truth, for what is taking place today in the Dominican R?public is clear to any unbiased observer. The Dominican people are fighting a reactionary, anti-popular dictatorship. The abject of the insurgents is to re-establish a constitution& govermnent in the country, a government to be elected. incidentally. under the supervision oftheorganization of American States. But, as we see, the United States is not allowing a constitutional government to be established. because it knows best what government and what system other people need. 135. 1s it not truc. after all. that the United States made every effort to crush the popular uprisingin the Dominican Republic even before it had thought of using the false pretext of a “communist threat“ in the country-when the United States propaganda still recognized that the question at issue was simply the re-establishment of a constitutional régime onthe island? But although events were leading in that very direction, towards the restoration of bourgeoisdemocratic freedoms in the Dominican Repuhlic. the United States blocked the way to that development. Indeed, the entire United States Press told the storv of how on 27 Aoril the American Emùassv at Santo Domingo flagrantiy interfered inthedomestic affairs of the countrv. The Emhassv exerted direct pressure on Mi-. Molina Ureïïa, the icting Presidcnt. who had intended to transfer authority to Mr. Juan Bosch on his return to the country-exerted pressure to prevent that from happening. 136. Thus the United States even then, by diplomatie means as it were, forced the democratic forces of the country to capitulate to the military junta. 137. But the United States warships were already standing off Santo Domingo: and since the Dominican pütriots, the country’s democratic forces, would not how their hends hefore the reactionary junta and its United States protectors, the United States grossly interfered in the course of events. in the domestic affairs of the Dominican Republic, hy military force. 138. Mr. Juan Bosch, as you know, openly statedthat but for the United States intervention the democratic forces of the Dominican Republic would have heen 139. The reactianary, asti-popular juata in tbe Donitican Rep&li~ is the creature of United States imperialism. tbe benclnan of the United States in tbe Dominicm Republic, the means of fore@ coatrol of the conntry’s life. Tbat is wby, in an effort to perpetuate a basis for its iaterference in the 6omestic affairs of a small Latin American country. tbe Unit& States ran to tbe rescue of tbis baadfnl of usurpa-s. That is wby it ignores tbe demands of the Dominicans. 140. Meanwbile, only yesterday Francisco Caama&o De%, who has assumed tbe functioas of coastitutioaal Presidant of the Dominican Republic. stated. accordto tbe Press: “We want United States troops to wltbdraw from our couatry as soon as possible”. 141. Yet today Mr. Stevenson again told us at great tbat tbe United States interventionists bave been a blessing to the Dominicans, bringîng them net only bayonets and tanks but even cakes and powdered em. 142. One migbt well ask, then. why do not tbe Domirdcans cesse their fire? Why do not the insurgent snipers in Santa Domingo stop firing at tbe Utited States invaders? Why are these protests and calls of “Yankee, go borne:“? Perhaps you Will explain this by saying that not enough cakes have been provided or that tbey are not sweet enough. 143. As we see. the United States representative evades tbese questions, ignores tbese calls of the Dominicans which are addressed directly to the United States. Why do you timidly avoid ansprering, Mr. Stevenson? Tell us openly about it. For otherwise we shah wonder why you shower us with mellifluous words about your attachmxd to the ideals of freedom, democracy and Western civilization. 144. TO you these are serious words, but nobody believes them. They are in fact empty words. What you like to say SO often. andat such length, about your humanitarian mission, about the virtue and nobility Of YOUF aCtiOnS to save foreigners and Americans, about your bountiful gifts during the occupation-a11 this is a fraud which tbe realities of life are exposing. 145. At today’s meeting we beard of cogent statement from Ambassador Rifa’i, the representative of Jordan. He emphasized. among other things. that what the United States is now engaged in is a return to the past, to a policy of brute force, an undermining of the very foundations of the security of small countries. Ambassador Rifa’i aptly reminded us, in this regard, that brute force, the force of arms. cannot determine issues and that whoever tries to apply it encounters only resentment and hatred. . 147. We feel no particular need of lesstins in scientlfic ideology or revolutionary experience; in fa&, we are always ready to share what we know with others. if we are asked to do SO. The Soviet people is unstinting both wlth regard to earthly matters, includmg the sociologlcal and historical sciences and the formation of a new civlliaation on earth. and wlth regard to such other matters as the conquest of outer space. When someone wants to glve us lessons, he should remember that we invite our mentors into outer space for a walk through the universe. 148. The United States representative was annoyed yesterday at the fact that the Soviet delegation used only one State Department document. He expressed a keen desire that we should not forget about other documents of the Department. 149. We propose to meet yourwlshes. Mr. Stevenson. 1 have before me a memoraudum on the Monroe Doctrine prepared by United Statss Underseoretary of State Clark. It is document No. 114 of the Senate, 71st Congress. second session, Washington, 1930. In it WC read: “President Roosevelt, in his ammal message of December 0, 1904. made the following comments: tt . . . If a nation shows that it knows how to act wlth reasonable efficiency and decency in sociaï and political matters, if it keeps order and pays its obligations, it need fear no interference from the United States. Chronic wrongdoing, or an impotence which results in a generallooseningofthe ties of civilized society, may in America. as elsewhere, ultimately require intervention by some civllized nation, sud in the WesternHemisphere theadherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the Unlted States, however reluctantly. in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, to the exercise of an international police power.” 150. This, Mr. Stevenson, cornes from the sphere of hlstorical record. Yesterdayyouattemptedtoreturn to the past, to turn back a few pages of history. But do you feel no shame for yonr compatriots, officiais of the United States, who produced such disgraceful doouments? Apparently not. for what is happening today is a confirmation of what was SO cynically-wlth such

As tbe hour is late, 1 shall try to he very brief. At the outset of his remarks Mr. Fedorenko compared me to a reptile. Well, 1 must say, 1 had not expected to be called a reptile by Mr. Fedorenko, but this adds another colourful epithet to MS rich inventory of discourtesies. However, 1 have been listening to these gracious remarks fromrepresenmtivss of the Soviet Union on and off since 1945 and 1 am neitner surprised nor indeed upset: 1 am insulated by experience from Soviet diplomatie mcetics. Moreover, 1 Will not even react in the manner of reptiles by striking hack. 161. Mr. Fedorenko asked me how many United States troops were in the Dominican Republic. Weil, 1 sent out for an evening paper where tbe figures are published daily but 1 have not yet received it. However. 1 have called my Government, and as of five o’clock the figure was 17,134. 1 sm sorry that that was the figure as of an hour ago, but that was when Mr. Fedorenko asked me. 162. As to what these forces are doing, 1 thought 1 explained that at some length. 1 explained that they were policing the City; that they were guarding the neutral safety zone; that they were evacuatingasylees and refugees; that they were distributingfood and medicine. But evidently Mr. Fedorenko was not listening when 1 spoke, and 1 commend to him the transcript of my remarks which Will appear in tomorrow’s Verbatim record, includmg the information-which he apparently overlooked-that it took 8,000 police to maintain order in Santa Domingo in peaceful times when there was a police force. 163. At the end of his remarks just now he raised the question of Article 53 of the Charter. As to this allegation that the Organisation of American States cannot act becaxe enforcement action requires Security Council approval under Article 53, there is of course a long history of Soviet obstruction and effort to equate a11 OAS regional action to enforcement action. The reason is obvious. becausethesoviet Union could thon veto the action in the Security Council, but the steps being taken by the OAS do not constitute enforcement action within the meaning of the United Nations Charter. What enforcement action is being taken against the Dominican Republic? None. What order is being enforced? None. What is being done by the Organisation of American States is fully within the proper scope of the authority of regional organisations to quote the language of the Charter to deal with the maintenance of peace sud security withfn their jurisdiction as provided for by Article st intervention is, however.decisive. 165. now perhaps 1 may ask a question af Amba r Fedorenko and bis Cuban colleague: Wow many commmist agents are now active in the omfnican Republic? ha otber of international commuuism in hand. with the obvious notber Castro r&gime in that bave to table to Moscow and Hamna for the Iâtest statistics, we shall be happy to wait tmtil tomorraw for their replies. 166. Tbe Uaited States bas repeatedly announced its tateatioion BO witbdraw its forces from tbe Docari Republic as soon as arrangements bave been made by tbe Organization of American States for t& establisbment of an indigenaus DominicanGovernroeat wbich Will assure tbe peaple of that comatry tbeir rigbt to determine their own future. I believe that tbere are few aronnd this table who do net believe that tbat pledge Will be kept. 167. In Cuba, on the other band, daspite Mr. Castro% @edge of free elections, he has never dared to hold tbem. Tbe Cuban peaple bave never been given a chance to chaose tbeir own Government. We doubt that the Communists èver Will give them that chance. And I believe that no one around this table. except perhaps Ambassador Fedarenko and bis Cuban colleague. wants that to happen to the Dominican Republic. 168. In view of tbe bour and of tbe fa& that everything has been said and resaid SO many times, 1 sball mot detain members any longer. i should wel- 170. It seems to me that this was said quite clearly: and if the United States representative found this ides, or image, to hls liking. and decided to apply it to bimself. that is a matter for hls own choice. We therefore oannot accept Mr. Steveuson’s rebuke. That is my first point. 171. Second, my Uuited States colleague spoke aL some length on entirely irrelevant subjects sud asked a11 kinds of absurd questions, concerning commuuist agents and SO forth. 172. Corne, Mr. Stevenson. what are you at? You becorne ridiculous in your own eyes when you put such questions! A schoolboy or an adolescent might perhaps be expected to ask such a question. But for you. Mr. Stevenson, a distinguished and reapected person like you, to stoop to this klnd ofnonsense is simply not fitting. 173. Meanwhile, may 1 draw your attention to the fact that you did not seriously answer the question we put to you-a question to which the Security Council would like to hear a reply-conceruing the number of troops. Wbat strength of United States occupying forces is required in order to protect the lives of United States citizens in the Dominican Republic? How many Army units. fleets. squadrons, tank unit% and SO on? Tbis is quite serious, and requires a serious answer. 1 recommend that you tbink about it; and if you are not ready, as you have shown that you are not, to give the answer uow, would you please try to give it at the next meeting? 174. Furthermore, you dia net answer or even comment upon the statement made by the President of the Dominican Republic, Juan Bosch, which 1 quoted. to the effect that the Uuited States bad prevented the Dominicans from solving their own problems themselves. 175. You also made no reference ta the statement by the provlsional President of the Dominican Republic, Colonel Caamafio De%, demanding the immediate withdrawal of United States troops from the Dominican Republic. 176. While bombarding us with words. you avoided glvlng an answer on the subjeot of the statement made by Mr. McCloskey, the Press Chief of the State Department. to the effect that the United States had uot yet selected a candidate to head the Government of the Dominican Republic. 177. Perhaps you Will still be good enough to answer these questions. til0

Tbe representative of the Soviet Union asked me one qwstioa; 1 gave him the answer and now he has more. 1 tbink perbaps tbat I have ay except that 1 pray God tbat o be a big boy and ask questions. Soviet Socialist ian): My United sentiments, feels This reminds me of an Eastern proverb: Wehind Buddha’s back there are aKways devils swarming. n IBP. I bave tbe impression tbat we shall obtain no satisfactmy answer from tbe representative of the United States, for a very simple reason. Even an appeal to the Abnighty Will not help him. There can be onIy one verdict: this aggression, this monstrous crime wbich is being committed by the Unlted States interventionists must be stopped immediately. this daughtering musé cesse, all United States armed forces must be recalled withont delay, and the people of tbe Dominicsn Piepublic must be allowed to decide its own destiny. This is wbat the Security Cou&l must telI tbe United States representative; this is what we must demand of him, without waiting for his ansmr. I82. Mr. STEVENSON (United States of America): 1 kmow a lot of proverbs too, but mercifully 1 am going to spare botb my colleague, Ambassador Fedorenko, and tbe members of the Security Council from repeating any of them at this heur. 183. But 1 would like to tel1 you a story that an olcl lawyer once told me when I was ayoung practitioner in my home State of Illinois. He said: Wy boy. if you bave not got the fa&. argue the law before the jury: and if the law is net with you, argue the facts. If you bave neither the facts nor the law. then just talk a lot. ”

SO now we have a complete explanation of why the United States representative behaves like this in the Securi@ Council. It is because he has been taugbt from childhood to keat facts, and the law, in this way.

1 think that 1 should finally thank both the representatives of the United States and the IJSSR for the exhibition of their talents in debate this evening. The meeting rose at 6.4C;p.m. IN UNITED United Nations publications may be obtained distributors throughout the world. Write to: United Notions, Sales ENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS Les publications des Notions Unies sont agences dépositaires du monde entier. Informer-vous oo adresser-vous à: Nations Unies, Section COMO CONSEGUIR PU LICACIONES Las publicaciones de las Nacianes Unidas casas distribuidoras en todas partes diriiase 8: Naciones Unidas, Secci6n LiehO in U.N. Pri~e: $US. 1.00 (oc eqtiwlent in other cwrencies)