S/PV.1220 Security Council

Before we proceed with the adoption of our provisional agenda, 1 should llke to say a few words to oui‘ outgoing President, Mr. Ramani of tialaysia. It is a long and tlme-honoured tradition that the incoming President of the Security Council express the appreciation of the members of the Council to the President for the previous month. Sometimes the predecessor deserves this praise; sometimes he does net, for the simple reason that there bave been no meetings during hls tenure of office. But 1 tblnk that we cari say with confidence that rarely in the history of the United Nations bas the Security Counoil had more reason to honour its past President than we bave today to honour Mr. Ramani for the way in which he conducted our debates during the month of May. During that month the Security Councll held twenty-five meetings, whlch is the highest number on record since August 1947, and many of those debates, as we ail know, dealt with a very controversial subject. In those very dlfflcult circumstances you, Mr. Ramani, bave conducted our debates $th the legal clarity of an experienced lawyer, the lmpartiality of a judge. and a sense of humour possessed only by wise men. Furhermore. those of us who bave co-operated closely with you in informai discussions outside tbis chamber bave had an opportunity to admire your unrelenting efforts and perseverance in trying to obtain solutions in almost insoluble situations and your glft indrafting formulas for that purpose. 2. In the annals of the United Nations tbs month of May 1965 Will undoubtedly be long remembered; on the debit side. 1 arn afraid, for the acrimoniousness 4. It bas been my fortune-I do not wlsh to qualify tt either as gucd fortune or ill fortune-t0 bave sat in that chair for more heurs and a greater nnmber of meetings than bas ever happened since 1947; at least Becretariat statisticians tell me SO. And much as 1 enjoyed my work. 1 cannot pretend to know or eve” to guess lhat everyone else at this table’similarly enjoyed my occupancy of that seat. But 1 may be permitted to clalm that 1 tried hard at being impartial as well as at belng considered impartial. For thés latter purpose 1 limited myself as the representative of my country only to the most essential Interventions in debate. Now that 1 seem to bave achteved through the officia1 record a certain publlcity as a long-time practitioner in the profession of the law, my colleagues wlll realize what a self-dental that was. net speaklng as often as 1 had wanted to. 5. A sense of lmpartiality is a subjective virtue; but if net objectively demonstrated it remains a secret between the ma” and his conscience. 1 think, tberefore. that 1 may point out the way. in which, in the clear CleaVage of opinion on the matter under debate, ail sides, and not one side only. were ready to take issue wlth my views at successive times-whether on procedural or other matters-with equal dispassion, if not perhaps withequal vehemence. It was a sufficient demonstration of that vlrtue that wouldothertise bave lain hldden. 6. But everyone. indeed every single one of tny colleagues, helpsd me to carry out my duties within the limits of my competence; and that ready and tilling co-operation was the foundation, the verycondition, of tbe meamre of success to which you, Mr. President. referred and whlch came my way in the blgh office you “0~ OCC~PY. Yo ail my colleagues. to everyone of them. 1 offer my grateful thanks for havlng enabled me to look wlth some satisfaction on the work 1 bave done. I canuot omit mentionlng in this connexion the Becretariat staff who were at ail tirnes-I mea” Adoption of the agenda

Before taking up the adoption of the agenda, 1 would wish to give the Council a word of explanation regarding the reasons for calling a meeting at this time. As members Will probably recall, at the conclusion of oui last meeting the then President of the Security Council made the following statement: “It goes without saying that if any member of the Counoil should consider it desirable or necessary to bave a meeting at any time on other information available to him, and if he communicates with me, 1 shall of course cons& the members of the Council with a view to calling a meeting of the Cou&l at once.” 11219th meeting, para. 37.1 There was no objection to this statementof the President IMr. Ramani], and it was therefore accepted. 9. Late yesterday afternoon, 1 received a request from the representative of the Soviet Union to call an urgent meeting of the Security Council. He pointed out that he particularly wanted to take up the question of the two telegrams which the President of the Security Council had received ûom Mr. Jottin Cury. in which the latter asked for the dispatch to the Dominican Republic of the UnitedNations Commission on Human Rights. 10. In conformity with tradition and with the statement by last month’s President of the Security Council, 1 undertook consultations with the members of the Council and 1 was fortunate enough to reach them a11 last night. The majority of the members pointed out that, if the subject of the meeting was to be the telegrsms from Mr. Jottin Cury, they did not think at first sight that it was prima facie a matter for the Council to deal with. since it was a matter concerning human rights. They pointed out, however. that, if one member of the Council insisted on a meeting. they would net abject. As to the time of the meeting, there were some members who expressed apreference for Monday or for Friday, but others-again. the majority-said they would be available at any Lime. 11. 1 thereupon communicated again with Ambassador Fedorenko. put these points of view before him and asked him whether he still wanted a meeting of the Security Council. IIe confirmed that he still insisted on a meeting. As to the time of the meeting. Ambassador Fedorenko felt that it was desirable to hold it “The President shall oall a meeting Of the Security Council at the request of any member of tlaa Security co”“oil.” 12. TO be complete and correct. 1 should like to add that during OUI second conversation, Ambassador Fedorenko also pointed out that he did net want to discuss only the two telegrams from Mr. Cury. but also certain other aspects of the matter. 13. 1 oall on the rspresentative of the Unlted States.

1 should like to mske a brief comment on our provisional agenda and its adoption. We bave listened with close attention to the President’s account of why thls meeting was called and why it was called SO urgently. why it is being convened only twenty-four heurs after the request was submitted. Nevertheless. 1 must confess that it is not entirely clear to me. 15. Our provisional agenda refers to the letter of 1 May from the representative of the Soviet Union. whlch in turn requested a meeting of the Council to consider the question of “the armed interference by the Unlted States in the inter& affalrs of the Dominicari Republic”. Thls. of course, is the ssme agenda item which formed the hasis of the numerous meetings on the Dominlcan situation which we bave held over the past month. concernlng which we adopted two resolutions and rejscted two draft resolutlons. The draft resolution, lncidentally. whlch was most decisively rejected and whlch obtalned ths partial support of only one member of the Council other than the Soviet Union was that whlch sought to obtaln Security Councll endorsement of the charge set forth in the aforementloned Soviet letter. 16. We of course are aware. Mr. President, as you bave reminded us, that the Council remalns seised of thls matter and is subject to cal1 if new and threatening developments should require its attention. We assume that such developments, if they should occur. would relate to the maintenance of international peace and security. slnce tbat is the responsibility with wbich the Council is primarily charged. However, 1 am aware of no such developments at thls tlle. Indeed. the strict cesse-fire requested by the Council bas been well observed and, through the efforts of the OAS, the principal spot where occasional firing was still tsklng place, the Presidential Palace, was yesterday occupied by OAS-in thls case Brasllian-forces. 17. While wide political dlfferences still exist in the Dominican Rspublic. no actions relating to ths maintenance of international peace and security bave mourred recently whloh could conceivably require an qent meeting of the Security Council. 19. It is relevant to note first, that Mr. Cury bimself does net ask Security Council consideration of this matter. but requests “dispatch Human Rights Commission of the United Nations” to verify his charges: second, that the Presidént of the Security Council asked the Secretary-General to transmit this communication to the Director of the United Nations Division of Human Rights. to whtch the Secretary-General replied that he was doing SO “in accordance with the established procedure”; and third, according to the message to the Secretary- General of the United Nations from the Assistant Secretary General of the OAS [S/6404]. both the socalled Constitutional Ciovernment and the so-called Government of National Reconstruction in theDominicao Republic bave requested the OAS to send representatives of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to investigate these charges. 20. 1 fail to sec, therefore, why the Secuity Council should concern itself with this matter.‘Of course. if the Soviet delegation wishes to transfer the discossion of human rights questions from the Commission on Human Rights and from the Genrral Assembly to the Security Council. 1 am sure that events in the Soviet Union ar d among its neighbours will provide us with very w.de scope for debate on matters in this field. 21. Finally, in comme?ting on the relevance and urgency of oui purported agenda, we should note that the Cbairman and Executive Secretarv of the OAS Commission on Human Rlghts are already in Santa Domingo in response to the request from both factions just mentioned. including the faction of which Mr. Cury is a member, and also that these officiais are actively engaged in an investigation of the alleged violations of human rights whlch the Soviet representative apparently intends to air before us, nu doubt with his well-known moderation and objectivity. 22. My delegation therefore finds itself in a considerable state of doubt, despite the President’s helpful statement, as to what we are actually called together to discuss, why the Seourity Council is being diverted from its normal responsibilities into the field of human rights, if that is indeed the intention, and the grounds on which the Soviet representative felt it expedient on such a flimsy basis to cal1 us together SO urgently. 23. Of course, it is well knovm that the United States never abjects to free discussion in the Security 24. The p~SIDENT:I take lt frOm thS SkitSment Of tbe representative of the Unlted States that he does net wish to raise formal objection to the adoption of the provisiona agenda. Therefore. if there Bi”s 110 further remarks with regard to the agenda’ I sbll consides it adopted. nteagedawa.9 Lctter dotal 1 &y 1965 from the Permanent Represeototive of tbe Union of Soviet So&&t Republics oddrcssed to the Prcsident of tbe Seawily Cauncil w6314

Tbe President bas received a letter from the Aotlng Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations [S/6407]‘~ ln which he renews hls request to be invited to participatewithout vote in tbe consideration of the question before us. In acoordance wlth the usual practice, 1 suppose.lfthere is no objection’ to invite him to take a Seat at the ConnciI table. Af fhe imdfaffm of fhe Presidesf, Mr. AHimso Maxfiiez (Cuhaj fc& a place af fhe Couscil fable.

Before I glve the flur ta the first speaker inscribed on my Rst. 1 should llke to draw the Council’s attention to some recent documents which bave been received in connexion wlth the matter now under consideration. Four telegrams were received yesterday and today from the Organization of American States. They are contained in documents S/64OOu and S/64Ol,g transmitting the texts of resolutions adopted on 2 June hy the Organization of American States, and in documents S/6404u and S/6404/Add.l$ concerning the dlspatch to Santa Domingo of nfficers of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. In addition, the Council bas received today the report of the Secretary-General, which is now bsfore members in document S/6408$I should also add that 1 bave received a letter from the Permanent Representatives of tblrteen Latin American countries which is in the prooess of translation and whlch Will bs clrculated to members thls afternoon as document S/6409. 27. As a11 members bave received these documents, eXCePt the last one, whlch Will be forthcoming’ 1 Will noW giVe the floor to the first speaker on my list’ the representative of the Soviet Union.

Before proceeding to present the statement of the Soviet delegatloo’ I should llke, Mr. President’ to make some Comments On tbe obviously bad-tempered statement which the Unlted States representatlve bas just made. 30. Secondly, the situation in the DominicanRepublic has not changed in any way since the Unitcd States intervention, as the country is still under United States occupation. The crimes of the interventionists and aggressors continue an3 romain unpunished. 31. Thirdly, ects of violence by United Skates imperialists against the paople oi a small Latin American country. a Member of the United Nations. are continuing. In these circumstanoes, to portray matters as tho United States representative bas attempted to depict them here is wilfully to distort the real state of affairs and deliberately to mislead the Security Council. 32. Fonrthly. it was in view of the sgreement reached at the last meeting of the Security Council on the possibility and necsssity of urgentlyconwning tbe Security Council at the request of any member-ta whtch you. Ir. President. duly referred-t-bat we requested the President of the Securicy Council to convene tbe dresent meeting. 33. As for the reasons and grounds for convening an urgent meeting of the Security Council, tbere are more than enough of those, as we shall now demonstrate in our statement. 34. In connexion with the continuing armed interferenoe by the United States in the fnternal affairs of the Dominican Republic. which is being conducted under caver of the Organizat!.>n of American States. the Soviet Covernment has instructed me to mske tbe follovffng statement:21 “The United States. after perpetrating overt military intervention against a sovereign State-the Dominioan Republic-and thereby grossiy violating very important principles of the United Nations Charter and the generally aocepted rules of international law. is using the Organisation of American States as a smoke-screen for its aggressive acts. On 6 May 1965, the 1Meeting of Consultation of Mini&ers of Foreign Affairs of tire States members of the. OAS, despite the vehement objections of a number of Latin American States participatfng in tbe Meeting, adopted. under direct pressure from the United States of America. a resolution on tbe formafion and tbe use in the Dominican Republic of a so-called Tnterdmerican Force’. “This resolution of the OAS is in flagrant contradiction with the Charter of the United Nations. “The OAS resolution violates Article 2 Of the Umted Nations Charter. wbich probibits tbe tbreat or use of force in international relations *agai=t the territorial izteeritv or political independence “Tbe Esolution violates Article 39 of tbe United Nations Charter, wbïch states tbat tbe SeCUrity Couacil alone shasll determine ‘the existence of any tbreat to tbe peace, breach of tbe peacs. or aCt of a ssion’ and decides what measures SIX& be tien ‘to maintàin or restore international peace aad securàty’. “The OAS resolntion is contrary to Article 53 of tbe charter, WhiCb states that noenforcementaction sbti be taken under regt0na.I arrangements or by regional apewzies Witbout the authorization of tbe security dm.nCL1’. Wmsequently. the OAS resolution violates fundamental provisions of the United Nations Charter and às tberefore illlegal. “Tbe United States bas also disregarded tbe obligations it asszned under the Charter of tk OAS and other inter-American agreements. Under article 15 of the charter of the OAS, no State or group of States lns the rigbt to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internai OP external affairs of any other State. “Following the formation of the so-called ‘Inter- American Force’, wbich is being used for intervention in the interna1 affairs of the Domintcan Republic, the United States is now endeavouring to organize a permanent inter-American force, an enaeavour that is fraugbt with great danger for the other countries of Latin America. It means inpractice that tbe imperialist forces in tbe United States are trying to arrogate to themselves the right to intervene under the OAS flag in the interna1 affairs of other Latin American States for the purpose of dealing with Governments that are net to their liking and with tbe democratic forces that are seeking to strengthen their freedom and independence. “The Soviet Government deems it essential to draw the attention of the States members of the Security Council and of all States Members of the United Nations ‘to the serious consequences which may result from the actions taken by the United States to mske use of the Organization of American States for its aggressive purposes. in violation of tbe United Nations Charter. “It is obvious that these actions of the United States are a further manifestation of tbat country’s aggressive fore@ policy. The United States armed intervention in the interna1 affairs of the Dominioan Republic has followed the United States aggression in Indo-China, the intervention of tbe colonial Powers in the Congo and the intervention of the imperialist forces in the affairs of sovereign States in otner parts of the world. “The Soviet ûovernment calls on the Security Council and a11 States Members of the United 35. Having read out the statement of the Soviet Government, cbe Soviet delegation would llke to express its conviction that the Security Council Will examine the statement wlth due tare and tske the necessary measures. 36. We realiae. of course, that memhers of the Council Will requlre time to study a statement of such importance by the Soviet Government. We are proceeding on the assumption that members of the Council will be able to present their views on this question at a meeting of the Security Council in the very near future, perhaps tomorrow, 4 June. 37. In view of the foregoing, the Soviet delegation proposes to continue its remarks after the consecutive interpretation of the statement of the Soviet Government which 1 bave just read out. The consecufive ioterpretafioa was give.2 of fhe sfafement of fhe Soviet Govemmenf which was read out by fhe represenfafive of fhe USSR.

1 understand that the representative of the Soviet Union prefers to continue now unless any immediate remarks are forthcoming with regard to the first part of hls statement. If no such remarks are ta be made, 1 shall glve the floor again to the representative of the Soviet Union.

The Soviet delegation has just read out a statement of the Soviet Govermnent and it remalns for me to add tbat we bave given the tex’ of this statement to the President, together with a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Soviet Union to the United Nations requesting that thls statemem of the Soviet Government be issued as an officisl Security Council. document. 40. The Security Council has met in emergency session because. as we pointed out, alarmlng reports are still being received from the Dominican Republic, requiring immediate consideration and the adoption of appropriate measures by the Council. 41. The United States armed intervention in the Dominlcan Republic is in its second month. A small country. belonglng to the family of States Members of the United Nations, has been subjected to brutal aggression and has been occupied by the forces of United States imperialism. Before the eyes of the whole world, United States imperialism is with impunity carrying out reprisals against the Dominican 43. Tbe Soviet delegation considers it necessary to draw tbe attention of tbe members of tbe Securlty CounoiI to tbe communication addressed to the President of the Security Cou&l on 25 May 1965 by tbe Mioister for Foreigo Affeirs of the Constitutional Government of tbe Dominican Repnbllc. Mr. Jottll Cury, lu wbich the Constitutional Government appeals to tbe Unlted Nations to conduct an lnqulry and take measures with regard to the crimes and reprissls against the civilian population committed by General Imbert’s bands in the sectors of Santa Domingo under bis control. These bloody crimes of the Domlnlcan reactionary elements. actlng under tbe protection and with the assistance of the United States armed forces. are not restricted to the capitslof the country. 44. On 29 May, the ConstitutionalGovernment through its representatlve again comnïunicated wlth the United Nations in connexion wlth the continuing atrocities of the United States henchmen. In this second communlcatien. it is stated tbat the so-called junta is continuing mass executione in the territory of the Dominican Republlc. Hundreds of civilians sympathising with the lawful Government of the Dominican Republic. bave been shot without triai or investigation in the towns of Bsrahona, Santiago and San Francisco de Macorfs, in the eastern provinces and ln the cemetery of Santo Domingo. 45. There are reports of tortures and brutalities which tbe junta is inflictlng on thousands of prisoners. On the admission of the junta itself, the Quisqueya stadium bas been converted into a prison camp. 46. The statements of the Constitutional Government of the Dominican Republic are amplified by reports in the United States Press. As early as 21 May. for instance, The New York Times pointed out that: “The Dominican Communists are net being killed in Santo Domingo. . . . The democrats. the liberals. tbe constitutionalists are being kllled by troops of a militaiy junta which the United States in effect set UP and certainly helped.” 47. A correspondent of Trie Christian Science Monitor speaks in the issue of 29 May-and 1 aaain auote-about “persistent reports of atrocities commitmd bylmbert junta forces” and about another prison-Victoria Prison-filled with Imbert’s prisoners, who number 1.560. Even the famous “security zone” is the scene 48. NC.~. as ycu see. the sc-called “zone regulatiens” bave beccme law. The origln of these regulations is well kncwn. First the armadas of Unlted States Marines invade the territory of a scvereign State. viclate its national scvereignty and independence. cooupy the ccuntry, create “international settlementsv, “neutral zones” and “security zones” by force of arms, and then brigandish arbitrary rcle begins and the fcrcing of the “American way of lie” and thcught on others. Al1 this fcllcws the well-wcrn paths of international brigandry. colonlalism and lmperialist usurpation wlth the sole difference that. whereas previcusly gunbcats and vblack flctillasn were used in this sbameful piracy. now bigh-pcwered cruisers with large punitive detacbments and aircraft carriers with airborne landings are invclved. 49. It is self-evident that the principalresponsibility for these reprisais against thepeacefulandccmpletely innocent population is borne by thcse whc put tbs hangmen of the Dcminican pecple in pcwer, placed weapcns in their bands and are now enccuraglng them in their blccdy misdeeds. 50. We bave already bad occasion more than once in the Security Ccuncil tc adduce facts demcnstrating that the, military junta is the creaticn of the United States invaders. The United States Gcvernment is financing the junta and making available tc it milllcns of dollars which. as the Constitution& Gcvernment emphasizes, are being used to pay the salaries of General Imbert’s mercenaries. Thls pclicy of bribery with dollars and shady deals is net ccncealed by United States leaders themselves. 51. Speaking at a Press conference on 26 May, the United States Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, stated cutright that the United States “did encourage” the civilian military grcupunderGeneralImbert’s leadership-“these gentlemen”, as Dean Rusk called them- “tc associate themselves and tc try to help deal with the prcblems of tbcse areas of the country tbat were net directly invclved in violence in Santc Domingo itself”. 52. Acccrding tc The New York Times of 28 May, nnd by the admission of United States cfficials, the United States is giving aid tc the Imbert junta. They assert that tbis step was necessary tc establish equilibrium between the junta and the rebels-incther wcrds. SO that the United States puppets shculd net meet with the same fate as Syngman Rhee, Ngc Dinh Diem and their like. And now that they have grcwn strcng on United States allcwances and enjcy the support of the Unlted States invaders, the junta of cut-thrcats is trying to establish a r@me of public. Ami it seems country is quite the tates representative 54. Members of the Security Cmmcil of course remember haw the Wnited Skates representative, Amba~sadm Ste~enson.expendeda~eatdealoforatorical effort on presentimg the case as though the United States b,ad invaded tbe DominicanRepublic for unselfish purposes, in order, as he put it, “to proteot ths lives of foreigners~. to preserve demo~racy and SO on. New tùe mal meaning of %merican democracy” bas been revealed to us. Pt is seen to be tbe forcible implantation of a régime of terrer. obscurantism, repression. prison tortures and mass executions. And all tbis SO as net to allow a small but freedom-loving peoph to decide their own fate tbemselves and SO as t0 force upon tbem a r&gime which is to Washington% ltking and wbich would net be loyal to the national interests of its country bat would be tbe obsequious servant of United States imperialism. 55. Already hardly anyone even iu tbe United States remembers tbe ridiculous pretext-“the defence of foreign citizensn-which vas SO widely used by tbe United States invaders in the first few days to justify tbe armed invasion of tbe Dominican Republic. Tbe worn out bogey of vthe comuïunist tbreat”. which the Umted States representatives used to invoke, bas ako lost much of its force because it bas bocome obvious to a11 wbat criminaf aims Washington is pursuing. 56. Sienificant in tbis renard is tbe followina statement in Le Figaro: wAny &minican who does%ot say tbat he is entirelv for the United States is considered to be a dangerou: communist*. 57. Cne cari clearly see who is tbe target of United States miiitarism in tbe Dominîcan Republic from a comparison of two facts. Tbe President of the United States. Mr. Johnson, stated tbat ou 24 April vrevolution erupted in tbe Dominican Republic’f. wbich “began as a popular democratic revolution committed to demooracy and social justice”. On tbat same day. tbirty military transport planes were hastily transferred from Vie&Nam to tbe United States military air base in North Caroliua because. as The Wall Street Journal explains, of extraordinarymilitary needs for tbe transfer of soldiers and weapons to Santa Domingo. Tbis is bow the United States greeted wbat it bad itself called “democracy and social justice@’ in tbe Dominican Republic. 55. It is precisely the attempt to stifle and suppress any-kind of demooratic, national movements for freedom and fndependence tbat is the main purpose of United States fmperialism. particularly in tbe Western Hemisphere, whicb Washington declares to be its own private domain where tbe United States is to rule supreme and unbinciered. There is no doubt either about tbe aims pursued by the American or “inter- American troopsv in tbis long-suffering country. 60. The back-stage manœuvrings hoth by the United States President’s “fire brigade” in Santa Domingo, and in Washington itself and far beyond its confines, indicate sufflciently eloquently by whom and how such a government is being created. It was noteworthy how shamelessly and cynically the Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, in a television interview a few days ago gave the recipe for creating a Government of the Dominican Republic from the so-called “centrist” and “coalition” elements. 61. Remember how the case was presented earlier, how they tried in Washington to use trumped-up pretexts and portray their armed intervention in this small State as an attempt to rescue foreigners, as a humane mission, a noble deed and SO on. I.ook what a vast distance, what a golf now separates this from what the United States invaders are doing in the Dominican Republic. 62. In a11 this shameless farce only one thing is forgotten: the question of interna1 organisation and régime is purely an interna1 affair of the Dominican people themselves and they alone-entirely alonebave the right to decide it wlthout any pressure or interference from outside. A label has already appeared to caver thls disgraceful arbitrary rule by the invaders-so-called “political trusteesbip”. 63. Apparently the United States would like to turn history back to the dark ages, when many peoples were under the trusteeshlp of imperialist Powers. The nature of the Unlted States “trusteeshlp” in the Dominican Republio is clear to everyone-it is the forcible deprivation of the people of a small country of their sovereign rights in the name of United Smtes imperialist interests. 64. John W. Finney of The New York Times wrote openly in that newspaper on 30 May 1965: “In effect. the Force was exercising a political trusteeship over the Dominican Republic, just as the United States Marines had done on the island 40 years ago.” 65. Very recently, leading circles in the UnitedStates bave heen maklng fresh attempts to justify armed intervention in the interna1 affairs of other countries. As cari be seen from the statement made by the President of the United States at Baylor University on 28 May 1965, he, for example, considers that “the old distinction between the civil war and international war has already lest much of its meaning”. In the words of the President. the right to decide the fate of their country rests only vpartly” with ths people n promis& as he said, %he chance e tkeir ovin course”. j6. ieclarations se !ng&ence .mposent rropos ioroes niscer :out pays, au mépris :t des principes *ous quelque gendarme s’efforcent ments de libération La condamnation rtuy -essary to prove in any detail that SUQ~ stateme~ts are incompatibIe with the obligations msm& by tk ullited states under tbe Charterof the ations, wkich probibits aay iuterference in tbe affairs of other countries. Pt is noticeable bis very same connexion we are once again tbe old ides about tke establiskment of SOca&& international police forces, which wotidbe able to interfere witk inpmdty in the fnternaf affairs Of any cotmtry. in violation of the des of international ~aw a& of tbe basic principles of the United Nations Charter. III wbatever gufse, the concept of the worfd policeman. a role vfkick tke Unit& States is trying to ~~SURI~ in order to suppress the national freedom movement, cari only evohe general condemnation. 67. pour Nations aussi Unis inactive de nationales. 67. Nor oan one fail to condemn tbe attempts of the United States to destroy the foundations of the United Nations and undermine the effectiveness of this world Organization. Everything indicates tbat it suits tbe United States very well to bave tbe United Nations ïuactive as an instrument for maintaiuing international peace and security. 68. It is no accident tbat tbe‘ statements by Wbite House officiahi do not even mention tbe United Nations and tbe wbole idea is to give uulimited power to the so-called regional agencies, inoluding tire Organisation of American States. This also sheds more ligbt on the efforts of the United States within the United Nations to make an exaggerated fuss about tbe so-called financial crisis of tbe Organisation. Washington is clearly trying to exclude the majority of Members of the United Nations from active efforts in tine cause of peaoe. Althougb rufing circles in tbe United States are worhing feverishly to accomplish tkeir monstrous invasion of the Domintcan Republfc and diotate their Will to tbe people of tbis small country, tke Dominican people are continuing thefr courageous struggle, despite tbe heavy sacrifices they are mahing as a result of the United States aggression and the occupation of this country by United States invaders. 68. des dirigeants pas fait rambne dites Etats pourquoi nisation possible 69. In their declaration of 25 May 1965, the lawfully elected representatives of the Dominican people-the SeMe and Chamber of Deputies of the Dominican Rwublic-denouuced the manoeuvres wbich are being carried on in tk? Dominican Republic by the Umted States Government and its representatives in Santa Domingo. 70. Tke National Congress of th.sDominicanRepublic stated that tirs Government of the United States of America, tbrough the use of delaying and obstructive tactics, bas been strongly pressing responsible persons and Qrgans in Santa Domingo and outside in the evident desire to impose solutions openly contrary to the democxatic iuterests of the Dominfcan peopte =d, W=W-W?nt$. t0 tbe Constitution of 1963. wbich 71. The Senate and the Chamber of Deputies of the Dominican Republic. in their capacity as lawful representatims of the Dominican people. raised a most energetic protest against the intention of the Government of the United States of America to deprive the Dominicans of the right of self-determination. They appealed to the parliaments of many countries to hear their loud voice in that heur of grievous desperation for three million people, who only seek to find a a better future freely and democratically. 72. The Security Council cannot ignore tbls urgent appeal. It must take a11 necessary measures to put an end ta the armed interference by the United States in the internai affairs of the Dominioan Republic. 72. The Security Cou&l must also take immediate measures with regard to the request of the Constitutional Government of the Dominican Republic for an immedlate inquiry by the United Nations into the mass reprisals against the civilian population and for the ending of these heinous crimes. 74. These are the urgent measures wbichthe Security Council must take without any delay. 75. Mr. President, 1 do not insist on interpretation into two European languages. 1 suggcst that it Will be suffioient to have consecutive interpretation into only one language-if you agree. the French language.

The representative of the Soviet Union has handed me the text of the statement of the Soviet Government which he has just read out to us, wlth the request that it be circulated as a document of the Security Council in view of its important nature. In accordance with his request, this document Will be translated and circulated as a document of the Security Council.

1 believe it should now be clear why the representative of the Soviet Union called for this urgent meeting of the Security Council. It was to make use of the Security Council as a propaganda platform to launch the government statement which he read at the opening of hls remarks. It was, moreover, simply to repeat in a new guise the same sweeping and unfounded charges about United States policy in various parts of the world to which the membersbip of tbe United Nations bas been repeatedly and exhaustively exposed over recent weeks in tbis body. in tbe Disarmament Commission, in the Special Committee on Peace-keeping Operations and in every other United Nations body now meeting. no matter how irrelevant or obstructive to its business tbese charges were. Whether or not the bundred or more repetitions of these charges were a sufficient pretext to warrant reepresentative of tbe soviet union h5s atf the Inter-American Peace I shmld lie ta recaIl that OAS resolutim of 6 May. to which dorenko referred. makes clear tbat cari Force lias but one purpose: that is to co-operate in the restoration of normal an Republic. in maintainmg itants ami the invioIability he establisbment of an atce and conci!.iation that will permit f democratic institutions. F0IIowing the Act establishing the Force. the 0eoere.l of tbe Organisation of American r. Jo& Mol-a. said tbat: “The purpose of the Inter-American Force is clearly net one of intervention but rather one of rendering assistance to the people of a sister nation. Tbe creation of the Force demonstrates once more the capacity of the Organisation of American States to adjust to new conditions and to deaI with new problems. problems bavingcbaracterist perhaps, not even envisaged at the time tbe c ter and the Rio Treatywere ratified. It is clear. however, that tbe objectives for whlch the Inter-American Force was created fall wlthin those broad provisions of tbe Charter which are concerned with matters affecting the peaoe ami security of tbe Western Remisphere. Peace. prosperity and justice “--de wnt on-W-e indivisible and interdependent. Where tbese are laching in one nation, it must be a matter of concern to ail. “The activlties of the Organisation of American States in the Dominican Republic are directed towards the fostering of peace and tranquillity under conditions wbich wllI permit the Dominican people to establish a democratic civil government of their own choosing to heal the wounds and the bitterness of civü strife and to begin the path of relief and reconstruction.” 79. Tbe representative of the Soviet Union bas renewed the Soviet assertion that authorization from the Security Council :,si this force is required. That assertion is evidently based on the proposition that the establisbment and the functioning of the Inter- American Force somebow constitute enforcement action wlthin the meaning of Article 53, paragraph 1, of the United Nations Charter. It seems evldent to us that the voluntary establishment and fnnctioning of tbe Inter-American Force are solely for tbe purposes which 1 bave just cited: tbat is. of assisting in the restoration of normal conditions in the Dominican ReImblio ami of making it possible for the Dominican people to determine their future and to operate under democratic institutions free from outside interference. Clearly, the Inter-American force is net designed to 80. These collective efforts of the regionalorganizatien concerned tc enable the Dominicanpeople to determine tbeir future government cannot properly be termed enforcement action under Article 53. In tbese circumstarces the reqdirements of the UnitedNations Charter are those set forthhi Articles 52 and 54 ramer than in Article 53. 81. 1 think that we might note that the Soviet Government abjects to peace-keeping operations under tbe auspices of the OAS, but it alsoobjects to such operations undertaken at the recommendaticn of the General Assembly. It insists that only the Security Counci:, where it has a veto-used over a hundred times-cari take action to keep thepeace. Inshort. the Soviet Union is trying to establish a de facto situationwhere international peace-keeping operations cari take place only at the pleasure of the Soviet Union. Havingin mind the explosive and dangerous Soviet doctrine of so-called wars of liberation, we cari imagine how many and what klnd of peace-keeping operations would take place under these circumstances. 82. 1 need only invite the attention of the Council to the declaration of the Moscow Conference of Communist Parties in 1960. to the effect that political independence is only “an important step tcwards complete liberation”. Thedoctrine envisages complete liberation-and here again 1 rely on the statement of the Moscow Conference-as “the overthrow of capitalism. the Socialist revolution and the establishment of tbe dictatcrship of the proletariat by and under the control of the Communist Party”. 33. Turning 10 a more pleasant subject-what the OAS has actually accomplished since we last met-itmight be useful to nc.te the following. 84. First, the Inter-American Force bas beenestablished in Santa Domingo. On the same day, the heads of the two factions. ColonelCaamaiioandGeneralhnbert. were formally notified of the establislunent of the Force and requested to address any complaints concerning compliance with the Act of Santa Domingothat is, the cesse-fire established by the OAS-to the Unified Command Headquarters of the Inter-Ameriran Force. 85. On 29 May 1965 General Hugo Panasco Alvim of Brazil cfficially took cornmand of the Force. Bras& Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras and the UnitedStates have thus far contributed contingents to the Force. Inter-American patrols have been instituted throughout siiimee tbat tins-e. mom tban 2,500 btes forces bave been withdrawn. is prepareà to mh? furth?3? withsador Bunl-rr tolà tlle0rganisation ( wk?n tzae Unified command of the OAS detemines tbat the IInter-American Force is 87. entre des hostiiit8s pacifique, sangbmts d’importantes Tbis Inter-Americau Force, st~dïag~t~ent~ amed factions. bas bmugllt about a cessation of sttlftieshet~nt~m.WitùoutthisIPeace- Id. it is LùgMy Bkely that tbme wotid bave been .bloc!dy conflict and great loss of life. 88. amion& de n&ociatious et du g&ii+ral Palais national du cessez-le-feu. arriv6 litarisation contribuera tiens L’accord liens de la Force interam8ricaineoccupent le palais. Secretary General Mors put it, wi11 facilitate ths derni~ta~iaa~0~ of tbe National Palace ami tbe surroundiug area anù wbich constitutes à fundamental step tovmds ending violation of tbe cesse-fire in tbis sensitive ama. On 2 Junte. tbe agreement was impiemented and Brazilian elements of tbe Inter-American Force are occopying the Palace. 89. we bave mted earlier, on 25 May. in tbe face Of rts of alleged violations of buman rigbts. Seeretaq General Mors called a meeting of Fore@ Ministers in Washington to request tbat the Commission on Human Rights of the OAS be sent to the Dominioan Republic. The Cbairmauof tbe Commission, Mr. Manuel BiancM. and tbe Executive Secretary of éiae Comdssion, Mr. Luis Reque, bave already arrived in tbe Dominican Republic. They are actively seeking to determine whether any violations bave tahen place ami. if so, wbat actionby tbe Inter-American Commission on Kuman Rigbts migbt be required. 89. 25 mai, à la suite de rapports de l%xnme la convocation &hangbres Commission en R8publique mission, Sec&taire vement Caine des droits 90. On 2 June. tbe Tenth Meeting of Consultation of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of tbe OAS approved an Ad Roc Commission made up of representatives of Braail. El Salvador ami tbe ünited States, to act on behalf of tbe Meeting of Consultation inorder,first. to provide offices to ail theparties in tbe Dominican Republic in order to acbieve a climate of peace and reconeiliation that will permit thefunctioningof democratië institutions ithe Dominican Republic, and, secondly. to provide the Inter-American Force with the directives necessary for tbe effective accomplishment of tbe Force*s purpose. ‘IXe tbree-man Ad Roc Commission was to arrive at 5 p.m. today in the Dominican Republic. 90. premier 92. A most important and gratifying feature of OAS activity in the Dominican Repablic bas been the manner in which the American Republios have responded to tke OAS resolution of 3 May to kelp meet the urgent needs of the Dominican people. Twelve member States bave niade contributions of millions of pounds of food, medicine and medlcal services. Four countries bave provided medical teams. The OAS relief programme co-ordinating centre bas acted in magnificent fashion in assembling and shlpping important quantities of food and medioines. 93. I am proud of my own country’s contributions of more than ten million pounds of food-etuffs, large quantities of medicines, îuel oil and gasoline for electric power and commerce. and cblorine for water purification. 94. The OAS has acted to fight disease, to treat the wounded, to bury the dead and to tske the necessary public health measures such as tke removal of garbage and refuse. These activities bave benefited ail of the people of the Dominican Republic. 95. Looklng beyond the immediate needs , the President of the United States on 1 June stressed as an essential goal the comprehensive task of economic reconstruction in the Dominican Republic for tke benefit of its 3.5 million people. Tke Unlted States is prepared, in oommon wlth otker friends of tke Dominlcan people. to he!p generously in this respect. 96. Returnlng to the polltical side, 1 might reiterate what Ambassador Stevenson mentioned severaltiies: tbat the OAS and tke United States. unllke the Soviet Union, are not supporting one faction in the Dominican Republic but are seeking a settlement acceptable to ail democratic parties. Obviously. the principal immediate objective of the OAS is that of promoting a political solution to tke fundamental politioal problem, a solution whioh would restore peace and security to the island and one whlch is acceptable to the Dominican people itself. 97. Toward tkis end Mr. Mors kas been in continuous contact not only witk the Imbert and Caamailo groups, but also with leaders of otker elements in the Dominioan Republic, in an effort to narrow the dlfferences and to find a formula wbick could be agreed upon. While hls efforts kave not as ystbeen orowned with success, tbis would be too muck to expect in the relatively short time he bas been 98. p b&eve tbat tbese evidences of constructive. impartial action on tbe part of the OAS Will be of mxe use and value to tbe Couocil tban would the detailed refutation of tbe endless ami groundless charges by tbe Soviet representative wbich we bave heard SO many times. It is interesting to note, bowever. tiit Soviet charges are no longer restrlcted ta tbe United States. but now embrace the majority of the members of tbe Osganization of American States wbo bave supposted tbe recent measures taken by tbat Organiaattn. I sbould not presume to spesk for tkm, but <.E is reasonable to point out tbat tbe views of countries, hlembers of tbe United Natioas. in r botb to tbe interpretation of tbe United Nations Charter and the interests of tbe people of Ibis bemisphere areperbaps more informed. more objective ami more responsive to tbe needs of peace than are those of tbe Soviet Union. 99. As car President bas mentioued. a statement by tbirteen members of the OAS on tbis subject bas just been circulated to the Council and deserves. I am sure. our careful attention. 190. Finally, as to tbe United Nations, 1 believe tbat tbe devotion of the United States to tbis great Organization is bardly in need of further proof. Any just comparison of tbe support glven tbe United Nations by tbe United States and by the USSR would be extremely revealing. Tlte members of tbis Council need no enligbtenment on tbis point. 101. Permit me to conclude by quoting what President Johnson bad to say on tbis subject at bis Press conference as recently as 1 June. Tbe President said: “Tbis month of June marks a very bistoric anniversary in tbe affairs of man. Twenty years ago. while war still raged in the world. the nations of the worfd assembled at San Francisco to sign the charter of hope that brought into being tbe United Nations. “B&en were mindful that in tbese tiies humankind must choose between cooperation or catastrophe. At San Francisco there was brougbt into being a great instrumentality for international cooperation and we cari believe today tbat the ccoperation enpndered by the United Nations bas helped to avert catastrophe in tbis century. “SO tcday we have to work net on trie tbings that dlvide us but instead on tbe tbings that unite nations in tbe bauds of common interest.” 1 trust that we here may follow tbis counsel. 104. There oan scarcely be any need for me to analyse in detail, still less seriously. the attacks, often in the form of insinuations, which United States representatives see fit to mske in various committees, including even the Security Council, the highest organ of the United Nations. These attacks are worthneither discussion nor refutation. There are toomanyobvious and convincing facts which beareloquent witness to the acts of unparalleled arbitrariness and appalling lawlessness committed bya great Power, the UnitedStates of America. 105. The United States representative assiduously tried to give the impression that the so-called Inter- American Force is a11 but beneficencepersonifiedand is motivated by a touching concern for the victims of the civil war in the Dominican Republic. He even went SO far as to say that the occupation troops are performing a humanitarian mission in healing the wounds of a people who bave suffered during the bloodshed. 106. The United States representative, for obvious reasons, does not tel1 us why tbis bloodshed and this fratricidal war took place. It took place, as we a11 know, because there was an armeci invasion of the Dominican Republic and for ail thts tire gangsterish intervention of the United States imperialists is to blame. 107. Are you. Mr. Ambassador, trying even here to defend the actions of United States militarism? Are you trying even here to whitewash the criminal actions of the United States occupation forces, and tomske us believe that your piratical troops are carrying out a humanttarian mission? Do corne to your senses, Mr. Ambassador: remember to whom you are speaking. 108. The question inevitably arises whether there cari be any limit to hypocrisy and cynicism when the official representatives of the United States try to give the Security Council the impression that the United States interventionists in the Dominican Republic are carrying out a rzscue mission. Really only a blind man could fail to see wbat United States imperialism is doing-so far unpunished even by the UnitedNattons, this world forum, to which the legitimate COnStitUtiOtnXl Covernment of the Dominican Republic bas appealed for help. The officia1 representatives of the Umted States are trying to portray themselves as innocent beings and to represent as virtue the most flagrant violation of a11 rules governing international relations and the fact that the ruling circles in the United StateS bave trampled underfoot the very Charter of the United Nations. o, to President Frei of Chile. The President of tbe DominicanBepublie, MI-. l?osob. bas mequivwxlly called tbe Organisation of American States 9he political instrument of tbe Uaited states*. mwever, its eadorsement of the of the united States. which tbe United States sadors are striving bebind cbsed doow to cannot give these plans even tbe sligbtest tinge t is surely common lkowkdga tbat Article 53 United Nations Charter categorically probibits any enforcement action whatsoever by regional agencies witbout the autborisation of the Security Council. Ill. It is truc tbat tbe Wnited States representative luas tried here to @ve the impression tbat the socafled “Inter-American Force’ bears witb it only virtue and beneficence. But wbo Will believe such fairy tales. su& fables? Everytbing goes to show that tbe flag of tbe Organisation of American States is needed by the United States primarily as a screen to cmer up its criminal actions~ and to place tlae Ixmden of responsibility on tbe Latin American countries also. And if the OAS cari be said to be playing anv kind of role at all. tbat role is merelv-as Tbe New York Ttmes stated in an editorial-to “pulls chestnuts out of the fire for the Johnson administrationR. That is the voice of one United States newspaper. If tbe officia1 representative of tbe Wnited States. who apparently takes a different view bere. tbinks that tbis is net SO, why does be not deny tbis statement by a United States newspapes wbich is printed in more t 1 miUion copies? 112. Of course the United States emissaries and specialists in securing voting majorities bad to work hard to muster the necessary two-tbirds vote in the OAS. In order to save themselves ail that trouble next time. Washington bas thought up a planfora so-called “permanent OAS force’. What this “permanent OAS force” is to be and bow it is to act is perfectly clear from tbe precedent set by the current United States intervention against the Daminican Bepubltc. Posthaste. black arm-bands, lacking only swastikas, appeared on the arms of the oocupiers.But,as they say. Oa monkey in a top bat is still a monkey”. 113. Of what does tbis so-called ‘Inter-American Force’* consist? It consists, like the well-known pie, of one rabbit and one herse. They are a11 tbe same United States troops. Tbe United States troops make up nine tentbs of all tbe occupation forces on Dominican soil. SO much for your fairy tale, Mr. Ambassador. 114. We know that tbe Brazilian General Alvim was formally sent to the Dominican Bepublic as tbe Com- 117. There is no need to dwell on a11 the attacks and insinuations against my conntry which Unlted States officia1 representatives bave long since tsken to making and which often place them in an absurd and ridiculous position when they boomerang. 118. 1 waive consecutive intcrpretation of my remarks.

In order that the record of this meeting may be more complete, 1 suggest tbat the President should read out the letter he has received today from the representatives of thirteen Latin Americancountries.

1 see no objection to complylng with this request. The letter[S/6409] reads as follows: :%y 1965 from tbe representavletter dated 25 M tivesofArgentina, Bolivia. Brasil, COlOm Salvad~, Guatemala, Haiti, bis, Costa Rica. El Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay and Peru addressed to the President of the Security Council “We the undersigned, as representatives of States Members of the United Nations which are members of the Organisation of American States. acting on the instructions of OUI respective Governments and concerned that our regional agenoy should fulfil the purposes assigned to it by its charter and by the Charter of the United Nations; and, at the ssme time, seeking to reaffirm the significance of the OAS as an instrument for the preservation of peace and security on the American continent, venture to place before the Security Council, with respect, the following considerations: “First: The Organisation of American States, in its zity as a regional agency, should continue to exercise the responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security in the hemisphere which is conferred on it by the charter of the OAS and recognized by the Charter of the United Nations. “Second: In accordance with Article 52, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, which Member States are bound to uphold, every effort sbould be made to encourage action by regiOna1 agencies for the pacifie settlement of localdisputes. Xe axe no furtber speakers. we corne “av of om next meeting. We bave heard ent of the representative of theSovlet he read out to ns tbe statement of the the Soviet Unban. which will be transted ana cimtited as a Security Council document. 1 assume tbis Will be done tomorrow. 1 am sure that members would Iike to study that statement carefully ad perhaps commuticate with tbeii Govemments abmt it. 122. Are tbere any suggestions as to when Une next bould take place? RIFA? (Jordan): In tbe ligbt of tbe important hich the President bas just pointed out,plus tbe fact tbat we bave just received the letter from tbe xepresentatives of tbirteen Latin American countries by the xepxesentatives of, tbe Soviet Union and the United States. 1 would therefore propose that we meet eaxly wtt sue&. pexbaps Tuesday aftexman, if that is agseeable to ail the members. ENT: The xepresentative of Jordan we meet Tuesdayafternoon. 8 June. 0 all tbe members? 125. bis. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Repubks) (translated from Russian): We bave listened Cai’efuIIy to your statement. Mr. President. and to tbe statement of Ambassador Rifa’i with regard to OUI next meeting. 126. With your permission. we should like to recall tbat after making a statement on bebalf of tbe Soviet Government. the Soviet delegation expressed the hope that the members of the Security CounciI would duly consider and comment on that statement at tbe Council% next meeting, in view of the gravity of its contents. In tbat connexion. we suggested Friday. 4 June. as a possible date. Naturally, we bave no objection to a Poager interval if tbis is needed for the study of the Sorbet Government’s statement andforcommunicating with Governments. In that case. we couldholdour next meeting, if net on Saturday, then at least on Monday. in vlew of tbe complexity and urgency of the situation in the Dominican Republic-the item whichremainson 127. Tbe PRESIDENT: Are there any other memn>ers of the COunCil wbo wish to express their opinion on tbe subiect of the next meeting?Iunderstand that the OUr agenda-and of the measures wblch fIow from the Council’s obIi&ions. 128. We therefore bave two suggestions beforeus. Cne is to hold ameetingon Monday, and the other is to bave a meeting on Tuesday. 1s there any preference? 129. Mr. RIPA’1 (Jordan): 1 would like tocombine the two propos& into one. 1 accept the suggestion of the representatlve of the Soviet Union, in the hope that hls request is for a meeting on Monday afternoon; if SO. that would be acceptable to me.

TWO suggestions bave then been merged into one, namely to hold a meeting on Monday afternoon. As there is no objection to this aomblned suggestion, the next meeting Will be held on Monday afternoon at 3 o’olock. The meeting rose at 6.2S’p.m. HQW TO OBTAIN UNITED United Notions publications may be obtained dirtributors throughout the world. write to: United Nations, Sales Section, ENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS Les publications des, Nations Unies sont agences d6positaires du monde entier. Informer-vous ou adressez-vous à: Notions Unies, Section COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES Las publieaeiones de las Naciones Unidas casas distribuidoros en todos pattes del diriiare a: Nociones Unidas, Secei6n Litho in U.N. Pricc: $U.S. 1.00 (or equivelent in ocher