S/PV.1310 Security Council

Before we proceed with our business this morning, I should like to express to the Council my most sincere apologies for the grave inconvenience which must have been caused to them by the changing of times at which notifications of meetings of the Council have been given during the past week. 1 am very well aware of the heavy commitments under which members of the Council are working at this time and 1 realize that 1 have added to their difficulties by the messages which I have had to send to them often at very short notice, in recent days. In such matters I constantly have in mind that we in this Council take pride in our ability to meet at the shortest notice to deal with urgent questions. I have always thought it an important principle that the Council should be called without delay when a question which is said to be urgent is brought to our notice, and 1 have never doubted that the question on our provi- SiOna agenda for today is one of continuing urgency. SO it has been my constant purpose to enable the Council without delay to proceed with consideration of the matter before us, On the other hand, it is a valued tradition of this Council that time should be provided for consultation whenever it appears that suoh consultation would be fruitful. Consequently, when earlier this week I was asked by members of the Council to provide additional time for private consultations, 1 felt that it was right to accede to that request. 1 did SO, of course, after consultation with other members of the Council. 2. Then yesterday I had a difficult decision to take. This Council was called to meet at 3 otclock yesterday afternoon, but, as a11 members of the Council 3. Having drawn attention to these considerations, 1 again wish to express my apology to members of the C ouncil for the inconvenience which these changes must have caused. 1 would ask them to accept the fact that, from the consultations 1 undertook and in the decisions that 1 reached, 1 was at a11 times seeking to serve the best interests and traditions of the Council, Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. The Palestine question Letter dated 12 October 1966 from the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7540)

In accordance with the decisions taken previously, 1 shall now, with the consent of the Council, invite the representatives of Israel, the Syrian Arab Republic and the United Arab Republic to take seats at the Council table in order to participate without vote in the discussion. At the invitation of the President, Mx. M, Comay (Israel), Mr. G. J. Tomeh (Syria) and Mr. M. A. El-Kony (United Axab Republic) took places at the Council table.

The Council Will have taken note of document S/7561/Rev.l of 23 October 1966, which is the further report by the Seoretary-General submitted in accordance with the request made by the Security Council at its 1309th meeting. The Council is also aware that a draft resolution on this question has been submitted on 27 October by the United Kingdom and the United States [S/7568]. 6. The Council wil! now resume its discussion of this question,

The Seourity Counoil is meeting again to consider the Israel oomplaint against the Syrian Arab Republic. My delegation has net spoken earlier on the substance of this complaint because we felt that it would be advisable to wait until the report of the Secretary-General onthe matter was presented. We now have the report of 17 October 1966 [S/7553] before us. 1 shall discuss that report after making a few observations on the points raised during the deliberations of the Council ooncerning this question, 8. The statement made by Mr. Eban on 14 Ootober [1307th meeting] emphasized the need for peaoe, And 1 nlUSt admit that it worries me whenI hear Mr, Eban speak about peace. 1 say this because experience has shown that when the lsraelis speak of peace and make loud noises about it, we take it as a warning to prepare 9. On 29 September 1953, Mr. Eban told the United Nations: “My Government continues , . . to uphold the vision of a Middle East at peace within itself, uniting the efforts of its two kindredpeoples to heal the wounds of aggressive violence , , an I/ Beautiful, poetic, appealing language. But it was only fifteen days later, on 14 October 1953, that the cowardly attack, committed in the dark against sleeping innocent men, women and children, took place in the village of Qibya. In that attack forty-two civilians-men, women and children-were killed. The house of worship was’ destroyed together with a school and forty houses. 10. On 11 December 1953, Moshe Sharett said: “The conclusion of permanent peace between us depends on the Arab States alone: on our part, we are always ready for it.” Three months later, on 28 March 1954, the Jordanian village of Nahhalin was attacked, again in the dark and again in oold blood, resulting in many casuaities among innocent civilians. 11. In January 1955, the Chief of Staff of the Israel forces said: “Israel has no aggressive designs against her neighbours.” A month Iater, on 28 February1955, an attack was made on Gaza in which thirty-eight persons were killed and thirty-one wounded. 12. On 14 August 1955, Ben-Gurion said: “We must faithfully observe the conditions of the Armistice Agreement . . , We must , -. strive for relations of peace and co-operation between Israel and the Arab States.” Seventeen days later Khan Yunis and Bani Souhaila in the Gaza area were attacked and the demilitarized zone was occupied. And later we heard this from Ben-Gurion: “The Armistice Agreement is dead and buried and Will never be resurrected.” 13. On 21 March 1956, Moshe Sharett said: “Since the summer of 1948 we have made one attempt after another to induce our neighbours to enter into negotiations with us that might lead to a peaoe settlement. n In the following month of April, Deir El-Balah, Gaza and Khan Yunis were attacked, and 59 civilians were killed and 102 wounded. 14, On 2 July 1956, Mrs. Golda Meir, then Foreign Minister, said: “Our policy has always been one of peace.” Three months later, on 29 October 1956-and today is 28 October 1966-the Israelis began their Sinai campaign against Egypt. 15. Shall I continue to cite more of such cases to show that whenever the fsraelis say npeace” they Y Officia1 Records of the General Assemblv, Eighth Session, Plenary Meetings, 449th meeting, para. 30, 16. It has become the practice of the Israel authorities to cal1 for peace immediately before; and sometimes after, committing an act of aggression. What we heard tlie othèr night was but another example. We a11 remember that the Israel Air Porte attacked Syria on 14 Juiy ï966 andappealedfor peaoe four days later. : 17. In my statement to the SecurityCouncilon26 July of this yéar [ 1289th meeting] 1 drew the attention of the Council to the crossing by Israelregular armedforces of the armistice demarcation line into the Hebron district in Jordan, where they launbhed anunprovoked attack on. thé village of Rafat, three kilometres inside Jordan, blew up ,nineteén bouses, causing substantial damage and injuring .Jordanian soldiers. 1 also told the Council that, at the same time, similar Israel forces penetratéd into Jordanian territory, crossing the Jordan river., They attaSkéd unarrned farmers, destroyed four houses and the Sheikh Hussein police post. Eleven civilians were killed and several seriously wounded, and four houses were blown up. 18. 1 need not dwell on a11 the attacks of provocation committed by Israel during ‘thfs year. Rut 1 should like to cite one serious violation that was committed this verp rnonth of October by the Israel authorities. On 5 October 1966, the Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission, the machinery now working in the area, considered a Jordanian complaint concerning the violation by Israel of the no man’s land in which the Tannous building is situated. The facts of the case were very simple, Israel civilians crossed the demarcation Une and. started some construction on the Tannous building which is in no man’s land. Mr. Izzat Tannous who, together with his brother, owns the building but cannot reach it, is one of the Palestine Arabs expelled by the Israel authorities. He has appeared scores of times before different organs of the United Nations, presenting the Palestine problem and defending thé Palestine cause, He does notqualify to go home simply beoause he happens to be a Christian Arab and not a Jéw, The law of return opens Israel’s doors to Jews only. ïp. Tannous, who is with us here in my delegation, is’ well known to a11 of you around this table. He is h’omeless and SO is a11 of his family, like a11 Palestinians, numbering over 1 millionhuman beings. 20. 1 leave it to the membcrs of the Council to draw their own conclusions about that discrepancy. 1 should like to say that the Mixed Armistice Commission, after hearing a11 parties and after examining the maps, decided that that part of the Tannous building was not for occupancy by Israel civilians and that the acts of the Israelis constituted a breach of the Armistice _ Agreement, In other words, an act of forgery was committed. 1 would say that that is not the first forgery in the history of Zionism. 21. The Mixed Armistice Commission called upon the Israel authorities to prevent the crossing of the armistice demarcation line by the Israelis into the Part of the Tannous building which lies in no man’s land and also to end immediately the use of that part of the building; they also called upon the Israel authorities to remove a11 the newly-constructed work in order to keep the status quo in that part of the building, as it was prior to that complaint. That was a decision of the United Nations machinery in the area requesting Israel to leave that part of the building because it was in no man’a land, in accordance with the United Nations map, and to stop any construction in that building. 22. The Mixed Armistice Commission requested the Israel authorities to prevent the recurrence of such acts of violation in the future; that was the decision of the Mixed Armistice Commission, 1 am sure that the Council would like to know the reaction of the Israelis to the deoision made by the competent and proper organ in the area. What was the reaction of the Israel authorities? The Jerusalem Post, which is the semi-officia1 paper of the Israelis, had an article entitled “Israel challenging Mixed Armistice Commission ruling on Jerusalem house”, taking pride in challenging the ruling of United Nations machinery. On 7 October 1966, The Jerusalem Post announced that Israel would challenge the decision of the Mixed Armistice Commission and stated in that article that the building, whioh faces the Old City of Jerusalem and David’s Tower across the valley, had been oc- Cnpied by some forty Israel families and that Israel -1 want my colleague of the United States to hear this-that Israel would not consider these resolutions as binding. The article continued: “The vote taken by the Mixed Armistice Commission is considered an errer”. That is typical Israel behaviour, that is typical Israel aggression. Israel has repeatedly been 23. Therefore, for the benefit of OUP colleagues who feel that thexe should be co-opexation with the United Nations machinesy, 1 would say that we have been coopexating completely; we a11 co-operate with the machinery. But the question should be put differently: is the othex side co-operating with the rnachinery and what is the result of a11 the decisions taken by the machinery? That is the cxux of the problem. 24. This is not the first time that the Israelis have challenged the authority of the machinery in the area. On the Syrian border the Israelis completely ignore the Mixed Armistice Commission; they corne directly ta the Security Council. On the other hand, the Jordan- Isxael Mixed Armistice Commission is functioning, but its decisions are flouted and undermined completely. The Security Counoil requested Issael to discontinue building a hotel in no manls land, yet Israel defied the Seourity Council and completed building a hotel. 25. Here is another case. Mx. President, you and the Secuxity Council decided that Isxael should not start any work in no man’s land, Israel, however, started building a hotel which has now been completed, in no manl s land. Net only this, they published an article in The New York Times entitled-this headline is very important when you oonsider the headline about the challenge and this headline also-“New Israel Hotel Rises in No Man’s Land”. The emphasis is on the challenge, There was a picture of the hotel in the article, a picture of the violation and the pride taken in oommitting this violation. 26. Here is an article which was published in many magazines in the United States to pxomote tourism. Apparently a challenge appeals to Zionibt minds. When one refers to a challenge, it may be helpful fox tourism. This picture is available to a11 my friends who wouid iike to see it. In fact, it cari be circulated if this is desirable. This challenge was intentional; this challenge was deliberate and was designed to appeal to Zionist minds. The same article appeared in many magazines and newspapers to promote tourism. This hotel, the Council may want to know, stands only several hundxed yards-not kilometres but several hundred yards-fxom the main Jexusalem- Bethlehem xoad in Jordan. 7 repeat, it is several hundred yards on no man’s land, in violation of the Council’s decision made here. 27. And we speak about pxovocative statements. How about acts? How about deeds? How about behaviour? 1s there not something called action to reaction, or seaction to an action, when one looks at the acts and deeds which were condemned by this body here? 1 hope we Will have one standard when we decide on this question. 29. The record of Israel in the area is very clear. Every one of the cases 1 mentioned is based on a finding by the proper machinery of the United Nations, This is very important for my friends to ponder. In spite of ail this, Mr. Eban has managed to present Israel as the victim to the Council. He cited sixtyfive cases of so-called attacks by Arab individuals, olaiming that they came from Syria. But did he cite one single finding reached by the Mixed Armistice Commission on any of the so-called attacks? He did not, and he cannot, because no such finding exists. Why did not Israel request a meeting of the Mixed Armistice Commission after such incident? Why did not Israel present evidence to prove any of these cited allegations? In his statement, loaded with concealed threats that the peace of the area is at stake, Mr. Ebsn conceded, in his own words, that while encouraging guerrilla activities against Israel, Syria “reooils from a confrontation of regular forces” [ 130’7thmeeting, para. 221. 30. These are the words of Mr. Eban. One should not wonder any more from where the threat to the peace of the area is ooming. In my procedural intervention, 1 stated that Israel is preparing for still another adventure, and 1 submit that the Israel statement has supplied us with positive proof to this effect. The timing of the Israel complaint and the forthcoming Israel aggression should not corne as a surprise to any impartial observer. 31. The Israel attack on the United Arab Republic in 1956 came in October, on 29 October to be exact, and in an election year in the United States. It seems that in an election year Zionist pressure groups are most active and effective. As a matter of fa&, the whole tragedy of the Palestine problem, the whole trageüy of the Palestine people, Christians and Moslems, was determined in an election year in the United States of America, Indeed, it is a human tragedy that the destiny of those Palestine Arabs, who are still struggling for recognition as a people, was dictated net by the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, not by the ideals of this organ, but by Political expediency, which responded to Zionist pressure groups. 32. It is a fact also that the Israel authorities are in a privileged and unprecedented position of receiving substantial Amerioan tax-exempt donations, on which they depend to a large extent. These donations CannOt continue in such large proportions without 33. We are the victims and we appeal to a11 Governments, and especially to the Government of theunited States, to examine this very issue objectively. 1 keep hearing statements from leading Americanfigures, as regards the sending of arms, that it is ths policy of the United States to keep a balance in armament between Issael and the Arab States. TO me, this is not the solution. Ie does not make sense to keep a balance between Israel and thirteen Arab States. I think it would be something unprecedented, something which is not practical, if an attempt were made to establish a balance in armament between Cuba and the United States of America. 34. This is not a solution, What is needed is a balance of justice. What is needed is not the power ta arm, but the power of morality, to prote& principles, icleals, rights of peoples, which is enshrined in aux own Charter. If we cari proceed in this way and along these lines, we cari certainly find a doos open for a solution, but the answer is not that of keeping a balance between Israel and thirteen Arab States. I do not think this is practical. 35. Much has been said about officia1 Syrian statements of a provocative character. 1 have not yet heard a single statement about those pressure groups which openly speak aboue and champion tbe basic Israsl doctrine calling for a State from the Euphrates to the Nile. The Zionist pressure group organized by some United States citizens which assaulted the Syrian Mission the other day left a paper carrying their motto, “Eretz Israel on both sides of the Jordan”. Jordan is my country, and both sides of the Jordan are part of my homeland. 36. The activities of such pressure groups are subversive, to say the least, and when they start working in friendly countries in the interests of a foreign authority in order to upset friendly relations bstween States, the matter becomes more serious and deserves careful study. 37, I should remind the Council in this connexion of the Lavon affair. There, also, the brains of the IsraeI leaders worked out a plan whereby certain Egyptian citizens of the Jewish faif;h would mine and destroy the United States Information Offices in Caire and Alexandria and other United States installations in that area in order to upset friendly relations with the United States and thus achieve certain changes in United States policy vis-&-vis the Arab States. This iS sabotage; it is not an individual crossing, but the SO-called State itself committing an act of sabotage. 39, I should like to remind the Seourity Council that the presentation of the Israel complaint to theCounci1 here before going to the Mixed Armistice Commission, the fact-finding commission in the area, is in and of itself a violation of the Armistice Agreement. We knOW for a fa& that Israel has been boycotting the Mixed Armistice Commission since 1951. Theydeclare peaCefU1 intentions to the world, on the one hand, and actively wreck the whole armistice maohinery on the other. Yet they are here; they are the complainants and we are the accused. They sit here to argue and cross-examine and appear as the aggrieved party. Al1 the citations on which Mr. Eban built his case indicate that he has been trying desperately to find justification for his allegations. 40. He oited statements made by Syrianofficials, and 1 beg the indulgence of the Council to refer to these oitations made by Mr. Eban. Even the parts of the statements attributed to Syrian officiais do not justify the charge. They refer to Syrian reaetion to Zionist aggressive designs. They state, and this is part of Mr. Eban’s quotation, that “any Israel movement Will result in a final grave for Israel” [1307th meeting, para. 261. The term which should not be overlooked is “Israel movement”. The second quotation referring to Israel states, in part: “We are constantly ready to act . . . inside Israel in order to defend our people and ils honour. We shall mobilize volunteers and we shall give them arms.” [Ibb,, para. 27.1 Here again, the words which should be emphasized are “in order to defend our people”. In a third quotation cited by Mr. Eban, the words 1 should like to emphasize are these: “the Syrian revolution , . , ever seady to meet and chase aggressionfl. The quotation continued: “Our objective in a11 the coming instances Will be to strike at the positions of aggression within the occupied territory.” II.., para. 28.1 41. We cari remember the recent air attack of the Israel Air Force against Syria. Here, again, SYria is referring to aggression, and although thequotations were taken out of context, even the parts quoted by Mr. Fban have a defensive character and reaction to Israel aggression. 1 would cal1 the Council’s attention to the phrase “positions of aggression”. Quite franklY t in a11 these statements 1 fail to see any reason for the Israel authorities to waste the time of the Council with them. The statements speak of defensive action and serve notice, as indeed they should, Qn the Israel authorities that we will not permit agg: essionon Arab lands, espeoially after the acts of aggression committed against Jordan and against Syria bYthe regular army and by the Air Force of ISrael. 42. It is olear, therefore, that no threat is involved and that no blame could be levelled at the SYrian Government for the so-called individual a& of “Having heaxd the statements of the representatives of Israel, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Syrian Arab Republic , . .“. 44. Mr. President, you know, and 1 think a11 my colleagues around this table know, that this is the first time that 1 take th-e floor to present the stand of my delegation on the substance of this complaint before the Council. Perhaps it is a privilege sometimes, in this responsible organ of theUnitedNations, to speak on issues before receiving the findings and the facts from the United Nations machinery in the area involved. But 1 submit that members of the Security Council who axe listed to speak on a given matter are entitled to have the courtesy of a hearing before any action of a serious nature is taken on such matter. CertainIy 1 abject to a paragraph in any draft resolution prepared by a responsible Security Council member which starts with the wosds “Having heard the statement of the representative of Jordan” before the representative of Jordan has even been heard. Everyone knows that until I started this present statement 1 had not made any statement on the substance of this question. 45. 1 know of no precedent for this practioe in the annals of the Security Council, and 1 must say that 1 am concerned and distressed. I do regret what has been going on in this matter and 1 shall have more to say on it later. At this stage 1 simply would like to say that the integrity of many United Nations organs is in jeopardy these days. We a11 know the recent attitude of the International Court of Justice vis-a-vis the question of South West Africa, and it is against this background that we feel compelled to cal1 for the protection of the integrity of the highest organ of the United Nations, the Secuxity Council. Not only is it our duty to observe normalrules of parliamentary couxtesy but we must also give equal attention to the merits of the case-every case. 46. The General Armistice Agreement provided for the machinery to be utilized in the area, and the Security Cauncil should not-and cannot, even if it wanted to-side-step that machinery. If Israel’s objective today is to frustrate United Nations arrangements, the Council is duty bound to protect the effectiveness of the Mixed Armistice Commission. We were happy 47. The representative of Syria oontinued to maintain, on behalf of his Government, their continued cooperation with this body. Indeed, the record of the Security Council is clear on this. On the other hand, during the 1309th meeting Mr. Comay gave qualified acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Mixed Armistice Commission, But 1 submit, it is not up to Mr. Comay to decide the competence of that body. The Mixed Armistice Commission is the body to determine its own jurisdiotion and competence. 48. Israel tries by a11 possible means to make its expansion an established fact. I will not enter into the details of the expansionist plans, starting with a national home, then a State, thena bigger State through aggsession and expansion, then an attempt to annex the demilitarized zone and claim sovereignty over it, then diverting the Jordan River, and SO on. The whole picture is. one of acquisition by force of more and more territory. 49. The report submitted on the demilitarized zone and defensive areas [S/7561/Rev.l] does not caver a11 that the Security Council is entitled to know. We want to know the status of the demilitarized zone. 1s it still as defined by the Armistice Agreement? Has there been any encroachment on the demilitarized zone in the area, and if SO, where does it corne from? In order to have a complete picture, 1 hereby formally request that a report on this be presented to the Council. 50, The question of who is co-operating with the Mixed Armistice Commission in the area should also be clarified. Both parties claim that they co-operate, and each party imputes lack of co-operation to the other. 1 request a report from the machinery in the area to clarify this question, to disclose who is co-operating and who is net. The Counoil is entitled to know the truth in order to adopt a deoision based on truth. 51. Before concluding, let me say that even now we keep hearing that only a part of the homeland has been liberated. 1 heard a great deal said here in the Security Counoil that some Syrian statements were provocative. Those Security Council members who are worried about the sentiments of the Israelis have said nothing about Israel statements, plans anddesigns aimed at grabbing the whole of Jordan and annexing it in fulfilment of a Zionist dream. 52. Israel was born of aggression and its intent is to continue on the path of terrorism, invasionandexpansioni Israel is actively urging every Jew to leave his homeland and proceed to Israel, which, according to ZioniSm, belongs only to the Jews and to no one else. perhaps with a11 the aid they are receiving from this CountrY they do not have to worry about sound economic theories. But where are a11 these people going to be absorbed? C ertainly, expansion Will provide the answer 54. This is the crux of the problem. Indeed, we believe that the creation of Issael was most unfortunate for the Jewish people, because in the proclamation of the State of Israel the Provisional Government explicitly claimed that it represented “the self-evident right of the Jewish people to be a nation . . . in its own sovereign State”. ,This has been the teaching of Zionism. 55.Finally, 1 turn to the report [S/7553]. Let me say at the very outset that we have examined the report fairly and constructively and have not found any evidence to support the charge or oomplaint, We are familiar with many Israel attempts to create ambignous situations and then to implicate Arab States, For that purpose they use various means such as acquiring sandals made in Hebron, Jordan, to be used to show fOOtprintS of so-called infiltrators comingfrom JOrdan or Syria; they say that the shoes are Bedouin shoes, Jordanian shoes, made-in-Hebron shoes, and then Mr. Comay cari corne here and claim that the shoes are of Jordanian or Syrian origin. 56. That statement needs corroboration, and here 1 have a quotation from the D% of Major-General Moshe Dayan, who was the Commander of the 1956 ISrael campa@ against Egypt. Here is what he said referring to some Israel crossings: “and that these would wear Bedouin sandals made inHebron”-Jordan -“SO that their footprints would noe be different from 57, These very same sandals can also be usedby the Israelis to mislead footprint traokess. It is nowonder that these footprints, in a11 cases-and I underline the word “ail”-ended within the Israel-oooupied area. We have a precedent, a case in which the United Nations military observers found that the footprint at the scene was the same as the footprint of the shoe whîch the Israel tracker was wearing. 1 cited this case last time as a case in point, where the footprint was the very same as that of the Issael tracker. This was a case of an attempt to mislead the experts and to say, “This is the footprint leading to Jordan”. 58. Thus, no matter how we look at the present complaint-1 say this in a11 fairness-there is no evidence to warrant any finding in favour of Israel. The report refers to two incidents. One took place in the Romema quarter, north-west of Jerusalem, and the other took place in the north of Palestine, south of the armistice demarcation line. 59. It is clear from the report that the complaint on the first charge-and this is again very importantwas submitted against Jordan, not against Syria, to the Mixed Armistice Commission, the machinery in the area. It was examined by the maohinery in the area. On 10 Ootober the Commission decided that there was no conclusive evidence to warrant the charge; the charge was dismissed. Then, on that very same day, we find that the charge was turned against Syria-just getting out of here to be sent there-the very same charge, and the facts were twisted again. And we find the quotation here to justify the oharge against Jordan; thuus the Israel authorities had to shift the charge and point their accusing finger at Syria. It should be recalled that the investigation on the Jordan-Israel demarcation line, which took place at the. request of the Israel authorities, was concluded on 10 October 1966. No evidence to implicate Jordan was found, and it was apparently on that same day-this is very important- 10 Ootober, that the Israelis altered their accusation hem oharging Jordan to chaxging Syria. 60. In a speechdeliveredby theIsraelPrime Minister in Hebrew, in Ramat Gan on the same day, 10 October, here is what Ms. Eshkol had to say. This exposes the whole picture: “Let us not forget the act of sabotage on Priday evening in Jerusalem.” He is referring here to the same act, in Romema, Jerusalem. “The threads and steps lead to Syria.” They were leading to Jordan yesterday; now they are leading to Syriathe very same complaint. On the very same day, after g Moshe Day an, Lrd., 1966), p. 41. Diary of the Sinai Campaign (London, Cox and Wyman 61. In both cases, no trace of incoming or outgoing footprints either from Josdan or from Syria was found. These are the facts, and facts, I submit to the Council, should be the basis for every correct judgement. That is the only way to serve the area; that is the only way net to complicate the situation; that is the only way not to add to the deterioration of the situation in thc area. The Council’s judgement would play a great part if that judgement were based on facts and truth. Clearly, there is no casebefore this Counoil, and the Israel charges should be dismissed.

Ms. President, the Security Council, as you have pointed out, now has before it a draft xesolution submitted by the United Kingdom and the United States oalling for strict observance of the General Armistice Agreement and for the Prevention of terroristic activities across boundaxies in the Middle East. 63. I listened, as I always do, with careful attention to the comments of our colleague, Mr. El-Farra, and with concern to his statement that the draft resolution as submitted had a reference to a statement by him which he had not made. 1 am reassured, however, in looking at the draft as submitted and ciroulated [S/7568] that it contains no such referenoe. Indeed, it could not appropriately do SO. This draft resolution has been carefully worked out . , ,

1 see that the repsesentative of Jordan wishes to speak. i shall ask the representative of the United States to continue and shall give the representative of Jordan an oppostunity of speaking later.

1 have no objeotion if the representative of Jordan wants to make a comment at this point. 1 would welcorne it. 6’1, K never intended to interrupt my United States colleague. But to make myself very clear on this point, 1 was referring to a draft resolution that even reached the Press, a resolution that has been in circulation for the last few days as a first draft. That draft states in its first psragraph: “The Security Council, “Having heard the statements of the represen tatives of Israel, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Syrian Arab Republic, and having , . ,n That has reached the Press, it has reached my area, and it depicts Jordan as if Jordan were the one against whom the complaint is presented. It is unfortunate. 68, 1 raise two points: first, that Jordan is a rnember of the Security Council. There is no complaint against Jordan. There is no sense in spreading rumours or creating any kind of atmosphere in a resolution such as that which in fact brings in Syria. and Jordan as two parties against whom there is a complaint. 69. Secondly, 1 feel it would be only fair and courteous and in the normal acceptable practice of the Council that when things like this take place thought should be given to their seriousness. I have nothing against consultations, But when the whole thing cornes into the open, when it is known everywhere and in every corner of the United Nations, it becomes a little embarrassing to members of the Council and to the Council itself. The representa,tive of Mali did not speak; 1 did not speak; perhaps we may have something to offer; perhaps we may have a contribution to make, It may be helpful to those who are drafting the resolution. We are not against consuiting and drafting, but give other members a chance to make their contribution as responsible members of this body. ‘70. That is a11 1 have to say about this question. 1 am sorry for the interruption which was not intended by me,

1 cal1 on the rcpresentative of tka United States to continue his statement.

The draft resolution which is befose the Council has been carefully worked out through broad consultations during the period since OUI: last meeting on the Israel latter on 20 October. 7% Since the Council hegan its consideration of this issue, further incidents have occurred within the frantiers of Israel which have been organized from heyond its borders, the latest of which has been re- Ported to the Council just this morning. The situation, tkerefore, continues to cause serious concern. 75. In the unfortunate instances where violence does occux, the United States has consistently called for utilization of United Nations machinery on the spot and for recourse to the Security Council as the proper forum for prevention and redress. Implicit in this policy is the concept that when resort is made to the United Nations machinery and to the Security Council the United Nations must take strong and effective action to bring to an end the use of violence, across those frontiers, in any form. 76. The Council should, in our view, express itself clearly and specifically on the matter before itin this and in a11 comparable incidents. We should indeed encourage reliance upon this institution and its agents for the maintenance of peace and thus turn the paxties away from the continuation and extensionof instability in the area, from the use of violence and from the implicit danger of its intensification, 77. That has been a consistent policy of the United States, year in and year out, determined in accordance with our constitutions1 processes by our people at large through a democratically elected Congress and President, and by no other means. I trust that our determined intention to do everything we cari in this Council to contribute to maintaining the peace in the Middle East is shared by a11 members of this Council and that they Will also utilize their influence to that end. The United States and other Governments, in addition to actions in’ the Security Council, have made repeated representations to a11 concerned to that end and have likewise used their influence to counsel moderation and discourage the further use of violence. 78. We would per;evere in the hope that a11 permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Counoil are doing SO as well, and that they Will urge a peaceful course and the prevention of violence to a11 concerned. Indeed, it is our view that the members of the Counoil should stand together for observance by a11 concerned of OUF resolutions, letting the chips fa11 where they may. 79. My Government, along with others, is deeply concexned at the continuing incidents of violence inside the frontier of Israel and at the oasualties and loss of life which have resulted, which is the subject of the instant complaint, just as we have demonstrated aux concern with violence and 108s of life which has occurred in Arab countriés when that has been the subject of the complaint. 81, As 1 pointed out in my previous statement’to the Council, the presence on Syrian soi1 of the organization responsible for many of the recent incidents is also an announced fact, and an established and unchallenged one, It is also apparent fxom the many broadcasts of communiqu& of that organization and from statements of Syrian government leaders that its illegal and dangerous activities cannot have been undertaken on SO extensive a level without the knowledge of the Syrian Government. Its attention also was drawn to that organization and its activities by members of this Council during our meetings this summer. 82. Members Will, 1 believe, consequently agree with the fact that the draft resolution should deplore those incidents, in the first operative paragraph, and that it should also remind the Government of Syria of its obligations in that connexion. The draft might well have drawn on the language of last year’s widely supported General Assembly resolution 2131 (XX) on non-intervention, the implementation of which appears as item 96 on the agenda of the twenty-first session Of the General Assembly. A relevant passage of that resolution states: n a** no State shall organize, assist, foment, finance, incite or tolerate subversive, terrorist or armed activities directed towards the violent cverthrow of the r6gime of another State, or interfere in civil strife in another State.” 83. While suoh a statement would have been appro- Priate in this draft resolution, the text presented rests upon an obligation which is more formal: the General Armistice Agreement. This obligation is exqressed in operative paragraph 2, which reminds SYria ta fulfil its obligations by taking a11 measures ~CI Prevent the use of its territory as a base of operatien for acts constituting a violation of the Armistice Agraament. This is an essential point of this draft resolution, and it is highly important that it be acted upon. 84. The draft resolution also calls for strict adharence to the Israel-Syrian General Armistice Agreement and urges full co-opesation by the Governments 85. Paragraph 6 of the draft urges the Secretary- General to follow the implementation of the resolution and to seek ways to ab;ist in the effective fulfilment of the resolution’s intent to prevent further violence in the area. 86. Another significant element in the draft resolution, suggested by others in the broad consultations which have taken place, is operative paragraph 5, expressing the Council’s intention to consider further as soon as possible in the interest of the promotion of lasting peace in the Middle East what steps could be taken on the broader question of Arab-Israel relations, That indeed has been a very constructive contribution to the text of the draft resolution, for, as has been rightly observed, this is an important part of the work of our Organization: the task of peaceful settlement. As the Secretary-General observed in the Introduction to his annual report to the General Assembly, 3/ too often we have been concerned in our resolutions only with controlling the manifestations of a dispute and establishing, where necessary, bodies or forces charged with observing or keeping the peace; we need also to turn our attention to the sources of the problems. The draft resolution accordingly includes that element. The United States is fully committed to ensuring peaceful conditions in the Middle East and would welcome such an examination. 87. The concern of my Government and the concern of the other Governments represented in this Council is an objective one. It is that peace be preserved in the Middle East. That will require, first of all, the exercise of responsibility and restraint by a11 the Governments in the area. Our responsibility here is to encourage suoh restraint and to encourage action to prevent violence which cari engender answering violence, The draft resolution, with its emphasis on restraint, its concern for peace and its recognition of the broader unresolved question which forces of violence are currently exploiting, is an important and appropriate expression of what needs to be said and said promptly and decisively by the Council. 1 trust that this text of the draft resolution will receive widespread support in the Council. 3/ Sec Officia1 Re tords of the General Assembly, Twenty-first Session, Supplement No. 1A. 89, In my two main statements concerning the incidents between Syria and Israel, 1 was at pains to emphasize my regard for both countries and to deplore the differences dividing them, Without drawing misleading or gratuitous conclusions, no one cari pretend that my statements could be interpreted as partial to one or other of the parties invoived. When judges uphold or reject the suits of litigants, they do not seek to favour or injure them, as the oase may be, but limit themselves to dispensing justice. Although this may be the noblest social duty, it is also the most difficult. TO be just is not only difficult, it is also a bitter and, painful task and honest feelings are commonly injured inadvertently. It also happens that olear thoughts give rise to mistaken or tendentious cgnclusions. The kind of sui generis justice which we as members of the Council have to dispense is complicated because political realities and strongfeelings interfere with the legal oonsiderations, depriving them of their true value and introducing other faotors which militate against good judgement and are incompatible with the wisest solutions. As if that were not enough, protests are lodged, critioisms are voiced and intentions are prejudged. The disoharge of one’s duty entails a11 these consequenoes. We should not be worthy of taking OUF places here if we forgot the great responsihllities involved in representing the international community. The powers vested in us justify a11 the anxiety and sorrow which their exercise may bring. 90. I regret that my views on some matters do net coincide with those of the representative of Jordan. Nevertheless, the differences between us are justifiable, Unlike myself, he is a combatant in this fight between Arabs and Israelis and it is understandable that Jordan should speak with feeling, passion and even partiality. The problem of Palestine has elements Which are somehow special, as old as time but ever new; which make it unique among a11 the problems besetting the United Nations. Apart from the faCtS, incidents ,and clashes, of greater or lesser severity and importanoe, which have been, and continue to be, brought to the attention of the Council, there is a series of factors underlying thie unending chain Of events which, although it does not explain each PartioUlar incident, reflects the continuous presenoe of latent causes, which are all-pervading, oonoealed and, 1 ‘would even say, primaeval. These trace their origins back to the mysterious and distant darkness 91. This series of causes continues to exert its influence as if mankind had’stood still since the time of the apostolic prophecies. If such psychological and political attitudes were to be found in most countries today, they might well give rise to claims of such proportions that the map of the world would have to be changed completely, even to the detriment of those who started the process. 92. This whole pattern of racial differences, religious struggles, political oonflicts, territorial claims, economic rivalries, persona1 hatreds and SO forth, which has existed since the dawn of history andcasts a dark shadow over the future, is the source of Palestine’s incurable illness, whose periodic symptoms are the frontier incidents which then lead to the reports of General Bull, the constant tension in the organization set up in 1949 to ensure peace between the Arabs and Israelis and the frantic efforts of the SecurityCouncil to reconcile men who have turned their gaze backwards, refusing to contemplate this new world bssed on unity, co-operation and the rejection of violence, 93. Unhappily, this vast and chaotic combination of emotive factors, ancient but still powerful, renascent but still deeply-rooted, has become a kind of impregnable fortress which psevents those inside from realizing the soundness of the arguments inspiring us outside with the best of intentions. IvIr. El-Farra speaks well, but he speaks as an Arab, and his voice, his feeling and bis vehemence reflect the Arab position. When 1 speak, it is not as a member of a geographical region or any particular race; it is as a member of the international community , founded on law and peace. Nevertheless, 1 am not unaware of the political realities or the demands whioh these impose, although they sometimes imply solutions which conflict with theoretioal principles. 94. We have travelled over a great deal of ground and we know Chat the dust of the road sullies our garments. But that does not matter. The main thing is that our SOU~S should remain unsullied. 95. Our position is objective, impartial and fair. We stand by ous two main statements: that made at the 1293rd meeting and that made at the 1308th meeting on this question. Yet we cannot approach the unending struggle between Arabs and Israelis with the same psychology and reasoning which guides them. It is obvious that the Uruguayan point of view cannotbe the same as that of the Israelis or the Arabs. We are not defending interests or positions of any kind. We are sitting in judgement on problems which concern fraternal peoples and may endanger world peace. We do not see the Near East and Middle East iri. Che same light as do the inhabitants of that geograph.en.1 region 96. That does not prevent our feeling compassion and sorrow on witnessing the sufferings and distress of those peoples, whose age-old civilizations should guide them to a better destiny. We want peace in Palestine, It is not our aim to point the finger of guilt, but to pave the way to understanding and coexistence under law. We are hostile to no one. We state the truth as we see it and face a11 the consequences which that may detail. We are sorry that the power of legal argument should cause offence, but when the law points to a course of action, we would be unworthy of our university training if we did not follow it. By SO doing, we believe we are contributing to just and durable solutions. 97, We think that Mr. El-Farra, the representative of Jordan, is mistaken in his reference to us. Benavente, one of the greatest Spanish thinkers, said: “The enemy only begins to be fearsome when he begins to be right.” There are two reasons why MI’. El-Farra is not fearsome to me: first, because he is not my enemy, and secondly, because his remarks about me are incorrect. 98. Since 1 have thus replied to the indirect and elegant reference to me by the representative of Jordan conoerning the passages in my speech dealing with statements broadcast by Radio Damascus and certain serious statements by members of the Syrian Government, 1 request that it be understood that 1 reserve the right to speak on the substance of the question after a11 the other members of the Council have spoken, and after consideration of the two latest incidents brought to the attention of the Council at today’s meeting, the one raised verbally by the Jordanian representative and the other raised by the representative of Israel and circulated as a Counoil document.

At this stage 1 should like to tel1 the Security Council how 1 think we might proceed with this debate. Several representatives have expressed a desire to speak. 1 think that it would probably be best to invite two more representatives to address the Council this morning and then continue Our consideration of this matter this afternoon, after the closed meeting that has already been arranged. 1 do not think that there will be enough time this morning to hear more than two speakers, 101. Mx. ADEBO (Nigeria): 1 am not indisagreement with youx proposa1 in principle, Mr. PxeSident. I mexely wish to give notice that, because the African members of the Secuxity Council work together, the representatives of Nigeria and Uganda Will wish to say a few words after the statement of the representative of Mali and before this meeting is adjourned. That Will not take very much of the Council’s time.

1 am sure that the Council Will agree that if the comments to be made at this stage by the representatives of Nigeria and Uganda are brief we should certainly hear them before we adjourn until this afternoon. With the agreement of the Council, we shall therefoxe proceed in that way.

My delegation is pleased to be in a position to note at the outset of this brief intervention that the draft resolution [S/7568] introduced today by the representative of the United States, in the name of his Government and that of the United Kingdom, is not the produot of any one member or group of members. It results from the joint efforts of a number of Council members xepreseuting a wide range of regional backgrounds. It is an expression of the overridingpreoccupation of these members-and of a11 members, one hopes-that, notwithstanding theix distinctive approaches to the question under consideration, peace shall not be distuxbed. 104. While it reoognizes in its operative paragraph5 that thexe is a. broader, persistent problem which cannot be ignored-and thus reflects the views put before us in the thoughtful statement by the representative of Nigeria at the 1309th meeting-the draft resolution emphasizes the concern of Council membexs that continuation of incidents such as those bxought before the Council constitutes an inherently dangerous situation, It is therefore necessary to stress, as is done in the draft resolution, that in such a situation there axe obligations, stemming both from the Charter and, even moxe specifically, from the General Armistice Agreement negotiated by the parties under the auspices of the Security Council, which must be fulfilled and strictly adhered to. 105. The draft resolution also acknowledges that the path of practical wisdom, if both parties are intent on ensuxing effective implementation of the General Armistice Agreement, lies in full cooperation with the United Nations machinery in the area and tht Mixed Armistice Commission, as urged by my delegation and by many others during discussions both in July and at the current series of meetings. It is our hope that the various provisions included in operative paragraph 6 and in operative paragraph 4, which attempts inter alia to meet certain of the points made by the representative of Uganda 106. Finally, let me emphaqize that the draR resolution, in the view of my delegation, is an essentially fair one, applying a single standard to a complex situation and compose.d, not in a spirit of recriminatien, much less of retrïbution, but with a sober awsreness that the responsibilities involved are not simply those for what has already occurred but, more important, are responsibilities for what should not be allowed to occur-and perhaps assume more serious proportions-in the future. 107. Mr. KEITA (Mali) [translated from French]: If I have understood oorrectly, I am to be the last speaker this morning, except for the brief comments which my African brothers are to make on this ques-. tien. 1 would like, first, therefore, to thank my colleagues for kindly allowing me to speak now, although’their names were before mine on the list. 108, 1 regret that my first duty as a participant in this discussion must be to bring up once more the unfortunate incident which took place at the Syrian Mission at mid-dsy on Priday, 14 October. My delegation, which represents a Young and small country, still thinks that it is at a good sc?.ool when it sits side by side with the grest Powers st this table; some of them have left with us concepts for which we cari rightly be thankful. Nevertheless, whatever the oolours and concepts of ail concerned may be, we in Mali are aware that we are, first and fosemost, only men, and that evil and wickedness are not the exclusive domain of any one people, whether it be a civilized one or a so-called primitive one. While not wishing to find excuses for it, we cari understand the reason for the incident which 1 have just mentioned, for, according to my information, if 1 am not mistaken, while the total population of Israel is 2,268,000, there are over 5.6 million Jews living in the United States, more than 2 million of them in New York City alone. 109. We note the solemn statement made at the 1307th meeting of the Council by the United States representative, and we continue-I repeat continueto have full confidence in the United States authorities, in the conviction that, despite the statistics 1 have just quoted, and whatever problems may be on the United Nations agenda, the various groups in the United States Will continue to respect the missions accredited here and to maintain that warm atmosphere of hospitality of which they may rightly be proud. 110. Turning back to the subject before us, 1 must say right away, unfortunately, that the Council seems ta have become SO accustomed to the Palestine problem that we now have the following situation: instead of eradicating the true causes of a malignant gangrene, which a11 of us know, the Council confines itself to Supporting whichever of the parties submits its case to it first. 112. What is, in fact, the issue? In the view of my delegation, it cannot really be for the Council to discuss Complai&s from Israel and Syria yet again. The real issue-and 1 stress this point with a11 the objectivity that it demands-is the psoblem of the Palestine Arabs. It Will be remembered that, during our last debate on the question, as at a11 our previous meetings, the delegation of Mali stressed, as it has always done, that this problem cari be solved only when it is finally agreed, at the United Nations level, to broach the real substance of the matter. 113. 1 am grateful to our brother, Mr. Baroody, who, in two brief meetings, has managed, in a masterly fashion, to increase the knowledge of a11 of us with the valuable and, I think, very objective details he has given us. As has been made clear, it is not a question of racism nor of anti-Jewish attitudes or behaviour. The proof of this is that every member sitting at this table numbers, among his persona1 acquaintanoes, Jews who are not the least regarded of his friends. In our opinion, a Jew is nothing more or less than a man like you, Mr. President, and me. 114. Our main concern must be, therefore, to avoid any misrepresentation of the problem. In our opinion, we have here a colonial situation which has been created by the imperialist Powers. For what reason 1 do not know, unless it was in order to create in that part of the world an interna1 hotbed of tension, conflict and war. Must the situation remain thus? Would those who today are ready to commend Israel for havingperhaps even on their advice-brought the matter precipitately before the Security Council, be equally ready with their support if tomorrow, by some unfortunate turn of events, Syria, instead of Israel, was the first to bring the matter to its attention? 115. Our friend Mr. Baroody has toldus here that the Arabs have never been animated by any xacistfeelings towards the Jews. He has shown that they are brothers and cousins, 1 wish, on behalf of my Government, to stress to the Council that we are guided in our discussion of this question only by the principles of objectivity and justice, It is thus that we have arrived a.t the conclusion that this problem Will neverrepeat, never-be resolved SO long as the Arabs who have been driven from their native soi1 are not allowed to return to the land of their ancestors. 116. Everyone knows too that the Jews of Israel cari and must live side by side with the native Arab population of Palestine. They are a11 brothers, as Mr. Baroody has stated in this Council. We findit difficult to understand, or rather we fail entirely to understand, how here, at the United Nations, where our main objectives are peace, seourity, decolonization and development of every kind, it is still possible to turn a ‘deaf eas to the heart-rending cries of millions of 118. I stated in the Security Council on 29 July 1966: “In my delegation’s view, the community of nations assumed a particularly heavy responsibility some twenty years ago in creating the situation whîch now prevails in that part of the Middle East. The tragic balance-sheet of the approval of the Balfour Declaration cari only become worse SO long as men of peace do not succeed in finding a final, just and equitable solution to the problem of the deplorable fate of the Palestine refugees. For it must be remembered that over 1 million human beings forced to leave their homeland cannot continue to live on international charity for ever. It would be vain to hope for any stability in that region SO long as that crucial problem has noe been adequately solved by the return of the expatrîated Arabs to their homes, which they were forced to abandon, sometimes l.eaving ail their possesslgns behind.” [1292ndmeeting, para, 12.1 119. Which of the countries represented at this table would happily accept being driven from îts territory and left with no hope, nothing but resignation? 1 admit frankly that to my delegation such a thing seems unthinkable. We take this opportunity, parsdoxical as that may seem, to pay a tribute to something which is often purposely overlooked: the fraternal hospitality accorded to the Palestine reffigees by the neighbouring Arab countries. Everyone here is, 1 am sure, aware of a11 the difficulties and consequences entailed by such humanitarian, but also extremely delicate and complex hospitality. 120. 1 should like, at this point, to xead to the Council an article which appeared in one of the leading newspapers of a country which 1 readily term great, because of its philosophy of wise neutrality. 1 am speaking of the Journal de Gen&ve, and specififically of NO. 247 of Saturday and Sunday, 22 and 23 April, Pages 1 and 5. 1 may add that the article which 1 am about to read was written by a leading journalist, who is ah on the staff of Le Monde, If; may be said that Le Monde is to the French-speaking world what The New York Times is to the English-speaking, I-Iere then is the article, which is entitled nTheCommandos of the Palestine Patriots”. “The situation in the Near East is explosive, The Palehtinians, who consider that Israel has robbed them of their homeland, are setting up commando units, which fxighten the Jewish State more than a whole army. That is because, first, commandos are the forerunners of guerrillas, which are almost impossible to stamp out; and, secondly, because El-Assefa, the organization of Palestine patriots, apparentlyn-and 1 stress this-“takes orders from “It would be possible to make a11 kinds of SPeculations, to txy to xead the thoughts of the Pentagon and predict the outcome of the ideological COnfliCt among the promotexs of the cultural revolution in Peking and to give a11 sorts of advice t0 MOSCOW, London and Paris; but one would still be left with the need for a moderate and objective analysis of the situation as it is, at whatever level one approaches it. “The situation now is not the Arab armies’ thseat to tthrow the Zionists into the sea’, nor the projects for diverting the Jordan waters, nor even reconsideration of the United Nations partition plan or the repatriation of Palestine refugees. Al1 these questions, which have been debated for SO long by the gxeat Powers, have today been superseded. ‘The Damascus Sawra summed up the situation in a few words: ‘One stick of dynamite is worth a11 the summit resolutions put together’. “As things stand at present, it is the fedayeen of El-Assefa that oonstitute-to use a legal texm-the immediate and determining cause of this conflict which may well degenerate into full-scale war. We had a foretaste of that in 1956, when an attack on the inner suburbs of Tel Aviv by commandos from Egypt wasusedby Israel to justify its Sinai oampaign. “That the Jewish State should be more frightened of a commando unit than of a whole army is in no way surpxising. Commandos are the foxexunnexs of a guexxilla force, which is impossible to contain” -and 1 wish to stress this also-“or to put down. It is also the surest means for the Palestinians to keep the Arab countxies and international organs con- Stantly aware of their presence, and above all, to prevent their case fxom being filed away in the archives of oblivion. El-Assefa is nothing more nox 1esS than a violent response to the failure of the hrab summits, whose ‘secret andpublic’ resolutions recall the equally ludicrous pxonouncements of the COnfWCxXes of Bloudane and Alexandria which pxeceded the Palestine disastex. El-Assefa is, in short, a living and positive expression of the Palestinian peopls, who are resolved to fight and die in oxder to regain their usurped homeland. “k3Xad CannOt imagine any greater threat to its SeWXity and its future. It is thus naiuxal that it should react SO VigOxOUSly in ordex tO nip in the bud what El-Assefa represents:. ‘The revolt of the Palestinian people’. 121. 1 am sure 1 will be excused for reading out this whole article from a newspaper which is generally regarded as one of the most serious ones and which is published in a country 1 have termed great because of its philosophy of wise neutrality. 1 hope that this artiole from the pen of a journalist who is also on the staff of Le Monde-and 1 repeat that Le Monde is to us what The New York Times is to the Englishspeaking peoples-will help to make clear what 1 really wished to convey to the Council. 122. My delegation honestly believes that whatever incidents have occurred, we cannot fail to appreciate the praise due to countries like Syria, which did not abandon men, women and children who had been stripped of a11 their possessions and reduced to the status of pariahs, but agreed to give them temporary asylum, 123. Everyone here knows that Israel is militarily very strong. I repeat, militarily very strong. That is evident from the following elementary data. FirstlY, we know that this people supplies eminent scientists to a11 the Powers in the field of nuclear and other research. I Will even go SO far as to say that pure knowledge, advanced scientific knowledge, seems to be a natural gift of this people. Secondly, everyone knows and understands the feeling which impels every human being to safeguard and maintain at any price and against any odds what he himself has created. 126. The multiplication of rmpervisoxy and investigatory commissions, and SO foxth, to which we have gxown accustomed here and which have been made necessaxy by the circumstances, serves only, in my delegation’s opinion, to cxeate fresh burdens for the United Nations, and it would be bettex if the United Nations did not find suoh M@asures necessary. 127. On behalf of my Govexnment, 1 wish to stress once moxe that the problem which concerns us will be solved only when the- Palestine Arabs’ elementary human right to xeturn to & land of their ancestoxs and determine their own .future is recognized and granted. Othexwise, I am forced to the conclusion that, SO far as Palestine is concerned, in spite of the presence in that xegion of our adhoc Mixed Armistice Commission-to whose dedication a sincexe tribute is due-a11 our efforts Will fail to pxoduce any positive xesults because we shall have to continue to meet here to discuss bloodshed and suffering inthat region. 128. Allow me now to read out a passage from the statement of the Foxeign Minister of Mali in the genexal debate at the twenty-fixst session of the General Assembly, on 14 Octobex 1966. 1 hope that this will help everyone, if this is necessaxy, to understand cleaxly my Govexnment’s position on the problem befoxe the Council: “Since the beginning of this yeax, the Republic of Mali has had the honour of sitting on the Secuxity Counoil, the orgsn charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. My oountxy appxeclates the full weight of the responsibility and the confidence which its bxoth.ex States and fxiends have placed upon it in these circumstances. Oux brief experience of the woxk of this body has been enough to show us how certain particularly explosive situations, as fox exampïe that in Palestine, persist. “We know how this txagedy began. The fate of the Arab people of Palestine is unjust and intolexable. Indeed, it is impossible to xemain any longer imperviot:s to the fact that a million and half human beings continue, aftex neaxly two decades, to live outside tbeix country. The Arab refugees from Palestine must xeturn to theix homes and to the land of theix foxefathexs. This is an inalienable right which cannot be ignored indefinitely. The peace and stability of the entixe Middle East axe at st.ake. The Government of the Republic of Mali, which has often displayed its sympathy for these people foxced into exile, once again reaffixms its unswerving support fox theix oouxageous efforts in 130. We feel that if the Council continues tu confine itself to isolated studies, which is what has been done SO far with regard to this crucial problem, the outcome will only be to make thequestionof Palestine or lsrael a permanent item on the agenda of the Security Council and other organs of the United Nations, 131. At this stage of the debate, therefore, in view of the foregoing and in view of the tension in the region and the Security Councilfs peace-keeping responsibility, 1 venture, on behalf of my Afrioan CQlleagues, to suggest that, in our humble opinion, it would be more constructive and effective, in the circumstances, if the Council showed its customary wisdom by coming to a consensus instead. With this enti in view, Mr. President, I should like, on behalf of the African group in the Council, to suggest that the present debate be adjourned in order to allow Us to hold broader consultations. 132, 1 am sorry if 1 have spoken at some length, but I wished to state offioially before the Council the consfderations which have guided the Afxican group privileged to be represented here. 1 should like further to suggest that, with a view to creating in the regiOn conditions favourable to a relaxation of tension and an atmosphere more conducive to Peace, the Coun- Cil might ask the parties concerned to give appropriate guarantees, 133, The PRESIDENT: 1 would again like to COnSUlt the Council on the procedure which we should follow. I bave reoeived requests from four delegations represented here to make short comment& and 1 ProPose to cal1 on them on the understanding that these would be short comments rather than a main speech that we would be asked to hear. 1 had in mind that, following the olosed meeting which is called for 3 O’CIock this afternoon, we should resume OUF 4/ecord.s of the General Assembly, ‘DfenQ’ -first Session. Pleaary Meetings, 1443rd meeting, parns. 134 and 135. “Outsiders to the United Nations sometimes are worried that we are always looking for a consensus in most of the things we do. They wonder why, having assured yourself of a majority of Council members or of Assembly Members, you do not just proceed with a resolution-push it through the organ concerned regardless of the result. The reason, of course, is that we do not do anything here regardless of the result. The reason is that the most important thing from the point of view of any of us is that result. And it is for that reason that 1 submit to this Council that we should strive for a possible consensus in this Council concerning the manner in which we should proceed in order that the decision we take may carry the greatest weight, may attract the greatest amount of co-operation from a11 sides and in that way be effective for the purpose we have in mind.” [1298th meeting, para. 67.1 135. We are supporting the representative of Mali in the proposa1 at present before the Counoil without prejudice to the attitude which any member of the Council may eventually take on the draft resolution before it, if it cornes to be voted upon. 136. We wish to appeal to everybody to go into these consultations that we suggest with the intention of making the utmost contribution to these consultations and with a view to getting not something that is just a consensus, but something that is a wosth-while consensus that Will have the effect that we a11 desire in the troubled situation in the Middle East nowfacing us. 13’7. Mr. KIRONDE (Uganda): 1 have already made my statement before the Council and I do not intend at this stage to addto or modify what I said previously, But if 1 may, I wish to associate myself with the proposa1 that has been put before the Council for an adjournment, durlng which time an opportunity should be provided for Council members to consult with a view to reaching a consensus. 1 am one of those who believe that the most important thing is to produce a way out, a solution to the problem; and 1 believe that if we could reach a consensus acceptable either to a11 members or at least to agreat number of them, much Will have boen donc to find a way out of the impasse presented by the situation in the Middle East. 139. My friend and colleague, Mr. Berro, said something about an implied reference to him in what 1 said concerning declarations over Radio Damascus. My speech is there for Mr. Berro to read, 1 was quoting specific statements made by Mr. Eban. 1 am sure 1 never confused Ms. Eban with Mr. Berro. That 1 never did, and if the interpreter gave that wrong impression, 1 cari definitely say that when 1 speak about Ms. Eban 1 mean Mr. Eban. 1 made this point clear-“quote” and “unquote”. 1 said that a11 those quotations on their very face did not justify the charge. They refesred to defensive measures vis-avis aggression, reaction to aggression. That is the first point. 140. The other matter which really disturbedme was to hear Mr. Berro, the judge and jurist, the member of the Security Council, the lawyer, say, right after 1 spoke, that I was not sight. 1 hope that this also was wrongly conveyed to me by the interpreter; at. any rate, 1 prefer to believe this, because 1 know Professor Berro, the judge and lawyer, would give me the benefit of the doubt before passing judgement, would examine the evidence 1 psoduced. 1 intxoduced quotations, indioating them as such, decisions of the Mixed Armistice Commission, findings of the proper authorities of the United Nations, determinations by the machinery in the area, l?or Mr. Berro to tel1 me-if the interpretation came through properly-that 1 am his friend but 1 am not right, 1 think, is to prejudge the thing, and 1 refuse to believe that he, as a judge, had that intention, 141. Mr. BERRO (Uruguay) [translatedfrom Spanish]: 1 merely wish to explain that, when 1 said that the representative of Jordan was mistaken, my remarks referred solely to his xeference to me and not to the other matters with which his statement dealt. At the end of my statement 1 said that 1 would refer to the latter at a later stage, My comments were explicitly and specifically directed to what 1 considered was a reference to my remarks to the Council regardingthe basis of the statements made by Syrian leaders and Radio Damascus, outlining a sort of policy of aggres- Sion, It was to that, and nothing else, that my statement today referred and 1 made that clear. 1 said that bis references to me were incorrect because, even Wposing that I quoted those statements in an abbreviated, distorted or incomplete version, it was because 1 Cook them from Mr, Eban’s speech-and they were net challenged in this chamber-assuming that they were true and quoted in extenso, and that the thought behind them had not been distorted. If. therefore, anyone is to be blamed, it is not me. Ï w& referring to that and nothing else. I said that the Jordanian pepresentative was mistaken in his references to me. I made no comment on the other points which he raised

I wish to make it very olear that nowhere in my statement was there any reference, even by implication, to Mr, Berro. But what is surprising to me is to find the name of Uruguay listed right after Jordan and the United States, even before 1 spoke. Apparently, Ms. Berro was expecting me to refer to his statement and he wanted to answer. I did not refer to Mr. Berro anywhere in my statement, 1 think. His name was inscribed on the list even before 1 spoke. 143. Mr. SEYDOUX (France) [translated from Prench]: I shall confine myself to the request made by my three African colleagues in their statements that fresh consultations should take place between members of the Council. While refraining from any statement on the substance of the problem, 1 wish to support that request and 1 hope that the Council Will act on it. In the view of my delegation, these consultations should not, of course, lead to a prolonged adjournment of the debate, which must be brought to a conclusion in keeping with the Security Council’s responsibilities. 144. Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) [translated from Russian]: 1 shall be very brief. There is a paper before the Security Council which was submitted today as a draft resolution on the question under consideration. Each delegation has, of course, the legal right to submit any draft it wishes for the consideration of the Council. But, speaking on the draft resolution in question, the representative of the United States stressed that the submission of the draft resolution had been preceded by broadconsultations. 145. Of course, we appreciate the relative nature of such a description, but since these were described as “broad consultations among members of the Security C ouncil” , and since our United States colleague only used oryptic language and did not name those with whom these broad consultations took place, we should like to point out that the Soviet delegationdid not participate in these consultations and is in no way associated with the contents of this draft sesolution; indeed, it was not even informed of the substance of this paper until it appeared before us in the form in which it has now been submitted. 146. It is not my intention to go into a detailed analysis of this paper. 1 only wish to say that undue

We have now completed the list of speakers for this morning. 1 would remind the Council that we are, in any event, under an obligation to have a closed meeting of the Council at 3 olclock this afternoon. 1 would propose that thereafter we reassemble, at 4 o’clook, as was suggested, SO that we may hear any other speakers who wish to address us and SO that we may decide on the proposal which has been put forward by the representative of Mali and supported by others this morning. The meeting rose at 1.40 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED United Nations publications may distributors throughout the world. Write to: United Nations, Sales COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS Les publications des Nations Unies sont agences dépositaires du monde entier. ou adressez-vous à: Nations Unies, Seçtion COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES Las publicaciones de las Naciones casas distribuidoras en todas partes dirijase a: Naciones Unidus, Section Litho in U.N. Price: $U.S. 1.00 (or equivalent