S/PV.1353 Security Council

In accordance with the decisions previouslj, taken by the Council, 1 shall now, with the consent of the Council, invite the representatives of Israel, the United Arab Republic, the Syrian Arab Republic, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Tunisia and Libya ta take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber in order to participate without vote in the discussion. At the invitation of the President, Mr. G. Rafael (Israel), Mr. M. A. El Kony (United Arab Republic), Mr. G. J. Tomeh (Syria), Mr. M. H. El-Farra (Jordan), Mr. S. Chammas (Lebanon), Mr. K. Khalaf (Iraq), Mr. A. II: Benhima (Morocco), Mr. J. M. Baroody (Saudi Arabia), Mr, S. Al-Shaheen (Kuwait), Mr. M. Mestiri (Tunisia) and Mr. W. El Bouri (Libya) took the places reserved for them.

Two of the parties directly concerned have asked whether it would be possible for them to be seated at the Council table, since it is very difficult for them to participate in the Council debate when they are not seated at the Council table. 1 would therefore put it to the members of the Council whether we could not seat the three countries directly involved, that is, the United Arab Republic, the Syrian Arab Republic and .Isracl, at the Council table. If there is no objection, 1 shah now invite the representatives of those three. countries to take places at the Council table. As there is no objection, 1 shall take it that it is SO decided. At the invitation of the President, Mr. G. Rafael-(Israel), Mr. M. A. El Kony (United Arab Republic) and Mr., G. J. Tomeh (Syria) took places at the Council table,

Mr. President, while 1 share the view which you have just expressed regarding the seating at this table of representatives who are directly concerned with the question we are discussing, 1 think that it would also be in order to see the representative of Jordan at this table. 1 therefore suggest to you that the representative of Jordan should be given the opportunity of taking a place at the table.

1 have no objection. Does the Council agree that we should also seat the representative ,of Jordan at the Council table? As there is no objection, 1 shall take it that it is SO decided. At the invitation of the President, Mr. M, H. El-Farra (Jordan) took a place at the Council table.

The Council Will now continue its consideration of the three items on its agenda.

In reply to the representative of the Soviet Union 1 would say that first 1 had consultations on one particular matter on which 1 also consulted the representative of the Soviet Union. 1 was Iater asked by one of the -members of the Council whether he could have a little delay, because he wanted to talk with the head of his Government . 9. 1 have on earlier occasions, in accordance with the courtesy that 1 thought 1 owed to the members of the CounciI, granted such delays to other members, including the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republits, and 1 have done SO without informing any member of the reason why 1 had granted the delays.

Mr. President, may 1 say with ail due respect that 1 cannot see any satisfactory grounds for such an inordinate delay. And 1 do not think that your statement tbat you consulted the Soviet representative is very well founded, since it was not you who consulted me but 1 who went to you to protest that a meeting of the Security Council was being delayed at the very time when figbting, was in progress, people were being killed atid cities were being destroyed. Was that not reason enough for me to protest? 11. Further, would you be kind enough to tell us which member of the Security Council it was who was contacting his capital and was therefore responsible for delaying the meeting of the Security Council? 12. The PRE!SIDENT: It is correct that the consultation that 1 had with the representative of the Soviet Union was held at his initiative, since he wanted to talk to me ta protest against the fact that we had not yet started the meeting. However, after 1 had received that protest, we proceeded to discuss another question, on which 1 consulted with the representative of the Soviet Union. 13. 1 .received the request for a short delay from the representative of the United States. As 1 have said, granting such a delay is a courtesy that 1 extend to ail members of 15. We have heard the voice of America enough already, and 1 hope the President will have a voice of his own,

I should like to make it very clear to my distinguished friend and colleague, Ambassador Fedorenko, that 1 am rather proud to be the voice of America. 17. With reference to convening the meeting, 1 sat here this morning while at the request of the Soviet representative many consultations took place. 1 was very anxious that the meeting should start, SO that the Council could adopt a cesse-fire resolution. I was here, and my deputy was here, at 6.30 p.m. for the convening of the meeting, Consultations were taking place, 1 made my telephone cal1 at 7.20 p.m.; it took exactly three minutes.

The Council will now continue its consideration of tbe three items on its agenda. Our last meeting was adjourned at 4.30 p.m. to await confirmation that orders had been issued for the cessation of hostilities and that fighting had actually stopped. Accordingly, 1 shall cal1 first upon the Secretary-General to give the Council the information currently available to him on this important point,

Mr. President, immediately after the adjournment of the Security Council meeting this afternoon, 1 sent table communications to the Foreign Ministers of Israel and Syria. The text of the table is as follows: “Your Excellency, “The Security Council decided at 1525 hours to ask me to seek immediate confirmation that orders bave been issued for the cessation of hostilities and that fighting has actually stopped. Since 1 am required to report back to the Security Council on these points within two hours 1 shall be grateful for your immediate reply. “U Thant” 20. At 5.30 p+m. today 1 received a telephone message from Ambassador Daoudy of the Syrian Arab RepubIic. This oral message was later confirmed by a written communication’ from the Permanent Mission of the Syrian 1 Subsequmtly circulated as document ~/7983. “ 1. Israel forces are still firing at the civilian population in Banias, which is located inside Syrian territory near the northern sector of the armistice line. “2. Israel aircraft are still flying in Syrian skies. “3. Israel helicopters are dropping paratroopers behind Syrian lines in order to carry out sabotage activities. “4. A huge number of tanks and armoured cars are taking positions inside Syrian territory for further offensive. “1 wish to confirm that orders have been given to the Syrian Armed Forces to stop military operations forthwith in accordance with Security Council resolution 235 (1967) of 9 June 1967. “(Signed) George J. TOMEH “Permanent Representative of Syria to the United Nations” 21,. At 6.5 p.m. today, 1 received a persona1 oral message from the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations, Ambassador Rafael; the message was as follows: “1 am instructed by my Government to confirm that the Government of Israel has accepted the cesse-fire resolution f23.5 (1967)J adopted by the Security Council today. Orders for the cessation of hostilities have been issued to the armed forces. 1 wish to assure the Secretary-General that on our part a11 fighting has stopped except for measures of self-defence when we are still being attacked.” 22. At 6.50 p.m. today, 1 received the following second written communication’ from the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic; the text of the communication reads as follows: “Further to my letter No. S/41 of today, 1 wish to draw to your attention that at 6.15 p.m. local New York time, 1 received a telephone cal1 from Damascus informing me that: “1. Israel Air Force has bombarded the Villages of Al-Yaquteh and Al-Ouyun near the town of Fiq inside Syrian territory. “2. At the moment of the telephone conversation with Damascus, namely, at 6.15 p.m. New York time, Israel military aircraft were still overflying Syrian territory. “3. Israel tanks and armoured cars are still being massed inside Syrian territory for further attack. “(Signed) George J. TOMEH “Permanent Represen tative of Syria to the United Nations” “Syria already complied with Security Council demand for immediate cesse-fire but Israelis are at this moment attacking the villages of Al-Yaquteh and Al-Ouyun from the air.. “Ibrahim MAKHOUS ‘Minister for Fore@z Affairs, Syrian Arab Republic” 24. Mr. President, that is the end of my report.

1 thank the Secretary-General for his report. 1 now give the floor to the representative of the United Arab Republic.

The Council has been meeting ail of today to examine the acts of aggression brutally committed by Israel against the Syrian Arab Republic. It adopted a resolution this morning fixing a time limit of two hours for the parties to cesse fire. While the representative of Syria announced the acceptance of his Government of that cesse-fire call, the other party has tried, using one set of words or anot&er, to refrain from specifically stating its acceptance. The Council was supposed to be reconvened by 6.30 p.m. to ascertain whether or not Israel had respected the order which the Cour&l adopted this morning. 27. The Israel representative stated clearly that neither one hour, two hours, nor even five hours, would suit him for giving his answer. Now we know the reasons for a11 these manoeuvres. Only a few hours ago, and during the last meeting of the Security Council, many parts of the United Arab Republic, notably Cairo, came under heavy bombing. This is taking place following the communication of our acceptance of the cesse-fire call, as prescribed by the Security Council in its two resolutions [233 11967) and 234 /1967j adopted on the 6th and 7th of this month, that is to say, after only a few hours. 28. This also is taking place following our compliance with the cesse-fire cal]. And it is taking place at points far away from the front, in fact at points which are very heavily populated. 29. I shall, with your permission, Mr. President, recount the air raids that have taken place only today. Caire was bombed for one hour beginning at 8 p.m. local time. Anshase had two air raids. IsmaiIia had one air raid at 10.40 p.m. local time. The Suez Canal area in general had no less than eight air raids from 12.35 until8 p.m. 30. Between Ismailia and the Delta Road, two civilian buses have been strafed, resulting in twelve kilIed and thirty wounded, a11 civilians, including women and children. One Israel plane was shot down over Ismailia. 32. This is but a new example of the ruthlessness of the Israelis and their utter disregard and violation of the Council’s resolutions. This gives further ample proof to the Council of the evil intentions of Israel. These actions, treacherous as they are, make it incumbent upon the Security Council to discharge its responsibilities and to take the necessary measures which should compel the aggressor to abide by the resolutions of the Council. 33. If, by their intention of continuing air raids on the United Arab Republic, and Cairo in particular, the Israelis and their associates are still entertaining certain dreams of intimidation, we tell them to forget about these dreams. 34. No action will affect the unity of the people of the United Arab Republic in their resolve to stand fïrm behind their leader.

1 now cal1 on the representative of Israel.

Since the Council adjourned, 1 have again been in telephone communication with my Government. 1 am instructed to confirm that the Government of Israel has accepted the cesse-fire resolution adopted by the Security Council today. Orders for the cessation of hostilities have been issued to the armed forces. 1 must also inform the Security Council that at this very moment extremely heavy artillery fire is being directed from Syrian positions against the Israel villages of Ma¶agan, Haon, and Gadot. This shelling is an extension of the shelling which 1 reported to the President this morning and has been going on with increased violence throughout the day. Very heavy damage has been inflicted and there are many casualties. The places which have been under heavy attack are: Susita, B’nei-Tsefat, Cesher Amir, Gonen, Lahavot HaBashan, Shamir and She’ar Yashuv. 37. In some of these villages nearly every building and structure has been destroyed. In spite of this continuing aggression against villages and civilian populations, 1 wish to repeat that orders have been given to the Israel armed forces for the cessation of hostilities. 1 cari assure the Council that on our part a11 fighting has stopped, except for measures of self-defence in places where we are still being attacked. 38. This morning the Syrian representative stated that Damascus had been bombed by Israel aircraft. That statement is false and without any foundation. The representative of the United Arab Republic has just stated that Cairo and other localities in Egypt have today been bombed by Israel aircraft. This is a malicious fabrication. 1 categorically deny it. The spreading of irresponsible and false charges of this kind only aggravates the already tense situation in the Middle East. 40. Mr. BENHIMA (Morocco) (translated frorn Frenchl: l thank you, Mr. President, for having given me the floor and 1 also thank my colleague, the representative of Jordan, for his courtesy in giving me his Seat SO that 1 could make this brief statement. 41. In the second statement he made in the Council, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Israel, referring to tbe resolution which the Council had just adopted and which called upon a11 the parties concerned in the conflict to ceasr: immediately all military activities, said-and 1 shall try to quote his words from memory-“We have heard the representative of Iraq, we have heard the representative 0.F the United Arab Republic, we have heard the representative of Syria, but not one of them told the Council that hi;s Government has accepted the cesse-fire.” Yesterday morning, the representative of the United Arab Republic sent to you, Mr. President, a very clear letter in which hi;s Government informed you that it accepted the Security Council resolution and that consequently it accepted the cesse-fire, This morning, the Syrian representative did likewise. 42. Mr. Eban left New York yesterday for London on his way to Tel-Aviv, no doubt to report to his Government on the debate in the Council. 1 am afraid that he acted somewhat cavalierly in leaving the Council in the middle of the debate, at a time when his presence would have been extremely valuable precisely because new and important events were taking place which the Council wished to know about and about which he himself seemed to wish to obtain some information. 43. This morning 1 received direct instructions from my Sovereign to lodge a protest with the Secretary-General, and with you, Mr. President, against the fact that, despite the announcement by Jordan, the United Arab Republic and Syria that they had accepted the cesse-fire, the Israel land and air forces are continuing to bomb the northern zone of the Canal and Syria. These operations are being conducted on such a scale that they cari hardly be described as the concluding phase of military operations or ascribed to extremely remote units which have not yet received the necessary orders from their Governments to take appropriate steps to put the cesse-fire into effect. 44. On the contrary, these are very intensive aerial attack,s and are being carried out with very large forces. Some people may perhaps be criticized for not having known, or realized, or evaluated the full range of armaments in Israel’,s possession. The surprise achieved by the Israel Air Force and the number of aircraft that have been bombing Syria throughout the day may well raise doubts about the fait11 45. We have heard the Israel Minister of Defence say that, even if the Arab world extended from the Arabian Culf to the Atlantic, they would be ready’ to attack Algiers, Tunis and Casablanca and to occupy these territories. Of course, the Israel Government has very highly deueloped information media and information services which find many echoes abroad; a statement made is denied some time later, SO that we are confronted with a denial, although the statement was made. 46. Th.is attack on Cairo, after the cesse-fïre had been accepted by the Government, is not merely a manifestation of the Israel Government’s stubborn determination to continue its aggression and to achieve certain military, psychological and political objectives, Only yesterday we heard Mr. Eban say that the Council must now turn its attention to the next phase; in other words, he considered that the military objective had been a11 but attained and that a different approach should now be envisaged, SO that he cari sit down at the negotiating table as the undisputed victor with ail the trump cards in his hand. 47. This obstinacy in continuing the hostilities on the scale and with the forces 1 have just mentioned is perhaps an indication that those who are preparing for possible negotiations wish to ensure that on one side of the table there Will be the completely vanquished, with an arrogant Power on the other. 1 am not asking you, Mr. President, to take the place of those who Will have to settle this problem if they feel they must assume the responsibility for doing SO. But, at the risk of repeating myself, 1 should like to say once again that if the Council had taken a firm decision to condemn the aggression at the outset of the crisis, we would certainly not be faced today with the continuance of military activity in ail its forms; this, after the cesse-fire, is a systematic violation of the Security Council resolution and of the decisions taken this morning after Governments parties to the conflict had informed the President of the Security Council that they had accepted the Council’s cal.l for a cesse-fire. 48. Mr. Abba Eban probably felt that there was no reason for him to remain here and that the assurance of irnpunity which he took away with him would enable Mr. Dayan and Mr. Rabin to continue until the Arab people was brought to its knees. 1 consider that President Nasse?s announced decision to resign in order to enable other leaders of his country to take new decisions is the act of a responsible statesman who showed great courage in addressing his people in the speech you have heard. Perhaps the Tel-Aviv Government .thought that, at a time when the Egyptian National Assembly was calling for President Nasser’s retum to the Presidency of the Republic, the Egyptian people and the people of Cairo ought be machine-gunned and cruhed for having taken that decision with regard to a heroic leader. 49. These are the aspects of the problem that we are asking the Council to consider if it wishes to continue with 50. We strongly urge the Council to try to take a bold decision. It has appealed to the opposing countries to stop the fighting. From the Arab side, you have learned of a series of decisions; on the Israel side, we see that the war goes on. Does the Security Council think this is a situation consonant with its decisions, or does it wish to demonstrate to thirteen Members of this Organization and to a11 those who have shown their support for the United Nations and placed their confidence in it, that the Council cari be confronted with a fait accompli at the outset and that the aggressor cari then continue to act with impunity without any reaction from the Council? 5 1. It is this responsibility which, With ail due respect, we ask the Council to assume with the utmost gravity, because the course of events may perhaps surprise us, just as it did at the outset, and we cannot tel1 whether this war, not held in check at the point where it was suspended, may not break out elsewhere.

ML President, the Security Council has been convened for an emergency meeting at the request of the representative’of the United Arab Republic and at the instance of the Soiriet delegation in connexion with a further treacherous attack by Israel on the United Arab Republic, and particularly in connexion witli the bombing Of Cairo, the capital of the United Arab Republic; as well as lsmailia and other inhabited localities. Israel is continuing its aggressive acts against Syria as well, in violation of the decisions which the Council has adopted today. 53. FrOm the statements by the representatives of the’ United Arab Republic and Morocco, and also from the information which we have just heard from the Secret@‘- General, it is abundantly clear that the armed for+ of’, Israel are ‘continuing their crimiLa1 aggression against the Arab States. ., 54. It is quite obvious that Israel is thus defying the Security Council’s resolutions calling for an imm@iate cesse-fire in the, Near East. The new aftacks have been made in spite of the decisions taken by the Couricil on 6 and 7 June [resolutions 233 (1967) ad.234 (1967)] atid also in spite of the demands made by the Council today for an immediate cessation of Israel’s aggresiion [resolution 235 (1967)]. 55. 1s it not treachery that the bombing of Cairo was taking place at the very moment when here, in the Security Council, the representative of Israej, was .making hypocritical statements, trying to delude $h.e members of the Councîl and attempting to distract attention from: the criminal acts of Israel’s .aggressive forces in the Near East? 58, Indeed, there is no limit to the arrogance, hypocrisy and adventurism of Israel’s present leaders. In the course of today alone they have committed crimes against peace and humanity, for which they deserve to be severely punished, The Soviet delegation believes thaf the Security Council cari no longer overlook these acts by Israel, which is violating all principles and rules of international law, trampling upon the Charter of our Organization and deriding and sabotaging Security Council resolutions designed to restore and maintain peace. 59. The Soviet delegation proposes that the Security Council should without delay-at once, in fact-take resolute, energetic and effective measures to ensure Israel’s compliance with the Security Council’s decisions. The Security Council must categorically condemn Israel’s disregard of its decisions; it must demand the immediate cessation of military activities by Israel and warn Tel-Aviv that failure by Israel to comply with the mandatory decisions of the Security Council will have the most serious consequences for the State of Israel, and that the Security Council Will be compelled to use the powers vested in it by the Charter of the United Nations for dealing with cases of this kind. 60. The Soviet delegation believes that it should draw the attention of members of the Council to the following statement issued by the Governments of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, the German Democratic Republic, the Hungarian People’s Republic, the Polish People’s Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on 10 June 1967 (Moscow time): “The participants in the meeting have considered the situation that bas arisen in the Near East in consequence of Israel’s aggression, which is the result of a conspiracy by certain imperialist forces, pa-rticularly the United States of America, against the Arab States. The participants have exchanged views on measures required to put an end to the aggression and avert the dangerous consequences which it might have for world peace. “The participants in the meeting believe that they must draw the appropriate conclusions from the fact that Israel has not complied with the Security Council’s decision and bas net ceased military activities against the Arab States. The occupation of the territory of Arab States by Israel’s forces could be used to re-establîsh foreign colonial rule. “In their struggle against imperialism for freedom, independence, the integrity of their territory and the inalienable sovereign right to settle independently a11 questions relating to their domestic life and foreign policy, the peoples of the Arab countries are fighting for a just cause. The peoples of the socialist countries are entirely on their side. “The peoples of the United Arab Republic and a number of other Arab countries have during the past years won some great historic victories in the conquest of national independence and freedom. Important social reforms have been undertaken in the interest of the working masses. “We are confident that these gains Will be preserved and that the progressive régimes Will be consolidated, in spite of the difficulties facing the Arab peoples. “In this difficult hour for the States of the Arab East, the socialist countries wish to declare their complete and whole-hearted solidarity with the just struggle of the Arab States, and to affirm that they Will assist them in repelling aggression and defending their national independence and territorial integrity. “The States participating in the meeting insist that Israel should forthwith cesse military activities against neighbouring Arab States and withdraw its troops from their territory behind the armistice Line. “The United Nations has a duty to condemn the aggressor. If the Security Council does not take appropriate measures, any States which have failed to discharge their duty as members of the Security Council Will bear a heavy responsibility. “Today, as never before, there is a need for decisive and concerted action by a11 peace-ioving and progressive forces-by all who treasure the cause of freedom and the independence of peoples. “If the Government of Israel does not cesse its agression and withdraw its forces behind the armistice Iine, the socialist states which have signed this statement will take a11 nccessary steps to help the peoples of the Arab countries deliver a decisive rebuff to the aggressor, defend their lawful rights, extinguish the hotbed of war in the Near East and restore peace in this area. “The just struggle of the Arab peoples Will triumph.”

1 call on the representative of Syria. 62. Could we have silence in the Chamber, please?

Mr. President, 1 thank you again for asking the rather disturbing audience in the galleries to keep silent. We know when they become silent and when 65. It would be cumbersome now to recall all the details of those discussions, but he submitted one argument after the other-making his acceptance or the acceptance of his authorities conditional, stressing the words “mutual acceptance” that occurred in resolution 235 (1967), and SO on. One after the other, those arguments were exploded until finally we deemed it sufficient to describe his arguments as “casuistry”; “sophistry” was not enough; “mockery” was the last Word-but it was not strong enough because the real description is beyond that. 66. 1 shah proceed to the specific points. The Secretary- General read out the two letters that 1 had addressed to him [puas. 20 and 22 above] on behalf of my authorities and he also read out to us what was communicated to him by the Israel representative [pura. 21 above]. One point which is a cardinal and crucial one in the Israel answer is worth considering and it is this: that they Will stop firing except for measures of self-defence. 67. Tbrougb you, Mr. President, 1 sbould like to put the following questions, which are based on the points contained in my two letters to the Secretary-General. We say that Israel tanks and armoured cars are still massed inside Syrian territory for further offensive action and attacks. Is that a measure of self-defence? We say that Israel aircraft are up to this moment still flying over Syrian skies. Are these measures of self-defence? We say that Israel helicopters are dropping paratroopers behind Syrian lines inside Syria to carry out sabotage activities. Are these measures of self-defence? 68. It is sufficient for the members of the Council to review one by one the points that 1 mentioned in my letter ta discover that those are not measures of self-defence, that they are measures of clear-tut aggression. The Israel army is inside Syrian territory. It is of course meeting with very stiff resistance. But the fact remains that Israel attacked; the mere fact that Israel forces are inside our territory and that the Israel Air Force is overflying Syrian territory is clear-tut and tangible proof that Israel is attacking and continuing to attack. The sentence which says that they will not fire except as a measure of self-defence is a very false and misleading statement that should not be accepted by this august and respectable body. 69. The Israel representative mentioned a number of villages and settlements which are being attacked, which, according to bis allegations, are being fired upon from the Syrian side. This action is taking place inside the dem.% tarized zone& It is not taking place inside Israel territory. 70. 1 have here a United Press International news dispatch dated today and originating from Jerusalem. With the permission of the President, 1 should like to read it; it says: “A United Nations report said Israel forces had driven fifteen miles inside Syria to the town of Kuneitra, only forty miles south of Damascus on the main highway leading to the capital. A well-informed Israel military source in Jerusalem said tbey believe the Israelis have reached Damascus outskirts.” The report goes on to say: “Israel forces greeted the fall of Nasser with no surprise and made it clear that the drive on Damascus was aimed at overthrowing the left-wing Socialist Ba’ath Party which Israel blames for starting the entire Middle East crisis. Israel radio appeals called on Syrians to rise up against the Syrian Government.” This is the real aim of the massive attack perpetrated by the Israelis on Syria. 71. 1 have just received another telephone caIl from Damascus, the content of which has just been communicated to me; it is as follows: “Columns of tanks and armoured cars from the Israel army have right now entered Syrian territory near the town of Masaba.” 72. Putting aside for the moment the interpretation of why the attack is being perpetrated, there are still all these points which 1 have mentioned: the overflight by the Israel Air Force of Syrian towns and cities-and by the way, Damascus was bombarded and what the Israel representative said is a complete falsehood-the massing of armoured cars, and what 1 have just stated about columns of armoured cars and tanks entering Syrian territory. 73. What is the reason for a11 that? Are these measures of self-defence? The purpose is clear. It is a Jerusalem source which states that the aim is to overthrow the Syrian régime which is SO heartily disliked by the Israel authorities. 74. We have said time and again, and 1 have no hesitation in repeating it now, that Israel is acting on behalf of imperialist Powers whose interests in the area cannot be safe unless and until this staunch régime of Syria, that has been fighting vested imperialist interests, is overthrown. But we are not afraid to defend ourselves against overwhelming forces, which certainIy are not the forces of Israel alone, equipped with ihe latest models of armaments which have corne to them from countries already too well known. 75. But we feel that it is an honour, an honour because we are fighting a battle of the Third World, of the liberation movements in Asia and Africa. The United Arab Republic fought its battle. Jordan alone-where 15,000 civilians and soldiers have been mass-slaughtered by the war criminals of

1 now give the floor to the representative of Israel. 78. Nr. RAFAEL (Israel): The Council has been presented with a motley collection of falsehoods and fabrications. 1 shall try to deal with them one by one. : 79. The representative of Morocco attributed a statement to the Israel Minister of Defence, General Dayan, to the effect, if 1 understood him cofrectly, that Israel intended to occupy the territory from Tunisia to any extent of the Arab world. 1 challenge the representative of Morocco to bring here and now proof of that statement and to produce it to the Council. There wzis no such statement. There cannot be such a statement. He should not corne here and make wild allegations. Let him bring his proof. %“‘, :c 80. The representative of Morocco bas again referred to alleged bombings of Cairo and other localities in Egypt. 1 bave denied these statements as malicious fabrications. 1 have noMr before me a ‘number of news agency dispatches and 1 ‘shall read ‘some of them. The following is from the Agence France-Presse, Cairo: “The air-raids at Cairo stopped at 6.15 pm. Were they Israel raids on Cairo or sharn raids by Egyptian aircraft? No one ,in Cairo cari yet say. The aircraft had their navigation lights, on; the sirens,sounded; anti-aircraft guns were firing. Air-raids on Port Said are also reported.“2 81. 1 have ,a dispatch from United Press International which says: “UP1 correspondents reported that Egyptian antiair’craft batteries had been firing, but the correspondents said ,they could hear no bombs falling in the capital.” 82. I-have befbre me a report from the Associated Press whîch, 1 think, is a most revealing one and perhaps provides a solution to that riddle of alleged Israel bombings. It reads as follows: “Police and soldiers fired grenades into the air Friday night to drive back demonstrating mobs marching on downtown Cairo and a furious anti-aircraft barrage lit up the sky. The Egyptian Ministry of Information said that an air raid was in progress. However, there were no signs 2 Quoted in French by the speaker. 83. The representative of Morocco attributed to my Foreign Minister a certain inaccuracy in reporting the position of the Arab Governments in respect to the cesse-fire resolution. If 1 understood him correctly, the Minister for Foreign Affairs stated, after the United Arab Republic had announced its acceptance of the resolution: “Since the cesse-fire resolution was adopted by the Security Council last night, the representative of Syria has spoken, the representative of Iraq has spoken, the representatîve of the United Arab Republic has spoken. 1 have heard and studied every word that they have said. 1 cannot find in any of those speeches one single sentence saying that ‘We, Syria, we, Iraq, we, the United Arab Republic, welcome and accept the cesse-fire resolution.’ ” [135Oth meeting, para. 46.1 That statement was made on Wednesday, 7 June 1967, at the 1350th meeting of the Council which started at 2.20 p.m., and is reproduced in the Verbatim record of that meeting. 84. The next day, Thursday, 8 June 1967, the Secretary- General informed the Council: “1 have just received the following communication from the Permanent Mission of the United Arab Republic to the United Nations. It is dated 8 June 1967.” [1351st meeting, para. 31.1 That communication goes on to state that Egypt had decided to accept the cesse-fire resolutions on the condition that the other party cesses fire. The Secretary- General’s statement is reproduced in the Verbatim record of the 1351st meeting of the Council. 1 mention this fact not out of pettiness, but merely to show the inaccuracy of the statements made here by Arab representatives. 85. The representative of Syria has made wild allegations of massacres in Jordan. 1 deny that categorically. Me has no proof of what he says. He wants to inflame passions. There will soon be the opportunity to ascertain the falsehood of his statements. 86. However, more interesting was the admission of the representative of Syria that Syrian forces have been shelling and are shelling villages in Israel. That shelling started yesterday afternoon, continued all through the night and îs still continuing right now at this moment. I have informed the Council of the very heavy damage to life and property whîch those artillery botibardments have caused to the villages and the civilian population in Israel. 87. 1 want to repeat again that no Israel aircraft has bombed or is bombing Damascus. I also want to deny categorically that any Israel forces arc advancing towards Damascus. The Israel operations which were begun today were intended, as 1 stated in the Council this afternoon (1352nd meeting] and as 1 infomled the President of the 89. Mr. President, 1 should like to refer to something more grave. I thought that in my previous intervention I might have impressed, or perhaps influenced, the representative of the Soviet Union to think again of what he has said about Israel and his infamous comparison of Israel with Hitler Germany. 1 only wish to say now to the representative of the Soviet Union that 1 still remember when one of his illustrious predecessors defended at the United Nations, with less venom though with similar violence, the charges of his Government that Israel was involved in a doctors’ conspiracy to poison Soviet leaders. 1 also remember very well when only a short while later the Soviet Government decided to withdraw those monstrous charges. I cherish the hope that also in the present case the Soviet Government Will withdraw those false charges which it now advances against the Government of Israel. 90. We have heard now the rnost infamous threats from the Soviet representative, threats to extinguish Israel. They remind me of the language which preceded the events which led up to the trials of Nürnberg.

1 should like to make this statement on the full authority of my Government. 92. The Security Council, with the full support of the United States, has adopted three resolutions calling for and demanding an unconditional cesse-fire between Israel and the Arab States. The United States deems it of the gravest import that the Security Council’s resolutions shall be complied with in letter and spirit by Israel and the Arab countries involved. There has bcen too much bloodshed and loss of life, and it is imperative that this war corne to an end and that a11 Governments involved in this conflict should retum to the urgent task of restoring peace to the Middle East. 93. The policy of my Government with respect to this situation was prophetically stated by the President of the United States on 23 May 1967. It remains the policy of our Government, as 1 indicated when 1 offered our draft resolution for the consideration of the Council yesterday. 1 said: “Speaking for the United States, let me add that our view on a11 these many problems has been stated many times and has not changed.” /1351st meeting, para. 23.1 94. It is perhaps necessary ta recall what the President Of the United States stated on 23 May 1967. He stated: “The Government of the United States is deeply concerned, in particular, with three potentially explosive aspects of the present confrontation. “First, we regret that the General Armistice Agreements have failed to prevent warlike acts from the territory of “Third, we deplore the recent build-up of military forces and believe it a matter of urgent importance to reduce troop concentrations. The status of sensitive areas, as the Secretary-General emphasized in his report to the Security Council, such as the Gaza Strip and Gulf of Aqaba, is a particularly important aspect of the situation.” Nothing could have been more specific than the statement of the President of the United States dealing with this particular situation, 95. And then the President of the United States stated the policy of our Government, which has been a constant policy for twenty years. He stated it in explicit terms, and his statement was not matched by statements by other Governments which might have assured the‘ avoidance of this conflict. He said: <’ “TO the leaders of all the nations of the Near East, 1 wish to say what three Presidents have said before-that the United States is firmly committed to the support of the political independence and territorial integrity of ail the nations of the area. “The United States strongly opposes aggression by anyone in the area, in any form, overt .or clandestine. This has been the policy of the United States led by four Presidents-President Truman, President Eisenhowever, President Kennedy, and myself-as well as the policy of both of our political parties. “The United States has consistently sought, tq have good relations with a11 the States of the Near East. Regrettably, this has not always been possible, but we are convinced that our differences with individual States of the area and their differences with each other must be worked out peacefully and in accordance with accepted international practice.” 96. Those words were not heeded at the time and our efforts to obtain general recognition of their import were not heeded in this Council. They were frustrated by certain members of the Council. But in presenting a draft resolution to the Security Council just yesterday, 1 pointed out that it was essential to our seaxch for peace in the area that our “objective must be a decision by the warring Powers to live in peace and to establish normal relations, as contemplated and pledged by the United Nations Charter” /1351st meeting, para. 211. And 1 said: “Our purpose is to provide for movement towards the final settlement of ail outstanding questions between the parties which the United Nations envisaged nearly twenty years ago”. [Zbicl.] 98. What is imperatively required here are two things which every fair-minded person must recognize. The firstif it cari be done in this Council and if obstructionism Will cesse-is an impartial investigation by the Secretary-General of the allegations which have been made concerning the violation of the cesse-fire orders which all parties that have expressed themselves here-Israel, the United Arab Republit, Jordan and Syria-have alleged; an investigation with adequate machinery to ascertain the state of compliance in the area. Obviously, any group called upon to decide on the conflicting charges and the conflicting statements which have been made would need this in order to make such a decision. 99. The second thing which we imperatively need is adequate machinery for the Secretary-General to implement the cesse-fire resolutions which have been ordered by this Council. 100. Today, both of those requirewents are lacking. Today, both are imperatively required, if we are to do the job that the Council has to do, and if we are to do it, not on the basis of accepting one party’s version as against the version of another, but on the basis of impartial, objective facts established by the most impartial agency we have: the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 101. My country would support those two proposals. My country has been willing to support them throughout this debate, SO that all that we do cari be aone in the interests of maintaining peace in the area. 102. Therefore, 1 make these proposals to the Council SO that it cari act-not on the basis of one-sided adlerence to a point of view, but on the basis of establisher’ facts that satisfy fair-minded men, and also on the basis of what must really be done in a situation as complicated as this. 103. The Secretary-General is lacking the tools to do the job of implementing a cesse-fire resolution, and therefore we Will have what we have had in some other situations; that is, charges and counter-charges, allegations of violations of the cesse-fïre, which we, sitting in New York, thousands of miles from the scene are unable to resolve. 104. Finally, 1 say this: Debate here, accusations here, Will not solve the problem. What will solve the problem is, first, ascertainment of the facts; and second, action on the ground by United Nations machinery to make sure that the cesse-fire is properly implemented. Those are the two ways in which we must proceed. 105. That is the view of my Government and I convey it to the members of the Council. 1Oii. First of all, he said that according to my own admission Syrian forces had been shelling villages inside Israel. That is not true. 1 did not say that. I stick by the statement which 1 made this morning, namely, that we accepted the cesse-fire and cabled the Secretary-General, and that he received our answer at 0036 hours last night. The Syrisn forces had abided by the cesse-fire for ont: complete hour when a barrage of fire started, first in the demilitarized zone and then on a very large scale along tht: line of demarcation between Syria and Israel. 109. The Israel representative said that the Israel operations against Syria, which were begun today, were to silence the Syrian guns. But the operations wlsich 1 have described and which go much beyond “silencing Syrian guns and Syrian positions”, how do they agree with bis statement? 110. Third, the Israel representative did answer two questions. One, he reaffirmed that Israel aircraft did not bombard Damascus. But he did not deny that Israel aircrafit were overflying the skies of Damascus. 111. In my two letters to the Secretary-General, 1 raisedl other questions and other points; 1 must read them again “1. Israel Air Force has bombarded the villages of Al- Yaquteh and Al-Ouyun near the town of Fiq inside Syrian territory.” (Para. 22 above.] 112. At the moment of the telephone conversation that took place between me and Damascus, at 6.15 New York: time, Israel military aimraft was still overflying Lyrian territory. That he did not answer- He also did not answer the following point: that Israel forces are still firing at the civilian population in Banias, which is located inside Syrian territory, near the northern sector of the armistice line- He did not deny the fact that huge armoured columns had already penctrated deep into Syrian rerritory and are massing for an offensive. 113. Now, in the variety of answers that he gave, he triedl to elude all these questions and all these facts- He also did not deny the United Press International report from Jerusalem stating that the Israel radio is appealing to the Syrians to rise up against the Syrian Government. 114. We are still, through you, Mr. President, awaiting an answer. There is aIso the fact which 1 specifically mentioned; namely, that huge amounts of Israel tanks have entered through the village of Massadeh. 1 am sure that the representative of the United Kingdom, to my left, who knows Syria SO well, knows that very place. I am referring to a specific place from which Israel tanks are penetrating into S~rian territory. Will the Israel representative answcr us whether this is correct or not? 115. Now, as long as we are on this point, 1 would not wish to finish my reply without referring to the intervention 116. Why is it that 1 called you at 5.30 this morning,Mr. President, and woke you up from your sleep? Was I going through a phantasmagoric dream, or was I in communication with Damascus, whîch told me of all these facts that 1 related to YOU? And you were kind and gracious enough to cal1 an urgent meeting of the Security Council. Surely, we are not in a dreatn. These are facts. 1 am stating that the Israel forces, in the manner that 1 described specifically and in detail, bave entered Syrian territory. The Israel representative did net, deny that, in spite of a11 the phrases and sentences that we have heard from him. 117. But, Mr. President, 1 feel it my duty again to impress upon you and upon the Council that the situation is very grave and should be dealt with with the gravity and seriousness that it deserves.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Jordan, to whom 1 now give the floor. 119, Mr. EL-FARRA (Jordan): 1 should like at the very outset to express my thanks to my friend and colleague, Mr. Fedorenko, through whosc effort 1 am now particip?.ting in a debate of direct interest to my Government. 120. 1 have listened with interest to the statement just made by Judge Goldberg of the United States. 1 was astonished to hear Judge Goldberg speak about impartial investigation of cesse-Gre orders by the Secretary-General, with adequate machinery. 1 was astonished because 1 was hoping-apparently against hope-that Judge Goldberg would proceed to bring first issues first. I was hoping that Judge Goldberg would ask the Council to establish the facts about the aggression: Who committed the act of aggression now being considered by the Council? Who invaded land and occupied towns and villages, destroyed buildings and killed inhabitants? 121. That 1 thought was the first issue for the Council. If there is an intention to divert the whole question into an inquiry about who violated the cesse-fire resolution adopted by the Council, I am afraid this would be a very unfortunate thitig for the Security Council, the organ created to maintain peace, to help in creating an atmosphere of peace, to condemn the aggressor and invoke a Chapter embodied in the great Charter of the United Nations. 122. I was hoping that Judge Goldberg, a learned J&e, a man of Iaw, would be able to corne here as the representative of a great Member of the United Nations, a responsible Member-and 1 would quote him when 1 say “the greater the Power, the greater the responsibility”[134Znd meeting, para. 13/, those were bis words-and deal with the crux of 123. There is another question. 1 keep hbaring a statement, repeated time and again, that the United States Government is committed to protect the territorial integrity of all nations. 1 keep hearing the words “ail nations”. But when Jordan was invaded, when almost half of the area of Jordan was conquered, when thousands were killed, 1 did not hear anything about this commitment other than a speech in the Council repeating the very same statement: we are committed to ail members of the Middle East, to a11 nations in the Middle East. 124. 1 hate to say this. We are a country friendly to the United States. We have to be careful about the sensitivity of a great Power, because we are a small Member. We have to be careful about choosing our tenns, because we need the support of a11 great Powers. But what is going on cannot be defined or described with sweet words. 125. We are the victims of a crime, a war crime. We would expect the small Members to have.the support of the great Powers; we would expect this because they are great, they are big, they Can afford to play an objective role, a role not dictated by power politics in an election year, a role dictated, rather, by the great values of the great Powers, by the great values of the American people, by the great heritage of the American people, by the great traditions of the American people. 126. 1 regret to say this, but SO far we have heard nothing concerning effective measures, first condemning the ag gressor; second, calling for an irnmediate withdrawal; and third, invoking Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.

Before 1 give the floor to the next speaker on my list, the representative of Israel, 1 would ask the audience to kindly maintain silence; 1 now cal1 on him.

The Syrian representative in his tale of the events has omitted to mention one fact, perhaps of minor importance to him, but decisive for the whole story. Did Syria declare war on Israel or did it not? ‘Il~s is the question. 1 cxpect him to give a clear and unequivocal answer to this question. 129. It was Syria that started the war against Israel. Much has been said about aggression and aggressors. 1 have an article before me, published by a very distinguished and learned jurist, René Cas&, and it reminds me of a number of very important facts in connection with positions taken by various Governments on the question of aggression. With your permission, Mr. President, 1 will read certain extracts from this article in French; the article was published in Le Monde on 3 June 1967; it says: “On 3 January 1952, in the Sixtlt Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations, the Soviet delegation submitted . . . six definitions, four of which referred to armed aggression. In the two others, a State was defined as an attacker State if ‘it instituted a naval “But on 3 October 1957, the delegation of the Soviet Union stated, inter alia, that a State shall be declared to have committed an act of economic aggression which ‘first . . . takes against another State measures of economic pressure violating its sovereignty and economic independence and threatening the bases of its economic life’. “On 14 October 1957 the Syrian delegation gave a mixed type of definition of aggression consisting of a general definition and an enumeration which did not fail to include blockade or ‘the toleration of the use by . . . armed bands of its territory as a base of operations or as a point of departure for incursions into the territory of another State’.“3 130. There have been acts committed against Israel through many long years, and the blockade was again introduced and imposed by Egypt in the Gulf of Aqaba on 22 May 1967. Ciearly, this was an act of aggression as defined by the Soviet Union and the Syrian delegation themselves.

1 give the floor to the representative of Syria.

The Israel representative has posed a question: Did Syria declare war against Israel? Did Syria start a war against Israel, or did it not? 1 shall answer that question. 133. The answer is: No, Syria did not declare war on Israel. Syria, and every other Arab State since the Middle East crisis arose, came to this Council. They are on record as having said: “We Will not attack Israel. We shall respond only if we are attacked.” 134. When the historians of this crisis study this period, they Will find that, unfortunately, the Arab States were deliberately misled, that they were led to believe that Israel was not going to attack. 1 shall mention one such instance. One evening during the crisisdo not recall the exact date, but it was between 5 and 6 o’clock, when the Secretary- General was giving a farewell party to the Ambassador of Tunisia-Under-Secretary Ralph Bunche told me officially, on behalf of the Secretary-General, that he had been told by the Israel representative that they were not going to attack either the United Arab Republic or Syria. He further requested me to convey that information to my Government, as he also requested the representative of the United Arab Republic. Of course, we could not but believe the distinguished Under-Secretary, and we conveyed the information. As the news cornes out, we learn-in fact, it is no secret-that representatives of Western Powers in our capitals impressed upon our authorities that Israel was not going to attack either the United Arab Republic or Syria, 3 Quoted in French by the speaker. 136. The situation in which we now find ourselves is in full harmony and in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, which states: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.” 137. Therefore, what has taken place between the United Arab Republic and the Syrian Arab Republic is in full conformity with the Charter, There is a Mutual Defence Pact between the two countries, and the Syrian Arab Republic was attacked, as 1 have said time and again, on 7 April. Israel threatened to attack Syria when the time was proper. At Syria’s call, the Mutual Defence Pact was completed; there was at no time any declaration of war started by Syria against Israel but there was the application of a Mutual Defence Pact in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter. 138. The representative of Israel quoted Cassin, who is a great authority on the question of aggression, and he brought in the views of the Syrian delegation on that particular subject. 1 will not be misled by the diversionary tactics of the representative of Israel. The issue in the Council now is not the academic one of a definition of aggression; the issue, 1 repeat, is an actual aggression committed by Israel air and ground forces against Syria, forces which have alrcady penetrated Syria. 139. Therefore, the second point that he used in his, SO to speak, answer to me is completely irrelevant. Blockades, waterways, free passage, innocent passage are not being discussed now; what is being discussed, at my request, in an emergency meeting of the Security Council is the attack that was started early this morning by Israel against Syria. That is the issue, not the theoretical definition of aggression. 1 will not be misled by the representative of Israel and indulge in these theoretical diversions, although at another time 1 would not hesitate at ail to do SO. 140. To bring the Council back again to the heart of the problem we are discussing, which is the Israel attack on Syria, to what 1 have said SO far, to the two letters addressed this afternoon to the Secretary-General, and to what I said about the massive march of Israel tanks and armoured columns into Syria, 1 want to state further that 141. The Syrian army is not attac,king Israel; the Syrian army is not advancing against Israel. What we are doing inside our own territory is fighting and resisting the march and the onslaught of the huge Israel machinery against Syria. 142. Furthermore, 1 want to affirm once more that as we are here discussing the question of the aggression of Israel against Syria, Israel’s Air Force at this very moment is still overflying Syrian territory, and 1 would again express the hope that the Security Council will treat this problem with the gravity it deserves and not be misled into lengthy discussions, as we were this morning and this afternoon, about subjects that are extraneous to the particular dangers we are now facing.

1 cal1 on the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on a point of order.

During the Council’s meeting very alarming information is still being received to the effect that Israel’s aggression in Syria is continuing and that armed hordes are committing more and more crimes on Syrian soil. Would you not consider it possible, Mr. President, to ask the Secretary-General to give us any information he may have at tlie present stage?

The question has been raised by the representative of the Soviet Union that the Council should hear whether the Secretary-General has further information to submit to the Council now. 1 give the floor to the Secretary-General.

Since my last report to the Council, 1 have had no confirmed information regarding the situation referred to by the representative of the Soviet Union. Therefore, 1 am sorry but 1 have no further report to submit to the Council.

1 thank the Secretary-General, and I now cal1 on the representative of the Soviet Union on a point of order.

Mr. President, we should like to ask for one more clarification in this connexion, It is well known that our Organization has certain facilities on Syrian territory. Perhaps the distinguished Secretary- General would consider it possible to make additional inquiries to discover whether there are any reports from his representatives there.

1 would ask the Secretary-General whether he would like to reply to the question raised by the representative of the Soviet Union.

As 1 have just reported to the Council, 1 have no further confirmed

In my delegation’s opinion, no one around this table is unaware of the quarter from which aggression came and why it began. However, the Council has still not corne to any decision about Israel’s responsibility for starting this aggrcssion. The Council’s decision to call for a cesse-fïre has not SO far prevented the aggressor from continuing bis invasion. Are we to believe that we have to wait until the invader has settled down comfortably and established control over the lands he has conquered SO that he cari dictate his laws to the occupied countries? If SO, my delegation cannot but interpret the Council’s attitude as tacit support of the aggressor. 152. You Will recall, Mr. President, that as early as Monday morning during our consultations, 1 told you that, in my delegation’s view, if an appeal for peace was to mean anything, it must be accompanied by a request for the withdrawal of the troops to their original bases. Unfortunately, that suggestion was not taken up, and we now have to face the consequences. 153. At present, despite Israei’s agreement to put an end to the war, the bombing continues and innocent victims are paying with their lîves. 154. 1 must repeat that, after condemning the act of aggression by Israel, the Council should effectively demand a cesse-fire and the withdrawal of the troops to their original bases. If Israel’s military successes go to its head and encourage it to continue its military activities, 1 feel bound to say that this bodes no good for the peace of the region.

After almost a full day of deliberations, despite the efforts made by its members to contribute to the achievement of an effective cesse-fire between Syria and Israel and between Israel and the other Arab States, the Security Council is now faced with the dangerous situation resulting from the continuing Israel aggression against Syria and the other Arab States. At least, this is the situation as it appears to us at present, not only from the contradictory information provided by the news agencies but also from the information we have been given by the Israel representative hîmself. 156. A few moments ago, instead of telling us that the cesse-fïre was in effect throughout the region and that the 1.57. The Secretary-General has given us some items of information and he has just stated that he would only give the Council information that he could verify, information whose authenticity cari be more or less verified. And we have been informed that Israel columns are on Syrian territory and its aircraft in Syrian airspace. 158. The Israel representative said: “We have stopped firing, except in self-defence.” But where is this “selfdefence” talcing place? Over Damascus, over Cairo, on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic, in other words in places where neither the Israel Air Force nor the Israel armed forces have any right to be under the cesse-fire arrangement. That is the crux of the question. The right of self-defence is being exercised on someone else’s territory, despite the cesse-fire. What kind of reasoning is this when, even at the very moment when the cesse-fire was proclaimed, Israel forces were on the territory of another country? The advance is merely being continued. 159. It is obvious that Israel, taking advantage of its treacherous attack on the United Arab Republic by which it has succeeded in damaging part of that country’s air force, is now trying ta turn that treacherous attack to account by continuing the bombing and by endangering whatever is left, whatever else cari be found in the United Arab Republic. As the representative of the United Arab Republic stated just now, Israel now seeks to be able to intervene, in everything that takes place in that country. 160. We have also heard a statement by tbe Moroccan representative on this subject. How and when is an attempt being made to intervene in the skies over Cairo? We havc of course seen some news agency telegrams which bave been read out and which try to persuade us that nothing has happened and that there has been .Ro intervention by the Israel Air Force. 161, The entry of Israel forces into Syria after the Syrian Government had accepted the cesse-fire is a very serious and dangerous move because the cease”fire was the crux of the Security Council’s decisions. The Israel forces began their attack against Syria at that very moment, not from their own territory, but in Syria. This is something which may have dangerous consequences in the future. If in the face of this situation the Security Council does not take the initiative and condemn this new and treacherous act of aggression, which violates a11 the decisions made by the Council on the question today, yesterday and the day before, in the course of discussions which are still taking place, the result may be a grave’and serious threat to the peace not only of the region but of the world. 162. The Israel attack and aggression has certainly been instigated and supported by certain imperialist circles from a11 over the world, and in particular by the irnperialists of 164. Just now the United States representative made a long statement on behalf of his Government and its highest circles. He spoke in dispassionate language devoid of any partiality as between the aggressor and the victim. His words were clearly indicative of a troubled conscience because they were unclear, and even of a guilty conscience which senses the condemnation of world public opinion. 165. Instead of statements, however, we would have preferred-and peace would certainly benefit by-a more helpful attitude on his part with respect to the cesse-fire: in other words, we would have preferred him to advise Israel, using every possible influence at his command, to cesse firing and to put an end to this aggression which threatens to have, and might well have, either now or in .the near future, fatal consequences for the States of the region where the conflict is taking place and very serious consequences for the peace of the whole world. 166. We have heard the Permanent Representative of the United States speak several times. In the past he has made statements to the effect that his Government intended to respect and even safeguard the territorial integrity and political independence of a11 the countries in the region. But now, when Israel is conducting a brutal act of aggression against the Arab countries, when its troops are invading and devastating the territories of the United Arab Republic, Jordan, and Syria, we may legitimately ask ourselves what steps the United States Government proposes to take with a view to giving effect to its earlier pronouncements. At a11 events, we see no sign of them in the draft resolution which the United States delegation has submitted to the Security Council. On the contrary, it is clear from the wording used at the beginning of that draft resolution [S/7952/Rev. 11 -which Mr. Goldberg told us about only a few minutes ago and which he presented as something that would make it possible to provide a remedy for a11 the harm that has been done in the Middle East-and towards the end, where it deals with the second stage, that the United States is steadfastly determined to give a bonus to the aggressor. 167. If the Security Council wishes to stay in session to listen to the statements of the Permanent Representative of Israel on academic questions, we shall certainly never be able to finish this meeting or to help to bring about a cesse-fire and an end of the aggression by Israel. 168. It is time for the Security Council to find out what the situation is in the area, because it bas now become dangerous. Then-and we think that the Council should already be directing its attention towards this aspect of the 169. Lastly, we must certainly consider doing what the representative of India suggested this morning: we must give new life and activity to the United Nations machinery on the spot and to the Mixed Armistice Commissions. But the first thing the Council must now do is to establish whether the Israel aggression has been brought to an end; if not, the Council should immediately consider other measures to put an end to it.

Mr. President, we should like to make some remarks about the recurrent, or never-ending, statements by the representative of Tel-Aviv. The Israel representative’s speeches are simply astonishing. He has rejected everything absolutely, he has flatly denied and refuted everything; and in SO doing he has resorted, quite unfastidiously, to hypocrisy, cynicism and demagogy. And if for a single moment one were to believe this wild imagination of bis, Israel’s aggression against the Arab countries would grotesquely assume the appearance of an ail-embracing act of virtue, an uncommonly lavish dispensation of benefits to the entire world. 171. Corne to your senses, distinguished Ambassador. You are not in the realms above the clouds but in the dock in the Security Council, which is condemning Israel for perpetrating a monstrous act of aggression. 172, The reprcsentative of Israel has gone SO far as to hold the Arabs in Cairo up to ridicule, practically saying that they are dropping bombs on themselves because the Israel Air Force has not been bombing them intensively enough or at the right tirne. With regard to the unbridled imagination of the Ambassador of Israel, we should like to ask whether by chance he has ever happened ta drop bombs on his own head. And, if he never has, then he might try his own recipe on himself. It is not altogether impossible that this rather effective remedy might help him to sober UP from the intoxication of aggression and warlike enthusiasm. 173. In order to justify aggression the representative of Israel bas suddenly indulged in an academic discourse and started quoting from an article by Professor Cassin. Somebody once said about a certain priest that, in order to play dirty tricks on other people, he even leamed arithmetic. In the first place, it is well known that Cas& is a supporter of the Zionist point of view. Secondly, it is precisely the Western Powers, and particularly the United States of America, which are irreconcilably opposed to drafting a definition of aggression, as is perfectly clear from 174. And in this connexion we should like to try once again to obtain an answer from the representative of Israel-who has obviously not yet thought up a form of words to reply to our question-about Tel-Aviv’s intentions regarding the withdrawal of its troops from the occupied territories of Arab countries. We do not wish to abuse your kindness, Mr. President, but we cannot refrain from asking you once again when and how you would consider it possible to use the means at your disposa1 to enable the Security Council finally to obtain a direct answer to this question. 17.5. We have aIso heard yet another statement by the representative of the United States. It was impossible not to notice how deeply distressed the judge was at the departure of the United Nations Emergency Force from the territory of the United Arab Republic, which has now exercised its legal rights as a sovereign State and rid itself of foreign troops-once and for ail, we hope. But everything points to the fact that our distinguished colleague from the United States still cannot get over the withdrawal of military contingents belonging to NATO countries, which are not of course interested in peace or the welfare of the Arab countries, but in their own selfish strategic purposes in the Near East. It looks as if people in Washington are still dreaming about the past and the opportunities they mlssed. It is time to abandon these wretched illusions, however much pleasure they may give to representatives of Western countries. 176. From the statement by the representative of the United States of America, it also appears that he feels obliged to delay by every possible means a solution of the most important problems involved in putting an end to the aggression, namely the withdrawal of Israel’s aggressive forces behind the armistice lines and the condemnation of aggression. It is not by accident that he has entirely evaded the question of the withdrawal of Israei’s forces. There is a remarkable similarity in the approach adopted by the representatives of Tel-Aviv and Washington. 177. We decisively reject this kind of approach. The Security Council must take immediate steps to condemn the aggressor and ensure that Jsrael’s forces withdraw immediately and unconditionally behind the armistice lines. And one is bound to agree wlth the representative of India, Mr. Parthasarathi, that the aggressor must not be allowed to Count on the possibility that his criminal aggression Will have favourable results and that he will advance his own interests by means of this adventure. The only fruits of aggression are bitter ones-severe punishment and harsh penalties for violating the sovereign rights of other peoples. 180. We say that these tanks that entered through Massadeh are advancing on the way to Damascus. Can we let them continue their advance to Damascus without trying to stop them? The Security CounciI, in accordance with the resolutions SO far adopted, must see to it that this aggression, the advance of Israel tanks and armoured col~mns on Damascus, should be stopped, and stopped immediately, “81. d The question has been raised about the use of United Nations machinery. 1 am empowered by the Syrian authorities to state categorically here that we are ready to facilitate the carrying out of any investigation in order to give the Security Council the facts by which it cari judge the situation. The United Nations military observers cari go to this region which 1 mentioned, Massadeh, and the Secretary-General cari by telephone contact the Chief military observer in the area and charge him with this task, namely, to go to the area and to see and verify the advance of the Israel column, and to report to the Security Council.

1 cal1 on the representative of Israel.

Mr. President, 1 shall be very brief. 1 wish to assure the Council and the representative of Syria that no armoured columns of Israel are advancing towards Damascus. Again 1 repeat, orders have been issued to the armed forces of Israel to cesse hostilities. 184, 1 find myself in singular agreement with the representative of Syria in stating that Israel Will facilitate the investigation which the Secretary-General may wish to institute to find out the facts about the latest events. 185 Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republits) (translated jbom Russian): Mr. President, we feel that we must draw the Security Council’s attention once again to the fact that there has not been any change for the better in the situation regarding the halting of the advance by Israel’s aggressive forces into Syrian territory. According to the information being received, Israel’s troops are continuing to press on into the interior of Syria. We have just heard some additional news from the representative of Syria, Ambassador Tomeh. May we once again request the Secretary-General through you, Mr. President, to take energetic steps to use the machinery available and pay all possible attention to the information emanating from this machinery, and to report to the Security Council witbout delay, perhaps in half an hour’s time.

1 now give the floor to the representative of Israel.

1 second the motion made by the Syrian representative,

May 1 draw the attention of Council members to the fact that motions cannot be made by countries participating in the debate but not members of the Council. 191. A proposa1 has been made by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics tbat we should ask the Secretary-General to use the machinery and try to get information from the area. 1 submit that a suggestion was made by the representative of Syria-not a motion-for our discussion: that we should ask the Secretary-General to contact the United Nations people on the spot and report tomorrow morning to the Council on developments. 192. 1 should like to hear Ihe views of the members. Would there be any objection to asking the Secretary-General to supply us with a11 the information he cari possibly get from the area through United Nations representatives? If there is no objection to that, there then cornes the question as to what timing we should fix. We have had one suggestion that we should try to have the information within half an hour. The representative of Syria has suggested that we should try to get it for tomorrow morning. 1 am in the hands of the Council. 193. 1 cal1 on the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic.

1 must state that 1 wasnot aware, perhaps because 1 did not follow the translation closely, that the representative of the Soviet Union had asked that this information be transmitted, through the Secretary-General, in half an hour. Of course, 1 welcome that.

1 take it that the representative of Syria lias withdrawn his suggestion. Therefore, there is only one suggestion before the Council. Before expressing any opinion on that suggestion, 1 should like to ask the Secretary-General whether he deems it technically possible to provide the Council with the information requested by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republits within the time-limit suggested.

Mr. President, with reference to the request of the representative of the Soviet 197. Secondly, in order to facilitate the collection of information, the essential condition is that the parties concerned must give all possible co-operation to the observers. SO far, to my knowledge, the necessary cooperation has not been forthcoming. Therefore, 1 would request the parties primarily concerned to render a11 possible co-operation and assistance to the United Nations observers in the discharge of their responsibilities. 198. Thirdly, 1 should like to report to the Council that since General Odd Bull and his staff have had ta leave Government House, they have no wireless communication facilities for the purpose of contacting the observers. They have had to use mostly commercial services, commercial communications, which of course are very defective for the purpose of prompt reporting. Therefore, 1 should like to take this opportunity of appealing to the Government of Israel, through its representative, to restore the use of Government House to General Odd Bull SO that he Will be in a position to reach the observers promptly for the purpose of reporting officially to me in order that 1 may be in a position to report accurately to the members of the Council. 199. Fourthly, one very essential element for the performance of their functions by the observers is to get freedom of movement. 1 think this is a must if the Security Council is to expect prompt and effective and accurate reporting from the United Nations observers on the spot. Therefore, 1 should also like to take this opportunity of requesting the parties primarily concerned to render a11 possible assistance to the United Nations observers to achieve complete freedom of movement for them. 200. If those conditions are obtained, 1 am sure we Will get the required information as soon as possible. But 1 do not think it is practical to expect an accurate report in the course of thirty minutes; that is physically impossible. 1 have no idea how long it Will take. But if those conditions are met, 1 am sure the reporting will be prompt. 1 cari assure the members of the Council that as soon as 1 receive the necessary report which is relevant to the matter under discussion, 1 shall see to it that the Council members get 7. that report as promptly as possible.

Mr. President, we have listened with great attention to the statement just made by the Secretary-General, U Thant. In this connexion we should Iike to refer to one circumstance-namely the deliberate seizure by Israel’s troops of the headquarters of the United Nations observers, SO as to deprive the headquarters of the possibility of reliable communications with observers in the field. 202. In my view we cannot overlook this circumstance, and we must condemn acts of this kind by Israel. This is an attack on the United Nations presence as well. We have 203. Secondly we are in favour of the idea expressed by the representative of Syria, Ambassador Tomeh, that the Secretary-General should immediately instruct the Chief of Staff of the United Nations military observers to visit a11 the areas mentioned by the distinguished representative of Syria, and should inform the Security Council of the actual situation without delay. We support this idea, and therefore propose that action should be taken accordingly.

1 give the floor to the representative of Israel.

1 would not prolong this debate were it not for the statement just now made by the representative of the Soviet Union. 1 recommend to the representative of the Soviet Union that he read the Secretary-General’s report to the Council, in the record of the 1347th meeting, where he Will get a clear account of the events which led to the breakdown of United Nations communications in Government House. The Secretary- General stated: “After hostilities began on the morning of 5 June, the Chief of Staff of UNTSO drew the attention of Israel and Jordan ta the inviolability of the Government House area and asked them to ensure that this inviolability would be fully respected. Bath sides gave him the required assurance, However, at 1330 hours local time today, approximately one company of Jordanian soldiers occupied the garden of Government House. General Bull in person protested to the Commander and asked him to withdraw his troops. He also protested in the strongest terms to the senior Jordanian delegate to the Israel- Jordan Mixed Armistice Commission against the violation of United Nations premises by Jordanian soldiers, whose withdrawal within half an hour he demanded, He also informed the Israel authorities of these developments and requested them to ensure that Israel soldiers would not enter the Government House area. By then an exchange of fire had already begun between the Jordanian soldiers in the Government House garden and Israel soldiers near.by. General Bull later informed me by an emergency message that Jordanian troops had not withdrawn and were demanding to enter Government House itself and had demanded that no telephone calls be made from Government Hou’se. Firing was continuing and mortar shells were now ianding within the Gavernment House compound. United Nations Headquarters lost radio con tact with UNTSO headquarters in Jerusalem at 0852 hours New York time, at which time Jordanian troops occupied Government House.” (1347th meeting para. 20.1. 206. This was the report made by General Bull. Conse quently, Israel soldiers drove out Jordanian soldiers from that area, and at the risk of their lives they rescued General Bull and bis staff and brought him and his party to Israel territory, where the Israel Government provided him with facilities to establish communications with United Nations Headquarters.

Mr. President, 1 have net the slightest intention of disputing anyone’s rights, which are determined by the order in which names are entered on the list of speakers. 1 am speaking on a point’of order. 209. What 1 wish to say is that the past and recollections are the last things which concern us here, and that we are not especially grateful to the reader of documents who has here recalled some pages of the past. We are interested in the present. In whose hands is the United Nations headquarters at the present moment? Please do not depict your soldiery in this area as angels with wings. This is not the place for that. Do not forget yourself. Do not be carried away by this picture you are painting, but answer the request by the Secretary-General who has clearly said that Israel’s forces are interfering there. What purposes are these recollections of yours meant to serve? Why are you side-stepping the issue? 210. 1 felt that 1 had to draw attention to this position taken by the representative of Israel, who is still trying to obscure the situation.

1 find it a little difficult to see what the point of order was. This was rather the exercise of the Soviet representative’s right of reply, which should have occurred in proper order, SO that the representative of Bulgaria should have had the right to speak first. 1 now cal1 on the representative of Bulgaria.

Before coming to the point on which 1 wished to speak, 1 should like to say that 1 too wished to make the comment that the Israel representative’s recording apparatus seems to be running a few days late. Only a moment ago, the Secretary-General made a perfectly clear statemetit in which he said that the United Nations communications facilities were now in the hands of the Israel Government. He asked, if 1 am not mistaken, for these communications to be restored and for Government House to be returned to UNTSO. That is what 1 myself wanted to say. The Israel representative cited passages from past records from which one cari seek to prove a great many things and tried to put the blame on the Jordanian troops. 213. The present situation is undoubtedly grave. The Secretary-General has just told us that he is without means of communication and that the Israel Government must co-operate with the United Nations if we are to receive any information. Instead of a promise that the United Nations communications facilities Will be restored forthwith, a11 we have heard is a quotation from the records, as the Soviet Union has pointed out. 214. What 1 should have liked to have heard from the Israel representative is a statement that his Government Will co-operate in restoring communications between United Nations personnel on the spot and the Secretary-General 215. That is why 1 think the Council must immediately take the necessary mezisures to ensure that communications are restored and that General Bull or some other member of the United Nations military staff on the spot Will be able to ascertain the facts and communicate them to the Secretary-General. 216. 1 am well aware of the difficulties, but 1 should like to have an answer and to know-given the co-operation which the Israel representative Will presumably hasten to promise to the United Nations-how soon it Will be possible to receive information about what is happening in the area. We could then decide how to proceed here and whether the Council should meet tomorrow, or suspend the meeting to await information. 217, The PRESIDENT: 1 give the floor to the representative of Syria.

1 listened with great attention to what the Secretary-General said about the proposa1 to contact the United Nations machinery on the spot to ascertain the facts. In this connexion, 1 wish to support most strongly what was stated in this respect by the Soviet representative, and to assure the Secretary-General, on behalf of the authorities of the Syrian Arab Republic, that we Will give General Odd Bull and his assistants in the United Nations machinery all possible facilities at our disposal SO that they cari go into the areas specified in my letters to tlie Secretary-General [paras. 20 and 22 above] and establish the facts and convey them to the Secretary General for the information of the Security Council. 219. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): For some little time past 1 have felt that we are not making any effective progress in the Council. We greatly hope that the action we took this morning Will have its effect, and we know that the important question is not what we say here tonight, but what is happening in the hîlls of Syria and the approaches to Israel. 1 should be anxious, we should ail be anxious, I am sure, to stay here through the night if necessary if we thought we could do any good. 1 should even be happy to listen to any given number of speeches from the representative of the Soviet Union. 1 cari think of no pleasanter way of spending the night. But 1 would respectfully suggest that we are dealing at the moment with rumour; we are asked to form judgements on the basis of hearsay. It does US no good and it does not advance our purpose to listen to accusations and counter-accusations. We have the assurance from both parties, freely given, and we are glad to note it, that both parties Will give the Secretary-General every possible assistance. 220. The Secretary-General has pointed out a way which would facilitate communications with bis officers on the spot. 1 am sure we a11 give full hacking to the recommendations he has put to us. It is essential that the 221. 1 do not believe it is profitable for us, in view of what the Secretary-General has said and in view of the known facts of the situation, to spend time wondering when we may be called together again. We are a11 always ready to be calied at any hour of the day or night, and we are proud of this, and we should be proud. 222. 1 think that the right decision, if I may so suggest, is at this stage to leave it to the Secretary-General to do everything he possibly cari to get us as full a report as soon as he cari. He would then no doubt report to you, Mr. President, and you would then, as usual, communicate promptly to us. 223. 1 would hope, therefore, we would agree to cal1 on the two parties to give every assistance and ask the Secretary-General to make every gffort to get as full a report as soon as possible; and that we could now adjourn and meet again as soon as a further report is available, or, indeed, whenever there is any other development which requires our presence. This is the suggestion which I respectfully put forward to you, Mr. President.

1 have Iistened to the suggestion made by the representative of the United Kingdom, but before proceeding with our debate 1 would draw the attention of the members of the Council to the fact that the representative of the Soviet Union has, if 1 have understood him correctly, formally moved, first, that we request the Government of Israel to restore normal working conditions for the staff of UNTSO in Government House in Jerusalem and, secondly, that we request the Secretary- General to instruct the Chief of UNTSO to send observers to certain locations mentioned by the representative of Syria. The representative of Bulgaria has supported this motion, and 1 should like to learn the opinion of other members of the Council on this forma1 motion made by the Soviet representative. I hope 1 have correctly stated what the Soviet representative moved.

What 1 have to say does not differ greatly from what the United Kingdom representative has just proposed. My delegation’s views are based on one ail-important factor: the time factor. We must realize that investigations by the United Nations observers will be most effective after daybreak, which will take place very shortly in that part of the world; consequently, everything must be done to make their work effective in the next few hours, and also to restore to them the freedom of communication which they now apparently lack. 226. The Secretary-General has told us in bis last statement that the task of the observers Will be macle much easier if the parties upon whom this depends will grant to the observers, and above all to General Bull, the communications facilities which are being denied to them, and the freedom of movement which they must have. 228. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): 1 merely wish to say that it is clear that we are very near an agreement. We have representatives of three Permanent Members at least who seem to be agreed on the course we should foIlow. The idea came from the representative of the Soviet Union, the enthusiasm from the representative of the United Kingdom and the precision from the representative of France. 1 would have thought that on that basis we might proceed and be ready to return when the Secretary- General notifies the President that he has information that we should know about.

1 cannot refrain from expressing my admiration at the ready wit and British sense of humour displayed to us by our distinguished colleague from the United Kingdom. He has, of course, expressed a very attractive idea about the way in which we could while away the @ht. But 1 have some doubts. He has obviously forgotten my proletarian origin, which, 1 fear, is not very suitable for such exalted society-that k, the company of a British lord, even a socialist one. 230. Mr. President, 1 should like once more to clarify what we said in connexion with the request made by the Secretary-General to the representative of Israel here in regard to Government House. Before me 1 have document ,Y/7930 dated 5 June 1967; it contains, in paragraph 13, the following text of a letter from the Secretary-General to Levi Eshkol, Prime Minister of Israel: “Whatever the circumstances leading to the Israel occupation of Government House and its grounds, its continued occupation by Israel troops is a most serious breach of the undertaking to respect its inviolability. “I therefore request the Government of Israel to restore the grounds and buildings of the Government House compound urgently to exclusive United Nations control. men this has been done 1 propose to seek a forma1 undertaking from both sides to respect the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization’s occupation of Government House in the future.” 231. It was precisely because of this, Mr. President, that we spoke on a point of order, and in regard to the Israel representative’s behaviour at this table. Such is the actual state of affaîrs and we should like once again to support the Secretary-General’s legitimate request in this respect.

Mr. President, 1 think that you have expressed fairly clearly what was proposed in general not only by the Soviet delegation but also by the United Kingdom representative and the representative of France. But we should like the last part to be worded more precisely, as follows: we agree that aIl members of the Council hold themselves available and should be ready to attend an emergency meeting at any time, but the Council should nevertheless meet again in any case not later than 10.30 tomorrow morning.

With that addition, then, would my suggestion be acceptable to a11 members of the Council? 23.5. Mr. TARABANOV (Bulgaria) (translated from French): I have no objection to the suggestion you have just made, Mr. President; but 1 should like to make some comments which may perhaps help us. 236. First, I said in my last statement that Israel’s co-operation was essential. The Syrian representative has said, on behalf of his Government, that we could Count on its co-operation- We have not received the same assurance from the Permanent Representative of Israel, although it has been supposed that he gave it. He said: ‘<Go ahead if you wish; we agree.” But the Secretary-General has asked for the return of Government House. The representative of Israel has not said that his Government agrees to this; at any rate 1 did not hear him say SO. Perhaps 1 am mistaken; if SO, 1 hope someone Will correct me. The representative of Israel could certainly make such a statement here on behalf of his Government SO that the Secretary-General would be in a good position to provide us with the necessary information. 237. Secondly, the Israel Government should give us ail the co-operation we desire. 238. Thirdly, 1 must say that 1 agree with the Soviet Union representative’s proposal that we should meet again

In order that we might try to complete our discussion now, 1 would say, in reply to what the representative of Bulgaria has said, that according to my record, the representative of Israel said that his country would give every opportunity to the United Nations to facilitate investigations. In his second intervention he said that he could support tlte motion made by the representative of Syria. 1 think that this is a factual statement, but we might ask the representative of Israel whether he would wish to confirm it. That is the way 1 understood it, although 1 may be wrong. It was my understanding that the representative of Syria and the representative of Israel were quite in agreement on this point.

You have quoted me correctly, Mr. President.

In these circumstances it appears that we all agree that we should request the parties concerned to extend all possible co-operation to United Nations observers in the discharge of their responsibilities, that we should request the Government of Israel to restore the use of Government House to General Odd Bull and should ask the parties to re-establish freedom of movement. 1 believe we are also agreed that the time and date of the next meeting Will be decided after consultation with members and as soon as 1 have the information from the Secretary-General. This last point has been changed: thc meeting Will take place at 10.30 tomorrow morning. 243. In accordance with the request made by the representative of Bulgaria, 1 shall ask the Secretary-General whether he considers it possible to have the information required, provided these conditions are fulfilled, before 10.30 tomorrow morning.

It is rather difficult for me to conjecture at this stage about the time which would be necessary for the proper functioning of the machinery which we contemplate. First of all, 1 shall have to send a table to General Odd Bull immediately, and then he Will have to make contact with the observers in the field. As 1 reported to the Council earlier, he has lost contact with most of his observers because of the unsettled conditions in many parts of tlie area. 245. Secondly, if they regain freedom of movement, and if the parties primarily concerned render them all possible co-operation and assistance-and it is already, as members of the Council are aware, six o’clock in the morning in the area-if all those conditions are met, 1 am confident that 1 shall have some very substantive material to comrnunicate to the Security Council before the convening of the meeting tomorrow morning.

In those circumstances, could we agree to adjourn now, on the understanding, of course, that

For the record, 1 wish to state that 1 have just received information from the Foreign Minister of the Syrian Arab Republic to the effect that an attack from Massadeh, to which 1 have referred, has already startcd.

1 take note of this statement which the representative of Syria wishes included in the record of this meeting. 249. During the intervention of the representative of the United Kingdom, Lord Caradon, he stated that we were now dealing with “rumeur” and “hearsay”. 1 was indeed astonished to hear that, for, since early this morning, we have not been dealing with rumour and hearsay; we have been dealing with facts and names, which 1 submitted to the Council, in two letters to the Secretary-General, and in the various statements that 1 made, 1 also challenged the representative of Israel to disprove those facts which 1 251. Since there is no objection to the procedure which 1 have suggested, we shall adjoum now on the understanding that 1 have outlined. The meeting rose ut 10.50 p.m