S/PV.136 Security Council

We have before us the pro-' C' visional 'agenda. If there are no objections, I , shall consider it unanimously adopted. , - " 1 See, OiJicial Records of the Security Co"~cil" Second, Year, Supplement,No. 12, Annex 33. I : lbid.~ Supplement No. 11,Annex 28. Ibid., Annexes 27, 30, 31 and 32 respectively. CONSEIL DE SECURITE PROCES·VERBAUKOFFICIELS ' CI:NT·TRENTE·5IXIEME ~EANCE Tenue aLake Success~ New-York, lejeudi 22mai 1947~ a10 h~ 30. , ,President: M. A. L6PEz (Co!ombie) ~ 153. Ordre du iour proVisoire (docurnent 5/357) 1. Adoption de l'ordre du jour. 2. Lettre,.en date du-7-mai'l947, adressee a.n S-ecretaire' gCI!eral par le 'Ministre des .t\ffairt'.'l etrangeres d'Italie (document, S/355)1, . 3. La question grecque: , a) Lettre, en datedl).J~nai,1947, adress#'_ auSecretaire generalp:n le representant .. de l'Union des 'Rq,ubliques socialistes sovietiques (document 8/347) z. b) Cablogramme, en date, du 5 mai 1947., , adressee au President, du Conseil de securite par le President de la: Commission d'enquetefjur les incidents survenus ala fronnere' ,grecque (document 8/343 et documents S/341, 8/342 et S/345).,. 'ayant tr~t' a 'la situation exposee,dans le cablogramme3 • ' 154~ Adoption del'ordre du iour Le .PRisIDENT(traduit,de l'anglais,) : L'ordre du jour piovisoire' est 'soumis au Conseil poUF examen. Siaucune objection n'est soulevee,. je considererai qu'il est adopte al'unanimite. 1 Voir les Proces~verbau~oiJici6ls d:e Conseit de sIcurite, Deuxieme Annee, Supplement No 12, Anne:lCe 35. '~Ibid., Supplement No 11, Annexe 28. " 8!bid.. '~nexes 27, 30, 31 et 32 respectivemettt. ~'are able and willing to carry out these obligations". ~ Further, we, the Security -Co~cil, consider the application from the point of view of peace and security. That is a'limited portion of the obligations of the Charter. 'Thenc~-c-isCaiSo the jUridical issue. The treaty with Italy, like those with the other four States, has not been ratified. Until it is ratified, it' does not come. into effect. Although there is a cla:use in everyone of these treaties' which says thatratiiication shall be effected as 'soon as·" possible, to •the best of our knowledge not.one of these treaties has been .ratified. We know from our oWn knowledge that the Italian treaty is meeting with but slow progress through the United.States Congress. Therefore, as the whole position in relation to membership is based,according to the Charter, on the ,sovereign equality of all States, and as·~taly,like the, other ex-enemy States~ is still bound by the provisions of the Armistice Agreem~nt, which place'3 grave limitations on her sovereignty-,foreign. troops are still in occupation of ItaIy-jD 'our opiirion, the a,pplication <;annot, be entertained. . Quite apart from. that, there is an incidental _questionth~t by.the Assembly resolutionll this Council -hits a' prior duty, to re-examine the case of' the rejected applications before it Can enter jnto'considerations such as this. 1 Voir les Proces':verbaux offi,ciels duConseilde securite, nt;uxieme An~~eJ !'fo3S, pag~ 8128 814. . 2Voir les Resolutions adoptees parl'AmmblCe glflirale, pendant laseeondepartie de sa premieresessio~: resolution 35 (I), page 61. - (···d 1 See Offit!ial Records of the Security Council, Second Year, No. 38, pages 812,to 814. ., .'. •.• 2 See Resolutions adopted by (Jeneral Assembly,during .the seCond Part of its first session, resolution 35 (lh page &.' " " ,. For those reasons, we object to this iteJJl, and cannot vote for the adoption of this agenda.

The reasons presented . by the representative of Australia· are certainly good ones, and they ought to be considered, but,I'do not think this is the time for it. This is' a matter on the agenda, and the agenda has not yet been adopted. Applications which the Secretary-General receives in accordance with his duties ought to be referred to the Security Council and.ought to be put on the agenda. When the agenda is adopted and we come to item 2; then theoppasition of the representative of Australia, and his remarks, would come ill for consideration. ~ I think the agenda should first be adopted, becau:;;e the Secretary-General cannot by himseH decide on the acceptance or,non-acceptance of such an application. It is for the Security Council to discuss the rp.attel' and give its decision.

Unless I hear .any further remarks, I shall take .it that t..lte agenda is adopted unanimously. The agenda was adopted. 155. Discussion on the ~gendC! Le colonel HODGSON (Australie) (traduit 'de Pangla'is): Etant donne que, nous avonS m~­ tenant adopte l'ordre, du jour, et que certams membres du Conseil' ont sans dout.e l'intention de .prendre la, parole a, propos de la lettte du Ministre des Affaires etrangeres d'Italie, ,qui figure au pOllt, 2, je ,propose que ,nouspassions a la discussion de la questiongr~cque,qui figure au point 3; Lt\ reunion de ce matin a ete convoquee acet effet, et c'est pourquoi j'("-stimeq~'e l'examen du point, 2 del-Tait etreajoume en faveur de la clli'cUssion de -la question, grecque qui, si nous avonn tous bien compris, etait preyue pour ce :r;natin et que nous~peri<insclore defini.:. tivement aujourd'hui. Telle estmaproposition. J'estimequ'elleae 'justifie du point de vue des faits; en efIet,la communication du Ministre des Affairesetrari-' geres d'Italie e,;'t plus recen~e: eUe devrait daM figurer au point 3 et non au point 2 denotre ordre du jour. Mr., Quo Tai-chi (China): I believe thisM. Quo Tai-chi (Chine) {traduit de l'an,L Council has a long-established procedure-thatglais}: Je ~rois que le Conseilpossede une trawis; sinceJhe Council.has beehfunctioning-for ;' tion deja longue-, aussi longue~ en tout c3$,'que dea1ingwith the application of a State for adsa propre existence-- en ce quiconceme la pl"Qmission to membership. ill the United Natiqns. cedure observee pour l'exam.en,. ~es delnandes Colonel HODGSON (Australia): In view of the fact that we have now adopted the agenda, and in view of the fact that there may be some _members who desire ~J speak on the subject of the letter ftom the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy, which is listed as item 2, I should like to propose that we proceed with the discussion of the· Greek question, .item 3. Th.emeeting this morning was· ,convened for that purpose, so ,I think that item 2 should be postponed for the ' consideration, o( the Greek question, which we . all understood we,were,to discuss this ID0rning and on which we hoped to reach a final decision today. -. . . That is my, proposal. I,think it, js -cOrl-eetin point of fact,because the letterfrom the' Minister . of Foreign Affairs of Italy is a later communica- . tion and it should figure as item.3 oLour agenda . instead of item 2. M. EL-KHOURI (S)'lie) (traduit de l~anglais) ;- .Les motifs exposes par le .representant de l'Am: tralie sont certainement justifies~ et I'on devrait les prendre en consideration; mais j'estime que le moment de le faire n'est pas venu. n s'agit d'une question inscrite a I'ordre du jOUfj et I'ordre du jour n'apas encore ete adopte. Les demandes dont est saisi le Secretaire general d~ l'exercice de ses fonctions doivent etre renvoyees au Conseil de securite et portees a l'ordre du jour. Lorsque rordre du jour aura ete adopte et que nous en serons arrives au point 2, ce sera· le moment de prendre en consideration les arguments et les observations du representant de l'Australie ~ propas du point discute. jestime qu'au prealable ilconvient d'adoptCll' l'ordre du jour, car le Secretaire general ne peut decider lui-meme, de la recevabilite d'une de. mande. C'estau Conseil de securitede discuter la question et de-prendre une decisionason sujet. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais): S'il n'y a pas d'autres obserVations, je considererai que l'ordre du jour est adopte a l'unanimite. L~ord'fe jour estadopte. 155. Discussion de I'ordre du' iour

Perhaps it might be as well to have a: ruling from the Chair regarding the proposal of'the Australian representative to the effect that we should proceed with the Greek question now and leave the matter of the application of Italy for membership to be dealt with afterwards. I should mention that in including this item concerning the application of Italy for member- . sllip, the Chair did not expect any discussion,' ihasmuch as we had a similar case only about a month ago at our hundred and thirty-second meeting, on the occasion of the application of Hungary for membership.1 However, since the representative of Australia wishes to discUss the matter further, the Chair wishes to accept his , sugg~l)n and discuss, the Greek question first, unless there is any,objection from the Council. '- ' Mr. GROMYKO (Union of' Soviet Socialist Republics): I should not object if the application 'received from the Italian Government were submitted to the Committee which considers the applications for membership received from different countries. , ' ,Now, the, Security Council and the Committee on Admission of New Members cannot consider the substmce of the application, because this question ,of consideration of the ,substance of'the application received from the Italian Governinent,' as well as the application received from the Government of Hungary, 'is part of the whole question of the consideration of applications for' membership from countries with which peace treaties should, be concluded and ratified. It is part of this whole question. And M. GROMYKO (Union deS Republiques socialistes sovietiques) (traduit de ~'anglais): Je ne ferais pas d'objection Si la demande du Gouvemement de I'Italie etait renvoyee auComite charge d'examiner l~ demandes d'admission emanant de'clifferents pays. Or, ni le Conseil de securite; ni le Comite'des demand~ d'adm.ission de nouveaux,~/[embres ne peuvent examiner le fond" de la demande. En diet, la. demande du Gouvemement itaiien, - aussi bienque ce1leduGouvernement hongrois, rentt.e dans le cadre de la question generale de l'examen des candidatures des pays aveC lesquels des traites de paix doivent €tre conclus et ratifies. C'est une partie de cette question, generaIe. Par consequent, si nous decidons de, renvoyer cette demande' au Comite des demandes d'admission, ce dernier !'examinera en temps voulu. ~'weagree to send this'application to.theCom- 'mittee on Admission ofNew Members, then the Committee will consider it at the appropriate tUne. Mr. :&A':tz-SucHY(Poland): As (you meniioned, Mr. President", only a month',ago we M. KATZ-SUCHY (Pologne)· (traduit de I'anglais): Comme vous I'avez fait reIharquer, Monsieur le President, nous avonsexamine,il y a un mois ,~.i1ement.. une demande absolument Identique acelle de l'Italie. Je croisque la pro,,: cedure que nousavons adoptee pour la demande \ de la Hongrie pourrait,· sans inconvCnient,etre adoptee pour la presente demande. Jene 'Vois pas comment' leConseil pourrait entamer une dealtwi~an application which ,is quite identicalwith the application of Italy. I believe that the procedure we adopted in regard to the application,of Hungary could easily, be adopted with , ~egard to this applieation.'1 do not see any possib~ty of this Council's discussing the matter in substance. \Jefore it is'l.investigated by 'the ,Oommittee '0"1 Admission of New Membersand,referred back to thiS Council. 'J ,Therefore, I move formally that the Council . ~6uIdacknowledge the.' receipt of the application of the Italian Government, for membership, .and ~at it should decide to send ihis-a:pplicapon Le PIffiSIOENT (traduitde l'anglais): Le mome~t est peut-etre yenu, pour le President, ' d'enoncer une decision en cequi concerne la proposition du representant de ]'Australie de renvoyer l'e.xamen de la demande d'admission de l'Italie, a une date ultene1.!re et depoursuivre maintenant la discussion de ,la question grecque. . Je dois dire qu'ell inscrivant la demand~d'ad- ,mission de l~Italie a I'ordre du' jour, je nem'attendais a aucune cliscussion, puisqu'un cas similaire s'est presente il y a environ un mois, au cours, de notre cent-trente-deuxieme seance, a propos de, la demande d'admission de la HO:lgrie1. Toutefois, comme le ~epresentant de l'Australie desire discuter la question plus a fond, le President .sera heureux d'adopter sa,suggestion tendant a examiner en premier lieu la question grecque, si les membres du Consei1 n'y ont pas d'objection. disc'IJss~on 'sur cette question quant au fond, avant qu'elle n'ait ete eJl;aminee paT le Comite des· demandes d'admission de nouveaux Membres et renvoyee au Consen. ' Je propOse donc formellement que'le Conseilprenne ~cte de la demande d'admission du Gouvemement italienet qu'il decide de la renvoyer au Comite des demandes d'admission de noa- Mr. Quo Tai-chi (China): A motion has been made by the Polish repreSentative. Mr. LAWFORD (United Kingdom): I have a point of order. I asked ta sp~ak quite a long time ago on your ruling. May I.spe?~~ now? The PREsmENT: Yes. Mr. LAwFoRD(United Kingdom): I understood that the Chair had ruled that we were to . discuss the Greek' question first. Has the I'lng been chall~nged? If not, it stands. 156. Continuation' of the ,discussion on the Greek q~estion A.t the invitation of the President~ Mr. Kahreman Ylli3"representative of Albania3Mr. Athan;' assov3representative of Bulgaria; Mr. DendrfJ,mis3 representative of Greece3' and Mr.' Krasf,1vec;, representative of Yugoslavia3 took their'seats at the Council table. , Mr. ATHANASSOv' (Bulgaria): Before I enter into disqussion of the questiori on the agenda, I wish !o'state with regret that· in some quarters , the attitude,'Of my Government has been quali- ' . fied as a refusal to co-operate,as an attempt to obstruct, and even as a challenge to the authority of the Security Council. In this respect I wish to be quite explicit and dispel any possible misunderstanding. Th~ Bulgarian Govequnent has,'a great respect for the United Nations and all., its organs. The'Btdgarianpeople and the Bulgarian Government are anxious to contribute their part to the ts- , tablishment of peace and security'in the world through the' United Nations. Although nota Member State, Bulgaria abides by'its 'formal obligations, to observe the decisions of,th~ Coun- \ cil ontheGreek case. I wish to.stressthat our faith in the United Nitionsand our sincere desire to co-operate With it are not mere words. We have proved this by' co-operating loyally with the .Commission of Investigation. We put, all oyr facilities, cornmunicationsand hotelaccQnunodations .at the disposal of the qo~on; we produced witnesses and interpreters; we facilitatedthe entry of the CommissiC'n into Bulgaria 'tr ; . M;, Quo Tai-chi (Chlle) (traduit, de l'anglais): Nous avons a cet egard la propositioIl du representant de laPologne. . M. LAWFORD. (Royaume-Uni). (traduit de fan.glais) : Je souleveune question d'or~. J'ai demande a prendre la parole il. y a quelque temps deja a pl'OpOS de la decision presidcnticlle. Puis-je l'avoir maintenant? Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais): Qui. M. I AWFORD(Royaume.;.l,Jni) (traduit def anglais) : ,J'ai cru comprendre que le ,~esident avait decide que nbus devions discuter en pIoemier lieu la question grecque., Cette decision a-t-elle ,ete contestee? Sinoll, elle reste .toujours valable. ,156.' Suite de la diiiiCU5$ion. SU~ la qu.estion grecque. Sur l~invitation du President, M. Kahreman Ylli3 representant dd 13Albanie, M. Athanassov3 reprlselttant de la Bulgane, M., Dendr(lmzs3 representant de la Grece,et M.Krasovec3repre- . se1l,tant j de la Yoiigoslavie3 prennent place'a la i'abl"e du Conseil, M. ATHANASSOV (Bulgarie) (ttaduzt,de13an-" gl.ais): Avant d'aborder ladisc::ussiondelaquestion inscritea J'ordre du jour, je dois exptimer mon / regret de constater que, danscertains "milieux,l'attitudede mon Gouvemement a ef!. interpretee comme un refus de~ooperer, co~tme une tentatived'obstruction etm@me COIIlIl1e'Ull defi a l'autorite du Conseilde secmite.. " A cet egard, je desire m'explimersans ambages avn de dissiper tout miitentendupo~ble. Le Gouvernernent bulgare a le plus grand respet:t pour-I'Qrganisation des NationsUnieset pour .tous ses organes. Lepe\lple ~t le Gouv~rne~ent bulgares veulent lapporter leur part ~·~uvre des Nations Unies, en aidant.a etablirla pm et lasecurite dans le, mondepar·l'intermediaire de cette ,Organisation..'Bien qu'elle ne soit 'pas un Etat MeqJ.bre, la Bulgarie ~ coW'orme .aux oJ?ligations formelles "qu'eUe ~assumees et s'iriu dine dev,ant les decisions du Conseil it·propos de la question grecque. Je desire souligner que notre foi dans lesN~tio!l:}UDies et notre desk sincere,de.c,ooperer ahX efforts de l'Qrganisation ne sont. p~ de'vaines affirmations.. Nous ravons pmuve en coop&ant loyalement avec la Commission d'eIiquSte. Nous .avoD,S facilite sa.tache 'en mettant a sa disposition tous''les servic~ "~Thesefacts having been given, I ~ it is impossible to assert that Bulgaria is unwilling to carry out the decisions of the Security Council. The Statemerit made on the Subsidiary Gro~p by our liaison officer in' Geneva camiot in any circumstances be'construed as a refusal to cooperate. Our position is quite dear and cannot possibly be subject to misinterpretation. We desire clarification as to the purposes and scope of activity of the Subsidiary Group. The fact that we have asked for this clarification cannot be represented as an action undermining the autbority of the Security Council. I believe tha.t it is our right to point out to the Security Council that in our opinion the Commission has not. instructed the Subsidiary Group in accordance with the resolution of 18 April 1947.1 The.Commission did not mstruct tIle Subsidiary Group' 'to perform subsidiary functions, but tiansformed it into a new body 'to investigate possible futUre ~cident8.. The representative of Belgium mentioned at our last meeting that it was not surprising that·in the present case hesitations might arise.~ I quite agree.. Hesitations anddifIerent interpretations .of 'the' competence of the Subsidiary' Group do indeed exist. Our position is that the Commission cannot in 'any circuinstancesassign to its Suh!idiary Group the investigation' of cases 'with which the ~ecurity COuncil Ims. not been seized. Some members of the yt>mmission seem to think differently. It is only natural that we should ask the· Council to ' c!arify aris problem. ' Mter having loyally co-operated with the ,Commisrion of Investigation, our position in Genevafuts been that we could not see the possibility of going again over a phase, already closed, of th~ Greek question. We' have pointed out that there is no. need to .establish a new commission of investigation while the first one is about to complete its report, becal;Ise, as a matter of.fact, the tenns of reference given to' the-Subsidiary Group virtually establish a new Commission of investigation. To this, naturally, Bulgaria could'not· Subscribe without requesting clarification from the Security Council, and without requesting authoritativeinterp:retation .of the purpose and competence of the Group. The Commission of Inve .dgation went to' I Geneva because of the lack of hotel accommodation in Greece. Had the Commission remained in Greece, there would have been ;:0 need of a sl.!?sidiary group, and no such group would have been created. In that case,.the Commission, after baving investigated the concrete facts sub- Initted by 'the Greek Government, would have started drafting its report on those facts, and we cannot visualize a.Situation in which the Commission would have waited indefinitely for new border incidents to· happen in order to include them in its report. Mter having started the wording of the report, the Commission could have reopened,ii necessary, a Hmited investigation oIa fact under consideration, in order to" . obtain additional or more precise. information on it. Now, for technical reasons, the Commission being awayfrom Greece, this task of obtaining additional information on the' cases already investigated has been assigned to a special body -the Subsidiary Group. But the fact that the CommisSion deals. through a· speCial organ does not change the nature of the work which may need to he _done. The work to be· don~, either directly by.the Commission, or through the Subsid!ary Group, ~ not·to open a. totally new in- . qwry; hut only to complete, whenever. n~ceSsary, the mfonnation already gathered. There is another pomt which I should like to raise in this connexion. I think the Security COtncil should establish the period of time duringwhich .the SubSidiary Group will exercise its fWlctiorts.This Group cannot stay indefinitely in' the Balkans. I doubt very much whether any ~.falli tous ces renseignements concemeraient des incidents passes·et non pas· des incidents futurs. La .Commission d;enquete est allee a Geneve en raison du manque d'hotels ..en Gr~e. Si la Commissiun etait restee en 'Grece, il n'y.aurait pas eu lieu de-constituer un groupe subsidiair-e, et aucUD. groupe de ce genre n'aurait ete cree. Dans ce .::as,apres avoir enquete· sur les faits precis presentes par le Gouvemt:ment gree, la Commission aurait conunencea !'ediger son rapport a leur sujet etil serait difficile d'imaginer la Commission~ttendantindefinimentque de nOuveaux incidents de frontiere surviennent pontles.incluredans sonrapport. Ayant commence .a rediger son rapport, la Commissionauraitpu, le .cas echeant, rouv.rir un~ enquetelimi!eeapropos·· d'un faitexamine,en Vile d"obtenir des renseignemetJ.ts compleme;ntaires . ou des. prtki- Sions. Or,la C!)riImi~ion ayant ete'obligee de quitter la Grece, la tache de recueillir'des IeD;- seigIlements complementa4'es stir lescas ayant deja fait robjet d'une enquete a ete, pour des raisons d'ordre· technique, attribuee a. un. organisme .special, le Groupe subsicliake.. Mais le fait que la C0mnlissi0n.a recours'aun organisme special ne change ~ .rien la nature dutrav~ qui pourrait se revBer necessaire.Que la Comrnission agisse elle-meme o~que le Groupe subsidiaire intervienne, le travail a accomplir' ne cortsiste pas it ouvrir une enquete nouvelle, mais simplement a completer, le ,cas echeant, les renseigriements .deja·recueillis. . Je desire, a ce propos,soUlever un autre point. J'estime que le Conseil de securite ·dewaitfucer ladurt~e de l~ periQdependant laquelle. le Groupe subsidiaire. exercera Bes fonctions.Ce Groupe ne. peut· rester indefiniment dans les Balkans, Je doute tres fort qu'un Etat souverain, That would be a case without precedent in international reIatinns and in absolute contradiction to established practice for the solution of international disputes. Vie have pledged ourselves to carry out the decision of the Security Council on the Greek. complaints, a."ld we abide by our pledge. We have carried out there obligationsin a spirit·of loyal co-operation, but we have not abdicated our sovereignty. It was not the sense of the Council, I believe, when it voted the resolution of 18 April, to have Bulgaria placed under the control of the Subsidiary Group' for an indefinite period. . At one of our previo1JS meetings, while offering his amendment to the draft resolution, the representative of France explained that the proposed subsidiary group was meant to be a temporary body.l If the Council now assigns to the Group large and unspecified functions and autho:izes .it to investigate at its own discretion anything that may happen in the Balkans, it will no longer be a temporary group. Thus, starting .from a procedural arrangement established for technical convenience, we shall be faced finally with a substantially different thing. Moreover, from the point of view of procedure, I do not see how we can accept the report of the Commission and start cfucussion and evaluation of the facts reported if there is to be a continuous flow of new information. We have to have a time-limit. There must be some limit to the facts to be discussed and considered. This is a most elementary practice in any court; and I think that, for all practical purposes, the procedure of the Council should be assimilated tCi the procedure of a court. In the settlement of every dispute, tJ;tere is always a phase in which the iJ;Uormation is gathered. Thereis subsequently a phase in which.this information is' examined .and. sifted, and there is a third phase whenthe facts are evaluated as t~ their juridical significance. We can never reach the second, let alone the third phase-that is, the discussion and· evaluation of the report of the Commission- .ifthe first phase is not closed at a given moment. As a matter of fact, the first phase, the phase· of .gatherin~ factual· information, should have been' closed when the Commission .left for Geneva, because the gathering of· factual information concerris definite complaints enumeratoo ()ne by one. in the letters which the representativ~ of Greece addressM to the Security Au cours d'une de nos seances' precedentes, le repr~..sentant de la France, en proposant son amendement au projet de resolution, a donne a entendre que le Groupe subsidiaire projete n'etait qu'un organisme temporaire1• Si ee Groupe est maintenant charge par le Conseil de fonctions etendues, si ces fonctions ne sont pas determinees, s'il est autorise a proceder a des enquetes sur tout evenement qui pourrait survenir dans les Balkans, ce ne sera pl1;1S alors un groupe temporaire. Ainsi done, en partant de dispositions,adoptees pour des raisons techniques et pour plus' de commodite, nous aboutirons finalement a que1que chose de fondamentaleme.'1.t different. En outre,. du point de vue de. la pl:oceclure, je ne vois pas comment nous pouvons accepter le rapport de la Commission, comment nous pouvons entamer la discussion et l'appreciation . des faits qu'ils nous signale, si de nouveaux ren- ~eignements doivent continuer a nous parvenir sans interruption. n faut qu'il y ait un deIai determine. Il faut limiter les faits qui seront sujets. a discussion et a examen. C'est une pratique eIementaire que ron observe dev:ant n'importe que! tribunal, et j'estime que du point de V1J.epratique, la procedure du Conseil devrait etre assimiIee ala procedure d'un tribunal. Dans le reglement de tout conflit, il y a toujours une phase premiere ou l'on recueille les renseignements. Vient ensuite une phase ou Ces renseigne;. ments sont examin~ et tries, suivie de la troisieme, phase ou les faits sont apprecies du point de vue juridique. Nous ne pourrons jamais atteindre la seconde phase, ni, a plus forte raison, la troisieme - c'est-a.-dire arriver a la discussion et a I'appreciation du rapport de la Commission - si la premiere phase ne se trouve pas close a. un moment determine. En realite, la premiere phase, ceLJpendant laque1le on recueille .les faits, aurait dft prendre fin quand·la Commission est partie pour Geneve, car le recueil de ces faits Therefore, I think the Council should make clearer the objeCtives of the Subsidiary Group and especially should set a time-limit for its, activity. This time-limit should, in my opinion, be the moment when the Security Council begins hearings on the report of the Commission. Otherwise, we shall get nowhere. At any moment, the work of the Council could be interrupted by a new piece of information, and then the whole discussion would Lave to begin.again from the very beginning. I do not think it is ~ble to work and to achieve results under those conditions. ~u Conseil risqUeI"'.Jt d'etre interrompu par I arrivCe d'Wl nouveau renseignement, et il faudrait alors reprendre toute la discussion depuis le debut. festime qu'il n'est pas possible de travailler et d'arriver a un resultat dans ees conditions. Enfin, je veux declarer une fois de plus que le Gouvemement bulgare n'a jamais refuse de cooperer aveC un vrai groupe subsidiaire. Lorsque le Groupe aura des raisons sufflSantes pour penetrer en territoire bulgare, notre Gouvemement lui accordera ]'autorisation necessaire. Mais je ne pense pas que le Conseil attende du Gouvernement bulgare qu'il assUIile de vagues obligationS en s'engageant a laisser le Groupe subsidiaire proceder a. des enquetes en Bulgarie pendant une periode de temps jn:' definie et sur des questions que nous ne eonnaissons pas. L~ fait d'assumer des obligations d'un caractere aussi general et aussi vague equivaudrait a une abdication de souveramete, et je .pensc que personne ne demanderaa la Bulgarie d'abdiquer sa souverainete. Je tiens a repeter que nous sommes disposes a cooperer avec le Conseil de securite et avec tous ses organes, mais nous ne pouvons accepter des obligations indetemllnees pour une p&iode de temps indefinie. Comme je l'ai deja sbuligne, pour nous per;. mettre de voir clairement en quoi ConsistCilt nos .obligations, le Conseil devrait ex~er la question de savoir si le mandat comic au Gr6upe subsidiaire par la Commission est compatible avec les termes de la resolution du Consen. Nons' examinons en ce moment un projet de resolution du representant de rUnion des Republiques sQcialistes sovietiques qui propose un mandat pour le Groupe subsidiaire2. Lorsque ce projet de resolution aura ete discute et qu'on aur&.\ defini avecplus de precision en ,quoi . consiStent nos obligatio~, je .demanderai la Finally: I wish to declare once more that the Bulgarian Government has never refused to cooperate with a real subsidiary group. When there is sufficient reason for the Group to enter , Bulgarian territory, our Gover:llnent will grant it permission to do lID. But I do not think that the Council expects the Bulgarian Gov~ent to assume a vague obligation for letting the Subsidiary Group make investigations in Bulgaria for an indefinite future period on matters of which we are not aware. Such a general and· vague obligation would mean abdication of sovereigntY, and I do not think anybody will.ask Bulgaria to abdicate its sovereignty. .I wish to repeat that we are ready to cooperate with the Security Council and all its organs, but we cannot accept indefinite obliga~ tions for an indefinite period of time. As I have pointed out, before we are able to see clearly what our. ohligations are, the Council should consider the question whether the tenns .of reference given to the Subsidiary Group by the Commission are consistent with the Council~s resolution. We have before us a draft resolution, submitted by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, proposing -terms of reference for the Subsidiary Group.ll After this draft resolution has been discussed aIld the nature of our qbligations has been made more clear, I shall ask the Chair for the floor and shall st~te the position of my_,Government. , , Mr. LAWFORD (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom delegation has studied with the closest a.ttention the speech made by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on 12 May.2 p~ole au President pOUf exposer l'attitude de mon Gouvernement. M. LAWFORD (Royaume-Uni) (traduit del'anglais): La delegation du Royaume-Uni a - etudie .avec la plus grandeat;tention le discours prononce le 12 maipar le .representant de l'Union des Republiques sociaIistes sovietiques2. - "Voir lesProces-verbaux officiel:: du Conseil de ~e­ curiM. Premiere Annee, Seconde. S6rie,· Supplement No 10. Annexe 16. Supplement No 11, Annexe ~O (ft ~up" pIement No 12, Annexe 24. . 2Voir les Proces.verbaux afftciels du Con$eil \dtl se- , In our view, there is nothing very extraordinary or incorrect about that. Under the terms of the Security Council's·resolution of 18 April, the Group is specifically empowered to continue to fulfil such functions as the Commission may prescribe, in accordance with its terms of refer- .ence. There seelns to be no reason why the Subsidiary Group, under this decision, might not have had· e."Cactly the same powers as the Commission itself as regards watching the situation. In point of fact, if we study the Subsidiary Group's terms of reference, we will see that the Commission has actually limited its powers. The Commission, in out' view, acted properly under a. Council decision. We have heard no really tangible suggestion as to any impropriety under this head, except the recurrence in Mr. Gromy- ~o's statement of the word "automatic". I do J;1ot know what is thought to be so sinister about this word. If it means strict compliance with the Council's decision, I cannot see that it has any pejorative smse. Then, the representative' of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics claimed that the original Commission had been set up to investigate only those incidents to which the Greek Gov- °ernment ha. called the attention of the Security Council. He pointed out, as is quite evident, that the terms of reference of the original Commission could not refer to iuture incidents of which no one had any knowledge. But then, as the Australian representative pointed out, he does, later Qll in his speech, admit that °"the Subsidiary Group, in accordance with the resolution of the Security Council, can and should carefully investigate any incidents that may take place in the Greek frontier areas1". With this latter statement, my Goverrm~ent finds itself in full agreement. Incidentally, I calmot at all accept the Bul~ garian representative's interpretation, given this morning, of the sphere of work of the Sub~ sidiary Group. In thisconnexion, I should like to draw attention to the last clause in the Security Council's resolution of 19 December.2 It reads as follows: "That the Commission be invited to make any proposals that it may deem wise for averting a repetition of border violations and disturbances in these areas." Quite clearly, it is the intention that the Commission should make recommendations for the future. 1 Cette declaration est tiree de l'interpretation provisoire donnee au cours de la cent-trente-troisieme· sean~ du Conseil de securite (document S/p.V. 133) et non deJa traduction officiele figurant aux Proces-verbaux officiels du Conseil de. securite, Deuxieme Annee,No. 39. : Voir les Proces-verbaux officiels du Conseil de. securite, Premie:re Annee, Sec~nde Serie, No 28, page 7(11'. There was a further C!Igument in Mr. Gromy- .ko's speech. He cast doubt on the validity of the Commission's proceedings on, 29 April, when it adopted its resolution regarding the powers and functions of the Subsidiary Group, on the grounds that the liaison officers of the four Balkan countries were not invited to participate in the discussion. If I may say so, the Belgian representative, in his admirable and closely reasoned statement, has completely demolished this theory, and we have nothing to add to that.1 So much for the legal, er 'quasi-Iegal, arguments used in ~upport of the theory of the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that the decision of the Commission of Investigation of 29 April was a wrong decision. Stripped of these arguments, which, for the reasons I have given, we consider fallacious, the speech ofthe representative of the Union of Soviet. Socialist Republics does not, in the view of my delegation, constitute a convincing justification of the attitudes which have been adopted by the Governments of Yugoslavia, Albania and Bulgaria in declining to t:o-operate hitherto with the Subsidiary Group. With regard to the terms of the resolution which the representative of the Union of Soviet SocialiSt RepUblics has tabled, there is little to add to the objections, valid in our view, .which have already been raised by various members of the Council. Paragraph 1 of the reSolution, which apparently proposes that the Subsidiary Group should refer each separate case. or·each separate incident back to a Commission situated in Geneva, or even at a later date somewhere in mid-Atlantic· or on Long Island, seems to us on the impractical side. Whatever may have been the object underlying such a proposal, there can be no doubt that its effect would be to stultify the whole purpose of the Council's decision. . Paragraph 2 of the resolution,·which proposeS that the'Subsidiary Group should have its headquarters in Athens, seems to us to be equally inappropriate and unacceptable. In his speech, Mr. Gromyko reminded us that Athens is the political and administrative centre of ('-"eece. I shall not·bother the Council by reaclliilb over again the Commission's terms. of reference, but. it .is not my impression that they contain anything that would rule .out Salonika as the head... 1 Voir lesPToces-veTbau~ officiels du Conseil' de sscnriM. l)euxieme Annee, No 40. c~eagues. Paragraph 30f the resolution lays down that , the Subsidiary Group shall cease its activity with' the liquidation of the CoInmission itself. ,The Security Council has not yet, of course, taken any' decision with regard to the liquida- . tion of the Commission. When the time comes for ~ch a decision, I do not'think that anyone could tnaintain that the Subsidiary Group of the Commission should not cease its activity if the Commission itself is liquidated. That follows logically, since the Subsidiary Group is a subsIdiary group of the Commission. A subsidiary group dies,with the, parent organization, but in oUr view, death dpes not occur until the Council liquidates the parent. Under the last paragraph of our resolution of 19 December, the Council may conceiVably provide for some permanent bOdy of, obs~ers. If we say that the Subsidiary Group dies with the Commission of Investigation, that cannot, of course, limit in any way the right of the Council to continue its existence or to substitute something similar in its place, if if should wish to do so. - In any case, this question of the length of existence of the Subsidiary Group, which is sandwiched into the resolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, does not·seeni to be intimately connected with the rest of the resolution, which is designed to rectify .what I understand the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics regards as the' mistake on the 'part of the Commission in giving to the Subsidiary Group certain precise terms. of reference which 'weknow~As is well known, there is no mention in those terms of reference of the duration of the.subsidiary Group's exiStence. . •If the objections to paragraphs 1 and 2 of ,the resolution'of ,the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics are well founded, and my delegation is convinced that they ,are, then paragraph 4 is super1luous,since there is nQthing in'the Subsidiary Group's terms of reference which, is not inconformity with the Council's decision. To sum up, therefore, subjeCt toW-hat I have said about, paragraph 3, my delegatjonwill' vote, againSt the resolution of the Union of SovietSoc:ialist Republics. , , Si les objections aux paragraphes 1 et 2 de la resolution de l'Umonsovietique sont fondees -" et ma d8.egil,tion 'est convaincue qu'elles le sont-le paragraphe 4 devient superflu, puisque le mandat du Groupe subsidiaire ne contient aucune disposition qui, ne soit conforme a. la decision duConseil. En resume, ,done, et sous. reserve de ce que j'ai dit 'a, propos du paragraphe 3,ma deIega~ tion voteracontre la resolution de l'Union deS Republiques socialistes sovietiques. As regards the other three States, it observes that Albania, according to the statement of her liaison representative, thinks there is no need for the Subsidiary Group. As to that, I must say that the, Council thought there was a need, and the Council's view must prevail, since Albania, in participatiIig in the discussion of this question, accepted the obligations of the Charter. Bulgaria,! for her part." if I understand her position correctly, will apparently co-operate only on her own terms. The case of Yugoslavia~ in the view of my Government, i'1 more serious, since Yugoslavia is already a Member of the United Nations. The Yugoslav liaiso!!. offker, in his letter to the principal'Secretary of the Commjs<>jon, declared that "the Yugoslav Government is not in a position to accept the decision;' of the Commission.1 In our view, this is ,tantamount to a refusal to accept a decision of the Security Council. However, we now understand, from the speech of the Yugoslav representative on 16 May,2 and from the speech which we heard this morning from the Bulgarian representative, that the attitude of the Yugoslav and Bulg-arian Governments in this matter is not meant to imply the !Cnon-recognition of the decision of the United Nations", but, rather, a request that the CoUncil should re-examine the question of the validity ·of certain decisions. Accordingly, we, for our part, since,rcly hope that if, as a result of our discussion, the Council rejects the resolution, of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Yugoslav Government-·and I would add, the other Governments concerned-Will conform to the Council's decision and not persist in an attitude which, in our view, would constitute a breach of Article 25 of the Charter. M. KRASOVEC' (Yougo.slavie) (traduit de, l'anglais): Je m'abstiendrai de repondre idaux accusationsdeIiberees 'portees contre monGouvemement par le representant de la Grece au cours de la derniere seance du Consei18•• Je ' crois qu'il sera plus opportuIi d'y revenIr all moment de la discussiondu rapport de la" Commission; 'cela permettra d'eviter desrepe- ,. titions. Je ferai observer seulement queJe representant des Etats-Unisn'a pas juge necessaire d'interromprei'orateura cette occasion. Comme J'a declare 'le representant _de la Yougoslavie au.'cours de la reunion, du Conseil ""de securite du 16 mai2, le Gouvemement de la Mr. KRAsoVEc (Yugoslavia): I shall on this occasion refrain. from answering the deliberate accusations set forth ,by the representat;ive of the Greek Government at the last meeting of this · Council.3 I believe it will be more appropriate to deal with them duting the discuSsion of '~ Commission's report, and in that way prevL-~ repetition. May I only remark that the, representative of the United States did not consider it necessary on that occ~ion to interrupt the speaker. As the Yugoslav representative stated at the · Security Council meeting of 16 May,2 the Govemm~Iit .of the Federal People's'Republic of 1 Voir le$ PToc~s.veTbaux officiels du Conseilde· $8- curite, Deuxieme Annee, Supplement No 11. Annexe 30. 1 Ibid., No 40. . ' , . .s Ibid., ,No 41. The Yugoslav delegation never declared, nor ·does it have the intention of declaring, that it will not carry out the decisions of the Security Council. Howevct', our delegation has pointed out that the decision arrived at on 18 April · 1947 contains a violation of the Charter, and it ·is of the opinion that the Council would con~ tribute to its ownauthority~ as well as to the authority of the United Nations, if it would study ,thoroughly the objections brought forth by the Yugoslav delegation. We regret to state that so far, perhaps with the exception of the Australian representative, the representatives who have spoken in the Council have not shown any inclination to deal thoroughly with the arguments presented by the Yugoslav delegation. . , , It is true that Article 25 of the Charter 8.",?ecmcally directs the Members of the Organiiation to accept and to apply decisions of the Security CounciI. It is very typical that thema~ jority of the Council members who have quoted this Article invariably neglect to quote the en-l of this Article, for it is in the final phrar that we, find the essence of this entire disagreement. ,Article 25 reads. as follows: "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Counc.ilin ac-. C()rdance with the present Charter." ·. The essence of the issue is in the application of this phrase. The Yugoslav delegation bound itself, and, conscious of its obligations, an- " ~ounces that it is prepared to accept and to ~pply the decisions of the Security Council. in. compliance with the Charter of our Organiza- , tion. We stated this dearly at the meeting of the' Security Council. Included in every legal order is a system of .legal remedies. A violation of regulations can ·.always occur for various reasons, in spite of the ·good intentions a:ild conscientiousness of those 'who apply the regulations. For this very reason, .the rule'prQvides for revisi(!n~ procedures. The . ·very structure of the Sec~rityCouncil excludes .. any possibility of appeal and revision.before any other authority. However, that does not exclude the .possibility or .'obligation .of the Security ·COUD,cil to investigate. every objection which is ...'weU"meant, made· by any Member of the Organization who. claims and submits argum.ents to the effect that the Council, by one of its decisions, violated the Charter of the Organization. The Yhgoslav·delegation ,believed-an~ it sti,ll ., believes~that.C<lnmg the attention of the Coun- ~cil to such violations of theCha.rt~ris not only its right iindduty, hq.t also a contribution.to the greater authority()f t~ s~preme organ .of the international syst~ which 18 ,entrusted With the In the opIDlon of the Yugoslav delegation, the first violation of the Charter occurred when authority was delegated to the Commission of Investigation by the Security Council, which entrusted the Commission with the power to form subsidiary groups. . I did not notice that any of the members of the .Security Council who have taken the floor . even a1ttempted to explain this most essential objection made by Yugoslavia. Nevertheless, it was' this particular question that we expressly wished to have cleared up. The Yugoslav Government is being criticized for. not having' complied with a decision, which on the basis of Article 25 of the Charter is binding ¥pon it. Article 25, however, refers to the decisions only of the Security Council as binding upon the Members of the United Nations. This Article does not compel the Members of the Organization to accept and apply the decisions of' any other body. This is not only a question,of words, but one of substance. The Security Council is of a unique composition; it has special methods of voting, as well as special procedural rules, which assure participation in its work, without voting rights, to all interested States whose interests could be vio- .1ated by a Council decision. For this reason and because such guarantees,were foreseen; the decisions of the Council have taken on great international' significance. Therefore,.it is not only outside the scope of.the Charter regulations to delegate authority from the Security Council to other organs, but it is also against the spirit of the Charter. To charge that a. Member State did'nut carry out the decision of the competent organ because it did·not carry out and because it .does not accept as authoritap.ve ·the decision of a non-competent organ-to which the competent organ qelegated its authority for a specific occurrence without being empowered to do sorepresents a mistake in reasoning. It cannot be maintained that a decision of the Commission is a decision of the Council. ,Accordingly, a decision of the CommiSsion can- , b __~_~ ~e 31 of the Charter-or in other words, the assertion that a.subsidiary organ of the Security Council does not need to consult representatlves of non-m~ber States of the Security CoUncil if they are concerned-is an assertion whiCh is in opposition to ~e spirit of the Charter of our Organization. Such a practice would not be in conformity with the Charter and would lead to senous consequences. Let us consider it. In the first. place, if the Council delegates its authority to other organs, every guarantee' extended to the States wIUch are non-members of the Security Council, acrording to .A11:icle 31 of the Charter, becomes illusory in all cases where Article 31 would apply. The Council· would simply be decidirig to establish subsidiary. bodies, while these subsidiary bodies would be making the actual decisions. Thus, Article 31 of the Charter would be reduced to a guarantee to interested countries tliat they may'be present at discussions in the 'Council when subsidiary bodies are being established, but not present at the deliberations of those.bodies.' If we add to this the assertion of soni~ members-of the ,Council that the decisions of such subsidiary bOdies have full authority in ~ccordance with Article 25, then we can come fa the conclusion that interested nations would not. be participating in the reaching of' decision..c; of substance; or in other words, the guarantees of' particip.ation of non-members of the Security Council in activities covered by Article 31 would be reduced to consid~rations of procedure. We cannot' understand the explanation by , some .members of the Council that the Commission do~ not need to consult the representatives of the mterested States in the Commission, '\.,'Ven' when the decisions concern the .States m . qu~on. This e.,-{planation is based on an etymo- Etats~ Cette these s'appuie sur une interpretation etymologique de I'expression "agent de liaison". Le representant de l'Australle sOutient que les organes de liai;;on .ne peuvent pas vraiment representer les Etats dont ilsemanent, qu'ilsne sont que des instruments charges de faire coli· naitre a la Commission les dCsirs de ces Etats ,et decommuniquer a ceux.,ci les decisions de la Commission. n parait superflu de discuter longuement cette these et de chercher a proqver que la tache de la Commission etait de con- . sulter les agents· de liaison, que la Co~on, . en fait, ne pouvait prendre de decision: sans les avoir consultes. Au teste, l~ .Conseil de securite luf-meme a resolu cette question. Quand la resolution prise par.le Conseille 19 decembre 1946 a ete mise ~~~ '~~;~~ih~r;;;~:n~;ti~e'oi~=~~~:=~ tains .that .the liaison organs cannot actually ~present their States but are onlv'instruments fa.communicate the will of the State to the Commission and to inform the·'State of the' Commission's decisions.....It would be superfluous to discuss at length and prove that the duty of the Commission was to consult with liaison officers and that the Commission could not ll!ake decisions without having consulted tIi,em~ This is -,a qu~tion which has been solved by the· Council itself. At the time the resoluti<:>n of 19 December 19460£ the Council was being Is any further comIilent necessary? Is. the declaration of the President not an authentic interpretation of the text that was put to the vote? That was the interpretation which was put into practice when the Commission was in the field, not because of the liberal spirit of the Commission, but because it was correct. If the contrary opinion, which is so staunchly defended by some members of the Council, is accepted, and if we add to this what has ~eady been said regarding the creation of· subsidiary organS for making decisions of substance, what would then be the consequence? The result would be that . States sitting on subsidiary.organs would be able to deprive the States concerned of the opportun"" ity ofpresenting _arguments which would be helpful in making decisions of substance; or the Council would not be resolving questions of substance, but would be delegating the solution of such questions to the.Commission. The Commission,however, would, be ignoring the existence of liaison officers, reducing them to the status 6£ messengers. This simply means"that the decisions would be made without consulting the interested States, and this would be contrary to the spirit of A1~tic1e 31 of t!!e Charter. This interpretation given by the representative of Australia would deprive any small nation concerned of the ·right·awarded it by the Char.- ter. I have to state that' the Australian delega- . tion, which has always pretended to be the protector of small nations, which has always pleaded for equal rights for small nations in the Security Council and in the United Nations generally, this time deserts this _alleged role. In _this concrete case in which the rights of the Yugoslav and two other small democratic nations are in- . volved, the Australian representative. changes his attitude towards small nations. ' It is apparent, froni what we have set forth, that there -is a dispute over the interpretation of the application of the Charter. What the Yugoslav -representative on the Commission objected to was not merely the factl.:finding role of the. Stibs~diary Group and Yugoslavia's participation in that work-'although -we consider it unnecessary to postpone the decision further, in order toallow the investigation of the various .,' .•When .•the'resolu1ion ..of. 18. April was '.'being discussed, we· expressed our stand against that resolution. We .cannot be responsible if the'resolution is vague. If the Council, in a new decision on. interpretation, would m$e the disputed points more precise, it would reach a decision whi~h, first"wouldbe emanatmgfrom. a competent body, and secondly, would be remaining within the limits of the Charter. Such a de~ision would show that Members of the United Nations , nt;ednot fear that decisions of the Security 90uneiI could be incompetently and inaccurately mterpreted'by,some other body. We considerthatsuch a grave measure as al- 'lawing .'a!t..·internationat 'body.. to inv~~tigafe freely throughout the territory of a State represents a step w¥chmustbetaken with thegreatest.cautiollby the highest and most respOnsible organs,. arid under all guarantees as regards procedure. - "Mofeover,the Commission ','of Investigation, byway of hypothetical reasoning about the futu.r~ situation in the :6alkans, withOJ,lthearing the directly interested parties, has purely and simply traIl$formed its exceptional authorization, with which' it was invested ad hoc and. for. the study .of. a given. situation,. into a pennanent authori;. zation,invested •in .•a. subsidiary organ." 1 This paragraph 1 quoted from the speech of the Yugoslav.••represeiltative .'.at .the hundred and thirty-fourth .'meeting. . ~Iay I again be allowed to repeat what our representative, Mr. Kosanovic, stated at the rtleetiIlg:of 16 May? , .,•• "Article 31 ofthe Charter guarantees to every Member, State. which is· not a rnember· of the Security Council the right to take ,part, without",ote,in. the c:Escussiohofany question dealt With by the Security,Council,whenever tlielatterconsiders that its. resulting .qecisions might .'specially affed the "interests of that Member State. The same·· provision'constitutes the ,gt!.ar~ ant~e .wher~py·the ·.right of sovereignty .of each l\1emner State. is protected, a .right which' is the basis of .thecontractua.!. character of our Organization under Article 2, paragraphr.1 ' .Should the. Security Councifacceptthesuggestions ,?fYugoslavi~ in the same spontal1eous partiesdirecte~tmtinteressees, purement et simplement tr~forme "les pouvoirs extraordinaires dont elleetait specialement investie pour l'etude· d'une situation donnee enpouvoirs permanents deIeguesa un organe subsidiaire 1." Ce paragraphe .est une citation du discours qu'a fait lerepr~entant de la Yougoslavie au cours de. la· cent.,trente.,qmitriemeseance. Jeme permettrai de repeter une foisde pluS ce q1.le notre representant, M. Kosan.ovic, a declare au coursde la seance du 16 mai: '. "L'Article31 .de la. Chart,e prevoit que ••tout Etat Membre qui ne ·fait pas partie du Coriseil de secutitepeut 'participer, ,sans droit de vote, a ..la discussion de toutequestion .souniise au Conseil .de securite~. chaque fois,. que celui-ci estime que sesdecisions sOl1tsusceptibles d'affecter les interets de cet Etat Membre. POUf ·chaqueEtat Membre, cette. meme disposition garantit, lasauvegarde de son droit de souverainete, droit quiconstitue la, 1:>asememe.du caractere contractuel de notre Organisation aux i:e~es du premier paragraphe de I'Article21." SI le Conseil.de securlte acceptait lespropositions de la Yougoslavie aussi sincereIllent, aussi , M. DE LA TOURNELLE. (France): La resolu~ tion adoptee le 18 avril parleConsei1 de securite, et a .la· redaction de laque1le la,delegation fran- Mr. DF, LA TouRNELLE (France) (translate'd from French): The resolution adopted by the Security Council on .18 April, in the drafting of which the French delegation .participated, states that: "•.. the Commission established by the resolution of the Council of 19 October 1946 shall maintain in the 2.1'ea concerned a sub~ sidiarygroup .. . . to continue to fulfil such fanctions as' the Commission niay prescribe,. in accordance with the terms of.reference . • ." We have before'us, therefore, .a clear and precise text allowing of no ambiguity. Within the limits of. its terms of reference as laid down by the Security Council, the Commission was bound to orgronze a subsidiary group. Anyone who , objected to this decision of the C~mmission's ,would be directly•contesting the' Security Council's authority. On.29 April1947,the Commission ofIn~ vestigation drafted instructions to the Subsidiary Group with. the •same precision. I cannot admit, as has just bef'Jl suggested, that in taking these decisioris the Security 'Council •.violated the Charter. , The Sbviet resolution submitted to us does ,. .not. seem to'me to make any modification neces-' sary in the.text· .of' the .instructions' .drafted by the Commission. Indeed, the latter acted as the Security Council< had requested..It did not oyerfltep its rights. .• . As .regards the headquarters of the Group, a question. which has given rise to discussion, it seems to we that the Commission was. entirely ,free· to choose "any'location which it considered most·suitable, whether that was.Salonika, Ath~ ens, Larissa,or any other town; this is a question solely. within the 'competence of the Commission. In regard to the duration of the Subsidiary Group, it is quite.evident.that it cannot. exceed that. of the CominisSion, sirice the Group was created by the Commission in conformity with _ the provisions ofits terms ofi'eference. The pow~ ers of the.Subsiciiary Group will therefore expire at the same tiIheasthose of the Commission~ There is'nothing in the text drafted.by the Com~ prission of Investigation to suggest that the Sub~ sidiary Gn:lUP might continue to exiSt after the Commission'sdisappeaunce. All comments on this subject therefore appear to mestrperHuous. Mter .the. dissolution of the Comm~sion, the Council mlJ,Y esta~lish any other supervisory group it li'..ay think nece,'ls'FY. ~aise a palticipe, declare que ".. .•. la Commis- . .'lion creeepar la resolution duConseil en date du 19 clecembre 1946· maintiendra dans les regions interessees un groupe' subsidiaire . •• qui continueraa accomplir te1les fonctions que lui assignera la Commission,en confomnte avec son mandat". Nous· sOIn.mesdoncen presence d'un texte clair, precis, ne ·laissant· pbl.ce .a. aucUIie arr.t-: biguite.• La ConnnisSion, dans les limites de son mandat tel qu'il.a ete detemrine par le.Consei1 de securiM,'.a •.ete .'tenue d'organi'ser.un groupe subsidiaire.. Quiconque .s'eleverait contre cette decision .de la Commission'contesterait' directemeni l'autorite 'du Conseil de securite. La Conunission d'enquete, le 29 avril 1947, a redige avec la meme precision des. instructions pour leGroup~ subsidiaire. Jene puis admettre, commit il~ent de l'etresuggere,que leConsei1 de securite, al'occasion de •ces"dedsions, .aurait vioIC la Charte. La resolution· sovi~tiqueiqui no:us est~0posee n,e •I;l1eparait·· apporter 'aucunemodification netessaireau textedes instructions redigees par la CommisSion. Celle-ci a, eneffet, procede , commele C6nseil de'securitel'en·avaitpriee. Eile n'a pasoutrepasse sesdroits. . Au sujet dusiegedu Groupt:, qui donne lieu a discussion, Rme. semble que .1aCommission avait toute libertepour l'etablir a l'emplacement qui 1ui paraissaitleplusqualifie,que ce.soit Salonique, AtheIles,Larissa ou.toute autre vine; c'est la une ,question relevant de la seule com'" petence de la Commission. , En. ce qui conceme la duree'del'existencedu Groupe subsidiaire, il est bien evident qu'e1le ne peut. exeeder ce1le de la Commission~ puis~ qu'il a ,ete .cree par cette derniereen conformite des tertnes de son ma."ldat. Les· pOuYQirs du Groupe subsidiaire. expireront done •en .,metne temps 'que ceuxde la Commission. Rien, clans le texte·redige Pal," la Commission.d'enquete, ne laisse supposer.que le Groupe subsidiaire pourrait subsister apresla disparition de la CoInll)isSion. Tous commentaires surce sujet me paraissent donc superHus.LeConseilpourra, apres' dissolu~' tion .de la (JoIDlllission, creer tout autregroupe desuryeillance .qui luLparaitrait necessaire. Mr. KATZ-SUCHY (Poland): On 18 April 1947, after a long discussion, a resolutit:..n setting up the Subsidiary Group of the Commission of Investigatiori was adopted by a vote of nine in favour and two abstentions. The Polish delegation, during the discussion, did not agree to the necessity of setting up such a body, and abstained from voting.' In our opinion,however" this resolution is valid and stands, and we consider that it is the duty of all the members of thiS Council of the United Nations,as well as the parties concerned, who agreed to accept the authority ami the decision of the Council and who are not all Members of the United Nations, tt> adhere to thatdecision. My Qovernment'has alreaG" shown its adherence to it by appointing a member on the Subsidiary Group. Entering today's discussion on the resolution submitted by the representative of,the Union,of Soviet Socialist Republics" we do not challenge' the previous reSolution, and it is not our mten- ='~'-tto1¥tochangecit, to abolish-it, or even to weaken: it. We consider this discussion and the proposal itself as very valuable, and in the opinion of the Polish delegation, what we are doing now is only a practical implementation of the resolution adopted on 18 April. It may be well to remember how we arrived atthe decision to set up "a subsidiary group. It was after the statement of the representative of the United States of America, Mr. Austin,who, m spit,e of many rumours, came before this Council'and outlined the United States plan for aid to Greece.:L In Mr. Austin's spf:ech, few ref- ,erences were made to the alleged border violations ot' the threat to Greece from its northern neighbours. The statement dealt mostly with the terrible plig-ht of the Greek people, with Greece's mtemal difficulties and the raging civil war. Mr. Austin described this state of affairs as a "disintegration of the Greek State". ' Although we discussed the matter thorou~hIy, and the Polish delegation took several'opportunities to show· its sympathy •and support for the plan of economi~ aid to Greece, in our opiniQn this Council acted rather hastily and \ as anxious ' to close the subject in reac:hing at ieast some kfud of resolution. . Our' delegation accepted the res9lution sub- M. KATZ-SUCHY (Pologne) (traduit de l'anglais): Le 18 avril 1947, apres un debat prolonge, le Conseil a adopte, par neuf voix, avec deux abstentions, une resolution want a' la creation du Groupe subsi4iaire de la Commission ci'enquete. Au cours de la discussion, . la delegation de la Pologne n'a pas reconnu la necessite de cet organismeet s'est abstenue de voter. 'Selon nous, toutefois, cette resolution reste valide; nousestimons donc qu'il est du devoir, non seUIement de tous les membres de ce Conseil, mais encore des parties interessees, qui ne sont pas toutes Memhres de l'Organisation mais qui se sont engagees a accepter l'autorite et les decisions du Consei1, de se :tallier a cette decision. Mon Gouvemement a demontre qu'il acceptait cette decision en df.signant d'ores et deja. son represt>..ntant au Grm'pe, subrddiaire. En participant aujou::d'hui ;<1-1 debat sur la resolution qu'a ~umise le reIJresentant de l'Union des Republiques sociaIistes scvietiques. nous ne nous elevons pas cantre la res'Olution pFecedente, --etne-songeoIls,--rj:.a .la--n:tediller, pj a la supprimer,ni meme a. en diminuer la portee.. ~ous ~timons que la presente discussion et la proposition eIle-meme sont d'une importance mcontestaole "et,. .du point, de vue de la delegation de la Pologne, 'nos...!lebats ne servent qu'une fin: 'meitre en, ctU\Te la:'resollltion que nous avons adoptee le 18 awl. _ Il convient peut-etre de rappeler a ce propos comment nons en sommes venus a decider de la creation d'un groupe subsidiaire. La.decision a ete prise ala suite de la declaration du representant des,Etats-Unis d'Amerique, M. Austin, qui, en depit de nombreuses ruIheurs, vint exposer brievement devant le Conseil le programme americain d'aide a la Grece:L. Le discours de M. Anstin ne contenait que derares allusions aux pretendUes violations de frontieres ou aux menaces ,que feraient pt:;Ser ,sur la Grece sea voisins du nord. Sa declarationportait principalement sur l'etat dedetreslie du, peuple grec, sur ses difficultes d'ordre interieur et sur la guerre civile qui dechire le pays.•M.' Austin a pade a cet egard d'une "desmtegration de l'Etat grec". ' Bien que la question ait ete debattue a fond, et que la delegation de la Pologne aitaplusieurs reprisessaisi l'occasionde mantrer combien eUe approuvait le plan, d)aide' economique a. la Grece, le '. Conseil a agi, selon, nons, d'une maniere un peu precipitee, desireux qu'il etait ' sans doute de clore la question en adoptant une resolution .quelconque. Si notre delegation a accepte la resolution soumise par le representant des '. Etats-Unis, a l'ellet de ereer ungrOtlpe subsidiaire, c'est qu'il ---"Voir lesP,roces~v,erbalJ,x, officiets'd,u 'Conse,il d~", SoB,'L curite. Deuxieme Annee, No 30 "~Ji The terms of reference of the Commission of Investigation are not wide open. They were carefully dravm up on 19 December 19i.l:6, and they defined its functions exactly. According to the above-mentioned resolution, the task of the Commission was "to ascertain the facts relating to the alleged border violations . . .". I believe this clearly defines its task. Certain border violations had been reported to the Security Council by the Greek representative, and in order to investi- , gate them, a Commission was set up. We find, however, that the Commission of Investigation, in drawing up directives for the Subsidiary Group, has given it much wider powers than those possessed by the Commission itself. It was stated at this Council that no one can bestow more power than he himself possesses. Did the terms of reference of the Commission of Investigation entitle the Commission' to investigate all violations or incidents? The Polish delegation is quite willing to agree to the Widest tenus of reference, but this must be stated in the resolution. At tlie present moment,' we do not yet know the results of the, investigation, except. , for certain. rumours-very often offensive rumours-reaching us through, the press. From these rumours, we hear that there is going to be more than one report and that certain pressure was exerted on four membt::..s of the Commission to bring them into' line with another group. We donot know the results, and we are impatiently waiting for' them. To our knowledge~ no new incidents ~ave occurred, 'although ilie ' main cause of trouble in the Balkans, the civil WM, is continuing. Should ne:w incidents occur, ,We are quite prepared to agree to'suh.nit them to the Subsidiary Group's investigation, but we; believe, that no' organ of the ,Security, Council can deal with .incidents which have not' been' reported tQ the Security Council and with cases of which the Security' Council has not been' seized. ' I do not know whether some of the m.embers' of the Council will bevery happy with the broad interpretation given to the terms cif reference. Some time ago, the Council discussed theinter~ vention of the Commission to prevent theexecu.. .. ''W Will this Council agree that the Subsidiary Group should investigate such incidents as the slaying of hundreds of political prisoners, or the case of the Albanian quislings who escaped into Greek territory and retumed armed into Albanian territory to wage war against the Albanian Government? I repeat, we are quite prepared to vote for such terms of reference, but they have to be drawn up and voted upon. At the moment, we have the terms of reference which were voted. upon on'19 December. These terms of reference direct the Commission to investigate certain cases which have been reported to this Council by the Greek Government. r~pete, a. voter en faveur d'un mandat de cette nature, a. condition toutefois que, d'abord, on en fixe les termes et le mette aux voix. A I'heure act;uelle, les terriles qui nous lient sont ceux du mandat vote le 19 decembre, qui chargent la CommisSion de proceder a. une enquete sur certains cas precis que le Gouvernement grec a portes a. la connaissance du Conseil de securite. La delegation de la Pologne estime que le mandat. du Groupe subsidaire ne saurait aIler au dela. des termes du mandat vote le 19 decembre. En decidant de n'autoriser les enquetes du Groupe, subsidiaireque sur instructions de la Commission - et a. conditio~que ies faits soumis a. l'enqueteaient ete, an prealable, portes a. la connaissance du Conseil de secm:ite.- nous pourrons, j'en suis persuade, poursuivre l'examen de cettequestion avec plus de succes, je dirai meme en parfaite una.trimite. En ce quiconcerne le siege du Groupe subsidiaire, .je vous demanderai, une fois de' plus, de vous reporter au mandat..Celui-ci declare que la Commission "aura autorite pour c~)l1duire son enquete en Grece septentrionale et en tous lieux dans les' autres parties de la Grece, en Albanie, en Bulgarie, en Yougoslavie . . .". Le Gtoupe menera, donc son enquete non seulement a. la frontiere septentrionale, mais en tout lieu du territoire grec, par exemple dans le '. Peloponnese, OU des' operations militaires se deroulent aI'heure actuelle.. Je ne pense pas qu~ le.Groupe subsidiaire sera en mesure dt mener son enquete en prenant Salonique comme point' de depart. Comme preuve, je citerai une declaration qu'a faite le representant de l'Australie, a. une seance precedente du Conseil'de securite. Voicisesparoles: The Polish delegation cqnsiders that the terms of reference of 19 December cannot be exceeded by the Subsidiary Group. Therefore, we believe that by resolving that the Subsidiary.Group can @'I'Y.out iIlvestigations ,0nlYc-,on the instructions of the Commission-investigations of facts which have been' reported to the Security Council-it will enable us to proceed over this case with greater success, and, I dare say, with unanimity. With regard to the seat of the Subsidiary Group, I must again refer you to the terms of reference which state that the Commission "shall have authority to, conduct ,', its investigation in . northern Greece and in such places in other parts of Greece, in Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia . . ." Therefore, they shall investigate not only on the northern. border, but'in any part of Greece, for instance, the Peloponnesus, where military operations are going on at the momenf. . . I do not think theywiUbeable to do it from Salonika..,In support of this, lwill quote a statement of the representative of Australia, at a previous meetirIg of the Security Cou"'cil. He stated: "Road communications between Athens and Salonika are very bad; there is no railway connexion at all; air communications are' not regular; it is several days by sea."2 ~'Les communications, par route entre Athenes et Saloriique sont tres'precaires; il n'existe aucune ligne de chemin de fer; 1es communications par air .sont irregulieres et ·le voyage par mer , dure plusieurs jours2." Si tel est l'etat des communications entre Salonique et la capitale, on peut imaginer' aisc':' ment ce qu'ellessont entre Salonique et les autres parties de la Grece. Croit-on vraiment qu'un. organisme du Conseil de securite pourra travailler,avec succes sm insta,lle son siegedans If these are the connexionsbetween Salonika and the,capital at Athens, we can easily imat1l1e what tb.e connexicus would be betWeen Salonika and !1ny otIjer place in Greece; Do you really believe that frop:1 a place cut ()fLfrom the rest of the w.or1~,as Salonika is today, an organ of There is no need to continue longer on the question of the termination of the ,mandate. It is ,quite understandable that the Subsidiary Group cannot live longer than the Commission from '\\l1ich it draws. its power and mandate. Practically:all the representatives have agreed on that. It was stated by the representative of the United States, by the representative of France and by sel'eral others. I do not think there is any need ..0 discuss this longer. , It is regrettable that certain statements of the representatives of Yugo~~via,,Albania, a~d. Bulgaria before'the COmmISSIOn have been nnsmterpreted by the press. That has brought a very unhealthy atmosphere into the previous'discussion. I must say that listening to the statements here of representatives of all the four Balkan countries; I do not find anyt1ing \Vhich would be contradictory to their -duties;' caccordi..",g'-:to,_~·the- Charter of the United Nations.' , We have invited them to send liaison officers. They can accept or decline. No one has declined to accept the decision of the Security Council, and we do not understand how legal. and quasilegal arguments on the violation of the Charter by' Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania have been brought in at' this stage'of the debate. ~gents de'liaison. lls peuvent accepter OU,refuser de le faire.Personne;pourtant, n'a refuse de se conformt;r a la deciSion du Conseil desecurite, et nous ne comprenons pas, au point ou en sont nos debats; comment des argumentS'juridiques ou d'apparence juridique ontpu ctre invoques' id en ce .qui concerne une violation des dispositions de la Charte de la part de la Yougoslavie, de la BUlgarie et de l'Albanie. Je desire, une fois de .plus, vaus donner l'assurance qu'en votant en faveur de la resolution presentee par 'rUnion ~es Republiques sodalistes sovietiques,nous sommesanimes par le seul desir deparvenir a un reglemellt rapide de la situation dans les. Balkans; pour que ces pays ravages <par laguerre puissenttetrauver la paix et la possibilite de mener .'a .bieJ:l lenr tache de reconstruction.Nous connaissons les souffrances que ces pays ont endurees. Notre pays. a ,ete lui aussi detruit completement .au cours de cette guerre; aussi nous sentons-nolls profondement unis alL"!: quatre Etats balkaniques sans distinction.: la Grece et la Bulgarie, .1'Alban!e et la'Yougoslavie -"- nous noussentonsunis a euxen t~t que payseuropeeg, en tant que pays detruitpar la guerre, .. et en tantqu'Etat Membre de l'Organisation des Nations Unies~ Apportons la Palx a cette. region infortunee du. glpbe et oublions lapolitique. de force pour Ile penser qu'aux seules.populations des Balkans. Le PRESIDENT:La seance est levee et reprendra a 15 heures. La seance est levee a13 h. 20. I wish to assure you again,that by voting for , the resolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,we are animated by only one desire, to see a quick settlement in the Balkans which will bring peace and possibilities of rehabilitation to these war-torn countries. We know their sufferi..llgs.We ourselves are a country which smferedcomplete destructioJ). in this war and .we have. a greatfee1ing. of'unity with all four of the .~Ba1kan.. countries, with Greece and Bulgaria, . '~ithAlbania and Yugoslavia-unity as a Europ,eancountry, as .a . war-destroyed country and ,as a .Member of the United Nations. Let .us bring peace to tl$ unhappy part of the world, forgetting power politics andrememberingtbe simple people of the Balkans. 'fhe'PImSlDENT:The meeting is. adjourned until'3 o'dock this aftelll.oon.