S/PV.1362 Security Council

As on previous occasions when the Council has had this item under consideration, the representatives of Cyprus, Turkey and Greece have submitted requests to be invited to participate without vote in the discussion, In accordance with the usual practice of the Council, therefore, I propose to invite those three representatives to take seats at the Council table in order to participate without vote in the discussion of the item before us. A f the invitation of the President, Mr. Z. Rossides (Cyprus), Mr. 0. Eralp (Turkey) and Mr. A. S’. L&is (Greece) took places at the Council table.

The report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Operation in Cyprus for the period 6 December 1966 to 12 June 1967 was circulated to members of the Council last week as document S/7969. 3. l should also like to draw the attention of the Security Council to the seven-Power draft resolution [S/79961 which is sponsored by the delegations of Argentina, Bra& Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria. 4. The Council will now take up the discussion of the matter before us. I give the floor to the first speaker on my list, the representative of Argentina, who will introduce the joint draft resolution.

On behalf of my own. delegation and those of Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria, I have the honour to present to the Council the draft resolution contained in document S/7996 concerning the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus. 6. Basically this draft resolution reproduces resolution 231 (1966) of 15 December 1946, which itself w;Ls based on a number of earlier resolutions, dating back to 1964, regarding the stationing of the Force. The essential purpose of the draft resolution is t.:, extend the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force for a further period of six months, until 26 December 1967. This proposed extension is based on the final paragraph of the report by the Secretary-General on the United Nations operation in Cyprus [S/7969/, in which the Secreeary- General recommends the extension of the mandate of UNFICYP for a further period of six months, up to 26 December 196’7. The Government of Cyprus and the Governments of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom have given .their consent to the extension of the mandate. 7. On behalf of my delegation I now wish to thank the Secretary-General for the detailed report which he has submitted to us and which shows us clearly not only what has already taken place but also the general characteristics of the problem. The over-all picture which emerges is that the truce has been kept, although some incidents, particularly in the Larnaca area, have disturbed the uneasy quiet and may give cause for concern. In other words, as the Secretary-General himself points out, the Force, by its patient and unremitting efforts, has had no small measure of success in discharging the essential part of its mission, which is to prevent a recurrence of fighting and help to maintain law and order. 8. The day-to-day situation in the Island has manifestly improved although from time to time incidents remind us of the seriousness of the situation. If the United Nations Force remains in areas of direct confrontation, the renewal of armed strife seems less likely. If, however, the Force were to be withdrawn, especially from certain areas, armed strife would be practically inevitable. For that reason and for others connected with the maintenance of law and order, the presence of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force is essential. I 10. We are fundamentally dedicated to preventing the spread and continuation of conflicts, but the actual settlement is lost sight of. These so-called peace-keeping operations are, perhaps, the most striking example of this tendency. Their objectives make it possible to call them police actions in the best sense of the term. Order is kept, but the problem is not solved. My delegation believes that the continued stationing of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, unaccompanied by any attempt to settle the Cyprus question, is merely putting off the peaceful settlement of the dispute, which must come sooner or later, by virtue of the Charter itself. 11. Before concluding, my delegation wishes to express its appreciation in the Council of the services rendered by Mr. Carlos A, Bernardes, of Brazil, who represented the Secretary-General in Cyprus with great distinction from 1964 to January 1967. 12. Mr, FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): The Soviet Union’s position on the question of Cyprus is well known. It has been expressed repeatedly in statements by the Soviet Government and in speeches by its representatives in the Security Council and elsewhere, We wish to make it clear that this position remains unchanged. 13. The Soviet Union bases itself on the premise that the question of Cyprus must be settled by peaceful means, in the interests of the Cypriot people and in order to reduce tension in this part of the world. The Soviet Union firmly supports the Cypriot people’s anti-imperalist struggle for the complete independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Cyprus, which is a full Member of the United Nations and is pursuing a policy of non-alignment. 14. There is not and there cannot be any doubt that the solution of Cyprus’ internal problems is a matter for the Cypriot people itself. The question of Cyprus must be settled without outside intervention, The lawful rights of both national communities in Cyprus must be respected. The Soviet Union is resolutely opposed to any proposals and attempts to settle the Cyprus question behind the backs of the Cypriot people, to the detriment of its fundamental interests and to the advantage of the imperialist Powers. 15. It is our firm conviction that in order to ensure the genuine independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus, all foreign troops must be withdrawn 16. Recent events have shown very plainly that the imperialist strategists of NATO have greatly intensified their efforts to convert the Eastern Mediterranean into a bridgehead of neo-colonialism against peoples fighting for their freedom and independence. Who can have any faith in the assertions of the NATO politicians about their “re. spect” for the rights of the Cypriot people, when tlte Western ‘Powers are openly trying to gain unrestricted control over Cyprus, to the detriment of its sovereignty and nafional interests. Military equipment of the most up-todate kind is being concentrated at the military bases of the former colonizers, for use against the freedomloving peoples of this area. 17. Whenever the Government of Cyprus raises its voice in defence of its lawful national interests and the cause of peace in this area, and opposes attempts to use its territory for hostile acts against the Arab countries, NATO circles reply by intensifying their threats and crude pressure, 18. Certain imperialist Powers are aiming to draw Cyprus unconditionally into the network of the Western militar)l ! bloc. The various plans advanced in the West for the settlement of the question of Cyprus, in NATO style, all amount to this. 19. These plans, as we know, are to be implemented in two phases. First, Cyprus is to be deprived of its independence; and then further plans are to be put into effect enabling countries members of the NATO bloc to establish new bases on the Island. It is common knowledge fhaf reactionary forces and militarist circles have been assigned a part-and not by any means a minor one-in the practical implementation of the NATO plans. Thus, we are faced with a large-scale conspiracy by aggressive foreign forces against the independent Cypriot State; we are faced with attempts to place the Island under the military and political control of NATO, and for its use for the aggressive purposes of the NATO bloc. 20. In these circumstances it is the duty of all States which champion the rights of small nations, and it is the duty of all true friends of the Cypriot people, to take effective steps to strengthen the independence and sovcreignty of the Republic of Cyprus. 21, The Soviet delegation would like to draw attention to the need for all States Members of the United Nations, in accordance with the Security Council resolution 186 (1964) of 4 March, to refrain from any action likely to worsen the situation in Cyprus. 22. Today the Security Council is again considering the question of Cyprus in connexion with the Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Operation in Cyprus for the period 6 December 1966 to 12 June 1967 [S/7969/. In this report the Secretary-General again reconlmends the extension of the mandate of UNFICYP for a further period of six mbnths,i.e. up to 26 December 1967. 24. This fact is acknowledged in the Secretary-General’s report, which states, irzter diu, that “the basic issues which are at the root of the Cyprus problem continue to be unresolved”, and that in fact a “deadlock” has been reachedin the settlement of the Cyprus question. 31. These, Mr. President, are the few considerations of a general nature which the Soviet delegation wishes to put forward at a time when the Security Council is discussing the question of prolonging the presence of armed forces in Cyprus. 25. The Soviet Union has stressed on many occasions that the use of foreign troops-including United Nations forcesand even the mere presence of such forces in the territories of other States may result in interference in the domestic affairs of States, serious international complications and extremely dangerous consequences for the United Nations itself. Surely this is borne out by the unfortunate experi” ence of the past. 32. With regard to the draft resolution on this question which has been submitted by the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria [S/7996] and in which it is proposed, inter alia, that the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force be extended for a further period of six months, we note that this draft resolution reaffirms the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964 together with other decisions taken by the Council on the question of Cyprus, 26. It is for this reason that the Soviet Union has been consistently advocating the strict compliance with the United Nations Charter in matters relating to the use of armed force on behalf of the United Nations. We again consider it our duty to point out that, under the Charter, the Security Council alone has the right to take decisions on these questions. 33. The Soviet Union will not object to the extension of the stationing of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus for a further period of six months, but only because this is in keeping with the wishes of the Cyprus Government, and only on strict understanding that this extension is effected in complete conformity with the provisions of the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964-that is, without any change in the existing functions of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus or in the present method of financing, i.e. financing on a voluntary basis. 27. Of course, this does not mean that one should minimize the role of the General Assembly, which is the most representative forum of our Organisation and which, in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter, “may discuss any questions relating to the maintenance of international peace and security”. 28, The meaning of the various General Assembly declarations and resolutions on the many vital international problems which are of concern to the peoples of the world is crystal clear and generally understood. Many important steps taken by the General Assembly have contributed to the maintenance of international peace and security, the liquidation of the colonial system, the condemnation of interference in the domestic affairs of States, the defence of small countries, progress towards a solution of the disarmament problem and many other questions. If the Security Council for any reason cannot take the decision it should take in accordance with the United Nations Charter, there is nothing to prevent the General Assembly at its regular sessions-or at special or emergency sessions in cases which do not brook delay-from meeting in accordance with its rules of procedure and examining questions relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, and from making recomnlendations to the States concerned or to the Security Council, within the limits of the Assembly’s competence under the Charter of the United Nations.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of India. I should like, on behalf of the members of the Security Council, to address a warm welcome to the Minister for External Affairs of India, His Excellency Mr. M. C. Chagla, who is taking part in our work this afternoon. It is indeed an honour and a pleasure for us to have him here. I now give the floor to the Minister for External Affairs of India. 3.5. Mr. CHAGLA (India): Mr. President, I am grateful to you for your kind words welcoming my presence here in the Security Council. The Permanent Representative of India, Ambassador Parthasarathi, has made it amply clear that India wishes to use its membership in this high organ of the United Nations for one purpose only: to promote peace and peaceful relations among all countries, based on the renunciation of the use of force in dealing with international disputes and the protection of the political independence and territorial integrity of all States. This will be our basic approach in dealing with the grave problems of war and peace that will come up before the Council. 29. This is in keeping with the United Nations Charter and the interests of the peoples, and helps to eliminate sources of tension and to protect the lawful rights of peoples. Nevertheless, in order to avoid any lllisllllderstandirig, we feel it our duty to emphasize that in the future, as in the past, the Soviet Union will steadfastly resist any attempts 36. I cannot let this occasion pass without paying a sincere tribute to you, Mr. President, for providing the leadership both in formal meetings of the Council and in informal consultations. “Concerned by the situation existing with regard to Cyprus, the Conference calls upon all States in conformity with their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular under Article 2, paragraph 4, to respect the sovereignty, unity, independence and territorial integrity of Cyprus and to refrain from any threat or use of force or intervention directed against Cyprus and from any efforts to impose upon Cyprus unjust solutions unacceptable to the people of Cyprus. “Cyprus, as an equal Member of the United Nations, is entitled to and should enjoy unrestricted and unfettered sovereignty and independence, and allowing its people to determine freely, and without any foreign intervention or interference, the political future of the country, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.“r 38. The Secretary-General has made available to the Council, as is characteristic of him, a forthright and detailed report in which he has touched on many facets of the functioning of the United Nations Force and the work of his Special Representative in Cyprus. One of the main objectives of the United Nations operation in Cyprus is to prevent a recurrence of fighting and, according to the Secretary-General’s report, ail efforts have been made by the United Nations Force during the last six months to achieve this objective. The presence of United Nations troops in sensitive areas has restrained all concerned from having recourse to arms, and the Commanders have done their best to avert clashes. The Secretary-General and his Special Representative have beeri exercising their good offices, which is worthy of commendation. It is also a matter of gratification that the Government of Cyprus has acted with the utmost restraint. 39. In view of the considerations I have just mentioned, the delegation of India has joined in co.sponsoring the draft resolution contained in document S/7996. I would commend it to the Council for adoption unanimously. 40. Mr, MATSUI (Japan): I shall speak very briefly and, first, of aII, I should like to express our very sincere 1 SW A/5763. 41. Turning now to the substance of the Secretary. General’s most recent report of 13 June 1967, on the United Nations operation in Cyprus (S/7969], I think it is necessary to speak quite frankly. My delegation is disappointed with a number of aspects of the situation in Cyprus, as reported by the Secretary-General; we can hardly describe them as hopeful, and we sincerely regret these developments. 42. We had anticipated, for example, that the dialogue between the Greek and the Turkish Governments, which began last summer, would have yielded fruitful results by now. However, we find that this dialogue which was apparently suspended in December 1966, has not since been resumed, and no one seems to know whether or when it will be. Further, there does not seem to be any substantial improvement in relations between the Govern ment of Cyprus and the Turkish Cypriots. It has not been possible to advance the mediation effort which the Security Council contemplated more than three years ago. There are disheartening reports of non-co-operative and antagonistic attitudes towards the United Nations Force. And &ally, the United Nations is still confronted by a very substantial financial deficit. 43. Thus, from the over-all point of view, the picture appears to be rather gloomy. However, in a situation of this kind, there is obviously nothing to be gained by taking a pessimistic or defeatist view of the situation, On the contrary, while not hiding our eyes from reality, we should take a positive and forward-looking view. 44. Basically, the most positive element in the situation is that the United Nations presence in Cyprus has contributed very substantially to the maintenance of peace there for the past three and a half years. This is a positive element upon which we should build for the future. 45. Recent events so tragic in human sacrifices have demonstrated beyond any doubt the value of United Nations peace-keeping operations in general. The peacekeeping operation in Cyprus is basically sound. If it has not accomplished ail that we might have wished, it certainly has the capacity to do more, with the goodwiI1 and COoperation of the parties. It therefore deserves the full, continued support of the Council. 46. For these reasons, my delegation endorses the Secretary-General’s recommendation that the mandate of the United Nations operation in Cyprus be extended for a further period of six months, to 26 December 1967. We are, therefore, very glad to join the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Mali and Nigeria in cosponsoring the draft resolution contained in document S/7996, which is now before the Council, and we express the hope that it will be adopted unanimously. 48. Finally, Japan will continue its loyal support of the Cyprus operation by voluntary contributions and in all other appropriate ways. We would take the liberty of urging at this time that other Governments, particularly those of the more closely concerned countries, be as generous as possible in their voluntary contributions for this purpose.

Since no other representative has asked to speak before the vote is taken, I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution co-sponsored by Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria [S/7996]. A vote was taken by show of hands. The draft resolution was adopted unanimously.’ SO. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): After our experience in the Council in recent weeks it was with relief, I am sure, that today we could act at once and act unanimously without fierce feeling and without interminable argumentation. S I. I might say here that I am sorry that the representitive of the Soviet Union is no longer present because I should have wished to make some very short comment on what he just now said to us. 52. I had the privilege, on behalf of my Government, of signing the Agreement establishing the independence of Cyprus, and Mr. Rossides and I are not likely to forget the lengthy negotiations which led up to the establishment of the sovereign base areas. I should like to say that those base areas have never been used for any offensive purpose and that they have indeed brought substantial positive benefits to the people of Cyprus. So, in the absence of the representative of the Soviet Union, I shall resist his enticements beckoning us to enter this afternoon into any cold war altercation. I would only wish to add that it was a great satisfaction to myself and my delegation to hear the representative of the Soviet Union defending the rights and privileges of the General Assembly. It was good to hear him speak with the enthusiasm, the faith and the charm of a convert, and I would only go on to say that I shall look forward even more than usual to hearing his forthcoming speeches in the Peace-keeping Committee. 53. YOU, Sir, and we are not likely to forget what I might call the “Sleepless Week of the Cease-Fire”, and we are all grateful to the representative of Argentina and to his co-sponsors for making our task today easy and quick. 54. But that should not give the impression that what we have done today is not of first importance. On the. 2 See resolution 238 (1967) of the Council. 56. If, at the beginning of this month, anyone doubted the effectiveness of concerted international action to stop fighting, there need be no doubt now. Equally, if anyone doubted the need for us to search in this Council for agreement if peace is to be won and then firmly based in just settlement, there need be no doubt now. Both our limited success in establishing and maintaining the cease-fire and the magnitude of the task now ahead of us in the Near East confirm and justify our faith in the need for international co-operation and international authority. 57. Fortunately, today we can put aside controversy on recent events. There was no cause for delay or doubt or disagreement today. We welcome the resolution which we have just adopted. We can be specially satisfied that it was adopted unanimously. 58. None of us can have failed to be impressed by the Secretary-General’s Cyprus report. It was very clear and very candid. He warned us of the “ever present possibility of large-scale fighting” and concluded that “there is general agreement that if it were not for the interposition of (UNFICYP] Forces as a buffer in areas of direct confrontation, the renewal of armed strife would appear to be practically inevitable” [S/7969, para. 1751. That is certainly a grave warning. The dangers and the needs of the situation are equally apparent. 59. On behalf of my Government I renew the pledge which we have repeatedly given to this Council before. We are resolved to support the United Nations endeavour in Cyprus, in the hope that its mission can be fuIIy and successfully discharged. Accordingly, my Government is willing to maintain its military contingent in the United Nations Force in Cyprus, and, what is more, will continue to meet all its costs, In addition, my Government will continue to make a voluntary contribution at the rate of a million dollars for each three-month period of the new mandate. My Government will continue to give its unqualified support to the efforts of the Secretary-General and those who work under him in Cyprus in the search for a just and lasting settlement. 60. And since we have from the beginning supported the United Nations peace-keeping enterprise in Cyprus and since, quite apart from meeting all the costs of our military contingent, our voluntary contributions will have amounted by the end of this year to more than $15 million, we feel 61. As we again salute the fine record of all those who serve under the United Nations flag in Cyprus and look forward to their efforts bringing success, there is one other main lesson in all our minds, I am sure, arising from other recent events in the Near East. 62. The Secretary-General told us in his report that the situation in Cyprus remains, after more than three and a half years, ‘“stubbornly deadlocked”. He appealed to the parties to the dispute to cast away “the dangerous attitude of complacency with a status quo . , . of uneasy truce” (ibid., para. 1761. He warned us again that a truce is no substitute for a permanent settlement, and his warning was strongly repeated and emphasized by the representative of Argentina just now. 63. We pray that in the period now ahead of us there will be another determined effort to tind a fair settlement in Cyprus, a settlement in which Greeks and Turks, who lived and worked together in their lovely island so long without enmity or bloodshed, may again come together, and come together in mutual respect and understanding, leading to fruitful friendship and co-operation in the interests of all.

We are all indebted to the Secretary-General for the clear, complete and perceptive report he has put before the Council. He has described in forthright language the problems which confront us all and his distinguished representative on the Island. It is evident that Mr. Osorio-Tafall has undertaken his latest assignment with energy and imagination; and we have no doubt that he, General Martola, and the officers and men of the United Nations Force in Cyprus will continue to serve the cause of peace with courage, patience, skill, and the determination to fulfil their mandate impartially. 65. We should also like to note our appreciation for the services rendered by the distinguished Brazilian diplomat, Ambassador Bernardes, as the previous representative of the Secretary-General. Ambassador Bernardes, who formerly was a colleague of ours on the Security Council, has shown a dedication to the high aims of the United Nations and a true devotion to the best interests of all the people of Cyprus in carrying out the heavy responsibilities given him by the Secretary-General with respect to the difficult situation there, 66. The Mandate of the United Nations Force in Cyprus is being extended for the eleventh time. Given present conditions, we believe that this was the only realistic and prudent course of action, and accordingly we voted for the resolution. However, as the Secretary-General has noted, all parties must bear in mind the inescapable fact that UNFICYP cannot remain in Cyprus indefinitely. The lack of progress on fundamental issues requires those concerned to seek new areas of accommodation even more urgently than before. All parties should extend full co-operation in 68. The Force must, in the first instance, have freedom of movement, and we note that the Secretary-General has reminded all parties that such freedom is explicitly pro. vided for in written agreement. Neither can any sort of harrassment of United Nations personnel or of UNFICYP be acceptable. 69. The United States also continues to believe, as Ambassador Goldberg stated before the Council last December [133&h meeting], that the importation of arms can only be a source of insecurity. The United States fully concurs in the Secretary-General’s view that any influx of arms and other military equipment is a cause for concern to UNFICYP in the execution of its Mandate. In this connexion, the United States is gratified by paragraph 27 of the Secretary-General’s report [S/7969], concerning the results of inspections made of certain arms by the Cornmander of the United Nations Force, and we welcome the assurances in this respect given by the Government of Cyprus. 70. The allegations of the distinguished representative of the Soviet Union of a hostile NATO design against Cyprus are, of course, a fantasy. A more positive contribution to our debate would have been to express tangible support for the United Nations Force on the Island, We will not comment on the digression made in ‘the understandable need to defend the recent recourse to the “Uniting for Peace” resolution. Our own views on the relative responsibilities of the General Assembly and of the Security Council are well known and unchanged. 71. Despite our disappointment at the lack of progress towards solving the fundamental issues and the many problems which have beset the United Nations in its efforts to maintain peace and promote a settlement, the United States continues fully to support UNFICYP. As evidence of this statement, I wish to announce on behalf of the United States a pledge of up to $4 million towards the cost of maintaining UNFICYP for the next six months. This pledge, as has been true of our previous pledges, will depend upon the amounts contributed by other Governments towards the cost of the operation. The United States pledges towards the cost of UNFICYP, including the amount I have just announced, now total over $32 million. 72. The United States hopes that the knowledge that UNFICYP will continue for another six months will 73, Mr. IGNATIEFF (Canada): Although my delegation voted for the resolution which has just been adopted, I have been instructed to record the disappointment of my Government, as a major contributor to UNFICYP, that it was not possible for the resolution to take greater cognizance of at least some of the observations of the Secretary-General in his latest report. 74. In making this comment, of course, my delegation is appreciative of the efforts of the co-sponsors of the draft . and of our extremely hard-working President at this extremely hectic time. But it is unfortunate, in our view, that the pressure of events upon members of the Council may not have given as much time as we would have wished to consult and seek agreement upon a resolution which would have come to grips with some of the issues raised by the Secretary-General in his latest report; and I am sure that we would agree that, on the next occasion, it would be desirable that we should try to overcome this deficiency. 75. Canada shares the concern of the Secretary-General at the lack of progress towards a settlement of the Cyprus problem. We would welcome fresh initiatives at the political level which would lead towards a solution. In this connexion, we believe that the Secretary-General’s Special Representative should be given full support by all parties concerned in the pursuit of his responsibilities. 76. As far as the activities of UNFICYP are concerned, my delegation believes that it continues to perform a useful rote. But we note in this connexion that all the parties concerned are agreeable that the continuation of the Force is necessary in the prevailing circumstances. We are, however, very much concerned at the difficulties faced by UNFICYP in carrying out its duties, and we would urge the parties directly concerned to co-operate fully in removing those difficulties. 77. I cannot help but note that the continuation of UNFICYP places a heavy burden on a relatively small group of countries in respect of their contributions in manpower, money, or both, and my delegation would hope that these contributions are fully recognized by members of this Security Council, and indeed by all Members of the United Nations, and that suclz contributions are not taken for granted. 78. In concluding, there is one further important point which I have been instructed to make, having in mind the circumstances of the withdrawal of UNEF and the failure of the United Nations to agree on satisfactory arrangements for peace-keeping operations. The point is this: that in voting for the resolution which we have just adopted, my

Permit me to begin my very brief remarks by expressing my delegation’s appreciation of the highly distinguished efforts of the Secretary-General and his staff, both here and in Cyprus, and of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, in their very difficult, delicate and even dangerous assignmeqt. The continued maintena+e of peace in Cyprus, however troubled that peace may be, is a standing credit to their dedication to the overriding demands of international peace and security, 80. My delegation joined in recommending the draft resolution and in urging upon this Council the extension of the stationing of this Force in Cyprus for a further period of six months.. We must confess, however, that we did so with some degree of regret about the continued lack of progress in several aspects of the Cyprus situation. We were encouraged to do so only by the hope that some further definite, urgent efforts will be made in the six-month period by the parties concerned towards some solution of this problem. 81. Lastly, permit me to draw to the Council’s attention, to welcome, underline and emphasize those portions of the statement made by the representative of the Soviet Union which pointed out that the General Assembly, under Chapter VI of the Charter, has a right and an obligation to discuss and consider any situation threatening international peace and security, and to make recommendations to the parties concerned or to the Security Council, especially when the Security Council is for any reason unable to act. Since my delegation has repeatedly held and expressed this view in the Special Political Committee and in the Special Committee on Peace-keeping Operations, we very much welcome these supporting comments from one of the permanent members. 82. Mr, KEITA (Mali) (translated from French): My delegation does not intend at this point to explain its vote, since it was a co-sponsor of the resolution which the Council has just adopted unanimously..It does, however, feel duty bound to pay tribute to the Secretary-General and his staff for the results already achieved. 83. I should like to take this opportunity to emphasize that we welcome every decision of the Secretary-General. Everyone agrees that all the Secretary-General’s reports are clear and precise. Consequently, all the decisions arising out of them can be easily understood by all, since they are taken for reasons which are obvious and cannot in good faith be interpreted otherwise than in the light of those reasons.

The French delegation joined in tne unanimous vote that has just been taken, because the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force for a further period of six months meets the wishes of the Governments of Cyprus, Greece and Turkey. 86. In his report [S/7969] the Secretary-General has clearly stated the positive aspects of the presence of the United Nations Force in Cyprus. In paragraph 174 of that report he notes that the Force “has had no small measure of success in preventing a recurrence of fighting and helping to maintain law and order”. That, in fact, is the task which the Council had entrusted to the United Nations contingents. I need not add that they have performed that task with distinction and in a manner which does credit to the countries from which they come. 87. The Secretary-General, however, in a praiseworthy desire to be objective, does not conceal the negative aspects of the present situation. Some of these relate to the uneasy quiet which we are told is from time to time disturbed by incidents such as that of Mari, in April of this year, which resulted in civilian casualties and material damage. That unfdrtunate incident shows that, in spite of the apparent calm, there is still tension between the two communities and that the interposition of the Force has helped to prevent the worst from happening, though it has not brought about a real political and psychological d&ten&. 88. The Force cannot be held responsible for that failure. The report of the Secretary-General also mentions the factors which have led to the present deadlock, namely the entrenched positions adopted by the two communities both on matters of principle and. in day-to-day coexistence; their failure to show a genuine willingness to find a peaceful solution for their problems; and, last but not least, a deplorable standstill in the dialogue between the Governments of Greece and Turkey. 89. It is in the hope of ending that deadlock that we have associated ourselves with the Secretary-General’s appeal to the parties “to cast away the dangerous attitude of complacency with a status quo which I can still describe as one of an uneasy truce” [ibid., para. 1761. 90. My delegation had already emphasized that aspect of the problem in its statement of 16 June 1966 (1286th meeting] in this Council, I therefore see no point in repeating what was said before, but I feel that the least the 91. It goes without saying that, as far as the French delegation is concerned, our decision to prolong the presence of the United Nations Force in Cyprus will, particularly as regards financing, be governed by paragraph 4 of resolution 186 (1964) of 4 March 1964.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Cyprus, to whom I now give the floor,

The question of Cyprus in the Security Council at least has the merit of unanimity. Every time the question arises there is a unanimous decision, and in this case we, the Government of Cyprus, according to paragraph 3 of the preamble, have agreed that in view of the prevailing conditions in the Island, it is necessary to continue the Force beyond 26 June 1967. 94. Before saying anything ahout the report of the Secretary-General, I should like to thank the representatives of those countries who have spoken in support of the territorial integrity,’ the sovereignty, and the unity of Cyprus, and for a solution in the spirit of co-operation within these principles. I also wish to thank those countrics which have been contributing fnlancially to the peacekeeping operations on Cyprus and have also provided contingents. 95. We have in front of us the report of the Secretary General for the last six months [5/7969/. It is a clear and comprehensive document depicting the present situation on the Island. In this connexion I wish to express my Government’s appreciation of the positive work that UNFICYP has been carrying on in contributing to the maintenance of peace, and of its efforts towards a return to normality in the daily life of the people, in accordance with the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964. 96. I avail myself of this opportunity to pay tribute to the Secretary-General, U Thant, whose wisdom and objectivity, coupled with his dedication to the United Nations and its Charter and to the cause of peace, has been the greatest asset of the Organization and the world community in times of crisis. We are particularly indebted to him for al1 he has been doing on the question of Cyprus as well as to his advisers and staff both here and in Cyprus, of whose work we are fully appreciative. In this regard we wish to mention the devoted services of the Commander of the United Nations Force, General Martola, and of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr, Osorio-TafalI, as well as of his predecessor, Ambassador Bernardes, whose patience and. consistent effort towards a return to narmality should not go unnoticed, For, indeed, normalization in the relations between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, as emphasized in .the report, and in previous reports, is the most important aspect of the situation, for it is closely related to the lessening of tension, on the need for which so many delegations have spoken here, and to making progress towards the solution of the problem. “Both the Greek and Turkish Cypriot populations of Cyprus are increasingly impatient for a return to normal conditions and for a solution of the Cyprus problem, and it is to be hoped that this factor may have a podtive influence upon the efforts now being nlade to find a solution.” 98. Again in a subsequent report /5/73.50/4 we read of: “The yearning and impatience of the ordinary people of Cyprus for a full return to normal conditions.” 99, There, therefore, e,xists the most essential element for normalization in the solution of the problem: the will of the people to conciliate. Yet there is no progress in this direction, We should inquire into this matter, In this connexion the present report stresses that there is misapprehension and divergence of views as to what normality means under the Security Council resolution. It would therefore be pertinent and necessary to look into this aspect. 100. The Security Council, in dealing with the question of Cyprus, by resolution of 4 March 1964, channeled its efforts through two distinct instruments, One is the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, entrusted with the task of contributing to the maintenance of law and order and a return to normal conditions of life. The other is the United Nations Mediator for a peaceful solution of the problem in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. Normalization, as explained by the Secretary- General in his report [S/5671],’ “is the restoration of normal conditions in the daily life of the people”, and a list of objectives is given, among which the main are the following: freedom of movement on all roads in Cyprus, including the Kyrenia road; “freedom of movement for all communities within the whole town of Nicosia and other cities under conditions of security; progressive evacuation and removal of all fortified positions held by Greek and Turkish Cypriots, with priority given to Nicosia; the progressive disarming of all civilians; return to normal conditions, and particularly normal economic activity; the normal functioning of the judiciary”; and similar others of minor importance. 102. Therefore, the question of normalization, which was entrusted to UNFICYP, is frustrated because it must await the fnlal solution of the problem. But this idea is entirely contrary to the concept of the Security Council which, in the meanwhile, and until the solution is reached, seeks the creation of normal conditions, the lessening of tension, the doing away with armed posts and so forth, and thus the bringing about of a spirit of understanding and conciliation through freedom of movement and freedom of contact between the people. 103. With regard to freedom of movement, I do not wish to take the time of this Council by referring to all the cases. The last report of the Secretary-General states the following: 101. Normalization is therefore the main duty of UNFICYJ? within the list given by the Secretary-General. The constitutional issue is a matter of the over-all solution of the problem; it falls entirely within the province of the Mediator and has absolutely nothing ,to do with the work of the UNFICYP. A confusion between these two aspects of 104. The Secretary-General, referring to the Turkish prohibition on freedom of movement in their areas, says: “In the context of normalization it may be mentioned that, in a discussion with my Special Representative,“- writes the Secretary-General-“the President proposed”- the President of Cyprus-” that consideration be given to a plan under which, with the exception of coastal defences, alf fortifications, check-points and military posts- Government and Turkish Cypriot alike-would be removed.“-this falls within one of the lists of the work for normalization of the Secretary-General-“Complete freedom of movement would thus be restored, including access to Turkish Cypriot enclaves by Greek Cypriots. The defortification of Turkish Cypriot enclaves and villages would be controlled by mixed Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot police patrols on the understanding that Turkish Cypriot policemen in such patrols would come under Government authori-ty. My Special Representative pursued this proposal with the Turkish Cypriot leaders, who reiterated their long-standing objection that such measures would be feasible only in the context of the 1960 Constitution or of an agreed political settlement.” [S/7350, para. 93. J “The Turkish Cypriot leadership denies Greek Cypriots access to the Turkish Cypriot enclaves and to most Turkish Cypriot villages at all times, even if accompanied by UNFICYP personnel , . .“-when there is no question of any danger-“while it keeps to a minimum the number of Turkish Cypriots allowed to leave those enclaves to visit Government-controlled areas. . . . The Government, for its part, maintains that there is complete freedom of movement for all (Turks) in the areas under its control . . , .” [ii/ 7969, para. IO5.1 “This ban appears to be enforced as a matter of political principle with little attempt at justincation on practical grounds . . . In addition, the Turkish Cypriot leadership strictly regulates even brief visits by residents 106. The Secretary-General states: 1‘ . . * the (Turkish) community leadership discourages the Turkish Cypriot population from engaging in personal, commercial or other contacts with their Greek Cypriot compatriots, from applying to government offices in administrative matters, or -+:I resettling in their home villages if they are refugees,” [S/6228, panz. 55.1’ 107. The Secretary-General states in document S/6426: “The Turkish Cypriot leaders have adhered to a rigid stand against any measures which might involve having members of the two communities live and work together . . . The result has been a seemingly deliberate policy of self-segregation by the Turkish Cypriots.” [S/6426, para. 106.1 8 Control of free movement is again mentioned and the report states: “. . . some steps should be taken by the Turkish Cypriot leadership towards relaxing its policy of discouraging Turkish Cypriots from circulating freely in places outside its control . , .“[S/7191, para. 941. 108. Therefore, we can now see why there is so little progress in normalization. The Government of Cyprus has declared that: “ * . . the Government was prepared to provide concrete assistance as follows: (a) to repair or totally reconstruct all Turkish Cypriot houses which might have been damaged or destroyed in any village;(b) to give financial assistance for the rehabilitation of all the Turkish Cypriots who had been forced by their leadership to abandon their villages; (c) to provide them with the means for the exercise of their profession or vocation . . .; (d) to take all the necessary measures for their complete safety . I .” [S/7001, para. 157]‘-and this we have said repeatedly. 109. The latest report of the Secretary-General stated that there had been some indications: “. . . that the Government had in mind an over-all plan covering all the main factors concerning the restoration of normal conditions . . , [the) removal of all remaining checkpoints, roadblocks and fortifications . . .” -with the assistance of UNFICYP-“my Special Representative . . . had meetings . . , with the President of the Republic and then with the Turkish Cypriot leadership” [S/7969, paras. 100, 1011, whose conduct and attitude have frustrated the efforts at normalization. 6 Ibid., Twenty-first Year, Supplement for October, November and December 1966. 7 Ibid,, Twentieth Year, Supplement for January, February and March 196.5. 8 Ibid., Supplement for April, May and June 1965. 9 Ibid., Supplement for October, November and December 196.5. 111. What is the reason for all this obstruction to normalization? It is that there should be no opportunity of reconciliation and of overcoming the present division, which has been artificially created so that, eventually, it might lead to some divisive sohltion, whether it be called partition or something else. 112. The question of Cyprus has come before this Council in the midst of your long, arduous and demanding preoccupations over a wdrld crisis of first magnitude over the Palestine situation which the General Assembly is now discussing. It is not the first time that the question of Cyprus has come to the Security Council, immediately before or immediately after a crisis connected with the Palestine situation or other similar problems of which the Security Council has been seized. I cannot help noting the common denominator in these cases which regularly and recurrently occupy the Security Council almost exclusively, They have one and the same source: the policy of division and partition. The division of a country by breaking up the unity of its people is almost invariably imposed from the outside, against the interests of the country and the will of the people themselves. It has been given the ostensible excuse that it was a necessary means to accommodate a difficult situation or to settle and solve a problem. 113. But experience has shown, particularly in the last two decades, that such partitionist policies have created far greater and more dangerous problems, constituting the gravest threats to peace, If we look at the world around us today-whether the problems are in the United Nations or outside-we find that all the grave threats to peace are derived from partitions. Partition in most cases has followed in the aftermath of colonialism, We can say that in all these cases, and in the case of Cyprus, the partitionist and divisionist policies came at a time when partition was in vogue, But I feel certain that now, with the experience that we have had in all cases where partition has been applied, there can no longer be any question of partition in any part of the world. The world community and public opinion should stand up against any other sources of perpetual fighting and trouble; for, partition is a wound in the heart of a country; it breaks the unity of a people and sets them apart beyond artificial frontiers; it creates such emotional situations that they have become explosive, almost as explosive as the splitting of the atom. The very concept of partition runs counter to the wholesomeness of nature, and also to the moral laws of the universe. That is why we find that they cause such explosive situations. 114. The identity of the Island of Cyprus-and I feel I must mention this, because we are not yet sure that the integrity of Cyprus is secure-is an unbroken entity though the millennia has remained intact; in spite of the foreign invasions and dominations under which the Island has suffered and passed through, the Island remains one 115, We seek to have not the enmities and the frictions that arise from partitions and divisions, but a solution in a spirit of understanding and co-operation, with mutual respect between all sections of the people. We believe that no solution which is supposedly good for the one side and bad for the other can be a good or lasting solution. Therefore, we would not seek or favour any solution which would not take into consideration the equal rights of all citizens in the population of the Island, just as we would not accept any solution which would disregard the democratic majority rights of the people of Cyprus. 116. We seek the co-operation of all peace-loving and progressive countries in these aims. We seek the cooperation of Turkey no less. We believe that Turkey, realizlng now, from its close proximity to the situation in Palestine, the grave evils of any divisive policy, would not wish such a situation in Cyprus where there is a section of Turkish population. Turkey would not, as much as we would not, wish to see the situation in Cyprus deteriorating through partition&t aims as in Palestine. 117. Therefore, we believe that there can be ample scope for co-operation and understanding between Greece, Turkey and Cyprus in a positive solution which preserves the territorial integrity of the Island. We hope that such a solution can soon be found from the moment that the partitionist aims are abandoned.

I call on the representative of Turkey.

It is with great reluctance that I have asked for the floor. At a time when the principal organs of the United Nations are fully occupied with the aftermath of war in the Middle East, it would seem out of place to burden the Council with the technicalities of an issue which it has been dealing with for three and one-half years and which represents &re of the most successful peace-keeping operations of the United Nations. 120. It is with dismay that I noticed that, quite unaffected by such considerations, Ambassador Rossides saw fit to take twenty-five minutes of the valuable time of this Council to make the same insinuations and falsifications. And the famous phobia of partition came out in all its nakedness once again, 121. I believe we all have the right to assume that all members of the Council have read very carefully the report on Cyprus by the Secretary-General. Therefore, I hardly see any reason for reading out, one by one, paragraphs which one of the parties may construe to be favourable to its claims. 122. Yet, I should like to depart from this in one instance, and that brings me to a word that I have to say about the remarks of the Foreign Minister of India who, I am afraid, 123. Of course, in conjunction with that, I must say that what the representative of the Soviet Union said in connexion with the lawful rights of the two communities, should never be allowed to go unobserved. But I do hope that the Foreign Minister of India has taken a look at the report of the Secretary-General; in reading paragraph 29, he will have realized where we have come in mr joint struggle for giving real independence to the peoples of Cyprus. Paragraph 29 states: “Over the past few months UNFICYP has noticed increased signs of a tendency to identify the Cyprus National Guard with the Greek Army. These include the widespread use of the Greek Army cap badge by the National Guard and the use of the Greek royal crown in flags and sign boards at many National Guard camps, while the oath taken by recent National Guard recruits on enlistment now incorporates allegiance to the King of Greece .” 124. Do I have to explain this any further? This is where we are in our aspirations for the independence and territorial integrity of Cyprus. The partition phobia which emerged so clearly from the remarks of Ambassador Rossides is a myth. No one desires the continued independence of Cyprus more than Turkey. Unfortunately, the fact is that the expansionist element in the Island wants to swallow the whole Iamb and not a part of it. That is alI there is to it. That is what the clamour is about. 125. Mention of dialogue between Greece and Turkey has been made by a number of members of the Council. Dismay has been expressed at the fact that, as the representative of France has said, this dialogue has reached a “‘stama tim dhbrable ‘: Perhaps the members of the Council will be happy to hear thai there is no ‘stagnation dkplorable “, In fact, through circumstances beyond the control of the parties, and circumstances which are not directly concerned with the Cyprus problem, they were in abeyance for a while; but a genuine effort, I believe, is now being made by way of contacts to revive these negotiations. These negotiations, this dialogue as it is called, is aimed at bringing about full understanding between the parties to the dispute. The dialogue is aimed at creating an atmosphere, so far as we are concerned, in which the independence and the territorial integrity of the Island can be safeguarded. 126. I have no knowledge of any so-called NATO machinations in the area. As I have always stated, the attempts we have made to solve the problem in a peaceful manner have been based on the continued independence of Cyprus. 127. I do not want to take up much of the Council’s time, so I shall not follow the example of Ambassador Rossides 128. This is a very dangerous tendency. We have seen similar cases where the authority, and even the presence of a peace-keeping force of the United Nations has been neglected or minimized, with disastrous results. The Peace* keeping Force is there with a very clear purpose, as set: out in the resolution of 4 March 1964 to prevent the recurrence of fighting and to contribute, as necessary, to the restora tion and maintenance of law and order. From the many meetings that this Council has devoted to the question of Cyprus and all the resolutions it has adopted, it is quite clear that UNFICYP is not there to become an instrument of one of the parties to extend its sway over the other. 129. Our understanding of this question of a return to normal conditions is quite clear, but it does not seem to agree with the understanding of the Greek-Cypriot administration. By a return to normal conditions it is not our understanding that the full sway of t&e power of the Greek-Cypriot administration should extend over the whole Island. ‘We do not understand it to be subjugation of the ‘Turkish community to the illegal authority of the Greek administration. If we start trying to normalize the situation in Cyprus from that premise, we shall never get allywhere. Normalization can come when and if the Greek Cypriots leave the Turks alone until a political settlement has been reached. Then, and only then, can we return to normal conditions on the Island and create an atmosphere in which a political solution might be reached. 130. I do not want to take too much of the Council’s time, but while I have the floor it is a very pleasant duty for me once again to extend sincere thanks, on behalf of my delegation and my Government, to the Sec;e tary-General. for his very objective reports and to his close collaborators here, who, even if they have spent a sleepless week, have still found possible to animadvert to this thorny question of Cyprus; to the recent Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Island, Ambassador Bernardes, for his diligent and patient efforts to do what he could under difficult circumstances; to the present Special Representative, Mr. Osorio-Tafall; and to General Martola for all they have done and are doing to bring peace and quiet to the Island and in dealing with the many thorny problems that the situation presents, and also, of course, to those public-spirited countries which contribute in men and money to UNFICYP. 13 1. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker on my list is the representative of Greece, to whom I now give the floor.

I did not intend to ask for the floor except to inform the members of the Council that I am instructed by my Government to announce officially that the Greelc Government will continue to contribute to the costs of UNFICYF’ on the same level as we have done in 133. Since I have the floor, may I answer two or three points that were raised by some of the speakers who preceded me? 134. The representative of the Soviet Union reminded us of the basic position of his country in respect to the Cyprus problem, and’ j.11 doing so he added several general and wide-ranging comments. We also warned us-and when I say “us” I mean that his warning was certainly also addressed to my Government-that no solution to the Cyprus problem should be sought behind th.e backs of the people of the Island. I wish to assure the Soviet representative that the general position of my Government on the Cyprus problem is and remains the same. It is quite well-known, and it is inspired by and in accordance with the most fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter, 135. As far as trying to fuld a solution behind the backs of the Cyprus people, I can assure the Soviet representative that this has never been the intention nor has it ever been in the minds of any of the responsible people of Athens SO far as our joint effort with Turkey is concerned. What we are doing with Turkey, at least as we see it and I am sure that my friend, Ambassador &alp, will agree with me, is to try-as was actually stated in the wording of the co!?lrwniqui issued about a year ago when the Greek-Turkish dialogue began-to help to find a solution to the problem of Cyprus, a solution which we trust will be equitable, just and proper and, therefore, acceptable to all the parties concerned. The solution will have to be submitted to the people of Cyprus as a whole for their acceptance. 136. So far as the Greek-Turkish dialogue is concerned, 1 am glad to subscribe to what Ambassador Bralp has just said. I regret I do not have any long report of the meeting that my Foreign Minister has had with his Turkish colleague, Mr. Ca~l,ajangil, during the past week, but from a -telegram I received the other day I understand that my Foreign Secretary expressed to his Turkish counterpart the resolute intention of the Greek Government to resume the Greek-Turkish dialogue on all difficulties existing between the two countries, including the Cyprus problem with a view to restoring normal conditions for friendly COoperation between them. 137. This, I think, answers the exhortations and the admonitions we have heard around this table. about the duly of those primarily concerned to do their best to fuld a political solution to the problem, and I wish to assure them once again that my Government, from the first, has done, is doing and will keep on doing its best in order to fuld such a solution. 139. That is all I wanted to say. I would not wish to answer my friend Mr. Eralp concerning his remarks about paragraph 29 of the Secretary-General’s report [S/7969]. I myself do not think that the substance of the information contained therein is too important. As far as that goes, there could actually be other counterparts with which one could oppose Mr, Eralp. But I will leave that to the special field of Mr. Rossides, since he is representing Cyprus and he should actually answer this question. 147. We also wish to thank the representative of Greece for his statement, with which we are in full accord, and also to say &at we look to the solution of the problem of Cyprus obviously through the United Nations. 148. With regard to what was said about the Security COUnCil effort for mediation-that it was stalled-we believe that the Galo Plaza report’ ’ is the sound basis for negotiations and discussions, and we hope that at some time it will be given the consideration i,t deserves. 140. Mr. de CARVALHO SILOS (Brazil): The Brazilian delegation was very happy to join the delegations of Argentina, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria in submitting the draft resolution [S/7.996] which the Security Council has just adopted. We did so because we are convinced that this Council should support the Secretary- General’s recommendation concerning the extension of the United Nations Force in Cyprus. Yet, we would like to stress our full agreement with the Secretary-General’s remarks on the lack of progress towards the solution of the substance of the problem. 149. Lastly, I should like to say a few words about the question of the importation of arms into Cyprus. As I said on a previous occasion, the Government of Cyprus has willingly-because it so wanted-co-operated with the UNFICYP and allowed the inspection of arms that were imported, and gave details of them. This has been done in a spirit of co-operation and not in any spirit: of derogating from the rights of the sovereign State of Cyprus. It has the responsibility for the maintenance of law and order inherently, and also through the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964. Whenever it thinks that it must import arms for its police, it can do so. It cannot be prevented from doing so by intervention. It is a sovereign country recognized by all and it can exercise its sovereign rights. 141. As we all know, the United Nations operation in Cyprus was aimed at the solution of the problem and not at its freezing at a dangerous level. 142. Finally, I should like to thank all delegations which have praised the service rendered by Ambassador Bernardes in his capacity as Personal Representative of the Sccrctary General in Cyprus.

I call on the representative of Turkey. 15 1. Mr. ERALP (Turkey): I have one word. This will not take more than one minute. With regard to the legality of the Government of Cyprus, it is true that we recognize the Government of Cyprus as a rle ficro authority on the Island and we have relations with it. None the less, we have always said that it is an insurgent administration; it is not legal. The Government of Cyprus which is mentioned in the 4 March resolution is a Government which at least maintained the form of constitutionality. On it there had ‘been three Turkish cabinet ministers, as provided for in the Constitution. And soon after the 4 March resolution, new cabinet ministers, Greek cabinet ministers, were appointed to replace them. Therefore, the very shape of the Government of Cyprus, as envisaged in the 4 March resolution, has been changed. My friend and colleague, Mr. Liatis, wanted to minimize the importance, the significance, of paragraph 29 of the Secretary-General’s report, which I, on the contrary, view with great misgivings.

The last speaker on my list is the representative of Cyprus, to whom 1 now give the floor.

I only want to say a few words. First of all, I want to thank the representative of Turkey, Mr. Eralp, for having categorically stated in this Council, officially stated, that partition is a myth. We take very serious note of that. Of course, when he speaks about partition being a myth, he means also any form of partition, camouflaged in any other way. 145. But I must explain why I brought this UP. I mentioned it because the former Foreign Minister of Turkey, Mr. Erkin, had stated the following in June 1964: “the radical solution . . .“-of the problem of Cyprus- “would be to cede one part of Cyprus to Greece and the other, closest to the Turkish Asiatic coast, to Turkey.” Again, the former Prime Minister of Turkey, Mr. Ismet Inonu, stated the fcdowing on 8 September 1964: “officially, we promoted the federation concept, rather than the partition thesis so as to remain within the provisions of the treaty.” 152. This is a very big step. We all know that officers, men in the armed forces, are civil servants, just like diplomatic 10 Ibid., Slyplemetlt for Jarmary, February and March 19 65. 1.53. The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Cyprus.

I have half a word, As regards what the representative of Turkey said about evicting the Turkish members of the Government, this is entireIy untrue. They withdrew in the sense of supporting the rebellion in December 1963. Therefore, for three and a 155. That is the position. And we would be very happy to see the return of a spirit of co-operation in the unity of the country, without divisive provisions, and respect for the democratic rights of the majority, as well as of the Turkish minority. The meeting rose at 5.20 pm