S/PV.1551 Security Council

During this month, the twentyfifth commemorative assembly of the United Nations will commence. We look forward, firstly, to a felicitous gathering which will crown the efforts of Ambassador Akwei of Ghana and his colleagues in the Committee for the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the United Nations. Secondly, we fervently hope that the numerous contacts which will take place among Foreign Ministers and Heads of State and Governments will bear fruit in the enhancement of peace and prosperity for all mankind. 6. Yesterday, it will be recalled, I received a letter from the Charge d’Affaires, a.i. of Lebanon, transmitting the text of a letter addressed to me by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lebanon That communication has been distributed as Security Council document S/9924. Early this morning I received a further letter from the Charge d’Affaires, a.i. of Lebanon, transmitting the text of a letter addressed to me by the Minister body in order to consider the question brought by his Government. Copies of today’s letter have been circulated in document S/9925. Upon receiving that letter I immediately undertook to contact all members of the Council in order to consult them as to the time when this meeting should be convened. I have endeavoured to meet the situation in accordance with the wishes of the Council’s members. I might mention at this juncture that the delegation of Nicaragua has agreed to the present meeting of the Council and that the representative of Nicaragua is already on his way to join this meeting. Accordingly, the Council should not feel inhibited from proceeding with the question on its agenda. 2. Our Chairman for the month of July was Ambassador Sevilla Sacasa of Nicaragua, He embodies in himself the finest qualities of diplomacy in the great tradition of Hispanic culture. As one’ of those who actually signed the Charter at San Francisco, this twenty-fifth anniversary must bring back many memories of the hopes and ideals of the United Nations. The patience and understanding with which he presided over the major African resolutions that were adopted in July won him universal praise and admiration. 3. I regard myself as being fortunate in succeeding my good friend Ambassador Kulaga of Poland as President of the Council, His personal distinction, modesty and wisdom were clearly evident in his conduct of our affairs during the past month. This is not the first time that my delegation has encountered his profound 7. I have little doubt that the wisdom of the Council and the good sense and humanity of those concerned will lead us to a speedy and harmonious solution of the matter now in hand.

In accordance with rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite the representatives of Lebanon and Israel, pursuant to their requests, which I have received in writing today &?I9926 and S/9927], to.participate without vote in the discussion of the item just inscribed on the agenda. At the invitation qf the President, Mr. Y. Mahnzassani (Lebanon)and Mr. S. Rosenne (Israel)tookplaceb at the Council table.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the matter inscribed on its agenda this afternoon at the request of Lebanon. 10. Before calling on the representative of Lebanon, I call on the Secretary-General who wishes to make an announcement to the Council.

With regard to the matter before the Council at this meeting, it is my duty to inform the Council of the relevant information available to me. I have until now received from the Chief of Staff of theUnitedNations Truce Supervision Organization in Palestine (UNTSO) two cabled messages. 12. The first message which was sent from Jerusalem today, 5 September, at 1740 hours GMT-that is, 1940 hours local time-reads as follows: “1. The following message was received by the Chairman of ILMAC” --that is, the Israel-Lebanon Mixed Armistice Commission-‘ ‘from the Lebanese authorities on 5 September 1970: “ ‘On 4 September 1970 Israeli aircraft attacked the Lebanese region of El Arkoub. At the same time the same area was subjected to artillery bombardment. The bombardment caused various material damage. When the bombardment ceased an Israeli mixed infantry and armoured force penetrated the region opening a way to our village of Kfar Chouba, approximate map reference 2150-3035, destroying our road networks in this region as they blew up several houses. Up to the present, 0930 GMT” ‘--that is, 1130 local ,time 5 September- “ ‘the Israeli unit continued to remain in our territory, on the outskirts of Kfar Chouba. For this reason we request: “ ‘(1) The confirmation by a United Nations military observer (UNMO) on the spot. “ ‘(2) The immediate withdrawal of the Israeli unit from our territory.’ As soon as I receive reports from these observers I shall promptly report to the Security Council, “3. Up to 1500 GMT”-that is, 1700 local time today, 5 September-“ assistant IDF liaison officer”-that is, the assistant Israel Defence Force liaison officer-“ did the alleged incident. not have any information on “4. I will await the report of UNMOs and will keep you informed.” 13. The second message sent at 1755 hours GMT on 5 September--that is, 1955 hours local time-is as follows: “Assistant IDF liaison officer”-that is the assistant Israel Defence Force lilaison officer-“called at 1705 GMT 5 September”-that is, 1905 local time-“and informed that at this time all IDF forces had withdrawn from Lebanese territory.” 14. This is the information given by the assistant Israeli Defence Force liaison officer. I have received no other information from UNTSO thus far. In this regard, the Council will recall the statement I made before it on 12 May 1970 on a similar occasion. This statement WS: “As members of the Council will be aware, I have for long sought to increase substantially the number of United Nations observers on both sides in this area, but without success. This accounts for the fact, among other things, that I cannot have detailed information of actions such as that now in progress in this area.” [1537th meeting, para. 8.1 1.5. The PRESIDENT: I thank the Secretary-General for his statement and now give the floor to the representative of Lebanon.

Mr. President, I wish to thank you for your prompt action in convening this urgent meeting of the Security Council at our request. My thanks go also to the other members of the Council for responding to your urgent call. It is an element of satisfaction to the Lebanese delegation to see you presiding over this august body in these extremely difficult circumstances, for it is needless to refer to the strong and cordial ties which link Sierra Leone and Lebanon. 17. Yesterday I communicated to Your Excellency and to His Excellency the Secretary General a letter fram the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lebanon [s/99HJg bringing to your attention that the Israeli aggression against Lebanon has been escalating at an alarming rate in the past few days, in flagrant violation of the pertinent resolutions of theUnitedNations and the Lebanon-Israel Armistice Agreement. 19. A few hoursafter I had communicated the aforementioned letter to you, Israeli armed forces consisting of two companies of infantry, backed by its air force and tanks, launched a sneak attack inside Lebanese territory reaching the village of Kfar Chouba, which is four kilometres inside the Lebanese border, and then constructed a road to ‘allow them frlrther military expansion. 25. Lebanon asks nothing more from the Security CounciI than the following: immediate and complete withdrawal of all Israeli forces from all Lebanese territory; a strong condemnation of Israel for its repeated acts of aggression against Lebanon, in violation of the Charter and the pertinent resolutions of the Security Council-262 (1968) of 31 December 1968; 270 (1969) of 26 August 1969, 279 (1970) of 12 May 1970 and 280 (1970) of 19 May 1970; Lebanon demands further the application of Chapter VJI of the Charter against Israel, in accordance with operative paragraph 3 of Security Council resolution 280 (1970), which states: 20. Today, Saturday, at 1300 hours local time, the Israelis have continued their aggression, backed by the Israeli air force, bombing Lebanese territory and civilian populations. They have penetrated an additional seven kilometres from the border. Our latest information is that the military operations are still continuing and the Lebanese Army is still resisting the aggressor. In fact, a few minutes before I came into this Chamber, about 4.15 p.m. New York local time, I received an official call .from Beirut confirming that the Israeli forces are still engaging units of the Lebanese Army inside Lebanese territory. This flagrant violation of our frontier and territory has, so far, resulted in the death of two civilians and two others were wounded seriously. Considerable material damage has been inflicted qn civilian installations. These acts of aggression take place at the same time when Israel is trying, by all,means, to obstruct a just solution of a peaceful settlemerit in the Middle East. These acts further constitute a direct threat to regional and world security by the grave implications and the consequences that could result from the extension of the area of conflict. “Declares that such armed attacks can no longer be tolerated and repeats its solemn warning to Israel that if they were to be repeated the Security Council would in accordance with resolution 262 (1968) and this resolution consider taking adequate and effective steps or measures in accordance with the relevant articles of the Charter to implement its resolutions”.

I now call on the representative of Israel.

Mr, President, I should like first on behalf of my delegation to express to you, Sir, our best wishes that your term of office will be tranquil and constructive. I would also take this opportunity to pay our respects to the oufgoing. Presidents for July &id August, the Ambassadors of Nicaragua and Poland. I would also pay my respects across this table to the Secretary-General and to his Special Representative. 21. Let me say now that the Israeli aggression has intensified because it is clearly apparent to the Israeli leaders that any just solution sought in the Middle East would expose Israel to serious difficulties and internal divisions, 28. The attempt of the Lebanese delegation to dramatize a minor patrolling incident, fully justified by the free hand given’to the terrorists by the Lebanese Government, by suddenly asking for this urgent meeting of the Security Council, knowing fUl well that nothing justified this step at a time when many members of the Council were taking advantage of the public holiday to Epose andgatherstrength for the forthcoming session of the General Assembly, will not have passed unnoticed. :‘Perhaps it is the vocation of Lebanon, which has beeu mentioned before in this Chamber, to excuse its own evil intentions, that supplies the real justification for the panic evidenced in the letter addressed to YOU, Sir, yesterday by the Chargk d’Affaires at the request of the Foreign Minister of Lebanon, followed by the request for this meeting. 22. Israeli aggression, which is taking the shape of ominous military hostilities directed against Lebanon, is undoubtedly a prelude to the resumption of hostilities on other fronts in the area. This aggression is directed not only against Lebanon but also against other Arab, States, as well as against all efforts to preserve peace in the Middle East and in the world. 23. The da.i!,y bombardment of Lebanon by Israel and the latter’s threats offer the world an example of the agonizing and sad circumstances created by Israeli military expansionists. The drama that Lebanon is living today at its southern border represents a challenge and a test of the ability of the Security Council to Live up to its obligations under the Charter and to ensure the safety, the security and the independence of small and peaceful nations, which are constantly threatened by military and expansionist aggressors. 29. It was clear when the Security Council adopted the inequitable and one-sided text of resolution 280 (1970) on 19 May last, that the resolution would, as similar ones in the past, give encouragement to the 30. Since the Security CounciI adopted that resolution there have been in fact at least 204 terrorist aggressions from Lebanese territory; fifteen Israeli civilians have been killed; five Israeli soldiers have been killed; thirty-eight Israeli civilians have been wounded; fiftyfive Israeli soldiers have been wounded. 31. To show the intensification of terrorist activity in this area between 12 May 1970, when the last debate on the Lebanese question began, until 31 May, twelve civilians and cne soldier were killed, twenty civilians and five soldiers were wounded. This corresponds to the openly-proclaimed designs of the terrorist leaders to sabotage the major diplomatic efforts now being made, to reach a peaceful and just solution of the Middle East crisis, 32. According to the Lebanese daily newspaper El- &K// K$//, of 31 December 1969, Chouba-which was mentioned in the report of the Secretary-General and again just now in the statement we have just heard by the representative of Lebanon who, I should have thought, should perhaps have not been too eager to have mentioned that name-serves as one of the main front posts of the terrorist organizations in the El Arkoub area, the area with which we are dealing. 33. I am now talking about the resolution of last May. That was not the first time that the Security Council had demonstrated its inability to address itself fairly and constructively to the situation in the Middle East, That was not the first time that it had set up a double standard, applying one measure for the Arab party and another for Israel, and failed to deal with the situation on its merits. 34. In these circumstances it is necessary for my delegation to make certain clarifications concerning its position in the deliberations in this organ. 35. The Charter of the United Nations states that the Organization is based on the sovereign equality of all Member States. That is a basic premise of our Organization. IsraeI, however, has consistently been deprived of this fundamental prerogative, particularly in the Security Council. 36. Although it is intended that the Security Council should be representative of the entire membership of the United Nations, Israel’s right of representation has been brushed aside. While all of Israel’s neighbours 37. Israel’s rights in the Security Council have been further whittled away by the fact that in the last fifteen years the Council has become paralysed by the use of the veto in all instances concerning the situation in the Middle East in which consideration for and recognition of Israel’s interests and rights was necessary. 38. Israel’s exclusion from representation on the Council and the Council’s inability, because of the veto, to accord due consideration to Israel’s righls, are aggravated by the composition of this organ. Onethird of its members maintain no diplomatic relations with Israel. Some of them even deny or question Israel’s right to exist. Of the remaining members, several unreservedly identify themselves with the Arttb position irrespective of its merits, which indeed they disdain to examine. What is more serious, some of the States represented on the Council follow a policy of unilateral measures against Israel which in fact constitute illegal sanctions contrary to Charter provisions on this matter. Their manifest lack of neutrality, their blatant partialities, deprive them of all claim to the status of impartial observers, let alone arbiters of the situation in the Middle East. 39. The most recent and flagrant deviation from Charter principles has been the seating as a member of the Council of Syria, which repudiates the United Nations Charter in relation to Israel, has rejected the Security Council resolution of 22 November 1967 1242 (1967)] on the establishment of a just and lasting peace and has even refused to accept the Secretary-General’s Special Representative, and to explore with him the road to peace. Syria’s membership in this organ has made a mockery of the Council’s responsibility for international peace and security . . .

I give the floor to the rep resentative of Syria on a point of order.

Mr. President, I think you will agree with me that it is high time for the representative of Israel to deal with the complaint brought by the delegation of the Lebanon, which is the question of the invasion of Lebanese territory. The candidature of Syria is not in question. If the delegation of Israel has a complaint about that, it can bring it before the Security Council at any time. I think that we are all faced with a very grave problem and we should adopt a resolution as soon as possible. Any delaying tactics would be interpreted, and rightly so, as allowing the aggression, the invasion, to continue. I hope that the Security Council will not be an accomplice to that. 42. I waive my right of consecutive interpretation deliberately because we want to achieve results and because we do not want any theses on Security Council

I thank you, Mr, President, and, of course, I thank the representative of Syria for indicating to me how to make my views known. But I prefer to do it in my own way. 45. As long as these circumstances prevail, the SecuritY Council cannot be considered as an organ capable of acting or entitled to act in the conflict between Israel and the Arab States. My delegation, however, comes before the Council to put its views on record. 46. The members of the Security Council are well aware of the Agreement, the so-called Cairo Agreement, which was signed on 3 November 1969 between the then Commander in Chief of the Lebanese Army, General Bmile Bustany-he is now in retirement -and Yassir Arafat, whose name will be well known around this table. Mr. Arafat is the man who claims over-all responsibility for directing and co-ordinating terrorist activities against Israel. That is the Agreement which provides the basis and the licence for terrorist activity against Israel from Lebanese territory. Let me give members of the Council one or two paragraphs Of that Agreement which are directly relevant to the situation on the affected part of the frontier between Israel and Lebanon. I will add that an English translation of that Agreement can be found in the weekly English edition of Le Mondc of 29 April last. The first part of that Agreement dealt with what is called the Palestinian presence in Lebanon, allowing it to have its own army command and the necessary mechanisms to ensure relations with the local authorities, bearing in mind, in&a &a, what is politely termed “the interests of the Palestinian revolutionary cause”. What is that interest? Let me quote from an interview given by that same Mr. Arafat to the Italian weekly magazine L’Ewopeo, as reproduced in the Washington Post of 29 Marchlast. It is in the form of questions and answers: 48. Yesterday and today a small unit of the Israel Defence Forces carried out a search and comb mission in the south-westerly foothills of Mount Hermon, east of the Hasbani. They completed their mission a few hours ago and have since evacuated the territory. Arms, ammunition, explosives and sabotage impedimenta were found. This was a minor action in which the Lebanese Army was not directly involved except for some shelling from a distance. As on a previous occasion this action was directed solely against terrorists in the area affected. Incidentally, according to a Reuter’s report from Damascus today, the Syrian Government has admitted that the Israeli actions in this area were posing a very serious threat to the terrorist operations, especially those of the El-Saiqa Group. 49. I should like to add once more some statistics. In the four-week period ending today no less than eighty-four acts of aggression against Israel have been committed from Lebanese territory. In these five days of September alone we have endured from Lebanese territory seven cases of mortar shelling, three cases of mining, one case of sabotage in a village, and four attempts at hostile and illegal crossings into our territory. I think the Council might be interested in a statement of the Minister of the Interior of Lebanon, Mr. Jumbalatt, circulated by the wire services in the course of today. According to the Reuter’s News Agency, Mr. Jumbalatt: ‘ ‘Arafat: We will not accept it”-that is, a peaceful settlement. “We will continue to wage war against Israel by ourselves until we get Palestine back. The goal of our struggle is the end of Israel HL?I! there can be no compromises or mediations whether our friends like it or not, the dimensions of our struggle will always remain those outlined by the principles of Al-Fath.” “ . * . asked Palestinian terrtirist organizations not to set up offices in Lebanese border villages in order to avoid giving Israel a pretext for retaliatory action against the villages. He also asked them to move what bases and offices were already close to the border back to some 10 or 15 kilometres from Israel. “Question: Thus you are not at all seeking the peace everyone is hoping for. “Answer: Right. We don’t want peace, we want victory. Peace for us means Israel’s destruction and nothing else. ” “Mr. Jumbalatt told reporters he had made the request at his regular meeting with representatives of terrorist organizations here (in Beirut) yesterday. He added that the terrorist delegates had promised to consider his request and reply to him soon, probably after his return from a visit to Cairo.” 47. Those are the interests which are recognized by the Lebanese Government in the Cairo Agreement. That Agreement goes on with a section on resistance 51. All this shows that in reality the Lebanese Government has long given up its control of the area concerned which, following a series of agreements and accords and understandings with the terror organizations, is now a central base for terror activities. 52. Does any member of the Security Council who is honest with himself, does any responsible Government in the world seriously expect the direct victim of this aggression to wait until these terrorist delegates will be obliging enough,, to give Mr. Jumbalatt their reply? Does not the very fact that the Lebanese Government had to adopt this manner of speaking with the terrorists show conclusively how hollow and how tendentious is that Government’s request for this urgent meeting of the Security Council? 53, Resolutions adopted by the Security Council in recent debates have reflected the Council’s disabilities to consider questions arising from the Israel-Arab conflict with equity’and in conformity with fundamental Charter precepts. The Council has thus, I regret to say, failed to pronounce itself on the statements made repeatedly by Arab Governments, including the Government of Lebanon and their representatives in the United Nations and elsewhere, that their aim is to bring about Israel’s annihilation as a State. The Council has failed to act on the incessant warfare openly pursued by Arab States against Israel. It has even failed to uphold and reaffirm the obligations to observe the cease-fire established by its own resolutions. 54. Neither Israel, nor the international community, requires Lebanon to favour Israel’s interests or support Israel’s views. Lebanon is obliged, however, as a Member of the United Nations to prevent irregular as well as regular forces from using its territory for aggression against another Member State. No pretext can weaken this obligation. No excuse can diminish the responsibility incurred in flouting it. No fine words can conceal the underlying truth. This has always been a tenet of international law and aUnited Nations principle repeatedly vindicated by United Nations jurisprudence. If Lebanon chooses to repudiate it, it opts for war, with all its dangers and repercussions. If Lebanon chooses to open its frontiers to aggression against Israel, it cannot claim to be immune to Israel’s defence against aggression. 55. With that, and stressing once again the defensive and very limited nature of the action which was completed several hours ago, I wish to reserve my delegation’s rights and position in this debate.

Mr. President, allow me first of all to welcome you, congratulate you and wish you every suc- 5’7. I should also like to send a greeting to your predecessor, the Ambassador of Poland, who, although he did not convene us in public, did call us together in private and with his great skill he succeeded in sparing us several meetings. Nevertheless, he carried OUI his duties as President. 58. My delegation would also like to send greetings to the Ambassador of Nicaragua for the fine manner in which he presided over the Council during July. 59. We have just heard the statements made by the representatives of Lebanon and Israel after having heard the statement made by the Secretary-General. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that the army of a Member State has penetrated by force into the territory of another Member State of the United Nations. These facts are undeniable and the delegation of Israel does not deny them although it attempts to minimize them, In this situation and without prejudice to the fact that the Security Council may in furlher meetings consider the facts in detail, and take pertinent decisions, it is evident that what is not possible is that the Israel army should continue to be present in the ferritory of Lebanon. 60. Last May, my delegation submitted a draft resolu-, tion which was adopted unanimously [279 (I970)3 and which forced the Israel army to withdraw from Lebanon. My delegation still recalls that we weregiven assurances that the withdrawal had been completed at the moment when the Council was taking up the matter. The facts later proved that, because of a series of circumstances which I need not relate, the withdrawal had not been completed as had been announced here in the Council. 61. Under these circumstances my delegation believes that this Council cannot remain inactive. The facts have been proved. The invasion has occurred and the fact that a withdrawal ha’s been initiated is not, in the opinion of my delegation, sufficient proof for the Council to remain completely inactive. 62. Under these circumstances and bearing in mind that it is a repetition of actions which have occurred in the past with the flagrant violation of specific Principles of the Charter, my delegation believes that the Council should act with all the urgency required by the situation. Consequently, my delegation submits the following draft resolution: “D~III&S the complete and immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory.” 63. The appeal issued by this Council on 12 May has produced its results and we trust that the Government of Israel will immediately bow to this qecision.

Mr. President, in tendering you our warmest congratulations, I should like. first to thank you for the speed with which you called this meeting of the Security Council and to assure you of the complete support. of my delegation in your delicate work. 75. Mr, DE PINIES (Spain) (interpretation from Spnnish): I do not wish to hold up the work of the Council, since I myself have asked that we proceed urgently; however, my delegation does not wish to let a fact pass without comment. When an armed force of a State penetrates into the territory of another sovereign State-that, with all my respect for those who do it, is a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, of which states: 66. I should like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to your predecessors, Mr. &villa Sacasa, Ambassador of Nicaragua, who presided over the Council in .Tuly with great mastery, and Mr. Ku&ga who, very happily, had no occasion to call a plenary meeting ofthe Security Council but who nevertheless carried on intensive diplomatic activity and many informal meetings with talent and tact to which I should like to pay tribute. “AI1 Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.” 67. For my part, I am prepared to waive my right to speak so as to make possible a rapid vote on the draft resolution submitted by our colleague from Spain. If there were other speakers I should, of course, address the Council; if not, I would be in’favour of proceeding as rapidly as possible to a vote. 76. Now, you can say “minor patrolling incidents” or whatever one wants to call them; but, in my delegation’s opinion, the invasion of a territory by a foreign army is a flagrant violation of the Charter. And in the light of this my delegation believes that the Council should proceed to a vote and call for the immediate and complete withdrawal of the forces of the Israeli army which have ‘penetrated into Lebanon. 68. In the circumstances, I reserve my right, if necessary, to explain my vote subsequently. I may add that I support fully the proposal of the Spanish representative.

Mr. President, first of all I should like to join those ‘who have already spoken in welcoming you to the Chair. Not only your distinguished record, but our experience of very cordial and very enriching contacts with you since your arrival in New York assures us that you will be presiding over the Council with great wis,dom and great distinction and we look forward to your tenure in the Presidency.

I give the floor to the representative of Lebanon.

I intended to re$y to the spokesman of Israel, but under the present circumstances I shall waive my right until after the vote.

I give the floor to the representative of Israel. 78. I should also like to convey my congratulations to Ambassador Kul’aga for thevely serene, competent 1 and courteous manner in which he conducted our consultations during the previous month.

I shall be brief, but I should like, if I may, to refer to something that was said just now by the representative of Spain. 79. Turning to the matter at hand today, I think we all recognize that someof the facts which have been put before us about the current situation along the frontier between Lebanon and Israel are in dispute. However, there can be no dispute that for a long period of time now there has been a pattern of guerr’illa-type raids conducted from Lebanese territory against Israel and Israeli counter-attacks directed against Lebanese territory. This problem has been subjected to lengthy consideration in the Security Council in August 1969, in May 1970, and more recent &vents have been reported in document S/9822 of 5 June 1970 and in 73. I should like to recall-1 was listening to the English interpretation-that when he submitted the draft resohltion, the representative of Spain found it appropriate to describe Israel’s a&tin-the word used was “invasion”-without however, referring to the warfare which, as everybody knows, is being waged continuously against Israel from Lebanese territory in flagrant -breach of the Charter. 74. I have already mentioned in my statement that no contribution to peace in the Middle East can be 8 I. The situation which confronts the Council today is in our judgment somewhat different. We have listened attentively to the statements made this afternoon, first of all to the report, delivered by the Secretary- General in such a thoughtful and timely manner, from the Chief of Staff of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, in which he informed us of allegations about continuing Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory, together with a statement by the Israeli representative to him that Israeli troops had been withdrawn. We have also heard before this Council the concerns which have quite understandably been reflected in the statement of our colleague from Lebanon about military operations on his territory and informationfrom his Government that those operations continue. At the same time, we have also listened to a statement by the representative of Israel in which he has assured us categorically twice-at least, I took it as a categoric assurance-that all Israeli trcops have in fact now been withdrawn from this most recent operation. 82. Therefore, this text which has just been handed us strikes me in a way as passing judgment not only on the principle that Israeli troops should be withdrawn-which we fully support-but in asense is asking us to make a judgment as to which of the two parties is giving the accurate version of the present situation on the ground: to wit, are the troops still there or are they not there? If they are not there, then such a resolution is redundant. If they are there, then it would command the full support of the United States because we believe that they should not be on Lebanese soil, 83. But we frankly find ourselves in the face of this conflicting evidence confronted with a rather painful dilemma. We merely regret that the draft resolution has been introduced with such haste and that there has not been an adequate opportunity to ascertain through some impartial source, such as the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, what the precise situation is as of the present time along the border. Now, that being so and taking account of the conflicting evidence, the haste with which we are asked to pass judgment on a matter of this seriousness, my Government has instructed me under such circumstances to abstain, while makingclear that this in no way detracts from our continued full and complete support for the maintenance of the territorial integrity of Lebanon. 85. I should like today to reiterate that concern. I also wish to reaffirm our special concern for the intcgrity of Lebanon, a democratic State with an illustrious history and one which has repeatedly demonstratd its commitment to the United Nations Charter and to peace.

I now call on the representiltive of Israel.

Referring to the last statement made by the representative of Spain, I should simply like to express the hope and understanding that the doctrine which he advanced will always be applied by him even-handedly and that he would demons&arc the same degree of solicitude at the situation in which Israel finds itself.

I now call on the represent* tive of Lebanon.

I should still like to reserve my right to reply after the voting has b@cn completed. 90. However, may I just say now that I should like to reject categorically Israeli allegations that their forces of aggression have withdrawn from Lebancg territory. The fact is that right now Israeli forces art’ still inside Lebanese territory. We are all acquainted with Israeli tactics of distortion, which were refcrrd to by the Ambassador of Spain. 91. The last time we came to this CounciI, A&assador Tekoah declared in front of all the members &at the Israeli forces had withdrawn. But at a later meeting he retracted that statement by stating that it was tm dark for them to withdraw and therefore they remained on Lebanese soil. I believe now in Beirut that it is already later than twelve midnight and I am sure it is still too darkfor the Israeli forces to withdraw. Therefore, I will refrain from replying to the Israeli representative until the vote has been completed.

Are there any objections 60 the Council’s proceeding to the vote on thedraft resolb tion submitted by the delegation of Spain? Are there any further explanations before the vote’? A vote was taken by show of hands. In favour: Burundi, China, Colombia, Finland, France, Nepal, Nicaragua, Poland, Sierra Leone, Spain, Syria, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Zambia. 100. It is a matter of distress and great regret to see one delegation unable to support the principle of withdrawal of foreign armed forces from the territory of independent and sovereign States, thus definitely implying support for aggression. It is ironical that this delegation in particular alleges that it is working for .peace, particularly in the Middle East. Against: None. 101. The spokesman of Israel referred to responsible Governments. I wonder if there is one responsible Government in the United Nations which has the audacity to send a representative to the Security Council to admit openly committing an act of aggression against a Member State. Abstaining: United States of America. The draft resolution was adopted by 14 votes to none, with 1 abstenti0n.l

I now call on the representative of the United Kingdom who wishes to make a statement after the vote. 102. Mr. Rosenne referred to the Palestinian people. Let me tell Mr, Rosenne that if there are 300,000 Palestinians on its territory, it is not Lebanon which is responsible but Israel which drove that Palestinian population from its homes. It is Israel which must bear the responsibility of failure to implement the United Nations resolutions adopted both before and after the war of 5 June 1967 and for the consequences of that failure. It shares that, responsibility with all other countries which give it direct support. It can on no account shift the responsibility on to Lebancm. Indeed of the whole international community Lebanon is without a doubt the country which least deserves to bear the responsibility for the Palestinian presence and activity for which Israel claims to be punishing it.

We have this afternoon heard conflicting statements from the parties about the present position on the ground and this has put my delegation in a difficult position. The representative of Lebanon maintains that Israeli forces are still operating on Lebanese territory. The representative of Israel maintains that all Israeli forces have now withdrawn. It seems impossible for the Council at this stage of the game to determine the exact facts. It is, however, clear that an armed incursion into Lebanese territory did take place and the representative of Israel has not denied this. Hence, in spite of the conflict of evidence, it is the view of my delegation that it was appropriate to adopt the resolution before US. If the Israeli forces have in fact withdrawn, the fact is welcome to us all. If they have not, then there is every reason for the Security Council to demand their immediate withdrawal. That is why my delegation voted in favour of the resolution. 103. Through its threats and its aggression Israel intends to compel Lebanon to force its 300,000 Palestinian refugees who are fighting heroically to return to their homes, through the use of armed force, to resign themselves indefinitely to the miseries of their exodus under penalty of itself suffering further aggression by Israel. Thus Israel’s aim is none other than to destroy Lebanon either from the inside or from the outside by confronting it with the alternatives of undergoing Israel’s raids against its own territory and its population or practising towards its own brothers who are resident in its territory a permanent policy of violence and civil war. 96. In voting in this manner, however, my delegation nevertheless.deplores all actions which are likely to impede the progress of Mr. Jarring’s mission and Of the negotiations for an eventual settlement. In this we include breaches of the cease-tire by the fedayeen which cannot in any respect assist toward this end.

I should like to take this opportunity to extend a very warm welcome to the representative of the United Kingdom at this his first meeting of the Security Council. He is no stranger to many of us here as he has ‘served before on his country’s delegation, served with distinction during the past decade. We hope that his stay with the United Nations will be a fruitful and successful one and we look forward very much to his future deliberations in the work of this Council. 104. The Israel representative spoke of obstacles to peace talks. His very presence here in this Council is an excellent proof of who is obstructing the peace talks.

I shall be very brief in right of reply. I very much regret that my friend from Lebanon was apparently a bit preoccupied during part of my statement and failed to note that I made very clear that the abstention of ‘See resolution 285 (1970). 106. Mr. KU,LAGA (Poland) (interpretation from French): I have asked to speak notin order to deal with the substance of the question before us or even to explain the vote that my delegation has just cast. I shall do that at the appropriate time. However, Mr. President, I should like to extend to you and to my colleagues in the Security Council my thanks for the very generous, not to say too generous, things that they were kind enough as to say about me. I was particularly appreciative of the mention which you made, Mr. President, of my stay in your country and in other African States, a stay which remains a very pleasant memory. 107. I could not conclude these remarks without extending our congratulations and best wishes to you, Mr. President, upon your accession to the presidency of the Security Council for this month. The experience, tact and distinction which we know to be yours allow HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUll.lCATlONS United Nations publications moly be obtained from bookstores and dirlribulors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Notions, Soles Se&on, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sent en vente dons les llbroiries et les agences dipositairsr du monde entlar. Informez-vous aup& da votre librairie ou odresser-vour 61 Notions Unlcr, Section des vcntes, New York ou Get&e. KAK llOJlYYKTb KS~AKKFI OPrAKH3A~KM 06bEfiHKEHHblX HAuHfl &~~(aIinx OprallnSaqnA 06!be&nHennb~x Haqnfi ~o%nO KynnTb B KmKHHX ldftra31ll~aX II arewwrnax no ncex pf&laX ampa. BanoAaTe cnpanKu 06 sisjqawmx B naKxe>r KwmiKo3t alaraanlre nmn nnunTe no aApecy: Opraaaaaqarr 065eAnHeHnnx IIaqnfi, CeKqnr no npoAaxe nB&aHnii, Hbro-tfopx Am >xeKesa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicacioncs de lar Nacioner Unidas sst6n en venta en librerias y cases dlstrlbuidoros en todos porter del mundo. Conrulte a su librcro o dirljare ar Nacionss ltnidos, Seccidn de Ventor, Nuevo York o Ginebra. I Aho in Uniml N;dons. New York Price: %U.S. 0.50 (or equi4ent in other currencies) 109. As the representative of Spain has said, we ~&VC devoted this meeting to the discussion of an in - resolution, without prejudice to any further me which we shall hold to discuss this matter furt understand that other delegations wish to particip!#e in this debate. After consultations, we have fixed Ihe date and time of the next meeting to be Tuesday. 8 September, at 3 p.m., but I hope that we shall sti in readiness should we be requested to hold furlher meetings before then. 110. I wish once again to thank members of the Couhlcil and the delegations of Lebanon and Israel for ticipating in this debate at such short notice duri the holiday period. I wish to thank the Secret General and his secretariat for their willing immediate response to our request for a meeting. The meeting rose at 6.35 pati.