S/PV.1600 Security Council

The Security Council has before it the report that was prepared by the Special Mission which went to Senegal under the provisions of resolution 294 (1971). Under the chairmanship of the Ambassador of Nicaragua, to whom we pay a most respectful tribute, the Mission carried out a thorough inquiry into the incidents which had occurred, and were continuing to occur even in its presence, on the frontiers between Senegal and Guinea (B&au). The mandate of the Mission was unique since it was entrusted with the task not only of observing what had happened but also of peace in the region, The President of the Council at that time, the Ambassador of France, deserves our most sincere tribute because at the right time he made clear the scope of that very important mandate and because he succeeded, in co-operation with the Secretary-General, in dispatching the Mission to the site. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1600) I. Adoption of the agenda. 2. Complaint by Senegal : , Report of the Special Mission of the Security Council established under resolution 294 (1971) (S/l 0308). Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. Complaint by Senegal 4. From the report a series of observations emerge as a result of the visits and inquiries carried out on the scene of the incidents tis well as of reports, sometimes by eye witnesses. The responsibility of the Portuguese colonial authorities in Guinea (Bissau) for the incidents which have caused scores of Senegalese victims, terrorized the inhabitants of the frontiers between Guinea (Bissau) and Senegal, and caused very great damage to the economic and social life of that part of Senegal, which is naturally beautiful, peaceful and hospitable, is a responsibility ,that has been clearly established. Report of the Special Mission of the Security Council established under resolution 294 (1971) (S/l 03081)

It will be recalled that at previous meetings devoted to the consideration of the present item on the agenda, the Security Council decided to invite the representatives of Senegal, Guinea, Mali, Sudan, Mauritania, Mauritius, Togo and Zambia to participate, without the right to vote, in the Council’s debate on the question before it. In view of the limited number of places at the Council table, and in conformity with usual practice, I shall invite the representatives of countries not members of the Council wishing to participate in this debate to take the places reserved for them in the Council chamber, on the understanding that they will be invited to take a place at the Council table when called upon to speak. I shall invite the representative of Senegal to take a place at the Council table. 5. One did not have to search for long to discover the sinister motives which inspired the Portuguese colonialist forces. Overwhelmed by the success of the revoIution in Guinea (Bissau), seeing their region of control becoming narrower from day to day and finally realizing that they are fighting for a cause which is immoral at its source and lost in advance, they foam with rage and commit their atrocities in the Senegalese border towns and against their peaceful population. At the invitation of the President, Mr. M. Fall (Senegal) took a place at the Security Council table and Mr. E. H. A. Tour.4 (Guinea) took the place reserved for him in the Council Chamber. 6. All the pretexts used by Portugal to attribute these abominable acts to the liberation movements were revealed as false and hypocritica1. The Guinean refugees in Senegal enjoy the fraternal hospitality of Senegal and lead a peaceful life while awaiting the recovery of their national rights. The national Iiberation movement does not carry out any activity in the frontier regions. Having liberated most of the rural areas, it concentrates its struggle on the

Before we continue our consideration of the item on the agenda, I 1 Qil?ci~l Records of the Security Council, Twenty-sixth Year, Special Supplement No. 3. 7. The draft resolution submitted by the African members of the Council reveals these truths. It merely affirms the condemnation of these acts committed by Portugal, whose responsibility was established beyond question. It emphasizes the responsibility of the Security Council to see to it that the security and territorial integrity of Senegal are respected, but it goes even further, to the very root of the problem, just as the Mission had to do because of the logic of things and because of its mandate. The draft resolution requests that the people of Guinea (Bissau) be given, without delay, the right to self-determination; if this right had not been purely and simply denied by Portugal, there would have been no problem. By entrusting to the President of the Council and the Secretary-General the task of supervising the question of implementation under review, the draft resolution gives Portugal a last opportunity to act in accordance with equity, morality and international law, that is to say, to respect the territorial integrity of Senegal, to recognize the personality of Guinea (Bissau) and to put an end to a colonial presence which weighs heavily on the security, stability and development of the region, a colonial presence which certainly imposes on the Portuguese people itself vain and sterile sacrifices: the sacrifice of its sons, resources and prestige and the friendship which the peoples of Africa would like to maintain with it only under conditions of mutual equality, dignity and co-operation. 8. The proposals of President Senghor to allow Guinea (Bissau) to exercise its right to self-d&termination was rejected by Portugal. Will the Portuguese authorities now once again reject the appeals of the international cornmunitY for the restoration of peace and justice, or will they have the courage to extend a hand to the liberation movement whose honourable leader, Mr, Cabral, sponta. neouslY declares his pride in Portuguese culture and the willingness of his country to have with Portugal, after the recognition of Guinean rights, the best possible relations of friendship and co-operation? The draft resolution justly requires that the Security Council meet to decide on the steps to be takeI; if Portugal should turn a deaf ear to these appeals. Thus, the draft resolution embodies all .the elements of the situation and the means of remedying it. g , Mr. NAKAGAWA (Japan): My delegatiorl WeicOnles tk draft resolution contained in document S/l 0395, which ii sponsored by three African members: Burundi, Sicm Leone and Somalia. 10, file six members of the Council, including K+ country, that composed the Special Mission to Sen+l actively participated in the drafting of the prolh?%J resolution, My delegation notes with satisfaction that Ike result of the intensive consultations we held is la&> reflected in the draft now before the Council. 11, We thought it would be very important for I!.: Council to adopt a resolution drafted on the basis oftbe report of the Special Mission. In my view, the Mi&n accomplished an exemplary task under the chairmanship p:‘ the representative of Nicaragua, Mr. Sevilla-Sacasa I \I,~!c> guided the work of the Mission with great skill ZiiJ effectiveness. The Mission produced an objective anS balanced report, which was adopted unanimously by jis members. The recommendations contained in the rep% are, in my view, well balanced and, if implemented full:. will certainly eliminate the causes of tension in the re&n and create an atmosphere of trust, peace and security. 12. The draft resolution, as the representative of Burundi pointed out at the 1599th meeting, is based in largi’ measure on the recommendations of the Mission. I belici< that this draft provides a constructive step forward in our joint efforts to achieve a peaceful and satisfactory set&* ment of the problems involved. My delegation will, therefore, cast an affirmative vote on the draft resolution. Ir! doing so, my delegation strongly urges the Government c;i Portugal to heed the appeals made in the draft resolutii?n.

The delegation of Argentina has read with great interest the report submitted by the Special Mission of the Security Council established under resolulion 294 (1971), which went to Senegal to investigate the complaint of the Government of that country and t*! examine the situation on the frontier with Guinea (Biss4 and which, as requested in that resolution, has made certain recommendations necessary to guarantee peace and securit!- in that region. 14. 1 wish to pay a tribute to the members of the Spccizl Mission and to its distinguished Chairman, Mr. Scvilla- Sacasa, for the dignified and efficient manner in which tlq discharged the duties entrusted to them by the SecuriO Council. We know that their work was not easy. In a ferv days, and sometimes in difficult conditions despite the fIllI co-operation of the Government of Senegal, the Specisl Mission endeavoured to form the most complete and impartial judgernent possible on what had transpired on 111~ frontier between Senegal and Guinea (Bissau). Later, the drafting of the report and the formulation of conclusion% 1.5. As I indicated in the statement I made in tha,; Council at the meeting of 15 July 1971, any course of action the Council adopts must be directed to avoiding a repetition of events such as those that have given rise to the repeated complaints of Senegal. 16. In this context, nevertheless, one must bear in mind that the problems which occur on the frontier between Senegal and Guinea (Bissau) do not constitute a typical case of conflict between two States. We are certain that were Senegal and metropolitan Portugal to share a common frontier there would be no questions between them. At the root of all these incidents is the colonial situation prevailing in Guinea (Bissau) and the struggle being waged by those fighting for their freedom, self-determination and independence , 23. In the latter reference the request is addressed only to the Secretary-General, whereas in the draft resolution before the Council it is addressed to both the Secretary- General and the President of the Security Council. And in the Spanish text it is not clear whether what is requested is two reports or only one. We should be happy to receive clarification from the sponsors on the points I have just raised. 17. It becomes clear, then-and this was repeatedly recognized in the course of the debate of the Security Council in July last-that there can be little hope for a lasting peace in ttie region so long as the present status of Guinea (Bissau) subsists. The Special Mission itself, in paragraph 127 of its report, states: 24. If my query is cleared up, we shall vote in favour of the draft resolution, and with its adoption we trust that moderation and self-control will finally prevail and that peace and calm will finally come to Senegal. “ [The Special Mission] reaches the conclusion that the above-mentioned acts of violence and destruction appear to be the consequence of the special situation prevailing in Guinea (Bissau), which, as the Mission notes with regret, is in contradiction to the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.”

The Security Council has resumed its consideration of the serious situation which has arisen on the African continent as a result of the aggressive policy of the Portuguese colonialists. 18. Without prejudice to advocating all the ?eps necessary for a change in the present state of affairs to which Ihave just referred, it is obvious that Senegal, like any other State Member of the United Nations and member of the international community, has an absolute right to have its sovereignty and territorial integrity fully respected and to be free from acts of violence and destruction in its frontier areas. 26. Before proceeding directly to the item which has been included in the agenda with a view to considering the report of the Special Mission of the Security Council which investigated the acts of aggression by the Portuguese colonialists against the Republic of Senegal, the Soviet delegation would like to draw attention to a number of new facts which demonstrate the seriousness of the situation. As is clear from the letter of 1.5 November 1971 from the Permanent Representative of Senegal to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council [S/l 03881, only recently, in late October and early November, the armed forces of Portugal carried out a number of new acts of aggression against the Republic of Senegal, These, to use the language of international law, are direct acts of unprovoked aggression; they are new developments, which seriously compound the crimes of the Portuguese colonialists. They should unquestionably be taken into account by the Security Council both when it discusses the report of the Council’s mission on Senegal and when it takes a decision on this matter. 19. We believe that the recommendations of the Special Mission adequately cover the various aspects which characterize the situation in that region of Africa, and for that reason we consider the draft resolution submitted by Burundi, Sierra Leone and Somalia to be acceptable, since it largely reflects the recommendations contained in the DZp0l-t. 20. At this stage I should like to make a few remarks with regard to the draft resolution before the Security Council. 21. In the first place, it seems to me that we could introduce into the draft resolution a paragraph whereby the Council would express its appreciation for the work of the Special Mission. The introduction of such a paragraph would be only just in view of the very efficient work done by the Mission which, as I said earlier, we all recognize. 27. In accordance with resolution 294 (1971) the Council has before it the report of its Special Mission, which investigated the facts of the Portuguese aggression against 29. The practice of establishing such special missions composed of members of the Security Council and of sending them to the scene of aggression has fully justified itself. It is wholly and completely in accord with the United Nations Charter and with the role which the Security Council is called upon to play as the United Nations organ primarily responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security. Moreover, these activities have been undertaken by the Council in accordance with precedents which are already firmly established as part of the system and practice of the Security Council. 30. Our experience in establishing and sending to scenes of aggression Security Council missions, rather than missions from the thirtyeighth floor of United Nations Headquarters, to perform functions directly on behalf of the Council in connexion with the maintenance and restoration of international peace provides us with an instrument which fully conforms to the spirit and ietter of the Charter and represents an important step forward in enhancing the role, the effectiveness and the responsibility of the Security Council. It is that positive step which the Security Council was, unfortunately, unable to take for many years from the time of the cold war because of flagrant and systematic violations of and serious departures from the United Nations Charter under pressure from the imperialist forces which at that time controlled the United Nations. But times have changed, and we cannot but welcome the restoration and affirmation of a practice which conforms to the United Nations Charter and is in full accord with the effort to strengthen peace and security and with the interests of the countries which have been victims of aggression by the forces of imperialism and colonialism, 31. The Soviet delegation, as you know, has already had occasion to set forth in detail the position of the Soviet Union on the substance of the question under considera. tion. It is hardly necessary to refer again in detail to the facts that expose the Portuguese policy of aggression h Africa, which for many years has been the subject of severe criticism and condemnation by the overwhelming majority of States Members of the United Nations and by this Organization as a whole. 32. The report of the Special Mission of the Council fully confirms the fact that the Portuguese colonialists are Pursuing a Policy of aggression with the support of tile leading NATO Powers. In paragraph 123 the report flatly states that “the recurrent armed attacks against Senegal cause considerable 10~s of human life, as well as material damage; they create a climate of insecurity and hstabjjity and are fraught with a threat to peace and security in the region .” 34. But however ~nuch Lisbon may tr)’ to preE;b?Elr R 1: matter a a favourable light, the facts eloquently tie/::< i* strate the opposite. The report of the Security I’VZ .(; mission is further proof that the sovereignty arld tt’rri!*.,r,k, integrity of an independent African State MCI~I~VX ali :.“.: United Nations, Senegal, ilre being corl.Sta~~tly ViOhkd 3,” : threatened by Portugal, The representatives !vhn F-*1 JP: spoken here in the Council hVe already refCrred tl! !I”,: relevant sections of the report of the Special Mission a!” ?: Security Council. The Soviet delegation would mcrd) r,a : to stress the most important of these, and above all the :A:- that the Security Council Mission produced facts tiII).g;:’ show conclusively that responsibility for the aclr violence and destruction and for the acts of aggrcuiorz Senegalese territory rests squarely with POlf.UgillI 35. The Security Council Mission also carnc lu C-,v: conclusion that the acts of violence and destruction 11~ *. ” 7 Portuguese forces are a consequence, as is st:ltecl in :“,: report, of a “special situation” which has been hrn:24, X about by the Portuguese colonialists in Guinea (Bissau P.2’ +: which is contrary to the United Nations Declaratiotl uai T’ Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries a: : Peoples. The presence of Portugal and of its triwbpa * Guinea (Bissau) is an illegal international :I& and rcprc>Jt’ * : a violation by Portuguese colonialism of IJnited N”;t~l :.-. decisions on decolonization. At the same time, the C*CW::Z should bear in mind when considering this problem the L1; ( that the legality of the just struggle of peoples for b?;, * national liberation and independence has been procl;li~r:i s and recognized by the United Nations and repc;lrc,‘::, confirmed by General Assembly resolutiorls, inciudiltg F : resolutions adopted at the twenty-fifth anniversary SW: of the General Assembly. 36. Portugal, which is economically weak, would oat 5,: able to carry on colonial wars without the support rrf ri.h NATO countries. The provocation against Senegal is p;ild ! L a general plan of the imperialist forces to Creiltc 3. base fwwhich to do battle against independent countries J;., national liberation movements in Africa, 37. Portugal, in spite and in violation of United Nali~l; g decisions, continues to maintain large colonial posseair\::: on the African continent. Today, with the cotonial syslarcollapsing everywhere in the world, Lisbon still holiE> colonial sway over more than 2 million square kitornetres ,-f African soil. Portugal maintains nn army of 150,000 men I’> Africa. The blood of African patfiots, of fighters fc)r tl:: freedom and independence of their peoples, contintlcs 2:~ flow. The Portuguese colonialists are waging wars cif annihilation against the peoples of hg~la, Mozambiqu: and Guinea (Bissau), who are defending their legitims$r rights. These colonial wars, as has frequently been poinl’cd out by African countries, are increasingly turning into wars waged by Portugal against independent African State< International imperialism and colonialism are deliberate?> bringing Portugal, alongside the Republic of South Africa. 38. The policy of imperialism, colonialism and racism in southern Africa is countered by the growing unity of the African States and peoples, whose goal is the elimination of the last vestiges of colonialism on African soil. The position of the African countries is widely supported by the United Nations and by an overwhelming majority of States and peoples, who have taken a firm stand in favour of the immediate elimination of the remaining centres of colonialism in the world. 42. The Soviet delegation supports the recommendation of the Special Mission of the Security Council that the Council should take all necessary steps to ensure that Porbgd will respect and fully implement t’le recommendations of the Mission. Effective steps should be taken to end, promptly and decisively, the acts of aggression of the Portuguese colonialists who are encroaching on the sovereignty and independence of Senegal and other African countries. The security and independence of African States and, consequently, peace and security on the African continent as a whole can be consolidated only if Portugal’s colonial wars against the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) are brought to an immediate end and if all those peoples are granted their freedom and national independence without further delay in accordance with the requirements of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 39. As we have frequently pointed out, the Soviet Union’s approach to the question under discussion is based on its fundamental policy of giving consistent support to peoples fighting for their national liberation against imperialism, colonialism and racism. That position was cIearly and accurately reflected in the programme for the struggle for peace, international co-operation, and the freedom and independence of peoples which was recently approved by the twenty-fourth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. This programme contains a demand for the prompt and full implementation of IJnited Nations decisions on the elimination of remaining colonial rCgimes, for universal condemnation and boycotting of racism and apurtheid in all their forms and manifestations. Constantly guided by this programme, the Soviet Union, pursuing a policy of peace and friendship between peoples, will continue to carry on a resolute struggle against imperialism and colonialism, to aid peoples fighting for their national freedom and independence against imperialist and colonialist aggression, and to administer a rebuff to the intrigues and diversionary manoeuvres of the aggressors

I should first like to join my colleagues in expressing appreciation for the efforts of the Special Mission and its members, and I shouId like in particular to commend its Chairman, the rcpresentative of Nicaragua, not only for the manner in which he directed this important task, but also for the leadership he gave the Security Council through many difficult periods of consultation as its President. He distinguished himself and he distinguished the Security Council. The Mission’s assignment was clearly not an easy one, and it was made more difficult by the limits imposed on the scope of its investigation by circumstances beyond its control or beyond the control of this Council. 40. Further clear proof of the fundamental policy of the Soviet Union, which calls for supporting the struggle of all peoples and revolutionary forces against imperialism, colonialism and neo-colonialism and for peace and international co-operation, was provided by the plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union which recently ended in Moscow, In the plenum’s resolution of 23 November 1971 on the international activity of the Central Committee following the twenty-fourth Congress, it is emphasized that: 44. My Government has consistently urged that this Council seek to establish the fact of any compIaint which may be brought to it before attempting to pass judgement on the situation or to take n? ‘asures aimed at resolving the problem which may exist, Cons&tent with that position my Government, at an early stage in the discussions of the present complaint brought by Senegal, supported the concept of a Special Mission which would go to the scene and examine all the pertinent facts. Despite the reservations which we had concerning other aspects of Security Council resolution 294 (1971), we made clear our support for the concept of a special mission by requesting a separate paragraph vote on that paragraph and voting in favour of it. “The consistent Leninist foreign policy of the Party and Soviet Government, in which a firm rebuff to imperialism and support for the revolutionary liberation movement are unwaveringly combined with a consistent policy of peaceful coexistence of States with different social systems, has won the Soviet Union great authority in wodd affairs, has helped to strengthen the international position of socialism and of all progressive forces, and has played a major role in changing the international situation in a manner favourable to peace and the security of peoples.” 45. We have examined the report submitted by the Special Mission. We have certain reservations about it but in general 46. At the same time’, we believe that this draft resolution does not do sufficient justice to the care that members of the Special Mission took in drafting their report. We call attention tct the fact that the Special Mission was careful to point out the hearsay nature of much of the evidence which it considered and to avoid approaching the situation with preconceived conclusions. We are struck by the fact that the Mission was unable to determine the responsibility for the mine-Iaying incidents which were the initial cause of the present Senegalese complaint to the Council. The conclusions which the Mission did reach are expressed with due caution consistent with the absence, in many cases, of concrete evidence and the incomplete nature of the investigation. 47. It is precisely this incompleteness and, frankly, onesidedness which we find troublesome in this draft resolution, Both the report and the draft resolution note that the Special Mission was unable to implement fully its mandate. We join in deploring the lack of co-operation of the Government of Portugal which prevented the Mission from completing its task. What the outcome of a broader investigation would have been we simply cannot say. But the report would have been able to take a more complete view of the situation and would, in the opinion of our delegation, have been in a better position to assist this Council in making a constructive contribution to the solution of this problem. 48. In turn the draft resolution we are considering makes no effort to overcome the obstacle admittedly put in the way of the Special Mission in order to take into account all the factors involved in the tension which we all know exists in the region. It shares a deficiency we have noted with respect to earlier resolutions dealing with comparable incidents elsewhere in the world of not taking into account the role which the use of sanctuaries by insurgent groups plays in the creation of border tensions. 49. Finally, we wonder about the contribution that the present draft resolution will make to ensuring “prerequisites for eliminating the causes of tension in the region and creating an atmosphere of trust, peace and security”. 50. My delegation examined the possibility of proposing the establishment of a commission acceptable to all parties 51. As it has so often done in the past, the Council has been considering incidents after they occurred, after the damage has been done. It would be preferable if, through the establishment of such a commission or other appro. priate means, this Council could act to prevent incidents and disputes arising from them. The United States will lend its best efforts to cooperate with other members to this end. 52. The representative of Argentina has asked a question about reporting; we should like to have the answer to that question. 53. Amendments have been circulating among members of the Council and the United States Government is very much interested in some of them. In the light of this, and in the light of the fact that we should like to have a small amount of additional time to consider possible amendments or to discuss with our colleagues questions that have been raised privately and one raised publicly here in this meeting, I should like to make a suggestion. I should like to suggest to our colleagues on the Council that after the conclusion of the speeches this morning we have a modest adjournment until this afternoon, perhaps until three o’clock-or whatever hour would suit the President-to give some of us a chance to discuss amendments to the draft resohrtion that we may wish to suggest and to give us a little more time to consider it. When my delegation came to the meeting yesterday we did not have the draft resolution; we received it at yesterday’s meeting. I understand some of the procedural problems involved in producing draft resolutions, but I hope that our colleagues on this CounciI will agree to allow a very short period of time during which we may consider some of the amendments or some of the questions that have been raised in the debate here this morning.

Mernbers of the Council have heard the suggestion that has just been made by the representative of the United States. 55. Consulting my list, I note that the delegation of Poland wishes to speak. Thus, if the Council will permit me to do so, I shall now speak as representative of POLAND, after which we might revert to the suggestion that has bean made. 56. On behalf of the representative of Poland, I should like to express the views of my delegation in regard to the report of the Special Mission that went to Senegal under the chairmanship of our colleague Mr. SevillaSacasa. l’%s document is a cautious one, the result of lengthy consuhstions and meetings and couched in plain, measured word. 60. I come now to my fourth observation, which is based on the conclusion of the Special Mission contained in paragraph 123, namely, that “the recurrent armed attacks against Senegal . . . are fraught with a threat to peace and security in the region”. In my opinion, that is a conclusion of major importance. 61. Let us recalI that already last year the Special Mission of the Security Council, which went to the Republic of Guinea and of which I had the honour to be a member, unanimously concluded that Portugal was directly responsible for the armed invasion of the territory of the Republic of Guinea. The Security Council, in its resolution 290 (1470), while strongly condemning the Government of Portugal for its invasion of the Republic of Guinea, declared “that the presence of Portuguese colonialism on the African continent is a serious threat to the peace and security of independent African States”. That general observation applies in particular to Guinea (Bissau), where internal repression is accompanied by active hostility and external armed attacks against independent African States, as is amply demonstrated by the complaints of the Republic of Senegal and the Republic of Guinea. 58. The negative attitude of the Government of Portugal, which the Special Mission, diplomatically, merely “strongly deplores” in paragraph 122, narrowed down the field’of action of the Mission to some extent. Nevertheless, it did not prevent it from finding “the indications such as to designate the Portuguese authorities in Guinea (Bissau) as responsible” for the acts of violence and destruction in the territory of Senegal, such as attacks, bombings, placing of mines, destruction of villages and so on. The Council will note that to give a general description of these acts the Special Mission used the exact wording of resolution 294 (1971) of the Council, which proves once again the extreme prudence with which it drafted its report. It is precisely these conclusions which Portugal attacks as being contrary to the facts and bizarre. 62. The Special Mission of the Security Council in its report fully confirms the soundness of these views by describing the acts of violence and destruction against Senegal as being a consequence of the refusal of Portugal to permit the people of Guinea (Bissau) to exercise without delay its inalienable right to self-determination and independence. I am referring to paragraph 128 of the report, 59. This conclusion leads me to another general observation that flows from the conclusion contained in paragraph 127, which describes all these armed attacks and acts of violence and destruction as a consequence of the special situation prevailing in Guinea (Bissau), a situation which “is in contradiction to the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”. In other words, they are the result of the colonial situation in Guinea (Bissau), the result of the colonial war waged by Portugal against the people of Guinea (Bissau), a colonial 63, That leads me to the conclusions of my delegation. In our opinion, there can be no doubt that these conclusions must be based on the following minimum points. First, Portugal must be firmly appraised of our condemnation of 64. It is in that spirit that my delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution submitted by Burundi, Sierra Leone and Somalia.

Without passing judgement on the various points made by our United States colleague, I think that the lateness of the hour and courtesy dictate that we should defer to the wish he expressed that we should postpone to this afternoon the continuation of the discussion. Moreover, the representative of Argentina has also made some interesting suggestions. In any case, I think that agreement could be readily achieved-agreement for which the African representatives hope and for which the representative of Senegal expressed a desire yesterday. I say this all the more freely since, for our part, we are in Favour of this draft resolution, subject only to one reservation-but on that point too, I believe that things can be worked out. Accordingly, I support the proposal of the representative of the United States to postpone our discussion until this afternoon. As the delay is not long, we should not display too much impatience in this connexion. 66. Mr. TERENCE (Burundi) linterpretntion from French): I should like to comment on the proposals that have been made. In chronological order, I shall start with that of the representative of Argentina. As my delegation formed part of the Special Mission that was sent to Senegal, we feel that a few words recognizing the merits of the Special Mission would only express the dedication with which the members of that mission carried out their responsibilities-and that of course also represents the feelings of the other sponsors. I am thinking especially of Mr. Sevilla-Sacasa, who presided over the team sent to Senegal by the Security Council. Once again, by coincidence or through the same magical power that I mentioned yesterday, Mr. Sevilla-Sacasa seems destined to be concerned with African problems. I hope that he will continue to do so to the extent possible. Africa will be grateful to him for that. 67. The representative of Argentina raised another point, concerning operative paragraph 7 of the draft resolution, 68. Lastly, I should like to refer to the proposal to postpone the vote until this afternoon. Of course, the sponsors and, I am sure, the representative of Senegal as well, would have preferred the vote to take place this morning. Nevertheless, bearing in mind the concern that guides all of us and being aware that the Security Council assumes collective responsibility-although we Africans are the most directly affected-we welcome all proposals designed to bring about the best possible solution for all concerned. We therefore think that the proposal to have the vote taken this afternoon rather than this morning was made with the object of improving the present situation and of reaching unanimous agreement during the vote to be taken in the Security Council this afternoon. That is why the sponsors of the draft resolution, of whom I am one, accept the postponement of the vote until this afternoon. We would nevertheless like to make an appeal to all the members of the Security Council that the vote should in fact be taken this afternoon and not later.

I do not understand the question at issue. The point is that the debate is continuing, and voting usually starts after the debate. The debate has not been concluded. A number of delegations have not yet spoken, and presumably they intend to speak. We still have 10 minutes left before 1 p.m., and that is enough time for one speaker at most. Obviously, then, we will have to hold a second meeting, and thus the question of voting does not arise at present. If the representatives of Argentina or the United States have amendments, let them submit them formally, in writing, and we shall consider them. It is difficult to understand the substance of those amendmeats, and to vote on them, simply after listening to them. 70. Therefore, if there are any further speakers on the list, they should be given the floor and allowed to speak. Then, let us reconvene at 3 pm., continue the debate if there are any other speakers, and if there are not, we can proceed to a vote. I consider that the question of voting has been raised prematurely and without sufficient justification.

I should like to clarify my request. I thought that perhaps the list af speakers had been exhausted. As to the amendments that I was referring to, I do not know whether anybody planned to present them formally or was trying to garner support for them, but certainly I concur with Ambassador Malik. All I was suggesting was that we could very usefully employ the two hours between now and the reconvening of the Council at 3 o’oclock. I did not mean to suggest anything out of the ordinary. 72. In response to our colleague from Burundi, I certaialy would concur that the Council should conclude its business. I am hopeful that in this period between now and 3 o’clock we might find ways to answer some of the problems that 1 raised in my statement. Certainly, I did not want to suggest

When we discuss a matter, I think there are three stages: first the debate, then the discussion of the draft resolution and then the vote; but we seem to skip the second stage-the discussion of the draft resolution. 79. Would it not be quite in order that when we have concluded the general debate on the item the draft resolution should then be put before representatives for discussion, so that those who wished to move amendments or to clarify certain points could have the opportunity of doing so? After having completed that stage we would hear explanations of vote before the vote, take the vote and then hear explanations of vote after the vote. But what I find is that representatives take the opportunity of skipping the second phase and go straight on to explain their votes before the vote, without allowing their explanations to be debated. 74. Mr. TERENCE (Burundi) (interpretation porn &en&j: In the interest of further clarification, I would point out that we spoke after the President because it appeared to us that the list of speakers for this morning had been exhausted. So we fully support the proposal of Ambassador Malik that the debate should continue, if there are any speakers on the list. 75. On the other hand, as we understood it, the proposal of the United States and France was designed to make it possible for certain other consultations to take place which might smooth out some of the existing difficulties. That is why we thought that we were the last to speak, because there were no other speakers on the list.

I am quite prepared to follow the course proposed by the representative of Somalia for this afternoon, and I shall gladly call on any delegation which wishes to explain its attitude on the draft resolution submitted to the Security Council. 76. In short, if there are further speakers we shall be very happy to hear them. If there are none, it is agreeable to the sponsors that, in accordance with the formal request made by the United States and France, the vote should be postponed until this afternoon. 81. Since no one wishes to speak now, I therefore propose, in view of the lateness of the hour, that we adjourn and resume this afternoon at 3.30.

I have a few delegations on my list of speakers which wish to lIthe meeting rose at 1 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Notions publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Conwlt your bookstore or write tat United Notions, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUELlCATlONS DES NATIONS LJNIES ler publications des Nations Unier sent en vente dons ler librairier et ler ogencer dipositoirer du monde entier. Informez-vous oupr&s de votre libroirie ou adresrcz-vous 6: Nations Unies, Section der venter, New York ou GM&Z.. KAK flOflYL(44Tb ll3/(AHlrFl OPrAHM3AUHM 06bEAMHEHHblX HAULiA COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicocioner de Ias Naciones Unidor estc’m en vento en libreriar y cosas distribuidoras en todar porter del mvndo. Conrulte a IU librero o diriiore a; Nacioner Unidas, Sacci6n de Ventos, Nue~o York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: 8u.s. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currenctes) 8217s-August I973--2,050