S/PV.1821 Security Council

I should like to express the gratitude of the Council to the retiring President-in fact, to the two outgoing Presidents, since during the month of March the Council was honoured by the presence in this Chair of Mr. Gonzalo Facie, Minister for External Relations of Costa Rica, who was succeeded by our friend Mr. Fernando SaIazar. Mr. Facie, with all the authority and skill which we had already recognized in him last year, presided over our work on a particularly difficult matter, which Mr. Salazar concluded with his customary distinction. We express our heartfelt gratitude to both. Expression of welcome to the representative of the United Republic of Cameroon

May I be allowed, as the President and as the repre-. sentative of France, to say how particularly pleased I am to welcome among us the new representative of the United Republic of Cameroon, Mr. Oyono. I wish to congratulate him on his appointment to this important post and assure him that he will find among all members of the Council a willingness to maintain with him the same friendly relations of co-operation which they had with his predecessor, our friend Mr. NjinC. Adoption of the agenda

I should like to apologize to all members of the Security Council for not having personally guided the important and fruitful consultations that were held to prepare the draft resolution [S/1167.5] which will shortly be put to the vote. I thank all members for the friendly and unreserved co-operation which they gave to my deputy, Mr. Jacques Lecompt, during those consultations. 5. I must inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Egypt and Israel requesting that they be invited to participate in the Council’s debate, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and of the provisional rules of procedure. In accordance with the usual practice, I intend, with the consent of the Council, to invite the representatives of Egypt and Israel to participate, without the right to vote, in the Council’s debate. all its members. Further, the mem- bers have agreed that the draft resolution should be put to the vote before I call on the first speaker. 7. In accordance with our agreement, I shall now put to the vote draft resolution S/11675.

I shall now call on those representatives whose names are on the Iist of speakers.

Mr. President, permit me first of all to congratulate you upon your assumption of the important post of President of the Security Council. The Soviet delegation takes particular pleasure in welcoming you as the representative of a friendly country with which the Soviet Union enjoys durable ties of mutual understanding and co-operation. Under your presidency, the Council has adopted a resolution which should promote the attainment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. I should Iike to take this opportunity to assure you, Mr. President, that you can count on the whole-hearted co-operation of the delegation of the USSR in the performance of your important tasks. 10. I should Iike also to express my gratitude to the Minister for External Relations of Costa Rica, Mr. Facie, and the representative of Costa Rica in the Security Council, Mr. Salazar, under whose presidency the Council adopted a resolution on the Cyprus question. The implementation of resolution 367 (1975) should promote a solution to the Cyprus problem on the basis of the lofty principles and purposes of the Charter. 11. The Security Council has just adopted a resolution aimed at a settlement of the Middle East conflict on the basis of the immediate implementation of Council resolution 338 (1973). We have to note with regret that this fundamental resolution, aimed at a just political settlement of the Middle East conflict, has so far not been implemented. The reason for this is clear to everyone. It lies in the stubborn refusal of Israel to withdraw its troops from all the Arab territories occupied in 1967. It ties in its refusal to recognize the lawful national rights of the Palestinian 12. In this regard, the delegation of the USSR would Iike to point out that in essence the fundamental goal of today’s Security Council resolution to extend the mandate of UNEF for an additional period of time-three months this time-is to make use of one more opportunity to achieve as quickly as possible a genuine settlement of the Middle East conflict. The attainment of this goal should be served by the earliest possible resumption of the work of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East. That Conference was specially convened to consider the whole range of questions involved in a Middle East settlement. It has the advantage that all questions relating to a Middle East settlement would be discussed not behind closed doors, but in the open-in full view of Arab and world public opinion, and this would make it much more difficult for the opponents of a just peace settlement to conduct their manoeuvres. 13. The fundamental position of the Soviet Union on the Middle East problem has repeatedly been expounded in the Security Council. I should like to take this opportunity to draw the attention of members of the Council to the statement by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Comrade Brezhnev, at the Eleventh Congress of the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party at Budapest on 18 March this year. In that statement he said: “The Soviet Union and other fraternal countries have unfailingly and with the utmost persistence and energy favoured the establishment of a genuinely lasting and genuinely just peace in the Middle East and have firmly advocated the most reliable means of attaining that end: the earliest possible resumption of the work of the forum especially created for the purpose, the Geneva Conference. It has been in favour of the solution of the fundamental problems: the liberation of all the Arab territories occupied in 1967, the satisfaction of the lawful rights of the Arab people of Palestine, including the creation of its own statehood, and it has favoured effectively guaranteeing to all States in the Middle East a secure, independent and free existence and development*‘. That Soviet Union position is shared by, among others, many States members of the Security Council. 14. It is with a feeling of deep satisfaction that I stress here the convergence of the positions of the USSR and France on key questions in a solution to the Middle East problem. In the Soviet-French communique issued in connexion with the official visit to the Soviet Union of the Foreign Minister “The Soviet Union and France believe that the achievement of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East is possible only on condition that Israeli troops are withdrawn from all the territories occupied in 1967, that the lawful rights of the Palestinian people, including its right to a national home, are protected, and that the right of all the States and peoples of the area to an independent existence is ensured. In that regard the parties express the hope that the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East will resume its work as soon as possible”. 15. It is a pleasure for us to note also the convergence of the positions of the Soviet Union and Iraq on the Middle East situation. In a joint Soviet-Iraqi communique just signed in Moscow in connexion with the visit of the Vice-President of the Revolutionary Command Council of the Republic of Iraq, Mr. Saddam Hussein, the following is stated: “The Soviet Union and the Republic of Iraq state that a just and lasting peace in the Middle East can be brought about only on condition that all the occupied Arab territories are liberated and that the lawful rights of the Arab people of Palestine, including its right to self-determination, are guaranteed”. 16. Turning now directly to the operations of UNEF, the USSR delegation would like once again to draw attention to the following. First, we must point out the abnormality of the situation in which such an urgent and fundamental problem as that of the freedom of movement of UNEF contingents in the area of operation has not yet been solved. From the report of the Secretary-General, it is clear that Israel, in spite of Security Council decisions, is continuing its discrimination against a number of contingents making up UNEF. It is restricting their freedom of movement on territories controlled by Israeli troops. 17. As it emerged at yesterday’s unofticial consultations among the members of the Council, from the answers of senior officials of the United Nations Secretariat, the essence of the matter is that Israel’s discrimination is directed against a majority-four out of the seven contingents now making up UNEF. These are the contingents of two African countries, Ghana and Sentgal; the contingent of an Asian country, Indonesia; and the contingent of a socialist country, Poland. By such illegal actions Israel not only is violating the spirit and letter of the relevant Council decisions, but also is undermining the effectiveness of the UNEF operations. The Soviet delegation considers that the United Nations Secretariat and the UNEF Command should, on the basis of the relevant Security Council decisions, take energetic steps to put an end to the illegal actions 18. The USSR delegation once again draws attention to the need for strict compliance with Council decisions that UNEF operations should be conducted with the greatest possible economy. In that regard we should like to express our satisfaction at the fact that the Secretary-General, in paragraph 27 of his report, notes in particular that “the Secretary-General will continue to exert his best efforts to ensure that the Force functions as economically as possible”. 19. To sum up, the Soviet delegation would like once again to stress that the further extension of the mandate of UNEF should be used for the earliest possible attainment of a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East problem.

I should like to congratulate you, Mr. President, and your Mission-particularly Mr. Lecompt-for leading the consultations which have promoted the agreement of the Council in renewing the mandate of UNEF. The United States is pleased to join in this consensus and to support the extension of the Force and its mandate. 21. Once again I wish to offer my Government’s appreciation to those countries which have supplied and maintained contingents for UNEF, to the civilian staff, to the observers of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) in the field, and particularly to the United Nations troops who contribute so directly to the continuous search for peace in the area. 22. The Commander of UNEF, Lieutenant-General Ensio Siilasvuo, deserves a special tribute from us all for his exemplary and steadfast leadership of UNEF since its inception. His example provides an enviable model for any future United Nations peace-keeping endeavours. 23. The Secretary-General and his Headquarters staff also deserve our highest commendation for continuing to perform such a difficult task so well. The operational efficiency of the Force is borne out by the latest report of the Secretary-General. The most conclusive evidence of UNEF effectiveness is that the situation has remained quiet and that both sides have generally complied with the Egyptian Israeli Agreement on Disengagement of Forces of 18 January 1974 [see S/11198] and have co-operated with UNEF. In consequence there have been no significant incidents since the preceding report of 12 October 1974 [S/11536/Add.f] of the Secretary- General. 24. These United Nations peace-keeping troops are essential not only in maintaining the lines of separa- (1%7) and 338 (1973). 25. As a matter of principle, we would have preferred an extension for a longer period of time. But whether the mandate is extended for three or six months, or even longer, we believe there is an urgent need to move ahead in achieving a negotiated settlement. 26. The last time the Council met to renew a United Nations peace-keeping force in the Middle East, I said that no one could doubt that the road towards peace would be “long and difficult, that it would try men’s patience and test their goodwill” [1809rh meeting, 1451. This has proved all too true. But the essential point is that we are still on that road-the road towards a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The United States is determined to continue that search. As President Ford said recently in his address to the joint session of Congress: “The United States will move ahead on whatever course looks most promising, either towards an over-ah settlement or interim agreements, should the parties desire them. We will not accept stagnation or a stalemate, with ail its attendant risks to peace and prosperity and to our relations in and outside of the region.‘* 27. Renewal of UNEF today is an important contribution towards continued movement in this process. We are happy to join with the Council in this action, and we pledge our best efforts in the continued search for peace in the Middle East.

Mr. President, as this is the first Council meeting since you assumed the presidency, I wish to extend my sincere congratulations to you. I feel confident that with your well-known diplomatic capacity you will guide our deliberations successfully during the remainder of your presidency. I wish to pay a tribute also to the diplomatic gifts of the Minister of External Relations of Costa Rica, Mr. Gonzaio Facie and of the Deputy Minister of External Relations, Mr. Fernando Salazar, the representative of Costa Rica, who served in turn as President of the Council in March. 29. My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution, which provides for the extension of the mandate of UNEF for an additional three months, ending on 24 July 1975. It is our conviction that, in prewnt calm in t-he area. We b&eve that this action offers an exccl!ennt opportunity for the Security Council to continue to assist efforts to establish a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. I avail myself of this opportunity to pay a sincere tribute to the Governments which have supplied the contingents of UNEF at great sacrifice, and to the Commander and the officers and men of the Force, who have come from far-away countries to faee danger in the cause of peace. And, of course, I cannot fail to express my appreciation to the Secretary-General and his devoted assistants for their work in organizing, deploying and supplying UNEF. Since the inception of the Force, the Secretary-General has meticulously kept members of the Council informed regarding its operations, and we have read with great interest his report, which gives a comprehensive account of the activities of UNEF during the period from 13 October 1974 to 12 April 1975. On behalf of the Government of Japan, I wish to express my sincere sympathy to the represenhtive of Canada over the deaths in the tine of duty of three Canadian members of UNEF, as reported by the Secretary-General. I should be grateful if he would transmit our condolences to the Government of Canada. 30. It is the fervent hope of my delegation that the extension of the mandate of the Force will help to maintain the momentum for peace and help to provide time for further negotiations. Every possible means to this end must be utilized, and the continued presence of UNEF should help provide time for additional negotiations. 31. My delegation has taken note with regret of the suspension of the efforts by Mr. Kissinger, the Secretary of State of the United States, to achieve a further disengagement of Egyptian and Israeli forces under the programme for a so-called stepby-step settlement. This leads my deiegation to appeal to the parties with all the greater urgency to continue to display moderation, self-restraint and co-operatti in every phase of the negotiating process and to refrain from the use of force or any threat to use it. In view of the continued instability in the Midd!e East, the announcement of the decision by President Sadat of Egypt to reopen the Suez Canal on 5 June has special political significance. Let us hope that t-he decision to open this great international waterway will prove a step forward as a symbol of Egypt’s confidence that the present cease-fire will be replaced by a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 32. In conclusion, my delegation sincerely hopes that the coming three months will bring convincir% signs that the obstacles which now block further progress towards a peaceful settlement in the Middle East will be overcome and that we can soon anticipti at least the beginning of a breakthrough. Certainly

Mr. President, may I first of all tell you how glad the whole Italian delegation is to have you back with us to lead our debates, on your return from the additional important duties which had been entrusted to you, and to be able to serve under your skilful guidance. In congratulating you upon your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council, I should 39, In previous meetings in which the Council discussed UNEF, it was emphasized that, by preserving calm in the area, UNEF is fulfilling the function of providing time and opportunity for negotiations. The aim of this peace-keeping force, like any other, is not to perpetuate a separation between the parties Iike to pay tribute to Mr. Lecompt, who has given to the Council, during the tenure of the presidency, the benefit of his -but to help to bring them closer together by maintaining an atmosphere that will allow them to express and translate into fact their desire to progress along the road of peace. Indeed, in previous months we have noted with satisfaction certain manifestations of this desire in the Middle East. I should like to make special mention here of a very recent one, because of the special interest that Italy attached to it. I refer to Egypt’s announcement that shortly the Suez Canal will be reopened, a decision which my Government hails with satisfaction and gratification. we& known qualities; he deserves special praise for leading us to the adoption, with no dissenting voices, of today’s resolution. 34. I should not like to miss this opportunity to repeat to the Minister of External Relations of Costa Rica, Mr. Gonzalo Facie, and to the representative of Costa Rica Mr. Salazar, the Italian delegation’s congratulations and appreciation for the exemplary manner in which they conducted our proceedings in the month of March, which were demanding indeed. 40. The function and objective of UNEF as I have described them are, in my view, 35. May. I also join you and the representative of France, in welcoming today at our meeting our new colleague, Mr. Oyono of the United Republic of Cameroon. stilI valid today. But the fact that the Security Council is renewing the mandate for three months, instead of six months as in the past, testifies to a profound sense of urgency. and underlines the disquieting aspects of the situation. We must not allow our disappointment at the failure of recent efforts to become a source of encouragement for stalemate; we must not let the disquieting aspects of the situation develop into an atmosphere of acute tension. Rather, we must remind ourselves, particularly at the present crucial time, that the renewal of the mandate of UNEF cannot be considered a substitute for the active search for a negotiated peace. The extension of the mandate, albeit for a shorter period than before, provides the parties with a further opportunity to go forward along this path.. We must all bend our efforts, each to the best of his ability, to accelerate this quest for progress. 36. Coming to the object of our debate, I should like to stress how much Italy had hoped, and thought it possible, that, when we came to renew the mandate of UNEF, this would have been in a framework different from that in which we find ourselves today. In particular, we were confident that the last efforts of the United States Secretary of State would lead to progress in the relations between the parties such as to further remove the dangers always inherent in the state of uneasy calm prevailing in the area and to bring the peoples in the Middle East closer to the objective of a just and lasting peace. 37. The lack of success of these generous efforts, to which, on behalf of the Italian Government, I should like to pay a well-deserved tribute, is a subject for regret and concern. We can already observe signs of increasing tension which remind us that the situation in the area continues to be potentially explosive. A new readiness of the parties which would occasion to these efforts to be resumed with favourable prospects would constitute in my opinion a positive element. Of course, I am looking in the same positive perspective to the possibility of reconvening the Geneva Conference. What is relevant is to pursue the path of negotiations in search of progress for agreement and peace. 41. Our task is therefore-to echo the statement made recently by Italian Foreign Minister Rumor to the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee-to renew our efforts to encourage and help the parties directly involved to overcome courageously and far-sightedly the contradictions which have crystallized for too long a situation which primarily is contrary to their own basic interests. For its part, Italy will continue, as it has always done, to work along these lines. 42. I am sure that we all share this feeling that we must make urgent efforts to progress towards a globa! peaceful solution of the Middle East conflict, knowing full well 38. In the present situation, however, I am sure that none of us can have any doubts about the desirability-or rather the necessity--of extending the mandate of UNEF. In his last report on the Force, that detente and international co-operation are indivisible. This is, in the Italian delegation’s view, the meaning of the specific reference made in the resolution we have adopted to the implementation (1%7), repeats once again the bases on which the peaceful solution must be achieved. 43. In this respect I should also like to recall the recent statements made in various forums by the parties directly concerned and derive from them some ground for optimism or at least hope. None of the parties seems to want to break off the search for a peaceful solution and, indeed, all of them indicate their willingness to resume it, the framework and conditions remaining open. 44. My delegation wishes to express the profound hope that they will achieve without delay the meeting of minds that will allow a renewed effort in the peace-making progress and that the further report which the Secretary-General will submit to us on the completion of the presence of UNEF in the Sinai for a further three months will reveal encouraging developments. 45. I wish to conclude this statement, the first in which my delegation has discussed the question of UNEF in the Security Council, by commending the action of UNEF fulfilling its delicate assignment in difficult and exacting circumstances. It is an operation conducted with efficiency and success on the technical level as well. Questions and positions of principle which in other forums are still subjects of dispute are being resolved pragmatically in the interests of peace. 46. My country, which in another forum is striving to make the most constructive contribution to the elaboration of general norms for United Nations peace-keeping operations, finds here a source of optimism and encouragement. I am therefore pleased to express our deepest appreciation of the role played in this respect by the Secretary-General, to whom special thanks are due for the precise and competent reports with which he enables us to follow the activities of UNEF in the field, and to express our appreciation also to the United Nations Command, to the military contingents and to the civilians engaged in the operation. In particular, the technical efficiency, the moral commitment and the unselfish personal sacrifices of all UNEF contingents are worthy of the highest praise. We should like to convey our gratitude to the troop-contributing countries which-with sacrifices and, indeed, with grievous losses of their nationals, concerning which my country expresses deepest sympathy-are carrying out an operation of such importance for the tranquillity of the area and for the general affirmation of the peace-keeping role of the United Nations. 47. Mr. MORETON (United Kingdom): Mr. President, I should like first to congratulate you personally on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. 48. We also warmly welcome our new colleague, and indeed our neighbour in the Council, Mr. Oyono, representative of Cameroon. 49. My delegation voted for the resolution we have just adopted because we share the view of the Secretary-General that the continued presence of UNEF remains essential at this crucial time. At previous meetings of the Council we have made it clear that we do not consider that UNEF should become a substitute for a proper settlement in the Middle East. The Force remains essential, however, at the present time in order to provide the necessary climate within which negotiations for a just and lasting settlement can take place based on the full implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). But we do not have much time to lose, and it is vital that these negotiations should be pressed with new energy and resolution. 50. We have followed with keen interest and, I might add, with great admiration the efforts made by the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Kissinger, to try to bring about a further disengagement agreement between Israel and Egypt. We regret very much that despite all his efforts-and no one could have done more to try to bridge the gap-this attempt has not met with success. The important thing now, however, is not to look backward and indulge in recriminations about who is to blame, but to look forward and to try to find some way of getting the negotiations going again. This is an issue which affects us all, and we have the right and the duty to ask the parties to consider all possible ways that may be open to them to move the negotiations forward so that the momentum may not be lost. 51. As regards the position of my Government, I should like to reaffirm the distinction which we continue to draw between the present Force and any more permanent peace-keeping force that may be set up in due course to guarantee a settlement in accordance with resolution 242 (1967). I should also like to repeat that we remain ready to play our part in that latter force. 52. In conclusion, my delegation would like once again to commend the Secretary-General and his staff, the Commander and offtcers and men of UNEF and all those who are responsible for the successful operation of the Force. That the Secretary-General is able to record in his excellent report that the situation in the UNEF area of operation has remained justiceupholding countries and peoples.

Mr. President, first of all, I should like to say how pleased my delegation is to see you presiding over the Security Council this month. This satisfaction is all the more warranted since we know from past experience that the meetings of the Security Council held under your presidency have always ended in important decisions which have not only enhanced the prestige of the Organization but also contributed to establishing an atmosphere of peace in the world. I am already convinced that the qualities of wisdom, culture, patience, courtesy and experience for which you are known are a sure guarantee of the success of the Council during this month of April.

When the Security Council discussed and adopted resolution 338 (1973) [f 747th meeting], the Chinese delegation expounded its stand with regard to the Middle East question and the said resolution and did not participate in the vote on the resolution. Moreover, the Chinese delegation has all along held different views in principle on the question of the dispatch of United Nations forces. For the same reason, we have decided not to participate in the vote on the draft resolution. 54. It can be seen that the situation in the Middle East remains turbulent. There, on the one hand, the struggle of the Arab and Palestinian peoples against imperialism, hegemonism and Israeli Zionism is developing in depth; on the other hand, the 58. The Security Council has just adopted the draft resolution which my delegation supported. The Council took this important decision because, we must say, of the political courage and wisdom of the Government of Egypt and its President. The decision taken on 29 March by the Government of Egypt according the Security Council Egypt’s agreement to the three-month renewal of the UNEF mandate is, beyond doubt, an additional proof of goodwill which sheds a ray of light in the heavy skies of the Middle East and at the same time dispels the legitimate disquiet felt on the eve of the expiration of the mandate of UNEF. The decision contained in operative paragraph super- Powers are engaged in ever fiercer contention and rivalry, each for its own purpose of seizing oil and strategically important positions. While talking profusely about “detente” every day and crying out for a solution of the Middle East question, they actually want to maintain the situation of “no war, no peace” so that they may undermine each other’s foundation and expand their respective spheres of influence. 55. The super-Power aggression and contention will only arouse the Arab peoples to even stronger resistance. From their own historical experience, the Arab and Palestinian peoples are coming to realize even more profoundly that they can only rely on the unity of their own peoples and their unremitting struggles for a final solution of the Middle East question and for the victory of the Arab and Palestinian peoples’ cause of national liberation, as in the case of the national liberation struggles waged by the people in all other parts of the world. Meanwhile, it is imperative to do away with super-Power meddling and intervention and in particular to maintain high vigilance against that super-Power which chants “support to the national liberation cause of the Arab peoples” while actually trying hard to manipulate the situation, exploit the contradictions and undermine the liberation cause of the Arab peoples. (b) of the resolution therefore reflects a sincere act of faith on the part of a Government which has always said that whenever possible it prefers to use peaceful means to arrive at a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The tension which now prevails in the Middle East can at any time bring about a new war with incalculable consequences which this time may be fatal, not only for the region concerned but for all mankind. Such an act of faith is certainly proof of wisdom and moderation on the part of a people and Govemment which, when it was necessary, took up arms to defend their freedom and dignity. 59. But the patience of the people of Egypt, their moderation and their often expressed preference for the language of peace to that of war-in a word, their willingness to seek a solution through negotiation-has certain limits, particularly when the appeal launched comes up against a wall of silence erected by the Tel Aviv authorities, with whom it has been impossible to negotiate so far. 56. The people of all countries always support each other in their struggles for liberation. The Chinese delegation wishes to reiterate that the Chinese Government and people resolutely support the Arab and Palestinian peoples in their just struggles against imperialism, hegemonism and Israeli Zionism and for 60. It is certain, at any rate, that the status quo which prevails in the Middle East at present cannot 61. Three months are available to the Security Council, and this is a supplementary and final period which can make possible a just and lasting settlement of the situation in the Middle East, as long as the wall of silence built by Israel yields and heed is paid to the appeal of the Government of Egypt and the international community. 62. Before concluding, I wish to pay tribute to Mr. Lecompt, who presided over the unofficial meetings of the Security Council with commendable skill.

Fit, Mr. President, I want to congratulate you personally on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. We look forward very much towards working with you and with the members under your wise guidance, and we pledge you our full support and co-operation. I also want to express our appreciation for the efficient leadership given to us by Mr. Lecompt during our informal consultations. 64. My delegation also wants to express its great appreciation for the skill, patience. and authority that Mr. Gonzalo Facie, Minister for External Relations of Costa Rica, displayed last month during very difficult negotiations. We also express &thanks also to our colleague Mr. Fernando Salazar. 65. I take this opportunity, too, to extend a warm welcome to our new colleague, Mr. Oyono of the United Republic of Cameroon. 66. The resolution just adopted by the Security Council is short and simple, precise and clear, and contains all the necessary elements for the continued operations of UNEF. 67. The task of UNEF has been well defined in paragraph 29 of the report of the Secretary-General, where he rightly stresses that UNEF is essential not only in order to maintain quiet in the Egypt- Israel sector, but also to provide an atmosphere conducive to further efforts towards the achievement of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and to assist in such further efforts, if required. 68. The Force did not only successfully establish itself in the area at a time of serious tension and prove able to control a highly dangerous situation. The Force has also, through its continued~ existence and service since the beginning of its operations, contributed to the prevention of major military incidents and to the relative calm in the area. 70. It seems clear that most members of the Security Council share our view that the continued presence of UNEF remains very important and useful. It is equally clear, however, that the existence of the Force and the prevailing quiet in the area must not lead to a relaxation in the search for peace. 71. This time the Council has decided to prolong the mandate of UNEF for a period of only three months, not six months as on earlier occasions. This shorter extension makes it all the more necessary to intensify the search for a lasting solution to the problems in the area. Ail the parties concerned must now exert all efforts and goodwill in the search for peace. 72. My Government regrets that the talks conducted with the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Kissinger, as an intermediary did not lead to a successful result. However, this must be seen as a temporary setback. The momentum towards peace must be maintained. The United Nations must encourage the parties to make renewed efforts to find ways and means for further negotiations in Geneva or elsewhere. The latest round of talks, though not successful on this occasion, has helped in shedding more. light on the positions and on the problems of the two parties in the UNEF area, thus facilitating the renewed efforts to reach an agreement based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) that must now follow. 73: The UNEF operation is based on the principle of collective responsibility among the Members of the United Nations and financed in accordance with Article 17 of the Charter. The General AssembIy is, therefore, the proper forum for a detailed dis cussion and for decisions in regard to the financing of the Force. For that reason I will limit my remarks here to an expression of satisfaction at the fact that the operations of UNEF, to judge from the report of the Secretary-General, appear to have a reasonably sound financial basis. The request of the Security Council in its resolution 362 (1974) that the Force should be maintained with maximum efficiency and economy still stands, and we are fully confident that the Secretary-General is acting accordingly. In this context my delegation wants to stress how important it is that the Members of the United Nations pay their assessed part of the costs without undue deiay, to make it possible for the Secretariat to honour all -the obligations of the United Nations as_ they arise.. opemtion. We express our support for the Secretary-Cfeneral’s efforts to this end and hope he will be able to register substantial progress in this matter soon. 75. The Security Council has been able to reach a decision today without major differences among the members of the Council. Sweden is convinced &at this decision is an important and necessary one. But it is still more important that the parties use the narrowing time-span for constructive efforts in order to regain lost momentum. It is our hope that at the end of the three-month period ahead it will be possible to register more substantial progress than has so far been achieved after three periods of six months.

Mr. President, on behalf of my delegation, I am taking this opportunity to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. My delegation, while promising to extend full co-operation to you in the discharge of your responsibilities, remains convinced that under your abfe leadership our deliberations will be crowned with success. 77. I should also like to congratulate the Minister for External Reiations of Costa Rica and his representative, who competently and skilfully presided over the Council during the month of March. I should like also to welcome warmly our colleague, the representative of the United Republic of Cameroon. 78. My delegation, together with the other nonaligned countries, participated in the preparation of this draft resolution. We did so cognizant of the prevailing state of tension in the Middle East. It is our belief, therefore, that the d&t resolution we have just adopted is aimed at reducing tension in the area, thus paving the way to the final solution of the cancerous problem in the Middle East. 79. The resolution makes reference to the resolutions concerning the Middle East problem adopted both by the Security Council and by the General Assembly. The overriding message of alI these resolutions is the unequivocal call to Israel to withdraw from all the Arab lands, it has been occupying since the June 1967 war. In our view, this is an essential and important prerequisite before lasting peace returns to the Middle East. 80. The Secretary-General, in paragraph 29 of his report, observes: “... the situation in the area as a whole remains fundamentally unstable... The continued presence of UNEF at the present crucial time is, in my opinion, eisential not only to maintain quiet in the Egypt-Israel sector, but also to provide an atmosphere conducive to further efforts towards the achievement of a just and lasting peace in the 81.. It is the considered view of my delegation that the measures we are now adopting are temporary in nature. In fact, when the Security Council accepted the principle of sending UNEF to the area, there was a genuine expectation that its presence in the area would create a climate conducive to further efforts towards the achievement of just and lasting peace. 82. Since October 1973, when the Security Council adopted resolution 341 (1973) establishing UNEF for an initial period of six months, the expectations of the Council have not been realized. The situation in the area is far from satisfactory. Israel is still entrenched in the Arab territories it forcibly occupied in June 1967; and the provisions of resolution 338 (1973) have yet to be implemented. 83. The Security Council has renewed the mandate of UNEF twice since its establishment in October 1973. But, it is sad to note, the situation still remains fundamentally unstable, as is stated in the Secretary- General’s report. And the Secretary-General is of the opinion that it will remain unstable so long as the underlying problems are unresolved. 84. It is the hope of my delegation, therefore, that the renewal of the mandate of UNEF for a period of three more months-that is, until 24 July 1975--will afford Israel this time an opportunity to implement Council resolution 338 (1973), which, among other things, calls for the implementation of resolution 242 (1967) “in all of its parts”. It was. precisely for that reason that my delegation had no difficulty in voting in favour of the draft resolution just adopted. 85. I should like to end my intervention by reiterating my -Government’s support for the Arab countries in their efforts to recover all the Arab lands occupied by Israel.

In speaking for the first time under your presidency, SC, 1 have great pleasure in joining those who have already congratulated you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the current month. It is especially gratifying for my delegation to see presiding over the Council the distinguished representative of France, a country with which Iraq maintains close and friendly relations, as exemplified by the recent exchange of visits between high officials of our Governments. 87. 1. should like also to pay a tribute to your predecessors from Costa Rica, Mr. Facie, the Minister for External Relations, and Mr. Salazar, for their able guidance of the Council’s proceedings 88. Iraq has on several occasions explained its position regarding the establishment of UNEF and the extension of its mandate. The recent-developments in the area have tended to confirm our views on the situation and to strengthen the grounds for our apprehensions concerning the extension of the mandate of UNEF. 89. Therefore, my delegation did not participate in the voting on the draft resolution just adopted by the Council, just as it did not participate in the voting on previous resolutions on the subject.

Mr. President, may I first of all express my felicitations and those of my delegation to you on your assumption of the post of President of the Security Council for the month of April. My delegation looks forward to co-operating with you during the remainder of your period in the Chair. 91. I should like also to take this opportunity to reiterate Guyana’s entire satisfaction with the manner in which the Minister for External Relations, Mr. Facie and Mr. Salazar of Costa Rica discharged their duties in the post of President during the month of March, especially in the most difficult negotiations on the Cyprus question. 92. I am most pleased also to extend a cordial and brotherly welcome to the new representative of the United Republic of Cameroon, Mr. Ferdinand Leopold Oyono. We look forward to working closely with him, particularly within the context of the non-aligned group on the Council. 93. The draft resolution we have just adopted extends the mandate of UNEF for a period of three months-that is, until 24 July 1975. It is perhaps no accident that the Council has deemed it fit on this occasion to limit the extension of the mandate to a three-month period instead of a six-month period, as in previous resolutions. When the Force was established, it was thought of as being an instrument which would contribute to the efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. It was never contemplated, however, that the Force should assume a quasi-permanent character so that its presence could be used as an excuse to perpetuate a no-peace, no-war situation, which can only be to the advantage of the occupying Power. 94. Resolution 338 (1973) called quite clearly for immediate negotiations to start between the parties concerned, under appropriate auspices, aimed at the establishment of a just and durable peace in the Middle East. But a year and a half after the adoption of that resolution little progres, if any, has been made towards that objective. %. The Secretary-General’s latest progress report on the activities of UNEF indicates that UNEF is on the whole functioning effectively and efficiently, and that is not only to the credit of the Secretary- General and the Commander of UNEF but also a result of the excellent performance of the troops which have been sent by various Member States. We wish to express our appreciation to the troop-contributing countries for the important contribution they are making to the maintenance of peace in the area. 97. At the same time, my delegation notes with regret the Secretary-General’s observation, in paragraph 16 of his report, that “The problem of restrictions on the freedom of movement of personnel of certain contingents still exists despite my efforts and those of the Force Commander.” That situation is not a happy one. It continues despite the Council’s decision in paragraph 4 of resolution 362 (1974) that ‘6 . . . United Nations Emergency Force must be able to function as an integral and efficient military unit in the whole Egypt-Israel sector of operations without differentiation regarding the United Nations status of the various contingents.. .** The fact that there is no specific mention of that point in the draft resolution just adopted does not, in my delegation’s view, diminish its importance. We would therefore ask the Secretary-General to pursue his efforts to resolve this matter, which if not settled in accordance with the Council’s decision will continue as an act of discrimination against certain contingents from Member States. 9& Mr. TCHERNOUCHTCHENKO (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): Mr. President, permit me first of all to associate myself with the sincere congratulations which have already been expressed to you, Mr. de Guiringaud, and your country, France, upon your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. Permit me also to express our profound feelings and deep respect to the Minister for External Relations of Costa Rica, Mr. Facie, and the representative of 99. It is also a great pleasure for me to welcome the newly appointed representative of the United Republic of Cameroon, Mr. Oyono. I wish him every success in his work in the Council. 100. The Byelorussian SSR agreed with the new extension-this time for three months-of the mandate of UNEF in the Middle East, in accordance with the wish expressed by Egypt, and we voted in favour of the draft resolution. 101. In connexion with the extension of the mandate of UNEF, the Secretary-General presented his regular report, which has been considered by the Security Council, and this has been reflected in the decision taken by the Council. In that connexion, the Byelorussian SSR delegation would state that, as is pointed out in paragraphs 16 and 20 of the report, the problem of the movement of

Mr. President, my delegation wishes to congratulate you and say how pleased it is at seeing you once again as President of the Security Council. We wish to avail ourselves of this opportunity to renew the assurance of our confidence in the discharge of your duties because we are sure that your vast experience and your diplomatic skill are a complete guarantee that the alI the contingents of the Force has still not been resolved, and new energetic efforts are necessary to put an end to the discriminatory attitude of one of the parties towards a majority of the contingents of the Force. Furthermore, our delegation considers it necessary to stress that the United Nations Secretariat should observe maximum economy in expenditures for the maintenance of these troops and comply with the relevant provisions of Security Council resolution 362 (1974). difficult mission entrusted to you will be crowned with complete success. 106. My delegation also wishes to express its appreciation of the work accomplished by Mr. Lecompt of your delegation, Sir, and of the skill with which he guided our consultations which led to the draft resolution just adopted by the Council. I also wish to associate my delegation with the welcome which you, Mr. President, addressed to the new representative of the United Republic of Cameroon, our colleague Mr. Oyono. 102. The Byelorussian delegation continues to believe that the extension of the mandate of UNEF is not an end in itself. We have always opposed the ambitions of certain forces to freeze and perpetuate the situation in this area. The continuing aggression of Israel, its attempts to -entrench itself in the occupied territories and to legitimize by any ways or means its occupation of considerable Arab territories should be countered by 107. Now my delegation would like to refer to the Secretary-General’s report on UNEF. The report contains valuable and illustrative assessments of the role of UNEF and gives us an over-all view of the situation existing in that region of the Middle East which my delegation received with genuine interest. We congratulate the Secretary-General for having supplied us with such valuable data. The Secretary- General in paragraph 29 of his report states that: firm demands that it abandon this course, which is so dangerous to all countries and peoples in that area, including Israel itself. 103. We are convinced that, in the course of the new three-month term for which the mandate of UNEF has been extended, determined efforts should be undertaken to bring about a peaceful settlement of the complex Middle East problem, which has arisen as a result of Israel’s aggression against Arab countries. For this it is necessary to ensure immediate compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. For a just and lasting settlement in the Middle East it is necessary to bring about the withdrawal of Israeli troops from all the Arab territories they have occupied and to satisfy the legitimate rights and aspirations of the Arab people of Palestine, including its right to its own statehood, and we must ensure that all States and peoples of the Middle East enjoy a secure, independent and free existence. “The continued presence of UNEF at the present crucial time is, in my opinion, essential not only to maintain quiet in the Egypt-Israel sector, but also to provide an atmosphere conducive to further efforts towards the achievement of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and to assist in such further efforts, if required.” 108. Taking up the point of view of the Secretary- General, my delegation considers that, in the present situation, it is not only proper but indispensable to the maintenance of an atmosphere conducive to future negotiations that the mandate of UNEF be renewed and, to contribute to this purpose, my delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution, 109. Yet my delegation must confess that it would have felt happier had it been agreed &hat the new extension would be for a period of six months, as has been customary since the Egyptian-Israeli agreement on Disengagement of Forces was adopted on 18 January 1974. My delegation is concerned that so short a period as three months will be insufficient to provide the parties with an opportunity to arrive at other arrangements which can replace that. 110. As the Secretary-General also states in patagraph 29 of his report: “Pending the conclusion of an over-all settlement, the situation in the area as a whole remains fundamentally unstable.” As a tribute to truth, we must say that the Disengagement Agreement between Egypt and Israel, as well as other measures which are adopted in times of war, such as a truce or a cease-fire, is a military .measure which is temporarily adopted to prevent a new outbreak of hostilities but does not in itself provide a solution to the substantive problem. Such an agreement must have as its purpose, together with restoring tranquillity in the zone, the creation of a propitious atmosphere so that the parties can negotiate a permanent political solution. 111. We know the recent efforts of the Secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Kissinger, which unfortunately failed. And, of course, the world received with relief the announcement that there may be another opportunity for a dialogue between the parties at Geneva. But as there is no certainty about that meeting, the peremptory termination of the UNEF mandate might in due course place the parties in a dangerous situation. 112. My delegation is not unaware of the complexity of the problems of the Middle East, and is always in,favour of solutions which can provide alternatives to peace. The mandate of UNEF, while short, will, we hope, be used so that at the end there will be no threat of a new outbreak of hostilities, but, rather, a new framework for understanding which the intemational community trusts the parties will arrive at. 113. Finally, I wish to reiterate my gratitude to those delegations which in the course of the debate have referred to Costa Rica’s presidency of the Security Council last month. We were deeply moved to hear the kind words addressed both to the Minister for External Relations of my country, Mr. Gonzalo Facie, and to me.

Mr. President, 1 should like to say to you how great a pleasure it is for me to be able to associate myself, on behalf of the delegation of the United Republic of Cameroon, with the congratulations extended to you upon your Securiry Council has taken place under the authority of a representative of France, a country with which my own country has very long-statrding and excellent relations in every respect. 115. I should also like to take this opportunity to express the gratitude of my delegation to the Minister for External Relations and to the representative of Costa Rica, for the authority with which they conducted the proceedings of the Security Council in the month of March. 116. I should like, too, to thank you, Mr. President, and also my colleagues, for the kind words of welcome which have been expressed to me. It is a pleasure for me to be able to assure you of my whole-hearted and faithful co-operation in the joint quest for appropriate solutions to the various problems confronting the Organization. 117. The Security Council has just adopted the dr;d2 resolution calling for the renewal for a period of three months-that is, until 24 July 1975-+f the mandate of UNEF in the Middle East. The underlying reasons for the need of this measure, its scope and its political significance have been expressed unambiguously by the Secretary-General in his excellent report to the Council and by previous speakers. 118. Indeed, in the view of my delegation, in spite of the apparent calm prevailing in the region, the situation remains fundamentally tense, unstable and potentially explosive, since no significant progress, as far as we know, has been achieved with any prospect of the establishment of a just and lasting peace in accordance with the letter and spirit of the decisions of the Council on the subject. 119. This tension has increased because of the failttru of the hopes aroused by certain initiatives to elect a more substantial disengagement of the Israeli and the Egyptian forces in the Sinai, something which might have created an atmosphere conducive to a comprehensive and final political settlement of the Middle East crisis. 120. In the present uncertain circumstances, my delegation can only support the views expressed by the Secretary-General in advocating a renewal of the mandate of UNEF for a new period of limited duration. This duration has just been set by the Security Council at three months, which seems reasonable to us. Indeed, the automatic renewal, of the six months’ extension of the mandate of the Force might have become a purely routine act which 121. The essential concern of the Council, in adopting a new resolution today, seems to me to be to crystallize political will so that the parties directly and indirectly concerned can in the course of the next three months make decisive progress towards the establishment of a just and lasting peace which will safeguard the fundamental rights of all the peoples of the Middle East in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council, particularly resolution 338 (1973). It is in this light that my delegation unreservedly supported the text of the resolution just adopted. 122. In conclusion, I should like to extend once again the warm congratulations of my delegation to the Secretary-General for his clear and relevant report to the Council and for his ceaseless personal efforts to find a peaceful solution to the long Middle East crisis. My delegation would also like to take this opportunity to pay a welldeserved tribute to the Commander of the Force, Lieutenant-General Siilasvuo, and all his colleagues for the effectiveness with which they have discharged their responsibilities .in the field in sometimes di&uIt conditions. 123. The PRESIDENT jinm-,wefuhmfiom French): Since all members of the Council who had asked to be allowed to explain their votes have now done so, before 1 call upon others whose names are inscribed on the list of speakers I should like in my capacity as the representative of FRANCE briefly to state the position of my country on the question before the Council. 124. The affirmative vote of the French delegation on the draft resolution submitted to the Council follows, quite naturally, from our attitude since the establishment of UNEF in the Middle East in October 1973. In the fundamentally unstable situation in that region, which is mentioned by the Secretary- General in his report, the presence of the Force remains an essential element to ensure compliance with the cease-fire. It also contributes to the prevention of any tension which might gravely jeopardize the efforts intended to establish a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and is therefore justified by the pursuit of these efforts. 125. It is true that that presence is not in itself a guarantee of success; nor, to the extent that its objective is military, does it represent something gained along the road to a political settlement. My delegationbas in fact constantly recalled the distinction we draw Getween a force guaranteeing the ceasefire-an emergency force-and a force whose role it would be to maintain peace, which presupposes a peace agreement. The latter, we believe, should .‘ 126. Two specific questions must once again receive our consideration. On the one hand, we mu& consider the financial aspects of the operation. While the Secretary-General’s report notes that the Force’s expenditures for the renewal of the mandate will remain within the appropriations. authorized by the General Assembly, in response to the concern expressed several times by the Council, it nevertheless points out the persistence of a major deficit because of delays in the payment of many contributions. We can but urge the rectification of a situation, which is straining the already severely tried financial resources of the Organization and which also lays an unfair burden on countries that have supplied contingents. 127. On the other hand, there is the important question of the freedom of movement of the contingents. Any impediment to this is contrary to the provisions of the Charter. We must therefore encourage the Secretary-General to pursue his efforts to settle the question in the terms he has himself spelled out in paragraph 16 of his report. 128. In conclusion, I should like to emphasize the concern with which my country has folIowed recent developments, or, more accurately, the recent absence of favourable developments in the Middle East. The failure of one procedure, with which we had been in sympathy because of the interest in it shown by the parties themselves, should not jeopardize all other efforts that might lead to a settlement. More than ever, time is running out: Council resolution 338 (1973) the immediate implementation of which we have again advocated, calls for negotiations. The framework already exists. As was stated in a joirit communique by the Chairman of the Revolutionary Council of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria and the President of the French Republic: “The need for a resumption, of the Geneva Couference after due preparation, is now felt.” 129. We must without further delay offer to the .States and peoples of the region proof of renewed efforts to help them find the way to a-just and lasting peace, which in our opinion must be based on withdrawal from the occupied territories, taking into account the right of the people of Palestine to have their own homeland, and on recognition of the rights of all the States of the region to live in peace within secure, recognized and guaranteed borders.

Mr. President, please accept my delegation’s highest consideration and best wishes for success in your distinguished office. 132. I should like to take this opportunity to express to UNEF, its personnel and its Commander, Lieutenant-General Ensio Siilasvno, as well as to the Secretary-General, my Government’s appreciation for the Iaudable manner in which the Force has been discharging its duties. 133. The UNEF presence is an integral part of the Egyptian-Israeli Agreement on Disengagement of Forces concluded on 18 January 1974. The deployment of UNEF and the Force’s tasks have been agreed upon between the parties and are stipulated in the Agreement. It is evident that the extension of the UNEF mandate is also a matter to be dealt with by both parties. It was to be expected that, in the spirit of the Agreement and on the basis of past pratice, -the mandate would be extended for a further period of six months. Israel proposed such an extension. However, the resolution just adopted renews the mandate for three months only. This has been done at the insistence of Egypt. 134. It is noteworthy that President Sadat should consider it possible to deal with the question of the renewal of the UNEF mandate unilaterally, to determine at will that the mandate be limited to three months, and even to threaten not to extend it at all. Such a position reflects Egypt’s arbitrary attitude towards the Agreement and indicates the defects in the present provisions regarding UNEF. President Sadat’s decision to curtail the duration of the UNEF mandate and to limit it to three months demonstrates once more how Arab Governments fail to comply with their international obligations when they deem compliance to be inconvenient to them. 135. Israel will, of course, continue to observe the Disengagement Agreement. Israel will continue to seek understanding and peace in the region. It is clear, however, that in future negotiations it will be necessary to find a solid basis for the UNEF presence and responsibilities. The Agreement in its present form does not provide such a basis of stability and credibility. 136. The PRESIDENT (interpre&.r?ionfi~m French): I now call on the representative of Egypt. 137. Mr. ABDEL MEGUID (Egypt) (interpretation from French): Mr. President, my first words are to you and your great country. You have assumed the presidency of the Security Council at a delicate time-a responsible time--and you are bearing its very heavy burden. But your exceptional qualities 138. A year and a half has gone by since the Council adopted resolution 340 (1973) on 25 October 1973, by which it decided to establish the United Nations Emergency Force to supervise the cease fire. This was deemed part of a first step on, the road to a just and durable peace in the Middle East. Since then, the Force, with the consent and the active co-operation of Egypt, has been performing its mandate as set out in resolution 340 (1973). 139. Now the Council has just voted to extend the mandate of the Force for a further period of three months, following the expiration of its present mandate. Egypt, in spite of Israel’s negative and obstructive attitude in all peace efforts, does not object to the extension of the Force’s mandate for another three months. 140. President Sadat, on 29 March 1975, announced that Egypt would accept the extension of the mandate for a period of three months in order to allow for a further opportunity in the process of achieving a peaceful settlement of the Middle East problem. Addressing the National -Assembly, President Sadat stated: “Some may expect from me an emotional reac- tion, ending the agreement over the Emergency Force in Sinai, but I prefer action to reaction. Hence I will allow the renewal of the United Nations Emergency Force’s mandate for three months only, instead of six, on the one hand, because I do not wish to place the international community before a sudden crisis, and, on the other, because I want the whole world to know that there are limits to time as well as patience.‘* The limitations on time and patience emanate from Israeli disruption of the process of settlement, and Israel’s intransigence has proven once more to be the stumbling-block upon which all peace efforts have faltered. 141. It is quite obvious, unfortunately, that Israel has not learned the lessons of the October war of 1973. Footdragging, procrastination and stalling on the part of Israel will not serve the cause of peace. Such tactics did not serve it before, and they cannot serve it now. The Israeli Government still persists 142. We have just heard the representative of Israel now. The position of Egypt on this problem is, I am sure, very clear and unequivocal to you all: we have been striving to achieve a just and lasting peace, which can result only from the with- drawal of Israel from all Arab territories occupied since 5 June 1967, and the restoration to the Palestinian people of their legitimate rights, for experience has proven that unless peace is just it cannot be durable. 143. Our desire for peace has been consistently manifested in all peace efforts aimed at achieving peaceful settlement of the Middle East conflict. For example, it is well known that Egypt declared on 15 January 1971, in its aide-memoire to Mr. Jarring, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General [see S/10083], that if Israel would give commitments covering all its obligations under resolution 242 (1967) Egypt would be ready to enter into a peace agreement with Israel, thereby ending the state of belligerency-I emphasize thereby ending the state of belligerency-and recognizing its right to live within secure and recognized boundaries. In contrast, Israel’s reply to Mr. Jarring on 26 February 1971 was totally in line with its present obstructive attitude towards peace. The reply categorically stated that Israel would not withdraw to the pre-5 June 1967 lines. 144. That was in 1971. Four years later Israel is still occupying Arab territories and remains unwilling to give any public pledge or declaration of policy regarding its willingness to relinquish the occupied Arab territories. Moreover, it now insists, as a price for a minimal and limited withdrawal from less than a third of Egyptian territory, that Egypt should end the state of war with Israel. 145. In the face of such intransigence, Egypt remains steadfast in its policy of restraint, moderation and peace. The latest evidence-which was mentioned today by some delegations in the Council-is our decision to reopen the Suez Canal on 5 June of this year, for the benefit of international navigation and the prosperity of all countries. However, it would be illusory to believe that Egypt would contemplate the surrender of its legitimate sovereign rights with regard to the restoration of its territorial integrity. 146. In the latest attempt at salvaging the momentum towards peace, undertaken by the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Kissinger, which was today referred to by many delegations, Egypt spared no efforts towards the success of his endeavours, in the hope that the result would be a second limited military agreement that would constitute a further step forward on the road to peace, in preparation for the achievement of a comprehensive settlement 147. During the recent talks, Egypt requested a partial withdrawal of the Israeli forces in the Sinai Desert, to include withdrawal east of the passes as well as from the Abu Rhodeis oilfields. In return for such withdrawal, Egypt was prepared, as stated by my Foreign Minister on 24 March 1975, to pledge to refrain from all military or paramilitary actions within the duration of the validity of the Disengage- ment Agreement and contingent upon the continuation of the efforts to bring about a just and lasting peace in accordance with the letter and spirit of reso- lution 338 (1973) and all other relevant United Nations resolutions. 148. In a concrete attempt to salvage the Kissinger mission, the Egyptian official spokesman issued the following declaration on 19 March 1975--and I quote the official text of the declaration so that it will appear in the offtcial records of the Security Council: “The approval by the Arab countries of Security Council resolution 338 (1973) encompasses their approval to terminate the state of belligerency once a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East crisis to establish a just peace is reached. “Proceeding from this, the Arab countries do not refuse to conclude a peace agreement with Israel when this country becomes not only ready but also potentially capable of facing up to the facts and essentials of a just peace, and to fulfil its intema- tional obligations in accordance with Security Council resolution 338 (1973). “It is therefore important, before this stage is reached, to highlight the fact that any new disengage- ment agreement is but a basic and important step on the road to peace. Such a new agreement would generate and test the good will of the belligerent parties on the basis of which a real peace could be established. “During the new disengagement process, it would be natural that the parties will not resort to the use of force as long as the provisions of the Disengage- ment Agreement remain valid and respected by the parties so that there could be progress towards peace on all fronts. “All this constitutes the true insignificance and importance of the new move. The essentials of a just and final peace must not be confused with agree- ments that pave the way for such a peace and which are necessary to create the confidence that forms the basis of a real peace.” That is the official announcement made by Egypt on 19 March to salvage the Kissinger mission. It failed. 150. Neither Egypt nor any other State Member of the Organization can ever accept that. For, according to the Charter and the norms of international law, no Member of the United Nations could be asked to undertake formally to surrender its right to recover its usurped territory while remaining under a con- tinuous illegal occupation. In short, a pledge of peace can only correspond to an act of peace. It cannot be made while the aggressor still occupies the greater part of one’s land. 151. We have just heard the accusation from the representative of Israel that Arabs do not respect their obligations. We& the whole world has come to realize Israel’s responsibility for the breakdown of the latest Kissinger peace mission. The United States, the initiator of the step-by-step approach, has itself blamed Israel for its intransigence, which led to the failure of this most recent peace attempt. President Ford stated on 27 March I975 that Middle East peace would have been better served if Israel had been more flexible during the negotiations with Egypt conducted by Secretary of State Kissinger. 152. The news media in the-United States-in part, as we aI1 know, traditionally sympathetic to the Israeli viewpoint-have come out squarely in criticism of Israel’s intransigence and shortsightedness. Thus, in an editorial dated 1 April 1975, The Washington Post wrote the following: “Having turned the Egyptian disengagement offer down, Israel must do something a good deal better than sitting tight, sniping at Egypt and appealing to the United States to do something to break the -impasse. Israel has worked itself into a position where it will be under increasing pressure to offer a feasible and responsible proposal for peace, one** -and this is The Washington-Post speaking- “that goes beyond the tired slogans of its past diplomacy and holds out some reasonable prospect of satisfying all the principals in the Middle East dispute.” 153. The Christian Science Monitor of 31 March 1975 reported the foIlowing from Washington: “An Israeii effort to blame Egypt for the break- down of step-by-step talks on a interim settlement by releasing maps daiming to show both Israeli and Egyptian maximum Sinai concessions has further irritated American officials. Release of the maps was part of a major effort by Israel to offset Ford administration anger at what is seen here [in Washington] as Israeli inflexibility during “An authoritative source says that the map published by the Israeli Embassy [in Washington) on 27 March was never given to the American delegation in Jemsalem*‘-i repeat: “was never given to the American delegation in Jerusalem”. “The eleventh-hour offer that the Israelis say they made to keep the talks going, therefore, contained nothing precise for the Americans to pass on to the Egyptians, the source says.” 154. I should like to turn to what was said a few moments ago here, but first of all I shall address myself to the Secretary-General’s report. In para- graph 29, the Secretary-General quite correctly observes that “pending the completion of an over& settlement, the situation in the area as a whole remains fundamentally unstable”. Nothing could be more true. But, I regret to say, paragraph 30 of the same report transmits to the Council the Israeli allegation--and we have just heard this allegation again from the Israeli representative-that “UN-EF is an integral part of the Disengagement Agreement of 18 January 1974”. Such an ahegation has no legal validity and is not conducive to peace. I shall now tell you why. 155. The draft resoiution just adopted by the Council is sufficient proof to the contrary of that Israeli allegation. It decides once again to call upon the parties concerned to implement immediately Security CounciI resolution 338 (I973), UNEF is an integral part of resolution 338 (1973-not of any other agree- ment. I repeat: UNEF is an integral part of resolu- tion 338 (1973). That is our position. The establish- ment of UNEF on 25 October 1973, in accordance with resolution 340 (1973), was a step aimed at implementing paragraph 1 of resolution 338 (1973). 156. The legal framework from which all efforts towards the maintenance of peace and the achievement of a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East derive is resoIution 338 (t973), which states: 157. Then, Security Council resolution 340 (1973) was adopted. Then, resolution 344 (1973) noted that a peace conference on the Middle East was to begin shortly at Geneva under the auspices of the United Nations and expressed the hope that this conference would make speedy progress towards the establish- ment of a just and durable peace in the Middle East. 158. Pursuant to efforts initiated at the Geneva Peace Conference, and with the assistance of t& United States Government, the Egyptian-Israeli Agreement on Disengagement of Forces was signed “This Agreement is not regarded by Egypt and Israel as a final peace agreement. It constitutes a fust step toward a final, just and durable peace according to 165. Israel’s allegation that the presence of the Force and the continuing validity of the Disengagement Agreement are not dependent on the achievement of further steps in the peace negotiations would lead to the unacceptable result that the provisions of Security Council resolution 338 (1973) and within the framework of the Geneva Conference.” both the Force and the Agreement remain for an indefinite period so long as Israel is not willing to carry out its obligations under resolutions 338 (1973) and 242 It is therefore clear that this particular provision explicitly defines the Disengagement Agreement only as a first step towards a peaceful settlement baaed on resolution 338 (1%7). This would be contrary to the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations as well as to the basic resolutions on the Middle East problem adopted by the Council. (1973), and, consequently, it is a measure of a temporary nature. 159. UNEF, established under resolution 340 f1973), is also of a temporary nature, since it was established for an initial limited period according to resolution 341 (1973) and for the purpose of supervising the cease- fire while further steps were taken to implement resolution 338 (1973) in all its parts. 166. Thus, instead of attacking and confusing the issues and trying to divert the UNEF mandate from its basic objective, I think that Israel should comply with resolution 338 (1973) by declaring its readiness to withdraw from the occupied Arab territories and to restore the rights of the Palestinians. 160. Egypt’s position with regard to the nature and presence of the Force on its territory is not new; it has already been stated before the Council and it is explicitly set out in a letter I addressed to the 167. If the necessary steps towards peace were to be obstructed by one of the parties-that is, Secretary- General as representative of Egypt Israel- then the whole process initiated by and embodied in resolution 338 (1973) would [S/11055]. What is the content of this letter? It is the following: consequentfy be blocked, and the existence of UNEF itself would then no longer be valid. 161. UNEF is not an occupation force. It is also 168. The fallacy of the Israeli argument is very clear to all of us. It is quite simply another attempt at perpetuating its occupation of our land. This cannot be accepted by Egypt nor by any other Member of the United Nations. not an enforcement force under Chapter VII of the Charter. Neither is it a peace-keeping force created for an indefinite period so as to become a substitute for the achievement of a permanent peace-a theme which has been repeated here today by many delega- tions. UNEF is no substitute for a solution in the 169. I would like to add that, in spite of Israel’s negative policy, Egypt is yet willing to pursue peace efforts in order to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. To that end, Egypt has formally requested the Co-Chairmen of the Geneva Peace Con- ference to reconvene the Conference with the aim of achieving a settlement of all issues of the Middle East problem. area. Thus the process of peace-making initiated by the establishment of the Force merely aims at facilitating the process of peaceful settlement, which the Council in resolution 338 (1973) has decided should be started immediately. 16t. However, the Israeli argument today would have the- world believe that the presence of UNEF is a sine die presence. Such Iogic cannot be accepted. Also, the Israeli allegation that the Disengagement Agreement should be viewed not as part of a process but as a separate occurrence of a 170. In that framework, a settlement must be reached by strictly adhering to both the letter and the spirit of Security Council resolution 338 (1973), and with the participation of the Palestinian people, for the restoration of their legitimate rights is indis- pensable for the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. sine die duration cannot be sustained in view of the explicit text of paragraph D of the Agreement itself, which I have just read out to the Council. 163. The unacceptable result of such allegations, which we heard today and which appeared in the Secretary-General’s report, would amount to the creation of new internationally supervised permanent 171. Time is running out, and in these coming peace efforts Israel faces a very grave responsibility. Either, it will, by shedding its negative attitude, opt for the road of peace, or it may, once more, shun the responsibilities of peace. The alternatives are lmes in the disengagement area. 172.

I shall now call on those representatives who have indicated a wish to exercise their right of reply. 173. Mr. OVINNIKOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): I have a few comments on the statement of the representative of China, Mr. Huang Hua. The Chinese representative came up with till already familiar recipe from the contemporary Peking kitchen, although quite unlike familiar Chinese cookery, these recipes are surprisingly monotonous. They can produce only one dish, which does not smell too good; that is, anti- Sovietism. 174. The Chinese representative, as he normally does, produced some general phrases on the substance of the matter which is under consideration in the Security Council, and then devoted himself to slandering the Soviet Union. In logic this is called switching premisses. In morality this is known as turpitude. Then why did Mr. Huang Hua feel it necessary to resort to such tactics? As always, in order to cover up the real position of China itself. And this real position of China has tong been for its representatives to come but in the role of devil’s advocates, the virtual accomplice of those occupying other people’s territories. 175. Only recently the Security Council discussed the question of Cyprus. Then th.e Chinese representative also devoted himself substantially to slandering the Soviet Union. But he did not say a word about how foreign troops should be evacuated from Cyprus. He did not say a word about the inadmissibility of the partition of Cyprus. He did not say a word about the need for maintaining the status of nonalignment of Cyprus. To whose advantage was this position? Of course, not to that of Cyprus. China is not only indiierent to, but even ready to play with, the fate of that sovereign State Member of the United Nations. 176. Today, the Security Council is considering the position in the Middle East. This time the position of China favours the aggressor, Israel. One can say frankly that China fears a just political settlement in the Middle East just as much as the aggressor. It fears this because it does not fall within the plans of China, which would prefer a new war in the Middle East regardless of how much that would cost the peoples of that area. It is precisely for this reason that the substance of the Chinese line in this matter is to undermine any possibilities for a peaceful settlement. 177. My final point is this. The true role of the Soviet Union in the Middle East is well known to 178. You can utter malicious anti-Soviet words, Mr. Huang Hua, possibly reading them from a text you have already prepared. But so much the more shameful will be your contribution to history. 179. The PRESIDENT (interprefafion from French): I call on the representative of Israel.

The statement made by the representative of Egypt illustrates the difficulties of holding a reticent and constructive exehange of views in a forum such as the Security Council. International situations cannot be dealt with effectively or even be discussed in a serious manner if they are approached on the basis of hollow slogans and distortions and not on the basis of facts. The world will undoubtedly take note of this fact. Israel will. A few examples of the distortions by the representative of Egypt: 181. He alleged that Israel considers the Disengagement Agreement as a final agreement-and this at the very time that it was Egypt that refused to take at least one modest step in the direction of peace from the present Agreement. 182. A second example, even more striking, perhaps. He claimed that UNEF is not an integral part of the Disengagement Agreement. I shalI quote a few passages. I shall quote in fact the greater part of the Agreement, which is extremely short, for the greater part of the Agreement refers to UNEF and assigns specific tasks to the Force. Paragraph B 2 states, in part: “The area between the Egyptian and Israeli lines will be a zone of disengagement in which the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) will be stationed”. Paragraph 3 says: *‘The area between the Egyptian tine and the Suez Canal will be limited in armament and forces.” Paragraph 4 says: “The area between the Israeli tine (B on the attached map) and the line designated as Line C on the attached map, which runs along the western base of the mountains where the Gidi and Mith “The limitations referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 will be inspected by UNEF. Existing procedures of the UNEF, including the attaching of Egyptian and Israeli liaison officer-s to UNEF, will be continued.” This is a solemnly concluded agreement,circulated as a document of the Security Council, signed formally by the representatives of Egypt and Israel, witnessed by the Commander of UNEF, containing one provision after another specifying the deployment and the responsibilities of UNEF. And yet the representative of Egypt comes before this organ to say that UNEF and its presence are not an integral part of this Agreement. Is it not clear, therefore, that Israel is justified in drawing attention to the arbitrary attitude of the Government of Egypt towards the very Agreement signed by it, the very undertakings solemnly entered into by it? 185. The PRESIDENT (interpretatiorrfiom French): I call on the representative of China, who has asked to speak in exercise of his right of reply.

Since a Soviet representative by the name of Ovinnikov has uttered what he has just said now, I deem it necessary to say a few words. 187. The stand of upholding justice as consistently taken by the People’s Republic of China in intemational affairs is known to all and cannot be distorted. 183. The representative of Egypt found it appropriate to refer to the recent effort made in the Middle East to advance towards additional understanding and agreement between Israel and Egypt. He revealed, perhaps unwittingly, Egypt’s responsibility for the failure of those talks, because he once again reiterated Egypt’s well known position that the agreement that was to be concluded, the agreement at which Egypt aimed, was to be of a purely military nature, without any political connotations whatsoever. In other words, Egypt demanded of Israel withdrawal from territories held by it, while Egypt refused any political action, Egypt refused the one political step which Israel suggested that both parties should take at this decisive moment in the peace-making process-a step towards peace. That was the only political suggestion made by Israel. 188. The ugly and evil doings of the Soviet Union in the Middle East are too many to be enumerated. Everywhere you boast about your “tremendous” and “selfless” aid to the Arab countries. But it is precisely the leaders of certain Arab countries which have suffered deeply from this so-called “aid” and the just Arab public opinion that have repeatedly made clear and forceful exposure of the essence of the Soviet “aid”. Speaking of the so-called “military aid”, you have not only reaped fabulous profits from huge arms deals under the smoke-screen of your “military aid” by taking advantage of others’ difficulties, but you have even openly interfered in the internal affairs of Arab countries and demanded bases and privileges from them and repeatedly resorted to the cessation of arms supply as a political blackmail to sabotage the Arab countries’ just war against Israeli aggression, not to mention your ugly deeds of grabbing cheap oil from certain Arab countries and reselling it at high price to others, including your so-called “allies”. While ostentatiously , condemning Israeli Zionism, you are sending large numbers of emigrants to Israel to help the Israeli Zionists strengthen their force of aggression, and you are flirting with the Israeli Zionists overtly and covertly and doing things behind the scenes that cannot bear the light of the day. Styling yourselves a “natural ally” in the liberation cause of the Arab and Palestinian people, you are actually sabotaging their unity and struggle in various fields regarding’ their territories, sovereignty and national rights as bargaining chips in your contention with the other super-Power for hegemony in the Middle East. Over a long period you have refused to 184. Egypt’s attitude towards commitment and Egypt’s arbitrariness in interpreting its own intemational obligations are further illustrated by the reference made by the representative of Egypt to the statement made recently by President Sadat that the Suez Canal would be reopened. That was presented then, at the time of the statement, and it was presented again today, as a gesture of goodwill. What was omitted, however, was that the announcement about the opening of the Suez Canal was also accompanied by an announcement that Israel-bound cargoes would not be permitted to go through the Canal. What was omitted was the fact that Egypt in January 1974 undertook solemnly to permit the passage of cargoes through the Canal once it is opened-without any discrimination, without any distinction. In other words Egypt, a year later, was openly declaring to the entire world that it was about to violate another of its solemnly undertaken recognize the Palestine Liberation Organ&&ion and you have vilified the Palestinian people’s armed struggle as “outrageous 189. The PRESIDENTCinterpretnrionfrom French): I call now on the representative of Egypt, who has asked to speak in exercise of his right of reply.

It is reluctantly that I have to take the floor again, but I am really obliged to do so. I know that the hour is late, but I must say a few words in answer to the allegations of the Israeli representative. 191. He has once again shown us his way of bypassing and confusing the main issues. He said that he was qualifying his Government’s request for non-belligerency as a “modest step” by Egypt. For us to make a declaration of non-belligerency would be a “modest step” in the mentality of the Israeli representative. Well, that step of non-belligerency will be taken only when there is peace, and I have said that we are ready for peace under two very clear conditions: restoration of the rights of the Palestinians, and withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces from all Arab territories. Then we will take that “modest step”. 192. The Israeli representative has again said that his country is justified in the attitude it is taking. Well, I have to ask him to read some of the comments of eminent American journalists and scholars and to see their judgement; and these are people who cannot be considered as very close friends of the Arabs or of the Egyptians. I have here in front of me an article by a Harvard professor, Stanley Hoffmann, entitled: “A New Policy for Israel”. published in the April 1975 issue of Foreign Aflairs, part of which has been reproduced in The New York Times of 27 March. I am sure many representatives here have read this article of Mr. Hoffmann’s, in which he writes “What is required is a willingness on the part of Israel, in exchange for its recognition and the signature of a peace treaty, to accept categorically and in specific terms its withdrawal from occupied [Arab] territories.” Mr. Stanley Hoffmann, for your information, is a professor of government and chairman of the Center 193. Let me also remind the representative of Israel of an article-maybe he has not seen it-in yesterday’s issue of The New? York Times by C. L. Sulzberger, who I do not think is a friend of the Arabs. I have the article in front of me; this is what he said: “since 1%7 [Israel] has displayed little diplomatic sense”. That is perhaps an understatement, but let us accept it at its face value. And then -Mr. Sulzberger, in another part of the article said: “The Israelis have made crucial mistakes in diplomacy*‘. Now there is a slight crescendo: he is speaking a little more bluntly: “The Israelis have made crucial mistakes in diplomacy”. And then, in.another part, he said: “Even in the recent unsuccessful Kissinger shuttle, Jerusalem failed to give while the giving was good”. I invite the representative of Israel to read that article. 194. I have a lot to say but really I should like to spare the Council although I am ready to stay here until midnight or after midnight. What of his tale about the Egyptian fellah? He always likes to tell tales. His tale about the Egyptian peasant and his donkey reminded me of a more famous tale about someone who was living in Venice, called the Merchant of Venice, who wanted repayment of his debts not in money but in human flesh from his poor prey. It is better not to tell tales about the Egyptian fellah. The Egyptian fellah has behind him 5,O years of civilization. Mind you, this Egyptian fellah gave you a lesson in October 1973 and is ready to give you another lesson. So it is better not to talk about the Egyptian fellah we all come from. 195. My last comment is this. I hope I shall not be obliged to take the floor again but I am ready to take it. I want him to hear the following words: “You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time”. 1%. The PRESIDENT (interpretatiunfr~m French): The representative of the Soviet Union wishes to exercise his right of reply. 197. Mr. OVINNIKOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)(interpretationfrom Russian): They say that in the East--possibly in China itself-there is an allegorical sculpture representing three monkeys. One of them sees nothing, the second hears nothing, and the third is dumb. We saw today that the Chinese representative can pronounce lengthy anti- Soviet speeches, although they are prepared beforehand on paper. The Chinese representative said here today, referring to other countries, that someone apparently does not want a state either of war or peace in the Middle East. I thank him for at least that half recognition that someone else does not 198. The PRESIDENT (inferpretation from French): The representative of Israel has asked for the floor to speak again in exercise in the right of reply. 203. Let me also put before the Council a statement by another distinguished American journalist, Mr. Anthony Lewis. I think Mr. Anthony Lewis is well known to the Israeli representative, who pretends he is not acquainted with some of these gentlemen.

I am not acquainted with the gentlemen-professors, writers and commentators-whom the representative of Egypt quoted but I am certain that the representative of Egypt is well acquainted with Mr. Heikal, a confidant of Egypt’s presidents, who wrote the following: 204. I wish to quote from Mr. Anthony Lewis because what he says is very relevant to the subject we are discussing here today. Writing in The New York Times on 27 March 1975, Mr. Anthony Lewis said: “We have two goals before us: one, the elimination of the consequences of the 1967 aggression by the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories; second, the elimination of the 1948 aggression by the eradication of Israel.” “First, the land occupied in 1967 is less and less significant in terms of physical security. New weapons will cover the distance involved and more. The next war will be more destructive than the others, whatever the particular boundaries. And militarily, time is running against Israel.” I do not think any additional comment is necessary, except to observe that the second statement by the representative of Egypt further convinced me that this is not a forum for It is not Egyptians saying that; it is Anthony Lewis: construc_tive discussion or attempts to take effective steps in the direction of peace. “The economic power of the Arabs is beginning to tell, and they are narrowing the gap with Israel in the mastery of military technology.

The representative of Egypt has the floor. “Second, retention of the occupied territories is sapping the already-diminished reservoir of good will toward Israel in the world. Professor Stanley

I have said that I should be obliged to answer if necessary, and unfortunately I am obliged to answer. The representative of Israel says that he is not acquainted with the gentlemen I am referring to. He must be an ignorant man not to know this particular gentleman I am referring to. Perhaps he does not know Professor Stanley Hoffman-I do not know him either-but perhaps he knows Mr. C. L. Sulzberger, to whom I have referred. Hoffmann of Harvard, one of the wisest foreignaffairs specialists in this country, has written of the danger of Israel’s ‘isolation, physical and mental, from its neighbours and indeed from much of the outside world. The United States is almost the only pipeline to the word . ..*. “Third, it is a delusion to think that Israel can ever get true nonbelligerency from her neighbours unless and until she returns the occupied territories*‘. 202. These are very serious moments. I am just reminding the representative of Israel of some of the declarations that are made by persons who are not Egyptians or Arabs. He is giving me a hundred times this declaration of Heikal. I do not want to discuss what That is only one article; I have many others in front of me. For it happens that there is now an attitude that Israel should be judged by its deeds. It no longer can fool everyone it used to fool. HeikaI said or did not say. I am reading some comments by Americans who are saying, as free and respected and eminent personalities, either journalists or scholars, what they think. I am giving the benefit of their thoughts to this distinguished gathering, the Security Council, because, as I said in my speech, time is running out for the change that this professor has asked for, for a new Israeli initiative, to look 205. The PRESIDENT (interpretation-z from French): I call on the representative of Israel in exercise of his right of reply.

I do not really think a reply is necessary. I believe it would be superfluous. I do not think that the members of the Security Council need any assistance in making their own appraisal of the presentation of the case by the representative of Egypt. m the future a.nd.to discard the slogans of the past, as mentioned in The Washington Post article. These are not my friends. These are distinguished American journalists and scholars. I can accept what Heikal said or refute what Heikal said, but I yut this in 208. Mr. HUANG Hua (China) (translation from Chinese,!: In my previous statement I cited a number of facts about Soviet social-imperialist aggression and expansion in the Middle East. These facts have been repeatedIy exposed by certain Arab leaders and the just Arab public opinion. Regrettably, however, the Soviet representative, being in no way able to deny ail these objective facts, has resorted to slanders and lies. Yet lies cannot cover up the facts. Facts speak in United Nations, New York 00400 Who Notes l See resolution 368 (1975). 82112024ctober 1983-2300