S/PV.2683 Security Council

In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings on this item, I invite the representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahitiya to take a place at the Council table. I also invite the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to take a place at the Council table. I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, the Byeloruesian Soviet Socialist Republic, cube, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, the Oerman Democratic Republic, Eungary , India, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malta, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, Uganda, the Ukrainian Soviet Saeialist Republic, Viet Nam and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber. I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organisation to take the place reserved for him at the side of the Council Chamber. At the invitation of the Preoident, mr. Treiti i- ** LiDyen Arab Jamahiriyaj and Mr. Al-Ataeei (Syrian Arab Republic) took places at the Council table; Mr. Nengrahaq (Afghanistan), Mr. Djoudf (Algeria), Mr. Siddiky (Bangladesh), Mr. Cgouma (Benin), Mr. Ouedrago (Burkina PaSO), Mr. Makslmov (ByelOrUW3ian Soviet Socialist Republic), Mr. Malmier~ Peoli (Cuba), Mr. Cesar (Czechoslovakia), Mr. Al-Alfi (Democratic Yemen), Mr. tiucke (German Democratic Republic), Mt. EndreW (HUngarY), Mr. Bhagat (India), Mr. Damavandi Kamali (Islamic Republic of Iran), Mr. Somvorachit (Lao People’s Democratic Republic), Mr. Borg (Malta), Mr. NyamdOO (Mongolia), Mrs. Bellorini Parrales (Nicaragua), Mr. Al-Anei (Oman) , Mr. Shah Nawaz (Pakistan), Mr. Noworyta (Poland), Mr. Al-Kawaei (Qeter) , &. Shihabi (Saudi Arabia), Mr. Birido (Sudan), Mr. Irumba (Uganda), Mt. Oudovendo (Ukrainian Soviet Sccialiet Republic), Mr. Bui Xuan Nhat Wet Nam and Mr. Dizdarezic (Yugoslavia) tcok the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber; Mr. Terai (Palestine Liberation Organieation) took the place teaerved for him at the aide of the Council Chamber. The PRKSIDENT (interpretation from French): The Security Council will now reaume consideration of the item on its agenda. Members of the Council have before them the following Uocumentst s/18026, letter dated 21 April 1986 from the Acting Permanent Repreeentative of Nigeria to the United Nation0 addressed to the Becretary-General) and S/18031, letter dated 23 April 1986 from the Permanent Representative of Denbmtatiu Yemen to the United Natione addrescmd to the 8ecretary4enerul. The first sgsaker ?; the deign Minister of India, Mr. Bali Ram Bhagat. I invite him to take m pls,e ot the Council table ati to meke his statement. a (P~35.a) t May I extend to you, Sir, my feliaitations on your assu;.&ion of the pe:ii%ency of the Setutity Council Sor the ourtent month. c Ear- -:r Ch:o amth tie IndLf~ delryatien had the opportunity of congratulating you sti c: expchssin; our cmfidsoco in your well-known ability to guide the I f,.dve ehti pri liege of addssuing the Security Council today on behalf of the Movement of NEW+ 1 igned Countries , of which India ie the current Chairman. I thank you ant! the members of the Council for this courteey extended to me and my aolloagues. For our Movement, the United Nations personifies a charter of faith - faith in ourselves and in our common destiny. The preservat$on of peace is a critical dismnsion of thk +%rter. ‘At our last summit Conferenae held at New Uelhi in 1983, the Heads of ‘qte or Government of the non-aligned countries stressed the role and effeaiivenees of the United Nation8 in ths Iraintenance of international peace a?rd security, in the eettlement of international disputes and arises by peaceful means and in the strengthening of international co-operation on the basiu of sovereign equality of all nation& as being indispensable to today’s world. (Mr. Bhagat, India) They voiced their expectation that the Security Council would “fulfil its primary reaponeibility for the maintenance of international peace and security by the pranpt and effective implementation of the collective security provisions of the Charter”. (s/15675, p. 49) The non-aligned countries look upon the Security Council, a principal organ of the United Nations, with great faith and hope in their effort to preserve and consolidate their hard-wan political independence and to ward off danger8 of external interference or int&vention on one pretext or another. The group of Foreign Ministers of non-aligned countries, which I have the honour to lead, has sought thie meeting of the Security Council in pursuance of the mandate given it by the ministerial meeting of the Co-ordineting BUreaU Of Non-Aligned COuntrief3 which was recently held in New Delhi. That meeting mandated the Hinistete of Congo, Cuba, Ghana, Senegal, Yugoslavia and India to visit Tripoli, and to meet Pie &ccellency Colonel Qeddafi in order to present him with the text of the communigud and to express the solidarity of the Movement with the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. That meting also mandated the group to vieit united Nation6 Reaauarters in New York to meet with the President of the Security Council and the Secretary-General. We have done 80, and have presented to them the text of that comunigu4. We are here today in the Council to reiterate the grave concern of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries over the set ions develapnents in the central Mediterranean, which have grave coneequencee for peace and eecucity, not only in the region but in the world at large. For several days, the Security Council has focused attention on those developcnents, which arose a8 a result of the bcrabing of same Libyan cities by united States aircraft. India, along with several other countries, mainly from the Non-Aligned Movement, has voiced its shock and dismay at the turn of events, and has condemned this act of aggression. This action, in contravention of the (Mr. Phagat, India) purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and norms of international law, wae undertaken, with the attenrlant risk of a wider conflagration, against the ewereignty, territorial integrity and independence of a sovereign State. The represctntative of Libya brought before the Council agonizing details of the death and destruction suffered by the civilian population in the bombed citie5. Our elrgectation was that the Security Council, as the primary organ responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, would take deoieive steps to discharge its responsibility to uphold the Charter , to restore peace and stability and to ensure that there vlould be no further deterioration in the situation. On 15 April 1986, the Prime Minister of fndia, Mr. ~a j iv Gandhi, Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned CoUntties, made the following statement in regard to these develmnts : aInBie, and the entire mn-Aligned Movement, are profoundly shocked, and deplore the United Ststes boeings of some cities of the Libyan Arab Jmahir lya. It is sought to justify these acts as reteliation for terroriet aote allegedly camaitted by Libya. The Non-Aligned Movement has StronglY Oondepned all forms of terrorism, whether oommitted by individuals or organized by s-tea. In these particular cases, Libya ha6 declared that it had no relationship with the claims made by the united stetee of America linking it to the recent terrorist acts, and has declared itself to be against all terroriet operations, such as the hijacking of aeroplanes and the murder of innacents. In view of this, the United States attacks on the capital of Libya, including the presidential palace in Tripoli, are all the more unjustifiable, and deserve condemnation on the part of all members of the Non-Al igned mvement . As Chair-n of the Non-Aligned Movement, I earnestly call upon the United States and all others to exercise the utmost restraint (Mt. Bhagat, India) and not to do anything to aggravate f!urther the already tense situation in the region. The Non-Aligned Movement extends its firm support and solidarity to Libya in this critical hour.” At its seventh summit Conference, the Non-Aligned Movement expressed its determination to resist economic and political pressure that might be exerted by any great Power against small and vulnerable states. Against this background, during the last three months, in response to anxiety expressed about the threat and Possible use of force against Libya, the non-aligned Co-ordinating Bureau, in a special meeting, urged that no precipitate steps be taken, as situations of this kind are best resolved through dialogue and not through pressure. Yet, wst regrettably, those appeal5 were ignored. On the eve of the aommetncement of the ministerial meeting of the non-aligned Co-ordinating Bureau in New Delhi, docking news of the aerial bombardment of Libya was rweived. The Ministers immediately met in emergency session to consider this flaming development. They were of the unanimous view that the aggression against Libya represented a flagrant violation of the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of that country, and strongly condemned it. They recalled that, at the non-aligned summit meeting in 1983, Heads of 8tate or Government of the Movement had ‘noted with amcern that policies of intervention and inter’ cence, pressure and the threat or use of force continued to be pursued against many non-al&wed countries, with dangetoue cmneeguences for peace and secucityw (fbi+.; n, 46! and that they had called upon all States to abide by the principle that the threat or use of force shall not be used against the territorial integrity or political or economic independence of States. (Mr. phagat, India) Although the text of the 15 April camun4u~ has already been read into the record of the Security Council, permit me to Quote same extracts which reflect the sense of deep indignation aud coucern felt by the non-aligned mUWieS: *The Ministers and Iieads of Delegation of non-aligned countries . . . noted ’ with deep shock and profound indignation the amed attacks by the United States undertaken with support and collaboration by it8 NAm military ally, the United kingdom, against the territory of the Gocialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahfr iya. They strongly condemned this dastardly, blatant and unprovoked sot of aggression against a fellow non-aligned country, which constituted a violetion of international law and of the principles of t.!e United Nations Charter, and endangered international peace and security. This act of aggression by the United State8 was all the more oondenkble since, by virtue of ite position as a permanent member of the security Council, it has Primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and to abide by the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. (Mr. Bhagat, India) ‘The international community has condemned all terrorist activities, whether perpetrated by individuals, groups or States. These attacks by the United states were therefore all the more reprehensible. I . . . .The Ministers and Heads of Delegation demanded that the United States of America put an immediate halt to its military operations, which violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, endanger peace and security in the Mediterranean region, and pose 8 grave threat to international peace and security. They also demanded that full and prompt compensation be provided to the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for the human and material losses ‘that it has suffered. Vhe Minister8 and Reads of Delegation called on the United Nations Security Council to take urgent action to condem this act of aggression and to prevent the repetition of such acts. They also urged that the Security Council should take steps to ensure that full and prompt compeneation be provided to the Socialist People.8 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. -The Ministers and Read6 of Delegation affirmed their full support to, and solidarity with, the Sociallet People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in safeguarding and in defending ite independence , sovereignty and territorial integrity. They extended their heartfelt sympethiee to the authorities and people of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for the losses that they have suffered.’ (S/17996, paras. 1, 2 atId 6-S) The events of last week are fresh in our minds. The non-aligned members of the Council jointly sponsored a balanced draft resolution. That draft resolution (Mr. Bhagat, India) would have condemned the acme8 attack by the United States on Libya, and called upon it to refrain forthwith fecm any attacks and threats thereof. It would have also condemned all terrorist activities whether perpetrated by individuals, groups or States. Further, it would have called upon all parties to refrain from resorting to force, to exercise restraint and to resolve their differences by peaceful means in keeping with the United Nations Charter. It would have requested the Secretary-General to take all appropriate steps to restore and ensure peace in the central Mediterranean. We regret that owing to the five negative votes, including the triple veto, the Council has lost an opportunity to place on record its commitment to the inqrortant concepts included in the draft teaolutfon. Oirr ministerial group has come to New York straight from Tripoli, where it saw foe itself the nature of the damage to life and property that resulted from the bombing raid. Several buildings in residential locations were destroyed. Entire families were wiped out and several children and adults were killed in their sleep or were severely injured. when the ministerial group met Colonel Qaddafi in Tripoli on 20 April, he spoke more in sorrow than in anger at the havoc caused by the united States action, which he emphasised was nothing less than an act of aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Libyan Arab Jamahitiya. Se rejected the allegations made by the United States and aome of its allies linking Libya with recent terrorist attacks , and disclaimed any Libyan connection with them. It has been scught to create a cause-and-effect relationship between an admitted attack on a sovereiqn State and suspected responsibility, which has been denied, for certain acts of terrorism. Nothing can justify the use of massive force or am armed attack against a sovereign State, in contravention of the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. (Mu. Bhagat, India) The Movement of’Non-Aligned Countries eharee the worltlwide abhorrence Of terroriem. That ie reflected in the New Delhi declaration of the non-aligned Cc-ordinating Bureau adopted last week, where a specific section details the menace of terrorism and the urgency of the need to combat it. An appropriate reference to thie was also included in the draft resolution presented to t.. .&curity Council by the non-aligned nations. Even though the Swurity Council stands paralysed a8 a result of the triple veto, its reeponsibility does not end here. It ie iwperative that the Security Council, as the primary organ responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, discharge its responsibilities in this direction. The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and all peace-loving peoples in the world would uot like the situation to escalate any further. We come hare to voice the demaud for peace, for de-escalation aud for defusing the situation. We look to the United Nation& to the Security Counc.il and the Secretary-General, to provide the urgently needed initiative that would restore peace and tranquillity. Contrary to our hopes and expfxtations, the eituation threatens to deteriorate furtRer. There is a growing dauger of renewed conflagration am3 a widening of the conflict. Restraint is the need of the hour. Escalation met be avoided at all caste. The Security Council has the primary responsibility to take preventive aation, a reoponeibility which it cannot shirk. The pernmnent member0 have an even greater reeponeibility, to enable the Council to discharge its functions. In the meantime, we renew our call on the world community to take a firm etand bae6d on the purpoees and principlea af the Charter. we fervently urge the Secretary-General to use to the utmost the political and moral authority that he has in the cause of peace to persuade the parties concerned to exercise restraint in this critical situation and to resolve differences by peaceful means in keeping with the United Nations Charter. The PRESIDEtW (interpretation from French); I thank the Minister for External Affairs of Iudia for the kind words he addressed to me. The nsxt speaker is the Federal Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia, Mr. I&if Diodarevic. f welcome him heace and invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make hio statement. Mr. DIZDARWVIC (Yugoslavia) 1 I thank you, Mr. President, for enabling me to participate in the deliberations of the Security Council, t-ether with other Inembers of the delegation of the Ministerial Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of thm Wovewant of Non-Aligned Countrieo. The position of my country, thet Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, regarding the reoent attack by United States warplanes on the non-aligned Libyan Arab Jamahiriya is very well known. We have come here to communicate the arsssamsnts, viaws and demands of the Hovemant of Won-Aligned Countries - which make up tsm third6 of the United Watione umbership - that were unaniwuely and without rewrvation defined and adopted at the Winistarial Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau in New Delhi. That aeeignaent was beet carried out by the head of our delegation, the Minister for Bxtemal Affairs of India, who presided over our meting in New Delhi. There is hardly anything that needs to be added to Rie etatetment. Nevertheless, f should like to point out some issue& (Hr. Diodarevic, Yugoslavia) Tha non-aligned’countries stand resolutely against the policy of aggression in ~kenatiarrl relations; against acts which violate the independence, sovereignty amd integrity of any country; against the policy of the threat or use of forcer ~hatevoe country is carrying it out. The non-aligned countries have unaninmmly l tmd up in drfenca 06 the independence , sovereignty and integrity of tbe Libyan Atrb Jawhieiya. They have always defended those principles in international relations, and they are doing so now. By defending them, they are defending both tbWOhMS md Other countries, because it is only on those principles that mrld maa and stability and the security of us all can be fom%L The ninisterial meeting of the Cwrdinating Bureau of the Wvement of #lor~~Ugned Countriee called upon the Security Council to take urgent meawres GOsdsMiug the sat of aggressian and to prevent the repetition of such acts. We did so heply aonoinaed that WC are facing far-reaching consequences, and that this A@ tb0 mount when the Security Council should act according to its twvibilitiu ti obligations as laid down by the Charter. mgrettably , -Woe, it has failed to meet its obligaticms in this case and to condemn and peewatt thr repetitiar of the use of force. This hae far-reaching implications for inteen8tiabrl ralaticins. Violencs brseds violence. ProblePPe cannot be solved by force,; force only w1tiQli.r than. If the practice applied in this case against Libya were tolwatsd, now 8att1 of aggression against new Libya6 would multiply. There uould ha new aggroseors and new vietims. The ones *aho fail to respond in an appropriate Wet ee(Ly will not have the r tght to do so tomrrow. And can the road to lswlossness in international relations be accepted? Its destruction is well known; it certainly lade to a situation in which force and weapons will be the order of (Hr. Di2BsreViC, Yugoslavia) the day. The language of force and arms , even if there ate attempt6 to confine it . to limited areas, makes the danger of a general conflagration very real indeed. rtrrs not the attack on Libya brought ue oloser to it? The geourPty Council, this organ of the United Nations and the international oormnunity, bears a hfstoria responsibility for preventing that. WI rsould like to believe that the Council will do it. The nan-aligned countries appeal and demand that the Security Council do so. We have me here frorp Tripoli. *at we aaw there only gives strength to our demands. We saw the moving scenes of death, of wounded and tautilated x!un, women and children) ve saw the ruins of apartment buildings and living quarters, and the suffering of innocent people. We saw that the target of the attack was the residence of the leader of independent Libya, his life wd the live8 of his family. We witnessed justified indignatim. We heard words of condemnation, but not of revenge, neither from the ordinary psopk, nor at the highest levels. All this makes ‘rhe Security Counotl even 11ore duty-bound to shoulder its responsibilities. The PR~SIDEHP (interpretation from Frenah): The next speaker is the Poreign Minister of Cuba, Hr. Isidoro Malmieraa Peoli, wham I welcome. I invite hb to take a place at the Council table and to make his statemetnt. Mr. MAIHIERCA PalLI (Cuba) (interpretation frown Spanish)t We are taking part in this meeting of the security Council, whiah is being held to deal with the united States aggression against Libya, in pursuance of a decision of the ministerial meeting of the Cmrdineting Bureau of the -veDent of Non-Aligned Countries recently held in New Delhi. In September this year, when it holds its eighth Summit Conference, the Non-Aligned Movement will celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of its founding. (Mr. Malmietca Peoli, Cuba) During the quarter of a century since the first summit conference, held in Belgrade in 1961, our mvement has considered the international situation at various matings of Heads of State or Goverment , or of Foreign Ministers, and has stated it8 position on it. Since 1961 there have been almost 40 such meetings. We have taken pact in more than half, and have followed events at the others, and we can say that never before nas the Non-Aligned Movmnt sham such firm and unanimous solidarity as was given by the ministerial meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau in dealing with the brutah aggression launched by iche United States government against the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. An emergency sessiai of the Uinistets and heads of delegation, convened on 15 April, even before the scheduled beginning of the ministerial ae&ing, adOPted without any objeotions or reservations a cosununiqJ condemning the aggression by the United States against Libya and expressing the solidarity of the Non-Aligned #oVtmtnt with the maple and <iovermnt of Libya and their leader, colonel Hu@Ammar Qaddafi. When the mihistetrial meeting began on 16 April, the first speaker, before the start of the general debate, was the Foreign Minister of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahitiya. Our colleague, lcamil Haesan Wansour, denounced the savege attack on the Libyan people, which had caused the death of women and children and the Wounding Of hundreds of persons, and declared the determination of the Libyan People not to be frightened by attacks or threats and to defend their independence, territorial integrity and savereignty at anv or ice. - - Later the ministerial meeting of Ministers and heads of delegation was addressed by representatives of almost 100 delegations, all of whom - in different ways and to varying degrees - condemned the United States aggression and expressed (Hr. r4alei*rua Peoli, Cuba) tbeie wliduity with the people and Gavermaent of Libya. The l inirtacial uoting deoided that a delegation coqowd of reprrsantativo8 oO~fndk, Yugorlavia, Senegal, Ghana, Congo and Cuba should go to Tripoli, LibY81 Mb then ‘ta United #attune Eba&uarterc in &w York to report ita findingo. In 00ing MI themating uarespreroing the unanimow uandmmtim by thmW*U aNWiU of the Non-Aligned CDovoment of the barbaric, 8avage and brutal aggrasrim by tha flnitad State% and their treli~~ of aoliduity with tba geopla and Govuarnt Of Libya. c? (Mr. Malmierca Peoli, Cuba) This reaction vise unprecedented, and it was warranted by the aggression. It was proof of the awareness that actions such as that against Libya were really acts of aggression against the independence , sovereignty and freedom of each and every one of cur countries and constituted a precedent and a threatr tomorrow such violationa of international law could be carried out against any one of our count r ice . It is interesting to compare the unanimity of the nearly 100 countries that met in New Delhi with the results of the vote in the Security Council. Here, Only nine of the 15 mambets voted in favour of the draft resolution submitted by the hrs of the Counail belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement. In addition to the self-confess& criminal, the United States, and its acco@iae, the United Kingdom, the votee of three other countries e%preaaed an unwillingness to oolcdemn the aat of aggreseion against Libya: they did not expreee cor&muation of manifestations of State terrorism or any other kind or terrorism8 and they did not want the United Nations to work to preserve peace and to prevent further violations of the Charter. Soam of those countries proclaimed their interest in etrengthsning the role of the United Natione and its various bodies. Yet in the face of the arrogant uggreseion against a ems11 country, they acted as accomplices of the aggreeaor and undermined the 8ecurity Council, its credibility and its ability to contribute to the search for peace and security. When that vote took place, our delegation was in Tripoli, Libya. We arrived &ha-* Am eI*nAl” 9A n..rdl ndl atmvd Charm mntil tha rPkor~n af 21 A?rCl. Ae fa c.au-e “,. “S...aWJ, -- ..r-es, -..- - --~ _L _.__ -_ -._--- - - ---... known, we expressed to Colonel Mu’Aiitmf3r Al-Qaddafi the solidarity of the Movement, and we reported to him the results of the meeting held in New Delhi. Colonel Mu’hmmar AlQaddafi expreareed his people’s gratitude for the position of (Hr. Malmierca Peoli, Cuba) the Non-Aligned Movement and reiterated the Libyan psople’s determination to fight for it6 frmdom, indepsndenee an8 sovereignty. He expressed its confidence in ultimate vic!toty. In Tripoli we also saw the results of the aggression carried out by the aircraft of the United 8tatee air force. We visited the reeidential areas that had baen bombed. We saw the destroyed French Embassy offices. At the cemetery we expressed our respect for the fallen, and we wished thoee who had been wounded and were being taken care of iu hospitals a speedy recovery. In the hospikals we saw terrible scenes8 children, Young people, women and elderly persons wbo had been mutilated and would spend the rest of their lives as invalids. But even there the vounded who could not speak raised their fists and Shook thea, thus proclaiming their determination not to surrender, not to be humiliated by the aggreSsorS. out in the streets, the relatives of the UOUIU~U and the viutiu told us that Reagan was the assassin and that they were not afraid of further aotl of aggressions, that they would fight, if that ware neoessary, Until death to defend <heir independence and their freedom What we did not see in Tripoli was fear or vacillation. Nor wa6 there any fear or vacillation at our ministerial meeting in New Delhi. There was determination. There was determination to confront aggression, to support the aggreSSed-upon and ko fight ko sse to it that there would be no further such actr of aggression. In their Declaration, in the paragraphs having to do with the Mediterranean, -I-L--- ---LB-- 1- ..-__ a-.L1 the WiIILD&.abD UiPorrl‘bJ 111 ,.cI” “CIA,,. stat& Giiii’r the uiiitee GtatG izct rf ,-g:=s=fagainat the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya endangefec? peace, stability and international security. They reaffirmed their total support for and solidarity with the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jahamiriya in safeguarding its independence, sovereignty and territorial integr+y in the face of threats and presaure and the possible further use of force. Such solidarity is necessary in the face of threats of further acts of aggression by the United States, which, in statements by President Reagan himself and by some of his closest accomplices, haa said that it might repeat its criminal actions. It even wants to present its UAW allies aa being prepared to participate in a more widespread act of aggression with a more complex objective8 the destruction of the Government headed by Colonel Mu’Ammar Al*addaf i . The cynicism ehown by the American imperialiste and their allies is truly amazing. They uninhibitedly confess their crimes. They even seem to be proud of their phno to repeat them on a broader scale. The propagandistic campaign that the Reagan Adminietration has heen carrying out for some time - for a number of yeere now - is aimed at presenting the Libyan Government as the organizer and perpetrator of terrorist actions and therefore deeerving of punitive actfone. If that ia the aode of aanduct of the imperieliets and they are thus obliged to punish terrorism, hew aan we explain their privileged relations with the South African rsoisto and the Zionists in Tel Aviv? In the Seuurity Council, on many occasion8 there have heen heard speeches by the representatives of those regimes in which they have admitted, with a ayniaism like that of their United states ally and accomplice, the carrying out of terrorCat a&ions agaimt defenceloes citizens in the territories of other countriee in violation of their sovereignty and territorial integrity, demanding the right to act outetde international law. We all know that the United States maintains a ‘constructive’ commitment to the apartheid chime - the dgime that in Angolan territory hae committed the killings in Raesinge, bombed Maputo, the capital of Mozambique, earr Led out coaumido attacks in Lusaka, the capital of Zambia, and in 1915 invaded Angola, and even now still occupies part of that territory. we all know that the United States maintains a strategic alliance with the Tel Aviv r&ime, which occupies Arab an8 Paleetinian territories. It invaded Lebanon and encircled Beirut. It bombed Tunis, and only a few day8 ago it launched new attacks againet Palestinian refugees in Lebanese territory. In reality, it is Washington that the headquarters of international terrorimn is to be found, and Mr. Reagan ie its undieguised chief. The racist8 in Pretoria an8 the Zionists in Tel Aviv are only disciples of their tutors and master& We can therefore not fail to denounce the fact that Reagan and hie allies are preparing new acts of aggression and are trying to create the condition6 neceeaary to aarry them out. Xn a etatement announcing the unleashing of further acts of aggreesion, a few days ago President Reagan said that in Wiaaragua a new Libya wa8 being formed in the backyard of the United state@. He did thie to take advantage of the present eituation and to try to change the attitude of American citizena, the mjority of whom have repeatedly expreeeed their oapositian to military aggreeeion by the united States againet Nicaragua. TO that end Reagan is beginning a campaign to try to portray Nicaragua a8 Libya and Qo lay the groundwork for further act8 of aggression. Yeeterday, 23 April, Mr. Reagan reiterated his threat to commit further act6 of aggreesion against the Socialist Peapfe’e Libyan Arab Jamehiriya. He aleo Baid that he was prepared t0 order further acts of military aggreseion against Syria and the Ielamic Republic of Iran, if it was felt they were linked to terroriet actione. All thie truly constitutes an incredible proceee full of constant groee violation8 of the meet elementary IUF--~ of international law. The criminal not (Mt. Halr\ierca Paoli, Cuba) only eoknowleUgoS him criaeot in addition he warns he will repeat thm againmt him old viatim and againot new viotimu. In tCyLng to drag ita European allies into ita demented catspaign ugainst Libya amd to obtain k.Ip&ort fo”r ita aato of aggression, the united States is talking 8bOut oitrefutahle proat of Libya.6 link with terrorimt actions. One clay wa ohall find out who really laid the groundwork for these actione, where the fundm to aupgort them aama from. NO 811 t-t the allqed Vietnaneoe act of aggression against the ASmican flmt in the Gulf of Tonkin, which wan the pretext used by the united Statem to jurttfy it8 invaoion of Viet Na8. We all remember too how the United Statee later tuqniwd that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a'hala lie, a provaaation ~repard to bring about publio support for the aggression againet Viet lam. (Mr. Malmiecce Peoli, Cuba) Those tactics are not new. Just as in the Viet Nam war there was a Gulf of Tonkin, in the Nazi invaeion of Poland Hitler fabricated the incident of Vesterplatte. No, those methods are not new. History has taught us that such provocations irrevocably lead to defeat and regrettably result in a tremendous cost in life, bloodshed and destruction. The imperialists are powerful. They have modern weapons which they do not hesitate to use. But Sn order to win, they must kill millions of men, women and children. However, just ae Hitler was destroyed, eventually they too will be destroyed; they will meet the same fate as they did at Plays Giron anal in Viet Nom. In a statement made on 19 April in commemoration of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the victory of Playa Giron and the proclamation of the socialiSt nature of our revolution, President Fidel Castro referred to a recent meeting of the Security Council and to a statement made here by the representative of my COUntry, Ambassador Albert0 Velazco, in which he denounced the perpetrators of the brutal act of aggression comitted against Libya by the veritable heirs of Hitler. Prehlent Fidel Castro said8 “What difference is there between Reagan’s methods and the methods of Hitler? “Hitler began an undeclared war with surprise bombing raids at all hours of the day and night. Reagan carried out a surprise attack against Grenada and mined the ports of Nicaragua without declarations of wart he treacherously ordered a surprise early-morning bombing raid on Tripoli in order to eliminate the Bead of State and his family, in contravention of all norms and laws, including the laws of warfare. He has systematically resorted to liee and Wt. Ralmieroa Peoli, Cuba) invoked every pretext to justify his deeds. This is true of the eXitWE comnitted in Grensda, Nicaragua and Tripoli. Ris aethsds are the same as RitAer’s. They are intendsd to manipulate world public opinion in support of his policies. Ris use of the mass media is the same a6 Ritler@e. Ris constant jingoistic appaals to arass patriotism are Hitlerite methdls. His arrogance and overwsening pride, his contexpt for world public opinion, in particular for the peoples of the third wrl& which also has a racist connotation - ,611 these are Bitlqrite methodhw The uorld canuot Close its eyes to reality. It cannot ignore the f#?t that the path of imPerialist aggression against peoplea that do not bend to his dictates will lead to disaster. If we are to believe the ieords of Mr. Reagan, we can only 9Xxgeot further act8 of aggreeeion against Libya or other indepndent countries. In comlusion, I wish to reiterate our confidence that the United Nations, ad in particular the Security Council, will fulfil its historic mission, the defence of peace. In this undertaking it msy always aount on the assistance of the peaple of Cuba and its revolutionary Government. To the people and Government of the Socialist Peaple’s Liisyen Arab Yamshiriya, ue onee again expreee our firm solidarity and our confidence in their victory. A psople determined to defend its independenue and freedom can never be defeated. UC. GBXO (Ghana): Sir, my delegation has already expressed it6 CO8Bpli~nts to you on your assuaption of the presidency of the Security Council. However, I should like this afternoon to sdd my persons1 satisfaction and felicitatiou for the excellent leadership that you have so far demonstrated in the CoURCil. I noto that Ghana and France enjuf the friendliest of relatione, even (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) though my country is not part of French-speaking Africa. I am happy also to not0 that the interaction between our two countries has been characterined above all by mutual respect for each other’s principles and history. Even though my personal working relationship with you, Sir, spans but a relatively short time hero at the United Nations, it is a matter of considerable pride for me that I have CtXW to appreciate your vaet and keen diplomatic skills. I have no doubt that th Counoil will profit irpmensoly from your leadership. the Ghana delegation has already stated its view in the Seaurity Counoil on last week’s bombing raid on the territory of the Libyan Arab Jamehiriya. P have asked to speak today for two reasons: first, because Ghana wa8 fumourad to b included in the ministerial delegation of the non-aligned countries mandated to bring the novement@s message to the security council and, secondly, tmceuee the prormuncements of Certain leaders , since the recent vote on the reeolutien authotdl by the non-aligned countries of the Security Council on the matter, uke ua fear 8 repetition of the use of force on a fellow member State of the non-aligned group Of countries. My intervention, therefore, is a further attempt to oontain the explooive situation now existing between the United States and Libya am well 88 t0 aid this Council so that it can act along the path of peace. In this regard, I am instructed to convey the regret of the Swwpetery fOK Foreign Affairs of Ghana to you, Mr. President, and the other member0 of tha Council, for his inability to participate personally in today08 debate due to Other pressing matters of State. The Chairman of our ministerial delegation, Mr. Ualai lam Bhagat. the Indian Minister of External Affairs, hse already informed the Council about the detail0 of the decision taken by the emergency meeting of the Ministere of the Non-Aligned countries cm 1.5 April in New Delhi, and he has been supported by other l inioterm (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) from non-aligned countries. I ah411 not repeat what they have oaid. Let me add, however, that the profound shock and indignation expreaeed by the ministers at the 4tmed attack on the sovereign territory of Libys is one in which Gh4na totslly COncuf8~ not only because of tha unacceptable use of force by the United States again& Libya in contravention of the Chatter, but also becauee the unbridled aggression committed against 4 fellow non-aligned comtry was also in violation of international law. The best expression of our condemnation of the illegal and imensitive act was therefore to express solidarity with Libya in the preeent uufortunste circumetance. It is important for members of the Council to know that the decision by our movement squarely to blame the united States for fte use of armed force agsinst Libya was taken after a lengthy examination of all aspects of the matter, including the claim by the United States that it 4cted in self-defence and in an effort to halt intern4tioual terrotiem. The ministerial meeting, however, concluded unanimously that the me of force could not be excused in this case einae there had been m4ny other peaceful options omn to the United Ststes in dealing with the problem. (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) Furthermore, there was the general feeling that to turn away from the Charter and the norms of international conduct in this particular case would be to set a very dangerous precedent, and the non-aligned countries - most of which are small ana militarily insignificant - would in the long run be the victims. I shall not delve into the legal arguments against the claim of the United 8tab3S that it acted in self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter. My delegation has alreudy done so. Let me however remind members of the Council that non-aligned countries have in the main attained and sustained their respective independence and nationhood through the observance and promotion of the purposes and principles of the Charter. The sains principles guarantee our swereignty as well as individual and collective security. It is our cardinal auty therefore to defend and promote the purposes and principles of the Charter at all times. There can be no selective adherence ta the Charter principles, in the circumstmce, Without a corresponding injury to the security and continued existence of our respective countries. Ghana thus aonsfders it 8 solemn aug, in the interest of international peace and security and on account of the military vulnerability of all non-aligned States, to join in the open condemnation of the use of armetl force by the ‘Jnited States in its dispute with Libya. The Charter and international law generally forbid this course of action , ana we intend to continue to support the observance of international law ana order. Our visit to Libya this week enabled my delegation to witness at first hand the traumatic results of the use of force to settle disputes between countries. The victims of the United States so-called surgical bombing of Tripoli were, unhappily, mostly women and children. The inscriptions on the graves in the mmetery on the outskirts of Tripoli dmwed the victims to be of such ten&r ages as six, seven and nine. They died in their innocent sleep at two o'clock in the moening of 14 April. The mistakes made by the United States bombers in either identifying their targets or taking accurate aim led to many civilian lives and property being destroyed. The Mishergi family, a wealthy and well-known Libyan family, who live some few hundred meter5 from the French Errbassey in Tripoli, were cruelly murdered in their beds in those early hours of the fateful morning - all eight of them. In the Central Hospital in Tripoli, we saw little children Critically injured, some from irreversible brain damage and others merely waiting for what little life was left in them to ebb away end the life-supporting machines awitched off. The deadly aud delayed characteristic of the especially inhumane boabs used in the armed attack tragically increased the toll of victims beyond the imediate casualty toll because some of the special bombs exploded hours and even days after the raid to kill and maim unsuspecting ciVilianS. So was it that one victim we saw in hospital had loot a forearm and his right eye when two day5 after the attack he tried, a fraction of a second too late , to save some little children fraa playing with oue such uneqdoded bomb. I could go on recounting my observations but let me ?ave the Council time and gory details by stating that our shattering experience convincea the Ghana delegation all the more that the use of foraei should continue to be rejected as a means of settling disputes. One may rightly ask, as indeed sane of the leaders of the United States are reported to have queried, what about the innocent wom3n and children who have fallen victims to the aseasein*s bullet in Europe and the Middle East. f wish to reiterate without equivocation that Ghana had condemned and will continue to condemn all wanton act5 of terrorism, no matter their origin. We lost an innocent national during the so-called storming of the hijacked aircraft on the tarmac in u&b\ ta --- --. We ~~lnr-a the v!nlenn@ then as we do now. whether mrpetrated by --c- -- - individuals or States. However, we do not share the view , as many European States have also noted, that international terrorism can be curbed or totally eliminated by the initiation of mote violence. History is replete with examples of violence inviting more viol-ace in an unending cycle of violence. Moreover, we believe that States should themselves endeavour not to be the vehicle of terror, since such actions could easily degenerate into war with dire consequences for international peace and security . In our meeting with the Libyan leader, His Excellency Colonel Mu~Aamar Qaddafi, he repeated the past denials of Libya being responsible far international ter for ism. We had no evidence with which to question the Libyan Head of State’s disavowal of responsibility for international terrorism. The opponents Of Colonel Qaddafi have lately been strident in hurling accusations against him and Libya, but it is also noteworthy that no watertight evidence has been presented to the Security Council to substantiate the accusations. we believe that the matter is so serious that any hard evidence of the complicity of any State in inteKnatiOnEd terrorism should be lpade available to the acurity ccwncil for objective analysis and further action in the interest of peace and security. My dslsgation iS therefore unable to Uphold those general eni3 unproven acaisatio#w, much less sanction a consequential we of armed force by any Member State against Libya. BMh the United States and the United Kingdom have continued to assure their respective nationals and the international community that last week’s bombing raids were directed at military and terrorist facilities. Whet we saw a few days ago in Tripoli proved to the contrary. The victims of the bombing were mainly civilian. The selective taogets showed clearly that the homes of the Libyan Leader and 84me of hi8 colleaguea were targeted, hence the concentration of bon&z&q in civilian areas. It is a matter of considerable sorrow to my delegation that the United States and the United Kingdom - two permanent members of the &cur ity Council - should decide not only to use armed force against a fellow Member State of the United Nations but also choose civilian targets for 6uch display of fire-power. BQ dolegation baa taken the f&or Uy to plead with the Council to live up to it8 Wte PlaB not be n#pt way by omtiment nor partiom politics to opt the ouy rauteof on~lmoy. (Hr. Gbeho, Ghana) (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) The Charter has been violated, and that violation should not assume legitimay because a super-Pawar is involved. The philosophy of might being right when a State can get away with it is an archaic, discredited and dangerous policy the Council should firmly discourage. This is the era of international oo-operatiun and interdependence, and we need, collectively, to ensure that we do not start wars that might very well run out of control. We have condemned the use of force by a permanent member of the Security Council, but that is not our sole nor primary purpose in this smatter. Out aim is to help uphold the ground rules that would reduce tension between the two countries and pave the way for a non-military settlement of the dispute. In this regard. we regret certain statements that have appeared in the press recently to the effect that the use of force would be repeated. We wieh to appeal to both sides to act with maximum restraint and, at this stage, to entrust the Secretary-General with a greater role in the search for a solution. The Ghana delegation is aware that the draft resoIution submitted by the non-aligned States members of the Council has been rejeated by the triple VetOeS Of the United States, the United Kingdom and France, but we do not consider that the Council’5 responsibility for ensuring the praaotion of peace between the united S?ates and Libya is over. In this endeavour, there is a role that the n--aligned countries could also play and one we take this occasion to urge the Council, through its President, to consider seriously. Finally, my delegation would consider its statement today to be incaraplete were we to fail to emphaeize once again that the Council and the international community should address the root cause of the problem of tettorima with courage and objectivity in order to eliminate the phenauenon of international terroriam. The cbalm that the coot cause of terrorism is .the murderous behaviour of the @wernment of Libya and its agents l is not only difficult to eubstantiate - it 15 (Hr. Gbeho, Ghana) to confuse symptoms with causes. All of the members of the Council know, even if they will hot publicly admit it, that the cause of internaticmal terror isa ie the frW3tCatim felt by Palestinians and Arabs generally over the failure of the inbrIbSfiWa1 ~Oprrpunity, especially the friends of Israel, to ensure that justice is hauded down to them and that the inalienable rights of aillione of Palestinians to a honmland and life in dignity are guaranteed. The link between the demand for justice, inalienable rights and the phenomenon of terrorism is too Clear to be denied. This is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And 00~ unless this rc;ot cause is addressed, terrorism will continue in spite Of Colonel Qaddaf i . This is a solemn and historic occasion, and my delegation would like to oall upon the Council, especially the permanent mesbefs, to uphold the Charter, for there ie no alternative to that responsibility if we must survive and develop in peace and harmony. 'Ib sanction indirectly the threat or u8e of force is to CODprarPiBe the prestige and authority of the Council to the detrbnt of our c0-n interests. Let us therefore now move beyond **at has already happened and seek new avenues for @ace and constructive relations among the parties to the dispute. we certainly stand ready to play any part, however little, in achieving that abjeetive. The PRESIDENT (interpretatiou from Frenuh)r I thank tht! representative of Ghana for his particularly kind words addressed to fse and to my couutry. Mr. ADOlJaf (Congo) (interpretation from French); A6 teceutly as 18 April the Congo expressed its views on the act of aggression - which it cardems - comitted by the united States of America against the swereignty and territorial integrity of Libya. I shall not, therefore, repeat those views, other than to add, briefly, that a super-Power, a member of the Security Council, a State with all the mney, the powerful economy, the considerable military strength that we all know, (Mr. Mouk i, Cungo) cannot txxb a country member of the Movement of Non-Uigned Countries, despite and in Violation of the United Nations Charter and other international instruments, particularly those relating to the peaceful settlement of disputes, without arousing the indignation of the international community. The spontaneity of the thousands of people who have demonstrated against this American act of aggression has spread to all the capitals of the world, including - ironically - Berlin, whid, is thought to be where that act of aggression had its origin. The Congo was a member of the ministerial delegation sent by the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. It is thus on that footing that I am -king this brief statemnt on behalf of my Minister, who is unable to be present. 1 highly esteem and endorse the important contribution8 made by the Foreign MiniSteM who have already Spoken, in particular that of the Foreign niniotw of India, the Chairman of that delegation. When a decision as important as that regarding a draft resolution befor the ~eourity Council cannot be taken, for various reasons - often even valid onea - there is always the greet rick that we are deprived of the ways and Eeans that could lead to action and generate hope. That applies to certain basic provisions that, had the wet recent draft resolution been adopted, could have enabled the United NetiOnS, itS %ctetaryCeneral or the Secutity Council to play a role comensurate with the Wenta and the crieie that had justified it.3 being seized of the Batter- That role, if it did not manage to facilitate dialogue between the parties concerned, could at least have encouraged a recourse to the peaceful means of S@ttling disputes in which the international order abounds. The failure to take any measure of that kind could enable those who are must determined to smkw Uod of (Mr. Adouki, consa) armed vir?hnue to regard what we might describe am the Organisation’8 anae8thetioed 8tate as a tribute to their policy. Yet it wuld appaar tn be of the greatest importance to international pace and 68ourity not to encourage , even by abstension or uniasion, the devekyaent of a right to have recourm to such violence , inoluding on the pretext of selfdefence. Over the course of history, many large conflicts have broken out triggered solely by unilateral decisions taken on the basis of what we can only call a free interpretation of collective provisions. Thus, we muet stress the IniportanCe in this case of preventive diplomacy. Had the Security Council made It its duty to analyse a universally condemned phenomenon such as terrorism in order to derive from it all the consequences affecting the relationship between that phenomenon and questions of peace and security throughout the world, it would certainly have been doing something useful. Having oaid that, the Congo would lay stress upon the problems caused by certain action6 - however well meant -’ by certain Powers, with the avowed intent of battling terrori6m. We have no doubt that the international community could easily circumscribe and limit the effects of this phenomenon: on this issue the General Assembly has already taken a consensus position by the adoption of its resolution 40/61. Members will recall that the General Aseembly refers there t0 measures to prevent tnternational terrorism which endanger6 or takes innocent human livee or jeopardizee fundamental freedoms and study of the underlying causes of those forms Of torroriem and acts of violence which lie in misery, Eruetration, grievance and deepatr and which cause 6ome people to sacrifice human lives including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes. That is the crux of the problem. With the clear determination to meet grievances, not create new onee, thio Organization can take the matter out of the hand6 of States or individuals dangarouely determined to make violence and the use of force a norm of conduct in international affairs. Thie LB an appeal for reaeon and maderation , and for the broadest possible co-operation, excluding no one, for the good of the international community. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Frenoh)r There are no further apeakere on my list. The representative of the United Statee has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I call upon him now. Mr. WALTERS (United States of America) t I do not wish to signify the personal insults of my Government leaders by the Cuban Foreign Minister, The colllparieon with Hitlerism is disgusting. Hundreda of thousands of Americans lost their lives fighting Hitler. He does not even know what Hitlerism is. My country has received more than 1 million refugees fleeing from the terror and repression of his country: 10 per cent of the population has fled the terror and repression of his Government, and he presumes to come here and give us lessons about what is terrorism and what is not terrorism. We have just heard the statements of members of a delegation who participated in the Ministerial-level Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement Of Non-Aligned Countries held in Delhi last week. I wish to recall that the ‘non-aligned” iseued a communiqu& on 15 April which attacked the United States for all manner of wrongs, inciuding a “dastardly, blatant and unprovoked act of aggreseionm (S/17996, annex, pate. 1) against Libya. Non-aligned alignment against the United States is not new, but rarely is it ae brazen as it has been in this Chamber this afternoon. A great conflict has been raging Between Iran and fraa for six years; not one word Of this appears in the non-aligned communiau8. They are talking about numbers of people infinitely smaller. why? why is there such ~sy unanimimity in attacking the United States and nothing to describe a great war which ie raging and costing thousands of lives? But perhaps this la non-alignment; I do not know. Three days ago, the United States, joined by several other members of this Council, voted against a Similarly flawed document which unjustifiably condemned United Statea action in Libya. They should know that my country is deeply (Hr. Walters, United States) indignant and will not forget thie totally one-sided view of these recent events. I repe8Ca Flow many Ameticanm must die before we will be recoglniaed as having the dght to take eaea action? I ask myself in reading those two docuaante whether their author6 really meant to confuae tha criminal with the victim, and whether they are fully aware of the iqtioatiana of their ahergea. I am chocked that neither document took any account of Libyan terrorha, which hae been repeatedly and anply denmnatrated before the entire world. The Governments of the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany have both aoknowledged that they are in poaseaaion of irrefutable evidence Of Libyan mlicity in thie dastardly crime in Berlin. Did they refer to Colonel Qaddafi’e nwrou8 threats against the United States, including a call for u&r sn 100 ftanta? A# I aaid in this Chamber on 15 April, *It ia hypa6tiay to equate the anwer to terroriam with terrorism8 it 16 equating ortae with those who fight crime’. (S/W.2674, p. 19) In the face of repeste% act6 of violence againet American citizens and after exoroidng great restraint, the United states reacted to intolerable aotione by Libya. A8 President Reagan eaid last week, to have remained passive in the face of Liwa’a terrorist attadtr auoh as the Berlin bombing would have only encouraged mre tarroria in the future. It ham been aatonirhing for ms to hear my country denounced before this Counail by some countries which have saught and received aceive co-operation from @Aa United stater in dosling with their owa problems involving terrorism and which haor R++J ghaek CC+ c_rri% ox,neo +rco .k--am1v.aa 6.x A--l -461. t)?=t -*nhl-- -__-.-L--_-- -- --_- “__.. c-----.... There i8 another charge which I have hear8 during this debate and with which 1 wieh to take isme. It has been said by a number of speakers that the United States action in Libya was condemnable because a big country attacked a small (Hr. Waltece, United States) aountry. The ceferancee to the size of the two countries may be true, but that was the only l lawnt of truth in those aooueatL.ns. I would aak those who have told us what they maw in Tripoli: Did you see the carnage of men, women and children at Vienna and m aitpocts? Did you 8ee those killed and wounded in Berlin? Colonel Qaddsfi’cl agent8 have left a trail of broken and blasted bodies from Beirut to Berlin. Some choose never GO mention these. I wonder why. Referenoee to the size of a nation ace irrelevant. What is relevant ace the tight8 of nations large OK small, the rights which ace ceoognized in international law and the United Natione Charter. Article 51 of the Charter specifically recognise8 the right at issue in this debater the right of self-defence by Member States: the right to defend themselves and their citizen& Talk about size roisses the point regarding terrorism. In the nethec.wocld of taceoci8sa, unfortunately, death comes in small paokages. For example, the explomivem found in a euitoase at Heathrow Airport last Thursday weighed lees than 10 poundo. They would have been powerful enough to destroy an entire passenger 8Ocoplane and all ite innooent passenger8 and crew, who numbered over 300. The explosive which damaged the Tram-World Airways (TWA) passenger pXane on 2 April is klieved by experts to have weighed lees than one pound. Yet its force was strong enough to have ripped a hole in the eide of the plane, caused the death of four parosngoce - one of them a baby, f might add - and endangered the lives of the tathere on board. The weapons of choice intended for the United State6 Officers Club in Ankera last Friday were hand grenades. They could have taken a heavy toll of Aamioan and Turkish lives if the attempt had not been foiled by the Turkish l uthorities. And in the most tragic incidents , one American and two British hortagea weee shot in the head and kiLled in Lebanon, while another American, a -Ubec of the United Statee Embassy in Khartoum, lies in serious condition in a hospital fr-om a terrorist’s bullet. 04~. Walters, United States) It doem not take advanced technology or the resources of a large country to * opted dortrwtion in civilised society. Terrorism can be attemptti by any mall gmup of determined, fanatical and, I should add, demented individuals. It is an ~V~JI greator danger if it is backed by a State, such as Libya, in flagrant violation of Article 2 (4) of the Chaeter. (Mr. Waltere, United States) I ehauld like to make another point. Many speakers have drawn attention to the civilian casualties in Libya. These oaaualtiea were indeed regrettable; but it is important to remember that they were the result of a legitimate United States response to repeated past and planned acts of terrorism by Libya in violation of the Charter. It is also a fact that civilian targets were avoided to the maximum extent possible. That was not the case with the terrorist incidents I have already mentioned. The issues before the Council are not the size of States or civilian caaualtiee. The chief issue remains the scourge of terrorism and how civilized nations can deal with it. Never once has Libya been named. Have the European countries pointed at Libya without proof? Fourteen Libyan *diplomatea have been expelled from European countries in the last couple of years for *criminal acts’. I wonder how many of the non-aligned noticed that. On the subject of statements which have been made by earlier speakers in this debate, I cannot fail to raise my personal objections to a particular comment made by the Libyan representative laet Monday. He said that the united States actions in Libya were action6 -against the entire Arab nation”. Such an accusation is patently untrue and amounta to slander against the Amerfcan people. It is untrue became the United States maintains close and valued relations with meet of the countries of the Arab world. As President Reagan said yesterday: *Let no one mistake this for a conflict between Western democracies and the Arab world. Those who condone making war by covardly attacks on unarmed third parties, including wemen and children, are but a tiny minority. We hope and pray the Arab world will join us to eliminate this scourge of terrorism”. The Libyan representative’s remarks were slanderous against my country because the United States Pa, as we all know, a country made up of peoples of many different (Wt. Walterc, United Skter) l thniu origin& including people fram the Arab world. Arab4bmriaaaw are a full part of our American society. They valua their tie8 with tha Aerb world, and thy ara an l mential olewent of &merican-Arab cultural exchange. They ahara with other Auriuana our horror over the riae of terroriu and support afforta to cmbat it. Allow we to make one firnaY point. fn the laat fsw day& a number of countciao, including eapeuially countrier in Europe, have taken actionm which undermore their concern about Libyan terrorism. There wtiona hava included maeurea to reatriot the personnel aRd aativitier of Libyan People.8 BWWJI) and other measure@ to control and monitor thm Ravemat of both official and non-official Libyana. The United Stat88 walccaea theme roticmo as part of the reaponore which free eocietie@ need to protrot themaelveo. we al80 rnrsoW Indian Prime nlnister Rajiv Gandhi’s danunciation at the rum-alignad riniatarialwating of ‘all aorta of tarrorirt aativitiea, whether by indiVidU818 or by a State’. We hope that the wider international community will aoma to a similar l ppreoiation of tha dangar that tarroriam poser ko the l ntira intarnatimal oarrrrnity anB will adopt the neaeaury aeasurea to respond to that danger. Ua tmgm that thaw ~)aaurea will ba built upon end axpan&d in the futuoa ao that the fight agaiaet Libyan terrorian will one a8y becm effecttw and enaura kbe ufaty af our aitinene and societies. The United $tatee, for its part, will not ahrink frtm tha etruggle against terrorism and those who practi6e it against urn. The PRESfCBNF (interpretation from Prenuh): The reprewntrtive of the Libyan Arab Jehiriya wisher to mpsak in exerei@e of the right of reply, and f n@w call on him. Mr. TREIKI (Libyan Arab Jauuhiriya) (inteqxatation from Arab&)8 I da not have very much to add to what has been @aid by the Miniates for Brtecnsl Affaira of India, the head of the non-align4 delegation# or by thm Federa& (MC. Tceiki, Libyan Arab Jamahic iya) Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia, the Poceign Minister of Cuba, and the representatives of Congo and Ghana , the other mambece of the delegation. All of them have, with great clarity, described what they saw ae a result of the crimes committed by United States imperialism. They described the effects of the crimes ccmmitted by the new Hitler. On behalf of amce than 100 countries, indeed on behalf of the entice world, they condemned the wanton, barbaric, imperialistic aggression committed by the United States, by the leader of international terror iem. As the Poceign Minister of Cuba said, Reagan is the leader of the largest terrorist gang in the world. I do not want to add anything to what he said. I must say - and I apologize to the United States representative - that if I were in his shoes I too would feel that I was in a very embaccaesing position. It it9 particularly difficult to defend as serious a ocime as the one committed by the United States against the Libyan Arab Jamahiciya. And, by the way, the United Stetee hae committed crimes against other small countries, beginning with Viet #a~ and going on to Nicaragua, and against the Palestinian people and the Cuban people. The United States choee to perpetrate its aggression against the Libyan perrple on the very anniveceacy of its attempt to invade Cuba - what.ia known as the imperialistic attack on Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. That crime could be repeated at any time. The United States representative spoke about teccocism. He dose not aeem to be aware that true terrorism has been practised by his country againet small countries. I should like to ask the United States representative thist On behalf of whom and of what clvilization were hundcede of thouaandrt of Vietnamese killed7 On behalf of whom and of what civilizatlon ace Palestinians now being killed7 The United States representative spoke about his Cguntcy’s friendship with the Arabs. But I must eay that that is untrue. I would defy any Arab to come here and say that the United States is a friend of the Arabs. with whooe weapons were the (Mr. Treiki, Libyan Arab Jamahir iya) children of Egypt killed? With whose weapon8 were the children of Lebanon and Syria killed? With whose support are Palestinians being killed? What kind of friendship is that? Who is helping Israel? Who is encouraging occupation? I would defy the United States representative here to state that his country in againet the annexation of Jerusalem. I defy him to express condemnation of the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem. I defy him to do that in the Council. On behalf of whom are Palestinians being killed? What kind of friendship is being referred to here? There is no friendship between the Arabs and the United States. For the United States is Israel, and Israel ie the United States. The United States is and will continue to be enemy Wo. 1 of the Arab nation. of course, when I say *the United Statee’, I mean the United States Administration, not the Amerioan people. The American people are viotims of these misguided terrorist policiee. The releti-- exiefting between the Zionist entity and the United Statee are even closer than those existing between any other State and Washington. The united States spends a great deal of money on Israeli aggression. Indeed, it spends more on supporting Israeli citiaens than it spends on American citizens in Alaska and Wawaii. An 16raeli newepeper, Aa*aratz, published the following on 18 April: ‘Shortly after the aggression against Libya, Israel received detailed reports abut that operation. These reports were distributed tnstantaneousPy and simultaneously in Israel and the united States, through military channels, For its part, Israel provided the United States with ultra-secret information about the eituation in Libya after the operation, particularly in regard to the extent of the damage caused in the place where Qaddafi wac. (Mr. Treiki, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) In the near future there will be a joint investigation into the tenults of the attack, including a detailed study of the weapons and means of comunication used and details of the operation.” That, then, is the nature of the friendship between the United States and Israel. A few days ago I heard the American President say that the United States wanted to be respected, not to be loved. I say to him that respect cannot be imposed by force. men Hitler occupied Europe he was not respected. He was not respected when he tried to impose his Nazi regime on Europe, for there is a limit to arrogance and force. Although we are a small country, we have a long history, and w would refer him to the year 1868, when the United States invasion of Libya ended with the destruction of the American fleet. Is he unawsre of the words to the United States Marines hymn, *From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli’? The Libyan people will defend its homelands it will defend its territory with all ite might. Neither aggression nor the means used will intimidate us, for we are determined to aefena our country. Notwithstanding the decisicn of the Council, the United Stat+3 terrorist Administration is now repeating that it may commit a further act of aggression. Indeed, it is now ColLaborating with Israel in its preparation. We warn the Council of the dangers of such an operation. Finally, we praise the position adopted by the international community, which has condemned the American Administzation. It is causing the American Administration to lose face and is placing it in an embarrassing position. ma we want peace. However, no one should underestimate our strength. We are not weak. I wish to tell the United States representative that, if and when necessary, we are determined to fight. The PReSIUENT (interpretation fran French): I call now on the representative of the United Kingdom, who wishes to speak in exercise of the right of reply. Sir JOHN TIPDMSON (United Kingdom): My delegation’s position was set out at some length and in a reflective way when we discussed this question on 17 April. I do not want to add to or change what I said then, but xe ought to reflect on one oc two of the statements we have heard this afternoon, sac of which were directed at my Qovernmant. Many, however, were directed not at my GovecNaent but at the Security Council as a whole. We heard frequently this afternoon that the Council had failed. The accusers of the Council ace five members of the Non-Aligned Movement, and it is a SeCiOUS charge that they made. But we should stop and consider whether it takes account of all the evidence, whether it is balanced, whether, in fact, it is also helpful in the present deliuate international situation. The five members of the team that visited Tripoli and have now spoken here seem to have been very much influenced by what they saw in Tripoli and by their conversation with Colonel Qaddafi, and they seem, if I understand them correctly, to have assured Colonel Qaddafi that he has the total support of the Non-Aligned Movement. But I did not gather from their statements this afternoon that they had considered all the evi&nce. At any rate, they did not say so. For example, although some fairly harrowing details were mentioned, there was no reference to the baby Dlwn out of the ‘LWA aircraft. There was no reference to the dead and wounded in the Berlin discotheque. There was no reference to the Xhnitted attaCk by the Govec~nt of Libya on &e Italian island of Lampeluea - admitted. There was no reference to the plan - that was foiled, fortunately - to bomb the queue of people seeking viea~ in Paris to visit the United States. There w&s no reference to the carnage at the airports in Rome and Vienna. There was no (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) reference to the murder two years ago in -don of policewoman Yvonne Fletcher, shot from the window of the Libyan People’s Bureau. Somebody was asking whether there was any evidence of any Libyan terrorism. There was no reference to the murder at the end of last ,.Aek of Mr. Douglas and Mr. Padfield, whose bodies were found near Beirut with a note attached to them. There was no reference to many other things, despicable acts of that sort, whicn have built up a long history. It is surprising, then, that there was a reference in the NowAligned Movement CO-Unic& and in the statements we heard today to “unprovoked” acts. Well, I do not know how far one has to go to provoke, but certainly it seems to me that the statements that YB have heard repeatedly that violence breeds violence have a truth in them. But where did the violence begin? The five uho spoke this afternoon and who went to Tripoli appeared to me, at least to juage frcm what they eaia, not to have listened to, not to have read, Colonel Qaddafi’s own statements on the record, supporting State-directed terrorism, inter alia against my country. They did not tell us that in their conversations with Colonel Qaddafi they expressed not only solidarity with Libya but abhorrence of any Libyan-directed terrorism. The Non-Aligned Movement commends great respect, but respect can be maintained only if there is respect for the evidence, respect for the truth- (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) I would very much hope that the five members of the team that went to Tripoli, and who have spoken this afternoon , can assure us that they brought homs to Colonel Qaddafi the position taken unanimusly by the Security Council in October last Year and again in Lkcember, and the position taken by the General Assembly at the fortieth session, on 9 December. These were important statements; they have entered into the corpus of international principle and law. The Security Council statements were adopted by all metiers of the Council. There was no dissent from the General Assembly resolution. These therefore represent the views and the conscience of the international ccmmunity as a whole. And, as I say, I hope that perhaps we can be assured that they were brought clearly to Colonel Qaddafi’a attention, as they need to be brought to the attention of other6 who are contemplating state-directed terrOriS& Reference has been made to the draft resolution voted on in this Council earlier this week. That resolution did not mention Libya. I do not believe that in refusing to accept such a resolution the Security Council, which followed its constitutional procedures, acted foolishly or unfairly. Surely the omission - among other considerations, but this alone was enough - of any reference to the long history of State-directed provocation5 , State-directed terrorism, was enough to justify the Council in deciding not to adopt the draft resolution. I can well understand, in the excitement of the moment - the news coming in in New Delhi, a huge meeting of Foreign Ministers and other very distinguished people - the sort of emotion that sweeps a group of that sort. All want to come together ; none dare express an Individual dissenting opinion. But, having got over the heat of the moment, one really needs to wonder whether the action has discouraged or encouraged State-directed terrorism. It ie a question we should all ponder. (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) Por my own part, my delegation rather doubts whether Colonel Qaddafi and others who sponsor terrorism will cease , unless it is brought home to them by the members of their own movement, by the members of their own communities, by their friends, by the international comaunity as a whole that the internatioi;al community does regard State-directed terrorism as criminal, as we said in our Security Council and General Assembly resolutions; that we really do mean it when we say we condemn terrorism in all its forms, wherever and by whomever committed. Even if it does not stop Colonel Qaddafi, I am sure it will help if members of the Non-Aligned Moveme:& will remind him that when they supported the General Assembly resolution they meant it. Perhaps they could remind him in particular of the first operative paragraph, which unequivocally condemns as criminal ‘all acts, methods and practices of terrorism wherever and by whomever ccnnmitted, including those which jeopardise friendly relations among States and their security “. (General Assembly resolution 40/61, para. 1) Very precise and relevant words. That resolution goes on to aall upon all States ‘to fulfil their obligations under international law and to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in other states, OL S~UfeSCing in ScffVftieS within their terrf-ry directed towards the aomission of such actLim. (Pare. 61 That is what needs to be brought hame. Those are our principles. Those are the principles the whole international community has accepted. we must act on them. f noted that the Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia said, if I recall correctly, that the u^L.,I--a Y------L .A-- --ear-a. AL- .--- -c c-e-- “-----it-r- ^C .A.lA-. ..“.,--..j.*~:u I-~“ciyl‘z.lI. “YD salj”..‘rrG. “Isi O&E VC L”&bC ra)joru*so.Q v. “..LI*. country is carrying it. out*. That is a good sentiment, a true position of the non-aligned which my delegation greatly respects. Those who hold it have a responnibility to bring this home to the people who sponsor ter for inm. (Sir John Thomson, urc i ted Kingdom) There is no one here who denies that terrorism, and indeed state-directed terrorism, has taken place - no one. The Ron-Aligned ?&vement has a responsibility to its metiers. That respoueibility is not restricted to expressing solidarity With them because they are members of the Ron-Aligned Movement. It includes bringing home to them the damage they do to the Non-Aligned Movement, and indeed to the whole international communi~, when they contravene the principles which the whole international cammunity has accepted and on which it must act. The PRESIDRHT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is Mr. Clovis Eilaksoud, Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States to the united Nations, to whom the Council extended an invitation at its 2675th meeting under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. I invite Mr. Maksoud to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. I certainly do not wish to restrict his right to speak, when we are all so aysare of his rhetorical talents. I will not look at the clock too often. We shall certainly be pleased to hear hime Mr. MAKsouD: I had no intention of making a further statement to the Sscurity Council today. Bwever, I find thnt in this debate it is as if we were living in two wor Ids. We are still in the habit of talking at each other instead of to each other. The rupture in the dialogue, perhaps interrupted by the incidents of violence, has exacerbated the dimension of rhetoric, and that is why I feel it necessary et this moment to bring back, in a reflective way, certain fundamental realities that cannot escape the deliberations of this Council. (Mr. Maksoud) But before I do that I should like, on behalf of the Arab Stbtes, to express our deep appreciation to the non-aligned delegation and their foreign ministers who have come long distances to express a studied position and not a position resulting from being swept away by the emotions of the moment. The non-aligned countries that met in New Delhi represent a deep-rooted civilisation and they are often inhibited in expressing emotiona. Their policies age txoatly studied and not hurried. Non-,tlignment is not an equidistant position between what is right and what is wrong. Non-alignment is an alignment with the forces of psace, progress and human liberation. That is why the argumentative natUze of the response to the non-aligned ministers did not t&e into coneideratim the inherent wisdom of their considered policies. I want to pit this on record because there is surreptiously a remaining hierarchical attitude taken in many instances by some of our Western friends , especially in tiQ united states and the Unitd Kiwdom, that la, that material or historical power gives them a certain inalienable right to establish at times a political or an intellectual hegemony whereby their own definitions and terms of-reference constitute the yardstick by which all behaviour should be measured and judged. I think that when we hear the response8 of the representative8 of the United State8 and the United Kingdom we note a measure of condeecension, and that is why in my first statement I said that we seem to be in two different uorlde. Therefore, I feel that it is mecessary to bring back, perhaps as this debate is closing, the elements of the debate. This is not a debate on terrorism. All the Arab States condemn terrorism and have participated in the unanimous General Assembly resolution on terrorism. We take United Nations resolutions Seriously because we feel that the third world in general, as well as the lmole world, are the ultimate beneficiaries of these (Mr. Maksoud) resolutions. we ace in the forefront of the commitment and dedication to the iWlementation of all United Nations reaolutione, including the one on terrorism. But that was not the issue that led the non-aligned countries to take a position on the violation of the territorial integrity of an independent State. That was the issue and that was the focus. This debate took place because of that, for we must a8sume that all the Arab States, including Libya, condemn all acts of State, as well as individual, terrorism. Terrorism, as I said in my earlier statement, is an explosion of frustration; it is an abdication of hopes it is an act of desperation. we & not believe in it, despite the immoral, indiscriminate consequence5 on civilian and innocent targets. We believe in the inevitability of the victory of freedom. me believe in the ultimate dismantling of all occupation. We believe in the ultimate realization of international equality. Therefore, we are optimists, despite the temporary disarray in which we might find ourselves. It is because of this that I hope we shall awaken to a moment of history and treat eeriously the pronouncementa of the non-aligned countries, which, it is hoped will lead to the revitalisation of this moment, given the constructive role the Non-Aligned Movement can play in bridging the gaps and in restoring sobriety to dialogue, in bringing back the rationality that has long eluded ue. As far as we ace concerned, we shall take pact in any international conference the united Nations might aall for combating all forms of terrorism. We hope that this would aleo stimulate those who have been reluctanh tb participate in an international conference to deal with all the violence that has emerged in the countries of the Midale East as a conoeQuence of the denial of Palestinian rights and of the continued occu@ation of Arab territories. We hops that this would bring about a defusicn of the level of violence that render G certain individual8 hopeless and, in their hopelessness , unaccountable for their behaviour. Give ecbtiety the implements to bring about a just peace and then we shall totally isolate not only the terrorists but also the sources of desperation. The PRESXDENT (interpretation from French): I have already indicated that there ace no further speakers foor this meeting. The next meeting of the Security Council to continue consideration of the item on its agenda will be fixed in consultation with the members of the Council. The meeting rose at 6 p.m.