S/PV.310 Security Council

According to rule 33 of the rules of procedm:e, aU questions regarding the suspension or the adjournment of a meeting mustbe given precedence and must be decided without debate. . 1shall, therefore, put to the vote the proposal of the. representative of Argentina, wmch is contrary to that of the President, in that it suggests that we should adjourn until Tuesday instead of until this afternoon. The proposaI was rejected by 10 votes to J.

We shaU meet again àt 2.30 p.m. THREE HUNDRED AND TENTH MEETING H eld at Lake SuccessJ New Y orkJ on SaturdaYJ 29 May 1948J at 2.30 p.m. President: MI'. A. PARODI (France). Present: The representatives of the following countries: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, Ukra~an Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Re- publics, United Kingdom, United States of America. The agenda waf that of the 309th meetingJ document S/Agenda 309. 96. Continuation of the discussion on the Palestine question The PRÈSIDENT (translated from French): Before calling on the Syrian representative to speak, 1 shol1ld like to bring to your notice this telegram from the Chairman of the Truce Com- mission [document S/800J: ."Jerusalem 29 May 1948 "Last night at 1800 hours (Palestine time) the Jewish quarter of the Dld Citysurrendered unconditionally. The men were taken prisoners of war and the women and children were evacu- ated to the Katamon quarter by the Internatiqnal Red Cross. This evacuation involving about one "Jean NmUWENHUYS "Chairman of the Security Council Truce Commission." 1 also recel.ved the following telegram from the French Consul: "The Arabs, who are on the City wa1ls, are now firing on our Consulate with armour-pierc- ing steel-cored bullets which the sandbags which have so far protected us fail ta stop." 1 should very much like ta avoid calling any meetings for Monday, which is a holiday, for tomorrow or for this evening after dinner. This does not depend on me, however, and 1 can only remind you of the need to' come, if possible today, to a decision on the various resolutions before the Counéil. Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): As sorne cable- grams have already been read by the President just now, 1 wish to take the occasion ta read one which 1 have just received, and which is signed by His Majesty King Abdullah. It reads as fol- lows:, "Big synagogue was u.sed as an aggressive fortress from which shooting took place on Old City, Christian Holy Places, the Dome and Great Mosque. Œc1 City is clear of the Haganah and others at present, and now Holy Places of all com- munities are safe." This cablegram was dated today at 10 a.m. The representative of the USSR charged cer- tain members of the Security Council this mom- ing [309th meetingJ with responsibility for im- peding the work of the Security Council. He mentioned Syria as one of these States, and he' aIso mentioned Argentina, Belgium, Canada and others. In that connexion, 1 may be permitted to say that these States, especially the small or medium-sized ones, are not in a position to destroy or impede the functioning of the &ecurity Council. We have never been accused of any such action. Everyone knows which State it is that has continually been accused of obstructing the work of the Security Council and making it less effective in the performance qf its duties. The representative of the USSR also referred to the attitude taken in the past by his delega- tion towards the Arabs of the Near East, .and he cited the attitude of his 'delegation in connexion with the case against the United Kingdom which ~gypt brought before the Security Co~cil. It 18 true that the attitude of the USSR in that casé was one of support for the Egyptian demands. A similar position was taken by the USSR in con- The representative of the USSR saidthat his Government had helped the Egyptians to get rid of Egypt's guest's-that is, of the United Kingdom forces. But now, in the case of Pales- tine, we are surprised to see that the position of the USSR is completely reversed: although it helped the Egyptians to get rid of their gue~ts, it is not helping the Palestinians against their guests. Just the contrary is true. Since the beginning of the discussion of this matter in the United Na- tions, the USSR has been supporting the gueSts and trying to strengthen them. It has been trying to give those guests rights not only equal to those of the owners of the country, but actually sur- passing the rights of the' owners; it has been try- h,g to give the guests a favoured position and greater privile~es in the country of their hosts. From these facts we may conclude that the attitude of the USSR in the other cases was taken not out of love for the Arabs, but perhaps out of hatred for the guests. We therefore can- not accept that attitude as béing altogether sin- cere. It seems that the USSR had other reasons for standing firm against its rivais; its attitude was taken not with a view to protecting weak peoples, but in order tQ diminish the authority of its rivals. Such a motivation would certairlly diminish our gratitude in that regard. The representative of.the USSR said that those who are not willing now to adopt stern measures and drastic actions against the Arabs will be j aggravating the situation and helping to bring about further bloodshed. 1 contest that nption; 1 say that just the contrary is true. There are now tV/o theories in the Security Council: one group of members favours drastic measures under Chapter VII of the Charter; another favours peaceful measures. 1 am sure that the drastic measures advocated by the USSR and the United States do not provide a good way ta attain peace, security, law and order in Palestine. On the contrary, they aggravate the situation and make it worse from day to day. The other ap- proach which is now upheld by certain members of the Secrrity Council-the approach involving peaceful raeasures-'is the correct way to reach a satisfactory solution and one which will serve the interests of both commlmities in Palestine. The situation in Palestine cannat be considered an international situation as long as there arè no opposing States fighting each other. It could be consideredan international situation o~y under 'one of t'Wo conditions. If the Jewish status in Palestine were determined to be that of aState entitled to assume the prerogatives of an inde- pendent State, then the matterinvolVÎI\~ the Jews and the Arab States would be an interna- tional matter. The second case in which it could he caIled international would be if the. United States, or any other State, decided to wage war with the Arab States. Then the situation would reaIly become international. In that case the State which wouId be thTeatening internacional peace would be that State which tried to wage war in Palestine, and not the Arabs. .;:: . The international status of Palestine should have been examined. 1 do not understand how we can deal with this situation, which is an inter- national one according ta the claims of the rep- resentative of the United States, without deteIDllining the international status of Palestine. This is a point which is essential for' our discus- sion. We cannot overlook and by-pass it, and !hen adopt decisions that it is an international dispute which threatens international peace and security. This point has been raised severa! times by ni)::.~1f and by other members of the Security. Council. It was submitted in.the form of a proposal by the United Kingdom, included in the first paragraph of their last proposai [document . 8/755], and was supported by six members of the Security Council. This number is, in fact, ~ simple majority, but it is not the majority re- quired by the Security Qouncil. . This indicates that those who hold this view and support such a proposal are in doubt concern- ing the international status of Palestine. If there is such doubt, is it not time to refer this question to the T,::ternational Court of Justice? It is clearly sraœd in the Charter that, when there are ques- tions concerning legal aspects of a matter, the opinion of the International Court of Justice should be requested. Wehave constituted the Court for just such matters. If the Court is not to be referred to in such an important case as that of Palestine, with aIl its complications and Unfortunately, the sponsors and supporters of the partition plan have arrived at a determination without investigation. They did not care or wish to study this matter any further. Why was that so? The representative of the USSR, in his state~ ment this morning, stressed the point that the Jewish State in Palestine was created in accord- ance with the General Assembly's resolution of November last.4 He has repeated that a number of times, and l aIso have repeated, in response to these statements, that the resolution of the Gen- eral Assembly was a recommendation which could not create new rights for anybody. The General Assembly, at its second special session, adopted a resolution5 which abandoned the original resolution by calling for the dismissal of the United Nations Palestine Commission, which had been formed to implement the original resolution. The same trend was indicated when, in the General Assembly, the representative of Australia submitted a draft resolution to be voted upon providing for the United Nations Palestine Commission to proceed with the implementa- tion of the resolution, but did not dare to have it put te the vote. When the representative of Cuba requested that it should be put to the vote in order to determine the opinions of the dele- gations, the representative of Australia, along with the other supporters of the partition plan, agreed to withdraw this draft resolution. They did not dare te put it to the vote. They saw that the General ASsembly, by a vote of thirty-two to seven, adopted a resolution calling for the dis- missal of the United Nations Palestine Commis- sion, which Commission had been charged with the implementation of the partition plan. From this it would appear that the General Asseinbly did not intend to support its original resolution; on the contrary, in its resolution of 14 May, it stater! tuat the Mediator should promote a peace- fui adjustment of the future situation in Palestine. C Ibid., Resolutions, No. 181 (II), page 131. We have explained several times that Pales- tine is our country-is Arab territory. From the bèginning it was never separated from Syria; it had always been a Syrian province. Subsequent to the First World War it was separated by force for imperialistic purposes in order to establish the Mandate and divide the Near East into zones of influence. When the Mandate was terminated, the peC'.. pIe of Palestine automatically became independ- ent and free to determine their fate and choose their own form of govemment. The people of Palestine never wanted ta be separated from Syria. They never made such a request. They opposed and protested and revolted against the separation. However, the separation was aè- complished by force. It was understood that when this force was removed, the liberty and freedom of the people of Palestine would return. If Palestine is not ours, then whose is it? Is it the possession of the United States or of the USSR? Certainly not. Suppose I agree, for the sake of argument, that it is neither our territory nor your territory. Whose territory would it be? 1t would be the ter- ritory of its inhabitants. The inhabitants of Palestine may define and determine their fate in the way they wish. The majority of those in- habitants invited Syria and the other Arab States to come to their assistance in order to facilitate their task of self-determination. As 1 have said, the inhabitants-Arabs, Jews, Christians, Mas- lems and members of all sects-are the awners of the country. We do not close our eyes and blind ourselves ta the facts of the actual situation in Palestine. We agree .that there exists there now a certain state of affairs which ought ta be con- sidered. . Suppose we leave aside for the moment aIl the le~al and historical aspects of the case and deal ~lth .the matter on the basis of the present situa- tIon m Palestine. We have there the Arabs, the Jews and the Christians: the three big religions of ~e world.We are ready ta recognize aIl the legltl1nate aspirations and rights of the Jews, Christians, Moslems and aIl minorities. We are ready to accept them. Wt; have made several offers and proposaIs with a view to the solution of this problem, but none of these has been ac- We made another offer, saying: Let us frame a constitution for Palestine on the same basis as the constitution of the United States of America, which is now a very good example for all the world. That proposal was aIso rejected. On what basis? Because the Jews did not like it. Then we suggested that Palestine should be organized on the basis of'cantonization after the model of Switzerland, with wide autonomy for the inhabitants of ~ach canton. That also was not accepted. Why? Because the Jews did not like it. The position continu.ed as it wasexcept for the efforts made here in the Security Council to secure a truce. We offered a truce under certain conditions which were adopted by the Truce Commission in Palestine and accepted by the Arabs as a whole. The Security Council then left Ôat proposal and took up another resolu- tion calling for an unconditional truce. This was rejected because the Jews would not accept' it. Is it equitable or right to continue to allow Jewish aspirations and desires to dictate and to impose their will upon the General Assembly, the Security Council, the" various committecs and the world at large, while disregarding alto- gether the wishes of the Arabs?The ArabI: are aIso there. One would suppose that they are in the same position and have the same rights as the Jews. The owner of a house has the same rights as his guests in compiling the luncheon and din- ner menus. Why should consideration be pa1d only to Jewish desires, and why should those desires be forced upon the Arabs who are opposed to them? 1s the Security Council to forc,e the Arabs to capitulate to the desires of the Jews- not ail the Jews of the world, but those of the Zionist Organization? Of course, this could be,done if resort were had to force. As the representative of Lebanon said yesterday, the United States and the USSR are certainly able to suppress any movement or activity of the Arabs without great difficulty. They were able to suppress Hitler's Germany and aIl its formidable power Jf opposition, and the Arabs are virtually unarmed and have. been organizcd for only two or three years. They do not possess the anus necessary for their defence, .sa how can it be imagined that they will stand Suppose, however, that the drastic measures now proposed and so vigorously advocated by the representatives of the Unite'i States and the USSR, are carried out. Those Powers may send forces to Palestine to suppress any Arab activity there, but how long would those forces remain? They might complete their task in a month, at the end of which the Arabs would be silenced. Is it intended that they should then take possession of the country and occupy it forever? Certainly not. It is intended that they should complete their task and then return to their own countries. As soon as they returned home, however, the situation would re-emerge on a scale worse than before. The forces would then have to return to Pl1estine, and might have to continue to do so again and again. The process might take two centuries, just as in the time of the historie Crusades. The solution of the problem cannot be achieved by force. Honesty compels me to give this advice, because'1 know the situation in the Near East as weIl as anyone. 1know the attitude of the Arabs and of the Moslem world in this respect. Is it wise, when we are trying here in the Security Council to restore peace in the world, to create a problem which will mean war continuously with- out end? Is that our job here in the Security Council? It is considered that our task is to secure peace, but what kind of peace? Sorne representa- tives have said peace with justice, not peace with injustice. When peace is based on justice it can be permanent and durable, but peace based on injustice cannot be secure and the trouble goes on forever. provoquera la que quelle précisé: -l'injustice. ~~ 1 qu'elle Representatives never ask the reason for this. The representative of the USSR saiù this morning that things were becoming worse and worse, that the matter had been discussed in the General Assembly for a year now without result, and that it was simply a matter of massacres, bloodshed and destruction. That is true, but what is the cause? The only cause is that resolution of 29 November which he himself. is now upholding. !hat is what precipitated the present situation in Palestine. Rad the problem been dealt with in confàrmity with the Charter of the United Nations, nothing of the kind would have hap- pened. Now those concerned are willing to en- Courage the Zionists to continue their fight raison l'URSS s'aggravait débattue maintenant seulement dévastations. de du défend provoqué Palestine. mément ce Chapter VII of the Charter has no bearing on the present case which, as 1 have said, is not that of an international situation. It is not wise for the Security Council to take such steps to suppress the situation in Palestine by force. The Security Council never asked the Jews-or, rather, the small committee which proclaimed an independ- ent State on 14 May-on what basis the procla- mation was made. If such a question were put to the Jews and they replied, "On the right granted to us by the resolution of the General Assembly", the answer is, "No, the General Assembly does not allow you to take such a step. The·resolution provides stages which depend on the acceptance of YOUT compatriots. The General Assembly it- self abandoned the scheme of November last. Therefore, you cannot proclaim your State on that basis." If the Jews were to say that they proclaimed their State becau~c they occupy the place and administer authority there, and therefore have the right of conquest; they could be tald that that right has no value in the twentieth century and under the Charter of the United Nations. Con- quest does not give that right unless it is built on a solid foundation. The Jews could be told: "You are there as guests, as immigrants coming into that country. It is enough that your hosts tell you that they will deal with you on a basis of complete equality. But you cannot detach one part of the country and declare your sovereignty there." But the Jews were not told that. The procla- mation of their State was taken as a fait ac- compli. Those who recognized the Provisional Government of the Jewish State are now defend- ing that recognition. 1 do not blame them; their Governments recognized that state of affairs in Palestine, and therefore their representatives have to defend the position here. But 1 request them not to try to press recognition of that ProvisionaI Government on the ott'1er members of the Security Council or of the United Nations. Let them be satisfied with having taken the step uncl~r their own freedom and sovereignty. They had a right to do whate\ er they liked, but they should not press their position on other members of the Security Council. 1 consider that each representative on the Security Council has two duties: one is to repre- sent and present the views of his Government; the other is to represent the fifty-eight Members of the United Nations and to speak on their behalf. Article 24 of the Charter states that the Security Cauncil should act on behalf of aIl the Member States. If the representatives of the United States and the USSR are working on be- half of fifty-eight nations, they should not im- We asked that·the matter of Palestine should hé dealt with according to internationallaw and justice. Well, that request has not been granted. We have been tÇ)ld that there is no place for legality here. We are told that there is a fait accompli. Very weIl; we asked for legal justice and we cculd not get it. We shall be satisfied with social justice, justice in equÏtjr. P~estine i-: inhabited by so many people, and the rights of all should be respected. It is impossible for the Jews to live quietly and safely in Palestine as long as they insist on being separated from their neighbours. The representative of Lebanon expressed this point of view very clearly yesterday. In his state- ment, he interpreted the views of all of the Arabs. It will be better for the Jews, for the Arabs, for the United Nations, for the Security Council and for the peace and security of the entire world if the Arabs and the Jews live together in the same country in a spirit of friendship and brotherhood. They are sù intermingled that they cannot be separated. There are no geographical borders hetween them. How can they be so intermingled and yet be economically separated? It cannot be done. It might be possible if they were widely separated from each other, without any relation- ship at all. But that is not the case in Palestine. The population of Palestine is indivisible. Pales- tine is divided into fourteen sub-districts. The Jews have the majority in only one of these sub- districts; that is, the Jaffa-Tel Aviv sub-district. The Jews are in the minority in the other thirteen suh-districts. 1 believe that aIl the delegations here have copies of statistics which were distrib- uted in this respect. If they (jo not, the Secre- tariat can supply them with copies of the statis- tics, which were compiled from official informa- tion of the Palestine Government. treize toutes session été le qui ont été ciels tine. 1 consider that Chapter VII of the Charter has nothing to do \Vith the" present situation in Palestine. The Security Council must deal with t1.is matter on a humanitarian basis. It must stop the bloodshed in Palestme. The solution must not be found in drastic measures but in media- tian. That is the best way for the members of the. n'a Palestine. question sur une base humanitaire. le pas diation. For the above reasons, my delegation cannot vote in favour of the draft proposal submitted by the delegation of the USSR. Ml'. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine) ~ The representative of the United Kingdom criticized my remarks made at the 307th meeting cf the Security Couneil because 1 suggested that the draft resolution [document 8/795] before the Security Council was in many respects inequit- able and discriminatory. We can take resolutions on1y as we find them, and what we have to ex- amine is not the intention of the resolution, but the effects which it would have if it were adopted. It was on the basis of the text as it stood that 1 made those criticisrns, to which 1 still adhere. ln particular 1 drew attention to the third para- graph, relating to an interference in the domestic jurisdiction of the State of Israel in the matter of immigration, and to the fourth paragraph which, 1 suggested-on the basis of the language as it stands-implies a unilateral embargo upon the State of Israel while irnposing no restriction whatsoever upon any one of the States now embarking upon invasion. With regard to the third paragraph, which affects the manpower resources of the parties con- cerned, let us remember that the belligerents are, on the one hand, the State of Israel and, on the other, five Arab States which have acknowledged that their ar.iies are operating outside their frontiers with the airn of destroying the integrity of that State. The manpower resources of the State of Israel are less than one million. The manpower resources of the other belligerents are 30 million. And here. in the third paragraph of this resolu- tion, wc have a provision of which the sole or main effect ~ ta impose manpower restrictions upon the smaller and the defending State. You cannot avoid the charge of discrimination if you do that. Still less can you invoke the Security Council's resolution of 17 April [document 8/723], for the United Kingdom draft resolution now before the Security Council tdocument 8/795/Rev.2] embodies the very principle which was discredited in the discussion of last April, and "Illich was eventu::Illy omitted. Thus the Security Council, under the terrns of that resolution spe- cifically rejected, in sub-paragraph 1(b), any such phrase as "men of military age", or indeed any phrase which. wo~d have affected immigra- In this respect, therefore, the draft resolution now before us seeks to restore the very principle rejected on 17 April. That resolution has had an unfortunate career at the Security Council table; it has so often been invoked without being quoted exactly. Time and time again, it has been suggested that that resolution precluded the es- tablishment of a Jewish State on 15 May, whereas it contains no single word which would have that effect. And now, again, it has been invoked to support a principle in a draft resolu- tion which was deliberately rejected in that prior resolution. In any case, the situation is no longer similar to that prevailing theu, for there now exists the Ïn- dependent Government of Israel with its own sphere of internal jurisdiction. The oruy request which the Security Council should address to t4at State is the request not to commit aggression against its neighbours, and not to act in a man- ner inconsistent with those obligations which all States, whether membez:s of the United Nations or otherwise, have towards the Charter. But the third paragraph of the draft resolution goes beyond those limits because it encroaches upon the domestic jurisdiction of the State of Israel; because it attac.ks that State at the most decisive and significant point of its independence: immigration; because no other State in the whole world would allow its immigration policies to be affected by anyone e1se. For these reasons, as 1 have explained, the State of Israel would feel no inclination to comply with this request. The Security Council, we fervently hope, will not commit itself to any opinion regarding the immigration policies of the State of Israel, or of Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, the United States or the United Kingdom, for we daim no special freedom which is not legitimate as the right of every other State in the world. Once you demand of Israel what you would not delIland of others, and what you would not tol- erate for yourselves, you commit an act of dis- crimination. 1 did not use that word yesterday, but it is legitimate to use it, not-'-I assure the representative of the United Kingdom-in any spirit of invective, but in an effort to explain the viewpoint which 1 am charged to represent as accurately as 1 cano Surely, the representatlve of the United King- dom cannot deny that an element of very great f discrimination does exist in the fourth paragraph of the draft resolution. Five armies march upon the State of Israel, with the avowed aim of over- throwing it, and a resolution is brought in which In respect of that paragraph of the draft reso- lution, even if the balance is theoretically re- dressed by applying the embargo to aIl thé Arab States as well-which 1 presume would be the lea3t that anyone aspiring to equity would do- even then, the ostensible equality would not be appropriate, for it would hit the defender a."1d the aggressor equaIly. It would benefit whoever nas had the most recent opportunity of stock- piling weapons, and it would caIl upon Israel to neglect its defence for four critical weeks. Would the State of Israel be weIl advised to neglect its defence for four weeks? That seems to be the most crucial of aIl questions. Would any State represented here, if threat- ened with invasion by five armies four weeks from now, neglect any measure for strengthen- ing its defences? Supposing that the United King- dom had the mcst solid reason for believing that five armies would march against it at the end of four weeks. Would they listen ta any appeal from . anybody to give up anY chance of improving their defence? Would they take that responsibil- ity? Would their people let the~ take it? If they would say "ye.s" to that question, in the certain prospect of an imminent invasion, they would be able effectively to influence our attitude towards this paragraph or to a possible amendment. But, of course, nobody could give that advice, and nobody who cannot guarantee that Israel will not he invaded again four weeks from now, car. ask Israel not to use those four weeks for the improve- , ment of its defence. With regard to the task of the Mediator, 1 should like to do nothing whatever to embarrass him at aIl. 1 described him as being, within the terms of the United Kingdom draft résolution, a "one-man General Assembly", and, 1 think, quite accurately, because under the terms of this draft resolution he is given the very task which the United Kingdom conferred upon the General Assembly 'last AprH, namely, that of making recommendations about an eventual settlement of the Palestine problem. 1 believe that we should do the Mediator a very great service if, on the contrary, we removed his functions completely from the heat of the political conflict and invited his exclusive initiative to those. high purposes of 1 think that it would be better to follow the aclvice of the representative of the United King- dom and not plunge further into history. 1 did sa yesterday only because we had before us, in his speech, a historical record which gave no hint- no hint at all-of what the most salient and important feature of this problem of_ world security is, namely, the invasion of Palestine by five armies from the outside. If you read that speech, you will get no impression that {ive armies have converged upon Palestine. 1 do not think any historian would regard an omission of that sort as adequately objective. We understand that the approach of this reso- lution may be affected by the solidarities of an alliance and special interests, but what we can- not unclerstand is why any member not. entangled by a special interest should support this resolution. The Govel:'Ilment of Israel fervently hopes that Belgium, whose relations with the Jewish people have been unclouded by any shadow, and to which tbg -Jewish people are bound by sa m~ny tie.sofrecent suffering, would not wish its first act towards the State of Israel to consist of denying arms in the very period when invasion is threatened. No State that knows what invasion means-and Belgium and China know what invasion means-eould ask an invaded peo- ple to let itself be thus exposed. The Government of Israel hopes that Canada, which took the leading responsibility for the creation of the State of Israel, will not support any measure-that is aIl, will not support any measure-which weak- ens the integrity of that State, or pUts any un- chivalrous handicaps upon it in the defence of its existence, a defence of which 1 think the gaIlantry and courage is recognized by everyone, whatever hisw~. . For these reasons, having heard the discussion which has since ensued, 1 must adhere to the atti- tude towards this resolution which 1 expressed yesterday. 1 would only add a few words concerning the draft resolution proposed by the representative of France [document S/798/Rev.2] as a tentative contribution to its discussion. The spirit of this resolution puts Jerusalem above the conflict and outside the battle. This is an aim which has always commended itself to us, and if the inter- national regime proposed for J erusalem six months ago had beer. put into effect, the present catastrophe would not have happened. That idea of a separate international regime com- manded wide support in the weeks following the In this draft resolution there is one vital prin- ciple at stake which the Government of France has always upheld, and which 1 am sure it would not wish to abandon now. That iS the idea of free access by all worshippers to their Holy Places.. The Moslems should have free access to- the Mosque of Omar and EI-Akhsa; the Christians should have free access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; but aIso, the Jews should have free access to the Wailing Wall. And today, when religions Jewish opinion 'is convulsed by yesterdayl,s' events, 1 feel moved to J'aise that principle here, and to ask how it will farê under this resolution. 1 would interpret this resolution as meaning that if the Jewsof the Old Citywish ta resume their daily worship at the Wailing Wall, or peacefully to resume their resi- dence there, it would notbe in order for anybody to use force ta prevènt them fromso doing, pro- Vided they came unarmed·for those·peaceful The final question arising in my mind, which is perhaps less simple and may require sorne added reference, concerns the question of food supply. 1 am convinced that the delegation of France has in mind a peaceful Jerusalem, but not, 1 am sure, a starving Jerusalem. It is not easy, at this distance, to devise a practical scheme whereby the entry of food and medical supplies into Jerusalem should not be obstructed by violent .action, but there are international bodies and personalities in: Palestine. There will be' the . Mediator; there is the United Nations Com- nrissioner for Jerusalem, Mr. Evans; there is the Truce Commission; there is the Red Cross. AlI of these together might be able ta work out, with the parties concerned, a suitable arrangement. It seems to us that the Security Council should give those bodies a directive in this resolution to en- sure that Jerusalem is saved, not only from the horrors of war, but from the misery and reproach of starvation. We are certain that as soon as the cease·fire order is given throughout the Holy City, the first step thereafter must be to ensure that a food blockade, which. after aIl is a weapon of war, is removed. There is no difference in prin- ciple between inaking war with artillery and making war with starvation. With these preliminary remarks, 1 should like ta reserve my position if a detailed discussion of the French resolution arises.

If there are no more speakers, we .3hould take a vote on the first of the draft resolutions before the Council, namely, on that presented by the delegation of the USSR [document 8/794/ Rev.2], Mr. L6PEz (Colombia): This morning the representative of the United K:ingdom raised several very -important and relevant questions, which remain unanswered, concerning the possibility of taking measures under Chapter VII, if the Security Council decided that the provisions of that Chapter should he invoked for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the resolutions of the Council. Before we go any further, 1 believe it would be useful to take notice.of the fact that the question does not seem to he whether recourse to the pro;. visions of that Chapter should be taken, or whether Qf not they apply to the present.case, or ,,:~ether the Charter contains the necessary pro- VISIOns to cover a case of this type, but whether the major Powers will carry out those provisions and are willing to comply with their obligations, as under .. the Charter they are specificaJly called Time and again we have been told that a threat to the peace exists in Palestine. There seems to be very little question in anybody's mind that sucb. a threat does exist, any more than that a doubt exists as to whether righting is going on, or that the old Jewish quarter within the Walled City of Jerusalem has aIready surrendered. However, when we come to take action, either we conventionally withdraw hom the position, because it is somehow or other understood that it cannat be adopted, or if we get into a discussion, very soon the result is that thl~ point cornes where we have to circumvent the position at which we have arrived. That is the reason the representative of the United Kingdom this morning, in support of bis proposal, very pertinently inquired whether the implementation and the enforcement action· would be forthcoming in case the draft proposai sub,mtted by the USSR was adopted. That actually means: whether the five permanent members of the Security Council would he prepared ta furnish such forces as are provided for in the Charter. l am afraid we shall find once more that the five major Powers are 'not ready to provide for a means of enforcement. I think-it ",ill be very useful ta record that fact, because the whole Orgamzation is b~ed on the principle of unanimity arnong the five permanent members of the Security Council. Such unanimity does not seem to come about in any case. Because of that fact, we have been having one failure after another in the Security Council and in the General Assembly, and people seem ta be losing confidence in the Organization rather than allocating the blame for those failures where it actually belongs. The irony of the thing is that when a situation such as the problempresently heing discussed arises, we very often observe, as we did this m'Jrning, that sorne countries in the Security Council and in the Gen.eral Assembly.seem to. let thespdngs of eloquence bubble before it cornes to taki.r.ïg action; but when it cornes to taking action, ther. the s;:rings 01 eloquence seem to stop. Once and for all, I should like to say that it is not .the fault of the small nations. There is nothing that they can offer but goodwill-not even eloquence-and they are not called 11pon by the Charter ta provide armed forces for the purposes either of collective security or of maintain~ ing international peace and security. That is specifically the duty Qf the five permanent members of the Security Council until the special agree- Let us at least he dear as to what is happening, sa that we may understand not only where the responsibility rests, but what is actuaIly the role of the sma11 and medium-sized nations ID every one of these debates. The sma11 and medium-sized nations simply have ta follow the leadership of the major Powers and abide by their decisions-perhaps abstaining from vdting for thèm-but not necessarily because those decisions are in full conformity with the: provisions of the Charter or even, in sorne cases, with the facts.

If there are no more speakers, 1 shàll make a few brief remarks in amplification of the short statement 1 made yesterday [30Bth meeting]. 1should like ta revert briefly and rapid1y ta the argument put forward, this morning by the United Kingdom and Belgian representatives, which amounts ta saying: "If you use Chapter VII as a starting point, how far are you prepared ta go and what do you propose ta do?" 1 do not think that the posing of this question constitutes a rea11y decisive argument, fust, because under the provisions of the Charter, the Council has no power of appraisal at the time when the existence of a threat ta the peace is determined. Article 39 states that the Council "shall determine the existence of any threat ta the peace'\ and, in my opinion, since a certain state of affalrs has ta be recorded if the facts are established, the recording must take place. It is only in the following Articles of Chapter VII of the Charter, which deal with action ta be taken by the Security Council, that the Council's power of appraisal reappears and is clearly defined by the Charter. Whereas Article 39 ,,'::ttes: "The Security Council sha11 determine .he existence of any threat ta the peace", Article 40 says: "In arder ta prevent an a.ggravation of the situation, the Security Council may . . . ca11 upon the parties . . ." Article 41 says: "The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed forceare ta be employed .. These (measures) may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations ..."; and Article 42 says: "Should the Secuiity Council consider '~at measures pro-vided for in Article 41 would be madequate ... it may take such action ...", that is, armed demonstrations; It is, therefore, when measures of execution have ta he considered, that the Cc..uncil cornes into its right ta The second argument is connected with what, if 1 may, Ishall call the spectre of military measures. This point was brought up this moming by tl;1e United Kingdom representative, 1 believe, and has just been discussed by the Colombian representatlve in a highly useful manner from the .standpoint of the Charter's interpretation. E·ut 1 should like to remind the Council that apart from military measures-which 1 think neither the Council nor anybody here seems disposed to take, at least at present-there are a number of less serious measures of qui~e another character wmch might prove to be effective in the case in point. 1 was, therefore, not conv~ced by the arguments' advanced this moming. They were not such as to cause me to alter the views 1 stated earlier. Mr. LÔPEZ (Colombia): 1 wish to apologize for making a remark which may not be found to be useful. However, 1 feel very tempted to make it. We hear ,ll great deal conceming the way the League of Nations 'came to grief. Conceming this matter, there seems to be no doubt in our minds. 1 bdieve the real usefulness of bringing this to mind is for the purpose of avoiding the following of the same course by the United Nations. The point 1 have been trying to make is that we are treading in the footsteps of the League of Nations, and are discreditiIlg this Organization by the use of the same methods and practices. We have not been able to give full effect to the provisions of the Charter either because of the disagreements among the major Powel'S or because we find it more expedient to circumvent th.:.'Se provisions when the opportunity arises. Tlùs moming 1 heard the statement made that we should not repeat the case of the sanctions against Italy. It might he profitable to ask what happened to the· sanctions again~t Italy. .As 1 remember, sorne of the small nations were requested to fall in line and decree thlJse sanctions for the definite purpose of acting against a country which was conducting a war of conquest. This decision was abandoned, and those small nations which had decreed sanctions' found themse1ves left with that resolution.

IlLe now caU op the Se.c.urity Council to vote on the r.esolutions before it.. We shall take them in the 1shall begin by putting the first paragraph to the vote, then the rest of the resolution, if this is agreeable ta the representative of the USSR. It does not seem ta me fair. ta include here any imputation against one side, when, in cases where responsibility could have been imputed against the other, we have made no such imputation. In the circumstances, the French de1egation will abstain fromvoting on the first paragraph as it is now drafted. Mr. TARA8ENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated trom Russian): 1 agree with the Presi :~nt that the vote should be taken paragraph by paragraph. As regards the first paragraph, in view of the opinion he has expressed, 1 think that it could be divided into two sub-paragraphs or, rather, we could take a separate vote on each of the two parts, the first part ree.ding as follows: "Considering that the Security Coul1cil's resolution of 22 May on the cessation of military operations in Palestine has not been carried out " -mier The second part would read: "... in view of the refusal of the Arab States ta comply with this decision". Mr. L6PEZ (Colombia): 1 believe 1 have made it clear that, in my opinion, the manner in which the Council will vote on the proposaIs before us is not important. However, as 1 had intimated that 1 would support the USSR proposaI, with amendments, 1 shall read wh~t 1 had Întended to propose, although 1 anl not going to propose this amendment: "Considering that the Security Council's resolutions of 17 April and 22 May on the cessation of military oper~tions in Palestine have not been complied with by aU the Governments and authorities concerned . . ." Mr. GROMYKO: (Union of Soviet Socialist Repul ~lcs) (translated trom Russian): If 1 have

If 1 am not mistaken, 1 have the consent of the USSR representative, as required by rule 32 of our ruIes of procedure, to put to the vote the first part of the fust paragraph, up to the words "has not been carried out". 1 shall then put the second part of the paragraph to the vote, after which 1 shall take a vote on the succeeding paragraphs as a whole. 1 shall now put to the vote the beginning of the first paragraph, which is a part of the preamble, up to the words: "has not been carried out": "Considering that the Security Council's resolution c..~ 22 May on the cessation of military operations in Palestine has not been carried out ..."

r think 1 am right in assuming·that in view of the circumstances there is no need to vote now on the second phrase of the preamble. Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics): Still, we decided to vote separately on the two parts of the paragraph.

t know that 1 am always being accused of being too logical. 1 agree to put the following words to the vote: ". . . in view of the refusal of the Arab States to comply with this decisiooc'. The result of the vote was 2 in favour and 9 abstentions. The second part of the first paragraph was not adoptedJ having tailed to obtain the affirmative votes of seven members.

l shall now put to the vote the three succeeding paragraphs as a whole, that is, the rest of the resolution. A vote was taken by show of handsJ as follows: In favour: Colombia, France, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United States of America. Abstaining: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Syria, United Kingdom. The result of the vote was 5 in favour and 6 abstentions. The remaining paragraphs were not adoptedJ having failed to obtain the affirmative votes of seven members.

If l have understood the intention of the Security Council correctIy, it was decided last ll:ight to take the texts of the draft resolutions in their proper order, namely, that in which they were presented. The second text to be presented is the United Kingdom delegation's draft resolution which has been slightly changed this afternoon. The text is the one before you [document S/795/Rev.2]. l should like to make a short statement on behalf of my de1egation. The French delegation srbmitted yesterday a draft resolution [document S/798/Rev.2] referring, in the main, to the City of Jerusalem. It is impossible for me to decide at this stage of the voting whether it would serve any useful purpose to maintain this draft resolution. l shall await the result of the vote on the text submitted by the United Kingdom delegation, before deciding whether or not to keep my resolution before the Council. l shall do so unless l find that the text now submitted by the 'United Kingdom delegation can .be amended in such a way as to enable my delegation to vote for it. l now propose to put the United Kingdom delegaûon's resolution to the vote, and unless the United Kingdom representative objects, l think it should be voted on paragraph by paragraph. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kil.1gdom) : l should be quite in agreement with.that procedure, which l think would be useful. l was not proposing now to roake any statement on the

It was my intention to deal with the amendments as they arise in relation to each paragraphe As there is no objection, 1 shaIl begin by putting to the vote the fust paragraph as follows: "The .Security Council, "Desiring to bring about a cessation of hostiliries in Palestine without prejudice to the rights, daims and position of either Arabs or Jews," A vote was taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Syria, United Kingdom, United States of America. Abstaining: Colombia, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republics, Union of Soviet SQcialist Republics. The first paragraph was adopted by 8 votes to none, with 3 abstentions.

The second paragraph is as follows: "Calls upon both parties to order a cessation of aIl acts of armed force for a period of four weeks," Mr. AUSTIN (United States Qf America): 1 move to strike out the words "both parties" and in lieu thereof, to insert the words "aIl Governments and authorities concerned".

1 shaIl first put to the vote the amendment proposed by the United States representative, unless the United Kingdom representative, the author oI the resolution, accepts this amendment. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): li it will facilitate our labours, 1 can sayat once that 1 shaIl accept it. Ml'. LÔPEZ (Colombia) : 1 was going to move another amendment, if 1 might be aIlowed to suggest one, to he effect that the words "for a period gf four weeks" be deleted, 'so that the paragraph would read: "Calls upon aIl Govemments and authorities concerned to order a cessation of aIl acts of armed force," Hostilities would thus cease not for four :weeks butfinally. Sir .t\..lexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : 1 heartily endorse the sentiment behind what the l'epresentative-of Colombia has said, but what 1

As the United Kingdom representative has accepted the United States representative's amendment, it is now embodied in the text. The only amendment upon which we need state our views is that of the Colombian representative which is to delete the words "for a period of four weeks". J shall first put this amendment to the vote.

1 shall now put to the vote the following paragraph as a whole: "Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to order a cessation of all acts of armed force for a period of four weeks," A vote was taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Syria, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, United Kingdom, Uniom. of Soviet Socialist Republics. A.bstaining: Colombia. The second paragraph was adopted by 10 votes to none, with one abstention.

We have now reached the third paragraph, which reads: , "Calls' upon both parties to undertake tbat they will not introduce fighting personnel or men of military age into Palestine during the ceasefire," Mr. AUSTIN (United States of Amcr-ica) : J,' move that the paragraph be amended by striking out the words "both parties" and inserting in lieu thereof "aIl Governments and a.uthonties concerned";and,after the word "Palestine," by. in- \\ vernements It was not my intention ta have my remarks translated ta read "in Egypt", and it was not an exact translation. There is no ward ta be added preceding the ward "Egypt". 1 shall read the entire paragraph as amended: "CaUs upon all Governments and authorities concerned ta undertake that they will not introduce fighting personnel or men of military age into Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan or Yemen during the cease-fire," Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : 1 indicated this morning that 1 expected amendments ta be moved ta this resolution. In a particular reference to this paragraph, 1 said that 1 expected amendments might be moved, and 1 certainly hope they will be discussed dispassionately: 1 have examined the amendment which has just been proposed. 1 am happy to be able to tell the Security Council that, for my part, 1 shall accept it. Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): Before bèing able ta comment on the proposed amendment, 1 have to grasp its meaning. When 1 am told not to do something, am 1 supposed ta be doin.g it now? Does it imply that there are fighting personnel and men of military age coming into Egypt? 1 want this explained. Perhaps my English is very pOOl', but 1 want· to understand the paragraph as amended. Ml'. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated trom Russian): In our opinion, this is one of the least acceptable paragraphs of the United Kingdom draft resolution. The addition suggested by the United States representative in no way affects the substance of the paragraph. As a matter of form, the amendment is a gesture, but it does not in any way change the. meaning of the paragraph, which is directed against the Jews and solely against the Jews. The Egyptian representative pretends that he even abjects to the amendment. Probably he does this for the sake of appearances. Everyone realizes that the amendment does not in the least affect the Arabs, and that it is directed solely against the Jews.

The representatives of the Jewish Agency and of .Lebanon have asked to speak. If they will allow me, 1 should first like ta make a statement myself on behalf of my delegation, as 1 wish tn If, however, wc are proposing to have a four weeks' armistice, it is essential that the basis of such an armistice should be absolutely fair and that it should not be capable of being regarded as favouring one of the parties to the detriment of the other. Otherwise, mère would be no chance at all of our having the wording accepted, and we should be committing an injustice. The amendment suggested .by tre United States representative removes sorne of the unilateral flavour of the wording by applying the same provisions te Palestine and to the States which have undertaken military operations agair..st the Jewish community. My delegation supports this amendment because it introduces a better balance into the text. l must say, however, that we do not consider that it really restores the balance completely. The prohibition of the introduction of personnel or of men of military age, would in practice effect only the Jew~. It may have some application to the Arab communities, but this would certainly be very limited. On the other hand, l appreciate the desire that, during this period, the Jewish community should not, for its part, engage in intensive military preparations in connexion with immigrants. In these circumstances, my delegation thinks the fairest scheme would be to forbid the immigration of fighting personnel but not of men of military age, and to take precautions to ensure that, during the truce period, snch men are not mobilized or given military training. The formula which l am going to propose will sanction their admittance on the understanding that they will not be mobilized, that they will not receive military training and, in order to ensure th.at this undertaking will be respected, that they will be housed in camps organized by the Jewish aut~orities, as it is really'Jewish immigration with which we are concerned. These camps will be under the control of the Mediator, who will be entitled eventually to authorize the men to leave the camps if he considers he has adequate gU1".rantees on all the other points. The text 1 am proposing has the disadvantage of being rather long. It œust, therefore, now be typed and circulated to the members of the Council. This will be done, if you approve, while the representatives of the Jewish Agency and Lebanon are speaking. Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine): The inclusion of these words "men of military age", involves the following anomaly which exists in the United States draIt amendment. What it means is that if aIlY ship or plane arrives in Haïfa, Alexandria, Cairo, Beirut, Jeddah, or Bagdad, that ship or plane must be searched, and everybody between the ages of eighteen and forty must be removed and deported. The absurdity of that process, 1 think, is obvious to everybody. It is completcly impractical. As soon as a doetor arrives in Palestine-a doctor aged thirty-or as soon as a student arrives in Cair"o or Beirut; this provision has been breached. You cannot escape that anomaly if you use this phrase "men of military age", and the entire resolution is transported into a sort of wonderland. 1 do not know whether you will be able to inform all the travel agencies and all the shipping firms that·no person between the ages of eighteen and forty may ti'avel eastward af all. 1 have not yet seen the text of the amendment which the President proposed, but with the"spirit of the amendment, 1 am in agreement. There is, however, one lechnical procedure which the President suggested, 1 am sure with good intentions, but which 1 think he might care to reconsider, because anything which involves the existence of a concentration camp in Palestine for twenty-four hours would historically and sentimentally create great revulsion, and 1 doubt whether the Stateof Israel would even begin "je consider it. Those people arriving in Palestine have had enough of concentration in EpIop.' 'nd i in Cyprus, and their first days on the fr(~ sO_ctf Israel cannot be spent in that ""vay. The Si;;:""e of Israel would bring into Palestine and roto h...; Mr. MALIK (Lebanon): 1 have nothing to say. Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): 1 wish to answer, if 1 can, the interrogatory remark of the representative of Egypt. The purpose of this amendment is substantially the same purpose the Security Council had subscribed to once before. In the resolution adopted 17 April [document S/723]-that is the resolution submitted by the representative of Colombia -we find the following: "The Security Council: "1. CaUs upon all persans and organizations in Palestine and especially upon the Arab Higher Committee and the Jewish Agency, to take immediately, without prejudice to their rights, daims, or positions, and as a contribution' to the wellbeing and permanent interests of Palestine, the following measures:" 1 am omitting sub-paragraph (a). Sub-paragraph (b) reads as follows: "( b) Refrain from bringing and from assisting and encouraging the entry into Palestine of armed bands and fighting personnel, groups and individuals, whatever their origin;" Paragraph 3 of that resolution reads as follows: "CaUs upon all Governments, and particularly those of the countries neighbouring Palestine, to take all possible steps to assist in the implementation of the! measures set out under paragraph 1 above, and particularly those referring to the entry into Palestine of armed bands and fighting personnel, groups and individuals and weapons and war materials." The phrase "armed bands and fighting personnel" relates to the subject matter of the paragraph that we are now considering, and "weapons and war materials" relates to the subject matter of the next paragraph in the United Kingdom resolution. Perhaps the proposed United States amendment is toO; restricted to make itself plain. However, the purpose of it is to have a real military standstill and not to have hostile acts committed, even though upon the territory of those neighbouring countries; and, as stated by the repre- Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): First of aIl, 1 \\ish to thank the representative of the United States for providing this explanation of his amendment. 1 think 1 understand it now and am able to express an opinion on it. However, 1 'iliould Iike to make sure that 1 do understand ~ before 1 proceed. 1 think it means that neither Egypt nor any of the other countries mentioned should introduce into their territory fighting personnel or men of military age during the fourweek period. li my understanding is correct, 1 shali proceed;otherwise, 1 wait correction. Mr. AUSTIN (United States ofAmerica) : YCii, that is what it means. For example, if it were ~ed out in good faith, it wouldprevent mobilization from one country over into the other çountry in rreparation for an. attack at the -end of the four weeks. It would prevent the bringing of these armed forces mto Egypt, the same as it would into Palestine. 1 might make ft c1ear at this rime that,either by accepting the suggestion of the representative of France or in some other way, 1 am going to delete the words 'or men of military age". -. Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt) : After hearing the intention-to delete thè words "or men of ~. tary age:~,and without cQmmen~g on tOO spedfic wording, 1 should Iike merely to say that Egypt was .not introducing any fighting persollnel into its O'wn territor<; from the outside. On the otherh:md, l wQncler how th.; wnole thing will be controlled. However, it if.( not ru)' rP'3ponsibility to go ioto this DOW. 1 hope the exceptions.which 1 take to some phases of tlrê arnendment will not be measured by. the brevity .."?lth which·1 shall speak. The Jamal Bey HUSSEIN! (Arab Higher Committee): 1 think 1 must make. the position of the overwhelming majority in Palestine quite c1ear on this subject. 1 would remind the Security Council t~at, as a matter of fact, the whole problem Je of PaIestine hinges upon the question of Jewish -en ~gration. We cannat accept Jewish immigration until such time as we have established a ~emocratic government which will speak for the mterests and in the name of the whole popula- ~on. "l'hen, and only then, can ~e accept any l'ensemble nnmigration which may be allowed in accordance en with the interests of the whole country. seulement, toute égard

While waiting for the English text of the draft anglais amendment which 1 submitted ta the Council ta l'honneur he circulated, l should like to make two comments je on the remarks màde by thé representative of the des Jewish Agency, on the one hand, and by the l'Agence representative of Egypt and of the Arab Higher lès COmmittee, on the other. arabe. If l understand the Egyptian representative and the representative of the Arab Higher Coml'Egypte In regard to what the representative of·the Jewish Agency has said, 1 should like to point out to lùm that ! have tried ta be very practical. lt is possible that from a sentimental point of view it may seem difficult to accept Jewish immigrant; and then to put them into camps. But after a1l, when immigrants arrive in any great number in any country, they have to be put somewhere at the outset, and 1 think that in this case it is merely a question of supervising their disposal in agreement with the Merliator so that he may be able to make sure at: any time that the immigrants are, in fact, not being submitted to military training. In these conditions, my te':: would give satisfaction and these men would be able to leave the camps fairly quickly. It is all a question of good faith and iacility of control. It seems to me, moreover, that under such a system of control, the Mediator may easily be in a position to issue exit permits from the camps, for if he receives accurately drawn"up identification cards showing where the immigrant is to employed, he will be ahIe to check all the facts, as Palestine is not such a large country that such a check would not be possible under satisfactory conditions. 1 therefore consider that my text is a perfectly practical one. Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): 1 am not undertaking to make a trade with the President. However 1 wan' to suggest, for bis consideration, that the reaction of my delegation to his proposai is as foHoVis. . We could accept the first paragraph of the French amendment in lieu of our amendment. In any event, if it stopped there, we could accept ~ . We could accept that part of the second paragraph of the French amendrnent which ends with the words "military training" if we could put· a period there and delete the rest of the paragraph; and if we could strike out the word "immigrants" and substitute the word "men" so that the second paragraph would read as follows: "Calls upon an Governments and authorities concemed, should men of military age be introduced into countries or territories unaer their control, to undertake not to mobilize or submit them to military training;" leur et taire,"

Unis nant ~ill the representative of the United States permtt me td say a word on the suggestions which he has just made? 1 should say that 1 do not think that they fundamentaIly alter my intention to balance the. wording, as the United Kingdom resolution states later that the Mediator shaIl be responsible for the application of the foregoing provisions. The fondamentalement l'intention qui était en dans il surer l'application La suite en ficatiüns des maintenant ~est of the wording thus establishes the control which l had in minci. In .the circurnstances, 1 acc~pt the amendments just suggested by the Umted State n , representative. Does the Council think that we could now v:ote? Sir ~exander CADOGAN (United Kinga ~-.):. If ~at 1S acceptable ta the' President ana' "'~ i (traduit Umted States representative, 1 accept it. Rowsentant ever l have one smaIl suggestion to make. est je . For the sake of accuracy, should we not make lt cIear that this second paragraph applies only pas CCGalls upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of military age be introduced iuto countries or territol'ies under their control during the cease-fire, to undertake not to mobilize or submit them to mi1itary training duting that period," 1 think that is what is intended. Otherwise, you would forevel' have a ban on men of military age being introduced into these countries.

The United Kingdom representative's proposal clarifies the text and 1 therefore accept it. The te...t now reads as follows (there will be two paragraphs instead of one) : "Galls upon aIl Governments and authorities concerned to undertake that they will not introduce fighting personnel into Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan and Yemen during the cease-fire, "Galls upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of militar}" age be introduced into countries or territories under their control, 'i:o undertake not te.: mobilize or submit them to military training during the cease-fire," Ml'. LÔPEZ (Colombia): Does this mean that they can introduce men of military age and, provided they do not mobilize them or submit them to military training, can have them ready for utiliza~on after the period of four weeks? The second paragraph reads: "Galls upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of military age be introduced into countries or territories under their control, to undertake not to mobilize or submit them to military tr~ing during the cease-fire," That is why 1 inquire whether they can bring them in and keep them ready for utilization after the period of four weeks.

If, at the end of four weeks, hostilitir-~ h.l';t'; not been resur;ned, 1 presume that t~es~ ~:el> wiU Datu;ally contmue to work at thelr clvib.';' (i,-.Cll');:..tlons. Should hostilities be resumed, hm~,:veL t{tty will 'be in a position of civilians who a!.:. ;u:mble to fight at once, as they will first have to receive military training. 1 should like to say to the Colombian representative, if he will allow me, that it is a half mensure; in my opinion, a measure half-way between a complete stoppage of immigration of Ml'. L6PEZ (Colombia): 1 jus~ wanted sorne clarification because it seems ta me that they may be men w'ho have already been trained, and tllUS they can go into action immediately as soon as the four. weeks are over. That is one point. There is anotlier point that relates to the rirst paragraph; "CaUs upon all Governments and authorities concerned to undertake that they'would not introduce fighting personnel into Palestine, Egypt, Iraq ..." What about ,the moving outof personnel in case for înstance, sorne of the Arab countries want to withdraw sorne of their people; they would have to come back and get inta one of those countries. Ml'. MALIK (Lebanon): If the resolution which is now being discussed is approached with a mental reservation that it is going to be ". failure, and that fighting is gûing to start all over again after four weeks, 1 really find no use at all in discussing it or 'in passing it. It is my understanding that the intention of this resolution is ta provide a breathing spell during which the real efforts of conciliationwill be resumed. If those.efforts ar~ not going ta be resumed, if real hanest attempts are not gomg ta be made, on the diplomatic and political plane, to bring about a genuine and permanent solution of this problem, 1 should advise the Security Council not ta pass anything at all, because fighting is going ta start again after four weeks. Therefore, it seems to me, all these mental reservations are dependent upon the degree of striousness with which the Security Council treats the more important job of this resolution, namely, the diplomatie; political, conciliatory job which is going ta be passed later on in this draft resolution. Accordingly, 1regret and deprecate this tendency of being complete1y cynical about the matter, of throwing up our arms and saying that,in the nature of the case, fighting is going to start after the four week period. That approach will certainly bring about a breakdown of this truce. Therefore, if we introduce aIl these amendments with a half-hearted sense of not taking seriously the job ta be done during these four weeks, as 1say, .Jthink the whole matter h~s nù meaning. lwould appeal tothe members of the Security Council to eliminate these mental reservations, and to assume and work hard towards the reiliza- . de sécurité que d'ordre sur au Je adopter une attitude profondément désabusée cette ciel de reprendre semaines. aboutira En amendern.ents. prendre de ces Mr. L6PF,Z (Colombia): 1 believe that the emphatic statement which We have just had the pleasure of hearing from the representative of Lebanon is very encouraging, the more so when , the Security Council has just voted' down-with the vote of Colombia-a proposal submitted by the representative of the USSR in which the Arab States were made to appear responsible for not complying with previous decisions of the Security .Council. 1 think that his statement . means that he has the very: sincere purpose of complying with this resolution if it is adopted. , My reservations and my pessimism arise from the very sad fact that for weeks and weeks the Security Council has sathere: discussing one proposal after another and requesting the parties to this dispute, without any success, to cease· hostilities. There does notseem to'me, therefore, to be very much reason to be quick in assuming that this time we are gcing to be more fortunate. However, if 1 cantake the statement of the representative of Lcbanon as an assurance that thistime matters will be different, 1 shall be' perfectly happy. As it is, the record shows that aIl the previous decisions of the Securit'y Council have been of no avail as far as bringing about a Jccase-fire in Palestine is concemed.- That is r~gretted very deeply by the'Security Council, by the delegation of Colombia and by the world at large. That is why the division of opinion that has arisen in the Security Council gives expression té> two very definite, criteria in regard to this matter. There is one school that believes or assumes or admits that we can go on indefinitely passing thesè resoiutions while fighting continues in Palestine, and while the situation goes from bad to worse without the Sectirity Council doing anything of an. effective nature to stop the fighting. The other school, which seems to be in the minority, has contended all aIong that we shduld move on to the provisions of Chapter VII and see whether we have reasonable assurance;, of having the resolutions of the Security 'Council complied with. Unfortunately, as we :have already stated, it appears to be the sense of the majorityof the members of the Security Council that we. cannot expect action trom the permanent members, as envisaged and provided for in Article 106 of the Ta summarize, 1 should like to assure the representative of Lebanon that 1 want to be optimistic, that 1 believe we Sh9uld aU like to be optimistic, and that. any ass~lT~ces we can receive from the parties to this dispute tn the effect that they propose to stop fighting, will be most welcome. . The thing we want to avoid is sitting here for days and days, as the representative of "Argentina said this morning, with such a deep sense of futility, discussing one proposition after another without feeling, at any stage, that wc are eugaged in very fruitful work. However, 1 'am very glad to anticipate that this time we are ,1 going ta have better luck. Mr. MALIK (Lebanon): 1 do not wish to take up the tÏn1e of the Security Council any further with this point. However, it seems to me that it is an inlportant one and 1 should like ta c1arify it a bit further. . The representative of Colombia said that he is on the point of giving up becél.use certain attempts to bring pe1:l.1.e to Palestine and the Near East have been made in the past, and these attempts ha.-ve not proved successful. 1 should like ta point out that it seems to me that this particular attempt differs essentially from those made in the past in that,.at least, it holds out the . hope--or 1 believe it· does-that thère will be further negotiation, that there· will be further attempts at conciliation, that the Arab world will not he presented with a tait accompli and asked . simply to accept it, that honest efforts will be made ta bring about a permanent and true solution of the problem. Therefore, it seems to me, the question whether fighting will start again àfter the four weeks' period, depends prinlarily, if not exclusively, on the degree of sincerity, dispassionateness, absolute fairness, understanding of the larger, deeper historical issues. involv~d, statesmanlike foresight and absolutely honest determi;. nation with whichthis period of four weeks will be filled. If·it is not ffiled with these, then, if war breaks out again, it will be the fault of those who did not 00.it with these things. It all depends on what will be done during the four . weeks. If a true and honést solution is conceived and rea11y brought about, then there will be peace in the Near East. If the situation recurs . four weeks from now, and we find ourselves exactly where we are now, then 1 am simply Sl'ggestïng that the Security Council had better . équité, Si, It is net a question of promising everything now. Everything depends upon the processes of mecliation and conciliation and real understanding which will be initiated, in all honesty and sincerity~ during these four weeks.

1 feel 1 should thank the Lebanese representative for what he has just said. 1 think he has expressed the common.desire of aIl members of the Security Council to reach real results in connexion with the conciliation plan. Mr. HSIA (China): 1 propose that the third and fourth paragraphs now be put to the vote. . The PRESIDENT (translated from French): If 1 understood correcdy, the amendment 1 proposed, which inc1udes part of the United States amendment, has been accepted by the United States delegation with certain modifintions which it has suggested. The United Kingdom representativ~ has also made an addition to it. f...m 1 to understand that the amendment has been accepted by the United Kingdom representative? 1 am now told that my interpretation of the matter is correct. 1 shall, thei'efore, put to the vote together the two paragraphs which result· from the combined amendmenu of the United States and the French de1egations, and which will take the place of the third paragraph of the original United Kingdom text. They read as follows: "Calls upon aIl Govemments and authorities to undertake that they will not introduce fighting personnel into Palestine, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan and Yemen during the cease-fir'e,· "CaUs upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of military age be introduced into countries or territories under their' control, ta undertake not to mobilize or submit them to military training during the cease-fire," 1 shall now put to the vote the two paragraphs which 1 have just read. A vote W(lstaken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: Argentina, Be1gium, Canada, China, France, United Kingdom, United States of America. 4bstaining: Colombia, Syria, Ukrainian·SÇlviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Repubhès. Thf' paragraphs were adopted by 7 votes to none wJth 4 abstentions. ThePREsIDÈNT (translated from French):, The following paragraph of the United Kingdom proposaI iH the fourth paragraph of the., Mr. AUSTIN (United. States of America): 1 move an amendment as follows: delete the words "both parties and upon aIl Governments", and substitute the words "aIl governments and authorities concerned"; after the word "importing" add the words "or exporting"; after the word "into" add the words "or to"; ,!-fter the word "Palestine" add "Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan or ,Yemen". The paragraph would then read: "Calls upon aIl Governments and authorities concerned to refrain from importing or exporting war material into or to Palestine, Egypt; Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan or Yemen during the cease-fire," Gouverne~ents" ments mot Arabie saoudite, Syrie, Transjordanie et Yémen", ,~t tion de ressés pension guerre saoudite,

1shall now put the fifth paragraph, as amended, to the vote. A votewas taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: Argentina, Be1gilim, Canada, Ohina, ,Colombia, France, Syria, United Kingdom~ United States of America. . Abstaining: Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Repùblie, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The paragraph as amended was adopted by 9 votes to none, with 2 abstentions.

The former,fifth paragraph, which now becomes th.e sixth, is as follows: uUrges both parties to take every possible precaution for the protection of the Holy Places and of the City of Jerusalem," , Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): 1 move the following amendment: to strike out the words "bot1 ,. lkliies" and in lieu thp.reof in- - sert the word~; "J1Jj.overnments and authorities . concerned". Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine): In aIl previous resolutions passed by the Security Council, in referring to the protection of the ~oly Places, the interest of the Security Council m access to ,the Holy Place has also been expressed. 1 am wondering whether the Security Ccmncil has any special reason for departing from that practice. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : Asmy delegation was the original author of this text, 1 can assure the Sec;urity Council that there was no intention of leaving that out. 1 should be g~ad to accept any suitable phrase which remedies the deficienèy. The paragraph might perhaps he amended to read: , Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): 1 do not want to be too punctilious, but perhaps the :tepresentative of the United Kingdom would agree to say "access to the Holy Places for purposes f ' h' " , o wors Ip ••. Jamal Bey HUSSEIN! (Arab Higher Committee): May Iadd one phrase: "in accordance with the status .quo"; or "in accordance with ·established usage"? Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): This matter was fully discussed in tÏI.e Security Council. The representative of the United States gave a very satisfactory explanation as to why these adcfi.. tional phrases, which .have now been proposed by the Arab Higher Committee and the representative of Egypt, should be inc1uded. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): Might we perhaps find a suitable solution in the Security. Council resolution of, 17 April [document 8/723] which has a1ready been adopted? That resolution speaks of "access to all shrines and sanctuaries for the purpose of worship by thàse who have an established right to visit and worship at them". The.paragraph might then read ~ "Urgesall Govemments and authorities concerned·to take every. possible precaution for protection of the Holy Places ~nd of' the City of Jerusalem inc1uding access to aIl.shrines and sanctuaries' for the purpose of worship by those who have an established right tovisit and worship ~t them," .

1 shall put this paragraph, as last yvorded, to the vote. A votewas paragraph, as 'mously.

'To'he next paragraph is as follows: " "Instructs the United Nations Mediator for Palestine, in concert with the Truce Commission, to supervise the· observance of the above provisions, and decides that they shall beprovided with.a sufficient number of military observers," A vote was taken b'J s.howof hands;, as follows: ln favour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, ' China, Colombia, France, Syria, United King- 'dom, United States of America. c Ahstaining: Ukraini~n Soviet Sodalist Republie, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. lIfr. IGNA'l'JEFF (Canada ~: Tht: l't'presentative of Lebanon remincicci us a few minutes ago of the very sel'ious johand l think these wc\"(\ in efreet, his wortis·····'of conciliatioll and mediation which would takt·, place in Pai(;stint~ within the perim! of four wcek:; jf the trun: conu's into effect." In thL" connexion! ullder the tenm; of the revisecl draft n:sollition it is proposed to cmploy the services of the Mediator c:.<;tablished by the resolution of the General A'>sembly.ll The language cmployed in the cxisting paJ'agraphs has gin:n riM: tCl ~0l1H: discu&"inn here. It is rather of a gt'ncrai natllrt\ amI l wondercd whether the ori~inator of the prop()~al·-the reprcsentativc of the United Killgdom-might accept refcrence back to the rcso1tltion of the General Assembl)'. l should therefon: sllgg-est the following amendmcnts: that instcad of the wortfs "making recommelldatiollS tn the Scnll'itv COllncil about an eventual settkmc:nt for Pales'tinc'\ the worcis "carrying out his f\lndions a~ ddermincd by the General A<;scmbly'! might he substituted j and that, in acconlanœ with the changes made in previous paragraphs, iIlstt~ad of Ilsing the words "bath parties," the wnrds "aH parties" should be substituted so that the pal'agraph \\'ould thcn read as follows: "Instructs the United N.\tÏons Mediator to make contact with aIl parties as saon as the cease·fire is in force with a vicw to carrying out his functions as dctcrrnined bv the GGlleral Asscmbly," ' Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : The change proposed by the rcprcsentative of Canada is cntircll' acceptable to my delcgation. MI'. MALIK (Lc:banon): l do not know what the Securit}' COlmeil fcds aIl this matter, but this is obviously, in a sense, the most important paragraph in the whole rcsolutioll because it is this paragraph which opens up the possibility of negotiatioll, conciliation and 11lcdiation. It strikcs me that the text, a..c:. suggestecl hl' the Canadian reprcsentative, and acccpted bl' the rcpresentative of the United States, does not add anything to the situation that exists now-that is, wc are teHing the Ivlediator ta do what he is now doing, and nothing cise at aIl. Wc are simply reminding him of his job, of his function. It is up to the Securitl' Couneil to decidc whether that could be helpful from the point of view of opening up vistas of hope and prospects of real achievemen t. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): The representative of Lehanon is quite right when he says that this is one of the most important paragraphs in the resolution. l accepted the proposaI suggested by the representative of Canada which refers ta the Mediator's functions as detcrmined by the General Assembly. If we look at the resolution of the General Assembly of 14 May 1948, by which the Mediator was appointed, and if we look at the definition of his functions, wc find that there are several of his functions mentioned there. They are: "(a) Ta use his good offices with the local and community authorities in Palestine ta: " (iii) Promote a peaceful adjustment of the future situation of Palestine". l had that in mind when l accepted the suggested change of the original United Kingdom ciraft. Personally, l should have thought t/;lat that change might stand and would effect all that wc wanted, but if it would make it more casily acceptable ta all concerned, 1 might suggest that instead of '''vith a view ta. carrying out his functious as determined by the General Assembly," we might say "with a view to promotiug a peaceful adjustment of the future situation of Palestine". That, as l just said, is a quotation from the General Assembly resolution of 14- May. Ml'. EL-KHOURI (Syria): Paragraph 3 of part II of the resolution of the General Assembly states the following: "The General Assembly " "Directs the United Nations Mediato~ ta conform in his activities with the provisions of this resolution, and with such instructions as the General Assembly or the Security Council may issue". The functions of the Mediator are not limited only ta those assigned by the General Assembly, but also may be extended by aIl instructions that the Security Council may issue. ~een i~, the resolutiol1 of the G~neral Assembly, JS to promote a peaceful adJustment of the future situation of Palestine", it will be enough simply to mention this paragraph. Otherwise, the ~ecurity Council .is inclined to give the MedJator more authonty, it must be so stated in this paragraph. Mr. L6PEZ (Colombia): l agree with the representat~ve of Lebanon that this is perhaps the most lmportant paragraph in the wholc resolution. Almost everything else-if not ind:ed, everything else-has been repeatedly'provJded for in previous resolutions. The one important new elemcnt in the situation, to my mind, is the one which was introduced by the rcpresentative of Lebanon when he gave us such clear assurance that the one great hope which we can entertain in regard to the usefulness of this proposaI lies in the spirit of accommoc1atiort in which it is going to be approached and carried out. If 1 understood the representative of Lebanon corr~ct1y, he do~s not seem to have found in any prevlOus resolutJOn as clear an assurance as this resolution conveys to him that it is, and has been, the purpose of the Security Council to ?ffer the parties an opportunity for understandmg and peaceful adjustment of all their differences. It was with that goal in mind that l took the liberty of suggesting yesterday that we should appoint a commission, the primary task of which should be ta discuss with the representatives of the Governments and authorities concemed the possibility of negotiating a peaceful settlement of t?e question of the future government of Pales- ~m~. l have asked to speak now not in order ta mSJst on that suggestion, but simply to explain that the suggestion was made in view of the ~act that the functions of the Mediator appointed m accordance with the instructions of the General Assembly are such that he cannat reasonably be expected ta have the time to undertake these additional tasks. . Fu:thermore, as the paragraph under discus- SJon JS now drafted, it would appear that the Mediator is to be caUed upon to carry out only those tasks provided for in the General Assembly rcsolution. That does not appear to the representative of Lebanon to be very impressive. l agreewith him: it does not impress me very much. The point being sa important, l think we should give it as much time as may be found necessary in order to be certain that we make adequate proviSIon for the purpose of facilitating these negotiations. Before we go any further in the consideration of this paragraph, it might be a very constructive step to have the ML NISOT (Belgium) (translated tram French): A point of order. Could we not vote on a text and finish with it?

1 still have quite a number of speakers on my list, namely, the Chinese, United Kingdom, Syrian, Canadian and Jewish Agency representatives. Would they agree to forego speaking? Mr. HSIA (China) : My delegation prefers the original text making recommendations to the Security Council about the eventual settlement for Palestine. The reasons are, in the first place, that this is definitely tied to the Security Council, while the General Assembly resolution is not very definite, and we do not want to bring the General Assembly into this situation which, to my mind, might confuse the issue. In the second place, the wording "eventual settlement for Palestine", to my mind, is preferable to the wording of the General Assembly resolution. Therefore, 1 prefer our original wording. l shaul? like to say just one word with reference to the remarks made by the representative, of Colombia. 1 have always favoured the idea of a commission, but I do not see how that idea can be brought in at the present time. l should be in favour of the draft resolution before the Council being passed'as it is. The scene will now change from New York to Palestine. if, a week or so after the Mediator has started to work, a sudden situation arises which requires a separate commission, l should be glad to consider the proposaI for a commission at that time, but I do not think it should be tied up with the present draft resolution at the last minute.

l would like to point out that it is .a question of .a text on the substance of which we are in agreement. Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): 1 asked the representative of the United Kingdom whether he wished ta give the Mediator any special Iunc- 'tion. The representative of the United Kingdom ~t was at his suggestion that the First Committee mserted the word "future" in this paragraph. At that tim~, .1 asked him what was to be done about .eXlstmg problems which needed adjusting -for mstance, the repatriation of the displaced persons. 1 believe that the representative of the United Kingdom might find some formula to request the Mediator to be charged with the function of the repatriation of the displaced persons, because that would facilitate the work a great deaI. There are hundreds of thousands of persans away from their homes who will disturb the peace wherever they go. They had better be sent back ta their homes.

l shaU reply briefly to the Syrian representative's remarks. The word "future" was introduced into the resolution to bring sorne order into the text.. 1t is the Mediator's duty to deal with the future government of Palestine; he has, in collaboration with the Truce Commission, aIl the powers with which that Commission is endowed; he is 'empowered to deal with aU· urgent questions under the paragraph of the resolution which lays clown that he shall collaborate with the Truce Commission. The question raised by the representative of Syria undoubtedly falls within the Mediator's most pressing and urgent tasks. Mr. IGNATIEFF (Canada): 1 just wanted to say that 1 didnot realize that my remarIes might give rise to so much discussion. What 1 have in mind is that the Mediator has not started any functions and that there is no truce. It is also one Qf our purposes to start things that can be done and to build on them. The Security Council might take as a starting point the functions which were very carefully considered by the sub-committee of the General Assembly, which include the things to which reference has been made, for the promotion of peaceful adjustment of the situation in Palestine, using that definition of functions rather than the more g'eneral one included in this paragraph. That was the purpose of my intervention. Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated trom S panz'sh): As 1 am anxious for a vote to be taken, 1 will not deliver the long statement 1 had prep~red. Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine): 1 think the members of the Security Council would be wise ta foUow the representtaive of Canada in defining the functions of the Mediatqr in the exact terms in which they are defined by the 1 think the representative of Lebanon will agrce that what the Mediator needs is not an impressive formula; what he needs is an atmosphere of confidence on the part of the parties with whom he comes in contact. Moreover, the terms in which the General Assembll' defined his functions, as read out by the representative of the United Kingdom, are not unambitious ones; the)' make wide provision for utilizing such clements of agreement, conciliation and mediation as he may find through his relationships with the Governments concerned. We think that we might do him no service if we complicate his functions bl' making him appear on the scene, in the cyes of one of the parties, as one who going to revokc what has alreadl' been establishcd and what is cherished by one of them. :tvfr. MALIK (Lebanon): 1 prefer the older formula 1l1yself. 1 be1ieve that this is really the most important paragraph, as the representatives aI the United Kingdom and of Colombia have both afIirmed. It would be very odd if it did nothing but mercly repeat what is alreadl' the books of the Security Council. 1 cannot conceive that it is so important if all it does is repeat wh::tt is alrcady in our records. 1 should prefer the eIder formula, and 1 would also remind the reprcsentative of the Jewish Agencl' that there are two parties, and that it is possible ta have crisis of confidence with the other party as well as with his own. 1'1'11'. AUSTIN (United States of America): In a few words 1 should like ta support the amendment of the representative of Canada, the following l'easons. 1 think it avoids the appearance, at 1east, of limitation to one singl.e purpose which the old language has, and shows ;hat the Security Council's interest mllch broader than that and extends to aIl powcrs named in the rcsolution of the General Assembly. 1 am especially interested in the one spoken of by the representative of Sl'ria; that one also is included since the General Assembl~ l'esolutian empowers the United Nations MedIator: "Ta invite, as seems ta him advisable, with a view ta the promotion of the welfare of inhabitants of Palestine"-that incIudes restoratian ta thcir homes-"the assistance an~ operation of appl'opriate specialized agencIeS

l consider the discussion closed. Would the Canadian representative be good enough to repeat his amendment? ML IGNATIEFF (Canada): The text of my proposaI is as foHows: "Instruets the United Nations Mediator to make contact with aU parties as soon as the cease-fire is in force with a view to carrying out his functions as determined by the General Assembly,"

Is the amendment acceptable to the United Kingdom representative? Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : Yeso

I shaH put the amendment to the vote. A vote was taken by show of hands) as follows: In favour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Stria, United Kingdom, United States of America. Abstaining: UkraiIÙan Soviet Socialist Republie, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. . The amendment was adopted by 9 votes to none, with. 2 abstentions.

l bcg ta ask you to make an effort to deal with the next paragraph at greater speed. l shaH put this paragraph, which reads as foHows, to the vote: "CaUs upon all eoncerncd to give the greatest possible assistance to the United Nations Mediator," A .vote was taken by show of hands) as follows: In favour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, United Kingdom, United States of America. Abstaining: Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republie, U mon of Soviet Socialist Republics. The paragraph was adopted by 9 votes ta none) with 2 abstentions. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): 1 shaH put the following paragraph to t~e vote: "Instr.uets the United Nations ;Medlator to 1make a weekly report to the Secrl.~ity Council during the cease-fire," ' ,

We shaH now vote on the last paragraph which reads as follows: "Decides that if the present resolution is rejected by either party or by both, or if, having been accepted, it is subsequently repudiated violated, the present situation in Palestine will be reconsidered with a view to action under Chapter VII of the Charter." Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) l think the word "present" has crept in by mistake in the phrase: "the present situation Palestine will be reconsidered". It should read, think: "the situation in Palestine".

l put the text as amended to the vote. A vote was taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, United Kingdom, United States America. Abstaining: Argentina, Syria, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republic,s. The paragraph was adopted by 7 votes none with 4 abstentions. Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): mave the adoption of the following amendment, which woulcl appear as the thirteenth paragraph of the resolution, if l have enumerated them correctly: "CaUs upon aIl Governments to take aIl possible steps to assist in the implementation of this . resolution." , The additional amendment was adopted by 8 votes to none with 3 abstentions.

Do the members of the Council wish a vote ta be taken on the text as a whole? Mr. 'ARCE (Argentina) (translated from Spanish): There is no mIe of procedure which requires such a vote.

The draft resolution submitted by the French delegation is still before you. After the vote which has just taken place, 1 fcel that our proposaI is covered by the resolution adopted. l very much hope that 1 am right, and that the new text, which has just been adopted, will effect what 1 desired to effect by my own text. In conclusion, may 1 appeal ta the Arab representatives and the representatives of the Jewish Agency to do their utmost to make events confirm my hopes for this resolution. l shall, therefore, not put the French resolution to the vote. You will remember that the Colombian representative made a number of suggestions which he did not submit in the form of a final draft resolution. l think it would be best to ask him ta reserve the consideration of his suggestions, if : rieure. ~e intends raising them again, for another meetmg. Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine): l assume that the phrase in the last paragraph but one, "by eithèr party or by bath" has the same meaning that is given in the previous paragraphs, namely, it refers to any Government or authority among those addressed in the previous paragraphs.

The text has already been adopted. We have just completod a weighty task. l call on the two parties ta appreciate the full gravity and effect of the text we have just adopted. 1 think 1 am right in interpreting the text as being somewhat different in its intentions, its spirit and its firmness from those which have preceded it. l ask that it may be interpreted in this way. cédé. ce Ml'. L6PEZ (Colombia): l believe that we an wish ta join Ml'. Austin in expressing our very high appreciation of the very able conduct of the business of the Security Council during the time of Ml'. Parodi's presidel1cy, and on behalf of my Government, l wish ta do sa very heartily, with a very deep sense of recognition. . Ml'. HSIA (China) : My delegation wishes to join heartily in the tribute which the representatives of the United States and Calambia have made ta the President for the excellent service he has rendered to the Security Council.

dare not allow any more discussion . . . Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated tram StJanish): In spite of the ruling given by the President of the Cauncil a few days aga regarding the veto, 1 fully endorse what has been said. If l do not say more, it is because l know that the office of President of the Council is held in rotation and l am afraid it might be thought that 1 am fishing for compliments. Ml'. IGNATIFF (Canada) : The Canadian delegation merely wants ta say, "Thank you, Ml'. President, for your services". Ml'. NrSOT (Belgium) (translated trom French) : l, tao, wish ta thank the President most warmly.

l wish ta thank the members of the Council for the gratitude they have expressed and for what they have said, aIl of which l appreciate aIl the more in view of the lateness of the hour. 1v1r. EL-KHOURI (Syria) : 1 reserve my right ta praise the presidency of Ml'. Parodi when l take the Chair after him.

It is high time that 1 close the meeting. Our llext meeting, as the Syrian representative has said will be held on Wednesday, 2 June, at , . 2.30 p.m., to discuss the Palestine questlOn.