S/PV.441 Security Council

We shall continue the discussion of item 2 of the agenda. There are two speakers on the list. I call upon the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. _ Mr. MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated from Russian): In connexion with the United States representative's statement [440th meeting] that when a vote is taken on the USSR draft resolution regarding the admission of all the twelve States, his delegation will require separate votes, the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR in its turn declares that, in that event, it will insist on the discussion of each application separately, as it would be quite irregular to take a vote without first having done so. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais): Avant 1'ouverture de la seance, des representants m'ont fait savoir qu'ils ne pourraient differer certains engagements et que nous devrions nous separer plus tot que de coutume. I1 y a encore un orateur inscrit, et, si nous devions proceder it un vote, je ne pense pas que nous en aurions fini avant l'heure habituelIe. Je demande donc si le Conseil accepte de lever la seance et de se reunir cet apres-midi it 15 heures. . Comme il n'y a pas d'objections, il en est ainsi decide. La seance est levee cl 12 h. 45. QUATRE CENT QUARANTE ET UNIEME SEANCE Tenue cl Lake Success, New-York le vendredi 9 septembre 1949, cl 15 heures. President: Sir Alexander CADOGAN (Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord). Presents: Les representants des pays suivants: Argentine, Canada, Chine, Cuba, Eg-ypte, France, Norvege, Republique socialiste sovietique d'Ukraine, Union des Republiques socialistes sovietiques, Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord, Etats-Unis d'Amerique. L'ordre du jour estcelui de la 440eme SefmCe [S/Agenda/440]. 4.· Admission de nouveaux Membres (suite) Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglai's): NouS poursuivons la discussion du point 2 de notre ordre du jour. Deux orateurs sont iriscrits. Je donne tout d'abord la parole au representant de la Republique socialiste sovietique d'Ukraine. M. MANUILSKY (Republique socialiste sovietique c1'Ukraine) (traduit du russe): Le representant des Etats-Unis ayant annonce [440eme seance] que sa delegation demanderait. un vote par division sur le projet de resolution de l'URSS relatif cl. 1'admission des douze Etats candidats, la delegation <;le la RSS d'Ukraine declare a son tour que, dans ce cas, elle insistera pour que chaquedemande d'admission soit discutee separement. En effet, it serait tout it fait anormal de proceder au vote sans avoir examine chacunedes demandes. It seems to me that at the present stage, after the vote taken the day before yesterday concerning Nepal [439th meeting]-a vote which is quite typical-and after the discussion concerning this particular case as well as the more general aspects of the problem, we have little to learn that is new. The President now has all the facts he will need for the report which he proposes to make to the General Assembly on the present state of the question in the Council.

I have already ~"Cpressed my own preference for that course of action. However, the proposers of the draft resolutions which are before the Security Council LS/1331-S/1337 . and S/1340] have insisted that they should be put to a vote. In these circumstances I have no alternative: we must proceed to a vote. As I have already intimat~d to 'the Council, I shall put to the vote first the draft resolution submitted by the representative of Argentina concerning the application of Portugal [S/1331]. Mr. TSARAPKIN (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): Resolution 197 (lII) C, to which the Argentine representative refers in his drafts, does not stand alone. I know, and we all know, that 197(III), also includes another section, B, the first paragraph of which states: "Having noted the special reports of the Security Council on the question of the admission of new Members (A/617 and A/618) ..." I should ·like to draw the Security Council's attention to the first of the documents referred to in that resolution 197(III)B, which precedes ~esolution 197(UI)C. , Le document A/617 enumere les pays qui ant presente des demandes d'admission a l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Ces pays y figurent dans l'ordre suivant: Albanie, Autriche, Bulgarie, Hongrie, Irlande, etc. J'attire l'attention des membres du Conseil de securite sur le fait que, dans ce docutnent officiel, l'Albanie figure en premier lieu. Ainsi donc, si nous voulons noUs conformer a la resc1ution de l'Assemblee generale, si noris voulons lir <:ompte des faits et examiner la .question en toute impartialite, nous devons etudier et mettre' aUX1 voix en tout premier lieu les demandes des pays qui nous sont parvenues les premieres. . Resolution 197(IlI)B asks the Security Coun- La section B de la resolution 197 (IU) decll to reconsider the applications, taking into mande au Conseil de securite a reconsiderer les Cl;ccount document A/617,' in' which Albania is demandes d'admission et se refere au document hstedfirst. The USSR delegation insists that the A/617 ou l'Albanie figure en, tete de liste. La Security Council should be completely objective iielegation de l'URSS insiste pour que le Conseil Document Aj617 lists the countries which have applied for membership in the United Nations in the following order: Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Ireland and so forth. I wish to point out to the members of the Security Council that in this official document Albania is mentioned first. If, therefore, we are to be guided by the General Assembly resolution; and if we are to maintain an objective approach to the discussion of this question, then the applications which were' made earlier must be discussed and voted on before those of other countrles. ~nd fair in its approach to this question and that de securite agisseen cetteaffaire d'une maniere It sh?uld not adopt low political stratagems by objective et equitable. Elle s'oppose a ce qu'il drawmg from among the applicants only those emploiedes procedes de basse politique en ne countries which are favourably viewed by the choisissant, parmi les pays candidats, que ceuxqui Anglo-American bloc. I have in mind countries jouissent des faveurs du bloc-anglo'-camericain. Je such .as Portugal, Ireland, Austria, Italy, Jordan veux parlernotamment des pays tels que le Portu- "'~i.,.,.£..4;,.•.•.~M._,U..~ ..... '!iI'iW00!.!'!IIIl¥_~'.!!IlI.INl!!!!llIIiIr__.ga_:IIIII:I"~:IIlIlI_IllIr1.:lIIIiJldllll:.~.l1l.'A_u.tr.ichl1l.ellll,.I..~I.ta.l..ie:ll,.I.aIlllJIIIiI~lIIir.d.allllmlllll·e.,..e.tc lIII "__ Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais) : J'ai deja. exprime ma preference personnelle pour cette methode. Toutefois, les auteurs des projets de resolution dont le Conseil est saisi [S/1331- S/1337 et S/1340] insistent pour que .ceux-ci soient mis aux voix. Dans ces conditions, je n'ai pas le choix: i1 faut proceder au vote. Comme je l'ai deja indique au Conseil, je vais d'abord mettre aux voix le projet de resolution soumis par le representant de l'Argentine, concernant la demande d'admission duPortugal [S/1331]. M. TSARAPKlNE (Union des Republiques socialistessovietiques) (traduit du russe) : Le representant de l'Argentine s'est rHere, dans ses projets de resolution, a la section C de la resolution 197 (lII) de I'Assemble generale; or, nous sayons tous la resolution 197 (Ill) comporte egalement une section B, dont le premier paragraphe contient le passage suivant: "Prenant acte des rapports speciaux du Conseil de securite concernant la question de l'admission de nouveaux Membres (A/617 et A/618) ..." Jevoudrais attirer l'attention du Conseil de securite sur ce premier document mentionne a la section B de la resolution 197 (UI), laquelle precede la section C. If the Security Council nevertheless considers a vote ne<:essary, it should be taken only in the order in which the applications were submitted. That is my first point. My seco:p.d is the following. On 16 June 1949, when the Security Council first resumed the discussion of the question of the admission of new Members [427th meeting], the President, Mr. Sunde, made the following proposal: "In my capacity as President of tlle Council, I should like further to suggest that if statements which might be made at this meeting do not reveal any such change of position as would make it possible for the Council to recommend the admission of any or all of the applicant States, it would not be necessary for us to take a formal vote." At the Security Council's 429th meeting on 24 June, the United Kingdom representative stated: "My delegation believes that if there is to be any voting-and we wonder whether in the light of the exchange of views which we have had, any useful purpose w.ould really be served by proceeding to ~ote ..." Thus, the United Kingdom representative too expressed a doubt as to whether any useful purpose would be served by taking a vote on the said applications if the parties had not changed their positions and if a vote, did not alter the existing position on the question of the admission of new Members. At the same meeting the United States representative, Mr. Austin, said: "I would wish to support the recommendations of the President that we should at this time simply take note of our inability, at the present time, to make a favourable recommendation on any of the applications before us." At the same meeting the French representative stated that his delegation would adhere to the Council's tradition and practice. The French delegation, he said, "does not think it at all necessary to take any new votes" on the question. The Egyptian representative said, at that meeting, that he thought that it would be better not to take a vote on the admission of new Members. He voiced a like view this ,morning [440th meeting], as did also the French representative. Finally, on 24 June [429th meeting), at the close of the meeting, the President said: etI am still of the opinion that no practical purpose would be served by taking a formal vote on the applications before us. Several representatives have expressed their agreement with this, Ainsi donc, le representant du Royaume-Uni doutait, lui aussi, qu'iI y eut un sens ou qu'it y eut inten~t a mettre aux voix ces demandes d'admission si l'attitude des parties demeurait in.. changee et si un vote ne devait apporter aucun element nouveau a la maniere dont se presente la question de l'admission des nouveaux Membres. A la meme seance, M. Austin, representant des Etats-Unis, a declare: "Je desire appuyer les propositions du President tendant a ce que nous nous contentions a present de noter que nous ne sommes pas en mesure de faire a. l'heure actueIle une recom~ mandation favorable au sujet de l'une queIconque des demandes dont nous sommes saisis." Le representant de la France a declare 111i aussi au cours de la meme seance que sa delegation avait l'intention de s'en tenir a. la tradition du Conseil. II affirma que la delegation·franc;aise ne croyait "nulIement necessaire que de nouveaux votes interviennent" sur cette question. C'est encore a la meme seance que le representant de l'Egypte a dit que, a son avis, la meilleure methode consisterait a ne pas mettre aux voix la question de I'admission des nouveaux Membres. Le representant de l'Egypte a soutenu la meme these ce matin [440eme seance], et le representant de la France a fait de meme. . Enfin, le 24 juin [42geme seance], le President a declare vers la fin de la seance : . "Je continue a penser qu'il ne servirait a rien de procedera un vote formel sur les demandes . dont nous sommes saisis. Pltisieurs representants, ont exprime leur accord sur ce point. Je demandet I ~ons ror membership, but that the discussion has ;ot revealed any change of attitude on the part of the members of the Council whiCh would make it possible to make a recommendation for the admission to mt\mbership of any of the twelve States the applications of which we have been asked to reconsider." That statement was made at the end of the meeting, and there was no formal reply from the membe"s of the Council, as the USSR representative s',tggested that the discussion should not be closed but should be continued. The point at issue was not whether the question should be put to the vote, but whether the discussion should be continued, since everything had not yet 'been said, and it was necessary to reply tu certain observations made by other members of the Council. Thus, at that time a considerable section of the Council had already expressed the opinion that it would serve no useful political or practical purpose to put the question to the vote, since the result was foreordained and quite obvious to each of us. It is perfectly clear that the result would be an exact repetition of what happened at previous votes on this question in the Security Council; the Council would not gain anything new by taking a fresh vote. Everybody is aware of this, including the Argentine representative who now insists that a vote should b~ taken on this matter. Cette declaration a et~ faite en fin de seance. Les membres du Conseil de securite n'y ont pas donne de reponse formelle, parce que le representant de I'URSS avait propose de ne pas clore le debat, mais de continue,r la discussion. I1 ne s'agissait pas de savoir s'il fallait mettre la question aux voix, mais simplement de savoir s'it fallait poursuivre la discussion, etant donne que le dernier mot n'avait pas encore ete dit et qu'il fallait repondre a certaines observations et declarations faites par d'autres membres du Conseil. Ainsi donc, la plupart des membres du Conseil avaient indique des ce moment-la que, a leur avis, il etait illogique, tant dupoint de vue pratique que du point de vue politique, de mettre cette question aux voix, puisque le resultat en etait clair d'avance. Il ne fait aucun doute que le vote reproduira fidelement les resultats des scrutins auxquels le Conseil a deja procede sur la meme question. Un nouveau vote n'apportera rien de nouveau. Tout le monde le sait, y compris le representant de l'Argentine qui insiste en ce moment pour que cette question soit mise aux voix. Should the Security Council-one of the most important organs of the United Nations, which deals with the most serious and important questions-approach the question of voting as lightly as in the present case, none of us, including those who insist on a vote's being taken, should have any doubt as to the result. Si le Conseil de securite, qui est l'un des orgartes les plus importants des Nations Unies pa.rce qu'il est charge d'examiner des problemes d'importance vitale, se met a traiter les questions concernant le vote de fac:;on aussi legere qu'il le fait maintenant, il est facile, pour chacun de nous, y compris celui ou ceux qui insistent en faveur d'un scrutin, d'en prevoir les consequences. A la suite de ce vote, aucun des Gouvernements dont nous examinons id les demandes n'obtiendra de recommandation ;favorablea 'son admission dans l'Orl~anisation des Nations Unies. Cela s'est deja produit a plusieurs reprises - deux ou trois fois - aU sein du Conseil de securite en ce qui . concerne chacun des Etats qui nous ont soumis des demandes; aussi, le semf de la proposition faite par un ou plusieurs membres duConseil qui insistent pour qu'on procede aun nouveau vote n'est-il pas du tout clair. Le representant de l'Egypte a dit a juste titre [440eme seance] que le Conseil de securite devait eviter de se mettre clans une situation ridicule devant l'Assemblee generale et devant le monde entier en mettant aux voix unequestion qui a deja fait l'objet deplusieurs scrutins ~uccessifs. En dIet, chacun de nous saitd'avance quel serait le resultat de ce vote. It est done permis de se demander pourquoi on exige un vote. Quel but'veut-on atteindre par-la? It n'en a qu'un: on vet\tmettre le Conseil de se,curite dans une situation ridicule et, peut-etre, obtenir de nouveaux arguments pour lancer une nouvelle attaque contre la regIe de l'unanimite dont l'application est de rigueur lorsque le Conseil met aux voix une question politiqueimportante. The result of the vote will be that not one of the States whose applications we are now con- .sidering will be recommended for admission to the United Nations. That has happened re- ~eatedl~ in the Security Council, twice or three times, m respect of each of the States whose applications are before us. In these circumstances, it is impossible to understand the purpose of the proposal made by one or several members of the Council, who insist that another vote should be taken. . The Egyptian representative· was right in saymg [440th meeting] that the Security Council should not make itself ridiculous in the eyes of the.General' Assembly and the entire world, by agam taking a vote on this question which has been put to the vote not once but several times, for we all know what the result will be. . Why, then, is a vote being demanded? What IS the purpose of such a vote? There' is only ?ne purpose, namely, to place the Security Council In a ridiculous position and to gather additional argut;'le!1ts for a fresh, attack on the principle of u.nammIty among the. five great Powers, a prin- CIple whIch must be observed to the,'letter when liiiiil.;ken on, important, political questions d tLLblhg" ..11 unlit' 'u 'fii In these circumstances my delegation can see no need for a vote on this question, since all the members of the C;:ouncil are well aware of the fact that. not a single one of othe twelve States will be admitted to the United Nations. That is the situation today. There is another point to which I must refer. I fully agree with my colleague, the representative of the Ukrainian SSR who said that, if we are to proceed to a separate vote on each of the requests from the twelve or thirteen States which have applied for admission to the United Nations, then before the voting we shall have to discuss each of those applications again. Regardless of the faCt that such discussions have already taken place before, each member of the Council, before voting on any one of the applications, must again explain his vote and state why he is voting as he is in the 'case of the country concerned. Mr. TSIANG (China): It is my understanding M. TSIANG (Chine) (traduitde l'anglais): that the President considers that the Security Si je comprends bien, le President estime que le Council might well postpone voting on the draft Conseil de securite peut parfaitement ne pas proresolutions. Nevertheless, he was about to put ceder immediatementau vote sur ces proje'ts de one of the draft resolutions to the vote, for the resolution. Neanmoins, le President etait sur le simple reaSon that the proposer of that draft point de mettre aux VOi;lC l'un .de ces projets de resolution desired that it be put to the vote. My resolution pour la simpleraison que son auteur delegation shares the sentiment already expressed desirait qu'il en fut ainsi. Ma delegation partage by several other delegations that no useful purpose l'opinion deja .exprimee par plusieurs autres delecould be served by putting this draft resolution gations qui ne voient pas d'interet a mettre ce to the vote. Although we wish to consider as projet qe resolution aux voix. Malgre notre desir much as we can the desires of proposers. of resode tenir compte, dans la mesure du possible, des lutions, I think the Security Council is fully vceitx des auteurs des projets de resolution, j'es- __.......en...ti...·tl......ed....· ...t_o...b...e_th_e__m...a_s_te...r......of_it...s...p...r_o_c...e_d_ur...e......in_t...h_at__t_im_...e...q_u...e_l_e...C~,o.nsei1~~ ~ecurit~e~t, entieremitltt On voit done que la position de I'Union sovietique a change. L'Union sovietique a modifie son attitude pour qu'il devienne possible de resoudre la question de l'admission de nouveaux Membres et de sorti.r de l'impasse dans laquelle le Conseil s'etait trouve par suite de l'attitude adoptee par les Etats-Unis, le Royaume-Uni et quelques autres Etats qui les suivent. Neanmoins, l'attitude du bloc anglo-americain sur la question de l'admission de nouveaux Membres est r'estee inchangee. Il est evident, d'apres les declarations des representants des Etats-Unis et de plusieurs autres pays, que cesrepresentants opposeront un veto aux demandes d'admission a 1'Organisation des Nations Unies presentees par l'Albanie, la Hongrie, la Roumanie, la Bulgarie et la Republiq?e populaire de Mongolie. .Dans ces Circonstances, ma delegation ne voit pas la necessite de mettre cette question aux voix, puisque'tous les membres du Conseil savent fort bielJ. qu'aucun des douze Etats ne sera admis a l'Organisation des Nations Unies. ,Telle est la situation dans laquelle se trouve le ConseiI. Il y a encore un autre point dont je voudrais parler. Je me joins entierement a mon collegue, le representant de la RSS d'Ukraine qui a dit que, si le Conseil devait mettre aux voix,' separement, chacune des douze ou treize dema117 des d'admission dont il est saisi, it nous faudrait avant le vote discuter a nouveau chacune de ces demandes. Bien que .cette question ait deja donne lieu a des debats, chaque membre du ConseiI, avant de voter sur telle ou telle demande d'admission, devra de nOUveau expliquer son vote et indiquer les considerations et les motifs qui l'ont pousse it adopter telle ou telle attitude a l'egard du pays interesse. Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated from Spanish): The Egyptian representative has just mentioned the desirability of restoring harmony in the Security Council. Risum teneatis amid? Everyone knows that if anything exists within the Security Council, it is discord. To try to contribute to restore harmony at the present moment and in the political situation of the world is clearly like trying to get pears from the elm, while knowing that the elm cannot produce pears. .Likewise, the Egyptian representative has stated that if the vote were postponed, that would in no way reflect on the substance of the matter, but would mean only that the Council was not prepared to vote. It is abundantly clear that the Council is prepared to vote; that is proved by the fact that statements have been heard from all its members who have not changed their point of view. Therefore the two main arguments of the Egyptian representative have not convinced me. M. ARCE (Argentine) (traduit de l'espagnol) : Le representant de l'Egypte vient de dire qu'il serait bon de retablirl'harmonie au sein du Conseil de securite. RiswJn teneatis amici? Tout le monde sait que, s'il est un sentiment qui regne au sein du Conseil de securite, c'est bien la discorde. Pretendre contribuer a· y retablir l'harmonie en depit de la situation politique qui existe actuel1e- ·ment dans le monde, revient exactement. a demander a. un orme de produire des peches tout en sachant que l'orme ne peut pas donner de peches. D'autre part, le representant de l'Egypte a declare que, si le voteetait differe, cela ne prejugerait en rien la decision sur le fond. de la question, rnais signifierait seulement que le Conseil de securite n'est pas pret a. voter. Or, il est parfaitement. evident que le Conseil est·en niesure de se prononcer; la p~euve en est que nous avons entendu tous ses membres declarer que leur point de vue n'avait pas change. Les deux arguments xrtajeurs du representant de l'Egypte ne m'ont donc nullement convaincu. I come now to the argUments of the Chinese representative. I find them unfortunate, and feel that they set a very bad precedent. They would allow any majority-not of a fixed bloc but of any chance bloc of seven members where a question of· procedure is at issue---o-to prevent !he 111.inority of four from being heard and from mducmg the Council to make a clear statement through the vote of its members. The Chinese representative's proposal is a very bad one, and I cannot support it. It is very bad because of the. very bad precedent it would set and the Chmese representative himself will soon regret having made this proposal. J'en 'liens maintenant a.. l'argumentation dti representant de la Chine. C'est la. une mauvaise argumentation, un tres mauvais precedent; cela permettrait a une majorite quelconquenon· pas a un bloc determine, n-J;tis aun blococcasionne! de sept membres, s'i1 s'agit d'une question de procedure -'- d'empecher que la minorite, composee desquatre autres membres, se fasse entendre et obtienne que le Conseil de securite se prononce par. un vote. C'estune tres mauvaise proposition que celle du representant de la Chine, et jene puis m'y rallier"; elle est extremement mauvaise en raison dudangereuxprecedent qu'eIleHablit, et le representant de la Chine luimeme se repentira a bref delai de l'avoir formulee. A vrai dire, on cherche ici, par des discours et par la promesse de nouv~aux discours, a exercer une pression sur le Con!'~i1 de secllrite pour l'empecher de proceder a un vote. Je ne suis pas dispose a me soumettre a cette pression. Que viennent tOllS les discoursannonces; si je dois, rester seul au sein du Conseil de securite a sou..\, tenir les droits des petits pays' en cette. matiere, \" . je demanderai au President de se conformer a \, Let us be truthful. What we have here is the pressure of speeches and the promise of new speeches to. influence the Security Council not to vote. I am not prepared to submit to this pressure no matter how many speeches may be made; and even if I must remain the sole defender in the S~curity Council of the. rights of the small countnes in this question, I ask the President ~ere to~the rules and custom and therefore Mr. TSIANG (China): I ventured' to make a proposal a moment ago with the sole purpose of preventing a bad situation from becoming worse. As to my attitude in regard to the sub-. stance of the matter, I think it is clear from my earlier statements that I admire the objective of the representative of Argentina, although I differ from him in regard to the way to reach that objective. From his statement a moment ago, I can see that my proposal would have a result contrary to the one I intended, aI!d I therefore withdraw it. Mr. MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated from R1lSsian): I feel that a somewhat dangerous precedent is being created when a member of the Security Council makes a completely arbitrary demand for a new vote on a question on which we have already' voted several times. I maintain that nowhere in the rules of procedure is it directly or indirectly stated that such a request by a member of the Security Council should be granted. It is characteristic that, at the time, that proposal was opposed neither by the representatives of the United States .and the United Kingdom nor by the :represe.ntative of Argentina, who supported it and proposed that no vote should be taken on the question. In July there was a second ruling by the then President [431st meeting] to the effect that the question should not be put to a vote. There was not a single member of the Security Counciland that includes the representative of Argentina~who insisted on a vote. Those who now demand a vote should at least explain why they demand It, what has changed, why the Council should go back on its decisions, on two rulings from the Chair and on two unanimous decisions of the Seourity Council? Should the Council go back on all these because one or its members feels that it is necessary to take a fresh vote on a question which has been discussed? That is not logical and the precedents are against it. That is why I feel there is no need to adopt this proposal. In addition, I should like to make a request of the President. I am very grateful to the representative of Argentina who has magnanimously stated that he has absolutely no objection to our discussing and giving our opinions on each application separately. I welcome that statement by the representative of Argentina, and if the majority nevertheless decides today that a vote should be taken, I shall ask the President to put my name immediately at the head of the list of speakers on the application of Portugal. I do not know which application is to be dis- Cl1ssed, that of Albania or that of Portugal, although I assume, that we shall have to discuss the applications in the order in which they were submitted. At all events, I should like to be the first speaker on the question. Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated from Spanish) : At no time have I given my support to a.ny resolution such as that which the representative of the Ukrainian SSR has just described. I shall add further that at no time has, the Council adopted any resolution, either in June or July.

Before calling on the next speaker, it might bring a little clarity into our , proceedings, and expedite them, if I' attempted to ~um up very briefly the situation as I see it. Le PRESIDENT (tr,wuit de l'a~'tglais): Ava.'1t de donner la parole a. l'orateur suivant, je crois que ce serait apporter quelqt1e clarte dans notre debat et permettre d'en accelerer le conrs que d'essayer de resumer tres brievement la situation, teIle qu'elle m'apparait. Thi~ item, which has been before the Security Counctl now for a long time, arises from General Assemblyresolution 197 (Ill) in which, among other !hmgs, the Assembly asked the Council to' reconSIder specifically certain listed applications. . !he Security Council has been doing that at lllllli'iPals now, for some months. =.. Ce point, dont le Conseil de securite e8t saisi depuis longtemps, decoule de, la resolution 197 (Ill) de 1'Assemblee generale invitant notamment le Conseil a. reconsiderer certaines demandes d'admission expressement visees. C'est bien ce que fait le Conseil de securite, par intervalles, depuis plusieurs mois. I return to the point that, unless any other I J'en reviens a. ceci: a. moins qu'une nouveIle motion is proposed or unless even now the motion ne soit deposee ou que les auteurs des a~thors of t~le .dra~t r:esolutions state ~hat they projets de resolution ne declarent qu'ils n'insiswdl not at thIS tIme mSIst upon a vote bemg taken teront .pas pour que ces projets soient mis aux on them, I, as President, have no alternative: I voix maintenant, je n'ai pas le choix, en tant que am bound to put the draft resolutions to the vote President: je dois mettre les projets de resolution and I shall put them, as I commenced to dO'arlie; aux voix, et je ferai proceder au vote, comme in our meeting, in the order in which I ind:.cated. j'ai d'aiIleurs commence a le faire au debut de la seance, dans l'ordre que j'avais indique alors. Mr. MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist M. MANUILSKY (Republique socialiste sovie- Republic) (translated from Russian) : I cannot tique d'Ukraine) (traduit du, russe) : Je ne puis agree to the procedure which the President has accepter la methode que le President vient de indicated. If the question of the admission of definir. It est inutiIe de proceder a un nouveau new Members to the United Nations, which is vote, puisque la question que nous sommes en before us, has already been discussed and voted train d'etudier, a savoir 1'admission de nouveaux on, then there is no need for a fresh vote. If that Membresa l'Organisation des Nations Unies, a is so why does the President change his mind in deja ete examirlee et a fait l'objet d'un scrutin. the afternoon and insist on a vote, when he stated Ce matin [440eme seance], le President a dit this morning [440th meeting] that, generally qu'un nouveau vote ne lui paraissait pas indique; I. III J.;!"jJM.te:#i!l~iM•..'Ul!l~!li.!"Jt,!!MU.':!$~ .•.".j!"MJ.~~"Ii!!'J,~~tt@il!!'!J$~iW.&.~~~_lll!!l!!l:"~".!!"I,!t'.'~~!I" __ I would point out to the President that this is not some procedural matter or other. It is a question concerning human beings, concerning States, many of which have tens of millions of inhabitants. The question is whether or not to admit those States to the United Nations. How can we close the debate on such a question with one stroke of a pen or one ruling from the Chair, and state that in the President's opinion the question need not be discussed any further? That would be unjust; it would be disloyal towards those States whose applications we are considering. It clearly would be so, regardless of whether a particular member of the Security Council did or did not sympathize with a particular State. That is why the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR is firmly opposed to the President's proposal to proceed to a vote without any preliminary discussion; such a proposal is completely unfounded politically and is also a logical contradiction.

Before calling on the next speaker, I must reply to what hJ.s just been said by the representative of the Ukrainian SSR. I have not changed my view at all. I said that I was in favour of not voting. I am still in favour of not voting, but in my capacity as President I cannot strike out a draft resolution which is on the table, having been proposed by a member of this Council; I cannot do it. Secondly, with regard to what I said about renewing the discussion which appeared to have reached its end on all these separate applications, Mr. Manuilsky said that would be unjust and unfair, and that members of the Council here would not be able to speak in favour of certain applicants. The representative of the Ukrainian SSR speaks as if some fresh application had been submitted today. All these applications have been befor~ the Security Council since June, and the representative of the Ukrainian SSR had several opportunities during the intervening time of saying everything that he might have wished to say in favour of the candidates he favours, or of heaping any amount of obloquy on those he does not favour. There has been no suppression of discussion whatever. Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypt): It is with. regret that I note that the fears which I expressed, along with other members of this Council, of our falling into an interminable discussion on the draft resolutions before.us because of the insistence that they should be put to a vote, are justified. I should have been happier if· I had been shown to be wrong in thinking that we were on the way to an endless discussion in connexion with the subject matter before us,. I I1 ne s'agit pas la d'une simple question de procedure. I1 s'agit d'etres humains et d'Etats qui comptent parfois des dizaines de millions d'habitants. I1 s'agit d~ savoir s'il faut ou non admettre ces Etats a l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Comment peut-on, d'un trait de plume ou par une simple decision presidentielle, clore le debat sur la question en se bornant a. dire que, de l'avis du President, il n'y a pas lieu de poursuivre la discussion a. ce sujet? Une telle procedure serait aussi bien irreguliere que, deIoyale a. 1'egard des Etats dont on examine les demandes. Quels que soient les sentiments de sympathie ou d'antipathie eprouves par tel ou td membre du Conseil a l'egard de l'un ou l'autre de ces Etats, il est evident que cette methode serait deloyale envers ceux-ci. C'est pourquoi la delegation de la RSS d'Ukraine s'oppose de la fac;on la plus categorique a. la proposition du 'President selon laquelle it y aurait lieu de proceder au vote sans aucune discussion prealable; cette proposition est insoutenable du point de vue politique et contradictoire du point de vue logique. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de T:anglais): Avant de donner la parole a. l'orateur suivant, it faut que je reponde au representant de la RSS d'Ukraine. Je n'ai nullement change d'avis. rat dit que je n'etais pas partisan d'un vote. Telle est encore mon opinion, mais, en qualite de President, je n'ai pas le droit de supprimerune resolution dont le Conseil a ete saisi par l'un'de ses membres; je ne pense absolument pas le faire. D'autre part, au sujet de ce que j'ai dit de la reouverture de la discussion de chacune de ces demandes d'admission alors que cette discussidh semblait etre parvenue a son terme, M.' Manuilsky a trouve que ma suggestion etait injuste et peu equitable. et qu'elle empecherait certains membres du Conseil de securite de parler en .faveur de tel ou tel candidat. Le representant de la RSS d'Ukraine parle comme si de nouve11es demandes avaient ete deposees aujourd'hui. Le Conseil de securite est saisi de toutes ces demandes depuis le mois de ju~n, et le representant de la. RSS d'Ukraine a eu plusieurs fois l'occasion, depuis, d'exprimer tout ce qu'il pouvait avoir a. dire en faveur des candidats qu'it soutient, ou d'accabler ceux dont i1 n'est pas partisan de tous les denigrements possible. La discussion s'est done deroulee sans aucune entrave. Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypte) (traduit de ranglais) : Je constate avec regret que mes apprehensions, partagees par d'autres membres du Conse-H, etaient justifi.ees lorsque je craignais de nous voir plonges dans une discussion inter.. minable des projets de resolutiondont nous sommes saisis, puisque l'on insiste pour qu'ils soient mis aux voix. J'aurais mieux aime avoira. reconnaitre que j'avais eu tort de croire que nous etibns sur la pente d'une discussion sans fin sur le .fond de la question qui nous est. soumise. There are, however, at least two considerations of which we cannot lose sight. One consideration is the matter of procedure. It is very clear that at certain moments the Security Council can say that the moment is not ripe for taking a decision or that the moment is not ripe for voting. I do not see why this should be put into doubt. I do not see it, although I repeat that a. representative of Egypt can never, in the deliberations of the United Nations, be among those supporting any suffocation of discussion or killing of proposals_ Besides procedure, there is the matter of logic, of wisdom. I am not even going to speak too long on that now, especially when I think of thegood advice of the representative of Argentina, who said that we should not unduly tax the patience of the Security Council amI its members, a piece of advice which we sometimes forget. Many members of this CounciI-I can rightly say most members of this Council, except perhaps one member-have repeatedly stated that it would not be wise for the Security Council to proceed to a vote now. No member of this Councilnone at all-said that we should never proceed to. a vote. Why then all this wrangle? Let us see the result. If we say that we are on the road to a vote, that we are nearing a vote, then we already have the assurance of hearing the repeated arguments submitted by the representatives of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR. They point to an endless discussion. From their point of view, it seems that this should be - allowed. Then, may I· remind the Council that I said at least once before at our previous meetings and again today [440th meeting], that we have three new members who, last year, when most of these applications were considered, did not take part in the deliberations of this Council or those of its Committee on the Admission of New Members. Until now, at the many meetings we have had on this matter-I regret to say, mostly useless meetings-we treated the applications in a general way. We did not go into the detail of discussing each and everyone of them separately, as we should certainly do. I do not say that I intend to discuss each and every one I1 y a cependant au moins deux considerations que nous ne devons pas perdre de vue. L'une d'eUes concerne la procedure. Il est patent que, dans certains cas, le Conseil de securite peut estimer que le moment n'est pas venu de prendre une decision ou de proceder au vote. Je ne vois pas pourquoi cela pourrait etre mis en doute. Je n'eo vois pas la raison, sans que cela m'empeche de repeter qu'on ne trouvera jamais un representant de l'Egypte dans le camp de ceux qui voudraient faire avorter une discussion ou une proposition, au cours d'un debat a. l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Outre ce probleme de procedure, il y a une question de logique, de sagesse. Je n'ai nullement l'intention de m'etendre longuement sur ce point a. l'heure actueUe, surtout quand je me rememore le bon conseil que nous a donne le representant de l'Argentine de ne pas abuser de la patience du Conseil de securite et de ses membres, conseil que nous avons parfois tendance a. oublier. De nombreux membres d" Conseil de securite - je suis meme fonde a. due, la plupart des membres du Conseil, a. l'exception peut-etre d'un seul - ont declare a. plusieurs reprises que le Conseil serait mal avise de proceder a. un vote actuellement. Aucun membre -du Conseil de securite - je dis aucun - n'a pretendu que nous ne devrions jamais voter sur ces propositions. A quoi bon, alors, toute cette querelle? Considerons le resultat. S'il est dit que nous prenons le chemin du vote, que nous sommes sur le point de voter, nous savons deja. que nouS allons entendre repetel' les a,rguments formules par les representants de I'URSS et de la RSS d'Ukraine. Cela fait prevoil' une discussion sans fin. Du point de vue de ces representants, il semble que cette discussion doive -etre toleree. Or, qu'il me soit permis de rappeler au Conseil ce qui j'ai deja. dit au moins une fois au cours de nos precedentes seances et que j'ai repete aujourd'hui [440eme seance], a. savoir que nous avons parmi nous trois nouveaux membres qui, l'annee derniere, a. l'epoque ou la majorite de ceS demandes ont ete examinees, n'ont pris part, ni aux deliberations du C9nseil, ni a. celles du Comite d'admission de nouveaux Membl'es. Jusqu'a. present, aU cours des nombretlses seances que nous avons consacrees a. cette question - je regrette d'etre I oblige de dire que la plupart d'entre elIes ont ete vaines - nous avons traite ces demandes d'un May I then hope that we shall ..desist from taking a vote now, in spite of the well-intentioned arguments put forward by our colleague from Argentina. But if the President says that we have no other choice but to proceed to a vote, and if our colleague from Argentina insists, then in that case. I repeat, we should allow everyone, and particularly the three new members of the Security Council, to submit any remarks they want to make on this matter.

If nobody' has anything further to say on the immediate point at issue, I am compelled to return to the simple and straightforward procedure from which I was diverted a little while ago, and put the first Argentine draft resolution to the vote. The draft resolution is to be found in document· S/133l. Mr. TSARAPKIN (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian) : The delegation of the Soviet Union is strongly opposed to the procedure proposed by the President for voting on the draft resolutions before the Security Council. It is difficult to describe the situation which has arisen otherwise than by the word "arbitrary". In actual fact, what legal basis has the Security Council for putting to the vote the draft r~solutions which the representative of Argentina hastened to submit to it on 16 June 1949 before any others, and before the application of Albania, which was submitted not on 16 June 1949-when the draft resolutions of the representative of Argentina were handed in-but on 25 January 1946, that is to say, more than threeand a half years ago? There is now a movement to vote on the admission to the United Nations of countries which submitted their applications more than a year, a year and a half or two years after Albania. There are no grounds whatsoever ~or such a step, since Albania, which submitted lts application first, is entitled to have that application voted on first, that is to say, before the others. I s?all read a list drawn up by the Secretariat· sh~wmg the dates at which it received the applicatlOns for admission to the United Nations and from whom those applications were received. Albania submitted its application on 25 January 1946. I wish to draw the Council's attention to the date, 25 January 1946, that is to say, more than three and a half years ago. What, then, was the further development of this question? Until now neither the Security Council nor other organs of the United Nations have queried the procedure to be followed when considering these applications. That procedure was based on the order in which applications were received. An application submitted earlier was considered and put to the vote earlier; an application received later was considered and put to the vote later. It was precisely in that order that the Sectirity Council Committee on the Admission of New Members, with which we are all familiar, considered the applications received; in other words, it began by considering the applications of Albania, the Mongolian People's Republic and then - the others in the order of their reception. The Security Council at its previous meetings followed exactly the same method, while at this meeting it suddenly rejects this logical, objective and, I should have thought, honest order of considering applications and gives preference to the seven Or eight countries whose admission to the United Nations is ~upported by the United States, the United Kingdom and others. We all know that the Anglo-American bloc favours the admission of such countries as Jordan, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Austria, Finland, Ceylon and Nepal, w; ~le it objects to the admission of Albania, the Mongolian People's RepUblic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria because of the internal political regimes of those people's democracies. The United States cannot endure the progressive and democratic; regimes of those countries nor the independence of their policies; hence it blocks their admission to membership in the United Nations. Thus we see that this policy of discrimination against some countries and of' favouritism to others makes itself felt even in the question of the order in which the Council should consider and vote upon the applications received. In deciding this question, those who pursue that policy do not wish to take into account the dates at. which the applications were submitted. The demand of the Argentine representative La pretention du representant de l'Argentine, that his draft resolutions should be voted first qui demande qu'en premier lieu on mette aux is entirely unjustified; and we cannot agree that voix ses propres projets de resolution, est absoluthe applications of the seven countries referred ment indefendable. Nousne pouvons pas accepter to in those drafts should be voted on first, while que l'on mette aux voix en premier lieu les the Council has before it the application of AIdemandes des sept pays mentionnes dans ces bania, submitted as long ago as 25 January 1946, projets. de resolutionalors que le Conseil elOt saisi and others. The applications of Albania, the de la demande d'admission de .1'Albanie qui a Comment la question a-t-ell evolue ensuite? Jusqu'a present, ni le Conseil de securite, ni aucun des autres des Nations Unies n'a mis en doute l'ordre a suivre lors de l'examen de ces demandes. Elles ont toujours ete examinees dans l'ordre meme de leur presentation. Les demandes qui avaient ete presentees les premieres ant ete examinees et mises aux voix avant les autres. Le Comite d'admission de nouveaux Membres, que nous connaissons tous, a suivi precisement cette methode pour examiner les demandes qu'il avait re<;ues; il a etudie en premier lieu la demande de l'Albanie, puis celle de la Repulbique populaire .. de Mongolie, puis toutes les autres demandes, en respectant l'ordre dans lequel eUes avaient ete presentees. Au cours des seances precedentes, le Conseil de securite a suivi exactement la meme methode. Et voici que, a la seaniCe d'aujourd'hui, on rejette cette methode logique, consciencieuse et, permettez-moi de le dire, impartiale, d'examiner les demandes d'admission, et on choisit arbitrairement les sept ou huit pays que les Etats-Unis, le Royaume-Uni et quelques ~lt1tres tiennent a voir admettre a l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Nous n'ignorons pas que, si le bloc angloamericain soutient les candidatures de pays tels que la Jordanie, le Portugal, l'Irlande, l'Italie, l'Autriche, la Finlande, Ceylan et le Nepal, et s'eleve contre l'admission de l'Albanie, de la Republique populaire de Mongolie, de la Hongrie, de la Roumanie et de la Bulgarie a l'Organisation des Nations Unies, c'est a cause du regime politique qui est en vigueur dans les pays de democratie populaire. Les Etats-Unis n'aiment pas le regime progressiste et democratique de ces pays, ni l'independance de leur politique, et c'est en raison de leur antipathie pour ce regime qu'ils empechent ces pays d'entrer a l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Cette politique de discrimination envers certains pays et de favoritisme envers d'autres pays se ,manifeste encore' aujourd'hui, lorqu'il s'agit de determiner l'ordre. dans lequel il conviendrait d'examiner et de mettre aux voix les demandes d'admission re<;ues. En envisageant cette question, ceux qui poursuivent cette politique ne veulent pas tenir compte des dates auxquelles les differentes demandes ontete presentees. - I did not insist. If the Argentine representative wished to speak first, I would not stand in his way. It was in that way that he introduced his draft resolutions. I. would' ask, however, whether we should allow ourselves to be guided by such purely fortuitous circumstances in deciding the order in which we shall vote. Is this order anything but fortuitous? No, we cannot let ourselves be guided by chance in this question; we must follow a logical and objective order, that is 1:0 say, the chronological order of suJ:>- mission of applications. I wish to make a further observation. Mr. Sunde, speaking in the Security Council even before the Argentine representative, made a preliminary statement [427th meeting] on the question of the admission of new Members, in which he advanced a suggestion to which reference has been made today by other representatives and in particuJar by the representative of Egypt. That suggestion, which I have already commented upon, was to the. effect that if the various countries did not change their position and.if no proposal were submitted making it posslb1e to hope that anyone of the applicant States would be admitted to membership, there was in his opinion no need to vote on these applications. particum~rement celui de l'Egypte. Cette suggestion, a. laqueUe je me suis deja. refere, consistait a. dire que, si la position des membres du Conseil demeurait inchangee et si aucune proposition permettant d'esperer qu'un des Etats candidats puisse etre admis aux Nations Unies n'etait pre·· sentee, il n'y aurait pas lieu de mettre aux voix ces demandes de l'Argentine. Cette suggestion a ete faite~vant que le representant de l'Argentine ne prenne la parole. Puisqu'on tient cl se montrer pointilleux en ce qui concerne 1es propositions formulees avec une teUe precipitation par M. Arce, et puisqu'on veut 1es mettre aux voix en tout premier lieu, il convient de rappeler que la premiere proposition a. etre soumise fut celle de M. Sunde, notre President; en dIet, ce1ui-d l'avait .formulee dans Son discours d'ouverture a. la 427eme seance du Conseil de securite tenue le 16 juin dernier; Si l'on tient done a. suivre cette voie, il faut examiner cette proposition et voir si les membres .du Conseil J'approuvent. En acceptant cette proposition, la majoritedu Consei1 aura adopte une decision qui dispensera le Conseil de securite d'examiner 1es autres resolutions. Si, toutefois,'la majorite desire qu'il soit a. nouveau procede a. un vote sur 1es demandes d'admission a. l'Organisation, alors le seul ordre legitime serait, comme je 1'ai deja. dit, l'ordre chrono10gique, c'est-a.-dire l'ordre dans .leque1 les demandes ont eie presentees. . That suggestion was made befor~ the Argentme representative spoke. Since we are being so overscrupulous as to feel that we must vote first on the hastily ,submitted Argentine draft resolutions, .it should be noted that the first proposal to be lntroduced was that of. our President, Mr. Sunde, at the opening of the 427th meeting, on 16 June. We might therefore follow the course of taking up this proposal and seeing whether the members of the Council agree with it. If the majority of the members agree, this will represent a decision of the Security Council and all other proposals will fall. If, however, the majonty still wishes to vote again on the applicatlOns for admission to the United Nations, then, as I have already said, the only legal proced?re would be to vote upon them in chronologIcal order, that is to say, in the order in which they were received. "Having considered the applications of Albania, the Mongolian People's Republic, Trans-Jordan (Jordan), Portugal, Ireland, Hungary" Italy, Austria, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, Ceylon and Nepal for admission to membership in the United Nations, "Recommends to the General Assembly that the above-mentioned countries be admitted to membership in the United Nations." This draft resolution lists all the applications in the order of submission, that is to say, begin- ning with Albania, which was the first to apply, and ending with Nepal, which was the last to do so. There is consequently every reason why this draft resolution should be put to the vote first; then all the other questions will be eliminated. If, therefore, the Council still comes to the conclusion that a vote is necessary, 1 'would urge that the USSR draft resolution should be voted on first and that Albania should be the first country on which we vote. The delegation of the Soviet Union will object strongly to any other procedure, since any other procedure would be illegal ,and arbitrary. We shall object if the S~curity Council casts its vote in an arbitrary manner even though that should be done as the result of a majority decision. Furthermore, if it is decided, as the United States representative insists, that the application of each country in our draft resolution should be voted upon separately-a suggestion which we oppose--then we consider it essential that there should be a separ?-te discussion with respect to each country.

I could reply at once to the statement which has just been made by the representative of the USSR, but in view of the lateness of the hour, I propose to the Council that we might adjourn now, and I should like to reserve to myself the right of making that .reply at the beginning of our next meeting, unless, of course, in the interval, the representative of the USSR indicates that his attitude has in any way been modified. As there are no objections, I take it ,that the Council is prepared to adjo1.lrn now. Before doing so, we have, to consider when we shall meet next. I am afraid that we have to recognize that our work is going along rather slowly. The General Assembly is approaching, and we shall therefore probably have to have quite a number of meetings in the course of 'the next few days. I was going to propose that if the membe'rs of the Council would agree, we should meet again on Tuesday morning, 13 September, with the possibility .of continuing that afternoon. That gives a little interval. I am optimistic enough still "AWnt examine les demandes d'admission a l'Organisation des Nations Unies presentees par l'Albanie, la Republique populaire de Mongolie, la Transjordanie (Jordanie), le Portugal, l'Ir- lande, la Hongrie, l'Italie, l'Autriche, la Rou- manie, la Bulgarie, la Finlande, Ceylan et le Nepal, "Reco11tmande a l'Assemblee generale d'admet- tre les Etats designes cl-dessus a l'Organisation des Nations Unies." Ce projet de resolution enumere toutes les demandes d'admission dans l'ordre de leur pre- sentation, c'est-a-dire en commencsant par l'AI- banie, qui a soumis sa demande la premiere, et en finissant par le Nepal qui a pose sa candida- ture le dernier. En consequence, c'est a cette resolution que revient la priorite absolue pour etre mise aux voix et, dans ces conditions, toutes les autres questions disparaitraient. C'est pourquoi, si malgre tout le Conseil de securite vient a conclure qu'il est indispensable de proceder a un vote, j'insisterai pour que le projet de resolution soumis par le representant de I'URSS soitmis aux voix avant les autres et pour que la premiere demande a faire l'objet d'un vote soit celle de l'Albanie. La delt~gation de I'Union sovietique s'opposera categoriquement a toute autre methode de vote, car toute autre methode sera entachee d'illega.lite et d'arbitraire. Nous nous opposerons a ce que le Conseil de securite - ft1t~e par une decision :prise a la majorite des voix - s'acquitte de sa tache en suivant un ordre arbitraire. D'autre part, si notre projet de resolution doit faire l'objet d'une decision du genre de celle que reclame le representant des Etats-Unis d'Amerique, .qui veut qu'il soit procede a un vote separe sur chacun des pays - procedure contre laquelle nous protestons - nous demande- rons une discussion separee sur chacun des pays candidats. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'ang1ais) : Je pour- rais repondre immediatement a la declaration que vient de faire le representant de l'URSS, mars, etant donne l'heure tardive, je propose de lever maintenant la seance tout en me reservant le droit de faire cette reponse au debut de notre prochaine seance, a moins, bien entendu, que, dans l'intervalle, le representant de l'URSS n'ait fait connaitre qu'il avait modifie son attitude de quelque maniere quece soit. Comme il n'y a pas d'objections, je tiens pour acquis que le Conseil est pret a lever la seance. .Avant de le faire, il faut que nous decidions quand nous nous reunirons la prochaine fois. Nous sommes obliges de reconnaitre, je le crains, que nos travaux n'avancent que lentement. La session de l'Assemblee generale ,approche, et il va falloil', par consequent, que nous tenions un assez grand nombre de seances dans les quelques jours a venir. Je proposerais que, si les membres du Conseil y consentent, ,nous nous re lissions de nouveau le mardi 13 septembre, dans la mati- nee, et que nous continuions event~el1e~ent71:4 Comme je n'entends formuler aucune objec- tion, je considere comme acquis que le Conseil de securite pourra se reunir de nouveau le mardi 13 septembre a 10 h. 30. Since ! hear no objection, I take it that the Security Council agrees to meet again at 10.30 l.m. on Tuesday, 13 September. The meeting rose at 6 p.m. Le seance est levee a18 heures. ( FRANCE Editions A. Pedone 13, rue Soufllot PARIS, ye AUSTRALlA~AUSTRALlE H. A. Goddard Pty. Ltd. 255a George Street SYDNEY, N. S; W. BELGIUM-BELGIQUE Agence et Messageries de la Presse, S. A. 14·22 rue du Pe.i'sil BRUXELLES BOLlVIA__BOl.lVIE Lihrena Cientifica y Literaris Avenida 16 de Julio, 216 Casilla 972 LA PAZ CANADA The Ryerson Press 299 Queen Street West TORONTO CHILE-CHill Edmundo Pizarro' Merced 846 SANTIAGO CHINA-CHINE The Commercial Press Ltd. 211 Honan Road SHANGIL\I COLOMBIA-COLOMBIE Lihrerfa Latina Ltda. Aparladll ~6J;eo "';'011 BOGOU COSTA RICA-COSTA-RICA Trejos Hermanos Apartado 1313 SAN JosE CUBA La Casa 'Belga Rene de Smedt O'Reilly 455 LA.1IAEANA CZECHOSLOVAKIA- TCFlECOSLOVAQUIE F. Topic Narodni Trida 9 PRAHA 1 GREECE-GRECE "Eleftheroudakis" Lihrairie mtemationale Place de la Constitution ATHENES GUATEMALA Jose Goubaud Gouhaud & Cia. Ltda. Sucesor 5a Av. Sur No. 6 y 9a C. P. GUATEMALA HAITI Max. Bouchereau Lwrairie "A la Carave11e" BOlte postale 11l~B , PORT-AU-PRINCE ~ELAND-ISLANDE .. Bokaverzlun Sigfusar Eymundsonnar Austurstreti18' REYKJA~ INDIA-INDE Oxford Book & Stationery Company Scmdia House NEWDELID IRAN BongahePiaderow 731· Shah Avenue TEHERAN 'IRAQ-IRAK - Mackenzie & Mackenzie l'he Bookshop BAGHDAD LEBANON-L1BAN Librairie universelle BEYROUTH LUXEMBOURG Librairie J. Schummer Place Guillaume LUXEMBOURG NETHERLAND5-PAYSaBAS N. Y. Mariinus Nijhoff Lange Voorhout 9 's-GRAVENHAGE NEW ZEALAND- NOUVELLE-ZELANDE Gordon & Gotch: Ltd. Waring Taylor Street WELLINGTON United Nations Association of New Zealand P. O. 1011,G.P.o. WELLINGTON DEN~RK-DANEMARK Einar Munksgaard N56rregade 6 K$15BENHAVN , DOMINICAN REPUBLIC- REPUBLlQUE DOMINICAINE Lilireria Dominicana CalIe Mercedes No. 49 Apartado 656 CIUDAD· TnUJILLO ECUADOR-EQUATEUR Muiioz Hermanos y Cia. NueV'e de Octubre 703 Casilla 10·24 C;UA.YAQUIL EGYPT-EGYPTE Lihrairie "La Renaissance d'Egyp~e" 9 Sh.Adly Pasha '·C.AtRO nTHIOPIA-EiHIOPIE Agenceethiopienne de publicite P.O. Box 8 J\l)DIS.ABEBA NICARAGUA Ramiro ·Ramfrez V. Agencia de Publicaciones MANAGUA, D. N. NORWAY-NORVEGE Johan Grundt Tanum Forlag Kr. Augustgt.7A OSLO SWITZI5RLAND-SUISSE Lihrairie Payot S. A. - LAUSANNE, GENEVE, VEVEY, .MONTREUX, NEUCHATEL, BERNE, BASEL Hans Rauuhardt Kirchgasse 17 . ZURICHI SYRIA-SYRIE Librairie universelie DAMAS TURKEY:-·TURQUIE Librairie Hachette 469 ·Istiklal Caddesi BEYOGLU·!sTANBUL UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA- UNION SUD-AFRICAINE Central News Agency , Commissioner & Rissik Sts. JOHANNESBURG and at CAPBTO and DURBAN UNITED KINGDOM- ROYAUME-UNI H. M. Stationery Office P. O. Box 569 LONDON, S.E. 1 and at H.M.S.O. Shops in , LONnON, EDINBURGH, MANe CAIwIFl?, BELl?AST, BIRMINGHA and..BRISTOL UNITED STATES Of AMERICA ETATS..UNIS D'AMERIQUE' .International Documents Servic Columbia University Press 2960 Broadway NEW YORK 27, N,Y. URUGUAY Oficma de Representaci6n de Editoriales Av. 18 de Julio 1333 Esc.1 MONTEVIDEO VENEZUELA Escritoria Perez Machado Condea Piiiango 11 CARACAS YUGOSLAVIA-YOUGOSLA Drzavno Preduzece Jugoslovenska Knjiga Moskovska Ul.36 BEOGRAD