S/PV.462 Security Council

During this meeting interpretation will be simultaneous. 2 . A d o p t i o n of the agenda Mr. BEBLER (Yugoslavia) (translated from French) : Members of the Council, I think that there is hardly any need to repeat the arguments which I advanced at the 461st meeting when I presented orally the pro- posal which is now before the Council in the form of a written draft resolution. I refer to document S/1448/- Rev. 1. I see that the question is on the provisional agenda as item 4. As I stressed at the preceding meeting, I consider it to be a question which should have prece- dence over any other question of substance the Council may have to discuss or decide upon. It should have priority because it involves a decision regarding the presidency which would affect our method of work. President: M. T. F. TSIANG (Chine). Presents: Les representants des pays suivants: Chine, Cuba, Equateur. Egypte, France, Inde, Nor- vege, Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord, Etats-Unis d'Amerique, Yougoslavie. 1. Ordre d u jour provisoire (S/Agenda 462) Adoption de 1'ordre du jour. Lettre, en date du 6 decembre 1949, adressee au President du Conseil de securite par le Secretaire general et transmettant le texte d'une resolution relative a la reglementation et a la reduction des armements de type classique et des forces ar- mees, adoptee le 5 decembre 1949 par l'Assemblee generale a sa 268eme seance pleniere (S/1429). Lettre, en date du 13 Janvier 1950, adressee au President du Conseil de securite par le represen- tant de l'lnde et transmettant le texte d'un projet d'amendements au reglement interieur provisoire du Conseil de securite (S/1447). Projet de resolution soumis par le representant de la Yougoslavie a la 461eme seance du Conseil de securite, le 13 Janvier 1950 (S/1448). 3. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais): Le Conseil utilisera Interpretation simultanee a la presente se- ance. 2 . A d o p t i o n d e 1'ordre d u jour M. BEBLER (Yougoslavie) : Messieurs les repre- sentants, je crois qu'il est a peine besoin de revenir sur les arguments que j'ai soumis, lors de la 461eme seance, alors que je vous saisissais oralement de la pro- position qui est aujourd'hui devant vous sous la forme ecrite, comme projet de resolution. II s'agit du docu- ment S/1448. Je constate que cette question figure a 1'ordre du jour provisoire comme point 4. Or, j'ai deja souldgne, au cours de la derniere seance, que je considerais cette question comme prejudicielle par rapport a toute autre question de fond que le Conseil aurait a dis- cuter ou sur laquelle il aurait a prendre une decision Elle est prejudicielle, puisqu'elle tend a ce qu'une de- cision soit prise sur notre maniere de travailler, en ce qui concerne la presidence. My delegation consequently believes that the order of the items on the provisional agenda should be re- versed, so that item 4 would become item 2; item 2 would become item 3 ; and item 3 would become item 4.1 make a formal proposal to that effect.

I understand that the representative of France has some remarks to make on the question of interpretation, and I therefore call upon him now. Mr. DE LA TOURNELLE (France) (translated from French) : I wish merely to draw the President's atten- tion to the fact that my delegation has not yet been consulted on his proposal regarding simultaneous inter- pretation of our discussion. I see no reason for deviat- ing from the established rule. I therefore have the honour to request the President to call for consecutive, and not simultaneous, inter- pretation.

The practice of employing the sys- tem of simultaneous interpretation was followed during the month of December. During this month I allowed it to drop, rather inadvertently. I had hoped that the Secretariat would have made preparations for simul- taneous interpretation at the first meeting held this month, but when I arrived I found that the facilities were not ready. That is the reason why we have not adopted simultaneous interpretation until now. I hope that the representative of France may find it possible to accept simultaneous interpretation. If, however, he insists on consecutive interpretation we shall return to that system. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): In order to save time, would it be possible to revert to a practice which we have employed in the past whereby, if a member of the Council speaks in Spanish or in Russian then, in order to avoid two consecutive inter- pretations, there is a simultaneous interpretation into French or English and, thereafter, a consecutive inter- pretation into English or French? That does save the necessity of having two consecutive interpretations which take up a great deal of time. Mr. DE LA TOURNELLE (France) (translated from French): I fully agree with the proposal made by the United Kingdom representative.

The practice, therefore, will be con- secutive interpretation into either English or French Ma. delegation considere done qu'il nous faudrait adopter un ordre du jour dont les divers points figu- reraient en sens inverse: le point 4 deviendrait le point 2; le point 2 deviendrait le point 3 ; et le point 3 deviendrait le point 4. J'en fais la proposition for- melle. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais): Je crois que le representant de la France a quelques observations a presenter sur la question de l'interpretation; je lui donne done la parole. M. DE LA TOURNELLE (France): Je voudrais sim- plement appeler l'attention du President sur le fait que ma delegation n'a pas ete consultee au sujet de la proposition qu'il a faite relativement a l'interpretation simultanee de nos debats. Je ne vois aucune raison pour que nous transgressions la regie qui a ete etablie. En consequence, j'ai l'honneur de demander au President de bien vouloir faire proceder a l'interpre- tation consecutive, et non pas simultanee. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais): Durant le mois de decembre, le Conseil s'est servi de l'interpre- tation simultanee. Ce mois-ci, c'est quelque peu par inadvertance que j'ai laisse le Conseil abandonner ce systeme d'interpretation. J'avais espere que le Secre- tariat aurait pris les mesures necessaires pour per- mettre l'emploi de l'interpretation simultanee au cours de la premiere seance de Janvier, mais, au moment ou je suis arrive, j'ai constate qu'on n'avait pas pris de dispositions a cet effet. C'est la raison pour laquelle nous n'ayons pas, jusqu'a maintenant, l'interpretation simultanee. J'espere que le representant de la France acceptera le systeme de l'interpretation simultanee. Si toutefois il insiste pour que nous revenions a. l'inter- pretation consecutive, nous emploierions a nouveau ce dernier systeme. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (Royaume-Uni) (traduit de Vanglais): Pour gagner du temps, ne serait-il pas possible de revenir a la methode que nous avons ap- pliquee dans le passe, selon laquelle, si un membre du Conseil s'exprime en espagnol ou en russe, l'interpre- tation est donnee simultanement en francais ou en anglais pour eviter deux interpretations consecutives, et, ensuite, l'interpretation consecutive est donnee en anglais ou francais? Cette methode permet d'eviter de donner deux interpretations consecutives, ce qui ne- cessite beaucoup de temps. M. DE LA TOURNELLE (France): Je m'associe en- tierement a la proposition faite par la delegation du Royaume-Uni. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais): Si le Conseil est d'accord, nous emploierons done l'interpretation As to the argument just advanced by the representa- tive of Yugoslavia, I would say simply that while, in his opinion, his draft resolution may be important, it cannot be considered by its nature to be a privileged resolution in a parliamentary sense. For those reasons I have submitted the present order of business which I hope the Council will maintain. The proposal before the Council is that item 4 of the agenda should become item 2.

I should like to say a few words as the representative of CHINA. The work which led to the adoption of resolution 300 (IV) the General Assembly was done in the Com- mission for Conventional Armaments. That work took a long time. My delegation participated in that work and supported the final plan that was agreed upon. In our opinion the question of the regulation and reduc- tion of conventional armaments is one of the most im- portant questions before the United Nations. We are also of the opinion that the plan recom- mended by the Commission is a scientific plan. Indeed it is only logical that we should begin such important work by securing accurate information on the arma- ments and armed forces of the world. Without accurate information we could not produce a plan which would suit the needs and meet with common agreement. If we passed the draft resolution submitted by the representa- tive of France we should have taken another important step in bringing about that final objective which we all have in mind. It is, therefore, for these reasons that my delegation will vote for this draft resolution. The draft resolution submitted by the representative of France is set forth in document S/1445. I think it is unnecessary to read the document.

Without touching upon the substance of the proposal now before the Council, may I suggest Enfin, le representant de la Yougoslavie a men- tionne l'absence d'un membre permanent du Conseil, absence volontaire qui est le fait du representant dont il s'agit et qui, je le pense, n'empechera pas le Con- seil, ainsi qu'il Ta nettement indique, de poursuivre ses travaux de fa^on reguliere et ordonnee.^ C'est pourquoi ma delegation aurait le sentiment tres net, au cas ou Ton souleverait lors des discussions au sein de la Commission des armements de type clas- sique des arguments analogues a ceux que vient d'in- voquer le representant de la Yougoslavie, d'un effort systematiquement tente pour eluder la discussion des tres importantes questions qui sont en jeu. Et c'est pour cette raison que j'ai ete amene, au nom de ma delegation, a intervenir dans le debat et a declarer, des maintenant, comme nous serons prets a le de- clarer a l'avenir, que de tels arguments nous parais- sent entierement hors de propos et que, si on les invoque, ce sera afin de masquer une tentative faite pour eviter qu'on aborde le fond des importants problemes qu'il s'agit de traiter. M. DE LA TOURNELLE (France): Je demande, Tau- torisation de presenter egalement quelques remarques relativement a l'attitude prise dans le vote par le representant de la Yougoslavie. Celui-ci, et avec raison, nous a rappele les luttes qui se poursuivent entre deux blocs au sein de l'Organisation des Na- tions Unies, mais il a eu manifestement tort de vouloir apposer une etiquette au projet de resolution presente par la delegation frainqaise, lequel a pour but de donner effet a la resolution presentee par les delegations de la Norvege et de la France et adoptee par l'Assemblee generale. Je puis assurer la delegation yougoslave que les delegations norvegienne et franchise, en deposant leur projet de resolution a l'Assemblee generale, n'avaient nullement pour but d'engager une pole- mique avec Tautre camp, ni de vouloir embarrasser la delegation de l'Union sovietique. C'est d'ailleurs la raison pour laquelle nous nous etions propose un but aussi modeste: reunir des renseignements afin de preparer une etape vers le desarmement. Nous espe- rions, et nous envisagions, que, sur ce terrain tres limite, la collaboration de l'URSS aurait ete possible, et nous etions prets, la delegation norvegienne comme la mienne, a. accepter les amendements que la dele- gation de l'Union sovietique aurait pu presenter. Mais tel n'a pas ete le cas. II y a meme eu un veto, comme le representant des Etats-Unis Ta rappele, au sein du Conseil de securite. 4. Projet d'amendement au reglement in- terieur provisoire du Conseil de securite (S/1447) Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais) : Sans vouloir aborder le fond de la proposition dont le Conseil est Sir Benegal N. RAU (India): In the letter [S/1447] which I have addressed to the President, and which has been circulated to members of the Security Council, I have already explained my object in submitting these proposed amendments to our rules of procedure. The difficulties which might arise from the absence of a uni- form rule on questions involving recognition of new Governments have been noticed by Mr. Jessup in his book A Modern Law of Nations written in March 1947. I quote: "Since the issue of approving the credentials of one or the other of two rival governmental groups may arise not only in the General Assembly but also in other or- gans of the United Nations and in specialized agencies, it would seem to be necessary to establish a general procedure for determining such questions." One solution propounded by Mr. Jessup is to formu- late an objective test for recognition of a new govern- ment and leave the question of representation, whenever it is raised, to be decided on the basis of that test by the International Court of Justice. Action on the seating of any representative from the State affected, or negotia- tions with the government of that State, might, he sug- gests, in that event be deferred until a decision was reached. That is a possible solution which we and the other organs of the United Nations could adopt if we chose. The drawback to that solution would be the delay involved in a reference to the International Court of Justice, and perhaps, too, the difficulty of formulating any objective tests on the question of recognition satis- factory to all States. The solution which I have indicated, rather than pro- pounded, in my proposed amendments, is slightly differ- ent. I have suggested that the decision, instead of being based on the views of the majority of the judges of the International Court of Justice, which is what is implicit in referring the question to that Court, might be based on the views of the majority of the governments of the States Members of the United Nations. Accordingly, the new rule which I have proposed runs thus : "Where the right of any person to represent, or to continue to represent, a State on the Security Council, or at a meeting of the Security Council, is called in question on the ground that he does not represent, or has ceased to represent, the recognized government of that State, the President of the Council shall, before submitting the question to the decision of the Council, ascertain (by telegraph if necessary) and place before the Council, so far as available, the views of the Govern- ments of all the other States Members of the United Nations on the matter." Sir Benegal N. RAU (Inde) (traduit de Vanglais) : Dans la lettre [S/1447] que j'ai adressee au Presi- dent et dont le texte a ete communique aux membres du Conseil de securite, j'explique les raisons pour lesquelles je soumets ces propositions d'amendement a notre reglement interieur. Dans son livre intitule A Modern Law of Nations, publie en mars 1947, M. Jessup signale les difficultes qui peuvent naitre de l'absence d'une regie uniforme lorsqu'il s'agit de questions qui touchent a la reconnaissance de gou- vernements nouveaux. Je cite: "La question de Tapprobation des pouvoirs des representants de Tun ou Tautre de deux groupes gouvernementaux rivaux peut se poser, non seule- ment a l'Assemblee generale, mais egalement a d'au- tres organes des Nations Unies et aux institutions specialises; il semble done necessaire d'adopter une procedure generale pour le reglement des problemes de cette nature." Une des solutions preconisees par M. Jessup est de formuler des regies objectives pour la reconnais- sance d'un gouvernement nouveau et de laisser a la Cour internationale de Justice le soin de trancher, conformement a ces regies, la question de la repre- sentation, lorsque cette question est soulevee. Dans ce cas, toute mesure concernant la participation aux debats d'un representant quelconque de l'Etat interes- se, ou toutes negations avec le gouvernement de cet Etat, pourraient, de l'avis de M. Jessup, etre differees, jusqu'a ce qu'une decision ait ete prise. C'est la. une solution que le Conseil et les autres organes des Nations Unies pourraient adopter, s'ils le desirent. L'inconvenient de cette solution est le retard cause par le recours a la Cour internationale de Justice et peut-etre aussi la difficulte de formuler, en ce qui concerne la reconnaissance d'un gouvernement nou- veau, des regies objectives qui satisfassent tous les Etats. La solution que j'ai indiquee, plutot que preco- nisee, dans mes propositions d'amendement, est quelque peu differente. Je suggere que la decision, au lieu d'etre fondee sur Topinion de la majorite des juges de la Cour internationale de Justice — ce qui resulte implicitement d'un recours a la Cour — soit fondee sur Topinion de la majorite des gouverne- ments des Etats Membres de l'Organisation des Na- tions Unies. En consequence, le nouvel article que je propose est ainsi concu: "Quand le droit de toute personne a representer ou a continuer de representer un Etat au Conseil de securite ou a une seance du Conseil de securite, est conteste pour le motif qu'elle ne represente pas, ou a cesse de representer, le gouvernement reconnu dudit Etat, le President du Conseil, avant de soumettre la question a la decision du Conseil, s'assure, dans la mesure du possible, (le cas echeant par voie telegra- phique) des opinions des Gouvernements de tous les autres Etats Membres des Nations Unies a ce sujet, et en soumet Texpose au Conseil." There may be other solutions. All I desire is that we should have some definite rule of procedure. Many con- flicts can, I feel sure, be avoided by suitable rules of procedure. I am not wedded to the particular solution I have indicated. I have merely tried to set the ball roll- ing, and I would propose, as the President has already suggested, that the draft amendment be referred to the Committee of Experts with instructions to make an interim or a final report by a specified date. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): I think the members of the Security Council will be grateful to the representative of India for having drawn their atten- tion to these important and difficult questions; they are questions which, it seems to me, are worthy of study and, in fact, need to be studied. I think that the suggestion made by the President that the Committee of Experts be asked to make a prelimi- nary study is a wise one. As the representative of India has said, one might imagine a number of different solu- tions, many of them perhaps raising considerations which would require very careful examination. For my part, I should not feel able to enter into a discussion of these possible solutions until the ground had been prop- erly surveyed and until we had before us all the various considerations which we shall have to take into account. I therefore hope that the Council will agree to refer the matter now to the Committee of Experts, so that within the shortest possible period we may have all the various considerations and suggestions put before us, and shall then be able to engage in a detailed discussion of them. Mr. VITERI LAFRONTE (Ecuador) (translated from Spanish): I believe that the proposal of the representa- tive of India may well provide us with the means of solving a problem which, we have seen, is difficult to solve without the adoption of some permanent rule for the settlement of questions raised as the result of the absence of definite provisions in our rules of procedure. It is obvious that the rules of procedure of the Secur- ity Council are incomplete; that is why for four years they have been called "provisional rules". Possibly some of the gaps or omissions which we find in the rules of procedure did not go unnoticed by the authors of the rules. It may be that some of the rules were left vague intentionally so that, in time and in the light of experi- ence, rules might be adopted to regulate the working of the Council. In any event, at our meetings we have seen D'autres solutions existent peut-etre. Tout ce a quoi je vise est Tadoption d'une procedure precise. Je suis certain que Texistence de regies adequates permettrait d'eviter plus d'un differend. Je n'insiste pas sur la solution particuliere que j'ai indiquee. J'ai voulu seulement donner la premiere impulsion, et je serais enclin a proposer, ainsi que le President Ta deja suggere, de renvoyer le projet d'amendement au Comite d'experts, qui aurait pour instructions de sou- mettre, a une date determinee, un rapport prelimi- naire ou definitif sur le sujet. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (Royaume-Uni) (traduit de Vanglais): Je pense que les membres du Conseil de securite sont reconnaissants envers le represen- tant de l'lnde d'avoir attire leur attention sur ces questions importantes et dedicates qui me paraissent dignes d'etude et qui me semblent, en fait, devoir etre etudiees. La suggestion faite par le President de demander au Comite d'experts de proceder a une etude prelimi- naire me parait des plus sages. Ainsi que Ta dit le representant de l'lnde, Ton peut envisager un grand nombre de solutions differentes, dont plusieurs sou- leveraient peut-etre des questions qu'il faudrait exa- miner avec grand soin. En ce qui me concerne, je ne me jugerai pas en mesure de participer a. une discus- sion des solutions possibles tant que Ton n'aura pas precede a une etude preliminaire approfondie et que nous ne serons pas en possession des divers elements dont il nous faudra tenir compte. J'espere done que le Conseil decidera de renvoyer des maintenant Taf- faire au Comite d'experts, afin que nous recevions communication, dans le plus bref delai possible, de toutes les donnees du probleme et de toutes les suggestions faites, et que nous puissions alors nous engager dans une discussion detaillee. M. VITERI LAFRONTE (Equateur) (traduit de I'es- pagnol) : A mon avis, la proposition du representant de l'lnde contient tous les elements necessaires pour denouer la situation dans laquelle se trouve le Con- seil. En effet, il est difficile de trouver une solution sans avoir etabli des regies de caractere permanent, permettant de resoudre les problemes que pose l'ab- sence de dispositions precises dans notre reglement interieur. II est evident que le reglement interieur du Conseil de securite est incomplet, et c'est pourquoi, depuis quatre ans, il est qualifie de provisoire. Certaines de ses lacunes et de ses omissions ne sont probablement pas passees inaperc.ues de ceux qui ont redige ce texte. 11 se peut, en effet, que certaines de ces "im- precisions" aient ete maintenues intentionnellement, afin qu'avec le temps et T experience on puisse adop- ter des dispositions permettant de soumettre a certaines It may be that there are also other means of achiev- ing that end besides the very intelligent suggestion of the representative of India. The delegation of Ecuador is in sympathy with the proposal which has been made because it provides for an exchange of views among the Member States of the United Nations, a practice very frequently used in inter-State relations by the American Republics, which exchange views and consult with one another regarding the recognition of governments in special cases which do not conform to constitutional de- velopments or in cases where there is an element of doubt. For that reason, my delegation is, as I have said, in sympathy with the proposal made by the representative of India, but we consider that there may also be other possibilities. It, therefore, seems advisable to us, if the matter is to be submitted to the Committee of Experts for consideration, that, in addition to being requested to report on the proposal which has already been made, the Committee of Experts should be authorized to report to us on any other suggestion which it considers might be adopted either as a substitute for the valuable pro- posal made by the representative of India or as a com- plement to that proposal.

In his statement, the representative of India suggested that a time-limit be set for the work of the Committee of Experts. I wonder whether he has any particular one in mind. Sir Benegal N. RAU (India): I have not applied my mind to this particular point but, since the President has mentioned it, I think we might allow the Committee of Experts a month's time in the first instance, because, as I have suggested, the Committee might make either an interim or a final report. If a month is not enough for the purpose, it can always submit an interim report and ask for further time.

As I hear no objection, I shall refer the proposal of the delegation of India to the Committee of Experts for study and report. That Committee is authorized to suggest to the Council alternative plans. The Committee is asked to render at least an interim report, if not a final report, within one month's time. 5. Draft resolution submitted by the repre- sentative of Yugoslavia at the 461st meet- ing of the Security Council on 13 January 1950 (S/1448/Rev. 1) Mr. BEBLER (Yugoslavia) (translated from French): There seems hardly any need for me to repeat the argu- II se pourrait que, outre la methode que vient de suggerer, fort sagement, le representant de l'lnde, il existe d'autres moyens de regler cette situation. La delegation de l'Equateur approuve cette proposition, parce que celle-ci prevoit des echanges de vues entre les Etats Membres des Nations Unies. Or, cette methode a ete employee frequemment dans le sys- teme interamericain, c'est-a-dire qu'elle a ete suivie par les Republiques americaines. Elle consiste a echanger des vues et a proceder a des consultations au sujet de la reconnaissance d'un gouvernement lorsqu'il s'agit d'un cas particulier qui ne correspond pas a des changements d'ordre constitutional ou d'un cas qui, pour une raison quelconque, peut paraitre douteux. Je Tai deja dit: c'est precisement pour cette raison que ma delegation approuve la proposition soumise par le representant de TInde. Cependant, nous esti- mons que, outre cette suggestion, il pourrait y avoir d'autres possibilites encore. C'est pourquoi il nous semble que, si nous decidons de renvoyer cette ques- tion au Comite d'experts, nous pourrions, non seule- ment lui demander de nous fournir des eclaircisse- ments a ce sujet, mais encore Tautoriser a nous soumettre d'autres solutions possibles, solutions qui, a son avis, pourraient, soit remplacer la proposition fort opportune du representant de TInde, soit la completer. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais) : Dans sa de- claration, le representant de TInde a suggere que le Conseil fixe un delai dans lequel le Comite d'experts devrait terminer son travail. Je desirerais savoir quel devrait etre, a son avis, ce delai. Sir Benegal N. RAU (Inde) (traduit de Vanglais) : Je n'ai pas reflechi a ce point particulier, mais, puis- que le President a souleve cette question, je pense que nous pourrions, pour commencer, fixer un delai d'un mois. En effet, ainsi que je Tai propose, le Comite peut etablir, soit un rapport interimaire, soit un rapport definitif. Si ce delai d'un mois n'etait pas sufnsant, le Comite d'experts pourrait toujours presenter un rapport interimaire et demander un nouveau delai. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais) : Aucune ob- jection n'ayant ete faite, je renverrai la proposition du representant de TInde au Comite d'experts aux fins d'etudes et de rapport. Ce Comite est autorise a proposer au Conseil une autre solution. Le Conseil demande au Comite de presenter tout au moins un rapport interimaire, sinon un rapport definitif, dans le delai d'un mois. 5. Projet de resolution soumis par le repre- sentant de la Yougoslavie a la 461eme seance du Conseil de securite, le 13 Janvier 1950 (S/1448) M. BEBLER (Yougoslavie): II est a peine besoin, me semble-t-il, de repeter les arguments que j'ai The draft resolution [S/1448/Rev. 1], which my delegation has submitted to the Council, is therefore divided into two parts. The first two paragraphs consti- tute the first part; the last two paragraphs make up the second part. Only the first part is of real importance, involving the decision to forego, as from today, the application of rule 18 in the sense that the present Chi- nese delegation shall no longer preside. The second part, namely the third and fourth para- graphs, provides merely one of the possible solutions of the problem of replacing the present Chinese delega- tion in the presidency. I therefore request the members of the Council, and the President, to consider first the first two paragraphs, and then the other two, both in any discussion and in the vote. Let me say in advance that I shall not insist upon the third and fourth paragraphs, since I shall accept any solution other than that of maintaining the present Chinese delegation in the presidential chair. Mr. BLANCO (Cuba) (translated from Spanish) : I wish, on behalf of my delegation, to make the following comments in connexion with the draft resolution pre- sented by the representative of Yugoslavia. During the 460th and 461st meetings of the Security Council, the representative of China, using the discre- tionary powers conferred on the President of the Secur- ity Council by rule 20 of the provisional rules of pro- cedure, felt that he should refrain from presiding over the debates in the Council during the consideration of a question which concerned the Member State which he represents. When that question had been considered and a decision taken on it by the Council, the representative of China again took the Chair in this Council in accord- ance widi rule 18 of the rules of procedure. In proposing the suspension of rule 18 of the provi- sional rules of procedure until 16 February 1950, the Yugoslav draft resolution is based only on "the serious objections which have risen against the validity of the credentials of the present Chinese representative to the Security Council." The proposal made by the representative of Yugo- slavia involves a question definitely foreseen and pro- vided for in our provisional rules of procedure, so that in order to accept his proposal, we should have to sus- Le projet de resolution [S/1448] que vous a soumis ma delegation est, en consequence, quant a son esprit, divise en deux parties. Les deux premiers paragraphes forment la premiere. Les deux autres, la seconde. Seule la premiere partie est vraiment im- portante, a savoir la decision a prendre de ne pas appliquer, a partir d'aujourd'hui, l'article 18, c'est-a- dire que la presidence ne serait pas assuree par la delegation actuelle de la Chine. La deuxieme partie, soit les troisieme et quatrieme paragraphes, ne represente qu'une des solutions pos- sibles pour remplacer la delegation actuelle chinoise a la presidence. Je demande done aux membres du Conseil, et au President lui-meme, de prendre tout d'abord en con- sideration les deux premiers paragraphes et, ensuite, les deux autres, tant en ce qui concerne la discussion possible que le vote. Je n'insisterai pas, je le dis par avance, sur le troisieme et le quatrieme paragraphe, puisque j'ac- cepterai n'importe quelle solution autre que celle qui consiste a maintenir au fauteuil presidentiel la delegation chinoise actuelle. M. BLANCO (Cuba) (traduit de I'espagnol): Je tiens a declarer ce qui suit a propos du projet de resolution soumis par le representant de la Yougo- slavie: Aux 460eme et 461eme seances du Conseil, le repre- sentant de la Chine, exerc,ant les pouvoirs discretion- naires que l'article 20 du reglement interieur confere au President du Conseil de securite, a decide de s'abstenir de presider les debats du Conseil, au cours desquels celui-ci devait examiner une question qui inte- ressait directement l'Etat Membre que M. Tsiang est charge de representer. Apres que le Conseil eut examine et regie cette question, le representant de la Chine a assume, de nouveau, en conformite de Farticle 18 dudit reglement, la presidence de cet organe. Le projet de resolution soumis par la delegation yougoslave, qui propose de suspendre Tapplication de l'article 18 du reglement interieur jusqu'au 16 fevrier 1950, n'est fonde que sur "les . . . objections sou- levees contre la validite des pouvoirs du representant actuel de la Chine au Conseil de securite". La proposition du representant de la Yougoslavie souleve une question qui a ete expressement prevue et resolue par le reglement interieur provisoire. Aussi, en Tacceptant nous devrions suspendre Tappli- It is obvious that the Yugoslav proposal now before us raises once again, although with another aim and for more limited purposes, the question of the rights of the representative of China, the validity of whose powers has been questioned in the Council. In rejecting the USSR draft resolution [S/1443] at its 461st meeting, the Security Council settled the ques- tion and consequently the credentials of the said repre- sentative of China continue to be valid in this Council. For these reasons, the Cuban delegation considers that in the present circumstances any proposal intended to repudiate or limit the rights of the representative whose credentials have been questioned in certain quar- ters is out of order. Mr. VITERI LAFRONTE (Ecuador) (translated from Spanish): Members of the Council will recall that at our [459th] meeting on 10 January I was the first repre- sentative to draw attention, with all possible discretion, to the provisions of rule 20 of the rules of procedure and to the possibility that our President might wish to avail himself of that rule. At the time, I said I was con- vinced that the representative of China was merely awaiting an opportune moment to do so. After calling attention to rule 20, at a time when I believed that it might help us to find some solution which would enable the Council to continue to meet with its membership of eleven, I took a special step and sug- gested something very similar to the proposal now brought before us by the representative of Yugoslavia. I then hoped that before the USSR delegation adopted any definite attitude, such possibilities for settling the matter might well be considered. Now, however, that certain developments have taken place and a certain attitude has been adopted which the Yugoslav proposal is not going to alter, I feel that the situation has changed. It will, therefore, be quite understandable that I cannot vote in favour of the draft submitted by the representa- tive of Yugoslavia.

The representative of Yugoslavia has asked me to divide his draft resolution into two parts, the first and second paragraphs to form the first part and the third and fourth paragraphs to form the second part. I shall therefore now put to the vote the first part, consisting of the first and second paragraphs.

I understand that to mean that the third and fourth paragraphs are withdrawn. That con- cludes our agenda for today. Before we adjourn I wish to consult the members of the Council in regard to another matter. Some time during the course of next week I shall call the Council together to consider the question of Kashmir. Repre- sentatives will remember that during the month of December we asked the President for the month to take charge of consultations with the two parties to the dis- pute and to report to the Council [457th meeting]. He did so report on 29 December [458th meeting], but we again requested him, and he undertook, to continue the consultations with the two parties. I think that our meeting on the subject of Kashmir it would be wiser for us to avail ourselves of the infor- mation and advice which General McNaughton will be in a position to give us, and so this afternoon I ask the authorization of the Security Council to invite General McNaughton to take a seat at the Council table at the meeting which I shall call on the subject of Kashmir. As there is no objection, I shall consider that I am authorized to issue that invitation. Est absente: l'Union des Republiques socialistes sovietiques. M. BEBLER (Yougoslavie): Je crois que tout vote sur la deuxieme partie du projet de resolution est devenu inutile. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de Vanglais) : J'interprete cette declaration comme equivalent au retrait des troisieme et quatrieme paragraphes du projet de re- solution. L'ordre du jour de la seance se trouve done ainsi epuise. Avant de lever la seance, je desirerais consulter les membres du Conseil au sujet d'une autre question. J'ai Tintention, au cours de la semaine prochaine, de con- voquer le Conseil pour examiner la question du Cachemire. Les membres du Conseil se souviennent que, au cours du mois de decembre, le Conseil a demande au President en exercice pour le mois d'en- trer en consultation avec les deux parties au diffe- rend et de faire rapport en seance du Conseil [457erne seance]. Le general McNaughton a fait son rapport le 29 decembre [458eme seance], mais le Conseil lui a demande de poursuivre les consultations avec les deux parties, ce qu'il a fait. Je crois que, a la seance que nous consacrerons a la question du Cachemire, nous aurions interet a entendre, de la bouche du general McNaughton lui- meme, les renseignements et l'avis qu'il sera en me- sure de nous donner. C'est pourquoi je demande aujourd'hui Tautorisation au Conseil de securite d'in- viter le general McNaughton a prendre place a la table du Conseil lors de la seance qui sera consacree a la question du Cachemire. Cette proposition ne soulevant pas d'objection, je me considere comme autorise a inviter le general McNaughton.