S/PV.493 Security Council

As President of the Council. l shaH reply briefly ta the representative of Egypt, sin::e he has questioned the advisability of includi'1g the items appearing on the provisional agenda in the agenda of the Security Counci~. The representative of Egypt and the members of the 5ecurity Caunci! win recall that during the discussion on the Korean question f111e membr.:- of the Security Council made repeated use of al1egories and described the 5ecurity Council as a "police detachment" which must hasten to the rescue of the victims of an attack by ·'bandits". Af10ther member compared the Security Council with a "fire brigade", which must put out a fire wherever it tiares up. In the light of the real state of affairs on today's international scene, rather than of those allegories, the Security Coundl is faced with one such conflagrationthe "'ar, started by the ruling circ1es of the United States, which is raging on the Korean peninsula. Now another fire is flaring up on the territory of China, since the ?-ir forces of the United States have committed unprovoked acts of aggression against the territory of China, destroying buildings, annihilating material, treasures and, most important of all, deliberate1y killing human beings. On!y today we have received a second cablegram from the Government of the Chinese People's Republic [S/1ï-13] reporting casualties among the peaceful population as a result of the repeated bombing of the territory of China by United States air forces. If the Securit) Council is regarded as a "police detachment", if it is looked upon as a "fire brigade", what kind of a fire brigade is it if it looks only in one direction where a fire is r<~ging, and fails to glance in another direction if a fire fl<>res up there? l do not think that we can agree with the representative of Egypt when he says that items 4 and 5 are "cropping up" in the agenda. l wish ta correct him; they are not "cropping up", they are bursting in. Life itself is thrusting them upon the agenda of the Security Council, and the Security Council is obliged to consider those items. That is its dutY and its sacred obligation under the Charter. The Security Council cannot disregard any incident anywhere on the surface of the earth whicp. threatens to develop into a war, into an international conflict fraught with serious consequences for the whole world, for the cause of peace and security. These items, therefore, are not cropping up in the agenda but are bursting in upon it. That is more accurate. It is impossible therefore to accept as valid the argument that if the agenda already contains one or ,\Vo items, a third and a fourth item can on no accoumhe inc111ded in it. The Security Council will find the necessary time. It has happelled more than once in the history of the Security Council that the Council has he1d two meetings a day, in the morning and in the afternoon. Sometimes it has even met three times a day, in the morning, the afternoon and the evening. If the Council considers it necessary, it will have three meetings a day, every day. And it will be obliged to examine, consider, discuss and take decisions on all the urgent questions involving peace and security which ;>;oc on its agenda, questions which may deve10p into a orId conflict ?nd which are fraught with serious consequences. Thus it is not a question of lack of time. If the will is there, the time will be found, The point is, as the month of August has shown, that the will ig not there since, instead of proceeding to the settlement of the Korean question by inv;ting both parties and considering the question of,.peaceful settlement, a number of delegations have taken the position that North Korea should in no case be invited and that the invitation should he extended to South Korea onl)'. This is precisely the reason why we ha'le been unable to proceed to the consideration of the substance of the Korean question during the month of August. We must face facts and proceed on that basis. Consequently the results of the work during the month of ~ugust cannat serve as a justification for not inc1uding ln the agenda other questions dictated by life itself, new, urgent and acute questions which, if they are not dealt with by the Security Council, may develop into a wo:ld conflict and lead to a breach of peace and SeClll1ty. The Security Council, therefore, cannot refuse to consider these questions. Mr.. TSIANG (China): At the last meeting of the Councl1 1 objected to the inclusion of item 3 in our agenda, that is, "Complaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)". To my regret, the majority of the members of the Council saw fit to support the stand !aken. by the representative of the Soviet Union. That Item IS now on the provisional agenda. In my statements to the members of the Security Council, l usually try ta suit the convenience of my listeners, so as not ta burden them with a string of strange names. l pay no attention ta the political implications of any name that we might have given ta a place, but l can see that the representative of the Soviet Union does attach a great deal of political significance to names. l should like to call the attention of the members of the Council to the fact that the practice of the USSR in that respect is quite different from the practice of Japan. l think the members of the Council later on will see the difference and appreciate the relative merits of the two practices. In ~he case of the Soviet Union, let me mtntion a few names across the Amur. There was a Chinese town called Hei-ho. As soon as the Russians took over that town in 1860, they called it and still cal! it Blagoveschensk. At the tip of the maritime province there is a port which we called for many centuries Hai-tsan-wei. As soon as the Russians took it over in 1860, they changed that name to Vladivostok. The name "Vladivostok" is full of political meaning, because that word means "dominator of the East." The USSR has told the world a great deal about its repudiation of imperialism. It certainly has not repudiated the fruits of imperialism, including imperialistic names. So far as people in China ancl Korea are concernecl, we thought the Japanese practices of imperialism were brutal, but in the case of names, at least, the JapaneSE: practice was, in our judgment, considerably more civilized than the Russian practice. l should like to returt1 to my objections to the inclusion of items 4 and 5 in our agenda. On 29 August l called the attention of this Council to the fad that the Council was about to set a bad precedent. If a complaint \Vith regard ta itcm 3, l felt that the delegation oi the Cnited States, sensitive, and rightly sensitive, about the good name of the United States. could not object to a discussion of that problem before the Security Counci!. 1 do 110t know what the attitude is of my colleague from the United St.'tes in regard ta this item 4, but l wish to say right now that without a discussion of this f1imsy accusation, the name c;f the United States of America would remain that of a peace-lover and freeclol11 promoter throughout the world. Of course, there are othefs who heap -:,ther names on the United States, but, no matter how many discussions we have here, no matter how many debates we have here, those who have chosen to cali the United States the warmonger and the aggressor will continue to do tha1. One cannot stop that sort of practice by staging more debates in the Security Council. The sentiments animating the delegation of the United St;J,tes are good democratic sentiments. \Vhen an accusation is made, it is naturally the democratic thing ta do ta have a discussion. If, however, when confronted with this extraordinary situation, one meets this kind of tactics with the practices of traditional democracy, one will be extending an invitation to have 1110;-e of this nonsense before the Council, The Council will virtually be put to improper use and to childish Use. Therefore 1 strongly oppose the inclusion of item 4, and l shall vote against that item. . With regard to item 5, this stands in a different hght. As it is phrased-"The unceasing terrorism and mass executions in Greece"-I can see that it might be thought that that item was raised in the noble cause of humanitarianisl11. The Security Council-indeed the ,lited Nations--eould not be accused, could not ~fford J he accused, of being callous, of being inhuman, of In the first place, the question of human rights and the humanitarian treatment of people aH over the world, important as it is, is not within the jurisdiction of this Council. The people who drafted the Charter for us realized that the business before the United Nations must be many~sided. The creators of the United ~a­ tians, therefore, createc1 separate organs to deal wlth c1itferent categories of business. The category involvir:g the questi.on of human rights be1qngs to the Econonllc and Social Council and its subsidiary organs. l do not mean to say that the subject is less important than the one with which we are dealing; it might be more important than the question of Korea, but it does not belong to the Security Council. We are charged with the. peace and security of the world, not with the treatment of individuals in the Member countries of this Organizatian. That is my first objection ta this item. Secondly, l have another objection, l think an even more important objection. l am not sure what really is happening in Greece. l do not say that this item is justified or unjustified. It may be that the Government of Greece has committed irregularities. l have no idea, and with regard to that proposition l do not commit my de1egation or myself. But we know very well that in this worlel violations of human rights occur in many countries. If the United Nations took up that work seriously-and l believe the United Nations should tuke that business very seriously-the proper thi.ng for the Unitec1 Nations to do is to have a special commission set up to survey all the Member States in regard to violations of human rights, and wherever such violations occur, whether in my country, in Greece, in the Soviet Union, in the United States or the United Kingdom, let us stop such violations. The party that raises this question should be the first to we1come such a wodd-wide investigation, including the country of the party proposing the item. If a party wishes the world to believe that it is deeply interestec1 in human rights in Greeee, and at the same time refuses to allow any investigation to he made in its own country, l shoulc1 cali that attitude hypocrisy. l should call that sheer low-grade propaganc1a, and that is what this item 5 is intended for. Are we sincere about human rights? Are we genuinely concerned about the poor people in Greece? How about the millions of people who have suffered unc1er the USSR in the Balkan States, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland and the Ukraine? Let ~s have ~ th~rough investigation of these things. If my mformatlOn IS wrong, and the Soviet Union is or could be an example to the whole world, l should like to have that fact properly certified and properly proc1aimed. But when we refuse to allow that to be

The representative of Egypt has expressed the wish-I am not quite sure whether it was a proposal-that the method of interpretation should be somewhat modified in order to save time. As l understood it, the gist of his remarks was that there should be no consecutive interpretation. First, is this a proposai? Secondly, if the other members of the Council do not object, we might agree that at this meeting, when the question of including any given item in the agenda is discussed, we might have only simultaneous interpretation and omit the conSeCtltive interpretation. l cal! on the representative of Egypt on this point only, since there are two speakers before him on the substance of the question under discussion. Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypt): l understand perfect1y what the President is saying, and l should like ta point out that l have made no formai proposai in connexion with the matter of iriterpretation. l simply mentioned that l might suggest later, and that the President might later find, that we have to do something to avoid a situation like the one in whieh we recently round ourselves, when a whole meeting-or a1l110st a whole meetil1g-was taken up with interpretations. However, l am not yet fonuulating any formai proposa!. l am in the hands of the Council; l am willing ta co-operate in any decision which the Conncil feels will best serve the interests of our business.

In view of the Egyptian representative's sensible proposai that we should have cinly simultaneous interpretation dut'- ing the consideration of the inclusion of items in the agenda, and also because there are many speakers on my list, the President feels that we might arrange to have simnltaneons interpretation only and to do without consecutive interpretation. If there are no objections, we shall adopt that procedure until the end of this meeting. Mr. LACOSTE (France) (translated from French) : I noted the remark made a short time ago by our colleague, the representative of Egypt; but l have refrainec1 from speaking until now precise1y in oreler to avoid impeding the course of the discussion on the substance of our meeting. The fact that the President is taldng up the suggestion compels me to refer ta it now. Simultaneous interpretation is a very convenient system because it is fast, but at the sal11e til11e it is un- However gifted the simultaneous interpreters may be-and some of them are very gifted-they cannat, in [act no one can, give an exact interpretation while keeping only haU a sentence behind the speaker in these debates. In sOlue languages, indeed, the meaning beeomes clear only at the very end of the sentence. Actually there are often quite important differences hetween the consecutive and the simultaneotls interpretations. \"Ie Olu'selves have often found that, and wc bave always noticed that the consecutive interpretation jnto English of a statement made in French follows the ()riginal far more accurately then the simultaneolls 1nterpretatioll, as is only natural. Mareover, the truth of my assertion is abundantly confirmed by the fact that same of the speakers here-the President himself, and particularly the representative of Egypt-often find it nccessary to correct the consecutive interpreters in order to make sure that their idea is being accurately rcnrlered. V/hat happens then when the speakers cannat hear the interpretation because it is taking place while they are speaking? [n these circumstances, the French delegation formally requests the retention of consecutive interpretatian.

Since the representative of Egypt did not put forward his suggestion as a formaI proposaI, and since the representative of France objects to having no consecutive interpretation, we sha11 continue our work on the olel system. 1~r. ALVAREZ (Cuba) (translated fram Spanish): At lts.1ast meeting, the Security Couneil decided to incIude 111 the agenda the new item which appears as item 3 of toda;Y's ~rovisional agenda, namely, "Complaint ,of armed mvas!on of Taiwan (Formosa)", with China ;and Cl;'ba votmg ag~inst and Egypt abstaining. My <delegatlOn voted aga1l1st the proposaI because it was aware that there was no question of a dispute or a controversy involved which might lead ta international f~'iction or still I~ss to ar: act of aggression. My delegatIon knew that It was sll11ply a new propaganda move and, what i.s more, a new ~oviet .man.oeuvre to bring a repres~ntatIve of commu111st Ch1l1a I11to the Security CouncI!. In fact, the USSR representative made ·exactly that prop?sal as so0!l as the Couneil had gener- .ous~y agree~ to dl.scuss the It7m. That is why we vated agamst the mcIuslOn of that Item in the agenda. iaIl1iIi~r with the way in which the fifth columns of in~ ternational com1111111is111 work. They take advantage cl the <Tenerositv of the democratic forms of governmf'nt in (~der to 'indulge in demagogic distortions of the trutlI, making propaganda attacks with the sole purpose oi promoting the cause of the aggressors who are contravening inter!lational law and order. The proposai for th~ inclusion of this new item in the Council's agenda is as demagogical as those submitted hv those who deiend the aggressors of North Koreu, ,vho luunched their attack across the 3Hth paralle1 at da\\:n on ~5 J~111e. The. wo.r~ling of the callies irom communlst Ch111a IS ven' tanllhar and we know \\'here the? originate. In<leed the wording is sa familiar that we fintl it ditlicult to distinguish hetween the messages sent irom the authorities of X orth Korea, l'oland, the Ckrainian SSR or the Peiping regime. It is as a tinal Soviet manoeuvre that the President is no\\' proposing, hefore his term of office expires at midnight tonight, that we should include in our agenda items 4 and 5 as set forth in document S/Agenda 493. \\'e haw spent thirty-one days in heated lkbates \\'ithout heing ahle to emhark upon the suhstance of the question of Korea, and it is evident that there still l'l'mains to be settler! the essential point which must he decided hefore we can continue the discussion in accordance \Vith the regular procedure, namely, the point of order raised repeatedly hy the representati\'e of China cOllcerning our r!ecision to im'ite the representative of the Repuhlic of Korea to lake a place at the ('onncil tahle. \Vith regard to the item relating to Creece, we must emphasize the fact that the Security Council withdre' that dispute from the list of matters for its consideration [202nd meeting], as it had been under examination" by the General Assembly since its second regular session. As a result of the action taken bv the General Assembly itself, and by the United Nations Special Commission on the Balkans. we possess adequate information on the evolution Qf the prohlem, and therefore believe that discussion of this matter hy the Coundl would be inopportune. It is not here that the USSR representative should raise this question. but l'dore the General Assembly, which will take cognizance of the matter in the near future and to which the representative of Greece will have the opportunity to supply his information, . l heard the representative of the Soviet Union state a moment ago, when he referred to the simile emplcyed here on several occasions, that the Council sh?uld act as energetica!ly as the police or a tire IJr1g-ade. 1t is true that that simile has been employed here, and it would be perfectly in ph-"e if such were the case this afternoon. But the President knows perfectly weil that the fire brigade has never been used ta post cp propaganda posters, but rather to c1ean the Il The PRESIDEr-iT (tnms/att'd fro-m R14ssian) : Since a liebate has deveiopeù, 1 find it necessary, as representati\"t~ of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, to t'xplain as briefly as possible why my delegation insists upon the indusion of the two questions which have given rise to sud1 lively discussion in the SP.t'urity Counci!. First of .1.11, from the statement of the Government IIi the 1't't1ple's l~.epubiic oi China about the bombing of Chinese territory by United States air forcesitem -1- oi the provisional agenda-the Security Coun- ('il is aware that two protests have already been re- ,,-eived from that Government against the unprovoked and barbarous bombardment of the territory of the People's Republic of China by United States aiï forces. The facts are given in the first cablegram from the ~Iinister for Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China [S/1722], which states that "on 2ï .-\ugust military airplanes of the l'nited States aggression forces in Korea invaded the air of the t'el1j'le's Republic of China". There foilows a list of the damages to the property of the People's Republic of China as a result of the bombardment of population ...·entres and valuable property by L'nited States air forct's. The second cablegram [S/1743] was received today. It states t.hat "the miiitary airplanes of the United ~tates aggression forces in Korea again invaded the air of the People's Republic of China on 29 August and kiiled and wounded a number of Chinese". Such are the facts. They show that an unprovoked act of aggression has taken place. The military air forces of one power have invaded the air of another Power; and not only have they invaded it, but the)' have al~ dropped iJomus and machinegunned the lJeaceful population, causing material damage and killing and wounding several persans. A :"ecuud act of invasion by L'nited States military ;,ir hrce~ ha~ l~en c<Jllllllilted. From the standpoint d international law that is an act of aggression. This î~ a gro~~ ';îdatÎ'JI1 of the sovereignty and territorial intt'grity of China. 1 ~ ;,)1ati')ll (JI Chim::,e air by the air forees of the United ~tate~. intenèed as provocation and carried out for the lJufJJ')* of barbarously killing pea,eflll Chinese citizen~' and destroying valuable material oiJjectives, Tht' interests of the Chinese people are, of course, 'JI HU omn"rn '0 the n"pre~entative of the Kuomintang ~r'n]J .... L'J d'J"" l1<Jt represent the Chinese peopl('. The same definition of aggression further states: "Xo consideration whatsoever of a political, strategical or economic nature . . . shall be accepted as justification of aggression." The action of the air forces of the United States against the territory of China falls entirely within this definition of aggression and the government which has permitted this act of aggression is the attacker, in (lther \\"ords, the aggressor. ln the case under consideration it is quite obvious that the air forces of the United States have already twice bombed the territory of another State--the People's Republic of China. This repeated act of aggression proves that the bombing is carried out consciollsly and deliherately, with the malicious intent of widening the scope of the war and destroying the peace. The Govemment of the People's Republic of China, as the victim of this unprovoked aggression on the part of the United States Government strongly protests against this attack, against this ba, sous bombing, ag-ainst the deliberate mowing-düwn of the peaceful population of China by American bombs and b.ullets, against the destruction of buildings, construc- !lons and dwellings and of other valuable property tn the territory of China. The Government of China has requested the Security Council to consider this question at once and to take measures to protect the lawful interests and the territory of the People's Rel ,,, The delegation of the Soviet Union feels it its duty to submit the following draft resolution [5/1i 45/ R (J'l'. 1] concerning this matter: "The 5ecurity Cmmcil) "Ha7'illg considercd the communications dated 27 August 1950 [5/1722] and 29 August 1950 [5/1743] addressed to the Security Couneil by the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China and relating to the violation by the air forces of the United States of America of the Chinese frontiers in the area of the Korean-l\Ianchurian border and the bombing and strafing by United States aircraft of buildings, railway stations and an aerodrome on Chinese territory, resuIting in loss of life and damage to railway and aerodrome inst.:1lations, railway rolling stock and motor vehicles, and "'Ha'lJillg Iward the explanation of the representative of the United States of America to the United Nations 1S/172i], "Colldemning the above-mentioned illegal acts of the Government of the Uùited States of America, and placing on the Government of the United States of America full responsibility for the above-mentioned acts and the whole of the damage caused to the People's Republic of China, and also for all the conseqLH'nce~ that l1lay ari~e as the resuIt of such acts, .. /laides to caB upon the Government of the United States of America to prohibit such illegal acts which violate Chinese sovereignty and cause damage to the People's Repuhlic of China and to the peaceful Chinese population." These are the motives which have prompted the CSSR delegation to include in the Security Council's provisional agenda the item on the bombing of Chinese territory by United States aircraft. Let us go on to the second question, item 5 of the provisional agenda. As long ago as 1948, at the third session of the General Assembly, in Paris, the USSR delegation and several other delegations raised the question of the death sentences which were still beillg imposed in Greece. The First Committee of the General Assembly considered that question and adopted measures1 to save the victims of polit-'o:al terrorism in Greece. A year went by. Terrorism and mass executions did not cease. a sauver an n'avaient avait mouvement avaient pour paix, monde. aucune des patriotes arraché folie monarcho-fasciste tion autres pouvaient leurs des vernement ment, à sauver dont divers de sourde la résolution huit cie trième défense de ments la cembre monarcho-fasciste criminels: contre violence. On 13 October 1949 a military tribunal in Athens condemned to death eight leaders of the popular liberation movement in Greece, who had heroically fought the hitlerite invaders for the freedom and independence of their country and for the peace, security and freedom of aU the peoples of the world. Those pe:-sons were sentenced to death without any evidence other than the statements of agents of the Piraeus security police, Those heroic patriots were tortured by fire, their hair was pulIed out, they were driven to the point of insanity and suicide. Those criminal acts of the monarcho-fascist regime in Greece provoked the indignation of the peoples of the Soviet Union and many other countries. Honourable men the world over could not do other than r, tise their voices in indignation and protest. In the m~antime the families of the condemned appealed to t~le USSR Government. Acting on the instructions of its Government, the de1egation of the Soviet Uniun caHed upon the General Assembly to raise its voiee in the defence and for the rescue of those people who were condemned without cause.2 Despite the stubborn resistance of several delegations, in particular the delegation of the United States, which tried to prevent the consideration of that question under yarious procedural pretexts, the General Assembly dec:-1ed to pay heed to the will, the conscience, and the honour of the peoples of the world, and took steps, by its resolution 288 C (IV), to save the lives of the eight leaders of the Greek popular liberation movement who had been sentenced to death. Thus at its third and fourth sessions, the General Assembly took a humane position on the defence of the victims of politieal terrorism in Grcece, and gave legal form to that position. However, from the end of the fourth session of the General Assembly, in December 1949, and up to the present moment, the monarchofascist Government of Greece has been continuing its criminal acts. Terrorism, mass executions and persecution of democratic elements continue with undiminished force. The barbarous and inhuman treatment of the prisoners in Greek concentration cu;::;''l sClIlblér séance. semblée 1080. DurinK that time th delegation of the Soviet Union to the United Nations made many appeals to General Romulo, President of the fourth session of the General Assembly, and to the Secretary-General, Mr. Trygve Lie. On 30 January 1950, the USSR delegation drew their attention to the fact that a political prisoner, Helena Zaglanaki, \\'as being subjected to cruel torture in Greek prisons. On 21 February, the USSR delegation forwarded a mtmorandum from the League for democracy in Greece which contained information on the inhllman torture and barbarous treatment to which p,': .ical prisoners were subjected in the concentration camps on the island of Makronisos. On 2 March the USSR delegation spoke in defence of the eight Greek trade union leaders who had be<..n condemned to death. On 12 April the USSR delegation spoke in defence of the thirteen members of the youth organization "Epon" whom the Greek courts had condemned to death. l, as President of the Security Council, recently received a telegram from Athens reporting that democrats in Greece who had played an active part in the national resistance movement were still being tried by special military courts. The telegram stated that forty-five citizens who had been deprived of their basic guarantees and rights were in danger of being shot simply because they had refused to give up their democratic beliefs. They live under the threat of the fulfilment of the conviction and execution. That telegram was forwarded to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Trygve' Lie. The Acting Secretary-General, Mr. LaU, informed me in letter No.264/4/02(3), dated 18 August that my letter on this matter and the attached telegram from Greece had been forwarded to the Greek representative to the United Nations for the attention of the Greek Government, and to the United Nations Special Commission on the Balkans. Copies of those documents can be found in a Secretariat Press release, No. BAL/725. Communications on tbis matter from the delegation of the Soviet Union and other delegations to the Secretary-General and to the President of the fourth sc<;ion of the General Assembly produced no results. i . ~rs addressed to them by delegations regarding Thus the statements, protests and requests contained in those documents, which \Vere written in the tears and blood of the victims of the political terror in Greece, made a slow round of the members at Lake Success and then returned to the monarcho-fascist executioners against whom the complaints had been' lodged.- As is evident from appeals recently received from the relatives of political prisoners and from various public organizations, the Greek Government is continuing its policy of terrorism, inflicting persecution, mockery, torture and painfui death upon the political prisoners. The vicious, vindictive and bloodthirsty monarcho-fascist fiends are continuing to heap persecutions, tortures, mockeries, military trials and executions upon their victims. In the latter part of August, an appeal addressed to Joseph Stalin, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USS.R, was received from the mothers, wives and children of Greek democrats. In that letter [S/1737] it was stated: "The spectre of death hovers over our long-suffering country. The civil war is over, but the number of those sentenced to death amounts to 2,877 . . . Our children are neither criminals nor traitors ; they are heroic fighters in our national resistance movement. They are honourable and noble • . . Their crime was that they refused to give up their belief or to desist from fighting in a just, and honourable cause. They are physically exhausted·. by the unheard-of tortures; they are immured in damp barracks and are facing death as a .result of the terrible conditions." appels tiques une tiques cruelle. haine, leurs trages, dent Staline, et dit dolori. nombre 2.877 traîtres; mouvement et de honnête. tures des par enfants lent et permette qu'on que milliers (l'une des lettre Grèce, et grecques trempées [5/17351 ~: " ~' - Those unhappy mothers, wives and children of Greek patriots under sentence of death appeal to Joseph Stalin, to the sense of jus-ice, the conscience, and honour of mankind to stop these sentences from being carried out, to end the endless agony of death, to drive away the shadow of death which is darkening thousands of unfortunate Greek homes. . :. , ~i .:~ :;. ,- -.' Further, J. V. Stalin has received an appeal from a delegation of the mothers, wives and sisters of Greek political prisoners suffering from tuberculosis, on the question of the unremitting terrorism and mass executions in Greece and the inhuman treatment by the Greek authorities of political prisoners suffering from tuberculosis. Those letters, written with blood and tears, cannot he read without a shudder. The text of that appeal is included in my letter [S/1735 and Corr. 1] to the members of the Security Council. W 1 ~ ,;; r.:; ! '1 Those unfortunate, long-suffering 1110thcrs, wi"es and children say in their appeal : "\Ye prote:-t nll)st l'IllTg·etical1:. to the governn1l'nts, parties. organizations. to the whole warld, to al! the peoples of the world, to mothers', sister,;. and wives throughout the worlll, and we tel! thl'!11 al! that in hlood-drenched Greece where every abyss is filIed with C\)rpses. where the hlllll'S ui the dl'ad have hl'l'n Ill'apl'd mountain-high. and where blood flo\Vs like a river-in this Greeee the Plastiras goyernment is now raising its haml against sick pel)ple, against consullIptivl's, iu order to hring about thl'ir physical destruction, is sending them to places far from the aid of scienlè and hanllùig them l1ver like hostages into the hands of L'riminals... The appeal says further: "\\'e appeal to mothers, sisters and \Vives, to alI t11llse who il'el Dur atHiction, to those who understand our grief for our dear ones, we appeal to aU peoples, to the whole world, to the United Nations Security Council, to the International Red Cross, to organiza- tions and parties throughout the whole world, ta jain us in a powerfui protest." In connexion with the above-mentioned appeals, the AH-l'nion Central Council of Trade Unions has ad- dressed the followin; rl'quest [5/1735 alld Corr. 1] to the President of the Security Council on behalf of the workers of the USSR: "Immediately to consider the question of the un- ceasing terror and mass exeeutions in Greeee and ta proteet the 2,877 Greek democrats doomed to death by the Greek monarcho-fascÏst Government; to demand that the Greek Government alIeviate the lot of the prisoners 5uffering from tuberculosis and to forbid their transfer to uninhabited islands of death." The letter goes on ta say: "The AlI-L'nion Central Council of Trade 1Jnions trusts that the Security Council will make full use of its powers as an international body called upon ta o<,iq~u;"rd hum;"n rights and will take efiective steps to IJut an end to the terror and mass exl'l'ution of l/ilitical prisoners," This letter bears the signature of Mr. V. V, Kuz- fieU,J", President of the AlI-Union Central Council {Ji T ra.de Cnions, As President of the Security Council, l have cir- cuiattti the text of the appeal of the Ali-Union Central (jJuncil (A T rade Unions as weil as that of the appeal li) j(J::.t:IJh ~talin from a delegation of the mothers, wi';e~ anti ~iw::rb (Jf Cirt::t::k political priseJnt::rs suffering frtJm tui~rcul{J~is, teJgether with a covering letter in whj,h 1 urge the mt::mbt::rs of the Security Council on iA141f d the t..::-;<-;l~ dt::legatifJn to heed the appeal of 1 n of deiendinl?: the yictims oi the political terror in Greece, and ta endeavour ta consider this question and reach a prompt and just decision to save the li\'es of the fighters of the national resistance movement in Greece, who waged a courageous struggle ag-ainst the hitlcrite invaders for the frel'dom and in- dèpendence of their country, for the cause of interna- tional peace and security. ~essions cIes étudie équitahle ment ment et et sécurité trueux Conseil sence ment mEnts peuplent monarcho-fascistes activement curité. le comme cie héroïque indignation rég-ime fin Conseil ne réYo1tante actuelle. ment posent. senter continuent ment damnés traduits danger au prisonniers l1es danger, blée sessions, en pêche ment The CSSR delegation considers that the Security Council cannot ignore aIl the acts of inhuman cruelty cOI11I11itted by the monarcho·fascist regime, The Secur- ity Council cannot remain indifferent in the face of the cold-blooded, hrutal and systematic murder. the torture and the barbarous, inhuman treatment of courageous fighters for the cause of freedom, peace and securitv in the Greek monarcho-fascist torture chambers and concentration camps. The Security Council cannat but condemn the cold- !llu(l:lec1 extEn;linalion oi (lut~tanc1ing leaders, and of the rank and file of the popular liberation 1110ve111ent of national resistance in Greece, who fought heroically against fascis111. Honourable 111en the world over condemn the crim- inal monarcho-fascist rulers of Greece with angry indignation and demand that an end should be put ta their eyil deeds. The delegation of the SoYiet Cnion considers that the :;ecnritv Council and the l-nited X ations can no longer tolerate the ....ile and shocking situation prevail- ing in Greece. The Security Couneil must actively intervene in this question and take the necessary measures, The USSR delegation, for its part, wishes to submit the following drait resolution [S/1746/Ret'.1]: "The Securih' Council, "Noting that- the military courts in Greece are con- tinuing to pass death sentences on the leaders of the national resistance movement and that the number of persons sentenced to death amounts to 2,877, aNoting at the present time in Greece 45 Greek democrats who took an active part in the national resistallce movement are 1>efore a militan' tribunal in Athens and are in danger of being shot, - "Noting that the Greek Gavernment is transferring political prisoners sufi"ering from tuberculos!" to desert islands with injurious dimatic conditions which en- danger their li....es, and :'Gul:ded by the humane approach adopted at the thlrd and fourth sessions of the General Assembly to the protection of the yictims of political terror in Greece, "Requests the Greek Government to suspend the execution of the death sentences on 45 active members of the national resistance movement who have been Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypt) : At this time 1 have the good news to convey to the representatives on the Council that l shall speak very briefly. As 1 was fearing, the Security Council has made practically no progress at aIl. 1t is considering its agenda for today. In French, as the representatives know, the agenda is c:--lled l'ordre du jour. But today is practically over, and many other days are likely to be over without the Council having done anything. In any event, 1 still wish to hope--perhaps hope against hope-that our work will not, if possible, for onf more minute continue to be stamped with the futility with which it has been stamped for quite sorne time already. 1 am not going to indulge in a consideration of the substance of this matter. 1 have already spoken on that, and 1 regret to say that my request that aIl other speakers should follow the same rule was not heeded. However, everyone has his own way of doing his business. It is not my task to apportion blame for the confusion and futility of the Council's work. 1 am even willing to accept whatever part of the respon- sibility befalls me in this respect. My point is that we should go ahead to do our work and ta take up our responsibility in a serious manner. l should have understood the matter very easily and readily if the Council, in taking up items 4 and S, had said: "\Vell, these are urgent matters. We shall put them before items 2 and 3. We shall deal with them toda,". Let us therefore put them on the agenda for todaY." In that case 1 might have been willi~g to vote for the inclusio!1 of those items. 1 say 1 mlght have; 1 do not say 1 should. However, 1 do not say 1 should not. Considering that we still have items 2 and 3 on the prü"isional agenda and considering that items 4 and 5 remain at the tail-end of the agenda, is there any serious hope or shadow of a hope that the Council might reach these items today, even if it were to con- tinue to work until midnight? Therefore 1 shall be honoured to vote against the inclusion of items 4 and 5 in the agenda of the Security Council for today, even if 1 am out-voted and belong to a minority in voting against the inclusion of those items. The PRESIDE;-n (trallslated tram Ritssian): It is the usual practice in the Security Council to begin by considering and deciding upon whether certain ques- tions should he included in the agenda and then to clecide upon the order of their consideration. It would not, therefore, he in accordance with universally ac- œpted pm'tiœ to begin di"nssing the o,d" in whi,h 20 glais) nous Je ne orateurs, longtemps. avis terminer provisoire, lorsque Sir Gladwyn JER!! (United Kingdom): So far as 1 am eoncerned, 1 should greatly prefer to go on now and finish our labours this evening, if we cano My own speech will take about eight or ten minutes only. 1do not know at what length other representatives are O"oing to speak, but 1 suspect it wiII not be long. 1 do tl1Ïnk. again speaking personally, that it would be far preferable, if we can, to conclude our debate on the provisional agenda now, so that at least 1 can start my presidency tomorrow, as it were, with a cIean sheet.

If there are no further suggestions, we shall continue until we have completed our work. d'autres travaux Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom) : The Council knows with what reluctance 1 venture ever to disagree with the representative of Egypt. 1 am not indeed sure now, after his second intervention, that l do disagree with him, but as regards his general thesis that we ought not, in principle, to have a long provisional agenda, or that we certainly ought not to add items at a moment's notice to the agenda, 1 am not quite so sure about that. 1 think, if 1 may say so, that the point, in general, of discussing the whole list of items appearing on the provisional agenda at one meeting is that, if they are put on the definitive agenda, they are therehl' placed on the list of subjects of which the Security Council is seized. Seizing the Security Couneil of a matter is an important action, and of course, it does not mean. as 1 understand it, that the Council must proceed immediately to discuss any particular question merely hecause it happens to be the next on the list. The items can certainly be discussed in sorne relation to the degree of urgency attaching to each particular one, and 1 shoulcl hope that in the future that is how we shall proceecl. \Ve might take one item, and then, perhaps, if it is snfficiently urgent, another item, but 1 think that if we do conclude our labours today with a vote, we shall have achieved something. \Ve shaH have establishecl a list, at least, of matters of which the Security Conneil is seized. glais) à En vention, en à ordre certainement veaux général d'une l'ordre inscrits sur sécurité. Conseil naturellement immédiatement simplement sur tions d'entre procéderons point ment travaux résultat des du moi, jour nous qu'ensuite gande What is quite wrong, 1 am sure, and here at least 1 think my Egyptian coHeague will agree with me, is for anl' cIeIegation to put on our provisional agenda any item which is not urgent when we already have urgent matters to deal with, and then to make a propaganda speech in support of the proposai that the matter concernecl should be put Oïl our agenda, a speech in So far as the substance of the question is concerned, and the only substance we are discussing now is whcther or not item 4 shaH be put on the agenda, ail l can say is that my de1egation will certainly not oppose its being placed on the agenda. It seems to me important, if l may say 50, that the Security Council should look into this matter and try to establish the faets, That is what the Secllrity Conncil is for and therefore, when we consider the matter next week, l hope there will be some constructive suggestions sllbmitted for this purpose. As for the USSR cirait resolution, which has been irregular1y distributed, as l understalld it, it is heneath contel11pt except for its only obvions use, namely, its distribution as a propaganda leaflet. As regards the torrent of abuse which we next hearcl in connexion with item 5 on the provisiollal agenda, let me just say this, For the represcntative of a country which maiutains millions of its own compatriots in slave labour camps in unspeakable conditions, which has frequently transported whole populations in cattletrucks to Siberia, whose whole way of life is based on recruiting slaves for the labour force by means of the secret police-for the representative of snch a government ta denonnce other governments for alleged misdemeanours as regards politieal prisoners is just about as nanseating a spectacle as that of Satan rehnking sin, In any case, 1 do not myself propose ta deal with the substance of item 5. Tt is perfectly clear that the Security Couneil has no jurisdiction in the matter at ail, and that it would be wholly improper for' the item to be included in the definitive agenda, The matters \Vith which the communication from the President deals obviously do not constitute a threat to the peace. They are clearly within the sphere of Greek domestic jurisl ~ee no reason why we should oblige the USSR representative in this way; l therefore move that this item should be struck from the agenda. l'anglais) Le caleridrier Katiolls trueux des de des souci la :\" et normale continuel du les nous deux de formulé assez question l'ordre douteux l'ordre l'ordre l'URSS débat quelles figureront débat aboutit Il barbares, tentionelIe, Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): We are ;\IJUut tu \\"iml up an histurie month. The 1110nth of August 1950 will certainly be a red-Ietter month. In the Security Council of the United Nations, it has been characterized by colossal contempt for the simple rules of the game of life, disregard of good morals and good behaviour, and the use of this great forum to heap contumely upon men of honour, character and dignity, and upon great nations which love freedom and which have gained it at great expense. \Ve have endured through a month of continuous and complete sabotage of parliamentary law and common procedure in parliamentary bodies and of endless di~respect for those rules which have been regarded as the me'ms of facilitating and hastening the performance of business in aIl parliamentary bodies throughout the free worid. And it has risen to a climax today. Have we ever witnessed the equal of this? Two items have been placed on the provisional agenda by the President, uncL;;' the ruIes, and have thus far been objected to by many members of the Security COlmciI; that is, on the preliminary question of whether those items should be on the agenda of the Security Council, thf..:e are apparently objections on the part of enough members to make it uncertain whether those items will indeed be on the agenda. But without those items ueing on the agenda at aIl, we have listened to the reprcsentative of the Soviet Union-when he is speaking in that capacity-Iaunch upon a discussion of the suustance of those two items in regard to which there is still a question as to whether or not thev shall he on the agenda. - . And not only that. It is not only a question of argumg the case. Being possessed of another capacity, he also makes a finding and declares the judgment. He makes a claim, which is contained in these accusations, of barbarous kiIIing, of wilful aggression, of intentional crossing of the boundary Hne, of the bombing of in- These items are not yet on the agentla. l am not going to violate the law just because he has; l am going to tell the Council honestly and candidly what our position is in regard to placing these items on the agenda, and then l shall stop--reserving, of course, the right to discuss the merits of the case if the items are placed on the agenda. And 1 trust that l shall not violate the common Ea1Se of the peoples of the world by making e.xtravagant, sickening claims such as those we have had to listen to here toda}' ls it possible that those who make these absurd charges believe that the peoples of the world have not intelligence enough to see through them? It is possible, of course, that the boundary line has been crossed. l'hat is a possibility in any war; especially in a northern country, climatic conditions sometimes brings about the accidentaI crossing of a boundary. But to come here and charge the soldiers of the United States, who love life and who are humane and who fight only for principle and never as aggressors-to charge them with crossing a boundary and bombing innocent civilians, is beyond the credulity of anybody on earth. l want to say one thing that does not affect the position of my Govermnent concerning the very complex questions in Asia; l am led to say this by what the representative of the Soviet Union has said about our colleague, .Mr. Tsiang, the lawful representative of the Government of China. Notwithstanding the claims to the contrary, that is what Mr. Tsiang is, in fact and in law. .i .1d he sits with us as an honoured and respected colleague. \Vhen the charge was made that he had no interest in his own people-his beloved people of China-I could not sit here and silently take that. For l know Chinese characteristics from intimate experience and study, and we aIl know Mr. l'siang from very close association-and if ever there was a more dastardly public charge than the one made here, we have not heard of it. 1 hope that Mr. Tsiang will retire tonight believing that he has the confidence of his colleagues on the Security Council. \Ve bow low to his learning and his erudition and his honest)' and his honour. And if we disagree with him political1y in the Security Council at any time, it will not be a reflection upon his honour or his integrity or his fidelity to his dear people. We are going to favour putting the subject matter that is contained in item 4 before the Security Council because it is a charge against the United States of America. l think it is contemptuous to put this propaganda language here--eertainly after the debate we had at our last meeting and the action taken by the Council But let me say something with regard to the facts. l am dealing only with facts affecting the question of whether this item ought to go on the agenda. l say that it ought to be placed on the agenda, but l say that it ought to be placed on the agenda in another formand that is something that the Security Council can take care of. In any event, there was submitted to the Security Council, on 28 A.ugust, a communication from Chou En-lai [S/1722], complaining that military aireraft operating under the Unified Command in Korea had flown over and strafed Chinese territory in Manehuria. l am the one who is saying that they were operating under the Unified Command; l do not say that Chou En-lai said so. What he said was quite different: he said that it was United States aircraft, thus, in effect, trying to convert the situation from a United Nations situation to a United States situation. soumis dont On 29 August, on behaIf of my Government, l subrnitted to the Council a reply [S/1727] to the complaint, which read in part as follows: "The instructions under which aircraft are operating under the Unified Command in Korea strictly prohibit them from crossing the Korean frontier into adjacent territory. No evidence has been received to indicate that these instructions have been violated. The United States, for its part, would welcome an investigation on the spot by a commission appointed by the Security Council." As soon as my Government received the complaint from MI'. Chou En-lai, the United States military authorities, operating under the Commander of the United Nations forces in Korea, were instructed to rnake an il11mediate investigation in order to determine whether there was any evidence to indicate that the charges were well-founded. Reports have now been reeeived which indicate that one F-51 aircraft of the 67th Fighter-Bomber Squadron may have, by mistake, violated Chinese territory in Manchuria and strafed an air-strip in the late afternoon of 27 August 1950. This evidence has not been fully confirmed but it indieates a possibility that one F-51 aircraft may have attacked an air-strip at Antung in Manchuria, which is approximately five miles from the Korean border. As stated in my communication of 29 August 1950, strict instructions have been issued by the military authorities of the Unified Command in Korea to confine the operations of aircraft ta the territory of Korea. For example, on 29 June 1950, in an order to the militar)' forces, it was stated that special care should be taken to ensure that operations in North Korea were weIl clear of the frontier. Again, on 2 July 1950, the Secretary of the Air Force of the United States directed the Commanding General of Air Force Operations ta emplasize the ". n""~ty of full briefing to air creW5 50 tbat there 25 For their part, the United States military authorities would extend to the commission full co-operation, including access to pertinent records. The commission, when established, can make an immediate investigation of the incident alleged in the complaint to have occurred on 27 August. If it is found that an attack did in fact occur, my Government is prepared to make payment to the Secretary-General, for appropriate transmission to the illjured parties, of such damages as the commission shaH find to be fair and equitable. In such case, my Government will see to it that appropriate disciplinary action is taken. l am requesting the Secretary-General to transmit a copy of my statement to the Council this afternoon to Mr. Chou En-lai. l should be prepared to accept item 4 on the agenda, but l believe that the Security Council in fairness ought to change the wording of it to read: "Complaint of bombing of Chinese territory by United Nations aircraft." If the President is unwiHing to accept that amendment, l am prepared to move that that part of the agenda should be amended before it is submitted for acceptance or rejection by the Council. l have not finished, but l have no intention of making a long speech and detaining the Council because l realize what time it is. However, l think the Council has to give heed to what the representative of Egypt has said: that we have to make our agenda an instrument that can be usefuI and that can expedite the transaction of our Lusiness. l also endorse the statement of the representative of the United Kingdom and agree with him except as regards item 5, which reads as follows: "The unceasing terrorism and mass executions in Greece: (a) Letter dated 29 August 1950 from the President of the Security Council addressed to the members of the Security CauDeil (S/1735)." l do not agree that a vote should be taken on a proposaI for the exclusion of this item from the agenda because, under the rules of the Council, it is not necessary to take that hazard. It is not necessary to secure a majority of seven votes in arder to keep this item off the agenda. The question arises in normal form: shaH it be on the agenda? The risk of its deletion is " 1 1 J" 1 am opposed tu the inclusion of this item. In the first place, it is very unfair to write it in this way, and equally unfair to include only the letter that is mentioned in the agenda and exclude the letter [S/1749] which the representative of Greece has addressed to the Couneil. They should ail be included if any are. The United States delegation opposes the inclusion of item 5 because it considers that tbis strange communication should not be entertained by the Security COllBcil. Among aIl the wild charges contained in this item, there is no single coherent suggestion that there is a threat to international peace or even an international dispute. It is just as weIl that no such precedent is set. After almast four years of continuous concern by the United Nations with the problem of the threat to the territorial integrity and political inciependence of Greece, the Conncil knows that the essence of the problem has been the effort of international communism, incited by, supported by and directed from Cominform countries, to overthrow the constitutional government of Greece thraugh force and terror. The General Assembly confirmed the existence of that threat in 1947, 1948 and 1949. During the course of the consideration of this problem in the past, charges like those of item 5 have been made every year by the Soviet group. Their patent purpose has been to divert the United Nations from the real problem of aggression against Greece. On ail those occasions the United Nations has recognized the introduction of the question 01 Greek executians as an obvious manoeuvre. We have heard it befare. It is still a manoeuvre, and the delegation of the United States proposes that the item should not be supported. 1 shall not indulge in a discussion of these two draft resolutions which have been introduced out of order, at this time. However, when they do come up for consideration by the Couneil, 1 think 1 shall have something more to say. constate Cnis d'une dont diquant auquel mis de pour Président question sage

The President finds the United States representative's statement somewhat contradictory. On the one hand, he said that we should not prejudge the issue in the phrasing of the item to he induded in the agenda and should not state whose forces were responsible for the bombing. On the other hand, he suggested that those forces should be referred to as "United Nations forces" ~nd at the same time that the Security Council should mvestigate and study this question. The President considers that, if it is felt that the issue should not be prejudged in the title, the item should be called simply: "Complaint of bombing by air forces of the territory Therefore it would be advisable to phrase this item with the same impartiality. As President, l take note of the United States representative's proposaI, but feel that my phrasing would be preferable. MI'. AUSTIN (United States of America): l would settle for the foIlowing language, if it meets with the President's good judgment, and the reason l would do so is because it removes the implication and the political decision that seems to be implied in the language the President has suggested. l am willing ta follow the precedent the President named. We state in item 3, "Complaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)". Item 4, therefore, could read: "Complaint of bombing of China". If the item were so worded, we should avoid prejudging any political or other questions. If we could agree on that, that would be'satisfactory to me.

Naturally, we mean Chinese territory and Chinese people, regardless of their political beliefs. We shall therefore word this item as the United States representative suggests, namely, complaint of aerial bombardment of Chinese territory - or the territory of China. The territory of China would sound better in Russian. As ta the English, it will be as you wish. MI'. QUEVEDO (Ecuador): l asked to speak because l intended to explain the vote l am going ta cast, but 1am going to give a sense of relief to aIl my coIleagues. The matter of the inclusion or non-inclusion of the items in the agenda has been so dealt with that it seems unnecessary for me to speak. l reserve the right to speak again if any other representatives do so and l think it necessary. MI'. LACOSTE (France) (trans!ated trom French) : My delegation does not see any practical purpose in adding new subjects to an agenda when, after a whole month, we have not even been able to start discussing the first item. Consequently, without in any way prejudging the substance of the question which the President proposes should be added to the agenda for this meeting as item 5, entitled: "The unceasing terl'UNION se question point territoire du lancées de de absolue. s'attendre senté1nt siècles, coloniaux, corps

The deiegation of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST RE- PUBLICS reserves the right to speak on the substance of this question when the item on the agenda on the bombing of the territory of China comes up for discussion. As to the United Kingdom representative's statement and his slanderous attacks on the Soviet Union, 1 must inform him that those millions of persons and, in fact, the entire population of the Soviet Union enjoy complete and absolute freedom. No one, however, expects or can expect any other statement from the representative of the United Kingdom, which has for centuries oppressed hundreds of millions of colonial slavçs, building its fortunes on their blood, bones, and lives. Mr. BEBLER (Yugoslavia) : 1 merely want to explain my vote. 1 have no remarks to make on item 4, since it seems that there is general agreement on the inclusion of the item and on the form in which it is to be included. As far as item 5 is concerned, 1 intend ta vote in favour of its inclusion. 1 shaH do 50 because 1 feel that the Security Council should do something in order to try ta save the lives and alleviate the fate of people many of whom waged a gallant ::itruggle during the Second World War against the Axis invaders of their country and fought in the post-war period for a democratic pattern of things in Greece. 1 think that the Council should take that action because it is the only principal organ of the United Nations at present in session. This, 1 believe, explains why 1 intend to vote in favour of the inclusion of this item, without prejudging the question of whether this Council is really competent to deal with such matters. me vation paraît et faveur que de en la des lutté ] e conduite, des Ainsi l'inscription juger compétent

It 1S proposed that item 4 should be included in the agenda in the following form: "Complaint of air bombing of the territory of China". saisis à bombardement de point le sur terreur If there are no objections, we shall adopt this item in that form without a vote and shaH vote only on the inclusion or non-inclusion of item 5, concerning terrorism in Greece. Mr. ALVAREZ (Cuba) (translated from Spanish) : 1 am very sarry that, perhaps owing to the fact that regrette que n'ait J'ai inscrire ~ spoke in Spanish, my remarks were not correctIy 1I1terpreted by the President. 1 stated clearly that my delegation accepted neither item 4 nor item 5 and 1 cannot understand how the President cau daim that

The representative of Cuba is fully entitled ta speak in Spanish. As regards the substance of the question, 1 take his remarks ta mean that he is pressing for a yote on item 4 as well, which we shall now proceed to take. 1 put ta the vote the question of inc1uding item 4 in the agenda in the following form: "Complaint of air bombing of the territory of China". _-1 7.'ote 7.i.'as taJ..:ell b)' sl107.i.' of hands as follo'Ws: In favour: Ecuador, France, India, Norway, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Yugoslavia. Agaillst: China, Cuba, Egypt. Item 4, as amellded, was adopted by 8 votes ta 3.

Let us pass on to the question of the inclusion in the agenda of item S, entitled "The uIlceasing terrorism and mass executions in Greece". A 'vote was taken by show of hallds as follows: hl favour: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Yugoslavia. Against: China, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, France, India, Xorway, Cnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Xorthern Ireland, United States of America. Item 5 was rejected by 9 votes ta 2. Sir Benegal N. RAU (India): 1 merely wish ta explain very briefly the vote 1 castls regards item 5 of the agenda. \Vhile in certain circun~stances the subject matter of item 5 may be a matter for the consideration of the General Assembly or sorne other organ of the United Xations, m)' delegation is not satisfied that it is a matter for the Security Council. ::\fr. AGSTIN (Cnited States of America): 1 move that the Council should adjourn until 10 :30 a.m. tomorrow. The PRESIDEl\'T (trallslated from Russian): The President is in a ratbt.~ embarrassing position. Cnder the rules of procedure, a motion for closure should be dealt with first. The representative of Ecuador wishes to speak. 1 do not suppose that the members of the Security Council will accuse me of violating the rules of procedure if l call on him. ~fr. QUEVEDO (Ecuador) (translated from Spanish) : When l stated a moment ago that 1 waived my right tu speak and to explain my vote, 1 observed that, if others spoke, 1 might do so also. 1 therefore wish At the last session of the General Assembly, it was my country which proposed in the First Committee that a recommendation should be made to the President of the Assembly to study the situation and see if it was possible to save the lives of the Greek prisoners. It submitted a proposaI, which was adopted with an amendment submitted by Mr, Vyshinsky, one of the representatives of the USSR.3 Thus it is a tradition in Ecuador that due regard should be paid to the observance of human rights with regards to political prisoners. Nevertheless, l voted against the inclusion of this item in the agenda because the Assembly will shortly open, because l take into account the wording of Article 13, paragraph 1 b of the Charter, and because whatever action is required to ensure that human rights are observed as far as possible in Greece and in alI other countries can he taken in the Assembly. tique, rale, dent s'il La proposition par C'est de politiques. voté en se de parce positions possible, Grèce donné la brièvement du à en que en avec nationales, :\lr. STABELL (Norway) : Since aII the other repïesentatives have explained their votes, l should like to state brief1y that my delegation voted against the inclusion in the agenda of item 5 of the provisional agenda because, in my opinion, the item as proposed is completely outside the jurisdiction of the Security Council whether the General Assembly is in session or not. This is so because this item has nothing to do with the maintenance of international peace and security, une DES gation l'urgence immédiatement, peut Si des tains mande pas tendant été de comhera

As representative of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUB- LIes, l wish to say that my delegation has drawn the Security Council's attention to the extreme urgency of this question. Thousands of death sentences may he carried out any day and at any moment. If it wished, the Security Council could take effective steps to save these people's lives. A number of delegations on the Council, however, have not heeded the insistent appeal of the USSR delegation and have not shown such a desire to take effective steps, and as a result the proposaI for the inclusion of this question in the agenda has been rejected. The responsibility will lie with those delegations. That should be duly noted. que au demande Royaume ce Speaking as PRESIDENT, since l am today relinquishing the powers of the presidency, l would ask the United States representative to address his request to the next President, that is, the representative of the United Kingdom. If the latter has no objection to caIIing a meeting of the Security Council for tomorrow,

For what time? Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom): Eleven o'clock. Mr. TSIANG (China): Not having anticipated that there would be a meeting tomorr'Jw morning, 1 had made arrangements for other work at that time. 1 should appreciate it if the Council's next President and the other representatives couId accommodate me to the extent of arranging the next meeting for 3 p.m. tomorrow. The PRESIDENT (tra1Jslated from Rt4Ssia1J): 1 have no objection. The matter rests with the Security Î 1 ~ ~ Council. ~ Mr. AUSTIN (Un~"ed States of America): 1 am ~ going to agree, although 1 had made arrangements ~ which were quite different. ~ The PRESIDENT (tra1Jslatcd from Russian): 1 shalI ~ have to put the question to a vote. Those in favour of ~ calling a meeting of the Security Council for Il a.m. tomorrow please raise their hands. ~ A point of order? 1 calI upon the representative of Egypt. " ~Iahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypt): 1 am in doubt as ~ to whether or not there ;>-:-~ two proposais before the l Council. 1 think that the representative of the United ~ States accepted t}1e suggestion made by the representa- 1 tive of China tha. the Council should meet tomorrow ! afternoon. There is one proposaI before the Council. 1 If the President wants the Council to vote directly on that one proposaI, that is different; but 1 do not think that it is the case that there are two proposaIs before 1 the Council. l The PRESIDENT (tra1Jslated from Russian): 1f the ~'~ representative of the United States will confirm d that he agrees to the proposaI that the Council shoul meet at j p.m" there will be no need for a vote. ~Ir, AUSTIN (United States of America): Yeso l 'l'ne PRESIDEXT (trallslated from Russiall): The l .·,. matter has been settled. The Secretariat has prepared a provisional agenda ,o for the next meeting, Item 4 reads "CJmplaint of air 1:. bombing of the territory of China". When 1 proposed the text to the Council in Russian, 1 suggested that it should read "Complaint of bombing by air forces of the territoP,' of Chi;;a". If the word "air bombing" in ,' English co;;veys the s~me üleaning as "bombing byair forces", 1 have no objection. But 1 believe it would be more correct to translate the text as "Complaint of bombing by air· forces of the territory of China". 1 think that would be more accurate. This wording has been adopted. The meeting rose at 8.20 p."".'.