S/PV.553 Security Council

The delegation of Ecuac10r would have preferred a satisfactory settlement of the question under discussion without the COlmcil having to take a decision on the dtaIt resolution before it; as the representative of Tnrkey implied in his statement, my delegation contributcd to the efforts made to reach such a settlement. We should have preferred a solution of that kind, provided that it wonld ensure respect for international instruments in force and the principles of international law applicable to the case, and wouId, at the same time, be conducive to strengthelling the possibility of agreement between the two States directly concerned in the dispute. 114. When the Security Council discussed the complaints lodged by Israel and Syria against each other, l had the occasion to remark that it appeared indispensable to make further efforts to achieve final peace between the Arab States and Israel, becanse the present tension in that area is a consequence of the fact that it has been impossible as yet to sign peace treaties putting an encl to the disputès and leading the parties towards full co-operation. ' 115. The representative of Egypt has quite rightly pointed out to us that, on many'occasions, final peace does not immecliately result from the conclusion of an armistice but takes some time to achieve. But that is one more reasol1 emphasizing the capital importance of achieving a satisfactory settlement between the States concerned with the assistance of the United Nations, through the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, and in a spirit of sacrifice and mutual understanding. 116. For this reason, my delegation would like to take this opportunity to express its satisfaction at the fact that the aforesaid United Nations Commission has invited the parties to make the new effort which is necessary. We should also like to express our most earnest hope ~hat the next meeting may be successful and may beg111 to remove one of the most Serious threats to the security, welfare and progress of the Middle East. 117. It is true that, technically, there is no question before us. e?,cept. the complaint made by Israel against the restnctlOns 1111posed on the free passage of ships bound for Israel or carrying a cargo for that country. N everthele~s, it seems ~ppropriate to recognize, as the representatlve of Brazil has done [552nd 11~eeting 1. ~hat one of th~ most serious obstacles to peace in that l\npor~ant reglOn of t?C, wodd is the question of the Palestme refugees. ThIS IS a vast human tragedy which, althougl: of direct .and ~mmediate intel'est only to the States m that reglon, IS also, by its nature and its magnitude, a question which should and does concern the United Nations and the moral conscience of the whole wor1cl. 119, Another factor which would in mv view facilitate progress towards a peaceful ~olution would b~ for each of the States concerned to abide faithfully by those part~ of the r~solutions adopted on the subj ect by the Secunty CounClI and the General Assemblv which arc acldressecl to them. • 120. In accorc1ance with the instrnctions of my GovenUllent, l shaH vote in ·favour of the draft resolution. l \Vish ~o put it on record that l sha11 do so in the light of our 1l1terpretation of certain paragraphs in the draft before us. 121. Since there are at present no real hostilities and since it was the purpose of the 1949 armistice to put an end to hostilities, the practice of restricting the passage of certain goods through the Suez Canal ane! of visiting and searching certain ships seems to be incompatible with the Armistice Agreement, with the authorizec1 interpretation of that instrument and with the purpose of the United Nations in endorsing' it. At the samc time, this practice appears to he unjustifiably prej nc1icing the interests of other States. 122. It is true that Article 51 of the United Nations Charter recognizes the right of self-de·Eenec under conditions specified in the Charter itself; but my delegation does not think that this right can be invoked in the present situation, that is to say, in the absence of hostilities after the Security Council has considered the matter and taken measures relating to the dispute, and since no actual armed attack by Israel upon Egypt has taken place. 123. Furthermore, although l have carefully studied the hackground to, and other questions concerning, the Convention of Constantinople of 1888, l cannot see how this interference with the passage of certain ships and goods through the Suez Canal can be reconcilec1 with that Convention. . 124, l wish to state expressly that my delegation will vote for the draft resolution on the understanding that none of its paragraphs can, either directly or indirectly or by omission, affect the principle of freedom of transit which should apply in respect of international navigation routes, since, if any of the paragraphs of this (haft resolution couic! be taken as a precedent for a restrictive interpretation of that principle or of the validity of bilateral or multilateral agreements now in /-I6rce re1ating to freeclom of navigation, my ~lelegation . would be ullable to vote for the draft resolutIon. f t 1 ' 125. It is obvious that freed0111 of transit on international routes is a matter of concern not on1y to the rrreat maritime Powers but to a11 countries in the world, ~vhatever their circnmstances or geographical position. Bence, from this point of view also, the draft resolution is of considerable importance. 126. In tl1e western hemisphere, as members of the Security Council know, the principle is deeply rooted. 127. In his instructions to the United States de1egates ta the Congress of Panama in 1826, Henry Clay saie1 that if a canal capable of conveying ocean-going ships from one ocean to the other was opened across the isthmu8, the resulting benefits should not he appropriated by any one nation but shou1d be extended ta aIl the countries of the world, subject to the payment of a jU8t remuneration or charge. And as regards that international South American river, the Amazon, ~Wi1lial11 Marcy, the United States Secretary of State, in a communication dated 8 August 1853, instructed ML Trousdale, United States Minister in Brazi1, to lay claim to the use of this natural trade channel for United States citizens, and stated that this right was not derived from treaty stipulations but was a natural right like that of sailing the ocean, the C0111mon highway of the nations. 128. Following this tradition, uncler article 35 of the Treaty of Peace, Amity Navigation and Commerce, concluded in 1846 between the United States and New Granada, now the Republic of Colombia, the United States guaranteecl positively and effective1y to New Granada the complete neutrality of the Isthmus of Panama, in arder that free transit from one ocean to the other might not be interrupted while the Treaty was in force. The Hay-Pauncefote Treaty of 1901- 1902, between the United States ancl the United Kingdom, sanctions a similar policy in its preface and articles III and IV; the Treaty between the United States and Panama, lmown as the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, signed in 1903 (articles IX and XVIII), and the 1936 Treaty between the two States (article 10) follow the same tradition, without prejudice, of course, to the defence needs of the two States, as appears Trom article 10 of the latter instrument, and naturally without prejudice to the clefence of the Canal itself, which is a vital artery for several nations of the Americas, and whose defence is therefore a matter of concern to several States. 129. The brilliant diplomatic history of Brazil c1emonstrates that it has maintained the same honourable tra~ition. This is borne out, among many other acts of 1tS Government and international instruments concluc1ed \Vith variotls other countries, by the decree of 7 December 1867, in which Brazi1 statec1 that the Amazon woulc1 be open to the ships of a11 nations. 130. As far as Ecuac10r is concerned, the same policy has been fo11owec1 in these l11atters and has been enshrined in severaI intcrnationaI instruments. 131. l venture to reca11 that the Convention and Statutes on the navigation of navigable rivers and canals of in.ternational interest, was signed at Barcelona on ?q Apnl 1,921, by the following American States: Bohvla, BrazJ1, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, 132. Tt is my belief that, in face of the need to maintair~. and develop solidarity of mankind and trade among natIOns, the general trend of international law on this subject is favourable to the establishment, consolidation and broadening of the principle of freedom of transit, and to the creation of an international regime which would regulate and guarantee that freedom on international navigation routes. 133. Consequently, inasmuch as the draft resolution uncler discussion today creates a precedent, it is of direct interest not only to the States parties to the present dispute but to a11 countries, since it is aimed at promoting respect for freedom of navigation. 134. For a11 those reasons, we shaH vote in favour of this drait since, in a friendly spirit, it requests Egypt to terminate the restrictions imposed, to which reference has already been made. 135. In voting for the draft resolution, my de1egation considers that it would not be departing in the least from the frienclly relations my country has with Egypt. 'vVe even hope that the elimination of the present difficuJty will promote the re-establishment of peace in this region and, consequently, the progress of Egypt itself. 136. Ml'. DAYAL (Indta): The problem which has been under discussion in the Council, entitled "Restrictions imposed by Egypt on the passage of ships through the Suez Canal", is an intricate and complicated one. My de1egation has 1istened carefully to the respective cases of the parties immediately concerned which have bccn presented to the Counci1 exhaustive1y and with a wea1th of detait My delegation has a1so paid careful attention to the speeches made by representatives on the CounciL The importance of the prob1em is obvious. It affects not only the general question of the passage of international commerce through the Suez Canal, but a150, in an immecliate and direct manner, the functioning of the great Haifa Rennery which, in turn, affects the oil supplies of the who1e world. 137. My de1egation was hopeful that the efforts which \Vere being made for a seUlement of the dispute outside the Connci1 wou1cl meet with success and that it would not be necessary for the Counci1 to take up the matter in a formaI manner. 138. Unfortunately, that hope has not been fulfi.lled. The Council has returned to the subject and has under its consideration the joint drait reso1ution presented by the rlelegations of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. 139. As l have said before, the question before us is a complicated and intricate one, involving considerations of national rights and obligations and of international 1aw. Egypt daims certain rights in the matter, but we are to1d that it is not necessary for the Council to pronounce upon them. The prob1em, it is said, is not whether there is a basis for the rights cIaimed, but whether the rights shou1d be actually exercised. But obviously, it seems to us, if there is a basis for the 140, My delegation fee1s that questions regarding the lega1 rights of the parties cannat he brushed asic1e as mere techllicalities. My delegation fully shares the hope that peace and stahility may saon be restored in the Middle East and it looks fonvard to the day when this hope will be realizee1. But it cannat share the belid that the ciraft l'l'solution which is before us will contribllte usefully towards that result. In fact, in view of the statel11ent of the representative of Egypt which wc have jllst hem"d, it may weil do the reverse. 111 view of these considerations, my de1egation will abstain when the clraft l'l'solution is put ta the vote, 141. Ml'. BEBLER (Yllgoslavia): The attitnde of my delegation with regard ta the joint clmIt l'l'saIntion no\\' hefore the Council is pr01l1ptecl by the :;ame considerations that have always inspired ottr approach to the varions other aspects of the Palestine Cjuestion which have come before the United Nations. 'iVhat wc are anxious ta sel' is an carly general settlement in the Middle East, Our interest in SUC11 a seUlement stems not merely from the. obvious geographical faet that the area involved is adjacent to the one in whlch our own country is sitllutee1. 'iVe are deeply convinced that snch a seUlement lies in the best interests of ail parties concernee! and is a vital col11ponent of the more gcneral problcm of relieving worle] tensions, Vlc shall thereforc nlways give our support to any step \\'hich wouId bring' us ne;trer to sneh a seulement anel which WCltlId mean an ac1vunce from the present armistice system towarcls a stable and encllll'ing peace in the 1\·1 idclle l'.:ast. And \ve shall always, natnra\ly, he cql1ally l'ager ta sec the ce~sation o~ any action, regartlless of origin, which I11lght eomtItllte an obstacle to suclt ail ad V,111cc. Tt is because wc ~eel that the general pnrpnse of the joint ?raft rcsolntlOn, as expresseel in it::; operative part, is 111 faet ta rl'l11ove such an obstacle that we shall give it our support. 142. It is precisely for the same reasons that we cannat but have rather serions cloubts regareting certain parts of the preamb1e, INe cio indeed fincl S0111e ellfficultf persnadi.ng onrse1ves that the language of some ?eetlolls of dus preamble Is not snch as to aggravate lssues rather than to help to seUle thel11 - which is, after aH, the pnrpose of the resolution, as wc understancl it.. I al:l referring more particnlarly ta paragraph 3 wh;ch cltes, and appears ta endorsl', an opinion of the ChIef o~ ?taff of the Truce Supervision Organization. The opmlOn and the ten11S in which it Is couched in t~le vicw of 111y c1elegatiol1, place npOl1 the entirl' q;lestl.on il label of such gravity as goes beyonc1 anything the ClrCl1111stances of the case would appear ta warrant, or the general context of the l'l'solution itsetf would seem ta imply. . 143. l \~~t!ld theref,ore urge the sponsors ta consîder the posslblhty of elther deleting this paragraph or 144. plus que questions gral 144. ln conclusion, l should like once again to elUphasize that my delegation's sole guide in this matter is its clesire to assist in bringing about a general sett1ement of the broacler Middle East issues, a settlement basecl on full respect for the rights of aH the parties concernee!. que chargé été

Spealdng as one of the sponsors of the draft resolution, l aÎn directec1 to announce that paragraph 3 of the text has been revised, to reacl as follows: "Noting the report of the Chief of Staff of the Truce Supervision Organization ta the Security Conncil of 12 Jnne 1951." 3 146. l am informed that a document 4 containing that revision will be circulatecl as soon as convenient. 147. As President of the Council, l would be carrying out the express desire of a great many members of the Council if l adjourned this meeting, Is there any objection on the part of anybody to snch an adjournment or to our meeting again next Tuesday, 21 August, at Il a.m.? It was sa decided. The meeting rose at 6.35 p.m, 3 III the original tcxt (5(2298) paragraph 3 reads as follows; "Noting that the Chief of Staff of tbe Truce Supervision Ol-ganization in his report to the 5ecurity Council of 12 June 1951 considered interference with the passage through the Suez Canal of goods destined for Israel to be a hostile and aggressive act, and contrary to the spirit of the Armistice Agreement, the effective functioning of which is thereby jeopardized," 'f Subsequently reprodllced under the sY1l1bol 5(2298(Rev,!. Except for the revision of paragraph 3, as indicated above, the texts of S(2298 and 5(2298/Rev.l, which are incorporated in the official record of the 558th meeting, are identieal. FIN LAND - FINLANDE Akntcemlnen Klrjakauppa. katu, Helsinki. fRANCE Editions A. Pedone. Paris V. GREECE - GRECE "Eleftheroudakis," nal., Plac. de la Constitution, GUATEMALA Goubaud & Cio. Uda. num. 28. 2 do Piso•. HAlTI MaK Bouch.reau, Libra.lri. v.lle." Boîte postale Prince. HONDURAS Librerla Panamerlcana. Fuente, T.guclgalpa. ICELAND - ISLANDE Bokaverzlun Sigfusar Au.turstretl 18, ReykJavik. INDIA-INDE Oxford Book & Statlonery House, New Delhi. INDONESIA - INDONES[E Jajasan Pembangunan, 84, Djakarta. [RAQ-IRAK ARGENTINA - ARGENTINE Editorial Sudamerlcana S.A., Cali. Alslna 500, Buenos Aires. AUSTRALIA - AUSTRALIE H. A. Goddard (Pty.l, Ltd., 255a Georg. Street, Sydn.y, N.S.W. BELGIUM -'- BELGIQUE Ag.nc••l M.ssagerl.s de la Pr.ss. S.A•• 14-22 ru. du P.rsil, BruxeUes. W. H. Smith & Son 71-75 Boulevard Adolph.-Max. Bruxelles. DOLIVIA - BOLIVIE lIbr.ria Clentifica y Lit.rarla, Avenlda 16 de Julio 216, Casilla 972. La Paz BRAZIL - BRESIL LIvrarla Agir, Rua M.xlco 98-8. Calxa Postal 32n, RIo d. JaneIro. CANADA - CANADA Th. Ry.rson Pr.ss, 299 Queen Street West, Toronto. CEYLaN -CEVLAN , The Assoclated Newspapers of C.y!on, Ud., Lak. House. Colombo. CHILE - CHILI . Librerra Ivens, Calle Moneda 822, Santiago. CHINA - CHINE Th. Commercial Piess, Ud., 211 Honan !load. Shanghai. COLOMBIA - COLOMBIE Librerla Latina Ltda.• Apartado A~ru 4011, 80gotâ. COSTÀ RICA - COSTA.RICA Tr.]os Hermanos, Apartado 1313. San José. CUBA La Casa Belga, René d. Smedt, O/Rellly 455, La Habana. CZECHOSLOVAKIA - TCHECOSLOVAQU[E ëeskoslov.nskY Spisovatel N~rodnl 1'Ffda 9, Pnha 1. DENMARK - DANEMARk Einar Munksgaard, N~rregade 6. K_benhavn. DDMINICAN REPUBLIC- REPUBL[QUE DOMINICAINE Llbrerra Domlnlcana, CaU. M.rc.d.s No. 49/ Apartado 656, CIudad TruJillo. ECUADOR:- EQUATEUR Munoz H.rmanos 'i Cia., Plaza deI T.atro, Quito. EGYPT - EGYPTE· librairIe "La RenaIssance d/Egypt.... 9 SH. Ad Iy Pasha, Calro. EL SALVADOR-SALVADoR Manuel Navas y Ciao "La Casa dei LIbro Barato" la Avenlda sur num. 37, San Salvador. ETHIOPIA - ETHIOP1E Agence Ethlopi.nne de Publlclttl. Box 8. Addis-Abeba. Macken~le's 8ookshop, Statloners, Baghdad. IRAN Ketab-Khaneh Danesh, Av.nue, Teh.ran. [RELAND - IRLANDE Hlbernlan General Ageney cial Bu IIdlngs, Dame ISRAEL Leo Blumstein, P.O.B. 35 Allenby Road, Tel-Aviv. ITALY -ITALIE CoJlbrl S.A., Via Chiosselto lEBANON - LIBAN LibraIrIe unlv.rselle. LIBERIA J. Momolu Kam.ra. Streels, Monrovia. LUXEMBOURG L1bralrl. J. Sehummer. Luxembourg. MEX[CO - MEXIQUE Editorial H.rmes, cal 41. Mexico. O. NETHERLANDS - N.V. Martlnus Nljhoff. 9, 's·Gravenhag•• NEW ZEALAND- NOUVELLE·ZELANDE United Nations Association land, G.P.O. 1011, N[CARAGUA Dr. Ramiro Ramrrez Publlcaclon.s. Managua, Unlled Nat/ons publications can further be obtalned 'rom the tol/o'lilng boobeller.: GERMANY - ALLEMAGNE AUSTRIA - AUTRICHE Buchhandlung Elwert & Meurer, Haupt.' B. Wüllerstorff, Waagplatz, strasse, 101, Berlin-Schiineb.rg. Salzburg. W. E. Saarboch. Frankenstrass•• 14, Kiiln-Junkersdorf. JAPAN - JAPOM AI.xande,· Horn. SpÎegclgasse. 9, Maruzen Co., Ud., Wiesbaden. Nihonbashi. Tokyo Orders ~"d inquiries 'from countries where sales ag.nls b,re not yot been appolnted may be sent to: Sales and Circl!laliOM Sor.tlon, United Nations. New York, U.S.A.; or Sales Section, United Nations Office, Palais des Nations, Ganeva, Swiherland. Printed in Canada Priee: 30 cents (or equiva1cnt in