S/PV.645 Security Council

l am sure that l interpret the sentiments of my colleagues in saying with 'what deep ~egret we learnt of the death of Sir Benegal Rau, a Judge of the International Court of Justice. Sir Benegal Rau was an outstanding member of this Council in the years 1950 and 1951, and he made a most noble contribution te the success of its efforts for the consolidation of p~ace. By his.~assing, India has lost one of its best polttlcal and spmtllalleaders, and the International Co~rt of Jt;tstice one Qf its most learned jlldges. The Umted.Natlons, at th.e same time, has been deprived of one of It~ most devôted supporters. \Veshall keep his nlemory lU deep respect. . Adoption of the agenda Letter dated 26 October 1953 from the permanent observer of Japan to the United Nations, addressed to the Sceretary-General, transntitting a cablegram dated 24 O~toher 1953 from the Minister for Foreign Mairs ·of Japan, con- cerning Japan's application to become a party to the Statute of the International Court Justice (S/3126) (concluded): report of the Chairman of the Committee of Experts con· cerning the conditions on which Japan may become a party to the Statute of the Inter· national Court of Justice (S/3146) Letter dated 6 November 1953 from the Secretary of State for Foreign Mairs of the Republic San Marino, addressed to the Seeretary-General, concerning San Marino's application to hecome a party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice (S/3137) (concluded): report the Chairman of the Committee of Experts concerning the conditions on which the Re. publi~ of San Marino may becom~ a party the Statute of the International Court Justice (S/3147)

Item 2 of the agenda refers ta the application of Japan ta become a party ta the Statute of the International Court of Justice. At our 641st meeting, on 23 November 1953, thisquestion was referred ta the Committee of Experts for examinatian and report. The report of the Chairman of the Committee of Experts [5/3146] is before the Couneil. 4. Item 3 of the agenda refers ta a similar application on behalf of the Republic of San Marino. At our 641st meeting, on 23 November 1953, this question was also referred ta the Committee of Experts for consideration and report. The report of the Chairman the Committee of Experts [5/3147] is before the Couneil. 5. If there are no objections, 1 sha11 ca11 on the Chairman of the Committee of Experts ta present these two reports .under rule 29 of our provisional rules procedure.- 6: Ml'. ROUSSOS (Greece) (Chairman of the Corn mittee of Experts): Fo11owing the deeision to which the Presidenthas just referred, the Committee Experts held two meetings, the firston 27 Novembel' 1953, under the chairmanship of Ml'. Pierre Ordonneau of Franc'.e, and the second on 1 December. In keeping with Article 93, paragraph 2, of the Charter, which . provides: . . 9. May 1 add that, at the request of the expert from the Soviet Union, these recommendations were put to a vote. In each case, the recommendations were approved by 10 votes to none, with 1 abstention.

We shall deal first with the application of Japan [S/3126]. In paragraph 2 of the report of the Chairrnan of the Committee of Experts [S/3146], there is the text· of a proposaI which the Committee suggests that the Security Council should recommend to the General Assembly. 1 do not thinkit is necessary for me to read it. 11. As there is no discussion on this proposaI, 1 shall put it to the vote. A vote was taken by show Qf hands. In fczvour: Chile, China, Colombia, Denmark, France, Greece, Lebanon, Pakistan, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Against: None. Abstaining: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 12. Tht" PRESIDENT: The text of the proposaI is adopted by 10 votes to none, with 1 abstention. 1 sha11 therefore submit it to the Presidént of the General Assembly. 13. We now pass ta the application of the Republic of San Marino. You have before you in paragraph 2 of the report of the Chairman of the Committee of Experts [S/3147] the same text of a recommendation to the General .Assembly as in the prior case. As there are no observations, 1 shall put this text to the vote. A vole was taken by show of hands. In favour: Chile, China, Colombia, Denmark, France, Gr~e~e, Lebanon, Pakistan, United Kingdom of Great Bntatnand Northern Ireland, United States of America. The Palestine quesûon Complaint by Syria against Israel concerning work on the west bank of the River Jordan in the demilitarized zone (S/310S/Rev.l) (continued) At the inv·itation of the PresidentJ Mr. EbanJ representative of IsraelJ Mr. AshaJ representative of Syria and Major General BennikeJ Chief of Staff of the Truce Supervision OrganizationJ tcok places at the Council table. 15. Major General BENNIKE (Chief of Staff of United Nations Truce Supervision Organization): the 639th meeting of the Security Council the representative of Pakistan put various questions to me. l in a position to answer sorne of them now, if the Council allows me to do so. • 16. The representative of Pakistan requested informationJ first, on the existing C'les in respect of irrigation, or any other advantage en; :yc~ by Syrian nationals within the boundaries of Syria, from the stretch of River Jordan which would be affected by the completion of the projected canal. My answer is that water that stretch of the River Jordan is being used irrigaûng lands, watering cattle and operating within the boundaries of Syria. The lands under irrigation and the water mills in operation"- seven altogether - are iq the ~rea of Buteiha Farm. 17. The representative of Pakistan put. the following questions with regard to Buteiha Farm. First, what the area of Buteiha Farm which receives irrigation the Jordan? Secondly, what is the total area of Buteiha Farm, and what part of it would he capable of receiving irrigation from the Jordan if there were no interference with the flow of the river? Thirdly, are there any other lands - not merely Arab-owned lands in the demilitarized zone, but any other lands within Syria - which receive irrigation from this part of the River Jordan or derive any other advantage from the river? 18. In his report to the Security Council dated October 1952 lS/2833J para. 60], my predecessor, . Lieutenant General W. E. Riley, stated that, accordi.'1g tQ the owners of Buteiha FarmJ about 18JOOO dunams of land would be under irrigation during the seasori. I have been informed .that the area at present urtder irrigation is 18,280 dunams - 1,828 hectares, approximately 4,570 acres., The area under irrigation onlya small part of the total area of Buteiha Farm. I am fiot in a position to state ta what extent the which is not irrigatëd now is capable' of receivillg irrigation. To my lmowledge, t.he irrigated lands ButeihacFarm~re the only lands in Syria which receive irrigation from the stretch ofthe River Jordan in question. With regard to the demilitarized zone, I bave informed that approximately 5,000 dunams oi land- 2,924 of which belong to the owners of B~teiha Farm receive irrigation from that stretch of the river. . of the waters of Lake Tiberias and of the River Jordan below Lake Tiberias be in any manner affected and,. if so, in what manner and to what degree? If any such change would be brought about, how would the present uses of the waters of the River Jordan, or any advantages aï present derived from the River Jordan by the State of Jordan be affected? 20. 1 do not think that 1 èL-n in a position to give an adequate ~swer to thi.s question. Under the Israel scheme WhlCh was outhned to me, the water of the River Jordan which would be diverted into the projeeted cana! Vlould be returned to Lake Tiberias, so that the completion of the canal w.0ul~ affect only !he stretch of the river rwrth of Lake T1benas. In such clrcumstances, the problem which arises is that of existing uses of, and advantages received from, the stretch of the river north of r ake Tiberias. Another problem would arise if, 20. réponse israélien tel du de resserait lac est de Un transformer ce du d'en nie fo~loiVÏng a conversion of the Israel project into an irrigltion project, the volume of the waters of Lake Tiberias and of the River Jordan below Lake Tiberias was reduced and their salinity consequently inc.reased. In that event, the interests of the State of Jordan would be affeçted. 21. Ml'. ZAFRULLA KHAN (Pakistan): 1 am grateful ta Major General Bennike for such information as he has been able ta supply to the Counci! 011 the questions that l had put on the record on 18 November [639th meetingJ. 1 can weIl understand his not possessing information with regard to matters that did not relate to this project or strictly to that stretch of the River Jordan which is within the demilitarized zone. 21. l'anglais): donner que Je données projet ment zone 22. a bien d'information disposition raël en respecterai: ne affaire, indépendante; je demandés concrète qu'on l'avenir, mais dit, j'accepte en dans ceux d'autant tater, renseignerrents sants 22. I have found sorne information in the documents that are already available to the Council, in addition to the information that Major General Bennike has been good enough to su}'oly. 1 havealso had sorne further information supplied ta me, very kindly, by the representative of Israel bm: under two restrictive conditions, which 1 accept and shaH respect: the f,rst, naturally, is that that information should not be used in connexion with the case unless l was able to get it independently ; and, the second ii> that in his view. which 1 equally accept as being right, the greater part of the information I requested was not strictly relevant to the concrete question that has ta be settled by thé Security Council ~t tbis stage. In considering long-tenn projects, that mformatïon might become relevant, btlt that stage·has not. ~et been reached. As 1 have said, 1 accept that positIon and, thererore, in dealing with the matter, 1 shall confine myself to the data available on the record and the information supplied by Major General Bennike. I am. the more willing so to restrict myself since, on further study of the record, 1 find that.the information to be found there is quite adequate for the purpose that I have mentioned. 24. As l have said, the crux of the matter with which the Security Cotmcil is concerned is whether this project can proceed while the Armistice Agreement is in force without a modification of that agreement by the parties to that agreement. For that purpose, it would be necessary to renlind ourselves as to the exact scope of the Armistice Agreement. What did it seek to achieve? What was that to which the parties agreed? Then would be for the Council to determine whether this project is likely to contravene any of the terms of the agreement. 25. l might c1ear the ground with a pre1iminary observation. The representative of Israel devoted considerable portion of his statement to the Security Cotmcil [639th meeting] to demonstrating that the pro;ect under consideration was a beneficial one. That obviously would be so. That proposition needs no demonstration. No government would go to the extent of spendingo, or encouraging the spending of, capital, techn~cal skiHs ~nd labour on a project which it had not already determmed would be beneficial. But that is not the point. The point is f'.ot whether this project is likely to prove beneficial. The point is whether the undertaking of this project and the carrying out of it so far as the demilitarized zone is concerned does or does not amount to a contravention of any of the terms of the agreement. vVhat were the conditions when the Armistice Agreement was arrived at? Fighting was in progress between ~yria and Israel; ?yr.ia occupied the greater part of what 15 now. the ~emI11~anzed zone, though that again is not a conSIderation dlrectly relevant to the question who w~s ~r was not o~cupying the area. For the purpose bnngmg the fightmg ta a close. the two parties - in this case Syria and Israelwere persuaded to agree certain conditions on the basis of which fighting would be stopped. 26. It is necessary ta bear constantly in mind that the parties to the agreement in this case - there are several armi~tice agreements be~ween Israel and the neighbounng States - are Syna and Israel. The question sovereignty over the demilitarized zone has been referred to by the representative of Israel, who at one stage eonceded that the question of sovereignty was irrelevant. Whether it is irrelevant or not, the question of sovereigntyunder the armistice is in abeyance. 27. In his statement to the Security Council on April 1951 General Riley said [542nd meeting, para. 92]: "The parties - Israel and Syria - have agreed an armistice, and in that agreement they set upcertain machinery, inc1uding a Mixed Armistice Commission, to deal with differences and disputes over thaï agreement, its interpretation and application." HThe question of civilian activity has, however, been raised, and in such a way as to create a dispute over interpretaHon of the agreement and friction between the parties so severe as to lead to a series of violent local episodes. «r" this regard, what must be made emphatically clear is thaï the Armistice Agreement did not in any way deal with the question of territorial sovereignty and that this quesîfon, generally and particularly in so far as the demilitarized zone is concerned, must rest in abeyance while the Armistice Agreement i8 in effect unless there is a mutua! agreement of the parties" - that is to say, Syria and Israe.l- «to the contrary." 28. That is the position. This position was summed up by Mr. Bunche in his interpretation of the agreement, parts of which are quoted in the statement by General Riley, from which l take one paragraph from the same record; Mr. Bunche said [542nd meeting, para. 97] : Uln the nature· of the case, therefore, under the provisions of the Armistice Agœement, neither party could validly claim to have a free hand in the demilitarized zone over civilian activity, while military activity was totally excluded ...." 29. From that stàtement of Mr. BUilche's interpretr.tion of the. terms of the Armistice Agreement, the Security Council later on incorporated in its resolution the fol1owing provisions [546th meeting, para. 2] : UThe question of civil administration in villages and settlements in the demilitarized zone is provided for,within the framework of an Armistice Agreement in sub-paragraphs 5 (b) and 5 (f) of the draft article. Such civil administration, including policing, will he on a local basis, without. raising general questions of a~inistration, jurisdiction, citizenship andsoverelgnty. «Where Israel dvilians return to or remainin an Israel village or settlement, the civil administration and policing of the village or settlement will be by Israelis" - not by the State of Ifraelbut by those Israelis who have returned to the· village or to the settlement. uSimilarly, where Arab civilians return to or remain in an Arab viUage" - that is, within the demilitarized zone - ua local Arab administration and police unit wiP be authorized. ~~~ ~1~f:~~~~~~?~~d'M~~J<~~~a:O:c~~~~~~:~===a_J 5tat~d on various occasions - that where for the purpose· of restûring local civil administration or nom1al civilian activity, it becomes nece3sar, to· arrange something on alarger basis than a villé~~ or a settlement, and where that arrangement affer."':s both local sides, the local Arabswho are affected and tl1e local Israelis who are affected must agree under the:supervision of the Mixed Arnistice Commission, and then that arrangement can be carried out. For that kind .of arrangement, which is purel)' local and is designed.to promote the restoration of normal civil activities or the setting.up of the iunctioning of local administration, neither the a.greement of Syrïa northat of the.State of Israel required. , 33. But - and this is the point to be emphasizedwhere anything would contravene any of the conditions of the arn1istice, only an agreement between the parties, tl'" ~s,.Syriaand.IsraeI. could effect such a modification. It is neces~ary to keep that distinction in mind. This was made still dearer by the questions· and allSV'ers the Secünty CbuncilAebates of April and May 1951. The representative of Israel had c1aimed at that time that the Armistice Agreement did not operate to limit inany way the civilian activity of the State of Israel wîthin the ·detnilitarized zone..It ismore or1ess·the sarneclaim that has been inàde tn the course of these proceedings with respect to this project 36. That deals with the restoration of normal civil1::m activities. Even with regard to that the State of Israel has no authorit"J, and this stands to reason bec< .Je within the demilitarized zone the position of the parties is equal. It ls a buffer zone created for t..he purpose of stopping the fighting, of separating the military forces, of reducing the friction. Whatever the State of Israel can do within the demilitarized zone, the State of Syria can also do. The boundaries have not yet been. fixed. In the meantime this zone hasbeen made hito il..buffer .lone in which neither State exercises any sovereignty. The exercise of sovereignty or even the question of sovereignty, or the determination of that question, is in ~beyance, and that, l submit, is crucial. 37. This point was made still clearer in answer to a question put by Sir Gladwyn Jebb to Major General Riley. The only clarification Major General. Riley made in' answer to that qUé",ùon was that when h~ said "villages", he also meant lands a.ttached to the villages; that is, the local arrangements set up by any villl'.l.ge or setilement inc1ude not only the village· proper and the setilement proper, but also the lands attached to that village or settlemen.t. 38. Thaï is the position with regard to sovereignty. In other· words, neither side can exercise any rights pertaîning to sovereignty within that area. If, for instance, one side can carry out what may amount ta or whatthey may conceive as a benèficial activity, so may the other side. The position taken up by the representative of Israel would mean that if Syria so chooses, it could have a ~cheme blue-printed, provided of course, agaîn, it was justified on it~ ments, if the question whether or nbt it was beneficial was relevant, and Syria could start works a little higher np in order to divert water onto its side, to be used outside the demilitadzed zone, or even within the demilitarized zone, for the Arab villages, and 80 on. 39. Regarding this point, the represel1tatîve ot Israel objectedihat the river could not be madeto flow upwards•. Science can do a numiler of things today which could not be done a few years ago. Apart from that, however, there are lands on the other sidewhich ha;ve been irrigated,and continue to be irrigated, from tbis stretCh of the Jor<:ign River. Renee, something of that ·kind would be possible on the other side, too. That is only an illustration. If the· State of Syria were to start someheneficialwork on theother side, and the State of Israel were to insist that itcould start sorne beilp.fidal work on. this side, the. result wollid.· he to tear up the entïre Armistice Agreement, aU the arrange- 43. In hisletter dated 24 September 1953 addressed to Major General Bennike, the Foreign Minister of Israel objected to that part of the decision. The objection was couched in these terms [Sj3122, annex II, para. 7 (e)] : '~As for the possible effect which the digging of a canal running parallel to the Jordan river-bed can have upon the achievement of that objective, so far from hampering, the.canal can only facilitate it, since a party bent upon aggression will find yet another obstacle to overcome. For its part, the Government of· Israel has consistently abjured aggression. Were it nutsing aggressive designs, it would be thwarting itsown purposeby digging the canal. On the other hand, the fact that the objection to the canal comes from Syria - the party guilty of aggression in the past - acquires an ominous significance." 44~ To this, Major General Bennike replied as follows [S/41.22,annex III, para. 7 (e)]: - "You have considered another question, that of the militaryvalue of the canal in which the water derived from the river would flow. The canals in yout opinion, would only constitutean obstacle for a party bent. uponaggression. You add that 'for its part, the 'Government of Israel has consistent~yabjuredaggres- Nowthis, as l have ~aid, is a very disquieting position. The position taken is that it is open to the State of Israel ta contravene the condition of the armistice that any change in the demilirarized zone must not interfere with the balance of military advantage to either sîde. Later on he says [S/3122, anne.1:' l, para. 7 (d)i' "The Government of Israel has statèd that the full volume of Jordan water now being used by Arab landowners for irrigation purposes would be assured. The Syrîans object to the irrigation of their lands depending in the future on Israel goodwill. Irrespective of that Syrian poiqt of view, it may be said that the waters in the bed of the river are already very low during the dry season, and it is likely that, unless special arrangements are made, the projected canal and power station wpuld sometimcs leave the Jordan with very little, if àny, water." 49. Objection was taken to this on behalf of Israel, and.it was pointed out that the factors upon wmch this appraisal was based were not quite as they had been assumed to be by General Bennike. For instance, the 1Vfinister for Foreign Affairs of Israel said [S/3122, annex II, para. 7 (b)] : "1)Vhat is called in your letter 'the smalI Island' is actually a speck of land, the size of which never exceeds 400 square metres." Ta this General Bemùke replied, in ms letter of 20 October 1953 ta the Foreign Minister of Israel, as follows [S/3122, annex III, para. 7 (a) and (b)]: "... the island, whose shape and size are variable ... was, when l saw it, approximately twenty times the size mentioned by Your Excellency ..." Thus there is a great d.eal of variation with regard ta the facts, but General Bennike, from his own observation, confirms that the appraisal he had made is fully justified by the fads. 50. Let me take another instance in the same connexion. Wit.~ regard to the mills ref~rred ta by General Bennike in ms decisiop-, the point was made that the two mills in question had ceased operating a· Iong time previously. This is 'h'"hat the Foreign Minister of Israel said [S/3122, annex II, para. 7 (c)]: " "The falseness of the coiltention made to you on this score is proved by thefact thatthe two mills shown to y«?u on 14 September as haVing 'ceased ta work owing to ':ack of \vater' have actually hot been in operation for years and that, .moreover, the canal leading to these millsbranches off from the J01"qan ff01'thof the pointfrom w.hich the contested new (".a.tWJ "On the other hand, the other mill, Tahunat Najmat es Subh, has been in operation this season. When l visited it, l found that the canalleading to it did not contain enough water for its operation. United Nations observers have confirmed that the water level had fallen to one-third of its former level, following the destruction of the dike which had been built in the river-bed to divert water into the canal. In digging out the bed of the river and constructing the new dike across its western braneh, Israel workmen destroyed the dike constructed by the owner of the mi1l. They have at the same time deprived of water the irrigated plot of land to which l have referred;' Thus we have this reassurance that wherever an attempt W'clS made to cast doubt upon the factùal data upon which General Bennike's report was made we find that the doubt, to say the very least, was not justified. 52. But the effect generally upon civilian life may be summed up as General Bennike summed it up in his letter to the Israel Minister for Foreign Affairs. This was also put in question by the Israel Minister for For~ign Affairs, but l shall not read out that part of his letter because it is dealt with in the reply of General Bennike in such a way as to make it sufficiently clear what the point was. General Bennike·wrote as follows [S/3122, annex III, pa.ra. 2] : "After visiting the area and studying the present I~raeli project in the light of the explanations given to me, l have found net only that there has akeady been sorne Interference with normal civilian life, but also that the completion of :the projèct, ty àeriving from the flcw of. the Jordan b the demilitarized zone the water necessary tû generate e1ectric power of 24,000 kilowatts, was likely to bring about greater disturbances unless definite obligations were entered into with a view to avoiding them. In the absence of such obligations, some Arab lands, which for many years have depended on the water of the Jordë.!n for irrigation, might becorrie, in the Acting Mediator's words, 'a vàcuum or wasteland':' 53. Further on he said [S/3122, am~'ex III, para. 7 (a) and Cb)] : "According to the assurances by Israel representatives, to which you have referred, such Arab land should have been neither 'uscd' nor 'otherwise affected' andit should in the future be neither used nor affected. It has however been used: Israel workmen have crossed it to build the dike in. the western branch of the river; their power-shovels, placed in the riverbed and also on Arab land, have iiiied up boulders and soil on it (these have been to date removed ta a large extent); heavy machinery has overturned the grourld; trees have been felled; Israel 55. It should be perfectly c1ear that, as far as the Arabs are concl"rned, norml:.l civilian life inside the de..tnilitarized zone would b:; very serioilsly af!ected if this project were carried out. 56. The representative of Israel here, the Foreign Minister of Israel in bis letter, and other representatives have said that they would give various assurances. l do not cast any doubt upon their intention to carry out these assurances. Eut today the situation is that these people in the demilitarized zone, where sovereignty lS not exercisable either by Syria or by Israel, can obtain what they have been accustomed to obî:ain without any interference. Once the project is carried out, they would be at the mercy of the State of Israel, and would obtain those benefits, if these assurances were carried out, by grace of the State of Israel, which would rea1ly to a very large degree change the situation which the Armistice Agreement sought to maintain intact. 57. T~e position with regard to Buteiha Farm has a1so beev a.plained at length towards the end of General .uennik-e's letter to the Foreign Minister of Israel. It is a large farm with an extensive area, part of which is irrigated from the Jordan River as it flows at present.' Wf".re thisproject to be ca.rried out, the whole af this irrigation would be cut off altogether. This if; a point to remember with regard to the Buteiha Farm : part of it lies within the demilita:T'Ïzed zone and the l'est of it lies within the State of Syria; portions of it, both inside the demilitarized zone and ,vithin the State of Syria, are entitled to receive water from the Jordan as it flows at present. 58. The situation in brief with regard to the project. i5 this. It may be conceded that it. i5 intended as, and would operate as, a beneficial project so far as the State of Israel is concerned.But that is nof the point with wbich eithet the Commission or the Security CO].1ncii îsconcernedat this stage..The project, if carried inta effect, would seriously eontra.....ene the actual provisions l~ter, a decision must ~e reached. It is to be hoped thzt, s.Ince the current seSSlOn of the General Assembly is hkely to fin; 5.ts work in a few days, the Council will then he abl' ..u complete its discussion of this item and ta reach a decision. 63. In those circumstances, l suggest that it should be left ta the discl'etion of the President to calI the next meeting of the Council as early as possible next week. ft was so agreed. UOÉllilHA - AlGEN'IolNE Editorial Sudamoricano SJ... AJline 500. Bueno, Air·$'. "AlICE Editions A. Poris V. GlEECE - SRECE ..Eleftheroudoki.... tian, Athènes. AUStRAUI. - AUST1AlIE ~. A. Godd.rd. 255. Ge9rge St•• Sydney. llnd 90 Qu.en St., Melbourne. Melbourne University Press. Corlton N.3. Victorie. 'ELGIUM -BElGIQUE Agence et Mos,agories de le Presse S.A•• 1....22 rue du Persil, Bruxelles. W, H. Smith & Son. 1"1.75. bouhvord Adolph••Mo.. Bruxell.s. .GUATEMALA Goub.ud & 28. Guetemelo. RA!YI Lib.oi,ie' "A III.B. Port·eu·P.ince. ROMDUIU Librer!.. PaMmeric.. Tegucigelpo. HOOSolOllU The Swindon Kowloon. ItELAND __ ISLANDE Bokovenlun 'OUYIA -JOllYIE lIbr.rl" S.I.ccione•• Cosille 972, 1.0 P~ 'Wlt _ !~ESIL .r LivroJ'lo Agir. Rio d. Jonoiro. Soo Peulo end Belc> Horizon,to. WWlA RyorsonPross. 299 Qu.on St. West; Toronto. • Periodico.lnc.. 4234 do la Roche. Mon. trool. 34. ŒYL03- !EYLAN The A.socioted Newspopers of Ceylon Ltd.. Laka Hou,e. Colombo. tNIlE-CHILI Libn,,/a Ivons. Monedo 822. Santi.go. Aust~rstraeti IMDIA-IHDE Oxford Bôok House, New Celcutto. P. Voredechery St., M.dr.s IGOMESIA-IHUO/IESIE Joie••n Pembongunen. Diokorta. IUIl Ketob·Khoneh nue, Tehren. IUQ-IIAl Mockenzie'3 ISUEl. Blumstein's Ro.d. ïel·Aviv. Editori~1 d.1 Poclfico, Ahumodo 57, Sontiogo. CHINA -CHIHE Th. World Book Co. ltd•• 99 Chung King Roed, lst .Secl1on, Taipeh.Toiwon. Commerciel Pre.., 211 HononRd.. Sheng. he;'. {gLOMSlA-COLOIIIIE • Librer!o Lotine, Carrero 60.. 13·05. Bogoto. Librerlo Amorioe. Modellln. Li.brerle Nadonet Ltde.. Sarronquillo. ITALY - ITALIE C..,libri S.A., LEWION - UlAM Libreirie Universelle. L1eEIII; J. Momolu Kemoro, LlrxElllOOIe Librairie J: IlEXI;;o- MEXIQUE Edito.iol Hermes 41. Mé:'ico. RElHEIWDS- N.V. M.rtinus '••Grov"nhoge. NEW ZEAtAItD_NOWEUE·ZEWiOE United Netions land, C.P.O. HDIWAY'-ROYE5E coSTA llCA - COSTA·lfCA . Tr.jos Hermonos, Aport.do 1313. San' José. CUlA i.. Ceso Solgo. O'Reilly 455, le Hobane. QECHOSLOYAIIA - TCHEtOSlUYAllOlE Ceskosloveosky Spi.ovotel, Norodnl T.lde 9. P..ho 1. DENMAII- DAHEIlAlI Eine, Munksgoerà. LM" Nerreged. 6, Kebenhavn, K. . DOMIHICAN IEPUILIC- IEPUllIlllIE DOIIINlCAIRE Lib.erl" Dominionne, Merc3des 49. Ciu. dod Trujillo. EOIA1"'t - EOUATEUt Libl't a Ciontrfico, GUfyequl1 end Ouito. Jo~.n Grundt gus!>gt. 7A, PAiISTAIl :Thome. & Thomes. Roed, K.rachi. Publishers United l.ohore. The Pokiston Chittogong PAIIAIIA José Me~êndez. PAiAGUAY MQreno He~meno., -;~T-Em'TE Llbrai.ie "Le Reneissonce. d'F.gypte:' 9 Sh. Adly Posho, Ceiro. EL SAlVADOI..SALYADOI Menue! Noves y CIo.. la. Avenlde sur 37. Seri Selvodor. ETHIOl'IA - mnOPIE Agence Ethiopienne de Publicité. So. !28, Addis·Abebo. . .fIN.";' FINUlîllE A~oteell\inen .Kïriokou~"o, 2, K••~uskotu, Heisin~i. OrdSll'S C1nû Inqui~ hem countrles wher. sales agents have nof yet been apPolntee! may be sent fo: Sales CfiCÏlféltÎon Section, United Nations, New York, U.S.A.; or Sales Sectioil, United Nations OffIce, Palais !:fatio~, Geneva, Switzer!and. Priee: $U.S. 0.15; (or equivâlent Printed in Canada'