S/PV.866 Security Council

My Government deeply regrets that the Argentine Government found it necessary to bring this question before the Security Council. Our regret ia, first, because we have always had ths 2. gouvernement regrette vivement que le Gouvernement argentin ait juge ndcessaire de saisir le Cons& de s6curit6 premier lieu parce que nous avons toujours entretenu les relations le gouvernement argentins et que nous attachons une grande valeur nous nous trouvons amen& & discuter ici, auConsef1, le fait criminels dont certains IsraBliens, et a &tB transi&8 mOSt friendly relations with the Argentine people and its Government, relations which we deeply value, and, secondly, that we have to discuss here, in this forum, the fact that Adolf Eichmann, one of the top war oriminals, was discovered by Jews, includingIsraelis, and taken to Israel. 3. 1 am in full accord with the learned and distinguished representative of Argentina in his desire to keep this discussion on the highest level and to avoid recriminations, and 1 regret that, in the course cf my statement, 1 am going to have to take exception to some of his remarks and the mariner in which he expessed himself, 3. Je partage pleinement le d&ir repr&entant sion sur le plan le plus Elevé et d%viter les rdcrimfnations, et je regrette de devoir, au cours de ma d&Iaration, et & la façon dont il s’est exprime. 4. At tbe same tims, with reference to what he said at the beginning of his speech this morning, 1 4. D’autre part, & propos de ce que le representant de 1’ Argentine a dit ce matin au d&but de sa dgcla- 5. In our letter of 21 June to the President of the Security Council (S/4341) we referred to two aspects which we consider of great significance. The first concerns the competenoe of the Security Council under Article 34 of the Charter, whioh is the Article invoked by Argentins, and we also explained why we cannot and do not share the view of the Argentine Government regarding “the failure of diplomatie representations”. We gave four reasons why we hold that point of view. The first reason was that the “note verbale” of 8 June 1960 [S/4334] contained an ultimatum. The fourth of those reasons-and, in ouf‘ view, perhaps the most significant-was that a meeting between the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of Argentina had been arranged to take place in Europe later this week. 6. In his statement this morning, the representative of Argentina, partly on the basis of Press reports, suggested that, in view of the known attitude of the Government of Israel on the question of the return of Eichmann to Argentina and the conditions laid clown by Mr. Ben Gurion, the Government of Argentina does not believe that there exists at the present time the requisite minimum basis for negotiation, and therefore President Frondizi cannot agree to a meeting the results of which have been vitiated in advance. 1 am informed by the Prime Minister that he was reported out of context and that the word “conditions” had not been mentioned by him. 1 think that the report in the newspapers this morning was not a quotation. 7. 1 think it would interest the members of the Security Council to be informed of the contents of a “note verbale” received this morning by our Embassy in Brussels from the ,Embaesy of Argentina in that City. The “note verbalel’ states: Vince the Government of Israel has submitted a note to the United Nations, the President [of Argentina] aonsiders that the meeting would not be possible until alter the United Nations has dealt with this question. The President very much regrets that the note which has been presented by Israel has changed the situation.” 8. The members of the Security’ Council cari judge for themselves what the real situation is and what are the real reasbns ,for it regarding the meeting between the two leaders. If the meeting does net take place, despite our readiness for such a meeting, it is clear that the responsibility lies on the Government of Argentina. 9. The representative of Argentina referred to the meeting which took place recently here in New York between himself and myself. 1 wish to take this opportun@ to express’ my appreciation that the re- 10. The representative of Argentina referred to the fact that in the Republic of Argentina there live several hundred thousand Jews and that a11 of them, both under the law and in custom, enjoy absolute equality of treatment. 1 wish tc assure the Government of Argentina, through its representative here, and the members of the Security Councfl that the Government and the people of Israel, and, 1 am sure, Jews the world over, are aware of this and apprecfate the freedom and equality which the Jewish communtty of Argentina enjoys. 10. plusieurs Argentine fait, a donner au Gouvernement de son reprbsentant, de S&urit& peuple isra4liens du monde reconnaissants jouit la collectivit6 11. 1 do not wish to occupy the time of the Ccuncil with a detailed refutation of the legal argumentation which was adduced by the representative of Argentins, whose legal qualifications and ski11 are well kncwn to a11 delegations in the United Nations. At this stage 1 merely wish to reserve the right of my delegation to make further observations on that part of the statement Ff we find this to be necessary after we have given it the full and dispassfonate consideration which it merits. 11. d&aillGe par le représentant et l’adresse d6lbgations. débat, senter déclaration l’estimons l’attention 12. Hcwever, 1 find it necessary to amplify a little of what we put forward in our letter of 21 June regarding the competence of the Security Councll, under Article 34 of the Charter-and 1 must say that the representative of Argentina has certainly not answered our objections, or rather our limitations, on the competence of the Security Council, under Article 34, which-1 must stress again-is the Article, the only Article invoked by the Gcvernment of Argentins in its request to the Council. 12. Mais il est n&oessaire, un peu ce que nous 21 juin au sujet de la competence rit.6 aux termes dois aucunement nos r&erves est le seul article de la Charte que le Gouvernement argentin ait invoque & l’appui de la demande dont il a saisi le Conseil, 13. Article 34 states: “The Security Ccuncil may investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute ,..“. 1 wish to stress the words “may investtgate”, The Article goes on to specify the one and only legitimate purpose of that investigation: n ..a in order to determine whether the continuance of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security”. 13, L’Article peut enquêter sur tout diffdrend ou toute situation qui pcurralt ou engendrer un différend”. mots “peut enqu&er”. le seul et unique but legitime de l’enquéte: “.,. afin de determiner si la prolongation de ce differend ou de cette situation semble devoir menacer le maintien de la paix et de la sécurit6 internationales”. 14. This means that the Council cari only take action in accordance wîth that Article. My Government is bound, therefore, to regard as ultra vires any resolution whioh may not be in conformity therewith. 14. Ainsi, le Conseil ne peut agir que conform6ment aux dispositions de cet article. Mon gouvernement est donc tenu de considdrer comme entache’e d’exc&s de pouvoir toute r4solution qui ne serait pas conforme B 1’Article 34. 16, There are, hcwever, one or twc parts of the oatensibly legal argumentation which transcends the limits of legal argument and whicli, 1 am sure, were lnoluded by the representative of the Argentine without full appreciation of their more general implications, and to these 1 must make a brief but emphatic Wly now. 16. Il y a cependant un ou deux points de l’argu? mentation manifestement juridique qui outrepassent les limites du raisonnement proprement juridique et que le repr&entant l’en suis àt&e, sans se rendre pleinement compte de leurs incidences plus g&&ales, ces points lui r8pondre maintenant de façon brhe bien que categorique. 16, In cne part of bis atatement the representative of the Argentine based an argument on the fact that net only Eichmann had entered and established him- Self in Argentina under false papers and irregularly but also many refugees, including Jewish refugees, frem Nazi oppression. l.6. Dans sa d&laration, tine a fait valoir que non seulement Eichmann mais aussi de nombreux rtlfugiés, qui avaient fui la pers&ution nazie, Btalent entres ?n Argentine et s’y étaient install6s sous une fausse .dentit4 et de façon irrQuli&re. 3 18. Having said that, I wish ta say we recognize that the persona who took Eichmann from Argentina to Israel broke, the laws of Argentina. For this the Israel Government has apologized to the Argentine Gevernment in its note dated 3 June 1960 [S/4342, se&. Ij stating: “If the volunteer group violated Argentine law or interfered with matters within the sovereignty of Argentina, the Government of Israel wishes to express its regret. The Government of Israel requests that the special significance of bringing to tria1 the man responsible for the murder of millions of persona belonging to the Jewish people be taken into account, and asks that due weight be given to the fa& that the volunteers, who were themselvea survivors of that massacre, placed this historio mission above a11 other considerations. “The Government of Israel is fully confident that the Argentine Government will show understanding of these historical and ethical factors.” And in a persona1 letter from the Israel Prime Minister to President Frondiei [ix, se& II] in whioh he stated: “The obligation of a11 countries to respect scrupulously the laws of other countries is beyond a11 doubt; but one cannot, nevertheless, fail to appreciate the lofty motives underlying the imperative moral force by which those who found Eichmann and with bis consent brought him ta Israel were impelled, or the depth of the feelings which moved them. “1 am conVinced, Mr. President, that you will understand the supreme moral force of these aspects of the problem. You yourself fought dictatorship untiringly, and have constantly displayed your profound respect for human values. 1 am sure that no one will understand better than yourself our true feelings; that you will accept the expression of our most sincere regret for any violation of the laws of the Argentine Republic whioh may have been committed at the bidding of an irresistible inner moral force; and that, togetlier with a11 friends of justice throughout the world, who view the tria1 of Eichmann in Israel as anact of supreme historical justice, you will see to it that the friendly relations between the Argentine Republic and Israel suffer no harm.” 19. But my Government sincerely believes that this isolated violation of Argentine law must be seen in the light of the exceptional and unique character of the crimes attributed to Eichmann, on the one hand, and the motives of those that acted in this unusual manner, on the other hand. These men belong, as do 1, to a people whose tragedy in the Second World War la unmatched in history. No people in modern times has ever mourned the loss of one third of its 20. Les historiens les nazis 12 millions rations le dessein non d6guis6 d’asservir populations tableau civils notamment 20. Hiatorians of this period tel1 us that the Nazis were responsible for the death of 12 millioncivilians, net as a result of mflitary operations but as a result of the naked design to enslave and annihilate those populations who did not fit into their picture of a new world order. Half of these were Jews and the other half Slavs, predominantly Russians and Poles. 21. Hitler divided the peoples of the world into several categories: Germans-the Herrenvolk; French, British, Scandinavians and a few other nations to be abaorbed into the Nazi Herrenvolk; Slavic peoplessome to be exterminated, and the rest to be turned into slaves of the Germans; Negroes were not even to he considered human; and Jews-physical extermination of every man, woman and Child. Only for Jews was there to be an immediate “final solution”. 21. Hitler plusieurs la race des seigneurs; les Scandinaves et quelques autres, qui devaient étre absorb& certains réduits B l’esclavage; pas considerer Juifs, qui tous, hommes, être exterminés. y avoir une “solution 22. The International Military Tribunal in Niirnberg made a finding that “In the summer of 1941 . . . plans were made for the ‘final solution’ of the Jewish question in a11 of Europe. This ‘final solution’ meant the extsrmination of the Jews, which early in 1939 Hitler had threatened would be one of the consequences of an outbreak of war, and a special section in the Gestapo under Adolf Eitihmann, as head of Section B 4 of the Gestapo, wa% formed to carry out the policy.” 22. Le Tribunal a conclu qu’ “au cours de l’été de 1941... des plans furent établis juive en Europe. Cette “solutionfinalew termination de 1939, qu’elle guerre; une section ordres d’Adolf cette police, 23. In the record of the Nürnberg tria& we read what Dieter Wialiceny, Eichmann’s aide, saidontheprocess of the final solution: 23. Dans les pro&-verbaux berg, assistant solution finale: “UntiI 1940 the general policy within the section was to settle the Jewish question in Germany and in areas occupied by Germany by mean of a planned emigration. The second phase, after that date, was the concentration of a11 Jews, in Poland and in other territories occupied by Germany in the East, in ghettos. This period lasted approximately until the beginning of 1942. The third period was the SO-called ‘final solution’ of the Jewish question, that is, the planned extermination and destruction Of the Jewish race; this period lasted until October 1944, when Himmler gave the order to stop their destruction.” En outre, comme on lui demandait si, dans l’exercice de ses fonctions avait eu connaissance lation de tous les Juifs, Wisliceny c’est d’Eichmann l’existence Further, in an%wer to a question whether in his official connexion with section IV A 4 he learned of any order which directed the annihilation of a11 Jews, he said: “Yes, I learned of such an order for the first time from Eichmann in the summer of 1942.” 24. Hitler il l’avait Juifs - de Hollande, 24. Hitler did not solve the Jewish question according to his plans. But he did annihilate 6 million JewS- Jews of Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, L~Xembourg, Poland, the USSR, Hungary, Yugoslavia, 25. And what about those who remained alive? Who are they? Each individual is a splinter of a family destroyed-each one lives in the nightmare recollection of his dearest and closest led to the crematorium. Mothers who have seen their babies thrown into the air and used as targets for Nazi bullets. Thousands upon thousands of Jewish women will never be mothers beoause of Nazi “scientific experiments” performed on them. Israel alone has within its borders tens of thousands of the maimed and sick, a11 victime of the attempt to salve the Jewish question. 26. Rudolf Hoess, the Commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp, testified at the Nürnberg tria1 as follows: “We had two SS doctors on duty at Auschwitz to examine the incoming transports of prisoners. The prisoners would be marched by one of the doctors, who would make spot decisions as they walked by. Those who were fit for work were sent into the camp. Cthers were sent immediately to the extermination plants. Children of tender years were invariably exterminated since by reason of their youth they were unable to work . . . Very frequently women would hide their children under their clothes but, of course, when we found them we would send the children in to be exterminated.” The killing is described by him as follows: “It took from three to fifteen minutes to kil1 the people in the death chamber , . . We knew when the people were deadbecause their screaming stopped . . . After the bodies were removed, our special commandos took off the rings and extracted the gold from the teeth of the corpses.” Rudolf Hoess says that in Auschwitz 2.5 million Jews were gassed. 27. There was no lack of heroic attempts on the part of Jews to resist this mass slaughter. The most dramatic attempt was made in the Warsaw Ghetto. How theae courageous people were dealt with by the Nazis is related by SS Brigadier-General Stroop, Military Commander of Warsaw, in one report dated April-May 1943: “Countless numbers of Jews were liquidated in sewers and bunkers through blasting. . . . Police and Wehrmacht .,. discharged their duties in an exemplary manner.” Stroop recdrded that his 28, According to the Nürnberg judgement: “Adolf Eichmann, who had been put in charge of this programme by Hitler, has estimated that the policy pursued resulted in the killing of 6 million Jews, of whioh 4 million were killed in the extermination institutions.” 29. 1 will not go on with the descriptions of these horrors. It would take years to relate all. 30. Now let us see what was Eichmann’s role. Was he an unlmportant cog in this monster machine of death and torture? No. He was in charge of this department. Wisliceny says on this subject: “Eichmann had special powers from Gruppenfiihrer Müller, the Chief of Amt IV [his immediate superior], and from the Chief of the Security Police. He was responaible for the so-called solution of the Jewish question in Germany and in a11 countries occupied by Germany.” 31, Bruno Waneck, another witness at the tria1 of the major war criminals, says: “Eichmann occupied, already in Heydrich’s life- Urne, a dominant or absolute special position, constantly widening and growing, and in the whole Jewish seotor he acted fully independently (meaning within the Reichssicherheitshauptamt). Then, after Heydrich’s death till the end he was directly responsible to Himmler. This fact was, to my knowledge, generally known, within the RSHA.” 32. Les comptes rendus du proces renferment declaration Huppenkothen, 32. An affidavit incorporated in the records of the above-mentioned triai, by Walter Huppenkothen, Gestapa Officer, states: “The Jewish section (IV B 4, later IV A 4 b) and its director, SS-Obersturmbannfiihrer Eichmann, occupied a special position in Amt IV. It (the section) was situated in abuilding on Kurfürstenstrasse, in which Eichmann and most officiais of hfs service unit lived as well. Eichmann himself and a major portion of the officials of his service unit were not civil servants but officers of the S.D. [Security Service]. r It should be noted in this connexion that the so-called Jewish section and a11 of Amt IV were deolared by ths Niirnberg judgement to be acriminalorganization. I appelait la section juive ainsi que le service IV tout mtier )ar le Tribunal 33, And how did Eichmann carry out his task? Here iS what Hoess, in his memoirs written in the Warsaw Prison, says about this: “Eichmann was a vivacious, active man in bis thirties, and always full of energy. He was conatantly hatchfng new plans and perpetually on the 100kout for innovations and improvements. He could never rest. He was obsessed with the Jewish ques- ++Yet even when we were quite alone together and the drink had been flowing freely SO that he was in bis most expansive mood, he showed that he was completely obsessed with the ides of destroying every single Jew that he could lay his hands on.++ And he quotes Eichmann. Eichmann said: “Without pity and in cold blood we must complete this extermination as rapidly as possible. Any compromise, even the slightest, would have to be paid for bitterly at a later date.” 34. Morgen, a witnesa for the defence at the Nürnberg triai, tells of his horror over what he found in the ‘camps. He aaid: “1 asked the SS Court at Berlin to investigate Eichmann on the basis of my report. The SS Court in Berlin thereupon submitted to the chief of the Reich Security Main Office, SS-Obergruppenflihrer Kaltenbrunner, in his capacity aa highsst judge, a warrant to arrest Eichmann. Dr. Bachmann reported to me that an the submission of this matter rather dramatic incidents took place. Kaltenbrunner fmmediately oalled in Miiller, and now the judge was told that an arreat was in no ,event to be considered, for Eichmann was carrying out a special secret taak of utmost importance entrusted to him by the Fübrer.” 35. Wisliceny was asked: “Did he [Eichmann] say anything at that time as to the number of Jews that had been killed?++ The answer was : “Yes, he expressed this in a particularly cynical mariner. He said he would leap laughing into the grave because the feeling that he had 5 ‘million people on his conscience would be for him a source of extraordinary satisfaction, ++ 36. ‘I’his is 1960-ftiteen years after Nazi Germany was defeated. 1s it not inconceivable that Eichmann has enjoyed freedom during a11 these years? That he has not been brought to tria17 1s not this a violation of the sovereignty of the spirit of man and of humanity’s conception of justice? 37. It is not a matter of revenge. In the words of the Hebrew Poet Laureate, Bialik, the devil himself cannot think up a revenge for the murder of one single Child. It is a matter of justice. 38. One of the major war criminals, Frank, Governor-General of Nazi-occupied Poland, said at the Nürnberg trial, ++A thousand years wiI1 pass and this guilt of Germany will not be erased.” Is fifteen years long enough a period to forget? Could a Jew be expected to forget that Eiohmann is ,still free? 39. What wonder that many Jews couId find no rest until they ascertained whether he was alive and tracked Mm down. Are these the “armed bands++ referred to inthe statement of the representative of Argentina this morning? 41. A considerable part of the address we heard this morning was devoted to elaborating the charge that the State of Israel has violated the sovereignty of Argentina. 1 emphatioally deny this charge. The State of IsraeI has not violated the sovereignty of Argentina in any manner whatsoever, and there is nothing in the record to enable the Security Council t0 make any such findings. The Government of Israel has made clear in officia1 communications to the Argentine Government,, which appear now on the record of the Security Council, that certain of its nationals in the course of their efforts to bring Eichmann to justice may have committed infringement of the law of Argentina, and it has already twice expressed its regret for this. I wish to repeat in a11 solemnity before this Council my Government’s regrets at any infringement of the law of Argentina which may have been committed by any national of Israel. But with the greatest respect for the representative of Argentina, 1 think that he is in complete error, as a basic legal proposition, in confusing the illegal actions of individuals, for which regrets have been expressed, with the non-existent intentional violation of the sovereignty of one Member Rate by another. This distinction is SO fundamental and SO well established in international law that 1 am at a complete loss to understand how it oould be expected that the Security Council should make SO far-reaching a finding as is implicit in the statement we heard this morning, without any adequate basis in fact and in law. 41. entendu ce matin portée raineté cette accusation. viol8 aucun Blément qui permette formuler officielle le Conseil le Gouvernement ses ressortissants, Eichmann coupables Gouvernement est Conseil fraction israélien dhfbrence permets sur le plan de l’argumentation les lesquels des regrets délibérée Etat alors Cette distinction Etablie en droit international on pourrait La moindre formule Tue celle qu’impliquait entendue ce matin. 42. Again 1 want to stress that if citizens of Israel broke the law of Argentina they broke it not in tracking down any ordinary criminal, but in tracking down Adolf Eichmann. And here 1 must ask, would Argentina have’ admitted Adolf Eichmann into its territory had it known bis true identity? Would asylum have been accorded him? Surely not. 42. Je tiens des ressortissants argentines, uriminel Adolf Eichmann. question: l’Argentine gon territoire Lui aurait-elle 43. The representative of Argentina expressed anxiety that this, if not dealt with by the Security Council, might constitute a precedent. But modern history 43. Le repr6sentant que le cas, sécurit6, contemporaine B Adolf B tent.6 d’opposer r&uli&e Y11 a voulu Etablir hOWs of no such monster as Adolf Eichmann. The representative of Argentina has sought to contra& the norms of ordinary legal prooedure, on the one hand, with resort to lynohing and mob violence on the other. In SO far as he sought, in the latter con- “HOW cari we not admire a group of brave men who have, during the years, endangeredtheir lives in searching throughout the world for this criminal and who had yet the honesty to deliver him up for tria1 by judicial tribunals instead of being impelled by an impulse of revenge to finish him off on the spot,” 44. In fntroducing his draft resolution [S/4345], the representative of Argentina expressed his desire to offer a conciliatory approach for the conclusion the present debate. 1 appreciate these sentiments which we fully share. 1 do not wish at this stage to comment in detail on the draft resolution, while fully reserving the right of my delegatlon to do SO in due course. 1 shall content myself now with putting one question to the representative of the Argentine. 45. ln paragraph 2 of the operative clause he refers ta “appropriate reparation”. My question is: what is the meaning of the expression “appropriate reparatien”? In putting this question 1 wish to repeat the general reservation we have made regarding the competence of the Security Council under Article of the Charter, and my question is solely directed to the purpose of obtaining the necessary clarifications SO that the members of the Security Council who may be called upon to vote on this draft resolution will know what they are voting about. 46. ln the view of my Government, the expressions of regret which we have alreacly made directly the Argentine Government and which were repeated hcre by me today constitute appropriate reparation. 47. Will not our Argentine friends se8 the exceptional nature and uniqueness of this case? 1 am sure that their conception of right and justice must place this isolated incident in its proper PerSPeCtiP0. 48. I again ask: is this a problem for the SecuritY Council to deal with? This is a body that deais with threats to the peace. 1s this a threat to peace- Eichmann brought to tria1 by the very people to whose total physica1 annihilation he dedicated a11 his energies, even if the manner of his apprehension violated the laws of Argentina? Or did the threat to peace Iie in Eichmann at large, Eichmann unpunished, Eichmann free to spread the poison of bis twisted sou1 to a new generation?

At the request of the Argentine Government, the Security Courmil is considering the dispute which has arisen between Argentina and Israel concerning the war crlminal Eichmann. 51. In order to unclerstand the nature of the Argentine Government’s complaint, the Security Council must, above all, bear in mind that this question is directly related to the case of one of the major Nazi war criminals who committed the most heinous crimes against humanity during the Second World War. 52. Who is Eichmann? For many ysars, up to the very moment of the collapse of the Nazi régime, Eichmann was in charge of the special division of the Gestapo that carried out the orders of the Nazi leaders for the extermination of the Jewish populatiOn. The International Military Tribunal for the tria1 of German major war crfminals at Nürnberg found that Eichmann was a particularly trusted agent of Himmler, Heydrich and Kaltenbrunner .and that he was not only responsible for putting into effect the Nazi policy of extermination but also personally organized the annihilation of millions Of men, women and children in concentration camps. Eichmann’s crimes were committed in the territory of Austria, Germany, France, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece and the Soviet Union, 53. Thus, the long-sought war criminal Eichmann is one of those who should be brought to tria1 in accordance with the joint Declaration of the Allied Governments on the German policy of extermination of European Jewry of 1’7 December 1942 and with the Moscow Declaration on German Atrocities of 30 October 1943. 54. It is pertinent to recall that in the first of the documents mentioned above the allied Governments reaffirmed their solemn resolution “to insure”- together with a11 the United Nations-“that those responsible for these crimes shall not escape retribution and to press on with the necessary practical measures to this end”. 55. The Declaration’of 30 October 1943 also stated that : Il . . . those German officers and men and members of - the Nazi ‘party who have been responsible for, or bave taken a consenting part in the above atrocities, massacres and executions, Will be sent back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were done 56. Particular attention should be drawn to the fact that the Moscow Declaration of 30 October 1943 was unanimously approved by the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace held in Mexico in March 1945. The resolutions of thia Conference stated that the American Republics adhered to the Declaration of October 1943 by Great Britain, the United States of America and the Soviet Union to the effect that persons guilty of, responsible for, and accomplices in the commission of such crimes should be tried and sentenced. 57. In addition, the Conference resolved to recommend “that the Governments of the American Republics do not give refuge to individuals guilty of, responsible for, or accomplices in, the commission of said crimes”. 58. Further, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted resolution 3 (1) recommending that the Governments of a11 States “forthwith take a11 the necessary measures to cause the arrest of those war criminals who have been responsible for or have taken a consenting part in the above crimes, and to cause them to be sent back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were done, in order that they may be judged and punished according to the laws of those countries”. 59. It is important to note that a11 the agreements and resolutions referred to are still fully in force at the present time. 60. However, with the direct connivance of the Western Powers many of the war criminals have succeeded in evading just retribution; some of them, as is well known, have found refuge in Argentine territory. By omitting to take measures for the timely arrest and extradition of Eichmann as a war criminal, the Argentine Government has failed to comply with the afore-mentioned international agreements and United Nations resolutions. 61. These resolutions imposed on the Argentine authorities specific obligations in relation to the capture of Nazi leaders hfding in Argentine territory and, in any event, precluded them from giving such persons refuge. 62. The peoples of the world, who have lived through the tragedy of the Second World War and have themselves felt the full weight of the Nazi crimes, have always vigorously demanded and continue to demand that a11 war criminals, without exception, be brought to justice. Obviously, this applies in full measure to the war criminal Eichmann, who has on bis conscience the lives of some millions of human beings, including 6 million Jews. 63. It must be emphasized that many war criminals are still evading justice. Furthermore, as a consequence of the policy of shielding war criminals, many of them at present hold important offices in the Federal Republic of Germany and in NATO organs, and are taking advantage of those offices to conduct an active campaign for revenge, which is sors, the Nazi” Oberlander committed crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Nevertheless, he was a minister of the Federal Republic of Gsrmany. War criminals and prominent Nazis have occupied and continue to occupy posts of the highest importance in Oberlander’s ministry and indeed not in this ministry alone. 65. It is well known that in Western Germany, eight of the seventeen ministers in the Bonn Government formerly held important, posta in the Nazi State machinery or performed responsible functions in the Nazi party or its organizations. Generals andadmirals who were formerly officers in the Nazi Wehrmacht are in command of the West German armed forces. 65. 17 ministres des hitlérien parti A la t&e dentale ont été des officiers 66. At the same time Western Germany is beginning to play an increasingly active part in NATO, and war criminals are being given leading posta in this aggressive bloc. Matters have gone SO far that the post of NATO Commander Allied Land Forces Central Europe is held by the Nazi army general Speidel. 66. un r6le de plus en plus actif a I’OTAN de guerre bloc agressif. oti le poste restres par Speidel, général de 11arm8e hitl&ienne. 67. It is not surprising that the former Nazileaders, ‘who realize that they cari act with impunity and have worked their way into power once again, should begin to cherish thoughts of revenge and new military adventures. Here is the real threat to the peace and sectiity of a11 nations! 67. Il n’est et revenus mettent tures $ la paix et a la S&urit8 68, En ce qui concerne sujet de la violation la d&egation sovi&ique principe 3ans les relations sible la mesure L’Bgard sovi&ique quelles il la iibsolument 68. As for ArgentinaIs complaint concerning the violation of its sovereignty by Israel, the Soviet delegation must make it clear that the Soviet Union bas always stood for the strict observance of the universally recognized prinoiple of sovereignty in relations between States and deems inadmissible any action designed to violate this principle. On the question of sovereignty the Soviet Union shares the Argentine position, since the violation of State SOVereignty is inadmissible under any circumstances and cari in no way be justified. 69. M. LODGE ltanglais]: la suivante: 3n vue !our st d’autres mondiale.

The matter before the Council concerns the removal from the territory of Argentin? of Adolf Eichmann ‘for the purpose of putting the said Eichmann on tria1 before an Israel court on charges of responsibility for systematic mass murder of Jews andothers in the Second World War. 10. La rvidemment jeux amicales 70. Clearly, the way in which Eichmann was apprehended has been the cause of an unfortunate Strain in the relations between the two countries mOSt concerned, whose relations, normally, are friendly. II. :onsid&ations le Conseil 71. In these circumstances, the United States believes that three considerations are uppermost. First, nothing which we do or say in the Council should 72. In lists submitted to the United Nations War Crimes Commission, Eichmann was described as a war criminal by at least three of the countries which suffered under Hitler, 1 refer to France, Ceeohoslovakia and the Netherlands. He is reported also to have supervised mass murclers during the Second World War in Hungary, that unhappy land. 73. In view of this a11 too extensive background, we cari well understand the strong feeling of the Government of Israel, many of whose citizens are the ohildren, brothers, sisters and parents of people murdered in Europe hardly more than fifteen years aga. 74. The United States, with its allies, fought the Second World War against Nazism. We were against it then; we are relentlessly against it now. If the Council will forgive a persona1 recollection, 1 saw the concentration camp at Dachau at the time that it was captured by the army. The memory of those literally thousands of piled-up human bodies will stay with me through life. We believe, therefore, that whatever action the Council may take on this matter, and whatever is said in this debate, we must make it clear that not only do we not condone the monstrous acts with which Eichmann is charged; we remember them with horror and with boundless pity fur his victime. 75. We may also, I think, repudiate the totally baseless Soviet innuendo that there is Nazi influence in NATO. NATO exists to defend freedom from totalitarianism. Let the Soviet Union attack it on that ground, if attack it they must in this debate. 76. ThiS issue with which the Council must deal is the complaint of Argentina that its sovereignty has been infringed by the manner in which Eichmann was removed. It is on this account that Argentina seeks appropriate reparation. We understand clearly the concern of Argentina that its laws and its sovereignty rights shall be respected SO that order shall prevail; it is legitimate. 77, The draft resolution before the Council [S/4345] appears to meet the considerations which 1 have described. It is drawn up in mcderate terms which, in our view, should not prejudice a peaceful solution. The United Rates would, however, like to suggsst two amendments [S/4346] which we hope will be accepted. 1 think that expresses what is in the hearts of many of us in the United States andinmany other countriss. A mon avis, la plupart de nous Eprouvent, que dans beaucoup d’autres 79. graphe au dispositif ainsi conçu: 79. We also propose the addition of a new OperatiVe paragraph, which would read as follows: “3. Expresses the hope that the traditionally friendly relations between Argentina and Israel wili be advanced. n 80. Nous pensons à ces additions, plupart expriment 30. We believe that these additions would improve the text and be in accord with the views of most members of the Council. We believe that they also express the hope of Argentina and Isyael. 81, probl&ne l’horreur dlEichmann international, a Israi% de résoudre relations qu’avec de r&solution tions. 81, TO sum up, we wish to sec this question dis- Poeed of in a way which will make clear the world’s sbhorrence of the crimes with which Eichmann is charged, which will uphold the rule of international 1a.w and, finally, which will help Argentina and Israel to salve thls matter between themselves and to renew their traditionally friendly relations. We believe that the pending draft resolution, with the amendments whiûh 1 propose, meets those requiremenk

The Council has met to consider the complaint by the mvernment of the Republic of Argentina of what it describes as “the violation of the sovereign rights Of the Argentine Republic resulting from the illicit afid clandestine transfer of Adolf Eichmann from Argentine territory to the territory of the State of Israelfl. 82. Sir Pierson l’anglais]: plainte sur ce qu’il appelle “la violationdes ,de la RQpublique et clandestin en territoire 83. We have heard the representative of Argentina uphold with vigour and with eloquency his case, that the act of kidnapping Eichmann was an infringement cf the sovereign rights of Argentina. We have also heard him urge that adequate reparation should be made by the Gcvernment of Israel. 83. défendre pour violation 1 *avons également Gouvernement 84, We have heard the Fore@ Minister of Israel state that the capture of Eichmann was an aCt Of Israel nationale and not of the Government of ISrael. Moreover, the Government of Israel, both in writing and through the mouth of the Fore@ Minister, bas apoIogiaed for any infringement of the laws of Argentins which many have been committed by nationals of lsrae1. 84. Nous BtrangBres mann &ait l’acte israélien; par écrit que par la voix de son ministre etrangeres des lois ressortissants 85, The Security Council is often confronted with disputes or situations which arise from a grave confliot of principle between two Member States. The Security Council then ha8 the duty of attempting to resolve such a conflict of principle. 85. pr6sence de diffhrends ou de situations cré& par un grave conflit de principe entre deux Etats Membres. En pareil cas, le Conseil de S&urit8 a le devoir de chercher & rt%oudre ce canflit. 86. 1 do not believe that in this case there is a major conflict of principle. It seems to me that the two prinoiples which underly the case of Adolf Eichmann are accepted by both Argentina and Israel. 86. Je ne crois pas qu’il y ait un grave conflit de principe l’Argentine et Israël acceptent tous deuxlesprincipes qui sont à la base de l’affaire d’Adolf Eichmann. 88. This is, indeed, a principle to which we ,must all, as representatives of sovereigncountries, wholeheartedly subscribe; and it is a principle which has been accepted by the Government of Israel in the “note verbale” of the Embassy of Israel in Buenos Aires to the Ministry for Fore@ Affaira andReligion of the Argentine Republic, dated 3 June 1960 [S/4342, sect. x]. In that note the Embassy of Israel, amongst other things, said: “If the volunteer group violated Argentine law or interfered with matters within the sovereignty of Argentina, the Government of Israel wishes to express its regret.” The kidnapping by nationals of one State of a person or persons within the territory of another State is clearly an illegal a&, and one of which the international community must disapprove. 89. On the other hand, we have fhe principle to which the Government of Israel understandably attaches great importance, and this is the principleadmittedly of a different order, though none the less weighty for the community of nations-that those who are accused of terrible, almost inconceivable crimes against vast numbers of innocent people should, by some means, be brought to trial. It would be wrcng for this Council to underestimate the strength feeling on this matter among Jewish people everywhere. 90. Adolf Eichmann was speclfically named in the Nürnberg judgement of 1 October 1946 as the head of that section of the Gestapo which was formed to carry out the policy of exterminating the Jews who at that time lived under Nazi rule. The passage of a few years cannot obliterate memories of SO monstrous a persecution. 91. In bis speech at the last meeting the repressntative of Argentina fully recognized the strength these feelings and said that the hospitality of Argentina could not be used as a concealment for crime. It is apparent, therefore, that both of the important principles underlying the debate are accepted by both Argentina and Israel. The difference between them arises out of the difficulty of reconciling these principles in the particular case of Adolf Eichmann. 92. We had hoped that this reconciliation could bave been achieved, without recourse to the UnitedNations, in direct discussion between representatives of Argentina and of Israel. We were encouraged in this belief by the knowledge that the two countries had built up a relationship of trust and friendahip during reccnt years. In particular, we had hoped that the presence in Europe at the same time of President Frondizi and Mr. Ben Gurion might have provided an opportunity for direct discussion, in accordance with Article 33 of the Charter, whlch would have made unnecessary an appeal to the Security Council. 94. de la question donner utile r&olution, pourrait Eventuel du litige. 94. Meanwhile, the Security Council has been seized wlth the question by the Covernment of Argentina and asked to express an opinion. It seems to me that it might, indeed, be useful for the Council to set out, in the form of a resolution, its opinion on the principles involved. This might serve as a guide and framework for the eventual settlement of the difference. 95. With regard to the draft resolution presented by the representative of Argentina, 1 cari say that in its approach to the question of sovereign rights the draft resolution corresponds to the views held by thè United Kingdom. 1 may wish to comment further on this text at a later stage. Meanwhile, 1 cari also say at once we had felt that in some respects the original wording of the draft might be modified 80 as to bring out more clearly the repulsion with which a11 of us, including the representative of Argentina, regard the crimes of which Eichmann is accused. We, therefore, welcome the ffrst amendment which has just been suggested by the representative Of the United States, and X hope that it will commend itself to the Council. 95. par le representant dans la mani&e souverains, Je reviendrai tout de suite modifier de mani&re l’horreur sentant dont Eichmann du premier representant l’agr&ment 96. 1 would like to emphasize our hope that the traditionally friendly relations between Argentina and Israel will not be disrupted by the incident which we are now discussing. It would, indeed, be a pity if the difference of opinion on the handling of the Eiohmann case was allowed to develop fnto a rift that divided these two countries. 96. Je tiens qui nous préoccupe relations et divergence Eichmann 97, relations Israël: deux pays serve est, amendement chaleureusement ment de tous. 97. We are ourselves happy to enjoy friendly relations both with Argentina and with Israel, and it is our hope that they may be able to use the friendship which has served both countries SO well to bridge their present difference. This is, Ibelieve, the thought which underlies the second amendment just saggested by Mr. Lodge, and we warmly support that amen+ ment and hope that it’will be acceptable to a& The meeting rose at S.15’p.m.