S/PV.934 Security Council

The provisional agenda for this morning's meeting is contained in documentS/Agenda 934. If l hear no objections, l will consider the agenda adopted.

My delegation is not umnindful of the circumstances which developed during the last meeting of the Security Council and which did not afford us an opportunity to express our deep regret and shock at, and our condemnation of, the slaying of Mr. Patrice Lumumba and his two aides. We must therefore take this opportunity to give expression to the gravest concern of the Government and people of Liberia at this sad occurrence. 3. However, the timing of events, in our experience, makes it imperative at this point for my delegation formally to request the addition to the present provisional agenda-though this is not to be construed 5.- The rising tide of African nationalism cannot be curled back like the waters of the Red Sea as ft reaches the Angolan border. Nor can any realistic appraisal oÎ the situation be influenced by the claim that Angola is an integral part of the Portuguese Republic. Uganda and Sarawak are not connties of the United Kingdom. Okinawa is not a political precinct of the United States. New Guinea is not a suburb of Amsterdam. Under every test that logically applies in such cases, Angola is a colony, and if the people of that colony are being deprived of their elementary human rights because of their subservient status, they are entitled to our sympathy-or, at the very least, to our attention. 6. Shakespeare said in one of his most memorable phrases, "Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety". The United Nations has in the past shown an abnormal shyness when invited to seize hold of nettles which it has feared may carry too sharp a sting. Yet if these nettles are left to proliferate, their poison will become so a11- encompassing as to make the flower of safety unattainable. 7. . 1 believe that there is still time for us to help to build in Angola a future of which neither the Portuguese nor the Africans need be afraid. But we no longer have centuries, or even decades, in which to accomplish what should be a simple humanitarian task. The five million unenfranchised and almost forgotten inhabitants of this vast area cannot wait an eternity before achieving the freedom which their brethren to the north have alreadywonin the pulsating context of this present generation. 8. For this once let us be bold in experiment; let us show conrage instead of timidity, wisdom of foresIght instead of hindsight, the ability to concede enough and in time rather than too Httle and too late-in brie!, the imagination which may rescue a few people from more folly than they intend and many people from more indignity than they can bear. oThe Government of Liberia wishes to observe that what appear to be authoritative reports from Angola indicate that fundamental human rights are, contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, being violated in Angola, and this is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. "The Liberian Government has therefore directed its representative on the Security Council to request the inscription of t.'le item on the Security Council's agenda under Article 34 of the Charter of the United Nations." 10. If a decision is taken that this matter should be placed on the agenda, l trust that l may reserve the right to submit an appropriate draft resolution for the Council's consideration.

The Council will have heard the proposaI made by the representative of Liberia that a new item dealing with the disturbances in Angola should be added to our provisional agenda. The rules governing the inscription of items on our agenda are set out in the provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council, particularly rules 6 and 7. l have examined the rules, and it seems to me that the proposaI now made by the representative of Liberia raises a considerable difficulty. l am unable to see that, under the rules as they at present stand, it is legitimate to add an item to the agenda in the manner now suggested. l therefore feel bound to rule that, under the existing rules of procedure of the Security Council, l cannot agree to add this item as requested by the representative of Liberia.

The remarks just mad~ by the representative of Liberia are undoubtectly of deep concern to the' whcle world. The question should certainly be discussed in the Security Council, because the events in Angola, and in the other colonies, arenow reflecting the struggle for independence of the colonial peoples, in which the United Nations is called upon to assist. l therefore thoroughly sympathize with the feelings of the people and Government of Liberia, as their representative brings this question before the Security Council, and l suggest that after the discussion on the Congolese question, which is on our agenda and is now the most urgent question of the moment, the Security Council should proceed to discuss the question of the situation inAngola.

l agree with the remarks just made by the representative of Liberia about the serious events which are taking place in Angola. l understand the Letter dated 13 July 1960 from the Secretary.General ad. dressed to the President of the Security Council (S/ 4381): Letter datee! 26 January 1961 frOID the Pennanènt Repre. sentatives of Ceylon, Ghana, Guinea, Libya, Mali, Morocco, United Arab RepubIic and Yugoslavia to the President of the Security Council (S/4641, S/4650); Telegram dated 24 January 1961 from the President of the RepubIic of the Congo (Leopoldville) and the President of the College of Commissioners.General and Commis· sioner.General for Foreign Affairs addressed to the President of theSecurity Council (S/4639); Letter dated 29 January 1961 from the Permanent Repre. sentative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the President of the Security Council (S/4644); Report to the Secretary.General from his Special Repre. sentative in the Congo regarding Mr. Patrice Lumumba (S/4688 and ·Add.1)

As the members of the Council will .note. further requests for participation in the discussion of the item Q,D the agenda have been received since our'last meeting from Sudan, Nigeria, Madagascar, Cameroun, Congo (Brazzaville), Senegal and Gabon. Unfortunately, there is not enough space to seat at the COUDcil table aIl the representatives who have now asked to be heard. This is an unprecedented situation. In the circumstances, l would like to suggest that all the invited representatives take the seats reservedfortheminfrontof the Council table. Those who wish to speak at a particular meeting will be invited to the Council table. After they have been heard, they would, l suggest, return to the seats reserved for them. If this procedure is agreeable. it will be followed accordingly. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Abdot!laye Maiga (Mali), Mr. C. S. Jha (India), Mr. Miso Paviéevié (Yugoslavia), and Mr. Sukardjo Wirjopranota (Indonesia) took the places reserved for them in front of the Council table.

l invite the representative of Belgium to take the seat reserved for him in front of the Council table.

Point of order.

l call 0:0. the representative of the Soviet Union on a point of order.

The Soviet delegation does not want to start a procedural discussion on the question of representation in the Security Council, At the invitaUon of the President, Mr. Walter Loridan (Belgfum), Mr. Diallo Telli (Gafnea) and Mr. K. K. S. Dadzfe (Gha."i.a) took the places reserved for them in front of the Coancl1 table. 19. The PRESIDENT: 1 invite the representative of Congo (Leopoldville) to take the seat reserved for him. . r

Point of order.

1 calI on the representative of the Soviet Union on a point of order.

The Soviet delegation, also in this connexion, does not want to distract the Council from the examination of the extremely important questions facing us in connexionwith evants in the Congo, but it feels compelled to explain its attitude towards the representation of the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville). With regard to the socalled representation of the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville), the Soviet delegation already stated during the initial discussion of this question in the Council that it does not consider the representative of the Congo whowas recognizedby an earlier decision of the Cobncil ta be the true representative of the Congolese people and its lawful government. It regards him as a person who has been sent by a clique of criminals, the direct perpetrators of infamous acts against t.lte national leaders of the Congo, and it is in this light that it will regard aIl his statements. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Evariste Loliki (Congo, Leopoldville), Mr. El Mehdi Ben Aboud (Morocco), Mr. Bohdan Lewandowski (Poland), Mr. Mobieddine Fekini (Libya), Mr. Omar A. H. Ade!el (Sudan), Alhaji Muhammad Ngl1eruma (Nigeria), Mr. Louis Rakotomalala (Madagascar), Mr. Aimé-Raymond N'Thepe (Cameroun), Mr. Emmanuel Dadet (Congo, Brazzaville), Mr. Ousmane Socé Diop (Senegal) and Mr. Joseph N'Goua (Gabon) took the places reserved for them in front of the Council table.

A few days ago l:l. new administration took office in the United States. This is the first occasion for the United States under the leadership of President Kennedy to speak formally in the Security Council on a question of substance. 24. But first let me thank you again, aIl of you bath here and abroad who have welcomed my arrivaI at this table sa graciously and so hopefully. While 1 cannot fulfil your expectations of miracles to come, 1 ean commit my country, my colleagues and myself 25. It seems to be my loi;. Mr. President, to address you and my colleagues fa:.: the first time in a moment of grave crisis in the brief and tragic history of the Congo and in a moment of equally grave crisis for the United Nations itself. 1 had hoped that it would be otherwise. Within recent days we have seen successively the withdrawal of two national units of the United Nations Forces, the violent death of the former Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba, the reported recognition of the Gizenga régime in Stanleyville by the United Arab Republic and a threat by the US&R to provide unilateral assistance outside the United Nations. 26. What we decide here in the next few days may, we believe, determine or not whether the United Nations will be able in the future to carry on its essential task of preserJ'ing the peace and protectingsmall nations. This is a time forurgentand constructive action. In the midst of passions it is a time when the Security Council must be calm. In the midst of efforts to déstroy the United Nations action in the Congo, it is a time when we must persevere in the interests not oilly of the Congo, but also of all of us, large and small. The choice, as always, is the choice of us, the Members of the United Nations. Either we will follow a path towards a constructive and workable solution or we will follow a path of negative recrimination and self interest. 27. As a new arrivallistening and talking to representatives, 1 have wondered sometimes in the past ten days if everyone is actuaUy thinking about the Congo, a new republic struggling to be born, or if the Congo has been obscured by passions and prejudices about the doctors, Kasa-Vubu, Lumumba, Gizenga, Tshombé and so forth. Opinion seems to be polarizing about them, not about the patient. So it is more important than ever to raUy strong support to the United Nations in order to save the patient. 28. For the past fortnight my country has been consulting on a United Nations programme to savethe patient, both bere and abroad, a programme on which there might be agreement by a large majority of United Nations Members. That effort, in which. so many of us have taken part, must not be abandoned. Indeed its urgency is only accentuated by the impact of subsequent events. 29. As 1 said, 1 had hoped that my first formaI remarks to the Security Councilonthevexedproblems of the Congo could have been directed solely to constructive suggestions which would be helpful to the Congolese people in working out their own 'Independence free from outside interference. Instead, 30. These texts propose the abandonment of the United Nations efforts for peace in the Congo and a surrender of the United Nations to chaos and to civil war. But the statement and the resolution say many things which we are glad to see, things which support positions which my country has always maintained. 31. As to colonialism, my country fought colonialism in 1776 when, if 1 may say so, the ancestors of the authors of this statement and this resolution had scarcely stirred beneath their bondage, and we have foubht it ever since. My countrymen died to end colonialism in the Philippines and my countrymen have assisted the Philippine people to attain their present high destiny of complete independence. My countrymen have died to end colonialism in Cuba, though some Cubans seem to have forgotten this. 32. We re]OICe, too, to hear the Soviets denounce political assassination with such vehemence. In this country, it has always beencondemned, bywhomsoever it is committed, whether by Congolese, by colonialists or by communists. We condemn any violation (}f human rights, any death without due process of law, whether of African politicians, Hungarian patriots or Tibetan nationalists. The United States stands clearly for the rights of man, individual men, man himself, as against any tyranny, whether it be the tyranny of colonialism, the tyranny of dictatorship or the tyramlY of the majority. 33. We note that the So-;iets demand that Belgian foreign military and ~aramilitary aid be withdrawn. We of the United States insist that allforeign military aid, from whatever source and to whatever end, be removed from the Congo and that no sl'.ch aid be permitted to interfere with the free and independent working out by the Congolese people themselves of their own political destiny. We mean this, and we intend to keep on meaning it, and we mean it with particular reference to the threat by the Soviet Government, which we hope we have misinterpreted, that "it is ready to render aIl possible assistance and support" to a so-called Congolese Government in Stanleyville which has no legal status. The United States intends to use its utmost influence, within the framework of the United Nations, to see to it that there is no outside interference from whatever source with the Congolese people's working out of their own independence. There"', ~e, we rejoice that the Soviet Union shares the :d .,aste of the United States for colonialism and jOÏllb with us in condemning political assassination and in condemning foreign interference in the Congo. 35. We know that the United Nations has been denounced with equal vehemence by Kasa-Vubu, by Gizenga and by Tshombé. Well, they also attack each other with equal vehemence, but could there be better testimony of impartiality? 1 would recall, if 1 may he permitte.d, that the Christian Scriptures say. "Woe unto you, when all men shall speakwell of you! " Neither the United Nations nor the Secretary-General seems likely to suffer from the affliction of universal approval. 36. We regret that the Soviet Government does not as yet seem to have seen fit to co-operate with States which truly seek peace in attempting to work out constructive steps for the co-operative solution of the agonizing problems through which the Congolese people are now passing. Instead, the Soviet Government proposes the complete abandonment of the United Nations operation in the Congo in one month. What does this mean? It means not only the abandonment of the Congo to chaos and civil war but, if you please, to the cold war. It meaIis the abandonment of the principle of the United Nations itself. Does anyone doubt that the removal of the United Nations Force would mean chaos? Does this Council, the Security Council, favour abandoning security for insecurity and anarchy? Do we want to withdraw the only elemE....ts that stand foursquare against civil and tribal war? Does the Soviet Government really want Africans to kill Africans? The United States does not, and it devotedly hopes that the Soviet Government does not either and that it will join the United States and other peace-loving States in supporting and strengthening the only force that can prevent Congolese civil war, and, indeed, a cold war, the United Nations. 37. Does the Soviet Government reaUy want to chill what should be warm and temperate in Africa with the icy blasts of power politics? The United States does not; its only interest in the Congo is to support the Congolese people in their struggle for real independence, free from any foreign domination from any source. The United States deplores any war, cold or otherwise. Its only desire is to live in peace and freedom and to let all other peoples live in peace 38. In that spirit, we declnre that so far as we are concerned Africa shaU never be the scene of any war, cold or hot, but we also declare that "Africa for the Africans" means "Afri'Ca for the Africans" andnet Mrica as a hunting ground for alien ambitions. We pledge our fuU and unstintedsupport against any attempt by anyone to interfere with the fuU and free development by Africans of their own independent African future. 39. We believe that the only way to keep the cold war out of the Congo is to keep the United Nations in the Congo, and we caU on the Soviet Union to join us in thus ensuring the free and untrammelled exercise DY the Congolese people of their right to independence and to democracy. 40. But the position apparently taken by the Soviet Government involves more than the unhappy and despicable fate of three Congolese politicians. It involves the future of the 14 million Congolese people. They are the ones with whom we are concerned. We deplore the past, and we condemn those responsible for it, no matter who they may be. But we submit that it is the future that is aU-important now and that the best efforts of this Council should be concentrated on the future security of the Congo, and indeed on the future security of aH peoples. :for it is tlie security of aH peoples which is threatened by the statement and by the proposaIs of the Soviet Government. Let me make my meaning abundantly and completely clear, if l cano 41. The United States Government believes, and proudly believes, that the single, best and only hope of the peoples of the world for peace and security lies in the Unitl?d Nations. It lies in international co-operation, in the integrity of an international body rising above international rivalries into the clearer air of international morality and international justice. 42. The United Nations has not achieved perfection, nor has the Uniteci States; and they probably never will. The United Nations, like the United States, is composed of humans. Ithas made mistakes; itprobably always will make mistakes. It has never pleased aU people. It cannot please aU people. In its desire and wholehearted determination to do justice, it may offend one group of States in 1952; another in 1956, and perhaps still another in 1961._ But always the Uni"~sd Nations has tried-and we believe that it will always try-to apply even-handedly the rules of justice and equity that should govern us aU. 43. Are we caUously to cast aside the one and only instrument that men have developed to safeguard their peace and security? Are we to abandon the jungles 44. The issue, then, is simply this. ShaH the United Nations survive? Shall the attempt to bring about peace by the concerted power of international understanding be discarded? (At this point there was a sustained interruption from the public gallery. The President ordered the gallery to be cleared ana suspended the meeting until this was done.)

Members of the Couneil, l regret that it will be necessary to exclude the public from the rest of this meeting, but in view of the disturbance which we have just witnessed there is no other alternative. There will, however, be no objection to the accredited correspondents returning to the Press gailery. 46. l apologize to the representative of the United States for the interruption, and ask him to resume his statement.

May l say that l deeply deplore this outrageous ar.d obviously organized demonstration. To the extentchat Amer.icans may be involved, l ~pologize on behalf of my Government to the members of the Security Council. 48. l was saying that the issue is simply this. Shall the United Nations survive? Shal1 the attempt to bring about peace by the concerted power of international understanding be discarded? Shail any pretence of an international order, of internationallaw, be swept aside? Sha:ll conflicts of naked power, awful in their potentia.l, be permitted to rage in Africa or elsewhere, unchecked by international co-operation or authority? 49. These are questions which call for an answer, not so much by the great Powers as by the smaller ones and the newer ones. My own country, as it happens, is in the fortunate position of being able to look out for itself and for its interests, and look out it will. But it is for the vast majority of States that the United Nations has vital meaning and is of vital necessity. l caU on those States to rise in defence of the integrity of the institution which is for them the only assurance of their freedom and their liberty and the only assurance for all of us of peace in the years to come. l also call upon the Soviet Union to reconsider its position. 50. My Government is earnestly determined to cooperate with aIl Governments in an attempt to improve international relationships and to. further friendship among peoples, and it has welcomed evidences of co-operation toward that end by the Soviet Government. Let those evidences be buttressed now by concrete steps, by the Soviet Government's looking toward a constructive solution ofthe difficult problems that confront us aIl. Let us join in condemning the past, but let us join in facing the future with calm 51. Let me now turn to the Congo and to what can be done to arrest the sad deterioration in that divided country. There are certain fundamental principles concerning the Congo which havehad. andwill continue to have. the full support of the American people and of the United States Government. It is on the basis of these principles that we have undertaken consultations this past fortnight. We believe that they are shared by others and we are willing to work with any and aU who show a wiUingness to find a solution. 5';;;. The essential principles of such a solution are, we believe, apparent to aU. In the first place, the unity, the territorial integrity and the political independence of the Congo must be preserved. 1 am sure that Sir Patrick Dean will not object if 1 repeat that the United States was one of the first anti-colonialists and that. during the 186 years since, we have stood steadfastly for the right of peoples to determine their own destiny. The United States desires nothing for the Congo but its complete freedom from outside domination. and nothing for its people but the same independent freedom which we wanted for ourselves so long ago and have resolutely defended ever since. Much as the United States was once beset by internaI dissensions. so the Congo. since its independence, has been beset by secessionistmovements. previously in Katanga and now in Oriental province tao. The United States supports the continued territorial integrity of the Congo. SA far as we are concerned, its borders are identical with its borders on 1 July 1960. The United States is ready to join with other States which supp'ort the Congo's independence and integrity to maintain this principle within the framework of the United Nations. 53. Secondly. the Congo must not become a battleground. as 1 have said. for either a cold or a hot war among the big Powers. When the United States was first requested to provide troops for the Congo. we told the Congolese Government ta appeal ta the United Nations. We then supported United NatioI].s military assistance ta the Congo. Incontrast to others. the United States has never at any time provided a single tank. a single gun. a single Boldier. a single piece of equipment that could be used for military purposes. to anyone in the Congo. We have. on the other hand. responded promptly and vigorously to every request made of us by the United Nations. so that the entire control over our assistance passed from our hands to those of the United Nations. We remain firmly determined. as 1 have said. ta do everything in our power to keep the cold war out of Africa. 54. Thirdly. we support the United Nations action in the Congo to the fullest measure of our power. The best way to keep the cold war and the hot wa!" out of the Congo. as 1 have said, is to keep the United Nations in. To those Members which are still contemplating withdrawal. l suggest a long. hard, careful look at what might happen in the Congo if the United Nations 56. On these principles-the maintenance of territorial integrity and political independence, the isolation of the Congolese from large-power and small-power Interference, continued vigorous United Nations assistance and the settlement of internaI political controversies by peaceful maans-rests, in our opinion, the only possibility for a solution. We are faced now with the necessity for urgent and effective steps to bring these principles closer to reality. The threat of civil war, ofincreasedwlilateral intervention in the Congo on aU sides, is increasingly grave. If the United Nations does not take effective action immediately, not only may conflict break forth in full fury in the Congo, but the hopes of African unitYmay be destroyed for many years to come by the divisions which will be produced amongAfricanNations. 57. What, then, in those circumstances needs to be done? 58. ~irst, aU foreign intervention outside theframework of the United Nations should cease immediately, and any foreign military or para-military personnel in the Congo should be withdrawn. The injunction of the General Assembly resolution [1474 (ES-IV)], adopted with the support of aU Members of the United Nations except the Soviet bloc, against any unilateral military aid whatever, whether direct-or indirect. should he adhered to fully by all UnitedNations Members. This applies to those Belgianswho areproviding military advice and assistance to the Congo. It applies equally to military assistance to the forces inOriental province. The United states, for its part, does not intend to sit by if others consciously and deliberately seek to exacerbate the present situation. We are prepared to use aU of our influence, ifother Members of the United Nations do likewise, to prevent sueh assistance from coming to the Congo, no matter from what quarter it may come. 59. Equally urgent and immediate steps are needed to avert the extension of civil war in the Congo and to protect the lives of innocent civilians and refugees, should the present passions result in widespread outbreaks of violence. The United Nations political and military authorities On the ground should consult immediately with the Chief of State and with other civilian and military leaders, if necessary, to agree on measures which would best maintain peace and stability and protect the lives of citizens. Such measures must he accompanied also by immediate steps to assure long-range stability and progresse 61. On Monday, here in the Security Council [933rd meeting], 1 deplored the reported death of Mr. Lumumba and his coUeagues and supported the Secretary-General's request that bis report should be included in the agenda and tIiat the preliminary investigation should be continued. On every occasion when the arrest of Mr. Lumumba has been discussed in the United Nations, the United States has taken the position that he must be treated humanely and with aU protection of law and order. We have similarly expressed ourselves through diplomatie channels to the appropriate authorities in the Congo. 1 believe it has been long known that in our consultations during the past week we advocated the release of all political prisoners and their participation in the political process, once law and order had been restored to the Congo and the possibility of civil war averted. We continue to believe that this must be done for those political prisoners such as Mr. Songolo, about whom the wvrld Press has been less aware. In the case of Mr. Lumumba we support the Secretary- General' s investigation, and we believe that it should be continued vigorously until the true facts are known. 1 earnestly hope that the Katanga forces will cooperate so that the full facts may be brought to light. 62. The ultimate objective of such steps should be to promote the reconciliation of the political elements in the Congo and a full return to constitutional processes, in a form to be designated by the people themselves. The Government recently appointed by the Chief of state is a step in the right direction. Indeed, any step in the direction of moderation and breadth of base is a step in the right direction. The provision of unfiUed Cabinet places for other elements is encouraging. Determined future efforts must he made to broaden the base of the Congolese Government, and Parliament should be convened as soon as conditions of security, law and order permit. Encouragement by the United Nations of such steps is of fundamental importance, we believe. 63. The measures 1 have outlined can be carried out with dispatch and effectiveness only through the Secretary-General and the United Nations mission in the Congo. To attempt to discredit and dismiss the Secretary-General at this critical moment would not only wreck the United Nations mission in the Congo, but dangerously weaken the United Nations itself. This is the measure of the gravity of our crisis. We calI upon aIl members at this table to face these realities soberly and solemnly. We are eager to continue consultations with other nations at this table with a view to producing a draft resolution to carry out measures such as those. We are prepared to meet in the Council by night and by day until we can reach consensus and agreement. 66. On the contrary. as far as the Congolese question is concerned, we have not detected in Mr. stevenson's statement any new approach on the part of the United States Government, but, unfortunately, we were able to discern some of the old attitudes and approaches which, you aH know, have already led to regrettable consequences in the whole train of events in the Congo. 67. Mr. Stevep.son spoke oftheneedforaconstructive approach to solving the Congolese problem, but his remarks contain no constructive suggestions which might change the situation in the Congo for the better. and they set forth none of the conclusions which we are forced to draw from the regrettable turn of events that we are now witnessing. 68. One further brief remark. Mr. stevenson spoke of the role of the United Nations, and of the hope which the people place in our Organization, and at the saroe time he identified the United Nations with its present Secretary-General. This. in our opinion, was a serious error. Mr. Hammarskjold is not the United Nations. and the identification ofthis individual with the United Nations as a whole is quite unjustifiable. especiaHy in view of aH the latest events. WE; are therefore unable to support the attempt to bracket together the United Nations andMr. Hammarskjold despite the fact that the Soviet Union has supported and intends to support constructive efforts on the part of the United Nations for strengthenlng peace and co-operation between nations and· for defending all the high ideals embodied in the United Nations Charter. In our opinion. this task is incompatible with the defence of an individual who, we firmly believe. has disgraced the United Nations. 69. With regard to various concrete questions, 1shaH permit myself in the course of this statement and on a later occasion to reply to a number of remarks and views expressed by the United states representative. This is aH 1 wish to say in my introductory remarks. 70. The Security Counci! is resuming its discussion of the situation in the Congo at a time when this situation has radically altered. Hired assassins have murdered the leaders of the African national freedom movement-Patrice Lumumba, the Congolese national hero and Head of Government and Joseph Okito and Maurice Mpolo, his companions-in-arms. men who 71. The physical violence inflicted on these leaders of the Congolese people is an international crime, the full responsibility for which is borne by the colonialists and, inparticular, the Belgiancolonial1sts, who control the Congolese province of Katanga, where Patrice Lumumba, Joseph Okito and Maurice Mpolo were sent for the specifie purpose of beiïg subjected to violence. In their hatred for the cause of the national liberation of the Congo, the colonialists even engineered the brutal murder of the lawful leaders of the Congolese people, before the eyes of the whole world, violating aIl the tenets of international law and moraIity, scoffing at the resolutions of the United Nations 8ecurity Counci! and challenging ail the peace-Ioving pe~ples of the world. 72. The Security Council has already adopted more than one resolution requesting the Belgians immediately to cease hostile activities in the Republic of the Congo. However, the Belgian Government, defying not only world pnblic opinion but aIso all the decisions of the Security Counci! and of the General Assembly, is still shamelesslycarryingonaggression against this new African State and has now even resorted to direct physical violence against the national leaders of the Congo. There is not a shadow of doubt about the responsibility of the Belgian coloniaIists for the long series of crimes perpetrated against the Congolese people. This has been shown by countless facts and has been confirmed by the whole course of events in the Congo. The incriminating evidence that has now been accumulated against Belgium is more than sufficient to justify the most severe condemnation. 73. Although Mr. Stevenson said that we should evaIuate the events taking place in the Congo, we are extremely surprised that the question of evaluating the Belgian aggression was never touched upon in his statement. This is something sad to contemplate. 74. Even now, despite all the resoluti0ns adopted by the Security Council and the General Assembly, it appears from the latest report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General in the Ccngo that Belgium is openly continuing to arm troops and "gendarmerie" in Katanga, sending them aircraft~ modern weapons, ammunition, equipmentand vehicles. "As a result of internai and external recruiting campaigns", this report states, "the Katanga authorities have now at their disposai a force estimated at some 5,000 men, which is weIl equipped and strengthened by non-Congolese officers and noncommissioned officers now esUmated to be some 400 strong." [S/4691, para. 2.] 75. The presumptuous criminal Tshombé, who is in the service of the Belgian colonial1sts, is speaking openly of his plans to arm the people of Katanga "to the teeth" and is threatening to launch a military 77. A so-called Foreign Legion is now operating in the Congo-an army of hirelings recruited by the Belgian Government from criminals in France, Western Germany.and a number of other countries. A Belgian-French staff has in fact been established on Congolese territory and is directing military operations against northern Katanga, Oriental province and Kivu Province, which are under the control of the lawful government. 78. The activities of Belgium in regard to the Congo are. a flagran~ violation of tpe declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples [resolution 1514 (XiIV)] adopted bythe General Assembly on 14 December 1960. This is especially true of paragraph 4, which states that: "AIl armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shaH cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely thei!' right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected." What territorial integrity can there be in the Republic of the Congo when its most important province is now universally recogIùzed to be under de facto Belgian occupation and when Tshombé has in fact established direct relations with Belgium. which is giving orders in Katanga as if it were its own colony? 79. The Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples begins, as we know, by stressing the determination "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of ... nations large and small". How can we speak of respect for human rights in the Congo when, in the course of the punitive operations of Belgian troops and the Belgianled Tshombé gangs, dozens of Congolese villages are being reduced to ashes and hundreds of innocent, peaceful lnhabitants are being murdered? With frank cynicism. one of the French adventurers who is a member of the so-called "Foreign Legion" recently stated. according to the American Press: "The people do not like us, but we are being weIl paid for killing women and children". It is significant that even a United Nations representative was forced to state that the activities of the Fasc~.~t cut-throats from the "Foreign Legion" contain "el'';11~nts of genocide". 81. The Soviet Government has often .stated that unless the aggressive activities ofthe Belgian colonialists in the Congo are rigidly suppressed, the situation in that country cannot return to normal, andthere can be no peaceful solution of the problem. Itwarned that, in their attempt ta reinstate the colonial régime in the Congo, the Belgian colonialists would be prepared to resort to any crime. For example, in a statement issued on 6 December of last year [S/4573], the Soviet Government drew the attention of the Security Council and of world public opinion ta the fact that the colonialists were planning tlle physical elinrlnation of the leaders of the Congolese State and the political leaders of the Congolese people in order ta replace them with their hirelings, such as Mobutu and Tshombé, also using for this despicable purpose the traitaI' of the Congolese people, Kasa-Vubu. The soundness of this warning by the Soviet Government is DOW fully obvious. 82. The times are now past, however, when the colonialists could commit the blackest deeds with impunity. Belgium-the aggressor country-having reached the limit in its criminal activities in the Congo, must now bear full responsibility for its crimes. It has more than once been warned in the clearest terms and must not be shown any further indulgence. 83. The statement· published yesterday by the Soviet Government contains the following passage: "The grievous crime of the colonialists cannot remain unpunished. The hirelings who shed the blood of Patrice Lumumba and his comrades-in-arms must be severely punished. The peoples deman<Î a reply from the Belgian Government concerning the l'ole it has played in this foul crime. The contempt and wrath of the peoples of the world will brand the murderers and the organizers of the crime. By their acts the executioners have merely sown nE;.r seeds of inextinguishable hatred in the soil of Africa, hatred that will flame hl the hearts of more than one generation of Africans." [8/4704, para. 8.] It is difficult to add anything to this statement. 84. Naturally, the Belgian colonialists wouldnothave dared ta perpetrate aIl the crimes which they have now committed if they had not feIt behind them the support of their allies, of a whole coalitionof colonial Powers. which from the very beginning have been urging the Belgians into shady enterprises in the Congo and who also cannot escape heavy responsibility for the crimes which have been committed. It was the allies of Belgium which rejected aIl the proposaIs 86. Particular attention should be devoted ta the l'ole played by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in all the events in the Congo. In the same statement the Soviet Government added the following: "The tragic death of Patrice Lumumba and his comrades-in-arms reveals with new emphasis the shameful l'ole that is being played in Congolese affairs by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Hammarskjold, and, under him, by the Command of the troops dispatched to the Congo in the name of the United Nations. Since the very first day of the so-called 'United Nations operation in the Congo', Hammarskjold has acted inthe interests of the enemies of the Congo-the Belgians and other colonialists. From beginning to end Hammarskjold's whole course of action with regard ta the lawful Government of Patrice Lumumba, at whose request the United Nations troops were in fact dispatched to the Congo,-was one of vile betrayal of the interests of the Congolese people, of the principles of the United Nations and of elementary standards of decency and honour. Under a false mask of impartiality the lInited Nations Secretary-General helped the colonialists to dismember and disorganize the Congolese State and to put arms in the hands of foreign hirelings and butchers." [Ibid., para. 9.] 87. The fact is that on 14 July 1960 the Secretary- General was authorized by the Security CoUncil "to take the necessary steps, in consultation with the Government of the Republic of the Congo, to provide the Government with such military assistance as may be necessary until, throughthe efforts ofthe Congolese Government with the technical assistance of the United Nations, the national security forces may be able, in the opinion of the Government, to meet fully their tasks" [Si4387]. The Security Council resolution of 22 July 1960 [S/4405] again stressed the need to do everything possible for the restoration of law and order in the Congo, for belping the Government of the Congo to exercise its authority, and for ensuring the security, territorial integrity and political indé- pendence of the Republic of the Congo. What doubts can there be about what was required from the Secretary- General in the practical establishment of the United Nations operation in the Congo, or about the stand he should have taken on the Congolese question? Everything must have been clear to anyone who intended to comply with the Security Council resolution honestly and objectively and to do everything possible to achieve the objectives set out in that resolution with extreme clarity. 88. For the purpose of carrying out the Security Council resolutions, a powerful means was granted to the Secretary-General-he was given troops thatwere fully adequate to implement those resolutions. What stage have we reached now, seven months after the 90. The results of the so-called "United Nations Force" in the Congo could not have been different, because the Secretary-General, hidingbehind a screen of artificial stratagems concerning the Security Council resolutions, and behind the far-fetched theory of "non-intervention"-which in fact signifies unwillingness to protect the lawfuI Government of the Congo in the struggle against the rebel bands organized and financed by the Belgians and other colonialists-has refused to carry out the tasks assigned to him and has sabotaged the resolutions of the Security Council. The Secretary-General has directly participated in the joint plan of the colonialists, the uItimate goal of which is to stifle the new African Republic. This "non-intervention", which in fact means complicity in the crimes of the colonialists, has now been dearly bought-with the lives of Lumumba, Okito and Mpolo. 91. The true nature of the Secretary-General's activities in the Congo has now been clearly revealed, and even an incomplete list of what he has done in the interests of the colonialists constitutes a serious indictment against him. 92. Almost from the beginning of the operations in the Congo, the lawful Government of the country was forced to draw the Security Council's attention to the fact that the Secretary-General was not taking the views of the Government into account and was thus disregarding one of the basic conditions imposedupon him by the Security Council, namely, to act in consultation with the Government of the Congo. Thus, on 7 August 1960 the Prime Minister of the Republic of the Congo, in a cable to the President of the Security Council [Si4421], rightly protested against the discussions which Mr. Bunche, a representative of the Secretary-General, was holding on behalf of the United Nations with the puppet authorities of Katanga without having consulted the Congolese Government. In a further cable from the Prime Minister of the Republic of the Congo, dated 20 August The same cable from Mr. Lumumba points out: "•••the Secretary-General's refusal to provide the Government of the Republic with the military assistance it needs. because the Katanga provincial government is opposed to this, constitutes not merely tacit recognition of the secession of the Congolese province of Katanga but a flagrant violation of the resolutions of the Security Council." 93. In August of last year. the Secretary-General and the command of the "United Nations Force" committed a clearly hostile act against the lawful Government of the Republic of the Congo by depriving it at an extremely critical moment of access to the radio stations and airports of the country and thus paralysing aIl activity by the Government. In a statement made in this connexion on 19 August 1960. the Head of the Congolese Government severely condemned the personal activities of the Secretary- General in the Congo in connexion with the refusal by the command of the "UnitedNations Force" to place the Leopoldville airport at the disposaI ofthe Government. this refusal having been backed up bythe threat to use arms against the units of the Congolese army supporting the Government. 94. It is appropriate at this point to recall that the command of the "United Nations Force" thenresorted to such measures as prohibiting the landing at Leopoldville airport of a plane carrying General Lundula, the commander of the Congolese National Army, who had remained loyal to the lawful Government. This prohibition was accompanied, moreover, by a threat to fire on the plane. However, neither the Secretary-General nor the command of the "United Nations Force" has ever threatened to fire on the planes which for several months have been supplying the troops of Tshombé and Mobutu with arms and other equipment and have brought hirelings from the "Foreign Legion" and aIl types of terrorists and hired killers into the Congo. 95. It was only under strong pressure from States which really do support the national interests of the Congo that the Secretary-General and the commandof the "United Nations Force" agreed to sendthe "United Nations Force" ta the province of Katanga. However, they did so only reluctantly and adopted the position of detached onlookers calmly watching as Tshombé, the organizer of anti-government activities, increased his armed forces. organized diversionary actions against the Government and, with Belgian and other outside help. actually severed the province from the rest of the country. 96. In September. the Secretary-General and the command of the "United Nations Force" allowed a military "coup d'état" to be carried out by armed bands organized under the eyes of the command itself by Belgianand other colonialists. Later. the Secretary- 98. In January, under the eyes of the command of "United Nations Force", PatriceLumumbawashanded over to his executioners; under the eyes of responsible leaders of this command, he was beatenunmercifully, and with their connivance he was murdered. This is why now we can only speak of of the role of the Secretary-General in the Congo with deep indignation. 99. The statement by the Soviet Government which r have already quoted also contains the following passage: "The murder of Patrice Lumumba and his comrades-in-arms in the dungeons of Katanga is the culmination of Hammarskjold's criminal activities. It is clear to every honest person throughout the world that the blood of Patrice Lumumba is on the hands of this henchman of the colonialists and cannot be removed. The States which cherish the authority and future of the United Nations cannot acquiesce in a situation where a sorry lackey of the colonialists speaks in the international arena on behalf of the Organization. His actions place a dark stain on the whole United Nations. Not only can such a mannot enjoy any confidence; he deserves only the contempt of aIl honest people. There is no place for Hammarskjold in the high office of Secretary-General of the United Nations, :mcl his continuance in that office is intolerable." ".•• The Soviet Government, for its part, will not maintain any relations with Hammarskjold and will not recognize him as an official of the United Nations." [S/4704, paras. 11 and 15.] 100. Some members of the Security Council are now advocating that the routine dtscussion of the Congolese problem should be continued along the same lines as have been recently followed and on the same basis as before the murder ofPatrice Lumumba. Unfortunately, the United States representative also suggests that we should work to this plan. What, however, does this in fact mean? 101. One of the main points of this former basis of discussion was the release of all political prisoners and, in particular, of the Prime Minister of the Republic, Patrice Lumumba, the recognized head of 102. The Secretary-General of the United Nations and the command of the "United Nations Force"under his orders have been acting contrary to the interests of the lawful Congolese Government and on behalf of Tshombé and Mobutu for some time, and there a're at present no grounds for thinking that the Secretary-General has seen the error of his ways and intends to change his policy. AlI his activities make ft clear that there is no guarantee ofany such change, with the result that there are no grounds for taking any decision which would represent a further mandate to the Secretary-General. Any decisions to that effect can only aggravate· matters; they can only intensify the Congolese crisis instead of alleviating it. 103. Furthermore, there can now be no doubt that the freedom and national independence of the Republic of the Congo cannot be ensured while Tshombé, Mobutu and Kasa-Vubu-the agents of the colonialists-are committing atrocities in its territory. 104. The activities of this clique are being shielded by Kasa-Vubu. Embroiled in political machinations and with his hands stained with the blood of his political opponents, this apology for a leader has sanctioned the illegal dissolution of the Parliament and the terrorist activities of Mobutu's bands. He has autocratically abrogated the Constitution of the country, while at the same time trying to exploit it. He has given his blessing to the activities of the Belgians aimed at oppressing his own people and has Dowed to the requests of that direct agent of Belgium, Tshombé, regarding the de facto dismemberment of the country. He has thus in the course of a few months displayed aIl the characteristics of a political buffoon and puppet. 105. Recent events leave no doubt that 1<:asa-Vubu has become a traitor to his people, has solidly aligned himself with men like Tshombé and Mobutu, and by actually participating in the murder of Lumumba, has burnt aIl his bridges behind him. There is now every reason to speak of the existence in the Congo of a corrupt Kasa-Vubu-Tshombé-Mobutu clique which has violated aU the laws of the country, has completely sold out to the colonialists and has taken on the task of directly carrying out measures designed to suppress the national liberation movement in the Congo. This clique does not enjoythe support of its own people, whom it fears, and is kept in power only with the help of the colonialists. It may manage to keep its head above water in the politicaillfe of the country for some time, but a sorry fate undoubtedly awaits it. The Congolese people will some day erect a majestic monument 10 the victims of the great struggle for national liberation, one of whom was the great son of the Congolese people, Patrice Lumumba, and they will erase from their memory the names of the traitors. 107. Mr. Stevenson has asked us whether the USSR wants Mricans to be killed by Mricans. There can be no question of this. Of course not. However. we do not want Africans to be killed by Belgians or other colonialists. This is what we want. 1'08. Tt is furthermore essential to put an immediate stop to the terrorist activities of the ringleaders of the armed bands of Tshombé and Mobutu, whose criminal activities are a challenge to the United Nations and are threatening the peace of the world and, in particular, the peace of Mrica. 109. In addition, the practical application of the Security Council resolutions ml.:.st be taken out of the hands of a man who for some time has been systematically thwarting these resolutions. 110. Finally, it is now clear to aIl that the time has come to bring the so-called "UnitedNations operation" in the Congo to an p.nd and allow the Congolese people themselves to decide the questions which are of vital concern to them. 111. Mr. Stevenson also asked whether the Soviet Union really wants to do away with the United Nations completely and whether it is unwilling that the United Nations should protect the Congolese people. The answer in both cases is, of course, no. The Soviet Union wishes the United Nations to be strengthened, and it wants the United Nations, and not the colonialists, to pro'tect the Congolese people. When, therefore, decisive measures to rid the Congo of Belgian and other colonialists have been taken. and the terrorist bands armed by the colonialists have been disbanded and disarmed, the Congolese people will be fully able to take the fate of their country into their own hands, and the United Nations will he fully able to bring its operation to an end. This was the meaning behind our proposaI for the liquidation of the "UnitedNations operation". This in turn is coupled with the proposaI that decisive measures should be taken against t1}e colonialists and their henchmen. and when these measures have been taken, the United Nations will be fully able to end its activities and allow the Congolese people to settle their internaI affairs themselves. 112. In this connexion, we consider it essential to submit the following draft resolution [S/4706], which has already been officially submittedfor consideration by the Council: "The Security Council, "Regarding the murder of the Prime Minister of the Republic of the Congo. Patrice Lumumba, and of the outstanding statesmen of the Republic, Okito and Mpolo, as an international crime incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations and as a flagrant violation of the Declaration of the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples adopted by the General Assembly at its fifteenth session, "2. Deems it essential thatthe sanctions provided under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations should be applied to Belgium as to an aggressor which by its actions is creating a threat to international peace, and calls on the States Members of the United Nations for the immediate application of these sanctions: "3. Enjol!1S the command of the troops that are in the Congo pursuant to the decision ofthe Security Council immediately to arrest Tshombé and Mobutu in order to deliver them for trial, to disarm all the military units and 'gendarmerie' forces under their control, and to ensure the immediate disarming and removal from the Congo of all Belgian troops and all Belgian personnel: "4. Directs that the 'United Nations operation' in the Congo shall be discontinued within one month and all foreign troops withdrawn from there so as to enab1e the Congolese people to decide its own internaI affairs: "5. Deems it essential to dismiss Dag Hammarskjold from the post of Secretary-General of the United Nations as a participant in and organizer of the violence committed against the leading statesmen of the Republic of the Congo." 113. AlI those who cherish the freedom and independence of the colonial peoples mustbe clearly aware that the United Nations is faced with a dilemma: the United Nations will either be in a positionto defend the national interests of the Congolese people, who have asked for its help, and will decisively eliminate the breeding grounds of colonialism in the Congo and finally remove from its territory the Belgian and other colonialists and their agents; or the Organization will abandon the principles embodied in its Charter and in the Declaration,on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, recently approved by the General Assembly, and will completely forfeit the confidence of the Congolese and other colonial peoples. This is the question as it now stands. 114. The adoption by the Security Council of the draft resolution which we have submitted would open the way to a radical and true solution of the Congolese problem that would be in accord with the principles of the United Nations Charter and the interests of international peace. On the basis of this decision, the United Nations would increase its authority and prestige, which have been considerably shaken and diminished as a result of all the recent events in the Congo.

Having heard the statements of the representatives of the United States and the Soviet Union, the Council will perhaps consider this a convenient moment to adjourn. In that event the Interpretations of the speech of the representative of the Soviet Union can be given immediately after the

There being no objection, the Council will adjourn until 3 p.m. May 1 ask that all members of the Council should be represented promptly at 3 o'clock as the interpretation cannot begin until an members are represented at the table. "The meeting rose at 1.45 p.m. Orde.. and inquiries 'rom countries not listed above may be sent ta: Sales Sedion, Publishing Sevice, United Nations. New York, U.S.A.; or Sales Sedion, United Nations, Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland. Litho in U.N. Priee: $U.S. 0.35; 2/6 Stg.; Sw. (or equivalent in other