S/PV.960 Security Council

Since no Council member has asked to speak on the substance of the matter under discussion, the President would like to allow the representative of ECUADOR to rnake a brief statement. 2. The Ecuadorian delegation finds itself somewhat ernbarrassed on receiving the President's permission to speak. It fears that there maybe an impression that it standS in the same relation to the President as a voiee to an echo. 1 must, however, declare that the notice which appears in sorne works of fietion-that 3. 1 shatùd like, therefore, to state my delegation's position on this difficult problem. My delegation considers that the very wording of the agenda indicates the controversial nature of the issue. On the one hand, we have the request of the United Kingdom representative, in support of Kuwait's complaint, which embodies two clear and distinct concepts: that Kuwait is a sovereign and independent State and that its sovereignty and independence are threatened by Iraq. And on the other side we have Iraq's complaint concerning a threat to its independence and security; implicit in this complaint is a disavowal of the sovereignty and independence of Kuwait, which Iraq considers part of its territory. 4. From this statement of the problem it is possible to draw a first conclusion: the question before the Council is, indirectly, a controversy concerning sovereignty. and from this controversy has arisen the Immediate problem of the threats to peace andsecurity alleged by both parties. My delegation understands, therefore, that the Immediate problem before the Council relates to the threats to peace in the form of military movements alleged by both parties. It does not consider that the matter to be decided is the controversy over sovereignty; that is not the question before the Council, although it is the dutYof the Council to prevent such controversies from becoming threats to peace, to which end it may avail itself of the peaceful methods provided in the Charter. 5. In this connexion, my delegation wouldlike to make it quite clear that it does not consider that an allegation by aState, based on legal and historical arguments, regarding its rights to a territory can in itself be considered a threat to peace and security so long as it is not accompanied by milital'y measures or clearly aggressive intentions. My delegation also thinks, however, that such an allegation falls withiri the competence of United Nations organs inasmuch as the controversy which it engenders may give rise to situations which endnager peace and security. 6. My delegation would also like to make it clear that this statement does not imply any judgement on the allegations of the parties in the matter now before the Council. It does not feel itself to be in possession of sufficient information to enable it to form an opinion on the legal and historieal titles on which the parties found their allegations, nor does it consider that this is the Council's specifie task today. 7. For these reasons 1 must make it clear that my delegation does not feel that it is authorized to express an opinion on the allegations which have been made regarding the interpretation and valiàity of legal instruments. 1 wish to declare, however, that my Government invariably maintains that compliance with vaUd treaties is the foundation of international coexistence and that in the same way neither justice nor ethics can give vaUdity to void treaties which are the product of force, violence or threat or the result of a victorious war, since such treaties lack the basic element of free consent of the parties. 9. In conclusion, may 1 say that my delegation has taken a special interest in this matter, not only because Ecuador is a small and peace-loving country which has always favoured a legal solution to international controversies, but also because Ecuadorfeels a warm friendship for the Arab peoples owing to its 8panish origin, for it feels that the 8pain which gave Ecuador its cultural heritage is as much Arab as European. 10. Ml'. LOUTFI (United Arab Republic) (translated from French): In my previous statements Idefin.edthe position of my delegation on the question under discussion. In summing up this position 1 stated that my delegation supported the independence of Kuwait on the basis of the self-àetermination of peoples and their right to independence and favoured the withdrawal of the British forces in Kuwait, and that it was confident that a peaceful solution to the problem couldbe found. My delegation also said that this dispute between two Arab countries should be solved within the framework of the League of Arab States and in accordance with Arab principles and traditions. 11. Today my delegation submitteda dràft resolution, which has just been circulated [8/4856]. This draft resolution embodying my delegation's position is very simple. It notes the statements of the representatives of Iraq and Kuwait and the many statements by the representative of Iraq to the effect that only peaceful means would be pursued in the solution of the question. Lastly, the dràft resolution urges that the question should be solved by peaceful means and it calls upon the United Kingàom to withdraw its forces from Kuwait immediately. 12. 1 do not think this dràft resolution requires any explanation. My delegation hopes that the members of the Council will be able to vote in favour of it. 13. The draYt resolution submitted bythe representative of the United Kingdom [8/4855] is, in my delegation's opinion, incompletei it does not correspond exactly with my delegation's views and, most important of all, it does not deal with the question of the withdrawal of the British forces, to which, as 1 have said here again and again, my Government attaches the greatest importance. Indeed, my delegation still considers that the presence of these forces cannot contribute to a peaceful solution of the question but can only increase tension and constitute a threat to peace and security. The presence offoreignforces belonging to a great Power in any part of the Arab world cannot fail to have serious repercussions. 14. My delegation is confident that the adoption of this draft resolution will help to ensure peace in the area and will permit two sister nations, Iraq and Kuwait, to settle their dispute. 15. Ml'. HStJEH (China): 1 have askedfor the floor in order to make sorne brief comments on the draft resolutions that are now before the Council. 17. That is the general position of my delegation. However, this does not mean that my delegation has any serious objection to the draft resolution introduced by the representative of the United Kingdom [S/4855] li the Council deems it fit to adopt a resolution. As we see it, the preambularparagraphs merely take note of sorne facts and of the peaceful intentions declared by the representatives of the parties concerned. They are aIl in the records of the Council, over which there can he no dispute. 18. As to the operative part of the draft resolution, my delegation thinks that paragraph 2 is entirely in conformity with the principles of the Charter and meets the wishes of the members of the Council. In fact, my delegation believes that the Security Council at this state should concentrate its emphasis on the theme of that paragraphe Even if the draft resolution should contain only that paragraph, my delegation would be quite willing to support it. 19. Having said this, 1 must add that my delegation has no positive opposition to operative paragraph 1. We only feel that it does not appear necessary to raise the issue in the present debate. 20. As to paragraph 3, in view of the function and the procedure of the Security Council, there is no question of the situation remaining under r~view. Therefore, it appears to my delegation that the provision of paragraph 3 does not make any real difference. 21. These are the considerations which will guide the vote of my delegation on the draft resolution of the United Kingdom. 22. What 1 have said applies equally to the other draft resolution just introduced by the representative of the United Arab Republic [S/4856], with the exception of its operative paragraph 2. My delegation does not think that the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the United Kingdom forces from Kuwait, as provided for in paragraph 2 of that draft resolution, would contribute to the strengthening of peace and security in that area. For that reason, my delegation cannot support that paragraphe

We have seen and welcomed the draft resolution of the UnitedArab Republic. We are as eager as they are and as aIl Arabs are for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Kuwait. But under the circumstances where the independence and territorial integrity of Kuwait is threatened by a powerful neighbour, Iraq, Kuwait has not found any guarantee for its independence in this draft resolutioq. 28. For reasons which we have already had occasion to explain here in detail, we consider that the installation of United Kingdom forces in Kuwait and the concentration of the United Kingdom fleet in this region are acts of provocation by a colonial Power, constituting a threat to peace and security not ooly in this region, but throughout the world•. 29. The adoption by the Council ofthe resolution submitted by the United Arab Republic would provide a satisfactory solution to this vital question whichis the first, most important and prime conditionfor a peaceful settlement and for the restoration of peace and security in this regi0u. 30. For this reason, we shall vote for the draft resalution submitted by the United Arab Republic. 31. Sir Patrick DEAN (United Kingdom): Out of courtesy to my colleague from the United Arab Republic, 1 should like very briefly t6 comment on the draft resolution which he has submitted [S/4856]. 32. Both the Ruler of Kuwait and the United Kingdom Government have made ft clear that United Kingdom troops will be withdrawn from Kuwait as soon as the Ruler considers that the threat to his country from Iraq has been removed. This position is included in the draft resolution which my delegation has circulated [S/4855]. 33. Furthermore, Her Majesty's Government has on more than one occasion emphasized in Londonthat the presence of Britishtroops in Kuwait does not constitute any aggressive intent towards Iraq. These troops are there in an entirely defensive role. My delegation has 34. But apart from this, my delegation in any event would find it impossible to accept this draft resolution for the following two reasons: first, its adoption by the Council S".êms to my delegation to be tantamount to a request on the part of the United Nations to my Government to default on an international obligation it has entered into with another State. As 1 have already explained, once the Ruler hadrequestedour helpunder the terms of I:'aragraph (g) of the exchange of notes of 19 June 1961, the United Kingdom had no option but to comply. The second reason is that a draft resolution of this nature, were it to be adopted, would constitute a clear infringement of Kuwait's sovereignty. It is Kuwait's prerogative as a sovereign State to invite assistance from this country, and indeed from any other country, and in the present case this invitation is extended in pursuance of an existing international agreement. It is for the Ruler himself, as my Government has repeatedly made clear, to decide whether or not he considers this assistanceis no longer necessary. 35. 1 have already had occasion to state that the Government of the United Kingdom, in the actions which it has been obliged to take in response to this request from the Ruler of Kuwait, bears absolutely no aggressive intentions towards Iraq. As 1have just said, our troops are there in Kuwait in a pureiy defensive l'ole. As an earnest of this, 1 think 1 should report the following to the Counci!. 36. The commander of the United Kingdom forces in Kuwait was obliged to move in a certain number of troops at the outset to hold the position against a threatened military attack from across the border with Iraq. In the initial phases it was found necessary to have rather more troops present than would be required once proper defensive-and 1 repeat that word defensive-positions had been taken up. 1 am glad to report that these positions have now been taken up and as a consequence the military commander has been able to reduce the number of United Kingdom troops in Kuwait. He has' decided to return two companies of the 2nd Coldstream Guards to their normal stations. One of these companies returned last night. The reminder of the detachment, 1 am informed, are due to return tonight, and in fact, since the report 1 received related to the ttme in Bahrein, they may well have done so by now. 37. MI'. PACHACHI (Iraq): 1 do not want to prolong the work of the Council any longer than necessary, but some of the comments of the representative of the United Kingdom make it necessary for me to take the floor at this time. 38. He said, 1 believe, that callingonthe United Kingdom to withdraw its forces from Kuwait would be asking the United Kingdom to disregard an international agreement which it concluded. As far as the agreement is concerned, 1 have tried to show that it is not really a valid agreement in any sense of the word. But what is more important is that we have the Charter of the United Nations, which takes precedence over any international agreement or treaty concluded by any Member State. According to the Charter, no Member 40. Again 1 must repeat that Iraq will employ only peaceful means for the solution of this question. The main argument of the United Kingdom, that they were there to face a threat coming from Iraq, is no longer valid for the simple reason that there have been no concentrations on the part of Iraq and that there has been no military threat from the side of Iraq. 1 would li:Œ to recall that only yesterday Air Marshal Elworthy, the Commander-in-Chief of the Middle East Forces of the United Kingdom, said that there is no likelihood now that an attack would come from Iraq. These are the words of the British Commander-in-Chief in the area. 41. May 1 also read a short item which appeared in The Times of London of 5 July, from that newspaper's correspondent in Kuwait. The article says: "With the visibility slightly better today, air and land reconnaissance could be sharpened. Armoured cars are patrolling the frontier, but immediately on the other side"-meaning the side of IraqlIat present there seems to be a void and silence. 1I 1 think this should dispose of the falsehoods about Iraq military concentration. 42. Therefore, in the absence of a threat from Iraq, what justification remains for the United Kingdom to maintain its forces in Kuwait, unless it is to threaten the sovereignty and independence of Iraq. And this is why the Council should act to see that the withdrawal of British forces from Kuwait be effectedimmediately.

Since no other member of the Council wishes to speak, 1 would draw your attention to the two draft resolutions at present before the Council: the draft resolution sul>- mitted by the United Kingdom in document S/4855 and the draft resolution submitted by the United Arab Republic in document S/4856. 44. According to rule 32 of the provisional rules of procedure 1 shaH first put to the vote the draft resolution submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A vote was taken by show ofhands. In favour: ChUe, China, France, Liberia, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great BritainandNorthernIreland, United States of America. Agafnst: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. , H 1 1, Abstalning: Ceylan, Ecuador, United Arab Republic. The result of the vote was '1 in favour, one against, wfth 3 abstentions.

Once again the Soviet Union has seen fit to veto measures which received the wide support of the Security Council. l do not know how many vetoes this now makes in the whole and sarry course of the Soviet Union delegation's performance at meetings of this Council since the Organization was founded. That, perhaps, is a point we can leave ta the computers of the present and the historians of the future. 47. But this much is clear: yet again, by using the veto, the Soviet Union delegation has frustratedaproposaI in this Council designed ta alleviate tension and to restore harmony in a troubled part of the international community. l shall not take up the Council's time in speculating about what the Soviet Union's motives might be in this particular case; they are perhaps not very hard ta guess. 48. We in our delegation had thought that in the draft resolution which we submitted yesterday there were some sensible and appropriate measures which the Council could and should take to deal with the situation between Kuwait and Iraq. That this belief was shared by most other members of the Council is apparent from the vote which has jùst been taken. 49. Regrettably, therefore, the Council has to conclude its presi?nt business without any decision having been taken. But, even sa, my delegation doss not in the least regret that the Council has heldthese discussions during the past week. In the first place, as l have explained, we feIt it incumbent on us ta report at once to the security Council on the military steps the United Kingdom Government had to take in meeting the request from the Ruler of Kuwait for assistance in the Îace of a threat. A second advantage-and l hope l am not being too sanguine in saying this-is that our deliberations here might give pause to the Governm~nt in Baghdad, and rdght have bJ'ought home to it the grave dangers in pursuing aa annexationist poUcy against its small neighbour. We can only hope that that will be the case. 50. In the course of our debate, my delegation has been very gratified ta note the wiàespreadsupport and sympathy which has been shown bath for the pUght of Kuwait itsèlf and for the measures taken by my own 51. And yet the situation in the area remains grave. The tone of the Baghdad press andstatements made by persons holding high office and position there are still extremely menacing. Only yesterday we hadconfirmation, on the other hand, from the representative of Kuwait that the threat from across Kuwait's frontiers had not been removed. l do not think it is too much to say that, in the light of the very widespread expression of opinion here at the United Nations in support of the independence andsovereignty of Kuwait, it is Intolerable that that threat should still be allowed ta persist by the Government which first uttered it. 52. My delegation therefore believes that it is the dutY of this Couneil, even though we have no formaI resolution to make it so, to watch very closely what takes place in that area andto meet at once and without delay should circumstances so demande

Permitme ta speak briefly as we draw toward the close of the present session on the question of Kuwait in order to indicate the general considerations we have taken into account in casting our vote in the way we have done. 54. To us it has been a matter of profound regret that the final stage of the emergence to independence of Kuwait was accompanied by a certainlackof understanding among sorne of her neighbours. But we sincerely hope that, as in an things in life, this phase of apparent lack of understanding will also be subject to change, and that, indeed, the doors of opportunity will open for closer brotherhood among these heirs of a great civilization which flourishes in that area which we regionally describe as the Middle East. 55. In ract, l should like to recall here the words of Shakespeare when he refers to the twins Vi!ola and Sebastian in Twelfth Nig#: One faoe, one voice, one habit, and two persons,- A l1afttral perspective, that is and 1s not! Or again, 56. We are confident that, like the twins to whom Shakespeare refers, these gifted peoples of the Middle East will be expressing their underlying unitY in the days to come in even greater measure than they are doing today. As the delegation of a country having nothing but the friendliest feelings towards every on,e of them, we venture to give expression to these hopes of ours. 57. In the same spirit, we also venture to express the hope that those who have had various historical interests and associations in that pegion will be able to effect their process of disengagement withthe least possible disturbance of the life of the people of the area and without providing possible cause for concern 58. Ml'. MOROZOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Re- publics) (translated from Russian): ln view of the interest, to say the least, whioh the United Kingdom delegation has displayed in the reasons why the Soviet Union voted against the United Kingdom draft resolu- tion, and also in order to explain in somewhat greater detail the reasons for the Soviet Union's vote both on tlùs draft resolution and on the other draft resolution before the Council, 1 sha11 now attempt briefly to out- line the main points we tlùnk it necessary to make before the Council concludes its discussions of tlùs item. 59. The chagrin reflected in the United Kingdom representative's attacks on the SovietUnidn'sposition on the question of Kuwaitis, of course, understandable. It is naturally unfortunate that a draft resolution tmder which the Council, a principal organ of the United Nations, responsible for the maintenance of inter- national peace and security, would in effect lend the sanction of the Council and the United Nations to the occupation of Kuwait by UnitedKingdom troops, should fail to secure adoption. One can, of course, understand this disappointment and regard it as the explanation of the somewhat hostile attitude towards the position adopted by the Soviet Union in this question. 60. However, since we are on the subject of the ob- stacles placed in the way of a decision which would strengthen and confirm the authority of the Council and of the United Nations, the United Kingdom representa- tive should first of all bear in mind how he Just voted on the other draft resolution, submitted ta us by the delegation of the United Arab Republic. 61. It is true that during the vote on the United Arab Republic draft resolution, we did not see the United Kingdom representative l'aise his hand to vote against it. However, this can deceive only people who are completely uninitiated and understand nothing about United Nations activities. 1 think that all or almost all of us here, and certainly the UnitedKingdom repre- sentative, know quite well that, given the existence in the Security Council of a firm majority prepared at all times to defend and support certain views of the Western Powers, there is no need for the representa- tives of those Powers to cast a negative vote. The same result is achieved very simply and everyone saw how it was done during the vote on the United Arab Republic draft resolution: all thatwas necessary was not to l'aise a handlnfavourbecause, as we know, seven votes are required for the adoption of a decision in the Security Council. Six are not enough. Seven votes are required-the concurring votes of the five permanent members of the Security Council and the votes of two non-permanent members of the Council. Thus, in our view, the United Kingdom representative and those who are supporting him in essence taok the sarne line as the Soviet representative followed, quite legitimately and in conformity with the Charter. They expressed their disagreement and preventedthe adop.- tion of the United Arab Republic resolution; they did not do so by raising their hands and voti;1~ against it, but achieved the same result merely by availing them- selves of the Charter provision which Ihave Just men- tioned. In fact, they did exactly what the Soviet repre- 62. 1 think. therefore, that 1 have saidenough and that l need make absolutely no further reference to the attacks of the United Kingdom representative, which are abviously motivated by anything but businesslike considerations-attacks based on the fact that the Soviet Union and. incidentally, not only the Soviet Union, but a number of other delegations of States which are members of the Council, in particular, the United Arab Republic, Ceylon and Ecuador, expressed in varying degree the same attitude towards the draft resolution submitted by the UnitedKingdom delegation refusing to support it. If the United Kingdom delega- tion had not been lacking in the sang-froid and com- pasure characteristic of the English people, whom we love and respect, obviously this aspect of the matter could have been considered completely exhausted. 63. However, 1 shall take the liberty of mentioning certain provisions of the UnitedKingdom draft resolu- tian, so that it may be quite clear why-and he!'e 1 am concerned with substance and not with procedure-the Soviet Union was not in a position to support a number of the provisions of this draft resolution or the resolu- tion as a whole. 64, Let us consider the third preambular paragraph. which states that British forces have been sent to Kuwait and placed at the disposaI of the Ruler of Kuwait, in response to his appeal. In order not to weary the members of the Council with lengthy argu- ments at this somewhat late hour, 1 should lilce to say that such provisions and certain other provisions of the preamble amount to a direct vindication of the United Kingdom occupation of the territory of Kuwait; the reference to an appeal by the Ruler of Kuwait can deceive no one and cannot justify this act of provocation committed by the United Kingdom. 65. In facto this is a vicious circle from which, if we accept the United Kingdom's reasoning on the subject. there is no escape. As long as British forces are in the territory of Kuwait, the Ruler of Kuwait can harctly be considered as a ruler who can freely express his will and freely make or retract any appeals. This is what a number of delegations have contended here and what we are now contending; it is something which is clear to the whole world. On the other hand. we have the United Kingdom assertion that it will maintain its forces until the Ruler of Kuwait requests it to with- draw them. However, if in circumstances of British occupation-I repeat, in circumstances of British oc- cupation-the Ruler of Kuwait cannot freely express his will. this means. if we apply certainmathematieal rules and perform the appropriate operations. that, so far as this specifie question and this specific situation are concerned, the will of the Ruler of Kuwait equals the will of the United Kingdom Government. Further- more. if we take as ourcriterionfor determining when the British forces will be withdrawn from Kuwait the promise made in the draft resolution submitted for our consideration by the United Kingdom delegation. then, on the basis of the same simple mathematical 66. But l shall goastepfurther.lraq'srepresentative here in the Security Council and its Government at Baghdad, bot.h with one voice and in the same formaI terms, have assured and are assuring the whole world that they neither have countenanced nor are coun- tenancing the use of force for the solution of the con- troversial issues connected with Kuwait. While no discrepancies can be detected between the position taken by Baghdad, the capital of Iraq, and the position taken by that country's representative here in the Council, there are patent discrepancies between the statements made here by the United Kingdom repre- sentative and the statements made on this question by other Britons whose standing is, l emphasize, no less authoritative and official. Even if we were to concede for a moment the vaIidity of what the United Kingdom representative said here concerning the basic reasons for dispatcl:ling British troops to Kuwait, these dis- crepancies force us to vote against proposaIs such as those made in the United Kingdom draft resolution. To take what l might calI the latest information, Sir William Luèe, British Political Resident in the Persian Gulf, said. not more than two days ago, that is, after the United Kingdom representative had made his state- ment in the Council. (1 quote the original English, with apologies for my pronunciation) : "In my opinion, as long as Kassim does not with- draw his claim to Kuwaiti territory, sorne sort of force will .have to stay in Kuwait. Since he does not seem likely to drop his claim, we obviously cannot withdraw until there is an alternative." 67. In other wards, they are promising here in the Council to withdraw their forces when the threat of armed attack has passed, but in Kuwait they are say- ing that they will be withdrawn, not when the threat of armed attack has passed, but when the Iraqi Govern- ment has renounced all its claims to Kuwait. However, in the course of the discussion of this question in the Council, our President, the representative of Ecuador, has already stated, and stated rightly, that he does not consider a mere assertion of rights to a particular territory to be a threat of the use of force of the type which is envisagedin the Charter of the United Nations. Thus if, in the light ofall thesefacts, the United King- dom representative is still claiming that a threat to the territory of Kuwait from Iraq persists, and is in this way trYing-after a number of members of the Council have subjected the position taken by the United Kingdom Government to very serious criti- cism-to assert that such a threat exists, this can only be described as complete disregard by the United King- dom Government, and by its representative in the Security Council, of the justified demands which. have been made for the withdrawal of the British troops from the territory of Kuwait. 69. 1 can definitely say, inconclusion, that, ifwe con- sider the outcome of the exa~ination of this question in the Security Council, we find that this examination has undoubtedly had favourable resmts, which are quite different from those which the United Kingdom representative has mentioned, the voting on the two draft resolutions before us being immaterial, as the Soviet delegation has shown. 70. Among thesefavourable results of the examination of the question in the Security Council is the fact that several small countries and, in particmar, those coun- tries which are in the direct vicinity of the region being subjected to colonial occupation by the British forces, have taken strong exception to the presence of British forces in this region. 71. Regardless of the formaI outcome of the vote on this question, the United Kingdom Government must draw serious conclusions, and heed the voice of the peoples who are demanding the immediate withdrawal of the British forces from Kuwait. It must realize that it is assuming a hèavy responsibility, if such a situa- tion continues and if it rejects the legitimate demand made to it by aIl peace-loving peoples for the im- mediate withdrawal of the United Kingdom armed forces from the Territory of Kuwait. 72. Ml'. PACHACHI (Iraq): Although my delegation regrets that the Council was not able to adopt the draft resolution calling upon the United Kingdom to im- mediately withdraw its forces from Kuwait, may 1say that we are not entirely displeased by the resmts, and for the following reasons. 73. It is a fact that no member of the Council voted against the call for Immediate withdrawal, although, as far as the United Kingdom is concerned, this might have been a procedural device to avoid being in the minority. However, it is a fact that the United Kingdom did not vote against the paragraph on withdrawaL We shaH take note of that, hoping, to use the words of Sir Patrick Dean, that the Government of the United King- dom will take pause and consider the implications of the debate in the Council and see its way to withdraw 75. It is now up to the Sheikh of Kuwait and his pro- tectors to draw the necessary conclusionfromthe fact that the Arab people, in aIl their countries, demand the immediate withdrawal of United Kingdom troops from Kuwait. 76. The threat to Iraq's sovereignty and safety con- tinues with the presence of United Kingdom troops in Kuwait. Therefcre, 1 should like to reserve my dele- gation's right to come to the Council again if the need arises and if we believe that our security and in- dependence are threatenad by the continued presence of United Kingdom troops in Kuwait. 77. 1 should also like to express our thanks to the representative of the Soviet Union for the support he has given us throughout the debate, and to the repre- sentative of Ceylon and other representatives in the Council. 1 would especially thank the President, the representative of Ecuador, for the understanding he has shown. 78. Before concluding, 1 should like to express tothe President and the other members of the Security Council my very warm gratitude for having given me an opportunity of taking part in this debate. 1 would thank the President personally for his unfailing cour- tesv and generosity and for the impartiality that he has demonstrated throughout the debate. 79. Mr. HUSSEIN (Kuwait): We brought our complaint to the Security Council because we feIt that there was a threat to the independence of Kuwait andthe freedom of its people. This threat still stands, and we regret that the Security Counci! was unable to take any measures to face it. 80. However, we are gratified at the support, sym- pathy and understanding shown by the members of the Security Counci! for the stand of Kuwait and its people. We hope that the Counci! will continue to watch the situation and will keep it under review. 81. The PRESIDENT (Translatedfrom Spanish] :Since there are no other names on the list of speakers, 1 should like to make a brief statement. 82. First, as President, 1 must express my deep concern at the fact that these meetings of the Security Counci! have ended without the adoption of a resolution, 83. l should also like to statethatwe and all the other members of the Council will remain vigilant with regard to the dangerous situation that unfortunately still exiRts. As President, l shall be prepared to con- vene the Council whenever circumstances make it necessary to do SOC' 84. Finally, l wish to thank aIl the members of the Security Council for their kindness andthe Secretariat for its efficiency. The meeting rose at 5.40 p.m. AFRICAIAFRI QU E BELGIUM/BELGIQUE: ET MESSAGERIES 14·22, rue du Persil, CZECHOSLOVAKIA/TCHÉCOSLOVAQUIE: CESKOSLOVENSKY Narodni Tfida 9, Praha DENMARK/DANEMARK: EJNAR MUNKSGAARD, Nj1lrregade 6, Kj1lbenhavn, FINLAND/FINLANDE: AKATEEMINEN KIRJAKAUPPA 2 Keskuskatu, Helsinki. FRANCE: ÉDITIONS 13, rue Soulllot, Paris GERMANY (FEDt=RAL ALLEMAGNE (REPUBLIQUE R. EISENSCHMIDT Schwanthaler Str. 59, ELWERT UND MEURER Hauptstrasse lOI, ALEXANDER HORN Spiegelgasse 9, Wiesbaden. W. E. SAARBACH Gertrudenstrasse 30, GREECE/GRl:CE: LIBRAIRIE KAUFFMANN 28, rue du Stade, Athènes. ICELAND/ISLANDE: BÔKAVERZLUN SIGFÛSAR EYMUNDSSONAR Austurstraeti 18, Reykjavik. IRELAND/IRLANDE: Dublin. ITALY/ITALlE: lIBRERIA COMMISSIONARIA Via Gino Capponi 26, & Via D. A. Azuni 15/1'., LUXEMBOURG: LIBRAIRIE SCHUMMER Place du Théâtre, Luxembourg. NETHERLANDS/PAYS-BAS: N. V. MARTINUS Lange Voorhout 9, NORWAY/NORVÈGE: JOHAN GRUNDT TANUM KarlJohansgate, 41, PORTUGAL: LIVRARIA 186 Rua Aurea, Lisboa. SPAIN/ESPAGNE: lIBRERIA BOSCH Il Ronda Universidad, LIBRERIA MUNDI·PRENSA Castell6 37, Madrid. SWEDEN/SUÈDE: KUNGL. HOVBOKHANDEL Fredsgatan 2, Stockholm. 'SWITZERLAND/SUISSE: LIBRAIRIE PAYOT, Lausanne, Genève. HANS RAUNHARDT Kirchgasse 17, Zürich TURKEY/TURQUIE: LIBRAIRIE HACHETTE 469 Istiklal Caddesi, UNION OF SOVIET UNIO.N DES RÉPUBLIQUES SOVIETIQUES: MEZHDUNARODNAYA KNYIGA, Smolenskaya UNITED KINGDOM/ROYAUME·UNI: H. M. STATIONERY P. O. Box 569, Londo.n, (and HMSO branches Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, YUGOSLAVIA/YOUGOSLAVIE: CANKARJEVA ZALOZBA Ljubljana, Siovenia. DRZAVNO PREDUZEéE Jugoslovenska Knjiga, Beograd. PROSVJETA 5, Trg Bratstva i Jedinstva, PROSVETA PUBlISHING Import·Export Division, Terazije 16/1, Beograd. CAMEROUN: LIBRAIRIE DU PEUPLE AFRICAIN La Gérante, B. P. 1197, Yaoundé. ETHIOPIA/ÉTHIOPIE: INTERNATIONAL PRESS AGENCY, P. O. Box 120, Addis Ababa. GHANA: UNIVERSITY BOOKSHOP University College of Ghana, Legon, Accra. MOROCCO/MAROC: CENTRE DE DIFFUSION DOCUMENTAIRE DU B.E.P.I., 8, rue Michaux·Bellaire, Rabat. SOUTH AFRICA/AFRIQUE DU SUD: VAN SCHAIK'S BOOK STORE (PTY.), LTD. Church Street, Box 724, Pretoria. UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC/ RÉPUBLIQUE ARABE UNIE: LIBRAIRIE "LA RENAISSANCE D'ÉGYPTE" 9 Sh. Adly Pasha, Caire. ASIA/ASIE BURMA/BIRMANIE: CURATOR, GOVT. BOOK DEPOT, Rangoon. CAMBODIA/CAMBODGE: ENTREPRISE KHMÈRE DE LIBRAIRIE Imprimerie & Papeterie, S. à R. L., Phnom·Penh. CEYLON/CEYLAN: LAKE HOUSE BOOKSHOP Assac. Newspapers of Ceylan, P. O. Box 244, Colombo. CHINA/CHINE: THE WORLD BOOK COMPANY, LTD. 99 Chung King Raad, lst Section, Taipeh. Taiwan. THE COMMERCIAL PRESS, LTD. 211 Honan Raad, Shanghai. HONG KONG/HONG.KONG: THE SWINDON BOOK COMPANY 25 Nathan Raad, Kowloon. INDIA/INDE: ORIENT LONGMANS Bombay, Calcutta, Hyderabad, Madras & New Delhi. OXFORD BOOK & STATIONERY COMPANY Calcutta & New Delhi. . P. VARADACHARY & COMPANY Madras. INDONESIA/INDONÉSIE: PEMBANGUNAN, LTD. Gunung Satrari B4, Djakarta. .JAPAN/JAPON: MARUZEN COMPANY, LTD. 6 Tori-Nichome, Nihonbashi, Tokyo. KOREA (REP. OF)/CORÉE (RÉP. DE): EUL·YOO PUBLISHING CO.. LTD. 5, 2·KA, Chongno, Seoul. PAKISTAN: THE PAKISTAN CO-OPERATIVE BOOK SOCIETY Dacca, East Pakistan. PUBLISHERS UNITED, LTD. Lahore. THOMAS & THOMAS Karachi: PHILIPPINES: ALEMAR'S BOOK STORE 769 Rizal Avenue, Manila. SINGAPOREJSINGAPOUR: THE CITY BOOK STORE, LTD., Collyer Quay. THAILAND/THAïLANDE: PRAMUAN MIT, LTD. 55 Chakrawat Road, Wat Tuk, Bangkok. VIET·NAM (REP. OF/RÉP. DU): LIBRAIRIE-PAPETERIE XUÂN THU 185, rue Tu·do, B.. P. 283, Saigon. EUROPE AUSTRIA/Al:JTRICHE: GEROLD & COMPANY Graben 31, Wien, 1. B. WOLLERSTORFF Markus Sittikusstrasse 10, Salzburg. Orders and inquiries from countries where sales agencies have not yet been or to Sales Section, United Nations, Les commandes et demandes de renseignements émanant de pays où il n'existe ONU, New York (É.•U.), ou à la Section. des ventes,