S/PV.971 Security Council

Before we proceed with the question of the agenda, the Chairlias a brief statement which it wishes to make. 2. As is known, the two applications for membership included in our provisional agenda have been pending before the United Nations for some time. The Chair has considered it its dutyto conduct a series of private consultations during the past weeks on these applications. It gives me great pleasure to announce that, as a result of these consultations, the Chair is now in a position to state its confidence that the outcome of our deliberations todaywill give satisfactionbothto Mauritania and to the Mongolian People's Republic, the two applicants for membership. Again as a result ofthese consultations, the Chair has come to the conclusion that our proceedings today would be facilitated if we considered the two applications in the chronologic.al order in which the respective countries applied for membership to thé United Nations. This conclusion of the Chair has absolutely no other significance except as a practical and objective suggestion made, bearing in mind the duties of the Chair to give a fair chance to both applicants. 1 would therefore suggest that the Council take up first the application of the Mongolian People's Republic and, âfter we have concluded that part of our debate and voted upon the draft resolution 3. Now, if there is no objection, l propose to handle the business of the day in the manner l have just outlined. 4. MI'. TSIANG (China):' The order of debate and voting which you, MI'. President, have just suggested is the so-called chronological order. In fact that reverses the order as established in the provisional agenda. That agenda was the result of a debate in this Counci!. l,must state, Sir, that the procedure you have outlined is, to say the least, very unusual. l must, therefore, place on the record of the Council my objection. In view of the circumstances which you, MI'. President, were good enough to explain inyour opening statement, l will not press the point.

The Chair wishes to reiterate and reassure the members of the Counci! that this suggestion had no significanceexcept as regards the practical considerations which Ihave already outlined. As l hear no formaI objection to my suggestion, l will consider the agenda as adopted in the manner l have outlined. The agenda, as amended, was adopted. Admission of new Members to the United Nations: (~) Letter doted 3 December 1960 {rom the Deputy Permanent Representative of the Union of Soviet Soci al ist Repub. lies addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4569); lette. dated 6 May 1961 from the Permanent Representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republies addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/4801); (~) Telegram dated 28 November 1960 from the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania addressed to the Secretary.General (S/4563 and Corr.1)

Before we take up the applications of the Mongolian People's Republic and of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, in that order, 1 wish to inform the members of the COUDcil that a number of communications have been received from states Members of the United Nations which are not members of the Council, requesting that they be invitedto speak concerning the application of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. These communicattons have been circulated to the members of the COUDcil as foHows: the request from Madagascar [S/4942], Ivory Coast [Si 4944], Senegal [S/4946] and Morocco [8/4952]. 1 have been informed that the representative of Madagascar has withdrawn his request. If there is no objection, 1 shaH accordingly, with the consent of the COUDcil, invite the representatives of the Ivory Coast, Senegal

The Counci! will proceed with examination of the application for membership of the Mongolian People's Republic. 8. MI'. ZORIN (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): The Security Counci! has to consider once again the important question of the admission of new Members. It is common knowledge that within a comparatively brief space of time a number ofnew countries have joinedthe United Nations, including former African colonies which through a persistent struggle wrested their national independence from the colonialists. Ever since the Soviet Government came to power, the Soviet Union, true to its policy as regards nationalities, has been championing the self-determination of peoples and their free development and national sovereignty. As far back as 15 November 1917, the young Soviet Republic, in the Declaration of the Rights of Peoples in Russia, proclaimed the right of aIl peoples to self-determination and the establishment of independent states. Themain provision of this Declaration, which constitutes the corner-stone of our national policy, have been incorporated in the Constitution of the USSR, the fundamental law of our State. For this reason our country has always been among the first to recognize newlyformed States. 9. The Soviet Union is also a resolute advocate of the universality of the United Nations. We are firmly convinced that aU states fulfilling the requirements of Article 4 of the United Nations Charter should be admitted to membership in the United Nations. 10. At this stage the Council has before it, first of aU, the application ofthe Mongolian People's Republic. The Mongolian People's Republic is the present form of one of the oldest states in the world. It will be remembered that Mongolian statehood dates back to the third century B.C. In 1911, as a result of the Mongolian people's prolonged struggle for national liberation, foreign domination was overthrown and the Mongolian state was reborn. The Mongolian people's democratic state was formed in July 1921, after the victory of the national revolution. Sincethenthis state, surging up from the steppes and the Gobi Desert, has made great progress in the social, economic and cultural spheres. Within a space of forty years, a brief span in terms of history, Mongolia has been transformed from a backward oriental country ofherdsmen to an agrarian and industrial country with a fastgrowing diversified economy. The Mongolian people have dedicated themselves tothe building of socialism. Very important industries, such as the mining, oil and textile industries are being developed inthe Mongolian People's Republic side by side with the light and foodstuffs industries. The rate of growth of industrial production for the year 1960 was 17.7 pel' cent, and industry now accounts for about 50 pel' cent of the country's total output. Industrial development is accompanied by the rapid development of agriculture. The Republic now fully meets its needs for grains and even exports some, whereas until quite recently the bulk of the grain had to be imported. 12. The International prestige of the Mongolian People's Republic has grown immeasurably. The country now maintains diplomatie relations with twenty-one States in four continents accounting for more than half of the world's population. The Mongolian People's Republic consistently pursues a peaceloving foreign policy; it is an active champion of the principles of peaceful coexistence and a tireless advocate of the easing of international tension and the maintenance and strengthening of world peace. 13. The Mongolian People's Republic has long possessed every qualification for admission to membership in the United Nations. It is common knowledge that it was one of the first countries to apply for admission. That was on 24 June 1946,Y at a time when many States which, by now, have long been fullfledged Membe,rs of the United Nations did not even exist. Since then, this peace-loving country has renewed its application many times. Thus far, however, for well-known reasons, the Mongolian People's Republic has remained outside the United Nations despite the fact that the General Assembly has repeatedly recommended its admission. Suffice it to recall inthis connexion General Assembly resolution 1602 (XV) of 19 April 1961, operative paragraph 1 of which states that " ••• the Mongolian People's Republic is a peaceloving State within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations, that it is able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and that it should, in consequence, be admitted to membership in the United Nations". 14. The USSR delegation urges the members of the Council to adopt a positive solution to the question of the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic to membership in the United Nations, thus removing, at long last, a historieal injustice towards a country which has been waiting for admission since 1946. 15. The USSR delegation has submittedtothe Security Council a draft resolution [S/4950]: "The Security Council, "Having examined the application of the Mongolian. People's Republic for admission to membership in the United Nations, "Recommends to the General Assembly that the Mongolian People's Republic be admittedto membership in the United Nations." It is our expectation that the overwhelmingmajority of the Council's members will vote infavourof this draft resolution. 18. With reference to the wish just expressed by the President, 1 should like to reiterate what we have already stated in the Security Council on a number of occasions, that if a favourable solution is given to the question of the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic, we shall not raise obstacles in the way of Mauritania's admission to membership in the United Nations despite the fact that the Soviet Union has its own views concerning Mauritania's admission, as we shall explain further when the question comes up for discussion. 19. Ml.'. BARNES (Liberia): The Security Councilhas before it a draft resolution [3/4950] by which it would recommend tothe General Assemblythatthe Mongolian People's Republic be admitted to membership in the United Nations. As is weIl known to everybody, the question of admission of the Mongolian People's Republic has been on the agenda ofthe Council and of the General Assembly since mid-1946, andthat isfor more than fifteen years. This, 1 submit, is a very long time for a country to wait for an invitationto join the community of nations and indeed a very long time for this community of nations to extend such an invitation. . 20. The recommendation for Mongolia's admission has cropped up during these fifteen years almost annually in one form or another, often in company with recommendations for admission of other countries, and has, to my delegation's mind, never beenrejected for a valid reason. My delegation has always been in favour of the universality of membership inthe United Nations and knows of no good reason which should prevent the Council from recommending that the Mongolian People's Republic should be admitted as a United Nations Member. 1 have therefore intervened to indicate that my delegation will vote for the draft resolution which recommendstothe General Assembly that the Mongolian People's Republic be admitted to membership in the United Nations. 21. As my delegation is a co-sponsor witli France of the draft resolution [8/4967] which recommends that the General Assembly admit the Islamic Republic of Mauritania to membership in the United Nations, it is evident that we shall vote for this draft resolution, and when the time comes we shall have more to say on this item.

Since Outer Mongolia applied for membership in the United Nations in 1946, the Security Council has considered and reconsidered the application a dozen times. Everytime, the Security Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter and of our provisional rules of procedure, found it necessary to reject Outer Mongolia's application. Today, we consider the application of Outer Mongolia for the thirteenth time. 23. Outer Mongolia was for many centuries a member the Chinese political family. From the end of the thi.rtleellth century to the latter part of the fourteenth 24. In carrying out its predatory design on Outer Mongolia, Tsarist Russia set an exarnple for Soviet Russia. The first step was· always to put a cloak of independence over Outer Mongolia. Seizing upon the opportunity of the revolution in China in 1911, Tsarist Russia induced a group of Outer Mongolian princes to declare independence from China. That declaration was made on 30 October 1911 and was immediately recognized by Tsarist Russia over the strongprotests of the ChinE'se Government. 25. The imperialist adventure of the Tsarist Government in Outer Mongolia, as elsewhere, was interrupted by the Bolshevik revolution in 1917. The newly established Soviet Government, in its anxiety to secure diplomatie recognition made a gesture to China by promising to declare "null and void all the treaties concluded with China by the former Government of Russia," to renounce "all seizure of Chineseterritory and all Russian concessions in China," and to restore to China, "without any compensation and forever, all that had beenpredatorily seizedfromherbythe Tsar's Government and the Russian bourgeoisie." In the hope that these promises would be kept by the new Government in the Soviet Union, China established diplomatie relations with the Soviet Union and concluded, in May 1924, an agreement with the Soviet Union, which provided, arnong other things: "The Government ofthe Union of Soviet Socialist Republics recognizes that Outer Mongolia is an integral part of the Republic of China and respects China's sovereignty therein." 26. Then, as now, the Soviet Union showed no hesitation in violating international treaties. Hardly had the ink on the Sino-Soviet agreement of 1924 dried when a so~called People's Republic of Mongolia was set up on 8 July 1924, whose constitution was closely patterned after that of the Russian Soviet Republic. 27. The Soviet Union gave military aid to the Outer Mongolian communist régime. In 1934, such aid was stepped up and the Soviet forces in Outer Mongolia were expanded. In 1936, the Soviet Union went further and, on 12 March of that year, signed with the socalled Mongolian People's Republic a protocol of mutual assistance. The Chinese Government protested against this protocol. The Soviet Union-and this is very interesting and bizarre-maintained that, in spite of its recognition of the Outer Mongolian régime and the signing of the protocol, the Sino-Soviet agreement of 1924 still remained in force, and denied that the protocol was a violation of that agreement. 28. The Second World War gave the Soviet Union further opportunities for aggression in Outer Mongolia. Playing upon the eagerness of the Allied Powers for Soviet participation in the Far Eastern phase ofWorld War II and for an early victory in the Pacifie, the Soviet Union obtained, in a series of secret deals at the Yalta Conference in February 1945, important concessions at the expense of China. Although such 32. The sad history of Soviet aggression in Outer Mongolia is something about which the world does not know too much. But the little we do know does not speak weIl for the Soviet Union. Outer Mongolia, under the disguise of independence, has been infact a colony of the Soviet Union. The history of Outer Mongolia during the last forty years typüiesthe new colonialism and imperialism which the Soviet Union is practising. 33. For those reasons, my .delegation has always opposed the admission of Outer Mongolia tothe United Nations. If Outer Mongolia were really independent, China would. not only not object to its admission, but would even be glad to sponsor Outer Mongolia's application for membership. The fact is that Outer . Mongolia is not really independent. 34. The Soviet Union, however, has forced upon the United Nations a cruel dilemma. She has blocked the admission of Mauritania in an effort to blackmail the COUDci! into admitting Outer Mongolia. She has attempted once again to effect a factual package deal in contravention of the provisions of the Charter. 35. My delegation has watched with sympathy the emergence of independent nations inAfrica. Eachtime such a newly-independent African nation applied for membership inthe United Nations, my delegation, without exception, gave its whole-hearted support to such application. We wish today to give Mauritania the same support. We feel that it is gross injustice that, of aIl the newly independent nations of Africa, Mauritania alone should be debarred. 36. Mauritania, and her many friends in Africa and elsewhere, have appealed to my Governmentto refrain from preventing the admission of Outer Mongolia, so that in the end, justice might be done to Mauritania. These friends of Mauritania have made it clear to my Government that, while they understand China's objection to the admission of Outer Mongolia, they would welcome a gesture of particular friendship towards Mauritania. For this reason, my delegation wishes to place on record the clear stand of my Government on the question of the admission of Outer Mongolia, but we will not participate in the vote on her application. ln other words, we will not exercise the right of veto. We hope that in this way no pretext, however meagre and unjustifiable, may be seized upon by the Soviet Union to cause further delay in the admission of Mauritania. From what 1 have said it is clear that my delegation heartily supports the admission of Mauritafia, and we will vote for the draft resolution jointly sponsored by France and Liberia. 38. The United states reaffirms its support for the admission of Mauritania to the United Nations. l shall speak further on this point later in our proceedings. 39. As to the other application before us, Mr. Stevenson told the Security Council some time ago [968th meeting] that the United States will not obstruct the admission of Outer Mongolia to the United Nations. The reasons for this decision, despite the views we hold, are weIl known. The United states is aware that last April the General Assembly found Outer Mongolia qualified for membership. We are preparedtorespect this view of the Assembly and will do nothing either here or in the Assemblyto oppose it. The United states therefore will abstain on the draft resolution recommending Outer Mongolia's achnission.

l can sayat once that my delegation is in favour now, as it has been in the past, of admitting the Mongolian People's Republic tothe United Nations. In our view, this State, which applied for admission as early. as 1946, fulfils aIl the requirements laid down in the Charter and should be a Member of the Organization. We hope that the Security Council will recommend the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic unanimously. My delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution submitted by the representative of the Soviet Union, who in his remarkable statement, has stressed the reasons militating in favour of Mongolia's admission. 41. My delegation will not be able to support the draft resolution submitted by France and Liberia.

In accordance with your recommendation, Mr. President, l should like to state my ctelegation's views on both of the candidatures before us. 43. As regards Mauritania, l shall be very brief, since France, together with Liberia, is a co-sponsor draft resolution before the Council and the 45. My predecessors indicated that both they and their colleagues had been led to ask whether Outer Mongolia reaUy fulfiUed aU the conditions laid down in Article 4 of the Charter for the admission of new Members. 46. Nevertheless, the French delegation will vote in favour of admitting the Mongolian People's Republic. In so doing, it is expresl:iing its confidence in the Mongolian people's determination to beindependentandits hope that the country's institutions will develop along democratic lines. Moreover, it does not want its vote to be used as a pretext, which would of course be unjustified and in contradiction with the Charter, for blocking the admission to the United Nations of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. 47. These are the reasons for which my delegation. faithful to the principle of our Organization's universality, will vote in favour of the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic to the United Nations.

My delegation, after careful consideration, will vote in support of the admission of Outer Mongolia to the United Nations. 49. In response to the request made by you, M:i'. President and in order that there should be no doubt about my Government' s attitude to the items on the present agenda, l should like to sayat this point that when the Council passes tothe consideration ofMauritania's application for membership of the United Nations, my delegation will vote, as it has in the past, in favour of its admission. 50. To return to the item atpresentunder discussion, as is well known my delegation has abstained in the past, except on one occasion, because we feIt that we did not know enough about Outer Mongolia to satisfy ourselves of its sovereigri, independent status. The previous occasion on which we voted infavour of Outer' Mongolia was in 1955 [704th meeting], when members will recall that a deadlock had been reached in admitting eighteen applicants to the United Nations. In order to break this deadlock, my predecessor, Sir Pierson Dixon, explained that my Government was prepared to stretch tolerance to the limit in judging the qualifications of certain of the eighteenapplicants, 51. Today, once again, my delegation considers that in the present circumstances the correct course is to give Outer Mongolia the benefitofthe doubtand to vote for its admission. The qualifications for membership laid down in Article 4 ofthe Charter are that a country should be peace-Ioving and that it should accept the obligations of the Charter and"be ready and willing to carry them out. Our vote for Outer Mongolia is thus an act of faith that it will accept and abide by these obligations once it has been admitted to the United Nations. j l 52. Our delegation is also influenced by the fact that it has naver ceased to consider that membership of the United Nations should not be restrictedto countries whose political and social systems we approve. We wish to encourage the widest possible membership in the beliefthatpoliticalbarriers betweenpeoples should be broken down. 1 l 53. For these reasons, my delegation will vote on this item in the manner in which I have just described. 54. Ml'. MALALA8EKERA (Ceylon): My delegationis very happy that after what appears to us to be an unconscionable period of waiting, the application of 'Outer Mongolia to be admitted into the world community lS about to reach a happy outcome. The Ceylon delegation has always supported the application of Outer Mongolia, and we should like to congratulate you, Ml'. President, that by your wisdom, patience and tact you should have been able to find a way out of the impasse in which we found ourselves in the recent few weeks. 1 1l J 1 1 J 55. Mongolia has a very ancient culture and it has had very close relations, cultural relations particularly, with our own country, because both our countries follow the same religion very largely, that is, the religion of Buddhism. I myself had the goodfortune to visit Outer Mongolia two years ago, and 'on that occasion I had the privilege of meeting some cf the memb6rs of the delegation which we see present here in this hall today. When I was in Outer Mongolia, I saw the determined efforts that were being made by the people of that country in many directions, particularly in the direction of raising the standard of living of its people, to cultivate good relations with its neighbours but at the same time to maintain its independence. I think that this is something that should be encouraged. That is why we should be very happy if we could find Outer Mongolia being admitted to the United Nations by a unanimous vote of the 8ecurity Council, and then later of the General Assembly. 56. With regard to the application of Mauritania, the principle that has consistently been followed by the Government of Ceylon is that, when a country which 57. Ml'. BENITES VINUEZA (Ecuador) (translated from Spanish): 1 should like first ofall, Ml'. President, to congratulate you, on behalf of my delegation, on the ability and intelligence withwhichyou have brought this matter to the verge of a happy solution and to pay a tribute to your wisdom in asking members of the Counci! to state their positions before the voting. 58. My delegation is always completely faithful tothe principles of the Charter. 1 should like tomention two of these principles. The first is that of tmiversality. If the principle of universality were not st:J:'ictly applied, the United Nations might become an elegant and very exclusive political club but it would not be the Organization ofthe international communitywithout distinction or discrimination of a political, ethnic or religious nature. The other principle is that of the self-determination of peoples, which we wholeheartedly support. Tt is to this principle that we owe the recent admission of many nations and what we might call the glorious awakening of the continent of Africa. 59. Respect for both these principles will lead my delegation to vote affirmatively. We shaH vote in favour of the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, reserving the right to give our views in more detail later if we see fit. 60. Ml'. SCHWEITZER (Chile) (translated from Spanish): Ml'. President, 1 am happy to congratulate you, on behalf of my delegation, on your praiseworthy initiative in breaking the deadlock of the lastfew weeks in order to enable this Council to solve the difficult problem, which has been outstanding sinee last year, of the admission of the two States which are seeking membership of the United Nations. 61. As a result of your wise and skilful action we are on the point of arriving at the happy outcome for which we all hope and which has been brought closer by the honourable attitude of many members of the Couneil, who have placed the interests of the United Nations above an others. 62. The Mongolian People's Republic is very far from Chile. We know very little about it, but we hope that our contact will enable us to know itbetter and to dis~ cover its particular characteristics and its problems. 63. We realize that this is a new State, which fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 4 ofthe Charter as the ~.mdamental standards by which we mustbe guided when we consider the admission of new States. 64. For this reason, my country's Minister for Foreign Affairs has already announced in this Counei! that we shall vote in favour of the draft resolution of the Soviet Union, reeommending that the General As-

1 now wish to speak in my capacity as representative of TURKEY. 67. The Turkish delegation will vote in favour ofboth the application of the Mongolian People's Republic-and the application of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. 68. As far as the application ofthe MongolianPeople's Republic is concerned, 1 wish to recall that, on a previous occasion, when my country was also a member of the Security Council-in 1956, to be exactwe voted in favour of the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic [704th meeting] when its application was presented as a separate draft resolution. However, on later occasions, whenthe same applicationwas presented in the form of amendments which could be interpreted as conditions imposed upon the admission of other members, we abstained on the hasis of the principle in the Charter that each application should be judged on its own merits. 69. 1 repeat our position in the present debate: we shall vote in favour of both applications. 70. 1 now continue as PRESIDENT. 1 assume that the Council is ready to vote on the draft resolution si 4950 presented by the delegation of the Soviet Union and concerning the application for admission of the Mongolian People's Republic. 1 shall now put this draft resolution to the vote.

May 1 first of aH express my delegation's deep gratitude to aIl the delegations which have supported our draft resolution andenabled the Security Council to submit a favourable recommendation to the General Assembly cO:'1cerning the admission of the Mongolian People's Repubiic. 72. At this stage, when a positive solution has been reached, 1 do not wish to take up the Council's tir.o.e 73. Nevertheless. for the informationofthe members of the Council 1 should like to quotefrom the record of the Security Council meeting of 29 August 1946 [56th meeting] a statement by Mr. Hsia. the Chinese representative. as follows. ftAs far as the Chinese delegation is concerned, we are satisfied. for the present pll.rpose. and we are prepared to support the application of the Mongolian People's Republic if we ever come to voting." ln 1946, persons who truly represented China favoured the admission of the Mongolian People's Republic. Those who now oppose it do not represent China.

1 do not wish in the least to engage in polemies. but 1 should like to inform this Council that the Government which issued the instruction to Mr. Hsia in 1946 is the same Government that issues instructions to me today. Indeed, in 1946 we hoped and we thought that Outer Mongolia was independent. Subsequentevents proved otherwise. Today, in making my statement before the Council. 1 omitted certain facts which 1 had presented to the Assembly on Many occasions. Let me cite one instance to explain why we have. changed our attitude. There are Many reasons, but 1 will just mention one. 75. In 1947 Outer Mongolian troops crossed the Chinese border and attacked Chinese Government troops at Peitasan with cavalry units. On the same day four Soviet aeroplanes bombed and strafedthe Chinese Government positions in support ofthe Outer Mongolian ground attack. Peitasan is located 200 kilometres north-west of Tiwa, in the province of Sikiang, and is 200 kilometres away from the Chinese frontier with Outer Mongolia. In other words, there we have a concrete instance where Outer Mongolia allowed itself to be exploited for Soviet aggression against my country. That is one of the Many reasons which have led my Government to change its attitude towards this. socalIed independent Outer Mongolia.

The Council will now proceed to the examination ofthe next itemonits agenda, which is the application of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. The first name inscribed on my list of speakers is that of the representative of France, upon whom 1 now calI.

Between 15 and 26 November 1960. during the fifteenth session of the General Assembly. the FirstCommittee .held a leilgthy debate on the subject of Mauritania. Y SUbsequently, at the 91lth meeting on 3-4 December, the Security Council for the first time examined the application of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for admission. Lastly. as a result of the request made on 79. For nearly a year, attempts have been made to iinpede first Mauritania's independence and subsequently its admission to the United Nations. These manoeuvres failed of their purpose. As the spokesman for eleven African States pointedoutattheAssembly's meeting of 18 December 1960, the opposition was, in the First Committee, quite definitely nonsuited. 80. In the Security Council, on 3-4 December, eight States from Africa, Europe, Asia, North America and Latin America voted in favour of Mauritania'a admission. The only two voting against itwere two communist States, Poland and the USSR. The Soviet Union therefore had to resort to the veto inorder to prevent the admission of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania from being recommended to the Assembly, at its fifteenth session, by ah overwhelming majority. We warmly welcome the fact that the Soviet Union has now agreed to change its attitude on this point. 81. These eleven African States, distressed at the fate of a country which, though having undergone the same evolution as their own, was being barred from an admission which they themselves had been granted unanimously, put before the General Assembly on 18 December a draft resolution which came up for discussion on 17 April. The paragraph in that document declaring that "the Islamic Republic of Mauritania is a peace-Ioving State within the meaning of article 4 of the Charter, that it is able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and that it should, in consequence, be admitted to membership in the United Nations" was adopted by 63 votes to 15 [General Assembly resolution 1602 (XV)}. 82. Subsequently, twenty African Heads of State, meeting at Monrovia from 8 to 12 May 1961, addressed to the President of the Security Couneil, through Mr. William V. S. Tubman, the President of Liberia, a letter]j stating that the conference, whieh comprised twenty-one States representing 120 million Africans, was convinced that the Republic of Mauritaniafulfilled all the conditions required for membership of the United Nations and that the conference regarded with apprehension any attempt, through the use of the veto, to bar that Republic from access to the Organization or to linkits admissionwith other questions. 83. Mauritania's application, which is now before us for the second time and is thus supported by twenty '!JI Ibid., Fifteenth Session, Annexes, agenda item 20, document A/ L.335. §j Ibid., Fifteenth Session (Part Il), Plenary Meetings, 986th meeting. 85. One after the other, aIl the specialized agencies or regional bodies to which Mauritania applied have admitted it without hesitation: the International Labour Organisation, the WorId Health Organization, the Inter- Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, the International Telecommunication Union. And the Economic and Social Council has unanimously decided to confer on it the status of ful1memberof the Economie Commission for Africa.§I 86. It is for these reasons that my delegation urges the members of the Council to recommend, unanimously, the admission of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania to our Organization, and to do nothing to thwart the wish that will be clearly expressed by the majority.

My delegation is pleased to reaffirm its support of the application of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for admission to membership in the United Nations. My delegation considers it a privilege to co-sponsor, with the delegation of France, draft resolution S/4967, which recommends that the General Assembly admit the Islamic Republic of Mauritania to membership in the United Nations. Our position on this matter should surprise no one, for it is the position we have taken which is in strict and clear conformUy with our staunch support of the progressive evolution at present taking place on the African continent. 88. It is clear that Mauritania possesses aIl the attributes of statehood and has the full capacity to fulfil the obligations to its citizens and to the community of the world. Moreover, Mauritania has clearly demonstrated that it qualifies for membership under Article 4 of the United Nations Charter. Itis a peaceloving State and has clearly shown its willingness and ability to carry out aIl the obligations of the Charter. As Mauritania's applicationwarrants favourable action by this Council on its own merits, there is no reason why such action should not be taken forthwith. 89. The representative of France has been good enough to draw our attention to a letter, dated 25 May 1961, addressed to the President of the Security Council, from the Conference of Heads of African and Malagasy States, through its Chairman, Mr. William V. S. Tubman, which emphasizes the fact that there is absolutely no excuse for delaying the admission of Mauritania to the United Nations any longer. With your permission, l should like to read this letter: 91. For the foregoing reasons, my delegation urges this Council to act expeditiously, favourably, and unanimously upon the application now before it. We feel that this new African Republic has great contributions to make to the United Nations in its efforts to build a better future for an mankind.

l should like first to thank you, Mr. Presi... dent, and the members of the Security Council, for allowing me to express, onbehalf of my delegation, the views of Morocco on the question of the application for admission to the United Nations of the so-called "Islamic Republic of Mauritania". 93. l should like to lay before you, objectively and with moderation, the considerations of fact and of law calculated to determine the decision that you are called upon to take in a problem which is of crucial importance to my country. What l am about to say will be designed to convince you of the soundness of the Moroccan argument, based as it is upon history, the facts of the situation, and the Charter of the United Nations itself. 9.4. At a moment when the Council is beingrequested to recommend the admission, to the General Assembly of the United Nations, of the so-called State of the "Islamic Republic of Mauritania", l have the honour, on behalf of my delegation, to draw your attention to the extreme gravity and dangerous nature of the decision which you are being called upon to take. 95. For with the proposaI that you should advocate the admission of Mauritania to this world Organization, you are being asked to take a decision which not only would injure my country by amputating a part of its national territory, but would be contrary to the principles of the Charter and of international morality. Were such a step to be taken, it would constitute an extremely dangerous precedent and wouldcarry within it the seedwhich might rot the foundations of our international body. 96. l should like to quote a statement made, on 4 October 1960, from the rostrum of the General Assembly, by His Majesty Hassan II, the King of Morocco, at that time Crown Prince and leader of the Moroccan delegation to the Assembly's fifteenth session. This is what he said: "1 can ••• assert that in no event could Morocco, a country devoted to justice and freedom which has given the best of itself •.•, be accused of wishing to deny them to others; still less could it be charged with inviting the many friends that it has the honour to count among delegations here to defend a cause which might be, or seem to it to be, unjust." 21 98. During our struggle for independence we never fought selfishly, and we have spared neither effqrts nor resources in order to ensure that other countries should attain sovereignty and be admitted to our Or-. ganization. Since our liberation, one of the fundamental principles of our policy-one incorporated in the organic law of our Kingdom-has been unreserved support for aIl peoples still under colonial rule and for their admittance to international life. It is therefore out of place and absurd to accuse Morocco of wishing to obstruct the independence of another country and its admission to membership here. 99. For Morocco, however, the problem at issue is that of return to the fatherland of a part of its own territory. For us, it is a struggle that we have undertaken, that is proceeding and thatwill continue, for the purpose of reuniting our country which hr.s been artificially dismembered and shorn of its southern part by typical colonialist machinations. 100. The problem is, in fact, a colonial one. 1t must be recognized that, in this field, France has a longestablished tradition. For ease of colonial administration, sometimes it groups together different territories having no affinity with each other; at other times it dismembers historically united countries in order to create from them artificially independent units. In earlier days, its colonial policy was based on the construction and exploitation of suchlarge units as French West Africa or French Equatorial Africa. Casting ethnic, geographical, historical and economic considerations to the winds, France "united" and ruled. Purely in its own interest and in that of its nationals, it instituted for these territories a single administration, common laws, one currency, and a standardized economy designed to complement that of metropolitan France. The national identity of each colony was ignored, as was its historical pasto In fact, through the destruction of its identity with a view to making it more subservient, its territorial integrity was deliberately impaired in order that opposition movements might be engendered, and its accession to independence and sovereignty in unity thus, to the maximum, delayed. 101. But soon, with the inevitable process of decolonization, set in motion and expeditedby the growing self-awareness of the peoples of the world, that policy was to be abandoned and, indeed, completely reversed. Henceforward, the colonial Power resorted to division in order to ensure the permanence of its rule. For political, economic and military reasons, France has created a completely artificial puppet state, with which it claims solidarity first by pro- ~he worldthe continuedandeffective exercise of French rule over the southern part of Morocco. 103. However, this Machiavellian policy deceives n.o one. What, in fact, is Mauritania? Here we must turn to the ancient and modern history of Mauritania. For centuries, it has been an integral part of Morocco. It is not important whether Mauritania was part of Morocco or Morocco part of Mauritania. Let us not indulge in sophistry. The important point is that Morocco and Mauritania were recognized, until the Protectorate, as two parts of a single country, under a single sovereignty. 104. When the Mauritanian problem is examined objectively from the historical, legal andpolitical standpoints, it is easily seen that the sovereign rights of Morocco cannot be seriously challenged and that only the principle of "might makes right" can dictate to us a settlement of our disputes with the colonial powers involved. 105. From the earliest periods of our nation's history up to the years 1905 to 1912, the geographical and political boundaries of Morocco were always recognized internationally and the area known today as Mauritania was always an integral part of our national territory. Neither Arab nor European historians, nor even French historians, have left any doubt on that point. The first French colonists in Mauritania ad~ mitted that they encountered strong resistance there, inspired by a national consciousness and a belief in the territorial unity of the Moroccan fatherland. Sorne of them laid particular stress on that factat the time. 106. However, in the face of selfish interests supported by the powerful resources of a rapidly expanding colonial empire, of what account were the lawful rights of Morocco, itself already weakened by intrigues and foreign exploitation? How could a subjugated Morocco secure respect for its rights over the whole of its territory, when the foreign Power which had arrogated to itself the role of Protector was the very one that indulged in the gravest infringement of those rights? 107. The General Act of the International Conference of Algeciras, signed in 1906 by most of the colonial Powers of the time and by other Powers which are represented in this Counci!, explicitly recognized the integrity and unity of Moroccan territory. 108. These Powers were quite ready to violate this agreement, and to c0nclude secret agreements in defiance of the elementary rules of international law. 1 need not add that these secret agreements, which constituted a violation of our sacred rights andnational sovereignty, were soon put into effect: armed action 109. This is how the armies of colonialism undertook the conquest of our country. It is well known that the series of military aggressions which followed these events ended only in 1934, after a resistance which lasted over thirty years throughout our national territory, including the Mauritanian regions. 110. The simuItaneous cessation of fighting in the southern regions, in Mauritania and in the Atlas and Riff mountains was more than significant. How could it have been otherwise, when there was such a feeling of national solidarity among aU our compatriots, whether they were in the North or in the Mauritanian provinces? 111. The ideal for which they feIt so firmly united, throughout the centuries and in good days as in bad, was always the same. In the struggle against foreign domination, they were defending the same country and the sarne national heritage. AU the inhabitants of the various provinces of Morocco have always shared a common national consciousness, both in the North and in the South, and whether the provinces had been liberated or were stiUliving in the nightof French or Spanish colonialism. 112. From the earliest years of this century, the occupation of Morocco from Senegal and Aigeria was methodically organized by France. Both before and after the establishment of the Protectorate, whole regions were annexed by France and attached to what the colonial Power then regarded as conquered territories and, as such, part of the French colonies. 113. These painful amputations were carried out in successive stages. The first took place in the South, in 1905, with the establishment ofthe civil territory of Mauritania-an evocative name which the twentiethoentury colonial Power had discovered somewherè in the night of North African history. The latest stage was as recently as 1952, one year befere our glorious sovereign Mohammed V went into exile, at a time when the national struggle was already assuming a new and decisive form. In that year the French Government thought it wise and timely to remove from the control of the central Moroccan authorities the regions of Fort-Trinquet and Tindouf, which had previouslybeen administered on behalf of His Majesty the King of Morocco, throughthe military authorities of the French Protectorate in Morocco. 114. This is why we are convinced that the solution of the Mauritanian problem dictated by French colonialism can never be permanent. We are still confident that law and justice will prevail. 115. We cannot, therefore, emphasize too strongly the exceptional gravity of any admission of the so~ caUed ftIslamic Republic of Mauritaniaft to member~ ship of the United Nations, when since 1957 my country has constantly informed this Organization of its most serious reservations. Since our accession to independence, we have regularly expressed our reser~ vations in the Fourth Committee; and, as you know, the question. of Mauritania was placed on the agenda 117. In its note of 28 August 1956, the Moroccan Government informed the French Government that it had the strongest reservatiolls, and could not be bound by a unilateral decision prejudging the sovereignty exercised in its territories and the delimitation of Morocco's frontiers. 118. My country has already had occasion, in the organs of the United Nations, ta state a complete case supported by weighty legal and political argumentsnot to speak of what we h~ve set forth in detail in regard to existing ethnie, religious and linguistic ties, which constitute other important factors in the life of nations. 119. Although colonialism in the last few decades has taken every step to erase from the records any trace, in legal and official documents, of the organic ties which made the Mauritanians members ofthe Moroccan national community, and despite the efforts made in that direction by the enemies of our national unity and territorial integrity, there has always been irrefutabl,e evidence of the justification of the Moroccan position. 120. We have drawn attention to evidence of great moral value and have quoted from documents in the French archives which prove that the situation in Mauritania, both in law and in fact, was based on the exercise of real and organized Moroccan sovereignty. One of the attributes of this sovereignty, as we also pointed out, was the circulation of Moroccan currency throughout the province of Mauritania; and officiaIs of aU ranks were assigned by the central authorities to one province or anoiher and recruited in aIl provinces, including Mauritania, without distinction or discrimination. 121. Last year my Government published a White Paper on Mauritania, containingaIl agreements, secret or otherwise, between the European Powers involved in the colonization of Africa, with commentaries; they provide irrefutable proof of frontiers which those Powers now affect to disregard. This White Paper also reproduces aIl the diplomatie notes and documents in which Morocco, both before the Protectorate and since its independence, has constantly protested against the alienation of a part of its territory. 122. We have also shown that there were no grounds for the French delegation's claim that Morocco never 'exercised lasting and effective sovereignty over Mauritania. 124. This policy of dividing a State in order to weaken it, in violation of formaI undertakings towards it, is particularly dangerous for peace and understanding between peoples. 1 need not point out that France's aim, in setting up Mauritania as a fictitious State, is to remain in this part of our country, under a new disguise, to secure strategic bases there, to exploit at will the area's underground wealth, and toincrease the number of French satellites. 125. It was simply an attempt to give legal form to a new kind of exploitation. This new version of the Protectorate over a part of our territory was created in order to serve the purposes of the new form of colonial domination and to deceive the worJd more effectively. 126. At the last session of the General Assembly the Moroccan delegation supplied ample proof that France's economic domination of Mauritania remains, whatever one may say, complete. French and foreign capital has gained control of this territory's mineraI wealth, thus depriving its inhabitants of resources which might have been used to l'aise their level of living. Everything connected with the key sectors of the region's economic life is in the hands of foreign companies or individuals. 1 do not think there is any need to .L..fer once again to such examples as the Mauritanian iron mining company Miferma, the Mauritanian coppel' mining concern Micuma, or the transport and fishing undertakings. 127. Mauritania offers the occupying Power a strategic position important for those who still dreamof separating Central Africa from North Africa and of perpetuating, in this way. their domination of the continent. 128. France has likewise established a substantial military presence. For that purpose, it has equipped five main bases: one at Atar, another at Fort-Trinquet, a staging-post at Fort-Gouraud, an outpost at Ain Ben Tili and a river transport base at Rosso. This information was given by a general at a meeting of the National Defence Commission of the French National Assembly. 129. It would be a senseless illusion to believe that a solution dictated by the needs of the new colonial polic)' in Africa can be imposed on our people and on our Mauritanian compatriots forever. It is Hot by stifling a people's legitimate aspirations and diverting the current of liberationfrom its natural and historical course that the foundations of peace will be strengthened or the necessary fruitful co-operation between the peoples established. 132. 1 cannot, however, go any further without telling the Council how deeply grieved my country has been by the grave and most unjust accusations made against it, accusations which can only be the result of bad faith or of deliberate hostility. No serious argument has been put forward against us, whether on ethnie, historical or legal grounds. The merits of our case, far from being called in question, have been quite simply ignored; and other considerations, completely foreign to justice and law or to historicnl reaUty, have governed the behaviour of certain delegations. This became quite clear during the discussion of the Mauritanian question at the fifteenth session of the General Assembly. We still consider that the Assembly shmùd have refrained from taking into account the selfish interests of any particular group of nations, or friendships and affinities of a more or less ephemeral nature, at the expense of a people's legitimate interests. Since it is the rights of aState Member of this Organization that are involved, those rights should have been taken into consideration first; the trickery of which 1 spoke just now has had the effect of blurring the problem and shifting the discussion away from its true subject. 133. We welcomed the entry, into our Organization, of new African States which were formerly under colonial domination. We remain convinced that their presence among us is of benefit to the international communjty. We had ev,ery reason to believe that they would naturally impress their peoples' deep sense of justice upon thei!' former colonial rulers and that they would remember having themselves been deprived of their rights and their dignity. We expected this aIl the more because we know that they are not yet completely safe from further injustice. 134. As soon as it became independent, Morocco took the side of aIl the peoples that are struggUng for their freedom, thereby sacrificing its most important interests. Can my country be accused of ever having violated this principle? ln the north and south of Africa and throughout the whole continent, there is not one genuinely African cause which ruy King, my Government and my people have not defended with faith and passion. 135. 1 cannot, however, pass over in silence the accusation made last year in certain statements by certain delegations. They asked whether what they called the independence of Mauritania was to be the prey of a new colonialism which dnrec! not speak its name. Is it Morocco which is being accused of colonialist greed, Morocco, whose sons have suffered in French prisons in Ah'ica itself? Has the prisoner of Réunion been so quickly forgotten? The first phase the conquest of Africa had not yet been completed a MOl'occan went to a distant island, much against will, to continue a struggle which he could not 136. And what is to be said of Madagascar? We dare not believe that this last phase of our national struggle has already been forgotten. Did not Mohammed V at Antsirabé bring back the dear memory of an illustrious queen in exile to the Malagasypeople? Morocco still remembers that when in the mosque of Antsirabé Mohammed V besought the Lord to save his people, he prayed also for the salvation and liberation of the Malagasy people. As far as we are concerned, Mohammed VIS memories of exile are directly linked with the Malagasy people's struggle for its freedom. The French jails of Africa stiU echo to the memory of Moroccan leaders sent to distant lands because they fought for the independence of their own country and, even then, for the liberation of aU Africa as weU. 137. I merely wish to remind certain people of past events which they should have borne in mind when making such serious, gratuitous andunjust accusations against my country. 138. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Senegal= the representative of wbich has asked for the floor today, probably in order to support the candidature of the so-caUed Islamic Republic of Mauritania-recognized, in bis last statement to the General Assembly, that: "From the moment that a colonized territory accedes to independence, its new sovereignty must extend to the boundaries of the former colonial sovereignty. ft!!/ My delegation was glad to hear that statement, which undoubted1y reflects wisdom and reason. That is a wise and reasonable policy. So we agree with the distinguished representative of Senegal. But so far as the question before us is concerned, no consideration either of fact or of law, as 1 showed earlier, entitled France to detach a Moroccan province on the eve of Morocco's independence and to make it into an independent State. 139. Morocco, of course, is not a great Power and wishes to see its cause triumph only by the voice of reason and by the action of our international Organi= zation. That is why, refusing to enter into a conflict with France, my country last year took the initiative of requesting that this question be included in the agenda. lt has confidence in the wisdom of the United Nations. 140. Morocco appears as a plaintiff seeking to gain its rights, which the French Government continues to disregard. We have caUed upon aU the peoples of the world to witness the injustice of which we are victims and which France has sought to perpetuate by its efforts to persuade an international organization ta ratify its act of force. Eminent Heads of State have, in the General Assembly of the United Nations, empha= sized the danger of neo-coloniaUsm and its methods. The question of Mauritania is a typical example of such neo-colonialism. It should be noted, moreover, that rule 137 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly reads as follows: "If the Security Council recommends the applicant State for membership the General Assembly shall consider whether the applicant is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter, and shall decide, by a two-thirds majority of the Members present and voting, upon its application for membership". 142. 1 think 1 have given ample proof thatthe Moroccan province of Ma.uritania is not a State as understood in internationallaw or in the Charter. Itis not enough for an applicant, in order to be admitted, to come before our Organization and declare that it undertakes to comply with the obligations of the Charter, when the other two essential conditions laid down in the Charter are not fulfilled. 143. In any case, the applicant does not fulfil, as 1 think 1 have shown, the essential condition: that is, it is not a State in international law. Morocco regards Mauritania as an integral part of its territory, just as it regards itself as an integral part of Mauritania. 144. There are twelve million of us Moroccans, there are twelve million of us Mauritanians. We want our Mauritanian brothers to be given their freedom in order that, they may give effect to their desire to join us, for better Qï:cworse. ls there any need to point out that this desire finds expression every day in the Mauritanian people's hel'oie resistance to the forces which seek to suppress its aspiration to unionwith the northern provinces? We want Morocco, including its southern provinces, to be a complete whole, reuniting a11 its children who were separated under colonial rule; we want aIl its children to join together to build their future in brotherhood, bringing peace, progress, prosperity and social justice to the Moroccan people as a whole. 145. It is, therefore, with faith in the wisdom of this Organization that, on behalf of the Kingdom of Morocco and with the utmost seriousness, 1 urge the members of the Council to make sure that the votes which they 147. In the first place, 1 am sorry that in his speech the representative of Morocco sawfit to use, in regard to my country, words which are certainly ungracious and which in sorne cases, if he re-reads them carefully, he may even find insulting. 148. The representative of Morocco has dealt once more with the whole question of Mauritania, as he is entitled to do. 1 should merely like to say that his arguments, which have already been putforward in the First Committee, were refuted by my delegation at the time and that 1 have nothing to add to what was said on the matter in the First Committee. 149. The representative of Morocco also said that the question of Mauritania was a Franco-Moroccan problem, or rather a French problem. Obviously it is convenient to put things in that way, because in doing so one avoids, or seems to avoid, attackingthe people, Government and State of Mauritania; yet it is in fact these quarters that he is attacking, because it was the Mauritanian people which, by an overwhelming majority, demanded its independence. It was that people which estabHshed the Islamic Republic of Mauritania and chose the Government that today, for the second time, is requesting that this young State be admitted to membership of the United Nations. 150. France is in no way a party to this debate. If France had not granted Mauritania the independence and sovereignty which its people demanded, what could it have done? Logically there would have been only two possibilities for my country: to keep Mauritania under a system of colonial administration which we are abolishing everywhere, or to sacrüice itto the Moroccan claims, which do not seem justified. Who in this hall, 1 ask you, could have advised France to follow either of those two courses? 151. Twenty-five years ago-together withaMinister who is no longer with us, a man of warm and generous heart-I strongly advocated the emancipation of Morocco. 1 hope the representative of Morocco will allow me, as a sincere and devoted friend of his country, to repeat to him that France has only one desire: to see close, confident and cordial relations established between Mauritania and its neighbours both to the north and to the south, since such relations are clearly in line with that country's destinyand will lead to friendship and peace in this part of the world. 152. In order to shorten the discussion, and because it is already late, 1 shall not insist on my right to have my statement interpreted into English, ifour Englishspeaking colleagues have no objection.

The Council has heard the proposaI of the representative of France. If there is no objection, from now on we would then do without consecutive interpretations and the debate would proceed in that way. It is so decided. It was so decided., 155. Before this endorsement by the General Assembly, several international organizations had already admitted the Islamic Republic of Mauritania to membership. These were the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, the Commission for Technical Co-operation in Africa South of the Sahara, and finally the Economic Commission for Africa. an official organ of the Economic and Social Council. which is itself an official organ of the United Nations. 156. It should be noted that, when Mauritaniawas admitted to the Economic Commission for Africa. all the Member States of the Economic and Social Council including the Soviet Union, voted for its admission. 157. :M:auritania was subsequently admitted to the World Health Organization and to the International Labour Organisation. 158. 1 would point out that. when a vote was taken on the admission of Mauritaniato the International Labour Organisation. representatives of Moroccan workersthe representatives of the Union of Moroccan Workers-did not vote against Mauritania. They abstained, because they did not want to endorse any attempt by one independent African State to annex another independent African State. 159. Mauritania was also admitted to the Conference of African Countries on Broadcasting and Television. 160. 1 hope the Council will allow me here to make a slight digression. in reply to something which the representative of Morocco said about a statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Senegal. 161. It istrue that the Senegalese Minister for Foreign Affairs said here that, when former colonial countries became independent, their territorial boundaries should be the same as those they had had in the colonial era. Thisis a wise legal rule, which was established in the past by former colonies in Latin America. But the representative of Morocco distorted the meaning of this statementbythe Senegalese Minister for Foreign Affairs. 162. Let us consider the facts. Morocco became independent long before the colony of Mauritania and, at the attaining of independence, did not ask France not to sign the independence agreements until Mauritania had been incorporated in Moroccan territory. Mauritania remained a colony for some time after Morocco had become independent; it was only five or six years laterthat Mauritaniagained its independence, in the same way as the twelve states of the Brazzaville group. 163. Thus Mauritania, in the colonial era, was not an integral part of the Moroccan colony.Itwas a separate colony. That is why F'1'ance did not incorporate Mauritania in Morocco when Morocco became independent and why we cannot agree to Morocco's demand for its annexation nowthat Mauritaniahas obtained its national independence in the same way as Morocco, Senegal 165. Moreover, less than four months ago, a presidential election took place in the Islamic Republic of Mauritania-and here 1 take up the ideajustexpressed by the representative of France. The Mauritanian peoples themselves-all the Mauritanianpoliticalparties, reconciled in a vast national union-elected President Mokhtar Ould Daddah by a majority of over 90 per cent. 166. This shows that Mauritania, both in its internaI and in its external affairs, fulfils the conditions for membership of our Organization. 167. Sùch are the reasons why Senegal asks youtoday to take into account the General Assembly resolution of 19 April 1961 and to recommend, for your part, the admission of Mauritania to membership in the United Nations.

Mr. President, the delegation of the Ivory Coast first wishes to thank you andthe other members of the Council for allowing it totakepart in the debate on the admission of Mauritania. 169. Some weeks ago, you had on your agenda applications for the admission of three countries, two of which were African-Sierra Leone, Mauritania and Outer Mongolia. Mauritania was then applying for the second time, and Africans felt deep concern, particularly because the wind of nationalism was stillblowing through Africa. Countries werebecoming independent, yet it began to seem doubtful whether t4ey would receive the approval of the worId Organization. Butwe were relieved to note the quick and easy admission of Sierra Leone. 170. However, although Africa rejoiced at this advance in status, we must admit that its rejoicing was tinged with great bitterness, particularly as for nearly a year one African country, Mauritania, hadhadto cope with enormous difficulties arising out of the ftcold war ft and taxing the young state far beyond its capacities. Mauritania was a hostage in the war between the great Powers; but, since it belonged to neither camp, no one was interested in its captive status except the s~all countries, its brothers. 171. Mauritania brings your Council face tofacewith a problem of conscience, of law, of international ethics and even of co-operation between the two most important bodies of our Organïzation-the General Assembly and the Security C"uncil. 173. On 28 November 1960 Mauritaniaproclaimedits independence and on the sarne day it applied for admission to the United Nations [S/4563]. But, at the sarne time, another formerly colonial cvuntry of Africa submitted to our Organization territorial claims involving nothing less than the outright annexation of the young state. The First Committee disinterested itself in the matter, adjourning its discussion without taking any decision. And although inthe Security Council the admission of Mauritania was supported by 8 votes to 1, the Councilcouldmakenorecommendation, since the single opposing vote was that of the Soviet Union, a permanent member of the Council and, as such, holding the right of veto. 174. Faced with this flagrant injustice, however, the United Nations General Assembly, observing legality and given the opinion of the International Court of Justice, considered itself competent to aid the admission of Mauritania, in accordance with its interpretation of the spirit of Article 4 of the Charter. It did aIl that it could be declaring, in its resolution 1602 (XV), that Mauritania fulfilled the conditions laid down in Article 4 of the Charter, and by requestingthe Security Counci! to draw the necessary inference and agree to the admission of Mauritania. 175. These are the difficulties withwhichyour Council is faced. But my delegation believes that they can be quickly overcome if, throughout the debate, each member of the Council seeks solely to ensure the complete application of the Charter and to establish whether the conditions laid down in Article 4 have been fulfilled. Any other consideration can onlybe subjective, will divert you from equity and justice and must therefore lack any legal basis. The judicial precedents of the United Nations, and particularly the opinion given by the International Court of Justice on 28 May 1948,!Y show that the application of Article 4 involves five objective questions: Is the candidate a state? Is it peace-loving? Does it accept the obligations contained in the Charter? Is it able to carry out those obligations? Is it willing to carry them out? 176. We have been told that Mauritania was not a State according to international law, but we have not been told what the definition of a State in international law is. We have been told that Mauritania was not independent, although sixty-three countries have recognized it. 1 do not know whether Morocco has its own private and occult standards for assessing independence; but the fact is that Katanga, although it proclaims its independence, has not been recognized !Y Admission of aState to the United Nations (Charter, Art. 4), AdvisorYOpinion: I.C.]. Reports 1948, p. 57. 177. No one can doubt that Mauritania's territorial boundaries are internationally recognized. Nor is there any doubt that the country has a Government whose writ runs throughout the territory, and a sovereign assembly whe::.e sovereignty is limited only by that territory's boundaries. Moreover, the country has adhered to the Charter and the principles of human rights, as the preamble to its Constitution shows. The Government of Mauritania is the outcome of universal suffrage and is recognized by sixty-three States, MoSt of which are Members of our Organization. Maurit~nia is a member of almost aH the international bodiesincluding the InternaHonal Civil Aviation Organization, the World Health Organization, the Universal Postal Union, the International Labour Organisation, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Co-ordinating Committee of Technical Assistance-and has diplomatic relations with them, which proves that it is able to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter. 178. It is not a country suffering from domestic crises. Its political system has a stabilitywhichmany states Members of the United Nations might envy. Its people has achieved unity around the President, Mokhtar.Ould Daddah, recently elected President of the Republic by the almost unanimous vote of his people, under a system of universal suffrage. i 79. It is therefore clear that Mauritania fulfils aIl the conditions laid down in Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Ch.arter, as two-thirds of the Members of our Organization agreed in General Assembly resolution ..1'602 (XV). 180. But, men being what they are, and countries-as weIl as this Council-being made up of men, there is no doubt that, try as youmaytoremain objective, your minds will from time to time be distracted by subjective considerations. That is why my delegation, without departing in any way from its guiding principles of equity, justice and legality, will try to make a brief analysis of these subjective considerations. 181. The territorial demand of Morocco would mean the annexation, not to say recolonization, of an African Territory only recently decolonized. Morocco has some support in the League of Arab States. This is commendable; but such support is based on solidarity, not on firm conviction. Of the twenty-six countries of Africa, Morocco can draw support for its clairn from five, of which two are in the Arab League and three are located in the southern area of Africa. Of these three last-named countries, one, byinvitingPresident Ould Daddah to pay it an official visit, has recognized him de facto. The other two, as members of the former Federation of French West Africa, were able to give their true opinion of the problem in 1957, when the Grand Council of French West Africadeclaredthatthe Moroccan claims were groundless. The rest is only 183. Mauritania is said to be a result of the dismemberment of Morocco. I may say, in passing, that I cannot see why France should be concerned ·about this. It is true that the Berlin Conference of 1885 dismembered aIl Africa, because of colonization. AlI the countries you have admitted here, it must be agreed, are the creation of colonial Powers, andtheir boundaries are those fixed by the Berlin Conference. The Republic of the Ivory Coast,the Republic of Upper Volta, the Republic of Mali, the Republic of Guinea, and the Reputilic of Ghana-aIl arise from the Berlin Conference, from dismemberment pure and simple. We are trying to fit, into the framework we have received, the content of astate, with aIl the economic attributes of a state and with a national outlook. If the African countries on achieving their independence, decided to revise the frontiers bequeathed to them by colonial rule, they would be involved indomesticwars which would become an issue between East and West and would soon disturb international peace and security. Africa needs peace. It has no right to add to international tension. 184. We perfectly understand the moving speech just made by our Moroccan colleague. But here the whole problem of colonial rule arises. As I listened to him, I wondered whether the Ivory Coast should make a claim, or the Upper Volta; for you must know that the Upper Volta was once the Upper Ivory Coast, and that the present Ivory Coast was the Lower Ivory Coast; and I do not know which of these two countries should claim sovereignty over the whole territory of the Ivory Coast-Upper Volta. The same is true of the Ivory Coast and Ghana. We cannot, therefore, spend our time revising the geography of Africa. As the Senegalese Minister for Foreign Affairs has said, we, as new countries concerned with something more than territorial claims, must follow the wise precedents set by the countries of Latin America. 185. May I remind the Council that twenty-one out of the twenty-five independent countries of Africa, meeting at Monrovia under the chairmanship of the President of the Republic of Liberia, Ml'. Tubman, supported Mauritania's request for admission? How could it be otherwise? How could the Security Council, the guardian of peace and security, countenance a territorial claim which history identifies as a source of danger to the peace, and of international conflict? How could the guardians of the Charter disregard the right to self-determination of a country like Mauritania, which has chosen to be a republican and democratic state, possesses a National Assembly, andhas a Constitution that recogni7~es the sovereignty of the people and establishes a Government of the people, by the people for the people? 187. My Government is one of those whichbelieve thëu the United Nations should be a genuinely representative Organization in which different political and social systems can coexista 188. It is glad that your recent vote has remedied this injustice of which Mongolia was a victim, and that henceforth this country will be able to take part in our Organization. But whatever the injusticedoneto Mongolia at that time, in that it was prevented from enjoying this right like all thefree states of the 'lIIorld, the veto against the admission of Mauritania remains a glaringly improper act, all the more distressing because this young state has no part whatever in the disastrous struggle for influence which divides East and West. To make the admission of one state dependent on the admission of other states is contrary to the Charter and to the advisory opinion of 28 May 1948 of the International Court of Justice. It cannot be said that the International CoUrt cf Justice was not explicit when it gave the opinion which l have just quoted. It is clear, therefore, that difficulty and illegality can be avoided only if we adopt the one reasonable criterion open to us, as set forth in the five objective requirements defined by the Court: to be a state, to be peace-Ioving, to accept the obligations contained in the Charter, to be able to carry out those obligations, and to be willing to carry them out. 189. The General Assembly, one of the two most important bodies of our Organization, has tried on several occasions to help the Security Council resolve these contradictions. It has addressed itself to the Council, either asking it to examine afresh the application of the state whose adm,ïssion the Council had not recommended, or makiilg a preliminary statement recognizing the qualifications of the candidate state and asking the Council to examine the state's application afresh in the light of that statement. 190. But it must be admitted that General Assem">ly resolution 1602 (XV) is unique both in form and in substance. It expresses the deep emotion felt by the majority of the General Assembly's Members when, on that night of 3-4 December l.fJ60, they learnt that the young state of M:'lritania ha ~~ become a victim of the cold war. It also shows the desperate efforts of the sma11 Powers to make the great Powers admit that the law of the stronger is not the law of justice and that might does not take precedence of right. 191. Thus this resolution reminds us of our Organization's calI to universality and stresses the importance of admitting a11 candidate States which fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 4 ofthe Charter. It 192. My delegation does Mt think tnat, in doing this, the General Assembly has overstepped its powers; quite the contrary. We believe that it acted as it did because of its desire to help, and that for this reason you should accept the recommendation of twothirds of your colleagues. In this connexion mydelegationnotes with satisfaction that this concern has since 1947 been shared by a considerable number of states; and 1 will quote the statement made by the United states on 21 August 1947, when it submitted to the Security Council a draft resolution under which the Council requested the General Assembly to examine the qualifications of candidates whose applications had been rejected, on the understanding that the Council would immediately recommend to the General Assembly the admission of aH of those said states whichthe Assembly considered to have met the necessary requirements. The United states representative said: "My Government has opposed certain applications, and in the General Assembly will continue to oppose them unless the reasons for our opposition change. However, in an instance of this type we should not desire our opposition to be the determining factor in keeping out of the Organization astate which, in the opinion of a two-thirds majority ofthe Members of the United Nations, would meet the qualifications. 1 submit that any other permanent member should consider taking the same attitude." W In fact, this is V/hat the United states representative has just done in showing that nis Government's policy remains unchanged, by announcing that it will not oppose the admission of Outer Mongolia and referring to General Assembly resolution 1602 (XV). 193. More than two thirds of your colleagues, Mr. President, believe in aIl sincerity that Mauritania fulfils the requiremerrt$ laid down in Article 4 of the Charter for membership of the United ~~ations. They have informed you of this in the letterto you from the President of the General Assembly.W containingresolution 1602 (XV). 194. For some years our Organizationhasbeengoing through a crisis of prestige because its resolutions are flouted. ls the Security Council going to join the ranks of the detractors of the United Nations? That is not possible: it would be an irremediable and mortal attack directed against our noble Organization by the very body whose responsibility it is to safeguard itnamely, the Security Council.

May 1 respectfully remind aIl the representatives around this table that it is now seven o'clock and, at the same time, that since the General Assembly is in session during' these months, it is not always easy or convenient to have as many sessions of the Security Council as we would like without inconveniencing the work ofthe General Assembly. Therefore, whenever the representatives would find it possible, it would be a great help if we could have brevity in the remaining statements in this debate. This, of course, is a suggestion of the President in view of the particulaI' difficulties of co-ordinating our work with the General Assembly. 197. Ml'. YOST (United states of America): 1 shallbe happy to follow your recommendation, Ml'. President, and he e:-..i:remely briei. The United States has maintained cordial relations with the Islamic Republic of Mauritania since November 1960 when Mauritania's independence was proclaimed. Last December the Security Council met for the purpose of recommending Mauritania for admission to the United Nations as it had done with so many other new Mrican States which we welcomed into our midst last year. Unhappily, this proved impossible in the case of Mauritania. The United states shared the disappointment of the Government of Mauritania and of other African states. We rejoice therefore at the prospect of achieving today the end we sought a year ago. 198. The United States believes that Mauritania's application is justified in accordance with tha criteria laid down in the Charter and that Mauritania is entitled to membership. Today we have a new opportunity to send the General Assembly a favourable recommendation. We believe that this should be done forthwith. The United states is confident that the people of Mauritania, as they take their place among us, will remain dedicated to the principles expressed in the Charter and that their leaders will devote their energies untiringly to the cause of peace. The United states extends new greetings to Mauritania and welcornes the opportunity to vote in favour of the draft resolution [S/4967] before us sponsored by France and Liberia. 199. Ml'. LOUTF1 (United Arab Republic) (translated from French): 1 shall bear your suggestion in mind, Ml'. President. 200. In its various statements, both inthe First Committee on 25 November 1960 and in the General Assembly on 19 April 1961, the delegation of the United Arab Republic clearly set out its views with regard to the problem of Mauritania. It is not my intention today to review in detai! .all the arguments that were adduced; but 1 should like briefly to recall some of the reasons which prompted our attitude. 201. At the very beginning of the negotiations with France about independence, the Moroccan Government 202. It was in this way that a "question of Mauritania" came into being: Morocco could neither agree to the dismemberment of its territory nor permitthat its opinion should not be asked with regard to the future of Mauritania. 203. Later, the problem grew more complicated as a result of the referendum held on28 September 1958, by which France consulted the Mauritanians about their future but did not ask them whether or not they desired to join Morocco. 204. The arguments advanced by the representative of Morocco in the brilliant statement which he made today have fully convinced us, and we cannot do other than support his point of view. Moreover, the Arab states which met at Chtaura in 1960 decidedto support the Moroccan position. The same attitude was taken by the African countries which met at Casablancathis year. 205. For all these reasons we cannot support the request for admission which is before the Counci!. We hope, nevertheless, that the problem will be settled to the satisfaction of all concerned. 206. Ml'. TSIANG (China): My Government has recognized the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. We have succeeded in establishing cordial diplomatie relations with this new African state. In the opinion of my Government and my delegation, Mauritania is fully qualified for membership in the United Nations. It will therefore be a pleasure for me tovote in favour of the draft resolution [S/4967] of France and Liberia. Iwish only to add that in casting this vote my Government and delegation intend to convey to the people of Mauritania our best wishes for prosperity and progresse 207. l wish also to take advantage of this present occasion to congratulate France once more for the honourable part that France has played in the long process of the peaceful progressive development from colonial dependence to national independence of Mauritania.

At the end of last year this Council considered the application of Mauritania, then newly born as an independent state, for membership in the United Nations. l was able on to express my country's pleasure at seen Mauritaniabecome, fil'st, a self-governing the French Community, and then the in- 209. When the Council last considered Mauritania's application, the First Committee of the Assembly had already endorsed its right to independence and my delegation warmly supported its claim to membership alongside the other new Members whom we were proud to admit at the füteenth session of the Genêral Assembly. My delegation was therefore Litterly disappointed that the 911th meeting of this Co.uncilhad to submit to the Assembly a special report !§I to the effect that because of the negative vote ofone of the five permanent members, the candidature of Mauritania must fail. The reasons for this misfortune were in no way connected with any sin, whether of omission or commission, on the part of Mauritania itself. 210. Time is marching on and through no fault of its own Mauritania approaches the anniversary of its full independence and is still debarred from membership. I hope and believe that the objections raised last year no longerexist and I trust that no further delay will be imposed. 211. In these circumstances the Council will, I feel sure, heed the requestof the Gene~al Assembly, in its resolution 1602 (XV) of 19 April 1961, asking us to note the Assembly's view that Mauritania is qualified and should be admitted to membership of the United Nations. The application of Mauritania has my delegation's warm and whole-hearted support.

It is a rule with my delegation to endeavour to co-operate, both in the Council and in the General Assembly, to be silent at the proper time and not to speak more than is necessary. 1 am sorry that 1 cannot he silent now, because 1 am obliged to comment on some ideas that have been putforwar9 in this debate. 213. 1 listened with great interest and respect to the brilliant statement made by the representative of Morocco and 1 should like to assure him of the warm sympathy of my delegation and my country for his country, not only hecause of the historicbonds arising from our common Hispano-Arabic heritage but also because of our great admirationfor the valiant struggle it waged to obtain emancipation. . 214. In his statement the representative of Morocco referred to two principles. These are of the greatest importance to my delegation, which will vote infavour of the admission of Mauritania. 215. The first principle, to which he referred in connexion with a speech by the Prime Minister of Senegal, 216. My Government is particularly anxious to declare, through my delegation, its unbounded respect for the principle of uti possidetis juris, which is the foundation of our existence as aState. It is also very anxious to state that it cannot in any way accept the principle ofthe self-determination of minorities, which was the disastrous Nazi doctrine of the "Anschluss." 217. In defence of these two principles, l should like to refer, as briefly as possible, to the present case. The representative of Morocco has said-if l understood him rightly-that it matters little to himwhether Morocco was part of Mauritania or Mauritania part of Morocco. My delegation attaches particular importance to this historical question, for it will determine what constituted the territory of the Moroccan State at the time of its emancipation. Secondly, l should like to call attention to the Senegalese representative's remark that, when Morocco became an independentState, it made no specifie demands with regard to the existence of another colony already established with its own territory-that colony beingMauritania, whichhas now acquired independence as aState. 218. With regard to the application of the principle of self-determination to national minorities, l should like to say that my delegation dGes not consider that the present case is one of the dismemberment and annexation of part of the territory of another State because of the existence of national minorities. It is a question of the creation of a new State, a new and substantive entity, whose application for admission to the United Nations is fully justified. 219. Lastly, l should like to state that my delegation views the apprehensions of the representative of Morocco and of a large number of Arab States with deep concern and sympathy: but it considers that, in voting for the admission of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania to the United Nations, it is recognizing the principle of self-determination of a nation which becornes a State and is then admitted to membership, and that this will make it easier in the future, should it prove necessary, for both States to cometa an understanding so that, if they both so desire they may eventually achieve Integration.

l now wish to speak in my capacity as representative of TURKEY, and following the suggestion which l made as President ofthe Council, l shaIl indeed be brief. My delegation will vote in favour of the application of Mauritania.

l too, shall be very brief. As we know, the question of Mauritania's admission was considered in thef'ecurity CouncilDecember 1960 and in the General Assembly at its resumed fifteenth session. 222. The Mauritanian people have played apartinthe common struggle of the colonial peoples for their liberation and, with the support of other nations, have 224. Our position was clearly stated in the First Committee of the General Assembly and inthe Security Council in the meeting of 3-4December last. Furthermore. we think that considerations put forward at this meeting of the Security Council by the representative of Morocco cannot be brushed aside. 225. While we strongly support the colonial peoples' just struggle for independence. we realize that the colonialists try to circumscribe the granting of independence by reservations of aH kinds and that they resort to various manoeuvres. includingthe territorial partition of their former colonies. with a view to retaining their political ard economic influence in the new States. 226. Nevertheless. we consider that even when the independence granted to colonies is far from complete it sets free national forces and brings the former colonies closer to genuine i~dependence. These remarks also apply to Mauritania. 227. Taking all the foregoing into account. we are unable to vote in favour of Mauritania's admission to membership in the United Nations and shall abstainin the vote on the draft resolution before us.

I have no other speakers on my list. May I assume that the Council is now ready to vote on the draft resolution regarding the admission of the Islamic Republic of Mauretania. I shall therefore put to the vote the draft resolution si4967 which has been submitted by the delegations ofFrance and Liberia. A vote was taken by show of hands. In favour: Ceylon. Chile, China, Ecuador. France. Liberia. Turkey. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. United States of America. Against: United Arab Republic. Abstaining: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 231. Before making that statement. however. I should like to refer very briefly to the two points raised by the representative of Ecuador. since they involve a question of international law. I shall not reply to the 233. When the representative ofEcuador speaks ofthe establishment of a new State, we must be clear about what is meant. What was this new State in the past? Was it an independent State which hadbeenannexed by a colonialist country, or was it part of another State bearing the name of Morocco? That is the whole ques- tion, and l think l have already given a positive answer: that part of the country which France wishes to set up as an independent State has always been an integral part of the Sherifian Empire of Morocco. 234. Consequently, the questionofself-determination cannot in any way arise in connexion with the matter before the Council. The expression "self-determina- tion" is used when it is a question of aState which already existed, which was already in being before an attempt was made to turn it into a sovereign State. l think l have demonstrated to the Council that Mauri- tania was never a State in the eyes of international law. You are aware of the conditions with which a State, in the sense used in international law, must comply in order to be admitted to the United Nations. My deduction is that this State, which does not fulfil the conditions required by international law, cannot in any circumstances be made into aState independent of Morocco. 235. l should now like to make another statement on behalf of my delegation. It was with feelings of con- sternation and deep distress that we heard the grave decision just taken by the Council. We were greatly surprised and profoundly shocked that the Security Council, despite the clear and incontrovertible evi- dence laid before it on many occasions-the most recent was only a few moments ago-by the Moroccan delegation, should have disregarded our claim and ignored our legitimate and internationally recognized rights. 236. It is a most regrettable circumstance that that decision, so unjust towards Morocco, was in no way reached on the bLais of the facts of the case or of an adequate consideration of the Mauritanianquestion. So far as l can see, this recommendation was made in deference to interests which have nothing to do with the question of Mauritania. 237. The way in which certain views and attitudes have changed reveals the approach adopted towards the consideration of this question, despite its vital importance to us lind to the future of the United Nations. 238. The higher interests of my country have been sacrificed to other interests which, however important may be, should never have been linked to a prob- 239. l should like to make the following comments. The haste with which the decision to recommend the admission of this puppet State has beentaken-without any attempt to hold a proper inquiry onthe spot, which would have revealed the true facts of the problem and made it possible to recognize the authentically Moroc- can character of this territory in the South of my country and the genuine, unanimous desire of its in- habitants to remain with the Mother Country-consti- tutes a grave injustice to Morocco and a flagrant vio- lation of the principles of the United Nations Charter. It sets a dangerous precedent which may openthe way to colonialism and enable it to go on dismembering, dividing up and weakening every country which has just attained independence. 240. It is' the duty of the 8ecurity Council to maintain peace and security in the various parts of the world; in fact, the name givento this body defines its purpose. 241. There is a danger that the recommendation, just made by the Council, that the so-called Republic of Mauritania be admitted may create another centre of international tension in a part of the world which is already restive. 242. At the very time when the First Committee of the General Assembly is giving priority to an attempt to frame a recommendation for the immediate cessation of nuclear tests, this Council has adopted a recom- mendation which constitutes tacit recognition of the military and nuclear ba'ses forcibly installed, by the French Army, in this part of our national territory. That is the unfortunate result of the bargainingand the more or less clandestine agreements that have been reached, about which the representative of Nàtionalist China has fully enlightened us. 243. Furthermore, this recommendation provides colonialism with the means for reconquering terri- tories that have been set freeandforundertaking what is nothing less than a recolonization of the whole of Africa. This is a state of affairs which threatens security, stability and peace, not only in Morocco and Africa but in the world as a whole. 244. In the name of His Majesty King Hassan II and of the Moroccan Government and people, l have the honour to make a strong and formaI protest against the recommendation just adoptedby the Security Coun- cil, and to draw the attention of the Council and of the United Nations to the grave consequences of this decision. When this question comes once more before the General Assembly, we shallaskthatbodyto reflect deeply and to realize clearly where its duty lies.

Under these circumstances the Council has now terminated the consideration of the two items which figured inits agenda today. AU necessary documents will be transmitted to the General Assembly. The meeting rose at 7.30 p.m. AFRICJ!I/AFRIQUE BELGIUM/llELGIQUE: ET MESSAGERIES DE 14·22, rue du Persil, CZECHOSLOVAKIA/TCHÉCOSLOVAQUIE: éESKOSLOVENSKY SPISOVATEL Narodni nlda 9, Praha DENMARK/DANEMARK: EJNAR~' 'lKSGAARD, Nl2lrrega<,- 6, Kl2lbenhavn, FINLAND/FINLANDE: AKATEEMINEN KIRJAKAUPPA 2 Keskuskatu, Helsinki. FRANCE: ÉDITIONS 13, rue Soufflot, Paris GERMANY (FED~RAL ALLEmAGNE (RÉPUBLIQUE R. EISENSCHMIDT Schwanthaler Str. 59, ELWERT UND MEURER Hauptstrasse 101. Berlin·Schëneberg. ALEXANDER HORN Spiegelgasse 9, Wiesbaden. W. E. SAARBACH Gertrudenstrasse 30, GREECE/GRtCE: LIBRAIRIE KAUFFMANN 28, rue du Stade, Athènes. ICELAND/ISLANDE: BÔKAVERZLUN SIGFOSAR EYMUNDSSONAR H. Austurstraeti 18, Reykjavik, IRELAND/IRLANDE: Dublin. ITALY/ITALIE: LIBRERIA COMMISSIONARIA Via Gino Capponi 26, & Via D. A. Azuni 15/A, LUXEMBOURG: LIBRAIRIE SCHUMMER Place du Théâtre, Luxembourg. NETHERLANDS/PAY5-BAS: N. V. MARTINUS NIJHOFF Lange Voorhout 9, 's·Gravenhage. NORWAY/NORVÈGE: JOHAN GRUNDT TANUM Karl Johansgate. 41, PORTUGAL: L1VRARIA 186 Rua Aurea, Lisboa. SPAIN/ESPAGNE: L1BRERIA BOSCH 11 Ronda Universidad, L1BRERIA MUNDI·PRENSA Castello 37, Madrid. SWEDEN/SUÈDE: C. KUNGL. HOVBOKHANDEL Fredsgatan 2, Stockholm. SWITZERLAND/SUISSE: LIBRAIRIE PAYOT, S. Lausanne, Genève. HANS RAUNHARDT Kirchgasse 17, Zürich TURKEY/TURQUIE: LIBRAIRIE HACHETTE 469 Istiklal Caddesi, UNION OF SOYIET SOCIALIST UNIO". DES REPUBLIQUES SOVIETIQUES: MEZHDUNARODNAYA KNYIGA, Smolenskaya UNITED KINGDOM/ROYAUME-UNI: H. M. STATIONERY P. O. Box 569, London, (and HMSO branches Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, YUGOSLAVIA/YOUGOSLAVIE: CANKARJEVA ZALOZBA Ljubljana, Siovenia. DRZAVNO PREDUZECE 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.), LTC. Church Street, Box 724, Pretoria. UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC/ RfPUBLIQUE ARABE UNIE: LIBRAIRIE "LA RENAISSANCE D'ÉGYPTE" 9 Sh. Adly Pasha, Cairo. ASIA/ASIE BURMA/BIRMANIE: CURATOR. GOVT. BOOK DEPOT, Rangoon. CAMBODIA/CAMBODGE: ENTREPRISE KHM~RE DE LIBRAIRIE Imprimerie & Papeterie, S. à R. L., Phnom·Penh. CEYLON/CEYLAN: LAKE HOUSE BOOKSHOP Assoc. Newspapers of Ceylon, P. O. Box 244, Colombo. CHINA/CHINE: THE WORLD BOOK COMPANY, LTD. 99 Chung King Road, lst·Section, Taipeh, Taiwan. THE COMMERCIAL PRESS, LTD. 211 Honan Road, Shanghai. HONG KONG/HONG.KONG: THE SWINDON BOOK COMPANY 25 Nathan Road, Kowloon. INOIA/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 Sahari 84, Djakarta. JAPAN/JAPON: MAFlUZEN COMPANY, LTD. 6 Tori·Nichome, Nihonbashi, Tokyo. KOREA (REP. OF)fCORÉE (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. SINGAPORE/SINGAPOUR: THE CITY BOOK STORE, LTD., Collyer Quay. THAILAND/THAïLANDE: PRAMUAN MIT, LTD. 55 Ch~jm"wat Road, Wat Tuk, Bangkok. VIET.NÀM (REP. OF/RÉP. OU): L1BRAIRIE·PAPETERIE XUÂN THU 185, rue Tu·do, B. P. 283, Saïgon. EUROPE AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE: GEROLD & COMPANY Graben 31, Wien, l. B. WÜLLERSTORFF Markus Sittikusstrasse 10, Salzburg. Orders and inquiries from countries where sales agencies have not yet been or to Sales Section, United Nations, Palais Les commandes et demandes de renseignements émanant de pays où il n'existe ONU, New York (É..U.), ou à la Section des ventes, Priee: $U.S. 0.50; 3/6 stg.; (or equivalent in other eurrencies) Litho in U.N.