Question of Palestine home
7 June 1967
1349th MEETING: 7 JUNE 1967
Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1349) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Adoption of the agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Letter dated 23 May 1967 from the Permanent Representatives of Canada and
Denmark addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7902). . . 1
Complaint of the representative of the United Arab Republic in a letter
to the President of the Security Council dated 27 May 1967 entitled:
"Israel aggressive policy, its repeated aggression threatening peace
and security in the Middle East and endangering international peace
and security" (S/7907) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Letter dated 29 May 1967 from the Permanent Representative of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland addressed to
the President of the Security Council (S/7910) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
THIRTEEN HUNDRED AND FORTY-NINTH MEETING
Held in New York, on Wednesday, 7 June 1967, at 1 p.m.
President: Mr. Hans R. TABOR (Denmark)
The representatives of the following States: Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Denmark, Ethiopia, France, India, Japan, Mali, Nigeria, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.
1. Adoption of the agenda.
2. Letter dated 23 May 1967 from the Permanent Representatives of Canada and Denmark addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7902).
3. Complaint of the representative of the United Arab Republic in a letter to the President of the Security Council dated 27 May 1967 entitled: "Israel aggressive policy, its repeated aggression threatening peace and security in the Middle East and endangering international peace and security" (S/7907).
4. Letter dated 29 May 1967 from the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7910).
Adoption of the agenda
The agenda was adopted.
Letter dated 23 May 1967 from the Permanent Representatives of Canada and Denmark addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7902)
Complaint of the representative of the United Arab Republic in a letter to the President of the Security Council dated 27 May 1967 entitled: "Israel aggressive policy, its repeated aggression threatening peace and security in the Middle East and endangering international peace and security" (S/7907)
Letter dated 29 May 1967 from the Permanent Representatives of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/7910)
1. The PRESIDENT: In accordance with the decisions previously taken by the Council, I shall now, with the I consent of the Council, invite the representatives of Israel, the United Arab Republic, Jordan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Lebanon, Iraq, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Tunisia and Libya to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber in order to participate without vote in the discussion.
At the invitation of the President, Mr A. Eban (Israel), Mr. M. A. El Kony (United Arab Republic), Mr. M. H. El-Farra (Jordan), Mr. G. J. Tomeh (Syria), Mr. S. Chammas (Lebanon), Mr. K. Khalaf (Iraq), Mr. A. T. Benhima (Morocco), Mr. G. Al-Rachach (Saudi Arabia), Mr. G. A. Al-Rashid (Kuwait), Mr. M. Mestiri (Tunisia) and Mr. W. El Bouri (Libya) took the places reserved for them
2. The PRESIDENT
In response to an urgent request received this morning from the Permanent Representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, I consulted my colleagues on the Council and convened this meeting at short notice, in accordance with the understanding that members would, hold themselves in readiness should the circumstances or the developments necessitate the convening of a meeting at short notice.
3. The Security Council will now continue its discussion of the three items inscribed on its agenda.
4. Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Repub
lics) (translated from Russian):
My delegation has asked for an urgent meeting of the Security Council in connection with the situation in the Near East.
5. Yesterday evening
the Security Council, as we all know, unanimously adopted resolution 233 (1967) calling for an immediate cease-fire and a cessation of military activities in the Near East. In so doing the Council took a decision that Israel's aggression against the Arab States should cease immediately and unconditionally. But the information now being received demonstrates beyond doubt that the forces of the aggressor are continuing their military activities, in disregard of the Security Council resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire.
6. May I say that my delegation has at yesterday's meeting explained its position of principle and given its assessment of the events occurring in the Near East area. We should now like to confirm this position and assessment of ours once again.
7. The Soviet Union decisively and categorically condemns Israel's absolutely unjustified aggression against the Arab States. We feel we must stress the fact that the continuation of military activities by the aggressor, in defiance of the Security Council's resolution, may create an even more menacing situation in the area. We consider that this is not the time for any postponements or procrastination. The Soviet Union for its part believes that the Security Council should without any delay demand, as a first step, a cease-fire and a cessation of all military activities in this area at 2000 hours GMT on 7 June.
8. Accordingly we are introducing the following draft resolution:
"The Security Council,
that, in spite of its appeal to the Governments concerned to take forthwith as a first step all measures for an immediate cease-fire and for a cessation of all military activities in the Near East
military activities in the area are continuing,
that the continuation of military activities may create an even more menacing situation in the area,
that the Governments concerned should as a first step cease fire and discontinue all military activities at 2000 hours GMT on 7 June 1967;
the Secretary-General to keep the Council promptly and currently informed on the situation."
9. The USSR delegation insists on an immediate vote. I should like to stress that we are not raising a new question, but responding to the need to ensure compliance with the resolution which the Security Council adopted yesterday, in view of the extremely serious situation in the Near East.
10. The Security Council must take the necessary decision without any delay.
11. The PRESIDENT: The members of the Council have heard the text of the draft resolution being submitted by the representative of the Soviet Union. He insisted on an immediate vote, taking into account that it was not a new matter before the Council but, rather, that the aim was to ensure the implementation of the resolution adopted by the Council last night; and also taking into account the extreme gravity of the situation.
12. I suggest that before we proceed with our discussion we should ask the Secretary- General to give us the information he has received in reply to the request transmitted to the parties by the Secretary-General in pursuance of our resolution of last night. I now call on the Secretary-General.
13. The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I received this morning the following cable
from the Foreign Minister of Jordan:
"I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your cable informing me of the Security Council resolution
calling upon the Governments concerned as a first step to take forthwith all measures for all immediate cease-fire and for a cessation of all military activities in the area. This cable is to inform Your Excellency that the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has taken note of the Security Council resolution and has authorized me to convey its acceptance of the said cease-fire resolution. I would add that I was in telephonic contact with Mr. El-Farra, our permanent delegate, when the Security Council voted the cease-fire resolution unanimously. Consequently, immediate orders were issued to our armed forces to observe the cease-fire resolution except in self-defense.
"Minister for Foreign Affairs"
The cable is dated 7 June 1967. I have, by telephone, informed the Government of Israel of its contents through the Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations.
14. The Chief of Staff of UNTSO reports that on the morning of 7 June the Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission headquarters was occupied by Israel forces. The Chief of Staff of UNTSO lodged a strong protest with the Israel authorities, insisting that the Mixed Armistice Commission headquarters should be evacuated at the earliest possible moment by Israel troops.
15. I regret to inform the Council of the death of an UNTSO observer, Commandant Wickham of the Irish Army, who was killed on 7 June on the road between Kuneitra and Damascus. I wish to express my sympathy and condolences to the Government of Ireland and the family of Commandant Wickham.
16. I have instructed the Chief of Staff of UNTSO to do whatever he can to continue with his functions and to make his good offices available to the parties whenever there is an opportunity to do so.
17. The Commander of UNEF reports that he is continuing his efforts to ensure the security of the remaining contingents of UNEF pending their evacuation. He reports that none of the units are at present in danger. Urgent efforts continue to find methods for their evacuation.
18. I also regret to have to report to the Council that the death of one Brazilian soldier of UNEF in Rafah Camp on 5 June is now officially confirmed. The Commander of UNEF has also informed me that, according to the latest information, the casualties suffered by the Indian contingent are nine killed, twenty wounded and twelve missing. I have expressed to the Governments of India and Brazil my deep sorrow at these casualties.
19. In view of the occupation of the headquarters of both UNTSO in Jerusalem and UNEF in Gaza by Israel troops, I have formally approached the Government of Israel to ask for their assurances that the records and documents of both of these headquarters, which are of both practical importance and irreplaceable historic value, will be preserved and protected, undisturbed and undamaged, until UNTSO and UNEF personnel return to their respective headquarters.
20. I have no further detailed information about th
fighting, which I understand to be continuing at numerous points.
21. The PRESIDENT: I thank the Secretary-General for his statement. I now call on the representative of Brazil on a point of order.
22. Mr. SETTE CAMARA (Brazil): We are all anxious to have the cease-fire resolution which the Council unanimously adopted yesterday complied with. The fighting in the Middle East must stop as soon as possible, and my delegation appreciates the initiative that has now been taken by the Soviet Union delegation. However, this is a very serious and grave matter. In spite of all the urgency that the matter requires, my delegation believes that we should have at least a short time to reflect and meditate on the text before us and to have some consultation among members. The Council could hardly vote on a draft resolution that we have barely had time to read. It took two days of strenuous negotiation for us to agree on a cease-fire resolution while the fighting was raging. My delegation thinks that it would be only fair to have a very short recess so that we can at least become acquainted with the wording of the text before us.
23. Therefore, I would suggest that we recess for twenty minutes and then resume to vote on the draft resolution.
24. The PRESIDENT: I take it that the representative of Brazil has made a motion under rule 33, paragraph 3, of the provisional rules of procedure, "to adjourn the meeting to a certain day or hour".
25. Before putting the motion to the vote, I call on the representative of the United States, who has asked to speak.
26. Mr. GOLDBERG (United States of America): I do not object to the suggestion made by the representative of Brazil, Mr. Sette Camara, but I would like to speak briefly.
27. My delegation has been conscious of the gravity of this situation not since last night, but for three weeks. At the 1348th meeting of the Council last night I made specific references to the records of the Council and official statements on behalf of our Government.
28. I think that the sequence of events should be very clear to the members of the Council and to the world community. We pointed out the extreme gravity of the situation. If certain Powers had not objected and had not deprecated our statements about the gravity of the situation, a resolution would have been in the hands of the Council for effective action to avert the outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East, with all the consequences that have ensued. But regrettably, our consistent requests and our consistent demands for action by the Council to call on all parties, in the strongest terms possible, to exercise restraint were not heeded.
29. But more than that: On Monday morning the President, conscious of his responsibilities to the Council, submitted a draft resolution informally to members, which I shall now read out;
"The Security Council,
the report of the Secretary-General on the recent outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East,
at the outbreak of fighting and with the menacing situation in the area,
all the Governments concerned to take forthwith all steps for an immediate cease-fire;
all Governments to co-operate fully with the United Nations in its task of supervising the observance of the cease-fire;
the Secretary-General to keep the Council promptly and currently informed on the implementation of this resolution."
30. When the President circulated that draft resolution to members of the Council, my delegation, among many others, strongly supported urgent and immediate action upon it, which we felt would have a good effect upon the situation and which we felt could contain the situation. It is a matter of profound regret to my Government that that draft resolution was not supported by other Powers.
31. We strongly support implementation of a cease-fire resolution. President Johnson said yesterday:
"We believe a cease-fire is the necessary 'first step' . . . a first step toward what we all must hope will be a new time of settled peace and progress for all the peoples of the Middle East."
32. That is our position. We reaffirm it here today. We have not changed our mind. We had this view on Monday we had it last night; we have it today.
33. I shall be glad to consult with my colleagues, for the reasons stated by the representative of Brazil, Mr. Sette Camara.
34. The PRESIDENT: The representative of France has asked to speak on the motion made by the representative of Brazil, and I now call on him.
35. Mr. SEYDOUX (France)
(translated from French):
In the spirit which prompted the brief statement by the representative of Brazil, I entirely support what he said and associate myself with his proposal.
36. My delegation approves of the idea of repeating the request for a cease-fire which was unanimously adopted by the Security Council yesterday, and is ready to vote in favour of the text submitted this morning, just as it voted for the draft resolution adopted yesterday. However, we feel that for purely practical reasons a short suspension of the meeting is necessary. In view of the circumstances and the need for the text to be circulated in the working languages, my delegation feels that this recess for technical reasons could be very brief and should not last more than ten to fifteen minutes.
37. The PRESIDENT: The next representative who has asked to speak on the motion made by the representative of Brazil is the representative of the Soviet Union, on whom I now call.
38. Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Repub
translated from Russian):
Mr. President, I do not intend to repeat what I said a moment ago. I still insist on an immediate vote. But I do have some understanding for the point made by the representative of Brazil.
39. On the other hand, Mr. President, I cannot understand why, after referring to the Security Council's provisional rules of procedure and having in mind rule 33, you have nevertheless to all intents and purposes opened the debate. This rule states that:
"Any motion for the suspension or for the simple adjournment of the meeting shall be decided without debate."
40. I am thinking of the rather long statement--in view of the hour--made by the representative of the United States of America. I should like to repeat again that this is not the time for discussions or for historical reminiscences, and even less for quoting one's own speeches, whatever pleasure this may give to the speakers concerned and their friends.
41. Having regard to the point made by Mr. Seydoux, the French representative, I agree to a suspension, but for not more than ten or fifteen minutes and this must not lead t further delays.
42. The PRESIDENT: After the intervention of the representative of Brazil, I asked whether he was making his motion under rule 33, paragraph 3, to adjourn the meeting to a certain day or hour. I call the attention of the representative of the USSR to the final part of rule 33 of the provisional rules of procedure, which reads as follows:
"Any motion for the suspension or for the simple adjournment of the meeting shall be decided without debate."
That means suspension or simple adjournment as referred to in rule 33, paragraphs 1 and 2. If a motion is made under either of those two paragraphs, there can be no debate. However, since the motion was made under rule 33, paragraph 3, the President has to put the question under debate.
43. Is there any objection to adjourning for fifteen minutes? As there is no objection, we shall adjourn and meet again at 2 o'clock.
It was so decided
The meeting rose at 1.45 p.m.
/ Subsequently circulated as document S/7946.