8/13/2019 APV563

1/34

PLENARYEETING63rdSaturday, 3 November 1956,at 8 p.m.

FIRST EMERGENCY SPECIAL SESSZON New York

CONTENTS Pagea item 5:considered by the Security Council at its 749thand 750th meetings held on 30 October 1956 (conti~ed) 45

President: Mr. Rudecindo ORTEGA (Chile).

AGENDA ITEM 5sidered by tbe Security Council at its799th and 750th meetings, held on 30 Oeto-ber 1956 (continued)

The PRESIDENT (&an&ted front spalzisrz) :meeting has been called by the Secretary-Generalmy request in view of a communication from theon of Egypt [A/3270]. trranslated front French) :ce of the matter I shoulde to refer to the two draft resolutions presented todaye representative of the United States of America32731. I must confess that I hesitate to takenow concerning these draft reso-since they have certain political implicationsich compel me to consult my Government.Following the armed attack by Israel upon Egyptthe night of 30 October 1956, and the amedthe British-French forces, the General As-at its 562nd meeting held during the night ofto 2 November, adopted a draft resolution submittedthe United States delegation [A/3256], which be-resolution 997 (ES-I). The Egyptian delegationthis resolution, although we should at thishave liked at least an explicit denunciation of theand a statement that it was a violation of thed Nations ,Charter and inconsistent with its pur-and principles. An overwhelming majority ofations, however, had stated that they were in fa-of this draft resolution and we wished to followcourse as the delegations supporting LIS in thewhich has been forced upon us.Paragraph 5 of the resolution requests the Secre-to observe and report promptly on thee with this resolution to the Security Councilto the General Assembly, for such further actionthey may deem appropriate in accor,dance with theParagraph 6 states that the General Assemblyremain in emergency session pending com-

received instructions from my Government yes-2 November, to inform the SecretarydGeneralthe United Nations that the Egyptian ,Governmentto implement the resolution adopted by the As-condition that the armed forces attackingdesisted from doing so ; and to this end myt requested me, in a communication whichreceived from Cairo, to ask for a meeting of the

General Assembly today. Allow me to read you a fewpassages from this communication, which has been dis-tributed under the symbol A/3270. On the first pagewe find the following passage:

It wa s again clear that France and the UnitedKingdom encouraged the Israel attack to take it asa pretext to intervene in the area and to attack andtry to occupy Egyptian territory, The plot was madeclear by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdomwhen he addressed an ultimatum to the EgyptianGovernment asking for the cessation of hostilitiesbetween Egypt and Israel, the withdrawal of militaryforces ten miles from the Suez Canal and, further-more, asking the agreement of the Egyptian Gov-ernment for the occupation of Port Said, Ismailia andSuez by French and British armed $&ces. The Brit-ish ultimatum was calculated as not to be acceptedby any sovereign State. The Egyptian Governmentused its right as a sovereign and independent Stateand refused the ultimatum. In spite of the indignationfelt by world public opinion, the French and BritishGovernments put their ultimatum in effect.

On the night of 31 October, joint French andBritish forces began their attack on Egyptian peopleand territory. They launched systematic and bar-barous attacks by air on all Egyptian airfields, de-stroying property and causing casualties among ci-vilians without discrimination. So . far casualtiesamount to 2.50 victims.The letter further states:

In spite of this resolution, which represents thedeep conviction of the en&-e world, Anglo-Frenchair attacks continued and even increased in intensityand frequency. Furthermore, it is also reported thatAnglo-French armed forces are taking part in thefight against Egyptian troops on Egyptian territoryin the Sinai peninsula.Faced with this continuous ruthless Anglo-Frenchaggression, the Egyptian Government has decided toask for an immediate meeting of the General Assem-bly in order to take the actions it pledged itself toundertake in order to uphold the principles of lawand order and to stop the unprovoked attack to whichEgypt is unlawfully subjected and to put an end tothe deliberate massacre of peaceful civilians.6. The Secretary+Generals report [A/3267] statesthat, as I have already announced, Egypt has agreedto a cease-fire subject to a condition which I need notrepeat. France and the United Kingdom, on the otherhand, have sent the Secretary,General a negative reply,as can be seen in particular in sub-paragraphs (b) and(c) of paragraph 3 of his report, which read asfollows :l(b) .The United Nations decides to constitute andmaintain such a force until an Arab-Israel peacesettlement is reached and until satisfactory arrange-ments have been agreed in regard to the Suez Canal,45 AjPV.563

8/13/2019 APV563

2/34

46 General Assembly-First Emergency Spec ial Session-Plenar y Meetingsboth agreements to be guaranteed by the UnitedNations.(c) In the meantime, until the United Nationsforce is constituted, both combatants agree to acceptforthwith limited detachments of Anglo-Frenchtroops to be stationed between the combatants.

7. Thus the United Kingdom has not changed its at-titude. The United Kingdom and France continue toclaim the right to maintain forces in Egypt on the falsepretext of separating the Egyptian and Israel armiesuntil a solution has been found to the Suez Canal ques-tion, The United Kingdom and France are still de-termined to act on their own init iati ve without anyauthorization from the United Nations.8. What I say is borne out by the fact that British-French forces continue to bomb Egypt and, accordingto our information, have even tried to land on its ter-ritory, The cablegram sent to the Secretary-General bythe representatives of the United Nations in Cairo,which has been distributed by the Secretary-General[A/3267, a?zltex] , also confirms my statement. Thecablegram says, and I quote:I . . . British radio has announced an imminentswitch to communicat ion centres, railway stations andtelephone exchanges, many of which are located in

densely populated areas. In spite of warning to civil-ian population to keep clear of these areas, imple-mentation of this policy will result in a terrific lossof life . We urge you to use every means availab le toyou to restrain implementation of this policy.Thus the brutal intentions and bad faith of the aggres-sors remain clear.9. Simi larly Israel, continuing its armed attack, hasoccupied the town of Gaza in violation of the armisticeconventions and the United Nations Charter.10. It is clear from what I have said, and above al lfrom the events which have occurred since the resolu-tion was adopted, that General Assembly reSolution 997(ES-I) has not been implemented and has not stoppedthe armed attacks against Egypt.11. This bloody, brutal premeditated armed attackhas aroused general incbgnation among world publicdpinion. Even in the United Kingdom, the Oppositionis ma&g more and more strenuous efforts to persuadeSir Anthony Eden to modify his attitude. Even theArchbishop of Canterbury has denounced this use offorce.

We cannot ignore the fact, he said, that thePresident of the United States thinks we have madea grave error, that world opinion on the whole isconvinced we have made a grave error . . . The situa-tion has produced a total politica l cleavage in thiscountry . . , Christian opinion is terribly uneasy andunhappy. The point to which the Christian consciencemust most acutely address itself is whether or notwe are standing for the spirit of the United NationsCharter.Mr. Nutting, British Minister of State, is reported tohave resigned to mark his disapproval of his Govern-ments action.12. Egypt is encouraged in its fight against aggressionby the evidence of sympathy and denunciations of ag-gression which have come from al l over the world.13. In the face of the behaviour of Israel, France andthe United Kingdom and their refusal to implement theAssembly resolution, which Egypt has accepted, it is

for the Assembly to take further steps to stop aggsion, arrest the bloodshed and re-establish peace, manitys greatest blessing.14. Egypt, a peaceful country subjected to barmed attack, in violation of the United Nations Cter, by two great countries, permanent members oSecurity ,Council, is defending itself and will contto do so.15. I shall not take up the arguments adduced byUnited Kingdom and French delegations to justify attack. All my colleagues have answered them, acould not do better.6. The situation is deteriorating; the war may up more violently at any moment. The peoples oworld have placed their hopes in the United NatiDo not disappoint them.17. The PRESIDlENT (transZaGtrd from S+a*isBefore I call upon the next speaker on the JistSecretaryaGeneral would like to report to the GeAssembly.18. The SIXRETARYIGENERAL: I have jusceived%%% YXiYYr^X&ld bring toattention of the IGeneral Assembly. I could, of-couhave waited to circulate it in the normal way, bbelieve that this is information of which the memof the Assembly would like to be seized.19. It is a letter from the permanent representaof the United Kingdom1 in which, on instructions his Government, he refers to the communicat ion the representative of the United Nations Truce Svision Organization in Cairo which is annexed toreport that is before the Assembly [A/3267]. statement he encloses is a statement from the Minof Defence in London, issued at 11.45 pm. todareads as follows:

Reports have been circulated that Anglo-Frenforces now intend to attack centres of communtion, including telephone exchanges and railwaytions, where heavy civ ilian casualties would betable . This is quite untrue. Anglo-French attacksnow be ing switched from air to army targets, ansuch attacks are to be made where civi lian casuwould be inevitable.20. This document will, of course, be immediately culated to members of the Assembly.

clear in the resolution adopted by the G,eneral Assethe other night [997 (ES-I)], and so there is no for me to repeat it now. The United States deeplgrets the fact that that resolutio?, which represethe views of such an overwhelmmg majority oUnited Nations, has not yet brought about a cessof hostilities. The United States earnestly hopes all parties in the conflict will be guided by theclusive evidence of world opinion which the very vote the other night symbolized.22. The United States is firmly convinced thaproblems which gave rise to the present situation and must be solved by peaceful and just means. . .- . 4 . . . . . _lemon on any other 13asis wouIcL, at best, provide a temporary respite: at worst, it would in al l hood sow the seeds of even graver problems future. That is why the United States believeswhile we should continue our efforts to obta in compliance with the General Assemblys cease-fire

1 Subsequently reproduceds document A/3274.

8/13/2019 APV563

3/34

563rd meeting -3 November 1956 47we must not lose sight of the problems and con-ns which gave rise to the present situation.As Secretary of State DuIles stated at the 561stpresent situation has resulted from a longhistory of irritations and provocations. Theof the armistice agreements is too welln to require comment. They have been violatedby Israel and by its Arab neighbours. Theshoulcl have led to a peaceful settle-

has instead given rise to growing provocationincreasing tension, especially since the ominousof Egypt by the Soviet Union. The abruptby Egypt of the Universal Suez Canal Com-and the failure thus far of efforts to find a solu-to this important problem, have created a situationdeep concern to many nations.le the temptation is strong to place the wholeon the States directly concerned, the fact is, asDulles reminded us, that the United Nationsalso share responsibility for what has happened.clear that we, the Members of the United Nations,not done all that should have been done to bringthe setdetnent of these matters in accordancethe principles of justice and international law.is why the United States today announced that itintroduce two draft resolutions dealing with theof the problems which gave rise to the presentsituation in the Middle East. These proposalsnow before the General Assembly, With these draftwe hope that we may begin now to lay thefor the constructive action which must fol-the cessation of hostilities, and I should like tothese two draft resolutions to the General

first draft resolution [A/3272] proposes aw approach to the settlement of the major problemsbetween the Arab States and Israel with ato establishing conditions of permanent peace andthat part of the world. We all know theof the long, conscientious but painful effortshave been made by the General Assembly, theil and the subsidiary bodies. In the lastyears the majority of the deliberations of the Se-y Council have been devoted to the Palestine ques-and each session of the ,General Assembly hasus engaged in deliberations which we hopedht lead, however slowly, to better relations in theBut the fact that we have hostilities there todaymust frankly look now to some new means which,the support of this body and the co-operation ofparties concerned, may at last achieve a final and apeace in this part of the world.

The agency of this Assembly which has, si?cebeen charged with the responsibility of workmgarrangements for a final solution of the problelnsbetween Israel and the Arab States is theConciliation Commission. The United Statesa member of that Commission, and, together withother two members, strove to fulfil1 its assignment.years of its existence the Commissionachieved some few things. It has cIarified a numberissues between the Arab States and Israel which

Property left in Israel by those who are now Arabrefugees. But despite this work, in paragraph 2 of itsfifteenth progress report [A/3199] dated 4 October ofthis year, the Commission stated:The Commission . . . must report again this yearthat, in view of the unchanged attitudes of the partiesand their failure to avail themselves of the Comn-&Sks services, the Commission has had no oppor-tudy to exercise its general function of conciliationwith any prospect of success,27. This, in the United States Governments view,must be the final chapter of the Conciliation Commis-sions efforts. We must try something new-somethingfree of the technical and procedural problems whichconfronted the Commission-if we are to have anyjustifiable hope of progress towards a settlement of themajor problems outstanding between the Arab Statesand Israel. We can say this because the United Statesis a member of the Commission, The Commission hasfailed, and, while we will keep what it has achievedor is achieving, we must try something new.28. For this reason the United States is suggesting inits draft resolution the establishment of a new com-mittee to be composed of five Members of this GeneralAssembly who will prepare recommendations, after con-sultation with the parties to the General ArmisticeAgreements, regarding the settlement of the majorproblems outstanding between them with a view to es-tablishing conditions of permanent peace and stabilityin that part of the world. We propose that that com-mittee should submit its recommendations to the partiesconcerned and to the General Assembly. If necessary,or as appropriate, these proposals might be submittedto the Security Council, The purpose of this is to en-sure that the parties themselves, the General Assembly,or, if necessary, the Security Council may have an op-portunity to accept and act upon them. Alternatively,through the responses which the parties may make, thecommittee may continue to seek a settlement satisfac-tory and just to all, and thus solve this critical problemonce and for all.29. Two other matters are important in this con-nexion, and our draft resolution therefore addressesitself to them.30. We think that there have been no more selflessand devoted international servants of justice and peacethan the Chief of Staff and the members of the UnitedNations Truce Supervision Organization, as they havesought to enforce the General Armistice Agreementsand to act as the agents of the Security Council. It isnot for this body to give them further suggestions orguidance. It is, however, for this body to commendthem for what they have done and for the diligence andthe courage which they have shown in the face of manytrying obstacles, and to urge that the parties directlyconcerned should co-operate fully with them as theycarry out their presently imposed future tasks. 1 refer,of course, to iGenera Burns and the staff workingunder him.31. The second matter which warrants our concern isthe plight of the Arab refugees. In the name of human-ity, it is important that through these critical and battle-tori1 #days those most directly concerned should be cer-

8/13/2019 APV563

4/34

4.8 General Assembly--First Emergency Special Session-Plenary Meetings32. That concludes my observations on the first draftresolution submitted by the United States delegation.33. I shall now address myself to the second draftresolution [A/3273]. This ,draft resolution offer, ameans of .finding a solution to the Suez Canal qUestIOn.The Security #Council has already made certain recom-mendations which could form the basis for a settle-ment, Recent events however, have linked this ques-tion with the host&ties now being waged in thatpart of the world, The Security Councils resolution of13 October [S/3675] emerged after many weeks ofstudy of the Suez question and represented the effortsof many nations and many people. It sets forth the sixbasic principles which, it is believed, are necessary fora settlement of the Suez Canal question. We attachgreat importance to these principles. That is why theUnited States #draft resolution endorses the 13 Octoberresolution in its entirety.34. The United States ,draft resolution then refersto the resolution adopted by the IGeneral Assembly on2 November, which, irtter a&, took note of the inter-ruption of traffic in the Canal to the serious pre judiceof many nations, and urged that steps should be takento reopen the Canal and restore freedom of navigation,upon the conclusion of a cease&fire.35. Recognizing that the permanent solution to thesituation must be consistent with the principles of justiceand international law, the sovereignty of Egypt and therights of the users of the Canal, as guaranteed by theConvention of lSSS? the -draft resolution would estab-lish a committee composed of three Powers to assumethe responsibility for, first, taking whatever measureswere necessary for the immediate reoplening of theCanal as a secure international waterway ; secondly,drawing up a plan, in consultation with the three na-tions most directly involved in the present problem, forthe purpose of operating and maintaining the Canaland freedom of passage through it, in accordance withthe IConvention of 1888 and the six requirements adoptedby the Security Council on 13 October; and thirdly,adopting and putting this plan into effect.36. Finally, the draft resolution requests the comrnit-tee to report to the General Assembly and the SecurityCouncil, as appropriate; invites the committee to makerecommendations for a just and permanent settlementof the Suez problem, consistent with the purposes andprinciples of the United #Nations; and requests theMembers of the United Nations to give the committeeal l appropriate assistance.37. I urge the General Assembly to seize this op-portunity to make a start toward a solution of two ofthe gravest issues threatening world peace, The timeto act is now, while the awful consequences of previousfailures and ,delays are so clear, Let us stop the fut ileprocess of patching up previous agreements and under-standings, which but serves to provide new pretextsfor further provocations. Let us face up to our respon-sibilities under the Charter. Let us work together for alasting settlement of what has become a dangerousthreat to the peace of the world.

: This is no time for eitherf ,emotions. The situation isso grave that every minute must be measured by theextensive military destruction and the slaughter of in-nocent human beings. It is the paramount duty of thisAssembly to arrest the aggressors, while there is stil l2 Convention respecting the free navigation of the SuezMaritime Canal,signedat Cohstantinople on 29 October 1888.

time, and to save the peace, the world in general, athe Middle East in particular. Furthermore, it is tduty of this Assembly to assert its authority? :incF onthrough SUCK action can it save the only exlstlng Intenational machinery which is in a position to operaIf it fails to ,do so, the tragic responsibility will fall every one of us, and thus we shall have led the wor,back to the dark ages.39. Everyone here and elsewhere is aware of the dagers involved in the refusal of the three aggress.Powers to abide by the decision adopted by this Assebly on 2 November. That decision, which was adoptby a majority of sixty-four votes, shows beyond adoubt that world public opinion was shocked by tpremeditated acts of aggression against a small Coun-the more so when it was realized that two pertnanemembers of the Security lCounci1 were responsible engineering the conspiracy. The fact that, SO far,cease-fire has not been achieved in compliance with resolution is a clear indication that the Powers in quetion have no respect either for the authority of United Nations or for the law of nations. For thPowers-and hei-e I refer particularly to the UniteKingdom and France-there seems o exist no otbinding factor than that of force. They have taken law into their own hands, despite the advice and waing of large and small Powers. This is the law of jungle, and the Powers in question are persistenapplying that law by means of their land, sea and forces.40. What makes the position even worse is the sistenceof these Powers on implementing a policy whhas been condemnedby this Assembly and world puopinion-and this includes public opinion in their ocountries. What worse dictatorship can the world pect to find? When the Nazis and the Fascists plungthe world into a total war of murder and clestructiothey defied the entire world, just as these Membersthe United Nations are now doing. But the Nazis the Fascists had never recognized the authority of League of Nations, had never accepted the bindmoral force of the law of nations. They never spokedemocracy; they ,despised t. And they stood alonetheir defiance of the entire civilized world, Where the Powers of whom I am now speaking stand in cparison with the Nazis and the Fascists?41. It would be neither fair not just to accuse a1 repeat: all-the British and French people of fax&These two great peoples have carried the torch civilization and democracy for centuries. The untunate fact, however, is that those in power have bmotivated by imperialist policies-and imperialismits ,&cadent and .rapidly declining stages. It is decline which they strive to avert, but this is noconformity with the historical laws of human progreIn fact, they want to put the clock back, as the Ntried to do at great expense. We are sure that the of the peoples n the United Kingdom and France mately will bring to reason the imperialist ruling c&in those two countries. It is no longer a secret that vested interests are in flagrant contradiction with primary premises of international dvilized existenThe last fifty years have witnessed the great awakenof peoples n pnder-developed parts of the world, a torical necessity that can never be averted. Imperialispolicies refuse to recognize this human evolution. the contrary, policies in the imperialistic countries always been directed to stopping this evolution at price. Unfortunately, this price has been paid by

8/13/2019 APV563

5/34

563rd meeting-3 November 1956 49people in those countries, and it is a price thathigh in terms of human life and progress ; but,or later, colonialism will pay its own price too.

SUCK a background, it is easy to realize thatlism does not abide by international or moialdecisions unless they suit its ownand its own purpose is to plunge the world intobath for profit or domination. Is there anyneeded other than the non-compliance of theed Kingclom and France with the resolutionby this Assembly? While those countries arebombing towns and peoples in Egypt, they ,do nottheir real intentions. That is why they have sug-he constitution of a United Nations armed force,their detachments occupy the territories of theof aggression. The conspiracy against Egyptagainst peace is quite obvious. What is more ob-than the fact that the aggressors will not stopacts of war unless their policy of war is carriedconclusion ?

The calling of this special session was the out-of the abuse of the use of the veto in the Securityil. IGeneral Assembly resolution 377 (V), en-Uniting for peace, which was adopted in 1950,a way of avoiding the misuse of the vetoSecurity Council and enabled collective measuresthe prevention and removal of threats to the peaceundertaken. It calls, therefore, upon this Assem-to take in hand whatever powers the ICharter hassuch circumstances. It is time for this As-to consider the measures to be taken to removethreat to the peace and the breach of the peace-r in particular to Chapter VII of the Charter-the object of applying such sanctions as may be ap-to meet the requirements of the situation.Any other procedure would be an endeavour tothe attention of this Assembly from the real prob-

A diversion to other problems would be nothingutter defeatism. When one cannot make an agres-abide by the rule of law, then one accepts his in-of the law and his method of implementa-What more can an aggressor ask than to commitand persist in carrying it out despite thes of a world assembly? The first draft resolution.ted this evening provides ample evidence toeffect, It ignores, or rather scraps, all that theNations has done and endeavoured to do in thewith regard to Palestine, That is because the ag-or persists in defying the decision of this &ssemblythat part of the world. It is rather surpnsmg thatof recognizing the rights of the people of Pales-it suggests, and then only 8% passant, that theybe treated in a humane way.While we had hoped that the Members of thison would take a stand against the defiancethe aggressors of #decisions of this Assembly, we findall the elements of appeasement have been put to-in the two draft resolutions before us. Appease-t has never been a successful policy; it has oftento disaster. If we gave way to the spirit of ap-t, aggression would become the p~hcy of all;such a moment, alas, there remains no raisolz d%ethis Organization.

the surrounding nations against the peace and territorialintegrity and, even, against the very existence of Israel.It has been aggravated by the rash and indefensible ac-tion of Egypt in nationalizing the Universal Suez Canal,ComPany and by the Soviet shipments of arms to thatcountry. Finally, it has persisted through the inabilityof the United Nations as a whole to intervene and torestore peace and order in that area,47. It is, therefore, nugatory to try to assess or to ap-Portion the blame for the difficulties that confront us,Jbecause all of US, all Members of the Unit,ed Nations,have to take some share in that blame. It would beparticularly unjust to single out either Israel or Franceand the United Kingdom and to reproach the one forhaving taken the action which it considered necessaryfor its self-defence and survival and the others for hav-ing stepped in where the United Nations had failedto act.48. What is necessary is that we should find somemeans of reasserting the jurisdiction of the United Na-tions over matters which plainly fall within its respon-sibility, and that we should do so in a manner thatprovides not only for an immediate cease-fire withouta real settlement, for that would only perpetuate thechaos, but also for a just and equitable solution of thetwo main problems involved. Such a solution of the dis-pute between Israel and its neighbouring States and ofthe question of Suez Canal should not be merely atemporary expedient, but one that would give promiseof some permanence.49. In the view of the Netherlands IGovernment, theproposals contained in the reply made by the representa-tive of the United Kingdom to the inquiry of theSecretarydGeneral, which are set forth in documentA/3267, form the best possible, step towarcds such asolution. These proposals, as I may remind my fellowrepresentatives, are to the effect that, inter al&z, both theEgyptian and the Israel Governments should agree toaccept a United Nations force to keep the peace; andthe United Nations should decide to constitute and tomaintain such a force until an Arab-Israel peace settle-ment is reached and until satisfactory arrangements inregard to the Suez Canal have been agreed upon, bothagreements to be guaranteed by the United Nations.50. During the ,debate on 1 and 2 ,November [561sta& 562nd wzeetinp] both the United Kingdom andthe French representatives stated emphatically that theirGovernments had no ,desire whatever that the militaryaction which they had taken should be more than tempo-rary in its duration. The proposals which they have nowmade prove that these Governments were sincere inthese statements and that they are prepared to act lnaccordance with them. If these proposals are acceptedby Israel and Egypt and if the United Nations forcefor which they call is formed and dispatched to thearea then the British-French intervention will case,the United Nations will take charge of a situationwhere it is its plain duty to exercise its authority andthe basis will have been laid for a settlement of the twoquestions which have for so long disturbed the peace.51. As to the settlement of the Suez (Canal question,the Netherlands Government remains convinced that thatcould be and should be governed by the six principles onwhich agreement was reached when the Security Corm-cil dealt with this matter [S/3675] ; and. that r;he Pro-

8/13/2019 APV563

6/34

50 General Assembly-First Emerg.ency Specia l Session-Plenary Meetingsattaches great importance is that Egyptian sovereigntyshould be respected.52. With regard to the draft resolutions which havebeen presented, in common, I think, with most of myfel low representatives, I have not yet had the time tosecure instructions from my Government. I shouldtherefore like to reserve the right to speak on thesetwo draft resblutions separately later on.nesl : When I receivedTiom the Secretarv-,General of the resumption of this emergency spe&lsession of the General Assembly at eight oclock thisevening I must confess that I did not know what wouldbe ,discussed. However, since the adoption of the reso-lution by the General Assembly on the morning of2 November calling for a cease-fire by the parties en-gaged in the confl ict, I have watched the developmentswith almost b,reathless interes , and so far there hasnot seemed to be the slightest Indication of compliancewith that resolution.54. In considering the nature of the action that thisAssembly can take in the circumstances, it might per-haps be worthwhile to consider by what authority thisemergency special session was called by the SecurityCouncil and, also, the immediate motivation for theresumption of the session this evening. It will be notedthat this emergency special session was called to ex-amine the question which had been considered by theSecurity Council at its 749th and 750th meetings, heldon 30 October 1956. If I recall correctly, what was con-sidered at the 749-Q meeting of the Security Councilwas the United States draft resoIution [S/3710], whichwas presented a few hours after the reported penetrationof Egyptian territory by Israel forces. That draft reso-lution was designed to call for an immediate cease-fireand the withdrawal of the forces to the demarcationlines, and it asked the Member States to refrain fromdoing anything that might result in a breach of thepeace. The draft resolution was vetoed by the UnitedK-K;;$rn and France at that meeting of the Security5.5. At the 750th meeting, if I also remember cor-rectly, the subject that was dealt with was the letterfrom Egypt [S/3712] in connexion with the ultimatumwhich had been received by that Government from theGovernments of France and the United Kingdom. Itis therefore o.bvions that when the General Assemblymet the day following those meetings, the question tobe considered was the immediate hostilities, the actualbreach of the peace. Or, as far as the legal relevancy ofthe issues is concerned, this emergency special sessionof the General Assembly was called to consider themilitary act of penetration of Egypt by Israel forcesand the ultimatum thalat was issued by the United King-dom and France. It was with a view to consideringthis breach of the peace that we adopted on 2 November

the resolution in which we asked for a cease-fire andthe withdrawal of the forces o f the combatants fromthe area of hostilities and for all Members to refrainfrom introducing mlhtary goods, and to halt militarymovements, into the area.56. This evening we are asked to consider two draftresolutions presented by the United States delegation.Before commenting on these resolutions, I must reiter-ate emphatically the consistent position of my Gov-ernment as far as this crisis is concerned, which is thatits fundamental and primary aim is to help to seek therestoration of peace. Wherever possible, in order toavoid any aggravation of the situation, we will not

express our views on who is right and who is wroin the controversy. We feel this is not the proper tto do so. Any attempt on our part, as I announced my first intervention, to point to any particular cbatant as being in the wrong now would only aggravamatters.57. The first United States draft resolution, colltainein document A/3272, seeks to deal with the Palestinquestion. It proposes in its operative paragrF@xsecure (a just and lasting peace by removing underlying causes of tension in the area with a vto achieving a final settlement between the parties the General Armistice Agreements, The reference to Egypt and to Israel. The second draft resolutio[A/3273] seeks to consider the Suez Canal questioalso with a view to seeking a final and conclusive stion of the outstanding issues between the parties. the outset I must say that I will not be in a positito express my views on the merits. of these tW0 posals for lack of specific instructions from my Gernment, I shall only comment on these two draft rlutions as far as the practical and procedural aspare concerned.58. From a procedural point of view I have serimisgivings on these two proposals. First, with respto the Suez Canal question, it will be remembered the Security Council is actually seized of this isEgypt, the United Kingdom and France have agron six principles, and on the basis of those six pciples they were in the process of continuing negottions when the hostilities broke out. But the outbreof hostilities did not remove this question from Security Council, in which the issue is still pending. is quite obvious from the relevant provisions of ,Charter that the General Assembly cannot cotwiderquestion of which the Security Council is actuaseized. That is rather elementary.59. It may be argued, of course, that this emergetIses*sion was called in pursuance of General Assembresolution 377 A (V). But the main basis of that rlution lies in paragraph 1 of part A, which I shall in part:I . . . that if the Security Council, because of la&unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercits primary responsibility for the maintenance international peace and security in any case wthere appears to be a threat to the peace, breach the peace, or active aggression, the General Assembshall consider the matter immediately with a viewmalting appropriate recommendations to Members collective measures, including in the case of a breof the peace or act of aggression the use of arforce when necessary, to maintain or restore innational peace and security.60. It is thus obvious that resolution 377 A which was the enabling authority for the calling- of emergency session, provides as a basis an actual breof the peace, and that the General Assembly hameet whenever it appears that the Security coutmc:for lack of unanimity, fails to exercise and discharits responsibility to maintain international peace security.61. Did the question of the Suez Canal, whcll it firs t raised in the Security Council, present all assuch as would make it fall within the purviewGeneral Assembly resolution 377 A (V) ? Undo&ted]it did not. And as the Security Council was actuseized of this issue, and there was no cllange in status, as well as m the progress, of the negotiat-0

8/13/2019 APV563

7/34

563rd meeting -3 November 1936 51he parties in the Security Council, I cannotand how we can now competently consider theCanal question with a view to the ultimate and

procedural aspect of this United States draftliquidation of its basic issues. Therefore, as far1s concerned, I have serious misgivings aswe can act on it at all.#Off hand I can say that I view with great sym-the noble motivation of this draft resolution, No

call fail to share with the United States ,delegationmotive which lies behind its aims to liquidate athat nlay be a soul-Ce of Continuhg friCtiOnhe Egyptian Government and the French andKingdom Governments, a question that plaguedeven before the outbreak of hostilities. Butextent that the United States, draft resolutionfinal and conclusive settlement of the question,context of the actual hostilities now in progress,whether this special session of the Generalcould validly deal with it.These remarks apply with equal force to the otherof the United States delegation. This reso-

refers to the Palestine question and, as I havet also seeks to achieve a final settlement of theTo achieve that end it seeks to create a com-e of five which will first prepare recommendationsregard to the settlement of the major problemseen he Arab States and Israel and then submitecommendations ta the parties concerned, to theAssembly and to the Security Council. It willthat the Palestine question presentsy profound problems of outstanding character.among these is the question, for example,repatriation or resettlement of the refugees, whichyears has defied solution by our body. Theremany intricate problems involved in the Palestineion which year after year it has been the task ofUnited Nations to consider. As I said, as thiswas convoked only to meet the emergencyfrom the hostilities as a result of the pene-of Egyptian territory by Israel forces and theaction of France and the United Kingdom,proposal that it should consider the long-standingtine problem with a view to its ultimate and finalment is open to serious question.I wish to express again my deep sympathy fordraft resolution and for the noble motivation behindan appropriate time in the future w et favour its consideration. I believe, however,this emergency session of the General Assemblyld confine itself to the issues as they are now, thewhich were faced at the meeting on 2 November.The General Assembly has already adopted a-fire resolution and should immediately concernwith the question whether the parties to the con-are disposed to comply with it. On the basis ofreport by the Secretary-General [A/3267 , whos equested in the resolution so to report, 17iat thehas not been complied with, this emergencyhould then consider how the resolution shoulded or whether or not it could be implemented.in my view, should be the purpose of our m.eet-To consider the United States draft resolutions, without making any reference to the cease-fire

the prestige of this Organization than an apparent aver-sion to meeting the situation squarely,66. Therefore, in co-operation with other delegations,we might submit within a fe w hours a draft resolutionof our own which would fundamentally reaffirm theGeneral Assembly resolution of 2 November. Aftereighteen or twenty-four hours-or whatever period oftime we might agree upon-we might request theSecretary-General to report on the status of complianceor non-compliance with that resolution.67. Allow me to summarize my views briefly. ThePhilippine delegation cannot now comment on the in-trinsic merits of the United States draft resolutionsas we have not as yet received our instructions. How-ever, I commend those drafts for the noble motivationbehind them and, in all likelihood, I may recommendto my Government that they be sympathetically con-sidered at an appropriate time in the future. Pro-cedurally, however, I entertain serious doubts as towhether this emergency session could consider the twodraft resolutions. As they make no mention of theprevious resolution of this emergency special session,I fear that they might be interpreted by the world asan act of evasion, to the great detriment to the prestigeof this ibody. : As I speak from this rostrumAssembly, British and Frencharmed forces are setting upon Egypt, the vi&m oftheir aggression, with the furious frenzy of a monstermlchained. It is highly significant that the United King-dom Government submits wa r bulletins to the UnitedNations instead of informing it that it has compliedwith the request of this Assembly to cease fire andstop the aggression.69. Despite the resolution adopted by the GeneralAssembly on 2 November, despite the condemnation ofthe combined British-French-Israel aggression by anoverwhelming majority of the Member States of theUnited Nations, despite the formal order for an im-mediate cease-fire addressed to these three aggressors,despite acceptance by Egypt, the victim of the aggres-sion, of the order to cease fire in compliance with the,resolution of the General Assembly-despite all this,the United Kingdom, France and Israel continue tosubject Egypt to armed attack, without respite andwithout discrimination between military and civiliantargets in contempt of the United Nations and of allhumatuty.70. The United Nations is witnessing the almostunbelievable spectacle of two of its most importantMembers lined up with Israel in deliberate and opensubversion of it, in a move to undermine the veryfoundations of morality and peace in the world. Un-ashamedly the accomplices confront the General AS-sembly, as they confronted the Security Council, withdefiance and obstinacy.71. This combined armed attack is continuing, andintensifying, and is bringing in its train an irreparableloss in human lives and material destruction of vastencompassment. It threatens to degenerate into a gen-eral conflagration, not only within the region Of theMiddle East but throughout the entire world, m thewake of those repercussions which will inevitably ,beprodllced. According to a message received from Care

8/13/2019 APV563

8/34

8/13/2019 APV563

9/34

563rd meeting-3 November 1956 53USA Of his natural right of legitimate defence into repulse the aggressor. The inadmissible coursetolerating the stationing of French and Britishwould be, purely and simply, the acceptance of

COP@li, a status brought about by the agps-Toleration of such occupation would go eventhan the aggression itself, for it would reducenullity the right of legitimate defence consecratedthe right of self-preservation of States in the Char-It would be in the highest degree immoral, unjust,,in contradiction of the provisions of the Charterof international law.Furthermore, the United Kingdom and Francepretend to set themselves up as policemen act-

011 behalf of the United Nations, at the same timethey themselves have opposed every action that theCouncil attempted to take in order to put anto the hostilities, and at a time when sixty-fourStates of the United Nations out of a total ofcountries-five of which are aggressors orof aggressors-have openly and publiclyvehemently condemned the infamous and cowardlyon perpetrated by the two Powers with thety of Israel.

In these agonizing circumstances, what is theAssembly to do? Its resoltition has clearly beenby the aggressors, and today we assembleto bury this great edifice of peace or to pull It outthe abyss dug by the aggressors to be its grave. Ithat Members will spare no effort and spare noifice to save the United Nations from the fate ofpredecessor, the League of Nations.Is it not the irony of fate that Mr. Eden, whohis voice high to condemn Mussolinis aggres-on Ethiopia and who then asked the wor1.d to

the Covenant of the League of Nations by meet-the aggression with appropriate sanctions, standsas the master of a more serious aggression, thequences of which are hard to calculate?ght it is our duty to hearken to the vpice ofEden in 1936 in order to atone for his crime onOctober 19%.he new situation which the General Assembly isupon to meet, under its responsibilities for theenance of peace and security in the world, compelsto adopt new measures. Actually, the measures pre-by the resolution adopted by the General Assem-on 2 November, which constitute provisional meas-

n accordance with Article 40 of the Charter, havebeen implemented by France, the United KingdomIsrael. By virtue of the same Article, the Geperalis bound to take due account of this failure.General Assembly must, in accordance with para-5 of the resolution already adopted, take newe new measures are embodied in Articles 4142 of the Charter. They may include complete orinterruption of economic relations of rail, sea,postal, telegraphic, radio and other means of com-ation, and the severance of ,diplomatic relations.d the Security Council consider that measures

or in Article 41 would be inadequate or haveed to be inadequate, it may take such action by

88. The responsibility of Member States to imposesuch measures is stressed in the Charter and the pre-ViOUSlYmentioned resolution of the General Assemb]y.It would be inconsistent with the provisions of theCharter to have the Assembly discuss any measuresother than those embodied in its last resolution, or dealwith measures which do not aim at enforcing the resolu-tion already voted upon by an overwhelming majorityof this Assembly. This resolution requests the immediatecessation of the tripartite military action of the UnitedKingdom, France and Israel. The Assembly may at thisstage, in so far as the cease-fire order has not beencarried out by the aggressors, only impose new measuresprovided for in the Charter, namely, sanctions to enforcethe preliminary measures ,mentioned.89. AS to the two draft resolutions submitted this eve-ning by the representative of the United States, we feelthat at this stage, pending instructions from our Gov-ernment, we are unable to express any views.9 Less than forty-eight hoursa pted a resolution which wasmoderate in tone, which was restrained, which wasconstructive, and which attempted not to worsen thesituation in any way but to do something to arrest thedamage to human life and property and the repercus-sions of that damage which were then beginning, It isa matter of the gravest disappointment to us that thatresolution, moderate though it was, statesmanlikethough it was, and though it was introduced by theleading Western Power, has not been complied with bythe Western Powers concerned. This is a matter ofgravest concern because the result of non-compliancehas led to a steady worsening of the situation.91. Fighting has intensified. We note that there hasbeen a cablegram from the United Nations representa-tives in Cairo informing us of the intensification ofattacks [A/3267, annex]. We also note that the rep-resentative of the United Kingdom has published acontradiction [A/3274] of this particular report, butthe statement he has given us in itself indicates thatthere has been an intensification of the fighting. It doesnot give my delegation much comfort to be told thatthere has been a switch from air to army targets. Afterall, are army targets always isolated from places ofcivilian habitation ; and, after all, are not army personsonly human beings in uniform? Is not human, life con-cerned in this case also? We do not see that this contra-diction brushes asicle the main fact, which is that thesituation is worse than it was two days ago, that thereis an intensification of the evils which confronted uswhen we met here two days ago.92. Furthermore, we are now faced definitely with justthose events which we were told were the reason whycertain Western Powers had embarked on their expe$-tion in Egypt. The very situations have arisen whichthe Western Powers sought to avert by going into thisoperation in Egypt. I refer to the closing of the Canaand to the cutting of oil pipelines. This was just thesort of thing that we were told the Western Powerswished to avert, and here as a result of their operation%just those things are takmg place.93. Though all this is happening, an? though,the .I-+ture is growing darker, at the same tune I thmk It 1also our duty to bring to the notice of this Assembly

8/13/2019 APV563

10/34

54 General Assembly-First Emergency Spec ial Session-Plenary Meetingsgood sense that was voiced here almost unanimouslytwo nights ago will prevail and that practical arrange-ments can be devised in the very near future to putan end to the hostilities in Egypt.94. We notice that the representative of the UnitedStates has brought two ,&aft resolutions before thisAssembly today [A/3272, 32731. We realize on readingthese ,documents that the United States is concernedwith the causes which have led to the present situationin Egypt. This is a commendable concern and it cer-tainly must engage our attention. However, these draftresolutions raise important questions which will have tobe studied very carefully. Therefore it seems to mydelegation that all we can do at the moment is to prom-ise the most expeditious study of these draft resolu-tions and then meet again as soon as we are in a posi-tion to express the views of our Government on them.9.5. But what of the immediate situation? What of thefilghting that is going on? In the opinion of the delega-tlon of India and in the opinion of the delegations ofalmost all the Asian and African countries representedhere, something must be done immediately to try toarrest the situation that exists in Egypt today. In viewof this extremely urgent fact in view of the need tostop the hostilities in Egypt, nmeteen delegations in thischamber have drawn up a draft resolution, which hasbeen handed to the Secretariat and which will be cir-culated in the next few minutes. With your permission,I shall now read this brief draft resolution so that thedelegations here assembled might see how acceptableit is and thus find themselves in a position speedilyto support it, and thus intensify the efforts which thisAssembly initiated two nights ago to stop the fightingin Egypt. This resolution reads as follows :s

The General Asmnbly,Noting with regret that not all the parties con-cerned have yet agreed to comply with the provisionsof its resolution of 2 November 1956,Not&zg the special priority given in the resolutionto an immediate cease-fire and as part thereof to thehalting of the movement of military forces and armsinto the area,Noting fztrtlzer that the resolution urged theparties to the armistice agreements promptly to with-draw all forces behind the armistice lines, to desistfrom raids across the armistice lines into neighbouringterritory, and to observe scrupulously the provisionsof the armistice agreements,1. Rcafirms its resolution of 2 November 1956and once again calls upon the parties immediatelyto comply with the provisions of the said resolution;2. Azl~ zoriz~s the Secretary-General immediatelyto arrange with the parties concerned for the im-plementation of the cease-fire and the halting of themovement of military forces and arms into the areaand requests him to report compliance forthwith and,in any case, not later than twelve hours from the timeof adoption of this resolution;3. Reque;sts the Secretary-General, with the as-sistance of the Chief of Staff and the members of theUnited Nations Truce Supervision Organization, toobtain compliance of the withdrawal of all forcesbehind the armistice lines ;4. Decides to meet again on receipt of theSecretaryaGeneraIs report referred to in operativeparagraph 2 of this resolution.

3 Subsequently reproduced as document A/3275.

96. As all delegations here will immediately recognizethis is an interim measure. This is an attempt to makan appeal to the parties which are engaged in hostilitiesimmediately to cease those hostilities. This authorizesthe Secretary-General to let us have an urgent reporon his efforts, in conjunction with the parties concernedto put an end to hostilities and to obtain withdrawal otroops from Egypt.97. This, surely, is the least we can do tonight. Surelythis Assembly, which passed a resolution almost unanimously, not forty-eight hours ago, wishes to adherto the terms of that resolution, wishes to call again othe parties to comply with that resolution and wisheto draw their attention, through our words here anthrough those of other speakers, to the worsening of thsituation in Egypt, to its repercussions on the rest othe Arab world, to its reverberations in areas outsidthe Middle East.98. If the situation is allowed to continue, it will soonot be one which can be met by resolutions afiectingjust those parties that are now on two sides of thSuez Canal. If we allow the situation to continue, wwill soon be faced with a situation which wil,l requireresolutions dealing not with a few hundred square mileof territory but with many tens of thousands of squarmiles of territory. It is therefore imperative that we stothis situation, arrest it at once, We therefore call agaiupon the parties concerned to comply with the resolutionwhich we adopted by so large a majority, on the initia-tive of the United States of America, not two days agIt cannot be the intention of the sixty-four countrieswhich voted for that resolution to allow the situationto remain in mid-air, because there is no mid-air insituation like this: there is a terrible fall-out from situation of this kind, and the area of contaminationand war will spread rapidly.99. It is for these reasons that w e are asking for thinterim measures included in this draft resolution.100. We give the Secretary-General only twelve hourto report to us. That is a short period of time. But, firstthe situation is extremely grave; secondly, certainPowers took it upon themselves to give Egypt a twelvehour ultimatum, aud certainly, if twelve hours wergiven in those circumstances, twelve hours are enougto stop the situation created by the end of thaultimatum.101. We would therefore earnestly request this Assembly, including the parties concerned, to adopt immediately the draft resolution which I have just readand which stands in the names of Afghanistan, BurmaCeylon, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, JordanLebanon, Liberia, Libya, Nepal, Pakistan,Saudi Arabia, Syria, Thailand and Yemen. Philippines,102. : The immediate purposeas possible

bring about as sooa cease-fire and a withdrawal of forces,the area which we are considering, from contact anfrom conflict with each other. Our longer-range purpose, which has already been referred to tonight anwhich may ultimately, in its implications, be even morimportant, is to find solutions for the problems whichbecause we have left them unsolved over the years, havfinally exploded into this fighting and conflict.

103. In regard to this longer-range purpose, importantdraft resolutions have been submitted this evening the United States delegation. We value this initiative,and our delegation will give those draft resolutions thexamination which their importance desemes, and will

8/13/2019 APV563

11/34

563rd meeting-3 November 1956 55hope, make its own detailed comments concerning

So far as the first and immediate purpose is con-a short time ago the Assembly passed, by ary large majority, a resolution which is now a recom-n of the United Nations General Assembly.d so we must ask ourselves how the United Nationsassist n securing compliance with the terms of thatthose who are most immediately con-and whose compliance is essential if that resolu-s to be carried out. How can we get from them theeration which is required; and howwe do this quickly?The representative of India has just read to US,behalf of a number of delegations, a very importantt resolution which deals with this matter. In op-hs 2 and 3 of that text, certain specificosals are made with a view to setting up machineryfacilitate compliance with the resolution alreadyby the Assembly. I ask myself the questionthat machinery is adequate for the complicateddifficult task which is before us. I am not in anythe draft resolution we have just heard

I appreciate its importance and the spirit in whichhas been put forward. But I do suggest that theeneral be given another and supplementaryconflicting, but supplementary-responsibility : toout at once a plan for an international force toabout and supervise the cease-fire visualized inesolution which has already been passed.For that purpose my delegation would like to sub-to the Assembly a very short draft resolution whichre to read at this time. It is as follows :4The General Assembly,Bearing in ~&cl the urgent necessity of facilitat-ing conlpliance with the resolution of 2 November

1956,LRequests,as a matter of priority, the Secretary-General to submit to it within forty-eight hours, aplan for the setting up, with the consent of the na-tions concerned, of an emergency international UnitedNations force to secure and supervise the cessationofhostilities in accordance with the terms of the afore-lnentioned resolution.I would assume that during this short period theeneral would get into touch with the partiestely concerned, and endeavour to secure theirin the carrying out of the earlier resolutionco-operation, I venture to repeat, is essential-asas endeavour to secure help and co-operation fromy others whom he thinks might assist him in hisThe draft resolution which I have just read outh will be circulated shortly has an addede of facilitating and making effective compliancethe resolution which we have already passed onrt of those whose compliance is absolutely essen-It has also the purpose of providing for interna-supervision of that compliance through the Unitedy, it has as its purpose the bringingan end of the fighting and bloodshed at once, evenSecretary-General is examining this questionreporting back in forty-eight hours.If this draft resolution commended itself to the

read to us by the representative of India-and if it wereaccepted and accepted quickly, the Secretary-Generalcould at once begin the important task which it giveshim. I apologize for adding to his burdens in this way,because they have already been added to in the im-mediately preceding draft resolution, but we know thathe can carry burdens of this kind both unselfishly andefficiently.110. Meanwhile, during this period of forty-eighthours we can get on with our consideration of and deci-sion on the United States draft resolutions and otherdraft resolutions before the General Assembly whichdeal with the grave and dangerous situation confrontingus, both in relation to its immediate as well as its widerand perhaps even more far-reaching aspects.111. The PRESIDENT (franslated from Sjanish) :With the permission of the representative of Uruguay,who is next on my list of speakers, I call on the rep-resentative of the United States.112.me th erica) : Letp->yleldmg tome for just a moment.113. I want to say that the United States likes theCanadian draft resolution very much. We are lookingfor something that will meet the immediate crisis whichis in front of us, as well as something that will go to thecausesand into the more long-range subjects.114. We have presented two draft resolutions dealingwith the long-range questions they obviously will re-quire study and we are not pressing them to a votetonight. We do think that the draft resolution submittedby the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairsis one that should be acted on promptly, and weshould like to see t given priority. We should like tosee t acted on quickly this evening, because t containsa real hope of meeting the very grave emergency thatconfronts the world.115. /__ i%wJ(tralz&ed jronc S$anish) : A few moments ago, fromthis rostrum, the representative of Canada told thisGeneral Assembly that compliance with the resolutionit adopted two nights ago was absolutely essential. Mydelegation considers that regardless of either the ac-ceptance or the regrettable rejection of that resolution,the very fact that this Assembly is meeting indicatesthat the principles of the United Nations Charter re-main in effect. Nothing can diminish the force of thoseprinciples, which have come to represent the deepestexpression of the human conscience.116. When tile free democratic peoples of the worldmet at San Francisco to draw up the Charter of theUnited Nations and begin the work of this interna-tional Organization, they laid down in the Charter thefoundations of justice and freedom and decided thatarmed forces should be used only in defence of Statesand in the common interest, On those monumentalfoundations the Charter became, in response to theuniversal appeal, what it is( today, the new law ofthe earth.117. Tonight we have met to consider the documentswhich the President has circulated to the Assembly,and to deal first ancl foremost with the draft resolutionssubmitted by the representative of the United States[n/3272, 32731.118. I must say at the outset that, just as events are

8/13/2019 APV563

12/34

56 General Assembly-First Emergency Spec ial Session-Plenary Meetingsdefinite stand, not merely on the two draft resolutionssubmitted today by the representative of the UnitedStates but, and even more so, on the draft resolutionspresented from this rostrum a fe w moments ago by therepresentatives of India and of Canada respectively.119. Therefore, while noting that the specific pointsembodied in the resolution of two days ago are stillin effect, and still constitute an appeal to all the partiesin this question, while affirming and hoping that thefirst, the fundamental, the essential and inevitable meas-ure will #be a cease-fire, the cessation of hostilities andthe withdrawal of the conflicting forces, we note, Irepeat, as I said at the previous meeting, that of allthese problems there is one which has its own peculiarform and characteristics, that is, the problem of thestate of war between Israel and the neighbouring Arabcountries, which has now reached a tragic climax.120. We welcome the United States draft resolutions,and, in particular, the draft resolution whose purposeis to establish peace between Israel and Egypt. In ouropinion it represents an immense and powerfu l contri-bution and a step forward in the attempts of the UnitedNations to achieve, not truces to be broken and armi-stices to be ignored, but a state of permanent peacebetween the admirable peoples and communities of thatwonderful region of the world-of Israel and the Arabcountries.121. At our previous meeting I maintained that thestruggle between Israel and Egypt should ,be consideredand decided upon by the Assembly in the light of itspeculiarities and of the realities of the situation. T%isstruggle has been going on, and this situation hasexisted, ever since Israels light for independence fol-lowing the adoption of United Nations resolution 181(II), which approved the so-called partition; and itcan and should be regarded in the light of this fact.In itself, it has nothing to do with other present-dayconflicts, w ith the ultimatum sent to Egypt or with theconsequent outbreak of violence which essentially gaverise to the General Assembly resolution already referredto, adopted on 2 November [997 (ES-I)].122. As I asserted at the previous meeting, after thearmistice lines were fixed between Egypt and Israeland between the Arab countries and Israel, establish-ing a truce between those countries and peoples, therefollowed, sometimes in quick succession, violations ofthe bases and provisions of those armistice agreements.It is an undoubted fact that during the .last few yearsthe frontier between Israel and its neighbours has beenthe scene of a continual struggle, a struggle which hasclaimed victims in the ,communities on both sides ofthe frontier. There is no point now in apportioning theblame for that struggle or in indulging in recrimina-tions; the only appropriate course of action for theUnited Nations General Assembly is to face the issueand, in the name of the unanimous desire of all thepeoples of the world, to lay the groundwork for apeaceful solution.123. When from this rostrum the United States Secre-tary of State, introducing the draft resolution which theGeneral Assembly adopted on 2 November, issued awarning that to continue on the path of violence wouldmean the destruction of the Charter and of this ,Organi-zation, and when President Eisenhower spoke of peacea few days ago aud we all realized that his, words werea cIear call for peace and a message of hope, I am surethat at that moment the silent but heartfelt gratitudeof all the mothers of the world went out to him. Forsince the Second World War, with the establishment

of the foundations of justice in the Charter United Nations and the various systems and mefor resolving differences, between nations, the of the common man in every part of the world hafor peace, not hatred, in the name of his childreother words, in the name o f hope for the future124. The draft resolution submitted for this puby the United States delegation [n/3272] makeerence, in the first place, to the Palestine ConcilCommission set up by this Assembly under GAssembly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December It then notes the efforts made by the Secretary-Geof the United Nations under the Securitresolutions of 4 April 1956 and 4 June 1956y[.$ ?36051. All our fervent hopes went with the SecrGeneral on that occasion, when as always he his great abilities at the service of this labour of and harmony on behalf of the Organization appointed him.12.5. The United States draft resolution then profor the appointment of a new committee whichreplace the Palestine Conciliation Commission. here, on this point, I should like, with the Presidpermission, to address myself more specifically United States representative, so that we may reclear understanding of the terms of this draft resolwith which my delegation is greatly in sympathy.draft substitutes for the old Conciliation Commisswhich Mr. Lodge very properly praised fromrostrum-a new committee, and assigns that comthe task of preparing recommendations, after contion with the parties to the General Armistice Aments, with a view to submitting its recommendato the parties concerned and to the ,General Assor the Security Council.126. I feel that it would perhaps be useful andessary now to make this procedure more flexible. we say that what are needed between Israel anArab States are not new formulae for an armistia truce but a formula for peace, what are we to say? What do we mean? To what specific priare we referring? To what necessity and what are we responding?127. Peace negotiations, in our opinion-and the point of view I shall submit for consideration we take up the draft resolution in detail-should be pursued through intermediary procedures whichprolong the negotiations and delay solutions whiopinions of the contending parties are solicitedmust instead bring the parties together, into with each other. We must put the ,representativIsrael, Egypt and the other Arab States togeththe same council table. After all, on the one ocwhen they did come together, the result of the mwas the armistice. ,On the island of Rhodes in the representatives of Israel and the Arab coumet at the same table. They engaged upon a gdiscussion; they voiced their complaints, their their hope and their faith. Out of that meetingarmistice agreements were born. We believe ththe present occasion we should seek a procedure will bring the great tragic actors in this confliccontact, so that out of their discussion may comword of peace which both communities deservwhich the whole world is calling for.128. My delegation would support any proposany time, tending to that end, and offers its co-opeto the United States delegation, which is the sof this draft ,resolution. We welcome this reso

8/13/2019 APV563

13/34

563rd meeting-3 November 1956 I 57we submit these v iews for consideration by theed States delegation in particular, as well as theWe believe that the Arab peoples and the peoplemust in the future constitute a social entitycb will entible future generations to enjoy peaceprogress, We know them ; we have been in contactthem. We have visited the homeland of Israel,borne which Israel is, fashioning day and night withtrength, and its faith, in the name of the ancient

We all know the glorious tradition of the Arabin the American continent it comes down topast ,centuries when, under the flags of Islam,Jews in the Spanish peninsula created newnew forms of culture and faith; and all thiso America in clue course in Spanish ships, andbequeathed to the peoples of America by the dis-and those who foresaw Americas present-dayWith all this in mind, I was anxious not only tothe general lines of the draft resolutions sub-by the United States delegation, but to outlineproposal concerning the draft resolution relating

he peace which must reign at long last bejweenand the Arab countries. This would be a greatibution to the progress of the world, since it woulddemonstrate that when the United Nationsin the name of the martyrs of the great waragainst nazism, laid down the principlesity and justice, it was speaking for our chil-and in the sacred name of the future of theMy delegation wil l examine any draft resolutionsch are circulated, and reserves the right to speakon the item under discussion. : We meet again,

at the British andFrench have defied the resolution adopted by anmajority of this Assembly, a resolutionch, in another sense, represents the sentiments ofthan 90 per cent of mankind. Two Members ofAssembly, permanent members of the Securityinstead of responding to the manifest desiresll the peoples of the world that they put an endaggression, actually have intensified their savageupon Egypt, upon its scl~ools, moscjues, hospitals,ent civilians and non-military institutions.It is now abundantly clear to everyone that thelled police action by the United Kingdo? andwas directed against all Egypt, with a view tothe Egyptians and everything that Egyptbuilt in the last few years, Nothing could be moreal Powers than a genuine sensedignity and national pride among small peoples.under President Nasser, the first truly Egyptianwho not only represents in sentiment the aspira-of the entire population of Egypt but who hasme a symbol of Arab awakening and unity, hasthe target of the British, French and Israel peo-A blow against Egypt and agamst Nasser 1s aagainst the entire Arab world.In recent years, Egypt, under the leadership oft Nasser, has been guilty of defending the

timate and God-given rights which are embodied

People of Cyprus, and has raised its voice and ,++enhope to all the people of Asia and Africa. Egypt isguilty of being a supporter of the freedom and equalityof all nations. Therefore, Egypt must be crushed andseverely punished for that support, The United King-dom and France, still, and with little sense of shame,claiming to be the champions of freedom, having be-come certain that a major world war is now impossiblebecause of the existence of the hydrogen bomb, sawthe opportunity to resort to nineteenth-century en-powder diplomacy and tactics. The Kingdom of Yemenwarns the peoples of Asia and Africa of this trend inEuropean diplomacy.1%. Mr. Dulles, to whom w e wish a speedy recovery,warned us at the meeting of the Assembly on 1 No-vember of the danger of a Power taking the law intoits own hands. He said:(If * . . we were to agree . . , that whenever anation feels that it has been subjected to injustice itshould have the right to resort to force in an attemptto correct that injustice then I fear that we shouldbe tearing this Charter Into shreds.,, [561st meet&g,pa. 140.-JThe United Kingdom and France remained heedless tothis and many similar warnings from all quarters ofthe globe, even from their own public servants andcitizens. Some of them, such as Mr. Nutting, Ministerof State of the United Kingdom, have resigned in moralindignation.136. We, the small nations, possess very little in theform of military security. Our security against thestrong lies in strict adherence to the principles of theUnited Nations. When the so-called big Powers-forbigness seems to refer only to military strength and toworld-wide prestige-take this Organization so lightly,then our basic sense of security has been destroyed. NoMember among the small nations doubts that unless weall immediately take appropriate measures to guaranteethe continued effectiveness of the various organs of theUnited Nations the security and safety of his own coun-try will become endangered. The issue is much morethan aggression against Egypt; it is an attack againstthe security of the weak, and a return to colonialism.137. This Assembly should not merely punish the ag-gressors, but should also make certain that what hastaken place in Egypt will not be repeated. Words ofcondemnation are not a sufficient remedy. MemberStates should immediately take effective steps againstthe United Kingdom, France and Israel if they do notcease their aggressive acts. The lesson should be unmis-takably clear. Otherwise the fate of this source of sect-rity and international co-operation-I mean the UnitedNations-would be that of the League of Nations.138. Everyone has now realized that aggressionagainst Egypt was planned and synchronized by Israel,the United Kingdom and France. The representativeof Israel has tried to impress upon you that the Arabswere responsible for tension in the Middle East. Heeven claimed that the belligerency came from the Arabsalone, The records of the Security Council and theMixed Armistice Commissions attest to the contrary.Israel alone was condemned many times by the SecurityCouncil. It has never surprised the Arabs that Israelhas been continuously belligerent to them. All of ,~sknow that the cardinal doctrine of Zionism to which

8/13/2019 APV563

14/34

58 General Assembly-First Emergency Special Session-Plenary Meetingsof Palestine, which rights have been consistently recog-nized by the United Nations, Israel has now deemed itopportune to plot with the United Kingdom and France,its allies, this expansionisE policy.139. Peace in the Middle East has to be establishedon the basis of justice. The Zionists have been success-ful in the last forty years or so in enlisting the assist-ance of the big Western Powers against the people ofPalestine. Now the United Kingdom and France haveeven conspired with Israel in attaining the goals ofZionism, In turn, Israel furnished them with the pre-text for destroying Egypt.140. We have always said that peace in the MiddleEast cannot be attained without justice. But now, underthe circumstances, we should add that peace in theMiddle East cannot be attained unt il some big Powersrefrain from making themselves the instrument of Zion-ist a&s. Certainly peace cannot be attained at the pointof a gun. The Arabs have always proved responsive tojust solutions. Unless the settlement is just, there canbe no peace.

For the third time inNations has been defiedby three Member States bent on aggression, expansionand the pursuit of selfish interests. In less than oneweek, the civi lized world has been thrice challenged,its efforts to restore peace in the Middle East thriceblocked by three power-hungry States-by Israel, a so-called State born in aggression, reared in aggressionand thriving on aggression; and by two great Powers:by France, in order perhaps to find a consolation forthe failure of its frustrated militarists and colonialistsin their war against the brave people of Algeria, whosesole crime was that of having asserted their inalienableright to freedom and dignity, nay, to existence itself;and by the United Kingdom, which was impatient per-haps to implement its long-cherished dream of hege-mony and clomination over the entire Middle East, whichwas constantly harassed by reactionary elements in itsParliament who stil l dream of empire and glory andwho have never forgiven their Government for havingabandoned its military base in the Suez Canal, andwhich was determined to extinguish the flame of nation-alism that is burning hot in the Arab world-that Arabworld which seeks sincere co-operation with al l nations,big and small, and which refuses to be the obedientslave of colon ial Powers.142. The United Nations and the civi lized world werechallenged by Israel when, in fragrant violation of thearmistice agreements, the resolutions of the SecurityCouncil, the provisions of the Charter and the mostelementary principles of decency and propriety in inter-national conduct, it launched its unprovoked war ofaggression and conquest against Egypt. The UnitedNations was defied when lsrael contemptuously re-jected the cease-fire order given to it by the Chief ofStaff of the Truce Supervision Organization.143. The United Nations and the civi lized world werechallenged and defiecl for the second time when theUnited Kingdom and France betrayed the confidenceplaced in them at San Francisco and abused their privi-leged position as permanent members of the SecurityCouncil to thwart the efforts of the international com-munity in its quest for peace, nay, to be assured of afree hand in their war of conquest and domination.144. The United Nations and the civi lized world werechallenged and defied for the third time in one week

comply with the request which the SGeneral Assemeeting in its first emergency special session, addto them to cease fire immediately, to halt the movof military forces and arms into the area, to withpromptly al l forces behind the armistice lines observe scrupulously the provisions of the armagreements.145. t has been argued in this Assembly and that this is not the time for propaganda speechthat propaganda is not the way to friendship. I esubscribe to this view. It has also been suggestelong tirades against the aggressors-France, the Kingdom and Israel-are not welcome at a timeminutes count in our search for means to put to bloodshed and destruction. With that view no quarrel. However, brevity must not be at tpense of truth; the facts, the true facts and ndistorted version thereof which we have heardthe representatives of France, the United KingdomIsrael, the true facts must be brought out before start on the right road leading to peace. The truemust be revealed if our efforts here are to prove and effective.146. One fact is that Israel has committed a crime of aggression against Egypt in defiance Security Council, the Charter and the will of humIt has committed this aggression in the best tradof Israel treachery and deceit at a time when its were deafening our ears with protestations of pintentions, at a time when Mr. Eban, its ambassaWashington, was cal ling on Secretary of State to assure him that Israel sought peace with the It has committed this heinous crime unprovokedlamentations and wailings of Mr. Eban notwithsing. The pretext given by Israel for its invasEgypt, namely, that it was a measure of retal iatioso-called fedayesn activity inside Israel, is too to deserve any comment. It has been categoricaljected by the Security Council, the Truce SupeOrganization, the Secretary-General himself and opinion in the civilized world.147. Another fact is that the United KingdomFrance, two great Powers, have also committed sion against Egypt. The excuses which thesPowers give for their brutal invasion of Egypt grotesque that one could chuckle heartily overbut for the tragecly of the hour, and the facthousands of innocent lives and homes are beistroyed in Egypt by the ruthless onslaught invaders.148. At the 749th meeting of the Security Counrepresentative of the United Kingdom said thobjectives which his Government pursued in inEgypt were twofold. I quote the verbatim recoThe first consideration is that the fightintween Israel and Egypt must stop. The seconsideration is that, unless hostilities can quickstopped, free passage through the Suez Canbe jeopardized-that free passage on which tnomic life of so many nations depends. [S/PTpwa. 6.1These objectives are noble, and I am sure that will quarrel with them. But how did the United dom and French Governments go about attail lingpraiseworthy objectives ? This is how they did 149.. ,$s regarcls the first objective, namely, shostlhtles, this xs the action taken by the United

8/13/2019 APV563

15/34

563rd meeting-3 November 1956 59of the Sinai desert in Egypt. If there is still anyin the minds of any one about the veracity offact, a quick glance at the British and Americanss of the last five days would, I am sure, be suffi-to dispel such doubts, Just read the reports ofReston and Marguerite Higgins or listen tobroadcasts from London, and al l doubt will dis-If indeed, as France and the United Kingdomnantly maintain, there was no collusion betweenand Israel, then one has the right to ask the

questions. First, why did the United King-and France, as responsible permanent membersthe Security Council, not join their ally , the Unitedin taking speedy action within the Council tohostilities? Secondly, why did they take advantagethe fact that one of them was President of the Coun-to delay, by dilatory tactics, a vote on the draft reso-on proposed by the United States delegation, whosewas precisely to put an end to the fight ing byal and internationally accepted methods-methodsch the United Kingdom and France had solemnlyd themselves at San Francisco to follow in theof a serious breach of the peace? Thirdly, why didresort to the veto to block the praiseworthy effortstheir United States ally to have adopted a resolutioning at an immediate cease-fire? Fourthly, why did hear from the mouths of the French and Unitedrepresentatives only a mild and friendly re-of Israel., the aggressor, while the Security Coun-and the General Assembly echoed to their loudsts against Egypt, the Arabs and the entire MoslemWhy, we repeat, why? Because, as we saidthe British and the French were not interestedpeace in the Middle East. They welcomed the oppor-provided by the Israel attack on Egypt to stabcountry in the back; the facts, the irrefutable facts,that they indeed plotted with Israel to invade

The British argument that Security Council pro-was too slow and that there exists no mil itaryfor the Security Council does not hold water. It isthe lie by the dilatory procedures followed byUnited Kingdom and French delegations to prevent,at least retard, action by the Council. If the Securityhad not been betrayed by two of its permanentit would have been in a position to cope withIsrael aggression and it could have called on Mem-States which had the means to intervene swiftlyfectively to stop the fight ing, First and foremostthose Member States would, of course, havethe United Kingdom and France.1. Furthermore, if the United Kingdom and Francere genuinely interested in stopping the fighting andthey preferred to act swiftly and not to wait forCouncil action, as they pretend, one wouldexpected that they would intervene against theressor, and not against the victim, Egypt. It isa curious and novel conception of maintainingthe peace by helping to knock out the victim ratherattempting to arrest and punish the aggressor. Itas indeed a sad occasion to listen to the representativeUnited Kingdom, a permanent member of theSecurity Council, which has a special responsibility inmaintaining the peace, It was indeed sad, to say theleast, to hear him argue before the Council, at its 751st

meeting, and again before the emergency special sessionof the 4General Assem#bly [56lst ~~zeetirtg], that what

152. That Israel has thrust its armed might intoEgyptian territory, that the air forces and navies ofFrance, the United Kingdom and Israel are poundingEgyptian cities, massacring innocent people , devastat-ing Egyptian homes- that this tragedy should occurand that a Government should argue that it is debatablewhether these acts constitute aggression, can only provethe aggressive designs of that Government.153. As for the argument that the British-Frencharmed inpasion of Egypt is, to protect the Suez Canaland ensure freedom of passage, the answer there toohas been given in what I have said before, As a furtherrefutation of this flimsy argument, one could ask thisquestion: does anyone believe that the Suez Canalis going to remain open to shipping in the face of thebrutal massacre of Egyptians? Does anyone believe thatthe thousands of tons of high explosives being droppedon Egyptian cities and positions bordering the Canaland on shipping in the Canal will keep the Canal openand contribute to the freedom of passage through thatvita l artery of international intercourse ?154. The sad truth of the matter is that freedom ofpassage through the Suez Canal and an immediatecessation of hostilities were far from the minds ofUnited Kingdom and French leaders when they decidedto join their accomplice, Israel, in its onslaught againstEgypt. The tragedy of the matter is that the UnitedKingdom and France determined to crush a countryin which they have found an obstacle to their imperi-alist aims in the Middle East, in Asia and in Africa,a country which has bravely and gloriously refused toyield to the ignominious demands of colonial Powers.The United Kingdom, along with its French ally , hasstabbed the victim of aggression. The responsibihty ofthe United Kingdom and France in this ugly affair isall the greater in view of the special responsibilitiesplaced upon them as members of the Security Council,the organ charged with the maintenance of peace andsecurity in the world. Their responsibility is renderedeven heavier by virtue of the fact that the Charter hasmade of them permanent members of that Council,men-fbers endowed with special powers and privi legesto enable them to discharge their duties more effectively.155. It is true that the United Kingdom and Francecontinue to call their war of conquest a police action.It is indeed a curious police action where the so-calledpoliceman has joined in stabbing the victim in the backcrather than remaining in the police force, the SecurityCouncil, and joining in the pursuit and punishment ofthe criminal; it is indeed a curious police action by apoliceman turned outlaw who has turned his back onthe police force and joined in aggression.156. The smaller nations of the world are alarmed.They have every reason to be alarmed. Their alarm isjustified when they witness two powerful States-Statesin which they had put their trust-blast the foundationsof the system. which was so laboriously built at SanFrancisco to save succeed,ing generations from thescourge of war which twice in our lifetime has broughtuntold sorrow to mankind. They are alarmed be-cause two of the permanent melnbers which have aspecial responsibility in main taining peace and securityhave gone astray and have embarked upon a war ofaggression.157. The world will never forget the noble standwhich the President, the delegation and the people ofthe United States have taken in the face of aggression.

8/13/2019 APV563

16/34

60 General Assembly-First Emergency Spec ial Session-Plenary Meetingsever he may be, was putting into practice his highprinciples about human conduct, For did we not hearhim tel l the graduating class at Baylor University on25 May 1956 that the test of lofty sentiment is thereadiness of individuals to cleave to principle even atthe cost of narrower, more immediate gains ?158. The human race stands in admiration Ibefore thegallant fight which the forces of freedom have wagedboth in the Security Council and at this emergencyspecial session of the General Assembly against theforces of aggression and conquest. These forces-andthey come from Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin Americaand North America-have earned the gratitude of thehuman race for the promptness and vigour with whichthey have acted to put an end to death and destruction.The fact that their efforts in the Security Counci l wereblocked by an abuse of a right and a privileged positionon the part of the United Kingdom and France, thefact that these two States along with their Israel pro-t&g& have defiantly refused to comply with the provi-sions of the resolution adopted by the emergency specialsession of the General Assembmly, does not mean thatIsrael-British-