Security Council resolution 238 (1967) [on extension of the stationing in Cyprus of the UN Peace-keeping Force]
Symbol: S/RES/238(1967)
Date: 1967-06-19
Meeting record: S/PV.1362
Subjects: UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus|PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS|CYPRUS|CYPRUS QUESTION
Notes: Extends the stationing in Cyprus of the UN Peace-keeping Force.
In: Resolutions and decisions of the Security Council, 1967. - S/INF/22/Rev.2. - 1968. - p. 10. - (SCOR, 22nd year).

Resolution 238 (1967)
of 19 June 1967

The Security Council,

Noting from the report of the Secretary-General of
13 June 1967 16 that in the present circumstances the
United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus is still
needed if peace is to be maintained in the island,

Noting that the Government of Cyprus has agreed
that in view of the prevailing conditions in the island
it is necessary to continue the Force beyond 26 June
1967,

1. Reaffirms its resolutions 186 (1964) of 4 March,
187 (1964) of 13 March, 192 (1964) of 20 June, 193
(1964) of 9 August, 194 (1964) of 25 September and
198 (1964) of 18 December 1964, 201 (1965) of 19
March, 206 (1965) of 15 June, 207 (1965) of
10 August and 219 (1965) of 17 December 1965, 220
(1966) of 16 March, 222 (1966) of 16 June and
231 (1966) of 15 December 1966, and the consensus
expressed by the President at the 1143rd meeting on
11 August 1964;

2. Urges the parties concerned to act with the
utmost restraint and to continue determined co-operative efforts to achieve the objectives of the Security Council ;

3. Extends once more the stationing in Cyprus of
the United Nations Peace-keeping Force, established
under Security Council resolution 186 (1964), for a
further period of six months ending 26 December
1967, in the expectation that by then sufficient progress
towards a solution will make possible a withdrawal or
substantial reduction of the Force.

Adopted unanimously at the
1362nd meeting.


16 Ibid., document S/7969.

Texto español (official Spanish version): 242 (1967). Resolución de 22 de noviembre
de 1967

El Consejo de Seguridad,

Expresando su constante preocupación por la grave
situación en el Oriente Medio,

Tnsistiendo en la inadmisibilidad de la adquisición
de territorio por medio de la guerra y en la necesidad
de trabajar por una paz justa y duradera, en la que
tedos los Estados de la zona puedan vivir con seguridad,

Tnsistiendo además en que todos los Estados Miembros, al aceptar la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, han
contraído el compromiso de actuar de conformidad con
el Artículo 2 de la Carta,

1. Afirma que el acatamiento de los principios de la
Carta requiere que se establezca una paz justa y duradera en el Oriente Medio, la cual incluya la aplicación
de los dos principios siguientes:

i) Retiro de las fuerzas armadas israelíes de los
territorios que ocuparon durante el reciente conflicto;

ii) Terminación de todas las situaciones de beligerencia
o alegaciones de su existencia, y respeto y recocimiento de la soberanía, integridad territorial
e independencia política de todos los Estados de
la zona y de su derecho a vivir en paz dentro
de fronteras seguras y reconocidas y libres de
amenaza o actos de fuerza;

2. Afirma además la necesidad de:

a) Garantizar la libertad de navegación por las vías
internacionales de navegación de la zona;

b) Lograr una solución justa del problema de los
refugiados ;

c) Garantizar la inviolabilidad territorial e independencia política de todos los Estados de la zona, adoptando medidas que incluyan la creación de zonas desmilitarizadas ;

3. Pide al Secretario General que designe un Representante Especial que marche al Oriente Medio, para
establecer y mantener contactos con los Estados interesados a fin de promover un acuerdo y de ayudar en los
esfuerzos para lograr una solución pacífica y aceptada,
de acuerdo con las disposiciones y principios de la
presente resclución ;

4. Pide: al Secretario General que informe lo antes
posible al Consejo de Seguridad sobre el progreso de
los esfuerzos del Representante Especial.

Aprobada por unanimidad
en la 1382a. sesión.

Decisión

El 8 de diciembre de 1967, el Presidente distribuyó
como documento del Consejo de Seguridad (S/8289)?
la siguiente declaración que refleja!: 'z opinión de los
miembros del Consejo:

“Por lo que hace al documento 5/8053/Add.3'*,
senalado a la atención del Consejo de Seguridad,
los miembros, recordando el consenso logrado en su
1366a. sesión, celebrada el 9 de julio de 1967, reco-

12 Ibid.

nocen la necesidad de que el Secretario General aumente el número de observadores en la zona del
Canal de Suez y de que se provean más material técnico y medios de transporte.”

LA CUESTION DE CHIPRE:'
Decisión

En su 1362a. sesión, celebrada el 19 de junio de
1967, el Consejo decidió invitar a los representantes
de Chipre, Turquía y Grecia a participar, sin derecho
de voto, en el examen del tema titulado “Carta del 26 de
diciembre de 1963, dirigida al Presidente del Consejo
de Seguridad por el Representante Permanente de
Chipre (S/5488)'*: informe del Secretario General
sobre la Operación de las Naciones Unidas en Chipre

(S/7969)”5,

238 (1967). Resolución de 19 de junio de 1967
El Consejo de Seguridad,

Tomando nota de que en el informe del Secretario
General de 13 de junio de 19671 se afirma que en las
actuales circunstancias sigue siendo necesaria la Fuerza
de las Naciones Unidas en Chipre si se quiere mantener
la paz en la isla,

Tomando nota de que el Gohierno de Chipre ha convenido en que, en vista de las condiciones existentes
en la isla, es necesario mantener en ella la Fuerza después del 26 de junio de 1967,

1. Reafirma sus resoluciones 186 (1964) de 4 de
marzo, 187 (1964) de 13 de marzo, 192 (1964) de
20 de junio, 193 (1964) de 9 de agosto, 194 (1964)
de 25 de septiembre y 198 (1964) de 18 de diciembre de
1964, 201 (1965) de 19 de marzo, 206 (1965) de 15
de junio, 207 (1965) de 10 de agosto y 219 (1965) de
17 de diciembre de 1965, 220 (1966) de 16 de marzo,
222 (1966) de 16 de junio y 231 (1966) de 15 de
diciembre de 1966, así como el consenso expresado por
el Presidente en la 1143a. sesión, celebrada el 11 de
agosto de 1964;

2. Exhorta a las partes interesadas a que actúen con

la mayor mesura y a que continúen en cooperación sus
decididos esfuerzos para alcanzar los objetivos del
Consejo de Seguridad;

3. Prorroga una vez más, por un nuevo plazo de
seis meses que expirará el 26 de diciembre de 1967,
el estacionamiento de la Fuerza de las Naciones Unidas
para el mantenimiento de la paz en Chipre creada por
la resolución 186 (1964) del Consejo de Seguridad,
con la esperanza de que para entonces se hayan realizado
progresos suficientes hacia una solución a fin de que sea
posible retirar o reducir considerablemente; la Fuerza.

Aprobada por manimidad
en la 1302a. sesión.

13 El Consejo adoptó también resoluciones o decisiones sobre
esta cuestión en 1963, 1964, 1965 966.

14 Véase Actas Oficiales del Consejo de Seguridad, Decimoro Año, Suplemento de octubre, noviembre y diciembre de
19263.

157bid., Vigésimo Segundo Año, Suplemento de abril, mayo y
junio de 1967. _—

16 Jbid., documento S/7969.


Русский текст (official Russian version): Турции н Греции принять участие без права го-
лоса в обсуждении вопроса, озаглавленного:
«Письмо постоянного представителя Кипра от
26 декабря 1963 года на имя Председателя Сове-
та Безопасности (5/5488)'*: доклад Генерально-
го секретаря об операции Организации Объеди-
ненных Наций на Кипре (57/7969) » !5.

Резолюция 238 (1967)
от 19 июня 1967 года

Совет Безопасности,

отмечая на основании доклада Генерального
секретаря от 13 июня 1967 года '%, что ири суще-
ствующих обстоятельствах присутствие  Воору-
женных сил Организации Объединенных Наций
по поддержанию мира на Кипре все еще необхо-
димо для поддержания мира на острове,

отмечая, что правительство Кипра согласилось
с тем, что ввиду существующих условий на ост-
рове необходимо продлить пребывание Воору-
жениных сил после 26 июня 1967 года,

|. подтверждает свои ‘резолюции 186 (1964) от
4 марта, 187 (1964) от 13 марта, 192 (1964) от
20 июня, 193 (1964) от 9 августа, 194 (1964) от
25 сентября и 198 (1964) от 18 декабря 1964 года,
201 (1965) от 19 марта, 206 (1965) от 15 июня,
207 (1965) от 10 августа и 219 (1965) от 17 де-
кабря 1965 года, 220 (1966) от 16 марта, 222
(1966) от 16 июня и 231 (1966) от 15 декабря
1966 года и общее мпенис, выраженное Предсе-
дателем на 1143-м заседании 1! августа 1964 года;

2. настоятельно призывает заинтересованные
стороны действовать с крайней сдержанностью и
продолжать прилагать решительные совместные
усилия к достижению целей Совета Безопасности;

3. еще раз продлевает пребывание ва Кипре
Вооруженных сил Организации Объединенных
Наций но поддержанию мира, созданных в соот-
ветствии с резолюцией Совета Безопасности 186
(1964), на новый шестимесячный срок, заканчи-
вающийся 26 декабря 1967 года, в ожидании, что
соответствующий прогресс, достипнутый к этому
сроку в разрешении проблемы, сделаст возмож -
ным вывод или значительное сокращение Воору-
женных сил.

Принята единогласно
на 1362-м заседании.

Решения

Иа 1383.м заседании 24 ноября 1967 года Со-
вет постановил пригласить представителей Кип-
ра, Турции и Греции принять участие без права
голоса в обсуждении вопроса,  озаглавленного
«Письмо постоянного представителя Кипра от
26 декабря 1903 года на имя Председателя Со-

М осм, Официальные отчеты Совета Безопасности, востм

набитый го, Допо нение за октчбрь, ноябрь и декабрь
{964 пода

РОоБимо же, двадцать аторой го), Дополнение за апрель,
май и ить 1907 пои.

6 Там же, документ 5/7960

вета Безопасности (5/5488) 7; Дисьмо постоян-
ного представителя Кипра от 24 ноября 1967 го-
да на имя Председателя Совета Безопасности
(5/8262) » !8.

На том же заседанни Председатель зачитал
следующее заявление, выражающее согласован-
ное мнение членов Совета:

«Совет сейчас ознакомился с позициями непо-
средственно заинтересованных сторон. Он _серьез-
но обеспокоен в связи © напряженным ин опасным
положением в отношении Кипра. Совет с удов-
летворением отмечает усилия, — предпринятые
Генеральным секретарем, чтоб: помочь поддер-
жанию мира в этом районе, и призывает все за-
ивтересованные стороны проявл ть крайнюю уме-
ренность н сдержанность и воздерживаться ог
любого акта, могушщего ухудшить положение на
Кипре и представить угрозу миру. Совет Безо-
пасности далее просит всех заинтересованных
срочно оказать содействие и сотрудничать в нод-
держании мира и достижении постоянного урегу
лирования в соответствии с резолюцией 186
(1964) Совета — Безопасность от 4 марта
1964 года».

Па 1385-м заседании 20 декабря 1967 года Со-
вст постановил пригласить представителей Кип-
ра, Турции и Греции принять участие без права
голоса в обсуждении вопроса, озаглавленного
«Письмо постоянного представителя Кипра от
26 декабря 1963 года на имя Председателя Сове-
та Безопасности (5/5488) 19: доклад Генерального
‹скретаря об Операции Организации Объединен-
ных Наний на Кипре (578286) » 2°.

На том же заседании Совет постановил при-
гласить г-па Османа Эрека в соответствии с
правилом 39 временных правил процедуры сде-
лать заявление в Совете.

Резолюция 244 (1967)
от 22 декабря 1967 года

Совет Безопасности,

отмечая обращения Генерального секретаря к
правительствам Греции, Турции и Кипра от
22 ноября 2!, 24 ноября *® и 3 декабря 23 1967 года
и доклад Генерального секретаря от 8 декабря *4
1967 года (5/8286),

отмечая ответы трех заинтересованных прави-
тельств * па обращение Генерального секретаря
от З декабря, в котором Генеральный секретарь

"Там же, восемнадцатый год, Дополнение за октябрь,
ноябрь и декабрь 1963 года.

8 Там же, двадцать второй год, Дополнение за октябрь,
ноябрь и декабрь 1907 года.

® Рам же, посемнадцитый год, Дополнение за
ноябрь и декабрь 1963 года.

6 Гам же, двадцать второй год, Дополнение за октябрь,
ноибрь и декабрь 1967 года

2! Гам же, документ 5/В248/ А.З.

# Там же, документ 5/В2А8/АНИ

23 Там же, документ 5/8248/А44.6, пункт 1.

м Там же, документ 5/К286.

2% Тим же, докумсит 5/В248/А44.7 9.

октябрь,

中文文本 (official Chinese version): 决 定

一 九 六 七 年 十 一 月 九 日 ， 理 事 会 第 一 三 七 三 次 会
讨 决 定 汶 请 阿拉 伯 联 合共 和 国 、 以色列 及 狗 且 代表 参
加 讨 花 下 列 项 目 ， 但 无 表决 权 :“ 中 东 情 势 : 一 九 六
七 年 十 一 月 七 日 阿拉 伯 联 合共 和 国 常任 代表 和 致 安全 理
事 会 主席 画 (S/8226)”。

一 九 六 七 年 十 一 月 十 三 日 ， 理 事 会 第 一 三 七 五 欢
会 议决 定 邀 请 斤 利 亚 代 表 参 加 计 苍 本 问题 ， 但 无 表决

由 。

一 九 六 七 年 十 一 月 二 二 二 日
决 芒 案 二 四 二 (一 九 六 七 )
安全 理事 会 ，
表示 其 不 断 关 切中 东 肝 重 情势 ，
强调 不 容 以 战 委 获取 毛 寸 ， 以 及 必须 致力 公正 及
持久 和 平 ， 使 坪 地 区 每 一 国家 均 得 安然 生存 ，
复 强 调 所 有 会 员 国 接受 联合 国 患 章 ， 即 负 有 滥 照
过 章 第 二 人 条 行 动 之 义务 ，
一 . 确 事 储 履 行 审 章 原则 ， 必 须 於 中 东 建 立 公 正
及 持久 和 平 ， 其 中 腰包 括 实施 下 开 两 项 原则 :
《一 ) 以 色 列 军 除 撤 研 其 於 最 近 衡 突 所 估 全 之 领
土 ;
(二 ) 罗 止 一 切 交 战地 位 之 主张 或 状态 ,每 重 北 承
认 读 地 区 每 一 国家 之 主权 ,领土 完 整 及 政治
狗 立 ， 与 其 在 安全 及 公 愉 之 疆界 内 和 平生
存 . 不 受 威 彰 及 武力 行 局 之 权利 ;
二 . 复 确 高 必须 :
Ca) 保证 读 地 区 国际 水 道 之 自由 通航 ;
(b) 过 成 克 民 问题 之 公正 解决 ;

《c) 友 由 包括 建立 非 武装 地 带 在 内 之 措施 ， 保 证
吝 地 区 每 一 国家 之 什 土 不 受 侵犯 及 政治 独立 ;

三 .请 秘书 长 指定 特派 代表 一 人 前 往 中 东 与 关 保
各 国 建立 小 保 持 接 盘 ， 以 期 促成 协 凡 北 协助 努力 依照
本 次 讨 案 之 规定 及 原则 加 成 和 平 及 各 方 接受 之 解决 办
法 ;

四 . 请 秘书 长 就 特派 代表 努力 之 进展 倩 形 ， 公 速
向 安全 理事 会 具 报 。

第 一 三 八 二 次 会 议 一 致 通过 。

同上 。

决 定
一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 八 日 ， 主 席 将 下 列 反映 理事 会
公 意 之 声明 作 翅 安全 理事 会 文件 (S/8289) 分 发 :7

“关於 提请 安全 理事 会 注意 之 文件 S/8053/
Add.3,2 各 理事 覆 按 一 九 六 七 年 七 月 九 日 在 第
一 三 六 六 次 会 巩 巡 成 之 公 意 ， 确 事 秘 书 长 有 增加
嵌 伊 士 运 河 区 观察 贞 人 数 ， 供 给 更 多 技术 器 材 及
到 迷 工 具 之 必要 。

赛 普 勒 斯 疾 题 ，

决 秆
一 九 六 七 年 六 月 十 九 日 ， 理 事 会 第 一 三 六 二 砍 禽
攻 决 定 邀 请 赛 普 袁 斯 土耳其 及 希腊 代表 参加 言 划 下
列 项 目 ,但 无 表决 权 :“ 一 九 六 三 年 十 二 月 二 十 六 日 赛
普 吉 斯 常任 代表 致 安全 理事 会 主席 画 (S/5488):” 秘
书 长 关於 联合 国 赛 普 动 斯 行动 之 报告 书 (S/7969) 。

一 九 六 七 年 六 月 十 九 日
决 芒 案 二 三 八 ( 一 九 六 七 )
安全 理事 会 ，

鉴 悉 秘书 长 一 九 六 七 年 六 月 十 三 日 报告 书 ,” 精
知 在 现状 之 下 ， 如 欲 蕉 持 赛 普 勒 斯 饲 和 平 ， 则 联合 国
驻 赛 普 寺 斯 维持 和 平 军 仍 属 需 要 ，

黎 悉 赛 普 勤 斯 政府 业已 同意 ， 由 於 该 鼻 现 势 ， 必
须 炉 规 读 军 至 一 九 六 七 年 六 月 二 十 六 日 以 后 ，

一 . 重申 其 一 九 六 四 年 三 月 四 日 决 以 案 一 八 六
《一 九 六 四 ) .三 月 十 三 日 决 嵩 案 一 八 七 (一 九 六 四 )、 六
月 二 十 日 决 凡 案 一 九 二 (一 九 六 四 )、 八 月 九 日 决 斑 案
一 九 三 (一 九 六 四 ) , 九 月 二 十 五 日 决 凡 案 一 九 四 (一 九
六 四 ) .十 二 月 十 八 日 决 凡 案 一 九 八 (一 九 六 四 ) ,一 九 六
五 年 三 月 十 九 日 决 嵩 案 二 @ 〇 一 (一 九 六 五 )\ 六 月 十 五

同上 。

3 一 九 六 三 、 一 九 六 四 、 一 九 六 五 、 一 九 六 天 年 理事 会 亦 售
就 木 冉 题 通 遇 决议 案 及 决定 。

“ 参 交 安全 理事 会 正式 志 估 ,第 十 八 年 ,一 九 六 三 年 十 月 、
上 一 月 及 十 二 月 份 生 篇 。

“同上 ,第 二 十 二 年 ,一 九 六 七 年 四 月 \ 五 月 及 六 月 份 锌 篇。

“同上 ， 文 件 S/7969。

日 决 以 案 二 〇 六 (一 九 六 五 )、 八 月 十 日 决 凡 案 二 @ 〇 七
(一 九 六 五 )\ 十 二 月 十 七 日 决 凡 案 二 一 九 ( 一 九 六 五 )
一 九 六 六 年 三 月 十 六 日 决 凡 案 二 二 @ 〇 (一 九 六 六 )、 六
月 十 六 日 决 凯 案 二 二 二 (一 九 六 六 )、 十 二 月 十 五 日 次
尺 案 二 三 一 (一 九 六 六 ) 之 意 上 中 ， 以 及 主席 在 一 九 六 四
年 八 月 十 一 日 第 一 一 四 三 砍 会 议 宣 优 之 公 意 ;

二 . 促请 当 事 各 方 力 事 抑 制 ， 缕 炉 坚 决 合作 ， 以
求实 现 安 个 理事 会 之 各 项 目标 ;

三 .将 依据 安全 理事 会 决 凡 案 一 八 六 (一 九 六 四 )
所 设 联 合 国 礁 持 和 平 军 驻 在 赛 普 款 斯 之 期 限 再 度 延 长
六 个 月 ， 至 一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 二 十 六 日 需 止 ， 希 肇 届
时 间 题 之 解决 已 有 相当 进展 ， 可 以 撤退 或 大 量 裁减 蔷
军 。

第 一 三 六 二 次 会 议 一 致 通过 。

决 定

一 丸 六 七 年 十 一 月 二 十 四 日 ， 理 事 会 第 一 三 八 三
次 会 贰 决定 邀请 赛 普 勤 斯 、 土 吓 其 及 希腊 代表 参加 言
论 下 列 项 目 , 但 无 表决 权 :“ 一 九 六 三 年 十 二 月 二 十 六
日 赛 普 勤 斯 常任 代表 和 致 安全 理事 会 主席 丙 (S/5488);
一 九 六 七 年 十 一 月 二 十 四 日 赛 普 寺 斯 常任 代表 和 致 安 个
理事 会 主席 函 (S/82627) .1
同 次 会 芒 ， 主 席 宣 读 下 开 代 表 理 事 会 公 意 之 声
明 ;

“理事 会 现 已 明 逐 直 接 关 傈 各 方 的 立场 。 理 事
会 鉴 於 赛 普 勒 斯 情势 紧张 与 危险 ， 深 储 焦 虑 。 理
事 会 欣 悉 秘 书 长 努力 协助 礁 持 该 坚 和 平 ， 特 请 党
事 各 方 表现 最 大 的 妇 导 与 抑制 ， 幸 勿 探 取 任何 可
能 恶化 赛 普 乾 斯 情势 且 构 成 和 平 威 奢 的 行动 。 安
全 理事 会 小 要 求 关 傈 各 方 迅即 依照 安全 理事 会 一
九 六 四 年 三 月 四 日 次 匣 案 一 八 六 (一 九 六 四 ) 共 同
协助 维持 和 平 小 谋求 永久 解决 。
一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 二 十 日 ， 理 事 会 第 一 三 八 五 次
会 贰 决定 激 请 赛 普 勒 斯 ` 土 耳 其 及 希腊 代表 参加 讨 花
下 列 顶 目 , 但 无 表决 权 :“ 一 九 六 三 年 十 二 月 二 十 六 日
赛 普 勒 斯 常任 代表 和 致 安全 理事 依 主 席 丙 (S/5488):9
局 “同上 ， 第 十 从 年 ,一 九 六 三 年 十 月 ,十 一 月 及 -上 二 月 份 补
屈 。
同上 ,第 二 十 二 年 ,一 九 六 七 年 十 月 ,十 一 月 及 十 二 月 份
补 编 。

2 同上 ,第 十 八 年 , 一 九 六 三 年 十 月 .十 一 月 及 十 二 月 份 补

吕

秘书 长 关於 联 合 国 赛 普 寺 斯 行动 之 报告 书 (S/
8286) .29

同 次 会 贰 ， 理 事 会 决定 依据 赤 行 愤 事 规则 第 三 十
九条 激 请 Mr. Osman tjrek 向 理事 会 提出 陈述 。

一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 二 十 二 日
决议 案 二 四 四 (一 九 六 七 )
安 企 理事 会 ，

培 悉 秘书 长 於 十 一 月 二 十 二 日 4 十 一 月 二 十 四
日 汪 及 十 二 月 三 日 ”向 希腊 .土耳其 及 赛 普 圭 斯 三 国
政府 发 出 之 呼 和 项 ， 及 秘书 长 一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 八 日 报
告 慎 ,34

甘 悉 吕 傈 三 国政 府 对 秘书 长 十 二 月 三 日 建 训 由 其
出 面 其 旋 之 呼 捧 所 兴 覆 文 , 及 对 其 以 往 呼 稀 之 履 文 ,”

自 上 述 秘书 长 报告 书 获 悉 目前 情形 仍 须 联 合 国 导
赛 普 副 斯 维持 和 平 军 缕 炉 留 驻 一 个 时 期 ，

获悉 赛 普 翰 斯 政府 业已 同意 一 九 六 七 年 十 二 月 二
十 六 日 以 合 仍 有 炎 炉 礁 持 蔷 军 之 必要 ，

一 . 重申 其 一 九 六 四 年 三 月 四 日 决 凡 案 一 八 六
《一 九 六 四 ) 与 其 后 各 决 芒 案 ， 及 其 就 此 问题 所 表示 之
公 意 ;

二 . 兹 准 依 理事 会 决 凡 案 一 八 六 (一 九 六 四 7) 设 并
之 联合 国 礁 持 和 平 军 留 驻 赛 普 寺 斯 期 间 延 长 三 个 月 ，
至 一 九 六 八 年 三 月 二 十 六 日 储 止 ;

三 .请 各 当 事 国 迅 速 利 用 秘书 长 之 坦 诈 ， 兹 请 秘
书 长 酌 量 将 部 旋 结 果 向 理事 会 具 报 ;

四 .促请 所 有 当 事 国家 秋 炉 极力 保持 温和 ， 自 相
抑制 ， 不 探 取 足 使 情势 恶化 之 任何 行动 ;

五 ， 促 请 当 事 各 方 重新 坚决 努力 实现 安 企 理事 会
之 目标 ， 以 期 条 照 理事 会 一 九 六 七 年 十 一 月 二 十 四 日
公 意 之 要 求 ， 傅 安全 理事 会 一 九 六 四 年 三 月 四 日 决 巩
案 一 八 六 (一 九 六 四 ) 厅 持 和 平 ， 获 致 永久 解决 办 法 ;

2 间 上 ,第 二 十 二 年 , 一 九 六 七 年 十 月 .十 一 月 及 十 二 月 份
定 祷 。

2 同上， 文件 S/8248/Add.3。

32 同上， 文件 S/8248/Add.5。

2 同上 ， 文 件 S/8248/Add.6， 第 一 段 。

2 同上， 文件 S/8286。

35 同上， 文件 S/8248/Add.7-9。

2 同上， 文件 S/8248/Add.6， 第 三 股 及 第 四 眉 。


Draft resolution (S/7996):
J eens
fry ——————————
possi r—————
TT i
porn m————— ee ———
ee
prereset ——————

UNITED NATIONS

SECURITY
COUNCIL

Distr.
GENERAL

8/7996
16 June 1967

- ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali, Nigeria:
joint draft resolution

The Security Council, :
Noting from the report of the Secretary-General of 13 June 1967 (5/7969)

that in the present circumstances the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in

Cyprus is still needed if peace is to be maintained in the island,

Noting that the Government of Cyprus has agreed that in view of the
prevailing conditions in the island it is necessary to continue the Force beyond
26 June 1967,

1. Reaffirms its resolutions 186 (1964) of 4 March, 187 (1964) of
13 March, 192 (1964) of 20 June, 193 (1964) of 9 August, 194 (1964) of
25 September and 198 (1964) of 18 December 1964, 201 (1965) of 19 March,

206 (1965) of 15 June, 207 (1965) of 10 August and 219 (1965) of 17 December 1965,
220 (1966) of 16 March, 222 (1966) of 16 June and 231 (1966) of 15 December 1966,
and the consensus expressed by the President at the 1143rd meeting on 11 August 196k;

2. Urges the parties concerned to act with the utmost restraint and to
continue determined co-operative efforts to achieve the objectives of the
Security Council; 3

3. Extends NOE MOL the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force, established under Security Council resolution 186 (1964), for a
further period of six months ending 26 December 1967, in the expectation that
sufficient progress towards a solution by then will make possible a withdrawal or

substantial reduction of the Force.

67-141.61

Meeting record:
UNITED NATIONS

SECURITY COUNCIL

LET
LAL Fores " .

OFFICIAL RECORDS  “v

EA

TEN
TWENTY-SECOND YEAR Ce 0
{ nd
| MEETING: 19 JUNE 1967
NEW YORK
CONTENTS

Page
Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1362) .... oii ee |
Adoption of theagenda ................. eee |

Letter dated 26 December 1963 from the Permanent Representative of Cyprus
addressed to the President of the Security Council (8/5488):
Report of the Secretary-General (S/7969) . .. «ooo ii ii ..

S/PV.1362
NOTE

Symbols of United Nations documents uz composed of capital letters combined with
figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document.

Documents of the Security Council (symbol S/. . .) are normally published in quarterly
Supplements of the Official Records of the Security Council. The date of the document
indicates the supplement in which it appears or in which information about it is given.

The resolutions of the Security Council, numbered in accordance with a system
adopted in 1964, are published in yearly volumes of Resolutions and Decisions of the
Security Council. The new system, which has been applied retroactively to resolutions
adopted before 1 January 1965, became fully operative on that date.
THIRTEEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SECOND MEETING
Held in New York. on Monday, 19 June 1967, at 3 p.m.

President: Mr. Hans R. TABOR (Denmark).

Present: The representatives of the following States:
Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, 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.

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1362)
1. Adoption of the agenda.

2. Letter dated 26 December 1963 from the Permanent
Representative of Cyprus addressed to the President of
the Security Council (5/5488):
Report of the Secretary-General (8/7969).

Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

Letter dated 26 December 1963 from the Permanent
Representative of Cyprus addressed to the President of
the Security Council (S/5488):

Report of the Secretary-General (8/7969)

1. The PRESIDENT: As on previous occasions when the
Council has had this item under consideration, the representatives of Cyprus, Turkey and Greece have submitted
requests to be invited to participate without vote in the
discussion, In accordance with the usual practice of the
Council, therefore, I propose to invite those three representatives to take seats at the Council table in order to
participate without vote in the discussion of the item
before us,

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Z. Rossides
(Cyprus), Mr. O. Eralp (Turkey) and Mr. A. S. Liatis
(Greece) took places at the Council table.

2. The PRESIDENT: The report of the Secretary-General
on the United Nations Operation in Cyprus for the period 6
December 1966 to 12 June 1967 was circulated to
members of the Council last week as document 5/7969.

3. I should also like to draw the attention of the Security
Council to the seven-Power draft resolution /S/7996]
which is sponsored by the delegations of Argentina, Brazil,
Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria.

4. The Council will now take up the discussion of the
matter before us. I give the floor to the first speaker on my
list, the representative of Argentina, who will introduce the
joint draft resolution.

5. Mr. RUDA (Argentina) (franslated from Spanish): On
behalf of my own. delegation and those of Brazil, Ethiopia,
India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria, I have the honour to present
to the Council the draft resolution contained in document
S/7996 concerning the United Nations Peace-keeping Force
in Cyprus.

6. Basically this draft resolution reproduces resolution
231 (1966) of 15 December 1966, which itself was based
on a number of earlier resolutions, dating back to 1964,
regarding the stationing of the Force. The essential purpose
of the draft resolution is 1 extend the stationing in Cyprus
of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force for a further
period of six months, until 26 December 1967. This
proposed extension is based on the final paragraph of the
report by the Secretary-General on the United Nations
operation in Cyprus [8/7969], in which the Secretary-General recommends the extension of the mandate of
UNFICYP for a further period of six months, up to 26
December 1967. The Government of Cyprus and the
Governments of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom
have given their consent to the extension of the mandate,

7. On behalf of my delegation I now wish to thank the
Secretary-General for the detailed report which he has
submitted to us and which shows us clearly not only what
has already taken place but also the general characteristics
of the problem. The over-all picture which emerges is that
the truce has been kept, although some incidents, particularly in the Larnaca area, have disturbed the uneasy
quiet and may give cause for concern. In other words, as
the Secretary-General himself points out, the Force, by its
patient and unremitting efforts, has had no small measure
of success in discharging the essential part of its mission,
which is to prevent a recurrence of fighting and help to
maintain law and order.

8. The day-to-day situation in the Island has manifestly
improved although from time to time incidents remind us
of the seriousness of the situation. If the United Nations
Force remains in areas of direct confrontation, the renewal --
of armed strife seems less likely. If, however, the Force
were to be withdrawn, especially from certain areas, armed
strife would be practically inevitable, For that reason and
for others connected with the maintenance of law and
order, the presence of the United Nations Peace-keeping
Force is essential.
9. The final settlement of the Cyprus question, which is
the basic issue, is a different matter. The Secretary-Gereral
does not mention any progress in the settlement of that
question, He makes it clear that the problem continues to
be unresolved and that there is only danger in ignoring that
situation. In this case, as in so many others, the experience
of the United Nations shows that, while the principal
purpose of maintaining international peace and security is
being achieved, peace is being maintained with weapons at
the ready, and forces prepared for action. Stress has always
been laid on the problem of collective security, while the
problem of the peaceful settlement of the dispute has been
relegated to the background.

10. We are fundamentally dedicated to preventing the
spread and continuation of conflicts, but the actual
settlement is lost sight of. These so-called peace-keeping
operations are, perhaps, the most striking example of this
tendency, Their objectives make it possible to call them
police actions in the best sense of the term. Order is kept,
but the problem is not solved. My delegation believes that
the continued stationing of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, unaccompanied by any attempt
to settle the Cyprus question, is merely putting off the
peaceful settlement of the dispute, which must come
sooner or later, by virtue of the Charter itself.

11. Before concluding, my delegation wishes to express its
appreciation in the Council of the services rendered by Mr.
Carlos A. Bernardes of Brazil, who represented the
Secretary-General in Cyprus with great distinction from
1964 to January 1967.

12. Mr. FEDORENKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): The Soviet Union’s
position on the question of Cyprus is well known. It has
been expressed repeatedly in statements by the Soviet
Government and in speeches by its representatives in the
Security Council and elsewhere. We wish to make it clear
that this position remains unchanged.

13. The Soviet Union bases itself on the premise that the
question of Cyprus must be settled by peaceful means, in
the interests of the Cypriot people and in order to reduce
tension in this part of the world. The Soviet Union firmly
supports the Cypriot people's anti-imperalist struggle for
the complete independence, sovereignty and territorial
integrity of Cyprus, which is a full Member of the United
Nations and is pursuing a policy of non-alignment.

14. There is not and there cannot be any doubt that the
solution of Cyprus’ internal problems is a matter for the
Cypriot people itself. The question of Cyprus must be
settled without outside intervention, The lawful rights of
both national communities in Cyprus must be respected.
The Soviet Union is resolutely opposed to any proposals
and attempts to settle the Cyprus question behind the
backs of the Cypriot people, to the detriment of its
fundamental interests and to the advantage of the imperialist Powers.

15. It is our firm conviction that in order to ensure the
genuine independence and territorial integrity of the
Republic of Cyprus, all foreign troops must be withdrawn

from its territory and foreign military bases on the Island
must be liquidated. This is particularly important at the
present time since there has recently been a sharp increase
in tension in the areas situated in the immediate vicinity of
Cyprus.

16. Recent events have shown very plainly that the
imperialist strategists of NATO have greatly intensified
their efforts to convert the Eastern Mediterranean into a
bridgehead of neo-colunialism against peoples fighting for
their freedom and independence. Who can have any faith in
the assertions of the NATO politicians about their “re.
spect” for the rights of the Cypriot people, when the
Western Powers are openly trying to gain unrestricted
control over Cyprus, to the detriment of its sovereignty and
nafional interests. Military equipment of the most up-todate kind is being concentrated at the military bases of the
former colonizers, for use against the freedom-loving
peoples of this area.

17. Whenever the Government of Cyprus raises its voice in
defence of its lawful national interests and the cause of
peace in this area, and opposes attempts to use its territory
for hostile acts against the Arab countries, NATO circles
reply by intensifying their threats and crude pressure,

18. Certain imperialist Powers are aiming to draw Cyprus
unconditionally into the network of the Western military
bloc. The various plans advanced in the West for the
settlement of the question of Cyprus, in NATO style, all
amount to this.

19. These plans, as we know, are to be implemented in
two phases. First, Cyprus is to be deprived of its independence; and then further plans are to be put into effect
enabling countries members of the NATO bloc to establish
new bases on the Island. It is common knowledge that
reactionary forces and militarist circles have been assigned a
part—and not by any means a minor one—in the practical
implementation of the NATO plans. Thus, we are faced
with a large-scale conspiracy by aggressive foreign forces
against the independent Cypriot State; we are faced with
attempts to place the Island under the military and political
control of NATO, and for its use for the aggressive purposes
of the NATO bloc.

20. In these circumstances it is the duty of all States
which champion the rights of small nations, and it is the
duty of all true friends of the Cypriot people, to take
effective steps to strengthen the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus,

21. The Soviet delegation would like to draw attention to
the need for all States Members of the United Nations, in
accordance with the Security Council resolution
186 (1964) of 4 March, to refrain from any action likely to
worsen the situation in Cyprus.

22. Today the Security Council is again considering the
question of Cyprus in connexion with the Report of the
Secretary-General on the United Nations Operation in
Cyprus for the period 6 December 1966 to 12 June 1967
[5/7969]. In this report the Secretary-General again recommends the extension of the mandate of UNFICYP for a
further period of six months, i.e. up to 26 December 1967.
23. In this connexion, we must point out that the
presence of United Nations armed forces in Cyprus for so
fong a period cannot be regarded as normal. These armed
forces have now been stationed in Cyprus for more than
three years, but this has not in any way advanced the
solution of the Cyprus problem.

24, This fact is acknowledged in the Secretary-General’s
report, which states, infer alia, that “the basic issues which
are at the root of the Cyprus problem continue to be
unresolved”, and that in fact a “deadlock® has been
reached in the settlement of the Cyprus question,

25. The Soviet Union has stressed on many occasions that
the use of foreign troops—including United Nations forces—
and even the mere presence of such forces in the territories
of other States may result in interference in the domestic
affairs of States, serious international complications and
extremely dangerous consequences for the United Nations
itself. Surely this is borne out by the unfortunate experi
ence of the past.

26. It is for this reason that the Soviet Union has been
consistently advocating the strict compliance with the
United Nations Charter in matters relating to the use of
armed force on behalf of the United Nations, We again
consider it our duty to point out that, under the Charter,
the Security Council alone has the right to take decisions
on these questions.

27. Of course, this does not mean that one should
minimize the role of the General Assembly, which is the
most representative forum of our Organization and which,
in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter, “may discuss
any questions relating to the maintenance of international
peace and security™.

28, The meaning of the various General Assembly declarations and resolutions on the many vital international
problems which are of concern to the peoples of the world
is crystal clear and generally understood. Many important
steps taken by the General Assembly have contributed to
the maintenance of international peace and security, the
liquidation of the colonial system, the condemnation of
interference in the domestic affairs of States, the defence of
small countries, progress towards a solution of the disarmament problem and many other questions. If the
Security Council for any reason cannot take the decision it
should take in accordance with the United Nations Charter,
there is nothing to prevent the General Assembly at its
regular sessions—or at special or emergency sessions in cases
which do not brook delay—from meeting in accordance
with its rules of procedure and examining questions relating
to the maintenance of international peace and security, and
from making recommendations to the States concerned or
to the Security Council, within the limits of the Assembly’s
competence under the Charter of the United Nations.

29. This is in keeping with the United Nations Charter and
the interests of the peoples, and helps to eliminate sources
of tension and to protect the lawful rights of peoples.
Nevertheless, in order to avoid any misunderstanding, we
feel it our duty to emphasize that in the future, as in the
past, the Soviet Union will steadfastly resist any attempts

to undermine the United Nations Charter, since strict
compliance with the Charter is the only basis for successful
action by the United Nations in all fields.

30. The Soviet Union has not recognized and does not ,
recognize any decisions which are contrary to the spirit and
the letter of the United Nations Charter, especially decisions relating to such a responsible domain of United
Nations activity as the use of armed force on its behalf.

31. These, Mr. President, are the few considerations of a
general nature which the Soviet delegation wishes to put
forward at a time when the Security Council is discussing
the question of prolonging the presence of armed forces in
Cyprus.

32. With regard to the draft resolution on this question
which has been submitted by the delegations of Argentina,
Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria /S/7996]
and in which it is proposed, inter alia, that the stationing in
Cyprus of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force be
extended for a further period of six months, we note that
this draft resolution reaffirms the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964 together with other decisions
taken by the Council on the question of Cyprus,

33. The Soviet Union will not object to the extension of
the stationing of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in
Cyprus for a further period of six months, but only because
this is in keeping with the wishes of the Cyprus Government, and only on strict understanding that this extension
is effected in complete conformity with the provisions of
the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964—that is,
without any change in the existing functions of the United
Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus or in the present
method of financing, i.e. financing on a voluntary basis,

34. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker on my list is the
representative of India. I should like, on behalf of the
members of the Security Council, to address a warm
welcome to the Minister for External Affairs of India, His
Excellency Mr. M. C. Chagla, who is taking part in our work
this afternoon. It is indeed an honour and a pleasure for us
to have him here. I now give the floor to the Minister for
External Affairs of India.

35. Mr. CHAGLA (India); Mr. President, I am grateful to
you for your kind words welcoming my presence here in
the Security Council. The Permanent Representative of
India, Ambassador Parthasarathi, has made it amply clear
that India wishes to use its membership in this high organ
of the United Nations for one purpose only: to promote
peace and peaceful relations among all countries, based on
the renunciation of the use of force in dealing with
international disputes and the protection of the political
independence and territorial integrity of all States. This will
be our basic approach in dealing with the grave problems of
war and peace that will come up before the Council.

36. I cannot let this occasion pass without paying a sincere
tribute to you, Mr, President, for providing the leadership
both in formal meetings of the Council and in informal
consultations.
37. There is much that the delegation of India and I
personally can say on the question of Cyprus, but this is
neither the time nor the occasion to expound at any length
the political and legal principles involved in the question.
For years now, the brave people of Cyprus have been
engaged in a struggle against colonialism and foreign
domination of one sort or another. Their determined
struggle against colonialism and foreign domination culminated in 1960 in the establishment of the Republic of
Cyprus. Unfortunately, that was not the end of the story.
For four years now, the Government and the people of
Cyprus have faced very difficult problems. We, in India,
view with the utmost sympathy the efforts of the Govenment of Cyprus to maintain the unfettered sovereignty,
independence and unity of the State of Cyprus. As the
members of the Council are no doubt aware, the Cairo
Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries in 1964 had something to say on the
question of Cyprus. India was a party to the Declaration
adopted by that Conference. It declared:

“Concerned by the situation existing with regard to
Cyprus, the Conference calls upon all States in conformity with their obligations under the Charter of the
United Nations, and in particular under Article 2, paragraph 4, to respect the sovereignty, unity, independence
and territorial integrity of Cyprus and to refrain from any
threat or use of force or intervention directed against
Cyprus and from any efforts to impose upon Cyprus
unjust solutions unacceptable to the people of Cyprus.

“Cyprus, as an equal Member of the United Nations, is
entitled to and should enjoy unrestricted and unfettered
sovereignty and independence, and allowing its people to
determine freely, and without any foreign intervention or
interference, the political future of the country, in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.”

38. The Secretary-General has made available to the
Council, as is characteristic of him, a forthright and detailed
report in which he has touched on many facets of the
functioning of the United Nations Force and the work of
his Special Representative in Cyprus. One of the main
objectives of the United Nations operation in Cyprus is ta
prevent a recurrence of fighting and, according to the
Secretary-General’s report, all efforts have been made by
the United Nations Force during the last six months to
achieve this objective. The presence of United Nations
troops in sensitive areas has restrained all concerned from
having recourse to arms, and the Commanders have done
their best to avert clashes, The Secretary-General and his
Special Representative have beer exercising their good
offices, which is worthy of commendation. It is also a
matter of gratification that the Government of Cyprus has
acted with the utmost restraint.

39, In view of the considerations I have just mentioned,
the delegation of India has joined in co-sponsoring the draft
resolution contained in document §/7996. I would commend it to the Council for adoption unanimously.

40. Mr, MATSUI (Japan): I shall speak very briefly and,
first of all, I should like to express our very sincere

1 See A/5763.

appreciation to the Secretary-General and his staff, to the
Special Representative, the Force Commander and the
United Nations personnel of all categories, military or
civilian, which constitute the United Nations presence in
Cyprus, for their efforts in the cause of peace there during
the past six months,

41. Tuming now to the substance of the Secretary
Generals most recent report of 13 June 1967, on the
United Nations operation in Cyprus [5/7969], 1 think it is
necessary to speak quite frankly. My delegation is dis
appointed with a number of aspects of the situation in
Cyprus, as reported by the Secretary-General; we can
hardly describe them as hopeful, and we sincerely regret
these developments.

42, We had anticipated, for example, that the dialogue
between the Greek and the Turkish Governments, which
began last summer, would have yielded fruitful results by
now. However, we find that this dialogue which was
apparently suspended in December 1966, has not since
been resumed, and no one seems to know whether or when
it will be. Further, there does not seem to be any
substantial improvement in relations between the Government of Cyprus and the Turkish Cypriots. It has not been
possible to advance the mediation effort which the Security
Council contemplated more than three years ago, There are
disheartening reports of non-co-operative and antagonistic
attitudes towards the United Nations Force. And finally,
the United Nations is still confronted by a very substantial
financial deficit.

43. Thus, from the over-all point of view, the picture
appears to be rather gloomy. However, in a situation of this
kind, there is obviously nothing to be gained by taking a
pessimistic or defeatist view of the situation. On the
contrary, while not hiding our eyes from reality, we should
take a positive and forward-looking view.

44. Basically, the most positive element in the situation is
that the United Nations presence in Cyprus has contributed
very substantially to the maintenance of peace there for the
past three and a half years. This is a positive element upon
which we should build for the future.

45. Recent events so tragic in human sacrifices have
demonstrated beyond any doubt the value of United
Nations peace-keeping operations in general, The peacekeeping operation in Cyprus is basically sound. If it has not
accomplished all that we might have wished, it certainly has
the capacity to do more, with the goodwill and cooperation of the parties. It therefore deserves the full,
continued support of the Council.

46. For these reasons, my delegation endorses the
Secretary-General’s recommendation that the mandate of
the United Nations operation in Cyprus be extended for a
further period of six months, to 26 December 1967. We
are, therefore, very glad to join the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Mali and Nigeria in cosponsoring the draft resolution contained in document
S/7996, which is now before the Council, and we express
the hope that it will be adopted unanimously.
47. In conclusion, may I say that in the view of my
delegation, all Governments and parties directly concerned
have the most solemn obligation to renew promptly their
efforts to solve the basic underlying issues which have
persisted for three and a half years. We believe that the
Security Council has every right and obligation to insist
that this is done. The United Nations is there to help them.
We feel that they, in turn, should respond by making full
and positive use of United Nations facilities to help resolve
their difficulties and bring lasting peace to Cyprus.

48. Finally, Japan will continue its loyal support of the
Cyprus operation by voluntary contributions and in all
other appropriate ways. We would take the liberty of urging
at this time that other Governments, particularly those of
the more closely concerned countries, be as generous as
possible in their voluntary contributions for this purpose.

49, The PRESIDENT: Since no other representative has
asked to speak before the vote is taken, I shall now put to
the vote the draft resolution co-sponsored by Argentina,
Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria [S/7996].

A vote was taken by show of hands.

The draft resolution was adopted unanimously?

50. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): After our experience in the Council in recent weeks it was with relief, I am
sure, that today we could act at once and act unanimously
without fierce feeling and without interminable argumentation,

51. I'might say here that I am sorry that the representative
of the Soviet Union is no longer present because I should
have wished to make some very short comment on what he
just now said to us.

52. Thad the privilege, on behalf of my Government, of
signing the Agreement establishing the independence of
Cyprus, and Mr. Rossides and I are not likely to forget the
lengthy negotiations which led up to the establishment of
the sovereign base areas. I should like to say that those base
areas have never been used for any offensive purpose and
that they have indeed brought substantial positive benefits
to the people of Cyprus. So, in the absence of the
representative of the Soviet Union, I shall resist his
enticements beckoning us to enter this afternoon into any
cold war altercation. I would only wish to add that it was a
great satisfaction to myself and my delegation to hear the
representative of the Soviet Union defending the rights and
privileges of the General Assembly. It was good to hear him
speak with the enthusiasm, the faith and the charm of a
convert, and I would only go on to say that I shall look
forward even more than usual to hearing his forthcoming
speeches in the Peace-keeping Committee.

53. You, Sir, and we are not likely to forget what I might
call the “Sleepless Week of the Cease-Fire”, and we are all
grateful to the representative of Argentina and to his
co-sponsors for making our task today easy and quick.

34. But that should not give the impression that what we

have done today is not of first importance. On the.

2 See resolution 238 (1967) of the Council.

contrary, what has happened elsewhere in the Near East
must have convinced us more than ever of the urgent need
for international action to keep the peace.

55. There may perhaps be some temptation to make
reference to the lessons which we have so recently learnt.
We have very fresh in our minds the dire consequences
which can so quickly follow when peace-keeping troops are
removed before a settlement is made. We now know all too
well what can happen when a truce is broken. We have
again learnt how dangerous or even disastrous it can be
when we in this Council delay or disagree. But it is at the
same time of some consolation to have again seen today
how effective the Council can be when it acts quickly with
a due sense of urgency and acts unanimously.

56. If, at the beginning of this month, anyone doubted the
effectiveness of concerted international action to stop
fighting, there need be no doubt now. Equally, if anyone
doubted the need for us to search in this Council for
agreement if peace is to be won and then firmly based in
just settlement, there need be no doubt now. Both our
limited success in establishing and maintaining the cease-fire
and the magnitude of the task now ahead of us in the Near
East confirm and justify our faith in the need for
international co-operation and international authority.

57. Fortunately, today we can put aside controversy on
recent events. There was no cause for delay or doubt or
disagreement today. We welcome the resolution which we
have just adopted. We can be specially satisfied that it was
adopted unanimously.

58. None of us can have failed to be impressed by the
Secretary-General’s Cyprus report. It was very clear and
very candid. He warned us of the “‘ever present possibility
of large-scale fighting” and concluded that “there is general
agreement that if it were not for the interposition of
[UNFICYP] Forces as a buffer in areas of direct confrontation, the renewal of armed strife would appear to be

practically inevitable” /S/7969, para. 175]. That is certain-

ly a grave warning. The dangers and the needs of the
situation are equally apparent.

59. On behalf of my Government I renew the pledge
which we have repeatedly given to this Council before, We
are resolved to support the United Nations endeavour in
Cyprus, in the hope that its mission can be fully and
successfully discharged. Accordingly, my Government is
willing to maintain its military contingent in the United
Nations Force in Cyprus, and, what is more, will continue
to meet all its costs, In addition, my Government will
continue to make a voluntary contribution at the rate of a
million dollars for each three-month period of the new
mandate. My Government will continue to give its unqualified support to the efforts of the Secretary-General
and those who work under him in Cyprus in the search for
a just and lasting settlement.

60. And since we have from the beginning supported the
United Nations peace-keeping enterprise in Cyprus and
since, quite apart from meeting all the costs of our military
contingent, our voluntary contributions will have amounted
by the end of this year to more than $15 million, we feel .
that we have the right to appeal to others to join usin the
prompt, positive and practical action which we have
taken—particularly we appeal to those who have so far
contributed nothing at all. We still hope that those who
vote for peace will be prepared to contribute too,

61. As we again salute the fine record of all those who
serve under the United Nations flag in Cyprus and look
forward to their efforts bringing success, there is one other
main lesson in all our minds, I am sure, arising from other
recent events in the Near East.

62. The Secretary-General told us in his report that the
situation in Cyprus remains, after more than three and a
half years, “stubbornly deadlocked”. He appealed to the
parties to the dispute to cast away “the dangerous attitude
of complacency with a status quo ... of uneasy truce”
[ibid., para. 176]. He warned us again that a truce is no
substitute for a permanent settlement, and his warning was
strongly repeated and emphasized by the representative of
Argentina just now,

63. We pray that in the period now ahead of us there will
be another determined effort to find a fair settlement in
Cyprus, a settlement in which Greeks and Turks, who lived
and worked together in their lovely island so long without
enmity or bloodshed, may again come together, and come
together in mutual respect and understanding, leading to
fruitful friendship and co-operation in the interests of all.

64. Mr. PEDERSEN (United States of America): We are
all indebted to the Secretary-General for the clear, complete and perceptive report he has put before the Council.
He has described in forthright language the problems which
confront us all and his distinguished representative on the
Island. It is evident that Mr. Osorio-Tafall has undertaken
his latest assignment with energy and imagination; and we
have no doubt that he, General Martola, and the officers
and men of the United Nations Force in Cyprus will
continue to serve the cause of peace with courage, patience,
skill, and the determination to fulfil their mandate impartially.

65. We should also like to note our appreciation for the
services rendered by the distinguished Brazilian diplomat,
Ambassador Bernardes, as the previous representative of the
Secretary-General. Ambassador Bernardes, who formerly
was a colleague of ours on the Security Council, has shown
a dedication to the high aims of the United Nations and a
true devotion to the best interests of all the people of
Cyprus in carrying out the heavy responsibilities given him
by the Secretary-General with respect to the difficult
situation there.

66. The Mandate of the United Nations Force in Cyprus is
being extended for the eleventh time. Given present
conditions, we believe that this was the only realistic and
prudent course of action, and accordingly we voted for the
resolution, However, as the Secretary-General has noted, all
parties must bear in mind the inescapable fact that
UNFICYP cannot remain in Cyprus indefinitely. The lack
of progress on fundamental issues requires those concerned
to seek new areas of accommodation even more urgently
than before. All parties should extend full co-operation in

accordance with this new resolution, to the Secretary-General, his special representative and UNFICYP, so that
progress may be made towards settling the long-standing
problems on the Island,

67. The essence of UNFICYP’s Mandate is to prevent a
recurrence of fighting in Cyprus and to restore and
maintain law and order. And it is evident that this Mandate
cannot be fulfilled if the parties concerned de not give it
full co-operation. The United States shares the Secretary-General's concern regarding restrictions imposed on
UNFICYP in the discharge of its normal duties, We deplore
any use or threat of force against UNFICYP by anyone, and
we hope that UNFICYP will receive co-operation in the
implementation of its authorized activities.

68. The Force must, in the first instance, have freedom of
movement, and we note that the Secretary-General has
reminded all parties that such freedom is explicitly provided for in written agreement. Neither can any sort of
harrassment of United Nations personnel or of UNFICYP
be acceptable. )

69. The United States also continues to believe, as
Ambassador Goldberg stated before the Council last December [1338th meeting], that the importation of arms can
only be a source of insecurity. The United States fully
concurs in the Secretary-General’s view that any influx of
arms and other military equipment is a cause for concern to
UNFICYP in the execution of its Mandate. In this
connexion, the United States is gratified by paragraph 27 of
the Secretary-General’s report [S/7969], concerning the
results of inspections made of certain arms by the Commander of the United Nations Force, and we welcome the
assurances in this respect given by the Government of
Cyprus.

70. The allegations of the distinguished representative of
the Soviet Union of a hostile NATO design against Cyprus
are, of course, a fantasy. A more positive contribution fo
our debate would have been to express tangible support for
the United Nations Force on the Island. We will not
comment on the digression made in ‘the understandable
need to defend the recent recourse to the “Uniting for
Peace” resolution. Qur own views on the relative responsibilities of the General Assembly and of the Security
Council are well known and unchanged.

71. Despite our disappointment at the lack of progress
towards solving the fundamental issues and the many
problems which have beset the United Nations in its efforts
to maintain peace and promote a settlement, the United
States continues fully to support UNFICYP. As evidence of
this statement, I wish to announce on behalf of the United
States a pledge of up to $4 million towards the cost of
maintaining UNFICYP for the next six months. This
pledge, as has been true of our previous pledges, will
depend upon the amounts contributed by other Govern
ments towards the cost of the operation, The United States
pledges towards the cost of UNFICYP, including the
amount I have just announced, now total over $32 million.

72. The United States hopes that the knowledge that
UNFICYP will continue for another six months will
encourage those most directly concerned to renew and
intensify their efforts to reach a just and lasting solution.
This extension should be regarded as an opportunity for
progress, not as a reason for inaction. We hope that when
the Security Council next meets on this matter we shall
have evidence that the time provided by this extension has
been well used. A wise man has said that time cools, time
clarifies, and no mood can be maintained forever. Let us
hope that those words will be justified by the course of
events during the next six months.

73. Mr. IGNATIEFF (Canada): Although my delegation
voted for the resolution which has just been adopted, I have
been instructed to record the disappointment of my
Government, as a major contributor to UNFICYP, that it
was not possible for the resolution to take greater
cognizance of at least some of the observations of the
Secretary-General in his latest report.

74. In making this comment, of course, my delegation is
appreciative of the efforts of the co-sponsors of the draft
‘and of our extremely hard-working President at this
extremely hectic time. But it is unfortunate, in our view,
that the pressure of events upon members of the Council
may not have given as much time as we would have wished
to consult and seek agreement upon a resolution which
would have come to grips with some of the issues raised by
the Secretary-General in his latest report; and I am sure that
we would agree that, on the next occasion, it would be
desirable that we should try to overcome this deficiency.

75. Canada shares the concern of the Secretary-General at
the lack of progress towards a settlement of the Cyprus
problem. We would welcome fresh initiatives at the political
level which would lead towards a solution. In this connexion, we believe that the Secretary-General’s Special
Representative should be given full support by all parties
concerned in the pursuit of his responsibilities.

76. As far as the activities of UNFICYP are concerned, my
delegation believes that it continues to perform a useful
role. But we note in this connexion that all the parties
concerned are agreeable that the continuation of the Force
is necessary in the prevailing circumstances. We are,
however, very much concerned at the difficulties faced by
UNFICY? in carrying out its duties, and we would urge the
parties directly concerned to co-operate fully in removing
those difficulties.

77. 1 cannot help but note that the continuation of
UNFICYP places a heavy burden on a relatively small group
of countries in respect of their contributions in manpower,
money, or both, and my delegation would hope that these
contributions are fully recognized by members of this
Security Council, and indeed by all Members of the United
Nations, and that such contributions are not taken for
granted,

78. In concluding, there is one further important point
which I have been instructed to make, having in mind the
circumstances of the withdrawal of UNEF and the failure
of the United Nations to agree on satisfactory arrangements
for peace-keeping operations. The point is this: that in
voting for the resolution which we have just adopted, my

delegation did so on the clear understanding that the
establishment of UNFICYP was authorized by the Security
Council for a specific period; that the Force had been
extended on a number of occasions, since that initial
authorization—for specific periods; and that, therefore, any
change in the Council’s decision, or any proposal for a
change, would involve prior consideration by the members
of the Security Council. It seems to my delegation that not
only participants in UNFICYP, but all Member States and
particularly members of the Security Council have an
interest in a clear understanding on this matter,

79. Mr. IYALLA (Nigeria): Permit me to begin my very
brief remarks by expressing my delegation’s appreciation of
the highly distinguished efforts of the Secretary-General
and his staff, both here and in Cyprus, and of the United
Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, in their very
difficult, delicate and even dangerous assignment. The
continued maintenance of peace in Cyprus, however
troubled that peace may be, is a standing credit to their
dedication to the overriding demands of international peace
and security,

80. My delegation joined in recommending the draft
resolution and in urging upon this Council the extension of
the stationing of this Force in Cyprus for a further period
of six months. We must confess, however, that we did so
with some degree of regret about the continued lack of
progress in several aspects of the Cyprus situation. We were
encouraged to do so only by the hope that some further
definite, urgent efforts will be made in the six-month
period by the parties concerned towards some solution of
this problem,

81. Lastly, permit me to draw to the Council’s attention,
to welcome, underline and emphasize those portions of the
statement made by the representative of the Soviet Union
which pointed out that the General Assembly, under
Chapter VI of the Charter, has a right and an obligation to
discuss and consider any situation threatening international
peace and security, and to make recommendations to the
parties concerned or to the Security Council, especially
when the Security Council is for any reason unable to act.
Since my delegation has repeatedly held and expressed this
view in the Special Political Committee and in the Special
Committee on Peace-keeping Operations, we very much
welcome these supporting comments from one of the
permanent members.

82, Mr. KEITA (Mali) (translated from French): My
delegation does not intend at this point to explain its vote,
since it was a co-sponsor of the resolution which the
Council has just adopted unanimously. It does, however,
feel duty bound to pay tribute to the Secretary-General and
his staff for the results already achieved.

83. I should like to take this opportunity to emphasize
that we welcome every decision of the Secretary-General.
Everyone agrees that all the Secretary-General’s reports are
clear and precise. Consequently, all the decisions arising out
of them can be easily understood by all, since they are
taken for reasons which are obvious and cannot in good
faith be interpreted otherwise than in the light of those

reasons. :
84. With regard to the draft resolution so brilliantly
presented by the Argentine representative, I merely wish to
say our position was determined solely by our concern for
peace and the safeguarding of territorial sovereignty, the
vital importance of which we wish to stress. We believe that
if Cyprus becomes totally independent and preserves its
territorial integrity, it will be possible to reduce the United
Nations Peace-keeping Force in that region and even to
withdraw it altogether. Our purpose in this Council must
not be systematically to authorize the continuing presence
of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, but
rather to help Cyprus gain total independence, guaranteed
territorial integrity and absolute national sovereignty.

85. Mr. TINE (France) (‘ranslated from French): The
French delegation joined in the unanimous vote that has
just been taken, because the stationing in Cyprus of the
United Nations Peace-keeping Force for a further period of
six months meets the wishes of the Governments of Cyprus,
Greece and Turkey.

86. In his report [S/7969] the Secretary-General has
clearly stated the positive aspects of the presence of the
United Nations Force in Cyprus. In paragraph 174 of that
report he notes that the Force “has had no small measure
of success in preventing a recurrence of fighting and helping
to maintain law and order”. That, in fact, is the task which
the Council had entrusted to the United Nations contingents. I need not add that they have performed that task
with distinction and in a manner which does credit to the
countries from which they come,

87. The Secretary-General, however, in a praiseworthy
desire to be objective, does not conceal the negative aspects
of the present situation. Some of these relate to the uneasy
quiet which we are told is from time to time disturbed by
incidents such as that of Mari, in April of this year, which
resulted in civilian casualties and material damage. That
unfortunate incident shows that, in spite of the apparent
calm, there is still tension between the two communities
and that the interposition of the Force has helped to
prevent the worst from happening, though it has not
brought about a real political and psychological détente,

88. The Force cannot be held responsible for that failure.
The report of the Secretary-General also mentions the
factors which have led to the present deadlock, namely the
entrenched positions adopted by the two communities both
on matters of principle and in day-to-day coexistence; their
failure to show a genuine willingness to find a peaceful
solution for their problems; and, last but not least, a
deplorable standstill in the dialogue between the Governments of Greece and Turkey.

89. It is in the hope of ending that deadlock that we have
associated ourselves with the Secretary-General’s appeal to
the parties “to cast away the dangerous attitude of
complacency with a status quo which I can still describe as
one of an uneasy truce” [ibid., para. 176].

90. My delegation had already emphasized that aspect of
the problem in its statement of 16 June 1966 [1286th
meeting] in this Council, I therefore see no point in
repeating what was said before, but I feel that the least the

Security Council can ask, at this juncture, is that the
manifestations of distrust of the Force reported by the
Secretary-General in paragraphs 178 and 179 of the
document before us should cease. We trust that these are
instigated by ignorant people and that the responsible
authorities will take effective steps to put an end to them,

91. It goes without saying that, as far as the French
delegation is concerned, our decision to prolong the
presence of the United Nations Force in Cyprus will,
particularly as regards financing, be governed by paragraph
4 of resolution 186 (1964) of 4 March 1964.

92. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker on my lst is the
representative of Cyprus, to whom I now give the floor,

93. Mr. ROSSIDES (Cyprus): The question of Cyprus in
the Security Council at least has the merit of unanimity,
Every time the question arises there is a unanimous
decision, and in this case we, the Government of Cyprus,
according to paragraph 3 of the preamble, have agreed that
in view of the prevailing conditions in the Island, it is
necessary to continue the Force beyond 26 June 1967.

94. Before saying anything about the report of the
Secretary-General, I should like to thank the representatives
of those countries who have spoken in support of the
territorial integrity,” the sovereignty, and the unity of
Cyprus, and for a solution in the spirit of co-operation
within these principles. I also wish to thank those countries
which have been contributing financially to the peacekeeping operations on Cyprus and have also provided
contingents.

95. We have in front of us the report of the Secretary-General for the last six months /S/7969/. It is a clear and
comprehensive document depicting the present situation on
the Island. In this connexion I wish to express my
Government’s appreciation of the positive work that
UNFICYP has been carrying on in contributing to the
maintenance of peace, and of its efforts towards a return to
normality in the daily life of the people, in accordance with
the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964.

96. I avail myself of this opportunity to pay tribute to the
Secretary-General, U Thant, whose wisdom and objectivity,
coupled with his dedication to the United Nations and its
Charter and to the cause of peace, has been the greatest
asset of the Organization and the world community in
times of crisis. We are particularly indebted to him for all
he has been doing on the question of Cyprus as well as to
his advisers and staff both here and in Cyprus, of whose
work we are fully appreciative. In this regard we wish to
mention the devoted services of the Commander of the
United Nations Force, General Martola, and of the Special
Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr, Osorio-Tafali,
as well as of his predecessor, Ambassador Bernardes, whose
patience and consistent effort towards a return to nor
mality should not go unnoticed. For, indeed, normalization
in the relations between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, as
emphasized in the report, and in previous reports, is the
most important aspect of the situation, for it is closely
related to the lessening of tension, on the need for which so
many delegations have spoken here, and to making progress
towards the solution of the problem.
97, The report states that although the United Nations
Force has had no small measure of success in preventing a
recurrence of fighting and in helping to maintain law and
order, it has made very little further progress in achieving a
return to normality. Yet the people of the Island—all the
people—ardently desire a return to normality. Two recent
reports of the Secretary-General speak very clearly about it.
I read from one report [S/7191] :

“Both the Greek and Turkish Cypriot populations of
Cyprus are increasingly impatient for a return to normal
conditions and for a solution of the Cyprus problem, and
it is to be hoped that this factor may have a positive
influence upon the efforts now being made to find a
solution.”

98. Again in a subsequent report /S/7350]* we read of:
“The yearning and impatience of the ordinary people of
Cyprus for a full return to normal conditions.”

99, There, therefore, exists the most essential element for
normalization in the solution of the problem: the will of
the people to conciliate. Yet there is no progress in this
direction, We should inquire into this matter. In this
connexion the present report stresses that there is misapprehension and divergence of views as to what normality
means under the Security Council resolution. It would
therefore be pertinent and necessary to look into this
aspect.

100, The Security Council, in dealing with the question of
Cyprus, by resolution of 4 March 1964, channeled its
efforts through two distinct instruments. One is the United
Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, entrusted with the
task of contributing to the maintenance of law and order
and a retum to normal conditions of life. The other is the
United Nations Mediator for a peaceful solution of the
problem in accordance with the Charter of the United
Nations. Normalization, as explained by the Secretary-General in his report /S/5671],° “is the restoration of
normal conditions in the daily life of the people”, and a list
of objectives is given, among which the main are the
following: freedom of movement on all roads in Cyprus,
including the Kyrenia road; “freedom of movement for all
communities within the whole town of Nicosia and other
cities under conditions of security; progressive evacuation
and removal of all fortified positions held by Greek and
Turkish Cypriots, with priority given to Nicosia; the
progressive disarming of all civilians; return to normal
conditions, and particularly normal economic activity; the
normal functioning of the judiciary”; and similar others of
minor importance.

101. Normalization is therefore the main duty of
UNFICYP within the list given by the Secretary-General.
The constitutional issue is a matter of the over-all solution
of the problem; it falls entirely within the province of the
Mediator and has absolutely nothing to do with the work of
the UNFICYP. A confusion between these two aspects of

3 official Records of the Security Council, Twenty-first Year,
Supplement for January, February and March 1966.

4 Ibid., Supplement for April, May and June 1966.

5 Ibid., Nineteenth Yeor, Supplement for April, May and June
1964,

the problem, in so far as the functions of the United
Nations are concerned, by raising constitutional issues in
matters of mere normalization of daily life, has at least in
some of the cases been instrumental in stalling the
normalization work of UNFICYP. A glance at the report
and at previous reports will bear this out. The Secretary-General's report of 10 June 1966 states:

“In the context of normalization it may be mentioned
that, in a discussion with my Special Representative,’
writes the Secretary-General—“the President proposed”—
the President of Cyprus—*“that consideration be given to a
plan under which, with the exception of coastal defences,
all fortifications, check-points and military posts—
Government and Turkish Cypriot alike—would be removed.”—this falls within one of the lists of the work for
normalization of the Secretary-General—“Complete freedom of movement would thus be restored, including
access to Turkish Cypriot enclaves by Greek Cypriots.
The defortification of Turkish Cypriot enclaves and
villages would be controlled by mixed Greek Cypriot and
Turkish Cypriot police patrols on the understanding that
Turkish Cypriot policemen in such patrols would come
under Government authority. My Special Representative
pursued this proposal with the Turkish Cypriot leaders,
who reiterated their long-standing objection that such
measures would be feasible only in the context of the
1960 Constitution or of an agreed political settlement,”
[8/7350, para. 93.]

102, Therefore, the question of normalization, which was
entrusted to UNFICYP, is frustrated because it must await
the final solution of the problem. But this idea is entirely
contrary to the concept of the Security Council which, in
the meanwhile, and until the solution is reached, seeks the
creation of normal conditions, the lessening of tension, the
doing away with armed posts and so forth, and thus the
bringing about of a spirit of understanding and conciliation
through freedom of movement and freedom of contact
between the people.

103. With regard to freedom of movement, I do not wish
to take the time of this Council by referring to all the cases.
The last report of the Secretary-General states the following:

“The Turkish Cypriot leadership denies Greek Cypriots
access to the Turkish Cypriot enclaves and to most
Turkish Cypriot villages at all times, even if accompanied
by UNFICYP personnel . . .”’—when there is no question
of any danger—“while it keeps to a minimum the number
of Turkish Cypriots allowed to leave those enclaves to
visit Government-controlled areas. ... The Government,
for its part, maintains that there is complete freedom of
movement for all (Turks) in the areas under its control... .” [S/7969, para. 105.]

104. The Secretary-General, referring to the Turkish prohibition on freedom of movement in their areas, says:

“This ban appears to be enforced as a matter of
political principle with little attempt at justification on
practical grounds ... In addition, the Turkish Cypriot
leadership strictly regulates even brief visits by residents
of the Turkish Cypriot enclaves to government-controlled
areas.” [S/7611, para. 109.] ©

105. The object is to prevent contact and fraternization,
in view of the obvious desire of the rank and file of both
sides for such a return to harmonious inter-communal
relations.

106. The Secretary-General states:

¢, .. the (Turkish) community leadership discourages the
Turkish Cypriot population from engaging in personal,
commercial or other contacts with their Greek Cypriot
compatriots, from applying to government offices in
administrative matters, or .-~m resettling in their home
villages if they are refugees.” /5/6228, para. 55.]7

107. The Secretary-General states in document S/6426:

“The Turkish Cypriot leaders have adhered to a rigid
stand against any measures which might involve having
members of the two communities live and work together
... The result has been a seemingly deliberate policy of
selfsegregation by the Turkish Cypriots.” [S/6426,
para, 106./8

Control of free movement is again mentioned and the
report states: “...some steps should be taken by the
Turkish Cypriot leadership towards relaxing its policy of
discouraging Turkish Cypriots from circulating freely in
places outside its control . . .”* [S/7191, para. 94].

108, Therefore, we can now see why there is so little
progress in normalization. The Government of Cyprus has
declared that:

¢,..the Government was prepared to provide concrete
assistance as follows: (a) to repair or totally reconstruct
all Turkish Cypriot houses which might have been
damaged or destroyed in any village; (5) to give financial
assistance for the rehabilitation of all the Turkish
Cypriots who had been forced by their leadership to
abandon their villages; (c/) to provide them with the
means for the exercise of their profession or vocation . . .;
(d) to take all the necessary measures for their complete
safety ...” [S/7001, para. 157]° —and this we have said
repeatedly.

109. The latest report of the Secretary-General stated that
there had been some indications: “. . . that the Government
had in mind an over-all plan covering all the main factors
concerning the restoration of normal conditions . .. (the)
removal of all remaining checkpoints, roadblocks and
fortifications . . .”—with the assistance of UNFICYP—"‘my
Special Representative ... had meetings ... with the
President of the Republic and then with the Turkish
Cypriot leadership” [S/7969, paras. 100, 101], whose
conduct and attitude have frustrated the efforts at
normalization.

6 Ibid., Twenty-first Year, Supplement for October, November
and December 1966.

7 Ibid., Twentieth Year, Supplement for January, February and
March 1965,

8 Ibid., Supplement for April, May and June 19635.
9 Ibid., Supplement for October, November and December 1965.

10

110. I do not say these things by way of criticism, but I
only wish to give an explanation to this Council in order
that it may understand why there is no progress towards
normalization, which would be a necessary step towards a
solution of the problem, Also, in the meanwhile, it would
help to avoid the increase of tension and all the incidents
that would follow.

111. What is the reason for alt this obstruction to
normalization? It is that there should be no opportunity of
reconciliation and of overcoming the present division,
which has been artificially created so that, eventually, it
might lead to some divisive solution, whether it be called
partition or something else.

112. The question of Cyprus has come before this Council
in the midst of your long, arduous and demanding
preoccupations over a world crisis of first magnitude over
the Palestine situation which the General Assembly is now
discussing. It is not the first time that the question of
Cyprus has come to the Security Council, immediately
before or immediately after a crisis connected with the
Palestine situation or other similar problems of which the
Security Council has been seized. I cannot help noting the
common denominator in these cases which regularly and
recurrently occupy the Security Council almost exclusively.
They have one and the same source: the policy of division
and partition. The division of a country by breaking up the
unity of its people is almost invariably imposed from the
outside, against the interests of the country and the will of
the people themselves. It has been given the ostensible
excuse that it was a necessary means to accommodate a
difficult situation or to settle and solve a problem,

113. But experience has shown, particularly in the last
two decades, that such partitionist policies have created far
greater and more dangerous problems, constituting the
gravest threats to peace. If we look at the world around us
today—whether the problems are in the United Nations or
outside—we find that all the grave threats to peace are
derived from partitions. Partition in most cases has followed in the aftermath of colonialism, We can say that in all
these cases, and in the case of Cyprus, the partitionist and
divisionist policies came at a time when partition was in
vogue. But I feel certain that now, with the experience that
we have had in all cases where partition has been applied,
there can no longer be any question of partition in any part
of the world. The world community and public opinion
should stand up against any other sources of perpetual
fighting and trouble; for, partition is a wound in the heart
of a country; it breaks the unity of a people and sets them
apart beyond artificial frontiers; it creates such emotional
situations that they have become explosive, almost as
explosive as the splitting of the atom. The very concept of
partition runs counter to the wholesomeness of nature, and
also to the moral laws of the universe. That is why we find
that they cause such explosive situations.

114. The identity of the Island of Cyprus—and I feel }
must mention this, because we are not yet sure that the
integrity of Cyprus is secure—is an unbroken entity though
the millennia has remained intact; in spite of the foreign
invasions and dominations under which the Island has
suffered and passed through, the Island remains one
undivided whole. The people of Cyprus are determined to
preserve their Island as one undivided unit, and no divisive
suggestions, whether under the name of partition or
federation, or under any other guise, will ever be acceptable
to them.

115, We seek to have not the enmities and the frictions
that arise from partitions and divisions, but a solution in a
spirit of understanding and co-operation, with mutual
respect between all sections of the people. We believe that
no solution which is supposedly good for the one side and
bad for the other can be a good or lasting solution.
Therefore, we would not seek or favour any solution which
would not take into consideration the equal rights of all
citizens in the population of the Island, just as we would
not accept any solution which would disregard the democratic majority rights of the people of Cyprus.

116. We seek the co-operation of all peace-loving and
progressive countries in these aims. We seek the cooperation of Turkey no less. We believe that Turkey,
realizing now, from its close proximity to the situation in
Palestine, the grave evils of any divisive policy, would not
wish such a situation in Cyprus where there is a section of
Turkish population. Turkey would not, as much as we
would not, wish to see the situation in Cyprus deteriorating
through partitionist aims as in Palestine.

117. Therefore, we believe that there can be ample scope
for co-operation and understanding between Greece,
Turkey and Cyprus in a positive solution which preserves
the territorial integrity of the Island. We hope that such a
solution can soon be found from the moment that the
partitionist aims are abandoned.

118. The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of
Turkey.

119. Mr. ERALP (Turkey): It is with great reluctance that -

I have asked for the floor. At a time when the principal
organs of the United Nations are fully occupied with the
aftermath of war in the Middle East, it would seem out of
place to burden the Council with the technicalities of an
issue which it has been dealing with for three and one-half
years and which represents one of the most successful
peace-keeping operations of the United Nations.

120. Itis with dismay that I noticed that, quite unaffected
by such considerations, Ambassador Rossides saw fit to
take twenty-five minutes of the valuable time of this
Council to make the same insinuations and falsifications.
And the famous phobia of partition came out in all its
nakedness once again,

121. TI believe we all have the right to assume that all
members of the Council have read very carefully the report
on Cyprus by the Secretary-General. Therefore, I hardly see
any reason for reading out, one by one, paragraphs which
one of the parties may construe to be favourable to its
claims.

122. Yet, 1 should like to depart from this in one instance,
and that brings me to a word that I have to say about the
remarks of the Foreign Minister of India who, I am afraid,

11

is no longer with us. We are greatly honoured by the
presence of the Foreign Minister of India, a country with
which my country has very close relations. We have greatly
admired at all times the efforts of India to bring real
independence to the people of Cyprus. I do hope that India
will follow that course and keep working for the real
sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Cyprus, because
after all that is what my Government wants.

123. Of course, in conjunction with that, I must say that
what the representative of the Soviet Union said in
connexion with the lawful rights of the two communities,
should never be allowed to go unobserved. But I do hope
that the Foreign Minister of India has taken a look at the
report of the Secretary-General; in reading paragraph 29, he
will have realized where we have come in our joint struggle
for giving real independence to the peoples of Cyprus.
Paragraph 29 states:

“Over the past few months UNFICYP has noticed
increased signs of a tendency to identify the Cyprus
National Guard with the Greek Army. These include the
widespread use of the Greek Army cap badge by the
National Guard and the use of the Greek royal crown in
flags and sign boards at many National Guard camps,
while the oath taken by recent National Guard recruits on
enlistment now incorporates allegiance to the King of
Greece.”

124. Do I have to explain this any further? This is where
we are in our aspirations for the independence and
territorial integrity of Cyprus. The partition phobia which
emerged so clearly from the remarks of Ambassador
Rossides is a myth. No one desires the continued independence of Cyprus more than Turkey. Unfortunately,
the fact is that the expansionist element in the Island wants
to swallow the whole lamb and not a part of it. That is all
there is to it, That is what the clamour is about.

125. Mention of dialogue between Greece and Turkey has
been made by a number of members of the Council.
Dismay has been expressed at the fact that, as the
representative of France has said, this dialogue has reached
a “stagnation déplorable”. Perhaps the members of the
Council will be happy to hear that there is no “stagnation
déplorable”, In fact, through circumstances beyond the
control of the parties, and circumstances which are not
directly concerned with the Cyprus problem, they were in
abeyance for a while; but a genuine effort, I believe, is now
being made by way of contacts to revive these negotiations.
These negotiations, this dialogue as it is called, is aimed at
bringing about full understanding between the parties to
the dispute. The dialogue is aimed at creating an atmosphere, so far as we are concerned, in which the independence and the territorial integrity of the Island can be
safeguarded.

126. I have no knowledge of any so-called NATO machinations in the area. As I have always stated, the attempts
we have made to solve the problem in a peaceful manner
have been based on the continued independence of Cyprus.

127, I do not want to take up much of the Council’s time,
so I shall not follow the example of Ambassador Rossides
in citing various paragraphs of the report. The members of:

the Council must have read them, and many of those
paragraphs, particularly those which relate to incidents in
the areas of Kokkina, Mari and, lately, the Larnaca-Artemis
road, show very clearly a very disturbing tendency on the
part of the military leaders of the Island to push aside the
United Nations Peace-kecping Force and to drive the Turks
from positions which they innocuously occupy.

128. This is a very dangerous tendency. We have seen
similar cases where the authority, and even the presence of
a peacekeeping force of the United Nations has been
neglected or minimized, with disastrous results. The Peacekeeping Force is there with a very clear purpose, as set out
in the resolution of 4 March 1964 to prevent the recurrence
of fighting and to contribute, as necessary, to the restoration and maintenance of law and order. From the many
meetings that this Council has devoted to the question of
Cyprus and all the resolutions it has adopted, it is quite
clear that UNFICYP is not there to become an instrument
of one of the parties to extend its sway over the other.

129. Our understanding of this question of a return to
normal conditions is quite clear, but it does not seem to
agree with the understanding of the Greek-Cypriot administration. By a return to normal conditions it is not out
understanding that the full sway of the power of the
Greek-Cypriot administration should extend over the whole
Island. We do not understand it to be subjugation of the
Turkish community to the illegal authority of the Greek
administration. If we start trying to normalize the situation
in Cyprus from that premise, we shall never get anywhere.
Normalization can come when and if the Greek Cypriots
leave the Turks alone until a political settlernent has been
reached. Then, and only then, can we return to normal
conditions on the Island and create an atmosphere in which
a political solution might be reached.

130. I do not want to take too much of the Council's
time, but while I have the floor it is a very pleasant duty for
me once again to extend sincere thanks, on behalf of my
delegation and my Government, to the Sec.etary-General
for his very objective reports and to his close collaborators
here, who, even if they have spent a sleepless week, have
still found possible to animadvert to this thorny question of
Cyprus; to the recent Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Island, Ambassador Bernardes, for his
diligent and patient efforts to do what he could under
difficult circumstances; to the present Special Representative, Mr. Osorio-Tafall; and to General Martola for all they
have done and are doing to bring peace and quiet to the
Island and in dealing with the many thorny problems that
the situation presents, and also, of course, to those
public-spirited countries which contribute in men and
money to UNFICYP.

131. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker on my list is the
representative of Greece, to whom I now give the floor.

132. Mr. LIATIS (Greece): I did not intend to ask for the
floor except to inform the members of the Council that I
am instructed by my Government to announce officially
that the Greek Government will continue to contribute to
the costs of UNFICYP on the same level as we have done in

12

the recent past, which means at the rate of $300,000 for
cach three-month period. This will bring our total contribu.
tion at the end of the period for which UNFICYP’s
presence in Cyprus has been extended to $5,650,000,
which is quite a substantial amount for Greece; if I am not
mistaken, the figure we are pledging for the coming six
months will place us fourth on the list of financial
contributors to the costs of UNFICYP. This, may I be
permitted to say, is particularly in answer to the exhortation which my good friend, the representative of Japan,
made in asking the countries most immediately concerned
to contribute as best they can to UNFICYP,

133. Since I have the floor, may I answer two or three
points that were raised by some of the speakers who
preceded me?

134. The representative of the Soviet Union reminded us
of the basic position of his country in respect to the Cyprus
problem, and: in doing so he added several general and
wide-ranging comments. He also warned us—and when I say
“us” I mean that his warning was certainly also addressed
to my Government—that no solution to the Cyprus
problem should be sought behind the backs of the people
of the Island. I wish to assure the Soviet representative that
the general position of my Government on the Cyprus
problem is and remains the same. It is quite well-known,
and it is inspired by and in accordance with the most
fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter.

135. As far as trying to find a solution behind the backs of
the Cyprus people, I can assure the Soviet representative
that this has never been the intention nor has it ever been in
the minds of any of the responsible people of Athens so far
as our joint effort with Turkey is concerned. What we are
doing with Turkey, at least as we sec it and I am sure that
my friend, Ambassador Eralp, will agree with me, is to
try—as was actually stated in the wording of the com
muniqué issued about a year ago when the Greek-Turkish
dialogue began—to help to find a solution to the problem of
Cyprus, a solution which we trust will be equitable, just and
proper and, therefore, acceptable to all the parties com:
cerned. The solution will have to be submitted to the
people of Cyprus as a whole for their acceptance.

136. So far as the Greek-Turkish dialogue is concerned, I
am glad to subscribe to what Ambassador Eralp has just
said. I regret I do not have any long report of the meeting
that my Foreign Minister has had with his Turkish
colleague, Mr. Caglajangil, during the past week, but from a
telegram 1 received the other day I understand that my
Foreign Secretary expressed to his Turkish counterpart the
resolute intention of the Greek Government to resume the
Greek-Turkish dialogue on all difficulties existing between
the two countries, including the Cyprus problem with a
view to restoring normal conditions for friendly cooperation between them.

137, This, 1 think, answers the exhortations and the
admonitions we have heard around this table about the
duvy of those primarily concerned to do their best to find a
political solution to the problem, and I wish to assure them
once again that my Government, from the first, has done, i
doing and will keep on doing its best in order to find such a
solution.
138. There was another point that was raised by Ambassador Matsui, if I am not mistaken-actually, I have been in
Japan too, like Ambassador Fedorenko, and I know
something about Japanese—urging us, those primarily concerned, to use all the United Nations facilities in order to
resolve the problem of Cyprus. As far as that goes, [ should
remind Ambassador Matsui that at least Greece has never
denied the assistance of the United Nations machinery, and
in particular of the mediation established by this Council in
its first resolution of 4 March 1964, in the search for a
solution of the Cyprus problem.

139. That is all I wanted to say. I would not wish to
answer my friend Mr. Eralp concerning his remarks about
paragraph 29 of the Secretary-General’s report [S/7969/. 1
myself do not think that the substance of the information
contained therein is too important. As far as that goes,
there could actually be other counterparts with which one
could oppose Mr. Eralp. But I will leave that to the special
field of Mr. Rossides, since he is representing Cyprus and he
should actually answer this question.

140. Mr. de CARVALHO SILOS (Brazil): The Brazilian
delegation was very happy to join the delegations of
Argentina, Ethiopia, India, Japan, Mali and Nigeria in
submitting the draft resolution [S/7996] which the Security Council has just adopted, We did so because we are
convinced that this Council should support the Secretary-General's recommendation concerning the extension of the
United Nations Force in Cyprus. Yet, we would like to
stress our full agreement with the Secretary-General’s
remarks on the lack of progress towards the solution of the
substance of the problem.

141, As we all know, the United Nations operation in
Cyprus was aimed at the solution of the problem and not at
its freezing at a dangerous level.

142. Finally, I should like to thank all delegations which
have praised the service rendered by Ambassador Bernardes
in his capacity as Personal Representative of the Secretary-General in Cyprus.

143. The PRESIDENT: The last speaker on my list is the
representative of Cyprus, to whom I now give the floor.

144, Mr, ROSSIDES (Cyprus): I only want to say a few
words, First of all, I want to thank the representative of
Turkey, Mr. Eralp, for having categorically stated in this
Council, officially stated, that partition is a myth. We take
very serious note of that. Of course, when he speaks about
partition being a myth, he means also any form of
partition, camouflaged in any other way.

145. But I must explain why I brought this up. I
mentioned it because the former Foreign Minister of
Turkey, Mr. Erkin, had stated the following in June 1964:
“the radical solution ...”—of the problem of Cyprus-—
“would be to cede one part of Cyprus to Greece and the
other, closest to the Turkish Asiatic coast, to Turkey.”
Again, the former Prime Minister of Turkey, Mr, Ismet
Inonu, stated the following on 8 September 1964: “officially, we promoted the federation concept, rather than the
partition thesis so as to remain within the provisions of the
treaty.”

13

146, But after the statement of the representative of
Turkey, we feel much better about this problem. I wanted
to mention another point. Mr. Eralp spoke of the Government of Cyprus as the illegal Government of Cyprus. The
Government of Cyprus is fully recognized by the United
Nations, by every Member of the United Nations, including
Turkey, and also by the Security Council resolution of
4 March 1964, It is recognized as the sovereign Government
of Cyprus, having responsibility for the maintenance of law
and order in the Island. Therefore, it is futile for Mr. Eralp
to try and use derogatory adjectives concerning the
Government of Cyprus.

147. We also wish to thank the representative of Greece
for his statement, with which we are in full accord, and also
to say that we look to the solution of the problem of
Cyprus obviously through the United Nations.

148. With regard to what was said about the Security
Council effort for mediation—that it was stalled—we believe
that the Galo Plaza report'® is the sound basis for
negotiations and discussions, and we hope that at some
time it will be given the consideration it deserves.

149. Lastly, I should like to say a few words about the
question of the importation of arms into Cyprus. As I said
on a previous occasion, the Government of Cyprus has
willingly—because it so wanted—co-operated with the
UNFICYP and allowed the inspection of arms that were
imported, and gave details of them, This has been done ina
spirit of co-operation and not in any spirit of derogating
from the rights of the sovereign State of Cyprus. It has the
responsibility for the maintenance of law and order
inherently, and also through the Security Council resolution of 4 March 1964. Whenever it thinks that it must
import arms for its police, it can do so. It cannot be
prevented from doing so by intervention. It is a sovereign
country recognized by all and it can exercise its sovereign
rights.

150. The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of
Turkey.

151. Mr. ERALP (Turkey): I have one word. This will not
take more than one minute. With regard to the legality of
the Government of Cyprus, it is true that we recognize the
Government of Cyprus as a de facto authority on the Island
and we have relations with it. None the less, we have always
said that it is an insurgent administration; it is not legal.
The Government of Cyprus which is mentioned in the
4 March resolution is a Government which at least maintained the form of constitutionality. On it there had been
three Turkish cabinet ministers, as provided for in the
Constitution. And soon after the 4 March resolution, new
cabinet ministers, Greek cabinet ministers, were appointed
to replace them. Therefore, the very shape of the Government of Cyprus, as envisaged in the 4 March resolution, has
been changed. My friend and colleague, Mr. Liatis, wanted
to minimize the importance, the significance, of paragraph
29 of the Secretary-General’s report, which I, on the
contrary, view with great misgivings.

152. This is a very big step. We all know that officers, men
in the armed forces, are civil servants, just like diplomatic

10 rpid., Supplement for January, February and March 1965.
servants, of the Government. How would the Council feel,
assuming that there was a diplomatic uniform in the Greek
foreign service, if the Ambassador of Cyprus appeared in
that uniform, or if he had taken an oath of allegiance to the
Kingdom of Greece? I fail to see the difference between
that and the armed forces taking an oath of allegiance to
the Kingdom of Greece.

153. The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of
Cyprus.

154. Mr. ROSSIDES (Cyprus): I have half a word, As
regards what the representative of Turkey said about
evicting the Turkish members of the Government, this is
entirely untrue. They withdrew in the sense of supporting
the rebellion in December 1963. Therefore, for three and a

14

half years, since August 1960, they were full members of
the Government and functioning in every respect, with due
regard to them in every way. It was only when the rebellion
started and the then Vice-President declared that the
Constitution was at an end and that there was no more
Cyprus State—in the hope that there would be partition—
that they were no longer members of the Government,

155. That is the position. And we would be very happy to
see the return of a spirit of co-operation in the unity of the
country, without divisive provisions, and respect for the
democratic rights of the majority, as well as of the Turkish
minority.

The meeting rose at 5.20 p.m,

Litho in U.N.

Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies)

35510—December 1970-2,100

Voting Summary
Yes: 015 | No: | Abstentions: | Non-Voting: | Total voting membership:
Y ARGENTINA
Y BRAZIL
Y BULGARIA
Y CANADA
Y CHINA
Y DENMARK
Y ETHIOPIA
Y FRANCE
Y INDIA
Y JAPAN
Y MALI
Y NIGERIA
Y USSR
Y UNITED KINGDOM
Y UNITED STATES