Security Council resolution 1067 (1996) [on the conclusions of the ICAO report on the shooting down of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban Air Force]
Symbol: S/RES/1067(1996)
Date: 1996-07-26
Meeting record: S/PV.3683
Subjects: ICAO|Convention on International Civil Aviation (1944). Protocols, etc., 1984 May 10|AIRSPACE|CUBA|ATTACKS ON AIRCRAFT|INTERNATIONAL AIR LAW|TREATIES
Notes: Endorses the conclusions of the ICAO report and the resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on the shooting down of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban Air Force.
Summary: Endorses the conclusions of the ICAO report and the resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996; reaffirms the principle that each State shall take appropriate measures to prohibit the deliberate use of any civil aircraft registered in that State or operated by an operator who has his principal place of business or permanent residence in that State for any purpose inconsistent with the aims of the Chicago Convention; condemns the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight as being incompatible with elementary considerations of humanity, the rules of customary international law as codified in article 3 b of the Chicago Convention, and the standards and recommended practices set out in the annexes of the Convention and calls upon Cuba to join other States in complying with their obligations under these provisions; welcomes the decision of the Council of ICAO to initiate a study of the safety related aspects of the report of the investigation with regard to the adequacy of standards and recommended practices and other rules relating to interception of civil aircraft with a view to preventing the recurrence of a similar tragic event.

UNITED
NATIONS                                                                       S
                 Security Council
                                                               Distr.
                                                               GENERAL

                                                               S/RES/1067 (1996)
                                                               26 July 1996




                               RESOLUTION 1067 (1996)

               Adopted by the Security Council at its 3683rd meeting,
                                   on 26 July 1996


     The Security Council,

     Recalling the statement made by its President on 27 February 1996
(S/PRST/1996/9) strongly deploring the shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of
two civil aircraft on 24 February 1996, which resulted in the death of four
persons, and requesting the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to
investigate this incident in its entirety and to report its findings to the
Security Council,

     Noting the resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on 6 March 1996 which
strongly deplored the shooting down of the two civil aircraft and which directed
the Secretary-General of ICAO to initiate an immediate investigation of the
incident in its entirety in accordance with the Security Council Presidential
Statement of 27 February 1996 and to report on that investigation,

     Commending ICAO for its examination of this incident and welcoming the
resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996, transmitting the
report of the Secretary-General of ICAO (S/1996/509, annex) to the Security
Council,

     Welcoming also the report of the Secretary-General of ICAO regarding the
shooting down of civil aircraft N2456S and N5485S by Cuban MIG-29 military
aircraft, and noting in particular the conclusions of the report,

     Recalling the principle that every State has complete and exclusive
sovereignty over the airspace above its territory, and that the territory of a
State shall be deemed to be the land areas and territorial waters adjacent
thereto and noting in this connection that States shall be guided by the
principles, rules, standards and recommended practices laid down in the
Convention on International Civil Aviation of 7 December 1944 and its annexes
(the Chicago Convention), including the rules relating to the interception of
civil aircraft, and the principle, recognized under customary international law,
concerning the non-use of weapons against such aircraft in flight,


96-19072 (E)                                                                  /...

S/RES/1067 (1996)
Page 2




     1.   Endorses the conclusions of the ICAO report and the resolution adopted
by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996;

     2.   Notes that the unlawful shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of two
civil aircraft on 24 February 1996 violated the principle that States must
refrain from the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight and that, when
intercepting civil aircraft, the lives of persons on board and the safety of the
aircraft must not be endangered;

     3.   Expresses deep regret over the loss of four lives and offers its deep
sympathy and condolences to the bereaved families of the victims of this tragic
event;

     4.   Calls on all parties to acknowledge and comply with international
civil aviation law and related internationally agreed procedures, including the
rules and standards and recommended practices set out in the Chicago Convention;

     5.   Reaffirms the principle that each State shall take appropriate
measures to prohibit the deliberate use of any civil aircraft registered in that
State or operated by an operator who has his principal place of business or
permanent residence in that State for any purpose inconsistent with the aims of
the Chicago Convention;

     6.   Condemns the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight as being
incompatible with elementary considerations of humanity, the rules of customary
international law as codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention, and
the standards and recommended practices set out in the annexes of the Convention
and calls upon Cuba to join other States in complying with their obligations
under these provisions;

     7.   Urges all States which have not yet done so to ratify as soon as
possible the Protocol adding article 3 bis to the Chicago Convention, and to
comply with all the provisions of the article pending the entry into force of
the Protocol;

     8.   Welcomes the decision of the Council of ICAO to initiate a study of
the safety-related aspects of the report of the investigation with regard to the
adequacy of standards and recommended practices and other rules relating to
interception of civil aircraft with a view to preventing the recurrence of a
similar tragic event;

     9.   Decides to remain seized of the matter.


                                     -----

Texto español (official Spanish version): NACIONES
UNIDAS
                                                                                S
                  Consejo de Seguridad
                                                          Distr.
                                                          GENERAL

                                                          S/RES/1067 (1996)
                                                          26 de julio de 1996




                                RESOLUCIÓN 1067 (1996)

               Aprobada por el Consejo de Seguridad en su 3683ª sesión,
                           celebrada el 26 de julio de 1996


     El Consejo de Seguridad,

     Recordando la declaración formulada por su Presidente el 27 de febrero
de 1996 (S/PRST/1996/9), en la que deploraba enérgicamente el derribo por la
Fuerza Aérea Cubana de dos aeronaves civiles el 24 de febrero de 1996, lo que
provocó la muerte de cuatro personas, y pedía a la Organización de Aviación
Civil Internacional (OACI) que investigara ese incidente a fondo y le informara
de sus conclusiones,

     Tomando nota de la resolución aprobada por el Consejo de la OACI el 6 de
marzo de 1996 en la que deploraba enérgicamente el derribo de las dos aeronaves
civiles y solicitaba al Secretario General de la OACI que iniciara una
investigación inmediata del incidente en su totalidad de conformidad con la
declaración del Presidente del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas de
fecha 27 de febrero de 1996 y le informara sobre esa investigación,

     Encomiando a la OACI por su examen de este incidente y acogiendo con
beneplácito la resolución aprobada por el Consejo de la OACI el 27 de junio
de 1996 por la que se transmitía al Consejo de Seguridad el informe del
Secretario General de la OACI (S/1996/509, anexo),

     Acogiendo también con beneplácito el informe del Secretario General de
la OACI en relación con el derribo de las aeronaves civiles N2456S y N5485S por
aeronaves militares cubanas MIG-29, y tomando nota en particular de las
conclusiones del informe,

     Recordando el principio de que todo Estado tiene soberanía total y
exclusiva sobre el espacio aéreo sobre su territorio, y que se considerará que
el territorio de un Estado incluye la superficie terrestre y las aguas
territoriales adyacentes a ésta, y observando a ese respecto que los Estados se
guiarán por los principios, reglas, normas y prácticas recomendadas establecidas
en el Convenio sobre Aviación Civil Internacional de 7 de diciembre de 1944 y
sus anexos (Convenio de Chicago), incluidas las reglas relativas a la

96-19075 (S)                                                                    /...

S/RES/1067 (1996)
Página 2



interceptación de aeronaves civiles y el principio, reconocido por el derecho
internacional consuetudinario, concerniente a la no utilización de armas en
contra de esas aeronaves en vuelo,

     1.   Hace suyas las conclusiones del informe de la OACI y la resolución
aprobada por el Consejo de la OACI el 27 de junio de 1996;

     2.   Toma nota de que el derribo ilícito por la Fuerza Aérea Cubana de dos
aeronaves civiles el 24 de febrero de 1996 violó el principio de que los Estados
deben abstenerse de recurrir al uso de las armas en contra de las aeronaves
civiles en vuelo y que, cuando se interceptan aeronaves civiles, no deben
ponerse en peligro las vidas de las personas a bordo ni la seguridad de la
aeronave;

     3.   Expresa su profundo pesar por la pérdida de cuatro vidas y su sincero
pésame y condolencias a las familias afligidas de las víctimas de este trágico
acontecimiento;

     4.   Insta a todas las partes a que reconozcan y cumplan las leyes de la
aviación civil internacional y los procedimientos conexos internacionalmente
convenidos, incluidas las reglas, normas y prácticas recomendadas establecidas
en el Convenio de Chicago;

     5.   Reafirma el principio de que cada Estado adoptará las medidas
apropiadas para prohibir la utilización deliberada de cualquier aeronave civil
matriculada en ese Estado o explotada por un explotador que tenga su oficina
principal o residencia permanente en ese Estado para cualquier propósito
incompatible con los objetivos del Convenio de Chicago;

     6.   Condena el uso de las armas en contra de aeronaves civiles en vuelo
por ser incompatible con consideraciones elementales de humanidad, con las
normas del derecho internacional consuetudinario codificadas en el artículo 3
bis del Convenio de Chicago y con las normas y prácticas recomendadas
establecidas en los anexos del Convenio, e insta a Cuba a que se sume a otros
Estados en el cumplimiento de las obligaciones que le imponen esas
disposiciones;

     7.   Insta a todos los Estados que todavía no lo hayan hecho a que
ratifiquen a la brevedad posible el Protocolo por el que se incorpora el
artículo 3 bis al Convenio de Chicago y a que cumplan todas las disposiciones de
ese artículo en espera de la entrada en vigor del Protocolo;

     8.   Acoge complacido la decisión del Consejo de la OACI de emprender un
estudio de los aspectos relacionados con la seguridad del informe sobre la
investigación en lo tocante a la suficiencia de las normas y prácticas
recomendadas y otras reglas relacionadas con la interceptación de aeronaves
civiles a fin de impedir que se vuelva a producir un acontecimiento trágico
similar;

     9.   Decide seguir ocupándose de la cuestión.


                                     -----

Texte français (official French version): NATIONS
UNIES                                                                          S
             Conseil de sécurité
                                                              Distr.
                                                              GÉNÉRALE

                                                              S/RES/1067 (1996)
                                                              26 juillet 1996




                               RÉSOLUTION 1067 (1996)

             Adoptée par le Conseil de sécurité à sa 3683e séance,
                               le 26 juillet 1996

     Le Conseil de sécurité,

     Rappelant la déclaration qu’a faite son président le 27 février 1996
(S/PRST/1996/9), dans laquelle il déplorait vivement la destruction par l’armée
de l’air cubaine de deux aéronefs civils abattus le 24 février 1996, qui a causé
la mort de quatre personnes, et dans laquelle il demandait à l’Organisation de
l’aviation civile internationale (OACI) de procéder à une enquête sur tous les
aspects de cet incident et de rendre compte de ses conclusions au Conseil,

     Prenant acte de la résolution adoptée par le Conseil de l’OACI le
6 mars 1996, dans laquelle le Conseil a vivement déploré la destruction des deux
aéronefs civils et chargé le Secrétaire général de l’OACI d’entreprendre
immédiatement une enquête sur tous les aspects de l’incident, conformément à la
Déclaration du Président du Conseil de sécurité en date du 27 février 1996, et
de faire rapport sur cette enquête,

     Félicitant l’OACI d’avoir examiné cet incident et accueillant avec
satisfaction la résolution adoptée par le Conseil de l’OACI le 27 juin 1996, par
laquelle le Conseil de l’OACI lui a transmis le rapport du Secrétaire général de
l’OACI (S/1996/509, annexe),

     Accueillant aussi avec satisfaction le rapport du Secrétaire général de
l’OACI concernant la destruction des aéronefs civils N2456S et N5485S par un
appareil militaire cubain MIG-29, et prenant acte, en particulier, des
conclusions du rapport,

     Rappelant le principe suivant lequel chaque État a la souveraineté complète
et exclusive sur l’espace aérien au-dessus de son territoire et suivant lequel
le territoire d’un État s’entend des zones terrestres et des eaux territoriales
adjacentes, et notant à cet égard que les États doivent être guidés par les
principes, règles, normes et pratiques recommandées établies par la Convention
relative à l’aviation civile internationale en date du 7 décembre 1944 et dans
ses annexes (Convention de Chicago), y compris les règles relatives à




96-19073   (F)                                                                 /...

S/RES/1067 (1996)
Page 2



l’interception d’aéronefs civils, et le principe reconnu en droit international
coutumier concernant le non-recours à l’emploi d’armes contre de tels aéronefs
en vol,

     1.   Fait siennes les conclusions du rapport de l’OACI et la résolution
adoptée par le Conseil de l’OACI le 27 juin 1996;

     2.   Note que la destruction illégale de deux avions civils abattus par
l’armée de l’air cubaine le 24 février 1996 a violé le principe selon lequel les
États doivent s’abstenir de recourir à l’emploi des armes contre les aéronefs
civils en vol et, lorsqu’ils interceptent des aéronefs civils, ne doivent pas
mettre en danger la vie des personnes se trouvant à bord et la sécurité des
aéronefs;

     3.   Exprime ses profonds regrets devant la perte de quatre vies humaines
et adresse toutes ses condoléances aux familles en deuil des victimes de ce
tragique événement;

     4.   Appelle toutes les parties à reconnaître et respecter le droit de
l’aviation civile internationale et les procédures connexes internationalement
reconnues, notamment les règles, normes et pratiques recommandées établies par
la Convention de Chicago;

     5.   Réaffirme le principe selon lequel chaque État doit prendre des
mesures appropriées pour interdire l’usage délibéré de tout aéronef civil
immatriculé dans cet État ou dont l’exploitant a le siège principal de son
exploitation ou sa résidence permanente dans cet État à des fins incompatibles
avec les buts de la Convention de Chicago;

     6.   Condamne l’emploi des armes contre les aéronefs civils en vol, qui est
incompatible avec les considérations élémentaires d’humanité, avec les règles du
droit international coutumier codifiées dans l’article 3 bis de la Convention de
Chicago et avec les normes et pratiques recommandées établies par les annexes de
la Convention, et engage Cuba à se joindre à d’autres États en respectant les
obligations qui découlent de ces dispositions;

     7.   Prie instamment tous les États qui ne l’ont pas encore fait de
ratifier aussitôt que possible le Protocole ajoutant l’article 3 bis à la
Convention de Chicago, et de se conformer à toutes les dispositions de cet
article en attendant l’entrée en vigueur du Protocole;

     8.   Se félicite de la décision prise par le Conseil de l’OACI
d’entreprendre une étude des aspects relatifs à la sécurité du rapport d’enquête
en ce qui concerne l’adéquation des normes et pratiques recommandées et autres
règles touchant l’interception d’aéronefs civils, en vue d’empêcher qu’un
événement tragique similaire ne se reproduise;

     9.   Décide de rester saisi de la question.

                                     -----

Русский текст (official Russian version): ?C'!=31!O3a
?#W+)3=+==YM =!O35                                                                                  S
               E@&,H #,2@B"F>@FH4
                                                                              Distr.
                                                                              GENERAL

                                                                              S/RES/1067 (1996)
                                                                              26 July 1996




                                   C+1?9_O3a 1067 (1996),

                     BD4>bH"b E@&,H@< #,2@B"F>@FH4 >" ,(@ 3683-< 2"F,*">44
                                      26 4`:b 1996 (@*"


      E@&,H #,2@B"F>@FH4,

       FFZ:"bF\ >" F*,:">>@, ,(@ AD,*F,*"H,:,< 27 L,&D":b 1996 (@*" 2"b&:,>4,
 (S/PRST/1996/9), & 8@H@D@< &ZD"0",HFb (:J$@8@, F@0":,>4, & F&b24 F J>4RH@0,>4,< & &@2*JN,
 8J$4>F84<4 &@,>>@-&@2*JT>Z<4 F4:"<4 24 L,&D":b 1996 (@*" *&JN (D"0*">F84N F"<@:,H@&, &
 D,2J:\H"H, 8@H@D@(@ B@(4$:4 R,HZD, R,:@&,8", 4 F@*,D04HFb @$D"V,>>"b 8 ;,0*J>"D@*>@6
 @D(">42"P44 (D"0*">F8@6 "&4"P44 (37!?) BD@F\$" D"FF:,*@&"H\ &F, @$FH@bH,:\FH&" ^H@(@
 4>P4*,>H" 4 *@:@04H\ E@&,HJ #,2@B"F>@FH4 @ F&@4N &Z&@*"N,

       BD4>4<"b 8 F&,*,>4` BD4>bHJ` E@&,H@< 37!? 6 <"DH" 1996 (@*" D,2@:`P4`, & 8@H@D@6
 &ZD"0",HFb (:J$@8@, F@0":,>4, & F&b24 F J>4RH@0,>4,< & &@2*JN, *&JN (D"0*">F84N &@2*JT>ZN
 FJ*@& 4 & 8@H@D@6 ',>,D":\>@<J F,8D,H"D` 37!? BD,*:"(",HFb >,2"<,*:4H,:\>@ >"R"H\
 D"FF:,*@&">4, &F,N @$FH@bH,:\FH& ^H@(@ 4>P4*,>H" & F@@H&,HFH&44 F 2"b&:,>4,< AD,*F,*"H,:b E@&,H"
 #,2@B"F>@FH4 @H 27 L,&D":b 1996 (@*" 4 BD,*FH"&4H\ *@8:"* @$ ^H@< D"FF:,*@&">44,

       &ZD"0"b BD42>"H,:\>@FH\ 37!? 2" BD@&,*,>>@, ,` D"FF<@HD,>4, ^H@(@ 4>P4*,>H" 4
 BD4&,HFH&Jb BD4>bHJ` E@&,H@< 37!? 27 4`>b 1996 (@*" D,2@:`P4`, BD,BD@&@0*"`VJ` *@8:"*
 ',>,D":\>@(@ F,8D,H"Db 37!? (S/1996/509, BD4:@0,>4,) E@&,HJ #,2@B"F>@FH4,

       BD4&,HFH&Jb H"80, *@8:"* ',>,D":\>@(@ F,8D,H"Db 37!? B@ &@BD@FJ @$ J>4RH@0,>44 &
 &@2*JN, (D"0*">F84N F"<@:,H@&   2456S 4     5485S 8J$4>F84< &@,>>Z< F"<@:,H@< ;4(-29 4
 @H<,R"b, & R"FH>@FH4, F@*,D0"V4,Fb & *@8:"*, &Z&@*Z,

       FFZ:"bF\ >" BD4>P4B, & F@@H&,HFH&44 F 8@H@DZ< 8"0*@, (@FJ*"DFH&@ @$:"*",H B@:>Z< 4
 4F8:`R4H,:\>Z< FJ&,D,>4H,H@< >"* &@2*JT>Z< BD@FHD">FH&@< >"* F&@,6 H,DD4H@D4,6, BD4R,< B@*
 H,DD4H@D4,6 (@FJ*"DFH&" B@>4<"`HFb FJN@BJH>Z, H,DD4H@D44 4 BD4:,("`V4, 8 >4< H,DD4H@D4":\>Z,
 &@*Z, 4 @H<,R"b & ^H@6 F&b24, RH@ (@FJ*"DFH&" DJ8@&@*FH&J`HFb BD4>P4B"<4, BD"&4:"<4,
 FH">*"DH"<4 4 D,8@<,>*J,<@6 BD"8H48@6,




 96-19074.R                                                                                  /...

S/RES/1067 (1996)
Page 2


2"L48F4D@&">>Z<4 & 7@>&,>P44 @ <,0*J>"D@*>@6 (D"0*">F8@6 "&4"P44 @H 7 *,8"$Db 1944 (@*" 4
BD4:@0,>4bN 8 >,6 (Q48"(F8"b 8@>&,>P4b), &8:`R"b BD"&4:", 8"F"`V4,Fb B,D,N&"H" (D"0*">F84N
&@2*JT>ZN FJ*@&, 4 BD42>">>Z6 F@(:"F>@ <,0*J>"D@*>@<J @$ZR>@<J BD"&J BD4>P4B >,BD4<,>,>4b
@DJ04b BD@H4& H"84N &@2*JT>ZN FJ*@& & B@:,H,,

     1.    @*@$Db,H &Z&@*Z *@8:"*" 37!? 4 D,2@:`P4`, BD4>bHJ` E@&,H@< 37!? 27 4`>b
1996 (@*";

      2.    @H<,R",H, RH@ BD@H4&@BD"&>@, J>4RH@0,>4, & &@2*JN, 8J$4>F84<4 &@,>>@-&@2*JT>Z<4
F4:"<4 *&JN (D"0*">F84N F"<@:,H@& 24 L,&D":b 1996 (@*" b&:b,HFb >"DJT,>4,< BD4>P4B",
F@(:"F>@ 8@H@D@<J (@FJ*"DFH&" *@:0>Z &@2*,D04&"H\Fb @H BD4<,>,>4b @DJ04b BD@H4& (D"0*">F84N
&@2*JT>ZN FJ*@& & B@:,H, 4 RH@ & F:JR", B,D,N&"H" (D"0*">F84N &@2*JT>ZN FJ*@& >, *@:0>"
FH"&4H\Fb B@* J(D@2J 042>\ >"N@*bV4NFb >" $@DHJ :`*,6 4 $,2@B"F>@FH\ &@2*JT>@(@ FJ*>";

      3.  &ZD"0",H (:J$@8@, F@0":,>4, B@ B@&@*J (4$,:4 R,HZD,N R,:@&,8 4 F&@4 F@$@:,2>@&">4b
B@H,Db&T4< $:4284N F,<\b< 0,DH& ^H@(@ HD"(4R,F8@(@ F@$ZH4b;

      4.   BD42Z&",H &F, FH@D@>Z BD42>"&"H\ 4 F@$:`*"H\ >@D<Z <,0*J>"D@*>@6 (D"0*">F8@6
"&4"P44 4 F@@H&,HFH&J`V4, BD@P,*JDZ, F@(:"F@&">>Z, >" <,0*J>"D@*>@< JD@&>,, &8:`R"b BD"&4:"
4 FH">*"DHZ 4 D,8@<,>*J,<J` BD"8H48J, 2"8D,B:,>>Z, & Q48"(F8@6 8@>&,>P44;

      5.    B@*H&,D0*",H BD4>P4B, 2"8:`R"`V46Fb & H@<, RH@ 8"0*@, (@FJ*"DFH&@ BD4>4<",H
>"*:,0"V4, <,DZ *:b 2"BD,V,>4b BD,*>"<,D,>>@(@ 4FB@:\2@&">4b :`$ZN (D"0*">F84N &@2*JT>ZN
FJ*@&, 2"D,(4FHD4D@&">>ZN & ^H@< (@FJ*"DFH&, 4:4 ^8FB:J"H4DJ,<ZN ^8FB:J"H">H@<, @F>@&>@, <,FH@
*,bH,:\>@FH4 8@H@D@(@ 4:4 B@FH@b>>@, <,FH@ BD,$Z&">4b 8@H@D@(@ >"N@*4HFb & ^H@< (@FJ*"DFH&,, &
8"84N-:4$@ P,:bN, >,F@&<,FH4<ZN F P,:b<4 Q48"(F8@6 8@>&,>P44;

      6.   @FJ0*",H 4FB@:\2@&">4, @DJ04b BD@H4& (D"0*">F84N &@2*JT>ZN FJ*@& & B@:,H, 8"8
>,F@&<,FH4<@, F ^:,<,>H"D>Z<4 F@@$D"0,>4b<4 (J<">>@FH4, >@D<"<4 @$ZR>@(@ <,0*J>"D@*>@(@
BD"&", 8@*4L4P4D@&">>Z<4 & FH"H\, 3 bis Q48"(F8@6 8@>&,>P44, 4 FH">*"DH"<4 4 D,8@<,>*J,<@6
BD"8H48@6, 2"8D,B:,>>Z<4 & BD4:@0,>4bN 8 7@>&,>P44, 4 BD42Z&",H 7J$J BD4F@,*4>4H\Fb 8
*DJ(4< (@FJ*"DFH&"< 4 &ZB@:>bH\ F&@4 @$b2"H,:\FH&", BD,*JF<@HD,>>Z, ^H4<4 B@:@0,>4b<4;

      7.   >"FH@bH,:\>@ BD42Z&",H &F, (@FJ*"DFH&", 8@H@DZ, ,V, >, F*,:":4 ^H@(@, 8"8 <@0>@
F8@D,, D"H4L4P4D@&"H\ AD@H@8@:, &&@*bV46 FH"H\` 3 bis & Q48"(F8J` 8@>&,>P4`, 4 &ZB@:>bH\
&F, B@:@0,>4b ^H@6 FH"H\4 *@ &FHJB:,>4b & F4:J AD@H@8@:";

      8.   &ZD"0",H J*@&:,H&@D,>4, & F&b24 F D,T,>4,< E@&,H" 37!? >"R"H\ D"FF<@HD,>4,
8"F"`V4NFb $,2@B"F>@FH4 "FB,8H@& *@8:"*" @ D"FF:,*@&">44 @H>@F4H,:\>@ "*,8&"H>@FH4 FH">*"DH@& 4
D,8@<,>*@&">>@6 BD"8H484 4 *DJ(4N BD"&4:, 8"F"`V4NFb B,D,N&"H" (D"0*">F84N &@2*JT>ZN FJ*@&,
& P,:bN >,*@BJV,>4b B@&H@D,>4b B@*@$>@(@ HD"(4R,F8@(@ F@$ZH4b;

     9.    B@FH">@&:b,H BD@*@:0"H\ 2">4<"H\Fb ^H4< &@BD@F@<.


                                            -----


النص العربي (official Arabic version): S                                                                            èb]SáÖK Üá©K
Distr.
GENERAL

S/RES/1067 (1996)
26 July 1996
                                                              àá©K ˝ÖZá


                                         (@HHE) @IEF dKdÄÖK


                              <BEGB éS¸ÖZ ï{ àá©K ˝ÖZá ãc`RK ícÖK
                                  @HHE éîÖëì/eëáR AE ï{ èbëÄtáÖK


                                                                               <àá©K ˝ÖZá àõ


ícÖK (S/PRST/1996/9) @HHE dìKdO{/nLOi AF ï{ ˝ÖZáÖK ˝îüd éN óÖbô ícÖK àLîOÖK óÖõ dî˛ì cõ
<@HHE dìKdO{/nLOi AC ï{ àîSîâbá àîRdüLoÖ êîNëÉÖK êìëZÖK QKëÄÖK nLÄgõ èëÄN àá©K ˝ÖZá éî{ PZi
êVbL]ÖK ãcå ï{ ÅÄ]R àô ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá óÖõ PÖoë <jL`iô êtNdô ÑSÄá óÖõ ñbô Láá
                                   <[üLSâ àá éîÖõ ÑkëSR Lás KdìdÄR àá©K ˝ÖZá óÖõ ÜbÄR àôë <LçSádN


<@HHE fdLá/dKc§ E ï{ ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá ˝ÖZá ãc`RK ícÖK dKdÄÖLN LáÖs nî]ì cõë
ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäáÖ ÜLtÖK àîá©K óÖõ PÖoë àîSîâbáÖK àîRdüLoÖK nLÄgõ èëÄN éî{ PZi ícÖKë
/nLOi AF _dùáÖK àá©K ˝ÖZá ˝îüd àLîOÖ LÄ{ë LçSádN êVbL]ÖK ï{ ÅîÄ]R òKdZõ ï{ dë|ÖK óÖs rd˛ì àô
                                                     <ÅîÄ]SÖK ÇÖc às KdìdÄR ÜbÄì àôë <@HHE dìKdO{


ãc`RK ícÖK dKdÄÖLN P¥¥]dì cõë <êVbL]ÖK ãc¥¥çÖ ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá j]{ óÖs ïäWì cõë
àîá©K dìdÄR àá©K ˝ÖZá óÖõ éN ÑL]ôë <@HHE éîâëì/àKdìe] AF ï{ ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá ˝ÖZá
                                                               <(Å{dáÖK <S/1996/509) êáqäáÖK ÇÖSÖ ÜLtÖK


êìdÉ¸tÖK QKdüLoÖK nLÄgõ às ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäáÖ ÜLtÖK àîá©K dìdÄSN Lmìô P]dì cõë
<jëk`ÖK éZë óÖs <LáÖs nî]ì cõë <N5485S ë N2456S àîSîâbáÖK àîRdüLoÖÖ AH - yîá eKdo àá êîNëÉÖK
                                                                         .[üLSâ àá dìdÄSÖK ï{ bdë LáN


ícÖK íëZÖK ÑLZáÖK óÖs êÄÖoáÖKë êÖáLÉÖK èbLî¸ÖK êÖëb ÑÉÖ àöN ïmÄì ícÖK ôbOáÖK óÖK dî˛ì cõë
dî˛ì cõë <LçÖ êá`LSáÖK êîáîÖ´K ãLîáÖKë êìdOÖK ÅoLäáÖK ëå êÖëbÖK ÜîÖõ ãdLOSsK PZì Lá àôë <LçáîÖõ ëÖtì
ó"këáÖK QLgdLááÖKë <dîìLtáÖKë <bsKëÄÖKë <ûbLOáÖLN bidS¸R àô ÑëbÖK óÖs PZì éâô óÖõ ~Lî¸ÖK Kcå ï{
LçRLÄ{dáë @HCC dOá¸ìb/Ñë©K àëâLÉ F ê`dùáÖK ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êîL|RK ï{ LçîÖs jëkäáÖK <LçN
PZëáN éN zdStáÖK <ôbOáÖKë <êîâbáÖK QKdüLoÖK lKdSsLN êÄÖtSáÖK bsKëÄÖK ÇÖc ï{ LáN <(ëwLÉîi êîL|RK)
              <LçâKdîo òLäVô QKdüLoÖK ãcå bm ê]Ög©K ÜKb`SgK ÜbtN ÅÖtSáÖKë <ï{dtÖK ïÖëbÖK àëâLÄÖK


../..                                                                     260796    260796    96-19070

                                                                            S/RES/1067 (1996)
                                                                            Page 2




                                                                     *9619070*
˝ÖZá ãc`RK ícÖK dKdÄÖKë ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá dìdÄR ï{ Qbdë ïSÖK [üLSäÖK bìùì     - @
                                           =@HHE éîâëì/àKdìe] AF ï{ ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá


AC ï{ àîSîâbá àîRdüLoÖ rëd˛áÖK dîw êîNëÉÖK êìëZÖK QKëÄÖK nLÄgõ àô p]®ì                  - A
QKdüLoÖK bm ê]Ög©K ÜKb`SgK às ÑëbÖK uäSáR àöN ïmÄì ícÖK ôbOáÖÖ LÉLçSâK ÑÉ˛ì @HHE dìKdO{/nLOi
óÖs àìbëZëáÖK jL`i©K èLî] <êîâbáÖK QKdüLoÖK lKdSsK bäs <do`ÖÖ ldtR /ßôë <LçâKdîo òLäVô êîâbáÖK
                                                                            =QKdüLoÖK êá®gë LçäSá


LìL]mÖK dg© éìeLtRë éRLgKëá jÖL` ÜbÄìë jL`iô êtNdô èL{ëÖ yÖLOÖK é|gô às Mdtì            - B
                                                                    =uZ|áÖK UbL]ÖK KcçN TOÉâ ïSÖK


QKòKdZ´Kë ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK àëâLÄN bîÄSR àôë zdStR àô zKdo©K uîáZ óÖõ PÖoì          - C
LçîÖs jëkäáÖK <LçN ókëáÖK QLgdLááÖKë <dîìLtáÖKë bsKëÄÖK ÇÖc ï{ LáN <LîÖëb LçîÖs Å|SáÖK êÖkÖK QKc
                                                                               =ëwLÉîi êîL|RK ï{


dq] ÑZô àá êOgLäáÖK QKòKdZ´K êÖëb ÑÉ c`SR àöN ïmÄì ícÖK ôbOáÖK bîÉöR bîtì               - D
ëô ï¸îüdÖK éÖás dÄá àëÉì j`i LçÖx˛ì ëô êÖëbÖK ÇÖR ï{ êÖZ¸á êîâbá èdüLo êì© íbátÖK ÜKb`SgßK
                  =ëwLÉîi êîL|RK zKbåô uá ó{LäSì ldw íô ï{ <êÖëbÖK ÇÖR ï{ ÜüKbÖK éSáLõ Ñ]á


uá LmdLtSá ãdLOSsLN LçâKdîo òLäVô êîâbáÖK QKdüLoÖK bm ê]Ög©K ÜKb`SgK àìbì               - E
êîL|RK àá KddÉá B èbLáÖK ï{ êâëbáÖK LçSxîkN ï{dtÖK ïÖëbÖK àëâLÄÖK bsKëë êîÖë©K êîâL¸â´K QKdLOSsßK
LNëÉ óÖõ PÖoìë <êîL|RßK ÇÖR QLÄ{dá ï{ LçîÖs jëkäáÖK <LçN ókëáÖK QLgdLááÖKë <dîìLtáÖKë <ëwLÉîi
                    =ÜLÉ]©K ÇÖR ï{ LçîÖs jëkäáÖK LçRLáKeSÖLN bîÄSÖK ï{ ñd`©K ÑëbÖK óÖõ ÜmäR àô


óÖõ KddÉá B èbLáÖK zLmô ícÖK ÑëÉëRëdOÖK óÖs btN ~bkR ÜÖ ïSÖK ÑëbÖK uîáZ X]ì             - F
ôbOì LáWìd èbLáÖK ÇÖR ÜLÉ]ô uîáZÖ ÑWSáR àôë <àÉáá Të Mdô ï{ ÇÖc Ñt|R àô óÖs <ëwLÉîi êîL|RK
                                                                                   =ÑëÉëRëdOÖK cL|â


êá®¸ÖLN êÖkSáÖK PâKëZÖÖ êgKdb òKdZõ ïÖëbÖK ïâbáÖK àKdîoÖK êáqäá ˝ÖZá dKdÄN P¥]dì        - G
êÖkSáÖK ñd`©K bsKëÄÖKë <LçN ó"këáÖK QLgdLááÖKë <dîìLtáÖK êìL|É àö˛N ÅîÄ]SÖK dìdÄR ï{ èbdKëÖK
                               =êtZ|áÖK êVbL]ÖK ÇÖR ÑWá rëë uäá zbçN êîâbáÖK QKdüLoÖK lKdSsLN




../..                                                                                     96-19070

S/RES/1067 (1996)
Page 3



                                 .ãdqâ bî êÖö¸áÖK òLÄNõ ddÄì   - H


                    ¥¥ ¥¥ ¥¥ ¥¥ ¥¥




../..                                                             96-19070

Draft resolution (S/1996/596):
UNITED
NATIONS                                                                         S
               Security Council
                                                                 Distr.
                                                                 GENERAL

                                                                 S/1996/596
                                                                 25 July 1996

                                                                 ORIGINAL:   ENGLISH




                  United States of America:   draft resolution


     The Security Council,

     Recalling the statement made by its President on 27 February 1996
(S/PRST/1996/9) strongly deploring the shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of
two civil aircraft on 24 February 1996, which resulted in the death of four
persons, and requesting the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to
investigate this incident in its entirety and to report its findings to the
Security Council,

     Noting the resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on 6 March 1996 which
strongly deplored the shooting down of the two civil aircraft and which directed
the Secretary-General of ICAO to initiate an immediate investigation of the
incident in its entirety in accordance with the Security Council Presidential
Statement of 27 February 1996 and to report on that investigation,

     Commending ICAO for its examination of this incident and welcoming the
resolution adopted by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996, transmitting the
report of the Secretary-General of ICAO (S/1996/509, annex) to the Security
Council,

     Welcoming also the report of the Secretary-General of ICAO regarding the
shooting down of civil aircraft N2456S and N5485S by Cuban MIG-29 military
aircraft, and noting in particular the conclusions of the report,

     Recalling the principle that every State has complete and exclusive
sovereignty over the airspace above its territory, and that the territory of a
State shall be deemed to be the land areas and territorial waters adjacent
thereto and noting in this connection that States shall be guided by the
principles, rules, standards and recommended practices laid down in the
Convention on International Civil Aviation of 7 December 1944 and its annexes
(the Chicago Convention), including the rules relating to the interception of
civil aircraft, and the principle, recognized under customary international law,
concerning the non-use of weapons against such aircraft in flight,

     1.   Endorses the conclusions of the ICAO report and the resolution adopted
by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996;


96-19066 (E)   260796                                                           /...

S/1996/596
English
Page 2



     2.   Notes that the unlawful shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of two
civil aircraft on 24 February 1996 violated the principle that States must
refrain from the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight and that, when
intercepting civil aircraft, the lives of persons on board and the safety of the
aircraft must not be endangered;

     3.   Expresses deep regret over the loss of four lives and offers its deep
sympathy and condolences to the bereaved families of the victims of this tragic
event;

     4.   Calls on all parties to acknowledge and comply with international
civil aviation law and related internationally agreed procedures, including the
rules and standards and recommended practices set out in the Chicago Convention;

     5.   Reaffirms the principle that each State shall take appropriate
measures to prohibit the deliberate use of any civil aircraft registered in that
State or operated by an operator who has his principal place of business or
permanent residence in that State for any purpose inconsistent with the aims of
the Chicago Convention;

     6.   Condemns the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight as being
incompatible with elementary considerations of humanity, the rules of customary
international law as codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention, and
the standards and recommended practices set out in the annexes of the Convention
and calls upon Cuba to join other States in complying with their obligations
under these provisions;

     7.   Urges all States which have not yet done so to ratify as soon as
possible the Protocol adding article 3 bis to the Chicago Convention, and to
comply with all the provisions of the article pending the entry into force of
the Protocol;

     8.   Welcomes the decision of the Council of ICAO to initiate a study of
the safety-related aspects of the report of the investigation with regard to the
adequacy of standards and recommended practices and other rules relating to
interception of civil aircraft with a view to preventing the recurrence of a
similar tragic event;

     9.   Decides to remain seized of the matter.


                                     -----

Meeting record:
United Nations                                                                                                             S/PV.3683


                 Security Council                                                                                                           Provisional
                 Fifty-first Year

                 3683rd Meeting
                 Friday, 26 July 1996, 3 p.m.
                 New York




President:       Mr. Dejammet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          (France)

Members:         Botswana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        Mr. Legwaila
                 Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     Mr. Somavía
                 China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     Mr. Qin Huasun
                 Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     Mr. Elaraby
                 Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       Mr. Eitel
                 Guinea-Bissau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         Mr. Queta
                 Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      Mr. Martínez Blanco
                 Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     Mr. Wibisono
                 Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   Mr. Ferrarin
                 Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      Mr. Włosowicz
                 Republic of Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           Mr. Choi
                 Russian Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          Mr. Gorelik
                 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . . . . . . . .                          Sir John Weston
                 United States of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              Mrs. Albright

Agenda
     Shooting down of two civil aircraft on 24 February 1996

             Note by the Secretary-General (S/1996/509)




96-86052 (E)                                       This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and interpretations of speeches
                                                   delivered in the other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the Security
                                                   Council. Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should be incorporated
                                                   in a copy of the record and be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned,
                                                   within one week of the date of publication, to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service,
                                                   room C-178.

Security Council                                                                                         3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                           26 July 1996

     The meeting was called to order at 3.25 p.m.               448, 449, 458, 470, 498, 499, 520, 525, 532, 570 and
                                                                577, which contain letters dated 1 March, 22 May, 18, 18,
Adoption of the agenda                                          21, 25, 28 and 28 June, 2, 3, 4, 16 and 17 July 1996,
                                                                respectively, from the Permanent Representative of Cuba
     The agenda was adopted.                                    to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General.

Shooting down of two civil aircraft on 24 February 1996              Mrs. Albright (United States of America): We meet
                                                                today to consider a matter of grave concern to my
     Note by the Secretary-General (S/1996/509)                 country, to members of this Council and to all who care
                                                                about the safety of those engaged in civil aviation around
      The President (interpretation from French): I should      the world.
like to inform the Council that I have received letters from
the representatives of Colombia, Cuba, the Lao People’s               The issue before us is not the United States versus
Democratic Republic and Viet Nam, in which they request         Cuba. It does not require that Council members make a
to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on   judgement about the repressive nature of Cuba’s
the Council’s agenda. In conformity with the usual practice,    Government or about the rights and wrongs of the past 35
I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those     years of United States-Cuban relations. The draft
representatives to participate in the discussion, without the   resolution deals, instead, with a fundamental question of
right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of    international law and with the observance or
the Charter and rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules      non-observance of international standards.
of procedure.
                                                                      It is for this reason that the draft resolution
     There being no objection, it is so decided.                condemns the cowardly and cold-blooded shootdown by
                                                                Cuba on 24 February of two unarmed civilian aircraft
     At the invitation of the President, Mr. Alarcón de         operated by Brothers to the Rescue and declares that
     Quesada (Cuba) took a seat at the Council table; Mr.       shootdown to be a violation of international law. The
     García (Colombia), Mr. Kittikhoun (Lao People’s            draft resolution also extends to the families of those who
     Democratic Republic) and Mr. Ngo Quang Xuan (Viet          were killed the Council’s deepest sympathy and
     Nam) took the seats reserved for them at the side of       condolences. I thank those of my colleagues who met
     the Council Chamber.                                       with the family members of those killed on 24 February
                                                                and who can better appreciate the human dimension of
     The President (interpretation from French): The            this tragedy. The draft resolution also demands that all
Security Council will now begin its consideration of the        nations, specifically including Cuba, abide in the future
item on the agenda. The Security Council is meeting in          by international legal standards governing civil aviation.
accordance with the understanding reached in its prior
consultations.                                                        Months ago, in the aftermath of the shootdowns,
                                                                representatives of the United States and Cuba each set out
     Members of the Council have before them the note by        a version of the events that took place on 24 February. In
the Secretary-General dated 1 July 1996 (S/1996/509),           key respects, those accounts differed. To resolve the
transmitting the letter dated 28 June 1996 from the             differences, each Government pledged to cooperate fully
President of the Council of the International Civil Aviation    with an investigation to be conducted by the International
Organization addressed to the Secretary-General.                Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Inherent in the
                                                                pledge of each was an obligation to accept the outcome
     Members of the Council also have before them               of that investigation. The United States does accept the
document S/1996/596, which contains the text of a draft         outcome of that investigation. Indeed, we believe that it
resolution submitted by the United States of America.           provides an accurate account of the facts.

      I should like to draw the attention of the members of           Those facts are clear. The Cuban military first
the Council to the following other documents: S/1996/152,       identified these two unarmed Cessna planes as civil
letter dated 1 March 1996 from the Permanent                    aircraft and then knowingly and intentionally destroyed
Representative of Cuba to the United Nations addressed to       them with air-to-air missiles. The Cubans did not follow
the President of the Security Council; and S/1996/154, 370,     ICAO standards or their own published procedures for


2

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

intercepting aircraft. The Cubans did not attempt to make             Well prior to 24 February, we issued warnings and
radio contact with either plane, nor did they instruct the       notices urging United States airmen not to enter Cuban
planes to land at a designated location. Finally, according      airspace without authorization. When the pilot of a United
to the most reliable position estimates, the aircraft were       States-registered civil aircraft overflew Havana last July,
destroyed approximately 9 to 10 miles outside Cuban              we moved to suspend his license to fly.
airspace.
                                                                      All along, we have asked the Cuban Government for
      By its actions, Cuba violated the principle of             information concerning alleged intrusions into its airspace,
customary international law that States must refrain from        and we have kept Cuba apprised of our actions. And
resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in        Cuba has previously acknowledged our efforts and
flight — a principle that applies whether the aircraft are in    cooperation in this regard.
national or international airspace. Cuba violated the ICAO
principle that interception of civil aircraft should be               As I said at the beginning of my remarks, this is not
undertaken only as a last resort. Cuba failed to follow          an issue of the United States versus Cuba. The people of
proper warning procedures. And, as the ICAO noted in its         every nation are vulnerable to lawless acts, be they acts
own resolution on 27 June, by taking the lives of four of        of terrorism or acts committed intentionally by
my countrymen — Pablo Morales, Carlos Costa, Mario de            Governments in violation of international law. The very
la Peña and Armando Alejandre — Cuba violated                    purpose of the Security Council is to help protect the
elementary considerations of humanity.                           people of all nations against such acts. We are here to
                                                                 protect international security and peace.
      Although the draft resolution before us today is
prompted by a tragedy that occurred five months ago, its               As far as I am concerned, what the Cuban military
greatest value relates to the future. This Council’s primary     did on 24 February was a crime and no excuse, no
mission is to maintain international peace and security. The     rationalization and no finger-pointing by the Cuban
draft resolution serves that goal by calling upon all nations    Government can change that judgement. If we were to
to refrain from shooting down civil aircraft in violation of     allow such acts to occur without expressing our
international legal standards.                                   condemnation, we would not be meeting our
                                                                 responsibility to the international community. If we were
      But the Government of Cuba still refuses to                to remain silent in the face of Cuba’s continued threat to
acknowledge the unlawful nature of its actions on 24             shoot down civil aircraft in flight, we would invite a
February. It has not expressed regret at the death of the        repetition of this tragedy. If we were not to insist that all
four men who were killed, or evidenced sympathy for the          countries meet their obligations concerning civil aviation,
irreplaceable loss felt by their families. And it continues to   we would put at risk the lives of all people who travel by
threaten that it may shoot down civil aircraft again.            air.

     Quite frankly, Cuba’s position has been callous and               In recent weeks, we have seen and heard a great
contemptible. They shoot down civil aircraft and then            deal about the anguish that the loss of a loved one in an
blame the victims. They call for an investigation and then       aeroplane crash can cause. In some cases, we know that
blame the investigators. They are the aggressors in this case    the tragedy is caused by mechanical shortcomings which
and yet claim they are being persecuted. They are                we can address. In other cases, we do not know the cause
consistent only in their refusal to admit the truth and their    and there is little we can do. In this case, we know the
determination to lie to the world over and over again.           cause and we know that the remedy is to accept and
                                                                 adhere to the rule of law.
      Clearly, the Government of Cuba has not met or
accepted its responsibility to comply with the Chicago                That is all that we demand of Cuba. And that is the
Convention and customary international law, which set out        standard we must always demand of each other and of
the standards of international behaviour with respect to civil   ourselves.
aviation. In contrast, my Government does accept its
responsibilities, both generally and with respect to the              The President (interpretation from French): The
control of United States aircraft.                               next speaker is the President of the National Assembly of
                                                                 People’s Power of the Republic of Cuba, His Excellency



                                                                                                                            3

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

Mr. Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada, whom I welcome and on             On 6 May 1996 — 60 days later — the Council of the
whom I now call.                                                  ICAO met to examine this document, the provisional
                                                                  report on the progress of the investigation regarding the
      Mr. Alarcón de Quesada (Cuba) (interpretation from          shooting-down, and so forth. This report shows that on 19
Spanish): At the outset, allow me to express my satisfaction      March — 13 days after the Council of the ICAO adopted
at seeing you, Sir, presiding over the Council’s work this        its resolution regarding the investigation — the same
month. I wish to thank you for your words of welcome and          communication was sent to the Government of the United
for the courtesy you have extended me during the time in          States of America and to the Government of the Republic
which we have been in contact as we prepared for this             of Cuba. It was accompanied by a list of requests for
meeting of the Security Council.                                  information from the relevant authorities, and of requests
                                                                  for action to be taken, in the United States or in Cuba,
     I also wish to express my thanks and appreciation to         with a view to the preparation of a report. In that same
your predecessor, Ambassador Elaraby, to whom I owe a             communication, a request was made for the relevant
debt of gratitude for his cooperation last month.                 authorization to visit the two countries to allow the work
                                                                  to proceed.
     It was also on a July afternoon — according to the
story, on a day warmer than today — when little Alice                   The Republic of Cuba responded immediately to this
heard a clear-cut, inexplicable warning from the Queen:           communication by inviting the ICAO investigation team
                                                                  to visit Cuba whenever they wished. The team arrived in
(spoke in English)                                                Havana on 24 March 1996, five days after that
                                                                  communication was sent.
     “ No, no!' said the Queen. Sentence first — verdict
afterwards'”. (Carroll, Alice in Wonderland, chap. XII)                 The provisional report says that on 30 March 1996
                                                                  the Cuban authorities had completely responded to all the
(spoke in Spanish)                                                requests made by the team. This is followed by an
                                                                  account of all the requests made, with which Cuba had
     That message has dominated attempts made by the              complied by 30 March 1996. The preliminary report also
United States of America since February to manipulate             states that the ICAO investigation team visited
information and falsify data to make it practically               Washington between 2 and 4 April. It returned to
impossible, or at least as difficult as it could be, to analyse   Montreal, and then went back to the United States — to
the 24 February incident and the circumstances and                Miami, Florida, where the team remained from 14 to 19
conditions that produced it. That effort has been                 April. The investigators do not say anywhere in the
accompanied by an intense publicity campaign seeking to           report — and they would not be able to do so — that the
pass sentence in advance, just as everything possible was         United States was in full compliance with their requests,
done to prevent the truth from becoming clear.                    as Cuba had been.

      Out of respect for the members of this body and for               Paragraph 3.2.4, page 4, of the 6 May provisional
all of the representatives to this Organization who are not       report of the ICAO also states that further contacts and
members of the Council, but to whom the Council must              talks were being held with regard to the submission,
answer, I would like to clarify several issues. In the spirit     inter alia, of information that it proceeds to list. I shall
of issuing the sentence “sentence first, verdict afterwards”,     not read this out, as it is almost a full page long. I shall
this Council was convened hastily in February. A                  merely highlight the issues to which, by 19 April the
presidential statement was adopted in which the                   United States had not responded: transcriptions of
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) was asked        communications from land control — this refers to the
to examine this incident and to present its conclusions to        interceptor planes. On 6 May the ICAO said that it was
the Council, with the Council’s promise that it would             still awaiting submission by the United States of the
consider them without delay.                                      transcription of communications between land control and
                                                                  the interceptor planes. For anyone who wishes to see
     The Council of the International Civil Aviation              them, our delegation has copies of these transmissions,
Organization (ICAO) met in Montreal on 6 March and                which the Permanent Mission of the United States of
adopted a resolution asking its Secretary General to conduct      America to the United Nations distributed in New York,
an investigation and submit the results 60 days thereafter.       in this very building, to the press of this country on 27


4

Security Council                                                                                           3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                             26 July 1996

February. None the less, on 6 May that information had not       June, no less than the Under-Secretary of State of the
been submitted to the ICAO investigators. We will                United States, speaking from nowhere less than the White
subsequently be able to consider why that was so.                House, distributed to anyone who might be interested a
                                                                 text of what it was assumed would be the investigation
     The list of information to be provided by the               team’s final report — which no one in Montreal had yet
Government of the United States continues: radar data from       received — and indicated to the media in advance what,
the customs coordinations centre of the United States; radar     in his view, was going to be the decision of the United
data from the incident registered by the Caribbean regional      Nations:
centre in southern Florida; radar data from the Miami
ARTCC and air force installations in Florida; radar data         (spoke in English)
recorded by United States navy air traffic control in Key
West; radar trace of a plane that was north of the 24th               “Sentence first — verdict afterwards”.
parallel on that date; and information on the degree of
observance of measures adopted regarding prior incursions        (spoke in Spanish)
into Cuban airspace.
                                                                       That weekend the members of the ICAO Council
     As members can see, ICAO had set a certain date for         finally received the investigation team’s report, and were
receipt and consideration of the investigation report, but       able to discuss it on 26 and 27 June. As a result, it was
when that date passed, it had to indicate that it had not yet    agreed to send the resolution before the Council, which
received from the United States of America the                   was the result of discussion among the members of that
transcriptions of radio communications, or any radar data,       specialized agency of the United Nations. The ICAO
or any information on measures adopted regarding earlier         Council declined, and not on a whim, to endorse the
violations of Cuban airspace, in spite of the fact that it had   investigation team’s report; it was no coincidence that it
been said, and has been repeated, that measures in fact had      refused to endorse it, but simply transmitted it to this
been taken before 24 February.                                   principal organ of the United Nations, as what the
                                                                 President of the Council of ICAO defined the collective
      As a result of that situation, on 6 May, the Council of    ruling, the collective view of the States members of the
ICAO had to agree to extend the investigation deadline by        Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization,
an additional month, and it asked its team to continue to        as reflected in the resolution the Security Council has
work. In other words, they had to continue to wait for the       received, and not in any other document.
United States to provide this basic data, which one
presumes should have existed since February, and the                   However, as many Members of the United Nations,
ICAO Council had to delay its meeting until 6 June. On 6         albeit not Security Council members or members of the
June, the only thing the ICAO Council could do was to            ICAO Council, may be interested in knowing something
defer once again its consideration of the report, which had      about the reasons why the investigation developed in this
not yet been completed because they had not yet received         way, why the report to the Council of ICAO was made in
all the information which they were awaiting from the            the way that it was, and why that Council reached the
United States side. The Council therefore had to delay this      decision to which I have already referred, I would like to
until the very last week of its session. The session even had    comment on at least a few of the central points relating to
to be extended one more week to accommodate the                  the allegedly proven data which I referred to at the
situation, to see whether it would be possible at last to        beginning of this statement.
obtain United States cooperation. On the very eve of the
closing of the most recent session of the ICAO Council,               I would invite Security Council members to look at
that body was finally able to fulfil the Security Council’s      page 77 of the investigation team’s report. They will see
request to examine and report on this incident.                  there how the members of the team explain how they
                                                                 analysed the question of the place where the incidence
     Something strange happened. If the ICAO Council met         occurred and the elements they used to calculate or
on 26 June, many members of the Security Council were            estimate that location. In paragraph 2.3.7.3, they explain
probably able to read in the United States media as early as     they arrive at it by means of a combination of:
20 June what the United States had already determined was
going to be the conclusion of the Council’s consideration of          “the communications recording provided by the
the report, which in fact it did not yet possess. And on 20           United States”, (S/1996/509, annex, appendix B)


                                                                                                                          5

Security Council                                                                                          3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                            26 July 1996

which was disclosed here in February but which there was       specifically to the location of the aircraft that penetrated
concealed until May,                                           Cuban airspace and to the location of the vessel Majesty
                                                               of the Seas.
     “in particular the reference to a large passenger ship
     and a fishing boat”. (Ibid.)                                   There is mention of eye-witnesses from the Majesty
                                                               of the Seas and the Tri-Liner. I invite members of the
     The investigators add that those three elements           Council to consider the text of the report carefully.
                                                               Indeed, it would be extremely useful to examine the
     “supported the view that the shoot-downs occurred         verbatim record of the meeting of the Council of ICAO
     near those vessels”. (Ibid.)                              at which the information I am speaking of was discussed
                                                               at considerable length. Nowhere, either in the preliminary
     The following paragraph states that                       report of May or the final report of June, is there any
                                                               reference to the investigation team having directly,
     “Eyewitness accounts obtained from the Majesty of the     personally interviewed any witness from either vessel, the
     Seas and the Tri-Liner were mutually supportive” and      Majesty of the Seas or the alleged United States fishing
     that “the position of the Tri-Liner relative to the       boat, supposedly named Tri-Liner. The investigators say
     Majesty of the Seas, and the resulting estimated          that when they went to Miami in April, they spoke with
     locations of the shoot-downs could therefore be           individuals from an aircraft involved in the incident. At
     considered to be the most reliable position estimates.”   the ICAO Council meeting, Mr. Frostell, the head of the
     (para. 2.3.7.4)                                           investigation team appointed by the ICAO secretariat,
                                                               indicated that they had not spoken with any member of
     Three basic elements — radio communications;              the Tri-Liner crew and that they had not visited that
eyewitnesses from vessels, or, to be more specific, one        vessel.
vessel, Majesty of the Seas, and an alleged fishing boat
which allegedly would have been in the area; and the                Hence, there has not even been any proof of the
combination, the mutual relationship between the location      very existence of the alleged fishing boat supposedly
of those two vessels — together with the radio                 known as the Tri-Liner. Yet in the portions to which I
communication would allow for the most reliable estimate.      have referred, the report makes use of the versions
Allow me to indicate some important issues relating to         provided by so-called eye-witnesses from that fishing boat
those three elements. As I said, we shall be distributing a    to establish its position in relation to the Majesty of the
document, distributed by the Permanent Mission of the          Seas — whose existence no one denies — to attempt to
United States of America on 27 February, distributed here      estimate the possible location of the downing.
in this City of New York, here in this United Nations
building, with this peculiar warning on each page of the             To make matters even more obvious — since the
document:                                                      questionable situation faced by the team is so clear from
                                                               this portion of the report and from its conclusions — they
(spoke in English)                                             state that they were unable to provide independent proof
                                                               of the location of the Majesty of the Seas.
     “This is the authoritative version of these transcripts
     as of 12.00, 27 February 1996. Destroy all others.”             With regard to the communications recording, I wish
                                                               to point out something which is contained in the report
(spoke in Spanish)                                             and which was the subject of considerable discussion at
                                                               the ICAO Council meeting: the mystery of this
      Perhaps that version too was destroyed, because one      document — far from being made clear through the
need only look at the ICAO report to see that what was         efforts of the investigation team — became increasingly
submitted to ICAO was a transcript, supposedly as official     complicated in the course of the investigation. I refer here
as this earlier one provided by the United States, but with    to the February version; the May version of the recording
six minutes missing. The first six minutes of the radio        was not actually submitted by the United States to the
communication, which are present in the February               ICAO secretariat. They state clearly that in May they had
document, have disappeared in May when at last the             the opportunity to listen to what the United States said
information is generously handed over to the investigation     was a recording of these radio communications, which
team. And it happens that those six minutes relate             were subsequently transcribed. The transcription clearly


6

Security Council                                                                                               3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                 26 July 1996

demonstrates the difference from what had earlier been             received instructions — warnings — from the authorities
transcribed and distributed in February: six minutes had           to the effect that certain flights that were to take place the
been eliminated, plus other, less important, differences           next day should be appropriately documented.
between the two United States versions.
                                                                        In spite of this, not a single one of these installations
      As to Cuba, the report states that by 30 March Cuba          was in a position to provide any data whatsoever by 19
had submitted not only its radar data but also its radio           April, when the investigation team went to the United
communications. It had also made it possible for the team          States. According to the report, on 21 May meetings were
to interview any witnesses it wanted. We also submitted to         held anyway in Montreal between representatives of the
them the original tape on which the Cuban side had                 Government of the United States and the investigation
recorded these radio communications. In addition, we               team to see if the team might at last be able to obtain the
submitted the equipment that had been used to make those           remaining data. Council members can look in the
tape recordings.                                                   introduction to the report and see — and I will read the
                                                                   paragraph word for word — that it says:
      It is now July. The ICAO investigation is over; the
discussions in Montreal are over; the Security Council is                     “Additional information was requested, and was
about to conclude its work; and the ICAO investigation                  provided on 21 May 1996 by the authorities in the
team is not able to change what it said in Montreal and                 United States regarding the mission of the P-3 Orion
what is stated in the report: that, from the United States              aircraft, and radar data from Naval Air Station at
side, they listened to — merely listened to — a cassette,               Key West, CARIBROC and NORAD’s SEAD
inserted into a tape player in the presence of representatives          sector”. (S/1996/509, annex, appendix B, para. 12)
of the Government of the United States, who were, as the
report tells us, the custodians of that cassette. Given that, as         The report goes on to explain exactly what was
even the United States indicates, what they were permitted         submitted as regards the radar data of the Key West
to hear in May was clearly different from what existed in          Naval Air Station. What was submitted was the 21 May
February — that the transcription was lacking six                  news that the Key West installation had erased its radar
minutes — I do not see why we should have any greater              data, had eliminated it, and that it had done so within 15
confidence in other parts of the version which the                 days of the incident, around 6 March — almost
investigators were only permitted to hear, the original tape       immediately after the staff of that installation was advised
of which was never submitted by the United States                  that an investigation was being conducted and that
Government.                                                        someone would be coming to ask for that specific data. I
                                                                   do understand why even information as categorical as the
      Those are the ins and outs of the radio                      elimination of data was not made known to the
communications. As to eye-witnesses, I have already                investigation team until 21 May.
indicated what the report itself says. The radar situation is
no less interesting: two months after an incident occurred,              The United States should explain the level of care
the United States authorities were not yet in a position to        and seriousness used in the work of their federal agencies,
provide any data from any of their radars, despite the fact        since despite being warned by Washington that a flight
that, as the report itself indicates, the United States            should be recorded because there might be an incident on
authorities had been warned a day in advance, on 23                it, and then, once the incident had taken place at exactly
February, that on 24 February there would be a flight or           the installation closest to where the events occurred, the
flights that should be properly tracked and logged by all          one that was involved in the incident — because one can
radar installations.                                               see in the report that planes have to fly over Key West
                                                                   and could possibly land there at any given time — simply
      Paragraph 2.2.2 of the report says that in the early         erased its data. Furthermore, as the report states, no
afternoon of 13 February — 13 February, 11 days                    United States radar data proved useful in describing the
earlier — the Department of State’s Office of Cuban                final minutes of that flight, that is to say, the final
Affairs contacted the FAA’s Office of International                minutes of the incident.
Aviation Office, informing it that something might occur in
connection with these flights and that they should be                   It does not seem to me difficult to understand the
alerted. The following paragraph says that on 23 February,         way in which the United States handled the data and the
the various United States communications control centres           information that it was obliged to provide, the way in


                                                                                                                               7

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

which it manipulated or concealed the information, the way        that pass each day through these corridors linking Cuba
in which it adulterated the radio communications, the way         with the United States.
in which it did not facilitate contact by the investigators
with the supposed witnesses of the supposed fishing boat                It should be the principal concern of the United
that supposedly was in the area, but that no one saw and          States Government - especially now, but at all times as
with whose crew members no one spoke — all this in order          well - to see to it that nothing violates, endangers or
to be able to claim that the incident took place somewhere        distorts genuinely civilian international communications
other than where it actually did — in other words, to             in this zone, so near to its territory.
present the case as if it were a question of destruction over
international waters and not, as was the case, well within              I have spoken of the aircrafts’ mission, but more
the territory of the Republic of Cuba.                            than this is at issue. All the aeroplanes used by the group
                                                                  responsible for the 24 February flights are of a single
      Furthermore, the United States delegation is trying to      model, the Cessna 337. But, as anyone who is at all
persist in that same effort at manipulation and confusion as      familiar with the subject of aviation knows, this Cessna
regards the supposedly civilian nature of the aircraft            model, and no other, happens to have a dual-purpose
involved. I must make a few clarifications in this respect.       design: civil and military. If anyone interested in aviation
I do not believe I can improve upon what ICAO itself              should look through Jane’s All The World’s Aircraft, a
believes should be the criteria for deciding if an aircraft has   fairly widespread publication, they will find in any of its
civil status or not. As is stated in an ICAO secretariat          editions a description of the Cessna 337 — or, according
document, prepared at the request of its Council precisely        to its United States Air Force designation, the O2. It is
to help make this fundamental issue as clear as possible:         known as the 337 when it is used to carry passengers,
                                                                  cargo or mail, and as the O2 when used by the United
          “The use of the aircraft in question is the             States military in Viet Nam and Central America. In other
     determining factor” — I repeat: the use of the aircraft      words, it is a plane designed and developed equally for
     in question is the determining criterion — “and not          tasks or missions of a military nature. You can find a
     other factors such as the registration and the markings      similar description in any United States military aviation
     on the aircraft ...”                                         handbook, in which the O2 is nowhere referred to as a
                                                                  civilian aircraft but only as one of the models that is used
      In other words, the first question would have to be,        for certain military tasks, as it has been by the United
what was the use of the aircraft involved in the incident of      States Government. The mission that was being carried
24 February? That needs to be defined before trying to            out had nothing to do with international civil aviation; the
apply to them the legitimate concern for the protection and       equipment used can also have military purposes,
development of international civil aviation, as the United        according to the United States’ own handbooks.
States side arbitrarily insists on doing. Neither their use nor
their mission related to the transport of passengers, mail or           But there is more. Three years ago and earlier, in
cargo; they had nothing to do with international civil            1992 and 1993, in Miami, a United States
aviation and a great deal to do with its abuse, a great deal      Congresswoman from Florida organized a major
to do with putting at risk the thousands of aircraft that truly   campaign to petition the Pentagon to provide several
are of a civil nature — most of them United States                Cessna 337s or O2s to the group that participated in the
aircraft — that have the right to navigate that airspace, that    incident of 24 February. She was very explicit and active,
have full cooperation from Cuba for that purpose, and that        making many statements and taking a number of
should have the due attention of the United States                initiatives. It would seem that she was successful, because
authorities.                                                      on 19 July of that year the Miami Herald published a
                                                                  report on its editorial page, written not by just any
      These authorities should be concerned with true civil       journalist but by Mr. David Lawrence, the editor of the
aviation and with seeing that there is no abuse in that area,     Herald.
because their own aircraft are the ones that use the airspace
the most and their nationals are the ones who fly through              In this account, Mr. Lawrence tells us of a trip he
there — hundreds of thousands of passengers a year, all           took with the group known as Brothers to the Rescue, the
enjoying the technical aid and cooperation of Cuban               group in question. Like any good journalist, he
authorities. There has never, ever been a single incident         accompanies his account with photographs, including
involving a United States civil aircraft, out of the hundreds     some of the plane that was used. In one, the marking


8

Security Council                                                                                              3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                26 July 1996

“N2432S” is quite sharp; in another, four letters are clearly     worked with it, providing information beginning in the
visible on its wing: “USAF”. In other words, this is not          summer of 1993 and ending in November 1995. It is
merely a type of plane that is used by the military; it is not,   logical that the FBI should have informers in various
as the Congresswoman claimed, just that similar aircraft          places, including among that group; I would imagine that
were to be found in airports in Florida ever since the end        there are many of them even now. The FBI must be
of the conflict in Central America; Mr. David Lawrence Jr.        awash in information. This person provided the Bureau
actually flew in the one bearing the marking N2432S, from         with information on the group to which he belonged. I
which the United States Air Force marking had not even            shall read from the report of the group of investigators,
been erased.                                                      which, since it is within quotation marks, I must suppose
                                                                  to be information provided by the FBI to the investigation
     That is one thing. Another is that, today, 26 July, at       team.
4.25 p.m., this aircraft is at the Opa Locka airport in
Miami. It still bears the markings of the United States Air            It reads as follows:
Force; it still belongs to Brothers to the Rescue and may be
involved tomorrow, the day after, or at some point in the              “ Twelve of the contacts were related to the
future in one of that group’s operations.                              Brothers to the Rescue. These reports include
                                                                       discussions of possible plans to smuggle or airdrop
      On 26 June 1996, at the meeting of the ICAO Council,             weapons into Cuba, and other plans to violate Cuban
what I have said here was acknowledged by Mr. Frostell,                airspace'.” (S/1996/509, annex, appendix B,
who said that, indeed, this plane was still at Opa Locka and           para. 2.6.9)
that it still bore United States military insignia. It is true
that the “F” is a bit faded; it would seem that it is                  The explanation that the Council has just heard tries
beginning to wear out, but you can still see it. It still         to suggest to listeners that the situation was accidental,
belongs to Brothers to the Rescue and at any time could be        surprising and unprecedented, a situation in respect of
used for acts of provocation against Cuba.                        which the Government of the United States had been
                                                                  taking measures prior to 24 February, as it had some
      I do not know if members can recall earlier situations      information about possible violations.
in which this Council or any other international body has
considered any incidents related to international civil                 The report of the investigation team says something
aviation. But I can say that there has been no other case         to this effect. But there is much more, and an attempt is
before the international community of premeditated                being made to keep it carefully concealed. I have another
activities undertaken by an organization that is involved not     United States document, dated 5 July 1996. I do not have
in civil aviation but in illegitimate activities that not only    all of it, as it is very long and has thousands of pages. It
violate international law, United States regulations and          is a document of the National Transportation Safety
Cuban sovereignty, but are also related to very serious           Board (NTSB), an entity which is often referred to in the
crimes against the Cuban people.                                  press. On 5 July it examined the matter to which
                                                                  Ambassador Albright referred: the suspension of the
      Cuba has had long experience in opposing actions            licence of a pilot. It was originally suspended indefinitely,
taken against it and its people by small aircraft operating       but the suspension has now been reduced to 150 days,
from United States territory. Cuban sugar fields have been        which means that, if there is no change in the situation,
burned by small aircraft. Cuban cities have been attacked         that person will be able to fly again by October.
from small aircraft. Explosives have been hurled from small
aircraft. Sabotage has been carried out from small aircraft.            At 8.35 p.m. on Friday, 5 July, the NTSB held a
Biological substances have been introduced into our country       meeting before an administrative judge of the Board, to
from small aircraft. From aircraft such as those of this          consider the question of the suspension of Mr. Basulto’s
group, actions of sabotage have been and are being planned        licence. Curiously, at that same meeting, Mr. Basulto
against installations of the Republic of Cuba.                    seemed to be pre-empting the United States Ambassador
                                                                  to the United Nations by making statements that seem to
     In this connection, let us consider page 83 of the           us to be very relevant. The United States presents its
report, which describes contacts between the United States        great, heroic, tough act of suspending a pilot’s licence as
authorities and Mr. Juan Pablo Roque, who had connections         an example of the vigorous application of its laws.
to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and who


                                                                                                                             9

Security Council                                                                                            3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                              26 July 1996

      On page 1785 of that document Mr. Basulto himself            too had violated Cuban airspace. He flew over Havana on
pointed out the inconsistencies of the United States               13 July. He also says that he took with him a journalist
Administration. He indicated that his licence had been             from Channel 10, Miami, and a cameraman. He added
suspended for 82 days after 24 February, but that during           that he was not charged by the FAA with any violation.
that period he had flown his plane and absolutely nothing          He also explained that after arriving at Miami he saw on
had been done about it. He also said that the United States        television that a number of planes, among them his own,
Government, in the allegations it made when suspending             were flying above Havana, obviously within the 12-mile
the licence, referred to another incident — the only one that      zone, because they were physically over the capital of the
the United States Administration accepts. It was referred to       Republic of Cuba. We have reached a total lack of
in an earlier text of the draft resolution the Council is likely   respect for the truth. I do not see it in the text, which
to adopt today, and concerns an aircraft that entered Cuban        seems to be final; it has changed many times. But even
airspace on 13 July 1995. Everyone knows that this is a lie.       yesterday, an earlier United States draft text stated that
Everyone knows that this is an unacceptable mockery of             one plane had penetrated Cuban airspace on 13 July, even
humanity. It even mocks the Security Council: the text             though the United States Government knows that there
refers to a plane in July 1995 for the simple reason that          were at least eight planes, and even though the pilots of
what happened that day was made public. It had been                those planes themselves have said so. They refer to the
announced many months earlier, and had been covered by             injustice done to Mr. Basulto. Why take away someone’s
United States television. As he said, “I am being accused of       licence just so that you can refer to it in the Security
that, but eight other aircraft were flying with me on that         Council? The policy is not to prevent these incidents, but
day.” That is an interesting detail from the 5 July meeting.       to promote and encourage them.
However, there are other points of interest which the
Council should take into account. The report also refers to             I have already spoken of the trip taken by the editor
measures taken earlier by the United States.                       of the Miami Herald. But what about the trip taken by
                                                                   Ambassador Dennis Hays? Who is Dennis Hays? I do not
      The United States inspector, Mr. Charles Smith,              know if he is already an Ambassador or if he is still in
supervisor of the office of the Miami district of the FAA,         the process of being confirmed by the United States
refers to meetings which he held in 1992, 1993, 1994 and,          Senate. And there, on 8 May 1996, before the United
of course, in 1996, with people from this group, to try to         States Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where they
convince them not to violate international law or United           were considering his possible confirmation as Ambassador
States regulations, and to warn them that they were                to some Caribbean country, Senator Christopher Dodd, a
committing offences which could be and should be                   well known person in North American politics, expressed
punished.                                                          alarm at information he had, that this was Mr. Dennis
                                                                   Hays, who until last summer was the Director of the State
     Ambassador Albright said that steps had been taken            Department Office for Cuban Affairs. Senator Dodd, a
before 24 February. Some inspectors or local authorities           cultured and informed political figure, had been told or
with a sense of responsibility, aware that those violations        had found out that the Miami press had said that Mr.
also put other United States travellers at risk, may have          Hays also flew with Brothers to the Rescue. He had also
talked to those individuals. What does Mr. Smith say? He           been a crew member of those airplanes when serving as
says that in July 1995, given that the violation was               Director of the Office for Cuban Affairs. Senator Dodd
publicized and well-known, he received a very explicit             asked about this before the Senate, at a level which I
response from the head of the group: he had to do what he          imagine must be taken seriously in the United States.
had to do — and he did it. Mr. Smith interpreted this to
mean that he was wittingly going to ignore rules and                    Following a detailed explanation, Senator Dodd
regulations and violate Cuban airspace. This was a man             asked:
who was warned year after year by the authorities. But he
had no reason to believe that any punishment would be              (spoke in English)
meted out.
                                                                        “Did you ever fly with Brothers to the Rescue?”
     The testimony of Mr. William Schultz, a member of
the Brothers to the Rescue group, appears on pages 1839                 Mr. Hays responded:
and 1840. Speaking before the administrative judge of the
United States Transportation Safety Board, he says that he


10

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

     “Yes, Sir. I believe it was in late ’93 and ’94. My               I invite members to turn to page 5 of the ICAO
     redecessor had also flown with them”.                       report. It is a voluminous report and it is not easy to read
                                                                 completely. However, page 5 is at the very beginning. It
(spoke in Spanish)                                               is the first map which appears in this report. It is a map
                                                                 drawn from United States information. It simply shows
      It is a tradition. Mr. Hays was appointed Director of      the Florida peninsula, the Florida strait, the outline of the
the Office for Cuban Affairs and among his assignments           Republic of Cuba, and two lines. One is the planned
was also to accompany the planes, which most likely bore         route. The planes would have flown down the eastern part
North American insignia, which most likely were going to         of the Florida peninsula towards the centre of Cuba and
violate Cuban airspace, which most likely were going to          then would have moved to the west to return to Key
commit sabotage. Does the United States really believe it        West. That was the planned route, the route for which
can convince anyone that it has done anything at all to          they were given authorization to take off from Opa Locka
discourage or prevent these things? No, Cuba does not            on 24 February.
accuse the victims, it does not turn the victims into the
guilty. The main culprit is the Government of the United              The other line is the actual route, the one that they
States of America. The main responsible party is an              actually took. It has nothing to do with the authorized
Administration which has been unable, not just to comply         route. Instead of descending by the east coast of Florida,
with international law, an obligation it must feel it has, but   they crossed the Florida peninsula to Key West and from
even to ensure respect for its own aviation rules and            there moved south, then west — all of this within the
regulations.                                                     region under United States air traffic control — and then
                                                                 follow a straight line to the capital of Cuba. I repeat: the
      In this document, which sets out the discussion with       two lines are from the United States; they are their
the administrative judge of the National Transportation          information — the request they made and what they
Safety Board, there is a very specific description which         actually did. Consider for a moment some timings. At
complements the investigation team’s assertion that the          1.15 p.m. they took off from Opa Locka; at 2.55 p.m.
United States expected an incident on 23 February. Not           they were almost at the 24th parallel. There was still
only is there the indication given on the thirteenth. Several    some distance to go. They have been on route for one
United States civil aviation officials give testimony to this    hour and 45 minutes, three quarters of the time of the
judge to the effect that there is background that dates back     whole incident, from the take-off from Opa Locka to the
even earlier. One of these officials, Mr. Houlihan, on page      shootdown of the planes and the return of third plane.
1796, says that one week before 24 February — in other           Three quarters of the time, an hour and 45 minutes.
words, on 17 February — he was called to a meeting in            Where? Over Cuban territory, in Cuban airspace, or over
which he was warned that on 24 February, that is a week          United States territory in United States airspace?
later, Mr. Basulto and other pilots of the organization called
Brothers to the Rescue would fly towards Cuba with the                What did the United States do to avoid an incident,
purpose of creating a political incident: one week before, 17    or the playing out of an incident? There is a violation
February.                                                        here, Madam Ambassador: from the moment of take-off
                                                                 the authorized flight plan was ignored.
      This is repeated to him on 23 February, and on 24
February, at 7.45 a.m., he is told that that flight with that          It was ignored throughout the flight. It was ignored
purpose will take place. Are the United States authorities       for an hour and 45 minutes. And the experts in
really so innocent? Do they really possess the moral             interception manuals — those who know the most, those
authority to present themselves as zealous defenders of the      who pontificate, those who advise the rest of the world as
law, as concerned for the lives of others, as the active         to what mechanisms to use in order to peacefully and
promoters of security in international aviation, as having the   smoothly avoid incidents — why did they do nothing?
authority to give advice to everyone on how to behave with       Where are the radio communications from any of those
regard to these possible incidences? Or are they the             authorities — their own version? Where are they? What
authority responsible for the occurrence of this incident?       did Opa Locka say? What did Miami say? What did Key
They knew about it beforehand. They informed Mr.                 West say? Where are their warnings to those flights?
Houlihan at least one week earlier. The information was          Where is the signal that they should turn back, that they
repeated on the eve, and they knew what was happening            should land or that they should fly where they had the
throughout the incident.                                         right to do so? Did it ever occur to you, Madam


                                                                                                                           11

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

Ambassador, that flying without authorization over an area       this formulation by a State that clearly has taken no
they had not been authorized to overfly could have               measures whatsoever to prohibit the deliberate use of civil
endangered the life of any United States citizen who might       aircraft in a way inconsistent with the aims of the
be using that same airspace in a lawful way? Did it ever         Chicago Convention? What are the “appropriate
occur to you that for an hour and three quarters, these          measures”? Should the Council also provide military
persons disregarded the United States authorities, who were      aircraft to persons who will violate the rules of civil
vigilant, who had been warned and who were documenting           aviation? Should it appoint ambassadors to accompany the
this — why? — to allow them to fly directly over the             provocateurs? Should it tolerate, allow, promote, incite
capital of the Republic of Cuba, and then to say later that      these activities? With what moral authority can the United
the very specific information they had ended here, that the      States talk about something that it systematically violates
last minutes were either erased or disappeared, or that their    day after day?
sophisticated technological methods were not able to
specify what happened in the last stages of these flights.            Paragraph 7 urges

     But these authorities were fully aware of the initial            “all States that have not yet done so to ratify as soon
stage of the flight and, as everything had been prepared in           as possible the Protocol adding article 3 bis to the
advance, not only did they do absolutely nothing, but it              Chicago Convention” (S/1996/596, para. 7).
almost seems as if they were waiting with their arms
crossed — and with the radar shut off, of course — for the            Will the United States do this? Will it set an
incident to occur and be announced, so that they could           example? Has it already taken the steps to ratify the
become the great champions, before the Security Council,         Protocol? Since it is the only author of this draft
of international law, of civil aviation, of humanitarian         resolution, one would assume that one who exhorts, one
principles, and so on.                                           who asks the entire world to do something, would itself
                                                                 be prepared to follow through. At best, this is possible.
      The United States concealed information, falsified data    But the end of the paragraph is truly a bad joke:
and impeded the analysis, and, in addition — using
procedures that are truly regrettable — tried to make                 “and to comply with all the provisions of the article
consideration of this item before the Security Council as             pending the entry into force of the Protocol” (ibid.).
difficult as possible.
                                                                      Has the United States really been applying the
      The Security Council now has before it a draft             provisions of article 3 bis? Has it ever truly applied any
resolution that, in its first operative paragraph, would         part of this article? Is it going to do so now? Is it going
endorse the conclusions of the ICAO report and the               to change its policy? Is it going to take genuine measures
resolution the ICAO Council adopted. In other words,             to prevent the deliberate use of aircraft that are registered
members would endorse the conclusions that the Council of        as civilian by the United States but that are dedicated to
ICAO refused to endorse; it asks that the Security Council       violating the rules of international civil aviation?
approve the conclusions of a report and at the same time
the resolution of the body charged with studying it. That              I should like to say the following: I know that some
body rejected the suggestion repeatedly made by certain          delegations that are members of the Council — not all,
parties that it endorse the report, and it rejected it because   because a number of States here have not ratified this
of the great number of inconsistencies, contradictions and       article — attach great importance to this issue. The
gaps the report contains.                                        Republic of Cuba wishes to offer to all of them the
                                                                 possibility of showing that they genuinely, and not only
      The Council would be asked, in paragraph 5 of the          rhetorically, adhere to article 3 bis. The Republic of Cuba
draft resolution, to reaffirm the principle that                 proposes, and is already taking the relevant steps, to ask
                                                                 the Council of the International Civil Aviation
     “each State shall take appropriate measures to prohibit     Organization to analyse, at its next session, problems
     the deliberate use of any civil aircraft” (S/1996/596,      related to the abuse of civil aviation in our region and to
     para. 5)                                                    the improper use of aircraft registered as civil aircraft in
                                                                 the United States, in contravention of the Chicago
and so on. The author is the United States. What real            Convention. We hope that the Council of ICAO will
significance would it have if the Security Council accepted      agree to discuss this issue, which would mean an analysis


12

Security Council                                                                                               3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                 26 July 1996

of the necessary conditions for compliance with the                     The President (interpretation from French): I thank
provisions of this article in one specific part of the world.      the President of the National Assembly of People’s Power
                                                                   of the Republic of Cuba for the kind words he addressed
      We hope that all the States that defend 3 bis and that       to me.
want to see it enforced will cooperate with us so that this
article, and its just purposes, can be truly applied in                 The next speaker is the representative of Colombia.
practice — not used simply so that a State that has not            I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to
ratified it and does not comply with it can utilize it             make his statement.
demagogically, exhorting others to accept it. I repeat that
very soon the Council of ICAO will be called upon at the                Mr. García (Colombia) (interpretation from
request of Cuba to examine this crucial question of the            Spanish): I should like first of all to express our pleasure
improper use of civil aviation in this region that unites us       at seeing you, Sir, presiding over this meeting of the
and separates us, specifically violations of international civil   Council. We commend you on your conduct of the
aviation and its norms. This, I might mention in passing,          presidency for July.
does not mean only violations of the sovereignty of the
Republic of Cuba — which might be of interest to the                    My delegation wishes to participate in this debate to
United States — but also means threats to the safety of            help avoid any recurrence of incidents like the one that
citizens of the United States, who are the majority users of       was the subject of the resolution adopted by the Council
the international air corridors over the Republic of Cuba; to      of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),
United States aircraft, which represent the majority of the        and of the events that surrounded it.
aircraft flying over Cuba; and to United States passengers,
who represent the majority of those who use the airlines                 We believe that these incidents and events require
that fly over the territory of the Republic of Cuba.               the international community to reflect on the causes that
                                                                   led to them or, more to the point, on those that might
      A month ago, the ICAO Council considered this                precipitate further incidents, if we are to avoid merely
question and adopted the decision contained in its                 recriminatory attitudes that are not in keeping with the
resolution. I recall very vividly the moment when                  responsibility of all States to avoid such incidents.
consideration of this subject began. I heard the
representative of your country, Sir — the representative of              My delegation wishes to express its appreciation to
France to ICAO — draw attention to the fact that,                  the Council of the International Civil Aviation
independent of or beyond the specific issue to be                  Organization for its efforts to agree on a moderate — or
considered by ICAO at that time, what was before the               better, measured — resolution with the constructive
ICAO Council was above all the question of the prestige            objective of impressing upon all States the need to respect
and credibility of ICAO. This subject, which was first             international principles of civil aviation.
raised in the discussion by the representative of France, was
reiterated on many occasions by most members of the                      In this connection, because of their relevance, we
ICAO Council. I regret that the verbatim records of all that       wish to stress operative paragraphs 2 and 3 of the ICAO
was said there are not available to members, and that no           Council resolution of 27 June 1996, which make the point
steps have been taken to make them available. Of course,           that these are concomitant principles that are ineluctably
my delegation is quite prepared to provide to anyone who           linked. The principle that States must refrain from the use
might be interested in the whole truth of events in Montreal       of weapons against civil aircraft in flight is as relevant as
with this information, which of course we have in our              that which establishes that each State shall take
possession.                                                        appropriate measures to prohibit the deliberate use of any
                                                                   civil aircraft registered in that State for any purpose
     In the end, on 27 June, I believe that the ICAO               inconsistent with the aims of the Convention on
Council, as I said there, managed to preserve its prestige.        International Civil Aviation. None the less, concerned as
It managed to prevent its credibility being damaged by the         the international community is to avoid further tragic
manipulative attempts it had to confront. It is up to this         incidents, from a preventive and practical standpoint it is
Council now to act. It is up to its members to respond on          of the utmost urgency that the second of these principles
behalf of the credibility and prestige of this organ.              be respected so that the sovereignty of States is not
                                                                   affected by acts that contravene the Convention and the
                                                                   principles of the United Nations Charter.


                                                                                                                             13

Security Council                                                                                            3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                              26 July 1996

      My delegation feels that the Security Council could        the same type had violated Cuban airspace and territorial
take advantage of its consideration of the item before us to     waters. A Cuban Air Force plane then flew towards them,
reiterate emphatically the commitment of the United              forcing them by its presence to leave the area. The planes
Nations to the inviolability of the sovereignty of States and    in question then flew north. Again according to Cuba, at
the individual’s right to life.                                  1.21 p.m. one of the planes again headed towards Cuba,
                                                                 despite the fact that it had been warned by Havana air
      As to the draft resolution under consideration, we         traffic control that it was exposing itself to great risk
regret that it does not contain some of the amendments           should it decide to intrude into this zone. In addition to
proposed by the caucus of members of the Non-Aligned             the violations of airspace and territorial waters, Cuba
Movement that are members of the Security Council.               referred to the introduction, by groups of people of Cuban
Similarly, we find no justification for the Security Council’s   origin based in Florida, of weapons and explosives into its
remaining indefinitely seized of the matter before it. If that   territory, and to the dispatch of commandos to spread
is the decision, we believe that it should be made taking        violence in various regions of the country. In short, these
into consideration the many elements that led to the             violations were committed on numerous occasions, even
incidents without discriminatory neglect of events that may      though those responsible had been repeatedly warned that
have preceded or followed them.                                  Cuban patience had its limits and that those incursions
                                                                 would no longer be tolerated.
     Lastly, my delegation wishes to reiterate the need for
all States to respect and comply with the principles and              According to Cuban authorities, all means of
norms of the Chicago Convention.                                 persuasion to prevent acts of this kind had thus been
                                                                 exhausted. That is why the Government of Cuba decided
     The President (interpretation from French): I thank         to put an end to the flights, which jeopardized Cuban
the representative of Colombia for the kind words he             sovereignty and endangered the lives of Cuban citizens.
addressed to me.
                                                                       My country, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
      The next speaker is the representative of the Lao          has followed this unfortunate incident very closely. We
People’s Democratic Republic. I invite him to take a seat        listened very attentively to the explanations offered by the
at the Council table and to make his statement.                  Cuban Government to the international community. We
                                                                 profoundly regret the loss of life that resulted from this
      Mr. Kittikhoun (Lao People’s Democratic Republic)          incident, and it is our sincere wish that this should never
(interpretation from French): Like other speakers, I wish at     recur.
the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of
the presidency of the Security Council for the month of                The world knows that the question now before the
July. Aware as I am of your skills and broad experience in       Council is not an easy one. On the contrary, it is delicate
international affairs, I believe that the Council’s work will    and particularly complex. Nevertheless, we are of the firm
be fruitful. I also wish to congratulate the Permanent           opinion that in all circumstances every country or
Representative of Egypt for his outstanding work in guiding      sovereign State has the right and the sacred duty to
the Council’s business last month. The Lao delegation also       defend its independence and territorial integrity if it
wishes to thank most sincerely all the members of the            considers that these are threatened or violated. This is the
Council for granting our request to participate in this          simplest and most elementary exercise of international
important discussion of the question before the Council.         law. However, given that at this stage a multitude — I
                                                                 stress, a multitude — of technical questions have not yet
      In the note from its Ministry of Foreign Affairs of 26     been clarified, we do not believe that there are yet
February 1996, the Government of Cuba informed the               grounds to resolve the substance of the question: knowing
world that on 24 February 1996, between 3.21 p.m. and            who is responsible for this incident, how it took place,
3.28 p.m., two Cessna aircraft which had taken off in            and why.
Florida had been shot down by aircraft of the Cuban Air
Force when they were again violating the airspace above                In the view of our delegation, this unfortunate
Cuban territorial waters at a distance of 8 to 12 kilometres     incident is but a sad reflection of the difficult relations
to the north of the beach of Baracoa, west of Havana. In         that have existed for more than three decades between the
the same note the Government of Cuba also stated that            Republic of Cuba and the United States of America. It
earlier, between 10.15 a.m. and 11.27 a.m., three aircraft of    seems that the two countries have not yet exhausted all


14

Security Council                                                                                               3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                 26 July 1996

available means to try to resolve their problems. Lack of         (spoke in English)
mutual trust generally predominates in their relations. The
international community can only be alarmed by this                     With regard to the item under discussion, my
situation which benefits neither party, but, on the contrary,     delegation would like to reaffirm that we, as a Member of
jeopardizes the legitimate interests of both peoples.             the United Nations, have always laid emphasis on the
                                                                  most fundamental principles of our Organization, that is
      It is true that, as we said earlier, the question before    to respect the national independence, sovereignty and
us is extremely complicated, but we also know that it is not      territorial integrity of all countries, be they large or small,
insoluble. Provided that there is true political will on the      and to abide by the principles of non-intervention and
part of the parties to the conflict, the desired end can surely   non-interference in their internal affairs.
be attained. Against this background, the Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, faithful to its policy of peace,                   As a non-aligned country and a good friend of Cuba,
independence, friendship and cooperation with all countries       Viet Nam supports the foreign policy carried out by the
of the world, appeals to both parties — the Republic of           Cuban Government, which is in accordance with the
Cuba and the United States of America — to demonstrate            principles of respect for peace, friendship, national
great wisdom and endeavour to improve their bilateral             independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, nonrelations and resolve their disputes peacefully, which would      intervention and non-interference in the internal affairs of
contribute to the maintenance of peace and the promotion          other countries. In this matter, my delegation fully
of cooperation in this region and in the rest of the world.       supports the ongoing efforts made by the international
                                                                  community, including those of the non-aligned countries,
     That is the opinion which my delegation wishes to            with a view to maintaining the aforementioned principles.
present to the Council on the subject of this unfortunate
incident.                                                              The President (interpretation from French): I thank
                                                                  the representative of Viet Nam for the kind words he
      The President (interpretation from French): I thank         addressed to me.
the representative of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic
for the kind words he addressed to me.                                  It is my understanding that the Council is ready to
                                                                  proceed to vote on the draft resolution before it. Unless
      The next speaker is the representative of Viet Nam. I       I hear any objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make        vote.
his statement.
                                                                       There being no objection, it is so decided.
     Mr. Ngo Quang Xuan (Viet Nam) (interpretation
from French): First, I should like to congratulate you, Sir,          I shall first call on those members of the Council
and to thank you for having convened this meeting, which          who wish to make statements before the voting.
our delegation considers very important.
                                                                        Sir John Weston (United Kingdom): I must say
                                                                  that, listening this afternoon to the representative of Cuba,
                                                                  I found myself wondering whether I was listening to
                                                                  something out of Alice in Wonderland, where everything
                                                                  is topsy-turvy and back-to-front — what you might call
                                                                  either Wonderland or Looking-Glass Land. It is rather
                                                                  revealing, I thought, that early in his statement he should
                                                                  have been quoting Lewis Carroll at us. But to adapt a line
                                                                  of Shakespeare, perhaps the envoy doth protest too much.

                                                                        The Security Council is about to vote on a draft
                                                                  resolution which makes clear this Council’s condemnation
                                                                  of the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight. That
                                                                  is why my delegation will be voting in favour of the draft
                                                                  resolution. The United Kingdom would like to take this



                                                                                                                              15

Security Council                                                                                              3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                26 July 1996

opportunity to express its deep condolences to the families              The purpose of this draft resolution is firstly to draw
of those who were killed on 24 February 1996.                     attention to the illegal use of weapons in this incident.
                                                                  And I think it really is important to recall this afternoon
     In the Council President’s statement of 27 February          against the background of what I might call the cloud of
1996, the Council strongly deplored the shooting down by          unknowing to which we had to listen earlier — a virtuoso
the Cuban Air Force of two civil aircraft on 24 February          demonstration of the art of filibuster in the grand manner.
and requested the International Civil Aviation Organization       I heard the representative of Cuba say in part of his
(ICAO) to investigate this incident and to report its findings    statement that Cuba had a lot of very long experience of
to the Security Council. The United Kingdom strongly              this and that. Well, I think this Council also has very long
supports the draft resolution’s endorsement of the ICAO           experience — experience, among other things, of tactics
report and resolution. And I think it is fair in the context of   deployed in this Chamber in relation to the policy of the
this afternoon’s discussion to remind ourselves of what           Government of Cuba. I myself remember very clearly
some of the conclusions of that report are.                       first hearing that kind of approach one autumn day in the
                                                                  year 1962 in this very Chamber. It brings to mind
      Conclusion 3.12 is that the first aircraft was destroyed    something that I might call the tactic of the whopper. I
by an air-to-air missile fired by a Cuban MiG-29 aircraft.        make no accusations. But the tactic of the whopper
Conclusion 3.13 is that the second aircraft was destroyed by      applies when one wants to take liberties with the truth
an air-to-air missile fired by a Cuban MiG-29 military            and rather than indulging in what Churchill would have
aircraft. Conclusion 3.18 is that means other than                called a little terminological inexactitude, the tactic of the
interception were available to Cuba, but had not been             whopper dictates that if you tell it long enough and you
utilized. Conclusion 3.19 is that during the interceptions no     tell it big enough, there is a sporting chance that someone
attempt was made to guide them away or instruct them to           will believe part of it, even if only out of sheer
effect a landing at a designated aerodrome. Conclusion 3.20       exhaustion. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
is that the standard procedures for manoeuvring and signals
by the military interceptor aircraft were not followed.                But this draft resolution also looks forward and
Conclusion 3.22 is that the rule of customary international       seeks to prevent the recurrence of similar actions which
law that States must refrain from resorting to the use of         put at risk the lives of those travelling in civil aircraft in
weapons, as codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago              the future. My delegation hopes that all States will take
Convention, apply irrespective of whether or not such             due note, acknowledge their obligations and take every
aircraft is within the territorial airspace of that State.        possible measure to ensure that the tragic events of
                                                                  24 February are not repeated.
      There can be no doubt that Cuba has contravened
principles of international law in using force against civil            In taking action this day, the Security Council is
aircraft and in not following established international           doing no more than upholding the principles of
procedures on interception of such aircraft. The message in       international law and fulfilling its responsibilities to
this draft resolution is clear. Such incidents are                safeguard international peace and security. It is with this
unacceptable to the international community.                      in mind that I commend the draft resolution to colleagues
                                                                  in this Council, and that is why we shall vote for it
      There is an obligation on all States to comply with the     ourselves.
provisions of international law and the standards and
recommended practices set down in the Chicago                          Mr. Eitel (Germany): Germany will vote in favour
Convention and its annexes, and to cooperate fully with the       of the draft resolution on the communication which has
International Civil Aviation Organization. The United             been presented at the request of this Council by the
Kingdom looks to all States to abide by their obligations in      International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) on the
this regard.                                                      incident which occurred on 24 February 1996 and which
                                                                  led to the shooting down of two United States-based
      The United Kingdom would draw the Council’s                 unarmed civilian aircraft by the Cuban Air Force.
attention to paragraph 7 of the resolution before us. We
urge all States who have not yet ratified the Protocol adding          The vote on this draft resolution comes after weeks
Article 3 bis to the Chicago Convention to take the               of intense discussions and deliberations. All different
necessary steps to do so as soon as possible.                     aspects of the case have been subject to close scrutiny. In
                                                                  this context, we would like to commend ICAO for its


16

Security Council                                                                                           3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                             26 July 1996

resolution and its report. The main item at stake is the basic        Regrettably, however, despite some efforts by the
rule that States must refrain from the use of weapons            sponsor, the key amendments proposed by the parties
against civil aircraft in flight. Let me add, in the light of    concerned were not accepted. This has given the current
what has been explained at some length by the                    draft resolution a biased tilt. Therefore, the Chinese
representative of Cuba, that shooting down unarmed civilian      delegation will abstain in the vote on the draft resolution
aircraft — regardless of where this is done: whether it is       before us.
done over territorial waters or over the high seas — is a
clear breach of international law — if not codified and               Mr. Legwaila (Botswana): Let me begin by
ratified, then of customary international law — which must       extending to our colleagues in the delegation of the
not be tolerated.                                                United States our condolences with regard to the pilots
                                                                 who lost their lives in February.
    Let me use this occasion to express our sincere
condolences to the families of those killed in those planes.           We are today addressing a very sensitive and
                                                                 delicate technical subject. We have had to decode and
     We hope that the legal discussion can now come to an        digest information from charts and graphs; some of us are
end, and that further violations of this basic rule will not     not very good at that. Our task has not been made easy
occur. We would like to see that the recent discussion has       by the nature of the International Civil Aviation
sharpened the conscience and sensibility of those                Organization (ICAO) report. It makes the matter under
responsible, and we sincerely hope that this will remain true    review subject to conflicting interpretations, a state of
in the future.                                                   affairs that is compounded by the history of the area in
                                                                 which the incident of 24 February 1996 took place. Our
      Mr. Qin Huasun (China) (interpretation from                comments this afternoon are therefore a synthesis of the
Chinese): Civil aviation not only involves the safety of the     facts as we understand them from the ICAO report and of
people of all countries but is also closely related to the       our interpretation of the Convention on International Civil
sovereignty of those countries, to which due attention           Aviation and its annexes.
should be paid. Therefore, the Council has considered the
draft resolution before us on many occasions.                          My delegation made its position very clear earlier
                                                                 this year regarding the absolute necessity for States to
      The Chinese delegation expresses its regret over the       refrain from the use of weapons against civil aircraft.
casualties caused by the shooting down of the two civil          There is no doubt in our minds that civil aircraft should
aircraft. We are of the view that the principles of              be rendered whatever assistance they may need at all
international law should be implemented in a                     times whenever they enter the national airspace of any
comprehensive, fair and balanced manner. No country              State unannounced or through an ungazetted entry point.
should apply selectivity to their implementation in              In the normal course of their operations such aircraft
accordance with its own needs. Therefore, we maintain that       would definitely lose their way. They should ordinarily be
the provisions of international law on the non-use of            intercepted and guided to a landing strip, where the true
weapons against civil aircraft should be respected; by the       facts regarding their presence in the area may be
same token, those on the inviolability of territorial airspace   established.
and those against the abuse of civil aviation must also be
observed.                                                             Equally, civil aircraft should never be used for
                                                                 purposes inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the
      The Council of the International Civil Aviation            Chicago Convention. Civil aircraft that take to the air
Organization (ICAO) has considered all aspects of this           from a country of registration, ignore air corridors they
question and has adopted a resolution on it. We believe that     have logged with the control towers and deliberately
this resolution is a balanced and fair one which represents      penetrate the airspace of another country for the purpose
the collective will of all the members of ICAO. Therefore,       of fomenting civil disorder or disturbance there should be
the Chinese delegation repeatedly emphasized during the          seriously warned against engaging in such acts of
consultations that the Council should base its actions on this   provocation. While States should indeed refrain from the
resolution and adopt the same fair and balanced approach.        use of weapons against civil aircraft, they should not be
We accordingly put forward reasonable amendments to the          unnecessarily provoked into taking actions they would
draft resolution before us.                                      otherwise ordinarily avoid taking.



                                                                                                                         17

Security Council                                                                                               3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                 26 July 1996

      In short, civil aircraft should not be used for the         safety of aircraft and that States are obliged in all
provocation of States under any circumstances, and States         circumstances to respect international law and human
should not shoot down such aircraft on sight, as this puts        rights norms, in particular article 3 bis of the Convention
the lives of those on board, and the aircraft, in danger.         on International Civil Aviation.

     The draft resolution before us is generally acceptable             The report of the International Civil Aviation
to my delegation to the extent that it reaffirms the              Organization, which investigated the incident at the
principles enshrined in the Convention on International           Security Council’s request, not only reaffirms these
Civil Aviation and its annexes. We would have been                principles, but also affirms that, although every State
happier, however, if the language of paragraphs 2 and 6           exercises territorial sovereignty over its airspace, it has
had been drafted differently.                                     the duty to observe the principle recognized in customary
                                                                  international law regarding the non-use of weapons
      The incident of 24 February 1996 was most                   against civil aircraft in flight and that, in intercepting such
unfortunate indeed, and we hope there will be no similar          aircraft, its conduct must be guided by the rules laid
tragic event in the future.                                       down in the Chicago Convention of 7 December 1944
                                                                  and its annexes.
      Mr. Queta (Guinea-Bissau) (interpretation from
French): My delegation has considered very carefully the                At the same time, the report reminds us that no State
deliberations of the Council of the International Civil           must permit, in violation of its international obligations,
Aviation Organization (ICAO), convened to examine the             the deliberate use from its territory of civil aircraft
question of the destruction, on 24 February 1996, of two          registered in that State to violate the territorial sovereignty
private civil aircraft registered in the United States. The two   of another State. Article 4 of the Chicago Convention is
airplanes shot down belonged to the Brothers to the Rescue        clear in stipulating that:
organization. We should like to express once again our
regret at the four deaths that resulted from this incident.            “Each Contracting State agrees not to use civil
                                                                       aviation for any purpose inconsistent with the aims
     This act is a violation of article 3 bis of the                   of this Convention”.
Convention on International Civil Aviation, under which no
circumstance and no argument can justify the use of                     My delegation considers that, in the incident of 24
weapons against civil aircraft in flight.                         February, there was a twofold lack of compliance with
                                                                  the responsibilities and obligations established by the
      My Government believes that respect for the rules of        Convention on International Civil Aviation. We feel that
international law is an indispensable condition for the           the international community must not permit such conduct
maintenance of international peace and security. In this          to continue. That is why Honduras, while condemning the
context, we feel that the draft resolution before us,             use of weapons against civil aircraft, wishes to appeal to
particularly in its paragraphs 4 and 5, sends a clear message     the parties involved to comply with their international
aimed at avoiding such incidents in the future. My                commitments, to take measures to avoid committing in
delegation will support the draft resolution.                     future such acts, which are incompatible with the
                                                                  objectives of the Convention, and to ratify its article 3
      Mr. Martínez Blanco (Honduras) (interpretation from         bis. My delegation therefore agrees with the contents of
Spanish): Honduras believes that all peace-loving States          the draft resolution before the Council and will vote in its
must align their conduct with the principles and norms of         favour.
general, treaty and customary international law. That is why
we regret the events related to the shooting down of two               Mr. Włosowicz (Poland): On 27 February 1996, the
civil aircraft on 24 February 1996 by the Cuban Air Force,        Security Council in its presidential statement requested
acts that are in clear contravention of those international       the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to
principles and norms.                                             investigate the tragic incident of the shooting down by the
                                                                  Cuban Air Force of two civil aircraft on
      In deploring that incident, this Council recalled in its    24 February 1996.
presidential statement of 27 February that States must
refrain from the use of weapons against civil aircraft and            We have before us the resolution of the Council of
must not endanger the lives of persons on board and the           ICAO and the report of the Secretary General of that


18

Security Council                                                                                            3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                              26 July 1996

organization. Our delegation welcomes both with a great         aircraft. My delegation, therefore, will vote in favour of
deal of appreciation. These documents confirm our strong        the draft resolution.
belief that States must refrain from resorting to the use of
weapons against civil aircraft in flight. This principle,             In conclusion, my delegation would like to express
although codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago               our sincere condolences to the families of the victims of
Convention, is indeed very well based in customary              the incident. Indeed, what is most important at this
international law. But do we really need to quote rules of      juncture is to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents
international law to prove that unarmed civil aircraft must     in the future and to secure the safety of civil aviation. To
not be shot down? After all, the resolution adopted by the      that end, the principles reaffirmed in the draft resolution
ICAO Council on 27 June 1996 expressly recognizes that          must be fully complied with by all States. It is in this
the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight is          spirit that my delegation fully endorses paragraph 7 of the
incompatible with elementary considerations of humanity.        draft resolution, which urges all States which have not yet
Today, we are going to condemn such acts in the Security        done so to ratify as soon as possible the Protocol adding
Council’s draft resolution, hoping they will never happen       article 3 bis to the Chicago Convention, and to comply
again.                                                          with all the provisions of the article pending its entry into
                                                                force.
      The draft resolution before us reaffirms the principle
that each State shall take appropriate measures to prohibit           Mr. Wibisono (Indonesia): At the outset, the
the deliberate use of its aircraft for purposes inconsistent    Indonesian delegation would like to express its
with the aims of the Chicago Convention. We value this          appreciation for the note by the Secretary-General
principle.                                                      (S/1996/509) transmitting the report of the International
                                                                Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), entitled “Report of
     Before concluding, let me take this opportunity to         the investigation regarding the shooting down of two
express my delegation’s deepest sympathy to the families        U.S.-registered private civil aircraft by Cuban military
of the victims of the tragic incident of 24 February 1996.      aircraft on 24 February 1996”. The report was produced
We sincerely hope that today’s debate and the draft             following the Security Council’s request, in paragraph 3
resolution, in favour of which Poland is going to vote, will    of the presidential statement of 27 February 1996, to
prevent such incidents in the future.                           investigate the incident in its entirety. That statement also
                                                                called on the Governments concerned to cooperate fully
      Mr. Choi (Republic of Korea): My Government has           with the investigation. My delegation would also like to
maintained a firm and consistent position in emphasizing        commend the Council of the ICAO, as the specialized
the safety of civil aviation. We are convinced that the use     intergovernmental body of the United Nations system
of weapons against unarmed civil aircraft in flight is          responsible for civil aviation, for its resolution.
unacceptable under any circumstances. Such an act
constitutes a violation of the rules of customary                     During the previous discussion on the presidential
international law governing international civil aviation, as    statement requesting the report, Indonesia expressed its
now codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention. In     position of deep concern, and strongly deplored the
keeping with this view, my delegation joined the Council’s      shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of the two aircraft
consensus last February in adopting the presidential            because it was incompatible with article 3 bis of the
statement, which strongly deplored the shooting down of         Chicago Convention. However, the tenets of article 3 bis
the two civilian aircraft. At the same time, my delegation      of the Chicago Convention should be viewed in a
considers it very important for the Security Council to         comprehensive manner, as they also encompass other
reaffirm the principle that all States shall take appropriate   cardinal principles. Hence, we would like to recall that
measures to prohibit the misuse of civil aircraft.              article 3 bis (d) of the Chicago Convention states that,
                                                                inter alia,
      The draft resolution before us upholds in clear terms
the principles of international law concerning the safety of         “each contracting State shall take appropriate
civil aviation, to which my Government is fully committed.           measures to prohibit the deliberate use of any civil
The draft resolution rightly condemns the use of weapons             aircraft registered in that State ... for any purpose
against civil aircraft and reaffirms the obligation of all           inconsistent with the aims of this Convention.”
States to take measures to prevent the misuse of any civil



                                                                                                                          19

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

      This principle should be strictly adhered to, for it is     such a selective approach, this would only undermine the
our opinion that the misuse or misrepresentation of civilian      credibility of international law. In the words of the world
aircraft for other purposes prejudices the safety of              Court, as reflected in the works of Professor Georg
legitimate civilian aircraft. Accordingly, it is important to     Schwarzenberger, the rules of international law exist
ascertain the true purpose of the flights of 24 February
1996. It is essential that the sanctity of civilian aircraft be        “in order to regulate the relations between these
preserved. In this regard, we are pleased to learn from the            coexisting independent communities or with a view
United States Secretary of Transportation, Mr. Federico                to the achievement of common aims.”
Peña, that the United States will take appropriate steps to
discourage exile pilots from entering Cuban airspace                    The incident of 24 February was thoroughly
without prior authorization.                                      deliberated in the Council of ICAO from 26 to 27 June
                                                                  1996. Even after three months of investigation, the ICAO
      Our delegation believes that it is the responsibility of    team was unable to obtain conclusive evidence which
all States to avoid any actions that hinder the development       would enable it to determine the precise location of the
of legitimate civil aviation and the promotion of air safety      incident. Significant differences exist in the data provided
worldwide. In this regard, my delegation believes that the        by the parties involved. Certain aspects require further
safety of international aviation should be approached in a        clarification. Having considered the above circumstances,
constructive manner by the Security Council: rather than          the Council of ICAO therefore found it difficult to
condemning the action of one State, the Council should            endorse the report of the investigation team. In this
underline the principles providing safe civil aviation            regard, we must express our reservations over paragraph 1
conditions, while respecting and promoting the sovereignty        of the draft resolution, since the Council of ICAO itself
of States over their territory, including their airspace. It is   did not endorse the report. Therefore, we deem it
my delegation’s firm belief that the territorial integrity of a   inappropriate for the Security Council to endorse the
State’s airspace must be respected by other States, and that      report at this juncture. Similarly, with regard to paragraph
repeated violations of the territorial airspace of Cuba by        2, the resolution of the Council of ICAO does not qualify
civilian aircraft would indeed be a cause of concern for          the incident of 24 February 1996.
Cuba.
                                                                        Moreover, our delegation is of the view that the draft
      It should be noted that more than 340 civil aircraft        resolution could be improved in order to have a balanced
overfly Cuban airspace daily without incident, and that           text. Among other elements which create difficulties for
more than half of these are United States aircraft. Therefore     my delegation is the request to only one party to comply
my delegation has reservations with regard to paragraph 6         with the relevant resolutions and international civil
of the draft resolution because it lacks the most elementary      aviation law, contained in the second part of paragraph 6.
objectivity by urging Cuba to abide by principles it has          We feel that no one party should be singled out. Efforts
always held. It is, indeed, intolerable that civil-registered     have been made by various delegations, including the
aircraft are used for purposes inconsistent with the              Non-Aligned Movement caucus, to improve the draft
Convention on International Civil Aviation and go so far as       resolution. However, my delegation cannot but express its
to violate the sovereignty of States and their airspace. We       disappointment that a number of proposed amendments
therefore call upon all States, without exception, strictly to    aimed at achieving a fair and balanced text were not
abide by the principles, norms, rules and regulations             adequately considered.
regarding international air navigation as laid down in the
Chicago Convention and its annexes, and in other                       It is our firm belief that the responsibility of the
international instruments.                                        Security Council and ICAO is to prevent the recurrence
                                                                  of such incidents in the future. In this regard, it is
      It is the view of the Indonesian delegation that the        imperative that all States honour their obligations under
Council’s reaction should be expressed in a comprehensive         the Chicago Convention and its annexes in their entirety.
and balanced manner. Hence, the Security Council must be          In this context, operative paragraph 9 of the resolution
assertive in ensuring that all parties are in compliance with     adopted by the Council of ICAO on 27 June 1996 is of
the Chicago Convention and its annexes in their entirety. It      paramount importance because it
is our firm belief that international law should be equally
applicable to all sovereign nations and not serve the                  “requests all Contracting States to report at any time
interpretations of one party. If the Council were to endorse           to the Council any infraction of the above-mentioned


20

Security Council                                                                                            3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                              26 July 1996

     rules contained in the Convention on International           provide us with accurate background information as to
     Civil Aviation”.                                             what in fact occurred.

      We believe that ICAO, as the competent body, will in             In regard to the first point, our position was clear
turn immediately adopt appropriate measures that should           from the first day. As representative of a country which
prevent further violations of the adopted principles, rules,      attaches special importance to humanitarian aspects, we
standards and recommended practices. The ICAO must do             could not but deeply regret the loss of four lives through
so to achieve the orderly and safe development of                 the downing of two aircraft registered in the United States
international aviation, thus preventing the occurrence of         on 24 February last. For us it is impossible to justify
further incidents.                                                these deaths, and we can only the hope that they may
                                                                  help avoid recurrence of such events.
      We regret the excessive use of force, which resulted
in the loss of human life. In this regard, my delegation                In connection with the second point, we have also
extends its sympathy to the families of the victims for their     affirmed from the outset as fundamental the need to
loss. It is our sincere hope that such an incident will not       comply with the norms of international law which govern
recur in the future. Therefore, my delegation would like to       civil aviation, and in this respect we have supported the
reiterate its position that there is no justification for any     principles and norms of the Chicago Convention of 1944,
State to resort to the use of weapons against civil aircraft      clearly establishing the validity as a norm of customary
in flight; no State must endanger the lives of persons on         law, of article 3 bis of that Convention. In that context,
board and the safety of the aircraft. Furthermore, all            one of our objectives has been to reaffirm the absolute
available measures to prevent such an incident from               need for that norm to be respected by all States in order
occurring, as well as standard procedures that guide aircraft     to ensure the proper use and security of civil aviation.
away from danger, must be followed.
                                                                       With respect to the third point, we agreed that the
      As a matter of principle, the Indonesian position           Council, together with deploring the events, should go
condemns the use of weapons against civil aircraft, as such       beyond that and ask the International Civil Aviation
use is clearly in violation of the rules of customary             Organization (ICAO) to conduct an investigation of the
international law, as codified in article 3 bis of the Chicago    case and transmit its conclusions to the Council.
Convention and ICAO provisions concerning interception
of civil aircraft. These rules must be respected by all                We have carefully studied this issue in the technical
parties, regardless of whether or not such an aircraft is         report, its recommendations and conclusions, and in the
within the territorial airspace of that State. The principle of   ICAO resolution of 27 June, which transmits it. We have
non-recourse to weapons against civil aircraft is indeed          expressed our appreciation for the efforts made by
reflected in paragraph 6 of the present draft resolution.         ICAO’s technical team, yet we recognize the difficulties
                                                                  faced by the team in arriving at a conclusive document
     Based on these considerations, the Indonesian                because of the limitations inherent in the nature of the
delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution before     investigation.
us today.
                                                                       All that notwithstanding, we appreciate the resolution
       Mr. Somavía (Chile)(interpretation from Spanish):          adopted by the Council of ICAO, as it provides us with
Following an active process of consultations, this draft          important substantive elements and reaffirms principles
resolution has been put before us; we shall vote in favour        which we deem to be fundamental.
of it.
                                                                       Nobody is unaware that above and beyond the
      Ever since the regrettable incident of 24 February was      factual aspects of the incidence itself, the controversy
brought before the Council, we have based our actions on          stemming from it straddles two different questions: on the
the following basic tenets: first, we have endeavoured to         one hand, the downing of unarmed civil aircraft, and on
express our sensitivity to the humanitarian dimension of the      the other hand, the use of civil aviation in a manner
incident, as valuable lives were lost; secondly, we have          inconsistent with the Chicago Convention. When
worked for the preservation of the principles and norms of        confronted with the task of placing the importance of the
international law; and thirdly, in the sphere of procedure,       two questions in proper perspective, it is obvious to us
we have wanted a clear investigative process that would           that human life is the supreme value which we must


                                                                                                                          21

Security Council                                                                                              3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                                26 July 1996

protect, just as we must protect the security of civil aviation   The Italian Government deeply regrets the loss of lives
in this case, by defending and reiterating the applicable         caused by this tragic event.
norms of international law. Thus, we shall participate with
our vote in the adoption of this draft resolution.                      My delegation fully subscribes, therefore, to the
                                                                  reaffirmation of the principle that States must refrain from
      But at the same time, it is our hope that this incident     the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight, which
will allow us all to reflect, so that in the future everyone      is also contained in the resolution adopted by the ICAO
may be able to held avoid similar situations. My delegation       and forwarded to the Security Council with the report.
hopes that States will take the appropriate additional            Such use is indeed a violation of the rules of customary
measures to prevent the improper use of civil aviation, as        international law, irrespective of whether or not the
is reaffirmed in paragraph 5 of the draft resolution.             aircraft is within the territorial airspace of that State and
                                                                  irrespective, as well, of whether or not that State has
      Also important to us is the decision taken by the           ratified the Protocol introducing article 3 bis of the
Council of ICAO to establish a mechanism for prior                Convention on International Civil Aviation.
information in the case of possible actions contrary to
article 3 bis, and for reporting to the ICAO. We also hope              On the other hand, we also believe that the ICAO
that the ICAO study on security aspects relative to the           Council was correct in underlining the principle that each
recommended standards and practices and other rules on the        contracting State shall take appropriate measures to
interception of civil aircraft will help in preventing future     prohibit the deliberate use of any civil aircraft for any
tragedies of this kind.                                           purpose inconsistent with the aims of the Convention. The
                                                                  draft resolution before the Council contains an important
     We conclude with a feeling of profound sorrow at an          reference to this principle.
incident we deplore, which Chile would prefer had never
occurred, in the firm hope that the Council will not have to            Indeed, the text of the draft resolution, largely based
deal with such a matter again, and in full solidarity with the    on the resolution adopted by the ICAO Council, contains
families of the victims.                                          specific references to all principles governing international
                                                                  civil aviation relevant to the issue under consideration,
      Mr. Ferrarin (Italy): In its presidential statement of      while noting in its crucial paragraph that the unlawful
the 27 February last, the Security Council strongly deplored      shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of the civil
the shooting down by the Cuban Air Force of two civil             aircraft violated the most basic of these principles.
aircraft, which had taken place three days earlier, resulting
in the death of four persons.                                           For these reasons, Italy will vote in favour of the
                                                                  draft resolution before the Council.
     On the same occasion, the Council requested the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to                   Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic):
investigate the incident and to report its findings to the        The delegation of Egypt wishes to make the following
Council. The ICAO report has confirmed the basic facts:           comments before the vote on this draft resolution.
two unarmed civil aircraft in flight were destroyed, while
                                                                        First of all, the subject before us today is, in the
           “Means other than interception were available to       opinion of my delegation, a legal one. Even if it has
     Cuba, such as radio communication, but had not been          important political dimensions, it relates to the need to
     utilized”. (S/1996/509, annex, appendix B, para. 3.18)       safeguard respect for international law under the Chicago
                                                                  Convention of 1944 and its additional Protocols, in
      The position of the Italian Government is fully             particular the 1984 Protocol adding the text of article 3
reflected in the statement issued by the Foreign Ministers        bis. This article enshrines the rule of customary law,
of the European Union on 26 February:                             whereby countries undertake to refrain from the use of
                                                                  weapons against civil aircraft in flight. The text of this
     “Irrespective of the circumstances of the incident,          article — and I personally participated in drafting it — is
     there can be no excuse for not respecting international      global in scope and does not allow for any exception,
     law and human rights norms”. (S/1996/145, annex)             whatever the grounds may be. Article 3 bis affirms the
                                                                  right of every country to protect its sovereignty by
                                                                  obliging any aircraft overflying its territory without due


22

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

cause to land at an airport according to procedures adopted            As a result of long and painstaking efforts, the
by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).         international community has established an international
However, this must be done without endangering the lives         legal framework for an approach to this set of issues. As
of passengers on board the aircraft.                             we know, these efforts were enshrined in article 3 bis of
                                                                 the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
      We live today in a world that must be governed by          Unfortunately, not all States have yet ratified that article.
law, and any violation of international law is a violation of
the rights of every country. We in the Security Council                Turning to specifics, the Security Council is
must act in solidarity so as to address any violations clearly   endeavouring to come to grips with all the circumstances
and specifically. Secondly, the Security Council’s approval      of the tragic incidents of 24 February of this year, which
of the conclusions of the report — even through we note          resulted in loss of life. We would like to reiterate that we
contradictions in certain parts of the report, and even          profoundly regret this loss of life and to express our
though the Security Council approves the report adopted by       condolences to the bereaved families.
the Council of ICAO by consensus — is aimed mainly at
ensuring the respect of, and full support for, international           The main lesson here is that all States without
law in this area. It aims also at ensuring the observance of     exception should fully comply with the requirements of
internationally adopted procedures and measures regarding        article 3 bis in their entirety. This is precisely how we
the interception of any aircraft penetrating the airspace of     view the essence of the consideration of the tragedy of 24
a country, whether that country has ratified the Convention      February, both in the Security Council and in the
or not.                                                          International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). As for
                                                                 the results of the work of ICAO, we are in a position to
      Egypt has ratified article 3 bis and would invite          say that this most authoritative body in the field of civil
countries that have not yet ratified that text to do so as       aviation opted for a constructive approach on the basis of
quickly as possible. We believe that all countries should        an expert analysis of this incident, to focus its attention
respect the rules set out in that Protocol. The delegation of    mainly on the prevention of similar incidents in the
Egypt considers it extremely important to affirm, as             future.
mentioned in the draft resolution and without any
exceptions, the need for all Member States to take                     The draft resolution before the Security Council
appropriate measures to prohibit the use of any civil aircraft   reaffirms the conclusion of the Council of ICAO, that
registered in that State or operated in full knowledge of the    States must refrain from the use of weapons against civil
facts by an operator who has his principal place of business     aircraft in flight and that, when civil aircraft are
or permanent residence in that State for any purpose             intercepted, the lives of persons on board must not be
inconsistent with the aims of the Chicago Convention and         endangered. This is a very important reaffirmation.
related Protocols, particularly if the goals are political.
                                                                       The draft resolution condemns the use of weapons
     For this reason, the delegation of Egypt will vote in       against civil aircraft in flight as incompatible with
favour of the draft resolution.                                  considerations of humanity, the rules of customary
                                                                 international law, standards and recommended practices.
      Mr. Gorelik (Russian Federation) (interpretation from      It is our conviction that this applies to all States.
Russian): Today the Security Council is considering a very
important question, which has a number of closely                      In this, however, the Security Council bears a great
interrelated aspects. Many of these have recently become         responsibility in terms of effective and timely measures
the focus of particular attention by the international           to ensure compliance with international law, which
community.                                                       includes not allowing violations of the sovereignty of
                                                                 Member States or of the standards and rules of
     We are facing a problem: how to ensure in practice          international civil aviation.
the proper observance and integration of the principles of
humanity, national security, State sovereignty in the flying           Unfortunately, the draft resolution before us, despite
of civil aircraft. To strike an optimum balance between          real improvements over the initial text — and we note
these principles is an extremely complex task, but it cannot     with satisfaction the efforts of the United States
be deferred.                                                     delegation to that end — continues to deviate from the
                                                                 general direction consistent with the interests of all


                                                                                                                           23

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

members of the international community. This text remains              We are convinced that there was a real opportunity
unbalanced from the political and international legal             to arrive at a generally acceptable text — and hence a
standpoints. It clearly does not strike a balance between two     correct interpretation for future incidents of this kind —
fundamental principles: the non-use of weapons against            and our delegation tried up to the very last minute to
civil aircraft and the non-use of such aircraft for illegal       work towards that end. It is not our fault if this did not
purposes. In our view, this establishes an unfortunate            succeed.
precedent for the future. International law must be complied
with by all and in all its aspects. In insisting on unswerving         In view of these considerations, the Russian
compliance with one of its principles, laid down in article       delegation cannot support the draft resolution in its
3 bis of the Chicago Convention, it is important to ensure        present form and will abstain in the voting.
complete compliance with the other, no less significant
principle of the same article.                                          The President (interpretation from French): I now
                                                                  put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document
     It has come about that the draft resolution skirts over      S/1996/596.
the underlying reasons for the incident and places its main
emphasis to the consequences. And yet it is common                     A vote was taken by show of hands.
knowledge that the nature of the flights undertaken by
Brothers to the Rescue, as well as the aims pursued through       In favour:
them, are hardly compatible with the aims laid down for the            Botswana, Chile, Egypt, France, Germany, Guineause of civil aviation by the Chicago Convention. The task,             Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia, Italy, Poland, Republic
however, is for the Security Council, through its                      of Korea, United Kingdom of Great Britain and
authoritative decision, to encourage the adoption of timely            Northern Ireland, United States of America
and all-encompassing measures to prevent such tragedies
from occurring in the future.                                     Against:
                                                                      None
      As to certain professional questions in connection with
the investigation of the incident, the Security Council has       Abstaining:
actually bypassed the opinions of the ICAO Council. We                 China, Russian Federation
are also unhappy that the draft resolution emphasizes the
report of the Secretary General of ICAO over the resolution             The President (interpretation from French): The
of the ICAO Council. We feel that the report is essentially       result of the voting is as follows: 13 votes in favour, none
a technical ICAO document, which was, however, not given          against and 2 abstaining. The draft resolution has been
an unequivocal assessment when it was considered. The             adopted as resolution 1067 (1996).
resolution of the ICAO Council expresses the political
position of the States members of that organization.                   I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the
                                                                  representative of France.
      In our view, today’s draft resolution also falls short of
the resolution of the ICAO Council in terms of the balance              The events of 24 February — the shooting down of
of its formulations. We do not feel that the Security             two civil aircraft by the Cuban Air Force, leading to the
Council should take it upon itself to make a legal                deaths of four persons — prompted a strong emotional
qualification of the tragic events of 24 February, not taking     reaction expressed in the Security Council’s presidential
duly into account the views of the specialized agency             statement of 27 February.
competent in these matters.
                                                                       Beyond the emotions, two imperatives arose: to
      In other words, we regret that accuracy and                 establish the facts and to recall the rules, respect for
thoroughness were sacrificed in the draft resolution to a         which should guarantee that a tragedy of this kind will
desire to force a decision. Unfortunately, the repeated           not reoccur.
appeals of the Russian and other delegations to continue
constructive work towards an agreed text that would fully              The International Civil Aviation Organization
reflect all aspects of this multifaceted problem went             (ICAO) has already helped to meet these goals. The
unheeded.                                                         report of the investigation undertaken by the Secretary
                                                                  General of that organization describes the chain of events


24

Security Council                                                                                             3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                               26 July 1996

that led to the incidents of 24 February. Two points have               The representative of Cuba has offered us many
emerged with particular clarity. The first is that these events   words this afternoon. But, despite the many words we
occurred in a context of tension caused by repeated               heard, we have heard nothing new. We have heard
violations of Cuban airspace in previous months. The              nothing to change the fact that the International Civil
second is that weapons were deliberately used against             Aviation Organization (ICAO) has concluded that Cuba
unarmed civil aircraft without prior recourse to procedures       shot down two planes over international waters. We have
that would have made it possible to divert these planes and       heard nothing to change the fact that the ICAO has
avoid the fatal outcome.                                          concluded that these were civilian planes. If the
                                                                  representative of Cuba continues to doubt this fact,
      The resolution adopted by the ICAO Council recalls          perhaps he should talk to the pilots of the Cuban MIGs
rules applicable to this case. These are those codified in the    who identified these planes as civilian aircraft before they
Protocol adding article 3 bis to the Convention on                blew them out of the sky. We heard nothing to change the
International Civil Aviation. This article lays down the          fact that the ICAO has concluded that Cuba violated all
basic principle of the non-use of weapons against civil           norms of civil aviation by shooting first and asking
aircraft in flight. It also formulates several principles aimed   questions later. And we have heard nothing to change the
at protecting States against the effects of the use of civil      fact that the Security Council has now endorsed the
aircraft for purposes inconsistent with the aims of the           conclusions of the ICAO report and thereby rejected
Convention. The ICAO Council was right to recall these            Cuba’s case completely.
rules and to appeal for the ratification of the Protocol
adding article 3 bis.                                                   But more important than all of that, I sat here and
                                                                  listened to the representative of Cuba for more than one
      The resolution adopted today by the Council, which          and a half hours and, despite all the words I heard, I
my delegation supported, is completely consistent with the        heard nothing to indicate regret by the Cuban Government
results of ICAO’s work. It notes a fact that no one disputes:     for the four civilian men who were killed. I heard no
the shooting down of two civil aircraft on 24 February            offer of condolences to the families, and I heard no
violated the principle of the non-use of weapons against          willingness by the Cuban Government to take
civil aircraft in flight. It also clearly recalls the principle   responsibility for an act that this Council has condemned
that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty           as a violation of international law.
over the airspace above its territory and the principle that
each Contracting State shall take appropriate measures to               Finally, I listened carefully to the representative of
prohibit the use of any civil aircraft registered in that State   Cuba use the phrase, “Sentence first — verdict
for any purpose inconsistent with the aims of the Chicago         afterwards”. I still do not understand the point he was
Convention. The French delegation, moreover, attaches             making, since this Council asked the ICAO to investigate
great importance to the resolution’s appeal to all States         precisely and to render its final judgment after an
which have not yet done so to ratify the Protocol adding          objective examination of the events of 24 February 1996.
article 3 bis and to implement it pending its entry into          But sadly, I must admit, “Sentence first — verdict
force.                                                            afterwards” is precisely what happened. For it is certainly
                                                                  true that on 24 February, five months ago, without any
      The resolution adopted by the Security Council thus         inquiry, without any warning, and without regard to law
makes an essential contribution to the strengthening and          and decency, the Cuban Government sentenced four of
consolidation of international law, which we hope will            my countrymen to death over international waters. Five
prevent any repetition of events such as those we witnessed       months have gone by and the verdict is in: this Council
last February.                                                    has declared Cuba guilty as charged — guilty of violating
                                                                  international law. It is high time for Cuba to accept the
    I now resume my functions as President of the                 judgment.
Council.
                                                                       The President (interpretation from French): The
      Mrs. Albright (United States of America): I would           representative of Cuba has asked to speak, and I call on
like to thank the members of the Security Council for this        him now.
overwhelming support and also for the condolences
expressed for the deaths of the pilots. But I feel committed          Mr. Alarcón de Quesada (Cuba) (interpretation
to making a brief statement of reply.                             from Spanish): I do not want to take up much of the


                                                                                                                           25

Security Council                                                                                       3683rd meeting
Fifty-first year                                                                                         26 July 1996

Council’s time, and it is not necessary. We did not need a    recording? Is it the one that was distributed in February,
Council meeting to do what the representative of the United   or the mutilated one given to the ICAO in May? Where
States believes the Council has done. On 20 June, even        is the truth, my dear friend? Why have you, the defenders
before the report of the investigative team was issued, we    of the truth, put so much time and effort into hiding it?
heard exactly the same words from the White House. Until      And somebody expressed surprise that we recalled the
yesterday the Council had an opportunity to take a decision   brilliant work of Lewis Carroll.
consistent with what it said in February. As one
representative very recently recalled, nine members of the         The specialized agency of the United Nations,
Council put forward ideas that would have been completely     ICAO, dedicated four long meetings in two days of work
along the lines of the conclusions of the Council of the      to the consideration of the report, which was conducted
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).             by civil aviation specialists. They did not do what
                                                              members of the Council, in a couple of hours, under
      One delegation, long before the meeting of the          pressure and manipulation, have been capable of doing. I
Council and the meetings of ICAO, insisted on repeating its   think that the majority of members deserve a good rest.
lies and distorting the truth without replying to specific
questions: where are the witnesses? Where is the                   The President (interpretation from French): There
                                                              are no further speakers. The Security Council has thus
                                                              concluded the present stage of its consideration of the
                                                              item on its agenda.

                                                                   The meeting rose at 6.35 p.m.




26

Voting Summary
Yes: 013 | No: 000 | Abstentions: 002 | Non-Voting: 000 | Total voting membership: 015
Y BOTSWANA
Y CHILE
A CHINA
Y EGYPT
Y FRANCE
Y GERMANY
Y GUINEA-BISSAU
Y HONDURAS
Y INDONESIA
Y ITALY
Y POLAND
Y REPUBLIC OF KOREA
A RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Y UNITED KINGDOM
Y UNITED STATES