Security Council resolution 583 (1986) [on extension of the mandate of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon]
Symbol: S/RES/583(1986)
Date: 1986-04-18
Meeting record: S/PV.2681
Subjects: UN Interim Force in Lebanon|PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS|LEBANON|MIDDLE EAST SITUATION
Notes: Extends the mandate of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon.
In: Resolutions and decisions of the Security Council, 1986. - S/INF/42. - 1987. - p. 1-2. - (SCOR, 41st year).
Summary: Decides to extend the present mandate of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon for a further period of 3 months, that is, until 19 July 1986; reiterates support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders.

Resolution 583 (1986)
of 18 April 1986

The Security Council

Recalling its resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978),
SOL (1982), SO8 (1982). 509 (1982) and 520 (1982), as well
as all its resolutions on the situation in Lebanon,

Having studied the report of the Secretary-General on
the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon of 9 April
1986. 6 and taking note of the observations expressed
therein.

Taking note of the letter of the Permanent Representative of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General of 1 April 1986. 7

Responding to the request of the Government of Lebanon,

1. Decides to extend the present mandate of the
United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon for a further interim period of three months, that 1s, until 19 July 1986:

2. Reiterates its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Lebanon within
its internationally recognized boundaries;

3. Re-emphasizes the terms of reference and general
guidelines of the Force as stated in the report of the Secretary-General of 19 March 1978.8 approved by resolution
426 (1978), and calls upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully with the Force for the full implementation of
its mandate;

4. Reiterates that the Force should fully implement its
mandate as defined in resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978)
and all other relevant resolutions;

5. Requests the Secretary-General to continue consultations with the Government of Lebanon and other parties
directly concerned on the implementation of the present
resolution and to report to the Council thereon by
19 June 1986.

Adopted unanimously at the
2681st meeting.



6 Ibid , document S/17965
7 Ibid. document S/17968

Texto español (official Spanish version): RESOLUCIONES APROBADAS Y DECISIONES TOMADAS POR EL CONSEJO
DE SEGURIDAD EN 1986

Parte 1

Cuestiones examinadas por el Consejo de Seguridad en cumplimiento

de su responsabilidad por el mantenimiento de la paz y la seguridad internacionales

CUESTIONES RELACIONADAS CON EL ORIENTE MEDIO!

La situación en el Oriente Medio

Decisiones

En su 26404. sesión, celebrada el 13 de enero de 1986, el
Consejo decidió invitar a los representantes de Israel, la
Jamahiriya Arabe Libia, el Libano y la República Arabe
Siria a participar, sin derecho de voto, en el debate del
tema titulado “La situación en el Oriente Medio: carta, de
fecha 6 de enero de 1986, dirigida al Presidente del Consejo de Seguridad por el Representante Permanente
del Libano ante las Naciones Unidas (S/17717?)”.

En su 2641a. sesión, celebrada el 13 de enero de 1986, el
Consejo decidió invitar a los representantes de Arabia
Saudita y Qatar a participar, sin derecho de voto, en el debate de la cuestión.

En su 2642. sesión, celebrada el 17 de enero de 1986, el
Consejo decidió invitar al representante de Marruecos u
participar, sin derecho de voto, en el debate de la cuestión.

En una carta de fecha 17 de abril de 1986? el Secretario
General informó al Presidente del Consejo de que, con sujeción a las consultas habituales, se proponía nombrar al
General de División Gustav Hagglund, de Finlandia, que
desempeñaba el cargo de Comandante de la Fuerza de las
Naciones Unidas de Observación de la Separación, para
reemplazar al Teniente General William Gallaghan, de Irlanda, como Comandante de la Fuerza Provisional de las
Naciones Unidas en el Libano. En una carta de fecha 24 de
abril de 1986, el Presidente del Consejo informó al Secretario General de lo siguiente:

“Tengo el honor de informarle de que he señalado su
carta de fecha 17 de abril de 19863, en la cual indicaba
que se proponía nombrar al General de División Gustav

! El Consejo también aprobó resoluciones 0 decisiones sobre esta cuestionen 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973. 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977,
1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 y 1985.

2 Véase Documentos Oficiales del Consejo de Seguridad, cuadragesimo
primer uño, Suplemento de enero, febrero y marzo de 1986,

3 S/ 18032.

4 8/18033.

Hiágglund, de Finlandia, nuevo Comandante de la
Fuerza Provisional de las Naciones Unidas en el Labano, a la atención de los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad. Estos examinaron el asunto en consultas ofictosas celebradas el 24 de abril y se mamtestaron de
acuerdo con la propuesta contenida en su carta”.

En su 2681a. sesión, celebrada el 18 de abril de 1986, el
Consejo decidió invitar al representante del Libano a participar, sin derecho de voto, en el debate del tema titulado
“La situación en el Oriente Medio: informe del Secretario General sobre la Fuerza Provisional de las Naciones
Unidas en el Libano (S/179635)”.

Resolución 583 (1986)

de 18 de abril de 1986

El Consejo de Seguridad,

Recordando sus resoluciones 425 (1978), 426 (1978),
501 (1982), SOS (1982), 509 (1982) y $20 (1982), así como
todas sus resoluciones sobre la situación en el Libano,

Habiendo examinado el mforme del Secretario General
sobre la Fuerza Provisional de las Naciones Unidas en el
Líbano de 9 de abril de 1986% y tomando nota de las observaciones en él formuladas,

Tomando nota de la carta dirigida al Secretario General
por el Representante Permanente del Líbano el 17 de abril
de 19867,

Respondiendo a la solicitud del Gobierno del Libano,

l. Decide prorrogar el mandato actual de la Fuerza
Provisional de las Naciones Unidas en el Líbano por otro
periodo provisional de tres meses, es decir, hasta el 19 de

Julio de 1986;

S Vease Documentos Oficiales del Consejo de Seguridad. cuadragesimo
primer año, Suplemento de abril. mayo y junio de 1986,

6 hid.. documento S/717965,

7 Ibid. documento $/17968.
2. Reiterasu decidido apoyo a la integridad territorial,
la soberanía y la independencia del Líbano dentro de sus
fronteras internacionalmente reconocidas;

3. Destaca una vez más el mandato y las directrices generales de la Fuerza tal como figuran en el informe del Secretario General de 19 de marzo de 197883, aprobado por la
resolución 426 (1978), e insta a todas las partes interesadas
a que cooperen plenamente con la Fuerza para asegurar el
pleno cumplimiento de su mandato;

4. Reitera que la Fuerza debe cumplir plenamente su
mandato tal como se define en las resoluciones 425 (1978),
426 (1978) y todas las demás resoluciones pertinentes;

5. Pideal Secretario General que continúe las consultas con el Gobierno del Líbano y con las demás partes directamente interesadas sobre la aplicación de la presente
resolución y que informe al Consejo al respecto antes del
19 de junio de 1986.

idoptadu por unanimidad en la
2681u. sesión.

Decisión

En su 2687a. sesión, celebrada el 29 de mayo de 1986, el
Consejo prosiguió el examen del tema titulado “La situación en el Oriente Medio: informe del Secretario General
sobre la Fuerza de las Naciones Unidas de Observación de
la Separación (S/180615y”.

Resolución 584 (1986)
de 29 de mayo de 1986

El Consejo de Seguridad,

Habiendo examinado el informe del Secretario General
sobre la Fuerza de las Naciones Unidas de Observación de
la Separación,

Decide:

a) Exhortar alas partes interesadas a que apliquen inmediatamente la resolución 338 (1973) del Consejo de Scguridad;

b) Renovar el mandato de la Fuerza de las Naciones
Unidas de Observación de la Separación por otro periodo
de seis meses, es decir, hasta el 30 de noviembre de 1986:

c) Pedir al Secretario General que presente al final de
ese período un informe sobre la evolución de la situación y
las medidas adoptadas para aplicar la resolución 338
(1973).

Adoptada por unanimidad en ta
26874. sesion

8 Documentos Oficiales del Consejo de Seguridad, trigesimo tercer año.
Suplemento de enero. febrero y marzo de 1978, documento S/12611

9 Ibid.. cuadragesimo primer año, Suplemento de abril, mayo y junio
de 1986, documento S/18061.

Decisiones

En la misma sesión, una vez aprobada la resolución 584
(1986), el Presidente formuló la siguiente declaración!0:

“En relación con la resolución que se acaba de aprobar sobre la renovación del mandato de la Fuerza de las
Naciones Unidas de Observación de la Separación, se
me ha autorizado a hacer la siguiente declaración complementaria en nombre del Consejo de Seguridad:

* Como se sabe, en el párrafo 25 del informe del
Secretario General sobre la Fuerza de las Naciones
Unidas de Observación de la Separación? se declara
que “a pesar de la tranquilidad que impera actualmente en el sector Israel-Siria, la situación en el
Oriente Medio en su conjunto no ha dejado de ser potencialmente peligrosa y es probable que siga siendolo
hasta que se llegue a un acuerdo completo que abarque todos los aspectos del problema del Oriente Medio”. Esta declaración del Secretario General refleja
el parecer del Consejo de Seguridad" >.

En una carta de fecha 2 de junio de 198611, el Secretario
General informó al Presidente del Consejo de que, con su-Jeción a las consultas habituales, se proponía nombrar al
General de División Gustaf Welin, de Suecia, Comandante de la Fuerza de las Naciones Unidas de Observación
de la Separación, para reemplazar al General de División
Gustav Hagglund, de Finlandia. El Presidente, previa
consulta con los miembros del Consejo, envió al Secretario
General la siguiente respuesta!?:

“Tengo el honor de informarle de que he señalado su
carta de fecha 2 de junio de 198611, en la que indicaba su
intención de nombrar al General de División Gustaf
Welin, de Suecia, Comandante de la Fuerza de las Naciones Unidas de Observación de la Separación a la
atención de los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad. Estos examinaron el asunto en consultas oficiosas celebradas el 5 de junio y se manifestaron de acuerdo con la
propuesta contenida en su carta”.

El 6 de junio de 1986. tras la celebración de consultas, el
Presidente del Consejo formuló la siguiente declaración 3
en nombre de los miembros del Consejo:

“Los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad estan gravemente preocupados por la constante intensificación
de las hostilidades en Beirut, sobre todo en los campamentos de refugiados palestinos y sus alrededores, con
un alto precio en vidas humanas y daños materiales,

“Los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad hacen un
llamamiento a todas las partes interesadas para que utilicen su influencia a fin de lograr el cese de las hostilichades y permitir que el Organismo de Obras Públicas y Socorro de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados de
Palestina en el Cercano Oriente y otras organizaciones
humanitarias emprendan operaciones de emergencia en
beneficio de las poblaciones afectadas, incluidos los re-

108/1811]
1 S/18135
12 S/18136
E ALIES

Texte français (official French version): RESOLUTIONS ADOPTEES ET DECISIONS PRISES
PAR LE CONSEIL DE SECURITE EN 1986

Première partie. — Questions examinées par le Conseil de sécurité en tant qu’organe
responsable du maintien de la paix et de la sécurité internationales

QUESTIONS CONCERNANT LE MOYEN-ORIENT |

La situation au Moyen-Orient

Décisions

A sa 2640° séance, le 13 janvier 1986, le Conseil a dé-
cidé d’inviter les représentants d’Israël, de la Jamahiriya
arabe libyenne, du Liban et de la République arabe syrienne à participer, sans droit de vote, à la discussion de la
question intitulée «La situation au Moyen-Orient :lettre,
en date du 6 janvier 1986, adressée au Président du Conseil de sécurité par le représentant permanent du Liban auprès de l’Organisation des Nations Unies (S/17717?)».

À sa 2641° séance, le 13 janvier 1986, le Conseil a dé-
cidé d’inviter les représentants de l'Arabie saoudite et du
Qatar à participer, sans droit de vote, à la discussion de la
question.

A sa 2642° séance, le 17 janvier 1986, le Conseil a dé-
cidé d’inviter le représentant du Maroc à participer, sans
droit de vote, à la discussion de la question.

Dans une lettre, en date du 17 avril 1986*, le Secrétaire
général a informé le Président du Conseil de son intention,
sous réserve des consultations d’usage, de désigner le géné-
ral de division Gustav Hägglund, de la Finlande, qui commandait la Force des Nations Unies chargée d’observer le
dégagement, comme nouveau commandant de la Force intérimaire des Nations Unies au Liban, en remplacement
du général de corps d'armée William Callaghan, de l’Irlande. Dans une lettre, en date du 24 avril 19864, le Président du Conseil a informé le Secrétaire général de ce qui
suit :

“J’ai l’honneur de vous informer que j'ai porté votre
lettre, en date du 17 avril 1986*, concernant votre intention de nommer le général de division Gustav Hägglund, de la Finlande, commandant de la Force intérimaire des Nations Unies au Liban, à l’attention des
! Questions ayant fait l’objet de résolutions ou décisions de la part du

Conseil en 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976,
1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 et 1985.

? Voir Documents officiels du Conseil de sécurité, quarante et unième

année, Supplément de janvier, février et mars 1986.

3 S/18032.
4 S/18033.

membres du Conseil de sécurité. Ceux-ci ont examine la
question lors de consultations officieuses tenues le
24 avril et ont accepté la proposition figurant dans votre
lettre.»

À sa 2681° séance, le 18 avril 1986, le Conseil a décidé
d'inviter le représentant du Liban à participer, sans droit
de vote, à la discussion de la question intitulée «La situation au Moyen-Orient : rapport du Secrétaire général sur
la Force intérimaire des Nations Unies au Liban
(S/179655)>.

Résolution 583 (1986)
du 18 avril 1986

Le Conseil de sécurité,

Rappelant ses résolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978),
501 (1982), 508 (1982), 509 (1982) et 520 (1982), ainsi que
toutes ses résolutions relatives à la situation au Liban,

Ayant examiné le rapport du Secrétaire général sur la
Force intérimaire des Nations Unies au Liban, en date du
9 avril 19866, et prenant acte des observations qui y sont
formulées,

Prenant acte de la lettre, en date du 1°" avril 1986,
adressée au Secrétaire général par le représentant permanent du Liban?,

Répondant à la demande du Gouvernement libanais,

1.  Décide de proroger le mandat actuel de la Force intérimaire des Nations Unies au Liban pour une nouvelle
période intérimaire de trois mois, soit jusqu’au 19 juillet 1986;

2. Réaffirme qu’il soutient fermement la cause de l’intégrité territoriale, de la souveraineté et de l’indépendance
du Liban à l’intérieur de ses frontières internationalement
reconnués:

$ Voir Documents officicis du Conseil de securité, quarante ct unième
année, Supplément d'avril. mai et juin 1986.

$ fbid., document S/17965.

? Ibid, document S17$68
3. Souligne à nouveau le mandat de la Force et les
principes généraux la concernant tels qu'ils sont énoncés
dans le rapport du Secrétaire général en date du
19 mars 19788 approuvé par la résolution 426 (1978), et
demande à toutes les parties intéressées de coopérer pleinement avec la Force pour qu’elle puisse remplir intégralement son mandat;

4.  Réaffirme qu’il convient que la Force remplisse intégralement son mandat, tel qu’il est défini dans les résolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978) et dans toutes les autres résolutions pertinentes;

5.  Prie le Secrétaire général de poursuivre les consultations avec le Gouvernement libanais et les autres parties
directement intéressées au sujet de l’application de la pré-
sente résolution et de faire rapport au Conseil le
19 juin 1986 au plus tard.

Adoptee à l'unanimité a la
2681° seance.

Décision

A sa 2687? séance, le 29 mai 1986, le Conseil a examiné
la question intitulée «La situation au Moyen-Orient : rapport du Secrétaire général sur la Force des Nations Unies
chargée d’observer le dégagement (S/180615)».

Résolution 584 (1986)
du 29 mai 1986

Le Conseil de sécurité,

Ayant examiné le rapport du Secrétaire général sur la
Force des Nations Unies chargée d’observer le dégagement”,

Décide:

a) De demander aux parties intéressées d'appliquer
immédiatement la résolution 338 (1973) du Conseil de sé-
curité;

b) De renouveler le mandat de la Force des Na-

tions Unies chargée d’observer le dégagement pour une
autre période de six mois, soit jusqu’au 30 novembre 1986;

c) De prier le Secrétaire général de soumettre, à la fin
de cette période, un rapport sur l'évolution de la situation

et sur les mesures prises pour appliquer la résolution 338 (1973).

Adoptée a l'unanimité à la
26872 seance.

8 Documents officiels du Conseil de sécurité, trente-troisième annec,
Supplément de janvier, février et mars 1978, document S/126H1.

9 Ibid, quarante et unième année. Supplément d'avril, mai et juin 1986,
document S/18061.

t_

Décisions

A la même seance, après l'adoption de la résolution
584 (1986), le Président a fait la déclaration suivante!® :

“A propos de la résolution qui vient d’être adoptée
sur le renouvellement du mandat de la Force des Nations Unies chargée d'observer le dégagement, j'ai été
autorisé à faire, au nom du Conseil de sécurite, la déclaration complémentaire suivante:

«Comme on le sait, il est dit au paragraphe 25 du
rapport du Secrétaire général sur la Force des Nations Unies chargée d’observer le dégagement que,
‘malgré le calme qui règne actuellement dans le secteur Israël-Syrie, la situation demeure potentiellement dangereuse dans tout le Moyen-Orient et risque
de le rester tant que l’on ne sera pas parvenu à un rè-
glement d'ensemble couvrant tous les aspects du problème du Moyen-Orient'. Cette déclaration du Secré-
taire général reflète les vues du Conseil de sécurite.

Dans une lettre, en date du 2 juin 1986!!, le Secrétaire
général a informé le Président du Conseil de son intention,
sous réserve des consultations d'usage, de nommer le géné-
ral de division Gustaf Welin, de la Suède, comme commandant de la Force des Nations Unies chargée d'observer le dégagement, en remplacement du général de
division Gustav Hägglund, de la Finlande. À la suite de
consultations avec les membres du Conseil, le Président à
adressé au Secrétaire général la réponse suivante!? :

«J'ai l'honneur de vous informer que j'ai porté votre
lettre, en date du 2 juin 1986!!, concernant votre intention de nommer le général de division Gustaf Welin, de
la Suède, commandant de la Force des Nations Unies
chargée d'observer le dégagement, à l'attention des
membres du Conseil de sécurité. Ils ont examiné la
question au cours de consultations officieuses tenues le
5 juin et ont accepté la proposition figurant dans votre
lettre.

Le 6 juin 1986, à la suite de consultations, le Président
du Conseil a fait, au nom des membres du Conseil, la dé-
claration suivante!3 :

«Les membres du Conseil de sécurité sont profondement préoccupés par la persistance et l'intensification
des combats qui se déroulent à Beyrouth, en particulier
dans les camps de réfugiés palestiniens et alentour, au
prix de nombreuses victimes et de graves dégâts maté-
riels.

«Ils appellent toutes les parties intéressées à user de
leur influence pour obtenir la cessation des combats afin
de permettre à l’Office de secours et de travaux des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés de Palestine dans le Proche-Orient et à d’autres organisations humanitaires
d'organiser des opérations de secours d'urgence dans
l'intérêt des populations concernées, y compris les réfu-

10 S/18111.
11 $/18135
!2 S/18136.
} S/18138

Русский текст (official Russian version): РЕЗОЛЮЦИИ И РЕШЕНИЯ, ПРИНЯТЫЕ СОВЕТОМ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ В 1986 ГОДУ

Часть 1. Вопросы, рассматривавшиеся Советом Безопасности в порядке возложенной
на него ответственности за поддержание международного мира и безопасности

ПУНКТЫ, КАСАЮЩИЕСЯ БЛИЖНЕГО ВОСТОКА

Положение на Ближнем Востоке

Решения

На своем 2640-м заседании 13 января 1986 года
Совет постановил пригласить представителей Из-
раиля, Ливана, Ливийской Арабской Джамахирии и
Сирийской Арабской Республики принять участие
без права голоса в обсуждении пункта. озаглав-
ленного «Положение на Ближнем Востоке: письмо
Постоянного представителя Ливана при Органи-
зации Объединенных Наций от 6 января 1986 года на
имя Председателя Совета Безопасности (5/17717)»`.

На своем 2641-м заседании 13 января 1986 года
Совет постановил пригласить представителей Ка-
тара и Саудовской Аравии принять участие без
права голоса в обсуждении этого вопроса.

На своем 2642-м заседании |7 января 1986 года
Совет постановил пригласить представителя Ма-
рокко принять участие без права голоса в обсуж-
дении этого вопроса.

В письме от 17 апреля 1986 года` Генеральный
секретарь информировал Председателя Совета ©
своем намерении, при условии проведения обычных
консультаций, назначить генерал-майора Густава
Хягглунда, Финляндия, являвшегося командующим
Силами Организации Объединенных Наций по на-
блюдению за разъединением, на пост командую-
щего Временными силами Организации Объеди-
ненных Наций в Ливане вместо генерал-лейтенанта
Уильяма Каллагена, Ирландия. В письме от

! Резолюции или решения по этому вопросу были также
приняты Советом в 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970. 1971, 1972, 1973. 1974,
1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979. 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 и 1985 годах.

* См. Официальные отчеты Совета Безопасности, сорок
первый 200, Дополнение за январь, февриль и март 1986 года.

24 апреля 1986 года' Председатель Совета сообщил
Генеральному секретарю следующее:

«Имею честь сообщить Вам, что Ваше письмо
от 17 апреля 1986 года“, касающееся Вашего наме-
рения назначить новым командующим Времен-
ных сил Организации Объединенных Наций в
Ливане генерал-майора Густава Хягглунда, Фин-
ляндия, было доведено до сведения членов Совета
Безопасности. Они рассмотрели этот вопрос на
неофициальных консультациях, состоявшихся
24 апреля, и согласились с предложением, содер-
жащимся в Вашем письме.»

_ На своем 2681-м заседании 18 апреля 1986 года
Совет постановил пригласить представителя Ли-
вана принять участие без права голоса в обсуждении
пункта. озаглавленного «Положение на Ближнем
Востоке: доклад Генерального секретаря о Времен-
ных силах Организации Объединенных Наций в
Ливане ($/17965)»`.

Резолюция 583 (1986)

от 18 апреля 1986 года

Совет Безопасности,

ссылаясь на свои резолюции 425 (1978), 426 (1978),
501 (1982), 508 (1982), 509 (1982) и 520 (1982), а также
на все свои резолюции о положении в Ливане,

изучив доклад Генерального секретаря о Вре-
менных силах Организации Объединенных Наций в
Ливане от 9 апреля 1986 года° и принимая к све-
дению высказанные в нем замечания,

УЛ8083
См. Официальные отчеты Совета Безопасности, сорок пер-
вый год, Дополнение за апрель, май и июнь 1986 года.
* Там же, документ $/17965.
принимая к сведению письмо Постоянного пред-
ставителя Ливана от 1 апреля 1986 года на имя Гене-
рального секретаря’,

отвечая на просьбу правительства Ливана,

1. постановляет продлить нынешний мандат
Временных сил Организации Объединенных Наций
в Ливане на дополнительный временный период в
три месяца, то есть до 19 июля 1986 года;

2. вновь заявляет о своей решительной под-
держке территориальной целостности, суверени-
тета и независимости Ливана в рамках его между-
народно признанных границ:

3. вновь подтверждает круг ведения и общие
руководящие принципы Сил, изложенные в докладе
Генерального секретаря от 19 марта 1978 года“,
утвержденном резолюцией 426 (1978), и призывает
все заинтересованные стороны оказывать всяче-
ское содействие Силам в полном осуществлении их
мандата;

4. вновь заявляет, что Силы должны пол-
ностью выполнить свой мандат, определенный в
резолюциях 425 (1978), 426 (1978) и во всех других
соответствующих резолюциях;

5. просит Генерального секретаря продолжить
консультации с правительством Ливана и другими
непосредственно заинтересованными сторонами об
осуществлении настоящей резолюции и предста-

вить Совету доклад по данному вопросу к 19 июня
1986 года.

Принята единогласно на
2681-м заседании.

Решение

На своем 2687-м заседании 29 мая 1986 года Совет
приступил к обсуждению пункта, озаглавленного
«Положение на Ближнем Востоке: доклад Гене-
рального секретаря о Силах Организации Объеди-
ненных Наций по наблюдению за разъединением (5/
18061)».

Резолюция 584 (1986)

от 29 мая 1986 года

Совет Безопасности,

рассмотрев доклад Генерального секретаря о Си-
лах Организации Объединенных Наций по наблю-
дению за разъединением",

’ Там же, документ 5/17968.

* Официальные отчеты Совета Белопасности, тридцать
третий год, Дополнение за январь, февраль и март 1978 года,
документ 5/12611.

® Там же, сорок первый год, Дополнение за апрель, май и июнь
1986 года, документ $/18061.

[29]

постановляет:

а) призвать заинтересованные стороны немед-
ленно выполнить резолюцию 338 (1973) Совета
Безопасности;

Ь) возобновить мандат Сил Организации Объе-
диненных Наций по наблюдению за разъединением
на новый срок в шесть месяцев, то есть до 30 ноября
1986 года;

с) просить Генерального секретаря представить
в конце этого срока доклад об изменениях в обста-
новке и мерах, принятых для выполнения резолю-
ции 338 (1973).

Принята единогласно на
2687-м заседании.

Решения

На том же заседании после принятия резолюции
584 (1986) Председатель сделал следующее заявле-
ние“:

«В связи с только что принятой резолюцией о
возобновлении мандата Сил Организации Объе-
диненных Наций по наблюдению за разъеди-
нением я уполномочен сделать следующее допол-
нительное заявление от имени Совета Безопас-
ности:

Как известно, в пункте 25 доклада Гене-
рального секретаря о Силах Организации
Объединенных Наций по наблюдению за разъ-
единением” говорится: «Несмотря на нынешнее
затишье в израильско-сирийском секторе, по-
ложение на Ближнем Востоке в целом продол-
жает оставаться потенциально опасным и, по-
видимому, останется таковым до тех пор, пока
не удастся достичь всеобъемлющего урегули-
рования по всем аспектам ближневосточной
проблемы». Это заявление Генерального секре-
таря отражает точку зрения Совета Безо-
пасности».

В письме от 2 июня 1986 года" Генеральный сек-
ретарь информировал Председателя Совета о своем
намерении, при условии проведения обычных кон-
сультаций, назначить генерал-майора Густава Ве-
лина, Швеция, на пост командующего Силами Ор-
ганизации Объединенных Наций по наблюдению за
разъединением вместо генерал-майора Густава
Хягглунда, Финляндия. Председатель после кон-
сультаций с членами Совета направил Генераль-
ному секретарю следующий ответ":

«Имею честь сообщить Вам, что Ваше письмо
от 2 июня 1986 года", касающееся Вашего наме-
рения назначить генерал-майора Густава Велина
из Швеции командующим Силами Организации
Объединенных Наций по наблюдению за разъ-
единением. было доведено до сведения членов

© 5181
'' 5718135.
° 518136

中文文本 (official Chinese version): 1986 年 安全 理事 会 通过 的 决议 及 决定

第 一 部 分 ， 安 全 理事 会 按照 其 维持 国际 和 平 与
安全 的 职责 所 审议 的 问题

有 关中 东 的 项 目 ”

中 东 局 势

决 ”是

1986 年 1 月 13 日 ， 安 理会 第 2640 次 会 议决 定 ， 近
请 以 色 列 、 黎 巴 嫩 、 阿 拉 伯 联合 酋长 国 和 阿拉 伯 叙 利
亚 共和 国 的 代表 参加 讨论 题 为 “中 东 局 势 ，1986 征 1 月
6 日 黎巴嫩 常 驻 联合 国 代表 给 安全 理事 会 主席 的 信
(S/117717)?@ 的 项 目 ， 但 无 表决 权 。

1986 年 1 月 13 日 ， 安 理会 第 2641 次 会 议决 定 ， 邀
请 卡塔尔 和 沙特 阿拉 伯 的 代表 参加 讨论 这 个 问题 ， 但
无 表决 权 。

1986 年 1 月 17 日 安理会 第 2642 次 会 议决 定 ，
邀请 摩洛哥 的 代表 参加 讨论 这 个 问题 ， 但 无 表决 权 。

秘书 长 在 1986 年 4 月 17 日 的 信 @ 中 通知 安理会
主席 ， 他 打算 经 过 通常 的 协商 之 后 ， 任 命 芬 兰 的 古 斯
塔 夫 ， 黑 格 伦 德 少将 〈 当 时 为 联合 国 脱离 接触 观察 员
部 队 指挥 官 ) 接替 爱尔兰 的 威廉 卡拉 汉中 将 担任 联

@ 安 理会 在 1967、1968、1969、1970.1971、1972.1973、
1974、1975、1976、1977、1978、1979、1980、1981、1982、
1983、1984 和 1985 各 年 也 曾 遂 过 关于 这 个 问题 的 次 议 或 次
定 。

国 见 《安全 理事 会 正式 记录 , 第 四 上 一 和 华 ，1986 生 1 工 月 、2
月 利 3 月 份 补 编 ?。

图 S/18032。

合 国 驻 黎 巴 嫩 临 时 部 队 指挥 官 。 安 理会 主席 在 1986 年
4 月 24 日 的 信忠 中 通知 秘书 长 如 下 ，

“我 谨 通 知 你 ， 我 已 将 你 1986 年 4 月 17 蝇 关
于 计划 任命 芬兰 的 古 斯 塔 夫 。 黑 格 伦 德 少将 为 联
合 国 驻 黎巴嫩 临时 部 队 新 任 指挥 官 的 信 @ 提请 安
全 理事 会 成 员 注意 。 他 们 在 4 月 24 日 举行 的 非 正
式 磁 南 中 讨论 了 此 事 ， 并 同意 你 信里 的 建议 。

1986 年 4 月 18 日 ， 安 理会 第 2681 次 会 议决 定 ，
邀请 黎巴嫩 代表 参加 讨论 题 为 "中东 局 势 : 秘书 长 关于
联合 国 驻 黎 巴 嫩 临 时 部 队 的 报告 (3/17965)"@ 的 项
日 , 但 无 表决 权 。

1986 年 4 月 18 日
第 583 (1986) 号 决议

安全 理事 会 ，

回 原 其 第 425(1978)、426(1978) 、501 (1982) 、
508(1982) 、509(1982) 和 520 (1982) 号 决议 以 及 所 有
关于 黎巴嫩 局 势 的 决议 ，

国 S/18033。
加 见 《安全 理事 会 正式 记录 ， 第 四 十 一 年 ，1986 年 4 月 、5
月 和 6 月 份 补 编 ?。
研究 了 秘书 长 1986 年 4 月 9 日 关于 联合 国 驻 黎
巴 嫩 临 时 部 队 的 报告 , @ 并 注意 到 其 中 表达 的 看 法 ，

注意 到 黎巴嫩 常 驻 代表 1986 年 4 月 1 日 给 秘书 长
的 信 ， 包

应 黎巴嫩 政府 的 请 求 ，

]， 决定 将 联合 国 驻 黎 巴 嫩 临 时 部 队 目 前 的 任务
期 限 再 临时 延长 三 个 月 ， 即 至 1986 年 7 月 19 日 为止;

2. 重申 坚决 支持 黎巴嫩 在 其 国际 公认 戏 界 内 的
领土 完整 、 主 权 和 独立 ;

3. 再 次 强调 秘书 长 1978 年 3 月 19 有 日 报告 @ 中
所 述 并 经 第 426 (1978) 号 决议 核 可 的 联 黎 部 队 的 职权
范围 和 总 指导 方针 ， 并 要 求 所 有 有 关 各 方 同 该 部 队 通
力 合 作 ， 使 其 能 充分 执行 任务 ;

4. 重申 联 黎 部 队 应 充分 执行 第 425(1978) 、426
《1978) 号 决议 以 及 所 有 其 他 有 关 决 议 中 给 它 规定 的 任
务 ;

5. 请 秘书 长 继续 同 黎巴嫩 政府 及 其 他 直接 和 有 关
各 方 就 本 决议 的 执行 问题 进行 协商 ， 并 在 1986 年 6
月 19 日 前 向 安理会 提出 报告

第 268] 次 会 议 一 臻 通过 。
决定

1986 年 5 月 29 日 ， 安 理会 第 2687 次 会 议 就 题 为
“中 东 局 势 ， 秘 书 长 关于 联合 朵 脱离 接触 观察 员 部 队
的 报告 CS/18061) ”加 的 项 目 进行 了 讨论 。

1986 年 5 月 29 日 第 584(1986) 号 决议

安全 理事 会 ，

审议 了 秘书 长 关于 联合 国 脱 离 接触 观察 员 部 队 的
报告 ,@

国 咱 上，S/17965 纯 文件 。

包 门 上 ，37417968 导 文件 。

国 《 安 全 理事 会 正式 记 洪 ， 第 十
月 利 3 月 份 补 编 》，S7ZT12611 攻 文件 。

仿 同 上 ，《 第 四 十 一 年 ，1986 年 4 月 、5 月 和 6 月 份 证
网 》，S718061 忆 文件。

-年 ，]1978 生 1 月 、2

决定 :

Ca) 更 求 有 关 各 方 立 即 执行 安全 理事 会 第 338
(1973) 号 决议 ;

Cb) 将 联合 国 脱离 接触 观察 员 部 队 的 任务 期 限
再 延长 六 个 月 ， 即 至 1986 年 11 月 30 昌 为止;

Cc) 请 秘书 长 在 这 一 期 间 终 了 时 ， 就 局 势 的 发
展 和 为 执行 第 338 (1973) 号 决议 所 采取 的 措施 提出 报

4 扩 -
fo

第 2687 次 会 议 一 致 通过。

次 定

在 同一 次 会 议 上 上， 主席 在 第 584 (1986) 号 决议 示
过 后 ， 发 表 声 明 如 下 :@

“关于 刚才 通过 的 延长 联合 国 赔 离 接触 观察
员 部 队 任 务 期 限 的 决议 ， 我 受权 代表 安全 理事 会
发 表 补 充 声 明 如 下 :

”众所周知 ， 秘 书 长 关于 联合 国 脱离 接
触 观察 员 部 队 的 报告 @ 第 25 段 说 : “尽管 以 色
列 - 叙利亚 地 区 目前 平静 无 事 ， 但 就 整个 中
东 局 势 来 说 ， 仍 是 危机 四 伏 。 除 非 能 够 伞 而
解决 中 东 问 题 的 各 个 方面 ， 否 则 ， 这 种 局 势
很 可 能 继续 下 去 。 秘书 长 的 这 段 话 反映 了 父
全 理事 会 的 看 法 。”

秘书 长 在 1986 年 6 月 2 日 的 信息 中 通知 安理会
二 席 他 打算 经 过 通常 的 协商 之 后 ， 任 命 瑞典 的 十 斯
塔 夫 ， 韦 林 少 将 接替 芬兰 的 古 斯 塔 夫 ， 黑 格 伦 德 少将
扣 任 联合 国 脱离 接触 观察 员 部 队 指 挥 官 。 王 席 同 安 理
会 成 员 协 商 ， 答 复 秘书 长 如 下 : @

“ 阅 下 1986 年 6 月 2 日 来 信 ,@ 内 称 打算 任 全
瑞典 的 古 斯 塔 夫 ， 韦 林 少 将 担任 联合 国 脱离 接 触
观察 员 部 队 指挥 官 。 谨 通知 你 , 我 已 将 该 信 提 请 安
全 理事 会 成 员 注 意 。 安 理会 成 员 于 6 月 5 日 举行
非 正式 协商 审议 此 事 ， 并 同意 阁下 信 中 的 提议 。
@S/18111。

四 3S/18135。
@S/18136。

النص العربي (official Arabic version): 3
مؤّرخة في ©؟ نيسان/ ابريل جيد 6 ‎٠+‏ آلغ

رسّيس المجلس الآأمين العام بما يلي :

“١اتشرف‏ بإبلاغكم بآنني وجهيت
انتباه آعضاء مجلس الآمن إلى رسالتكم
المؤرخة في ‎١7‏ نيسان/ ابريل يدر
بشآن إعترزامهمكم تعيين اللواء غوستاف
هاغلوند ؛ من فنلندا ,ء قاكئدا جديدا لقوة
الآمم المتحدة المؤقتة في لبنان , وقد
نظروا في تلك المسالة في مشاورات غير
رسهية آجريت في 7 نيسان/ابريل ووافقوا
على الاقتراح الوارد في رسالتكم" .

وفي الجلسة («ا7 ؛ء المعقودة في
‎٠8‏ نيسان/ابريل ‎١87‏ ء قرر المجلن دعوة
ممشثل لبنان إلى الاشتراكَ ء دون أن يكون
له حق التصويت ؛ في مناقشة البند المعنون
“الحالة في الشرق الاوسط : تقرير الآمين
العام عن قوة الامم المتحدة الموّقتة في

)0
لبنان (5/17965)"

القرار كمه (ل1مح١)‏

إن مجلس الآمن ؛

إذ يشهر إلى قراراته 70 (غضلا١)‏
و 71 (8/ا١٠١)‏ و ١ه‏ (27ا٠)‏ و دءه (كتغح)
و “*ءه ‎)١87(‏ و 0 ‎)١87(‏ , فضلا عن
جميع قراراته بشآن الحالة في لبنان ء

. 5/18033 )©(

(ه) انظر : الوشائق الرسمية لمجلى
الآمن ء السنة الحادية والاربعون + ملحق
نيسان/ابريل وآيار/مايو وحزيران/ يونيه
لكي

وقد درس تقرير ا لامين ا لعام عن قوة

الآمم المتحدة المؤّقتة في لبنان المؤرخ
3

في 4 نيسان/ ابريل حيو 00 ‎٠»‏ وآحاط علما

بالملاحظات المبداة فيه ء

وإذ يحيط علما برسالة الممثل الداكم
للبنان الموجهة إلى الأمين العام
والمؤرخة في ‎١‏ نيسان/ابريل جر(

واستجابة هنه لطلب حكومة لبنان ؛

‎١‏ - يقرر تهديد الولاية
لقوة الأهم المتحدة المؤّقتة في لبنمان
لفترة موّقتة آخرى مدتها ثلاثة آاشهسر + آي
حتى ‎١9‏ تموز/يوليه ‎١١807‏ ؛

‏الحالية

‏7 - يكرر تاكيهد تأاييده القوي لسلامة
لبنان الإقليمية وسيادته واستقلاله ضمن
حدوده المعترف بها دوليها ؛

‏7 - يعيد تاكهيد الاختصاصات والمبادئٌ
التوجيهية العامة للقوة كما هي مبينة في
تقرير الآمين العام المؤرخ في “9١آذار/مارم‏
مر 0ف ‎٠»‏ ومعتمدة بالقرار 77 ‎)٠7/8(‏ ؛
ويدعو جميع الاطراف المعنية إلى التعاور
تعاونا تاما مع القوة لتنفيذ ولايته
تنفيذا تاما ؛

‏(3) المرجع نفسه الوشثيقة 8/17965 .

‎. 58/17968 ‏المرجع نفسه الوثشيقة‎ )٠7(

‏(/) الوشائق الرسمية لمهجلس الآامن
السنة الشالشة والكلاثون + ملحق كانو
الثاني/يناير وشباط/قبر اير وآذار/امار
علا١ا‏ , الوشيقة 5/12611 .

ع - يكرر تآكيهده آن على القوة آن
فد ولايتها تنفيذا كاملا كما هي مبينمة
القرارين 7# ‎)١78(‏ و حي (خلا١٠)‏

فشي
وماثر القرارات ذات الصلة ؛

مه - يرجو من الآمين العام أن يواصل
المشاورات مع حكومة ليثنان والاطراف الأاخرى
المعنية مباشرة بشآن تنفيذ هذا القرار
وان يقدم الى المجلس تقريرا عن ذلك في
موعد غايته ‎١9‏ حزير ان/يونيه ‎١١827‏

78١ ‏الجلسة‎

مقرر

في الجلسة 7187 , المعقودة في
*؟ أآيار/مايو 1987 + باهر المجلس مناقشة
البند الهعنون "الحالة في الشرق الأوسط :
تقرير الآمين العام عن قوة الامم المتحدة
لمراقبة فض الاشتباك (0)5/18061(*)

القرار عه ‎)٠١81(‏

المؤرخ في 79 آيار/مايو ‎١١85‏
‏إن مجلس الآمن ؛ء

وقد نظر في تقرير الامين العام
مغن قوة الامم المتحدة لمهراقبة فض

9
الافتبا ون ,

[ل) المرجع تنفسه ء السنة الحادية
والأاربعون ؛, ملحق ئيسان/ابريل وآيار/مايو
وحزيران/يونيه ‎١9/07‏ ء الوثيقة 5/18061 ‎٠.‏

ا ا ا#لْجْال؟#طا ل

يقرر :
(1) آن يطلب إلى الاطراف المعنية
أن تنفذ فورا قرار مجلس الآامن 774 1977) +

(ب) ل ن يجدد ولاية قوة الآمم المتحدة
لمراقبة فض الاشتباك لفغترة ستة آاشهير
أخرى نْْ أي حتثتى ‎٠‏ تشرين ‎١‏ لثاتي/توفقمبر
محا ؛

(ج) آن يرجو من الآمين العام آن
يقدم ْْ في نهاية هذه الغترة ء تقرير ا عن

التطورات الحاصلة في الحالة ء, وععكن
التدابير المتخذة لتنفيذ القرار
‎)٠١77(‏
‏اعتمد بالإجمساع في
الجلسة /ا8ا؟ .
مقررات
في ‎١‏ لجلسة ذا تها فق عقب ل عتما ى

القرار 0/86 (1981) ء ادلى رشين المجلس
بالبيان الخاني! ‎١"‏

"فيما يتعلق بالقرار المتخذ
توا بشآن تجديد ولاية قوة الامم
المتحدة لمراقبة فض الاشتباك + آذن
لي بالإدلاء بالبيان التكهيلي التالي
باصم مجلس الآأهمن :

"كما هو معروف جاء في

الفقرة 70 من تقرير الآمين العام عن
قوة الآمم المتحدة لمراقبة فض

5/18111 )٠١(

Draft resolution (S/18019):
UNITED
NATIONS S

Security Council Distr.
GENERAL

$/18019

18 April 1986
ENGLISH

ORIGINAL: FRENCH

Draft resolution

The Security Council,

Recalling its resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978), 501 (1982), 508 (1982),

509 (1982) and 520 (1982), as well as all its resolutions on the situation in
Lebanon,

Having studied the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations
Interim Force in Lebanon of 9 April 1986 (S/17965) and taking note of the
observations expressed therein,

Taking note of the letter of the Permanent Representative of Lebanon addressed
to the Secretary-General of 1 April 1986 (5/17968),

Responding to the request of the Government of Lebanon,

1. Decides to extend the present mandate of the United Nations Interim Force
in Lebanon for a further interim period of three months, that is, until
19 July 1986;

2. Reiterates its strong support for the territorial inteqrity, sovereignty
and independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries;

3. Re-emphasizes the terms of reference and general quidelines of the Force
as stated in the report of the Secretary-General ot 19 March 1978, approved by
resolution 426 (1978), and calls upon all parties concerned to co-operate fully
with the Force for the full implementation of its mandate)

4. Reiterates that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon should fully
implement its mandate as defined in resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978) and all
other relevant resolutions;

5. Requests the Secretary-General to continue consultations with the
Government of Lebanon and other parties directly concerned on the implementation of
the present resolution and to report to the Council by 19 June 1986.

———

Wo mca ar wd Sn BYR § BE

PF - [Po «1A
: $f Vv FE t
, L d
J aah

“emer o. am

86-10874 27172 (E)

Meeting record:
13

Security Councli

PROVISIONAL

8/PV.2681
18 April 1986

ENGLISH

PROVISIONAL VERBATIM RECORD OF THE TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED
AND BIGHTY-PIRST MEETING

Held at Headquarters, New York,
on Priday, 18 April 1986, at 4 p.m.

President: Mr. de KBEMOULARIA (Prance)
Members: Australia Mr, WOOLCOTT
Bulgaria Mr. GARVALOV
China Mr, LIANG Yufen
Congo Mr. BALE
Denmark Mr, BIBRRING
Ghana Mr. DUMEVI
Madagascar Mr. RAKOTONDRAMBOA
Thailand Mr. KASEBMSRI
Trinidad and Tobago Mr. ALLEYNE
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Mr. DUBININ
United Arab Bmirates Mr, AL-SHAALI
United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland 8ir John THOMSON
United States of America Mr. WALTERS
Venesuela Mr. AGUILAR

This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and
interpretations of speeches 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
sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned, within one week,
to the Chief, Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services,
room DC2-750, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.

86-60556/A 8227V (E)
BCT/7C 8/PV.2681
2-8

The meeting was called to order at 5.20 p.m.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was ted.
THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE BAST

REFORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL ON THE UNITED RATIONS INTERIM FORCE IN LEBANON
(8/17963)

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I should like to inform
members of the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of
Lebanon in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the
item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice and with the
consent of the Council, I propose to invite that representative to participate in
the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant
provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of
procedure.

There being no objection, it {is so decided.
At the invitation of the President, Mr. Pakhoury (Lebanon) took a place at the
Council table.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The Security Council will
now begin consideration of the item on its agenda,

Members of the Council have before them the report (8/17965) of the
Secretary-Genaral on the United Nations Interim Porce in Lebanon for the period
11 October 1985 to 9 April 1986. They have before them also the following
documents: 8/17968, letter dated 1 April 1986 from the Permanent Representative of
Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; and 8/18019,
containing the text of a draft resolution drawn up during consultations by the

Security Council.
Jp/haf 8/pv.2681

Mr. DUBININ (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from
Russian): Today the Security Council is again considering the renewal of the
mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). Having set up the
force wore than eight years ago, after a large-scale Israeli invasion into Lebanon,
the Security Council in resolution 425 (1978) gave it the task of confirming the
withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory, restoring international peace
and security and assisting the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its
effective authority in the area.

So far not one of those tasks has been accomplished, The fundamental reasons
lie in the continuing, systematic encroachments by Israel on the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Lebanon. Acts of brigandage and aggression have been and
continue to be the corner-stone of Israeli policy in Lebanon, as indeed in respect
of other Arab States and peoples. Although, as a result of the liberation struggle
of patriotic Lebanese forces, the aggressors were compelled to abandon the greater
part of the lands they had seized, Israel still continues to hold on to the border
steas of Lebanon, where, with the backing of the local mercenaries it set up, it
has established an unlawful security zone.

Stubbornly disregarding the demands of the Security Council for the immediate,
unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territory of Lebanon, Israel is
trying to perpetuate the occupation of the southern region of that country, and to
set up in the area a bridgehead from which to carry out new strikes deep within
Lebanese territory and to destabilize the general situacion in Lebanon.

Of course, in Tel Aviv UNIPIL has alwavs been regarded as an impediment to the

the Porce. Directly, or through its local mercenaries, Israel has systematically
created, and continues to create, obsticles to the normal functioning of UNIFIL for

the effective fulfilment of Lhe tasvs entrusted to it bv the Council. Exhaustive
JP/hat 8/PV.2681

(Mr. Dubinin, USSR)
information on that matter is contained in the numerous reports of the

Secretary-General ~ inter alia, in his most recent report, which is now before the

Council.

The purpose of those provocative actions by Israel is not in doubt) it is,
through armed provocation, to complicate the activities of UNIPIL and in the long
run to drive it out of Lebanon. It is well knoun that a criminal always tries to
get rid of undesirable witnesses.

The normalization of the situation in Lebanon, as in the Middle Bast as a
whole, is also being impeded by the United States, whose policy of connivance with
the Israeli aggressors runs counter to the basic interests of the Lebanese people
and impedes the attainment of a just and comprehensive settlement in the region.

The Soviet Union has unswervingly attached, and it continues to attach, prime
significance to guaranteeing the immediate withdrawal of the Israeli occupation
forces from Lebanese territory, as the Council's decisions clearly require. An
important role in carrying out that task must be played by UNIPIL, in accordance
with its manda '.

The Soviet Union shares the opinion of the Government of Lebanon about the
need to retain, in present circumstances, the presence of UNIPIL in Lebanon. In so
doing, our basic postulate is that such a presence acts as a decisive factor
impeding the implementation of Israel's aggressive plans in respect of southern
Lebanon.

The situation that has come about urgently requires the active co-operation of
all who sincerely want a reliable defence of the sovereign rights of Lebanon
against Israeli encroachments and who see the importance of the consolidation of
international support for the cause of the liberation of Lebanon from Israeli

occupation,
J¥/hat s/o frat

(Mr. Dubinin, USSR)

Guided by those considerations, and also taking into account the appropriate
appeal from the Lebanese Government, the Soviet Union has decided to vote in favour
of the draft resolution on the extension of UWIFIL's mandate in Lebanon, and
declares its willingness henceforth to take part in the financing of that Porce.

Of course, that decision should in no circumstances be regarded as having
retroactive effect as recognition of "indebtedness” on our part for past years.

In so doing, the Soviet side proceeds from the premise that the presence in
Lebanon of UNIPIL is very much a temporary measure, and should in no way be used as
a means of freezing the situation in the interests of the Iaraseli aggressor.

The Soviet delegation again emphasizes that the Security Council must take
realistic, urgent measures to secure the earliest implementation of its decisions
calling for the prompt and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon

and unwavering respect for that country's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
RH/10 S/PV. 2661
11

Sir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): The Soviet statement we have just

heard marke an important change in Soviet policy. I was delighted to hear the
Soviet Ambassador base his case on resolution 42% (1978), on which, of course, the
Soviet Union sbstained. I take it that the Soviet Union is now fully in favour of
resolution 425 (1978), and I hope that this can be confirmed.

If that is the case, I think it must follow that the Soviet Union has been in
favour of 425 (1978) from the beginning, and I think that this must imply that the
Soviet Union will now be willing not only to give the Porce its full political
backing and to meet its assessed share of its costs from now on, but also to meet
the assessed shares from the past.

The United Nations Force in Lebanon is indeed a force for stability. My
delegation is able to give full support to paragraph 50 of the Secretary-General's
report. That paragraph states that he is convinced that the maintenance of
international peace and security requires that the Force's mandates be extended. He
points out that if it were to be withdrawn there would be an immediate escalation
of fighting. We think this is probable, and we think this would lead to the
undesirable consequences he mentions: “A further major crisis could easily
result”, The mandate given to UNIFIL, he says,

“remains fulfillable and ,.. deployment of the Force to the international

frontier is the best available way of restoring international peace and

security and of ensuring the return of the Government of Lebanon's effective
authority in the area”.
That is the position of my delegation, The Secretary-General continues:

"As long as that possibility exists, it would in my view be wrong for the

Council to decide to withdraw the Force,"

That too is the position of my delegation, and I hope I understood correctly that

it is now the position of the Soviet delegation.
RE/10 8/PV. 2681
12

(8ir John Thomson,
United Kingdom)

I have to recall the various debates we have had in this Council in the past.

I recall, for example, in 1982 the extzeme difficulty we had in persuading the
Soviet delegation even to abstain on a resolution which provided for a three-month
extension of the mandate of UNIPIL, My delegation was very much in favour of a
six-month extension. But in the end, to accommodate the Soviet Union, we accepted
three months.

I continue with paragraph 50 of the Secretary-General's report. He refers to
the important humanitarian help that UNIPIL is able to give, and he concludes:

“For all these reasons, and taking into account the request submitted by the

Govermment of Lebanon, I recommend that the Council extend the mandate of

UNIPIL for a further period of six months”,

That too my delegation can accept. He goes on to say, though, in paragraph 51:

it is my duty to advise the Council that it will not be enough simply to

renev the mandate of UNIPIL., If that decision is to have the desired result -

namely, completion of the withdrawal of Israeli forces, the restoration of
international peace and security and the return of the Government of Lebanon's
effective authority in the area - it will be necessary for the Council and all
its members to make a determined effort to fulfil a condition that was
identified in 1978 as being essential for the Force to be effective."

I sm delighted to hear that the Soviet Union has now discovered that despite
its abstention in 1978 the resolution to which the Secretary-General refers is
indeed the right course to take and is fully valid.

Paragraph 51 of tha Secretary-General's report continues by stating that what
Pcros to be:
confidence and backing of the Security Council. My delegation gives the Porce that
full confidence and backing, and I trust tha: we are now about ~ for the first time

since UNIPIL was established - to have unanimous support for it in the Council.
RE/10 S/PV, 2681
13

(Sir John Thomson,
United Kingdom)

The Secretary-General concludes paragraph 51 by stating:

“I therefore appeal again to all Member States to give the Force full

political backing” -
and, as I have just observed, perhaps we are about to witness that -

"and to meet their assessed share of its costs”.

1 welcome the fact that the Soviet Union is now about to meet its assessed share of
the costs, but I 40 not think that this absolves it from its obligation to meet its
assessed shares from the past, which it has consistently refused to do.

I now say that if the Soviet Union will in fact meet its assessed shares from
the past, this will be a still mcre notable improvement in its position and will
realiy demonstrate support for UNIFIL and for the objectives of UNIFIL as set out
in Security Council resolution 425 (1978).

I do welcome the statement we have just heard from the Soviet Union. As I
have said, it is a notable step forward. But it is only still half a step, and it
remains to be seen whether the Soviet Union puts its full backing behind the Force.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): I take it that the Council
is prepared to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. If I hear no
objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote, Since that is the case,
it is so decided.

1 shall first call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements
before the vote.

With the consent of the Council. I shall now make a statement in my capacity
as representative of France.

The Security Council is meeting today to consider the request of the Lebanese
Gover ment for a renewal of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Porce in
Lebanon (UNIFIL) for the nineteenth time since its establishment, which I recall

took place on 19 March 1° . as a result of resolution 425 (1978).
RE/10 8/PV, 2681
14-15

(The President)

My delegation will of course vote in favour of the renewal of the UNIFIL
mandate for a three-month period. This vote expresses Prance's commitment to
UNIPIL, a commitment reflected in the presence in the field of the largest
contingent of the Force. In fact, my country considers that in spite of the many

obstacles in its way the action of the Force has definitely been useful, especially

for the populations of southern Lebanon, which have suffered so much.

But Prance is increasingly concerned. It is concerned at the deterioration of
the situation in the field, on which the Secretary-General has correctly reported
in his reports. It is also concerned at the Force's inability to fulfil its
complete mandate as defined by Security Council resolutions 425 (1978) and
426 (1979).

1 consider it appropriate at this time to recall its three objectives: to
confirr the withdrawal of the Israeli forces, to restore international peace and
security, to assist the Lebanese Government in ensuring the return of its effective
authority in the area.

Given this situation, Prance can no longer accept a virtually automatic
rengwal of the mandate of the Porce for six months, We believe that the Security
Council should see to it that all the countries concerned shoulder their
responsibilities, and that is why we have proposed a shorter mandate, which we are
agreeing should be extended by from two to three months. As has been the case in
the past, this is in order to induce the countries concerned to reflect and to
congider the situation, which is needed now more than ever before, In the same

spirit, we would request that the Secretary-General report to the Council in two

months.
BHS/gnr 5/PV.2681
16

(The President)

In the present difficult circumstances in Lebanon I take this occasion to
reaffirm Prance's commitment to Lebanon's unity, territorial integrity and
independence.

I shall conclude by expressing the hope that in three months the situation
will have developed in a positive manner thanks to the efforts of the countries
directly concerned and the friendly pressure of others.

1 now resume my functions as President.

Mr. DUBININ (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from
Russian): The statement of the representative of the United Kingdom concentrated
on an interpretation of the position of the Soviet Union, past and present. I wish
to point out to all the members of the Council and to all those present,
particularly in the light of the fact that the United Kingdom's statement contained
many inaccuracies, to put it mildly, that the position of the Soviet Union, of
course, is stated only by the Soviet Union. Anyone interested in that position can
familiarize himself with it from the records of the Security Council for the entire
period starting in 1982 and also from our statement at this meeting.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): I call on the representative
of the United Kingdow who has asked to speak, I believe, on a point of order.

Sir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): Mr. President, am I to understand

that the statement just made by the representative of the Soviet Union is an
explanation of vote in addition to the statement he made earlier? I thought I
understood, Mr. President, that you had begun the voting process. If you have
begun the voting procecs, then a statement is out of order,

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): When I called upon the
representative of the Soviet Union, I understood that he was to speak in

explanation of vote. I thought that I would be rhe last speaker before the
BHS/gur 8/PV.2681
17

(The President)
vote, but out of courtesy to the representative of the Soviet Union, I called upon
him,
I believe that this magter is now closed and we shall proceed to the vote. I
put to the vote the draft resolution contained in dcoument S/18019.

A vote was taken by show of hands,

In favour: Australia, Bulgaria, China, Congo, Denmark, Prance, Ghana,
Madagascar, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America,
Venesuela
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Rusuian): There were 15 votes in
favour. The draft resolution has therefore been adopted unanimously as
resolution 583 (1986),
I shall now call on those members of the Council who wish to speak after the
vote.
Mr. WOOLCOTT (Australia): Peace~keeping is an important function of the
United Wations in the discharge of its responsibility to maintain international
peace and security. The word "peace~keeping® is not mentioned in the Charter; yet
the peace-keeping role has evolved in response to the needs of a world still
troubled by conflict. Peace-keeping enjoys widespread popular support. It shows
the United Nations to be acting constructively rather than simply talking. It has
provided a necessary buffer between contending sides. It is a matter of deep
tegret, as the Secretary-General's report on the United Nations Interim Porce in

Loa and
EH) -

t 1 function of the tinited Nationa has

Lebanon {(URiIFiL)] poinis out, t 21 Sup n h n A

not had the support in the past of all United Nations Members. Australia has

participated in United Natione peace-keeping activities, ig currently a member of a
BHS/ gmt S/PV.2681
18

(Mr. Woolcott, Australia)
number of United Nations peace-keeping forces and is a strong supporter of United
Nations peace-keeping activities, under appropirate conditions where the parties
concerned support the United Nations operation.

If any prompting were needed, the informal consultations which, as ie
customary, preceded this meeting of the Council, have brought home to members the
fact that this i8 no routine meeting to renew the mandate of UNIPIL, My delegation
takes particular satisfaction in the fact that the mandate has on this occasion
been rencwed unanimously. The decisions which the Council takes in relation to the
Porce will hove a direct impact on the situation in southern Lebanon. The
situation in that region calls for sober and considered reflection and my
delegation has been impressed by the seriousness with which all members of the
Council have approached this particularly important matter.

Tha Secretary-General's report on UNIPIL is comprehensive and valuable and we
welcome the detailed information it provides. The report testilies all too clearly
to the operational and financial problems faced by UNIFIL, Of particular concern
is the jrave financial situation facing the Force. We note the Secretary-General's
comment that the severe financial crisis could itself threaten the future of the
Fozce. The accumulated arrears have a direct impact on the troop contributors,
many of whom are in no position to carry such costs on behalf of the international
cosmunity. The financial outlook is, if anything, becoming more adverse, and
recent decisions may reduce even further the rate of reimbursement to troop
contributors. Members will be aware of the hardship being borne by the
contributors, especially the smaller States, which are carrying heavy burdens
because of the financial shortfall, We note, for example, that Piji is owed a

aubstantial debt by the United Nations and will experience difficulties in
BHS/gmr 8/7V,2681
19-20

(Mz, Woolcott, Australia)
continuing its participation if the situation daterioratos further. The same is no
doubt true of other smaller contributors which provide valuable support for
peace-keeping operations.

Given the Secretary-General's particular concern over .he financial position,
my delegation believes it is timely to emphasize the need for all parties concerned
to honour sll their financial commitments in respect of the funding of UNIPIL.
Australia abides by its obligiations to meet its assessed contributions and calls
on all Members to do likewise. Only by such commitments can the Porce be placed on
a sacure footing. Only by honouring such commitaents can peace-keeping in general
be advanced in the future.
J/12 8/PV. 2681
21

(Mr, Woolcott, Australia)

UNIFIL's problems, however, are not confined simply to financial questions.
The Secretary-General's report contains a sombre catalogue of particular
operational difficulties which UNIFIL has faced over the past six months, In
paragraph after paragraph, the Secretary-General sets out particular incidents in
which members of the Force have been placed at risk. The deaths of three members
of the Force by hostile gun-fire over the past six months testifies to the very
real dangers faced by the Porce. My delegation takes this opportunity to express
its appreciation of the bravery and steadfastness displayed by members of the Force
and by their Governments in serving the cause of peace-keeping in most difficult
and dangerous circumstances.

The present situation of UNIFIL is a difficult one from both financial and
operational points of view, as I have said, Clearly, the interests of regional
peace would be better served by the deployment of UNIFIL in accordance with the
mandate conferred on it by the Security Council. My delegation notes that the
Secretary-General was contemplating recommending the withdrawal of UNIPIL but that
ultimately he decided that a further renewal was warranted, We know that the
Government of Lebanon had a strong preference for renewal of the mandate for a
period of six months, Now we are discussing a United Nations Porce in his country,
in Lebanon, and therefore we take very seriously his views, But my delegation also
acknowledges that the mandate should not be renewed automatically, and, moreover,
the views of France as a major contributor must be given due weight. The
observation of the Secretary-General in relation to the wishes of the local
inhabitants of southern Labanon concernina the future of the Force is also of
considerable significance.

For all these reasons Australia supported the terms of the draft resolution
before the Council to extend the mandate of the Porce for a further three-month

period, At the same time, however, my delegation hopes that this discussion in
Jw/12 s/ey. 2681

(Mr. Woolcott, Australia)

the Council will setve to indicate to all concerned the need to put an end to the
difficulties which have so complicated the task of UNIFIL. The problems must be
addressed in a constructive and resolute way. If they are simply side-stepped, it
would be more than understandable if troop contributors corcluded that the support
they required from the international community was not fully forthcoming. In these
circumstances, the future of the Force would be placed in further jeopardy.

The operational and financial problems still confronting UNIPIL must be
addressed. The Australian delegation stands ready to do what it can in any such
discussions. It hopes that the same spirit will be displayed by other delegations
and by all parties which have an interest in securing a peaceful future for the
people of southern Lebanon.

Mr. BIBRRING (Denmark) (interpretation from Prench): Picrst of all, sir,
I should iike to pay tribute to my successor as President of the Council. Indeed,
while performing your functions this month, you have already given ample evidence
of your professional and human qualities. My delegation is quite convinced of the
success of your important mission.
(continued in English)

My delegation has carefully studied the report of the Secretary-General on the
United Mations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

The report clearly shows that there is an urgent need for determined 2fforts
to make progress towards the full implementation of Security Council resolution
425 (1978).

It is an indisputable fact that the situation in southern Lebanon has
deteriorated, The level of violence has increased and continues to do so.

The continuing occupation of parts of southern Lebanon by the Israeli Defence
Porces (IDF) has inevitably provoked a reaction in the so-called security zone, but

there have also been several rocket attacks against targets in northern Israel.
JW/12 AN 2681

(Mr, Bierring, Denmark)

The attacks have in turn led to strong counteraction by the IDP and its South
Lebanon Army (SLA) allies in the gone,

Unless a solution is quickly found, this cycle of violence is likely to
continue and even intensify to the detriment of all parties concerned.

Denmark fully understands Israel's legitimate concern over the security of its
northern border, across which in the past it has been and still is subjected to
attack. At the same time, however, it is my Government's firm belief that the
present "security zone® is neither a legitimate nor an effective means of meeting
Israel's security concerns.

The security zone not only contravenes resolution 425 (1978), but is also
likely to built up further resentment against Israel among the local population and
encourage use of the area as a base for attacks across its border.

We therefore fully share the Secretary-General's assessment that Israel's own
interests would be advanced if it were to complete the withdrawal of its forces and
allow deployment of UNIFIL to the international frontier.

The present situation of UNIFPIL is clearly not accedjtable, and we do indeed
understand why the troop contributors have become increasingly worried. Mot only
have they experienced that the FPozce has been prevented from carrying out its
mandate to the full, but their personnel has also been faced with increased
security risks owing to the hostilies ir. the area, Furthermore, it is the troop
contributors which have to bear the consequences of the financial crisis facing the
Force owing to the failure of some Member States to pay their as~essed
contributions to UNIFIL,

We fully realize that renewal of UNIFIL's mandate cannot be understood to mean
that UNIFIL will be allowed to become an open-ended commitment for the
troop-contr ibuting countries if the requisite conditions for the effective

operation of the Porce continue to be absent.
W/12 8/PV, 2681
34-29

(Me. Bierring, Denmark)

Denmark therefore strongly urges the parties concerned to work expsditiously
and constructively together with the Secretary-General in order to reach practical
arrangements for the full implementation of Security Council resolution
423 (1978). We also join the Secretary-General in his appeal to all Member States
to give the Porce full political backing and to meet their assessed share of its
costs.

When making his recommendation, the Sscretary-General rightly pointed out that
for a renewal of UNIFIL's mandate to have the desired results, the Porce had to
have the full confidence and backing of the Security Council, This was already
identified in 1978 as an essential condition for the Porce to be effective.

For its part, Denmark continues fully to support UNIPIL and my delegation
interprets the unanimous decision, which we 80 happily just arrived at in the
Council, to renew the mandate Of the Foros as a firm commitment by all its members
to fulfil this oondition. The fact that the mandate was renewed for only three
sonths clearly indicates the urgency of finding a solution of the operational and
financial problems of the Foros.

In concluding, I should like to psy tribute to the Commander of UMIFIL snd to
his staff, as well as to the officers and men of UNIPIL who have performed their
difficult tasks with exesplary dedication and courage. As General Callaghan will
relinquish his command of UNIPIL soon, I should like to take this opportunity to
express through you, Mr. President, our gratitude for the distinguished services he

has rendered this United Nations peace-keeping operation.
rV13 8/%V. 2681
26

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): I thank the representative
of Denmark for the very kind words he addressed to me.

Br. GARVAIOV (Bulgaria): Today ~ if our calculations are correct - marks
the nineteenth time since 1978 that the Security Council has been convened to
extend the mandate of the United Nations Interim Foroe in Lebanon (UNIFPIL). In
spite of the explicit and categorical provisions of relevant Security Council
resolutions that the UNIPIL mandate should be fully implemented, :hat objective has
not yet been attained owing to the continued Israeli occupation of part of Lebanon.

The concern of the international community is quite justified. The situation
in southern Lebanon continues to be extremely dangerous and tense. This is also
confirmed by the Secretary-General's report on UNIPIL of 9 April 1986, which, inter
alia, emphasises that, in the period under review,

“The level of violence has increased and continues to do so.” (8/1796S,

pars, 41)

In addition to that, we have recently witnessed a dangerous escalation of
tension which, in our opinion, could erupt into hostilities at any moment. The
root cause of that state of affairs is the incessant acts of aggression and
violence on the part of Israel and its puppets in southern Lebanon.

Under the pretext of establishing a security zone in the south of Lebanon,
Israel continues to occupy a sizeable part of that country's territory. The
encroachments upon the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of
Lebanon still persist. The so-called security zone is being used as a spring-board
for aggression deep inside Lebanon, Alarming reports continue to filter through
from the long-suffering country describing mass arrests and abuses of the local
population, punitive raids under the pretense of pursuing so-called Palestinian
terrorists and persistent shelling and bombing of civilian targets, including

refugee camps.
RM/13 8/pPV, 2661
27

(Mr, Garvalov, Bulgaria)

It must be made clear once and for all that the problems of Lebanon cannot be
resolved by arm twisting. There is only one road to peace for that country. It
has been set forth clearly and unequivocally in Security Council
resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), which were unanimously adopted and which
demand that Israel withdraw all its its military forces forthwith and
unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon.

My country, the People's Republic of Bulgaria, firmly believes that Israel
should immediately discontinue its occupation of southern Lebanon and comply with
the Security Council resolutions. Only then will it be possible for UNIFIL to
implement its mandate unimpeded. Proceeding from the foregoing considerations, and
in view of the explicit request of the Government of Lebanon, as well as of the
recommendation of the Secretary-General, Bulgaria voted in favour of the resolution
just adopted to extend UNIFIL's mandate.

I should also like to affirm Bulgaria's position that UNIFIL's presence on
Lebanese soil is only of a temporary nature and shall not be used for the
perpetuation of the occupation of southern Lebanon by Israel, It is also the duty
of the Security Council to take urgent measures to ensure the implementation of its
resolutions related to the mandate of UNIPIL.

Mr, DUMEVI (Ghana): I would like to place on record Ghana's profound
appreciation, as a troop contributor, of the untiring efforts of the
Becretary-General and his staff to keep the concept of peace-keeping alive. We
have taken a close look at the report he has submitted. We find it very
comorehandive and very ravealina. and we also endorse his views get forth in
paragraphs 50 and 51.

In particular, Ghana is of the view that, despite the numerous problems facing
the Porce, it would be ill advised at this time to do anyth:ng that would kill - so

to speak - the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). We feel that the
13 5/PV.2681
nd 28-30

(Mc. Dumevi, Ghana)
conoept is very noble. UNIPIL is not an offspring of the Charter, but has
developed to meet the practical needs in the field of peace-keeping. Ghana has
been associated with peace-keeping efforts since 1960, and I would like to say here
that our support of this consensus document reflects the abiding commi tment of ay
country to peace-keeping by the United Nations. We are happy, therefore, that the
resolution extending the mandate of UNIFIL - resolution 583 (1986) - has, for the
first time, been adopted unanimously as a consensus document. We interpret that
consensus decision as a good omen, especially in that {t will mean the full
co-operation of every member of the Council to see that the problems of UNIPIL are
removed and that the Force can improve its effectiveness in the field.

Having said that, let me turn to a very delicate matter. The problems of

UNIPIL, as outlined in the document before us, are many. There are the problems of
the so-calied security zones and of the harassment of troops, which almost

invariably result in heavy casualties. My country has been one of the victias of

such harassment.
ENS/14 8/PV.2691
n

(Mr. Dumevi, Ghana)

But apart from this, there is also the nagging problem of funds to keep UNIFIL
afloat. That ie a very delicate problem which, I know, the Secretary-General and,
of course, the President of the Council have been exerting their best endeavours to
resolve. I do not think it is enough to give political backing to the Force; but
what is important is to translate that political backing into continuing funding or
permanent assessed contributions, That is the only way we can keep this concept
alive.

1 say this partly through enlightened self-interest, but it ie certainly a
fact that it would be sad to see third-world and small countries literally
underwriting the commitments of the United Nations in the area of peace-keeping. I
should like to interpret this afternoon's consensus decision as meaning that the
way is now open, and that our colleagues who for certain political reasons have
withheld funds from UNIPIL will now begin to think seriously, and will resume their
full responsibilities by regularly paying their assessed contributions. The
alternative, as already demonstrated, would be chacs and escalatad violence in
Lebanon.

Mr. WALTERS (United States of America): My Government is pleased to vote
once more for an extension of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in
Lebanon (UNIPIL). We believe that UNIFIL makes an important contribution to
efforts to bring stability to southern Lebanon, and that its disbandment now would
be imprudent. We fully recognize the difficulties UNIPIL is tacing. We
congratulate the Governments contributing troops to the Force on the exemplary
performance of their contingents. In particular, my Government wishes to express
its thanks to the departing UNIFIL Commander, General Callaghan.

We note that UNIFIL is, by definition, an interim force, and we reiterate our
long-standing belief that agreed-on security arrangements are the best means to

bring stability to southern Lebanon, assure security along the Lebanese-Israeli
EMS/11 8/PV. 2681
32

(Mr, Walters, United States)

border and allow the Government of Lebanon to re-establish its authority. We
further believe that progress towards achieving. security arrangements could be
enhanced by continuing UNIPIL's mission.

Let me take this opportunity to express my country's and my delegation's
horror over the recent news of the brutal murder of three hostages in Lebanon. Two
of the victims have been identified as British; one has been tentatively identified
as an American. This tragedy is not a matter of nationalities. The sanctity of
life is not affected by geographical boundaries. Nothing can justify these acts of
terrorism. 1 wish to convey my Government's sorrow and grief to the families of

the victims,

8ir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): The financial situation of the United

Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is not, in the opinion of my Government,
satisfactory. We regret that some members of this Council and of this Organization
have failed to pay their assessed share. This failure to pay has caused severe
damage to the United Wations, to the Porce and to the troop contributors.

We welcome the improvement in the position in this respect of the Soviet
Union, and we hope that applies to our allies. We believe that all arrears should
also be paid. We take note of statements made Ly the United States Administration
that it will continue to seek the necessary funding from Congress to enable it to
pay its share in accordance with its policy of strong support for UNIFIL,

As regards the term of the extension of the mandate, my delegation was ready

to support the reauest of the Lebanese Government for six months. However, we
fully saree with the dalaegation of Prance that the axtansion of the mandate should
not be automatic, After all, the object of the Force, as set out in Security
Council resolution 425 (1978), is to chance the situation in Lebanon in various

specific ways. We cannot accept that the present unsatisfactory situation continue

automatically.
BMS/14 8/PV.2681
33

{(8ir John Thomson, United Kingdom)

The territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon
within its internationally recognized boundaries must be restored and respected.

Baually, however, we do not accept that the presence of the Porce should be
only temporary if that means that it might be withdrawn before its mandate has been
successfully achieved.

My delegation was able to vote for the extension for three months,
particularly in the light of the newly-found, and welcome, unanimity of the Council
in support of the Porce.

I wish to express my delegation's warm thanks and appreciation to the officers
and men and the civilian staff serving with UNIFIL, as well as to their respective
Governments, for the steadfastness with which they have continued to serve the
cause of peace in the face of great adversity. I wish to thank especially the
outgoing Commander of UNIPIL, Lieutenant-General William Callaghan, who has led the
Poros in the most distinguished manner since February 1981 {in the long and
honourable tradition of his country's dedication to United Nations peace-keeping.

Mr. President, a short while ago I raised a point of order. 1It is the
understanding of my delegation that in response you ruled that the statement we
oueried was in fact an explanation of vote before the vote.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I had said that the incident
was closed; let us leave it closed.

The representative of Lebanon has asked to make a statement. I call upon him

Mr. PARROMIDY (T.ahannn) {({ntarnratation from Arahic): Tt is mv nlaasnre

Sir, to congratulate you on behalf of my delegation on your assumption of the

ptesidency of the Security Council for this month. I recall the very close
EMS/14 8/PV, 2681
4-338

(Mr, Fakhoury, Lebanon)
friendship which has linked our two countries, and reaffirm our confidence in your
ability, efficiency and wisdom in guiding the work of the Council in the best
possible way.

It is wy pleasure also to convey to your predecessor, His Exceilency the
Permanent Representative of Denmark, our thanks and appreciation for the exemplary
sanner in which he conducted the work of the Council last month, displaying all the
diplomatic experience, skill and objectivity we all acknowledge in him.

We have taken note of the report of the Secretary-General contained in
document 8/1796% of 9 April 1986. That report contains an objective, serious and
intelligent assessment of the situation in southern Lebanon and, in particular, the

situation concerning the United Nations Interim Poroe in Lebanon (UNIPIL).
BCT/TC 8/¥V.2661
36

(Mr. Pakhoury, Lebanon)

We pay a tribute to the Secretary-General for his report and express our
appreciation to him. We agree with him that the situation is tense and that a
speedy, radical solution is essential if the tension is not to worsen and spread to
the entire Middle Bast region, threatening its peace and security.

We recall that the Secretary-General has supported Lebanon's request for a
six-month extension of the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon
(UNIPIL) - that is, until 19 October 1986 - and the fact that for the first time
the Council has been unanimous in extending the mandate.

On behalf of the Government and people of Lebanon I extend to the delegations
of the Soviet Union and Bulgaria our gratitude for their countries’ support for the
present draft resolution. Their attitude has had a positive effect on support for
UNIFIL and its mandate in southern Lebanon.

The oft-repeated request by the Lebanese Government over the past eight years
for the renewal of UNIFIL's mandate has not been based on a desire to make that
mandate permanent or to obtain a routine prolongation of it. Rather, it has been
and remains based on vital, essential reasons.

First, the Force should be enabled to discharge the mandate given it by the
Security Council under resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978), “hus far, obstacles
have been placed by Israel in the way of the fulfilment of the mandate. Israel has
refused to withdraw from Lebanese territory unconditionally and to make possible
deployment by the Force to the internationally recognized boundaries.

Secondly, the presence of the Force in southern Lebanon constitutes a
commitment bv the international community and the Sacurity Council ¢o Lebhenon and
its legitimate right to recover its sovereignty and authority over its entire

territory,
BCT/TC 8/PV.2861
37

(Mr. Fakhoury, Lebanon)

Thirdly, the presence of the international Force in suuthern Lebanon is an
essential factor for stabilization and the best available option for ensuring
peace, stability and security, in the absence of the total implementation of
Security Council resolution 425 (1978) and other relevant resolutions.

Por eight years now, Lebanon has been awaiting the day when the Security
Council will make it possible for the international Force to carry out its
mandate. The coming of that day depends on removal of the obstacle preventing the
implementation of the mandate, which, as the Council knows, is the intransigent
attitude of Israel. Israel stubbornly refuses to withdraw and insists on
maintaining its occupation of part of Lebanese territory, which it calls a
"security zone", or a "security belt”. It invokes the pretext of the need to
protect Israel's northern regions. But, in fact, that "security sone® has never
guaranteed Israel the protection to which it aspires, and it will never 40 so, On
the contrary, it has heightened the wave of violence in the region and bence
national resistance in Lebanon - resistance which is legitimate before the law,

The SBecretary-General's report provides a detailed description of the events
between 11 October 1985 and 9 April 1986. These are distressing and dangerous
events, but they are limited to the international Force's deployment region.
Letters addressed by me to the Secretary-General, which have been distributed as
official documents of the Security Council and the General Assembly, detail
Israel's arbitrary practices and attacks in the southern region as a whole, The
Secretary-General's report describes the present "security zone" as follows:

*{It] is not a legitimate means of weeting Israel's security concerns; nor is

it an effective one. It is not legitimate, because it contravenes Council

resolution 425 (1978), which called for 'strict respect for the territorial

integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its
BCT/TC 8/pV.2861
38-40

(Mr, Pakhoury, Lebanon)
internationally recognized boundaries’ and called upon Israel ‘immediately to
cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw
forthwith its forcas from all Lebanese territory'. In addition, the ‘security
gone’ is not effective in ensuring Israel's security because the continuing
occupation by IDP of Lebanese territory and the often brutal bshaviour of SLA
build up resentment of Israel among the local population and encourage use of
the area as a base for attacking Israel across the international frontier".

(8/17965, para. 44)

There could not be a more frank or precise description of the illegitimate
occupation of Lebanese territory and of the effectiveness of that "security zone”
and the explosive situation resulting from it.

In paragraph 45 of his report, the Secretary-General states that a complete
Israeli withdrawal and the deployment of the Force to the internationally
recognized frontiers would have a positive effect in terms of peace and security in
southern Lebanon, {n terms of sparing the Lebanese the kind of suffering they have
been experiencing for the past decade, and in terms of enabling the Lebanese
Government to begin consolidating its authority over the region, with the help of
the international Force.

In paragraph 46 of his report, however, the Secretary-General recognizes with
regret the failure so far to persuade Israel to withdraw and to enable UNIFIL to
deploy to the internationally recognized frontiers. In paragraph 50, he expresses
his willingness to continue his contacts and consultations during the period of the
extension of the mandate, on the understanding that UNIPIL's deployment to the
internationally recognized boundaries is the best way to restore international
peace and security and to ensure the restoration of Lebanon's effective authority

in the region.
JP/hat 8/7V. 2681

(Mr, Pakhoury, Lebanon)
The efforts of the SBecretary-Generel and his assistants, within the framework

of the resolutions adopted by the Council and on the basis of the
Secretary-General's personal wish to make southern Lebanon a region of peace and
security, are commendable. None the less, prime responsibility for the
implementation of those resolutions rests on the Security Council. In paragraph S51
of his report the Secretary-General says that if the Council approves the renewal
of UNIPIL's mandate it will be necessary for the Council and all its members to
aske 8 determined effort to fulfil a condition that was identified in 1978 ~s being
essential for the Force to be effective. This was that it must have at all times
the full confidence and backing of the Security Council. The Secretary-General
adds that he regrets that that condition has not been fully met, and he therefore
appeals again to all Member States to give the Force full political backing and to
mest their assessed share of its costs.

The six-month mandate requested by the Lebanese Government is essential from
that standpoint for the Council to be sble to consider the necessary measures for
the implementation of resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978) and the other relevant
resolutions. That is why we insisted on a six-month extension, since the
three-month period that the Council had agreed on is not sufficient, in the
Lebanese Government's view. That is why my delegation would like to state for the
record the official position of our Government in that respect.

In addition to the political deadlock and the impasse in the field faced by
the Poroe, UNIPIL has also been experiencing a budgetary deficit. My delegation
endorses what the Secretary-General has said and reiterates its appeal to ail
States to meet their financial commitments 2s Members of the United Nations,
Membership of the United Nations imposes obligations in addition to giving rights.
My delegation shares the concern of the troop-contributing States about the

political situation with regard to Israel and the budgetary deficit, It also
JP/hat 8/PV, 2661
42

(Me. Pakhoury, Lebanon)
shazes the view that the Council hag full responsibility for UNIPIL, and it must
take the measures to enable UNIFIL to carry out its mandate completely. The
Security Council's responsibility will be heavier still in the coming extension
petiod, since the resolution extending the mandate in the present situation - a

gesolution that was adopted unanimously, for the first time in the eight years
since the adoption of resolution 425 (1978) - should be regarded not as routine,
but, rather, as an affirmation of a commitment to implement resolution 425 (1978)
and the subsequent relevant resolutions and a determination to emerge from the
political impasse and overcome the financial difficulties.

We repeat that the Council must act seriously and swiftly in the coming
extension period, since UNIFIL's success will be to the benefit of the Council
itself and of the peace-keeping efforts of which UNIPIL is a part, a part that
requires special trsatment commensurate with the mission assigned to it and the
dangers in the region.

UNIFIL's failure would be a disaster for southern Lebanon and the region as a
whole. It would have a negative impact on the Council and its peace-keeping
Operations,

On behalf of the Lebanese Government and people, I wish to thank all the
friendly countries that have voluntarily taken part in UNIFIL, its constituent
forces themselves and their commanders, officers, soldiers and staff. In
particular, I thank Lieutenant-General William Callaghan, who has worked with such
prrseverance in difficult and often dangerous circumstances, for the sacrifices
made in the face of many obstacles, the source of which is well known to the
Council,

In conclusion, I wish to state that the fate ~f UNIPIL for the coming period

is in the Council's hands. If the Council gives the Force full confidence and
JR/hat 8/PV. 2681
43-43

(Mr, Pakhoury, Lebanon)

collective political support, and if it makes it possible for the Force to carry
out the mandate it has given it, the Council will have helped lebanon to restore
its sovereignty and authority over its territory and will have removed the
nightmare of occupation and its practices that the region has experienced and aided
the peace and security of the whole region. If the Council does not succeed in
that, it will bear responsibility for the continuation of a tense situation. But
the responsibility may be more serious yet, for a threat to international peace and
security is at issue, peace and security the maintenance of which is the Council's
responsibility under the Charter.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): I thank the representative
of lLabsnon for the kind words he addressed to we.

1 call on the representative of the Soviet Union, who has asked to speak in
exercise of the right of reply.

Mc. DUBININ (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from
Russian): I consider it necessary to state that the Soviet Union spoke in support
of the request of the Government of Lebanon for an extension of the mandate of the
United Nations Interim Porce in Lebanon for six months, We took the same position
on the Secretary-General's recommendation in that regard.

I also take this opportunity to emphasize yet again that the Soviet Union
considers it is the prime task of tha Security Council to ensure the immediate
withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces from Lebanese territory and to ensure
that Israel complies with the relevant Security Council resolutions,

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Prench): There are no further
speakers, The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its

consideration of the item on its agenda.
w/17 8/PV.2681
46

(The President)

I should now like to say a few words as representative of Prance.

My delegation, repeating statements of my Government, expresses indignation at
reports of the assassination in Lebanon of two British citizens snd one Asscican
citizen. My Government wishes to convey to the British Government and the American
Government, their two delegations and the families of the victims our deep sympathy.

The Prench Government wishes to reaffira its feelings of solidarity with the
United Kingdom and the United States in this hour of distress.

I now resume my functions as President of the Council.

Before adjourning this meeting, I wish to announce that the Security Council
will resume its consideration of the question related to the request made by the
Libyan Arab Jamahariya, Burkina Faso, the Syrian Arab Republic and Oman this
evening at 7 o'clock.

The meeting rose at 6.40 p.m.

Voting Summary
Yes: 015 | No: 000 | Abstentions: 000 | Non-Voting: 000 | Total voting membership: 015
Y AUSTRALIA
Y BULGARIA
Y CHINA
Y CONGO
Y DENMARK
Y FRANCE
Y GHANA
Y MADAGASCAR
Y THAILAND
Y TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
Y USSR
Y UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Y UNITED KINGDOM
Y UNITED STATES
Y VENEZUELA