Any motion to adjourn for consultations or instructions
Vote in favour
Explanation of vote according to the circumstances.
CONFIDENTIAL.
CONFIDENTIAL
ANNEX A
T
Chinese Representation
The Security Council has before it on its agenda a
matter of great importance. My delegation believes that
it should deal with that matter without delay. We believe
that to raise the issues which have now been introduced in
the context of this debate in the Security Council could
only obstruct the achievement of the Council's more immediate
objective. My delegation is accordingly of the view that
the Council should not now at this meeting seek to deal with
the complex questions of principle which have been raised by
the distinguished Representative of
The position we have taken on this matter is without
prejudice to our view on whether the inscription of a
separate item was required for procedural reasons or on
whether the issue should be taken up at another time.
It is simply our belief that here and now the Council should
deal with the matter of great importance which is on our
agenda.
CONFIDENTIAL
Annex B
CHINESE CREDENTIALS
Explanation of vote in favour of a motion or resolution to the effect
that the Council should not consider the matter further.
There are two principles and two purposes which my Government has
consistently supported and consistently advocated. It is unnecessary
today to repeat in full past statements on these principles and
purposes, but I nevertheless wish to make the position of my Government
absolutely clear.
First. The British Government has for long past maintained that the
Government of the People's Republic of China is the Government of China
and that consequently its representatives should be seated in the United
Nations. In successive debates in the General Assembly I have so spoken
and so voted. It is our hope, as I said again in the Assembly in
November, 1967, that the Assembly will without delay finally decide in
favour of the seating of the representatives of the Chinese People's
Republic. That has been the declared policy of my Government for many
years past. We stand by it. We have no reason to retract or retreat
from it.
**
Second. We have moreover taken the view, to which we also
firmly adhere, that in this question we should take into account the
wishes of the whole membership of the United Nations. This is not any
new position. Indeed, our view on this issue too has been long publicly
declared. A statement was made by my Government in the British
Parliament (mere-than-two-yeare-age which clearly set out our policy. We
recognised of course that the decisions of the Assembly in this respect
are not binding on the Council, but at the same time we stated our
carefully-considered opinion. The statement of the British Government
was
consequently
-
and I quote the words of the declaration of
13 December, 1965
"Her Majesty's Government consider that the right organ of the United
Nations in which decisions of principle about a change in Chinese
representation should be taken is the General Assembly".
** A/PV.1610 28/11/1967
Ae
י
I
I
I
We still strongly feel that it is right that the general membership of
the United Nations should first decide on this
issue.
It is with these two basic principles and clear purposes in mind that we
shall deal with the questions raised in the Council today.
L
4
Annex C
CHIMESE CREDENTIALS Explanation of vote in favour of the proposition
that it is the challenge to credentials which must be put to the vote.
one.
The question which we have to decide is a purely procedural It is a
question of general application which may arise not only in this case
but in other cases. Indeed, it has arisen in relation to the credentials
of representatives of various countries in the past.
The question is this: where a representative's credentials are called in
question, is it the challenge to those credentials which should be put
to the vote, or is it the credentials them- selves which should be
submitted for approval?
In the view of my Delegation, it is clear from Rule 17 of the Security
Council's provisional Rules of Procedure that it is the challenge that
shall be put to a vote. What the Council has to take a decision on, in
accordance with that rule,, is the objection raised to the
credentials of a representative.
In this connection I would like to recall to the Council whet
was said by the British Representative on this subject as long ago as
1958 in connection with a challenge to the credentials of a
representative of a Kiddle Eastern state. I quote now from the official
record of the Security Council's 827th meeting on 15 July, 1958. Sir
Pierson Dixon, the then British Representative, said at that meeting:
"He the representative in question has taken his seat under the
authority of this rule .e. Rule 167 and it is quite clear to me that
under Rule 17 he may continue to sit, unless objection to his
credentials has been sustained by a vote
of this Council".
That was our position in 1958 and it is still the position of my
Delegation today.
But this is not only our position; it is a view-point which has been
supported by statements of the President of the Counc11 at earlier
meetings.
Aiy
Ly Delegation accordingly considers that it is the challenge to the
credentials which should be put to the vote.
Note. The President's statements were at the 752nd and
834th meetings.
124
2/37
ANGAL
copy of ena is
already
al 24110
строй
BRITISH HIGH COMMISSION
1. When to Fackelin jo Amic, wow (Pre)ink".
GEORGETOWN
math (we had ad
M. Tum (? ang #th
dukiristin),
Dear Stuart,
GUYANA
เส
24
14 October, 19761723/10
October the to see. 2) Ragy, Pl.pty.
ду
ANGI 1/2
1
him Torke, 2020 (3)
mis, AlH IRS
Mn. Clissold, R.id.
Them PA
Mr. Burnham gave a Press Conference on 10 October, primarily to report
on his attendance at the Non-aligned Conference in Lusaka and his
subsequent tour of East and Central Africa. I enclose a copy of his
prepared statement.
23/10
2. The main interest of the Conference was in the question and answer
period which followed. I have already reported by telegram Mr. Burnham's
remarks on Garfield Sobers' visit to Rhodesia, and I am sending separate
letters by this bag (not to all) reporting Mr. Burnham's remarks on
relations with the Soviet Union and Brazil arms sales to South Africa
and race relations" in the UK.
3. The only comment I wish to make in this letter relates to the seating
of China in the United Nations. In his prepared statement, Mr. Burnham
recalled that he had affirmed while in Africa his support for membership
by the People's Republic of China on both the General Assembly and the
Security Council. He amplified his remarks in the question and answer
period, and I enclose the relevant extract.
4. My American colleague, who was rather concerned at these remarks, has
told me that Mr. Burnham subsequently indicated to him that
C. S. Roberts, Esq.,
Caribbean Department.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
CONFIDENTIAL
/there would
Je, 18/1, hen. Pl. watter to
VUND, with f.
to (21). Da
PIA
!
1
there would in fact be no change in Guyana's voting on this issue in the
United Nations, 1.e. Guyana would vote for the "important question"
resolution and abstain on the Albanian resolution; but it seems doubtful
whether Guyana really can continue to vote this way after Mr. Burnham's
statement.
5. I am copying this letter and its enclosures to Chanceries in
Bridgetown, Kingston, Port of Spain, Castries, Washington, and Caracas.
Yours ever. John
(J. A. Sankey)
CONFIDENTIAL
■
I
#
I
+
Seating of China in the United Nations
RICKEY SINGH: Mr. Prime Minister, on this question of the seating of
China, you said that you support China taking her rightful place in the
United Nations. What do you see that rightful place to be, bearing in
mind that Taiwan claims to speak for mainland China as well.
PRIME MINISTER: That I thought was apparent in my open- ing statement.
The People's Republic of China should be admitted to the United Nations,
both to the Assembly and the Security Council. If the People's Republic
of China is admitted to the Security Council, quite obviously Taiwan
could not speak for China.
H. WILLIAMS: Looking back over the past two years, in terms of the
resolution in seeking to seat China
in the United Nations, is the Guyana Government prepared now to back any
resolution, or do you still take the view that as in the past two years:
if its a two-edged sword you won't back it? Have you moved from this
position in terms of China..
PRIME MINISTER: No, but we are carrying on discussions With some of our
collegues, because it is our view that the People's Republic of China is
the proper Government and representative of China. But it's a hard fact
of life that the Government in Taiwan is the effective Government of a
nation of over 13 million people; and though it is our view that they
should be excluded from the Security Council amongst the big 5, it is
still our view that they should continue to be members of the United
Nations" at the General Assembly
level.
;
I
4
STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER AT A
PRESS CONFERENCE
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1970
Good morning, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press. It
feels good to be with you after a period of eight weeks.
this morning
I propose to report briefly on the Third Summit Confer-
ence of Non-Aligned Nations held at Lusaka, Zambia, September
8-10, which along with my colleagues I attended, as well as my
official visits to five Central and East African countries thereafter.
We participated in and contributed to the deliberations and
decisions of this Conference which was the first since Guyana,
achieved independence. We also had an opportunity of sharing our
experiences with and learning from the nations assembled at Lusaka,
who shared our determination to achieve economic emancipation,
strengthen independence and make a contribution to the world peace
and economic and social progress for the benefit of all mankind.
The official visits were to Zambia, Uganda, Konya,
Tanzania and Ethiopia, and offered the opportunity not only of re-
establishing previous contacts and furthering goodwill, but also of
making arrangements for mutually bonoficial relations between these
countries and Guyana at the trade, economic, cultural and political
levels.
I was able to make arrangements with all of the countries visited for an
oxchange of diplomatic reprosentatives, mutual tech- nical assistance,
increased trade relations and cultural exchangos, In the cases of
Zambia, Uganda and Tanzania, it was further agreed that there should be
an exchange of fraternal delegates between the
/People's
·
+
People's National Congress and the ruling Parties of those countries
at their respective Annual Conferences.
It was further possible to learn at first hand, particularly
from the Commonwealth countries visited, their experience, tactics
and plans for securing the ownership, control and rapid development
C
of their resources, and to explain in each case what Guyana was doing
and planning in this direction.
While in Tanzania, we mot Ministers of the East African
Community at their headquarters at Arusha and it was agreed that
there would be valuo in an exchange of information between them and
the Caribbean Regional Secretariat in Georgetown. I propose to com-
municate this view to the Socrotary-General of CARIFTA.
At the Conference and in the course of the visits, I was able
to amplify and explain to my counterparts my Government's policies
on both the domestic and external fronts. For instance, it was made
clear that Guyana saw the United Nations as the best available vehicle
for achieving international democracy and amity, but that it should
become a universal organisation including in its membership, both of
the Assembly and the Security Council, the People's Republic of
China whose Government was an effective one of a nation of over 7
hundred million people. We also urged that every effort should be made
to have established a preventivo poaco-kaoping force under the aegis
of the United Nations as early as possible.
On the Middle East, our position which we communicated was,
is, and always has been that the United Nations Security Council
Resolution No. 242 of 22nd November, 1967, should be adhered to by
all sides. On Indo-China our firm opinion was that all foreign troops
/should.
I
T
+
+
+
3-
should be withdrawn from South-East Asia, particularly South
Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos, and the people of these countries
and that region be left to their own dovices, skills and initiative
to settle their problems and decido the form of political and econ-
omic organisation best for them.
We pledged our support to our African brothers in Angola,
Mozambique, Guinea Bissau, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Nimíbia
we
in their struggle to rule themselves and rid their countries of minority
racist regimes and colonial powers, and as you know, made the first of
annual contributions in the sum of $50,000 to the Liberation Com- mittee
of the Organisation of African Unity.
We were one with our colleagues in opposing the proposed sale of arms to
South Africa by the United Kingdom and the continued zalo by countries
like France and West Germany.
In the circumstances wo welcomed and supported the appoint- mont by the
Organisation of African Unity of a team headed by President Konneth
Kaunda of Zambia to visit certain European countries for the purpose of
persuading them against supplying arms to South Africa.
The Summit Conference agreed to appoint President Kaunda as co-ordinator
for the purpose of pursuing the decisions of the Confer- once,
exchanging information, taking initiatives and arranging for ministorial
and other mootings between that Conference and the next
ono.
In my private discussions with Prosident Kaunda subsequently,
I intimated to him that if he felt the need for it the Government of
Guyana would be proparod to offer the services of an officer on
secondment to assist in any area where the necessity arose.
/From...
8
From my own point of view one of the most important
positions taken by the delegates at the Conference related to the
emphasis on the need for self-reliance on the part of developing
nations, the increase of trade, technical assistance and economic
co-operation as between them, the control of their resources for
their individual and mutual benefit and the general pooling of their
respective resources, not only to support and make real their
political independence, but also to improve their bargaining position
vis-a-vis the rest of the world.
L
་
I was one of those who took note of the fact that the non-
aligned and developing countries represent at least one half of the
population of the world and the actual or potential ownership of
more than one half of the world's natural resources which should be
exploited to remove us from the status of mendicants and recipients
of charity to that of truly independent and economically viable nations.
ti stre
I have circulated copies of the Declaration of Lusaka and
from these you will see what was the consensus of the 53 countries
there represented at delegate level and how this basically accords with
our own thrust and objectives.
I should also like to mention that it was both a pleasure and a
privilege to have had an opportunity of successfully sponsoring the
admission of Trinidad and Tobago as a full member of the Conference
and of Barbados as an Observor
Further, our Permanent Represent-
ative to the United Nations
-
Mr. Pat Thompson
-
was unanimously
elected as Rapporteur to both the Foreign Ministers' and Summit
Conferences. This was an honour to Guyana and Mr. Thompson
acquitted himself with distinction.
/It...
-5
5.
It is perhaps also apposite to report that on Thursday,
Fusaka
3rd September, in London, on my way to the Conference, I had
discussions with the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr.
Heath, and indicated to him clearly and unequivocally the stand of
my Government on the proposed sale of arms by his to South Africa
under the terms of the Simonstown Agreement.
Later the same day, in the evening, I spoke to a large
gathering, numbering several hundrods, of Guyanese and Wast
Indians at a macting at Porchester Hali. There I informed thom
on the developments in Guyana, our plans and programme, and was Bome
able to learn at the same time of the problems faced by West Indians
in the United Kingdom.
In sum,
it is my view that my recont trip abroad was most
useful, and if as will be the case, follow-up action takes place, will
+
prove to be beneficial to the poople and nation of Guyana.
+
E
+
L
1
EN CLAIR
123
COUTINE UKMISSION NEW YORK TO FOREIGN AND CO
TELEGRAM NUMBER 2881
UNCLASSIFIED 177C15Z
TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE 16 NOVEMBER 1970
Ez zHx
TOP
COPY
ADDRESSED TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE TELEGRAM NUMBER 2081 GF 16
NOVEMBER RE÷EATED FOR INFORMATION TO PEKING WASHINGTON TAMSU! SAVING TO
PARIS MOSCOW HONG KONG.
MY TELEGRAM NO. 2858: GENERAL ASSEMBLY CHINESE REPRESENTATION.
THE DEBATE CONTINUED TODAY WITH STATEMENTS FROM YUGOSLAVIA, ROMANIA,
TANZANIA, IRAQ, SAUDI ARABIA, AND TUNISIA,
2.
THE FIRST FOUR SPEAKERS ALL CONCENTRATED THEIR ATTACK ON THE IMPORTANT
QUESTION RESOLUTION AND ANY SUGGESTION OF A TWO CHINAS'
SOLUTION.
3.
DRISS (TUNISIA) SEEMED TO BE LEANING IN THE TWO CHINAS' DIRECTION. HE
SUGGESTED (BUT DID NOT FORMALLY PROPOSE) AMENDING THE RESOLUTION TO PUT
IN SEPARATE PARAGRAPHS THE QUESTION OF ADMISSION AND THE QUESTION OF
EXPULSION, SO AS TO ALLOW THEM TO BE VOTED ON SEPARATELY. ALTERNATIVELY,
INSTEAD OF CALLING FOR THEIR EXPULSION, THE RESOLUTION COULD ASK THE
REPRESENTATIVES OF FORMOSA TO REMAIN UNTIL THE NEW STATUS OF FORMOSA HAD
BEEN DEFINED. HE ALSO WANTED A NEW PARAGRAPH TO REQUEST THE
SECRETARY-GENERAL TO REPORT TO THE 25TH SESSION ON THE QUESTION OF
CHINA. HE MADE NO COMMITMENT TO VOTE EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THE
RESOLUTION AS IT STOOD.
FCO PASS PEKING TAMSUI SAVING PARIS MOSCOW HONG KONG.
SIR C. CROVE
[REPEATED AS REQUESTED]
DEPARTIENTAL DISTRIBUTION
+
F.E.D.
U.7.D.
HER. DEP".
E.E.S.D.
IEWS DEPT.
RESEARCH DEPT
(F.E. SECT.
SCV. SECT.) (AER. SECT.)
LITED
STAT;
เวม
AGENCY
For 2/4
Friday, November 13th, 1970
FED
UNITED STATES INFORMATION SERVICE, AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON
Au
OFFICIAL
TEXT
FROM USIS
TEXT OF AMBASSADOR C, PHILLIPS' SPEECH IN U.N. CHINA DEBATE, NOVEMBER
12TH
Following is the text of the speech made in the U.N. General Assembly
November 12th by U.S. representative Christopher H. Phillips on the
question of seating Communist China: (Begin Text)
"We have before us for consideration once again a proposal sponsored by
Albania, Algeria and sixteen other states to expel the Republic of China
from the United Nations and to place in the same seat representatives
from the People's Republic of China. I use the words 'once again'
because this proposal, and the resolution which seeks to effect it,
differ not at all from similar proposals and resolutions which we have
considered and decisively rejected many times in the past. My delegation
hopes that it will be rejected again this year.
Mr. President, the position of the United States is well known. We have
joined with the Governments of seventeen other states, embracing
representatives from every continent, in co-sponsoring a procedural
resolution which affirms that any proposal to change the representation
of China in the United Nations is an important question and requires a
two-thirds majority for adoption. This is a long-established position of
the General Assembly, affirmed and re-affirmed by large majorities on
many Occasions when there has been a substantive debate on the issue of
Chinese representation.
We would do well to look into the matter and understand why the
important question' procedure has so consistently received overwhelming
support, particularly since we have already heard it attacked as nothing
more than a transparent device for withholding from the People's
Republic of China something which, it is claimed, is its own. The fact
of the matter, however, is that far from being some sort of manoeuvre,
the
'important question' procedure found in Article 18 of our charter is one
of the most essential protections of all members of the United Nations,
whether large or small. The plain language of Article 18 is that
decisions of the General Assembly on important questions shall be made
by a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. Important
questions are defined in that Article as recommendations with respect to
international peace and security, election to various offices within our
organization, questions relating to the operation of the trusteeship
system and the budget, the suspension of rights and privileges of
membership, the admission of new members and the expulsion of present
members and this is precisely what document A/L.605 would have us do.
Mr. President, to insist on the integrity of the charter, to re-affirm
the protections which it provides, and to insist that these protections
must be available to all members without distinction, is not only a
matter of self-interest for all of us within this room; it is also a
matter of simple equity and justice. It would set a most dangerous
precedent to expel a member of the United Nations -- an act that has
never been taken in this organization's quarter century of life by a
simple majority of those present and voting. Those who may be tempted to
disregard the charter's safeguards because of their views on the present
issue should consider carefully whether at some future time on some
future issue they might find themselves in a position
--
This text may be used in quotation or in full, with or without
attribution to USIS, by press. radio and other media. In the case of
wireless texts, whilst every effort has been made to maintain accuracy,
transmission problems may result in certain inaccuracies and allowance
must be made accordingly.
I
-2-
similar to that in which some have sought to place the Republic of
China. We should remain faithful to the plain words of the charter and
ensure that these words apply to all without discrimination. In thus
re-affirming the 'important question' principle we will be taking an
action that relates to far more than just the question of Chinese
representation.
It is for these reasons that my country has joined in co-sponsoring the
resolution set forth in Document A/L.599. It is for these reasons that I
strongly urge all members, regardless of their position on the
substantive question of Chinese representation, to vote to re-affirm
this vital procedure.
Mr. President, I turn now to the substantive resolution, contained in
Document A/L-605. You are well aware of my Government's firm opposition
to this draft resolution. Its proposal to expel the representatives of
the Republic of China is both unwise and unjust.
Mr. President, the expulsion of a member state is a most serious
business. Article 6 of the charter reserves this action to cases in
which a member has persistently violated the principles upon which our
organization was founded, and it requires joint action by both the
Security Council and the Assembly. There is not a single act of the
Republic of China that would justify these extreme measures. Yet the
resolution before us has deliberately joined the concept of admitting
the People's Republic of China to the call for expelling the Republic of
China. Indeed they are so joined as to prevent the extrication of one
from the other.
We have heard it said before, and doubtless it will be repeated during
the course of this debate, that the People's Republic of China is a
reality that cannot be ignored. Indeed that is so. And I do not believe
any of us here today, or any of the Governments that we represent,
ignores that reality. As far as the United States is concerned, as most
are aware, we have actively sought to move from an era of confrontation
to an era of negotiation. Representatives of my Government have met with
representatives of the People's Republic of China twice this year and
would have met more often had Peking been willing to do so. And my
Government has taken a number of concrete actions actions for which we
neither proposed nor anticipated a quid pro quo to ease relations
between us. The fact of the matter is, the United States is as
interested as any in this room to see the People's Republic of China
play a constructive role among the family of nations. All of us are
mindful of the industry, talents and achievements of the great people
who live in that ancient cradle of civilization.
But let us also remember, Mr. President, that the charter nowhere
confers upon states the right to make their own conditions for
membership in the United Nations. Neither in the charter, nor in any
resolution is it written that a state may say 'we will join, but only if
you expel member X. What the charter does say is that membership shall
be open to all peace-loving states able and willing to carry out the
obligations of membership, and that members may be exeplled only if they
have persistently violated the principles of the charter.
All of us must recall that many times during the period of general
debate earlier in this session, and in the speeches delivered during the
special commemorative week, we have heard distinguished delegates,
Foreign Ministers, and even Heads of State warmly endorse the principle
of universality of membership of the United Nations. How curious it is
that some of the same delegations who then urged universality of
membership, now with equal fervour urge that we expel one of our present
members. Surely if universality means anything at all, it means that we
add to our present membership, not subtract from it. My Government fails
to see how it is possible for a delegation that favours universality of
membership or for any delegation at all
to vote to expel from our midst a Government which:
-3-
Effectively governs 14 million people a population larger than that
of two-thirds of the members of this Assembly;
organization;
agencies;
Is recognized diplomatically by more than sixty of the members of this
Has been a member of the United Nations since the organization's
founding;
Has worked faithfully and constructively for the good of the
organization;
Has contributed more than its share to the work of the specialized
And has consistently sought to assist the process of development
throughout the world.
The sponsors of the resolution now before us, as they have done in
previous years, would have us ignore such considerations and, by
spurious appeals to the principle of universality and misrepresentation
of fact, call on us to expel a member which has faithfully abided by the
charter of this organization. Such a demand clearly violates the
principles of equity and justice. It should be opposed by all those who
believe that these principles should guide the actions of this
organization and who maintain that the charter must be upheld if this
organization itself is to survive and be effective.
Mr. President, we believe that these reasons require that this Assembly
reject this proposal to expel the Republic of China from the United
Nations. Whatever views members may hold on the question of Peking's
participation, we do not see how the purposes of this organization can
be served by expelling any member which has long and faithfully observed
the obligations set forth in its charter.
It is on this basis, Mr. President, that I urge the distinguished
delegates of this Assembly to reject decisively the resolution contained
in Document A/L.605." "
(End Text)
.
L
OFFICE OF THE
HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR CANADA,
CANADA HOUSE,
LONDON, 8.W.1.
M. Maurde
-to w
HAUT-COMMISSARIAT DU CANADA,
MAISON DU CANADA,
LONDRES, 8-0.1,
tet about cucentias
& Landinavian atty luck to
CONFIDENTIAL.
November 12, 1970.
munbership of Granther's Committee. As?.
Der John,
Ke
121
182 13/11
13/1
My
AAP 13/11
Код
Ź
اه
Attached for your information are copies of two telegrams from the
Canadian Delegation, New York, No. 2019 of November 10 on South African
Credentials, and No. 2038 of November 11 on the Special Committee on
Apartheid.
Also attached, for you and Mrs. Chitty to see, is a copy of Ottawa
telegram OUN 899 of November 11 informing our Permanent Mission to the
United Nations in New York that Canada will vote in favour of "Important
Question" resolution this year when the issue is considered in UNGA.
نامرد
David M. Miller, Counsellor.
12
Mr. J. H. Lambert,
Head,
F.END...
United Nations (Political) Dept.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.