put IL 171 effect that they, as permanent members of the Security The question remained on the list of matters of which Council, af&m their intention that in case of aggression the Security Council is seized.“* with nuclear weapons or the threat of such aggression /7 gainst a non-nuclear weapon State, party to the Non- ‘“/Proliferation Treaty, they would seek immediate action SITUA’l-ION IN through the Council to provide assistance, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, to such a State. The INITJAL PROCEEDJNGS declarations also included a reaffirmation of the inherent By letter a’4 dated 21 August 1968, the permanent right, recognized in Article 51 of the Charter, of individual representatives of Canada, Denmark, , Paraguay, and collective selfdefence if an armed attack, including the and the requested a nuclear attack, occurred against a Member of the the President of the Security Council to convene an United Nations, until the Security Council had taken urgent meeting of the Council to consider “the present measures necessary to maintain international peace and serious situation in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic’*. security. At the 144lst meeting on 21 August 1968, before the At the end of the discussion,‘*0 at the 1433rd meeting, adoption of the agenda, the representative of the USSR, the three-Power draft resolution was adopted by 10 votes speaking on a point of order, read the text of a letter ‘(6 to none with 5 abstentions.‘” which he had addressed to the President of the Security The resolution ‘u read as follows: Council opposing the consideration of the question by “The Securify Council, the Security Council.eu “Noting with appreciation the desire of a large At the same meeting, the Council decided by 13 votes number of States to subscribe to the Treaty on the in favour and 2 against to include the question in its Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and thereby agenda.“’ to undertake not to receive the transfer from any At the same meeting, the representative of Czecho- transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other was invited to take part in the discussion.‘” nuclear explosive devices or of control over such At subsequent meetings, the Council also invited the weapons or explosive devices directly or indirectly; representatives of ,“@ aso and Yugo- not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear slaviaal to participate in the debate. At the 1445th meeting, weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, and not a proposal by the representative of the USSR that the to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture representative of the German Democratic Republic be of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, invited to participate in the debate was put to the vote “Taking into consideration the concern of certain of and rejected.06* these States that, in conjunction with their adherence Dee&ion of 22 August 1968 (1443rd meeting): to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Rejection of the draft resolution submitted by Brazil, Weapons, appropriate measures be undertaken to Canada, Denmurk, France, Paraguay, Senegal, the United safeguard their security, Kingdom and the United States “Bearing in mind that any aggression accompanied At the 144lst meeting, the representative of Czecho- by the use of nuclear weapons would endanger the slovakia* quoted several messages from the Minister peace and security of all States, of Foreign Affairs of Czechoslovakia containing state- “1. Recognizesthat aggression with nuclear weapons ments by various Czechoslovak Government and or the threat of such aggression against a non-nuclear- Communist Party organs, to the effect that on 20 August, weapon State would create a situation in which the troops of the USSR, Poland, , Bulgaria and the Security Council, and above all its nuclear-weapon German Democratic Republic had crossed the borders State permanent members, would have to act imme- of Czechoslovakia in contravention not only of principles diately in accordance with their obligations under the of relations among socialist States and the Warsaw United Nations Charter; Treaty but also of the fundamental norms of international “2. Welcomes the intention expressed by certain law. Accordingly, his Government had protested to the States that they will provide or support immediate five aforementioned Governments and requested, among assistance in accordance with the Charter, to any non- other things, that the armies of those Warsaw Treaty nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons that is a victim of ua For retention of the item on the Secretary-General’s sum- an act or an object of a threat of aggression in which mary statement on matters of which the Security Council is seized, nuclear weapons are used ; seechapter II. p. 54, No. 156. “3. Reafirms in particular the inherent right, u4 s/8758. OR, 23rd yr., Suppl. for July-Sept. 1968, p. 136. recognized under Article 51 of the Charter, of individual ua S/8759, OR, 23rd yr., Suppl. for July-Sept. 1968. p. 136. and collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs w For the discussion on the inclusion of the item on the agenda, against a Member of the United Nations, until the see chapter 11, Cases 20, 3. Security Council, has taken measures necessary to U7 144lst meeting (PV), pp. 58-60. For the question of circula- tion of communication in conncxion with this question, see maintain international peace and security.” chapter II, Case 2. u8 144lsl meeting (PV), p. 66. Uo For the consideration of the provisions of Cha tcr VII in a’ 1442nd meeting (PV). pp. 48-50. general. sec. chapter XI. Case 12; for the discussion o P the provi- a0 1443rd meeting (PV), pp. 2-5. sions of Article 51. see Ibid.. Case 11. u1 1444th meeting (PV), pp. 18-20. c(1 1433rd meeting (PV), p. 46. aa 1445th meeting (PVL 92. For discussion of the question us Resolution 255 (1968). of invitation, see chapter IJ P’, Case 5. -172 Chapter VIII. Maintenance of international peace and security countries be withdrawn from the territory of Czecho- any such request. The statement which he had read before slovakia, and that the members of the Government who the Council was from a nameless group, and he had were detained be set free.“63 not been able to disclose the signers of that statement The representative of the United States noted that who were certainly not the members of the Czechoslova It---i ;_ the statements of the representative of Czechoslovakia Government.- had demonstrated the need for the Security Council to At the 1442nd meeting on 22 August 1968, the repre- take appropriate action to restore peace and to redress sentative of Denmark introduced a draft resolution IX’ the violations of the United Nations Charter which had which was jointly sponsored by Brazil, Canada, France, occurred. He also stated that the Council, which, under Paraguay, the United Kingdom and the United States. the Charter, was the body primarily responsible for the Senegal was later added esato the list of co-sponsors of maintenance of international peace and security, should the draft resolution according to which the Security take immediate action in the interests of world peace, Council would: (I) affirm that the sovereignty, political and call upon the USSR and its allies to independence and territorial integrity of the Czechoslovak remove their troops from Czechoslovak soil and to Socialist Republic must be fully respected; (2) condemn cease interfering in that country in a manner contrary the armed intervention of the USSR and other members to the principles of international law relating to sover- of the Warsaw Pact in the internal affairs of Czechoslo- eignty and self-determination of States.bb’ vakia, and call upon them to take no action of violence The representative of the USSR contended that the or reprisal that could result in further suffering or loss question of Czechoslovakia was an internal affair of that of life, forthwith to withdraw their forces, and to cease country and “the common cause and affair of its partners all other forms of intervention in Czechoslovakia’s in the socialist community under the Warsaw Treaty”. internal affairs; (3) call upon Member States of the Hc further held that there was a dangerous conspiracy United Nations to exercise their diplomatic influence of the forces of internal and external reaction to restore upon the USSR and the other countries concerned with the order in that country which had been brought down a view to bringing about prompt implementation of this by the socialist revolution. In view of this direct threat, resolution; and (4) request the Secretary-General to a group of members of the Central Committee of the transmit this resolution to the countries concerned, to Czechoslovak Communist Party, of the Government and keep the situation under constant review, and to report of the National Assembly, had addressed an appeal to to the Council on compliance with this resolution. allied States, members of the Warsaw Treaty, for imme- At the 1443rd meeting on 22/23 August 1968, the eight- diate assistance through armed force. After reading Power draft resolution was voted upon and failed of the text of the appeal, the representative of the USSR adoption. The vote was IO in favour, 2 against and maintained that the decision of the Czechoslovak side 3 abstentions (one of the negative votes being that of a and the actions of the Warsaw Pact nations were in full permanent member of the Council).660 conformity with the right of States to individual and At the same meeting, the representative of Canada collective selfdefence provided for in treaties of alliance submitted a draft resolution aeowhich was jointly spon- concluded between the socialist countries, and also with sored with Brazil, Denmark, France, Paraguay, Senegal, the provisions of the United Nations Charter. He further United Kingdom and the United States. Under the terms noted that the Soviet Government had officially stated of the draft resolution, the Security Council would that Soviet troops would immediately bc withdrawn request the Secretary-General of the United Nations to from Czechoslovakia as soon as the existing threat to the appoint and despatch immediately to a Special achievements of socialism in that country, and to the Representative who would seek the release and ensure security of the countries of the Socialist community, the personal safety of the Czechoslovak leaders under would be “dispcllcd”, and as soon as the legitimate detention and who would report back to the Council authorities would decide that the further presence of urgently. those armed forces in Czechoslovakia was not required. At the 1444th meeting on 23 August 1968, the repre- He asserted that those military measureswere not directed sentative of the USSR objected to the draft resolution against any State or against the indcpendcnce and sove- on the ground that it was a direct intervention in the reignty of Czechoslovakia, or any other country. They internal affairs of a Member State of the United served only the cause of peace and were directed towards Nations.e6* the strengthening of peace. Therefore, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 7, the Security Council should not The joint draft resolution was further discussed but interfere in the internal affairs of Czechoslovakia. was not put to the vote.oeX Moreover, the reprcscntativcs of Czechoslovakia had At the 1445th meeting on 24 August 1968, the rcprc- not appealed to the Council for such intcrvcntion.dJ5 sentative of Czechoslovakia stated that “the act of use The representative of the United States disputed the of force” by the Governments whose armed units had contention of the USSR representative that the invasion occupied his country could not be justified on any of Czechoslovakia was an internal matter for Czecho- slovakia, since there had not been any request or pcrmis- sion from the Government of Czechoslovakia for such a58 1441st meeting (PV). p. 136. intcrfercncc. Hc added that the Soviet rcprescntativc “57 S/X761. 1442nd meeting (PV), p. 17. had not been able to document the fact that there was nan S/8761/Add.l, OH, 2-M I”.. SuppI. /or Ju1.pSrpc. 1968, p. XIV. aJD 1443rd meeting (PV), pp. 163-l 65. OL3 144lst meeting (PV), pp. 66-67. ““” S/8767. 1443rd meeting (I%‘). p. 168. Oh’14ilst meeting(PV), pp. 77-87. M’ 1444th meeting (PV). pp. 7-10. 6JL 1441st meeting (PV), pp. 101-135. EVA For discussion of the proposal, see chapter V, Cast 3. Pari--~__ II. grounds. No request had been made by the Czechoslovak added, could constitute a basis for a future solution. Government for the military occupation; neither could The reaching of that solution, his Government was fully it be justified on the grounds of concern for Czechoslovak aware, lay squarely with the Governments of the five -be. curlty or alleged danger of counter-revolution. He socialist countries concerned, in negotiation with the ‘Jadded that too much harm had been done already and constitutional authorities of Czechoslovakia. However, it was an urgent responsibility to prevent further harm the Council, having discussed the problem, could con- being done. He expressed the hope that the current tribute to its solution by creating the favourable atmos- negotiations undertaken by the Czechoslovak President phere for reaching it and for creating a basis for a solution and his delegation in might contribute to that such as he had outlined. end. In the meantime, notwithstanding the non-fulfilment At the conclusion of the 1445th meeting on 24 August by the five socialist countries concerned of their obliga- 1968, the President (Brazil) after saying that a substantial tions towards Czechoslovakia, his country continued to number of delegations had indicated their desire that abide by the principles, aims and objectives of its social- the Council should reconvene urgently to resume the ist foreign policy, including co-operation with socialist consideration of the item, of which the Council remained countries, peaceful coexistence, and support for the pro- seized, stated W that, unless otherwise decided after gressive efforts of people throughout the world against informal consultations, the Council would meet on colonialism, imperialism and any aggression. That policy 26 August 1968. There being no objection, the meeting gave Czechoslovakia every right to oppose “such dis- was adjourned. respect for international obligations where we ourselves are The question remained on the list of matters of which involved”. On the basis of these principles, the Czecho- the Security Council is seized.“’ Slovak Government had demanded that the foreign troops leave its territory without delay and that its soveriegnty be fully restored. It was the view of his Government that aen 1445th meeting (PV), p. 123. W S/8933. 16 December I968. item 78. For a subsequent the functions of its constitutional and political organs rcquesi by thk Acting Permanent Representative of Czechoslovakia mu>t be fully respected and that all acts of occupation that the item be withdrawn from the Council’s agenda. see organs were illegal. The position he had set forth, he chapter 11, foot-note 41.