1086Th Meeting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Part II 99 - ___-- -~ -... - Decision of 9 August 1964 (S/RES/193 (vii) Situation in Territories in Africa under (1964)). preamble. Portuguese administration: Decision of 25 September 1964 (S/RES/ Decision of 22 November 1965 (SIRES/ 194 (1964)), para. 4. 218 (1965)), para. 8 (second part). (ii) The question of race conflict in South Africa: 3. From regional agencies or arrangements. Decision of 9 June 1964 (S/RES/l90 Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: (1964)), para. 3. Decision of 30 December 1964 (S/RES/ 199 (iii) F;tuon in the Democratic Republic of the (1964)). para. 6. B. Provision by express decision to consider the matter Decision of 30 December 1964 (S/RES/ further. 199 (1964)), para. 7. (i) Situation in Southern Rhodesia: (iv) Complaint by Senegal: Decision of 6 May 1965 (S/RES/202 (1965)), Decision of 19 May 1965 (S/RES/204 para. 7. (1965)), para. 4. Decision of 20 Novrmber 1965 (S/RES/ZI 7 (v) Situation in the Dominican Republic: (1965)), para. Il. Decision of 22 May 1965 (S/RES/205 (ii) The India-Pakistan question: (1965)). para. 2. Decision of 6 September 1965 ( S/RIWZlO (vi) The India-Pakistan question: (1965)), para. 3. Decision of 4 September 1965 (S/RES/209 C. Statement by the President that the Council would ( 1965) ), para. 4. remain seized of the question. Decision of 6 September 1965 (SIRES/ 210 (1965) ), para. 2 (third part). (i) Complaint by Panama: Decision of 20 September 1965 (S/RES/ Decision: Prcsitlcnt’s statement of IO January 211 (1965)), para. 5. 1964. Decision of 5 November 1965 (S/RES/ZlS (ii) Situation in the Dominican Republic: (1965)). paras. 3 and 4. Decision: President’s statement of 26 July 196s. Part II COMPLAINT HY PANAMA Decisions of 10 January 1964 (1086th meeting): Statement by the President expressing the consen- INITIAL PROCEEDINGS SUT of the Council to the eflect (1) that its President By letter lo dated IO January 1964, the permanent would address an uppeal to the purties for un IM- representative of Panama requested the President of mediate end to the exchange of fire and bloodshed the Security Council, in accordance with Articles 34 and (2) that the matter remained OII the Council’s and 35, paragraph 1 of the Charter of the United Na- agenda tions, to convene an early meeting of the Council to At the 1086th meeting on 10 January 1964, the consider “urgent matters connected with the grave representative of Panama * stated that Panama was the situation that exists between Panama and the United victim of an unprovoked armed attack against its States of America because of the Canal cnclavc in territory and its civilian population, committed by the our territory”. The situation with which Panama was armed forces of the United States garrisoned in the confronted had been brought about by the “repeated Panama Canal Zone, “while neither its Government, its threats and acts of aggression committed by the Gov- population nor its citizens have committed any hostile ernment of the United States” in Panama, which in- act of any kind”. After describing certain “provoca- fringed its territorial sovereignty, violated its terri- tions” which had been committed by United States torial integrity and constituted in practice “a serious citizens and students he recalled an agreement between danger to international peace and security”. In addi- Panama and the United States, under which the flags tion to other “serious acts” committed as a result of of both countries were to fly together at certain places the intolerance of United States troops stationed in in the Canal Zone. However, the “Zonians” as United the Canal Zone on 3 November 1959, and which had States citizens living in the Zone were called, had done resulted in a total of eighty wounded, Panama had all they could to prevent the agrecmcnt from being been the victim of aggression since 9 January 1964, implemented, and in an arbitrary gesture, the United with a total of twenty dead and over 300 wounded States Governor in the Canal Zone decided that in persons. Should the situation continue to dctcriorate, some places in the Canal Zone neither the Panamanian the state of alarm fraught with insecurity and violence nor the United States llag should be hoisted. Despite was bound to persist. Panama accordingly requested that ban, United States students attending schools in that the United Nations should intcrvcnc, so that the Canal Zone decided on their OWLI initi:ltive to hoist “these acts of aggression may bc considcrcd by the only the United States flag at those schools. Such an Security Council”. act of disrespect for an international agreement and challenge to the Panamanian nation caused considcr- At the 1086th meeting on IO January 1Y64, the able annoyance to the community of Panama. Consc- Council included the item in its agenda I* and con- quently on the previous day, 9 January 1964, a sidered it at that meeting. The reprcsentativc of Pana- number of Panamanian citizens and students dccidcd ma was invited to take part in the discussion. II’ to hoist their flag at those places whcrc it legally should be hoisted. The police of the Canal %onc and 1” S/5509, O.R.. IYth pr., Suppl. for Jtrn.-Mtrr. lW3, pp. 18-19. the military forces garrisoned there then opened fire 11 1086th meeting: para. 19. with machine-guns on the pcaccful demonstrators, I2 1086th meeting: pnra. 20. taking a high toll in lives and injuring pcoplc. After Chapter VIII. Maintenance of international peace and security - giving a detailed account of the legal situation and of The Brazilian representative’s initiative was sup the claims of Panama concerning the Canal Zone, he ported by the representatives of the United Kin dom, stated that the Zone should “not continue under its Morocco, Ivory Coast, the United States and 8 hina. present status, which is and will remain a cause of The representative of Panama also stated that his permanent discord”. In his view, it was imperative reaction to the suggestion was favourable. that the status of the Panama Canal be changed, either At the end of the discussion the President (Bolivia) by nationalization or by internationalization. The noted that many of the members of the Council had Panamanian representative was requesting the inter- supported the proposal of the representative of Brazil vention of the Security Council in the hope that peace to the effect that the President of the Council would be and tranquillity would be restored in the Canal Zone, authorized to address an appeal I3 to the Governments and that lasting solutions would be sought for of the United States and of Panama so that they should Panama. immediately take the most a propriate measures to The representative of the United States stated that bring to an end the exchan e o P fire and the bloodshed. the riots and violence in Panama were of special re et There bein no objection a e declared the proposal as to the United States Government and people since tff ey adopted. l-i e President also stated that the question blotted the record of the long and friendly and would remain on the agenda of the Council. l4 improving relationship between both countries. The United States Government was doing everything THE INDIA-PAKISTAN QUESTION humanly possible to restore the situation. The United STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ( 1117~~ MEETING) States President had telephoned the President of Panama to discuss the situation, and the two Presidents By letter I5 dated 16 January 1964, the representa- had agreed that violence in the Canal Zone had to be tive of Pakistan requested the President of the Council stopped. The United States President had also given to convene an immediate meeting of the Council to instructions to United States authorities to do cvery- consider “the grave situation that has arisen in the thing within their power to restore and maintain peace State of Jammu and Kashmir” which, he contended, and order in the Canal Zone It was to be hoped that was “the direct consequence of the unlawful steps that the Panamanian authorities were being equally vigorous the Government of India is continuing to take in order in their efforts to restrain lawlessness and to maintain to destroy the special status of the State” in disregard order and prevent further incidents of violence and of the resolutions of the Security Council and of the bloodshed. United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP). Refcrcnccs were made to two earlier letters The representative of the United States further denied from the President of Pakistan to the President of the the Panamanian representative’s allegations of aggres- Council, dated 9 October 1963 I6 and 3 January sion and stated that when the Canal Zone police 1964 li drawing the attention of the Council to the appeared unable to restore order, United States Army measures contemplated by the Government of India forces had been requested to nssumc responsibility for “to consolidate India’s hold over the bulk of Jammu the protection of the Zone. They had acted with the and Kashmir, to demoralize its people and to interpose greatest restraint. Thcrc was no evidcncc that either further obstacles in the establishment of conditions for the police of the Zone or the United States Army ever the exercise of their free choice in regard to their went outside the Zone. Their only use of firearms had future”. It was further stated in the letter that as a been within the Zone, to protect United States citizens result of those acts and the occurrence of sacrilegious residing there against an onrushing crowd of several acts disrespectful to the Muslim population as well as thousand and against snipers.