16

of the Security Council were not members of the Committee. The Venezuelan delegate, speaking on the Argentine motion in which provision was made for the inclusion of these five members, specifically asked the United Kingdom and United States delegates whether they believed their country should be represented on the Committee. The United Kingdom delegate, in one of his very rare interventions in the debate, stated that, as a good member of the United Nations, the United Kingdom Government would not refuse to serve on the Committee if asked. But he reminded the Committee that his Government might in that case find itself at .times in the witness stand, and later on the jury, and it would find this a somewhat embarrassing and difficult position. The United States delegate, in his reply, said that his fear was that opposing views in debate among the permanent members of the Security Council, if they were on the Committee of Inquiry, would cause delay by the intrusion of other interests which were, perfectly obvious here, and which were constantly arising on mere detail. He believed that the probability of arriving at an immediate decision would be greatly enhanced by having that Committee set up as nearly free as possible from those strong adverse interests which they constantly ran into when permanent members participate in a decision. They recognized their responsibility and would face it, but it would come at the right time, which would be after this preliminary investigation and in the reviewing of the facts. The Soviet delegate (Mr Gromyko), on the other hand, strongly urged that the permanent members of the Security Council should be members of the Committee of Inquiry for two principal reasons —firstly, he believed that they had in this matter a responsibility which they could not avoid, and that it was their duty to accept that responsibility and take part in the proceedings of the Committee from its inception ; secondly, he urged that no settlement of the Palestine question would be satisfactory, or indeed possible, unless it was supported by agreement among the five permanent members. During this debate the Chairman announced that he had received a telegram from the Palestine Arab delegation indicating that the Arab Higher Committee would be glad to appear before the First Committee. At this stage in the debate the Committee had before it not only the three resolutions from the Argentine, United States, and El Salvador, but also many suggestions for amendment submitted by other members. The Chairman pointed out that there was not a great deal of difference among these proposals, and suggested the appointment of a subcommittee which might endeavour to redraft the proposal, and the following members were appointed: Argentine, Australia, China, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, El Salvador, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the U.S.S.R. The Chairman was added to the Committee at the request of several members. At the next meeting the Chairman of a sub-committee which had been appointed to consider the communications from non-governmental