CEIRPP meeting – Summary record




Held at Headquarters, New York,

on Tuesday, 21 August 1979 at 10.30 a.m.

Chairman:  Mr. FALL (Senegal)


Other matters










* No summary record was prepared for the rest of the meeting.




     This record is subject to correction.


     Corrections should be submitted in one of the working languages.  They should  be set forth in a memorandum and also incorporated in a copy of the record.  They  should be sent

within one week of the date of this document to the Chief, Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services, room A-3550.


     Any corrections to the record of this meeting and of other meetings will be issued in a corrigendum.


The meeting was called to order at 11 a.m. 





1. The CHAIRMAN announced that the representative of Afghanistan had left New York in order to take up other duties and that the Committee would therefore have to elect a new Vice-Chairman at its following meeting.


2. With regard to what had been termed the resignation of Mr. Young, Ambassador of the United States to the United Nations, he wished to dispel a number of misunderstandings.  The fact that the Permanent Representative of the United States had apparently contacted the Observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization seemed, in the view of some, to be a capital sin requiring that he should leave the United Nations.  However, the representative of the United States had made that contact just before taking up his duties as President of the Security Council for the current month.  It was common knowledge that the United States had taken steps once again to postpone the debate in the Security Council that was to take place on 23 August 1979.  It had been during talks concerning the Security Council debate scheduled for 30 July that it had been decided that that debate should be postponed until 23 August.  During those talks a United States ambassador, a colleague of Mr. Young, had contacted him (the Chairman) in his capacity as Chairman of the Committee.  He wondered, since the United States had never recognized the Committee, why there had been no such strong reaction in response to that contact, which fell within the context of the United States policy to request a postponement of the meeting.  The United States did not wish that meeting to take place, and that was the context in which the action taken by the representative of the United States should be viewed.  His contact with the Observer for the PLO had taken place on 26 July.  Since the representative of the United States was to preside over the Security Council meeting on the question of Palestine that his Government wished to have postponed, the least he could do was to contact the parties concerned; it appeared that the party most closely concerned in the question of Palestine was the Observer for the PLO.  The future President of the Security Council could therefore not be criticized for having contacted the observer in question and it must be made clear that the representative of the United States and the Observer for the PLO had not been engaging in any plots.  The actions they had undertaken had been in the context of United States policy.  Once the United Nations had been officially informed of the departure of the Permanent Representative of the United States the Committee would meet to discuss that important question.


3. If he heard no objection, he would take it that the Committee wished to invite the representative of Kuwait to participate in the rest of the meeting as an observer.


4. It was so decided. 



The discussion covered in the summary record ended at 11.15 a.m.


Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Go to Top