U.N. Gives Egypt Chance to Release “bat Galim”; Adjourns Debate

The United Nations Security Council today, in effect, gave Egypt one more opportunity to release the Israel freighter Bat Galim, which had already been ordered released by the Israel-Egyptian Mixed Armistice Commission.

After a two-and-one-half hour session during which exhaustive presentations of argument were voiced by Abba Eban for Israel and Omar Loutfi for Egypt, the Council adjourned subject to recall “as soon as justified.” It was understood here that at least two of the big powers–the United States and Britain–are bringing pressure to bear upon Egypt for release of the vessel at the very earliest time.

Mr. Eban opened the discussion of today’s Council meeting by reviewing not only the Bat Galim case–which originated September 28 when the ship was seized at the entrance to the Suez Canal–but also Israel’s entire case against Egypt’s blockade of the waterway. Mr. Eban pointed out to the Council that not only the MAC, but also a special committee under the UN truce supervision machinery, to which Egypt had appealed, has ruled in favor of Israel.

EBAN INSISTS ON FREEDOM OF PASSAGE OF ISRAEL SHIPS VIA SUEZ

The Israel representative noted that Israel has always carried out UN decisions at no matter what the cost. He appealed to the Council to get Egypt, in turn, to carry out UN decisions, not only by liberating the Bat Galim, its crew and cargo, but by permitting the ship to complete its passage through the Canal to Haifa–thus demonstrating its readiness to observe the United Nations resolution of 1951 on freedom of passage through the Canal for all shipping.

Mr. Loutfi spoke for a full hour–as long as Mr. Eban–but confined most of his arguments to his country’s insistence that a state of war still exists between Israel and Egypt, and that therefore Egypt is justified in halting Israel shipping through the Canal, He declared that if Egypt allowed Israel shipping to pass through the Canal, Israel might scuttle its own ships, lay mines in the Canal, attack Egyptian territory, damage the Canal or commit sabotage.

Sir Pierson Dixon, British delegate, made a statement which was considered important by a number of delegates. Sir Pier son answered all of Egypt’s arguments about Egypt’s alleged right to stop Israel shipping, by re-affirming very clearly Britain’s adherence to the principles of the Security Council’s 1951 resolution. That resolution makes no distinction between Israel-owned shipping and any other shipping, but merely clarifies the right of all shipping to freedom of passage in the Suez Canal. Sir Pierson then suggested that the meeting adjourn subject to the call of the Council president, if and when such a call is justified by events.