5 UN Council Members — Including U.s., Britain — Would Abstain on El Aksa Measure

Five members of the Security Council let it be known in advance of this afternoon’s meeting that they would abstain from voting on the Pakistan resolution which called for Israel to abrogate all measures and actions it had taken “to alter the status of Jerusalem” and reaffirmed “the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible.” The resolution also condemned Israel for failure to comply with previous Security Council resolutions opposing the integration of East Jerusalem and called for a Security Council meeting to consider further action if Israel continued in its refusal to obey these resolutions.

The five countries who disclosed in advance that they would abstain from voting on this resolution were the United States, Great Britain, Finland, Paraguay and Colombia. France and China were reported to be undecided.

The American position was spelled out Monday morning by Ambassador Charles W. Yost. He stressed that “we have seen no shred of evidence to support the allegation that the act of suspected arson which occurred at the Haram-as-Sharif on Aug. 21 was other than an individual act, as demented as it was dastardly.” He said it would be most unfortunate “if the international community, which itself shares a deep interest in Jerusalem’s shrines, were diverted from formulating a positive response to the present situation by incitements or allegations in support of other objectives. This Council cannot lend itself to such incitements or allegations.” Mr. Yost expressed approval of the Israeli measures to investigate the fire and its agreement to admit Moslem experts in connection with repairs.

Mr. Yost told the Council that “we do not consider that it is appropriate or desirable so soon again to reexamine and pronounce upon the status of Jerusalem or to link the deplorable fire in El Aksa to the whole tragic Arab- Israeli conflict.” He said that the resolution before the Council should have concerned itself “directly and exclusively with measures for the maintenance, repair and protection of the Holy Places, including provision for adequate participation of Moslem representatives, but not one which again went over the ground covered during our debate last July.”

AMBASSADOR TEKOAH VOICES HOPE FOR ACTION THAT WOULD UNIFY, NOT DIVIDE

Ambassador Yosef Tekoah of Israel appealed to members of the Council “not to end the deliberations” on a note that would add to the controversies of the Middle East. Our region has enough hostility. It does

He said that the draft resolution “is not conceived in that spirit. There is no reason whatever to reiterate at this stage known but strongly contested views. It is what unites we must seek and not that which separates us. The resolution would exacerbate the conflict without introducing a single constructive element, a single impulse toward understanding and cooperation this on a matter on which understanding is possible and cooperation sorely needed. The eyes of the world are again upon the Security Council, in hope, in expectation that perhaps this time it would find it possible to give encouragement to those who do not want to fan the flames.”

Speaking for the Soviet Union, Ambassador Yakov A. Malik gave full support to the Pakistan draft resolution and demanded Israel’s “unconditional and immediate compliance” with its terms. He said the Security Council must state that Israel had moral and political responsibility for the El Aksa fire. The Soviet Union, he said, would have preferred a stronger and even more direct resolution.