S/PV.1089 Security Council

In the firet naraarronh of his stntomcnt nt ihe lnst meeting, two cïaysagi, the Eduontion Ministar of Indin uttered tho ndmonition chat the Seourity Counoil 1s not intended ns R platform for propnp;anda agninst any Member Stnte. The membars of lhe Coluioil will have hnd time to study the otatamont of the representative of India and to judge in whnt mnnner he followed hic own diotum. 6. Then Pakistan was aooused of being a theooratio State while India, whioh has witnessed 660 oommunal riots sinoe it beoame independent, Is a seoular Rate. India, the representative of India said, has a modern, rational and eeoular attitude while Pakistan is reaotionary. Pakietan’s philooophy, aooording to him, 1s that in the very nature of things, Muslims mruet hate the Iiindus and the Hindus must hatethe Muslims. Paklstan’s polioy is bassd on oommunal hatrsd and fanatioism and the Pakistan Government, he stated, @deliberately and for set purpoee oreated an atmosphere SO that riota should brsak out in Eset Pakistan” (1036th meeting, para. 6D]. Then turningfromaoouser tu Judse. he delivered ludsement. sayinn that “the P&i&n. Qovernment o&oi be atisohsd-of its reswnsibflih, for ths deatb of tbsrs innooent IBORW (ii>id.]. Hé statsd that ths rsal rsason why &ld&an was insisting on a plebisoite was; n , , , to try and see whether It oannot inflame oommunal paseions in Kashmir by msking the inhabitants of that State believe that their religion is in danger, and bring about ths reourrenoe of the terrible events of tbe partition of India in 1947: blood-shed, migrations, untold humsn miaery~ [1033th meeting, para, 333. 3. Then again, Pakistan was, in theview of the repressntativs of India, “playing the Chinese game of weakening India internally and undermining its defnnoe agaG& ChIna* [ib-g, para, S] in or&% to prsv0nt India from fulfilling its self-appointsd role of eaving the whole world from China. ‘ï’he Permanent Repr& ssntatlve of India bad promised on tbe eve of the meetinp of tbe Seourity Counoil that there would be a good deal of mud-t&wing at tbis meeting. Msmbers will agres tbat the Minister of Eduoation of India bas net diéappointed the expectations of hle Permanent Repressntative. 1 rsjeot, with all tbe emphasis at my oommond, the false and absurb oharges that he bas hurled against my Qovernment. 7. On Karhmir ltself, what the repressntaUvc> of India had to say was net nsw. Membere who heve studied the oase will bs familiar wlth a11 hil arguments on Pakistan~s alleged aggression, the Ibsolute right of the despotlo Maharnjah to sign away the righte of the people of Kashmlr, the noquisition by India of the lmperial mantle of paramountoy, trie three eleotlons held in Kashmir under the survelllanoe of tho four Indian dlvlsions station& there. These arguments are as oontradlotory as the~v are unoonvinoing. 1 must nevertheless, for the reoord, oorreot the miestatements nnd distortiona w!th whloh the representntive of Indin has sought to virlote «le simple issue of aelf-dcrtermlnatfon tnvolved in the Kashmir dispute. But before 1 do BO, mayl be permitted to deal brlefly wlth the grave aoousntlono nnd ohnrges levelled 6. E!nsuite, il a aocus6 le Pakistan d’6tre un Etat th6ooratique, alors que l’Inde, oh pourtant plus de 660 oonflits ont 6olat6 entre oommunaut6s depuis l’ind6pendanoe, serait un Etat laitlue. L’Inde, a-t-11 dit, a des oonoessions modernes, rationnelles et laltlues, tandis que le Pakistan est r6aotionnalre. Selon lui, la philosophie du Pakistan est qu’il est dans la nature m6me des choses que les musulmans haibsent les hindous et que les hindous haibsent les musulmans. La politique du Pakistan reposerait sur la haine et le fanatisme religieux et, a-t-il ajout61 nD61ib6r6ment et dans un but pr6ois, le Qouvernement pakiotanais a or66 une atmosph8re propioe aux troubles qui devaient 6olater au Pakistan orisntal.” [lOWme s6anoe, par, 60.1 Puis, d’aoousateur se faisant juge, il a d6alar6 qus “la responsabilit6 du Gouvernement pakistanais dans le meurtre de oes innooents demeurait entii3reN W.]. Il a ensuite ajout6 que la v4ritable raison pour laquelle le Pakistan insistait sur l’organisation d’un pl6bisoit.s 6tait qu’il se demsndsit Wil ns pourrait pas snflammer les passions des oommunaut6s du Caohemire en faisant oroire aux habitants que leur religion est en danger, et provoquer ainsi le retour des terribles BvBnements qui ont marqu6 le partage de l’Inde en 1947: effusions de sang, migrations et souffrances lndioibles” [10386me 86anoe, par. 331. 6. Le repr6sentant de l’Inde a aoous6 Bgalement le Pakietan de faire “le jeu des Chinois en affaiblissant l’Inde sur le plan int6rieur et en sauant ses d6fsnses 6 1’6gard de ia Chine” w., par.-31, en vue d’emp6aher l’Inde de remplir le rble @elle s’est ellem6me assign6, 6 savoir sauver de -h Chine le monde tout entier. Le reprbrentant permanent de Nnde avait promis, la veille de la r6union du Conseil de s0ourft6, que Ier oalomnies pleuvraient. Les membres du Conseil oonviendront avso moi que le Ministre de IWuoation de l’Inde a tout fait pour donner raisan au repr6sentant permanent de son pays. Je rejette de toutes mes foroes les aoousations rldioules et msnsong6rss qu‘il a lsno6es oontre mon gouvernement. 7. Sur le Caohemire lui-meme, oe que le repr6- sentant de Nnde a eu A dire n’6tait point neuve-au. Les membres du Conseil qui ont BM16 la questiaa oonnaiseent bien tous ses arguments touohant Vagression pr0tendument oommise par le Pakistan, le droit absolu du Maharajah despotique de renonoer aux droits dee populations du Caobemlre, l’aoquisitionpar l’Inde du manteau imp&ial de In sueerainet6 et les trois Bleotions qui 88 sont d8roul6es au Cnohemire sous le oontr8le des quatre divisions indiennes qui s’y lrouvnient !&tionnBes. Tous oes argumente sont nussi oontradlotoires que peu oonvninoante. Je dols n6anmolns, pour l’amour de la v6rlt6, reotlfier les erreurs et les inexootltudes griloe auxquelles 10 repr43sentant de l’Inde n oheroh6 fi jeter In confusion et A dhnaturer la ques9lon pourtant simple qui 80 8. The Eduoation Minieterof India saidc a,, , if we are left to ourselves we will have no oommunal trouble whataoever’ [1099th meeting, para, l3Bl. How doea b reoonoile this statement with the faot that einoe ihe Minorities Agreement oonoluded between the Prime Mini&ers *1 Pakistan and India in April 1950, tbere bave been more than 6130 riots inIndia?I.n faot, bardly a Muslim festival has paeeed in India ainoe 1960 without the Muslim oommunity being eubjeoted to attaoka of oommunal freney in one part of India or another. In oontrast, there bas been oomplete communal peaoe in Pakistan, but for two or three riote, until tbe reoent disturbanoes broke out. In Mamh 1961, aoores of Muslfms were killed in Jubbulpore andthe Chief Minieter of Madhya Pradeeh was reported to bave said tbat the oity %oked like a oremation ground”. Was net India being left to itself tben? 10. In Ootober 1961, the Home Miniater of the State of Uttar Pradeeh admitted that behind the then ourrent anti-Muslim riote, there wa6 a wide and deep-lald oonapiraoy. He deolared: “It oan go on reoord tbat a oommon pattern le disoernlble behind a11 theee incidente. Murders were oommitted in individual knife attaoke by youngpeople ooming from the eeotlon of our sooiety whosemembere would faint at tbe eight of blood.” He went on to rayr “Thia ehowed tbat these people have reoeived training in the art of killing. One would not be surprlsed, aa days pries, if oommunnl inoidents fnorense in number and in intensity.” Did thls Indian officia1 sny thnt Pakistan was training these murderers? Could he say that Pakistan waB behind the deep oonspiraoy? W& Pakistan inoiring the Hindus of Indla to kil1 Muslims? Was net thon India being left to itself? 11. Speaking in the Indien Pnrliament, Mr. Syad Bodrudduja, n veteran of the Indian stru 7 le for independonce, expressed the agony thnt the In ian Muelims Continuing, this member of the Indian Parliament aaidr Y&u~sulmans ha% been pureued to the bitter end. They have been tortured with every refinement of oruelty and barbarous eavaagery. In malignity, in oruelty, in savagery, in oriminality, the reoords of Jubbulpore and Malda surpaes any reoords during the Britieh r6gime.n Thia systematio massaore of Muslims follcwed a pattern whioh was particularly notioeable during the reoent riots, when the attaoks were aimed at driving the Muslime out of West Bengal, foroing them to seek ehelter in East Pakietan. Although a large number of men, women and ohildren were killed, the emphasis wa8 on eetting fire to their houses, looting and destroying their shops and industrial establishments so as to deprive them, at onoe, of thoir shelter and their meane of livelihood, The faot that there have sinoe been open demands by militant Hindu organisations for a population ex&ange tends to support my Government’e fear that the real intention of those responsible for the riots 1s to drive the Muslims out of West Bengal into East Pakistan. 12. Tbe repressntative of India aooused Pakistan of having iaofted the reoent riota, Ido not wish to harrow the Counoll with a reoital of the blood-ourdling headlia06 and rep~rtu oarried la tha Iadian West Bengal Prerr on the regrettable inoidants whioh ooourred in Khulna agd Jesaore. Let us turn instead to the teetimony of impartial, foreign observera. As regard8 the reoeat riota in Calautta, here le a report fmm Caloutta by James Mitohell, correspondent of me Observer of London, publisbed on 26 January : V+%ile rioters made no great ssoret of their plans, tbe polioe force in the fi& days seemed always to be everywhers exoept in the streeta attaoked.” Iie blames what he oalls “the blaok week of Caloutta” on rpolioe laxity” and rays that the authorities “lot the sltuation pt oompletely out of hand” and that the result was that about 600 people were kllled. Aooording to tbis report, tens of thousands lest their homes bsoause, aftor the riots stnrtod, interestedpoople paidbigsums of money to keep them up, 80 that landlords would olear their Innd of poor tannnts. Did Pakistan inspire this oold-blooded design? 13. We hear a great deal about the seculnr outlook in Indfu. A Calcuttn daily, the New A_ge, of 19 Janunry 1964 snid: “Les musulmans ont et6 atrooement pers6out43s. Ils ont 6t6 tortur6s avea une oruaut6 raffine0 et une sauvagerie barbare, Ce qui s’est pas86 P Jubbulpore et B Malda depasse en m6ohanoet6, en oruaut6, en sauvngerie, en horreur tout oe qui a pu se produire sous le r6gime britannique.” Ce massaore syst6matique des *musulmans ressemblait fort aux r6oents d6sordres oll les attaques tendaient visiblement B ohasser les musulmans duBengale oooidental pour les forcer B oheroher refuge au Pakistan oriental, On a tu& il estvrai, un grand nombro d’hommes, de femmes et d’enfants, mai8 on a surtout oheroh6 A mettre le feu A leurs maieons et A piller et A d6truire leurs boutiques ainsi que leurs Btablissementa industriels, pour les priver du marne OOUD de leur abri et de ieürs moyens d’existenoe. Le-iait que des organisations militantes hindoues soient intervenues ouvertement depuis en faveur d’un Bohange de populations tend A justifier les appr6hensions de mon gouvernement, qui oraint que l’intention v6ritable des fauteurs de troubles ne soit de ohaseer les musulmans du Bengale oooidental vers le Pakistanoriental. 12. Le repr6sentant de l’Inde a aoous6 le Pakistan d’avoir provoqu6 les troubles r6oents. Je ne voudrais pas abuser de la patienoe du Conseil en donnant leoture des manohettes sensati&nelles et des r6oits @ouvantables qu’on a pu lire dans la presse indienne du Bengale-oooide&l A propos des iniidents regrettablea qui se sont produits B Khulna et A Jessore. Prenons filut& oonnaissanoe des t6moignages d’observateur8 6trnngern impartiaux. Au sujet des troubles r6oents qui ont Bolat6 B Caloutta, vol01 oe que dit James Mitohell, oorrespondant dans oette ville de l’Observer de Londres, dans ~II artiole publi6 le 26 janvier. “Bien que les fauteurs de troubles n’aient pas fait grand secret de leurs plans, la polioe semblait Btre partout, les premiers jours, sauf dans les rues 0Q se produisaient les attaques.” Ce journaliste oondamne oe qu’il appelle “la semaine noire de Calcutta” et la “mollesse de la polioe”: il ajoute que les autorit6s ont “lai& la situation Bohap per entibrement A leur oontrble” et que oela a oodt6 la vie A pr6s de 600 personnes. Selon oet article, des dizaines de milliers de personnes se sont trouv6es sans abri, du fnit que dBs le d6butdes desordres oortains 616ments i:lt8ress6s ont vers6 de fortes sommes pour que les troubles continuent afin que les propri6- taires puissent se dbbnrrnsser de leurs locntairerr pauvres. Le Pakistan n-t-il inspir6 cette aotion impitoyable’? 13. On pnrle beauooup des conoessions lnl’quos de l’Inde. Mais vo101 oo que disait le Nsw Age, un quotidien de Cnlcuttn, dans son num6ro du 19 janvier 1964: rle oorrespondatk de mes oontredit lea obiffres sxag0rsment grossis qui avaient Bts donnse. Je rsgrette que le Mindstre do 1’6duuation de YInde ait su rsooura fi des informations non vgrifisss qui, il aurait dtl le savoir, avaisnt B# dsmonties. Ls Haut Commissariat du Pakistan a Nsw Delhi a imm&liate+ ment publi8 un dgmenti, le 34 janvier. En publiant A la lgg&re des nouvelles aussi fausses et aussi provsoantee, le8 organes d’information du Gouvernement indien as eont attlr6 de8 oritiques bien m8ritees du Ta de Londres Ls oorrospsndant de oe journal g Delhi gorivait, le 33 janvier: “Que le Gouvernement indien souhaite sWeusement d6oouragsr la diffusion do nouvelles tcuossnt les violents oonflîte entre oommunaut4s au Pakistan, on peut en douter aujourdchui sprss avoir oonstats la plaoe faite par A11 India Radio au oommuniqus du oorrespondant de l’agsnoe Rsuter B Daooa. Ce oommuniqug a Btg lu tout au dgbut du journal par18 de midi et il Btait enoors mis sn vedette dans les bulletin6 de la eoir&s. Al1 India Radio est snti&remsnt B la solde du gouvernsmsnt et la publioitg donnse B 08 oommuniqus laisse B penser que Delhi ns oraint pas le6 risques de rgpsrouseions au Bengale oooidental autant qu’slle le sevrait, oompte tenu des bvsnemsnts rgoentsa 15. Mon gouvernement est fermement oonvainou que la paix et la essurit entre oommunautbe set la oondition premi&re de touts vie oivilisge. Mon muvernement a mobilieg toutes ses rossouroe6 poÜr avoir le plein oontrde ds la situation au Pakistan. Si l’ai paris aussi longuement de oette question, oe n’est pas seulement pour rsfuter les fausses all6gations de l’Inde, mais aussi pour faire ressortir un fait fondamental, a savoir que :e refus de rsoonnaftre au psuple de PEtat de Jammu et Caohomire le droit A l’autodstsrmination est une souroe constante de tension et ompoiaonne les relations entre l’Inde et le Pakistan. Ce diffsrsnd, qui no ossso de s~snvsnimer, a sntraih6 p&riodiquement dos attaques brutales oantre la minorite musulmane depuis qus l’Inde a aoo&ls Il Plndb psndanoe sn 1947. 16. C’est cette attitude du Gouvernement indien qui a or86 au Caohemire et dans oertaines parties de l’Inde le olimat de haine sur l.equel j’ai appel8 votre attention dans ma lettre du 16 jnnvier 1964 [S/GS17-/], dont voioi un extrait: *C’est oe olimat. dans lequel les droits politiques, religieux et oulturels du peuple de 1’Etat sont trnitss nveo mepris par les gouvernants indiens, qui Vi%e Indian GovsrnmenVs seriousness in dieoouraging oirsulation of news about oommunal violenoe in Pakistan was prit intd doubt today by All- India Radio% treatment of the Reuters oorrsspondent’5 report from Daooa. The midday nsws broadaasts made Wat rspsrt tbsir first item and it still figured prominently in bulletins later tsnight. All- India Radio is a oompletely aubaervient agnt of the Gsvsrnment and its trsatment of the report muet suggsat that Delhi is not as apprshensive about tbs dangsrs of repsroussions in Weet Bengal a0 its rsoent expsrienoe should bave made it.” 16, My Government firmly bslisves that oommunal peaoe and ssourity is an essential oonditionof olvilieed life. My Government mobilized a11 its rssouroea ta bring tbs situation undsr oomnlets oontrol in Pakistan. 1 haa to go into this qusstionat some length, not only ta dispmve the false allsgations made by India, but to emphasiee one oentral faot: It le that ths denial of the right of self-detsrmination to the wople of Jammu and Küshmir is a oonstant souros of tension, Xt. is embittering the relations bstween India and Palcistan, As a result of this fostering dispute, rsourring brutal attaoks on tbo Muslim minority bave bsen taklngplaoe in huila ever sinoe lb indspendenoe in 1947. 1G. It la this attitude of ths Govsrnment of Indin whioh has oreated a vioious olimate in Kashmir and in oartain parts of India, to whioh 1 invited your attention in my letter of 16 January 1964 [S/6517)~ from wliioh 1 quote: sIt is tbis olimate, in whioh thepslitioal, religious and oultural rights of the psople of the State are treated with soorn by thoir Indian rulers, that has .!/ OffIdi Record~ of tho SOC&~ Councll, Nlne~centh Yoar, Supplomeut for Janwy, Febrwy and hbrch 1964. A/ DocumenIs offlclels du Coneell do S&~U-116, dix-neuvldme antic, Supplbment de jenviw, 1Bvrler et mare 1964. It fa thie same olimate whioh enoourases militant organieations in India to launoh frequen‘t oommunal attaoks and outragea on the Muslims andoallfor their expulsion from India in exohange for the liindu minority in Pakistan, It is thie dlsregard of human rights whioh le the root oause of the existinn unheaval in Kashmir and of the grave oommunal te&& in Weat Bengal. It a11 flows frofn the faot that the Kashmir dispute has been allowed to fester for eixteen years. 17. Wbile speaking about the eviotlon of Indian Muslima from Tripura, Aesam and the border distriots of West Bensal. the Eduoation Minister of Indla took shelter behid a massive array of oensus figures, IIe named the dietriots of Noakbali, Comilla, Sylhet and Bakarganj, where tbe relatively slow growthof population le attrlbuted to the migration of Muslim population to India. Cf these, Bakarganj has no oommon border with any part of India and oan have no relsvanoe to the issue. 18. It ie interesting to note that only three border distriots were named by the representative of India, whereae Mymensingh, Bangpur; Dinajpur, Hajshahi, Kushtia sud others 81‘8 alao border dietrlote, but h6 oarefully left them out. The reasons are not faf to ssek. The Weet Bengal dietriote in whioh a relatively bigh inorsaee of Muslim population was shown by him are not oontiguous to the Pakistan dietriots where a slow rate of inorease of Muslim population was reoorded. Obvlously, therefore, there oan be no possible oonnexlon between these trends of population growth. It 1s possible to refute the arguments tbat he hae advanoed by quoting exteneively from the oeneus reports of India and Pakistan to prove that the oase he wants to establieh is baeed merely on a fugglery of figures. Even without going into a detailed examinatien of the oensus reports, one oan draw oertain obvious oonolusions from oommon sense. 19. A eystem of passports and visas was introduoed in 1962 to regulate oompreheneively the movemente of Indlans and Pakistanla aoross the border, The Indian authorities introduoed a strict system of border oheokpointa to prevent the entry of non-Indiana through unauthorited routes into Indian territory. These restrictive mea6ures rerulted in almost oomplete stoppage of entry to Assam, Tripura and West Bengal. 20. Aoart from these restrictions. one hno to remember the oommunnl feelinga and tensions existing at the time of partition of the India-Pakistan sub-oontinent to nppreointe the improbability of large-soole Musliin migration from Pakistan to India. Witb memorieo of inoredible sufferings, of losh of human lives and destruotlon of property, it is inaonoeivable tbnt hundreds of tbousands of Muslims, as alleged by India, woulcl surrender the safety and seourity of their homeland in Pakistan to migrnte with their women and ohtldren 17, A propos de l’expulsion des musulmans indiens du Tripura, de PAssam et des distriots frontaliers du Bengale oooidental, le Ministre de 1’6duoation de l’Inde s’est abrite derriere un amas de ohiffres tires de reoensements. Il a cite les distriots de Noakhali, Comilla, Sylhet et Bakarganj, oQ le rythme relativement lent de l’aooroiseement demographique est imput6’ a la migration de la population musulmane vers l’Inde. Parmi oes distriots, oelui de Bakarganj n’est, en auoun point, limitrophe de l’Inde, si bien qu’il ne saurait avoir de rapport aveo la questlon. 18. Il est interessant de noter que le representant de l’Inde n’a parle que de trois distriots frontaliers, sans oiter oeux de Mymeneingh, Rangpur, Dinajpur, Bajshahi, Kushtia et d’autres enoore, qui sont pourtant egalement limitrophes de l’Inde. Les raisons de oette omission sont faoiles B deviner. Les dietriots du Bengale oooidental ou il a signale une augmentation relativement Blevee de la population musulmane ne sont pas oontigus aux regions du Pakistan oD. l’on a releve un faible taux d’aooroissement de la populntion musulmane. Dans oes oonditions, il ne peut Bvidemment y avoir auoun rapport entre oes deux tendanoes demographiques. Il est possible de r6futer les arguments de l’Inde en oitant de larges extraits des rapports sur les recensements effeotues en Inde et au Pakistan et de prouver ainsi que le dossier qu’il veut etablir ne repose que sur des chiffres fantaisistes. MBme sans entrer dans l’examen detaille desdite rapports, le bon sens permet de tirer oertainee oonolueions Bvi.dentes. 19. Un systame de passeports et de visas a Bte introduit en 1902 pour reglementer, dans tous ses aspeotn, le passage des Indiens et des Pakistanais B la frontiere. Les autorites indiennes ont mis en place un dense reseau de pstes-frontiere pour emp8oher Ventr&e, par des routes interdites, de non- Indiens en territoire indien. A la suitede oes mesures restrictives, il n’y a wur ainsi dire plu8 eu d’entrees illegalas en Assam, au Tripura ni au Bengale ocoidental. 20. Mais, incl6pex~dumment de ces mesures, il suffit de SQ rappeler les dissensions et les tensions qui existaient entre les deux communnut6s au moment du partage de l’Inde et du Pakistan pour oomprendra que toute migration en masse de muf3ulmans du Pnkistnn vers l’Inde Otait improbable, Il est inoonoevnble qu’aveo le souvenir des souffrnnoes indioibles qui leur ont 616 inflig6ee, des pertes en vies humaines et en bien6 auxquelles ils ont nssiat6, des centnines de milliers de musulmane puiesent renoncer, comme 21. But let us not get involved in a pedantio oontroversy, for we deal here not with oold statistios but with human tragedy. Tbe faot of the matter is that hundreds and thousands of innooent men, women and ohildren have been driven aoross the border as part of a premeditated and oold-blooded plot to get rid of Muslim oitizens from Indian territory bordering on East Pakistan, The speoinl oorrespondent of The Times of London in hic dispatoh of 6 Deoember 1963 oarried a vivid eye-witness aooount of his experienoe: “In oamps and oompounda in the Comilla distriot of Pakistan there are thoueands of Muslims who have bsen foroibly evioted from their homes in India and driven into East Pakistan, The pretext for the eviotion is that these people had illegally entered the Indian territory of Tripura ., , and that they have now eimply been sent baok: but the evideno available from them shows that most were long settled in Tripura, even for generations,’ Continuing, he said: “But the long-settled Muslims who are expelled oome into East Pakistan as broken refuzees with nowhere to turn, and the Covernmen. here now has about 47,000 on its hands. ‘Che eviotions bezan in the middle of last year and oontinued at a rate of hundreds eaoh week, the flow being augmented now by tbose Muzlims who flee from the inimioal olimate apparently oreated in Tripura by the mass eviotions. Wutting it at its best, the eetabllshed residents of Tripura, Indian oitizenz by right, who have beenuprooted and dumped over the border with no formalities, or only the sketohieet, are the viotims of looal authortties in that territory whose exoesses are not fully appreoiated in Delhi. They may be aoting in responae to looal forces of oommunal enmity and greed for land, but they are aoting with lnfustioe and inhumanity.a 22. The speoial oorrespondent of m ‘l’imap went on to ezy: Wome rsoeived ‘Show oauze’ notioea warnfngthem that they would be expelled unless they oould prove that they bnd been in Indinbefore 1962. They say tbat they went to oourt witb their papere nnd were told thnt the Magistrat0 would moka furtber investigations-but thnt a day or two later tbe police and lorries came to their villaps and they were EL. sad in and driven to the border, Cthers received no notioes nor warning before the polloe vehicles arrived. Yome of tbeir papera were kept by the court or destroyed by tbe polioe who expelled tb0m . . . .a 21. Ne nour laissons oependant pas entrafber dans une controverse p5dante, oar nous traitons ioi non de froides stAstiques, mais d’une trag5dio humaine. Ce qu’il faut oomprendre, o’est que des oentsines et des milliers d’lnnooents, hommes, femmes et enfants, ont Gtd refoul5s de l’autre obt5 de la’frontiare B la suite d’un oomplot pr5m5dit5 de sangfroid pour BO d5barrasser des musulmans dans les parties du territoire indien contiguës au Pakistan oriental. Un t0moin ooulaire, oorréspondant sp5oial du Tfmes de Londres, a fait le r5oit suivant, dans Ba d5pOohe du 6 d5oembre 1963: aDans des oampe et autres enoeintes du distriot de Comilla, au Pakistan, se trouvent des milliers de musulmans qui ont 5t5 expuls5e par la foroe ds leurs foyers on Inde et refoul5e vers le Pakistan oriental. Et oela, sous pr5texto qu’ils 5tsient ettr5B ill5galement dans le territoire indien duTripura , , , et qu’ils devaient 5tre renvoy5s ohez eux; or, lee t5moignages qui ont pu Otre reoueillis prouvent que la plupart d’entre eux vivaient depuis longtemps au Tripura, oertains marne depuis des g5nBrations.” Ll a ajout5: “Mais les musulmans qui 5taient 5tablie de longue date dans oette r5gion et qui en ont 5t5 ohass5s arrivent au Pakistan oriental sans le sou et sans personne 5 qui s’adresser; le gouvernement en a maintenant quelque 47 000 sur les bras. Les expulsions ont oommeno4 vers le milieu de l’ann5e derniere et se sont poursuiviea au rythme de plusieurs oentaines par semaine; l’exode s’est aooru du fait que des musulmans fuient d’eux-m6mes fl oauae du climat hostile qu’ont or55 su Tripure les expulsions massives. “En mettant les ohoees au mieux, on peut dire que les r5sidents du Tripura, oitoyens indiens de druit qui ont 5t5 d5raoin5s et refet5s de l’autre o6t5 de la fronti5re sans auoune formalit ou presque, sont les vlotimes des autoritds looales de oe territoire, qui oommettent des abus dont Delhi ne se rend pas bien oompte. II se peut qu’elles ob5issent B des forces looales de haine re!igieuse et de oonvoltlse pour les terres, mais elles agissent de façon injuste et inhumaine.” 22. Le oorreepondant sp5oial du BCertains avaient 5t5 *averti@ qu’ils aerai.snt expds5s B moins qu’ils ne puissent Trouver qu’il0 Btnient Btablis en Inde avant 1962. Ils ont d5olarb qu’ils s’étaient pr5s0nt5s devant le tribunal uv00 leurs papiers et qu’ils avniant reçu l~assuruno0 qua le juge proobderait II de nouvelles enqu&eB; mais un ou deux jours plus tard, la polloa fit irruption dana 10~s villages AVOO des oamions dans lesquels on les fit monter de for00 pour les oondulro d0 l’autre oOt6 de la frontibre. D’autr0s n’avnient reçu ni avis ni avertissemant avout l’arriv5e deB voiture0 de polioe. Certnins de leurs papiars ont 5t5 gardbs par le0 trlbunnux ou d5truits par la polioe, qui les u ohaBB6s , , ,II 24. That is what an impartial observer of a leading British newspaper has to say abcut the brutal and inhuman methods adopted for the mass eviction of Indian Muslims from Assam, Tripura and West Bengal. The President of the Hindu Mahasabha, Mr. V. Q. Deshpande, declarsd on 15 January 1964 that an exchange of population on Government level was the only way tc ensure the safety of minorities in India and Pakis- . tan. He said: RTheyn-the Hindus-wmust be brought to India and the Muslim population in Assam and West Bengal must be sent to East Pakistan’. An exohange of population was demanded in public meetings and newspaper editorials in many parts of India. Al1 these point towards one conolusion. namely. that there is a move tc expel Indian Muslimsby illegai and inhumnn methods from lndian territory bordering on East Pakistan for no fault of theirs bÜt the faot that they happen to be Muslims. 26, The Eduoation Minister of India claimed that a11 these tens of thousands of Indian Muslims who were forcibly evicted from their hearths and homes and pushed aoross the border into East Pakistan are not Indian national& If that be SO, India shauld have no objection to having the facts verified by an impartial inqutry. 26. Speaking on this matter before the General Assemblv of the United Nations on 3OSeptember 1963, 1 said: - “1 would deolare here before YOU that the question whether thess people are being evioted or whether thev are infiltrators cari be decided by a United Naiions inquiry commission, by an in&natianal inquiry commission., . or by any third-party oommission agreed to by India and Pakistan, Thess are asoertainable facts. It cari Se ascertained by any inquiry oommission whether these unfortunate, help less people driven >y the Indinn bayonet into Pakistan are Indians or Paltistanis.” r/ We stand by this declnration aven now. We rire prepared to have the matter examined by an international commission of inquiry. If India’e hands are clean, a8 it claims, let it corne forward and agree to an inter- 27. The Eduoation Minister of India stated that tbe President of Pakistan refused to issue a joint deolaration with the President of India to our respective peoples appealing for peaoe and harmony and that Pakistan, in effeot, also rejeoted the proposa1 of the Government of India that the Home Ministere of the two oountries should meet and visit the soenes of disturbanoe and euggest what further steps should be taken t0 prevent suoh happenings, 28. 1 have already dealt in my statement of 3 February [108 th meeting] with the subjeot of a joint deolaration by t!l two Presidenta. The Preeident of Pakistan pointed out that he had already appealed to the people of Ptkistan to maintain oommunal peaoe and harmony and ,uhat was really needed waa to take deterrent muasures against oommunal and oriminal elements whioh were responeible for the riots in both the oountries and to re-eetablish oonditions of seourity for the refugees of the minority oommunities to enable them to return to their homes, l’his action my Qovernment for its part took at onoe, and the flames of oonrmunal dieturbanoe were stamped out in my oountry. 29. Pakistan did not rejeot the proposa1 of the Government of India for a meeting betweerr the Home Ministers of the two Governments. We have made a positive and oonstruotive reeponse. This 1s that onoe order hae been restored, the two Ministers oould meet in Rawalpindi in Pakistan or Delhi in India to disouas measures neoessary to enable the refugees from the communal disturbanoes, as well as those who have been evioted by Indio from Assam, Tripura and West Bengal during the last two years, to return to their homes, 30. It is the pollcy of my Qovernment to encourage the refugeee to return to their homes. My mvernment la pledged to ensure the seourity of their lives and property and to restore their oonfidenoe. Thn InaiTn Home Minister% statement of 29 January that conditions in East Pakistan have become suoh as to make the migration of Hindue inevitable and that oonditions for the granting of migration oertifioatee to them in East Pakistan would have tobe eased 1s bound to have an uneettling effect on them and to enoourage their exodus. We regret this statement a11 the more beoauee communal harmony has been fully restored in East Pakistan, My Government is npprehensive that if u new influx of Ilindus into Indi11 tnkes ~JhlX! ns B result of the Indian polioy of faoilitatingmigration, the position of the Muslim m;nority in Enst Bengal, Calcutta and, for thut mntter, in a11 other par+? of India will be further imperilled. 31. The Pakistan High Commissionor in Calcutta was bosiepd dur@ the communal ricts in thnt city by thouznnda of Muslima demnnding emargncy cortlficates to migrnte to East Pakistnn. We did not respond. 32. The representative of India permitted himself to make disparaging remarke about the demooratio institutions of Pakistan, May 1 remind him that eaoh country must fashion its self-governhg institutions aooording to ita own genius. It is not neoessary for me to oite exemples of modem and progressive oountries whioh have found, as a result of their experienoe, that the system of indireot eleotions and eleotoral oolleges best meets their politioal and oonetitutional requ~rement& Pakistan 1s not the only oountry whioh eleots its President and Parliament by an eleotoral oollege. The parliamentary form of government is not the only form of demooratio aovernment. hlany oountries, partioularly those of AËia, Afrioa and Latin Amerioa, and even of Europe and the United States, have found the Presidential .8yetem to be neoessarj to ensure their stability and eoonomio progress. 33. The Eduoatlon Minister of India called Pakistan *a theooratio State‘, May 1 ask him whether we ars governed by a hierarohy of priests? The offioial name of our State ia the Islamio Republio of Pakistan, Does this nomenclature make us a theooraoy? Several Muslim oountriee, Members of the United Nations, have the same desoription or have given recognition to Islam as the officia1 religion of the State. Then are they a11 priest-ridden? There are also Western Eumpean and Latin Amerioan States, the Consf&utions of whioh provide a plsoe for Chrietianity as the established State religion, The reprssentative of India, 1 am certain, would not on that aooount olassify them as theooracies. 34. We have often been told that in the Indian Union fundamental rights are guaranteed. This 1s surely not a unique phenomenon. Al1 Member States of the United Nations are pledged to respect human rights, andit 1s thefr general praotioe to ensure its observanoe. The Constitution of Pakistan is no exoeption, and we sec no reason to olaim any special oredit for treating a11 the oitieens of our multiraoial, multireliglous and multilin a1 Republio as equals before the law. We do net t lerefore consiclor it in tho lenst unomalous ‘i” thnt tho head of the judicinry of our Islnmic Repul~lic should be R Pakistnl;i Chris~inn. The C%lef Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistnn is a Paltistuni Christian b%lon$ng to the Romnn Cntholic denomination who, under our Constitution, is the finfll aurhority in the intorprotatlon of a11 laws, including tho persona1 and relisious lnws of the Muslims, who constitute the mnjority in Pakistan. We hflve given i*epresentation in the highest services of oui’ State to the rninority oommunitios whose leaders huva pi~l~licly borne testl- 32. Le reprbsentant de l’Inde s’est permis de dBnigrer les institutions d8mooratiques du P..kistan. Puis-je lui rappeler que ohaque pays façonne se8 insYtution8 autonomes selon son g6nie propre? Il est sans doute inutile de donner ici des exemples de pays modernes et dynamiques qui Ont 6th amen& II aonolure, A la lumiare de leur expbrienoe, que le syst8me des Bleotione indireotes et des 001lQees Bleotoraux rbpondait le mieux ti leurs exigences politique8 et oonstitutionnelles. Le Pakistan n’est pas le seul pays Il 6lire son pr6sident et son parlement au moyen d’un ooll8ge eleotoral, Le gouvernement parlementaire n’est pas l’unique forme de gouvernement d&mooratique. De nombreux pays, notamment en Asie, en Afrique et en AmBrique latine, et m8me en Europe, comme d’ailleurs aux Etats-Unis, ont estim6 que le r6gime prbsidentiel Btait n6oessaire pour assurer leur stabilit6 et leur progr&s 6oonomique. 33. Le Ministre de 1’8duoation de l’Inde a qualifib le Pakistan dl “Etat th6ooratique”. Puis-je luidemander si nous sommes muvern6s aar une hi6rarohie de pr&ree? Le nom of&oiel de nôtre Etat est “RBpubliaue islamiaue du Pakistan”. Ce titre fait-il de nous une’th6ooratié’l Plusieurs pays musulmane, Membres de l’Organisation des Nations Unies, ont la m8me dbnomination ou ont reoonnu l’islam oomme la religion officielle de 1’Etat. Sont-ils dono tous sous la coupe du olerg67 Il existe bgalement des Etats d’Europe oooidentale et dlAm6rique latine dont la Constitution fait du ohristianisme la religion d’Etat. Je suis persuade que le repr&sentant de l’Inde n’en ferait pae pour autant des th6ooraties. 34. On nous a dit souvent que dans l’Union indienne les droits fondamentaux 6taient garantis. Cela n’est certainement pas un ph6nom8ne unique. Tous les Etats Membres de POrganisation des Nations Unies se sont engag& R respeoter les droits de l’homme et ils s’aoquittent en g6n8ral de oet engagement. La Constitution du Pakistan ne fait pas exoeption 6 la rbgle et nous ne voyons nucune raison de nous vanter tout sp6ciulemont de trnitar sur un pied d’6gnlit6 devnnt la loi tous 10s citoywns do cette r6publiquo multirncinle, inultireligiouse et multiliiigue qui est la nOLre. Il no nous pnrnh donc nullument axlraordineirc que le chef du pouvoir Judiciaire de notre r6publique islamique soit un Pakistanais ohr6tien. La Premier Pr6sitlent de la Cour supt*@ine du Prtkistnn e8t 6ii offet un ohrbtion: c’est un Pakistannia de re!igion oatholique qu1, conform8ment 9, notre ooiistitutioii, d13cidu en dernier ressort do l’iiitarpr6tntion de toutes les lois, y compris celles relevant du statut personnel et roliglew des mueulmnns, qui ooiistltuent “What we have in India today is not real demooraoy but only a phony demooraoy. If we are true demoorats, whloh 1 may say we are not, there would not have been 80 muoh of disoontant and il1 will, Then they would not have any kind of nepotism, oorruptfon and oommunal prejudioe whioh have brought down the oountry to degradation.” 36. The repreaentntive of India also attaaked the philosophioal and spiritual foundations of Pakistan, He admltted that India and Pakistan are two natione but rejeoted the “two-nation theory”. The basis of this “theory” fa that, beoause Hindu Ëooiety is organised on the religious oaste eystem of antlqulty, in whioh persona1 statua ie determined by birth into a partioular oaste in an asoendinganddesoendingseries of worth and dignity, we the people of Pakistan wished to have established a State of our own in the oontiguous Muslim majorfty areas in the north-west and the northeast of the sub-continent, whereln we oould live our own way of life governed by the prinoiples of equality whioh are enshrined in the religlon of Islam, The oaete system is by its very nature exolusive. It soverns those within ite fold from the oradle to the grave. Notwithetanding the fundamental rights spelled out in the Indian ConËtitution, the oaeteéyetem haa not been made lllegal, though untouohability has been forbidden, at lasbbut only in the law. Distlnguished phllosophers of history have establiohed that exolustve eocieties invite disintegrationfrom within. This is what happened in the aub-oontinent in 1947. 37. We oannot underatand that whenever a dispute is involved, India seeks to make rsferenoe to ib demooratio and eeoular oharaoter, although Indien aooiety le steeped in the oaate system, in a venu1 system, to the exoluaion of a11 other people belonglng to a11 other oreeds. It le a system oonfined to the Hindus. Anyone outside the pale of the caste system le worse than an untouohable, a sub-human. So 1 say that with suoh a society, with suoh a situation. with this mentalib~revalllng in Indla, with tts treatment of mlnoritleé, wtth the manner in whioh it has held Kashmir in bandase. there cari really ba no peaoe between our two oountrl&; Remove the dispute of Kashmir, ond you will find that we cun Hve in pcacc, nnd we must liva in pence, becausa it is Kashmir olone that dividcs us. 38. It is no use mnking ultrn vires referencea to democrncy. India dlspleys itë&Ïïï%~oy like n senile parson displaying lue folse teeth. Its democracy 18 ns false as the teeth of a senile person who put’ades his 39, Lmt me therefore now turn to the main question before the Seourity Counoil. The repressntative of Indin made no attempt to explain the deolarations of the Government of India, whioh 1 quoted !n my last statement to the Seourity Counoll, that the so-oalled aooession was only proiisional, o&d!t!onal and sub- Jaot to ratifioation bu the mople of Jammu and Kash- Ïnir through a plebisoite undei international auspioes. Instead he ohose to dismiss ‘my submissions as Rn mixture of misetatements, omiseions of material faob nnd refusa1 to fnoe up to the olear provisions of the Indian Indepsndenoe Aotn [lOSSth meeting, para. 171. A oase is not proved by glossing over or ignoring inoonvanient fnots, 40. In our previous rspresentntions before the Counoil, we bave endaavoured to explain at ample length our position regarding the aooession of States toIndia or to Pakistan, Of oourae, there ‘Na8 no oontroversy regarding those States where the Ruler and the people were of the same view, and no oonfllot arose betweon India and Pakistan on that soore. In a11 those oases, naturally, the Ruler signed the Instrument of Aooession to one or the other oountry, and no trouble ensued either between him and bis people or between Indin and Pakistan. The question arose regarding those States where there was disagreement between the Ruler and his people in regard to aooession. On this question, the Indian Education Minister made three etatements, and 1 shall invite the Counoil to examine them not in relation to our arguments, but in the light of the position internationally advanoed by the Government of India. 1 ehall take eaoh of those statementa reparately. 41. The firat rtatement le: @It le eignifioant that there was no provision for oonsulting the people of the prinoely States oonoerned, Nor was there any provision that the aooession had to be ratified by asoertaining the wiehcs of the people of the nooeding States.” [Ibfd,, pnrn. 11.1 Contra& this stntemant with the followlng, yuoted from the Whita Pnper of the Govornment of India issued on 10 August 1948: “The Government of Indin are firmly of the v!ow that whntover aoveretgn rights revertod to theso Stntes on the lapse of paramountoy, they vest in the people, nnd oonditions muat be craated in every Stute for a free and unfettered oxorolse of theeo righto.” 39. J’en viens maintenant h la qUeSt!On PrinOiPale dont le Conseil de s6ourit6 est sa!& Le re&sentant de l’Inde n’a m6me pas tent6 d’expliquer les d6olarations du Gouvernement indien, que j’ai oit6eS dans ma dernibre d6olarntfon devant le Conseil de S~OUrit6, selon lesquelles le pr6tendu rattaohement n%ta!t que provisoire, oonditionnel et sujet A rat!f!ont!on par le peuple du Jammu et Caohemire au moyen d’un pl6bisoite tenu sous des auspioes Internationaux. Au lieu de s’y appliquer, il a &f6r6 Boarter me8 arguments on disant que Je mt6tais txzn6 “h d6former la v6rit6, li passer sous silenoe des faits patents et A refuser de [m’linoliner devant les dispositions tr8s olaires de In loi sur l%d6pendanoe de l’Inde” [10888me s6anoe, par. 171. Cn ne prouve pas le bienfond6 de sa oause en 6duloorant des faits g8nants ou en feignant de les ignorer. 40. Lors de nos pr6o6dentes interventions devant EB Conseil, nous nous sommes attaoh6s R exposer dans le d6tail la situation en oe qui oonoerne le rattaohement des Etate h l’Inde ou au Pakistan. Bien entendu, il n’y a pas eu de oontroverses lorsqu’il s’est agi des Etats dont le souverain et le peuple avaient les m6mes vues, si bien qu’nuoun ooni’lit-8 oe sujet n’a Bolat6 entre l’Inde et le Pakistan. Dans tous 088 oas, naturellement, le souverain a sign6 l’instrument de rattaohement B l’un ou il l’autre des deux pays, et oela n’a donn6 naisssnoe R auounediffioult6, eoit entre lui et son peuple, soit entre l’Inde et le Pakistan, La question ne s’est pos6e que pour les Etats OQ il y avait d6saooord entre le souvernin et aon peuple au sujet du rattaohement. A oet @rd, 10 Ministre de 1’6duoation de l’Inde a fait trois d&olarations, et j’invite le Conseil B les examiner eu Bgard non pas B nos arguments, mais h la position prise sur le plan international par le Gouvernement indien, Abordons s6par6ment ohaoune de oes d6olarations. 41. La Premiere est la suivanter “11 est Imoortant de noter que la loi ne ettpulait nulle part que la population de 1’Etat prinoier int8ress6 ddt Btre oonsult6e. Elle ne pr6voyait pas non plus que le rattaohement dQt Btre raiifi6 par la populat!on.*1 [Ibfd., par. 11.1 Compnroc cotte dbolnration avoo la suivante, extraite du Livre blnno publia par le Qouvf%‘nem~i~t indien 10 10 aoat 1948: n Lo Gouvamemsnt de lVIndo est fermoment oonvaincu que, quels que aoiont les droits eouve1~ains qul sont revews fi 086 Etats lorsque la suzerninotb a prie fin, ooa droits nppnrtlennent au pauple ot, duns ohnque Etat, des oonditions doivent Rtre or66ee qui permettant 10 libre exeroioo do oes droits.” Theae are alear worde. The poeition is not only that the p8ople bave to be oonsulted: lt 18 they who bave to make tho deoision. Ce8 mot8 sont parfaitement oldre. Le peuple ne doit pas seulement 8tre oonsult6; olest lui qui doit 89 prononoer . 42. And how oan the statement now made by the Eduoation Minister of Indla be 8UStained by the one made by the Xndian representative at the 264th meeting of the SeOUrity Counoil? He saidi 42. Et comment peut-on oonoilier la d6claration que vient de faire le Minietre de 1’6duoation de l’Inde aveo oelle faite par le reyrasentant de l’Inde a la 264Bme 86anoe du Conseil de sBourit67 Il avait alors dit: *No doubt the Ruler, a8 the head of the State, has to take aotion in respeot of aooeaeion. When he and hi8 people are in agreement a8 to the Dominion to whioh they should aooede, he applies for aooeesion ta that Dominion, However, when he takes one view and hi8 people take another view, the wishes of the people have to be asoertained, When 80 aeoertained, the Ruler ha8 to take aotion in aooordance with th8 vercliot of the peuple, That le OUF position.~ 9 By “our positiona he meane the poaitfonof the UoPernment of India. The worde are tobenotedt “That ta our position.~ This id not the position now advanoed by the Eduodion Minieter of India. Par “notre positionw, il entend la position du Qouvernement indien, Note8 bien 8e8 parOlea! “Telle aat notre poeition.” Or, telle n’eet pas la positkon qu%xpose maintanaat le MM8tr8 de Mduoation de Nnde. 43. Et que dirait-il maintenant de la d&olaration suivante, que le Premier Ministre de l’Inde lui-mdme, son premier ministre, a faite lors d’une -ion publique a New Delhi et qui a 6t6 rapporthe dan8 le8 terme8 oi-aprba par le Timee of Iadla, de Bombay, dan8 8on num8ro du 7 jtti~iosat 43. And what would he make of thie statement of the Prime Mini8t0r of India hlmeelf, hls Prime Minieter; made at a pub110 meeting in New Delhi and reported by The Timee of India, of Bombay, of 7 July 1962; “In any event, from the start, Indla was oommitted to the prinoiple of letting the final word regardlng aocession rest witb the people of the prinoely Btates and”-let us mark these worde-Were oould be no gettlng away from that, oommltment. In faot, that wae why India had accepted Kashmtr’s aooeesion only provisionally in 1947, pend@ the expresslcn of the Will of the people.” That ie ëe statement of the Prime Minis& of Indla. 1 oould elaborate thia argument, but the statement of the Prime Mfnirter of Indta should at leaet auffice t0 take oare of the theels that the Eduoation Minirter of India now seekr to foist upon u8. Telle est la d6olaration faite par le Premier Mi&tre de l’Inde. Je pourrai8 d4velopper oet argument, mai8 j’estime que la d0olaration du Premier Minirtre do l’Inde devrait B tout le moins nuffire pour Muter l8 thbre que le Ministre de 1Wuoation de l’Inde oherohe maintenant B nou8 faire admettre. 44. La dauxi&me d&laration du Mlnirtre de It6duoation de l’Inde ert la ruivantel 44, The reoond 8tatement of tbs Eduoation Mfnirtor of India isr “There was no question whatsoever with regardto tho roligious oumplcxion of th0 population of the prinocly States, Tha question wbother one prinoely St& should aocede to India or Pakistan \VILE left to th0 doterminntion of tho Rular of the Stats.” [108Eth meeting, pnra. 12.1 Est-oe vrai‘? Je vous le demande, ne s’est-on vraiment nullement pr8ocoupb dos appartenanoes religieuses dos populations des Etats prinoiers? Le If3 tbat true? 1 a&, was thora no question whntsoever with regard tc the religious oomplexion of the population of the prinoely States? The Eduontion Ministor - y Saa Off~clnl Records of the .Securl~y Councll, Thlrd Ycar, Nos. r-r%, p. 20. 31 Voir Procds-verbnux offlclols du Ci~n~oll de ~hcurltô, trolalhe mn9e, Noallais, p 20. 4/ Ibld,, Non, 36-51, p. SO. “Le eouverain, en 88 qualit de ohef dlEtat, doit inoontestablement jouer un r8le dan8 la querrtion du rattaohement. Lorsque 8on peuple et lui eont d’nooord 8ur le ohoix du dominion auquel il8 doivent se rattaoher, il demande B 8e rattaoher B oe dominion. Mais, quand il y a divergenoe de vue8 antre 8on peuple et lui, il faut determiner exaotement la volont populaire, Ensuite, le souverain doit 8e oonformer h Oette dernibre. Telle 08t notre po- 8itiOnti.” “En tout Btat de oause, l’Inde eoutient depuis le debut le prinoipe selon lequel la d6oiaion finale, en ce qui oonoerne le rattaohemeat, appartient au peuple de8 Etat8 prinoiere,et” - remarquez bien oe8 mot8 - “11 n’est .pas poeeible de revenir LUT oette poeition. En fait, olest la raison pour laquelle PInde n’a aooept6 que provisoirement, en 16r47, le rattaohement du Caohemire, en attendant que le peuple exprime 88 volont&fl Wn ne 8te8t nullement pr6ocoup6 de8 appartennnoes roligieusos des ~pulations de8 Etats prinoiers, st la question dc savoir si 008 Etats 80 rnttnoheraient A l’Inde ou au Pakietan a bt4 laies& enti8rement A In disorbtion de laurs 8ouverains.~ [10836tne sBano0, par. 12.1 ti Ibld,, Noa 36 1 SI, p. 50. 46. Thon, again, if there was “no question whateoever with regard to the religious oomnlexion of the ponulation of -the prinœly Statesw , why did the Qovernment of India proteet against the accession of the Itate of Junagadh, whioh had a Hindu majority, to Pakistan? What did it aotually protest about They said, and 1 quote fram the telegram of the Qovernor-Qeneral of India addreased to the Qovernor-Qeneral of Pakistan on aa September 1947: ” a*. Pakistan Qovernment have unilaterally pro- œeded to aotion whioh i( waa made plain Qovernment of India oould never and do not aoqttieeos in. Suoh aooeptanœ of aooession by Pakistan oannot but be regarded by Qovernment of India a8 an enoroaohment on India% sovereisnty and territory and inoonsietent with friendly relations that shauld exist between the two Dominions, This action of Pakistan fa oonsidered by Qovernment of India to be a olear attempt to oauae dieruption in inteerity of India by extending influenœ an& botindaries-of -Dominion of Pakistan in utter violation of prinoiples on whioh partition wae agreed upon and effeoted.. . Il l ** possibility of Junagadh’e aooessionto Pakiqtan Dominion in teeth opposition from ib Hindu population of over eighty per oent ha8 given rise to serioua oonoern and apprehension to looal population ann~H;~o:ding fltater whioh have aooecied to ” l 48. Finally, if tbere was no question whatsœver with regard to the religious oomplexion of the population of the prinœly Statee, how does one understand the following aooount given by no other perron thon Mr, V. P. Menon, tbe eminent offioial of the Qovernment of India who was handling the aoœeslon of the prinœly Stater to India? Cm page 117 of bis book, The Stoiv of the Integration or the Indian Stateg& Mr. Menon Otatee: “Lord Mountbntmn made it olsor thatfrom a purely legal standpoint there wns no objeotion to the râler of Jodhpur ACKXXibg to Pakistan; but the MAhArAjAh should, he etressed, conslder seriously the oonsequencee of bis dolng BO, hAViIlg regnrd to the faot mAiB 10 MA~AI*A~A~ devnit, A-t-il soullf@, rOfl6Ohir ssrleusemsnt aIlx 0onsOquonoes d?m tel Aote, Otant donnO qu’il Btalt lui-mOme hindou, qu.s IA populutloA de aon Et& Omit en mA)oritO hindoue, de m6ma que oelle des Etats voisins du Jodhpur. CcmptetenU de 08s ooAsidOrAtlon8, ai le Maharnjnh d&ddAit do that ho himsslf was a Hlndu; thAt bis State WA~J PO~Ulated nradominnntlv bv Hlndus And that the sAme applled to the StA& surrounding Jodhpur. In the light Of tho80 oolmidWatiOn8, if tho MahArAjAh WBr0 m AOOQdo to PAkistAn, hiS aotion would 8Uroly ba in s/ Calcutta. orht Longmns Lsd., 1956. 47. If a Iiindu Stats wantsd to acdede to Indir, India invoked the prinoiple of partftion. namelv. relidous oomposition and ~ograpbioal eont&ity. %%nn i& s question of a Muslim St& aooedina to Pakistan. India ëays that the prinoiples of partition do aot aipïj to princsly Statee. Sur@ some measure of coneistenw is essential in all human relations, whether individual or international, If SO, how does the distinguished Education Minister of India expeot us to regard Ns statement now that thers was “no question with renard to the rsligious complexion of thë poln0ation ofthe princely Statssa? IIe statsd: “The question of religion did net corne into play at all,a (1088th meeting, para. 14.1 Did it not oome into play with rsepot to Junagadh? And Jodhpur? And Hyderabad? It did. 80, why should it not oome into play with respeot to Kashmir? 48. The third stabment of the distingpllshed Eduoation Mlnleter of India ie: # *e* tbere is no substance in the sugSestlon that the accession of Jammu and Kashmir was not oomplets and absoluts beoause the psople of that St& had not bsen oonsulted nor bsen given opportunity ta express their ohoioea. He added Inter: “Jammu and Kashmir beoame an integral part of Indla when the Instrument of Aocfxision was signed and aooepted, and from that day till today it aontinues to oooupy the same position vis-A-vis the Indian Union and no question oan poesfbly arise of annexing Kashmir or further intsgratlng it into the Indian Union, You oannot make more oomplets what le already oomplots,a l&&l,., paras, 15 snd 1S.l 48. La troislAme dAolaration du Ministre de lWwntlœ de l’Inde est la suivants: “Rien ne permet . . . de dlw que le rattnohement du Jammu et Caohemire n%et pas oomplet ni almolu du fait que la Population de oet Etat n’a pss bt6 oonsult& et n’a pss eu la paeaibilitA de faire oo~ naftre ses vœux.~ Et il a ajcutA: aL’Rtat de Jammu et Caohemire est devenupartie integrants de PInde lorsque 1’ instrument proolsmant le rattaohemsat a Ate ri@ et aooeptAi depuis l&n, son statut au regard de PUnion indiame est db mewb Inohat@. Une annexi0n OU uriO int&rAtiat plus pnusst3e du Caohemirs dans llUnion indiarae ert dono inoonoevsble; 11 est impossible de rendre plus oomplet oe qui est d&ll oomplet.n @&&, par. 15 et 18.1 49. Je rApAte: “11 est impossible de rsndre Plus oomplet os qui est dAjA o~mplet.’ Cela 1811111) fort bien. Les mot8 olefa loi, aont HoompletM et *sbso&~~. Compares-les aux adleotifr employAr dans id nana6 par iea reprbsentanti de PInde jwr quolfflk œ prAtendu rattachement. Parlant du Wtardu rattahement du Caohemire A l’Inde, le rep&sentant de PI& a dit devant le Conseil de sAouri#r “11 s’est rattsoKA A PUnion, A titre proofsolre, en Ootabre 19W (433We sAanoe, p, 301. Le terme employA btait *~visoîres, œ qui est bien diff6rent des mots *abaolu~ St *nomplat2 * 60. Then ogain, if the aooesslon was %omplsts* and Habsolutea, what did the Prime Minister of India say in a telegram he sent to the Prime Ministsr of Pakistan on 28 Ootobsr 1847~fust after the so-oalled aocosslon? He said: aIn regard to nosession aIso, lt hao been made olear that this 1s subfeot to reference to poople of St& and their deoi6ion.a It was either abeolutc and oomplete or lt was subjeot to roferenca to the poople, The clistinguished Eduoation Minister of Indin snys it waa the one; the Prime Mlnlstsr of India says it was the other. Whom is tbe United N&ions to 49, 1 repeatr aYou oannot make more oomplets what is alrsady oomplstee.n That sumds very niœ. Ths key words here ars %ompleW and fiabsolut@. Contrast these with the adjeotives employed by the repmmtatlves of Indla in the past to deroribe tbis so-oallsd aoœinalon, The representative of Indla at tbat tlme raid in the Seourity Counail, referrîng to the sooalled aoœsslon of Kashmir to India: * . , , it aoosded, tsntatively, tn October 1947” [463rd meetinS, p* 301. The word here te ?&.stivsa, whioh 1s frr from nabsoluteW and %ompleW. 60. Dailleurs. si le rattaohement &ait ~oomnlet* et *abaolu~, o&nment expliquer que, dans une I&re qu’il avait adressde au Premier Ministre du Pakistan le 28 ootobre 1947, aussi& aprAia IepriXendu rattaoh@- ment, 10 Premier Ministre do l’Inde ait diti *En os qui oononrne aussi le rattuohement, il a et6 bien prsoisd qu’il est subordonn6 A In ooneultntion do la population de PEtat, qui doit prendre ls dAoision*? Ou blon 10 rattaohement Btait absolu et oomplet; ou bien il dtalt eubordonn6 A la ooneultatlou do la population, Le Ministre de ll&iuoatton de l’Inde est d’un 81. Fin&!, if Kaehmir 1s an inte al part of India, what question le left to be ad&& r and adjudioated betwesn Indîa and Pakistan? What la it that we bave bœn negotiating about, and what !q it that we cari negotiate about now? May 1 here rlJfer to the joint oommuniqud irmmd by the Qovernrr.ente of India and Paldetan at tht rYmoluaion of the blla:sral negotiations whioh 1 0onduoted on behalf of Paldsta~. and whloh were held at the ministerial level between India and Pakistan from Deoembor 1962 to May 1’43 for aix montha. Tha oommuniqug eaid, at the ocnolueion oi the rix montlte d talke on the Kashmir c’tepute, a8 f0110wsr ” , ‘ l the two Ministers reoorded with regret that no agfwment oould be reaohed on tbe settlement of th0 KaWIir dis r te.” If Kashmir is an integral part of India, and i thie integration la abrolute and eomplato, what 1s thir “Kashmir disput@, and what were we try@ to settle? What agmement iethere for w to maoh? The dfstInguished reprarentative of Indfa uyr, mferring tu Aaad Ka&tmir, that it 1s “8 pazt of brritoy whioh by international law 1s a6 muoh a part of Indian territory 81 Bombay or Delhi 18”. [1036th mœtlpg, w4 8.1 59, An a t oomment on the attitude behind thie atatement is Lt ahed by another statement of the Prime Minister c4f India made in the Indian Parliament on 26 JUIN lQ5& The Indian Prime Minietor eaid then: W ir.,, a matter ,,. 0f dealing with a situation whioh jr very delioate, very diffioult andthe deoision for whioh ultfmately lier with the few m1llfonpeople in Kaabmi;--te;n wltb this Parliament , . . India in ir r , , , Karhmir ir almort the heart of A B. There 18 an enormous differenob, aot only in geography, but in all kinds of faokro there. Do ad tbink you are dealing with a part of U. P. [the Unitad Provinoer], Bihar or Qujerat . , . .“Y Tbe Uaited Provinœr or Blhar or Oujrrat are Indian stataa, and tb@ Indian Prime Minhter smphuiaed that tbme lr an ~enormou~ diffembnœP between thon0 Staten and KarJhmir. The poeition tak0n by the distinguiahed representative of Indla hcr0 i0 thnt thore ie no differenm and he stnms that Knohmir is a8 muoh II part of India na Bombay and D0lhl. 63. In tho contsxt of the queetion 0f n000~slon, th0 dietinguiehed representative of Indin stamd that when India wae partltioned, Wn part of the country aeceding” con&tutad iteelf int0 Pakistan, and 1~0 olalmod: * . . . 81. Bnfin. si le Caohemlre fait partie int8nrante de l%de, què reete-t-i1 8 aplanir‘ et B r6gier entre pïnde et le Pakistan? Sur quoi avonf+nous nOgo et sur quoi pouvons-noue enoore n@oier? Pu&Je ‘rappeler, B oet Ogard, 10 oommuniqu8 oommun pub116 par les Qouvernemants de l’Inde et du Palcietan & l’issue des nOgooiation8 bilat5ralgs qui se eont dOrou- 16ea au niveau minist4riel entre l’Inde et le Paltietan pendant six mois, de d6oembre 1963 B mal 1063, et auxquelles j’ai partioip5 en qualit de repr5eentant du Pakistan? Le oon’nnunlqu~ disait, au bout de six mois de pourparlers eur le diffbrend oonoernant le Cachemirer w. a . les deux minietres ont oonstat6 aveo regret qu’auoun aooord ne pouvait Otre rOalis6 au sujet du rbglement du diffbrend oonoernant le Caohemire.” Si le Caohemire fait partie WOgrante de l’Inde et ai oette lntigratlon est absolue et oompIete, en quoi oonsiete 08 ~diffBrend oonoernant le Caohemir@ 8t nu~88flavomWioua de r&aoudre? Quel aooord pouvona&oue &alieer? Le reprOsentant de l’Inde, parlant du Caohemlre “aead”, dit qu’il s’agit dl *une portion de territoire qui, suivant les rB lee du droit international, fait aartie de Nnde au m $i me titre que Bombay ou Delhi” ilO338me aOanoo, par. 31, 53. Une autre dOolaration du Premier Ministre de l’Inde, oelle qulil a faite au Parlement indien le 36 Juin 1953, Oolaire l’attitude que refl&e la dbolaration que, je viens de oitor. Le Premier Ministre a dit alors; “11 s’agit , , , de a%oouper d’une situation trOa diffloile et trOe delioate, que le Parlement lui-mOme ne peut pas rhglerr la d6oieion A son sujet doit Btre prise, 0n fin do oompCd, par lee quelque millione de pereonnes qui peuplent le Caohemlre, , , L’Inde ert un vaste paya , , , le Caohemire 80 trouve presque au oœur de l’Asie. 11 y a entre lee deux une diffdrepqo &Orme, non seulement uur le plan g00graphiquo, main B de nombreux polntm de vuo. Ne pennec pas que ~OUI avec affaire A une partle der P.-U. [Pxwinoer-Unies], au Bihar ouauGujerato/,n Ler Provinoer-Unie& 10 Bihar ou le Qulerat ront der Etat& indiens, et Ie hemfer Miniatre de l’Inde aouligne qu’il y a ‘une diffbrenoe 6normow entre o0a Etats et le Caohemlre. Or, la poaitton qu’a priee 101 le reprt%entant de l’Inde est qu’il n’existe auouno diff&ronoe, et il dOolar0 qua le Cnohemlre fait pnrtie do l’Inde au mOme titre que Bombay ot Delhi. 38. Dans 10 oontexte do la question du rnttaohemollt, le reprasentant de l’Inde a d6olarB que, lors du gai’- tage do l’Inde, %In0 purtle du pnys ayant fait eooession” rivait, form0 le Pakistan, ot il a ooutenu 00 qui vol. II, No 10, Zho p~rtlo, hoc Answore, New !W~I, Porlkunont Se.oratarta~ col. 2595. 64. Xt is truc chat Pakietan waa admittedtothe Unltad Nations and othor lntarnatlonal organleatlone as a new State, but thle was done by vlrtue of ite exprese oonsent under the Indlan Independenoa (International Arranaementa) Order of 1047. In all other resaeote the e&e O&r provided, as for inetanaa, in régard to the righte and obligations devolving from treatles and international agreementa tn whioh undivided India was a party, that both India and Pakistan wew to inherit thesé righte andobligationa a6 auooeesor Statas of the Britleh Qovernment in India, 1 wculd not like to take up the time of the Eaourity Counoll ta adduce further argumenta in support of this submieslon, A raferenae to the areamble and the varidue eeotlona of the Indian Indepëndence Aot, 1047, dl1 make it olear that the Aot epeaks of %VO Indepandent Dominionsa to ba set up in Indla to be known reepeotlvely as Indla and Pakistan as from 16 Auguet 1047. lapaseing, may 1 observe that paramountiy whioh ended wi% thë entering lnto forœ of tbe Indlan Tndepandence Aot of 1047 wa8 a dootrine r.ot of international law. but eul and, aouordlng to Brltish lsgal autliorltl8s, to the oonstitutlonal development of the Brltieh Indlan Empire. 65. 1 pas6 over the aooount glven by the Minlster of lndla of tbe oiroumstauœs ln Kashmir whloh formed the genesls of the dispute, 1 do sobeoauw the truthful and balanoed aoaount of these olroumrtanœr 1s on moord in the Seourlty Counoil, set forth at Iength in ltr proœedinge. 1 alno do 80 beoaure it ir irrelevant whetber one or the 0th~ aooaunt 1s trus, In terxrm of the Charter of the United Nation@ and in terme of tha moral and lagal obligationa af States, the aontrovwrier whloh rxirt8d before the aooeptanœ of arl 0greement oannot be revlved in connexion wlth the lmplementation of that agreement. Once an ngreemont 10 reaohed, you oannot revive the aontroversy whloh wa8 reeolvedby the ngreement. The oontroverey closes ne aoon a8 there 1s an anreement. In the Knshmlr dispute, the nllegatlons of tïggresslon by the two parti& agninst eaoh other were debated in tho Connoll nnd inthe Unlted Nation8 Commlsslon on Indla and Pakistan before that body’s resolutlona were adopted. The adoptlon of these resolutione and tholr aooeptanoe by the two parties evidently dinpoeedof the oontentious issues whloh existed prlor to them. IX. Il est vrai qua le Pakistan a 4th admip a l’Organlaatlon des Nations Unies et 13 d’autre8 organleatlons internationales en tant que nouvel Etat, maie oela s’est fait aveo son oanrmtement exprBs, 0onformC ment aux dlepoeltlons de ltordonnanoe sur ltlnd@ndanoe de l’Inde (arrangemente internationaux) de 1947, A tous autres Bgarde, oomme par exemple k lI&gard dee droite et obligations daooulant dee trait88 et dee aooords internationaux auxauela l’Inde d’avant le œrtage Btalt partle, la m8me~ordannanoe pr&voyaii que l’Inde et le Pakistan h&itaient toue deux des droits et obllgatione du Gouvernement britannique en Inde, en tant qu’Etata suooe88eur& Je ne voudrais par abuser du tempe du Conaell en prt%sent& d’autres argumente a l’appui de oetta tbbee. Si l’on se rewrte au-prhambule ët aux divers artlolea de la loi 6ur l’lnd4pendanoe de l’Inde de 1847, on voit qulil est clairement dit que “deux dominions lnd@andanW seront ora& en Inde, BOUB le nom d’Inde et de Pakistan respectivement, a partir du 15 aodt 1047. Permettez-mol de faire remarquer en paeeant que la sueeralnet0 qui a pria fin lors de kantr6e en vigueur de la loi sur Pinddpendanoe de l’Inde de 1947 ne oorreeaondalt I>BB b La notion oonnue en droit lnternatlo~al, maie, (tait un ayatbme sui -=Set* selon les jurlsoonruitee britanniques, un sye me partlouller A ll&olution oonatitutionnelle de l’Empire britannique de l’Inde. 56. Je ne nVattardera1 pas sur le rdolt qu’a fait 1s Mlnlatre de U&luoatlon de l’Inde dee otroonstanoea qui ont donn6 naisranoe au dlffdrend sur le Caohemire. Je ne le ferai PBIY par01 pue le r8olt vbridlaue et lmpartlal der fait& figure dans las arohivœ du Conrell, ayant 4t(5 donn6 de faoon d6taiB4e au oours des d4bats. Je ne le ferai pas ïion plu8 paroe qu’a la V&it& il importe peu de ravoir ri tel ou tel rQit est axaot. Au regard de la Charte des Nations Uniea et du point de vua de8 obligationa moraiœ et juridlquer dea Et&, les oontroveraee qul exletaient avant l’aoooptntlon d’un aooord no padvent Btre soulevBes A nouveau au moment de la mise en oeuvre de oet aooord. Une fols l’oooord oonolu, 11 & lmpoeslblo de faire renaftre la oontroverse A laquelle il a mie fln. La oontroverse oeaae dba que l’aboord est oonolu. Dans le dlffbrend relatif au Cnohemlre. les all0rrations dea deux parties, qul s’aooU8alent mutuelïement d’agression, ont ate examinbes par le Consell de s8ourit8 et par In Commission des Nations Unies pour 1’Snde et le Pakistan avant Yadoption daa rBec+ lutions de oette oommleslon. De toute Bvidaloe, l’adoption de 068 r&volutlons et leur aooaptatlon par “We oannot be a Dartu to the reversa1 of arevlous deoieions taken by” the- United Nations Con&isston with the agreement of the parties.” [606tb meeting, para. 86.1 At the 769th meeting of the Counoil, the then representative of Indfa said the following: *I sdd the other day that this engagement bound our twe oountries.. , , 1 should like to say that there are three parties engaged in thfs whole prooess. “T%e Seourity Counoil is a party to the reeolution of 13 Auguet 1946. , ., and 78.1 a [7f39th meeting, paras, 77 The same representative stated the following at the ward meeting of the Counoilt NThe resolution of 17 January 1948, and the resolutions of the United Nations Commiesion for India and Pakistan, the assuranoes given, these are a11 resolutions whioh carry a greater weight-that is beoauee we bave aooepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or net,” [ 773rd meeting, para. 68.1 57, This, in brie& hae been t.% statue of the agreement arrivod at between India ~3 Pakistan through the effort aad authorlty of the L ,dted Nations. The obligatory oharaoter of these reeolutions arose not only from the oonsent of the parties, but also from the faot tbat the agreement @enshrined” the prinoiple of self-determfnati on whioh is integral to the oonoepts of the Charter. It was furthsr enhanoedby tlle faot that it was on.ly on the basis of the aooeptanos of the two rerolutlona tbat the aeaae-flre agreement was reaohed between Indla and Pakistan and the people of Kashmir who were fighting against the Indian army were pereuaded to lay down their arma. Now the repreeentative of India says that the (1 *** two resolutionr of the Seourity Counoil dealing with plebiroite were oonditional and aontingent on Pakiitan vaoatlng its aggreooion, and that o&ition has not bsen oomplied with. It ie really more than a oondition. It was the very basls on whioh these two reeolutions wsre founded, and the oondition not having bean oomplied with and the basis having disappesared, these reaolutions are no longor bindlng on ua. In nny oase, by the passage of timo and various faotors intervening , , , thoy bave becomc -bsolete.” [108Eth meeting, para. 33.1 68. I dealt, I hope eufffofently, in mystatement to the Seourity Counoil on 3 February [1087th meeting] witb this theory of passage of time to show how uutenable A la 7698me s&noe du Conseil de s6ourit6, le repr& sentant de l’Inde s’est exprim8 dans les termes suivfults: “J’ai dit l’autre jour que Oet engagement liait nos deux pays . . . je voudrais souligner que oette affaire engage trois parties. “Le Conseil de s6ourit6 est lui aussi partie B la r6solution du 13 aoat 1948 , , .” [7698me sbanoe, par. 77 et 76.1 Le mi3me repr6sentant a d6olar6 h la 773Bme s&noe du Conseil de s&ourit& “La r6solution du 17 janvier 1948, les r6solutions de la Commission des Nations Unios pour l’Inde et le Pakistan, les assuranoee dotMes-ont une plus grande porthe, oar nous les avons aooept&es, nous y avons adh&%, qu’elles nous plaisent ou non,” [7730ma sbanoe, par, 63,] 57. Tel est, en r&um& la situation en oe qui oonoerne l’aooord oonolu entre l’Inde et le Pakistan grâce aux efforts et il l’autorit des Nations Unies. Le oaraotbre obligatoire de oes r6solutions d6ooule non seulement du oonsentement des parties, mais @lement du fait que l’aooord oonsaore le prtnoipe de la libre d&ermination, qui est au nombre des prinoipee de la Charte. Ce oaraot%re obligatoire a BtB renforob du fait que o’est uniquement sur la base de l’aooeptation de 088 deux r&olutions que l’aaoord de oessee-le-feu a 6tB oonolu entre l’Inde et le Pakietan et que la population du Caohemire qui luttait oontre l’arm&e indienne a pu Btre persuadbe de dBposer tee armes. Le reprbsentant de l’Inde dit aujourd’hui oeoi: #Les deux r9eolutions du Conseil de e8ourit.6 nyant trait au pl6bisoite Btaient eubordonn&ee A uns oonditiom elles pr&aupposaient que le Pakletan mette un terme a son agression; or, cette oondition ncn pns 6tB remplie. En fait, oe n’&a!t pas lh uns simple aondition, mais la pierre angulaire des deux r6solutions; la oondltion n’ayant pas 6t6 remplie et le fondement ayant disparu, les r&olutlons ont oess6 d’avoir pour noua foros obligatoire, De tout0 façon, le temps a pas& etdivers autresfaoteurs + . . sont entr8s en jeu, si bien que les r&eolutions ont perdu de leur aotualit&ll [10888rne &ance, par. 33.1 66. Dune la d6olaratîon que j’ai faite le 3 f8vrlw devant le Conseil de sdouritb [10878me s&moe], je orols avoir trait6 assez longuement de oette th6orio 69, The Covernment of India aooepted the resolutions of thn Uuited Nations Commission of 13 August ~948 and 6 January 194971 providlng for a oease-flre. a truoe agreemént, and a pleblsoite in Jammu and Kashmir to determine the question of its accession to India or to Pak!.stan after -ami 1 stress saftsrw-this question of aggresslon had been oonsidered. The question of a oondltlonal and contingent aoosptanoe of those two rosolutlons, therefore, dos8 not arlse. The Seourlty Counoll is fully aware that Pakistan 1s not requlred by the terms of the two resolutlons to make a unilateral and unoonditional withdrawal of its milltary forces from the State. The withdrawals have to bs reolprooal and synohronised in suoh a manner that at the end of the proaess, while a11 the armed foroes of Pakistan have left the State, the bulk of theIndian armed forces have aleo vaoatsd the State. The obligationof Pakistan to withdraw oomes lnto foroc and operation only after the oonoluslon of a truas agreement under the resolutlon of 13 August 1948, whloh provides for a synohronieed withdrawal in the manner and ta the etient stipulated. 60. Who 1s responsible for the deadlook with resusot to tbe truoe agreement, that 18, wlth rsspsot to the demilitarisation of the State? Indla balked at the synohronleatlon of the withdrawal of the foross on the two sldee. India withheld its oo-operation in formulatlng a trime agresment. Inclia refused to help in establlshlng oonditlons whioh would involve the oomplete withdrawal of the Pakistanforcesfrom Kashmlr. Xndia refeoted the proposai for stationing a Unltsd Nations fores there for the uurwae. After havinrr done all those things, Indla bsganto oomplain that the Pakistan foroee had not withdrawn. Certalnly it rsquires no “deep knowledge of law”, to quots tho expression of the Eduoatlon Mini&er of India, to uadsrstand that a party oannot ohallengs the binding oharaoter of an agreement by pleading its own falure to perform it. 61. India has always oharged Pakistan with the rssponslbility for thla deadl%ok, while refuuelng to submit lta assertion to impartial sorutlny by lnveetlgation 5r to llmitsd arbitfation. In my atatement of 8 February I referred to the offer made by Pakistan to the Seourity Cou&l in 1962, that if an impartial dstsrmination should show that Pakistan is in faot responslble for the situation, my Qovernment would rsotify the default “through the epeediest method at the earliest wrslble moment. oo that the way may bs opened towards full lmplementation of the resolutl&P i1008tb meatins. para, 1661. The faot that Indla has rejeoted this o?fer shows thnt its aoousntlon against Pakistan is only A pretext for oontinuing its unlawful oooupation of the State and lts refusa1 to enablo the people of Jnmmu nnd Kashmlr t0 axoroisa the riglit of self-determinatlon. 68. If you ponder this oonslderation, you will realise that the entire oase of the Eduoatlon Mini&er of India reets on the exoluslon of the rights and lnterests of the paople of Kashmlr. Ho wante to oonvert the whole issue lnto a pseudo-lagal one betweenxndla and Paklstan and make lt void of a11 human and moral eignifloance. 1 say *pseudo-legal” advisedly beoause, if the representatives of India wore serious in formulatlng the legal issues impliolt in the dispute, thsn they would also be prepared to aooept thelr detarmination by a oompetent authority. But they merely try to giVe it a lerral oharaoter in order to oonfuee issues and to &$ert attention from the righte and interest of the people of Kashmir. This refleotion is austainedfurther by thcir repeated allegations of aggreseion against Pakistan, 64. What is there in thie allegation that oan be at a11 relevant to the solution of the problem from a human wint of view? The auestion whether Pakistan did or &i-hoi oommlt aggreision in Kashmir oanbe answered only by the people of Kaehmir. For, if Pakistan did oommit aggreesion in Kashmir, then evidently it was tbe ~80~10 of Kashmir who were ita viottme. Surely then; IniUa should be insistent on anunfettered plebisoite in Kashmir whioh would enablo the viotims to return an overwhelming verdiot againet the aggreseor. That it is Pakistan tbat eeeks thie plebisoite, and India that rejeotr lt, show8 how muoh truth the Government of IndIa fwls there is in its oontentionr. It prover whioh of the two parties bears the burdan of gullt, Psklrtan ha8 notbing to hi& it ir prepared to dnd the linht of dav. whioh meano a olear and osmn asoertainme~t of the- Will of tha people of Kashtiir. It ir India that reekr to ensure tbat that light should nevsr dawa But tbe Ught of day Will dawa 6L In rward to the meaoures of annexation of the .%te of JËmmu and Kashmlr, to whioh 1 drew atten- Mon in my letter to the Prosident of the S~ourlty Counoil of-18 Januaxy 1984 [S/SS17], and in my rtatement of 3 Fsbruary, ths dirtinguished rspressntatlve of India has extolld the allsged benefitr that thore msasures would aonfer upon the peoplr of Jammu and Kashmir. The point that 1 have the honour to make in regard tc theee measulzs is not that they are or are not a bleselng to the peoplo of Knebmlr but that they are belng imposed by an unlawful nuthority, in disrepnrd of the infunotions of the Seourlty Counoil, ns set forth in the résolutiona of the Ccunoii of 80 M&oh 1961 and 24 Janunry 1967.Y 1 would request the que In Conseil ue seourlte note que le Gouvernement indien, loin de renonocr A poursuivre l’nppliontlcn Seourlty Councll to note thul tire Governmoni of India . ._ . . . . ~. remains impenltent tn regnro to trie rurrnor emenmon 18 l’attention dan8 ma lettre du 18 janvier 1964 !ST8171 au PrBsident du Conseilde s8ourit6, ainsique dans ma d6olaration du 3 f&vrier, la repr6rentant de l’Inde a fait 6tat des prdtendus avantages queoer mesures pr4oenteralsnt pour ler populations de oet Etat. Je tiens A souligner que la quefltion n’est pas de savoir si oeo mesures procurent ou non des avantngee nux habitants du Cnohemiro; mon nrgument est qu’elles sont imposbes par une nutorit6 ill6gitim0, nu m8prls des injonctions du Conseil de ebouritb, tellcs qu’elles figurent dam, sea r8solutions du 30 mare Il%1 et du 24 jnnvier 1067?/. Je voudrai8 87, On the other hand, the repreaentative of India makee an offer to Vlsouss with Pakistan a11 ar outetanding diffemnoesn. The question is: How oan the offer be t&en at a11 seriouely if the position of the Oovernment of India 1s as the Indian representative desOribes it? How oan these differencee be resolved if the Qovernment of India maintains its rigld position, as it did during the bilateral negotiations of lDD2-19837 These nenotifltions failed. as did a11 nenotiatione 67. D’autre part, le repr&entant de l’Inde offre “d’examiner avoo le Pakistan tous les diffQrende qui subsistent enoore entre [les] deux paya”. Comment, le vous le demande, oette offre peut-elle 8tre prise au sBrieux, si la position du Qouvërnement indl& est oelle que le repr6sentant de l’Inde a exposAeT Comment oes diff&ende peuvent-ils Btre &olua ai le Gouvernement indien reste sur des positions rigides, before, Thé aovernment oi India aays that i%ediation comme il l’a fait au oours des nAgooiations bilatAralee ~111 not help. New, the repreecntatlve of India adde de lD62-19697 Ces n&ooiations ont BohouB, oomme thatr “. , , the paesing of reeolutionen-by the Ccunoil toutes oellaa qui les avaient pr&oAdAes. Le Clouver- -“will net be helpful, It ie likely only to anrrravate nement indien dit que la m&Iiation n’apporterait pas feolinge.” The Qotirnment of India bas-takenthe rigid de solution. gt, maintenant, le roprAeontant do l’Inde position that it ~111 not a ajoute: n , . . il ne servirait pas A grand-ohose, sinon ree to suhmlt to limited arhttration the pol;.ts of dif erenoe that exist betwean f A exacerber les esprits, d’adopter des r6eolutions.~’ the parties over queetions of faot in regard to thc Le Qouvernement indien a d4olar6 oat6gorlquoment implementatlon of the international agreement on qu’il n’aooepterait pas de soumettre A un arbitrage Kashmir. IlmitA les divergenoes entre les deux parties qui portent sur des questions de fait ut 1ntAreeeent la mise en œuvre de l’aooord international sur le Caohemire. 88. 1 would like to put the queationbefore the Counoil: If negotiations haw repeatedly falled and it fa im- 68. Dans oes oondttions, je poae la quoation au posslljle for them to bea-r any f&t, iftbe Qovernment Conseil: si les nAgooiations ont toujours BohouAet s’il of India is averse to mediation, if it rejeote llmited eet impossible que des n0gooiations aboutissent, si le Gouvernement indien ne veut pas d’une mtiiation, arbitration, if it warna aginst the geourity Counoil~~ s’il rejette l’arbitrage m8me limitA, s’il met engarde passing any resolutione, then le not the position thie that a11 avenues of peaceful eettlement are barredand le Conseil de s6ouritA oontrë l’adoption do toute clored to us? rAsolution, ne faut-il pas en oonoluro que toute8 les possibIl1tAe de rbglemont peoifîquo nous ront formees? 6D, Tbia bringr me to India’a offer of a eo-oalled BD. Cela m’amene A la ddolaration dite de “renoa- “no-war deolaration”. We have sald again and again tbat we havs already siuned a “no-war deolaratiotV+ oiation A la guerre” propos&3 par l’Inde. Nous avons when we pledged OU~ adhorenoe to tho United Nations dit et r4pAt6 que nous avons dAjA eignb une *d&ola- Charter, The reprosontative of Indla aeks lf WI bave ration de rononolation A la guerre* quand nous noua any mental reiorvatlons. Dld India bave mental sommes engag0s A respecter la C%arte dos Nations Unies. Le reprAsentant de l’Inde demande ri nour rerorvatlonr when it rignod tho Charter of the Unlted avonr dor rbrervor taoltor. L’Inde en avait-elle Nations? If not, wb8t tr th neoorsity of a %o-war dwlrrationw? Wut ir nmded ir not rnother doolrrrquand elle a stgn& la Charte dro Nation8 Uniw? Si tien but to devise speoifio methods for the settloment elle n’en avait pan, A quelle n6oorritb r6pondralt une of the Kashmir dispute. This would remcvo tho sole d6olaration de oe genre? Ce qui eet n&oessaire, ce n’est pas de formuler une nouvelle d6olnration, mals oause of oonfliot betwoen the two countrias. de mettre au point des m6thocles propres Aassuror le r8glemont du difff3rend sur le Caohemire. On blfrninerait alnsl l’unlque oause de oonflit entre no8 deux pays. ‘70. We have been trying to impress this polnt on the Governmont of India since 19130, when we proposed a 70. Nous noua efforçons do faire pnrtager oe point ‘no-war dsclaratton” which would ccntain prcvlsions do vue nu Gouvernement indien depb 1960; oottu for negotintions betwoen India and Pakistan, and, in nnn6e-lA, en effet, nous lui avons propos6 unenddola- ‘he OUI~ of the faiiure of negotiatione, for recourse rntion de rononolntlon A In guorr@* qui oontlendrnit io medlallon and, in the ovent of the fnilure of mediades dispooitions relatives A l’ouverture de ndgooiatiens antre l’Inde et le Pnkistan et prbvoiralt, en 71. While our position hae been greatly misrepresented in the past, it is gratifying that the prinotples for whioh we have sought to gain aoceptanoe are now finding expression in the dialogue between the heads of Qovernment of the United States and the Soviet Union. In hia reoent statement regarding the peaoeful settlement of territorial disputes, Chairman Khruehohev said: “Life shows that the majority of territorial dianutes are frausht with the danuer of oomplioation of the relations between the pa%ies with the possibility of a serious armed oonfliot, and that they oonsequently oonstitute a potential thrent to univereal peaoe.’ He added: “1s it that the Soviet Union proposes to or088 out with one stroko a11 territorial issues between Stotes, to abandon a11 attemptc to settle them as if these issues do not exist rt nll? No, thie is not the point. We realiee that some oountries have weighty rensons for their olaims.* He oontinued: “A pcaceful scttlement of territorial disputes is nlso favoured by the faot that in the praotioe of international relations there already exists a etore of improved methods of peaoeful settlement of outstanding issues: direot negotiations between the States oonoerned, use of good offioes, request of assistanoe from international organisation , , . .” On this bas&, Chairman Khrushohev proposed an agreament whioh shculd inolude “an undertaking to settle a11 territorial disputes exolustvely by peaoelJ1 means, suoh as negotiations, mediation, oonoiliatory prooedure, and also other peaoeful means at the ohoice of the parties oonoerned in aooordanoe with the Charter of the United Nationen. 72, Let us take this rtatement of the Chairmanof the Ccunoil of Mini&ers of the USSR and apply it to the Kashmir dispute, even though this dispute hinges on a people’s right -to self-detérmlnation.~ Aooorcïing to this statement. it is not at a11 lustlfiable to abandon nll nttempts to-sottlo the dispute; ns if it did net exlst at nll. Dut that is preoisely what India eooke to bave the Counoil do. Aooording to this atntement, there la to bc an undertaking to aettlc tho disputa by peaceful means. Dut nfter the failure of ono of those means, thnt if3, ncgotintion, India blooks the othor monns. And still Indin propcses a w~lo-wnr declnrnttontl! 73. JA u8 now refer to th0 etatemout of Prenldent Johnson of tho IJnited Stntes made In 111s lettor of 15 January 1264 addrossod to Chuirman Khrushohev, in Le preeident Khrouohtohev a ajout& “L’Union sovletique propose-t-elle dlelimlner d’un ooup tous les differends territoriaux entre les Etats, de renonoer A toute tentative de reglement oomme si les differends n’existaient pas? Non, 18 n’est pas la question. Nous savons fort bien que quelques pays ont de bonnes ralsons 5 fnire valoir 5 l’appui de leurs revendioatlons.” Et il continue: “La solution pacifique des oonflits territoriauxest egalement facilltee du fait qu’il existe, dans les relations internationales, tout un arsenal de mbthodes perfeotionnees de reglement paoifique des differends: negooiations direotes entre les paya intereeses, reoours aux bons offioes de tiers, demandes d’nssistanoe d’une organisation internationale . . .* Se fondant sur oes ooneiderations, le president Khrouohtchev a propose un hcoord qui oomporterait Vengagement des parties intereseees de regler toua les litiges territoriaux par des moyens exolusivement paoifiques, tels que la negoolation, la m&hation, la 0onoillatIon et tous autres moyens Bgalement paolfiques qui s’offrent 5 elles, oonformement a la Charte des Nations Unies”. 72. Prenons oette deolaration du President du Consell des ministres de IIUHSS et appilquons-la au differend sur le Caohemlre, enoore que oe dtff&end touche BU droit d’un peuple 5 l’autodetermlnatton. Selon oette d6olnrntion. 11 serait absolument injustifi6 de renonoer A toute tentntive de rbglement du dlffbrond, comme SI cal&01 n’existnit pris. Or, o’est prbcle4ment ce qua l’Inde voudrnlt fnire nu Conseil. D’nprbs In dBclnrntlon, 10s pnrtlert r~oIvot1t e’engnger n r6gler le diff6rend pnr des moyens pncifiques. Aluis aprbs 1’6chec do l’un de oes moyens - In lv3gocllltloI~ -, i’111c10 8’oppotlu n ca que l’on nit recours nux nutres. Et pourtant, elle propose une 88dbolarntion de renonclntlon if In guerre”! 73. Reportons-nous mnlntcnnnt h In dbclnrntiou COI~- tenue dans la lettre quo le PrBsidont des Etnts-Unle, M. Johnson, n ndrese6e le 1G Jnnvler 1964 nu I>I*~- 74. How dees thie apply to the question before ue? Slnoe negotlation between Xndla and Pakletan hae falled, !s India prepared for llmited arbltratlon or judloial eettlement of those po!ntE of dliferenoe between the partles whloh are capable either of arbitratfon or of baing jud!o!ally determlnod? M!a has rejeoted these meane agaln and agaln. India ie even rejooting today tbe aaaiatanoe of the Un!ted Natfone !n tho eettlement of thle dlepute. And yot Indla proposes a “no-war &olaratlonn ! The Presldent of the Unitod States adda In hle atatement: “The preventlon of wars over territorial and other disputes requires not only mnoral wino!~los but _ - aleo tho gro-&h and 1mprovemenV , . ; regakifng the maoblnery and methode for peaoeful eettlemont. Thû Un!ted Statea believee that -tho peaoe-keepfng proce~e.68 of tbe Unlted Nation&-and epeoifioally ite Seourity Counoil-should be more fully ured and atrengthened , , , ,” 19 “Pour emp8oher dee guerres provoqu6ee par des litiges territoriaux ou autrea, il faut non eeuloment btabllr des prlnolpee generaux, mals enoore “Etendre et am0liorer” , , , les criepoeitlfe existant8 pour le regloment pao!f!que des diffbrende. Les Etat&Unis estiment qu’il oonvient d’utllieer davantage et do renfomor les meoanlsmee de maintien de la paix dont dlspoeo 1~Organleatlon dee Nations Unies, et plu8 pr0oie8ment 10 Coneeil de rburltB~/.” 76. Ce sont oes meoaniames de maintien do la paix dont diapose PONU que l’Inde d&!a!gno quand il @agit du Caohomlre. Lorsqu’il a t3te queetlon d’arrgter lea modalltbs du retrait des foroee !ndlennee et paklstanalses de 1’Etat de Jammu et Caohemfro et dtaesurur la a0ouritQ de oot Etat, noua avons propos6 que aoit etatlon& dane le territoire tuie foroo des Nation8 Unies ausel impartiale A 1’6gard de l’Inde qu’!t 1’6gard du P&l&an. L’Inde a rejet& oetto proporltlon et a mena08 de oonelderor comme inamical tout pays qul tenteratt d’interposer une foroe der Nations Unter dans la partie du Caohemlre qutellsoooupalt. Noua somme6 alles plus loin, et noua avons fait ravolr au reprbsentant dea Natlons Unies, en lQS6, que nou6 aoooptione, oonformbment R sa propoeitlon, d%tudlor la porstbillte de statlonner du o6té paklstanalr do la frontlere du Jammu et Cachemire une fomo der Nations Unies oharg6e d’a@aurer la r&ourltb de la reglon apres 1s retrait des foroea pakl&analror. L’Inde a dklar6 qu’elle Nregrotteralt* 10 rtatlonnement d’une telle fomo our le territoire paklrtanair et elle a alnrl rendu imporrlblo le reaouro au mbanisme de maintien de la paix dont diepoee I’ONU pour regler le diffbend conoernant le Cnohemlre. Qulplus est, 0110 oberoho mgme A oinpbohor 10 Consefl d’adopter uno rbsolutlon. ICt pourtnnt, l’Inde propose une “dëolnration de renonolntlon h la guorro”! 76. 11 cet une dro oonsîd0ration ImpooPtante dont il faut tenir oompto, s’agîssnnt de lloffro que1~Indenow II~ faite on noua demandant de “venir tzi’aaseolr aveo 76. It !s these peace-keeping prooesaes of the United Natfons whioh Indla spurna w!th regard to Kashmir. When lt oamu to tho qüeatlonof howtie forooe of Indla and Pakistan oould be w!thdrawn from the Stato of Jammu and Kaehmlr, and the soourity of tho State preserved, we proposed tho etationlng of a United Nations foroe whioh would be impartfal to both Indla and Pakistan. Ind!a rejeoted tho proposa1 and threatonec! that any oountry whloh would attempt to injeot a Unlted Natlone foroe In Indlan-oooupled Kashmlr would be regardod as unfrlendly to M!!a. We went furthor and oonveyed our aooeptanoe to the Unlted Nation6 ropreeentatlve !n 1918 of h!s euggertlon that tbe posllblllty of rtationlng a Unlted Nations foroe on the Pakistan slde of tho Jammu and Karhmir border be examtnod b onaure the seourlty of the area alter !he wlthdrawal of the Paklotan forcer. Indla sald that it would %egretw the stationlng of suoh a foroe In the territory of Paklrtan. Thuo India made tt tmpoaatble to have reoourao to the peace-keeptng maohinery of tbe Unit& NaMono for a solution of the Kashmlr dlopute. What ir more, Indla obstruots aven a resolu- Mon of this Counoil. And yet India proposes a “no-war deolaratlon” ! 7G. There is another Important conslderntion involvod ho witb roepeot to Indla’s offer to “ait witb US to roeolve our Viiflorences “. Any impartial observer 77. There may be many mlnor dlfferanoes between Indla and Pakistan, as there would be between any two nelghbourlng oountrle8, but none of them bas preaented a major obetaole. There le the queetlon of the mlnorltlea, for ln&ume, but that le obvlously wlthln the octopa of the domeetlo responelblllty of eaoh Qovernment. The mlnorltles in Indla oan be proteoted only by the Oovernment of Indla, and the mlnorltles in Pakletan oan be proteoted onIy by the Clovernment of Pakletan. What room le there for any international medlatlon td brîng abcut any tangible lmprovement ln thlhl,ng;rd7 Apart from eaoh Qovernment taklngflrm f! ve lts mlnorltlus the fulleet senae of oeourlty, w at la requlred here fr ca-operatlonbetween the two countrlee to enable the refugeee to return k thelr homes. Even more, there ehould be an over-a11 lmprooement in the relations batween Indla and Pakistan and in the development of a fraternal aplrit betwwn the Hlndue and the Muelime in tho two oamtrles. But a laetlng lmprovement oan take plaoe only with the settlement of the Ka8hmlr dispute, Indla would svada thlhlr settlement and yet talk of reeolvlng Wffermaw~. Ite poeltlon le, 1 am oonstralned to eay, 80 tranrpamntly dls~ngenuotm that lt oannot poerlbly delude anyone. 78, The ropreeentatlve of Indla professed not to belleve the sentiments 1 exnreaeed the other day regardlng the peacoful settlement of lnternatlonai dls- Puter. He aooused Pakistan of lndulglng ln threate of iiiolsnoe, The Kaehmlr dlepute hae-beën bafore the Camoll for sixteen long yearr. Numerour offorts bave bwn made durlng these yearr to reaoh a peaceful oolutlon of thhs problem. No 1008 than twenty diffemnt nronoralr bave been made at one tlme or another bu ëminent perronalltler, lnoludlng the Preddent of thë Udted Stater and the Prlme Mlnlrter of the Unlted Klngcbm, in order to brlng about agre6mc.k between Imita and P&l&an. Every one of thene proposals wa8 aaeepted b by Indla, If P&l&an. Every one of them was rejeotad thlr door not aonrtlkits proof of Paklrtan% wlRlngnew to reek peaoeful rettlement of dlsputee, thon 1 am at a lorr to know how to oatlefy Indla. 70. It waa the Defenoe Mlnlrter of Indlawbodeolared that Indla bad no: l bjured the UEO of armed foroe and that lt redrervad the rtgbt to rerort to foroe when itd lntarartr r demanded. It WPI tbe rame Defenoe Mlnlstar wbo publloly derorlbed Paklrtan aa Indlrfr %nemy number onea. We bave corne here not witb a threat, but with an nppeal-an appeal to you to rcmember tbat lhls Orgatileation waf3 eetabll8liod Y.43 maintain international psace and seourlty, , . . to brlng about by poaoeful meane, and in oonformlty with the prlnolples of justloe and lnternatlonal lnw, adjuotment c,r settlement of lntornatlonal dlaputes or eltuatlons whloh mlgbt load.to a broaoh of tho peaoe”. Wo appoal to you to remomber that the hlstory of manklud ha8 kon markod by war and vlolenoe, tliat if thlrc Organieatlon in whioh mon havo plaood their bopeo for future poaoe turns a deaf ear to the pleas 77. 11 y a peut-8tre beauooup de petites querelles entre l’Inde et le Pakistan, comme d’ailleurs entre n’importe quels paye voisins, mals auoune d’elles n’a pr&eent& de dlffloultb majeure, Il y a la question des mlnorlt68, par exemple, mals 11 est 6vident qu’elle eat du ressort de ohaaue rrauvernement. Les mlnorlt&e en Inde ne peuvent &rè protag8es que par le Oouvernement indien. et oelles du Pnklstan ne peuvent 1’Btre que par le C&vernement pakistanais. -Quelle poselbllita y a-t-il de m6dlation internationale en vue d’apporter une am8lloration tangible R oet Egard? En dehors de l’aotion vigoureuse que ohaoun des deux gouvernements peut entreprendre pour donner a ses mlnorit6s le sentiment que la plus entibre abourita leur 8era assur6e, il n’est besoin dans 08 domaine que de la ooop&atlon dee deux paye pour nermettre aux r&fud&e de reuauner leur8 foyers. Plus n6oessaire eno”ore est 11am6110ration des relntlons entre l’Inde et le Pakistan et l’&ablieaement d’un ollmat de fraternlt6 entre hindous et musulmane dans les deux DRY& Mals la situation ne peut s’arnb llorer de matil& durable que ai le dlffbrend Rur le Caohemlre est r6glB. Or, l’Inde veut Bvlter oe rbglament tout en parlant de vider les flquerollesn , L’hypaorisle de oette attitude, je me vols oontraint de le dire, est ei apparente que nul ne saurait e’y tromper. 78. Le repraeentant de l’Inde semble douter de la slno6rit6 dee sentiments que j’ai axprim6s l’outra jour au sujet du r&lemont paoiflque des dlff6rends internationaux, Il a aoous6 le Pakistan de se laisser aller a menaoer d’avoir reoours il la vlolenoe, Mals il ne faut pas oublier que le Coneell a’ououpe de la question du Caohemfrë depule 18 ans, Dan efforts 88118 nombre (rslt BtB faite au ooura de oette phlode pour trouver une aolution paolflque au dlff6- rend. Non molne de a0 propositions ont Bt6 suooe#- alvement formul6ee par dee pereonnallt& Bmlnentee, dont le PrBeldent dee Etate-Unie et le Premier Ministre du Royaume-Uni, en vue d’amener PIndo et le Pakletan A s’entendre. Toute& f~tum exoeptlon, ont BtB aooept8ea par le Paklrtan et toutes, sans exoeptlon, rejet6ea par PIndo. Si 18 n’eet pas la preuve du d8elr du Paklcitan de reoheroher un raglement paolflque du dlffbrend, je ne sais oomment oonvalnore l’Inde de la rlno0rlt6 de nos eentlmento. 79. Vert le Mlnlrtre de la d6fenue de l’Inde luimarne qul a d0olar8 que ron pays n’avait pae renonob a l%iaap de la foroe arm6e et ~‘11 08 r6rervalt le droit d’y reoourlr ri ron 1 intir t l~tucigealt. C’est aussi le Mlnlrtre de la dafenre de l’Inde qui a traita publiquement le Paklstan ndtennemi No 1” de 8on pays. Nous no eommoa pne VB~UB loi pour profbrar dea meuuoua, mnis pour lnnoer un nppol, pouP voU8 prier de voua aouvenlr qua notre orgnnlsntion n Bt6 or&3e pour nmaIntenIr la pnlx ot In f&uritb internationalos. . I , r13alIeer. nui des moyona paoîfiqua8, oonformbinont nux prIn&I& de la juËtioe-et du droit international. l’nluetement ou le r&lement do diffbronde ou dé sitÜntions, de onraot&e internntionnl, susoeptibles do menc a uno rupture de la palxH. No~8 VOUQ demandons instr.mment de vous rappolor (1~0 l’histoire de l~humnnit6 est marqu6o pnr In guerro la plue grande partie de 1’ Etat de Jammu et Caohemiro et rr’8Imeràit rien tant que d’6tre laise6e tranquille. MA~S nous, qui voyons no8 fr&ree vivre dans la tyrannfe et l’oppreseion, devons-nous rester epeotateure silenoiew dee souffranoee de8 nbtres? Nous, qui aasietons au aoul8vement d’un peuple r6eolu 11 Btre libre et qui pouvons oomprendre ses sentiments, ne devont+noue pae vow mettra en garde oontre le danger qu’il y Aurait & laisser aller les ahoees et oontre les ooni36quenoee qui pourraient en r&sulter? 81. Le repr6eantant de l’Inde a tenu) de faire endoseer au PakIetan la responeabilit6 de l’boheo des oonvereatione bilat6rales qui ont eu lieu entre nos deux paye en 186a et en 1968, pr6tandant que oet Boheo 0tait dtl B la oonoluaion de l’aooord de fron!= tibree sIno-pakistanais, Il a m6me &4 ju8qu3 m’aoouser d’avoir finalement interrompu les n6gooiationr en d6pit de toue les efforts d0ploy6s par son guuvernement pour qu’elles oontlnuent. Permettes-moi de dire au Conseil de e0ourit6 08 qui Ve& r6ellement pase6. Sa, Dans le oadre de na politique qui vire A oultiver l’amit de toue lu0 paya du monde et, en partioulier, de oeux qui le bordent, le Pakistan a aonolu der, aooorde de frontl4ree avea lllraa, la Birmanie et, dans une oertaine meeure, avea l’Inde. 0eat dans le oadre de oette m6me politique que le Gouvernement pakistanais propoea formellement au Gouvernement de la RBpubliqua populaire de Chine, en marr HQ, d’augager des n6gooiatione ‘en vue de e’entendre sur llemplaoement et le rbajurrtement de la frontibm non trao6e de la provinoe ohinoire du Mn-ktang ot dea r6gionr oanttgukle, dont la d4fenne inoombe uuQouvernement pakietanaie. 82, The representative of India ha8 eought to blame Pakletsn and the oonolusion of the Ifno-Pakistan boundary agreement for the failura of the bilateral talka whloh took plaoe between our two oountriee in 1062 and lB69, Hegoesontoohargethat the talke were finally broken off by me in spite of a11 offorte on the part of hia Government to keep them going. Let me place the relevant faots before the Semrity Counofl. 8a. ln purauanoe of the polioy of the Governmeut of Pakietan to promote friendly relatione withall nations of the world, and In partioular with those whioh are ltts nelghbourr, we oonoluded bnundary agreemento wlth Iran, Burma and to 8ome extent even with India. It was In purauanoe of this polioy that tbe Qovernment of Pakistan formally proposed to the Qovernment of the Peoplele Republlo of China in Maroh 1861 tbat the two Qovernmenta should enter into negotiations to reaoh an underetanding on the looation and alignment of the non-demaroated border bstween the Chineee provlnoe of Sinkiang and the oonttguour arean, the defenoe of whioh la the reeponeibflity of the Qovernment of Pakistan. 89. The Qovernment of the People’s Republio of China made an affirmattve reeponse at the end of February 1061, and a few montlm later, in May, a joint oommuniqu8 waa iaeued by the tw Governments rtatlng tbat thety had deoided to enter Into negotlationrr to reaoh an understandlng on the boundary question on the baris of mutuel aoaommodatfon and in the rpirit of friendly relation6 between neighbours. The negotlatione oommenoed in Peking a f6w weeks before the outbreak of the Sino-Xndian border oonfiiot, in Catober ltW2. That wao a oonfliot behveen twapowerful nation8 of the East. That WM a orfsir whioh wAs net of our mrkfng. We oould neither prevent lt nor influence itr oour8e. 83. Le 0ouvernemen: de la Rbpublique populaire de Chine aooueilllt favorablement oetta proPosition ver8 la fin de fhrier 196a et,. quelques moir plur tard, m mai, lee deux gouvernements publi&ent un oommunIqu8 oommun IndIquaut que, rouohux de m6nrgsr leur6 LntBrOts rbiproquer et anim&r d’un erprlt de bon voisinage, ils avaisnt dbldb d’y del ny oiations en vue de s%intendre sur a quertion ea frontf&es. Les n0gooiationr aommenobrent A P&in quelquer remainerr avant PouvrrRtre der hartfliti R la frontlbre rino-indienne, en ootobre .961. 11 s’agirsaIt d’un oonflit quf opporait deux natfotm puinranter de l%rient, d’une orire dont noua Uttfonr nullbment re~ponrabler. Nctw ne ~ouvtonr ni l*emp8oher ni influer mir ron oaurr. 84. Quand le Prbident du Pakirtan et 10 Premier Minletre de l’Inde publiRrent, le 20 novembre 1#62, le oommuuIqd oommull dam lequel ils d8olarAient qu’lls btaient oonvenua dedeployer donouveauxofforts pour rbsoudre la diffbrend relntlf au Cnohemlre SIUP une bAso Aqultnble et houorablo, l’Inde savait parfnitoment quo quolques mois Auprnvnnt le Pakistan et la ChIno nvnient antarn A P&In dos nbgoolations en vue d’nboutir A uu Aooord de frontI8roe. A IA veille dos oonverentioue bilatbrnles qui s’ouvrirent h RawalpInd1 le 27 d6oembro rI36a, il fut annon quo le Puklstan ot la ChIne A&ient parvenucI A un Aooord de prInoIp0 total BU~ 10 r6Ajustement do IA fronti&e 84. When the joint oommuniqu6 of the Prerident of Pakletan and the Prime MinIster of IndIa wa8 issued on 20 Novombor 1002, agreeing to mnko renewed efforts to resolve the Kn&mIr dispute on A just and honourable bah-i, IndIn knew full well thAt l%kiStAn And Chinn hnd oommonoed MVJOtiAtiOUf3 on A h3UMkUy Agrcemont In Peking muob oarlior. On UIC ovo of tho oommenoemont of the bilatoral tnlkEl In R~~nlpIudI, on 27 Deoember lOf32, oomploto Agraemont in prinoiple b&W@en PAkIstAn And ChInA on tiu3 AlignmoIIt Of tb0 boundary bhveon SInkIang und the oontiguous ArOAE, for the dofenoo of whioh Paktetau was responelble, WA61 announoed. We took thie OOIA~BO before the bilaternl 86, The representative of India oalls the oonolueion of thie boundary agreement a @provocation” and givee ordit to hia Government for not breakinp off the Kashmir negotiations with Pakistan, He aot%iee me of this aotion. In May 1988, during the laat round of talks, 1 repeatedly told the Indian Mini&er, Sardar Swaran Singh, the leader of the Indian negotiation team, that 1 would be willing to stay on in Delhi if he waa at a11 prepared to oonaider the Pakistan euggeetione to break the oomplete deadlook that bad been reaohed sinoe the third round. 1 got no responee, Therefore the negotiations encjed. 88. The repreaentative of India bac thought it fit to aoouse us of oarrying on “flirtations with China” and that @Pakistan does not want India to k strongl it wante to weaken India bath internationally and domestioallyfl, Mr; Preaident, wns thihis remark about Flirtatiens with China” meant for ‘your eare? Wae it meant for the Bar8 of everyone in this Counoil? Obviously net, It wa8 supporred to be a dialogue, However, 1 should like to eay that no one in this Counoil ie SO itmooent a8 net to know the differenoe between an ally and an opportuniet, We are allies, we are oommitted in two defonce allianoes with our friends, and we etandby thoee oommitments and aIlianoee. We take the advantager and the dleadvantages of allianoea, We take tbe benefits and non-benefits of allianoes, We are willing perhaps ta faoe nuolear annihilation for a oommon oaum and oommon deetiny and oommon values. Perbapr one of the reaaona Why no progrers bas been made in the eettlement of tbe Kasbmir dispute is beoause we are oommitted firmly to our allianoerr. No one then oan delude anybody that Pakietan in fIirting witb Communirt China. We bave aboundary agreement with alI oountries, witb Burmo, witb Iran. China happenr to be our aeighbour ad well an4 91 with all otbero, we bave oonoluded a boundary agree ment with that neighbour in the intereats of peaoe and reourity and rtability to remove a11 posdble 8ouroeI of friotion, ao that peaoe 11 oonrolidated, eothat there ir not a repetition of the oonfliot tbat India ir involved in with 80 mmy oountrie6. Tblr WPI in the interert net only of our allhnoer, thir wa# ta thr interert of world waoe. We hme reooaniaed reaIitYi many oountriës havi reoogniced the r$ality. Have they beeh aooueed of flirtinn with Communi’st China? May we romind the ropre&ntntivo of tho Qovernmant of Ïndia of the ten years of soduotion that sxi&od between the aovernment of India and the People’a ltepublio of China? 87. We hera in thie Counoil are aoousedof flirtntions with n neighbour meroly beoause we bava normal relationo, but no one in thie Counoil is 80 nai’cro a8 to 813. Le repreaentant de l’Inde qualifie de “provooation” 1~. oonolusion de cet aooord de frontibres et attribue B aon gouvernement le merite de n’avoir pas alore rompu les nQooiation5 f4veo le Pakistan au sujet du Caohemire. C’est moi qu’il aoouae de oette rupture, En mai 1983, lors de la dernibre serie de oonvereatione. l’ai dit it plusieurs rearieee au chef de la d616gation -Indienne, ie sardar tiaran Singh, que Je prolongerais volontiere mon eelour R Delhi e’il etait Pr& a-examiner le8 propoeitiois pakietanaiees tendant B eortir de ltimpaeeo dans laquelle on ae trouvait depuie la troieibme eerie de oonversations. Je n’ai pas repu de reponee favorable, et otest pourquoi le6 n+ooiations prirent fin. 88. Le repr6eentant de l’Inde a Jug4 bon de parler du Vlirtm du Pakistan flaveo la Ohinefl, et de noua aoouser de ne oas vouloir “auo l’Inde soit forte”. ajoutantt “il veÜt l’affaiblir tint sur le plan international que sur le plan interieur”. Moneieur le Pr& eident, oette allusion B un “flirt aveo la Chine” VOOUB BU-elle destinee? Etait-elle destinbe R tous lee membres du Conseil? Assurement non. Il a’aglsaait d’un dialogue. Cependant, fe tiens B dire qu’auoun membre dÜ@oneeii n’est &Ëoa naU pour ne @e faire la dietinotion entre un allie et un opportuniste. Nous eommea le8 allies de oertaine pay&‘nous avons pris des engagements dan8 le cadre de deux allianoes defeneivee oonoluee aveo nos amis, et noua tiendrons 086 engagement8 oomme noua respeoterone 088 allianoee. Nous aooeptone les avantagee et lee inoonventente des allianoeet noua en aooeptons les oone& quonoea, favorables ou defavorables, Noue risqueronr e’il le faut l’an&ntieeement nuol6aire pour une oauBe oommune, pour un destin oommun et pour des valeur8 oommunes; L’une dee raieons peutibtre pour leaquelle8 auoun progr8r n’a et4 fait dans le r8glement de l’affaire du Caohemire ert que noun adherone fermement B nos allianoea, DB# lorr, nulnepeut faire oroire B pereonne que le Paktrtan flirte avti la Chine oommunirte. Noua avons dem aooordr de frontMer aveo ~QUI ler pays, aveo la Birmanie, nveo l%%n, Il ee trouve que la Chine ert aussi au nombre de nor voiainr et, oomme aveo tour Ier autrea, nour avons oonolu avfx elle un aooord de frontiCer danr ltW4r& de 1s pain, de la réouritb et de la rtablliti en vue d%liminer toute I~UVI de friotion porrible, de manibre B oonrolider la paix et & 6viter der oonflita tels que oeux qui opposent l’Inde B tant d’autres pays. Cet aooord a 6t4 rlonolu dnna Vint&& non seulement de no8 nllinnooe, maie auf& dnnu oelul de In pnix mondlnie. Noua nvonti admis la rBnlit6; do nombreux pays ont ndmis ïn r6ulit.6. Les n-t-on noouf de flirter nvoo la Chine oommuniste? Qu’il me soit pormie cle rnppeler au ropr6sentnnt de l’Indo l’idylle qui a uni pendnnt 10 nns aon puvernement Ot oelui de la RBpubllque populnire de China. 87. On hou8 aoouae iol, au Conooll, do flirter aveo une nntlon voleIne unlquement pnroe que noue avons 6veo 0110 dos relations normnles; mais auoun membre 88. We are aooueed of weakening India domestioally and internatfonally. I have dealt aufflîriently with the domastic aepeot, Iiow bave we weakened India internationally? Must we remain on unfriendly terms with Indiala neighbure beowae India% relations with mont of them are unfriendly? It fa noe alone with P&l&an that Indla hae differenoee, India has dlfferenoes with almoet a11 its neighbours. If those differenoee had bean only with Pakistan, then perhaps there might have baen Borne blame that oould be apporUoned to Pakistan, But apparently India ta rlght in every oaae and the rest of the world-and in partîoular its neighboura-le wrong in every oaae, 88. We are aoouaed of having given away to China aa a reeult of the boundary agreement 2,000 square miles of Kaahmir. 1 thank the repreeentative of India for reduoing the oharge to this more modeet dlmenrion. Immedlably after the oonolueion of the boundary agreement, the Prime Ministar uf India stated in the Indlan Parliament on 6 Marc-h 1068 that Pakistan had %urrendered” 13,000 square milea of territory to China. Now w corne down to 2,000 rquare miler. The faot fa that Pakistan did net surrende~adngle lnoh of territory to the People’a Republio of China, P”” oontre mon pays. Il ne faut pas oublier, en effe , que, imm&iIatement aprAr la oonolunion de oet aooofd, le Premier Minirtm de l’Inde avait dAolrr6 de91111 le Parlement de ron pays, le 6 marI lS68, que le PIktrtan avait @oAdA* A la C&e un territoire ‘d’une superfioie de 13 000 millee oarrA8, Ce ohlffre est maintenant ramen6 fi 1000 milles 0rrrAr. La v6rtt4 ert que le Pakilrtan n’a pa8 o&dd( un raul pou06 de tsrrltoire a la R&publique populolre de Chine. 80, Le repsGantant de l’Inde a egaIement routrau que la population du Caohemtre Atait parfaiMmu@ heureuse ~OUI ltadminialration bienveillante de aab paya, sl bien qu’il n’y avait par lieu de lui i%oonnaftre le droit A l~autadAtormlnation, Il a dit au Ca+ rail que ler ra&ter de 1Wat de Jammu et Urc&- mire avaient awantb, de m6me que la psw!ualW de denrAer allmaatalrw. Il a d(olarA quU y avait plur d%aoler, d’h6pltau& de routaa a boa &at, d’Aleotrioit6 < s . que 10 1~ plur t& Ca#r dœorlp 00. The repreaentative of Indla ha8 alao asrertedthat the people of Kashmir were prfe&Iy happy under tha b&evolent rule of India and should nol therefore be given the rlght of self-deeermination. We told the Coun- 011 that the revenue of the &a& of Jammu and Kaahmir had inoreasedt 80 had food produotion. There wetre more sohools, morehorpitals, botter roa&, elactrlolty and ao forth, than thora wero tan yearr a glowing report, permit me to aay, remin dar’ Thir on0 of nothlng ao muoh a6 an rooounf of itr rdmlniutratlon of a térritory glven by a colonial Pwer bfore tha Trusteesklp Counoil, The arnument tht the uaorrle are well fed and happy under for8lgn rule, thaE tlie b&tev+ lent rulor knowvs what 1s blet for tha peoplo and thnt thosu wlw speak for f,voedom nro disgruntlcdagltators is one with whioh thls worlcl Organizatlon is a11 too fnn~llIar. FIow many Urnes havo wo net henrd tho Foroign Minister of South Afrioa stand at tire rostrum of the Clonornl Aeoembly andextol, in tormo of hoepitnd lx&, 8ohcolroomfl, roade, kilowatts nnd mogawutts tho b5nofits brought about by bis Cfovernmont to the hidlgenous pooplo of Boutlr Wast Afrioa? Likko tho Eduontiou MinIster of lndln, the Porolgn Minleter of buth Afrlon too feols thnt ifonly 111s Govoruinonl: woro left alono, nll vfould be well. 110 tw would like tho tion ri favorable de la rltuatiar au Uaohomiro a#u fait îmmAdlatemwt panaor, Iwmattea-mot do le dire, aux rapporta que Ier P\l~an~er ooloairlrr pr&&ont nu Consoil do tut&10 au auj& de 16$r ndministrntion. Dirs quo 1~ l~pulatîon oat biQ11 nourrlo ot vit heurouso sous llndminlstratio~~ Btrangbre, qu’une ndmlnlstrntion bionvoillanto unit 00 qui oonvlonb le mieux au peuplo qu’elle gouvorno ot quo ooux qui rbolnmont la libort6 oont doa porpbtuok agîtatoure, o’ost nvanoor l’un do 008 argumnnt.8 qui no sont qua trop familleru h notre organieatiou. Combien de fois n’nvcmti-nouB pas on offot ontondu 10 MMetro dos nffnircs Btrnngbroa do 1’Afriqua du Sud, du bit dc la tribun0 do l~Aesombl0o g&nbrnla, vnntos -. an parlant d0 lite d’hbpitAU.K, d0 SAhS do dAB@O, dI3 k’OUtW, $1. WA hrw rlwqys aoneidered Kashmir to be a Vita&l illlpfMt8llt qUA&iOn kOaUAe it iS, AbOVU A& A humAn question on whosa fust A&d honourAblA reaolution depends tbe fats and future of nearly 600 million -1s wbo tubabit t. Xndfa-Metan subuontinent. Xt 1s t!ie Xndian pretsnsion that K~~htnir le a symbol and guarantee of thsk seoularlnm, X venture to rubmit tbt KMhmlr 1s a te& of the ability of the world oommunity ta resolve dirputes through pOAOf3fld maans, Xf Kasbmir ta t0 be A rymbol and guarantee, let lt be the symbal of t& wllXfngnes0 of nations to solw dis- P utorr tlwaugh peaqeful means and A guarantee that urtioe Will bs dons to aX1 States and aX1 people, WS and rmall. Oa, Ths K~hmir dtArW hAA weisted for masw yeart?, Th@ aomplsxitiss that rur&und it are me oom; plaxttler of pnlitlor and power, The issue lnvoloed la simple and oleart the Fi&t of a petople to sslf-deter- &RAtiOA Alid th0 Obl&AtiOn Of 8tAtsE t0 bOROlll’ illtOF national oommitmenti, Ws heard a achalastia ci& odursb ths other dry from th6 Eduaation Minhter of Xndia on ths maaning of theword vrolLdetermioationP, TO thore of UI in thora hallr who foqht And strtq@ad for thtr right, to thore of us wbo rymbollae by our pmarnas hors the triumph of tbir prinoiple, ths mean@ of self-determination 1s qults clear, 88, P0ki8tM i# IWt PkVillU With OhO idAA’Of AelfdeterminAtion wken it talrlkr 01 Kantunir “po morethsn wtisn t rwaks of ralf4etermination r Anqola, bfOWibiC@, &?dAAiA rnd 8OUth WA8t &k?A. ‘%At IA ~AIR~ nked &A repreAent&ive of lndtr, Mr, C&@A, th@Othdry, Le ifbr WAl’AUAAWAFAOfthA oommltmmol givm by bis &wwnmrnt to the peopfe of Kuhir, to P@klrtan and to the Baoudty Couno& Thîs fr lmw the Prime Minister of Xndia, bis Prime Ministor, auswurûd thhe yuostion on tbree difforont oooAf3ions. Ill 1047, in a broadoast tothoIndlAn IlAtiOn, Mr. Nshru sald: “ii% ilWCl dtWlAX%i tbllt th0 fAk, of KMdUnil’ 161 ultim~toly to bo dooidud by tho poople. !Ut~& plod&o wo hAva glvsa , , , not only ta tho paapls of Kashrnfr but to tho world, Wo wlll not and onnnot baok out of 10.” aation~le contre v 8 dans une oonsplratlon lnter- 1tA rlque du Sud et la paix maadiale. Le nombre et la divereite des raisons lnva qu&s par le repr&entant de X’Xnde pour justifier le fait que son gouvernement n’a pas tenu ses engameots sont si grands qu’il n’est pas faolle de auivre e fil de son argumentation, Y 01, Nous avons toujours oonsid8r6 Xa question du Oaohemlre oomme sxtr6mement importante et mSme vitale, 6tant donna qufil s’agit bvant taut d’un pi% blbme humain, puisque de sa solution juste et honorable d6pend 10 mort des 600 millions de personnes environ qtd habitent la partie du oontinent asiatique qui oonstitue 1Qnde et Xe Pakistan, Wnde Pr&end que le Caohemire cet un symbole et une SQ%ntis de sa laibit& Je ma permets de dire que le Caohemire met a l%preuve l’aptitude de la oommunaut6 mondiale B r0eoudre les diff0rende par des moyens pauiftquea, Si le Caohemlre doit Btre un symbole et uns garantie, qu’il soit le symbole de la volont des naticns de rb ler les diff&snds par des moyens pacifiques, et a prantio que tous les Etats et toua f les peuples, grande et petits, oblendront que fustioe soit iklite. 0% Le dlffkend du Caohemire dure depuie de nombreuse8 anni%& Les oomplexit06 qui l’entourent sont celles de la politique et du pouvoir. La quastion 6n litige sot simple et olairet il. s’agit du droit d’un p8uple B l~aukd&ermtnatian et de l’obligation des Etats d%onorer leurs engagements internationaux, Nous avons entendu l’autre faYr un dioouurs trbr Brudit du Mfnirtre de l*&iuoation de l’Inde our le sens du terme ~autod6termlnatIon~. Four aeux d%ntre nous qui ont lutta et combattu pour ae droit, pour osw d’entre nous qui symbolissnt par leur pr&ssnaa loi le triomphe de ne prinoipe, le ssns du mot “autodattermination” est tris olair. 08. kkque le Paff rtandsmande 1~~utud6ternUnatla nour le Caohemirs. il est tout aussi rbrleux pue forrqu% la rbXam6 pour t’A.ngola, 1s Mocambiq& la XUnd~rie St le Sud-Ouest africain. A prqm du prbtixe “autoN, M. Cha la a demand6, l’autre jour, quelle 8tatt “OettO sntit f uui A le droit de d&alder de ion ~OS%*, eomma r*lX ipirait fer engng6msntr pris par mn gouosrnement envers la population du Caohb mirs, le Pakietan et le Conseil de asourit& Vo101 somment le Premier Ministre do PInda -% saa prainier minletro - a r6pondu & ootto question en trois diffbrantos aoo~sians. En 1047, dnns un dlsoaurs radiudiffus8 s la nation indiains, M. Nehru R diti “Nous avons daolarfi quo le destin du Cnohomlro doit, on dernibra ~n~lyAo, Eltre d6aid8 par la pupulation. Cet etigagamont, nous l’nvons pris , , , non soulemant A l’bgurd ds la populntlon du Cnohemiro, maie Q llBg.nrddu monde. Nous nu rovisndrona pas sur aet #ngAgalnant et noue no pouvons d’AillaWB pAa la P&ro.” Then, in the Sndhn ParWnent, in Fobruary 1861, $he Prime Mini&er of Indla declaredr “Wo bave given our pledge to the peopki of Kaahmir and sulaeeauently to the United N&ions. wo stood by it andwe Ëtand by it today, Lot thë people of Kashmir deo1de.R sommet tenue et noue noue y tenone enoore aujouG dthui, Que la population du Caohemiro d&ide,n Cer parole5 sont simpleii, leur sans est olafr. %Jue la population du Caohemire d&oide,” En l~oaour~an~a, aucune bquivoqu~, auouna argutie Vert porribk mur ee qu%at l~aukd&rminationi PInde: ne oraint pas de voir aon unit&, sa eolidarit8 et son int&grit& oom- PKSmfEt?& The wardrr are EIimR1es thetr maanfna olear-RLet ehs peoplo of Kaebmlr‘d&ldeie,~ There ié no equiwxation here. na uuibbling about what ia selbdetermination. no f6ar thàt ths utity, aolidarity and inte@@ of Indii WPB at staka, $4, Yet, now we are toid that the rîght of self&etermination le aomething the oountries of Afrioa and Aaia ought ta fear. In hic dort laeaon on &e history of the Utrltad Btatee, the representativ~ of Indla redlod for u8 the blo&y Civil War fought in the Wnited Statee b prevent the buth from eeoeding. Tha aatiagy ia inœ aaaurate sinoe Kashmir Is net a part of India trying to eeaede, nor a elavo-owning ac-oiety att%mptlng b retain alavory. Kaehmir le an entity and ample, and to quote Mr. Nehru, it fa a people %vlth a aoul of itu awn and an indiviJuality of its ownn to whom the B4, Or, on vient maintenant nouB dire que le droit & l~autx3d0terminatian eet une ohoae aua lea nava d’Afrique et d’Asie devraient oraindie, l%È -Éa br$vs 1 on sur Ilhistoire dea Etat~-Unis, le reps% Se&nt 7 e l’Inde nouB a rappel8 la sanglante guerre ohle qui a 0tB livrbe dana 08 lzaye IXRI~ em&$her la s&ekfon du Sud, L~anaiagfe‘nion~pas exa&e,.vu que le Caohemfre n’est nl une partie de l’Inde qui essaie de faire abeasion ni une SQQ~&& eaolavagisto qui atefforoe de maintenir l’eaolavage. Le Caohemirs est une entit& son peuple, pour oiter M. Nebru, cet un pauple @qui a une Urne et une indfvidualftCi sü! lui ecnt propres* et auquel on a promis il y a 18 an@ qutil d&olderait librement de &on avenir. L%nalogie faite par le repr&aentant de lUde est inthœrante en oe B~IS qu(ells rQv6le que oetui vcit de tade Qvldenoe dans le oas du Caohemfrs une rltuation daî~ laquelle uu peuple r0aaloltrhnt doit btrs m*iatsau, par la foroe des arme& danrr PUnion indiakme, pour faire triompher quelque gmrnde oau dont 1Vnds a%at QllQ4nerne inrtîwe le ahamplon. ! remise WBB made ei%teen yeare ago that it would be rse ts deoide its own future, The intsroating aad revealing foaturo of the anataay drawn by the ropresentatfve of Indla le that he obviouely sees tbe eif&ation in Kashmlr BE one in whloh t3n unwiUing people bave, by tome of arme, to be held witbln tha Indian Union for the fulfilment of Borne higb and noble purpose of whioh India 1s the self-appofnted instrument. 95, Pakistan baa oome horo net to se& pur eupport for Mit3 right of a minority e0 a~soedo from tk8 Indian Union, St oomeo b reek a rsaffirmation of &a ghn to sll the peuple of Kmhmir tbt t&q snabled to deoide the future of thofr land. Tho people of K&&dr are not an ktdkn inhorl&. ThsYwiIl nover be an Indhn minodty. “Kamhm~ ii Rat tht prspol$ of sither ludia or Pa&i&n. Et belonîp to the peuple of KuhmW, and tlm people ol Kulmh rloas WfU d~01de ~8 b whrt tbeir future affiliation and oourse of aotion Ail lx. Tho wos’da 1 bave @et rmken omx a@n a~ the wordr of obe Prime Miiiihor of Indir, 95, Le Wirrtrù ne afat par adresab au@oaroilpaur lui demander d’a&niyer 1s droit d’une mlnori# de me dparor de l@Un& -indienne. Il 6@t v6nu ioi pour obtanir la r$affirmation de la promarrs dande L la population du Cachemire tout entibre, B ravoir qu%lls rerait mire en mesure de dbider de l~av&ir de son pays. La popyfatlorr du Caohamire no a~rtitue pM Me minoritb indknne. Elle ~lb @ora frmair Mb rnim?- rit6 indisnne. *Le Caahomlro aFart Sa pmpriW ni de PInde ni du Pakistan. Il appartient aux’Ca&* mlriaara, et rsula aeux-al d&olderart de leur IWOI olrtkm futww 3t de k llwas ds eanduM0 k rdqsbr, &r paroler quo je visnr do proptanaer une fols de plu8 aont lee garolea m&noe du Prfmior Minbttre de l’lndo. QS. LB Mînfstro de 1’6duoation de PInde a asaay8 d’agiter 10 spaotra do la fragmantation des Etats d’ Afrlnue et d’ Asle. dont bertuoouu ont dea minarit& R l~intbrieur de II&+~ frontibras; RI le prinatpo de l’nutodbtormiuntlon devait btro nppliqu6. En da urBo4dontes actoasiom, 10s porte-p&& de l’litdè ont virriblomont oaenyb do B~attlror la 6ympafhie de& pays Qfkxh3 QI Oamparnnt 10 Cnohcniiro uu Katanga. Je no eornl pria [LBBOZ nalP pour ontror dana (de jeu, mnia gormottee-moi do dire qua, ai 10 Caohemlrc 06, Tho Eduoatian Ministar of bdia triad t~rafaotho spaotre of frngmantntion of t%e Statee of Afrfon and Asla, mnny of whioh havo minoritles wlthin thnir l%xYlara, if tho prinoiple of a~lf-dotenllislntion WOPB to k appliod. Onprovious 06oa&m8, Xudisn sp&esmon havo mado a transparent bid for Afrloan sympathy by oomparfng Kn&mir with Kutauga, Xt would he nnlbo for me to ontor Into this garno, but let ino ay that if Knehmir ie Katanga, thon its despotio Maharajah, whoso forefathore purohnned tho valloy and lta peuple 97. In his broadoast of 13 August 1963, Mr. Salazar aaked the following question: “If self-determination aims fundamentally at verifying the assent given to the form of state or of government under which populations live, it is not understood how there oan be a sinde method of aohieving this purpose or of determinhgthat assent, the single method being a plebisoite following the illegitimate demanda of the United Nations.” Aooording to Ms. Salazar, Angola and Mozambique are an integral part of Portugal beoause Porguguese law says 80, and any attempt to asoertain the wishes of the people of Angola and Mosambique is to be viewed as a dangerous negation of the noble and high-minded policy of multi-raoialism whioh Portugal ha8 been attempting, for the last 600 year8, to follow in Afrioa. QS, The representative of India oonsiders that the future of the world depends on the evolution of multiraoial nations and States in different parts of the world. Perhaps-that may be SO; It is not a oontention with whioh we quarrel in prinoiple. Pakistan itself is a oountry in whioh live people professing different fait& speaking different languages, belonging ta diverse raoial origins. Our differenoe on this matter wlth India-as with Portugal46 that we believe that the ewlution toward multi-racial States and sooieties should corne about not by foroe, not on the basis of legal fiotions, but on the willing oonsent ofthe people. If tbis 1s a reaotionary polioy, then we plead guilty. BO. The representative of India sought to Lnlighten us about India’s orusade against imperialirm and ooloniallsm. Iiis olaims, 1 venture to submit, would hsve been far more oonvinoing if, in the same statu ment, ho had not built bis whole oase regarding Kashmir on the rightr of the ruler, a feudal ohief, a tyrant wbo bad been proteoted from his own people only under an imperialist dispensation. Moreover, it is unfortunate for the olaims of the representative of India regarding India’s anti-imperialist mentality tbat when he wants to yrove Kasbmir Is affiliation with India, he cites tbe evidence that Kashmlr was a part of the empire of Emperor Asoka. 100. Surely. not only Kashmir but the whole of Pakistan and m&t of Afghanistan were inoluded in the empire of Asoka. And it 1s fntal for Mr. Chada’s theËis thnt the politionl thougbt of modem Indiahns been nrticulated in other terms by her mostprominent “Our vision has been obsoured by an un-Indian wave of paoifism. ~Ahimsa~n-non-violenoe-nie no doubt a great religious oreed, but that is a oreed whioh Indla rejeoted when she refused to follow Qautama Buddha. The Hindu theory at a11 times, espeoially in the period of her historio greatness, was one of aottve aosertion of the right, if neoessary tkrough the foroe of arms. , , , TO the Indian ooean, we shall then have to turn, as our anoestors did, who oonquered Soootra long before the Christian Era, and eetabliehed ctn Empire in the Paoifio , , , .” Surely the attitude that is projeoted here is one of expansionism, an attitude that would extend India% hegemony from Somalia to Indonesia, and from the Hindu Kush to the Mekong River, that is, over a11 oountries and territories touohed by the waters of the Indian Coean, It is, 1 submit, hardly an anti-oolonialist attitude. 101. Who has not heard of the epio freedom struggle of the peoples inhabiting the sub-oontinent? For long yeara all of us fought side by side, although even while the struggle oontinued, the present leadership Of Inclia oppoped, tooth and nail, the right of Pakistan to be a free and independent oountry. It pains us, therefore, that a oountry SO reoently liberated from foreign rule, should itself now employ the arguments and manoeuvres assooiated wilh oolonial powers to deny the prioeless gift of freedom ta the people of Kashmir. 10% The representative of India etated that demooraoy, like oharity, must begin at home, 1 would remind him that this 1s truc of aIl virtue and that eelfrightaousnese is no substitut43 for rightsousness. He asserted that India has fought unoeasingly in the United Nations for the oause of freedom in Asia and Afrioa. 1 do not think that it is aven neocasary for me to remlnd tbe members of the. oounoil of üe humble oontribution thst Pakistan itself ha8 tried to make to the struggles of the peoplee of Asia and Afrioa to free themselvea from foreign domination. We take no oredit for this. We seek no oredlt for it. It is our duty. It ir our responsibility to world peaoe and to antioolonialiem. It is a natural thing. It is a normal thing; it is not a phenomenon. Nor do we wish to SuggeSt that Pakistan% impnot hns been of a singulnr or decisive nature, The oredit must go in every case to the peOple8 themselves and to their leaders who fougbt andstruggled, even as the peuple of Knshmlr are doing today. èoit .louli&e ou dboisive. Dons ohaquo oas, le mbrito revenir nux populations elles-marnes et A leurs ohefs qui ont lutt6 et oombattu, tout oommo 10 fait aujourd’hui le peuple du Cnohemire. -/ New York, ‘Ilo John Luy Company, 1946. ki New York, ‘Illa John Dpy Conqmy, 1946. !i!/ London, Georyc AIlon and Unw111 Ltd.. 1945. 13 Lmxl.roo. Goorgo Allen PW Unwln, Lid., 1945. 104. 1 am l frald that, In hls ceal to oontradlot my statement, the diatlngulshed representwtl~~ of Indla forgot to read it oarefully, Ne attrlbutes to me rome preans of pralso wllh regard to Sblkh Abdullah. Aotually, though 1 ounnot fa11 to honour the eufftwlng and admire the saorlfloe of She1k.h Abdullah slnoe 1969, the Iaudatoru ahrmsee about hlm that were oontainèd in qv stsbïnsnt wura aot miner they orme from the Prime Minlatar of Indla and they were all wlthln quotntlon mark& If the dlatlngulahed representatiw of Indla oontradiota them, hs oontradiok hls own Prime Minlslar and dwa nit oontradtot me. Thon, he olalma that the trlal of Shelkh Abdullah h&o b6en wlth due prooeaa of lkw, Thla olalm oan tm judgad frem the following report publlrlwd ln T& Ta of London on 90 Baptwbw 19691 U Juw. the rmlor proreoutlng oounaal, Mr. Pande rstired tirn the oane. Ma rddthrtthe money for hlr feer oould ha botter uabd, Thr tria& ho rai? oould a on for another flve b mvm yrarr, 106. It oan air0 b judged from tha lrtter addreusd b tlm Prime Minlrktr of IndIa tflfty mmberr of tha Indlan Parllament in Sapkmber 1963. Tha report of thlr latter, publlskd ln Tha Timer of London in the rame iuue raldr %a view of th adwrrr offaot whloh the trial of [Quurh Ahdullah md hlr uroolater wal havlagoverc MU aad of Ue oolorarl and rbnormal amounta klisved to hm bwn ap4ntton thooa44,tUw44 the bpporttme and f&vourrblo time’ for tbr withdmwal of tb t3hargarn tlw memberr argued, ‘If the aotmrnimnt of India oould flnd a graosful and Ro~iuMllY rab WaY of wltJulmwllu tba OhmEu ii bmmu lrnd thokudm b forg&fultiar, tbsy ilt umoAnrortably on mlhl’r polltl~al oon@olœmr and, qutta apas% fan thr frk of tba shaikb IllIIUrlf, tb.M are many wbo drploru thooffeotoftMJtr~tly polîuoal trial oa tha iadrpradrror and relf-oon- EldEnm of thE hdlan judioiary, ‘8 Shdkh Abhllah ooutdkhrw Ytobladhlmself mt to tub up again the oauae of an independent Kaaluair or of a pleblolte to deolde lts future, D&&l mlght be plsased to releaoe hlm. The Shalkh hlmnelf hna anld that he bolde the k6y to hier prlron but wfll not glve ti a88uranoe8 that are domandod.g But the Sh0ikh releured and onlllng for a ohange In tbe prarrcst atatuu in Kaohmlr wouid MI an upuetting influetme, to uay tha lsaat, Thir, M 1 sald bfore, lu a mport of tho letter addreuoed to tha Prima Mlnlot0r of Indla by fifty membre of tha lndim Parllament, und OOmmctIdu thftreoü. *En Juin, l’avwat gMra1, M. Pande, a’eat desraie1 de Wfalre. Il a dlt uue nea honorairea pouvaient 9tre mieux emplo~9r. Le pro&, ait-11 ajout& peut duror enoore otnq h rept ano.” 106. Je rappellera1 &galement la lattre adreaa6e au Premier Mlnlatre do 1Qxie par 60 parlementairer indlena en reptembre 1963. Vol01 dea extralta de lt~rtiole qu6 lui a ofnuaurb le Ta de Londrer dam le m6me num6rot aEtant d-6 l’effet dbfnvorable que le prooba du oheik Ahdullah et de au oollaborateumi pmxtuit & 1~8tranger et lu “rommea extraordinairement 9lev9er que, or&-on, OI pro&r auralt dljl oolW, le moment remble parUoul19remsnt %pportun et bien ohoirl” pour oluaer l*affelre, falraisnt valoir 100 parlementairea. *Si 1s Qouvernement de l%de pouvait trouver un moyu 614gmt 3 politlqueunant rllr de olausr l’rilalxu Qontre 1@ obdk+ il M lui uenlt pu dlaiollr de oarvaiuorr l~apporiflon. Bis que l’on ait tmdame 6 oublior cm0 pumultu qui trafhent u lueur au Jammu, ellea n’a p&at pas moia, Eur la mmolonw pouMqu a Dolhi ot# olbn rbtmuuGa hite du Eort du OMk lut-memo, nombreux eont ooux qui dbplonat 1Wfet de OI pmxtb OunlfMtumœAt polltlqw Rul’lnd9pendaaor du,laJpgdiol&lm lndta ut mlr la owflanw a8110&dkA~paneltOtrerma61afar gager ft renoaoer a lutter pour l’lndbpendanoe du Ctrohomiro ou pour un pl~bleoito, Delhi le rel&ohoralt av8o plairlr. Le oheik lut-mbme a dlt qulll tlent antre fi08 malnr les olofr do aa prleon maie qu’il no donnerait pas lea aueuranoes qu’on lut demande.” 81. une fols llb@&, le ohelkh demandait quo la etatut notuel du Caohemlru uolt modlfl6, oola fetteralt, pour le mohu, le trouble. Il n’agit, Je 10 r&JXe, d’un nrtlole oonrraorb a la lettre adresaee au Premier Minletro de l’Inde par 60 parlementnlros indlenu et d’un oommoi~lalre P oo aujet. spontannb de la popùatlmn, par loque1 lor habitan& ont oondamnh l’Inde a uno Boraernte majorltb. La oorrerpondant du Timer de Wrer brivait, 10 2 Mvrtor 1964, do Sdnrgrrr “Chaque folr quW y a rarrombloment - et Aa vuo dor oorrerpondantr btrangora, qui ne rant rotuolA* mont qu’au aombro do dowt, rufflt paü’ attirer MO foule vwUhnt0 -, on catend der olameurr en faveur du ohoik AbdulU, d% pl6birolb, et mbme du Pakietan , , .” Il ajoute; ” *a. mnirl~~duobnudupm@Uoafaît remantor g lr rurfaao toute8 lsr ranm19 aaaumulkr dor Caohomirienat lt&oroulomsnt du rkimo looal et 8011 remplaoomanni pnr une adminirtr&n ot une pulioe amon&sr do ltoxt&r16ur - “do l%xie”, dirakit lor Caohomirlenr - va& vr8irombAablb ment frira do DoAAii la olble dsr m&nmtarta. Cn a toujourr oru, jurqu’loi, quand OR a diaoutb de la qwrtion du Caohomlra, quo lor dhtr ne 10 trouvoraiont pa# aumpliqu~r par dw manif~trt1oar violenter dor Cachamirienr, rauoieux do faire aonaaftre leur voloat6. Lorquo la queMon Iera de nouveau portbe ootto remuA.no devant lr Natiaaa Unloa, il faudra peut-&ra reeonnrftrequfunnauveau faoteur srt venu r’lntMcluire dam la violur 6qultien, A ravoir ll~rerrioa de la volont du Cauie aUrienan Ainri, un obmmtaur Wuyer par10 dt “un nouveau froteur , ,, drnr lr vîrillo Oquation”, ogndrnt qu’ici le roprbmnknt do AQvh noum dit qu’il n’y a I~~\DI fait nouvmu. NWhenever crowdo gather-and the aight of ioreign oor~rpondentr, of wbom there are only two ju4t now, oan bo enou& to attraot P olamouring mobrhouts are raImi for SAmlkb AbduUah, for a plobiralto, and ewn lor PaJtistan . , , ” Ho adds, Il , , , but the ailrir of thhe hair hrr bmtit to the rurirce ail tha rtored xvmntmmrab of tha Khnirir rnd the orumbli~ of the loarl rkime and itr replaoement by atilnirtratorr and jjolloe from outride-Ymm Indiat au a Kashmiri would ray-bave made it llkely that the reaentments will -now ba foaunred on Delhi. Diaoursloa of the Kaahmir prob= lem in tba part bar alwayr been aotnfortnhly informed with the belief that ct leart it would Rot k 0omplIoatod by violent oxprearionr of their ownwill by the Kaahmlria. When the matter in kfors th Udted Nation# again thir wwk, it may havo ta be wted that there lr a new faotor in tba old equrtion, tha relf-urortioa of tha KuAmxrls.~ Thir ir a forni@ oboerver tdklng of a %6w faator la tha old equationa, but lwe we haoe tha rspFsaeataUva of ladlr raylng that there ir a0 aew riturtion, 107. Thon thore L the dirp&h la Ths NW York 107. Jo oitoral tmutto wa d&phbo dr Sriaagar, an date du 8 fbvrier, publiba daim le New York Tlnryr j&gg writtrn hm Srinyrr on 6 February: Tlm 0ovornamt of lndia wu dworibod todny aa toomplately out of towh with Uw mal rantimenta~of tkNlkNl~h d th BtrputaI titr of Jaalmu and . CTht V*E the view of remwl Kuhmfri hriwrr luQn, inoluding ainciua, in tbi~ pr8dominantIy Moalrm mon. ~Acoordlng to these mon, wtm aeked net ta be IdfAIfied, ‘sinos IWI tbe Moslem magority of KPehmlr ha8 Wn pro~Pakletan’. “On a dit rujouni%ut du Qouvorwmmt da AWîa qu’il rt “rbrotutnmt Yz orultduEattmœltrrWI” dor populatkxu de 1’ E t di Jammu ot Orobmln, qui frit 1’abj.t d’un di@brad. “T@e est l’opinion di plurihcmmrr d’affalnr oMllomirioM, y oamprir dea MWtuD, dulr Wtt. r6glon A pr6dominanoa murulmano. nD1aprbu 008 hommeo dttiiAlreu, qul ont demande A gardsr l’anonymat, NdepuIe 1084, la rmajorIt0 muwlmano dee AmUtauto du CaohRmlre eot puur le lUkl&uP * LI Luur opinlon cet dlnin&r~lonlont op r 060 I oolle UU’P exprim&o bior , , ,‘I - 10 Ministre o l’Inde raan~ ~rtefeüille, La1 Babadur Shaatrl, h Oon rotuur & New Delbi. ++M, Bhamtri , . . II dit quo 100 uoutlmenlr au lbhemire Btalent %ettament pro&dienun. *Tfieir vfew WPB oompletely dlfferent from that SxproMed yerterdly , , .“--by La1 Bahadur Shotrl, the XacUau Mlrdrter Wltht Pfxtfollo, aftfw hir return to New Delhi. *Mr, Shntri , , , sald that the feeling in Karhdr wao UefiniteAy pro-Indlnn’. *For four weelu now tbe Kashmlrla, in an imprssaively diaoilalinad non-violent rsbnllioa. have Qemonrtrïted thëir bortllity toward olooer~ llnka witb India and tbsir determinatlon b deaide tbeir dastiny. nIndia’a peaoemaltlng overturer and rightoour indignation are nat an sfhtive aubatltute for the prubably only laati4 solution-finally ~4nti4 tha Kuhmirir relf46tarmlnation,~ IIe addedi “Ths Unit& States oannot now commit ltself to a long-tarin arma aid to India witbin the naat few waalta, aa it haa planned to, witbout aerioualy questloni to in 8 tha purrible reperouralona of wlut amdunta rwtly auppnrtl4 Indialr oirtual oolonial overlordahip pf Kahmlr,* In tha aama diapatah, tbs norreapondsnt rayrthat ‘the Indian Qovernment haa net ohoasn to revaal a true piotura of eventr in SrlnaSara. Conaideri4 that rmnark, it lr not all aurprial4 to haar the denial 4 t&Tgasvu of Mia that there la no new situa- . 109, Thora aru further rtatementa of forslgn o&ervomi Lr orample, tha mrt in the Baltimore Sun of 5 Fabruary, whioh raya %KI halr, whioh Mualima Mievu orne originally frem tha Prcphet, la only a rymptom of the problema in tbe Indian two4hir& of Kuhmlr a, Azut 1 am foroed to oontent mywlf wlth thora In ordor to avoid undua langtb. Tba nprereatdicr8 of Indiabrrtrlrdtcftulrsltappruthrtths~noftb haaly nlio wu ah iwlated inoifbnt, and thst, with the reoover~ of tbe rello, tbe inoldent la oloaed. l the ckvernmwt and tha -10 of Pakirtanwste porturbad ovor tbia tbeft and talc0 110 poaltlon WASF tha genuineneu of itr reaovery, 1 murt malu t lt fa tha rcvalationa bmugtît about by thh IwiQnt, rat& tkn tba inoidsnt itrrlf, to whioh ww are eeddq ta draw tba t33umf11~ attontlon. expnoltlon of tha holy rello. Aooording to this dlepatoh from Srlnogar, the Prosldent of the Peuple% Aotion CommIttue said that ths ban imposod by the Committes on thd openit~ of shops on Bridays would oontlnus untll thulr domands hud bacs oonocdod. It wns aftor fhe maovery of the holy ro110, agaIn, thet Mnulana Mauoadi, awordlng to (L Hautors dIspaCoh, sald that Indlan-held Kaahmlr wss Qoo muoh P polioe State, wlth evory Mlntstor movl4 around wlth pool100 protsotlon II, and not only dld hs demand the releose of Slulldl Abdullah but also orltlolsod ths oxpulaion of Clhulam Abb~r and Yueuf f?&ah, two Kashmirf lea&ro who, nVoiol quatre romaines que lea Caohemlrlans, dana uwe rbbellion ciel se oaraotbrire nar une extrbms diaoipllns et par l’abaanoe de reooÜrs il la vlolanoe, manifestant leur hoatlllt0 A l’@ard do l%tabllraemant de liena phu &rolta avea 1Qade St leur volontb de dboider de leur avenir. MLsa ouvertures de pal% de l%de et oa balle LndQnatlon na aauraient auppl6er a la aolutlon qui ert vraiaemblablsment la roule durablet l%ntrol an fin de oompte aux Oaohamiriana du droit A l(autad6termination.m Il ajoutait: H Las Khta-Unis ne peuvent maintenant n’e4ager dan8 un pr ranime d’aide B long terme B l%da, IOUII forme $ e fourniture dWmao, oomme ils avaient l’intention de le faire au ooura des quelquea proohainoa aemalnso, rans r6fMhir a~rleuremsnt aux r@aruuaalonr poaaibles d’un aote qui 6quivaudrait h appuyer indirsatement la domination quari oolonlale do 1’ Inde au Caohemire.” Dans la mbme d&ti-:ie, le aorraapondsnt borlt quo “le Gouvernament lndlen n’a par aru devoir montrer lea bv6nementr de Srinapr aoua leur vkitable Jour”, Danr aea oonditlona, 11 n’eot par aurpmnant dtentendre la roprbaentant de l’Inde nier qu’il ae aalt prndult au Caahamim un fait nouvaau, 109, Je pourraia alter dcautrea dblarationa d’obaap vatsura &ranirwr. somma nar axsmnle l’artlale naru dans le Baltlkor6 Sun du -5 fihvieri d 11 ert dit qua “1s ahaveu aaar6, que lea muaulmanr arolant avoir appartanu RU Pn>phbte, n’ert qu’un symbole des zYmu 2 N pownt dans lea deux tien du aaoha= prr 1Wi3, mai0 fian rwtorai la pour ne pas 8tre trou 104. La rapr&aantant de l’Inde a’eat offcira de n& fa& aroirë qua la vol de la relique rrarhe Malt un inaldent la016 et qu’avao la prWndue rQoup6ratloa de aella-al Nnaldent hait aloa. Le @uvernemant et le psuplr du Pahiatan ont Ylprofondbment troUOs par ae vol et n’unt paa prlr porltlon sur la queatlon de l~authantlolt~ de la relique mtrouvaet je tlana ae dant A prblasr qua oe sont lor 6vbnrm6ntr r rbv lbr Pr oet inokient plut& que l*inaldrnt lui-m&me que nour VOdOM porter & ~iattantien du Conreil. 110, Le T mrr of Indla a pub116 un artlolr aignl- -in fioatif aur m uG%ïïZrk la 06r6manle au aours do laquollo la rollquo siorbe a bt6, dit-on, axpaoba. Salon la dbp&oho provenant de Srinagar, 10 Prbsldont du Comltb dlnotlorr popululro a dit que la d6olslon du Comltb d~lntardlro Pouvorturo dos magasins 10 vondrudl surnlt malntunuo nues1 lon&umps qutIl ne ooralt pas fait drolt k uos ruvendloatlonu, braqua Maulana Manwdl a dit, eslon uns d&&uhc do l’sponos Rnutor, quo la part10 du Caohomlru woup60 par 1’Iudo “uvalt tout d%n Etat polloler, ohaquo mlnlstrs no se tl8plapant que souu la protoutlon do la polIoon, la relique naor& avait daJA bt4 ratrouvf!ai non seulsmant il n rblamb la klb&ratlob du oheih Abdullah, 111. In thlr wnnsxion, 1 must mention 801~ reoent utteranaer of Bak6hl Qhulam Mohammed vbo for tan yopTE, bO&iMiIig in 1363, WU tbs #ONrlied uhlof Minlrtar of Jammu and Kuhmir md, themfom, Iadirlr main prg, in tha Mate. 1 bave almady quutad [lO8Tth mmth~l hir rtabmsnt of 17 Januar~ 1061 that tha deman& of the peuple 0fKaahmlr weri for tbe mleue of 8heikh Abdullah and tl~ &ldIn@of apleblroik. T%ir rtrtemont WM lator aolariflodW in a mannor whloh furnirhed rtrnng giuundo for tha bollof that th %larC flortlonM waI ma& under pmrrure. We bave now a rtakiment from Baknhf Qhulam Mohammod, whloh, aoaordînq to reliablo m WM oiroulated in Dolhl, TE rts, rttll unoontradiotod, rtatement saldt 111. A ue propnr, jo V~UIIFU I or aertainor dbclarationr rbanter do Bak&l cllaz Mobamtnod, aul. demur 1068, em4 mui-dirmt Premier Mlnlrtm de ~1089bno sbanao] aa dblaratkk du li jurvî&~lB@4, danr laaualla 11 dlralt au0 le neu~le du Caohomim la ruitts l’oblat dhmo %AI~ au paInta dana dar aai& tiotu put portant tivsment L oroira qua daa pwaiaar ont 6t4 oxorobr. Bakahi Wam Mc&ammti a fait dopuir uno nouvelle dbolaratlon qui, 101p11 dw Inh= matlotu dlgnw do foi qui n’ont pas (u1oora 6tO damaatiw, a 6t4 pubU& k Dal!& Il y ut dlk Wonroquont upon UKJ dlrmiusal and armert In 1088 of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah beoaurr ho hadulwcl Wa ta wlthdraw tmapr fa9m Kuhmlr prepuatoy to holdinp of the mmUd plobirolk, 1 aooaated promisrrlilp of the- Stats am it WN my-bonort ionviotlon than that tha majority aommunlty of Kuhmir aould bo bmugbt reundtortayl onwîthbulia and that tby would really b botter o a andmom woura wlth awular India Un with oommunal Pakiutan, “For a full deoade, 1 dldallIoouldtoward#thla rnd, but yrar dter yrar I boaamowirer by obervi~ that svenk In India raflwted on tlw pi9yobol~ of Knrhmlrlr.@ Bakahl Wam Mohammed went on to ray; “Tbs rearnt epirode of the HO!~ Relia Lt HurathU ha extremely rlmoke6 rrnrltira Kuhmirl Mwlhu who now ODWY dwlaro that avan tbmlr relUon ead aulture tr‘ d rafe wtth Indla, Tby alaa ïry that Ptirtan ir no mare a Murlim 8tati than Mta la a Hlndu &ak, and tha mry faot that ewyttd4 Uut bofallr lilndua In Pakirtan mtUiatu all Uw mura Mverely on Murllma ln Ilxua balior tlw olaim of ladia tn hr a renular Btata. a Stata aborelUien. T&y fur their fa& tamoriow wtll br no dlff&ant km or not battor tkn that of Caloutta Mwlimr. EtBUhi Chh~~N&aaunod ajout.1 “Of thelr throo immodlarte domands, numoly, tha rttle~~e of Shelkb Abdullah, the holting of a pleblrolte and tbe iuquiry into ti~lro that led to tbe sventa of 1333, I bava alrerdy apprired the Frelr,~ Ho aontlnuedr “1 frankly admit that wbat ELbelkh Akdullah erld In 10113, I oay today aftor a fwüier ten yeare of expsrlment, Içven todqy 1 mn bonost and falthful to kilo nnd If 19 fn3mef8 tu a plebluelte, I mlght vo& “Aprbr la tivoaaclon et llarremtatta(l m 191 du obuli Yohmmma6 Alxlullah-p*rar vainou l lorr que la 0ommutuut4 majOrWr0 du Caohomlm pourrait Otre ama& A mbr WtaabW k l’Inde et quWle urait rbllemont plur praapb et plua çl(l r8ouritb aven PEtat lalb q@ut NI& ~M~UII Etrt A tadanœ ml@huu wmmo 10 *Pendait 10 ana, Pal !Ut tait 00 Qw Val pu polir “J’ai’ d618 lnformb lu urwne de leuro 6x01~1 deof KamhmIr derire,” 113, Bakrhl Ohulam Mohammed har up ta now been one of the main inrtrumentr of Indiatr derlgnr in Jammu and Kaahmir. A rtatement of thir nature, domlng fmrn IndiaQ ohief agent In the State, aoquirea a dtqular lmportanoe, We h&va reporta that ourrently ha Ir uncbr estmmo prerrura from the IndfanQowrnment 8nd Mut he ir either to bs arrsrted and ImpriMnsd-Uke hla p&eow~or, Sbalkb Abdullabor forœd b raroind hlr rtatomentr, A rt.rong rtuplolon that tba Gowrnmont af Indla wtll meb out wvena lmhment to hlm for hlr audaolty in oonleulag the aots abqt Kuhmlr Ir oreated by the rtatemrnt of tw former membem of hir oOvernmant, Shaw-La1 smaf ad ardharl La1 T a, ohargbtg Mm with dunadng tha intereak of Ind a, p” 118, The@a are aomo of the faotr wbfoh @ire an lndloa- In Iadian-oouupled Kash- 9 d Iaorw of people w 010 oitier ad townr’ mudn damatdratlona by vî&ually thr entîn aduli populaMon d a oapïtal olty ad aullen nwntment spontanooudy expnrd~(~ ltwlf bdon for01 obmrverm do net ootutltuk a ave dtuation, r re n what Will, ucœpt an outbnak d ortilltter? 114, Tht lt lr tba nrtralnfq hud of tl~ Pakimtut Govwnmrnt alaw whloh pnwmr prœ ln Kuhmlr -all Mm eharger againrt uI bvolled by tho Indian mpmwntative aotwlUukndln(-lr l ppwont from tba mt@d dema& mdr by tba A8adKa&mlrOovornmont, aad tba Al1 Jammu aad Kaahmîr Murlim Confomœ for iba abrgrtioa of tk aeaw-fin ynrmmt,Tbewdma&amnotMghtlymade,Theyam Qb rgoatr#au ex~nrdoa of t& tœmloa in Aud K&lr wbloh 11 i dlnot nuit d tlw raprordan updrr whloh tba BldtuI~od MdrlKlian-wted area of Jammu and Ka8hmlr Sroanr. 111. Th.e IsbdIan repreeentatlve denier the gravity of the~ rltuation ti fllngn epithatr at uu for narrrtlng “a horror #tory* and for bolna viottme of a *vlvld imaglnaMon~. If-the avkienoe ~6 have offereri !r net 8uffIobnt. let the Soouisity Ccun~ll employ whatever mita&& 10 feasible foi a thorouyh ind fmpartlal faot flndlng of the rltuation in tbe IixMan-oooupled area of Ynmmu and Kahmlr whioh nhould inolude taldug tibe evIdenos of ail poUloal priaoners in the 113. Je vlenr de oiter quelquer fait6 qui ~OUI permettront de voua faire une id60 de la rltuatlon aotuelle danr la partie du Oaohemire oaoup&e par l’Inde. 81 le mauaom par la polios de dlainsr et de dlsalner de pemonno~, der grbver gbn6ralea qui paralyrent der viller enti&er, der manlfertatlonr marriver de la prerque totallU de la populatlon adulte d’une oapttale et un rerrentlment maurrade qui Vdxprirne rpontan6ment devant des obrervateurr Qtrmgerr ne eonrtituent paa une rltuation f” ave, qu’ent-oe donc qu%me ;\&&Ion grave, hormlr e oas d’ouverture der horti- 114. Seule la mal~ration du Gouvernement pakirtanalr permet de uuveprder la paix au Caohamire, quo1 quW dire le reprbentant de l%de, qui nw attrlbw buter ~rter de tort& C*e#t oe qui reuort der demander rWWtas du Ciouvemement du Uaobe mire “asad” et de la Conf&enoe musulmane pour l~enrrmble de 1tEtrt do Jammu et Oaohamire, qui mtlmt l’abrogation de llaaoord de osrrer-le-feu, Toukr ow drmander ne ront pu pr6renUu A la 1Ogke. Elle# ront l’exprerrfon rpoatanti do la t@nrlon qui exirto danr 10 Caohomlre *arab ot qui ort ln oonr6quenoe dimote du rbgimo de rbprersion sou8 lequel g&mlt la population de la partIedu Jammu et Unohemlre oooupBo ot domin6o par l’Inde, 118. Le raprbeentant de PInde nlu la gruvltb de In eltuation et nous aoouoe d’avoir pr8uent8 un “roman d’Opuuvanten et d’btro vlotimoe d’une aImaglnation furtUeR. Si 1011 preuves que noua avoH8 apport0eo ne titufflaent pa11, quo 10 Conaoll do rbourIt4 uuo dcr, moyenil dont 11 dlspoae pour offeotuer une enqu3te oomplbto et impartiale 6ur la sltuatlon danr 16 partie du Yammu et Caohemlro oaoup&e par l’Inde - une cinqu3te danu 10 oadre de laque110 on roouollloralt 1113, We hav4 &awn the Caunoll~r attantlon to th4 pnwnt rlt~~Mon in the State oi Jammu md Ka&mlr nnd to W Eerloun defsrioratlcn la th4 mlationr batwen ündia and Pakirt~ whiah 1s ths dimct oonaoquonoe of that rltuatioe. h do@ e62$ iv8 Wlew w(s hav4 done Mm duty tkat Mm Ckartsr bar impoead an UI, tbo duty of aeekinq ardotasw of thlr worldOqanfr;atioih in rmoliorrttag tho rltuatioa8 ln armrtl dstwloratlon, in prewmting a aaoenlu~t& 00 %E Upon the ardrtanoe that th4 Counoil, la ~CE Wdom and in ltr renrs of tlte 4oll44ties r8rpnrlbiüty of mrnkind, Will rondor UI, rsrt the hopsr for peaoe in our region. Ws pry that th4re hop4r may not NM&‘0 A M&A& 111. Ths PREBIRENTr 1 thti ths Forslgn Mlalrter cd PakMu~ 1 havu no other rpsrker on mp Ilrt for tbl6 lIfwnooP’R meeting, Aft4r fx?arulting with uw msmbers of th4 @ourrcll lnfomn&SIy, I rhouid ltk4 fo ruggert tkat the Counull rhculd w~oo1mne on MIXW& 10 February, at 8 o~ol@& ln tha af&now, If 1 hear no objooüon to tktr -~Mon, f dl a1mm4 that tke Camdl agreer with lt, -. ..*,. t ,.- yuo, v. VA Iw !?&4& “_“_, II..---, NQRFN AHKKlQAi MbtN6QUK DU NORD