S/PV.1148 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken at the 1144th and 1145th meetings of the Council, 1 propose, with the agreement of members of the Council, to invite the representatives of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines to take part in the discussion. 1. . Le PRESIDENT (traduit du russe): ConformBment aux dgcisions prises aux 1144ème et 1145ème sgances du Conseil, je me propose, avec l’assentiment des membres du Conseil, d’inviter les representants de la Malaisie, de 1’IndonBsie et des Philippines B participer à l’examen de Ia question, A f fhe invitation of the President, Data’ Ismail bin Data’ Abdul Rahman (Malaysia), Nr. Sudjarwo Tjondronegoro (Indonesia) and Mr. Jacinto Cas tel Borja (Philippines) took places at the Council table. Sur l’invitation A bdul Rahman (Malaisie), negoro (Indonésie) et M. Jacin to Cas tel Borja (Philippines) prennent place à la table du Conseil. 2. Le PRESIDENT (traduit du russe): Le premier orateur inscrit sur ma liste est le représentant de la Malaisie, 2 qui je donne la parole,

The first speaker on my list is the representative of Malaysia, and 1 now give him the floor. 3. Data’ ISMAIL (Malaysia): Mr. President and members of Council, 1 thank you for giving me the floor once again in this debate. In 5ofar as the central matter before the Council is concerned, the facts which 1 have already presented with great tare to the Council are more than adequate to demonstrate beyond any doubt that Indonesia has committed blatant and inexcusable aggression against Malaysia, apeaceful neigh- 3. Data’ ISMAIL Je remercie le Président et les membres du Conseil qui m’ont permis d’intervenir ce débat. Pour ce qui est de l’objet essentiel de la discussion, les faits que j’ai déja exposés tr&s en détail suffisent amplement % démontrer, sans aucun doute possible, que l’Indon&sie a perpétre une agression flagrante et inexcusable contre la Malaisie, sa voisine pacifique. IXNr. 4. I would not have asked the members of the Coud-il to bear with me again but for the attempt by Indouesia, supported 1 regret to note by the Soviet Union, at the 1l.45th meeting on 10 September, to again run away from the central matter of Indonesian aggression by gcing into general polemics on neocolonialism and revolutionary socialism. 4. Je n’aurais pas demandé aux membres du Conseil de m’Bcouter 51 nouveau aujourd’hui si l’Indonésie - appuyBe, j’ai le regret de le constater, par l’Union sovi&ique - n’avait pas, h la 1145eme seance, tenue le 10 septembre, tenté de s’écarter de l’objet essentiel du débat, que constitue l’agression indonésienne, pour se lancer dans des polemiques de caractére g&-&ral socialiste, 6, Nevertheless, in view of the deliberately misleading remarks made against the integrity of my country, I consider it my compelling duty to put the record straight. The formation of Malaysia has again oome under criticism as a neO-Colonial prOj&. 1 am sure the Council is aware that the formation of Malaysia 1s not the issue before it, The formation of Malaysia was settled once and for a11 time by the people of Malaysia when they decided to form Malaysia of their own free will. That. the people have exercised their full right of self-determination, one of the cardinal tenets of the Unitecl Nations, is fully confirmed by no less a person than the Secretary-General of the Unit& Nations. That freedom is irreversible; that freedom is not negotiable. 6. Néanmoins, 1acieuseS dirigees j’estime V&ite. qualifiee parfaitement, la formation La Malaisie par son peuple, qui en a d8cide librement, a exero8 nation, des Nations le Sec&taire Cette mnti&re 7. Le peuple malaisien que des étrangers lutte m&mes la formation un acte de décolonisation. notre mais la politique avouge est d’écraser 7. The people of Malaysia today do not need outsiders to champion their struggle against COlOnialiSm, because we ourselves rejected colonialism from our land, because the formation of Malaysia itself is a major act of decolonization. The danger that is threatening Malaysia today is not colonialism, but the neo-imperialism of a big neighbour whose avowed policy is to crush Malaysia. 8. May I with your indulgence quote an example of the tone .in which this policy has been espoused, not because it is particularly harsh, ?f which there are numerous other examples, but because of its facetiousness in dealing with problems involving human 1iveS and international security. 1 quote President Sukarno who said on 25 September 1963: 8. Permettez-moi & quel point l’Indon&ie et que j’ai choisi sont particuli&rement égard bon nombre d’autres du ton facétieux bEmes rité internationale, a d&lark “Yes, brothers, the word ‘crush’ has already becorne a well-known word everywhere. When 1 visited Tjilatjap yesterday some people used the phrase ’ swallow , (“kermut”) Malaysia’, It is entirely up to you whether you use the word Icrush’ or ‘swallow’ but 1 think Jogjakarta citizens prefer the word ‘crush’.” nant connu partout rendu B Tjilatjap, sonnes parler Il ne dépend que de vous d’utiliser ser” les terme,” The question at issue appasently is which organ of the human anatomy is to be used. La question partie de l’anatomie 9. But the guns have already echoed. It is this aggression committed by this neo-imperialist neighbour-a manifestation of the bullying tactics of the “LWYang” or “crush” diplomacy-whioh has prompted Malaysia to corne to the Security Council not only for the protection of its territorial integrity and Security, but also to prevent suoh aggressive acts from escalating into total war in the area. This, 1 need hardly remind the members around this table, 1s the cent& matter before the Council. 9. Mais les canons C’est imperialiste de la diplomatie qui a poussts de sêcurité, grité pour empêcher g0n8rent besoin de rappeler cela qui constitue est saisi. 10. The 1957 Agreement on external defence and mutuaI aSSiStanCe between the Federation of Malaya and the United Kingdom and the presence of military bases in Malaysia have cited as a manifestation of neo-cclonialism. But, any nation enjoys the sovereign right to enter into military alliance with another 10. L’Accord l’aide mutuelle, et la Féderation militaires tion du néo-colonialisme, qu’elle 11. Indonesia is making a lot of noise about British bases in Malaysia. May 1 point .out that not merely the question, of bases in general, but the specific question of bases in South-East Asia was discussed by the Heads of Governments’of Indonesia, Philippines and Malaysia-then the ‘Federation of Malaya-at Manila in August 1963. The existence of bases in the territories of these countries was not considered an obstacle to “Maphilindo”. I qucte from the Joint Statement issued after that meeting: “The three Heads of Governments further agreed that foreign bases-temporary in nature-shculd not be allowed to be used directly or indirectly to subvert the national independence of any of the three countries. In accordance with the principle enunciated in the Bandung Declaration, the three countries Will abstain from the use of arrangements of collective defence to serve the particular interests of any of the big powers.” In this regard, as 1 said at themeeting of the Security Council on 10 September, and 1 repeat now, neither before the Manila meeting, nor after, has Malaysia or bases in Malaysia been used to subvert the national independence of Indonesia. j-2. Furthermore, the British military bases in Malaysia are indeed temporàry in nature,. No fixed duration has been set, as in the case of many other foreign bases in other countries, and’Malaysia as a, party to the defence Agreement retains the right to revoke it at any time, Just as Malaysia had to obtain British military assistance under the defence arranghment because of the threat and actual use of force by Indonesia against it, Malaysia would consider this same defence arrangement no more necessary as so0n as it is assured that a11 military threats to its security have been completely and permanently eliminated. 13. For the present at the reauest of the Malavsian Government there are indeed Commonwealth troops fighting side by side with Malaysian troops against these attacks from Indonesia, We grieve in the losses’ that they have suffered together with OUI‘ own in the defense of Malaysia. In this connexion, 1 am glad to note that even the representative of Indonesia could make no more than a ritual. reference to these Indonesian attacks as directed “net against the native’ population but against British oclonial troops with 1/ Declaration on the Promotion of Wo?ld Peace and Co-operaticn, adopted at the Asian-African Conference held at Randung, Indonesia, from 18 to 24 April 195.5. 14. Still another oriticism of Malaysia is that its economy is dominated by British monopolistic interests. Such criticism is of course as unfounded as it is irrelevant to the question with which the Council is seized-the question of Indonesian aggression against Malaysia. 15, Nevertheless, may 1 briefly turn to meSe remarks. The representative of the Soviet Union said blithely in respect of the rubber industry in Malaga -which is the largest industry in the country-Vhat 60 per cent of the rubber plantations are controlled by fore@-mainly United Kingdom-capital” [ibid., para, 641. This, to say the least, is a gross inaccuracy. The fact is that, out of the total rubber acreage, about 60 per cent are owned by small holders and 40 per cent by large estates. Al1 the small holders are Malaysians and of the remaining acreage in the large estates a great bulk is also owned by Malaysians. Can anyone adduce from thesefacts that Malaysia’s rubber industry is controlled by foreign capital, let alone by British capital? 16. It was also suggested, as an instance of British domination of Malaysia, that Malaysia’ s external trade is controlled by British monopolies. But again, what are the facts? The country’s external trade with the United Kingdom accounts for 12.5 per cent of its total external trade. The rest is shared among many trading countries, including, if 1 may say SO, the Soviet Union, which is one of the largest importers of Malaysian rubber. Do these facts suggest British economic domination of Malaysia? May 1 point out also that in the years after Malaysia’s independence in 1957, our trade with the United Kingdom relative to our total external trade has considerably decreased, while trade with other countries has been increasing a11 the time. Today Japan has become one of our chief trading Partners and our trade with neighbouring countries, euch as the Philippines and Thailand, with whom we have fcrmed the Association of South-East Asia for regional economic and cultural co-operation, is rapidly expanding. Our large and important trade with Indonesia was unfortunately interrupted by the unilateral declaration of a trade boycott by Indonesia. Thus, far from Britain’s exercising economic domination, the importance of Britain in our Overseas trade has considerably declined. In fact, a11 we have done, of course, is to keep our economic and trading relations with a11 countries on advantageous terms, We have no need to prove our independence by expro- 17. We have heard much from the representative of Indonesia about the aim and character of the Indonesian revolution. We are a11 aware that we live today in revolutionary and tempestuous times. Malaysia itself is a product of the winds of freedom which have swept the world these last twenty years ormore.But we are most anxious to ensure that these winds, though they must have the force of hurricanes, shall not only destroy the. shame and evils of colonialism which we despise, but also release the creative energies of our people and work our ploughs and our machines. The Malaysian revolution is not a romantic revolution, it is a very real revolution, a very dynamic revolution which has brought to our people the goods of life, which has built new soads and bridges and schools and hospitals, which has created new sources of industrial power, which has diversified our economy, which has opened up our lands, which has altered the pattern of our trade from its former colonial structure, which has revitalized our arts and our culture. It is not a revolution of words, it is a revolution of sweat and effort and*organization. It is a revolution to meet the rising expectations of our people, not to divert their rising frustrations, It is not glamorous or romantic or sensation-seeking but very earnest and practical. We believe in this practical approach for it brings results, and it is results whichfinally Count. We do not wish to talk too much about this revolution, we wish rather to live it, to act upon it. But because we choose to act and not coin facile abbreviations or grandiose slogans, let no one misread the tempo and temper of our revolution. That the representative of the Soviet Union, in his statement on 10 September SO badly misjudged these forces which are moving my country forward, and SO outrageously misrepresented them, is a cause of deep regret to me. 17. parlé indonesienne. des temps elle-même a balayé Mais force les méprisons, notre nos une révolution realiste, & notre a construit des puissance mie, commerce a n’est par revolution sants a fascinante, tion, mais elle est serieuse à cette attitude et ce sont Nous que la vivre nOU6 formules ne se notre represectant ration ces deformées 18. For we do not claim that we have any special insight about this revolution, its character or its demands; we share its aspirations and goals and efforts with our brothers elsewhere in Asia and Africa and Latin America. We understand one another for we have lived in the same shadow, we have endured the same injustices, we have emerged into the same light of freedom and struggle and search for a better life, we walk together now toward the same goals. Malaysia was not yet independent in 1955 when the countries of Africa and Asia then independent met in Bandung. But it drew inspiration from that meeting and knew when it became independent that it was 18. révolution, particulierement aspirations, de6 latine, car nous boucher lutte nant, La Malaisie lorsque 20. Let us examine this question of pre-condition. The representative of Indonesia omitted to mention that right from the beginning of this year during a11 the proposals for a meeting, commencing with the one by the then Attorney-General of the UnitedStates, the principal problem was Indonesia’s insistence that the reelars and irregulars, of whose presence in the Malaysian Borneo states she gleefully and proudly boa&, should remain there. The representative of Indonesia also omitted to mention that, prior to the meeting in Tokyo, the three countries-Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia-agreed to a joint communiqué announcing that the terms of the meeting on this particular question of the presence of Indonesian regulars and irregulars in the Malaysian Borneo states were as follows: “Indonesia acoepts the principle of withdrawal of her forces, bath regulars and irregulars from Sabah and Sarawak.” 21. We attended the meeting at Tokyo on this clearest understanding to which Indonesia hadpledged her word from the highest government level, her word in writing which we had particularly insistedonobtaining in view of her familiar evasions from oral undertakings. 1 Will not go into the details of that meeting, but it failed on this particular question, Soon after the meeting began, President Sukarno proclaimed that if Malaysia insisted on a withdrawal the answer was “NO, a thousand times no”. Having made that pronouncement, the President left the meeting, 22. SO, what is this talk about pre-condition? I have urged upon YOU the words that no less a person than Mr. Gromyko, now the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union, spoke before this very forum. That, 1 submit, is the correct principle. TO insist upon anything less than that is to negotiate from a position of inequality, with literally a pistol pointed at our head. TO insist upon the continued presence of these troops within our territory, as Indonesia has done, is indeed to set a pre-condition. 23. But, said the representative of Indonesia the other day, if the troops are withdrawn, what is there t0 negotiate? What is the need for a conciliation commission? That is precisely to say that theproblem is the presence of these troops wfthin Malaysia. We 24. Nevertheless, the representative of Indonesia insisted that Malaysia threatened his revolution and his country. We are surprised, of course, that we could threaten the Indonesian revolution which has SO long and, on Indonesia’s own claim, SO glorious a history. We are sorry that twenty years after she proclaimed her independence Indonesia feels herself SO insecure though she has many friends, including her former colonial masters, 24. prétendu revalution. pouvoir histoire marne, apres nésie dépit de ses nombreux coloniaux. 25. Ignore, if you Will, ourprotestations of friendship and brotherhood for Indonesia. Ignore, if you Will, our vehement and repeatecl assertion that we have done nothing and that we Will do nothing, that we have not been used nor Will we allow ourselves to be used, to subvert the course of the Indonesian revolution. Ignore, if you Will, the fact that Indonesia has produced no direct or credible evidence to support its assertion of Malaysian involvement in the struggle for power in Indonesia. Let us ignore the reality of the facts, let us accept the reality of Indonesia’s fear. Malaysia is prepared to talk with Indonesia at any time, in any place, and in any way, jointly to examine these fears, to seek out their sources, to devise their remedies. Let us talk then in the spirit of I’mushawarah~~, in the spirit of African-Asian solidarity, let us peacefully conciliate these clifferences. 25. tations Laissez avons n’avons nous nous COUTS de la revolution si vous aucune l’appui la lutte cSté la réalite craintes ger des conversations n’importe examiner cher Engageons mushawarah, asiatique, 26. de ce qu’il ginaires des auxquelles envahir combattants ganisations depuis envers appartenant a rejetes qui se sont déroulees ces pour ver ment pouvoir 26. The repsesentative of Indonesia has made much of what he calls the volunteer guerrillas from Malaysia among the bands of troops which have been sent across the border to invade Malaysia. Who, indeed, are these so-called volunteer guerrillas? They are members of organizations which have been discredited in the eyes of the people because they have been exposed as owing allegiance, outside Malaysia. They are frustrated politicians of political parties who have been soundly rejected by the people in the various elections held throughout Malaysia in the last eighteen months and who are now lending themselves toforeign Powers to gain their objectives by violent means. They are quite simply anti-nationalists who want to shoot their way to power. 27. venons tolererons egalement la violence se constitutionnelles tez-moi soviétique les a la 27. Let me make it absolutely clear that we in Malaysia, who have only recently won our freedom, Will tolerate no traitors in our midst. Let me make it equally. clear that those who choose the path of violence to attain their political objectives Will be met with violence, The constitutional paths are always open. And let me add at this point that the representative of the Soviet Union need not have gone to such lengths to distort the remarks of the London newspaper, The Observer, which he quoted at the 1145th meeting, He need go no further than the 28. It is precisely to ensure that the people’s voice shall always triumph that a11 the resources of the Government, which has been freely elected by the people, Will de deployed firmly and unremittingly against a11 anti-nationalist agents, against a11 traitors in the service of foreign Powers, against a11 terrorists and saboteurs who are trying to intimidate the people by force. Let the representative of Indonesia not be proud of using these unsavoury elements. 29. The representative of Indonesia has sought to oharacterize the burden of our present complaint as a slap in a series of many slaps-a graphie description, no doubt, even though it does not adequately describe the senseless loss of human life andproperty and tranquillity. Yes, there have been many others, none from Malaysia, a11 from Indonesia, which Indonesia has openly admitted, even gloried in, We have already informed members of the Council of these incidents in our letters of 11 and 17 August 1964, in addition to our earlier communication Co the Secretary- General about incursions from Indonesia into Malaysia. We had refrained from asking that our letters be circulated as officia1 documents in the hope, vain though it turned out, that no recourse to the Council might be necessary. But the gravamen of our present complaint is a clear and specific charge that Indonesia has committed unprovoked and blatant aggression against Malaysia, which 1 have already substantiated with the utmost particularity and detail. The representative of Indonesia has responded to this charge by regaling us at length about the Indonesian revolution and by telling us clearly and brazenly that Indonesia has its troops, both regulars and irsegulars, within the borders of Malaysia, and that it intends to keep P them there until its demands are satisfied. And further urgency is lent to this most dangerous situation by the fact that yet another landing was made in the afternoon of 9 September, which, 1 might add, was duly apprehended. 30. 1 submit that this is an issue of the gravest importance and one which concerns not Malaysia alone, but every Member of the United Nations, and indeed the future of this Organization itself. These are no idle words. Has this body yet heard a State Member of the United Nations say flagrantly that it has its troops in the territory of another State Member of the United Nations and that it Will keep them there? Has the United Nations yet heard a Member State proclaim unequivocally that the first aim of its foreign policy is to eliminate a peaceful neighbouring country and a fellow Member of the United Nations? Can there be any doubt that Indonesia’s declared aim of destroying Malaysia is contrary to the letter and spirit of resolutions on peaceful coexistence unanimously adopted by the General Assembly? 1 refer to General Assembly resolutions 1236 (XII) and 1301 31, glais]: tieusement parties c’est-à-dire Gouvernement approfondir qui ont motivé

The Brazilian delegation has scrutinized a11 the arguments presented by the interested parties on the question under consideration, that is, the complaint of Malaysia against the Government of Indonesia, and has sought t0 delve into the legal and political issues behind them. 32. sur l’Indonésie lorsque, de 30 gu8rilleros chuté présentées ces guérilleros rant les ljreuves n’a pu &re tat d’une action militaires de l’Indonésie la péninsule des opérations du territoire certains de même que des “volontaires” le Gouvernement 32. The complaint submitted by the Government of Malaysia refers specifically to a particular incident: the use of fosce by Indonesia against Malaysia when, on the night of 2 September 1964, a group of thirty guerrillas, heavily armed, was parachuted into Malaysian territory. According to the evidence submitted to the Council by the Malaysian delegation, those guerrillas carried armaments in current use by the Indonesian armed forces. Al1 the evidence indicates also that the attack could not have been the act of individuals, but was the result of a planned action supported by the military authorities of Indonesia. Furthermore, the Indonesian representative admitted that the act which took place on the Malayan Peninsula was on a small scale, as compared with the operations which are taking place in other parts of Malaysian territory where local rebels, some of them trained in Indonesia, together with Indonesian “volunteers “, are engaged in fighting against the Government of Malaysia. 33. claire, le devoir le recours mettre des Nations cher plus, à l’Indonésie la Malaisie, 33. The issue before us is a very clear one and the Security Council, if it is to discharge its duties under the Charter, cannot condone the use of force and is compelledto take Swift action to stop the fighting and-perhaps through the presence of the United Nations in the area-to endeavour to prevent the recurrence of similar acts, The Security Council, moreover, would do well to remind Indonesia that, by its aggressive policy towards Malaysia, it is not only jeopardizing the peace but is weakening the very 35. The recession of the colonial tide and the birth of sovereign States in a particular area of the world frequently engender political and territorialproblems which are often conducive to the poisoning of relations between the newly-independent neighbouring oountries. An additional burden is thus brought to their task of accelerating their economic development and of raising their standards of living in the enjoyment of their newly-aoquiredfreedom. These areparamount tasks for any* country. These are paramount tasks for Young States in particular. For this very reason they should swiftly and peacefully settle their external problems and join efforts, helping each other to render less diffioult the path towards the achievement of their national goals. 36. In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Brazilian delegation views with the utmost concern the violation by Indonesia of its special duties as a country which came of age under the aegis of the principles set forth in the United Nations Charter. If there are problems between Indonesia and Malaysia, they should not resort to the use of force to settle them. On the contrary, it is their sacred duty to use the peaceful methods of negotiation in the settlement of their differences, as provided for in the United Nations Charter. 37. Sir Patrick DEAN (United Kingdom): When 1 spoke shortly on 9 September 1 promised to give proper study to the statement made by the representative of Indonesia and to reply later to any of hia charges which might seem pertinent to the matter which we are discussing. That is, as 1 may remind members of the Council, the complaint by Malaysia that Indonesia oommitted a deliberate act of aggression by dropping members of its regular armed forces from an Indonesian Air Force plane on Malaysian soi1 near Labis on 2 September. 38. As 1 understand the tenor of the Indonesian statements on 9 and 10 September, this attack was 39. My first duty, therefore, must be to deal with the charges of proyocation which have been made against my country. Those relating to Malaysia pave already been disposed of by the representative of that country . d. 40. 1 have already assured the Council that we hate not supplied British arms to Indonesian’ rebels and 1. have pointed out that, given the fact that such arms were until recently standard equipment for the Indonesian Army, their use by Indonesian rebels, who have often been recruited from the Inclonesian Army, cannot be held against my country by the Government of Indonesia. 41. 1 am today authosized by my’ Government categorically to deny the charge that we have attempted to subvert the Indonesian Government. 42. The repre’sentative of Indonesia has also given the Council a circumstantial list of alleged British violations of Indonesian territory, principally in the air. Members of the Council Will note that his list refers to dates subsequent to the start of his country’s armed attacks on the territories comprising Malaysia, and they may in’ any case be inclined to give. the benefit of the doubt to those who are defending themselves against an acknowledgedIndonesian aggression. 43, Nevertheless, 1 cari assure the Council that my Government has been most punctilious in doing its best to make sure that’ whatever the provocation, violations by land, sea and air ,of waters internationally recognized as Indonesian territory and territorial sea, have not been committed by forces under British command. 44. However, it’is generally recognized that occasionally in areas where frontiers are inadequately marked, and even in some where they are quite clear, violations of a minor and essentially technical nature cari take place. 45. Had the violations, which have been alleged in this Council by the representative of Indonesia, been the subject of complaint at the time they occurred, it might have been possible for my Government to redite them in detail. But,‘with one possible exception, none of them were; and the lapse of time before they were dragged out here makes proof one way or the other virtually impossible. 46. Despite this fact I am in a position to make the’ following points in relation to the lise pf Indonesian charges. 47. Certain of the charges in the copy of Mr. Su-, djarwols speech circulated by the Indonesian,mission’ ‘on 9 September refer specifically to Royal Air Force Dakota aircraft. The Royal Air Force bave, no Dakota aircraft in South-East Asia. 48. Other charges refer to paratroop. operationd in .Borneo. The security forces have undertaken no paratroop ope??ations in Borneo. 51. There is also one general point 1 wish to make in connexion with these charges, My Government is in full diplomatie relations with Indonesia. We both have Ambassadors in our respective capitals. The normal way of dealing with charges of violations of the kind raised in the Council by the representative of Indonesia is to complain and ask for a redress through the diplomatie channel. 52. This channel has at a11 times been open to the Government of Indonesia, yet it has never been used by the Indonesian Government, with perhaps the single exception I shall now quote, On 30 May 1963, the Minister commanding the Indonesian Air Force sent a note to the British Air Attaché in Djakarta complaining that two British helicopters had landed one and a half kilometres on the Indonesian side of the Sarawak/Kalimantan frontier. Although this note was copied to the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs “for necessary action”, no protest was received. 53. On 7 June, however, the British Military Adviser in Djakarta, in the absence of the Air Adviser, was authorized to Write in reply, stating that the British pilots did net believe they had violated the border, but that as the border was obviously hard to define from the air, “if in fact there was a minor and unintentional violation of the frontier, 1 am authorized to express regret”. 54, A further accidental violation took place on 26 July 1963, on the same frontier near Long Bawan. The British Ambassador in Djakarta sent a note of apology on 28 July, two days later, before any Indonesian complaint had been reoeived. 55. What 1 have said should demonstrate the conciliatory and correct attitude of my Government towards episodes of this kind. SO much then for the specific charges brought against my country. 56. 1 should now like to comment briefly on the representative of Indonesia’s other contention that his country’s revolutionary ethic allows him to represent armed attaoks on a neighbour as something other than aggression. He said that “there is no textbook to understand, let alone to judge” this revolutionary ethic. He cast aside existing international law as the creation of colonialists. 57. Well, Mr. President, the representative of Indonesia is, with respect, wrong. There may be no textbook in the tecbnical sense whereby we may judge 58. It is the Charter of the United Nations which requires us a11 to practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours. This is the Charter to which Indonesia, as an independent State, freely and voluntarily subscribed and freely and voluntarily undertook to observe. 58. Je veux parler qui exige vivions la Charte, a librement librement 59. These obligations under the Charter, particularly those stated in Article 2, cannot be disowned by the Government of Indonesia, least of a11 in arguing a case before a body such as this, established under the Charter. 59. Le Gouvernement les obligations 1’Article une th&se organe qui a 6% etabli en vertu 60. By freely accepting these Charter obligations the Government of Indonesia expressly contradicted the principal argument which has been used by Indonesia’s representative here to justify his country’s policy towards Malaysia, 60. En acceptant par la Charte, contredit ici par la politique 61. Mr. President, 1 am grateful to you for allowing me some latitude in order to followthe representative of Indonesia down the diversionary trail which he laid in his statements and 1 am fully aware how little relevance the bulk of what he said, and of my reply SO far today, has to the matter brought before the Council by Malaysia. Since, however, you have allowed me SO much latitude, 1 may, if you allow me to, take a little more. 61. Je vous m’avoir moandres sentant de rapport ments jusqu’a la Malaisie m’avez un peu, si vous le voulez bien, 62. Je sais fausse de l’Indon&sie faites les relations constituent 62. 1 am conscious of the theme which, in a11 the statements SO far made beforc the Council by the representative of Indonesia, underlies the spurious argumentation, This is the theme that my country’s relationship with Malaysia constitutes a challenge t0 Indonesia. 63. S’il tacle sa voisine, peux qu’accepter 63. If by this he means that we are an obstacle to his country’s attempts to dominate its neighbour and our friend and ally, 1 must accept his strictures. 64, Mais, une menace de son pays, vernement de le rassurer. 64. If however he means that we are a threat to his countryls sovereignty and independence, or to the system of government adopted in Indonesia, 1 hasten to reassure him. 65. 1 said in my brief intervention on 9 September that my Government has never at any time been actuated by hostility towards Indonesia and that we would be only too happy to resume the friendliest cf relations with that country if they would stop their admitted and proclaimed confrontation policy against Malaysia-a policy which in practice has been apolicy of constant armed attack. 65. Dans j’ai dit que jamais par une hostilite et que nous ne serions Pes relations mettait confrontation qui, dans sous la forme 66. Je suis aujourd’hui qu’il membres du Gouvernement 66. 1 am glad to repeat this assurance with a11 solemnity here today, lest there shculd be any doubt in the minds of members of the Security Counoil or, indeed, of the Government of Indonesia. 67. J’aimerais nesie son pays etaient d’ailleurs tenir 67. 1 should like to recall to the representative of Indonesia the harmonious relations which existed between his country and mine as long as Sabah anl Sarawak were aotually British colonies-days inwhich we did not have to keep a single British soldier in either territory. Indonesia’s attitude cnly changed 69. The representative of Indonesia bas, spoken of conflict and dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia, but he has allo placed emp@sis upon the common affinities of their ,peoples and the common interest of all peoples living in South-East Asia. T@e: Security Council Will have noted the wise and pacifie wosds spoken by the representative of Malaysia.on 10 September, and here 1 quote Datol,Ismail: I(I wish to iay here and now that; on behalf of the Malaysian Government and its people, I give this solemh unclertaking: that we have nothing but goodwill for the people,of Indonesia; we want to live in peace With Inclonesia; we do not want aQ inch of its, territory; and, lastly, we have not .permitted, nor shall we hereafter permit, our country to become a springboard for any State to crush or subvert any other State.” [1145th meeting, para, 98.1 70. This tiommon theme ,was echoed by the rep&r sentative of the Philippines. 71. My ,co$mtry, f& its’ part, wishes only to enjoy a,nd encourage good relations with a11 the countries of the ar:+. The Cou$l may therefore choose to builcl for the future upon the principle of good neighbourliness. It must be clear, however, that true good neighbousliness cari, only be based upon an absolute mutual respect for the territorial integrity of all’ concerned. WhaUhen should the Councii do now? . . 72. It must,, of course, deal with ,the complaint of aggression brought before the Cpuncil by Malaysia, a complaint brought by a small State in search o< the shelter promised by the ChaTter from attack by. its larger and more powerful neighlsour. That is our, plain duty. It ,must also provide a hope for the future. ,. : 73., I have no specific proposa1 to put before my COlleagUeS at this stage, and 1 would .wish only,to indicate certain principles to which my Government attaches importance. 74. First, as regards whatehas happened in the past, in our view, the Council should show in unmistakable terms its disapproval of the admitted actions of the Indonesiaa Government against the Government and 76. As regards conciliation between Malaysia and Indonesia, nothing could be clearer than what the Malaysian representative said at the 1145th meeting, If 1 may try to summarize in a sentence what he said, it was: conciliation by a11 means, but not negotiation at the point of a gun. We must be careful, in anything which the Council may decide, not to give the impression that we are tolerating the use of force as a legitimate instrument of negotiation. ‘77. Our first task is to help to bring to an end the undeclared war on Malaysia, a fellow Member of all of US in the United Nations. The way would thus be clear for the resumption of talks SO that both Malaysia and Indonesia may live together in peace with one another as good neighbours.

1 give the floor to the next speaker on my list, Mr. Liu.

I had wished that 1 would not have to remind the Chairman again that 1 am speaking as representative of China and should be SO addressed. malaise agrandie. Son hostilité s’ est manifestée etrangeres de l’Indonésie a déclüs8 que la création de la nouveïle fédération constituait une forme de neo-colonialisme vice des intérêts britanniques dans le Sud-Est asiatique, et qu’il convenait donc de s’y opposer coOte que coûte. Cette politique a pris le nom de politique de l’confrontationl’. cette th&e du nneo-colonialismeV, en ce qui concerne la Malaisie, n’est pas une invention de M. Subandrio. première foie par le part1 communiste indonésien. Philippines, gences existant pourraient rectes. Mais cet espoir a et6 vain. L’hostilité de llIndonésie n’a ces& de crofire depuis la proclamation officielle lors, l’Indonésie a men8 une campagne acharnee pour dktruire et de @tendus volontaires ont afflue dans le Bornéo du Nord, B travers 80. The Council is dealing with a case in which the essential facts are not in dispute. It is well known that Indonesia has not, from the very beginning, taken kindly to the idea of an enlarged Malaysian Pederation. Hostility was manifest when in January 1963 the Poreign Minister of Indonesia declared that the formation of Malaysia constituted neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism serving British interests in South- East Asia and must therefore be resisted at a11 costs. This has corne to be known as the “confrontation” policy. It is interesting to note that this “neo-colonialist n thesis in respect of Malaysia was not of hlr. Subandriols invention. It was fisst asserted in December 1961 by the Indonesian Communist Party. 81. Thanks to the untiring efforts of the President of the Philippines, it seemed for a time that the differences between Indonesia and Malaysia could be ironed out by direct negotiations. This, however, proved illusory. Indonesian hostility increased with the forma1 proclamation of Malaysia a year ago. From that clay to this, Indonesia has waged a relentless campaign to destroy Malaysia. Guerrilla bands and so-called volunteers poured into North Borneo fsom across the jungle-infested border area. Events have lately taken a more serious turn. Indonesia bas 82. The representative of Indonesia has not denied the Malaysian charges. On the contrary, he seems to take Pride in the fact that his country now ttpossesses sufficient strength ” to carry the battle, in his own WOrdS, into V.he enemy’s own territory”. He frankly admits that Indonesian guerrilla bands and ttvolunteers” bave been fighting on Malaysian soi1 for some time. He cloes not hesitate to assert that the fighting %ould only become aggravated or even escalatet’. Seldom in the history of the United Nations has a more frank admission been macle in these halls. 83. The representative of Indonesia has also made much of what he calls Yrevolution”. Indonesian military activities in Malaysia are to him part ancl parce1 of the Indonesian revolutionary process, He said in his statement of 9 September: “We have our own friends in the worlcl, our comrades-in-arms, SO to speak, because the Inclonesian Revolution is only part of the great human revolution of this Century.” [Ix., para. 71.1 84, It is no secret, of course, that the Chinese communists have, on their own part, clesigns on Malaysia. It is not without reason that they have SO .rehemently denounced Malaysia and SO steadfastly pheld the so-called confrontation policy. 5, In this connexion, let me state that my Governzent has no quarrel with Lndonesia in its struggle or national inclependence. The Chinese people, i mny say SO, has been the first in Asia to challenge colonislism and imperialism. My country has consistly upheld the right of colonial peoples to national indel~endence. The efforts of the Indonesian people to shake off colonial rule in the post-war years received unstintecl support from my country. It is a matter of record that my predecessor in the United Nations intervened vigorously in the Security Council in support of Indonesian freedom nncl independence. He clid this even when some 2 million Chinese nationals in Indonesia were suffering a great deal at the hands of Indonesian armed ban&. 86. I recall this episocle in history because 1 wish to show that my Government bears no il1 Will towards Inclonesia. We are at one with the Inclonesian people in their efforts to achieve freedom and inctependence. nut it would be a sad turn of events if the elimination of European colonialism wereto be accompaniedbythe emergence of an Asian expansionism. 87. Malaysia cannot by any stretch of imagination be called a colonial Power, still less a tool of colonin1isr-n; it bas but recently emerged from colonial status; it is now a sovereign State and a Member of the United Nations. Nor cari the people of Sarawak and sabah be barred from exercising their right self-delermination to join the Malaysian Federation. 88. The Indonesian Government has hitherto refused to recognize the validity of the findings of the Secretary-General who, in his conclusions of 14 September 1963, reported that: II . . . it is my conclusion that the majority of the peoples of the two territories . . n wish to engage, with the peoples of the Fecleration of Malaya and Singapore, in an enlarged Federation of Malaysia through which they cari strive together to realize the fulfilment of their destiny.Vt 89. The representative of Inclonesia in the course of his statement of 9 September challenged the Secretary-General’s conclusion by saying that Indonesia cannot be stopped by legal arguments. The conilict between Indonesia and Malaysia, according to him, is “net a legal problem; it is political problemtl. He went on to say: Yegal arguments, particularly when they are based on t;he so-called international law of the world of the colonial Powers, cannot be applied to stop this strugglel’ [i)sid., para. 861. 90. This, 1 submit is a dangerous argument, as well as an untenable one. In fact, this is a flat denial of the existence of internat.ional law and a complete nega’cion of the purposes and principles for which the United Nations was founded. The consequences that would flow from this doctrine could be grave indeed. 91. In the face of the Indonesian threat to crush the existence of Malaysia, the Government of Malaysia has done well to bring its case before the Security Council. It is within its right to do SO. The Security Council, on its part, cannot condone the use of force as a methocl of resolving international differences. The dispute must be settled by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter. In the meantime, the Security Council is in duty bound to pronounce its disapproval of the armed incursions inCo Malaysia, which must be brought to an end. There cari be no equivocation when the peace and security of an important part of the world is in the balance,

I have no more speakers wishing to take the floor at this meeting of the Council, but there are six speakers who have put themselves down for this The meeting rose at 12.55 p.m.