S/PV.237 Security Council

Does anyone wish to speak? We shall obviously be unable to fulish this discussion today, and 1 suppose that members of the Couneil will wish to have an opportunity of examining at their le.isure the documents 1 communicated to them at the beginning of this meeting. So we could continue t'he discussion tamorrow. If 1 am correctly informed, tomorrow moming there will be a meeting of the Atomic Energy Commission. The Chaimtan of that Commission is present. Would he care to say whether that is true? Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): A meeting oI the Working ComII1ittee of the Atomic Energy Com- II1ission has been scheduled for tomorrow mommg, and it would be railier difficult to alter that schedule. 1 think it would be advisable for the Working Committee to meet tomorrow moming as schedùled.

Do we agree ta continue this discussion tomorrow aftemoon at 2.30? Sïnce there are no objections, we shall do so. TWO HUNDRED AND TBIRTY-SEVENTH MEETING ReId aL Lake Success, New York, on Thursday, 29 January 1948, at 2.30 p.rn. Président: Mr. F. VAN LANGENBOVE (Bel- gium), Present: The i'epresentatl.ves of the following counmes: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, C\lIombia, France, Syria, Ukrainian Soviet So- cialist Republic, Union'of Soviet Socialist Repub- lies, United Kingdom, United States of America. 34. Provisional agenda (document SIAge:t:tda 237) 1. Adoption of the agenda. 2. India.;,;Pl.lkistan question: (a) Letter çlf1ted. 1 January 1948 from the representative of India addressed to the President nf the Security Council concem- ing the situation in Jammu and Kashmir (document S/628).1 (b) Letter dated 15 January 1948 from the Minister for Foreign MIairs of Pakistan addressed to tht;; Cecretary-General con- 35. Adoption of the agenda 36. Continuation of the discussion of the India·Pakistan question

The question arose yesterday [236th meetingJ whether measures to end acts of hostility and violence should have priority over a plebiscite, or vice-versa. In my opinion the .question of priority should, not arise. The measures to end acts of hostility and violence on the one hand, and the plebiscite on the other, are two aspects of the same problem, namely, fue restoration of order and tranquillity in Jammu. and Kashmir. Common sense indir.ates thatboth aspects should be considered together. 1 ~erefore suggest that the Security Council should decide simultaneously on two resolutions, one concerning the plebiscite, the other concerning the cessation of acts of violence and hostility. la l'Etat indique temps le Conseil de sécurité sur l'autre et au Belgigue, points. sous biscite, sentants donné .séance "Whereas India and Pakistan recognize that the question whether the State of Jammu and naissent Kashmir shall accede to Pakistan or to India must Jammu be decided through the democratic method of a' à plebiscite to be held under the auspices of the tique· d'un United Nations, in arder to ensure complete l'Organisation impartiality; la "The security Council is of the opinionthat such a plebiscite must be organized,held and biscite supervised under its authorit)r." , autorité 'The second draft [document S/662] which 1 have mentioned is new.It refers tothe measures j'ai ta end acts of hostility and violence. 1 shall read mesures it as well : lité In order to facilitate the discussion 1 submit to the Council, as the representative of Belgium two drafts referring to those two points. The first [document S/661] is an amended version of the <!raft concerning the plebiscite, which 1 submitted on 24 January to the representatives of India and Pakistan, -and of which 1 informed the COUDcil during our meeting yesterday. 1 shall read it: Il The Security Council, Il Considering its resolutions of 17 [document S/651] and 20 [document S/654] January 1948; S/651] Il Considering the urgency. of achïeving the cessation of acts of hostility and violence; actes "ité, pages .. 2. In the pursait of this aim, the Commission shaIl use every diligence te ensure that its mediatory action be exercised without delay.1I The members of the Council have before them the texts of these two draft resolutions. Mr. AUSTIN (United States): The United States supports the two draft resolutions proposed by the President of the Security Council. We accept the obvious inference that these resolutions are the product, in a measure, of the knowledge which· the President of the Security Council has gained in negotiations up to this point. We see in these resolutions strength for the parties and for the President of the Security Council in the continued effort to arrive at agreement upon detalls. We hold the view that no party to this transaction wishes to have hostilities and violence stopped by violence. No one wants to see a sù- perior force sent into the Kashmir area to drive out the invaders. of tb.at area. Everyone, we assume, wants to see this situationso settied by an agreement that it will not be necessary to use any force to carry it mto effect. It is also our viev{ tbat, if we contmue in the spirit of amity and with the wonderful sense of fairness that has been shown. up to this pqint, it is·possible here to adopt reselutions which would finaIly determine the conditions.upon whichthe hostilities could be stopped. Of course, there will .be differences about the details-as to what these details should be and how they should be worked out-but before .getting down to the close questions of detail, it does seem. to us thatwe need a foundation for further negotiation, which foundation is .fairly represenLd inthese two draft resolutions. 1 think it is a very important fact fuat we can have presented to us by the President .of the Security Council, following these negotiations, draft resolutions that do show progress in the agreement. The preamble of the fust draft resolution, which alleges that.both ..parties to ..the dispute Il recognize thatthe question whether. the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall accede to Pakistan or to India must be decided. tbrough the democraticmethod of. a .. plebiscite to be held underthe auspices ofthe United Nations, in order to ensure cOJ.llplete impartiality," goes a long way. It indicates that very distinct progress has been made towards a final settiettlent of the matter. This agreement upon complete.impartiality. is of importailcenot merely to these parties but also to the whole world. The second draft resolution is an èqually important part of the record of these negotiations. It shows that both parties have agreed that such measures shall be taken' as will promote the cessation of acts of hostility and violence, and that this element of the situation so far agreed upon is an urgent part of the problem. It does not seem tà my delegation that there is any actua! disagreement regarding the arder. 1 say that because l think that each of these draft resolutions is a part of the whole idea'that one cannot have cessation of hostili.ties and violence unless one has also an understanding, as one negotiates, as ta the manner in which the hostilities shpJl be terminated, an agreement that ~atisfies everybody Concemed in the agreement that the arrangements for the plebiscite have been advanced far enough sa that it is apparent that the plebiscite will be free and fair. Of course, we can see that a superior military force could be employed ta drive out the'trespassers in Kashmir and Jammu, and to force the battle lirue off this ground, but that might not end the military character of this problem; that might not settle the matter. On principle and on the impracticality of such a m.ethod, 1 think we have to discard the idea of using force and .thus separating .this question of themilitaryproblem from the. other question of a fair plebiscite. The other question ofa fair plebiscite will also naturally involve a consideration. of the form and substance of the administration of the Government l;,:)ading up to and during the period of the plebiscite. 1 do not desire to say any. more. about this, because 1 do not want to get into a discussion of detail. But 1 should be glad to go intô detail at some time in the future. However, for the present, 1 do wish. to~ndorse heartily the President's two draft resolutions. General McNAUGHTON (Canada) : The .President has rightly pointed out that theending of the fighting and the holding of the plebiscite under conditions which will·. be .reçognized as fairalld impartial are two .aspects of the same matter. In recognition of this fact he has placed before the Security .' Counciltwodraft resolutionswh~ 1, taken .together, wOuld give effectto this thought. , It isthe view of the ~eiegation of Canada that these .draft resolutions,·.taken'together and' when implemented, will establish abasis fo end the fighting and alsowiIl act to eliminatethe causes which have led to the fighting, a mattèr which, in our view, is of fundamental importance. Mr. TSIANG (China): 1 am very happy to express the support of my delegation for the two draft resolutions which the President has submitted. It is obvious that the key to the problem lies in the plebiscite. If the principle of a free and impartial plebiscite for deciding the all-important question of the accession of Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be accepted, much of the incentive to violence and the use of force would be removed. On the other hand, unless we restore peace in Kashmir, such a plebiscite would not be possible. Therefore, 1 think it would be very wise for the Security Council ta pass the two draft resolutions together. At this stage of our discussion 1 think it would be out of place to go further, especially in the consideration of the details. However, 1 should like to say a few words in regard to the general development of the Commission. It seems to me that, in acbieving our purpose, the Commission might, and 1 am sure will, make important contributions. Therefore, my delegation is eager to have the two parties take immediate steps so that the Commission may become effective. • Se,;ondly, 1 should like to suggest that, since the question is complicated and since the Security Councilis far from the scene and May notknow aIl·of the forces at work, it would be wise for the Security Council to content itself with the laying. down·of certain general principles" and ·to leave theworking out of those principles to the Com- .mission when it starts to function. Mr. DE LA TOURNELLE (France) (translated from French): The•French deiegaHon eamestly hopes -that the two. draft resolutions which the 'Presidenthassubmitted to this meeting will receive· theassent of the two parties and thesupport of the Council.Itconsiders that these two draft resolutions are interdependent.The fust· concems the organization of a plebiscite and the seCond·the e~tablishment of peace by the pacification of· Kashmir. It is obvious that the plebiscite 'cannot be held before peace has been restored, and that the objectof the plebiscite will then be to avoid· arecurrence of hostilities by giving the population freedom of decision. regarding ils choice. The organization of that plebiscite will certainly involve the adoption of a whole series of complicated measures, but the French delegation hopes that those measures will be decided on by COJ.l1lllon consent between the partiees, under the al;1spices of the President of the Council. The French delegation believes furthermore that intemational peace and security ar~ endangered by the present situatio~ m Kashmir. It is therefore desirable that the Council should take cOgnlzance of that situation and attempt to end ît. For that purpose ît has set up a ,Commission which, with the approval of the parties, will undertake without dela,y the task of pacification. When that task has been accomplished, it will be possible to hold the plebiscite. Mr. EL.,.KaouRI (Syria): The President has chosen to take fuis question in stages, one after another, and in my view that is a very wise course. We.have already dea1t with three resolutions on the subject, two more are now before us, and we shall pass on toothers registering points of agreement. The President's decision to base these draft resolutions on points of agreement between the parties is very sound. If aU the resolntions were taken in that way as items of agreement between India and Pakistan, it would be very conducive to a peaceful settlement of.the situation. .l am very happy to see these two draft resolutions as theyare presented today, and 1 accord them my full support..They are interdependent, and no question of priority arises. The stoppage of fighting is essential before any plebiscite can be held. Unless order prevails m the country, no one can hold such a plebiscite, ana it would be impossible to speak of a peacefuI and democratic settlement. However, as the representative of the United States has said, no stoppage of fighting or any kind of settlement could be achieved unless both parties acceded to the resolutions and recommendations of the Security Council. .Unfortunately, in this case, the fighting front liesbetween States which are not both Members of the United Nations. One is a Member State, but the other, Kashmir, with hs Maharaja and his troops, is not. Furthermore, the tribesmenand the !inhabitants of Kashmir are not responsible to aUjoody, and 1 do not believe that anyone would have sufficient control overthem to issue a ceasefire order, aswas done m thé case of Indonesia, .where: fighting ceased forthwith. Hère, tribesmen For this reason 1 think it highly desirable that both proposais should be adopted by the Security Conncil, nnanimously if possible. l'should like to express my gratitude to bath parties and to the President for preparing these proposais.

In submitting to the Conncil the draft resolutions which are before it, 1 stated that 1 had attempted to strike as fair a balance as possible betweenthe opinions which were expressed at yesterday's Council meeting, particularly by thetepresentatives of India and Pakistan. In order to avoid any misunderstanding, 1 should make it clear that the text of those' two resQlutiàns wasnot submitted to them before the meeting. Mr. NOEL BAKER (United Kingdom) : During the discussion yesterday .afternoon 1 ventured to put forward theview, in contradiction tothe representative of India, that perhaps we should do well to· discussthe question of the plebiscite fust and then to pass on to other matters, it being understood,. of course, that every member of the Security CouncU would remain free to make any intervention in the debate which he desired, and above aU the representatlve of India, if he thought that the viewBor interests of India were being prejudiced in any way. The -President decided that 1 was wrong, that we would do better to discuss together the question of the. plebiscite and the question .of stripping the actual fighting. For that reason the President hasput forward these two draft resolutions, arguing, as hedid so \Vell this afternoon, that these are reaUy two aspects of. one .question and· that totry to separate them WQuld be a mistake. 1 am quite ready. to accept the view· of the President. 1 think that by accepting it, we escape the reproach to which we might otherwise be open in India : that we were fiddling with phrases whUe Kashmir burned. 1 not !'nly.acœpt the proposaI of ,the President withregard to procedure, but 1 accept· his dr~t· resolutions.. On behalf of ~y Govemment ..,and as a member of. the SecuIlty Councilwitb its collective responsibility, 1 am sure that weshall do right to adopt the resolutions this afternoon. Speaking aIse>·on behalf of my Government and as a member of the Security Council, with its collective .responsibility to. aU the nations which belongto our Organization, perhaps 1 may venture The representative of the United States went on to point out that that has important results for the action of the Security Council. 1 think it important oecause of the time factor. 1 venture to think that we have wasted no time in our proceeding in this matter in the Sec'Urity Council, but 1 am sure that both parties will agree that we have no time to waste. If the negotiations which have taken place under the guidance of the President dq not lead within a very short time to some definite result or to some hope of a full settlement in the early future, 1 feel sure that it will become incumbent upon the Securlty Council to see whether it cannot heip in some more direct and collective way. Secondly, 1 am gIad that members of the Security Conncil seem to share the view, which 1 have expressed more than once, that a general plan of full sett1ement of outstanding differences will, in fact, be the quickest way to stop the fighting. As the representative of the United States said this afternoon, one cannot bave a cessation of violence unless one has an agreement that satisfies everybody that the plebiscite willbe free and fair, and, therefore, one must have an agreement as to how the plebiscite is to be prepared. 1 hope, therefore, tbat the Security Council will move as rapidly as possible to sucb a full agreement. 1 agree with what the reprflsentative of China said, of course, as we an must, that we must start by working out the principles upon wi".dch agreement can be built. If 1 understood him, he suggested that perhaps, when we 11ad the broad general principles, we could then band ove! the forther task to the Commission, to be carried out on the spot. My Government ls doubtful as to whether it would be wise to leave too much to the CommIssion. Defore we adopt the resolution by w11ioh the Commi.ssion was established, 1 suggested ta the parties and to the Couneil tbat we should regard it primarily as a commission to apply a settlement which was made here in the Council [230th meeting]. 1 shall not repeat my words; 1 have them before me, and 1 have said them more than once. Of course, it i5 a matter of degree, and 1 am in fun agreement \Vith the representative of China tbat there will he many details which the .In working towards that agreement, 1 am sure that the draft resolution on the plebiscite which the President has put fÇlIWard will, when it has been adopted by the Security Council, be an important landmark on the road. Even since the :firsi speeches were~ade on this subject in India and Pakisum. months ago, 1 have been consi- ·deting what signifiance could be attached to the phiase U 'under the auspices of the United NatiQns." The more 1 think about it, the more conyinced 1 am that that phrase must imply not only ~atthe plebjscite must be fair in itself, but t}iat if must seem fair to aIl concemed; not only that in .fact justiçe shall be assured, as 1 am 'çèrtâin it would be ass.ured by the sole action of ân'Y one Governmènt at this table if it had a freè hând,butthat it must' seem fair to both· the Government of India and the Government of ~P8kistan, to all the ~ember.s of the Security COUQ.cil, to all the Members of the United Nations and, 1 add-and l 'think this is the crucial point in stopping the nghting, as 1 have said beforethat it must seem fair to the combatants, both Muslim and non-Muslim, in Kashmir itself. . •.. ' .. Unless wecan get snch a system, 1 am sure that the SecurityCounêil would not be· justified in undertaking any responsibilityin the matter in the.name of the· United Nations. For that reason, 1 thi:'k the second paragraph of the President's d,raft resolation on the. plebiscite is not onl'y useful but essential. 1.do not think that the .Security Council could give its authority in any similar case. without. retaining final. controlover what actually happens when ti1e plebiscite occurs. l' agree.with the representative of the United . States that, of course, the organization of the plebiscite will involveconsiderations of adminis- ·tration, of the maintenance of law and ·order, and so' on. 1 do not doubt that we shall have to debate those matters; but 1 donot think it îs necessary to do so at this moment in order to enable us to adopt the draft resolution which isbefore us. 1 should like to bring up an idea whichhas appeared before, 1 think, in a draft resolution, and which Iknow has been put before us different forms by the representatives ·of India and Pakistan, namely, that for the satisfactory execution of any plan the co-operation of the two Governments will~ in fact, be required in many ways. Therefore, our taslc is not only·to make scheme, but to· help tobring the Governments a .state of mind. such that they will desire to give their full co-operationin order to make that :scheine succeed. . We hope that the great new forces which have been releas~d in the Governments of.India and Paldstan will very soon be free to get on to these .great tasks which lie before them and that, as they co-operate with each other, so the frontier, wherever it may be, tbat lies between them will become less and less a barrier, and the common interest which bind them together in an matters will become more and more evident to both. The representative of the United States .spoke of world opinion and said that whatever settle..; ~ent was made here,.would gain great strength if It had .the approbation of good people in aIl countries througbout the world. World opinion is a great weapon. 1 am convinced that world opinion will be behind theseresolutions. 1 ardently hope that it may also make possible early and rapid progress toward à settlement. . Mr. GOPALASWAMI AYYANGAR(India) : 1 am very grateful to the President, to tae representa,. tive of the United Kingdom, and to the representative of Pakistan for the good wishes they conveyed to me yesterday .afternoon as regards the recovery of my voice. 1 have .no doubt that their goodwisbes have contributed a great deal to the improvement which my listeners, 1 hope, do notice in thequality of the voice with 1 speak to them today. Left to myself, 1 should have preferred tobave beena listener until practically the end of this debate among the.members of the Security CounciIbefore 1 elected to say anything at aIl on de sident, représentant ont ment vœux de père, simple auditeur et écouter les de débats, Tt may be that thcy have the assent of representative of Pakistan; 1 do not know. 1 here, however, to state that the draft resolutions as. framed do not meet with the assent of country which 1 represent here this afternoon. Wben 1 say that they do not command the assent of my country, 1 do not want the Security Council to suppose that 1 am opposing every ward every idea that is contailled in the two draft resolution. There are, however, substantial matters included in them ta which we find ourselves unable to assent. There was a difference of opinion between represetttative of the United Kingdom and myself yesterday afternoon over the question of priority, the question of whether the Security Council fust should debate the stoppage of fighting or matter of the plebiscite. 1 always listen with greatest respect to whatever falls from the tips the representative of the United Kingdom. Iistened. yesterday with the greatest care, and pondered over everything that he said after "had Hstened to his speech; but 1 must confess that on this one matter 1 am still unrepentent to the position which 1 took yesterday aftemoon. In the course of his remarks, the representativè of the United Kingdom made an observation which describcs the present situation in the Security Council in the most graphie manner possible. a resu1t of the information which 1 receive every day from India as to what is happening in my own country, 1 know it is the opinion in India, which accords and with my Own view of the matter, that wc seem here to be fiddIing while Kashmir bums. That is a very truc description what is now engaging the attention of the Security COl1ncil. .'I wish to assure the members of the Security Council that 1 mean no disrespect any of them. It is possible that their honest view of the matter is embodied in the two draft resolutions which have been placed before the Security COlIDCil. However, as 1 look backupon what has happened in my country and as 1 recollect and am reminded every day of what is happening my country, 1 cannot help thinking that we are now spending time on issues which should be .taken up much 1ater in our consideration of the wholc problem, rather than on the one issue which should take precedence over all· others. That conviction still remains with me in spite of all that the represcntative of the United Kingdom said yestcrday, and in spite of all that has been said by the speakers fuis afternoon. 1 sha11 tell the Security Council exactly what is the state of affairs in my country. As the Security Council has proceeded to debate the two draft resolutions which have been submitted 1 shall discuss the second of these draft resolu~ tions because, in my opinion, that has sorne l'cmote bearing on the issue which 1 consider pris résolution, sens, autre des sitions au écarté formuler des qui sécurité deux cessation des tions. d'un serpersonne, ploie ce mission n'est rendre que, prises mots d'hostilité un et jours That has been passed' over. Instead, there is a draft resolution before the Security Council which is, if 1 may say so without offence, innocuousin the extreme. l say that deliberately, because what does it attempt to do? It directs that the Commission, which has been decided on but which has yet to come into existence and find its way to India, ". . . shall take :iD.to consi- ,deration that among the duties incumbent upon it are included those which would tend toward promoting "-1 emphasize •• tend" and" promoting " _cc the cessation of acts of hostility and violence, and which are of a particularly urgent character.'" . If there are, acts of hostility and violence, and l say they are being perpetrated every day, and if they are of an urgent character, we are now Are we nearing the solution of the immediate problem, the cessation of hostilities, with respect to wmch the representative of the United Kingdom so emphatically agreed with me? Is this not an illustration of our trying to fiddle here while India is burning? Let us consider what is happening in India tOOay. 1 received only this moming a telegram which states in part that the following raids in Jammu and Kasbmir have taken place since the night of 23-24 January: .. 23-24 January, raid at Am; 23-24 January, 1,000 raiders at Ramgarh; 25-26 January, at Blare Chak, 13 miles soùth of Jammu, 300 raiders." Jammu is the headquarters of the Indian Army today in Kashmir. Thirteen miles from that place there was a raid by 300 raidersbnly three days ago. The telegram continues : •• On 25-26 January~another 400 raiders at Am." They raided our territory ands when our troops went to meet them to drive them back, they retired into Pakistan territory. troopsenga~d!hem and.infficted 1.....11 cas:lalties. If these two mCldents, whlch really constituteone ~ci~ent, of group killingof MuslÎms are left out, It will be séen that ,.during allthe period that our troops have beenin Kashmir there has not been another ~tance of·· group ·killingof Muslims. What is the account ontJ;1e other side? There were_.mass •kiilings.duri!1g the sameperiodofnon- Musillns by, Muslims.. m·the thousands at places 1 ask the members of the. Security Council whether, while these incidents have been taking place, even in the recent past, while attacks have been made from day to day on our borders from the Pakistan side, and while raiders have been driven back only to take refuge in Pakistan terrltory, we are discharging our obligations to world opinion if we ignore this situation, îf we do not take the obvious, concrete step of asking that the facilities which these raiders enjoy for committing these murders and causing these depredations should be denied to them. Are we meeting our obligations? Should it not go direct from the Security Council that these killings should at 1east stop, beginning tomorrow ? What is it that we are asking? The halting of killings is all that we are asking. We have not even copied the example set by Pakistan when its representative asked that those who participated in massacres and killing in the past should be brought to justice to be hanged by their necks until they were dead, as if we were going to conduct another Nürnberg Trial in India. That is not what we have been asking. We say merely that incidents have happened, incidents are happening today. They happened because of facilities which are availab1e in Pakistan. Should we not tell Pakistan: .. Please put a restraint upon these incidents. Please deny these facilities. Please refuse this assistance, at least in the future" ? Is that too much to ask? Even if there were a war between India and Pakistan and we were considering the question of bringing about peace between the two Dominions, what would be the first step that in common sense we should take ? 1s it not that the fighting should stop? Is it not that acts of hostility should at least be placed under a truce for the time being? Yet we do not do that. We say. let us look at the farthest end of the long-range solution, and let us decide that now. Then the fighting will stop of its own accord. Is that the proper way of looking at a problem which is costing lives, which is costing the honour of hundreds and thousands of women in my country ? . Now, 1 have said that what we have been asking ,for is this simple thing. Members of the Council might well ask me, Il Well, you assume that the Pakistan Government is responsible, for these facilities bemg given to these raiders, these marauders and murderers. Have,you any proof that that is true ? Pakistan has denied it. Wehave created a'Commission, and unless that Commisrejeté l'accusation. dans rapport sion~ent out to India, made aninquiry and submltted a report, can we ask, the Pakistan It is the contention of the repr.esentative of Pakistan that the trouble in Kashmir is due essentially to the fact that certain people in the Kashmir State revolted against constituted authority because of their grievances against it; that other people went to their assistance from outside --from Pakistan and from the tribal areas. Let us take thase facts into consideration. On'those facts, 1 say it is the duty of the Pakistan Govemment to prevent that assh;tance. going to insurgents in Kashmir. The quotatioll to'which 1 have just referred, from the report of the Commission established by the' Security Council, was blessed, if not by the unanimoué> opinion of the Security Council, at. least by the great majority oÏ its members. That is a sufficient indication of what the obligations of Pakistan are, even on the basis of'its oWIiadmission. .Another· portion of the same report 1 have referred to states the following : 1 4' In the light oÎthe· situation investigated by it, the Commission' believes that in the area of its investigation future· cases of support of armed bands formed on the territory of one State and crossing into the territory of another State, or of refusal by a Government, in spite of the demands of the State. concel1led, to take all possible measurês on its own 1;\~rritory to deprive such bands.of aid or protection, shotùd he considered 1 See ;repOrt to the Security Council by the Commission of Investigationconceming Greek Frontier Incidents (document S/360), volume l, page 181 (mimeographed text).' . Q See report to the Security Council by the Commission of Investigation concerning Geek Frontier Incidents 1 have said that the material already before the Security Council is more tàan sufficient ta pin this obligation upon Pakistan. Times without number India has asked Pakistan, appealed ta it, pleaded with it ta stop this aid and assistance. We did not succeed in India. We therefore came to a body the fust duty of which we thoughtand 1 hope the Security Council will enable us ta think so permanently-was ta see that what is recognized as a proper international obligation w~s discharged by every one of the Members of the United Nations. We came and asked the Security Council ta send forth this fiat: Il Here is a wellrecognized obligation; we say that you have not discharged it, on your own admissions. Will you discharge it at least for the future ? " The answer we have received in reply to our proposaI is, " Our Commission has been appointed; it will go ta India and will recognize among its duties the dutY of doing something which will 'tend' ta 'promote ' the cessation of hostilities." 1 said that, on the admissions of Pakistan itself, there is sufficient material before the Security Council with reference to tIJg matter. 1 shall now refer, in some detail, to these admissions, and after 1 have finished with them, 1 shall invite the Security Council's attention to the evidence of spme eye-witnesses. In order that that evidence' might not be suspect, 1 have selected eye-witnesses who cannot be convicted of bias on either side. 1 wish ta turn ta·the admissions. In document No. l, attached to the letter dated 15 Janûary 1948, from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan ta the Security Council [document 8/646], which is a reply ta the Indian Government's letter of 1 January 1948 [docùment 8/628], it is admitted in paragraph 3 that " ... a certain number of independent tribesmen and persons from Pakistan are helping the Azad Kashmir Governmentin its struggle for liberty as volunteers." My case is that, even if we concede that it was a struggle for liberty in Kashmir and that the people who went over to assistthose who were fighting for liberty in Kashmir were volunteers, if they came from Pakistan it is the dutYof the Pakistan Government to prevent them froIn giving that assistance. In document No. III, which is attached ta the same letter, the following is stated in paragraph 18: .. Consequently, sorne of these refugees and other Muslims from contiguous areas who had numerous ~ies of relationship with the persecuted Mushms of the State, went across ta assist their kinsmen in the struggle for freedom and indeed for. existence itself." lsthat not an admission that these people went from Pakistan, since the only contiguous areas are those. of Pakistan in the south and west? It is not the Pakistan Government's case that people from the east, In paragraph 21 of the same document is stated the following ~----" In view of this background, it is not surprising if independent tribesmen and persons from Pakistan~ in particular the Muslim refugees (who) it must be remembered, are nationa1s of the Indian Union). • ." This is an extraordinary remark in this document. These Muslims, because of the two-nation theory, had migrated from India to Pakistan, because they wanted to be in what they believed would be an Islamic State. No doubt in theory, and until their nationality in the Indian Union is snapped by legal methods, they arc Indian nationals. However, to lay emphasis on that fact in a document of this nature passes my understanding. The document states: .. It is not surprising if independent tribesmen and persons from Pakistan, in particular the Muslim refugees (who, it must be remembered, are nationals of the Indian Union) from East Punjab, are taking part in the struggle for the liberation of Kashmir as part of the forces of the Azad Kashmir Government." This is another admission that these people have gone from Pakistan. In the course of bis speech on 16 January 1948 before the Security Council [228th meeting]. the representative of Pakistan stated the following while referring to the people of Poonch in Kashmir: .. They were compelled, in view of the horrors committed elsewhere, with wbich they were now faced, to evacuate their women and children, ~ake them out of Poonch, and put them in West Punjab, and them come back to fight with weapons borrowed or taken from their friends or relatives in West Punjab." This is a tardy admission, no doubt,. but an admission which shows that weapo»s were either borrowed or taken from friends or relatives in West Punjab and were taken to the scene of this 'conflict for the aid of the insurgents. The representative of Pakistan had further repeated what the Prime Minister of Pakistan had stated much earlier,..--namely: .. Kashmiris----and especially the inhabitants of. Poonch----had many relatives in Hazara and in West Punjab. Consequently, feelings in certain parts of Pakistan rose very bigh and some people from the North West Frontiet Province and the tribal areas, stirred by the atrocities in Kashmir, rushed to the aid of their brethren," The Prime Minister of'Pakistan, in a telegram to the Prime Ministerof India~andthis is quotee} in the recentàddress [228th, meeting] of the representative of Pakistàn-,stated as follows ~ .. In Poonch Muslinis were ,attacked, andthose in Jammu massacred by m.ob~ led' by Kas~.. h~ve got out of control." In this connexion l wish to refer to one very important point which 'has emerged from the statement made by the representative of Pakistan from time to time. 'l'he representative of Pakistan contended that, in so far as these tribesmen are concerned, the Government of Pakistan tried to discourage their ptoceeding to Kashmir by every means shori: of war.Let us assume that it is a fact that that Government has attempted to discourage these tribesmen from going to Kashmir. The fact rernains that these tribesmen have entered Kashmir in their thousands; they are now in Kashmir in their thousands; more tribesmen are on their way to Kashmir in their thousands. A discouragement short of war has apparently had no appreciable effect on these tribesmen. l submit to the Security Councll and to the representative of Pakistan that, if measures short of war fail to prevent the infiltration of these people into Kashmir, it is the obligation of.the Government of Pakistan to resort to measures of war against these tribesmen. l consider that this is a point on wbich the Security Council may usefully spend sorne time in debate, if not for resolving the trouble between the Governments of Pakistan and India, at least for the guidance of nations wbich may come into conflict in the future in similar circumstances. That duty, which we contend rests upon Pakistan, has yet to be discharged by its Government. There have been varying estimateg as to the numbers of these Pakistanis that are in Kasbmir today, whether residents of the settled tracts of Pakistan or residents of the tribal areas. But that it is a substantial number goes without saying. The lowest percentage that the delegation of Pakistan has relied on for these Pakistanis in Kashmir, both tribesmen and others, is 35 per cent. Our contention is that it is a much larger percentage. However, assuming that 35 per cent is the. correct estimate, the obligation still rests upon Pakistan to prevent this augmentation of the ranks of insurgents in Kashmir by as much as 35 ,per cent insul'gents. against the constituted authority in the State. These tribesmen are present in Kashmir. What do we say the Pakistan Government has been doing? Our case is that the Pakistan Govemment, or at any rate officers connected with the Pakistan Government, are not altogether exempt from the charge of having actively offered helpand encouragement, and thereby having made it easier for these raiders to proceed to Kashmir. l shall quote some testimony in this regard shortly. ' .' For the moment, 1 shall deal with the question of whatthe Pakistan Government -maybe said to have admitted. We contend that these tribesmen .~ The State of Swat-if again the members of the Security Council will turn to their maps-is aImost on the border of Kashmir itself and is contiguous with the whole of the rest of the tribal area. That is one answer ta the allegations of the representative of India that nothing was being done by the Pakistan Government to stop these tribes, namely, the complaint of the tribes themselves thatp owing ta the lack of co-operation of the Pakistan Government, they found it necessary to cross the frontier from Swat to Kashmir." 1 would beseech the patience of the members .of the Security Council and ask them to look at their maps once again. Swat is no doubt contiguous to the tribal area; it is not. contiguous to Kashmir. There is a bit of the North West Frontier Province stretching out like a kind of tongue between the Swat State and the Kashmir State. That perhaps explains why the' representative of Pakistan was careful to quality his observation by using the word .. aImost·." But what he said subsequently might have given the members of the Security Council the impression that becausethe Pakistan Government prevented the tribesmen from .passing through Pakistân territory into Kashmir, the tribesmen used some territory other than Pakistan territory as a route for reaching Kashmir: If my recolle/ction is correct, Swat as a Stat~ has acceded to Pakistan. Iam subject to correc~ tion on this .point. But even if Swat had not acceded to Pakistan, it would still be geographically impossible for ariy tribesman from the tribal a,reas to reach Kashmir except through Pakistan territory. IfSwathas acceded to Pakistan he would ·travel the whole. way fromhis tribal area to Kashmir through' Pakistan territory. If Swat has not accededto Pakistan he would still, after crossing Swat, have to pass through the North West Frontier Province in order to reach Kashmir .territory. That is a very minor point, but it is necessary fpr us to eschew, if possible, wrong impressions that might have been created. 1 have referred to the re-eent tour of the tribal areas by the Prime Minister of Pakistan. He went there on an official visit accompanied, 1 take it, by a number of foreign correspondents. The following is an extract· from a speech made by him in reply to an address of welcome by Afridi tribesmen, as reported in a bulletin entitled .. Paki- The report continues: •• He thanked the tribesmen·for reiterating their allegiance ta Pakistan, and pointed out that the State wculd prûsper only with complete solidarity amoijg its nationals." By implication the Prime Minister of Pakistan counted tribesmen among Pakistan nationals. 1 have been in some doubt for days past as ta whether 1 could describe these tribesmen as Pakistan nationals~ bl,ltwhether or not they are such in law, here is the Prime Minister of Pakistan so describing them by implication. He added: .. The tribal people are f1.esh of our f1.esh, and they shall be sharers in om schemes for economic, educ.ational and political uplift for om people." That is an aspect which must convince the Security Council that people in Pakistan, whether in the settled districts or in the autonomous tribal areas, have gone over in thousands into Kashmir State for the pmpose-let us suppose, for the moment-of helping certain insmgents in their great fight for liberty and nationalfreedom in that State. On the strength of that admission 1 think that the Security.Council should consider it its duty to tell Paldstan that it has no right to allow this sort.of thing and must stop it from now on. That is what we are asking. 1 said that we had made. other allegations, namely, that Pakistan provides bases, supplies, arms and ammunition. Pakistan has categorically denied that anything of this kind is being done. There is,. however, one very significant document in this connexion, and as it is the latest of its kind 1 should like,with the.· indulgence of the Security Council, to read it fairly fully. It is a dispatch which appeared in this morning's New York Times, and it gives the report of an interview which the representative .of that paper in InJia had with an exoofficer of the United States Army named Russell K. Haight Jr. who, for two months,·is supposed to have held the rank: of Brigadier-General of the rebel forc~s in Kashmir State. At this point the above portion of the remarks of the representative of lndia were interpreted into French.

1 propose that we now adjoum om meeting and

l presUme there are no objections to the next meeting being held tomorrow, Friday 30 January, at 2.30. TWO HUNDRl~D AND THlRTY·EIGHTB MEETING Held at Lake Success, Mw York, on Friday, 30 lanuary 1948 lt 2.30 p.m. President: Mr. F. VAN LANGENl'OVE (Belgium). Present: The representatives of the following countrles: Argentina, Belgium, C~ada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, Ukrainiail Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Soc;,;ÙÏst Republics, United Kingdom, United States of America. 37. ProVisionalageQda (dûcument SjAgenda 238) L Ac;loption of the agenda. 2. India-Pakistan question: (a) Letter dated 1 January 1948 from the representative of India addressed to the . President of the Security C(\uncil CGncem- ing the situation in Jammu and Kashmir (document S/628).1 (b) Letter dated 15 January 1948 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan addressed to the Secretary-General con- éeming the situation in Jammu and Kash- mir (document S/646).2, (c) Letter dated 20 January 1948 from. the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan addressed to the President of the Security Council (document S/655).3 38. Tributes to Mohandas K. Gandhi

A tragic event dominates our thoughts. We meet today under the influence of the emotion which reigns throughout the world at the announcement of. Gandhi's death. 1 See' Offi~ial Records of the Security Council, Third Year, Supplement for November 1948, pages 139-144.