S/PV.351 Security Council

1shouId like to give the representative of Canada some .infonnation. The question of Ceylon appears on the agenda and we shall, :of course, consider it, whether it appears as item 1 or item 2 on our agenda. It is' part of our work to consider tIps question today. Mr. NISOT (Belgium) (translated trom FriJil.ch): For the reasons he himself has advanced, 1 support the motion presented by the representative. of Canada. General McNAUGHTON '(Canada): 1 was only .going to say. that 1 still think that the arguMents which 1 advanced are valid, and wouId ask thatthat motion which 1 put before the Council be accepted. Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): It is true,~ the President has said, that as long as this item is on the agenda it ought·to be discuSsed, but with regard to the order in which it shouId be cliscussec;l, the representative of Canada has advanced some reasons which are appropriate. agree'that we should adopt the.agenda on that basis and that thé question of the admission of Ceylon to the United Nations shouId be discussed first. Mr. TSJANG(China): 1 simplywish to state that my delegation supports the motion placed before the Security Council. A vote was taken by~ show ofhands. The. motionwas''adoptetl by 9 votes to 1, with 1 abstention. ' , Mr. ASHA (Chairman of the Committee on the Admission of New Members): On behalf of the qommittee on the Admission of New Members, 1 have the honour to present to the Security Council the r~port of this Committee. The Committee has examined the application of the Government of Ceylon for membership in the United Nations, in accordance with the decision of the Security Council at its 318th meeting of 11 June 1948, and the majority of the members of the Committee have supported the application of the Government of Ceylon for membership. However, the representatives of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR have abstairted from supporting the application and have reserved the right of their delegation to discuss the matter in theSecurity Council. That is all 1 have to sayon the question under consideration. Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): The United States welcomes Ceylon's application for membership in thé United Nations and wishes, uPQn this occasion; to restate its intention to support the' application. Ceylon's progress of recent, years toward full independence has been based upon sound preparation and careful ,study. Each step in this progress has ,been made a matter of record. tention sur sur Major steps toward full independence have resulted in the promulgation of ,successive new constitutions for the Governments of the country, each of which grants new self-governing POWefs to the Ceylon Government and reduces the scope of His Majesty's Government's prerogatives. Both the Government of Ceylôn and the Government of the United Kingdom have announced that on 4 February 1948 the few remaining obstructions to complete self-government were removed and Ceylon, on that date, achieved sovereign independence as a wholly responsible member of the BritishConimonwealth of Nations. . de promulgation de plusieurs nouvelles pour .dont tonomes l'étendue Royaume-Uni.' Le l~ deux niers été écartés et que, un temps Commonwealth Ceylon has participated in the work of a number of new international agencies. It' has thus .' demonstrated·its sincere wish and intention to ,!ake tlp its, full responsibilities as' a free and mdependent member of the community of nations. ' nombre démontrant pleÎIh~ment bre nations. . For all these reasons, ~d because of the growmg significance of this new State in the affairs . of southernAs~a and of the world, the United States continues to advocate the admission of Ceylon to membership in the United Nations._ plus Etat entier, mission Mr. TSIANG (China): On behalf of my Government 1 wish to associate myself with the remarks just made by the representative of the United States of America" The political position of Ceylon today is identical with that of Canada and Australia, whose representatives in the Security Counci1 have contributed and are contributing so much to our,work here. There can be no question that Ceylon is a peace-Ioving country. There is aIso 'no question that Ceylon is-willing and able to fulfil aU the obligations of membership of the United Nations. As the representative of a country which has long c1ultural and re1igious tics with Ceylon, 1· am particularly anxious to see this Counci1 extend its welcome to Ceylon, and 1 very much hope that the admission of Ceylon may be approved by a unanimous vote. Mr. MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet' Socialist Republic) (translated trom Russian): On 1 July, at the meeting of the ComIlÛttee on the Admission Gf New Members, the delegation of the Ukraiman SSR supported the USSR representative's proposal to await the receipt of additional and fuller information on Ceylon before recàmmending the Security Council to admit Ceylon to the United Nations. This was a perfectly legitimate request, all the more necessary bècause during the past years the United Kingdom Government has repeatedly tried to secure the admission to the United Nations, as independent States,of territories whieh do not possess either independence or national sovereignty. It is suffieient to mention Transjordan, whose independence the Government of the United Kingdom has proclaimed three times: in 1922, 1928 and 1946, but which still remains a British puppet State. The. çlelegation of the Ukrainian SSR has ail the more reason to doubt Ceylon's independence as, in January 1948, the Ukrairllan Government received an invitation to send its representative to attend the celebrations mi the·occasion of the proclamation of Ceylon's independenee, not' from the Government of Ceylan or from the social or political organizations which led the fight for Ceylon's independence, but from the British· Governor of Ceylon. Tlps very fact thatthe newly-proclaimed independent State could.not even invite representatives of other countries to attend'the celebrations in connexi~n with the proèlamation of' its indemajorité de personnes terminer de arrivées chait, éluder du problème nienne tude mission Unies, renseignements.complémentaires The information which the Ukraini:m delegation possesses on the question of Ceylon further convinces it that the Security Couneil should insist on obtaining exhau~tive data before recommending Ceylop's admission to the United Natio;ns. ' dire Qouverneur de économique, déclare gouverneur contraire, les et ploie diffèrent Ceylan fut. ,cinghalaise. Indeed, can any of the members of the Security Council, present at this meeting, sayexactly what the Govemor of Ceylon's functions are and how far his powers extend in political, administrative, economic and military matters, We are told that bis powers are those of the governor of a dominion. But, there are some who assert that in fact the' Govemor of Ceylon is vested with the authority and powers of a governor of a colony and not of a dominion, and that the methods of bis so-calIed constitutional administration. hardly' difIer from the·'practices in force in Ceylon before the proclamation of its very doubtfuI independence on 4 February 1948. Â further and equally important question arises. .How can the parliamentary regime, allegedly existing in Ceylon, and its independence he reconciled with the fact that haH the mem- .bers of the Senate' are appointed by the Brit,ish Governor? Itwe compare Ceylon's political and legal system with that estabIished by the United Kingdom in its other colonies, it becomes obvious tha~ they are completely identical. non mer dant que la par It is well-known that the Governors of·British colonies also do their best to make use of les the feudal native upper classes to carry out their seigneurs ,policy of enslaving the broad masses of the colonial population. There is little neW in tbis except the widely broadcast anrwuncements of les Ceylon's"independence". , Weare told that: Ceylon has. a constitution,' but the· documents circtilated· by the 'United. '. Ceylan. Nations Secretariat, .as' information·from Ceylon, 1. , Sll~ little about the constitution actually iri force, If we are not mistaken, the constitution now in force in Ceylon is the one adopted in 1946: that is, two years before the proclamation of "independence". If that is so, it is difficult to understand what sort' of a constitution it can be which is good for both the colonial period and the period of independence. The Secretariat dûcuments show that one of the criteria of Ceylon's independence is the fact that Ceylon undertakes to fulfil all obIig-ations towards third parties, wmch before the grant of independence were assumed by the United Kingdom by virtue of international a{{feements. But such an undertakingis in ~ect contradiction to the principle of independence. The obvious conclusion is that Ceylon does not enjoy independent status.but is bound to the United KÏng-dom bv its obligations and not onlv to the United King'dom, but to third parties, and this without any clear or precise indication of the rights enjoyed by Ceylon. ' The delegation of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic warml;v sympathizes with the. efforts of the freedom-Ioving Plt0ple of Ceylon to win independence and national sovereig'nty , for their country. It hopes to see a really independent €eylon take its place as à sovereign State among the members of the United Nations.' If these two conditions were present, the dele- ,gation of the Ukrainian SSR would vote unconditionally for Ceylon's admission ta the United Nations. But the Ukrainian delegation suspects thatCeylon's independence and national soverei~ty is as :fictitious as that of Transjordan referred to earlier. We cannot vote blindly simply because the United Kingdom and Canadian representatives want a favourable vote on the question and expect us to believe their word. We want façts and doèuments proving that Ceylon is really an independent sovereign State. We have no such fàctsor documents before us, and the United Kingdom delegation refuses to produce any. In view of the aforesaid considerations, the delega;tion of the Ukrainian SSR cannot support the proposal made concerning Ceylan .by the majority of the Committee on the Admission of New Members [8/859J beforereceiving full and célérer nos question, à vail, oppose,

In arder ta expedite our work and the discussion of the question before us, it has been suggested that we restrict ourselves to an interpretation into one working language only; namely, English. If there are no objections, we will adopt this procedure and act accordingly. Daon cerne, du le Mais manière tions. Mr. PARODI (France) (translated from French): 1 have agreed to this procedure in so far as it applies only to the speech which the President intends to make-as 1 understand it does, .from what the representative of the Secretariat has just said ta me. But, 1 cannat approve the procedure as a general rule or for other speeches. en

In tha.t case we will abide by our earlier pro~ cedure. (traduit vernement, représentant et 'au primer mettre Unies. tion nouveau Membre Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): On behalf of my Government, 1 wish to endorse what was said by .the representative of the United State::: concerning the nature and the extent of the independence of Ceylan and to express the hope that the Couneil will decide to admit Ceylon to membership in the United Nations, in the confident belief that if that were done, the United Nations would gain by the accession of a valuable new Member. auront représentant dépendance pour Nations sky présenter 1 do not know how far the Council will have been impressed by hearing the representative of the Ukrainian SSR arguing that Ceylon does not possess :mfficient independence to warrant its ,inclusion in the United Nations. Mr. Manuilsky said, among other things, that the United Kingdom had refused to submit documents regarding the status of Ceylon. 1 do not know ta what he was rekrring, but, in any case, it is not for d~ sentant n'est qu'il appartient, des documents ment doèumeJ;lt[S/591] .mander certaines texte i the Government of the United Kingdom, in· this case, ta submit documents on tms subject on behalf of Ceylon. The Governmentof Ceylon itseIf have already submitted a' paper, which 1 begin to suspect that Mr. Manuilsky has not r~ad, .document 8/951, giving certain explanatians m regard to the status of Ceylon. In.the course of that document, the following is stated: lan "The legislative authority of the Parliament ofCeylon is supreme and includes: Acte où "1..The power ta repeal or modify any' Act tf the British' Parliament in so far as it has become tlle law of Ceylon . . . actuelle . "2. The power to alterits present constitution ID any ~anner it plcases . . . 't3. The power of full control over its external mfairs .••" . , Annexed ta that document are two State papers, one, the Geylon Independence Order"fu- Oouncil (1947), and two, ,the Ceylan Independments concernant In all these circumstances, 1 do trust that the Cm:mcil will decide to accept and grant this application, aIid 1am certain that it would be to the benefit of the United Nations and Ceylon, th~t Ceylon should be included as one of its Members. General McNAUGHTON (Canada): 1 should like to say a few words to add the full support of the Canadian delegation to those other representatives who have spoken in favour of approving the application of Ceylon for membership in the United Nations. The position of my delegation hà!! already been expressed in the Committee on the Admission of New Members . by the câna<Îian representative on 29 June. and again on 1 July. At that time our representative pointed out that,·.in our opinion, Ceylon fulfilled the relevant provisions ofthe Charter relating to admissions into the United Nations, and that we accotdingly st1pported its application. 1 wish to reiterate that ppsition. Under Article 4 of the. Charter five conditions are laid down for membership in the United Nations. According to that Article the applicant must (a) be a State, (b) be peace-lovLllg', (c) accept the obligations of the Charter, (d) 'be able to carry out those obligations, and (e) he willing to do sa. 1 am certain that Ceylon's ,application cannot properly .be contested on anv of those points. That Ceylon is peace-Ioving 1 do not think is, open to doubt..That it is aState constitutionally capable of carrying.out its obligations is evident from an exaIIlÎnation of working paper No. 13 which. was submitted by the Secretariat on 24 June 1948. This working paper details the 'constitutional development Ç)f Ceylon to its present status as a fu1ïy independent .and selfgoverning member of the British Commonwealth of Nations under the terms of the Ceylon Independence Act of 1947 and the parallel documents which'are cited. . 1 am aware that the representative of the USSR in the Committee on the Admission of New Members felt that {urther mformation was required in order to establish ,Ceylon's truly independent status. 1 note that ,the representative of the Ukrainian SSR has thismorning reiterated that position, and thaï he hasasserted that Canada has invited the Council to vôteblindly.' It.is, .,perhaps,.,needless for me to comment on tbis. statement 'Cenmnly-neitI1er:the·Canadian representative in the Committeeon the Admission of New Memb~rs nor, Ibelieve, any other les voyer paragraphe la Ceylan: As to Ceylon's willingness to carry oût the obligàtions of the Charter 1 need only refer members of the Security Council ta paragraph 3 of documer-t S/820 which contains a statement from the Prime·Minister of Ceylon w~ch reads: présente des que gations "The Government ·of Ceylon hereby ~ccepts the obligations contained in the United Nations Charter ànd is prepared to demonstrate the ability and willingness of Ceylon ta carry out these obligations." . subsister répond.entièrement suivant In the judgment of my delegation there can, therefore, be no·doubt whatever that Ceylan fully meetS the requirements of Article 4 under the five criteria which are laid down in the Charter. l'Article mêmes d'admission il tions vemement tions tative mission absolument tion Ceylan l'Article sont· ligne cl' la The question arisés ~ to whether the requirements of Article 4 are exhaustive in themse1ves or whether other requirements and' considerations should be taken inta account 4I judging whether an applicant State is ta be adrnitted to the United Nations. The position of my Government has consistently been that -the clear provisions of Article 4 exhaust the criteria relevant to applications for membership, and that other , .considerationsare quite îrrelevant. The Cana, , dia,n delegation -believes that the application of Ceylon fulfils the requirements enumerated in Artkle 4 of the Charter ànd that these are the only relevant requitements which should be considered. Accordingly, we believe that Ceylon's application should be approved by this Council. Le son de Nations autre question tant il comme Mr.· EL-KHOU1!I (Syria):. In his statementthe representative of Canada hascovered practically all. t?e.points which may be said te justify the adnnsslOn of Ceylon into the United Nations. 1 simply wish to mention anothe:r point which 'was1raised by the representative of the Ukràiniàn SSRwhen he said he did not consider that the 'full independence of Ceylon couldbe recognized. The independence of êeylon has not been oppar se déclare indépendant feste tion sache, de po~ed byany State.When anyState or nation c.l~ that it ois indeF"'=ndeJ}t,and there is o~p()­ Sltiop. from any oilier State-whether rightly or wrongly---the matter maybe discussed. But 1 do not _know thatanyone isopposing the principle· Ceylon's independence. Even the represen,ta- India~ Pakistan, New Zealand, Australia, the Union of South Mrica, Canada-all of them are Dominions which enjoy independence in practically the same fOrIn. The receipt of an invitation from a British Governor· f}eneral could happen in the case of the othei" Dolninions, which are Members of the United Nations. No objection has been raised as to their special treaties with the United Kingdom. International treaties are open to everybody, and it is not within the framework and scope of our Charter ta discuss ;':luch treaties in order to see whether they are relevant ta independence or if they diminish the right of independence in any country. These States are free ta relinquish a certain amount of their sovereignty by the alliances 'which the! make with other nations. 1know that in :Eastern Europe there is a large bloc bound together by certain obligations towards one another. But that does not change their situation as independent States. 1 have said that the independence of Ceylon has not been opposed. It is a peace-Ioving State; there is no question about that. Nobody has claimed that Ceylon has taken any aggressive ac~oIi. It is willing and able to fulfil the requirements of membership. This point cannot be contested. If the representatlve of the Ukrainian SSR has any doubts about that independence, think the admission of CeylOI1 to the United Nations 'would be helpful in removing these doubts because, according to the Charter, Members of the United Nations enjoy sovereign equality. Ceylon would have sovereign equality with an the other States-even with the United Kingd<?:rnwhich issupposed to have. certain means .of intervention in the sovereignty and . prerogatives of Ceylon. If such doubts exist, then admit Ceylonat once in order to protect it and safeguard it from any influence. Give it the same right of ~overeign equality as the ot~er nations. Hwc_sympatpjze with Ceyhn and wi..sh to give it 'full indepeudence and sovereign equality, the best way'ïs ta admit it at once "~d' not put obstacles in its wà't and L:nder its enjoyment of those prerogatives which are necessary for full independence. -\ It was said that the Committee on the Ad.. mission of New Members wished ta have sorne inforwation. 1 do notsee that· any additional in.. formation isrequired. AlI the declarationshave been '•. received .from the. Ceylan Governinent[ fromthe Se!:retariàt and from the United King- Mr. NIso'l' (Belgium) (translated iram French): The Belgian delegation is completely satisfied that Ceylon fulfils the requirements set forthitl Article 4 of the Charter. My delegation is therefore happy to vote in favour of the admission of Ceylon into the United Nations. est, l'Article cette mission Mr. PARODI (France) (translated tram French): 1 tWnk that by now everytlùng that could, and should, be said in favour of the admission" of Ceylon to membersmp of the Urited Nations has been said. Consequently, 1 simply wish to state that the French delegation will vote in favour of the admission of Ceylon and in doing so endorses the remarks made previously by other members of the Conneil. 1 am happy that one more country will t.ltus be added to the group of nations which form our international Organization. pouvait sion de Ceylan tenant que l'admission vations déjà sant nombre nisation

On behalf of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 1 should like to, say that the Security Council and the Committee on the Admission of New Members do not dispose of sufficient information on the national status Œ' constitution of Ceylon. Moreover, there is no adequate proof of the fact that Ceylon is really a sovereign and independent State. _. déclarer, l'Union que d'étudier disposent sujet Ceylan. établissant cinghalais Comité chargé d'étudier l'admission de nouveaux Membres pas demande reçu ments sentants ceux cètte With tlùs fact in mind, the representative of the USSR delegation on the Committee on the Admission of New Members made a proposal to the effect that the Committee should not make any final recommendation on the application made by Ceylon until such time as suflicient information was received from the Government of Ceylon. The representatives of other delegations, and in particular those of the United Kingdom and Canada, failed to agree to that proposaI. d'étudier pas-été mission de Ceylan. In view of that faët, the USSR representative of the CQmmittee on the Admission of New Members was unable tû suppûrt<-l;e application of Ceylan for admission ta the L~jted Nations. In the absence of adequate information, the USSR delegation finds it diflicult to consider this matter. We do not know ènough about the .natiopa1 status or constitution of Ceylon, and· thertisa totallack of evidence that Ceylon is a .sovereign and independent State; on the contrary, we are informed, in particular, by the Press that Ceylon is not a sove:reign State but remains to· aIl intents and purposes a British colony. gouvernemental délégation miner Ceylan Bien disposons indiquent pendant tannique." The document submitted to the Security Council by the representative of Ceylan [8/951], to which the United Kingè.om representative has referted, cites certain clauses of the constitution seil [8/951] Royaume-Uni ln actual fact, the conditions of the defence agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and Ceylon on 11 NovemOOë ï947 provide for the installation of British sea and air bases and the maintenance of British land forces in Ceylon. Moreover, under this agreement the Government of Ceylon undertakes to place at Britain's disposaI its own seé'. and air bases, ports, barracks, means of communication, etc. Under articles 3 and 4 of this agreement, Ceylon's armed forces are virtually placed wlder Britain's full control. None of these facts cau be taken as evidence of the independence and sovereignty of Ceylon. Another agreement, on Ceylon's foreign relations, states, for example, that diplomatie relations between Ceylon and other coùntries must be established through the United Kingdom Government, which again does not bear out the fact that Ceylon is a sovereign and independent State. As regards the internal politiéal structure of Ceylon, information is available to the effect that under the constitution, the British Governor- General in Ceylon retains full and unlimited powers. He has the right to convene Parliament, adjourn its work and dissolve it. He is the chief executive and it is he who appoints the Cabinet, not to mention the fact that he is free to appoint half the members of the Senate and part of the members of the Lower House as he sees fit. Consequently, we may assiune on the basis of !hese J:<:p0rts that Ceylon is not an independent State but remains in practice aBritish colony.lt would, therefore, be harmful to the cause of international co-operation if we took up the defence of the colonial order established in Ceylon by the l!nited Kingdom. Information on the questions which 1 have just. cited is not to be found in the document submitted by the representative of Ceylon, and no suçh informati(ln was' made àvailable to.the Committee,on the Admission of New Members. We, therefore, have full grounds to maintain that the information provided by the representative of Ce.ylon isinadequate and one·sided. '<_._~,~~•••:t:---- r f ----------- It would be quite wrong if the Security Council failed to get a clear picture of the real state of affairs and actually took up the defence of any such policy on the part of certain colonial circles in the United Kingdom. The representative of Syria on the Council has tried to draw a. parallel between the United Kingdom's relations with Ceylon and relations between the independent sovereign States of Eastern Europe. Such remarks by the representative of Syria are baseless and insuIting to the sovereign and independent States of Eastern Europe. The representative of Syria asserts that Ceylon's admission to the United Nations would make it possible to place Ceylon under the United Nations' protection. The question is, how would this be possible? Paragraph 7 of Article 2 of .thi': Chartel" prohibits interference in the domestic affairs of States, and neither the Security Council nor the United Nations as such have the right to interfere in such matters. Thus, the admission of Ceylon to the United Nations at a stage wh".l that country is not a sovereign and independent State would mean in practice that the United Nations would put the stamp of legality on Ceylon's present position of dependence. We know that in the course of the Second Warld War, during the struggle of the free, democratic peoples agài.tlSt fascist aggression and in the post-war period the national liberation movement in colomial countries has gathered mo- . mentum and that the desire of the colonial peoples to rid themselves of foreign domination and ta attain freedom and national and political independence has growb stronger. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its peoples welcome and would welcome the independence of any colonial people now under foreign dominà- tion. But the USSR and its peoples are bv no means prepared' ta give tlieir-blëssing to sham independence in any shape or form. . . Mais The USSR delegation considers that the United Nations and the Security Council must distinguish between real sovereignty .aJ1d independence and sham independence. .The real meaning of the latter wotild be that a colonial people would continue inits former state of de.. pendence, with. the single difference that this condition.would be Ranctioned and legalized by the United Nations which, by closing its eyes to the real facts 'of the .C?l:1e, would merely heIp. ta The USSR delegation, therefore~ proposes that the question of the admission of Oeylon should be postponed until such time as the Government of Ceylon supplies full information on the national status and 'constitution of Ceylon as well as fully conclusive evidence that Ceylon is an independent and sovereign State. The text of the resolution submitted by the USSR delegation is as follows: "Having considered the application of the Government of Ceylon for admission to the United Nations, "Resolves to postpone the consideration of the question of Ceylon's admission to the United Nations until such time as full information on the status of the Government of Ceylon and on its constitution as well as sufficient proof that Ceylon is a sovereign and independent State has been received from the Government of Ceylon." [S/974] General McNAUGHTON (Canada) : 1 want to refer briefly to a statement made by the Presi- dent to the effect that the Canadian representa- tive on the Committee on the Admission of New Members opppsed the seeking of further infor- mation from Ceylon. The summary record of the meeting of that Committ~ held on 1 July 1948, which is contained in document S/C.2/ SR.26, will show the position which the Cana- dian representative took on that occasion. If the representative of the USSR persists in the view which he has expressed and which is 1 also wish to point out that, as a result of the discussion which took place in the COplmit- tee on the Admission of New Members, the Gov- ernrnent of Ceylon submitted additional infor- --mationwhich"vas ··conveyed to theSecurity Council in document S/951, dated 5 August 1948. 1 wish to sayagain that 1 believe that the information contained in that document is suf- ficient ta resolve any reasonable doubt as ta the eligibility of Ceylon for membership in the United Nations and to carry the assurànçe to any fair-minded person that Ceylan is indeed eligible 011 all counts and should be admitted to. the United Nation::. . Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : There appear to be two delegations here which have a thirst for further information in regard to Ceylon. It would be interesting to me to know what steps they have taken to obtain that fur- ther information. Ceylon's application has been before the United Nations for a long time; the Security Couneil, at its 318th meeting on 11 June 1948, transmitted it to the Committee on the Admission of New Members. Nearly a fort- night ago, on 5 August, the representative of Ceylon, who is here, submitted certain informa- tion which is reproduced in document S/951. In the course of his covering letter, he said: "1 may aIso add that l "m equally available to anY individual member who may require in- formation." 1 wonder whether any approach was made to the representative of Ceylon, who declared him- self ready to answer anyquestions. 1 should have thought that the two delegations which are so anxious to obtain information would have seized that opportunity to inform themselves further as to the exact status and position of Ceylon. 1 suggest that even now, here-tbis morning or this afternoon-we can invite the representative of Ceylon to come to the Security Cauncil table. 1 am sure he would be ready, to the 'best of his ability, to answer anY questions put to him. 1 wish to comment on one or two rèmarks that the President made in the course of bis statement. 1 think he said, among other things' -if 1 understood him aright-that the'repre- sentation of Ceylon abroad is confided to the United Kingdom. If that is what the President 'au said, 1 am bound to say that it is incorrect. The President also introduced another argu- qlent to prove the lack of independenceof Cey- Ion by dring the fact that theIJnited JGngdom' is empowered to maintain bases there. 1 need oruy point out that, if that were reàlly a proof of lack of independence, we ought never to have admitted the Philippines to the United Nations. In fact, the same argument'might even apply to the United Kingdom. There are 'foreign bases on British territory-and perhaps we should be" debarred from membership in the United Na- tions, according to the President's theory. 1 do not accept bis theory at aIl; 1 have nodoubt whatever about the independence of the United Kingdom. But ~ do wish to show, by painting' ta those two instances, that the fact adduc~d by the President is not an absolute criterion of in-. dependence.constitue There is one other point which 1 wish to raise. If the Security Couneil were to adopt the resolution proposed by the President, involving dèlay and obstruction in this case, 1 should then consider that the last paragraph of rule 60 of our rules of procedure would apply. We have bee..'1 reminded this ,morning that there are time limits governing the consideration of applications for , admission to the United Nations. One time limit is that the Security Couneil must make its recom- mendation not less than twenty-five days in ad· vance of a regular session of the General ASj sembly. If this further inquiry were insisted upon and were spun out so that that time limit was o"errun, 1should say that the next paragraph of rule 60 would then apply. That paragraph states: "In special circumstances,"-and 1 should eonsider that a special circumstance--"the Se- curity Couneil may decide to make a reeommen- dation to the General Assembly concerning an application for membership subsequent to the ex- piration of the time limits set forth in the pre- ceding paragraph." Mr. TSIANG (China) : 1 am at a loss to under- stand the IIJ.otives and the resolutionwmch the President has just placed before us. ·The discus- sion today has inciuded requests for more infor- mation. That was also btought out in the discussion in the Committee on the Admission of New Members on 1 July, more than six weeks ago. Since the meeting of the' Committee on lJuly, the representative of Ceylon offered, to all the delegations here, all the information that any of us wished to ask for. He, personally, wrote to therepresentativesof the USSR,and thé. Ukrainian' SSR, stating that he would be glad to' appear before them and answer any ~,Jlll~stiop:s" W'hiehthey mig!Itpl.l! to.Qim., :Elis r~- ~---ijùèst forsuéhirifervie-ws was refused. ,,' ", 1 J~OQJgl:ljp~ ';l'herepresentatîve of Ceylon has been 'cager tosupply.the information, bllt,the seeker of the information has refused. The representative of Ceylon has submitted" document S/951 to the ,Seèurity Couneil. It isindeed a document whieh oughtto be read. It is drafted in,a ,special form, -but ifwewould take the timeto study the docu- ment, •the",doubts raised hereby the representa- tives of the.USSR and the Ukrainian SSR would ' be.,removed.•••There canbe,110' question, if ,one takes ,the 1trouble to read,. the document, that Ceylon oiS'. afullyindependentcountry. , That lin<: of argument may be understood by a few schoolboys.Even the majority of school~ boys will refuse to be lùred by such propaganda. With regard to the adult population in the Far East, 1 can assure the President that such a line is a great disappointment to them. sons renseignements ce sujet. Ml'. MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated trom Russian): The' United Kingdom representative's proposal that we should devote this aftemoon's meeting to a hearing of the repœsentative of Ceylan seems to me to he questionable for the following l'casons. The United Kingdom representative has appar~ ently not fully grasped the reasons Îor our ob~ jection to taking an immediate decision on this matter and our insistence on the need for addi- tional informatj.on.'We have already pointed out that we do not know the constitution or the national status of Ceylon, that we do not know the degree of its independence and sovereignty, and that consequently we must have fuller and more exhaustive information on these points. Internatiônal experience shows that in recent pmes puppet States have been set up in the forro of independent States, which, however, are at the beck and call ànd work in the interests of countries with political, economie and military interests in the puppet territories concerned. We must have documents and facts. If we have , doubts conceming the nature of the independ~ ence of Ceylon, it is just because documents and faèts proving its independence are lacking. années gouvernements tains cutent tains économiques faut en précisément fait Sir Alexander Cadogan might suggest· to us thatwe should hear the expert opinion of the British Gove'mor of Ceylon.. But we question the genuL'1eness and·vaIidity of i\iny stat~1Uent by the British Govemor, beca,use we consider that such a statement· would in any case·he tendentious. Weprefer t9 deal with documents and faets rather than with one-sided statements. .poser, tannique doutes déclarations effet, .ces toute affaire qu'à The Ukrainiandelegation protests most em- phatically against theremark,s made here by the representative of China to the effett that the Soviet representatives have repeatedly spoken in the defence of the rights.of nationalities and that hecannot understand why we are objecting ta the proposal to admit Ceylon ,to the United Nations.' 1 .think that the. actions and speeches .o.f the USSR' delegation.on the ~ndonesianques- . tion, the Palestine question and a whole row of riquement faire effet, intervenus droits pourquoi relative des titudequela

1 wish to make a few remarks on behalf of the delegation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in reply to the statements made by the Canadian, United Kingdom and Chinese representatives. The representative of' Canada has tried to deny that the Canadian representative on the Committee on the Admission of New Members objected to the continuation of the discussion on the qu~tion of t."J.e admission of Ceylon and of receiving adequl..te information. There are records of the proceedings in question and 1 do not think it necessary to dwell on this question in detai!. As regards the statement of the Unitèd KingdûID representative that the information could have been supplied to the USSR delegation, the matter is not one of information being supplied to the delegations but of sufficient information .being made available to the Security Council and the Committee on the Admission of New Members. f ln this connexion,' 1 would like to inform the Chineserepresentative that his assertion that the USSR delegation had refused to meet the representative of Ceylon is based on incorrect information. A teIephone call was put throùgh to the representative of Ceylon at· the Plaza Hotel on the day when it would have been possible to meet him, but the reply received-was that he had already left the hote!. 1 do not think it necessary to reply to the remarks madeby the representatives of Canada and China, that the USSR delegation's statement was propaganda, as 1 consider that the Chinese representative's statement was out of place. lwishonce more toproc1aim theprinciple undeI'lying.the stand.taken by. the USSR ,dele-. ccgdûun,cwhichI <hàvemeàdYdoütiinedin m)" staternent. Isaid that "the Union of Soviet .SocialiSt Republics and itspeopleswelcome and would wêlcome theindependénce ofanycolonial people nowunder. foreign domination; But the USSR andits peoplesarehy no me~s prepared to give theit blessing ta shàm independence"- andlwish tofjtress the words: sham independ- 'l~nce-"inanyshapeorform". ,':'): j'The ,statemenf made by the. Chiriese .'repre- . s~ntative cannotberegarded ~ anything but .pfopaganèla in favout ofshamindependence for •... ~?l()nialpeoples.lcannot share theviews of the q:hinese representative and. 1 bdieve that the de encore dent posé son simplement de rendu d'étudier tenue p'hrase, observations suivante: General McNAUGHTON (Canada): 1 apoIogize for the necessity of speaking again on this subject. However the President has questioned the correctness of the statement l made. fu.answer to his comment on my observations, l merely wish to read into the record of this meet- .ing one sentence from the summary record of the meeting of the Committee on the Admission 'of New Members which was held at Lake Success on 1 July 1948. That sentence, contaihed in a paragraph summarizing the remarks of the Canadian representative, reads as follows: idée ments vrait [SjC.2jSR.26 "If the representative of the USSR insisted on his position that there was insufficient information for a decision, the Committee should . know specifical1y .what he Irtight desire" [SjC.2jSR.26 and Corr. 1]. côté,.je quel phrase

l shall aIso quote a sentence from the same document. The preceding sentence reads as follows: discussion l'objet Hlt was in the power of the Committee to declare that the consideration of the matter was closed and had been reported to the Security Council." Canada, question sécurité. j'ai dit précédemment. du moins pour tion. This was stated by the Canadian representarive who insisted on the closure of the di~cussion and referred the mattér to the Security Counci1. That was what 1 maintained and that is corroborated by the records. The Canadian representative abstained from voting but during the discussion he insisted on the closure,of the discussion of the matter. Mr. URDANETA-ARBELttEZ (Colorribia) (translatM trom Spanish): The. delegation of Coduit lombia completely agrees with the point of view hie , of those representatives who think that the Se..' quels curity Council should have at its disposalall dispôser informa.tion .d~em~d ·neçessary•. toenab1e. th~rrt utiles ta vote wisely in connexion with the admission l'adinisSionde~nou~ea\lXof new Members. The delegation of Colombia 'qu'ildoit believes in this the more because in its opinion avis, the Council's right to admit new. Members is cerne.' l'admission reallylimited to verifying whether or not .the ,lirrûte c~nditions required by the Charter àre complied non Wlt?, for the Charter confers on aIl peace-Ioving effet, nations able to comply with itsprovisions and fiques obligations,. the right to becomeMembers of the respecter United Nations. de faire partie Therefore 1 reallydonot understand why the ?elegations...'that· '.are riglltly requesting ·more . gations ~ormationdenot agree:to hear the representaseignements tive of Ceylon whois' presentat this meeting. T que cannat agree with the stand. taken bythe rep- • 1 am, therefore, in complete agreement with the suggestion made to that effect by the representatives of the United Kingdom, Canada and China. .

The representative of the United Kingdom has asked to speak. But before l call upon mm 1 wouldlike to settle the schedule of our future work. 1 suggest. we continue until 2 p.m. so as to finish with this question and thenmeet again at 4 p.m. As thereare no objections, that is what we shaI! do. Sir AlexanderCAooGAN (United Kingdom) : 1. have orny one quite short comment. In the speech which the President made earlier this morning-, he referred to a statement whiçh he' saidhadbetmmadeby Mr. Creech Jones, the Ministr:rforthe Colonies, in Lonslon on l'il June. I,.ha":e ascertained that ~r. Creech'Jones made nostatementon 18June ohhis year, though he didmake l;üs statement on 18 June 1947, ëight ,nlCmths before Ceylon acquired its independence. That statement, was to·the effectthat elections in Ceylon were béingarranged at· the time, and foreshadowing agreements that wouldhave.to be. rea.ched before Ceylon became independent. . TltePREsIDEr-rr (translatedfrotnRiMsian): ~~_J~.uDite(LKingdomI:epreseÎ1t~ti,~e,J!as-appar",', ently ••nûsunderstood me, perhapsowing '. to a . ",faultyinterprëtation. Iactually did Tefer.· to the. .' •·.,"statelllent made by,. Mr.i\rthur Creech Jones on ."l8,June 1947, and that was the statement menti0lledin mytext. Thatwasthe statement 1 had "in. mind; it defined the statlis,of Ceylon which . waSann9unced later. Consequently, there is no cqntradiption.•here, .GeneraIMcNAt1Ga'rO~l (Can,ada): 1 unIr' 'wanteg tOBay that 1 appreciate thePresid-.; ,having,read theadditional sentence into ,(i~~ ~lc~~~doiri:~~~nsQ~r°:he~~d=:~ryole;:~ ,sommes s'agit représentant

The general discussion on this question is closed, and the Council will now proceed to vote. We have before us a draft resolution proposed by the USSR delegation [8/974]. 1 shall now put this resolution to the vote. A vote was taken by show of hands~ as follows: ln favour: Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. . Abstaining: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, United Kingdom, United States of-America. Etats-Unis de p~ The remlt of the votewas 2 in favour ànd none against, with 9 abstentions. The draft reso~ lution was not adopted~ having failed to obtain the affirmative votes of seven members. , , - Mr. TSIANG (China): ln so far âs the parliamentary.situation is concetned,-1 understand th,at wehave a report from the Committee'on the Admission of New Members and that the majority favour the admission of Ceylon. That is the majority report 'of the Gommittee. Itseems unnecessary for anyinember to move anything. It is the usual procedure of the President of the Council to put the report of the Committee to the vote. If the President should rule that that is not sufficient, then 1 would be glad to -move formally that the Security Council recommend to the General ~embly the admission of. Ceylon to membership in the United Nations. nous dier .trant titue semb!~ tion le mité. n'est formellement mande

We arèaware of the, procedure mentièmed· by the Chinese representative but 1 .. am only re- 'ferring ta the factthatthe Committee on the ==ccï\:dmissidnof New Mëllioêts-hàs fiot·plit foi: ward any concrete proposaI. AlI wefindis one sentence only: naissons la .sin:tple~e1!-t· .d'etümet formulé du "The majority of the members of. the Cornmittee express·their support for the application of the admission of Ceylon." [8/859] en •. 1 do not.think there would be any use in putting such a sentence to the vote. That was L~e re8;S?l1 why 1 said that there was no'proposalin wnting. phrase j'ai sition Since the re]>resentative of China has now formallyproposed Ceylc:l'sad.q-lission tomembershipjnth:~ŒdteàNations,T shall put this proposaI to ~h.:, votealthoughit wasnot sub. a aux l'Organisation,. A vote was taken by Sh9W of hands, as follows: '. ,. ln tavour: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, United Kingdom, United States of America. Against: Ukrainiari Soviet Socialist R.,,}public, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The result of the vote was 9 in lavour and 2 against. The proposal was not adopted, one of the votes against being that of a permanent mèmber of the Counc;l. Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated from Spanish): Feeling, as 1 have felt"that the entire , discuss;('u this morning was completely politidù, purpOSl ,SB and not in keeping with the Charter, 1 have not said a single ward. But the time has ,come for me to speak. In the first place 1should like to have it placed on record that the President has not put this question to the COt.Ulcil in the manner prescribed by the Charter. He,has asked us to vote on the question of whether or not Ceylon Sh01Ùd be admitted to the United Nationswhen actually the only matter to be decidedis whether we should accept or reject the , recommendatioll, ma~e to US by the Committee on the Admission of New Members,that we SÎlould recommend to the Assembly that Ceylon should be admitted. FuIthermore, the Pr~ident has just sai,dthat as olfe of the permanent mem- ,bers oft.heCouncühas voted against it, the proposaI is not ·accepted. 1 do not understand whaC 'that stp.tement means. li the President ineans thatthe Council doesnot recommend the admission of Ceylon, 1 beliêve !hat paragraph 3 of Article 27 is not ·applicCJ,ble, but 1 shall not make,anissue. of the matter because, as 1 have showribefore and as 1 hope tobe able to prove asoft~ asnecessary, the:Assembly has the right to aCGept a: new Member even ~hen th~Security. Council ·does· not recommcnd.its admission. . Accdrclingly, 1 sha1l Itl6'elyrequest Îhat aU relevant documents on thisquestion, illcluding a c()py of the resolutionadoptëd· by the Coullcil, should .he submitted to the General Assembly forco~deration.adoptéepar 1-' '.:- ' , " ' , . _ Th,~F~EsmENT(translatedfromRus.ti~:'!):1; goes.. without saying •that ',the Cmnese. p~Ûpd!l~· ,.wasbased on the recommenciqtion oftho. qom~s~ '.111Ïttee.ontne Admission,of New Memb~r.'3.As t,heCô:Qlnllttee'sproposal had not beetl worded as a Fesolution,the .Chïnfse. represen.tativeeaS~d Qtit'fask.anddtafted âconcrete<propo39Jbased·· on tlfuse.r~coIIlmendâti(ms.Consequently,there le le naissance rappeler prévoit que: l'admission ou remet à il spécial des \s regards the Argentine representative's ..œment that the matter should be referred to :he General Assembly, it is obvious that we must abide by rule 60 of. the rules of procedure which states that: Ulf the Security Council does not recommend the applicant State for membership or postpQnes the consideration of the application, it shall sub- Init a special report to the General Assembly with a complete record of the discussion." générale The Secretariat'will submit a full report to the General Assembly. J'ai compte rendu du demande Nations Unies. et quises veaux coup l'EXtrême-Orient. Mr. TSIANG (China): 1 have asked ta speak in ordèr to have recorded my protest against the veto of the representative of the U~SR on the application of .Ceylon for membership in the United Nadons. l consider that veto to b~ arbitrary and not justified by the qualifications for membership stipUlated by the Charter. 1 consider it to he a great blow to the aspirations of all Far Easternpeoples. 'de socia.1;ÎStes mots Chine. a contraire

On hehalf of the tielegation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 1 shall take up one minute to reply to the statement made by the Chinese representative.' The USSR delegation rejects the protest of the Clûnese representative as unfounded and in contradiction wiili the United Nations Charter. tion nous voulue. donner d'indépendance. la The reason why the USSR delegation voted against is outlined with sufficient clarity in the, statement of the USSR.de1egation. Unlike the C~nese de1egation, the USSR delegation does . not-consider it advisable ta create the illusion of . sham independence among the colonial peoples. The Secùrity Council will meet again at 4 . p.m. to diSCUS3 the Trieste question, la à ", ARGENTINA-~RGENTINE Editorial Sudamericana S.A. Alsina 500 BUENOS AmES AUSTRALIA-AUSTRAUE H. A. Goddard Pty. Ltd. 255a George Street SYDNEY. N. S. W. FINLAND-flNLANDE Akateeminen Kirjakauppa 2, Keskuakatu HELSINKI BELGIUM-BELGIQUE Agence et Messageries de la Presse, S. A. 14-22 rue du P~rsil BRUXELLES FRANCE Editions A: Pedone 13, rue Soumot PAJUS. va GREECE-GRECE "Eleftheroudakis" Librairie internationale Place de la Constiiutibn ATHÈNES BOLIVIA-80UVIE Libreria Cientfica y Literaria ~venida 16 de Julio. 216 Casilla 972 LA PAZ GUATEMALA José Goubaud Goubaud «Cia. SucClIOr Sa Av. Sur No. GUATEMAU CANADA . The Rverson Press 299 Qüeen Street Welt TORONTO CHILE-CHIU Edmundo Pizarro Mer~.846 SANTIAGO HAITI Max Bouchereau . Librairie UA la noîte postale IlI-B PORT-AU-PRINCE CHtNA-CHlNE The Commercial Press Ltd. 211 Honan Ï{oad SHANGHAI INDIA-INDE Oxford Book Scindia HOll!3 NEwDELm COlOMBlA-COLOMBIE Libreria Latina Ltda. Apartado Aéreo 4011 BOGOTA IRAN Bongahe Piaderow 731 Shah Avenue TEHERAN COSTA RICA-COSfA-IfCA Trejos Hermanos Apartado 1313 SAN JosÉ IRAQ-IRAK Mackenzie & Mackenzie The Bookshap BAGHDAD CUBA La Casa Belga René de Smedt O'Reilly 455 LA. HABANA lEBANON--UBAN Librairie universelle BEYROUTH CZECHOSLOVAKIA- TCHECOSLOVAQUI~ F. Topic Narodni Trida9 P!lA1IA 1 LUXEMBOURG- Librairie J. Schummer Place Guillaume LUXEMBOURG DENMARK-DANEMARIC Einar Munskgaard Norregade 6 K.10BENHAVN NETHERLAND5-I'AY5-BAS N. V. Martinu!! Lange Voorhout S'GRAVENHAGE DOMINICAoN REPUBLlC- REPUBUQUE DOMINICAINE Libreria Dominicana Calle Mercedes No. 49 Apartado 656 CllJDAI:ITRUJILLO NEW ZEALAND- NOUVEUE.ZELANDE Gordon & Gatch, Waring Taylor WELLINGTON ECUADOR--:EQUAfEUR :Ptfuiioz Heimanos y Cia. Nueve de Octobre 703 Casilla 1();.24 GUAYAQVlL . NICARAGUA Ramiro Ramirez Agencia de Publicacion68 MANAGUA, D.