S/PV.471 Security Council

l propose that aIl those present observe a minute of silence in memory of one of the greatest friends and defenders of liberty ·and builders of peace and the United Nations, F.anklin Delano Roosevelt. 3. Thanks to the retiring President

Before we start our work today, 1 should like to express to the representative of Ecuador the Couneil's admiration and gratitude for the masterly way in which he guided the deliberations of the Couneil .during the month of March. mencer sentant l'èxpression présidé mois Mr. VITERI LAFRONTE (Ecuador) (translated tram Spanish) : l should first like to thank the President for his kind words with regard ta my work last month as President of the Seçurity Couneil. désire lantes de de avons tion à propos, membres ils lièrement In the course of our work during the month of March, we dealt with the question of India and Pakistan. VVe. succeeded in adopting a resohltion [SI1469] and, in that connexion, l should like to thank aIl the members of the Couneil for their co-operation. l wish to refer particularly to the co-operation l received at aIl times from the four sponsors of the resolution and from the representatives 4. Statement by the President

This being the first meeting of the Security Councîl during the current month, 1 feel my duty, in the present world situation, to make general statement regarding international peace and security.. It is an open secret that the world is now passing through a period of tension and anxiety. It is equally obvious that there are many who feel that the United Nations, and more particularly the Security Council, has not so far adequately fulfilled in this respect its mandate under the Charter. Looking at the inventory of the work of the Security Council up to the present moment, when attention inevitably drawn to sorne deficiencies, shortcomings, and gaps in it, 1 shall mention only a few salient examples. Articles 43 and 106 were put into the Charter with the intention of filling the gap; a situation similar to that prevailing today proved fatal to the League of Nations. Yet these articles remain unimplemented, and their implementation does not at present seem to be in sight. The dut;ies of the Security Council relating to disarmament a."ld the regulation of armaments are not satisfactorily discharged. Even the inadequate resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council remain hanging in the air. The same has been, until now, the fate of Article 26 of the Charter which stipulates : "In order to promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world's human and economic resources, the Security Council shaH be responsible for formulating, with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee referred to in Article 47, plans ta be submitted to the Members of the United Nations for the establishment of a system for the regulation of armaments." Another example is Article 4 of the Chart"'r. Article 4 puts clear!y and exclusively the requirements for admission to membership in the United Nati()ns; but for outside political reasons, and not for reasons relating to the Charter, several worthy applicants are refused acceptance. Our failure to admit worthy applicants to membership goes contrary to the stipulations of the Charter and the principle of the universality of the United Nations; it deprives this Organization of the valuable contributions these worthy applicants would certainly have made to its work. The time has come for a11 of uS ta revitalize our work and ta do something still hlore positive than that which we have done sa far for world peace and security, which are the raison d'être, the very essence, of the United Nations. From the first Hne of its first Article, the Charter puts foremost among the purposes of the United Nations the maintenance of international peace and security. The duties of the Security Council in this respect are great indeed. Article 24 of the Charter states: "In ?rder to. enst:re prompt and eff~ctive action by the Umted Nallons, lts Members confer on the Security Côuncil primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf:' With the same purpose in view, the Charter stipttlates, in Article 28, that "The Security Couneil shaH be so organized as ta he able ta function continuously" and that it "sha11 hold periodic meetings at which each of its members may, if it so desires, be represented by a member of the government or by sorne other specially designated representative". The importance of the Council's work and of its responsibilities in connexion with peace and security Is further enhanced by the stipulations of Articles 11 and 12 and paragraph 3 of Article 35 of the Charter. It is nevertheless felt that, for a11 the ordinary and extraordinary sessions of the General Assemblv, with ail the assiduous efforts of the various organs' of the United Nations, with all the four hundred and seventy meetings of the Security Council in about four years, as compared to only about sixty meetings in over twenty years of the Council of the League of Nations -despite a11 this, the structure of world peace and security remains as shaky today as only an ill-wisher would want it to be. As l hinted before, there have been, it is true, some great efforts made by the Security Couneil and by ather organs of the United Nations. Such efforts, however, have been tao often stalemated by various factors, and especia11y by the lack of agreement between the permanent members of the Security Council, these Members of the United Nations whose agreement is 50 essential to the success of our Organization. The reason for which l make special mention of the permanent members of the Security Council is quite In speaking as l speak to the Council today about international peace and security, l am not trying to apportion any blame or to level accusations against anyone. My ultimate objective is the very same as that of the Charter, namely, that we help in the establishment of a workable, peaceable, secure and really civilized international life. My immediate objective ta appeal ta the Security Council, and particularly ta its permanent members, sa that we may aIl redouble our efforts ta accomplish agreement instead of perpetuating disagreement, and to give more hope of peace and security to a weary, perturbed world. In this, as President of the Security Council and as representative of EGYPT, l am quite ready, as l am sure ail of the representatives are ready, to work day and night and ta co-operate with everyone who aims at the same objective. While l submit my present statement for the consideration of the Couneil, and particularly for its help and co-operation, l am well aware of the fact that we cannat solve our problems instantly; l am well aware that their solution will require sorne time, varying in length according to the atmosphere and complexities of the problems. Several proposaIs and efforts have been made ta solve one or other of our problems. Sorne of them are noteworthy and merit most careful consideration by the Council. Those who have made them deserve our gratitude, even if sorne of us think that these proposaIs or thèse efforts do not fully or properly coincide with the requirements of the present unseti:led state of affairs ::n the world. We should consult more, more frequently compare notes and ideas. We are expected to work unceasingly and relentlessly for the cause of peace and security. We should not allow it to he tïUly said that the work of the Security Couneil is stamped with futility and lack of stamina in the face of what many consider to be a deteriorating-nay, an alarming-state of world affairs. Of course we should not be alarmists. We should not exaggerate the danger which the world facing. On the other hand, we should not under-rate such danger. An overdose of complacency and unseeing optimism might be fatal. The danger is there; but can be eliminated through determined, persistent, enlightened and timely endeavours. Such is the hope and the public opinion of the world today. As l indicated before, l have made this preliminary statement in an attempt to discharge part of the duty incumbent upon me as President of the Security Council under the present circumstances prevailing in the world. . l noW suggest that we proceed with the consideration of the provisional agenda which is before the Council in document S/Agenda 471/Rev.1. 5. Adoption of the agenda

The members of the Security Coundl will recall that, at our previous [470th] meeting on 14 March 1950, it was decided that the Security Council would, in due course, appo,nt a United Nations representative for India and Pakistan; the functions of such representative who would be so appointed have been defined by the Security Council resolution [S/1469] of the same date. The representatives of Cuba, Norway, the United IGngdom and the United States presented to me the name of the Australian jurist, Sir Owen Dixon, with the understanding that l submit the matter to the Security Council for consideration, which l am now doing. l intend to ask whether the Security Council approves the appointment of Sir Owen Dixon as United Nations representative for India and Pakistan. Royaume-Uni didature entendu du de Dixon l'Inde l shallnow put to the vote for approval by the Council the appointment of Sir Owen Dixon as United Nations representative for India and Pakistan. sur représentant kistan. In favour: China, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ire1and, United States of America. Norvège, lande Abstaining: India, Yugoslavia. Absent: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. tiques. avec ratifier représentant Pakistan. .The PRESIDENT: The appointment of Sir Owen Dlx?n as United Nations representative for India and ~akistan has been approved by the Council by 8 votes m favour, with 2 abstentions. India is one of the countries abstaining, and l suppose that it considers l am equally pleased to extend the Council's congra- tulations and good wishes to Sir Owen Dixon, the United Nations representative for India and Pakistan. Mr. SUNDE (Norway): The Norwegian delegation wishes to associate itself whole-heartedly with what has just been said by the President. The vote just taken by the Security Council on the appointment of Sir Owen Dixon as United Nations representative brings to a satisfactory conclusion difficult stage in the process of bringing about a peaceful settlement of the unhappy dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. My delegation takes note of and highly appreciatès the co-operative attitude shown by the two parties accepting the Security Council's decision on the question of selecting the person to be entrusted with the crucial task of implementing the Council's resolu- tion of 14 March, aiming at the demilitarization Kashmir in preparation for the final solution of tlle problem through the free and impartial plebiscite upon whkh the parties have agreed. 1 think 1 am safe in sayingthat the agreement which we have just reached is also a tribute to the man upon whose shoulders the Council has now placed these heavy responsibilities. My delegation feels that the choice Sir Owen Dixon as United Nations representative a happy one, and it is convinced that Sir Owen's weU-known qualities as an experienced administrator Nations dressant qu'il tact. Furthermore, l feel that the United Nations repre- sentative will also not hesitate to extend his assistance to the parties to the degree of drawing up the programme for such talks, whenever he feels that this will be useful and necessary in bringing the parties tagether. Owen technique l'attention est vers accomplis parties. As l have already indicated, l feel confident that Sir Owen Dixon is fully aware of every aspect of the technique of negotiation. l nevertheless want to draw attention to this particular point, because, in so doing, 1can also stress the obvious fact that whatever progress can be made towards a final solution of the dispute will necessarily be made through arrangements agreed upon by both parties. l'anglais) couragements tion qu'ils situation paru blâme damnation l'examen développement et time ment Membres visager Je se bref, drais à prises rité: Conseil devons Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): The United States wishes to encourage its fellow Members of the United Nations, India and Pakistan, to continue ta make these substantial gains in the direction of the settlement of an extremely complicated situation. It has oever been necessary for the Security Council to consider the question of blame, guilt, or anything of that kind. It has had enough to do in considering the facts, the complexity of which was the natural out- growth of a situation having many ramifications and along and ancient history. 1 think that, as representative of the United States, 1~ou1c1, do no better at this moment of progress than bnefly to refer to what these great Members of the United Nations have already accomplished and to the promise which this holds for the future. l should like ta bring out the high points 'in the comparatively brief co~sideration which the Security Council has given to Ih1S matter. l should also like to touch upon the matters which remain to be considered and acted upon by the twa representatives of the Security Council: first, by ~e 'pers~m whom we have appointed today and whose drstIngtllshed character giv.es us every cause for expressing gratitude at his willingness to assume the burdens of this great task; and, then, after he has This, briefiy, is the story as we see it, and we think it. represents a notable achievement by two great countries which were suddenly confronted with the necessity of solving these problems that grew out the great change from a colonial status to one independence. It was in January 1948 that this matter was brought before the Security Council. On the 17th of that month the Security Council adopted a resolution [S/651] submitted by the representative of Belgium which called· upon the parties "to take . . . all measures . . . to im- prove the situation... ". The United Kingdom delega- tion suggested that the President of the Security Coun- cil meet with the representatives of the parties explore the grounds for settlement; and, still in that same month, on 20 January 1948, a three-member Com- mission was created by the Security Council [S/654] to praceed to the spot, investigate and report. On 13 August 1948, by virtue of a resolution [S/1100, paragraph 75] adopted by the United Nations Com~ssion for India and Pakistan [UNCIP], the Secunty Council Commission to which l have just referred, a cease-fire was ordered and a truce ao-ree- ment proposed, reaffirming the wish of both p:rties that the future status of the State be determined accprdance with the will of the people. O~ 23 December 1948-1 am skipping many of the detaI1s of this hi~tory, because it is necessary on this occasion to bring only the high points inta the record -Inda accepted, by letter [S/1196, annex 4], the proposals made by UNCIP; and, on 25 December Pa~stan did likewise [S/1196, annez 5]. India and PakIstan agreed, then, to order a cease-fire, which became effective, at midnight, one minute before January 1949. 9n 5 January 1949, UNCIP adopted another reso- lutlOn [S/1196, paragraphe 15] supplementing part III of 0e. resolution o~ 13 August 1948, providing for plebISCIte to be carned out by a plebiscite administrator to be nominated by the Secretary-General and to formally appointed ta office by the Government Jammu and Kashmir. Very shortly thereafter, on 24 March, to be exact, Chester W. Nimitz, F1eet AdmiraI of the United States Navy, was designated Plebiscite Administrator and the Commission of the Security Counci1 was na'tified the Secretary-Genera1 of this designation. These were important and logica1 steps toward pacific solution of a situation which had become On 26 August, the parties not having been able to agrèe to aU the particulars of UNCIP's proposaIs, another idea was tried out: a proposaI [S/1430/Add.l, alllle.?: 35] providing for arbitration on the differences existing between the parties concerning aU questions raised by them regarding the implementation of part II of the resolution of 13 Augùst 1948. l'Inde été tous les mise l have referred to two reso1utions: one of 13 August 1948 and the other of 5 January 1949. They are basic resolutions, and l have called attention to them because they are concerned with what we are doing today·and constitute the basis of our action, as l shall point out. The proposaI for arbitration was rejected. The net gain up to this point, then, before the resolution which \Vas adopted on 14 March 1950 and to which the representative of Ecuador has referred, was the cessa- tion of hostilities, the adoption of a line of truce, an agreement for a plebiscite, and recognition by both India and Pakistan that Admirai Nimitz was satis- factory as a supervisor and oveîseer of the plebiscite. That is where we stood on 14 March 1950, when the Security ({mncil adopted the joint resolution introduced by Cuba, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States, which replaced UNCIP by a single repre- sentative and called upon the parties "to prepare and execute within a period of five months from the date of this resolution"- that would bring it to next August -"a programme of demilitarization on the basis of the princip1es of paragraph 2 of General McNaughton's proposaI [5/1453] or of such modifications of those principles as may be mutually agreed." l s~all not take the time' of the Security Council ta reVIew the McNaughton proposaI but l refer to it in arder to have this record connect~d up logically. There is one paragraph in the resolution of 14 March 1950 that l ask leave to read; it is not long and l regard it as important enough to be made a part of my remarks. It reads: "Commending the Governments of India and Pakistan for their statesmanlike action in reaching the agreements embodied in the United Nations Commis- sion's resolutions of 13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949 for a cease-fire, for the demilitarization of the "1. The cessation of hostilities effected 1 January 1949, "2. The estabHshment of a cease-fire line on 27 July 1949 and "3. The agreement that Fleet AdmiraI Chester W. Nimitz shaH be Plebiscite Administrator." What is there left immediatly before us? We find that the greatest difficulty, and one which provoked the idea of arbitration, was the demilitarization of the country, which is deemed to be necessary, and which is considered by the Security CotlUcil to be necessary, in order that the plebiscite may be held in an orderly way and uninfluenced by the presence of the armed forces of either party to this controversy. Consequently, the immediate question still to be decided, and the question with regard to which this very distinguished representative will participate, assist, afford guidance and report to the Security Council from time to time is that of demilitarization. l should like to say, in conclusion, that the United States wishes to strengthen the ar!'1 of the representa- tive of the Seeurity Couneil as far as it is proper and appropriate for a member of the Security Couneil and a Member of the United Nations to do so. Tt is our jpdgment that this great representative should have t..1J.e strong support of the Security Council at aIl times in his. very diffieult task. In saying this we çast no asperSlOns whatsoever upon the parties. T;leir problem is exceedin,O"ly difficult, as we know. We are not trying. to enforée .. uething by punj~1J.ment, eoercion or any- thing of that kind. What w~ c,:e trying to do is to use that finest -of instrumentalities in all disputes, pacific settlement, and the offer of a very distinguished and able person to aid in b~inging the parties together. .Sir Alexa~der CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : l only wlsh. very bnefly to endorse what has been said by the PreSIdent and by other representatives at this table. like to think that the decision which we have taken today marks an important advance towards a peaceful and satisfactory settlement -of this extremely difficult question. l should like, on behalf of my delegation. to we1come the appointment of Sir Owen Dixon. The problem with which Sir Owen will be faced is one of very great complexity calling for the exercise of the utmost skill and wisdotP.. Moreover, his task is one which can be undertaken only by someone of the highest stature, whose views and recommendations will carry great weight not only with the Governments of India and Pakistan but also with public opinion in the sub- continent and in the world at large. l am confident Reference has already been made to the recent meeting in New Delhi of the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan. The atmosphere in the sub-continent has, l am sure, been immeasurably improved during the past week by reason of the agreement reached between Indiaand Pakistan in regard to minority rights. The conclusion of that agreement results from the states- manlike approach of the two Governments towards the difficult problems which have a;risen. I feel that the United Nations has a great opportunity to perform a service of the highest importance to the people of India and Pakistan by bringing to an end a dispute which has for so long existed in regard to Kashmir. Tout le vote de seil Owen Le Sir collaboration 1v1r. GOPALA MENON (India): First, I wish to confirm the President's interpretation of Inclia's abstention in the vote, in accordance ,vith Article 27 of the Charter. My Government instructed me ta convey to the Secllrity Council its acceptance of Sir Owen Dixon as the United Nations representative. The Government of India will be glad to extend to Sir Owen its warm and full co-operation in the discharge of his functions. Sir Mohammad ZAFRULLA KHAN (Pakistan): The observations that have already been made by members of the Security Council happily make it unnecessary for me ta detain the Council very long at this stage. Nevertheless, it would perhaps bear emphasizing, as has indeed already been done by the representative of the United States, that on this difficult problem which has for so long complicated the relations between India and Pakistan, the measure of agreement so far reached is represented by and is embodied in the two resolu'i:Ïons of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan, dated 13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949. In pursuance of those resolutions, the cessation of hostilities was effected as of 1 January 1949, and a cease-fire linewas actually established on 27 July 1949. duit faites mettront de Toutefois, comme ce les dans quée le des application le a cord nistrateur procéder l'adhésion kistan était le impartialité notamment l'Etat était et In.addition, with the agreement of the parties, Fleet Adm~r~l Chester W. Nimitz was appointed Plebiscite Admmlstrator to organize and hold the plebiscite which shollid determine the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan or to India. . It Was to have been the duty of the Plebiscite Ad~in­ Istrator to establish conditions which would ensure and guarantee that the plebiscite is in every respect f.ree and impartial. In the meantime, however, difficul- tles arose with regard principally to the demilitari:-ation of. the State, a· condition which obviously is essential as a preIiminary to the organization and the holding of the plebiscite. The resolution adopted by the Security The members of the Security Council will recall that on 14 March 1950, when this resolution was adopted by the Council, l submitted to the Council on behalf my Government the acceptance by my Government that resolution in its letter and in its spirit. It foIlows therefore, that in the discharge of the duties and functions laid upon him by that resolution, the United N a~ons representative will receive the fullest support, assIstance and co-operation of my Government. Tt is unnecessary to add anything more on behalf of the Pakistan Government at this stage. But l might express the hope that, in view of the agreement reached between the two Governments on a different but basically connected problem, the United Nations representative may find his task rendered easier than it is feared it might otherwise be. Ml". TSIANG (China): l appreciate and praise the noble motives which actuated the President to make the s.tatemen~ whic~ h~ did at the beginning of today's meetmg. It IS ObVlOUS that the peoples of the world look to the United Nations and, in particular, to the Security Council, to keep the peace of the world. It also obvious that problems have increased faster than we have iJeen able to find solutions for them. The President's concern is therefore very legitimate. l wish to take a few minutes of the Council's time to set forth the views of my delegation in regard to the problem which the President took up in his opening statement. In the first part of the President's statement he stressed the problem of disarmament and the organiza- tion of a United Nations force. Although he did not specifical1y mention the problem of atomic energy, l am sure he had it in his mind, as indeed aIl of us must have it always in our minds.My delegation regrets and laments that we have not suc.ceeded in prohibiting and controlling the atomic weapon. We regret that the ~f the world. Indeed, we can say that such a state of affairs has come about against the deep wishes of aU the peoples of the world. Nevertheless, it is a fact, and we can ponder over the reasons for the present situation. des guerre par pièce côtés, ne Je ment accord résoudre contrôle vain un semble tient rendre rester rendions nous l'employer sentent paix Puissances paix l'Organisation The world, in spite of its shortcomings, has pro- gressed beyond the stage of cannibalism or war for the sake of just killing people. War for sake of war is definitely a museum piece. If, then, we still see on aU sides preparations for war it is because we are divided on policy. It is my sincere conviction that the cause of disarmament can be served only by seeking a seUlement in the political sphere. Any effort to work on the problem of disarmament, including the control and prohibition of atomic energy, would not bear fruit unless we succeed in the first instance in achieving a sllbstantial measure of political agreement. TUWi...lg now to the political field, it appears ta me that it is weU for the Security Councîl ta keep in mind its limitations. To realize our limitations is not to abdicate or to remain passive in the face of the world crisis. If we realized our limitations we could then more profitably build up our strength and apply that strength along lines that would be reaUy useful. One of the great politieal problems facing the world today is the problem of peace treaties with Germany, Japan and Austria. Now, it was decided by the Powers that the question of peace treaties should be placed beyond the sphere of activities of the United Nations. No matter what we here might think today, this problem is not within our jurisdiction. l ean sec nothing that the Seeurity Council can do usefully in this field. The second great limitation which we must face is the rise of Soviet Union imperialism. This rise is unexpeeted. In the years before the organization of the Unitd Nations and during the Conference at San Francisco, aIl the Governments and peoples of the world expected the Soviet Union to C'o-operate with the other countdes of the world on the basis of live and let live. Actual events have gone against our ex.peetations. We Ïace today a new kind of imperialism more deadly than anything we have ever seen before in aU?f mankind's history. It works with weapons against WhlCh the Charter made no specific provision just because the framers of the Charter did not visualize such a possibility. It i5 only when aggression assumes the classical form of armed invasion that the specific Articles of the Charter can be brought into action. Aggression through propaganda, through the "fifth column", through exploitation of economic baek- wardness in sorne countries, waging a war of aggression \Vhat. then, caD the United Nations contribute towards the maintenance of peace? It has no force its own. It has no financial resources of its own. Sorne of the important problems of the world are not within its scope of activities. Our Charter \Vas designed more ta meet the problems of the past than ta meet the one problem of today. In the face of aIl these limitations and difficulties there is one sphere where we cau be useful and' strong. That is the sphere of world public opinion. Ir is by the mobilization of the moral forces of the world that the United Nations today can make a real contribution. l am firmly convinced that if vve should be courageous enough ta deploy all the moral forces of the world, we could yet maintain the peace of the world. During the fourth session of the General Assembly, my delegation asked the United Nations to consider the aggression of the Soviet Union against my country. The .General Assembly contented itself with a resolu- tian of abstract and remote prin~iple.l Even today, when the question is before the Interim Committee, sorne delegations are only too prone to be passive, to say that what is past is pasto 1 cannot conceive of any way of raising the prestige of the United Nations if we continue to hush matters. ProposaIs have been made to patch up things. Such proposaIs are calculated to preserve the United Nations as a piece ùf bureau- cratic machinery. 1 am not interested in the United Nations a.s a piece of bureauçratic machinery; 1 am interested in the United Nations as a force for international justice and peace. As soon as it œases to be such a force, a mere gigantic bureaucracy will serve no purpose 'whatever. On this occasion when the President has brought our minds back to the fundamentals of our problem, namely, the peace and security of the world, 1 have offered my observations in the hope that our labours might be directed to fields where we can do really vital ~ See Official Reords of the fourth session of the General Assembly, IResollltions, resolutions 291 (IV) and 292 (IV). Mr. BEBLER (Yugoslavia) (translated tram French) : l am quite willing to allow other members ta speak first, as it is my intention ta address my remarks solely to the statement made by the President at the beginning of this meeting. tour parler a pagnol) qui Inde-Pakistan dit, de si sion créée Mt. VITERI LAFRONTE (Ecuador) (translated tram Spanish): l wish to return for the moment to the item on the agenda and to say a few words on the India-Pakistan question, because l feel that we should not end today's meeting without making some reference ta the able and decisive work of the .United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan, whiçh was established by the Security Council. sentant chargé et indiqué titue Conseil du The Security Council has appointed a representative responsible for making the preparations for a plebiscite, for preparing a programme of demilitarization, and for proceeding to that demilitarization. As several of my coileagues have pointed out, this appointment represents anew step in the Security Council's endeavour to solve the difficuIt problem of India and Pakistan. This decision was a result of a suggestion made by the commission of five persons designated by the Council. As soon as we received that suggestion we realized the conviction felt by a group which said: "VVe have done aU we can to bring about an agreement between the parties; we believe that, jointly and as a group, we can do no more, and we suggest that our task be entrusted to a single individuaI." proposition soumise nommée nous de déclarait sible cord; jointement, proposons sonne." The. Commission's suggestion was approved by the Councll and l think it only just, while taking this new step, to recall the Commission's good work. le nouveau qu'il complie In connexion with the election we have just com- pleted, names of high distinction and great prestige were l?en~ioned, thus proving that when the Security procéder, haute ainsi confier son personnalités trouvait grand sa ~ouncI1 wlshes measures to be undertaken on its behalf, It ~eeks to enlist the co-operation of persons of pre- em1l1ent stature. One of those names was that of Sir Owen Dixon, and the Ecuadorean delegation took great pleasure in voting for his appointment. l feel sure that it will be found necessary and desirable to place on the staff of the United Nations representative high military authorities to assist him and co-operate with him in all truly technical military matters. The Security Council is anxious that this step should be fully effective and that the solution with which we are all concemed should be brought about as speedily as possible. Ml'. CHAUVEL (France) (tmnslated !1'01n French) l am glad to associate myself with what has been said by severa1 members, particularly by the representatives of the United States and the United Kingdom. The French delegation welcomes the appointment of a mediator for the Kashmir dispute, as well as the fact that Sir Owen Dixon has been able ta accept that important post. l was highly gratified by the comments of the representatives of the interested parties upon the decision taken by us. It is dear that the success of the mission will very largely depend upon the co-operation vouchsafed it by the New Delhi and Karachi Govemments. The French delegatian does not doubt that those two Govemments, which have just given a solemn and public token of their will to eliminate the causes of the conflict between them, will avail themselves of the apportunity offered to them ta settle a dispute the gravity and protracted character of which has rightly alarmed us all; an<ito do so under conditions which are highly honourable for both parties and most likely to guarantee the interests involved. My delegation, and l am sure all others represented here, hope that the 'will h, understanding and co- operation, without which the wisest of procedures and the best of measures vmuId remain useless, will be manifested on aU sides.

As there are no further speakers on the India-Pakistan question, l' wish to extend the Council's thanks to the representative of Pakistan and to the Chairman and other members ôf the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan.

With reference to a point raised by the representative of China, l should like to mention 1 wish this point to be quite clear and to be placed in the record of this meeting. le membres au gation gner, du publique, appelés grands nales. Mr. BEBLER (Yugoslavia) (tmnslated tram French) : At the beginning of this meeting the President, referring to the present world tension, addressed a general appeal to the permanent and non-permanent memhers of the Security CotlUcil. My delegation feels that, in so doing, hr was perfectly justified in emphasizing that in the eyes of public opinion we-and l am 'speaking of the Council as a whole-are very far from playing the part which we are called upon to play in international life: that of a great artisan of peace and of international understanding. Our agenda contains a long list of questions. We do not mention them. l of course share·the opinion of those who hold that failure to discuss these questions is perhaps a good omen, since it can be taken to mean that they are not "burning" questions. However, as the President pointed out, there are problems to which that optimistic view obviously cannot apply. Sorne of them are not taken up despite the fact that they are immediate and pressing. questions. ment pas puisqu'il tions la thèse Certains caractère l'admission :présenté Unies trois Etats, d'entre miers pour tions The President was right in mentioning the question of the admission of new Members. Sorne States applied for admission to membership in the United Nations in 1946 and 1947. They have been waiting for the past three of four years. It is to be deplored that these States have not been admitted as a result of a lack of agreement on the question as to how many of them should be included in the first group of new Members to he admitted. The prestige and success of the United Nations calI for an immediate solution to that problem. Moreover, l feel that l must refer to the problems of armaments. These are particularly grave problems since the armaments race adds to international tension which in tum speeds up that race. Who, other than the Security Council, can rescue the world from this vicious circ1e? hlèmes tère ajoutant celle-là. sortir soit qu'il composé initiatives ~~e Security Council must, of cours~, be in a moral ,posItion to do so. It is therefore essential that the Council :.tself should be able to function. Its composition should be such as to permit it to take, with authority, whatever initiative may be required. Urifortunately, we cannot say that all is weIl within the Security Council. We are divided on a vital question, that of the representation of a permanent de notre capitale la presse, cette possible: me~ber, China. As l told the Press the other day, l consl~er that the time has definite1y come for that questIon to be solved. There is, in our opinion, only one possible solution, that of admitting to our table the repiesentative of the Government of the People's j\{oreover, is there still that majority of seven votes which the Charter requires for accepting the validity of the credentials of the Chinese delegate who is here at this time? l doubt that very much and l believe that the President should examine the situation and lead us to a speedy solution of that question which has remained in suspense for too long a period of time. To avoid any misunderstanding, l wish to point out that such a decision should be taken immediately, not because of the intentional absence of another permanent member, but despite Lnat absence. It should be taken in the interests of the United Nations; it should taken because the Charter requires the presence China in the Security Council; that is clearly stipulated in Article 23. It should be taken because China's absence constitutes the most flagrant violation of the principle of universality of the United Nations, since it concerns a country the population of which is larger than that of the whole of Europe or even of the two American continents combined. In our opinion, we should deal with this question first and should devote one of our forthcoming meetings to it. This is the first task awaiting not only the permanent members of the Council but also and especially the non-permanent members, since the latter seem less divided on this point-which, incidentally, no more than a reflection of the general state. of affairs in our troubled world. This last factor is an additional reason for our attitude with regard to the part to be played by large and small countries. This attitude was clearly stated 1:iy my country's Minister for Foreign A..:ffairs, Ml'. Kardelj, during a general debate at the last session of the General Assembly, when he said:2 "We are far from under-estimating the part which the great Powers are at present playing in international life and, particularly, in the defence of pea.ce. We 1-.dieve, however, that the co-operation on an equal basis of the small Powers in an efforts towards strengthening the peace is essential if the peace is be not merely a peace for the great Powers but also one between the great Powers and the small, i.e., peace between equal nations, a peace for all and not only a peace for the strong and the mighty." For that real, just and indivisible peace, we are prepared to do everything which is necessary. As a member 10 all peoples: the desire for a lasting peace. d'orateur la

l have no other speakers on my list. 1therefore propose to adjourn the meeting. The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m.