S/PV.490 Security Council

We shaH continue our work. Three of the speeches made at the Security Council's last meeting have still ta be interpreted into French. They are the statements of the USSR, United Kingdom and United States de1egations.

The in- terpretation of all three speeches is conc1uded. Speaking as representative of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, 1 wish to say that at the end of the Security Council's last meeting, of which our meet- ing today is in fact the continuation, the USSR delega- tion had intcnded to make a brief statement. 1 shall con- fine myself to commenting hriefly on the statements of the United States and United Kingdom representatives. In the first place, 1 wish to point out that the facts quoted in the statements made by the USSR delegation were based on official sources. Not a single one of the offi~ial statements 1 have quoted, either those made by Umted States officiaIs or those made by the Syngman Président: M. J. :MALIK (Union des Républiques socialistes soviétiques). Préscuts: Les représentants des pays suivants: Chine, Cuba, Equateur, Egypte, France, Inde, Norvège, Union des Républiques sociali..stes soviétiques, Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord, Etats-Unis d'Amérique, Yougoslavie. 1. Ordre du jour provisoire (S/Agenda 490) 1. Adoption de l'ordre du jour. 2. Plainte faisant état d'une agression contre la Ré- publique de Corée. 2. Adoption de l'ordre du jour 3. Plainte faisant état d'une agression contre la République de Corée (.uite) Le PRÉSIDENT (traduit du rztsse): J'invite main- tenant le Conseil à continuer son travail. Au cours de la séance précédente du Conseil de sécurité, trois déclara- tions n'ont pas été interprétées en français: celle de la délégation de l'URSS, celle de la délégation du Royaume-Uni et celle de la délégation des Etats-Unis. Il est donné lecture de la traduction en français des déclarations faites par les représentants de l'URSS, du Royaume-Uni et des Etats-Unis à la 489ème séance du Conseil. Le PRÉSIDENT (traduit du russe): L'interprétation des trois discours est terminée. En ma qualité de représentant de l'UNION DES RÉ- PUBLIQUES SOCIALISTES SOVIÉTIQUES, je voudrais rap- peler que, à la fin de la dernière siance du Conseil de sécurité, séance que nous poursuivons en fait, la délé- gation de l'URSS avait l'intention de donner quelques brèves précisions. Je me limiterai à donner briève- ment certaines explications en ce qui concerne les interventions des représentants des Etats-Unis et du Royaume-Uni. Tout d'abord, je voudrais souligner que les faits mentionnés dans les déclarations de la délégation de l'URSS sont tirés de sources officielles. Ni le repré- sentant des Etats-Unis, ni le représentant du Royaume- Uni n'ont réfuté aucune des déclarations officielles In the second place, 1 wish to point out that 1 said that the United States Government had begun armed aggression against the Korean people in the absence of any United Nations resolution, even of an illegal resolution. That fact was corroborated by none other than the United States representative, Mr. Austin. At the 48Sth meeting of the Security Council, on 10 Au- gust, he stated that at noon on 27 June the President of the United States had ordered the United States air and naval forces to go to the aid of the Korean Govern- ment. The 474th meeting of the Security Council, at which the United States delegation subsequently im- posed its illegal resolution for the purpose of concealing its unprovoked aggression in Korea, was convened at 3 p.m. on the same day, 27 June. This is clear from the official records. Consequently it is an undeniable historical fact that the Government of the United States arbitrarily and illegally launched its aggression in Korea several hours before the meeting of the Security Council was called, ___ thus_i<j.~iu.g. J;h~__:United Nations and the entire world . with the fait accompli of its aggression in Korea. Then, several hours later, supported by its- "Marshallized" allies of the aggressive North Atlantic bloc and by the members of the Pan-American Union, the United States Government put through the Security Couneil an illegal resolution in order to justify and cloak its aggression in Korea. That is how this aggression came to be labelled "United Nations". This is an undeniable historical facto The United States Government's reference to the illegal Security Council resolution of 2S June [473rd meeting] is pointless, as that resolution does not pro- vide for any military sanctions and does not authorize anybody to apply such sanctions. The only logical con- dusion is that the Government of the United States first committed an act of aggression and then trîed to cloak that aggression by label1ing it "United Nations". Now a last point. 1 charge Sir Gladwyn Jebb, the United Kingdom representative, with having grossly distorted the meaning of the quotations he arbitrarily tore from their contexts and introduced into his speech. He referred to volume II of the Soviet History of Diplomacy. There is nothing in volume II which in any way resembles what he said. In volume III of the His- tory of Diplomacy there is a chapter called "The Meth- ods of Bourgeois Diplomacy". In it sorne instructive examples ~>re adduced of how bourgeois diplomacy makes u..~ of pacifist propaganda to mislead its oppo- news, h "{ ;~ conceals its acquisitive purposes beneath lofty principles and allegedly "disinterested" ideological motives, how it disguises its aggressive plans with anti- communist and anti-USSR propaganda, how, with the The history of the development of the Korean ques- tion and of its discussion in the United Nations and the Security Couneil clearly shows that aIl these methods of bourgeois diplomàcy are being used by United States and British diplomats in order to conceal, justify and facilitate United States armed aggression against the Korean people. Soviet diplomacy is based on entirely different prin- ciples, on basically new principles. Its main function is ta secure peace for the peoples of the Soviet land and ta create the external political conditions which are essential for their peaceful, creative work. This func- tian coincides completely with the interests of progres- sive mankind as a whole. Soviet diplomacy is therefore a most important factor in the international struggle against aggressors, warmongers, and their accom- pliees-in the struggle for peace, freedom, progress and full democracy. Soviet diplomacy is led by the greatest strategist and diplomat of aIl times and of aIl peoples, the great Stalin. That is the pledge of the success of the great and noble task towards the achievement of which Soviet diplomacy is directecL As regards the quotations from the declarations of Lenin and Stalin adduced by Sir Gladwyn Jebb, not one of them has any bearing whatsoever on the Korean question. The quotations from Lenin relate particu- larly to the time when Mr. Churchill, warmonger No. 1 and Sir Gladwyn Jebb's compatriot and mentor in aggression, organized the armed intervention of the Entente against Soviet Russia. That was in 1919'-20. Mr. Churchill then organized the armed intervention by the Entente in the domestic affairs of Soviet Russia, as President Truman is now trying to organize armed intervention in the domestic affairs of the Korean people. At that time the British, French, Japanese and United States interventionists invaded the territory of Soviet Russia from the south, north, west and east. Thos~ "civilized" bandits crept up secretly, like thieves, ~nd landed their forces on Russian territory. The Brit- Ish and French landed theîr forces in northern Russia, and occupied Archangel and Murkmansk. The United States and Japanese imperialists ran wild in the Soviet Far East. The hordes of international imperialism in- vaded Soviet Rllssia, l;ot in order to collaborate and live peacefully side by side with the peoples of Russia, ?ut to strangle and destroy the Soviet land and turn it mto a colony and its people into slaves. There began a desperate struggle, not for existence but for )ife or death, between the first socialist State in the world and a whole gang of capitalist countries-interventionists and aggressors. 1t was then that the Soviet Government and Îts great founders, Lenin and Stalin, dec1ared that As a result of the heroic struggle of the workers and peasants of Soviet Russia under the leadership of the Boishevist Party, the interventionists were defeated, foreign military intervention was beaten off, and the interventionist forces were thrown out of the Soviet land. After the expulsion of the interventionists, Lenin put forward the theory of co-existence, of business relations and peaceful economic rivalry between the Soviet State and capitalist States. The great Stalin developed and strengthened the theory of the co-existence of the t\\'o systems and of peaceful collaboration between them. He said as early as 1934: "If anyone wJ.nts peace and seeks for business connexions with us, he will always find support from us." Sir Gladwyn Jebb, as a typical representative of bour- geois diplomacy, resorts to the well-tried tricks of that diplomacy. He arbitrarily selects sentences, distorts them and then quotes them out of their context in time and space. In this he follows in the footsteps of Bevin, McNeil and Shawcross. Those who have taken part in the sessions of the General Assembly will remember quit· weIl how often those gentlemen also resorted to such tricks of bourgeois diplomacy. Like them, Sir Glad- wyn Jebb blatantIy slanders the Soviet Union and its foreign policy, which is one of peace and friendship among the peoples. 1 would point out that the British diplomat is wasting his efforts. History has shown that it was not Soviet Russia which tried, by armed aggression, to destroy capitalist Britain and the capitalist United States; on the con- trary, it is Britain and the United States which have more than once, both overtly and covertIy, sought to destroy Soviet Russia. Such are the historical facts. Is it not clear who was-and still is-the aggressor, who repudiates peaceful co-existence and co-operation between the two systems-those of socialism and cap"" italism? Those are the observations which the USSR delega- tion felt bound ta make in connexion with the state- ments made by the United States and United Kingdom representatives. 1 consider it my dutY as PRESIDENT to inform mem- bers of the Security Council of the heavy stream of letters and telegrams which is reaching the Security Council daily from aIl parts of the world, protesting against United States intervention in Korea, against the inhuman bombing of towns and villages by the United States Air Force, against the bombardment of Korean coastal areas by the Navy and against the other barbarous methods of mass destruction of the peaceful population which the United States forces are using in Korea. From 1 August to the present day not only have letters and telegrams of protest been received from the Govemments of a number of States, such as Poland, rux.Le grand Staline a développé et étayé la thèse de la coexistence des deux régimes et d'une collaboration pacifique entre eux. Dès 1934, il déclarait: "Quiconque veut la paix et cherche à entretenir des relations d'af- faires avec nous aura toujours notre appui." Sir Gladwyn Jebb, représentant typique de la diplo- matie bourgeoise, a recours aux procédés éprouvés de cette diplomatie. Il extrait arbitrairement une phrase, la dêforme et la cite en dehors de son contexte dans le temps et dans l'espace. Ce faisant, il suit les traces de Bevin, de McNdl et de Shawcross. Quiconque a assisté aux séances de l'Assemblée générale se sou- viendra que ces messieurs recouraient eux aussi bien souvent à ces procédés de la diplomatie bourgeoise. Comme eux, M. Jebb calomnie grossièrement l'Union soviétique et sa politique étrangère, politique de paix et d'amitié entre les peuples. Ce sont là de vains efforts, Monsieur le diplonldte britannique. L'expérience de l'histoire nous enseigne que ce n'e']i pas la Russie soviétique qui a tenté, par une agression armée, de détruire la Grande-Bretagne et les Etats- Unis capitalistes, ce sont ".u contraire la Grande- Bretagne et les Etats-Unis qui ont plusieurs fois, ou- vertement et en secret, tenté de causer la perte de la Russie soviétique. Telle est la vérité historique. Ne voit-on pas clairement qui est et qui demeure l'agresseur en refusant de se prêter à la coexistence pacifique et à la collaboration entre les deux systèmes, le régime socialiste et le régime capitaliste? Telles sont les précisions que la délégation de l'URSS a jugé nécessaire de donner en réponse aux interven- tions du représentant des Etats-Unis et de celui du Royaume-Uni. En ma qualité de PRÉSIDENT, j'estime devoir porter à la connaissance des membres du Conseil de sécurité l'afflux grandiose de lettres et de télégrammes que le Conseil de sécurité reçoit tous les jours, de tous les pays du monde, lettres de protestation contre l'inter- vention des Etats-Unis en Corée, contre les bombar- dements inhumains des villes et des villages par l'armée de l'air des Etats-Unis, contre le bombardement des régions côtières de la Corée par les forces navales et contre les autres méthodes barbares de destruction massive qu'emploient, contre la population pacifique de la Corée, les forces armées des F-tats-Unis. Depuis le 1er août et jusqu'à ce jour, des lettres et des télégrammes sont parvenus, non seulement des Gouvernements de certains Etats, tels que la Pologne, Telegrams of protest have been received from or- ganizations such as the World Federation of Trade Unions, representing about 80 million organized work- ers {rom sixtY countries and territories of the world, the World Federation of Democratic Youth, whose meinbers include about 70 million young men and \vomen, the office of the Permanent Committee of the W orlel Peace Congress, which, as we know, obtained over 273 million signatures ta the historic Stockholm appeal in seventy-five countries of the world, the All- Union Central Council of Trade Unions of the USSR, which represents millions of workers and employees in the Soviet Union, the second Congress of the In- ternational Students' Union, which was attended by the representatives of seventy-two couiltries and by the national students' unions of a number of countries, inc1uding the United States, the United Kingdom and France, and the International Women's League for Peace and Freedom, etc. Tt is, of course, the duty of the Security Council, in considering the Korean question, to take into account the desire thus expressed of the broad masses of the people throughout the world who are demanding cessa- tion of aggression, the restoration of peace and the peaceful settlement of the Korean question. AlI these telegrams are in the possession of the Secretariat, and those desiring ta do so may acquaint themselves with their contents. Telegrams frolT1 Gov- ernments have been issued as Security Council docu- ments. Today, during the meeting of the Security Cauncil, two documents have been issuecl: document S/1715, a telegram from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, accusing the Govern- ment of the United States of cOl11mitting an act of armed aggression against China by the virtual occupa- tion by United States armed forces of the Chinese island of Formosa, and document S/1716, a s,tatement by the representative of the United States in the Secur- ity Council designed ta justify the above-mentioned acts of the United States Government with respect ta For- mosa, These documents were received after the meeting of the Security Council had begun. The l11embers of the Security Council will need some time to study them, and the Council will probably revert to this question at an early meeting. l have thought it necessary ta give the members of the Security Council this, short account of the doct1- ments received by the Counci1. " At the request of the Secretariat, the Security Coun- cil should consider its draft report covering the year which has elapsed-July 1949 to July 1950. 1 believe we could talce up the matter at a closed meeting at 3 p.m. on Monday, 28 August, in accordance with the usual Sinœ t!u're uFpears to be no ohjection, 1 take it that the Council agrees to this proposaI. In that case, in view of the late hour. we might adjourn at this point. 1 call upon the representative of the United States, ~Ir. GROSS (tTnitcd States of America) : In view of the fact that the President has referred ta the commu- nication which has been received from l\Ir. Chuu En-lai [S/1ï 151 and the letter dated 25 August from the rep- resentative of the United States addressed to the Secre- tan'-General concerning Formosa [5/1716], with the indulgence of the President and the menlbers of the Council, and upon instructions from my Govemment, 1 should like to read into the record of the meeting the communication from the United States representative to which 1 have referred: "There has been circulated to members of the Secur- it)' Council a paper which charges the United States with aggression against FornlOsa. The paper asks the Security Council to eünsider the question of FornlOsa. "The Cnited States Gove:rnment does not intend to discuss at this time this paper or the ridiculous false- hoods which it contains. It does \Vish ta take this occa- sion ta make a further statement about the Formosan question. "On 2i June [-Iï4th lIIeeting1 the United States representative read ta the Security Council the follow- ing statement of the President of the United States: .. 'In Korea the Governmcnt forces, which \Vere arnled ta prevent border raids and ta preserve in- ternai security, were attacked by invading forces from Korth Korea. The Securitv Council of the Cnited Kations called upon the invading troops to cease hostilicies and to withdraw to the 38th paraUel. This they have not done but. on the contrary, have pressed the attack. The Security Coundl called upon al! 11embers of the United Nations ta render every assistance to the Cnited Nations in the execution of this resolution. .. 'ln these circumstances, 1 have ordered United States air and sea forces to give the Korean Govern- ment troops cover and support. .. 'The attack upon Korea makes it plain heyond ail douht that communism has 1.Lssed heyond the use of subversicll to conquer independent nations, and will no\\' use armed invasion and war. It has defied the orders of the Secuïity Council of the United Nations, issued to preserve international peace and security. In these circumstances, the occupation of Formosa bv communist forces would be a direct threat to the sécurity uf the Pacific area and ta United States 1\1. GROSS (Etats-Unis d'Amérique) (trculllit de l'all- glais) : Puisque le Président a mentionné la communica- tion qui lui a été adressée par M. Chou En-lai [5/1715] et la lettre relative à Formose adressée au Secrétaire général le 25 août 1950 par le représentant des Etats- e nis [5/1ï16], j'aimerais, avec la permission du Pré!,i- dent et des membres du Conseil, et conformément aux instructions de mon Gouvernement, lire, pour qu'elle figure au compte rendu de la séance, la lettre du repré- sentant des Etats-Unis: "Les membres du Conseil de sécurité ont reçu un document qui accuse les Etats-Unis d'agression contre Formose et invite le Conseil de sécurité à examiner la question. "Le G:mvernement des Etats-Unis ne se propose pas pour le moment de discuter ce document ni les contre-vérités ridicules qu'on y trouve. Il saisit toute- fois cette occasion pour faire une nouvelle déclaration sur la question de Formose. "Le 2i juin [474hlle séallce], le représentant des Etats-Unis a lu -lU Conseil de sécurité la déclaration suivante du Président des Etats-Unis: "En Corée, les forces du Gouvernement, qui étaient armées pour empêcher des incursions de frontière et pour protéger l'ordre public, ont été attaquées par des forces d'invasion venues de la Corée du Nord. Le Conseil de sécurité de l'Organisation des Nations Unies a invité les envahisseurs à cesser les hostilités et à se retirer sur le 38ème parallèle. Loin de se conformer à cette résolution, les agresseurs ont, au contraire, donné plus d'ampleur à leur attaque. Le Conseil de sécurité a invité tous les Membres de l'Or- ganisation des Nations Unies à prêter leur entier concours à l'Organisation pour l'exécution de la ré- solutinn adoptée. "Dans ces conditions, j'ai donné l'ordre aux forces aériennes et navales des Etats-Unis d'accorder aux troupes du Gouvernement coréen leur soutien e,.t..k.1!,r appui. "L'attaque COTltre la Corée montre, de manière incontestable, que le communisme ne se contente plus de recourir à la subversion pour conquérir les nations indépendantes, mais qu'il utilisera désormais l'inva- sion armée et la guerre. Il a défié les ordres que le Conseil de sécurité de l'Organisation des Nations Unies a donnés pour protéger la paix et la sécurité internationales. Dans ces conditions, l'occupation de Formose par les communistes constituerait une .. '1 have also directed that the United States forces in the Philippines be strengthened and that military assistance ta the Philippine Govemment he accelerated. .. '1 have similarly directed acceleration in the fur- nishing of military assistance ta the forces of France and the associated States in Indo-China and the dis- patch of a military mission to provide close working relations with those forces. .. '1 know that aU Members of the Vnited Nations will camider carefuIly the consequences of this latest ~ggression in Korea in defiance of the Charter of the Lnited Nations. A retum ta the rule of force in in- ternational affairs would have far-reaching effects. The United States will continue ta uphold the role of law. .. '1 have instructerl A...nbassador Austin as the representative of the United States to the Security Couneil ta report these steps ta the Couneil.' "Since then, the President of the United States on 19 July made the foUowing declaration in a message to the Congress: .. 'In addition ta the direct mih.ary effort we and other l\1embers of the United Nations are rr:.aking in Korea, the oütbreak of aggression there requires us ta consider its implications for peace throughout the worid. The attack upon the Republic of Korea makes it plain beyond aIl doubt that the international com- munist movement is prepared to use armed invasion ta rrmqüer independent nations. \Ve must, therefore, recot;nize the possibility that armed aggression may take place in other areas. .. 'In Yiew of this, 1 have already directed that United States forces in support of the Philippines be strengthened and that military assistance be speeded up to the Philippine Government and to the Asso- ciated States of Indo-China. and ta the forces of France in Indo-China. 1 have also ordered the United States Seventh Fleet to prevent any attack upon Formosa, and 1 have requested the Chinese Govern- ment on Formosa to cease al! air and sea operations against the mainland. These steps were at Jnce re- porteJ to the 'Cnited Xations Security Cauncil. .. 'Our action in regard to Fonnosa was a matter of elcmentary security. The peace and stability of the Pacifie area had been violentl)' disturbed by the ...In order that there may be no doubt in any quar- ter about our intentions regardin~ Fomlosa, 1 wish to state that the United States has no territorial ambi- tions whatever concerning that island, nor do we seek for ourselves any special position or privilege on Fomlosa. The present military neutr<llization of Fonnosa is without prejudice to political questions affectin~ that island. Our desire is that Formosa should not become embroiled in hostilities disturbing to the peace of the Pacifie and that aU questions affecting Fonnosa he settled by peaceful means as envisaged in the Charter of the United Nations. With peace re-established, even the most complex political questions are susceptible of solution. In the presence of bnttal and unprovoked aggression, however, sorne of these questions may have to he held in abeyance in the interest of the essential security of all.' "These statements and the facts to which they re- lated make perfectly clear certain fundanlental points which the people of the world will have clearly in mind : .. I. The United States has not encroached on the territory of China nor has the United States taken aggressive action against China. "2. The action of the United States in regard to For- mosa was taken at a time when that island was the scene of conflict with the mainlanù. More serious con- flict \Vas threatened by the public declaration of the Chinese communist authorities. Such conflict would have threatened the security of the United Nations forces operating in Korea under the mandate of the Security Council to repel the aggression on the Repub- lie uf Korea. They threatened to extend the conflict thwugh the Pacific area. "3. The action of the United States was an impartial neutralizillg action addressed both to the forces on For- Illusa and tu thuse on the mainland. It .;as an action ·.le"igned tu keep the peace and 'vas therefore in full accord with the spirit of the Charter of the United Na- tiuns. As President Trllman has solemnly declared, we h.av~ nu designs un Formosa and our action was not insl,ired by an)' desire ta acquire a special position for the Cnited States. "4, The actiun uf the l'nitel! States was expressly "tated tu he without prejudice to the future political ::ettlt:llIellt uf the "tatus of the island. The actual status ui tl1l' i"land is that it is territury taken from ]apan hy tlie vietvry uf the Allied lorees in the Pacifie. Like other "Ul.:h territurie", il'> legal stat~ls ~'allnut be fixed until Ihere i" illtt:rI1G.tiullal artiull tu deterllline its future. The ('h;lle~e (;lJVCTllllll:nt was asked by the Al!ies to take the "unewlcr ui the Japalle:-.e furces un that island. Th.at i" the rea:'UJ! the Chinese are there now. "5. Tht: Cllitcd Stales hal'; il record thruugh history IIi iriclHbl.q. ft,r the Chine:.e people. \Ve still feel the iriewbhl\' alld ~lllJW that l1IilliollS of Chine, e reciprocate il. \\'c tl,(Jk Ih... lead WltÎ1 ulhers in the lasl United Na- 1l1,11~ (,ult:ral :\ ,,,t:1l11JIr tll ,CUire appruval of a resolu- ti',li 12Y.! (1 t' JI (JII tlit: illlegrity ui China. Gnly the "Ces déclarations et les faits auxquels elles sc rap- portaient rendent parfaitement clairs certains points fondamentaux que les peuples du monde auront nette- ment à l'esprit: "1. Les Etats-Unis n'ont pas empiété sur le terri- toire de la Chine; les Etats-Unis n'ont commis aucun acte d'agression contre la Chine. "2. Les décisions prises par les Etats-Unis à l'égard de Formose l'ont été à un moment où cette île était le théâtre d'un conflit avec le continent. La déclaration officielle des autorités communistes chinoises iaisait prévoir un conflit plus grave. Ce conflit aurait lllenacè la sécurité des forces des Nations Unies opérant en Corée, chargées par le Conseil de sécurité de repousser l'agression dont la République de Corée était la victime. Les autorités communistes chinoises menaçaient d'éten- dre le conflit à d'autres régions du Pacifique, "3. .I:'ac~e des Etats-Unis a p,té un acte impartial de neutralIsatIon; nous nous adressions aussi bien aux forces de Formose qu'à celles du continent. Cet acte était destiné à maintenir ia paix; il était donc pleine- ment confonne à l'esprit de la Charte des Nations Unies. Comme l'a déclaré solennellement le Président Truman, nous n'avons pas de desseins sur Formose, et notre action n'a pas été dictée par le désir d'obtenir pour les Etats-Unis une position spéciale. "4. Nous avons expressément déclaré que notre acte ne préjugeait pas le futur statut politique de l'ile. A l'heure actuelle, le statut de l'île est celui d'un territoire enlevé au ] apon par la victoire des forces alliées dans le Pacifique. Comme celui d'autres territoires similaires, ~on statut juridique ne peut être fixé que par un acte mternational. Les Alliés ont invité le Gouvernement chinois à accepter la reddition des forces japonaises ùans cette île. C'est pourquoi les Chinois s'y trouvent actuellement. ..5. L'histoire offre la preuve de l'amitié que les Etats- Unis portent au 'peuple chinois. Nous sommes toujours animés de cette amitié, et nous savocs que des milliers dt' Chinois y répondent. A la dernière session de l'As- semblée générale des Nations Unies, nous avons été au numhre de ceux qui se sont efforcés de faire adopter "7. W e do not believe that the Security Council need be or will be diverted from its consideration of the aggression against the Repllblie of Korea. There was a breach of the peace in Korea. The aggressor attacked, has been condemoed, and the combined forces of the United Nations are now in taule to repel the aggres- sion. Formosa is now at peace and will remain so un- less someone resorts to force. If the Secllrity Council wishes to study the question of Formosa we shall sup- port and assist that study. Meanwhile the President of the Security Council shollld discharge the duties of bis office and get on with the item on the agenda which is the 'Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea' and, specifical1y, the recognition of the right of the Korean Ambassador to take his seat and the vote on the United States draft resolution [5/1653] for the localization of the Korean conflict."

We shaH now ask the Assistant Secretary-General to read out document S/171s. The ASSISTANT SECRETARY-GENERAL IN CHARGE OF SECURITY COUNCIL AFFAIRS: The cablegram dated 24 August 1950 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Central People's Government of the People's Re- public of China addressed to the President of the Secl1r- ity COl1ncil reads as follows: "On 27 June this year, President Truman of the United States of America announced the clecision of the Unitecl States Government to prevent with armed forces the liberation of Taiwan [Formosa] by the Chinese people's liberation army. Meanwhile, the United States Seventh Fleet moved towards, the Straits of Taiwan, foHowed by the arrivaI in Taiwan of contin- gents of the United States Air Force, in open encroach- ment on the territory of the People's Republic of China. This action on the part of the United States Govern- ment is a direct armed aggression on the territory of China, and a total violation of the United Nations Charter. "Taiwan is an integral part of China. This is not only a faet basecl on history, .confirmed by the situation since the surrender of J apan, but it is also stipulated in the Cairo Declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam com- 11Iuniqué of 1945, as binding international agreements which the United States Government has pledgeditself to respect and observe. "The people of China cannot tolerate this action of arl11ed aggression by the United States Government on the territory of China, and are determined ta Iiberate from the tentacles of tneUnited States aggressors' Tai- Le PRÉSIDENT (tmdwit du russe) : Nous allons de- mander au représentant du Secrétaire général de nous donner lecture du document S/I71s. Le SECRÉTAI1Œ GÉNÉRAL ADJOINT CHARGÉ DES AF- FAIRES DU CONSEIL DE SÉCURITÉ (traduit de l'anglais) : Voici le texte du télégramme, en clate du 24 août 1950, adressé au Président du Conseil de sécurité par le Ministre des affaires étrangères du Gouvernement cen- tral du peuple cie la République populaire de Chine: "Le 27 juin 1950, M. Truman, Président des Etats- Unis d'Amérique, a annoncé que le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis avait décidé d'empêcher, au moyen de fOrces armées, la libération de Taïwan [Formose] par l'Armée populaire chinoise de la libération. En même temps, la Septième Escadre cles Etats-Unis s'est dirigée vers le détroit de Taïwan; puis, des contingents de l'armée de l'air des Etats-Unis sont arrivés à Taïwan, violant ouvertement le territoire de la République popu- laire de Chine. Cet acte du Gouvernement des Etats- Unis constitue une agression armée et directe contre le territoire de la Chine et une violation totale de la Charte des Nations Unies. "Taïwan fait partie intégrante de la Chine. Il s'agit là, non seulement d'un fait historique, confirmé par la situation qui a suivi la capitulation du Japon, mais aussi d'une clause de la Déclaration du Caire de 1943 et de la Déclaration de Potsdam de 1945, accords interna- tionaux obligatoires que le Gouvernement des Etats- Unis s'est engagé à respecter et à observer. "Le peuple de Chine ne peut tolérer cet acte d'agres- sion armée du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis contre le territoire cie la Chine et est décidé à arracher aux tenta- cules des agresseurs américains Taïwan et toutes les

Thus the Security Council has heard the views of both the parties involved in this· serious international conflict. There is one more speaker on my list, but before he had time to ask for the floor there wa5 a proposaI for adjournment. ShaH we continue the discussion or shaH we adjourn now? Mr. TSIANG (China): 1 need only one minute to make a statement, and that statement is contained in one sentence. There has been no United St~t~s aggres- sion against the island of Taiwan [Fçmr~a]. • .-

The Security Council will probably discuss this question and determine the substance of the matter. 1 takc it that we may now adjourn. The meeting rose at 6.25 P.III. Le PRÉSIDENT (traduit dIt mue) : Ainsi, le Conseil de sécurité est saisi des vues des deux parties à ce grave conflit international. Un orateur figure encore sur ma liste, mais, avant qu'il ait demandé la parole, on a proposé de lever la séance. Allons-nous poursuivre notre discussion ou lever la séance? M. TSIANG (Chine) (traduit de l'a1tglais) : Je n'ai besoin que d'une minute pour fai.e une déclaration, et cette déclaration se réduit à une seule phlase. Les Etats-Unis n'ont commis aucune agression contre l'ile de Taiwan [Formose] . Le PRÉSIDENT (traduit du russe): Il appartiendra sans doute au Conseil de sécurité d'examiner cette ques- tion et d'aller au fond des choses. Je pense que nous pouvons maintenant lever la séance. La séance est levée à 18 h. 25.