S/PV.492 Security Council

The agenda which is before the Security Cauncil consists of three items. The first is the adoption of the agenda; the second is the complaint of aggression upon the Republie of Korea; the third-the preliminary discussion of which was started at the 490th meeting of the Security Council-is a statement of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China concerning armed invasion of the territory of China by the Government of the United States of America and concerning violation of the Charter of the United Nations. .The Security Council has two documents relating to thlS question, namely, document Sjl715---eablegral'l dated 24 August 1950 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China, Mr. Chou En-lai, addressed ta the President of the Security Council and document Sjl716-letter dated 25 August 1950 from the repre- , 1 Ù COll1.~I1. If there are no comments, objections or additions, we shaH consider the agenda adopted. .:\lr. :\t'STl:\ (L~nited States of America): Reservmg illY nght tt) abject, l shaH make a brief statement betorc asking a parliamentary question. 1t is our unJerstanding that in the preparation of tile provisional agenda the Secretary-General draws up the provisional agenda and the President of the Security C June'~ approves it. lt then comes to the Security ( Juncil for ilS consideration. The language in which an item is ta be couched is subject to agreement by the members of the Council. If there is something about \he language which is obnoxious because it seems to p::ejudge an issue, it is then within the just and fair scope oi the Security Council to correct such langua::,t: and ta put it into a form which is unobjection- <Ae and yet, at the same ttme, does Fesent the issue. As l underch.nd it from documents S/1715 and Sjlïlb referred to in sub-paragraphs 3 (a) and (b) of the provisional agenda, the issue is a compiaint regarding Formosa. My question is whether, since this preliminary paper is still within the jurisdiction of the President-and l think it contim:es to be within his jurisdiction until the Secllrity Council acts upon itthe President would find it wise and convenient to change paragraph 3 of the provisional agenda, which no\\" reads as follows: ..Statement of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China concerning armed invasion oi the territory of China by the Government of the L"nited States of America and concerning violat:ons ai the Charter of the ünited Nations." \\'ould the President be willing to substitute for that \\ording in the provisional agenda to be considered by the .5ecurity Coundl, the language: "Complaint regardin;:: Formosa"? l might say that if the President were w:Iling to include the item in the agenda in that form, the L"nited States would then be glad ta vote in favour ai the adoption of the agenda. The PRESIDE:"T (translated from Russian): The item on the agenda \Vas worded in accordance with the crJntents oi the statement received from the Central I)erJr"e'~ Government ai the People's Republic of China (fJntainerl in a cablegram, dated 24 August, from ML ChrJU En-lai. ~Iinister for Foreign Affairs of that Re- ;>uLEc. It is naturally for the Security Council to decide whethef tf) adopt the agenda in its present form of ·....rJrris rJr in the farm propased by the L'nited States rer)re~ntatiYe. The President presumes that the best ·.·.ay teJ r1ecirle thi s question is ta decide it by a vote. ~.ff T~lf,";f, ((~hina): .:\Iy deJegation objects ta the :U»if,r. ;r. th,: r)rr)','i~irmal agenda of item 3, which :U:;CI1J~1 l,i the Security Council. there must be at least S:'I1lt' mild ctegree oi a t"im<J fan'c case..-\s regards this c(11l1pb:nt. there is not eyen the f1imsiest trima fan"c (ase. Ir \\"l,uld he Yery s~range ii the 5ecurity Council ,,,ere w place on its agenda any f1imsy complaint which Jl1yl1l,dy in the wc,rld \n,uld wish to o1ter here, [\"t'r,·l'l'dy kno\\'s th::lt l11\' G0yernment is in e1teetiye Cll11tW]' :ln,f administrati.)ri oi the island oi Taiwan 1f(lr;n",;a 1· Thtre ha,. l'een ';l'me di~cussi(ln concerniilg the iuridical ,otatus oi that i,oland. This is not the time (1r ti1e l,ecasi'il1 ior a discussion l,n the law ai that questi(\n. There are ttrriwries \\'hich had ta he changed as a result (\i tht \\'ar. 1 ha\"('" in mind such territories as, ÏL,r examl'le. the eastem pan oi Gennany, the Kuril i-landand Sakhalin island. \\ïthout going into the det~il,o (Ii all these questions, l can iai;ly claim that the legal titit l,i Il''' \..~oYernment w Taiwan island is cer- ,a~l1h' I:Ot les,o 'complet:: or less yard than the title oi thl,,,é G,wernment,o \\'h1Ch have Î'lcorporated eastern Gennal1\". tht Kuril j..,lands and ~akhalin island intü iheir administrations. ::'Ily \..~lWernl1lent kn(I\\',o ai nc, aggression on the part oi the l'nited Stace, :\h Goyernment has no complaint 10 make. \\'e han- !l.. \t heard eYen Cl -,,-hisper ai a demand on the part (li the l'nited States for any territorial (1: eC(lnol1lic concession,o nn the island ai Tai wan, or i(.• any special J'olitical priyileges on that island. There i,o absolutely no case \\'hateyer. The G(n'ernment ai the l'r,:ilt:d States. through its rel'resemariH' in the Secur;!\, Councii. has told the' lclu;),i! rha: it wekomes a dis'cussion <:.nd, ii necessan, an il1\-e,;ti~arion ai this question. The Goyemment oi the l'ni,ed States has in recent years made grEat efforts :n the cau,oe ai wcrld peace and ireedo~. It is sensitiye -naturally and rightly-about its good name through- •'ut the wo:ld. 1 can understand that the delegation of ihE' l-nirf'd Sratf's wou}d n(\t 0p!,ose a discussion oi Thar qUbtion here. H oWeYer, that is onh' the attitude oi the dtlf'g-atil1D oi the 1-nired States. - l 1;, thé' iudgmem (li I11\' dele~ation the Security Council mus,' pCl~der this éluestic~n yery seriousl}: beiore ado1'tinr that anitude Ii the CCIuncil should today consid(:r !his question on the strength ai a telegTan1 irom a Elan ".hCI can" him:;eli the ..F oreig-n :\1inister" of SOl1it ("[\umn. art "'t sure that thi~ is the end of it ~ Su; '1'(1,.(, wiiwrw\\' H (1 Chi-minh ni Tndc.china :;ends us :t tt;tg-ram accu~ing tht l-nittd State;. ni aggressinn against 1ndochina, sl10uld "'t not he obliged -1,,' the !,re~en: l'rf'sidem tCI t'onsider abc) that question~' Sup- P~)St tht day aÏter trlm(lrro\\' the H uks in the Philil'- 1':11('5 sh,\uld lodgt a comJ}laint against the aggression 01 the l'nited States in the PhilijJjJine~, shnuld we not he ~\]'lig-ed te> consider aIsc) that complaint ~ 5imilar C(lmp!amts mir;ht he raised h\' the communi;;t:;; or their fello\\" tra\'ellers in Iran. in' Turkey, in Greece, and in all the countries of westem Eur01!e. Shoulè we not be The CouBcil has been C'tigaged-fruit!es:,ly to be sure ~uring the mont!. of August, in obtaining further action concerning the aggression in Korea. lts efforts haw been iruitless and we ail know who is responsible for that. Instead of concentrating our attention on the business at hanel, there is a demand that we shoulel e1iscuss Sllme other case of aggrcssion. The purpose is manifest. :l11d 1 trus[ that the Security Council, mindful of its primary duty ta maintain peace and security in the worlel. will not faU into this trap. The item is being placed on the agenda on the strength of a cablegran~ from somebody who signs himself "Minister i~)r Foreign Affairs of the Central Peûple's Government of the People's Republic of China". Does that party have the right ta lodge a complaint in the United Xations? \ Yhat is the character of that party? What is the ori~in of that party? If we want ta know the ch'lracter of that regime, we do not have ta go very far. Thi'i gentleman who complains about the aggression of the C nited Stat~s against China, also complained, in a ca1Jlegram of 20 August, against Cnited States aggressil,n in Korea. That cahlegram has been circulated as doCtlmcnt S/l ï03. Ii one reads that document, one will unr\erst<'.nd the character of the regime which that man, Chou En-lai, represents. The cablegram begins with the following statement: "The Cnited States of America instigated the Korean incident. launched sea, lanel and air forces in a direct agressilJn of Korea ..." That is :"lr. Chou En-lai's idea of aggression. Do we shan: that idca? He is repeatin~ the same nonsensical accusatj(Jll against the {-nited States. The cablegram of 20 .\llgU5t sars further: "Tlw lJ-lIl-:,til)l~ of Korea must and can he settled •>t'ace!ully; IJUt 50 far the (Iiligent o1Jstntc: i'le and dilat'ir)' aeti'JTJS (10 the part of the United States of America in 'th~ :-;/:curity COllncil meetings have prevented the n:a"",ilJable peact'flll seulement of the Korean question cernin~ the peacetul regulatlOn ot the Korean questIOn ~ubll1iùed on -+ A.ugust in the L'nited ~ations Security èouncil hy ::\fr, Jacob Malik on behalf of the Union Di S(lYiet Socialist Republics GOYemment. These proposa!:' are in c(lml-~ete accordanc~ with the .spirit of the 'l"nitel! ::\ations l harter and wlth the wlshes of the petiplcs of Asia and the world," The final paragTaph oi this cahlegram reads in part: "The Central People's GOYemn'ent of the P :ople's Republic oi China firn11y oppo~es t~e barbarous bomoin~ lii the tov.-ns and peacetlll mhabm..nts conducted by A~l1erican ayiation in Kor-e'a . . ," That cablegram had nothing ne\\' to tell us, There is n(,~h:ngin that cablegram which was not stated here more dir;cth' hy the represematiw oi the Sm'iet L'nion. The ca:)legram' is signed by ::\fr. Chou En-lai, b~t the \'ClÏce i5 the yoiee oi l\foscoVl. and without addmg to (Iur kno\\'ledge of the horean question. that ~elegram does rtwal the chameler of the' regime of which Chou En·la: i5 the spokes;nan. That telegram arriwd on 21 ,-\u~ust. \\'e ha\'e from that puppet re[~·'iP i~l Peiping many indications of its oVIn nature an\.. character. (ln :::; .1 um· the puppet radio in Pei:)ing broadcast the ic>llowin~ message: "The T'cki;lP P,(lf'J,'s DaiJ;.- te.day headlined this ediwri;].:: 'The h:orean people are fighting for the rout of the im·acler5'." L-itlng ample eYidence, the editorial obseryed that the rurrt';:: horean war hac! long been prepared by the ; 5yn~;:;~n Rhee clique and the l.'nited States, the actual in5:i!:a:or~ of the war. The broadcast VIent on ta say tha: 'u commentâTy in the preylOus day's Tinlisin Dail:" had drii"'n the attention of the readers ta the fact that Rhé'é' hac! 5taned the northern assault soon after Dulles had \':~jted the 38th paralIe1. T;~f ;lroudcast on the same day had another message. lt 5ah~ :ha: aH newspapers in Shanghai on the preYious day hud irom-paged the Korean news. Ta Jùmp Pao hac: wmmented that the SyngTI1an Rhee Gov~rnment had pnmounced it~ (rwn death sentence by sending its puppet tr,lop~ into ~orth Korea. That attack. the paper added. hac! eyidenth' lteen made under the orders of rnilé'Ù States iml1erialism. and was a chalIenge to the I\.orean People's Democratic Republic. It had-occurred on the i llllnh dav after the l.~nited States warmonger Dulit·~ had leit ~eoul folIowinl.: his talb with 5yngman J-.:hee. . h ~hat new 10 us ~ Is that in am' \\'av din<-:rent from the \'lli~'t we heard here? 1\ot at aIl. . LeT nit' cali the Council's attention to a broadcast of the sam\:' Pl11'T>et statlon un ï July. The station hroadcas: the ~tatement of ~1 r. Andre; Gromyko, Deput\' ~rin;~t('r for Forei~'11 Affairs of t1le l'SSR, on l.!nited ~tate, amwc1 interwntion in K{)rea. That statement had recei\'ed from-page l'rominem:(' in the Peil'ing On ï J uly. the same day, the head of the puppet Oyerseas Affairs COl11mission broacicast a message to the Chinese people in aIl the scattered parts of the world, the so-called "oyerseas Chinese". In the course of that broackast. that puppet had this inte. ing thing to say: "On j une 28, our Foreign l\Iinister, Chou En-lai, in a statelllent pointed out the wrongm:ss of Trnman's aets and exposed the lawless actions of American imperialislll in intervening in the affairs of Asia. The A.merican il d llperialist? took T ' o}ft: th~ir deceitful d mt:l.sk atnhd began ~nlle aggre~sIOl~s. lelr alms a~~ to es roy e People s Democrattc Government of Korea, to make Karea their colony and to make K01;ea a base for fUî- ther aggression ln our northeast or in Russia. The peace-Ioving peoples of the world will not tolerate such lawlessness as that of American imperialism. The aggressive plans of Alllerican imperialism ale the. l;ame as those of the fascists of Germany and Japan lt1 the pasto American imperialism will cume to no good." d l do not need to repeat the similar statements brca cast ail oyer China. l think l have cited enough to reyeal to the Council the nature and character of that regime for which Chou En-lai speaks. Does the voice of such a regime deserve any consideration in this Council? The cablegram calling for Security Council action against the so-called United States aggression in Korea [5/1703] includes a sentence: in which China's interest in Korea is stressed. It says: "Korea is China's neighbouring country. The Chinese people cannot but be more concerned about the solution of the Korean question." To be sure, we Chinese are deeply interested in the fate of Korea. \\'hat is China's interest? Is it to China's interest that Korea should become a satellite of the Soviet L'nion, that the resources of Korea should be used sorne day for the strengthening of Soviet imperialism in the Far East? ;\ot at aIl. The obvious interest of China is in helping to build up a united and independent Korea-the more independent, the better for China. That is the obvious interest of China. Ali the Chinese people understand that. \\'e in China have tried a variety of actions in regard to Korea because we have had relations with Korea for 3,000 years. According to ml' family legend. one of ml' an.:estors sought and found political refuge in Korea 3,000 years ago. From al! those centuries of experience in Korea. what is the conclusion today in China? The conclusion is that it does not pay China to try to interfere in Korea. It does not pay China ta tr)' to control Korea. The only sensible policy 1 1 Thcse broadcasts, these statements and these newspapers in the puppet areas in China proclaim that it is ta the interest of China that Korea should become a part of the Soviet world domain. That certainly is un- Chinese. Such statements do not represent the true opinions of the Chinese people. What reason do we have ta assume that a cablegram from such a puppet recrime deserves any serious consideration on the part al' this Council? In my statement before the General Assembly last autumn,l 1 tried to tell the world the real origin of this puppet regime of Peiping. 1 shall not repeat that long stan hefe. It is in the records of the General Assembly. HO\\'eYer, certain salient facts in the origin of the Chinese communi~ts must be borne in mbd if we are ta arrive at a correct judgment of the great crisis in the Far East. The Chinese Communist Party \Vas organized some thirty years ago as a branch of the Third International Its very first organizational meetings were participated in and directed by agents of the Third International at that time. The actual movement in China began sorne t\ytnty-three l'eafS ago as a mutiny in the army. It has remained a rebellion against the legal Central Government of China. It has reached its present status in China thanks to USSR f:-iendship. As a result of the Yalta Agreement, my Government signed a Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with the Government of the Soviet Union in August 1945. l w01l1d ask the Council ta note those \Vords-"Treaty of Friendship and Alliance". Accorc1ing to that Treaty, dIe Soviet army was to go into l\fan-::huria to help defeat the Japanese aggressors, and we, for our part, were to concede to the USSR half the control of the tnmk railway lines of Manchuria and specIal privileges for the Soviet Union in Dairen and Port Arthur. That mark of friendship on the part of the Soviet Union has been the source of ail our troubles. After the J apanese surrender, my Government wished ta send an army to Manchuria. How could the Chinese army get to Manchuria? Naturally, it could get to l\1anchuria by using the largest and most convenient port, namely, the port of Dairen. But the Soviet army \Vas in Dairen. The USSR Government said: "No, you cannot use Dairen." \Ve said: "AlI right, we sha11 send an army by rail." The rails, however, were cut, obstructed and some parts were already occupiec1 by the Chinese communists. My Government tried to send an army to Manchuria by air, but the Soviet army was in control of the airfields. They said that we could Then, besides tllOse obstructionist tactics against my Government's effort to re-establish our administration in :\Ianchuria, in addition to this the Soviet army in 1Iandmria supplied the Chinese communists with the vast quantity of arms captured from the Japanese. ~Ianchuria formerly was occupied by the so-called K",antung army of Japan. That army o~ Japan was the Nite of the J apanese armed forces. It had the best equipment. That equipment was tl1Tr.~d over by the SO\·iet l'nion to the Chinese communists. Also, in the \vars in Manchuria two KOl'ean divisions -if not more-fought side by side with their Chinese comrades. That is the basis on which the present puppet regime climbed ta its present status. l have, on behalf of my Government, brought to the General Assembly an item on that question. If we are going to discuss this cablegram from a party whose character and origin l described, l submit that the Security Council should study a preliminary question, namely, the real origin and character of that regime and whether its cablegram is worthy of our consideration. Today my Government is on the island of Formosa. Formosa, in China, in the eyes of the Chinese people, occupies a position similar to that of the Pusan area in Korea. If the Council accepts a discussion on United States aggression against Taiwan, we should, ta be consistent, accept simultaneously an investigation on American aggression against Korea. Is that a sensible thing to do? l think not. 1 think the two cases are paralle!. For these reasons, 1 object to the addition of this item to our agenda and ask that that item should be put to the vote. Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom): l should like very briefly to support the recommendation of the United States that the complaint regarding Formosa should be placed as item 3 on our agenda. \Vhatever the position may be regarding the recognition of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China in Peking, the fact remains that that Government is in physical control of by far the greater part of China. The fact also remains that this Government has made a complaint---couched, incidentally, in rather intemperate language-against the Government of the United Stales. Finallv, the fact remains that the United States Governmént has said with regard to these allegations of the Central People's Government, that it would be perfectly prepared for and in fact would welcome a United Nations investigation or consideration of the case of Formosa. In these circumstances 1 believe that the Security Couneil would har,':y be accomplishing its dutY if ft failed to place such a serious matter on its agenda. ln spite, therefore, of the very eloquent statement of our Chinese colleague, 1 hope that the vote we are about ta take will result in this happening. 1 would, however,

As representative of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST RE- PUBLICS, l wish ta make a few remarks on behalf of my delegation. As is known, the Security Council has received a cablegram dated 24 August 1950 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China [S11715] concerning direct armed aggression by the United States Government on the territory of China. In this cablegram, the Government of the People's Republic of China states that "for the maintenance of international peace and security and for the upholding of the dignity of the United Nations Charter, the United Nations Security Council is obliged by its ina1ienable duties to condemn the United States Government for its criminai act in the anned invasion of the territory of China, and ta take immediate measures ta bring about the complete withdrawal of aIl the United States armed invading forces from Taiwan and from other territories belonging ta China". Chapter l of the Charter, which deals with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, says in Article 2, paragraph 4 : "All Members shaH refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations." As can be seen from the cablegram received from the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China, the United States Government has violated one of the basic provisions of the Qlarter and has cOl11mitted a direct act of armed aggression against China, by virtually occupying the island of Taiwan with its naval and air forces. That being 50, the Security Council certainly must consider this question, which has arisen in connexion \Vith the statement of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China. In that statement it is clearly said that the United S'tates Government has committed an act of armed invasion of the territory of China. The item on the provisional agenda has been formulated accordingly. Moreover" as is known, the Security Council at its r490th] meeting on 25 August in practice began consideration of this question on the initiative of the United States delegation, which, without even having heard in the Council the cablegram from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the CentraI People's Government of the People's Republic of China, hastened to give its reply rSI1716] , intencled The arguments advanced by the U~ited Stat~s representative to the effect that the Secunty Co~ncll sho~l1d consider the question of Forn}osa, are ?b~IOusly wlde of the mark, since the Secunty Councll IS not faced with the question of Formosa but w,ith ,that of armed invasion by the United States of an mahenabl.e p~rt of the territory of China which,. in accordal~ce wI,th mternational agreements-the CaIro ,DeclaratIOn, sl~ned by the United States, the United Kll1gdom and Chma, the Potsdam decisions, and, lastly, the act of surrender, of Japan-was returned to China as' an integral and lllalienable part of its territory. It is not therefore, the Security Council's tasle to consider th~ question of Formosa. The question ?f Formosa is not open to discussion. It has been declded. by international agreements and decisions adopted dunng and aEter the war, as a problem arising as a result of the Second vVorld War after the defeat of German fascisl1l and Japanese militarism, It has been decided finally and unequivocally. The United States statement contains an observation to the effect thàt the question Sh0111d he resol ved by some other special international agreement. In the light of historical facts, of the Cairo Declaration, of the Potsdam decisions, of the act of surrender of Tapan, that remarie in the United States statement sourÏds extremely strange. What other special international decisions are required on the question of Formosa, or Taiwan, as it is called by the Central People's Governtnent of the People's Republic of China? In this connexion it should be noted that the United States Government is keeping to the old Japanese name of Formosa, although the Chinese name of the island is Taiwan, It would therefore be more correct to refer to the island as Taiwan, since it is an integral and inalienable part of China, and its name in Chinese is Taiwan and not Formosa. Thus we are concerned not with Formosa or a complaint concerning Formosa, but with the fact that this 1l1t~gral component part of the People's Republic of Ch1l1a has been invaded by foreign naval and air armed "forces, In accordance \Vith the order of the President .of the United States, naval forces of the United States, !the so-called Seventh Fleet, are cruising in the Taiwan ~traits and, by ~ threat of armed force, blockading the Island and denYlng access to it to the only legal government of China-the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China, In these particular circumstances, the question is 110t one of Formosa or of a complaint concerning Formosa, but of invasion by the United States Government of a foreign territory-the territory of Chinafor th~ purpose of sei~ing .it. Disregarding the fact that, III accordance wlth ll1ternational instruments signcd hy the late President Roosevelt for th~ Unite~l St~tes Go.vernment,. this territory belongs to Ch~na, d.lsregarcll1lg the eXIstence of these legal internatIOnal mstrUlllents returning Taiwan to China, the ln thl' light of these facts the CSSR delegation considers that the wonling of this item on the agenda shonhl l'l'main as it appears in the provisional agenda, na111el" : "~t;tl'ment of the Central People's Government of the l'eople's Repuhlic of China concerning armed in- "asiun of the tl'rritory of China hy the GOYernment of the l-nitell ~tates oi :\merica and concerning violation of the Charter of the Lnited ~ations." ~ir Helll'gal ~. RAt' (India) : Suhject to modifications of wording, my delegation is in favour of retaining ite111 3 un the agenda. \\'e need not discuss the merits of the case just no\\'. That is a matter which we shall have to go int~) in due l'ourse, after the suhject has heen first put un the agenda for discussion. Sous ma l'ordre d'examiner aurons aura tlun interprété Si. !jl11 contre comme de propose. le qu'il du As regards the wonling of the item.-my delegation Cl'1l5'lkrs that it should he hrief and should not he capallk of heing misunrlerstood as a pronouncement U]'lln tlll' merits oi the case. li we follow the wording oi item 2, whieh reatls: "Complaint of aggression upon the Repuhlic of Korea". item 3 should read: "Complaint ui armed invasion of Taiwan or Formosa". 1 therdore propllse this wording. 1t is nllt quite identical \ri,h that proposed hy the representative of the United ~tate5. hut 1 hope it will he acceptable to him and ta the ll111l'r memllers of the Council. ::\11'. :\l'STIX (l'nited States of America) : 1 accept the a1ternatiw wonling suggested hy the representatin' nf 1ndia. l'anglaIs) tant The l'RESIIJEXT (translated jroll! RIIssian): Are there any more speakers on this question? If there are nn more speakers and no ohjections, "'e shaH adopt the form ni worc1s proposed hy the representative of India, n;:meh': "ComJ1laint of armed invasion ...". \Ve must he !luite sure whether the Indian representative wishes to say "Taiwan" or "Formosa", prendre a proposée vasion sentant Formose" :-;ir 11enegal ~. RAt' (lndia): 1 \\'nuld propose "Taiwan" and. within brackets. "Formosa". Je entre _ The l'IŒ:,IIJEXT (transla./('d fro/ll NI/ssiall): This tOrIn ~)f words will he !juite c1ear. \\'e shaH take a yote ?n th15 question. \\ïll ail thosf' in faw",r of including Item 3 in the Security Council's agenda in the fonn of words suggested l)y the representative of India, namely, Je qui ù qu'a l'hl' l'IŒS1IlE:\T (l1'll1ls/atl'd frolll RussùlII) : \ViIl all thosl' in iavour of inl'1mling" this item in the form in which it appl'ars on the prnvisional agenda l'll'ase mise thl'ir hands. /11 fm'vII r: l'nion lIi ~ovil,t ~ocialist l{epublics. l'hl' l'RESIllE:\T (lnllls/llted frolll Nussioll): This item will thus he inrluded in the agel1('a in the followingiorm: "Colllplaint oi armed invasion of Taiwan {Formosa) ". The li~~R lkkgation prcfern'd and supported the wonlinguSl'd in the provisional agl'nda. ~lr. TSI;\:\I; {China): The President has asked for the vote oi those who support that item. He has, howl'ver, iaikd to ask those lI1emhers who oppose it or those n1l'lI1hers who ahstain. The procedure is incomph.,te. The PRES\IlF.:\T {fnlllsiated frolll NIISSÙl1I): \Ve shaH proceed with thl' vote on the proposai oi the 1ndian representati\"t.'. .·I!ll1illst: China. Cuha. .-/bstail/i1l!l: Egypt. Tlze ,."trl'sel/talin' of }'u!los/m'ia did IlOt participate in 11z.. ,,·otil/Y. The PlœslDENT (tra1lslatt'cf from Russiall) : The Indian representativ::,'s proposaI ior the inclusion of the thinl itl'm in the ag-l'l\(la 11I111er the heading "Complaint oi armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa)" has heen adopted hy ï votes to 2. \Vith one abstention. The discussion of this question is conduded. .-\s representative of the l::\w:-< Ill' SOVIET SOCIALIST lÜ:Plïlucs, 1 \Vish to lira\\' attention to document S/1722, recein'd tmlay. cnntaining a te1egram addressed to the Sl'curitv Council bv the :'.linister for Foreig-n :\tTairs oi the Central Peollle's Government of the l'eople's Repuhlic of China on the question of the violation of the irontiers oi the l'eople's Repuhlic of China hy l'nited States air forces and the hOlllhing and ~!tooting IIp hy them ni 11Ilildings, railway stations. railway carriagl's, peaceful populations and an aerodrome on the territory of the People's Repuhlic of China. ~ly delegation therdore suhmits a proposaI for the inclusion of this matter in the agenda of the Security Cmlllcii and its consideration untIer the following 11eading: "~tatement hy the Central People's Government of the Peopie's Repuhlic of China on the violation of the irontiers of the People's Republic of China hy United States air forces and the bomhing and shooting up by Jl) -\n"'ust 1950 ta the Secretarv-Ceneral from 1\lr. \ns'tin: representative of the l.fnite<1 States to the United Nations. glais) trer deux je nous aussi documents non cette provisoire crire quer délai réfléchi, question doit je sujet. Sir (;la(I\\')'n JEHll (United Kingdom) : 1 am bound to sa\' that l had not seen either of the documents to \\'hicli the President referred until l came into the Counl'il chaIllber and 1 read them only about one minute ago. 1 snggest that we really cannot proceed in this way so preripitousl)'. \Ve must have time to read the documents hefure we l'an consider putting a thing on the agelHla or not. As a matter of fact, this question is not e~'en on our provisional agenda for this afternoon's meeting. Snrdy the tlling for the President to do is to put the item on the prnvisional agenda and SUl11mon the meeting tmllorrow at twent)'-four hours' notice, and we shall then a11 consider the matter, having dul)' retlected "'hetlwr it should come on the agenda or not No douht it shonld-I shan not say no-hut 1 have not had any time to fOrtll a view on "ït at aIl. The l'RESIIJE:\'T (trallslatcd frolll Russiall) : According tll the Secretariat, the cablegram from the Government of the People's H.epublic of China was received }'estenla)'. If, however, the members of the Security Caunril have not seen these documents and are consequentl)' unable to state their position on the question no\\', it ilia)' be advisable to postpone consideration of it and to include it in the provisional agenda of the follo\\'ing meeting. seignements gramme de du ces d'exposer prochaine visoire If there are no objections or observations, this question will he induded in the provisional agenda of the next nleeting of the Security Counril. JI r. :\{'STE'" (United States of America) : 1 do not quite um\erstand. The provisional agenda is entirely in the hands of the President. The Securitv Council has no business making an agreement about'what will he in the provisional agenda. If the rt'marks of the President mean that he will exercise his office and put the question on the provisional agenda, 1.t amounts to nothing but a notice. That is fair enoug.l. It leaves us, the Security Council, with our power to decide on the pro\'isional agenda in the usual way. The PRESJDENT (trallslat('d fram Russi01I): The President of the Security Council will of course do just 1. Aduption of the agenda. 2. Complaint of aggression upon the H.epuhlic of Korea. 3. COlllplaint of armed invasion of Taiwan (Formosa ). This item comes umler two snb-headings: (Il) Cahlegram datetl 2-1- August 1950 from the i\linister for Fc,reign AlTairs of the Central People's Covernment of the People's Repuhlic of China addressed to the President of the Securit)' Conncil (S/1715); (b) Letter dated 25 August 1950 from the representati"e of the "Cnited States of Aml'rica addressed to the Secretary-General concerning Formosa (S/17l6),

Before the Council proceeds to the consideration of item 2 on the agenda, the delegation of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPl'BLICS has a proposaI to make which it submits for the consideration of the Security Council as an exception. 1n view of the fact that the consideration of item 3 on the Security Council's agenda requires the presence of the representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China, which approached the Security COlmci! with the complaint of armed ÏI1\'asion of the island of Taiwan (Formosa), the USSR de1egation deems it logical to propose that the Security Council should invite the representative of the People's Repuhlic of China to participate in meetings of the Security Council during the consideration of that item. In submitting this proposaI the USSR de1egation is guided by the United Kations Charter, which in Article 32 provides that the Council should invite both parties to an international conflict which might develop into a threat to international peace and security. In submitting this proposaI the USSR delegation is also guided h)' the previous experience and practice of the Security Council which, in considering disputes and conflicts like1y ta prove a threat to international peace and security, has invited the representatives of both sides. That was the case in the consideration of the Jndonesian question. the Palestine question, the Kashmir question and others. Jn view ~f the foregoing, the USSR delegation proposes that th,e Security Council should take such a decision immediàtely, taking into account the fact that some time-three or four clays at least, ancl perhaps l'ven fiw-will he requirec1 to enable the representativf' of the Central People's Goveïl1ment of the People's Rel1r. AUSTIN {United States): Without considering at ail the merits of the subject, the United States could not join in an agreement for exceptional treatment of this item; certainly it ought not to agree to the premature treatment of the item, and this appears ta us ta be premature. The regular order of business has been obstructed for ~lmost thirty days. The first item on the regular order of business is "Complaint of aggression lIpon the Republic of Korea", and also the invitation ta the representative of the Republic of Korea to take a place at the Security'Council table. The business which ought to be transacted immediately is the invitation to the representative of the Republic of Korea. No other business is in order. - r That is our positIOn. \Ve are ne, indic".ting in the least degree what our choice would be with regard ta the consideration of the subject at its proper time.

l shaH reply to the representative of the United States in my capacity as President. In suhmitting its proposai, the USSR delegation made the express reservation that it was doing so as an exception, and with no intention of violating the rules of procedure of which the representative of the United States was speaking. The submission of this proposaI by way of exception does not of course affect the discussion of the Korean question. The Korean question will he discussed first, f~r it is the first item on our agenda. It was only in Vlrtue of the considerations expre~sed hy the USSR de1egation, and particularly the distance between Lake Success and Peking, v,'hence the representative of the Çentral People's Government of the People's Repubhe of China would have to travel, that the delegation of the.Soviet Union suhmitted this proposai by way of exception. In addition, the USSR delegation also took account of the fact that it is Security Council practic:, and strictly in accordance with the Charter, that the representatives of both sicles should be present and he IlCard .at meetings of the Security Council when an in- !ernatlOnal dispute is being considered. It would he ot :J " > ;:. r:; ~.. 'r .i'4 ~ncor.rect to violate that principle in this question as it -~ IS hemg violated in the Korean question. Mr. TSIANG (China) : It is obvious that the Security Council is faced with another manoeuvre. The representative of the Soviet Union, on assuming the presidency at the beginning of the month, tried to achieve his objective by' rendering an arbitrary ruling. The Security Council overruled him. By putting this item on the agenda now, he is trying, through a manoeuvre, to achieve his objective in a way which he failed to do on 1 August. There is no basis for such a proposaI as he has made. Regardless of when that proposaI comes to a vote, l shall vote against it.

Since there has been a challenge of the President's ruling that the USSR proposaI, submitted as an exception, should be put to the vote, the President must submit his ruling to the judgment of the Security Couneil. A vote 'Was taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour of overrttling the President's decision: China, Cuba, Ecuador, Norway, United States of America. Against o'vcrrllling the Presidcnt's decision: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Yugoslavia. Abstaining: Egypt, France, India, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The resulfs of the vote was 5 in favour, 2 against and 4 abstentions. The President's rttling was upheld, the challenge lUL'l'ing failed to secure the affirmative votes of seven members.

Since the ruling stands, l shall put the proposaI of the USSR delegation to the vote. l shall repeat the text: "The Secl/rity CO/wcil, "In connexion with the statement of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China regarding armed invasion of the island of Taiwan (Formosa), "Decides to invite a representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China to attend meetings of the Security Council." Sir Glachvyn JEBR (United Kingdom): l think l must point out that it is material, for any vote on this point, to be quite certain as to the wording. As l understand it, the President's formula is the following: "The Security Couneil decides ta invite to meetings of the Security Council a representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of C!'ina." But surely it should read: "c1ecides to invite 'neetings of the Security Conncîl when the above-

The opening part of this resolution reads: "In connexion with the statement of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China regarding armed invasion of the island of Taiwan". Obviously the reference is ta this statement and its consideration, a question on which the Security Council has already taken a decision. It is in this connexion that the proposaI is made that representatives of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China should be invited ta attend meetings of the Security Council. Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom) : If that statement of thé President is on reèord as representing the general intention, l am sure that aIl is weIl; but l continue ta maintain that in English, at any rate, there is a legal loophole. It does not matter very much, but it could suitably be revised, in my view. However, if it is the intention and point of view of my colleagues that the representative of the People's Republic of China should be invited only when this alleged aggression on Taiwan is under consideration, that is aH right with me.

If one looks for tricks in every word one can find any nUITIbp.r of them; but what is the United Kingdom representative's actual proposaI? Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom): My concrete proposaI would be, if the USSR representative would like to have it as an amendment to his draft resolution, to amend that text after the word "decides", as follows: "to invite to meetings of the Security Council, when the above-mentioned matter is under discussion, a representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China". In other words, my proposa! is to insert the words "when the above-mentioned matter is under discussion" after the words "Security Council". Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): l do not think that we ought to take this vote without carefully ~onsidering aH of the effects that may possibly flow from It; l shaH vote against it, without undertaking to con- V1l1ce anybody at this table of the real, fundamental is- ?ues here that would nonnally he given consideration ln a vote of this kind. However, l speak at this moment for the purpose of asking the members of the Security Council if they do not think that we ought to pause and ccnsic1er before we accept a proposition of this kind which \,:e. have been fighting for twenty-nine days.Is this not n?lculous of us? Bere we have been trying to get the wIll of the Security Council put into eHect by caHing the representative of the Repuhlic of Korea to the table as How will this affect the efforts of the Security Council to do something substantive towards peace and towards the performance of the function of the United Nations, that of peace-making, if they can be diverted and twisted in this matter? l think that in time Wp shall he able to discuss the question of whether there shall be heard, before a commission or committee or some body representing the Security Council, a communist who daims to represent the government of China. That may come up at some future time, but it is entire!y premature to take this action now. There is nothing in this situation that calls upon us to adopt this draft resolution now. Therefore l do trust that other members will take the same view in this matter that causes me to oppose this draft resolution now. As l said before, l reserve the right to state my position upon the mencs of this question later, without being prec1uded therefrom by what l have said now and by my vote now. l say, as l said in the first instance, that it is wrong to present 'his to us at this moment.

The question is settled. The President's decision has not been overruled, and it is impossible not to express astonishment at the statement of the representative of the United States, who is attempting, at a time when we have already proceeded to the vote, and thus in evident violation of the rules of procedure, to intrude with his statement mere1y for the purpose of exerting a certain pressure on sorne members of the Security Council during the vote. That is a flagrant violation of the rules of procedure. The Security Council is not concerned with the political views of any particular memher of the Security Council or of the representative of any particular Government, or with the political ideology of any particular Government. As the main organ of the United Nations, whose function is to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council is obliged, in accordance with the Charter, to consider international conflicts that may threaten peace and security. We are all \Vell aware of this, and so is the representative of the United States. \\'hat, l repeat, have the political views of any particular Government to do with our business here? No one is concerned with them. And the Security Council cannot be guided by the principle of the party allegiance of one representative or another-whether he is a communist or an anarchist, a socialist or a democrat, a republican or a member of no party. If the Security Council hegins to act like this, it will cease to be the Security ln the USSR delegation's view such a position is untenable. ln accordance with the decision we have adopted, let us proceed to the vote. The de1egation of the Soviet Union has no objection ta the addition proposed by the representative of the United Kingdom, consisting in the insertion of the words "when this question is under discussion" after the words "Security Council". Thus the sentence will read: "to invite a representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China ta attend meetings of the Security Council when this question is under discussion," ML QUEVEDO (Ecuador) (translated from Spanish) : 1 am obliged, by the way in which this discussion has developed, ta explain my vote as briefly as possible. 1 have already explained my Government's position with regard ta the government of China. My Government still maintains diplomatie relations with the Nationalist Government of China and we therefore believe that China is represented in this Council. Nevertheless, it is common knowledge that around the island of Formosa, or rather in connexion with the island of Formosa, there is a situation which might lead to international friction under the terms of Article 34 of the Charter and that, under the terms of Article 39 of the Charter, there is a threat ta the peace. That is why a few moments aga 1 voted in favour oi the incl""ion of the complaint of aggression against Taiwan (Formosa) in the agenda, without, however, intending to prejudge the merits of the case. The fact that the sub-paragraphs of this item refer to the People's Government of China, and ~hat my delegation has accepted the inclusion of this Item, does not imply that my Government accepts the so-called people's government as the government of China. It is, however, obvious that when there is an international situation which may lead to a breach of the

1 caU on the representative of the United Kingdom on the question of the voting procedure. Sir Gladwyn JEBB (United Kingdom) : The position of my delegation on the substance of this question is entirely clear. \Ve are in favour of a representative of the Central People's Government being present when the complaint of armed Învasion of the island of Formosa is under discussion in the Security Counci!. 1 hope, therefore, that there will be no doubt as to our fundamental attitude. But on the particular issue which is now before us. namely, that exceptional treatment should be accorded to the representative of the Central People's Government, we shaH abstain on the vote for the reason that we think it is by no means necessarily right that we should oblige the President to the extent suggested when he, for a whole month, has excluded the representative of the Republic of Korea from the Security Council. In our view, the proper course, in any case, is to wait until we know exactly when the question, whi(-]- is now item 3 on the agenda, will come up for discussion

These are two entirely separate questions. Mr. CHAUVEL (France) (tmnsla.ted tram French) : The French delegation did not oppose the taking of a vote on the matter raised by the delegation of the Soviet Union. It will also abstain from voting. The USSR proposaI was exceptional. The position in which the Council has been placed for a month through the action of the USSR delegation in connexion \Vith a similar case is also f..'{ceptional. The fact that the French delegation has thus abstailled twice is the consequence of these two aspects of the question. Tt does not in any way prejudge the vote which the French delegation will cast when the .'lame question is raised again but in usual and normal circumstances. Mr. SUNDE (Norway): l should Iike to hear the text.

It reads: "The Security Council, "In connexion with the statell1ent of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China regarding armed invasion of the island of Taiwan (Formosa), "Decides to invite a representative of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China to attend meetings of the Security Council when this question is under discussion." A vote was taken by show of hands, as follows: In favour: India, Norway, Union of So~iet Socialist Rcpl1blics, Y ugoslavia. Against: China, Cuba, Ecuador, United States of America. Abstaining: Egypt, France, United Kingdom of Great Britain and N orthern Ireland. The proposal was rejected by 4 votes to 4, with 3 abstentions.

As representative of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUB- LICS l announce that my delegation reserves the right to introduce this proposaI during the consideration of the substance of the item, the armed invasion of the island of Taiwan, whieh is included in the agenda of the Secl1rity Council. The PRBSIDENT (fral1s/ated from Russiotl) : ln view of the lateness of the hour, we shall, if the members of the Security Couneil have no objections, adjourn the meeting. The next meeting will be on Thursday, 31 August, at 3 p.m.