S/PV.588 Security Council

The provisional agenda has been distributed and is before t.~e CoundI. l assume that we can adopt it subject to the usual reservations. The agenda was adopted. Quèstïon of a request for investigation of alleged bacterial warfare (continued)

The representative of the United States indicated at the last meeting ofthe C01J.ndl that. he wished to introduce the draft resolu/tion [S/2688} which he had distributed at that time. l caU on him now.

The germ warfare campaign which was fabricated and· sponsored by the Soviet Union Government now stands exposed before the world as a crude and a tragic hoax. If .the people of the world neededany further confirmation that the·charges against the United· Nations forces in Korea were false from beginninl'rto end, the cnduct of the Soviet Union representative here in the SeLUri+ '1 Couneil since the middle of Junehas provided that proof. After making baseless and unfounded accusations in the Disarmament Commission, which is not authorized und('r its terms of reference to investigate t~e,?, the.Soviet Union representative and the Soviet UnIon Governnu:nt didnot make any effort to press these same charges ili· the Security·CounciI. Whynot? 4. The Soviet Union representlltive in the Securitj' Coundl, aiter refnsing to parttclpate in the debate, vetoed the investi~ation which the Security Coundl, through aU its other memberllt saw wu the appropri;.te action to take. At our la$t meeting, l tw1t::e ~equested the Soviet Union rep~sentative to reco~sider his action in vetoing the drait reoolution. He rejected the cliallenge. The record now c1early shows that the Soviet Union Government knows that its charges will not bear impartial 3nvelltigat'on. 5. l 5aid at our last meeting that if the Soviet Union Government would not te«'lnsider its refusa1 ta permit the Security Coundl to provide for an imp.'l.rtial inves~ tigation, l would reque~t the Coundl at the meeting tOOàY to oonsider (lad to act upon the draft resclution oow beforc' it. This drait rt:solution conc1udes, trom the refusai of the Qo-;emments and authorities con~ cerned to permit an impartial investigation, that the charges must he presumed to he without substance and false. It condemns the practic:e of fabricating and disse~ tninati~ such Wse charges, the continuation of which <:an only have the result of increasing tension among nations and wlûch is designed to undermine the efforts of the United Na:tions to combat aggression in Korea and the support of the people of the world for these efforts. 6. Despite his rejection and repudiation of the inves~ tigation, the Soviet Union representative and the Soviet Union Government have not withdrawn these false charges. On the contrary, through the official propaganda outlets of the Soviet Union Government and through the international communist apparatus all over the world, the Soviet Union Government continues up to this very moment the practice of fabrica~ ting and disseminating false charges, the practice which \'Ii-ould he condemned by adoption of the draft resolunon now befOre the Council. 7. The Soviet Union catnpaign of hatred against the encire iree world is carried on in the areas under Soviet Union control and influence. As 1 pointed out in the Council -on 1 July on behalf of my Government [S85th mectif:g], the United Nations will do weIl to watch the progress of this campaign of hate c1ose1y in aIl its manikstations, for its target is nothing less than the United Nations itself. This campaign isa revoIt against the fundaxnental purpose of the Charter: to deve10p frien<lly relations amongnations. As the custQdians~ th2 trustees of the Charter of the United Nations, we, in the Security Council, cannot afford to overlook this type <:if"attack which is designed to confuse the United Na:tions. tu paralyse 011. will to act and ta SOl[{ seeds of distrustamong us. Itinvolves XI'01; one of, us but al1 of us. 'In seeking to condemn thE' practiceof fabricating and 'disseroinating, ialse cllar6es, we are engaged in a rommon çanse in which everyone of us has a deep and a vital ~est. No one can stand aside. 8. The vast majority of the Members of the United Nations have expre~sed in the General Assembly their attitude towards what the Soviet Union representative and his C'ravernment generally refer to as war- Illollgering. The false germ warfare charges now being repeated by the Soviet Union Government, in the very iace of the expoSlh'e here of their falsity, definitely he- 1011~ to the cat<'g'ory of warmongering. Ou 3 Novenlber 1947, the General Assembly adopted a resolution,l introduced originally and supportec1 by the Soviet Union delegation itselfJ which condemned; "aU forms of propaganda, in whatsoever country conducted, wnich i5 either designed or likely to provoke or encourage any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression." 9. On 7 November 1950, the General Assembly adopted another rcsolution Il under the title -"Condemnation of propaganda ag-ainst peace". This re501ution reaffirmed the resolution of 1947, to which l have just referred, and described such propaganda, which it condemned, as: " (l) . Incitement to conflicts of aets of aggression; 10. exprimé accusations parties l'Union de semblée sujet. 11. jusqu'à le ment répandre forces armes poursuivre quences nous au 12. soviétique, qu.'i1n lution camplgne de le <1 (2) Measures tending to isolate the peoples from. any contact with the outside world.. , i "(3) Measures tending to silence or distort the activities of the United Nations in favour of peace..• JI. la. This was the voice of the United Nations in the General Assembly. The g-erm wartare charges, as part of the continuing campaig-n of hatred in the Soviet Union, are an open violation of the letter ana. spirit oi these General Assembly resolutions. There can be no doubt about it. 11. Throughout the whole last week of June and up to the present moment, as l shaH show, the Soviet Union Government, through its official Press and ra~iio, has persistently continued to spread the lie that United Nations forces in Korea have been using bacterial weapons. It has continued and now continues to press its campaign ofhatredJ with its compelling significance for the free world, for all of us. Let me give the Council a few examples. 12. On 26 June, when the Soviet Union President of the Council was still taking the position here that there was no connexion between his draft resolution on the Geneva Protocol [S/2663] and the germ warfare campaigrl, the Soviet Union radio was broadcasting this barefaced lie to the people of Iran: S I See Official Recoràs of the Gmeral Assembly, Second . ession, Resoltl.tiOlIS.. resolution 110 (II). .2Ibid., Fifth Ses.#on, R~solutions, resolution 381 (V). "The American interventionists in Korea have spread germs, flies and mosquitoer cartying dangerous disease. The American poIicy of aggression and e..x:termination is based on radalism, which ls the official ideology of the Government of imperiaIist America." 14. So spoke the Soviet Union radio on 27 June. During that same week the Soviet Union radio was broadcasting the germ wanare charges to Tndonesia. Here is more from its message of hate: "The American imperiaIists ... ferocious1y en- gineered aggression against the Indonesia Republic. In Korea, the Americans buried aIive 100,000 women and children." 15. This is the officiaI voice of Moscow, the voice of hate. On 30 June, the Moscow radio said this in a broadcast to the United Kingdom: "The United States Command has brought the barbarous germ weapon iv.to use against the civil population of Korea and China." 16. On 1 July, the Moscow radio broadcast an editoriaI from the Soviet trade union journal Tr'ud, which toM .the Soviet Union workers that "the examination of the Soviet Union proposaIs in the Security Council on the question of banning bacterial weapons has shown that the American imperiaIists intend to go on t~sing this weapon of mass desttilction". So spoke the Moscow radio, the voice of hate, on 1 July, during the very moments wh.i!e we were con- ducting our deliberations here. . 17. Again on 1 July, in a bitter attack on Gener~ R1Lzway,î:he Moscow radio tol<1 Russian listeners at home that the Îormer United Nations Commander, whom it labelled l'the Plague General", had "em- ployed the barbarousgerm and chemicaI weapons in Kotea." 18. On 2 July, when the Soviet Union repreHentative had gone on.a sit-down strike against the truth here in the Security Council, the Moscow radio on that same clay was teIling the Soviet Union people them- selves that the newspapers of Brazil were referring to the United States Secretary of State as the "Minister . of Plague". 19. The Moscow Literary Gazette, official organ of the Soviet Union Writers Union, told the peopl(~ of th\= Soviet Union just a few days ago, white we Nere conducting our deliberations here, that the United States had been caught, to· use their expression, "red- handed using germ warfare in Korea." To iIlustrate the·depths to which the Soviet Union r~gime has gone, and is going, to poison the minds of its own.people, the Literary Gazette pul>lished a cartoon of the President D~ath as his co-rider, carrying the American flag. 20. During this period, when the Soviet Union repre- sentative in the Security Council was evading the truth and pretending to hide beh:nd the coat-tails of the Chinese Communist and North Korean authorities, the Soviet Union régime placed large posters around Mos- cow showing American soldiers in Korea carrying cholera bombs and hypodermic syringes, while in the background other Amei-icans are depicted as vampires drinking human blood. 21. 1t is ironie that not long ago, with g~at cere- mony, the Soviet Union régime adopted a deeree which prohibits war propaganda within the Sovièt Union as the greatest crime against humanity. Writers and others who put out such propagandz. are to he con- sidered as dangerous criminals. If that law were ob- jectively applied under a free judicial system within the Soviet Union itself today, the Soviet Union régime would be without leaders to:nôrrow. 22. 1 have referred sa fa,r only to a continuationuf the germ warfare campaign by the Soviet Union régime in its own official propaganda. Throughout this period the charges were being echoed il1 the capitals of the satellite States and elsewhere. On 25 June, the second anniversary of the start of the North Korean aggressic.n against the Republiè of Korea, several so-call.ed people's organizations in Bul- garia dec1ared in a message of hate to the people. of Bulgaria: "American interventionists, enraged by the stub- horn· resistancé of. the valiant Korean people, have resorted to the most criminal and despised weapons - the plagne, cholera and other microbes. Long live the world-wide front of peace headed by the great Stalin." 23. Such was the voiee of hate in Bulg"ria..The germ warfare charges were also being repeated in Warsaw and in Prague, as well as in many other places through- out Eastern Europe and throughout the world. 24. In the last w~k of June, while we were delib- erating here and white the Soviet Union representative was pretending that the Geneva Protocol item had nothing to do with germ warfare charges, .the Italian communist newspape!;. Unità, loyal to the dictates of Moscow, published a six-column headline .which stated: "Smashiilg documentation on bacterial crimin.als . will be presented to the WoridPeace Council in Ber'1n." 25. These charges of germ warfare have now been made before the so-called World PeaceCouncil meet..; ing in ~erlin. The Soviet Union news agency, Tass, "The United States imperialists and their allies are resorting to crimes without pre~edent in world history. Vi-olating aIllaws and aIl international conventions, they 1011 unarmed peaceful populations, destroy towns and ...'il1ages, spread bacteria of -lethal diseases md without hesitation execute prisoners of war." 26. Such W?S the Moscow voice of hate in India. 1 do not believe that the Council needs further evidence that the Soviet Union Government at home and abroad has continued and is continuing to push this campaign of lies tu the limit in the face of the open refusaI of the Soviet Ul1;on representative in the Security Coun- cil to agree to an investigation of the gerni warfare charges. 27. ~l think the members of the Council will be struck by the obvious discrepancy between the continuation of the germ-warfare campaign _by the Soviet Union Government and the conduct of the Soviet Union representative here. Members of the Councii will also note the obvious c1iscrepancy which cries for eXplanà-- tion between what the Soviet Union representative Was telling the Disarmament Commission not long ago and what he has told us here. The Council has just heard the excerpts 1 have read out from the Soviet Union Press and radio within the last two to three weeks. 28. The éharge of germ warfare is unequivocal and éategorical. But here in the Security Council the Soviet Union representative disclaims responsibility on the part of the Soviet Union Government-for these charges. This, he says, is the affair of the Chinese 3.J."1d North Korean communist régimes, not of the Soviet Union Government. AlI we have to do is to invite the Chinese Communists and North Korean authorities here, and they will give us all the necessary information -'- in- formation about the activities of the Soviet Union Gov- ernment. That i8 what 1 have been referring to and exposing just now. 29. But in the Disarmament Commission the Soviet TJnion' representativedid not take that same line. In the Disarmament Commission, the Soviet Union représentative did not insi'lt - he did not even suggest ~ that the Disarmament Commission invite the ChineseCorornunists and the North Korean authorities to participate in the discussion of charges which he, the Soviet Union' representative, was making in the Commission. He did not raisethe question of such an invitation. Yet, despire this fact, on 9 April in Com- mittee 1 of the Disarmament Commission the Soviet Union representative made this fiat statement which is typical of what he wassaying at the time: 3 " ... the United States aggressors committed a horrible crime ~agaînst peace and against mankind. " ... the U!1ited States is attempting to impose on the SecurityCouncil its own one-sided version of ,questions connected with events in Korea ... The USSR delegation wishes to dec1are once again that, in the absence of representatives of the.Peopie's , Republic of China and of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea, it is unable' to consider th(; ques- tion submitted by the United States de1i::gation. The USSR delegation therefore will not take part iri the discussion of this question and will vote against the United States draft resolution on that matter." 31'. Thiswas the method of evasion. This was the tactic which the Soviet Union Government hit ttpon ta av:oid participating in our action calling for an inves- tigation. What is the Council to believe of tbis remark- able change in Rttitude on the part of the Soviet Union represelltative? Why was the presence of the Chinesé and North Korean Communists unnecessary when the Soviet Union representative made these charges and sought in the Disarmament Commission to obtain ~ discussion of these questions?, Why was their presencê unnecessary there and then -.- suddenly- essential and over;.ridL'lg when We propose~ an investigation by the Security Council? Why, we may furthe:r ask, did many communist parties around the, world appea} to the International Committee of the Red Cross itself for an investigation and then, ,suddenly, turn against thisin- stitution, this respected organization, with a violent campaign of abuse? 32. There is a significant inconsistency between the position first taken by these communist .parties and that later taken hy the Soviet Union representative when he allegedhere that any impartial in:vestigation undertaken by the United Nations·would serv~ otily to collec\: inLelligence information and he ':on espionage service. The Soviet Union régime, for its own specIal purpos~ and reasons, has wanted to pr\~ss its, germ warfare campaign, knowing that it was perpetrating a fraud upon the world.· The incol1sistency oiits be- haviour, the contrastbetween the statements .of the Soviet Union representative to the Disarmament Com- mission'and' his disclaimer. of responsibility·' here, are ~plained by one eSSellt1f.Ü fact: under no drcumstances 33. The Soviet Utlion represeutative, by his veto, has deprived those people, those authorities, those régimes of the right to be heard on the subject by an impartial investigating body in response to a request or a sug- g~tion of .tbe Security. Council. But d:~spite t.'lese twists and tums, the Soviet Union Government can- not and must not he permitted to eva~e ifs responsi- bility for launching and for continuing at this very moment its germ warlare campaign. 34. The leaders of the Soviet State may have thought that, with thcir germ warfare campaign, they could drive a wedge into the United Nations fighting in Korea, that they could corrode and destroy the under- lying unity of the free world. But the States com- posing the Unified Command and the members of the free worldsupporting the action against aggression in Korea are t~pable of withstandi11g this type of attack. At the same time, we know - certainly those of us sitting around this table - that free governments do not ûlways agree. These disagreements may be interpreted bysome as a sign of weakness or lack of resoluhon. Most thinking men would see in them a sign of strength. 35. The imPOrtant thiug ta. remember is that we all h~ve access ta the f~cts and ta the truth. That is the underpinriingof our great strength. We do not have ta lie to our own people or to each other. We do not indulgein hate campaigns, not because we do. not have to but because it does not occur to us. We do not make charges against foreign countries, .charges that cannot be backed up·by a single shred of credible evi- dence. ·If &DY government ·in the free·wor1d tried these tacties, and it was exposed as it should be, that gov": ernment would be out of office the next day. 36.It is characteristiè of the response of the free w<irld tothe start of the germwarfare campaign that we· ittunediately offered to provide assistance for what apparently was a raging epidemic .in North Korea and China. Tt is quite proper that the draft resolution now before the. Seeurity Council should note the offer of assistance made by the World Health Organization and the readiness of the Unified Comnla.ild to co-operate. We·.think·it is unfortunate that the other ·side rejected the offerof the World Health Organization and that v!1"f.ims.eoLdis.easeinC;hina and in North Korea were allowed fasuffer in arder· to sustain a propaganda campaignof unwarranted charges agaînst the Un~ed Nation~ forces in Korea. Was this offer ofUnit~d Na- tions •assistance,· in the face of this unbridled propa- ganda attack,a sign of weakness or of strength? We leaveit to the free wprld ta judge. 38. So far as w(' are concerned, we want to see the United Nations continue to hold true to its chief ob- jective - tu rid mankind of the scourge of war - even in the face of aggressive acts against the Organization itself and the continuaI efforts on the part of a small minority to throttle its work. Is it weakness or strength on our part to see this Organization succeed? Again, the world may judge. 39. Last Wednesday [586th meeting], the represen- tative of Chile, Mr. Santa Cruz, in tailcing of the Sovi~t Union veto vf the Red Cross investigation, stressed the enormous importance of the United Nations to the sma1ler countries of the world. He said: "Small countries like mine can do very little to .help the intematbnal community, particularly when the.great Powers reserve for themse1ves the right of veto. We do not have the physical means of making Wélr impossible or even of preventing the propaga;' tion of hatred. On the contrary, we are exposed to all the consequences of the folly of others. We have only one card left to play in the international game and that is our adherence to the United Nations, whose enormous moral support is of vital impor- tance to us." 40. :i ~gree with this wise stJ.tement by Mr. Santa Cruz, è..ud would add only that it is just as important for their own security that the large nations aIso adhere ta and remain loyal to the United Nations. We have seen in the germ warlare campaign an example of what can only be described as disloyalty to the fundamental purposes of the Charter on the part of a large nation. This is indeed folly, f~r even larger Powers, inc1uding the Soviet Union, need the United. Nations. The germ warfare campaig11 directed against the United Nations, directed against ail of us, is pari of the much larger Soviet Union eampaign of hatred for the outside world. This would indicate that for the present the leaders of the Soviet Union have lost sight of their own best interests, certainly e-~ the in- terests of their own people. 41. We do not see that the Soviet Union representa- tive has left the Security Council any choice but to ~reat P\lWerS and to eliminate those very weapons of mass destruction which it faiselv accuses the United Natiom; C~)mmand of usinp; in Karea. -ht This would indeed he a blow for peace, as the würd "peace" is understo')d by the vast majority of the nations of the world. 44. Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Repub~ lies) (trans!lltt'd fr(lf~ RlIssian): The faet that the United States representative twice had ta explain and speak on support of his draft resolution speaks for it~ self. It is the most convincing proof of the worthless~ ness of his pro~sal and arguments. 45. The USSR delegation ieels obliged to make the followiug statement in conne..'tion with the second draft resolution SUbll :tted by the United States repre~ sentative to the Council. 46. Before the Council proceeds to discuss the new United States draft resolution, the USSR delegation considers it essentia! <mce agnin to draw attention ta the fact that, in the absmce of the Chinese and Korean representatives, any discussion of the use of bacterial weapons by the United States armed forces in Korea and China is not ouly illegal, but will make it im- po...'isible tû establish the truth. 47. The Security Council now has official documents before it which show beyond question that the United States armed forces are usinp; bacterial weapons in Korea and China. The United Nations Secretariat has receh-ed a number of official statements on that subjt~ct from the Govemments of the Chinese Peopl, " Rcpub~ lie and of the People's Democratie Republic of Korea, as weIl asa number of appeals ~f('m international democratic organizations. 48. The many passages which the United States represeatative quoted in his speech are from those statements and official documents and l'very member {}f the SeCtlritv Couneil can learn these facts for hhn- self from thos-e officiai state.-nents. The United States representative fals"ly attributes a11 these statements to tlae USSR Press and broadcasts. The USSR Press and the USSR broadcasts mereiy state the facts which are citee;, in the indicated official documents of the Govern- ment of the People's Republic of China and the Gov- emment of the People's Democratie Republic <of Koreaand in official appeals addressed to the United 49. l intt'nded ta quote the relevant passages from these documents which tell of the bacterial weapons m,cd b)' the United States armed forces in Korea and China, but the United States representative has relieved me of that task by citing nlost (lf those pas- ~ages himself. There is no need ta repeat these quota~ tians since the United States representative has made them for me. 50. Amollg these official documents is a statement of 22 Febrllary 1952, made on behalf of the Government of the Pcople's Democratic Republic of Korea by Pak Hen En, Minister for Foreign Affairs, citing many COllcrete examples of the use of bacterial weapons by the United States armed forces against the People's D~mocratic Republic of Koren [S/2684] . 51. These official documents also include a cablegram of 8 March 1952 from :hou En-lai, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, who energeti.cally protests on behalf of his .Goverrunent against the use by the United States Government of bacterial weapons against the Chinese people and against the violation of Chinese air space by the United States air force. Thestatement of the Centr-cJ. People's Government of China cites many concrete examples of the use by the United States armed forces of bacterial weapons against the Chillese people in February and Marc!l of this year in northeast China. It says: "rt is the view of the Central People's Govem- ment of the People's Republic of China that the United States Government, pursuing its objectiv~s of extending the Korean war and undermining peace in the Far East and other parts ofthe world, has employed bacterial weapons, strictly prohibited by humanity and international conventions, ag-ainst the peaceful population and armed forces of the Korean and Chinese peoples in Korea and is even extending such crimes against the peaceful popula- tion in northeast China, by employing these illegal bacterial weapons in a brutal provocation". 52. The cablegram of 21 April of this year from Mr. Pak Hen En, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the ~eople's Democratic Repubiic of Korea to the Secre- tary-General of the United Nations [S/2684] contains an official statement by the Govermnenf of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea ta the effect that t.he use of bacterial weapons by United States interven- tioni.sts has been proven irrefutably by many impartial representatives of world public opinion, inclu<'::ng the Commission of the International Federation of Demo- cratic Women, the International Association of Demo- cratie Lawyers and correspondents from the USSR, China, the United Kingdom, Prance and other conn"' tries. 53. Among the documents suhmitted to the Security C(luncil on' thisquestion, there is the official appeal 37. As :r~a1"ds the rclerences in the United States ùr.é1t fi} ihe~ ~'InternatiQna1"Commitiee of the :Red CrûSS, the proposaI for aI\ investigation by this "Having completed its e:s:amilla,tion) the Council of the International Association of Democratie Law- yers declares that the lol.cts reported by the conl- mission prove that atrocious erimes have been com~ mitted by the United. States armies not only against combatants, but also against the civilian population. Those crimes inc1ude the use of ehemiea,l weapons, mass massacre, torture, rape, murder, air raids on peaceable inhabitants, lootillg and destrttction of property, in particular cultural treasures, and above aU the use by United States artnies of bacterial \veapons in Korea and China". 54. AU this material has been brought out in official documents of the Security Council and they are there for anyone to study and to learn the irrefutable proof of the use of bacterial weapons against the Korean and Chinese peoples by the United States forces in Korea. ln view of this irrefutable proof and evidence, it is perfectly dear why the United States submitted to the Council its new draît resolutiotl containing pro- vocative insinuations and imaginary accusations against the· USSR, the People~s Republie of China and the People's Democratie Republic of Korea. 55. l must most energetically protest against the pro- vocative nature of this draft and the proposaIs con- tained therein~ which are patently designed to divert pUblic attention from the qm:stion of the United States Government's responsibiHty for the use of bacterial weapons against the Korean and Chinese people. 56. The references in the draft to the unfounded dellWSof fue use(lf bacterial weapons by the United States military command in Korea s.re unconvincing and inconc1usive. The United States Govemment's sttlhborn reiusal in the O:lUncil to examine, in the presence (li representatives of those countries, "the .question (lf the useo! bacterial weapons by United States Ion:es against Korea and China shows that the empty denials which the United States military com- ma:ndand Government have attempted to make are ialse and without any foundation. 58. It is generally known that the so-caUed Inter- national Committee of the Red Cross, which the United States Government is attempting to put forward as an "impartial invesHgator", is not an international organi- zation at alt. It is a Swiss national organization, al- though it has appropriated the title "International Committee of the Red Cross." During the Second World War that Committee did not utter a single word in defence of the victims of the Hitlerite misc'heds in the territories occupied by the Hitlerites. In Jractice, the Committee thereby concealed the Hitleri~s' war crimes, just as, by its failure to speak, it i5 now covering up, for the benefit of the United States ag- gressors in Korea, their monstrous crimes on K.oje Island and their treatment o~ Korean and Chinese prisoners-of-war. 59. It goes without saying that such a Committee cannot act impartially as an international organization should. 60. It is also a matter of general knowledge that the chief representative of that Committee with the United States military command àt Tokyo and in Korea is Otto Lechner, who Jormerly, when investigating the Hitlerite concentration camps, said that everything was in order in those camps. 61. Consequently, there is absolutely no reason t.o expect that such an institution, which has already com- promised itse1f, and which masquerades under the title "International Committee of the Red Cross", will dis- play any ldnd of objectivity or impattiality. By its actions the Committee has shown itself to be an ae- complice and lackey of the United States aggressors in Korea. 62. In the light of these facts it has become dear to everyone that the U=,ited States Government is press- ing its proposai for ai: investigation by the above- mentioned Commictee in an effort to prevent the examination by the Council, with the participation of· the Chinese and Korean representatives, of the ques- tion of the use of hacterial weapons by the United States forces against the Korean and Chinese peoples. p3. The attempt to refer to the World Health Orgatùzation is further proof of the utter worthless- ness of the United States draft resolution. Such refer- ence is useless and deserves to be rejected most em- pbatically. 64. The·Security Council has at its disposaI the reply, dated 21 April 1952, from Mr. Pak Hen En~ Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People's. Demo- cratic Republic of Korea, ta the Secretary-General of l the United Nations, ta which 1 have already drawn attention. In that reply it was stated that the Govem- ment of the People's Democratic Repubiîc of Korea bas succeeded in preventing the rise of epidemics and ~, U!:t~!J""""'", itself~ the tollowing statements are made in the above- mentloned reply trom Mr. Pak Hen En: "Korean people cannot COlmt on assistance of so- called \Vorld Health Organization since it is well known that this organization has not the necessal'Y international authority. Many States are not mem- bers of this organization. It i::. also well known that certain States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) Pob.nd) Czechoslovakia and others, left the organization in 1949, owing to its inactivity over a number of years in carrying out the tasks in- cumbent on it in conne..'{ion with preventing and combating disease." . 66. Expressing on behalf of the Korean people the hope that the United Nations will categorically oon- demn the criminal use of hacteri&1 weapons by the United States interventionists and the other misdeeds perpetrated by them in violation of international law and the fundamental principles of morality, the Gov- ernment of the People's Democratie Republic of Koreaagain urges the United Nations to take imme- diate steps to put an end to the military crimes of the United States aggressors in Korea. 67. In the light of all th:lt has been said, it is quite obvious that the reference in the United States draft resolution to the so-called vVorld Health Organizaticn is of no value and is merely intended to cover up the refusaI of the United States Government to prohibit the uae of bacterial weapons. 68. In the light of the facts adduced from the official statements by the governments of the People's Repub- lie of China and the People's Democratie Republic of Kùrea and from the official documents submitted to the Uniteà Nations and the Security Council by a number of international democrntic organizations, it is neces- sary particularly to emphasize in the Security Council, and to draw the Council's attention to the circum- stance, that the facts of the use of bacterial weapons by the United States anned forces in Korea and China have been established by authoritative international commissions anèl are ge1.1erallY known throughout the world. The quotations in the United States representa- tive's speech today from the international Press confirm this. They shown that these facts are known in Indo- nesia and Brazil ànd Italyand other countries of the world. The United States aggressors cannot get away trom these facts. The attempt to deny them while hiding behind a screen of insinuations and fabricatior.s, including some against the Soviet Union, is doomed in advance to failure. 69.. In its statement of 1 July [584th meeting], the USSR delegation explained its attitude to the proposaI submitted tothe Security Council by the UIlited States 70. The United States representative's references to the Disarmament Commission are quite unfounded. In the Disarmament Commission, the United States dele- gation and its compaq.ions-in-arms in the aggressive Atlantk bloc rejected the USSR proposaI regarding the consideration of this question, but now ,the United States representative is attempting to give a false pic- ture of the situation in the Security Council, implying that the USSR representative did not submit any pro- posaI in th~ Disarmament Commission about inviting the Pe<:}1Jle's Republic of China and the People's Demo- cratie Republic of Korea to attend. He kept discreetly quiet however about the faet that it was impossible to submit any such proposaIs in the Disarmament Com- mission because the United States representativeand his colleagues in the aggressive Atlantic bloc rejected the USSR proposaIs regarding the consideration of the question of the prohibition of baeterial weapons and to hold answerable those who disregard it. 71. Those are the faets. They show the falseness of the arguments adduced here by the United States representative. In addition, it is a matter of general knowledge that there is a weU-established tradition in the Security Council of inviting an the interested parties to attend when any disputed question is being considered. Provision for this is made in Article 32 of the Charter and in the Security Council's rulesof procedure. In view of the aforementioned the United States repfesentative had no justification for drawing a paraUel between the procedure for dealing with items in the Disarmament Commission and the procedure for dealing with items in the Security Council. It is suf- ficient to raise the question in that manner in order to disclose the whole falsity and worthlessness of the argument adduced here by the United States repre- sentative. 72. Having beendefeated in its attempt to impose ?pon the Security Council the adoption of a decision lU ·obvious contradiction to the Charter of thé United Nations, the United 'States isagain attempting to im- pose upon .the Security Council .a siniilar procedure- 72. don Etats-Unis par 73. The United States representative's mendncious reÎertll1œs ta the so-called ôisartrtament programme, ttlle~lv 5ubmitted by the United States in the United Ntlhotls Disarnuu11I:nt Commission, are Iudicrous be~ tause, as the SeCltrity Councn 1ind the whole world kl1('\V,helther the United States representative nor his United I\:1ngdol1t and French tollengues ever sub- nlitted a11Y l\:Înd ot disl1fmament programme in thàt Cummission. The Uttited States represetltative in the Commission tried, ilS tryhtg Md apparentIy intends to ~ on tryii\t; to substitute for the question of the reduc- t\Qh of arttlll.ltielits and l:u.'nled torces and the prohibi~ tioh of atûluië litid 3011 other wel1pons of tnass destrttc- tlôlll 111dudin~ oo.cterial weaponsl 1). proposaI For the tolteètlon of itltôrnultion on arttllltnents, and, mùreover, (jfily 011 tonventionnl armaments. 74. FoUowing the îailure of this United States ~ttempt~ the United l{:ingdom and France came to the Umtcl St.ltes) Msistancè. Together.they tried tù sub- stitute for the proposhl tor thereduction of nrm::unents ~nd arfl.l00 forces and the prohibition of à{ùf!1ic atld aU otl'l.él' weapons of ttla8S desttuction a ttlong~'el proposaI ror the establishment ot so·called C1levels'\' but only for annooÎùrces. Clel:1rly such proposaIs have hot atid can never have anything in common with th~ disarmllIDent progrnnm1e or the' programme .for the reduction of armmnents al'l.d the prohibition of atomic and aU ùther weapons of mass destruction, Reference to these worth- less proposaIs of the United States represetltative in . the Security Council are pure demagogy, the purpose of which. 1S to disguise, at least partially, the United States· Government's refusaI to ratify the Geneva Pro- t«ol and ils disregard of the prohibition to use bacteria! weapons. Only one·Tea! and al1-embracing programme -that 'Of the USSR-for the reduction of armaments a,nd·armed forces and.the prohibition of atomic and aU 6ther weapons of mass destruction, was submitted to the Disannament Commission. This programme, however,is heing·stubbomly rejected by the United States Governmen.t. Sucb are the we1l-kttown facts. 75. In view of these facts, the USSR de1egation is ~ toparticipate in the discussion of the second United States draft resolutionalso, and will vote ~ it. At the Same time it eonsiders it essential to ihaw· ihe·Secm-ity C()unci1's attention to the following ~.important cirOlmstance. The English interpretation of the statement by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub- lies was then givèn. 77. The PRESIDENT: With the permission of the Council, l suggest that we now adjourn until 2.45 p.m., when l suppose We shan adopt the agenda again and then proceed to hear the French interpretation of Ml". Malik's statement.. . 78. Since l hear no objection to that procedure, we . stand adjourned until 2.45 p;m. SALES AGENVS FOR UNITED DEPOSITAIRES DES PUBll(ATlONS HEICE-OECE "Eleftheroudekis." tion. Athan.s. AIIINtilll-AlGINTINI Edllori.l Sud.meric.n. S.A.. Aldn. 500. Bu.nos Aires. GUAtEMALA Goubeud & CIo. Ltdo Guet.molo. AUSWLIA - AUSTftAUI H. A. Godd.rd. 255. G.o"". SI., Sydn.y. .nGlbM_ln.IQUl Ag.nc. et Moss.gerios de 1. Pr.sse S.A•• 1+22 rue du Pqrsil. BNxoll••• W. H. Smith 1< Son. 71·75 Boul.v.rd Adolph••M.... Bruxelles. NAm Libreiri. "A le Cor.v.U.... 111·8. Port·au-Peinc HONOURAS librerla PaJorn.ric.ne. li1ente, tegucigalpe. IOUVIA- IOUVIE Librorl. S~loccion... C.sille 97.1. Ln P... IWIL-IUSIL Livr.ri. Agir. Ru. Mexico 98.B. Rio d.. J.neiro. WlM:A Ryerson Press. 299 Quee" St. Wésl. Toronto. l.. Presse. Universit.lre. lev.l. Qu.bac. INbIA-INDE Oxford Book & Stetionory House. N.w Delhi. P. Varadachary & St. Medr., 1. 1!lllOllE51A-INOONESIE J~iosan Pembengunen. Ojakart.. CEYlON -CEYLAN The Associeted New.p.p.rs of Ceylon. l.td.. l.ke House. Colombo. IRAN Keteb·Khenoh Denosh. nuo. Tehran.. GIlLE-CHILI t.Ibre,le Iv.ns, Monede 822. Sentiego. GllIIl-WNE Commorci.1 Press. ltd•• 211 Hen.n Rd.. Shenghei. COLOUlA-COLOMIIE Librerl. letlne Ltde.. Ce""e 60.. 13..05. 801l0t6. GiUA IlCA-œSTA.lICA Trèjo, Hermenos. Apertecio 1313. Sen Jos6. IRAQ-IRAK Meckenzie', Bookshop. IIELAND-IILANDE Hibemien Gener.1 mercial Buildings. ISWL Blumstein's 800kstores. Rood. Tel Av'w. IrALf-ItAUE Colibri SA. Via ClIIA le Ce.. 8elge. O'Reilly 455. le Heben.., LEIANON- U!lAII Librairie universelle. CI«l\OSLOYAKlA - tcNICOSLOYAQUlE Cfikoslovensky Spis<lVelel. Nerodni Tride 9. Preha 1. • LllEalA' J. Momolu K.mero. llE1lIIA1K- DANlMlIIK Einet Mun1:sgeerd. lote!.. NlIrreg,de ~. LUXrMIOUll Libroirie J. S<:hummor. ~benhevn. K. DOIÛllICAN IEPIlIUC-IIPlII. DOMINICAINE lJbrerle Dominicene. Mercecl" -t9. Ciu~ decl Trujillo. MEXlCO-MmQ~ Editoriel ~lermo. 41. M6xico. D.F. NntlEaWIDS.- .AlS.IAS N.V. Mertinus Nijholf, ·,.Grovenhoge. ICI/AllO.- EQllATIUII Librerle CienUilee. Box 302. Guey,quil EIYM"';EGIPn libreirie "le Reneissance d·Egypt.... 9 Sb. Adly Peshe. Ceiro. GWYAIlOI-ULYADOI Menuol Neves y CIe.. le Avenide sur 37. Sen Selvedot. NEW ZEAWlD- NOUYEUE·m.ANOE U. N.A..n. of New.ZeeIOlld Wellington. NICAUGllA Or. Remiro Il.mlrez V I1lIICfIA- ElItIO'IE Ag.nee Ethiopi.nne de -Publicit6. Box 128. Addis.Abebe. fl\lIAlI\I- f1l1W1OE Ab!oeminOll Kirjebup~. 2. ICNlusblv. H.lsinkl. iiOiWAï-iiOniGE Johan GnJ(.dr 'l'enum gu,tsgt. 7A. OW. 'AIlSiU Thome, & Thom... Roed. Kare~hi. 3, Publish~rs Unitod ho.... IIAIICI 6:litiOllS A. Peclon.. 13 rue SoUmQt.l'.risV. ORIen Clnd lnqulries from cCluntrios where $CItes Olilenb bove not 101 been 9Ppointed moy be sent toi Soles and CirculotlonSectlon, United Notions, Now York, U.S.A.; or Sales SectIon, United Notions OffIce, Palais des NatIons, Gtneves, Swllzerlond. Printed in Çanada Priee: W ('Ir equivalent