29101959  Letter Dated 29 October 1959 from the Permanent Representative of India C.S. Jha to the President of the Security Council

 

  Letter Dated 29 October 1959 from the Permanent Representative of India C.S. Jha to the President of the Security Council

 

I have the honour to refer to the letter, dated 11 September 1959 (S/4219), from the Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan, addressed to the President of the Security Council and to state that the Government of India's position in the case of the construction of Mangla Dam in Jammu and Kashmir has been clearly stated in my previous communications to the President. I have, however, been instructed by my Government to correct the following inaccurate statements made in the letter of the Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan of 11 September 1959.

 

2. The Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan has, while referring to the statement in my letter, dated 7 August 1959 (S/4202), that "On its own admission, as recorded by the United Nations Commission in its reported and its resolution of August 13, 1943, the Government of Pakistan committed aggression on the Indian Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir", commented that "Neither my Government nor the United Nations as a whole is aware of any such admission." The contention of the Pakistan Acting Permanent Representative is not only unsupported by the facts as reported by the UNCIP but stands denied by them. The following extracts from UNCIP report may be relevantly quoted:

 

"As set forth in the letter of 1 January 1948 (S/628), the Government of India placed its complaint against the Government of Pakistan under Article 35 of the Chapter, which allows any Member to bring to the attention of the Security Council any situation the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. India alleged that such a situation existed between it and Pakistan owing to the aid which invaders, consisting of nationals of Pakistan and of tribesmen from the territory immediately adjoining that Dominion on the north-west, were drawing from Pakistan for operations against the State of Jammu and Kashmir, which had acceded to India on 27 October, 1947, and was part of India."

 

"The Government of Pakistan in its communication of 15. January 1948 (S/646 and Corr. 1) denied that it was giving aid and assistance to the invaders..." (paras. 111 and 112)

 

"In the course of this interview, the Foreign Minister (of Pakistan) informed the members of the Commission that the Pakistan Army had at the time three brigades of regular troops in Kashmir and that troops and been sent into the State during the first half of May (1948)" (para. 40).

 

"The statement of the Foreign Minister of Pakistan to the effect that Pakistani troops had entered the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and later his reply to a Commission questionaire that all forces fighting on the Azad side were 'under the over-all command and tactical direction of the Pakistan Army', confronted the Commission with an unforeseen and entirely new situation." (para. 127).

 

"According to the Security Council's resolution of 17 January, the Government of Pakistan was requested to inform the Security Council immediately of any material change in the situation. In a letter addressed to the Security Council, the Pakistan Government agreed to comply with this request. The Government of Pakistan had, however, not informed the Security Council about the presence of Pakistan troops in the State of Jammu and Kashmir." (para. 128).

 

-(The United Nations Commission's First Interim Report. Words within brackets are mine).

Date/Purchase; //62% 201 Cast: 400/vel "Then came the first bombshell. Sir Zafrullah Khan in formed the Commission that three Pakistani brigades had been on Kashmir territory since May... The Commission ... explained to the Pakistanis, the movement of these troops into foreign territory without the invitation of that territory's Government, was a violation of international law..."

 

- ("Danger in Kashmir" by Josef Korbel, a member of the UNCIP).

 

"As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State."

 

- (Para. Al of Part II of the UNCIP resolution of 13 August 1948).

 

Thus aggression on the Indian Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir by Pakistan on the one hand and the obligation subsequently accepted by Pakistan to vacate the aggression, are on record.

 

3. Another statement made in the letter of the Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan reads:

 

"The United Nations resolutions, which both India and Pakistan have accepted, laid down clearly that the future. status of the State shall be decided by a free and impartial plebiscite. The assumption that Jammu and Kashmir State is Indian territory is, therefore, wholly unwarranted."

 

The Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan is obviously referring in this connexion to the provisions of the United Nations Commission's resolution of 5 January, 1959. This resolution, according to its own terms, in "supplementary" to the UNCIP resolution of 13 August 1948. With regard to the "plebiscite" proposals contained in it, it was explained by Dr. Lozano, Chairman of the United Nations Commission, that they "did not supersede Part III of the resolution of 13 August but were an elaboration of it." The Chairman had stated further that if the Plebiscite Administrator found a plebiscite impossible for "technical or practical reasons", he or the Commission would then recommend to the Security Council a solution different from that of a plebiscite (Annex 8, S/1430). Thus there is no exclusive or final character about the plebiscite proposal.

 

Even apart from the fact that plebiscite proposals in the resolution of 5 January are only one of the methods envisaged in Part III of the resolution of 13 August, the order in which these matters are to be considered is, first the implementation of Part I, then of Part II and finally of Part III of the resolution of 13 August. The "consultations" envisaged in Part III obviously can no take place unless Parts 1 and 11 have been implemented.

 

Not only has Pakistan not implemented Parts I and II but has repeatedly violated and continues to violate the terms and the spirit of the obligations assumed by her in the first two parts of the said resolution. Some of her violations, e.g., the augmentation of the so-called Azad Kashmir forces and the annexation of the northern areas after the cease-fire, and totally contrary to the United Nations resolutions and agreements arising thereof as well as to the information given to the Commission by Pakistan, have been placed on record by the United Nations Commission. Other have been detailed by India's representatives in the Security Council from time to time. Meanwhile, Pakistan troops and elements which were to be withdrawn from Kashmir under Part II still continue their forciable and illegal occupation of the territory of the Union of India in Jammu and Kashmir, though eleven years have elapsed since the provision for their withdrawal was made and accepted by Pakistan under Part II of the UNCIP resolution of 13 August, 1948. Pakistan has thus in this regard alone violated solemn and vital agreements and continues do so. to

 

4. I request that this communication may kindly be circulated as a Security Council document and brought to the notice of the members of the Security Council. Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration,

 

(Signed) C.S. JHA

Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Permanent Representative of India to the

United Nations

(Source: UN Document S/4234).