24011948 Text of the Speech made by Mr. Austin (United States of America) in the Security Council Meeting No. 235 held on 24 January, 1948

Text of the Speech made by Mr. Austin (United States of America) in the Security Council Meeting No. 235 held on 24 January, 1948

I intend to make only a few brief remarks. The presentation of the claims on both sides permits of only one decision which, it seems to me, prescribes a course for the Security Council. Even without finding the facts, we clearly see a situation which urgently requires the application of all the pacific powers of the Security Council. I have listened intently to the claims of both sides, and never in the history of the United Nations have I been so grateful that the United Nations exists and is here to receive the presentations that have been so ably made on both sides of this question.

The Security Council has not yet been called upon to make a decision with respect to guilt or with respect to what the actual facts are in detail, but we already have enough information to arouse the ethical sense of the United Nations. to full and complete action, and we should do everything we can, as a world Organization whose aim is to abolish war and to establish conditions in which peace will prevail, help and guide these people who are, beneath all their troubles, brothers and friends, and who are true lovers of Peace seeking our guidance. They would not be here unless they expected a great effort from us to help them. Of course, this calls for mutual consideration, mutual sacrifice, and mutual endeavour, which the parties here have shown most nobly in what they have achieved so far. The fact that they have already made an agreement and have asked the Security Council to put it into effect through a resolution [230th meeting] is progress for which they are entitled to great praise.

Another point which I want to have in the record is a recognition of the very important fact that when India accepted the accession of Kashmir, it made its act stand for a great principle by stating as a part of the acceptance that it was conditional on fair plebiscite being held to determine the will of the people of Kashmir with respect to accession. I think an example was made in history at that point. Now comes Pakistan, which agrees to and stands for exactly the same doctrine. So we are blessed, as it were in this tremendously difficult situation, by having the two parties which have that vision as to the possibilities of a solution that would really settle their troubles.

This is a situation, however complex and difficult it may be, that is filled with hope. It seems to me, in determining whether there is a situation which, if it were to continue, might lead to a dispute or to war, that we have before us an opportunity to make progress in the right direction, through the continuation of the entirely friendly and informal conferences under the guidance of the President of the Security Council. My country thinks that these conferences should be continued in the real spirit that animates. India and Pakistan here, and that they should not be interfered with by the necessary presentation of charges, counter-charges, claims and so on that have to go into the record.

We should like to suggest to the two parties that under the guidance of the President of the Security Council, they should try to reach agreement on those issues and they relate to political issues as well as to the military issues that were presented by the first petition (document S/628]. We now have a counter-petition [document S/646].

The whole matter is before us. It is the Kashmir matter on which all these other questions will depend. It seems to me that our advice to the two parties should be-and that is what they are asking for when they come here that they proceed with the Kashmir matter, without prejudice to the other question; complete the negotiations that are now pending; and, with respect to the media and methods of creating those conditions in which a fair plebiscite can be held, arrange an interim government that is recognized as free from the smell of brimstone, as nearly impartial and perfect as two great countries like India and Pakistan can make it, in which the rest of the world will have confidence as being fair. It will not be difficult. If one comes to the conference table with the spirit of agreement, one will find many ways of carrying out this spirit. Of course, the agreement should be such as would invite the return of emigres to their homes. It should be such an interim arrangement as would open up the ballot boxes to everybody with the utmost freedom, and without any restraint except the restraint of maintenance of order under the law.

Freedom in the exercise of the franchise is what I understood India to refer to when that country made it a condition. precedent to the final accession of Kashmir to any other country; namely, that a plebiscite should be held. That was a part of the res gestae for India.

I wish to ask something else. My thoughts are not mature enough to submit a proposition. I am not making a motion, but I ask if it is not worthwhile for the parties involved, in their search for peace and for a real, true settlement of a very complex situation, to conduct all these proceedings the plebiscite especially-under the aegis' of the Security Council. In asking that question, I do not mean to imply that the Security Council should be sent over there. The Security Council can remain here and perform its duty. In addition, it can supervise this interim situation so as to guarantee a free and clear opportunity to the people of Jammu and Kashmir to record their will with respect to accession and other questions, as there will soon come the question of a permanent Government also.