Text of the Speech made by Mr. Austin (United States of America) in the Security Council Meeting No. 284 held on 17 April, 1948

 Text of the Speech made by Mr. Austin (United States of America) in the Security Council Meeting No. 284 held on 17 April, 1948

The India Pakistan question, which is item 2 of the agenda, is before the Security Council on the basis of allegations by both India and Pakistan that a dispute exists between them, the continuance of which is likely to endanger international peace and security. That is the reason they have come here to the Security Council. Indeed, they pictured a scene of fearsome threat to international peace and security in the several representations which they made to the Council. The facts which they submitted, facts in which we believe and on which we rely, justify their allegations.

The Security Council does not have to pass judgement upon any issue of fact in this dispute beyond the one on which both parties were agreed, and which they pressed earnestly. The Security Council has never undertaken to decide the particular issues of fact or of law existing between the parties. It was sufficient to charge the Security Council with the duty to have before it a dispute, the continuance of which was likely to endanger international peace and security.

Our responsibility was challenged at once, and it remains challenged now. We are acting under a general mandate which is beyond the specific provisions of the Charter. It is contained in paragraph 1 of Article 24, which reads as follows:

"In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Member confers on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international relations. peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf."

We have acted on behalf on these two Members for whom we have very great respect. We recognize the contribution which they have made to peace and we recognize the devotion of both of them to the principles and policies of the Security Council and their earnest desire to arrive at a solution of this dispute which will be peaceful and just Their conduct has been according to that principle.

India appeared before the Security Council with the request that the Council assist in restoring peace and order in Kashmir by calling upon Pakistan to desist from certain actions which the Government of India considered to be unfriendly

The members of the Security Council will note that in this revised draft resolution, an attempt has been made to deal with this particular allegation. In paragraph 1, under the title, "Restoration of peace and order' we find this recommendation:

"1. The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavours: "(a) To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting and prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State.

"(b) To make known to all concerned that the measures. indicated in this and the following paragraphs provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste, or party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, as that therefore they should cooperate in the maintenance of peace and order."

On the other hand, in the counter-complaint of Pakistan, it was maintained that the people of Kashmir had strong economic and cultural ties with their Pakistan neighbours but were not able, under circumstances prevailing in the State, to express their wishes on the ultimate affiliation of the State to one or other of the two dominions. Fortunately, the Government of India had, at the time of Kashmir's accession, committed itself to the statesman like principle that this question must ultimately be decided by the freely-expressed will of the people of the State. Responsible Indian leaders announced. their willingness to see the issue resolved by a plebiscite, under international auspices.

Therefore, the problem which confronted the sponsors in working out this revised draft resolution was a simple one in some ways. It was principally a problem of pacification and of establishing a plebiscite, about which both parties had begged the Security Council to do something. However, the difficulty remains of devising procedures whereby the plebiscite would be administered fairly and impartially. We soon ascertained that the method which we have always tried in every one of these issues, the continuance of which might endanger the security and peace of the world, and which was the same method which we tried here-of solution by negotiation, with the Security Council standing on the sideline and exhorting the parties did not accomplish its objective. It was apparently impossible for the parties to agree on a solution.

Thereupon normally, under the Charter, it would become the duty of the Security Council to make recommendations. But in addition to that, in this case, the Security Council was requested by both parties to make specific recommendations. Of course, both sides reserved the right to challenge those recommendations and state their objections to them. I anticipate that they will do that now.

In passing, let me say that the record of this case has been admirable from the point of view of the attitude of the parties and their representatives present here. Their conduct, in a parliamentary way, has been superior to any I have ever witnessed They have treated each other with consideration, and considerate courtesy, and they have made our task far more pleasant than it can be, as we well know, when parties hurl invectives at each other and when they fail to observe the rules of good conduct in parliamentary debate. Here we have a notable example of what a cultured person has accomplished and can do. The example is a very good one.

This plan is not a final solution. It does not pretend to be more than a recommendation, accepting the creation of a subordinate organ representing the Security Council to help these parties in accordance with their request.

The first part of the revised draft resolution is a resolution, not a recommendation, and amends the previous resolution by increasing the number of members of the Commission to five. It instructs the Commission in a manner which relates to the future and shows that the theory which the Security Council has about a solution here is one work; that this is only a plan; only a recommendation; a suggestion to these parties, and calls for work on their part and a continuation of their efforts, but with the aid of good offices of the Security Council. This Commission is vested with authority not merely of a good offices commission, but with the authority of a good offices commission, but with the authority of a mediator. to settle controversies, questions and interpretations, and to enable these parties to accomplish the business of a final settlement on the spot.

Thus, it says in the first part of the draft resolution, which is both effective and binding

"Instructs the Commission to proceed at once to the Indian sub continent and there place its good offices and mediation at the disposal of the Governments of India and Pakistan with a view to facilitating the taking of the necessary measures, both with respect to the restoration of peace and order and to the holding of a plebiscite, by the two Governments, acting in cooperation with one another and with the Commission, and further instructs the Commission to keep the Council informed of the action taken under the resolution..."

All that which follows this is a recommendation. Even the part which relates to the Commission is a recommendation that the Commission should, at the end of the plebiscite, certify to the Security Council whether the plebiscite has or has not been really free and impartial. The Security Council is undertaking here and now to fulfil for these parties the requests they have made and lay before them these recommendations. The Security Council. has no authority to apply sanctions to these recommendations. The Security Council has been called upon for its good offices under the pacific settlement provision of the Charter. It is just responding now to this request, and what it is offering to these Members of the United Nations, on whose behalf the Security Council is acting, is something which represents three months of effort on the part of the Security Council to arrive, not at a decision and final solution, not at a determination of the issues between the parties, but at a method to be recommended to them to apply to their dispute, and for them to arrive at a solution by agreement in contrast to a solution by military decision.

In passing, permit me to thank Mr. Noel Baker for what he had to say about this subject of the achievement of the United Nations. Of course, I recognize that what he refers to in this instance is that, had there not been a United Nations to come to with this case three months ago, there might have been a devastating war of great magnitude already in progress. We recognize that because the United Nations was in being and because the parties came here with their dispute, that which existed and threatened so much, calmed a little and certainly did not increase, and that the situation today is better in India and Pakistan, because the United Nations was here to consider carefully the appeals of both these parties.

We have now considered these appeals and have given the best that our judgement affords. It took something to do this. I am sure the parties realise that, when they appeal to a body like this, one made up of eleven different nations, they are appealing to individuals and to countries that will have different points of view and envisage these problems differently, and that, therefore, it takes a spirit of conciliation in order to reach that measure of agreement which has already been indicated here by the fact that there are several sponsors to this draft resolution. It is not because of the dignity or worth of these sponsors, but because of the fact that so many of them in studying this case came to this measure of agreement, that there seems to me to be cause for considering carefully these recommendations.

I had intended to go into the development of the character of future action under these resolutions, but I think I have said enough. Now if the parties desire to study this draft resolution with that point of view, aiming at the realisation. that the character of this resolution is one of help, that it is not one imposing anything on them, and that it takes one other factor in order to make it a binding obligation agreement or assent to it, or action under it-then I have a feeling, and I certainly have a hope, that what the Security Council has done for them at their request may be found by them to be worthy of trying out, and, if tried out, may be found feasible and effective.