Text of the Speech made by Mr. Kyrou (Greece) in the Security Council Meeting No. 572 held on 31 January 1952
Text of the Speech made by Mr. Kyrou (Greece) in the Security Council Meeting No. 572 held on 31 January 1952
Greece's interest in the dispute between India and Pakistan does not, of course, date only from its election to the Security Council. The Greek Government has followed the successive stages in the development of the question of Jammu and Kashmir, now with anxiety, now with hope, but always with keen and friendly sympathy. It has never lost its confidence in the wisdom of the two parties directly concerned. That is why I have read the two reports [S/2375, S/2448] submitted by the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan with great care, and why I listened with interest to his brilliant statement [570th meeting).
As was so eloquently said at yesterday's meeting, Pakistan and India are two highly important factors in the progress and civilization, not only of the continent of Asia, but of the whole world. May I add in this connection that it is only through fraternal collaboration that these two nations, descended from an ancient and noble common civilization, will be able to discharge fully the great responsibility which has been placed upon them. The fact that not only the outstanding leaders but also enlightened public opinion in the two States which comprise the sub-continent are fully aware of that supreme necessity, gives us confidence that the question before us will find a solution, and reason for hope in the future of Asian affairs. As the Netherlands representative so rightly said yesterday, the leaders of Pakistan and of India fully realise that the key question in the differences between them is the question of security. It is, I believe, the problem of security which dominates the scene, over and above all questions relating to the withdrawal of troops, the induction of the Plebiscite Administrator or the setting of the date for the plebiscite, Both the Karachi Government and the New Delhi Government know well that there can be no security without their fraternal agreement, and consequently they are resolved to reach such agreement.
That is why the anxiety felt by the friends of those two nations, indeed by the entire civilised world, during the first stages of the dispute is more and more giving way to feelings of hope. Only yesterday the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan told us with his customary calm confidence that his Government is convinced there can be no real solution of the question of Kashmir and Jammu save through friendly negotiations. I am sure that the Indian representative's speech will show the same spirit, and that he too will assure us of his Government's firm resolve to follow the same road.
May I pay sincere tribute to Sir Mohammad Zafrulla Khan for the constructive spirit, the sense of responsibility and the extreme moderation which he has once again shown. I am confident, I repeat, that the representative of India will follow. in his footsteps.
It is only right that I should associate in this tribute the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan, who has achieved such practical results in his brief mission. Mr. Graham has succeeded, thanks to his patience, tact and understanding for everything human, in removing several points of difference he therefore well merits the Security Council's confidence. It is therefore our duty to uphold Mr. Graham's mission, strengthened by the fact of the support which the two parties directly concerned will continue to give him.
The Greek delegation unreservedly subscribes to the proposal made by the United Kingdom representative to permit Mr. Graham to continue his efforts for some weeks further, perhaps without fixing any date, as our Chinese colleague has just suggested.
I will even go further. I believe that we have no right to suspend an undertaking which started under such favourable auspices and which has already borne fruit. The possibility of terminating Mr. Graham's mission could only have been contemplated if the two parties directly concerned had expressed that desire or if Mr. Graham himself had told us that it could no longer produce any useful results. Fortunately, precisely the reverse happened. India and Pakistan recognize the advantages resulting from Mr. Graham's intervention. The result is that the United Nations Representative was in a position to state, in his second report, that agreement had been reached upon four further points of his demilitarisation proposals. Consequently, we have no right to terminate a mission which made a good start and continues to have every chance of reaching settlement on the four points still pending.
I even consider such a prolongation perfectly natural and I believe it should not be hampered by a too rigidly delimited mandate. I think it would be enough for us to outline the mandate and to leave its fulfilment to the parties concerned, the course of events and Mr. Graham's wisdom. So long as the final aim is the organisation of a popular plebiscite, there can be no misunderstanding. Let us leave it to the main protagonists, with Mr. Graham's help, to arrange the conditions for the demilitarisation that will make it possible to fix the date which we hope and believe will not be far distant-of the induction of the Plebiscite Administrator and the date of the plebiscite itself Although in the last resort the settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir question is a matter for the people of that State, India and Pakistan have a supremely important part to play therein and the United Nations a useful mission to perform.