Text of the Speech made by Sir Pierson Dixon (United Kingdom) in the Security Council Meeting No. 765 held on 24 January 1957

Text of the Speech made by Sir Pierson Dixon (United Kingdom) in the Security Council Meeting No. 765 held on 24 January 1957

It is a matter of very deep regret to my Government that the Security Council should have to be dealing once more with the Kashmir dispute. There is the closest relationship between my country and all the peoples of the sub-continent-if I may use a term which, I agree with the representative of India, is not a very elegant one. Ties of history, of sentiment and, as we firmly believe, of interest also, link our small island kingdom with every part of that vast section of Asia. We are proud of our part in the constitutional development of the Commonwealth. We like to think that, in a period which is past, we contributed not a little of our own to the inheritance of the age-long civilizations of that part of the world. There is much that we have learnt in return.

In the past, as the present, our constitutional relations with the various parts of this area have differed, but our good will to every part of it remains the same.

I should like to take this opportunity of expressing my gratification at the generous remarks that have been made in the course of this debate about the attitude of my Government and of the role played by many of my countrymen during the difficult and anxious period of travail that gave birth to the India and Pakistan of today. Only the voice of envy would, I think, deny that the Englishmen, the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish-for, on a small scale, we too have our diversity all those who served the Crown in the old imperial India and in the transitional period came to feel a deep devotion to the peoples among whom they passed their lives and gave of their best.

In the altered circumstances of today those feelings persist. From the bottom of our hearts we wish well to the peoples of India and Pakistan. They are partners with us, and with many others, in a community which rises above differences of race or creed and which is, I think, unique not only in the present world, but in world history. Everything that unites these two countries gives us deep satisfaction, anything that divides them causes us deep concern.

Unhappily, today the Security Council is dealing with a problem that does deeply divides these two countries. That the difference is a deep one and that it has caused the strongest emotional reactions on both sides, it would be useless to deny. It is, therefore, the desire of my Government, as it is certainly the duty of the Security Council, to proceed in this matter with the greatest prudence and foresight Under the United Nations Charter, the Security Council is charged with primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security on behalf of the Members of the United Nations as a whole. I am sure that the Council will do its best to act in the spirit of the great responsibilities which it bears.

I shall have more to say at a later stage of the proceedings about many of the matters of substance touched upon in the statements of the Foreign Minister of Pakistan and the representative of India. At this stage, however, I propose to limit myself to the subject matter covered by the draft resolution which my delegation has joined in sponsoring [S/3778]. This particular matter has, of course, been considered by the Council before.

The Constituent Assembly was established in Srinagar in 1951. As Mr. Krishna Menon pointed out yesterday, its primary task was to promote the processes of self-government in Kashmir territory. That is not a matter which in itself comes within the jurisdiction of the Security Council, and my Government, for one, of course, welcomes any step towards the development of democratic processes in Kashmir as elsewhere; but when its attention was called to the matter in 1951, the Security Council could not fail to take note of the reports that one of the functions of this Constituent Assembly would be a decision on the future shape and affiliation of Kashmir.

The Council was naturally concerned that nothing done in Kashmir should prejudice a settlement of the whole issue in accordance with the principle that had been the basis of its consideration of the matter since 1948, that is to say, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir should be made in accordance with the wish of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

What action did the Council then take ? It did not seek to interference with the processes of democratic development in Kashmir, but it affirmed a quite simple proposition that the convening of the Constituent Assembly and any action that it might take would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the principle to which I have just referred.

The Council was assisted in its task at that time by the explicit assurances at various stages of the proceedings by the representatives of the Government of India. In particular, on 9 March 1951, Sir Benegal Rau had this to say:

"Will that assembly decide the question of accession ? My Government's view is that, while the constituent assembly may, if it so desires, express an opinion on this question, it can take no decision on it." [536th meeting, para. 23.)

Then, after the resolutions had been passed, Mr. Dayal on 29 may 1951 reiterated this assurance and said something else, which I should also like to quote: "...I reaffirm that so far as the Government of India is concerned, the constituent assembly for Kashmir is not intended to prejudice the issue before the Security Council or to come in its way." [548th meeting, para. 40.]

The position thus was quite clear, and I now turn very briefly to what has happened since. If I understood Mr. Menon correctly when he spoke yesterday, [763rd meeting, paras. 135 ff.], he said that the Constituent Assembly for Kashmir had passed a Constitution, some of the clauses of which came into effect automatically on 17 November 1956, and others will come into effect on 26 January next. In particular, Mr. Menon referred to section 3 of the Constitution as already being in effect, and that section, I believe, states that the "State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India". In these circumstances it is surely quite natural that the Government of Pakistan should seek some reassurance as to the views of the Security Council.

If I understood Mr. Menon correctly yesterday, he said that the constitution for Kashmir which we are considering is that of "a sub-sovereign body" [Ibid., para. 136]. This is, I take it, another way of making the point made by Sir Benegal Rau in 1951 when he told the Security Council that as regards the question of accession the Constituent Assembly can take no decision on the matter.

This, then, appears to be the position today, as it was in 1951. The Security Council, in dealing with this limited question, has before it therefore the same considerations as it had in 1951. In these circumstances there appears to be no reason at all to modify the simple proposition set out in certain parts of the Security Council resolution of 30 March 1951 [S/2017/ Rev. 1] to which I have previously referred.

In view of the expressed anxiety of the Pakistan representative on this score, it seems to me reasonable for the Security Council to consider a short draft resolution which re-affirms the clear stand it took in 1941. It is for that reason that the United Kingdom joined in sponsoring the draft resolution before the Security Council.

My colleague from India complained this morning that the draft resolution had been circulated before he had completed his speech. Perhaps I should say, as one of the sponsors, that I had taken the statement we listened to yesterday afternoon as a clear exposition of the Indian position on the particular aspect of the Kashmir problem with which the draft resolution deals, that is, the point relating to this constitutional issue. There is, of course, a special reason for expedition in connection with this particular point, since the other party to the dispute, the Government of Pakistan, has expressed concern lest some step might be taken in the very near future, that is, on 26 January. For the practical purpose of our discussions here in New York, this date may in fact partially be considered as 25 January, since New York is eleven to twelve hours behind. Delhi and Karachi in time. It is evident, therefore, that time. is very short if some reassurance is to be given.

There are, of course, other matters of the greatest importance referred to in the speeches of the representatives of Pakistan and India. These matters are before the Security. Council, and they are matters which require full and most careful consideration. It is for this reason that it seems wise to include operative paragraph 2 in the draft resolution, and I would wish to return to these questions at that later stage.