Text of the Speech made by Mr. Sobolev (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) in the Security Council Meeting No. 770 held on 18 February 1957
Text of the Speech made by Mr. Sobolev (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) in the Security Council Meeting No. 770 held on 18 February 1957
The Security Council has heard statements by the representatives of India and Pakistan, and by members of the Council, on the question of Kashmir. The Soviet Union's general position on this question was outlined in Council's meeting on 81 to 88]. at the Security 24 January [765th meeting, paras.
The Soviet Union's view, and its basic premise, is that the Kashmir question has in actual fact already been settled in essence by the people of Kashmir themselves, who consider their territory an integral part of the Republic of India. Having attained their rights as an autonomous States within the united family of Indian peoples, the people of Kashmir have assumed an active part in the peaceful constructive work in which the whole country is engaged, and have scored considerable successes in the field of economic, social, cultural and political development.
Some States, however, do not want to acknowledge the great changes which have come about in Kashmir in the last few years. They continue to foment an artificial huc and cry on the subject of the so-called "Kashmir question" in order to force the reconsideration of the decision taken by the people of Kashmir themselves. This hue and cry will in no way help to bring about the re-establishment of normal conditions in the area, and it is diametrically opposed to the vital interests both of the people of Kashmir and of the peoples of India and Pakistan The object of those who started this hue and cry is not to find a solution to the differences still outstanding between India and Pakistan, but rather to aggravate them. In fact, they are urging the Security Council along the same path, by calling on it to ignore the changes that have taken place in Kashmir and to try to force the solution of the Kashmir question into the Procrustean bed of the old resolutions.
The Security Council would be committing a serious mistake if it were to recommend any measures whatsoever without taking into account the extent to which they correspond to the true situation and the vital interests of the people of Kashmir.
The Security Council cannot ignore the facts which have been placed before it notably in the statement made by the representative of India. The facts show that in the many years that have passed since the Security Council adopted its resolutions on the holding of a plebiscite, the situation in Kashmir has changed considerably. We must not forget that the idea of a plebiscite in Kashmir now meets with the objections of one of the parties; that it has in fact been rejected by that party. At the present time, the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir, with outside interference in one form or another, as proposed by some members of the Security Council, can serve only to excite local conflicts and to complicate the international situation in the area. The task of the Security Council, however, is to strengthen peace and tranquillity in the area. In these circumstances, what useful purpose will be served by including in the Security Council resolution a clause providing for the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir ? Clearly, no purpose at all.
Nor, in our opinion, would there be any point in making a reference in the resolution to the Pakistan representative's proposal concerning the use of United Nations forces in the Kashmir region. The United Nations Charter provides clearly and unambiguously that United Nations armed forces can be used only to repel aggression and to restore international peace. The Charter of the United Nations makes. no provision for the use of armed forces for any other purpose. It goes without saying that the Charter does not provide for the use of United Nations forces to impose by force a plebiscite in any country. Thus, the introduction of a United Nations force into Kashmir would be completely at variance with the principles of the United Nations Charter and would be an outright insult to the national sentiments of the people of Kashmir.
That being so, the Soviet Union delegation will vote against the inclusion in the draft resolution of any provisions. which do not correspond to the true situation in the Kashmir area, which fail to take into account the vital interests of the people of Kashmir or which are at variance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.
The Soviet delegation would however be prepared to support proposals calling for the suspension for a certain time of the Council's consideration of the Kashmir question. During that time the members of the Council could study the documents which have accumulated, and the parties directly concerned could make a further effort to settle their differences by means of direct negotiation.
In the Soviet delegation's opinion, the parties are far from having exhausted all the possibilities for a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir question by means of bilateral negotiations, without outside intervention of any sort. Such a procedure would be fully in keeping with the principles of the United Nations Charter, as also with the interests of the people of Kashmir and of the people of India and Pakistan.
The sponsors of the draft resolution have told us that the purpose of the resolution is to try a new-and I would stress the word "new" approach to find a peaceful settlement of the differences between India and Pakistan in his new approach consists in requesting Mr Jarring, the President of the Security Council, to go to the area and examine with the Governments. of India and Pakistan the situation in Kashmir and possible means of settling the existing differences, If this is indeed the purpose of the draft resolution, there can be no objection to it. In that case, however, there is no need to tie Mr. Jarring's hands by proposals which, even at the stage of their discussion in the Security Council, have been objected to by one or other of the parties and we have heard such objections in the Security Council.
The representative of Colombia, Mr. Urrutia, had made a very interesting proposal here. If I understood him correctly, he proposes that the preamble to the draft resolution, with the exception of the first paragraph, should be deleted [768th meeting, para, 86]. The delegation of the Soviet Union supports this idea; however, it would be desirable to modify not only the preamble but also operative paragraph 1, by deleting from it. any proposals to which objections have been raised.
The delegation of the Soviet Union therefore presents the following amendments [S/3789] to the draft resolution submitted by Australia, Cuba, the United Kingdom and the United States [S/3787]:
"1. Replace the preamble by the following text :
"Having heard the statements of the representatives of the Governments of India and Pakistan." "2. Amend paragraph 1 of the operative part to read as follows:
"Requests the President of the Security Council, the representative of Sweden, to examine with the Governments of India and Pakistan the situation in respect of Jammu and Kashmir, and to consider the progress that can be made towards the settlement of the problem, bearing in mind the statements of the representatives of the Governments of India and Pakistan,"
"3. In paragraph 3 of the operative part delete the words: 'but not later than 15 April 1957'.
The last amendment is to delete the reference to a specific date for the presentation of the report. Mr. Jarring should be at liberty to present his report whenever he deems it appropriate.
These amendments are intended to remove from the draft resolution such provisions as have been objected to by one of the parties directly concerned, while retaining the nucleus of the proposal, as we understand it, namely, the request to the President of the Security Council to examine the situation in Kashmir with the Governments of India and Pakistan and to report to the Security Council.
The delegation of the Soviet Union hopes that these amendments will be accepted by the sponsors of the draft resolution and supported by the other members of the Security Council. The delegation of the Soviet Union is of course ready to discuss with the sponsors of the joint draft resolution the best way of including in it the idea underlying the Soviet amendments.