Delegates of the Soviet Union and Chinese People's Republic clashed again in the Security Council yesterday (Wednesday).
Delegates of the Soviet Union and Chinese People's Republic clashed again in the Security Council yesterday (Wednesday). The cause of Contention this time was a Polish resolution calling for the transfer of East Pakistan to the elected "representatives of the people" and an immediate ceasefire in the Indo-Pakistan fighting.
Chinese Ambassador Huang Hua once again denounced Indian "aggression", and complained that the new Polish resolution was a thinly-veiled Soviet plan to "dismember" Pakistan. Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister Jacob Malik retaliated that a lasting settlement could only be achieved by transferring power to the elected representatives of the people in East Pakistan.
Long sections of both speeches--in Chinese and russian--are included in this coverage. A rough translation is provided on the commentary page. By the end of the Security Council session, in the early hours of this morning, there were no less than five ???solutions under discussion. In the meantime, India, victorious in the East Pakistan fighting and supported by the Soviet veto in the United Nation s, was reported unwilling to accept any Security Council resolution.
SYNOPSIS: In the U.N. Security Council, the debate over the Indo-Pakistan fighting continued on Wednesday:
Mr. Huang Hua, Ambassador of the Chinese People's Republic, bitterly rejected a Polish resolution calling for the transfer of power in East Pakistan to elected representation of the people and for a general ceasefire in the fighting. Mr. Huang said the resolution was a direct attempt to dismember Pakistan. Had Poland forgotten what it was like to be partitioned? he asked. And he went on to declare his belief that the resolution originated from the Soviet representatives, not the Pales. PAUSE. Mr. Huang next turned to Britain and France. They had attempted to assume an attitude which is seemingly impartial, but which failed to distinguish between right and wrong concerning Soviet support for Indian aggression. This attempt at impartiality reminded Mr. Huang of the League of Nations during the Thirties. No matter what happened in the war, he went on, the Chinese people would continue to support Pakistan in their struggle against foreign intervention and aggression, and in their defence of national integrity and unity. Whatever reverses they might suffer, the Pakistanis were sure to achieve the final victory, added Mr. Huang.
The Indian delegates, having heard their policies condemned by the Chinese, were subsequently supported by their Soviet allies.
Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister Jacob Malik supported the Polish ceasefire plan. Such a ceasefire, he said, could only have lasting effect if coupled with a simultaneous political settlement in East Pakistan. The Security Council could be assured that the Indians would withdraw their troops if a similar Pakistan withdrawal was accompanied by the transfer of power to the representatives elected in last year a elections. It was also necessary for the ten-million East Pakistan refugees, now in India, to return to their own country. PAUSE. Earlier in his speech, he had accused the Chinese of failing to recognise the realities of the Indo-Pakistan conflict. He protested that neither Mr. Huang nor Pakistani Foreign Minister Ali Bhutto-who stormed out of this session of the council--had any interest in the millions of refugees or the hundreds-of-thousands of casualties. PAUSE. By the time the session was adjourned in the early hours of Thursday morning, the Security Council had a total of five resolutions before it. But India--victorious in the fighting in East Pakistan--was reportedly unwilling to accept any Security Council resolution on the conflict. And there was speculation that the whole debate on the conflict would be transferred back to the General Assembly, where there is no veto and where resolutions would stand a better chance of success.