Whereas the Charter calls upon all members to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations: The General Assembly, desiring to promote the stability of international relations in the Far East, calls upon all states

"(1) to respect the political independence of China and to be guided by the principles of the Charter in their relations with China;

"(2) to respect the right of the people of China now and in the future to choose freely their political institutions and to maintain a government independent of foreign control;

"(3) to respect existing treaties relating to China; and

"(4) to refrain from (a) seeking to acquire sphere of influence or to create foreign-controlled regimes within the territory of China, (b) seeking to obtain special rights or privileges within the territory of China." [The following three paragraphs were underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Austin:]

The adoption of such a resolution as this cannot be expected to deal with and cure all of the difficulties inherent in the China question presented to the General Assembly. The resolution does, however, isolate and emphasize certain elements in this question which are of special concern to the United Nations. Those elements are: first, the maintenance of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of China; second, the right of the people of China to maintain political institutions free of foreign control; third, the observance in good faith of existing treaty obligations with respect to China; fourth, a ban on the establishment by foreign powers of spheres of influence or puppet regimes in the territory of China; and, fifth, a proscription of the acquisition of special rights or privileges which would give individual foreign powers an exclusive or monopolistic position.

I think there can be no doubt that these are matters on which the Assembly can pronounce and that such a pronouncement will not be futile. In our view, the provisions of the draft resolution represent the application to the China question of certain of the basic principles of the Charter. They represent the application to the particular situation in China of the "Essentials of Peace" resolution adopted last week by an overwhelming majority in this committee. They represent the traditional policy toward China of many members of the community of nations. They represent an earnest expression by the General Assembly of its concern for the welfare and security of the people of China.

I should like to reiterate that this resolution states principles which would naturally obtain the endorsement not only of the Chinese Government but also of the great body of the Chinese people and of any one else who has at heart the true interests of China. It is, moreover, a resolution to which all nations pledged to the Charter and to the rule of international law can adhere. Indeed a failure to endorse this resolution might well be interpreted as indicating an intention to profit by the present situation in China for purposes of imperialist aggrandizement. It cannot lightly be assumed that any member of the United Nations has such intentions, and I therefore confidently hope that this resolution will receive a unanimous vote in this committee and in the Assembly.

It may be said that it is disingenuous for my delegation to expect uananimous approval of this resolution in view of the fact that one member of the United Nations has been charged with violating the principles which it contains. On this point I should like to say that, if we have erred in our interpretation of the historical facts, we should rejoice to have that error established because our concern is with the welfare of China and the Chinese people and with the maintenance of the historical principles which have guided United States policy in the Far East for half a century. We do indeed hope that unanimous approval of this resolution may be forthcoming, and that after its adoption the conduct of all states in their relations with China will be governed by the principles contained in it.

[The following two paragraphs were underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Austin:]

China, we all must recognize, has experienced cruel hardships and bitter sufferings from the ravages of a world war which was thrust upon her in the course of her struggle since the days of the Chinese Empire to achieve security against foreign imperialism, the establishment of democratic political institutions, and economic and social advances in the life of the people of China. World War II was followed in China by devastating civil conflict which is even yet not ended. No state should be permitted to take advantage of these dis

turbed conditions for purposes of self-aggrandizement by detaching areas from the territory of China or by extending its control to dominate part or the whole of that country.

All of the United Nations are only too keenly aware of the efforts of the Japanese imperialists and militarists to extend their domination over China and the rest of the Far East. These attempts, which began in the nineteenth century, were pressed forward steadily and insidiously, to the point where at last they plunged Asia and ultimately the whole world into war. The United Nations must be alert to see that the domination of China by one totalitarian power has not been displaced only to make way for the subjugation of that country to any other imperialism. The common efforts of the United Nations in rescuing China and Japan from the grasp of imperialist and militarist power must not be nullified by acquiescence in new imperialist conquest by more subtle devices than outright war.

Our purpose in submitting the joint draft resolution is to show the specific application of certain basic principles of the United Nations Charter to the existing situation in China. If the United Nations can through this resolution help all the nations to follow and give effect to those accepted principles in relation to China, the organization will have made a notable contribution to the maintenance of general peace and to the efforts of the Chinese people to promote in China the growth of free institutions, social progress, and better standards of life in larger freedom.

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP, COMMITTEE I, DECEMBER 5, 1949

Mr. Chairman, I should like, first of all, to pay tribute to the spirit which obviously inspires the three delegations of Cuba, Ecuador, and Peru in tabling the draft resolution which has just been placed before us. It is quite clear from the resolution and from the statements of its sponsors that we have here a further indication of the spirit to which the distinguished representative of China, Dr. Tsiang, has just referred-a spirit of warm sympathy and friendship for China and for the people of China.

As the members of the Committee are aware, both from the statement which I have had the honor to make to the Committee on behalf of my Government and from the long history of the relations between America and the American people and China and the people of China, no nation has more sympathy, no nation has closer ties with China and the Chinese people than does the United States.

I was not aware that a proposal of this kind would be placed before us this morning but at the same time I should like to point out that the delegations which have sponsored the joint resolution, which is also before us, have carefully considered this whole matter which is before the committee, both in the original drafting of their resolution and in subsequent consideration of it in the light of the debates in this Committee.

The proposal contained in this new joint resolution, sponsored jointly by Cuba, Ecuador, and Peru, is not an idea which has escaped our attention. I think I may say for all of the sponsors, but I will speak only for myself, that we did not feel that the reference of this matter to the Interim Committee would provide a new basis for a final attitude of the members of the General Assembly in regard to action upon this case.

It is true, Mr. Chairman, that the statement which was laid before us on November 25 by Dr. Tsiang on behalf of the Government of China was a very long and detailed statement containing many points. That statement was made ten days ago and has been before the members of the Committee. It is natural that many members of the Committee should feel that it was a statement requiring careful study, but it is also true, Mr. Chairman, as I think all member of the Committee will recall, that as the days have gone by in our discussions since this statement was laid before us on November 25, that it has not been a question of particular analysis of details in that statement which has concerned the attention of the Committee. I think we have all been concerned with trying to find the appropriate action which could be taken by the General Assembly at this session on this very important and serious case which is now before us.

I also feel ill at ease, Mr. Chairman, in expressing any difference of opinion, especially on a juridical matter, with my distinguished friend, the leader of the delegation of Peru. But in this case, I must with due deference suggest that the joint resolution which my delegation joined in sponsoring does not

constitute a judgment of acquittal on the charges against the Soviet Union which have been placed before this Committee by the delegation of China. I venture to suggest that the joint resolution is a proper expression of the attitude which the Assembly should take, having in mind the interests of China and of the Chinese people in their present and maybe in future difficulties.

I have noted, Mr. Chairman, in the comments which have been made to us this morning on behalf of the resolution which has just been tabled a number of points to which I should like to refer very briefly.

Attention was called, as Dr. Tsiang pointed out, by the distinguished representative of Ecuador to the question of Greece which has engaged in the past and at present the attention of the General Assembly. If I understood correctly, he suggested that perhaps some of the great powers did not attach to the situation in China and the Far East the same importance which it attaches to situations in other parts of the world.

I submit, Mr. Chairman, that no one who is familiar with the history of the United States, in particular with its relations to the Far East or with the position of my Government in regard to the great issues which confront the world today, should have the slightest doubt of the importance which my Government attaches to the situation in China and in Asia as a whole.

I noted also Mr. Chairman, that in some of the statements made on behalf of the sponsors of this resolution, particularly in the comments of the distinguished representatives of Cuba and Peru, there were references to the moral basis of this question which confronts us. The distinguished representative of Cuba referred to our interest in the suffering of the Chinese people. Again I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the United States and the American people have given through their acts complete proof of their sympathy with the suffering of the Chinese people and have demonstrated by their acts the tangible and material aid which has been extended to the people of China in attempts to alleviate their suffering.

The distinguished representative of Peru has referred to the high moral basis which underlies the joint resolution which my Government joined in sponsoring and which is before this Committee. I submit that that resolution has a high moral basis. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that it represents an attitude on the part of the sponsoring delegations and I hope on the part of many delegations represented here, and an attempt to approach this subject in a spirit of sympathy with China and the Chinese people, and in a spirit of discharging the obligations of the General Assembly as confronted with this question.

I have already indicated, Mr. Chairman, that the essential nature of the suggestion contained in this resolution, which has now been laid before us by the delegations of Cuba, Ecuador, and Peru, while new in the sense of attention laid before the Committee, is not wholly new in the sense of a possible action by this Committee upon this case. In our deliberations concerning the formulation of a proposal to lay before this Committee, we have felt, as we have all stated hitherto to the Committee, that our approach constituted the approach which seemed to us wisest and most effective.

[The following paragraph was underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Aus tin:]

THEREFORE, MR. CHAIRMAN, MY DELEGATION STILL MAINTAINS ITS PREFERENCE FOR THE JOINT RESOLUTION WHICH HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND DOES NOT FAVOR THE NEW PROPOSAL WHICH HAS NOW BEEN LAID BEFORE US.

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP, COMMITTEE I, DECEMBER 6, 1949

Mr. CHAIRMAN: As the distinguished representative of the Philippine delegation has just stated, the five powers which sponsored the resolution, which bears the document number 552, on the promotion of the stability of international relations in the Far East, have discussed the ideas which he has now laid before the Committee in an amendment to the resolution submitted yesterday by the delegations of Cuba, Ecuador, and Peru.

I ventured to point out yesterday, Mr. Chairman, that the cosponsors of the other resolution-namely, Australia, Mexico, Pakistan, the Philippines and the United States-had tried constantly to keep under review among themselves their preliminary examination of all possible satisfactory approaches to a solntion of the problem which now confronts the Committee.

I should like to say, Mr. Chairman, that I endorse and agree with the very clear and eloquent statements which have been made by the distinguished representative of the Philippines in presenting his proposed amendment to the three-power draft resolution. I should like to emphasize one or two points which he brought out.

Earlier discussion yesterday of the resolution submitted by the delegations of Cuba, Ecuador, and Peru brought out that there were differences of opinion in the Committee as to the relationship between that resolution and the earlier five power resolution. I agree with the distinguished Representative of China that the very clear statement made by Dr. Arce, the distinguished leader of the Argentine delegation, has pointed out what seemed to us to be true: namely, that the two resolutions were not inconsistent.

However, a difference of opinion did exist in the Committee, and I think that difference of opinion arose from the fact that there was no linking of the two suggestions. The Philippine amendment which has just been read to the Committee does provide a link between the two proposals. It does evaluate the question of continuing study in the interim committee to the point which we have felt was so importaint in the resolution tabled by the five delegations: namely, that there should be a clear ringing statement by the Assembly of the principles which are to govern the conduct of states in their relationships to China.

Those principles, Mr. Chairman, are continuing principles, principles of continuing application. We hope that violations of them would not occur but violations of them might occur. Unfortunately, the conduct of the Soviet Union in the past has led many delegations to fear that further violations would

occur.

We think, therefore, that this amendment, which would show the relationship between the application of these principles and the further consideration of the matter in an organ of the United Nations, is a solution which we could support and which we will support.

I would like to suggest another point, Mr. Chairman, and it is a point to which other delegations and not my own delegation have called attention to on a number of occasions. We are confronted with a serious situation in China and in Asia as a whole. No one has doubted that. It is important, Mr. Chairman, that when the General Assembly of the United Nations speaks on this question it should speak with a united voice. There are no great differences among us in our devotion to the principles laid down in the five-power joint resolution. There is no difference among us in our desire to be of assistance to China and the people of China.

I would like to add my word to that of the distinguished representative of the Philippines to plead with members of the committee to see if we cannot draw our ideas together so that we will speak with one voice, and I believe, if that voice follows the line of adopting the five-power resolution and this amendment of the three-power resolution, that the Assembly will have acquitted itself well in its dealing with this item before us.

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR JESSUP, FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY, DECEMBER

7, 1949

Mr. President, one thing which stood out clearly in the debates in the Political Committee on the item which now engages our attention was the strong friendship of the overwhelming majority of nations for China and their concern for its welfare and for the welfare of the people of China. Those debates revealed also the determination of an overwhelming majority of the delegations represented, as shown in the adoption of the resolution on the promotion of the stability of international relations in the Far East, to do their part to maintain China's integrity and independence.

[The following paragraph was underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Austin:]

In sharp contrast to that attitude of the vast number, the vast majority of the delegations in the First Committee, was the attitude of the delegation of the Soviet Union and of the small group of delegations following its lead. The attitude of those delegations was the direct opposite of that which I have described. That attitude strengthens the justified suspicion of other nations regarding the Soviet policies and intentions towards China. That attitude revealed especially two things: First, a callous disregard for the interests of China and of

the Chinese people; and, second, a renewed indication of the most regrettable Soviet unwillingness to cooperate in the work of the United Nations to carry into effect the principles of our Charter.

I think it appropriate to review the actions of the delegation of the Soviet Union on this item which we are now considering. The first action which they took was to oppose placing this item on the agenda, thus seeking to deprive the General Assembly of an opportunity to discuss the matter.

[The following four paragraphs were underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Austin:]

The second action which they have repeated today was an attempt to deny the right of the duly accredited representative of China to speak in the General Assembly.

I think it has been the experience of all of us that the delegation of the Soviet Union is not unaware of the existence of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, and they have on frequent occasions invoked those rules. If they had chosen on this occasion to abide by our rules of procedure, they would have found in rule 25 the exact way in which this point might have been raised in a regular fashion. They would have found in rule 25 that any representative to whose admission a member has made objections shall be seated provisionally with the same rights as other representatives until the credentials committee has reported and the General Assembly has given its decision. The Soviet Union did not choose to follow the procedure laid down in our rules.

In the third place, Mr. President, the Soviet Union has failed to respond to the expressed willingness of the Chinese delegation to refer certain questions involved in this case to the International Court of Justice.

In the fourth place, the Soviet Union refused to participate in the debates in the first committee and this afternoon has said it refuses to participate in the debates in this session of the General Assembly.

Now, Mr. President, I claim no special virtue for the policy of my Government, but I cite the examples as the normal attitude of most members of the United Nations. I refer to the question of willingness to discuss items on the agenda. The Soviet Union placed on the agenda an item containing slanderous attacks upon the United Kingdom, and upon the United States. Those attacks, the charges made therein, were repudiated by a vote of 53 members of this Assembly after full discussion, but in the first instance, Mr. President, when we were asked to consider placing this item on the agenda, our delegation and the delegation of the United Kingdom made no objection to the consideration of these items because we believe that this is the forum in which charges, no matter how unfounded, should be discussed.

I would say also, Mr. President, that my Government has not been afraid to have the record of United States policy in China in recent years examined by the world. The official United States publication telling this story was referred to by Mr. Vishinsky himself, who stated that its frankness must be admired. If the Soviet Union admires frankness and open discussion of national policies, why does it not practice frankness?

Why does it not publish or produce before the General Assembly the text of the barter agreement which the distinguished representative of China reported that it had concluded with the local authorities in Manchuria, an agreement under which the Soviet Union sought an arrangement to take away from the people of China the food and other products of Manchuria which are essential to Chinese recovery?

Why does it not publish or produce before the General Assembly the text of the reported monopolistic agreement which it has concluded for the exploitation of the resources of Manchuria?

Why does it not publish or produce before this Assembly the text of the reported agreement by which it seeks to control for 50 years the monopolistic exploitation of the natural resources of Sinkiang?

Why does it not publish or lay before us the record of any other such agree ments for special rights and privileges which it may now be seeking to obtain or which it has already obtained in China?

[The following five paragraphs were underlined for emphasis by Ambassador Austin:]

If the Soviet Union had not been afraid to publish the facts concerning its policies and practices in the Far East, we could have had a basis on which to decide whether or not we are mistaken in our well-founded conclusions that the Soviet Russian policy in China today is part of a continuous story, a story which began in the days of Czarist Russian imperialism and which still is characterized