SECURITY q/4259 CQUNCiL 22 January 1960 ORIGINAL: XEZLISH

LET'BR DATED 22 JANUARY 1960 FRCM 'I'HF: ACTING PERi?!NT P;EPRESENTATIVEOF PAKISTAN ADDRESSEDTO TFiZ FRESIl%NT .OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL

I am instructed by the Government of Pakistan to refer to the letter addressed by the Permanent RepresentEative of India to the President of the Security CouncS-1 on 12 October 1959. 2. It appears from this correspondence that the practice has become habitual

with the Government of In&ia to aF&ver every question, and attempt to meet every objection, about their actions regarding Kashmir by making a general statement 'which, in itself, is completely baseless. To refute a statement of this character is merely ts cite the rudimentary facts of the Kashmir dispute, as known and realized by the United Nations and the world community in general. Since the Government of India shows itself as impervious to all arguments, it is necessary here only to make a statement of a basic position. It is:' (i) Jammu and Kashmir is not, and never has been, in point of human, moral or legal fact, a constituent state of the Indian Vnion. It is a territory in dispute, whose disposition shall be determined only by the will of its own people to be ascertained in a free and impartial manner and without any coercion. (ii) The resolutions of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan were framed, not on the basis of InAials complaint against any alleged aggression, but with regard to the situation in Jammu and Kashmir and to the legitimate rights and interests involved therein. These resolutions clearly preclude any move by either party which has the effect of prejudicing the self-determination of the people of Jammu and Kashmir themselves.

60 -01726 / . . . s/4259 English Pap 2

(iii} The acceptance of these resolutions by both India and Pakistan was unconditional and unreserved. Any assurances given to one party and not accepted by the other and any assurances not specifically

written into the text of the resolutions are, therefore, at best extraneous to the international agreement and cannot in any way detract from its force. No such assurances can therefore be invoked to justify the evasion of the obligations clearly imposed upon the parties by these jointly accepted resolutions. (iv> As regards the military forces of the two sides, a number of proposals formulated to effect the demilitarizction of the state have been accepted by Fakistan and rejected by India. It is, therefore, the Government of India which alone bears the responsibility of obstructing the withdrawal of forces from the state of Jammuand Kashmir so that the territory in question vould be demilitarixed and an impartial plebiscite held. It is an established fact that the resolutions of the UNCIF envisaged the withdrawal of forces on the two sides to be so arranged and synchronised as not to place either side at a disadvantage. The only concession made to India was that she was allowed to retain some residual forces in that area of Jammuand Kashmir which is occupied by her so as to ensure the observance of law and the maintenance of security during the transitional stage. In any case, there was no question of any vacation of aggression or even of any withdrawal of forces by only one side and not by the other. (v) Any move madeby the Governmentof India, by whatever manner of means, which has the effect of integrating any part of Jammuand Kashmir with the administrative, economic, judicial or political set-up of India itself is a contravention of India's commitment that she shall enable the people of Jarrmuand Kashmir to give their unfettered verdict \:hether or not they wish to remain a part of India or to join Pakistan.

/ . . . . s/425g , b X&@3h Page 3

3* These are the elementary facts of the situation with respect to Jammu and KasNr and they are being cited in this correspondence only because the Government of India seem unable to appreciate the grounds or implioationo of our objections to the moves made by them. It mtlst be repeated that these moves are not even remotely of a democratic characttirand that they lack all semblance of normalcy. T’ne so-called “Government of the constituent state” is not a legally constituted Government but a puppet regime sustained only by India’s overwhelming military presence in Kasbxnir , Any request emanating from the clique installed in authority by India cannot be quoted in justification of 1 . . any move which involves a breach, in graater or less degree, of India’s internatLonai commitment. 4. I request that this communication may kindly be circulated ars a Security Council document and brought to the notice of the members of the Security Council * 5* Please accept, etc.

(Signed)---- RXAZ PIRACHA . . Acting Permanent Representative of ?akistan to the United Nat:;lons

..““W_