sign in sign up
<<
Home , Hyderabad, July 1948, Nizam of Hyderabad, September 1948

Part il. Question of the Free Territory of Trieste 353

the Committee of Experts with the task of obtaining abstentions, and 1 member not participating in the further testimonial evidence. voting.6s4 - The Czechoslovak question remained on the list of matters of which the Security Council is seized. THE HYDERARAD QUESTION INITIAL PROCEEDINGS

THE QUESTION OF THE FREE TERRITORY OF By cablegram dated 21 ,585Hyderabad TRIESTE informed the Security Council, under Article 35 (Z), that a grave dispute had arisen between Letter dated 28 from the representa- and , which, unless settled in accordance with tive of Yugoslavia to the Secretary-General international law and justice, was likely to endanger transmitting a Note from the Government of the maintenance of international peace and security. the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia concerning the Free Territory of Trieste (S/ The letter stated that “Hyderabad, a State not a Mem- ber of the United Nations, accepts for the purposes of 927 ) the dispute the obligations of pacific settlement pro- Ih-ITIM, SROCEEDINGS vided in the Charter of the United Nations”. By sub- By letter dated 28 July 1948, Yugoslavia brought to sequent communications dated 12 and 13 September, the attention of the Security Council the “consistent Hyderabad informed the Council of the imminence acts of violations of the clauses of the Treaty of Peace and subsequently of the occurrence of invasion.586 with Italy regarding the Free Territory of Trieste on At the 357th meeting on 16 , the the part of the Allied Military Command”;577by which Security Council included the question in the agenda.s87 “a situation is created likely to endanger the mainten- The Security Council considered the question, or ance of international peace and security”, and re- made reference to it, at its 357th, 359th, 360th, 382nd, quested the Council “to assure the respect by the 383rd, 38&h, 425th and 426th meetings between 16 Governments of the United States of America and September 1948 and 24 . the United Kingdom of their international obligations, At the 357th meeting on 16 September 1948, the thus guaranteeing the independence of the Free Terri- representative of Hyderahad” urged that the situation tory of Trieste”.578 demanded immediate action by the Security Council, At the 344th meeting on 4 August 1948 the Security not only under Chapter VI of the Charter, but also Council included the question in the agenda.579 under Articles 39 and 40.58s The Security Council considered the question at its By cablegram dated 22 September 1948j8” the C 344th to 346th, 34&h, 350th, 353rd and 354th meet- informed the Secretary-General ings between 4 August and 19 August 1948. that he had withdrawn the complaint, and that the Derisions of I9 Aztgzcst 1948 (354th meeting): Rejec- delegation to the Security Council, which had been sent tion of draft resollrtions submitted by the represen- at the instance of his former Ministry, had ceased to tatices of Yugoslazia and the Ukrainian SSR have any authority to represent him or his State. At the 344th meeting on 4 August 1948, the repre- At the 359th and 360th meetings on 20 and 28 sentative of the United States stated that the charges September 1948, discussion centered on three ques- made by the representative of Yugoslavia were “utterly tions: (a) the validity of the credentials of the Hydera- devoid of substance”.5S0 bad delegation; (b) whether the withdrawal of the At the 348th meeting on 13 August 1948, the repre case by the Nizam of Hyderabad had been made sentative of Yugoslavia submitted a draft resolution to voluntarily or under duress; and (c) what attitude declare that certain agreements concluded between the the Council should adopt if the State and Government Allied Military Command and the Republic of Italy of Hyderabad were to disappear completely. were “incompatible with the status of the Free Terri- By letter dated 6 ,5gothe head of the tory of Trieste” and to render them “null and void”.6B1 Indian delegation informed the Council that the com- At the 353rd meeting on 19 August 1948, the repre- plaint, “which Hyderabad never had the right to make, sentative of the Ukrainian SSR submitted a draft now stood expressly withdrawn”, and there existed no resolution that it was “urgently necessary to settle the longer any reason for his Government to maintain a question of the appointment of a of the Free delegation in for dealing with the question. Territory of Trieste”.5s2 At the resumption of the discussion during the At the 354th meeting on 19 August 1948, the draft 425th and 426th meetings held on 19 and 24 May resolution submitted by the representative of Yugo- 1949, the representative of Pakistan suggested that, slavia was rejected by two votes in favour, none with regard to the question of the competence of the against, with nine abstentions.bs3 Council to deal with the matter, an advisory opinion At the same meeting, the draft resolution submitted of the International Court of Justice under Article by the representative of the’ Ukrainian SSR was re- 96 of the Charter might be sought.5g1He further sug- jected by 4 votes in favour, none against, with 6 gested that, as a provisional measure envisaged under M5 S/986, O.R., 3rd year, Suppl. for Sept. 1948, p. 5. - ;; OK, 3rd par, Suppl. for Aug. 1948, p. 79. ‘@S/998, S/1000, 0.X., 3rd year, Suppl. for Sept. 1948. O.R., 3rd year, Suppl. for Aug. 1948, p. 84. pp. 6-7. “‘344th meeting : p. 1. 68’For consideration of the inclusion of the item in the w344th meeting: pp. 8-9. agenda, see chapter II, Case 33. m 348th meeting : p. 14. M 357th meeting : pp. 12-13. =‘353rd meeting: pp. 18-19. 65DS/1011, OX., 3rd year, SuppI. for Sept. 1948, p. 7. w 354th meeting : p. 36. GM S/lOS9, 3SZnd meeting : pp. 27-25. w354th meeting: p. 37. ‘“’ 426th meeting : pp. 28-30.

-. -...--___ _ ._- _ 354 Chapter VIII. Maintenance - of international peace and security

Article 40 of the Charter, the Council might cause to other occupying Powers from exercising their legiti- be ordered a general amnesty for certain persons and mate rights and discharging their legal and humani- organizations, and that a plebiscite be taken under the tarian responsibilities”. The three Powers had, there- guidance, supervision and control of the United Na- fore, brought the matter to the Security Council “as tions to decide whether Hyderabad should accede to a clear threat to the peace within the meaning of India or remain independent. Chapter VII of the Charter”. The Hyderabad question remained on the list of The representative of the USSR contended that matters of which the Security Council is seized.5Q2 the allegation “that the situation which had arisen in constituted a threat to peace and security, was IDENTIC NOTIFICATIONS DATED 29 SEPTEMBER 1948 without any foundation whatsoever” and that the allega- FROM THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE FRENCH REPUB- tion of a threat to the peace had been devised in order LIC, THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED to by-pass Article 107 and to make it appear that the STATES OF AMERICA Security Council was competent.596

INITIAL PROCEEDINGS Decision of 25 October 1948 (372nd meeting): Rejec- tion of draft resolution submitted by the representa- By identic notifications,sQ3 France, the United King- tives of Argentina, Belgiu~~t, Ca,nada, China, Colo~m- dom and the United States drew attention to the bia. and Syria serious situation which they considered had arisen as a result of the unilateral imposition by the Govern- At the 370th meeting on 22 October 1948, the repre- ment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of sentatives of Argentina, Belgium, , China, Cd- restrictions on transport and communications between ombia and Syria submitted a draft resolution5g7which, the Western Zones of Occupation in and citing Article 40 of the Charter, called upon the four Berlin. The notifications stated that this action was occupying Powers to prevent any incident of a nature not only in conflict with the rights of the British, to aggravate the situation in Berlin; “to put into French and the United States Governments, but was effect, simultaneously” the steps required for immedi- also contrary to the obligations of the Soviet Govern- ate removal of restrictions on transport and commerce ment under Article 2 of the Charter of the United and an immediate meeting of the four Military Gov- Nations, and created a threat to the peace within the ernors, to arrange for the unification of currency in meaning of Chapter VII of the Charter. The three Berlin; and thereafter to reopen the negotiations in the Governments further stated that the Government of Council of Fcreign Ministers on all outstanding prob- the USSR, by its illegal actions, had been attempting lems concerning Germany as a whole. to secure political objectives to which it was not en- At the 372nd meeting, on 25 October 1948, the titled and which it could not achieve by peaceful draft resolution was not adopted.6Q8There were 9 means. The Government of the USSR was considered votes in favour, and 2 against (1 vote against being responsible for creating a situation in which further that of a permanent member of the Council).600 recourse to the means of settlement prescribed in By letter dated 4 May 19449sooto the Secretary- Article 33 of the Charter was not possible in the General, the representatives of France, the United existing circumstances, and which constituted a threat Kingdom and the United States stated that their to international peace and security. Governments had concluded with the Government of After discussion at the 361st and 362nd meetings on the USSR an agreement on the question as indicated 4 and 5 October 1948, the Council included the ques- in a communiquP attached to the letter. tion in the agenda.6Q4 The question remained on the list of matter of After the adoption of the agenda, the representatives which the Security Council is seized. of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR stated that the COMPLAINT OF AGGRESSION UPON THE REPUBLIC decision represented a violation of Article 107 of the OF KOREA Charter and that they would not take part in the dis- cussion of the question. INITIAL PROCEEDINGS On 25 June 1950, the Deputy Representative of the The Council considered the question further at its United States transmitted to the Secretary-General 363rd, 36&h, 36&h, 368th, 370th and 372nd meetings a report from the United States Ambassador to the between 6 October and 25 October 1948.6Q5 Republic of Korea that North Korean forces had in- The representatives of France, the United Kingdom vaded the territory of the Republic of Korea at several and the United States contended that the restrictions points in the early morning hours of 2.5 June (Korean on transport and communications established by the time) .601 Government of the USSR in Berlin constituted, con- 698362nd meeting: p. 22 ; 364th meeting : p. 35. trary to its obligations under Article 2 (4) of the W S/1048, 370th meeting : pp. 5-6. Charter, recourse to “threat of force to prevent the m 372nd meeting : p. 14. 888On 30 the President of the Security COUP m For the retention of the question, see also chapter II, Case cil “in the exercise of his powers” instituted a Technical Com- 60. mittee’on Berlin Currency and Trade from experts nominated wS/1020 and Add.1, O.R., 3rd year, S@pl. for Oct. 1948, by neutral members of the Security Council to study, and pp. 9-45. make recommendations within thirty days upon, the establish- W362nd meeting: p. 21. For procedural discussion on inclu- ment of a single currency in Berlin (Press Release SC/908, sion in the agenda, see chapter II, Cases 23 and 34. Enclosure 1). On 27 the President of the m For statements regarding recourse to Article 33, see Council extended the life of the Committee which made public chapter X, Case 6; for the discussion regarding Article 107, its report on 15 (Press Release SC/908). see chapter XII, Case 30; for the invocation of Chapter VII “S/1316, O.R., 4th vear, Stcppl. for May 1949, pp. l-2. of the Charter, see chapter XI, Case 14. an S/1495, 473rd meeting: p. 1.

. ..-- -- _..I-