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 Berlin 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, Canada, China, Cd- restrictions on transport and communications between ombia and Syria submitted a draft resolution5g7which, the Western Zones of Occupation in Germany 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.6Q8 There 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 November 1948 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 December 1948 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 March 1949 (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- Part II. Complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea 355 At the 473rd meeting on the same day, the mes- independence and unity of Korea; and the concern sage was included in the agenda under the title, “Com- expressed that the situation described by the United - plaint of Aggression upon the Republic of Korea”, Nations Commission on Korea in its report men- together with a cablegram from the United Nations aces the safety and well-being of the Republic of Commission on Korea concerning the same question.@Jz Korea and of the people of Korea and might lead In this cablegram the Commission, after describing the to open military conflict there; military situation in Korea, drew the attenticn of the “Noting with grave concern the armed attack Secretary-General to the “serious situation developing upon the Republic of Korea by forces from North which is assuming character of full-scale war and may Korea, endanger the maintenance of international peace and security”. “Determines that this action constitutes a breach of the peacr, The question was considered at the 471rd to 490th 492nd to 497th, 502nd to 50&h, 518th to 521st and “I. Calls for the immediate cessation of hostili- 523rd to 531st meetings between 25 June 1956 and ties; and 31 January 19.51. “Calls upon the authorities of North Korea to At the 525th to 530th meetings, the question was withdraw forthwith their armed forces to the 38th discussed jointly with the “Complaint of Armed Inva- parallel ; sion of Taiwan (Formosa)“. “II. Requests the United Nations Commission on Korea Decision of 25 June 1950 (473rd meeting): Deter- mining the action by North Korean forces a breach “(a) To communicate its fully considered recom- of the peace, and calling for immediate cessation of mendations on the situation with the least possible kostilities delay ; At the 473rd meeting on 25 June 1950, the Secre- “(b) To observe the withdrawal of North Korean forces to the 38th parallel ; and tary-General stated603 that the report he had received from the Commission, as well as reports from other “(c) To keep the Security Council informed on sources in Korea, made it plain that military actions the execution of this resolution; had been undertaken by North Korean forces. These “III. Calls upon all Members to render every actions were “a direct violation” of General Assembly assistance to the United Nations in the execution resolution 293 (IV) of 21 October 1949, “as well as of this resolution and to refrain from giving assist- -- a violation of the principles of the Charter”, ance to the North Korean authorities.” At the same meeting the representative of the United States submitted a draft resolutionRo4 which, as Decision of 2.5 June 1950 (473rd meetmg): Rejection amended after consultations among some of the repre- of draft resolution submitted by the representative sentatives,sOfiwas voted upon in parts and finally adopted 0 f Yugoslavia as a whole by 9 votes in favour with 1 abstention, At the 473rd meeting on 25 June 1950, the repre- one member of the Council being absent.s0B sentative of Yugoslavia submitted a draft resolutionsoB The resolution read as follows:so7 to call for an immediate cessation of hostilities and withdrawal of forces, and to invite the