No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Security Council
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 May 2009
Extract
On December 12, 1948, the Committee of Good Offices submitted a special report on the direct talks between the representatives of the governments of the Netherlands and the Republic of Indonesia which, together with its appendices, made available previously confidential documentation that had been the subject of Security Council discussion. Of special interest were the so-called Crichtley-DuBois Memorandum of June 10, 1948, and the Cochran Memorandum of November 10, 1948. In the former, the Australian and United States' representatives had submitted to both parties a working paper for the resolution of differences containing the following suggestions: 1) that the extent of the Republic's representation in the Provisional Federal Government be determined on the basis that Republican territory would include all those portions of Java, Sumatra and Madura in which, through a plebiscite, the population expressed a desire to be incorporated into the Republic; 2) that it would be possible to create a fairly representative Provisional Federal Government through machinery which would consist of a Joint Commission of Technical Experts to delineate boundaries of states; a Constituent Assembly elected upon the basis of one delegate for each 500,000 inhabitants and given power to accept the report of the Technical Commission making changes in proposed state boundaries only by majorities of both the Assembly and the delegates from the areas affected by changes; and a Provisional Parliament. The memorandum proposed that the powers of the Lieutenant Governor-General be limited, in the provisional period, to a veto over acts of the Provisional Federal Government which were contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or to the Union Statute and to the direction, after consultation with the provisional authorities, of the employment of federal armed forces in cases of civil conflicts which the provisional authorities were unable to control.
- Type
- International Organizations: Summary of Activities: I. United Nations
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The IO Foundation 1949
References
1 For previous summaries of the Indonesian question see International Organization, I, p. 77–78; II, p. 80–85, 297–299, 500–502; III, p. 86–88.
2 Document S/1117/Add.l, p. 46 and 96.
3 Ibid., p. 100f.
4 Ibid., p. 46f.
5 Ibid., p. 65f.
6 Ibid., p. 39f.
7 Documents S/1117.
8 Documents S/1129.
9 Ibid.
10 Document S/1138.
11 Document S/1129.
12 Document S/1129/Add.l.
13 Mr. Critchley, the Australian member, and Mr. Herremans, the Belgian member of the Committee of Good Offices, were in Kaliurang, in Republican territory, and were out of communication with Mr. Cochran from December 19 until late on December 21. At that time they reported occupation of Kaliurang by Dutch forces on December 21, several fatal shootings of unarmed civilians by advancing Netherlands troops, and endorsed the reports of Mr. Cochran and Mr. Cutts. Document S/1144.
14 Document S/1138.
15 Document S/P.V.388.
16 Document S/1142.
17 Document S/1145.
18 Document S/P.V.390.
19 Document S/1148.
20 Document S/1150 and the United Nations Bulletin, VI, p. 80.
21 Ibid.
22 Document S/P.V.393.
23 Ibid.
24 Document S/1158 and United Nations Bulletin, VI, p. 81.
25 Document S/1159 and ibid.
26 Document S/1160 and S/1162.
27 United Nations Bulletin, VI, p. 81Google Scholar.
28 Documents S/1189 and S/1193.
29 Documents S/1189 and S/1190. At about the snme time, Mr. van Royen, in a letter to the President of the Security Council, suggested that, to avoid duplication, confusion and misunderstanding, questions on the subject of direct discussion in the Security Council should not be simultaneously dealt with by the Committee of Good Offices and the Netherlands authorities in Indonesia. Document S/1180.
30 Document S/1189.
31 Documents S/1211 and S/1212.
32 Documents S/P.V.398 and S/P.V.400.
33 Document S/P.V.400.
34 Document S/P.V.402.
35 Ibid.
36 Document S/1219.
37 States attendint this conference, called by India, included Afghanistan, Australia, Burma, Ceylon, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen, with China, Nepal, New Zealand and Siam sending observers. For text of resolution on Indonesia adopted, see this issue, p. 389.
38 Document S/P.V.406. Belgium was not a Council member after January 1, 1949, but continned to participate in discussions on Indonesia.
39 United Nations Bulletin, VI, p. 268Google Scholar.
40 Document S/P.V.421. Editor's note: In connection with these debates, a New York Times report of January 31 from London may be of relevance. It was reported that the ministers of the five Western European Union powers had discussed the Indonesian question. The French and Belgian representatives assured the Netherlands of support, while Mr. Bevin, indicating his sympathy, was reported to have stated that the United Kingdom, under heavy economic debt to the United States, “had been put under heavy American pressure to go along with the United States on its Indonesian resolution in the Security Council.” New York Times, February 1, 1949.
41 Document S/1196. For previous summaries of Security Council discussions of this question, see International Organization, II, p. 299–306, 488–489, III, p. 108–110. For text of the commission's resolution, see this issue p. 392; for article on this subject by Josef Korbel, see this issue p. 278.
42 Ibid.
43 New York Times, March 22, 1949.
44 For previous summaries of the Palestine question, see International Organization, II, p. 306–311, 491–500; III, p. 91–98.
45 Document S/1152.
46 Document S/1169.
47 Document S/1187.
48 Documents S/1205, S/1209 and S/1225.
49 Document S/1227.
50 Document S/1284 and S/1284/Corr.1.
51 Document S/Corr.1.
52 Document S/P.V.386.
53 Document S/P.V.414.
54 See International Organization, III, p. 63–65.
55 Document S/P.V.384.
56 Document S/1238.
57 Document S/P.V.409.
58 Document S/1281.
59 Document S/P.V.410.
60 Document S/1246/Rev.1.
61 Document S/1248.
62 Document S/P.V.410.
63 Document S/642 and S/916/Add.1.
64 Document /P.V.415. For action by the Trusteeship Council on this question see this issue, p. 329.
65 Document S/P.V.422.
66 See International Organization, III, p. 88–90.
67 For text, see International Organization, III, p. 211.
68 Document AEC/P.V.17. The last two paragraphs were approved unanimously, the first by a vote 9 to 0 with the Soviet Union and Ukrainian SSR abstaining on the ground that the previous material had already been published and a working paper was unnecessary.
69 Document AEC/P.V.20.
70 Document AEC/37.
71 Document ACE/P.V.18.
72 Documents AEC/P.V.20 and ACE/P.V.21.