No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Security Council
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 May 2009
Extract
On July 31,1947, the Security Council began its discussion of the Indonesia question as the result of communications from two Members of the United Nations. India, under Article 35(1) of the Charter, contended that the “large scali military action against the Indonesian people” initiated by the Dutch endangered the maintenance of international peace under Article 34. Australia stated that the hostilities between the armed forces “of the Netherlands and of the Republic of Indonesia” constituted a breach of the peace under Article 39 and suggested that the Council should call upon the two governments to cease hostilities and commence arbitration in accordance with Article 17 of the Linggadjati Agreement signed by the two parties on March 25, 1947.
- Type
- International Organizations: Summary of Activities: I. The United Nations
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The IO Foundation 1948
References
1 Document S/447.
2 Document S/449. For text of the Linggadjati Agreement, see Document S/311.
3 Document S/P.V. 171. To support this view, it was later stated that the Indonesian Republic had been Invited to send repesentarives to the International Trade Organization discussions at Havana, and that the registration of the Linggadjati Agrees ment by the Netherlands under Article 102 of the Charter itself proved Indonesia's status as an independent state.
4 Document S/P.V. 172.
5 Document S/P.V. 173.
6 Documents S/466 and S/469.
7 Documents S/475.
8 Documents S/178.
9 Documents S/184.
10 Document S/P.V. 178.
11 For text, see International Organization I, p. 205.
12 Document S/P.V. 183.
13 Document s/P.V.184.
14 Ibid.
15 Document S/P.V. 185.
16 Document S/P.V. 187.
17 Document S/513.
18 Document S/512.
19 Document S/p.v. 193.
20 Document S/p.v. 194.
21 Document S/514.
22 Document S/P.V. 194.
23 Document S/P.V. 206.
24 Document S/P.V. 195.
25 Dutch advances had created spearheads between which were large Republican forces. The Republicans were ordered to cease hostilities but to resist attack. The Dutch drew a line between the points of the spearhead, resisted efforts to provision the by-passed Republican groups, and continued “police operations” between the spearheads on the ground that they were entitled to control the area around major holding points.
26 Document S/586.
27 Comment during this debate became as heated as previous exchanges on the Greek qnestion. This was particularly true of remarks between the Philippine (Eomulo) and Indian (Pillai) representatives and Mr. Van Kleffens (Netherlands).
28 Document S/P.V. 217.
29 Document S/P.V. 218.
30 Ibid.
31 For previous summaries of Security Council discussion of this matter see International Organization, I, pp. 84–90, 331–332, 494–503. For summary of Russian resolution, see p. 501–502.
32 Documents S/P.V. 174.
33 Documents S/P.V. 177.
34 Documents S/471.
35 Document S/P.V. 188.
36 Document S/P.V. 202.
37 Idid. For summary of subsequent action taken by the general Assembly on the Greek Question see this Issue, p. 59.
38 Document S/410.
39 Document S/P.V. 175.
40 Document S/P.V. 176.
41 Document S/P.V. 179.
42 Document S/P.V. 189.
43 Ibid.
44 Document S/P.V. 198.
45 Editor's Note. Mr. Lopez, who had indicated his general approval of the Brazilian resolution in the preliminary discussions, was subjected to some criticism both for introducing his resolution at the last moment and for abstaining from a vote on the Braresolution since his abstention made the difference between approval and disapprovnl of the motion.
46 Document S/P.V. 198.
17 Document S/P.V. 201.
48 The summary records of the committee sessions appear as Documents S/C.2/SR. 15 through S/C.2/SR.23. The report of the committee appears as Document S/479. For previous summaries of the admission of new members, see International Organization I, p. 51–2, 90–94, 503–504. As the result of pressure from the Australian representative (Hodgson), meetings of the committee in 1947 were open to the press. For Assembly action on admissions, see this issue, p. 63.
49 Document S/P.V. 186.
50 Document S/C.2/SR.16.
51 Document S/P.V. 186.
52 Document S/479, p. 39–46.
53 Document S/P.V. 186.
54 Ibid.
55 Document S/479.
56 Document S/P.V. 190.
57 Ibid.
58 The Finnish application for admission is contained in Document S/559.
59 Document S/P.V. 204.
60 Ibid.
61 Documents S/P.V. 205 and 206.
62 Document S/P.V. 206.
63 Ibid.For further action resulting from the Soviet proposal that its acceptance of the application of Italy was dependent upon the action of the Council in regard to other applications, see this issue p. 64.
64 Documents S/P.V. 197 and S/520.
65 Document A/384.
66 Document A/384. For action of the General Assembly, see this issue p. 64. For resolution of the Security Council, see Document S/528. For rules of procedure of the General Assembly and Security Council, see International Organisation, I, p. 184Google Scholar.
67 For summary of the work of the Commission on Conventional Armaments, see International Organization, I, p. 508.
68 Document S/C.3/SK.10.
69 Document S/557. This also appears in largely the same form as Document AEC/26.
70 Document S/557, p. 2.
71 Ibid., p. 58.
72 Document AEC/24.
73 Document S/557, p. 89.
74 Document S/613.
75 Document S/535. For summary of the Previous work of the Military Staff Committee see International Organization, I, 504. For excerpts from the report of the Committee, see Ibid, p. 561. 507.
76 Document S/577.
77 For previous summaries of the diecussions in the Security Council on the appointment of a Governor of the Free Territory of Trieste, see International Organization, I, p. 507.
78 Document C/P.V. 223.