Balkan neighbors of the Greece was apparent. On the other hand, the Special Committee found that while Yugoslavia had continued to give moral and material aid to the guerrillas during the closing months of 1948 and the early part of 1949 this aid had subsequently diminished "and may have ceased."

With reference to the return of Greek children to their homes, the Special Committee was compelled to report that the states which had received such children had not complied with the resolution of the General Assembly. Indeed, it was found that in some instances certain of these children had been sent back to Greece as fighters in the guerrilla ranks.

During the period immediately prior to the General Assembly's renewed consideration of the Greek problem, the Special Committee was able to conclude that the Greek Army had eliminated organized guerrilla resistance in the northern frontier area and that many guerrillas, as well as other Greek nationals, had either fled or been taken into the territories of the northern states, particularly Albania. It noted that Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia had announced that Greek guerrillas entering their territory had been disarmed and interned and that Yugoslavia had implemented its declared policy of closing its frontier with Greece.

The Special Committee transmitted these findings in reports of August 2 and September 16 to the autumn session of the General Assembly. In the second of these reports, it recommended that the northern countries be asked to cooperate in a United Nations program of verification of the conditions under which Greek guerrillas in their territories had been disarmed and interned. It asked that Albania and Bulgaria be put on notice that further disregard of the Assembly's recommendations would increase the "gravity of the threat to peace in the Balkans." Finally, it recommended that a further conciliation effort be made during the fourth Assembly session to find means of settling peacefully the differences between Greece and the northern countries.

New Conciliation Efforts. Acting first on the Special Committee's recommendation for a renewed conciliation effort during the Assembly session, the First Committee appointed on September 29, 1949, a new Conciliation Committee consisting of the president of the General Assembly, the Secretary-General, and the chairman and vicechairman of the First Committee. The Conciliation Committee was to continue the work of the group that had functioned during the preceding session and was empowered "to consult, in its discretion, with other powers which might be able to assist."

The new group met separately on a number of occasions with the Representatives of Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Yugoslavia. It also

consulted with the Delegations of the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Delegation, in expressing its views to the Conciliation Committee, insisted on the unqualified renunciation of Greece's claim to Northern Epirus and offered as a basis for settlement a set of proposals calling for international supervision of Greek elections, U.S.S.R. participation in an international commission to "control" Greece's northern frontiers, a general amnesty and cessation of military operations in Greece, and the withdrawal of all foreign military assistance and personnel from Greece. The Soviet position thus stood unchanged from that held prior to this renewed effort toward settlement by conciliation. The United States and the United Kingdom Delegations indicated their view that the Conciliation Committee should deal with the international aspects of the Greek problem, not with Greek internal affairs, and urged in particular the conclusion of suitable frontier agreements to prevent or adjust border incidents.

On the matter of the Greek-Albanian frontier, the Conciliation Committee suggested that both parties agree not to use force or the threat of force against each other's territorial integrity or for the purpose of changing the existing boundary. Greece was prepared to accept such an agreement. Albania maintained its insistence that the frontier must be recognized as final. Bulgaria's reply was inconclusive, predicating acceptance upon general agreement "between the interested Balkan countries." Yugoslavia indicated qualified approval of the suggested agreements but called attention to the possibility of seeking a Greek-Yugoslav adjustment through normal diplomatic channels.

General Assembly President Romulo, in reporting the results of the conciliation effort to the First Committee, noted the absence of agreement but stated that nevertheless "the discussions had served a useful purpose in clarifying and in some cases narrowing the points of difference between the Governments concerned. . .'

Subsequent Action. The First Committee then considered the findings of the Special Committee on the Balkans. Protracted efforts were made from the outset by eastern European states to divert attention from the central issues by repeated questioning of Greek military justice. The Committee was able to return to discussion of the UNSCOB reports after the president of the General Assembly had reported to the Committee that Greece had decided that all death sentences pronounced upon those guilty of crimes against the state would be referred to a special Court of Appeals.

The United States Delegation acting jointly with those of Australia, the United Kingdom, and China introduced in the First Committee two resolutions, one seeking early return of the Greek children,

the other calling for the continued existence of UNSCOB with its established functions, coupled with new recommendations to the states concerned.

The Four Power resolution on continuance of UNSCOв included certain new elements. By its terms the Assembly would recommend that no state furnish directly or indirectly either arms or war materials to Albania or Bulgaria until the proper United Nations agency had determined that the "unlawful assistance of these states to the Greek guerrillas has ceased." The resolution stated that UNSCOB would be justified in recommending urgently the convocation of a special session of the General Assembly if further foreign assistance to the guerrillas were to result in the launching of new armed action against Greece from adjacent territory. It recommended that all states harboring Greek guerrillas cooperate with the United Nations in verifying the "disarming and disposition" of Greek guerrillas who had entered their territories. Finally, it urged that steps be taken by the states harboring Greek nationals to permit the peaceful return to Greece of all those who wished to return and abide by their country's laws; alternatively, in the case of those Greeks whose return was not feasible, arrangements should be made for their resettlement elsewhere.

The Soviet Delegation introduced a resolution embodying the same points it had submitted earlier during the conciliation effort. The great majority of the members upheld the findings and recommendations of UNSCOB, but the Delegations of the Soviet Union and other Cominform states made every effort to discredit the Special Committee and its methods of work, and the Soviet resolution called for its dissolution.

The First Committee provided a hearing for the Representatives of Albania and Bulgaria who denied the validity of UNSCOB's findings and otherwise echoed Soviet arguments against Greece and the western world as a whole. The Committee then voted on the Four Power resolution and the Soviet resolution. The former was approved by a vote of 38 to 6, with 2 abstentions. The Soviet draft was defeated by substantial majorities in separate paragraph-by-paragraph votes. On the related question at issue, a report from the International Red Cross organizations showed that some progress had been made in preliminary negotiations with the eastern European countries harboring Greek children, though as yet no children had been repatriated. All delegations who spoke on this matter in the First Committee, including those of the eastern European countries, indicated continued support for the 1948 Assembly resolution regarding the return of the children. The First Committee thus was able unanimously to adopt a revised Four Power resolution on this subject. The resolution thanked the Red Cross agencies for their efforts to date, noted that no

children had yet been repatriated, and urged all states concerned to cooperate with the Red Cross groups and the Secretary-General to insure the early return of the children to their homes.

On November 18 the General Assembly in plenary session adopted the Four Power resolution by a vote of 50 to 6, with 2 abstentions. The Soviet draft which had already failed to obtain support in the stage of Committee debate was reintroduced but was decisively rejected by the Assembly. The Assembly adopted unanimously on the same day the resolution urging accelerated efforts to bring about the return of Greek children.

2. CHINA

A grave complaint was presented by China in the autumn of 1949 against the Soviet Union for violations of both the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance of 19451 and the Charter of the United Nations. The complaint was considered by the General Assembly. The first of the two resolutions adopted laid down certain essential standards of conduct to which all nations are called upon to adhere in their relations with China in the interest of reaching stability of international relations in the Far East. The other provided for further consideration by the Interim Committee not only of the Chinese charges but of any violations of these standards of conduct in the future.

The general charge made by the Representative of China was that the political independence and territorial integrity of China and the peace in the Far East had been threatened by Soviet violations of the 1945 treaty and of the United Nations Charter. Specifically it was charged that, in contravention of the treaty, the Soviet Union had thwarted all efforts by the Chinese Government to reestablish its authority in Manchuria and had aided the Communist regime in taking over areas evacuated by the Soviet army and supplying that regime with arms and ammunition, and that the Soviet Union is seeking both economic and political domination of Manchuria. The Chinese Representative further charged that the independence of China had been jeopardized through Soviet intervention in Chinese internal affairs by rendering assistance toward violent overthrow of the recognized government and that the integrity of China had been infringed by the establishment of special regimes under Soviet control not only in Manchuria but in the northern provinces of China as well. He submitted a draft resolution proposing that the Assembly make a finding sustaining these charges, determine that the Soviet Union.

1

See Department of State Bulletin, Sept. 2, 1945, p. 333.

879514-506

has violated the treaty and the Charter, and call upon all members to desist from giving military and economic aid to the Chinese Communists and to refrain from granting diplomatic recognition to any Chinese Communist regime.

At the outset the Delegate from the Soviet Union sought to prevent any consideration of this problem by the General Assembly by opposing its inclusion on the agenda, and asserting that the Chinese Delegation had lost the right to represent the Chinese people. When this effort failed, the Soviet Delegation announced its refusal to participate in any consideration of the problem or to take into account any decision which might be made at the request of the Chinese Delegate. The Ukrainian, Byelorussian, Polish, and Czechoslovak Representatives took the same position. This refusal of one of the parties to the dispute to answer charges made against it or to take part in the discussion was sharply criticized by the United States Delegate and by other delegates as well.

In the course of the consideration of this problem in the General Assembly, it became increasingly clear that a large number of delegations, though sympathetic with the case presented by the Chinese Delegate, felt that the complexity of the legal and factual issues involved made it impossible for the Assembly to make a specific finding of facts regarding the charges. Many were reluctant, in view of the rapidity of developments in the Far East, to commit themselves to decisions which would restrict their future freedom of action regarding the relations between their respective countries and China. Furthermore, some delegations felt that the United Nations would have been in a better position to have taken effective action on the specific charges brought by the Chinese if the Chinese Government had not waited so long to bring the matter before it.

The United States Representative, Ambassador Philip C. Jessup, voiced the deep concern of the United States Government at the evidence of continuation by the Soviet Union of prewar Czarist and Soviet Russian imperialistic policies in the Far East-policies characterized by efforts to obtain special monopolistic privileges, to encroach on Chinese sovereignty, and to promote dismemberment of China. He indicated the view of the United States that there is serious question whether certain provisions of the 1945 Yalta agreement between the United States, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.S.R. regarding China have been carried out properly and in good faith by the Soviet Union.

In outlining the views of the United States, Ambassador Jessup urged that the Assembly use its great fund of moral power to translate the principles of the United Nations Charter into specific standards of conduct to which all nations should be called upon to adhere