194 Australian Delegation, United Nations, to Department of External Affairs

Cablegram UN574 NEW YORK, 24 June 1948, 5.27 p.m.


Security Council 23rd June. [1] INDONESIA.

1. Replies from the Committee to the President's cabled inquiry concerning suspension of negotiations circulated as document S/850 and 850 add 1 [2], as follows(summary)

Australian - United States concern at lack of progress and consideration of means of reconciling positions of parties. Van Mook's letter stating greatest importance attached to his discussions with Hatta. Committee's reply welcoming this but emphasized Committee's obligation to take steps within its own competence. Handing of Australian - United States suggestions to Hatta and Van Mook (contents not reported to Council). Netherlands unable to consider the paper. Australian - United States reply affirming continued belief that working paper provided framework of settlement. Netherlands Delegation at this point stated that because of publication of proposals discussions would be discontinued for the time being. 18th June Committee asked whether Netherlands Delegation would now continue discussion and on 20th June Van Mook assured Chairman of Committee negotiations would be resumed. 21st June Republic expressed the view that proposals were one of best means to settlement and asked Committee to invite Netherlands to resume. 22nd June Netherlands Delegation stated it was authorised to resume. Paper placed on agenda for Steering Committee 23rd June. Chairman appealed to parties to consult with a view to finding formula for discussion of paper. [3]

2. Palar opened discussion in Security Council 23rd June.

Netherlands has intentionally misinformed Council. Indonesians desire Federation but not one such as Dutch now trying to create.

East Indonesia Government 21st June acknowledged leadership of Republic. Provisional Federal Government was old N.E.I. Government in new form and Indonesians all come from Dutch-sponsored states.

Bandoeng Conference a clear violation of paragraph 3 of the truce agreement [4] in as much as Conference was meant to take decisions concerning matters being negotiated by Netherlands and Republican Delegations.

3. Van Kleffens again deplored discussions in the Security Council and alleged dual discussions at Batavia and Lake Success jeopardized early settlement. Mentioned that Republic has neither the monopoly nor priority in discussing Federation either with Dutch or with other states who would form United States of Indonesia.

4. Other speakers were Romulo, in support of Indonesian case, and Tournelle (France) who supported Van Kleffens and mentioned that the Security Council should leave the matter in the hands of the Committee of Good Offices. The Soviet accused the Netherlands of using the Committee of Three in their own interests. Tsiang stressed the fact that the Security Council has the right to expect that the Netherlands would use only peaceful methods of settlement and also the right to expect normal economic relations between the Dutch and the Republic should be resumed as soon as possible.

5. Australia mentioned the Security Council cannot ignore the latest report from the Committee of Good Offices which stated failure to achieve agreement on discussion of Australian - United States working paper. Suggested that Security Council should, through the President, add its own appeal to the two parties to find at least a formula for the working paper to be discussed.

Also suggested that verbatim records of the meeting be sent to the Committee of Good Offices and pressed for fixing of definite early date for the next meeting of the Council on Indonesia.

1 The full text of this discussion is given in United Nations, Security Council Official Records, Third Year, No.89, 326th Meeting, 23 June 1948, pp.1-36.

2 See Documents 192 and 193.

3 See Documents 171, 173, 176, 177, 182 and 189.

4 Paragraph 3 of Document 22.

[AA:A1838, 403/3/1/1, xvii]