Security Council. Indonesia 26th February. [1]

1. Sastroamidjojo, Indonesia made statement dealing fully with
West Java as unilateral and contrary to Renville. Exposed the
puppet nature of the new state. Lack of plebiscite. Grave
consequences for Republic of new states. Expressed agreement with
Australian proposal.

2. Gromyko (Soviet) repeated that Renville Agreement is a screen
for reimposition of Dutch Colonial domination with support of
other Colonial Powers due to investments and fear of success of
movements for independence. Renville 'shameful document'.

Indonesia cannot expect any help from Committee. Netherlands
ignores provision for plebiscite. Canadian resolution [2]
unacceptable. Australian [3] and Colombian amendments [4] do not
really change the resolution. Praise given the report reminds him
of Mark Twain's hen which insisted her egg was a planet.

3. Tsiang (China). Two dangers-creation of new states and
differences of interpretation of Renville. Considered Indonesian
position on new states reasonable. Reminded Council war in
Indonesia came after an agreement (Linggadjati). Necessity to
watch situation after this further Agreement (Renville). Recalled
procedures statement and Kirby suggestion. Had found there were
objections in Council to his arbitration suggestion. Committee has
power to adopt Kirby procedure. Not necessary to sit [5] on
Australian proposal. No rule of Council prevents the suggested
procedure. Unless this challenged will not press to vote.

Colombian amendment would not change resolution. Will support
Canadian proposal. [6]

4. Van Kleffens (Netherlands) made statement in refutal of
Indonesian statement on new states. West Java conference [is]
third of a series of informal unofficial conferences. Entirely
without interference or pressure by Netherlands authorities.

Republic representatives were present. Quoted para. 2 of the
twelve political principles. [7] Suppression by Dutch would be to
side with Republic against people desiring autonomy. Republic not
synonymous with healthy democratic development. Conference
com[p]rises [8] several groups none designated by Netherlands
Indies authorities. Local knowledge essential and proper place to
deal with question of new states is in Committee of Good Offices
on the spot. If still member of Council, Netherlands would oppose
both Colombian and Australian proposals. Committee has not asked
for extension of functions. Only a majority of Committee has asked
for this. Would cease to be a Committee of Good Offices.

Particularly against publication if Committee is to be considered
to have right to make suggestions, let it do so with greatest
caution and in a way conducive to voluntary agreement. Make
certain beforehand suggestion acceptable to both parties.