"Having noted from the report of the United Nations Commission for Korea that the authorities in North Korea have neither ceased hostilities nor withdrawn their armed forces to the Thirty-eighth Parallel, and that urgent military measures are required to restore international peace and security, and

"Having noted the appeal from the Republic of Korea to the United Nations for immediate and effective steps to secure peace and security. "Recommends that the members of the United Nations furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repel the armed attack and to restore international peace and security in the area.'

This is the logical consequence of the resolution concerning the complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea adopted at the four hundred and seventythird meeting of the Security Council on June 25, 1950, and the subsequent events recited in the preamble of this resolution. That resolution of June 25 called upon all members to render every assistance to the United Nations in the execution of this resolution, and to refrain from giving assistance to the North Korean authorities. This new resolution is the logical next step. Its significance is affected by the violation of the former resolution, the continuation of aggression, and the urgent military measures required.

I wish now to read the statement which the President of the United States made today on this critical situation.

(See 4 above.)

"The keynote of the resolution and my statement and the significant characteristic of the action taken by the President is support of the United Nations purposes and principles-in a word 'peace.'

"

7. The Second United Nations Security Council Resolution-June 27, 1950

Resolution_concerning the complaint of aggression upon the Republic of Korea, adopted at the four hundred and seventy-fourth meeting of the Security Council, on June 27, 1950:

The Security Council,

Having determined that the armed attack upon the Republic of Korea by forces from North Korea constitutes a breach of the peace,

Having called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, and

Having called upon the authorities of North Korea to withdraw forthwith

their armed forces to the 38th parallel, and

Having noted from the report of the United Nations Commission for Korea that the authorities in North Korea have neither ceased hostilities nor withdrawn their armed forces to the 38th parallel and that urgent military measures are required to restore international peace and security, and

Having noted the appeal from the Republic of Korea to the United Nations for immediate and effective steps to secure peace and security,

Recommends that the Members of the United Nations furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repel the armed attack and to restore international peace and security in the area.

8. United States note of June 27, 1950, and Soviet reply

Department of State Press Release No. 701, June 29, 1950:

The American Embassy at Moscow on June 27, 1950, communicated with the Soviet Foreign Office in regard to the invasion of the Republic of Korea by North Korean armed forces.

The Embassy called to the attention of the Soviet, Foreign Office the fact that forces of the North Korean regime had crossed the thirty-eigth parallel and had invaded in force the territory of the Republic of Korea at several points. It was also pointed out that the refusal of the representative of the Soviet Union to attend the Security Council meeting in New York despite the clear threat to the peace and despite the obligations of a Council member under the United Nations Charter required the Government of the United States to bring this matter directly to the attention of the Government of the U. S. S. R.

The Embassy concluded by calling attention to the universally known close relations between the Soviet Union and the North Korean regime, and stated that the United States Government was asking assurances that the Soviet Union

would disavow responsibility for this unwarranted and unprovoked attack and that it would use its influence with the authorities of North Korea to withdraw their invading forces at once.

Ambassador Alan G. Kirk today was read the following statement by Deputy Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko:

"In connection with the statement of the Government of the United States of America, transmitted by you on June 27, the Soviet Government has instructed me to state the following:

"1. In accordance with facts verified by the Soviet Government, the events taking place in Korea were provoked by an attack by forces of the South Korean authorities on border regions of North Korea. Therefore the responsibility for these events rests upon the South Korean authorities and upon those who stand behind their back.

"2. As is known, the Soviet Government withdrew its troops from Korea earlier than the Government of the United States and thereby confirmed its traditional principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of other states. And now as well the Soviet Government adheres to the principle of the impermissibility of interference by foreign powers in the internal affairs of Korea.

"3. It is not true that the Soviet Government refused to participate in meetings of the Security Council. In spite of its full willingness, the Soviet Government has not been able to take part in the meetings of the Security Council inasmuch as, because of the position of the Government of the United States, China, a permanent member of the Security Council, has not been admitted to the Council which has made it impossible for the Security Council to take decisions having legal force."

9. Legality of United Nations Security Council Action on Korea Department of State press release No. 702, June 30, 1950:

SOVIET ALLEGATION OF ILLEGALITY OF UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION WITH RESPECT TO KOREA

In its reply to the United Nations and to the United States, the U. S. S. R. alleges that the action of the Security Council with respect to Korea was illegal since the action taken did not have the concurring votes of all the permanent members. In its reply of June 29 to the United States communication of June 27 asking the U. S. S. R. to use its influence with the North Korean authorities to cease hostilities, the U. S. S. R. made the same point and contended further that the action of the Council was illegal because the representative of China participating in this action was not the representative of the Peiping regime.

With respect to Article 27 of the Charter dealing with Security Council voting, it is provided that substantive questions be decided by an affirmative vote of seven members including the concurring votes of the permanent members.

By a long series of precedents, however, dating back to 1946, the practice has been established whereby abstention by permanent members of the Council does not constitute a veto.

In short, prior to the Soviet allegations, every member of the United Nations, including the U. S. S. R., accepted as legal and binding decisions of the Security Council made without the concurrence, as expressed through an affirmative vote, of all permanent members of the Council.

As to the Soviet claim concerning the Chinese vote, the rules of procedure of the Security Council provide the machinery for the seating of an accredited representative of the Security Council. No affirmative action has been taken which, by any stretch of the imagination, could give force to the contention of the U. S. S. R. that a representative of the Peiping regime should be regarded as the representative of China on the Security Council. The credentials of the representative of the National Government of China were approved by the Council and the Soviet attempt at a later date to withdraw this approval was defeated. Therefore, the vote of the Nationalist representative on June 25 and 27 was the official vote of China.

A list of some of the more important precedents involving action by the Security Council on substantive matters taken without the concurrence of an affirmative vote by the Soviet Union follow:

Palestine case

On April 16, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution which called for a truce in Palestine.

On May 22, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution for a cease fire in Palestine.

On July 15, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution ordering a cease fire in Palestine and giving instructions to the mediator there.

On November 4, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution calling upon all governments concerned to withdraw beyond positions they held in Palestine on October 14, 1948.

In none of these instances has the Soviet Union challenged the legality of the action taken by the Security Council.

Kashmir case

On January 17, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution calling upon the parties concerned to avoid actions aggravating the situation.

On January 20, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution for setting up a UN Commission for India and Pakistan and which gave that Commission broad terms of reference.

On April 21, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution expanding the terms of reference of the UN Commission for India and Pakistan and which set the terms for bringing about a cease fire and the conditions for the holding of a plebiscite.

On June 3, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution which affirmed previous resolution and ordered the UN Commission to proceed to the arca.

In none of these instances has the Soviet Union challenged the legality of the action taken by the Security Council.

Indonesian case

On December 24, 1948, the Soviet Union abstained on a resolution calling upon the parties to cease hostilities and ordering the release of Indonesian officials. In that case the French also abstained.

On January 28, 1949, the Soviet Union abstained on a number of paragraphs of a resolution setting up the UN Commission for Indonesia with wide powers.

In none of these instances has the Soviet Union challenged the legality of the action taken by the Security Council.

Furthermore the Soviet Union has never questioned the legality of action taken by the Security Council in which it voted with the majority but on which other permanent members of the Council abstained.

This has occurred in at least three substantive decisions:

1. In the action of the Council on December 28, 1948, in which a resolution was passed calling on the Netherlands to set free political prisioners in Indonesia (a resolution incidentally introduced by the representative of China). France and the United Kingdom abstained on this resolution.

2. In the action of the Council on March 4, 1949, recommending to the General Assembly that Israel be admitted to UN membership. The United Kingdom abstained on this resolution.

3. In the action of the Council on March 5, 1948, recommending consultation of the permanent members of the Council in connection with the Palestine situation. The United Kingdom abstained on this resolution.

The voluntary absence of a permanent member from the Security Council is clearly analogous to abstention.

Furthermore article 28 of the Charter provides that the Security Council shall be so organized as to be able to function continuously. This injunction is defeated if the absence of a representative of a permanent member is construed to have the effect of preventing all substantive action by the Council.

No one of the 10 members of the Council participating in the meetings of June 25 and June 27 raised any question regarding the legality of the action-not even the member who dissented on June 27.

10. Statement of President of the United States of June 30, 1950, on further military action in Korea

At a meeting with congressional leaders at the White House this morning, the President, together with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reviewed with them the latest developments of the situation in Korea.

The congressional leaders were given a full review of the intensified military activities.

In keeping with the United Nations Security Council's request for support to the Republic of Korea in repelling the North Korean invaders and restoring peace in Korea, the President announced that he had authorized the United States Air Force to conduct missions on specific military targets in Northern Korea wherever militarily necessary, and had ordered a naval blockade of the entire Korean coast.

General MacArthur has been authorized to use certain supporting ground units. 11. North Korean protest to United Nations, July 2, 1950.

United Nations press release PM/1771:

I have the honor to request you to bring to the notice of all members of United Nations the declaration made by me on the instructions of the Government of the Korean People's Democratic Republic on July 1, 1950.

In reply to the declaration of the Foreign Minister of the Korean Feople's Democratic Republic of June 27, the President of the United States, Mr. Truman, declared that he had ordered the air and naval forces of the United States to intervene in the military operations in Korea on the side of the South Korean puppet regime, which has unleashed civil war in our country at the behest of the American imperialists.

On June 30, Mr. Truman announced that American land forces had been sent to South Korea. American aircraft are brutally bombing our peaceful population and flying over Pyongyang and other points in North Korea and the liberated cities of South Korea, attacking units of the People's army with the purpose of hindering their victorious advance southward. The policy pursued by the American imperialists of enslaving the Korean people and turning Korea into a colony of the United States has now developed into open armed intervention against the Korean People's Democratic Republic. ·

American imperialists have long dreamed of establishing their domination in the Far East. Previously, however, they had to reckon with the imperialistic interests of Great Britain, Japan, and other powers and expand their position in the Far East by making deals with those powers at the cost of enslaving the peoples of Asia. The Korean people will not forget in particular the fact that in 1905 the United States, with a view to reinforcing their domination over the Philippines, negotiated a treacherous deal with Japan and joined in setting up a Japanese protectorate over Korea.

After the Second World War, which resulted in the defeat of Japan and the weakening of Great Britain, American imperialists decided to occupy their place in the countries of the Far East, endeavoring to transform the Pacific Ocean into an American sea and the peoples of the Pacific Ocean countries into the slaves of American monopoly. The strengthening of the forces of the democratic camp, however, the advance of the national liberal movement in the countries of Asia, and particularly the great victory won by the Chinese people, utterly destroyed the base designs of the American imperialists. The Korean people has personally experienced the whole weight of the colonialist policy of American imperialists. Having rid itself of the hateful yoke of the Japanese, it again finds itself threatened with enslavement.

The American imperialists, in their anxiety to keep a grip on South Korea, stubbornly resisted the unification of the Korean people. They disrupted the formation of a single democratic government based on the Moscow decision of the Foreign Ministers of the U. S. S. R., U. S. A., and U. K. They refused to remove their troops from Korea before they had transformed southern Korea into their own colony with the assistance of the puppet government of Syngman Rhee created by them. It is now clear to every Korean that, even after the withdrawal of American troops, South Korea was governed by the American imperialists. It is they who, together with the Syngman Rhee clique, bear full responsibility for the crimes of the military police regime which they have set up in South Korea, for the executions and murders of tens of thousands of the sons of the Korean people destroyed by the Syngman Rhee clique on the orders of the American masters, for the tortures inflicted on hundreds of thousands of patriots thrown into prison and brutally tortured, for all the sufferings of the people of South Korea. But they did not succeed in enslaving the Korean people, the main hindrance to this being the democratic regime established in North Korea. North Korea has become a powerful base for the fight of the Korean people for unity, independence, and freedom. Its successes in peaceful reconstruction,

which have shown the superiority of democracy as compared with the antipopulur military and police regime of South Korea, have inspired the Korean people to fight against the efforts of American imperialists to reduce Korea to a colony, have convinced the people of ultimate victory.

That is why the American imperialists and their South Korean lackeys, in their hatred of the Korean People's Democratic Republic, have long been cherishing plans to throttle it by military force. They obstructed the realization of the proposals for the peaceful unification of Korea, which were frequently put forward by the democratic parties and social organizations and also by the Government of the People's Democratic Republic.

With the support of the United States, the government of Syngman Rhee has for 2 years past openly prepared for an attack on the north, boasting that its army could occupy Pyongyang in a single day, and that it was merely awaiting the order to advance, having secured the promise of military support from the United States of America. At the behest of its American masters, the Syngman Rhee government on June 25, began civil war in Korea.

In provoking this war the American imperialists intended by means of armed intervention to destroy the Korean Democratic Republic and take possession of all Korea. Civil war in Korea was also necessary to the American imperialists in order to create a pretext for aggression against China and Vietnam also, to throttle the national liberation movement of the peoples of the Orient.

The United States is trying to cover its intervention in Korea with the name of the United Nations, but everyone knows that the American imperialists have placed the United Nations before a fait accompli by undertaking armed intervention; it calculates that it will succeed by means of the votes of countries dependent on the United States of America, using the name of the United Nations to cover any unlawful action whatsoever, even after it has been perpetrated.

The American-dictated resolution of the Security Council based on one-sided, fabricated information, is invalid and contrary to the United Nations Charter, since it was adopted without the participation of representatives of the government of the Korean People's Democratic Republic and also without the participation of representatives of two great powers, permanent members of the Security Council, the U. S. S. R. and the Chinese People's Republic.

Members of the Security Council who voted in favor of this resolution have once again shown that they are prepared to put their signatures to any document dictated to them by the United States, regardless of the rights and interests of the peoples.

In this connection, it is worthy of remark that the pro-American majority in the United Nations, which has now shown such a feverish readiness to save the bankrupt Syngman Rhee regime, ignored the repeated applications of the Korean People's Democratic Republic and social organizations of Korea made in U. N. organs regarding the atrocities and military provocation committed by the Syngman Rhee regime. It also ignored numerous requests made by Korean social organizations with concrete proposals for the peaceful unification of Korea, thus encouraging the adventurist actions of the United States of America and their South Korean vassals to stir up civil war in Korea.

The American imperialists and their South Korean protégés committed a desperate mistake in unleashing civil war in Korea. The troops of Syngman Rhee have met with fitting resistance and under the blows of the People's Army, which has counterattacked, are fleeing in disorder to the south. The gallant People's Army, in defense of the freedom and independence of the Korean people, is continuing to pursue the enemy. In the military operations of the past week, the People's Army cleared the enemy out of a large area of the southern half of the republic and liberated Seoul, the national capital.

The population is everywhere welcoming its army, which has liberated it from the terrors of the Syngman Rhee regime, and it is giving it active assistance in the liberation of the country. The heroic partisans in South Korea have carried out military operations on the enemy's communications and have cut the main railway line from the harbor of Pusan; in collaboration with the insurgent population they have freed a number of towns in South Korea. The flight of the Syngman Rhee army and the popular rising in its rear are further evidence of the rottenness and failure of the antipopular regime of the South Korean puppets of the United States of America.

The complete bankruptcy of the Syngman Rhee regime has today become obvious. Seeing the collapse of their plans for the colonization of Korea, the Ameri