13

external support of the Greek guerilla movement and had made a detailed inspection of the northern frontier areas. Though hampered by the refusal of Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia to co-operate in any way, the ten participating members of the Special Committee had agreed unanimously on certain facts. These were that Albania and Bulgaria had continued to encourage the Greek guerillas in their attempts to overthrow the Greek Government, had provided them with large quantities of war materials and other supplies, had allowed them extensive use of their territories for tactical purposes, had actively assisted in the recruitment of Greeks in their territories, and had continued to operate a system whereby guerillas received treatment in their hospitals and convalescent centres and were then returned to fight in Greece. Yugoslavia, the Special Committee reported, continued to give moral and material aid during the early part of 1949, but later (as the split between Yugoslavia and the countries of the Soviet orbit developed) this aid diminished, and by August it had possibly ceased. On the other hand, there had been an increase in the support given the rebels by certain States not bordering on Greece, notably Roumania. As dealt with by the Assembly during this session, the Greek question had four aspects : proposals for United Nations action in the case of certain death sentences passed by Greek Courts, conciliation under United Nations auspices, UNSCOB investigation of the charges of outside intervention in Greece, and the repatriation of Greek children. Death Sentences in Greece Much of the First Committee's discussion of the Greek question centred round a proposal, pressed persistently by members of the Soviet group (supported in this case by Yugoslavia), that the United Nations should intervene to prevent the execution of death sentences pronounced by military Courts in Greece upon certain "named persons who had been engaged in political activities. For several sittings the Committee considered both the allegations of the Soviet group that terroristic measures and tortures were being employed against " fighters for democracy and freedom " and the Greek representative's assertions that sabotage and acts of sedition encouraged from outside necessitated vigorous counter-measures which could be replaced by clemency only with the return of peace and the end of foreign intervention. Only occasionally was the question of competence raised —for instance, the New Zealand representative (Sir Carl Berendsen), while emphasizing that the Greek Government should certainly give proof of the greatest possible clemency, stated that he could not support the proposal of the Soviet Union not only because the Committee was in total ignorance of facts which would show either the guilt or innocence of the persons mentioned in that resolution, but also because, even if fully acquainted with the facts, the Committee did not possess the authority to intervene in such