38

In the general debate that followed, representatives of the Slav States repeated their usual attacks on the Commission, claiming that its establishment had been contrary to the Charter and that it was merely a tool of the United States Government. Giving the Soviet version of the situation in Korea, these representatives praised developments in the North, and asserted that in the South the Seoul authorities, who were simply puppets of foreign Governments, conducted a reign of terror in order to try to crush the revolt of the Korean people. The Korean nation was, in their opinion, entitled to choose its own destiny and was not obliged to receive directions from abroad nor to submit to the rule of foreign States. While the United States was opposed to unification because it wished to create a new military, political, and economic base in Korea, the Soviet Union had always faithfully supported the Korean people and was convinced that the problem could be solved only if foreign intervention ceased. The majority of the members of the Committee, however, rejected this fantastic account of the situation in Korea. Many speakers deplored the grave injustice to the Korean people involved in the division of their country, a division which they had no doubt was attributable to the flouting of the General Assembly's resolutions by the Soviet Union. The New Zealand representative (Mr Shanahan) praised the Commission for the frankness of its report on the explosive and serious situation in Korea. He pointed out that, while it was deeply to be regretted that the relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had been such as to thwart the prospects of unification, it must nevertheless be stated emphatically that the reports of the Korean Commission showed that, while the United States had done everything in its power to ensure the successful settlement of the Korean problem by the fullest co-operation with the Commission, all efforts had been completely nullified by the Soviet Union's boycott of the Commission and by its refusal to implement two resolutions adopted by overwhelming majorities in the General Assembly. It was true that the Commission had criticized certain aspects of the policy of the Government of the Republic of Korea, but it had concluded that the Republic was " a result of free elections and the expression of the people's will." Moreover, the Korean Commission had pointed out that " psychologically, if not materially, the activities of the North have compelled the Republic to go on a war footing." The consistent refusal of the authorities in the North to co-operate with the United Nations by inviting impartial international observation of the situation could not but raise doubts as to the truth of the claim that the Northern Government was truly representative of all the people. There was, in fact, no objective evidence to show that it was democratic, and all the available impartial evidence tended to show that it had no popular basis whatever.