501.BC Indonesia/12–649: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Consulate General at Batavia 1
niact
611. For Beam from Dept and Cochran: Altho New Delhi sponsored res congratulating Neth and Indos and welcoming estab RIS as sovereign state was overwhelmingly adopted by Ad Hoc Polit Comite of UN GA over Soviet opposition, portions of statements by reps of USSR (Tsarapkin), Ukrainian SSR (Manuilsky) and Poland (Katz Suchy) might be harmful Indo settlement if broadcast to peoples of Indo without adequate refutation.
Indonesian item, particularly UNCFI report RTC, probably comes before SC Mon, Dec 12 and Dept feels that SC discussion offers perhaps best forum for detailed refutation Sov charges that settlement is creature of US capitalistic imperialism, that RTC agreements make RIS a Dutch puppet state, and that Hatta and Sukarno are “traitors” to Indo people.
US and other reps will make appropriate SC statements,2 but it is preferable, of course, that detailed defense of RTC agreements be made by parties thereto, particularly by rep of Indo. From standpoint of both internal and external positions RIS govt now being formed it appears important that vicious and irresponsible Sov charges be answered in SC.
In SC Palar may speak in this vein on own initiative, but in view of doubts raised by previous experience re consistency of Palar’s statements with views of Repub leaders believed desirable to ensure that he express his govt’s position fully. We suggest therefore that you discuss [Page 581] this with Hatta soonest, recommending that prior to Dec 12 Repubs instruct Palar make forthright defense of RTC settlement.
Recognizing delicacy of Indo position re prospective application for UN membership, Dept recommends that Indo SC statements be cast not as direct answers to Sov attacks but primarily as straightforward exposition character of agreements from Indo position. Judging from line of Sov attack in GA Comite, a brief explanation of fol points in SC by Indo rep wld be of particular value in showing falsity and distortion in Sov arguments: unqualified nature of RIS independence under terms of Charter of transfer of sovereignty, equality of RIS with Neth in prospective Union (stressing fact that Union can take no decisions without RIS consent), fairness of agreement re assumption of debt in light of controversial amounts involved, and fairness of commercial agreement which conforms with generally accepted intl standards and practice.
- Repeated as 631 to New York (USUN) and as 1100 to The Hague.↩
- For UN GA action on the Indonesian case, passage of a resolution on December 7 after debate, see Department of State Bulletin, December 12, 1949, pp. 902–903; for Mr. Austin’s speech at Rochester, N.Y., on December 7, with special reference to Soviet tactics, see ibid., December 26, 1949, pp. 970–974.↩