BRITISH TROOPS IN JAVA

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24797, 11 February 1946, Page 5

BRITISH TROOPS IN JAVA

Security Council Discussion LITTLE PROGRESS MADE (Rec. 6.30 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 9. The Security Council of the United Nations sat for another two hours today without maiking much progress in consideration of the Ukrainian charges about Indonesia. Mr Manuilsky (Ukraine) claimed that neither the British nor the Dutch nas contested his statements, first, that British troops had been used in Java for some months in fighting Indonesians, and second, that Japanese troops were used against the Indonesians. Different interpretations had been placed on these facts, but the facts remained unaltered. The Ukraine could not agree to Britain’s interpretation of the task allotted in Indonesia. The main task.entrusted to the Allied command was to receive the surrender of and disarm the Japanese. “Was this task, carried out?” he asked. “My answer is ’No.’ The Japanese were not disarmed. They were used to fight against the Indonesians.” Mr Manuilsky said it seemed to him that the agreement between the great Powers covering Far East operations had been violated on this point, it had been argued that British troops had the task of liberating prisoners of war in Indonesia, but in the House of Commons it had been reported that all 2197 Allied prisoners had been liberated by the end of September. 1945. If this were so, why should the Netherlands present the problem ot rescuing prisoners as an excuse for the activity of British troops. Disagreement by Russia

It had also been said the British had to liberate 2000 Europeans in concentration camps. The Ukraine agreed these persons had to be liberated, but could not agree that under this pretext armed forces should be used against the local population. Russia did not consent to tnis in previous negotiations and the Ukraine, feeling itself a patty wiui rcussia. could not agree either. Britain used arms to prevent the Indonesians putting forward and defending their elementary rights. “Mr Bevin has reproached me for not quoting figures of British losses,’’ said Mr Manuilsky. “I must say I regret that the lives of British soldiers were lost in an action in which they should never have been engaged.” Mr Manuilsky claimed that the war in Indonesia was “a little unilateral” in character. It was fought between modern forces and a few. small, ill-armed detachments whose losses must inevitably have been much greater. “Interests of Shell Oil” He referred to a question by Dr van Kieffens (Netherlands) who asked what Ukrainian soldiers would have done if, serving under the Russian Army in the occupation of Bornholm Island, they had been attacked by the local inhabitants. “Soldiers of my country don’t fight to defend the interests of Shell Oil, but to oefend «.»country/’ said Mr Manuilsky. British soldiers should have made every effort to avoid bloodshed. * suhnnt it would have been posje.t° have avoided bloodshed if use had been made of the Indonesian central and local organisations. Instead, Admiral Mountbatten told the Japanese to retain their power. The IndoJ his as meaning that the British had placed greater tk»nl? e ? Ce i in the Ja P an ese. Their naThoH £™! in u gS we F e deeply wounded. There you have the cause of the sad events which followed.”

sJri r h? l^ ilsk ?'. said Mr Bevin had d,d n . ot know quite what the j want ®?* Mr Manuilsky set out the demands as follows:

Ukrainian Demands TI? at the Nations considJ? Se ? f .. Britlsh troops against 9 P°PUJahon not just or right, z. inat it was inadmissible for Japanese troops to be used against Indonesians.

Indonesians should be f P nnci Ples and rights es- { abllsbed b v the United Nations Char-

4. That a commission should be sent out on behalf of the Security Council to deal with the abnormal situation. * £ ask Mr ® ev in if he cannot agree to these proposals,” said Mr Manuilsky. . Bevin: I am not going to be singled out to accept something I don’t think any other government would accept. I suggested at the Council of foreign Ministers an inquiry into the troubles in Rumania and Bulgaria, but Russia said this was a sovereign matter. and I did not question that. Why should Britain and the Netherlands be selected for an exoeriment which does not apply in the Charter? Are we always going to be sending commissions to investigate when international troubles arise? I cannot agree to that principle.” Mr Bevin said no one denied the right of the Indonesians to form their own government. Britain had asked for a truce. The Indonesians were fighting, and not with bows and arrows. The total of British casualties was not small. 1479. The best advice he could give the Indonesians was that Dr. H. J. van Mook was there readv and waiting to negotiate. A British representative had been sent to assist. As soon as an agreement was signed and the police were carrving out their duties troops would be withdrawn. Britain would be glad to gpf them out. If Britain brought anv similar situation before the council she would have been told tn mind her bus>’ness.

Dr. van Kloffens (Netherlands) said all Mr Manuilsky had achieved was to show his incomnlete command of the facts. His argument about the defence

of oil interests was of the sort which turned itself against the person using Discussing Mr Manuilsky’s reference to a “unilateral” war. Dr. van Kieffens said there were, as far as he knew, 80,000 well-equipped Indonesians with modern arms, anti-aircraft guns, and other weapons. Even 'these figures were not exact, because there were still parts of Java where the Allies had not penetrated. Mr Manuilsky was also inexact in the matter of prisoners of war. Dr. van Kieffens doubted whether all had been brought in yet There was no question of any struggle against the Indonesians The British troops had to resist armed bands to carry out their tasks. The British-Netherlands treaty did not refer to the use of armed forces in Java, and merely defined the manner in which the administrative, not military, element was to operate during the time the Netherlands East Indies remained in Admiral Mountbatten’s command. Dr. van Kieffens claimed that no case had been established.