UN. Council Not To Debate Oman Fighting

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28362, 22 August 1957, Page 18

UN. Council Not To Debate Oman Fighting

(NJZ. Press Association— Copyright)

NEW YORK, August 20. An Arab bid to have the Security Council debate charges of British “armed aggression” in Oman was defeated today, in the absence of the necessary seven affirmative votes for adoption of the agenda. British sources privately expressed acute disappointment at the United States decision to abstain in the vote on the agenda, rather than join Britain, France, Australia and Cuba in opposition to inscribing the Arab complaint. Sweden also surprised Western diplomats by joining Iraq, the Soviet Union and the Philippines in supporting the inclusion of the Arab item.

Sir Pierson Dixon (Britain) told the Security Council there could be aggression only by one sovereign State against another sovereign State. There was no independent sovereign State of Oman.

The Sultan of Muscat and Oman had asked Britain for help in restoring order in the face of a revolt against his authority which had been fomented outside his territories.

Mr Hashim Jawad (Iraq), the only Arab member of the council, led the appeal for inscription of the complaint on the agenda, insisting that Oman had independent status.

Mr Jawad prefaced his statement with a pledge of Iraqi friendship for Britain, but he accused the British of trying to subjugate unarmed people >in Oman. The British action, he alleged had thrown in doubt the whole sense of security of small States and had given the impression that the United Nations was incapable of protecting the interests of such States when these did not accord with those of the big countries. Mr Arksdy Sobolev (Russia) and General Carlos Romulo (Philippines) backed the Iraqi case for placing the question on the agenda. Mr Sobolev said that Britain was attempting to justify its intervention “in the name of old traditional ties with the Sultan of Muscat. However, no colonial ties can justify the intervention in Oman.” Britain’s action in supporting the Sultan with planes, armoured cars and troops was aimed at seizing oil resources which belonged to the Arab people, he said. Mr Sobolev asked the United States delegate, Mr Lodge, to explain a statement by the Secretary of State (Mr Dulles) on August 6 in which he said there was close co-operation between the United States and the United Kingdom in this area. “Did he not mean co-operation in carrying on aggression against the Arab people?” he asked. Mr Lodge replied that a government which promoted aggression by its creation of the Molo-

tov-Ribbentrop pact and committed the rape of Hungary was in no position to speak sanctimoniously of foreign aggression, ’ least of all to criticise the United States Secretary of State. The Soviet Union had not come to the council with clean hands, and should have remained silent, he said. “The various statements that have been made urging the adoption of the proposed agenda item have been listened to with close attention. Equally close attention has been given to the statements of various members who feel that the proposed item should not be considered by the council. “These statements and the other information available to us are not sufficient to justify the United States in committing itself for or against inscription at this time.” 1 Mr Guillaume J (France) told the council that he would vote 'against putting the Arab complaint on the agenda. He said the Arab accusations were inane and “based on gratuitous appraisals with regard to the Imanate of Omaii.” The Charter was created to maintain peace and international security, he said. ‘ “It must in no case serve as a shield for subversive propaganda and intervention in the domestic affairs of another country, still less for the manoeuvre which would consist in acting through an intermediary in fomenting disorder.” Those who voted for inscription were the Soviet Union, Iraq, Sweden, and the Philippines. Against were Britain, Australia, ‘ Colombia, Cuba, and France. The United States abstained and Nationalist China did not vote.