RUSSIA USES VETO

Greymouth Evening Star, 23 September 1946, Page 5

RUSSIA USES VETO

INDEPENDENT INQUIRY IN GREECE AMERICAN PROPOSAL OPPOSED NEW YORK, September 20. When the United Nations Security Council resumed, the debate on the Ukraine’s charges against. Greece, Mr Gromyko (Russia) opposed the United States motion for the appointment of a commission to investigate the border incidents between Greece on the one hand and Bulgaria, Rumania, and Jugoslavia on the -other. Mr Herschel Johnson (United States, had moved that a commission comprising three persons should'visit the countries named. Mr Gromyko objected that neithei Bulgaria nor Jugoslavia was involved in the Ukraine’s charges, am that the appointment bf a commission would unfairly cast a shadow o. those countries. Soviet Motion Rejected The Soviet vetoed thqjUnited States motion, which received the support of eight members only, Russia and Poland opposing it. Australia abstained. The original Soviet resolution holding Greece responsible for aggression, with the support of British troops was defeated by nine votes to two, only Russia -and Poland supporting it. A Netherlands motion appealing to the Balkan States to cease provoking border incidents was defeated by six votes to three. Mr Lange (Poland) moved, “in the interests of unanimity,” that the Council keep the Greek situation under observation. Mr Paul Hasluck (Australia) pointed out that the Council had listened for 12 sittings to a series or grave charges made in an extremely bad spirit. He expressed the opinion that it seemed too late to talk about unanimity. Mr Lange’s resolution was defeated by nine votes to two, only Russia and Poland voting for it. Mr Lie May Take Action During the debate the SecretaryGeneral (Mr Trygve Lie) pointed out that he had the right under the United Nations Charter to make any investigation he deemed necessary, to determine the facts in connection with the Ukrainian charges. Mr Gromyko said Mr Lie was perfectly correct in raising the question of his rights. Observers say that Mr Lie’s statement, which was unsolicited by t< Council, seems firmly to have established his role as an official considerably more influential and more im portant than his counterpart in the League of Nations. Mr Lie is apparently determined to emphasise that, regardless of the opinions reached by Council members without the benefit of formal investigation, his job demands that he must be prepared to conduct his own surveys wherever international peace may be endangered.