U.S. MAY INSIST

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21980, 26 March 1946, Page 5

U.S. MAY INSIST

COUNCIL_REVIEW RUSSO-PERSIAN PACT OBVIATING VIOLATION (11 a.m.) NEW YORK, March 25. The New York Times says _ that a highly-authoritative source disclosed that the United States would insist that the Security Council examine the bona fides of any agreement between Russia and Persia and would also propose international measures to ensure the new pact is not violated. The American view is that if the Moscow radio reports are correct and the Russians are withdrawing an agreement may already have been reached. The United States Government sees no reason for hasty action. The Russians’ timing of the disclosure that their troops are withdrawing is not considered surprising in view of the way matters were handled at -the London meeting of the Security Council. British Reactions The immediate Russian-Persian crisis is over, says the Daily Mail in a leader on the Russian announcement that the evacuation of Persia has begun. The sudden end of a situation which seemed to set back the clock to 1938 and aroused fears of another war will be received with. relief throughout the world. . . , ... The Soviet Government acted with wisdom and common sense. There can be no question, however, that its decision was promoted by the firm attitude adopted by Britain and America ana their refusal to postpone the examination of the dispute before the Security Council. The leader says: “The matter will no doubt remain on the agenda. It is necessary that it should. _ There is a good deal to be explained, including the continuance of Russian occupation beyond the treaty date. . Clarification Needed

“In the interests of future international relations, it is necessary to know what the situation was and how it was clarified. It will be asked why, if Russia can begin to withdraw her troops by March 24, she could not have done so on the agreed date, March 2. “Moscow’s announcement also contains points which are not quite dear. The withdrawal, it is stated, will be completed in five or six weeks if nothing unforeseen happens to prevent it. The period of recall for these troops would seem to be unduly prolonged except on the assumption that no preparations were made to get them out on March 2. What, it will be asked, is likely to happen in the next five or six weeks to keep the Russian forces in Persia? Such questions may seem hypercritical when weighed against the all-important fact that a dangerous world crisis has blown over, but if the situation is to have a final satisfactory settlement there must be no loose ends." .

Security Council’s Duties

The leader declares: “The fact is that Russia broke the treaty with Britain and Persia. Russian troops occupied the territory of a friendly nation long after they should have withdrawn and the Russian failure to reply to repeated requests for information should not be glossed over. The Security Council, for these reasons, should not lightly dismiss the Russian-Persian dispute. "The Russian Government’s decision is unquestionably a victory in advance for the United Nations and what it represents, but there should be no disposition to crow over the Russian climbdown. The crisis is too grave for that. Rather should there be a renewed attempt to understand the Russian viewpoint and to banish the fears and suspicions which are at the bottom of her search for security.”

“The announcement that Russian troops are withdrawing from Persia presented the first ray of hope of a fair and friendly solution since the Persian problem became acute,” says The Times diplomatic correspondent. “London was all the more surprised at the more favourable turn because Britain’s request last week to Moscow for a reply to her inquiry of three weeks ago brought no response.”