Repeat Washington No. 4.

1. The Political Committee of the General Assembly met yesterday (3 January) at 10.45 a.m. and received the report of the Cease-Fire Group¹ which was presented by Sir Benegal Rau.' In an air-mail letter yesterday to the Under-Secretary I am sending a copy of this report. After hearing the report and after some debate, the Political Committee adjourned for forty-eight hours until 10.45 a.m., Friday, 5th January.

2. Prior to the meeting of the Political Committee the Cease-Fire Group held an informal meeting with the United States delegation, at the request of the latter. In reply to a question from Gross, the members of the Group informed him that their report would be of a purely factual nature and would not contain recommendations. Gross then said that he understood Austin would wish to speak at the meeting of the political Committee. In the opinion of the United States delegation it would be insufficient for the Political Committee merely to meet, receive a report of failure from the Cease-Fire Group, and then adjourn without any discussion. The United States delegation considered this would be inadequate in view of the all-out Chinese attack now taking place below the 38th Parallel. Gross said that Austin's state­ment would be short and of a general nature, and would emphasize the gravity of the situation and the necessity for unity within the free world. The members of the Group indicated that they did not consider that they were in a position to dissuade any delegation from speaking on their report if such a delegation were ready to do so.

3. When the meeting of the Political Committee opened the first speaker was Rau, who read out the report of the Cease-Fire Group. He emphasized the purely factual nature of the report. He also stressed that, despite this initial failure, the United Nations must continue to make every effort to bring about an end of the hostilities.

4. The next speaker was Malik, who made a vituperative propaganda attack on the United States in which he repeated all the former Soviet allegations regarding United States aggression in Korea and the atrocities committed by the United States forces as well as the "Syngman Rhee hangmen". He also remarked that the people of Western Europe, as well as the people of Asia, must now realize that they were only regarded as cannon fodder by the United States militarists. He concluded by proposing that the First Committee should see a film concerning alleged United States atrocities in Korea which was in the possession of the Soviet delegation.

5. Austin replied in a generally restrained and dignified manner, considering the provocation given him by Malik. He commended the efforts of the Cease-Fire Group. He said that the constant ignoring and rebuffing of these efforts by the Chinese Communists left no doubt as to where the blame lay for the failure to reach a cease-fire. He said that the large-scale offensive across the 38th Parallel being undertaken by the Chinese Communist forces "compounds the original aggression" and that the free world must consider what the next step should be, in view of this new situation. He emphasized that the United Nations must demonstrate that the free world was united in resisting aggression, and that the United Nations troops must remain in Korea. He also said, however, that the door should be held open for every attempt to find an "honourable solution". He concluded by saying that the Committee should adjourn for a short period to permit representatives time to study the Cease-Fire Group's report and in order to allow consultation in an atmosphere of "fresh air" as distinct from the "polluted atmosphere" created by Malik's statement.

6. The Norwegian representative, Sunde, then asked the Cease-Fire Group whether they had given consideration to the formulation of principles underlying the negotiation of outstanding issues, which could be put into effect if a cease-fire were achieved. This intervention by Sunde was really an "arranged question", as the members of the Cease-Fire Group had asked him, prior to the meeting, to address such a question to them.

7. Mr. Pearson then replied on behalf of the Cease-Fire Group and assured the Committee that the Group had given serious consideration to the formulation of such principles. He emphasized, however, that the cease-fire must come first, before any such principles could be acted upon. He said that at a later stage the Cease-Fire Group might be able to inform the Committee of their views on these principles for negotiation, but that they were not at present in a position to do so.

8. Jebb then made a short intervention in reply to Malik and also moved the adjournment of the Committee for a period of forty-eight hours in order to allow

representatives time to study the Cease-Fire Group's report. After a short discus­sion this motion for adjournment was adopted by a vote of 46 in favour, 5 against, and 7 abstentions. The Soviet bloc opposed the motion, claiming that the Commit­tee should take up the previously submitted Soviet resolution on this question. Mr. Pearson abstained on the motion, as did the other members of the Cease-Fire Group.

9. A report on negotiations preceding the meeting is being given in separate tele­grams from Mr. Pearson.

¹Au sujet des activités du Comité du cessez-le-feu, voir aussi/On the activities of the Cease-Fire Com­mittee, see also L.B. Pearson, Mike: The Memoirs of the Rt. Hon. Lester B. Pearson, Volume 11: 1948-1957, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973, pp. 279-314.

²Voir Canada, ministère des Affaires extérieures, Documents sur la Crise coréenne, Ottawa Imprimeur du Roi, 1951, pp. 21-31.
See Canada, Department of External Affairs, Documents on the Korean Crisis, Ottawa: King's Printer, 1951, pp. 19-28.