the establishment of reception centers and the provision of facilities for the resettlement of the returning refugees by every feasible means we have demonstrated that we are anxious for our nationals to return. On 19th July. Secretary General U Thant proposed to both India and Pakistan that a limited number of the Representatives of the U.N.II.C.R. be posted on both sides of the border to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of the refugees. We unhesitatingly accepted this proposal. India however, rejected it.
The ostensible reason which India cites for its refusal to allow the return of the displaced persons is that conditions are not secure for their return. In the first place, India itself makes the conditions insecure. Secondly, what India means by “secure conditions", as the distinguished Forcign Minister of India made amply clear before this Assembly, is a political solution which would be in accordance with its dictates. The Prime Minister and other leaders of India have publicly declared that they will agree to the return of the displaced persons only when the so-called “Bangladesh” emerges' in other words, when East Pakistan secedes and passes under Indian tutelage.
Could there be a more blatant interference in the internal affairs of one state by another? Only last year. India joined all of us in voting for the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security which solemnly affirmed the universal and unconditional validity of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, including the principles of non-interference, as the basis of relations among States, irrespective of their sizc, geographical location, level of development, of political, economic and social systems, and declared that the breach of these principles cannot be justified in any circumstances whatsoever.
The issue that is posed by India's interference is not of concern of Pakistan alone. It concerns all nations that wish to preserve their sovereign status and territorial integrity. If the principle of non-intervention is set aside or compromised, every nation, smaller or weaker than its neighbor will be open to the latter's inroads. I therefore appeal to this Assembly to exercise its powers of persuasion on India to desist from its interventionist course. For our part, we are determined to resist India's encroachments and achieve the political solution which we sorely need for our own survival.
Let not India pretends that it has not also created some other problems in the subcontinent. India engaged in efforts to subjugate the Nagas-a proud, non-Indian peoplewho have borne untold hardship during their long resistance to Indian rule. In India's own territory, there are situations which are the direct result of the exploitation and suppression of the smaller linguistic and ethnic groups in India, notably the Dravidians, she Sikhs and the Bengalis, but we do not made them a cause for interfering in India's affairs. We only wish that India realized, as we do, that anarchy and fragmentation are a danger as much to itself as to us.
If I may sum up the India-Pakistan situation it is a situation of a patent threat to peace which needs to be removed if the people of the two countries are to resume their struggle to achieve higher standards of life in larger freedom. We do not consider the Indian
