CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 40
The Commission continued for the fourth consecutive day consideration of the Yugoslav amendment to Article 3 [C.P. (Gen.) Doc. 1.U.3]. A member of the Yugoslav Delegation made a further statement on Gorizia. He was followed by M. Bebler (Yugoslavia), who presented the Yugoslav defense of the fourth and last sector of the Yugoslav line, that is, the Lower Isonzo. The Czechoslovak motion of yesterday proposing the establishment of a subcommission to study the frontier around Gorizia and related amendments was defeated by 11 votes to 9. The Commission then heard a final defense of the Byelo-Russian amendment (C.P. (Gen.) Doc. 1D1). It was supported in statements by the Ethiopian, Polish and Ukrainian Delegates.
M. Kardelj (Yugoslavia) made a statement for the Record and for history: Yugoslavia has presented a detailed exposition of each sector of its proposed frontier. A few delegates have taken the floor in [Page 439] support thereof, but no one has spoken against the Yugoslav amendment. This important question has therefore not been discussed. Silence has characterized the Commission’s attitude, which ordinarily might signify agreement, but, in this case, signifies opposition, he observed. It means the intention to achieve an objective in spite of reality and in the face of contrary facts which have not been refuted. The Yugoslav Delegation submitted its most recent proposal in a spirit of compromise, but no proposals have come from the other side, he said, and it would appear these states do not wish to come to an agreement with Yugoslavia. Peace would not be furthered by imposing decisions on smaller countries, and nothing would be solved through the fiction that peace settlements can be achieved by formal decisions. He concluded that Yugoslavs were not accustomed to accepting “alien will” and appealed to the members of the Commission to consider that it was not yet too late to reach an agreement with Yugoslavia.
Senhor Accioly (Brazil) spoke in favor of the Brazilian amendment (C.P. (IT/P) Doc. 23).86 His remarks and amendment were contested by the Representatives of Yugoslavia and Poland. In reply to certain Yugoslav charges Senhor Fernandes (Brazil) declared that his country had no reparation claims against Italy, that Brazil would not keep any Italian merchant ships nor confiscate Italian property. The Chairman declared discussion on the Yugoslav, Byelo-Russian and Brazilian amendments to Article 3 closed.
- Not printed.↩