904 ংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা যুদ্ধ দলিলপত্রঃ ত্রয়োদশ খন্ড struck the forward airfields, close to the Pakistan border, at Srinagar and Avantipur in Indian-occupied Kashmir and at Pathankot and Amritsar. The perfidious nature of the Indian aggression is clear from the outright and irresponsible falsehood which was perpetrated by India. The falsehood lay in India's denial that its forces were involved in the serious fighting which began in the territory of Pakistan on 21st November. On 22nd November, a spokesman for the Defense Ministry of the Government of India stated: "Our troops are under strict instructions not to cross the border". That statement was made when those troops had already crossed the border, and when fighting was taking place inside the territory of Pakistan. On 24th November, however, a Reuters dispatch reported as follows: "An Indian Government spokesman admitted today that Indian tanks had crossed the border into East Pakistan last Sunday (that is, 21st November), when they destroyed 13 Pakistani tanks. The spokesman said that the Indian forces had acted under modified instructions which allowed them to cross the frontiers in self-defense. He confirmed that our (that is Indian) tanks have been in action in self-defense on Sunday. Asked whether they had gone into East Pakistan, he replied, 'Naturally; they had to cross the border". I would appeal to you, Mr. President, and to the Members of the Security Council to keep this square contradiction between a denial and an admission of the same fact on the part of India clearly in view. When it had to admit that it was directly participating in the fighting in Pakistan territory, India cited the right of self-defense. But since when is it permissible under the Charter of the United Nations for a Member State which is not attacked to enter the territory of another Member State in the name of self-defense? It would be fantastic to allege that Pakistan, which is one-fourth India's size, whose armed forces are vastly outnumbered by India's in both man-power and equipment, and which at present is grappling with a severe internal crisis, launched-or even contemplated-an armed attack on India in November. The territory of Pakistan in the east is surrounded on three sides by India and separated by the whole width of northern India from our territory in the west. The direct air link between the two parts of Pakistan was severed in February this year by the Indian Government through an illegal act banning the over flight of Pakistan's aircraft. Moreover, only a small part of our army is stationed in the east. In the face of these facts, what could be more mythical than a plan of armed attack on India by Pakistan in November? Indeed, hardly any situation is conceivable where the plea of self-defense would be more grotesque. It was, of course, to be expected that India should have contrived an excuse for launching an armed attack on Pakistan by alleging that Pakistan's forces intruded into Indian territory at a certain time and place. When listening to these allegations, regardless of their falsehood, the Security Council has to bear in mind the principle that a State which is the victim in its own territory of subversive and/or terrorist acts by irregular, volunteer or armed bands organized by another State, is entitled to take all reasonable and
