that such violations are being committed by India almost every day, the UNMOGIP has been sending these reports of violations and they can be made available by the Office of the Secretary-General. So, to single out one small alleged incident of a border crossing as denoting Pakistan's intention of attacking India is, I regret to say, not evidence of a sense of proportion.
The Representative of the Soviet Union ranged far and wide in his many interventions on the internal affairs of Pakistan, and he also spoke about certain aspects of Pakistan's external relations. In speaking of the problems of the refugees he stated that India was justified in massing its forces on Pakistan borders because, to quote Ambassador Malik, what self-respecting State which cares for its security is not going to displace part of its armed forces to the territory where there was this rush of 10 million refugees? If that was justified, we should like to ask was it also justified for India to have established bases for armed guerrillas, to have equipped, trained and unleashed them for carrying out acts of sabotage and destruction in East Pakistan? Is that also justified because there are 10 million refugees in India? And was it also justified when finally Indian armed forces attacked Pakistan on 21st November on a large-scale at many points of the border-which has been admitted by the Representative of India?
We regret that the Soviet Representative did not take into account those other aspects of the situation. But in one respect I welcome his statement. Since April of this year, we have heard repeated charges from India of genocide that Pakistan armed forces had killed hundreds of thousands of men, women and children in East Pakistan that they have carried out all kinds of untold atrocities.
We are glad to note the sobriety and responsibility, in the statement of the Representative of the Soviet Union and in his Government's statements whenever they have spoken about the situation, they have referred to thousands killed in the disturbances—although they have talked of 10 million refugees.
I should like to inform the Council that I have no desire to enter into an exchange with the Representative of India in regard to this tragic situation. Impartial observers, such as the correspondents of the London Guardian and even some correspondents of The New York Times, did report on the massacres carried out by the anti-State and secessionist elements in East Pakistan before 25th March. And, if the Representative of India has chosen to disregard the other side of the picture we can only say that his submissions here in the Security Council cannot be considered balanced or fair. I would be glad to draw his attention to the reports that have appeared in the world press, in the most responsible and respected organs of public opinion, in this regard.
The Representative of the Soviet Union drew a very graphic picture when he said that 10 million refugees constitute a larger population than that of some 88 Member states of the United Nations. Undoubtedly, this is an enormous figure. Without entering into a controversy as to the actual number of refugees that have left, let me also point out that in the Third Committee debates on the question of humanitarian assistance to Pakistani refugees, the Representative of Uganda stated that his country had given asylum to 188,000 refugees from neighboring African countries. And, at the same time the
