U.N.O. and Albania
The only important feature about the discussion on the British complaint against Albania at the meeting of the Security Council on Monday was the Russian opposition to the inscription of the question on the agenda and—when the inscription had been carried by to votes to none—further opposition to any hearing of the case till Albanian representatives saw fit to present themselves. The latter thesis, which was also defeated, meant, as Sir Alexander Cadogan
pointed out, that Albania, who is the defendant in the case, would be enabled to veto any consideration of the British complaint at all. As to other points, M. Gromyko, the Russian member of the Council, submitted that Britain had not exhausted the possibilities of direct negotiation under Act 33 of the United Nations Charter ; Sir Alex- ander Cadogan answered, accurately, that it had completely exhausted them. M. Gromyko further contended that an international mine- sweeping organisation ought to be created ; Sir Alexander replied that such an organisation already existed. The Security Council is likely to proceed with the hearing of the British complaint this week. Meanwhile the question arises, why should Russia alone of all the members of the Council- oppose what is obviously a most right and proper request to the Council by Great Britain. Mines off the coast- of Alban:a, which could on the face of it not have been laid there, after the area had been fully swept, without the knowledge of the Albanian Government were responsible for serious loss to two British warships and the loss of 44 British lives. To reasonable approaches the Albanian Government returned defiant, not to say provocative, replies. What, in such circumstances, should Great Britain have done? Bombarded the Albanian coast, as Mussolini bombarded Corfu in 1923? Why when we go instead to U.N.O. does Russia du her best to get her Ally non-suited?
Previous page
