Chinese nationalist forces known as the Kuomintang (which had been defeated in the Chinese Civil War) had fled to Burma from China in the early 1950s. In March 1953, Burma requested that the matter be included in the GA’s 7th session, alleging that the presence of the forces constituted a violation of their territory and also that the forces in question had engaged in looting and other violations and forcibly resisted efforts to have them disarmed, removed or otherwise interned (A/2375).1 The Union of Burma requested the GA to recommend to the SC “to take all necessary steps to ensure immediate cessation of the acts of aggression by the Kuomintang Government of Formosa against the Union of Burma”.2
In its ensuing resolution 707 (VII) of 23 April 1953, adopted by 59 votes in favour and 1 abstention (Burma), the GA “condemn(ed) the presence of these forces in Burma and their hostile acts against that country”, and raised its concern at the violation of Burma’s territory by foreign forces (A/RES/707(VII)). It declared that foreign forces (implicitly the Kuomintang) “must be disarmed and either agree to internment or leave” the Burmese territory, urging all States to provide assistance to the Government of the Union of Burma “to facilitate by peaceful means the evacuation of these forces” (ibid., paras. 3, 5).
The GA also recommended that the ongoing negotiations “through the good offices of certain Member States should be pursued” for the “immediate disarmament and withdrawal of the said forces from the territory of the Union of Burma” (ibid., para 4). One month later, on 22 May 1953, the US initiated a Four-Nation Military Commission (including Burma, the Republic of China, the US and Thailand) in Bangkok to negotiate the withdrawal of Kuomintang troops from Burma. The remaining Kuomintang troops were not fully evacuated to Taiwan until the People’s Republic of China and Burma undertook a series of coordinated military operations in 1960–1961.
Unlike most of the examples of GA resolutions related to the use of force provided in this Handbook, this case was an example where the GA acted without the SC having previously taken up the issue.3
Notes
- The letter noted that “approximately 12,000 Kuomintang troops” refused to “submit to disarmament and internment” and had committed “depredations against the civilian population”. It further argued that the presence of Kuomintang troops was an “infringement of Burmese territorial integrity” and that they were directed by the Government of Formosa (A/2375). ↩︎
- Ibid. ↩︎
- Barber, “A survey of the General Assembly’s competence in matters of international peace and security: in law and practice”, pp. 147–148. ↩︎