The U.S. made careful preparations to launch the war under the name of the UN, the white paper says, and goes on:
The U.S. had already organized a “drafting group” at the State Department and let it work out a “basic document” and “resolution” to be presented to the UN with the calculation that a complaint that the “north Korean army committed armed attack” was made to the UN, in a purpose to legally hurl its forces and troops of its satellite countries into the Korean War.
After provoking the Korean War under a carefully worked out plan, the U.S. abused the UN in a bid to falsify the truth about its start of the war and justify its undisguised armed intervention.
No sooner had the war broke out in Korea on June 25, 1950 than the then U.S. representative at the UN briefed the UN secretary general in New York on a report presented by officials of the U.S. State Department to the effect that “north Korea made a war declaration”. He urged the UN chief to immediately call a UNSC meeting at the urgent request of the U.S. government.
An emergency UNSC meeting was thus held on June 25 due to the gimmick of the U.S. and its brigandish demand. UNSC “Resolution 82″ was thus railroaded. This U.S.-sponsored “resolution” branded the DPRK as an “aggressor” on the basis of its lie that “north Korea made an armed attack,” thus shifting the blame for the outbreak of the war on to the DPRK.
Another UNSC meeting held on June 27 passed UNSC “Resolution 83″ under the U.S. pressure. This resolution allowed UN member nations (the U.S. and its allies) to launch armed intervention in Korea.
This resolution was, however, nothing but a fig leaf to cover up the U.S. aggression of Korea with the name of UN in view of the time of its adoption.
On June 25, before the adoption of “Resolution 83″, the U.S. let its Japan-based 68th and 339th combat flying corps as well as the 25th corps of fighter bombers of the 5th air force make sorties over Korea 163 times. They perpetrated saturation bombing on the areas of the northern half of Korea from daytime of June 26 and the U.S. 7th fleet launched military operations in the waters off Korea on that day.
For the purpose of hurling more troops of its satellites into Korea the U.S. got the UNSC adopted its “Resolution 84″ on July 7 calling for the organization of the U.S.-led “UN Forces”.
This brought the number of the countries which sent their troops to the above-said Korean war of aggression to 15.
Disclosing the injustice of the UNSC “resolutions” cooked up according to the U.S. scenario, the white paper says:
First, they were adopted without examining the specific facts about the dispute.
“Resolution 82″ was worked out on the basis of a report presented to the UN secretary general by the then U.S. Ambassador to south Korea Muccio and a report of the “UN Commission on Korea” put forward by the U.S. and others. These were cooked up on the basis of the U.S. inventions or of what they obtained from traitor Syngman Rhee.
The same can be said of “Resolution 83″. The UNSC adopted it with neither examination nor confirmation of four reports which the “UN Commission on Korea” worked out in the morning on June 26 at the U.S. instruction.
Second, those resolutions were adopted quite contrary to the requirement of the UN Charter which calls for letting the parties involved in the dispute participate in the discussion.
The U.S. deliberately turned down just requests to invite the representative of the DPRK, a party to the dispute, to the negotiations even though such requests were made whenever there were discussions on the DPRK. It manipulated negotiators to allow only the south Korean puppet representatives to participate in the debate.
Third, those resolutions were adopted in wanton violation of Paragraph 3 of Article 27 of the UN Charter stipulating the voting procedures of the UNSC which say that any resolution can be passed with the approval of seven member nations (at that time) including the yes votes of all the five permanent members.
The UNSC was not functioning properly at that time as the UN had pro-U.S. tendency and the former Soviet Union, one of the five permanent member nations, was not present there.
Fourth, those resolutions were cooked up in defiance of the requirements of the UN Charter concerning the UN Forces.
The U.S. breached norms of the UN Charter concerning the organization of the UN Forces.
The U.S. and its 15 satellite countries dispatched their troops to the Korean front before concluding any special agreement in line with Article 43 of the charter.
The U.S. also wrested all rights to command the “UN Forces” in violation of the system of supervision of the UN Forces and the principles of its activities. Clark, UN forces commander toward the end of the Korean War, confessed in March 1967 that he was “UN Forces commander” in Korea but he did not remember what instruction he got from the UN during the war.
This proves that the “UN Forces” and the “UN Forces Command” organized by the U.S. by abusing the UN had nothing to do with the UN. That was why at the 28th UN General Assembly representatives of many countries charged that the U.S. fabricated “Resolution 84″ by abusing the UN and the sham forces which were not responsible for their actions before the UNSC were preposterously called the “UN Forces”.
The injustice of the UNSC “resolutions” related to the Korean War, which were concocted according to the U.S. scenario, were brought to light with the UNSC “resolution 90″ adopted later.
On Jan. 31, 1951 after the former Soviet Union participated in the activities of the UNSC, it adopted “Resolution 90″ retracting from its agenda the Korean War-related “complaint about the aggression against the Republic of Korea” which was presented by the U.S. on June 25, 1950. The Korean issue had not been tabled since then.
The adoption of “Resolution 90″ meant, in the final analysis, the UNSC’s admittance of the injustice of all “resolutions” related to the Korean War.
All facts prove that the U.S. abuse of the UN for the war of aggression against the DPRK was a very serious breach of international law as it had no legal validity.