of the general reduction of armaments. Are we to under-
stand that we are being called upon to postpone the sub-
mission of information regarding troops on foreign terri-
tories until such time as we finish discussing the question
of the general reduction of armaments? Are we to under-
stand the proposal for the joint discussion of these two
questions in the sense that information regarding troops
on foreign territories is not to be demanded from England,
the 'United States, the Soviet Union, France, and other
states until the problem of the general reduction of ar-
maments has been worked out? If 'that is so, and if we
adopt such a decision, we will place ourselves in a very
embarrassing position. It will be understood that we do
not wish, as yet, to inform the United Nations organization
about our troops on foreign territories. We will thus give
cause to think that we wish to keep our forces on the ter-
ritories of other United Nations as long as possible. But
judge for yourselves—what will that lead to? How will
it be interpreted? Again, another consideration. If we
decide on the joint discussion of these two questions,
and postpone the submission of information regarding
troops on foreign territories until such time as we finish
our work on the problem of the general reduction of ar-
maments, we must ask ourselves another question: will
such a decision have a desirable effect from the point of
view of the prestige of the United Nations organization?
V
A CLEAR REPLY IS NECESSARY
It is clear to all of us that nobody will now dare open-
ly refuse to submit this information to the United Nations
orgapdzation. Such a refusal would put any country into
29*