RSC Lot 60–D 224, Box 99: UNCIO Cons Five Min 2

Minutes of the Second Five-Power Informal Consultative Meeting on Proposed Amendments, Held at San Francisco, May 9, 1945, 3:05 p.m.

[Informal Notes]

[Here follows list of names of participants, including the Chairmen of delegations of the United States, United Kingdom, and France, the Acting Chairmen of delegations of the Soviet Union and China, together with various unnamed delegates, advisers and members of the technical staffs.]

In opening the meeting, The Secretary said that he hoped to make it as short as possible, since they had one major item on their agenda, namely, the report from the Subcommittee of their Deputies. Accordingly, he said, he would call upon Mr. Pasvolsky as his Deputy to report to this meeting.

[Page 653]

Mr. Pasvolsky said that the assignment of the Deputies had covered two points:

The suggested procedure for drafting the final Charter, and
The establishment of a system whereby consultations might proceed respecting the amendments placed before the Conference by the other Governments.

He said that his Subcommittee had completed the first of these assignments, and that there was being distributed a copy of the procedure which was being suggested for the approval of the heads of the Delegations. He said that oil the second point, the method had been established for reviewing the mass of amendments now pending before the Conference and that He thought that they would be able to proceed rapidly with these consultations.

1. Drafting Final Charter

At Mr. Stettinius’ request, Mr. Pasvolsky summarized the document shown in Annex A.48

Following this oral summary of the document, Mr. Stettinius said that in his opinion, each member of the five should appoint a deputy to sit on the Coordination Committee, and that the Coordination Committee would then report to the Executive Committee. He said that it was his understanding that the procedure set forth in the draft proposed by the Subcommittee was in the nature of a unanimous recommendation to the heads of the Delegations. Mr. Pasvolsky also noted that it was the recommendation of the Subcommittee that if the document was approved by the five heads of Delegations, it should then be submitted to the Executive Committee for its approval before it would become operative.

Mr. Stettinius then asked for comments on the document.

Mr. Bidault said that paragraph 6 seemed to be a bit complicated. Mr. Stettinius said that both paragraphs 6 and 7 seemed to be somewhat complicated and both envisioned a problem which, in his judgment, would have to be met when it arose. Mr. Eden agreed with this point of view. Mr. Pasvolsky suggested that if the paragraphs were dropped, the procedure that they contemplated would, of course, have to be kept in mind.

Mr. Gromyko then inquired as to whether the heads of the Delegations would sit on the Coordination Committee, stating that in his view this would be a preferable procedure. Mr. Stettinius said that he could not agree to such a proposal; that in his judgment it would be better if the members of the Coordination Committee were of the technical level, otherwise there would be great confusion. Mr. Gromyko said that in that event, he recommended that Mr. Sobolev sit as the Soviet member of the Coordination Committee.

[Page 654]

Representative Eaton expressed the hope that in the drafting of the Charter, it would be written so that the common people could understand it.

Mr. Stettinius said that if there were no further comments on the Subcommittee’s report, it would be accepted as modified.

Mr. Pasvolsky then raised the question as to the manner in which the procedure could be adopted, expressing the view that the drafting procedure could be adopted by the Executive Committee without referral to the Steering Committee. Messrs. Stettinius, Eden, Bidault , and Koo agreed that this would be the procedure to follow, with Mr. Koo noting that it might be well to report the action to the Steering Committee at its next meeting.

Mr. Hiss then suggested that the Coordination Committee itself should meet informally first to approve the procedure and then have the Executive Committee meet formally to approve the document itself. Mr. Pasvolsky said he would agree with such a suggestion if the only business before the Coordination Committee at such a meeting was the approval of such a procedure.

Although Mr. Eden expressed the opinion that this seemed to be a slow procedure, Mr. Stettinius said that in his view the Coordination Committee could be quickly called together, even later in the afternoon, to discuss the document and then to clear it with their respective members on the Coordination Committee.49 Then, if it appeared to be necessary, the Executive Committee could meet the following morning at 10:30 for the purpose of approving the document itself.50

This procedure seemed to be agreeable, and Mr. Hiss was requested to make the necessary arrangements at once.

As the meeting closed, Mr. Dunn suggested, and The Secretary approved, that the head of each Delegation might also wish to appoint an alternate to the Deputy which he appointed to the Coordination Committee.

Whereupon the meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m.

  1. Not printed.
  2. Doc. 198, CO/2, May 10, UNCIO Documents, vol. 15, p. 5.
  3. See Doc. 184, EX/10, May 10, ibid., vol. 5, p. 432, and Doc. 243, ST/8, May 11, ibid., p. 222, which was approved by the Steering Committee at its third meeting, May 10 (Doc. 224, ST/7, May 11, ibid., p. 207).