Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, General; the United Nations, Volume I

501.BD/10–946

Memorandum by David H. Popper of the Division of International Organization Affairs

secret

[Washington,] October 9, 1946.

Selection of ECOSOC Commissions¹⁶

1. Results of the Elections

On October 2 the Economic and Social Council selected the members of eight commissions which it had created to work in specific fields. The table appended to this memorandum lists the membership of the Commissions.¹⁷

Thirty-nine of the 51 members of the United Nations have been given places on one or more Commissions. By common consent, each of the Big Five has a seat on each Commission. India is represented on six Commissions. The following states are represented on four Commissions: Australia, Canada, Czechoslovakia, the Netherlands, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR, and Yugoslavia.

Eight Latin American States are unrepresented on the Commissions (Argentina, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay). In the Near Eastern-African area, Ethiopia, Liberia, and Saudi Arabia are without representation. Among the Western European states, Luxembourg did not receive a seat.

Total representation on all Commissions, by regional groups, is indicated in the following table:

representation on ecosoc commissions

Group	Number of States	Number of seats on eight Commissions
Big Five	5	40
India	1	6
Smaller Eastern Europe	5	19
Latin America	20	19
British Dominions	4	13
Smaller Western Europe	5	12
Near East-Africa	10	10
Far East	1	1
Total	51	120

2. Original Instructions to the Delegation

The basic instructions to the Delegation, as contained in the Position Paper of September 3,¹⁸ called for the inclusion of nine of the smaller Eastern European States on the six Commissions which had been previously created by the Council, as against fifteen such seats for Latin American countries. The lists as chosen gave fourteen seats to the smaller Eastern European countries and fifteen to the Latin American States, with five seats for the Eastern European bloc as against four for the Latin Americans on the Fiscal and Population Commissions, which were created at this session of ECOSOC.

3. Attempts To Reach a Compromise

Following several telephone conversations on the subject, Mr. Hendrick¹⁹ of OA returned to Washington on September 19 from a visit to New York with a description of negotiations which were being carried on with the Soviets, British and others with a view to reaching complete agreement so that the matter could be presented to the Council and voted upon without delay or acrimonious debate. On the basis of tentative commitments which the Soviets were making at that time, it was understood that the margin of disagreement with the Soviets was relatively small; that the Soviet representatives indicated we might have almost as many Latin American countries on the compromise slate as on the original; and that they felt we should lose some Western European seats. No specific information, however, was formally supplied to the Department on the proposed composition of the six Commissions. It was indicated that Mr. Stampar,²¹ Delegate of Yugoslavia and Acting Chairman of the Council, thought that the tentative compromise slate gave too much representation to the Eastern satellites.

On receipt of this information, the Delegation was requested by telephone to state in writing the present position with regard to slates, giving the details as to the composition of each Commission. The response to this request came to us in telegram #595 from New York, September 21.²² This telegram indicated that the Soviets not only would not accept the compromise slate but also were making additional demands which would raise the smaller Eastern representation to 17 seats on the six Commissions (as compared with 9 on the original U.S. list and 13 on the compromise slate).

4. Departments Views on Compromise

As a result of this information the Department’s Membership Team held a meeting on September 23 in which it decided that it would reluctantly accept the compromise slate as it had been handed to Mr. Stampar as the limit of its concessions to the Soviets. The Team felt that the representation afforded the Soviet bloc under this so-called “Stampar list” was more than generous to the Soviet bloc on a proportional basis, considering that it comprises only 6 of the 51 UN members. Certain additional changes were authorized, but these would not have increased the representation of the Eastern group. It was stated that, if an agreement upon this basis were unobtainable, the Department preferred that the Delegation revert to support of the original list of candidates prepared in the Department and included in the Position Paper of September 3, and left to the Delegation’s discretion the methods to be followed in order to produce a generally accepted slate as close to the original list as possible. (Telegram No. 205 to New York, September 24).²²

5. Departments Opposition to Further Concessions

On September 25 Mr. Hyde²³ telephoned to say that the outlook for any agreement on the slates was dark and to get our reaction on the possibility of making further concessions to the Russians in a final attempt to reach unanimous agreement on the slates. The changes suggested by Mr. Hyde would have raised the representation of the smaller Eastern European countries on the six Commissions to 15 seats as against 13 given to them under the Stampar list and 9 in our original slate. Mr. Hendrick and Mr. Popper told Mr. Hyde that this appeared to give the six UN members in the Soviet bloc a far higher representation than that accorded to any other group or region. They told Mr. Hyde that they seriously doubted the Department would agree to the Russian demands, but that they would inform him more definitely after consultation with the officers concerned. As a result, telegram No. 216, September 27,²⁴ was sent to New York confirming the fact that there was no change in the basic instructions for the Commission slates but permitting a few alterations which would not have increased the representation of the Eastern group. It was specifically stated that the Department did not approve placing Poland on the Economic and Employment Commission.

6. Prospect of Agreement on Favorable Basis

On September 30 Mr. Hyde telephoned us to say that it appeared that an agreement might be reached on the basis of only 12 seats for the Eastern group. It was indicated that the Russians would not insist on placing Poland on the Economic Commission, and that they also agreed that Yugoslavia should receive only three seats on the six Commissions, including the Commission on Women instead of the Transportation Commission. This seemed encouraging, since it indicated we might reach unanimous agreement on a basis more favorable to us than the Stampar list.²⁵

7. Consultation with Mr. Acheson

On October 1 and 2 Mr. Hyde spoke with the Department in four separate telephone conversations during which matters were moving very rapidly. At this stage Mr. Hyde told us that Mr. Winant had received authorization from Mr. Acheson to reach an agreement with the Russians on the basis of 14 seats for the smaller Eastern European countries on the six original Commissions, plus two seats for the Eastern satellites on each of the two new Commissions (Population and Fiscal). In his last conversations Mr. Hyde gave the impression that the matter was now being handled at Mr. Winant’s level and was largely out of his (Mr. Hyde’s) hands.²⁶

8. Changes in the Final Stage

During these conversations Mr. Hyde dictated to us the tentative slates as they stood on October 1, before the telephone conversation between Mr. Acheson and Mr. Winant. A comparison of these slates with those finally elected shows that, at the final stage, five seats were transferred from other states to the Eastern group, against one from an Eastern group state to a Latin American state. Norway and Poland were substituted on the Economic and Employment Commission for Egypt and the Netherlands, although the Department had strongly opposed both these changes. Greece had been displaced from the Transportation and Communications Commission by Yugoslavia, and was thus reduced to a single seat on the Commissions. Byelo-Russia had replaced Norway on the Human Rights Commission; the Ukraine had replaced India on the Population Commission and had also replaced Denmark on the Fiscal Commission. As a result of these changes it will be observed that the smaller Eastern European group was limited to one seat on the Commission for Women and the Statistical Commission, which are relatively unimportant from the standpoint of policy. On the contrary, the smaller Eastern European group has three seats on each of the following Commissions: Economic and Employment, Human Rights, Social, Transportation and Communications, and Fiscal, as well as two seats on the Population Commission. On all of these more important Commissions it has at least as many representatives as any other group and in some cases more.

16. At the third session of the Economic and Social Council which extended from September 11 to October 3 the Council determined the terms of reference and composition of the Population Commission and the Fiscal Commission. It then selected the States to designate representatives on all of the now permanent commissions (except the Narcotics Commission, to which the membership had been elected immediately at the London session), namely Economic and Employment, Human Rights, Social, Status of Women, Statistical, Transportation and Communications, Fiscal, and Population.
17. Table not appended.
18. Not printed.
19. James P. Hendrick of the Division of International Organization Affairs.
21. Dr. Andrija Stampar.
22. Not printed.
22. Not printed.
23. Louis Hyde, Adviser to the United States Representative on the Economic and Social Council.
24. Not printed.
25. In a revision of this memorandum drafted on October 14 Mr. Popper wrote at the beginning of this paragraph: “On September 30 Mr. Hyde telephoned the Department from a public phone in the Delegates’ lounge at Lake Success. Since he could be overheard by other people, he had to talk in guarded language, and his exact meaning was difficult to ascertain. We understood him to say that it appeared an agreement might be reached on the basis of only 12 seats for the Eastern group. …”At the end of the paragraph in the revised memorandum there appeared a parenthetical statement: “(Mr. Hyde has since informed us that what he was attempting to convey was that, if no agreement were reached with the Soviets and a vote were taken, we could elect a slate which contained only 12 seats for the Eastern Group on the six original commissions.)” (501.BD/10–1446)
26. In the revised memorandum of October 14 Mr. Popper wrote an additional paragraph in section 7, following this paragraph: “Mr. Winant had in fact telephoned Mr. Acheson and had informed the latter that the Department had suggested limiting the representation of the smaller Eastern European countries on the six original Commissions to 13 seats; that the British were prepared to settle on the basis of 15 seats for these countries; and that he (Mr. Winant) felt sure he could reach an agreement on the basis of 14 seats. Mr. Acheson authorized Mr. Winant to reach an agreement on this basis. In a second telephone conversation, after the event, Mr. Winant said that he had agreed to proportionate representation for the smaller Eastern states on the two new Commissions (Population and Fiscal). Mr. Acheson apparently assumed this to mean that the smaller Eastern group had received two seats on each of these Commissions.” (501.BD/10–1446)