Office of the Historian

501.BB/8–3146: Telegram

The Acting United States Representative at the United Nations (Johnson) to the Secretary of State

secret
urgent
New York, August 31, 1946—12:15 p.m.
[Received August 31—11:30 a.m.]

533. Reference Department’s 167, August 23, 2 p.m.59 I have discussed frankly with Hasluck all queries raised in the Department’s telegram. He said that as he understands, what Evatt proposes to do at the Assembly will depend very largely on what he finds the “climate” of the Assembly to be. Evatt does not plan an all-out attack on the veto as such but his purpose is to effect a restriction of the veto more in line with what he believes to have been the general intention at San Francisco. Evatt is worried about developments since San Francisco which indicate that the Russians consider the veto a convenient piece of machinery to impose their will in all sorts of questions and to block any type of action that does not please them. I gather from Hasluck’s remarks, therefore, that Evatt does not favor total abolishment of the so-called veto but would like to see its use confined to matters of real substance which would be of vital interest to the great power employing it. Hasluck showed some caution in reporting his statement as the views of Evatt because he has not got specific instructions. His conclusions may, therefore, be erroneous, as Evatt, if he finds extensive support in the Assembly for abolition of the so-called veto, may go further than he now intends. Evatt, however, has considerable political realism and, if my judgment of him is correct, he would not wish to go too far out on an issue which would lead him to a complete impasse. According to Hasluck, the Australians regard the Cuban proposal as unrealistic and I do not think that the Australian item has any relation to the Cuban proposal.

Johnson

  1. Not printed; The Department requested Ambassador Johnson to “… obtain by informal casual inquiry of Hasluck” information regarding Foreign Minister Evatt’s purpose in requesting that the Australian item relating to Article 27 be placed on the agenda of the General Assembly. “To what extent does he desire modification of voting formula? Does he favor abolishment of so-called veto on all or part of Chapter VII, or other parts of Charter in addition to those relating peaceful settlement? Does he intend open challenge of four-power declaration?

    “Any information you can obtain as to Australian views on Cuban proposal and its relation to Australia item would be appreciated.” (501.BB/8–2346)

    ↩