501.BB/10–2446
Memorandum by Bernhard G. Bechoefer of the Division of International Security Affairs to the Chief of the Division ( Johnson )
Subject: First Meeting of Delegation on October 22, 1946 concerning the Veto Problem
I am submitting this memorandum at the suggestion of Mr. Paul Taylor79 since neither the secret summary which I prepared immediately after the meeting and which was sent today nor the minutes80 which Mr. Taylor has prepared and cleared with me deal with certain phases of the meeting which are of particular interest to you. I shall follow this practice only in unusually important matters where greater detail is required than is ordinarily furnished through the minutes. The meeting took place on the afternoon of October 22 and lasted approximately an hour. Senator Austin stated that the U.S. position has been briefed more thoroughly in connection with the veto problem than with any other problem confronting the General Assembly because it was necessary to convince not only the General Assembly but [Page 313] also to convince public opinion in order to rectify misunderstandings and to secure agreement on voting principles.
Senator Austin stated that there was nothing novel in the Security Council voting principles embodied in the Charter and that they were evolved after much study to meet actual conditions. He compared at some length the procedure leading to the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations with the procedure used to adopt the U.S. constitution.
Senator Austin stressed the necessity of (quoting the Vermont constitution) “recurrence to fundamental principles”. He stated that the U.S. position aims to avoid the tangle of details. He then said that the U.S. position paper,81 which was distributed in the meeting, comes from the White House. It had been discussed and approved by the President, the Secretary of State, and the Under-Secretary and that the contents represented the recommendations of the Chief Executive.
Senator Austin stated that the discussion with the Secretary of State and the President concerned not only the substantive position but also procedures for presenting the substantive position. It was agreed that a general statement of the U.S. position should be presented to the delegates of the permanent members of the Security Council82 before any discussion took place either in the general committee or in the General Assembly. Senator Austin would personally see the delegates in the hope that the permanent members would take positions similar to that recommended by the U.S.
Senator Austin further stated that the U.S. would advocate a discussion in the General Assembly immediately after the general debates and prior to the reference of this particular matter to a committee. The Senator would attempt to induce the U.S.S.R. to suggest a general discussion prior to the reference of the matter to a committee. The purpose of such discussion would be to limit the extent of consideration in the committee and to sift out the most important problems.
Senator Austin then proceeded to state briefly the substance of the position paper. He made two fundamental points: First, the U.S. adheres firmly to the principle of unanimity which requires that the more important decisions of the Security Council be approved by all Powers with responsibilities to carry out the decisions. The loss of speed through the requirement of unanimity is more than counterbalanced by the gain in certainty of the abolition of war. Second, the U.S. must assure the world that it is not standing against world opinion through opposing change. The U.S. is eager to go ahead at the proper time when real progress can be achieved through change and when change will advance the possibilities of peace. Specifically, from a long-range standpoint, the U.S. looks forward to interpretation [Page 314] of the Charter in such a manner that the veto at some future time may not apply to matters arising under Chapter VI of the Charter. The U.S. cannot however hold out any hope for any change in the Charter which would eliminate the veto under Chapter VII.
Senator Austin suggested that the position paper be studied carefully and that more detailed discussions should take place at a later time.
Senator Austin stated that one aspect of the U.S. position is negative. The U.S. believes that no case has been made out for amendment of the Charter at this time and therefore will oppose the Cuban proposal for a convocation of a general conference. The indictment against the Security Council voting formula is directed not to the formula but to abuses, malpractice—and therefore is insufficient to justify amendment of the Charter.
Affirmatively, the U.S. suggests rules, regulations, definitions, not changes.
Senator Connally suggested that possible future modifications of the Charter should not be restricted to Chapter VI but might also apply to matters such as the election of the Secretary-General. Minister Wadsworth further suggested that future modifications might also apply to admission of States to membership.
Senator Austin agreed but stated that the first task was to stop the Cuban movement which could not help but result in futility because of the right of permanent members to veto any amendments.
Mr. Dulles suggested that the U.S. should not take the Cuban proposal too seriously since the Cubans knew that it was futile. It was put forward because of the feeling of many nations, not only the smaller nations but also some of the greater powers, that the veto has been used arbitrarily. However, to the best of his knowledge no State has contended that the veto has been used arbitrarily by the U.S. Mr. Dulles therefore suggested that it was not necessary for the U.S. to come to the defense of the veto. If the purpose of the discussion is to air the grievances of the smaller States concerning the veto, why should we come to its rescue?
Senator Austin stated that the U.S. must take the leadership to revive the spirit of our people with regard to the United Nations, indicating that the campaign against the veto had shifted the viewpoint of the U.S. from fundamental conceptions of the United Nations. Mr. Dulles said that he conceded Senator Austin’s contention but stated that he objected to Senator Austin’s statement that there was no grounds for the Cuban indictment. Congressman Eaton asked if the U.S. was defending the veto and merely objecting to the U.S.S.R. use of the veto. Senator Austin reiterated that the attacks on the veto undermined the confidence of the American public in the United Nations and the U.S. position must be directed to end the defeatist [Page 315] attitude in the U.S. Minister Wadsworth said that he was impressed by the necessity for defending the principles of unanimity but asked what safeguards could be given against continuing abuses. Senator Austin said that safeguards could be furnished through rules and regulations. Senator Austin informed Mr. Stevenson that there would be many chances for further discussion but that such discussions should not take place until all the delegation had had an opportunity to study the Charter.
[For the brief General Committee discussion as to whether the three items on the voting question should be recommended to the General Assembly for inclusion on its agenda, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, First Session, Second Part, General Committee, pages 74 and 75. In deference to the Soviet Representative’s (Vyshinsky) withdrawal of an initial opposition to the inclusion of the items on the agenda, the United States Representative (Austin), “actuated by the same conciliatory spirit as Mr. Vyshinsky”, did not press for a General Committee recommendation for discussion of the items by the General Assembly in plenary session before referral to the appropriate committee. The General Committee decided, then, that a “qualified committee” should be appointed to study the question and to report to the General Assembly. The final recommendation of the General Committee to the General Assembly was that the items should be adopted for inclusion in the final agenda and then be referred immediately to the First Committee (Report of the General Committee to the General Assembly, document A/163, United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, First Session, Second Part, Plenary Meetings, pages 1475 ff., annex 30; this record is cited hereafter as GA(I/2), Plenary)]
- Paul B. Taylor of the Division of International Organization Affairs and an Assistant Executive Officer on the expert and advisory staff attached to the United States Delegation to the General Assembly.↩
- Neither the telegraphic summary nor the minutes of the meeting are printed here. The minutes of the meetings of the United States Delegation are in the IO Files, the series carrying the symbol US/A/M(Chr); the identifying number for the meeting under reference here, the eighth held by the Delegation (October 22, 1946, 3 p.m.), is US/A/M(Chr)/8.↩
- Document, SD/A/C.1/69B, supra.↩
- See document US/A/C.1/20, November 4, p. 320.↩