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

IO Files: US/A/C.1/37

Minutes of Informal Meeting of Members Committee 1 Group¹

[New York,] November 4, 1946.

Voting in Security Council

Present:	Senator Warren R. Austin
	Senator Connally
	Ambassador Herschel Johnson
	Mr. Dulles
	Mr. Stevenson
	Mr. Cohen
	Mr. Fahy
	Mr. Ross
	Mr. Sandifer
	Mr. Joseph Johnson
	Mr. Noyes
	Mr. Foote
	Mr. Sanders
	Mr. Stokes
	Mr. Wilcox
	Mr. Bechhoefer

Copies of documents US/A/C.1/20 and US/A/C.1/18 were distributed to those present. Mr. Joseph Johnson read the former document which was a draft of a memorandum which it was proposed to submit to the delegations to the General Assembly of the other four permanent members of the Security Council indicating the position of the United States on the problem of voting in the Security Council. Mr. Johnson summarized the latter document which also was to be submitted to the other four permanent members of the Security Council and which contained the proposals for rules of procedure of the Security Council which the United States intended to present to the Security Council.

After considerable discussion it was agreed that the position memorandum should be revised in certain details. Likewise the comments on the proposals for the rules of procedure should be revised to delete all reference to secret documents of the San Francisco Conference. It was further agreed that both documents as revised should be submitted to the delegations of the other members of the Big Five—if possible today or tomorrow morning and in any event, prior to any discussion of the problem in Committee I. It was further agreed that they should likewise be submitted to the delegations of other members of the Security Council shortly after submission of the documents to the other Four.

It was decided that the documents should also be filed with the President of the Security Council but no decision was reached as to the time when such filing should take place.

No decision was reached on the following questions:

1. Whether the proposals on rules of procedure to be filed with the Security Council should be a restricted document.

2. Whether in the presentation to Committee I of the General Assembly the United States should confine itself to the general points made in Senator Austin’s speech or should list the matters where the United States believed additional interpretation of the voting formula was required.

3. The nature of the statement to be made by Senator Connally in the Committee.

4. Whether to submit the specific rules of procedure to the General Assembly.

5. The nature of any resolution which the United States should support in the General Assembly.

Mr. Stevenson and others emphasized that almost immediately after the presentation of the documents discussed in this meeting to the other members of the Security Council, their contents would become public. Therefore, it was suggested that it would be appropriate to submit the documents officially to the General Assembly for its information but not for action, even though the exact text of the proposed rules of procedure need not be deemed a firm position of the United States.

Mr. Cohen and Mr. Joseph Johnson emphasized that the objective of the discussions in the General Assembly was to obtain acceptance by the Security Council of satisfactory rules and practices, and not to secure a resolution that satisfied the General Assembly. Since it would be undesirable to press for the hasty adoption of rules by the Security Council which might be unsatisfactory, there was very little chance that the Security Council would act during the present session of the General Assembly. Accordingly they felt that the presentation in the General Assembly should be made in such a way as not to prejudice success in the Committee of Experts and in the Security Council.

Mr. Cohen stressed that the unofficial publication of United States proposals would not be the equivalent of their being submitted to the General Assembly by the United States as an official document.

It was agreed that there was considerable danger that a great multitude of very specific proposals would be made to the General Assembly with the effect of confusing the main issues. The fact that other states might submit specific proposals to the General Assembly should not influence the United States to change its emphasis on the necessity of Security Council Action.

Mr. Dulles suggested that the United States revise its suggestion concerning voluntary absention from voting to include the point made by Mr. Parodi in the General Assembly that the Security Council permanent members be permitted to vote negatively on non-procedural matters without their negative votes being considered as an exercise of the veto. Others present at the meeting suggested that such a proposal would contravene Article 27 of the Charter.

1. Drafted by Mr. Bechhoefer.