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

501.BB/1–1846

The Principal Adviser on the United States Delegation (Hiss) to the Secretary of State

[London,] January 18, 1946.

The Problem

The question of the relations of the World Federation of Trade Unions to UNO was discussed at a meeting of the Subcommittee of the General Committee on January 16 from 9 p.m. to 12:30 a.m.³⁶ The WFTU representatives were Messrs. Citrine, Saillant, Jouhaux and Kuznetsov.

Three principal problems were discussed:

1. Collaboration with the Assembly

2. Collaboration with the ECOSOC

3. The right to vote in the ECOSOC

1. Collaboration with the Assembly

The representatives of the WFTU were asked two questions:

(i) Would they desire a permanent seat in the Assembly?

(ii) Would they claim the right to speak whenever they wanted in the Assembly?

The answer to the first question was a definite “yes”. The representatives said that they had not discussed the second question but that they recognized that there would have to be some restriction upon their action in this connection.

2. Collaboration with the ECOSOC

There was no disagreement that relations with the ECOSOC were provided for under Article 71 of the Charter. The WFTU however wanted the General Committee to recommend to the General Assembly that it recommend to the ECOSOC that arrangements be made to provide for regular and permanent consultation with the WFTU. The Labor representatives apparently had in mind having a seat in every meeting of the ECOSOC. Most of the time of the meeting was devoted to the issue of whether the General Assembly should make recommendations to the ECOSOC on this matter. No decision was reached.

3. The Right To Vote in the ECOSOC

The Labor representatives indicated that they would take up at some future time the question of a right to vote in the ECOSOC. They recognized that this would require an amendment to the Charter.

The question was also raised whether the Subcommittee was going to recommend that the WFTU representatives be given a hearing by the General Committee. They were told that this was a question for the General Committee to decide and not for the Subcommittee to decide.

Recommended U. S. Position

It is recommended that the U. S. should take the general position that the WFTU is not a unique case to be considered only on its own merits but that any privileges extended to it would also have to be accorded to other large international non-governmental organizations.

In the specific issues raised it is recommended that:

1. Collaboration with the Assembly

The United States should take a definite position that the WFTU is not entitled to a seat in the Assembly nor to the privilege of speaking in the Assembly.

This point was raised by some of the British representatives with Mr. Bevin this morning and he stated emphatically that no such right or privilege should be given the WFTU.

2. Collaboration with ECOSOC

The United States should take the position that this is a matter to be taken up by ECOSOC in connection with Article 71 of the Charter and that no action by either the General Assembly or the General Committee would be appropriate until a recommendation on the matter has been made by ECOSOC.

3. The Right To Vote in the ECOSOC

If our recommended position under point 2 is sustained this question will not arise. If it does arise, the United States should definitely oppose any action which would lead to the granting of the right to vote.

4. Further Hearing of the WFTU by the General Committee

The United States should take the position that the Subcommittee has now heard the wishes of the WFTU and that there is no need for the General Committee to hear any further statement from them. If any question arises requiring clarification, the Subcommittee might meet again with the representatives of the WFTU in order to save the time of the full Committee.

36. In a covering memorandum dated January 18 (apparently drafted on January 17) Mr. Hiss told the Secretary of State that it was expected that on January 18 the General Committee would hear the report of the “Subcommittee of 4 Which was appointed to ascertain the request of the WFTU. There is attached a memorandum stating what occurred when the Subcommittee met with the WFTU representatives last night and setting forth recommendations as to the position which we feel the United States should take on this question.” The Secretary was urged to attend this meeting in person “… in view of the importance of the WFTU issues. …” (501.BB/1–1846)

    No meeting of the General Committee was held on January 18, however, and the Sub-committee’s views were not received by the Committee until January 21. Presumably the Sub-committee was awaiting the clarification of the WFTU’s objectives desired by the Secretariat, which was conveyed by the WFTU in its letter of January 17; see footnote 37, p. 503.