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

IO Files: USGA/Ia/Gen Com/3

United States Delegation Position Paper

secret

[London,] January 21, 1946.

World Federation of Trade Unions Issue

In the General Committee, when the subcommittee which has conferred with representatives of the WFTU reports, there will apparently be three issues:³⁷

1. Whether the WFTU will have the right to sit regularly in the Assembly, and to speak at its request under special arrangements;

2. Whether the WFTU will have the special right to participate in the meetings of ECOSOC, its commissions and committees, and eventually the right to vote; and

3. The action to be taken by the General Committee on these points.

The General Committee should dispose of these questions in the following manner and for the following reasons:

1. Collaboration with and the right to vote in ECOSOC.

Provision is made in Article 71 of the Charter for consultation of non-governmental agencies with ECOSOC. Neither the General Assembly nor the General Committee should take any action on the question of relations of non-governmental organizations with ECOSOC. This is a matter for ECOSOC itself.

Recommendation: The President should be advised by the General Committee to reply in writing to the WFTU in this sense and he should inform the General Assembly of this advice.

2. Collaboration with the Assembly.

The United States should take a definite position against the proposals of the WFTU on this issue and should vote against it in the General Committee for the following reasons:

a. UNO is an association of governments. The Charter of the United Nations does not make any provision for relations between the Assembly and private organizations or individuals. Furthermore, there is no such provision in the rules of procedure.

b. The Charter provides under Article 71 for a special type of relations between the ECOSOC and private non-governmental organizations. By implication the Charter does not contemplate any similar relations directly with the General Assembly.

c. If any particular private international organization is given a special relationship with the General Assembly, the General Assembly would undoubtedly find it necessary to deal similarly with a large number of applications from other similar organizations.

Recommendation: The General Committee should advise the President to reply in writing to the WFTU in this sense and he should inform the General Assembly of this advice.

3. General Approach.

a. The U.S. representative should make it completely clear in his statements that they are not based on any antagonism toward the WFTU but are based on general constitutional considerations and that the position of the United States would be the same regardless of what private non-governmental organization made a similar request.

4. Procedural question of a recommendation to the General Assembly.

a. There is an additional argument why the General Committee should not recommend to the Assembly that the WFTU request should be granted, i.e., the procedural ground that the General Committee has no authority to make recommendations on substantive issues. The most that the General Committee is empowered to do is to refer such matters to the Assembly with a factual report and without recommendations.

5. Possible request for right to speak before General Assembly.

a. Some member of the General Committee may make an alternative suggestion that the Committee recommend to the Assembly that the WFTU be invited to speak before the Assembly at this meeting. We should oppose such a proposal on the following grounds:

1. The General Committee does not have the right to recommend action on the request of a private individual or organization.

2. It is not authorized by the Rules of the Assembly.

3. It would set a bad precedent.

It is recommended that the U.S. maintain this opposition so as to preserve its right to oppose the proposal in the Assembly.

6. 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.³⁸

37. The second WFTU letter, dated January 17, and signed by Sir Walter Citrine, President of the Federation, as well as the Secretary-General, Mr. Saillant, had been received by the Sub-Committee during its deliberations, and stated in pertinent part: “We feel it should be possible for representatives of the World Federation of Trade Unions to be invited to sit in the Assembly in an advisory and consultative capacity, and also to be brought into regular consultation, under the provisions of Article 71 of the Charter, with the Economic and Social Council. We would also hope that, at a later date, the World Federation of Trade Unions would be accorded full participation in the work of the Economic and Social Council, with the right to vote.” (For complete text, see GA(I/1), General Committee, pp. 38–40, annex 2a)

    By January 21 the General Committee also had received requests from three more non-governmental organizations for association with the organs of the United Nations along the general lines of the request from the WFTU: the International Cooperative Alliance, the International Federation of Women, and the American Federation of Labor (see ibid., pp. 40 ff., annexes 2b, 2c, and 2d). From the outset of the meeting of the General Committee on January 21, when he “submitted that the World Federation of Trade Unions was an organization of a totally different character from the other three. …”, the chairman of the Ukrainian Delegation to the General Assembly (Manuilsky), was associated with the initiative in all attempts undertaken to establish a special status for the WFTU on this basis, first in the General Committee, then in the First Committee, and finally on the floor of the General Assembly.

38. For the statements by Senator Connally, United States delegate on the General Committee, to the Committee on January 21 and January 24, in support of the United States position outlined in this memorandum, see GA(I/1), General Committee, pp. 9 and 12. The essence of his argument was that “the admission of any organization to permanent participation of the kind suggested infringed the provisions of the Charter, which were based on the principle of national representation by Governments”, (ibid., p. 12).

    The question of the representation of non-governmental bodies on the organs of the United Nations continued under the jurisdiction of the General Committee until February 2, at which time the General Assembly received it in the form of a report from the General Committee (see GA(I/1), General Committee, pp. 2–15, passim; pp. 33 ff., annex 2 and appendages; and United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, First Session, First Part, Plenary Meetings, pp. 578 ff., annex 5 [the latter hereafter cited as GA(I/1), Plenary]). The General Assembly on February 2 voted immediately to put the WFTU request on its agenda, and passed the problem on to its First Committee (ibid., pp. 326 ff.). On February 14 the General Assembly received a report from the First Committee on the subject with a proposed resolution (United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, First Session, First Part, First Committee, pp. 667 ff. [hereafter cited as GA(I/1), First Committee]); and adopted the proposed resolution on February 14 (United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, First Session, First Part, Resolutions Adopted by the General Assembly during the First Part of the First Session, p. 10; in the subsequent serialization of the resolutions of the General Assembly this was named Resolution 4 (I)). The complicated maneuvering that occurred both in the General Committee and the First Committee during this period may be traced in the official records of those Committees; General Committee references have been noted above; for the First Committee see GA(I/1), First Committee, pp. 15–35, passim; for consideration of the subject by the General Assembly on February 14, see GA(I/1), Plenary, pp. 501 ff. This problem was canvassed exhaustively by the United States Delegation in meetings from January 25 to February 8; minutes are found in the IO Files, series USGA/Ia/Del. Min. (Chr.).

    Throughout this period the United States, represented by Senator Connally in both the Committees and in the General Assembly, adopted a position based on the principles enunciated in numbered paragraph (2.) (“Collaboration with the Assembly”) of this memorandum, and as a result the final resolution contained no provision for consultative relationships between non-governmental organizations and the General Assembly. Also by the end of the General Committee phase there was a complete acceptance of the United States view that there could be no question of granting an organization representation with the right to vote in any of the organs of the United Nations as this would constitute an amendment of the Charter. This principle was explicitly stated in the Report of the General Committee to the General Assembly and in the Report of the First Committee to the General Assembly.

    Regarding the points set forth in numbered paragraph (1.) (“Collaboration with the right to vote in ECOSOC”) of this memorandum, the United States subsequently modified its position, accepting a proposal that the WFTU request should be transmitted by the General Assembly to ECOSOC with a recommendation that suitable arrangements be established as soon as possible; at the same time the United States insisted that the same status be accorded to certain other non-governmental organizations. The resolution adopted by the General Assembly, incorporating these provisions relating to ECOSOC, was based on a draft originally put forward in the First Committee by the United States.