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

501.BC/9–1446

Department of State Position Paper⁸⁸

secret
SD/S/734

Washington, October 14, 1946.

British Proposal To Make the Whole of a Nation’s Forces Available to the Security Council

The Joint Chiefs of Staff have requested the views of the Department of State on the following article which was proposed by the United Kingdom representatives on a subcommittee of the Military Staff Committee of the United Nations for inclusion in the Standard Form of Agreement concerning the size and composition of the armed forces to be made available to the Security Council:

“[Member Nation] guarantees to place, if requested by the Security Council, the whole of its national forces at the disposal of the Security Council so far as its other commitments and transport resources permit.”

The Department of State holds the view that the United States should oppose the inclusion of this article in the Standard Form of Agreement. The reasons for holding this view are as follows:

1. The article would not be in agreement with United States law.

Section 6 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (Public Law 264–79th Congress) reads as follows:

“The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.”

The wording of this section makes it clear that the special agreement to be entered into by the United States will have to be approved by Congress and that Congress expects the agreement to mention a specific quantity of armed forces, any commitment beyond which would require further authorization by the legislative branch.

2. The article would be out of harmony with congressional opinion.

During conversations held on April 1, 1946 by representatives of the State Department with Senators Connally, Vandenberg, Austin and Thomas, it was the judgment of these Senators that the number of forces, and particularly of the ground forces, should be small; otherwise, the possibility of public disapproval was foreseen.

3. The article overvalues the effectiveness of the Charter from the security point of view.

As stated in SWNCC 219/9 (page 97, paragraph 3), the existence of the unanimity requirement makes it highly improbable that the Security Council will ever take action by armed forces. Action against any of the permanent members of the Security Council is practically impossible. The only conceivable action which the Security Council could take would be against small nations. It would, therefore, be unnecessary to place large forces at the disposal of the Security Council.

In making this proposal, the United Kingdom probably wished to strengthen the United Nations and to increase its prestige. The United Kingdom has not, however, proposed the abolition of the unanimity rule, which would appear to be a necessary condition to strengthening the United Nations in the way suggested in this article. However, if such is the intention, it would appear to be useless to attempt to strengthen the United Nations in such an indirect manner at this time. If, at some future date, it seems likely that the unanimity rule could be eliminated, the question of providing larger forces might then properly receive further consideration.

For these reasons, the Department of State is of the opinion that the United Kingdom proposal should be opposed by the United States. The same view would apply to other proposals which provide for the placing of anything but limited and specific number of armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council.

The Department recognizes, however, that the Security Council in some conceivable situation might need more armed forces than were made available to it in the special agreements. With this thought in mind the present article 8 of the Draft Standard Form of Agreement was included. In order to meet the wishes of other Governments, the Department would not oppose the inclusion in this article of a clause by which the member states would undertake to consider a request for additional troops made by the Security Council as rapidly as is possible in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.

It is, therefore, recommended that the Department should advise the Joint Chiefs of Staff that, if they concur in the above views, they may wish to instruct their representatives on the Military Staff Committee of the United Nations as follows:

(1) The U.K. proposals or any other proposals which would cause the member states to commit anything but a limited and specific number of armed forces to the Security Council should be opposed.

(2) The reasons for this position should be explained informally to the other Delegations. An effort should be made to get the U.K. rep resentatives on the Military Staff Committee to have this proposal withdrawn. If such an effort does not succeed, the Department should be informed through the U.S. representatives on the Security Council.

(3) A clause might be included in the Draft Standard Form of Agreement making it obligatory for member states to consider a request made by the Security Council for additional troops as rapidly as is possible in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.

A request should also be made to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to advise the Department if their representatives on the Military Staff Committee are instructed in the above sense.

88. This paper was prepared in response to SWN–4744, September 14, p. 917. On November 27, the Joint Chiefs of Staff advised the Department of State through the State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee that the United States Representatives on the Military Staff Committee had been furnished guidance substantially as recommended in the present paper. (SWNCC Files)