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

IO Files

Memorandum by the United States Representatives to the Military Staff Committee

restricted
USMS/50/28

New York, 9 December 1946.

United Kingdom’s Proposal Regarding Use of United Nations Armed Forces Against Permanent Members of the Security Council

1. The United Kingdom Representative on the Subcommittee on Basic Principles informally circulated to the U.S. Representatives a draft of their proposal on the subject of Strength under item 3 of the Program of Work.⁶¹ This proposal is as follows:

“Item 3: Strength.

Principle affecting the total strength of Armed Forces placed at the disposal of the Security Council.

(i) The United Nations Armed Force can only be employed with the unanimous support of the Five Permanent Members of the Security Council and will therefore only be used against any nation or combination of nations other than the Five Permanent Members.

(ii) The United Nations Armed Force must be of sufficient strength to command the respect of all nations and to meet any commitments likely to exist under paragraph 1 above, but not so large as to prejudice swift and effective action when called upon by the Security Council.

(iii) The United Nations Armed Forces shall be kept to the minimum strength consonant with the principles stated in paragraphs (i) and (ii) above.”

2. The U.S. Representatives informed the United Kingdom Representative on the Subcommittee that the U.S. Delegation on the Military Staff Committee could not accept paragraph 1 of the United Kingdom proposal under any circumstances for the following reasons:

(a) It added to the provisions of the Charter and, in a sense, was considered as an amendment to the Charter.

(b) It was believed an unwise policy to make such a statement in the Basic Principles because of the probable unfavorable repercussions among the smaller nations and the general public. (Vide “Veto” debate.)⁶²

(c) The statement that the United Nations Armed Forces could never be used against any of the five major powers was directly contrary to the United States Atomic Energy proposal for decision without veto on punishment of treaty violators, and was contrary to similar views made by both the United States and United Kingdom Delegations to the General Assembly on the subject of the Regulation and Reduction of Armaments.

3. The U.S. Representatives also informed the United Kingdom Representative on the Subcommittee that the use of the word “minimum” in paragraph 3 was not believed to be as good usage as the word “limited.” The word “limited” had been included in the instructions to the U.S. Representatives from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and is believed to leave a wider freedom for future decision.

4. The United Kingdom Representative subsequently submitted informally a new proposal on the subject of Strength, as follows:

“The strength of the United Nations Armed Force should be governed by the following principles:

(i) Enforcement action under Chapter 7 of the Charter requires unanimity on the part of the Five permanent members. The moral weight and potential power behind such a unanimous decision will therefore be very great, and will directly influence the size of the force required.

(ii) The United Nations Armed Force must be of sufficient strength to command the respect of all nations and to meet any probable commitments but not so large as to prejudice swift and effective action when called upon by the Security Council.

(iii) The United Nations Armed Force shall be limited initially to the strength consonant with the principles stated under paragraph (i) and (ii) above.”

5. The U. S. Representatives informed the United Kingdom Representative that paragraph 1 of the new United Kingdom draft proposal was still unacceptable to the U.S. Representatives because it seemed unnecessary, and, to some extent, was objectionable for the same reasons previously stated.⁶³

6. Mr. Herschel Johnson has been informed of the position of the U.S. Representatives on the United Kingdom proposal and personally concurs.

61. The program of work under reference is that adopted by the Subcommittee at its 9th Meeting, October 29, contained in the record of that meeting, MS/UNF/10, not printed.
62. For documentation on the veto question, see pp. 251 ff.
63. The United Kingdom submitted a draft to the 15th Meeting of the Subcommittee, December 17, identical with that printed here except that paragraph 1 read as follows: “The moral weight and potential power behind any decision taken in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter will be very great, and will directly influence the size of the force required.” The Subcommittee continued to discuss the subject of strength at its three subsequent meetings in 1946, but failed to complete its consideration of the matter. (IO Files)