CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 49
Mr. Thorp (US) proposed an amendment to Article 24, adding a new paragraph exempting Rumania from responsibility for compensation of damages caused to UN property in Northern Transylvania during the period of Hungarian sovereignty in the area.1 The Commission unanimously approved this paragraph as a new paragraph 5 of Article 24. The Commission unanimously adopted Article 25 without discussion.
The Rumanian Delegation was invited to appear to answer questions on Article 24, paragraph 4. In reply to questions asked by Mr. Thorp, the Rumanian representative said that: (1) the estimated value of UN interests in the Rumanian petroleum industry of $150 million did not take into account offsetting liabilities; (2) the total value of UN property interests in Rumania was well over $200 million; (3) the petroleum industry had, on the whole, suffered more damage than other sectors of the Rumanian economy; (4) the figure of $1 billion referred to in previous Rumanian testimony as expenses already incurred by Rumania on behalf of the Allied war effort included $400 million of expenditures for Rumanian troops, $300 million of expenditures for Russian troops, and $300 million for war material; (5) the Rumanian Government had been unable to estimate even approximately the total burden which would be placed on Rumania by the economic clauses of the treaty. In reply to questions put by Mr. Gregory (UK), the Rumanian representative said that reconstruction credits had been granted on the basis of the importance of concerns in the national [Page 508] economy, that the credits bore interest at the rate of 6 percent, and that, in effect, substantial compensation was involved owing to the depreciation of the lei between the granting of the credits and the present time. The Rumanian representative also confirmed Mr. Gregory’s statement that under Rumanian war-time legislation, the profits of enemy (UN) firms were deposited in a special account in the Rumanian National Bank, that Controllers were appointed for such firms, and that an inventory of all enemy property rights and interests was taken. In reply to a question by Mr. Walker (Australia), the Rumanian representative said that Rumanian citizens resident during the war in UN territory had not been treated as enemies under Rumanian legislation.
The Netherlands representative spoke briefly in support of the United States proposal for Article 24, paragraph 4 (compensation) and said that the matter was of considerable importance to the Netherlands as damage to Dutch property in Rumania could be estimated at about $35 million.
The Commission considered the Australian amendment to Article 24, paragraph 8 a (definition of United Nations’ national) [C.P.(Gen.)Doc. 1.B.26].2 M. Gerashchenko (USSR) opposed the amendment on the grounds that it was not necessary and that it would open the door to frauds. Mr. Walker said that the reply by the Rumanian representative clearly indicated that Rumanians resident in Australia, who had not become naturalized Australians until after the Armistice, would not be covered by paragraph 8 a. He thought that each of the United Nations would be able to prevent abuses of the provision proposed by Australia.
- For text, see C.P.(Plen) Doc. 29, the Report of the Commission on the treaty with Rumania, vol. iv, p. 434.↩
- Amendments contained in C.P.(Gen)Doc. 1 are printed in vol. iv, p. 654.↩