The Secretary of State to the Acting United States Representative at the United Nations ( Johnson )
1. Dept believes SC should move at earliest practical and convenient date to take up general subject of regulation of armaments and disarmament in response to GA Resolution on this subject2 (Re your tel 1002, Dec 313). Draft Resolutions have already been submitted by Soviet Union and ourselves to bring this subject before SC.4 Dept feels that part of general subject which relates to international control of atomic energy, as set out in findings and recommendations contained in report of AEC,5 should be considered first by SC. While we desire SC to consider this part of subject first, at the same time we believe fruitful, rather than hasty, discussion should be the aim. Accordingly, [Page 328] we are ready to accommodate our views on timing to those of SC if others feel that such discussion is more likely to result from consideration some time in the near future rather than immediately as is called for by our Resolution submitted Dec 31. We would not consider the three weeks’ delay suggested by De Rose6 and Hasluck7 as too long and a delay of this duration would meet Cadogan’s point.8
Since CFM desires SC approval of Trieste documents by Jan 15, we can see some additional advantage in acceding to desires of other SC members regarding timing of SC discussion of atomic energy control, since to do so would give an early opportunity for SC to take up Trieste papers.
Further instructions referred to in para 3 of Dept’s 327, Dec 30, will be dispatched promptly.
- December 14, 1946; Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. i, p. 1099.↩
- Ibid., p. 1106.↩
- For the text of the Soviet resolution, see telegram 998 from New York, December 28, 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. i, p. 1104; for the text of the United States resolution, see telegram 327 to New York, December 30, 1946, ibid., p. 1105.↩
- Published as United Nations, Official Records of the Atomic Energy Commission, First Year, Special Supplement (hereafter cited as AEC, 1st yr., Special Suppl.).↩
- François De Rose of the French Delegation to the Security Council and the Atomic Energy Commission.↩
- Paul Hasluck, Alternate Australian Representative on the Security Council; Acting Representative on the Atomic Energy Commission.↩
- Sir Alexander Cadogan, British Representative on the Security Council and the Atomic Energy Commission, had expressed reluctance to support immediate consideration of the Atomic Energy Commission’s report, fearing a veto; see telegram 1002 from New York, December 31, 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. i, p. 1106.↩