IO Files: US/S/299, also US/A/AC. 18/101

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Charles P. Noyes of the United States Mission at the United Nations

Participants: Mr. M. E. Bathurst, United Kingdom Delegation
Mr. P. S. Falla, United Kingdom Delegation
Mr. C. P. Noyes, United States Mission


I detailed to Bathurst and Falla our position on Italian Membership. They said they would send a telegram this afternoon to London putting forword our suggestion.

Their personal reactions were that there were a great many technical difficulties involved. They did not, for example, feel that the excuse of the difference between the General Assembly resolutions on Italy and Transjordan and the resolutions of the other five applicants was a very strong argument for taking these two up separately. Bathurst suggested that since that argument was flimsy we might as well be blunt about it and try to take up Italy all by itself. He also pointed out that various members of the Council might want to take up certain other applications at the same time—for example Ireland and Portugal. He appeared to have his mind open to the possibility that we might not make too much of an issue of treating Transjordan and Italy alone. Both he and Falla thought the time was very short and that this gave Gromyko all sorts of opportunities to stall the decision up until very close to the election and they agreed that it was essential that we be assured of sufficient support to drive this through quickly before undertaking any moves.

In regard to Finland, they indicated they were certain the Foreign Office was a good deal cooler on this application than previously. They intimated that their position was that Finland was about to become a Soviet Satellite and that they might therefore not be prepared to support her application. They said they would let me know immediately they received any reply from the Foreign Office.

In this connection I mentioned our position on the Burmese application contained in the Department’s 134.1 They had not received instructions on this point.

[Here follow discussion of the situation in Czechoslovakia and the problem of voting in the Security Council.]

  1. The Mission was authorized to support Burma’s application when considered, but not to take any initiative in bringing up the matter (501.AA/3–1248).