Editorial Note
At the 164th Meeting of the First Committee, October 19, 3 p. m., the Canadian Delegation agreed to amend its draft resolution, A/C.1/A.III/1/Rev. 3 (that approved by Subcommittee III). The modification consisted of the addition of the following sentence: “Meanwhile the General Assembly calls upon the Atomic Energy Commission to resume its sessions, to survey its programme of work, and to proceed to the further study of such of the subjects remaining in the programme of work as it considers to be practicable and useful.” This augmented draft, circulated as A/C.1/340, was ultimately approved by the General Assembly; for text, see page 495.
Later in the meeting, Ambassador Austin delivered a statement which was recorded as follows: “Mr. Austin (United States of America) stated that his delegation would accept the revised Canadian resolution but wished it clear that it still adhered to the principles and policies which the delegation had advocated throughout the debate. His delegation was firmly convinced that the Third Report of the Commission was correct in stating that no useful purpose could be served by carrying on negotiations at the Commission level since the failure to achieve agreement arose from a situation beyond its competence. The Commission had found the deep-seated political division separating the Eastern Powers from the Western Powers a constant barrier to agreement and had therefore recommended, not an indefinite suspension as Colonel Hodgson had considered, but a suspension until such a time as the Assembly found that the present situation no longer existed, or until the six permanent members of the Commission found, through prior consultation, that a basis for agreement existed.
“However, the United States had given attention to the anxiety expressed in the Committee that the question of international control was being set aside. While still believing firmly that a solution could come only on a higher level, it would agree with the feelings of the Committee. As evidence that the United States did not try to force its opinion on others, it was going to vote for the Canadian draft resolution. But he thought it would be the gravest error to merge again the question of the control of atomic energy with the regulation and reduction of conventional armaments after they had been separated by the Security Council in February 1947 after a long debate. The General Assembly must use its moral power in support of the work of the Atomic Energy Commission where a small minority had persistently resisted a decision of the Commission. He objected to weakening the resolution by adding the words ‘in principle’ or ‘substance’ in the first [Page 488] paragraph. He repeated that his delegation would give its support to the Canadian draft resolution provided it were not mangled by amendments.” For the full record of the 164th Meeting of the First Committee, see GA (III/1), First Committee, pages 191–203. For full text of Austin’s remarks, see Department of State Bulletin, October 31, 1948, pages 539–540.