Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, General; the United Nations, Volume I, Part 1

501.BB/9–1048: Telegram

The Ambassador in Belgium (Kirk) to the Secretary of State

secret

Brussels, September 10, 1948—9 p. m.

1704. From Jessup. Visits at Hague September 9 and 10 and at Brussels September 10 accompanied by Ross.¹ Discussions with De Beus² and Lovink (Secretary General Foreign Office) at lunch September 9 and with Foreign Minister Stikker and Van Royen September 10 a. m. In Brussels had hour’s conference with Spaak. In both Hague and Brussels every facility afforded and perfect arrangements made through Ambassador Baruch and Kirk and their staffs. Following comments on various General Assembly items:

1. Presidency of GA.

Stikker said Evatt is coming to see him next week but Stikker is uncertain what he will say to Evatt. Feels embarrassment regarding Australian stand on Indonesia but thinks Evatt inevitable choice since agreed the French are not available but Dutch remain unenthusiastic. Spaak believes Evatt is only possible choice and he will support him but also without enthusiasm.

2. Chairmanship Committee One of GA.

Deptel 1320 September 8³ not available until I arrived Brussels. No definite Dutch view obtained but it is clear they would support Spaak with whom Stikker conferred September 9 Brussels. Stikker reported to us that Spaak planned to be in Paris during most of GA. Spaak still insisted that he is not at all a candidate but he would accept although he remarked that he might be equally useful from his seat as a Belgian delegate. He could not promise to be in Paris every single day for three months but he could fly back and forth from time to time as situation in Brussels required. He stressed desirability of having suitable vice chairman of this committee who could serve if he were called back to Brussels suddenly during session. He mentioned MacEachen Uraguayan Ambassador at London and Freitas-Valle Brazilian Ambassador-designate to Spain as suitable candidates. We inquired his view regarding Padillo Nervo whom he thought acceptable but not as good as others. Spaak suggested Lange of Norway but agreed it would be difficult elect both chairman and vice chairman from west Europe. My impression is Spaak knowing the problem thoroughly and being honest with himself and with us would stay on job and believe he could carry out duties if called upon. If Department desires us follow this matter with delegates in Paris particularly those from Latin America, request instructions especially on vice chairmanship.

3. Seats on Security Council.

De Beus on Thursday indicated Netherlands receptive to securing Belgium’s seat on SC and very doubtful whether Norway would be suitable in view of its voting record especially in GA. Stikker September 10 made very clear Dutch desire for seat frankly indicating their need for support in the SC on Indonesian question.⁴ Van Royen who had just reached Hague and who had not seen Stikker before joining us in our conference with him developed this theme in Stikker’s presence saying that Dutch considered obtaining this seat “a matter of first national importance”. From angle of national import he with Stikker’s concurrence stressed reliance on Belgium hitherto in SC on Indonesian question and reiterated doubts concerning Norwegian attitude. From international standpoint they stressed the doubtful character of reliance on Norway on any issues. We stated our reasons for favoring Norway but indicated we had not reached final decision. We pointed out objections in other delegations to giving a semi-permanent seat to Belgium and Netherlands, and indicated possible drive by Middle East and Far East countries to secure Belgium’s seat for India unless strong west European candidate presented. Stikker said the Dutch would not press their candidacy if this would mean assisting India to get on or losing the seat to western Europe. Stikker closed on this point by saying it was squarely up to US to decide whether Netherlands should receive the seat. Spaak said he would be embarrassed if Dutch are candidates and he was hardly in position to advise them not to seek the seat. Spaak recognized force of our arguments but also indicated it was up to US to make the decision. He himself aside from Dutch complication leans towards Norway and did not himself express the fears which Dutch had voiced concerning Norwegian stand. Regarding Syria’s seat Spaak thought that India and Pakistan might alternate on ECOSOC and SC but agreed that present Kashmir and other troubles made both these states poor candidates for SC this year. He told us he was informed Turkey would not accept SC seat because her position was too delicate. On our suggestion of reference of India, item for study of geographic distribution of SC seats De Beus enthusiastically agreed on value of IC reference.⁵

4. ECOSOC seat.

Spaak recalled that when Belgium resigned in favor of the Netherlands in elections in GA in 1946 it was in expectation that Belgium would be elected to ECOSOC in 1948. He definitely asked for US support for Belgium this year. He had heard that we were favoring Sweden and thought that if Norway were also on SC this would be “a little too much”.

[Here follows discussion of matters placed on the agenda of the impending session of the General Assembly.]

[Jessup]

Kirk

1. John C. Ross, Deputy to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin).
2. J. C. de Beus, Netherlands diplomat assigned to the Permanent Delegation of The Netherlands at the United Nations and appointed an Alternate Representative on The Netherlands Delegation to the Third Session of the General Assembly.
3. See footnote 1, p. 129.
4. For documentation on this subject, see vol. vi, pp. 57 ff.
5. This refers to a proposal that the India item be referred to the newly-established Interim Committee of the General Assembly, for study and recommendation by the Interim Committee to the General Assembly.