Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, The United Nations; The Western Hemisphere, Volume II

501.AA/6–2149

Memorandum by Miss Ruth Bacon, Special Assistant to the Director of the Office of Far Eastern Affairs (Butterworth), to the Chief of the Division of Chinese Affairs (Sprouse)

confidential

[Washington,] June 21, 1949.

We may be presented in the near future with several questions bearing on the Chinese Communists’ position with respect to the UN. These questions may arise in one or more of the following ways:

(1) A Chinese Communist delegation may seek to obtain visas in order to proceed to the UN.

(2) The Chinese Communists may send credentials to the Secretary General for a permanent representative to the UN.

(3) The USSR may challenge the right of the National Government representative to a place on the Security Council or other UN organ.

(4) A Chinese Communist may claim China’s seat on the Security Council or other UN organ.

There are attached a copy of a memorandum of June 9 prepared by USUN, Mr. Power, on “Credentials for a Chinese Communist Delegation”;¹ a copy of New York’s telegram 697, June 8,² presenting the views of a British member of the Legal Section of the UN Secretariat on this general question; and an article from the New York Times of June 9² which discusses possible efforts by the Communists to obtain accreditation to the UN and concludes that “most delegates said they believed that the United States would abstain”.

The following suggestions are made:

(1) We should supply brief background information to our posts in China concerning the possibility that the Chinese Communists may request visas and instruct these posts in such case to report to the Department before taking any action. A draft telegram is attached.²

(2) We should in so far as possible give guidance to our mission in New York upon the general policy which it should follow under present conditions in case questions concerning efforts of the Chinese Communists to obtain accreditation should arise. This question should be discussed with UNA, and our mission in New York should be advised to keep in close touch with the Department on this question. Our mission should likewise be instructed to make clear to the Secretariat that in our view questions relating to the accreditation of delegates which may involve deciding which of two governments is the government of a country are matters of general concern to UN members and should not be decided by the Secretariat without full consultation.

It is suggested that at least for the present our policy with respect to the Chinese delegation in New York should parallel our recognition policy, that is, under present conditions so long as we continue to recognize the National Government we should give support to the right of its delegates to represent China in UN organs.

Additional comment is given in the attached memorandum.

(3) We should discuss with UNA the attitude to be adopted in case at a later time it is argued in the Security Council that acceptance of Chinese Communist credentials or other related questions are substantive and not procedural matters.

Normally examination of credentials would be a procedural matter requiring only the affirmative votes of seven members of the Security Council. Examination of credentials in a case involving decision between two governments each of which claims to be the government of a country, presents, however, larger issues. In such circumstances a good case could be made for holding that the decision is a substantive one to be decided by seven affirmative votes, including the votes of the Great Powers. The question whether a decision on the credentials of the Chinese Communists carries the veto may become of considerable importance. It may be raised either by the Russians or by the Chinese, depending upon the circumstances of the case.

While it is believed that good arguments can be advanced for holding that the decision is a substantive rather than a procedural one, it is believed that UNA will feel strongly that the question should be treated as procedural. This Government has been using its influence to reduce the use of the veto so far as possible. Unless you feel strongly on this question it is probable that UNA will feel accordingly that the question should be treated as a procedural matter even if the issue is raised by the Chinese Government.

1. Not printed; the essential points of the memorandum are set forth in abbreviated form in the first two paragraphs of Miss Bacon’s memorandum of June 21 to Mr. Sprouse, infra. Mr. Thomas F. Power, Jr., was Deputy Secretary-General of the United States Mission at the United Nations (USUN).
2. Not printed.
2. Not printed.
2. Not printed.