501.BB/10–2949: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations ( Austin ) to the Secretary of State
Delga 156. Australian delegation today submitted nine draft resolutions on membership relating to Austria, Ceylon, Finland, Ireland, [Page 308] Italy, Jordan, Korea, Portugal and Nepal.1 Texts are identical except that first operative paragraph of resolutions on Korea, Nepal and Austria begins “determines” rather than “re-affirms its determination” as in all other resolutions. Text of resolution re Portugal follows:
“The GA ,
“Noting from the special report of the SC on the reconsideration of the application of Portugal for membership in the UN (A/982) that nine members of the SC on 13 September, 1949, supported a draft resolution recommending the admission to the UN of Portugal, but that no recommendation was made to the Assembly because of the opposition of one permanent member;
Deeming it important to the development of the UN that all applicant states which possess the qualifications for membership set forth in Article 4 of the Charter should be admitted;
Considering that the opposition to the application of Portugal was based on grounds not included in Article 4 of the Charter;
Recalling the recommendation of the GA in resolution 197 (III) A of 8 December 1948 that each member of the SC and of the GA, in exercising its vote on the admission of new members, should act in accordance with the advisory opinion of the ICJ of 28 May 1948, which declared that a state was not juridically entitled to make its consent to the admission dependent on conditions not expressly provided by paragraph 1 of Article 4;
Reaffirms its determination that Portugal is, in its judgement, a peace-loving state within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter, is able and willing to carry out the obligations of the Charter, and should therefore be admitted to membership in the UN; and
Requests the SC to reconsider the application of Portugal in the light of this determination of the Assembly.”
- These draft resolutions were submitted to the Ad Hoc Political Committee, which began its consideration of the membership question on October 31; see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fourth Session, Ad Hoc Political Committee, pp. 119 ff. For a U.S. Delegation discussion of the new situation caused by this development, as well as by the submission of a proposal by Argentina that the General Assembly had full authority to admit applicants to membership regardless of whether the recommendations of the Security Council were favorable and requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on this point, see IO Files, Minutes of the 25th Meeting of the U.S. Delegation, document US/A/M (Chr)/119, November 1, 1949, not printed. Generally, the Delegation felt that if the Argentine draft resolution were amended appropriately, that the proposal presented an opportunity to take the Argentine proposition, which had been gaining favor over the years, “out of the political forum” and on to a legal basis. It was felt that it should be made clear that the U.S. had not changed its views regarding the competence of the General Assembly on the matter. It was believed that the Court would decide against Argentina, but that nevertheless the United States should not take a position that would not permit the Court to decide the question.↩