Office of the Historian

740.00119 EW (Peace)/10–2649: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

secret
Washington, October 26, 1949—11 a. m.

3841. Dept believes desirable proceed immed to naming US members Balk treaty comms human rights case. Emb will recall US notes of Aug 1 to Bulg, Hung, Rum1 called upon latter to join in naming Comms. Proposal now is to send additional notes informing Balk Govts of appt US members to serve on Comms, asking them to name their members and to consult with US with view to naming third members.

Dept believes failure of US and other complaining Allied states to name reps and specifically demand satellites name theirs might make it difficult for ICJ to give clearcut opinion that satellites have defaulted in their obligations. If ICJ does not give straight affirmative answer to question II of those submitted to it by GA res of Oct 22,2 then entire further proceeding contemplated in that res, involving submission questions III and IV to Court, might be thrown into confusion. Allied states wld have to appoint their reps to comms in any case after ICJ answered questions I and II in affirmative. Accordingly deemed advisable do it now with purpose avoiding ambiguous ICJ opinion on question II.

Copies of notes to satellites naming reps shld be sent SYG for circulation among members and transmission to ICJ in accordance GA res. While default of satellites seems clear from diplomatic exchanges laid before GA in Docs A/985 and A/990,3 proposed additional notes might be useful in making it airtight. Does FonOff agree?

Dept agreed with Brit FonOff last summer that for purposes convenience disputes between Allied states and each satellite shld be consolidated, and that 4 or 5 Allied states making charges under each Peace Treaty wld name same rep to present their case jointly. We proposed Allied states be represented by Dominion citizen in Hung, Amer in Rum, and Briton in Bulg. UK accepted this plan but apparently experienced some difficulty in obtaining agreement of three Dominions [Page 272] concerned on single Rep. (Deptel 1940, Jun 4,4 Emb A–1152, June 20,5 Deptel 2333, Jul 66 and Embtel 2782 Jul 15.7)

Suggest you ask FonOff whether they wish now proceed along same lines and will approach Dominions again with request to agree on single Dominion Rep.

If this approach again encounters difficulties or delays, Dept intends to go ahead and name US members in notes to three Govts. We shall probably name same man to all three comms; at later date he cld be replaced on two of them. Important thing at present is to have our nominations on record before ICJ considers case.

Sent London, rptd USUN, NY.8

Acheson
  1. Regarding the notes under reference here, see editorial note, p. 264.↩
  2. Regarding the resolution under reference here, see editorial note, p. 266.nn↩
  3. Regarding the documents under reference here, see editorial note, ibid .↩
  4. Ante, p. 249.↩
  5. Not printed, but see footnote 1 to telegram 2333, July 6, to London, p. 254.↩
  6. Ante, p. 254.↩
  7. Not printed, but see footnote 4 to telegram 2333, July 6, to London, p. 255.↩
  8. Repeated to New York as telegram Gadel 74.↩