Office of the Historian

320/9–1950: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Acting Secretary of State

priority
New York, September 19, 1950—7:08 p. m.

Delga 7. GA adopted today following resolution introduced by Canada and amended by Australia by vote of 42 for, 9 opposed, 6 abstentions.

“The GA,

“Taking note of differences of views concerning the representation of China in the UN,

“Establishes a special committee consisting of seven members nominated by the President and confirmed by the Assembly to consider the question of Chinese representation and to report back, with recommendations to the present session of the GA, after the Assembly shall have considered item 62 of the provisional agenda (Cuban item).

[Page 302]

“Resolves that, pending a decision by the GA on the report of this special committee, the representative of the National Government of China shall be seated in the GA with the same rights as other representatives,”1

Acheson

  1. For the proceedings of the General Assembly on September 19 relating to the Chinese representation question, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifth Session, Plenary Meetings, vol. i, pp. 2 ff. For the Secretary of State’s statement against the Indian resolution, see ibid., p. 6. The Indian resolution was considered ahead of the Canadian resolution, and was rejected by 33 votes to 16, with 10 abstentions. After approving the Canadian resolution as amended by Australia (the original Canadian resolution provided the President of the General Assembly with sole power of selection of the members of the proposed commission), the General Assembly rejected two Soviet draft resolutions.

    The Special Committee on the representation of China was established by the General Assembly on December 12 in Resolution 490 (V), consisting of Canada, Ecuador, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Philippines, and Poland; and held its first meeting on December 15, electing Sir Benegal Rau of India as its chairman. The Special Committee “decided at that time to leave it to the Chairman’s discretion as to when to call a further meeting in light of the discussions which were then in progress relating to a cease-fire in Korea.” The committee did not meet again until October 16, 1951.

    ↩