320/11–2250: Telegram

The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State


Delga 330. Indians in South Africa: Re above staff views tactics in plenary as follows:

US should oppose discussion in plenary. In this connection USDel advised South African delegation under instructions make long statement.
US should support request that paragraph[s] be voted separately and should abstain on last paragraph preamble and vote in negative on third operative paragraph of resolution.
US should discourage all proposed amendments for following reasons:
In event of any amendments plenary discussion certain with usual irresponsible speeches;
Practically impossible secure two-thirds majority necessary amend last paragraph preamble or third operative paragraph. However, at least an even chance that more than required third will vote negatively on third operative paragaph as it stands;
In event amendments proposed India likely reintroduce its resolution which might carry.
Further objectionable amendments might be introduced and carry.
While operative paragraph 2 is unsatisfactory, US should not oppose since defeat of this paragraph would eliminate recommendation of renewal of round table conference. It might not be difficult secure two-third majority to amend this paragraph. However, staff considers that attempt amend this paragraph alone likely open door to plenary discussion and additional amendments. Furthermore, the paragraph is not sufficiently objectionable to justify taking chances of reopening entire controversy in plenary.
While US should continue its role of remaining in background, USDel should in its discretion be permitted to inform states that voted negatively or abstained on unsatisfactory parts of resolution how it intends to vote in plenary.
Presumably as in plenary US would abstain on entire resolution if third operative paragraph approved. Department’s views requested as to US vote on entire resolution if last paragraph preamble carries but operative paragraph 3 defeated.