IO Files
Minutes of the Thirty-eighth Meeting of the United States Delegation to the United Nations General Assembly
[Here follows a list of those present (49).]
1. Korean Relief and Rehabilitation (A/1493, A/C.2 & 3/L.32, Deptel 497)1
Mr. Lubin recalled that the original draft resolution adopted by the Economic and Social Council2 on this subject gave the Unification Commission certain responsibilities. The Assembly’s overall Korean resolution had simply stated that the Commission should assume such responsibilities in the field of rehabilitation as should be decided. In connection with this provision, the Economic and Social Council had recommended that the Commission should be empowered, first, to determine the Korean authorities with whom the Agent-General should have political relations; second, to determine the areas in which the Agent-General should operate; third, to determine when he should start operations; fourth, to recommend such policies on rehabilitation as would enable it to carry forward its own responsibilities in the political field. Chile had now submitted amendments to the Economic and Social Council resolution, which was before the Joint Second and Third Committee, which amendments were designed to broaden the powers of the Unification Commission. We opposed these amendments since their adoption might mean that the Commission could become the directing force in the relief operations.
Mr. Lubin called the Delegation’s attention to Deptel 497 containing possible United States amendments to the resolution. The real question [Page 1136] was how much pressure we should put on other delegations to maintain the original draft as adopted by the Council. The Chilean amendments represented an attempt on the part of the countries on the Unification Commission to get power over expenditure of the funds for the relief and rehabilitation program.
Mr. Dulles thought this matter was very important. However, it was also such a complicated affair that he doubted whether an off-hand Delegation judgment would be particularly helpful. Mr. Ross quite agreed that the situation was very complex. At the same time, the Economic and Social Council resolution had been discussed by the delegation before and had been approved in general. The present difficulty was created by the Chilean amendments and raised the question whether we should submit amendments of our own. He believed that it was better to stick to our guns on the Council resolution and to defeat the Chilean amendments rather than to put in counter amendments.
Senator Sparkman said his own thoughts were along the same lines as those expressed by Mr. Ross. We should move every stone possible to insist that the compromise accepted by the Council be adhered to in the Assembly. He did not believe we would get very far by offering counter amendments. Mr. Lubin thought the real question was whether we might not save time by submitting amendments. He personally felt we should fight for the original resolution as adopted by the Economic and Social Council. While the Department also preferred the original draft, these amendments had been suggested in order to formulate a compromise upon which the majority could agree. Senator Sparkman pointed out that the United States might find itself in a minority in insisting upon the original draft resolution. We would either have to have a “knock-down and drag-out fight” on this issue, or accept some sort of a compromise.
Mrs. Roosevelt thought nothing could be done except to leave it to Senator Sparkman as to the best thing which could be worked out in the circumstances. Senator Sparkman said that he had hoped that Senator Lodge would be present so that together they might confer with Romulo and Santa Cruz who were leading the move for amendments in this regard and point out to them the practical matters involved, including problems with the Congress. He planned to do this in any event but he had thought that Senator Lodge might lend a helpful Republican flavor to the conversation. There was no further discussion of this item.
[Here follows a record of discussion on the second agenda item dealing with the Palestine question.]