IO Files: US/A/M (Chr)/217
Minutes of the Thirtieth Meeting of the united States Delegation to the Sixth Regular Session of the United Nations General Assembly, Hotel Astoria, Paris, December 11, 1951
[Here follow a list of those present (49), the agenda of the meeting, and discussion of the first agenda item.]
2. Developments in the Disarmament Sub-Committee
Ambassador Jessup pointed out that there had been unanimous approval for the report of the Sub-committee. This was based on the second draft of Padilla Nervo’s memorandum, as amended by us and by others. The atmosphere at the last meeting had been extremely cordial.
Problems still remaining for solution were outlined by Ambassador Jessup. With the United Kingdom and the French there was the problem that both were willing to emasculate the draft tripartite resolution to make it more agreeable to the Soviets. Secondly, Padilla Nervo had suggested that other states might wish to add amendments. For this purpose he had suggested to us the possibility of having two resolutions: one would be an innocuous resolution simply establishing the new Commission, to which the Soviets could agree. The other would contain all the principles which the Soviets cannot agree to. Ambassador Jessup said that it would be a great problem of tactics to solve this situation.
At the meeting of Committee One that day Mr. Lloyd (UK) would make the first speech. Changes had been prepared in the draft resolution which would take into account the points on which quadripartite agreement had been reached in the Sub-committee.
Ambassador Jessup hoped that things could be kept moving in the First Committee so that not only the Disarmament item but also the CMC item could be completed before the Christmas recess. Ambassador Jessup suggested that the political officers stress the results of the Subcommittee debate and the desirability of establishing the new Commission promptly so that it could begin its work.
In regard to a question by Ambassador Gross as to the control organ to be established, Ambassador Jessup said that the United States had accepted general Language in this regard since 1946, with only one exception. The powers for it would have to be spelled out in a Treaty which would keep things “within the framework of the Security Council”. Vyshinsky had agreed that there would be no veto in its operation up to a certain point. That point was where the control organ decided to provide for sanctions against violations. At that point, although he was a little vague, Vyshinsky seemed to feel that a veto would apply.
[Page 612]Mr. Meyers felt that Vyshinsky had slid over this matter rather delicately without committing himself to anything concrete.