UNP Files, Acc. No. 71A5255, Lot 58 D 224

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs (Hickerson) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Rusk)1

secret

Subject: Proposed GA Resolution on Report of CMC

In response to your memorandum regarding the above subject,2 UNA concurs in the comment that paragraph 6 of the operative portion of the Resolution constitutes no commitment on the part of the United States and other governments to raise in any regional arrangement [Page 682]the subject matter of that paragraph. Furthermore, UNA believes, as stated in FE’s memorandum, that the UN should be strengthened by means and at a pace consistent with the best interests of this Government.

If we agreed on these points, does it not logically follow that in order for any possible future action against aggression to be most effective, preparatory consideration of the problem should be carried forward before an emergency arises? UNA believes it desirable that studies be undertaken initially within the Departments of State and Defense in order to determine whether regional arrangements, as distinct from their Member Governments, can make any concrete contribution at this time to the collective security system of the UN. Such studies would indicate whether it is worthwhile as a matter of hard-headed realism to work out plans for coordination and to initiate studies in various regional arrangements with a view to developing closer complementary relationships between them and the UN.

  1. Hickerson transmitted a similar memorandum (also dated November 5) to George W. Perkins, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, replying to Perkins’ memorandum of October 24 on the draft resolution respecting the CMC report. The Perkins memorandum reads in part as follows: “We of course believe that there must be a firm conceptual relationship between NATO and the UN, and we believe that NATO, by its very existence, is making an important contribution to the collective security system of the United Nations. We are also convinced that, in the event of hostilities in the NATO area, it will probably be necessary to establish a formal working relationship between NATO and the UN. However, we do not believe that such a relationship is desirable or practicable at this time. In general, we do not believe there is any concrete contribution which NATO, as an organization distinct from its member governments, can make at this time to the collective security system of the UN, except the indirect contribution which is already being made by virtue of NATO’s basic program. . . . Therefore, we do not believe it would be useful to raise for consideration within NATO at the present time the subject of UN–NATO relationships or the problem of a specific contribution on the part of NATO itself to UN collective measures.” (UNP Files, Acc. No. 71A5255, Lot 58 D 224)
  2. Dated October 23, p. 678.