IO Files

United States Delegation Plenary Position Paper

restricted
US/A/3429

Complaint of Aggressive Acts of the United States and Its Interference in the Domestic Affairs of Other Countries, As Instanced by the Appropriation of 100 Million Dollars to Finance the Recruitment of Persons and the Organization of Armed Groups in the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and a Number of Other Democratic Countries, as Well as Outside the Territory of Those Countries: Report of the First Committee (A/2030)

1. united states position

The First Committee has not recommended any resolution to the GA for adoption. The Assembly will have before it, however, a Soviet resolution which was rejected by the First Committee and has been reintroduced in the plenary (A/2031).1 The United States should [Page 487]vote against this resolution which (a) condemns the United States Mutual Security Act as an act of aggression and as interference in the internal affairs of other states; and (b) recommends that the United States Government take steps to repeal this Act.

The United States should abstain on the question whether there should be plenary debate of the First Committee report (Rule 67). If there is debate the United States should make a statement along the lines of Annex A attached; if there is no debate the United States, in explanation of vote, should make a statement along the lines of Annex B attached.2

2. history in committee

After 4 meetings of debate the First Committee rejected Soviet resolution (identical to that indicated above) by 39 votes to 5, with 11 abstentions (Afghanistan, Burma, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen). Since the Soviet resolution was the only proposal introduced under this agenda item, the First Committee did not recommend any resolution to the Assembly for adoption.

3. possible developments in plenary

It is unlikely that the required number of states (one-third) will desire plenary debate of the First Committee report. In this event, however, the Soviet states can be expected, in explanations of vote, to renew their attacks against the United States. As indicated above, the United States, in explanation of vote, should make a statement along the lines of Annex B attached.3

  1. The text was the same as that submitted by the Soviet Union to the First Committee on December 19 and substantially transmitted in Paris telegram Delga 745, December 19, p. 484.
  2. Neither Annex is printed, but see footnote 3, below.
  3. On January 11 the General Assembly considered the new Soviet item and after some discussion rejected the Soviet draft resolution 42–5–11 (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Burma, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iran). For the proceedings, see GA (VI), Plenary, pp. 306 ff.

    Congressman Mansfield made a lengthy statement in explanation of the United States position, describing the Soviet charges as propaganda aimed not just at the Mutual Security Act, but as “part of a general assault launched by the delegation of the Soviet Union at the beginning of this session against the United Nations collective security system and the regional collective security systems which strengthen it.” (Ibid., p. 309)