315.3/2–553: Circular airgram
The Acting Secretary of State (Matthews) to Certain Diplomatic and Consular Offices 1
The General Assembly during the first part of its Seventh Session decided, on the initiative of the Secretary General as prompted by several delegations, to include in its agenda for the second part of the session a full discussion of the current personnel policies governing the United Nations Secretariat. Pursuant to this decision the Secretary General has prepared a report on United Nations personnel policy to be used as a basis for this debate.
This decision of the Assembly is a direct result of investigations conducted by United States authorities during the past year of charges of infiltration of the United Nations Secretariat by subversive U.S. citizens. It is anticipated that the question of personnel policy will [Page 326] be one of the major issues to be considered by the second part of the Seventh Session of the General Assembly.
For this reason arrangements have been made to supply the diplomatic posts in countries primarily concerned with full documentation on this issue. The position paper setting forth the position of the United States Government will be forwarded as soon as it is available.
Copies of the report of the Secretary General, which contains a copy of the letter from Ambassador Austin transmitting the Executive Order to the Secretary General and the Secretary General’s reply, the report of the Commission of Jurists appointed by Mr. Lie to advise him on this question, and statements by former Secretary Acheson and Assistant Secretary Hickerson before committees of Congress, and a copy of the Executive Order issued by President Truman on January 9, 1953 are being pouched to you.
A Federal Grand Jury sitting in New York City initiated investigations of United States Communist infiltration of the United Nations Secretariat in the summer of 1952. This Grand Jury investigation, which has so far resulted in no indictments but which produced a presentment critical of the United Nations and the Department of State, has been supplemented by investigations of two sub-committees of the judiciary committees of the Congress. These investigations have dealt with the problem of United States nationals employed by the United Nations who are believed to be engaged in, or to have been engaged in, or who are likely to be engaged in, activities regarded as subversive by the United States Government.
In the course of proceedings before the Grand Jury and hearings of the Internal Security Subcommittees, a number of witnesses, some of whom were employed by the United Nations, took recourse to the Fifth Amendment and refused to answer questions, on grounds of self incrimination, concerning past and present membership in the Communist Party and past and present participation in espionage and subversive activities. As a result of these developments the Secretary General first suspended or placed on leave, and then dismissed, a number of United States nationals employed by the Secretariat.
These dismissals and the public investigations provoked a number of questions from other delegations as to the propriety of such actions in the light of the United Nations Charter (primarily Articles 100 and 101) and the pertinent Staff Regulations.
When the failure of United States nationals to respond to questions was first publicized, Mr. Lie appointed a group of jurists of high professional standing to assist him in deciding on these questions. This group was composed of Mr. William Mitchell, former Attorney General under President Hoover; Professor Veldekins, well known Belgian professor of international law; and Sir Edwin Herbert, former [Page 327] Director of Censorship in the wartime British Government and presently a private attorney of international repute. Mr. Lie placed before these jurists a series of questions with respect to United Nations staff members of United States nationality. The report of the jurists, as amended by them, will undoubtedly play a significant part in the forthcoming debates of the Assembly. This report and the related report of the Secretary General will provide a frame of reference for the debates and will constitute important factors in the future actions of the Secretary General.
When the Seventh Session of the General Assembly reconvenes on February 24, consideration of the Jurists’ report and the report of the Secretary General will be the subject of prolonged discussion.
The Department would request, therefore, that you familiarize yourself with the issues involved, and be in a position to discuss generally with officials of the Government to which you are accredited the importance which the United States attaches to the elimination of subversive United States nationals from the United Nations Secretariat. This airgram is designed to provide the preliminary basic information needed to undertake such discussion at your discretion. Further suggestions as to precise representations to be made will be furnished later in the event the Department decides this is desirable.
Discussion
At the time of the creation of the United Nations, the United States, as a matter of basic policy, strongly supported the adoption of provisions in the United Nations Charter, and later in the United Nations Staff Regulations, which would guarantee to the Organization a free hand in the selection of personnel, and would safeguard the Organization from undue influence by Member States in this regard. In the discussions of the Preparatory Commission and the early General Assemblies, the independence of the Secretary General in employing staff was stressed as one of the factors required in developing an international secretariat of the highest integrity.
In consequence, the United States has followed the practice of not recommending its citizens for employment, nor has it cleared them for employment, by the United Nations. In the fall of 1949, however, the Department became concerned about the possible infiltration of the United Nations Secretariat by United States citizens who are Communists, or who are subject to Communist discipline.
It accordingly entered into a secret arrangement with the Secretary General of the United Nations whereby adverse comment was made on certain United States citizen employees, and upon a number of prospective employees.2 Because of United States restrictions on the release [Page 328] of classified information such comment could only be made in the most summary terms. At that time the Secretary General believed that he did not have authority to dismiss any employees on the ground of Communist affiliation. Accordingly, wherever the employment of United States Communists was terminated by the Secretary General, such action had to be taken on the basis of some authority which the Secretary General believed he possessed under the Staff Regulation.
The significance of the Report of the Commission of Jurists is that, for the first time, there is an impartial and responsible pronouncement to the effect that the Secretary General can and should rid the United Nations Secretariat of United States citizens who engage in subversive activities against the United States. Following this the Department initiated, and the President issued, Executive Order 10422 on January 9, 1953.
It appears that as a consequence of public reports of a plan to revise the existing federal loyalty program, some procedures of the Order may have to be altered. You will be advised as to the exact nature of any changes as soon as they are made. However, you should proceed at your discretion with discussions on the basis of Executive Order No. 10422.
The issuance of Executive Order 10422, while calling for a loyalty determination on United States citizens who are or may become international civil servants, does not constitute a fundamental change in basic United States policy toward the selection of United States personnel by international organizations. It specifically recognizes the right of the heads of these organizations to make the final decision as to employment or termination. At the same time, the United States considers that it is appropriately in its interests to attempt to assure that no United States citizen be employed if he is believed to be engaged, or is likely to be engaged in activities regarded as subversive by the United States Government. Consideration of past activities of this nature would necessarily be an important factor in any determinations made by the United States in this regard. Consistent with, and in response to the Jurists’ conclusions and recommendations, the Executive Order provides for the supplying of information to the Secretary General on persons decided upon adversely by the United States as a result of a United States investigation and review.
It is important to note in this connection that there is a distinction between the criteria of the Executive Order on the one hand, and of the Secretary General on the other, in arriving at conclusions in individual cases. The United States would first come to a determination as to whether there is a reasonable doubt as to loyalty to the United States. The Secretary General, operating under the terms of the recommendations of the Jurists, would base his decision on whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the individual is, or is likely to be [Page 329] engaged in subversive activities against the United States. It is our expectation and hope that the information supplied by the United States will be such as to persuade the Secretary General that the individual on whom the United States has commented adversely does not measure up by the standards he must apply as well. Consequently the action to be taken by the Secretary General will be based upon somewhat different standards than those of the United States. This will help persuade other Member States that the United States is not attempting to destroy the personnel independence of the Secretary General under the United Nations Charter.
Should the General Assembly not permit an arrangement which would achieve the elimination from the Secretariat of subversive United States citizens, it seems inevitable that the United States Congress will act to withhold United States financial support, or enact legislation to make it illegal for United States citizens to accept United Nations employment without United States clearance. A bill imposing criminal penalties on any United States citizen accepting United Nations employment without such clearance has been introduced in the United States Senate. It is necessary that every effort be made to avoid severe United States unilateral action, if this is possible. It is for these reasons that the Department attaches such great importance to the action to be taken by the Seventh General Assembly when it reconvenes next month.
For your information, several delegations to the first part of the Seventh Session of the General Assembly were most anxious to discuss the Jurists’ report prior to the recess on December 22. Such discussions were postponed as a result of a plea made by the President of the Assembly, the Chairman of the Fifth Committee, and the Secretary General. In a joint statement these three officials pointed out that Governments should have adequate opportunity to review the Jurists’ report in detail. They stressed that the Secretary General should be provided time to develop in detail the course of action he would propose to follow on the result of the advice of the Jurists, should the Assembly indicate its approval thereof. Statements made by several delegations in regretfully agreeing to this postponement indicate considerable reservation on their part as to the wisdom and desirability of complete acceptance by the United Nations of the Jurists’ conclusions. Most significant among these were India, Canada, the Netherlands, Egypt, Belgium, Sweden, Mexico, and France. Several members of a number of delegations also privately indicated their dislike for the Jurists’ recommendations on the basis that it would make personnel on the United Nations staff so subject to the dictates of their own Governments that it would be impossible to recruit and maintain an independent body of personnel which could be expected to carry out efficiently the tasks of the UN Secretariat.
[Page 330]Advance indications of the attitudes of other Member States, leads the Department to believe that a majority of them will be persuaded to support the Jurists’ recommendations only if they become convinced that this is the only way to insure continued support of the United Nations by the United States.
At the moment the details of placing the Executive Order into full effect are being worked out. The Secretary General and his assistants have demonstrated a spirit of cooperation during meetings held with representatives of the Department and the United States Civil Service Commission for this purpose. It is significant to note, however, that he has not publicly committed himself to postponing any further appointments of United States citizens until the Executive Order is in full operation. This assurance was requested in the Department’s formal transmittal of the Executive Order to the Secretary General. His formal reply welcomed the assistance provided under the terms of the Executive Order, but made no reference to the requested assurance regarding new employment. This is because of the need for consideration of this matter by the General Assembly. In the meantime, the Department is pressing ahead to put the arrangement authorized by the Executive Order into full effect. In view of this it would be especially unfortunate if the General Assembly were to reject the Jurists’ report.
- Drafted by the Chief of the Division of International Administration (Henderson) and the Director of the Office of International Administration and Conferences (Ingram). This circular airgram was sent to 62 Foreign Service posts around the world.↩
- No documentation on this “secret arrangement” has been found in the 1949 or later Department of State files. Later in 1953, Department officials were actively engaged in an effort to clarify the origins of this important understanding.↩