320/10–753: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Mission at the United Nations

confidential

Gadel 20. Re Charter Review

1.
If Egyptians envisage technical committee as intergovernmental body with “highly political functions” (Delga 79, Oct. 7)1 we are even less disposed see it created by 8th.
2.
Committee’s functions as reported reftel seem to us to illustrate lack of realism and practicality which characterizes Egyptian proposal.
a)
Creation of special intergovernmental body to guide Secretariat in preparing documentation seems waste of time and money, full of possibilities impeding execution of a technical job by a technical staff. Department believes this sort of job requires intelligent and singleminded supervision, which Secretariat should provide.
b)
Second purpose Egyptians have in mind seems even more unrealistic. For one thing Dumbarton Oaks discussions2 were negotiations conducted by top level diplomats under instructions from their governments. But above all they were based on drafts which had been laboriously developed by governments as end products of internal policy formulation process. Analogy appears meaningless in present setting, at least at this stage.
3.
Department heartily endorses views expressed by Governor Byrnes and Von Balluseck. We particularly agree that premature involvement in substantive debates might prejudice any orderly development of preparatory procedures including vote at 10th GA on holding of review conference itself.
4.
From our standpoint it would be clearly preferable if Egyptian proposal could be dropped. US delegation’s suggestion that contemplated committee be restricted to guiding Secretariat in discharging its largely mechanical tasks seems to us open to objections cited paragraph 2 a) above. It might be added that if committee were model of non-interference once Secretariat chores were programmed, it would [Page 182] have nothing to do and might be sorely tempted involve itself in Charter re-drafting.
5.
Our second choice would be possibility suggested in Gadel 10, Sept. 25, para. 4, i.e., final operative clause in consolidated resolution to effect that 1955 GA will doubtless wish consider creation of appropriate preparatory machinery both for review conference arrangements and to give preliminary consideration governmental proposals submitted by then.
6.
Our third preference would be variation on latter, leaving way open for 9th GA in 1954 to evaluate progress to date and consider best timing and method of organizing collective preparatory work.
7.
Suggested draft statement for US representative sent by MISUN this afternoon. Last paragraph will require adjustment depending on solution reached re Egyptian proposal.
Dulles
  1. Not printed.
  2. For documentation on the Dumbarton Oaks conversations at Washington, August–October 1944, see Foreign Relations, 1944, vol. i, pp. 614 ff.