320/9–854: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Mission at the United Nations1
133. Re procedure for handling Chinese representation issue at Ninth GA.
1. Essential there be firm agreement friendly delegations in advance opening session on precise procedure which will dispose of Chinese representation issue promptly, definitely and with minimum confusion. Fact that initiation these broad consultations must necessarily await agreement with UK on text moratorium formula points up necessity such agreement at earliest possible time. As soon as formula worked out, suggest you initiate consultations on procedure first with UK, then with China, Thailand and Netherlands, and subsequently with others. If Mrs. Pandit is definitely to be in chair at opening session procedure should also be discussed with her.
2. Procedural courses must be considered in light fact that unlike previous years we cannot this year rely on cooperation Acting President. Alternatives include:
- (a)
- As at previous sessions we could wait until issue raised by others [in early plenary meeting, probably in form usual motion: in Credentials Committee in form proposal that Chinese credentials be declared invalid; in form request inclusion new item in GA agenda]2 and then move to have our counter proposal voted upon first, followed by motion that no other proposals be voted upon. This has worked reasonably well in past, but leaves initiative to others and, if issue raised before election President, subjects us to vagaries Acting President.
- (b)
- We could take initiative in raising matter by proposing our formula at outset opening plenary. This course seems impracticable in absence certain measure cooperation Acting President and if Menon in chair we would expect him employ every possible procedural device thwart us and general confusion could prevail.
- (c)
- In initial consultations with UK you may wish to explore following alternative. If issue raised by others at outset opening plenary, US or other delegation could immediately move that GA adjourn debate on matter until first plenary meeting following completion organization ninth session. Under rules 76 and 78 such motion has priority and only two speakers may speak in favor and two against, after which must be immediately put to vote. In putting forward this motion we would stress desirability of completing formal organizational steps before substantive questions considered.
At plenary meeting following election officers, by prearrangement with President and Secretariat we would speak early, possibly first, in [Page 778] debate and propose our moratorium motion. Since proposal which initiated debate would normally have priority over our motion in vote, we or some other delegation, just before vote, would move under rule 93 that our proposal be put vote first. Following adoption our proposal, we or some other delegation would then move, also under rule 93, that other proposals not be voted upon (assuming President did not rule that in light adoption moratorium formula it would be inconsistent for GA act on other proposals.
If Chinese representation issue not raised at outset opening plenary, we would take initiative this matter by moving our moratorium proposal immediately following election of officers, basing our action on inevitability this matter arising and desirability settling it promptly. In this case our motion would automatically have priority in vote, but following its adoption we would formally move that other proposals not be voted upon (assuming President does not rule that in light adoption our motion it would be inconsistent for GA act on other proposals).
This course of action probably best ensures our control over procedures to be used for disposal Chinese representation issue. However, it may be difficult obtain broad agreement, which we consider essential, on this course. Proposal to adjourn debate at outset plenary may be regarded as transparent move against Menon, while Dutch and Thais may feel it implies their candidate for presidency is committed to support us on this question. Moreover, UK might contend our taking initiative following election officers and in absence other proposals inconsistent with moratorium arrangement which has been understood provide basis for joint action if issue raised by others. It may also be argued that our majority would be greater if moratorium proposal applied in reaction to Soviet initiative.
In any event, if UK (which is key to cooperation Western European and Commonwealth countries) strongly prefers (a) or (b) above, we should not press this course.
3. It is likely that in course proceedings Menon will reiterate view he put forward last year that Chinese representation issue should be taken up initially in Credentials Committee and might formally propose that all proposals be referred that Committee. We would oppose such course on ground no need refer this matter to Credentials Committee and moreover Chinese representation issue constitutes important political question and not simply credentials question as recognized by GA in resolution 396 (V) in which GA stated inter alia that this type issue “should be considered in light of the Purposes and Principles of the Charter”. We would argue that such questions can best be decided by Assembly as whole, preferably in plenary session.
If instead of formal motion and in absence any proposals on Chinese representation question Menon while Acting President announces [Page 779] he does not intend accept any proposals on this question since he believes this matter should be dealt with initially by Credentials Committee, we would attempt get floor to state that while we welcome effort to prevent surprise substantive motions before Assembly even organized, we must reserve our right at later time to state our opposition to consideration this important matter by Credentials Committee.
4. Position paper on appointment Credentials Committee pouched USUN sets forth criteria for balanced slate and proposal that US or some other friendly delegation move substitution of complete alternative slate in event Acting President nominates unbalanced group. Complete substitute slate much preferable to proposing amendments substituting individual countries since tends to avoid direct slap at particular countries. Here too need for advance consultations vital. In particular it will of course be necessary ascertain from each country on our alternative slate that it is willing serve.
Suggest as first step that USUN ascertain from Cordier nature slate Secretariat plans recommended Temporary President. You should take occasion emphasize our view that slate must be constructed on basis criteria used in past, i.e., it must be geographically representative and must include no more than three countries which recognize Chinese Communist regime. (For details see position paper.)3 Slate suggested by Chinese (urtel 201) satisfactory.
- Drafted by Samuel DePalma of the Office of UN Political and Security Affairs, cleared with the Bureau of Far Eastern Affairs, the Bureau of European Affairs, L/UNA, and the Executive Secretariat, and approved and signed by the Assistant Secretary of State for UN Affairs (Key).↩
- Brackets are in the source text.↩
- See Department of State Position Paper, Sept. 9, p. 781.↩