320/10–352
Memorandum by the Director of the Office of United Nations Political and Security Affairs (Wainhouse) to the Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs (Hickerson)
- Subject:
- Japan’s Interest in Possible Arrangements for Non-Member Participation in the General Assembly
Ambassador Gross, in August, mentioned to the Japanese observer in New York various alternatives suggested in the past as possible solutions to the membership problem. One of the alternatives he mentioned was the suggestion that states excluded from membership by the Soviet veto might be given the right to participate without vote in the General Assembly. Mr. Kamimura of the Japanese Embassy subsequently informed NA that the Foreign Minister was interested in this idea and asked the Department for answers on several specific questions. NA said that they would try to arrange written answers. (A memorandum of this conversation is attached.)1
There was recently a newspaper report from Tokyo which erroneously stated that we had made a specific offer to Japan for “associate membership.” We have denied this in response to queries from the press and United Nations delegations. A later newspaper report said that the Foreign Office has apparently decided against “associate membership” but we have had no official word on Japan’s views. The Italians still seem dead set against the idea, and Guidotti seems worried that Japan might like it.
We believe we should take no action which might be interpreted as a specific offer to Japan. For this reason, and since this is a matter which affects all United Nations Members and on which we have no final views ourselves, we believe that we should not give Mr. Kamimura written answers to his questions. Mr. Young of NA agrees but he has told me that he would like to meet with Mr. Kamimura informally [Page 860] next week to discuss the matter. If you concur, he will discuss in very general terms the questions raised by Kamimura, using the views presented below as a guide. He would make clear that there are important political as well as legal question involved and that we have not yet formulated a final position, and would seek to ascertain whether Japan would be interested.
Our present views on the points raised by Mr. Kamimura are as follows:
1. Is the procedure to admit Japan as a non-voting participant of the General Assembly permissable under the Charter of the United Nations?
There would be no Charter difficulty in arranging for non-voting participation by Japan in General Assembly deliberations on matters which the Assembly considered of particular concern to Japan. The General Assembly has already established the practice of inviting non-members to participate in its Committees on an ad hoc basis during discussion of cases in which they are directly interested. The question is whether non-Member participation in the General Assembly could be established on a more generalized basis consistent with the Charter.
The final answer to this question could only be determined by the General Assembly and would depend upon the scope of participation contemplated. With these reservations, it is our view that there is nothing in the Charter which would prevent the General Assembly from establishing some form of non-voting participation by Japan in its proceedings on a more generalized basis than has been followed in the past.
2. If so, will Japan be able to sit in the same capacity in the Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council and other organs of the United Nations when problems of interest to Japan are discussed?
An invitation to Japan by the General Assembly to participate in some manner in General Assembly proceedings would not enable Japan to sit in the same capacity in the Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council and other organs of the United Nations when problems of interest to Japan are discussed. Each organ would have to determine for itself whether to permit Japan or other non-members of the United Nations to participate in deliberations on matters of concern to them.
3. In so participating, will Japan be legally bound by the Charter, resolutions, and other actions of the United Nations?
If Japan should participate as a non-member in General Assembly proceedings, this fact in itself would not legally bind Japan to the Charter, resolutions and other actions of the United Nations unless the Assembly required, as a condition for Japan’s participation, the acceptance of the obligations of the Charter and an undertaking to be bound [Page 861] by Assembly resolutions to the same extent as Members. However, Japan has accepted, in the Treaty of Peace, certain Charter obligations and it is already bound by the Charter to the extent that it has accepted these obligations.
Furthermore, it should be noted that article 35(2) would in any event be applicable in a case where any non-member wished to bring to the attention of the Security Council or of the Assembly any dispute to which it is a party. This article requires that the non-member accept in advance, for the purposes of the dispute, the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the present Charter.
4. In this capacity, will Japan be able to submit draft resolutions, documents, etc.?
The answer to this question depends upon the quantum of participation which the Assembly might decide upon.
Only one formal proposal for non-member participation has been presented to the General Assembly. Under this proposal, submitted by El Salvador in 1950, the General Assembly would have requested the Secretary General to invite non-Members whose applications had been vetoed by the USSR to send observers to sessions of the General Assembly and its Committees, including the Interim Committee, “in order to enable them to express their views and furnish information whenever consulted by the delegation of any Member State.” The proposal would also have provided for the distribution to Members of documents and letters sent by the non-Members to the Secretary General. The General Assembly, however, did not adopt this proposal. Many members, while fully sympathizing with the motives behind El Salvador’s suggestion, wanted more time to consider its implications or had doubt that the non-Members would themselves be interested.
If the General Assembly decided to give non-Members the right to participate in the Assembly, it might grant non-Members the privileges provided in the El Salvadorian proposal. These privileges might possibly be extended to include the right to speak in Committees, and perhaps the Plenary meetings, under the same rules as Members on any matter before the Committee and of making proposals and submitting draft resolutions on matters of substance, which could be put to a vote at the request of a Member. More limited participation might include the right to present views on the substance of each item in the Committees at a time authorized by the Chairman and of having written statements circulated to all Members. We have no definite views on this matter.
5. Will Japan be required to make her financial contribution?
The assessment of a financial contribution against non-Members on the same basis as assessments against Members would be contrary to article 17(2), which provides that the expenses of the organization [Page 862] shall be borne by the Members as apportioned by the General Assembly. Conceivably a financial contribution might be requested of non-Members in the event that arrangements for their participation in the Assembly were established, these contributions to cover the expenses resulting from participation. We have, however, reached no final view on this matter.
6. In general, what are the rights and obligations of Japan in this capacity?
See above.
- Not printed (310.2/9–252).↩