IO files, US/A/M(Chr)/265
Minutes of Fifth Meeting of the United States Delegation to the General Assembly, New York, September 23, 1953
[Here follow list of persons present (44) and brief reference to a matter of Delegation attendance at plenary meetings of the General Assembly. Byrnes presided in the temporary absence of Lodge.]
1. Membership
Mr. Stein made the presentation on the problem of admission of new members. He noted the qualifications set forth for the admission of new members in Article 4 of the Charter and the procedures outlined therein for such admission. He said the sad reality was that nineteen candidates had been knocking at the door of the UN for a long time. Fourteen of these were non-Communist nations and they included Italy, Japan and Austria. All these applications had been vetoed in the Security Council by the Soviet Union. The other five applicants were Soviet Satellites which had never obtained a majority in the Security Council.
The Soviet Union had proposed the simultaneous admission of five satellites and nine non-Communist states in what was generally referred to as a “package deal”. This proposal had never obtained a majority vote in the Security Council. The United States opposed this approach since the applications of each country must be considered individually and on their own merits. The result had been a deadlock on the question of membership in the Security Council.
The General Assembly had been extremely concerned with this problem and pressures had built up in the Assembly for some move looking to universality of membership. These pressures had gone in two directions. The first was that the Assembly should take over the whole problem and admit those candidates who were qualified. This course was favored by the Latin Americans, who had come up with some very clever theories none of which, however, had been legally acceptable to the United States. The second course was that of a political settlement, i.e., some sort of “package deal”. These pressures had reached their height in Paris in the winter of 1951–52, when a resolution to this effect had almost been adopted by the Assembly.
The United States position on this question was relatively simple. First of all, the five Soviet Satellites simply did not qualify for admission. However, the US did favor the admission of all the others who did qualify. Under the Charter, as presently drafted, it would only be possible to obtain their admission by some sort of deal as the Soviets proposed, but this would involve admission of those we felt were not qualified. In addition, a concession on the admission of Satellites would [Page 972] not be possible now, since it would lend weight to the arguments, although logically unconnected, made in favor of seating the Chinese Communists.
A holding operation was therefore necessary. The question was how to accomplish this. Mr. Stein said that Ambassador Belaunde of Peru wanted to have a Good Offices Committee of three which would bargain on a political basis with the parties concerned in an effort to break the deadlock on this matter. This Committee, according to his plan, would have no deadline and would report only if progress were made. Such an approach, Mr. Stein added, would keep the Latin Americans happy and would be very helpful in avoiding the immediate pressures for a package deal. Mr. Stein said that this matter had been taken up with Governor Byrnes who felt that it might be worth-while as a way out for the time being. He also noted that the Department had reluctantly concurred in this proposed course of action. The only disadvantage, said Mr. Stein, was that this might commit us to agreeing at some future time to a political settlement. However, it was the least embarrassing solution for us now and did put us on record as not stalling on this matter. He therefore recommended that the Delegation approve this course of action.
Mr. Stein also mentioned the possibility of Associate Membership for those applicants we considered qualified. Under this scheme they would have all rights of full Members except that of voting. There was the thought that this could some day lead to their acceptance as full Members. It had been discussed with the Italians, Japanese and the Austrians.
Governor Byrnes said that with regard to his views as mentioned by Mr. Stein, he was not too optimistic about the success of any Good Offices Committee, but he felt that the deadlock was very likely to be protracted and that the US Government would face great pressures in the future. He, therefore, agreed with the Staff recommendation. Governor Byrnes noted that if we stood by the qualifications set forth in the Charter we could not allow the admission of the Satellite States. None of them were independent or willing to uphold the obligations of the Charter. To admit them, moreover, would bless them with the characterization of “peace loving”. World public opinion would not be favorable to such action, he felt. However, the Latin Americans wanted most strongly to see Italy become a member of the United Nations. Therefore, there was this pressure to contend with. Governor Byrnes said he had read the report of the Committee which had met during the past year to discuss the question of membership and he appreciated the different points of view set forth there. He reiterated that he agreed with the Staff that a Good Offices Committee would not be harmful and might do some good. He wanted, however, to be able [Page 973] to say something about the personnel of such a Committee. He noted also that the British and some others had approved this general idea.
Mr. Murphy read from the language of the Department’s telegram and said that the United States Delegation could reply to this that it supported the idea wholeheartedly. Governor Byrnes added his agreement.
Ambassador Lodge, on assuming the Chair, noted the interest of the Secretary in the Associate Membership idea. He said he had tried to sell this idea to the Japanese, who were the biggest country not represented in the UN. He felt that if they would agree, it might become fashionable for others to accept such a type of membership. He noted that the Italians had originally disliked this idea as a sort of second-rate citizenship, but considered this attitude rather doctrinaire on their part. Mr. Murphy said that the Japanese had become very interested in such a possibility of late. Governor Byrnes pointed out that just such a contingency as this would be left open by the recommended approach and the various pressures would be avoided.
Mr. Ward Allen, with regard to Italy’s opinion, said that the Italians feared that pressure for their full membership would abate if they got only part of the way in.
Mr. Taylor noted that the position paper authorized us to consult with other countries regarding Associate Membership, if the Japanese and Italians showed any interest in this idea, in order to lay the groundwork for action at future sessions. He recalled that in a discussion with the Austrian Observer, who had once been quite opposed to this idea, they were indicating an attitude of willingness now and thought that the objection that had once been understood to be the attitude of all European non-Members might no longer be so firm.
[Here follows discussion of another agenda item.]