L/UNA files, “Privileges & Immunities, General, 1944–1954”

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs ( Hickerson )

  • Subject:
  • Possible Restriction of Alien Personnel at the United Nations

I am attaching a draft letter to the Attorney General prepared for the signature of General Smith, together with a copy of the tentative Justice Department proposal for the restriction of “international organization” aliens, particularly at the United Nations, to which the draft letter is addressed. The Justice Department memorandum has been under study within the Department and the United States Mission to the United Nations, and was the subject of a meeting in my office with Messrs. Tate and Meeker of L, Mr. Barbour of EE, and Mr. Ylitalo of CON.

The draft letter to the Attorney General is not intended to represent a State Department position which has been agreed to at this time, as the aforementioned meeting served only to clarify the issues involved and not to secure agreement on a given course of action. However it does represent an approach which this Bureau is prepared to support, and I would like to see if you will agree that it is adequate as a basis for discussion with the Under Secretary. If this is agreed to, and if the Under Secretary should determine that this is the position for the Department to take, he may wish to send a letter on this order or, alternatively, to discuss the matter orally with the Attorney General.

John D. Hickerson
[Attachment]

The Acting Secretary of State to the Attorney General of the United States ( Brownell ): Draft Letter

My Dear Mr. Attorney General: Officers of the Department of Justice who are concerned with your Department’s participation in the deliberations of the Interdepartmental Committee on Internal Security (ICIS) have developed a memorandum, dated February 10, 1953, for the Standing Committee on the subject of restrictions for United Nations personnel. This memorandum recommends for ICIS consideration that legislation be sought to authorize the issuance of visas, in the case of the United Nations, which are valid only for admission to the United Nations Headquarters District in New York and the immediate vicinity, and that such visas be issued in the future [Page 242] to persons whose freedom of movement should be restricted for reasons of security. The proposal states, in part:

“Security considerations strongly suggest a drastic limitation of the area in which personnel attached to the United Nations may reside or travel while in attendance at or employed by the United Nations. The investigative efforts of this nation have been thwarted or seriously impeded, for example, by the purchase by the Soviet Union of a large estate on Long Island outside the boundaries of the City of New York. Surveillances of every type have been thwarted by the ease with which personnel favorable to the Soviet Union have been able to take advantage of the Soviet estate on Long Island to avoid detection. There have been several investigations of espionage activities engaged in by United Nations personnel which have been rendered far more difficult because of the wide area that has to be covered in any such operation.”

The memorandum of February 10 makes it clear that the proposal is put forward on behalf of the Department of Justice conferees, and is not submitted as a proposition of departmental policy. We in the Department of State greatly appreciate having the benefit of these preliminary views of the officers of your Department and have given the proposal careful consideration. As a result of this consideration, we would like to ascertain if it is the formal conclusion of the Department of Justice that restrictions should be imposed on the movements of certain foreign delegation and Secretariat personnel at the United Nations.

As you know, the only foreign personnel at the United Nations who have been restricted to date have been a limited number of correspondents, invitees and representatives of non-governmental organizations, otherwise inadmissable, who have been issued visas under the discretionary authority of the Attorney General. In Washington there has been no restriction of foreign diplomatic personnel on security grounds, the existing regulations with respect to the travel of personnel of the missions of the Soviet Union, Hungary and Rumania having been adopted as measures of retaliation. For the United States to enter upon a policy of general restrictions at the United Nations will have repercussions on our relations with other members of the United Nations the full measure of which cannot be gauged at the present moment. At the same time, if it is the considered opinion of the Department of Justice that confinement of the movement of certain persons to a limited geographic area is essential to the conduct of investigations and surveillance operations necessary in the interest of national security, the Department of State will concur wholeheartedly in the imposition of such restrictions.

If restrictions are to be imposed, however, it is the opinion of the Department of State that an effective program of restriction can be entered upon without recourse to legislation as contemplated in the Department of Justice memorandum. The proposal put forward in the [Page 243] memorandum would have the Administration request special legislation requiring that aliens falling within Section 101 (a) (15) (g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, i.e., members of the delegations of foreign governments to an international organization and alien personnel of the secretariats of international organizations, and members of their families and servants, be issued visas limiting them to travel within the city in which the international organization meets and travel to and from that city and the port of entry. In the case of the United Nations, it is proposed that the “city” be considered as the Borough of Manhattan of the City of New York. No suggestion is made as to the appropriate area in the cases of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Organization of American States, and the Pan American Sanitary Bureau, all of which have their headquarters in Washington. The memorandum further suggests that the Secretary of State would be authorized to make exemptions in individual cases.

The legislative approach embodied in the memorandum would appear to have serious shortcomings. It makes no provision for the restriction of persons already admitted to the United States. If restrictions were to be imposed prior to admission only, the delays in the issuance of visas which would result would not purchase the degree of protection desired, inasmuch as the relevant security information would, in many cases, be developed after admission.

As stated above, it is the view of the Department of State that adequate authority already exists for the imposition of restrictions, and the delay which would be involved in the introduction and consideration of legislation can and should be avoided if restrictions are deemed to be necessary. In the case of the United Nations this authority is contained in the provisions of Public Law 357, 80th Congress. While the authority is not as explicit in the case of the organizations headquartered in Washington, we are confident that any necessary restrictions here could be applied and enforced without great difficulty. It is assumed that any cases deemed to require restriction would be occasional only, inasmuch as Czechoslovakia is the only Iron Curtain country holding membership in an organization located in Washington. In any event, it is our understanding that the immediate question exists with respect to the United Nations alone.

In the imposition of restrictions at the United Nations or elsewhere, the Department of State would expect the Department of Justice to notify it of those persons who should be restricted. While the Department of Justice would undoubtedly wish to apply the restriction uniformly to all persons within certain categories, such as delegations of Iron Curtain countries, it may be helpful toward an understanding that the restrictions are for the purpose of security rather than retaliation if they are generally considered as applying to individuals. [Page 244] While the Department of State would appreciate being informed of the particulars of each case requiring restriction which falls outside certain group categories, it would not propose to pass upon determinations of the Department of Justice in any way. Once a policy of restriction is decided upon, foreign policy considerations do not operate to make a distinction as between individual cases, and any distinction should be based on security considerations alone. For its part, the Department of State would attempt to keep the Department of Justice advised of any information pertinent to the determinations to be made by the Department of Justice.

The determinations of the Department of Justice that certain persons or groups of persons should be restricted would be conveyed by the Department of State, through the United States Mission to the United Nations in New York, to appropriate authorities at the United Nations. In the case of members of an international secretariat, their families and servants, the appropriate authority would be the Secretary General. This would also be true in the case of invitees, representatives of non-governmental organizations, and correspondents. In the case of members of delegations, their families and servants, the appropriate authority would be the chief of delegation. The Department of State would also notify the authorities of the conditions of restriction and the procedures whereby authority might be requested of the Department of Justice for travel outside the area of restriction. If the restrictions, once imposed, should be violated in any respect, this would be considered an abuse of privileges of residence within the meaning of Public Law 357 and the individual would lose his exemption from the laws and regulations regarding the continued residence of aliens. As it is assumed that any person restricted would be one not normally admissible under the provisions of Public Law 414, 82nd Congress, the removal of his exemption would make him subject to deportation.

If restrictions are imposed on persons at the United Nations in New York, the reliability of our statements to the effect that they are imposed on security grounds may be publicly challenged when it is recognized that comparable restrictions are not to be imposed on all diplomatic missions of Iron Curtain countries here in Washington. We would therefore wish to have the assistance of the Department of Justice in the development of such information as may be made public with respect to the differences in the security situation as between New York and Washington.

for signature of General
Smith