UNP files, lot 59 D 237, “Membership”
Memorandum of Conversation, by Senator J. W. Fulbright of the United States
Delegation to the General Assembly and Joseph J.
Sisco, an Adviser of the Delegation
confidential
[New
York,] October 1, 1954.
- Subject:
- Non-member Participation
- Participants:
- Mr. Crosthwaite,
U.K. Delegation
- Mr. Michael Williams, U.K. Delegation
- Senator Fulbright, U.S. Delegation
- Mr. Joseph Sisco, U.S. Delegation
Senator Fulbright made available to Messrs. Crosthwaite and
Williams a copy of a brief summary of our
non-member participation proposal and a copy of the legal memorandum which
explains the juridical basis of our proposal.
Mr. Crosthwaite said he
would take this matter up in their delegation urgently. During the course of
the luncheon conversation Messrs. Crosthwaite and Williams made the
following points:
- 1.
- He described their position on our proposal as somewhere between
outright opposition and extreme scepticism.
- 2.
- The UK has real doubts as to the
legality of the proposal.
- 3.
- He indicated that according to their information none of the
European non-members would favor participation on the basis of our
proposal.
- 4.
- They were opposed to any proposal which would derogate from the
authority of the Security Council and enhance the position of the
General Assembly. He explained further that in their view the
General Assembly is not a reliable organ. He maintained that the
UK has no comparable “veto” in
the GA as the US has by virtue of its
ability to muster 20 Latin American votes on any proposal which
really affects its interest. He cited the Latin American support of
the US against Indian participation in the Korean Political
Conference.
- 5.
- They did express specific opposition to the provision that the
vote of the non-member participants be recorded but not
counted.
[Attachment 1]
Brief Summary of United States Proposal
limited official use
The proposal is for non-member participation of the 14 qualified states.
(Those states who have received 7 votes in SC and ⅔ majority in GA).
Under the proposal the GA would set up
arrangements for the participation of these non-members. Their
privileges might include: receive UN
documentation; they could speak, make proposals, and have
[Page 1034]
their vote recorded but not
counted, they would be asked to make some financial contribution.
This is different from the old associate membership idea. The GA would invite the qualified non-members to
participate on the above basis—no individual applications would be
necessary. The non-members could choose to respond to the GA invitation to participate shortly after
the adoption of the resolution or at a subsequent later date.
It would be an interim step towards full membership. This proposal is
complementary to our continued support of qualified applicants for full
membership. Its juridical basis rests on the assumption that the GA, as an adaptable and flexible organ, can
invite states to participate in its proceedings under conditions defined
by the GA.
The proposal would also include an operative paragraph or two in the
resolution which would have the GA
declare or express the opinion that membership should not be subject to
the veto and that the Charter be revised to this effect.
We have been informed that the Prime Minister Yoshida has accepted the proposal
in principle. The Koreans have also indicated their willingness to
participate on this basis. We are awaiting responses from a number of
other non-members.
[Attachment 2]
Legal Memorandum
limited official use
Non-Voting Participation in the General
Assembly
Representation and voting in the General Assembly are provided for in
Articles 9 and 18 of the Charter, which specify that each United Nations
Member is entitled to five representatives and one vote in the Assembly.
The Charter makes no provision for any form of associate membership in
the United Nations.
On the other hand, the Charter does not exclude the possibility of
non-Member states appearing before and being heard by United Nations
organs, including the General Assembly. Indeed, Articles 11(2) and 35(2)
clearly contemplate this. Article 35(2) provides that a “state which is
not a member of the United Nations may bring to the attention of the
Security Council or of the General Assembly any dispute to which it is a
party if it accepts in advance, for the purposes of the dispute, the
obligations of pacific settlement provided in the Charter.”
In a large number of instances, main committees of the Assembly have
invited representatives of non-Member states to appear and speak on
questions coming before the Assembly. For example, representatives
[Page 1035]
of Albania and Bulgaria were
heard in the Greek case; representatives of Jordan have been heard in
discussion of the Palestine problem; the Republic of Korea has been
represented by spokesmen in the Assembly’s Political and Security
Committee. Austria and Italy also have appeared and been heard by
Assembly Committees.
These have been instances where the non-Member states concerned were
thought to have a special interest in the particular subjects under
consideration, and were therefore invited to participate. But there is
nothing in the Charter to suggest that similar arrangements may not be
made by the General Assembly for one or more non-Member states whose
participation the Assembly believes would be valuable over the whole
range of subjects dealt with in the Assembly’s sessions.
The General Assembly, by large majorities, has expressed its view that
fourteen of the existing applicant states ought to be admitted to
membership in the Organization so as to participate in its work; they
have been excluded only through the veto in the Security Council by one
permanent member of the Council. There is no reason why the Assembly may
not invite these states to participate in its deliberations, with such
privileges as the Assembly wishes to accord, so long as the non-Members
do not have their votes counted so as to affect the outcome on proposals
placed before the Assembly and its Committees.
