USUN files, IO, “Privileges & Immunities, Delegations”

Memorandum by the United States Representative at the United Nations ( Lodge ) to the Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations, Affairs ( Hickerson )

secret

Possible Restriction of Alien Personnel at the United Nations.

I have reviewed this question in some detail with the Mission staff. The basic assumptions which we have agreed on are as follows:

1.
Action must be taken wherever necessary to safeguard the internal security of the United States against any clearly demonstrated actual or potential dangers.
2.
The steps taken to safeguard the internal security should be such as to create the minimum possible disturbance and dislocation of our relationships with other free governments and international organizations and we should wherever possible be able to demonstrate a clear security requirement underlying any such restrictions.
3.
Restrictions which apply to the Soviet Union and its satellites should be undertaken only after calculation of the probable consequences and possible retaliatory action.

The Mission is obviously not competent to judge the nature of the dangers to the internal security of the United States and the character of restrictions necessary to deal with these dangers. The Mission does have some concern, however, with the second and third assumptions above.

The United States brings to bear in the United Nations a major part of its foreign policy. It is a significant forum in which the United States and other governments of the free world can contrast their actions against the actions and words of the U.S.S.R. In the months to come I anticipate that it will be an increasingly important arena in the struggle for world peace; thus, any restrictions which are to be applied at the United Nations Headquarters should be framed with the following considerations in mind.

A.
The United States needs the support and assistance of other delegations and members of the Secretariat for its foreign policy. If [Page 270] general restrictions or individual restrictions are imposed without adequate safeguards, we may lose some of that support.
B.
In recent speeches United States spokesmen have contrasted the restrictions and extreme security measures of the Soviet Union with the great traditions of freedom of the United States and other countries of the free world. This has been effective propaganda. It would lose some of its effectiveness if restrictions are applied.
C.
In applying restrictions to the U.S.S.R. and other Soviet delegations care should be exercised that the Soviets are not given an opportunity to play the martyrs. Denial of the use of the Glen Cove facilities during the summer months might have this effect.
D.
Restrictions applied at the present moment to the Soviet delegations might also be misinterpreted by some delegations as being deliberately provocative and as contradicting the President’s speech.
E.
The imposition of general restrictions at this time, when the U.S. is attempting to settle a “dispute” with the SYG UN concerning the application and effect of the Section 6 “security reservation” to the Headquarters Agreement, may prejudice the attempt at settlement and deepen the concern which a number of friendly Delegations have already evidenced re the tightening of U.S. control over persons coming to the Headquarters District on official business.
F.
If security is the reason for action then, as I have previously stated, exactly parallel treatment should be afforded delegations in New York and the diplomatic establishments in Washington.

Beyond these few points which I would wish to have the Department consider in reaching the final decision, I can add only our desire to cooperate fully with the security agencies of the Government in their effort to insure the internal security of the United States.