148. Telegram From the Mission at the United Nations to the Delegation at the Foreign Ministers Meetings, at Geneva1
14. Geneva for Secretary. Verbatim text. Following is my revision of text contained in Geneva 33 (Secto 188 to Dept2) on which I would appreciate your comments soonest:
“1. In his speech at the opening of the General Assembly on September 22nd, Secretary of State Dulles pointed out ‘that our organization’s power derives largely from moral judgments formed here’ and that, therefore, it is essential ‘that there should be here all of those eligible nations which, by their policies and conduct, have demonstrated their devotion to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter’.
2. He said further that ‘about a score of sovereign nations are not represented here and many of them meet the membership tests of our Charter. They are peace-loving and they have shown themselves able and willing to carry out the Charter’s obligations. Their governments would reflect here important segments of world opinion. To block the admission of such nations by use of the veto power is a grave wrong, not only [to] them, but it is also a wrong to this organization and to all of its members. I hope that during this Tenth Session action will be taken by the Security Council and by the General Assembly to bring these nations into our membership. Thus, the UN would enter its second decade better equipped to serve mankind.’
3. Twelve of the thirteen deserving and qualified nations have been blocked from admission to the UN because of Soviet Russia’s abuse of the veto power in the Security Council. The Security Council has not as yet acted on the application of Spain.
[Page 336]4. In the European area, the list of applicants includes Italy, Austria, Finland, Eire, Portugal, and Spain.
5. In the Near and Far East, it includes Cambodia, Ceylon, Japan, Jordan, Laos, Libya, and Nepal. These were specifically endorsed for membership by the Bandung Conference of last spring.
6. It is reported that the Soviet Union will withhold its veto and that these free nations can become members of the UN if the free world is willing not to block the admission of governments behind the so-called ‘iron curtain’—governments which are not equals among equals as are the nations of the free world, but are in a subordinate relationship to Moscow. This means Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania.
7. Not to prevent the entrance of such governments into the UN does not mean approval of their systems of government nor a condoning of the violations of human rights in which these governments have persistently engaged.
8. But there is an overriding reason which, after mature consideration, seems to us to outweigh this drawback. It is that the admission of these 13 free nations would add so tremendously to the moral weight of the UN as overwhelmingly to outweigh the admission of the 4.
9. There is also reason to hope that membership in the UN will to some extent bring the people of Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania closer to freedom.
10. For these reasons, the US intends to vote for the admission of the 13 and to abstain on the 4 mentioned above.”
I will undoubtedly get a question at the press conference, after having released my statement, regarding Chinese representation. While not including reference to this question in my prepared statement above, I propose to answer such query along following lines:
“11. To avoid any possible misunderstanding, I point out that the question of new members is totally distinct from the demand of the Chinese Communists to represent China, which is already a member.
In American political language, the matter raised by the Chinese Communists is a credentials question and not a membership question. The only connection would be that the added moral weight which these 13 would bring would mean more support for the United States on many issues, including the type of motion we have made in the past in the United Nations against the seating of the Chinese Communists.”
I have noted your suggestion that reference to divided countries be omitted from my prepared statement because of difficulties of treating with Federal Republic of Germany. As you are aware, North and South Vietnam and North and South Korea have applied for membership, [Page 337] whereas Federal Republic of Germany has not. I am not aware of any intention on its part to make application until it is unified. Even if there is no reference to divided states in my prepared statement, I will surely be asked at press conference what US attitude is regarding applications of divided countries. Would appreciate your suggestions as to what I might say in response such press query.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 310.2/11–755. Secret; Priority; Limit Distribution. Repeated to the Department for Hoover and Phillips as Delga 233, which is the source text.↩
- Document 144.↩