235. Letter From the Representative at the United Nations (Wadsworth) to the Secretary of State1
Dear Chris: The already developed pattern of Soviet demands as to representation on various bodies in and out of the United Nations prompts me to suggest that the time is rapidly approaching for a very strong statement indeed on the whole subject of “Parity—What it really is”.
[Page 428]I don’t believe that the rest of the world fully understands how outrageous the Soviet demand for parity in negotiating bodies really is when one considers the structure of the United Nations and, indeed, of the world. It is the utmost effrontery to claim that the so-called Socialist States now totaling 12 in number, if you count Yugoslavia and Cuba, should be equated with the 50 States that we characterize as solidly free world, or even with the 37 States that proclaim they are “uncommitted”. It is absurd and distorted and artificial and I think we ought to say so.
The only place we have really accepted parity in negotiating bodies is in the 10-nation group. This is not necessary and does not set a precedent. Parity on a Control Commission for a nuclear test treaty is different, because you set forth voting procedures in the Treaty, and you have agreed that in order to succeed, neither side should have advantage over the other.
I think that people in general, all over the world, would respond to the theory that international bodies generally and negotiating bodies specifically should have a composition reflecting the state of the world, not artificially twisted to create “parity” for any one group. Admission could be made, and I believe should be, that in matters such as disarmament a majority vote in any such body could not be considered to be conclusive—that agreement is imperative. That is another reality which we have had to face for some time.
The composition of really important negotiating bodies is no longer important from the standpoint of a majority for voting, and therefore, any demand for artificial parity is merely a device to gain prestige or to make trouble or both. Where voting is necessary and desirable, parity is absurd; where voting is not required, parity is even sillier. Before it is too late, with parity completely accepted all over the place, the United States should take a strong stand on the side of the angels.
Sincerely yours,
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 320/10–2860. Confidential. Attached to a copy of Herter’s November 9 response, which stated that he agreed with Wadsworth and that the Department was preparing a statement on parity along the lines Wadsworth had suggested. A copy of this statement has not been found.↩