409. Telegram From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State 1

2712. Chirep: Cosponsors Meeting, Sept 16.

Summary. Reps of thirty-five Missions attended Chirep cosponsors’ meeting at USUN Sept 16. Bush reviewed Chirep activities since cosponsors’ meeting Aug 17, explaining US decision to accept others’ recommendation that dual representation resolution must be revised [Page 812]to enable resolutions to succeed. Distributed revised text of DR.2 Described ROC flexible reaction prior to DR revision and said we continuing to consult closely. Solicited statements of cosponsorship for IQ and DR. At same time, Bush made clear that we understood number of other governments needed more time to consider, that therefore we would consider that list not closed and that we fully anticipated additions to cosponsors’ list prior to tabling early next week. Following said they would cosponsor IQ: Colombia, Costa Rica, Haiti, Honduras, Philippines and Swaziland. Following said they would cosponsor DR: Colombia, Costa Rica, Haiti, Honduras, Philippines and Swaziland. Colombia commitment conditional. Phils spoke especially strongly on behalf of reses. Australia and New Zealand, in similar statements, said they prepared in principle to cosponsor pending identification of others on list. Following asked questions or made other comments without discussing their willingness cosponsor: Belgium, Netherlands, Fiji, Thailand and Ghana. Japanese did not speak. Philippines reiterated request for revision of third operative paragraph of DR. We accepted revision. End Summary.
Following Missions represented at Chirep cosponsors meeting at USUN Sept 16: AR: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Rep, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay; EUR: Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain; NEA: Turkey; EA: Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Philippines, Thailand; AF: Botswana, Car, Chad, Gabon, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Lesotho, Liberia, Niger, Swaziland, Uganda, Fiji. Phillips, Bennett, Schaufele, PolCouns and MisOffs also present.
Bush opened meeting by reviewing events since last meeting Aug 17. He cited continuous consultations in New York and capitals, strong recommendations that representation resolution must be explicit regarding Security Council seat, our agreement to revision as only way to ensure maximum support for reses and preservation of ROC seat. Bush also reviewed ROC flexibility since Secretary’s Aug 2 statement. Noted that ROC viewed situation realistically and understands, from closest consultations with US and others, why revision necessary. Mentioned ROC restraint since notified last week that we obliged to revise text.
Bush said we have delayed tabling resolutions to permit other govts ample time to consider them. Recognized need to table and anticipated [Page 813]doing so “by early next week”. Said we already privately had word from number of govts that they would cosponsor both resolutions. Said we hoped reps would record at meeting their govts’ willingness to cosponsor. Invited specific commitments or any other explanations of govts present positions. Said we aware some govts need more time to consider and we would expect, in addition to those speaking at meeting, that others would join us over next few days.
Bush distributed new text of representation resolution with first operative paragraph revised to read “hereby affirms the right of representation of the People’s Republic of China and recommends that it be seated as one of the five permanent members of the Security Council:”
PolCouns (Newlin) provided summary of our attitude toward tactical questions. Anticipated that AR and US items would be merged under neutral heading; priority for IQ; question of priority for DR would be handled in light of existing situation. Would work to pass IQ, defeat AR and pass DR.
Anand (Thailand) asked about AR cosponsors tactical plans. Reply included statement that we had heard nothing about intentions in Credentials Committee and that we would seek to insure best composition with neutral chairman. Belgium, Netherlands and Fiji also asked questions about tactics. Ghana and Liberian reps asked about support from govts not represented at meeting.
Australia (McIntyre) first to respond to Bush’s invitation to speak on cosponsorship, said GOA had taken no final or formal position on cosponsorship. Wants to cosponsor both, especially since the DR includes SC seat. GOA explaining position to many govts, soliciting their support and cosponsorship. GOA not inhibited in this direction. McIntyre said he believed IQ definitely winnable. Later in mtg, in response to Thai request for clarification of GOA position (as well as positions of New Zealand and Philippines), McIntyre repeated foregoing, adding that GOA only waiting to see what the final list of cosponsors looks like; meanwhile doing its best to encourage others to support. (Merrillees later verified to MISOFF that he had made round of calls to other missions.)
New Zealand (Scott) in somewhat more positive statement than McIntyre, said New Zealand waiting to see number of other cosponsors, then New Zealand will be able to cosponsor. Revision enhances chances of successes. In later response to Anand’s question, Scott rephrased to say that New Zealand prepared to cosponsor but final position will be taken in light of responses of other govts.
Philippines (Reyes), who made strongest supporting statement of meeting, said that change in DR was not easy decision for US to take. Phils had been among first to remark on weakness of original draft’s ambiguity on SC seat. Basis of whole USG approach had been [Page 814]to face up to reality. Phils aware of extreme difficulty Dual Rep policy faced in GA because of lack of precedents giving two seats to one state. Phil Govt feels should maintain seat of ROC and bring in PRC. Reyes said he authorized to state GOP would cosponsor both resolutions. (In his later response to Anand, Reyes added only that after USG accepted GOP recommendation it logical and fair that Phils cosponsor.)
Reyes then added that GOP believed DR operative para three may not cover all UN bodies. He suggested we insert ref to “all UN bodies”. Bush agreed to change op para three to read “recommends that all UN bodies and the specialized agencies take into account, etc”.
Colombia (Espinosa) said GOC supported admission of PRC while preserving ROC position. Two draft resolutions are carefully composed and well balanced statements for these purposes and GOC is prepared cosponsor. It can wholeheartedly support revised DR because it now clarifies SC seat question. GOC appreciates USG agreeing to revision. Associating self with GOA and New Zealand statements, said GOC would favor inscription of drafts with sufficient cosponsors to indicate strength. Asked that his delegation be kept currently informed of progress of draft reses. (In later conversation with MisOff, Espinosa said he surprised by failure Australia to make commitment to cosponsor in view of earlier private statement by McIntyre to effect GOA cosponsoring both reses. Espinosa added Australian and New Zealand cosponsorship would seem essential to any credible cosponsors list. Colombia would be happy to be included in such list.)
Chad (Ouangmotching) said in view of modification of DR, Chad would cosponsor that res. Position on IQ would be decided later. (Chad Del not informed of Fort Lamy 16813 prior to meeting.)
Bush informed meeting that Honduras had authorized USUN to announce its cosponsorship of both reses.
Costa Rica (Molina) said Govt of Costa Rica would cosponsor both because wanted to preserve ROC seat while seating PRC in both GA and SC.
Haiti (Coradin) said he had received instructions just prior to meeting enabling him to state that GOH would support both reses provided they do not affect the interests of ROC and ROC’s continued participation in UN. Accordingly, Haiti would cosponsor both reses.
Swaziland (Dlamini) said position of his govt was that he is free to cosponsor both resolutions.
Bush said that he would not tell waiting press names of participants in meeting or identify cosponsors but would attempt make clear that we see significant forward movement in meeting. Reyes expressed [Page 815]appreciation for Bush’s desire not to embarrass participants by giving press name lists. He added hope that delegations interested in fate of DR would come to decision ASAP. Failure to decide complicates public relations aspects of Chirep effort. Very fact that we unable to finalize and table reses or to indicate a definite date for tabling gives negative impression. At this stage, Reyes said, other side has psychological advantage because AR cosponsors known and resolution already tabled. Reyes said he appreciated difficulties with which other dels confronted but reiterated urgency of issue.4
  1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1970–73, UN 6 CHICOM. Confidential. Repeated to Abidjan, Accra, Ankara, Asuncion, Bangkok, Bangui, Bathurst, Bogota, Brussels, Buenos Aires, Caracas, Canberra, Cotonou, Dakar, Dublin, Fort Lamy, The Hague, Gabarone, Guatemala, Hong Kong, Kampala, Kigali, Libreville, Lima, Luxembourg, Madrid, Managua, Manila, Mbabane, Mexico City, Monrovia, Montevideo, Niamey, Ouagadougou, Port-au-Prince, Quito, Rome, San Jose, San Salvador, Santo Domingo, Suva, Tegucigalpa, Tokyo, Tunis, and Wellington.
  2. Telegram 166117, September 10, which invited governments to this meeting, transmitted a message from the Secretary that informed the governments of a revision to the draft Dual Representation Resolution that recommended that the People’s Republic of China be seated as one of the five Permanent Members of the Security Council. The Secretary invited governments to join with the United States in co-sponsoring the revised resolution. (Ibid.)
  3. Not printed.
  4. Further reports on the September 16 meeting were sent to certain Latin American posts in telegram 172102 and to certain African posts in telegram 172118. (Both September 17; ibid.) The Department also urged the Ambassadors to Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to make special efforts to persuade those countries to support the IQ and DR resolutions. (Telegram 172103 to Canberra and Wellington, September 17, and telegram 172259 to Tokyo, September 18; both National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1970–73, UN 6 CHICOM)