S/PV.108 Security Council

Does anyone wish to speak? If no one else wishes to take part in the debate today, we can continue it tomorrow afternoon at 3 o'clock. The meeting rose at 1 p.m. HUNDRED AND EIGHTH MEETING Held at Lake Success, New York, on Tuesday, 18 February 1947, at 3 p.m. President: Mr. F. VAN LANGENHOVE (Belgium) . Present; The representatives of the following countries: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, China, Colombia, France, Poland, Syria, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom, United States of America. A representative of Canada also attended the meeting. 62. Provisional agenda (document 5/278) 1. Adoption of the agenda. 2. Letter from the Chairman of the Atomic ou l'on a des raisons de supposer la presence de mines. Je termine la l'expose des faits et des arguments presentes par mon Gouvernement. I1 lui a ete tres penible d'etre oblige de saisir le Conseil de cette affaire, mais il est oblige de veiller a ce que la vie d'innocents marins de toutes nationalites soit protegee contre des activites criminelles clandestines.. J'aime it croire que le Conseil ne verra pas dans cette affaire une tentative d'intimidation de la part d'un grand pays it l'egard d'un petit. Les petites nations n'ont pas plus que les autres le monopole de l'infaillibilite, et elles doivent se conformer aux principes de civilisation qui sont it la base de la Charte des Nations Unies. J'ai vu dans un journal yougoslave un dessin humoristique representant deux paysans albanais qui, debout au bordde la mer, regardent passer deux navires de guerre, avec la Iegende: "Pourquoi ces navires ne sont-ils done pas venus au moment ou nous nous battions contre les fascistes?" A ceIa, je reponds: "Ces navires sont venus". La marine britannique, en efIet, a pris part, en 1943 et 1944, a d'innombrables operations dans l'Adriatique, et je pourrais fournir de longs rapports sur l'appui qu'elle a donne aux forces de la liberation. Ce sont les forces britanniques qui, de concert avec les partisans, ont libere Corfou, et Saranda meme, au mois d'octobre 1944. Ce fut le jour de Noel de la meme annee-il y a de cela un peu plus de deux ansque la marine royale britannique a invite 750 enfants albanais a une fete organisee pour eux. Je puis assurer au Conseil qu'elle serait heureuse d'avoir l'occasion de renouveler ce geste, si seulement elle avait l'assurance de ne pas etre payee de retour avec des balles, des obus et des mines. Le PRESIDENT: Personne ne demande la parole? Si personne ne desire plus intervenir aujourd'hui dans le debat, nous pourrions le poursuivre demain a 15 heures. La seance est levee cl 13 heures. CENT-HUI1'IEME SEANCE Tenue aLake Success, N ew-Yark, le mardi 18 jevrier 1947, a15 heures. President: M. F. VAN LANGENHOVE (Belgique) . Presents: Les representants des pays suivants: Australie, Belgique, Bresil, Chine, Colombie, France, Pologne, Syrie, Union des Republiques socialistes sovietiques, Royaume-Uni, Etats-Unis d'Amerique. Le representant du Canada assistait egalement ala seance. 62. Ordre du jour provisoire (document 5/278) 1. Adoption de l'ordre du jour. 2. Lettre en date du 31 decembre 1946 adressee 63. Adoption of the agenda 64. Continuation of the discussion of the First Report of the Atomic Energy Commission Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I am circulating to the members of the Security Council the proposals, amendments and addi- tions of the Soviet delegation. 2 I assume that the Security Council will only consider and take decisions on the general findings and the recom- mendations contained in the report, and that it will consider the other parts of the report as material submitted to the Security Council by the Atomic Energy Commission for its informa- tion. If my assumption is correct-and I con- sider that this would be the only correct pro- cedure in considering the report-I shall confine myself to submitting the proposals, amendments and additions which all the members of the Security Council will presently receive. If, how- ever) the Security Council decides to consider not only the general findings and recommen- dations contained in the report of the Atomic Energy Commission,8 but the other parts of this report as well, the Soviet delegation will submit a number of other amendments and proposals relating to the other parts of the report. This is all I wish to say before circulating to the members of the Security Council the text of the Soviet delegation's proposals, additions and amendments. Mr. MWHALOWSKI (Poland): More than a year ago, on 24 January 1946, the General Assembly in London adopted the first resolution on the subject of atomic energy:' I should like to quote one passage of it here: "The work of the Commission should pro- ceed by separate stages, the successful comple- tion of each of which will develop the neces- sary confidence of the world before the next stage is undertaken." Since this resolution was adopted, during the seventy-nine meetings of the Atomic Energy Commission and various committees mOre than a million words have been spoken, ~nd tons of paper used to record them. We believe that the time has come when we can ask ourselves 63. Adoption de I'ordre du jour 64. Suite de la discussion du Premier Rap- port de la Commission de I'energie otomique M. GROMYKO (Union des Republiqucs socia· listes sovietiques) (traduit du 1"llsse): .le vais faire distribuer maintenant aux memhres du Conseil de securite les propositions, les amende· ments et les addenda que prcsente la. delegation sovietique2 • .le pense que le Conscil de securite se contentera dJexaminer les conclusion,s generales et les recommandations contenues dnns le rap- port, et ne prendra de decisions que SUI' les dites conclusions et recommandations, ks autrcs par· ties du rapport devant ctre considcn~es comme des documents tral1smis au Conseil de sccurite par la Commission de l'energie atomique :\ titre de renseignement. S'i! en est ainsi,--et scion moi cette methode est la seule qui soit appropricc a l'examen du rapport-je me borncrai a presenter les propositions, amendements et addenda que l'on va distribuer a l'instant a tous les membrcs du Conseil. Si, au contraire, le Conseil de secu- rite decide dJexaminer non seulemcnt lcs conclu. sions et recommandations generales CCllItcnucs dans le rapport de la Commission de l'cnergic atomique3 , mais aussi les autrcs paJtics du rap- port, la delegation sovictique prescntcra de nou- veaux amendements et propositions se rapportal1t aces autres parties du rapport. C'est tout ce que j'avais a dire avant de faire distribuer aux membres du COI1seil lcs proposi- tions, amendements et addenda de la delegation sovietique. ' M. MICHALOWSKI (Pologne) (traduit de ['an- glais): 11 y a plus dJuI1 an, le 24· janvier 1946, l'AssembIee generale, rcunie a LoncIres, adoptait la premiere resolution relative a I'encrgie ate- mique 4 • Je voudrais citer tin passage de cette resolution: "L C " 'I' a . o~l1nusslOn proccc eases travuux par stades dlstmcts de fa~on q\le l(~ succes obtenu a la fin de chaque stade dcveloppe parmi les pays la confiance indispensable, avant qu'oll ne passe au stade suivant." Depuis le jour Oll cette resolution a ete adop· tee, au COUl'S des soixante-dix-neuf seances de la Con:-n;ission de l'energie atomique et dc'i divers comItes, on a prononce plus d'un million de mots, et l:on a employe ~Ics tonnes de papier pour les enreglStrer. Nous estmlOns qu'il est temps de I V,oir Proc~s-rJlrbaux officieLr d,J Conuil dd stcuritl, Deuxleme Annee, ~uppl~inent No 5, Annexe. H, et ProcB.s.rJlrbaux officlIls de la Commission dl! l'inlfgi, at~mlq.ue, SuppICment special. V,olr Proc~s'[)lrbau:~ otficiels du Conseil de sicuritJ, De.uXle~e Annee, Supplement No 7 Annexe 16. Parties II et Ill. ' 'Voir RJsolll~i,ons ad~Plt!es par t'AssembUIt glnhall pendant la premIere partle de Sa premiere session, page 9. La delegation polonaise doit maJh(~ur('tI~·('n1{'nt exprimer des doute.<; sur ee dernicl' poim. hit'l\ que Pon ait SOllv~nt c:ntendu le: mot "1'fmli,lIler''' panni les millions de mot.... prmlOll\"I:~ ;l~l n nlr~ de ces nombrell~·('$ S(:~llKC$, Nos doutes pro\,j(:nm~nt Slll'tout du bit qlI'(,l1 clepit des dcdarations solenndks [:lite,;; Ir ~:,l jiln- vier 1946 et le 14 c1cn'mlm: l!14fi, 011 ll'("ll continue pas mains it fabriqut'r dC's hombc,:; :no- mique.c; et it en constitm'r de.... ~to\,k,<, AII"\ yt'liX du monde entier, cc ~("ul fait rrdUlt ;1 Ut;l!lt hllJ<; les efforts des hommcs c1'Etat (~t dt';:'; SIY.lIlt!' qui parlent, au eOlIn; de leurs rcuniom. Ill- \ nn(n~lt: et d'abolition, ck s:ectlritc momli;llt~ ('t dr confiance, Cc sont la su~pki?f~ etl,a (r;!intt',et non la confiance et la s(~eunte, qUI ~c 9mr al'· erues. L'explosion duG aout 1945. qui a rrttnti d,\u!'\ le monde entier, a mal'qlJ(~ le debut cl'une JlOU- velle gucn-c. une gucrrc des ncrfs, qui est d'at!_ tant plus tragiquc qu'dlc doit son ()ri~ine, nnn it des armes cn~ees pill' l'enm'mi, mail' aunc~ arme que nom; avons I1OlIS-mCmes fabriqutc, uue arrne alliee. Cctte guerrc se deroll)(~ dans le fil'Ur et dans !'csprit des rnns..<;e.<; populaires riu Ulcmdr: allie. The blast which was heard round the world, on 6 August 1945, marked the beginning of a new war, a war of nerves. This war is all the more tragic in that it has, as its source, not weapons created by the enemy, but a weapon of our own making, an allied weapon. It is being fought in the hearts and minds of the common peoples of the allied world. Je ne park pa., lllliql1cment des arnH'$ atn- miques, bien qu'dlcs mic-Ilt (,II"s dom nil parlC' le plus ouvertemenL N'y attadlOllS pits lllle im- portance cxagcr6c. Now, :UltH'$, Pn!nn:tis, connaL'>Sons une arrne tout n u~~i dc;~mlct rife ct I am speaking not only of atomic weapons, though they may be the most loudly spoken of and proclaimed. Let us not overestimate them. We Poles know a weapon just as destructive and horrible as this one. We know the death factories of Oswiecim, Tremblinka, Majdanek, and Buch- enwald. This weapon killed six million people in Poland, more than a hundred times as many as died at Hiroshima. The atomic bomb must not overshadow the more general problem of weapons of mass destruction, weapons directed against peaceful towns, women and children, the old and the weak. horribl~ que l'armc atomiquc, Nou!! ronnai~lt.Qn~ les usincs de mort d'n'twiccim, de Trcmblinka, de Majdanek et dc Biidwnwald. C~tt(' anlle a tue six millions de pcrsonnrs ell Pll!qi!nl'\ !'toit plus de cellt fois le Ilornbre tk p[·n;onlll'.'; tllf(','i ;l Hiroshima. La bombe atOlniqllr. 11(' doit 1';1." bin" oublier le problcm(~ gh1Cl'al (k~ arIlw- d(' d('~. t~ucti(lll .f:Hl.S$ivc, de,'t amH\<; dirigtt., nHHI'f" !i("" VIBes pauHbk$, des fenHn('~'i et dl.\<;; ('Il£anl,;, dr.~ vieillards et (k~" if11irrm~$. If we are to reach the first stage of "necessary confidence", if we are to struggle for "freedom from fear", first we must all clearly and without doubt condemn, once and for an, every kind of weapon of mass destruction, including the atomic bomb. . Si nOli!; \'otJ!OllS alteindrc 1(' pn'mit'r~t;i,ir d(' uconfiance indi8pcnsflblc", ~i n(Ht!i \'!'Hllnn.. tuttr( pour nous libcrrr de la craint,,, !IOU!' d['\nll~ tnut d'abord prnnollcer, lInc foi!l pOllr VHl!f,~·. Iln(' condamwltinn JlC'ltc et 1';,ms ('.qlliw)(1l1r lir tflU" les types d'arnlcs de dc~tnH'lion ma"'i;."i\ t. ',' r"'nl. pris la hmnbe atomiquc. . La deJegation polonai~(' maimkm dnm: 1,\ position qu'dlt~ a rri~,c, ch·plli.!> cks mnk All i.I'HU''!I de la dis(lJ&"i~mqlli $1r£t dhonlfr :1 ,'(' ""jrt prn. dant la prenllcrc partir de b prl'lnih'~ :'<'"..iml tll' l'As.<;cmblee ~t'fl(~l':11(' j\ I...ol1dn"$!, :\t Zvitfmmt Modzelcws.ki; mtuellrm('nt Mini~tr~ dc:; .;\ff;lirt':'I 6trang'trt'$; a £oumiffl \lll~. propll"'itio!l illvlt;uH I(';~ ParIcmrnts dr'$ diflhtllt'l P;\\':'\ Trprb:.rntf!l j adopter Illlt' Ini nmtrn.lnt lc~.. primipi~I;~lli. vants: . The Polish delegation thus maintains its posi- tIon, ~dopt~d many months ago. In the course of the dlScussIOn all the question during the first part of the first session of the General" Assemblv in Lond01:,~ Mr. Zygmunt Modzclewski, the present Mmlster for Foreign Affairs, submitted a proposal that the parliaments of the countries represented should adopt a law embodying the following principles: 1. That the results obtained ill the scientific 1. I.I's T.:,qJ!tats 01Hf'IlW' d.\ll!' Ir dmn.llnr fi ',See Verbatim Records of the Plenary m"tings of the g'st part of tlk, first session of the GencT(ll AWlmbly eventeenth p enary meeting, pages 262-263.' 3. That Member States of the United Nations should undertake to eliminate atomic weapons and other weapons of mass destruction from their national armaments; and that the above principles should become part of the con- stitutions of Member States. At that time, in London, we decided not to submit this proposal as a formal resolution, in view of the adoption on 24 January of a resolu- tion concerning the control of atomic energy. The events of the last year prove that we were right in assuming that without the outlawing of the use of atomic weapons, in whatever form they may appear, there can be no progress in the solution of the atomic energy problem. A cette epoque, aLondres, nous avons decide de ne pas presenter cette proposition comme une resolution formelle, etant donne qu'une resolu- tion relative au controle de l'energie atomique avait deja ete adoptee le 24 janvier. Les evene- ments qui se sont derouIes au cours de l'annee passee prouvent que nous avions raison de sup~ poser qu'a moins que l'emploi des armes ato- miques, sous foutes leurs formes, ne soit interdit~ la solution du probleme de l'energie atomique ne saurait faire aucun progres. Nous avans souvent entendu dire qu)avant de mettre hors la loi les armes atamiques, il faut etablir un systeme de contrOle et d'inspection. Puis-je attirer l'attention du Conseil sur le fait que, mule part dans le monde, la repression <iu crime et le cMtiment n'ont precede l'elaboration des principes de la conduite humaine. Le COUl.- mandement "tu ne tueras point" existait bien avant la creation du premier tribunal et la nomi- nation du premier agent de police. Aussi, avant de pouvoir etablir un systeme de cantrole et d'ins- pection, il nous faut proscrire la fabrication et la detention des armes atomiques et de toutes les autres armes de destruction massive. On a souvent dit que le probleme est celui de la divulgation du secret de cette arme dange- reuse. Mais tel n'est pas le cas, Les nations paci- fiques ne s'interessent pas a la fabrication de la bombe atomique. Leur seul desir--et nous le disons ouvertement devant le monde entier-est de voir detruire les stocks de bombes actuelle- ment existants et d'empecher que ces stocks ne We have often heard the argument that the outlawing of atomic weapons must be preceded by the formation of a system of control and in- spection. May I draw the attention of this Council to the fact that nowhere in the world has the prosecution of crime and punishment ever preceded the formation of principles of human .conduct. The commandment "thou shalt not kill" existed long before the first court came into being and the first policeman was appointed. Thus, before we can form a system of control and in- spection, we must outlaw the production and possession of atomic weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction. We have often heard the reasoning that the problem is that of giving away the secret of this dangerous weapon. But actually it is not. The peace-loving nations are not interested in the manufacture of the atomic bomb. Their only desire is-and we say it openly before the whole world-the destruction of the stockpiles of bombs now in existence and the prevention of their use by anybody, anywhere. Once this is accomplished the way will be open for the peace- time application of this enormous source of energy for the benefit of hu~anity. A monopo- listic approach to atomic energy in one country diverts research from peaceful purposes to a race for inventive research for military purposes in all other countries. , At a time when more than half the world is going through a very difficult post-war economic crisis, when lack of energy and fuel paralyses the life and work of hundreds of millions of people, efforts to use atomic energy for peaceful purposes are being neglected for political reasons. so~ent utilises ou que ce soit et par qui que cc SOlt. Des que l'on aura accompli cela, la voie sera libre pour l'utilisation padfique de cette cnorme source d'energie pour le bien de l'humanite. Tout pays qui desirerait se constituer un monopole de l'energie atomique inciterait les autres a detour- ne,r les recherches de leur but pacifique pour les onenter vers une course aux inventions et aux recherches d'ordre militaire. Au moment meme ou plus de la moitie du globe traverse une crise economique aigue a la suite de la ?,uerre, et ou le tnanque d'energie et de combustibles paralyse la vie et le travail de centai~les de ~i~lions d'hommes, on neglige pour ~es ra~ons pol~tlquesles efforts visant a employer I energIe atomlque ades fins pacifiques. ,La se~ai,ne derniere, nous aVOilS fait des pro- gres conSlderables dans la question du desarme- n;ent. Nous :stimo~s que la resolution adoptee n est pas aUSSl parfaIte que nous l'aurions desire Last week we made considerable progress on the question of disarmament. We do not consider the resolution adopted to be as perfect as we would desire, and we expressed this feeling when voting on its various parts. Nevertheless, we voted for the resolution as a whole because on t 1, d' , ~ e nous avons emontre au cours du vote sur les differentes parties de celle-ci. Mais nous avons The Polish delegation, in its letter of 31 De- cember, quoted in document S/239/ has empha- sized that it considers the unanimity of all the permanent members of the Security Council to be of paramount importance for a fruitful solu- tion of the problem of atomic energy. The problem of unanimity is not merely a legal one, and cannot be discussed only from the point of view of conformity with the Charter. The Polish delegation approaches the problem of unanimity from the angle of the possibility of an effective system of control and inspection and, furthermore, of an effective convention for the prohibition and demolition of atomic and other weapons of mass destruction. We do not know what will be the ruling principle of the future authority of control and inspection, but here, in the Security Council, the principle of unanimity does exist. Here, at this table, we must reach unanimous agreement. We must find a reasonable solution in the interest of the peoples of the world. As a result of the discussion, which has lasted a year, it is clear to us that in order to reach this unanimity a certain logical sequence of proce- dure within the framework of the Security Coun- cil is necessary : (1) A convention providing for the prohibi- tion of production of atomic and other weapons of mass destruction and the relinquishment of the use of atomic energy for military purposes; (2) The destruction of all existing stockpiles of atomic weapons and other weapons of mass destruction; (3) The formation of an international system of control and inspection; (4) The formation of an international body which should promote the exploitation of atomic energy for peaceful purposes in all countries. This is the order which should be attained. If preferred, we might attempt to carry all the four stages through simultaneously in one day. Only distrust stands in the way of such an order. On the other hand, any other order will create even more distrust. And so we come to a vicious circle. I am under the impression that distrust sits at this table as the thirteenth repre- The Polish delegation, for its part, offers its co-operation in the forthcoming discussion and will use all the resources in its power to help in achieving a unanimous agreement.

I think it would be advisable for the Council to decide the order in which the report of the Atomic Energy Commission is to be considered. The representative of the Soviet Union has just proposed that the Security Council should be called upon to express an opinion on Parts 11 and IIl, headed respectively "Findings" and "Recommendations". On the other hand, the Council would treat :the other parts of the report merely as information, and would not be called upon to reach a conclusion regarding them. If this point of view is adopted, we should proceed to the consideration of the second and third parts paragraph by paragraph, as soon as the general discussion is finished. At the same time, we would consider the amendments submitted by the representative of the Soviet Union, as well as any others that may be submitted by members of the Council. Does the Council agree to this procedure? Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I was not referring to the findings as a whole. I said that we should ,limit our task to the consideration of the "General findings", that is to say, Part n, C, of the report. The "General findings" do not include the whole text of Part, H, but only a part of that text. I also had in mind Part Ill, "Recommendations". I did not refer to the whole of Part H, but only to a section of this part, namely, to "General findings".

A slight misunderstanding has arisen. The proposal of the representative of the Soviet Union regarding the second part, referred to the "Gen~ eral findings", Section C, page 15.1 The discussion o.f the points on which the Security Council' Le PRESIDENT: Il convient, je crois, que le Conseil determine l'ordre scIon lequel il procedera al'examen du rapport de la Commission de l'energie atomique. Le representant de l'Union sovietique a propose tout a l'heure que le Conseil de securite soit appele ase prononcer sur les parties II et In intitulees respectivement "Conclusions" et I'Re_ commandations". En revanche, le Conseil considererait comme simples elements d'information les autres parties du rapport et il ne serait pas appele ase prononcer aleur sujet. , Si cette maniere de voir etait adoptee, nous devrions, sitot que la discussion generale sera terminee, proceder a l'examen des deuxieme et troisieme p.arties, paragraphe par paragraphe. A cette occasIOn, nous prendrions en consideration les amendements presentes par le representant de l'Union sovietique ainsi que tous autres que pourraient soumettre les membres ciu Conseil. Le Conseil est-il d'accord sur cette procedure? . M. G~?~YKO (Union des Republiques sociahstes sovletiques) .(traduit du russe): Je n'ai pas p~le des conclUSIOns dans leur ensemble. J'ai dlt que nous devrions nous limiter a. l'examen des "Conclusions generales" contenues dans la section C de la partie II du rapport. Les "Conclusions generales" ne comprennent pas tout le texte de la partie II mais seulement une par~e de ce ;exte. J:avais egalement a l'esprit la partle Ill, c est-a.-dIre les I'Recommandations". Ai?si, il ne s' ~git pas ?e toute la partie H, mais umquement dune sectIOn de cette partie asavoir I "C I' , r. ' es onc USIOns generales". Le PRESr,nENT: Une legere confusion s'est, en e,ffet,. produ!~e: La proposition du representant de 1.Utyon so~~etlque c~ncernant la deuxieme partie VIsalt les ConclUSIOns generales" section C 151 C' , " page . est a cette section de la deuxieme partie que serait limitee la discussion des points ,,' Voi,r Proc~s-verbaux officiels de la Commission dl1 1energJe atomzque, Supplement special, page 15. .Mr. AUSTlr-: (~nited States of America): I tlunk some pomts 111 the statemen~ made by the representative of the Soviet Union ought to be cleared up before we get into a misunderstanding about them. \'"c are dealing here with a report of a majority of the Atomic Energy Commission. The activity of that Commission is finished, so far as this first report is concerned. Everybody recognizes that it is not the completion of the work of the Atomic Energy.. Commission, but rather that it constitutes an interim report. It is clearly identified by the statement in the report that it is "based upon its deliberations to date". Therefore, we cannot view the report before us as if it were open to amendment. It is open to attack by minority views, minority suggestions, and so on, but, as I understand it, the report is not subject to amendment at this time. Apres avoir, au cours de ses seances, fourni a ses membres l'occasion de presenter tous amendements et modifications utiles, la Commission de l'energie atomique a finalement elabore un rap- , port provisoire contenant des principes fondamentaux, rapport que nous prenons comme base de discussion. Or, ce rapport contient deux ordres d'eIements nouveaux et importants: les uns sont les "Conclusions generales" et les "Recommandations"; les autres se retrouvent dans les "Conclusions relatives aux mesures de precaution", resumees dansla section B des "Conclusions" et qui tiennent compte des resultats de deux mois et demi d'etudes que le Comite 2 a consacres aux mesures de precaution, au cours d'entretiens officieux. Une lecture attentive des "Recommandations~' montrera qu'on ne peut les comprendre parfaitement sans se referer a la fois aux "Conclusions generales" de la deuxieme partie, section C, page 15t, comme l'a dit le President, et aux "Conclusions sur les mesures de precaution", figurant dans la deuxieme partie, section B. Ceci est particulierement vrai des fonctions de l'organisme de controle, qui ne sont esquissees dans les "Recommandations" qu'en termes tres generaux. En consequence, je ne vois pas tres bien ou nous en sommes, efant donne la fagon' dont la question nous est presentee., Sommes-nous en train de discuter le point de savoir si ce rapport sera adopte ou non? Discutons-nous pour savoir si, au cours et a la fin de nos deliberations, nous renverrons certaines questions a la Commission de l'energie atomique, dans le cas, par exemple, ou nous constaterions que le Conseil de securitc est d'accord sur certaines parties des "Recom- The Atomic Energy Commission, having afforded an opportunity during its hearings for amendment and consideration of changes, has finally made this interim report, which we have under consideration as a basis, and which contains fundamental principles. The new and significant material in this report is twofold: the "General findings" and the "Recommendations" form onc part; the other is the "Findings on the safeguards" which are summarized in Section B of the "Findings", and which reflect the two and a half months of exploration of the problem of safeguards in the informal conversation meetings of Committee 2. A careful reading of the "Recommendatj.ons", will show that they cannot be fully understood without reference to the "General findings" in Part II C, page 15/ as the President has said, and also to "Findings on the safeguards" in Part II B. This is particularly true with respect to the functions of the control agency, which are .sketched in the "Recommendations" only in the most general tenns. Therefore, it is not clear to me just where we stand. Are we discussing whether this report shall be accepted or not? Are we discussing whether, during the discussion, and at the end of it, we should make certain references back to the Atomic Energy Commission, if, for example, we were to find here that while the Security Council did agree on certain parts of th~ "~eco~­ mendations" and certain general pnnclples, It could not agree on certain other parts, parts 1 See 0 ffieia! Records of the Securit')' Council, Second sion, Special Supplement, page 15. ¥. A~STIN .(Etats-Unis d'Amerique) (traduzt de l anglazs): A mon avis la declaration que vient de faire le represent~nt de l'Union sovietique contient certains points qui doivent etre clarifies avant que nous n'arrivions a un malentendu. ' Nous examinons ici un rapport emanant de la majorite des membres de la Commission de l'energie atomique. Le travail de cette Commission est acheve en ce qui concerne ce premier ' rapport. Nous admettons tous que ce rapport n'est pas l'aboutissement des travaux de la Commission de l'energie atornique, mais constitue en realite un rapport provisoire. Cela est nettement etabli par le passage qui precise que ce rapport est "base sur les deliberations de la Commission jusqu'a ce jour". En consequence, nous ne pouvans pas considerer le rapport qui est devant nous comme susceptible d'etre amende. Ce texte peut faire l'objet de critiques et de suggestions de la part de la minorite, mais, amon avis, le rapport ne peut pas faire l'objet d'amendements, en ce moment. 1 Voir Proces-verbaux officiels de la Commission de l'Jnergie atomiqull, Supplement special, page 15. Then, having carefully considered all the minority reports and suggestions contained in this document, and any other document that they may wish to present to us, we may refer the matter to the Atomic Energy Commission for it to decide whether or not to amend its report on the points upon which there is disagreement. It seems to me that we ought to understand where we are heading for in this matter of procedure, and not to have any confusion about it, in order to avoid anyone being foreclosed in the discussion of the "Recommendations", from using these important parts of the report, which are only sketched in general terms in the "Recommendations", but in greater detail in Parts 11, B, and n, C. From my point of view, it seems that we should be perfectly Clear about what we are doing, and that really we are considering the majority report and the minority report from the Atomic Energy Commission, and trying to find out to what extent we agree. We can refer the part on which we agree to the Atomic Energy Commission in order that it may commence work at once upon the drafting of proposals for that section of any treaty or treaties that this agreement justifies. Then we can discuss the views that are suggested in this document received this morning, and refer those parts upon which we do not agree to the Atomic Energy Commission to see if it can find it possible to amend its report in those respects. (After the interpretation into French of the above remarks) Mr. Austin continued as follows. ) As.I listened to the translation, it seemed to me that I might have left a wrongimpression. I want to clarify it. The purpose I have in view is to refer the points of disagreement to the Atomic Energy Commission for discussion, to see whether we can accommodate each other's views; it is not to decide arbitrarily for or against these amendments. I would not assume such an arbitrary position in the matter. I have in mind the possibility of composing in the Atomic Energy Commission differences that we are unable to reconcile here. cussion des "Recommandations", des importantes parties du rapport qui sent ebauc1lecs d'une maniere tres generale dans les "Recommandations", mais plus en details dans les parties Il, B, et Il, C. J'estime que nous devons envisager clairement la situation et nous rendre compte que nous examinons en realite le rapport de la majorite : et le rapport de la minorite des membres de la Commission de l'energie atomique, tout en essayant de voir dans quelle mesure nous sommes d'accord. Nous pourrons alors renvoyer la partie du rapport sur laquelle nous sommes d'accord a la Commission de l'energie atomique, qui commenceni immediatement l'elaboration du projet de la partie du au des traites que cet accord justifie. Par la suite, nous pourrons discuter les suggestions qui se trouvent dans le document que nous avons re~u ce matin, et renvoyer les parties sur lesquelles nOllS ne sommes pas d'accord ~ la Co.mmission de l'energie atomique, qui exammera SI elle peut accepter d'amender son rapport sur ces points. (Apres rinterpretation des observations precedentes en franfais) M. Austin poursuit comme suit. ) En ecoutant la traduction, il m'a semble avoir laisse une fausse impression. Je voudrais mettre les choses au point. Je preconise de renvoyer ala Commission de l'energie atomique la discussion des points sur lesquels nous ne sommes pas d'accord, afin ~e co~cilier, si possible, nos points de vue respectIfs; Je ne demande pas que l'on se prononce arbitrairement pour ou contre ces am~I?-dement~. Je .ne .voudrais pas prendre une pOSItiOn aussl arbltrmre en la matiere. Ce que j'ai a l'esprit, c'est la possibilite de concilier au s~in de la Commission de l'energie atomiqu;' les dIvergences sur lesqueIles nous ne pouvons nous mettre d'accord id. i V?ir Proces-verbaulC officiels du Conseil de sdcurite, DeUlueme Annee, Supplement No 7, Annexe 16. As regards the order to be followed in considering the report, I feel sure that since the whole of the Atomic Energy Commission's report is before the Security Council, members of the Council are quite at liberty to express their opinion on each part of the report. From a practical point of view, it appears advisable to consider whether we devote our attention exclusively, or at least prim~rily, to those parts of the report in which the difficulties are, as it were, concentrated. I think these are the parts referred to by the representative of the Soviet Union, so they will also be those affected by his amendments. As regards the form of our conclusions-a point to which the representative of the United States has particularly drawn the Council's attention-should these conclusions be presented in the form of amendments to the report, which appears to be the view of the representative of the Soviet Union, or should they be in the form of observations for the future guidance of the Atomic Energy Commission? Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I think that as a result of the debate on the report of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Security Council may well be able to achieve something definite. If it is in a position to take a decision on any of the "Recommendations" and "Findings" of the Atomic Energy Commission, then these "Recommendations" and "Findings", once agreed upon, will cease to be the "Recommendations" and "Findings" of the Atomic Energy Commission and will become decisions of the Security Council. I imagine that the final results of the debate on this qucstion may be as follows: if the Security Council reaches unanimous decisions, these decisions will cease to be "Recommendations" of the Atomic Energy Commission and will become, on their adoption, decisions of the Security Council. . I think that this formal aspect of the matter IS clear. I have 110 objection to the Security Council discussing this question as a whole. Members of the Security Council are entitled to ,refer to all or to any particular parts of this report. I think, however; that it would be log~cal to t~ke decisions only on those parts whlch constltnte the substance of the report, . the substance of the question on which the Atomic Energy Commission prepared this report. The '''Recommendations;' and the "General En ce qui concerne l'ordre a suivre pour l'etude du rapport, il m'apparait avec certitude que, le Conseil de securite etant saisi de l'ensemble du rapport de la Commission de l'energie atomique, les membres du Conseil ont pleine liberte d'exprimel' leur opinion sur chacune des parties de ce rapport. D'un point de vue pratique, il convient, semble-t-il, de se demander si nous devons porter exclusivement ou, tout au moins en premier lieu, notre attention sur les parties du rapport ou se trouvent concentrees, en quelque sorte, les difficultes. Je crois que ce sont les parties qu'a visees le representant de l'Union sovietique; ce sont celles, aussi, qu'irtteressent les amendements qu'il a presentes. Sur la forme a donner aux conclusions de notre examen-point sur lequel le representant des Etats-Unis vient d'attirer particulierement l'attention du Conseil-convient-il de donner a ces conclusions la forme d'amendements au rapport, ainsi que semble l'envisager le representant de l'Union sovietique, ou convient-il de leur donner la forme d'observations en vue de l'orientation future de la Commission de l'energie atomique? M. GROMYKO (Union des Republiques socialistes sovietiques) (t1'aduit du russe): 11 me semble qu'a la suite de la discussion portant sur le rapport de la Commission de l'energie atomique, le Conseil de securite pourrait bien aboutir a certains resultats precis. S'il parvient a se prononcer au sujet de quelques-unes des "Recommandations" et "Conclusions" de la Commission de l'energie atomique, les "Recommandations" et "Conclusions" qui aurontfait l'objet d'un accord cesseront alors d'etre des "Recommandations" et "Conclusions" de la Commission de l'energie atomique pour devenir des decisions du Conseil de securite. Je crois que nous aboutirions en fin de compte au resultat que voici: si le C011seil de securitc parvient a des decisions unanimes, celles-ci ces· seront d'etre des "Recommanelations" de la Commission de l'energie atoll1ique pour devenir, une fois adaptecs, des decisions dll Conseil de sCcurite. 11 me semble que cctte question de forme ne prete pas it malentendu. Je ne m'oppose pas ace que le Couseil de sccurite discute cette question dans son ensemble. Les membres elu Conseil peuvent, dans !curs interventions, toucher al'ensemble des questions e1u rapport, ou a chacune de ccs questions en particulier. Mais il me semble logique de ne prendre de decisions qu'au sujet des parties qui constituent le fond du rapport, c'est-a-dire le fond elu problcme qui fait }'objet du mpport de la Commission de l'energie For this very reason I think that, in so far as decisions are concerned, the Security Council should limit itself to taking decisions only on the "General findings" and the "Recommendations". I repeat that this does not preclude members from dealing with all questions and all sections of this report in the discussion. I think that this would be the best procedure and, furthermore, it seems to me to be the only correct one. . Mr. ARANHA (Brazil) (translated from French): In accordance with article 44 of the .rules of procedure, I ask you, Mr. President, for permission to speak in Portuguese; if necessary, I will have my remarks translated by an interpreter from my delegation. (Tmnslated tmm Portuguese): This is the first time that the Security Council has to take note of a report by one of its commissions. There is nothing in our rules of procedure prescribing the order in which the Council should consider and judge resolutions adopted by such commissions. It seems to me that, in view of .the volume of information, the range of subjects covered and the vast quantity of details .usually embodied in such reports, not only of the Atomic Energy Commission but also of other commissions set up by this Council, we ought to dra':V up forthwith standards and rules, which are unfortunately still lacking in our rules of procedure, governing the consideration of the findings of these commissions. I think that, in view of' the conclusions of the Atomic Energy Commission, the correct and most helpful procedure for carrying on our work would be for the President of the Council to draw up, with the assistance of the Secretariat, a programme of work to be considered by this Council, as a conclusion and summary of a commission's report and, in this particular case, of the Atomic Energy Commission's report. If the programme of work drawn up by the Secretariat and submitted by the President does not meet with the consent and appproval of all the members of the Council, it could be modified like any other programme of work submitted for our consideration and discussion. But it would be adding to the difficulties of our task and making our debates more confused, to consider a report of these dimensions, either in its entirety or even in detail, as we seem to be about to do now, as it would be impossible, without prior study, to determine and select the material which should be particularly considered in detail by the Council. It is therefore the Brazilian delegation's opinion that the President of the Security Council, with the assistance of the Secretariat, should draw up a programme of work and submit it for consideration at the next meeting of the Council; this procedure would avoid the doubts de proceder n'exclut pas une discussion portant sur toutes les questions, sur toutes les sections de ce rapport. J'estime que cette methode serait la plus appropriee et la seule appropriee. M. ARANHA (Bresil): En vertu de l'article 44 du reglement interieur, je vous demande, Mon· sieur le President, la permission de parler en portugais; au besoin, je ferai faire la traduction de mes observations par un interprete de ma delegation. (Traduit du portugais): C'est la premiere fois que le Conseil de securite prend connaissance du rapport de l'une de ses commissions. 11 n'existe aucune disposition dans notre rcglement interieur qui fixe l'ordre dans lequel nons devom i prendre connaissance des resolutions adoptees par ces commissions, ou celui dans lequel nous devons les examiner. n me semble qu'etant donne le volume des renseignements, l'etendue des considerations et le grand nombre de details que ces rapports renferment en general, q u'll s'agisse d'un rapport de .la Commission de l'energie atomique ou du rapport d'une des autres commissions creees par ce Conseil, nous devons fixer des maintenant, pour l'examen des conclusions de ces commissions, les -normes et Ies regles qui n'existent malheureusement pas dam notre reglement interieur. En presence des conclusions de la Commission de l'energie atomique, le plus sur, me semble-toil, et le plus utile ala marche de nos travaux, serait que le President du Conseil de securite dressat, avec I'aide du Secretariat, un plan de travail qui serait comme une conclusion ou un resume des rapports presentes au Conseil de securite,-dans le cas present, du rapport de la Commission de l'energie atomique-et soumit ce plan'de travail a I'approbation du Conseil. Si ce projet etabli par notre Secretariat et presente par notre Presi· dent n'obtient pas I'assentiment et l'approbation de tous les membres de ce Conseil, il nous sera loisible de l'amender comme tout autre projet presente a notre examen. Mais ce qui ne serait pas possible, ce qui rendrait notre tache difficile, ce qui augmenterait la confusion de nos debats, ce serait l'etude d'ensemble, ou meme de detail, a laquelle nous semblons etre sur le point de nous livrer d'un rapport aussi. volumineux dans lequel on ne peut pas, sans un examen prealable, :fixer et distinguer les points auxquels le Conseil doit reserver une attention particuIiere. Le sentiment de la delegation bresilienne est done que le President du Conseil de securite devrait dresser, de concert avec le Secretariat, un plan de travail et le soumettre, au cours de la prochaine seance, a I'examen ciu Consei!. On eviterait ainsi les doutes que l'on vient d'exprimer Mr. HASLUCK (Australia): The resolution of the General Assembly which established the Atomic Energy Commission might possibly give us some guidance in this matter. I think we can assume' that the contents of that resolution are 'not only a direction to the Atomic Energy Commission, but are to be observed by the Security Council itself. The resolution of January 1946 expressly provides that: "The Commission shall submit its reports and recommendations to the Security Council, and such reports and recommendations shall be made public unless the Security Council, in the interest of peace and security, otherwise directs. In the appropriate cases the Security Council should transmit these reports to the General Assembly and the Members of the United Nations, as well as to the Economic and Social Council a~d other organs within the framework of the United Nations. "In view of the Security Council's primary responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security, the Security Council shall issue directions to the Commission in matters affecting security. On these matters the Commission shall be accountable for its work to the Security Council.m , Now, I take it to be the sense of that direction to the Security Council and to the Commission that the formal approval, by the Security Council, of any report from the Atomic Energy Commission is not essential to enable the Com-, mission to proceed. Whether or not we formally approve a report, or any part of it> there should be no obstacle to the Atomic Energy Commission proceeding with its work. But, having stated that as a first principle, I think we have also to recognize the political reality> which is rather distinct from the formal question which we are now considering: unless we can reach some measure of agreement regarding certain subjects in tlus report, it will be extremely difficult for the Atomic Energy Commission to make much more progress. The second conclusion that one might draw from the resolution of the General Assembly is that in one particular field, the Security Council not only has the right, but the obligation to issue directions to the Atomic Energy Commission: that is the field which covers matters affecting security. We are directed by the General Assembly to issue directions on any matters within that field. M. !IASLUCK (Australie) (traduit de ['anglais): La resolution de l'AssembIee generale portant cre~tion de la Commission de l'energie atomique pourrait sans doute nous fournir quel. ques indications en cette matiere. A mon avis, il nous est perrnis de supposer que cette resolution renferme des directives qui ne visent pas seulement la Commission de l'energie atomique, mais s'adressent egalement au Conseil de securite lui-meme. La resolution du mois de janvier 1946 prevoit explicitement ce qui suit: "La Commission adresse ses rapports et ses recornmandations au Conseil de securite; ceux-ci sont rendus publics, sauf decision contraire prise par le Conseil de securite dans l'interet de la paix et de la securite. Lorsqu'il le juge approprie, le Conseil de securite transm~t ces rapports al'Assemblee generale et aux Membres des Nations Unies, ainsi qu'au Conseil economique et social et autres organes, dans le cadre de l'Organisation des Nations Unies. I "En raison de la responsabilite principale du maintien de la paix et de la securite internationales conferee au Conseil de securite par la Charte des Nations Unies, le Conseil de securite donne a la Commission des directives sur les questions interessant la securite. Daus cet ordre de questions, la Commission est res~ ponsable de ses travaux envers le Conseil de securite." Or, j'estime que ces directives au Conseil de securite et a la Commission signifient que l'approbation officielle par le Conseil de securite d'un rapport emanant de la Commission de l'energie atomique n'est pas absolument necessaire pour permettre ala Commission de poursuivre ses travaux. Que nous approuvions ou non un rapport ou une partie d'un rapport, rien ne s'oppose a ce que la Commission de l'energie atomique poursuive ses travaux. Toutefois, ce premier principe etabli, j'estime que nous devons reconnaitre les realites politiques, qui sont independantes de la question de forme que nous etudions en ce moment; en effet, amoins que nous ne reussissions a realiser une certaine mesure d'accord sur que!- ques-unes des questions qui font l'objet de ce rapport, la Commission de l'energie atomique pourra difficilement faire avancer ses travaux. La deuxieme conclusion que l'on pourrait degager de la r~solution de l'As:'emblee.ge~eral~ est la suivante: il y a un domame partlcuher ou le Conseil de securite a non seulement le droit, mais encore le devoir de fournir des directives a la Commission de l'energie atornique. Il s'agit des questions interessant l,a securite,. et l'As~em~lee generale nous a charges de fourmr des drrectlVes sur toutes les questions relevant de ce domaine. The second formal matter to which we come is this: do we wish to give any direction to the Atomic Energy Commission on security matters? Again I should imagine that if we did wish to give such a direction, it would be given , in general terms. And in neither case, whether transmitting to other organs or to the Members of the United Nations with comments, or giving directions to the Atomic Energy Commission itself, do I think that the sense of the Assembly resolution is that we should amend the text. I do not think that the General Assembly resolution ,either gives us the right, or proposes the desirability of making amendments to the text in the Security Council. Rather, it seems to lead towards a broader and much more general expression of the Security Council's opinion regarding the substance of this report, and it would seem to be a matter for the Council's own judgment whether it expresses that opinion in general terms on one part of the report or on the report as a whole. It would seem that a possible way in which we might make progress in the Security Council would be for the representative of the Soviet Union, and any other representative who cared to do so, to raise his particular objections and point out his particular difficulties regarding this report. Then it will be open to the Council, by adopting a resolution couched in general terms, to refer either parts or the whole of the report back to the Atomic Energy Commission, or to some other organ of the United Nations, with the comments which it deems appropriate. But to my mind the Security Council has not the power to make precise amendments to the text, nor has it the power to adopt the text as a whole, or sections of it in their entirety, nor do I think any useful purpose would be served by attempting to do so. 1 think such a course would lead us nowhere, nor would it be in conformity with the General Assembly resolution which established the Atomic Energy Commission and provided for the submission of the report to this Council. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom): I hope I shall not increase' the confusion that seems to exist on this procedural question but 1 should like just to say one or two words: The situation, it seems to me, is that the AtomiG Energy Commission was assigned a definite task, with instructions to report to the Membres des Nations Unies, ou qu'il s'agisse de fournir des directives ala Commission de l'energie atomique elle-meme, la resolution de l'Assemblee generale ne nous autorise pas, je crois, a modifier le texte du rapport. A mon avis, la reso· lution de l'Assemblee generale ne nous donne pas ce droit ni ne suggere qu'ils sait desirable d'ap· porter, au sein du Conseil de securite, de.<; amendements au texte de la Commission. Cette resolution, me semble-t-il, invite plutot le Consell de securite a donner son avis sur le fond du rapport en termes bien plus generaux, et laisse au Conseille sbin de decider s'il exprimera cette opinion generale sur une des parties du rapport ou sur l'ensemble du rapport. Pour faire avancer les travaux au sein du Conseil de securite, nous paurrions proceder comme suit: le representant de l'Union sovietique et tous les autres representants qui le jugeront opportun, signaleront leurs objections particuliere touchant ce rapport. Il sera alors loisible au Conseil, en adoptant une resolution redigee en termes generaux, de renvoyer soit certaines parties du rapport, soit I'ensemble du rapport a la Commission de l'energie atomique ou a d'autres organes des Nations Unies, en y joignant les commentaires qui lui sembleraient appropries. Mais, amon avis, le Conseil de securite n'a pas le pouvoir d'apporter au texte des amendements specifiques ou d'adopter l'ensemble du texte ou des parties entieres de ce texte. Je ne vois d'ailleurs aucun interet pratique a proceder ainsi. J'estime qu'une telle fa90n de proceder n'aboutirait arien; au surplus, eHe ne serait pas conforme ala resolution d~ l'AssembIee generale portant creation de la Commission de l'energie atomique et prevoyant la presentation de ce rapport au Conseil de securite. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (Royaume-U ni) (traduit de l'anglais): J'espere que je n'augmenterai pas la confusion qui semble deja. entourer cette question de procedure, mais je voudrais simplement dire un ou deux mats. . A mon avis, le probleme se pose dans Ies te:mes suivants: la Commission de l'energie atomlque a ete chargee de s'acquitter d'une tache I imagine that the Commission, before going on with its work, may wish to know the views of the Council on the work it has done and the principles on which it has based that work up to date. It seems to me that the Council must do more than take note of the report. It must pronounce itself, to some extent, on the report which has now been submitted to it. That brings us to the question of procedure. You, Mr. President, suggested that there were two questions. One is the question of the order in which we examine the work. Now, in that respect, it seems to me that this is a voluminous report which contains a great deal of very valuable material. It represents agreement over a very wide field. Certain criticisms have been raised, and it seems to me that if we can be assured that there is agreement on the rest of the report, we had better address ourselves at once to these criticisms, to see whether we can reach any agreement on them. Like the representative of the United States, I have not yet had time to look carefully at the document which has been circulated this afternoon by the representative of the Soviet Union. Perhaps wc shall find some points in it upon which agreement may be reached. It seems to me that the simplest manner of proceeding to the examination of this report would be to direct our attention to those parts which appear to be in doubt and upon which there is not, at present, agreement. Now, as regards the form of our ultimate decision, I agree that you cannot amend the draft of the Atomic Energy Commission. It is public property; it has been published and you cannot change it. If we were all agreed upon it, we could adopt it, approve it and re-issue it on our own as a report of the Security Council. That could be done quite simply. Unfortunately, however, we may not be able to do that, and there may remain certain points on which agreement has not yet been reached around this table. In this event, I think we should attempt to define the points of difference. I should hope they would be comparatively few, and would cover only a small part of the ground. We could then do onc of two things. We could refer the report back to the Atomic Energy Commission, with our approval of all that large part of the field on which there is agreement, and ask it to elaborate that part and then, to go on with its work. If that were thought useful; we could at the same time, suggest that more work should be done on those other points on which agreement was not reached in the Security Council, in order that, Comme le representant des Etats-Unis, je n'ai pas eu le temps, jusqu'ici, d'etudier en detail le document que le representant de l'Union sovietique a fait distribuer cet apres-midi. Il se peut que nous y trouvions quelques points sur lesquels l'accord pourra se faire. La manihe la plus simple de proceder al'examen de ce rapport serait, me semble-t-il, de. porter notre attention sur les parties qui pourraient etre contestees et sur lesquelles, jlisqu'ici, il n'y a pas eu d'accord. En ce qui concerne la forme que devra revetir notre decision finale, je reconnais que le Conseil de securite ne peut pas amender le texte du rapport de la Commission de l'cnergie atomique. Ce rapport appartient au domaine public; il a ete publie et ne peut ctre modifie. Si nous etions tous d'accord, nous pourrions l'adopter, l'approuver, le publier a nouveau comme emanant du Conseil de securite. Cette maniere de proceder serait tres simple. Il se peut malheureusement que nous ne puissions pas faire cela; il reste peut-etre certains points sur lesquels les representants ici presents ne sont pas d'accord. Dans ce cas, j'estime que nous devrions nous efforcer de preciseI' les points sur lesquels subsistent des divergences. Je serais porte a croire que ces points sont relativement peu nombreux et constituent une partie minime des questions qui nous occupent. Nous serions alors en face des deux solutions suivantes: ou bien nous renverrions le rapport a la Commission de l'energie atomique, avec notre approbation de toute la partie importante sur laquelle il y a eu accord, en lui demandant de la mettre au point et de poursuivre ses travaux. En meme temps, nous proposerions, si le Conseil le jugeait a. propos, que les autres points, sur lesquels il n'y a pas eu accord au Conseil de securite, soient soumis a une etude plus approfondie

The Council will certainly have listened with interest to the remarks made by the representatives of Brazil, Australia and the United Kingdom"regarding the method of work. I do not think we are faced with serious procedural difficulties at the moment. At the beginning of this meeting, the representatives of the Soviet Union and of Poland made some observations on the substance of the matter, in reply to a request that had been made to them. The representative of the Soviet Union put his remarks in writing. I think the other members of the Council who have observations to make should also do so, and that we should then begin the discussion of the report. We now have the written comments of the delegation of the Soviet Union and the spoken comments of the Polish delegation. When, after this discussion, we have definitely established the points of agreement and disagreement, I think we should be able to decide on the form in which our conclusions should be presented. But, in my opinion, it would be premature to consider that now, while we are stilI uncertain as to the conclusions we shaH reach. Mr. ZULETA ANGEL (Colombia) (translated from French): I am entirely in agreement with you, Mr. President, and I fuHy support your suggestion. There is obviously nothing to prevent us from beginning a general discussion now, both on the report and on the ideas expressed by Mr. Gromyko and the Polish representative. After the general discussion, it will be time to decide on the manner in which we shaH take our decisions. The further the general discussion goes, the better we shaH be able to determine the best form in which to present the Council's conclusions. In any case, we shaH save time by beginning now the general discussion on the report and on the proposals made by Mr. Gromyko and the Polish representative. While dealing with this subject, and in order that it may be considered when the time comes to decide on our procedure, I should like to recall the General Assembly's resolution establishing the Atomic Energy Commission, the last paragraph of which reads as foHows: "The Commission shall not infringe upon the responsibilities of any organ of the United Nations, but should present recom- Voila, me semble-t-il, la ligne de conduite que devrait adopter le Conseil de securite. Le PRESIDENT: Le Conseil aura ccrtainement entendu avec interet les remarques faites au sujet de la methode de travail par les representants du BrcsiI, de l'Australieet du Royaume-Dni. Je crois que nous ne nous trouvons pas, en ce "moment, devant de serieuses difficultes de procedure. Au debut de cette seance, repondant al'invitation qui leur avait ete adressce, les representants de l'Union sovietique et de la Pologne ont formule des observations quant au fond. Le representant de l'Union sovietique a eIonne aux siennes une forme ecrite. J'estime qu'il serait souhaitable que les autres mcmbres du Conseil qui ont des observations a presentel' les formulent a leur tour, et que nous abordions cnsuite la discussion du rapport. Nous avons actuellement les observations ecrites de la delegation de l'Union sovietique et celles, verbales, de la delegation de la Pologne. Quand nous aurons, a la suite de cet examen, etabli d'une maniere precise quels SOllt les elements d'accord et de desaccord, nOlls pourrons, je crois, decider de la forme que nous dc\'rons donner aux conclusions de nos deliberatioru;, Mais il serait, a mon avis, premature de l'en· visager des maintenant alors que nous sommes encore dans l'incertitude quant aux conclusions auxquelles nous aboutirons. M. ZULETA ANGEL (Colombie): Je suis tout afait d'accord avec vous, Monsieur le PI'csident, et je me rallie entierement avotre suggestion. 11 est evident que rien n'empeche que nouS nous engagions des maintenant dans une discussion de caractere general, a la fois sur le rapport et sur les idees qu'ont exprimees ~L Gromyko et le representant de la Pologne. Lorsque la discussion generale sera termince, le moment sera venu de regler la fa~on dont nous prendrons nos decisions. Plus le debat general sera avancc, mieux nous serons en mesure de decider de la meilleure forme a dOlmer aux conclusions clu Conseil. Dc toute fac;on, nous gagnerons du temps en commen~antdcs maintenant la discussion generale du rapport, en mcmc temps que celle des propositions de M. Gromyko et du representant de la Pologne. A cettc occasion, et afin qu'elle soit prise en consideration lorsque le moment sera venu de regler notre fa<;on de proceder, je voudrais rappeler la resolution de l'AssembIee generale creant la Commission de l'energie atomique, dont le dernier paragraphe est redige de la fa~on suivante: "La Commission ne doit pas empieter sur les attributions des autres organes des Nations Unies, mais soumettre des recommandations Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I would remind the Council how this question arose. It arose after my statement that if the Security Council decided to consider and take decisions not only on the "General findings" and "Recommendations" but also on other parts of the report, the Soviet delegation would submit additions, proposals and amendments on other parts of the report as well.' We can agree not to settle the question for the time being and leave it open, but we shall have to settle this sooner or later, because the submission of additional proposals by the Soviet delegation depends on this decision. Je ne m'oppose pas a ce que la discl,lssion generale soit prolongee, mais tot ou tard cette question devra etre resolue. I do not object to continuing the general debate, but sooner or later this question will have to be settled. Le PRESIDENT: L'ensemble du rapport est soumis a l'examen du Conseil de securite. A mains que le Conseil n'en decide autrement, il est permis de formuler des observations portant sur toutes les parties du rapport.

The whole of the report has been submitted for consideration by the Security Council. Unless the Council decides otherwise, comments may be submitted with regard to all parts of the report. M. GROMYKO (Union des Republiques socia· listes sovietiques) (traduit du russe): J'estime, Monsieur le President, que votre declaration ne suffit pas pour n~soudre cette question. Si nous voulons laisser cette question en suspens, il faut que nous en convenions d'une fac;;on explicite. Si, au contraire, nous prenons une decision definie sur l'ordre dans lequel nous aurons a nous pro· noncer sur l'adoption du rapport de la Commis· sion de l'energie atomique, nous devons prendre cette decision et en tirer la regIe appropriee. Il faut que nous prenions l'une de ces deux decisions. Mr. GROMYI<O (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I consider your statement inadequate to settle this question. If we wish to leave it open, we must then agree accordingly. If we make a definite ruling regarding the order in which we are to consider the adoption of the report of the Atomic Energy Commission, then we must take this decision and make a ruling accordingly. One or the other of these decisions must be taken.

This is how I understand the statements made during this meeting: the members of the Council are free to make comments on the whole of the report. It is, therefore, on the whole of it that comments will be submitted. I am, of course, prepared to put before the Security Council the proposal to limit our discussion, at least for the time being, to the parts Le PRESIDENT: Voici la fac;;on dont j'ai interprete les declarations qui ont etc faites au cours de cette seance: les membres du Conseil ont la faculte de presenter des observations sur Pensemble du rapport. C'est done sur cet ensemble que les observations seront presentees, referr~d to by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. I understood, however, that several members of the Council took a different view. Mr. HASLUCK (Australia): It seems to me that the concern expressed by the representative of the Soviet Union would become real only if it were envisaged that the Security Council would eventually be 'carrying a motion approving the complete text of this report. His concern M. GROMYKO (Union des Republiques sodalistes sovietiques) (traduit du rum): Je voudrais rappeler au Conseil les circonstances dans lesquelles cette question s'est posee, EIle s'est posee aprcs que j'eus declare que si le Conseil de securite examinait et prenait des decisions non seulement Sur les "Conclusions generales" et les "Recommandations", mais aussi sur les autres parties du rapport, la deh~gation sovietique presenterait des addenda, des propositions et des amendements se rapportant aces autres parties. Nous pouvons convenir de rernettre la decision, de laisser la question en suspens, mais nous de· vrons la resoudre tot ou tard, car c'est de cela que dependra la decision de la delegation sovietique de presenter ou de ne pas presenter des propositions supplementaires. Evidemment, je suis pret a soumettre au Conseil de securite la proposition tendant aHmiter notre discussion, tout au mains pour le moment, aux parties que le representant de l'Union sovietique a visees. Cependant, j'ai cru comprendre que plusieurs membres du Conscil etaient d'un avis different. M. HASLUCK (Australie) (traduit de l'anglais) : A mon avis, les preoccupations exprimees par le representant de l'Union sovietique ne s~­ raient justifiees que s'il s'agissait pour le Consel1 de securite d'adopter en fin de compte une motion tendant a approuver le texte complet du Up to date, however, we have not heard any suggestion of that kind. It may be that we shall find ourselves in a position to do that at the end of our debate, but, as I see the position at present, it is this: Seven of the representatives at this table have already expressed their comments on this report, inasmuch as they have adopted it as members of the Atomic Energy Oommission. Three other representatives at this table have not had the opportunity of expressing an opinion on it, because they were not members of the Security Council in 1946 and thus did not take part in preparing it. It is possible that those three members, coming fresh to the subject, may have very useful comments to make and may be able to direct our attention to some defects or omissions in this report. On the other hand, there are two representatives at this table who did not avail themselves of the opportunity of presenting amendments to the first draft when it was before us in the Atomic Energy Commission, but reserved the right to present their views when the matter came before the Security Council. Until this afternoon, we had not had the objections of the Soviet Union to this report in concrete form. Most of the other delegations presented three, four, or more amendments to the first draft when we considered it in the Commission; those amendments were either adopted or rejected and we made our final decision on the r~port. The representative of the Soviet Union did not take such an active part in the concluding debates of the Atomic Energy Commission, and he has now presented his amendments for the first time. It would appear, then, that if the three new members of the Security Council have any observations to make, we might listen to them, and then perhaps we could hear the reasons that lie behind the various concrete suggestions which the representative of the Soviet Union has now put forward. Some of these concrete suggestions, which we now hear for the first time, may be acceptable to us. It may be that the Council will feel able to express an opinion on them. I cannot say, because we have not had time to examine them in detail. But if that procedure were followed, it would do no injury to any member of the Council. It would make it possible for the Oouncil to see if there is some point of substance, some point of real importance, in the new matters which the tepresentative of the Soviet Union has put forward. Then, having made up our minds, we could, Or J'usqu'ici nous n'avons entendu aucune " . 'bl proposition dans ce sens. Il n'est pas Im~~ss~ e que nous soyons amenes, ala fin. ~e nos d~hbera­ tions, aadopter une telle propOSItIOn, m.ms, pour le moment, la situation, me semble-t-I1, est la suivante: Sept des representants qui siegent a:c Conseil ont deja fait connaitre leurs commentalres sur ce rapport, puisqu'ils 1'ont adopte a titre de mem· bres de la Oommission de l'energie atomique. Trois autres representants qui siegent ace Conseil n'ont pas eu l'occasion d'exprimer leur opinion, etant donne qu'en 1946, ils n'etaient pas membres du Conseil de securite et n'ont donc pas pris part al'elaboration de ce rapport. Il est possible que ces trois membres, nouveaux venus parmi nous, aient des observations tres utiles a presenter et soient en mesure d'attirer notre attention sur certains defauts ou certaines lacunes de ce rapport. Par ailleurs, deux representants qui sicgent a ce Conseil n'ont pas cru devoir presenter d'amendements au texte primitif du projet de rapport soumis ala Commission de l'energie atomique, mais se sont reserve le droit de £aire connaitre leurs vues lorsque ce rapport serait presente au Conseil de securite. Jusqu'a ce jour, le representant de l'Union sovietique n'avait pas formuIe d'objections concretes a ce rapport. La plupart des autres delegations avaient propo~ trois, quatre amendements au texte primitif, voire meme davantage, lorsque nous l'cxami· nions au cours des reunions de la Commission. Ces amendements ont ete, les uns adoptes, les autres rejetes, et nous avons abouti a une decision finale sur le rapport. Le representant de l'Union sovietique n'a pas, a ce moment-la participe tres activement aux deliberations finales de la Commission de l'energie atomique. 11 presente aujourd'hui ses amendements pour la premiere fois. Il semblerait done que, si les trois nouveaux membres du Conseil de securite ont des observations a presenter, il faudrait les entendre d'abord et ecouter ensuite les raisons que le representant de l'Union sovietique fait valoir a l'appui des diverses propositions concretes qu'il vient de presenter. Il se peut que certaines des propositions qu'il nous soumet pour la premiere fois se revelent acceptables. Il se peut que le Conseil s'estime en mesure d'exprimer une opinion sur ces propositions. Pour le moment, je ne saurais me prononcer, car nollS n'avons pas encore eu le temps de les examiner en detail. Toutefois, si l'on suivait cette procedure, eIle ne porterait prejudice a aucun des membres du Conseil. Elle permettrait au Conseil de voir s'il existe, dans les nouvelles propositions que le representant de l'Union sovietique vient de formuler, quelque chose de veritablement Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): I see that it will be difficult for, us to reach any definite decision today on the question of procedure. Let us therefore continue the general debate and return to this question later on. Perhaps it will then be easier for us to reach a definite decision on the order in which the report of the Atomic Energy Commission should be considered. Otherwise, it will appear that we have received a report and do not know what to do with it.

If there are no further remarks, we can proceed with the consideration of the report at the next meeting. We shall then hear any further comments by members of the Council. They will, of course, be entitled to comment on any part of the Atomic Energy Commission's report. This next meeting will also be devoted to discussion of the comments made. If there is no objection, we shall follow that procedure. The next meeting of the Security Council, for the consideration of the Atomic Energy Commission's report, will take place on Thursday, 20 February 1947, at 3 p.m. Mr. ZULETA ANGEL (Colombia) (translated from French): I understand that a general discussion on the whole of the report will take place; during this discussion we shall deal with the comments made by the delegations of the Soviet Union and of Poland.

That is quite correct. The meeting rose at 5.15 p.m. M. GROMYKO (Union des Republiques socialistes sovietiques) (traduit du russe): Je vois qu'il nous est difficile d'arriver aujourd'hui aune decision definie sur la question de procedure. I1 vaut donc mieux prolonger la discussion generale et revenir a cette question un peu plus tard. Peut-etre nous sera-toil alors plus facile d'arriver a une decision definie sur l'ordre dans lequel le rapport de la Commission de l'energie atomique doit etre examine. Sinon, nous pourrions donner l:impression qu'ayant re<;u le rapport, nous ne savons qu'en faire. Le PRESIDENT: S'il n'ya plus d'observations, nous pourrions poursuivre l'examen du rapport au cours d'une prochaine seance; a cette occasion, nous entendrions les remarques que les membres du Conseil auraient encore afonnuler. Il es~ bien entendu qu'ils auraient toute faculte de le faire a propos de n'importe queUe partie du rapport de la Cotnmission de l'energie atomique. Cette nbuvel1e seance serait consacree, en meme temps, ala discussion des observations formulees. S'il n'ya pas d'opposition, il en est ainsi decide. La prochaine seance du Conseil de securite, consacree a l'examen du rapport de la Commission del'energie atomique, aura lieu le jeudi 20 fevrier 1947 a15 heures. M. ZULETA ANGEL (Colombie): Je crois comprendre qu'une discussion generale sur l'ensemble du rapport aura lieu; au cours de cette discussion, nous nous refererons aux observations presentees par les delegations sovietique et polonaise. Le PdSIDENT: I1 en sera bien ainsi. La seance est levee cl 17 h. 15.