S/PV.1505 Security Council

This meeting of the Council has been convened at the request of the representative of the United States of America. Members will recall that several communications concerning this matter have been received by the Council and circulated in the following documents: S/8296,2 S/8316,2 S/8376,3 S/8437,3 S/8520,4 S/9327’ and S/9397.’ 2. The Council will now begin its consideration of the item on the agenda. The first speaker on my list is the representative of the United States, on whom I now cdl.

The United States has requested this meeting of the Security Council to deal with an important problem which has long been foreseen in the evolution of the United Nations, but on which the first practical step has yet to be taken, with the consequence that a solution to it is now urgently required, That problem is to find a way by which the growing number of very small independent States, often called “micro-States”-many of which may soon seek to become Members af the United Nations-can find an appropriate place and status within the United Nations family. Such a status should respond to their needs and rights, yet should not do violence either to their nature and interests or to the nature and interests of the United Nations itself. 4. Members of the Council are well aware that Article 4 of the Charter provides that “Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving States which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgement of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations.” 5. To put this matter in its most concrete terms: should even the smallest independent State be eligible for full memberhsip in the United Nations, no matter how few its people or how limited its resources may be? What would be the consequence for the authority and effectiveness of our Organization if during the coming years, 40 or 50 very small States, so small as to be unable to carry out the obligations of membership, should nevertheless apply and be admitted as Members? What alternative methods might be devised for associating such States with the United Nations, for assuring them of its benefits without imposing upon them burdens they could not bear, and for giving them a status within the United Nations family appropriate to their independence, their capabilities and their needs? 6. This problem did not become urgent for the United Nations until recent years, when the progressive ending of the colonial age began to bring into being independent States of widely varying size-some very substantial but others very small indeed, Our Secretary-General was :he first to mark the problem officially for our attention when, in the introduction to his annual report for 1965, he referred to “the recent phenomenon of the emergence of exceptionally small new States [whose] limited size and resources can pose a difficult problem as to the role they should try to play in international life”.5 The Secretary- General went on to suggest that “. , . the time has come when Member Statcsmay wish to examine more closely the criteria for the admission of new Members in the light of the long-term implications of present trends”, [Ibid,/ 7. Later, in the introduction to his annual report in 1967, the Secretary-General again raised the same question6 and discussed it in more detail, He urged that in the 6701/Add.l), para. 162. 8. From those considerations the Secretary-General drew certain conclusions which, in my Government’s view, are entirely sound and which I commend to the Council: first, that full membership in the United Nations “. , . may, on the one hand, impose obligations which are too onerous for the ‘micro-States’ and, on the other hand, may lead to a weakening of the United Nations itself’. Second, that “ it appears desirable that a distinction be made between thd ’ right to independence and the question of full membership in the United Nations”. Third, that “. . . it may be opportune for the competent organs to undertake a thorough and comprehensive study of the criteria for membership in the United Nations, with a view to laying down the necessary limitations on full membership while also defining other forms of association which would benefit both the ‘micro-States’ and the United Nations”.7 9. Those observations by the Secretary-General sum up perfectly the essence of the problem and the steps which we believe are required to deal with it. 10. A number of Members, my own country among them, have from the first supported the Secretary-General in his efforts to gain attention for the micro-State problem. I myself, speaking for the United States in this Council on 20 September 1965 [1243rd meeting], pointed out the problem and urged members of the Council to seek an answer to it. ln December 1967, following the Secretary-General’s later initiative, the United States representative formally proposed action in the Council on this subject.8 That moment was particularly opportune for such action, since no applications for membership were then pending and the matter could therefore be dealt with-as it should be-on the basis of general principles. Unfortunately, our consultations on the subject were still under way when, in the summer of 1968, further membership applications were filed, and the opportune moment for action thus passed. But the problem itself did not pass, and it was again the subject of comment by the Secretary-General in 1968 in the introduction to his annual report.9 11. Now again we have a brief opportunity to act on the basis of general principles, because, again, at this moment no applications for membership lie before the Security Council. The major question of principle can thus be addressed in the proper perspective, without the distraction and controversy that are likely to arise from debate over individual cases. This moment is not likely to last long. I urge that we do not again let slip this opportunity to make 7 Ibid., paras. 164 and 165. 8 S/8296, see footnote 2. 13. But these Territories together would have a grand total population between them of about 4.5 million people. That means that all of these potential candidates for United Nations membership added together muster fewer people than any one of the 69 most populous States now Members of the United Nations. It means that they possess 0.2 per cent of the total population of the present membership. Yet, if they were added to the present membership, they would comprise one third of the votes in a General Assembly of about 190 Members. Their combined votes would nearly suffice to defeat an otherwise unanimous Assembly resolution. 14. Those are the facts which we presume the Secretary- General had in mind when he urged that such a general influx of micro-States would “lead to a weakening of the United Nations itself’ and that “the line has to be drawn somewhere” .I 0 15. The United Nations is, in the words of the Charter, “based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members”. That is a necessary and historically valid principle; for the community of nations has long included States widely varying in population and in power. It is right that all Members, though unequal in size, should have equal rights in the General Assembly. It is right that Members other than the major Powers should have a voice and a Vote here in the Security Council. 16. But that very same principle will remain valid only as long as it is not carried to an ultimate extreme. The United Nations can no longer afford to waive that judgement of an applicant’s ability to lulfil its Charter obligations that the Charter itself provides the Organization shall exercise. A line must indeed be drawn; otherwise the United Nations, which has truly been called the hope of the world, risks losing its relevance to the real world of nations and being reduced to an absurdity. That cannot be allowed to happen. We therefore believe that Members of this Organization must hereafter take into account the pertinent capabilities of an applicant for membership in determining whether it is in fact able to carry out the obligations of the Charter, however willing it may be to do so. 10 Ibid., Twenty-second Session, Supplement No. IA, paras. 164 and 162. 18. However, this does not conclude the matter. Even the smallest newly independent State, merely by virtue of its independence, is sure to feel in need of, and entitled to, certain of the benefits of the United Nations system appropriate to its independence-and no longer available to it by way of the former ruling Power. Independent micro-States should particularly share the benefits of the various United Nations agencies concerned with development, trade, technical assistance and the quality of the environment. Likewise, they might participate in the regional economic commissions; they might be admitted to membership in some of the specialized agencies; and they should certainly all have access to the International Court of Justice. Those able to do so might also maintain offices at United Nations Headquarters. 19. Some of them might also arrange with the Secretary- General to attend United Nations meetings of particular interest to them and, when their interests are directly involved in a United Nations debate, they should doubtless be invited to participate without vote in the debate. Those are examples of the kinds of benefits and privileges of the United Nations system which, as the Secretary-General has suggested, ought to be open to micro-States. And they are entitled, I think, to be assured in advance that such benefits and privileges would be available to them in cases where full membership was not the right solution. 20. The best solution to this problem, in the view of my Government, is the creation of a new status of association with the United Nations which might be called “associate member”. A status such as that of associate member would carry with it the kind of benefits and privileges that I have just indicated. Perhaps equally important, it would stand as 22. This status of associate membership may, in our view, be created by the General Assembly. Such an act by the Assembly is within its general powers as set forth in Articles 10 and 11 of the Charter, as well as its power over its own rules of procedure as set forth in Article 21. Such past practice as exists, particularly ‘in the Main Committees, confirms this view. The Assembly may create a category of associate members and define for States enjoying that status whatever duties, privileges and benefits fall within the purview of the Assembly itself or of those organs that function under its authority. As for those benefits that involve other organs, such as the Security Council and the International Court of Justice, it would be appropriate for the General Assembly to recommend to those organs that they each give suitable recognition and privileges to associate members; it would then be up ta those organs to act on that recommendation. 23. Although the General Assembly would, as we conceive it, be the prime mover in this step, it seems to us entirely appropriate that the Security Council, in view of its co-responsibility with the Assembly in the matter of membership, should take the initiative in placing this matter before the Assembly. Certainly the Council, as the organ which must act first on membership applications, has a most important interest in any move to create a category of associate membership; for the existence of such a category would afford the very small States an entirely new alternative to full membership and would thus enable them to examine their relation to the United Nations in the light of their own best interests and capabilities. 24. Therefore, the United States now proposes a draft resolution which, if adopted by the Council, would ask the Secretary-General to place this question on the agenda of the General Assembly at its forthcoming twenty-fourth session. The resolution is short and 1 shall read it: “The Security Council, ‘Bearing in mind that membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving States which accept the obligations contained in the Charter and which are able and willing to carry out these obligations, ‘%urther bearing in mind the increasing emergence of States so small that they would be unable to carry out the obligations of full membership, “l)esirous of ensuring that all such States should nevertheless be able to associate themselves with the 25. The adoption of this draft resolution is one of two steps which my delegation recommends to the Security Council. 26. The second step which I suggest is that i.he Security Council itself should make its own substantive contribution to a solution of this problem, and thereby facilitate the General Assembly’s consideration of it, by referring the problem for study to a committee of experts of the Council. That committee of experts should be asked to consider the entire problem. The committee should report the results of its study and its recommendations to the Council within two months, which would bring us to the beginning of November, in time for the Council in turn to make recommendations to the General Assembly during the twenty-fourth session. 27. Accordingly, I do now make a formal motion that a committee of experts be convened promptly to examine this question and to report its recommendations to the Council not later than 1 November 1969. 28. Such are the proposals of the United States on the problem of micro-States and their relation to the United Nations. Unless some action such as we propose is taken promptly, the results for the United Nations could be disastrous. This great institution is not immortal. It could die of various diseases: political indifference, financial neglect, the tdo-rigid pursuit of the narrowly perceived interests of each Member. Or, in the p!esent case, it could fall victim to a simple structural ailment which, because the Members were unwilling to repair it, might doom the institution to die of creeping irrelevance. 29. It is up to us, the Members, to perserve the United Nations from any and all of these disasters, so that it may live to fulfil the great destiny which,, I devoutly hope and pray, history has reserved for it,

Mr. President, the Security Council is meeting at the request of the representative of the United States of America in connexion with his letter dated 18 Augu’st 1969 addressed to the President of the Council [S/9397/. The letter requested the Security Council to consider submitting a proposal to the Secretary- General of the United Nations for the inscription of an item entitled “Creation of a category of asspciate membership” on the provisional agenda of the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly. 31. We have heard the statement by the United States representative, Ambassador Yost, setting forth the views of 11 Later distributed as doclrment S/9414. 33. The Soviet delegation is therefore ready to reconsider favourably the proposal by the United States representative that a committee of experts of the Security Council be established to study the question of associate membership in the United Nations and make appropriate recommenda. tions to the Security Council, At a later stage, the Security Council could resume its discussion on the possibility of creating a category of associated membership in the United Nations and examine the substance of the question in the light of the conclusions and recommendations of its committee of experts. Only after such careful preparation and study would it be possible to raise the question of the inscription of an item on the provisional agenda of the General Assembly. 34. In the meantime, it would be premature and unwarranted for the Security Council to do as the United States representative proposes and request the Secretary-General to place the question of the creation of a categov of associate membership in the United Nations before the General Assembly at its twenty-fourth session. There are no reasons for such haste. At this time, therefore, the Soviet delegation is opposed to a recommendation of the kind proposed by the United States. Haste in placing this question before the forthcoming session of the General Assembly is all the more unjustified inasmuch as the United States itself, evidently recognizing the complexity and novelty of the problem, considers that it should first be studied by a committee of experts of the Security Council. 35. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): Sir, this may be my last opportunity this month to pay my respects to you as our President. Allow me to say that there is no Ambassador here who has a more extensive knowledge and understanding of United Nations practices and procedures, or a greater personal regard for the best principles of OUT United Nations parliamentary diplomacy, Perhaps I might add that when you speak under instructions as the representative of your Government, I sometimes permit myself the right of reservation; but when you direct our proceedings as our President, we rejoice in confidence that your decisions flow from your own personal a.ld impartial judgement. 36. I turn from such comforting reflections to the serious business before us today. 37. The subject which has been brought for our considera. tion by the United States delegation is certainly one of the 38. We are also grateful, I am sure, for the thoughtful and thorough way in which the representative of the United St&es has raised the matter with us today. 39. Since the question raised is of such importance to every Member of the United Nations, it is a question on which we should seek the widest measure of general agreement. We should decide and act, so we would hope, in full concord. Clearly, this is a subject in which there need be no dispute or disagreement between us. All of us wish to apply the test of what is best for the United Nations and best for every nation, large and small. 40. While I agree that the question should be further considered by the members of this Council, and while I would also be prepared to agree that we should ask the Secretary-General to place the question before the General Assembly, I feel sure that it will be wise not to prejudge or prejudice the main question at issue by the terms we use. Therefore, I would welcome the opportunity of informal discussions between the members of the Council so that we can reach full agreement on the description of any item which we wish to refer to the Assembly. 41. We would consequently wish to have the opportunity of discussing-and if necessary, revising-the terms of the draft resolution which Ambassador Yost has today proposed. 42. I do not always wish to associate myself with the cautious and perhaps negative attitude of the distinguished representative of the Soviet Union, but in this case, if I may respectfully say so, I would agree with him that we need to proceed in this matter after the fullest consultation together, and I would not wish to accept immediately the terms of the draft resolution which has been suggested. 43. SO much for the action which is now required. It would be a mistake, I am sure all of us would agree, to attempt to debate here and now the many issues which must be so carefully considered later on. 44. I would say now, however, that I regard this question as a much wider one than merely a question of membership of our Organization, important though that is. 45. We must consider the whole question of the relationship of the United Nations to small States and also small Territories still dependent. The relationship must be not negative but positive. It is not a question of exclusion or discrimination. It is a question of how the United Nations can best meet the positive needs and aspirations of small countries-countries which may be remote and small in Size and population, but which have just as much right to freedom and prosperity as the peoples who live in the polluted congestion of great States. 47. I recognize the difficulty of contriving exact qualifications of universal application. The main characteristic of small countries is that they are all different. This we must consider together, but my present view is that what we need is agreement on guiding principles rather than rigid and uniform stipulations. 48. I was consequently pleased to hear Ambassador Yost speak of the need to deal with this question before us by the application of general principles. 49. I was much struck by the comment made in the excellent study carried out by UNITAR on the subject of the status and problems of very small States and Territories. The report of that study in its introduction says: “The international problems raised by the existence of small territories can be examined from two different angles. On the one hand, from the point of view of the international organizations, the question arises whether they are really fully qualified as members and participants, and whether their proliferation is a reason for concern, particularly in regard to the decision-making procedures of these organizations. On the other hand, from the point of view of the small territories themselves, it is necessary to examine if international action is required to protect their rights, define their.duties and solve some of their difficulties.“1 2 SO. I think that sums up our problem very well. Certainly we do not wish to see th2 options open to small States unduly limited, We do not wish to force upon them commitments and obligations beyond their capacity. We would wish to offer them help and guidance without any suggestion of discrimination or condescension but with a realization that the problem we consider calls for unusual, original, imaginative action. 5 1. It is with those general considerations in mind that we look forward to participating in a discussion with our brother members of this Council and then, if it is so agreed, with the wider membership of the Assembly. I trust that that discussion will lead to agreed conclusions which are 12 Small States and Territories: Status and Problems, UNITAR Series No, 3 (New York, Arno Press). 52. I trust that we shall approach the problem with understanding and fairness and generosity, guided by the principle of the Charter that the interests of the peoples concerned should be paramount.

I particularly wish to thank the representative of the United Kingdom for the kind words he has addressed to me. In this connexion, I should like to say that I have always made it a rule to try to be completely objective. I think that is why it cost me no effort to achieve objectivity in the discharge of my duties here.

The Finnish delegation welcomes the initiative taken by the delegation of the United States in seeking this meeting of the Security Council to consider the problem posed by the association of emerging very small States with the United Nations, We understand that the purpose is to give an opportunity for a general exchange of views on the subject with the intention of requesting the Secretary-General to inscribe this question as an item on the provisional agenda of the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly. The representative of the United States has furthermore suggested that the Council should establish a committee of experts to study this question and to report its recommendations to the Security Council at a later date, in time to transmit these recommendations to the General Assembly at its twenty-fourth session. 55. For many, the consideration of this problem seems overdue. As early as 1965 the Secretary-General drew the attention of the Organization to the long-term implications of the phenomenon of the emergence of exceptionally small new States in the international arena. And in the introduction to his annual report in 1967 the Secretary General suggested that “the competent organs undertake a thorough and comprehensive study of the criteria for membership in the United Nations with a view to laying down the necessary limitations on full membership while also defining other forms of association which would benefit both the micro-States and the United Nations”.* 3 56. Despite various efforts in this direction, the Secretary General’s suggestion did not at that time lead to the desired result. In the meantime the problem has been an object of study and debate outside the United Nations. Within the United Nations the Committee of Twenty-four14 has continued to pay special attention to the problem of very small Territories which will in the future attain self-government or independence. Recently, UNITAR completed a most valuable study on the status and problems of the very small States and Territories. Thanks to those efforts, we have today a much clearer picture of the dimensions of the 58. The question has been raised whether the micro- States, because of their smallness, their lack of resourlce and so on, are really fully qualified to be members of international organizations and particularly of the Unil:ed Nations. Reference has been made in this context to Article 4 of the Charter, which stipulates that membership of the United Nations is open to States which in the judgement of the Organization are not only willing but also able to carry out the obligations of the Charter. The suggestion has been made that micro-States, because of the heavy financial and other burdens involved in membership of the United Nations, might choose to avail themselves of other forms of participation in international co-operation short of full membership of the United Nations. 59. The examination of the relationship between the micro-States and the United Nations and international organizations in general will, of course, proceed from the basis of the particular needs and interests of these Statm. Foremost among these is the need for security. Because of their weakness the micro-States must look to the United Nations for protection of their sovereignty and territorial integrity. 60. Another problem common to the majority of micro- States is that of economic under-development. Although this problem is, of course, not limited to microStates, it causes, as far as they are concerned, peculiar difficulties arising from their small size and population, their limited natural and human resources, and sometimes their geegraphical isolation. The Secretary-General has emphasized that as members of the international community micro- States are entitled to expect that their security and territorial integrity should be guaranteed and to participate to the full in international assistance for economic and social developmentr s 61. It is the hope of the Finnish delegation that the stu’dy of the particular problem of the relationship of the

Thanks to the vast decolonization movement which has developed in the world during the last twenty years, a large number of States have acceded to national sovereignty. It was natural that the attainment of independent statehood should have led young countries to request admission to the United Nations, where their contribution has constantly been effective and beneficial to the international community . 63. However, for some years the Secretary-General has, in the introduction to his annual reports, drawn the attention of Member States to the problems which might be raised by the entry into the Organization of “. . . entities which are exceptionally small in area, population and human and economic resources . . ,“.I 6 In 1967, he suggested that the competent organs might examine this question and, if necessary, define forms of association with the United Nations other than full membership. 64. I do not with to go into the substance of this question today and shall speak only of procedure. Our Council has been convened at the request of the United States delegation to consider a proposal whereby the Secretary- General would be requested to inscribe on the agenda of the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly an item entitled “Creation of a category of associate membership” and a committee of experts would be established to study the matter. 65. In the view of the French delegation, both the legal and political aspects of any alternation of the criteria for the admission of Member States raise important and delicate problems, since they affect the very foundation of our Organization. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the principle of the sovereign equality of States gives any territorial entity recognized as a State the right to become a Member of the United Nations, if it meets the criteria laid down in Article 4 of the Charter. The Security Council and the General Assembly also have discretionary power to judge the ability of a State requesting admission to carry out all the obligations imposed by the Charter. The Council must therefore bear in mind the fact that the creation of a special status, if it were accepted, would necessarily require a substantive amendment of the Charter. Consequently, my delegation considers it advisable that, before taking any other decision, the Council entrust to a committee of experts the task of making a thorough study of thjs important question.

I would agree in general with the remarks that Lord Caradon has just made. I am sure that everyone would like to reflect a little further on this matter. We do, as we have said, consider it an urgent matter. We consider particularly urgent the first step, the establishment of a committee of experts, on which, as Lord Caradon has said, we would expect that all members of the Council would serve. We would hope there could be prompt agreement on that initial step. But if it is desired to hold another meeting of the Council in a day or two, we would be quite prepared to wait for that. We

I have no other speakers on my list. I have the impression, however, that on a subject of sych importance other members of the Council may wish to participate in the debate. That being the case, I should like to know whether representatives wish us to adjourn this meeting now an!, after consultations, reconvene at a date acceptable to everyone; or whether, alternatively, of the two proposals made by the United ---_ 67. Under these circumstances, I should be glad if the members of the Council would advise me as to how we may proceed. As I see it, the alternatives are either to adjourn the meeting until a later date, so that all the members of the Council may have an opportunity of explaining their views, or, if the Council agrees, to proceed to the establishment of the committee of experts at this meeting. I should like to have your opinion on this matter. 68. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): I have been considering what has been said so far in the Council, and it seems to me that already certain results are obvious. First, we are grateful to the representative of the United Stat& for having brought this subject to our notice, and brought it in a manner which enables us to consider it in all its aspects. And so, first of all, I am sure that it is in all our minds that we are grateful to him, and that has been reflected in every statement made. Secondly, it does seem to me that there isa general view among those who have spoken that it may be wiser to proceed-and all of us, I am sure, wish to proceed to consider this matter-in two stages rather than by taking two steps at the same time, and that there is a wish that we should first of all refer this for further discussion to a committee of experts, which would be composed no doubt of all members of the Council. That does seem to be agreed in all the discussions which have taken place. But there is also a third point which is in the minds, I gather, of some of my brother members of the Council. That point is that it would be well, having heard the important statement from the representative of the United States, and indeed the initial reactions and comments of other members of the Council, that we should adjourn, not necessarily for a long period, but for a day or two, and give ourselves an opportunity of coming together. It may be then that there would be other members who on reflection would wish to speak on this important subject, and it would also be necessary to allow ourselves a little time in order to proceed in this matter at each stage in complete agreement. 69. Therefore, I would suggest-and naturally I wish to hear the views of others-that we might agree together that we will proceed with this matter without delay, but that at the same time we will adjourn to a time-in the near future-to be fixed after consultations when we could take the next step in the consideration of the matter before US. continue the debate on this question. The meeting rose at 5.55 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from booksfores ond distributors throughout the world. Consulf your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT St PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publicalions der Nations Unier sont’en vcnle dons ler libroiries et ler agencer diposilaires du monde enlier. Infarmez-vous auprbr de votre librairie ou adrersez-vou.s b: Nations Unier, Section der ventes, New York ou Genive. HAM IlOIlY’iHTb M3AAHCIIR OPTAHHIA~HH 06bEAHHEHHblX HAuHti COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicocioncs de lar Nacioner Unidos erlirn en venla en libreriar y cosas dislribuidoras en lodar parler del mundo. Conrulle a su librcro o dirljase a: Nociones Unidas, Seccl6n de Venlas, Nueva York o Ginebro. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 82210-December 1972-2,050