S/PV.279 Security Council

Before the reading of the draft resolution submitted by the representative of China, on b~half of the Colombian delegation 1 wish to say we warmly support the application of the Union of Burma. Mr. SOBOLEV (Assistant Secretary-GeneraI in charge of Security Council Affairs): 1 shall read the draft resolution proposed by the Chïnese delegation. "Having received and considered the report submitted by the Committee on the Admission of New Members regarding the application of the Union of Burma; . "Having taken· note of the unanimous ap- provaI of the members of the Security Council of the application of the Union of Burma for membership in the United Nations; A vote was taken by show of hands, and the resolution wasadopted by 10 votes in favour, with 1 abstention. Votes for: Belgium Canada China Côlombia . France Syrïa Ukrainia.'l Soviet Socialist Republk Union of Soviet Socialist RepublLs United Kingdom . United States of America Abstentions: Argentina

1 calI the attention of the members of the Security Council to the fact that the text of the draft resolution submitted by the representative of China. reads, ". . . Havinp taken note of the unaniruous approval ..." 1 suppose the Argentine delegation has no objection to the text in that form. , Mr. MUNOZ (Argentina): 1 have no objection whatsoever for the very reason that 1 have already explained. 11. Reconsideration of the applications fQr membership in the United Nations of Albania,Austria, Bulgaria, Fin!and, Hungary, Ireland, Iioly, the Mon~ golian People's Republie, Portugal, Roumania and Transjordan

The Security Council cornes next to item 3 on its agenda which is the reconsideration of several applications for membership in the United Nations in the order in which they have been re-submitted to the Council. Point (a) is the letter dated 3 April 1948 from the representatives of France, the United Kingdom and the United States concerning the applications of Italy and Transjordan, set forth in document S/709. ApPLICATION ÔF lTALY Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): The United States has consistently given its full support to the application of Italy for admission My Govemment, together with the Governments of the United Kingdom and France, has requested this renewed consideration of the Italian application. Speaking for my Government, this action is taken because we have the firrn conviction that an injustice has been done to Italy. This nation of 45 million people meets, by any conceivable standard, the qualifications laid down in Article 4 of the Charter concerning membership. This has not been questioned. My Government feels, therefore, that it should do everything within its power to bring about a correction of this injustice. It believes this qpinion is shared not only by most of the members 'of this council, but by an overwhelming majority of the total membership of the United Nations. This was made clear !n. the resolution on Italy's application which was passed at the 118th meeting of the General Assembly.l In the opinion of my Government, the Security Council has not, thus far, given proper weight to that resolution. It did meet briefly on the question while the General Assembly was still in session, but the members of the Security Council who were sitting on the Council at that time will recaIl that the representative of the USSR made known that his negative attitude toward the admission of Italy had not change. [221st meeting.] As the members of the Security Council will also recall, the USSR has attempted in the past to tie the Italian application with the applications received from other ex-enemy States. To 1 See Official RI/cOTds of the second session of the General Assembly, Resolutions, No. 1.13 (II) F.. If, on this renewed consideration of the Italian application, the same tactics are attempted, and if this Councilshould unfortunately fail to recommend Italy's admission, the world will have no doubt as to the reason for this injustice. The world can interpret the act in no other way than as an expression by the USSR of a lack of friendship for the pople of Italy. In conclusion, may 1 stress again that Italy's record clearly merits its admission to the United Nations? The Italian people have suffered greatly, they have worked hard, and they have proved to the satisfaction of my Govemment and, 1 believe, to that of all democratic nations, that they have earned their right to a seat in the world councils. My Government has faith in the Italian people. We ask that they be granted immediately their rightful position among the nations. We hold that their contribution to the world community, based on generations of spiritual and intellectual attainment, will add immeasurably to the betterment of that community. We maintain that further to deny or condition in any way Italy's admission to the United Nations, is to expressa lack of faith in her people, that it is without moral or juridical justification as we interpret the principles of the Charter, that it is unfriendly to a free, democratic nation, and that it is unworthy of ~'y nation or nations represented here. Mr. PARODI (France) (translated from French) : 1 should like to explain briefly the vote in which we are about to take part. My delegation has on several occasions spoken in favour of Italy's admission to membership. Since we first considered this application, Italy has steadily proved her right to be considered a great democratic an.d peâce-loving nation. The links which bind my country to Italy-links forged by geographical proximity and by our common share in one of the oldest and greatest civilizations of the world, aS well as by friend- In view of this, and in order to correct a situation which is definitely becoming an i...1- justice, as the United States representative has just said, the French delegation, in agreement with the United Kingdom and the United States delegations, asked for the reconsideration by the Security Council of the question of Italy's admission to membership. 1 should like ta express the hope-and 1 am addressing myself in particular to our colleagues of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic-that the Security Council may vote unanimously, thus righting this injustice and putting an end to this lamentable situation. General McNAUGHTON (Canada); My Government warmly supports the application of 1 Italy for membership in the United Nations. The Italian Government has ratified the peace treatv and, in our view, there is no doubt that Italy should properly be considered peace-Ioving in the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter. Moreover, the Italian Government has demonstrated that it is really independent and fully capable of fulfilling its obligations under Article 4. Canada has traditionally had friendly relations with Italy, partIy in view of the fact that a great number of our citizens share the same religious faith as the overwhelmingo mass of the Italian people. Following the conclusion qf the peace treaty, Canada and Italy exchanged diplomatie missions, giving tangible form to the long friendship between the two peoples. Canada will warmly welcome and will support the admission of Italy to the United Nations. Mr. MUNOZ (Argentina): My delegation will vote for the admission of Italy ta the United Nations. The participation of the Italian people in the national life of my country is something that we Argentinians cannot and shaIl not forget; nor can we forget the bonds of friendship which unite us to the great Italian nation. We therefore support the application of Italy for admission to the United Nations. 1 should like to add, in connexion with the voting procedure, that my delegation does not consider" paragraph 3 of Article 27 of the Charter as applicable to votes on the admission of new members. Futhermore, in this particular case the use of the veto would constitute an in- Mr. LAWFORD (United Kingdom): First of aIl, 1 should like to endorse wholeheartedly what has been said by the representatives of the United States and France who, together with the United Kingdom representative, signed the letter which 1 is now before the Security Council. 1 should like to endorse what has been said by the other members of the Security Council who have spoken hitherto. As stated on many previous occasions, the United Kingdom warmly supports the application of Italy for membership in the United Nations. We regard Italy as fully qualified under the Charter and we sincerely hope it will no longer be prevented, for reasons which we consider invalid, from taking its rightful and useful place in this Organization. Mr. NISOT (Belgium) (translated [rom French): As it has consistently done in the past, Be~gium will give its warm support to Italy's application for admission to the United Nations. This support is founded on the conviction that Italy meets the requirements laid down in Article 4 of the Charter. Furthermore, our attitude is inspired by the traditional ties linking Belgium and Italy. Mr. HSIA (China): On many occasions during the past twelve months the Chinese delegation has expressed its attitude towards this application by Italy for membership, and our position has not changed. We are still convinced that Italy is ready and qualified for membership, and we shall support its application. Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syrîa): My de1egation has supported the application of Italy for membership on more than one occasion and has voted for it, first, because we consider that Italy is fully qualified for adInission and, secondly, because, on the various occasions when the matter has been under discussion, we have never heard any allegation which would disqualify Italy from the right of being adInitted. In my view, Italy has not been adInitted in the past for reasons for which it was not responsible, and 1 do not think that it behoves the dignity of the Security Council to deal with non-member States in that way -denying them their rights for reasons which are outside their control and for which they cannot be blamed. It i<; only because of ÎI!ternal rivalries within the Security Council that the applications of Italy and certain other countries have not been accepted, and 1 do not feel that it is right for the Security Council ta deny other nations their rights. In fact, we should try ta attract them and .sa As 1have already done in the past, 1 shall vote again in favour of granting Ital~'s application in the hope that the wishes of the majority of the Security Council will not be obstructed because, as 1 have said, Jtaly does not belong to any of the rival fronts. Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated tram Russian) : The USSR delegation is of the opinion that the Security Council is not entitled ta take a decision on, nor even ta consider, the question of the admission of Italy ta the United Nations independently of that of the admission to the Organization of other cOl.mtries with which peace treaties have been signed. 1 have no doubt that all the representatives on the Security Council are clear in their minds as ta why the Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom and France have at the present time raised the question of the consideration of Italy's admission ta the United Nations. This proposal is tantamount ta a tactical manœuvre based on the ca1cu1ation that the study of this matter in the Security Council is likely ta attract some of the Italian electorate ta vote for the rightist parties-which have the support of the United States-during the elections scheduled ta take place on 18 April 1948. The submission of this proposal thus has one single purpose, namely ta apply pressure on the internal political situation in Italy in favour of rightist circles. Such conduct, especially on the part of the Government of L,.e United States of America, is understandable, as the latter long aga embarked on a policy of flagrant interference in the domestic affairs of Italy, and it does not hesitate before the use of any possible means ta attain that end. The range of such means which the Government of the United States can use for that purpose is extremely wide. This policy involves bare-faced blackmail and attempts ta fool the Italian people by means of propaganda which describes the United States as a friend of Italy, and certain other countries as enemies of Italy. Naturally, we did not expect the ruling classes of the United States would prove ta be models of high morality in their attitude towards the forthcoming elections in Italy. We had no illusiam, about the moral standards of those people, who have, for a long time, openly admitted interference in the domestic affairs of other countries to he their official policy. At the same time, we feel we cannat but draw again the attention of the Security Council ta this state of affairs. The question of the admission of other countries, as is weIl known, arose only incidentaIly. Transjordan was dr:ogged in by the United States and the United Kingdom merely to disguise to sorne extent the aim of the measure taken by them in respect of Italy. The manœuvre of the United States and the United Kingdom in connexion with Italy cannot, however, fool anybody. It must be supposed that it does not fool the Italian people, which is weIl aware why the authors of this proposal have undertaken the present step. It must be supposed that the Italians will realize that the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom wish to deceive the people of Italy by making out that the USSR is opposed to the admission of Italy to the United Nations. Those who stoop to such trickery clearly cannot have too high an opinion of the Italian electorate. They obviously start from the conviction that the Italians are unable to understand what is happening, that they cannot guess why the United States and the United Kingdom portray themselves as friends of the Italian people and why it is they strive to throw false light on the position of the USSR towards the question of Italy's admission to the United Nations. Undoubtedly, the Italians already know the attitude of the USSR towards the question 'of the admission of Italy to the United Nations. This attitude has been defined several times in the past during the consideration of Italy's application. 1 consider it essential, however, to state that the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is in favour of the admission. of Italy to the United Nations, but that my Government cannot agree that the admission of Italy should be realized to the detriment of the legitimate rights of several other States which are on exactly the same footing as Italy. As aIl are weIl aware, peace treaties have been signed with five countries: 1taly, Bulgaria, Roumania, Hungary and Finland. AlI these five countries have the same right to request admission to the United Nati<ms. We do not think that the Italian people itself has anything against the admission to the United Nations of, shall we say, Bulgaria or Roumania, or of any other of the above-mentioned countries. It is not difficult to imagine to what cot:dusiolis we should come, were we all to share the point of view of the United States and the United Kingdom. W~ should reach absolutely absurd conclusions, for it is common knowledge that even among the Mentber States of the United Nations, there are countries with different social structures and politicaI regimes. No- .body can fail to see the difference, for instance, between the social-economic structure of the USSR and that of the United States. It would be possible to cite still further exampIes in support of this affirmation. None of us, however, raises the point that this or thàt Member State of the United Nations does not deserve to be a Member of the Organization merely because its social-economic structure differs from that of other countries. And this is comprehensible, for were we to be governed by.the criteria which inspire the Governments of the United Nations and the United Kingdom, we should be forced to the conclusion that even the existence of an international organization such as the United Nations is altogether impossible. We are convinced that the Italians will understand who it is that, by their policy and attitude, are really placing obstacles in the way of the admission of Italy to the United Nations. These obstacles are being placed by the United States and the United Kingdom, as those States are submitting unacceptable proposals designed to place States with which they have peaèe treaties on difIerent footings, so that some of them should be admitted to the United Nations and others refused admission. The Italians will understand that the question of the admission of Italy has been transformed by the United States and the United Kingdom into a political game the object of which is to confuse and fool public opinion in ItaIy and, above aIl, to deceive that country with regard to the actual position of the USSR on this question. But those who are playing that game forget that the Italian people, as a whole, cannot he fooled and that it is fully able to understand why the United States and the United Kingdom treat them as if they were children. In the past, when the Security Council was considering applications for admiSsion from Bulgaria, Roumania, Hungary, Finland and' Italy, 1 have called attention to the obligations assumed by the Goverment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States of America and the United Kingdom at the Pots- Despite these obligations and apparently in accordance with their usual practice of nonfulfilment of previously assumed obligations, the Governments of the United States of America and of the United Kingdom have decided to divide these countries into two groups, although there never were legitimate reasons for such a division. . In this connexion we are told that the attitude of· the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom towards the applications of Bulgaria, Roumania and Hungary is to be explained by the fact that the latter countries do not observe the treaty clauses which guarantee human rights. Statements of this kind have been made in the past by the represe;ntatives of the United States and the United Kingdom during the consideration of the applications from countries with whichpeace treaties had been signed. Such statements, however, have no real foundation, as the countries in question are honestly and punctually carrying out all their obligations under the peace treaties, including those concerning human rights, to which l have already referred. In making their unfounded statements, the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom have let it be understood through their representatives in the Security Council that they had in mind measures taken in the above-mentioned countries against certain persons-foreign agents and traitors to their own country-who attempted to organize the overthrow of the government and the establishment of a fascist regime in those countries. As was to be expected, these persons were appropriately punished by the authorities of the countries con- .provoqué ce~ed. The fact that legal measures taken by the authorities of those countries against traitors and foreign agents has led to so much discontent in certain circles abroad, merely shows the timeliness of the measures taken against such adventurers. Consequently, there can be no question of ~y violation of the peace treaties by the countries in question. AlI these statements are intended merely to hoodwink public opinion as to the real reasons behind the attitude of the United States and the United Kingdom towards applications for admission to the United Nations. l should also like ta remind you that the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom have accepted the obligation to sponsor applications for admission from all of the five nations in question, not only under the Potsdam agreement but aIso under the peace treaties concluded with those nations. Under those same treaties, France and sorne other countries signatory to them 20150 accepted siniilar obligations. Thus, in objecting to the admission to the United Nations of alI five of these countries, the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom are violathlg the obligations incumbent on them under both the Potsdam agreement and the peace treaties themselves. This is not the first time the Government of the USSR has been confronted with a situation in which a government-the Government of the United States, for example-undertakes an obligation with one hand and violates it with the other. 1t is, however, useful to calI attention to this at the present time in connexion with the consideration of applications for admission. The delegation of the USSR adheres to the opinion, which it has previously expressed, that the question of the admission to the United Nations of Italy, Bulgaria, Roumania, Hungary and Finland is one and the same question. AlI of these States, as States with which peace treaties have been signed, are on an equal footing. Therefore, there can be no question of dividing them into groups in order to alIow one country or a group of countries to be admitted into the United Nations by disregarding and infringing the legitimate and indisputable interests of other countries and their right to the same treatment. Mr. LAWFORD (United Kingdom): l do not intend to follow Ml'. Gromyko's interesting disquisition on motives and on the morality of others. He is entitled to his own yiews, and l always listen to them with interest. They are interesting, but in this case, they are quite irrelevant. l do, however, wish very briefly to comment on one or two aspects of what Ml'. Gromyko said. He maintained, as he has maintained very often before, that, in supporting Italy's application and not supporting the applications of Roumania, Bulgaria and Hungary, the United States and. the United Kingdom Governments had broken an engagement and failed to honour an obligation. That being so, l am afraid that once again, at the risk of boring the Security Council, l must state as clearly as l can that my Government, for its part, does not consider itself under any obligation to support the application of any of the countries Ml'. Gromyko mentioned, including Italy. The Potsdam Declaration states that the conclusion of peace treaties will enable the signatories to support these applications. The' same statement occurs in the preambles to the peace treaties. There is no obligation; only the removal of a previous disqualification, which, as Sir Alexander Cadogan has pointed out very often before, does not imply an absolute quali- Finally, 1 should like to comment very briefiy on what MI'. Gromyko said abOut the United Kingdom-and, 1 think he said, the United States-trying to fool the people of Italy into believing that we are their friends and others are not, and on what he said about the intelligence of the Italian electorate. 1 agree with MI'. Gromyko that you cannot fool the Italian people. 1 think that the Italian people, with their keen intelligence, will perfectly weIl understand that the United States, France and my country are in favour of admitting Italy to the United Nations, whereas the USSR is apparently unwilling to admit Italy, except under quite unjustifiable conditions, which are irrelevant to the Italian case.

On behalf of my delegation, 1 should like to say that Colombia has consistently supported the application of Italy and would warmly welcome the admission of that country to the United Nations. We shall now proceed to vote on the question of recommending to the General Assembly the admission of Italy. A vote was taken by show of hands, and the recommendation was defeated by 9 votes in favour and 2 against, one of the votes against being that of a permanent member of the Security Council. Votes for: Argentina Belgium Canada China Colombia France Syria United IGngdom United States of America

' As one of the permanent members has voted against the resolution, it is notcarried. Ml'. AUSTIN (United States of America): 1 have witnessed with profound regret this third veto by the USSR on the application of Italy for membership in the United Nations. It is almost beyond comprehension t-qat one State should continue to frustrate the will of the overwhelming majority of the Members of the United Nations by the arbitrary exercise of a special privJege which we all had reason to think, when oùr Organization Wail created, would be exercised sparingly, and then oruy on questions vitally affecting the national interests of the Power exercising that privilege. We sit here and listen to the dec1aration that the USSR is in agreement with the admission of ltaly to the United Nations, "but ..." and that is a startling word in this situation. We notice the association of Italy with ex-enemy States in a most unfair, unrealistic manner, charging that Italy has the same status as, and that its grounds for admission are equivalent to, the applicants of ex-enemy States: Albania, Bulgaria, Roumania and Hungary. Nothing could be more unlike the reality than this association. Italy was a co-belligerent with the United Nations from 1943 to 1945, and was recognized as sueh. Why should it be important to the USSR to keep a State like Italy out of the United Nations, a State with the admission of which the USSR admits agreement, aState which is clearly quali- :lied to become a Member of the United Nations? 1 can only conc1ude, as 1 believe the worU will conc1ude and as 1 have already stated here, that this action means that the USSR is not a friend of the people of Italy. ' The USSR misuses Italy in trying to coerce the Security Council; it is trying to coerce this large majority of nine members of the Security Council to, admit non-peace-loving nations, States sorne of which are already before the bar of the United Nations as parties to situations and disputes.. No friend of Italy could, in good conscience, use Italy in such a manœuvre. No friend would sacrifice Italy's l'ights for such a cal!!le. It would appear desirable in these circumstances for attention to be paid to the possibility of devising means whereby such States may be able to have a voice in the General Assembly of the United Nations. The General Assembly of the "Cnited Nations is the master of its own house. It could, therefore, choose a method which, at least in part, would do away with the present unfair and unjust disqualification of nations which have every moral right to become Members of the United Nations. Such a formula which would permit the voice of Italy and of certain other StateS to be heard in the- General Assembly of the United Nations, can and should be found. - Mr. MUNoz (Argentina): My delegation will not challenge the President's ruling in connexion with the interpretation of the voting today. We shall take this course in deference to the President and to the other Members of the Security Council, and also because we know that our opinion would not be accepted by the Security Council. I should like to ask the Presid~nt whether, in the light of the vote today and of the opinions expressed in the Security Council regarding the application of Italy~ we shall make a report ta the General Assembly, or whether we are not going to makè a report on this question. Finally} I should like to make a statement regarding the result of the voting, to the effect that, in our opinion, this negative decision of the Security Council constituteS a great blow to aU those who are inheritors of the high standards set for the world by Roman civilization. Mr. GROMYKO (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian): It is somewhat tiresome to have to listen to the expostulations of the United States representative whenever the question of Italy's admission to the United Nations come up in the Security Council. But we have no alternative to continuing to listen to t.i.em since we sit around the same table in the Council. None of us however, has any difficulty in understanding why the United States has brought up the question of Italy's admission to faites fois Mais on n'y peut rien: . nous monde choisi de mande importait, question fa:Hait avril, - prendre situation ~embershipin the United Nations at the present tune. Above all, it was essential for the United States to ensure a debate on this subject prior to the Italian elections; it had ·to provoke a "veto" by the USSR before 18 April, the date of the said elections. This manœuvre-thïs trick, 1 might say-is not difficult to comprehend for ~nyo~e with clear understanding of the political SItuatIOn.

ln regard ta the. question raised by the representative of Argentine, 1 would remind him that, according to the rules of procedure of the Security Council, we should submit a report ta the General A<;sembl? Accordingly, the Coun(;il can submit a report to the special session of the General Assembly if the Cm:ncil so decides. As to the consideration of the other items on the agenda today, 1 wish to say that the Council has ten more applications to consider and vote upon one by one, and 1 think it is very desirable to dispose of this matter at the earliest convenience of the Council, having in mind that the General Assembly is meeting next Friday, 16 April, and that we should have available as much time as we can utilize for the consideration of the Palestine and India-Pakistan questions. 1 would suggest, if it is the pleasure of the Security Council, that it meet again ,this afternoon and that, in discussing this matter without any prejudice to the rights of all the members of the Council~ it consider the advilability of its members refraining from speaking when they have no speciai statement to make but are simply going to take :':le same attitude as taken here before: that is, they srQuld not speak in order to announce their votes. If that procedure is satisfactory, 1 believe tne Council might attempt to dispose of these ten applications at a meeting this aftelT'\}on, aPrf we shall adjourn now until 2.3Ù p.m. The meeting rose at 1:5 p.m. Australia-Âmtralie Egypt-Egypte H. A. Goddard Pty. Ltd. Librairie "La Renaissance 255a George Street d'Egypte" SYDNEY, N. S. W. 9 Sh. Adly.Pasha CAIRO Belgium-Belgiqtle Finland-Finlande Agence et Messageries de la Akateenùnen Kirjakauppa Presse, S. A. 2, Keskuskatu 14-22 rue du Persil HELSINKI BRUXELLES Bolivia-BoUvie France EGitions A. Pedone Librerla Cientlfica y 13, rue soumot Literaria PARIS, va Avenida 16 de Julio, 216 Greece-Grèce Casilla 972 LA PAZ "Eleftheroudakis" Librairie internationale Canada Place de la Constitution The Ryerson Press ATHÈNES 299 Queen Street West Guatemala TORONTO José Goubaud Chile-Chili Goubaud & Cia Edmundo Pizarro Sucesor Merced 846 5a Av. Sur No. 6 SANTIAGO GUATEMALA China-Chine Haiti-Haïti Max Bouchereau The Commercial Press qd. Librairie "A la 211 Honan Road Boîte postale I11-B SHANGHAI PORT-AU-PRINCE Costa Rica-Costa-Rica India-Inde Trejos Hennanos Oxford Book & Stationery Apartado 1313 Co. SAN JOSÉ Scindia House Cuba NEW DELHI La Casa Belga Iran René de Smedt Bongahe Piaderow O'Reilly 455 731 Shah Avenue LA HABANA TEHERAN Czechoslovakia Iraq-Irak Tchécoslovaquie Mackenzie & Mackenzie F. Topic The Bookshop Narodni Trida 9 BAGHDAD PRAHA 1 Lebanon-Liban Denmark-Danemark Librairie univ,erselle Einar Munskgaard BEYROUTH Norregade 6 Luxembourg KJOBENHAVN Librairie J. Schummer Dominican Republic Place Guillaume LUXEMBOURG République Dominicaine Netherlands-Pays-Bas Librerla Donùnicana Calle Mercedes No. 49 N. V. Martinus Apartado 656 Lange Voorhout CIUDAD TRUJILLO S'GRAVENHAGE