S/PV.442 Security Council

The Security Council will have taken note of the statement of the representative of the Soviet Union. Mr. AUST1N (United State~ of America): In this parliamentary situation, the delegation of the United States will support the ruling of the President of the Security Council with respect . to the procedure to be followed; that is, to take up first the draft resolutions offered by the representatIve of Argentina and to vote first upon t..he application for membership of Portugal; 0 and, secondly, to take up the draft resolution' offered by the representative of the Soviet Union which, ·1 understand, is now -the original draft resolution of 21 June supplemented by the'jnclusion of an additional country, Nepal. . ( But, if possible, I wish to strengthen the general position of the United States. This position lhas been repeated on every occasion we have been cohfronted by a draft resolution containing several applications for. membership. 11]. t;le beginning, as Ishall show, we submitted such a draft resolution [54th meeting] our'>Selves, but we withdrew it, and the reasons that obtained for offering it will be pointed out. However, whenever a parliamentary situation such as the present one arises, we wonld prefer "not to proseed to a vote. As the President has announced, in this case the debate has indicated no change in the positicm shown by previous voting. When there has been no change in position, and when it.is obvious, before the vote is taken, what the result will be, and that the. result will be a negative one, then we think it is harmful to proceed to a vote. .That is our position in general. However, if there must be a vote, when we are confronted with a proposal such as that of the Soviet Union, we think tha.t the correct procedure is to vote separately on each application. We have continued to take that position on the basis of precedent, .on the basis of logic, and on the basis that it is juridically correct, as held by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion1 which was given at the request of the General Assembly. Let .liS•examine the first ground for taking a separate vote upon each of the applica~ions c;ontained in the draft resolution of the SOViet Umon. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'cmglais) : Le Con. seil de securite prend bonne note de la remarque du representant de l'Union sovietique. M. AUSTIN (Etats-Unis d'Amerique) (tradl£it. de l'anglais): Etant donne la situation clans laquelle nous nous trouvons en ce qui concerne l'or- .dre de nos travaux, la delegation des Etats-Unis appuiera la decision du President du Conseil de securite concernant la procedure cl suivre; asavoir, qu'il y a lieu de commencer par les projetsl de resolution du representant de l'Argentine et I de voter par consequent en premier lieu sur la . demande d'admission du Portugal; c'est ensuite ,I seulement qu'il y aura lieu de mettre aux voix le I projet de resolution presente par le representant de l'URSS et qui, ainsi qu'il vient d'etre precise, . est le projet primitif [S/1340J presente le 211 juin et complete par la mention d'un candidat suppU~mentaire, le Nepal. Je voudrais definir avec encore plus de netlete, si possible, l'attitude g~nerale des Etats-Unis, attitude qUi_adejcl ete3ndiquee cl plusieurs reprises, chaque50is que nous avons ete saisis d'oo projet de r~solution conce~ant les demandes d'a.dmission emanant de plusieurs candidats. Des le debut de la discussion, la delegation des Etats· Unis elle-meme avait presente un projet de re80- lutiot:J.de ce genre [54eme seance] ; par la suite ce projet a ete retire. Nous indiquerons les raisons pour lesquelles nous avons presente ce projet de resolution. Nous pre£ererions ne pas proceder au,vote chaque fois qu'il se presente une situation semblable cl celle d'aujourd'hui. Ainsi que le President vient de le declarer, la discussoi1 n'a revele aucun changement dans l'attitude des diverses delegations telle qu'eIle s'est manifestee par les votes precedents. Or, s'il n'y a en aucun changement, si le resultat du vote est evident avant It scrutin et si l'on sait d'avance qu'il sera negatif, nous estimonsqu'il est inopportun de proceder au vote. Telle est notre attitude generale cl l'egard de cette question. Mais, si un vote doit malgre tout avoir lieu et si nous sommes en presence d'une proposition comme celle de l'URSS, la procedure correcte, me semble-t-il, est de mettre aux voix separement chaque demande d'admission. Nous avons toujours soutenu cette these; qui repose a la fois sur les precMents et sur la logique. Nous sommes egalement persuades q'11'elle est juridiquement fondee, puisqu'elle est conforme cl l'avis emis, sur la demande de l'Assemblee generale, par la Cour internationale de Justice1. Examinons la premiere raison' pour laqueIle nous demandons un VQte distinct sur chacune des demandes d'admission mentionnees dans le pro- "I move, as a procedural matter, that the action of the Security Council on this draft resolution 5/1340, be taken up by separate consideration and a separate vote taken on the different applications made by the countries named in the draft resolution, so that each member of the Security Council may rtflect the attitude of his country on each applicant." "Je propose, comme motion de procedure, que, en examinant le projet de resolution S/134O, le ConseiI de secnrite procede par divioion et qu'iI mette aux '1oix separement les demandes d'admission presentees par les pays dont le nom figure dans le projet de resolution, afin que chaque membie du Conseil de securite puisse montrer I'attitude de son pays a l'egard des diverses candidatures." The decision of the International Court of Justice which supports this method was given on 28 May 1948. . The renresentative of the Ukrainian SSR, Mr. ManuilskY, :"as referred [429th meeting] to the position held in August i946 by the representative of the United States, Mr. Johnson.Mr. ]ohnson proposed [54th meeting] that the Security Council approve the applications of all of the eight countries which were seeking membership at that time. Subsequently [57th meeting] he opposed the admission of two of those countries: Albania and the Mongolian People's Republic. '. Out of .context, this might be made to appear inconsistent. But let me supply the context. La Cour intemationale'de Justice s'est prononcee en favenr de cette procedure, dans SOl1 avis du 28 mai 1948. M. ManuiIsky, representant de la RSS d'Ukraine, a rappe1e [42geme seance] la position prise, en aotit 1946, par le representant des Etats-Unis. M. Johnson. Ce dernier avait alors propose [54eme semz,;c] que le Conseil fie securite approuvat en bloc les candidatures des huit pays qui demandaient :-'ors leur admission. Par la suite, iI s'opposa a. admission de deux de ces pays [57e111,e seance], l'Albanie et la Republique populaire de Mongolie. On peut certes presenter cette attitude comme manquant de logique si 1'on ne tient pas compte de l'ensemble des faits. Laissez-moi done' V011S rappeler ce qui s'est passe. - Le representant des- Etats-Unis avaitpropose d'abord que les demandes des huit pays candidats, . I'Afghanistan, I'Albanie, l'Islande, l'Irlande, la Republique populaire de MongoIie, le Portugal. la. Suede et la Transjordanie (Jordanie) fuss€;'1t l'objet d'une recommandation favorable a l'Assemblee generale. M.Gromyko, representant de l'URSS, indiqua [55en-ze seance]qu'il ne pouvait pas donner son accord a l'admission d'une resolution recommandant "d'admettre indist~nctement dans _ I'Organisation tous les pays qui en ont fait la demande." After th~ representative of Australia, Mr. Apres que M. Hasluck, representant del'Aus~ Hasluck, had also opposed the' United States tralie, eut pris egalement position contre la prodraft resolution, Mr. Gromyko suggested that position des Etats-Unis, M. Gromyko proposa the draft resolution be withdrawn. Mr. Johnson gue la resolutil;m ftit retiree, ce que M. Johnson did so, saying that it was quite evident that the fit 'en declarant que le vote de rUR,SS empeche.;. vote of the Soviet Union would block the passage rait de toute evidence I'adoption de la resolution. of that resolution. Mr. Johnsonwent on to refer M. Johnson rappel::t ies doutes qui avaient ete to the doubts which had arisen in the Committee exprimes au Comite d'admission desnouveaux on the Admission of New Members regarding Membressur la question de sa-voir sil'Albanie et .the qualifications of Albania and the Mongolian la' Republique populaire. de Mongolieremplis- People's Republic, and to the statement that the saient les conditionsrequises par la Charte; il representative of the Soviet Union made without rappela egalement la declaration, faite parle reexplanation, to the effect that the Soviet' Union presentant de l'Union sovietique sans commencould not support the applications of Ireland and taire explicatif et se10n Iaquelle I'URSS n'ap- The representative of the United States first proposed that the applications of Afghanistan, Albania, Iceland, Ireland, the Mongolian People's Republic, Portugal, Sweden, Transjordan (Jordan) be' favourably recommended to the General Assembly. Mr; Gromyko, the representative of the Soviet Union, could not agree. [55th meeting] that a resolution cailing ". . . for the wholesale admission to the Organization of all countries who have applied for membership .. ." should be adopted. ~ortuga:,.about whose qualifications no .substanpuierait pas la demande cl'admission de l'Irlande tIaI questlOn had been raised by any member of et du Portugal dont les Htr~s n'avaient pourtant the Council. He said he had originally proposed ete serieusement .contestes par aucun membre du the admission of the eight applicants en bloc Conseil. M. Johnson .rappela qu'il avait primiti- <c••• in order to achieve a broader purpose, howvement propose l'admissionen bloc des huit pays ~ver, and a purpose which we think is in the real candidats "... afin d'atteindre un but plus large, mterest of all and in the real interest of . .." et nous pensons que ce but repond au veritable the United Nations. The United States Governinteret de l'Organisation". Le Gouvemement des ~ent had hoped -Chat, once within the Organiza- Etats-Unis esperait que, une fois admisesa 1'0rgatlOn, Albania and the Mongolian People's Renisation, l'Albanie et la Reptiblici,'ue popillaire de publ!c-·wouldmore rapidly approach the necessary Mongolie evolueraient plus' l'apidement dans le _ In other words, the ~orld would probably not understand why, in its first consideration of the admission of new Members, the United Nations should choose to admit the doubtful and reject the qt:alified. Accordingly, on 29 August 1946 [57th meeting] the United States voted against the admission of Albania and the Mongolian People's Republic, while the Soviet Union, as expected, voted against the applications of Ire-2 land, Italy, Portugal and Transjordan (Jordar~). ,On that occasion, Albania rece1vedonly five favouia:ole votes and the Mongolian People's Republic received six. Thus both failed to obtail;1. the necessary seven votes. Now, let us see how, following that experience, the United States, both when its representative served a1'j Pt.:esident' of the Security Council and when it acted in its capacity as a tnemberof the Council, has adhered constantly to the position taken at that time, and has insisted that the Council should not undertake to pass upon sevefalapplications at the same time unless there'was some 'reason for so doing, some such reason as an expression of unanimity ~t' the Security Council which made a judgment upon each application unnecessary. Since that time. the United States has always stood for a separate consideration of applications for membership Unless there was a. special reason for joint consideration. Ort the only occasbn that I recall, when the representative of the United States was .acting as President of the Security Council and when such a question arose, the President .announced, that it appeared that the members of the Security Council had not changed their positions and that, unJessthere was objection, tt•• • the President will consider that unanimous consent is given'. . ." to report the situation as it was' to the General Assembly wi~hout taking any vote. Permit me now to turn to the second reason for which the United States continues to hold that position. That reason is that. it is correct in logic. Albania has been censured ,by' the General' Assembly2 for its open intervention in the in~ ternal affairs of our fellow Member, Greece, which scarcely indicates a ·peace-'loving. attitude. Albania must have a peace-loving attitude in order to become a Member of this great Organization. Bulgaria was also censured for the same reason. d~fendu la positIon qu'ils avaient adoptee a la date indiquee ci-·dessus et comment ils ont soutenu que le Conseil ne devrait pas examiner simul.; tanement plusieurs demandes.sauf s'il existait, pour agir ainsi, une raison spetiale - palxempIe.. si l'unanimite all sein du Conseil de securite rendait inutiIe un examen separe de' chaque demande. Depuis cette epoque, les Etats-Unis ont toujours preconise' un examen distinct des candidatures, sauf si une raison spedale arguait en faveur d'un examen commun. Lots de la seule occasion. dont je'me s6uvienne - a' un moment ou· le representant des Etats-Unis presidait le Conseit de s~curite et ou une telle'question s'est posee - le President a declare' que les membres du Conseil n'avaient pas. semblait-il, modifie leur attitude et que, sauf objection, "le President estimera qu'il y a accord unanime . ; ." pour faire rapport sur la situation a l'Assemblee generate .sans proceder a aucun vote. ' J'aborde maintenant, avec la permission du , Conseil, la seconde raison pour laquelle les Etats~ Unis maintiennent leur. attitude. C'est que cett~ attitude, est logiquement fondee. ' L'Albanie a fait l'objet d'un bla.me de la part de l'Assemblee' generale2. pour son intervention, ouverte dans les affaires interieures d'un Etat Membre, la Grece, ee qui ne, semble pas etre un.e preuve de sentiments pacifiques. L'Albanie dQ!t montrer des sentiments pacifiques pour deventt un, Metnbre de notre grande Organisation. La Bulgarie a, e1le aussi, fait l'objet d'un blame pou~ la meme raison. The position of the United States is not one of favouritism, discrimination, injustice, or of a concealed veto, since a great majority ,both of the Security Council and of the General Assembly have shown clearly that they do not consider these countries qualified for membership in the United Nations. No one can truthfully claim that refusal to cast a favourable vote is onc and the sa.111e thing as casting a negative vote. We have repeatedly shown the direction of our bterpretation by employing the abstention instead of 'Toting negatively. Les Etats-Unis ne font pas preuve de parti pris, de discrimination, d'injustice; iIs n'opp6sent pas non plus un veto camoufie.a certaines candidatures, car une grande majorite, a la £ois au Conseil desecur.ite et it l'Assemblee generale, a montre clairement qu'eIle n'estime pas que ces pays aient des titres aetre admis cornme Membres de l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Personne ne peut honneteP;1ent pretendre que refuser de voter affirrriativement cquivaut a voter negativement. Nous avons it. maintes reprises mont;re queIle est nocre fa~on de voir, en nons abstenant au lieu de voter negativement. . Je crois que l'on admet en general, .et les declarations prononcees anterieurement devant le Conseil 1'0ut amplement moutre, que les Et?.ts- Unis ne se sont nullement engages it appuyer sans distinction les demandes des pays en -cause, qu'ils satisfassent'ou non aux dispositions del'Artide 4 de la Charte. La conclusion des traites de paix permet.d'appuyer 1eurs candidatures; ceci, M.Manuilsky l'a fait ressortir [440eme seance] ; mais elle ne le permetque.si ces pays. bnt fait !a preuve de leurs titres; ceCl,· M. ManutIsky ne 1a pas me1'ltionne. En· ce qu( .concernele cinqui~me carididat, la Republique populaire de Mongolie, mon Gouvernement estime que l'on ne dispose pas d'informations suffisantes pour se rendre,--eompte sice pays a des titres a· etre admis comme Metnbrede rOr·· ganisation cortformemetit a I'Article 4 de la Charte. Je repete une formule, devenue dichea. force d'etre repetee, qui indique nettement la position des Etats-Unis en cas d'execution. Nous n'avons pas l'intention, par notre vote, d'interdire dans l'avenirl'admission de n'importe que! C'.andidat ayant beneficie de sept vote.saffirmatifs au sein du Conseil de securite. Je reprends une declaration prononcee par mOl au cours' de la seance' du 24 juin [42gew.e .. seance] : "Mon Gouvernetnentserait dispose ... aexaminer de nouveau la question a. tout moment si les evenements venaient a jeter un jour nouveau sur les titres de la Bulgarie, de l'Albanie, de la Rou- , I think it is generally conceded, and past statements in the Council have amply dem01'lstrated, that the United States took no sweeping commitment to support the applications of these countries for· membership whether or not they fulfilled the requirements of Article 4 of the Charter. The conclusion of the Peace Treaties made it possible to support their applications, as Mr. Manuilsky pointed out [440th meeting], but only, of course, if they proved themselves qualified, which Mr. Manuilsky did not poip.t out. .' As regards the fifth applicant, the Mongolian People's :Republic, tliere is still, so far as my Government is aware, insufficient information at hand to ~how that it is qualified under Article 4 of the ,Charter for membership in the United Nations. -I repeat a formula, which has become such by repetition, which represents the position of the United States in voting: we have no intention in the future of permitting our vote to prevent the ~dmission to membership of any applicant receiv:- tng. seven affirmative votes in the Security Council. . . . I repeat a statement which I made on 24 June [429th meeting] : . "My Government ... would be prepared to reconsider this question at any time if it should appear that further developments cast new light on the qualifications for membership under f ! 8 See Offiical Records of the third session of the S Voir les Documents officiels de la troisieme session IIIIII;l Assembl~, ~art~~. Resolutio~-s, ~o. 27~~~~~I~:~_~~:'~~S~~f11~.:~~e~.:le, deu:cieme partie, Resolutions, This statement stands today as it did when I made it on 24 June. It does not represent either directly or indirectly any injustice, favouritism or discrimination. It relates to the performance of our duties as members of the Security Council unde. the Charter, and to the exercise of that care and judgment which are required of U2- when we make the decision that an applicant is t.~le and willing to assist in the preservation of peace and is a peace-loving nation. , I conclude this general statement with a reference to the third basis for the position of the United States which I am now repeating here. This is taken from the text of General Assembly resolution 197 (Ill) regarding the admission of new Members adopted by the General Assembly at 1ts 177th plenary meeting held on 8 December 1948: "Whereas the International Court of Justice in an advisory opinion of 28 May declared that: "(a) A Member of the United Nations which is called upon, in virtue of Article 4 of the Charter, to pronounce itself by its vote, either in the Security Council or in the General Assem:- bly, on the admission of a State to·membership in the United Nations, is not juridically entitled to make its consent to the admission dependent on con.ditions not expressly provided by paragraph 1 of the said Article; ,and " (b) In particular, a Member of the Or?;anization cannot, while it recognizes the conditions set forth in that provision to be fulfilled by the Stat~ concerned, subject its affirmative vote to the additional condition t.l:1at other States be admitted to membership in the United Nations together with that State, "Recommends that each member of the ~ecurity. <;:oun.cil and of the General Assembly, m exercIsmg Its vote on the admission of new Members, should act in accordance with the fore- going opinion of the International Court of Justice." . C'est la. une recommandatio1:l de haute probite. La suprematie de la loi est n6cessaireJ si noUS voulons que le ConseiI de securite travaiIle d::tns l'ordre. Juridiquement, nous n'avons pas le droit de poser comme condition qu'un pays doitetre admis, £aute de quoi les candidatures de tous les autres pays seraient rejetees. Une teUe attitude menerait al'anarchie, al'absence de tout droit et de tout ordre au sein meme du ConseiI de securi- te. Dans ce~ conditions, queUe serait la prochaine etape? I wish to thank the President for listening to Je tiens a. remercier le President d'avoir bien what perhaps seems like unnecessary repetition, voulu ecouter ce qui semble peut-etre une repeti- but what I have said has been said with great tion inutiIe, mais j'ai fait ma declaration avelc seriousness because the United States is firmly quelque solennite, parce que les Etats-Unis sont . This is a reason of great probity. The suprem- acy of the law is necessary if we are to have order in the Security Council. We are not juridically entitled to make it a condition that one country must be admitted or else that all the others will be black~Dalled. Such a position is a tendency toward anarchy-the lack of law and order-right here in the Security Council. What will be the next.step? ceAttendu que, dans un avis consultatif emis le 28 mai 1948, la Cour internationale de Justice a declare: Ha) Qu'un Membre de l'Organisation des Na- tions Uniesappele, en vertu de l'Article 4 de la Charte, a. se prononcer par son vote, soit au Con- seil de securite, soit a. l'Assemblee generale, sur l'admission d'un Etat comme Membre des Nations Unies, n'est pas juridiquement fonde a. faire de- pendre son consentement a. cette admission de conditions non expressement prevues au paragra- phe 1 du dit Article; et "ll) QU'en particulier, un Membre de I'Orga- nisation ne peut, alors qu'iI reconnait que les conditions prevues par ce texte sont remplies par I'Etat en question, subordonner son vote affirma- tif a la condition' qu'en meme temps que I'Etat dont il s'agit, d'autres Etats soient egalement admis comme Membres des Nations Unies, ceRecommande a chacun des membres duCon- seiI de securite et de l'Assemblee generale de se conformer, lors du vote sur I'admission des nou- .veaux Membres, a. l'avis precite de la Cour in- ternationale de Justice." nationale de Justice. I wish we could refer this question to the Comme je 1'ai deja declare a maintes reprises, General Assembly without any vote at ail, as I I je souhaiterais que nous soumettions cette ques- have repeatedly said, but since we must vote I tion a l'Assemblee genera1e sans proceder a aucun hope that the procedural proposal which I have vote; mais, comme it nous faut voter, j'espere que made will be a,dopted, and that we will vote upon la motion de procedure que j'ai proposee sera each application separately. adoptee et que noUs voterons sur chaque demande separement. Enfin, dans le cadre du probleme de procedure qui nous occupe, i'annollce que If'S Etats-Unis se- ront heureux de voter en faveur de l'admission du Portugal. Finally, in the parliamentary situation which confronts us, I announce that the United States will gladly vote in favour of the admission of Portugal. M. ARCE (Argentine) (traduit de fespagnol): Le tour pris' par les debats sur 1'admission de nouveaux Membres, ces derniers jours en par- ticulier, me decide a changer de tactique. Je me proposais de ne pas prendre la parole, sauf en cas de circonstances exceptionnelles. Je ne voyais pas d'interet a parler pour parler; mon seul but Hait d'obtenir que le Conseil se prononce sur les recommandations de l'AssembIee generale. Ce- pendant, j'ai constate certaines manreuvres d'ob- struction devant lesquelles je ne puis m'indiner. Je crois remplir un devoir ineludable en me deci- dant a denoncer devant 1'0rganisation et devant l'opinion mondiale les erreurs auxquelles se lais- sent aller certaines delegations. Je ne veux faire de tort a personne, mais, pour defendre les inte- rets des Membres non privilegies de 1'0rganisa- tion, il est indispensable de dire les choses avec une parfaite nettete. Bien entendu, je serai bref; je tiens seulement a ce que figure au proces- verbal une declaration concrete prouvantla nature de ces erreurs. On a affirme que 1'on procedait actuellement a l'examen des demandes d'admission de certains pays et que, de ce fait, il convenait de les soumet- tre a une discussion et a un vote dans l'ordre chronologique ou e1les avaient ete presentees. Cet argument est denue de tout fondement. I1 manque tout d'abord de veracite. Le Conseil de securite .Il'examine pas actuellement les demandes d'admis- sion de ces pays; il y a deja h'es longtemps qu'il a abandonne cette tache. Ce que le Conseil de se- cuI'ite examine, ce sont deux recommandations de l'Assemblee generale. Dans l'une d'elles, l'As- semblee demande qu'il soit procede a un nouvel examen de la situation du Portugal, de l'Italie, de la Jordanie, de l'Irlande, de l'Autriche, de la Finlande et de Ceylan. L'Assemblee generate a declare que ces pays devraient etre admis au sein de 1'0rganisation des Nations Unies et, avec l'autorite que lui donne le pouvoir de decision finale que 1ui confere la Charte, elle a recomman- de au Conseil de securite de reconsiderer son at- titude. La delegation de l'Argentine s'est fait l'echo de cette recomniandation et, de ce fait, a presente sept projets de resolution [S/1331 a S/1337] dont le Conseil est actuellenient saisi. Mr. ARCE (Argentina) (translated from Spanish): The turn which the debate on the admission of new Members has taken, especially in recent days, has made me deciq.e to alter my tactics. I had intended not to spea-l<: unless ex- ceptional circumstances arose. I did not wish to speak for the sake of speaking, but in order to induce the Council to take a decision on the Assembly's recommendations. But I have noticed obstntctionist practices to which I will not submit. I believe that I am fulfilling an ineluctable duty in deciding to place before the Organization and before world opinion the fallacies in the position of certain delegations. I do not wish to offend anyone but, in the defence of the interests of the non-privileged Members of the Organization, it is essential to speak with ?-bsolute clarity. I shall of course speak briefly and for the sole purpose of putting a concrete demonstration of such fallacies on record. It has been stated that the applications for admission of certain countries are at present under consideration and that, therefore, they should "be discussed and voted upon in the chrono- logical order of their submission. The argument is completely without foundation. To begin with, it is not true. The Security Council is not con- sidering those countries' applications for admis- sion; it set them aside a considerable time ago. The Council is ~onsidering two requests from the General Assembly. The object of one of them is that the position of Portugal, ,Italy, Jordan, Ireland, Austria, Finland and Ceylon should be reconsidered. The Assembly has stated that those countries should be admitted to the Organization and, with the authority deriving from the power of final decision conferred on it by the Charter, ~as re.comm~nded the Security Council to recon- Sider Its attitude. The Argentine delegation has supported that recommendation and to that end has submitted seven draft resolutions [S/1331 to S/1337] which are before the Council. L'autre demande de l'Assemblee presente un caractere global; elle vise a ce qu~ toutes 1es de- mandes en instance soient soumises a un nouvel examen. C'est la delegation de l'Union sovieti- . The other request is of a general nature; it is alme~ at reconsideration of all the applications pending. The i:lelegation of the Soviet Union has lflilited that recommendation and to that en.d 111 &. ,lddl ~#"'~~"""'i9!ll"'''''_d-'''l·... -iiidt.''''.'''fif'''-_'''·......._.... ......_._'-- _ t' 1" What is really happening is that the USSR delegation is trying to negotiate the entry of certain countries which are of political interest to it but which would not obtain the number of affirmative votes required by the Charter. That is the real reason which made it decide to propose the admission of thirteen countries en bloc. But that attitude is childishly ingenuous, first because any member of the Council can ask for a vote by parts as the United States representative has already done, and, secondly, because it is not possible to add dissimilar quantities, and an over- whelming majority of the General Assembly has condemned the conduct of some of the. States sponsored by the delegation of the Soviet Union. Moreover this Council's recommendations, like the General Assembly's decisions, cannot be made en bloc. The applications are individual and re- quire an indiVIdual. decision. Each.country has special characteristics, and the Organization's judgment, based on those characteristics, must be made separately for each country. Nevertheless no one has opposed the USSR delegation's draft resolution's being considered and voted upon; its right to submit it is recognized. But this did not meet that delegation's purposes. Although the agenda has l!een adopted, and the· order of submission of the draft resolutions- which according to the rules of procedure de- termines the order in which they a'e to be con- sidered and voted upon-has been clearly estab- lished, the delegation of the Soviet Union rejects the order established by the Chair and claims priority for its draft resolution. It has also been stated that before the Argen- tine delegation submitted its draft resolutions, two Presidents of the Security Council had sub- mitted draft resolutions intended to exhaust con- sideration of this item without its being put to the vote. That statement is not correct. Neither the representative of Norway, when he was President, nor any other President, has submitted any draft resolution. They limited themselves to expressing their opinion as the present President has done, but they did not attempt to impose any specific procedure on the Council. . I must close, .but it is obvious that the USSR delegation wishes to spare itself the embarrass- ment of voting against the entry. of some peace- loving countries Which, according to its own Ce qui se passe en realite, c'est que la delegation de l'URSS cherche a. negocier l'admission de cer- tains pays qui pr("entent pour elle un interet politique, mais dont les demandes n'auraient pas reuni en leur faveur le nombre de voix fixe par la Charte. TelIe est la veritable raison qui a in- cite cette deh~gationa. proposer l'admission simul- tanee de treize pays. Mais cette attitude est d'une ingenuite puerile, d'une part, parce que tout mem- bre du Conseil de securite peut demander la di- vision du vote, comme l'a deja. fait le representant des Etats-Unis, et d'autre part, parce qu'il n'est pas possible d'additionner des quantites hetero- genes; or, l'Assemblee generate a condamne, a. une majorite ecrasante, 1'attitude de certains des Etats dont la delegation de l'Union Sovietique patronne l'admission. D'autre part, les recommandations du Conseil de securite, .de meme que les decisions de l'As- semblee, ne peuvent etre prononcees en bloc. Les demandes sont individuelles; eUes exigent une decision individueUe. Chaque pays a ses carac- teristiques propres; l'Organisation doit exercer son jugement separement pour chacun des pays et fonder ce jugement sur ces caracteristiques par- ticulieres. Malgre tout, personne ne s'est oppose a ce que fut examine et mis aux voix le projet presen- te par la delegation de 1'URSS, par l'effet du meme droit qui lui avait ete reconnu de le presen- ter. Mais cette delegation ne s'est cependant pas estimee satisfaite. Apres l'adoption de l'ordre du jour - lequel etablit dairenient l'ordre de pre- sentation des projets de resolution et, par conse.' quent, l'ordre dans lequel ceux-ci seront exarni-' .. nes et mis aux voix - la delegation de l'Union sovietique se refuse a. accepter 1'ordrefixe par le President et insiste pour que priodte soit don-' , nee a. son projetde resolution. On a en outre affirme que, avant que la de- legation de 1'Argentine n'ait presente ses projets de resolution, deux· Presidents du Conseil de securite avaient soumis des projets visant a.liqui- der l'examen de ce point de 1'ordre 'du jour sans qu'il ffrt soumis a. un vote. Cette affirmation manque d'exactitude. Ni le representant de la Norvege, quand vint son tour d'assumer la pre- sidence, ni' aucun autre President n'ont presente le moindre projet; ils se sont bornes a. exprimer leur opinion, comme l'a fait le President actuel, mais its n'ont pretendu imposer au Conseil aucune procedure determinee. ' Je dois en finir. I1 est evident que la delegation de l'URSS desire s'eviter l'e'llbarras d'emettre, un vote dMavorable a. l'admission de .certains pays pacifiquesqui, seIon ses propres dec1arati~ns..... We regret the awkward position in which the delegation of the Soviet Union has voluntarily placed itself but we cannot give our collaboration to help it out of it. In the question of the ad- mission of new Members we hold the completely opposite view and we cannot abandon the defence ,6f non-privileged States. Unfortunately, in spite of the clear provisions of the Charter, the USSR delegation has a majority and the United Nations will have to wait until that majority reconsiders and repairs the grave damage which its inex- plicable attitude is causing to the union of peace- loving countries and to those countries who wish to become Members of our Organization in order to assist us in maintaining peace. Such a reputable newspaper as The New York Times said last Friday, commenting on what had happened in the case of Nepal's application, that it was lamentable that that State should suffer because of the USSR attitude. There is a slight 'error in that statement. It is not Nepal but the United Nations which suffers most. The New York Times felicitously added: "This shows the necessity for a revision of the veto procedure, and a reformation in the machinery of admis- sions". It appears that truth is making progress, al- though slowly. The Argentine delegation has been striving for three years to attain that result. For the moment it 'Would be satisfied with "a reformation in the machinery of admissions".

I hav.e no other speakers on my list. Is it desired that we how proceed to a vote on the draft resolution of Argentina concerning Portugal, document ,S/1331? Mr. TSARAPKIN (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (translated from Russian) : It might perhaps be advisable to adjourn now; otherwise we shall be sitting after 1 p.m. I shall speak for approximately half an hour and that will be fol~owed by the English and French interpretahons. It would therefore be better to adjourn now and to resume half-an-hour earlier, or at 3 o'clock as usual, so as to avoid a break between my speech and the interpretations. If I were t? speak now, my statement and the interpretations would take over an hour. Le PRESIDENT (traduitde l'anglais) : Lorsque le reli'\~sentant de l'URSS a commence a parter, je pensais lui den1~nder si son expose durerait une demi-heure environ, et s'it accepterait d'en remettre l'interpretation au debut de la' seance de l'apres-midi; mais, a la fin de ses observations, le representant de l'Union sovietique a indique . qu'il objecte a. cette fac;on de proceder. Je ne cOnl;oispas bien les motifs de son objection et ne vois pas la portee qu'il y attache. It nous reste The PRESIDEN'l': When the representative of th7 USSR began to put his request, I had it in mmd to ask him wheth~r he would not speak now f?r about half an hour and allow the interpretahons to be given. at the beginning of our afternoon meetit,lg, but towards the end of his remarks, the representative of the Soviet Union indicated th~t he saw some' objection to thCJ.t. I am not qUIte sure what the objection is or how strongly he feels on the subject. We have not got very Le PRESIDENT (tl'aduit de l'anglais): n n'y a plus d'orateur irtscrit. A1!I.ms-nous proceder au vote sur le projet de resolution de l'Argentine concemant le Portugal [S/1331]? M. TSARAPlnNE (Union des. Republiques socialistes. sovietiques) (traduit du russe): Peut- -etre conviendrait-il de suspendre la s~ance des a. present; ,autrement, la dis.cussion nous retiendra au"dela de 13 heures.Ma declaration durera a. peu pres une demi-heure et sera suiviedes inte'rpretations en anglais et en franc;ais. Par consequent, il serait logique de suspendre la seance maintenant et" de nousreunirul1edemi-heure plus tot ou, comme d'habitude, a. 15 heures, afin qu'il n'y ait pas d'interruption entre ma declarationet l'interpretation. Si je prenais la pa,role maintenant, mon intervention et son interpretation dureraient plus d'uneheure. An alternative would be that I should call upon the next speaker on the list, that is, the representative of Egypt. I have ascertained that the representative of the USSR would not object, and that I can, therefore, call upon the representative of Egypt. It is true his speech will be followed by one interpretation, but I tnlst it wii] not last for half an hour. With that understanding, and with the Council's permission, I call upon the representative of Egypt. Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypt): I t~e no exception to the statement of the President this morning except on two points. One concerns the remarks which some members of the Security Council, and in particular the new members, might still wish to make on the various applica- \ tions before us. I continue to maintain the right of the members of the Council, and particularly the new memb(lrs, to make any further comments they wish on such an 'important matter. I would recall that I pointed out at the last meeting, and at other meetings, that we were discussing these applications in general, and that we were not going thoroughly intti the various appli- .cations. I therdore submit tJ:;'at anyone who wishes to make any commentary on these applications should be allowed to do so. The other matter about which I raised some doubt concerning what the President said this morning, concerns the order in which we shOUld vote, if we are going ~o vote at all. I doubt whether the interpretation given 'by the President and by some other members is necessarily the correct one. I am not insisting that it is wrong, .but ! am not sure that it is right. I see nothing in General Assembly resolution 197 (Ill) which is mandatory as regards the order of voting on these applications. It is true that the General Assembly set out these applications in a certain order. At the same time it is equally true that one part of the resolution of the General Assembly dealt with certain applications to the exclusion of others. Therefore, I repeat, I do not see anything mandatory with regard to the order in which.we should vote. Je suis toutefois moins perplexe a. ce sujet qu'a propos d'uiJ. autre aspect de la meme question. Puis-je demander pourquoi on met tant d'insistance et d'aprete a. determiner queUe demande d'admission doit etre mise aux voix la premiere, du moment que nous mettrons aux voix toutes lesdemandes d'admissioa? ... -..=....""'..,"'':t·...'tL'"''--.,.·"''*,......~·_~~,~ ''..,'_'H~......,.....-...~ __~... ",.~......._~.,_._,.,~<t~.~~' .•_,__ ~._•.. _~.,.,.~,~,_~.~ .• '"'~_~,', __. '_,...•'_ ~_. _ However, this does not worry me as much as another consideration in conne.xion with the same point. May I ask the reason for all this insistence and all this wrangle about·· the application on which we are to vote first, since we are going to vote on all the·applications? It y a une autre possibilite qui consisterait a donner la parole a. l'orateur suivant: le representant de l'Egypte. Je me suis assure que le representant de l'URSS ne verrait pas d'inconve. nient a. ce qu'il en fUt ainsi et, dans ces conditions, je puis donner la p:lrole au representant de l'Egypte. I1 est vrai que cet expose sera suivi d'une interpretation, mais je me rapporte a.lui pour qu'il ne parle pas plus d'une demi-heure. S'il en est bien ainsi, et avec l'autorisation du Conseil, je donne la parole au representant de l'Egypte. Mahmoud FAWZI Bey (Egypte) (traduit de I'angtais) : Je ne trouve rien a. redire a la declaration faite ce matin par le President, sauf sur deux points. L'un a trait aux obserVations que certains membres du Conseil de securite, en particulier les nouveaux membres, pourraient encore avoir a. faire au sujet des diyerses demandes d'admission dont 'est saisi le Consei1. Je persiste a defendre le droit des membres du Conseil, et tout specialement ceIui des nouveaux membres, de faire tuutes nouvelles observations qu'ils desirent sur une question aussi importante. Je rappell~ que, au cours de notre derniere seance et a. d'autres seances encore, nous avons discute ces demandes d'admission d'une fac;on generale, mais que nous ne les avons pas examinees en detail. J'estime donc que les representants qui le voudraient devraient etre autorises a faire les observations qu'iIs desirent a cet egard, La seconde question a propos de laquelle j'eprouve un, c~rtain doute concernel'ordre dans lequel nous devrions voter si nous sommes appeles a le faire. Je me demande si l'interpretation donnee par le President et par d'autres membres du Conseil est absolument juste. Je ne pretends pas qu'elle sait fausse, mais je ne suis pas certain qU'elle soit juste. Je ne vois rien d'obligatoire dans la resolution 197 (Ill) de J'AssembIee quant a. l'ordre a. suivre pour mettre aux voix ces demandes d'admission. It est vrai que l'Assemblee generale a c1asse ces demandes dans un certain ordre. Mais it est egalement vrai qu'une partie de la resolution de l'Assemblee generale ne concerne que certaines demandes d'admission, a. l'exclusion d'autres demandes de meme nature. Je repete donc que je ne vois rien d'obligatoire dans l'ordre :l suivre lors du vote. . I am not indicating now what the position of my delegation will be as regards the priority of voting on these various applications. I beg to be allowed to postpone this until later. However, meanwhile I cannot help expressing the concern of my delegation over this new element of bargaining which is creeping into the work of the Security Council. I now wish to refer to the statement of the representative of the United States. I have indicated several times the opinion of my delegation concerning two points which he mentioned. The first is that we really should not take a vote on this matter; the reasons for not doing so have been given time and again. The other matter is in connexion with separate voting, if we do vote. We also expressed our' approval of this procedure. Avant de terminer, je voudrais dire quelques mots au sujet de la declarationdu representant de l'Argentine. J'estime que certaines parties de son expose revetent une tres haute importance· et je ne saurais qu'approuver ce qu'il a dit lorsqu'il a parle de la protection du droit des Membres "non privilegies" des Nations Unies; j'apprecie a sa juste valeur l'euphemismedont il a use en les appelant "non privilegies" au lieu et place de "parents pauvres". J'apprecie la forme sans que mon sentiment varie sur le fond meme. Pour ce qui est de l'opportunite de proceder a',.1 scrutin, je ferai, lorsque la question sera mise aux voix, une breve declaration avant le scrutin .pour expliquer, a un certain P9int de vue, le vote qu'emettra la delegation egyptienne. Before concluding, I want to say a few words in cOO11exion with the statement of the representative of Argentina. I consider some parts of that statement to be of extreme importance, and I could not but endorse what he said when he referred to the protection of the rights of the "non-privileged" Members of the United Nations. I also appreciate his euphemism in calling them "non-privileged" and not "under-privileged". I say this although my feeling is still the same as his on this subject. In .connexion with the advisability of taking a vote on this matter, and when the matter comes to a vote, before voting I should like to make a brief statement explaining a certain phase of the vote that will be cast by the Egyptian delegation.

Apart from the representative of the USSR, the only other speaker I have on my list is the representative of the Ukrainian SSR, and if Mr. Manuilsky can assure the Security Council that his speech and its two translations can be concluded in a quarter of an hour, I am sure the Council would be delighted to hear him. Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais) : Outre le representant de l'URSS, le seul orateur inscrit est le represeIltant de la RSS d'Ukraine; si M. Manuilsky peut assurer au Conseil de securite que son ")ose ainsi que les deux interpretations qui le SUivront ne depasseront pas un quart d'heure, je suis certain que le Conseil sera heureux de l'entendre. . M,r.MANUILSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated from Russian): I reserve the right to speak after· the representative of the Soviet Union and shall merely make a short statement. M. MANUILSKY (Republique socialiste sovietique d'Ukraine) (traduit du russe) : Je me contenterai, pour l'instant, de me faire tine breve declaration, en me reservant le droit de prendre la parole apres le representant de l'Union sovietique. Les delegations des Etats-Unis et du Royaume- Uni pensent, a tort,que nous ne nous rendons pas compte de ce qui se passe. Ils pensenten vain , The delegations of the United States and the United Kingdom are quite mistaken in thinking that we are not aware of what is taking place here and that we consider the representative of Argentina primarily responsible' for these debates. e respect the Security Council, we uphold its c que·nous considerons le representant de l'Argentine comme le principal coupable de ces debats. Nous respectons le Conseil de securite et defen- Consequently, everything that is happening here is organized by the delegations of the Unjted States and of the United Kingdom, who wish to provoke yet another "veto". That is being-done in order to undermine the principle of unanimity laid down by Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter. The principle of unanimity is an obstacle to aggressors and to those who support an aggressive policy. That is why the question must now be put. That is all I / shall say for the" time being. Later on I shall have something to say on the observations which have been made by,Mr. Austin' and by 'other speakers.

Unless there is any objection, I propose to adjourn the Council. We shall meet again at 3 o'clock, and I would appeal to the representatives to be punctual. The meeting rose at 12.55 p.m. FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY-THIRD MEETING QUATRE CENT QUARANTE. TROISIEME SEANCE ' Held at Lake Success, New York, on Tuesday, 13 September 1949, at 3 p.m. President: Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United, Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). Present: The representatives of the following countries: Argentina, Canada, China, Cuba; Egypt, France, Norway, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdomo£ Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of Ame:rica. 1. Admission of new Members (continued) representantct~ l'Argentine est un jeu; ce n'est qu'un jeu. Si le representant de l'Argentine met- tait ses menaces a execution et quittait cette seance pour obtenir des instructions, je puis assurer au Conseil de securite que le del ne s'ecroulerait pas; les fleuves ne changeraient pas lettr cours le soleil ne s'eteindrait pas, et le Conseil de secu~ rite continuerait a sieger comme auparavant. On aurait pu meme predire ce qui se passerait a la seance suivante. Tout ce qui arriverait, c'est qu'a la seance suivante, on verrait l'honorable repre- sentant de l'Argentine ou son suppleant assis a sa place, laissant entendre par la meme qu'il a re<;u ,de son Gouvemementdes instructions lui enjbignant de ne pa~ quitter le Conseil de securi- t~ avant que ne soit expire le mandat par lequel l'Argentine a ete invitee a sieger au Conseil de securite. . Ainsi donc, tout ce qui se passe ici est organi- 'se par les delegatiOl~s des Etats-Unis et du Royaume-Uni qui veulent attacher un nouveau "veto"afin de saper la regIe de l'unanimite prevue au paragraphe 3 de}'Article 27 de la Charte. Cette regIe de l'unanimite lie les mains des agresseurs et des partisans d'une politique d'agression. Voici pourquoi il faut maintenant poser cette question. Je me contenterai pour l'instant de cette decla- ration, mais je reviendrai plus tard sur cermines remarques faites par M. Au~tin et par d'autres orateurs. . Le PRESIDENT (traduit de l'anglais): S'i! n'y a pas d'objection, je propose de lever kl. seance. Nous nous reunirons a 15 heures, et je prie Ies membres du Conseil de bien vouloir se montrer ponctuels. La seance·est levee d 12 h. 55. Tenue d Lake Success, New-York le mardi 13 silptembre 1949, d15 heures. President: Sir Alexander CADOGAN (Royaume- Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord). Presents: Les representants des pays suivants: Argentine, Canada, Chine, Cuba, Egypte, France, Norvege, Republique socialiste, sovietique' d'Ukraine, Union des'· Republiques socialistes sovietiques, Roya'i1me-Uni.de Grande··Bretagne et d'Irlande duNord, Etats-Unis d'Amerique. LJordre du jourestcelui de-la 442eme seance (S/ Agendaj442). 1. Admission de nonveaux Membres (suite) FRANCE Editions A. Pedone 13, rue Souffiot PARIS, ye GREECE-GRECE "Eleftheroudakis" Librairie internationale Place de la Constitution ATHENES GUATEMALA Jose Couhaud Gouhaud & Cia. Ltda. Sucesor' 5a Av. Sur No. 6 y 9a C. P. GUATEMALA ' HAITI Max Bouchereau Lihrairie "A la Caravelle" Boite postale 11l"B PORT-AU-PRINCE ICELAND-ISLANDE Bokaverzlun Sigfusar E}'1lluIll1sonnar Austurstreti 18 REYkJAVIK INDIA-INDE Oxford Book & Stationery Company Scindia House NEWDELill IRAN Bongahe Piaderow 731 Shah Avenue TEHERAN IRAQ-IRAK MackenZie & Mackenzie The Bookshop BAGHDAD LEBANON-lIBAN Lihrairie universelle BEYROUTH LUXEMBOURG Librairie J. Schummer Place Guillaume LUXEMBOURG NETHERLANDS-PAYS..BAS N. Y. Martinus Nljhoff Lange Voorhout 9 'S-GRAVENHAGE K~BENHAVN DOMINICAN REPUBLlC- REPUBLlQUE DOMINICAINE Lihreria Dominicana . Calle Mercedes No. 49 Apartado 656 ClUDAD TRUJILLO ECUADOR-EQUATEUR Mufioz Hermanos y Cia., Nueve de Octubre 703 Casilla 10-24 GUAYAQUIL EGYPT-EGYPTE Lihrairie "La Renaissance d'Egypte" . 9 Sh. Adly Pasha CAmo NEW ZEALAND....... NOUVELLE-ZELANDE Cordon & Gotch, Ltd. Waring Taylor Street ,WELLINGTON United Nations Association of New Zealand P. O. 1011, G.P.O. WELLINGTON NICARAGUA Ramiro Ramirez V. Agencia de Puhlicaciones MANAGlJA, D. N. . NORWAY.-NORVEGE ETHIO~IA,-ETHIOPIE Agenceethiopienne de puhlicite P. O. Box 8 AnDIs·ABEBA J?h~(;rundtTanumForlag Kr.AuguStgt. 7A OSLO PHILIPPINES D.P. Perez Co. 132 Riverside SAN JUAN, RIzAL POLAND-POLOGNE Spotdzielna Wydawnicza "Czytelnik" 38 Poznanska WARSZAWA SWEDEN-SUED!: A.-B. C. E. Fritzes KungL Hofhokhandel Fredsgatan 2 SMCKHOLM SWlrZERLAND-SUISS5 . Librairie Payot S. A. LAusANNE, GENEVE, VE\I£Y, MONTREUX, NEUCHATEL, " BERNE, BASEL Hans Raunhardt Kirchgasse 17 ZURICHl SYRIA-SYRIE Librairie universelle DAMAS TURKEY.-TURQUIE Librairie Hachette 469 Istiklal Caddesi BEYOGLU·!sTANBUL UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA- UNION SUD-AFRICAINE Central News Agency Commissioner & Rissik Sta. JOHANNESBURG and at CAPETO and DURBAN UNITED KINGDOM- ROYAUME-UNI H. M. Stationery Office P. O. Box 569 LONDON, S.E. 1 and at H.M.S.O. Shops in LONDON, EDINBURGH, MANCBES CARDIFF, BELFAST, BIRMING and BRISTOL UNITED'STATES OF AMERICA ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE International Documents Servic Colmnbia University Press 2960 Broadway NEW YORK 27, N. Y. URUGUAY Oficina de Representaci6n de . Editoriales Av. 18 de Julio 1333 Esc. 1 MONTEVIDEO VENEZUELA Escritoria Perez Machado Conde a Piiiango 11 CA.il.ACAS . YUGOSLAVIA-YOUGOSLAVI Drzavno Preduzece ' Jugoslovenska Knjiga Moskovska 01. 36 BEOGRAD