S/PV.50 Security Council

The next item on the agenda is the report of the Chairman of the. Atomic Energy Commission to the President of the Security Council concerning the pro- Mr. EVATT (Australia): As the letter points out, Canada considers that her interests are especially afIected because, as a member of the Atomic Energy Commission, Canada is the only nation not represented on the Security Council. And if you approve, 1 will move, as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, the resolution which 1 think has been circulated, and which 1 shaH now read. "Considering that the interests of Canada as a member of the Atomic Energy Commission are especially afIected by the matter now before the Security Council, the Security Council in accordance with Article 31 of the Charter, decides ta invite Canada ta participate in the meeting without the right to vote." Those are the words in Article 31 of the Charter and rule 37 of the Security Council rules of procedure. The PRESIDENT: The motion of the Australian representative is open for discussion. Mr. GROMYKO (Soviet Union) (translated jrom Russian): Mr. President, 1 did not receive the letter of the Canadian representative on the Atomic Energy Commission. Sa far as 1 am aware, other members of the Security Council did not receive it either. The question raised by this letter is a new one that requires ta be studied. Moreover, it is not connected with the question of mIes of procedure which we are considering today. For this reason, 1 think that consideration of the letter from the The question is to decide whether the Canadian representative, under Article 31 of the Charter, is particularly interested, and hence, under the same Article, can ,be invited to sit at the Council table. That is the motion of the representative of Australia which is under discussion. Mr. EVATT (Australia): 1 did not elaborate on the proposaI because l thought there could be no objection raised fron any quarter. The facts are these. Here is a matter on the agenda of the Security Council dealing with the Atomic Energy Commission's rules. Canada is not a member of the Security Council. You, as President of the Security Council, have been addressed by Canada pointing out that, as Canada is a member of the Atomic Energy Commission and is not a member of the Security Council, that country is specially affected by this matter. The fact is, l think, obvious. At this point in the business of the Security Council, Mr. President, you bring up the letter addressed to you by the representativc of Canada asking for the Security Council to permit Canada to sit with us, without the right to vote, in accordance, first of aIl, with the Charter and also with rule 37 of the Security Council mIes. Therefore, it does not raise a new question, but merely the question of how wc shall deal with the business on the agenda before us. Shall we, or shall we not, invite participation by Canada? Has that to be put off to another day-the whole business-or can we deal with it as an incident arising from the agenda? 1 submit the latter is the true view and that wc should unhesitatingly exercise the power we have to invite Canada to sit with us during consideration of this item. Mr. VAN KLEFFENS (Netherlands): Mr. President, 1 simply want to second the Australian motion. The representative of Canada, General Mc- NaughtonJ then took his place at the Council table. Mr. GROMYI(Q (Soviet Union) (translated jrom Russian): 1 consider that questions such as invitations ta participate in the meetings of the Security Council are not procedural ones but questions of substance. For this reason 1 consider that a positive deeision cannot be taken on the letter of the Canadian representa- .tive if any one of the permanent members of the Security Conncil does not agree with the proposaI ta admit the representative of Canadaa to participate in the present meeting of the Couneil. Mr. EVATT (Australia): This very question was dealt with by the Four Powers, one of whom was represented by Mr. Gromyko, at the San Francisco Conference. You will remember that after a request by a number of other na· tions, the sponsoring Powers at San Francisco gave their opinion as to the difference between a matter of substance and a matter of procedure. Section 1, paragraph 2 of the statement by the delegations of the four sponsoring Powers-the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Clùna, and the Soviet Union-states: "For example, under the Yalta formula" that is, the formula which was embodied in the Charter, "a procedural vote will govern the decisions made under the entire section D of Chapter VI." That is the point Sir Alexander Cadogan made. Then the sponsoring Powers' declaration goes on to say: "This means that the CounciI will, by a vote of any seven of its members, adopt or alter its rules of procedure; determine the method of selecting its President; organize itself in such a way as to be able to function continuously; select the times and places of its regular and special meetings; establish such bodies or agencies as it may deem necessary for the performance of its functions;" And then occur these crucial words: "invite a Member of the Organization not represented on the Council ta participate in its discussions when that Member's interests are specially afIected; ..." So that you had at San Francisco an illustration of what were essentially proceduraI matters, including this very matter of inviting to the Council table a country whose interests were especially affected. That matter was declared to be a procedu.;al one. Of course, the sponsoring Powers' declaration does not bind Powers who did not participate in making it, but 1 think it should bind, at any rate, those who did, and it should bind Mr. Gromyko. It clearly says that this is a procedural matter. l do not know whether Those are the rules of the Security Council, and 1 submit that at the last meeting when the questions were discussed up at the other end of the city-a long way up-that procedure should have been followed. The question for Ml'. Gromyko to answer now is: Does he challenge the ruling of the President? If he does, then the question is not whether your ruling should be affirmed, but whether it should be overruled. The rule says, "it shaH stand unIess overruled." It cannot be overruled except by a resolution, and that resolution cannot be carried unless there is a procedural vote in favour of it. l submit, first, that ML Gromyko has gone counter to the declaration of the four sponsoring Powers at San Francisco, and secondly, if he wishes to carry the matter further, he must move that the President's decision be overruled. Unless he so moves the next business shouId be called with Canada present.

1 will asle the Assistant Secretary-General to rcad the second paragraph of the statement of the four sponsoring Powers. l consider the resolution of the representative of Australiahas been adopted. If the representative of the Soviet Union challenges my ruling l will submit his resolution to the vote of the Council. Ml'. GROMYKO (Soviet Union) (translated jram Russian) : l think that Sir Alexander Cadogan distorts the sense not oruy of the dec1aration of the Four Powers, to which France also adhered, on this question, but the text of Article 31 of the Charter of the United Nations as .well. The Charter reads: "Any Member of the United Nations which is not a member of the Security Council may participate, without vote, in the discussion of any question brought before the Security Council whenever the latter considers that the interests of that Member are special1y affected." But before deciding the question whether the representative of Canada should be invited to participate in the meetings of the Security Council on questions with which the Atomic Energy Commission is concerned, the question of whether the special interests of Canada as a State are reany affected should be decided first. But let us suppose that even the special interests of Canada are affected. l stated n mière ne l'opinion rité. sujet de canadien. seil sentant point au Commission présente son rapport. J'aborde discussion, sécurité de l'occasion de également Canada, loppement guerre. l'Assemblée mise intitulé "La l'énergie juge concernant de propos: de pays cette sion sein cours de soumets sera qu'un l'énergie abordons ordre dans est à

The Couneil takes note of the remarks by the Soviet representative. We will continue with the second item on the agenda and invite the representative of Australia, who is Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, to present his report. Ml'. EVATT (Australia): 1 will now introduce the main item; that is, the question whether the Security Council approves the rules of procedure of the Atomic Energy Commission. 1 am glad to have an opportunity of doing so not only in the presence of aIl the members of the Security Couneil, but also in the presence of the representative of Canada, whose country has contributed so much ta the development of atomic energy during the war. Now this matter cornes before the Security Couneil because of a resolution adopted by the General Assembly. It is provided for in paragraph 4, entitled "Rules of Procedure", which states that, "The Commission"-that is, the Atomic Energy Commission-"shall have whatever staff it may deem necessary, and shall make recommendations for its rules of procedure to the Security Couneil, which shall approve them"-and these very happy words then follow-"as a procedural matter". The rules are before the twelve countries now represented around this table. The representatives on the Atomic Energy Commission have approved the rules of procedure in the Committee of Experts, and at a public session of the Atomic Energy Commission they were unanimously approved. Therefore, 1 submit them, trusting there will be no objectiQn and that they can be adopted. The PRESIDENT: Are there any objections? 4. International Court of Justice The PRESIDENT: We come now to the third item on the agenda, which is the definition of conditions under which the International Court of Justice shall be open to States not parties to the Statute. On this subject we have a letter from the International Court of Justice ta the The members of the Council have aIready received both documents, and 1 propose to refer this matter to the Committee of Experts. If there are no objections the matter will be re- ferred to the Committee which will prepare report on the subject. That Bnishes our agenda. Now, before ad- journing, 1 am going ta say a few words. (Translated from Spanish): As 1 shall have to return to my country for official duties before the Security Council meets again, today's meet- ing is the last at which 1 shaH have the honour ta preside. ' At the termination of my duties 1 find it fit- ting ta rnake sorne comments on the questions discussed in the Council during my term of office as President. The most outstanding ques- tion during this period, and clearly the most important, was that of Spain. During its dis- cussion matters arose which can be considered as problems of special interest. The Council is weH aware of Mexico's special position with regard to this subject, and the debates in which the various views were stated are still fresh in our memories, so 1 can confine myself to saying that 1 regret the outcome of the discussions which amounted to no more than the retention of the matter on the Council's agenda. Sorne of us are convinced of the serious consequences of the continued existence of the Franco regime, and we should like to see sorne action taken as soon as possible ta put an end ta a situation generally recognized as abnormal. During the period in which 1 had the honour to act as President, one of the permanent mem- bers exercised ms right' ta veto a numbei of motions. At the time of the San Francisco Conference we, the representatives of the small nations, fought stubbornly against the inclusion of such a limitation. Many of us strove to find a con· ciliatory fonnula which would be less inconsis- tent with democratic principles. In one of these discussions 1 proposed that a resolution in certain cases ta be specified in the Charter, should be submitted ta the vote of the permanent Mem- bers and decided by a majority of three. The right of veto was not ruled out but it was made impossible for a single dissentient ta overrule the majority view. My enquiries as to the chances of success of such a formula showed me that it was use1ess to mave it formally in spite of the favour with which it was received by the representatives of the smaller Powers. The veto in the fonu laid down by the Char- ter was acceptedbecause it was pointed out us that it was a sine qua non condition for the establishment of the organuation for peace. At our meeting of 29 June l outlined my view on the interpretation of Article 12 regard- ing the exercise of the Security Council's func- tions. l think the mere retention of a subject on the agenda cannot be held to constitute the exercise of a function; such exercise must in- volve action of sorne sort. It seems to me that when the Security Coun- cil is not engaged in the study of a problem; is not in the process of solving it, and has not taken any interim measures for executory ac- tion requiring the Council's supervision, but is mere1y leaving the matter on its agenda to show that it is keeping the said problem in mind or under its observation, then it is not reasonable to regard such a procedure as con- stituting the continuous exercise of the Coun- cil's functions within the meaning of Article 12. This would deprive the Assembly of the right to make recommendations on the problem in- volved on the grounds that there must be no in- terference or conflict between two organs when only one is acting and the other, the Council in this case, is abstaining from action and is mere1y keeping the matter on its files. In mechanics the various parts of the ma- chine, and in biology the various organs per- form their functions when they are in action; when this action ceases the machine or the or- gan ceases to function and cames ta a stand- still. The Council is the most important organ of the peace structure and like certain biological organs, has periods of l'est. The case under review is typical. No discussions or investi· gations are going on and no decisions are being executed; in a word, the Council is not exercis- ing any function but is merely putting off action until a suitable moment. l would ask my colleagues to forgive me for this digression, but l hope the matter will have their earnest attention. To ensure the greatest possible efliciency in this Organization, a pur- pose we aIl have at heart, l should like ta see satisfactory solutions arrived at not only for these problems but for aIl problems. That such solutions wî11 be reached l have no doubt, for whatever their differences the Members of the United Nations are all animated by the same purpose of organizing and maintaining, Mr. VAN KLEFFENS (Netherlands): Mr. President, we have just heard what 1 should like to caB your swan song, and what a swan song it was. This was no mere matter of pro- cedure. If anything it was Cl. matter of consid- erable substance. l also think that it is not a matter of mere procedure when today you take leave of us here. This, too, is a matter which goes very deep in our hearts. 1 think that every occupant of the chair imprints his personality during his tenure of office and, if anything, this has been emphasized during your period here. In your case, 1 think wehave feIt that one of the great qualities shawn was what 1 should like ta calI a great measure of soldierly firmness, a quality acquired no doubt during one of the phases of your so very distinguished work. It is a matter of great event ta see you leave this chair and leave our midst because this soldierly firmness was tempered by that great courtesy which is one of the secrets of the Mexican character and which every one else has good reason ta envy. We all wish you, Sir, aS the Australian representative has done, Gad speed when you go back to your country, and we thank you from the bottom of our hearts for the way in which you have guided us, Qecause this firmness and this courtesy was bounded by great understanding of the questions at issue. You are not the only one ta whom we have ta say good-bye at this meeting of the Council. 1 understand that Dr. Evatt, very unfortu- nately for· us all, is also going to leave, and should like to say to bim, too, that we are very sarry indeed ta see 1ùm go. His, too, was a quality of firmness. Perhaps it was not a soldierly firm- ness, but it was certainly the firmness of a great lawyer who knows what he is talking about, who knows his text, and who knows how to deal with it. 1 think, Mr. Evatt, that you have done great service ta this institution, which you have so much at heart, by always expounding, with that clarity and preciseness of which you are mastcr, the points at issue, and 1 hope that, al- though no doubt you will have many other as- l l r dire très tous, de - - s e n s n - e - - remercie russe): souhaiter votre pays, Mr. GROMYKO (Soviet Union) (translated tram Russian): Mr. President, l would like to assure you also that l wish you a safe arrivaI in Mexico, your own country, and l wish you the best of health. It has become a tradition among us that when a president retires after his term of office he makes certain statements. l do not know whether this IS a good or a bad tradition. It may be a good one. In any case I do not object to this tradition. (Laughter) But so far as I am aware, the agenda of the Security Council today did not contain and does not contain such a serious question as that of the unanimity in the Security Council of the permanent members of the Council in taking decisions regarding the maintenance of peace and security; which is one of the most funda- mental points of the Charter of the United Na- tions. Dr. Castillo Najera touched upon this ques- tion in his statement. That was his affair; he did not have to ask anyone's permission to make a statement on this question and there can be no objections. He is fully entitled as President to make such statements. I wish, however, to say to Dr. Castillo Najera, in reply to his remarks, that if he hopes to achieve any serious result from his statement, he is pro- foundly mistaken. The raising of this question today regarding the fate of the unanimity of the permanent members of the Security Coundl in deciding the most important questions of the maintenance of peace will not have the notice- able result desired by Dr. Castillo Najera. sident cesse tradition qu'elle soit bonne. (Rires) la cette de Conseil, maintien constituant de devoir en sonne sident, les e e r e e e jera, que il question Castillo gible, mité le plus remercie duit les représentant je apprécié vous du Pendant sidence, complexes. préhension l'expression et nous si

l thank you very much. Mr. JOHNSON (United States of America) : Mr. President, l should like to add my own appredation to the very eloquent expressions of esteem pronounced by the representatives of the Netherlands and Australia, for the courtesy and kindness with which you' have considered all your colleagues on the Council during a difficult time. During the last month when you have been the presiding officer of this Council, the sessions have been difficult and have been complicated and long. Without your patience and understanding of the individual points of view, which were expressed with varying degrees of cIarity and eloquence, I do not know how we should have fared. '1 did not know that your Excellency was returning to Mexico so soon until l heard it in The meeting rose at 4.33 p.rn.