501.BC/8–147
Memorandum Prepared in the Office of Special Political Affairs2
U.S. Slates for Election of Members of Security Council, Economic and Social Council, and Trusteeship Council3
the problem
At the second regular session of the General Assembly, which will be convened on September 16, 1947, it will be necessary to elect three states to non-permanent membership on the Security Council, and six states to the Economic and Social Council, to replace states whose terms of office will expire December 31, 1947. It will also be necessary to elect two members of the Trusteeship Council, in order to attain an equal division between states which administer trust territories and states which do not, in accordance with Article 86 of the Charter, since the U.S. trusteeship agreement for the former Japanese mandated islands has been approved. (For present composition of these Councils, see Table, pages 3 and 4.)4
[Page 101]recommendations
- 1.
- It is recommended that the U.S. slate for non-permanent membership on the Security Council consist of Czechoslovakia; Uruguay, with Cuba* as a second preference; and Canada.
- 2.
- It is recommended that the U.S. slate for election to the Economic and Social Council consist of Brazil;* Poland; Iran, or as a second preference, Siam; Sweden; the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; and the United Kingdom.
- 3.
- It is recommended that the U.S. slate for election to the Trusteeship Council consist of the Philippine Republic and Denmark.
- 4.
- It is recommended that no commitments for United States support
for election to these Councils be made to the representatives of any
foreign countries prior to September 1, 1947† and
that, whenever possible, commitments be avoided until the United
States Delegation to the General Assembly reaches New York. It is
further recommended that if such representatives should approach the
Department seeking United States support, the Officers concerned
should respond in accordance with the following formula:
- (a)
- In answer to all inquiries, it should be emphasized that no final decisions have been made, and that they will probably not be taken until the Delegation reaches New York.
- (b)
- If an approach is made by a representative of a country which the Department plans to support, a statement may be made to the effect that the United States is giving serious consideration to its candidacy.
- (c)
- If an approach is made by a country whose candidacy the United States would definitely oppose, its representative should be informed that there is no present prospect of support for it.
It is further recommended that, unless special circumstances suggest the desirability of a contrary course in a particular case, states which may be admitted to membership in the United Nations at the forthcoming meeting of the General Assembly not be considered for election to these Councils at this time.
[Page 102]TABLE
Present Membership on UN Councils and Preliminary Suggestions on U.S. Slates
| present membership | proposed slate | |
| Security Council | ||
Permanent Members:
|
||
| Non-Permanent Members | ||
Term Expires December 31, 1948:
|
||
Term Expires December 31, 1947:
|
Two-Year Term:
|
|
| Economic and Social Council | ||
Term Expires December 31, 1949:
|
||
Term Expires December 31, 1948:
|
||
Term Expires December 31, 1947:
|
Three-Year Term:
|
|
| Trusteeship Council | ||
Administering States
|
||
Non-Administering States
|
||
Term Expires December 31, 1949:
|
||
| Additional Members: (Three-Year Term)
|
||
discussion
1. Security Council
Under Article 23 of the Charter, the General Assembly each year elects three non-permanent members to the Security Council for a term of two years, “due regard being especially paid, in the first instance, to the contribution of Members of the United Nations to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the other purposes of the Organization, and also to equitable geographic distribution.” A retiring member is not eligible for immediate re-election.
Subject to the condition that members be capable of making an important contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security, the Department, on the basis of the current membership of the United Nations, has in the past considered it desirable to include among the six non-permanent members of the Security Council:
- One member of the British Commonwealth
- One country from Eastern and Central Europe
- One country from Northern, Western, and Southern Europe
- Two countries from the other American Republics
- One country from the Near East and Africa
(SC–171/8, November 15, 1945)
This distribution was attained in the elections held at London at the first part of the First Session of the General Assembly and was continued in the elections held at New York last October, when Syria, Colombia, and Belgium were elected to the Council for a two-year term to replace Egypt, Mexico, and the Netherlands.
If the existing balance among the non-permanent members is to be retained, Australia, Brazil, and Poland must be replaced by a member of the British Commonwealth, a Latin American State, and an Eastern European State, respectively.
(a) Successor to Australia:
In deciding upon a replacement for Australia, it is to be noted that the categories listed above provide no representation for the Pacific–Far Eastern area except for China, a permanent member of the Security Council. For this reason, some consideration has been given to the question whether a Commonwealth State from this area (New Zealand) or India would have a prior claim over other members of the British Commonwealth. New Zealand, however, still has two years to serve on the Economic and Social Council, while the uncertain political status of India would appear to preclude its consideration as a candidate for the Security Council at this time. Moreover, it does not appear appropriate at this time to consider the substitution of one of the two other Far Eastern members of the United Nations, Siam or the Philippine Republic, for a British Commonwealth State. At a later date, after other members are admitted to the United Nations, it may be necessary to reconsider the distribution of seats in the Security Council.
[Page 104]The question remains as to which member of the British Commonwealth should succeed Australia. South Africa should probably be eliminated from consideration as a candidate because of its unpopular position in the Indian–South African controversy and in the matter of the status of Southwest Africa. Canada, although remaining a member of the Economic and Social Council until December 31, 1948, appears most suitable, by virture of its political orientation and importance, to replace Australia on the Security Council.
(b) Successor to Poland
The possible Eastern and Central European candidates include Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Beylorussia and the Ukraine. The Department would not desire to support a constituent Soviet Republic or Yugoslavia for membership on the Council. On the other hand, Czechoslovakia would serve a useful function because of its ties with both the East and the West.
(c) Successor to Brazil:
Unless there are strong reasons to the contrary, the United States should support any candidate agreed upon by the Latin American Republics for the remaining seat on the Council. Uruguay and Cuba are suggested as the two most important Latin American states (except for Argentina) which will not hold other posts on United Nations Councils after December 31, 1947. Cuba retires from the Economic and Social Council at that time. Uruguay, which the United States unsuccessfully supported for election to the Economic and Social Council in 1946, proved to be a poor candidate; but its election to the Security Council at this time would provide a good geographic balance on the Council, since Colombia is the other Latin American member. For this reason, Cuba is listed as a second preference.
The remaining Latin American states not now members of any United Nations Council are Argentina, Panama, Guatemala, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Honduras, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica.
2. Economic and Social Council
Under Article 61 of the Charter, the General Assembly each year elects six members to this Council for a term of three years. A retiring member is eligible for immediate re-election.
The current membership of the Economic and Social Council is indicated in the Table on pages 3 and 4 [earlier in this document].
The existing geographic balance in the Council is as follows:
- The Five Major Powers
- Four Latin American Republics (Chile, Cuba, Peru, Venezuela)
- Two Eastern European States (Czechoslovakia, Byelorussian SSR)
- Two Western European States (The Netherlands, Norway)
- Three Members of the British Commonwealth (Canada, India, New Zealand)
- Two Near Eastern States (Lebanon, Turkey)
This distribution, attained in the elections in New York last October, differs from that of the First Economic and Social Council, elected at London in January 1946, and may be further modified as new members are admitted to the United Nations.
The United Kingdom and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics should be re-elected without difficulty, in view of the common agreement on the desirability of representation for all of the Five Major Powers on the Economic and Social Council.
(a) Successor to Cuba
Brazil is recommended as the preferred U.S. candidate because it is considered desirable that one Latin American state of leading economic importance (Brazil, Argentina, Mexico) should always be represented on the Council. None of these sits on the Council at this time. Because of this consideration, the U.S. would not wish to support this year a small, economically unimportant and relatively underdeveloped Latin American Republic, although in general it is disposed to accept any candidate agreed upon by the Latin American states.
Brazil has already informed this Government that it is a candidate for the Economic and Social Council. It may be noted that Argentina has also expressed its interest in serving on the Council.
(b) Successor to Czechoslovakia
Of the Eastern European states, Poland is the logical replacement for Czechoslovakia, although the Czech representative in New York has raised the question of the re-election of Czechoslovakia with the U.S. Delegation. However, except in the case of major powers, it has previously been felt that immediate re-election is, in general, undesirable as it would result in deferring membership unduly for many states. Moreover, the fact that Czechoslovakia is our choice for the Security Council precludes its consideration here. Yugoslavia has previously served on the Council (term expired December 31, 1946) and has made known its interest in serving on the Council again. Present U.S. policy does not indicate support for Yugoslavia at this time. One Soviet Republic, Byelorussia, was elected to the Council in 1946.
(c) Successor to India
Iran is recommended as the U.S. candidate. It has not yet served on any of the Councils. Greece, which previously served a one-year term on the Council, has requested that the U.S. support its candidacy this year. However, in view of the program of U.S. aid to Greece and the fact that Turkey is already a member of the Council, it would not appear desirable to support Greece for this post.
Because there is only one member (China) on the Economic and Social Council representing the Far East, some consideration should be given to the substitution of a Far Eastern state for Iran. Since the Philippine Republic desires, and enjoys U.S. support for, election to the Trusteeship Council, Siam would appear to be the only other eligible Far Eastern State. It is therefore listed as a second choice on the slate.
[Page 106]It may be necessary to consider the re-election of India to this post, or alternatively, the election of South Africa.
(e) [sic] Successor to Norway
Sweden, Demark, Iceland, and Luxembourg appear to be the possible Western European candidates. Belgium is now on the Security Council and resigned last year from the Economic and Social Council in order that the Netherlands could be elected to that Council. Sweden appears to be exceptionally well suited for membership on the Council because of its economic importance and its moderate, progressive economic and social policies. However, if the Scandinavian states agree upon a different condidate (e.g., Denmark), the U.S. might reconsider its position on Sweden, subject to the necessary changes in the slates for the other Councils.
3. Trusteeship Council
Article 86 of the Charter provides that the Trusteeship Council shall consist of the following Members of the United Nations:
- (a)
- those members administering trust territories;
- (b)
- such of the five major Powers as are not administering trust territories; and
- (c)
- as many other Members elected for three-year terms by the General Assembly as may be necessary to ensure that the total number of Members of the Trusteeship Council is equally divided between those Members of the United Nations which administer trust territories and those which do not.
The Trusteeship Council was brought into existence by the General Assembly at the second part of the first session in New York last December, following the approval of eight trusteeship agreements submitted by Australia, Belgium, France, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. These five states thus became administering members of the Council. The automatic membership of China, the U.S., and the U.S.S.R. under Article 86 (b) made it necessary to elect two additional members of the council to achieve the required equal balance between states administering trust territories and states not administering trust territories. Mexico and Iraq were elected to these two seats.
The existing geographic balance in the Council is as follows:
- The Five Major Powers
- Two members of the British Commonwealth (Australia, New Zealand)
- One Western European State (Belgium)
- One Near Eastern state (Iraq)
- One Latin American state (Mexico)
Since the United States draft trusteeship agreement for the former Japanese mandated islands has been finally approved, it is necessary to elect two additional members to the Council.5
[Page 107]The United States Delegation, considering the slate for the Council last December, agreed that if more than two members were to be elected at that time, the third candidate should be either Denmark or the Philippine Republic. The choice of a fourth member at that time lay between India and an Eastern European state from the Soviet bloc. (US/A/169; US/AM(Chr. 32).6
A commitment has already been made to support the candidacy of the Philippine Republic for the Council.
It has been recommended that our candidate for the second new seat be a Western European state, preferably Denmark, with consideration being given to the question whether, since Belgium is now an administering member of the Council, a better geographic balance would not be attained by placing an Eastern European state on the slate. It should be noted, however, that the Eastern European states voted against the approval of the eight trusteeship agreements last December, and that the U.S.S.R. did not participate in the first meeting of the Council this spring.
4. Procedure in the General Assembly
If, after two ballots, it becomes clear that there is no prospect for immediate election of the United States candidate or candidates, the Delegation should be free to support alternative candidates after consultation with the Department.
- The Office of Special Political Affairs was charged with responsibility for U.N. affairs in the Department of State.↩
- In line with procedures established in the Department in 1946 (see Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. i, pp. 251 ff.), the groundwork in formulation of policy regarding slates was accomplished by a Departmental team known as the “Membership Team.” Minutes of meetings of the Membership Team are in Department of State files 501, 501.BB, and 501.BC.↩
- Printed herein, p. 102.↩
- Subject to the qualification that the United States is generally disposed to support any candidate agreed upon by the Latin American Republics. For further elaboration, see Discussion below. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- Subject to the qualification that the United States is generally disposed to support any candidate agreed upon by the Latin American Republics. For further elaboration, see Discussion below. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- With the exception of the Philippine Republic, to which a commitment has already been made as regards the Trusteeship Council. [Footnote in the source text.]↩
- For documentation concerning this subject, see pp. 258 ff.↩
- See Foreign Relations, 1940, vol. i, pp. 242 and 244.↩