Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, United Nations Affairs, Volume III

IO files, SD/A/C.1/433

¹

Position Paper Prepared in the Department of State for the United States Delegation to the Eighth Regular Session of the General Assembly

secret

[Washington,] September 8, 1953.

Preparatory Work With Regard to the Possible Holding of a General Conference of the Members of the United Nations in Accordance With Article 109 of the Charter

the problem

[The portion of this item dealing with documentation is covered in the position paper on the Argentine item (A/2415)]²

The Netherlands government proposes that the 8th GA invite member states to submit prior to the 10th session (1955) “their preliminary views with regard to the possible revision of the Charter and tentative proposals and suggestions.” The motive of the Dutch is to stimulate governments to start their preparations now, and the submission of proposals before the 1955 session is designed to furnish a suitable basis on which that GA can vote on whether to call a review conference. Although the Dutch do not intend to advance the date of the review conference itself, which they agree will probably be in 1956 or 1957, they may contribute to the confusion already existing here and abroad as to timetable. While they, like the US do not wish to encourage or engage in debate at this GA on substantive aspects of Charter review, and they thus hope their item will be treated procedurally, there is a real danger that debate on the veto, membership, etc., is inevitable under the rubric of their item.

united states position

1. The United States should support the Dutch proposal, welcoming it as consistent with the Secretary’s recent efforts to stimulate thoughtful consideration by governments and particularly by peoples as to how the Charter can be improved, but making clear our understanding that the submission of proposals by mid-1955 is optional, since some governments may not be in a position to publicize their policies a year or more before the review conference itself.

2. The U.S. should favor merging this item with the Argentine item and having it handled procedurally, with substantive debate to be avoided.

3. The U.S. should oppose the creation of any UN intersessional preparatory body at this time on the ground that such a group would not be useful until governments have had a chance to develop their own general positions. We should refer in this connection to the democratic process of public debate and consultation which this country will need to undergo before our government can formulate its final policies.

4. If the Secretary refers in his opening address to subjects such as voting procedures, membership, and disarmament in the context of Charter review, we should in general resist efforts by others to confuse the discussion of contemporary issues by connecting them too directly with their long-term Charter review aspects. However, the UK has indicated that it might attempt to avoid debate at this session on membership by referring to the possibilities inherent in Charter revision. While we can refer to the opportunity we will all have later to reexamine Article 4 as well as all other articles, we should in no way anticipate or prejudice any position we may wish to take later on this matter.

comment

1. The Secretary’s Boston Speech³ plus his anticipated references to Charter review in his statement in the general debate will create an atmosphere of great curiosity as to U.S. positions regarding Charter revision, and will, in the light of the Dutch item, stimulate other governments to think and probably speak on the subject.⁴ Since the U.S. has not reached any final policy decisions other than to favor the calling in 1955 of a subsequent review conference, an effort may be necessary to forestall substantive debate on such favorite topics as the veto, etc. Prior consultation will be necessary with friendly delegations to reach agreement that at this early stage the problem is purely procedural. The most authentic statement of the atmosphere in which the U.S. is thinking about the problem is contained in the Secretary’s statement to the press on September 3 (State Department Press release no. 474), and this line should be used extensively in preliminary discussions as well as in our statement in committee.

1. Master files of the Reference and Documents Section of the Bureau of International Organization Affairs.
2. Brackets in the source text. Position paper not printed. The Argentine item proposed that the Secretary-General of the United Nations compile and publish a documentary record of the practice of U.N. organs (a legislative history of the drafting and application of the articles of the Charter).
3. Reference is to the address made before the American Bar Association at Boston on Aug. 26, 1953, entitled “U.S. Constitution and U.N. Charter: An Appraisal.” See the editorial note, supra.
4. For the Dulles address to the General Assembly on Sept. 17, 1953, see Department of State Bulletin, September 28, 1953, pp. 403–408. The section on Charter revision is on p. 407. Dulles emphasized the interest of the U.S. Senate in Charter review, because of the veto problem. He also solicited the views of nonmembers of the UN (excluded because of the Soviet veto) on Charter revision.