500.A/12—3146: Telegram
The Acting United States Representative at the United Nations (Johnson) to the Secretary of State
urgent
[Received 4:52 p.m.]
1002. Paragraph 2 of Dept’s 327, December 30. In connection with the American proposal which delegation presented to the SC today,77 [Page 1107] British delegate Cadogan passed a note at the Council table to Herschel Johnson which expressed regret that the first paragraph of the American proposal called for consideration and action on the AEC report “as soon as received” (by SC).
The note stated:
“I rather regret the last phrase of your paragraph 1. I had hoped a pause might ensue before bringing the Atomic Commission report before the Council. We don’t want to rush head-on into a veto, and are we clear enough yet as to the position that might be produced by an ‘abstention’? I should have liked time for reflexion.”
At the close of today’s Council meeting, the delegation was informed by De Rose (France) and Hasluck (Australia)78 that the Council should not consider the AEC report for 3 weeks in order to give the Russians an opportunity to reflect on the AEC subcommittee’s vote yesterday, which found all members in favor of the report except Russia and Poland who abstained.79 Both De Rose and Hasluck felt that it would be better tactically not to force consideration and quick action on the AEC report but instead to give an opportunity for the implications of the vote to have an effect in Moscow.
- The reference is to the 88th Meeting of the Security Council.↩
- Paul Hasluck, Australian Representative on the Security Council; Acting Representative on the Atomic Energy Commission.↩
- The reference is to the 10th Plenary Meeting of the Atomic Energy Commission at which its report to the Security Council was adopted.↩