Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, Paris Peace Conference: Proceedings, Volume III

CFM Files

United States Delegation Journal

September 13, 1946, 4 p.m.

USDel (PC) (Journal) 39

M. Pipinelis moved the Greek Delegation’s draft resolution whereby the Commission would request the Military Commission to give an opinion on the military aspects of the Greek territorial claim on Bulgaria.⁹⁹ A long discussion ensued on whether the Greek amendment to Article 1 was properly before the Commission. M. Novikov (U.S.S.R.) held the view that this amendment had not been submitted by August 20 and therefore, under the rules adopted by the Conference, could not be considered by the Commission.¹ The Chairman said that the Greek amendment had been presented too late and therefore had no official standing before the Commission, but that since it had actually been distributed by the Secretariat, it was up to the Commission to make what disposition it desired of it. The Soviet view was supported by the Ukrainian, Byelo-Russian and Yugoslav Delegations. M. Pijade (Yugoslavia) proposed that the Commission proceed immediately to vote on Article 1 as drafted by the Council of Foreign Ministers. Mr. Hodgson (Australia) took issue with the Soviet point of view, saying that the rules of procedure of the Conference clearly allowed the submission of amendments after August 20. M. Nosek (Czechoslovakia) said that he had the impression that the Commission was looking for an acceptable solution of the problem, and that several delegations favored the text proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers. The Czechoslovak Delegation considered it a reasonable solution.

Mr. Warner (U.K.) said that if the Chairman did not feel justified in making a ruling on whether the Greek amendment was before the Commission, the Commission itself could judge what it wished to consider. He therefore proposed that a vote be taken on the question whether the Greek amendment was before the Commission and should accordingly be discussed and voted upon. After a speech by the Ukrainian Delegation, Mr. Caffery (U.S.) invoked rule 62 and called for a closure of the debate and a vote on the proposal of the U.K. Delegation. The Chairman said that the Commission had fully discussed Article 1, but that since difficulties had arisen concerning procedure, he was going to close the meeting in order to be able to discuss with the Secretary General this complex procedural matter; on Monday the Commission would re-assemble and proceed to a vote. Mr. Caffery did not agree to the adjournment and insisted that the Commission proceed to vote on the motion of the U.K. Delegation. The Chairman said that he could not agree with Mr. Caffery, and that the meeting was closed. Mr. Hodgson (Australia) protested against the Chairman’s ruling. As Delegations began to file from the room, the Chairman said that he would appeal the matter to the five presidents of the Conference. The Chairman left the room as did all members of the Delegations of Byelo-Russia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia, The Delegations remaining in the room then called on the Vice Chairman, Brigadier Park (New Zealand) to take the chair and continue the meeting. Mr. Caffery wished to have it noted that the Commission had not supported the Chairman’s ruling and had not expressed a wish to adjourn. The Vice Chairman announced that in the present rather difficult circumstances he thought it would be advisable to adjourn. Mr. Hodgson said that the Australian Delegation wished it to be placed in the Record that the Chairman had refused to put to a vote the U.K. motion and the motion by the U.S. Delegation that the debate be closed and a vote taken; also that the Chairman had wrongly adjourned the meeting without the aproval of the Commission. The Vice Chairman said that the Australian statement would be put in the Record. The Greek Delegation requested that it also be put in the Record that eight Delegations did not agree with the decision of the Chairman. The Vice Chairman then adjourned the meeting.

99. The Greek claim was contained in C.P.(Bul/P) Doc. 9; for text, see footnote 63, p. 409. For a description of the proposed communication to the Military Commission, see C.P. (Plen) Doc. 22, Report of the Political and Territorial Commission for Bulgaria, vol. iv, p. 478.
1. Regarding the August 20 deadline, see the extract of the Verbatim Record of the 19th Plenary Meeting, August 15, p. 236. The Rules of Procedure, C.P. (Plen) Doc. 1, are printed in vol. iv, p. 796.