CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 17
M. Vyshinsky referred to Article I, Paragraph 3 of the Rules of Procedure concerning the composition and work of the Commission.11 He interpreted the provision dealing with the membership of the Political-Territorial Commissions to mean that those commissions would consist of member states who were at war respectively with the enemy states in question. In interpreting the phrase “members of the Council who prepared the draft treaties”, he referred to the decisions taken at the Berlin and Moscow Conferences which laid down the procedure for the preparation of draft treaties by the states which signed the respective armistices. Thus under the strict application of these rules France would be excluded from membership on the Rumanian Commission since France was not at war with Rumania and the preparation of the draft treaties was limited by the Moscow Agreement to the U.K., the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. The Soviet Delegation was willing, however, that France should participate in the discussions of the Commission on the same footing as it took part in the preparation of the treaties in the Council of Foreign Ministers, that is, France would have a full part in the discussion but would not have the right to vote.
Mr. Jordon (New Zealand) sharply attacked the Soviet Delegation for continually wasting the time of the Conference and preventing the Commissions from getting down to work. Mr. Jebb (U.K.) said that the Commission had met for the sole purpose of electing officers and that the Soviet statement was out of order. The proper place to raise the question was the Plenary Conference or the Committee on Procedure. General Catroux (France) said he would not attempt to answer M. Vyshinsky at the moment and believed that the Commission should go ahead with the business before it.
Mr. Cohen (U.S.) agreed with those delegations which had stated that the question raised by M. Vyshinsky should not be taken up in substance by the Commission. Without entering into a discussion of the substance, the U.S. Delegation wished to give notice that it did not interpret the rules of procedure in the same way as M. Vyshinsky. [Page 245] The only question was what members of the Council of Foreign Ministers had prepared the draft treaties? Reference to the draft treaties themselves would indicate that France had taken an active part in their preparation. There was no question, in the opinion of the U.S. Delegation, that France had the right to membership in the present Commission. There was nothing in the rules of procedure to distinguish between types of members. M. Vyshinsky maintained that his statement had been quite in order since it was a question of interpreting the rules of procedure affecting the Commission in which they were sitting. The Soviet Delegation reserved the right to return to the question at an appropriate time. He said that the charge that the Soviet Delegation was delaying the work of the Conference was unjustified and that his Delegation would never submit to angry words.
The Commission then unanimously elected M. Manuilsky (Ukraine) as Chairman and Sir Navroji Jehangir Wadia as Vice Chairman.
It was agreed at the next meeting to begin the discussion of the Rumanian Draft Treaty article by article.
- For text of the Rules of Procedure, see vol. iv, p. 796.↩