330/8–950: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
niact
[Received August 9—2:58 p. m.]
240. We have carefully considered following alternatives for dealing with SC for remainder August beginning Thursday afternoon, August 10.
- 1.
- Do nothing but reply to Malik’s attacks.
- 2.
- Continue drive for procedural decisions having objective to clear agenda for S/1653 (US resolution localization conflict).1 This involves “sweating out” August on procedural rows interspersed with substantive statements.
- 3.
- Establishment committee of whole under rule 28 to consider and recommend on complaint of aggression upon ROK. Such committee would elect own chairman and report to SC September 1.
- 4.
- Adjournment for remainder of month of August.
- 5.
- Amendment rule 18 in order eject Malik from chair and elect new chairman.
- 6.
- Special session GA.
We strongly favor number 3. Number 2 is bad alternative for following reasons:
- a.
- Continuation through month August of proceedings last ten days would play into hands Russians who, despite daily victories we may have won, have achieved objectives (1) paralyzing and demeaning Council; (2) using Council as effective sounding board, particularly in Asia.
- b.
- Continuation of present procedure but in addition using every opportunity available to us and to our friends to make substantive statement would (1) increase paralysis SC; (2) improve Malik’s propaganda position; (3) increase difficulty maintaining solidarity our friends; (4) impair our moral position which is one of our strongest assets; (5) give victory in fact to Malik on not seating ROK representative; (6) involve protracted and embarrassing discussion seating North Koreans, Chinese Communists; (7) prevent progress towards vote on Korea; (8) involve great damage SC machinery and prestige by demonstrating ability Russians to tie it up; (9) enlist public support here and abroad for Hoover proposal as irritation increases.
We strongly favor number three for following reasons:
- a.
- It would extricate us from procedural morass we are now in which is very advantageous to Malik and disadvantageous to us.
- b.
- It would provide us with opportunity to regain by legal means substantive initiative we effectively seized July 31 by introduction our localization resolution (S/1653) but which we lost to Malik during last ten days; under this procedure he would be forced to take position on localization resolution.
- c.
- Re-assert the authority and competence of SC.
- d.
- Give us opportunity to reply legally to Malik’s propaganda speeches.
- e.
- By acting within rules do least violation of established procedure of Council, having regard to disorderly precedents now being established which Soviet will exploit in months to come.
- We recognize effort to establish rule 28 committee might involve us in double veto; we feel, however, that there is no reason to be afraid of this.
Foregoing, of course, is subject to consultations. We would contemplate, if possible, getting nine or ten sponsors motion to establish committee. We have in mind possibility giving Malik “last clear chance” by renewing, this time sponsored by ten members Council, point of order that President is requested by decision SC of June 25 to invite representative of ROK to table prior to transaction any other business. If Malik still dodges issue by refusing to give rule or otherwise seat them, contemplate introduction motion to establish committee.
Meeting with other delegates 4:30 p. m. today.