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

UNP files, lot 59 D 237, “Membership”

Memorandum by Elizabeth Brown of the Office of United Nations Political and Security Affairs

confidential

[Washington,] October 6, 1954.

Summary of Reactions to US Proposals for Non-Member Participation in UNGA

Reactions to our non-member participation proposal, from both qualified applicants and Members, as indicated in the attached, detailed survey, have not been encouraging.

1. Out of the fourteen applicants we consider eligible under our proposal, only three (Japan, Jordan, ROK) are interested. Five (Cambodia, Ceylon, Laos, Libya, Nepal, Vietnam) have not responded. It is clear that three (Italy, Austria, Portugal) are entirely negative, and informal reactions from the remaining two (Ireland, Finland) indicate they will also be negative.

2. We have reactions, mainly preliminary and informal, from twenty-six delegations. Of the eight Latin American states approached, three (Peru, Mexico, El Salvador) favored the plan, and one other (Colombia) probably would support it. The two Far Eastern states consulted promised reactions later. In the British Commonwealth, the United Kingdom is strongly opposed on legal grounds, and we have no final reactions from the others, though Canada, Australia and New Zealand appear somewhat intrigued by the idea. Only one (Belgium) of three Western Europeans consulted seemed favorably disposed. The reaction of the Near and Middle Eastern states has been generally noncommittal, except that Greece and Turkey seem inclined to support the plan.

[Attachment]

confidential

[Washington,] October 6, 1954.

Reactions to US Proposal for Non-Member Participation in UNGA

a. attitudes of qualified applicants

1. Austria

Official reply negative on basis might prejudice full membership later and proposal had aspect of “second-class citizenship” in UN.

2. Cambodia

No response.

3. Ceylon

No response.

4. Finland

Finnish observer was “confident it would not be in the Finnish interest to accept anything short of full membership.”

5. Ireland

Foreign Office comments informally it will probably favor the plan and also states new Irish Government has reached no decision as to its attitude toward UN, but will be influenced by the attitudes of Italy and the Vatican.

6. Italy

Opposed.

7. Japan

Japanese observer indicated his Government favored the proposal

8. Jordan

Preliminary reaction favorable.

9. ROK

Enthusiastic.

10. Laos

No response.

11. Libya

Under-Secretary approached in Benghazi who promised give us reaction and indicated Libyan intention to resubmit application for full membership.

12. Nepal

No response.

13. Portugal

Not interested in proposal. However, Embassy expressed view Portugal would go along if other qualified nations accepted.

14. Vietnam

No response.

b. attitudes of others

1. Latin American States

Peru—Without instructions but reacted favorably and urged US to press proposal.

Argentina—Would support only as a second best approach and then would favor making the participation as full and formal as possible, even to the point of making the states “members of the GA.”

Mexico—Reacted favorably, emphasizing necessity for developing a firm legal basis for such GA action.

El Salvador—Extremely enthusiastic and would like to help in every possible way.

Brazil—Initially non-committal, indicating legal aspects would have to be considered with great care. Subsequently instructed that Foreign Office took a dim view, feeling plan was legally doubtful, and questioning desirability of establishing second-class membership. However, would pursue the matter with us when we had concrete proposal to show them.

Venezuela—Personal and informal reaction that idea of “second-class” membership highly unsatisfactory and gives idea that full membership being abandoned, as well as provides USSR with propaganda point alleging US circumvention of the Charter.

Nicaragua—Generally negative along same lines as Venezuela but raised question of what might be done to include Spain and Western Germany.

Colombia—Favorable to anything in direction of bringing non-members into the organization but said it would be a good idea to make sure that such a measure would be passed by GA before introducing it.

2. Far Eastern States

Burma—Promised to give us views later.

Indonesia—Promised views later but did not seem very strongly interested.

3. British Commonwealth

Australia—Ambassador Spender’s interest in 1952 noted but recalled that official Australian position negative. However, Mr. Casey found no objection but was referring matter to Canberra.

Canada—Was interested in exploring matter but Ottawa generally cautious, with some legal doubts. Inquired whether any consideration had been given to requesting ICJ opinion on legality and seemed to have some concern over fact that plan would benefit one group of non-members over another.

Australia—Ambassador Spender’s interest in 1952 noted but recalled that official Australian position negative. However, Mr. Casey found no objection but was referring matter to Canberra.New Zealand—Found proposal interesting and promised to refer it to his Government. Some question as to whether non-members would wish to be put in position of having to vote on certain matters and whether arrangement sufficiently attractive to offset financial obligations involved.

Union of South Africa—Full membership or nothing, and while promising to consult Government predicted a negative response.

United Kingdom—Cannot support. Doubted legality and suggested desirability of ICJ reference, indicating that if the US is willing to submit it to Court and it finds plan legal, the UK will be prepared to consider whether the plan is politically feasible or desirable. Moreover, important non-members are not interested.

4. Western Europe

Belgium—If applicants reacted favorably and US sponsored the resolution, would undoubtedly support it.

Netherlands—Doubted legality and whether European non-members would participate.

France—Preliminary Foreign Office reaction not favorable.

5. Near and Middle East

Syria—Some interest.

Israel—Considerable interest but noncommittal.

Iran—Probably no objection if no states mentioned and that is left up to GA for decision.

Iraq—Noncommittal but willing to study further.

Turkey—Favorably disposed and promised further reaction.

Greece—No objection.

India—Japanese observer indicated to USUN that India would favor some sort of arrangement permitting greater non-member participation in UN.

Ethiopia—Promised views later but questioned legal basis and wondered about the practical effect of such a plan.