Office of the Historian

362. Memorandum of Conversation1

Washington, August 2, 1965, 5:05 p.m.

SUBJECT

  • Article 19

PARTICIPANTS

  • The Secretary
  • Thomas M. Judd, EUR/BNA
  • Sir Patrick Dean, British Ambassador
  • Nigel C.C. Trench, Counselor, British Embassy

Ambassador Dean inquired as to the current U.S. views on the Article 19 controversy. Secretary Rusk informed him that we were willing to concede that Article 19 cannot be applied at this time. This would apply not only to peacekeeping operations but to all operations of the UN. If, for instance, the UN membership wished to launch a costly UNCTAD program with which we did not agree, we should be in a position where we could refuse to participate. The French and the Soviets should not be the only ones who could decide when they would participate and when they would not.

Ambassador Dean asked if the U.S. would make a voluntary contribution. The Secretary replied that we probably would not. It would depend on what the others did. We might be prepared to contribute on the basis of an assessment to refinance the UN.

The Secretary went on to say that if the General Assembly wished to give up its prerogatives, that was for the General Assembly to decide. He reiterated the U.S. view that if the USSR and France were to be given the privilege of nonpayment for what they objected to, the U.S. would want the same privilege.

  1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, United Nations, Article 19, Vol. 2. Confidential. Drafted by Judd and approved in S on August 10. The memorandum is Part 2 of 3. The meeting was held in the Secretary’s office.↩