POLITICAL AND SECURITY PROBLEMS OLITICAL and security problems of varied character occupied the attention of the Security Council and the General Assembly during 1948. These specific problems are, for convenience in presentation, grouped into the following general categories: security problems, efforts at peaceful settlement of disputes and situations, and organizational problems of a political nature. Security Problems INTERNATIONAL CONTROL OF ATOMIC ENERGY In 1948 there were two significant developments in the United Nations negotiations for international control of atomic energy. The first was the General Assembly approval of the plan of international control developed in the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission during its two years of work. The second was the clear recognition of the impasse in these negotiations created by the refusal of the Soviet Union to accept this plan-the only workable and effective system of control it has been possible to devise. In its First Report to the Security Council, dated December 31, 1946, the Commission presented proposals and general principles with respect to the establishment of a system for the international control of atomic energy. In its Second Report, dated September 11, 1947, the Commission presented specific proposals covering the operational and developmental functions of a proposed international control agency. In voting for the "General Findings and Recommendations" of the First Report and the "Specific Proposals" of the Second Report, the General Assembly in 1948 found that these proposals constitute "the necessary basis for establishing an effective system of international control of atomic energy to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes and for the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons. in accordance with the terms of reference of the Atomic Energy Commission". In the Political and Security Committee (First Committee) of the General Assembly and in the plenary session, 46 member governments voted to approve the plan and proposals of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission for the control of atomic energy and the prohibition of atomic weapons. These governments expressed deep concern at the impasse reached in the work of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission as shown in its Third Report, which states: in the field of atomic energy, the majority of the Commission has been unable to secure the agreement of the U.S.S.R. to even those elements of effective control considered essential from the technical point of view, let alone its acceptance of the nature and extent of participation in the world community required of all nations in this field by the First and Second Reports of the Atomic Energy Commission." Only the six members of the Soviet bloc voted against these reports. Reconsideration of Soviet Proposals The Soviet Union had introduced proposals for control on June 11, 1947. These were given prolonged consideration by the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission. This consideration took place in connection with the development of the specific proposals of the Second Report and throughout a number of meetings of the Commission in 1948. On April 5, 1948, the Working Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission adopted a report analyzing these proposals which found that they "ignore the existing technical knowledge of the problem of atomic energy control, do not provide an adequate basis for the effective international control of atomic energy and the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons, and therefore, do not conform to the terms of reference of the Atomic Energy Commission." The Working Committee also concluded that "no useful purpose can be served by further discussion of these proposals in the Working Committee." Third Report of Atomic Energy Commission In the winter and spring of 1948 the majority members of the Atomic Energy Commission, after prolonged and repeated efforts, were forced to recognize that the Soviet Union was unwilling to accept any of the basic elements of control considered necessary by the majority. It became evident, in the words of the Third Report, "that agreement on effective measures for the control of atomic energy is itself dependent on co-operation in broader fields of policy." The Commission was confronted by virtually the same deadlock that stultified its initial discussions. The Commission concluded that "The failure to achieve agreement on the international control of atomic energy arises from a situation that is beyond the competence of this Commission. In this situation the Commission concludes that no useful purpose can be served by carrying on negotiations at the Commission level. "The Commission, therefore, recommends that until such time as the General Assembly finds that this situation no longer exists, or until such time as the sponsors of the General Assembly Resolution of 24 January 1946, who are the permanent members of the Atomic Energy Commission, find, through prior consultation, that there exists a basis for agreement on the international control of atomic energy, negotiations in the Atomic Energy Commission be suspended." The Commission recommended that its three reports be transmitted to the next regular session of the General Assembly "as a matter of special concern". Nine of the eleven members of the Commission, including the United States, approved these conclusions and recommendations. Security Council Consideration of Three Reports On June 22, 1948, the Security Council voted upon a resolution introduced by the United States which would have approved the plan of the Atomic Energy Commission embodied in the First and Second Reports and the recommendations, notably for suspension of the AEC work, of the Third Report. The resolution also directed the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly and the Member nations the three reports of the AEC, together with the record of the Security Council's approval thereof. Although nine members of the Security Council voted in favor of this resolution, it was vetoed by the Soviet Union. Following this vote, a Canadian resolution simply calling for a transmittal of the reports of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission to the General Assembly as a matter of special concern was adopted by a vote of nine in favor, with two abstentions (the Soviet Union and the Ukraine). General Assembly Consideration of Atomic Energy The Secretary of State, in addressing the plenary session of the General Assembly on September 23, 1948, called for the "early adoption of an international system for the control of atomic energy, providing for the elimination of atomic weapons from national armaments, for the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes only, and for safeguards to insure compliance by all nations with the necessary international measures of control." The international control of atomic energy was the first item considered by the Political and Security Committee of the General Assembly. At the first meeting of the Committee, on September 30, 1948, the Canadian Delegation introduced a resolution similar to that which had received majority support in the Security Council on June 22. The question was actively considered by the First Committee, or by a subcommittee of the First Committee, from September 30 to October 20, 1948, with the committee holding 15 meetings and the subcommittee 8 meetings. In the debate in the Political and Security Committee, Warren R. Austin, the United States Representative, pointed out that, from the day on which the first bomb was dropped, the United States had moved with speed to get international control of atomic energy in order to eliminate the menace of atomic warfare. Moreover, the offer of the United States to submit its atomic-energy resources and facilities to an effective system of international control still stands. Only through an international system of control with effective enforceable safeguards can long-term security be insured. This is why the United States is anxious for control. Ambassador Austin stated that this is a policy of the people of the United States as evidenced by actions of the Congress. The majority of members of the UNAEC agree, he said, that the international agency must own all nuclear fuel and must own, operate, and manage all atomic facilities which might endanger international security. Failure in the UNAEC to make swift progress was not due to lack of effort by the large majority of UNAEC members, but rather to Soviet Union insistence on placing its sovereignty ahead of the security and survival of all. The impasse in the UNAEC could be broken only if the overwhelming majority of the General Assembly supported the majority plan and thus aroused world opinion, which in turn would focus attention on the necessity for a new spirit of cooperation among all nations. In the committee meetings the Soviet Union was reckless in its denunciation of the majority plan of control. It then introduced a resolution stating that the activities of the Atomic Energy Commission had "not so far yielded positive results" and recommended that the Atomic Energy Commission "prepare a draft convention for the prohibition of atomic weapons and a draft convention on the establishment of effective international control over atomic energy, both the convention on the prohibition of atomic weapons and the convention on the estab |