Verbatim Minutes THE NINTH PLENARY SESSION LORD HALIFAX (presiding officer): Fellow delegates, Our principal business tonight is to hear the final reports of the Steering Committee and the four Commissions of the Conference and to vote upon the documents which have been drafted as the result of two months of work. Before proceeding to the main work of the evening, however, we have one or two items of business to attend to. I would first like to call the attention of the delegates to the memorandum of June 24 from the International Secretariat as to removal of Conference documents from the restricted category. The Secretariat, I think, has dis Ninth Plenary Session. tributed this memorandum to all delegations, and it has asked that the Conference in plenary session approve the recommendations that the documents there listed be removed from the restricted category and thereby be made available for publication. Does any delegate have an comment or question on this recommendation? There being none, the recommendation is approved. The next item of business is the report of the Credentials Committee. The Chair recognizes M. Le Gallais, chairman of the delegation of Luxembourg, and chairman of the Credentials Committee, who will deliver the report of that Committee. I would ask Mr. Le Gallais to step to the speaker's platform. Report of Credentials Committee MR. LE GALLAIS: Mr. Chairman, I present the report of the second meeting of the Credentials Committee. The Credentials Committee held its second meeting on June 22, 1945, at 11 a.m., attended by the representatives of the delegations of Luxembourg, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yugoslavia. It met for two purposes: first, to examine the credentials of the representatives of Argentina, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Denmark, and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic; and second, to examine the full powers for the signature of the final Conference documents which had been deposited subsequent to the first meeting of the Credentials Committee, held on April 28, 1945. The governments of Argentina, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had been invited by the Conference at its plenary sesson of April 30, 1945, to participate in these sessions, and the Government of Denmark had been issued a similar invitation on June 5, 1945. The Committee found to be in good order the credentials of the delegations of Argentina, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Denmark, and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. It, therefore, recommends that these credentials be accepted and that the representatives named therein be granted full status at the Conference. The Committee also found to be in good order the full powers deposited since the meeting of the Committee on Ninth Plenary Session . . . April 28, 1945, by the following delegations: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Greece, India, Iran, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Philippine Commonwealth, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of South Africa, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the United Kingdom. The Committee reports, therefore, that all of the fifty governments participating in the Conference have now empowered one or more members of their respective delegations as indicated in the attached list to sign the final documents of the Conference. LORD HALIFAX: Fellow Delegates, you have heard the report of the Credentials committee. Is there any comment or objection? There being no objection, the report is approved. We now come to the report of the first Commission of the Conference. I would like to ask the officers of the Commission, if they will, to come to the speaker's platform: the President, Mr. Henri Rolin of Belgium; the Rapporteur, Mr. Francisco A. Delgado of the Philippine Commonwealth; the Assistant Secretary-General, Mr. Charles H. Maliki of Lebanon, and the Executive Officer, Mr. Malcolm Davis. The chair recognizes the Rapporteur of the first Commission, Mr. Francisco A. Delgado. Report of the First Commission RAPPORTEUR (Mr. Delgado): Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, the following is a condensation of Document 1142: Commission I at its first, second, and third meetings, on June 14, 15, and 19, gave consideration to the work of Committee I/1 dealing with Preamble, Purposes, and Principles. The Commission approved the report of the Committee's Rapporteur, Mr. Farid Zeineddine of Syria (Doc. 944, as supplemented by Doc. 1070) with minor exceptions as noted below. The Commission at its first meeting on June 14 unanimously accepted the Preamble as submitted by Committee I/1. However, there was expression of the general feeling reiterated at the Commission's second meeting on June 15 that the phraseology of the Preamble needed to be improved and simplified. Article 1 of Chapter I was scrutinized by the Commission at its first session. After debate on a proposal by the delegation of Egypt to transpose and insert in the first clause the phrase concerning the principles of justice and international law, the Commission unanimously approved the original text of Paragraph 1 of Chapter I as submitted by Committee I/1. At the Commission's second session on June 15, articles 2, 3, and 4 of Chapter I received unanimous approbation. The Peruvian delegate made a declaration with reference to Article 1 of Chapter II, as submitted by Committee I/1, stressing the belief of his delegation that this Article should have contained a reference to the "personality of states." He likewise expressed misgivings as to the meaning of the phrase "sovereign equality," to which the rapporteur of Committee I/1 replied with a full review of the ideas as comprised in the Committee's discussions of the phrase. Article 1 as submitted by the Committee was unanimously adopted. Under Article 2 of Chapter II an amendment proposed by the Colombian delegation was adopted unanimously to include in the provision that Members shall fulfill the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the Charter, the words "in good faith." The Commission thereupon approved the Article with the Colombian amendment. Article 3 of Chapter II as submitted by Committee I/1 was approved unanimously. The delegate of New Zealand, in commenting on Article 4 of Chapter II as submitted by the Committee, recalled that his delegation had sought to amplify the Article by the phraseology "all members of the Organization undertake collectively to resist any aggression against any Member," and that in the Committee this proposal, while falling short by a few votes of the required two thirds, did have in its favor a substantial majority which could not be ignored. Article 4, as well as Articles 5, 6, and 7 of Chapter II, as submitted by Committee I/1 was thereupon unanimously adopted by the Commission. At its third meeting on June 19, Commission I considered the text of Article 8 of Chapter II as approved by Committee I/1. The delegates of Uruguay and Belgium explained their attitudes toward this Article as based on the belief in the rule of international law as a criterion of what matters were within the scope of domestic jurisdiction. The Belgian delegate was satisfied that the text would not interfere with the settlement of disputes by the International Court of Justice or other tribunals on the basis of international law. The Peruvian delegate requested that it be noted in the report that the Peruvian Delegation, as well as a number of other delegations, had proposed that the International Court of Justice should determine whether a matter pertained to domestic jurisdiction. Following these explanations, article 8 of Chapter II was adopted by the Commission. At its third and fourth meetings on June 19, Commission I also considered the work of Committee I/2 concerning Membership, Principal Organs, Secretariat, and Amendments. The Commission approved the reports of the Committee's two Rapporteurs: that of M. Gerard E. Lescot of Haiti, on Membership (doc. 1178), and those of Sayyid Jamil Daoud of Saudi Arabia, on Principal Organs (doc. 1072), on the Secretariat (doc. 1155), and on Amendments (doc. 1154). The text of Chapter III, as recommended by Committee I/2, and adopted by Commission I, consists of provisions for original membership, admission of new members, suspension, and expulsion. Original Members, it is quite clear, will be those signatories which ratify the Charter. New Members will be admitted only if they are recognized as peace-loving, accept the obligations contained in the Charter, and, upon scrutiny by the Organization, are adjudged able and ready to carry out those obligations. With respect to the admission of new Members, Com mission I approved by acclamation the following interpretative commentary submitted on June 19 by the delegation of Mexico and supported by the delegations of France, Australia, Belgium, Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, United States, Uruguay, Guatemala, and Chile. "It is the understanding of the delegation of Mexico that Paragraph 2 of Chapter III cannot be applied to the states whose regimes have been established with the help of military forces belonging to the countries which have waged war against the United Nations, as long as those regimes are in power." The Commission accepts the principles of suspension and expulsion recommended by Committee I/2. The Organization may apply the provision on suspension to any Member of the Organization against which preventive or enforcement action shall have been taken by the Security Council. This provision forsees the restoration of the exercise of the rights and privileges of the suspended Member. As regards the principle of explusion, Commission I envisages its application only in exceptional circumstances against any Member which persistently violates the principles contained in the Charter. The Commission did not recommend any text on withdrawal for inclusion in the Charter. However, the absence of such a clause was not intended to impair the right of withdrawal under certain exceptional circumstances. Consequently, Commission I includes the following commentary on withdrawal: "The Committee adopts the view that the Charter should not make express provision either to permit or to prohibit withdrawal from the Organization. The Committee deems that the highest duty of the nations which will become Members is to continue their co-operation within the Organization, for the preservation of international peace and security. If, however, a Member because of exceptional circumstances feels constrained to withdraw, and leave the burden of maintaining international peace and security on the other Members, it is not the purpose of the Organization to compel that Member to continue its co-operation in the Organization. "It is obvious, however, that withdrawal or some other forms of dissolution of the Organization would become inevitable if, deceiving the hopes of humanity, the Organization was revealed to be unable to maintain peace or could do so only at the expense of law and justice. "Nor would it be the purpose of the Organization to compel a Member to remain in the Organization if its rights and obligations as such were changed by Charter amendment in which it has not concurred and which it finds itself unable to accept, or if an amendment duly accepted by the necessary majority in the Assembly or in a general conference fails to secure the ratification necessary to bring such amendment into effect. "It is for these considerations that the Committee has decided to abstain from recommending insertion in the Charter of a formal clause specifically forbidding or permitting withdrawal." Paragraph I of Chapter IV enumerates the principal organs thus: a General Assembly, a Security Council, an Economic and Social Council, a Trusteeship Council, and International Court of Justice, and a Secretariat. The second and third paragraphs respectively establish the constitutional authority for the creation of subsidiary agencies and assures that the Organization shall not discriminate between men and women in their eligibility to participate in any capacity on equal conditions in the principle of the subsidiary organs of the Organization. The lady delegates graciously led the discussion on this last topic. The Commission recommends the text for the Chapter on the Secretariat as submitted by Committee I/2, con stituting in the words of the Canadian delegate a "Charter for an international civil service." It provides for a Secretariat comprising a Secretary-General, who will be appointed by the General Assembly upon nomination by the Security Council, and such staff as may be required. Significantly, the Secretary-General is empowered to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which, in his opinion, might threaten international peace and security; additional paragraphs of the Chapter assure independent international character, the highest standards of efficiency, competence, integrity, and broad geographical representation in the staff. The Chapter on Amendments concludes the task of Commission I. On this subject the Commission held that the Charter should neither impose undue rigidity nor permit dangerous instability. Consequently the procedures for amendment which the Commission recommends follow a sound middle course. The text recommended by Commission I provides that a two-thirds majority of the Assembly may adopt an amendment to the Charter and this amendment will come into force when it is ratified in accordance with their respective constitutional processes by two thirds of the Members of the Organization including all of the permanent Members of the Security Council. Taking cognizance of the facts that the Charter being prepared at San Francisco could not be perfect and that the delegates could not foresee all eventual developments in international affairs, Commission I recommends for inclusion in the Charter provisions for a special conference on the revision of the Charter. This conference may be held at a date and place to be fixed by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly with the concurrence of any seven Members of the Security Council. It is also provided that in case the conference is not held before the tenth annual meeting of the Assembly following the entry into force of the Charter, the proposal to call such a conference is to be placed on the agenda of that meeting of the Assembly and the conference may be called by a simple majority of the Assembly with the concurrence of any seven Members of the Security Council. The procedure for ratification of the revisions which might result from such a conference would be the same as for ordinary amendments. During the discussion of the proposal for a special conference on the Charter, the Turkish delegation suggested that it be held in the City of San Francisco in recognition of the excellent manner in which the present Conference was managed by the Government of the United States of America, and in gratitude for the great hospitality shown by the State of California and the inhabitants of this City by the Golden Gate. The suggestion met then, and is meeting right now, with general approval. And now, Mr. President, with your permission, may I say just one or two words of thanks and appreciation. The Philippine delegation appreciates to the full the honor shown the Commonwealth of the Philippines by this Conference and the presiding officers thereof in electing one of its members the Rapporteur of Commission I. The Philippine delegation sincerely appreciates the honor conferred upon it and it is fully appreciative of the very kindly treatment and spirit of co-operation shown by each and every delegation to this Conference. We have learned to like you so much that we actually hate to part from you. This spirit of fellowship, of almost brotherhood developed in this Conference, is in itself a great achievement and a great step forward toward that goal that should be the goal of all good peoples, the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God We also desire to extend our appreciation to the pre siding officers and other officials of the Commission for their tact, their impartiality, and their kindness to us in every way and under all circumstances and to the members of the Secretariat,-from the Secretary-General to the last messenger girl-who have been so kind and ever-ready to help and who have carried a good deal of the burden of this Conference. We wish to include, of course, our good interpreters, to whom we extend our thanks also. To the officials and the people of the State of California and to the inhabitants of the City of San Francisco, we wish to say au revoir. We shall be back again. Finally, Mr. President, to the Government of the United States of America and to the great American people who made it possible for this Conference to meet, and who have made it possible for us from the Philippine Commonwealth to attend, we extend our sincere gratitude and appreciation. LORD HALIFAX: Thank you very much Sr. Delgado. Ladies and Gentlemen, you have heard the statement of the Rapporteur of the first Commission concerning his report, a copy of which I think has been in your hands. Is there any comment or objection concerning that report of the first Commission? The Chair recognizes the delegate of the Soviet Union. MR. GROMYKO: Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Soviet delegation deem it necessary to make to the plenary session of the Conference the following statement: In the report of the Rapporteur of Committee I/2 on Chapter XI (doc. 1154, June 22, 1945), the text of the Declaration on Withdrawal contains the following statement: "The Committee deems that the highest duty of the nations which will become Members is to continue their co-operation within the Organization for the preservation of international peace and security. If. however, a Member because of exceptional circumstances feels constrained to withdraw, and leave the burden of maintaining international peace and security on the other Members, it is not the purpose of the Organization to compel that Member to continue its co-operation in the Organization." The Soviet delegation feel that the expression "and leave the burden of maintaining international peace and security on the other Members," contained in the abovecited phrase of the Report, is defective and in no way can the delegation agree to it. The opinion of the Soviet delegation is that it is wrong to condemn beforehand the grounds on which any state might find it necessary to exercise its right of withdrawal from the Organization. Such right is an expression of state sovereignty and should not be reviled, in advance, by the International Organization. May I cite as an example of unconditional acknowledg ment of this right of sovereign states Article 17 of the Constitution of U.S.S.R., which reads as follows: "To every Union Republic is reserved the right freely to secede from U.S.S.R." It is common knowledge that this right is a most striking manifestation of democracy on which the organization of the Soviet State is founded. The U.S.S R. is formed on the basis of voluntary accession to the Union with a right of free withdrawal from it. It would be still less justifiable to condemn in advance the reasons for a state's withdrawal from the International Organization, which is also founded on voluntary participation of sovereign states. To deny or to revile such a right would be a violation of principles of democracy and of sovereignty. Further the same paragraph of the above-mentioned Report states: "It is obvious, however, that withdrawal or some other form of dissolution of the Organization would become inevitable if, deceiving the hopes of humanity, the Organization was revealed to be unable to maintain peace or could do so only at the expense of law and justice." The Soviet delegation cannot agree to this assertion either. The presence of the above-cited sentence in an official document of the Conference can only discredit the International Organization, since it makes the Organization responsible for any withdrawal by any state, regardless of the motives of such withdrawal. The Soviet delegation have already expressed their opinion on this matter, but unfortunately due weight was not given their arguments. Therefore the Soviet delegation reaffirming their point of view deem it necessary to make this statement to the plenary session and request that their statement be attached to the record of this session. LORD HALIFAX: Are there any other observations? The Ninth Plenary Session . . . statement that the delegate of the Soviet Union has made will, of course, be attached as he requests to the record of the plenary session. Are there any other observations? There being none, the Report is approved. Before the officers of that Commission resume their seats, I should like, if I may, on behalf of our body, to express our appreciation to them and to the members of the first Commission for the help that they have given to the work of the Conference. We now pass, Ladies and Gentlemen, to the report of the Second Commission. I will ask the officers of the Second Commission kindly to come forward and take their places: the President, Field Marshal Jan Christian Smuts of the Union of South Africa; the Rapporteur, Dr. Ricardo Alfaro of Panama; the Assistant Secretary-General, Mr. C. L. Simpson of Liberia; and the Executive Officer, Mr. Huntington Gilchrist. The Chair will now recognize Dr. Ricardo Alfaro, the Rapporteur. Report of the Second Commission RAPPORTEUR (Mr. Alfaro): Mr. Chairman, Fellow Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen: Commission II has had the privilege and the honor of functioning under the Presidency of Field Marshal Jan Christian Smuts, that great elder statesman of the Conference, who, I will tell you confidentially, would beat any of us in a race to the top of Tamalpais, and whom we will always remember, and future generations will also remember and admire and render tribute to, as the author of the inspiring Preamble of the Charter by which we expect to organize a world of right and peace. This Commission has covered a wider range of subject matter than that of any other Commission of the Conference. Three of the six principal organs of the United Nations Organization will be established pursuant to the recommendations of Commission II, namely, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, and the Trusteeship Council. The organ of widest jurisdiction among the three treated by Commission II is, of course, the General Assembly. The structure and procedures of the Assembly are the subject of recommendations of Committee 1 under the chairmanship of His Excellency Hasan Saka, Foreign Minister of Turkey. Its functions and powers were treated by Committee 2, presided over by His Excellency Victor Andrade, Ambassador of Bolivia to the United States. Most of the Commission's work was in fact done by the committees and done so thoroughly that only one text recommended for insertion in the Charter was altered during the Commission stage of our proceedings. The General Assembly, upon which each Member of the United Nations will be represented and in which each Member will have one vote, will be-to quote Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg, member of the United States delegation-the "town meeting of the world." It will be empowered to discuss any questions or matters falling within the scope of the Charter, or relating to the powers and functions of any organ provided in the Charter. It is the recommendation of Commission I that the meetings of the General Assembly, except in extraordinary cases, be open to the public and to the press of the world. Thus, in the clear light of public scrutiny, the town meeting of the world may consider problems of universal import to the end that peace and security may be preserved. Except in the case of situations which are being dealt with by the Security Council in discharge of its special responsibilities for taking action to preserve the peace, the General Assembly will have authority not only to discuss these great problems, but to make recommendations concerning them to the Security Council or to the member Governments, or both. The Economic and Social Council, which is the subject of a report by Committee 3, presided over by Sir A. Ramaswami Mudaliar, Supply Member of the Governor General's Executive Council of India, breaks new ground. Economic and social co-operation at the international level was hardly mentioned in the Covenant of the League of Nations, although within its power; the League, nevertheless, succeeded in making some valuable contributions in these fields. In the Charter of the United Nations, on the other hand, the subject has been thought to be of such importance that two chapters are devoted to it. It should be noted, furthermore, that the Organization has set itself the task not only of facilitating the solution of international problems in the economic, social and related fields, but its statement of purposes goes beyond that by enlisting the co-operation of the Members of the Organization in seeking the achievement of positive goals. These goals include higher standards of living, full employment, conditions of economic and social progress and development, and the universal respect for the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms. In promoting effective co-operation for these purposes, the Economic and Social Council may, under the supervision of the General Assembly, be expected to become, in the course of time, one of the principal instruments for the organization of the peace. The San Francisco Conference will go down in history as the first world congress where it is definitely recognized and established by the sovereign will of fifty nations that the individual, just as the state, is a subject of international law. Committee 4, under the Chairmanship of the Right Honorable Peter Fraser, Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs of New Zealand, recommended a system of international trusteeship which might be applied to certain dependent territories. This is a subject which had not even been mentioned in the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals. Territories in three different categories may be placed under the system by subsequent individual agreements between the states concerned and strategic areas therein may be designated and treated separately. The General Assembly and the Trusteeship Council, as well as the adminstering states, will be charged with special responsibilities for the welfare of the inhabitants of the trust territories. The Security Council will have supervision over strategic areas. But the Charter goes further: for the first time in history it includes in a world-wide treaty, a Declaration setting forth general policy concerning the administration of territories inhabited by peoples who have not yet attained a full measure of self-government. This is based upon recognition of the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of non-self-governing territories are paramount. Those of the United Nations which administer these territories accept as a sacred trust the obligation to insure to the inhabitants of these territories their political, economic, social, and educational advancement as well as their just treatment and their protection against abuses; to develop self-government, to take account of their political aspirations, and finally to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions. Each of the Committees reported the results of its labors in its rapporteur's report, and each report was considered and approved by the Commission. The reports of the rapporteurs of the four technical committees constitute integral parts of the report of the Rapporteur of Commission II, which has been circulated to you and which I have the honor hereby to submit to the plenary session for its consideration and approval. Ninth Plenary Session . . . Permit me, Fellow Delegates, in conclusion, to express my personal opinion that when this Commission shall have in this manner stated its will that the Articles it has approved be incorporated into the Charter, we shall have taken a step forward in the attainment of our goal, a world free from fear, a world of peace and freedom, of honor and dignity, of law and justice. LORD HALIFAX: Thank you very much, Dr. Alfaro. You have had an opportunity, Ladies and Gentlemen, to examine the Report of the Rapporteur on which he has just made that most valuable comment. Do I hear any comment or objection to the adoption of the Report? There being no objection, the Report of the Rapporteur of the Second Commission is approved. Before we leave the Second Commission, I am sure that I express the feelings of all delegates in extending out thanks to the officers and the members of the Second Commission for all the work that they have done in formulating provisions that will concern so closely the life of the future Assembly. We now pass, Ladies and Gentlemen, to the Report of the Third Commission, concerning the Security Council. The officers of this Commission are: the President, Ambassador Wilhelm M. Morgenstierne of Norway; the Rapporteur, Ambassador Celso R. Velazquez of Paraguay; the Assistant Secretary-General, Ambassador Julian Caceres of Honduras, and the Executive Officer, Mr. Grayson Kirk. Will these gentlemen be good enough to come to the speaker's platform? The Chair is glad to recognize the Rapporteur of the Third Commission, Ambassador Velazquez. Report of the Third Commission RAPPORTEUR (Mr. Velazquez): Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen. This is a summary of my report to the plenary session. The task assigned to Commission III consisted of the preparation of draft provisions on four principal topics relating to the maintenance of international peace and security. These were: the structure and functioning of the Security Council; the determination of procedures for the pacific settlement of international disputes; the methods to be used by the United Nations for the enforcement of peace and security; and, finally, consideration of the regional arrangements which might serve as a useful complement to the central Organization. Each of these topics was assigned to a technical committee, the documentation of which consisted of the original Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, together with the amendments of the sponsoring governments and those submitted by the various national delegations. After a total of 72 meetings, these four Committees submitted the reports of their respective rapporteurs to the Commission, and it is a source of gratification to be able to announce that their reports, which have already been distributed, and which are an integral part of this report, were all approved by the Commission without any opposing votes and without abstentions except in a few instances. Though several delegations explained to the Commission the motives which had led them to oppose the views which had prevailed on certain points in the committees, they did not press their opposition farther by seeking to have the Commission reverse decisions already taken. It may be noted also for the purpose of the record that no amendments were offered in the Commission meetings either to the texts adopted by the committees or to the Rapporteur's reports thereon. In short, the sessions of the Commission were characterized by a spirit of unity and cordiality which is a hopeful augury for the future of the great Organization which we have labored to produce in the San Francisco Conference. Within the sessions of Commission III, the fifty nations were truly united. Let us hope that they will remain so! The methods to be used for the promotion of pacific settlement and, if necessary, for the use of force to prevent or repress threats to the peace have been described fully in the Committee's reports and they have been summarized in my full Report, the text of which has been distributed. It might be noted that the central feature of the system is the concentration of responsibility in a small Security Council of 11 members. The five great powers are to have permanent seats on the body, and the non-permanent members are to be chosen by the Assembly. The voting procedure, which was decided after long and intensive discussion, is that which was agreed upon at the Yalta Conference. It is the view of the Commission that the security arrangements, which have been incorporated in the relevant sections of the final text of the Charter, constitute as a whole a sound foundation for the future. An attempt has been made to harmonize power with responsibility, and there has been full recognition of the fact that certain states, by virtue of their immense strength, must necessarily assume the major burden for the security enforcement. However, the general guiding principle is that, within a framework of common obligations and stated principles, the various members, large and small, will assume those responsibilities which they are respectively best fitted to discharge in the common cause. |