Ask the Scholar
Page 110 of 436
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
J. 333305-MONO-State
Galley 109
UNCORRECTED GALLEY PROOF
on the question of procedure of voting in the Security Council. I
have to remind you that in the original American draft was specially
marked the necessity to work out special rules in regard to the pro-
cedure of voting in case of a dispute which involves directly one or
several permanent members of the Council. In the British draft it
was also stated that the general order of settlement of disputes between
Great Powers, should such disputes arise, may prove unfit.
In this connection the first and second points of your proposal meet
with no objections and can be accepted, bearing in mind that point
two deals with procedure questions mentioned in Chapter 6 Sub-
division D.
As regards point three of your proposal I have, to my regret, to
inform you that with the proposed by you wording of this point
I see no possibility of agreeing. As you yourself admit the principle
of unanimity of permanent members is necessary in all decisions of
the Council in regard to determination of a threat to peace as well as
in respect to measures of elimination of such a threat or for suppres-
sion of aggression or other violations of peace. Undoubtedly, that
when decisions on questions of such a nature are made there must be
full agreement of powers which are permanent members of the Council
bearing upon themselves the main responsibility for maintenance of
peace and security.
It goes without saying that the attempt to prevent, on a certain
stage, one or several permanent members of the Council from partici-
pating in voting on said questions, and theoretically it is possible to
assume also a case when the majority of permanent members will
find themselves prevented from participation in making decisions on
a question, can have fatal consequences for the cause of preservation
of international security. Such a situation is in contradiction with
the principle of agreement and unanimity of decisions of the four
leading powers and can lead to a situation when some great powers
are put in opposition to other great powers and this may undermine
the cause of universal security. In prevention of this small countries
are interested not less than great powers since a split among great
powers, united for tasks of maintenance of peace and security for all
peace loving countries is pregnant with the most dangerous conse-
quences for all these nations.
Therefore I have to insist on our former position on the question
of voting in the Security Council. This position, as it seems to me,
will provide the new international organization with the unanimity of
four powers, contributing to avoiding of attempts to put certain powers
in opposition to other great powers which (unanimity) is necessary
for their joint fight against aggression in the future. Naturally, such
a situation would secure the interests of small nations in the cause of
preservation of their security and would correspond to the interests
of universal peace.
I hope that you will estimate the importance of the above stated
views in favor of the principle of unanimity of decisions of the four
leading powers and that we shall find an agreed upon decision of this
question as well as certain other questions which remain still unsolved.
On the basis of such an agreed upon decision our representatives
could work out a full draft on this question and discuss the measures
necessary for an early convocation of a general conference of the
United Nations.
Page data
- Page
- 110
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- 94c30c0c8703c283
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 750433
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "750433",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
"collections": [
"President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
"Subject Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"imageCount": 436,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "750433",
"label": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "750433",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Foreign Affairs File, 1940-1953: \"Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945\" (galley proofs, Part I)",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
"collections": [
"President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
"Subject Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-001.jpg",
"imageCount": 436,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/750433",
"naId": 750433,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 110,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602191/750433/750433-01-110.jpg",
"mediaId": "94c30c0c8703c283",
"ocrText": "J. 333305-MONO-State\nGalley 109\nUNCORRECTED GALLEY PROOF\non the question of procedure of voting in the Security Council. I\nhave to remind you that in the original American draft was specially\nmarked the necessity to work out special rules in regard to the pro-\ncedure of voting in case of a dispute which involves directly one or\nseveral permanent members of the Council. In the British draft it\nwas also stated that the general order of settlement of disputes between\nGreat Powers, should such disputes arise, may prove unfit.\nIn this connection the first and second points of your proposal meet\nwith no objections and can be accepted, bearing in mind that point\ntwo deals with procedure questions mentioned in Chapter 6 Sub-\ndivision D.\nAs regards point three of your proposal I have, to my regret, to\ninform you that with the proposed by you wording of this point\nI see no possibility of agreeing. As you yourself admit the principle\nof unanimity of permanent members is necessary in all decisions of\nthe Council in regard to determination of a threat to peace as well as\nin respect to measures of elimination of such a threat or for suppres-\nsion of aggression or other violations of peace. Undoubtedly, that\nwhen decisions on questions of such a nature are made there must be\nfull agreement of powers which are permanent members of the Council\nbearing upon themselves the main responsibility for maintenance of\npeace and security.\nIt goes without saying that the attempt to prevent, on a certain\nstage, one or several permanent members of the Council from partici-\npating in voting on said questions, and theoretically it is possible to\nassume also a case when the majority of permanent members will\nfind themselves prevented from participation in making decisions on\na question, can have fatal consequences for the cause of preservation\nof international security. Such a situation is in contradiction with\nthe principle of agreement and unanimity of decisions of the four\nleading powers and can lead to a situation when some great powers\nare put in opposition to other great powers and this may undermine\nthe cause of universal security. In prevention of this small countries\nare interested not less than great powers since a split among great\npowers, united for tasks of maintenance of peace and security for all\npeace loving countries is pregnant with the most dangerous conse-\nquences for all these nations.\nTherefore I have to insist on our former position on the question\nof voting in the Security Council. This position, as it seems to me,\nwill provide the new international organization with the unanimity of\nfour powers, contributing to avoiding of attempts to put certain powers\nin opposition to other great powers which (unanimity) is necessary\nfor their joint fight against aggression in the future. Naturally, such\na situation would secure the interests of small nations in the cause of\npreservation of their security and would correspond to the interests\nof universal peace.\nI hope that you will estimate the importance of the above stated\nviews in favor of the principle of unanimity of decisions of the four\nleading powers and that we shall find an agreed upon decision of this\nquestion as well as certain other questions which remain still unsolved.\nOn the basis of such an agreed upon decision our representatives\ncould work out a full draft on this question and discuss the measures\nnecessary for an early convocation of a general conference of the\nUnited Nations."
}