III

Major Substantive Problems

Control and Use of Atomic Energy for Peaceful Purposes

Pursuant to the agreement reached in December 1945, at the Moscow Conference of the Foreign Ministers of the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union, and to subsequent negotiations, the British Government, acting on behalf of the five permanent members of the Security Council and Canada, on January 4 proposed that the resolution drafted at Moscow relating to the establishment of a commission for the control and use of atomic energy be added to the Agenda of the General Assembly.

Mr. Attlee underlined the importance of the establishment of the proposed Commission in his address of welcome to the Assembly on January 10, and the head of the United States Delegation, Secretary Byrnes, in opening the general debate on the report of the Preparatory Commission at the Seventh Plenary Meeting on January 14, said:

"We have another task of transcending importance. The establishment of a commission to deal with the problems raised by the discovery of atomic energy is inseparably linked with the problem of security. It is a matter of primary concern to all nations. We must not fail to devise the safeguards necessary to ensure that this great discovery is used for human welfare and not for more deadly human warfare."

The Assembly referred the establishment of the proposed Commission to its Political and Security Committee which considered the proposed resolution at its second and third meetings on January 21 and January 22. The brief debate was opened by Senator Connally, the United States Representative on this Committee. At the end of the meeting of January 21, the resolution was approved without change by forty-six votes to none, with one abstention. After a further brief debate on the following day, the First Committee on January 23 approved unanimously the report of the Rapporteur on the establishment of the Commission.

On January 24 the report and resolution authorizing the Commission on Atomic Energy were approved in the General Assembly with no dissenting votes.

and powers of the proposed Commission was set forth by Senator Connally and by Secretary Byrnes, whose full statements are appended to the present Report. The relationship of the Commission to the General Assembly and to the Security Council, respectively, is in accord with the responsibilities of these principal organs under the Charter, and is set forth in the text of the resolution, which also is appended to this Report.

The Genera Assembly took no action with respect to the place and date of the first meeting of the Atomic Energy Commission. It is expected, however, that this meeting will take place at the temporary headquarters of the United Nations at a time to be set by the Secretary-General of the United Nations after consultation with the twelve governments represented on the Commission.

Iran; Syria and Lebanon

Two major international political issues concerning relations between Members were brought to the attention of the General Assembly, namely the difficulties which had arisen between Iran and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics over the situation in Azerbaijan, and the presence of French and British troops in Syria and Lebanon.

Mr. Taqizadeh, head of the Iranian Delegation, in his speech at the Eighth Plenary Session of the Assembly on Tuesday, January 15, spoke at some length of the "very disturbing situation prevailing in Iran" which confronted Iran with "certain great difficulties of an international character." He added that, although the situation was one which "could certainly be brought before this Assembly to be dealt with in its present session as a situation 'likely to impair the friendly relations among nations"", Iran had not yet despaired of an acceptable solution, and, therefore, his Delegation had "refrained rather reluctantly at the last moment" from adding this matter to the Agenda of the Assembly, reserving the right to do so if no early solution was reached.

The Iranian Delegation thus did not place the problem for action before the Assembly, but a few days after Mr. Taqizadeh's speech referred it to the Security Council. This was the first of the four important political problems which were considered by the Council during the month of its sessions in London, the others relating to Syria and Lebanon, and to Greece and to Indonesia. The latter two were not referred to in the General Assembly.

On January 19, the Lebanese Delegate, Mr. Frangieh, alluded in his speech during the general debate in the General Assembly to the hindrance to Lebanon's legitimate aspirations offered by the presence of foreign troops on Lebanese soil. He did not refer to the possible role of the United Nations in relation to this problem, but his Syrian

that the Syrian Government had asked its Delegation to "bring this matter to the attention of the United Nations, demanding an early and complete withdrawal of foreign troops". Mr. Khoury added that the Delegation would do no more than bring the matter to the attention of the Assembly, hoping that the difficulty would be resolved without the necessity of bringing it up "in full" before the United Nations.

The Syrian-Lebanese question was not again referred to in the Assembly. On February 4, however, the heads of the two Delegations addressed a letter to the Secretary-General bringing "this dispute to the attention of the Security Council" and asking the Council to "adopt a decision recommending the total and simultaneous evacuation of the foreign troops from the Syrian and Lebanese territories."

Both the Iranian and Syrian-Lebanese appeals were heard and discussed in full in the Security Council. In the Iranian case, the Council decided to leave the matter to direct negotiations between the parties, both the Iranian and Soviet Governments having indicated their readiness to engage in such negotiations, and at the same time requested the two Governments to inform the Council of "any results achieved in such negotiations" and stated its right "at any time to request information on the progress of the negotiations".

It proved impossible for the Security Council to reach a decision on the Syrian-Lebanese question. In essence, however, a comparable result was achieved since, following a vote in which seven of the eleven members, though not the Soviet Union, concurred, the Representatives of France and the United Kindgom stated that they would in fact proceed as if the resolution proposed by the United States Representative had been adopted as the decision of the Council. The proposed resolution expressed confidence that the foreign troops would be withdrawn as soon as practicable and that negotiations to this end would be undertaken by the parties without delay, and requested the parties to inform the Council of the results.

The United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration

At the instance of the United Kingdom Delegation a draft resolution was introduced emphasizing the need for immediate action to make possible the extension by the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration of necessary relief to the peoples of the states devastated by the war. The resolution as originally phrased urged signatory states that had not yet acted to contribute the further one percent of their national income to relieve this distress that had been recommended by the Council of UNRRA in August 1945, and urged other peace-loving states to join UNRRA. It concluded with an instruction to the Secretary-General to make arrangements for the

UNRRA.

Two principal problems arose. First, certain states, including the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, desired to limit the "peace loving states" invited to join UNRRA to States Members of the United Nations. This was agreed upon. Second, the United States Delegation was interested in assuring that the resolution would include specific reference to the completion of the work of UNRRA at the end of the present year in Europe, and in March 1947 in the Far East. Constructive suggestions in this and in other respects, as suggested by the Hon. Sol Bloom, representing the United States in this matter, were adopted. The remarks of the Delegates during the final discussion in the General Assembly made clear that all were conscious of the necessity of immediate relief, and that there was a widespread desire to join in this appeal to extend relief to suffering peoples.

The substitute resolution, proposed by the United States ond adopted by the General Assembly, provided for a Committee composed of representatives of Canada, China, Dominican Republic, France, Greece, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom, and the United States, to facilitate the successful carrying out of the purposes of the resolution. This Committee, in a preliminary meeting on February 14, decided to meet at Atlantic City when the Council of UNRRA convenes in that city on March 15, 1946. It is gratifying to note that a number of responses to this appeal by the General Assembly have already been made. The text of the resolution is appended to this Report.

Refugees

At the initiative of the United Kingdom the problem of refugees was included on the Agenda of the General Assembly as a matter of urgent importance. The United Kingdom Delegation, after preliminary discussions, limited their proposal to a recommendation that the problem of refugees should be referred to the Economic and Social Council "for thorough examination in all its details" and report to the next session of the General Assembly. This was supported by the United States Delegation as placing the matter before the appropriate organ. Subsequently, varying proposals were introduced by other Delegations.

In an effort to reach agreement, Mrs. Roosevelt, who represented the United States in the consideration of this problem, presented on February 5 a proposal combining acceptable features of the proposals of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the Soviet Union. It suggested that the entire problem should be referred to the Economic and Social Council for study by a special committee, and that the Council should take into consideration certain guiding principles

and Mr. Geoffrey Wilson, British, as Deputy Secretary. On February 4, the Inspection Group returned to London, and the Interim Committee on Headquarters approved its report subject to certain changes. The report recommended that the permanent headquarters of the United Nations should be established "(a) near to New York City; and (b) in the North Stamford - Greenwich district", and that the interim headquarters should be in New York City.

At the outset of the subsequent debate in the ad hoc Headquarters Committee of the Assembly, Mr. Adlai E. Stevenson, representing the United States, stated that his Government would be neutral with respect to the selection of a city, as it had consistently been theretofore in connection with the choice of a country for the permanent headquarters. He extended assurances, however, that his Government was prepared to assist and cooperate in any way to facilitate the establishment of permanent headquarters and also of suitable temporary facilities, but did not otherwise participate in the discussion. The debate disclosed certain objections to the North GreenwichStamford area recommended by the Interim Committee, some Delegations favoring San Francisco, and others objecting particularly to the cost of acquiring a large amount of land in the recommended area. The United States took no part in this discussion except that, in a related consideration of budgetary matters, Senator Vandenberg, representing the United States in the administrative and budgetary fields, questioned the necessity of purchasing a tract of over forty square miles of expensive land, especially in view of the consequent heavy financial burden upon the Members. A motion by the French Delegation to postpone the choice of the permanent seat until the September Assembly meeting, pending thorough study of all the offers from various cities and localities, was lost by a tie vote of 19 to 19.

A resolution originally proposed by the Netherlands recommending that the permanent headquarters should be situated in Westchester County, New York, and/or Fairfield County, Connecticut, was finally adopted in the Committee by a vote of 22 to 17. This resolution provided for the establishment of a Permanent Headquarters Commission of the General Assembly, and directed it to prepare plans and estimates of the costs of sites varying in size from 2 square miles to 40 square miles within these counties, and to recommend a specific site of specific dimensions. It further provided that on the basis of this information, the Assembly in its September meeting shall make the final decision on the exact area required and the exact location. The Commission will also assist the Secretary-General on problems arising in connection with the temporary headquarters and with arrangements for the next meeting of the General Assembly. Experts designated by the United States Government will help the Commission in its work. The Secretary-General will conduct any necessary