Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XXV, Organization of Foreign Policy; Information Policy; United Nations; Scientific Matters

286. Telegram From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State¹

New York, December 10, 1963, 8:45 p.m.

2436. Enlargement of Councils.

1. Federenko (USSR) dropped bombshell today in SPC when he told Comite Sovs would take tough line against enlargement of councils because of opposition of Chinese Communists (ourtel 2427).² Previously Sovs had indicated they expected take relatively soft line towards enlargement. Hostile reaction of Africans was immediate; Bindzi (Cameroon) proposed delay of mtg in SPC until Thurs³ PM. Diallo (Guinea) suggested GA remain in session until enlargement question settled. Under circumstances, all previous bets off on what action will be taken by SPC.

2. SC enlargement: LA draft of increase by two tabled with two year ratification period but without annex until question of ECOSOC distribution agreed upon. Knowing that ASAFs pushing hard for increase of 4 in SC, our liaison officers told Africans and Asians quietly but bluntly that US not in position to support this larger increase. Result was that Asians pulled back from insisting on larger increase, for moment at least. Hakim (Lebanon) tells us Arabs continue oppose larger increase and that those Africans who desire 13 member council will insist on right to vote for LA res. At this state it impossible predict what effect Sov position will have on question of SC enlargement.

3. ECOSOC enlargement: With breakdown apparent Eur-LA agreement on ECOSOC distribution, returning one seat to Eurs, Eurs immediately began talking in terms of increase of 7 or 9; this had auxiliary advantage from UK viewpoint of providing greater support for Commonwealth position on ECOSOC. Eurs proposed formulas for increase of 7 or 9 to LAs and once they got agreement from latter, both LAs and Eurs proposed formulas to Tarazi (Syria) as pres of ASAF caucus. Meanwhile, Malhotra (Nepal) reports Asians have also separately nearly reached agreement on 27 man ECOSOC. In Eur and LA formulation distribution would be as follows: LA—4–1/2, 4 perm members, WE—3–1/2, ASAFs—12, EE—2, Others—1. Asian formula would provide LAs 4, 4 perm members, ASAFs 13, WEs 3, EE 2, plus one floating seat to be divided among various groups on still undecided basis. Proposal for 25 members in ECOSOC came from Netherlands which suggested that of 7 new seats, 6 would go to ASAFs and one to WE.

4. Since we got wind of Eur proposal, and after checking with Dept, we told number of leading Eurs and LAs that US strongly committed internally at this point to limiting increase in ECOSOC to 6 and that all we could do was take their proposal under consideration. We also indicated clearing new position might indeed be time consuming. Our recommendations follow.

5. General Comite: Only new development re GC was Sov statement in favor of amending GC res to provide for annual rotation of GA Presidency in following order: Africa, Eastern Eur, Middle East, Western Eur, LA. We have indicated to number of dels that we strongly opposed to taking decision which would impose rigid schedule of elections for GA Presidency. On other hand Cambridge (UK) showed us tel from London which instructed UK to support formula for deciding GA Presidency. They instructed support amendment to provide for succession to GA Presidency over 10 year period during which EE would hold post only once. Instructions also called for formula which would insure Eur would get GA Presidency in 1964 or 1965. British Emb Wash instructed consult closely with Dept prior to making their position public while UKUN instructed consult with old Commonwealth on point.

Stevenson

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1960–63, UN 8 SC. Confidential. Repeated to London.
2. Dated December 10. (Ibid.)
3. December 12.