[ 1946-47 ] part 1 chapter 1 origin and evolution of...

Part One:

1. Origin and Evolution

A. THE DECLARATION BY UNITED NATIONS

The term, "The United Nations," was sug-gested by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It wasfirst used in the Declaration by United Na-tions, and at the San Francisco Conference itwas unanimously adopted as the name of thenew international organization as a tribute tothe late President of the United States.

On January 1, 1942, the representativesof 26 nations that were fighting against theAxis aggressors signed in Washington, D. C.,a Declaration by United Nations. This is thefirst landmark in the evolution of the UnitedNations. The text of the Declaration1 is asfollows:

The Governments signatory hereto,Having subscribed to a common program of

purposes and principles embodied in the JointDeclaration of the President of the UnitedStates of America and the Prime Ministerof the United Kingdom of Great Britain andNorthern Ireland dated August 14, 1941,known as the Atlantic Charter.

Being convinced that complete victory overtheir enemies is essential to defend life, liber-ty, independence and religious freedom, andto preserve human rights and justice in theirown lands as well as in other lands, and thatthey are now engaged in a common struggleagainst savage and brutal forces seeking tosubjugate the world,

DECLARE:(1) Each Government pledges itself to em-

ploy its full resources, military or economic,against those members of the Tripartite Pactand its adherents with which such govern-ment is at war.

(2) Each Government pledges itself toco-operate with the Governments signatoryhereto and not to make a separate armistice orpeace with the enemies.

The foregoing declaration may be adheredto by other nations which are, or which maybe, rendering material assistance and contri-butions in the struggle for victory overHitlerism.

DONE at Washington, January First, 1942.

The original signatories of the Declaration2

were:

United StatesUnited KingdomU.S.S.R.ChinaAustraliaBelgiumCanadaCosta RicaCubaCzechoslovakiaDominican RepublicEl SalvadorGreece

GuatemalaHaitiHondurasIndiaLuxembourgNetherlandsNew ZealandNicaraguaNorwayPanamaPolandSouth AfricaYugoslavia

In addition to the original 26 signatories.21 nations adhered to the Declaration. Belowis a list of the adherents, together with thedates of communications of adherence:3

Mexico June 5, 1942Philippine Commonwealth June 10, 1942EthiopiaIraqBrazilBoliviaIran

July 28, 1942January 16, 1943February 8, 1943April 27, 1943September 10, 1943

1 U. S. Department of State Bulletin, January

3, 1942, p. 3.

2 France and Denmark were generally regarded

as having been identified with the United Nationsfrom the beginning, as the French authoritiesabroad had carried on hostilities and the DanishMinister in Washington had signified the adher-ence of all free Danes to the Allied cause. As theDeclaration was signed by governments, theycould not at that time, however, formally adhereto it.

France, when the French National Committeewas constituted as a government, adhered for-mally to the Declaration. Denmark, which wasnot liberated until after the opening of the SanFrancisco Conference was admitted as one of theUnited Nations by the Conference.

3 These dates are from the U. S. Department

of State Bulletin, August 12, 1945. The dates givenare those borne by the communications addressedto the Department of State.

Yearbook of the United Nations

ColombiaLiberiaFranceEcuadorPeruChileParaguay

December 22, 1943 VenezuelaFebruary 26, 1944 UruguayDecember 26, 1944 TurkeyFebruary 7, 1945 EgyptFebruary 11, 1945 Saudi ArabiaFebruary 12, 1945 SyriaFebruary 12, 1945 Lebanon

FebruaryFebruaryFebruaryFebruaryMarch 1,March 1,March 1,

16, 194523, 194524, 194527, 1945194519451945

B. THE ATLANTIC CHARTER

The signatories of the United Nations De-claration subscribed to the "common programof purposes and principles" embodied in theAtlantic Charter—the Joint Declaration madeby the President of the United States and thePrime Minister of the United Kingdom onAugust 14, 1941. The Charter1 reads:

The President of the United States ofAmerica and the Prime Minister, Mr. Church-ill, representing His Majesty's Governmentin the United Kingdom, being met together,deem it right to make known certain commonprinciples in the national policies of theirrespective countries on which they base theirhopes for a better future for the world.

First, their countries seek no aggrandize-ment, territorial or other;

Second, they desire to see no territorialchanges that do not accord with the freely ex-pressed wishes of the peoples concerned;

Third, they respect the right of all peoplesto choose the form of government under whichthey will live; and they wish to see sovereignrights and self-government restored to thosewho have been forcibly deprived of them;

Fourth, they will endeavour, with due re-spect for their existing obligations, to furtherthe enjoyment by all States, great or small,victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms,to the trade and to the raw materials of the

world which are needed for their economicprosperity;

Fifth, they desire to bring about the fullestcollaboration between all nations in the eco-nomic field with the object of securing, for all,improved labour standards, economic adjust-ment and social security;

Sixth, after the final destruction of the Nazityranny, they hope to see established a peacewhich will afford to all nations the means ofdwelling in safety within their own bounda-ries, and which will afford assurance that allthe men in all the lands may live out theirlives in freedom from fear and want;

Seventh, such a peace should enable all mento traverse the high seas and oceans withouthindrance;

Eighth, they believe that all of the nationsof the world, for realistic as well as spiritualreasons, must come to the abandonment of theuse of force. Since no future peace can bemaintained if land, sea or air armaments con-tinue to be employed by nations whichthreaten, or may threaten, aggression out-side of their frontiers, they believe, pendingthe establishment of a wider and permanentsystem of general security, that the disarma-ment of such nations is essential. They willlikewise aid and encourage all other practic-able measures which will lighten for peace-loving peoples the crushing burden of arma-ments.2

1 U. S. Department of State Bulletin, August 16,

1941, p. 125; Joint Declaration by the Presidentof the United States of America and Mr. Win-ston Churchill representing His Majesty's Gov-ernment in the United Kingdom, known as theAtlantic Charter, August 14, 1941. London H.M.Stationery Office 1941. [United States No. 3(1941), Cmd. 6321].

2Under the Inter-Allied Declaration of St.

James's Palace of September 24, 1941, "this decla-ration of principles" was adhered to by the repre-sentatives of Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece,Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland,the U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia and General de Gaulle,leader of Free Frenchmen. [Inter-Allied Meetingheld in London at St. James's Palace on Septem-ber 24, 1941. Report of proceedings. London, H.M.Stationery Office, 1941. Miscellaneous No. 3(1941), Cmd. 6315].

(note cont.)A previous Inter-Allied Declaration of St.

James's Palace of June 12, 1941, adopted by rep-resentatives of the United Kingdom, Canada, Au-stralia, New Zealand, South Africa, Belgium, theProvisional Czechoslovak Government, Greece,Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Polandand Yugoslavia and the representatives of Generalde Gaulle, leader of Free Frenchmen, had recog-nized that "the only true basis of enduring peaceis the willing co-operation of free peoples in aworld in which, relieved of the menace of aggres-sion, all may enjoy economic and social security"and had stated that it was "their intention towork together, and with other free peoples bothin war and peace to this end." [Inter-Allied Meet-ing held in London at St. James's Palace on June12, 1941. Report of proceedings. London, H.M.Stationery Office, 1941. Miscellaneous No. 1(1941), Cmd. 6285].

2

Origin and Evolution

C. THE MOSCOW DECLARATION ON GENERAL SECURITY

On October 30, 1943, the Foreign Ministersof the United States, the United Kingdomand the U.S.S.R. and the Chinese Ambassadorto Moscow issued the Declaration of FourNations on General Security, which contem-plated the establishment at the earliest prac-ticable date of a general international organ-ization, based upon the principle of thesovereign equality of all peace-loving Statesand open to membership by such States, largeand small, for the maintenance of interna-tional peace and security.

The text of the Declaration1 is as follows:

The Governments of the United States ofAmerica, the United Kingdom, the SovietUnion and China:

United in their determination, in accord-ance with the Declaration by the UnitedNations of January 1, 1942, and subsequentdeclarations, to continue hostilities againstthose Axis powers with which they respec-tively are at war until such powers have laiddown their arms on the basis of unconditionalsurrender;

Conscious of their responsibility to securethe liberation of themselves and the peoplesallied with them from the menace of aggres-sion;

Recognizing the necessity of ensuring arapid and orderly transition from war topeace and of establishing and maintaininginternational peace and security with the leastdiversion of the world's human and economicresources for armaments;

JOINTLY DECLARE:1. That their united action, pledged for the

prosecution of the war against their respective

enemies, will be continued for the organiza-tion and maintenance of peace and security.

2. That those of them at war with a com-mon enemy will act together in all mattersrelating to the surrender and disarmamentof that enemy.

3. That they will take all measures deemedby them to be necessary to provide againstany violation of the terms imposed upon theenemy.

4. That they recognize the necessity ofestablishing at the earliest practicable datea general international organization, based onthe principle of the sovereign equality of allpeace-loving States, and open to membershipby all such States, large and small, for themaintenance of international peace and secur-ity.

5. That for the purpose of maintaining in-ternational peace and security pending there-establishment of law and order and theinauguration of a system of general security,they will consult with one another and asoccasion requires with other members of theUnited Nations with a view to joint action onbehalf of the community of nations.

6. That after the termination of hostilitiesthey will not employ their military forces with-in the territories of other States except forthe purposes envisaged in this declaration andafter joint consultation.

7. That they will confer and co-operatewith one another and with other members ofthe United Nations to bring about a practic-able general agreement with respect to theregulation of armaments in the postwar period.

V. MolotovAnthony EdenCordell HullFoo Ping-sheung

Moscow, October 30, 1943

D. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCES ON ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS2

Before the establishment of a general in-ternational organization, as contemplated inthe Moscow Declaration, a number of UnitedNations conferences were held to discuss cer-tain special problems. As a result of theseconferences a number of specialized agencieswere subsequently established.

The first of these conferences was theUnited Nations Conference on Food and Agri-culture, held in Hot Springs, Virginia, fromMay 18 to June 3, 1943, which set up an Inter-im Commission on Food and Agriculture todraw up a Constitution of the Food and Agri-culture Organization of the United Nations.

On October 16, 1945, FAO came into beingwhen its Constitution was signed.

The Conference of Allied Ministers of Edu-cation, which first met in London in October1942, drafted plans for a United Nations Edu-cational and Cultural Organization. Theseplans served as a basis of discussion at theUnited Nations Conference for the Establish-ment of an Educational, Scientific and Cul-tural Organization, held in London from

1 U. S. Department of State Bulletin, November

6, 1943, pp. 307-311.

2 For fuller information on these conferences see

Part Two of this Yearbook.

3

Yearbook of the United Nations

November 1 to 16, 1945, which drew up theConstitution of the United Nations Educa-tional Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO).

The Agreement creating the United NationsRelief and Rehabilitation Administration wassigned in Washington on November 9, 1943,by representatives of 44 nations, and on thefollowing day the first meeting of the UNRRACouncil took place in Atlantic City, NewJersey. It may be noted that UNRRA was thefirst of the United Nations agencies formallyto come into being.

The United Nations Monetary and FinancialConference was held at Bretton Woods, NewHampshire, from. July 1 to 22, 1944. The Con-ference drafted the Articles of Agreement of

the International Monetary Fund and theArticles of Agreement of the InternationalBank for Reconstruction and Development.The Articles of Agreement both of the Fundand of the Bank came into force on December27, 1945, and the inaugural meeting of theBoards of Governors of these two institutionstook place in Savannah, Georgia, U.S.A., fromMarch 8 to 18, 1946.

The International Civil Aviation Confer-ence was held in Chicago from November 1to December 7, 1944. It drafted a Conventionon International Civil Aviation and an Inter-im Agreement on International Civil Aviation.The Provisional (Interim) International CivilAviation Organization came into being onAugust 15, 1945.

E. THE DUMBARTON OAKS CONVERSATIONS

The first concrete step toward the creationof a general international organization wastaken in the late summer of 1944, when theDumbarton Oaks Conversations took place.The first phase of the conversations was be-tween the representatives of the U.S.S.R.,the United Kingdom and the United Statesfrom August 21 to September 28, and thesecond phase between the representatives ofChina, the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates from September 29 to October 7.1 Asa result of these conversations the fourpowers reached a number of agreements whichwere embodied in the Dumbarton Oaks Pro-posals. The text of the Proposals reads:

PROPOSALS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENTOF A GENERAL INTERNATIONAL OR-GANIZATION2

There should be established an internationalorganization under the title of The UnitedNations, the Charter of which should containprovisions necessary to give effect to the pro-posals which follow.

CHAPTER IPURPOSES

The purposes of the Organization should be:1. To maintain international peace and

security; and to that end to take effectivecollective measures for the prevention andremoval of threats to the peace and the sup-pression of acts of aggression or otherbreaches of the peace, and to bring aboutby peaceful means adjustment or settlementof international disputes which may lead to abreach of the peace;

2. To develop friendly relations among na-tions and to take other appropriate measuresto strengthen universal peace;

3. To achieve international co-operation inthe solution of international economic, socialand other humanitarian problems; and

4. To afford a centre for harmonizing theactions of nations in the achievement of thesecommon ends.

CHAPTER IIPRINCIPLES

In pursuit of the purposes mentioned inChapter I the Organization and its membersshould act in accordance with the followingprinciples:

1. The Organization is based on the prin-ciple of the sovereign equality of all peace-loving states.

2. All members of the Organization under-take, in order to ensure to all of them therights and benefits resulting from membershipin the Organization, to fulfill the obligationsassumed by them in accordance with theCharter.

3. All members of the Organization shallsettle their disputes by peaceful means insuch a manner that international peace andsecurity are not endangered.

4. All members of the Organization shallrefrain in their international relations fromthe threat or use of force in any manner in-consistent with the purposes of the Organ-ization.

1 For list of representatives at the Conversa-

tions see p. 43.2Dumbarton Oaks Documents on International

Organization. U. S. Department of State, Con-ference Series 56, Publication 2192. DumbartonOaks Conversations on World Organization,August 21 to October 7, 1944. Statement of tenta-tive proposals. London, H.M. Stationery Office,1944. [Miscellaneous No. 4 (1944), Cmd. 6560].

4


5. All members of the Organization shallgive every assistance to the Organization inany action undertaken by it in accordancewith the provisions of the Charter.

6. All members of the Organization shallrefrain from giving assistance to any stateagainst which preventive or enforcement ac-tion is being undertaken by the Organization.

The Organization should ensure that statesnot members of the Organization act inaccordance with these principles so far asmay be necessary for the maintenance of in-ternational peace and security.

CHAPTER IIIMEMBERSHIP

1. Membership of the Organization shouldbe open to all peace-loving states.

CHAPTER IVPRINCIPAL ORGANS

1. The Organization should have as itsprincipal organs:

a. A General Assembly;b. A Security Council;c. An International Court of Justice; andd. A Secretariat.

2. The Organization should have such sub-sidiary agencies as may be found necessary.

CHAPTER VTHE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Section A—CompositionAll members of the Organization should

be members of the General Assembly andshould have a number of representatives tobe specified in the Charter.

Section B—Functions and Powers1. The General Assembly should have the

right to consider the general principles ofco-operation in the maintenance of interna-tional peace and security, including the prin-ciples governing disarmament and the regu-lation of armaments; to discuss any questionsrelating to the maintenance of internationalpeace and security brought before it by anymember or members of the Organization orby the Security Council; and to make recom-mendations with regard to any such principlesor questions. Any such questions on whichaction is necessary should be referred to theSecurity Council by the General Assemblyeither before or after discussion. The GeneralAssembly should not on its own initiativemake recommendations on any matter relatingto the maintenance of international peace andsecurity which is being dealt with by theSecurity Council.

2. The General Assembly should be em-powered to admit new members to the Organ-ization upon recommendation of the SecurityCouncil.

3. The General Assembly should, uponrecommendation of the Security Council, beempowered to suspend from the exercise ofany rights or privileges of membership anymember of the Organization against whichpreventive or enforcement action shall havebeen taken by the Security Council. The exer-cise of the rights and privileges thus sus-pended may be restored by decision of theSecurity Council. The General Assemblyshould be empowered, upon recommendationof the Security Council, to expel from the Or-ganization any member of the Organizationwhich persistently violates the principles con-tained in the Charter.

4. The General Assembly should elect thenon-permanent members of the Security Coun-cil and the members of the Economic andSocial Council provided for in Chapter IX.It should be empowered to elect upon recom-mendation of the Security Council, the Secre-tary-General of the Organization. It shouldperform such functions in relation to the elec-tion of the Judges of the International Courtof Justice as may be conferred upon it by theStatute of the Court.

6. The General Assembly should apportionthe expenses among the members of the Or-ganization and should be empowered toapprove the budgets of the Organization.

6. The General Assembly should initiatestudies and make recommendations for thepurpose of promoting international co-opera-tion in political, economic and social fields andof adjusting situations likely to impair thegeneral welfare.

7. The General Assembly should makerecommendations for the co-ordination of thepolicies of international economic, social andother specialized agencies brought into rela-tion with the Organization in accordance withagreements between such agencies and theOrganization.

8. The General Assembly should receive andconsider annual and special reports from theSecurity Council and reports from other bodiesof the Organization.

Section C—Voting1. Each member of the Organization should

have one vote in the General Assembly.2. Important decisions of the General

Assembly, including recommendations withrespect to the maintenance of internationalpeace and security; election of members ofthe Security Council; election of members ofthe Economic and Social Council; admissionof members, suspension of the exercise of therights and privileges of members, and expul-sion of members; and budgetary questionsshould be made by a two-thirds majority ofthose present and voting. On other questions,including the determination of additionalcategories of question to be decided by a two-thirds majority, the decisions of the GeneralAssembly should be made by a simple major-ity vote.

5

6 Yearbook of the United Nations

Section D—Procedure1. The General Assembly should meet in

regular annual session and in such specialsessions as occasion may require.

2. The General Assembly should adopt itsown rules of procedure and elect its Presidentfor each session.

3. The General Assembly should be em-powered to set up such bodies and agenciesas it may deem necessary for the performanceof its functions.

CHAPTER VITHE SECURITY COUNCIL

Section A—Composition

The Security Council should consist of onerepresentative of. each of eleven members ofthe Organization. Representatives of theUnited States of America, the United King-dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, theRepublic of China and, in due course, France,should have permanent seats. The GeneralAssembly should elect six states to fill the non-permanent seats. These six states should beelected for a term of two years, three retiringeach year. They should not be immediatelyeligible for re-election. In the first election ofthe non-permanent members three should bechosen by the General Assembly for one-yearterms and three for two-year terms.

Section B—Principal Functions and Powers1. In order to ensure prompt and effective

action by the Organization, members of theOrganization should by the Charter confer onthe Security Council primary responsibilityfor the maintenance of international peace andsecurity and should agree that in carryingout these duties under this responsibility itshould act on their behalf.

2. In discharging these duties the SecurityCouncil should act in accordance with the pur-poses and principles of the Organization.

3. The specific powers conferred on theSecurity Council in order to carry out theseduties are laid down in Chapter VIII.

4. All members of the Organization shouldobligate themselves to accept the decisions ofthe Security Council and to carry them out inaccordance with the provisions of the Charter.

5. In order to promote the establishmentand maintenance of international peace andsecurity with the least diversion of the world'shuman and economic resources for armaments,the Security Council, with the assistance ofthe Military Staff Committee referred to inChapter VIII, Section B, paragraph 9, shouldhave the responsibility for formulating plansfor the establishment of a system of regula-tion of armaments for submission to the mem-bers of the Organization.

Section C—Voting(Note: The question of voting procedure

in the Security Council is still under con-sideration.)

Section D—Procedure1. The Security Council should be so organ-

ized as to be able to function continuously andeach state member of the Security Councilshould be permanently represented at the head-quarters of the Organization. It may holdmeetings at such other places as in its judg-ment may best facilitate its work. Thereshould be periodic meetings at which eachstate member of the Security Council couldif it so desired be represented by a memberof the government or some other special repre-sentative.

2. The Security Council should be em-powered to set up such bodies or agencies asit may deem necessary for the performanceof its functions including regional sub-com-mittees of the Military Staff Committee.

3. The Security Council should adopt itsown rules of procedure, including the methodof selecting its President.

4. Any member of the Organization shouldparticipate in the discussion of any questionbrought before the Security Council wheneverthe Security Council considers that the inter-ests of that member of the Organization arespecially affected.

5. Any member of the Organization nothaving a seat on the Security Council and anystate not a member of the Organization, if itis a party to a dispute under consideration bythe Security Council, should be invited toparticipate in the discussion relating to thedispute.

CHAPTER VII

AN INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

1. There should be an International Court ofJustice which should constitute the principaljudicial organ of the Organization.

2. The Court should be constituted andshould function in accordance with a Statutewhich should be annexed to and be a partof the Charter of the Organization.

3. The Statute of the Court of Internation-al Justice should be either (a) the Statute ofthe Permanent Court of International Justice,continued in force with such modifications asmay be desirable, or (b) a new Statute in thepreparation of which the Statute of the Per-manent Court of International Justice shouldbe used as a basis.

4. All members of the Organization shouldipso facto be parties to the Statute of the In-ternational Court of Justice.

5. Conditions under which States not Mem-bers of the Organization may become partiesto the Statute of the International Court ofJustice should be determined in each case bythe General Assembly upon recommendationof the Security Council.


CHAPTER VIII

ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE MAINTENANCE OFINTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY, IN-

CLUDING PREVENTION AND SUPPRESSIONOF AGGRESSION

Section A—Pacific Settlement of Disputes1. The Security Council should be em-

powered to investigate any dispute, or anysituation which may lead to international fric-tion or give rise to a dispute, in order to deter-mine whether its continuance is likely to en-danger the maintenance of international peaceand security.

2. Any state, whether member of the Or-ganization or not, may bring any such dis-pute or situation to the attention of the Gen-eral Assembly or of the Security Council.

3. The parties to any dispute the continu-ance of which is likely to endanger the main-tenance of international peace and securityshould obligate themselves, first of all, to seeka solution by negotiation, mediation, concilia-tion, arbitration or judicial settlement, orother peaceful means of their own choice. TheSecurity Council should call upon the partiesto settle their dispute by such means.

4. If, nevertheless, parties to a dispute ofthe nature referred to in paragraph 3 abovefail to settle it by the means indicated in thatparagraph they should obligate themselves torefer it to the Security Council. The SecurityCouncil should in each case decide whether ornot the continuance of the particular disputeis in fact likely to endanger the maintenanceof international peace and security, and, ac-cordingly, whether the Security Council shoulddeal with the dispute, and, if so, whether itshould take action under paragraph 5.

5. The Security Council should be em-powered, at any stage of a dispute of the na-ture referred to in paragraph 3 above, torecommend appropriate procedures or methodsof adjustment.

6. Justiciable disputes should normally bereferred to the International Court of Justice.The Security Council should be empoweredto refer to the Court, for advice, legal ques-tions connected with other disputes.

7. The provisions of paragraph 1 to 6 ofSection A should not apply to situations or dis-putes arising out of matters which by interna-tional law are solely within the domestic jur-isdiction of the state concerned.

Section B—Determination of Threats to thePeace or Acts of Aggression and Action

With Respect Thereto1. Should the Security Council deem that

a failure to settle a dispute in accordancewith procedures indicated in paragraph 3 ofSection A, or in accordance with its recom-mendations made under paragraph 5 of Sec-tion A, constitutes a threat to the maintenanceof international peace and security, it shouldtake any measures necessary for the mainte-nance of international peace and security in

accordance with the purposes and principlesof the Organization.

2. in general the Security Council shoulddetermine the existence of any threat to thepeace, breach of the peace or act of aggressionand should make recommendations or decideupon the measures to be taken to maintain orrestore peace and security.

3. The Security Council should be em-powered to determine what diplomatic, econ-omic, or other measures not involving the useof armed force should be employed to giveeffect to its decisions, and to call upon mem-bers of the Organization to apply such meas-ures. Such measures may include complete orpartial interruption of rail, sea, air, postal,telegraphic, radio and other means of commun-ication and the severance of diplomatic andeconomic relations.

4. Should the Security Council considersuch measures to be inadequate, it should beempowered to take such action by air, naval orland forces as may be necessary to maintainor restore international peace and security.Such action may include demonstrations, block-ade and other operations by air, sea or landforces of members of the Organization.

5. In order that all members of the Organ-ization should contribute to the maintenanceof international peace and security, theyshould undertake to make available to theSecurity Council, on its call and in accordancewith a special agreement or agreements con-cluded among themselves, armed forces, facili-ties and assistance necessary for the purposeof maintaining international peace and secur-ity. Such agreement or agreements shouldgovern the numbers and types of forces andthe nature of the facilities and assistance tobe provided. The special agreement or agree-ments should be negotiated as soon as possibleand should in each case be subject to approvalby the Security Council and to ratification bythe signatory states in accordance with theirconstitutional processes.

G. In order to enable urgent military meas-ures to be taken by the Organization thereshould be held immediately available by themembers of the Organization national air forcecontingents for combined international en-forcement action. The strength and degree ofreadiness of these contingents and plans fortheir combined action should be determined bythe Security Council with the assistance of theMilitary Staff Committee within the limitslaid down in the special agreement or agree-ments referred to in paragraph 5 above.

7. The action required to carry out thedecisions of the Security Council for the main-tenance of international peace and securityshould be taken by all the Members of theOrganization in co-operation or by some ofthem as the Security Council may determineThis undertaking should be carried out by themembers of the Organization by their own ac-tion and through action of the appropriatespecialized organizations and agencies ofwhich they are members.

7


8. Plans for the application of armed forceshould be made by the Security Council withthe assistance of the Military Staff Commit-tee referred to in paragraph 9 below.

9. There should be established a MilitaryStaff Committee the functions of which shouldbe to advise and assist the Security Councilon all questions relating to the Security Coun-cil's military requirements for the mainte-nance of international peace and security, tothe employment and command of forces placedat its disposal, to the regulation of armaments,and to possible disarmament. It should beresponsible under the Security Council forthe strategic direction of any armed forcesplaced at the disposal of the Security Council.The Committee should be composed of theChiefs of Staff of the permanent members ofthe Security Council or their representatives.Any member of the Organization not perma-nently represented on the Committee should beinvited by the Committee to be associated withit when the efficient discharge of the Commit-tee's responsibilities requires that such a stateshould participate in its work. Questions ofcommand of forces should be worked out sub-sequently.

10. The members of the Organization shouldjoin in affording mutual assistance in carry-ing out the measures decided upon by theSecurity Council.

11. Any state, whether a member of the Or-ganization or not, which finds itself confrontedwith special economic problems arising fromthe carrying out of measures which have beendecided upon by the Security Council shouldhave the right to consult the Security Councilin regard to a solution of those problems.

Section C—Regional Arrangements

1. Nothing in the Charter should precludethe existence of regional arrangements oragencies for dealing with such matters relat-ing to the maintenance of international peaceand security as are appropriate for regionalaction, provided such arrangements or agen-cies and their activities are consistent withthe purposes and principles of the Organiza-tion. The Security Council should encouragesettlement of local disputes through such re-gional arrangements or by such regional agen-cies, either on the initiative of the states con-cerned or by reference from the SecurityCouncil.

2. The Security Council should, whereappropriate, utilize such arrangements oragencies for enforcement action under itsauthority, but no enforcement action shouldbe taken under regional arrangements or byregional agencies without the authorizationof the Security Council.

3. The Security Council should at all timesbe kept fully informed of activities undertakenor in contemplation under regional arrange-ments or by regional agencies for the mainte-nance of international peace and security.

CHAPTER IXARRANGEMENTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC

AND SOCIAL CO-OPERATIONSection A—Purpose and Relationships

1. With a view to the creation of conditionsof stability and well-being which are neces-sary for peaceful and friendly relations amongnations, the Organization should facilitatesolutions of international economic, social andother humanitarian problems and promoterespect for human rights and fundamentalfreedoms. Responsibility for the discharge ofthis function should be vested in the GeneralAssembly and, under the authority of the Gen-eral Assembly, in an Economic and SocialCouncil.

2. The various specialized economic, socialand other organizations and agencies wouldhave responsibilities in their respective fieldsas defined in their statutes. Each such organ-ization or agency should be brought into rela-tionship with the Organization on terms tobe determined by agreement between the Econ-omic and Social Council and the appropriateauthorities of the specialized organization oragency, subject to approval by the GeneralAssembly.

Section B—Composition and VotingThe Economic and Social Council should

consist of representatives of eighteen mem-bers of the Organization. The states to berepresented for this purpose should be electedby the General Assembly for terms of threeyears. Each such state should have one repre-sentative, who should have one vote. Decisionsof the Economic and Social Council should betaken by simple majority vote of those presentand voting.

Section C—Functions and Powers of theEconomic and Social Council

1. The Economic and Social Council shouldbe empowered:

a. to carry out, within the scope of its func-tions, recommendations of the General Assem-bly;

b. to make recommendations, on its owninitiative, with respect to international eco-nomic, social and other humanitarian matters;

c. to receive and consider reports from theeconomic, social and other organizations oragencies brought into relationship with the Or-ganization, and to co-ordinate their activitiesthrough consultations with, and recommenda-tions to, such organizations or agencies;

d. to examine the administrative budgets ofsuch specialized organizations or agencies witha view to making recommendations to the or-ganizations or agencies concerned;

e. to enable the Secretary-General to provideinformation to the Security Council;

f. to assist the Security Council upon itsrequest; and

g. to perform such other functions withinthe general scope of its competence as may beassigned to it by the General Assembly.


Section D—Organization and Procedure1. The Economic and Social Council should

set up an economic commission, a social com-mission, and such other commissions as maybe required. These commissions should con-sist of experts. There should be a permanentstaff which should constitute a part of theSecretariat of the Organization.

2. The Economic and Social Council shouldmake suitable arrangements for representa-tives of the specialized organizations or agen-cies to participate without vote in its delibera-tions and in those of the commissions estab-lished by it.

3. The Economic and Social Council shouldadopt its own rules of procedure and themethod of selecting its President.

CHAPTER XTHE SECRETARIAT

1. There should be a Secretariat comprisinga Secretary-General and such staff as may berequired. The Secretary-General should bethe chief administrative officer of the Organi-zation. He should be elected by the GeneralAssembly, on recommendation of the SecurityCouncil, for such term and under such condi-tions as are specified in the Charter.

2. The Secretary-General should act in thatcapacity in all meetings of the General Assem-bly, of the Security Council, and of the Eco-nomic and Social Council and should make anannual report to the General Assembly on thework of the Organization.

3. The Secretary-General should have theright to bring to the attention of the SecurityCouncil any matter which in his opinion maythreaten international peace and security.

CHAPTER XIAMENDMENTS

Amendments should come into force for allmembers of the Organization when they havebeen adopted by a vote of two-thirds of themembers of the General Assembly and rati-fied in accordance with their respective con-stitutional processes by the members of the Or-ganization having permanent membership onthe Security Council and by a majority of theother members of the Organization.

CHAPTER XIITRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

1. Pending the coming into force of thespecial agreement or agreements referred toin Chapter VIII, Section B, paragraph 5, andin accordance with the provisions of paragraph5 of the Four-Nation Declaration, signed atMoscow, Oct. 30, 1943, the States parties tothat Declaration should consult with one an-other and as occasion arises with other Mem-bers of the Organization with a view to suchjoint action on behalf of the Organization asmay be necessary for the purpose of maintain-ing international peace and security.

2. No provision of the Charter should pre-clude action taken or authorized in relation toenemy States as a result of the present war bythe Governments having responsibility forsuch action.

(Note: In addition to the question of vot-ing procedure in the Security Council referredto in Chapter VI, several other questions arestill under consideration.)

F. THE YALTA AGREEMENT

In February 1945, Prime Minister Church-ill, President Roosevelt and Marshal Stalinmet at Yalta in the Crimea. A report wasissued after the conference which containedthe following passage:

We are resolved upon the earliest possibleestablishment with our Allies of a generalinternational organization to maintain peaceand security. We believe that this is essen-tial, both to prevent aggression and to removethe political, economic and social causes of warthrough the close and continuing collaborationof all peace-loving peoples.

The foundations were laid at DumbartonOaks. On the important question of votingprocedure, however, agreement was not therereached. The present Conference has beenable to resolve this difficulty.

We have agreed that a Conference ofUnited Nations should be called to meet atSan Francisco in the United States on the

25th April 1945, to prepare the charter of suchan organization, along the lines proposed inthe informal conversions of Dumbarton Oaks.

The Government of China and the Provi-sional Government of France will be immedi-ately consulted and invited to sponsor invita-tions to the Conference jointly with the Gov-ernments of the United States, Great Britainand the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.As soon as the consultation with China andFrance has been completed, the text of theproposals on voting procedure will be madepublic.1

China and France were consulted. The Chi-nese Government agreed to join in sponsoringthe invitations. The French Government

1 U. S. Department of State Bulletin, February18, 1945, pp. 213-216; Report of the Crimea Con-ference, February 11, 1946. London H. M. Station-ery Office, 1945, [Miscellaneous No. 5 (1945)Cmd. 6598.] '

9


agreed to participate in the conference but de-cided not to act as a sponsoring nation.

The countries qualifying for invitationswere those nations which had declared war onGermany or Japan by March 1, 1945, and hadsigned the United Nations Declaration.

The invitations) were issued on March 5 andcontained the proposals for voting referredto in the Report of the Crimea Conference.The terms of invitation1 read as follows:

The Government of the United States ofAmerica, on behalf of itself and of the Gov-ernments of the United Kingdom of GreatBritain and Northern Ireland, the Union ofSoviet Socialist Republics and the Republicof China, invites the Government of [nameof Government invited] to send representa-tives to a Conference of the United Nations,to be held on April 25, 1945, at San Franciscoin the United States of America, to preparea charter for a general international organiza-tion for the maintenance of international peaceand security.

The above-named Governments suggest thatthe Conference consider, as affording a basisfor such a charter, the proposals for theestablishment of a general international or-ganization which were made public last Octo-

ber as a result of the Dumbarton Oaks Con-ference, and which have now been supple-mented by the following provisions for Sec-tion C of Chapter VI:

C. Voting1. Each member of the Security Council

should have one vote.2. Decisions of the Security Council on

procedural matters should be made by anaffirmative vote of seven members.

3. Decisions of the Security Council onall other matters should be made by an af-firmative vote of seven members, includingthe concurring votes of the permanent mem-bers; provided that, in decisions underChapter VIII, Section A, and under the sec-ond sentence of paragraph 1 of Chapter VIII,Section C, a party to a dispute should ab-stain from voting.

Further information as to arrangementswill be transmitted subsequently. In the eventthat the Government of [name of Governmentinvited] desires in advance to present viewsor comments concerning the proposals, theGovernment of the United States of Americawill be pleased to transmit such views andcomments to the other participating Govern-ments.

G. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS ON THE DUMBARTON OAKS PROPOSALS

1. INTER-AMERICAN CONFERENCE ON PROBLEMSOF WAR AND PEACE

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals were beingstudied and discussed by the nations of theworld, severally as well as individually. FromFebruary 21 to March 8, 1945, for instance,twenty Members of the Union of AmericanRepublics met in Mexico City to consider theproblems of war and peace. In a resolution2

the Inter-American Conference suggested thatthe following points be taken into considera-tion in the formulation of a definitive charterof the proposed international organization:

(a) The aspiration of universality as anideal toward which the Organization shouldtend in the future;

(b) The desirability of amplifying andmaking more specific the enumeration of theprinciples and purposes of the Organization;

(c) The desirability of amplifying andmaking more specific the powers of the Gen-eral Assembly in order that its action, as thefully representative organ of the internationalcommunity may be rendered effective, harmo-nizing the powers of the Security Councilwith such amplification;

(d) The desirability of extending the juris-diction and competence of the InternationalTribunal or Court of Justice;

(e) The desirability of creating an interna-tional agency specially charged with promot-ing intellectual and moral co-operation amongnations;

(f) The desirability of solving controver-sies and questions of an inter-Americancharacter, preferably in accordance with inter-American methods and procedures, inharmony with those of the General Inter-national Organization;

(g) The desirability of giving an adequaterepresentation to Latin America on the Secur-ity Council.

2. BRITISH COMMONWEALTH CONFERENCEFrom April 4 to 13, 1945, talks were held

in London between representatives of the Brit-ish Commonwealth as a preliminary to the SanFrancisco Conference. They were attended bythe representatives of Australia, Canada, India,New Zealand, the Union of South Africa and

1 U. S. Department of State Bulletin, March 11,1945, pp. 394-5.

2 Final Act of the Inter-American Conferenceon Problems of War and Peace, Mexico City, Feb-ruary-March, 1945, Pan American Union, Wash-ington, D.C., 1945, Resolution XXX, pp. 73-75.

Origin and Evolution 11

the United Kingdom. The statement issuedat the close of the meetings contained the fol-lowing passage:

We have examined, generally and in detail,the tentative proposals resulting from the

Dumbarton Oaks Conversations, and we havehad a valuable exchange of views. We areagreed that the proposals provide the basisfor a charter of such an organization, fullyrecognizing that in certain respects they callfor clarification, improvement and expansion.

H. THE COMMITTEE OF JURISTS1

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals providedthat there should be an International Courtof Justice as the principal judicial organ ofthe organization, but the Proposals left openthe question of whether the Court's Statuteshould be the Statute of the Permanent Courtof International Justice with such modifica-tions as were necessary, or a new Statute basedon that of the Permanent Court.

The United States Government, acting onbehalf of itself and the other governmentssponsoring the San Francisco Conference, in-vited a Committee of Jurists to meet in Wash-ington for the purpose of preparing a DraftStatute of the Court and submitting it to theSan Francisco Conference. Jurists from 44countries met from April 9 to 20, 1945.

The Committee felt that it was for the SanFrancisco Conference to decide whether theCourt should be established as a new Courtor as a continuance of the Permanent Courtof International Justice established in 1920.The question affected particularly the opera-tion of treaties containing references to thejurisdiction of the Permanent Court.

The Committee took the Statute of the Per-manent Court as a basis and proceeded to re-vise it article by article. The revision con-sisted, on the one hand, of the effecting ofcertain adaptations of form, and on the other

hand, of the introduction of certain new fea-tures considered desirable.

On the nomination of judges the Committeedid not reach any agreement. It submitted twoalternative texts—one retaining the system ofnomination by national groups and the otherintroducing a system of nomination by gov-ernments. The Committee suggested that one-third of the judges should be elected everythree years, instead of a complete electionevery nine years.

On the question of obligatory jurisdictionthe Committee could not reach a unanimousagreement. Some jurists wanted to see theprinciple of obligatory jurisdiction affirmed inthe new Statute, while others preferred to re-tain the optional clause. In the end two alter-native texts embodying both views were pre-sented.

A provision for amendment, based on aUnited States proposal, was adopted to fillwhat was felt to be a lacuna in the old Stat-ute. The Committee called to the attentionof the San Francisco Conference the impor-tance of formulating rules for the executionof the Court's decisions, and the necessity ofadjusting the situation as regards Stateswhich were parties to the Statute of the Per-manent Court of International Justice but notMembers of the United Nations.

I. THE QUESTION OF TRUSTEESHIP

The question of trusteeship was placedtentatively on the agenda of the DumbartonOaks Conversations, but no provisions con-cerning it were included in the DumbartonOaks Proposals. It was understood that thequestion would be a subject of subsequentstudy and would be placed on the agenda of theUnited Nations Conference. At Yalta the mat-ter was discussed and agreement was reachedon the following policy:

(1) That the five Governments with perma-nent seats in the Security Council should con-sult each other prior to the United Nations

Conference on providing machinery in theWorld Charter for dealing with territorialtrusteeships which would apply only to (a)existing mandates of the League of Nations;(b) territory to be detached from the enemyas a result of this war; and (c) any otherterritory that may voluntarily be placed undertrusteeship.

1 For a full account of the discussions of the

Committee of Jurists see Documents of the UnitedNations Conference on International Organiza-tion, published by United Nations InformationOrganization, London and New York in co-opera-tion with the U. S. Library of Congress, 1945.Vol. XIV.


(2) That no discussions of specific territo-ries were to take place during the preliminaryconsultations on trusteeships or at the UnitedNations Conference itself. Only machineryand principles of trusteeship should be formu-

lated at the Conference for inclusion in theCharter, and it was to be a matter for subse-quent agreement as to which territories withinthe categories specified above would actuallybe placed under trusteeship.1

J. THE CHINESE PROPOSALS

In the second phase of the DumbartonOaks Conversations the Chinese Governmenthad put forward certain proposals which wereagreed to at that time between China, theUnited Kingdom and the United States. TheGovernment of the U.S.S.R. agreed to join insponsoring the proposals for presentation tothe San Francisco Conference. The proposals,which were submitted to the San FranciscoConference on May 1, 1945, were:

(1) The Charter should provide specificallythat adjustment or settlement of internationaldisputes should be achieved with due regardfor principles of justice and international law.

(2) The Assembly should be responsible forinitiating studies and making recommenda-tions with respect to the development and revi-sion of the rules and principles of internationallaw.

(3) The Economic and Social Councilshould specifically provide for the promotionof educational and other forms of cultural co-operation.2

K. THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION3

1. COMPOSITION OF THE CONFERENCEThe Government of the United States, on

behalf of itself and the other sponsoring Gov-ernments, on March 5, 1945, invited the Gov-ernments that had signed or adhered to theUnited Nations Declaration and had declaredwar against Germany or Japan to send repre-sentatives to the San Francisco Conference,officially known as the United Nations Confer-ence on International Organization, beginningon April 25, 1945. The complete list of thesponsoring Governments and the invited Gov-ernments is as follows:

AustraliaBelgiumBoliviaBrazilCanadaChileChinaColombiaCosta RicaCubaCzechoslovakiaDominican

RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEthiopiaFranceGreeceGuatemalaHaitiHonduras

IndiaIranIraqLebanonLiberiaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNicaraguaNorwayPanamaParaguayPeruPhilippine

CommonwealthSaudi ArabiaSyriaTurkeyUnion of South AfricaUnion of Soviet

Socialist Republics

United KingdomUnited States of

America

UruguayVenezuelaYugoslavia

The invitation to Poland, which was anoriginal signatory of the United Nations Dec-laration, was withheld at that time pendingthe formation of a Polish Provisional Govern-ment of National Unity. On April 27, 1945,the San Francisco Conference adopted the fol-lowing resolution on Poland:

The Governments of the United Nations ex-press to the people of Poland their sympathyand their admiration. They hope that the con-stitution of a Polish Government recognizedas such by the sponsoring nations will make itpossible for Polish delegates to come and takepart as soon as possible in the work of theConference.

1 Charter of the United Nations. Report to thePresident on the Results of the San FranciscoConference by the Chairman of the United StatesDelegation, the Secretary of State. June 26, 1945(Washington, D. C., Govt. Print. Office, 1945),p. 128.

2 Documents of the United Nations Conferenceon International Organization, San Francisco,1945, published by United Nations InformationOrganization, London and New York in co-opera-tion with the U. S. Library of Congress, 1946.Vol. III p. 25 (Doc. 1. G/1(a) May 1, 1945).

3 For the complete official record of the UnitedNations Conference on International Organiza-tion, see Documents of the United Nations Con-ference on International Organization, publishedby United Nations Information Organization,London and New York in co-operation with theU.S. Library of Congress, 1945. Vols. I to XV.


On April 30 the Conference approved theadmission of Argentina, the ByelorussianS.S.R. and the Ukrainian S.S.R. On June 5Denmark, which had just been liberated, wasinvited to attend the Conference. A total of50 nations attended. 1

2. ORGANIZATION AND PROCEDURE OF THECONFERENCE

The chairmen of the delegations of the spon-soring Governments presided in rotation at theplenary sessions of the Conference. Theywere: Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., of the UnitedStates; Anthony Eden, of the United King-dom; Dr. T. V. Soong, of China; and V. M.Molotov, of the U.S.S.R. Lord Halifax laterdeputized for Mr. Eden, Dr. V. K. WellingtonKoo for Dr. Soong, and Andrei A. Gromyko forMr. Molotov. The chairmen of these delega-tions held private meetings from time to timewith Mr. Stettinius presiding, and on May 3the chairman of the French delegation wasinvited to attend those private meetings.

The Conference established four generalcommittees: A Steering Committee, consist-ing of the chairmen of all delegations, withMr. Stettinius presiding, was to considermajor questions of policy and procedure. AnExecutive Committee, consisting of fourteenmembers—the chairmen of the delegations ofthe four sponsoring Governments and thechairmen of the delegations of Australia,Brazil, Canada, Chile, Czechoslovakia, France,

Iran, Mexico, the Netherlands and Yugoslavia—with Mr. Stettinius presiding, was to makerecommendations to the Steering Committee.A Co-ordination Committee, consisting of onerepresentative of each of the fourteen mem-bers of the Executive Committee was to assistthe Executive Committee and to supervise thefinal drafting of the Charter. A CredentialsCommittee, consisting of the chairmen of thedelegations of Ecuador, Luxembourg, Nica-ragua, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yugoslavia,was to verify the credentials of the repre-sentatives.

The Conference was divided into four com-missions and twelve technical committees.All delegations were represented on the com-missions and the committees.

Each commission had a President and aRapporteur, who were nominated by the Steer-ing Committee and approved by the Confer-ence. An Assistant Secretary-General of theConference served as the secretary of eachcommission. Each commission was to developgeneral principles to guide its technical com-mittees.

Each technical committee had a Chairmanand a Rapporteur, who were nominated by theSteering Committee and approved by the Con-ference. Each committee was to formulaterecommendations on various parts of theagenda assigned to it.

The terms of reference of the commissionsand the committees were as follows:

Commission &Committee 2

Commission ICommittee I/1

Committee I/2

Commission IICommittee II/lCommittee II/2Committee II/3

Committee II/4

Commission IIICommittee III/lCommittee HI/2Committee HI/3Committee III/4Commission IVCommittee IV/1

Committee IV/2

Title

General ProvisionsPreamble, Purposes

& PrinciplesMembership, Amendment

& SecretariatGeneral AssemblyStructure and ProceduresPolitical & Security FunctionsEconomic and Social

Co-operationTrusteeship System

Security CouncilStructure and ProceduresPeaceful SettlementEnforcement ArrangementsRegional ArrangementsJudicial OrganizationInternational Court

of JusticeLegal Problems

Terms of Reference(Dumbarton Oaks Proposals)

Chs. I & II

Chs. III, IV, X & XI

Ch. V, Sees. A, C, D, paras. of Sec. B.Ch. V. especially Sec. BCh. IX & paras. of Ch. V

Principles and Mechanismof Trusteeship System

Ch. VI, Sees. A, C, D, paras of Sec. BCh. VIII, Sec. ACh. VIII, Sec. B, & Ch. XIICh. VIII, Sec. C

Ch. VII

Judicial Status of United Nations,Registration of Treaties, et cetera.

1 For list of representatives at the Conference, see pp. 43 ff.2 For Officers of Commissions and Committees see p. 47.


The Secretary-General of the Conferencewas Alger Hiss; the Deputy Secretary-Generalwas John Ross. The Secretariat consisted of1,058 persons, not including the United StatesArmy and Navy personnel and volunteer work-ers. The expenses of the Conference, estimatedat somewhat less than $2,000,000,1 were metby the United States as the host government.

Each delegation to the Conference had onevote. Any question of procedure was decidedby a majority of the votes of the delegationspresent and voting; all other questions weredecided by two thirds of the votes of the dele-gations present and voting.

The official languages of the Conferencewere Chinese, English, French, Russian andSpanish. The working languages were Eng-lish and French. Addresses in English orFrench were interpreted into the other lan-guage, and addresses in any other languageinto both English and French.

promotion and encouragement of respect forhuman rights and for fundamental freedomsfor all without distinction as to race, language,religion or sex; and

CHAPTER II. PRINCIPLES

1. The Organization is based on the prin-ciple of the sovereign equality of all (peace-loving States) its Members.

3. All Members of the Organization shallsettle their international disputes by peacefulmeans in such a manner that internationalpeace and security are not endangered.

New paragraph to be added following para-graph 6, to take the place of paragraph 7 ofChapter VIII, Section A, which would be de-leted:

Nothing contained in this Charter shall au-thorize the Organization to intervene in mat-ters which are essentially within the domesticjurisdiction of the State concerned or shall re-quire the Members to submit such mattersto settlement under this Charter; but thisprinciple shall not prejudice the application ofChapter VIII, Section B.

3. AGENDA OF THE CONFERENCE

At a meeting of the chairmen of the dele-gations on April 27 it was agreed that theagenda of the Conference should be "the Dum-barton Oaks Proposals, as supplemented at theCrimea Conference, and by the Chinese Pro-posals agreed to by the sponsoring Govern-ments, and the comments thereon submittedby the participating countries."

The four sponsoring Governments them-selves submitted jointly to the Conferenceon May 5 a series of amendments to the Dum-barton Oaks Proposals. The text of the amend-ments was as follows:2

CHAPTER I. PURPOSES

1. To maintain international peace and se-curity; and to that end to take effective collec-tive measures for the prevention and removalof threats to the peace and the suppression ofacts of aggression or other breaches of thepeace, and to bring about by peaceful means,and with due regard for principles of justiceand international law, adjustment or settle-ment of international disputes which maylead to a breach of the peace.

2. To develop friendly relations among na-tions based on respect for the principle ofequal rights and self-determination of peoplesand to take other appropriate measures tostrengthen universal peace;

3. To achieve international co-operation inthe solution of international economic, social,cultural and other humanitarian problems and

CHAPTER V. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLYSection B. Functions and Powers

6. The General Assembly should initiatestudies and make recommendations for thepurpose of promoting international co-opera-tion in political, economic, (and) social andcultural fields to assist in the realization ofhuman rights and basic freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, language, religionand sex and also for the encouragement of thedevelopment of international law (and of ad-justing situations likely to impair the generalwelfare.).

New paragraph to follow paragraph 7:The General Assembly should examine the

administrative budgets of such specializedagencies with a view to making recommenda-tions to the agencies concerned.

CHAPTER VI. THE SECURITY COUNCIL

Section A. CompositionThe Security Council should consist of one

representative of each of eleven Members ofthe Organization. Representatives of theUnited States of America, the United King-dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, theRepublic of China, and, in due course, France,should have permanent seats. The General

1 Unless otherwise indicated, $ sign representsU.S. currency.

2 Amendments are indicated by using italic typefor added passages and italic type in parenthesesfor deleted passages.


Assembly should elect six States to fill the non-permanent seats, due regard being speciallypaid in the first instance to the contributionof Members of the Organization towards themaintenance of international peace and secur-ity and towards the other purposes of the Or-ganization, and also to equitable geographicaldistribution. These six States should be electedfor a term of two years, three retiring eachyear. They should not be immediately eligiblefor re-election. In the first election of the non-permanent members three should be chosen bythe General Assembly for one-year terms andthree for two-year terms.

Section D. Procedure2. The Security Council should be empow-

ered to sot up such bodies or agencies as itmay deem necessary for the performance ofits functions, (including regional sub-commit-tees of the Military Staff Committee.)

5. Any Member of the Organization nothaving a. seat on the Security Council and anyState not a Member of the Organization, if it13 a party to a dispute under consideration bythe Security Council, should be invited to par-ticipate in the discussion relating to the dis-pute. In the case of a non-member, the Secur-ity Council should lay down such conditionsas it may deem just for the participation ofsuch a non-member.

CHAPTER VII. AN INTERNATIONAL COURT

The provisions of Chapter VII of the Dum-barton Oaks Proposal should be adjusted tobring it into conformity with the recommen-dations of Commission IV in light of the re-port of the Jurists Committee.

CHAPTER VIII. ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE MAINTE-NANCE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND

SECURITY INCLUDING PREVENTION AND

SUPPRESSION OF AGGRESSION

Section A. Pacific Settlement of DisputesThe following new paragraph should be in-

serted before Paragraph 1 of Section A ofChapter VIII:

Without prejudice to the provisions of para-graphs 1 to 5 below, the Security Councilshould be empowered, if all the parties so re-quest, to make recommendations to the partiesto any dispute with a view to its settlement inaccordance with the principles laid down inChapter II, Paragraph 3.

2. Any State, whether Member of the Or-ganization or not, may bring any dispute orsituation to the attention of the General As-sembly or of the Security Council. In the caseof a non-member, it should be required to ac-cept, for the purposes of such dispute, the obli-gations of pacific settlement provided in theCharter.

4. If, nevertheless, parties to a dispute ofthe nature referred to in paragraph 3 abovefail to settle it by the means indicated in thatparagraph, they should obligate themselves torefer it to the Security Council. (The) If theSecurity Council (should in each case decidewhether or not) deems that the continuanceof the particular dispute is in fact likely toendanger the maintenance of internationalpeace and security, (and, accordingly, whetherthe Security Council should deal with the dis-pute, and, if so, whether it should take actionunder paragraph 5) it shall decide whether totake action under paragraph 5 or whether it-self to recommend such terms of settlement asit may consider appropriate.

(7. The provisions of paragraph 1 to 6 ofSection A should not apply to situations ordisputes arising out of matters which by inter-national law are solely within the domesticjurisdiction of the State concerned.)

(Note: This paragraph would be replacedby the new paragraph proposed for additionfollowing paragraph 6, Chapter II, Principles.)

Section B. Determination of Threats to thePeace or Acts of Aggression and Action

with Respect Thereto1. Should the Security Council deem that a

failure to settle a dispute in accordance withprocedures indicated in paragraph 3 of SectionA, or in accordance with its recommendationsmade under paragraphs 4 or 5 of Section A,constitutes a threat to the maintenance of in-ternational peace and security, it should takeany measures necessary for the maintenanceof international peace and security in accord-ance with the purposes and principles of theOrganization.

2. In general the Security Council shoulddetermine the existence of any threat to thepeace, breach of the peace or act of aggressionand should make recommendations or decideupon the measures set forth in paragraphs 3and 4 of this Section to be taken to maintainor restore peace and security.

Insert the following paragraph betweenparagraphs 2 and 3:

Before making the recommendations or de-ciding upon the measures for the maintenanceor restoration of peace and security in accord-ance with the provisions of paragraph 2, theSecurity Council may call upon the partiesconcerned to comply with such provisionalmeasures as it may deem necessary or desir-able in order to prevent an aggravation of thesituation. Such provisional measures should bewithout prejudice to the rights, claims or posi-tion of the parties concerned. Failure to com-ply with such provisional measures should beduly taken account of by the Security Council.

9. There should be established a MilitaryStaff Committee the functions of which shouldbe to advise and assist the Security Council

OF JUSTICE


on all questions relating to the Security Coun-cil's military requirements for the mainten-ance of international peace and security, to theemployment and command of forces placed atits disposal, to the regulation of armaments,and to possible disarmament. It should be re-sponsible under the Security Council for thestrategic direction of any armed forces placedat the disposal of the Security Council. TheCommittee should be composed of the Chiefsof Staff of the permanent members of the Se-curity Council or their representatives. AnyMember of the Organization not permanentlyrepresented on the Committee should be in-vited by the Committee to be associated withit when the efficient discharge of the Commit-tee's responsibilities requires that such a Stateshould participate in its work. Questions ofcommand of forces should be worked out sub-sequently. The Military Staff Committee, withthe authorization of the Security Council, mayestablish regional sub-committees of the Mili-tary Staff Committee.

CHAPTER IX. ARRANGEMENTS FOR INTERNA-TIONAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL

CO-OPERATIONSection A. Purpose and Relationships

1. With a view to the creation of conditionsof stability and well-being which are necessaryfor peaceful and friendly relations among na-tions based on respect for the principle ofequal rights and self-determination of peo-ples, the Organization should facilitate solu-tions of international economic, social, cul-tural and other humanitarian problems andpromote respect for human rights and for fun-damental freedoms for all without distinctionas to race, language, religion or sex. Responsi-bility for the discharge of this function shouldbe vested in the General Assembly, and underthe authority of the General Assembly, in anEconomic and Social Council.

Section C. Functions and Powers of theEconomic and Social Council

1. The Economic and Social Council shouldbe empowered:

Insert after paragraph a, new paragraph asfollows:

To make recommendations for promoting re-spect for human rights and fundamental free-doms;

b. To make recommendations, on its owninitiative with respect to international eco-nomic, social, cultural and other humanitarianmatters;

c. To receive and consider reports from theeconomic, social, cultural and other organiza-tions or agencies brought into relationshipwith the Organization, and to co-ordinate theiractivities through consultations with, and rec-ommendations to, such organizations oragencies;

Section D. Organization and Procedure1. The Economic and Social Council should

set up (an economic commission, a social com-

mission and such other commissions as maybe required) commissions in the fields of eco-nomic activity, social activity, cultural activ-ity, promotion of human rights and any otherfield within the competence of the Council.These commissions should consist of experts.There should be a permanent staff whichshould constitute a part of the Secretariat ofthe Organization.

CHAPTER X. THE SECRETARIAT

1. There should be a Secretariat comprisinga Secretary-General, four deputies and suchstaff as may be required. (The Secretary-General should be the chief administrative of-ficer of the Organization. He should be electedby the General Assembly, on recommendationof the Security Council, for such term and un-der such conditions as are specified in theCharter.) The Secretary-General and his depu-ties should be elected by the General Assemblyon recommendation of the Security Council fora period of three years, and the Secretary-General should be eligible for re-election. TheSecretary-General should be the chief admin-istrative officer of the Organization.

4. In the performance of their duties, theSecretary-General and the staff should be re-sponsible only to the Organization. Their re-sponsibilities should be exclusively interna-tional in character, and they should not seekor receive instructions in regard to the dis-charge thereof from any authority external tothe Organization. The Members should under-take fully to respect the international charac-ter of the responsibilities of the Secretariatand not to seek to influence any of their na-tionals in the discharge of such responsibility.

CHAPTER XI. AMENDMENTS

1. The present Charter comes into forceafter its ratification in accordance with theirrespective constitutional processes by theMembers of the Organization having perma-nent seats on the Security Council and by amajority of the other Members of the Or-ganization.

Note: The existing text of Chapter XI wouldbecome paragraph 2.

2. A general conference of the Members ofthe United Nations may be held at a date andplace to be fixed by a three-fourths vote of theGeneral Assembly with the concurrence of theSecurity Council voting in accordance with theprovisions of Chapter VI, Section C, para-graph 2, for the purpose of reviewing theCharter. Each Member shall have one vote inthe Conference. Any alterations of the Charterrecommended by a two-thirds vote of the Con-ference shall take effect when ratified in ac-cordance with their respective constitutionalprocesses by the Members of the Organizationhaving permanent membership on the SecurityCouncil and by a majority of the other Mem-bers of the Organization.


Two additional amendments to the Dumbar-ton Oaks Proposals agreed to by the Govern-ments of the United States, United Kingdom,the Soviet Union and China were submittedon May 11, 1945. These amendments are asfollows:

CHAPTER V. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLYSection B. Functions and Powers

New paragraph to follow paragraph 6:Subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of

this Section, the General Assembly should beempowered to recommend measures for thepeaceful adjustment of any situations, re-gardless of origin, which it deems likely toimpair the general welfare or friendly rela-tions among nations, including situations re-sulting from a violation of the Purposes andPrinciples set forth in this Charter.

CHAPTER VIII. ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE MAIN-

SECURITY INCLUDING PREVENTION AND

Section C. Regional Arrangements2. The Security Council should, where

appropriate, utilize such arrangements oragencies for enforcement action under itsauthority. But no enforcement action shouldbe taken under regional arrangements or byregional agencies without the authorizationof the Security Council with the exceptionof measures against enemy States in thiswar, provided for, pursuant to Chapter XII,paragraph 2, or, in regional arrangementsdirected against renewal of aggressive policyon the part of such States, until such timeas the Organization may, by consent of theGovernments concerned, be charged with theresponsibility for preventing further aggres-sion by a State now at war with the UnitedNations.

It would be impossible in this brief surveyto include all the amendments and proposalssubmitted to the Conference and to go intothe details of the work of the Commissionsand Committees. In the following pages anattempt is made to point out some of thevital issues discussed at the Conference andsome of the main contributions of the Con-ference to the drafting of the Charter of theUnited Nations.

4. PREAMBLE, PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLESThe Dumbarton Oaks Proposals did not

contain any Preamble. Chapter I of the Pro-posals was devoted to the Purposes, andChapter II to the Principles, of the UnitedNations. The Charter in its final form con-tains a Preamble, and the Purposes and thePrinciples which constituted Chapters I and

II of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals becameArticles 1 and 2 of Chapter I of the Charter.

The task of drafting the Preamble andPurposes and Principles was assigned to Com-mittee I/1. Several delegations had proposedthat the Charter should contain a Preamble,and several drafts were submitted. It wasfound difficult to draw a clear-cut distinctionbetween the Preamble, the Purposes and thePrinciples of the United Nations. After somediscussion the Committee finally made thedistinction in these paragraphs:

(1) The "Preamble" introduces the Char-ter and sets forth the declared common in-tentions which brought us together in thisConference and moved us to unite our willand efforts, and made us harmonize, regulate,and organize our international action toachieve our common ends.

(2) The "Purposes" constitute the raisond'etre of the Organization. They are theaggregation of the common ends on whichour minds met; hence, the cause and objectof the Charter to which Member States col-lectively and severally subscribe.

(3) The chapter on "Principles" sets, inthe same order of ideas, the methods and regu-lating norms according to which the Organ-ization and its Members shall do their dutyand endeavor to achieve the common ends.Their understandings should serve as actualstandards of international conduct.

More briefly, the Preamble sets forth theintentions of the participating Governments,the Purposes constitute the raison d'être ofthe United Nations, and the Principles serveas the standards of international conduct.

Committee I/1 accepted as a working basisthe Preamble submitted by the Union of SouthAfrica. The final form of the Preamble readas follows:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONSDETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from thescourge of war, which twice in our lifetimehas brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental humanrights, in the dignity and worth of the humanperson, in the equal rights of men and womenand of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justiceand respect for the obligations arising fromtreaties and other sources of international lawcan be maintained, and

to promote social progress and betterstandards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS

to practice tolerance and live together in

TENANCE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND

SUPPRESSION OF AGGRESSION


peace with one another as good neighbours, andto unite our strength to maintain interna-

tional peace and security, andto ensure, by the acceptance of principles

and the institution of methods, that armedforce shall not be used, save in the commoninterest, and

to employ international machinery for thepromotion of the economic and social advance-ment of all peoples,

HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TOACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS.

Accordingly, our respective Governments,through representatives assembled in the cityof San Francisco, who have exhibited theirfull powers found to be in good and due form,have agreed to the present Charter of theUnited Nations and do hereby establish aninternational organization to be known as theUnited Nations.

On the proposal of the United States dele-gation, supported by the delegations of theU.S.S.R., the Ukrainian S.S.R., China, Franceand Latin American countries, the phrase"The High Contracting Parties" in the or-iginal draft proposed by South Africa waschanged to "We the Peoples of the UnitedNations." However, it was recognized thatthe Charter, by its nature, must be an agree-ment between the Governments of the UnitedNations. Accordingly, at the end of the Pre-amble the clause was inserted that " . . . ourrespective Governments through their repre-sentatives assembled in the city of San Fran-cisco . . . have agreed to the present Charterof the United Nations and do hereby establishan international organization to be known asthe United Nations."

It was suggested in the Dumbarton OaksProposals that the name of the organizationshould be "The United Nations." CommitteeI/1 unanimously adopted the name as a tri-bute to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt,who was the first to suggest it. Commission Iand the Conference accepted the name withoutdissent.

The Preamble has the same validity as thePurposes and Principles. The report of theRapporteur of the Committee I/1 contains thefollowing remarks:

The provisions of the Charter, being in thiscase indivisible as in any other legal instru-ment, are equally valid and operative. Therights, duties, privileges and obligations ofthe Organization and its Members match withone another and complement one another tomake a whole. Each of them is construed to be

understood and applied in function of theothers.

It is for this reason, as well as to avoidundue repetition, that the Committee did notfind it necessary to mention again in eachparagraph relevant dispositions included inother paragraphs of the same chapter or otherchapters. It was, nevertheless, unavoidable attimes to make some repetition.

May the explanation given above dispel anydoubts as to the validity and value of anydivision of the Charter, whether we call it"Principles," "Purposes," or "Preamble."

It is thus clear that there are no groundsfor supposing that the Preamble has less legalvalidity than the two succeeding chapters.[Purposes and Principles]. We found it appro-priate to state the last remark, which couldotherwise be taken for granted.

Chapter I of the Charter lists four Pur-poses, which constitute the raison d'etre ofthe United Nations.

The Conference agreed that the first andforemost purpose of the United Nations was"to maintain international peace and security,and to that end: to take effective collectivemeasures for the prevention and removal ofthreats to the peace, and for the suppressionof acts of aggression or other breaches of thepeace, and to bring about by peaceful means,and in conformity with the principles of justiceand international law, adjustment or settle-ment of international disputes or situationswhich might lead to a breach of the peace."The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals did not con-tain the words "in conformity with the prin-ciples of justice and international law." Onthe proposal of China, the four sponsoringGovernments agreed that "the Charter shouldprovide specifically that adjustment or settle-ment of international disputes should beachieved with due regard for principles ofjustice and international law." The phrase"with due regard" was changed by CommitteeI/1 to read "in conformity with."

The second purpose of the United Nationsis "to develop friendly relations among na-tions based on respect for the principle ofequal rights and self-determination of peoples,and to take other appropriate measures tostrengthen universal peace." The words "basedon respect for the principle of equal rightsand self-determination of peoples" were in-troduced at the San Francisco Conference;they were not in the Dumbarton Oaks Pro-posals.

The third purpose of the United Nationsis "to achieve international co-operation in


solving international problems of an economic,social, cultural, or humanitarian character,and in promoting and encouraging respect forhuman rights and for fundamental freedomsfor all without distinction as to race, sex,language, or religion." The words "in promot-ing and encouraging respect for human rightsand for fundamental freedoms for all withoutdistinction as to race, sex, language, or reli-gion" were introduced at the San FranciscoConference; they were not in the DumbartonOaks Proposals.

The fourth purpose of the United Nationsis "to be a centre for harmonizing the actionsof nations in the attainment of these commonends." The words "to afford" in the Dumbar-ton Oaks text, which at the time denoted aneye to the future, were changed to "to be."

Chapter I of the Charter lists seven Prin-ciples which should serve as the standards ofinternational conduct. The Principles as final-ly agreed upon at the San Francisco Confer-ence were substantially the same as thosecontained in the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals.

The first principle is "the sovereign equal-ity" of all the Members of the United Nations.The Moscow Declaration of October 30, 1943,and the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals used theexpression "the sovereign equality of all peace-loving States." At San Francisco "all peace-loving States" was changed to read "all its[United Nations] Members." The term, "sov-ereign equality" according to the report of theRapporteur of Committee I/1, means:

(1) that States are juridically equal;(2) that each State enjoys the right inher-

ent in full sovereignty;(3) that the personality of the State is

respected as well as its territorial integrityand political independence; and

(4) that the State should, under interna-tional order, comply faithfully with its inter-national duties and obligations.

The second principle is that "all Members,in order to ensure to all of them the rights andbenefits resulting from membership, shall ful-fil in good faith the obligations assumed bythem in accordance with the present Charter."The words "in good faith" were added byCommission I, upon the suggestion of theColombian delegation.

The third principle is that "all Membersshould settle their international disputes bypeaceful means in such a manner that inter-national peace and security, and justice, are

not endangered." This followed the wordingof the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, except thewords "and justice", which were added uponthe proposal of the Bolivian delegation.

The fourth principle is that "all Membersshall refrain in their international relationsfrom the threat or use of force against theterritorial integrity or political independenceof any State, or in any manner inconsistentwith the Purposes of the United Nations." Thewords "against the territorial integrity orpolitical independence of any State" were notin the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals; they wereinserted upon the demand of several delega-tions which thought there should be a morespecific guarantee in the Charter against anyviolation of territorial integrity and politicalindependence. A New Zealand amendmentthat "all Members undertake collectively toresist any act of aggression against anyMember" gained considerable support butfailed to secure the necessary two-thirdsmajority.

The fifth principle is that "all Membersshall give the United Nations every assistancein any action it takes in accordance with thepresent Charter, and shall refrain from givingassistance to any State against which theUnited Nations is taking preventive or en-forcement action."

The sixth principle is that "the Organiza-tion shall ensure that the States which are notMembers of the United Nations act in accord-ance with these Principles so far as may benecessary for the maintenance of internation-al peace and security." The French delegationproposed the addition to the fifth principleof a clause to the effect that membershipin the United Nations was incompatible withthe status of permanent neutrality. It wasunderstood, however, that the fifth and sixth-principles, properly interpreted, would coverthe French amendment.

The seventh principle is that "nothing con-tained in the present Charter shall authorizethe United Nations to intervene in matterswhich are essentially within the domesticjurisdiction of any State or shall require theMembers to submit such matters to settlementunder the present Charter; but this principleshall not prejudice the application of enforce-ment measures under Chapter VII." In theDumbarton Oaks Proposals a similar para-graph was to be found in Section A, Chapter


VIII, dealing with pacific settlement of dis-putes. The Proposals used the expression"matters which by international law are solelywithin the domestic jurisdiction of any Stateconcerned." The sponsoring nations them-selves proposed that the paragraph should betransferred to the chapter on the Principlesof the United Nations, and they re-wordedthe expression to read "matters which areessentially within the domestic jurisdictionof any State." The representatives of Uru-guay, Belgium and Peru, however, expressedregret that the Charter did not establishthe rule of international law as the criterionof what matters were essentially withindomestic jurisdiction.

5. MEMBERSHIPChapter III (on Membership) of the Dum-

barton Oaks Proposals contained only oneArticle, which stated that "membership of theOrganization should be open to all peace-loving States."

In the Charter, membership is dealt within Chapter II, which contains four Articles.The task of drafting the provisions for mem-bership was assigned to Committee I/2.

The Committee made a distinction betweenoriginal Members and future Members. Theoriginal Members are those States which,having participated in the United NationsConference on International Organization orhaving previously signed the United NationsDeclaration, signed and ratified the Charter.New Members are those peace-loving Stateswhich accept the obligations contained in theCharter and, in the opinion of the organiza-tion, are able and willing to carry out suchobligations. According to the report of theRapporteur of Committee I/2, it was under-stood that:

This distinction did not imply any discrim-ination against future Members but that thenormal course of events required it. Beforenew Members can be admitted the Organiza-tion must exist, which in turn implies theexistence of original Members. On the otherhand the definition adopted would serve tocalm the fears of certain nations participat-ing in our deliberations which, properly speak-ing, are not States and which for this reasonmight be denied the right of membership inthe Organization.

In the deliberations of Committee I/2, thedelegations of Uruguay and some other na-tions took the position that all States shouldbe Members of the United Nations and that

their participation was obligatory. That is tosay, it would not be left to the choice of anynation whether to become a Member of theUnited Nations or to withdraw from it. Otherdelegations believed that universality in thissense was an ideal toward which it was properto aim but which it was not practicable torealize at once.

The Committee considered two other funda-mental problems: (1) the relation existingbetween membership and the observance ofthe principles and obligations mentioned inthe Charter; and (2) the extent to which itwas desirable to establish the limits withinwhich the organization would exercise its dis-cretionary power with respect to the admissionof new Members.

The unanimous opinion of the Committeewas that adherence to the principles of theCharter and complete acceptance of the obliga-tions arising therefrom were essential condi-tions to participation by States in the organ-ization. Nevertheless, two principal tenden-cies were manifested in the discussions. Onthe one hand, there were some who declaredthemselves in favor of inserting in the Charterspecific conditions which new Members shouldbe required to fulfil, especially in matters con-cerning the character and policies of govern-ments. On the other hand, others maintainedthat the Charter should not limit the organ-ization in its decisions concerning requests foradmission.

The term "all peace-loving States" was re-tained, while the qualifications for member-ship were elaborated. To declare oneself"peace-loving" does not suffice to acquiremembership in the organization. It is alsonecessary to prove two things: that a nationis ready to accept the obligations of the Char-ter and that it is able and willing to carryout such obligations.

With respect to the admission of new Mem-bers, Committee I/2 recommended, and Com-mission I and the Conference approved thefollowing interpretative commentary originallysubmitted on June 19, 1945, by the delegationof Mexico, and supported by the delegationsof Australia, Belgium, the Byelorussian S.S.R.,Chile, France, Guatemala, the Ukrainian S.S.R.,the United States and Uruguay.

It is the understanding of the delegationof Mexico that paragraph 2 of Chapter III[Article 4, Chapter II, of the Charter] cannotbe applied to the States whose regimes have


been established with the help of militaryforces belonging to the countries which havewaged war against the United Nations, aslong as those regimes are in power.

The Charter provides that the admission ofany State to membership in the United Na-tions will be effected by a decision of the Gen-eral Assembly upon the recommendation ofthe Security Council. This was recommendedby Committee II/l. It was stated in the reportof the Rapporteur of that Committee that "thepurpose of the Charter is primarily to providesecurity against a repetition of the presentwar and that, therefore, the Security Coun-cil should assume the initial responsibilityof suggesting new participating States."However, it was understood that this provisiondid not "weaken the right of the GeneralAssembly to accept or reject a recommenda-tion for the admission of a new Member, ora recommendation to the effect that a givenState should not be admitted to the UnitedNations."

The question of withdrawal aroused muchdiscussion in the Committee. On the one hand,it was argued that it would be contrary tothe conception of universality. On the otherhand, it was asserted that a sovereign nationcould not be compelled to remain in the organ-ization against its will. In the end the Com-mittee decided against the inclusion in theCharter of a withdrawal clause. Instead itadopted a declaration on withdrawal, the textof which, as revised by Commission I, was asfollows:

The Committee adopts the view that theCharter should not make express provisioneither to permit or to prohibit withdrawalfrom the Organization. The Committee deemsthat the highest duty of the nations which willbecome Members is to continue their co-opera-tion within the Organization for the preserva-tion of international peace and security. If,however, a Member because of exceptionalcircumstances feels constrained to withdraw,and leave the burden of maintaining interna-tional peace and security on the other Mem-bers, it is not the purpose of the Organizationto compel that Member to continue its co-operation in the Organization.

It is obvious, particularly, that withdrawalor some other form of dissolution of the Or-ganization would become inevitable if, de-ceiving the hopes of humanity, the Organiza-tion was revealed to be unable to maintainpeace or could do so only at the expense of lawand justice.

Nor would a Member be bound to remain

in the Organization if its rights and obliga-tions as such were changed by Charter amend-ment in which it has not concurred andwhich it finds itself unable to accept, or ifan amendment duly accepted by the necessarymajority in the Assembly or in a general con-ference fails to secure the ratification neces-sary to bring such amendment into effect.

It is for these considerations that the Com-mittee has decided to abstain from recommend-ing insertion in the Charter of a formal clausespecifically forbidding or permitting with-drawal.

The questions of suspension and expulsiongave rise to a lengthy exchange of views inCommittee I/2. These questions were dealtwith in the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals inChapter V (on the General Assembly), butthey were transferred to Chapter II (onMembership) in the Charter. In the discus-sions, some representatives maintained thatexpulsion would be contrary to the concept ofuniversality, while the majority thought thatthe primary purposes of the United Nationswere peace and security, not universality. Inthe end the Committee recommended and Com-mission I and the Conference adopted thefollowing provisions:

A Member of the United Nations againstwhich preventive or enforcement action hasbeen taken by the Security Council may be sus-pended from the exercise of the rights andprivileges of membership by the GeneralAssembly upon the recommendation of theSecurity Council. The exercise of these rightsand privileges may be restored by the Secur-ity Council.

A Member of the United Nations which haspersistently violated the Principles containedin the present Charter may be expelled fromthe Organization by the General Assemblyupon the recommendation of the SecurityCouncil.

6, ORGANSChapter IV (on Principal Organs) of the

Dumbarton Oaks Proposals suggested thatthe United Nations should have four principalorgans—a General Assembly, a Security Coun-cil, an International Court of Justice and aSecretariat—and should have such subsidiaryorgans as might be found necessary. Thismatter was assigned to Committee I/2.

Upon the recommendation of CommitteeII/3, the Economic and Social Council wasmade a principal organ, and upon the recom-mendation of Committee II/4, the TrusteeshipCouncil was likewise made a principal organ.


Committee I/2 added a new Article: "TheUnited Nations shall place no restrictions onthe eligibility of men and women to partici-pate in any capacity and under conditions ofequality in its principal and subsidiaryorgans."

These provisions constitute Chapter III(Organs) of the Charter.

7. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Matters relating to the structure and pro-cedure of the General Assembly were assignedto Committee II/l. The functions and powersof the General Assembly with respect to themaintenance of peace and security, the promo-tion of economic and social co-operation andthe operation of international trusteeshipwere assigned respectively to Committee II/2,Committee II/3 and Committee II/4.

Chapter V of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposalsas amended by the sponsoring Governmentswas used as the basis of discussion in Com-mittee II/l and Committee II/2. The work ofCommittee II/3 and Committee II/4 will bediscussed later.

a. Structure and ProcedureOn the structure and procedure of the Gen-

eral Assembly the suggestions of the Dum-barton Oaks Conversations were generallyaccepted with minor changes and additions.

The Dumbarton Oaks text stated that allMembers of the organization should be mem-bers of the General Assembly and should havea number of representatives. Committee II/lrecommended that each Member "shall havenot more than five representatives in theGeneral Assembly."

Some delegations proposed that the publicand the press of the world should have freeaccess to the sessions of the General Assembly,but other delegations thought that the ques-tion should be dealt with as a proceduralmatter by the General Assembly itself. TheCommittee recommended and Commission Iand the Conference approved the followingstatement to be included as a part of the offi-cial record of the Conference:

The Conference is of the opinion that regu-lations to be adopted at the first session of theGeneral Assembly shall provide that, save inexceptional cases, the sessions of the GeneralAssembly shall be open to the public and thepress of the world.

b. Functions and PowersOn the functions and powers of the General

Assembly, Committee II/2 made certain verysignificant recommendations which tended tostrengthen the position of the General Assem-bly.

In the first place, the Committee recom-mended and the Conference approved what isnow Article 10 of the Charter, which makesthe General Assembly the overseeing and re-viewing organ of the United Nations. Thetext of the Article, as finally adopted, wasas follows:

The General Assembly may discuss anyquestions or any matters within the scope orthe present Charter or relating to the powersand functions of any organs provided for inthe present Charter, and, except as provided inArticle 12 [matters under the considerationof the Security Council], may make recom-mendations to the Members of the UnitedNations or to the Security Council or to bothon any such questions or matters.

In the second place, the relationship betweenthe General Assembly and the Security Coun-cil was further clarified by Committee II/2.The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had suggestedthat "the General Assembly shall receive andconsider annual and special reports from theSecurity Council." While this was retainedin the Charter, Committee II/2 added an in-terpretation that the General Assembly, whenconsidering annual and special reports fromthe Security Council, might exercise thepowers of discussion and recommendation.This interpretation was embodied in the re-port of the Rapporteur of Commission II andadopted by the Conference in these words:

Commission II calls particular attention tothe word "consider" as used in the Charterin connection with reports of the SecurityCouncil and other organs. It is the intentionof Commission II that this word shall be in-terpreted to encompass the right to discuss,and that the power of the Assembly to discussand make recommendations as defined inArticles 10, 11, 12 and 14 is not limited inany way with respect to its consideration ofreports from the Security Council.

In the third place, Committee II/2 recom-mended a new Article, which is now Article14 of the Charter. The Article, as finallyadopted, read as follows:

Subject to the provisions of Article 12[matters under the consideration of the Se-curity Council], the General Assembly may re-commend measures for the peaceful adjust-ment of any situation, regardless of origin,


which it deems likely to impair the generalwelfare or friendly relations among nations,including situations resulting from a violationof the provisions of the present Charter set-ting forth the Purposes and Principles of theUnited Nations.

In the discussions of Committee II/2, theproblem of the revision of treaties wasbrought up. Some representatives thoughtthat any reference to the revision of treatieswould tend to weaken the structure of inter-national obligations and might be an invita-tion to the enemy States to seek a revision ofpeace treaties. In the end the Committeerecommended the more general and inclusivephrase, "peaceful adjustment of any situation,regardless of origin."

The Committee also made some minorchanges in the Dumbarton Oaks text with re-spect to the elective, administrative and budg-etary functions and powers of the GeneralAssembly.

8. THE SECURITY COUNCILMatters relating to the structure and pro-

cedure of the Security Council were assignedto Committee III/l. The functions and powersof the Security Council with respect to pacificsettlement, enforcement arrangements and re-gional arrangements were assigned respective-ly to Committee HI/2, Committee HI/3 andCommittee HI/4. Chapters VI and VIII ofthe Dumbarton Oaks Proposals as supple-mented by the Yalta agreement and amendedby the sponsoring Governments served as thebasis of discussion of these four Committeesof Commission III.

a. Structure and ProcedureThe Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had sug-

gested that the United States, the UnitedKingdom, the U.S.S.R., the Republic of China,and, "in due course," France should have per-manent seats in the Security Council. On thesuggestion of the Canadian representative,Committee III/l deleted the words "in duecourse."

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had sug-gested that the General Assembly should electsix States to fill the non-permanent seats.Pursuant to an amendment of the sponsoringGovernments, Committee III/l decided to addthe following clause: "due regard being spe-cially paid, in the first instance to the contri-bution of Members of the United Nations tothe maintenance of international peace and

security and to the other purposes of the Or-ganization, and also to equitable geographicaldistribution."

Perhaps the most controversial issue in theSan Francisco Conference was the voting pro-cedure of the Security Council. The text ofthe procedure, known as the Yalta formula,which was finally adopted by the Conferenceas Article 27 of the Charter, read:

1. Each member of the Security Councilshall have one vote.

2. Decisions of the Security Council onprocedural matters shall be made by an affirm-ative vote of seven members.

3. Decisions of the Security Council on allother matters shall be made by an affirmativevote of seven members including the concur-ring votes of the permanent members; pro-vided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, andunder paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party toa dispute shall abstain from voting.

During the debate there was wide disagree-ment on the interpretation of the voting for-mula. Committee III/l established a Sub-Com-mittee for the purpose of clarifying the doubtsthat had arisen in the course of the discussion.On May 22 representatives other than thoseof the sponsoring Governments on that Sub-Committee addressed 23 questions on the exer-cise of the veto power to the representativesof the sponsoring Governments on the Sub-committee.

On June 7 the delegations of the sponsoringGovernments issued the following statementon the voting procedure of the Security Coun-cil:

Specific questions covering the voting pro-cedure in the Security Council have been sub-mitted by a Sub-Committee of the ConferenceCommittee on Structure and Procedures ofthe Security Council to the Delegations of thefour Governments sponsoring the Conference— the United States of America, the UnitedKingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ire-land, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,and the Republic of China. In dealing withthese questions, the four Delegations desireto make the following statement of their gen-eral attitude towards the whole question ofunanimity of permanent members in the deci-sions of the Security Council.

1. The Yalta voting formula recognizes thatthe Security Council, in discharging its re-sponsibilities for the maintenance of interna-tional peace and security, will have two broad.groups of functions. Under Chapter VIII, theCouncil will have to make decisions which


involve its taking direct measures in connec-tion with settlement of disputes, adjustmentof situations likely to lead to disputes, deter-mination of threats to the peace, removal ofthreats to the peace, and suppression ofbreaches of the peace. It will also have to makedecisions which do not involve the taking ofsuch measures. The Yalta formula providesthat the second of these two groups of deci-sions will be governed by a procedural vote—that is, the vote of any seven members. Thefirst group of decisions will be governed by aqualified vote—that is, the vote of sevenmembers, including the concurring votes ofthe five permanent members, subject to theproviso that in decisions under Section A anda part of Section C of Chapter VIII partiesto a dispute shall abstain from voting.

2. For example, under the Yalta formula aprocedural vote will govern the decisionsmade under the entire Section D of ChapterVI. This means that the Council will, by avote of any seven of its members, adopt oralter its rules of procedure; determine themethod of selecting its President; organizeitself in such a way as to be able to functioncontinuously; select the times and places ofits regular and special meetings; establishsuch bodies or agencies as it may deem neces-sary for the performance of its functions; in-vite a Member of the organization not re-presented on the Council to participate in itsdiscussions when that Member's interests arespecially affected; and invite any State whenit is a party to a dispute being considered bythe Council to participate in the discussionrelating to that dispute.

3. Further, no individual member of theCouncil can alone prevent consideration anddiscussion by the Council of a dispute or situ-ation brought to its attention under paragraph2, Section A, Chapter VIII. Nor can partiesto such dispute be prevented by these meansfrom being heard by the Council. Likewise,the requirement for unanimity of the per-manent members cannot prevent any memberof the Council from reminding the Membersof the organization of their general obliga-tions assumed under the Charter as regardspeaceful settlement of international disputes.

4. Beyond this point, decisions and actionsby the Security Council may well have majorpolitical consequences and may even initiatea chain of events which might, in the end, re-quire the Council under its responsibilities toinvoke measures of enforcement under SectionB, Chapter VIII. This chain of events beginswhen the Council decides to make an investi-gation, or determines that the time has cometo call upon States to settle their differences,or make recommendations to the parties. Itis to such decisions and actions that unanimityof the permanent members applies, with theimportant proviso, referred to above, for ab-stention from voting by parties to a dispute.

5. To illustrate: in ordering an investiga-tion, the Council has to consider whether theinvestigation—which may involve calling for

reports, hearing witnesses, dispatching a com-mission of inquiry, or other means—mightnot further aggravate the situation. Afterinvestigation, the Council must determinewhether the continuance of the situation ordispute would be likely to endanger interna-tional peace and security. If it so determines,the Council would be under obligation to takefurther steps. Similarly, the decision to makerecommendations, even when all parties re-quest it to do so, or to call upon parties to adispute to fulfil their obligations under theCharter, might be the first step on a course ofaction from which the Security Council couldwithdraw only at the risk of failing to dis-charge its responsibilities.

6. In appraising the significance of the voterequired to take such decisions or actions, itis useful to make comparison with the require-ments of the League Covenant with referenceto decisions of the League Council. Substan-tive decisions of the League of Nations Coun-cil could be taken only by the unanimous voteof all its Members, whether permanent or not,with the exception of parties to a disputeunder Article XV of the League Covenant.Under Article XI, under which most of thedisputes brought before the League were dealtwith and decisions to make investigationstaken, the unanimity rule was invariably in-terpreted to include even the votes of theparties to a dispute.

7. The Yalta voting formula substitutes forthe rule of complete unanimity of the LeagueCouncil a system of qualified majority votingin the Security Council. Under this systemnon-permanent members of the Security Coun-cil individually would have no "veto." Asregards the permanent members, there is noquestion under the Yalta formula of investingthem with a new right, namely, the right toveto, a right which the permanent members ofthe League Council always had. The formulaproposed for the taking of action in the Se-curity Council by a majority of seven wouldmake the operation of the Council less sub-ject to obstruction than was the case underthe League of Nations rule of complete unani-mity.

8. It should also be remembered that underthe Yalta formula the five major Powers couldnot act by themselves, since even under theunanimity requirement any decisions of theCouncil would have to include the concurringvotes of at least two of the non-permanentmembers. In other words, it would be possiblefor five non-permanent members as a groupto exercise a "veto." It is not to be assumed,however, that the permanent members, anymore than the non-permanent members, woulduse their "veto" power wilfully to obstructthe operation of the Council.

9. In view of the primary responsibilitiesof the permanent members, they could not beexpected, in the present condition of the world,to assume the obligation to act in so seriousa matter as the maintenance of international


peace and security in consequence of a deci-sion in which they had not concurred. There-fore, if a majority voting in the SecurityCouncil is to be made possible, the only prac-ticable method is to provide, in respect of non-procedural decisions, for unanimity of the per-manent members plus the concurring votes ofat least two of the non-permanent members.

10. For all these reasons, the four spon-soring Governments agreed on the Yaltaformula and have presented it to this Confer-ence as essential if an international organ-ization is to be created through which allpeace-loving nations can effectively dischargetheir common responsibilities for the main-tenance of international peace and security.

IIIn the light of the considerations set forth

in Part I of this statement, it is clear whatthe answers to the questions submitted by theSub-Committee should be, with the exceptionof Question 19 [with respect to the prelimin-ary question as to whether a matter is pro-cedural]. The answer to that question is asfollows:

1. In the opinion of the Delegations of thesponsoring Governments, the Draft Charteritself contains an indication of the applica-tion of the voting procedures to the variousfunctions of the Council.

2. In this case, it will be unlikely that therewill arise in the future any matters of greatimportance on which a decision will have tobe made as to whether a procedural vote wouldapply. Should, however, such a matter arise,the decision regarding the preliminary ques-tion as to whether or not such a matter isprocedural must be taken by a vote of sevenmembers of the Security Council, includingthe concurring votes of the permanent mem-bers.

In the course of the debate that ensued,several delegations indicated that they wouldbe more favorably inclined to accept the pro-posed voting procedure if a revision of thatprocedure were made possible at another con-ference. They hoped that such a revisionwould not be subject to the rule of unanimityof the permanent members of the SecurityCouncil.

The Australian representative proposed thatdecisions of the Security Council with respectto pacific settlement of disputes should bemade by a majority of any seven members,i. e., should be considered as decisions on pro-cedural matters. The Australian representa-tive stated that he was reluctantly preparedto accept the veto power in connection withenforcement measures, but that in pacificsettlement of disputes no one power should

block any Council decisions. The Australianamendment, like several others, was notadopted.

Committee III/1, Commission III and even-tually the Conference adopted the Yalta votingformula, which constitutes Article 27 of theCharter. The statement of the delegations ofthe sponsoring Governments on the voting pro-cedure of the Security Council, however, wasnot formally accepted as the official interpre-tation of Article 27.

Committee III/l agreed to the DumbartonOaks recommendations: (1) that Members ofthe United Nations should confer upon theSecurity Council primary responsibility forthe maintenance of international peace andsecurity and should agree that in carryingout these duties under this responsibility theSecurity Council should act on their behalf;(2) that in discharging these duties the Secur-ity Council should act in accordance with thePurposes and Principles of the United Na-tions; and (3) that Members should obligatethemselves to accept the decisions of the Secur-ity Council and to carry them out in accord-ance with the provisions of the Charter.

b. Pacific SettlementSection A of Chapter VIII of the Dumbar-

ton Oaks Proposals was the subject matterconsidered by Committee III/2, which madesome changes in the order and wording of theparagraphs. The substance of this section con-stitutes Chapter VI of the Charter.

The Committee thought the first Article inthis Chapter should set forth the basic obli-gations of Members to settle disputes by paci-fic means. The Dumbarton Oaks text hadstated that parties to a dispute should seek asolution "by negotiation, mediation, concilia-tion, arbitration or judicial settlement, orother peaceful means of their own choice."Committee III/2 added "inquiry" and, uponthe recommendation of Committee III/4, "re-sort to regional agencies or arrangements" tothe list of pacific means.

The Dumbarton Oaks text had suggestedthat any State, whether a Member of the or-ganization or not, might bring any dispute,or any situation which might give rise to adispute, to the attention of the General Assem-bly or of the Security Council. CommitteeIII/2 revised this text so as to make it clear:(1) that any Member might bring any dis-pute or situation to the attention of the Gen-eral Assembly or of the Security Council; and


(2) that a State, not a Member of the organ-ization, might bring only a dispute (not asituation) to the Assembly or the Council ifit accepted in advance the obligations of paci-fic settlement as provided in the Charter. Itwas understood that the enemy States in theSecond World War "shall not have the rightof recourse to the Security Council or theGeneral Assembly until the Security Councilgives them this right."

Committee III/2 agreed to the DumbartonOaks recommendations, as amended by thesponsoring Governments: (1) that the Secur-ity Council might investigate any dispute, orany situation which might lead to internation-al friction or give rise to a dispute, in orderto determine whether the continuance of thedispute or situation was likely to endangerinternational peace and security; (2) thatthe Security Council might, at any stage ofsuch dispute, recommend appropriate pro-cedures or methods of adjustment; and (3)that the Security Council, if it deemed thatthe continuance of a dispute was in fact likelyto endanger the maintenance of internationalpeace and security, might recommend appro-priate procedures or actual terms of settle-ment. With respect to the last clause, it wasunderstood that such a recommendation"possessed no obligatory effect for the parties."

c. Enforcement ArrangementsSection B of Chapter VIII of the Dumbar-

ton Oaks Proposals was the basis of discussionin Committee HI/3. The substance of thissection, as amended and adopted by the Con-ference, constitutes Chapter VII of theCharter.

According to the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals,the Security Council "should determine theexistence of any threat to the peace, breachof the peace or act of aggression and shouldmake recommendations or decide upon themeasures to be taken to maintain or restorepeace and security." Several delegations pro-posed that the term "aggression" might bedefined or explained, but the majority ofthe Committee thought that a preliminarydefinition of "aggression" went beyond thescope of the Charter and that the modern tech-niques of warfare rendered any definition of"aggression" impossible. The Committee de-cided to adhere to the Dumbarton Oaks text.

The Chinese delegation introduced a newparagraph to the effect that, before making

recommendations or deciding upon enforce-ment measures, the Security Council mightcall upon the parties to a dispute to complywith such provisional measures as it mightdeem necessary and desirable, such provisionalmeasures being without prejudice to the rights,claims and position of the parties concerned,the failure to comply with such provisionalmeasures to be duly taken account of by theCouncil. The substance of this paragraph be-came Article 40 of the Charter.

In using the word "recommendations" inthe two preceding paragraphs, CommitteeIII/3 intended to indicate the action of theSecurity Council under the provisions of paci-fic settlement, and at the same time theCommittee realized that the Security Councilwould in reality pursue simultaneously twodistinct actions, one having for its object thesettlement of the dispute, and the other thetaking of enforcement or provisional measures.The Committee was unanimous in the beliefthat, in the case of flagrant aggression im-perilling the existence of a Member, enforce-ment action should be taken without delay.

Committee HI/3 agreed to the DumbartonOaks recommendations: (1) that the SecurityCouncil might call upon Members to employmeasures not involving the use of armedforces, such as severance of economic anddiplomatic relations, to give effect to its deci-sions; and (2) that, should these measuresprove to be inadequate, the Council might takesuch action by land, sea or air forces as mightbe necessary to maintain international peaceand security.

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals contem-plated that the forces put at the disposition ofthe Security Council should take the form ofnational contingents furnished by Membersaccording to special agreements to be negoti-ated subsequently. On this matter the Frenchdelegation proposed a new draft, which be-came Article 43 of the Charter. The draftread :

In order that all Members of the Organiza-tion should contribute to the maintenance ofinternational peace and security, they shouldundertake to make available to the SecurityCouncil, on its call and in accordance with aspecial agreement or agreements, armed forces,assistance and facilities, including rights ofpassage necessary for the purpose of main-taining international peace and security. Suchagreement or agreements should govern thenumbers and types of forces, their degree ofreadiness and general location, and the nature


of the facilities and assistance to be provided.The special agreement or agreements shouldbe negotiated as soon as possible on the initia-tive of the Security Council and concluded be-tween the Security Council and Member Statesor between the Security Council and groups ofMember States. All such agreements shouldbe subject to ratification by the signatoryStates in accordance with their constitutionalprocesses.

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had sug-gested that a Military Staff Committee shouldbe established to advise and assist the Secur-ity Council on all questions relating to theCouncil's military requirements, to the em-ployment and command of forces, to the regu-lation of armaments and possible disarma-ment; that the Military Staff Committeeshould consist of the Chiefs of Staff of thepermanent members of the Security Councilor their representatives; and that any Mem-ber not represented on the Committee shouldbe invited by the Committee to be associatedwith it when the efficient discharge of theCommittee's responsibilities required thatsuch a State should participate in its work.

Upon the suggestion of the Canadian dele-gation, Committee III/3 added a new para-graph which became Article 44 of the Charter.It read:

When a decision to use force has been takenby the Security Council, it shall, before call-ing upon any Member not represented on it toprovide armed forces in fulfilment of its obli-gations under the preceding paragraph, invitesuch Member, if it so requests, to send a repre-sentative to participate in the decisions of theSecurity Council concerning the employmentof contingents of its armed forces.

Under this paragraph every Member not rep-resented on the Security Council may partici-pate, with the right of voting, in the delibera-tions of the Council when it is a question of theutilization of its armed forces. To repeat theexpression of the Netherlands representative,the principle of "no military action withoutrepresentation" was accepted by CommitteeIII/3.

The Philippine delegation proposed and theMexican delegation seconded an amendmentthat the Military Staff Committee should becomposed of the Chiefs of Staff of all the Mem-bers of the United Nations. The amendmentwas not adopted, on the grounds that the Com-mittee should be a small group so that it mightbe able to make decisions on military matters

and that if the forces of a country not repre-sented on the Committee were used there wasno question but that the military staff of thatcountry would be consulted.

d. Regional ArrangementsSection C of Chapter VIII of the Dumbarton

Oaks Proposals was referred to CommitteeHI/4. The substance of this section constitutesChapter VIII of the Charter.

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had sugges-ted that "nothing in the Charter precludes theexistence of regional arrangements or agenciesfor dealing with such matters relating to themaintenance of international peace and secur-ity as are appropriate for regional action, pro-vided such arrangements or agencies and theiractivities are consistent with the Purposes andPrinciples of the United Nations." This wasaccepted by Committee HI/4.

The Egyptian delegation introduced a defi-nition of regional arrangements which read:

There shall be considered as regional ar-rangements organizations of a permanent na-ture grouping in a given geographical areaseveral countries which, by reason of theirproximity, community of interests, or cultural,linguistic, historical or spiritual affinities,make themselves jointly responsible for thepeaceful settlement of any disputes which mayarise between them and for the maintenanceof peace and security in their region, as wellas for the safeguarding of their interests andthe development of their economic and culturalrelations.

This amendment was not adopted, on theground that it might not cover all the situa-tions which might come under the term"regional arrangements."

Committee HI/4 agreed to the DumbartonOaks recommendation that the Security Coun-cil should encourage pacific settlement of localdisputes through regional arrangements or byregional agencies, either on the initiative ofthe States concerned or by reference from theSecurity Council. However, the Committee ad-ded a new paragraph to the effect that thisprovision did not impair the application ofArticles 33 and 35 of the Charter.

Committee III/4 also agreed to the Dumbar-ton Oaks recommendation that the SecurityCouncil should, when appropriate, utilizeregional arrangements or agencies for enforce-ment action under its authority, but noenforcement action should be taken underregional arrangements or by regional agencies


without the authorization of the SecurityCouncil. The Committee approved an excep-tion, suggested by the sponsoring Govern-ments. It recommended that measures underregional arrangements directed against therenewal of aggressive policy by any enemyState of the Second World War might be takenwithout the authorization of the SecurityCouncil until such time as the United Nationsmight be charged with the responsibility forpreventing further aggression by any suchState.

Committee HI/4 wrote a new paragraphwhich read as follows:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impairthe inherent right of individual or collectiveself-defence if an armed attack occurs againsta Member of the United Nations, until theSecurity Council has taken the measures neces-sary to maintain international peace and secur-ity. Measures taken by Members in the exer-cise of this right of self-defence shall beimmediately reported to the Security Counciland shall not in any way affect the authorityand responsibility of the Security Councilunder the present Charter to take at any timesuch action as it deems necessary in order tomaintain or restore international peace andsecurity.

This paragraph, however, was not insertedin Chapter VIII of the Charter, which dealswith regional arrangements, but became Arti-cle 51 of Chapter VII, which deals with en-forcement measures.

9. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIALCO-OPERATION

Chapter IX of the Dumbarton Oaks Pro-posals constituted the agenda of CommitteeII/3. The substance of that chapter, as amen-ded by Committee II/3, became Chapter IX,International Economic and Social Co-opera-tion, and Chapter X, The Economic and SocialCouncil, of the Charter.

Committee II/3 made certain significant con-tributions to the drafting of Chapters IX andX of the Charter.

In the first place, the Committee unani-mously recommended that the Economic andSocial Council be listed as one of the principalorgans of the United Nations. This recom-mendation expressed the opinion of the Com-mittee that international economic and socialco-operation was of the utmost importance tothe success of the United Nations as a whole.

In the second place, the Committee greatlyenlarged and broadened the objectives whichthe United Nations should promote in theeconomic and social fields. It recommended thatthe United Nations should promote:

(a) higher standards of living, full employ-ment, and conditions of economic and socialprogress and development;

(b) solutions of international economic,social, health and related problems; and inter-national cultural and educational co-operation;

(c) universal respect for, and observance of,human rights and fundamental freedoms forall without distinction as to race, sex, languageor religion.

There were some misgivings as to whetherthis statement of objectives might not be takento imply that the United Nations might inter-fere in the domestic affairs of Member States.The Committee agreed to include in its recorda statement to the effect that nothing in theprovisions relating to international economicand social co-operation "can be construed asgiving authority to the Organization to inter-vene in the domestic affairs of Member States."

Committee II/3 accepted the DumbartonOaks recommendation that the Economic andSocial Council should consist of eighteen mem-bers elected by the General Assembly forthree-year terms. The Committee specified thatone third of the members of the Council shouldretire every year. It rejected amendmentsdesigned to give permanent representation tothe great Powers or to make membershipdependent upon economic and social impor-tance.

As to the functions and powers of the Eco-nomic and Social Council, Committee II/3recommended that, under the authority of theGeneral Assembly, the Council might initiatestudies and make recommendations with re-spect to international economic, social, cul-tural, education, health and related fields;make recommendations for the purpose ofpromoting respect for, and observance of,human rights and fundamental freedoms;prepare draft conventions and call interna-tional conferences on matters falling withinits competence; enter into agreements withspecialized agencies and co-ordinate the activi-ties of and receive reports from such agencies.The Committee suggested that the GeneralAssembly, however, and not the Economic andSocial Council, should examine the adminis-trative budgets of the specialized agencies.

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals had sug-gested that the various specialized economic,


social and other agencies should be broughtinto relationship with the United Nations.Committee II/3 recommended that this pro-vision should apply only to those inter-govern-mental agencies having wide internationalresponsibilities, as defined in their basic in-struments, in economic, social, cultural, edu-cational, health and related fields. It wasunderstood that the term "inter-governmentalagencies" should be interpreted to mean agen-cies set up by agreement among governments.It was further understood that the UnitedNations should not deprive any specializedagency of its responsibilities in its own special-ized field as defined in its basic instrument.

Committee II/3 further recommended thatthe Economic and Social Council might makesuitable arrangements for consultation withnon-governmental organizations which wereconcerned with matters within its competence.

In the course of the Committee's discussions,a number of statements and declarations relat-ing to specific problems of international co-operation were made by national delegations.The French delegation issued a statement oncultural co-operation; the Brazilian and Chi-nese delegations a joint declaration regardinginternational health co-operation; the Greekdelegation a declaration regarding the recon-struction of devastated areas; the Braziliandelegation a declaration on the status ofwomen; the Panamanian delegation a declara-tion on the question of migration; the UnitedStates delegation a statement on the controlof dangerous drugs. The Committee thoughtthat its terms of reference did not permit itto pass resolutions on these matters; it decidedto keep the texts of the statements and declara-tions on its record.

10. INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEESHIPThe Dumbarton Oaks Proposals did not con-

tain any provisions relating to the establish-ment of an international trusteeship system.At Yalta President Roosevelt, Prime MinisterChurchill and Premier Stalin agreed that theSan Francisco Conference should discuss onlythe machinery and principles of trusteeshipand that specific territories to be placed undertrusteeship should be a matter of subsequentnegotiation and agreement.1

Consequently Committee II/4 was assignedthe task of drafting provisions "on the prin-ciples and mechanism of a system of inter-

national trusteeship for such dependent terri-tories as may by subsequent agreement beplaced thereunder."

On the basis of a number of proposals, thedelegations of Australia, China, France, theU.S.S.R., the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates submitted a Working Paper to theCommittee on May 16. The text of the WorkingPaper was as follows:

A. General Policy1. States Members of the United Nations

which have responsibilities for the adminis-tration of territories inhabited by peoples notyet able to stand by themselves under thestrenuous conditions of the modern worldaccept the general principle that it is a sacredtrust of civilization to promote to the utmostthe well-being of the inhabitants of these ter-ritories within the world community, and tothis end:

(i) to insure the economic and social ad-vancement of the peoples concerned;

(ii) to develop self-government in forms ap-propriate to the varying circumstances of eachterritory; and

(iii) to further international peace and se-curity.

2. States Members also agree that their pol-icy in respect to such territories, no less than inrespect to their metropolitan areas, must bebased on the general principle of good neigh-bourliness, due account being taken of the in-terests and well-being of other members ofthe world community, in social, economic andcommercial matters.

B. Territorial Trusteeship System1. The Organization should establish under

its authority an international system of trus-teeship for the administration and supervisionof such territories as may be placed thereunderby subsequent individual agreements and set

2. The basic objectives of the trusteeshipup suitable machinery for these purposes.system should be: (a) to further internationalpeace and security; (b) to promote the political,economic, and social advancement of the trustterritories and their inhabitants and their pro-gressive development toward self-governmentin forms appropriate to the varying circum-stances of each territory; and (c) to insureequal treatment in social, economic and com-mercial matters for all Members of the UnitedNations, without prejudice to the attainmentof (a) and (b) above, and subject to the pro-visions of paragraph 5 below.

3. The trusteeship system should apply onlyto such territories in the following categoriesas may be placed thereunder by means of trus-teeship arrangements: (a) territories now held

1 See p. 11.


under mandates; (b) territories which may bedetached from enemy States as a result of thiswar; and (c) territories voluntarily placed un-der the system by States responsible for theiradministration. It would be a matter for sub-sequent agreement as to which territories wouldbe brought under a trusteeship system and uponwhat terms. The trusteeship system should notapply to territories which have become Mem-bers of the United Nations.

4. The trusteeship arrangement for each ter-ritory to be placed under trusteeship should beagreed upon by the States directly concernedand should be approved as provided for in para-graphs 8 and 10 below.

5. Except as may be agreed upon in indi-vidual trusteeship arrangements placing eachterritory under the trusteeship system, nothingin this chapter should be construed in and ofitself to alter in any manner the rights of anyStates or any peoples in any territory.

6. The trusteeship arrangements in eachcase should include the terms under which theterritory will be administered and designatethe State which should exercise the adminis-tration of the territory or designate the UnitedNations Organization itself to exercise the ad-ministration of the territory.

7. In addition, there may also be designated,in the trusteeship arrangement, a strategicarea or areas which may include part or all ofthe territory to which the arrangement applies.

8. All functions of the Organization relat-ing to such strategic areas, including the ap-proval of the trusteeship arrangements andtheir alteration or amendment, should be ex-ercised by the Security Council. The basic ob-jective as provided for in paragraph B. 2above should be applicable to the people of eachstrategic area. The Security Council may availitself of the assistance of the TrusteeshipCouncil provided for in paragraph 11 below toperform those functions of the Organizationunder the trusteeship system relating to po-litical, economic and social matters in the stra-tegic areas, subject to the provisions of thetrusteeship arrangements.

9. It shall be the duty of the State adminis-tering any trust territory to insure that theterritory shall play its part in the maintenanceof international peace and security. To this endthe State shall be empowered to make use ofvolunteer forces, facilities and assistance fromthe territory in carrying out the obligationsundertaken by the State for the SecurityCouncil in this regard and for local defense andthe maintenance of law and order within theterritory.

10. The functions of the Organization withregard to trusteeship arrangements for allareas not designated as strategic should beexercised by the General Assembly.

11. In order to assist the General Assemblyto carry out those functions under the trustee-ship system not reserved to the Security Coun-cil, there should be established a TrusteeshipCouncil which would operate under its author-

ity. The Trusteeship Council should consist ofspecially qualified representatives, designated(a) one each by the States administering trustterritories, and (b) one each by an equal num-ber of other States named for three-year peri-ods by the General Assembly.

12. The General Assembly, and under itsauthority, the Trusteeship Council, in carryingout their functions, should be empowered toconsider reports submitted by the administer-ing State to accept petitions and examine themin consultation with the administering State,to make periodic visits to the respective ter-ritories at times agreed upon with the adminis-tering State, and to take other action inconformity with the trusteeship arrangements.

13. The administering authority in eachtrust territory within the competence of theGeneral Assembly should make an annual re-port to the General Assembly upon the basisof a questionnaire formulated by the Trustee-ship Council.

Committee II/4 adopted the Working Paperas a basis of discussion. As to the "generalpolicy" in the Working Paper, the Committeefound that it was desirable to change thedescription of Non-Self-Governing Territoriesas being "inhabited by peoples not yet ableto stand by themselves under the strenuousconditions of the modern world" to that ofterritories "whose peoples have not yet at-tained a full measure of self-government."The Committee added a further obligationrequiring the administering powers to trans-mit regularly to the Secretary-General statis-tical and other information relating to theeconomic, social and educational conditionsof the territories they administered. The Com-mittee changed the "general policy" into a"declaration," which eventually became Chap-ter XI of the Charter.

As to the "territorial trusteeship system"in the Working Paper, Committee II/4 madesome significant changes. In the first placethe Committee recommended that the promo-tion of the progressive development of thepeoples of Trust Territories should be directedtoward "independence" as well as "self-govern-ment." In the second place, the Committeesuggested that the trusteeship system shouldencourage respect for human rights andfundamental freedoms for all without distinc-tion as to race, sex, language or religion.

The Committee agreed to the provisions inthe Working Paper that the trusteeship systemshould apply to such territories in the follow-ing categories as might be placed thereunder


by means of Trusteeship Agreements (a) ter-ritories now held under mandate; (b) terri-tories which might be detached from enemyStates as a result of the Second World War;and (c) territories voluntarily placed underthe system by States responsible for theiradministration.

The Working Paper had suggested a "con-servatory clause" to the effect that, until indi-vidual Trusteeship Agreements were concluded,nothing in the provisions concerning the trus-teeship system should be "construed in andof itself to alter in any manner the rights ofany States or any peoples." The Committeeadded at the end of this paragraph the follow-ing words, "or the terms of existing interna-tional instruments." It inserted a new para-graph, however, to the effect that the con-servatory clause should be not interpreted asgiving grounds for delay or postponement ofthe negotiation and conclusion of TrusteeshipAgreements.

With regard to the terms of TrusteeshipAgreements, the Committee accepted withsome minor changes the recommendations ofthe Working Paper. The terms of trusteeshipshould be agreed upon by the "States directlyconcerned" and should designate the Admin-istering Authority. In any Trust Territory astrategic area or areas might be designated.All functions of the United Nations relating toTrust Territories, other than strategic areas,should be exercised by the General Assembly,and those relating to strategic areas by theSecurity Council.

In the course of the discussion the Egyptiandelegation proposed: (1) that the GeneralAssembly should have the power to terminatethe status of trusteeship of a territory anddeclare the territory to be fit for full inde-pendence; and (2) hat whenever an Admin-istering Authority violated the terms of trus-teeship, or ceased to be a Member of theUnited Nations or was suspended from mem-bership in the United Nations, the organiza-tion should transfer the territory under trus-teeship to another Administering Authority.These proposals, however, were not adopted.

Committee II/4 recommended the creationof a Trusteeship Council as a principal organof the United Nations. The Council was toconsist of: (a) those Members administeringTrust Territories; (b) those permanent mem-bers of the Security Council which were notAdministering Authorities; and (c) as many

other Members elected for three-year termsby the General Assembly as might be neces-sary to ensure that the total number of mem-bers of the Trusteeship Council was equallydivided between those which administeredTrust Territories and those which did not.

The Committee agreed to the definition ofthe functions and powers of the TrusteeshipCouncil as suggested in the Working Paper,and wrote several paragraphs on the votingand procedure of the Council.

The provisions on the International Trustee-ship System constitute Chapter XII of theCharter, and those on the Trusteeship Council,Chapter XIII.

11. THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICEChapter VII of the Dumbarton Oaks Pro-

posals and the report of the Committee ofJurists constituted the agenda of CommitteeIV/1.

The basic question the Committee had toresolve was whether the Permanent Court ofInternational Justice should be continued asan organ of the United Nations or whether anew Court should be established. After balanc-ing the advantages to be gained and objectionsto be overcome in adopting either course, theCommittee recommended the establishmentof a new Court. This was thought to be inkeeping with provisions to be proposed in theCharter, under which all Members of theUnited Nations are ipso facto parties to theStatute of the International Court of Justiceand a State not a Member of the UnitedNations may become a party to the Statute onconditions to be determined by the GeneralAssembly upon the recommendation of theSecurity Council.

Committee IV/1 recommended that eachMember of the United Nations should under-take to comply with the decision of the Courtin any case to which it was a party. The Com-mittee added another paragraph to the effectthat, should any party fail to comply with thedecision of the Court, the other party couldhave recourse to the Security Council, whichmight make such recommendations or decideupon such measures as to give effect to thedecision.

The Committee of Jurists had presented twoalternative texts relating to the nominationof judges, one retaining the system of nomina-tion by national groups, the other institutinga system of nomination by governments. The


majority of Committee IV/1 thought that thesystem of nomination by national groups hadworked very well in the past; the Committeetherefore decided to recommend the retentionof the system. As to the election of judges, twoviews were expressed: one favored election byboth the General Assembly and the SecurityCouncil, the other election by the GeneralAssembly alone. In the end the Committeedecided to recommend that both the Assemblyand the Council should take part in the electionof judges and that an absolute majority shouldbe required in each body.

There was a general desire on the part ofthe Committee to establish compulsory juris-diction for the Court. However, some of thedelegates feared that insistence upon compul-sory jurisdiction might impair the possibilityof obtaining general accord to the Statute aswell as to the Charter itself. It was in thatspirit that the Committee recommended theadoption of the optional clause.

The Committee proposed that the procedurein amending the Statute should be the sameas that in amending the Charter, but it addedthat the Court itself should have the powerto propose amendments to the Statute.

12. THE SECRETARIATThe task of drafting provisions for the

Secretariat was assigned to Committee I/2.Chapter X of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposalswas the agenda of the Committee.

The Dumbarton Oaks text had suggestedthat there should be a Secretary-General, whowas to be elected by the General Assembly up-on the recommendation of the Security Coun-cil. The sponsoring Governments proposed anamendment providing that there should befour Deputy Secretaries-General elected inthe same way. However, Committee I/2 did notadopt this amendment.

The Committee accepted the DumbartonOaks recommendations: (1) that the Secre-tary-General should be the chief administra-tive officer; (2) that the Secretary-Generalshould act in that capacity in all meetings ofthe General Assembly and the Councils; (3)that he should make an annual report to theGeneral Assembly on the work of the Organi-zation. After considerable discussion the Com-mittee also agreed to the Dumbarton Oakssuggestion that the Secretary-General mightbring to the attention of the Security Councilany matter which in his opinion mightthreaten international peace and security.

The Committee recommended that the Sec-retariat should be truly international in char-acter; that the members of the staff shouldnot receive instructions from any govern-ments and the Members of the United Nationsshould not seek to influence the members ofthe staff. It further recommended that theparamount consideration in the employment ofthe staff should be the necessity of securingthe highest standards of efficiency, competenceand integrity, and that due regard should bepaid to the importance of recruiting the staffon as wide a geographical basis as possible.

13. LEGAL PROBLEMSCommittee IV/2 was assigned the task of

drafting provisions regarding such legal mat-ters as the judicial status of the UnitedNations, the privileges and immunities of theUnited Nations, registration of treaties, treatyobligations inconsistent with the Charter andinterpretation of the Charter.

The Committee recommended that theUnited Nations should enjoy in the territoryof each Member such legal capacity as mightbe necessary for the fulfilment of its purposesand that representatives of the Members ofthe United Nations and officials of the UnitedNations should enjoy such privileges and im-munities as were necessary for the indepen-dent exercise of their functions.

It recommended that every treaty and everyinternational agreement should be registeredwith the Secretariat and published by it andthat no party to any such treaty or agreementwhich had not been registered might invokethat treaty or agreement before any organ ofthe United Nations.

It further recommended that in the eventof a conflict between the obligations of theMembers of the United Nations under theCharter and their obligations under any otherinternational agreements, their obligations un-der the Charter should prevail.

As to the question, how and by what organor organs the Charter should be interpreted,the Committee decided that it would be neithernecessary nor desirable to make any explicitprovision in the Charter. It made the follow-ing statement for the record:

If two Member States are at variance con-cerning the correct interpretation of theCharter, they are of course free to submit thedispute to the International Court of Justice


as in the case of any other treaty. Similarly,it would always be open to the General Assem-bly or to the Security Council, in appropriatecircumstances, to ask the International Courtof Justice for an advisory opinion concerningthe meaning of a provision of the Charter.Should the General Assembly or the SecurityCouncil prefer another course, an ad hoc com-mittee of jurists might be set up to examinethe question and report its views, or recoursemight be had to a joint conference. In brief,the Members or the organs of the Organiza-tion might have recourse to various expedientsin order to obtain an appropriate interpreta-tion.

14. AMENDMENTSCommittee I/2 was charged with the respon-

sibility for drafting provisions relating toamendments to the Charter.

Chapter XI of the Dumbarton Oaks Propo-sals contained only one Article on amend-ments. This was amended as follows:

Amendments to the present Charter shallcome into force for all Members of the UnitedNations when they have been adopted by avote of two-thirds of the Members of theGeneral Assembly and ratified in accordancewith their respective constitutional processesby two thirds of the Members of the UnitedNations, including all of the permanent mem-bers of the Security Council.

The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals did notprovide for the calling of a general conferenceto review the Charter. The sponsoring Govern-ments proposed an amendment providing forsuch a conference to meet the wishes expressedby several delegations. After lengthy debate onthe voting procedure and the time limit forcalling a general conference, the Committeedecided to recommend the following provi-sions:

A General Conference of the Members of theUnited Nations for the purpose of reviewingthe present Charter may be held at a date andplace to be fixed by a two-thirds vote of themembers of the General Assembly and by avote of any seven members of the SecurityCouncil. Each Member of the United Nationsshall have one vote in the conference.

Any alteration of the present Charter rec-commended by a two thirds vote of the confer-ence shall take effect when ratified in accord-ance with their respective constitutional proc-esses by two-thirds of the Members of theUnited Nations including all the permanentmembers of the Security Council.

If such a conference has not been held be-fore the tenth annual session of the General

Assembly following the coming into force ofthe present Charter, the proposal to call sucha conference shall be placed on the agenda ofthat session of the General Assembly, and theconference shall be held if so decided by amajority vote of the members of the GeneralAssembly and by a vote of any seven mem-bers of the Security Council.

15. SIGNING OF THE CHARTERAt the final plenary session of the San

Francisco Conference on June 25, 1945, theCharter of the United Nations was unani-mously approved, the heads of the 50 delega-tions standing to mark their vote in favor.

President Harry S. Truman attended thisfinal session in person and addressed the Con-ference on the conclusion of its historic task.He congratulated the delegates of all 50 nationsupon having produced a solid structure onwhich could be built a better world.

On the following day the signing ceremonytook place in the Veterans War MemorialBuilding at San Francisco. China, in recog-nition of its long-standing fight againstaggression, was accorded the honor of beingthe first to sign. It was arranged that thesignatures of the U.S.S.R., the United King-dom and France should follow, and then, inalphabetical order, the remaining nations, withthe United States, as host country, signinglast. As each delegation came forward to sign,its chairman made an official speech to com-memorate his country's participation in thework of the Conference.

16. RATIFICATION OF THE CHARTERUnder Article 110, the Charter of the United

Nations, together with the Statute of the In-ternational Court of Justice, was to come intoforce upon the deposit with the Governmentof the United States of ratifications by China,France, the U.S.S.R., the United Kingdom,the United States, and by a majority of theother signatory States.

On October 24, 1945, the Charter came intoforce when the five permanent members of theSecurity Council and 24 other signatory Stateshad deposited their ratifications with theGovernment of the United States. On that datathe United States Secretary of State signeda Protocol of Deposit of Ratifications, whichread as follows:

WHEREAS, paragraph 3 of Article 110 of theCharter of the United Nations, signed at SanFrancisco on June 26, 1945, provides as follows:


"3. The present Charter shall come into forceupon the deposit of ratifications by the Repub-lic of China, France, the Union of Soviet So-cialist Republics, the United Kingdom of GreatBritain and Northern Ireland, and the UnitedStates of America, and by a majority of theother signatory states. A protocol of the rati-fications deposited shall thereupon be drawn upby the Government of the United States ofAmerica, which shall communicate copiesthereof to all the signatory States.";

WHEREAS, the Charter of the United Nationshas been signed by the Plenipotentiaries offifty-one states;

WHEREAS, instruments of ratification of theCharter of the United Nations have been de-posited bythe Republic of China on September 28, 1945,France on August 31, 1945,the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on Oc-

tober 24, 1945,the United Kingdom of Great Britain and

Northern Ireland on October 20, 1945, andthe United States of America on August 8,

1945;and by

Argentina on September 24, 1945,Brazil on September 21, 1945,the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic on

October 24, 1945,Chile on October 11, 1945,Cuba on October 15, 1945,Czechoslovakia on October 19, 1945,Denmark on October 9, 1945,the Dominican Republic on September 4, 1945,Egypt on October 22, 1945,El Salvador on September 26, 1945,Haiti on September 27, 1945,Iran on October 16, 1945,Lebanon on October 15, 1945,Luxembourg on October 17, 1945,New Zealand on September 19, 1945,Nicaragua on September 6, 1945,Paraguay on October 12, 1945,the Philippine Commonwealth on October 11,

1945,Poland on October 24, 1945,Saudi Arabia on October 18, 1945,Syria on October 19, 1945,Turkey on September 28, 1945,

the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic on Oc-tober 24, 1945,

Yugoslavia on October 19, 1945;

AND WHEREAS, the requirements of para-graph 3 of Article 110 with respect to the com-ing into force of the Charter have been fulfilledby the deposit of the aforementioned instru-ments of ratification;

Now THEREFORE, I, James F. Byrnes, Secre-tary of State of the United States of America,sign this Protocol in the English language, theoriginal of which shall be deposited in thearchives of the Government of the UnitedStates of America and copies thereof communi-cated to all the States signatory of the Charterof the United Nations.

DONE at Washington this twenty-fourth dayof October, one thousand nine hundred forty-five.

James F. ByrnesSecretary of State

of the United States of America

After the signature of this Protocol thefollowing States deposited their instrumentsof ratification:

CountryAustraliaBelgiumBoliviaCanadaColombiaCosta RicaEcuadorEthiopiaGreeceGuatemalaHondurasIndiaIraqLiberiaMexicoNetherlandsNorwayPanamaPeruUnion of SouthUruguayVenezuela

Date of DepositNovember 1, 1945December 27, 1945November 14, 1945November 9, 1945November 5, 1945November 2, 1945December 21, 1945November 13, 1945October 25, 1945November 21, 1945December 17, 1945October 30, 1945December 21, 1945November 2, 1945November 7, 1945December 10, 1945November 27, 1945November 13, 1945October 31, 1945

Africa November 7, 1945December 18, 1945November 15, 1945

L. THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. INTERIM ARRANGEMENTS

On June 26, 1945, when the delegates to theSan Francisco Conference signed the Charterof the United Nations, they affixed their signa-tures at the same time to an agreement onInterim Arrangements. This agreement estab-lished a Preparatory Commission of the United

Nations for the purpose of making provisionalarrangements for the first sessions of theGeneral Assembly, the Security Council, theEconomic and Social Council and the Trustee-ship Council, for the establishment of theSecretariat, and for the convening of the In-national Court of Justice.

The text of the agreement was as follows:


The Governments represented at the UnitedNations Conference on International Organiza-tion in the City of San Francisco,

Having determined that an international or-ganization to be known as the United Nationsshall be established,

Having this day signed the Charter of theUnited Nations, and

Having decided that, pending the coming intoforce of the Charter and the establishment ofthe United Nations as provided in the Charter,a Preparatory Commission of the United Na-tions should be established for the perform-ance of certain functions and duties,

AGREE as follows:1. There is hereby established a Prepara-

tory Commission of the United Nations forthe purpose of making provisional arrange-ments for the first sessions of the GeneralAssembly, the Security Council, the Economicand Social Council, and the Trusteeship Coun-cil, for the establishment of the Secretariat,and for the convening of the InternationalCourt of Justice.

2. The Commission shall consist of one rep-resentative from each government signatoryto the Charter. The Commission shall establishits own rules of procedure. The functions andpowers of the Commission, when the Commis-sion is not in session, shall be exercised by anExecutive Committee composed of the repre-sentatives of those governments now repre-sented on the Executive Committee of the Con-ference. The Executive Committee shallappoint such committees as may be necessaryto facilitate its work, and shall make use ofpersons of special knowledge and experience.

3. The Commission shall be assisted by anExecutive Secretary, who shall exercise suchpowers and perform such duties as the Com-mission may determine, and by such staff asmay be required. This staff shall be composedso far as possible of officials appointed for thispurpose by the participating governments onthe invitation of the Executive Secretary.

4. The Commission shall:(a) convoke the General Assembly in its

first session;(b) prepare the provisional agenda for the

first sessions of the principal organs of the Or-ganization, and prepare documents and recom-mendations relating to all matters on theseagenda;

(c) formulate recommendations concerningthe possible transfer of certain functions, ac-tivities, and assets of the League of Nationswhich it may be considered desirable for thenew Organization to take over on terms to bearranged;

(d) examine the problems involved in theestablishment of the relationship betweenspecialized intergovernmental organizationsand agencies and the Organization;

(e) issue invitations for the nomination ofcandidates for the International Court of Jus-tice in accordance with the provisions of theStatute of the Court;

(f) prepare recommendations concerning ar-rangements for the Secretariat of the Organi-zation; and

(g) make studies and prepare recommenda-tions concerning the location of the permanentheadquarters of the Organization.

5. The expenses incurred by the Commis-sion and the expenses incidental to the con-vening of the first meeting of the GeneralAssembly shall be met by the Government ofthe United Kingdom of Great Britain andNorthern Ireland or, if the Commission so re-quests, shared by other governments. All suchadvances from the governments shall be de-ductible from their first contributions to theOrganization.

6. The seat of the Commission shall be lo-cated in London. The Commission shall hold itsfirst meeting in San Francisco immediatelyafter the conclusion of the United NationsConference on International Organization. TheExecutive Committee shall call the Commissioninto session again as soon as possible after theCharter of the Organization comes into effectand whenever subsequently it considers such asession desirable.

7. The Commission shall cease to exist uponthe election of the Secretary-General of theOrganization, at which time its property andrecords shall be transferred to the Organization.

8. The Government of the United States ofAmerica shall be the temporary depositary andshall have custody of the original documentembodying these interim arrangements in thefive languages in which it is signed. Duly certi-fied copies thereof shall be transmitted to thegovernments of the signatory states. TheGovernment of the United States of Americashall transfer the original to the ExecutiveSecretary on his appointment.

9. This document shall be effective as fromthis date, and shall remain open for signatureby the states entitled to be the original Mem-bers of the United Nations until the Commis-sion is dissolved in accordance with para-graph 7.

IN FAITH WHEREOF, the undersigned repre-sentatives having been duly authorized forthat purpose, sign this document in the English,French, Chinese, Russian, and Spanish lan-guages, all texts being of equal authenticity.

DONE at the city of San Francisco this twen-ty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hun-dred and forty-five.

2. FIRST SESSION OF THE PREPARATORYCOMMISSION

The Preparatory Commission held its firstsession on June 27, 1945, at San Franciscoimmediately after the closing session of theConference. It was agreed at this meeting thatthe Executive Committee should carry on inLondon the work of the Commission and should


call the full Preparatory Commission into ses-sion again as soon as possible after the Charterof the United Nations had come into effect.The Executive Committee was to choose itsown officers and staff and to determine itsown rules of procedure.

The ten committees completed their workin seven weeks and made a number of recom-mendations and proposals. These recommen-dations and proposals were embodied in aReport of the Executive Committee to thePreparatory Commission.1

COMMISSION

The Executive Committee of the Prepara-tory Commission, consisting of representativesof Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China,Czechoslovakia, France, Iran, Mexico, theNetherlands, the U.S.S.R., the United King-dom, the United States and Yugoslavia, heldits first meeting in London on August 16, 1945.The Committee elected Mr. Gladwyn Jebb asits Executive Secretary. The representativesof China, France, the U.S.S.R., the UnitedKingdom and the United States in turn servedas Chairman of the Executive Committee fortwo weeks each. The representative of Brazilserved as Chairman for the last meeting onNovember 24, at which the Executive Com-mittee adopted provisional rules of procedureand a provisional agenda for the second sessionof the Preparatory Commission. He presentedthe Executive Committee's Report to the Pre-paratory Commission.

Under item 2 of the Interim Arrangements,the functions and powers of the PreparatoryCommission, when it was not in session, wereexercised by the Executive Committee. TheCommittee conceived it to be its duty to pre-pare for the second session of the Prepara-tory Commission by undertaking the worklaid down in items 1 and 4 (b) to (g) of theInterim Arrangements. For this purpose theExecutive Committee on September 1 set upthe following ten committees:

CommitteeCommittee 1Committee 2Committee 3

Committee 4Committee 5

Committee 6

Committee 7

Committee 8


SubjectGeneral AssemblySecurity CouncilEconomic and

Social CouncilTrusteeship CouncilCourt and Legal

ProblemsArrangements for

the SecretariatFinancial

ArrangementsRelations with Spe-

cialized AgenciesLeague of NationsGeneral

4. SECOND SESSION OF THE PREPARATORYCOMMISSION

The second session of the Commission beganon November 24, 1945, and concluded onDecember 23. At its second meeting on Novem-ber 26, 1946, the Preparatory Commissionadopted the agenda and rules of proceduredrafted by the Executive Committee and elec-ted as Chairman Eduardo Zuleta Angel (Co-lombia) and as Vice-Chairmen D. Z. Manuil-sky (Ukrainian S.S.R.) and Paul-Henri Spaak(Belgium).

The Preparatory Commission establishedeight Technical Committees as follows:

CommitteeCommittee 1Committee 2Committee 3


Committee 6


SubjectGeneral AssemblySecurity CouncilEconomic and

Social CouncilTrusteeshipCourt and Legal

ProblemsAdministrative

and BudgetaryLeague of NationsGeneral Questions

Each of these committees was to considerand report on appropriate chapters and sec-tions of the Report of the Executive Commit-tee. In addition, the Commission, on the recom-mendation of the Executive Committee, ap-pointed an Advisory Group of Experts onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions anda Technical Advisory Committee on Informa-tion.

The Report of the Executive Committeeserved as the basis of the Preparatory Com-mission's work. While the Preparatory Com-mission did not in all cases adopt the recom-mendations and proposals of the ExecutiveCommittee, these played an indispensable partin the whole preparatory process. The workof the Preparatory Commission was embodied

1 The Report of the Executive Committee to the

Preparatory Commission is available in all of thefive official languages of the United Nations.

3. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE PREPARATORY


in a. Report of the Preparatory Commissionof the United Nations.1

5. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PREPARATORYCOMMISSION

Following is a brief review of the principalrecommendations of the Preparatory Com-mission and of some of the major issues asthey arose in the course of the deliberationsboth of the Executive Committee and thePreparatory Commission:

a. General AssemblyThe Preparatory Commission recommended

that the General Assembly meet at the earliestpossible date. The Commission submitted theprovisional agenda for the first session andProvisional Rules of Procedure for adoptionby the General Assembly. It recommendedthat the Assembly establish six Main Com-mittees (Political and Security; Economicand Financial; Social, Humanitarian andCultural; Trusteeship; Administrative andBudgetary; Legal), two Procedural Commit-tees (Credentials Committee and GeneralCommittee), two Standing Committees (Ad-visory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions and Committee on Con-tributions) and such ad hoc committees asmight be required from time to time.

As regards the Main Committees, represent-atives both in the Executive Committee andthe Preparatory Commission differed as towhether there should be one or two committeesto deal with questions in the economic andsocial field. In favor of a single committee itwas argued that economic and social prob-lems were closely interrelated and that onecommittee should have the overall review ofthe policy and program of the Economicand Social Council. In favor of two committeesit was maintained that there would be somany different questions to be dealt with inthe economic and social field that more thanone committee would be needed, lest importantwork be neglected due to pressure of time.The work of two committees could be co-ordinated by joint meetings, joint sub-com-mittee meetings or in the plenary sessionsof the General Assembly. A small majorityof the Executive Committee was in favorof the establishment of two committees. Bya vote of 28 to 14, Committee 1 (GeneralAssembly) of the Preparatory Commissiondecided in favor of the creation of two com-

mittees and the Preparatory Commission en-dorsed this decision.

Divergent views concerning the functionsand the composition of the General Committeewere expressed both in the Executive Com-mittee and the Preparatory Commission. Somerepresentatives considered that the GeneralCommittee should ensue the general political-direction of the work of. the General Assemblyand that committee members therefore shouldbe chosen on the basis of broad geographicaldistribution. Other representatives consideredthat the main function of the General Commit-tee was to guide the practical work of the Gen-eral Assembly and that it was desirable to havea small, efficient committee whose membersshould be chosen primarily for their personalcompetence. Although a Sub-Committee ofCommittee 1 of the Preparatory Commissiondefined the functions of the General Committeeas being primarily concerned with non-politicalmatters, a Belgian amendment to the effectthat "the General Committee cannot decideany political questions" failed to obtain therequired two-thirds majority vote for adop-tion. The Preparatory Commission recom-mended that the General Committee consist ofthe President, the seven Vice-Presidents andthe Chairmen of the Main Committees.2

Committee 1 (General Assembly) of theExecutive Committee had voted 10 to 2 infavor of a Nominations Committee to nomi-nate "candidates other than the President forfunctions which carry with them a seat onthe General Committee." In the plenary meet-ing of the Executive Committee, however, thisproposal obtained only 8 votes against 6, lessthan the required two-thirds majority. Infavor of a Nominations Committee it wasargued that only a properly constituted bodywould be able to give the exhaustive and intel-ligent appraisal necessary for the proper eval-uation of candidates, taking due account ofall such factors as personal competence, equit-able geographical distribution, etc. In oppo-sition, representatives pointed to the dangerof concentrating too much power in a smallbody such as a Nominations Committee. Thequestion of making nominations, they declared,

1 The Report of the Preparatory Commission ofthe United Nations is available in all of the fiveofficial languages of the United Nations.

2 The Executive Committee's recommendationincluded the Chairman of the Credentials Com-mittee.


should be left to informal consultation be-tween all of the Members of the GeneralAssembly. After considerable discussion thePreparatory Commission decided by a vote of37 to 3 against the creation of a NominationsCommittee.

b. Security CouncilThe Preparatory Commission, on the basis

of the Executive Committee's Report, recom-mended that the Security Council adopt theprovisional agenda for its first meeting andthe Rules of Procedure presented by the Com-mission. The representative of the first mem-ber of the Security Council in the Englishalphabetical order of the names of memberswas to act as temporary Chairman of theCouncil.

The Preparatory Commission recommendedthat at its first meeting the Council shouldadopt a directive requesting the Chiefs ofStaff of the permanent members of the Secur-ity Council to meet at a given place and dateand to constitute the Military Staff Committee.The provisional agenda for the first meetingof the Security Council included recommenda-tion to the General Assembly on the appoint-ment of a Secretary-General; election of mem-bers of the International Court of Justice;discussion on the organization of the staffwhich would assist the Council and the bestmeans of negotiating special agreements forplacing armed forces at the disposal of theSecurity Council.

The Preparatory Commission's recommen-dations regarding the Security Council wereless detailed than those dealing with otherorgans of the United Nations, partly becauseit was felt that the Council would meet con-tinuously and would be able to develop its ownorganization and program of work.

c. Economic and Social CouncilThe Preparatory Commission recommended

that the Economic and Social Council be or-ganized at the earliest practicable date andadopt the provisional agenda and Rules ofProcedure submitted by the Preparatory Com-mission. The Executive Committee had recom-mended that the Economic and Social Councilat its first session establish a Commission onHuman Rights, an Economic and EmploymentCommission, a Temporary Social Commission,and a Statistical Commission, and consider thedesirability of establishing at an early date aDemographic Commission and a Temporary

Transport and Communications Commission.At its first sessions the Council should con-sider the desirability of establishing a Co-ordination Commission.

The Preparatory Commission approved theserecommendations, but it proposed that theEconomic and Social Council, in addition,establish a Commission on Narcotic Drugs todeal with problems of the control of narcoticdrugs and to take over certain of the functionsin this field previously exercised by the Leagueof Nations, and that it consider the desirabilityof establishing a Fiscal Commission. A pro-posal that a commission should be establishedto deal with the refugee problem was notaccepted by the Preparatory Commission,although it was agreed that the problem shouldbe considered by the Economic and SocialCouncil. At the same time it was recommen-ded that the General Assembly likewise con-sider the question because of the politicalproblems involved.

The Executive Committee made no specificrecommendations concerning the relationshipsof the Economic and Social Council with spe-cialized agencies, but submitted a number ofobservations which the Preparatory Commis-sion transmitted to the General Assembly "toserve as a guide to the Economic and SocialCouncil in its negotiations with specializedagencies."

d. Trusteeship CouncilThe Preparatory Commission submitted

Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Trus-teeship Council. As the Trusteeship Councilcould not be established until some territorieswere placed under trusteeship the ExecutiveCommittee recommended the establishment ofa Temporary Trusteeship Committee to carryout certain of the functions assigned bythe Charter to the Trusteeship Council andto assist the United Nations in speeding theconclusion of Trusteeship Agreements. Therepresentatives of Czechoslovakia, the U.S.S.R.and Yugoslavia opposed the establishment ofsuch a committee on the ground that it wasunconstitutional because it was not in accord-ance with the Charter. Some representativesquestioned whether the establishment of sucha committee would not retard rather thanhasten the establishment of Trusteeship Agree-ments. Various alternative proposals pre-sented to Committee 4 (Trusteeship) of thePreparatory Commission were referred to a


Sub-Committee composed of the representa-tives of Belgium, the U.S.S.R., Syria, theUnited Kingdom, the United States and Yugo-slavia. Committee 4 and the Preparatory Com-mission adopted the Sub-Committee's recom-mendations, which consisted of a draftresolution to be adopted by the General As-sembly calling on Mandatory Powers to under-take practical steps in concert with the otherStates directly concerned so that TrusteeshipAgreements could be submitted for approval,preferably not later than the second part ofthe first session of the General Assembly.

e. International Court of JusticeThe Interim Arrangements agreed upon at

San Francisco empowered the PreparatoryCommission (instead of the Secretary-Generalas provided for in Article 5 of the Statute ofthe Court) to issue invitations for the nomina-tion of candidates for the International Courtof Justice. The Statute of the Court, however,requires that invitations shall be issued atleast three months before the election. Inorder that the election of the judges shouldtake place at the first session of the GeneralAssembly and the Security Council, the Execu-tive Committee directed the Executive Secre-tary to issue the invitations. The PreparatoryCommission approved this action and recom-mended that the General Assembly take thenecessary steps for the convening of the In-ternational Court of Justice. It adopted aresolution stating that it would welcome) thetaking by the League of Nations of appro-priate steps for the purpose of dissolving thePermanent Court of International Justice.

Certain of the members of the PreparatoryCommission which were members of theLeague of Nations informed the Commissionof their intention of moving at the forthcom-ing session of the League Assembly a resolu-tion for dissolving the Permanent Court ofInternational Justice, and stated that theywould also take steps to require the assentof ex-enemy States which were parties to theProtocol of Signature of the Statute of theCourt to any measures taken for dissolvingthe Court. Members of the Preparatory Com-mission which were parties to the Protocol ofSignature recorded their assent to the Court'sdissolution.

f. Registration of TreatiesBoth the Executive Committee and the Pre-

paratory Commission recommended that the

Secretary-General should work out detailsfor the registration and publication of treatiesin accordance with Article 102 of the Charter.

In order to prevent any gap occurring be-tween the conclusion of the League of Nationstreaty series and the beginning of a similartreaty series by the United Nations, the Ex-ecutive Committee instructed the ExecutiveSecretary to send a circular letter to the Mem-bers of the United Nations informing themthat as from the date of the entry into forceof the Charter of the United Nations treatieswhich Members sent in would be received andfiled on a provisional basis until the adoptionof detailed regulations. The Preparatory Com-mission approved this action. The Commissionrecommended that the General Assembly con-sider inviting non-Members to send on theirown initiative treaties and international agree-ments for registration with and publication bythe Secretariat and inviting all governments,whether or not Members of the United Na-tions to send for publication treaties and in-ternational agreements concluded before thedate of entry into force of the Charter, whichhad not been included in the League of Na-tions treaty series.

g. Privileges, Immunities and Facilities ofthe United NationsUpon the recommendation of the Executive

Committee the Preparatory Commission in-structed the Executive Secretary to invitethe attention of the Members of the UnitedNations to the fact that under Article 105of the Charter the obligation of all Mem-bers to accord to the United Nations allprivileges and immunities necessary for theaccomplishment of its purposes operated fromthe coming into force of the Charter. ThePreparatory Commission transmitted to theGeneral Assembly for its consideration andinformation a Study on Privileges andImmunities presented by the Executive Com-mittee and a Draft Convention on Privilegesand Immunities drawn up by a Sub-Commit-tee of Committee 6 (Legal) of the Prepara-tory Commission. The Preparatory Commis-sion recommended that the privileges andimmunities of specialized agencies containedin their respective constitutions should bereconsidered with a view to their co-ordina-tion with any convention ultimately adoptedby the United Nations.


h. SecretariatThe Preparatory Commission adopted the

Executive Committee's recommendation thatthe Secretariat be organized on a functionalbasis, each administrative unit being at thedisposal of any organ of the United Nationsfor the performance of work falling within itscompetence. The principal units of the Secre-tariat should be: Department of SecurityCouncil Affairs, Department of EconomicAffairs, Department of Social Affairs, Depart-ment of Trusteeship and Information fromNon-Self-Governing Territories, Departmentof Public Information, Legal Department, Con-ference and General Services, Administrativeand Financial Services. The Executive Com-mittee rejected a minority proposal submittedby the Soviet delegation for the establishmentof separate secretariats for each of the princi-pal organs of the United Nations (SecurityCouncil, General Assembly, Economic andSocial Council, Trusteeship Council).

Representatives differed as to the desirabil-ity of establishing one, or two, departmentswithin the Secretariat to deal with questionsin the economic and social field, but after dis-cussion both the Executive Committee and thePreparatory Commission decided in favor oftwo departments. The Executive Committeerejected a proposal that an official of a statussuperior to that of a departmental head shouldensure co-ordination between the two depart-ments. The Preparatory Commission recom-mended that the Secretary-General shouldtake the necessary steps to co-ordinate thework of the Department of Economic Affairsand the Department of Social Affairs.

As the Preparatory Commission consideredthat the United Nations could not achieve itspurposes unless the peoples of the world werefully informed of its aims and activities, itappointed a Technical Advisory Committee onInformation to make recommendations con-cerning the functions, policies and activitiesof the Department of Public Information. ThePreparatory Commission transmitted theTechnical Advisory Committee's recommenda-tions to the General Assembly for itsconsideration. Moreover, the Commissionappointed a small Sub-Committee to studycertain aspects of the practical application ofthese recommendations and submit its reportto the Secretary-General for his guidance.

The Executive Committee made recommen-dations concerning the recruitment of staff andthe grading of posts in the Secretariat, drewup provisional staff regulations and recom-mended that the Preparatory Commissionmake detailed recommendations concerningsalaries and allowances. It recommended thatthe Preparatory Commission consider theestablishment of an International Civil Serv-ice Commission to advise the Secretary-Gen-eral on methods of recruitment.

The Preparatory Commission consideredthat the Secretary-General's freedom to or-ganize the Secretariat should not be restricted,however, by too much detail. In particular, itfelt that it would be premature to make defin-ite recommendations concerning salary scales.The Preparatory Commission recommendedthat the General Assembly should determinethe salaries of the Secretary-General, theAssistant-Secretaries-General, and the top-ranking Directors, and that for all other poststhe Secretary-General should determine aclassification scheme. The question of salaries,allowances and pensions was referred forpreliminary study to the Advisory Group ofExperts appointed by the Preparatory Com-mission to assist the Executive Secretary inthe development of administrative, budgetaryand personnel policies.

The Preparatory Commission established aspecial Sub-Committee to revise, in consultationwith the Advisory Group of Experts, the staffregulations submitted by the Executive Com-mittee. Upon the recommendation of the sub-committee the Preparatory Commission di-vided the provisional staff regulations draftedby the Executive Committee into staff regu-lations defining the fundamental rights andobligations of the staff which the PreparatoryCommission recommended should be adoptedby the General Assembly, and provisional staffrules to implement the staff regulations, whichwere to be transmitted by the General Assem-bly to the Secretary-General for his informa-tion. The Preparatory Commission rejecteda proposal requiring that appointments ofstaff members should be made only with theconcurrence of the governments of the candi-dates concerned.

The Preparatory Commission recommendedthat the Secretary-General establish an In-ternational Civil Service Commission afterconsultation with the heads of specializedagencies.


i. Budgetary and Financial Arrangements.

In it recommendations the PreparatoryCommission laid down the general principleswhich it considered should govern the financialand budgetary arrangements of the UnitedNations, leaving detailed arrangements forfuture consideration by the General Assembly.Draft provisional financial regulations sub-mitted by the Advisory Group of Experts andthe observations of certain delegations onthem were referred to the General Assemblyfor its consideration.

To meet United Nations expenditures untilsuch time as the first annual budget wasapproved by the United Nations the Prepara-tory Commission instructed the ExecutiveSecretary, assisted by the Advisory Group ofExperts, to prepare a provisional budget forsubmission to the first part of the first sessionof the General Assembly.

The Preparatory Commission recommendedthat the General Assembly establish an ad-visory committee on administration andbudgetary questions and a committee oncontributions, and that pending the appoint-ment of the Advisory Committee the Secre-tary-General appoint an advisory group ofexperts similar to the one appointed by thePreparatory Commission.

j. Permanent HeadquartersOn October 3, 1945, the Executive Commit-

tee voted 9 in favor, with 3 against and 2 ab-staining, that "the permanent headquarters ofthe United Nations be located in the UnitedStates of America."

The Preparatory Commission assigned thequestion of the headquarters to Committee 8(General Questions) for consideration. OnNovember 29, 1945, Committee 8 appointeda Sub-Committee of seven members (Aus-tralia, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, the Neth-erlands and Yugoslavia) to take evidence fromdelegations, municipalities and other bodieswhich had invited the United Nations to es-tablish its seat within their territory. Not-withstanding the Executive Committee's re-commendation that the headquarters be locatedin the United States, the whole question wasreopened in the Preparatory Commission,many representatives expressing themselves infavor of Europe as the seat of the headquar-ters of the United Nations. A lengthy debateensued, involving points of substance as wellas procedure.

In favor of establishing the United Nationsheadquarters in Europe it was argued thatEurope was the most important potentialcenter of international unrest. The UnitedNations should be located where the need foraction to maintain peace and security wasgreatest. If the United Nations were locatedaway from Europe, with its troubles andsufferings arising from the war, this mightresult in official aloofness and lack of realism.Europe was the cultural center of a largepart of the world; it was a natural center ofcommunications and was closer to the capitalsof the majority of the Members of the UnitedNations than the United States.

Another argument in favor of Europe asagainst the United States considered of majorimportance was that the) United Nationsshould not be located in the territory of oneof the major powers, in particular one of thefive permanent members of the Security Coun-cil. A permanent member of the SecurityCouncil in the role of host State might exertundue influence over the organization andmight obtain advantages not enjoyed by theother powers. On the other hand the presenceof the United Nations on its territory mightembarrass a permanent member of the Secur-ity Council and limit its freedom of action.The headquarters of the United Nations, there-fore, should be established in a small countryunaffected by major political and interna-tional issues. International influence, moreover,should be equitably distributed throughout theworld. With the International Monetary Fund,the International Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment and the Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations located inthe United States, it was not desirable tolocate there, in addition, the headquarter ofthe United Nations.

In favor of establishing the headquarters ofthe United Nations in America it was main-tained that Europe was not the only center ofinternational difficulties and that other areassuch as the Pacific or South America shouldnot be neglected. The United Nations shouldbe a truly international and not a regionalorganization. Moreover, the prevention of in-ternational conflict was only one of the func-tions of the United Nations. It was hoped thatits positive tasks in the fields of internationaleconomic, social and cultural co-operationwould become increasingly important. TheUnited States with its traditions of peace and


freedom and in view of its location betweenEurope and the Pacific countries would pro-vide the best choice. The League of Nationshad failed despite the fact that it was locatedin Europe. A new start toward world peaceshould be made in a new atmosphere.

In answer to the contention that the head-quarters should not be located in the territoryof a major power, lest one of them gaingreater influence and prestige than the others,it was pointed out that this argument wasbased on the old concept of balance of power,while the concept underlying the establish-ment of the United Nations was that of collec-tive security. The United Nations should beinternational in spirit and action, whereverits headquarters were located. Finally, thelocation of the headquarters of the UnitedNations in the United States would help toensure the support of the American peoplefor the United Nations, which was an import-ant factor in its success.

At its meeting of December 15, 1945, anamendment to the Executive Committee's re-port recommending Europe in place of theUnited States as the site of the permanentheadquarters was defeated by a vote of 25 to23, with 2 abstentions. Following the defeatof this amendment, the recommendation ofthe Executive Committee was carried with avote of 30 in favor and 14 against, with 6abstentions. The recommendation having beenpassed by a two-thirds majority, it was de-cided that the vote be made unanimous.

On December 22, 1945, Committee 8 voted22 to 6, with 12 abstentions, against a motionthat the site should be located in the west ofthe United States. The Committee thenapproved an eastern site by a vote of 25 to 5,with 10 abstentions.

On December 20 the Sub-Committee chargedwith taking evidence from deputations whichhad come to invite the United Nations re-ported to Committee 8 that it had receiveddeputations from some fifteen communities inthe United States, but that more time wasrequired to make a satisfactory report con-cerning a specific site for the United Nationsheadquarters. Committee 8 therefore decidedthat the Sub-Committee should close its hear-ings and that an interim committee beappointed to start functioning upon the closeof the Preparatory Commission's session. Theinterim committee composed of twelve mem-bers would determine the exact requirements

for a United Nations site and would examinespecific sites in the light of these require-ments. The Preparatory Commission on De-cember 23 approved the recommendations ofCommittee 8.

On December 28 the Interim Committeeapproved as a location for the site thefollowing areas: within 50 to 60 miles fromBoston, Massachusetts; east of the HudsonRiver in New York or Connecticut, between25 and 80 miles from New York City; or thePrinceton, New Jersey, area. The Committeeappointed an Inspection Group of seven mem-bers, who left London on January 4, 1946,and arrived in New York on January 5;then proceeded to study areas near Boston,Princeton and New York; and departed forLondon on February 2. The Inspection Grouprecommended that the permanent headquar-ters should be established: (1) near to NewYork City, and (2) in the North Stamford -Greenwich district.

k. League of NationsRepresentatives to the Executive Commit-

tee and the Preparatory Commission agreedthat it was desirable that the United Nationsshould take over certain of the functions,powers, activities and assets of the Leagueof Nations. Opposition was expressed, how-ever against assumption by the United Na-tions of political functions exercised by theLeague of Nations under international agree-ments. Some representatives opposed thetransfer even of certain non-political func-tions of the League. The Preparatory Com-mission therefore recommended that theUnited Nations take over only custodial, tech-nical and non-political functions belonging tothe League under international agreements,and that the General Assembly reserve itsright, after due examination, not to assumeany particular function and power. Concern-ing non-political activities performed by theLeague of Nations other than those arisingfrom international agreements, the Prepara-tory Commission recommended that the Eco-nomic and Social Council survey these func-tions to determine which of them should beassumed by the United Nations. Pending theconclusion of this survey the Economic andSocial Council should provisionally continuecertain of these functions. The PreparatoryCommission's recommendations were put inthe form of a draft resolution for adoptionby the General Assembly.


On December 18, 1945, the PreparatoryCommission appointed a Committee consistingof one representative each designated by thedelegations of Chile, China, France, Poland,South Africa, the U.S.S.R., the United King-dom and the United States to enter into dis-cussions with the League of Nations Super-

visory Committee for the purpose ofestablishing a common plan for the transferof the assets of the League of Nations to theUnited Nations. This Common Plan was tobe submitted to the first part of the firstsession of the General Assembly for approval.

ANNEX IREPRESENTATIVES AT THE

CHINAV. K. Wellington KooWei Tao-mingVictor Chi-tsai HooGeneral Shang Chen

UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICSAndrei A. GromykoArkady A. SobolevSemen K. ZarapkinMajor-General Nikolai V. SlavinRear Admiral Konstantin K. RodionovSergei A. GolunskySergei B. KrylovGrigori G. DolbinMikhail M. Yunin

UNITED KINGDOM

Sir Alexander CadoganLord HalifaxSir William MalkinAdmiral Sir Percy NobleLieutenant-General G. N. MacreadyMajor-General M. F. Grove-WhiteAir-Marshal Sir William WelshAir-Vice-Marshal R. P. Willock

DUMBARTON OAKS CONVERSATIONSCommodore A. W. ClarkeSir George SansomGladwyn JebbColonel Denis Capel-DunnPeter LoxleyC. K. WebsterP. H. Gore-Booth

UNITED STATES

Edward R. Stettinius, Jr.Isaiah BowmanBenjamin V. CohenJames Clement DunnLieutenant-General Stanley D. EmbickMajor-General Muir S. FairchildHenry P. FletcherJoseph Clark GrewGreen H. HackworthAdmiral Arthur J. HepburnStanley K. HornbeckBreckinridge LongLeo PasvolskyMajor-General George V. StrongRear-Admiral Harold C. TrainVice-Admiral Russell WillsonEdwin C. Wilson

ANNEX IIREPRESENTATIVES AND OFFICERS AT THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE

ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, SAN FRANCISCO

ARGENTINA

Miguel Angel CarcanoOscar Ibarra GarciaBrigadier-General Juan Carlos BassiRear-Admiral Alberto D. Brunet

AUSTRALIA

Francis Michael FordeHerbert Vere Evatt

BELGIUM

Paul-Henri SpaakAuguste De SchryverAlbert Marteaux

RepresentativesVictor de LaveleyeBaron Robert SilvercruysCharles De VisscherFernand van LangenhoveLieutenant-Colonel Henri RolinFernand DehousseJoseph van der ElstWalter LoridanJoseph NisotRoland LebeauBaron Pierre de Gaiffier d'Hestroy

BOLIVIA

Gustavo ChacónVictor Andrade


Eduardo Arze QuirogaCarlos SalamancaLuis Iturralde

BRAZILPedro Leão VellosoCarlos MartinsCyro de Freitas ValleMajor-General Estevão Leitãs de CarvalhoMajor-General Armando Figueira

Trompowsky de AlmeidaAdmiral Sylvio de NoronhaAntonio Camillo de OliveiraDr. Bertha Lutz

BYELORUSSIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC

Kuzma V. KiselevAnton R. ZhebrakVladimir N. PertsevGeorgy I. BaidakovFrol P. Shmigov

CANADA

W. L. Mackenzie KingL. S. St. LaurentJ. H. KingLucien MoraudGordon GraydonM. J. ColdwellMrs. Cora T. Casselman

CHILEJoaquín FernándezMarcial MoraMiguel CruchagaJosé MazaGabriel Gonzalez-VidelaCarlos Contreras-LabarcaEduardo Cruz-CokeFélix Nieto del RioAmílcar ChiorriniEnrique AlcaldeGuillermo del PedregalOscar Gajardo VillarroelGermán VergaraJulio Escudero

CHINA

T. V. SoongV. K. Wellington KooWang Chung-huiWei Tao-mingHu ShihMiss Wu Yi-fangLi HwangTung Pi-wuHu Lin

COLOMBIA

Alberto Lleras CamargoRoberto Urdaneta ArbeláezMiguel López PumaregoAlberto González FernándezEduardo Zuleta AngelSilvio VillegasJesús Mariá Yepes

COSTA RICAJulio Acosta GarcíaLuis Anderson MoruaAlvaro Bonilla LaraFrancisco de P. GutiérrezLuis Demetrio Tinoco CastroJ. Rafael OreamunoJulio Peña Morua

CUBA

Guillermo Belt RamirezErnesto Dihigo López TrigoRamiro Guerra y SánchezFrancisco Aguirre

CZECHOSLOVAKIA

Jan MasarykVladimír S. HurbanJan PapánekIvan KernoKarel CervenkaJosef HancVladimír VochocVáclav Benes

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

Manuel A. Peña BatlleEmilio García GodoyGilberto Sánchez LustrinoTulio Franco y FrancoGeneral Antonio Leyba y PouMiss Minerva Bernardino

ECUADORCamilo Ponce EnríquezLuis Eduardo LasoGalo PlazaGonzalo Escudero MoscosoNeftalí PonceCarlos Tobar Zaldumbide

EGYPTAbdel Hamid Badawi PashaIbrahim Bey Abdel HadiMahmoud Pasha Hassan

EL SALVADORHector David CastroJ. Antonio QuirosCarlos Leiva


ETHIOPIA

Bitwodded Makonnen EndalkachauAklilou Abte-WoldAmbai Wold-MariamBlatta Ephrem Tewelde MedhenEmmanuel AbrahamMenasse Lemma

FRANCE

Georges BidaultRené PlévenFrançois BillouxJoseph Paul-BoncourHenri Bonnet

GREECE

John SofianopoulosKyriakos VarvaressosJohn PolitisThanassis AghnidesCimon DiamantopoulosNicholas G. Lély

GUATEMALA

Guillermo TorielloManuel Noriega MoralesEugenio Silva Peña

HAITIGérard E. LescotVély ThébaudGeneral Alfred NemoursAndré Liautaud

HONDURAS

Julián R. CáceresMarcos Carias ReyesVirgilio R. Gálvez

INDIA

Sir A. Ramaswami MudaliarSir Firoz Khan NoonSir V. T. Krishnamachari

IRAN

Mostafa AdleBagher KazemiAH Akbar SiassiNasrollah EntezamAllah Yar SalehGhasem GhaniMohammed ShayestehMajor-General Ali RiaziSadigh Rezazadeh SchafaghJalal AbdohAbdoul Hosein Etebar

IRAQArshad Al-OmariAli JawdatNasrat Al-FarsyFadhil Al-Jamali

LEBANON

Wadih NaimAbdallah YafiJoseph SalemCharles Habib Malik

LIBERIA

C. L. SimpsonGabriel L. DennisLemuel GibsonRichard HenriesColonel Moses Grant

LUXEMBOURG

Joseph BechHugues Le Gallais

MEXICO

Ezequiel PadillaFrancisco Castillo NájeraPrimo Villa MichciManuel Tello

NETHERLANDS

Eelco N. van KleffensAlexander LoudonH. J. van HookJ. C. KielstraVice-Admiral C. E. L. HelfrichCharles 0. van der PlasMajor-General A. G. van TrichtFather L. J. C. Beaufort

NEW ZEALAND

Peter FraserCarl A. Berendsen

NICARAGUA

Mariano Argüello VargasGuillermo Sevilla SacasaColonel Luis Manuel de Bayle

NORWAY

Wilhelm Munthe MorgenstierneArnold RaestadJac. S. Worm-MüllerArne OrdingOyestein Thommessen


PANAMA

Roberto JiménezRicardo J. AlfaroOctavio Méndez PereiraJuan R. MoralesAbdiel J. Arias

PARAGUAY

Celso R. VelazquezJuan Bautista AyalaCesar R. Acosta

PERU

Manuel C. GallagherArturo GarcíaVíctor Andrés BelaundeLuis Fernán CisnerosPedro G. Beltrán

PHILIPPINE COMMONWEALTH

Brigadier-General Carlos P. RomuloMaximo M. KalawCarlos P. GarciaPedro LópezFrancisco A. DelgadoUrbano A. ZafraColonel Alejandro MelchorVicente G. Sinco

SAUDI ARABIA

Amir Faisal ibn Abdul AzizHafiz WahbaAsad El-Faqih

SYRIAFaris el-KhouriNaim al-AntakiNazem al-Koudsi

TURKEY

Hasan SakaHüseyin Ragip BaydurFeridun Cemal Erkin

UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC

Dmitry Z. ManuilskyIvan S. SeninAlexander PalladinVladimir G. BondarchukPeter S. PogrebniakNikolas N. Petrovsky

Field-Marshal Jan Christian SmutsD. D. ForsythLeif Egeland

V. M. MolotovV. V. KuznetsovA. I. LavrentievA. A. GromykoK. V. NovikovS. K. ZarapkinA. A. SobolevS. A. GolunskyS. B. KrylovRear-Admiral K. K. RodionovLieutenant-General A. F. Vassiliev

UNITED KINGDOM

Anthony EdenClement AttleeThe Viscount CranborneThe Earl of Halifax

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Edward R. Stettinius, Jr.Cordell HullTom ConnallyArthur H. VandenbergSol BloomCharles A. EatonCommander Harold E. StassenDean Virginia C. Gildersleeve

URUGUAYJosé SerratoJacobo VarelaJuan Carlos BlancoRoberto E. MacEachenMrs. Isabel P. de VidalCésar CharloneCaptain Héctor LuisiCyro GiambrunoJuan F. GuichónHector Payssé Reyes

VENEZUELA

Caracciolo Parra-PérezGustavo HerreraAlfredo Machado-HernandezRafael Ernesto López

YUGOSLAVIA

Ivan SubasicSreten ZujovicStanoje Simic

UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS

UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA


Presidents of the Conference

Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., Chairman of theDelegation of the United States

T. V. Soong, Chairman of the Delegation ofChina

V. M. Molotov, Chairman of the Delegation ofthe Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Anthony Eden, Chairman of the Delegation ofthe United Kingdom

Officers of Commissions and Committees

Commission &Committee

Commission I

Committee I/1

Committee I/2

Commission II

Committee II/l

Committee II/2

Committee II/3

Committee II/4

Commission III

Committee III/l

Committee III/2

Committee III/3

Committee III/4

Commission IV

Committee IV/1

Committee IV/2

Officers

President:Rapporteur:

Assistant Secre-tary General:

Chairman:Rapporteur:

Chairman:Rapporteurs:

President:

Rapporteur:Assistant Secre-tary General:





President:Rapporteur:Assistant Secre-tary General:





President:Assistant Secre-tary General:



Henri Rolin (Belgium)Vicente G. Sinco (Philippine

Commonwealth)

Charles Habib Malik (Lebanon)

Dmitry Z. Manuilsky (Ukraine)Farid Zeineddine (Syria)

Alvaro Bonilla Lara (Costa Rica)Gérard E. Lescot (Haiti)Jamil Daoud El-Mussalmy (Saudi Arabia)

Field-Marshal Jan Christian Smuts(South Africa)

Octavio Méndez Pereira (Panama)

C. L. Simpson (Liberia)

Hasan Saka (Turkey)Kuzma V. Kiselev (Byelorussia)

Victor Andrade (Bolivia)Tulio Franco y Franco (Dominican

Republic)

Sir A. Ramaswami Mudaliar (India)Manuel Noriega Morales (Guatemala)

Peter Fraser (New Zealand)Joseph Bech (Luxembourg)

Wilhelm Munthe Morgenstierne (Norway)Celso R. Velázquez (Paraguay)

Julián R. Cáceres (Honduras)

John Sofianopoulos (Greece)Hector David Castro (El Salvador)

José Serrato (Uruguay)G. P. Arkadiev (U.S.S.R.)

Camilo Ponce Enríquez (Ecuador)Joseph Paul-Boneour (France)

Alberto Lleras Camargo (Colombia)V. K. Wellington Koo (China)

Caracciolo Parra-Perez (Venezuela)

Ato Emmanuel Abraham (Ethiopia)

Manuel C. Gallagher (Peru)Nasrat Al-Farsy (Iraq)

Abdel Hamid Badawi Pasha (Egypt)Mariano Arguello Vargas (Nicaragua)


Officers of the Secretariat

Secretary-GeneralAlger Hiss

Deputy Secretary-GeneralJohn C. Ross

Executive SecretaryC. E. Rothwell

Deputy Executive SecretaryCarter L. Burgess

Assistant Executive SecretariesRobert B. StewartJohn C. Dreier

Administrative SecretaryWilliam D. WrightDeputy Administrative Secretaries

John RussellMillard KenestrickStephen P. DorseyMerle K. Wood0. H. Transtrum

ANNEX III

MEMBERS AND OFFICERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION

CountryAustraliaBrazilCanadaChileChinaCzechoslovakiaFranceIranMexicoNetherlandsU.S.S.R.United KingdomUnited StatesYugoslavia

Members of the Executive Committee

RepresentativeH. V. EvattC. de Freitas-ValleW. F. A. TurgeonManuel BianchiV. K. Wellington KooJan MasarykRené MassigliNasrollah EntezamLuis Padilla NervoJ. H. van RoijenA. A. GromykoP. J. Noel-BakerEdward R. Stettinius, Jr.Ljubo Leontic

Chairmen of Committees of the Executive Committee

CommitteeCommittee 1 (General Assembly)Committee 2 (Security Council)Committee 3 (Economic and Social Council)Committee 4 (Trusteeship Council)Committee 5 (Court and Legal Problems)Committee 6 (Arrangements for the

Secretariat)Committee 7 (Financial Arrangements)Committee 8 (Relations with Specialized

Agencies)Committee 9 (League of Nations)Committee 10 (General)

ChairmanP. J. Noel-BakerEdward R. Stettinius, Jr.Victor Chi-tsai HooH. V. EvattS. B. Krylov succeeded by H. McKinnon WoodA. Pelt

Glenvil HallB. J. O. Schrieke succeeded by Raoul Aglion

Jacques Fouques-DuparcNasrollah Entezam


Members of the Preparatory Commission

49

CountryArgentinaAustraliaBelgiumBoliviaBrazilByelorussiaCanadaChileChinaColombiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEthiopiaFranceGreeceGuatemalaHaitiHondurasIndiaIranIraqLebanonLiberiaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNicaraguaNorwayPanamaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPolandSaudi ArabiaSyriaTurkeyUkraineUnion of South AfricaU.S.S.R.United KingdomUnited StatesUruguayVenezuelaYugoslavia

RepresentativeAdolfo ScilingoH. V. EvattP.-H. SpaakCarlos SalamancaC. de Freitas-ValleKuzma Venediktovich KiselevL. D. WilgressManuel BianchiV. K. Wellington KooEduardo Zuleta AngelGuillermo BeltJan MasarykFranz HvassPorfirio Herrera-BaezAntonio Parra VelascoAbdel Hamid Badawi PashaGustavo GuerreroBlatta Ephrem Tewelde MedhenRené MassigliTh. AghnidesMiguel Ydigoras-FuentesLéon LaleauTiburcio Carias, Jr.Sir A. Ramaswami MudaliarNasrullah EntezamCol. Shakir el WadiCamille ChamounJ. J. PearsonJoseph BechLuis Padilla NervoJ. PI. van RoijenR. M. CampbellEduardo Avilés RamirezErik ColbanRoberto JiménezGen. Andrés AguileraRicardo Riviera SchreiberPedro LopezZygmunt ModzelewskiH. R. H. Faisal ibn 'Abdul 'AzizNajeeb al ArmanaziCevad AcikalinDmitro Z. ManuilskyG. Heaton NichollsAndrei A. GromykoP. J. Noel-BakerEdward R. Stettinius, Jr.R. E. MacEachenManuel Perez GuerreroStoyan Gavrilovic

Chairman of the Preparatory Commission

Eduardo Zuleta Angel

Vice-Chairmen of the Preparatory Commission

D. Z. Manuilsky P.-H. Spaak


Chairmen of Technical Committees of the Preparatory Commission

CommitteeCommittee 1 (General Assembly)Committee 2 (Security Council)Committee 3 (Economic and Social)Committee 4 (Trusteeship)Committee 5 (Legal Questions)Committee 6 (Administrative and Budgetary)Committee 7 (League of Nations)Committee 8 (General Questions)

ChairmanErik ColbanZygmunt ModzelewskiSir Ramaswami MudaliarGuillermo BeltAbdel Hamid Badawi PashaTh. AghnidesNajeeb al ArmanaziR. E. MacEachen

SECRETARIAT

Executive Secretary of the ExecutiveCommittee and of the

Preparatory CommissionGladwyn Jebb

Deputy Executive SecretaryA. D. K. Owen

Executive Committee

Section1. General Assembly2. Security Council3. Economic and Social Council4. Trusteeship Council5. Court and Legal Questions6. Arrangements for the Secretariat7. Financial Arrangements8. Relations with Specialized Agencies9. League of Nations

10. General

Chief of SectionAndrew CordierM. P. ShakhovPaul GuérinPing-chia KuoVáclav BenesMartin HillC. R. S. HarrisJohn D. TomlinsonC. Beelaerts van BloklandBenjamin Cohen

Preparatory Commission

Section1. General Assembly2. Security Council3. Economic and Social4. Trusteeship5. Legal Questions6. Administrative and Budgetary7. League of Nations8. General Questions

Chief of SectionAndrew CordierM. P. ShakhovJ. D. TomlinsonPing-chia KuoE. HambroMartin HillC. Beelaerts van BloklandBenjamin Cohen