| |
Volume #13 - 341. | |
CHAPTER VIII UNITED NATIONS | |
PART
2 ELECTIONS TO SECURITY COUNCIL | |
341. |
DEA/5475-AS-1-40 |
Memorandum for Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs | |
CONFIDENTIAL |
Ottawa,
April 3, 1947 |
ELECTIONS TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL AT THE SECOND SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY — SEPTEMBER 20, 1947 | |
When the second session of the General Assembly meets in New York on September 20th, three non-permanent members will he elected to the Security Council to replace the non-permanent members whose terms of two years expire December 31, 1947, (Australia, Brazil and Poland). These countries will not be re-eligible for election. The terms of office of the other three non-permanent members — Belgium, Colombia and Syria — will continue until December 31, 1948. 2. The question arises whether or not Canada desires to seek election as a non permanent member of the Security Council at the next session of the General Assembly. Although it is, of course, recognized that the Commonwealth does not constitute a "region", Canada or India will be generally regarded as the most appropriate successors to the Australian seat on the basis of "equitable geographical distribution". India, it will be recalled, pressed its candidacy at the last meeting of the Assembly and although it obtained substantial support, it failed of election. It is probable that India will press its candidacy again. (The possibility of New Zealand as a competitor cannot be excluded.) 3. From the experience of the Canadian Delegation at the First Session of the General Assembly, it is apparent that in view of the lobbying of regional groups, it is necessary to make preparation in advance to ensure the fullest support of our candidacy. 4. In deciding whether or not we should take action in advance to prepare the ground for Canada's election to the Security Council certain facts should be borne in mind as regards the advantages and disadvantages of being a member of the Council. The considerations of prestige are obvious. It is also an advantage that Canada should be in a position to participate in some of the most important decisions affecting the maintenance of world peace. It might also be argued that Canada would have a useful contribution to make in remedying the shortcoming of the Council and improving its practises and procedures while the Council is still in a comparatively formative stage of its development. It should also be remembered that the treatment of the problems of disarmament and collective security (implementation of Article 43) is in its planning stage. Canada's interest in general peace and well being might best be served by participation in the work of the Security Council and its subordinate bodies on these questions. 5. On the other hand, membership would carry with it heavy obligations, responsibilities, and certain disadvantages. The Security Council is organized so as to be able to function continuously and representatives on the Council are usually of ministers rank. One obvious consideration then would be that a senior Canadian representative would have to be more or less continuously absent from Canada in order to participate in the work of the Security Council. Representation which in some cases may overlap will also be required on the subsidiary bodies of the Council which include: the Commission on Conventional Armaments, Committee of Experts on the Rules of Procedure, and ad hoc bodies such as the Commission of Investigation in Greece. Canada's membership on the Atomic Energy Commission would not be affected. 6. The role of the non-permanent member of the Security Council, especially at the present time, is not an easy one. Although the Charter imposes the obligation on all members to exercise their responsibilities as members of the Council not in the defence of their own national interests, but in the interests of the United Nations as a whole, this is a position which in practice generally falls to the lot of non-permanent members especially to uphold. Non-permanent members are also expected to help resolve differences which continually arise between the Great Powers. Because of Canada's geographical situation, Canada may be placed in a difficult position in relation to decisions affecting the special interests of the United States or the Soviet Union. It should also be remembered that questions will inevitably arise in the Council which do not involve any direct Canadian interest, but on which Canada will have to take a position for purposes of voting, which may imply or involve a commitment to support a policy the consequences of which may present difficulties to the Canadian Government. 7. It would seem desirable that early consideration be given as to whether we wish to seek election. If it is decided that we should advance our candidacy next September, consideration should be given to the possible action that might be taken. 8. In this connection, I would suggest that possible action might include the following: 1) that it be made generally known through the Missions abroad, and in particular in Washington, London, Paris, Moscow and Chungking that Canada intends to seek election to the Security Council; 2) that steps be taken to inform all Delegations to the United Nations and the United Nations Secretariat; 3) that steps be taken to plan for the strongest possible Canadian Delegation to the General Assembly; 4) that action be taken to set up a Canadian Permanent Mission to the United Nations; 5) that enquiries be made regarding India's and New Zealand's intentions concerning their candidacies in September. | |
|