activities of the United Nations and the strengthening of its role in achieving cooperation among all states without distinction as to social system, in building a more just and a better world, and in securing a durable peace." This document contained concrete proposals, some involving basic Charter amendment, some not. The ensuing debate, in which 80 states took part, was directed more toward what was the most desirable and effective approach to strengthening the United Nations than toward concrete proposals. Where such proposals were discussed, it was in general rather than specific terms. Favorable references were made by some speakers to the Romanian document, but without comment on the actual proposals it contained. Similarly, the importance of the Australian initiative at the 29th session on peaceful settlement and the need for further work in this area was recognized by some but without detailed discussion for the most part. The wide divergence in views on how best to approach the problem of strengthening the United Nations continued, ranging from those who have consistently over the years opposed any review or change in the Charter, through those who oppose overall review but not necessarily any amendment where such appears both desirable and feasible, to those advocating very basic changes in the United Nations. Of the five permanent Security Council members, only China favored review, noting in particular the need to give "Third World" interests greater recognition in the Charter. In part as a result of the nature of the Ad Hoc Committee's report and the obvious conclusions to be drawn therefrom, and in part as a result of the consideration of this agenda item with that on strengthening the role of the United Nations, the discussion was broader and less divisive than that in 1974 when the Committee had considered the Charter review item by itself. There was a clear majority in favor of extending the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee, with little opposition thereto expressly indicated, and substantial support, both explicit and implicit, for adding to the Committee's mandate the substance of the Romanian item. U.S. Position Speaking for the United States on November 14, Monroe Leigh, Legal Adviser of the Department of State, said that in the view of his delegation the items on Charter review and strengthening the role of the United Nations were the most important ones before the Sixth Committee. He said that since the Committee's debate in 1974, the United States had reviewed its position more than once, but it continued to view the question of Charter review with both skepticism and concern. Recognizing the shortcomings of the United Nations, he continued: "Impediments to greater effectiveness of this organization do not lie in any restrictions or limitations imposed by the Charter. Those impediments are found in the political will of states which interpret and apply the Charter's provisions. Common sense, good will, and a sense of responsiveness to the common interests of mankind are not to be legislated. They will not be evoked by modification of the Charter; on the contrary, the present text of the UN Charter both allows and encourages those elusive qualities as much or more than any modifications we have heard discussed.. "Our doubts about this Charter review exercise are based on a concern that the United Nations will lose even that degree of consensus which we now share. We do not seek to maintain the status quo of 1945, or 1975. The Charter was conceived as a document which could stand the test of time by growing with evolving needs. It was conceived not merely as a constitutive treaty, but as a constitutional instrument. "It has evolved, moreover, in central fields such as the effective functioning of the Security Council, peacekeeping, and human rights, including self-determination." As a concrete example of the evolutionary development of the United Nations under the Charter, the U.S. Representative cited the agreement early in the organization's history that an abstention does not count as a veto despite the provision of Article 27 of the Charter that all Security Council decisions on substantive matters require the concurring votes of the Council's permanent members. This, he said, stands "as an excellent example of how the. language of the Charter permits important evolutionary changes without requiring textual changes," and he warned that the "reopening of questions on matters to which we have all freely agreed on various occasions in the past is hardly likely to widen the areas of agreement among us." He also warned that attempts to meet particular problems "of our moment in history by Charter amendment are likely to restrict the Charter's ability to continue flexibly to meet the needs of the future," and he reminded "those who say that if revisions of the Charter made in 1975 prove inappropriate in 1980 we can make further changes, that constant tinkering with a constitutional document can serve to destroy that institutional stability which is the sine qua non of the healthy growth and development of a parliamentary institution." Finally, he said, we are concerned "that preoccupation with constant tinkering with the constitutional structure of the institution runs the great risk of diverting attentions and concerns from the urgent problems with which the institution can and must deal." Reiterating the U.S. willingness "to consider measures for the improvement of the functioning of the United Nations and of its ability to perform its Charter responsibilities," the U.S. Representative noted the "unproductive nature" of the past summer's meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the UN Charter and declared: "No useful purpose can be served by repeating that experience." However, he continued: We could see some utility in a committee which would follow up on the work of the Committee on Rationalization of the Procedures of the Assembly and examine the wealth of governmental comments already submitted in the context of strengthening the role of the United Nations. In this connection, Mr. Chairman, we believe that it is not necessary to agree with all of the proposals put forward by Romania in order to acknowledge that we all owe them a debt of appreciation for having initiated the item and provided us with much food for thought." In this general context, the U.S. Representative cited, as a "major area of concern" where UN members might usefully concentrate their efforts, the "strengthening and development of measures for the peaceful settlement of disputes." In this connection he emphasized the functioning and role of the International Court of Justice, urging those "who have hesitated to have recourse to the Court for fear it would apply a form of law created by another era" to take "a careful reading of the recent jurisprudence of the Court." At the same time he recognized that some disputes "can best be solved, or at least initially ameliorated, by other means," and made specific reference to negotiation between the parties; third party good offices, mediation, and conciliation; factfinding and inquiry; and arbitration. He concluded by declaring: "There is clearly much to be done in the field of dispute settlement and prevention and much to be done in terms of making the UN system more effective. We must seek to accomplish as much as is humanly possible within the existing Charter before 17/The 31-member Special Committee on the Rationalization of the Procedures and Organization of the General Assembly was established by the 25th General Assembly in 1970 and submitted its report to the 26th Assembly in 1971. distracting ourselves with more ambitious and less General Assembly Action On November 28, the Philippine Representative introduced a draft resolution eventually sponsored by 29 states. This draft merged the two items and decided that the Ad Hoc Committee should be reconvened as a "Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization" to examine the observations of governments on both subjects, list the proposals made in the Committee, and identify those arousing special interest. The draft resolution further asked the Special Committee "to examine the proposals which have been made or will be made with a view to according priority to the consideration of those areas on which general agreement is possible"; decided to enlarge the Committee from 42 to 47 members; and invited governments to continue submitting observations and proposals. The Secretary General was asked to prepare a study complementing those already prepared under the two topics presenting analytically the views of governments. Finally, the draft resolution requested the Special Committee to report to the 31st session of the General Assembly. On December 2 the Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution by consensus. The four permanent members of the Security Council opposing any effort at overall Charter review made clear in their explanations of vote that their joining in the consensus in no way indicated a change in this basic position. On December 15 the General Assembly in plenary session adopted the resolution without a vote. After the adoption the U.S. Representative, Mr. Mitchell, said: We have gone along with the consensus on this resolution out of respect for and in response to the spirit in which it was proffered. This spirit was particularly well-summarized by the distinguished Foreign Minister of the Philippines when he said in committee, 'No member objects to improving the United Nations; no member feels that the United Nations is beyond improvement. ' "We are now all joining to launch an exercise from the firm basis of consensus. If we continue in this spirit and on this basis, we are likely to benefit. If we deviate from it, all will be the losers." 18/Barbados, Belgium, Egypt, Iraq, and Romania were subsequently chosen by the regional groups. |