proceedings of the conference confirm the optimistic view which I had expressed in the introduction to the annual report last year, and I am particularly grateful for the resolutions adopted by the conference, which were directed towards strengthening the effectiveness of the United Nations.

In October 1964, the Second Conference of the Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries took place, also in Cairo." Although I was unable to participate in this conference, I did send a message to it. Practically all the items on the agenda of the conference were also items under consideration by the United Nations. I hope that the conclusions reached at the conference will make a useful contribution to the discussion of related items on the agenda of the nineteenth session.

Steadily the Organization is continuing to make progress towards universality. Before long we will be welcoming Malawi, Malta and Zambia into the world body." Some countries, which are not Members of the United Nations but are members of specialized agencies, are represented in New York, and have also been participating in various activities undertaken by the world body, especially in the economic field. In addition, I believe that their presence in New York has helped them towards a better understanding of the international scene. Fully cognizant of the political difficulties involved, I cannot help but wonder whether the time has not come when other countries not at present represented in New York should be enabled to maintain contact with the world body and be able to listen to its deliberations. In this way, they too would obtain an exposure, now denied them, to the currents and cross-currents of opinion in the world Organization. I feel that such exposure will have beneficial results which might well outweigh the political objections.

During recent weeks there have been changes in political leadership in two major Governments, as well as in some others, while in a third recent elections have confirmed the present leadership for a further term with a reinforced popular mandate. I am confident that in 1965, which has been acclaimed as International Co-operation Year," these leaders, as well as the leaders of all other countries, will do their utmost to promote international understanding, to reduce tensions and to reach agreement on issues on which agreement seems so near. In particular, I would urge that in 1965 we should press forward to make progress towards disarmament and to reverse the arms race, especially the nuclear arms race. I also hope that we might see an end to the financial crisis which the Organization has faced in recent years, as I believe that the solution of this crisis will improve the international climate and usher in the International Co-operation Year under the most favourable conditions.

The General Assembly is due to meet on 1 December, later than it has ever done before, in a hall which has undergone seating alterations and has been equipped with facilities for electronic voting. May I hope that the Assembly will also meet in an atmosphere of goodwill, which will be congenial to the realization of the purposes of the Charter.

Document II-4

The Resurgence of the United Nations Security Council: ADDRESS BY THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AFFAIRS (SISCO) BEFORE A DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOREIGN POLICY CONFERENCE, CLEVELAND, JUNE 18, 1964 (EXCERPT) 77

For many years the intended role of the Security Council was hampered by one veto after another cast by the Soviet Union. In 1950

"See post, doc. VII-9.

See post, doc. II-28.

7 The U.N. General Assembly designated 1965 International Cooperation Year in Res. 1907 (XVIII); text in U.N. doc. A/5515, pp. 5 6.

17

Department of State Bulletin, July 13, 1964, pp. 55-59.

78

it became necessary to pass the "Uniting for Peace" resolution to provide a mechanism for the General Assembly to act quickly when the Council could not act. Many observers began to talk of the demise of the Security Council as though it had become a vestigial organ, like the human appendix. Its current resurgence is therefore all the more interesting at this time.

There are good reasons why the Security Council is more than ever in the thick of things."

First, despite the principle of sovereign equality among the member states, everyone knows that there are very great differences in power and influence and responsibility in the workaday world of nations. The framers of the charter realized this perfectly well when they designed the Security Council and gave it primary responsibility for keeping the peace. As you know, the five major powers of the postwar world were made permanent members and the six other members are elected on a rotating basis to provide a broad geographic representation.

So the composition of the Security Council gives recognition to the reality of disparate national strengths and assigns major responsibility to the major powers-which plainly is the way it ought to be.

80

We face the question of expansion of the Council within the next year. With a hundred-percent increase in the size of the U.N. membership since the charter was signed, it is understandable that the new members consider they are not adequately represented on the Council. Since the suggested increase of the Security Council from 11 to 15 would require the first charter amendment, it must be viewed in the context of the whole constitutional development of the United Nations, including the importance we attach to the principle of collective financial responsibility.81

Second, the Security Council is small enough to make prompt and effective action possible and flexible enough to cope with a wide variety of peacekeeping problems. In practice the Council has approached the cases brought before it not from the point of view of rigid legal norms-which was one of the characteristic failures of the League of Nations-but as the highly political body it is, seeking the best agreement it can reach by debate, negotiation, and compromise-the very stuff of practical political action.

Third, the renewed primacy of the Security Council in peacekeeping matters is a reflection of the growing realization that maintenance of the peace is in the common interest of all U.N. members, whatever their ideological and other differences may be. It is also a recognition by the small powers that in many of the tough problems big

79 Text in American Foreign Policy, 1950-1955: Basic Documents, vol. I, pp. 187-192.

"In an earlier portion of the speech, not printed here, Mr. Sisco said that the Security Council had held more than 100 meetings since June 1963 and gave a partial list of topics which it had considered: Cyprus, the Aden-Yemen boundary dispute, Kashmir, apartheid in South Africa, and the Cambodia-South VietNam boundary dispute.

80 See footnote 71 to doc. II-3, supra.

power involvement is necessary. All but a handful of states committed to militant violence are gradually accepting the idea that any serious breach of the peace raises the danger of ultimate nuclear annihilation, that all states therefore share a common interest in peaceful resolution of the inevitable disputes that will plague the world for a long time to come, and that international peacekeeping machinery offers a safe and effective way to deal with such disputes.

It is worth noting that since the Lebanese crisis in 1958 82 the Soviet Union has not blocked a U.N. peacekeeping operation with a veto. Regardless of the fundamental differences which remain, there seems to be greater recognition of the utility of the U.N. as a buffer, as a third party which can help avoid big-power confrontation.

84

85

More than 40 nations already have contributed troops to the various U.N. peacekeeping forces in Korea, the Middle East, the Congo,s and Cyprus; and other nations, including especially our own, have contributed logistical support and other services.

86

I do not think it is too much to hope that we may be approaching something like an international consensus-with the conspicuous exception of Communist China-on the need for peaceful settlement of disputes among nations and on the corollary need for international machinery to keep the lid on dangerous situations while solutions are being worked out at the conference tables.

This in general is why the United States welcomes the new-found vigor and relevance of the Security Council and hopes that it will continue to play its role as the major instrument of the world community for keeping and repairing world peace.

C. The United Nations Budget and the Problem of Financing Peacekeeping Operations

THE UNITED NATIONS BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 1964

["The General Assembly . . . Authorizes the Secretary-General To Expend up to 18.2 Million for the Present Phase of the United Nations Operation in the Congo During the Period 1 January to 30 June 1964": RESOLUTION 1885 (XVIII), ADOPTED BY THE U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY, OCTOBER 18, 1963-Post, Doc. VIII-13]

See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1958, pp. 937 ff.

83 See post, doc. IX-87.

See post, docs. VII-10 and 17.

See post, docs. VIII-13-15.

- 8 See post, docs. IV-103 et seq.

Document II-5

United States Views on the United Nations Budget for 1964: STATEMENT MADE BY THE U.S. REPRESENTATIVE (MAILLIARD) IN COMMITTEE V OF THE U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY, OCTOBER 28, 1963 (EXCERPT)1

We are gratified to find a number of improvements in administrative practices and financial procedures, including the fact that no overall supplementary appropriation is being requested for the current year and that no expansion in permanent staff is contemplated. All this is evidence of sound policies, careful work, and devoted service, for which we wish to express our gratitude and appreciation to the responsible officials of the United Nations.

As we turn to the budget estimates for 1964, we are struck at once with that stark and inescapable fact which the Secretary-General expressed in these words: "... for the immediate future the financial position of the Organization will remain one of extreme difficulty." 2 The cold figures-an estimated deficit of $112 million at the end of the current year-make the point that the Secretary-General did not exactly overstate the problem.

The reason for our current financial plight is known to all of us. The United Nations is not guilty of irresponsible spending: Some of its members are guilty of irresponsible nonpayment of assessments. legally assessed and legally due.

It is a simple statement of fact to say that if delinquent members. would pay up their arrearages, our house automatically would be put in order, financially speaking. But we all know, of course, that the question of arrearages is much more than a question of money. If matters drift indefinitely, certain members will lose their voting privilege in the General Assembly under the mandatory and automatic application of article 19. We hope that all nations, large and small, will pay their arrears; none of us wishes to see any member bar itself from full participation in the work of the Assembly.

In the meantime, however, the existence of large arrearages and the consequent budget deficit imposes a heavy drag on the entire organiza

'Department of State Bulletin, Dec. 2, 1963, pp. 871-875.

*U.N. doc. A/C.5/988.

'Text of the U.N. Charter is in American Foreign Policy, 1950-1955: Basic Documents, vol. I, pp. 134–161. Article 19 reads:

"A member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The General Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the Member."

tion and inhibits the adoption of any new programs and projects regardless of their merit.

We therefore are faced with the sheer necessity of finding economies wherever we can, of eliminating all frills, of cutting any corners we can cut in a commonsense effort to eliminate all unnecessary costs. An excellent example of how to trim costs without damage to operations is the suggestion of the Advisory Committee that nearly a quarter of a million dollars could be saved by limiting reimbursements for travel costs to economy class rather than first-class fares. I might say in passing that my own Government instituted this very practice some time ago. Substantial economies have resulted, and, while not everybody was entirely happy about it, everybody got where he was needed at less cost per head.

Mr. Chairman, the Secretary-General has called for a policy of "consolidation and containment." It is obvious that this is justifiedindeed required-on purely financial grounds. But I would suggest that even if the cost of peacekeeping had not been so high in recent years, even if certain members had not created a financial crisis by refusal to pay assessments, we would be faced with something of the same problem at about this point in our history, for the need for consolidation is, in our view, caused by several things other than a shortage of ready cash.

Indeed, Mr. Chairman, I do not find it at all surprising that this organization as a whole has arrived at a period of pause, not in current operations but in rate of growth. I suspect that my delegation would find good reason for supporting the idea of a period of consolidation and containment at about this time even if the budget were balanced and the cash outlook very much brighter than it is. We believe that, quite apart from the purely financial point, at least four factors contribute to our present difficulties, to the need for a bit of consolidation and containment.

First, the very complexity and novelty of this organization, plus the complexity and novelty of the problems with which it deals, would dictate periodic reappraisals of administration and procedures. I think it is important to remind ourselves, every now and again, that the United Nations is an organization without historical precedent and that it is engaged in an extremely diverse range of activities which have never been undertaken before on an international scale. Many of these activities are extraordinarily complex and sophisticated tasks at the frontiers of human experience-tasks for which the social sciences have yet to provide us with very clear guidelines. We are, in short, engaged in a vast range of experimentation and pioneering. Under the circumstances it would be a plain miracle if our organizational structure, our planning, our programing, our priorities, and our procedures did not need a periodic overhauling.

Second, for almost two decades this organization has been in a process of rapid growth. Our membership has doubled, our institutional