From United Nations 35.

Security 24.

1. Acting on instructions in your UNY19 Hodgson endeavoured in
private conversations today to obtain support for further
investigation of the Iranian question or for deferring the passage
of any resolution by the Council until after examination of the
facts but without exception all representatives prefer to adjust
the matter immediately if possible and except for some slight
hesitation on the part of the Egyptians they are prepared to
support a proposal which Byrnes has circulated to the effect that
having taken note of the replies given by the Soviet and Iran, the
Council defer further proceedings until 6th May by which time the
two Governments should report to the Council whether the
withdrawal of troops has been completed and the Council should
then decide what further steps are required. In the meantime
Byrnes proposes that if there are any developments which would
retard the withdrawal of troops [t]he Secretary General should
draw attention to such reports and they should take priority over
all other items on the Council's agenda. Byrnes intends to move to
this effect when the Council meets tomorrow and Australia is at
present the only dissentient. The full text of Byrnes proposal is
given in our immediately succeeding telegram.

2. Acceptance of Byrnes' proposal by other representatives is
based on the belief that the concluding sentences of the Soviet
reply (see our Security 23 paragraph 1) amount to an assurance by
Soviet the withdrawal will be unconditional and they believe that
Iran is also ready to accept this assurance. The Iranian
Ambassador's statement in answer to Byrnes' at this morning's
meeting is supported by a note in identical language which had
been handed to the Secretary General before the meeting but which
as it was a personal and private message from the Iranian Prime
Minister' [1], he did not feel at liberty to disclose at a public
session. Taking this view they are convinced that the Council will
complete its task of mediation by accepting Byrnes' proposal;

Cadogan pointed out in conversation that the assurances refer only
to the withdrawal of troops and Iran's complaints regarding
interference in internal affairs have not been remedied. The
answer which Cadogan advanced was that if Iran was prepared not to
press for consideration of the matter the Council need not concern
itself further.

3. After the adjournment of this morning's meeting the Secretary
General called another private meeting of representatives. Hodgson
immediately protested both to the President and the Secretary
General but was informed that the Secretary General had various
administrative and general questions to discuss but that some
delegate might raise procedural questions regarding Iran. Hodgson
stated that he could not take part if the Iranian question was to
be discussed. No guarantee could be given about this. At the
meeting Byrnes did raise the Iranian question and Hodgson again
protested and announced his intention to withdraw. He remained
only on condition that a paper which Byrnes presented was to be
regarded as for information only without discussion of its
substance. The meeting proceeded to an informal exchange of views
but no decision was sought or given.

4. We fully recognize the strong objections to the manner in which
the Council has proceeded and we have tried hard to advance the
policy laid down in our instructions but the plain fact to be
faced at present is that all other members of the Council regard
the Byrnes proposal as the best way out.