Assembly 16.

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

1. On 21St January [General Assembly] Committee One by 46 votes to
0 with one abstention (Philippines) adopted the resolution
presented by the Big Five and Canada setting up an Atomic Energy
Commission.

The text of the resolution [1] is identical with the text agreed
upon at the Moscow Conference.

2. There was little discussion of the terms of the resolution but
objection was raised in various quarters to-
(a) limitation of membership to members of the Security Council
and Canada and
(b) provisions under which the Security Council decides what
reports of the Atomic Energy Commission shall be transmitted to
the General Assembly and other organs of the United Nations.

An overwhelming majority of the Committee felt, however, that
agreement between the Great Powers with a view to ensuring
international control of atomic energy was so important and the
possibility of amending the Moscow resolutions was so remote
(particularly in the existing political situation here) that the
resolution as presented would have to be accepted despite these
objectionable features. Having in mind-
(i) Australia's primary interest in securing a seat on the Atomic
Energy Commission by virtue of her seat on the Security Council
and
(ii) The delicate political situation which has developed in
relation to Russia-
I decided it would be unwise pressing at that stage the arguments
set out in your telegram UNO.204 of 12th January. [2] The Chairman
had indicated that opportunity would be given for general
observations at the next meeting. At today's meeting I made a
speech emphasising the central and basic position of the General
Assembly, the need for free selection of members of bodies set up
by the Assembly and the right of the Assembly to receive
information and the right to discuss all matters. I added that the
action of the Committee One in accepting Moscow Agreement
constituted an act of faith which would be reciprocated by all
members of the Security Council and the Atomic Energy Commission,
whether great powers or small powers. I said that, so far as
Australia was concerned, she would do her utmost as a member of
the Security Council and the Commission to ensure that within the
limits of security, the work of the Commission was made public and
that reports of the Commission which should be dealt with by other
organs of the United Nations were in fact transmitted to them. I
also made a passing reference to view that atomic weapons are to
be regarded as 'facilities'. The speech appeared to be well
received and has been distributed to the Australian and other
press. [3]