Your D.933. [3]

1. Australian views on the exercise and purported exercise of the
veto are well known to the United Kingdom Government but there is
no reference to this in your D.933. Australia took the initiative
at San Francisco in trying to limit the veto to questions related
to enforcement action. We have throughout the Security Council
proceedings maintained our position.

2. We consider our fears expressed at the London Conference and
later at San Francisco have proved well founded. We are greatly
concerned at the damaging effect on the United Nations which
results from the frequent and unjustifiable exercise of the veto
in the Security Council.

3. It was for this reason that the Minister for External Affairs
arranged while in New York in April for the item on the agenda
which stands in Australia's name, of which we assume you are
aware. [4]

4. We are glad to learn that according to para. 5 of your telegram
under reference you consider yourself free to make suggestions to
the Assembly, which we interpret to mean to give general support
to a move such as we have initiated.

5. We cannot agree that a satisfactory solution is to be found in
defining 'dispute' and 'situation' as you suggest in para 4 (B).

Such rigidity is undesirable and in any case the permanent members
would still argue that they retain the right to exercise the veto
in the determination of whether a question is procedural or
substantive.

6. The purpose of the Australian Agenda item is to promote
Assembly discussions with a view to proposing a resolution
designed to limit the exercise of the veto to decisions on
enforcement action. We shall stress in particular our objections
to the use of veto in cases of preliminary investigations before
enforcement is contemplated; clear obstruction of majority of
Council in Pacific settlement; admission of new members;

determination of whether a matter is procedural or not.

7. Accordingly Australia proposes after debate in the Assembly to
move a resolution along the following lines-

The GENERAL ASSEMBLY-
Mindful of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the
United Nations, and
Taking notice of the manner in which the power of veto conferred
by Article 27(3) of the Charter has been employed at the
proceedings of the Security Council in relation to matters outside
Chapter 7 of the Charter,
Considers that certain exercises and threatened exercises of such
power of veto are not in keeping either with the general
principles and purposes of the Charter or with the understanding
of the United Nations Conference on International Organisation
held at San Francisco, and therefore [5]

Earnestly requests that the permanent Members of the Security
Council shall refrain from exercising this power of veto except in
cases under Chapter 7 of the Charter.