Assembly 41.

(1) In General Committee this morning Vyshinsky proposed that the
Committee report against inclusion in Agenda of Australian
proposal on Article 27 (Item 32 of the Provisional List) [1] and
Cuban proposals to amend Charter (Items 1 and 9 of the
Supplementary List). Australia and Cuba were invited to
participate in the meeting.

(2) Shawcross said that while the United Kingdom was likely to
oppose any move to amend Charter General Committee should not
recommend deletion of the item.

(3) Australia, speaking strictly on procedural aspects having
regard to the limited functions of General Committee stated Item
32 had been submitted in accordance with the rules of procedure
and its subject was within the scope of Assembly functions. The
first objection by Vyshinsky had been that amendment of the
Charter was proposed. While we did not recognise this objection
and quoted Article 108 to show expectation that proposals for
amendment would appear on the Assembly Agenda, we drew attention
to the actual terms of the Minister's proposal. The second
objection by Vyshinsky was that discussion of the item was against
the interests of the organisation. We replied this was a matter of
opinion. Other Members believed it was definitely in the interests
of the Organisation to discuss the item. This difference of
opinion was really an argument in favour of admitting the item to
the Agenda.

(4) In subsequent debate the Soviet was supported only by the
Ukraine. Incidental remarks showed that the United States and
China had misgivings about veto and that the debate might be
useful in moderating use of veto but would not consider amendment
of the Charter so early in the Organisation's life.

(5) Vyshinsky eventually withdrew opposition but in doing so
questioned Australian and Cuban aims. Australia replied expressing
appreciation of co-operation but insisting that fellow members
must respect the opinions and motives of each other. In bringing
forward the proposal, Australia also had a genuine concern for the
interests of the Organisation.

(6) Austin (United States) proposed that the Australian and Cuban
items be the subject of a general debate before reference to
Committees but as soon as Shawcross and Spaak supported procedure
of rules 109 and 110 [2], immediately withdrew. Australia
supported the proposal along lines of your instructions and
indicated that the general subject of Committee procedure could
still be discussed in Plenary Session on receiving the report from
the General Committee on Agenda and reference of items to the
Committee.

(7) Vyshinsky also opposed admission of the South African proposal
on South-West Africa (Item 2 of Supplementary List) and the
Canadian proposal (Item 7) but eventually withdrew opposition.