Skip to main content

Historical documents

237 Australian Government to Addison, Australian Delegation at United Nations and Cutler

CANBERRA, 22 November 1946 Cablegrams 397, UNY392, 431


Your D.1057 to D.1062. [1] Exercise of the veto.

1. Australian Delegation at New York is fully instructed on
subject of veto and will have made known our views at British
Commonwealth meetings.

2. We have three main objectives-
(a) Expression of General Assembly opinion on application of
Article 27 in past year.

(b) Request that Security Council, in carrying out obligation of
peaceful settlement under Chapter VI, should not be hindered or
obstructed by vote of single member.

(c) Recommendation by General Assembly of adoption of practices
and procedures conducive to attainment of (b).

3. We have examined various proposals put forward by some of
permanent members. While agreeing with some, they do not wholly
measure up to above minimum objectives. In particular the
fundamental objective (b) does not appear in any of suggested
drafts in spite of US statement in para. 4 (4th sentence) of your
D.1060 [2], implied Chinese support (D1062) [3] [and] the Prime
Minister's statement to the House of Commons. [4]

4. We considered, particularly in view of recent statement by Mr
Attlee, that we were entitled to full support of UK for draft
resolution, which has recently been discussed with UK Delegation
in New York. It is emphasised that our resolution is only a
request to the great powers.

5. Our advices would indicate majority support, including that of
the United States, for our draft, and with the active support of
the UK there should be a good prospect of carrying it.

6. You will be aware of the Australian view as to the vital
necessity for establishing the primacy of the Assembly in United
Nations matters. We are not attempting by our actions to prejudice
eventual Great Power agreement which alone could lead to the
essential rehabilitation of world opinion in regard to the
Security Council. We feel most strongly that an agreed code of
[behaviour] which is privately arrived at is unlikely to be as
effective as one emanating from a prior expression of the opinion
of all the United Nations in the General Assembly.

1 These cablegrams summarised the progress of Big Five meetings on
the question of the veto and conveyed the texts of U.K., Chinese
and U.S. discussion papers.

2 Byrnes had commented that the United States had supported the
principle of the veto at San Francisco 'because they believed it
would only be used as regards enforcement matters or on matters of
greatest importance'.

3 Like the United States, China did not favour a revision of the
U.N. Charter, but affirmed the desirability of permanent members
agreeing on certain improvements in the procedure of the Security

4 See Document 178, note 1.

[AA:A1838/2, 852/10/5, i]
Last Updated: 11 September 2013
Back to top