UNITED NATIONS VETO

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25447, 19 March 1948, Page 6

UNITED NATIONS VETO

N.Z. PROPOSES AN AMENDMENT

CURBING POWER OF ANY ONE NATION From our own Reporter

WELLINGTON. March 18. A proposal by the New Zealand Government to amend the principle of the veto is now being considered by a sub-committee of the united Nations. The sub-committee is called upon to submit its findings not later than May 15. The sub-committee consists of representatives of Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brasil, Canada. Chile, China, Cuba, France, Guatemala, India, Norway, Siam, Syria, Turkey, the United Kingdom, ana the United States. This information is contained in a series of cablegrams received by the Prime Minister (Mr P. Fraser) from Sir Carl Berendsen, New Zealand representative to the United Nations. The amendment proposed by the New Zealand Government is that Article 27 of the Charter, Which provides for voting in the Security Council, should be altered so that the words “concurring votes of permanent memibers” be replaced by the words “concurring votes of four Of the five permanent members.” _ . . The effect of the amendment would be that the power bf veto by any one of the five permanent members would be abolished. In its place would be a provision that any two of the five permanent members could veto a decision of the Security Council. The five permanent members are Britain, the United States, Russia, France, and China. A message received to-day from Sir Carl Berendsen stated that on March 17 the Little Assembly had started examination of voting in the Security Council. After the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, and Argentina had explained their proposals and a number of other representativesi mainly Latin American, had spoken, it was unanimously agreed to establish the sub-committee to consider the proposals.

New Zealand’s Views At the meeting of the Little Assembly the New Zealand delegate recalled the warnings and misgivings expressed by the Prime Minister (Mr P. Fraser) at San Francisco that the veto was uniair and indefensible and might, if retained and exercised, be destructive not only of the main purposes of the international organisation but of the organisation itself. “The record of the Security Council has coßfirmed only too well these misgivings,” Sir. Carl Berendsen said. “In making the proposal now placed before the committee, the New Zealand Government is actuated by a desire not to destroy any parts of the Charter but rather to enable the objectives, particularly the maintenance of peace, to be attained. We do not propose the elimination- of the veto nor do we ask for a voice equal to that pf the great Powers. We believe that our proposal would reduce the arbitrary and capricious misuse of the veto which has hurt not only the prestige of the United Nations but also the cause of peace. We shall support the proposals of the United Kingdom, the United States, and other countries if they are the best that can be obtained, but we consider that ,they do not go far enough and that we should make the bolder attempt indicated in our proposal.” _____________