NEW U.N. PLAN TO KEEP PEACE

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26262, 6 November 1950, Page 7

NEW U.N. PLAN TO KEEP PEACE

Assembly Approves ( All Provisions , l J NEW YORK, November 3. ] The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to- 1 day to invite all member nations to hold part of their national forces ( in readiness to help to fight any j future aggression. ; The decision was taken by 45 j votes to five, with seven abstentions. The earmarking of national forces , for possible use by the United Nations was the moat important provision of i the whole new plan of collective security finally approved by the General : Assembly to-day. Votes on other sections of the new collective security plan were: To make provision for calling the General Assembly into session at 24 hours’ notice when the Security Council is prevented from taking action by veto.—s2 votes to 5, with 2 abstentions. To establish a Peace Observation Commission of 14 members to keep an eye on trouble spots anywhere in the world.—s 7 votes to 0, with 2 abstentions. To establish a Collective Measures Committee of 14 to study the whole problem of collective security.— 49 to 5, with 3 abstentions. A recommendation that the Security Council take steps to put into effect the provisions in the Charter for the placing of armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council, and to provide for the effective functioning of the Military Staff Committee.—s2 to 0, with 6 abstentions. An appeal to the Big Five to meet and discuss collectively, or otherwise, the world’s outstanding problems. —Approved unanimously. A declaration that effective peace also depends upon the observance by all nations of human rights .nd the fundamental freedoms, and on the establishment of eonditiona of eco- > nomic and social well-being in all countries.—s 4 to 0, with 1 abstention. Soviet in Opposition The vote on the entire plan for collective action against agression was 52 to 5, with 2 abstentions. The Soviet bloc cast the five opposing votes. India and the Argentine abstained. Lebanon was absent. Mr John Foster Dulles, the American delegate, said the adoption of the resolution was the most Important General Assembly action since the Charter was adopted. It would vitalise the Charter by providing such dependable collective resistance to aggression that it was less likely that aggression would occur. N.Z. On Oammisslon The members of the Peace Observation Commission selected by the Assembly are: New Zealand, Nationalist China, Colombia, Czechoslovakia, France, India. Iraq. Israel. Pakistan, Sweden, the Soviet Union. Britain, the United States and Uruguay. Mr Vyshinsky said the Soviet would accept a seat on the Commission, which will go to any spot on the invitation of any threatened country to check on threats to peace. The United States had preferred the Big Five to stay off this group, but Mr Vyshinsky insisted that the Great Powers should be on it. The United States agreed, and noted that the decisions of the Commission would be by a majority vote. There would be no veto. The Collective Measures Committee is composed of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Burma. Canada. Egypt. France, Mexico, the Philippines. Turkey, Britain. the United States, Venezuela and Jugoslavia. "Turning Point” Reuter’s United Nations correspondent says that the decision to give the Assembly power to act swiftly in cases of aggression is generally regarded as the turning point in the organisation’s history. Most delegates concede that the United Nations Charter, as drafted at San Francisco, did not envisage giving the General Assembly any direct power to enforce the maintenance of peace. This function was intended to be reserved for the Security Council working through its Military Staff Committee, and through such bodies as the Disarmament Commission and the Atomic Energy Commission. The Charter also provided that the main responsibility for the maintenance of peace should be placed in the hands of the Big Five permanent members of the Council. The experience of the last four years showed up the weakness of some articles in the Charter by emphasising that aggression could be condoned, if not directly aided, by the use of the Big Power veto. Force of Recommendations The decision taken to-day has taken the whole question many steps farther. While the Security Council still maintains its nominal monopoly in the maintenance of international peace, the Assembly of 60 nations has now obtained the right to recommend enforcement action to all its members. Any such action in future will only be "recommendations.” The experience of the Korean war has shown that it will probably have as much strength as a direct order from the Security Council. The Soviet delegation fought bitterly against the passage of the latest resolution, claiming that it was contrary to the Charter. The weakness of their case, in the minds of many delegates, lay in the remarkable total of over 40 vetoes accumulated bv the Soviet Union in the Security Council. This had never been foreseen by the framers of the Charter in 1945. It is thought that one of the most important features of the decision today is that the Assembly will now have ■ permanent "watchdog” Commission at its command, able to investigate threats of aggression before trouble develops.