U.S. Govt tries to explain away U.N. veto flip-flop

Press, 7 June 1982, Page 6

U.S. Govt tries to explain away U.N. veto flip-flop

NZPA Paris The United States Administration sought yesterday to portrav its extraordinary flip-flop on a United Nations cease-fire resolution as a simple disagreement over wording in the document, and not a retreat from its support of Britain •in the battle for the Falkland Islands. But the British, while remaining officially ■’mum." let it be known that the Prime Minister . (Mrs Margaret Thatcher) and her Government were dismayed by what one official called the “curious behaviour" of Britain's closest ally.

Larry Speakes. spokesman for * President Ronald Reagan, who is at Versailles for economic talks with the world’s main industrial democracies, said that the late-night manoeuvres that led ' to the embarrassing American attempt to explain its veto at the United Nations Security Council took place after Mr Reagan had gone to bed. Mr Speakes said the decision to abstain from the voting — which came too late to block the recording of a “no" vote of the United States — was made by the Secretary of State (Mr Alexander Haig). But it was not clear why Mr Haig changed his mind after assuring the British Foreign Secretary (Mr Francis Pym) earlier in the day that the United States would join Britain in opposing the resolution.

Britain objected to the measure sponsored by Latin American countries because it called for an immediate cease-fire in the South Atlantic without specifically demanding the withdrawal of Argentine forces from the Falklands by a given date.

Mr Speakes would say only that the United States decided that the language contained in the resolution, while unacceptable to the United States, was notobjectionable enough "to justify a No vote."

“As in the case of many votes, it was a close call." Mr Speakes said. As reconstructed by British and American sources in Paris and officials at the United Nations in New York, it appeared that Mr Haig had told Mr Pym in a brief meeting at the American Embassy in Paris that the United States would join

Britain in vetoing the proposed resolution. But after midnight (Paris time). Mr Haig telephoned Mr Pym to inform him that the United States Ambassador to the United Nations (Mrs Jeane Kirkpatrick) would not cast the veto as planned but would abstain instead. British Government sources said that Mr Pym was dismayed by the news.

But about 10 minutes later, the sources said. Mr Haig called back to tell Mr Pym

that the order, relayed from Paris through Washington to New York, had reached Mrs Kirkpatrick too late' and that she had already cast her veto.

Mr Pym. quipped one source, was then "undismayed."

But a source in a position to know Mr Pym's reaction said that he ' was furious about the American aboutface. although it was decided later that it was to Britain’s advantage to interpret the recorded veto as a continuation of American support for the Thatcher Government and to say nothing about the incident that would keep attention focused on it.

"We got the veto." one British Government source told an American reporter. “Why on earth should we join you in stripping ourselves naked?" But Mrs Kirkpatrick was doing almost that before her colleagues at the 15-nation Security Council. After casting her vote she announced that her instructions had been changed and that, had she received them in time,, she would have abstained. But in the lastminute flurry of messages from her superiors in Versailles. some of which she described as having arrived on scraps of paper, she was unable to carry out her Government's wishes.

It would not have happened if her superiors had not been on the far side of the Atlantic, she said. Mrs Kirkpatrick confessed that she was embarrassed by the event, but Mr Speakes denied that the White House was.

Other White House officials said privately that the Administration was indeed chagrined and uncertain how best to explain itself.

.Mr Reagan, who Mr Speakes said had been informed of the flip-flop at a breakfast meeting with Mr Haig and other senior advisers. was asked as he sat down to lunch, what had happened. “Uh. you've caught me a long way from-there," said the President,,who had spent most -of the ? morning in economic talks with the other summit conference participants.

“Let me catch up with things of that kind," he said. Mrs Thatcher, when asked at the same time if she was angry about the incident, replied: "I don't do interviews at lunch time."