Storage

H E A R IN G S

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERN ATIONAL 

ORGANI ZATIONS AND MOVEMENTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFEAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

EI GH TY -N IN TH CONGRESS

FIR ST SE SSION

ON

S. 1903

TO AMEND THE UN ITE D NATIONS PART ICIPATIO N ACT,

AS AME NDED (63 STAT. 734-736)

50-623

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1965
CO MMIT TE E ON FO REI GN AF FA IR S

TH OM AS E. M ORGAN , Pennsylvania, Chairman

CL EM EN T J. ZA B LO CK I, Wisconsin 

OM AR BU R LE SO N , Texas 

ED N A F. K E L L Y , New Yo rk 

W AY NE L. H A Y S, Ohio 

AR M IS TE AD I. SE LD E N , Jr., Alabama 

B A R R A T T O’ H A R A , Illinois 

L. II. FO U N TA IN , North Carolina 

D A N T E B. F A S C E L L , Florida 

LE O N A R D F A R B S T E IN , New York 

C H A R LE S C. D IG G S, Jr., Michigan 

L IN D L E Y BECK W O R TH , Texas 

H A R R IS B. MCDOWELL, Jr., Delaware 

WILLIAM T. M U R PH Y, Illinois 

CO R N E LIU S E. G A LLA G H E R , New Jersey 

R O B E R T N. C. N IX , Pennsylvania 

JOHN S. M ONAG AN, Connecticut 

D O N ALD M. F R A S E R , Minnesota 

R O N A LD BR O O K S CA MER ON, California 

BE NJ AM IN S. ROSE N TH AL, New York 

ED W AR D R. R O Y B A L , California 

JO HN C. C U LV E R , Iowa 

L E E H. H AM IL TO N, Indiana 

R O Y H. M cV IC K ER, Colorado

F R A N C E S P. BO LT ON, Ohio

E. RO SS A D A IR , Indiana

WIL LI AM S. M AIL LI AR D . California 

P E T E R II. B. F R E L IN G H U Y S E N , New Jersey 

WILLIAM S. BROOM FI ELD , Michigan 

J. IR V IN G W H ALL EY, Pen nsylvania 

H . R. GR OS S, Iowa

E. Y. B E R R Y , South Dak ota

EDW AR D J. DERW IN SK I, Illinois

F. B R A D FO R D MOR SE, Massachusetts 

VE R N O N W. TH OM SON, Wisconsin 

JA MES G. FU LTO N , Pennsylvania

B oyd C rawford, Sta ff Administrator

R oy J. B ullock, Senior Sta ff Consultant

Albe rt C. F. West phal, Sta ff Consultant

F ran klin J. Schupp, Sta ff Consultant

Robert F. B randt, Sta ff Consultant

Har ry C. C romer, Staff Consultant

Philip B. Billing s, Staff Consultant

Marian A . Czar nec ki, Sta ff Consultant

Melvin O. Benson, Sta ff Consultant

June Nigh, Senior Staff Assistant

Hele n C. Matt as, Staff Assistant

Hele n L. Hash agen, Sta ff Assistant

L ouise O’B rie n, Sta ff Assistant

Mar y Med sger, Staff Assistant

Dorjs B. McC ra cken, Sta ff Assistant

Jea n E. Smith, Sta ff Assistant

R obe rt J. B owen, Clerical Assistant

Su b c o m m it tee on I n t e r n a t io n a l Or g a n iz a tio n s an d M o v e m e n t s

D A N T E B. F A S C E L L , Florida, Chai rman

L. H. FO U N TA IN , North Carolina 

OM AR B U R LESO N , Te ias 

DO N ALD M. F R A SE R , Minnesota 

BE NJ AM IN S. RO SE N TH AL, New York 

EDW AR D R. R O Y B A L , California

H. R. GR OS S, Iowa

P E T E R H. B. F R E LIN G H U Y SE N , New Jersey 

EDW AR D J. DERW IN SK I, Illinois

Marian A. Czarneck i, Sta ff Consultant

Helen L. Hasha ge n, Sta ff Assistant

H
co

WITNESSES

Wednesday, June 30, 1965:

Cleveland, Hon. Harlan, Assistant Secretary of State for International 

Organization Affairs______________________________________

Thursday, July 1, 1965:

Cleveland, Hon. Harlan, Assistant Secretary of State for International 

Organization Affairs______________________________________

Lyerly, J. Edward, Deputy Legal Adviser for Administration, Department of State ___________________________________________

Page

2

32

37

MEMORANDUMS AND STATEMENTS SUBMITT ED FOR 

THE RECORD

Text of S. 1903________________________________________________ 1

Prepared statem ent of Hon. Harlan Cleveland, Assistant Secretary of

State for International Organization Affairs_______________________ 3

Organization chart, U.S. representation at the United Nations_________ 25

Number of ambassadors, envoys, and ministers of member states, accredited to the United Nations and stationed in New York (partial list)____ 28

Comparison on yearly basis, of salary and allowances paid Ambassador

Roger W. Tubby at his present rank, and as Ambassador, class 3______ 28

Comparison of proposed legislation and existing legislation, amending the

United Nations Participation Act______________ •>________________ 29

h i
7

............. <; -.-I .; .

< .
TO AMEND THE UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION

ACT, AS AMENDED (63 STAT. 734-73 6)

W E D N E SD A Y , JU N E 30 , 19 65

H o use of R e pr e se n t a t iv e s,

C om m it tee on F o reig n Aff a ir s,

S ubcom m it te e on I n ter n a tio n a l

O rganiz ati ons an d M o v em en ts,

Washington, D.C.

The Subcommittee on Interna tional Organizations and Movements 

met in open session at 10 a.m., Wednesday, June 30, 1965, in room 

2200, Rayburn Building, Hon. Dan te B. Fascell (chairman of the 

subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. F a sc ell. The subcommittee will come to order.

We are here this morning to hear testimony on and to consider S. 

1903, to amend the United Nations Participation Act as amended.

(The text of S. 1903 is as follows:)

[S. 1903, 89th Cong., 1st sess.]

AN ACT To amend the United Nations P articip ation Act, as amended (63 Sta t. 734-736)

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, Th at subsections (a), (b), and (d) of the United 

Nations Partic ipation Act of 1945, as amended by Public Law 341, Eig hty-first 

Congress, October 10, 1949, a re hereby fur the r amended to read a s follows:

“ (a) The Presiden t, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall 

app oint a representative of the United States to the United Nation s who shall 

have the ran k and sta tus of Ambassador Extraordin ary a nd Ple nipotentiary a nd 

shall hold office at the pleasure of the President. Such representativ e shall 

represent the United Sta tes in the Security Council of the United Nations and 

may serve ex officio as represe ntative of the United States in any organ, commission, or oth er body of the United Nations other than specialized agencies of 

the United Nations, an d shall perform such other functions in connection w ith th e 

participation of the Un ited States in the United Nations a s the President m ay, 

from time to time, direct.

“ (b) The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall 

app oint additional persons with appropriate titles, rank , and sta tus to represent 

the United States in the principal organs of the United N ations an d in such organs, 

commissions, or other bodies as may be created by the United Nations with 

respe ct to nuclear energy or disa rma ment (control and limitation of arm ament). 

Such persons shall serve at the pleasure of th e President and subje ct to the direction of the Rep resentativ e of the United States to the United Nations. They 

shall, at the direction of the Representative of the United States to the United 

Nations, represent the United States in any organ, commission, or other body of 

the United Nations, inclu ding the Security Council, the Economic and Social 

Council, and the Trusteeship Council, and perform such other functions as the 

Representative of the United States is authorized to perform in connection with 

the participation of the United States in the United Nations. Any Dep uty 

Representative or any othe r officer holding office a t the time the provisions of this 

Act, as amended, become effective shall not be required to be reappointed by 

reason of th e enactme nt of th is Act, as amended.

1
2 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS

“ (d) T he Pre si den t m ay als o appoin t fr om tim e to tim e su ch oth er pe rson s as 

he m ay d ee m n ec essary to r ep re se nt the U nited S ta te s in org an s and age nc ies o f the 

U ni te d N at io ns . Th e Pre si de nt m ay , w ithout th e ad vi ce an d co ns en t of th e 

Sen ate, de sign at e an y officer of th e U nited S ta te s to act w ithout ad dit io nal compen sa tion as th e re pr es en ta tive of th e U nited Sta te s in eit her th e Eco no mic an d 

So cia l Cou nc il or th e T ru st ee sh ip C ou nc il (1) a t an y specified session th er eo f whe re 

th e p os itio n is va ca nt or in th e ab se nc e or dis ab ility of th e re gu la r re pre se nta tive 

o r (2) in co nn ec tio n w ith a specified su bje ct m att er a t an y specified session of 

ei th er su ch Co un cil in lieu of th e re gu la r re pr es en ta tive. The Pre si den t may 

de sign ate any offic er of th e D epart m ent of Sta te , wh ose ap poin tm ent is su bje ct to 

co nf irm at io n by th e Se na te, to ac t, w ithout addit io nal co m pe ns atio n, fo r te m ­

pora ry pe riod s as th e re pre se nta tive of th e U nited Sta te s in th e Sec ur ity Co un cil 

of th e U ni te d Natio ns in th e ab se nc e o r dis ab ility of th e re pre se nta tives pr ov id ed 

fo r under se ction 2 (a) an d (b) or in lie u of su ch re pre se nt at iv es in co nn ec tio n 

w ith a specified s ubj ec t m att er. ”

Sec . 2. Se cti on 2 of su ch Act is he re by fu rt her am en ded by re de si gn at in g su bsections (e) an d (f) to be s ub se ctions (f) and (g) re sp ec tive ly ; an d by ad din g aft er 

su bs ec tio n (d) th e follow ing new su bs ec tio n:

“ (e) The Pr es id en t, by an d w ith th e ad vi ce and co ns en t of th e Sen ate, sh al l 

ap poin t a re pr es en ta tive of th e U nite d Sta te s to the E uro pea n office o f th e U nited 

N at io ns w ith ap pro pri at e ra nk and sta tu s who sh all se rv e a t th e pl ea su re of th e 

Pre si de nt and su bj ec t to th e di re ct io n of th e Sec re ta ry of Sta te . Su ch pe rs on 

shall, a t th e dire ctio n of th e Sec re ta ry of S ta te , re pre se nt th e U nited S ta te s a t th e 

E uro pea n office o f th e U nited N at io ns, and p er fo rm s uch oth er fu nc tion s th er e in 

co nn ec tion w ith th e par ticip ati on of th e U nited S ta te s in in te rn ati onal or gan iz ation s as th e Se cr et ar y of S ta te may , fr om tim e to tim e, dir ect” .

Pa ssed th e Se na te Ju ne 25, 1965.

A tt est : F el to n M. J ohns to n, S ec re ta ry .

Mr. Fascell. Our first witness this morning will be th e Honorable 

Harlan Cleveland, Assistant Secretary of State for Internatio nal 

Organization Affairs, who is accompanied by Francis Cunningham, 

Oscar H. Nielson, and Paul Toussaint, from the Bureau of International Organization Affairs of the Department of State.

Mr. Secretary, we are very happy to have you here once again, 

and will be delighted to hear from you.

Mr. Cleveland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF HON. HARLAN CLEVELAND, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIO NAL ORGANIZATION

AFFAIRS

Mr. Cleveland. You will recall tha t amendments to the U.N. 

participation Act were proposed during the 88th Congress. The 

amendments proposed in 1963 included one which would have provided 

a housing allowance for those officers at the U.S. mission in New York 

with important representational responsibilities. This element was 

somewhat controversial and is not part of this year’s submission. It 

is not in the bill before this committee nor is it in the bill passed by the 

Senate. Tha t is, the bill passed by the Senate is identical with the 

bill now before you.

I have a prepared statement but believe it would be preferable if 

it were placed in the record, and I spoke to it rather than read it aloud.

Mr. Fascell. Without objection, the statement will be put in the 

record a t this point.

(The statement is as follows:)
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 3

Sta t e m e n t o f H a r la n C l e v e l a n d , Assis t a n t S ec r eta r y of S ta te fo r

I n t e r n a t io n a l O r g a n iz a tio n A f f a ir s

a m e n d m en ts to t h e u n it e d n a t io n s p a r t ic ip a t io n ac t

Mr. Chairman and members of the comm ittee, I am glad to come before you 

tod ay in support of proposed ame ndments to the United Nations Partici pation 

Act of 1945, as amended by Public Law 341, 81st Congress.

The proposed amendmen ts would accomplish three thin gs: Wider discretion 

would be granted the President in the app oin tment of top level personnel of the 

U.S. mission to the United Nations; the U.S. representative to the United Nations 

would be given more flexibility and discretion in the assignment of personnel to 

the various organs of the United Nations in accordance with workload at hand 

and other considerations, and the Presiden t would be authorized to app oint a 

representativ e to the U.S. mission to the European office of the United Nations.

Although subsections (a), (b), and (d) of the basic act are rew ritte n by the 

first section of th e proposed bill, the revisions make very few changes of substanc e 

in existing law.

The principal effect of the first section of the proposed bill would be to permit 

the use of the five top officials of the U.S. mission to the U nited N ations as a group 

of interchan geable represe ntatives. Presently, only thre e of the five may represent this country in the Security Council, and only the chief U.S. represen tative 

and his first dep uty may represe nt the United States both in the Security Council 

and in “an y organ, commission or other body of the United Nations other th an the 

specialized agencies.” I believe this alteration of the basic act, as amended, is 

warranted by the fac t th at several important United Nations meetings normally 

are occurring simultaneously, and, as is often the case, the same issue'recurs in 

several different forums.

The first section of the proposed bill would not increase the num ber of statu tor y 

officials now present in New York. Presently , the five top people are: Gov. 

Adlai E. Stevenson, the U.S. representative to the United Nations, the head of the 

U.S. mission in its day -to-day relations with the represe ntatives of 113 other 

nations and with the United Nations hea dqu arters itself; Francis T. P. Plimpton, 

the sta tutory deput y U.S. representativ e; Charles W. Yost, a career minister in 

the Foreign Service, the d epu ty representativ e of the United States to th e Security 

Council; Franklin H. Williams, the U.S. representativ e to the Economic and Social 

Council of the United Nations, and Mrs. Marietta P. Tree, the U.S. represe ntative to the Trusteeship Council of the United Natio ns. Both Mr. Stevenson 

and Mr. Plim pton have the sta tutory rank and sta tus of Ambassador Ex tra ordinary and Plenipoten tiary. Mrs. Tree and Messrs. Y'ost and Williams have 

been granted the personal ran k of Am bassador by the President.

Although the Pre sident usually app oin ts all five of these represe ntatives to our 

delegation to the General Assembly, thereby increasing our flexibility to some 

extent, thi s still does not solve the majo r problem of assignments to the other 

prin cipa l organs of the United Nations. I believe the problem would be met by 

the ena ctm ent of the first section of the proposed bill. Given the autho rity 

reflected in the first section of the bill, the senior U.S. representativ e would be 

able to assign t he top m embers of the mission staff to represen t the United Sta tes 

at meetings of the United Na tions commissions, committees, or other bodies as 

their special competence, mission workload, or other circumstances may require.

The effect of the first section of th e bill is to explicitly require Senate confirmation for an a ppo intment which is implicitly subject to such confirm ation by the 

general wording of the pre sen t law. Th at is to say, the first section of the bill 

does not repeal any require ment of existing law. The language in the bill au th ­

orizing the appointme nt by the President, subject to Senate confirmation, of 

U.S. representativ es to “such organs, commissions or other bodies of the United 

Nations as are concerned with nuclear energy or disarmame nt (control and limitation of arm am ent)” is compara ble to the powers currently exercised by the 

Pre sident und er sectio n 2(d) of the present law. Section 2(d) provides for such 

appoi ntm ents “in any commission th at may be formed by the United Nations 

with respect to atomic energy or in an y o the r commission of the United Nations t o 

which the United Sta tes is entitled to app oint a representativ e.”

The second section of the bill affects the U.S. represen tative to the Europe an 

office of the United Nations in Geneva. Since 1960 the represe ntative in Geneva 

has been appointed by the President and given the personal rank of Ambassador. 

The enac tment of the second section of the proposed bill would provide a statutor y 

basis for this position. The Preside nt would be authorized to appo int, by and 

with the advice and consent of the Senate, a represe ntative of the United Sta tes 

to the European office of the United Nations who, in addition to representing the
4 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

United States at the European office of the United Nations, would perform such 

other functions in connection with U.S. participation in international organizations 

as the Secretary of State might direct.

Geneva has become increasingly important as the headquarters of many international organizations and as an international conference site. All in all, there 

are permanently located in Geneva several thousand international civil servants 

and foreign government representatives, plus several thousand more representatives of private organizations and business firms with a direct and continuing 

interest in international organization activities. At the present time Geneva 

houses 20 international intergovernmental organizations, including 4 specialized 

agencies (the International Labor Organization, the World Health Organization, 

the International Telecommunication Union, and the World Meteorological 

Organization); a regional economic commission (the Economic Commission for 

Europe); a multilateral institution for the negotiation and discussion of trade 

problems (the General Agreement on Tariffs and Tra de); a regional trade arrangement in which the United States has an important interest (the European Free 

Trade Association); and 2 institutions concerned with refugees and migration 

(the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International 

Committee for European Migration).

As the second conference center of the United Nations, some 3,000 conference 

sessions a year are held including not only conferences of the resident agencies, 

but regular meetings of such United Nations bodies as the Economic and Social 

Council, the Human Rights Commission, and the International Law Commission. 

Added to this is the fact tha t there are now in Geneva some 36 resident missions 

(as distinguished from consulates), 31 of them headed by Ambassadors.

The enactment of the proposed bill would not require th at any of the five toplevel people holding office at the time of its enactment be reappointed. Also, 

section (d) of the proposed bill continues the provisions of the existing law applicable to appointments which are not subject to special Senate confirmation.

In my judgment, the enactment of the proposed bill would increase and 

strengthen the capacity of the United States to fulfill its role in international 

organization matters thereby enabling the United States effectively to represent 

its policies and aims in the field of international politics.

Because I believe the proposed amendments to be sound, I do not hesitate 

to urge tha t you give them careful consideration.

Mr. Cleveland. The proposed amendments would accomplish 

three things: The President would be given somewhat wider discretion 

in the appointment of top-level personnel to the five major positions 

at the U.S. mission of the United Nations in New York; the chief 

representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Stevenson, would 

have more flexibility and discretion in the assignment of his personnel 

to the various organs of the United Nations, and a statutory basis 

would be provided for the appointment of the U.S. representative to 

the European office of the U.N. and to other international organizations in Geneva.

In order to accomplish these things, a good many changes have to 

be made in the language of the original U.N. Participation Act, ra ther 

more changes in language than changes in substance.

I believe it is fair to say that the U.N. Participation Act, by and 

large, has turned out to be a remarkably durable piece of legislation. 

It was passed shortly after the U.N. Charter was ratified, and provides for the U.S. mission in New York as well as authorizing our 

annual contribution to the U.N. budget as assessed by the General 

Assembly of the United Nations. In my judgment, the act has 

worked very well.

The U.N. Participation Act, as enacted in 1945, provided for the 

U.S. chief representative to the United Nations and a deputy to serve 

on the Security Council.

In 1949, in the face of an increased workload, the act was amended 

to provide for another deputy to the chief representative who, in effect, 

would be the chief representative’s alter ego. This deputy also may
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 5

serve on the Security Council as well as represent the United S tates in 

any other U.N. body, organ, or commission. Since 1949 the activity 

in New York has increased manifold. This is true not only as regards 

the Security Council but also in the economic and social fields and, 

for a time, in the ma tter of trust territories. Questions affecting the 

latter field have decreased substantially since there are now only three 

trust territories remaining, including the U.S. Trust Territory in the 

Pacific. The Committee of 24, in which dependent area issues are 

debated, is another forum which has seen a substantive increase in 

workload.

Originally, the U.S. representative on the Economic and Social 

Council on the Trusteeship Council did not possess ambassadorial 

rank. However, in recent years, the President has granted the incumbents the personal rank of ambassador. Although the incumbents hold sta tutory appointments, their appointment is to a specified 

organ of the United Nations thereby depriving Ambassador Stevenson 

of their services in other U.N. bodies to handle problems within their 

respective areas of competence.

For example, a colonial issue will come up in the Committee of 24, 

and in the Trusteeship Council, and then arise again in very much 

the same form involving very much the same kind of debate in the 

Security Council or in a committee of the General Assembly. Therefore, it is important that Governor Stevenson be able to shift his staff 

from one U.N. forum to another and thereby take advantage of their 

individual expertise and knowledge concerning the issue or problem 

at hand.

I am sure you know all of the people who are currently involved 

in the five top jobs we are discussing. Governor Stevenson, the chief 

representative; Francis Plimpton as the overall deputy; Ambassador 

Charles Yost, a Foreign Service career ambassador appointed to the 

Security Council; Franklin Williams, the U.S. representative on the 

Economic and Social Council; and Mrs. Marietta Tree, the U.S. 

representative on the Trusteeship Council.

The proposed bill would not affect the incumbents with respect to 

their primary responsibilities on the Security Council, the Economic 

and Social Council, and on the Trusteeship Council. The effect of 

the bill woidd be to make the holders of the jobs interchangeable and 

afford Ambassador Stevenson the flexibility he needs.

The bill would also require Senate confirmation for long-term appointments to the Economic and Social Council and to the Trusteeship Council. It has been the President’s practice, certainly in the 

time I have been here, to subject to Senate confirmation, even though 

not required by law, appointments to the Economic and Social Council and the Trusteeship Council, whether of definite or indefinite duration. This bill would make confirmation of all such appointments a 

matter of law.

The second section of the bill deals with the U.S. representative 

to the European office of the United Nations in Geneva. This is the 

job now held, as you know, by Roger Tubby, who has the personal 

rank of Ambassador. However, this is not now a statuto ry chief of 

mission job.

We have been building up the Geneva mission to try to handle, 

on the spot, the extraordinary amount of business which has developed in Geneva. Some of you will remember tha t just after the 

war everybody was trying to figure out how to use the old League of

50 -6 23 — 65 ------ 2
6 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Nations Building. That no longer is a problem and has not been for 

sometime. Now the problem is how to fit into Geneva all the conferences which are held there. Geneva is now the biggest conference 

center in the world. It outranks the U.N .’s New York headquarters 

in terms of the amount of business, for something like 3,000 sessions 

of intergovernmental conferences are held there annually. This does 

not include all the private professional societies which also meet there.

Geneva houses 20 intergovernmental organizations, including four 

of the main specialized agencies of the U.N.; one of the regional 

economic commissions of the U.N., and the General Agreement on 

Tariffs and Trade. In addition, Geneva is the site of the Kennedy 

Round discussions. The High Commissioner for Refugees, and some 

of the European regional organizations also make their headquarters 

in Geneva.

Our hope would be to continue to build up the position of our 

Geneva mission so that increasingly it can handle more of the conference work with the people already there instead of our having to 

send people from the Department or elsewhere in the Government 

almost everytime a conference is held. As a contribution to making 

this the major diplomatic mission that it is fast becoming, it seems 

to the administration that it would be useful to set it up as a statutory 

chief of mission position requiring Presidential appointment, and 

Senate confirmation, rath er than the more informal arrangements 

we have had up to now.

All of this is by way of cleaning up some of the edges of a growing 

activity in the field of international organization which, as you 

know, is an increasingly large part of our total diplomacy. We 

belong to 53 international organizations and last year, the United 

States participated in 540 international conferences. This activity 

accounts for something like a quarter, or just under a quarter, of 

the State Department budget as well as for a part of chapter 3 of 

the AID program.

In our judgment the enactment of this bill would strengthen our 

capacity to work with and through the United Nations, and represent 

the United States effectively in so doing. I urge tha t this bill, 

which was passed by the Senate the other day, be approved this 

year by the House of Representatives.

Mr. Fascell. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

The housing allowances are out of this bill?

Mr. Cleveland. They are out of this bill.

Mr. Fascell. Does this legislation authorize any additional 

appointments to the U.N. delegation?

Mr. Cleveland. No, i t authorizes no additional appointments.

Mr. Fascell. Does this legislation in any way diminish congressional control over the present delegation?

Mr. Cleveland. It actually increases it in the sense that it makes 

statutory appointments, subject to Senate confirmation, of two of 

the jobs that don’t now require it in New York, and sets up the 

Geneva job as a statutory job requiring Senate confirmation.

Mr. Fascell. I think the Economic and Social Council and 

Trusteeship Council appointments both require Senate confirmation 

now?

Mr. Cleveland. They don’t require it. They are submitted for 

Senate confirmation in practice.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS 7

Mr. Fascell. Maybe I misread this. I am reading from section 

2(d) of the present law now:

The Presiden t may also app oint from time to time such other persons as he 

may deem necessary to represent the United States in the organs and agencies 

of the United Nations, bu t th e re presentative of the United St ates in th e Economic 

and Social Council and in the Trustee ship Council of the United Nations shall be 

app ointed only by and with the advice a nd consent of the Senate, except th at — 

and so forth.

Mr. Cleveland. My understanding is tha t that is changed b y the 

present bill—do you have the original law there?

Mr. Fascell. The only exceptions—appointments which require 

no confirmation as I recall it are those: “except tha t the President 

may, without the advice and consent of the Senate designate any 

officer of the United State s to act.” Is that what you are talking 

about?

Mr. Cleveland. In practice once you have the flexibility in this 

new arrangement it shouldn’t be necessary to designate other people 

to act, because there will be enough talent in New York to handle the 

problem.

Mr. Fascell. Nevertheless, tha t same language is retained in 

this amendment. I cannot see any difference. In the legislation 

which is before us it star ts out, tha t same section, page 3 of t he bill:

The P resident m ay also a ppoin t from tim e to tim e such other persons as he may 

deem necessary to represen t the United States in organs and agencies of the 

United Nations. The President may, without the advice and consent of the 

Senate, designate any officer of the United States.

Mr. Cleveland. I misspoke before. In the case of the Geneva 

job it does not now require Senate confirmation. In the case of the 

New York jobs, all of those jobs now require it. Certainly that has 

been the practice right along.

Mr. Fascell. It would seem if you are making the position in 

Geneva statutory and now requiring the advice and consent of the 

Senate, you would have a difference there. But in respect to the 

additional appointments ordinarily placed under subsection (d), it 

seems you are reversing the process in the language I read. Where 

there are specific appointments to a specific council requiring the 

advice and consent of the Senate, tha t is now being changed so tha t 

there is no longer required specific designations under (d), bu t there is 

required the advice and consent of the Senate in regard to the overall 

appointments under the new subsection (b). That might be confusing 

to some people. I think we ought to make that clear for the record, 

tha t while the language in the legislation we are considering in subsection (d), does not refer to Senate confirmation as the present 

subsection (d) does in the present law, confirmation by the Senate is 

required in subsection (b) because all of the appointments to the 

delegation are now provided for in the new subsection (b).

Mr. Cleveland. To these five permanent jobs.

Mr. F ascell. When (d) was rewritten it was simply rewritten to 

provide for the additional appointments tha t are ordinarily carried-----

Mr. R osenthal. Would you yield for a question? I don’t understand why you need subsection (e) a t all. Why doesn’t th at authority 

come under subsection (b) of the first section?

Mr. Cleveland. Section (e)?

Mr. Rosenthal. Subsection (e), under section 2 of this bill.

Mr. Cleveland. Subsection (e) has to do with Geneva.
8 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Mr. Rosenthal. Isn’t tha t auth ority in subsection (b), section 1, 

or do you need special authority because it is another geographical 

place?

Mr. Cleveland. It is another geographical place. What we are 

trying to do is make that like an ambassadorship to a country; that is, 

a statutory job to which the President appoints with the advice and 

consent of the Senate.

Mr. Rosenthal. Is each ambassadorship covered in a separate 

section of the law? I am not familiar with that. Is it?

Mr. Cleveland. Not in this-----

Mr. Rosenthal. In the other related laws?

Mr. Cleveland. No, the President has autho rity to appoint chiefs 

of mission and give them special authority as Ambassadors plenipotentiary, and so forth.

Mr. Rosenthal. Tha t is why I don’t understand why you need 

subsection 2(e). Isn’t that contained in (b) of section 1? I am sure 

there must be an answer. I would like to know what it is.

Mr. Cleveland. The Geneva job is rather special, and when the 

lawyers considered what we were trying to do they decided it would 

be better to deal with Geneva separately. The reason that it is 

special is tha t the person is not a U.S. representative in a particular 

organ of the United Nations, but a representative to a collection of 

organs of the United Nations, and other international organizations 

tha t happen to be located in this center of internationalism called 

Geneva. We want tha t person to have the rank and title of a chief 

of mission, an ambassador, a sta tutory agent of the U.S. Government, 

and enable him to represent the United States not only in meetings 

of the U.N., as such, b ut also in other international meetings t hat may 

take place in Geneva. We put him on a number of delegations to 

serve in effect as the political officer.

Mr. Fascell. The direct answer, of course, is th at (e) is not in 

(b), because (b) deals with the principal organs of the United Nations.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. The principal organs of the United Nations 

are all in New York.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Gross.

Mr. Gross. Mr. Cleveland, why cannot you move people around 

in New York to fit certain jobs?

Mr. Cleveland. Under the present structure of the U.N. Participation Act, the people holding the economic and social and trusteeship jobs could not, for example, represent the United State s in the 

Security Council of the United Nations.

Mr. Gross. Why? Are they prohibited by the charter, or law or 

what?

Mr. Cleveland. The structure of the original act is such th at a person can serve only in the U.N. organ to which he is appointed by 

the President.

Mr. Gross. Is there anything wrong with that? Can ’t he accredit 

them to attend any meeting, function, or anything else he wants to?

Mr. Cleveland. There are problems particularly in relation to 

the Security Council. The lawyers have ruled tha t in order to appear 

in the Security Council it has to be one of the three people; the two 

overall ambassadors-----

Mr. Gross. Wha t lawyers have ruled?

Mr. Cleveland. Our own Legal Adviser’s Office.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDME NTS 9

Mr. Gross. What do you mean by this language on page 2 of the 

bill? Beginning on line 9:

The President, by and w ith the advice and consent of th e Senate, shall appoint 

additional persons with app rop riate titles, rank, and sta tus to represent the 

United States in the principal organs of the United Nations and in such organs, 

commissions, or other bodies as may be created by the United Nation s with 

respect to nuclear energy or disarmamen t (control and limitation of a rmam ent).

Mr. Cleveland. Th at is language out of the original----- -

Mr. Gross. Is it proposed to create some other bodies now?

Mr. Cleveland. No, sir; that is language from the original act. 

As you recall at that time everybody was quite excited about the 

nuclear energy aspects. For that reason the language appears as a 

special inclusion in that sentence. We didn’t see any particular 

reason to change it since tha t is still an im portant-----

Mr. Gross. We have made quite a buildup with respect to disarm ament in this country. There is the possibility here of a further 

buildup, it seems to me, by this language. I don’t understand why.

Mr. Cleveland. This covers, for example, the situation that we 

had in the Disarm ament Commission of the United Nations which 

was meeting for a couple of months this spring. Ambassador Stevenson was designated as the chief representative, and Mr. William Foster 

was designated by the President as the deputy i>wUJJ5jLl>jdive. Mr. 

Foster in fact served in that capacity at the cam^RmceT^X^V

Mr. Gross. The point is that you say notfMhg about theWteation 

of other bodies in the original law; or do yoj& zA

Mr. Cleveland. The original law has tfft la nj m ag ^^ oi rf jpther 

bodies, such other bodies which may be ti ^ it efl ^ The assumption 

at the time was t ha t there might develop same aisarmam entfygans.

Mr. Gross. I don’t see it here. X. A r f

Mr. Frelinghuysen. It is the left side.

Mr. Cleveland. Mr. Gross, in the 1949 ameuuTWwwt^fo the U.N. 

Participation Act, there was a special reference to any commission 

that may be formed by the United Nations with respect to atomic 

energy. The part of the act in which tha t language appears falls out 

in these new amendments, and so a special reference to the nuclear 

energy aspect is introduced in the new language because we do not 

want to imply th at there is less reason to have senior representatives of 

the United States on t ha t subject now th an there was in 1949 when, 

in fact, there certainly is not.

Mr. Gross. It seems to me you are reaching for something with 

that explanation, Mr. Cleveland. I am going to have to know a good 

deal more about this than I know now before I support this kind of 

language. It looks like another buildup to me.

Mr. Cleveland. This is actually the same number of people and 

would in fact be the same people. It is a slightly different arrangement of the boxes.

Mr. Gross. There is no limitation in this bill. You say the same 

number of people. So far as I can see, there is no limitation in this 

bill. You can go on and add people, can’t you?

Mr. Cleveland. There is no limitation in the original bill or in 

this one except the limitation-----

Mr. Gross. Your s tatement that you are not going to add people, 

th at is all we have to go on, isn’t it?
10 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. There now is no additional organ of the 

United Nations tha t would rate a senior permanent representative 

in New York. If you suddenly got a great thaw in the cold war, 

and some kind of disarmament organization could be set up, obviously 

you would need somebody full time on tha t.

Mr. Gross. You already have several somebody’s on full time with 

respect to disarmament. How much more do you want to build up 

this agency? We have gone from spending less than a million dollars 

to $10 million a year for the purpose of talking about disarmament.

Mr. Cleveland. The Geneva disarmament discussions are negotiations outside the framework of the U.N., strictly speaking.

Mr. Gross. I might interpose-----

Mr. Cleveland. There isn’t any U.N. disarmament organization 

to which a U.S. representative needs to be appointed.

Mr. Gross. I might interpose the observation that I don’t know 

who proposes to disarm these days anyway.

With respect to section 2 of the bill, and your desire to create another ambassador, don’t you think we ought to be reducing instead 

of increasing the number of American ambassadors around the world? 

We are sticking ambassadors in countries with 300,000 population 

these days. It seems to me we ought to be going the other way, 

instead of increasing the number. This means an upgrading of 

salaries, does it not, and certain emoluments tha t go with the office 

of ambassador?

Mr. Cleveland. This bill doesn’t deal with any of the bilateral 

ambassadorships tha t you are referring to.

Mr. Gross. I am taking it in context with all the rest. I might 

be more amenable to a new ambassador in Geneva, Switzerland, if 

you weren’t appointing ambassadors to every small country all over 

the world.

Mr. Cleveland. Th at is a different subject that I think I had 

bette r leave to the Secretary.

Mr. Gross. It is a part of this question of creating another 

ambassador.

Mr. Cleveland. Even the Geneva one wouldn’t represent a new 

ambassador. It would be making a statuto ry job of a job that 

already carries the personal rank of ambassador.

Mr. Gross. What is the difference?

Mr. Cleveland. The difference is that it is by and with the advice 

and consent of the Senate. It is a formal chief of mission job rather 

than Foreign Service Reserve officer with the personal rank of 

ambassador.

Mr. Gross. And increase the emolument of the office?

Mr. Cleveland. It increases the salary of the office.

Mr. Gross. Of course it does.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Fraser.

Mr. F raser. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We were just discussing whether there might be an effort to add on 

a section that requires th at article 19 of the Charter be enforced.

Mr. Gross. I am all for tha t. Go to it.

Mr. F raser. I don’t really have any questions. The fact tha t 

the money for the delegation up there tha t was in the earlier bill 

has been taken out is due to the opposition tha t it created—or has 

tha t been solved some other way?
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 11

Mr. Cleveland. No, it has not been solved. The decision was 

not to press it this year in connection with this legislation, particularly in connection with Geneva. We would like to get the statu tory 

arrangements set here.

Mr. Fraser. As I read your statement, it seems to me tha t the 

one appointment tha t is now being made which apparently isn’t 

clearly required to be brought before the Senate is the representative 

to the disarmament talks. I got tha t partly from reading the report, 

and last year’s bill where it suggested that it was implicit in the law, 

and this would make it explicit.

Mr. Cleveland. The present disarmament talks, the 18-Nation 

Disarmament Committee in Geneva, is not, strictly speaking, a U.N. 

body. Therefore, we trea t that simply as one of the many conferences 

tha t go on during the year. The designation is made as a matter 

of Executive action in tha t case by the President rathe r than the 

Secretary. If there were to be some new U.N. organization formed 

in this field—which doesn’t look very likely at the moment, I must 

say—the arrangements in this bill would apply. The arrangements 

in this bill don’t apply to any international body that is not a permanent body of the United Nations to which permanent U.S. representation, resident at the seat of the organization, is required.

Mr. Fraser. I m ay have misread t ha t report. I find this language 

in the old law awfully hard to follow. I find the new language quite 

easy to follow, so it seems to make sense to have the new language.

I have no further questions.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Frelinghuysen.

Mr. F relinghuysen. I have followed this discussion with much 

interest, but I am still confused as to what we have and what the 

changes would do to the existing law.

As I understand it now, four of the five key people at the U.N. now, 

U.S. key people, are ambassadors, is that right? Two are stat utory 

and two have the personal rank of ambassador?

Mr. Cleveland. All five of them are now ambassadors.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. It doesn’t say so in your statement on page 3. 

It says Stevenson and Plimpton have statutory rank as ambassador. 

Yost and Williams—excuse me—all have personal rank.

Mr. Cleveland. By letter from the President.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. The effect of these changes would be to 

allow Mrs. Tree to serve as the U.S. representative on the Security 

Council, whereas now she is precluded.

Mr. Cleveland. That is right. At the discretion of the chief 

delegate there.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. What this is doing is seeking flexibility. 

It is seeking an opportunity to allow Mrs. Tree to represent the 

United States on the Security Council or Mr. Williams, who is the 

other one, who does not now have the right to represent the United 

State s on the Security Council.

Mr. Cleveland. That is right.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. It seems to me tha t what this shifting around 

of language has done is to decrease the statutory positions tha t we 

presently have. The changes, as I see it, indicate tha t there is only 

one individual who shall be appointed with the rank of ambassador, 

tha t is the representative, Ambassador Stevenson. Then there is a
12 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

catchall provision tha t the President shall appoint additional persons 

with appropriate titles and ranks, which probably would be the four 

others who now have top ranks. But it doesn’t indicate at all which 

those individuals are. There is no reference to the fact tha t any of 

these individuals shall be entitled to represent this country in the 

Security Council except to say that they shall represent the United 

States in the principal organs of the United Nations. This seems to 

me to weaken the statutory auth ority which the deputy representative 

presently holds, and also the additional deputy to which the present 

law refers. And it strips the language in the present section 2(d) 

which now says specifically tha t the U.S. representatives to the Economic and Social Council and to the Trusteeship Council shall be 

appointed only with the advice and consent of the Senate.

True, all the additional individuals referred to in the new section (b) 

shall be appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate, but this 

only indirectly indicates that w’e consider representation on the 

Security Council of significance. It makes no reference, except on 

the top of page 19 of this committee report, to the Economic and Social 

Council or Trusteeship Council. It seems to me we might weaken 

ourselves.

As Mr. Gross says, it provides no upper limit on the number of the 

appointments t ha t would be made under (b). We know only th at it is 

the intention of the Department to have only four additional representatives, all considered to have statutory rank as ambassadors, if 

they should be appointed under this new section.

Is this what we want, to strip the law of the specific power to delegate 

representation on the Security Council from all others and only 

refer to the representative himself as serving on the Security Council?

Mr. Cleveland. The intention of this, and what I believe it 

accomplishes, is to create a pool, as things now are, of five people, 

each of whom would be appointed by the President, confirmed by the 

Senate, and hold the rank of ambassador. Each one would be 

available, at the discretion of the senior U.S. representative to the 

United Nations, to perform whatever representational duties in 

whatever boards or commissions or councils of the U.N. as would 

be dictated by the skills of the individual and the needs of the moment.

Since the original enactment of the U.N. Participation Act in 1945, 

and of amendments later in 1949, other committees and boards of the 

U.N. have come into being which turn out to generate as much business or more business than the original organs established in the 

Charter. For example, the Trusteeship Council now has jurisdiction 

only over three territories, one of which is our Trust Territory in the 

Pacific, and two Australian territories. All the rest are out of the trust 

territory business. On the other hand, the so-called Committee of 

24, a suborgan of the General Assembly, is a year-round debating 

group on the subject of dependent territories. In practice, the way it 

has worked is that Mrs. Tree, who is formally the U.N. representative 

to the Trusteeship Council, seldom sits in the Trusteeship Council 

because it seldom meets. She spends most of her time in other meetings. We want to regularize the situation as it is developing.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. I would think if the Trusteeship Council is 

of lesser consequence now than it has been that we should not be requiring the representative to the Trusteeship Council to be an ambassador and subject to confirmation by the Senate. I would think tha t
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS 13

section (d) would perhaps permit an individual to be appointed to that 

position without confirmation by the Senate.

The only reference that I see in the changes proposed to require 

th at anyone who represents the United States in the Trusteeship 

Council be subject to confirmation by the Senate is this language: 

“That these individuals who are appointed with the advice and 

consent of the Senate shall represent the United States in any organ, 

commission, or other body of the U.N. including the Trusteeship 

Council.”

But it is a sort of indirect kind of thing.

I would think this would be a limiting factor, if it isn’t of any great 

consequence.

Mr. Cleveland. I do not think it limits it. Wha t it means is 

that you can have a group of deputy representatives, deputies to 

Adlai Stevenson, who can be deployed from month to month in 

whatever way the situation warrants. It has now become even a 

sort of curiosity for one of those deputy representatives to have the 

statutory job description of U.S. representative to the Trusteeship 

Council when everybody knows that the Trusteeship Council is 

practically withering away through lack of business and through the 

independence of the various territories.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. I s it your feeling, if this autho rity is granted, 

that the four subordinates to Ambassador Stevenson will be all 

designated as deputy representatives, without any furth er description 

assigning them, for example, to the Economic and Social Council? 

Will they just be depu ty representatives fully qualified to serve on 

any organ of the United States including the Security Council, or 

will you spell that out in their job description?

Mr. Cleveland. I think the practice would then be to appoint 

them as deputy representatives to the United Nations. Obviously 

you would want different skills represented in tha t group. You 

would want somebody who was especially good on economic and 

trade problems, and another who was especially good in dealing with 

some of these dependent territory problems. But each of them would 

be a deputy representative to the United Nations.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. There would be no designation th at any one 

of these would be the representative to the Economic and Social 

Council? This, it seems to me, is a weakening of what we might be 

trying to do to get specialists. You say we will have specialists in 

certain areas as we have in the past, but there would be no requirement that this particular job must be filled by someone with that skill. 

This might be the case if you had an individual up for confirmation 

by the Senate for a particula r job.

Now there is a mandatory requirement that the representative to 

the Economic and Social Council shall be appointed by and with the 

advice and consent of the Senate. You are indicating that any of 

these deputies who shall be appointed may serve on the Council. 

This would seem to me to diminish the specialization which we have 

tried to develop in the U.N. representation.

Mr. Cleveland. In practice, I think we would need full-time people 

on some subjects. The Economic and Social Council generates 

enough business that you would probably need to have somebody 

who was pretty much full time on this work. Even in the field of 

economics, there are other boards and committees such as the U.N. 

50 -62 3— 65------ 3
14 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Trade Organization, not contemplated in the original U.N. Charter, 

which require high-level representation by the United States.

Mr. F relinghuysen. There is nothing now to preclude the present 

representative from serving in tha t capacity. He simply cannot 

serve as a representative on the Security Council, isn’t that right?

Mr. Cleveland. It can be done in practice, and it is increasingly 

being done in practice. But under the present rigid structure of the 

law, it is anachronistic, I think, when you come to look at how things 

are really done up there.

What we would like to do is to bring the law up to date with the 

rather flexible arrangements tha t now turn out to be necessary to 

cover all the different organs and bodies tha t have developed under 

the Charter of the United Nations. This seems a good way to do it.

Mr. Gross. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. Frelinghuysen. My time has expired.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Rosenthal.

Mr. Rosenthal. Are the deputy representatives at the U.N. in 

New York responsible to the representative there?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. This operates in practice as an integrated 

mission.

Mr. Rosenthal. And the proposed representative at Geneva is 

responsible to the Secretary of State?

Mr. Cleveland. Tha t is right.

Mr. Rosenthal. I was trying to find a distinction between the two 

positions, and in reading the statute of the proposed legislation I see 

the man in Geneva is responsible to the Secretary of State, while the 

other four deputy representatives are responsible to the representative.

Mr. Cleveland. That is right.

Mr. Rosenthal. Tha t might be a good reason why there should 

be a separate section of appointment for the man in Geneva rather 

than to include him in those who are appointed to the U.N. headquarters in New York.

Mr. Cleveland. It is a separate item in the missions to international organizations appropriations. There are a few others, too, 

such as the U.S. representative to the International Civil Aviation 

Organization in Montreal, and so on, but without the rank of ambassador in tha t case.

Mr. F ascell. Mr. Fulton.

Mr. F ulton. How many countries have as many ambassadors as 

we do at the United Nations? Would you put a list in showing 

the various countries and the various numbers of ambassadors they 

each might have, with the chairman’s consent, so we can compare 

this with other representation, so tha t we can see that we aren’t 

getting too many flowers in our diplomatic bouquet.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. We, of course, have more than most 

because we are the host country, and do a lot of-----

Mr. Gross. Entertaining?

Mr. Cleveland. And do a lot of business.

Mr. Fascell. As I understood the request-----

Mr. Cleveland. Some of it over drinks.

Mr. Fascell (continuing). Was the question the number of 

ambassadors in the U.N.?

Mr. Fulton. Yes, the major countries, if it is going to be a long 

list.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 15

Mr. Fascell. It will be 114 countries.

Mr. F ulton. Say so many countries have so many ambassadors 

but on the major countries I would like to be able to compare our 

representation with theirs.

Mr. Cleveland. We will secure tha t and put it in the record.

(The information requested will be found on p. 27.)

Mr. Fascell. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Mr. F ulton. What is the difference between the rank of ambassador and minister on effectiveness at the U.N.? Should we 

change these ministers to ambassadors?

Mr. Cleveland. I don’t think-----

Mr. F ulton. Yost is a career minister.

Mr. Cleveland. I thin k he has been made a career ambassador.

Mr. F ulton. He is on the personal appointment of the President, 

made a career ambassador, not a statutory ambassador.

Mr. Cleveland. I am afraid that the testimony is slightly obsolete 

in that respect. He was recently appointed as a career ambassador. 

But career minister is also a rank in the Foreign Service, as you know.

But for purposes of dealing with ambassadors from other countries, 

people of the rank of minister, or indeed of FSO-1 and FSO-2, have 

been appointed ambassadors so that they can deal on an equal level 

with people from other countries. Generally speaking, in international meetings, most of the senior representatives around the table 

have the rank of ambassador. Ours frequently do not.

Mr. Fulton. If you would put a statement in the record.

The other point is this: You have the phrase t ha t you have referred 

to several times, “Any organization, commission, or other body of the 

United Nations other th an the specialized agencies.”

The words “other tha n the specialized agencies” is a limiting 

clause. My question would be, Why don’t you have that all the way 

through when you speak of the various levels of the United Nations? 

Would you put a statem ent in on that?

Mr. Cleveland. Each of the specialized agencies has its own 

participation act.

Mr. F ulton. This will not affect in any degree the specialized 

agencies representation?

Mr. Cleveland. Tha t is right. There is a special law, or participation act, enacted by the Congress under which funds are appropriated, and the representatives are appointed-----

Mr. F ulton. Even though tha t phrase is not carried through in 

every particular section it does mean to apply the limiting phrase 

“other than the specialized agencies,” when we refer to representation 

in this bill?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes, these are amendments affecting the United 

Nations Participation Act; tha t is, concerning the U.N. itself. They 

do not deal with the specialized agencies, which have their own setups, 

their own parliaments, and as far as our legislation is concerned, their 

own legislative auth ority or participation acts.

Mr. F ulton. Will the designation of this number of Americans 

derrogate or reduce the level of importance of the U.S. delegates to the 

United Nations appointed by the President and the Secretary of 

State to the General Assembly?
16 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Mr. Cleveland. No. Our practice in the past 3 or 4 years has 

been to include among the 10 representatives and alternates accredited 

to the General Assembly all of the 5 permanent representatives.

Mr. F ulton. That is correct. I realize that. What I am really 

saying, in relation to the other five delegates, by designating these 

people with the high rank of ambassador, does it derrogate the position 

of the other five U.N. delegates so tha t they relatively become more 

ineffective and more obscure?

Mr. Cleveland. No. In practice what happens is tha t-----

Mr. Fulton. I have been there so I know what the practice is.

Mr. Cleveland. Only two of the five make the list of the first 

five on the U.S. General Assembly delegation. Typically, the U.S. 

General Assembly delegation consists of the chief delegate, Ambassador Stevenson; the two Congressmen or Senators; the deputy 

representative, Mr. Plimpton at the present time, and a fifth person 

chosen, basically, on the content of the General Assembly agenda. 

Last year, because of the disarmament question, Mr. William Foster 

was the fifth delegate. The other three regular Americans in the 

New York office, along with two other designees, make up the list 

of alternates.

Mr. Fulton. My question is, When we have so many Americans 

representing the United States will this reduce the level of the ordinary 

delegate of the United States, or all the alternates?

Mr. Cleveland. No. Actually, in the past year the other career 

people who were accredited to the U.S. delegation, 1 or 2 of whom 

were not on the list of 10, included 2 ambassadors. That is to say, 

they were plucked out of countries in Africa, and elsewhere, for service 

on the U.S. delegation during the General Assembly. I don’t think 

it has tha t effect. The people who don’t have the rank of ambassador 

on the delegation, generally, are the representatives from Capitol Hill. 

I am certain nobody thinks they are less important th an ambassadors.

Mr. Fulton. What is the total cost of this bill?

Mr. Cleveland. The only financial implication of the bill is the 

rise in the salary of the representative in Geneva. It will be around 

$3,000.

Mr. F ulton. What other emoluments might be added on, that 

will be an expense rather than a salary? If you would put tha t in 

the record to show us what the total cost effect and budget effect is, 

I would like to have that.

Mr. Cleveland. The rest of the emoluments are already built 

into the present situation where you have a Foreign Service Reserve 

officer who is serving with the personal rank of ambassador.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Secretary, if you would furnish that for Mr. 

Fulton and the committee, show us what the present position now 

costs, and what it would cost under the legislation.

Mr. Fulton. And the allowances, salary.

Mr. Fascell. Tha t is everything, allowance and salary.

(The information requested above will be found on p. 28.)

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Gross had an additional question or two.

Mr. Gross. Mr. Cleveland, I know the British, French, and 

Russians are not as enamored of the United Nations as we are, but 

tell me how do they move their people around, or do they? Mr. 

Fulton has asked you for the number of ambassadors in other principal countries. Do they move their people around now?
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 17

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. You mean from country to country?

Mr. Gross. Within the United Nations, what you want to do here.

Mr. F ulton. Are the other nations doing what you want to do. is 

what he is-----

Mr. Cleveland. By and large, they have the same kind of setup 

we have. They have an integrated mission with specialists who sit 

on particular bodies. But they seem to appear in pretty much any 

body they want to appear in. I haven’t examined the Russian 

legislation on this subject. We could do so if tha t would be helpful, 

to see wh at the arrangements are. They seem to have considerable 

flexibility in their economic man appearing at a political body when 

the political man in question is out of town or back in Moscow.

Mr. Gross. There is nothing to prevent us from doing the same 

thing, is there?

Mr. Cleveland. We can do it on those organs t ha t are not charter 

organs. We have taken it to be impossible in the case of bodies t hat 

are organs of the charter—that is to say, the Security Council.

Mr. Gross. They don’t take it to be impossible?

Mr. Cleveland. They have their own legislative structure.

Mr. Gross. W hat qualifies Mrs. Tree to sit on the Security Council, 

to be our representative on the Security Council?

Mr. Cleveland. She doesn’t.

Mr. Gross. You are trying to put her in a position to serve on the 

Security Council. Wha t are her qualifications for this job?

Mr. Cleveland. We are legislating here presumably for the long 

term and not with respect to particular individuals now there. Her 

qualifications run to the economic and social and to trusteeship 

matters.

Actually, in practice, she would be more likely to be assigned to the 

Economic and Social Council if the man regularly assigned to tha t 

body were not present. If, as is increasingly happening, you have 

issues arising in the Security Council which have arisen first in the 

Committee of 24—the so-called Colonialism Committee—that is, 

issues having to do with the Portuguese territories, with South Africa 

and so on, it might well make sense for the person specifically charged 

with handling these issues to be available for service on the Security 

Council on the day they come up there.

Mr. Gross. How about the tax situation? Would these people 

tha t you want to elevate pay taxes, or wouldn’t they? Would they 

get tax rebates? We need taxpayers in this country. I don’t want 

to see any more people given tax rebates and become nontaxpayers.

Mr. Cleveland. They pay regular taxes. They live in the United 

States, and they are Federal employees, and they pay just like the 

rest of us.

Mr. Gross. You mean our employees in the United Nations don’t 

get tax rebates?

Mr. Cleveland. These are U.S. representatives to the United 

Nations working for the U.S. Government. When you speak of 

Americans in the United Nations, tha t is a different story, but they 

also don’t get tax rebates. They also pay taxes.

Mr. Gross. You mean to say that all American employees at the 

United Nations pay taxes and none of them get rebates?

Mr. Cleveland. American employees of the United Nations on the 

New York end make—it is a rather complicated situation.
18 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS

Mr. Gross. I am afraid it is.

Mr. Cleveland. What happens is that every employee of the 

United Nations, Argentine, Russian, or whatever, pays an internal 

tax or U.N. staff assessment. Each employee’s salary is docked by 

an amount which is roughly equivalent to the U.S. Federal tax plus, 

I believe, the New York State tax. In addition, U.S. citizens must 

also pay their regular New York State and Federal taxes. Those two 

amounts are about the same. Since they get them back, everybody 

in the U.N. winds up paying his own Government, in effect, about the 

equivalent of our tax bill.

Mr. Gross. Which one, the State or the Federal?

Mr. Cleveland. Both. The equivalent of the two taken together.

Mr. Gross. How do they wind up doing this?

Mr. Cleveland. What happened was tha t we never ratified the 

United Nations Convention on Privileges and Immunities. Just about 

every other country has. The Privileges and Immunities Convention 

provided tha t the international civil servants would not have to pay 

taxes to their own Governments. But we never ratified it. Therefore, this does not apply to our people. In order to avoid a situation 

where our people were paying taxes to their own Government, and 

everybody else was getting a tax-free salary so that an American 

secretary of $5,000 was paying part of her salary to the Government, 

but an Argentine was getting the whole $5,000, the U.N. has 

adopted an arrangement whereby they assess everybody for about 

what the American girl would lose on taxes and rebate that amount 

tha t they take from the Argentine girl back to the Argentine 

Government. This is to accommodate us, in effect.

Mr. Gross. Do these rebates come out of the U.N. fund?

Mr. Cleveland. There is no rebate to the individual. They 

take from the individual and give it back to the Government of wnich 

tha t individual is a citizen.

Mr. Gross. Out of U.N. funds?

Mr. Cleveland. Out of the girl’s salary, which in turn originally 

came out of the U.N. budget.

Mr. Gross. As you said, it is a complicated story. I am not going 

to pursue it. There is not time if we are going to have an executive 

session.

I am still far from clear as to how this thing works. My information 

is tha t some of this tax business is paid out of U.N. funds which, of 

course, means tha t we are, percentagewise, the heavy payers of this 

tax business.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Secretary, under the present law in section 2(d) 

it says the advice and consent of the Senate shall be required for the 

appointment by the President of the representative of the United 

States in any Commission tha t may be formed by the United Nations 

with respect to atomic energy. That is the present law. Has any 

such Commission been formed?

Mr. Cleveland. No. This was the assumption at the time.

Mr. Fascell. That is all I need to know. The law provides you 

can appoint somebody to that Commission, but no commission has 

been formed.

Mr. Cleveland. No.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 19

Mr. Fascell. “Or in any other commission of the United Nations 

to which the United States is entitled to appoint a representative.” 

That is the present law. Has any other commission been formed?

Mr. Cleveland. A lot of bodies have been formed.

Mr. F ascell. I am going to get to that, later.

Mr. Cleveland. Most of them are not called commissions.

Mr. Fascell. I just want to get this nailed down. Under the 

present law we can appoint a representative, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to any commission which may be formed with 

respect to atomic energy or in any other commission. Your testimony 

is that no commission has been appointed with respect to atomic 

energy. I am trying to find out whether or not any other commission 

has been formed because under existing law you could appoint a 

representative to any other commission.

Mr. Cleveland. Quite a nu nber of other bodies have been formed, 

most of them not called commissions, and to those bodies the people 

already in New York are usually designated to serve. For example, 

the disarmament commission, which is a suborgan of the General 

Assembly consisting of 114 members, and really a committee of the 

whole, has been meeting with Governor Stevenson as the chief representative. His appointment is, of course, subject to Senate confirmation.

Mr. Fascell. In the language, in the proposal before us, in section (b), which covers this subject now rather than section (d), it 

says the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 

shall appoint additional persons, and so forth. Then it goes on and 

says, “In such organs, commissions, or other bodies as may be created 

by the United Nations with respect to nuclear energy or disarmament 

(control and limitation of armament.)”

The way I read that language, this is a severe limitation on the 

language that is included in the present law, because the proposed 

law says that you can appoint to an organ, commission, or other 

body, which is an expansion of the present law in the sense th at you 

now designate more than commissions, you designate an organ and 

other body, whatever these are, b ut you limit them to nuclear energy 

or disarmament. You expand the inclusion by specifically naming 

disarmament but you specifically limit it by excluding “or in any 

other commission.”

Mr. Cleveland. The “or in any other commission” feature of the 

previous language is now in effect included in subparagraph (a), of 

the new language, in which it says tha t the top ambassador may 

serve ex officio as representative, and in subparagraph (b) where it 

says that at the direction of the top representative the others may 

represent the United States in any organ, commission, or other body 

of the United Nations.

Mr. Fascell. Starting on line 18 of the bill, page 2:

The v shall, at the direction of the Represe ntative of the United States to the 

United Nations, represent the United States in any organ, commission, or oth er 

body of the United Nations.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Fascell. Then the inclusive language is really meaningless 

except to keep some people happy.
20 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Mr. Cleveland. Tha t is right, simply to mention the main charter 

organs-----

Mr. Fascell. Originally mentioned, so tha t they are included 

specifically. I didn’t mean they were meaningless, I just meant-----

Mr. Cleveland. In the case of nuclear energy or disarmament, 

where there was a special point made of this in the original act, we 

thought tha t we had better keep in the picture what was obviously 

the congressional intent at the time. That is, if some kind of atomic 

energy commission of the Baruch type, or disarmament organization 

of the type contemplated in our disarmament proposals were ever to 

be formed, th at would be regarded as a major task to be covered by a 

Presidential appointment confirmed by the Senate.

Mr. Fascell. So we have changed the word “atomic” in the 

old law to the word “nuclear” in the new law. Also we have enlarged 

the division of commissions to include “organs and other bodies” so 

there will be no technical or legal limitation in the event that another 

body is created which would deal with nuclear energy or disarmament?

Air. Cleveland. Right.

Mr. F ulton. On construction of the words, could I ask a question 

right there?

Mr. Fascell. Certainly.

Mr. Fulton. Does the phrase “as may be created by the United 

Nations with respect to nuclear energy or disarmament (control and 

limitation of armament) modify only the word “bodies,” or does it 

modify “organs” and “commission” before that?

Mr. Cleveland. I think it modifies “organs” and “commissions,” 

also.

Mr. Fascell. That would be my interpretation, too. We have 

established tha t no atomic energy or nuclear energy commission has 

been created. Is there any organ or commission or other body dealing 

with disarmament in the sense used in this language?

Mr. Cleveland. There is a disarmament commission of the General Assembly which is essentially a committee of the whole, but-----

Mr. F ascell. That doesn’t require a special appointment under the 

terms of this legislation?

Mr. Cleveland. I think it would not. In any case, our representative to tha t is our representative to the General Assembly-----

Mr. Fascell. Tha t is what I meant.

Mr. Cleveland. Governor Stevenson. So the question hasn’t 

arisen.

Mr. Fascell. By the inclusion of the aforementioned language in 

the pending legislation, is another position created by virtue of 

the fact tha t you now have a committee of the whole sitting in the 

General Assembly dealing with disarmament? The answer, obviously, 

is it is not.

Mr. Cleveland. I think the answer is, “It does not.”

Mr. Fascell. So tha t if a commission or organ or other body were 

to be created by the United Nations dealing with nuclear or disarmament control and limitation of armament, it would require an 

appointment by the President, confirmation by the Senate? That is 

what I am trying to arrive at.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes, sir.

Mr. Fascell. I had a question on the Geneva position. In 

making statuto ry the pDsition of our representative to the United
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 21

Nations in the European office, do we by this legislation create any 

additional positions?

Mr. Cleveland. No, sir. This is making s tatu tory a position tha t 

already exists in practice on appointment by the President.

Mr. Fascell. The present officeholder is a career minister with 

the personal ran k of Ambassador?

Mr. Cleveland. The present officeholder is Roger Tubby, a 

FSR class-1 officer—not a member of the Foreign Service, as such— 

who used to be Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. He is now in 

Geneva as an FSR-1, bu t holding the personal rank of Ambassador.

Mr. Gross. His salary will go from what to what?

Mr. Fascell. We said about a $3,000 increase.

Mr. Cleveland. From twenty-four five, to twenty-seven, a little 

over twenty-seven.

Mr. Fascell. You were going to supply us with the details on that. 

Your estimate now is from $24,500 to $27,000 on the increase?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Fascell. The question I have is whether the present officeholder would be required to be confirmed by the Senate, if the pending 

legislation becomes law.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Fascell. His name would have to be resubm itted, and-----

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Gross. A better house and a better car?

Mr. Cleveland. No; same house, same car.

Mr. F ascell. Maybe he could get ice water and air conditioning.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. Mr. Chairman, I don’t want to prolong this 

discussion, but I think it is interesting, and I am still not quite happy 

with the situation if we changed the law.

It seems to me, Mr. Cleveland, tha t under the present law Mr. 

Plimpton and Mr. Yost have direct responsibilities for sharing in 

representing the United States in the Security Council at the U.N. 

Under the proposed plan everyone but the representative himself has 

broad responsibilities but with no direct necessity to represent this 

country in the Security Council. This strikes me as a downgrading 

of two of the five individuals about whom we are talking.

As a matter of practice, the need will be for at least as much participation in the Security Council by those two or perhaps all four of the 

deputies. However, we do strike from the bill the provision tha t 

anyone other than the representative, himself, shall have responsibility for service in the Security Council and may serve ex officio in 

any organ, commission, or other body of the U.N. Th at language is 

stricken with respect to the No. 2 and No. 3 men. In effect, you 

make them all of equal status. Or you may, I suppose, designate 

under this authority that they shall have certain direct responsibilities, 

and that others may not. I don’t know. You seem to say tha t they 

are going to be given a broad charter of responsibility but with no 

direct responsibility for the Security Council, as such.

Th at disturbs me because it seems to me the way that the system 

was set up was a reasonably specialized one. They shall have— 

No. 2 and No. 3—shall have responsibilities to help the Ambassador, 

the chief representative; then the other two have specialized functions, 

Economic and Social Council, and the Trusteeship Council.
22 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Since t he five amb assado rs who m we prese ntly have are no t sub ject 

to rea pp ointmen t, and are no t subje ct to reconfirma tion by the 

Senat e, it worries me th at we will end up by havin g a spe cialist who 

ma y be well qualified fo r th e jo b th at he o r she was chosen for ava ilab le 

for s ervice a t some level for w hich he or she is not p artic ularly qualified.

I person ally can imag ine no more at trac tiv e rep resentati ve th an Mrs . 

Tree in the Sec urity Council, bu t it migh t be th at she was chosen for a 

specializ ed reas on to preside over a fun ction which is of some wh at less 

consequ ence th an oth er areas in th e Un ite d Na tions, and, as you say, 

of dim inishing im portance. She migh t no t have been chosen if i t had 

been kno wn at the tim e th at she might be exp ecte d to rep resent thi s 

co un try on the Sec urity Coun cil.

I have concern on two points. One is that we are downgra din g two 

ou t of the four sub ord ina tes, an d secondly, th at we are upgra din g 

spec ializ ed sub ord ina tes who migh t not be pa rti cu larly well qualified 

for th e job s th at they would be expected to assume.

Mr. Cleveland. I think th at th e change in th e existin g sit uatio n 

is no t as dra ma tic as all th at . I would have no diff iculty with the 

pro position th at Mrs. Tre e could rep res ent th e Un ite d St ates in the 

Se curity Council. In practic e, th e prearra ng em ents wou ld tend to 

persist—th at is to say, th at Am bassa dor William s would continue to 

work prim ari ly on economic an d social problems an d M ar ie tta Tree 

would con tinue to work primarily in th e are a of colonialism . It 

would free the de pu ty rep resentati ve on th e Se cu rity Cou ncil to be 

availabl e to sit in an y body of th e U.N. in the way th e othe r de pu ty 

has th e st at uto ry rig ht to do. I th in k th at also in practic e we will 

set up these four jobs at different levels—th at is to say , th ey will not 

all be ambas sad orship s of the sam e class. Th e pro posed legislatio n 

would ena ble the chief delegate to han dle h is mission as an in teg rat ed 

mission, an d to assign people to fun ctions, from mon th to mo nth , in 

the man ne r ind icated b y the rapidly moving business of t he U .N.

Mr. F kelin ghu yse n. Your p oin t is t h at Mr. Yost un de r th e pre sen t 

st at uto ry au thor ity is too lim ited in th e specific are a of his resp ons ibility, an d th at you would like to use him as you use Mr. Plimpto n?

Mr. Cleve land. Yes.

Mr. F kelin ghuysen . I ce rta inly wou ld have no fa ul t to find in 

upgra din g th at position. Ye t, I do wo rry ab ou t wha t seem s to be 

the dow ngrad ing w ith res pect to the se ind ividuals, bec aus e you do n’t 

assign the m an ything specifically for the Security C ounci l a t all. You 

say th at any of the m shall be appo inted at th e direction of the rep resentative of the Un ite d St ates in an y organ, inc lud ing th e Security 

Council. Th is sounds so cas ual, as if thi s might be or migh t no t be 

one of their resp onsibilities. As a practic al m at te r, you say because 

the ind ividuals hav e individu al inter ests and qu ali tie s they will 

pro bably be con tinued wi th ab ou t th e sam e responsibilitie s as they 

have now. But we are ce rta inly ge tting away from th e specialized 

appro ach which the present law soug ht to establ ish.

I am no t sure the su bs titu te will be an im provem ent.

Mr. Clev eland. Th ere are qu ite a lot more spe cialities than were 

pro vided for in the original ac t. Th e orig inal act presum ed the re
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 23

would only be three organs of the U.N. other than the General Assembly. Now, there are all sorts of bodies and commissions and 

boards which have to be covered somehow by U.S. representatives.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. This is an argument for increasing the 

number of top people. You say you are not planning this. Certainly 

the new language would allow any increase you want, and would 

make mandatory a requirement which the chairman has just pointed 

out is now discretionary. It would make mandatory the establishment 

of a suitable rank, presumably ambassador, for a group concerned 

with nuclear energy or disarmament. I don’t know why that should 

be mandatory. It seems to me we ought to say “may appoint 

additional persons to represent the United States in such commissions 

as may be created with respect to activities such as nuclear energy 

and disarmament.” I don’t know why there is this “or.”

Mr. Cleveland. It was in the original act. We had no special 

intention to wipe out that requirement.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. It isn’t a requirement in the original act. 

It says if he does establish such a commission he must be subject to 

confirmation.

Now, you make it mandatory, and you broaden it not only to say a 

commission, but you say if a body of the United N ations is established 

in relation to these fields, it is mandatory to appoint somebody for 

this job.

Mr. Cleveland. It is not mandatory to such a job.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. Under this language it seems mandatory.

Mr. Cleveland. It would still leave it dependent upon the kind 

of organization it was—that is, whether you assign to it somebody 

who is already holding a Senate confirmation appointment, or whether 

you add a sixth position.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. You are surely implying tha t you are going 

to add additional individuals for those fields. Nor could you assign 

someone under the new section (d) who does not need confirmation 

to serve those fields. This seems it is unwise. And you ought to 

have it discretionary, as the law now stands, not mandatory. Nor 

do I know why the language was changed from “commission” to 

any “organ, commission, or other body.” If any of these groups are 

established you must put someone in charge who has been confirmed 

by the Senate.

Mr. Cleveland. The purpose of this language was simply to carry 

into an appropriate place in the new structure the same idea that is 

contained in the phrase “the advice and consent of the Senate shall be 

required and appointment by the President in any commission th at 

may be formed with respect to any nuclear”-----

Mr. Frelinghuysen. The present language says he may, if he feels 

like it, appoint such a representative, and if he does it must be subject 

to confirmation. The new language says he must. Instead of just 

having reference to a commission tha t may be formed, it says “any 

organ, commission, or other body which,” would seem to be far 

broader, as the chairman has pointed out. I would think it might be 

unwise to move in either of those directions, if we are trying to limit
24 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

the number of top people. I would think you might want to have the 

flexibility either to appoint an individual who is subject to confirmation, or do it under section (d) if it is not of significant consequence. 

If you should set something up as unimportant as the trusteeship 

council you might well want to have tha t individual appointed without confirmation by the Senate. This would seem to require-----

Mr. Cleveland. Or use one of the existing ones.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. The only way you could get around that 

would be to add to the responsibilities of an existing official.

Mr. Cleveland. I think the assumption of the authors of this 

language was tha t if you really had some kind of disarm ament setup 

in the U.N., an operating organization with inspection functions, and 

sort of thing, tha t organization would be so important a development 

that you would probably want a special American to deal with tha t 

function in New York or Geneva, or wherever the seat of it was. 

Hence, the “shall.”

Mr. Frelinghuysen. This makes him appoint someone. The 

present language says if you appoint anyone to have him subject to 

confirmation, which seems preferable.

Mr. Fulton. When the four deputies are made equal, under the 

present situation, they become equally indefinite as to assignments. 

You have now said there will be various levels of ambassadors appointed to fill these slots. Would you please put in the record, with 

the chairman’s permission, what are these proposals in this direction?

Mr. Fascell. I didn’t understand they have a definite proposal, 

but I think he suggested-----

Mr. Fulton. What kind of ambassadors would you use? You 

don’t have to fill the slots----- -

Mr. Cleveland. At the present we would keep the setup tha t 

we now have, with the additional flexibility.

Mr. F ulton. What did you mean by your phrase “different levels 

of ambassadors,” then?

Mr. Cleveland. The intention isn’t to have four people who 

would have equal rank and status in the mission under the head of the 

mission. Presumably you will still have someone who is the overall 

deputy, who is left in charge when Ambassador Stevenson is absent-----

Mr. F ulton. If you would pu t tha t proposal in the record, without 

names, I would like to have it.

Mr. Fascell. Show us how you would rank the four deputies so 

we might get an idea of how this might work.

(The following chart was subsequently submitted for inclusion at 

this point:)
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 25

UN ITED STA TES MIS SIO N

TO THE UN ITED NATIONS

OR GA NIZA TIO N CHART

The chart illustrates the internal structure of the U.S. mission to the United 

Nations.

Under the changes proposed in the law, the two Deputy Representatives as 

well as the Representative to the Economic and Social Council and the Representative to the Trusteeship Council could be assigned by the principal U.S. 

Representative to the United Nations to serve interchangeably on three of the 

principal organs of the United Nations: the Security Council, the Economic and 

Social Council, and the Trusteeship Council.

Mr. Cleveland. The intention is tha t some will be more equal 

than others.

Mr. Fascell. Gentlemen, I want to than k you. We cannot 

possibly conclude today. I think we will have to adjourn for now. 

There will be a quorum call shortly, and we will reconvene at 10 

o’clock in the morning.

Can you be here in the morning, Mr. Secretary?

Mr. Cleveland. I will check and see.

Mr. Fascell. Do the best you can.

We will have to proceed.

(WTiereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned until 

Thursday, July 1, 1965, a t 10 a.m.)

TO AMEND THE UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION

ACT, AS AMENDED (63 STAT. 734 -73 6)

THU RSD AY , JU LY 1, 19 65

H o u se of R e pr e se n t a t iv e s,

C o m m it tee on F o r eig n Af f a ir s,

S ubcom m it tee on I n tern a tio n a l

O rganiz ati ons an d M o v em en ts,

Washington, D.C.

The Subcommittee on International Organizations reconvened in 

room 2200, Rayburn Building, at 10:40 a.m., Thursday, J uly 1, 1965, Hon. Dante B. Fascell (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. F a sc ell. The subcommittee will come to order.

We will open the record for further testimony in connection with 

the bill S. 1903. We have as witnesses today the Honorable Harlan 

Cleveland, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization 

Affairs; accompanied by Mr. Paul Toussaint, Acting Executive 

Director of the Bureau of Internatio nal Organization Affairs; Mr. 

Mr. Francis Cunningham, Director, Office of International Conferences of tha t Bureau; also Mr. J. Edward Lyerly, Deputy Legal 

Adviser for Administration, Department of State.

As I recall it, we still had some questions tha t we wanted to get on 

the record.

May I inquire, since we had requested some information yesterday, 

has it been possible to prepare some of that information, or all of it?

Mr. T o u ssa in t. Yes.

Mr. F a sc ell. Without objection, we will include in the record this 

list.

It is the partial list t ha t Congressman Fulton requested, as I recall 

it, of the member states of the United Nations maintaining a permanent mission in New York City, and their ambassadors.

(The information above referred to is as follows:)

The following is a partial list of member sta tes of the United Nations maintaining a permanen t mission in New York City and the number of amba ssadors 

extraordin ary and plenipotentia ry, envoys extraordin ary and ministers pleni-
28 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

potentiary each has stationed in New York City and accredited to the United 

Nations.

Ambassadors 

extraordinary 

and plenipoten tiary

Envoys e xtraordina ry and 

ministers plenipotentiary

Argen tina______ ______________ ___________________ . . . . . . 2 1

Belg ium__ __ ________ .. _______________ ______________ 1 1

China, Republic o f ___ __________._ _________________________ 2 2

Czech oslovaki a___ ________ ________________ ______ - . . _____ 1 1

Fra nce ______ _______________ _________________________ . 1 2

Haiti______ _______________ ______________ ________ _____ 2

Isra el_________ - . . . _________________________________ .. 1 2

It al y_____________ - ___________________ __________ 1 1

Ja pa n__________________________ __________________ _________ 2

Mexico ________________________ ________________ _________ 1 1

Morocco... _______________ ______ . . . . _________ ____ _____ 2

Netherlands____ ___ _______________ _________ ____ _ 1 1

Nicaragua_____________________________ _____________________ 4

Pa kista n____ __________________________________ _____ _ 1 1

Pa na ma__________________ _________ ________ _______________ 4

Philippines__________ _____ _____________ . . __________ _____ 2

Polan d. . _________________ _____ ______ .. _________ ____ 1

Saudi A rabia.____________ __________ . . _. __________ 3

Spain_______________ ________________________________ . 1 1

Th ailan d__________________________ _______ ___________________ 2

Tu rkey __ . _. _________ _________ _____________ 1 1

Union of Soviet Socialist Re publics______ ________ ___________ .. 2 2

United A rab R epublic___ ."________ ___________________________ 2

United K in gdom .____ ______ ______ _____ ________________ (!) 5

Venezuela. _________ ____ ________________________________ 3

Yugo slavia_____________ ____ ________ ____ ____ _ _______ _ 1 1

1

 Min ister of State for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Fascell. I also have before me a comparison on a yearly 

basis of the salary and allowances made to Roger W. Tubby in his 

present rank, and those proposed for the new position; I believe this 

is the information that Congressman Fulton asked for.

We will include th at in the record.

Comparison, on yearly basis, of salar y and allowances paid Ambassador Roger IF. Tubby at his present rank, Foreign Service Reserve officer, class 1 and as Ambassador,

class 3

FSR-1 Ambassador, 

class 3

Increase

Salary______________________ . $24,500 $27,000 $2,500 Quarters allowance 1_________ _________ _

Post allow ance______________ ______ . 2 740 2 740 Representation_______ ________________ 6,000 6,000 Official residence expenses_____________________________ 6/200 6,200 Ed uc ation.. .................................. . ....................................... L300 1,300

1

 Ambassador Tu bby does not receive a quarters allowance. He occupies Government-leased quarters 

at an ann ual rental of approxim ately $11,000.

1

 Plus $65 for each child (2 children).

Mr. Fascell. I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, and your staff, 

in being so prompt for furnishing this information for our benefit.

Mr. Cleveland. Than k you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Fascell. I requested, and we have before us a comparison of 

the proposed legislation and the existing legislation, showing the 

changes proposed in new sections. I thought it might help us in 

consideration of the legislation.

(The comparison is shown below:)
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 29

U n it ed N a tio n s P a r t ic ip a t io n Act. as A m en ded

PR O PO SED LE G IS LA TIO N

To amend the “ United Nations Participation Act”, as Amended 63. Stat. 

734-736.

Be it enacted by the Senate and 

House of Representatives of the United 

States of America in Congress assembled,

Th at subsections (a), (b) and (d) of 

the United Nations Partic ipa tion Act 

of 1945, as amended by Public Law 341, 

81st Congress, October 10, 1949, are 

hereby furthe r amended to read as 

follows:

Se c. 2. (a) The President, by and with 

the advic e and consent of the Senate, 

shall app oin t a Representative of the 

United States to the United Nations 

who shall have the ran k and sta tus of 

Ambassador Extraord inary and Plenipoten tiary and shall hold office at the 

pleasure of the President. Such Representati ve shall represent the United 

States in the Security Council of the 

United Nation s a nd m ay serve ex officio

as representativ e of the United States 

in any organ, commission, or other body 

of the United Nations oth er than specialized agencies of the United Nations, 

and shall perform such other function s 

in connection with the participation of 

the United States in th e United Nations 

as the President may, from time to 

time, direct.

E X IS T IN G L E G IS LA TIO N

Public Law 264—79th Congress, 

December 20, 1945, as amended by 

Public Law 341—81st Congress, October 

10, 1949.

To provide for the app ointme nt of 

represe ntatives of the United States in 

the organs and agencies of the United 

Nations and to make other provisions 

with respe ct to the partici pation of the 

United States in such organization.

Be it enac ted by the Senate and 

House of Representatives of the United 

States of America in Congress assembled, Th at this Act may be cited as 

the “ United Nations Partici pation Act 

of 1945”.

Se c. 2. (a) The President, by and with 

the advice and consent of the Senate, 

shall appoint a representativ e and a 

deputy represe ntative of the United 

States to the United Nations, both of 

whom shall have the r ank and sta tus of 

envoy extraordinary and ambassador 

plen ipotentiary and shall hold office at 

the pleasure of the President. Such 

represen tative and dep uty representative shall represent the United States in 

the Security Council of the United 

Nations and may serve ex officio as 

United States represe ntative on any 

organ, commission, or other body of the 

United Nations other than specialized 

agencies of the United Nations, and 

shall perform such oth er functions in 

connection with the participation of the 

United States in the United Nations as 

the President may from time to time 

direct.
30 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

PR O PO SED LEG IS LA TIO N

(b) The Presiden t, by and with the 

advice and consent of the Senate, shall 

app oin t such additional persons with 

app ropriate title s, rank and sta tus to 

represen t the United States in the 

principal organs of the United Nations 

and in such organs, commissions, or 

other bodies as may be created by the 

United Nations with respect to nuclear 

energy or disa rma ment (control and 

limitation of arm ament). Such persons 

shall serve at the pleasure of the 

Presiden t and subject to the direction 

of the Rep resentativ e of the United 

States to the United Nations. They 

shall, a t the direction of the Representative of the United States to the United 

Nations, represe nt the United States in 

any organ, commission, or other body 

of the United Nations, including the 

Security Council, the Economic and 

Social Council, and the Trusteesh ip 

Council, and perfo rm such other functions as the Rep rese ntative of the 

United States is authorized to perform 

in connection with the participation of 

the United State s in the United Nations. Any Deputy Representative or 

any other officer holding office at the 

time the provisions of this Act, as 

amended, become effective shall not 

be requ ired to be re appointed by reason 

of the ena ctm ent of this Act, as 

amended.

(c) No change.

E X IS T IN G L E G IS LA TIO N

(b) The President, by and with the 

advic e and consent of the Senate, shall 

app oin t an add itional deputy representati ve of the United States to the 

Security Council who shall hold office at 

the pleasure of the President. Such 

deputy representativ e shall represent 

the United States in the Security 

Council of the United Nation s in the 

event of th e absence or d isability of both 

the representativ e and the dep uty 

representativ e of the United Sta tes to 

the United Nations.

(c) The President, by and with the 

advice and consent of the Senate, shall 

designate from time to time to atten d 

a specified session or specified sessions 

of the General Assembly of the United 

Nation s not to exceed five representatives of the United Sta tes and such 

num ber of altern ates as he may determine consisten t with the rules of procedu re of the General Assembly. One 

of the representativ es shall be designated as the senior representativ e.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 31

PRO PO SED L E G IS L A T IO N

(d) The Preside nt may also appoint 

from time to time such other persons as 

he may deem necessary to represent the 

United States in organs and agencies of 

the United Nations. The President 

may, withou t the advice and consent of 

the Senate, designate any officer of the 

United States to act without additional 

compensation as the representativ e of 

the United Sta tes in eith er th e Economic 

and Social Council or the Trusteesh ip 

Council (1) at any specified session 

thereof where the position is vacan t or 

in the absence or disability of the 

regular representativ e or (2) in connection with a specified sub ject matt er at 

any specified session of eith er such 

Council in lieu of the regular repre ­

sen tative. The Presiden t may designate any officer of the Depar tment of 

Sta te, whose app oin tment is subject to 

confirmation by the Senate, to act, 

witho ut additional compensation, for 

tem porary periods as the represen tative 

of the United States in the Security 

Council of the United Nations in the 

absence or disability of the represen tatives provided for under section 2 (a) 

and (b) or in lieu of such representatives 

in connection with a specified subject 

ma tter.

Section 2 of such Act is hereby further 

amended by redesignating subsections 

(e) and (f) to be subsections (f) and (g) 

resp ectiv ely; and by adding after subsection (d) th e following new subsection:

“ (e) The President, by and with the 

advice and consent of the Senate, shall 

appoint a Representative of the United 

States to the European Office of the 

United Nations with appro priate rank 

and sta tus who shall serve at the pleasure of the Preside nt and sub ject to the 

direction of the Secretary of State. 

Such person shall, at th e direction of the 

Secretary of State, represent the United 

States at the European Office of the 

United Nations, and perform such other 

functions there in connectio n with the 

partic ipation of the United States in 

Inter natio nal Organizatio ns as the Secretary of S tate may, from tim e to time, 

direct.”

E X IS T IN G LE G IS L A T IO N

(d) The Presiden t may also app oint 

from time to time such other persons as 

he may deem necessary to represe nt the 

United States in th e organs a nd agencies 

of the United Nations, but the represen tative of the United States in the 

Economic and Social Council and in the 

Trusteeship Council of the United 

Nations shall be appointed only by and 

with the advice and consent of the Senate, except th at the President may, 

withou t the advic e and consent of the 

Senate, designate any officer of the 

United States to act, withou t additional 

compensation, as the representativ e of 

the United States in e ither such Council 

(A) at any specified session thereof 

where the position is vacant or in the 

absence or disability of the regular represe ntative, or (B) in connection w ith a 

specified sub ject matter at any specified 

session of eith er such Council in lieu of 

the regu lar representativ e. The Presiden t may designate any officer of the 

De par tment of State, whose app oin tment is subject to confirmation by the 

Senate, to act, withou t additional compensation, for tem porary periods as the 

representativ e of the United States in 

the Security Council of the United 

Nations in the absence or disability of 

the represe ntative and dep uty representatives gfxpb'f^RstjM^ider section 2 (a) 

and (b) ori plieu OrflQwtfepresentatives 

in coruaQgrlon with a ^n.Wfied subject 

ma tt<a^* The advic e and^n^nsent of the 

Senajfcjjphall be required fcffihe appointmen t » the. PresidpnJkof tararepresenta - 

tive liS thq Vnited-wates"*!^ any commission th at may be formed by the 

Unitdk Nations with reajsuct to atom ic 

energyVOTBin any otb ^fC ^mmission of 

the UniradjNaJtj'aii^ ^^ m ic h the United 

States is effHUwdi tifl^appoint a representative.
32 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Gross, do you have any additional questions 

you wanted to propound?

Mr. Gross. I note here, and it is interesting, that apparently we 

are tryin g to keep up, in the matter of ambassadors to the United 

Nations, with Nicaragua and Panama. They each have four. What 

is the total number tha t you will be asking for?

STATEMENT OF HON. HARLAN CLEVELAND, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERN ATIONA L ORGANIZATION AFFAIRS

Mr. Cleveland. We now have up there five.

Mr. Gross. We have five.

Mr. Cleveland. Five with the rank of ambassador.

Mr. Gross. This would create how many more?

Mr. Cleveland. This would leave things the way they are, but 

would change the statuto ry arrangements.

Mr. Gross. Then we are not catching up with them but they are 

catching up with us.

Mr. Cleveland. They are catching up with us.

Mr. Gross. These powerful nations of Nicaragua and Panama. 

The rest have one and two, I see.

Mr. Cleveland, I was born on a farm, raised on a farm, and we never 

bought a new set of harness to put on a dead horse. It seems to me 

the United Nations comes pre tty close to being a dead horse these 

days. I am not in favor of beefing it up in any way, shape, form, or 

manner as you might suspect. Do you have any ideas, since it is 

related, have you any ideas as to how we are going to get the delinquent nations to pay their obligations, their financial obligations?

Mr. Cleveland. The United Nations-----

Mr. Gross. Let’s explore th at for 2 or 3 minutes.

Mr. Cleveland. The United Nations is far from a dead horse.

Mr. Gross. Financially it is not in good shape, unless you in the 

State Department have decided that we are going to welch, tuck our 

collective tails between our /collective legs, and run on the issue of 

making the4

.delinquents pay the millions they owe.

But go almad and tell.ufe about it.

Mr. Cleveland. First of all, on the dead-horse question. As you 

know, the General Assembly was paralyzed on the so-called no-vote 

procedure this past year. Everything else the U.N. is doing, for 

example, economic and social work, is very much alive. The Security 

Council has had more meetings this year than in any year except in 

the middle of the Palestine issue in 1947. In fact, the Security 

Council has had an average of one meeting every 3 days all through 

the year.

All the other committees and organizations and operating programs 

have been proceeding actually at a higher level, more so than in any 

previous year of the U.N.’s 20 years of life The paralysis of the 

General Assembly, which has gotten an enormous amount of publicity, 

has given people an impression that is largely false. The impression 

tha t the organization has slowed down to a halt is not the case. 

Even the General Assembly took 18 actions on a no-vote basis, 

including all the authorizations of specific operations tha t were 

required for the year.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDME NTS 33

The General Assembly is going to come back into business with the 

19th session on the 1st of September. I am n ot in a position to predict what will happen at that moment, or what the President will 

decide our political strategy should be. This decision is currently 

under consideration.

Mr. Gross. You cannot give us any help at this time at all as to 

what is going to happen?

Mr. Cleveland. There has been a good deal of discussion about it, 

but since the President hasn’t decided w hat we will do, and it is his 

decision to make, I think I really have to defer that discussion un til 

he makes the decision.

Mr. Gross. Mr. Cleveland, I don’t want to engage in a discussion 

of semantics, but I would like to amend your statement. You say 

the President is going to decide. Maybe that is true because of his 

ability to twist arms, and so on, and so forth, but Congress ought to 

have something to say about this don’t you think?

Mr. Cleveland. What I meant was he is going to decide on what 

proposition we will consult with you.

Mr. Gross. That means money, doesn’t it, and Congress should be 

controlling the purse strings, but I guess it doesn’t. I don’t know.

Mr. Cleveland. Sooner or later it means money. And always-----

Mr. Gross. I don’t want you to bypass Congress. I unde rstand 

the practical end of this thing. I get my eyes opened a little more 

every day.

Mr. Cleveland. I wouldn’t dream of bypassing Congress.

Mr. Gross. I was in hopes that you might be able to give us some 

indication of what is likely to happen with respect to this huge arrearage in contributions and assessments.

Mr. Cleveland. I think it is just not possible to predict. In the 

first place, it is not possible to predict what our strategy will be until 

the President decides it. It is also not possible to predict what some 

of the other factors in the equation will be. What the Russians will 

do. What the French will do. And what the small-country majority 

of the General Assembly will be willing to do.

Mr. Gross. Our position as of now is pretty clear, isn’t it? Didn’t 

we say you either pay up or else? Wasn’t tha t about what we said?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Gross. Are we now going to retreat from tha t position or 

what are we going to do? You have no idea?

Mr. Cleveland. I won’t go so far as to say tha t, but I have no 

policy th at I am in a position to discuss as of today.

Mr. Gross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Secretary, it still boils down to, does it not, on 

the question of the enforcement of article 19; can you get the votes to 

enforce it?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Fascell. We can do a lot of talking about what we would 

like to do, and what we are going to do, but enforcement depends on 

whether the member nations will vote for the enforcement of the vote 

exclusion.

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. And the lesson of the General Assembly 

meeting earlier this year, and just before Christmas, was tha t the great 

majority of the General Assembly had a very ambivalent feeling.
34 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

On the one hand, they didn’t want to lower the boom on the delinquent nations, especially the great powers that were delinquent. On the other hand, they didn’t want to abandon the principle of their assess­ ment power in article 17 of the Charter. They didn’t want to abandon 

the assessment power, but they didn’t want to use, at that time, the sanction that the Charter provides to protect the assessment power. 

Obviously tha t rather contradictory position cannot hold forever. 

They have to come down off tha t fence one way or the other.

Air. Fascell. I don’t know if 1 agree with tha t. I have seen 

contradictory positions in legislative bodies last for a long time. I have been serving in one that has had contradictory positions for a long time. Some are resolved and some are not. I agree with you on that. I think it is clear from the action of the Assembly that they are not in any big hurry to enforce the vote exclusion, for 

tha t they are not in any big hurry to enforce the vote exclusion, for whatever reasons, whatever they may be, and it still boils down to whether or not you are ever going to corral the votes to do it. This may be one of the problems involved in Charter change, it would seem 

to me. If the article is there, and if you cannot in a practical sense get the members to apply their own article, then perhaps the time has come to consider some other method, some other avenue, some other approach, otherwise you would have an impossible stalemate, if this is going to be the attitude of the members. It is like anything else, I suppose. It will only run as long as the people want it to run.

Mrs. Kelly had some questions, Mr. Secretary.

Mrs. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This next session would be the 20th, and not the 19tli.

Mr. Cleveland. There will be a resumed session, a resumed 

19th session, on the 1st of September.

Mrs. Kelly. The Senate will still be represented and not the House?

Mr. Cleveland. Senator Long and Senator Carlson will still 

be the representatives for tha t bobtail session which will start either 

on the 1st of September, or maybe just a few days before that.

Mrs. Kelly. Under those conditions, since it will be a continuation 

of the last General Assembly, the question of payment is still very 

open, is tha t right, the paym ent of arrears?

Mr. Cleveland. The question of payment is open.

Mrs. Kelly. With tha t in mind, you have just made a statement 

tha t many meetings were held during the session, and many agree­ ments made, but were they not made with a prior agreement tha t no 

votes would be taken?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. All the actions-----

Mrs. Kelly. This was taken up and Russia was included in the 

meeting at which the agreement was reached tha t there would be no 

vote challenge, is tha t right?

Mr. Cleveland. The agreement, Mrs. Kelly, was that nothing 

would be done in the General Assembly tha t couldn’t be done on a no 

objection procedure.

Mrs. K elly. Tha t is why there has to be a continuation of the 

19th General Assembly, to fulfill the tasks tha t confronted the 19th 

session, is that correct?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes; and to receive the report of the-----

Mrs. Kelly. Of the previous-----
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS 35

Mr. Cleveland. Of the Committee of 33 which was set up as the 

interim negotiating committee to discuss this very question, and which 

has been meeting inconclusively ever since.

Mrs. Kelly. Is t hat report public a t this time?

Mr. Cleveland. They made an interim report a m onth or so ago. 

It said nothing.

Mrs. Kelly. You couldn’t read between th e lines?

Mr. Cleveland. No; because it said “on the one hand,” and “on 

the other hand ” ; it said “some countries think this and some countries 

think t ha t.”

Mrs. Kelly. As the author of the resolution expressing the sense 

of the Congress tha t we should confront Russia on this issue, I am 

very strong on th at, and I want to emphasize it at this time, because 

I would rather see my country go down in defeat and be outvoted on 

this issue by those small countries tha t don’t have the population 

which I have in my own district in the city I represent. I am still 

of the opinion tha t what Lord Home said in that famous speech of 

his, if I remember it correctly, tha t there should be no representation 

without taxation in the U.N.

There isn’t any consideration being given by Russia a t this moment 

to the bringing in of Red China, is there? Has that been dropped?

Mr. Cleveland. It hasn’t been dropped. I must say the Soviets 

exhibit no enthusiasm whatever for the project, and haven’t for a 

couple of years now.

Mrs. Kelly. Has anyone else?

Mr. Cleveland. No. Albania is the only enthusiast in the General 

Assembly on tha t proposition.

Mr. Fascell. Mr. Frelinghuysen.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to revert back very briefly to a comment Mr. Cleveland 

made with respect to Mr. Gross. It reminded me of that popular 

song, “ I can dream, can’t I?” I would suspect, Mr. Cleveland, even 

though you may not indulge in this, tha t the members of the executive 

branch must dream often of bypassing Congress, even though they 

feel they don’t dare. There must be occasions when you like to 

bypass it.

Mr. Cleveland. Over the years since I have been on this job, I 

have appeared as the principal witness in 18 hearings a year, and as 

a supporting witness in a number of others. I think it will take a big 

stretch of a dream from me to bypass Congress.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. I would think that might encourage you to 

dream.

I have two questions. I am concerned about the possible demotion 

of at least one of our team at the U.N. if we should accept the changes 

already approved by the Senate. As I understand it, the present 

language gives statutory authorization to two ambassadors to the 

U.N., whereas the changes would give statutory authority only to 

one, the top man, and then the others are just designated with such 

appropriate titles, rank, and status as he may designate.

Mr. Cleveland. They would all be statutory Senate confirmation 

jobs; those other four.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. There is no spelling out tha t one of them is 

to be ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary. Is tha t the 

expression tha t all of them would get as deputies?
36 UN ITED NA TION S PA RT IC IP AT IO N AC T AM EN DM EN TS

Mr. C le ve la nd . None of them would have tha t particula r, rath er 

old-fashioned tag.

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . It is a demotion for the No. 2 man?

Mr. C le ve la nd . Th e No. 2 man would remain the No. 2 man.

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . He would no longer be ambassador extraordinar y and plen ipotenti ary as prov ided under the present law? 

This is w hat worries me.

Mr. C le ve la nd. I am not sure wh at tha t means.

Mr. F re ling huy se n. I am not sure wh at it means, either. I 

would assume that anyone from the State Depar tment would hav e 

knowledge of wh at it means. Isn ’t it at leas t a stat us symbol to be 

designated f orm ally as ambassador extr aordinary and plenipotentiary?

Mr. C le ve la nd. No effect is intended here on the function tha t 

the No. 2 ambassador-----

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . It wouldn’ t affe ct his func tion at all. I 

think it would represent in the diplomatic field a demotion, if he cannot atta ch tha t to his card or on his letterhe ad, tha t he no longer 

would have that title, he could not hav e tha t title.

Mr. Cle ve la nd. The incum bent, of course, would continue to 

have it. His successor would not. I don’t think tha t is on Mr. 

Plim pton ’s card, anyway .

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . He doesn’t like it-----

Mr. C le ve la nd . I don’ t think anyone puts on “ ambassad or extraordinary and plenipotentia ry” any more, do they?

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . I thought part of the reason for this resolution was to give increased stat us to some of the team, and not a division of responsibility , equitable-----

Mr. Cle ve la nd. T o increase the flex ibility of the assign ments 

among them and to give them all similar titles. One would still be 

the overall dep uty. Another would still be prim arily concerned with 

Securit y Coun cil affairs. A third would still be concerned with economic and social affairs. And a fourth would still be concerned 

primarily with these dependent areas problems.

Mr. F re ling hu ysen . As long as no one is worr ying abo ut the 

possible effect of the loss of tha t title for the No. 2 man, I don’t 

suppose I should worry.

The other question is this manda tory provision with resp ect to 

the possible development of an organ, commission, or other b od y with 

respe ct to disarmament. I could understan d if there was a formal 

commission established, something at a high level, tha t it mig ht be 

advisable to hav e a m andatory high -leve l U.S. represen tativ e. Ho wever, the addition of the words “orga n or other bo dy ” would seem to 

negate the poss ibilit y of naming someone to head a group tha t migh t 

not be of sufficient importance to requ ire an individual, who is s ubject 

to confirm ation by the Senate. I wou ld thin k it might be easier for 

such an individual to be appointed to something relat ive ly minor, 

even though it is in the field of disarmam ent or nuclear energy, to 

be appointed under subsection (d) witho ut confirmation b y the Senate. 

I am not sure again whether these are just loose terms, “ organ, 

commission, or bo dy .” Also, in subsection (d) it says:

Th e Presiden t may also appoint from time to time such persons as he may 

deem necessary to represent the United State s in organs and agencies of the 

United Nat ions.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 37

We seem to have so man y ter ms to describ e wha t I wou ld assum e 

to be certa in sub divisio ns of act ivities. Is there an y sign ific ance to 

these words “organs and agencies and bodie s” ?

Mr. Clev ela nd. I th in k the intention was sim ply to cov er all the 

possibilities.

Mr. F relin gh uy sen. You do n’t cover all possibilitie s bec aus e you 

do n’t use the term “agencie s” in sub sec tion (b), and you do n’t use 

th e term “bo dies and com mis sions” in sub sec tion (d). It wou ld seem 

in ad ve rten t to eliminate some, and to includ e some in one pla ce and 

no t in others.

If thi s is tig hte nin g up the language , yo u ha ve n’t don e a very good 

job.

STATEMENT OF J. EDWARD LYERLY, DEPUTY LEGAL ADVISER FOR 

ADM INISTRATION , DEPA RTMENT OF STATE

Mr. Lyer ly. Let me say this, Mr. Frelinghuysen. I th ink first 

off we do have in the presen t section 2(d) the requ ire men t for the 

ap po intm en t by the Pr esiden t and Senate con firma tion of any person 

who would be desig nated the U.S. represen tativ e to se rve on an y com ­

mission or body in volving atom ic e nergy, or on an y o ther com mission of 

the Un ite d Na tio ns, to which th e Un ite d St ates is en titled to ap po int a 

rep resentative.

Mr. F re lin gh uy sen. T hat is an inaccu rate stat em en t. I am sure 

it w as inad ve rte nt . Th e only au thor ity , the only req uirem ent now is 

if a commission is est abl ished. Th e new l ang uag e would say there is 

a requ ire men t if “a ny org an, commission, or othe r bo dy ” is es tablish ed. Th is is mu ch broader, I would assume, th an the presen t 

language .

Mr. F asc ell. Unless th ey all m ean the same thing.

Mr. F re lin gh uy sen. If they all mean the sam e thing, we are 

mo vin g in the wrong dir ectio n by add ing verb iage.

Mr. L yer ly. I wa nted to po int o ut t h at s tartin g with 2 (d) the pr es ­

en t au thor ity , ou r attem pt was to modify or amend it to confine the 

requ ire men t for Senate con firma tion to tho se m atters of repr es en tatio n on ato mic e nergy or d isa rm am en t m atters. We would be c arv ing 

ou t and giving to the Pr esiden t the flexibility to desig nate repr es en tatives of othe r org ans and agencies no t dealing wi th ato mic energ y or 

disarm am ent. Bec ause of the importa nce attach ed to ato mic m atter s, or any m at te r relatin g to disarm am ent, we th in k there sho uld be 

rep resentati on by Presiden tia l ap po intm en t by and wi th the adv ice 

an d con sen t of th e Senate.

Mr. F re lin gh uy sen. M y que stio n is, Why did you add to th e 

word “co mm ission,” “orga ns and othe r bod ies” ? I would th in k 

this might be an area, if org ans and other bodies are some thing 

subo rdinate , th at should be don e wi tho ut con firm atio n by the Senat e. 

I am no t say ing nec essarily th at it sho uld no t be m an da to ry for an 

ind ividual who is heading up a comm ission, th at the chief U.S. repr ese ntative on a disarm am en t comm ission should no t be subje ct to 

confirm atio n. That is pr ob ab ly a good provision in the pre sen t law, 

now in effect, and also in the new law. Bu t you have cha nged th e 

lan guage so as to include two ter ms which do n’t mean an ything very
38 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

clear to me, except th at I would assume these are subordinate kinds of 

activities.

Mr. Cleveland. During the period since the original act was 

passed the term “commission” has come to have a rather specific 

meaning in the U.N. context. It doesn’t cover the kind of organization which is proposed in the first stage of the U.S. disarmament 

proposal, which is essentially an operating organization working on 

inspection problems, and so forth. Nobody knows what it would be 

called.

Mr. F relinghuysen. The Department wants any kind of activity 

sponsored by the United Nations which deals with disarmament 

headed by a representative who is subject to confirmation?

Mr. Cleveland. This is the idea. In practice, in the Disarm ament Commission of the U.N., which is a committee of the whole of 

the Assembly, the President, President Eisenhower then, and now 

President Johnson, has simply used as the chief representative on 

that Commission the person who was in New York anyway as the 

chief delegate to the U.N., Ambassador Lodge before, and Ambassador Stevenson now.

Of course, those individuals have been subject to Senate confirmation. This is designed to take care of the contingency, which doesn’t 

seem a very likely one at the moment, that there would be some form 

of disarmament agreement tha t might result in the establishment of 

a major international organization in the field of disarmament.

The thought is tha t with this kind of organization we probably 

should have, and it was the intent of th e original legislation to have, 

a major appointment, tha t is, a person confirmed by the Senate.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. The other question tha t I asked yesterday 

was with respect to the importance of the Trusteeship Council. As 

I understand it, the revised language would still require, though less 

pointedly, tha t the head U.S. representative on the Trusteeship Council must be an individual who is subject to confirmation by the 

Senate?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. Is it not your view tha t the Trusteeship 

Council may become of increasingly less imDortance, and might be 

headed by someone designated by the President under auth ority of the 

new subsection (d) ; in other words, not subject to confirmation?

Mr. Cleveland. As long as it exists probably the last action of the 

Trusteeship Council will be to hold some functions in relation to our 

own Trust Territory in the Pacific. I think tha t even though the 

total amount of business of the Trusteeship Council has dwindled, and 

it doesn’t have to meet for as long or as often, I think that from the 

U.S. point of view the function of t ha t Council will always be very 

important and highly political. I think we would always want to use 

one of the five ambassadors in New York as the chief representative 

on th at council.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. In your view, in the future, with respect to 

future appointments to these five positions—they might conceivably 

be more, but a t least five positions—do you anticipate when any individual comes up, male or female, he or she will be subject only to 

confirmation only if he was considered capable in all areas, including 

service on the Security Council? Could he be a specialist, as has been 

the case with the Economic and Social Council, and the Trusteeship
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS 39

Council up to now? It would seem that you are trying to make it 

possible for all five of these individuals to serve in any capacity.

Mr. Cleveland. No, I don’t think there are that many Angels 

Gabriel. For all of these functions, there are very few people who 

would be competent to serve in all of the bodies. I think you are 

still going to have to have people whose primary experience and concern is with the specialized activity. Obviously one consideration 

in the appointment of such a person is whether he or she has the general 

good sense and the general political experience to represent the United 

States in whatever way may be most necessary. As you know’, we 

try to get such people and they are appointed delegates to the General 

Assembly each year. This is a separate Presidential act and a separate 

Senate confirmation. When they are delegates to the General 

Assembly they do have, of course, a functional representation across 

the board. Often they sit in meetings where subjects other than 

their own specialty are being debated.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. You say there are very few competent to 

act in all capacities, yet what you are doing is establishing the four 

subordinates as generalists instead of specialists. You say you 

anticipate they will be chosen for their specialty in, say the economic 

or social sphere, but they will be not confined to that area at all. 

In effect, I would think you would be making them subject to confirmation on any basis.

Mr. Cleveland. It is like any major appointment in the Federal 

service. You want somebody running a specialized agency of the 

United States, specialized department or agency, who knows something about the subject that he is going to be administering. However, you also want a good general executive. The sort of generalist 

overlay tha t I am describing is like the overlay of executive ability on 

top of specialized knowledge.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. The present law tries to separate the responsibilities and now w’e are trying to get away from tha t separation.

Mr. Gross. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Frelinghuysen. Yes, I am finished.

Mr. Gross. Mr. Cleveland, help me with the proposed language 

under subsection (b):

The President, by and w ith the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appo int 

additio nal persons with app ropriate titles, rank, and sta tus to represen t the 

United States in the principal organs of the United Nation s and in such organs, 

commissions,

and so forth.

Could we by the adoption of this language be giving the President 

the authority to appoint additional persons without coming to this 

committee? Of course, they would go to the Senate for confirmation, 

but we are opening this up so th at the President can appoint additional 

ambassadors only with the advice and consent of the Senate without 

coming to this committee for autho rity to do so?

Mr. Cleveland. This would be the authority to do so. For 

example, in the disarmament case we have been using as an example, 

if a disarmament organization were to be set up, and if a senior U.S. 

representative were needed, the revised language would constitute 

authority for the President to appoint someone to the new position.

Mr. Gross. We could have unlimited ambassadors if the President
40 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDME NTS

deemed it necessary and restricted only by the Senate of the United 

States in the m atter of confirmation?

Mr. Cleveland. And by the financial provision for the mission. 

Mr. Lyerly. Mr. Gross, might I add that we have this authority 

now, in section 2(d) of the present law which says, “The President 

may also appoint from time to time”—this is now in addition to the 

three tha t are provided for in the present law.

Mr. Gross. Do you mean section 2(d)?

Mr. Lyerly. Of the present law.

Mr. Cleveland. It is the middle of page 19 of last year’s report.

Mr. Lyerly. It provides: “The President may also appoint from 

time to time such other persons as he may deem necessary to represent 

the United States in the organs and agencies of the U.N .,” and so 

forth. We have brought that language into this new section 2(b).

Mr. F relinghuysen. I have the floor, I think.

The old section (d) is not language that talks about “with the advice 

and consent of the Senate.” That is a provision to make such appointments as are appropriate without going to confirmation.

Mr. Fascell. Except for the last sentence.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. You mean disarmament?

Mr. Lyerly. All persons appointed to commissions to which the 

United States is entitled to appoint a representative must have 

Senate confirmation.

Mr. Frelinghuysen. That is right. So your point is tha t the rephrasing in (b) is a taking out of language in two places of the present (d)?

Mr. Lyerly. Yes, sir.

Mr. Gross. I must agree with the gentleman from New Jersey in 

view of this language here. You speak in one place of “principal 

organs.” Over here in the revised language in (d), it is “organs and 

agencies.” I have to agree with him that I do not know why you 

differentiate in the language in these two paragraphs of the bill, call 

them what you want.

Mr. Cleveland. I think there are two different subjects here. One 

is the President’s auth ority to appoint additional-----

Mr. Gross. You say he has it in both now?

Mr. Cleveland. Tha t is right. The other is the question of which 

job should require Senate confirmation. The President’s authority 

to appoint additional people is simply carried over into the new bill. 

Instead of trying to define the organs in the bill, the organs of the 

U.N. to which appointments confirmed by the Senate will be required, 

the term “principal organs” is used, because there are more principal 

organs now, and possibly in the future, than those described in the 

Charter itself. The original act, you see, simply mentioned the 

names of the principal organs specified in the Charter. But, the 

organization changes and develops other organizations to which the 

President would have to name Senate confirmed appointees if the 

organizations were to be regarded as principal organs.
UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMEN DMENTS 41

Mr. Frelinghuysen. “Principal organs,” always reminds me of an 

anatom y lesson.

Mr. Cleveland. I am afraid it is.

Mr. Fascell. It provides for appointment to both, principal 

organs and those other organs, commissions, and bodies dealing with 

either nuclear energy or disarmament?

Mr. Cleveland. Yes. This makes clear that the Congress is 

saying tha t anything dealing with nuclear energy and disarmament 

will be regarded as a principal organ of the U.N.

Mr. Fascell. I wanted to be sure I had read correctly.

Mr. Rosenthal, do you have any questions?

Mr. Rosenthal. Yes, I have a few.

Mr. Secretary, do you have any objection to going back to a discussion of the article 19 situation?

Mr. Cleveland. None at all.

Mr. Rosenthal. I just wondered whether you felt it was relevant 

to the discussion under this section if this Government takes a hard 

line or a “Gung Ho” attitude and says, “No pay, no vote, and we go 

down the line tha t way,” do you think that might contribute to the 

dissolution of the United Nations?

Mr. Cleveland. I think that leads us into a line of discussion 

which really goes to the question of w hat the U.S. strategy will be 

on this subject. I am afraid I am not in a position to discuss t ha t 

until the President has considered the whole problem and has decided 

what he wants us to do about it.

Certainly we have to be in a position, somehow or other, not to 

permit the Soviets to decide whether or not the U.N. proceeds with 

its important work. The problem is how to bring that about.

Mr. Rosenthal. Overall it seems to me the point is not to win 

the debating point but to make sure that the survival of the United 

Nations is paramount. That is my own personal opinion. I realize 

you are in a very difficult position.

I have no thoughts of how we can extricate ourselves. I think the 

overriding concern is the survival of the United Nations because 

without th at I think we have a problem with the survival of mankind. 

I hope tha t the State Department, in discussing this and making 

recommendations to the President, is n ot principally concerned with 

the debating point—th at we might win or lose in the situation— 

but are more concerned with the broad allover view of our civilization.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Gross. One further question.

Did n’t you discuss this matter of enforcement of article 19 before 

the President went out to San Francisco to speak to the United 

Nations?

Mr. Cleveland. We discussed it frequently, including then.

Mr. Gross. You must have reached some kind of a position or 

understanding at that time?
12 UNITED NATIONS PARTICIPATION ACT AMENDMENTS

Mr. Cleveland. The position or understanding reached at tha t 

time was n ot to mention the subject in San Francisco.

Mr. Gross. That is pre tty well borne out by the press accounts of 

what happened out there, Mr. Cleveland.

Mr. Cleveland. Some of the press accounts, no t all of them, could 

possibly be true since they are quite contradictory.

Mr. Gross. Was there anything contradictory on the subject of 

the U.N. deadbeats paying up? I didn’t read anything in the newspaper accounts tha t seemed to be contradictory.

Mr. Cleveland. The facts on the delinquents not paying are all 

too clear.

Mr. Fascell. Thank you, Mr. Secretary and gentlemen. We 

appreciate your coming back this morning to complete the hearings 

on S. 1903. We will stand adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned.)

o