Evening star., 1947-09-21
The Fundamental Need

Proposals to modify the Big Five veto
power in the United Nations are not likely
To pass beyond the stage of debate for
many months to come, If ever. The Steer
ing Committee of the General Assembly
with Russia and Poland saying mo" and
with France, China and India abstaining-
has voted 8 to 2 in favor of an Argentine
resolution to have the Assembly consider
holding a special world conference on the
subject. But this allows for nothing more
than discussion, plus possible agreement
to recommend such meeting. 1t does not
open the way to concrete action.
Actually, when he first raised it in his
significant address last week, Secretary
Marshall himself made clear that a lot of
time and study would be required before
the Assembly could reach any clear-c
decision on the question of eliminating the
veto from such matters as applications for
membership in the U. NJ and the peace
full settlement of disputes under Chapter
vi OF the Charter. Further than that, of
course, even II the General Assembly voted
overwhelmingly in favor of an amendment
to put the proposed revisions into effect,
Russia would be wholly within it's legal
rlghtS-as permanent member of the
Security Council--to say mo" again and
thus nullify the will of the great majority.
The chances are, too, that that is ex-
actly what the Russians will do if the
Assembly approves such an amendment
by two-thirds vote. For they have left
little or 10 room for doubt that they are
unalterably opposed at this stage to the
slightest modification of the veto. The
primary reason for this is that in the
world as 1t Is today majority can always
be mustered against them. Up to point,
therefore, they have a valid argument
when they say that they cannot have
absolute faith in the good will of that
majority and hence must hold fast to the
right, which the Charter grants them, to
block any action they consider detrimental
to their interests. The trouble with this
view, however, is that it has turned out to
mean paralysis in the United Nations. It
has done so because on every major issue
troubling mankind the Kremlin has taken
the position that everybody is wrong but
itself and that there can be no co-opera-
ton unless the cooperation is in keeping
with its own terms.
This paralysis has not been caused by
the veto in itself. Russia's excessive use
OF that power is merely symptomatic of
the basic clash of ideologies and economic
and strategic interests between the east
and west. The clash cannot be ended by
General Assembly action to amend the
Charter-an action that would be mean
ingless without Soviet approval. At most,
in debating the issue, all that the Assembly
can do Is to exercise enough moral suasion
to effect change for the better in the
Kremlin's policy-a policy that simply does
not fit in with the policy of the majority
of nations
In such a situation, as President Truman
told the General Assembly last year, "the
exercise of neither veto rights nor majority
rights can make peace secure" The great
fundamental need Is for agreements that
are universally acceptable because they
are just to all concerned" Until we have
these, the life of the United Nations will
hang in the balance