Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-04-04
Mr.. Mansfield on the u. N.

AS SOOQ IrlenQ OF Cne UnlCe0 Ma
tons, Senate Majority Leader Mike
Mansfield now has spoken out in Signi-
ficant and Somber terms against certain
weaknesses of the world organization.
What he has in mind most of all is not
its financial difficulties, which surely
are serious enough, but its internal
structural and political distortions,
which are potentially very grave.
Similar concern has been voiced in
recent weeks by such other staunch
friends of the U. N. as Senators Hicken-
looper Of Iowa, Aiken Of Vermont and
Jackson of Washington. Like Mr.. Mans
field, and with good reason, they have
asked stern questions about the wisdom
and sanity of letting critical decisions
be taken on the basis of "one-state-one-
vote procedure in a General Assembly
of 1O4 nations, ranging in population
from 175,000 in the smallest to 407 mil
lion in one Of the largest" Many of
these member states are new, relatively
primitive, politically unsophisticated,
and otherwise woefully inexperienced or
backward. Yet, in terms of voting, they
have as much weight in the Assembly
as our own country or the USSR.
Further, these international new
corners like to throw that weight around
often in an inSufferably Self-righteous
manner, and quite reckleSSly and alb
Surdly in relation to ancient, highly
civilized lands. This amounts to major
U. N. weakness that has led Mr.. jackson,
for example, to speak out as he has
against the highly dubious wisdom, if
not fatuouSneSS, of our own Govern
ment'S policy-a policy aimed at curry
ing the favor Of world opinion"-of
voting with the mass of the fledgling,
immature nations against NATO allies
like Portugal and Belgium on issues
such as Angola and the Congo. Ger
tainly, in Mr.. ManSfield's words, this
is one of the distortions that threaten
to make the United Nations innocuous
at best or lead to its extinction at
worst. To quote him further:
That outcome is not what successive
Presidents and Secretaries of State-of both
parties-have said is in the best interests of
this Nation. They have all stressed the i'm
portance Of strong and vital United Nations.
Yet the prospect for such an outcome is
there, and it is looming larger. 1t will not go
away If we delude ourselves with the belief
that it does not exist. It will not disappear
II the Senator from Washington the Senator
from Iowa and the Senator from Vermont
are buried under an avalanche of highly I'M
justified criticism for having the temerity to
discuss aspects of the problem. -.
the possibility is ever present, under
the one state-one-vote formula, that we shall,
at some time. find some involvement lin the
U. NJ totally unacceptable. So we ask our
selves what then? Do the lights then 60
cut in the General Assembly, as they have
already gone out in the Security Council?
Do we then take the lead in putting them
out?
This . Is the deeper crisis in the United
Nations. 1t is the crisis of moribund Sc
curity Council where, under the charter, de-
cisions could be coupled realistically with the
real and proportionate responsibilities Of the
various nations. . 1t is the crisis of Gen.
eral Assembly which has been subtracting
from its enormous potential of moral force
as it has presumed to add to itself the func-
lions of the Security Council under pro-
cedures which invite disrespect.
Coming from the majority leader of
the United States Senate, these are
words of more than passing import. He
continues to be strong supporter of
the U. N, but he obviously is full of
misgivings about its drift, and this re-
fleets widespread feeling in America
Other member nations, particularly the
new ones, would be well advised not to
pooh-pooh the significance of that fact
1t could turn out to be much bigger
than they may imagine at the moment.