Letter from Jack Conway to Seán Murphy (Dublin)

You will be interested in being informed of the events of the past few days in connection with acceptance of Ireland as a member of the United Nations. Prior to our entry, I had been in close touch with the Canadian Delegation. Following the defeat of their Draft Resolution, the Soviet Union unexpectedly changed its position, and sixteen Nations were accepted as members. I consulted the Ambassador immediately, and I understand that he had telephone conversations with the Minister. As a result of the telephone conversations, the Ambassador instructed me to assume Ireland’s seat at the General Assembly on Thursday morning, December 15th.

There were no particular formalities connected with this. I paid a visit to the Secretary General and the Chef de Protocol, who welcomed me warmly and did not require credentials.

There appeared to be universal pleasure on the part of the other Delegations at the acceptance of Ireland’s application for membership. Sir Pierson Dixon¹ of the United Kingdom; Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge, of the United States; Mr. Sobolev of the USSR;² Mr. Hervé Alphande of France;³ Mr. V.K. Krishna Menon of India; Sir Leslie Knox⁴ of New Zealand, and General Carlos Romulo of the Philippines were among the many who made a point of offering their congratulations. Father D’Souza⁵ of the Indian Delegation blessed Ireland’s seat.

The Delegate of Ecuador asked for an appointment at my office to discuss with me the opening of Trade Relations between his country and Ireland. Mr. Paul Martin,⁶ the Chairman of the Canadian Delegation, who is well known to you, was particularly warm in his greetings. He arranged to have a photograph taken of our meeting, which presumably is intended for the Catholic Press in Canada. He is, of course, French-Canadian, and is married to an Irish lady. He stated that it was his personal attitude that our delegation represented the whole country. Mr. Asha,⁷ who is permanent delegate of Syria, was also extremely friendly. He indicated that his country belonged to an Asiatic and African group which represents more than twenty votes in the United Nations, and that they were sure Ireland would have a lot in common with them, and they with us. He, of course, is particularly concerned about the Israeli-Syrian clash at the present time, and was anxious to sound us out on our position. He hinted that Ireland could, and should, accept a leading and active position among the anti-colonial small powers, since Ireland, although a Western European country, is not a Western European colonial power, and is considered, because of her history, to be sympathetic to claims for self-determination. It is interesting to note that the Syrians and the Lebanese have created a position of influence in the United Nations greater than is warranted by their strength and actual importance by taking an active and constructive part in all possible aspects of UN activities.

Several Delegates of the Latin-American countries also showed great interest in our membership, and stated they felt certain ties with us, not only because of common religious affiliations, but because of the part Irishmen had played in their wars of liberation.

On Friday, December 16th, I returned to the General Assembly with Messrs. Keating and Gallagher. I brought them with me because I felt it was extremely important for them to make contacts with the Secretariat, and to learn their way around generally, so that we can maintain liaison until such time as a permanent delegation is appointed.

The particular matters on the Agenda on that day were the election of the eleventh member of the Security Council, the election of a member to the Trusteeship Council and the report of the Subcommittee on Disarmament. We took no part in the second two items, due to the fact that we had not had time to study them and had not received instructions. We were, however, very strongly pressed to vote for Burma for the Trusteeship Council by the French delegation who noted that we had not voted on the first two ballots. In the matter of the Security Council we adhered to our instructions, and voted consistently for the Philippines. However, following a recess in the afternoon, the President of the General Assembly informed the Assembly that an arrangement had been made by which Yugoslavia and the Philippines, together with their particular backers, had agreed to split the two year term between those two countries, with Yugoslavia seated for the first year. The Latin-America countries immediately objected, and when the matter was put to a vote the arrangement failed. On that vote, I again voted for the Philippines, for the following reasons:

1. My instructions gave me no discretion in this matter;
2. I was inclined to accept the reasoning of the Latin-American delegates, who declared that the arrangement might not be entirely legal, and certainly is not legally enforceable.
3. I was in no position to vote for this gentleman’s agreement, since I could not possibly bind our delegation to vote for the Philippines against any other country next year to fill the second half of the two year term.

Incidentally, the voting was by secret ballot, but I felt it useful to inform General Romulo privately that Ireland’s first vote at the United Nations would be in support of his country.

As a result of the deadlock, I voted in favour of continuing the life of the General Assembly until midnight, Tuesday December 20th. A further meeting on the matter was held on that day at 10.30 a.m. At that meeting, sixty-nine ballots were cast of which thirteen were abstentions. The total valid vote therefore was fifty-six, making the quota necessary for election thirty-eight. Yugoslavia received forty-three votes; Philippines eleven; Finland one and Sweden one. I again voted for the Philippines for the reasons mentioned at (2) and (3) above. The thirteen abstentions were probably Latin-American ballots. I did not exercise my discretion to vote for Sweden since it became obvious over the week-end that Sweden did not desire support unless publicly backed by both the Soviet and the Anglo-American groups.

As a result of my experiences, I would like to offer some comments on the effects of our membership which, I hope, may be of some assistance to you. The first and strongest impression I received was, that most of the members and particularly the Arabian-Asiatic and the Latin-American groups, expected us to play an important part in the activities of the United Nations, and they welcomed us warmly on that account. There is a general impression among the other delegates that Ireland will follow an independent line, and will not be attached to the Anglo-American bloc or to the neutralists. It is assumed, of course, that we will be quite definitely anti-Communist.

I was quite surprised by the amount of lobbying done by the other delegations. The United States and France were particularly active in attempting to find out our position on the matters that came before us on Friday. I feel that we can expect considerable interest on the part of these delegations and others on the trend of our ideas on matters of importance.

From the hints thrown out to me, and from newspaper articles here, and radio comments, it is apparent that we are expected to bring up the question of Partition at the earliest time. Whereas other delegations have expressed a great deal of friendliness towards us, there is no assurance at all that a majority would necessarily support us. To bring up the question of Partition with reasonable prospect of majority sympathy, intensive and careful ground work would have to be done over a period of months, and we shall have to give considerable thought to the attitudes we shall take on the other political questions before the United Nations.

In connection with the possible size of the permanent delegation, I am enclosing herewith for your information a copy of the list of delegations to this Tenth General Assembly and also a copy of the list of Permanent Missions issued by the United Nations.⁸

At the request of Mr. Jehan De Noue, Chef de Protocol, I visited him in his office and he raised the question of the form our delegation would take. He said that whereas the United Nations could not instruct us in the matter, the Secretary-General is anxious that each country should have its permanent delegation in New York, as complications continually arise when the Permanent Representative is also assigned to the United States. He mentioned that as a practical matter, it is difficult to maintain close contact with a Representative in Washington, and that commuting from Washington for formal meetings ignores the fact that much important work is done at informal meetings and in private caucus.

As you are already aware, the Office of Public Works proposes in the near future to lease the major portion of the Consulate General to CTT.⁹ As a result, there will not be enough space in the building for the United Nations delegation according to the new arrangements. I shall shortly forward you some correspondence I have received from Real Estate Agents offering other premises.

The next meeting of the General Assembly is scheduled for September 26th, 1956, but there is some support for delaying it until after the American Presidential elections in November. Delegates may be asked to pass on this question later, and it would be helpful to know your feelings on this.

I am also enclosing herewith a booklet advising new delegations of the forms to be followed in presenting their credentials.

I am forwarding a copy of this minute to the Ambassador for his information.

I hope you will find the above useful and you may wish to keep me informed of any developments in Dublin in the interim period.