Extracts from a letter from Liam Cosgrave to John A. Costello (Dublin)

In connection with these reports, and any views or opinions expressed therein, you will appreciate that subsequent events or circumstances may make them look foolish. Here, proceedings on some items move quickly and a view or opinion expressed today may be altered entirely by a vote or a decision taken after discussion. I mention this so that you will be able to evaluate them, allowing for alteration in circumstances.

Today, I made my speech in reply to the welcome extended by the President to the nineteen new members.¹ I was third speaker and the first to get any applause from the Assembly. This afternoon’s session is mainly devoted to short speeches by each of the new members. The General Committee today approved a proposal to add an eighth Vice-President and has so recommended to the Assembly. As you will probably remember during the discussion we had, it was expected that an eighth Vice-President would be approved and that Italy would likely get the nomination, thus leaving the way free between Sweden and Spain for the seat on the Security Council. The Assembly has yet to vote on this proposal from the General Committee.

We were approached by the Americans to support them in their attitude on the admission of Communist China. This item, as you know, has come up on a number of occasions, and, so far, the American proposal that the matter be not considered has been carried. We agreed to say a few words in support of their view on the grounds that Communist China was recently branded as an aggressor by the United Nations and that UN prisoners who fell into the hands of the Communists are still unaccounted for, etc.

Louw,² of South Africa, spoke to Fred Boland and myself requesting our support against the inscription of the Apartheid question on the agenda. He said that he was contesting the issue at this stage on legal grounds only, aside – as he put it – from the merits of the case and basing his argument under Article 27 of the Charter. He went on to say that South Africa was tired of the United Nations, that they had stuck this for ten years but that he thought they would not go on much longer. We have since considered this and decided that we would have to vote against them as the South African Government’s attitude on the matter is entirely opposed to Catholic teaching. I mentioned to Louw that we might wish to dispute the applicability of Article 27 in connection with our own problem of Partition. He recalled that he had met you and McGilligan in 1929.

The most interesting news here today was the announcement that Hammarskjöld was going to Egypt. This appears to have been a sudden decision as he had arranged a dinner for tomorrow night for delegates, which has now been cancelled. I gather that the British and French are annoyed over his visit and feel that it is a victory for Nasser. You will probably have read in the papers that agreement had been reached with Egypt on certain matters but this is not so and Nasser’s publicity man has ‘jumped the gun’. It is understood that the United States approve of Hammarskjöld’s visit.

I also met today Senator Knowland³ (Republican), Minority leader. He was very friendly and said that he supposed the Irish papers would spell his name N-o-l-a-n! He said he would like to visit Ireland some time. I met, too, Martino,⁴ the Italian Foreign Minister, who is always friendly.

We have regular meetings of our group to discuss various matters. As you know, activity at this conference is to a great extent conducted in the lobbies. Here, because of the vast size of the Organisation, there is even greater activity than you can ever imagine in other organisations. It is remarkable to what extent coloured races are represented and the voting power they possess.