Advertisement

The United Nations in World Politics

  • David Armstrong
Chapter
Part of the The Making of the 20th Century book series (MACE)

Abstract

There was never any question in the minds of the allied leaders about whether a new collective security system would be created after the Second World War. Equally there was no prospect of this new organisation being built on the existing League structure: this was generally discredited and wholly unacceptable to the Russians, who had been expelled from it. But although references to the League at the principal allied meetings which drew up the Charter were few and usually disparaging, it is clear that the League experience was too relevant to be ignored, especially by the professional diplomats responsible for working out the details of the new organisation. Hence the United Nations, in its essentials, was seen as an improved League, rather than a departure from it.1

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    This is made quite explicit in some of the earlier British position papers on the UN. See, for example, the memorandum by the British Foreign Secretary, Anthony Eden, on a future world organisation in which he says: ‘(i) It is improbable that the League of Nations can be revived in its old form but it is highly desirable that some international machinery, embodying many of the good features of the League, should be established on the conclusion of hostilities. (ii) In any case every effort should be made to preserve those technical and humanitarian services of the League which have been so conspicuously successful in the past.’ Text of memorandum in P. A. Reynolds and E. J. Hughes, The Historian as Diplomat (London, 1976) Appendix B, pp. 126–34.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. J. Hughes, ‘Winston Churchill and the Formation of the United Nations Organisation’, Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 9., no. 4. (October 1974) pp 177–94; Cordell Hull, The Memoirs of Cordell Hull, vol. II (New York, 1948) pp. 1640–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. Yergin, The Shattered Peace (London, 1978) pp. 47–8. See also T. M. Campbell, Masquerade Peace: America’s UN Policy, 1944–45, (Tallahassee, 1973) pp. 1, 89, 147, 156–7.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reynolds and Hughes, The Historian as Diplomat p. 129.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. L. Goodwin, Britain and the United Nations (London, 1957) p. 17.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell, Masquerade Peace p. 37, and United States Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) (Washington, 1946) vol. I, p. 127.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Z. Rubinstein and G. Ginsburgs, Soviet and American Policies in the United Nations (New York, 1971) p. 3.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hull, Memoirs vol. II, p. 1682. See also Stalin’s speech of 6 November 1944, International Conciliation (December 1944) p. 814.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Campbell, Masquerade Peace pp. 36–7.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hull, Memoirs vol. II, p. 1648.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. D. Weiler and A. P. Simons, The United States and the United Nations (New York, 1967) p. 40.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    For Truman’s own account see The Memoirs of Harry S. Truman vol. I (London, 1955) pp. 193, 201, 210–11.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hull, Memoirs pp. 1625–7; Weiler and Simons, The US and the UN pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    The Yalta formula was written into the Charter as Article 27. See also D. E. Lee, ‘The Genesis of the Veto’, International Organisation (February 1947) 33–42.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hull, Memoirs, pp. 1706–7. See also note 6, this page, FR US, vol. I (1946) pp. 544–711.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    United Nations Information Organisation, Documents of the United Nations Conference on International Organisation (UNCIO), vol. I (1945) p. 125.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Ibid., pp. 173–8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    For a detailed comparison of the Covenant and Charter, see L. M. Goodrich, ‘From League of Nations to United Nations’, International Organisation, vol. I (1947), and H. G. Nicholas, The United Nations as a Political Institution (London, 1975) pp. 14–40.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. M. Goodrich and E. Hambro, Charter of the United Nations, Commentary and Documents (London, 1949) pp. 110–21.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    The Security Council’s decisions were to be binding upon the whole membership of the UN. See a briefing given to the US delegation to the UN, FRUS, vol. I (1946) p. 129.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ibid., pp. 1136–7.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ibid., pp. 1167–71.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ibid., pp. 142, 149, 153–6, 166–9.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    For an account of the debate, see Trygve Lie, In the Cause of Peace (New York, 1954) pp. 31–3.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weiler and Simons, The US and the UN p. 125.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Trygve Lie, In the Cause of Peace pp. 81–8.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goodwin, Britain and the UN pp. 74–8.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ibid., pp. 113–14.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weiler and Simons, The US and the UN pp. 203–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    B. V. Cohen, ‘The Impact of the United Nations on United States Foreign Policy’, International Organisation, vol. 5, no. 2 (May 1951) p. 277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    FRUS vol. II (1950) p. 31.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    For detailed discussion of the UN’s work in relation to decolonisation, see M. El-Ayouty, The United Nations and Decolonisation (The Hague, 1971); R. Emerson, ‘Colonialism, Political Development and the UN’, International Organisation, vol. 19, no. 3 (Summer 1965); H. K. Jacobson, ‘The United Nations and Colonialism: A Tentative Appraisal’, International Organisation, vol. 16, no. 1 (Winter 1962).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    For an account of the UN’s handling of the Palestine question during 1947–9, see L. L. Leonard, ‘The United Nations and Palestine’, International Conciliation, no. 454 (1949) 603–786.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    UNSCOP Report to the General Assembly UN Document A/364 (October 1947).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    See FRUS vol. V (1947) pp. 999–1328, and vol. V (1948) passim; also G. T. Mazuzan, Warren R. Austin at the UN, 1946–1953 (Kent State University Press,) pp. 94–115.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    FRUS, vol. V (1947) pp. 1177–8.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ibid., pp. 1281–2.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    See, for example, Report by the Policy Planning Staff on the Position of the United States with Respect to Palestine (19 January 1948), in FRUS vol. 5, Part 2 (1948) pp. 546–54, the criticisms of this by Dean Rusk, then Director of the Office of Special Affairs (renamed the Office of United Nations Affairs on 28 January 1948) in a memorandum dated 26 January 1948, ibid., pp. 556–62, and the reply by Kennan to this, on 29 January, ibid., pp. 573–80.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    See, for example, message to the President, 21 February 1948, ibid., pp. 637–40, and Truman’s reply, ibid., p. 645.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Truman, Memoirs, vol. II, (1956) p. 157.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    FRUS vol. 5 (1948) p. 657.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ibid., pp. 690–6. Cf Truman’s explanation of his Palestine policy: ‘the matter had been placed in the hands of the United Nations, and, true to my conviction that the United Nations had to be made to work, I had confidence that a solution would be found there’. Memoirs vol. II, p. 157. Emphasis addedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    J. L. Gaddis, ‘Korea in American Politics, Strategy and Diplomacy, 1945–50’, in Yonosuke Nagai and Akira Iruyo (eds), The Origins of the Cold War in Asia (University of Tokyo Press, 1977) pp. 282–3.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    The USSR had been absent from the Security Council since January 1950 in protest against the continued seating of the Nationalist Chinese represetatives on China’s permanent seat in the Security Council, which they believed rightfully belonged to the Chinese Communists.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    For Truman’s response to the North Korean attack, see his Memoirs vol. 2, p. 333, and FRUS vol. VII (1950) pp. 160 and 183. For Bradley’s comment see ibid., p. 158.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    See memorandum by the Director of the Office of North-east Asian Affairs, 24 July 1950, ibid., pp. 458–61, and draft memorandum prepared in the Department of Defence, ibid., pp. 502–10.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    A. James, The Politics of Peacekeeping (London, 1969).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    R. Hiscocks, The Security Council (London, 1973) pp. 266–8.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    W. R. Frye, A United Nations Peace Force (London, 1957) pp. 10–14.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    For a discussion of the legal controversy surrounding the creation of UNEF, see D. W. Bowett, United Nations Forces (London, 1964), esp. pp. 93–103.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hammarskjöld, quoted in Frye, UN Peace Force p. 15.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    U Thant, View from the UN (London, 1977) p. 223.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ibid., p. 227.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    James, Politics of Peacekeeping p. 205.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    There is substantial literature on the Congo intervention, but see especially R. Higgins, UN Peacekeeping, 1946–67, vol. III (London, 1980), and G. AbiSaad, The United Nations Operation in the Congo, 1960–64 (Oxford University Press, 1978).Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Security Council Resolution S/4741 (21 February 1961) quoted in full in Higgins, UN Peacekeeping p. 30.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ibid., pp. 243–63.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rubinstein and Ginsburgs, Soviet and American Policies in the UN p. 150.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hiscocks, The Security Council pp. 204–5.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Higgins, UN Peacekeeping pp. 396–8.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    For details of this controversy, see ibid., pp. 274–303, and J. G. Stoessinger, The United Nations and the Superpowers, 3rd edn (New York, 1973) pp. 103–25.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    M. P. Doxey, Economic Sanctions and International Enforcement, 2nd edn (London, 1980) p. 68.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ibid., pp. 73–9, 114–19.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Two books which discuss the UN’s functional work in its entirety are M. Elmandjra, The United Nations System, an Analysis (London, 1973), and M. Hill, The United Nations System: Co-ordinating its Economic and Social Work (Cambridge, 1978).Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Its role in the human rights area is discussed in Chapter 6.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    W. R. Sharp, The United Nations Economic and Social Council (New York, 1969) pp. 73–5.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Hill, The UN System pp. 66–71, 105–8.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    J. P. Sewell, UNESCO and World Politics (Princeton, 1975) pp. 85–103.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    R. Hoggart, An Idea and its Servants: UNESCO from Within (London, 1978) p. 26.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sewell, UNESCO pp. 251–4.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hoggart, An Idea and its Servants pp. 75–81.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ibid., p. 194.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
  75. 75.
    FRUS, vol. II (1949) pp. 15–22.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ibid., p. 17.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Ibid., p. 19.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Ibid., pp. 20–1.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    W. F. Buckley, cited in D. P. Moynihan, A Dangerous Place (London, 1979) p. 29.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    A. Yeselson and A. Gaglione, A Dangerous Place (New York, 1974).Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Ibid., p. 157.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    UN General Assembly, 30th Session, Resolution 3379, 10 November 1975.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Cf. D. A. Kay, The New Nations in the United Nations, 1960–1967 (New York, 1970) p. 187.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Churchill, The World Crisis.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    D. A. Kay, The Changing United Nations (New York, 1977) p. 3.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    FRUS vol. II (1950) p. 46.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    See, for example, Trygve Lie, In the Cause of Peace pp. 275–322; U Thant, View from the UN pp. 20–84.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    U Thant, View from the UN p. 27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© David Armstrong 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Armstrong

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations