10

because it had no diplomatic relations with these States received adverse comment in the Committee. Resolutions were introduced by Egypt, the Philippine Republic, and Panama. The gist of these was the same —namely, that the Security Council, in considering applications for membership, should confine itself strictly to the conditions laid down by the Charter. The representative of New Zealand was amongst the speakers who supported the principle contained in these draft resolutions. He also drew attention to the fact that the Security Council's report afforded no evidence that the Security Council had attempted to formulate any general criteria applicable to all candidatures. He admitted that two of the three conditions of membership—namely, that the applicant should be " peace-loving" and that it should be " willing" to carry out its obligations —involved judgments of a highly subjective character, but argued that the third condition —that it should be " able " to carry out its obligations—might admit of some general formulation, and cited the questions submitted to applicants on the occasion of the First Assembly of the League of Nations. The introduction of an objective element of this kind might, he thought, help to relieve the present deadlock. A sub-committee was appointed to collate the various draft resolutions. In the sub-committee an amendment by the Ukraine representative,, to add a reference to the conduct of an applicant in World War II as a circumstance to be taken specially into account, was defeated. The text as finally adopted in the First Committee reads : "The General Assembly Recommends that the Security Council re-examine, in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter, applications for membership in the United Nations of the abovementioned States strictly on their respective merits as measured by the yardstick of the Charter." (iii) The Australian delegation tabled a resolution by which the Assembly requested the Security Council to appoint a Committee to confer with a Committee on Procedure of the General Assembly with a view to preparing rules governing the admission of new members which would be acceptable both to the General Assembly and to the Security Council. In a second paragraph of the draft resolution a number of principles were enunciated to which it was proposed that regard should be paid in the preparation of such rules. The draft resolution was attacked by the delegate of Yugoslavia on the grounds that it was an attempt to revise the Charter and to destroy the unanimity of the Great Powers. The New Zealand representative supported the practical purpose of the resolution —namely, the preparation of new rules as the result of joint consideration by organs of the General Assembly and the Security Council. While rejecting as wholly unfounded the accusation of the Yugoslav delegate that the Australian delegate was seeking to undermine the Charter, he could not, however, with the statement of principles, and