32

These declarations brought a sharp protest from Dr Evatt (.Australia), who stated that in actual fact a refusal to take part in. the work of the Committee constituted a breach of the Charter. Sir Hartley Shawcross then inquired of Mr Vyshinsky whether he would accept a decision of the International Court of Justice regarding the legality of the establishment of the Interim Committee. Mr Vyshinsky, however, replied that Sir Hartley was attempting to place the International Court, one of the organs of the United Nations, above the organization itself, and further denied that therewas anything in the Charter which made it necessary for all Statesto participate in the work of a subsidiary organ. 4. Relations of Members of the United Nations with Spain The General Assembly, on 12 December, 1946, adopted a resolution condemning the Franco regime, barring it from international agencies and conferences under United Nations auspices, and asking members to recall their chief diplomatic representatives from Madrid. In addition, it was recommended that "if within a reasonable time there is not established a Government which derives its authority from the consent of the governed . . . the Security Council consider the adequate measures to be taken in order to remedy the situation." This resolution had followed earlier resolutions adopted by the United Nations Conference at San Francisco, the Three Great Powers at Potsdam, and by the General Assembly in London. In the period which had elapsed since the adoption of this resolution, all the members of the United Nations (with the exception of Argentina) which had. maintained Ministers or Ambassadors in Madrid withdrew them, but there was a sharp divergence of opinion as to what other effects, if any, had been produced by the resolution. Some speakers, notably Mr Lange (Poland), Mr Masaryk (Chechoslovakia), Mr Gromyko (Soviet Union), and Mr Bebler (Yugoslavia), considered that in the eleven months which had passed since the adoption of the resolution the situation in Spain had not changed. In fact, Franco's regime had strengthened its basis by various laws, such as the Law of Succession. The Spanish question was not a domestic matter but an international problem, and non-intervention was just a " pretext " to whitewash the Franco regime. Since noimprovement had taken place in the Spanish situation, it was time for the Security Council to act. This action, it was suggested, should take the form of economic sanctions against Spain.