1. Talks of the United Kingdom and Dominion representatives have
continued. What has been done is gradually to elucidate issues
arising from suggestions made by the various Governments from time
to time or by their delegates in London. To show how complex and
difficult these issues are, I am sending to you in my immediately
following telegram [1] a complete list of the questions which will
probably be posed when the meetings are re-assumed to-morrow. No
less than sixty questions are involved. None of them is
unimportant and some are of great importance.

2. Our own directive has been the general principles laid down by
Australian and New Zealand delegates at the two conferences with
New Zealand and in each case adopted by the Full Cabinet. The
Wellington resolutions on world organisation were approved by
Cabinet on 10th November. [2]

3. You will appreciate that, although these numerous questions may
be arrayed separately, many of them are closely inter-related. For
instance, in the Dumbarton Oaks proposals it will be possible for
any one of the five great Powers not only to forbid the
application of sanctions in cases to which it is itself a party
but to forbid the application of any sanctions or even the
employment of conciliatory measures designed to settle disputes to
which it is not itself a party.

4. Fraser is becoming more and more anxious about the reactions in
New Zealand to this absolute power of veto which means, in his
view, that the world organisation will intervene as such only in
cases where the aggression or threat to peace proceeds from small
states. In cases where any of the great Powers are affected, they
will, of course, veto proposals for sanctions to be applied
against themselves.

5. While Fraser is emphasising this aspect we have to recognise
that unless we get started with the world organisation now,
enthusiasm and interest in the plan will rapidly vanish in the
United States and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

6. Accordingly, it would seem desirable not to press for the
complete removal of the veto power, but-
(a) To consider means of limiting its exercise except in cases of
emergency.

(b) To permit arrangements for security, regional or otherwise, by
which the majority of the great Powers might take enforcement
action against aggression even although one or more of the great
Powers had exercised its veto to prevent such action being taken
through the Security Council; and,
(c) To provide for a more flexible method of amending the Charter
of the organisation which, at present, can be amended only with
the consent of each of the five great Powers, none of which would
agree to an amendment depriving it possibly of special privileges.

7. Any one of the three courses mentioned would require some
amendment of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals. It may not be possible
to secure them all, but I think that amendments will be possible
in some of the directions mentioned. These points are in
substantial agreement with the principles of the Australian and
New Zealand resolutions at Wellington. Further progress will be
reported. [3]

8. You will be very glad to know that at a Cabinet meeting on
Friday, I was able to obtain a firm undertaking from the United
Kingdom Government through Churchill and Eden that they will do
their utmost to support the Australian and New Zealand claim to
participate as principals in the armistice arrangements with
Japan. Churchill said that he wholly agreed with our case and
assured us that he would support our claims with all the influence
he could and the President would not tolerate our exclusion. It
will be recalled that at the Wellington conference it was
acknowledged by all delegates that the matter was so important
that I should be asked to visit the United Kingdom on behalf of
Australia and New Zealand to obtain this assurance. Unfortunately,
no similar assurance could be obtained in the case of the European
armistices when the three great Powers declared themselves as
acting 'on behalf of' other United Nations, in some cases without
prior reference to them.

9. At the Downing Street meeting the question of participation in
the peace conferences was also raised. Mr. Churchill said that the
nations participating in the war would be represented. I asked
whether that meant that only the nations really participating in
hostilities would participate in the conference and that United
Nations who were only nominally at war would not participate. Mr.

Churchill said that was so. In reply to a further question by me
he said that the Dominions would participate in the peace
conference as principals.