Security 94.

1. The Spanish Committee completed its report late last night
reaching complete unanimity except on two points. Brazil reserved
its position on the principle involved in one of the
recommendations and Poland entered a reservation regarding a point
of legal argument.

2. The Committee's report, after recording the previous United
Nations decisions establishing that the Spanish Question is a
matter of international concern [1] and the Committee's own
agreement that the facts established before the Committee go far
beyond the questions of domestic jurisdiction, objectively
[examines] [2] the relevant facts, it establishes that in
organization, nature, structure and general conduct the Franco
Regime is fascist and was established largely as a result of aid
from Hitler and Mussolini, that Franco gave wartime aid to our
enemies arid entered into the conspiracy against the United
Nations. Extensive evidence regarding persecution of political
opponents and police supervision is recorded as characteristic of
fascist regimes and as being inconsistent with the principles of
the United Nations concerning respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms. Examination of evidence regarding military
questions leads to the conclusion from the facts that although it
cannot be found that Spain is at the present time preparing for an
act of Aggression or threatening the peace, it is a potential
danger to peace. Particular attention is also given to the
international action regarding Franco Spain expressed in various
United Nations resolutions and declarations, particularly the
declaration by France, the United Kingdom and the United States of
4th March last [3], and the breaking off of Diplomatic relations.

These facts are taken to establish the existence of international
friction.

3. The report then examines the jurisdiction of the Security
Council and its power to take action under Chapter VII of the
Charter as requested by the original Polish resolution. [4] The
report points out that a positive and affirmative finding under
Article 39 must be taken before any of the series of enforcement
measures set out in Article 41 and 42 can be directed by the
Security Council and the opinion is expressed that on the present
evidence the Security Council cannot make the determination
required by Article 39. Attention is then directed to Chapter VI
and particularly Articles 34 and 36 and the Committee expresses
its conviction that the situation in Spain has led to
international friction and that its continuation is likely to
endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. The
Committee also points out the power of the General Assembly to
deal with such situations under Article 14 and under Article 10
read in conjunction with Article 1(2). At this stage of the
argument close attention is directed to the explicit Terms of
Three Power Declaration of the 4th March, both as evidence of the
potential danger to peace and of existing friction and as pointing
the way towards possible action.

4. The following conclusions are reached.

'(A) Although the activities of the Franco Regime do not at
present constitute an existing threat to peace within the meaning
of Article 39 of the Charter and therefore the Security Council
has no jurisdiction to direct or to authorize enforcement measures
under Articles 41 or 42 nevertheless such activities do constitute
a situation which is a potential menace to international peace and
security and which therefore is a situation likely to endanger the
maintenance of international peace and security within the meaning
of Article 34 of the Charter.

(B) The Security Council is therefore empowered by Article 36(1)
to recommend appropriate procedures on methods of adjustment in
order to improve the situation mentioned in (A) above.'

5. The Committee finally makes the following recommendations:

'After considering what would be effective and appropriate
measures to meet the situation and having regard to the important
powers of the General Assembly under Article 10 the Committee
recommends-
(A) The endorsement by the Security Council of the principles
contained in the declaration by the United Kingdom, United States
and France, dated 4th March 1946.

(B) The transmitting by the Security Council to the General
Assembly of the evidence and reports of this Committee, together
with the recommendation that unless the Franco Regime is withdrawn
and the other conditions of political freedom set out in the
declaration are in the opinion of the General Assembly fully
satisfied the resolution be passed by the General Assembly
recommending that Diplomatic Relations with the Franco Regime be
terminated forthwith by each Member of the United Nations.

(C) The taking of appropriate steps by the Secretary-General to
communicate these recommendations to all members of the United
Nations and all others concerned.

In the event of the General Assembly being satisfied that all the
conditions set out in the Declaration have been complied with,
including the withdrawal of the Franco Regime, Political Amnesty,
the return of exiled Spaniards, freedom of Political Assembly and
Association and Free Public Elections the sub-Committee suggests
that it would be appropriate for the organization to consider
favourably an application by a freely elected Spanish Government
for membership in the United Nations.'
6. The features to be noted about the report are its objectivity
which is in keeping with the judicial manner in which the
Committee has proceeded throughout its work. At the same time its
recommendations are politically practical and the reference of the
situation to the General Assembly, besides being a sound
application of the intention of the Charter and in keeping with
the previous continuous interest in Spain by the United Nations
during the past twelve months, is in fact likely to produce
results more certainly than any attempt by the Security Council to
pass recommendations. The responsibility of dealing with what is
regarded to be a situation which is a potential danger to the
peace and which also militates against the smooth and efficient
working of the United Nations itself is thus thrown upon the whole
body of members. These charges against Franco which could not be
substantiated by convincing evidence have been found not proven
and the Committee has also rejected the original Polish
proposition that there is an existing threat to the peace. This
decision is in keeping with the general United Kingdom views. At
the same time evidence of friction and a potential danger to the
peace is conclusive and does appear to require firm action by the
Security Council both to remove the potential danger and the
existing friction and to maintain the interest and discharge the
responsibilities of the United Nations. We believe that this
report, if adopted by the Security Council, will do much to re-
establish the standing of that body which has been deleteriously
affected by its recent failures to face up to the issues before
it.

7. The reservation by Brazil concerns the principle involved in
recommendation (B), their Government being at present doubtful
whether or not this involves interference in domestic
jurisdiction. [5] The rest of the Committee are completely
satisfied on this point. The Polish reservation concerns the legal
argument regarding whether or not the 'Threat to peace' mentioned
in Article 39 was an imminent threat to peace or a long-term
threat to peace and whether in consequence of a determination on
that question the ability of the Security Council to take action
is limited.

8. The course adopted in the report is a middle one steering
between drastic sanctions which would be favoured by Soviet and
Poland and complete inaction which would be destructive of the
hopes of the Labour Movement throughout the World.

9. The Security Council will not deal with the report for some
little time but it is quite probable that substantial majority
will approve of it particularly as the Assembly will be the
ultimate determining authority. 10. The Minister especially asks
that the Prime Minister be given a copy of this cable forthwith
and that a copy also be transmitted immediately to Mr. Fraser
through the office of the New Zealand High Commissioner, Canberra.