§ 2.36 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOODMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask His Majesty's Government what power exists under the Charter of the United Nations to enable that body to recognise a Government as the Government of any country which is one of the United Nations and to with-draw its recognition when it ceases to be the effective Government of that country; and how many of the United Nations have for themselves recognised the Pekin Government as the Government of China.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (LORD HENDERSON)My Lords, the United Nations does not confer upon, nor withdraw from, Governments of Member States recognition as such, and no specific provision for such action is made in the Charter. Those United Nations bodies which are competent to do so must, however, decide upon the credentials of delegates claiming to represent Member States and, where more than one delegation claims to represent 302 the same State, must settle this procedural question by vote. In casting their votes on this issue, representatives of Member States will, of course, be influenced by the fact that their Governments have recognised one or other of the Governments claiming to represent the State concerned. Seventeen members of the United Nations have recognised the Central People's Government as the Government of China.
THE EARL OF PERTHMy Lords, arising out of the noble Lord's reply, will His Majesty's Government consider whether it would be possible to obtain, as a matter of urgency, the opinion of the International Court on the question of Chinese representation on the Security Council? Is the Minister aware that some of us believe that the Government which has its seat in Pekin is legally a member of the Security Council? Does he not, therefore, feel it desirable that the point should be clarified and, as it is rather a question of law and not of politics, does he not think that an advisory opinion of the Court would be of great value?
§ LORD HENDERSONWith regard to the supplementary questions, as my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary made clear in another place on March 21, we consider that it is international law which defines the conditions under which a Government should be recognised. We believe that broadly the same principles govern the question of the representation of a Member State in the United Nations. It may well be, as the noble Earl has suggested, that an opinion of the International Court would be helpful in laying down the principles upon which such questions should be settled. Many Governments of Member States of the United Nations do not, however, agree with our views on recognition and on representation, and are of the opinion that the question is primarily a political one. As the noble Earl knows, it is necessary, in order to obtain an advisory opinion from the Court, for a resolution requesting it to be adopted by the Security Council or the General Assembly. In present circumstances, it is hardly likely that such a resolution would command a majority in either of those bodies.
§ VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOODWould it be right to assume that it would be well within the competence of the General Assembly of the United Nations, if they so chose, to give an opinion on this point?
§ LORD HENDERSONThe position is as I have already stated in my first answer—that it is for the Credentials Committee and all the competent bodies to take a decision. The General Assembly is one of the competent bodies.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEWould the Government agree that the exclusion of the Chinese Government from the Security Council is prolonging the war in Korea?