CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAREN BOWYER JUST WAR DOCTRINE

The operation and extent of the veto was, inevitably, a major cause of division at the
1945 San Francisco Conference that paved the way for the signing of the UN Charter;
not only between the Major Powers (by then extended to include France) and the rest,
but also between the big five themselves. Urged by President Truman to bring the
Conference to a speedy conclusion, his Secretary of State, Edward R Stettinius Jr,
argued that ‘it would be unwise to press too strenuously because of resentment which
might be created with the other countries which might jeopardize the final outcome of
our great undertaking.’ 28 Among the issues still dividing the five powers was
specifying ‘the parts of the charter on which the voting will not require unanimity on the
part of the five great powers.’ 29 A critical issue was the degree to which the veto might
be used to prevent not only Security Council action on an issue but even its discussion
of an issue. Stettinius sent a further memo to the President the following day:
We have reached a very serious crisis in the Conference in San Francisco.
Gromyko told the meeting of Heads of five principal delegations last night that
the Soviet Government would not agree to permit even QUOTE consideration
and discussion UNQUOTE of any dispute or threatening situation brought
before the proposed security council unless formal decision by seven members
of the council including the unanimous vote of the five permanent members was
taken. … … We have maintained however that … (n)o individual member of
the council should be in a position to stop the consideration and discussion of a
dispute brought before the council. 30
Stettinius was able to announce the Soviet Union’s eventual agreement to the position
of the other four Major Powers on 8 June 31 and the conference was able to conclude its
work.
Whilst this is evidence that the Powers other than Russia were keen to see some
tempering of their veto power, the importance that all five attached to it, and that they
had had to argue that position strenuously with the other nations is clear from the
transcripts of their representatives’ closing statements. The Chinese said that
Starting from the premise that everyone desired to make the Security Council a
strong and effective organ, there was no choice but to support the rule of
unanimity as essential for its strength and effectiveness. The alternative was a
voting system which, though it might be more perfect, could in any given
moment, weaken the Council in its efforts to act promptly and effectively. 32
74