Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T15:17:06.594Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A permanent UN force: British thinking after Suez*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Edward Johnson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Introduction

Prior to the Suez crisis of 1956, the United Nations found itself restricted in its military response to threats to international peace and security. The authors of the UN Charter had originally called for member states to make armed forces available to the UN Security Council under a set of special agreements to be concluded in the post-war period. These would furnish the UN with the military means to take collective action against aggression which was to be the essential precondition of the success of the UN. The body responsible for the conclusion of these special agreements under Article 43 of the UN charter was the Military Staff Committee (MSC), which comprised the Chiefs of Staff of the five permanent members of the Security Council. However, the divisions of the developing Cold War permeated the MSC from 1946 and it became clear that there were major differences amongst the permanent members on the military role that the UN should play in the post-war international system. As a result, the Article 43 special agreements were stillborn and the UN was left without a formal system to provide it with its own armed forces.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 1991 , pp. 251 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This article is based on papers given at the University of Keele in November 1988 and the University of Lancaster in March 1990. I would like to thank Professor Alan James and David Travers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

References

1 Urquhart, B., A Life in Peace and War (London, 1987), p. 120Google Scholar.

2 See HC, 5th series, Vol. 558, col. 1649, 1 November 1956, and also, Eden, Anthony, Full Circle: The Memoirs of Sir Anthony Eden (London, 1960), pp. 535–7Google Scholar.

3 EC(56) 40th mtg., 4 November 1956, CAB 134/1216. References to Cabinet an d Foreign Office papers are to documents in the Public Record Office, Kew.

4 Fry, M. G., ‘Canada, the North Atlantic Triangle, and the United Nations’ in Louis, W. M.Roger and Owen, Roger (eds.), Suez 1956, The Crisis and its Consequences (Oxford, 1989), p. 310Google Scholar.

5 CM(56) 79th mtg., 4 November 1956, CAB 128/30. See also mtg. Reading to Selwyn Lloyd relaying views of the Cabinet meeting of 13 November 1956, FO 371/118874/JE1074/35.

6 HC, 5th series, vol. 562, cols. 1415–1426, 19 December 1956.

7 Minute by Murray, 29 November 1956, FO 371/123755/UN 2286/27.

8 HC, 5th series, vol. 550, col. 801, 19 March 1956.

9 FO 371/123755/UN2286/27, 29 November 1956.

10 Memorandum by Murray, ‘A Permanent Force for the United Nations’, 20 December 1956, FO 371/123755/UN2286/27.

11 See the annexe to Murray's memo (note 10), 14 December 1956.

12 See Selwyn Lloyd's comments to the delegation from the Federal Union Commission in FO 371/129917/UN2286/37.

13 The failure of the UN Military Staff Committee discussions on Article 43 is discussed generally in Goodrich, L. M. and Simons, A. P., The United Nations and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security (Washington DC, 1955)Google Scholar, while the British position is specifically dealt with in, Johnson, E. J., ‘British Proposals for a United Nations Force 1946–48’ in Deighton, A. (ed.), Britain and the First Cold War (London, 1990)Google Scholar.

14 See the annexe to Murray's memo, 14 December 1956, FO 371/123755/UN2286/27.

15 Ibid.

16 See the conclusions of the Cabinet Steering Committee on International Organisations in IOC(58)142, 30 October 1958, CAB 134/2071.

17 Memorandum by Murray, ‘A Permanent Force for the United Nations’, 20 December 1956, FO 371/123755/UN2286/27.

18 Ibid.

19 Ibid, see the minutes by Selwyn Lloyd, Kirkpatrick and Dean.

20 A. H. Poynton to Dean, 6 February 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/4.

21 Ibid.

22 H. J. B. Lintott to Dean, 26 February 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/7.

23 Sir Alexander Johnston to Dean, 28 February 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/8.

24 Sir Richard Powell to Dean, 24 April 1957, FO 371/129916/UN2286/21.

25 FO 371/129915/UN2286/13.

26 Ibid.

27 Minute by Murray, 12 March 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/9.

28 See for 27.

29 ‘The United Nations: A Stocktaking’, 7 February 1957, FO 371/129903/UN2251/27.

30 FO 371/129913/UN22515/7.

31 See Selwyn Lloyd to Eden, 18 November 1956, FO 371/118873/JE1074/11; Selwyn Lloyd to the Foreign Office, 20 November 1956, FO 371/118875/JE1074/46; Dixon to Selwyn Lloyd, 3 January 1957, FO 371/125505/JE1421/5.

32 Dixon to Selwyn Lloyd, 3 January 1957, FO 371/125505/JE1421/5.

33 FO 371/129913/UN22515/7.

34 FO 371/129913/UN22515/8.

35 Minute by Murray, 12 March 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/9.

36 Minute by Pink, 13 March 1957, FO 371/129915/UN2286/9.

37 Minute by Murray, 17 May 1957, FO 371/129916/UN2286/28.

38 Ibid.; see also the minute by Pink 17 May 1957.

39 Minute by Murray, 17 May 1957, FO 371/129916/UN2286/28, and see the minute by Pink, 17 June 1957.

40 The Times, 4 October 1957, and 28 November 1957.

41 See The Times, 16 May 1958, and Harris, K., Attlee (London, 1982), p. 551Google Scholar.

42 A copy of the Report of the Federal Union Commission can be found in FO 371/129916/UN2286/20.

43 Minute by Murray 30 April 1957, FO 371/129916/UN2286/20.

44 FO 371/129917/UN2286/29.

45 FO 371/129917, UN2286/37, 2 July 1957.

46 INTEL 112, 1 July 1957, FO 371/129918/UN2286/50.

47 Wiggin British Embassy Washington, to Scrivener at the FO, 10 July 1957, FO 371/129918/UN2286/42.

48 Crosthwaite to Pink, 8 August 1957, FO 371/129918/UN2286/48.

49 Minute by Haydon, 21 August 1957, FO 371/129918/UN2286/48.

50 Minute by Scrivener, 22 August 1957, FO 371/129918/UN2286/48.

51 Minute by Scrivener, 28 February 1958, and Dixon to FO, 1 July 1958, FO 371/136976/UN2286/4.

52 The position of the Foreign Office was set out in a minute by Murray of 17 October 1958, FO 371 136977/UN2286/29. The Foreign Office was able t o accept Hammarskjold's study, but was unhappy with the US Government's action in seeking Britain's public support for it. The Foreign Office consulted with other government departments as before and the result was a Steering Committee paper, IOC (58) 142, 30 October 1958, CAB 134/2071. This was approved at IOC (58) 10th mtg., 5 November 1958, CAB 134/2066.

53 IOC(58)142, 30 October 1958, CAB 134/2071.

54 IOC(58)142, 30 October 1958, CAB 134/2071.

55 Russell, R. B., The United Nations and United States Security Policy (Washington, 1968), p. 213Google Scholar.

56 Urquhart, , A Life in Peace and War, p. 137Google Scholar.

57 See the record of the meeting between a delegation of the Parliamentary Group for World Government and Selwyn Lloyd, 11 December 1958, FO 371/136977/UN2286/44.

58 See the report of the National Executive Committee in, Report of the 60th Annual Conference of the Labour Party, 1961, pp. 7–8.

59 HC 5th series, vol. 707, col. 235, 23 February 1965.