THE AMERICAS: Time Bomb

With every appearance of innocence and reasonableness, the Soviet Ambassador to the U.N., Vasily V. Kuznetsov, last week proposed a simple step to the Security Council. The recent decision by the Organization of American States calling for diplomatic and economic sanctions against the Dominican Republic should be approved by the Security Council. Its jurisdiction, said Kuznetsov, is clear, under Article 53 of the U.N. Charter, which says, “No enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements without authorization of the Security Council.” On the surface, the action appeared only to range the U.N. on the side of the angels against Dominican Dictator Rafael Leonidas Trujillo. But it turned out to be a time bomb loaded with implications. The Soviet resolution, if passed, would:

¶ Set a foot-in-the-door precedent for future U.N. intervention in the OAS and such other regional bodies as NATO and SEATO.

¶ Subject enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine to U.N. supervision.

¶Give the Soviets a veto in case the OAS, as is likely, gets around to Dominican-pattern sanctions against Russia’s new friend Cuba.

In effect, the maneuver would give the Soviets a legal right to interfere in hemisphere affairs.

The possibility of invoking the never-before-used Article 53 had come up last month at the OAS meeting in San Jose, when the Dominicans, hard pressed, claimed that the OAS had no right to vote sanctions without U.N. approval. Lacking precedent, Secretary of State Herter worried that the Dominicans might be able to make a case before the Security Council. State Department legal experts now argue that voting sanctions was not “enforcement action,” since they involve no use of military strength and are only what individual nations can apply any time. The U.S. holds that the action falls under Article 54, which merely requires that the Council be kept “fully informed” of regional organization activities.

Quickly the U.S., Ecuador and Argentina whipped up a counter-resolution calling on, the U.N. simply to do no more than “take note” of the OAS sanctions.

The vote was 9 to o for the West’s resolution. Poland and Russia abstained “in the interests of international cooperation.” Yet what really constitutes “enforcement action” under Article 53 is still uncertain and potentially troublesome.