tralian representative, takes a different view of the matter.
He explained why he had supported the British and Amer-
ican delegations in upsetting the decision of the Council of
the four Ministers that recommendations should be adopted
by a two-thirds majority. Speaking in the Procedure Commit-
tee, he said:
"Let us as'sume there is a draft amendment proposed by
one country. The Soviet Union disagrees with this amend-
ttient. It will be quite impossible to get a two-thirds majority
for that draft amendment. That is quite clear."
Dr. Evatt did not disclose the ba'sis of his calculations. He
only hinted at it, refusing to show his cards. For him the
most important thing is to ensure the most convenient way
of carrying through at the Conference recommendations to
which the Soviet Union does not agree. He does not hope
that two-thirds of the votes can be obtained in favour of
recommendations directed against the interests of the Soviet
Union. This is why he is so active at the Conference in his
efforts to have it adopt recommendations by a simple maŤ-
jority.
Certain public circles understood Dr. Evatt perfectly well.
On the day following the decision of the Procedure Commit-
tee certain Paris newspapers supported Dr. Evatt with great
gusto. Yesterday the newspaper Citi Soir said: "The West-
ern Powers gained the upper hand over the U.S.S.R." The
newspaper Etoile du Soir and some others write in a similar
vein.
That is the way the decision of. the Procedure Committee
on the voting question is understood, and the Conference
delegates cannot ignore this.
Yet, the Soviet delegation does not believe that the pur-
pose of the Peace Conference is that a particular Power or a
particular bloc of Powers might gain the upper hand over the
U,S,S.R. or any other state. More, at the Peace Conference
105