We learn in the first paragraph that members of delegations from various small countries and representatives of several nongovernmental organizations believed that the language of Article 1 of the UN Charter was not strong enough.
The remainder of the passage is focused on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Answer choice (A) is incorrect for a couple of reasons:
(1) The passage does not state that the language in Article 1 is ambiguous; rather, the general concern held by various representatives was that the language was not strong enough.
(2) The claim that the language of Article 1 is such that it renders the article "almost wholly ineffectual" is very strong. We do not learn anything about the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the Article as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted as an alternative to improving Article 1 of the Charter.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any further questions.
