Minneapolis spokesman., 1962-02-16

anything at all, they would require
the cooperation of all the inde-
pendent African states.
Little had been done to achieve
this. In fact the Casablanca Con-
ference was to a large extent a
counterblast to the Brazzaville
Conference and the two groups of
states were in opposition to one
another. Also the English-speal1ing
African states, except for Ghana,
were not aligned in either group,
although all independent African
states accepted the ideals aimed at,
at least in theory.
1t was to bridge this gap that
the MonroNa Conference of May,
1861 was called. It was certainly
the biggest and most comprehen-
sive Conference of African inde-
pendent states up to date. 1t was
attended by Cameroun, Togo, Sene-
gal, Congo (Brazzaville), Daho-
mey, Niger, Upper Volta, Ivory
Coast, Tchad, Central African Re-
public, Gabon, Mauritania, NAL
agasy, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Sierra
Leone, Liberia, Sudan, Lydia and
Tunisia.
1t was sponsored by six states,
representing all the existing shades
Of political groupings; two Brazza-
vile States Qvory Coast and Cam
eroun), two Casablanca States
Guinea and Mali) and two un-
committed States Liberia and Nj
geria).
All six states at first agreed to
co-sponsor the conference, but at
a meeting in Accra, a few days be-
fore the opening Of the Conference,
the two Casablanca States were
persuaded to back out.
The Monrovia Conference, like
the Casablanca Conference, also
set up its Committee of experts,
who met at Dakar and produced
what are known as the Dakar Rec
concentrations. They were similar
to the Conakry Recommendations,
but they covered a much wider
field.
The general field covered by the
Monrovia Conference was much
the same as that covered by the
Casablanca Conference except for
one Solemn Affirmation adopted at
Monrovia that the following prin-
ciples shall govern relationship be-
tween Afric an and Malagasy
States:
"O Absolute equality of Afri-
can and Malagasy States, what
ever the size of their territory,
density of their populations or
value of their possessions; (2)
non-interference in the internal afs
fairs of States; (3) respect for the
sovereignty of each State and its
inalienable right to existence and
development of its personality; az
unqualified condemnation of out
side subversive action by neigh
bouring States"
There is no such Solmen Affirm
alton in the. resolutions and rec
concentrations of the Casablanca
Conference.
On the other hand, the Casa
blanca Group can point out that
they had all made similar resolu-
tons in respect to all states in the
world, by virtue of their member
ship of the United in the United
Nations Organization. They can
say 1t never occurred to them when
they had already promised not to
be wolves to any state in the world,
that anybody would require them
to make a specific promise in rela-
ton to their fellow African States.
The MonroHa States are not so
sure, though they would feel 1t
highly undiplomatic to say so open
ly. Morocco's avowed intent to
swallow up Mauritania on the
grounds that it is historically part
of Morocco does not add to their
confidence and, to be frank, not a
few West Africans suspect Presi-
dent Nkrumah of expansionist ten
denotes and his attitude to the
Togo Government ever since Togo
became independent tends to con-
firm these tendencies. There Is
oJoA q onJa-o,y opoor- NIinrorjoN.