CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR
INTERNATIONAL PEACE

Offices

700 Jackson Place, Washington 6, D. C.
405 West 117th Street, New York 27, N. Y.

TRUSTEES

ARTHUR A. BALLANTINE
New York

DAVID P. BARROWS
California

WILLIAM MARSHALL BULLITT
Kentucky

NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER
New York

DANIEL K. CATLIN
Missouri

WILLIAM WALLACE CHAPIN
California

BEN M. CHERRINGTON
Colorado

JOHN W. DAVIS
New York

FREDERIC A. DELANO
District of Columbia

JOHN FOSTER DULLES
New York

GEORGE A. FINCH
Maryland

DOUGLAS S. FREEMAN
Virginia

FRANCIS P. GAINES
Virginia

EARL GRANT HARRISON
Pennsylvania

ALGER HISS
District of Columbia

PHILIP C. JESSUP
Connecticut

PETER MOLYNEAUX
Texas

PHILIP DUNHAM REED
New York

DAVID ROCKEFELLER
New York

EDWARD LARNED RYERSON
Illinois

WILLIAM JAY SCHIEFFELIN JR.
New York

JAMES T. SHOTWELL
New York

HARPER SIBLEY
New York

ELIOT WADSWORTH
District of Columbia

THOMAS JOHN WATSON
New York

WILLIAM WESLEY WAYMACK
Iowa

HENRY M. WRISTON
Rhode Island

PREFACE

The second regular session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which opens this month at Flushing Meadows, comes at a time when political and economic problems of great significance beset every area of the globe. The importance and the geographical extent of the issues at stake can hardly be overestimated. Seldom before has there been greater need for such an assemblage of the nations of the world to increase mutual understanding and to harmonize national efforts toward the solution of common problems. The deliberations of the General Assembly will be a matter of deepest concern to the peoples of all nations. In this issue of *International Conciliation* the major questions coming before the Assembly have been analyzed by the Endowment's own staff, most particularly by Miss Anne Winslow. The issue also reproduces the Secretary-General's introduction to his report to the General Assembly on the activities of the organization during the past year. This introduction is, in summary, a report to the nations of the accomplishments, and of the issues to be faced in the months ahead.

NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER

*President Emeritus*

New York, September 1, 1947.

478

THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
ITS EXPANDING ROLE AND THE ISSUES
BEFORE THE SECOND SESSION

As the United Nations concludes its second year of operations, there is manifest the steadily growing importance of the General Assembly, which convenes for the third time in regular session on September 16, 1947, at 11 a.m. in the General Assembly Hall in Flushing Meadows, New York. Deliberations of the fifty-five nations are expected to continue through October, on matters affecting the lives of the billion and a half individuals whom they represent. Under their review come the activities of the whole complex of United Nations' organs and of related specialized agencies. These involve questions of collective security, including the work of the Atomic Energy Commission, as exemplified in the Report of the Security Council; problems of non-self-governing peoples such as are involved in the relationship of the Union of South Africa to Southwest Africa, as well as the broader question of a moral responsibility toward less advanced peoples; the development of international machinery for economic cooperation such as the International Trade Organization and the Economic Commissions for Europe and for Asia and the Far East. Over and above these are such special problems as the future of Palestine for which the Assembly has assumed a direct and primary responsibility. There is also the Greek question which was added to the supplementary list at the request of the United States after the Security Council had failed to take any action. In addition, new items may be introduced at any time during the course of the Assembly session by a simple majority vote.

Within the Charter of the United Nations the scope of the Assembly is very wide. It controls the budget and the election of all nonpermanent members to its three councils, Security, Economic and Social, and Trusteeship. All organs of the United Nations and all specialized agencies brought into relationship with

479

480

the Economic and Social Council must report to it either directly or through a parent body. The Assembly "may discuss any questions or any matters within the scope of the present Charter." It "may consider the general principles of cooperation in the maintenance of international peace and security, including the principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments" and "may discuss any questions relating to the maintenance of international peace and security" and "may make recommendations with regard to any such questions to the state or states concerned or to the Security Council or both," and "may recommend measures for the peaceful adjustment of any situation, regardless of origin, which it deems likely to impair the general welfare or friendly relations among nations." It may not, however, make such recommendations "while the Security Council is exercising in respect of any dispute or situation the functions assigned to it in the present Charter" unless the Council so requests. But this does not, in any way, curtail the right of the Assembly to discuss and engage in full debate on such matters.

It shall also "initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of: promoting international cooperation in the political field and encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification" and "promoting international cooperation in the economic, social, cultural, educational, and health fields, and assisting in the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion." Finally the Assembly "may establish such subsidiary organs as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions."

During the first organizational year while the United Nations was testing out the scope and the capacity of and the demands upon its various bodies, the Assembly was naturally reluctant to assume the full powers granted to it. The importance of unanimity among the five great powers exercised something of a restraining influence upon the "Town Meeting of the World." Furthermore, the fact that the Security Council has the power to enforce peace while the Assembly is limited to studies and recommendations tended to highlight the importance of the Council. However, at the second part of the first session of the Assembly last fall there was increas-

481

ing evidence of a tendency to utilize the Assembly as an arbiter of situations which might affect peace and security. The Security Council took the Spanish situation off its agenda so that the Assembly might not only discuss but also make recommendations concerning this matter. India brought the question of the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa not to the Council but to the Assembly.

The issue we have brought before you is by no means a narrow or local one, nor can we accept any contention that a gross and continuing outrage of this kind against the fundamental principles of the Charter can be claimed by anyone, and least of all by a Member State, to be a matter of no concern to this Assembly of the world's peoples.

On April 2 of this year the British Government requested that the question of Palestine be placed on the agenda of the next regular session of the Assembly and that a Special Assembly be called as soon as possible to arrange for a preliminary investigation.

This increasing reliance upon the Assembly by individual member governments was paralleled by the assumption on the part of the General Assembly itself at its last session, of the role of supreme supervisory body of the United Nations. It studied the accomplishments of the Security Council with a critical eye and expressed its dissatisfaction on several points as well as a desire for swifter and more comprehensive action. It requested the Council to reexamine "on their respective merits as measured by the yardstick of the Charter, in accordance with Article 4" (the Article governing the admission of new Members) the applications for membership in the United Nations of the five nations which had been rejected, and asked the Council "to appoint a committee to confer with a committee on procedure of the General Assembly with a view to preparing rules governing the admission of new Members which will be acceptable both to the General Assembly and to the Security Council." It also earnestly requested "the permanent members of the Security Council to make every effort, in consultation with one another and with fellow members of the Security Council, to ensure that the use of the special voting privilege of its permanent members does not impede the Security Council in reaching decisions promptly."

482

On the initiative of the Soviet Union, the Assembly also launched a full-scale discussion on the subject of the control and limitation of armaments and armed forces which resulted in two recommendations couched in somewhat peremptory terms. The first resolution asked the Council to "give prompt consideration to formulating the practical measures, according to their priority, which are essential to provide for the general regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces." The resolution further stated that: "The plans formulated by the Security Council shall be submitted by the Secretary-General to the Members of the United Nations for consideration at a special session of the General Assembly. The treaties or conventions approved by the General Assembly shall be submitted to the signatory States for ratification in accordance with Article 26 of the Charter." The Assembly further urged the Council to "expedite consideration of the reports which the Atomic Energy Commission will make to the Security Council" and also to "expedite consideration of a draft convention or conventions for the creation of an international system of control and inspection, these conventions to include the prohibition of atomic and all other major weapons adaptable now and in the future to mass destruction and the control of atomic energy to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes." In its second resolution concerning information on armed forces to be supplied by Members of the United Nations the Assembly "calls upon the Security Council to determine, as soon as possible, the information which the States Members of the United Nations should be called upon to furnish, in order to give effect to this resolution."

In compliance with the requests of the Assembly the Council has established a Commission for Conventional Armaments, and has reexamined the rejected membership applications—without, however, taking any favorable action. Of the new applications for membership, the Council has recommended the admission of Pakistan and Yemen. An effort has been made to expedite the work of the Atomic Energy Commission which, at least in elaborating suitable machinery for a system of control, has made considerable progress. This aspect of the work has, to a large extent, been over-

483

shadowed by the political questions where common agreement on principles has yet to be made. However, inspection as a component part of the control system has now been accepted by all members of the Commission including the Soviet Union which, initially, opposed it even in principle. In view of the complexities inherent in any control system, the political approach, if it is to be fruitful, must, of necessity, be based upon concrete and specific proposals. There are no precedents to serve as guidance in this field and the problem is further complicated by the necessity of providing for adequate utilization of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. The objective of achieving international security would be much simpler if atomic energy, like the $V_2$, had no industrial uses.

The Assembly recommendation to the Council concerning the preparation of rules governing the admission of new members resulted in a series of conferences between the General Assembly and Security Council committees to draft a set of rules acceptable to both bodies. Under the Charter, membership is "effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council." The only criteria are stipulations that prospective members must be "peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations." The absence of any specific standards of eligibility makes possible the widest latitude of interpretation. The Soviet Union, for example, rejected a number of candidates on the ground that she had no diplomatic relations with those countries. The necessity for a much more precise definition of what does or does not constitute eligibility has been heightened by the division between the great powers, which has resulted in the blackballing, by one side or the other, of the majority of candidates. The Assembly resolution represented an effort to give the Assembly a voice in the establishment of governing principles as a more precise guide to the Council in its deliberations.

With regard to the other recommendations of the Assembly, little action has been taken. This is a reflection not so much of a disregard of Assembly wishes as of the inability of the Council to

484

carry out the recommendations. Until the spearhead problem of atomic energy is solved, little progress can be expected in other fields of armaments. The Assembly resolution concerning information on the armed forces of Member States has not even been discussed. As far as any modification in the use of the veto power is concerned, the Council itself is powerless to act. Moderation can only be achieved through the individual acts of each individual member. However, as at the last session of the Assembly, this question is again being raised. Argentina has asked for the "Convocation of a General Conference under Article 109 of the Charter to abolish the privilege of the veto." According to the Charter such a conference "for the purpose of reviewing the present Charter may be held at a date and place to be fixed by a two-thirds vote of the members of the General Assembly and by a vote of any seven members of the Security Council." Any alterations in the Charter which the Conference might recommend would take effect only if "ratified in accordance with their respective constitutional processes by two thirds of the Members of the United Nations including all the permanent members of the Security Council." While little concrete action is, therefore, expected in connection with this particular proposal, the cumulative effect of the protests of the smaller nations in the Assembly has already had a sobering effect upon the Council, and may result in further measures to modify the detrimental effects of disagreements among the permanent members.

Apart from the establishment of the Atomic Energy Commission in January, 1946, and the International Children's Emergency Fund in November, 1946, the Assembly has not yet made any substantive use of its authority to "establish such subsidiary organs as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions." However, there may well be future developments along this line. From time to time, the necessity will undoubtedly arise, as in the case of the two subsidiary organs already established, of creating new bodies to perform necessary functions for which no machinery is available. The Assembly might also deem it advisable to create bodies for the purpose of coordinating existing activities or for the sake of supplementing or expediting their objectives. This might,

485

in some instances, result in a partial shift in responsibility from another organ of the United Nations to the Assembly itself. Although, for example, all processes of enforcement are the prerogative of the Security Council, the Assembly might, if it chose, create subsidiary bodies to study, investigate, analyze, or co-ordinate certain aspects of the basic problems.

The Second General Assembly may well prove to be crucial in the history of the United Nations. The gravity of postwar economic and security problems is increasing steadily. The slowness of certain United Nations bodies to find adequate solutions is causing world public opinion to lose faith in the Organization's ultimate ability to provide effective cooperative machinery. The vigor and decisiveness of the Assembly during its session last autumn resulted in an upsurge of hope and confidence. This session the Assembly is faced with problems urgent, complex, and widely ranging. It is doubtful if any other body, national or international, has ever had such demands upon it. They will strain to the utmost its resources for positive, concrete, and imaginative statesmanship. Its handling of the problems will play a large part in determining not only the actual role of the Assembly itself in relation to its other organs but also the prospects of achieving collective international action within the years immediately ahead.

The importance of this session of the General Assembly, as well as of the topics under discussion, will undoubtedly be reflected in the caliber of the delegations which the nations are sending. Secretary of State Marshall heads the American delegation, assisted by an experienced group of diplomats and experts. These include as delegates, Warren Austin and Herschel Johnson, our representatives to the Security Council; Mrs. Roosevelt, Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights; and John Foster Dulles, who has had long experience in international affairs, and was an adviser to the United States delegation at San Francisco and at the Conference of Foreign Ministers in 1945 and 1947 and an alternate delegate to the last General Assembly. The alternates on the American delegation are Charles Fahy, recently State Department legal adviser; Willard Thorp, Assistant Secretary of State for Economic Affairs and our representative on the Economic and

486

Social Council; Francis Sayre, Chairman of the Trusteeship Council; Adlai Stevenson, formerly Special Assistant to the Secretary of State and an alternate delegate to the last General Assembly; and Dr. Virginia Gildersleeve, delegate to the San Francisco Conference and member of a recent education mission to Japan. Though this issue of *International Conciliation* goes to press before other governments have announced their delegations, they will doubtless be composed of men of similar eminence in the conduct of their nations' affairs.

The first problem before the Assembly is the election of its president. Much depends upon that choice. It calls for a personality able to dominate the big hall and inspire confidence in his impartiality and wisdom. The president must know when to intervene in the interests of speed and order and when to be silent. He must constantly and unobtrusively create the framework within which the discussions operate. He must arbitrate scrupulously but firmly. Never for a moment can he lose the thread of the discussion. The task demands the skill of an adept horseman with a team of unruly horses. The speed with which an Assembly operates, the constructive directions which its efforts take, are determined in no small measure by the ability of the president.

The agenda for the present session can be classified roughly under five major headings: security matters, questions of non-self-governing peoples, economic affairs, administrative matters, and budgetary questions.

The report of the Security Council will include its discussions of the first Report of the Atomic Energy Commission and of the plan of work adopted by the Commission for Conventional Armaments. The second Report of the Atomic Energy Commission will be available on September fifteenth. Since the Assembly created the Atomic Energy Commission and was responsible for the creation of the Commission on Conventional Armaments, it has a special interest in the activities of both these bodies although they report directly to the Security Council. It will undoubtedly, therefore, scrutinize their progress with close attention.

The first report of the Atomic Energy Commission found

487

that scientifically, technologically, and practically, it is feasible,

a) to extend among 'all nations the exchange of basic scientific information' on atomic energy 'for peaceful ends,'

b) to control 'atomic energy to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes,'

c) to accomplish 'the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons,' and

d) to provide 'effective safeguards by way of inspection and other means to protect complying states against the hazards of violations and evasions.

It then proceeded to outline the problems and the general methods of control (see *International Conciliation*, April, 1947).

The Commission proposed a system of control which included management, supervision, material accounting, licensing and inspection under the aegis of an international control agency. Such an agency would have unimpeded rights of ingress, egress and access to mines, processing plants, nuclear reactors, and other activities connected with atomic energy production of all nations. The agency would itself conduct research on nuclear fuels both for the purpose of providing basic scientific information on the peaceful uses of atomic energy and in order to remain in the forefront of atomic knowledge.

Since the Report was issued on December 30, 1946, Committee 2 of the Commission has been studying methods of control, including the general characteristics of a control agency—its functions, powers and limitations as concerns the development, research and the international planning of atomic energy production. Under consideration have been the following subjects:

* Functions of the International Agency in Relation to Research and Development Activities.

* Functions of the International Agency in Relation to Location and Mining of Ores.

* Functions of the International Agency in Relation to Processing and Purification of Source Material.

* Functions of the International Agency in Relation to Stockpiling, Production, and Distribution of Nuclear Fuels and the Design, Construction, and Operation of Isotype Separation Plants and of Nuclear Reactors.

488

Rights and Limitations of the International Agency in Relation
to Inspections, Surveys, and Explorations.

The Committee has also had before it a general paper on the
"Operational and Developmental Functions of the International
Agency and its Relation to Planning, Coordination and Direction
of Atomic Activities." This paper brings together the outstanding
problems and discusses their interrelationship.

When the Atomic Energy Commission published its December
Report it recognized that it had not yet taken up the problem of
"how the various safeguards would be administered in practice as
part of an overall system." It realized, moreover, that the sug-
gested safeguards "do not represent a plan for atomic energy
control but only some of the elements which should be incorporated
in any complete or effective plan." It is to these problems that
Committee 2 has been devoting its major attention in recent
months and it has found it necessary to study additional consider-
ations of security over and above those included in the Report.
Out of this study have emerged new principles of control which
provide, in some cases, for more comprehensive and stricter
measures than originally contemplated.

Two of the primary considerations, at the present time, are the
principles of strategic balance and of ownership. General security
depends upon a well-planned distribution of stockpiles, production
facilities, and facilities utilizing nuclear fuels to lessen the danger
of any nation's accumulating such resources for the purposes of
atomic warfare. It is, therefore, generally believed that, difficult
as it may be, a strategic balance should be maintained with respect
to the mining, production and utilization of nuclear fuels when
dangerous facilities are involved. It is considered essential that
comparable national deposits, wherever they may be found, should
be depleted proportionately.

The principle of ownership arose out of a conviction on the
part of the majority that in no other way would it be possible to
administer controls effectively. Ownership by the international
agency would apply to source materials, nuclear fuels, and danger-
ous facilities whether or not currently utilized for industrial pur-

489

poses. The agency would assume complete control of the source materials after their separation from their natural deposits and would have the exclusive right to move or lease them and the right to use and produce energy from them. It would acquire ownership at an agreed price with the stipulations that it would not be permitted to sell these materials and that its decisions would be exercised in accordance with principles previously embodied in treaties or conventions.

The complexity of the problems and the radical nature of the techniques of any effective system of control have greatly increased the difficulty of a political formulation of the findings of the Commission despite the urgent need for an immediate solution. In order to safeguard, in so far as possible, the security and sovereignty of individual nations, the Commission has been working on the development of clearly-defined procedures which would regulate and delimit the powers of the agency, without, however, impairing the essential nature of its operations. Whether the Assembly can or whether it desires to take any steps to accelerate the introduction of a control mechanism, it will undoubtedly give the whole matter serious consideration.

The plan of work of the Commission for Conventional Armaments was approved by the Security Council on July 8, 1947. This includes a consideration and determination of general principles in connection with the regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces; formulation of practical proposals for the regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces; consideration of practical and effective safeguards by means of an international system of control operated through special organs and other media to protect complying States against the hazards of violations and evasions. Since the Commission for Conventional Armaments has just gone into operation, its major interest to this Assembly will be its potential contribution to the overall machinery of security and its relationship to other bodies in the field.

The Military Staff Committee, after sitting for fifteen months, submitted its first report to the Council on May 3 and a second, in response to a specific request, on June 3, both of which are discussed in the Report of the Security Council to the General

490

Assembly. From the tenor of both reports it is obvious that a Committee such as this, composed of the Chiefs of Staff of the five great powers or their representatives, is seriously handicapped by the same lack of harmony which has prevailed in the Council itself. No agreement has been reached on even such basic issues as the principles governing the proportionate contributions of individual Member States or the desirable size of the forces to be placed at the disposal of the United Nations. Other questions of primary importance upon which the Committee has taken no action include the establishment or use of permanent or temporary bases and the right of transit of United Nations forces across the territory of Member States and over international waterways.

Since this is the first opportunity that the Assembly has had to review the work of the Military Staff Committee, it will presumably arouse considerable interest. If, as seems probable, the whole field of security and disarmament comes under discussion, some effort may be made to clarify the situation and provide for positive, substantive measures, possibly through the creation of new bodies to handle particular aspects of the problems. The two major problems—the international control of atomic energy and the strengthening of the United Nations coincident with the decrease of national armaments—cannot be dealt with piecemeal because of their close interdependence. Starting with the question of atomic energy, there is need for an orderly program of evolution and development, including arrangements for the tremendous amount of technical study and research necessary for practical implementation.

In addition to these questions concerning the maintenance of peace through the control of armaments and armed forces, the Assembly will also have for its consideration the report of its Committee on the Progressive Development and Codification of International Law. The Committee has recommended the creation of an International Law Commission for the purpose of carrying out the progressive development of international law and its eventual codification. The Committee recommended that one of the specific tasks of such a commission should be the preparation of "a draft convention incorporating the principles of international

491

law recognized by the Charter of the Nurnberg Tribunal and
sanctioned by the judgment of that Tribunal." The Committee
also recommended the formulation of "a detailed draft plan of
general codification of offenses against the peace and security of
mankind" and suggested that there might be brought into existence
"an international judicial authority to exercise jurisdiction over
such crimes."

The importance and complexity of the whole problem of non-self-governing peoples has been brought sharply into focus both by the Palestine situation and by the recent development in the Netherlands East Indies. There is no clear definition in the Charter of a "non-self-governing territory" except for the statement that it is a territory "whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government." These territories, under the Charter, are broken down into two categories—those voluntarily placed under the Trusteeship system and all others for which Members of the United Nations "have or assume responsibilities" for their administration.

For the former group the United Nations has an explicit re-
sponsibility and the first report of the Trusteeship Council to the
second session of the Assembly marks the assumption by the
United Nations of its duties in this respect. The report itself is
largely a sober account of the organizational achievements of the
first session of the Council. The one important administrative
problem still to be resolved is the question of overlapping juris-
diction between the Trusteeship Council and the Economic and
Social Council. The Charter places direct responsibility upon the
Trusteeship Council for the welfare of the trust areas. The Charter
also gives the Economic and Social Council jurisdiction with re-
spect to "international economic, social, cultural, educational,
health and related matters." Since no exemption is specified, its
mandate would presumably include trust areas. This dualism raises
a number of problems, including the question of direct access of
commissions of the Economic and Social Council to the Trusteeship
Council. A joint committee of the two Councils submitted a
series of recommendations on this matter for the consideration of
both bodies.

492

The situation with regard to the second category of territories is much more obscure. Not only is there no clear definition of a non-self-governing territory but there is no determination of the point at which such territory ceases to be non-self-governing.

The confusion which reigns in connection with this point was apparent during the recent debates in the Security Council on the question of Indonesia. The Netherlands considered that Indonesia was still part of the Dutch Empire and had previously notified the Secretary-General that information was being submitted on it, as a non-self-governing territory, in accordance with the Charter obligations. Therefore, in response to a charge that the situation in Indonesia was a threat to the peace, under Article 39, the Netherlands representative replied that this article did not apply since the situation was an internal police problem and not a situation resulting from the relationship between two sovereign States. Other delegates contended that though the Republic of Indonesia would not achieve its full independence, under the terms of the Cheribon agreement, until January, 1949, the recognition by the Netherlands and by other governments of the present de facto government of the Republic was sufficient grounds for treating it as an independent State.

Under the Charter the only specific responsibility laid upon the United Nations with regard to non-self-governing territories not placed under the Trusteeship system is that the Secretary-General shall receive "for information purposes" the reports which members are required to transmit regularly "subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require," of "statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible." (Article 73e.) The General Assembly, during its first session in London, directed the Secretary-General to include in his annual report a summary of this information. During the second part of its first session, the Assembly further directed the Secretary-General to analyze and classify as well as summarize. It also appointed an ad hoc committee of sixteen, composed like the Trusteeship Council of an equal number of members submitting information

493

and of those not administering dependent areas. The Assembly further authorized the invitation of representatives of the following specialized agencies, the Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Labour Organisation, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organization, and the International Trade Organization, when it came into existence, to participate in an advisory capacity. This Committee was convened by the Secretary-General a few weeks before the opening of the Assembly to "examine the Secretary-General's summary and analysis of the information transmitted under Article 73e of the Charter with a view to aiding the General Assembly regarding the procedures to be followed in the future and the means of ensuring that the advice, expert knowledge, and experience of the specialized agencies are used to the best advantage."

The specialized agencies are in a position to make a substantial contribution to the discussions of the Committee. The International Labour Organisation has recently adopted five Conventions concerning social policy in non-self-governing territories. The World Health Organization has a special provision in its Charter permitting representation by non-self-governing territories as associate members. The studies of the Food and Agriculture Organization on agricultural and nutritional problems include all areas of the globe. While the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has only just begun its substantive work, one of its primary concerns is the question of mass education in the less developed areas of the world.

The *ad hoc* Committee, to which relatively little prominence has been given, is handling one of the most delicate problems of the United Nations. It involves the whole question of national sovereignty and the right of the United Nations to intervene in so-called domestic matters. It also involves the obligations which Chapter 11 of the Charter imposes upon Member States. The immediate, practical issues before it are the designation of territories concerning which reports should be submitted, including those occupied in consequence of the last war, the form and content of such reports and the uses to which such reports shall be

494

put. On the basis of the Secretary-General's summaries of the reports, it would appear that much more comprehensive and explanatory reports should be made available to the United Nations if the information concerning such non-self-governing territories is to have any real significance.

Either in connection with this Committee's report or with other agenda items, it seems probable that the question of the relationship of the United Nations to non-self-governing territories and the obligations of administering authorities to such territories will come under discussion. During its autumn meeting the Assembly refused the request of the Union of South Africa to annex South-west Africa and requested that it place this territory under the Trusteeship system. The reply of the Union of South Africa was received at the end of July of this year. It declined to place South-west Africa under the Trusteeship system but promised to fulfil all the obligations assumed under the mandate system of the League of Nations and to send reports upon the area. It agreed not to incorporate the territory but informed the United Nations that it was giving the territory representation in the Union's parliament. This statement will undoubtedly arouse considerable discussion, particularly as it highlights a growing tendency to incorporate territories as part of the metropolitan area. The formerly independent Baltic States were made into constituent republics of the Soviet Union. The French Government passed a law which took effect on the first of January conferring the status of a metropolitan department on Martinique, Guadeloupe and Dependencies, French Guiana and Reunion.

The problems surrounding the question of non-self-governing territories are similar, in certain aspects, to those involved in the question of the rights of minorities. In accordance with the resolution of the last Assembly, the Union of South Africa and the Indian Government will submit a report on the progress of their negotiations concerning the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa. Since any hopes for a settlement which would be mutually satisfactory appear to be very slight, this whole question will undoubtedly be debated at some length. Unless the Assembly decides to refer the matter to the International Court, as was

495

proposed last year, there seems to be very little action that it
can take. It can, however, and undoubtedly will, continue to
stimulate the pressures of public opinion through open debate.

The Palestine question, although it concerns a former League
mandate, raises issues of a distinctive nature. The Report of the
Special Committee, which was appointed by the Special Assembly,
will undoubtedly be the subject of one of the longest and bitterest
debates. Out of that debate should come some concrete recom-
mendations and a program of implementation. The Palestinian case
represents the first instance of an administering authority's re-
questing the assistance of the United Nations in determining the
ultimate status of a non-self-governing territory. When the Secre-
tary-General convened the first meeting of the Committee on
May 26 he said, "Confidence in the ability of the United Nations
to fulfil its momentous mission will be greatly influenced by the
results of your work."

Under the terms of the resolution of the Special Assembly, the
eleven-member Committee was granted "the widest powers to
ascertain and record facts, and to investigate all questions and
issues relevant to the problem of Palestine." The Committee was
authorized to conduct investigations in Palestine and anywhere
else it might deem desirable and to hear testimony from any
source.

The report of the Committee is the result of an intensive study
of the problem in Palestine and Lebanon as well as of the findings
of a subcommittee which visited some of the displaced persons'
camps in Germany and Austria. The Committee toured Palestine
visiting factories, farms, municipal offices, schools and welfare
centers upon its arrival. Several weeks were then devoted to hear-
ing testimony from representatives of the mandatory, of the
Jewish Agency and other organizations and individuals. The
Palestinian Arabs refused to appear before the Committee on the
grounds that "Palestine Arabs' natural rights are self-evident and
cannot continue to be subject to investigation but deserve to be
recognized on the basis of principles of the United Nations Charter."

The solutions proposed by the Jewish representatives were
divided into two main categories. Members of the Jewish Agency

496

and certain other groups insisted that Palestine should become an independent Jewish State. This State might comprise the whole of what is now Palestine or it might be the result of a partition. A Jewish State resulting from such a partition must, however, fulfil the requirements of the Jewish Agency as a "viable" State. The Palestine Union, the Jewish IHUD (Union) Association and the League for Jewish-Arab Rapprochement and Cooperation, on the other hand, disagreed vigorously with this proposal. They believed that a binational State was feasible and economically sound. Most of these proposals envisaged numerical parity between Jews and Arabs as well as social and political equality.

On July 17 the Committee concluded its hearing in Palestine and proceeded to Lebanon to hear evidence from the Arab States of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The Arab representatives reiterated their resentment over the Balfour Declaration as an infringement of national sovereignty, and demanded that Palestine be immediately granted its independence under an Arab government. Any other solution, they warned, would result in disturbances and violence. One representative declared that "the Arab States will not stop at an economic or political boycott but will in their turn take effective and positive measures to return the country to its lawful owners."

The Balfour Declaration stated that "His Majesty's Govern-
ment views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national
home for the Jewish people. . . . It being clearly understood that
nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious
rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." This
anomolous declaration was subsequently formally approved by the
Allied and Associated Powers and in September, 1923, the Allied
Supreme Council designated Great Britain as the governing power
over the Palestine Mandate. The terms of the Mandate reproduced
in substance the Balfour Declaration. Since the inception of the
Mandate, efforts to enforce its conflicting provisions have given
rise to steadily mounting friction between Jews and Arabs. The
plight of Jews as a result of Nazi persecutions, on the one hand,
and the achievement of independence on the part of neighboring
Arab States, on the other, have resulted in a state of tension which

497

is a matter of international concern. Whatever conclusions may be reached by the General Assembly based upon the findings of the Committee of Inquiry (which has not been published as this goes to press), it is obvious that only a solution backed by the authority of an international body can have any hope of success.

The gravity of the economic problems faced by this Assembly cannot be overestimated. In his Annual Report, the Secretary-General declared that "both the relief needs and those of reconstruction were at first seriously underestimated, and the continuing existence of unsatisfied needs constitutes a serious threat to the long-term objectives of achieving economic stability. . . . Unhappily it appears that in the winter and spring of 1947-48, conditions will hardly be better than those which have so gravely troubled the world this year. Recovery has proceeded neither so far nor so fast as to offer any prospect of substantial improvement. The food situation in particular has improved but slightly." The situation in Indo-China, the East Indies, China and Greece has made impossible any substantial efforts at rehabilitation in those areas. The uncertainties arising out of the fact that none of the peace treaties have gone into effect and some, like the treaty with Germany, are still undrafted, has been a major factor in retarding progress. Meantime the dollar resources of the world—even of such dollar wealthy countries as Canada and Argentina—have been brought dangerously near to exhaustion. This has been caused: first, by the gravely erroneous estimates of the rapidity with which European agriculture, mining (particularly coal), industrial production, and transportation could be rehabilitated; second, by the disproportionate amount of dwindling dollars that had to be spent on food, coal, and other consumable goods instead of machines and raw materials for industry; and third, by the steadily mounting price paid in the United States for these goods.

The major problem, therefore, will continue to be the finding of ways to increase the available supply of dollars to enable countries, first to buy the food, clothing, and coal to keep alive, and second to purchase fertilizer, agricultural implements, capital goods and rolling stock. Only thus can they rehabilitate their agriculture, industry and transport and reestablish production

498

levels capable of supporting an international exchange of goods. Finally, there must be established such international machinery as to enable that exchange of goods to continue and to expand with a minimum of restrictions.

At its last session the Assembly passed several resolutions dealing with the problem of relief, bearing in mind particularly the unmet needs which would have to be faced after the termination of UNRRA on June 30 of this year. The Assembly urged Member nations "to assist in the furnishing of relief, when needed and where needed during the ensuing year, by developing their respective programmes with the greatest possible speed and, in appropriate cases, by extending special credit facilities to the needy countries," and appointed a special Technical Committee of Experts to appraise the relative needs of various countries. The overall estimate of the Committee now appears to be about thirty to forty per cent higher than the actual amount being made available by individual governments, exclusive of the relief needs of China, on which the Committee made no estimate.

A second step taken by the Assembly was the creation of an International Children's Emergency Fund to be utilized "for the benefit of children and adolescents—for child health purposes generally, giving high priority to the children of countries, victims of aggression. The Fund shall consist of any assets made available by UNRRA or any voluntary contributions made available by Governments, voluntary agencies, individual or other sources." In its report to the Fifth Session of the Economic and Social Council in July of this year, the Fund announced its decision "on the basis of reports from Governments and discussions and observations of the Fund's Mission in the field" to give first priority to food and among the foods first priority to milk. With an assurance of some twenty million dollars, including over half a million made available by UNRRA from the Emergency Food Collection, the Fund expects to provide a limited quantity of milk, fats and cocoa to 3,250,000 children and pregnant and nursing mothers, during the initial six months of its operations.

In its December resolution calling upon Member States to assist

499

in meeting relief needs after the termination of UNRRA, a section
was added, at the instigation of the Norwegian delegation which:

Directs the Secretary-General to consider the ways and means of collecting and utilizing contributions, from persons, organizations and peoples all over the world, equivalent to the earnings of one day's work, for the purpose of helping to meet relief needs during 1947; and to report on the results of such consideration to Member Governments and to the Economic and Social Council at the earliest possible date.

In March, 1947, the Economic and Social Council reviewed the findings of the Secretary-General and decided that in view of "the need of the International Children's Emergency Fund for contributions" it approved,

in principle the proposal for a special world-wide appeal for non-governmental voluntary contributions to meet emergency relief needs of children, adolescents, expectant and nursing mothers, without discrimination because of race, creed, nationality status, or political belief, by way of a 'One Day's Pay' collection or some alternative form of collection better adapted to each particular country.

Detailed plans for the collection are now going forward in line
with the resolution finally adopted by the Council at its fifth
session in August.

The third measure adopted by the Assembly was the appropriation of $670,186

a) for a requisite number of social welfare experts to provide, on the request of Governments which show the need for them, such advisory services, and to put into practise, over an appropriate period, new technical methods in any branch of social welfare;

b) for enabling a requisite number of suitably qualified social welfare officials to observe and familiarize themselves with the experience of other countries administering social welfare programmes;

c) for providing advice, demonstration and instruction in connection with the manufacture of prosthetic appliances, and the vocational training of physically handicapped persons; and for furnishing the necessary demonstration equipment and tools;

d) for furnishing to Member countries which have been devastated during the war technical publications helpful in the training of social welfare workers.

In accordance with the requests of Member governments a

500

number of social welfare experts have been sent to various countries, fellowships in the field of physical rehabilitation have been granted, supplies of prosthetics have been made available for demonstration purposes and information concerning advisory social welfare services has been provided.

During its current session the Assembly will have to decide whether or not it wishes to appropriate additional funds and continue such activities in 1948. As originally envisaged, these services were considered primarily as measures to meet an emergency situation. They do, in fact, represent a departure from the normal functions of the United Nations and belong rather in the category of those associated with the specialized agencies. However, during the fifth session of the Economic and Social Council considerable support was evinced for their continuance by the United Nations and it was suggested that these services might be eventually broadened and put on a permanent basis.

Despite the efforts of the Assembly to provide such assistance, as lay within its power, to meet the emergency situation, there are still major needs which are not being met. In his Report the Secretary-General suggests that "as the information available to date indicates that relief problems are still of an urgent character, the General Assembly may desire carefully to review the over-all situation."

Crucial as is the world situation with regard to food, shelter and the bare essentials, it is of less long-range import than the paralysis of production facilities. Shortages of capital equipment, rolling stock, agricultural machinery, and fertilizers are seriously hampering recovery. The primary stockpile for these materials today is the United States, but few countries have dollars to purchase in anything like the requisite quantities. The French Government recently negotiated a loan for $250,000,000 with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the first to be made by that body. Following this, on August 7, a loan of $195,000,000 was granted to the Netherlands. But even the considerable resources of the Bank, if fully utilized, could only provide a partial solution to the world's financial problems. It is for these reasons that the Marshall plan, whether it is discussed by the Assembly

501

or not, will inevitably play a role in the deliberations of that body.

The third facet of the economic problem is the question of the
development of machinery to provide, on the one hand, for the
maximum utilization of available resources and, on the other, for
the type of meshed action upon which prosperity depends. Several
instruments for achieving these objectives are either already in
existence or in the process of development.

At its last session the General Assembly recommended that
in order to give effective aid to the countries devastated by war, the
Economic and Social Council, at its next session, give prompt and favour-
able consideration to the establishment of an Economic Commission for
Europe and an Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East.

In March, 1947, the Economic and Social Council, in obedience
to the wishes of the Assembly, established the two Commissions.
The terms of reference of both Commissions provide that "acting
within the framework of policies of the United Nations and subject
to the general supervision of the Council," they shall "initiate and
participate in measures for facilitating concerted action for the
economic reconstruction" of their respective areas and for raising
the level of economic activity and for maintaining and strengthen-
ing regional economic relations and relations with other countries
of the world.

The Economic Commission for Europe is composed of all the
European members of the United Nations (including the Soviet
Union) and the United States. The first two sessions, which were
held in May and July respectively, were devoted largely to or-
ganizational matters and consideration of functions. The Com-
mission made arrangements to take over the essential functions of
the three prior organizations, the European Coal Organization,
the European Central Inland Transport Organization and the
Emergency Economic Commission for Europe. It established a
number of committees to cover these and other fields—a Coal
Committee, an Inland Transport Committee, a Committee on
Electric Power, a Committee on Industry and Materials, with
subcommittees on Timber, Fertilizers and Alkalis, and a Panel on
Housing Problems. The functions of these committees are to
provide a forum for discussions of problems of common interest,

502

to initiate studies and to seek agreement on programs of common
action. The Commission has also been consulting with the Allied
Control Council in Germany "in view of the great importance
which attaches to the problem of the economic relations between
Germany and the other European countries."

The Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East held its
first session in Shanghai in June and a Committee of the Whole
met at Lake Success in July to complete consideration on certain
organizational and procedural matters. As one of its immediate
tasks the Commission decided:

to analyze in the light of all the information available the short-term
requirements of the various countries within the geographic scope of the
Commission in respect of essential reconstruction needs, such as food,
seed, fertilizers, textiles, raw materials, industrial, agricultural, mining
and transport equipment; coal and other fuel;

to ascertain the extent to which the above requirements can be met, and
to suggest measures designed to ensure that such requirements are met:

(a) from *domestic* sources, e.g. by expansion of agricultural and industrial production, improvement of internal transport facilities, distribution methods, etc.,

(b) from *within the region*, e.g. by provision of facilities for more extended inter-regional trade, improvement in external transport facilities, etc.

(c) from *all other sources*, e.g. by expansion of external trade generally, adoption of measures necessary for financing imports, improvement in external transport facilities, etc.;

to suggest the measures necessary to facilitate training in the economic
field of administrative and technical personnel of the countries concerned
and the obtaining of competent technicians from outside by countries in
need of them;

to examine any other matters relating to the reconstruction requirements
of the area (such as obstacles to the flow of goods), the early consideration of which is essential for the completion of the above studies.

At the fifth session of the Economic and Social Council, the
Chilean delegation, supported by other Latin-American countries,
proposed the creation of an Economic Commission for Latin
America. The extreme poverty and malnutrition caused to a large
extent by unbalanced economies and the lack of any adequate
machinery to remedy the situation were adduced as cogent reasons
for the creation of such a Commission.

503

It is not necessary for an economy to be self-sufficient in order to thrive. Absolute self-sufficiency is virtually impossible, and even inconvenient, as many representatives have pointed out during this session. What is very important is that the large sectors of an economy develop at an equal pace, in order to produce the necessary equilibrium. It is this point which forms the basis for one of the great weaknesses of the Latin-America economy. There is no diversification, and many countries depend almost entirely upon one or two export items to provide for their economic needs. . . . the problem of industrial development should be approached collectively, in order to ensure harmonious production and to avoid the installation of artificial and anti-economic industries.

The Council finally decided, with the consent of the Latin-American countries, to appoint an *ad hoc* committee to consider this matter and to call it to the attention of the Ninth International Conference of American States convening in Bogota in January, 1948, in order to ascertain the sentiments of the Latin-American countries as a whole.

Whether or not particular reference is made in the Assembly to the desire of certain Member States for a Latin-American Commission or to an earlier request for a Middle East Commission, the whole question of regional developments must, inevitably, be of interest to the Assembly. In the course of discussions on this matter within United Nations bodies, two diverse opinions have been expressed. Proponents of regional planning consider it a normal, healthy development, expressive of a realization of the common problems, resources, and approaches inherent in particular areas. Others were

concerned lest in the future, regionalism and regional autarchy will come to play the dangerous role which nationalism and national autarchy have played in the recent years. We are therefore concerned, for example, lest multi-lateralism be abandoned for systems of regional tariff preferences. We believe that a trend towards regional autarchy could be no less dangerous economically, socially, and politically, than could national autarchy. A wall that is built around a number of countries in a single area of the world can constitute no less a barrier to the well-being and prosperity of the world at large than a wall built around the boundaries of a single state.

The growing demands for regional commissions and other similar devices make it highly desirable that the Assembly, as well

504

as the Economic and Employment Commission, to which the Economic and Social has referred the problem, consider carefully the whole question lest a decision be taken by default. It may be that a body such as the Commission, with a long-range, overall conception, can supply the necessary balance wheel.

Another problem which has arisen both in connection with the regional commissions and with various United Nations conferences is the question of the membership and voting privileges of non-member States and non-self-governing territories. How far should a United Nations body be permitted to go in admitting to membership and in according voting privileges to such nonmembers of the United Nations? Membership in the United Nations implies that certain requirements have been met and certain obligations accepted which should entitle the member to corresponding privileges and responsibilities. On the other hand, as was recently pointed out in connection with the forthcoming Conference on Trade and Employment at Havana, there are certain common problems which are of vital interest either to all peoples of a region or of the world. Such problems, in many instances, cannot be solved without the full cooperation of the nations or areas concerned. This again is a matter of principle but is, perhaps, sensible to varying interpretations depending upon the particular circumstances. It is, however, a point which needs definition in both of its aspects—non-Member States and non-self-governing territories.

One of the most significant pieces of machinery in the economic field is the proposed International Trade Organization which, like the Economic and Employment Commission, is concerned with a universal, rather than a regional framework.

At its first session in February, 1946, the Economic and Social Council decided to call an International Conference on Trade and Employment "for the purpose of promoting the expansion of production, exchange and consumption of goods." In preparation for this Conference it created a Preparatory Committee to elaborate an annotated draft agenda, including a draft convention, for consideration by the Conference, taking into account suggestions which may be submitted to it by the Economic and Social Council or by any Member of the United Nations.

505

The Council suggested

as a basis of discussion for the Preparatory Committee, that the agenda
include the following topics:

a) International agreement relating to the achievement and maintenance of high and stable levels of employment and economic activity.

b) International agreement relating to regulations, restrictions, and dis-criminations affecting international trade.

c) International agreement relating to restrictive business practices.

d) International agreement relating to intergovernmental commodity arrangements.

e) Establishment of an international trade organization, as a specialized agency of the United Nations, having responsibilities in the fields of b), c) and d).

The Committee held two sessions, one in London in October-November, 1946, followed by a meeting of a drafting committee in New York in January-February, 1947, and the second in Geneva from April through August of this year. The Committee has prepared a draft charter for the consideration of the Conference based upon two United States documents—the Proposals for Expansion of World Trade and Employment issued in 1945 and a Suggested Charter for an International Trade Organization of the United Nations published in 1947. It also recommended to the Fifth Session of the Economic and Social Council that the Conference be convened in Havana on November 21, 1947, and that in addition to members of the United Nations, invitations be sent to such nonmembers as had an appreciable interest in world trade and to the appropriate authorities in Germany, Japan and Korea as well as to Burma, Ceylon and Southern Rhodesia. The Economic and Social Council has approved the recommendations of the Preparatory Committee and has added to the list of those to be invited the Republic of Indonesia and Pakistan. It decided, however, that while nonmembers might participate in the discussions they would not be entitled to vote. This latter question may be raised again during the General Assembly as there were a number of governments who felt that the dominant consideration should be the importance of foreign trade to any given State, rather than a criterion of membership in the United Nations.

The function of the International Trade Organization is the
development and the maintenance of international rules governing

506

the trading policies of nations. The purpose of these rules is to
make possible a steady expansion of production and consumption.
This expansion depends upon three factors: first, elimination of
government-created barriers to the free flow of trade—tariffs,
preferences, quotas, discriminatory trade practices and so forth;
second, business practices which might tend to limit or inhibit
international trade; and third, the maintenance of high and stable
levels of employment and production within national borders. In
his report the Secretary-General stated that

the experience of the 1930's has shown that the problem of expanding the
volume of international trade cannot be dissociated from questions of full
employment and economic development. Unemployment in advanced
industrial countries, and the under-development of many areas of the
world, are much more serious and fundamental in their effect on the
volume of world trade than the restrictive practises which are often
merely the secondary phenomena of profound economic instability.

The Charter as it is now drafted contains nine chapters: Purpose and Objectives, Membership, Employment and Economic Activity, Economic Development, Commercial Policy, Restrictive Business Practices, Intergovernmental Commodity Agreements, the International Trade Organization, Settlement of Differences—Interpretation, and General Provisions. Few of the articles are absolute. Most of them contain escape clauses which may be utilized by individual nations if warranted by special necessities. Nevertheless the Charter does represent the first attempt in history to achieve multilateral agreement on a broad set of principles in the field of international commercial relations. Adherence to the Charter as it now stands would result in some modifications of the commercial policy of every participating nation. It has not been easy to reach agreement even on a draft charter. Many nations have balance of payments difficulties, others fear lest their trade commitments be endangered by trade fluctuations and depression. The less industrialized countries, in particular, have been hesitant to take any action which they feared might prove a handicap in the competition with more developed countries. There has been a growing tendency among these countries to use tariff and quantitative restrictions as a means of developing infant industries.

While the Preparatory Committee was concluding its work in

507

Geneva on the Draft Charter, it was also initiating and conducting negotiations among the eighteen participating governments on tariff preferences and other trade restrictions. The negotiations, still in progress as this goes to press, have not produced optimum results, but they do represent the greatest step yet taken in the direction of economic cooperation on a global scale. The significant fact is that machinery is being set up for continued consultation on world trade problems. These negotiations represent an immediate, practical effort to put the principles of the relevant sections of the Draft Charter into operation.

Although the Assembly is not required to take any action at this session concerning the development of the International Trade Organization, it may well be that the floor of the Assembly will be used for the expression of opinion or reservations concerning some of the basic principles involved. The importance of the proposed International Trade Organization cannot be overestimated. In the words of one government the Charter will contain "the terms of success or failure for the economic system of the whole world."

In the preceding pages an attempt has been made to outline some of the major issues which are under review by this Assembly. The continuing machinery which may be required by the United Nations to deal with these problems will be determined, in the first instance, by the decisions taken by the Assembly in connection with the 1948 budget. A budget, in essence, is merely the translation of a program of action into financial terms. The Secretary General has submitted a budget of $39,403,792 for 1948. Any substantial increase or curtailment of this sum will inevitably be directly reflected in the extensiveness of the programs to be undertaken or the continuance of those now in operation.

The 1948 budget represents an increase of $11,663,792 over that of 1947. This increase is largely the result of the growth in the activities of the various organs of the United Nations. While $39,403,792 is a relatively small sum in view of the scope of the tasks to be undertaken, the burden placed upon many of the Member States represents a substantial sacrifice, particularly as,

508

under existing arrangements, all payments must be made out of
the rapidly dwindling supply of dollars.

In its efforts to arrive at fair and equitable allocations among
the Member States, the Assembly has had to find the mean between
two opposing considerations: universality of participation, on the
one hand, and ability to contribute, on the other. The more evenly
the costs of the Organization are shared the greater the sense of a
common effort toward common goals. If, however, a few nations
assume a disproportionate share of the budget there will almost
certainly be a tendency to insist upon a greater voice in the con-
sideration of programs and the sense of equality would be lessened.
On the other hand, the necessity of securing adequate funds must
not be met by placing upon the smaller nations financial burdens
which they are unable to bear.

The second part of the first session of the Assembly set a
temporary scale of contributions for one year. It therefore de-
volves upon this session to fix a new scale which will reconcile,
in so far as possible, the objective of universality with the ability
of individual members to contribute.

The Assembly will also have before it the administrative
budgets of four specialized agencies which have been brought into
relationship with the Economic and Social Council: the Inter-
national Labour Organisation, United Nations Educational, Scien-
tific and Cultural Organization, Food and Agriculture Organiza-
tion and International Civil Aviation Organization. Under Article
17 of the Charter the Assembly is authorized to

consider and approve any financial and budgetary arrangements with
specialized agencies referred to in Article 57 and shall examine the
administrative budgets of such specialized agencies with a view to making
recommendations to the agencies concerned.

This review will bring to the forefront many questions concerning
the relationship between the United Nations and the specialized
agencies. At present, there is no overall financial control as the
specialized agencies have been operating as independent bodies.
However, there is evidenced an increasing determination on the
part of the United Nations itself, to make full use of its super-

509

visory and coordinating powers in the interests of an integrated
overall program, and the question of a consolidated budget (United
Nations and all specialized agencies) is receiving more and more
attention. Another tendency which has developed during the past
year is the assumption, on the part of the United Nations itself,
of certain operational activities which normally have been associ-
ated with the specialized agencies. The proposed budget for 1948
includes $750,000 for advisory welfare services, $1,430,000 for
the Economic Commissions for Europe and for Asia and the Far
East, and $150,000 for "administration of the Territory of Trieste."
The latter two items could conceivably grow to sizable proportions
and no doubt will receive careful consideration.

The United Nations programs must be realistic in terms of the
basic tasks that lie ahead and there must be funds ample enough
to meet the expenses involved. The United Nations was created
to make possible a rational and peaceful solution of security,
economic and social problems and it should not be crippled by an
inadequate budget. The General Assembly will have the task of
approving a budget sufficient to meet its needs and at the same time
not so high as to endanger universality of membership. Thus,
through the consideration of the budget, decisions on all critical
programs will be made that will vitally affect the activities of
the United Nations during the coming year.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
ON THE WORK OF THE ORGANIZATION,
1947

Though we are now approaching only the second regular session of the General Assembly, the United Nations is rapidly maturing into a fully functioning organization. The report which I submit herewith, in accordance with Article 98 of the Charter, is an account of a year crowded with international activity. In no other year in history have the representatives of nations met together more frequently, or worked more intensively on so many and such diverse matters. The statistics of the number of meetings of the organs of the United Nations since my first report to the General Assembly are in themselves revealing. During the period from 1 July 1946 to 30 June 1947, the General Assembly held 443 plenary and committee meetings, the Security Council 347, the Economic and Social Council 168, the Trusteeship Council 56, and other United Nations bodies 897 meetings. In addition, there were numerous meetings of specialized agencies, general international conferences and meetings among groups of States.

These figures are of major significance in two respects. On the one hand, they reflect the large number and the complexity of the problems which the world faces today. On the other hand, they show a heartening willingness on the part of Governments to rely increasingly on the processes of international organization for the exploration and solution of problems of common concern. As my report relates in detail, much has already been accomplished through these processes. Unquestionably, the year was one in which the United Nations could record much to its credit, even though it should be noted that the growth of the Organization has been somewhat impetuous and not always sufficiently subject to over-all planning.

The developments of the year, however, have revealed certain disturbing tendencies. In a number of instances in which a decision was taken on a general principle of considerable importance, the actual carrying out of the principle has been delayed or frustrated

510

511

by the unwillingness of governments to take the necessary steps,
or by their inability to agree on practical measures for execution.

The outstanding political achievement of the first part of the
first session of the General Assembly was the resolution on atomic
energy; the comparable achievement of the second part of the
session was the resolution on the general regulation and reduction
of armaments. The Atomic Energy Commission has worked hard
and made some progress, but the complexity of the problem still
presents many points of disagreement and delay. The Commission
on Conventional Armaments has made little progress beyond the
adoption of a general plan of work. Thus, the two most significant
resolutions of the General Assembly still require positive imple-
mentation.

There are other resolutions of the Assembly on which I cannot
report without qualification. For instance, the problem of Franco
Spain cannot yet be said to be satisfactorily resolved in the spirit
of the resolution passed by the General Assembly. Again, notwith-
standing the resolution on relief needs after the termination of
UNRRA, the demonstrated needs of the devastated countries have
been met only in part.

Nations are beset with the critical problems of relief, of eco-
nomic reconstruction and social rehabilitation, and of defining
human rights and raising standards of living, and many other
questions with vital implications for the welfare of mankind. At
present, important discussions are still in progress with regard to
the economic problems of Europe and their relation to assistance
from the United States of America. It will be possible to evaluate
these problems fully only when the discussions have been concluded.

All this cannot, in the main, be ascribed to the economic dis-
location and instability resulting from the war, though these factors
are even more serious now than a year ago. It arises in large
measure from a basic political situation which underlies and affects
all international political, economic and social activity. I hold it to
be my duty to call attention to this situation as it affects the United
Nations.

The world political situation has not improved in the last year,
in spite of the fact that conditions at the beginning of 1947 ap-

512

peared more hopeful after the great powers had shown, in the General Assembly, a determination to seek agreement among themselves. Of outstanding significance, is the fact that the main peace treaties still remain undrafted and unsigned, and that no agreement has yet been reached even on some of their fundamental principles. The importance of these treaties, not only to the future of the United Nations, but to the future of the whole world, cannot be over-emphasized. It is clear that in the political, and in particular in the economic sphere they are a pre-requisite of a reconstructed world order.

Important, however, as are the peace treaties, events have shown that the problem which they present is, in turn, part of a larger political complex which operates to delay and frustrate this endeavour as it has operated in some of the affairs of the United Nations. Though the drafting and conclusion of the treaties must remain a responsibility of the powers which fought the war, the basic problem which delays their conclusion is world-wide in character. It is now apparent that while the nations directly responsible for the conclusion of the peace treaties continue their efforts, it is also necessary for all of us to apply ourselves seriously —through every means available to us—to a more general effort to explore and resolve the fears and conflicting interests which are at the root of our difficulties.

It is often, all too often, said that we are heading towards a new disaster. It is far less often said that the situation is also potentially very promising and that we can, if we all strive for it, move quickly and steadily towards a new era of peace, prosperity and civilization. It is this latter belief which has the United Nations as its chief exponent.

I do not believe that this present world situation is as threatening as it is often made out to be. I am convinced that no responsible statesman in any country can, or does, contemplate the prospect of war.

If we could start our efforts to resolve the basic problems from that more hopeful, but none the less truly realistic standpoint, I feel that not only might we have a chance of reaching a successful conclusion, but also the millions of people who watch our delibera-

513

tions might really feel that their own cause, their indisputable longing for peace, is being truly championed by this Organization.

It is evident that, in the past year, the United Nations has made great strides in setting up international machinery for the handling of world political, economic, and social problems. The structure of this machinery is almost complete; its shape and design are well defined. It is now possible to say that, with the co-operation of the Member governments, the United Nations is equipped to undertake responsibility for the handling of problems in these fields.

During the past year the United Nations has progressed in many ways. Its membership has increased by the addition of Afghanistan, Iceland, Siam and Sweden. It has acquired the site for a permanent home and begun preparations for its construction. The European office at Geneva has begun to function as an important international centre, and information centres have now been opened in eight countries. The Trusteeship Council, the last of the principal organs provided in the Charter, has been established. The Trusteeship System is now in operation, and the first visit to a Trust Territory is being made. Two new bodies of great potential importance have been set up, the Economic Commission for Europe and the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. The International Children's Fund has been organized and the first substantial contributions have been made available to it by Member Governments. The General Assembly has held its first special session, to deal with the question of Palestine, and a Special Committee has been set up to elucidate the problem. The International Court of Justice received its first case. The Security Council has conducted its first field investigation on the frontiers of Greece. The Secretariat is improving in efficiency and organization and is daily gaining greater experience in the discharge of its task.

The first regular session of the General Assembly was an outstanding event in international life. We all felt that the session has served to harmonize conflicting views, to bring a better spirit into the relations between the Member Countries, and to accomplish important political tasks.

We have, in the General Assembly, the representatives of

514

fifty-five nations, among them the greatest and the smallest in the world. Now, more than ever before, every nation has a vital stake in the establishment of a stable and prosperous international order. I am more than ever convinced that the United Nations can, and should, be a place where the combined common sense and determination of the peoples will find its voice and take a real part in the framing of the future of mankind.

The Charter is filled with provisions which are specifically designed for this very end. Its first Article states that among the purposes of the United Nations are the following: "To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace," and "To be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends."

If there ever was a time for developing "friendly relations among nations," "harmonizing the action of nations"; considering "the general principles of cooperation in the maintenance of international peace and security," and "promoting international cooperation in the political field," can it not be said that that time is now?

I urge that the Member States devote the most earnest thought to this matter before the opening of the session of the General Assembly.

Trygve Lie
Secretary-General

4 July 1947

INTERNATIONAL NOTES

Prepared by the Editorial Assistant, Division of Intercourse and Education

MAY 23—AUGUST 18

TOWARD EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AGREEMENT

In an address at Harvard University on June 5, 1947, Secretary of State George C. Marshall made a statement to the effect that before the United States can do much more to aid European recovery the countries of Europe must decide what “the requirements of the situation” are and what part they themselves will take to make effective such aid as the United States may give. Following a meeting in Paris between the British and French Foreign Ministers, Ernest Bevin and Georges Bidault (June 17-18), Foreign Minister Vyacheslav M. Molotov of the Soviet Union was invited to join in further discussion of the Marshall suggestion. An Anglo-French proposal to set up a “Committee of Cooperation” to coordinate the economies of European States offered at the Conference held at Paris from June 28 to July 2 was rejected by the Soviet representative on the ground that creation of such an organization would “lead to interference in the internal affairs of European countries.” (For text of Conference statements, see New York *Herald Tribune*, July 3; see also *New York Times*, same date.)

Despite Soviet opposition, the British and French Governments on July 3 sent to 22 European nations¹ the text of their proposal and invited attendance at a conference opening at Paris on July 12. (See New York *Herald Tribune* or *New York Times*, July 4, for text.) Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Eire, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey accepted; Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, and Yugoslavia declined. Before adjourning on July 15, the Conference had set up machinery to carry out its objective which was the “drawing up of a program concerning European availabilities and requirements as soon as possible.” The machinery consists of the Coopera-

¹ Spain was excluded.

515

516

tion Committee, comprised of representatives of each State attending the Conference, whose function will be the preparation of the report of the findings of the economic inquiry; a 5-member executive committee on which Great Britain, France, Italy, Netherlands, and Norway are represented; and four subcommittees —on food and agriculture, iron and steel, transport, fuel and power. (For text of plan, see *New York Times*, July 14.) A plenary session of the Conference will convene September 1 or 2 to consider the report, which will then be submitted to the United States Government.

Meanwhile three committees set up by President Truman in June are making a study of "United States resources available for economic assistance to foreign countries" and "the relation between this assistance and our domestic economy." (See text of President Truman's statement in Department of State *Bulletin*, Vol. XVI, No. 417, June 29, 1947.) Two of the committees are government groups, headed respectively by Julius A. Krug, Secretary of the Interior, and Dr. Edwin G. Nourse, Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers; the third, a 19-member citizen group, is headed by Secretary of Commerce W. Averell Harriman.

An Anglo-American conference on questions relating to the Ruhr coal mines opened at Washington on August 12 and another conference on the industrial rehabilitation of Germany, in which France will participate, is to meet shortly in London. These two moves are results of the new United States policy on Germany issued to General Lucius D. Clay, commander in the United States zone, in mid-July. (For text of directive, see *New York Times*, July 16, or Department of State *Bulletin*, Vol. XVII, No. 421, July 27.)

## INDIA

A plan to partition British India into Hindu and Moslem areas, recommended by Viscount Mountbatten, the Viceroy, approved by the British Cabinet on May 23, and accepted by Indian leaders representing the three major political parties in a conference at Simla on June 2, was made public simultaneously at London and

517

New Delhi on June 3. (See text of Prime Minister Attlee's statement in *The New York Times* or New York *Herald Tribune*, June 4, for details.) The India Independence Bill, fixing August 15 for the establishment of the Dominions of India and Pakistan (the first comprising predominantly Hindu areas and the other Moslem-majority areas), each of which would have a Governor-General appointed by the King, was passed by the House of Commons on July 15, by the House of Lords on July 16, and approved by the King on July 18. During the House of Commons debate, Mr. Attlee announced that Viscount Mountbatten would be Governor-General of the Dominion of India and Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Moslem League president, Governor-General of Pakistan. On July 19, the Interim Government of India was divided into two groups so that until the arrival of the independence date each could meet separately to consider matters concerning its own territory; on matters of common concern, the two groups held joint meetings under the chairmanship of the Viceroy.

The Indian Constituent Assembly, previous sessions of which had been boycotted by representatives of Moslem areas, reconvened at New Delhi on July 14 and by the end of the month had completed a draft constitution for the Dominion of India. A Constituent Assembly of 66 members, representing provinces comprising Pakistan (Sind, Baluchistan, Northwest Frontier Province, and parts of Bengal and Punjab), was authorized by the Viceroy to draw up a constitution and to act as Pakistan's Interim Legislature; it convened at Karachi on August 10, electing Mr. Jinnah as president of the Assembly.

Most of the Princely States have decided to join the Indian Dominion. Under the accession agreements, according to a New Delhi dispatch of July 31 (see *New York Times*, August 1), the Princely States “surrender control of defense, foreign relations, and communications to the central authority, but retain their internal authority.”

## JAPAN

The holding in the United States of a conference to discuss a peace treaty for Japan was proposed by the United States Govern-

518

ment to the other ten nations members² of the Far Eastern Commission on July 11. In proposing the 11-power conference, the United States expressed the view that "other states at war with Japan should be given an opportunity to present their views while the treaty is being drafted and that after the draft has reached a sufficiently advanced stage it should be considered by a general conference of all the states at war with Japan." August 19, 1947, was suggested as the tentative opening date. (See Department of State *Bulletin*, Vol. XVII, No. 421, July 27.) All the governments, except that of the Soviet Union, were agreeable to the suggestion, although some favored a later date. The Soviet Government objected to the United States having acted without previously consulting the Soviet, Chinese, and British Governments and stated further that "the Soviet Government considers it necessary that the question of calling a conference for the preparation of a peace treaty with Japan be examined preliminarily by the Council of Foreign Ministers." (See *New York Times*, July 24, for full text.)

Explaining in his reply, made public at Washington on August 15, why the United States Government does not consider it appropriate to refer the drafting of the Japanese peace treaty to the Council of Foreign Ministers, Secretary of State Marshall pointed out that "the special interest of other Pacific powers in the Japanese settlement requires the Governments which compose the Council of Foreign Ministers to recognize that a conference now to consider that settlement even provisionally should be larger in composition than the Council." (For full text, see *New York Times*, August 16.)

On July 11 also, the Far Eastern Commission announced completion of a "basic post-surrender policy" for Japan to replace the United States initial directive issued to General Douglas MacArthur in September, 1945. (For text, see Department of State *Bulletin*, Vol. XVII, No. 422, August 3, 1947.)

## KOREA

Following an exchange of letters between Secretary of State

² United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, China, the Philippines, India, Australia, New Zealand, France, the Netherlands, and Canada.

519

Marshall and Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov last spring, the joint Soviet-United States Commission on Korea met (May 21) to resume negotiations for the establishment of a Korean provisional government, but again became deadlocked over the question of what Korean political parties or social groups should be consulted. Calling the situation to the attention of Mr. Molotov in a letter on August 11, Secretary Marshall reminded the Soviet Foreign Minister that he had been aware when agreeing to resumption of the negotiations that the United States Government was averse to excluding representatives of Korean democratic parties and social organizations from consultation with the Commission "because of opinions they might hold or may have expressed in the past concerning the future government of their country, provided they are prepared to cooperate with the Commission." Mr. Marshall concluded by asking that the Joint Commission report "the state of its deliberations" by August 21 so that "each Government may immediately consider what further steps may usefully be taken to achieve the aims of the Moscow agreement: namely, the establishment of an independent united Korea which can take its proper place among the United Nations." (See *New York Times*, August 14, for full text.)

## THE UNITED NATIONS

*The Security Council*—Debate on the report of the Council's Balkan Investigating Commission opened on June 27 with submission by the United States delegate of a resolution proposing that effect be given to one of its major recommendations by establishing a semi-permanent commission to investigate and report on future incidents arising on the frontier between Greece on the one hand and Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia on the other. The resolution, with certain amendments proposed by other Council members, came to a final vote on July 29 but failed of adoption by two votes—cast by the Soviet Union and Polish representatives. On August 4 the Council rejected a Soviet resolution condemning Greece for the Balkan frontier troubles and asking withdrawal of foreign military personnel from Greece, Poland alone siding with Russia in the 9–2 vote. On August 12, after a special seven-

520

nation subcommittee set up to attempt the drafting of a compromise resolution to settle the Balkan question reported failure, the United States representative on the Council introduced a new resolution accompanied by a statement in which he said that "The continued failure of the Security Council to take effective action in this case because of the Soviet veto cannot, in the opinion of the United States Government, preclude individual or collective action by States willing to act, so long as they act in accordance with the general purposes and principles of the United Nations"; that "we are confident that the General Assembly will exercise its powers to the limit for the protection of Greece"; and that the United States would be prepared "to cooperate with like-minded Members of the United Nations in taking any steps which might become necessary within the terms of the Assembly recommendations or within the provisions of the Charter to afford Greece the protection to which she is entitled under the Charter." (For text of statement and resolution, see *New York Times*, August 13.)

The situation arising from the resumption of hostilities between Netherlands and Indonesian armed forces on July 21, following the breakdown of negotiations to implement the Cheribon agreement signed on March 25, was brought to the attention of the Council by the Australian and Indian members in late July. (See texts in *New York Times*, July 31.) With Great Britain, France, and Belgium abstaining from voting, the Council on August 1 adopted a resolution calling upon the Netherlands and Indonesian Governments to "cease hostilities forthwith" and to "settle their disputes by arbitration or other peaceful means." Both parties agreed to abide by the Council's appeal, but each has accused the other of violating the truce which went into effect August 4. By a vote of 8 to 3 (Great Britain, France, and Belgium casting the negative votes), the Council agreed to allow the participation of Indonesia's representative in the debate on the case, and on August 14 Sutan Sjahrir, former Premier of Indonesia, stated his country's case and suggested that the Council appoint a commission to see that the truce is observed and to arbitrate the dispute.³

³ Two offers of mediation have been made by the United States and at the

521

Egypt's demand for the withdrawal of British troops from Egypt and the surrender of British control over the Sudan was presented to the Council by the Prime Minister of Egypt on August 5 and two later Council sessions were devoted to the case, which has not yet reached the voting stage.

Today, August 18, the Council voted to admit Yemen and Pakistan to membership in the United Nations, but rejected applications made by Albania, Ireland, Outer Mongolia, Portugal, and Trans-Jordan. There are five other applications before the Council, those of Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, and Rumania.

An inconclusive debate on the projected world police force occupied a number of Council sessions from June 4-July 15. After some debate on the report submitted to it by its Military Staff Committee on April 30, the Council on June 25 asked the five members of the Committee (Soviet Union, United Kingdom, France, China, and United States) to submit by June 30 preliminary estimates on the size and composition of the forces needed by the United Nations to preserve peace. It was the continued refusal of the Soviet Union to submit its figures which brought the debate to a standstill. (Extract from the four reports submitted appeared in *The New York Times*, July 1.)

On July 8, the Security Council adopted a plan of work for its Committee for Conventional Armaments, the Soviet and Polish delegates abstaining from voting.

*The Atomic Energy Commission*—The Working Committee of the Commission, charged with the task of adjusting differences between the Soviet Union's views and the Commission's interim report submitted to the Security Council on December 30, 1946, has made little progress during the past months, due in great part to the delaying tactics of the Soviet delegation, according to a statement made by Frederick H. Osborn, Deputy United States

request of the Indonesian Government a United States representative visited Jogjakarta, capital of the Republic, to be acquainted with that Government's viewpoint. The Indonesian Government in each case accepted the "good offices" of the United States but requested that the United States "use its influence with the Netherlands and the United Nations Security Council" to bring about the dispatch of an international arbitration commission to Indonesia. (For text of first Indonesian reply, see *New York Times*, August 8.)

522

Representative on the Commission, and published in *The New York Times* of August 3. Committee No. 2, on controls, succeeded in drafting "preliminary working papers setting up in some detail the functions of the proposed international agency for control of atomic energy," Mr. Osborn said. The report, a summary of which was given in the *New York Herald Tribune* on August 2, was sent to the respective governments for examination. A reply to Mr. Osborn's statement, explaining the Soviet position with regard to atomic energy control, was written for the United Press by the Soviet delegate, Andrei A. Gromyko. (See *New York Herald Tribune* or *New York Times*, August 10, for text.)

*The Economic and Social Council*—This Council held its fifth session at Lake Success, from July 19 to August 27. Action taken by it included approval of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Monetary Fund as specialized agencies of the United Nations; completion of plans for a United Nations conference on Trade and Employment to open at Havana, November 21, and an international conference on Freedom of the Press scheduled to open at Geneva on March 23, 1948; and constitution of a committee to consider the establishment of an Economic Commission for Latin America similar to those set up for Europe and for Asia and the Far East. (For details, see *New York Herald Tribune*, August 18.)

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS

This series presents the views of distinguished leaders of opinion of many
countries on vital international problems and reproduces texts of official
treaties and public documents. The most recent issues are listed below. A
complete list will be sent upon application to International Conciliation, 405
West 117th Street, New York 27, N. Y.

425—*November, 1946*. The Share of Labor in World Trade, by Robert L. Gulick, Jr. Text of Suggested Charter for an International Trade Organization of the United Nations, presented by the United States as a basis for discussion by the Preparatory Committee for the International Conference on Trade and Employment.

426—*December, 1946*. The Idea of Human Rights, by James T. Shotwell. Statement on and Text of a Bill of Human Rights drafted by the Executive Committee of the Committee on Human Rights of the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace. The Trusteeship System and Nonself-Governing Territories: Report prepared for the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace by its Committee on Trusteeship under the chairmanship of Professor Arthur N. Holcombe.

427—*January, 1947*. The United States Education Missions to Japan and Germany: An article by Dr. George F. Zook, President of the American Council on Education, and summaries of the Reports of the two Missions.

428—*February, 1947*. Soviet Policy toward Disarmament, by Marina Salvin, Research Assistant, Division of Economics and History, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

429—*March, 1947*. Russia Seen from Within: An account of a relief mission visit by Peter Grimm, President of the New York State Chamber of Commerce. Russia and the World: A Soviet review of diplomacy, by Max M. Laserson, Lecturer in Economics, Columbia University.

430—*April, 1947*. The United Nations Atomic Energy Commission: An Historical Survey of the Period June 1946 to March 1947.

431—*May, 1947*. The Development of UNESCO: Introduction by Howard E. Wilson; Report of the Chairman of the Program Coordinating Committee, Paris, December 9, 1946; Progress Report by the UNESCO Secretariat, Paris, March 26, 1947; Agreement between the United Nations and UNESCO.

432—*June, 1947*. The Food and Agriculture Organization at Work: An article by Gove Hambidge, Director of Information of the FAO, accompanied by documentary material. Security through the United Nations: Fifth Report of the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace. Report on the Moscow Meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers, by John Foster Dulles. Transcript of Stalin-Stassen Conference, Moscow, April 9, 1947.

433—*September, 1947*. The United Nations General Assembly: Its Expanding Role and the Issues before the Second Session. Introduction to the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, 1947.