I consider that the discussions were successful and that they
resulted in a greater appreciation on the part of the
representatives of the participating governments of the United
States positions with respect to the consideration of dependent area
questions by the United Nations. I am not certain, however, that the
favorable outcome of the discussions will counter the
intensification of the anti-colonial trend which will undoubtedly
result from the raising of the Moroccan question2 and other recent
developments in the Middle East. Consequently, I fear that the
general atmosphere in the Fourth Committee will not appear to have
been altered substantially as the result of the non-administering
talks.
There is attached a report summarizing briefly the views set forth by
the non-administering representatives on the more important subjects
discussed. As would be expected, it was the consensus of the
majority of the representatives that the progress of dependent
peoples towards self-government or independence was too slow and
should be accelerated. One point which emerged during most of the
conversations in
[Page 621]
which I
participated impressed me greatly: the non-administering powers made
a clear distinction between the United States and the other
administering powers. While their statements along these lines must
be discounted to a certain degree, I am still convinced that the
non-administering powers do not consider the United States as
motivated by the same considerations in the colonial field as the
other administering powers.
I think that we should give consideration to the advisability of
carrying out similar consultations prior to the 1952 meeting of the
General Assembly. If this suggestion is adopted, I strongly
recommend that the invitations to consult be transmitted at a
sufficiently early date to permit the missions here in Washington to
obtain the views of their governments on the topics to be discussed.
It was unfortunate, in my opinion, that in the consultations which
we carried out this year the great majority of the representatives
stated that they had not had time to obtain the views of their
government and that, consequently, it should be understood that they
were expressing only their personal views.
[Enclosure]
Summary of Colonial Talks With
Non-Administering Powers of the
UN
In an attempt to summarize the views expressed by representatives
of the non-administering members of the UN in the Colonial Policy Talks, several factors
must be kept in mind. In some cases the representatives who were
called in were unprepared to state the official views of their
governments on the topics discussed. They were also unprepared
through lack of background knowledge to set forth even their
personal views on some questions. It is believed that in those
cases where unofficial views were expressed there will not be
too wide a divergence with the official attitudes and positions
of the respective governments.
In many cases it is noted that the area of agreement stated with
respect to the United States position is more apparent than
real. It is believed that this is especially true with respect
to the Latin American countries, with whom talks were held in
the field.
Keeping these considerations in mind, we have made an attempt to
summarize the talks by cataloging those positive points which
were made during the talks and which reflect an attitude
somewhat different than the United States position. Absence of a
country from the list of those who maintained a certain position
does not necessarily imply agreement by that nation with the
United States position. Reticence and the often resulting
apparent agreement might be caused by lack of instruction,
background knowledge, or both.
[Page 622]
general questions
The most persistent theme in the discussions with
non-administering states on colonial problems was that the
achievement by non-self-governing peoples of independence or
self-government should be expedited. In a few cases the
suggestion was advanced that a timetable be set up for the
achievement of these objectives (Syria, Saudi Arabia and
Thailand).
The Representative of Pakistan expressed his belief that the
prestige of the UN was
diminishing because of many compromise solutions reached by the
General Assembly and the failure of that body to take a
clear-cut stand based on the right or wrong of any given issue.
His evaluation of the British and French colonial
administrations is worth noting: whereas in the colonies French
administration was superior because of the absence of
discrimination, the French government in the Metropole, unlike
the British government, was bad because of its lack of
organization and fixed responsibility.
The Liberian Representative was critical of the lack of training
in self-government given by the Administering Members to their
African colonials.
The Representative of India expressed the view that the
inhabitants of trust territories could be made more aware of
their special status.
In response to a statement that the Trusteeship Council was
functioning effectively, the Indian Representative pointed to
the growing tendency of the General Assembly to assume the
functions of other UN bodies
which were not functioning effectively. The “Uniting For Peace”
resolution was cited as an example.
south west africa
The opinion that the General Assembly should take a firm stand on
this question was expressed by the Representatives of Pakistan,
Afghanistan, the Philippines and Cuba. The Pakistani
Representative thought that the primary short-range problem of
the UN in the field of dependent
area affairs was to prevail upon the Union of South Africa to
submit reports.
italian participation
The Pakistani Representative thought it wrong to assign any
administrative functions in Africa to Italy. The Representative
of Syria expressed the same opinion based on the belief that
Italy’s colonial attitude had not changed. The Indian
Representative believed that the only solution for Italian
participation lay in agreement by the Members of the Security
Council on the whole question of Membership.
trusteeship council procedures
The Representative of Saudi Arabia thought it would be unwise to
attempt to restrict General Assembly discussion of Trusteeship
Council
[Page 623]
procedures.
The officer of the Cuban Foreign Office with whom the
discussions were held emphasized the broad powers of discussion
available to the General Assembly.
transmission of political information
The Representatives of Saudi Arabia, China and Uruguay while
recognizing that the Charter did not specifically require the
submission of political information on the non-self-governing
territories thought that it would be desirable for Administering
Members to submit such information voluntarily. The
Representative of Saudi Arabia suggested that the United States
urge other Administering Members to follow its example in
submitting this information.
factors which should be taken into account
in deciding if a territory is or is not a territory whose
people have not yet attained a full measure of
self-government
The Representatives of the Arab States almost without exception
expressed the view that it was not desirable to establish
criteria of too restrictive a nature in determining if a
territory is ready for self-government or independence. For
example, the Iraqi Representative maintained that lack of
political and economic development should not be given too much
emphasis in determining whether colonial peoples were ready for
self-government.
One of the arguments most frequently advanced against the
establishment of criteria of too restrictive a nature, was that
in many independent countries the level of social, economic and
educational advancement was low. One Arab Representative
compared the stage of development in the independent country of
Yemen with that of Morocco, and concluded that, since Yemen was
independent, Morocco which was much more advanced was also
entitled to independence.
The Representative of Lebanon did not believe that the final
determination of whether or not a territory is self-governning
should be left exclusively to the Administering Member
concerned. The Indian Representative thought that before the
General Assembly approved a change in status it should make
certain that the wishes of the people concerned had been
considered.
