Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XXV, Organization of Foreign Policy; Information Policy; United Nations; Scientific Matters

221. Circular Airgram From the Department of State to Certain Posts¹

CA-2368

Washington, August 30, 1962, 8:02 p.m.

SUBJECT

• Committee of 17 in the Seventeenth United Nations General Assembly

REF

• Department Circular Telegram 328²

At the Seventeenth General Assembly the United States expects to lay considerable stress on the need for responsible and moderate action by the GA, particularly on colonial questions. For example, it is expected that the major speech by the United States at the opening of the Assembly will stress this theme. As part of this overall approach, we, and hopefully others, shall also make a major effort to reconstitute the Committee of 17 in the hopes that it will act more moderately and responsibly than in the past year.

The United States continues to favor the achievement of self-determination by dependent peoples throughout the world, and we believe that the United Nations has a vital role to play in the process of decolonization. Moreover, we recognize and sympathize with the strong feelings against colonialism held particularly by the Afro-Asians and Latin Americans. However, we believe that the United Nations Committee of 17, the committee established by the Sixteenth General Assembly to oversee the implementation of the Colonialism Declaration, has often demonstrated an unjustified doctrinaire extremism and impracticality in its proceedings and recommendations. This attitude is, in large part, due to the presence of the USSR on the Committee and its patent attempts to use the Committee as a “cold war” instrument with which to belabor the West, in general, and specifically, to link the United States with European colonial powers pursuing what the Soviets, for propaganda purposes, describe as “aggressive and repressive colonial policies.” With the USSR consistently pressing for the most extreme “anti-colonial” positions in the Committee, most of the other members, with the exception of Australia, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States, are usually reluctant to lag behind the Soviets’ propaganda position lest they appear to be “soft on colonialism.” This has appeared especially the case with the Afro-Asians. Unfortunately, the Latin American members of the Committee have tended to be unwilling to take a stand contrary to that of the Afro-Asians while admitting privately the impracticality and questionable legality of some Committee action. We fear other Latin Americans may follow this tendency. The result has been the passage of a number of irresponsible resolutions with unworkable recommendations.

The Department believes that, in the interest of having the United Nations’ contribution toward ending colonialism progress on a sound basis, an intensive effort is justified to moderate and improve the Committee’s future performance and behavior by ridding it of the USSR. While we continue to support the Committee’s objectives and purpose, we believe that the United States, together with the USSR, should be replaced, considering this to be the best method of minimizing the “cold war” issue in the Committee’s colonialism debates. The elimination of the USSR from the Committee of 17 might best be achieved through a broader reconstitution by the General Assembly of the Committee’s membership (this would not rule out the continued membership of such present members as Australia and the United Kingdom).

The Department accordingly believes that an intensive effort should be made as soon as possible to gain support for this measure among UN delegations in New York and in key capitals. While the Department is opposed to United States withdrawal from the Committee if the USSR retains its membership, this should not be revealed to foreign governments, except the United Kingdom, since knowledge of this might undermine our main goal of getting rid of the Soviets.

Addressee Action Posts, unless they perceive overriding objections, are requested to take up this matter on an urgent basis and at an appropriately high level with the respective governments to which accredited. Embassy London should inform the Foreign Office of these demarches and urge the UK Government to make similar approaches.

USUN should also discuss this matter with United Nations delegations representing both Action Post and Info Post member states, except the USSR and Ethiopia. (The demarche to Ethiopia should be made exclusively in Addis Ababa.) Info Post countries include those whose UN delegations in New York tend to have the major voice in the fixing of their governments’ positions on this issue. In the case of such countries, we believe, the demarches should be made exclusively in New York. As the support of the Africans, Asians and Latin Americans is of utmost importance if our effort is to succeed at the Seventeenth General Assembly, the approaches made in these countries, and with their United Nations delegations, will be of particular importance. The approaches should be made verbally.

Action Posts are requested to report Foreign Offices’ reactions telegraphically, with messages repeated to USUN. The Department would appreciate receiving any comments Embassy Moscow cares to make on this matter.

Action Posts’ presentations should include the following six points, and Posts may draw on the background information contained in Annex I to this Airgram and the examples given in Annexes II and III³ to the extent considered necessary. Citation of the examples contained in Annexes II and III will obviously have to be tailored according to the country or delegation being approached.

Points to be Made to Foreign Governments and UN Delegations

1. The United States will continue its policy of encouraging and contributing to practical actions which should result in the achievement of self-determination by dependent peoples as soon as possible. We support the principles contained in the United Nations’ Colonialism Declaration, particularly the principle that “All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” The traditional United States position on colonialism was summed up by President Kennedy speaking before the General Assembly last fall when he said: “My country favors a world of free and equal states . . . Within the limits of our responsibility in such matters, my country intends to be a participant, and not merely an observer, in the peaceful expeditious movement of nations from the status of colonies to the partnership of equals.” We continue to believe that the United Nations can play a vital and constructive role in the liquidation of colonialism.

2. In line with the above, the United States supported the establishment of the Committee of 17 and agreed to serve on it. We continue to believe that the Committee can make an important contribution toward the decolonization process. While we have differed with the majority of its members in some of their recommendations and the procedures they have employed, we are prepared to cooperate with the Committee whether we are members or not.

3. Up to now, however, the Committee’s record has been clouded by the Soviets’ exploiting it for propaganda purposes. Their participation in it has not been for the legitimate purpose of contributing to the orderly termination of colonialism, but rather to exploit the Committee of 17 as a “cold war” forum. While posing as the most ardent champion of dependent peoples, the Soviets have attempted to lump the United States with European colonial powers allegedly following “aggressive and repressive policies.” We do not believe that it is in the interests of countries sincerely desirous of contributing to colonialism’s demise for them to provide a forum for such “cold war” propaganda exercises against the United States when the record of concrete US assistance in the United Nations and elsewhere to dependent peoples gives the lie to such false propaganda.

4. In order for the Committee of 17 to fulfill its potential constructively and to avoid, if possible, further “cold war” maneuvers, we believe that the USSR should be replaced on the Committee and ask the governments being approached to support this measure when the future of the Committee of 17 is being discussed in the Seventeenth General Assembly. We have no wish to see the Committee used for “cold war” purposes and are also prepared to withdraw in the interests of improving the Committee’s work.

5. In addition to replacing the USSR and the United States, we believe further changes in the Committee’s membership might be desirable so as to give countries which have not yet had a chance to serve the opportunity of making their contribution to the work of this important body. The Committee’s membership should be equitably balanced geographically, and it should continue to include member states which have recently become independent as well as some member states which administer colonial territories. FYI. Posts should avoid entering into a more detailed discussion about the future membership of the Committee. End FYI.

6. (Posts have discretion in presenting the following points.) We believe that the Committee of 17 can be made a more effective instrument in the decolonization process if it begins to proceed on a more responsible and realistic basis to consider the actual problems faced by an Administrating Authority in advancing individual territories toward self-determination. The practice of unrestrainedly criticizing all Administering Authorities and the adoption of impractical and intemperate resolutions have the following negative results:

(a) Extremism and lack of realism in the United Nations on the colonial question, as well as other issues, tend to undermine the effectiveness of the General Assembly—the only body in which all member states have an equal voice. Intemperate debate and the lack of realism in resolutions may very well create a situation in which Administering Authorities, instead of heeding the United Nations, will come increasingly to look upon it as a forum for oratory only, thereby diminishing the authority and effectiveness of the United Nations in colonial matters.

(b) In the United States, the country on which so many crucial UN operations depend for political and especially financial support, the passage of unrealistic resolutions, drafted more for their anticipated propaganda impact than for their contribution to a solution of colonial problems, tends to make important segments of American public opinion, and consequently Congressional opinion, question United States support for the United Nations and its operations. Therefore, the extent of our future cooperation with the Committee of 17 may well depend on the degree of realism and responsibility which that body displays.

(c) The adoption of extreme and unworkable measures tends to undercut United States efforts to influence colonial powers to adopt policies regarding their dependent territories in line with the wishes of the world community as expressed in the United Nations. Such measures also tend to strengthen the hands of the more conservative elements in countries administering colonial areas, often encourage negative approaches to solutions of problems and thereby impede the achievement of the goals we and other opponents of colonialism support.

Rusk

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1960–63, 320/8–3062. Confidential. Drafted by James B. Parker; cleared by Jesse MacKnight, Captain Rosse E. Freeman, Joseph J. Sisco, George N. Monsma, Louise McNutt, Herbert Reis, and James M. Ludlow; and approved by Assistant Secretary Cleveland.
2. Dated August 24. (Ibid., 320/8–2462)
3. None of the annexes is printed. Annex I is entitled “Background”; Annex II is entitled “Examples of Soviet ‘Cold War’ Tactics in the Committee of 17”; Annex III is entitled “Examples of Unwise Action Taken by Majority of Committee of 17.”