Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

authorizing the Economic and Social Council to call the conference in favor of an amendment, moved by Cuba, recommending that Members responsible for the administration of non-self-governing territories convene conferences of representatives of non-self-governing peoples.

Throughout the committee discussions and in the plenary meetings of the General Assembly, the United States strongly supported regional rather than world-wide conferences of representatives of non-self-governing peoples and opposed any proposals which would have authorized the Economic and Social Council to convene such conferences. The United States Delegation held that granting the Economic and Social Council such powers would be contrary to the Charter since it tended to give the Economic and Social Council an authority equal to or greater than that exercised by the metropolitan governments responsible for the administration of non-self-governing territories.

Drafting of the Trusteeship Agreements During meetings of the General Assembly and its Trusteeship Committee in London all of the mandatory powers, except the Union of South Africa,' announced that they would draw up trusteeship agreements placing the “B” and “C” mandated territories respectively administered by them in Africa and the Pacific under the international trusteeship system provided for in chapters XII and XIII of the Charter. The Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on February 9, 1946 welcomed the declarations by these mandatory powers and invited them and other states to take steps to conclude trusteeship agreements for submission to the Second Part of the First Session of the General Assembly.

At its final meeting in April 1946 the Assembly of the League of Nations noted the expressed intentions of the Members of the League administering territories under mandate to continue to administer them for the well-being and development of the peoples concerned in accordance with the obligations contained in the respective Mandates until other arrangements had been agreed upon between the United Nations and the respective mandatory powers.

Early in 1946 the United States Government received copies of pro posed trusteeship agreements for Tanganyika, Togoland, and the Cameroons from the United Kingdom; for Ruanda-Urundi from Belgium; and later for Togoland and the Cameroons from France; for

* The question of trusteeship for South West Africa, a former League of Nations mandate administered by the Union of South Africa, is discussed later in this chapter.

726027-47-6

Western Samoa from New Zealand; and for New Guinea from Australia. The United States Government communicated to each of those mandatory powers its comments on their proposed terms of trusteeship and its views on procedures for the submission of trusteeship agreements to the General Assembly. Consultations regarding many provisions in the draft trusteeship agreements were undertaken with each of these nations. Although certain controversial points were not settled in the conversations, agreement was generally reached to add a significant number of provisions to the original draft agreements enlarging upon the rights of the inhabitants of the trust territory and specifying in greater detail the obligations of the administering authority to insure their political, economic, social, and educational advancement.

The most important provisions initiated by this Government were directed toward insuring that the administering authority would: guarantee freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of petition, of worship, and of religious teaching; extend the general system of education; apply any pertinent international conventions and recommendations to the trust territory; facilitate the periodic visits of the Trusteeship Council to the trust territory; and cooperate on behalf of the trust territories in any regional advisory commissions for nonself-governing territories which might be established and in other public or private international organizations.

Although the suggestions of the United States received general approval and were included in most of the trusteeship agreements, other articles in some of the drafts permitting certain types of monopolies to be established in trust territories occasioned considerable discussion, without complete agreement being reached before the meetings of the General Assembly.

tem

Trusteeship Agreements Approved by General Assembly

Article 79 of the Charter provides, in part, that “The terms of trusteeship for each territory to be placed under the trusteeship sys

shall be agreed upon by the states directly concerned, including the mandatory power in the case of territories held under mandate by a Member of the United Nations .

The procedure for agreeing upon the terms of trusteeship as specified in this article is not susceptible of easy determination. At the San Francisco conference the United States understood that the "states directly concerned" would be determined and that these states might negotiate prior agreements. Later the United States favored a simplified procedure. In November 1946 the United States Delegation proposed in the Trusteeship Committee of the General

a

Assembly a practical procedure to obviate the necessity for specifying the “states directly concerned” in each trust territory and thereby to facilitate the early establishment of the trusteeship system. Under this proposed procedure every state which is interested, whether or not technically determinable as a “state directly concerned” and whether a great power or a small power, would have an equal opportunity to present its views in a subcommittee of the Trusteeship Committee. In accepting this procedure, those states (except for the mandatory power in each case) without prejudice to any rights they might possess, would waive formal classification as a “state directly concerned” and forego formal signature of the preliminary agreements submitted to the General Assembly, simply agreeing to accept the decision of the General Assembly taken by the requisite vote. Following this procedure, the Trusteeship Committee selected a subcommittee which examined the provisions, interpretations, and implications of each article of the eight proposed agreements and of each of the two hundred and twenty-nine suggested modifications to the agreements introduced by the Members.

The subcommittee which considered the proposed trusteeship agreements found that the preambles of the drafts raised the question of "states directly concerned” by stating that the provisions of article 79 of the Charter had been complied with. The Soviet Representative argued that the Charter provisions had not been fulfilled because the "states directly concerned” had not been identified and had not previously agreed to the terms of trusteeship. When the subcommittee failed to reach a fully agreed solution of this problem, the chairman requested the Delegates from the Soviet Union and the United States to undertake consultations in an attempt to find an acceptable answer to the question. The consultations between the two Delegates did not succeed, and consequently the subcommittee took decisions on the preambles of the eight agreements with special regard to the question of "states directly concerned”. It approved a proposal of the United States Delegation to the effect that the following statement be included in the report of the Rapporteur:

“Approval of any terms of Trusteeship by this session of the General Assembly should be on the following understanding with respect to 'states directly concerned':

"All Members of the United Nations have had an opportunity to present their views with reference to the terms of Trusteeship now proposed to the General Assembly for approval. There has, however, been no specification by the General Assembly of 'states directly concerned' in relation to the proposed Trust Territories. Accordingly, the General Assembly in approving the terms of Trusteeship

does not prejudge the question of what states are or are not 'directly concerned within the meaning of Article 79. It recognizes that no state has waived or prejudiced its right hereafter to claim to be such a 'state directly concerned' in relation to approval of subsequently proposed Trusteeship agreements and any alteration or amendment of those now approved, and that the procedure to be followed in the future with reference to such matters may be subject to later determination".

This statement was approved by an overwhelming majority in the full Trusteeship Committee of the General Assembly. Thus the formula by which approval of the trusteeship agreements was secured did not define the states specifically concerned in each trust territory and left the question in regard to areas which may be proposed for trusteeship in the future to be determined at that time. The United States believes that the practice followed by the Assembly in this matter constitutes a useful guide for the future.

The principal objection of the United States to the proposed agreements for the African “B” mandates was to those articles permitting, when in the interest of the inhabitants, the administering authority to establish private monopolies. The views of the United States were met in part when Delegations of the United Kingdom and Belgium agreed to include a specific provision in the agreements to insure that any such monopoly contracts would be granted without discrimination. The French Delegation stated that under French law private monopolies were not permitted at all in such territories. As a further concession, the Delegations of Belgium and the United Kingdom, with the approval of the Committee, included declarations in the Committee Report to the effect that it was the intention of their Governments that:

(a) The Governments of Belgium and the United Kingdom have no intention of using the grant of private monopolies in Trust Territories as a normal instrument of policy;

(6) Such private monopolies would be granted only when this was essential in order to enable a particular type of desirable economic development to be undertaken in the interest of the inhabitants;

"(c) In those special cases where such private monopolies were granted they would be granted for limited periods, and would be promptly reported to the Trusteeship Council.”

With regard to the question of including in the trusteeship agreements some provision for alteration or amendment in the light of changing circumstances, the Trusteeship Committee recommended,

at the suggestion of the United States, that the General Assembly should instruct the Trusteeship Council:

"(a) to observe whether the Trusteeship agreements which have been approved by the General Assembly operate in fact to achieve the basic objectives of the Trusteeship System; and

(6) if it is of the opinion that, in the light of changing circumstances and practical experience, some alteration or amendment of any such Trusteeship agreement would promote the more rapid achievement of the basic objectives of the Trusteeship System, to submit such proposed alteration or amendment to the administering authority so that, if agreed on pursuant to Article 79, such alteration or amendment may then be submitted to the General Assembly for approval.”

This recommendation was not acted upon by the General Assembly and remains to be considered at a subsequent session.

The eight trusteeship agreements were adopted by the General Assembly on December 13, 1946 by more than a two-thirds vote over the continued opposition of the Soviet Union and several other Members. The agreements for the Cameroons and Togoland under French mandate were approved by a vote of 41 to 5, with 6 abstentions, while the other six agreements were accepted by a vote of 41 to 6, with 5 abstentions. The United States Delegation voted in favor of all eight agreements. The Soviet Delegation, stressing the principal points of disagreement in the subcommittee and committee debates, contended that the trusteeship agreements violated the Charter because: the "states directly concerned” have never been identified; the agreements make the trust territories an "integral” part of the administering power; and the agreements do not provide for the Security Council's approval of military arrangements in the trust territories. A motion to reject these agreements on the above grounds was defeated by more than a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly.

Trusteeship Council Organized The General Assembly, by approving on December 13, 1946 the eight trusteeship agreements submitted by the Governments of Australia, Belgium, France, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, made possible the organization of the Trusteeship Council. The Charter provides that, in addition to the states administering trust territories, the Trusteeship Council should be composed of the permanent members of the Security Council not administering trust territories (China, the United States, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), and other members elected for three-year terms by the General Assembly as required to have the number of non-administering states equal the number which administer trust territories. On

« ÎnapoiContinuați »