« ÎnapoiContinuați »
criticized by certain delegations. While a sincere desire to promote the welfare of the trust territories motivated some of these criticisms, others were obviously made for the purpose of political propaganda. However, the Fourth Committee appeared to be little affected by such propaganda.
The debate on the Trusteeship Council's report culminated in the unanimous adoption of four resolutions by the General Assembly on November 18, 1948. In one of these resolutions the General Assembly took note of the report of the Trusteeship Council and recommended that the Council consider at its next session the comments and suggestions made by the Assembly.
A second resolution, initiated by several Latin American delegations, recommended a number of steps to facilitate educational advancement in trust territories. The Trusteeship Council was quested to study the financial and technical implications of a further expansion of higher education in Africa, including the possibility of establishing in 1952 a university for the trust territories. This study is to be undertaken in consultation with administering authorities, and the Council is authorized, if it so desires, to consult UNESCO.
A third resolution, emphasizing principles already contained in the Charter of the United Nations and the terms of the trusteeship agreements, urged the administering authorities to take all possible steps to promote the progressive development of the trust territories.
The complex and controversial question of administrative unions was the subject of a fourth resolution. The general feeling in the Assembly was that this problem merited a more comprehensive study by the Trusteeship Council before further consideration in the Assembly. This feeling was shared by the administering authorities, who expressed their willingness to cooperate fully. When a resolution advocating a general investigation of administrative unions was introduced in the Fourth Committee, however, it contained a number of paragraphs expressing opinions and making recommendations on the substance of the problem. Although agreeing with most of these opinions, the United States and a number of other Members believed it premature and illogical for the General Assembly to express opinions and reach conclusions concerning administrative unions in the same resolution which called for an investigation. Since this view was not shared by a majority of the members of the Fourth Committee, the debatable paragraphs were approved by that Committee. In the plenary session of the Assembly, however, these paragraphs failed to receive the two-thirds vote necessary for their retention in the resolution. The resolution on administrative unions, as finally adopted
by unanimous vote of the General Assembly, simply provides for a Trusteeship Council investigation of the whole problem.
SOUTH WEST AFRICA
In addition to examining the report of the Trusteeship Council, the General Assembly for the third time debated the future of the mandated territory of South West Africa. The debate was featured by controversy over South Africa's announcement that South West Africa was to be brought into closer association with the Union by a grant of representation in the Union Parliament. When several members of the committee voiced opposition to this plan, they were assured by the Representative from South Africa that the Union did not intend to incorporate or absorb the territory. He also reaffirmed the Union's intention to continue administering South West Africa in the spirit of the mandate.
During the ensuing debate several proposals, including the sending of a United Nations Commission to South West Africa, were introduced by delegations critical of the Union. However, with a view to securing from the Union further reports on South West Africa for examination by the Trusteeship Council, the Fourth Committee adopted a resolution in more moderate terms. It expressed regret that the Union of South Africa had failed to comply with the Assembly's request to place South West Africa under the trusteeship system and recommended that the Union continue to supply annual information on the administration of South West Africa until agreement is reached with the United Nations regarding the future of the territory.
In the plenary discussion this recommendation was condemned as falling far short of what was required under the Charter. The Union Delegate, however, insisted that his Government was under neither legal nor moral obligation to submit a trusteeship agreement. At his request a roll-call vote was held on the paragraph of the resoluion which maintains the recommendation of the First and Second Sessions of the Assembly that South West Africa be placed under the trusteeship system. After the controversial paragraph was approved by a vote of 32 to 14, with 5 abstentions, the whole resolution was adopted with only South Africa's opposing vote.
TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS
There were several notable developments during 1948 regarding the administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, for which the United States is the administering authority.
Soon after the conclusion of the trusteeship agreement between the United States and the Security Council, which came into force on July 18, 1947, work was begun on organic legislation for the territory by way of fulfilment of article 12 of the agreement. Such legislation was introduced into the Eightieth Congress which, because of insufficient time, was unable to act on this matter.
With the rapid withdrawal of American armed forces from the Trust Territory, the local administration has been confronted by the need for rehabilitating the native economies of the widely scattered islands which comprise the Trust Territory. One of the most important steps taken in this regard has been the effort to revive and further the fishing industry. This Government announced its policy relating to commercial fishing opportunities in the Trust Territory on September 29, 1948. Fishing opportunities in the territorial waters of the Trust Territory will be equally available to fishing enterprises of all nations, except that the High Commissioner will have discretion in excluding enterprises for reasons of security or for the purpose of carrying out the obligation to promote the advancement of the inhabitants. The taking of fish and the establishment and maintenance of shore facilities will be strictly controlled by the High Commissioner in order that the welfare of the native inhabitants can be safeguarded and the harvesting of the resources can be undertaken along adequate conservational lines. This effort is in keeping with the general policy of this Government to develop the territory in behalf of the local inhabitants.
The first annual report to the United Nations on the administration of the Trust Territory has been prepared by the Department of the Navy. This report is to be transmitted to the United Nations early in 1949.
The “Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories" (chapter XI of the Charter) set forth certain guiding principles for the administration of non-self-governing territories. Furthermore, it obligates those members having responsibilities for such territories to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitations as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions. The development of methods for dealing with this information submitted under article 73 (e) has constituted an important and controversial aspect of United Nations activity during its third year.
Information submitted on non-self-governing territories is handled in accordance with resolutions of the General Assembly, which has assigned the responsibility for a preliminary review of this information to a “Special Committee on the Transmission of Information Under Article 73 (e) of the Charter". This Committee is empowered to examine the information and, with certain restrictions, make recommendations for the consideration of the General Assembly.
During the year 1948, eight Members of the United Nations submitted information in accordance with article 73 (e) of the Charter
some sixty non-self-governing territories. The best use to be made of this annual information has been a continuing problem within the United Nations.
UNITED STATES ACTION IN SUBMITTING
In compliance with the declaration regarding non-self-governing territories contained in chapter XI of the Charter, the United States promptly submitted annual reports to the United Nations on Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands for the fiscal year 1947. Prepared by the territorial governments in collaboration with Federal departments, these reports generally followed a standard form, originally suggested by the United States, which was adopted by the General Assembly on November 3, 1947.
The United States also provided voluntary information called for by the optional part of the standard form on geography, history, people, government, and human rights. The major portion of the standard form, however, requests detailed information on labor and employment conditions, public health and sanitation, housing, welfare and relief, educational policy, agriculture, industry, communications and transport, and banking and credit.
METHOD OF EXAMINING REPORTS
The General Assembly, under resolution 146 (II), adopted November 3, 1947, invited its Fourth Committee to constitute a special committee,
"to examine the information transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter on the economic, social and educational conditions in the Non- . Self-Governing Territories, and to submit reports thereon for the consideration of the General Assembly with such procedural recom
mendations as it may deem fit, and with such substantive recommendations as it may deem desirable relating to functional fields generally but not with respect to individual territories." The Special Committee, duly established by the General Assembly in 1948, met at Geneva from September 2 to 17, and at Paris on September 23 and 29.
As in the case of last year's Ad Hoc Committee on the same subject, 8 of the 16 members of the Special Committee represented states administering and reporting on non-self-governing territories, and an equal number, elected by the General Assembly, represented nonadministering members. The Committee for 1948 was composed of Australia, Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States (administering members), and China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Nicaragua, Sweden, and the U.S.S.R. (nonadministering members). In addition representatives of the following specialized agencies participated in the discussions on matters affecting the work of their organizations: the World Health Organization (Who), the International Labor Office (ILO), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
Summaries and analyses of the information on some sixty territories were prepared by the Secretariat. Proceeding on functional lines, the analyses covered economic, health, labor, and educational conditions and social welfare. Information regarding the development of self-governing institutions, voluntarily transmitted by the United States, Australia, Denmark, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and France (for Morocco and Tunisia), was not analyzed but was included in the summaries prepared by the Secretariat.
In the effort to improve the preparation and use of this information, the Committee made general comments on the analyses for the guidance of the administering authorities and of the Secretariat. These comments included suggestions: (a) for further improvement in the presentation of statistical information; (b) for the preparation of special studies, including those of a long-range nature which might be undertaken in collaboration with the specialized agencies; and (c) for the amplification of information on certain topics in future reports.
The Special Committee, after two weeks of debate in which the United States often played the role of conciliator, adopted four resolutions. These were in turn adopted by the Fourth Committee together with a fifth resolution initiated by the Delegation of India in