UNITED STATES DELEGATION TO THE SEVENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM OF CONVERSATION
November 7, 1952 (Typed November 10, 1952)
SUBJECT: Racial Conflict in South Africa; Hearing of NSGT Representatives in Committee 4.
PARTICIPANTS: Foreign Minister Casey, Australian Delegation The Secretary of State Ward P. Allen
Racial Conflict in South Africa. Minister Casey stated he understood the U.S. would vote in favor of UN competence in this case and indicated Australia did not share this view. He asked if the Secretary could explain the position in more detail. The Secretary replied that this, of course, from both the legal and political point of view, a very troublesome problem; that on the one hand the Charter contains a number of provisions regarding the observance of basic human rights, and on the other, the injunction in Article 27 against interference in domestic matters. Where the exact line is to be drawn in the apparent conflict between the human rights and domestic jurisdiction provisions of the Charter cannot be settled on the basis of words and formulas. For example, there is no subject generally regarded as more essentially within domestic jurisdiction than immigration policy, and yet we have had numerous international conferences on this matter, one recently concluded in Brussels. It is quite clear that this subject is one appropriate for at least discussion in an international forum. As one proceeds from discussion to recommendation to action, one rapidly approaches intervention in domestic matters. Certainly action is intervention, probably recommendation would be intervention, and it may be that, in some cases discussion would be intervention. In the present case, however, the U.S. is inclined to vote that the GA is competent to discuss if the question of competence is raised at the outset and to make a minatory statement along the foregoing lines. However, we believe from the point of view of wise policy, as well as regard for legal difficulties, that the General Assembly, if it desires to pass any recommendation, should confine itself to a general one referring to general standards of conduct which all nations should follow. The Assembly is surely competent to do that and, indeed, has done it on several occasions in the past. However, any resolution
- 2 -
directed against a particular member may well constitute crossing the line of intervention. If such a resolution is proposed, directed against South Africa, the U.S. would either abstain or vote against.
Hearing of NSGT Representatives in Committee 4. Mr. Casey expressed concern at the growing tendency of Committee 4 to grant hearings to all sorts of representatives from NSGT's. As an example, he referred to a recent decision by the Committee to hear a representative from Togoland, whom, it subsequently developed, represented only a small splinter group which had been badly defeated in recent elections, and was seeking to recoup its political fortunes. Mr. Casey requested that the U.S. join with the Australians and other like-minded Delegations in discussing the matter with chairmen of Delegations of Non-Administering Powers who are spear- heading this movement in an effort to explain the difficulties and dissuade them from pressing it. The Secretary said that he was not familiar with the details of the problem but would discuss it with Ambassador Jessup today.
Distribution: Basic List
WPAllen:bw 372