Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Africa and South Asia, Volume XI, Part 1

IO files, lot 71 D 440

Department of State Position Paper¹

confidential
SD/A/C.1/437

Washington, September 7, 1954.

Treatment of Indians in Union of South Africa

The Problem

The Seventh General Assembly established, and the Eighth General Assembly continued, a Good Offices Commission (Cuba, Syria, Yugoslavia) to arrange and assist in negotiations between South Africa and India and Pakistan on the question of the treatment of people of Indian origin in South Africa. The Commission will presumably again report failure to bring the parties together, but it may also include in its report, pursuant to its instructions from the Assembly, “its own views on the problem and any proposals which in its opinion may lead to a peaceful settlement of it”. This item was automatically included in the provisional agenda of the Ninth Session by the Assembly’s action last year.

United States Position

1. Resumption of direct negotiations between the Government of the Union of South Africa and the Governments of India and Pakistan provides the only hope for a solution.

2. The United States should support a resolution recommending direct negotiations and which follows generally the line of previous Assembly resolutions on this approach to the problem.

3. If the negotiating situation makes it possible, the Delegation should seek to persuade India and Pakistan not to include in their proposals the following features of past resolutions which have hindered the resumption of direct negotiations.

(a) reference to the Group Areas Act and to the fact that South Africa has proceeded with its implementation despite Assembly recommendations that implementation be suspended, or to other legislation such as Immigrants Regulation Amendment Bill of 1953;

(b) characterization of the policy of apartheid in such a way as to imply criticism or condemnation of South Africa;

(c) establishment of United Nations commissions or agencies to play a role in the negotiations.

4. The United States should vote against any provision calling for automatic inclusion of the item on the agenda of the Tenth Session, but the inclusion of such a provision should not of itself change the United States vote on the resolution as a whole. In voting on other individual paragraphs of any proposed resolution or proposals that the Good Offices Commission may make, the United States Delegation should bear in mind (a) the voting pattern it followed on similar provisions at previous sessions (in the past, the United States has abstained or voted against references to the Group Areas Act or similar legislation and has voted for characterization of the apartheid policy as being based on doctrines of racial discrimination and for the establishment of United Nations agencies to assist in bringing the parties into direct negotiations); and (b) the basic criteria set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) above.

Comment

Last year’s resolution, besides continuing the Good Offices Commission, called upon the Union Government to refrain from implementing the Group Areas Act. India, on April 28, 1954 sent to the Secretary General for circulation to all Members a memorandum protesting further measures taken by South Africa to implement the Group Areas Act, and expressing concern over South Africa’s policies in this regard. Also, at the request of the Union Government, the office of the Indian High Commission in South Africa was closed on July 1, 1954.

In view of its position denying the competence of the United Nations on the ground that the matter is essentially within its domestic jurisdiction, South Africa is unlikely to respond affirmatively to any United Nations resolutions. At the same time, for reasons of domestic opinion and national prestige India will not cease pressing its case in the Assembly and may insist upon condemnatory references to the Group Areas Act and the continuation of United Nations machinery to assist in the negotiations. There may be some prospect for bringing the parties together outside the United Nations; it is conceivable that if this year the Assembly adopted a resolution merely calling upon the parties to negotiate, bilateral discussions might be resumed. It is possible that in the light of its discouraging experience of the past two years the Good Offices Commission will itself suggest that the Assembly simply call upon the parties to enter into direct negotiations. It would seem doubtful that the Commission would recommend its own continuation since it has failed to make any progress.

1. This paper was prepared for the use of the U.S. Delegation to the Ninth Session of the UN General Assembly.