Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, The United Nations; The Western Hemisphere, Volume II

IO Files: SD/A/C.3/139

Position Paper Prepared in the Department of State

confidential

[Washington,] September 9, 1950.

Refugees and Stateless Persons (Resolution 319 A IV, 3 Dec. 1949)

Provisions for the Functioning of the High Commissioner’s Office for Refugees: Draft Resolution Proposed by the Economic and Social Council

the problem

The General Assembly in Resolution 319 A (IV), paragraph 4, requested the Economic and Social Council to prepare at its eleventh session a draft resolution embodying provisions for the functioning of the High Commissioner’s Office for Refugees and to submit recommendations regarding the definition of the term “refugee” to be applied by the High Commissioner. The Economic and Social Council has recommended a statute for the Office of the High Commissioner, a definition of the term “refugee” to be applied by the High Commissioner, and the adoption of a provision for an Advisory Committee on Refugees. On request of the General Assembly in Resolution 319 A IV the Secretary General has proposed a budget for the operation of the Office in 1951. What position should the United States Delegation take with respect to the ECOSOC recommendations and the budget proposed by the Secretary General?

recommendation

The United States Delegation should work for and support the adoption by the General Assembly of the resolution recommended by ECOSOC providing: (1) a statute for the functioning of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees; (2) a definition of the term “refugee” to be applied by the High Commissioner; and (3) provisions for the establishment of an Advisory Committee on Refugees. In the event that the General Council of the International Refugee Organization at its October 1950 session decides to extend IRO operations to November 1951, the United States Delegation should request instructions from the Department with respect to the inclusion in the ECOSOC resolution to be adopted by the General Assembly of an amendment providing for the establishment of the Office of High Commissioner for Refugees at a date later than January 1, 1951. Barring this development, the budget proposed by the Secretary General should be supported. Otherwise the budget should be amended on the basis of new instructions from the Department.

comment

The resolution proposed by ECOSOC is satisfactory because its provisions follow closely the principles adopted by the General Assembly Resolution 319 A IV, and develop the outlines of the plan for the Office included in that Resolution.¹ The proposal maintains the emphasis on legal protection, restricts the charge of the Office upon the regular United Nations budget to administrative expenses, and preserves the function of the General Assembly to pass on appeals for funds, for assistance to refugees in advance of such appeals by the High Commissioner.

The ECOSOC recommendation also contains provision that persons falling under the competence of the High Commissioner’s Office for Refugees shall be those defined in Article I of the Draft Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. This definition of the term “refugee” is satisfactory to the United States because it defines the refugees to be protected by the United Nations precisely and covers all existing categories of refugees requiring international protection in their civil status, with the exception of certain Chinese refugees presently outside of China who might be included by General Assembly action with United States support provided they are eventually included in Article I of the Convention.

At the General Assembly last December and at the eleventh session of ECOSOC there was strong support by certain governments, principally Belgium, Canada and the United Kingdom for a simple global definition. The United States opposed this vigorously on the grounds that such a definition would commit the United Nations to the protection of unknown groups of refugees and divest the Assembly of its freedom of action to deal with new refugee situations which might arise in the future. These new refugee situations or any present refugees who can be clearly identified in the future can always be added later to the competence of the High Commissioner by Assembly action. There is also great danger that the adoption of a simple global definition would involve the United Nations in responsibilities for so-called internal refugees such as those in Germany, Greece, India, Pakistan and in China who do not require international protection because they enjoy the rights of citizenship in their present countries of residence but who nevertheless raise serious problems of material assistance. Any refugee situation arising in the Balkans in the future might raise issues of a political nature with respect to which the General Assembly should retain freedom of action.

At the eleventh session of ECOSOC the French and United States Delegations took the lead in obtaining the inclusion of a provision for the establishment of an Advisory Committee on Refugees, and the United States Delegation should continue to support this provision as it provides the only means by which governments not Members of the United Nations such as Italy and Switzerland which are interested in refugees may participate in the work of international protection.

Resolution 319 A IV establishes the Office of High Commissioner for Refugees on January 1, 1951. At the time this date was set it was expected that IRO would discontinue operations on March 31, 1951. It now appears because of the delay in the movement of refugees to Australia and the United States that IRO may continue protecting and resettling refugees until as late as November 1951. In this event there would be overlapping of functions between the Office of High Commissioner and IRO and it may prove desirable to establish the Office of the High Commissioner at a later date than January 1, 1951, to be determined after action on the matter of termination is taken by the General Council of IRO at its October 1950 session.

The budget for operations of the Office for 1951 proposed by the Secretary General appears adequate on the basis of information presently available and should be supported. If, however, the establishment of the Office at a later date than January 1, 1951 is determined upon, the budget would need to be amended on the basis of new instructions from the Department.

1. The terms by which the Fourth General Assembly decided to establish an Office of High Commissioner for Refugees largely reflected positions taken by the United States, Most of the debate which led to the General Assembly decisions took place in the Third Committee, but important action occurred in the plenary meetings of the General Assembly, also, as a result of successful amendments introduced by the United States. Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt was the United States representative concerned in these matters, assisted by George L. Warren, Adviser on Refugees and Displaced Persons, Department of State. The basic United States position regarding the new Office was that the provision of international protection should be the sole function of the proposed office and that the termination of the IRO should conclude broad operational refugee functions under the direct auspices of the United Nations with the one exception of the Palestinian refugees.