745K.00/3–1651
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Deputy Director of the Office of United Nations Affairs (Jones)
Subject: The Ewe Question
| Participants: | Sir Alan Burns, United Kingdom Representative in the Trusteeship Council |
| Mr. J. K. Thompson, Colonial Attaché, British Embassy | |
| Mr. Michael de Normann Ensor, Acting Chief, External Affairs Branch, Gold Coast Government | |
| Mr. Durward V. Sandifer, UNA | |
| Mr. Ward Allen, EUR | |
| Mr. J. Jefferson Jones III, UND | |
| Mr. Curtis C. Strong, UND |
Mr. Sandifer stated that the appropriate officers in the Department had been considering the two suggestions which Sir Alan had made at the meeting yesterday with respect to proposals on the Ewe question which might be submitted to the Trusteeship Council. Mr. Sandifer said that the Department had been impressed with Sir Alan’s suggestion that a resolution be introduced in the Council taking note of the statements made by the administering authorities concerned and requesting them to continue their efforts to complete the composition of the Consultative Commission. Consequently, we had embodied his idea in an amended version of the original Anglo-French resolution and had already discussed our amended version with members of the French Delegation in New York. The French Delegation, including Ambassador Garreau, found the amended version acceptable but would prefer to have the major changes introduced as an amendment after the [Page 565] French, and British had introduced the original Anglo-French resolution. It was our understanding that the French Delegation was now consulting Paris to ascertain the French Government’s reaction. Mr. Sandifer then gave to Sir Alan a copy of the amended resolution which we had discussed with the French [enclosure (attached) to Mr. Jones’ memorandum to Mr. Sandifer of March 6,1 entitled “Position to be adopted by the United States Delegation to the Trusteeship Council on the Ewe Question”].2
Sir Alan said he thought that the amended resolution was an excellent one and that it was acceptable to the United Kingdom Government. He would be glad to urge the French to accept this draft, and particularly to make every effort to obtain the approval of the French Government in time for the Anglo-French resolution and the United States amendment to be submitted to the Council when it began its discussion of the Ewe question. Sir Alan suggested that it might be well to attempt to obtain another non-administering member of the Council in addition to Iraq to co-sponsor the amendment with the United States. He thought that it would not be difficult to prevail upon either the Dominican Republic or Thailand to co-sponsor with Iraq and the United States.
With regard to the following clause in the Anglo-French resolution, which the United States had suggested might be omitted, Sir Alan expressed doubt that the French Government would be willing to agree to its omission:
“Considering that these methods were such as to enable all sections of the population to express their true opinions”.
Mr. Ensor remarked that he considered it preferable to retain this clause, in as much as its inclusion might be a factor of importance in prevailing upon the Ewes to cooperate with the French and British authorities in arriving at a substantive solution of the problem.
The British representatives thought that it would be desirable that the phrase “at its next session” be added at the end of the paragraph recommending that the administering authorities formulate as soon as possible substantive proposals for a practicable solution of the question and inform the Council accordingly. The basis of the British views on this question was that the inclusion of the phrase might be used as a lever with the French to prevail upon the latter that it was necessary to agree upon substantive proposals for the solution of the problem before the next session of the Council.