320/9–1052: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in India1
729. Greatly appreciate ur analysis GOI attitude on Tunisian question and other problems of special interest to Asian-African Govts to be raised in 7th GA (urtel 693, Aug 18).2 This analysis most helpful in current planning US program for Assembly in which we expect one of our major problems to be to avoid split ASAF Dels from West on so-called colonial issues;3 USSR will undoubtedly make strong effort foster this split. Hope fol views will be useful in ur discussions with GOI.
During past months we have urged Fr in Wash and Paris promptly decide on and make known position agreeing inclusion Tunisian question in Assembly agenda. Such announcement wld clear way for gen agreement to discussion in GA thus removing collateral issue unrelated to substance Tunisian problem involving principles free access to UN and equal standing small states. This wld, we hope, improve atmosphere at opening GA and wld improve possibility calm and sympathetic debate with chance of advancing settlement by negot of parties. FYI. It is our estimate that Tunisian question will probably be placed on GA agenda regardless of what position Fr or for that matter US take on agenda issue. End FYI.
On substance of Tunisian question we have been consistently urging Fr offer meaningful reform program acceptable to Tunisians which wld ensure internal autonomy within relatively brief period. We believe offer by Fr of reforms is helpful step in that direction. We have also advised Tunisians negotiate with Fr since difficulty in end can be resolved only by mutual agreement. Problem is to restore atmosphere confidence and persuade both parties negot in good faith. We are now developing US position for GA and will advise you as soon as necessary decisions made.
Our views re Tunisia reflect basic US policy to support progressive development towards self-government of dependent people as envisaged UN Charter. This policy envisages maximum progress “as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each terr” (Art 73). In Tunisia, present circumstances appropriate for maximum progress on internal autonomy. US has welcomed and in nr cases actively furthered emergence of new states in Asia and Africa, e.g., Philippines, [Page 806] Indonesia. Some 10 former colonies have emerged in free world as independent states since end World War II and great strides have been made in other areas toward improving status of still dependent people. (At same time, unfortunately, new colonialism has engulfed millions of people behind iron curtain who for centuries enjoyed independence.)
On question South African racial persecution this govt has supported GA jurisdiction to consider item on treatment of Indians and voted for GA res implying disapproval Union policies and offering UN machinery for negots designed settle problem. New item which GOI reported planning to submit appears not limited to problem of population of Indian extraction (which has long history of intl negots between India and Union) but involves South African policies toward its entire non-white population. We do not yet have enough info re Indian plans on this item to offer our views. It is, however, our feeling that in delicate field of human rights, we must weigh every intl action most carefully in order not to exacerbate conflict but seek practical means which wld help and not harm those for whom we are concerned.
Re Indian proposal to make Special Comite on info from non-self-governing terrs permanent we believe extension of comite for another 3 years with present terms ref wld be most practical way to proceed and wld be most likely to assure continued cooperation of both colonial and non-colonial powers. Under present circumstances we are opposed to permanent continuation. Here again we must keep in mind that Charter provisions concerning dependent peoples, particularly provision for public debate in TC on stewardship of administering authorities, constitutes important advance in intl community. San Francisco conf rejected proposal for estab of comite along above lines. For this reason, US Govt originally opposed estab as unnecessary and extra-constitutional. On basis further experience however we have come to recognize its utility. Administering powers in UN went along with this development although it clearly increased difficulty of mtg their responsibilities. We believe this was another important step ahead which cld be taken only when broad majority including most directly interested parties were willing to agree. We believe all important constitutional steps such as that proposed by GOI require broad gen support which we doubt is presently forthcoming. There is some opinion that Comite 4 of Assembly tends to disregard detailed work of Special Comite and thresh same material over again, and that some membs of Special Comite encourage this in order secure passage of proposals which failed in Special Comite. If there is to be such duplication in 4th Comite, utility of Special Comite tends to diminish. We believe, for these reasons, that further experimentation is desirable in order to enable [Page 807] membs to judge its advantages, and since review conf on Charter is projected for 1955 it seems to US Govt that experience then acquired wld give better basis for action than exists in 1952. US Govt has great admiration for constructive and painstaking service in Special Comite rendered by Dr. Shiva Rao and other Indian reps who have helped put Comite on rational instead of propaganda basis. We hope, therefore, that GOI and US Govt will be able cooperate further to demonstrate practical worth of this Comite.
- This telegram was drafted by Stein (UNP) and cleared in UNE, L/UNA, UNA, UND, NEA, SOA, WE, AF, and EUR. Popper (UNP) signed for the Secretary. It was repeated to USUN.↩
- Ante, p. 797.↩
- For documentation on U.S. planning to meet the Arab-Asian problem in the Seventh General Assembly, see vol. iii, pp. 32 ff.↩