Union of South Africa

75. TREATMENT OF PEOPLE OF INDIAN ORIGIN IN THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA: United Nations General Assembly Resolution 615 (VII), December 5, 19521

The General Assembly,

5

3

Recalling its resolutions 44 (I),2 265 (III), 395 (V) and 511 (VI) relating to the treatment of people of Indian origin in the Union of South Africa,

Noting that the Government of the Union of South Africa has expressed its inability to accept General Assembly resolution 511 (VI) in respect of the resumption of negotiations with the Governments of India and Pakistan,

Noting further that the Government of the Union of South Africa has continued to enforce the Group Areas Act in contravention of the terms of General Assembly resolutions 511 (VI) and 395 (V),

1. Establishes a United Nations Good Offices Commission consisting of three members to be nominated by the President of the General Assembly, with a view to arranging and assisting in negotiations between the Government of the Union of South Africa and the Governments of India and Pakistan in order that a satisfactory solution of the question in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may be achieved;

2. Requests the Good Offices Commission to report to the General Assembly at its eighth session;

6

3. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the members of the Commission with the necessary staff and facilities;

4. Calls upon the Government of the Union of South Africa to suspend the implementation or enforcement of the provisions of the Group Areas Act, pending the conclusion of the negotiations referred to in paragraph 1 above;

U.N. General Assembly, Official Records, Seventh Session, Supplement No. 20 (A/2361), p. 8.

2 Resolution of Dec. 8, 1946; ibid., First Session, Second Part, Resolutions (A/64/Add. 1), p. 69.

3 Resolution of May 14, 1949; ibid., Third Session, Part II, Resolutions (A/900), p. 6.

1 Resolution of Dec. 2, 1950; ibid., Fifth Session, Supplement No. 20 (A/1775), p. 24.

* Resolution of Jan. 12, 1952; ibid., Sixth Session, Supplement No. 20 (A/2119), p. 11.

General Assembly Res. 217 (III) of Dec. 10, 1948; A Decade of American Foreign Policy, pp. 1156–1159.

5. Decides to include the item in the provisional agenda of the eighth session of the General Assembly.'

76. POLICIES OF APARTHEID IN THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA: United Nations General Assembly Resolution 917 (X), December 6, 1955 2

The General Assembly,

Recalling its previous resolutions on the question of race conflict in South Africa resulting from the policies of apartheid of the Government of the Union of South Africa,

Recalling section E of resolution 377 A (V) of 3 November 1950,* in which it expressed its conviction that a genuine and lasting peace depends also upon the observance of all the principles and purposes established in the Charter of the United Nations, upon the implementation of the resolutions of the General Assembly and other principal organs of the United Nations intended to achieve the maintenance of international peace and security and especially upon

1 The General Assembly adopted further resolutions concerning this question: (a) Res. 719 (VIII), Nov. 11, 1953; ibid., Eighth Session, Supplement No. 17 (A/2630), pp. 5-6. In connection with the consideration of the draft resolution in the Ad Hoc Political Committee, the U.S. representative stated, in part, the following: "My delegation believes the basic task of the Assembly here is to bring about direct discussion between the parties. . My delegation believes that, before the governments concerned have made further efforts to resume direct discussions, the General Assembly should not recommend particular measures or solutions-solutions of the problem which the parties, first of all, must face" (Department of State Bulletin, Nov. 23, 1953, pp. 729-730).

(b) Res. 816 (IX), Nov. 4, 1954; U.N. General Assembly, Official Records, Ninth Session, Supplement No. 21 (A/2890), pp. 7-8. For the U.S. position on the draft resolution, see Department of State Bulletin, Nov. 22, 1954, pp. 783-786. The U.S. representative stated in part: "The United States will vote in favor of the resolution as a whole, since we are in full agreement with its conciliatory nature and in particular the objective of direct negotiations between the parties which it seeks to bring about. Our belief is that progress can only come to the extent that the parties are willing to confer and to negotiate" (ibid., p. 786).

(c) Res. 919 (X), Dec. 14, 1955; U.N. General Assembly, Official Records, Tenth Session, Supplement No. 19 (A/3116), p. 8. The resolution noted that the negotiations envisaged in Res. 816 (IX) had not been pursued; urged the parties concerned to pursue negotiations with a view to bringing about a settlement of the question; and invited the parties to report at the next session of the General Assembly.

2 U.N. General Assembly, Official Records, Tenth Session, Supplement No. 19 (A/3116), p. 8.

3 Res. 616 (VII), Dec. 5, 1952 (ibid., Seventh Session, Supplement No. 20 (A/2361), pp. 8-9); Res. 721 (VIII), Dec. 8, 1953 (ibid., Eighth Session, Supplement No. 17 (A/2630), pp. 6-7); Res. 820 (IX), Dec. 14, 1954 (ibid., Ninth Session, Supplement No. 21 (A/2890), p. 9). For the U.S. position in the Ad Hoc Political Committee and in the General Assembly opposing the draft resolution adopted on Dec. 14, 1954, see Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 3, 1955, pp. 32-36. In each case the U.S. abstained.

4 U.N. General Assembly, Official Records, Fifth Session, Supplement No. 20 (A/1775), p. 10.

respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all,

Reiterating its resolutions 103 (I) of 19 November 1946 and 616 B (VII) of 5 December 1952 in which the General Assembly has declared, inter alia, that it is in the higher interests of humanity to put an immediate end to religious and so-called racial persecution and discrimination, and that governmental policies which are designed to perpetuate or increase discrimination are inconsistent with the pledges of the Members under Article 56 of the Charter,

Noting that the United Nations Commission on the Racial Situation in the Union of South Africa has now submitted its third report,2 1. Commends the United Nations Commission on the Racial Situation in the Union of South Africa for its constructive work;

2. Notes with regret that the Government of the Union of South Africa again refused to co-operate with the Commission;

3. Recommends the Government of the Union of South Africa to take note of the Commission's report;

4. Expresses its concern at the fact that the Government of the Union of South Africa continues to give effect to the policies of apartheid, notwithstanding the request made to it by the General Assembly to reconsider its position in the light of the high principles contained in the Charter and taking into account the pledge of all Member States to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race;

5. Reminds the Government of the Union of South Africa of the faith it had reaffirmed, in signing the Charter, in fundamental human rights and in the dignity and worth of the human person;

6. Calls on the Government of the Union of South Africa to observe the obligations contained in Article 56 of the Charter.

1 U.N. doc. A/64/Add.1, Jan. 31, 1947, p. 200.

U. N. doc. A/2953 (1955). The Commission was established by Res. 616 (VII), cited above.

Part XIV

THE FAR EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA

A. THE BASIC POSITION OF THE UNITED STATES

1. REVIEW OF THE POSITION AS OF 1950: Address by the Secretary of State, January 12, 1950 1

FOUNDATIONS OF POLICY

1

This afternoon I should like to discuss with you the relations between the peoples of the United States and the peoples of Asia, and I used the words "relations of the peoples of the United States and the peoples of Asia" advisedly. I am not talking about governments or nations because it seems to me what I want to discuss with you is this feeling of mine that the relations depend upon the attitudes of the people; that there are fundamental attitudes, fundamental interests, fundamental purposes of the people of the United States, 150 million of them, and of the peoples of Asia, unnumbered millions, which determine and out of which grow the relations of our countries and the policies of our governments. Out of these attitudes and interests and purposes grow what we do from day to day.

Now, let's dispose of one idea right at the start and not bother with it any more. That is that the policies of the United States are determined out of abstract principles in the Department of State or in the White House or in the Congress. That is not the case. If these policies are going to be good, they must grow out of the fundamental attitudes of our people on both sides. If they are to be effective, they must become articulate through all the institutions of our national life, of which this is one of the greatest-through the press, through the radio, through the churches, through the labor unions, through the business organizations, through all the groupings of our national life, there must become articulate the attitudes of our people and the policies which we propose to follow. It seems to me that understanding is the beginning of wisdom and therefore, we shall begin by trying

Made before the National Press Club, Washington; Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 23, 1950, pp. 111-118.

to understand before we announce what we are going to do, and that is a proposition so heretical in this town that I advance it with some hesitation.

Now, let's consider some of the basic factors which go into the making of the attitudes of the peoples on both sides. I am frequently asked: Has the State Department got an Asian policy? And it seems to me that that discloses such a depth of ignorance that it is very hard to begin to deal with it. The peoples of Asia are so incredibly diverse and their problems are so incredibly diverse that how could anyone, even the most utter charlatan believe that he had a uniform policy which would deal with all of them. On the other hand, there are very important similarities in ideas and in problems among the peoples of Asia and so what we come to, after we understand these diversities and these common attitudes of mind, is the fact that there must be certain similarities of approach, and there must be very great dissimilarities in action.

To illustrate this only a moment: If you will consider as an example of the differences in Asia the subcontinent of India and Pakistan, you will find there an area which is roughly comparable in size and population to Europe. You will find that the different states and provinces of that subcontinent are roughly comparable in size to the nations of Europe and yet you will find such differences in race, in ideas, in languages, and religion, and culture, that compared to that subcontinent, Europe is almost one homogeneous people.

Or take the difference, for instance, between the people and problems of Japan and Indonesia, both in the same Asian area. In Japan, you have a people far advanced in the complexities of industrial civilization, a people whose problems grow out of overpopulation on small islands and the necessity of finding raw materials to bring in and finding markets for the finished goods which they produce. In Indonesia, you find something wholly different-a people on the very threshold of their experience with these complexities and a people who live in an area which possesses vast resources which are awaiting development. Now, those are illustrations of complexities.

EMERGING INDEPENDENCE

There

Let's come now to the matters which Asia has in common. is in this vast area what we might call a developing Asian consciousness, and a developing pattern, and this, I think, is based upon two factors which are pretty nearly common to the entire experience of all these Asian people.

One of these factors is a revulsion against the acceptance of misery and poverty as the normal condition of life. Throughout all of this vast area, you have that fundamental revolutionary aspect in mind and belief. The other common aspect that they have is the revulsion against foreign domination. Whether that foreign domination takes the form of colonialism or whether it takes the form of imperialism, they are through with it. They have had enough of it, and they want

no more.

These two basic ideas which are held so broadly and commonly