BIG FIVE DISAGREE

Grey River Argus, 12 May 1945, Page 5

BIG FIVE DISAGREE

CONTROL OF COLONIES Trusteeship Question (Received 11.15 p.m. May 11) SAN FRANCISCO, May 10 The Big Five failing to present a joint proposal on the trusteeship 'question, threw the problem into the | lap of the lesser nations to-night, i whereupon Trusteeship Committee, | under the chairmanship .of Mr. Peter | Fraser, went to work using as a basis in their discussions, a statement from the Big Five frankly setting forth the divergent views. ' The “New York Times’s” correspondent says that there is a possibility that the whole (question will have to be postponed for further negotiations after the conference unless the lesser nations break the deadlock. The stumbling block appears to be Britain’s desire to avoid any strong international supervision over the colonies. The original idea about trusteeships attributed to Mr. Roosevelt was that they should be extended to all Colonial territories and should aim to bring backward people to a level ot independence. “"The idea has been whittled down until only former mandates and lands from enemy nations would be subject to. trusteeship under the present American proposal. The correspondent says tnat Russia has suggested that independence be made the ultimate objective , in all Colonial territories under the new League of Nations. This has introduced a new element into the trusteeship controversy, since Britain and France are not in favour and the Americans are still undecided. This is virtually the only proposal the Russians have made at trusteeship meetings. There has been some progress toward resolving the problem of reconoiling world and regional security systems, with growing support among Americans for a simple formula whereby regional disputes should be settled in the Security Council by a Vote of any seven of the eleven nations. This would deny the veto on regional questions to the five permanent members. The Steering Committee over-ruled the economic and sorial committee’s decision that the World Federation of Trades Unions should be allowed to sit in committee meetings. The committee voted 32 to 10 when Belgium and Canada protested. “The Times” comments that this is the first time the powerful Steering Committee has over-ruled one of the technical committees. The action is regarded as a rebuff to the Russians, who laboriously worked for conference recognition of this Trade Union Federation. The British Dominions have continued to take the lead, in attacking the power of the Big Five in the Security Council. Mr. MacKenzie King (Canada), in committee, argued against putting troops at the disposal of the Security Council without having a vote. New Zealand went further, arguing, that the Security Council should be stripped of . its great powers and made responsible to the wishes of the General Assembly. The “New York Herald Tribune’ says that Dr. Evatt (Australia) presented a formula designed to bar Spain under its present Government from membership of U.N.C.1.0. The formula bars any Government which has given military aid to the Axis : since 1939,either in personnel or supplies. Several Governments expressed opposition to the formula and its fate is regarded as highly uncertain. The “New York Times’s” correspondent points out that the conference like an, iceberg, is at least nine-tenths below the surface, but from what one gathers, considerable progress _ is being made in solving problems. The regional question is riioving to a solution under which the right of any one of the permanent members ot the proposed Security Council to paralyse enforcement action by a regional agency is going to be removed. AUSTRALIAN DELEGATES (Rec. 9.10) CANBERRA, May 11 Mr. R. G. Menzies, Opposition Leader in the House of Representatives said that no evidence existed that certain views on Colonial trusteeship reported to be held by the Australian delegates to the San Francisco conference, were those of Australian people. He had a fear that Australia might become invol- , ved, largely by the exercise of his independent judgment by the Minister of External Affairs, Dr. Evatt, in disputes with other countries, including Britain. According to a Press report, Australia would take a lead in the fient against United States and British plans for trusteeship in backward areas. The report stated: Australian delegates had askd, why trusteeships should be confined to former mandated territories and to new areas, taken) from enemy nations and also asked why all the Colonial areas should not be put under international supervision. Mr. Menzies said there was no evidence that this was the view of Cabinet. The Acting Prime Minister, Mr. Chifley, replied that the Commonwealth Government policy on international trusteeship for backward areas would be announced as soon as possible. He had cabled Mr. Forde and Dr. Evatt for all information available. . , ~ The Sydney “Herald.” in a leading article, to-day, said: It seems the Federal Cabinet have- not yet formulated its policy on the international supervision of dependent territories. The matter is one too important to be left to the discretion of the Commonwealth delegates at San Francisco. It should be debated, by Parliament. Idealistic enthusiasm ot ■the Australian delegation seems to have 'outrun discretion. There is no call for Australian views on the Governing of colonies to be thrust on other powers, including Britain. Our business is to acquit ourselves faithfully as trustees, and not to go ci us ading for an international system oi trusteeship.” MR EDEN’S COMMENTS (Rec. 6.30) SAN Mr Eden told a Press conference that sixteen Polish leaders were airested by Russia. They included nearly all of the leading figures of the Polish underground He said that the British thought that many of those arrested should be included in a new Democratic Warsaw Government. He revealed that the Big Four agreed to exercise their veto power over Security Council decisions only on measures which require enforcexnent action. JVtr Eden p sir tic ul ally emphasised that there was a change backed by the sporsoring powers which would give the Security Council authority to make definite recommendations for peaceful settlements of disputes without permitting any of the Big Five to veto such a recommendation as against itself. Mr Eden said this would be his final F'ress conference before his returning home. Regional security was the most difficult remaining issue. He could not yet see a solution. Britain felt that regional pacts were valuable in strengthening the World Organisation, but that they cannot replace the Organisation itself. He pointed out Britain already had announced a policy of making India an independent British Dominion. Referring to Palestine, Mr Eden said: “Until someone else is assigned Britain’s mandate over Palestine we wifi go alon s and do the best we rnn ” Mr Eden said he Was thoroughi ly convinced U.N.C.1.0. will devise I a better charter than the one outI j irie d at Dumbarton Oaks.