Note for file CANBERRA, 6 September 1946

The French Minister explained that he [1] wished to clarify in his
own mind certain aspects of our draft agreement. [2]

The following points were raised by him-
(a) He asked why we had referred only to approval of the terms of
trusteeship by the Assembly (Art. 85) and why no reference had
been made to approval by the Security Council. He drew attention
in this connection to Art. 7 of our draft which empowers the
Administration to take all desirable measures for defence of the
Territory.

It was explained to M. Auge that Security Council approval was
required by the Charter only when a 'strategic area' was
designated in the agreement. [3]

He then asked whether we regarded New Guinea as a 'strategic
area', referring to comments in the press and to Mr. Chifley's
statements on Manus, all of which underlined the importance
attached by the Australian Government to New Guinea as an area of
direct importance to Australia and British Commonwealth defence.

It was pointed out to the Minister that though New Guinea might be
strategically important to our defence that did not make it
necessarily a 'strategic area' within the meaning of the Charter.

It was possible under the Charter we believed, to propose the
designation of a strategic area in the future if we desired to do
so.

(b) Equal treatment clause in economic matters (Art. 76(d)). M.

Auge drew attention to the provision regarding equal treatment in
economic matters which, he stated, covered such matters as
preferential tariffs etc. As he was presumably seeking information
as to the absence of any clause in our agreement dealing with this
question of equal treatment, it was explained to him that we had
relied on Charter provision (Art. 76(d)). Particular attention was
drawn to the wording of the Charter which made equal treatment
subject to the attainment of the objective of native welfare.

(c) Relationship with South Seas Commission. M. Auge remarked that
he felt that there might be some inconsistency in the Charter
reference to the political advancement of the inhabitants of the
Mandated Territory and to [the apparent determination to exclude
that subject from] [4] the terms of reference of the South Seas
Commission.

In reply it was pointed out that the Commission was to be purely
an advisory body and representative only of Governments with
direct territorial interests in the area. That [it was not to] [5]
be connected in any organic way with the United Nations
Organization. Attention was drawn to the Caribbean Commission
Constitution, to which France had subscribed, and in which it was
stated that the Commissions would co-operate generally with UNO
but no organic link with UNO was mentioned.

It was admitted that the existence of regional organizations
created certain problems of adjustment so far as the World
Organization was concerned. But it was felt here that such
regional groupings could play a useful part in assisting nations,
possibly, to discharge their obligations to the World
Organization.

It might be a very good thing to leave room for such spontaneous
groupings of powers interested in a particular region to form
associations for specific regional purposes-the inspiration for
such an organization coming from below and not being imposed from
the centre.

Discussion on this aspect would doubtless take place at this
Conference to be convened to discuss the establishment of the
South Seas Commission.

(d) 'States directly concerned'. M. Auge asked whether we regarded
all the four Governments we had consulted as 'states directly
concerned'.

[It was explained to him that we had not been able to find any
definition of the phrase. This inability to discover a
satisfactory definition was] [6] apparently shared by many other
nations. At the moment therefore we had not chosen to regard any
one state as necessarily 'directly concerned' in the trusteeship
agreement for New Guinea. The matter was exceedingly difficult.