Cablegram UN885 NEW YORK, 3 December 1946, 1.27 p.m.
Assembly 321. TRUSTEESHIP.
1. Sub-Committee I, 2nd December, two meetings, continued
consideration of proposed modifications to African and New Guinea
2. The Soviet proposal in regard to Article 4 of French and 5 of
other agreements (power for administrative unions and common
services) was to delete whole paragraph B of Tanganyika Article 5
and similar modification of other agreements including New Guinea
whole Article 5.
3. The Soviet argument followed the familiar trend (tendency to
incorporation) and stressed that utility depended on similarity of
territories concerned. India strongly opposed union of Tanganyika
with Kenya where racial discrimination was, next to South Africa,
the worst in the world. China supported both. United States
supported the useful principle of the agreements. Mexico and Iraq
supported Soviet. Canada, Belgium, France supported United States.
Australia drew attention to the special need for provision for
power to make administrative arrangements for New Guinea and Papua
together giving factual reasons. The United Kingdom pointed to 25
years of practice, twitted Soviet itself on annexation and
affirmed Tanganyika would retain identity. The Soviet reacted
promptly referring to agreement between powers including Britain
in some cases and expressed wishes of the people of other
territories in question.
4. Soviet and Chinese proposals to the effect mentioned were
defeated by ten to six with Iraq abstaining. An Indian proposal to
a similar effect was defeated nine to four with United States,
U.S.S.R., Iraq, Czechoslovakia abstaining.
5. In the course of the debate, the United Kingdom answering Iraq
expressed willingness to place on record the following declaration
repudiating the intention of annexation or extinguishing the
status of Tanganyika as a trust territory.
'The Sub-Committee invites the rapporteur to include in his report
an assurance from the delegate of the United Kingdom, in response
to a suggestion by the delegate of Iraq, that the United Kingdom
delegation does not regard the terms of Article 5(b) in the
proposed agreements for Tanganyika, Togoland under British
administration and the Cameroons under British administration as
giving powers to the administering authority to establish any form
of association between the trust territory and adjacent
territories which would involve annexation of the trust territory
in any sense or would have the effect of extinguishing its status
as a trust territory.'
6. The Sub-Committee invited delegations of other mandatories to
associate themselves with this declaration. All agreed to do so
subject to settlement of exact terms in consultation. Assurance
would be included in Committee's report.
7. The United States proposal to delete 'in its opinion' which
appears only in Article 5 of the Australian draft was carried by 8
to 5, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Soviet and Yugoslavia abstaining. In
this vote Australia was supported by Belgium, New Zealand, South
Africa, United Kingdom.
8.  Dulles took this action despite prior appeal made privately
by Bailey. United States view was that inclusion of phrase did not
alter substance but gave a disagreeable and provocative emphasis
which other texts had avoided.
9. Principle contained in our Article 6 was not discussed as no
modifications had been proposed in respect of any agreement. This
accords with procedure at present stage whereby modifications only
and not paragraphs as submitted are being discussed.
10. Article 7. Soviet, India and China had proposed modification
of defence article (including our Article 7) designed to bring all
defence arrangements under the Security Council. Discussion was
short in view of the exhaustive discussion on Western Samoa (see
Assembly 302 ).
11. The Soviet proposal defeated by ten to six, Iraq abstaining.
China, Czechoslovakia, India, Mexico and Yugoslavia voted with
12. Indian proposal  was defeated by 9 to 4, Czechoslovakia,
Iraq, United States and Soviet abstaining. China, Mexico,
Yugoslavia voted with India. This vote applied to the first part
of Indian proposal regarding New Guinea.
13. Second part of Indian proposal regarding New Guinea was
defeated by 8 to 5, four abstaining. China, Mexico, Soviet and
Yugoslavia supported India. Czechoslovakia, Iraq, Uruguay and
14. Byelorussia introduced proposal along the lines in our
Assembly 225 stressing consultation under direction of Trusteeship
15. Bailey pointed out that whereas this was proposed as a
modification of articles existing in the texts of African mandates
it was in respect of New Guinea a proposed new paragraph, and it
had been agreed that new proposals should be considered after all
existing clauses had been dealt with. The chairman confirmed this
so that consideration of all new proposals for New Guinea will not
take place until all modifications of African mandates have been
dealt with. At the present pace, however, this may be Tuesday,
16. The Byelorussian proposal was defeated 9 to 7, Iraq