The United States took the position that the International Court of Justice should be asked for an advisory opinion on the question whether an international obligation actually existed between the Union of South Africa and India. The United States Delegation believed that this question should be answered before the Assembly took any action directed against a Member state; that, if the Court advised that an international obligation existed, the General Assembly would be in a much stronger position to exert its influence against the alleged discrimination in South Africa; and that, since South Africa questioned the jurisdiction of the United Nations and was willing to have the matter submitted to the Court, it was entitled to that consideration.

The United Kingdom, Sweden, and a number of other states (including the South African Delegation itself) favored this general approach as the method best calculated to assist in a satisfactory solution of the problem. After a dramatic debate, the General Assembly rejected this view, and instead, by a two-thirds majority (32 to 15, with 7 abstaining), approved a proposal presented by France and Mexico and accepted by the Indian Delegation, which stated that friendly relations between the two Member states had been impaired and expressed the opinion that the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa should be in conformity with the international obligations under the agreements concluded between the two Governments and the relevant provisions of the Charter. The resolution requested the two Governments to report at the next session of the General Assembly the measures adopted to those ends.

ADMISSION OF NEW MEMBERS

Four new Members-Afghanistan, Iceland, Sweden, and Siamwere admitted to the Organization by the General Assembly upon recommendation of the Security Council. Considerable dissatisfaction was expressed, however, with regard to the Council's action on the admission of new Members and particularly because the Council had failed to make any recommendation regarding the admission of the five other states which had made application for membership: Albania, Eire, Mongolian People's Republic, Portugal, and TransJordan. Without such a recommendation the General Assembly, under article 4 of the Charter, cannot act to admit an applicant.

A number of delegates asserted that the Security Council had rejected certain applications on grounds other than those contained in the Charter, which provides that membership is open to ". peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations." The Assembly conse

quently adopted a resolution recommending that the Security Council reexamine the applications for membership in the United Nations from the five states which had not been admitted, on the basis of the criteria established in the Charter. The United States supported the proposal, opposing an unsuccessful attempt by certain eastern European states to alter it so as to lay special emphasis on the conduct of applicant states during World War II as a factor in admission. Another resolution of the Assembly, originally presented by Australia but considerably modified in discussion, requested the Security Council to appoint a committee to confer with an Assembly committee, with a view to preparing rules governing the admission of new Members which would be acceptable to both bodies. The United States opposed the resolution on the grounds that the rules of procedure on membership are generally satisfactory and have not in themselves given rise to major difficulties, and that in its final form the resolution left the proposed committee without directives as to how to proceed.

On November 29, 1946 the Security Council approved the establishment of a subcommittee to meet with and to hear the views of the Assembly committee, and accepted the Assembly's resolution urging reconsideration of the five applications in question. The Council has appointed China, Brazil, and Poland to represent it in the joint discussion. The General Assembly committee will consist of Australia, Cuba, India, Norway, and the Soviet Union.

2. ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL PROBLEMS

THE FOOD SHORTAGE

At the First Part of its First Session the General Assembly passed a resolution urging that immediate and drastic action be taken to increase and conserve supplies of cereals and to provide for the collection and publication of information on the food situation.

In view of the danger of a renewed food crisis in 1947, the General Assembly on December 11, 1946 adopted unanimously a more comprehensive resolution to encourage food production, food conservation, and the equitable allocation and prompt distribution of available supplies of cereals and other foodstuffs, free from political considerations. Associating itself with the objectives of the resolution, the United States Delegation pointed out that production goals for American farmers were being pushed even higher in 1947 than in 1946 and that the main factor limiting United States exports was not shortage of available supplies but an overstrained transportation system.

POST-UNRRA RELIEF

At the suggestion of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration and the Economic and Social Council, the General

Assembly also approached the problem of residual relief needs in 1947 through an exhaustive discussion of methods of extending relief to needy countries after UNRRA activities are concluded.

Many Delegations, particularly those from war-devastated areas in eastern Europe, exhibited a strong preference either for the prolongation of UNRRA activities or for the creation of another international relief agency such as an emergency food fund suggested to the Assembly by UNRRA Director General Fiorello H. La Guardia. The task of relief, these Delegations argued, was an international· burden which should be borne by an international body with power to make allocations without regard to political factors.

The United States took the position that the need for direct relief had been greatly reduced by recovery in the liberated countries and by the availability of credit facilities; that time was of the essence in developing relief plans before the critical period prior to the 1947 harvest; and that the best results could be obtained not by the timeconsuming process of establishing a new international agency to ascertain needs and allocate supplies but by direct, informal consultation among the contributing governments and the governments of the few countries still needing assistance.

The United States Delegation emphasized that this country did not intend to use food as a political weapon and that, in the particular circumstances of the case, it was not prepared to agree to the mandatory allocation of relief supplies by an international agency. The United States approach to the residual relief problem in 1947 was supported by the United Kingdom Delegation.

In view of the very great importance of the United States and the United Kingdom as contributors to any relief program, efforts were made to reconcile the divergent points of view by a compromise under which the functions of the international machinery to be established would be limited to collecting information and facilitating informal international consultation.

The resolution, passed unanimously by the General Assembly on December 11, 1946, recognized the need for relief, on a reduced scale, after the termination of UNRRA programs. It established a Special Technical Committee of ten experts, including an expert designated by the Government of the United States, to render a report by January 15, 1947 on the financial assistance required for relief purposes, and directed the Secretary-General to transmit information to, and to facilitate informal consultation among, the governments concerned regarding relief needs and plans.

A Norwegian proposal calling upon the Secretary-General and the Economic and Social Council to study the feasibility of obtain

ing voluntary contributions of one day's pay for relief purposes also received the Assembly's unanimous approval.

ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION OF DEVASTATED AREAS

Pursuant to a General Assembly resolution of February 12, 1946 the problems involved in accelerating the economic reconstruction of devastated areas have been under study by the Economic and Social Council and a temporary subcommission of the Council established for that purpose.

At its session in New York on December 11, 1946 the General Assembly reviewed the conclusions reached by the Council and adopted unanimously a resolution reflecting the views of the Members on the subject. The resolution recognizes the urgent need for international cooperation in reconstruction activities, stresses the importance of prompt financial assistance through the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and recommends a survey of raw material resources needed for reconstruction purposes.

In the same resolution the General Assembly recommended that the Economic and Social Council give favorable consideration to the establishment of an economic commission for Europe and a similar commission for Asia and the Far East.1

3. SOCIAL, HUMANITARIAN, AND CULTURAL PROBLEMS

ASSISTANCE TO REFUGEES

At the Second Part of its First Session the General Assembly approved by a vote of 30 to 5 the Constitution of the International Refugee Organization and an interim arrangement for a Preparatory Commission, and requested the Secretary-General to open both instruments for signature. By December 31 representatives of eight countries-Canada, the United States, France, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, the Philippine Republic, and Liberia— had signed the two instruments, bringing the statute of the Preparatory Commission into force. The Constitution will become effective when 15 states contributing a total of at least 75 percent of the budget have become parties.

The action of the General Assembly at this session completed a long cycle of discussion. In February 1946 the Assembly had referred the whole question of refugees and displaced persons to the Economic and Social Council. The Council, through debate in its three sessions and through a series of committees and subcommittees, had emerged with draft instruments for the organization, a draft budget, and proposed scales of contribution.1

A protracted debate took place at the autumn session of the Assembly on the IRO Constitution. Seventy-nine amendments to the Constitution were proposed, principally by the countries of origin of the refugees situated in eastern Europe. These countries consistently strove to bar political dissidents, whom they tended to regard as war criminals or fascists, from the benefits of any IRO activities except repatriation. In the main the countries of origin asserted that the new organization should be debarred from concerning itself with the resettlement of non-repatriable displaced persons. The Soviet Union also proposed that the life of the organization should be limited to one year. Such proposals and all the changes which they entailed were successfully resisted, largely under the leadership of the United States. Likewise defeated, except in a stipulation in the preamble of the Constitution without operating effect, was a provision designed to place the financial burden of the repatriation of displaced persons, to the extent practicable, upon the German and Japanese economies-a load which could not be borne without increasing the present subsidies of the occupying powers, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, to the economies of the enemy states.

The budget of the organization had been carefully prepared by the Economic and Social Council, assisted by a special financial committee which met in London in July 1946. As approved, the budget provides $4,800,000 for administration; $151,060,000 for operations other than large-scale resettlement; and $5,000,000 for large-scale resettlement operations, this last sum to be contributed on a voluntary basis. The United States contribution to the administrative budget has been fixed at 39.89 percent of the total (equal to its share of the United Nations administrative budget). The contribution to be made by this country to the operational budget has been set at 45.75 percent. This figure was reached as a result of special consideration for countries which had suffered from enemy occupation.

SOCIAL WELFARE ACTIVITIES AND THE CHILDREN'S FUND

The General Assembly took positive action on two projects originally proposed by the UNRRA General Council in September 1946 and subsequently endorsed by the Economic and Social Council.

The first project-the assumption by the United Nations of the more urgent advisory social welfare functions of UNRRA-was presented to the Assembly in a detailed plan prepared by the Secretariat. Under the plan, as approved by the Assembly, the United Nations is to provide funds for social welfare experts who will furnish advisory