Ethiopia and Liberia instituted litigation in 1960 before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to test the legality of South Africa's administration of the mandated territory of South West Africa. The ICJ received, thereby, an opportunity to deal with a major question of international concern. Hopes were raised that the role of international adjudication would be enhanced by the results of this litigation. The case was also expected to demonstrate to the new states that the procedures and institutions of traditional international law could be used to promote, as well as to retard, their distinctive goals in international life.

The transformation of the political environment of Western Europe in the mid-1960's has been only partially completed. On the one hand, in many economic sectors relations among the six members1 of the European economic communities are set within the context of a new process and a new institutional method of community building and are being modified by the notion of a common interest beyond six sets of national interests. But, on the other hand, the relations among the Six in the “political” realm—that is, in the sphere of foreign and defense policy—have not yet been transformed by common institutions. It is in this area that the confrontation between traditional methods of interstate relations and the new community m thod is currently taking place, and it is here that the ultimate validity of the concept of European unification will face its most difficult test. Therefore, a crucial question in Europe today is whether or not the Six will be able to organize their political life on a collective basis as they have done in many economic sectors.

The oratory of the General Assembly and the Security Council and the resolutions adopted by these organs are the most obvious activities of the United Nations in the field of human rights and the features usually studied. They alone, however, give little indication of the effectiveness and the effects of the UN's actions. To investigate this one needs to go beyond New York to the national capitals. How do governments whose policies are severely criticized in the UN respond? On one level the questions can be simply answered. The alternatives are reasonably clear. They include token and substantive compliance, indifference, and defiance. But how is one alternative chosen over the others and does what goes on in New York have any impact on the political dynamics within the national framework? This article is an attempt to investigate a limited aspect of this question. It is an analysis of both the reactions within the parliaments of Rhodesia and the Republic of South Africa to UN actions concerning these territories and the possible importance of these reactions in parliamentary elections.

If the United Nations system is to outlaw the unilateral use of force, except in cases of self-defense, it is clear that some provision must be made for the peaceful settlement of disputes and for peaceful change. In the past, peacekeeping operations have often succeeded in restoring a fragile peace. Yet collective actionall too frequently has been limited to a restoration of the status quo ante. Indeed, states have usuallyfailed to accept any collective responsibility to deal with the grievances that initially led to the outbreak of hostilities. If peace is to be maintained over any extended period of time, peacekeeping operations must not, asAmbassador Arthur J. Goldberg recently warned, “be a sofa to provide a comfortable respite from efforts atpeaceful settlement” but instead should “be a springboard for accelerated efforts to eliminate the root causes of conflict.”

Anaversion to the international borders drawn by the colonial powers, if not their complete rejection, has been a consistent theme of anticolonial nationalism in Africa. The borders are blamed for the disappearance of a unity which supposedly existed in Africa in precolonial times; they are regarded as arbitrarily imposed, artificial barriers separating people of the same stock, and they are said to have balkanized Africa. The borders are considered to be one of the humiliating legacies of colonialism which, according to this view, independent Africa ought to abolish.

Budget Estimates for the Financial Year 1967 and Information Annexes; Report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions: In its report to the General Assembly on the budget estimates for the financial year 1967 the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions noted that the Secretary-General had proposed for 1967 a gross expenditure budget of $128,227,800, an increase of $6,660,380 over the gross level of $121,567,420 approved by the Committee for 1966. Of the total estimated income of $21,623,626 for 1967 income from staff assessment (for distribution to Member governments as credits through the Tax Equalization Fund) was calculated at $13,350,000 and income from all other sources (for deduction from gross appropriations for purposes of the assessment of contributions) at $8,273,626. After deduction of estimated income the net expenditure level for 1967 would be $106,604,174, an increase of $4,827,454 over the net level of $101,776,720 approved for 1966. Recommendations by the Advisory Committee for reductions in the expenditure estimates totaling $1,730,600, together with certain recommended adjustments in the income estimates, would reduce the net expenditure level for 1967 from $106,604,174, as proposed by the Secretary-General, to $104,831,974. In the aggregate members of the various UN organizations would be asked to contribute about $285.7 million for 1967 as against assessments of $265.8 million for 1966 and $231.9 million in 1965.

In his Introduction to the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, 16 June 1965–15 June 1966 Secretary-General U Thant observed that the year under review had been a period in which the prospects for the peace and well-being of mankind suffered disappointments which seemed to outweigh once again the modest gains made in some directions. Describing the international political situation, Mr. Thant said that the cloud over Vietnam had grown larger and more ominous. The serious open conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir had calmed, but tensions had been heightened and violence had erupted elsewhere. Nuclear as well as conventional armaments developed apace. Furthermore, comparatively little happened during the year to brighten the outlook of those who occupied the two-thirds of the world where poverty, disease, ignorance, and lack of opportunity were the most conspicuous facts of daily life. Generally speaking, during this period the powerful nations did not show themselves able to overcome the suspicions, fears, and mistrust that sprang from their different ideologies and from their different conceptions of the best interests of the rest of the world; the rich nations did not rise above their concern for the continuation of their own prosperity, nor did the poor nations escape from the dead weight of their chronic poverty and their anachronistic social structures. Against such a background the international community, still incompletely represented by the United Nations, made only limited progress in those areas such as peacekeeping, disarmament, economic and social development, decolonization, and human rights where most was expected of it.

The Security Council convened on July 25, 1966, to consider this question following a request contained in a letter dated July 21, 1966, from the permanent representative of Syria. A letter dated July 22, 1966, was subsequently received from the permanent representative of Israel. The Council devoted its 1288th–1295th meetings, held on July 25–August 3, to this matter. At the invitation of the President representatives of Iraq, Israel, and Syria were invited to take places at the Council table.

The Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) met at The Hague on May 12–14, 1964. The Council reaffirmed that the government of the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) was the only German government freely and legitimately constituted and therefore entitled to speak for Germany as the representative of the German people in international affairs. The Council invited Manlio Brosio, former Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister of Italy and presently the Italian Ambassador to Paris, to become Secretary-General of NATO in succession to Dirk U. Stikker (Netherlands), who would retire on August 1, 1964.

The Organization of American States (OAS) Council met in Washington, D.C., in secret session on April 29, 1965, at the request of the United States to consider the crisis which had arisen in the Dominican Republic. This crisis had been brought about by the overthrow on April 25–26 of a three-man civilian junta which had ruled the Dominican Republic since 1963. Civil ar had almost immediately broken out between supporters of former President Juan Bosch, led by Colonel Francisco Caamaño Deñó and military units headed by Brigadier General Elias Wessin y Wessin, who was one of the leaders of the coup which had overthrown Bosch in 1963.