The present critical stage of inter-American relations offers a timely occasion for an inquiring glance at the Organization of American States (OAS). For more than half a century—and particularly during the last two decades—the United States has increasingly adapted its policy toward Latin America to the principles and procedures of the Organization of American States, confident that such an approach would best serve our long-range objectives in the hemisphere. Yet the varying responses which the United States has gained from the regional agency when problems of high importance have been submitted to it constitute one of the most confusing aspects of our hemisphere relations. The last few years have provided a striking illustration of this point.

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.”

Professor Robert Cox's “Labor and hegemony” in the Summer 1977 issue of International Organization includes one of the most sophisticated versions of the corporate unionist or “revisionist” description and explanation of American labor's foreign policy that has appeared to date. Nevertheless, it is inaccurate both as description and explanation, and like other attempts to use the corporate unionist approach, it is a misleading paradigm impeding research into the nature of labor's transnational involvements.

In discussing recent developments regarding the United Nations, an earnest advocate of world government might label as significant any steps which would move the United Nations either toward or away from world government, while an American nationalist might consider activities of the United Nations significant if they either forwarded or frustrated American policies. Accepting, however, the value system of the United Nations Charter, developments may be considered significant insofar as they influence the probability of war, the security of fundamental human rights, respect for international justice, and the advancement of social and economic welfare. These criteria are vague, but they do exclude criteria flowing from values peculiar to any nation, religion, race, or economic class. Further, most of the peoples of the world have subscribed to them through the United Nations Charter.

On March 5, 1970, the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) went into effect, having been ratified by 47 states including the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The treaty legally bars these three nuclear powers from transferring atomic weapons to nonnuclear states and formally pledges those nonnuclear states signing the treaty to refrain from developing such weapons or acquiring them from other powers. It thus caps a long effort by the United States to inhibit—so long as it could not preclude—the spread of nuclear weapons and to avoid the potential instabilities associated with that spread.

With this issue, the editorial offices of International Organization (IO) move from the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University in the United States to the Munk Center for International Studies at the University of Toronto in Canada. For the past five years, Lisa Martin has done an outstanding job in leading the journal to its current top-ranked position in the field. As editor-in-chief, Lisa was assisted not only by Rebecca Webb, an excellent managing editor, but also by two superb associate editors, Thomas Risse from the Free University in Berlin and Beth Yarbrough from Amherst College. We are grateful to them all for their hard work and dedication.

Please substitute the following for the definition on page 276 of our article in the Spring 1996 issue of International Organization (Volume 50, No. 2, pp.269–99):

Definition. A coalition of m (out of n) members is nonconnected if there is a member i ε {N} – {M} that belongs in the Pareto set of {M}.

Since the signing and ratification of the treaties establishing the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), there has been renewed interest in the organization which pioneered die European effort toward economic integration under supra-national institutions. The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) commemorates this year two anniversaries which are of more dian usual significance. February 10 and May 1, 1958, mark die completion of die first five years of die common market for coal and iron ore, and for steel and scrap, respectively. February 10 also marks die end of die “period of transition” provided by die treaty to cushion die impact of competidon on weak industries and to facilitate their adaptation to die conditions of the common market. During this period, some member countries were authorized to continue certain customs duties (e.g., on Italian imports of coke and steel), subsidies (e.g., for Lorraine coal and coke), and odier protective devices; and in some cases, provision was made for financial assistance by the Community itself (e.g., in favor of coal mines in Belgium and Sardinia). But unlike the escape clauses included in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), diese exemptions and supports were limited to five years, widi die possibility, in some cases, of a further extension of two years. Also during this period, measures were to be taken to eliminate discriminatory practices and to harmonize the conditions of competition, particularly in transport, and a common tariff was to be worked out vis-à-vis non-member countries.

On May 5, 1951, the Deputies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization announced the adoption by their governments of new terms of reference for the North Atlantic Council, a reorganization of the various committees of the Council, and the creation of a financial and economic board.

Recognizing the determination of the United Nations to create conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations,

TheParties to this Charter undertake in the fields of trade and employment to co-operate with one another and with the United Nations

For the Purpose of

Realizing the aims set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the attainment of the higher standards of living, full employment and conditions of economic and social progress and development, envisaged in Article 55 of that Charter.

The eighteenth annual report of the Bank for International Settlements, which reviewed the period from April 1, 1947, to March 31, 1948, called for abandonment of the wartime type of direct controls on prices, production and trade, and the restoration of a functioning price system, operating under well-controlled monetary regimes. The report, the most comprehensive ever issued by the Bank, dealt in detail with such topics as 1) recovery and set-back in 1947, 2) restoration of monetary order, 3) price movements, 4) the tense position of international trade, 5) foreign exchange rates, 6) production and movements of gold, 7) international credit conditions and the trend of interest rates, 8) European payment agreements, multilateral monetary compensation and the European Recovery Program, and 9) current activities of the Bank. Reference was made to the fact that the Bank for International Settlements had acceded to a request to act as technical agent for the Agreement on Multilateral Monetary Compensation, signed in Paris on November 18, 1947. Practical compensation operations under this agreement were begun in December 1947.

The Ministerial Council of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) met in Lisbon on May 9–11, 1963, under the chairmanship of Mr. Corrêa d'Oliveira (Portuguese Minister of State). The Ministers decided to establish a final timetable for the dismantling of tariffs on industrial products. These tariffs would be eliminated by December 31, 1966. The next 10 percent reduction would take place on December 31, 1963, thus bringing intra-EFTA tariffs down to 40 percent of their level when EFTA began.

The following summary covers the activities of the Security Council from its 757th meeting on December 19, 1956, through its 775th meeting on March 7, 1957.

The first part of the fourth session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) was held July 2–5, 1958, in Paris, under the presidency of Sir James Hutchison (United Kingdom, Conservative). In the course of its discussion of military questions, the Assembly debated three reports and took note of a communication by M. Etienne de la Vallée Poussin (Belgium, Social Christian) on the responsibility of WEU in military policy. After its consideration of the request for an opinion from the Consultative Assembly on the military implications of regional or limited disarmament or of the policy of disengagement in central Europe, the Assembly adopted a resolution rejecting the Rapacki Plan and stating that disengagement which implied a withdrawal of United States and Soviet troops would be highly dangerous to the west unless it took place under certain express conditions, one of these being that neutralization of western Germany could not form part of such a policy. The Assembly also adopted a resolution and a recommendation on WEU's contribution to the production of armaments within the Atlantic alliance; the resolution allowed for the creation of a committee of investigation of five members, to be nominated by the Presidential Committee. In connection with the state of European security the Council approved by 50 votes to 6, with 8 abstentions, a recommendation from its defense committee calling for a minimum land force in central Europe of 30 divisions, with tactical nuclear weapons. There was to be no reduction in the contribution of member states, according to the recommendation, and they were to bring their contingents up to the agreed level.

The Council of the Baghdad Pact held its annual meeting in Karachi from June 3 through 6, 1957. Representatives were present from the five member countries—Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and the United Kingdom—and the United States was represented by an observer delegation. The Council had been scheduled to meet months earlier, but Iraq originally refused to meet with the United Kingdom. At the opening session, presided over by Mr. Suhrawardy, Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nuri es Said, was reported to have spoken forcefully about the dangers implicit in the problems of Israel, Algeria, Kashmir and Cyprus. Mr. Lloyd, Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, was reported to have followed Mr. Nuri es Said's remarks with a speech in which he announced his government's offer of a contribution of £500,000 a year in cash and in kind for building up the minimum military infra-structure in member countries. The speeches of other delegates were reported to be noteworthy for their frank recognition of past weaknesses in the Baghdad Pact organization and the need to give it new effectiveness. In the course of the first session the United States formally accepted an invitation to join the Pact's Military Committee; and a United States military delegation headed by General Nathan F. Twining started participating in a separate concurrent meeting of the Military Committee. The United States thus became a member of the Pact's three main committees, but had still not become a formal member of the Pact.

Having considered the report prepared by the Secretary-General, in consulltation with the specialized agencies, on an expanded programme of technical assistance for economic development, pursuant to resolution 180 (VIII), 2 Being impressed with the significant contribution to economic development that can be made by an expansion of the international interchange of technical knowledge through international co-operation among countries, Believing that a sound international programme of this character must combine and make use of the experience of many nations, with different social patterns and cultural traditions and at different stages of development, so as to facilitate progress in the less advanced countries and to help solve their technical and economic problems.