On April 9, 1951, the deputies of the foreign ministers of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and the Soviet Union began their sixth week of Paris meetings in an attempt to frame an agenda for a conference of the foreign ministers.

The International Commission for Northwest Atlantic Fisheries was established in accordance with the provisions of the International Convention for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries which was concluded at Washington on February 8, 1949, andentered into force on July 3, 1950. The Convention, which was signed by Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom for itself and Newfoundland, and the United States, established an International Commission with the following purposes and responsibilities: to keep under continuous review all the pertinent information concerning the international fisheries of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean; to coordinate and disseminate all information concerning such fisheries; and to make recommendations to member governments on conservation action deemed necessary to maintain the fisheries at a maximum level of sustained production.

On October 26 of this year, during his conversation with J. A. Malik, Mr. Dulles presented a memorandum on the question of the peace treaty with Japan, containing a brief general statement of the type of treaty that, in the opinion of the United States Government, would be suitable for ending the state of war with Japan. In this connection the Soviet Government would like to obtain an explanation on several points of this memorandum.

On March 6, 1951, the Allied High Commission released a communiqué summarizing the decisions agreed upon between it and the German Federal Republic to implement the agreements reached bythe foreign ministers in September 1950.

The raw materials shortage, acute after the outbreak of the Korean war, became even more severe after the Chinese “volunteers” entered the conflict. The growing fear that inadequate supplies would be available in some of the countries participating in the defense effort, led to widespread requests on the part of nations for an international coordination of commodity problems.

Japanese Peace Treaty: Diplomatic discussions initiated in the fall of 1950 by the United States government with members of the Far Eastern Commission continued during the period under review. On December 27, 1950, the United States delivered to the Soviet representative to the United Nations (Malik) an aide-mémoire which further discussed points raised by the Soviet government in its reply of November 20 to the United States proposal of October 26 for a Japanese peace treaty. After careful study of the Soviet reply, the United States concluded that most of the questions it raised had been answered by the proposal of October 26. In addition, the United States aide-mémoire included the following points: 1) the hope that all nations at war with Japan would participate in the conclusion of peace; 2) no nation had a perpetual power to veto the conclusion by others of peace with Japan; 3) the Cairo Declaration of 1943, like those of Yalta and Potsdam, was subject to any final peace settlement where all relevant factors should be considered; 4) upon conclusion of a peace settlement the military occupation of Japan should cease; 5) current international conditions made it reasonable for Japan to participate with other nations in arrangements for individual and collective self-defense, such as were envisaged by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter; and 6) the treaty should not limit the Japanese peace-time economy nor deny Japan access to raw materials or participation in world trade.

On January 23, 1951, the United States, United Kingdom and France replied to a Soviet proposal of December 30, 1950, concerning a proposed meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers. Theidentic notes pointed out that the western powers had specifically stated that they were unwilling to participate in a conference restricted to Germany alone and felt that the agenda should include the principal problems whose solution would permit a real and lasting improvement of relations with the Soviet Union and the elimination of the cause of existing international tension throughout the world. The three powers requested a clarification of the Soviet note on this point.

Noting the report of the Additional Measures Cómittee dated 14 May 1951, Recalling its resolution 498 (v) of 1 February 1951,

Noting that:

(a) The Additional Measures Committee established by that resolution has considered additional measures to be employed to meet the aggression in Korea,

(b) The Additional Measures Committee has reported that a number of States have already taken measures designed to deny contributions to the military strength of the forces opposing the United Nations in Korea,

A meeting of the International Sugar Council was held in London, June 26 to July 20, 1950. The meeting was attended by delegates of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dominican Republic, France, Haiti, Indonesia, the Netherlands, Peru, Philippine Republic, Poland, Portugal, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Yugoslavia, and the United States. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the world situation in sugar and the proposal for a new international sugar agreement. The council adopted a protocol which extended the international sugar agreement of 1937 one year from August 31, 1950. During 1950, the council created a special committee to 1) study the changing sugar situation as it related to the need or desirability for negotiating a new agreement, and 2) report to the council, as occasion might arise, on its findings and recommendations as to the possible basis of a new agreement. The special committee prepared a document which set forth certain proposals in the form of a preliminary draft agreement. The draft agreement included six fundamental bases: 1) the regulation of exports, 2) the stabilization of sugar prices on the world market, 3) a solution to the currency problem, 4) the limitation of sugar production by importing countries, 5) measures to increase consumption of sugar and 6) the treatment of non-signatory countries. The draft was then considered by the council at its meeting on July 20 at which time the council decided to submit it to member and observer governments for comments and to transmit such comments for consideration at a meeting of the special committee.

The Twelfth International Penal and Penitentiary Congress met at The Hague onAugust 14, 1950. The last such Congress had been held in Berlin in 1935. The Twelfth Congress dealt with such matters as the problems encountered in the application of penal law, the problem of a code of penal execution, and measures which might be substituted for the penal sentence in order to take into account the needs of a humane defense of society. The International Penal and Penitentiary Commission1 held meetings immediately preceding and following the congress on the question of its relationship with the United Nations. The prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders — which had been the principal fields of activity of IPPC since its organization in 1872 — had been matters of concern to the United Nations, in particular the Social Commission of ECOSOC, since 1946. Because of a desire to avoid duplication of effort, and because 18 of the 26 members of IPPC were also Members of the United Nations, representatives of IPPC and of the United Nations conducted negotiations in 1949 and 1950 for the integration of IPPC into the United Nations Secretariat

The United Nations Tin Conference had not yet been reconvened during the period under review. The conference, which was held in Geneva from October 25 to November 21, 1950 was adjourned when the prolonged deliberations revealed that further governmental study was necessary if there was to be any agreement on the numerous proposals for international control of tin stocks and prices. The “Paris Draft”, previously drawn up by the International Tin Study Group, had not been able to satisfy the demands of the widely divergent producing and consuming interests. In a unanimous resolution which conceded the probability that “difficulties will arise concerning tin” which would require inter-governmental action, the conference was able to agree only that “when a surplus or shortage of tin is expected to occur, inter-governmental cooperation and action, in accordance with the principles of the Havana Charter, would be desirable to meet such difficulties”. The conference chairman was instructed to keep the work of the International Tin Study Group under review and to consult with the conference steering committee and the United Nations Secretary-General about holding a second conference at a later date.

Recalling its past resolutions of 15 July 1948, 11 August 1949, 17 November 1950 and 8 May 1951 relating to the General Armistice Agreements between Israel and the neighbouring Arab States and to the provisions contained therein concerning methods for maintaining the armistice and resolving disputes through the Mixed Armistice Commissons participated in by the parties to the General Armistice Agreements.

The International Tin Study Group announced that world production of tin concentrates had attained the postwar record of 15,600 long tons in June 1950. The increase was partially attributed to the high Bolivian figure of 4,001 tons. Malaya, Indonesia and the Belgian Congo also reported high levels of production in tin concentrates for the month. The figure for world production of tin metal in June 1950 was 700 tons.

The second session of the International Wheat Council, which met in London, was held in two parts; the first part from November 1 to 4, 1949 and the second part convened in January 1950 and held meetings until March 15, 1950. It was announced that Brazil, Cuba, Nicaragua, Panama and Guatemala had ratified the International Wheat Agreement and that China, Colombia, Liberia, Uruguay and the Philippine Republic had signed the agreement. The application of Haiti, the West German Federal Republic and Costa Rica for membership together with their respective requests of 28,000, 1,800,000 and 30,000 tons of wheat for importation were received and the council approved the requests of Ceylon, Israel and Egypt for increased purchases of wheat under the agreement.

On July 19, the United States Department of State announced that the International Whaling Commission would convene at Capetown, South Africa, for its third annual meeting on July 23, 1951. The third meeting was to be concerned with such matters as possible amendments of the schedule of regulations controlling whaling; action taken by member governments to promulgate certain laws and regulations concerning whaling, in conformity with the provisions of the 1946 convention; the method of reporting infractions of the regulations and the penalities for such infractions; the status of ratification and adherence of several countries to the convention; possible amendments to the rules of procedure; and administrative and budgetary matters.

Examination of the causes and effects of present international tensions in Europe and of the means to secure a real and lasting improvement in the relations between the Soviet Union, the United States, United Kingdom and France, including the following questions relating to: the demilitarization of Germany; the existing level of armaments and armed forces and measures to be proposed jointly by the USSR, United States, United Kingdom and France for the international control and reduction of armaments and armed forces; fulfillment of present treaty obligations and agreements; the elimination of the threat of war and fear of aggression.

The fourth annual meeting of the International Wool Study Group composed of representatives of twenty or more wool exporting and importing countries convened at London on October 2, 1950 to review the current wool problems arising from reduced supply and increased demand and the ensuing rise in wool prices.