On November 3, 1949 the second session of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe opened in Paris under the chairmanship of Gustav Rasmussen, Danish minister for foreign affairs. The work of this session consisted mainly in examining and approving or disapproving the recommendations of the Consultative Assembly which had met at Strasbourg in August and September 1949. In particular the Committee considered whether or not the Statute of the Council of Europe should be amended as suggested by the Assembly, as a step in increasing its influence and freedom within the Council. Although it was decided not to allow changes in the Statute for the time being, as it had just been approved by national parliaments and had only just come into force, the Committee was, however, “concerned to insure that the wishes of the Assembly shall in practice be met to the greatest possible extent.”

It was reported by the United States High Commissioner (Keyes) that the Soviet policy of charging the Austrian government with neo-Nazism and military rearmament culminated during the period from April 1 to June 30, 1950. In an April meeting of the Allied Council the Soviet High Commissioner charged that the Austrian gendarmerie in the United States, United Kingdom and French zones was being organized, armed and equipped in violation of existing Allied Council agreements to provide a basis for a future Austrian army. However, in a preceding meeting of the Executive Committee, the United States, United Kingdom and French Deputy Commissioners had stated their investigations had revealed no such activities in their zones.

Council of OEEC

On April 4, 1950, the Council of OEEC held its annual election. Dr. Dirk U. Stikker, Foreign Minister of the Netherlands and political conciliator of OEEC, was elected chairman of the Council, thus combining the functions of those two OEEC offices. Representatives of Austria and Switzerland were elected as vicechairmen of the Council, while new members of the executive committee of OEEC were Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and the United Kingdom; the United Kingdom retained the presidency of this committee and France the vice-presidency and Turkey replaced Switzerland as rapporteur géndral. The Council also decided to do away with the consultative group of eleven which had proved to be unwieldy and to eliminate the practice by which the chairman and vice-chairmen had been expected to spend two days of every week in Paris. It was decided that: 1) the full Council should meet at the ministerial level on the first Friday of every second month; 2) whenever circumstances demanded, the executive committee could be convened at the ministerial level, with the participation of the chairman of the Council and possibly at his call; 3) the chairman was empowered to ask the vice-chairmen to meet with him in Paris at any time to review progress or to discuss action. In response to a request from the Council of Europe, the Council of OEEC appointed a subcommittee of three members to meet with a similar subcommittee from the Council of Europe to discuss closer cooperation. Sweden and Italy were named to the OEEC subcommittee with a third member to be announced later.

Two topics were the subject of discussion in the Allied Council and Executive Committee during August 1949: 1) the question of Allied Control over Austrian political parties; and 2) the western attempt to eliminate censorship over Austrian communications. Concerning the political parties two resolutions were submitted by the French and by the United Kingdom Commissions. The French draft was rejected by the three other commissions and the United Kingdom draft, declaring that the Allied Council had decided that political parties needed “no longer obtain the authorization of the Allied Council as required by the decision of the 11th September 1945“ and the “Austrian Government will be responsible for regulating the formation and activity of political parties or organizations according to provisions of international laws,“ was adopted by the Council. The Soviet representative objected to this and to a second French proposal. The United States and United Kingdom agreed to a French suggestion that the Allied Council meet in an extraordinary session to consider further the French positionand the question in general but the Soviet High Commissioner refused to accept

On October 11, 1949 the Council of the Organization of American States adopted a resolution designating the city of Bogotá as the seat of the tenth Pan American Child Congress and setting 1952 as the year in which the Congress should meet. Approval was given on November 2 to the report and second draft statute of the Inter-American Council of Jurists submitted by the Committee on the Organs of the Council and Their Statutes; the draft was put into force provisionally. The Council decided to transmit it to the governments of the American republics and to the Inter-American Juridical Committee for observation. The activities of the Inter-American Trade Mark Bureau were declared to have ceased, while the report and second draft statute of the Inter-American Cultural Council as submitted by the Committee on the Organs of the Council and Their Statutes was approved by the Council and transmitted to the governments. After this committee had received the observations of the Inter-American Cultural Council and prepared a definitive text of the statute on the basis of these comments, it was to submit the text to the Council of the Organization. Finally, at its meeting on November 2, the Council chose Mexico City as headquarters of the first meeting of the Inter-American Cultural Council and agreed in general upon the second half of 1950 as the time of meeting. The Cultural Council was requested to study the matter of the provisional creation and headquarters of the Committee for Cultural Action and submit recommendations on the provisional membership of the Committee for Cultural Action.

Council Action: Following approval in principle by the Council of the Allied High Commission on May 31, 1950 of the progressive relaxation of existing restrictions on foreign investment in Germany, the Council approved on June 15 the detailed procedure prepared by its financial advisers for the first stage in the process of relaxation. The new opportunities to be granted to foreign owners of property and funds in Germany and to foreigners wishing to bring new capital into Germany had been discussed earlier with the Federal finance minister and with representatives of the Benelux governments. Further measures of liberalization and relaxation were to be introduced in the light of the experience gained in the operation of the new procedure.

At a meeting of the Allied Council for Japan on March 1, 1950, the British Commonwealth representative, Colonel W. R. Hodgson of Australia, urged General MacArthur to take “positive action” on Japanese charges that war prisoners in the Soviet Union had been denied repatriation unless they agreed to join the communist party upon their return. Colonel Hodgson criticized General MacArthur's policy of maintaining that the Allied Council could only discuss the issue, and demanded that the Council order Japanese authorities to make a thorough investigation of the accusations, particularly to determine if charges of treason should be brought against Kiyuchi Tokuda, general secretary of the Japanese communist party. William Sebald, United States representative on the Council, after an original statement that Colonel Hodgson's proposal was “not appropriate,” agreed to suggest that Japanese authorities launch a “positive” inquiry. The Japanese government on the following day announced initiation of an investigation.

Council of the Organization

Meeting on April 8, 1950 as the Organ of Consultation in conformity with the Inter-American treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, the Council passed nine resolutions based on the recommendations of the Investigating Committee appointed January 6, 1950. Declaring that the facts verified by the InvestigatingCommittee were in violation of several inter-American treaties, such as the Rights and Duties of States, 1933, the Additional Protocol Relative to Non-intervention, 1936, and to the principles of Article 15 of the Charter of OAS, the Council resolved to 1) request the government of the Dominican Republic to take “immediate and effective measures to prevent government officials from tolerating, instigating, encouraging, aiding, or fomenting subversive or seditious movements against other Governments;” 2) request the Dominican Republic to comply with the Joint Declaration of June 9, 1949; 3) point out to both governments the advisability of strengthening their relations by a bilateral treaty, incorporating the aims of the Havana Convention of 1928 on the Duties and Rights of States in the Event of Civil Strife and containing a special provision to prevent ”the inhabitants, national or foreign, of each country from taking part in activities of any kind capable of disturbing the internal order of the neighboring country;” 4) point out to both governments the advisibility of reaching a bilateral agreement to deal with problems connected with the employment of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic; 5) request both governments to take whatever action lay within their power to prevent the continuation of systematic or hostile propaganda, by any medium whatsoever, against each other or against any other American countries and their respective governments; and 6) express the hope of the Council that good relations be reestablished between the two countries.

Negotiations on the Saar Territory: Negotiations between France and the government of the Saar on a convention to define their relationship toward each other were the subject of considerable discussion in Germany. On January 7, 1950, Jacob Kaiser, Minister for the Reunification of Germany in the west German government, proposed that the Saar's future political status be determined by a referendum, while President Theodor Heuss suggested that final settlement of the question could only be made in a German peace treaty and Chancellor Konrad Adenauer announced that any step to separate the Saar from Germany would meet “the same opposition that we have offered to creation of the Oder-Neisse line.” French Foreign Minister Schuman stated on January 15 that his government would continue with the policy defined in the Saar statute; the discussions were technical, and would have to be confirmed by the peace treaty.

The deputies of the Council of Foreign Ministers resumed negotiations on the Austrian treaty in London on June 10, 1950. The meeting ended in deadlock with the Soviet delegate declaring that so long as violations referred to in the Soviet note of July 8 on Trieste continued, there could be no guarantee that the western powers would not similarly violate the Austrian treaty. After the western delegates denied the allegations on Trieste and maintained that they were irrelevant to the Austrian treaty, it was agreed to hold a further meeting on September 7 subject to the approval of the Soviet government.

From October 22 to 31, 1949, the fourth session of the South Pacific Commission met at its headquarters in Noumea, New Caledonia with representatives of the six participating governments present. Progress on the 30 research projects the Commission had undertaken in May 1949 was reviewed; the projects related o t the health and economic and social development of the 2,500,000 people of the south Pacific region. The project regarding exchange of epidemiological information between the fifteen non-self-governing territories of the area had been completed and was to begin operation during November 1949. Encouraging progress was noted in other projects, including: investigation of infant food; a filari-asis survey; introduction of economically valuable plants in Fiji, New Caledonia, Papua and Netherlands New Guinea; the problem of illiteracy; establishment of centralized technical training institutions and use of visual aids in education; a pilot survey of methods of land usage; and a scheme of community development under trained native leadership. The Commission, recognizing the importance of disseminating information throughout the territories, decided to issue a quarterly bulletin reporting primarily upon progress made in the implementation of the Commission's work program.

First South Pacific Conference

Sir Brian Freeston, Governor of Fiji, was chairman of the first South Pacific Conference which met at Nasinu, Fiji, April 25 to May 5, 1950. The proposed agenda items had been assigned to the member governments for the preparation of introductory papers to serve as discussion guides; Australia reported on mosquito control and die improvement and diversification of food and export crops; the United States on village health; New Zealand on the village school; Netherlands on vocational training; the United Kingdom on cooperative societies; and France on fisheries methods. The conference adopted recommendations in each of these fields as well as exchanging ideas and information on administrative matters. Delegates attended the Conference from Papua, New Guinea, Nauru, New Caledonia and dependencies, French Oceania, the Netherlands, New Guinea, Western Samoa, Cook Islands including Niue, Fiji, British Solomon Islands, Gilbert Islands, Ellice Islands, American Samoa, New Hebrides, and Tonga.

The United States High Commissioner (Keyes) reported that the question or Austrian communications continued to absorb the time of the Allied Commission for Austria during the first quarter of 1950. One of the questions referred to the Allied Council by the Executive Committee concerned the redistribution of radio frequencies for Austrian broadcasting stations. The United States, the United Kingdom and French High Commissioners recognized the necessity for additional wave lengths in Austria and, with one exception, gave full support to the proposal of the director general of the Austrian Post and Telegraph Administration made in January 1950 allocating new wave lengths. The Soviet High Commissioner demanded that Austrian radio stations be limited to the four frequencies allotted by the European broadcasting convention held in Copenhagen in 1948, which had been rejected as inadequate in number and of improper wave length for mountainous terrain by Austria. After considerable discussion, during which no agreement was reached, the question was dropped.

The Secretary-General of the Far Eastern Commission, Nelson T. Johnson, released his report on the activities of the organization from December 24, 1948, to June 30, 1950. The report was a summary of activities and a description of the nine policy decisions made during the period. Cessation of the trial of Japanese war criminals, reform of the Japanese agricultural system, restoration of patent rights to allied nationals (including rights previously held on utility models and designs), restoration of trade-mark rights together with regulations governing Japanese use of trade names and marking of merchandise and revisions of previous decisions governing restitution of looted property and access to technical and scientific information in Japan by Allied governments were the subjects covered by the decisions of the Commission.

During June and July 1949 the Allied Council and its Executive Committee considered a series of election laws for Austria. The constitutional law establishing procedures and regulations for the conduct of the 1949 national elections was approved by the Council after considerable debate over its relationship to a Council decision of September 1945, which required Allied Council authorization for new political parties. Approval of the election law was eventually given on the understanding that it did not conflict with previous Council decisions. The Council also discussed in detail a Vienna city election law dividing the city into 23 electoral districts, which was opposed by the communist party as putting it at a disadvantage; the Soviet representative refused to approve the law and stated that unless it was withdrawn he would not approve a constitutional law defining the borders between Vienna and lower Austria, making elections impossible. The Vienna city council subsequently modified the city law and it was approved by the Allied Council, the United States High Commissioner (Keyes) noting his “regret and disappointment” over “tampering” with the Austrian legislative process.

The Council of Foreign Ministers Deputies on the Austrian Treaty reopened their sessions in London on January 9, 1950. At the first meeting the Soviet deputy (Zarubin) reported that he was without instructions and was still awaiting conclusion of Soviet-Austrian negotiations on Austria's payments for post-war supplies and services by the USSR. After several subsequent meetings at which Mr. Zarubin was still without instructions, the United States, United Kingdom, and French ambassadors in Moscow protested to Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko against the delays encountered in the treaty negotiations. The three ambassadors requested “assurances” that the treaty negotiations would not be further delayed but did not receive them.

In February 1950 the annual report of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation was presented to the United States Economic Cooperation Administration. The report stated that future progress of European recovery would depend to a large extent upon the level of economic activity in the United States, upon United States tariff policy; and upon international investments made by the United States. The forecasts of European trade were based on the assumption that United States business activity would remain at least as high as in the second and third quarter of 1949; it was pointed out that even small setbacks in the United States economy would have disproportionately large consequences for western Europe whose reserves were not great enough to stand much strain. The report insisted that what remained to be done to solve the dollar problem was not a task for Europe alone but was rather a “joint problem.” Western Europe's dollar deficit could not be eliminated unless its exports to the United States amounted to 75 percent of its imports in value. It was necessary that the emphasis shift from the expansion of total production to the development of dollar earning and dollar saving types of production, as well as a reduction in costs. Inflationary pressure had been greatly relieved but nearly all the Marshall Plan countries were still suffering from some inflationary pressure which tended to reduce their exports and increase their imports. This pressure was likely to continue unless a world depression developed.

The Security Council,

Recognizing the hardships and privations to which the people of Korea are being subjected as a result of the continued prosecution by the North Korean forces of their unlawful attack; and

Appreciating the spontaneous offers of assistance to the Korean people which have been made by governments, specialized agencies, and non-governmental organizations;

Requests the Unified Command to exercise responsibility for determining the requirements for the relief and support of the civilian population of Korea, and for establishing in the field the procedures for providing such relief and support;

Requests the Secretary-General to transmit all offers of assistance for relief and support to the Unified Command;

Western Germany: Major developments concerning western Germany during the fall of 1949 centered around the problems of dismantling, German industrial production, and the international status of the German Federal Republic. The foreign ministers of France, the United Kingdom and the United States, meeting in Paris on November 10 and 11, turned the problem over to the Allied High Commission; French agreement to proposals for liquidation of the dismantling program was obtained after long discussion and with the provision that German steel production should not increase above the current limit of 11,500,000 tons annually. The ministers “reaffirmed their policy as expressed in the occupation statute of giving to the Federal Republic a wide area of free determination in the conduct of German affairs,” the area of autonomy to grow as the Republic “gave confidence that it was proceeding toward the establishment of a free democratic and peaceful Germany.” The integration of the German people into the European community was also to be supported.

Reorganization of the Coal and Steel Industries of the Ruhr: On March 29 the Allied High Commissioners met with west German trade union leaders to discuss the contemplated revision of the anti-trust provisions for Ruhr iron and steel and coal industries of United States-United Kingdom Law 75, passed by the bipartite military government organization in November 1947. After two days of continued negotiations on the proposed law, which would reorganize the iron and steel industries of the Ruhr, the Allied High Commission on April 14 issued a communiqué stating that the draft of the law had been adopted with certain amendments. The communiqué further stated that the decision to adopt the preamble had not been unanimous and that an appeal had been made against it. When Sir Brian Robertson (United Kingdom) and John J. McCloy (United States) voted in favor of the preamble, André François-Poncet (France) appealed to the French government against a clause granting the federal government the right to decide the eventual ownership of die iron and steel and coal industries. Following rejection of the French appeal the Commission made public the reorganization law on May 17.