Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:49:47.254Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Africa at the UN: Some Observations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

John H. Spencer
Get access

Extract

Within the space of less than six years, the African membership in the United Nations has increased from three to twenty-eight Members constituting the largest geographical group in the Organization. Furthermore, as many as seven other territories may become independent and seek membership before the end of 1965.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , Spring 1962 , pp. 375 - 386
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 South Africa, which is not in the African caucus, is excluded for the purposes of this study.

2 For an incisive discussion of this problem seeGood, R. C., “Four Tendencies at the United Nations,” Africa Report, 06 1961 (Vol. 6, No. 6)Google Scholar; and “Congo Crisis: The Role of the New States,” in Neutralism, published by the Washington Center of Foreign Policy Research, 1961Google Scholar.

3 Olympio, S., “African Problems in the Cold War,” Foreign Affairs, 10 1961 (Vol. 40, No. 1), p. 50–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 A/PV.1065, November 27, 1961.

5 “One of the principal arguments advanced in support of that thesis by Mr. Subandrio … is that when a colonial territory accedes to independence, its sovereignty should be exercised within the limits of the former colonial sovereignty. This is a principle which is doubtless quite just in most cases, but certain qualifications must be introduced when it is a question of territories whose peoples are not united by racial or cultural links or by common beliefs.” A/PV.1065.

6 “The right of self-determination applies, of course, to the entire population of a colony ts a unit and to the entire territory of a colony as a unit [italics added] … The right of self-determination i s not something to be applied to racial, cultural, or ethnic groups within a colony.” A/PV.1065, November 27, 1961, Subandrio, representative of Indonesia.

7 “In our opinion, the problem of self-determination raises several awkward problems … We consider that we could never agree to the right of self-determination being exercised otherwise than for the whole body of the Algerian people and for the whole of the Algerian territory.” A/PV.956, December 19, i960, D'Arboussier, representative of Senegal.

8 “At the moment of accession towards independence, in order to avoid internecine wars which might jeopardize the independence just acquired with such difficulty it was agreed to accept the territorial limits obtaining at that time.” A/PV.1043, October 27, 1961. The political relations between the Congo (Brazzaville) and the Congo (Leopoldville), in general, and with respect to the provinces of Katanga and Leopoldville, in particular, cannot be ignored in this connection.

9 A/PV.1031, October 10, 1961. See also opposition of the Sudan, itself a former beneficiary of self-determination. A/PV.1065, November 27, 1961, Ambassador Adeel on West Irian question.

10 SeeEmerson, Rupert, From Empire to Nation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Chapters VI and XVI.

11 It would seem that the basic issue involved in the recent admission of Mauritania was less the threat to the territorial integrity of Morocco, as exploited by it in the discussions, than the threat to African boundary treaties generally if the colonial arrangements establishing the frontiers of Mauritania were to be drawn into question by the General Assembly through refusal to admit Mauritania to membership.

12 A/PV.1031, October 10, 1961.

13 SeeInternational Organization, Autumn 1961 (Vol. 15, No. 4), p. 549–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 In his view, the Secretary-General was “one in whom there would be combined both the political and executive functions of a President with the internal administrative functions that were previously accorded to a Secretary-General. Obviously, this is a reflection, in some measure, of the American political system, which places authority in a chief executive officer who is not simply subordinated to the legislative organs but who is constitutionally responsible alone for the execution of legislation and i n some respects for carrying out the authority derived from the constitutional instrument directly.”Hammarskjöld, Dag, The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), p. 11Google Scholar.

15 SeeEmerson, Rupert, “Pan-Africanism,” in this issue, p. 275–290Google Scholar; and Erasmus H. Kloman, Jr., “African Unification Movements,” ibid., p. 387–404.