Un Trusteeship Agreement 1947
The Security Council discussed at four meetings a draft U.S. Fideluté Agreement. Given that the President has already sent a memorandum to Congress analysing the draft decision [p. 3/4] and which briefly records the discussion of the Security Council, I would like to highlight the most important points today. No state has rejected our proposals, although several governments – Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom – initially felt that the case should be upheld until peace with Japan was settled. The U.S. government has argued that the issue of the former islands mandated in Japan does not depend on the peace settlement with Japan and should not wait. We saw no reason to postpone this issue, but we were prepared to consider such a postponement after the formal presentation of our proposals, as the Security Council might consider necessary. During its deliberations, the Council`s deliberations were so extensive that the governments of Canada, India, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the Republic of the Philippines were able to express their views.
When the views of all MEMBERS of the United Nations directly involved in the Pacific War were to be heard by the Council, the proposal to delay the issue until the withdrawal of a peace settlement with Japan was delayed. Three amendments, none of which fundamentally amended the agreement, were proposed by members of the Security Council and accepted by the representative of the United States with certain interpolations, which he requested to be included in the protocol. Section 3, which deals with the conduct of the administration, was amended by removing the phrase “as an integral part of the United States.” In adopting this amendment, the representative of the United States stated that my Government was of the view that it agreed with this amendment and that it should state in the minutes that its authority on the territory of the Trust is in no way considered to be deducted. Article C, paragraph 1, was amended by adding, after the words “towards autonomy,” the words “or independence that may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of the fiduciary territory and its peoples, as well as to the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned.” In accepting this amendment, the representative of the United States stated that the United States believes that it should not assert its opposition to the principle of independence, to which no people could be devoted more than the people of the United States, but to the idea that this could be done in the near future. In addition, Article 6, paragraph 1, was also amended by removing the term “local” from the term “in local government.” At the request of the representative of the United States, Section 7 was refined by conveying the concept of “freedom of conscience” so that it is not subject to the requirements of public order and public safety. The aforementioned amendments were freely accepted by the representative of the United States on the orders of that government. No objections have been raised in the Security Council with respect to its interpolations, which I have just indicated, of amendments which allow it to approve, on behalf of the United States, the loyalty agreement proposed by that government and approved by the United Nations Security Council on 2 April 1947. TERRITORY CONCERNED The trust agreement applies to the territories of the Mariana Islands, Caroline and Marshall Islands in the Central Pacific. These islands were German possessions before 1914. In October 1914, they were occupied by Japanese troops. After the First World War, Germany renounced all its overseas assets in favour of the main allies and associated powers. The ancient German islands of Micronesia were then ordained to Japan as part of the League of Nations.
During World War II, American forces snatched them from the Japanese at a huge cost in life and equipment.