Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T18:23:12.692Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Disposition of Enemy Dependent Areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 April 2017

Annette Baker Fox
Annette Baker Fox*
Affiliation:
Institute of International Studies, Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

If a defeated Japan is to be “ pared back to her volcanic core,” China will be a prime beneficiary. The Cairo Declaration promised to return to her Formosa, the Pescadores, and Manchuria. But what of those parts of the Japanese colonial empire which were not Chinese? Some other arrangements must be made for Korea and the Japanese mandated islands. Liquidation of Italy's African empire raises similar questions.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , July 1945 , pp. 486 - 503
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1945

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 For discussions of the mandate system see Quincy Wright, Mandates Under the League of Nations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1930; Aaron M. Margalith, The International Mandates, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press; 1930; Norman Bentwich, The Mandates System, London: Longmans; 1930; John A. Decker, Labor Problems in the Pacific Mandates, New York: Institute of Pacific Relations; 1940; Emanuel Moresco, Colonial Questions and Peace, Paris: International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation; 1939.

2 For general discussions of joint control see L. Oppenheim, International Law, 2 vols., London: Longmans; 1937 (5th ed., by Lauterpacht); Norman L. Hill, International Administration, New York: McGraw-Hill; 1931; Raymond Leslie Buell, International Relations, New York: Holt; 1925; M.F.Lindley, The Acquisition and Government of Backward Territory in International Law, London: Longmans; 1926; Royal Institute of International Affairs, The Colonial Problem, London: Royal Institute of International Affairs; 1937. A more detailed discussion of some examples may be found in Francis B. Sayre, Experiments in International Administration, New York: Harper; 1919.

3 Some kind of international supervision over a native administration is often proposed for areas like Korea, and superficially this might appear to be a fourth alternative. However, if this supervision is not confined to moral persuasion but also includes the power to make and execute important decisions, it becomes either a type of joint control or international administration. This is equally true in the case of proposed regional commissions for backward areas.

4 Hunter Miller, David, The Drafting of the Covenant, New York: G. P. Putnam; 1928 Google Scholar; Pitman B. Potter, “Origin of the System of Mandates Under the League of Nations,” in American Political Science Review, Vol. XVI (1922), pp. 563-83; Beer, G. L., African Questions at the Paris Peace Conference, New York: Macmillan; 1923 Google Scholar; House, Edward M. and Seymour, Charles, What Reality Happened at Paris, New York: Scribner; 1921 Google Scholar; Lansing, Robert, The Peace Negotiations, Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 1921 Google Scholar; Jan C. Smuts, “The League of Nations, A Practical Suggestion,” reprinted in David Hunter Miller, work cited, Vol. II, pp. 23-60.

5 A further evaluation of the mandate system will appear in the concluding section.

6 A selected bibliography includes Steefel, Lawrence D., The Schleswig-Holstein Question, Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1932 Google Scholar; Simon, Edouard, The Emperor William and His Reign, London: Remington and Co.; 1888 Google Scholar; Wycliffe Headlam, James, Bismarck and the Foundation of the German Empire, New York: Putnam; 1899 Google Scholar; Britain, Great, Foreign Office, Schleswig-Holstein (Handbooks Prepared Under the Direction of the Historical Section of the Foreign Office, No. 35), London: H. M. Stationery Office; 1920 Google Scholar; Sarah Wambaugh, , A Monograph on Plebiscites, New York: Oxford University Press; 1920 Google Scholar; and Mowat, R. B., A History of European Diplomacy, 1815-1914, London: Edward Arnold & Co.; 1922.Google Scholar

7 Louis Stevenson, Robert, A Foot Note to History, New York: Scribner; 1892 Google Scholar; R. M. Watson, History of Samoa, Wellington, N. Z.: Whitcombe and Tombs; 1918; Keesing, Felix M., Modern Samoa, London: Allen and Unwin; 1934 Google Scholar; Scholefield, Guy H., The Pacific, Its Past and Future, London: John Murray; 1919 Google Scholar; Townsend, Mary E., The Rise and Fall of Germany's Colonial Empire, New York: Macmillan; 1930 Google Scholar; the same, Origins of Modern German Colonialism, New York: Columbia University Press; 1921; Ryden, George H., The Foreign Policy of the United States in Relation to Samoa, New Haven: Yale University Press; 1933 Google Scholar; Henry C. Ide, “Our Interest in Samoa,” in The North American Review, Vol. CLXV (1897), pp. 155-73; and John George Leigh, “The Samoan Crisis and Its Causes,” in The Fortnightly Review, No. 389 (1899), pp. 723-34.

8 Great Britain, Foreign Office, New Hebrides (Handbooks Prepared Under the Direction of the Historical Section of the Foreign Office, No. 147), London: H. M. Stationery Office; 1920; Philippe Grignon-Dumoulin, Le Condominium et la Mise en Valeur des Nouvelles Hebrides, Paris: Les Presses Universitaires de France, 1928; Harrisson, Tom, Savage Civilisation, London: Gollancz; 1937 Google Scholar; Great Britain, Colonial Office, New Hebrides, 1938, London: H. M. Stationery Office; 1940; Cambridge History of the British Empire, Vol. VII, Part II: New Zealand, New York: Macmillan; 1933; George Brown, “The Trouble in the New Hebrides,” in The Contemporary Review, Vol. CV (1914), pp. 526-32; and John H. Harris, “The New Hebrides Experiment,” in The Nineteenth Century, Vol. LXXV (1914), pp. 932-38.

9 The Earl of Cromer, Modern Egypt, New York: Macmillan; 1908; O'Rourke, Vernon A., The Juristic Status of Egypt and the Sudan, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press; 1935 Google Scholar; Great Britain, Foreign Office, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan (Handbooks Prepared Under the Direction of the Historical Section of the Foreign Office, No. 98), London: H. M. Stationery Office; 1920; Martin, Percy F., The Sudan in Evolution, London: Constable; 1921 Google Scholar; Hilmi II, Abbas, The Anglo-Egyptian Settlement, London: Allen and Unwin; 1930 Google Scholar; Kohn, Hans, A History of Nationalism in the East, New York: Harcourt, Brace; 1929 Google Scholar; Royal Institute of International Affairs, Great Britain and Egypt, 1914∼1986, London: Royal Institute of International Affairs; 1936; Yacoub Pasha Artin, England in the Sudan (London: Macmillan; 1911; Pierre Crabitès, “Egypt, the Sudan and the Nile,” in Foreign Affairs, Vol. III(1924-25), pp. 320-30.

10 Stuart, Graham H., The International City of Tangier, Stanford University: Stanford University Press; 1931 Google Scholar; Harris, Walter B., France, Spain and the Rif, London: Edward Arnold & Co.; 1927 Google Scholar; Raphäel Durand, M., Le Problème de Tanger, Aix-en-Provence: J. Brun; 1926 Google Scholar; Mellor, F. H., Morocco Awakes, London: Methuen; 1939 Google Scholar; Charles E. Hobhouse, “The International Status of Tangier,” in Contemporary Review, Vol. CXLVIII (1935), pp. 156-63; John R. Tunis, “Tangier: A Test in Internationalism,” in Current History, Vol. XXXVII (1933), pp. 675-79; “Tangier, A Study in Internationalisation,” in The Round Table, Vol. X (1919-20), pp. 348-60; W.H.Crawfurd-Price, “Where East Meets West,” in Christian Science Monitor, Sept. 4, 1935; “Tangier: International Questionmark,” in New Statesman and Nation, Vol. XXIII (1942), p. 271; Charles G. Fenwick, “The International Status of Tangier,” this JOURNAL, Vol. XXIII (1929), pp. 140-43.

11 Swire, J., Albania, The Rise of a Kingdom, London: Williams & Norgate; 1929 Google Scholar; Wadham Peacock, Albania, The Foundling State of Europe, New York: Appleton; 1914 Google Scholar; Edith Pierpont Stickney, Southern Albania, 1912-1923, Stanford University: Stanford University Press; 1926; The Memoirs of Ismail Kemal Bey, Sommerville Story, ed., London: Constable; 1920; Edith Durham, M., Twenty Years of Balkan Tangle, London: Allen & Unwin; 1920 Google Scholar; Ernst Christian Helmreich, The Diplomacy of the Balkan Wars, 1912-1913, Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1938; Nationalism and War in the Near East (By a Diplomatist), Lord Courtney, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1915; E. J. Dillon, “Foreign Affairs,” in Contemporary Review, Vol. CVI (1914), pp. 276-80; H. Charles Woods, “The Situation in Albania,” in Fortnightly Review, Vol. CI (1914), pp. 460-72.

12 Reynolds, B. T., The Saar and the Franco-German Problem, London: Edward Arnold and Co.; 1934 Google Scholar; Osborne, Sidney, The Saar Question, London: Allen and Unwin; 1923 Google Scholar; Russell, Frank M., The International Government of the Saar, Berkeley: University of California Press; 1934 Google Scholar; Lambert, Margaret, The Saar, London: Faber and Faber; 1934 Google Scholar; Florinsky, Michael T., The Saar Struggle, New York: Macmillan; 1934 Google Scholar; Donald, Robert, A Danger Spot in Europe, London: Leonard Parsons; 1925 Google Scholar; Balk, Theodore, The Saar at First Hand, London: John Lane at the Bodley Head; 1934 Google Scholar; Wambaugh, Sarah, The Saar Plebiscite, Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1940 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haskins, Charles H. and Lord, Robert H., Some Problems of the Peace Conference, Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1920.Google Scholar

13 Hudson, Manley O., The Verdict of the League: Colombia and Peru at Leticia, Boston: World Peace Foundation; 1933 Google Scholar; Ulloa, Alberto, Posición Internacional del Peru, Lima: Imprenta Torres Aguirre; 1941 Google Scholar; Colombia, Ministry of Foreign Relations, El Conflicto de Leticia, Bogota: Imprenta Nacional; 1934; Henry Grattan Doyle, “Peace Efforts in South America,” in Current History, Vol. XXXVIII (1933), pp. 90-94; Lester H. Woolsey, “Leticia Dispute Between Colombia and Peru,” this JOURNAL, Vol. XXIX (1935), pp. 94-99; David Y. Thomas, “The Settlement of the Leticia Dispute,” in The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, Vol. XV (1934-1935), pp. 155-65; “The Seventieth Council and Three Disputes,” in Geneva, Vol. VI (1933), pp. 23-25; “The League and Latin America's Quarrels,” same, p. 46; “The League Council Faces Trouble in Three Continents,” same, Vol. VII (1934), pp. 62-66; Y. M. Goblet, The Twilight of Treaties, London: G. Bell & Sons; 1936.

14 Kalijarvi, Thorsten, The Memel Statute, London: Robert Hale; 1937 Google Scholar; The Status of the Memel Territory, Doc. C.159.M.39, Geneva: League of Nations; 1924; Lithuanian Information Bureau, The Question of Memel, London: Eyre and Spottiswoode; 1924; Ian Morrow, F. D. and Sieveking, L. M., The Peace Settlement in the German Polish Borderlands, London: Oxford University Press; 1936 Google Scholar; Robinson, Jacob, Kommentar der Konvention Über Das Memelgebiel, Kaunas: Spaudos Fondas; 1934 Google Scholar; Rogge, Albrecht, Die Verfassung des Memelgebietes, Berlin: Deutsche Rundschau; 1928 Google Scholar; Donald, Robert, The Polish Corridor and the Consequences, LondonGoogle Scholar: Thornton Butterworth; no date; John A. Gade, “The Memel Controversy,” in Foreign Affairs, Vol. II (1923-24), pp. 410-20.

15 Danzig between the two world wars was not an example of joint control The High Commissioner representing the League of Nations was the guardian of the constitution, and Poland was responsible for the foreign relations of the Free City, but the government was in local hands. Cf. P. E. Corbett, “What Is the League of Nations?”, in British Year Book of International Law, 1924, pp. 119-48, at p. 141.

16 J. L. Kunz, Die Staatenverbindungen, Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer; 1929, p. 280; Kunz called condominium a Verlegenheitsschöpfung.

17 Lack of single ultimate authority has perpetuated disputes over the protection of native labor and land titles. The protocol of 1914, which was not ratified until 1922, made important improvements, especially in juridical matters, which were designed to counteract the mutual paralysis engendered by this “pandemonium” system.

18 Reynolds, work cited, pp. 121-28; Lambert, work cited, pp. 126-29; Florinsky, work cited, pp. 40-44; Russell, work cited, pp. 209-26; Donald, A Danger Spot in Europe, pp. 57-62.

19 As a result of the tugging and hauling among the contending powers, half of Albania was handed over to her hereditary Slav enemies, including a million Albanian inhabitants, the most fertile and productive territory, and all important communities except Scutari and Valona. Although an international boundary commission tried to settle the southern frontier on equitable, rather than political, lines, in the end the decision was based on a diplomatic trade involving external considerations. Even then the Greeks failed to observe the line drawn. The result of these restricted boundary lines for the new-born country was economic ruin, starvation, and disorder. Swire, work cited, pp. 148-53, 163-72, 187-94, 202-06; Stickney, work cited, pp. 21-50; Peacock, work cited, pp. 205-23.

20 Swire, work cited, pp. 201 and 209; Woods, work cited, pp. 471-72; The Memoirs of Ismail Kemal Bey, pp. 286 and 382.

21 There were three currencies, and the separate French and British police systems could be used jointly only in case of special emergency. Crowning an elaborate judicial system of native and national courts was a Joint Court, presided over by an appointee of Spain, while the legal procedure was a mixture of French and British practice.

22 Superimposed on the tribal political organization of the Samoans was the office of the king, a totally artificial concept for Samoa. In addition there was a chief justice selected by a neutral state, and the capital was governed by a municipal council headed by a president selected in similar fashion. This administrative machinery provided a façade behind which the consuls of the three states functioned in a seldom harmonious fashion as advisers and controllers.

23 The following officials and agencies governed seventy thousand people: the Sultan's representative, who was directly responsible for the administration of the natives; an International Legislative Assembly of twenty-six members representing the participating states, the Mohammedans, and the Jews; a Committee of Control formed by the consuls de carrière of the signatories of the Act of Algeciras (actually they dwindled to seven); an Administrator; and three Assistant Administrators, of different nationalities. Finally there was a correspondingly elaborate judicial system. There were enough officials to govern a population ten times as large.

24 In Memel, on the other hand, the government was relatively simple. Few important alterations were made in the customary forms and there were no special provisions for Lithuanian representation. The government was overthrown when Lithuania seized the territory

25 Durham, work cited, pp. 264 and 268; Helmreich, work cited, p. 438; Swire, work cited, p. 198; Memoirs of Ismail Kemal Bey, p. 383.

26 Royal Institute of International Affairs, Great Britain and Egypt, p. 36.

27 Peruvian nationals had forcibly seized the disputed area, thus bringing the contest to a head.

28 Reynolds, work cited, p. 128; Lambert, work cited, pp. 92-95; Florinsky, work cited, p. 23; Russell, work cited, pp. 207-08. For a different view, cf. Wambaugh, The Saar Plebiscite, p. 78.

29 The Saar evidence might be regarded as an argument for a very long period of joint control in order to provide the confidence necessary to attract financial investment. However, the disadvantages of shared administration are likely to make for an unstable regime regardless of length of tenure.

30 The lack of a broad tax base, high fixed charges on the administration which the Zone assumed involuntarily and which profited the neighboring French and Spanish protectorates, the high cost of the customs administration, which was under French Moroccan control, and the general overstaffing of the government all caused local hostility to the regime. Cf. Stuart, work cited, pp. 132-33 and 211-21; Tunis, work cited, pp. 676-77.

31 These included the customs union with France, the introduction of the franc, which created a tariff barrier against Germany, and the reduction of the tax on coal at the French owned mines, which redistributed the tax burden to the disadvantage of the German inhabitants.

32 The governmental arrangement disregarded the tribal organization of the country, while ignorance of Albanian customs seriously handicapped the earnest Dutch gendarmerie officers in defending the government against the rebels, led by more sophisticated Balkan officers.

33 Cf. Stuart, work cited, pp. 159 and 210; Harris, work cited, pp. 16-17.

34 Ryden, work cited, pp. 532-33.

35 Macmillan, W. M., Democratise the Empire! A Policy for Colonial Change, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.; 1941, pp. 49-50 Google Scholar, and Lord Hailey, , The Future of Colonial Peoples, Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1944, pp. 57-58.Google Scholar

36 In this case, at least, the mandate system would also have to be modified to permit the fortification of these islands for the use of at least one of the guardians of peace in the Pacific.