Austrian Treaty: Negotiations on an Austrian treaty were temporarily suspended by the Council of Foreign Ministers Deputies on December 14, 1949. The Deputies had considered questions concerning the treaty at a series of 34 meetings held in New York from September to December 1949; three informal meetings of the Foreign Ministers were also held.

Whereas, Chapters XII and XIII of the Charter of the United Nations provide for an International Trusteeship System;

Whereas, by Article 23 of the Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Italy, signed in Paris on 10 February 1947, Italy renounced all right and title to the Italian territorial possessions in Africa;

Whereas, under paragraph 3 of Annex XI of this Treaty, the General Assembly of the United Nations was requested to make recommendations regarding the future status of the territories referred to in Article 23 thereof;

Whereas, under paragraph 3 of Annex XI of this Treaty, the Governments of France, of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of the United States of America agreed to accept the recommendation made by the General Assembly of the United Nations in this matter;

The Economic and Social Council,

Profoundly concerned over the hardship and suffering brought upon the people of Korea by the unlawful attack of the North Korean forces,

Determined to do everything in its power for the relief and support of the civil population of Korea

Having given due consideration to the resolution adopted by the Security Council on 31 July 1950 and the request addressed to it in that resolution, under the terms of Article 65 of the Charter,

Bearing in mind the agreements between the United Nations and specialized agencies which provide for the co-operation of these agencies with the Economic and Social Council in rendering such assistance to the Security Council as that Council may request, and

Deeply conscious of its functions and responsibilities under Chapters IX and X of the Charter,

On April 26 the Council of Foreign Ministers' deputies resumed negotiations on the Austrian treaty in London; no progress was made, however, and the meeting was adjourned to allow further time for direct negotiations between the Soviet Union and Austria on Austrian payment for Soviet goods and services received since the end of World War II.

The Economic and Social Council,

Taking note of the report of the fourth session of the Sub-Commission on Economic Development, the experts' report on National and International Measures for Full Employment, the report of the fourth session of the Economic and Employment Commission, and

Considering the studies prepared by the Secretary-General in pursuance of Council resolutions 179 (VIII) and 222 D (IX)

A. With the object of keeping under continuing review problems of financing economic development

The Far Eastern Commission in two meetings on September 22 and October 6, 1949, approved amendments to its policy decision on restitution of looted property, which had been approved on July 29, 1949. The amendments related to a secured fund established by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers from the proceeds of unidentifiable looted property, the original policy decision stating that the fund was ultimately to be distributed by October 1, 1949 among the countries looted by Japan (Australia, China, France, India, the Netherlands, the Philippines and the United Kingdom) in proportion to the shares of Japanese reparation received by these countries. The amendments extended the deadline date of October 1,1949 to April 1, 1950, and provided that, in the absence of an agreed schedule of reparation shares, the seven countries might work out among themselves a schedule of shares for distribution of the secured fund.

Report of the Secretary-General for 1949: During the four years the Inter-Allied Reparation Agency had been in existence, the rate at which German industrial and other reparation had been made available to it by the occupying powers in Germany and by neutral countries had been extremely slow and the total pool of expected reparations had been subjected to continual reductions. By the end of 1949, however, the agency finally knew roughly the amount and value of the final pool of reparations and could foresee the end of its task. Of the two chief forms of reparations, industrial capital and German external assets, the allocation of the first was expected to be completed by the spring of 1950 and the final accounting of the external assets was scheduled to take place in January 1951. It was expected that by the time accounts were closed member governments would have received $517,000,000 in reparations from Germany.

The primary difficulty in the current question of the representation of Member States in die United Nations is that this question of representation has been linked up with the question of recognition by Member Governments.

It will be shown here that this linkage is unfortunate from the practical standpoint, and wrong from the standpoint of legal theory.

The twentieth annual report of the Bank for International Settlements, which reviewed the period from April 1, 1949, to March 30, 1950, noted that “despite much political anxiety, economic recovery has in general been achieved on a more substantial scale than seemed possible after the convulsions and destruction brought about by the second world war.” World production levels stood 35 percent above pre-war, with the peak increase of 70 percent occurring in the United States. Given this increased production, however, the Bank pointed out that the increase in the total national income had not kept pace with the increase in population. Industrial production had risen more than the output in agriculture and other fields. Yet reconstruction needs and increased military expenditures resulting from the uncertain political situation prevented the full benefit of the increased production to be realized. Patterns of trade had also been disarranged as, for example, between eastern and western Europe; and disturbing influences and other forms of disorganization created by the war still affected the monetary system. In addition to considering the significance of mounting production, the report dealt also with 1) the return to a balanced system as between national receipts and expenditures; 2) the approach to more normal price relationships; 3) foreign trade in 1949; 4) the effects of the 1949 devaluation cycle; and 5) intra-European payments and compensation.

On 8 March, at 4:30 p.m., two hours after you circulated your memorandum on “Legal Aspects of Problems of Representation in the United Nations” (S/1466), I protested to you orally against your memorandum and reserved my right to make a further statement on it. I have now been instructed by my Government to lodge with you the formal protest of my Government.

Under General Assembly resolution 177 (II), paragraph (a), the International Law Commission was directed to “formulate the principles of international law recognized in the Charter of the Nurnberg Tribunal and in the judgment of the Tribunal”.

The “consultative group” of the Council of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation, composed of eight foreign or finance ministers, met in Paris on October 28, 1949. The group discussed a report made by permanent members of the Council which analyzed the reductions of quantitative import controls suggested provisionally by governments of OEEC. The report concluded that the proposed reductions were less important than they appeared, since many of them merely would ratify an existing situation. It found that the main obstacles to a substantial reduction of import barriers were the difficulties of international payments and the traditional desire for protective measures.

The General Assembly,

In accordance with Annex XI, paragraph 3, of the Treaty of Peace with Italy, 1947, whereby the Powers concerned have agreed to accept the recommendation of the General Assembly on the disposal of the former Italian colonies and to take appropriate measures for giving effect to it,

Having taken note of the report of the Four Power Commission of Investigation, having heard spokesmen of organizations representing substantial sections of opinion in the territories concerned, and having taken into consideration the wishes and welfare of the inhabitants of the territories, the interests of peace and security, the views of the interested Governments and the relevant provisions of the Charter,

Established by the Congress of Vienna in 1815, the Central Commission of the Rhine assumed its present character as a result of modifications provided in the Treaty of Versailles (1919). Its operations terminated vis-à-vis Germany in 1936 and suspended completely in 1939; the commission was reorganized on a provisional basis in 1945 as a result of the Potsdam Conference and the proposal made there that nations take immediate steps to establish interim machinery for the internationalization of each of the principal waterways of Europe. Six member governments – Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, United States and United Kingdom – agreed to the provisional organization, Germany's interests being represented by the delegations of the three western occupying powers. Four meetings of the commission were held during 1949 at which decisions involving technical aspects of improvement of navigation conditions and maintenance of full navigability were reached. The budget for 1949 was estimated at 16,320,000 French francs.

The Governments of the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;

Being parties to the North Atlantic Treaty signed at Washington on April 4, 1949;

Considering their reciprocal pledges under Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty separately and jointly with the other parties, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, to maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack;

Recognizing that the first Purpose of the United Nations is “to maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace”,

The General Assembly,

Having regard to its resolutions 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 and 194 (III) of 11 December 1948,

Having studied the reports of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine set up under the latter resolution,

I. Decides

In relation to Jerusalem,

Believing that the principles underlying its previous resolutions concerning this matter, and in particular its resolution of 29 November 1947, represent a just and equitable settlement of the question,

The foreign ministers have reviewed the situation in Germany and Allied relations with the Federal Republic in the light of development since their last meeting in London in May, 1950. They have taken into account in their examination the views which have been expressed on recent occasions by the Government of the Federal Republic.

On November 15, 1949 the United States, United Kingdom and France sent parallel notes to the governments of Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia declaring that the United States, United Kingdom and France did not recognize the Convention of August 18, 1948, establishing the Danube Commission, as having any valid international effect. Declaring that the convention violated concepts of international waterways which had been recognized in Europe for 130 years, the note stated that it also failed to carry out the decision of the Council of Foreign Ministers of December 6, 1946. The convention deprived the United Kingdom and France of rights established by international agreement in 1921, and disregarded the “legitimate interest of non-riparian states.”