The Republic of China and Spain, being equally desirous of strengthening the bonds of friendship between the two countries and promoting the mutual interests of their peoples, have decided to conclude a Treaty of Amity, and have, for this purpose, appointed us their Plenipotentiaries:
His Excellency the President of the Republic of China:
His Excellency, Dr. Yu Tsune-chi, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Spain, and
His Excellency the Chief of the Spanish State:
His Excellency, Dr. Alberto Martin Artajo, Minister of External Affairs, who, having communicated to each other their respective full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles:
ARTICLE I
There shall be perpetual peace and everlasting amity between the Republic of China and Spain as well as between their respective peoples.
ARTICLE II
The High Contracting Parties declare their firm determination to collaborate for the peace of the world and to base their relations on principles of justice.
ARTICLE III
Each of the High Contracting Parties shall have the right to send to the Other diplomatic representatives, who shall enjoy in the territories of the Other all the rights, privileges, immunities and exemptions generally recognized by international law.
ARTICLE IV
The High Contracting Parties shall settle by pacific means all differences and disputes which may arise between them. If settlement cannot be attained through ordinary diplomatic channels such differences and disputes shall be referred to a commission of arbitration to be appointed according to the usual rules of international law, and if this commission fails in its purpose or no agreement can be reached as to its constitution, the Permanant Court of Arbitration at The Hague shall be qualified to solve such differences and disputes.
ARTICLE V
The nationals of either High Contracting Party shall enjoy in the territories of the Other, subject to its laws and regulations, under conditions not less favorable than the nationals of any third country and on the basis of reciprocity, the rights of free entry and exit, traveling, choice of residence, the rights of property—movable, immovable and intellectual and the rights to engage in industrial, commercial and all other kinds of activities.
Either High Contracting Party shall respect, subject to its laws and regulations, the rights duly acquired in its territories by nationals of the Other before the conclusion of the present Treaty.
ARTICLE VI
The nationals of each of the High Contracting Parties shall receive in the territories of the Other in regard to all legal proceedings and in matters relating to the administration of justice treatment not less favorable than that accorded to the nationals of the Other. In matters relating to the levying of taxes the principle of reciprocity shall apply.
ARTICLE VII
Each of the High Contracting Parties shall have the right to send to the Other consuls-general, consuls and vice-consuls, and to appoint within territories of the Other consular agents and honorary consuls, and such consular officers shall be accorded such privileges and courtesies as are generally recognized by international practice.
The High Contracting Parties agree to negotiate, after the coming into force of the present Treaty, for the conclusion of treaties or agreements relating to extradition, commerce, navigation, consular rights and cultural relations between the two countries.
ARTICLE VIII
Other relations between the two High Contracting Parties shall be based on the principles of international law.
ARTICLE IX
The High Contracting Parties agree that the Preliminary Treaty of Amity and Commerce between the Republic of China and Spain signed at Nanking on December 27, 1928 and all the documents attached thereto shall be deemed to lose its validity as from the day of the coming into force of the present Treaty.
ARTICLE X
The present Treaty is drawn up in the Chinese, Spanish and English languages. In case of any divergence of interpretation the English text shall be authoritative.
ARTICLE XI
The present Treaty shall be ratified as soon as possible by the High Contracting Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements and it shall come into force as from the day of the exchange of ratifications, which shall be effected at Taipei.
IN FAITH WHEREOF, the above-mentioned Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty and have affixed thereto their seals.
Done at Madrid this Nineteenth day of the Second month of the Forty second year of the Republic of China, corresponding to the Nineteenth day of February of the year One Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Three.
FOR THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR SPAIN
Address Given by Dr. Tingfu T. F. Tsiang at the Chiang Kai-shek Observance Day Banquet Held in Monroe, Louisiana, 26 June 1953
This morning, Ambassador Koo told you a great deal about the policies and purposes of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. I would like to add some intimate touches to the picture. It was my fortune to be his personal friend for two years, from 1933 to 1935. From 1935 on, he was my direct boss over almost the entire period of the war down to 1945. From 1945 to the present, I have been in constant touch with him. In other words, I have known him for 20 years, first as a personal friend, then as a direct subordinate.
The Gimo, as his foreign friends call him, is first of all a great patriot. He has dedicated his life to winning for China unity and independence. He cares nothing for wealth. He lives simply, even austerely. In Nanking, the Government built for him a presidential palace, but he chose to live in a small ranch-type house outside of the city. He does not smoke or drink. He rises early and goes to bed early. He is very fond of the outdoors and takes long walks on the hills. When he gets some leisure, he reads. His favorite books are the great classics of China and the Christian Bible. Those of us who have had the privilege of intimate association with him know him to be dedicated to the welfare of his country.
In the second place, the Gimo is a great fighter. He does not seek a fight. He believes that much of the fighting in the world could be avoided if both sides would be sensible. When a fight is forced on him, the Gimo does not waver, or stop halfway, of compromise, or appease. When the fight is over, the Gimo does not allow feelings of revenge to prejudice the settlement. He works for a settlement that will endure. This aspect of his character is best illustrated by his handling of China's relations with Japan.
You may recall that the Japanese staged the so-called Mukden Incident on September 18, 1931. The Japanese Army proceeded according to plan to take the Northeastern Provinces of China. The Chinese people naturally demanded a war of resistance. Patriotism was roused to a fever pitch. The Gimo determined that all resources of peaceful negotiation must be exhausted before national war should be resorted to. In spite of popular agitation and bitter denunciations against his policy, he would not give up the hope of peace. He adhered to this course of action for six years.
The war finally came in the summer of 1937. After barely one year of hostilities, some of the erstwhile super-patriots joined with the weak-kneed people to demand a peace of compromise with Japan. I remember clearly the inner councils on the question of whether to continue the war or to sue for peace. I remember the discussions in July. August and September 1938. I remember particularly one occasion when the responsible leaders of the Government were gathered around the Gimo to make a final decision on that momentous question. After hearing many pleas for some compromise with Japan, the Gimo stated: "I know the war is hard. I knew that before the war started. That was why I was determined to exhaust all resources of peace. Now the war is on us. We cannot get a peace without sacrificing the unity and independence of China, So far as I am concerned, I am determined to fight to the last man. If necessary I would retreat further to the west. I could make a cave in the western mountains my headquarters. Those who wish to sue for peace with Japan can dissociate themselves from the Government. Those who wish to join me in fighting this war to the end can stick around."
As the war, drew on and prospects began to improve, people began to think of the terms of peace. The Gimo, from the very beginning, decided to work for a peace which would make China and Japan good friends and good neighbors. In 1945 and 1946, many foreign friends, including American friends, were astonished at the moderation of the Gimo. Some chose to call him a crank, or a Chinese puzzle, or a Don Quixote. Events have proved him to be right in his policy of moderation towards Japan.
The Gimo is a fighter. In regard to that there can be no doubt. But he fights for permanent conditions of peace and friendship. He does not fight for the sake of fighting or just for revenge. He is a statesman-fighter.
The Gimo has not studied or travelled in the United States or Western Europe. He speaks no West European language. When he receives American reporters or talks with American friends, he has to have an interpreter. He reads western papers, magazines and books only in Chinese translation. This is a handicap to him. He knows it and he takes steps to overcome the handicap as much as possible by cultivating friends who know the western world. Above all, he draws upon the information of Madame Chiang Kai-shek, who, in addition to her devotion to China and the Chinese people, knows and loves the people of the United States. But the Gimo knows the Chinese people, their history and their culture. That is the reason why he has risen to leadership in China and has stayed a leader for the last 30 years.
Before he rose to leadership, the country was divided. There was civil war. Armies from the south of China fought against the armies from the north. Generals, having bases in the west, fought against generals of the east. Thirty years ago, when I returned to China after my studies in the United States, I thought my country was a crazy-quilt so far as armies and governments were concerned. It was the Gimo who led the revolution in the '20s and restored unity to the country. His leadership was not contested. Nobody suggested that an alternate was possible.
In the '30s, when we faced Japanese aggression, the country again turned to the Gimo for leadership. All political groups in China recognized that the Gimo and the Gimo alone could lead the Chinese people in this war of resistance. I remember my private and confidential mission to Moscow in the winter of 1934, when the Gimo sent me to sound out the Russian attitude in case of a war between China and Japan. Moscow gave me promises of cooperation with China and Moscow made it clear to me that the China with which Moscow wished to cooperate was the China of Chiang Kai-shek. In the '30s and early '40s neither Moscow nor Washington nor London thought there was any possible substitute for the Gimo.
A part of world opinion turned against the Gimo after victory over Japan. Why? Because the Gimo would not compromise with communism. It was not that the Gimo did not allow the existence of a communist party in China. It was because the Gimo was determined not to allow China to fall under communism.
That was the real reason for the Gimo's unpopularity in the postwar period. Ostensibly, people talked about corruption and reaction and fascism. Now I would like to say a few words on these charges. There was considerable corruption in China in the latter part of the war and the early years of the post-war period. The real cause of that corruption was inflation. China entered the war against Japan a poor country without any economic surplus for purposes of war. The Chinese fought the Japanese eight long years. That war was paid for by deepening the misery of the people. Money depreciated. Prices jumped. Millions and millions of people suffered thereby. China in the winter of 1945 was actually near economic collapse. I was in the Government throughout the period of the war and I know from personal experience the financial difficulties of the war period. I would like to say this. I think my Government could have done better but, after all is said and done, no financial genius could have saved China from inflation after that long and horrible war. Economic chaos was the fertile field for the growth of corruption. I doubt that government officials of any country, living under such conditions of inflation, could have resisted temptation better than the Chinese officials did in that period.
Then there is this charge of reaction. I do not need to say much on that account. The fact is that, under the leadership of the Gimo, the country finally convoked a convention of people's representatives to draft and adopt a constitution, with a president and a legislature elected, by the representatives of the people. Now on the island of Formosa, all the counties and cities have complete self-government, with mayors, magistrates, and councils elected by universal suffrage. This has been done under the leadership of the Gimo.
Then there is this talk of fascism. Communists and their fellow-travellers call all anti-communists fascists. Russian delegates in the United Nations have at times called me a representative of a fascist clique. Whenever Vyshinsky or Malik resort to such blows below the belt, I bring them to book and issue to them a challenge. I tell them that the United Nations should organize an international commission to study the comparative degree of denial of personal freedom in the various countries of the world. And I say that, if such an international commission should find that the ratio of people suffering from political opinion disagreeable to the ruling authorities should be one million for Russia and one for China. I would gladly call the Russians democrats and the Chinese fascists. That challenge has never been accepted by the Soviet representatives in the United Nations.
The truth of the matter is that, in taking an anti-communist stand, the Gimo has been ahead of his times and he has had to pay for it. Four or five years ago, the Gimo told the world that the Chinese communists were just communists, no more, no less. He was called a reactionary and a fascist for that reason. Those who called him, such names told the world that the Chinese communists were not communists but agrarian reformers. Events have shown the Gimo right and the white-washers of communism wrong. At this very moment, some people wish for Titoism in China and say that the Chinese communists will break with Moscow. The Gimo says there is no possibility of Titoism among the Chinese communists. Let us see who will be proven to be right by events.
The fact of the matter is, among the contemporary leaders of the world, the Gimo knows best the nature and character and ultimate purpose of world communism. He is determined to rid China of communism. His unpopularity in certain circles is traced to this cause.
We Chinese wish China to be united and independent. We regard the Chinese communist regime on the mainland of China to be a puppet regime. We know that that regime is un-Chinese in character and un-Chinese in purpose. It serves Russia. It is out to play the role of a junior partner in extending communism all over the world. It is doing that both out of ideological fanaticism and political profit. We are fighting against this regime.
In this fight we have of course several fronts. One of these fronts is the United Nations. Those who favor the cause of world communism have claimed during the last several years that the Chinese communists should take the seat of China in the United Nations. They say that the Chinese communist regime is an accomplished fact and will stay as a fact. We say it is not an accomplished fact. Right now, millions of our brothers and sisters on the mainland of China are resisting the regime.
China has been a member of the United Nations ever since its foundation. In fact, China was one of the original founders of the United Nations. We have been faithful in the discharge of our obligations as a member. Up to the present moment, we have not derived any benefit whatsoever from the United Nations, but we will not give up China's sent to the communists. Why? Because in the minds of' people in the Far East, admission of the Chinese communists into the United Nations would mean world collective recognition of the communist regime. Such a step would add to the strength and consolidate the forces of communist tyranny in my country. We do not ask the United Nations for help. We have not asked and will not ask Great Britain or India for a single rifle or a single dollar. All we ask of the United Nations is not to put further difficulties in the way of the Chinese people fighting for their national freedom and independence. We think that is not too much to ask of this world organization.
The map of mainland China has changed color. The people on the mainland have not changed color. They are Chinese and wish to remain Chinese and not puppets of Soviet Russia. Diplomats, who spend their lives writing treaties, conventions, protocols, have thought they can write off China. The Chinese people refuse to be written off by any diplomatic pen. Whether you like it or not, China and the Chinese are there, 450 million of them. They bulk large on the map. They are large in real life. That is what everybody knows. People in the neighboring countries of China know something more. For centuries China has been the leading nation in the Far East. To them the massiveness of China is not only physical, it is also cultural. In the countries of Southeast Asia there are 11 million Chinese who, in many places, constitute the economic backbone of the communities where they live. China's position in the Far East is more important than the position of Germany in Europe. In Europe you know very well that, if you concede Germany to communism, you will have lost the whole of Europe. In the Far East, if you concede mainland China to communism, you will also have lost the whole Far East, no matter what you might do in the fringe countries.
Admission of the Chinese Reds into the United Nations, far from contributing to the peace and stability of the Far East, would make it easier for Moscow and Peiping to build and extend their joint world empire.
We free Chinese, under the leadership of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, are straining every ounce of energy we have to recover our country from communism. Those who can help us, let them do so. Those who cannot help us should at least refrain from giving aid and comfort to our enemy, who is in the long run also their enemy.
Statement on the Korean Question Delivered by Dr. Tingfu T. F. Tsiang Before the First Committee of the General Assembly on 20 August 1953
Every Member Nation represented here, big or small, strong or weak, near or far, has an interest in the question of Korea which is the subject of debate in this Committee. While our interests may vary in degree, no delegate can declare that whatever happens in Korea does not affect his country at all. We are, or at least should be, all interested in the question of Korea. This is of course an obvious fact.
Having said this much, I would like to state another obvious fact. While all countries are interested in this question, no country can be so interested as Korea herself. We all have something at stake in Korea; the Korean people have everything at stake in their own country. The Government of the Republic of Korea, which is the only legal government, recognized as such by the United Nations, is, for this elementary fact and reason, entitled to have its wishes duly considered by this Committee. I do not mean to say that we should allow the Government of the Republic of Korea to dictate to the United Nations or wield a veto over the decisions of this Committee. No, not at all. I do mean to say that the wishes of the Government of the Republic of Korea deserve at least as much consideration as the wishes of any other government represented here, without exception whatsoever. Mr. Chairman, I claim that this is a moderate statement of an obvious fact.
There was a time when the delegates to the Assembly or to the Security Council were inclined to ignore or disregard the wishes of the Republic of Korea. Some even indulged in unfair and unsympathetic criticism, assuming that the Republic of Korea did not count at all in our deliberations and decisions. Events have proved that the Republic of Korea does count. It is a regrettable fact that the United Nations, dedicated to peace and justice, discounted the legal and moral claims of the Republic of Korea until that Republic built up an army and showed that that army had the will and the capacity to fight. There has been some revision of attitude towards the Government of the Republic of Korea. I am afraid that that revision is not complete. Unless the Members of this Committee bring their mental attitudes up-to-date and give the wishes of the Government of the Republic of Korea due and proper consideration, the preparatory work which this Committee is trying to do will, I am afraid, complicate and burden the already complicated and difficult task of the political conference.
The principal draft resolution dealing with the political conference, set before us in document A/L.151/Rev.1, begins with an approval of the Armistice Agreement concluded in Korea on 27 July 1953. My delegation shares this approval because the Armistice stops the fighting. However, I would like to say here that my delegation does not think that the Armistice Agreement could not be improved or is totally without dangers. I am of the opinion that the United Nations could have obtained a better armistice agreement if certain delegations had not indulged in so much neutralism and wishful thinking.
We wish, of course, "to produce an atmosphere conducive to peace," as the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom advised us to do on Tuesday morning. But, Mr. Chairman, I am sure the Committee would not wish to create the impression that the Armistice is only the starting point of a long appeasement program. Such an impression would defeat peace. I remember a conversation which I had with a Czech statesman in the summer of 1944. I congratulated him for the success of President Benes in establishing friendly and close relations with the Soviet Union. To my surprise, my Czech friend remarked, "In Europe there is a proverb to the effect that appetite grows with eating." The United Nations in the question of Korea meets a test. If in this question it should go in for appeasement, it would be working for its own destruction.
The Fifteen-Power draft resolution in its second paragraph reaffirms that a unified, independent, and democratic Korea remains an objective of the United Nations. My delegation welcomes this reaffirmation. I note that the language of this paragraph includes the very important phrase, "by peaceful means." I do not take any exception to this phrase. If I construe the intention of the sponsors correctly, I understand this phrase to be addressed to all concerned in general and to President Syngman Rhee in particular. I have known President Rhee for some ten years. I know that he is a man of peace. He prefers peace to war. In the period before the communists launched their aggression across the 38th parallel, President Rhee cooperated with the United Nations wholeheartedly in its program of unification by peaceful means, that is, by consulting the wishes of the Korean people. There was no criticism whatever that President Rhee failed to give the United Nations Commission in Korea all the cooperation asked of him. President Rhee's preference for peaceful means was shown to us beyond any dispute in his leadership in those pre-aggression years. As I understand the situation now, the difference between President Rhee and some delegations here is this. President Rhee believes that unification of Korea should be achieved by peaceful means. If all peaceful means have been exhausted and proved ineffective, President Rhee believes that other means should be used. Some delegations in the United Nations believe that it is better to accept division of Korea without the use of other than peaceful means. This difference is basic in the Korean problem.
Every government and people represented here values its own national unity and is ready to make all possible sacrifices either to establish national unity or to preserve that unity once established. This is the heart of modern nationalism. Nevertheless, some people, while valuing their own national unity, somehow manage to adopt an attitude of indifference towards the efforts of other peoples in establishing or preserving unity. This indifference towards national unification of other countries is a recurrent phenomenon not peculiar to the present case of Korea. This mental indifference has in the past resulted in foreign intervention and obstruction in national unification, movements. Not infrequently in history have we felt a shocking contrast, in temperature: within the country struggling for national unification and independence there is white heat of patriotic passion; outside that country there are foreigners who view the scene with cynical indifference or regard it as a nuisance to be gotten rid of by some step of intervention. In the past, such contrasting temperatures have not contributed to the establishment of friendly international relations. In the case of Korea, the United Nations has every reason to view the efforts of President Syngman Rhee with sympathy and understanding. How much moral or material aid each government can give or is willing to, give to the Korean people in their effort to achieve national unity and independence is a question to be answered by each government. The United Nations cannot compel such contributions. The least the United Nations can do is not to obstruct the efforts of President Syngman Rhee. We have no right to compel him and his people to accept a division of their county.
The Fifteen-Power draft resolution in paragraph 3 quotes at length paragraph 60 of the Armistice Agreement. I have already said that I share the approval of the Armistice Agreement. Naturally I approve this quotation. In the interpretation of this paragraph, several delegates have vaguely referred to other questions which might be put on the agenda of this conference or a subsequent conference. I would like to state clearly and emphatically here that my Government is opposed to the consideration of any Chinese question or interest in this Korean political conference.
Paragraph 4 of the draft resolution requires no comment.
Paragraph 5 of the draft resolution is divided into four sub-paragraphs. Sub-paragraph (a) is the most important section in is whole draft resolution. It proposes that "the side contributing armed forces under the Unified Command in Korea shall have as participants in the conference those among the Member States contributing armed forces which desire to be rep resented together with the Republic of Korea." My delegation supports this proposal and I would like to explain the reasons for our support.
In connection with international conferences, the most difficult preliminary question is drawing the line between inclusion and exclusion. Generally, more countries desire to be represented than is good for the practical solution of questions before a conference. Therefore, the line between inclusion and exclusion must be based on a just and fair criterion. Here the Fifteen-Power draft resolution sets up as a criterion the contribution of armed forces. I believe this to be a just and fair criterion because the contribution of armed forces in Korea attests both to the degree of interest in Korea and to the degree of devotion to the principles of the United Nations. If this criterion should be adhered to by the Assembly, we have nothing to say. On the other hand, if this criterion should be departed from, then I would have to ask the Committee to reconsider the whole problem of participation in the political conference.
In the debate on Tuesday morning, the distinguished representative of Australia pressed the claims of his country for a seat in this political conference. I am glad that the criterion set up by the Fifteen-Power draft resolution automatically includes Australia. I would go further and say that my delegation favors the participation of Australia in a conference of this kind, with or without this criterion. The claims so eloquently expounded to us by Sir Percy Spender are reasonable and sound. I would, however, add that in this matter the claims of my Government to a seat in the political conference can, in no way, be considered inferior to the claims of Australia, whether we look at the matter from the point of view of interest or of geography or of history. It is true that my Government has not sent armed forces to Korea to fight side by side with the other 17 countries, but that is not because my Government wished to shirk its responsibilities in the implementation of collective security. In relief, my Government has during the past three years sent to the suffering people of Korea substantial quantities of rice and medical supplies. The Government of the Republic of Korea has graciously acknowledged these gifts.
In this connection we have before us a Four-Power draft resolution recommending the participation of India and a Two-Power draft resolution recommending the participation of the Soviet Union. The sponsors have explained to us at length Tuesday morning the reasons for their proposals. I am not convinced.
The inclusion of the Soviet Union in this political conference is recommended to us on grounds of realism. I am not so bookish or so theoretical as to shut my eyes to considerations of realism. I would only ask the sponsors of the draft resolution to pay some attention to the moral basis of their proposal. The United Nations must base all its actions on some moral principles; otherwise the United Nations will discredit itself in the eyes of the common people throughout the world. In the debate on Tuesday morning, both the representative of New Zealand and the representative of the United States reminded us of the military supplies which the Soviet Union provided for the aggressor in violation or the Charter of the United Nations and in violation of the resolutions of the principal organs of this organization. The matter is more serious than material military supplies. Everybody knows that the real responsibility for aggression against the Republic of Korea lies with Moscow. The United Nations has strangely refrained from calling the Soviet Union to account. Now it is proposed that the Soviet Union should, by the recommendation of the United Nations, participate in this political conference. I hold that whether the Soviet Union participates or not can be left to the aggressors. The United Nations has no reason whatsoever to go out of its way to make any recommendation in this matter.
The Four-Power draft resolution recommending, the inclusion of India in the political conference does not have the support of my delegation. It is an open secret that the Government of the Republic of Korea objects to the inclusion of India. We can be sure that without India the views and policies advocated by Premier Nehru will find able and energetic expression in the political conference through representatives of some of the other countries already included by the Fifteen-Power draft resolution.
The three other sub-paragraphs of Paragraph 5 of the Fifteen-Power draft resolution are almost routine and require no comment.
Paragraph 6 appeals to all Member Governments to contribute towards the relief and rehabilitation in Korea. This paragraph has the hearty blessings of my Government.
I have, Mr. Chairman, said what I think is useful to say in this preliminary general debate. I reserve the right to offer my detailed comment on the several resolutions when that stage of the debate is reached in this Committee. Before closing, I would like to offer one additional thought to this Committee. We all hope that this political conference will result in peace and security in the area and in the unification of Korea. We may succeed; we may not. Not all is within the control of the United Nations. That has been made clear by past events. Whether we succeed in doing good or not we must be sure about one thing, namely, that the political conference must not be allowed to be used as an instrument for strengthening and consolidating the forces of communist aggression in the Far East. The Far Eastern peoples face the most critical period in their whole history. How much aid they can secure from the United Nations is one big question. At least we should give them the assurance that the United Nations will not obstruct the efforts of the Far Eastern peoples in their struggle for peace and freedom.
Statement Made by Dr. S. S. Liu Before the Trusteeship Council on 23 June 1953, on the Italian Administration of Somaliland
My delegation has studied with great interest all the information which has been placed at the disposal of the Trusteeship Council by the Administering Authority and by the Advisory Council on the Administration of Somaliland under Italian Trusteeship during 1952 and also, of course, the comments and observations of UNESCO. In the course of this study, we of the delegation of China have found much evidence of great progress in the Territory during the year and of the sincere and conscientious effort on the part of the Administering Authority to promote the advancement of the Territory's inhabitants towards the independent existence for which they are destined in scarcely more than seven years. What has given my delegation great satisfaction is the extent to which the Advisory Council and the Administering Authority have collaborated for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Territory. We have been especially pleased that the Chairman and members of the Advisory Council have managed to stay in the Territory for the greater part of the year and have accomplished a great deal of truly commendable work. From this it is evident that all the members of the Advisory Council have the interests of the Territory close at heart. I associate myself with other delegations in recommending that the Trusteeship Council commend the work that has been accomplished by the Advisory Council during the year.
As to the interpretation to be given to article 8 of the Trusteeship Agreement regarding the scope of the matters which should be submitted to the Advisory Council for advice, we have noticed the difference of opinion between the Advisory Council and the Administering Authority. We are happy, however, to learn from the opening statement of the special representative that the Italian Government will be ready to enter into negotiations with the Advisory Council with a view to coming to some agreement on the question. We earnestly hope that these negotiations will be commenced as soon as possible and that a satisfactory solution will result therefrom.
A point which has engaged the attention of my delegation, and upon which we thought we should touch in this brief statement, is the question of the boundary between Somaliland and Ethiopia. At the eleventh session of the Trusteeship Council, a resolution was adopted in which the hope was expressed that the conversations which have been initiated between the two parties would lead to a satisfactory solution. Although up to the present the Administering Authority has not been able to inform the Council of this solution, the conversations are still going on and we reiterate the hope that the negotiations will soon be brought to a successful conclusion.
In the political field, my delegation has noted with satisfaction the division of the reduced committee of the Territorial Council into two committees and the creation of two vice presidents for the Territorial Council. We believe that these steps tend to give the indigenous members of the Territorial Council an increased opportunity to participate in the management of their own affairs and thus acquire the knowledge and experience requisite for it. We regret, however, that nothing further was done during the year to clothe the Territorial Council with some legislative power. It will be recalled that this objective has been envisaged both by the Trusteeship Council and by its Visiting Mission of 1951. In view especially of the brevity of time which will precede the attainment of independence by the Territory in 1960, it is clear that the granting of legislative powers to the Territorial Council is an urgent step if the Somalis are to be given the necessary political training sufficiently in advance of the attainment of their independence. It seems to my delegation that the Trusteeship Council should make a clear-cut request to the Administering Authority for some urgent action.
With regard to the question of suffrage, my delegation feels that there is still room for intensified effort on the part of the Administering Authority. My delegation would register its agreement with both the Visiting Mission of 1951 and the Advisory Council that neither the civil register nor the census should be regarded as a condition precedent to the establishment of universal suffrage.
On the local government level, the functioning of the Residency Councils remains to be improved and democratized. With regard to the municipal councils, it has been gratifying to note that the Administering Authority intends to have members elected to these councils by direct suffrage in 1953. While the special representative has not been able as yet to report any such elections to the Trusteeship Council, we look forward to hearing much further on this question when the next annual report is submitted to the Council.
On the question of administrative services, the Administering Authority has made a conscientious effort to meet the wishes of the Trusteeship Council. Not only has the number of Somalis in the administrative services been increased by 352 during the year, but of these 352, quite a few have been appointed to comparatively responsible positions. We are especially pleased to learn that in 1953 the Administering Authority intends to appoint Somalis to a number of positions of considerable responsibility. We shall be greatly interested to read in the next annual report about the precise number and nature of these positions.
On the judicial structure of the Territory, it is noted that the Advisory Council, in considering the draft ordinance establishing commissariat judges, recommended the deletion of article 6, which retains the Provincial Commissioners as chairmen of the regional courts which apply collective sanctions. We feel that in strict accordance with the principle of the separation of administrative and judicial powers, the recommendation of the Advisory Council is unassailable and should be given the consideration it deserves. My delegation also shares the view of the Advisory Council that the imposition of fines without trial should be abolished. With regard to the reorganization of the judiciary, we have noted with gratification that a court of appeal was established in 1952 and that a law establishing a supreme court was promulgated. The latter is especially welcome news inasmuch as the Territory will eventually become an independent state and its supreme court is an essential part of the judicial system. Now that the law for its establishment has already been made public, we hope that its implementation will not take long.
We have also been happy to learn that the new judicial regulations have been drafted and are being re-examined. Although the special representative has informed us that during the past year, owing to the pressure of other work, not a great deal has been accomplished in the work of revising the judicial regulations, let us hope that before long we shall be able to learn of the accomplishment of this task.
In the economic field, the Trusteehip Council still awaits with great interest the submission by the Administering Authority of its general development plan for the Territory. It will be recalled that this matter formed the substance of a resolution adopted by the Council at its eleventh session. We have no doubt that the Council has a continuing interest in this matter and will be eager to hear more about it from the Administering Authority.
In response to the concern which was evinced be the Council at its eleventh session in regard to the future of the finances of the Territory, the Administering Authority has shown earnestness in tackling the problem of bringing about a balance between revenue and expenditure. It is gratifying to note that the budgetary deficit has been reduced to an extent more than was expected and also that steps are being taken by the Administering Authority to increase the revenue of the Territory, such steps including the introduction of a tax on cultivated lands. My delegation does not doubt that the Administering Authority will not fail to continue its efforts in this direction, although it is submitted by my delegation that in order to enable the indigenous inhabitants to tackle this problem when the time comes, some careful close study will have to be made by the Administering Authority of the steps that should be taken in the meantime to prepare the indigenous inhabitants for the task lying before them. While we are speaking of taxation, my delegation, in this connexion, would like to urge upon the Administering Authority anew our earnests requests or the abolition of the hut tax and its replacement by a more equitable levy, a step which has been consistently advocated by the consensus of the Council.
My delegation has noted with satisfaction that the Administering Authority has devoted great attention to the drafting of land legislation. We shall look forward with great interest to the completion of this important task and to receiving and examining the text of the new law.
The steps which have been taken and which are contemplated by the Administering Authority to develop co-operatives are most encouraging. We believe that the assured success of this movement will be an incentive for further effort. Judging from the extent to which the system of co-operatives will increase the Territory's production, my delegation is certain that the initiative and sustained effort of the Administering Authority in this sphere will be richly rewarded.
As the development of fishing holds out great promise for the Territory, my delegation is interested to know that a close study is being made by the Administering Authority of this branch of economic enterprise and that the cooperation of the FAO has been obtained. The establishment of the maritime and fishing school naturally will aid the development of fishing considerably. My delegation will therefore be pleased to have further information on this matter.
In the field of social advancement my delegation is mainly interested in the following matters: first, labour legislation; secondly, medical and health services; and thirdly, the conditions of chronic malnutrition and slow starvation.
In regard to labour legislation, the special representative has informed us that the Labour Code is being drafted by the Administering Authority in collaboration with ILO and that the various parts of this Code will be completed and put into force separately. Those specific parts of the legislation in which the Council has particular interest itself, namely, the one on female labour and the one on child labour are being given the consideration of the Administering Authority. We look forward to hearing more about the consummation of this very important task when the next annual report is submitted.
With regard to medical and health services, we have been gratified to learn of the increase of medical doctors and health facilities. However, although it is the view of the Administering Authority that the existing medical and health services are adequate for the needs of the Territory, the situation may bear some close re-examination in view of the size of the Territory and its population, particularly the large number of nomads who are not now fully taken care of in respect of medical and health facilities.
The problem of chronic malnutrition is of course a very serious one. We are pleased that the concern expressed by the Council at its eleventh session is bearing fruit. My delegation hopes that the joint effort which is now being made by the Administering Authority and the FAO on this problem will enable the Administration to solve it with satisfaction.
In the field of educational advancement, my delegation has been gratified to receive and take note of the new five-year plan which the Administering Authority has just worked out with the co-operation of UNESCO. We appreciate the careful thought and serious study which have been put into the preparation of the plan, and we feel that the Council should commend the Administering Authority on the completion of this plan and express its congratulations to UNESCO for the excellent work it has performed in this connexion.
We share the opinion of UNESCO in regard to the intention of the Administering Authority to implement the plan in full, and we have no doubt that when this is done the educational conditions in the Territory will be greatly improved.
There are, however, two points on which my delegation proposes to lay special emphasis. The first is the question of a written Somali language, which is the most important one. From the annual report itself we obtained incontrovertible evidence that the lack of such a written language accounts for many of the difficulties which the Administration is encountering in the realm of teaching. In these circumstances, it is needless to say that the urgent solution of the problem is one of the most important tasks confronting the Administering Authority. It would therefore be imperative for the Administering Authority to tackle it with the greatest expedition, and in the performance of this task the Administering Authority will again of course be in need of the valuable assistance of UNESCO.
Secondly, the shortage of teaching staff is another serious problem with which the Administration is faced. In order to carry out the five-year plan satisfactorily, it is essential to secure as early as possible the requisite teaching staff which can properly perform the duties of imparting to the Somali youth all the knowledge which it requires. My delegation would therefore ask the Administering Authority to hasten the work of carrying out a teacher-training programme.
Finally, in connexion with the question which the President just referred to, the question of a special questionnaire for the Territory of Somaliland, my delegation wishes to state that its position is similar to that which has already been expressed by most delegations: that is, from the fullness of the information provided by the current report we realize that the questionnaire, although a general one applicable to all Territories, is in no way deficient. For that reason my delegation feels that there is no need for the drafting or preparation of a special questionnaire for the Territory of Somali land.
In conclusion, I should like to express my delegation's gratitude to the special representative, Mr. Spinelli, for his excellent work and the efficient manner in which he has answered all the question put to him and helped the Council in the examination of the current report.
Mind Is Everything
The Hindu monk Chu Fah Shen was once an honored guest at Chien Wen's place. Liu Yin asked, "May I be enlightened as to why a learned monk like you should have visited a palace with vermilion doors?" The monk replied, "While you are impressed by the vermilion doors, I just feel like moving around in a thatched cottage."
—From Shih Sho Hsin Yu
* Instruments of ratification were exchanged on September 21, 1953 in Taipei.