During the split second of time represented by the last few years, humanity has been bereft of five of its great leaders who were still in the midst of carrying awesome responsibilities including the promotion of peace—Jawaharlal Nehru, Pope John XXIII, John F. Kennedy, Dag Hammarskjöld, and Adlai E. Stevenson. How great the void that the passing of each of them produced! How strong our conviction that a world gripped with grave problems—old and new—needed their special gifts, their clearminds, their strong hands, their sense of devotion for a longer span of time! Yet the destiny that shapes our ends is in this sense beyond our control.

Preventing the spread of nuclear weapons is one facet of the problem of preventing nuclear war, a problem which has engaged the statesmen of the world ever since the dust of the Nagasaki explosion settled. In the Truman-Attlee-King declaration of November 15, 1945, the President of the United States, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and the Prime Minister of Canada proposed that the United Nations set up a commission to study how atomic energy could be controlled so as to limit its use to peaceful purposes, how atomic weapons could be eliminated from national armaments, and how safeguards could be set up so as to ensure that all nations would comply widi the obligations which they undertook to these ends. Thus fell to the United Nations one of the most intractable problems of international organization, a problem which might be looked on as the creation of a new sphere of international law.

Is it possible to integrate states into larger unions without the use of force? Should we think of a continuous “federalizing process” in which economic integration is a first step? Are there certain conditions under which economic integration of a group of nations automatically triggers political unity?

The Community of the Six owes its origin and continued success largely to the inventiveness and political astuteness of a small group of leaders, generally associated with Jean Monnet (France) and, from 1956 on, the Action Committee for the United States of Europe. The purpose of this article is to assess the strategy of Monnet and his associates and their influence on the formation and development of the three European Communities: the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), and the European Economic Community (EEC) or the Common Market.

The attempts which have been undertaken, primarily by specialists in international law, to define an international organization emphasize a variety of features which distinguish that social phenomenon. Some of the characteristics that have been mentioned include creation on the basis of an international agreement, the existence of a distinct personality of the organization separate from its individual members, the exhibition of a relative autonomy of will by the organs of the agency as compared with the will of the total of its members, etc. There is general agreement that an essential feature of an international organization is the possession of permanent organs; otherwise, there has so far been no consensus on the necessity for an international organization to possess any specific feature. For example, it can be demonstrated that there are no bases for particularly stressing, as a supposedly indispensable feature of such an organization, its possessing a separate personality and an autonomy of will, as is done by certain French authors.

Enforcement of international decisions and awards has not enjoyed universal recognition as a problem. Judgment-enforcement, it has been contended, is separable from the general question of sanctions; since submission to adjudication and arbitration in international law is voluntary, it is argued, a state will not submit a particular dispute to third-party settlement unless it has already reconciled itself to the possibility of losing the case. By logical reduction this argument must conclude that there have been no cases of noncompliance. Other writers assure compliance by pointing to the “moral force” of a decision. Given the decentralized structure of the international arena, the “horizontal” allocation of control, and the fact that international affairs hover so perilously close to crisis level, it is tempting to accept the nonexistence of an enforcement problem and thus to sidestep the necessity for formulating enforcement strategies. The wisdom of this course of action is questionable: “Leaving things well enough alone” may, arguably, not make them worse, but it will also not make them better. Organized international decision processes (which include adjudication and arbitration as well as a host of less institutionalized decision processes) counteract relative international anarchy. The efficacy of these decision processes depends upon compliance with or enforcement of their decisions.

The General Assembly resumed the work of its nineteenth session on September 1, 1965, at UN Headquarters in New York. The 1286th-1330th plenary meetings comprised the previous part of the session which had convened on December 1, 1964, and adjourned on February 18, 1965.

The Security Council convened on November 16, 1964, at the request of Syria and Israel to consider the outbreak of hostilities the border between the two countries on November 13. The Council devoted its 1162nd, 1164th-! 169th, 1179th, and 1182nd meetings, held on November 16, November 27-December 8, December 17, and December 21, 1964, respectively, to the discussion of this question. The Council also had before it a letter of November 14, 1964, from the representative of Israel describing the border clash.2 At the invitation of the President, Michael S. Comay (Israel) and Rafik Asha (Syria) took places at the Council table to participate without vote in the Council's deliberations.

The 37th session of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), comprising the 1314th-1351st meetings, was held in Geneva from July 13, 1964, to August 15, 1964. At the 1314th meeting Sir Ronald Walker (Australia) was elected President of the Council; Mr. Matsui (Japan) was elected First Vice President; and Mr. Chanderli (Algeria) was elected Second Vice President.

The report of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to the ninth General Conference of the Agency covered the period from July 1, 1964, to June 30, 1965. During the period under review, membership of the Agency increased from 87 to 92. The new members were Cameroun, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Kuwait, and Madagascar. The main event during the period had been the Third International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (Third Geneva Conference), which had provided a full evaluation of the experience gained since 1958 in designing, building, and operating nuclear power plants as well as of future prospects for nuclear power being introduced in an increasing number of countries. Ten specialized agencies, 75 states, and the Agency had been represented. The Conference focused its attention on nuclear power, the rapid rise of which as a major source of energy promised to be of decisive importance to the economic development of the world.

The Board of Governors of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) held its nineteenth annual meeting in Tokyo, September 7–11, 1964, under the chairmanship of Francisco Aquino h., Governor for El Salvador. The meeting was held in conjunction with the annual meetings of the Boards of Governors of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and its affiliates.

The ANZUS Council held its fourteenth annual meeting in Washington on June 28, 1965. Keith J. Holyoake, Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs of New Zealand; Paul M. C. Hasluck, Minister for External Affairs of Australia, and Dean Rusk, Secretary of State of the United States, attended the meeting.

A meeting of representatives of the member states of the Arab League was held in Cairo on April 28–29, 1965. During the session, which was boycotted by Tunisia, a resolution was adopted under which the Arab heads of state rejected any call for recognition, reconciliation, or coexistence with Israel and declared that recognition of Israel in exchange for the repatriation of the Palestinian Arabs would be a deviation from Arab unanimity on the Palestine cause and from the Charter of the Arab League. The representatives also reaffirmed Arab support for previous Arab summit resolutions on the Palestine question, including a unified Arab command, on the “Palestine Liberation Organization,” and on Arab schemes for diverting the headwaters of the Jordan River. The resolution, however, did not provide for the expulsion of Tunisia from the Arab League and its exclusion from all future Arab summit meetings, demands made by Ahmed Shukairy, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization. Mr. Shukairy walked out of the meeting on April 29, but he was later persuaded to return.

The thirteenth conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers to be held since the war took place in London on July 8–15, 1964, with the participation of all eighteen independent nations of the British Commonwealth.1 When the conference opened on July 8 under the chairmanship of Sir Alec Douglas-Home (United Kingdom), agreement was reached on an agenda in the following order: 1) a review of the world political situation; 2) the progress of British territories toward independence and membership in the Commonwealth; and 3) means of promoting closer cooperation between the peoples of the Commonwealth; and world economic affairs.

The second Conference of Nonaligned Nations, following the Belgrade Conference of September 1961, took place in Cairo on October 5–10, 1964. During the preparatory meeting held in Colombo, Ceylon, on March 23, 1964, the participants agreed that the Conference should be convened in Cairo in the first week of October and that the countries to be invited should be: 1) the 25 which had taken part in the Belgrade Conference; 2) all those which subscribed to the Charter of the Organization of African Unity (OAU); 3) all Arab countries which had taken part in the January 1964 meeting of the Arab League in Cairo; 4) Malawi, Laos, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay, Venezuela, Austria, Finland, and Sweden; 5) Zambia and British Guiana if their independence was proclaimed before October 1964; and 6) Holden Roberto's provisional government of Angola and any other provisional government formed in Africa between March and October 1964 and recognized by the OAU. It was also decided that the Cairo Conference should be preceded by a foreign ministers' meeting in Cairo. The preparatory meeting recommended that the following items be included in the Conference's agenda: 1) general discussion of the international situation; 2) the safeguarding and strengthening of world peace and security and the promotion of positive trends and new emerging nationalist forces in international affairs; 3) peaceful coexistence and the codification of its principles by the United Nations; 4) respect for the sovereignty of states and their territorial integrity; 5) problems of divided nations; 6) colonialism, neocolonialism, and imperialism; 7) racial discrimination and the policy of apartheid; 8) settlement of disputes without the threat or use of force in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter and the right of self-determination; 9) general and complete disarmament, prohibition of all nuclear weapons tests, establishment of nuclear-free zones, prevention of the dissemination ol: nuclear weapons, and the abolition of all nuclear weapons; 10) the United Nations, its role in international affairs, the implementation of its resolutions, and approval of proposed amendments to the Charter; and n) economic development and cooperation, the effects of disarmament on world economic development, and the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

The Caribbean Council held its fifth and last meeting in Curaçao, Netherlands Antilles, from November 30 to December 4, 1964. Attending the meeting were delegates from France on behalf of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, and Martinique; the Netherlands Antilles; Surinam; the British Virgin Islands; the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and the United States Virgin Islands. Representatives of Antigua, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, and St. Vincent, countries enjoying special observer status, attended the meeting. Also at the meeting were observers from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The thirteenth session of the Ministerial Council of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) was held in Teheran on April 7–8, 1965, under the chairmanship of Abbas Aram, Foreign Minister of Iran. Others attending the session were Muhammad Shoaib, Pakistan's Minister of Finance; Hasan Esat Isik, Foreign Minister of Turkey; Michael Stewart, the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary; and Dean Rusk, Secretary of State of the United States. The Council's session had been preceded by a meeting of the CENTO Military Committee, held in London on March 30–31, 1965.

At a meeting in Warsaw on January 19–20, 1965, the Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Treaty Organization adopted a communiqué condemning proposals for a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) multilateral force (MLF). Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, and the Soviet Union were represented at the meeting by their respective Prime Ministers and Foreign and Defense Ministers and by the First Secretaries of their Communist Parties. Albania, although invited, did not send a delegation on the ground that the meeting had been convened without prior consultation.