On May 5, 1951, the Deputies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization announced the adoption by their governments of new terms of reference for the North Atlantic Council, a reorganization of the various committees of the Council, and the creation of a financial and economic board.

On September 23, 1955, Pakistan announced its formal adherence to the alliance formed on February 24 by Iraqand Turkey, and adhered to by the United Kingdom on April 5 (Baghdad Pact). On October 11, the government of Iran announced its intention to adhere to the Pact; following parliamentary approval of the decision, Iran formallyadhered on November 3. Both before and after Iran's formal adherence to the Pact, the Soviet Union, according to press reports, protested strongly. In a note of October 12, the Soviet government declared that the accession of Iran was incompatible with the interests of consolidating peace and security in the near and middle east, and contradicted certain treaty obligations of Iran with respect to the Soviet Union. In a subsequent note, the Soviet Union repeated its protest, alleging that Iran's adherence to the Pact “inflicted serious damage” to relations between Iran and the Soviet Union, and that Iran would have to bear the full consequencesof joining. In a reply to the earlier Soviet note, Iran had declared that its object in adhering to the Pactwas the consolidation of peace and security in the middle east; the Pact was for defensive purposes, and Iran'sadherence should not mar Iranian-Soviet friendly relations, nor did it conflict with the terms of existing agreements between Iran and the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, both the United States and United Kingdom had formally welcomed Iran's decision.

The General Council of the International Refugee Organization held its eighth session October 23 to 27, 1951 at Geneva. The Council reviewed the annual report of the Director-General for the period July 1, 1950 to June 30, 1951 in which Mr. Kingsley summarized the activities and achievements of IRO since its inception, defined the migration trends for the previous year, and discussed methods being employed to transfer IRO functions to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Allied High Commission for Germany, and to voluntary groups and local authorities. In a supplementary report on residual problems Mr. Kingsley emphasized the serious refugee problems in Greece, Trieste, Austria, Italy, China, and Korea which would survive the organization's closure early in 1952 despite the substantial completion of IRO activities by that time. He reported that 573 ‘institutional hard core’ cases were being resettled and 1,514 locally resettled but pointed out a lack in satisfactory arrangement for 477 hard core cases in Shanghai, Samar, Greece, and Spain, while particularly emphasizing the need to make intensive efforts to resettle the 398 cases in Shanghai and 900 additional cases in Trieste. Although the Council agreed to delay its communication on residual problems to the United Nations until its next session pending further information on Trieste and Shanghai, it approved a decision first to assist the 477 hard core cases, then to apportion expenditures equally between material assistance and resettlement. At the close of this report on residual problems Mr. Kingsley announced the favorable outcome of the shipping program and satisfactory arrangements with the ‘institutional hard core’, permitting resettlement of 9,000 additional refugees before closure.

Following a three-hour special meeting of the Council of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) in Bangkok, Thailand, on December 12, 1960, a SEATO communique expressed the view, the press reported, that the shipment of heavy arms by the Soviet Union to the rebel forces in Laos would only prolong the crisis in that country. According to the press, however, the chairman of the Council had said that SEATO could not intervene, since all the parties involved in the fighting in Laos were Laotians and not the forces of a foreign nation.

During the period from September 16, 1954 through December 15, 1954, the Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) took a number of administrative and budgetary decisions among which were the following: 1) At a meeting on September 16, 1954, the Council decided to postpone until 1955 the Second Meeting of the Inter-American Cultural Council and the Inter-American Meeting of Ministers of Education, the exact date of the meetings to be determined by the Council in consultation with the government of Brazil since the meetings would be held in that country. 2) On October 20, 1954, the Council decided to include the representative of Chile on the Committee on Juridical-Political Matters, thereby increasing the membership of the committee to fourteen. 3) On November 17, 1954, the Council elected Dr. José A. Mora (Uruguay) Chairman, and Dr. José Ramón Rodríguez (Dominican Republic) Vice-Chairman for 1954–1955. 4) Under a resolution adopted by the Council on December 15, 1954, the chairmen or vice-chairmen of special committees were to be included in the membership of the General Committee, and ex-chairmen of the Council who were still members might participate and vote in the discussions of the General Committee. 5) On December 15, 1954, the Council also approved the organization plan of the Inter-American Travel Congresses submitted by the Fifth Inter-American Travel Congress.

The first part of the fourth session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) was held July 2–5, 1958, in Paris, under the presidency of Sir James Hutchison (United Kingdom, Conservative). In the course of its discussion of military questions, the Assembly debated three reports and took note of a communication by M. Etienne de la Vallée Poussin (Belgium, Social Christian) on the responsibility of WEU in military policy. After its consideration of the request for an opinion from the Consultative Assembly on the military implications of regional or limited disarmament or of the policy of disengagement in central Europe, the Assembly adopted a resolution rejecting the Rapacki Plan and stating that disengagement which implied a withdrawal of United States and Soviet troops would be highly dangerous to the west unless it took place under certain express conditions, one of these being that neutralization of western Germany could not form part of such a policy. The Assembly also adopted a resolution and a recommendation on WEU's contribution to the production of armaments within the Atlantic alliance; the resolution allowed for the creation of a committee of investigation of five members, to be nominated by the Presidential Committee. In connection with the state of European security the Council approved by 50 votes to 6, with 8 abstentions, a recommendation from its defense committee calling for a minimum land force in central Europe of 30 divisions, with tactical nuclear weapons. There was to be no reduction in the contribution of member states, according to the recommendation, and they were to bring their contingents up to the agreed level.

Secretary-General Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold in the introduction to his thirteenth annual report on the work of the Organization, June 16, 1957–June 15, 1958/ drew attention to some aspects of recent developments since the opening of the twelfth session of the General Assembly. He first dealt with the question of disarmament, observing that although new and serious difficulties had arisen to prevent pursuing the work in forms which had been followed in past years, efforts had been made Co approach one aspect of the problem from a new angle. In this context he referred to the meeting of experts from eight countries, representing both sides, which had convened in Geneva in the summer of 1958 to study the technical possibility of detecting violations of a possible agreement to suspend nuclear weapons tests. These experts agreed on what would be needed, from the technical point of view, and thus, by isolating certain non-political, scientific elements from the politically controversial elements in the total problem of disarmament, reduced the area of conflict some what. Mr. Hammarskjold suggested that it might be worth considering whether those elements of the problem of disarmament lending themselves to objective study by experts in science and technology, in military experience, and in law might not be singled out for separate treatment in a similar manner. The Secretary General noted that with the successful conclusion of the technical discussions at Geneva, all the present atomic powers had taken initiatives in the direction of a suspension of further weapons tests. The growing awareness of the increasing dangers of the continuing arms race might, Mr. Hammarskjold remarked, be reflected in the debates of the UN, were the General Assembly to resume discussion of disarmament under the item which he had proposed for the thirteenth session.

In addition to the Charter of the Organization of American States, the American Treaty of Pacific Settlement (the Pact of Bogotá), the Economic Agreement of Bogotá, the Inter-American Convention on the Granting of Civil Rights to Women, and the Inter-American Convention on the Granting of Political Rights to Women, the conference approved several resolutions and recommendations. Among these were included a resolution which established the Inter-American Juridical Committee as the Permanent Committee of the Inter-American Council of Jurists; one which provided for a survey of inter-American specialized organizations in order to determine which ones should be discontinued and which ones maintained; an agreement to convoke an Economic Conference of the Organization of American States in Buenos Aires in late 1948 or early 1949; and a resolution calling for a meeting of representatives of the Inter-American Economic and Social Council and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America to draft a formula for the functioning of the two organizations Mid to outline their respective fields of activity. Recommendations were made concerning working conditions, improvement of social services, and the achievement of social justice in the American republics; an Inter-American Charter of Social Guarantees to protect workers was adopted by the conference, as well as the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. The conference also approved the statute of the Inter-American Commission of Women; Two further resolutions were passed, one condemning international communism, or any other totalitarian doctrine, and a second creating an American Committee on Dependent Territories.

The Permanent Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) met in Paris early in May 1959 to consider the proposals of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom for presentation to the Soviet Union at the forthcoming conference of foreign ministers. According to the press, the proposals won a favorable reception from the Council. No formal action of approval was required, but agreement was reached on the principle of a permanent liaison between the western ministers and the Council during the Geneva conference, scheduled to begin on May 11.

“To maintain international peace and security …” is the first purpose listed in Article I of the United Nations Charter, and it is generally conceded to be the Organization's most important one. Although the United Nations Charter provides procedures for both peaceful settlement and peacekeeping, the peacekeeping role has been more active and more contentious. Indeed, without an authoritative organ for interpreting the Charter each Member has been left to determine for itself the meaning of such fluid phrases as “enforcement action,” “national sovereignty,” and “primary responsibility,” to mention only a few. The result has been a divergence of views which surprises all but that consummate logician—the reasonable man.

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,

It is a truism that the text of the Charter gives a quite misleading picture of the United Nations as it is today. In no respect is this more true than in the working of the Organization in the maintenance of international peace and security. Those provisions of the Charter which were claimed by its authors to provide the new Organization with teeth that the League of Nations did not have either have never been used or have in practice been of little importance. New emphases and new methods have been developed through the liberal interpretation of Charter provisions. These have not always been equally acceptable to all Members, however. The process of adaptation and development continues, with great present uncertainty as to what the future has in store.

The Ministerial Council of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) met in Lisbon on May 9–11, 1963, under the chairmanship of Mr. Corrêa d'Oliveira (Portuguese Minister of State). The Ministers decided to establish a final timetable for the dismantling of tariffs on industrial products. These tariffs would be eliminated by December 31, 1966. The next 10 percent reduction would take place on December 31, 1963, thus bringing intra-EFTA tariffs down to 40 percent of their level when EFTA began.

In recent years efforts to account for changing patterns of alliance relationships have incorporated a growing number of insights and propositions derived from the analysis of “global interdependence.” These efforts have been complicated, on the one hand, by a lack of precision in providing operational definitions of the independent variables and, at a more fundamental level, by considerable ambiguity with respect to those types of changes which may be best explained in terms of these variables.

An analysis of Washington-Bonn relations reveals a reasonably coherent pattern of changes with regard to four specific aspects of the relationship: 1) the nature of the alliance agenda; 2) the structure of the relationship (i.e. the characteristic distribution of influence between alliance partners); 3) the operative procedural norms which regulate bilateral bargaining and negotiation; and 4) the institutional arrangements which have evolved for the coordination of alliance policy.

The eighteenth session of the International Wheat Council was held in Geneva on November 7,1955, while the United Nations Wheat Conference was meeting. The Council, in connection with consideration of quality differentials during the UN Conference, agreed that information should be furnished by the Secretariat concerning prices as recorded in past transactions under the Agreement and also on current prices in the future. The nineteenth session met in London on July 17, 1956, at which time the Council noted expenditure for office and conference accommodation in Haymarket House for the International Sugar Council and the International Wheat Council, and expressed its approval of various proposals, to be adopted subject to the agreement of the International Sugar Council, for apportioning the expenditure between the two bodies and for arrangements necessary for the discharge of their joint responsibilities in connection with the premises. After this session, a conference of the signatories of the International Wheat Agreement, 1956, met and agreed that the latter should come into force.

At the request of the Director-General (Chisholm) of the World Health Organization, the Secretary-General of the United Nations (Lie) transmitted on March 20, 1952 to the People's Republic of China and the People's Democratic Republic of North Korea WHO's offer of assistance in controlling reported epidemics in north Korea. Two further telegrams were sent on March 27 and April 3 but no acknowledgment or reply had been received.

The South West Africa Cases presented the International Court of Justice (ICJ) with a choice not only between the parties to the suit but also between rival claims about the nature of international law itself. Perhaps every case presents the Court with a choice of some degree between jurisprudential foundations, but in the South West Africa Cases the choice is striking.