The eighth annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission took place in London July 16–20, 1956, under the chairmanship of Dr. G. J. Lienesch (Netherlands). All seventeen contracting governments, with the exception of Brazil, were represented, with observers from Italy, Portugal, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, and the International Association of Whaling Companies. During the deliberations the Commission 1) received from the Bureau of International Whaling Statistics data on the operations and the catch for the past season; 2) received various scientific papers concerning the stocks of whales, and almost unanimously favoring a substantial reduction in the catch in view of evidence that the stock was declining, recommended that the catch for future seasons should not exceed 15,000 blue whale units, and, with one dissentient, recommended that the limit should be reduced in the 1956–1957 season to 14,500 blue whales; 3) after examining the returns rendered in respect of infractions of the whaling regulations, noted that, in general, there had been a decrease over the previous year; 4) received further confirmation from the Commissioner of the Soviet Union of the use of fenders of porous rubber to replace the present use of whale carcases for this purpose; 5) allocated an equivalent of $1400 towards the cost of whale marking; and 6) requested the United States to prepare a protocol for the amendment of the convention requiring every factory ship to have on board two inspectors who were generally of the same nationality as the flag of the ship, to permit consideration of a scheme to appoint independent observers in addition to the national inspectors.

The second part of the eighth ordinary session of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe was held in Strasbourg from October 15 through 26, 1956, under the presidency of Mr. Dehousse (Belgium, Socialist). He informed the Assembly that a majority of the Committee of Ministers had considered that a special meeting of the Assembly to discuss the Suez problem would be premature.

The Caribbean Commission held its 23d meeting in Bridgetown, Barbados, December 10 to 15, 1956, under the chairmanship of H. R. Van Houten (Netherlands). In regard to conferences sponsored by the Commission, it 1) discussed a recommendation of the Town and Country Development Planning Conference held in Trinidad in November 1956 asking the Commission to arrange study tours in Puerto Rico where the activities of the Puerto Rico Planning Board could be observed, and suggesting that arrangements should be made for training of planning technicians and assistants; 2) approved the agenda of the Conference on the Demographic Problems of the area served by the Caribbean Commission, which would be held in August 1957 to discuss the present demographic position, projections, possible solutions of problems of over-population, and need for future research; and 3) decided to hold the West Indian Conference in Curacao, in November–December 1957.

On September 28, 1956, Lord Ismay, Secretary General, called a special meeting of the Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to consider the implications of the decision by the government of the German Federal Republic to request the west German parliament to establish the term of national compulsory military service at 12 in lieu of 18 months. The Council feared that this decision would very probably prevent the German Federal Republic from meeting its commitments to NATO. The west German representative stated that his government would meet its previously negotiated commitments both as to quality and quantity; west German regular forces would be raised from 230,000 to 300,000 to compensate for the reduction of availability of conscripts. The Council requested the west German representative to inform his government of the concern of the Council.

The third part of the eighth ordinary session of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe was held at Strasbourg from January 8 through II, 1957, under the presidency of Mr. Fernand Dehousse (Belgium, Socialist).

At its meeting in Paris on December 13, 1956, the Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), as was reported in April 1957, heard Mr. Selwyn Lloyd explain in general terms his “grand design” for Europe, which was later presented to the Council of Europe at Strasbourg. The principles of his grand design, according to Mr. Lloyd, were the maintenance of the unity of NATO and the expansion of European integration to include not only the federation of France, west Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries, but also such states as Austria, Yugoslavia, Switzerland, Sweden and Finland. Three elements were contained in the plan: the politico-strategic, the economic, and the parliamentary. In the politico-strategic field, Mr. Lloyd stated that development depended chiefly upon the development of NATO in the direction of closer consultation, as recommended by the Committee of Three of the Council of NATO. In the economic field, it was the view of the United Kingdom government that so far the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) was the basic channel for the development of the closest economic relations, and that it would be desirable for the machinery which would be set up for the European free trade area to be part of OEEC. Mr. Lloyd proposed, in connection with parliamentary matters, that one assembly be established for the Council of Europe, Western European Union (WEU), NATO, OEEC, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), Euratom, the Common Market, and the free trade area, as well as for any European organizations which might be established in the future.

The Council of Ministers of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) convening in Paris under the chairmanship of Mr. Macmillan (Chancellor of the Exchequer, United Kingdom) received the report of a Ministerial Working Party of OEEC on November 15, 1956 which discussed the economic situation in member countries. The report noted the prosperity in western Europe, yet stressed the threats to it due to events in the middle east and interruption of traffic in the Suez. Besides a shortage of oil, the report noted a shortage of coal. It also stressed three weak points in the economy of western Europe: 1) the slowing down of the expansion of production; 2) the rise of prices; and 3) the imbalance in intra-European payments. It explained that the increase in production had fallen off due to a shortage of available labor; the rise in prices was due to excessive demand and increasing wages. The report called for serious fiscal measures, such as an increase in taxes, a reduction of subsidies to consumption and a cutting down of public expenditures. These measures could be supplemented by governmental action designed to increase competition in the home market and to enhance the free movement of workers in order to alleviate the man-power shortage.

The European Payments Union (EPU) was prolonged for a seventh year from July 1, 1956, without any alterations in the rules under which it had operated since August 1, 1955. The sixth annual report of EPU retraced the economic and financial developments in member countries during the fiscal year 1955–1956. It pointed out that economic activity had continued to expand, but in many countries demand had showed signs of growing rather faster than output, so that some inflationary pressures were felt in the form of rising prices and wages and of some weakening of individual balances of payments. The strongest advances in industrial output had occurred in France, with increases in west Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands being next in importance; there had been no growth in the United Kingdom. Most countries had witnessed a gradual exhaustion of spare productive capacity and very full employment, with man-power shortages in certain specific sectors. A significant development in most countries had been the increase in fixed capital formation. In France and the United Kingdom especially, one main reason for it had been the fact that full use of industrial capacity had already been approached and labor shortages were appearing. The rise in investment expenditure, in conjunction with a continued increase of consumer expenditure, particularly on durable goods, had added to inflationary pressures. In a number of countries wage demand had seemed in excess of the probable rise in productivity; and in several countries wage increases had been granted. Between the second quarter of 1955 and the second quarter of 1956, prices had risen in most countries by 4–6 percent, and by even more in Iceland and Turkey.

The eighth annual report of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), Europe To-Day and in 1960, was made public in April 1957. The report was divided in three parts: Volume I dealt with Europ to-day, Volume II, with Europe in 1960 and Volume III consisted of surveys of the economic situations in the individual member countries.

The first part of the second session of the Assembly of Western European Union (WEU) was held in Strasbourg from April 23 to 25, 1956, under the presidency of Mr. John Maday, President of the Assembly (United Kingdom, National Liberal and Conservative). Mr. Maclay read to the Assembly a letter he had received from Mr. Guy Mollet (Prime Minister of France) in which the latter, regretting that he had been unable to attend the session, pledged that France would support all initiatives tending to strengthen WEU, in particular in the cultural and social spheres. A draft order of business was presented to the Assembly for consideration and was accepted.

The Council of the Organization of American State (OAS) took the following decision during the period September 8, 1955 to April 19, 1956: I) It concluded an agreement with the Inter-American Statistical Institute establishing a basis of cooperation in the promotion of basic progress in statistical work. 2) It commended the plans of the Cordell Hull Foundation for International Education to establish fellowships and provide assistance to Latin American students in educational institutions in the United States, and authorized the Pan American Union to offer to collaborate in the program. 3) It approved the distribution of four resolutions of the Inter-American Council of Jurists concerning the Inter-American Academy of Comparative and International Law, a draft convention on extradition, the consideration of amendments to the statutes of the Inter-American Council of Jurists, and reservations to multilateral treaties. 4) It noted with satisfaction the two agreements signed by Costa Rica and Nicaragua on January 9, 1956, and decided to transmit the texts of the documents to the member states.

The third annual meeting of the Council of the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) was held in Canberra, Australia March 11–13, 1957, under the chairmanship of R. G. Casey, Minister for External Affairs of Australia. The meeting was attended by representatives of Australia, France, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and United States. In the communiqué issued at the close of the session, the Council stated that its plans to consolidate and enhance its previous progress provided for 1) maintenance of the defensive capacity of the treaty members to deal effectively with armed aggression, 2) extension of the program to detect, appraise, expose and combat subversion directed from without, and 3) development of the economic resources of the treaty members, particularly the Asian member states, by measures inside and outside SEATO.

The eleventh session of the Contracting Parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was held in Geneva from October n to November 17, 1956, under the chairmanship of SirClaude Corea (Ceylon), who succeeded L. Dana Wilgress (Canada). At the beginning of the session Mr. Wilgress warned the delegates that if the trade system provisionally established under GATT were not given more permanent form, alternative machinery was likely to be established. Mr. Wilgress's comments were reported to have been directed at the failure of the United States to adhere to the proposed Organization for Trade Cooperation (OTC) United States foreign trade policy was reported to have been severely criticized during the session, notably by Australia; the Australian representative reportedly said that United States leadership was open to doubt, for one thing because of the failure of the United States government to accept the OTC and for another because of its surplus disposal program. The Contracting Parties, after examining the status of the Agreement providing for the OTC, urged non-signatory Contracting Parties to sign it without delay.

The second part of the second ordinary session of the Assembly of the Western European Union (WEU) was held in Strasbourg from October 11 to 13, 1956, under the chairmanship of Mr. J. S. Maclay (United Kingdom). Following examination of a report presented by its General Affairs Committee, the Assembly adopted three recommendations to the WEU Council, concerning, respectively, cultural matters, WEU's activities in the Saar, and social questions. On October 12, the Assembly discussed the state of European defense, on the basis of a report presented by Mr. J. J. Fens (Netherlands, Popular Catholic). Following its debate, the Assembly adopted two further recommendations. The first called upon the Council to take an immediate decision concerning the nature of the reorganization of western defensive forces, and to give a clear lead to public opinion in the matter; it continued that it must be accepted that substantial conventional forces be retained in order to meet all eventualities, and that the west German contribution to European defense should be made effective as soon as possible. In the second recommendation, the Assembly expressed its belief that it could not hold an informed debate unless, with due regard to the requirements of security, all the documentation necessary was made available, and recommended that the Council urgently review its interpretation of the Brussels Treaty as regarded WEU's function in that field. The latter resolution, according to press reports, followed a debate marked by a sense of frustration, with nearly all the speakers complaining that the Council had not given the Assembly's defense committee sufficient information on which to base recommendations. A majority of the continental deputies were reported to favor the Council's becoming responsible to the Assembly, rather than to member governments, for its decisions, but they were reported to realize that the United Kingdom parliament would never accept the consequent limitation of sovereignty. However, in the meantime, the feeling was reported to be that governments could still do much to strengthen WEU.