The bare facts about the history and organization of the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) are not difficult to relate. The commission was established in 1947 by the Economic and Social Council, along with two other regional economic commissions for Europe and Latin America, as a five-year experiment. Its terms of reference authorized it “acting within the framework of the policies of the United Nations and subject to the general supervision of the Council” and provided that it take “no action in respect to any country without the agreement of the Government of that country” to:

(a) initiate and participate in measures for facilitating concerted action for the economic reconstruction of Asia and the Far East, for raising the level of economic activity … and for maintaining and strengthening the economic relations of these areas both among themselves and with other countries of the world;

To the contemporary liberal humanitarian the acceptance of the League Mandate System by the world's chief colonial powers signified the advent of a New Deal for dependent areas in which the older and baser motives of empire were defeated even if not completely eliminated. To the con-temporary mind impressed with the prevalence of power politics, how-ever, the acceptance of the Mandate System signified nothing of the kind. It merely represented a new form of compromise between clashing imperial powers who sought to remove one source of friction by recourse to “internationalization”

In 1955 the General Assembly of the United Nations will have to consider the revision of the Charter, and there are reasons for believing that a number of governments are already giving thought to this question.

In the past few months the attitudes of France toward Western European unity have been undergoing a perceptible change. Initiative, imagination, and drive have given way to hesitancy, skepticism, and even withdrawal. The change was placed in dramatic focus by the coincidence of the formal opening of the coal and steel pool, which owes its existence in large part to the work of the two Frenchmen, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, at the very time the newly created Mayer government was communicating to other interested states its reservations regarding the European Defense Community Treaty, for which French effort is also in large part responsible.

The Arab-Israel armistice system has entered its fifth year, with no signs of a political settlement in the offing. Indeed, the portents in the early fall of 1953 appear more ominous than for many months past. Daily murders, thefts and arson on both sides of the 594 winding miles of armistice demarcation lines have kept tensions at fever pitch. The Arab states have not relaxed their economic boycott or blockade practices against Israel. The transfer of Israel's foreign office to Jerusalem as the final step in converting its part of the city into the nation's capital, the progressive execution of the Hulah reclamation and irrigation scheme which in part involves construction on Arab-owned land in the demilitarized zone along the Syrian border and the erection of a Jewish village in the demilitarized zone along the Egyptian frontier have evoked vigorous protests from the Arab states. Israel's moves were apparently designed as a warning that it would proceed with its program of development and consolidation throughout the area claimed by the Jewish state, if the Arab governments continued to reject the offer of direct negotiations for a settlement of political differences.

International technical aid programs, under the impetus of the Point Four idea, have now been functioning for three years. The time has perhaps come to review program operations in terms of some of the practical problems that have confronted the managers of the United Nations and United States programs. Such an evaluation, however tentative in character, may throw light on the potentialities and difficulties of the multilateral versus the bilateral framework for technical assistance. Exaggerated claims and counter-claims have been advanced with respect to the two processes. What does the record to date appear to reveal?

It has now become quite axiomatic to say that United States participation in the United Nations system is having an effect upon the substance I of United States foreign policy. What is not so well known as yet is that this participation is the cause for the creation of a new piece of machinery I for aiding the conduct of our foreign policy. Established in 1946 as the United States Delegation to the United Nations, this new outpost of the Department of State illustrates in its organization and operation many of the changes which have come about as bilateral diplomacy has given way to multilateral, “conference-type” United Nations diplomacy. Located at the headquarters of the international organization in New York City, the permanent Mission and its work are symbols of the importance and endless variety of problems posed for American foreign policy by our membership in and support for the United Nations. Since it is still in the process of development, the following study of the organization and role of the United States Mission to the United Nations should be taken as a preliminary analysis.

The problem of security (“a feeling of safety, whether founded on fact or delusion”, “freedom from danger, care or anxiety”) is inevitably seen in different perspective from Washington and Hanoi, from Canberra and Tokyo, from New Delhi, Singapore, Djakarta and Peking. It is at once global and regional; it assumes different proportions when viewed by the Burman rice coolie and the Japanese factory worker, the Californian industrialist and the Malayan rubber planter, the Melbourne factory worker and the Whitehall administrator.

The four books under consideration in the present review fall readily into two groups. The first two deal with various legal questions relating to the Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The others share a concern about the role of an interi national secretariat, although their points of view are quite different.

This issue covers the work of the seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly from April 7, when the Assembly resumed following an Easter recess, through its adjournment on April 23, 1953. As stipulated in a resolution on the Korean situation approved on April 18, the Assembly was to hold itself ready to reconvene at the call of the President if an armistice were signed or if a majority of the Members considered that “other developments in Korea” made further discussion necessary.

If there is truth in the assertion that the strength of the United Nations depends upon the support of public opinion within member states, the responsibility of those organs of the United Nations which supervise public information activities of the Secretariat is an important one. To those concerned with the future of international organization an analysis of the scope and limitations of the information programs which have developed in the first six years of the history of the United Nations should be of primary value. What are the problems which national delegates to the United Nations face in making decisions about the way in which an international secretariat should attempt to influence public opinion? What is the process by which such decisions are made in the administrative framework of the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies? What outcomes in terms of increased international cooperation can be expected from the information activities of United Nations Secretariat?

Six years have passed since the conflict between India and Pakistan over the State of Jammu and Kashmir was put on the agenda of the Security Council. The United Nations has tried incessantly to bring it to a final and peaceful settlement but with no success. The issue continues to evade its efforts, which have been limited to mediation, and still rests finally with the parties in dispute, the governments of India and Pakistan.

The seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly was resumed on February 24, 1953; the following summary contains information on the activities of the Assembly from this date through April 1, 1953, when the Assembly again recessed for Easter.

For the convenience of readers, we are listing here membership of United Nations organs for 1953. Dates in parentheses represent ends of terms; the states serve through December 31 of the year listed.

The fifteenth session of the Economic and Social Council met at United Nations headquarters in New York from March 31 to April 28, 1953. Mr. Raymond Scheyven (Belgium) was elected President, Mr. Rodolfo Munoz (Argentina) first vice-president and Mr. Henryk Birecki (Poland) second vicepresident. After a proposal by the United States that discussion of a Soviet motion to seat the representative of the Central Government of the People's Republic of China be adjourned for the duration of the session had been adopted by a vote of 14 to 4, the Council turned to consideration of an agenda of some 29 items.

Report of the Agent General of the United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency: Addendum covering the period February 15–June 30, 1953: On July 23, 1953, the Agent-General of the United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency transmitted to the seventh session of the General Assembly a report covering the period February 15–June 30, 1953. The Agent-General (John B. Coulter) noted that the planned expenditure of the $70 million program included approximately 59.5 percent for projects for the rehabilitation of productive capacity and 29 percent for sustaining commodity imports. In addition to the $43,828,954 available as of February 15, 1953, UNKRA had received $26,714,236 during the period reviewed; this included $15,750,000 from the United States, $7,840,000 from the United Kingdom and $1,330,733 from Australia. Of the total of $71,793,190 available at the end of June, $1,745,123 had been offered in kind. During the period reviewed, $3,590,205 had been expended, leaving a balance of $66,457,826 available for the $70 million program. Of that amount, $54.4 million had been allotted to firm and agreed projects

The seventh regular session of the General Assembly opened on October 14, 1952, and elected as its President Mr. Lester B. Pearson of Canada. Representatives of China, Egypt, France, Honduras, USSR, United Kingdom and United States were elected vice-presidents of the session, and chairmen of the committees of the Assembly were elected as follows: Political and Security Committee, Joāo Carl Muniz (Brazil); Economic and Financial Committee, Jiri Nosek (Czechoslovakia); Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee, S. Amjad Ali (Pakistan); Trusteeship Committee, Rodolfo Muñoz (Argentina); Administrative and Budgetary Committee, Carlos P. Romulo (Philippines); Legal Committee, Prince Wan Waithayakon (Thailand). The session also established an Ad Hoc Political Committee, with Alexis Kyrou (Greece) as its chairman. General debate extended from the 382d meeting on October 16 to the 385th meeting on October 20.

The sixteenth session of the Economic and Social Council met in Geneva from June 30 to August 5, 1953, with Mr. Raymond Scheyven (Belgium) continuing as president, Mr. Rudolfo Munoz (Argentina) as first vice-president and Mr. Henryk Birecki (Poland) as second vice-president, although Mr. Birecki did not attend any of the meetings because of illness. An agenda of 39 items was shortened by the postponement of six items to the second part of the 16th session, planned for the period immediately after the eighth session of the General Assembly

The following summary covers the activities of the Security Council from its 605th on October 10, 1952, through the 611th meeting on December 23, in addition to unofficial information concerning closed meetings of the Council in March 1953, to consider a recommendation for Secretary-General. During this period, the following representatives were chairmen of the Council: October, Chile (Santa Cruz); November, China (Tsiang); December, France (Hoppenot); January, Greece (Kyrou); February, Lebanon (Malik); and March, Pakistan (Bokhari).

Upon its return in December 1952 to United Nations headquarters, the Visiting Mission to Trust Territories in West Africa, 1952, prepared its report to the Trusteeship Council. Departing fom New York on August 18, 1952, the mission travelled through Togoland under United Kingdom administration, Togoland under French administration, the Cameroons under French administration, and the Cameroons under United Kingdom administration, and returned to New York on December 5, after visits to London and Paris. The mission, arrangements for which had been decided upon at the tenth session of the Trusteeship Council in March 1952, divided its report into five selfcontained parts, one on each of the four trust territories visited and one on procedures of visiting missions. At meetings of the mission on March 4 and 5, 1953, these five reports were approved unanimously and submitted to the Council in accordance with the mission's terms of reference. These reports were to be considered by the Trusteeship Council at its twelfth session, scheduled to begin on June 16, 1953.