New Guinea, Samoa, In Annual Farce At Lake Success

Having seen something of the be ginnings and the operations of the Trusteeship Council, I may perhaps be excused for the cynical remark that many of the idealists were readily aided and abetted by those whose chief enthusiasm was to trip up and discredit other nations. I must confess to the opinion, too, that, even in our own Australian policy, some of the proclaimed love of the native was, in fact, a hatred of the capitalist. It certainly was ap plied more plainly to the disadvan tage of the capitalist than to the improvement of the dependent peoples. —Paul Hasiuck, Australian Territories Minister, in a public address, Sydney, Nov. 30, 1951.

While Australia welcomes construc tive criticism, the sort of unbridled and exaggerated criticism which has been made here only weakens both pillars of the Trusteeship system—the administering authority, on the one side, and the Trusteeship Council on the other. —W. D. Forsyth, Australian Delegate to the United Nations, speaking at Trusteeship Council in New York on March 18.

SOUTH Pacific people, having read accounts of the annual farce at

the Trusteeship Council meetings at Lake Success in March and early April, will agree heartily with both speakers.

The Council considered reports on the administration of the Trustee Territories of New Guinea, Nauru and Western Samoa. The Reds, rep resented by the Soviet delegates and a queer fish called Awni Khalidy. from Iraq, took much pleasure in savagely cross-examining Mr. J. R Halligan, sent specially from Aus tralia to present the New Guinea and Nauru reports, Mr. J. B. Wright (pre senting the Samoa report for New Zealand) and Messrs. W. D. Forsyth (Australian delegate) and Leslie Munro (NZ Ambassador), there tc support respectively Mr. Halligan and Mr. Wright.

Whenever well-informed people criticise these Trustee administra tions, they insist that both Australia and New Zealand are doing too much, rather than too little, for the native inhabitants. Australia pours some five or six million pounds an nually into Papua-New Guinea, in stead of making the huge country live more on its own fat.

The people of Western Samoa and; of Nauru are, without question, the richest native communities in the;

Pacific. The British Phosphate Com mission pays huge royalties to the Nauruans. The NZ Government gives to the Samoans most of the

profits of NZ Reparations Estates (the

properties taken over from the Ger mans in 1914-18, and operated since

by the State).

Yet at Lake Success, hour after

hour, day after day, the Russian

Communist Soldadov, and the Iraqi freak Khalidy, and sundry other queer little people from queer little States, bombarded Messrs. Halligan and Wright with questions based on their contentions that; Australia fails to train natives for administrative posts, or industrial occu pations; falls to provide sufficient village councils, village courts, medical personnel, school buildings; and permits big com panies to exploit the natives’ gold and get away with 95 per cent, of the proceeds.

Australia has alienated 24,000 acres of NG native land, without native consent.

Australia allows a big company to ex ploit the phosphate wealth of Nauru, while paying Nauruans “miserly” wages and making them live under “criminal” conditions.

Australia is encouraging the natives to continue with a tribal system, instead of self-government based on democratic principles. (Another report says this is charged against NZ in respect of Samoa).

New Zealand has robbed the Samoans by not returning the Reparation Estates to them.

New Zealand has not done anything worth while to help the Samoans towards self-government.

PATIENTLY, both Mr. Halligan

and Mr. Munro tried to present the actual facts to their fanatical in

terlocutors. They emphasised the

primitive stage of the New Guinea

natives; the impossibility of introduc ing an extended system of village schools until both a common lan guage and trained teachers were available; failure of the Reds to ap preciate the huge cost of getting gold out of New r Guinea; the fact that Nauru natives did not labour for the Phosphate Commission, but lived comfortably at home and drew royal ties; the prosperity in Samoa, where the Samoans themselves in Legisla tive Assembly handled their huge government surplus, and are about to receive an Executive Council.

But it was no use. The Red jackals barked and screamed. As Mr. Hasluck has said, they were not concerned with the truth: they wanted only to “trip up and discredit other nations.” Again and again, both Mr. Forsyth and Mr. Munro, with strong language, intervened to stop the silly and senseless question ing of their officials.

After many days, the Council majority took charge, chopped off the Reds, praised the administrative achievements of Australia and New Zealand, and made some commend able suggestions.

Only the fanatics seek the con tinuation of this absurd system—and that only in order to embarrass the Democracies. We suppose it is too much to expect that Australia and New Zealand will ever—like South Africa in relation to SW Africa— show enough spirit to put an end to the farce and, for the general good and their own security, make the care of these Islands Territories their

own responsibility.