Tongues In
pp. 56-57 · Read in the full issue
Cheeks
At The Un!
By a staff writer
There were, as usual, several tongues in cheeks when the United Nations Trusteeship Council held its hardy annual in New York—dis cussion of the report on America’s administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
As usual, there was criticism of the United States stewardship. Two of the severest critics were Soviet Russia and France whose represent atives, in the now familiar hypo critical style, took the US to task for the self-same sins committed by their countries.
Said Soviet delegate V. Kova lenko: “The Soviet Union wishes to see the people of Micronesia, just like those of other colonial terri tories, exercising their inalienable rights to self-determination and in dependence as soon as possible”.
Adhering to the time-honoured custom of keeping a closed mouth on matters which might rock the UN boat, no member of the council mentioned the Soviet “colonies” of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia! There was the same reaction when the French delegate expressed hopes that the TT administration would suc cessfully develop a plan for Micro nesia’s transition to a new status; that further authority over the Budget would be given to the Con gress of Micronesia; that the political education programme would show meaningful results and that there might be a more thorough role for the district legislatures in a future governmental structure. Which would have brought hollow laughs from representatives of the autonomist parties in French Polynesia, New Caledonia and the New Hebrides.
With a clearer conscience, the Australian delegate questioned why the target date for Micronesian self government had been set for 1981 when progress made over the past 12 months in the US-Micronesia talks on future status indicated an earlier date? He also called for the appoint ment of more Micronesians to res ponsible positions in the TT.
Mr Joab Sigrah, one of Ponape’s representatives on the Congress of Micronesia, told the council that he wished the Trusteeship Council would, as it had done in the past, make a strong recommendation to the United States about greater con trol of the Budget by the Congress
of Micronesia. He also asked for restriction on America s power of veto over legislation approved by the Congress.
This plea didn’t fall on deaf ears, as indeed few pleas from Micro nesians to the Trusteeship Council ever do. The council, in its fin<il re port, called for the regulation of the veto power by “appropriate legis lation” which drew a line between “special interests of territory and the international obligations” of the United States.
The council also asked that the Congress should be given final authority over a larger percentage of the Budget.
But the problem which troubled the Trusteeship Council the most, and rightly so, was the threat of fragmentation hanging over a future United States of Micronesia.
Earlier, Senator Wilfred Kendall of the Congress of Micronesia had said the Congress was disappointed at certain actions of the United States over the question of future status. Presumably, the certain actions were in connection with the separate talks between the United States and the Marianas. The sen ator said that, while the Congress recognised the rights of the people of the TT to self-determination, America should not close the door on any possibility of future unity.
He said he noted that America had indicated that it would hold a ple biscite in the Marianas on the question of future status, whether or not negotiations had been completed with the other districts.
“This course of action”, he said, “will prevent the people of the Marianas from having a real choice on the question of political status”.
He urged the council to persuade America to respect and honour the Congress view that voting on a future political status choice by the people of Micronesia should be all at the same time.
The point was taken by the coun cil which, in its report, asked the United States to do just that and called for the maintenance of the closest possible links between the Marianas and the other districts.
The call by the council for the United States to “preserve the unity of the Marshalls and the Carolines” without including the Marianas seems to indicate that the council recog nises that the negotiations between the Marianas and America will end with the severance of the former from the rest of Micronesia.
Probably, the only realistic view to come from this annual study of America’s stewardship of the Trust Territory.