Trusteeship Council hears

Micronesia Negotiations (1)

Trusteeship Council hears it from the USA

The two reports below offer contrasting viewpoints on aspects of the negotiations between the United States and Micronesian governments on the proposed Compacts of Free Association between the US on the one hand and the governments on the other. The first document is the final statement on the negotiations to the June meeting of the United Nations Trusteeship Council by the US Ambassador to the council, WILLIAM SHERMAN. The second is a report by ROSS STEVENS on reactions of various Marshallese groups to the signing the compact of May 30 by President Amata Kabua (PIM July p 5), and the possible consequences of the signing. Ross Stevens is a freelance journalist specialising in North-South issues at the United Nations, and edits a monthly newsletter on the North-South dialogue. From 1975 to 1981 he taught journalism at the University of Papua New Guinea.

The United States has sought to ‘negotiate a political status’ for the Pacific Islands under its trusteeship which would ‘meet the aims of the people of Micronesia and lead towards termination of the trusteeship,’ a high-ranking US official told the United Nations in June.

US Ambassador William Sherman, the American rep resentative to the UN Trusteeship Council, told the council just before its adjourn ment after a month-long session that ‘the peoples of Micronesia and the people of the United Stales both ardently desire' this termination.

In remarks to the council, without direct reference to the Soviet Union whose representa tive had charged that the US is trying to ‘fragment’ the Islands, Sherman declared that ‘just the opposite is true’. The Island governments, he added, are being established in accordance with the wishes of the Island people.

Before the 49th session of the council adjourned, it adopted a report to the Security Council on the conditions in the territory and its decision, suggested by the US, to send a mission to the area in July.

The Compact of Free Associ ation, being entered into be tween the US and the Island governments, provides for self government by Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Fed erated States of Micronesia.

It recognises their authority in internal and foreign affairs, accords defence and security responsibility to the US, and provides for US economic as sistance. The compact can be ended by any government at

any time, but the US defence responsibility and economic as sistance would continue for at least 15 years.

Micronesia is classified in the United Nations Charter as a ‘strategic area’, and for this reason the Trusteeship Council reports to the Security Council on conditions there. Micronesia is the only remaining trust territory since the accession to independence of Papua New Guinea in September 1975. The other 10 territories, which at one time came under the inter national trusteeship system, have since achieved indepen dence or self-government either as separate states or as parts of stales.

Following is the text of Am bassador Sherman’s statement refuting charges made against the US during the session;

‘President: . . . Throughout our

deliberations we have heard views expressed by the Micronesian special representa tives and advisers on conditions in their respective jurisdictions within the Trust Territory.

They have explained the extent to which they govern their affairs and are assuming greater responsibility for the functions of their own governments. They are the authentic voices of the people of Micronesia, who have in past elections chosen the special representatives and their colleagues to play essen tial roles in assisting this council in its work. We owe a great debt of gratitude to them for their dedication and contributions to this council, ‘We have also heard during our days of deliberations many unfounded, sometimes wild, charges levied against my gov

ernment for alleged violations of the UN Charter and Trusteeship agreement, and a host of other purported sins. ‘We have been charged with fragmenting Micronesia, when just the opposite is true. My government resisted appeals by the people of the Northern Marianas for separate status for many years until it became apparent that we would other wise be denying them their right to self-determination if we failed to heed their request for Commonwealth status. Simi larly, the peoples of Micronesia were given every opportunity to remain a unified entity in the 1978 referendum on the consti tution, establishing the Feder ated States of Micronesia. The peoples of Palau and the Marshalls chose otherwise, in a referendum observed by a visit ing mission of the Trusteeship Council. Those who claim that the administering authority is “fragmenting" the region in essence deny the right of every Micronesian to decide his own political future. My govern ment has heeded the clearly stated wishes of the various Micronesian peoples as enunci ated in free, open and fair referenda. The fundamental premise of self-determination is free choice and the choice of the various Micronesian entities has been obviously free and certified by this council. ‘We have been charged with forcing the Micronesian govern ments to accept free associ ation. Perhaps those who make this charge have been attending different meetings of the Trusteeship Council in the past month, but I can recall hearing, and seeing in the record, absol

utely clear statements by rep resentatives of the governments of Micronesia that their govern ments believe free association to be the political status which best meets their needs, and that they have embraced free associ ation of their own volition. ‘We have been charged with denying independence to the peoples of Micronesia. Nothing could be further from the truth.

My predecessors in this council and I have stated that, should the peoples of Micronesia reject free association as negotiated, the US would be prepared to begin negotiations with the Micronesians consistent with the political status of indepen dence if they so desire. My Soviet colleague is wrong in asserting that independence is the only acceptable political status option that should be made available to the peoples of Micronesia. If we are to respect the concept of self determination, which we do and some governments profess to do, then we must leave it to the people of the region themselves to decide, ‘We have been charged with attempting to secure military and defence rights in Micronesia that would extend beyond the trusteeship period, and with having failed to promote international peace and security in the Trust Terri tory as called for in the trusteeship agreement. These are specious arguments. The region of the Trust Territory has been free from external threat during the period of the trusteeship because my govern ment has maintained a strong defensive posture. The peoples of Micronesia have made im portant contributions to their own defence. With their co operation we have promoted

international peace and security in the region that has made the waters surrounding Micronesia truly a sea of tranquillity. As to military and defence rights that go beyond the terms of the trusteeship agreement, no such provisions can be included in any future political status ar rangement unless it enjoys the agreement of the Micronesian governments and peoples. It is fully within the rights of the Micronesian governments to provide for their own future security and to enter into any such agreements with the US if they so choose. ‘We have been charged with attempting to place conditions on this council with regard to the process of examining the annual report of the administer ing authority, and with provid ing unsatisfactory answers to questions posed by some del egations. If anyone objects to procedures that promote fair ness, honesty and integrity, then we are guilty as charged. If anyone seeks to gain political advantage out of the proceed ings of this council, then I am afraid that we will never be able to provide him with satisfactory responses. ‘We categorically reject those allegations and positions which seem designed to provoke rather than to assist the work of the council. ‘As for their substance, we would simply point to past records of this council, which has taken decision after de cision commending and sup porting our efforts to facilitate greater self-government for the peoples of Micronesia, the com prehensive reports of the visit ing missions despatched to Micronesia to observe the nu merous plebiscites and referenda that have paved the way for the establishment of constitutional governments, and the statements of the Micronesian special representa tives that have supported the US Government’s aim to nego tiate a political status that would meet the aims of the people of Micronesia and lead towards termination of the trusteeship, which the peoples of Micronesia and the people of the United States both ardently desire.’ US International Communication Agency.