The Evening Star (January 15, 1946)
Eliot: UNO and dependent peoples
By Maj. George Fielding Eliot
The great task of assuring world peace and security is not one which can be performed by a minority of mankind. It is a task in which all must assume a due share of responsibility. To have any large segment of the world’s population outside the scope of that responsibility is dangerous for all of us. But such responsibility cannot be exercised by any people save through the medium of a government freely chosen by the people and fairly representing the interests and desires of the people. Hence it is of the first importance, as we approach this great new venture – the building of a world community – to see to it that the peoples of China, India and Southeast Asia, comprising something more than half the population of the globe, should be brought into such relationship with the world organization, through the medium of their own governments, as shall enable them to do their part in making the phrase “One World” a reality.
That this can be easily or quickly done is not contended. But it is obviously impossible for anyone to speak honestly of “One World,” of world security and a community of peoples, while more than half the world’s population is in no position to have its proper voice in the affairs of the world. Therefore a peculiarly heavy and peculiarly delicate responsibility lies on the shoulders of those countries who have in their charge the duty oi preparing these hundreds of millions for self-government, and aiding them to attain unity and political stability.
In this respect there is a remarkable similarity between the present position of the United States in China and the British in India. In each case, there are harsh internal conflicts, of considerable antiquity and involving deep bitterness, between major elements of the population. In each case there are populations of some 400,000,000, composed of peoples diverse in race, language and religion, and with these diversities complicated by all sorts of personal and local ambitions, interests and difficulties. The British came to India, it is true, as conquerors and rulers, while we are in China as friends and mediators; but at the moment the problems are the same – how to get out without leaving chaos and bloodshed behind, how to use present position and influence to the end that an orderly, reasonable and unified government may be established which will have some chance of survival, how to bring the Indian and Chinese populations along with the procession of United Nations marching slowly up the narrow, rugged path of cooperation for mutual security and for the general welfare of the human race.
To lesser and varying degrees, the British and ourselves have responsibilities with like objectives, though differing in nature, in Indo-China, Siam, Burma, the Netherlands Indies and the Philippines; and these responsibilities are shared by France and the Netherlands in their particular areas.
It is no longer a question of imperialism, or exploitation, or commercial advantage. It is a question of how to help one-half the human beings on this earth to begin to govern themselves and to take their due share, as they gain experience and confidence, in the ordering of the world’s affairs. They themselves must determine what form of government is best suited to their needs. These may not resemble our own ideas of government very closely; for with most of these peoples the economic ranks well before the political; most of them live terribly close to the deadline between survival and starvation, year in and year out. The raising of their standard of living must be their first consideration.
The objective must be clearly stated: The establishment of free, orderly and stable governments among these peoples, under whatever form may be desired by them and most adaptable to their necessities. There is, of course, no question as to the full independence of China, Siam and the Philippines; there should be none as to the eventual independence of the other countries involved, whether or not they first pass through the stage of dominion status within the respective commonwealths with which they have in the past been affiliated. The point to be kept clear, and to be made clear to every one of them, is that they are going to be free to choose their own rulers, to make their own laws, to find by the long weary process of trial and error the institutions of government which can serve them best.
It would be a useful thing if the four powers immediately concerned could say all this officially, perhaps in a joint statement, as soon as the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations Organization has its first meeting; and if that statement, bearing the joint guarantee of the American, British, French and Dutch governments and peoples, could be as widely disseminated as possible.