Colonialism on the International Agenda


Chapter III

3.1 Introduction

Until the end of the First World War, the existence of colonialism went more or less unchallenged. Hans Kohn writes:

The Roman empire had been the model for Western political thought for over a thousand years. Americans at the end of the eighteenth century spoke proudly and hopefully of their 'empire'. The French revolutionaries proclaimed their 'imperial' expansion of their leadership. Modern Western civilisation was regarded as superior to other, comparatively stagnant civilisations and to bring higher civilisation to less developed countries was considered a praiseworthy enterprise. (...)33

The condemnation of colonialism has become almost universal by now. This condemnation tends to focus on a specific manifestation of colonialism, while other forms of colonialism continue to evoke a sense of heroism and courageous determination. Ironically, the United States of America, which has been among the strongest critics of 20th century European colonial rule in Africa, Asia and Latin America, recently celebrated the 500th anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus, which paved the way for some of the most ruthless colonial conquests in the history of colonisation.

The following section will sketch the 20th century development towards the internationalisation of colonial administration as well as delineate the limits which have been imposed on this development.


3.2 The League of Nations

After the First World War, the allied powers divided the German and Turkish colonies among themselves. At the same time, the idea that the simple annexation of these territories was incompatible with the ideals for which the Great War had been fought was starting to gain ground. President Wilson played a pivotal role in disseminating the principle that colonisation by conquest was no longer acceptable. In doing so, he referred to the American Declaration of Independence: 'Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.' Most probably, it was never Wilson's intention to apply his theories on self-determination beyond sub-state 'nations' within the conquered Ottoman and German empire in post First World War Europe. But once he had launched the principle of self-determination, it was soon adopted by those favouring decolonisation all over the world. The fifth of Wilson's famous 14 Points recommended:

free, open-minded and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based on the strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty, the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.

This idea, though very unpopular among certain colonial powers, inspired the inclusion of Article 22 in the Covenant of the League of Nations, which reads:

To those countries which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand up for themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.
(...)
The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it, and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the League.

The Mandate system of the League of Nations, however limited in scope and application, constituted the beginning of a system of supranational supervision over colonial territories.


3.3 The UN Charter: Trust Territories and Non-Self-Governing Territories

The idea that colonial administration was no longer a strictly national and sovereign affair was further developed within the UN, the legal successor to the League of Nations.

The most important UN document on colonialism is the UN Charter itself. Chapters 11, 12 and 13 of the UN Charter deal with Trust Territories and Non-Self-Governing Territories (NSGTs). The UN General Assembly adopted a series of important resolutions on colonialism which will be discussed later.

Compared to the Mandate system of the League of Nations, The UN Charter represents an important step towards the internationalisation of colonial issues. In addition to the Trusteeship System, which replaced the Mandate system of the League of Nations, and which regulates the administering of colonial territories of conquered powers after the First and the Second World Wars, the UN Charter includes a Chapter on NSGTs. Article 73 of the UN Charter contains a short but interesting phrase on the nature of colonialism. It refers to colonial powers as:

members who have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government'34 [emphasis added].

Subsequent attempts by UN Secretary General Trygve Lie to clarify the factors to be taken into account in determining which territories qualified as NSGTs failed.35

Notably absent in the texts adopted by UN organs is a clear and widely accepted definition of colonialism. This absence can be traced to the deliberate attempt by some UN member states to avoid a general definition by confining the scope of the term colonialism and its implications to a specific and exhaustive list of territories. The list of these so-called 'Non-Self-Governing-Territories and Trust Territories reflects the extent to which the international community was (and is) prepared to acknowledge the geographical scope of colonialism.
The UN has undoubtedly served as the principal international forum of discussion on colonialism and decolonisation. The following section will give a brief overview of these discussions and select those elements which are relevant to this report.


3.3.1 1945-1960: Gradual Internationalisation

The distinctions between the rules governing Trust Territories and Non-Self-Governing Territories (NSGTs) was the subject of many heated debates in the decades following the Second World War. One of the main differences between these two legal regimes is that the Trusteeship System contains the phrase 'progressive development towards self-government or independence'36,[emphasis added] Whereas the NSGTs system merely mentions 'self-government' as one of its objectives.37 The Afro-Asian Block maintained that 'self-government' included the possibility to opt for independence, while most of the colonial powers claimed that 'self-government' merely implied internal self-determination (i.e. autonomy).38

Another difference between Chapter 11 and Chapters 12 and 13 of the UN Charter is that the latter two provide for extensive international supervision in the form of the Trusteeship Council, whereas Chapter 11 remains silent on the question of supervision. Between 1945 and 1960 the Afro-Asian Block successfully lobbied for the adoption of many General Assembly Resolutions which slowly but gradually eroded the distinction between NSGTs and Trust Territories and encouraged NSGTs to seek independence.


3.3.2 UN Supervision vs. Non-interference Principle

A number of states, notably the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and France, attempted to circumvent international supervision by maintaining that their colonies were integral parts of the metropolitan state. They called these territories 'overseas provinces' or 'provinces outre-mer' instead of colonies. The ultimate failure of these states to avoid UN supervision shows very clearly that the relevant UN organs have not considered recognition by a metropolitan state of the colonial status of a territory (as opposed to its 'provincial status') to be a constitutive element of colonialism.39

The history of the Portuguese colonies is one of the clearest examples that the refusal by a metropolitan state to recognise the colonial status of its colonies did not prevent the UN from treating these territories as such. While most colonies had gained independence by the end of the 1960s, Portugal held on to its colonies much longer. The Portuguese dictator Salazar maintained that the Portuguese territories in Asia and Africa constituted integral parts of Portugal and that the independence of these territories would amount to the dismemberment of Portugal.40, This did not deter the UN from strongly condemning Portugal's refusal to report41 on its colonial policies in Angola, Mozambique and East Timor. Portugal's response to UN pressure to report on the situation in these territories was that 'the furnishing of information was conditional upon voluntary agreement of Member States that the principles of Article 7342 applied to them'.43 For the first time in the history of the NSGT system, the UN General Assembly ) took the significant step of listing 9 particular territories as NSGTs, thus demonstrating that it considered itself competent to determine when Article 73 of the UN Charter applied in concreto.


3.3.3 1960: Rapid Changes in Colonial Relationships

Whereas the 15 years following the end of the Second World War witnessed a slow but steady pace towards international supervision over the administration of colonies and the development of an evolutionary right to self-determination for NSGTs, 1960 marked the beginning of a new era in the grand debate on colonialism and decolonisation. From 1960 onwards the legal discussions were replaced by the political weight of the UN General Assembly resolutions.44 Two General Assembly Resolutions set the tone in this new era: Resolutions 1514 and 154145. Both of these resolutions, which are generally discussed in the context of decolonisation, contain interesting phrases on the nature of colonialism. Therefore, they are worth examining in some detail.

Resolution 1514 and the Special Committee of 24

On 14 December 1960, the UN General Assembly adopted the by now historical resolution 1514: 'Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.' This political declaration, which is generally considered to reflect customary law and is as such binding on all states, constituted a powerful break through. Not only was the difference between Trust Territories and NSGTs finally eliminated, but a third category of 'all other territories which have not attained independence' was also added to the list of colonies.46 The preambular phrase 'the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations' [emphasis added] also indicates a development towards a wider interpretation of colonialism. This conclusion is reinforced by the definition of colonialism contained in resolution 1514. The Declaration condemns 'the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation'47. It does not explicitly equate this phrase to colonialism, but the context implies that it defines colonialism in these terms. The Special Committee of 24 was established48 to supervise the implementation of resolution 1514. It replaced all earlier ad-hoc committees. Compared to these earlier supervisory organs, the supervision regime of the Committee of 24 constituted an important break-through: it was granted the power to hear petitioners and carry out missions to gather first hand information.49 In theory, the inhabitants of the territories in question were at last given some say in defining the actual substance of their 'paramountcy of interest'.50 On paper these interests were no longer exclusively determined by their colonial rulers.


Resolution 1541

Whereas the Trust Territories constituted a well-defined, exhaustive list of regions, the term Non-Self-Governing Territories remained undefined. The colonial powers preferred to list these territories rather than to define them, and they came up with a list of 74 NSGTs. The Afro-Asian Block, fearing that this list would remain subject to the sovereign whims of the colonial powers, unremittingly attempted to specify which criteria should be used while determining which territories qualified as NSGTs, to which Article 73 of the UN Charter should be applied. On 15 December 1960 it finally succeeded in securing the passage of General Assembly Resolution 1541: 'Principles which should guide members in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for in Art. 73 of the UN Charter.' Principle IV of this resolution reads:

Prima Facie there is an obligation to transmit information in respect of a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administe ring it.

Principle V adds:

(...) additional elements may be, inter alia, of an administrative, political, juridical, economic or historical nature. If they affect the relationship between the metropolitan State and the territory concerned in a manner which arbitrarily places the latter in a position or status of subordination (...).

Two phrases warrant special attention. Firstly, the words prima facie suggest that the criteria mentioned in Principle IV are indicators, instead of hard and fast criteria.51 Secondly, the words inter alia point out that the list of indicators is not finite and that other indicators may be relevant as well (see section 2.2). .

The 'indicators' of colonialism emerging from this resolution are: geographical separateness, ethnic/cultural/historical distinctness and arbitrary legal/political/economic subordination of a territory by a Metropolitan State.


3.3.4 The International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism

The issue of colonialism has not been entirely removed from the agenda of the United Nations. Although most former colonies on the list of the Committee of 24 had gained independence by the '70s, some colonies still remain. `A number of these colonies are on the list on the Committee of 2452 while others are not and never have been on that list.

In 1990, at its 45th session, the General Assembly adopted a resolution announcing the beginning of the 'International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism.' During this decade, the 'elimination of the last vestiges of colonialism by the year 2000'53 was to be one of the priorities of the United Nations. Most states interpret this resolution as merely addressing the situation of territories listed by the Special Committee on Decolonisation, although the language of the resolution itself does not explicitly impose this limit. It 'called upon the Administering Powers to take all necessary steps to enable the peoples of Territories concerned to exercise fully as soon as possible their right to self-determination, including independence.'54
In the course of the Decade of the Eradication of Colonialism, the General Assembly adopted a number of resolutions on the subject, reiterating its conviction of the need for decolonisation of the remaining colonies. During its 50th session, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 50/39, in which it noted 'with concern the negative impact which the non-participation of certain administrating Powers has had on the work of the Special Committee [i.e. the Committee of 24]'. It confirmed once again that

'the continuation of colonialism in any form or manifestation - including economic exploitation - is incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples'.[emphasis added] 55

This chapter has outlined the process towards the internationalisation of colonial administration. This exercise has shown that the remarkable progress which has been achieved has merely applied to a limited group of territories recognised as colonies and thus subject to international supervision by the Committee of 24.

[ Homepage ] [ Present Situation in Tibet ] [Tibet Mission Report ]



This site is maintained and updated by The Office of Tibet, the official agency of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in London. This Web page may be linked to any other Web sites. Contents may not be altered.
Last updated: 3-Oct-97