UNITED NATIONS: The Bogey of Colonialism

A group of Arab nationalists has confronted the U.N. General Assembly, convening in New York this week, with one of those practical moral and political problems which, from time to time, make the U.N. a genuine world forum. Since the U.S. will have a decisive voice in the debate, the problem is one for all Americans: What is the U.S. attitude towards modern colonialism?

Arab Rights. The specific issue is the right of the Arabs, claiming to represent 90% of the population of Morocco and Tunisia, to sovereignty in those countries. Both Morocco and Tunisia are French protectorates (i.e., colonies) administered by French Residents-General under treaties imposed by force on the

Moslem sovereigns, the Bey of Tunis (1881) and the Sultan of Morocco (1912). Last week the French cabinet decided that it would “accept no [outside] interference in these questions which relate essentially to the national competence of France.”

The French were basing their case on the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 7, which provides that the U.N. is not authorized “to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.” Great Britain, also a colonial power, announced that it will support the French. But 14 Arab and Asian countries propose that the problem be discussed by the General Assembly. The U.S., which has supported France in its noninterference position, is now wavering. Members of the U.S. delegation recoil before the accusation from the small nations (and the U.S.S.R.) that the U.S. is refusing to let a complaint even be heard.

French Systems. The essence of the problem lies in the nature of modern colonialism. This is illustrated in the systems of control developed by the French in their three North African territories:

¶Algeria (pop. 9,000,000) : an area more than three times the size of Texas, mostly desert. Algeria is now an integral part of metropolitan France, has 30 members in the French National Assembly, 14 members in the Senate, and 18 counselors in the Assembly of the French Union, which meets at Versailles. There is universal suffrage for all over 21, except for Moslem women, who by tradition take no part in public affairs.

¶Tunisia (pop. 3,250,000): an area about the size of New York State, dominated by the Mediterranean city of Tunis. Since Tunisia is not a member of the French Union, established in 1946, it has no representative in the French National Assembly or in the Assembly of the French Union. The French community in Tunisia, however, has two members in the French Council of the Republic.

¶Morocco (pop. 959,000): an area somewhat larger than California. Like Tunisia, Morocco is not a member of the French Union and continues to be administered by a French Resident-General. The French community has three representatives in the French Council.

French Reform: Moroccan and Tunisian nationalist leaders in 1946 demanded the suppression of the French secretariat, administration and gendarmarie, the complete elimination of French influence from government except in local bodies where there was a French minority. The French government replied with a program of reforms which provided for Arab representation in local and municipal government. Reform plans were submerged under a hail of protests from the 1) French colonials, who thought the Arabs were getting too much, and 2) the Arab nationalists, who thought they were not getting enough. France still believes a compromise possible. The French say one stumbling block is encouragement given to Arab ambitions by anticolonial sentiment in the U.S.

Colonial Sentiments. What makes the colonial problem in North Africa different is the presence of nearly 2,000,000 French settlers, many of them born in North Africa, which they regard as their home. Americans on the scene frequently accuse the settlers of being more narrow, repressive and intransigent than the French government. Marshal Alphonse Juin, commander of the NATO ground forces in Europe, was born at Bone in Algeria. Last week Juin (onetime Resident-General of Morocco, 1947-51) strongly attacked the U.S.’s wavering attitude. “There was nothing to get excited about so long as our opponents were only the Arab bloc, bound together by Moslem solidarity, and the U.S.S.R. with her satellites . . . but today we are seriously threatened with the possibility of seeing the U.S. join this group . . . This fact is very grave for it wounds us sentimentally and strikes at our idea of what should be the international solidarity to which we have already made such heavy contributions.”

American Parallel. When an American tells a Frenchman that the U.S. once fought a war to throw off a colonial power, the Frenchman is apt to reply that the Americans have oversimplified their own history. The Indians were the true local population of America and they were pretty well exterminated by the colonists, say the French. In other words, colonialism in U.S. history involves three elements, not two: the natives (the Indians), the European colonists (George Washington) and the parent government (George III). When the Americans instinctively and sentimentally rush to the side of the Arabs in North Africa, they are mindful of the American Revolution, and think they are siding with George Washington. They actually should be thinking, say the French, of their own Indian wars, and should realize that they are siding with Sitting Bull, while committed by a military alliance to General Custer. The American dilemma: What happens if the Sioux go seriously on the warpath and Custer decides to make a last stand? America’s great military bases in North Africa are in Indian territory.

U.N. Intervention. Actually a good deal more than air bases would be in jeopardy. The French fear that U.N. intervention in North Africa would eventually result in a U.N. trusteeship and the loss of her colonies. This, the French claim, would so weaken their nation as to destroy the balance of power between

France and Germany, and make any kind of alliance with Germany impossible. Said the economic weekly La Vie Française last week: “[Juin] has expressed himself with measure and firmness. The Americans pursuing quite opposite ends have come to use the same language as Moscow and to reach the same conclusions: France must hand over. But France knows what she has accomplished in North Africa and does not ignore what remains to be done .. . France is an old enough nation, rich enough in experience, to determine herself the means to employ and the best moment to choose.”

The shadow of the Middle East fell darkly over the brand-new $12,250,000 U.N. General Assembly Building in New York as representatives of 60 nations filed in for their seventh session. The African-Asian countries were prepared to insist that the Tunisian nationalists be heard. The French felt that they were being put on trial before the world largely by a collection of backward, undemocratic states whose plumbing, politics and sense of public order are far worse than those of Morocco or Tunisia. The U.S., divided between its desire to please an ally and its sentimental aversion to the old fighting word “colonialism,” was in a tough spot.