representatives to meet at Geneva on August 7, 1950. The Council also invited the governments of the opium-producing countries and of the drug-manufacturing countries to send representatives to convene at Geneva on August 14, 1950. These two groups were instructed to consider the Ankara plan and the possibility of drafting an international opium agreement.

The Joint Committee of Opium Producers and Drug Manufacturers accepted the main principles of the Ankara plan and agreed that machinery would be necessary to insure control over opium production. It was recommended that the machinery might consist of a regulating committee which would make policy decisions on all important questions, such as the quantity of opium to be produced, the stocks to be maintained, the assessments to be levied, and the loans to be negotiated. There might also be an agency under a director which would handle the commercial phases of the work of the monopoly, that is, the buying and selling of the world's legitimate opium. It was felt that it would be desirable, if the agreement were to achieve its aims, that the agency be authorized to undertake inspections, but the Committee was unable to agree on the manner of conducting the inspections. The Committee was of the opinion that the basic price of opium should be fixed for the duration of the agreement but failed to reach agreement on the method of fixing the price. The producers suggested that the average price paid for opium during 1947, 1948, and 1949 be used to establish the basic price, while the representatives of the manufacturing countries favored a price based on the price of opium in 1937, modified by the application of changes in the indexes of world wholesale prices of staple commodities.

The Joint Committee decided to accept a proposal presented by the representative of the United States for the standardization of methods for assaying, packing, sampling, and weighing of opium.

A suggestion was made in the Joint Committee for the setting up of an international monopoly of alkaloids. As a detailed study of it could not be made, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs requested the Secretary-General to obtain as soon as practicable from governments represented on the Commission their views on the proposal.

The Committee also failed to reach agreement on the question of the currencies in which payments might be made and the problems. of operating costs, assessments, exportation of alkaloids by producing countries, and competition from exports of alkaloids manufactured from poppy straw.

On the request of the Joint Committee, the Secretary-General decided to permit the Committee to meet on November 14, 1950, to continue its discussions. The Committee again was unable to resolve the problems carried over from its session at Geneva.

The fifth session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations convened on December 1, 1950, at Lake Success. It noted that progress had been made at Ankara, Geneva, and New York on the drafting of an opium agreement based on the limitation of production to medical and scientific needs but recognized that the question of the basic price of opium would have to be determined before the agreement could come into force. The Commission accordingly decided to recommend to the Economic and Social Council that its sixth session begin April 3 and continue through May 1951 in order that it might have sufficient time to bring the draft agreement to completion.

The Commission at its fifth session also gave consideration to the draft of a convention, submitted by the Secretariat on the request of the Economic and Social Council, which may replace the eight existing instruments on narcotic drugs. The main principles of the draft were discussed, but owing to their complexity and the lack of time the Commission felt that it would be premature to send the text to governments for their observations at this time. The Commission expressed the view that its members might bring with them to its sixth session memoranda containing their observations on the provisions of the draft single convention and that 2 or 3 days might be devoted to their consideration. On the basis of these observations and the discussion thereon the Secretariat might prepare a revised draft to be presented to the Commission during its seventh session in 1952. Another important question discussed by the Commission was the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the Coca Leaf, which had studied at first hand the problem of coca-leaf chewing in Peru and Bolivia. The report concluded that the chewing of the coca leaf has harmful effects and that this practice should be prohibited within 15 years by government action. The representatives of Bolivia and Peru who attended the discussion on the report stated that they were dissatisfied with many of its recommendations and conclusions.

The Commission on Narcotic Drugs decided to ask the Commission of Inquiry to forward its observations on the opinions expressed by the representatives of Peru and Bolivia to the Secretary-General by March 1, 1951, in order that they might be transmitted to the Council. The Narcotics Commission also recommended that the report and the observations of the Commission of Inquiry should be forwarded to the Governments of Peru and Bolivia with the request that they present their observations thereon to the Secretary-General before September 15, 1951. The Commission on Narcotic Drugs plans to examine the report further at its seventh session in order to submit recommendations to the Economic and Social Council.

In its study of the illicit traffic in narcotics, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs considered reports concerning clandestine laboratories for the manufacture of heroin in Turkey, the diversion from legitimate sources of heroin in Italy, large seizures of opium in Thailand, and the production of hashish in Syria and Lebanon.

The representative of the United States submitted a draft resolution requesting the Secretary-General to compile a list of merchantvessel personnel who have been convicted during the years 1946 to 1950 of crimes involving the smuggling of narcotics and instructing him to transmit the list to governments with the recommendation that they take measures to revoke officers' licenses and seamen's certificates held by such persons.

The Commission decided to include the above draft resolution in its report and to request the Secretary-General to ask governments for their comments on the possibilities of giving effect to the resolution and to communicate these comments to the Commission as soon as possible.

With regard to 500 tons of opium in China reported as available for sale, the Commission recommended to Ecosoc that it request the organs entrusted under international treaties with the control of narcotic substances to ascertain, if possible, the origin of this opium, the period in which it was collected, the total stocks in China, and whether the cultivation of the opium poppy and the export of opium are still prohibited in China.

5. Refugees and Displaced Persons

During 1950 the United Nations began to look toward the contraction and reorientation of its services in the field of refugees. As the year closed it seemed clear that the International Refugee Organization would, before finally ceasing operations on October 1, 1951, have resettled approximately 1,000,000 persons and made reasonably satisfactory arrangements for some 100,000 others who would not be resettled by transferring responsibility for their cases to authorities or agencies in their countries of residence. With regard to future international services on behalf of refugees, concentration was on the problem of legal protection for refugees and stateless persons who have not yet acquired a nationality or a satisfactory legal status; the fifth session of the General Assembly had before it a draft convention relating to the status of refugees, the principal instrument available to the future High Commissioner for Refugees in performing his function of protection.

The United States participated actively both in the effort to bring IRO to an early and satisfactory close and in the plans to extend legal protection and nondiscriminatory treatment to refugees who have not yet acquired citizenship in their countries of residence. These two complementary developments are discussed below.

TERMINATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL
REFUGEE ORGANIZATION

In the 3 years from July 1, 1947, when the Preparatory Commission for IRO began operations, through June 30, 1950, some 800,000 displaced persons left areas in which IRO operates for new countries of residence. Of this number 194,000 were resettled in the United States, 145,000 in Australia, 118,000 in Israel, 87,000 in Canada, 83,000 in the United Kingdom, 38,000 in France, 29,000 in Argentina, 23,000 in Brazil, 22,000 in Belgium, and 14,000 in Venezuela.

Until midsummer 1950 it had been hoped that IRO would be able to complete its operations by March 31, 1951. Because of delays in the processing of displaced persons for admission to the United States and Australia from January to October 1950 and because the funds which would have been used in such resettlement were not expended and were therefore still available, the General Council of IRO in October 1950 voted to extend the operations of IRO to October 1, 1951. This decision, together with that to extend resettlement services to refugees who arrived in areas of IRO Operations between October 15, 1949, and October 1, 1950, will enable IRO to complete its task more effectively and to achieve by October 1, 1951, the resettlement in countries of reception of an additional 200,000 refugees, thus bringing the total of refugees to be resettled by IRO before termination to 1,000,000.

Amendments to the United States Displaced Persons Act of 1948 will assist IRO's efforts to complete its program. On June 16, 1950, the Congress increased the number of visas to be granted displaced persons and refugees from 205,000 to 341,000; extended the period during which these visas could be issued from June 30, 1950, to June 30, 1951; and substituted January 1, 1949, for December 22, 1945, as the date on which eligible refugees must have arrived in Germany, Austria, or Italy in order to qualify for admission into the United States under the Displaced Persons Act.

In order to concentrate its resources upon resettlement, IRO on June 30, 1950, transferred to the governments of the areas of residence responsibility for all those refugees not considered likely to qualify for resettlement. The refugees transferred will remain as permanent

residents in the countries in which they are now living and in which a substantial number are self-supporting. Only those refugees who had prospects of resettlement in other countries during 1950 and 1951 and those ill and aged refugees requiring permanent institutional care after the termination of IRO were continued under IRO care and maintenance, pending resettlement of the former and planning of permanent institutional arrangements for the latter. Although such planning for the institutional "hard core" and their dependents was one of the most difficult problems faced by IRO during 1950, considerable progress was made and the total number of such persons and their families for whom plans still had to be made in October 1950 had been reduced from over 20,000 to approximately 9,000.

In Germany IRO, in addition to transferring on June 30, 1950, the responsibility for the care of nonresettleable refugees to public and private agencies, has worked very closely with the Allied High Commission to establish a legal status for refugees remaining in Germany. In order to safeguard the rights of refugees and displaced persons in Germany and to provide opportunities for their self-maintenance, the Allied High Commission requested the German Federal Government to pass legislation defining the legal, political, social, and economic status of refugees within Western Germany.

LEGAL PROTECTION

Refugees who find themselves in countries where they cannot readily acquire citizenship must be assured a minimum of legal rights and status and nondiscriminatory treatment. In particular they must enjoy rights and services which other aliens enjoy by treaty or through representation by their own governments. Thus, for example, they must be assured the right of access to courts, the right to work, the right to enjoy the benefits of social-insurance systems, opportunities for education, the issuance of travel documents and the enjoyment of other consular services, and the right to remain in the country with a sense of security.

It has proved necessary and desirable to have international bodies concern themselves with assuring these rights and services for refugees. Such legal protection was provided originally under the auspices of the League of Nations, continued under IRO, and envisaged as necessary under the United Nations for such time as the General Assembly might later determine.

When IRO ends on October 1, 1951, an estimated 250,000 refugees, particularly in Europe, who have not acquired a new nationality will require international protection. The General Assembly of the United