Is there a legal obligation under the U.S. ratification of the Charter of the United Nations that makes the U.S. responsible for protecting the human rights including the right of "self-determination" of the Netherlands New Guinea ?
N.B: you can find transcript of the relevant UN resolutions & New York Agreement etc. at http://wpik.org
1) In 1945 the U.S. and several other nations created an organization called the "United Nations" governed by the Charter of the United Nations
2) In 1945 the U.S. President by proclamation and/or the government otherwise ratified U.S. membership of the UN and obligations under the U.N. charter including chapter XI regarding colonies, see articles 73 & 74 of the charter
3) the Netherlands identified "Netherlands New Guinea" as a colony and began transmitting data as required by article 73(e) of the UN charter.
4) in 1948 the UN membership endorsed the Netherlands notice that West Papua (Netherlands New Guinea) was still a colony - see UN General Assembly resolution 448 (III).
[[ Side-note: Likely because of business desire for easy access to "the wealth of south east Asia" the Axis leader Sukarno after the war had been allowed to maintain his military and his rule from Sumatra to the Celebes in Asia and to the Spice Islands in the Australian Pacific, instead of allowing the populations a choice the UN and Netherlands recognised Indonesia as a member state in 1949. Problem for West Papua is that a Standard-Oil company NNGPM in 1936 had discovered the mountain of Ertsberg in West Papua was world's richest gold & copper reserve, but this was not reported to the Dutch who had granted the exploration licence. In March 1959 the New York Times revealed the Dutch were searching for the mountain source of alluvial gold along the entire southern coast of West Papua, in August 1959 a joint Rockefeller/Lovett interest Freeport began establishing a claim on Ertsberg as a "possible copper reserve" as reported by the Dutch in that's year's report to the UN. After the US elected a John F Kennedy, Mr Lovett suggested Lovett's friend McGeorge Bundy be appointed to run the NSC and in 1961 the NSC began a campaign to get President Kennedy to coerce the Netherlands to trade the people of West Papua for benefit of the U.S.; no kidding - the NSC and Bundy's action is actually been documented by the DoS. see the Department of State historical summary e.g. see http://wpik.org/Src/1961_US_record.html ]]
5) The U.N. in December 1960 agreed on U.N. General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) and 1541 (XV)
6) in January 1961 The Netherlands New Guinea (West Papua) held national elections for a "New Guinea Council" using electoral rolls prepared during the previous three years, and Australian & NZ officials attended the installation of the New Guinea Council on April 5, 1961. The U.N. Secretary General Mr Dag Hammarskjold was killed on September 18, the U.S. took the NSC plan to the U.N. at some point, the New Guinea Council was told about the U.S. plan on October 18, 1961; and the Council on the night of October 18 implemented their people's wishes by designing symbols of nationhood including the now beloved Morning Star flag and the Manifesto of independence (a copy is also at wpik.org)
7) ** The U.S. plan was drafted by Robert Kennedy and signed by the Netherlands, Indonesia, and the new U.N. Secretary General after the U.S. and other members voted in support of U.N. General Assembly resolution 1752 (XVII).
[[ Side-Note: Under the contract the U.N. was required to note an "act of self-determination" , but instead of self-determination Indonesia had sold Freeport a 30-year mining license in 1967 and in 1969 conducted what the U.N. in it's notation called a 'Act of Free Choice' in which the Papuan public was not allowed to vote. see U.N. General Assembly resolution 2504 (XXIV) ]]
Argument : West Papua needs help, I think that the U.S. by it's actions including it's vote in U.N. General Assembly resolution 1752 (XVII) is legally obliged under articles 73 & 74 of the U.N. charter to help protect the self-determination & other human rights of West Papua.
What do you think ? ? Would a federal court also support an argument that the US should sponsor a petition at the UN General Assembly asking for the ICJ to provide an Advisory Advice about the status of West Papua (Netherlands New Guinea) ? ?
East Timor got it's vote AFTER the ICJ got a chance to volunteer it's opinion about East Timor in 1995, see http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index....3&p2=3&case=84
As I'm an Australian, I've asked my government to discuss West Papua at the UN General Assembly & to petition the Assembly to allow the ICJ to give it's legal opinion - because Australia also decided to vote in UN General Assembly resolution 1752 (XVII).
But is any reader here a member of any U.S. NGO that might be interested in promoting the application of international law for the defense of human rights by asking your government to fulfill their obligations under the U.N. charter ? Please email me if you can speak to your NGO about this.
Please note: America has tried to do right a couple of time such as when the US Congress in 2005 asked for the Secretary of State to report about conditions inside West Papua, but the Indonesian President objected to Americans asking questions so the US Senate removed that section of the Foreign Relations Authorization bill. I think the US and others should ask the ICJ to give it's advise for benefit of the U.N. and Decolonization Committee that Indonesia has a seat on.