International Whaling Commission

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 701-702 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Association ◽  
Substantial Reduction ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Whaling Commission ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
The Cost

The eighth annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission took place in London July 16–20, 1956, under the chairmanship of Dr. G. J. Lienesch (Netherlands). All seventeen contracting governments, with the exception of Brazil, were represented, with observers from Italy, Portugal, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, and the International Association of Whaling Companies. During the deliberations the Commission 1) received from the Bureau of International Whaling Statistics data on the operations and the catch for the past season; 2) received various scientific papers concerning the stocks of whales, and almost unanimously favoring a substantial reduction in the catch in view of evidence that the stock was declining, recommended that the catch for future seasons should not exceed 15,000 blue whale units, and, with one dissentient, recommended that the limit should be reduced in the 1956–1957 season to 14,500 blue whales; 3) after examining the returns rendered in respect of infractions of the whaling regulations, noted that, in general, there had been a decrease over the previous year; 4) received further confirmation from the Commissioner of the Soviet Union of the use of fenders of porous rubber to replace the present use of whale carcases for this purpose; 5) allocated an equivalent of $1400 towards the cost of whale marking; and 6) requested the United States to prepare a protocol for the amendment of the convention requiring every factory ship to have on board two inspectors who were generally of the same nationality as the flag of the ship, to permit consideration of a scheme to appoint independent observers in addition to the national inspectors.

International Whaling Commission

1955 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 455-455
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Technical Committee ◽  
Scientific Committee ◽  
International Council ◽  
International Whaling Commission ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Present Procedure ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
The Soviet Union

The International Whaling Commission held its sixth meeting in Tokyo, Japan, from July 19 to 23, 1954. Represented were all of the seventeen member governments except Iceland. Observers were present from Argentina, Chile, Italy, Portugal, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, and the Food and Agriculture Organization. Mr. A. T. A. Dobson (United Kingdom) acted as secretary of the meeting. The Commission approved its expenditure of £1,854 for financial year 1953/1954, and adopted a budget of £2,580 for 1954/1955. Attention was called to the great waste of resources represented by lost whales; the Commission accepted various suggestions from its technical committee for tightening up the present procedure with a view to reducing the number of infractions in the future. It was decided that the use of helicopters and other aircraft for the killing of whales should be brought within the scope of the Convention. A large number of recommendations emanating from the scientific committee were dealt with. The scientific committee's recommendation prompted a large number of proposals for the amendment of the regulations in force. At the invitation of the Soviet Union, the next meeting of the Commission was to be held in Moscow on July 18, 1955.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

1947 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-353 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Director General ◽  
World Food ◽  
Full Member ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Social Council

FAO Preparatory Commission on World Food ProposalsThe Second Session of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Conference, held in Copenhagen, Denmark, from September 2 to 13, 1946, created a preparatory commission to consider the proposals of the Conference and any other suggestions relative to the establishment of a World Food Board. The Preparatory Commission, made up of representatives of sixteen member nations of FAO — Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, Netherlands, Philippine Republic, Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States — and representatives of four United Nations organizations — the Economic and Social Council, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Labor Office and the International Monetary Fund — began its sessions at Washington October 28. Siam, although not a member of FAO, participated as a full member in all the discussions concerning rice; the Soviet Union and Argentina, also non-members of FAO, were invited to participate as full members of the Commission but did not designate representatives, although Argentina named two observers. Fifteen FAO members, not members of the Commission, and the International Emergency Food Council (IEFC) also sent observers. The representative of Australia (Bruce) was appointed by the Director-General of FAO (Orr) to serve as chairman of the Commission.

Power and Military Impotence

Worldview ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Seymour Melman
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
The United States ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Military Power ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Military Security ◽  
Special Force ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Military

After twenty-five years of a nuclear-military arms race, it is possible to define significant limits of military power for national security. These limits apply with special force to the nuclear superpowers. These same limits of military power also define new requirements for a disarmament process.Underlying the long discussion of disarmament among nations has been the understanding that lowered levels of armaments produce mutual advantage: the prospect of physical destruction is reduced; and the cost of armaments can be applied to constructive uses. The arms race from 1946 to 1971 between the United States and the Soviet Union has not improved the military security of either nation, and the economic cost to these two countries has exceeded $1,500 billion.

scholarly journals The Role of Food in the International Affairs of the United States

1981 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph D. Coffey
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Food Aid ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Cultural Exchanges ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Import Quotas

From the early 1600s, when tobacco exports literally saved the struggling Jamestown settlement, to the January 4, 1980, embargo of grain to the Soviet Union, food and agriculture have played varied roles in international affairs of the U.S., that is, in the political, military, economic, and cultural exchanges that affect the power of the U.S. relative to other sovereign nations. Food donations have been used as a humanitarian gesture to avert starvation. Food export embargoes have been used as weapons against foreign adversaries and domestic scarcities. Food pledges have been used to promote international food aid conventions. Food import quotas have been reallocated to reward friendly nations and penalize unfriendly ones. U.S. food shipments have been used to feed Allied soldiers and to barter for strategic materials. Food exports have been used to bolster the domestic economy and strengthen the dollar.

International Whaling Commission

1956 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 519-519
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Annual Meeting ◽  
The United States ◽  
Technical Committee ◽  
International Council ◽  
International Whaling Commission ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
The Right

The seventh annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission was held in Moscow from July 18 to 24, 1955. All of the seventeen member governments were represented except Brazil, and observers were present from Argentina, Italy, the Association of Whaling Companies, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and the Food and Agriculture Organization. At the end of his three-year term as chairman, tribute was paid to Dr. Remington Kellogg (United States), who was succeeded by Dr. G. J. Leinesch (Netherlands) for the succeeding three years. The Commission elected Mr. R. G. R. Wall (United Kingdom) as vice-chairman to replace Dr. Leinesch. After the Commission had considered the reports of the Technical Committee and the Scientific Committee, it adopted amendments to the schedule, containing the whaling regulations annexed to the 1946 Convention. It was reported that the decisions had not been unanimous and that none of the amendments to the schedule would come into operation until they had been submitted to all member governments, which had the right to object within a period of 90 days. The Commission decided to request the United States to proceed with the amendment of the 1946 Convention by means of a protocol so that helicopters and other aircraft could be brought within the jurisdiction of the Convention.

scholarly journals Осмысление дороги в аспекте диспозиции «свой» и «чужой» (на материале калмыцкой политической баллады ХХ в.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 332-344
Author(s):  
Rimma M. Khaninova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Communist Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Protest ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Perspective ◽  
Blood Relative ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Cost

The article discusses the concept of “road” in the aspect of the disposition of “your” and “alien” on the material of Kalmyk political ballad of the XX century —”Julian Grimau” (Rus. transl. “The Ballad about Communist”) by Yegor Budzhalov and “Ooshk torhn — Rosa kyukn” (Rus. transl. “Ballad about the girl Rosa”) by Moradzhi Narmaev. The political perspective of these ballads is determined by historical events (civil war, imprisonment of political figures, execution, loss of eyesight), historical characters (Julian Grimau, Henry Winston), the members of the Communist Party of their countries, the main place names (Spain, the United States of America, the Soviet Union). The dichotomy of “one’s own” and “another’s” in Budzhalov’s ballad demonstrates political (fascism and democracy), ideological (imperialism and the communist Party), social (protest of different countries against the verdict of Grimau) and personal (Franco and Grimau) vectors. This is the boundary between the life and death of the hero, his path to the grave, to non-existence, physical and spiritual immortality, it is the conclusion of his human fate. In the Narmaev’s ballad the “one’s own” and “another’s” disposition is represented in theintercrossing of different people’s lives — the American communist G. Winston, his opponents, his friends, Soviet people, including the author himself, Soviet Youth and Rosa girl in particular — when the “stranger” communist from the USA becomes “one’s own” like-minded person, when a stranger literally becomes a blood relative, when long distances do not become an obstacle to good deeds and thoughts, when someone else’s life is saved at the cost of self-sacrifice. These works of Kalmyk poets bear the imprint of their time in a pronounced socio-political and ideological perspective, without reducing the humanistic and moral-ethical vector of the author’s intention.

scholarly journals CILECT as the Project of a World Film School: Origins, Specifics, Development

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 8-24
Author(s):  
Vladimir Malyshev
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
International Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
100Th Anniversary ◽  
State Institute ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Film Education

The continuing introduction of digital technologies into the production of meaningful and engaging audiovisual images accentuates the necessity of international cooperation in the sphere of the professional education of those young people who are planning to work in film, television and other screen arts. All over the world film schools are challenged by problems the solution of which requires consolidated participation of worldfamous masters. This has been recently confirmed at the Congress of the International Association of Film and Television Schools (CILECT) Congress held in October 2019 in Moscow in connection with the 100th anniversary of the All-Russian State Institute of Cinematography (VGIK). This essay analyzesVGIK's contribution to the process of perfecting programs in the field of screen arts at different stages of their development. The essay explores issues of CILECT development since its foundation in 1954. Initially, CILECT was supported by nations with developed film cultures, such as Brazil, Chile, Czechoslovakia, France, Italy, Poland, the Soviet Union, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Today, the Association unites 180 film schools from 65 nations. The essay analyzes VGIK's role in the development of film education and, more generally, the development of screen arts; and emphasizes the importance of international cooperation in this technological, digital age.

The Role of the Mongolian People’s Republic in the Korean War

2018 ◽  
pp. 97-130
Author(s):  
Denzenlkham Ulambayar
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Korean War ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Intelligence Agency ◽  
Intelligence Agency ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Archival Documents ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
History Of

Since the 1990s, when previously classified and top secret Russian archival documents on the Korean War became open and accessible, it has become clear for post-communist countries that Kim Il Sung, Stalin and Mao Zedong were the primary organizers of the war. It is now equally certain that tensions arising from Soviet and American struggle generated the origins of the Korean War, namely the Soviet Union’s occupation of the northern half of the Korean peninsula and the United States’ occupation of the southern half to the 38th parallel after 1945 as well as the emerging bipolar world order of international relations and Cold War. Newly available Russian archival documents produced much in the way of new energies and opportunities for international study and research into the Korean War.2 However, within this research few documents connected to Mongolia have so far been found, and little specific research has yet been done regarding why and how Mongolia participated in the Korean War. At the same time, it is becoming today more evident that both Soviet guidance and U.S. information reports (evaluated and unevaluated) regarding Mongolia were far different from the situation and developments of that period. New examples of this tendency are documents declassified in the early 2000s and released publicly from the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in December 2016 which contain inaccurate information. The original, uncorrupted sources about why, how and to what degree the Mongolian People’s Republic (MPR) became a participant in the Korean War are in fact in documents held within the Mongolian Central Archives of Foreign Affairs. These archives contain multiple documents in relation to North Korea. Prior to the 1990s Mongolian scholars Dr. B. Lkhamsuren,3 Dr. B. Ligden,4 Dr. Sh. Sandag,5 junior scholar J. Sukhee,6 and A. A. Osipov7 mention briefly in their writings the history of relations between the MPR and the DPRK during the Korean War. Since the 1990s the Korean War has also briefly been touched upon in the writings of B. Lkhamsuren,8 D. Ulambayar (the author of this paper),9 Ts. Batbayar,10 J. Battur,11 K. Demberel,12 Balảzs Szalontai,13 Sergey Radchenko14 and Li Narangoa.15 There have also been significant collections of documents about the two countries and a collection of memoirs published in 200716 and 2008.17 The author intends within this paper to discuss particularly about why, how and to what degree Mongolia participated in the Korean War, the rumors and realities of the war and its consequences for the MPR’s membership in the United Nations. The MPR was the second socialist country following the Soviet Union (the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics) to recognize the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) and establish diplomatic ties. That was part of the initial stage of socialist system formation comprising the Soviet Union, nations in Eastern Europe, the MPR, the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and the DPRK. Accordingly between the MPR and the DPRK fraternal friendship and a framework of cooperation based on the principles of proletarian and socialist internationalism had been developed.18 In light of and as part of this framework, The Korean War has left its deep traces in the history of the MPR’s external diplomatic environment and state sovereignty

Utopias of One

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Kotin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
World War I ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The Soviet Union

This book is a new account of utopian writing. It examines how eight writers—Henry David Thoreau, W. E. B. Du Bois, Osip and Nadezhda Mandel'shtam, Anna Akhmatova, Wallace Stevens, Ezra Pound, and J. H. Prynne—construct utopias of one within and against modernity's two large-scale attempts to harmonize individual and collective interests: liberalism and communism. The book begins in the United States between the buildup to the Civil War and the end of Jim Crow; continues in the Soviet Union between Stalinism and the late Soviet period; and concludes in England and the United States between World War I and the end of the Cold War. In this way it captures how writers from disparate geopolitical contexts resist state and normative power to construct perfect worlds—for themselves alone. The book contributes to debates about literature and politics, presenting innovative arguments about aesthetic difficulty, personal autonomy, and complicity and dissent. It models a new approach to transnational and comparative scholarship, combining original research in English and Russian to illuminate more than a century and a half of literary and political history.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document