5 THE POST-WAR DECLINE OF THE INTERNATIONAL STUDIES CONFERENCE 447intellectual co-operation.’^72 That said, it is important to note here
Bonnet’s insistence that India never manifested any of the ‘reticence and
even hostility’ towards Intellectual Cooperation that was manifested by
the other members of the British Empire in the assembly.^73 Noel-Baker
then informed the meeting that the attitude of the British delegations
had now changed: the members of the Commonwealth wished that in
the future, intellectual cooperation would play a significant role in inter-
national relations, a sentiment warmly endorsed by his Australian and
Canadian counterparts. Alluding to the French expression of pride in
the fact that UNESCO’s seat was in Paris, Noel-Baker stated that he was
very happy to see France once more taking the lead in this domain.^74
Also present at this meeting was Scelle who noted in that context the
intellectually ‘very elevated’ character of the ICIC and who suggested
that UNESCO desired to place itself on a ‘terrain...more practical.’
Responding to Noel-Baker on behalf of France, Scelle expressed delight
in hearing that the heart of the British Commonwealth now beat in uni-
son in favour of intellectual cooperation.^75
The next day, the Twenty First Assembly adopted a resolution com-
mending the IIIC for its ‘precious collaboration’ with the LON since
- In the same resolution, the assembly recalled the accord between
the French government and the president of the LON Council in 1924
which had seen the IIIC, an institution which was a creature of French
law and whose premises and annual budget were dependent on the
(^72) Coopération Intellectuelle Internationale, nos. 3–4 (1946), 16, and Cowell ‘Planning
the Organisation of UNESCO, 1942–1946: A Personal Record,’ 219. Note that Bonnet
always maintained that India was a strong supporter of intellectual cooperation at the LON
and from the very beginning. Bonnet, Intellectual Co-operation in World Organization, 6.
(^73) Henri Bonnet, ‘La Société des Nations et la Coopération Intellectuelle,’ Journal of
World History 10, no. 1 (1966): 198–209, 200. See also Bonnet, Intellectual Co-operation
in World Organization, 6. H. Wilson Harris recorded that at the assembly in 1922, the
French delegation moved to reverse a cut to the ICIC’s annual budget made by the LON
Assembly’s Fourth Committee and that the French motion was ‘supported in admirable
speech by the Jam Sahib of Nawarnaga’, a delegate of India. The French motion, which
was, in the event, successful, was opposed during the vote by Australia, Canada, Great
Britain, New Zealand and South Africa. H. Wilson Harris, Geneva 1922: Being an Account
of the Third Assembly of the League of Nations (London: League of Nations Union, 1923),
53.
(^74) Coopération Intellectuelle Internationale, nos. 3–4 (1946): 16–7.
(^75) Ibid., 15–7.