(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Department of State bulletin"

INDEX 



July 4- December 26, 1955 




V,\. ^ 






sfe ETtno sr 



Corrections in Volume XXXIII 

The Editor of the Bulletin wishes to call atten- 
tion to the following errors : 

September 5 : page 398, right-hand column, ISth 
line from the top, 1952 should read : 

-1962" 

September 19 : page 457, right-hand column, the 
20th line from the top should begin : 

"The following list of 19 other Americans . . . ." 
The list which follows should include the name of 
Mrs. Homer V. Bradshaw. 



INDEX 



Volume XXXIII: Numbers 836-861, July 4-December 26, 1955 



Adenauer, Konrad : 

Geneva Heads of Government Conference, letter to 

President Eisenhower, 259 
German vested assets in U.S., return of, correspondence 

with Secretary Dulles, 973m 
Leadership in Germany and cooperation with West, 14, 

44, 48, 49, 93, 525 
Negotiations with Soviet Union, 494 
Administration, Deputy Under Secretary of State for, 

delegation of functions and authorities to, 909 
Administrative Tribunal, U.N., review of judgments by 
International Court of Justice, statements of U.S. 
position regarding procedure (Merrow) and text of 
General Assembly resolution, 938 
Aerial inspection and exchange of military blueprints, 
President Eisenhower's proposals. See under Dis- 
armament 
Afghanistan : 

International Bank, articles of agreement, 164 
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement, 164 
Soviet economic activities in, 342, 343 
Africa (see also individual countries) : 
Foreign Relations, volume on, published, 165 
Mutual security program in, 32, 266 
Vice President Nixon, visit of, 380 
West Africa, problems of self-government, 159 
Agricultural surpluses, U.S., use in overseas program : 
Agreements with — 
Austria, 124; Brazil, 898, 932; Colombia, 85, 86; 
Ecuador, 676, 678; Egypt, 1086; France, 406, 998; 
Greece, 100, 210 ; Guatemala, 196 ; India, 617 ; Israel, 
86, 10S6 ; Italy, 225, 249 ; Japan, 86, 577 ; Libya, 263 ; 
Pakistan, 678 ; Peru, 210, 623 ; Spain, 862 ; Thailand, 
164 ; Turkey, 998 ; Yugoslavia, 86 
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act : 
Amendment, statement (Eisenhower), 362 
President's report to Congress (Jan.-June 1955), 197 
Disposal problems, 713, 849, 850, 930, 937 
FOA sales proceeds chart, 30 
Mutual security program : 
Report to Congress (Jan.-June 1955) , 431 
Report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 267, 270 
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act. See 

under Agricultural surpluses 
Agriculture : 

Cooperative program agreements with — 
Dominican Republic, 909 
Libya, 1086 

Panama, extending 1952 agreement, 932 
Imports, restrictions on, U.S. report to 10th session of 

GATT, 1019 
Plant protection convention, international, 85, 589, 931 
Soviet Union, exchange of agricultural delegations with 

U.S., 151, 689 
World agriculture, problems in, statement (Benson) , 934 



Agriculture, Department of, personnel assigned abroad, 

Executive order concerning, 306 
Aid to foreign countries. See Economic and technical aid 

and Military assistance 
Air defense. See National defense 
Air transport. See Aviation 
Aircraft. See Aviation 
Albania, admission to U.N., 1068, 1070, 1071«. 
Aldrich, Winthrop W., 651, 793 

Algerian question in U.N., proposed inscription on General 
Assembly agenda : 
U.S. position, statements : Dulles, 605 ; Lodge, 546, 582 
Withdrawal of French delegation from General Assem- 
bly, address and statement : Dulles, 605 ; Wilcox 740 
Decision to omit from agenda, statement (Lodge), 992 
Ali, Mohammed, 916 
Al-Khayall, Abdullah, 361 
Allen, George V., 604, 683, 786 

American-Israeli friendship, address (Brownell), 97 
American Republics. See Latin America and individual 

countries 
Amity, economic relations, and consular rights treaty with 

Iran, 367, 369 
Antarctica, expeditions for International Geophysical 

Year, 990 
Antilles, Netherlands, double taxation convention, U.S.- 
Netherlands, 37, 38, 290 
Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and invest- 
ment, address (Kalijarvi), 538 
ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534 
Arab-Israeli dispute : 

Arms supply to Middle East. See Arms supply 
Egypt, hostilities with Israel : 
Address (Wilcox), 904 
Security Council resolution, 459 
U.S. position, statements, 786 ; Lodge, 458 
Refugee problem : 
Addresses (Dulles), 379, 526 
U.S. aid, 33 
U.N. role in truce negotiations, 741 
U.S. position, address and statements: Allen, 684; 
Brownell, 99; Dulles, 378, 421, 525, 1009, 1010; 
Eisenhower, 845 ; Murphy, 493 
Arbitral Commission on property rights and interests in 

Germany, charter of, 442, 813 
Architects, American Institute of, planning of Berlin con- 
ference hall, 302 
Argentina : 
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74 
Telecommunication convention, international, and addi- 
tional protocols (1952), 368 
Tung oil, limit on export to U.S., discontinuance, 792 
U.S.-Argentine relations, statement (Dulles), 605 



Index, July to December 1955 



1091 



Argentina — Continued 
U.S.private capital, remittances for earnings on invest- 
ments, 462 
U.S. recognition of new government, 560 
Armaments (see also Disarmament) : 
International control of: 
Address and statement (Dulles), 9, 53 
NAC position on, 1047 
WEU system of, 417 
Near East. See Arms supply 
Soviet surplus, question of disposal, 601, 879 
U.S. policy, address (Eisenhower), 133 
Armed forces : 

Courts for armed forces of Canada and U.K. in U.S., 

proclamation discontinuing, 361 
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war 
Protocol on termination of occupation regime in Federal 

Republic of Germany, 406 
Reduction in and exchange of information concerning. 

See Disarmament 
Soviet proposed reduction, statement (Dulles), 338 
Soviet troops in Rumania, 339 
Armed forces, U.S. : 

In France, relations with local communities, address 

(Dillon), 1014 
In Japan, joint statement, U.S.-Japan, 420 
Members dying in France, agreement with France re- 
garding burial, 210 
Military missions, U.S., abroad. See Military missions 
Reduction, statement (Dulles), 830 
Treatment under NATO status of forces agreement, 
statement (Murphy), 178 
Armistice agreement, Korea. See under Korea 
Arms supply to Middle East : 

Egypt, arms purchase from Czechoslovakia, address and 

statements : Allen, 684 ; Dulles, 604, 6S9 
Israel, request to buy arms from U.S., statement (Dul- 
les), 965 
U.S. policy, address, letter, and statement: Allen, 685; 

Dulles, 004 ; Eisenhower, 894 
U.S.-U.K. joint statement, 560 
Arsenal, agreement with Korea for establishment of facili- 
ties for, 164 
Artibonite Valley, agreement with Haiti for development, 

369 
Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia (see also individual 
countries) : 
Atomic energy center for research and training, U.S. 

proposal for, 749, 1010 
Communist aggression in, addresses: Dulles, 9; Robert- 
son, 295, 692 
Economic development : 

Colombo Plan. See Colombo Plan 
Progress and problems, address (Kalijarvi), 1059, 
1063 
Manila Pact, address (Dulles), 526 
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. See Southeast 

Asia Treaty Organization 
U.S. mutual security program in, reports: 

Jan. 1953-June 1955, report to President (Stassen), 
266, 269, 271 



Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia — Continued 
U.S. mutual security program in, reports — Continued 
Jan. 1-June 30, 1955, report to Congress (Eisen- 
hower), 429 
June 8, 1955, statement (Stassen), 31, 32 
U.S. policy in, addresses and statements : Dulles, 965 ; 
Robertson, 695 ; Young, 843 
Assistant Secretary-Controller, Department of State, dele- 
gation of functions and authorities to, 910 
Astronomical Union, International, U.S. delegation to 9th 

General Assembly, 325 
Aswan Dam, Egypt, financial support by U.S., U.K., and 

World Bank, discussions, 1050 
Atomic energy, cooperation regarding atomic information : 
Mutual defense agreements with Canada and U.K. for 
exchange of information: 
Letters (Eisenhower, Wilson), 59 
Entry into force, 290 
Texts, 60 
North Atlantic Treaty, agreement between parties for 
cooperation, 442, 478, 623, 813, 931, 1024, 1086 
Atomic energy, international control of atomic weapons. 

See Disarmament 
Atomic energy, nuclear explosions : 
Explosion in Soviet Union, 916 
Soviet proposed suspension of tests, 964 
Atomic energy, peaceful uses of : 

Addresses, statements, etc. : Baker, 316 ; Dulles, 527 ; 
Eisenhower, 787; Hays, 714; Holland, 598; Libby, 
381 ; Pastore, 660, 1030 ; Stassen, 536 ; Wilcox, 487, 
743, 900 
Agreements with — 

Belgium, 37, 5S, 478 ; Brazil, 478 ; Canada, 37, 58, 290 
Chile, 55w, 327; China, 55m, 210; Colombia, 210 
Denmark, 249 ; Greece, 55m, 290 ; Israel, 164 ; Italy 
290 ; Japan, 55n, 909, 998 ; Korea, 55m ; Lebanon, 210 
Netherlands, 55», 210; Pakistan, 55m, 328; Peru 
55m ; Philippines, 55m, 249 ; Portugal, 55m, 249 
Spain, 210 ; Sweden, 55m ; Switzerland, 210 ; Turkey 
55 ; U.K., 38, 58, 290, 862 ; Uruguay, 55m ; Venezuela, 
55m, 210 
Asia, economic and social progress through use of the 

atom, statement (Hollister), 747 
Colombo Plan center for research and training, U.S. 

proposal for, 749, 1010 
Commemorative stamp, remarks (Eisenhower) upon 

issuance 217 
International Atomic Energy Agency. See Atomic En- 
ergy Agency, International 
Medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doctors, 264 
Radiation effects on human health : 

Address and statement : Dulles, 528 ; Pastore, 1031 
U.N. proposed committee to coordinate and dissemin- 
ate information on, text of resolution and state- 
ments (Wadsworth), S51 
U.S. proposal for international collation of data on, 54 
U.S. request for item on agenda of General Assem- 
bly, 365 
Soviet proposals at Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, 

779 
Technical conferences. See Atomic energy, technical 
conferences 



1092 



Department of State Bulletin 



Atomic energy, peaceful uses of — Continued 
Training programs, U.S., 382, 3S3, 663 
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 385, 

388 
U.N. General Assembly agenda item, U.S. request for, 384 
Atomic energy, technical conferences : 

U.N. conference on peaceful uses of atomic energy 
(first) : 
Addresses : Libby, 3S1 ; Lodge, 738 ; Phillips, 256 
Message from President Eisenhower, 300 
Procedure of meetings, delegates commended for 

promptness, 720 
Results, address (Strauss), 555 
U.S. delegation, 64, 243 
U.N. conference on peaceful uses of atomic energy 
(second) : 
Proposals concerning, addresses and statements : 
Dulles, 527 : Eisenhower, 381 ; Pastore, 662, 797, 799, 
802, 803 ; Strauss, 381 
U.N draft resolutions, 665 (text), 801 (text), 802, 803 
Atomic Energy Agency, International, establishment : 
Address and statements: Pastore, 660, 662, 1030; 

Phillips, 256 
Draft statute : 

Statements in General Assembly (Pastore), 662, 796 
Text, 666 

12-power meeting to consider, 79S, 800 
U.N. draft resolution, 796, S01 (text) 
Relationship to U.N., 324, 488, 798, 799, 801, 804 
U.S. reply to Soviet note, 264 
Australia : 

ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534 
Bills of lading convention (1924), 441 
Civil aviation convention, international, protocol relat- 
ing to sessions of ICAO, 123 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and 

text of schedules, 4th protocol, 368 
Visas, nonimmigrant, agreement with U.S. concerning 
reciprocal changes, 590 
Austria : 

Communist domination, resistance to, address (E. 

Dulles), 423 
Consular districts, U.S., establishment of, 442 
Neutrality, Austrian, U.S. recognition of, U.S. and Aus- 
trian notes, 1011 
Property of U.N. and U.S. nationals. See under Claims 
Tariff concessions to U.S., request for renegotiation, 114 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 124 
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S. 

amending 1950 agreement, 249 
GATT, proces-verbal extending validity of 1953 dec- 
laration regulating commercial relations between 
contracting parties and Japan, 164 
Road traffic convention, 909 
State treaty. See Austrian state treaty 
U.S. Government property in Austria, agreement with 
U.S. regarding disposition, 677 
U.N., admission to, 1067, 106S, 1070, 1071rc 



Austria — Continued 

U.S. relations with since the war, address (Elbrick) 

upon celebration of independence, 788 
U.S. Secretary of State, visit, 733, 789 
Austrian state treaty : 
Address (Dulles), 524 

Current actions on, 37, 85, 86, 94, 209, 327, 702, 1086 
Property of U.S., U.N., and British nationals in Austria, 

agreements concerning, 760, 967 (texts), 1024 
U.S. ratification and proclamation by President, 94, 327 
Auto travel, international. See Travel 
Aviation : 

Aerial inspection proposals of President Eisenhower. 

See under Disarmament 
Air routes established by 1949 air transport agreement 

with Canada, review of, 533 
Attacks on aircraft : 
Bulgarian destruction of Israeli aircraft, 263, 354 
Communist attack on U.N. training plane in Korea, 

U.N. Command protest, 396 
Soviet attack on U.S. plane in Bering Sea, statements 
(Dulles) , 50, 52 ; U.S. note and Soviet memorandum, 
100 
Soviet destruction of U.S. B-29 off Hokkaido (1952), 
U.S. application to International Court of Justice 
and Soviet note, 65 
Ethiopia, U.S. loan for expansion of facilities, 617 
International Civil Aviation Organization. See Inter- 
national Civil Aviation Organization 
Soviet Union, Western proposal at Geneva for reciprocal 

civil aviation rights with, 776, 878 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Air Force mission (U.S.), agreements with — ■ 
Cuba, extending 1950 agreement, 38 
Paraguay, amending 1943 agreement, 406 
Air service agreement with U.K., amending 1946 

agreement, 406 
Air transport agreements with — 

China, amending annex of 1946 agreement, 590 
Germany, 145, 164 
Syria (1947), 86 
Air transportation, international convention for uni- 
fication of rules, 549 
Aircraft, imported, arrangement with Netherlands 

relating to certificates of airworthiness for, 909 
Aircraft assembly or manufacture in Japan, agree- 
ment with Japan, 210 
Army, Navy, and military aviation missions, agree- 
ment with Peru for performance of duties of mem- 
bers of, 909 
Civil aircraft, agreement with U.K. for use of facil- 
ities in the Bahamas long-range proving ground, 290 
Civil aviation convention, international, 123 
Damages to property of Japanese nationals, agree- 
ment with Japan for payment, 99S 
Jet engines, agreement with Italy for repair facil- 
ities, 249 
Rights in aircraft, convention on international recog- 
nition of, 998 

Baghdad Pact : 

Iranian adherence, 653 



Index, July to December 1955 



1093 



Baghdad Pact — Continued 
Pakistani adherence, 534 
U.S. continued support, statement (Gallman) before 

Baghdad Pact Council meeting, 926 
U.S. military and political liaison, U.S. observers, 895 
Bahama Islands long-range proving ground facilities, 

U.S.-U.K. agreement for use by civil aircraft, 290 
Baker, John C, 109, 312 
Balewa, Malam Abubakar Tafawa, 495 
Bank for Reconstruction and Development. See Interna- 
tional Bank 
Barley, U.S. import quotas, expiration of, 543 
Barnes, William, 549 
Bases, U.S. military, in Spain, 31 
Baffle Berres, Luis, 338 

Battle Act. See Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act 
Beam, Jacob D., 910 
Beaulac, Willard L., 335 
Belgium : 

Agricultural imports, restrictions on, 1019 

Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 37, 58, 

478 
Atomic information, agreement for cooperation between 

parties to NAT, 931 
Customs convention on temporary importation of pri- 
vate road vehicles, 289 
Customs facilities for touring, convention on, 2S9 
European Migration, Intergovernmental Committee for, 

constitution of, 210 
GATT, compensatory concessions from U.S., 226, 228, 231 
Korea, participation of Belgian forces in U.N. operations, 
agreement to pay U.S. for logistic support, 189, 210 
Mutual defense assistance agreement with U.S., 550 
Telecommunication convention, international, 516 
U.S. nationals, interment of, agreement extending 1947 
agreement, 368 
Bell, Laird, 673, 906, 948 
Benson, Ezra Taft, 276, 934 
Bering Sea, Soviet attack on U.S. aircraft in : 
Statements (Dulles), 50, 52 
U.S. note and Soviet memorandum, 100 
Berlin, Germany : 

Boundary of Greater Berlin, protocol with U.S.S.R. de- 
fining location of, 165 
Communist domination, resistance to, address (E. Dul- 
les), 424 
Conference hall, construction of, 302 
Freedom Bell, 5th anniversary of installation, message 

(Eisenhower), 734, 916 
Quadripartite status, U.S., French, and British position, 

1013 
Soviet obligations to West regarding access to, 1010 
U.S. Congressmen, detention in Soviet sector, U.S. pro- 
test against, letter (Dasher), and note and state- 
ment (Conant), 1012 
U.S. policy toward, 17, 425 
Bernbaum, Maurice M., 478 
Bhabha, Homi J., 720 

Bicycles, U.S. tariff increase, 399, 794, 795, 930, 976, 977 
Big Four conference. See Geneva Heads of Government 
Conference 



Bills of lading, international convention for unification of 

rules relating to (1924), 441 
Binational cultural centers overseas, U.S. assistance to, 

article (E. R. Murphy), 358 
Bipartisan foreign policy : 

Meeting of President with congressional leaders, 1049 
Statement (Dulles), 965 
Bishop, Max Waldo, 998 
Bissonnette, Rev. Georges, 102 
Blackboard Jungle, question of showing at Venice Film 

Festival, letter (Mcllvaine), 537 
Blaustein, Jacob, 628, 762, 811, 1074 
B'nai B'rith, 834 
Boland, Rep. Edward D., 1012» 
Bolivia : 

Army mission agreement with U.S. extending 1942 

agreement, 550 
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061 
Guaranties agreement with U.S. under Mutual Security 

Act, 769 
Road service, agreement with U.S. for establishment of, 
442 
Bonbright, James C. H., 721, 860 
Bond, Niles W., 369 

Books, U.S., need for increased distribution abroad, 616 
Boris, Archibishop, 102, 784, 888 
Bowie, Robert R., 442 
Brazil : 
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. for pur- 
chase, 898, 932 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 478 
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062 
Education, industrial, agreement with U.S. extending 

1950 agreement, 249 
GATT, 4th protocol of rectifications and modifications, 

368 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservations to, 74 
Industrial apprenticeship, cooperative program of, 
agreement with U.S. extending 1952 agreement, 368 
Joint Brazil-U.S. Military anil Defense Commissions, 

continuation agreement, 769 
Oil shale study, agreement with U.S. extending agree- 
ment for technical assistance, S61 
Uranium resources of Brazil, agreement with U.S. for 
cooperative program for reconnaissance, 516 
Brentano, Heinrich von, 560 

British Cameroons, progress toward self-rule, 159 
British Togoland, future relationship to Gold Coast, 159 
Broadcasting, Western proposals at Geneva Foreign Min- 
isters Meeting for exchange of radio broadcasts with 
Soviet Union, and Soviet rejection, 776, 877, 880 
Brokenburr, Robert L., 810 
Brown, Winthrop G., 516 
Brownell, Herbert, Jr., 97, 179, 180 
Brownell, Samuel M., 575 
Buchanan, Wiley T., Jr., 478, 516 
Bulganin, Nikolai A. : 
Asian tour, 1007, 1056 
Disarmament proposals, 644, 705, 70S 
Bulgaria : 

Assets in U.S., disposition of, 845 



1094 



Department of State Bulletin 



Bulgaria — Continued 

Customs tariffs, international union for publication of, 
protocol modifying 1890 convention, 769 

Israeli aircraft, destruction, U.S. protest and Bulgarian 
note of regret, 263, 354 

Petkov, Nikola, anniversary of death, 529 

United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071m 
Burma: 

GATT, signature to declaration and protocols, 931, 932 

Gift to U.S. for sacrifices during Burma campaign, 96 

Postal convention, universal, 769 

Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 50, 95 

U.N. role in peaceful settlement in, 741 
Butterworth, W. Walton, 643 
Butz, Earl L., 543 
Byrnes, James F., 46 

Calendar of international meetings, 35, 204, 403, 580, 763, 

932 
Cambodia : 

Communist threat of subversion, 694 
Military assistance agreement with U.S., 290 
Religious leader, visit to U.S., 896 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n 
World Meteorological Organization convention, 909 
Cameroons, British, progress toward self-rule, 159 
Canada : 
Air routes established by 1949 air transport agreement 

with U.S., review of, 533 
Columbia River power development, proposals for, 980 
Courts for armed forces in U.S., discontinuance, 361 
Distant early warning line installations, joint U.S.- 
Canadian inspection, 495 
Fraser River salmon fisheries, destructive effect of 
power projects on, report of International Pacific 
Salmon Fisheries Commission, 984, 985 
Fur seals, North Pacific, conference for conservation of, 

437 
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources, 

21 
Trade and Economic Affairs, Joint U.S.-Canadian Com- 
mittee, 2d meeting : 
Address (Stuart), 928 

Delegations, functions, and joint communique, 274, 576 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 37, 

58, 290 
Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 478 
Atomic information, exchange of for mutual defense, 
agreement with U.S., letters (Eisenhower, Wilson), 
text, and entry into force, 59, 290 
Communication facilities in the vicinity of Stephen- 
ville, New foundland, agreement with U.S. amend- 
ing 1952 agreement, 86 
Distant early warning system, agreement with U.S., 

22 
GATT, compensatory concessions from U.S., 226, 228, 

231 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, protocols amending, 164 



Canada — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 
Great Lakes fisheries convention with U.S., 678, 770 
Petroleum products pipeline, construction, agreement 

with U.S., 623 
St. Lawrence seaway, relocation of Roosevelt Bridge 

span, agreement with U.S., 932, 978 
Vessels, naval, agreement with U.S. for furnishing 
supplies and services to, 327 
U.S. relations with, addresses : Murphy, 411 ; Stuart, 927 
Captive peoples : 
Europe, Eastern and Central, question of restoration of 

sovereignty, 172, 219, 561, 562 
Sacrifices of, address (E. Dulles), 423 
Caribbean Commission, U.S. delegation to 21st meeting, 988 
Carpenter, Isaac W., Jr., 442 
Cartels, effects on international trade, address (Kali- 

jarvi), 539 
Cartography, 7th Pan American Consultation on, U.S. 

delegation, 288 
Castillo-Armas, Col. Carlos, 599, 790 
Censorship of press and radio, Soviet, 877 
Central Intelligence Agency, functions, address (A. 

Dulles), 602 
Ceylon, admission to U.N., 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071» 
Chaco Road, Paraguay, construction of, U.S. training 

program, 177 
Charter of the United Nations. See United Nations 

Charter 
Chief Joseph Dam award, 794, 795 
Child feeding programs, agreement with Italy, 225, 249 
Children, employment at sea, convention fixing minimum 

age, 589, 1024 
Children's Fund, U.N.: 
Appointment of U.S. alternate representative on Execu- 
tive Board, 316 
U.S. contribution to, 513 
Chile : 

Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061 
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation, 
meeting with U.S., Ecuador, and Peru, 3S4, 513, 1025 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n, 

327 
GATT, protocol of terms of accession of Japan, 164 
GATT, protocols amending, 368 

Technical assistance to medium and small industry, 

agreement with U.S. amending 1952 agreement, 164, 

1086 

Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on, 

36S 

China (see also China, Communist, and China, Republic 

of), Soviet investment enterprises in, 344 
China, Communist : 
Aggression in Asia, addresses (Dulles), 9, 526 
Civilians in U.S., release of. See under Geneva ambas- 
sadorial talks 
Economic position, address (Kalijarvi), 1059 
Formosa Straits, situation in, 492 
Military strength and political influence in Far East, 

article (Lindbeck), 751 
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 82 



Index, July to December 7955 



1095 



China, Communist — Continued 
Soviet support, 492 
Taiwan area, building of airfields in, statement 

(Dulles), 1009 
Trade with free world, statement (DeLany), 918 
U.N. representation, question of, 544, 737, 744, 1011 
U.S. civilians in, release of. See under Geneva ambas- 
sadorial talks 
U.S. policy of nonrecognition, address and statements: 

Dulles, 51, 220 ; Murphy, 491, 492 
U.S. prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war 
China, Republic of: 

Communism, efforts to combat, 755, 757 

Economic recovery, progress and problems, address 

( Kali jar vi), 1059 
Immunity question in National City Bank v. Republic of 

China, 750 
Mongolia, Outer, question of veto of admission to U.N., 

statement (Dulles), 1008 
Quemoy and Matsu Islands, Communist buildup of air- 
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009 
Soviet tanker Tuapse, jurisdiction over, 302 
Taiwan, Communist threat of aggression, 693 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Air transport agreement (1946), agreement with U.S. 

amending annex, 590 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55m, 

210 
Medical research, agreement with U.S. relating to 

establishment of U.S. Navy unit in Taipei, 862 
Naval craft, small, agreement with U.S. for loan of, 86 
U.S. loan agreement, 307 
U.N. representation, question of, 544 
U.S. support of, address (Dulles), 526 
Chou En-lai, 219, 220, 260, 261, 262 
CIA. See Central Intelligence Agency 
Cinematographic Art, International Exhibition of, U.S. 

delegation, 367 
Cisler, Walker L., 706 

Citizenship, U.S., possible loss by "dual citizens," 658 
Civil aviation. See Aviation 

Civil Aviation Organization, International. See Interna- 
tional Civil Aviation Organization 
Civilians, protection in time of war. See Geneva conven- 
tions 
Claims : 

Germany, Federal Republic of, agency established for 

external restitution, 355 
Japan, agreement with U.S. for payment of damages 

caused by U.S. aircraft, 998 
Japanese and German vested assets in U.S., return, 119, 

971 
Luxembourg, reciprocal war damage agreement with 

U.S., 150 
U.N. nationals, claims against — 

Austria, for losses under state treaty, 970 
Germany, for return of property subject to wartime 
discriminatory treatment, 426 
U.S. citizens and nationals, claims against — 

Austria, understanding regarding protection and res- 
toration of property, rights, and interests, 760, 967 
(text), 1024 



Claims — Continued 

U.S. citizens and nationals, claims against — Continued 
Cuba, payment of claims of U.S. companies, 27 
Germany, U.S. proposed legislation for payment of 

war claims against Germany, 119, 971 
Japan, U.S. proposed legislation for payment of war 

claims against Japan, 971 
Mexico, final payment to U.S. under 1941 convention, 
896 
Clover seed, alsike, proclamation modifying import quota, 

116 
Coal and Steel Community, European : 
Annual report, 1018 
U.S. mission established, 643 
Coexistence, definition, 975 
Coffee trade with Latin America, addresses : Holland, 656, 

962; Kalijarvi, 1062 
Colclough, Vice Adm. Oswald S., 706 
"Cold war," effect of Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting 

on, statement (Dulles), 870 
Collective security (see also Mutual defense, Mutual se- 
curity and National defense) : 
Associations for, statement (Dulles) at Geneva Foreign 

Ministers Meeting, 728 
Concept of, during past 60 years, address (Phleger), 647 
Europe. See European security and North Atlantic 

Treaty Organization 
Near and Middle East. See under Near and Middle East 
Philippines, address (Ferguson), 975 
U.S. and free world policy of, addresses and statement : 
Dulles, 6, 261, 262, 641, 1003 ; Murphy, 490, 491 
Colombia : 
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. for pur- 
chase, 85, 86 
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210 
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S., extending 

1950 agreement, 406 
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 998 
Medical education project, agreement with U.S., 770 
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement 
regarding duties of members of military missions, 
678 
Colombo Plan : 
Atomic energy center for research and training, U.S. 

proposal for, 749, 1010 
Meeting (7th) of Consultative Committee: 
Annual report, Department announcement and ex- 
tract, 992, 995 
Communique, 994 

Ministerial meeting, statement (Hollister), 747 
Objectives, 513 
U.S. delegation, 514, 566, 567 
Colonialism (see also Self-determination and Trust terri- 
tories), Communist colonialism in South and South- 
east Asia, 295 
Columbia River power development, Canadian proposals 
and U.S. position, statements by International Joint 
Commission and U.S. chairman, 980 
Commerce. See Trade 

Commerce, Department of, pamphlet on establishing a 
business in the Federal Republic of Germany, 886 



1096 



Department of State Bulletin 



Commercial relations, U.S. and other countries. See Eco- 
nomic policy and relations, U.S. ; Tariff policy, U.S. ; 
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on; and Trade 
Commercial samples and advertising material, interna- 
tional convention to facilitate importation, 406, 549, 
677, 769, 813, 861 
Commercial treaties. See Trade : Treaties and Trade 

agreements 
Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Ter- 
ritories : 
Statement on report (Bell), 673 

U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell), 906, 
907ra 
Commodity Credit Corporation, disposal of agricultural 

surpluses. See Agricultural surpluses 
Communications (see also Telecommunication conven- 
tion), facilities in vicinity of Stephenville, Newfound- 
land, agreement with Canada amending 1952 agree- 
ment, 86 
Communications, freedom of, statement (Eisenhower) and 

directive to Foreign Ministers, 175, 177 
Communism (see also China, Communist, and Soviet 
Union) : 
Efforts of free world and captive peoples to overcome, 

address (E. Dulles), 422 
Europe, propaganda efforts in, 181, 184 
Far East, aggression in, addresses and article: Lind- 

beck, 751 ; Robertson, 295, 690 
International communism, problem of, addresses : 

Dulles, 9, 525, 1003 ; Ferguson, 975 
"Peace" appeals, propaganda campaigns for, 79 
Subversion, free world defense against, address (A. 

Dulles), 600 
Underdeveloped countries, propaganda efforts in, 345, 

346 
U.S. personnel security program, address (McLeod), 56S 
Conant, James B. : 
Addresses : 

Germany, Federal Republic of, partnership with U.S. 

in NATO, 12 
Germany, reunification, 915 
Goals of the University in the Free World, 837 
Berlin, quadripartite status, U.S. position, text of note 

and statement, 1013 
Germany, anniversary of June 17 uprising in Soviet 

Zone, statement, 15 
U.S. Congressmen, detention in Soviet sector of Berlin, 
U.S. protest, text of note and statement, 1013 
Conferences and organizations, international (see also 
subject), calendar of meetings, 35, 204, 403, 5S0, 763, 
932 
Confident of Our Future, address (Dulles), 639 
Congress, U.S. : 

Addresses by Prime Minister of Burma, 95 
Foreign affairs and national defense, bipartisan discus- 
sion of problems with President, 1049 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, meeting of Members 

of Congress with Secretary Dulles, 686 
Legislation : 

Foreign policy, listed, 34, 152, 329, 357, 402, 434, 455, 

495, 814 
Foreign policy legislation, statement (Kalijarvi), S4S 



Congress, U.S. — Continued 
Legislation — Continued 

Security legislation, Federal personnel, address 
(McLeod), 56S 
Legislation, proposed : 

North Atlantic union, resolution proposing conven- 
tion, letter (Dulles), 224 
Organization for Trade Cooperation, U.S. member- 
ship, postponement of hearings, 1SS 
Sugar, statement of Department's views (Holland), 

120 

Tax treatment for business income earned abroad, 432 

Vested assets, return to Germany and Japan, 119, 971 

War claims of American nationals against Germany 

and Japan, payment of, 119, 971 

Presidential messages, reports, etc. See Eisenhower: 

Messages, reports, and letters to Congress 
U.N., support of, 483 

U.N., 10th anniversary, resolution on renewed efforts 
for peace, 3, 4 
Consular districts, U.S., establishment in Austria, 442 
Consular rights, amity, and economic relations, treaty 

with Iran, 367, 369 
Consular service, U.S. See Foreign Service 
('(insulate, U.S., at Hanoi, Viet-Nam, closing, 10S6 
Consultative Committee for Economic Development in 

South and Southeast Asia. See Colombo Plan 
Control posts (for military inspection). See Disarma- 
ment 
Cooper, Jere, 188 
Copyright : 

Inter-American convention on copyrights, 702 
Universal copyright convention and related protocols, 
163, 326, 327, 328, 441, 769 
Costa Rica : 

Inter-American Highway, Export-Import Bank credit 

to finance, 898 
Nicaraguan dispute, conciliation of, OAS Council reso- 
lution and committee report, 546 
Courts of foreign forces in U.S., proclamation discontinu- 
ing, 361 
Crime and Treatment of Offenders, U.N. Congress on 
Prevention of: 
Address (Rogers), 624 
U.S. delegation, 243 
Cronkhite, Bernice B., 575 
Cuba: 

Claims of U.S. companies, payment of, 27 

Sugar legislation, U.S., effects of proposed revision of 

Sugar Act on Cuban economy, 122 
Tariff concessions, preferential, termination by U.S., 

226, 228, 230 
Tariff negotiations, possible adjustment in preferential 

rates, 509, 510 
Tariff quota on rice, GATT, agreement with U.S., 27 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Air Force mission, agreement with U.S. extending 

1950 agreement, 38 
Army mission agreement with U.S., extension, 38 
Copyrights, inter-American convention on, 702 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 



Index, July to December 1955 



1097 



Cuba— Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Military assistance agreement with U.S., performance 
of duties by Armed Forces missions, 516, 590 
Cultural property : 

Convention for protection of cultural property in event 

of armed conflict, S61 
Restitution of, agency established in West Germany, 355 
Cultural relations : 

Cultural centers overseas, U.S. assistance to, article 

(E. R. Murphy), 35S 
Inter-American convention for promotion of cultural re- 
lations, 441 
Swedish contributions to American culture, address 
(Warren), 222 
Cumish, Wilfred C, 354 
Cunha, Paulo, 653, 966 

Currency, guaranties against risks respecting inconverti- 
bility and expropriation of, agreement with Ireland, 
770 
Cusack, Elizabeth B., 316 
Customs : 

Customs tariffs, creation of international union for pub- 
lication of, protocol modifying 1890 convention, 769 
Road vehicles, convention on temporary importation of, 

289, 931 
Touring, convention concerning facilities for, 289, 516, 

931 
U.S. consular certification of invoices, 399, 698 
Cyprus question : 
Address (Allen), 684 

Letter of President Eisenhower to King Paul, 560 
Messages to Prime Ministers of Greece and Turkey 

(Dulles), 496 
Proposed inscription on General Assembly agenda : 
U.S. position, statement (Lodge), 545 
Decision to omit from agenda, 546re 
Czechoslovakia : 
Arms shipments to Egypt, 604, 684, 689 
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 81 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Austrian state treaty, 702 

GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Load line convention, international, 442 

Darden, Colgate Whitehead, Jr., 858 
Dasher, Maj. Gen. Charles L., 1012 
Debts, German external, agreement on, 164 
Defense commissions, Joint Brazil-U.S. Military and De- 
fense Commissions, continuation agreement, 769 
Defense Department, foreign-aid functions, Executive 

order regarding allocation of funds, 273 
DeLany, Vice Adm. Walter S., 918 
Denmark : 

Import restrictions on U.S. goods, relaxation, 762 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 249 
Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 1086 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation, 769 



Denmark — Continued 

Treaties, agreements, etc.— Continued 

Customs convention on temporary importation of pri- 
vate road vehicles, 931 
Customs facilities for touring, convention on, 931 
Employment at sea, minimum age, convention on, 589 
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes 

and text of schedules, 4th protocol, 702 
Visual and auditory materials, agreement for inter- 
national circulation, 406 
DEW. See Distant early warning system 
Dharmawara, Chief Venerable Vira, 896 
Diem, Ngo Dinh, 760 
Dietrich, Sepp, 887 
Dillon, Douglas, 976, 1014 
Dion, Father Louis, 103, 784 
Diplomacy, U.S. (see also Foreign Service), address 

(Beaulac), 335 
Diplomatic immunity, statement (Murphy), 183 
Diplomatic representatives, U.S., abroad. See under 

Foreign Service 
Diplomatic representatives in the U.S., presentation of 
credentials : Colombia, Iceland, Laos, Lebanon, Lux- 
embourg, Pakistan, Philippines, 916; Saudi Arabia, 
361 ; Turkey, 20 
Disarmament (see also Armaments) : 
Aerial inspection and exchange of military blueprints 
(see also under Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting 
and Geneva Heads of Government Conference) : 
Addresses and statements : Dulles, 339, 528, 829, 830 ; 
Lodge, 438, 528, 738, 1032; Murphy, 493; Phillips, 
258; Stassen, 703; Wadsworth, 530 
Control posts and inspection, Soviet proposals : 
Letter (Bulganin) and reply (Eisenhower), 643 
Statement (Stassen), 705 
Stalemate in U.N. Disarmament Subcommittee, ad- 
dress (Wilcox), 742 
U.N. committee action on, 1049n. 
U.S. memorandum, 708 
Armed forces, proposed reduction of, letter (Bulganin), 

646 
Atomic weapons, prohibition of: 

Soviet proposals, letter (Bulganin), 644 
Statements on Soviet proposals at Geneva (Dulles), 
874, 875 
Basic principles, address (Stassen), 41S 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and pro- 
posals concerning. See Geneva Foreign Ministers 
Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions 
and proposals concerning. See Geneva Heads of 
Government Conference 
Soviet draft declaration on, 882 
Task forces for study of, 706 

Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) draft statement on, 882 
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 386, 

388 
U.N. progress, addresses : Lodge, 73S ; Wilcox, 742, 904 
U.S. position, address and statement : Lodge, 765 ; Wads- 
worth, 530 
Disarmament Commission, U.N., U.S. Deputy Represent- 
ative, confirmation, 264 



1098 



Department of State Bulletin 



Displaced persons. See Refugees and displaced persons 
Disputes, pacific settlement of : 

"Renunciation of force" principle, U.S. policy, addresses 
and statements : Dulles, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690 ; Rob- 
ertson, 693 
Role of United Nations, address (Phillips), 258 
Distant early warning system (DEW) : 
Agreement with Canada, 22 
U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495 
Dominican Republic : 
Agriculture, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro- 
gram, 909 
Education program agreement with U.S., extension, 38 
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702 
Military assistance agreement, disposition of U.S. equip- 
ment, agreement with U.S., 406 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia- 
tion, 274 
Doolittle, James H., 706 

Double taxation, conventions for avoidance of, with — 
Italy : 
Estates and inheritances, 290, 442 
Income, 290, 442 
Netherlands, income, protocol and agreement supple- 
menting and extending 194S convention to Antilles, 
37, 38, 290, 442, 907, 909 
Drugs, narcotic (see also Drugs, potent) : 

Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use of 

(1953), 86, 289, 442 
Protocol amending certain international agreements by 
transferring certain duties and functions from 
League of Nations to U.N. and WHO, 623 
Protocol bringing under international control drugs out- 
side scope of 1931 convention, as amended by 1946 
protocol, 623 
Drugs, potent {see also Drugs, narcotic), protocol for 
termination of agreements for unification of 
formulas, 623 
Dried figs, imports of, 462 

"Dual citizens," possible loss of U.S. citizenship, 658 
Dulles, Allen W., 600 
Dulles, Eleanor, 422 
Dulles, John Foster : 
Addresses, statements, etc. : 

Algerian question in General Assembly, 605 

Arab-Israeli dispute, 421, 1009, 1010 

Argentine-U.S. relations, 605 

Atomic energy, peaceful uses, 527 

Austrian state treaty, 524 

Berlin, Soviet obligation to West regarding access to, 

1010 
Bipartisan unity in foreign policy, 965 
Burmese Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 50 
China, Communist: 

Buildup of airfields in Taiwan area, 1009 
Nonrecognition, 220 

United Nations, question of representation, 1011 
U.S. fliers, release of, 262 
Collective security, 53, 261, 262, 524, 525, 641, 1003 
Communism, international, 525, 1003 
Disarmament, 339, 528, 640, 642 



Dulles, John Foster — Continued 

Addresses, statements, etc. — Continued 
Disputes, forceful settlement of, U.S. opposition, 221, 

260 
East-West tension, Soviet disinterest in relaxation of, 



Economic productivity, U.S., 640 

Eden, Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 1009 

European unity, 964, 1005 

French-Tunisian conventions, 301 

Geneva ambassadorial talks with Communist China, 

220, 260, 341, 527, 606, 689, 690, 1008 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva 

Foreign Ministers Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See 

Geneva Heads of Government Conference 
German inland waterways control, British concession 

to East Germany, 1011 
German reunification, 51, 54, 524, 525, 606, 964, 965, 

1005 
Goa, dispute between India and Portugal, 263, 1007, 

1008 
Japan, economic and defense problems, joint state- 
ment with Foreign Minister, 419 
Korea, unification, proposed conference, 341 
Korean-Japanese tension over so-called Rhee line, 

1009 
Korean Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, 298, 

340 
Luce, Mrs. Clare Boothe, reported tapping of tele- 
phone of, 1010 
Mutual security and assistance programs, U.S., 641 
National defense, 640 
Near and Middle East : 

Arms supply policy in, 560, 604, 689 

Johnson mission, 340 

Policy statement, 378 

Problems in, 525 

U.S. economic programs, 965 
North Atlantic Council, ministerial meeting (Dec. 

1955), 1048 
Nuclear bomb tests, Soviet proposed suspension, 964 
Nuclear training center in Asia, location, 1010 
Organization of American States, 525 
Patriotism, 639 
Peace, 642 
President Eisenhower's illness, conduct of foreign 

policy during, 566, 607 
Renunciation of force, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690 
Rumania, Soviet troops in, 339 
Satellite question, 525 

Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit, 94 
SEATO, 526 

Southeast Asia, U.S. economic programs, 965 
Soviet armed forces, proposed reduction of, 338 
Soviet attack on U.S. plane, 50, 52 
Soviet "new look" policy, 639 
Soviet-U.S. exchange of persons, 689 
"Spirit of Geneva," 418, 524, 525, 529, 1007 
Taiwan, defense of, 526 
Underdeveloped countries, U.S. policy, 1005 



^ 



Index, July to December 7955 



1099 



Dulles, John Foster — Continued 
Addresses, statements, etc. — Continued 

United Nations : 
Entering the Second Decade, 523 
Membership question, 607, 100S, 1001 
Moral Foundation of, 10 
Tenth anniversary, 6, 50 
Uniting for peace resolution, 649 

U.S. fliers, release by Communist China, 262 

Viet-Nam, elections, 50 
Administrative actions : 

Immigration and nationality laws, change in delega- 
tion of authority, 478 

International Cooperation Administration, establish- 
ment and functions, 124, 767 
Correspondence, messages, etc. : 

Cyprus question, concern over Greek-Turkish differ- 
ences, 496 

Geneva conventions for protection of war victims, 71 

German vested assets in U.S., return of, 973» 

Inter-American Commission of Women, 586 

Japanese cotton textiles, question of import restric- 
tions, 1064 

North Atlantic union, 224 

St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water re- 
sources, 21 

United Nations, review of 9th year, letter to President 
transmitting report, 388 

War claims by American nationals and return of 
vested assets to Germany and Japan, 119 
Discussions and meetings (see also subject) : 

Germany, Minister of Foreign Affairs, 560 

Portugal, Minister of Foreign Affairs, joint commu- 
nique, 966 
Visit to Austria, 733, 789 
Visit to Yugoslavia, 733, 833 

Earthquake, Greece, U.S. aid, 100 

East-West contacts (see also under Geneva Foreign Min- 
isters Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Con- 
ference) : 
East- West trade. See under Trade 
Soviet disinterest in relaxation of tensions, 1010 
Economic activities of Soviet-bloc countries in free world, 

Battle Act report, 342 
Economic Aid, Joint Council for, agreement with Haiti 

establishing, 1086 
Economic and Social Council, Inter-American, U.S. repre- 
sentative, 166 
Economic and Social Council, U.N. : 

Documents, lists of, 209, 248, 366, 515, 583, 714 
Self-determination, resolution to establish commission 

to study, 80S» 
Trade, international, efforts to curb restrictive practices, 

541, 542 
U.S. delegation to 20th session, 109 
U.S. representative, confirmation, 109 
Yearbook on Human Rights, 2S0 
Economic and technical aid to foreign countries {see also 
Agricultural surpluses, Colombo Plan, Export-Import 
Bank, International Bank, International Cooperation 



Administration, Mutual security and other assistance 
programs ; Underdeveloped countries and United 
Nations: Technical assistance program) : 
Address (Dulles), 641 

Aid to : Africa, 32 ; Asia, 31 ; Bolivia, 442 ; Brazil, 368 ; 
Chile, 164, 1086 ; China, Republic of, 307 ; El Salva- 
dor, 406 ; Europe, 31, 835 ; Guatemala, 790 ; Haiti, 
369, 909; India, 31; Korea, 190; Laos, 536; Latin 
America, 33, 598 ; Liberia, 770 ; Libya, 210, 328, 427 ; 
Near East, 32 ; Paraguay, 177 ; Yugoslavia, 124 
Education, cooperative program agreements. See under 

Education 
Health and sanitation, cooperative program agreements. 

See Health and sanitation 
International Development Advisory Board, members, 
493 
Economic Commission for Europe, U.N. : 
Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th 

session, 907, 
Timber Committee, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440 
Economic Commission for Latin America, U.N., U.S. dele- 
gation to 6th session, 405 
Economic Defense Advisory Committee, structure, 919, 920 
Economic Development, Inter-American Bank for, U.S. 

position on establishment, 140 
Economic development in South and Southeast Asia, Con- 
sultative Committee. See Colombo Plan 
Economic development of Latin America, U.S. contribu- 
tions to, address (Holland), 595 
Economic missions, exchange of between Soviet Union 

and free-world countries, 347 
Economic policy and relations, U.S. (see also individual 
countries) : 
Aid to foreign countries. See Agricultural surpluses, 
Economic and technical aid, Export-Import Bank, 
and Mutual security and other assistance programs 
Domestic economy : 

Address and statement : Baker, 314 ; Kalijarvi, 1062, 

1064 
FOA report, excerpts, 270, 271 
East-West trade. See under Trade 
Far East, U.S. economic policy, importance in com- 
batting communism, 758 
Foreign economic policy : 

Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and in- 
vestment, address (Kalijarvi), 538 
U.S. objectives, statement (Kalijarvi), S46 
International Development Advisory Board, members, 

493 
Organization for Trade Cooperation. See Organization 

for Trade Cooperation 
Tariff policy. See Tariff policy, U.S. 
Economic relations, amity, and consular rights, treaty 

with Iran, 367, 369 
Economic situation, world, address and statement : Baker, 

312, Kalijarvi, 1057 
ECOSOC. See Economic and Social Council, U.N. 
Ecuador : 

Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation, 
meeting with U.S., Chile, and Peru, 3S4, 513, 1025 



1100 



Department of Si'ofe Bulletin 



Ecuador — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 676, 

678 
Cultural relations, inter-American convention for pro- 
motion of, 441 
Duty-free entry and defrayment of inland transporta- 
tion charges on relief supplies, agreement with U.S., 
516 
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S., 38 
Military missions, agreement for performance of 
duties specified in mutual defense assistance agree- 
ment with U.S., 998 
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and 

use of, 442 
Reciprocal trade agreement with U.S., termination, 86, 

140, 511, 516 
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending, 442 
Vessels, naval, agreement with U.S. for furnishing 
supplies and services to, 249 
Eden Plan for German reunification, references to, 729, 

730, 781, 784, 819, 822 
Eden, Sir Anthony, 705, 1009 

Edinburgh Film Festival, 9th International, U.S. delega- 
tion, 367 
Education (see also Educational exchange program) : 
Books, U.S., need for increased distribution abroad, 616 
Change and improvement necessitated by world con- 
ditions, address (Murphy), 1055 
Cooperative program agreements, with — 

Brazil, industrial education, extending 1950 agree- 
ment, 249 
Colombia, medical education, 770 
Dominican Republic, extending 1951 agreement, 38 
Libya, 1086 

Panama, extending 1950 agreement, 932 
Peru, extending 1950 agreement, 38 
NATO fellowship and scholarship program, 735 
Public school administration by Philippine Department 
of Education within U.S. Naval Reservation at 
Subic Bay, agreement with Philippines, S62 
Universities in the free and unfree world, comparison 
of goals, address (Conant), 837 
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, U.N. : 
Constitution, 368 

U.S. National Commission, 5th conference, 134 
Educational Commission, U.S., operational agreement with 

U.K., 38 
Educational exchange program, international (see also 
Education) : 
Address (Simmons), 92 
Agreements, with — 

Austria, amending 1950 agreement, 249 
France, financing agreement amending 1948 agree- 
ment, 141, 210 
Greece, amending 194S agreement, 86 
Italy, financing agreement amending 194S agreement, 

210 
Norway, renewing and amending 1949 agreement, 37, 

S6 
Thailand, financing agreement amending 1950 agree- 
ment, 164 



Educational exchange program, international — Continued 
Atomic medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doc- 
tors, 264 
Cambodian religious leader, visit to U.S., 896 
Report on activities under Fulbright Act (Jan. 1-Dec. 

31, 1954), 232 
Study of relationship between State Department and 
ICA programs, 966 
Egypt: 

Arms shipments from Czechoslovakia, 604, 684, 6S9 
Aswan Dam, U.S., U.K., and World Bank financial sup- 
port, discussions on, 1050 
Dispute with Israel. See under Arab-Israeli dispute 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S., 10S6 
Civil aviation convention, international, protocols re- 
lating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO, 123 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation of, 677 
Cultural property, convention for protection of in 
event of armed conflict, 861 
Eisenhower, Dwight D. : 
Addresses, statements, etc. : 

Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act 

of 1954, title I, amendment, 362 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreements with Belgium, 

Canada, and the U.K., 58 
Atomic energy, hope for second conference on peace- 
ful uses, 381 
Atoms-for-peace postage stamp, U.S., on occasion of 

issuance, 217 
Atoms-for-peace proposal, 172 
Burma, joint statement with Prime Minister, 96 
Disarmament, proposals for inspection system (see 

also under Disarmament), 172, 173, 216, 439 
East-West contacts, 174, 217 
European security, 216 

Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, 217, 728, 871 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See 

Geneva Heads of Government Conference 
German reunification, 216 
Inter-American Commission of Women, 586 
Mutual Security Appropriation Act, 1956, approval, 

362 
Near East, reaffirmation of U.S. policy in, 845 
Peace, 131, 215, 375 

Refugee Relief Act, recommended amendments to, 564 
"Spirit of Geneva," 376, 377 
Trade Agreements Extension Act, 25 
United Nations, 10th anniversary, 3 
U.S. fliers, release by Communist China, 262 
Congressional leaders, meeting with, discussions on 

foreign affairs and national defense, 1049 
Correspondence and messages : 
Arab-Israeli dispute, need for peaceful settlement, let- 
ter to Rabbi Silver, 894 
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, progress and future, 

787 
Atomic Energy, U.N. Conference on Peaceful Uses, 300 
Berlin, on 5th anniversary of installation of Freedom 
Bell, 734, 916 



Index, July to December 1955 



1101 



Eisenhower, Dvvight D. — Continued 
Correspondence and messages — Continued 
Bicycles, imported, increased duties on, 401 
Greece, Cyprus question, letter to King Paul, 560 
Disarmament, 643 

Edible tree nuts, letter to Tariff Commission cancel- 
ing hearing, 276 
Geneva conventions for protection of war victims, 

ratification, 454 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, exchange of 
letters with Konrad Adenauer on results and future 
hopes, 259 
Guatemalan President, welcome on arrival in U.S., 790 
Mexico, disaster in Tampico, U.S. aid, 791 
Philippine-American Day, 975 
Rye imports, request for investigation of effects on 

domestic price-support program, 28 
Tariff concessions, GATT, withheld by U.S., 397 
Tariff concessions to Canada and Benelux countries, 

231 
Tariff concessions to Italy, effective date for, 617 
Executive orders. See Executive orders 
Illness, conduct of foreign policy during, statements 

(Dulles), 566, 607 
Messages, reports, and letters to Congress : 

Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act, 

report (Jan.-June 1955), 197 
Atomic information, exchange of for mutual defense, 

agreements with Canada and U.K., 59, 62 
Glaser, Kurt, denial of permanent residence status in 

U.S., 83 
Lend-lease operations, transmittal of report to Con- 
gress, 760 
Mutual security program, report (Jan. 1-June 30, 

1955), excerpt, 428 
Organization for Trade Cooperation, U.S. member- 
ship, 113, 188 
United Nations, annual report (1954), 385 
Proclamations. See Proclamations by the President 
Elbrick, C. Burke, 788 

Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th ses- 
sion, 907 
El Salvador: 

Fisheries agreements, extending 1951 agreement with 

U.S., 770 
Health and sanitation program, agreement with U.S. 

extending 1950 agreement, 327 
Technical labor services, agreement with U.S. for co- 
operative program, 406 
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 678 
Employment at sea, convention fixing minimum age for 

children, 1024 
Enemy assets in U.S., disposition, 971 
Enemy property in U.S., disposition of, designation of 

attorney general as administrator, 845 
"Escape clause" provisions in U.S. tariff laws, 930 
Estate tax convention between U.S. and Italy for the 

avoidance of double taxation, 290, 442 
Ethiopia : 
Aviation facilities, U.S. loan for expansion, 617 
UNESCO constitution, 368 



Europe (see also individual countries) : 

Collective security. See European security and North 

Atlantic Treaty Organization 
Eastern and Central Europe, captive peoples, question 
of restoration of sovereignty, 172, 219, 561, 562, 833» 
Eastern Europe, Soviet investment policies, 344 
Refugees. See Intergovernmental Committee for Euro- 
pean Migration and Refugees and displaced persons 
U.S. economic aid, 835 
U.S. mutual security program : 

Report (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 267, 269, 272 
Report (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955), 428 
Unity, addresses and statement : Dulles, 964. 1005 : Mur- 
phy, 46 
Western Europe, progress in economic recovery, address 
(Kalijarvi), 1057, 1063 
European Coal and Steel Community : 
Annual report, 1018 
U.S. mission established, 643 
European Migration, Intergovernmental Committee for. 
See Intergovernmental Committee for European Mi- 
gration 
European security (see also North Atlantic Treaty Or- 
ganization) : 
Address and statement (Dulles), 53, 524, 525 
Defense of Europe, address (Gruenther), 609 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and pro- 
posals. See under Geneva Foreign Ministers Meet- 
ing 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions 
and proposals. See under Geneva Heads of Govern- 
ment Conference 
Progress toward, address (Murphy), 834 
Western European Union : 

Armaments control system, 417 
German membership, 44 
Examinations, Foreign Service, announced, 575 
Exchange of persons : 
Educational exchange program, international. See Edu- 
cational exchange program 
German University Exchange Service, 837 
Study of relationship between State Department and 

ICA programs, 966 
Visitors to U.S., question of permanent residence, mes- 
sage to Senate (Eisenhower), 83 
With France, address (Dillon), 1014 
With Soviet Union (see also Geneva Foreign Ministers 
Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Con- 
ference: East-West contacts), 151, 689 
Executive orders : 

Agriculture Department personnel abroad, regulations 

affecting, 306 
Bulgarian, Hungarian, and Rumanian property, dispo- 
sition of, designation of attorney general as admin- 
istrator, 845 
Federal employees serving abroad, post differentials and 

cost-of-living allowances, 549 
Mutual Security Acts (1955, 1956), implementation of, 

273 
Personnel security program, address (McLeod), 569 
Strategic materials, release of stockpile in event of en- 
emy attack, 701 



1102 



Department of State Bulletin 



Executive orders — Continued 

Tariff of Foreign Service fees, amendment, 699 
Export-Import Bank : 

Lending activities, report (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955), 619 
Loans to: Costa Rica, 898; Ethiopia, 617; Japan, 263; 
Latin America, 597, 960, 961, 963 
Exports, U.S. (see also Trade), to Soviet bloc, U.S. con- 
trols on peaceful goods relaxed, 784 
Expropriation and currency inconvertibility, guaranties 
against risks respecting, agreement with Ireland, 770 
External debts, German, agreement on, 164, 1024 

Facilities assistance programs, agreements with — 
Netherlands, 210 
Spain, extending, 210 
Turkey, 290 

United Kingdom, extending, 210 
Fairless, Benjamin, 706 

FAO. See Food and Agriculture Organization 
Far East (see also individual countries) : 

Communist intentions in, address (Robertson), 690 
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi), 

105S 
Foreign Relations, volumes on, published, 165, 517 
Heads of Government Conference and future confer- 
ences, possible discussions at, statement (Dulles), 
50 
State Department officials, visit, 566 
U.S. policy and Communist China, article (Lindbeck), 
751 
Ferguson, Homer, 974 
Fields, Murray, 354 

Filberts, shelled, proclamation on modification of restric- 
tions on imports, 275 
Film Festival, Edinburgh, 9th International, U.S. delega- 
tion, 367 
Finance Corporation, International, 598, 627, 858 
Fingerprinting provision for nonofficial visitors to U.S., 

104 
Finland : 

GATT, protocol of rectifications to French text, 932 
German external debts, agreement on, 164 
■Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia- 
tion, 115 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071» 
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 678 
Fisheries : 

Agreements extending 1951 agreement with El Salvador, 

770 
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, meeting on 
conservation (U.S., Chile, Ecuador, Peru), 384, 513, 
1025 
Great Lakes fisheries convention with Canada, 678, 770 
Tuna industry, domestic, study of, 119 
Fisheries Commission, International North Pacific, meet- 
ing, 357 
Fisheries Commission, International Pacific Salmon, re- 
port on destructive effect of power projects on Fraser 
River salmon, 984, 9S5 
Fisk, James B., 706 

FOA. See Foreign Operations Administration 
Folsom, Robert S., 369, 5S9 



Food and Agriculture Organization, U.N. : 
Role in solving world agricultural problems, statement 

(Benson), 934 
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712, 713 
U.S. delegation to 8th session of conference of, 812 
Force, renunciation of. See "Renunciation of force" 
Forced labor in Communist countries, report to Congress 

(Eisenhower) on U.N. action (1954), 387, 392 
Foreign aid. See Agricultural surpluses; Economic and 
technical aid; Economic policy and relations, U.S.; 
Mutual security and assistance programs ; Refugees 
and displaced persons ; Underdeveloped countries ; 
United Nations : Technical assistance program ; and 
individual countries 
Foreign economic policy, U.S. See Economic policy and 

relations, U.S. 
Foreign Language Institute, Korea, 506 
Foreign Ministers, U.S., U.K., France, consultations in 
New York : 
Geneva meeting, arrangements for, 415, 559, 606 
Germany, statement of views on Soviet obligations in, 
559 
Foreign Ministers Meeting, Geneva. See Geneva Foreign 

Ministers Meeting 
Foreign Operations Administration (see also Interna- 
tional Cooperation Administration) : 
Final report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 265 
Functions transferred to ICA, 124 
Foreign policy, U.S. : 
Bipartisanship, statement (Dulles), 965 
Conduct of foreign policy during President Eisenhower's 

illness, statements (Dulles), 566, 607 
Discussion on, by President and congressional leaders, 

statement (Hagerty), 1049 
How We Work With Other Nations, address (Simmons), 

91 
Legislation. See under Congress 
Review of, address (Murphy), 490 
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1939, Vol. IV, pub- 
lished, 165 
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1940, Vol. IV, The 

Far East, published, 517 
Foreign Scholarships, Board of, appointments, 575 
Foreign Service (see also State Department) : 

Agriculture Department personnel abroad, Executive 

order concerning, 306 
Allowances for cost-of-living and post differentials, regu- 
lations, 549 
Ambassadors and minister, appointments and confirma- 
tions, 249, 369, 516, 678, 722, 998 
Consular districts in Austria, establishment, 442 
Consular service, history and reorganization, article 

(Marx), 447 
Consulate at Hanoi, Viet-Nam, closing, 1086 
Designation of U.S. representative on Inter-American 

Economic and Social Council, 166 
Development, address (Heath), 1051 
Diplomatic immunity, statement (Murphy), 183 
Economic officers, meeting, 454 
Examinations announced, 575 
Functions, addresses on : Beaulac, 335 ; Simmons, 92 



Index, July to December 7955 



1103 



Foreign Service — Continued 

Functions and authorities of State Department officers 

concerning Foreign Service, public notice, 909 
Immigration and nationality laws, change in delegation 

of authority, 478 
Legation in Hungary, surveillance of staff members, 

U.S. protest, 462 
Legations raised to embassy status : Laos, 299 ; Luxem- 
bourg, 478 
Selection Boards, meeting and membership, 125 
Women in the Foreign Service, address (Heath), 1051 
Wriston Committee program, report on progress of in- 
tegration and recruitment, 1053 
Foreign trade. See Trade 
Formosa Straits, situation in, 492 
France : 

Berlin, quadripartite status, position, 1013n, 1014 
Disarmament, tripartite (with U.S. and U.K.) draft 

statement on, 882 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva For- 
eign Ministers Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva 

Heads of Government Conference 
Import taxes, discussions at 10th session of GATT, 1018 
Morocco, French, gee Morocco, French 
Quadripartite talks with U.S., U.K., and Yugoslavia, 

joint communique, 49 
Soviet obligations in Germany, U.S., U.K., and French 
joint statement and note to Moscow following 
Soviet-East German agreements of Sept. 20, 559, 616 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia- 
tion, 114 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 931 
Austrian state treaty, 209 
Copyright convention, universal, 769 
Educational exchange programs, financing, agree- 
ment with U. S. amending 1948 agreement, 141, 210 
Equipment under mutual defense assistance program, 

disposition, 998 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Merchant ship masters and officers, minimum profes- 
sional capacity requirements, 589 
Safety of life at sea convention, extension to posses- 
sions, 249 
Seafarers, medical examination of, 5S9 
Seamen, able, certification of, 5S9 
Seamen, holidays with pay, 589 
Seamen, minimum age for employment at sea, 589 
Seamen, shipowners' liability for, 589 
Surplus agricultural commodities, agreement with 

U.S., 406, 99S 
U.S. armed forces, members dying in France, agree- 
ment with U.S. regarding burial, 210 
Tunisia, cooperation with, statement (Dulles), 301 
U.S. NATO military forces, relations with local com- 
munities, address (Dillon), 1014 
Four Power conference. See Geneva Heads of Govern- 
ment Conference 



Fraser River salmon fisheries, destructive effect of power 
projects on, report of International Pacific Salmon 
Fisheries Commission, 984, 985 

Free world, combined strength, chart, 33 

Free World Defense Against Communist Subversion, ad- 
dress (A. Dulles), 600 

Freedom, Responsibility, and Law, address (Lodge), 696 

Freedom Bell, 5th anniversary of installation, message 
(Eisenhower), 734 

Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with Ger- 
many, 249 

Fulbright Act (see also Educational exchange program), 
report to Congress on activities during 1954, 232 

Fur seals, North Pacific, conference for conservation of, 
437, 952 

Gallman, Waldemar, 895, 926 

GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on 
Gaza border incidents. See Arab-Israeli dispute 
General agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT). See 

Tariffs and trade, general agreement on 
General Assembly, U.N. (see also United Nations) : 
Algerian question. See Algerian question 
Atomic Energy Agency, International. See Atomic 

Energy Agency, International 
Chinese representation in U.N., postponement of con- 
sideration at 10th session, 544 
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question 
Documents, lists of, 20S, 441, 515, 583, 676, 714 
Korea, Republic of, and North Korea, question of par- 
ticipation in Committee I discussions, 1074 
Non-Self -Governing Territories, Committee on Informa- 
tion from : 
Statement on report (Bell), 673 

U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell), 906, 
907» 
Resolutions : 

Administrative Tribunal, review by International 

Court of Justice of judgments, text, 946 
Admission of new members, text, 1069 
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, 1030 
Atomic energy, 2d international conference on peace- 
ful uses, draft, 665, SOI 
Atomic Energy Agency, International, draft, 801 
Atomic radiation, effects of, 1031 
Charter review conference, text, 949 
Human rights, advisory services in the field of, text, 

1039 
ICAO, West German admission to membership, 811, 

811«. 
Korean question, 1081, 1085 (text) 
Moroccan question, decision to postpone considera- 
tion of, text, 1041 
Non-Self-Governing Territories, Committee on Infor- 
mation from, continuation, 907n 
Refugee relief program, 633 (text), 634«, 762, 811, 

812m 
Technical assistance program, U.N., text, SOS 
Self-determination, U.S. proposals for study of, address 

(Murphy), 891, 893 
Tenth session : 

Addresses : Dulles, 523 ; Wilcox, 483 



no4 



Department of State Bulletin 



General Assembly, U.N. — Continued 
Tenth session — Continued 

Agenda, provisional, 363, 365, 384, 437, 583 
U.S. delegation, 221, 366, 488 
Geneva ambassadorial talks, U.S.-Coninimiist Cbina : 
Announcement of resumption of talks and statement 

(Dulles), 219, 220 
Cease-fire in Formosa area, statements (Dulles), 220, 

260, 261 
Civilians, U.S. and Chinese, negotiations for release : 
Addresses and statements : Dulles, 220, 260, 527 ; John- 
son, 456; Murphy, 492; Robertson, 692 
Agreed announcement on release : 
Text, 456 

Implementation, progress of, 489 
U.S. compliance and Communist violation, 1049 
U.S. citizens imprisoned in Communist China, list, 
457 
Progress of negotiations, statements (Dulles), 260, 341, 

606, 689, 1008, 1008w 
Renunciation of force, statements concerning (Dulles). 
221, 260, 261, 690 
Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners of war, 
wounded and sick, and civilians (1949) : 
Current actions, 123, 289, 516 
Status of and reservations to, 72 

U.S. ratification, letters and statements regarding (Dul- 
les, Eisenhower, Murphy), 69, 454 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting (Oct. 27-Nov. 16, 1955) : 
Addresses and statements : Dulles, preconference state- 
ments, 606, 687, 688; Dulles, departure statement, 
686; Dulles, conference statements, 727, 72S, 775, 
780, 781, 819, 823, 825, 828, 872, 875, 876, 880, 8S1, 
883 ; Dulles, report to Nation, 867 ; Eisenhower, 21 7, 
728 : Molotov, 784 ; Murphy, 834, 1055 
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, Soviet proposals, 779 
Aviation, Western proposals for reciprocal civil aviation 
rights with Soviet Union, statements (Dulles), 776, 
878 
Collective defense organizations, statement (Dulles), 

728 
Consultations regarding preparations : 

Meeting between Secretary Dulles and congressional 

leaders, 686 
New York consultations : 
Announcement, 415 
Communique, 559 
Statement (Dulles), 606 
Date and place, 177, 301 
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference, 176 
Disarmament and mutual inspection proposals : 

Addresses and statements : Dulles, 727, S28, 869, 872, 

884; Murphy, 1056 
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference, 176 
Soviet draft declaration, 882 
Soviet proposal, 832 (text) ; statements (Dulles), 874, 

875 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal, text, 831 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) statement, 882 



Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting — Continued 
Documents published, 916 
East-West contacts : 
Address and statements: Dulles, 727, 775, 869, 876, 

880, 881, 885 ; Murphy, 834, 1056 
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference, 177 
Soviet draft statement, 881 
Soviet proposal, text, 779 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal, 778 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) statement, 925 
European security : 
Address and statements: Dulles, 780, 781, 819, 823, 

825, 868, 883 ; Molotov, 784 ; Murphy, 1056 
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference, 176 
Soviet draft treaty, text, 7S3 

Soviet proposals, 732 (text), 823, 828 (text) ; state- 
ment (Dulles), 825 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) declaration, text, 886 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal (treaty of 
assurance), text, 729 
Final communique, text, 886 
German reunification : 

Address and statements: Dulles, 606, 688, 727, 729, 
775, 781, 819, 823, 825, 868, 883 ; Eisenhower, 728 ; 
Murphy, 1056 
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference, 176 
Soviet proposal, 819, 820, 827 (text) 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) declaration, text, 886 
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposals: 
Free elections, text, 828 
Statements (Dulles), 820, 823 
Treaty of assurance, text, 729 
Middle East problems, question of discussion of, 688 
Results, statements (Dulles), 867, 883 
"Spirit of Geneva" (see also "Spirit of Geneva"), effect 

of meeting on, statements (Dulles), S67, 868, 870 
U.S. delegation, 687 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference (July 18-23, 
1955) : 
Addresses and statements: Dulles, 9, 50, 132, 218, 339, 
524, 525 ; Eisenhower, 4, 131, 171, 215, 376, 377 ; 
Murphy, 48, 49 ; Robertson, 691 
Agenda, possible items, 50 

Agreement by Soviets on time and place of meeting, 20 
Consultations regarding preparations : 
Paris meeting, statement (Dulles), 132 
San Francisco meeting, 50 
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176 
Disarmament and mutual inspection proposals : 
Address and statements : Dulles, 218 ; Eisenhower, 172, 

173, 216 
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176 
Documents published, 339, 686 
East- West contacts : 
Address and statement (Eisenhower), 174, 217 
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 177 



Index, July to December 1955 

392566—56 3 



no5 



Geneva Heads of Government Conference — Continued 
European security : 
Address and statement : Dulles, 218 ; Eisenhower, 216 
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176 
German reunification : 

Address and statements: Dulles, 21S; Eisenhower, 

171, 216 
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176 
Results : 

Address and statement : Dulles, 21S ; Robertson, 691 
Exchange of letters (Adenauer, Eisenhower), 259 
Review of negotiations, address upon return to U.S. 
(Eisenhower), 215 
"Spirit of Geneva," address (Eisenhower), 376, 377 
U.S. delegation, 49 
"Geneva, Spirit of." See "Spirit of Geneva" 
Genocide, convention on the prevention and punishment 

of the crime of (1948), 368 
Geography and History, Pan American Institute of, U.S. 

delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288 
Geophysical science and foreign relations, address (Ru- 
dolph), 989 
Geophysical Year, International (1957-1958) : 

Address and article: Reichelderfer, 436; Rudolph, 989 
U.S. plans for earth-circling satellite, 218 
Gerety, Pierce J., 917 
German University Exchange Service, 837 
Germany: 

Assets vested by U.S., proposed U.S. legislation for re- 
turn, statement (Murphy), 971 
Berlin. See Berlin 

Free elections in. See Reunification, infra 
Germany in the Free World, address (Murphy), 43 
Property, rights, and interests in Austria, Austrian dec- 
laration to annul by legislation, 970 
Reunification : 
Addresses and statement: Conant, 18, 915; Dulles, 8, 

524, 525, 964, 965, 1005 : Murphy, 46, 48, 490 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and 
proposals concerning. See Geneva Foreign Min- 
isters Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions 
and proposals concerning. See Geneva Heads of 
Government Conference 
North Atlantic Council position, 1047 
Soviet position, statements (Dulles), 51, 54 
Soviet obligations under 4-power agreements : 
Joint statement (U.S., U.K., and France) and note to 
Moscow following Soviet agreements of Sept. 20 
with East Germany, 559, 616 
U.S. position, exchange of notes between U.S. and 
Soviet Union, 734 
Germany, East : 

Inland waterways, British concession to East Germany 

for control, statement (Dulles), 1011 
Soviet agreements of Sept. 20, position of U.S., U.K., and 
France concerning Soviet obligations toward three 
powers, 559, 616, 734 
Uprising of June 17. anniversary statement (Conant), 
15 



Germany, Federal Republic of: 

Addresses : Conant, 12 ; Kalijarvi, 1058 ; Murphy, 43 

Claims. See Claims 

Diplomatic relations with Soviet Union, negotiations 

concerning, 494 
Establishing a business in, Department of Commerce 

pamphlet, 886 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, preparatory con- 
sultations with U.S., U.K., and France, 415, 559 
ICAO, admission to membership, 810 
Minister of Foreign Affairs, talks with Secretary Dulles, 

560 
Prisoners of war in Soviet Union, negotiations for re- 
lease, 494 
Restitution, external, agency established, 355 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Air transport, agreement with U.S., 145, 164 
Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 1086 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation, 549 
Copyright convention, universal, and related protocols, 

163 
External debts, German, agreement on, 164, 1024 
Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with 

U.S., 249 
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702 
Mutual defense assistance, agreements with U.S., 142, 

164 
North Atlantic Treaty, protocol on accession to, 406 
Occupation regime, protocol on termination of, 406 
Property, rights and interests in Germany, charter of 

Arbitral Commission on, 442, S13 
Tax relief for U.S. expenditures for common defense, 

agreement for, 862 
Telecommunication convention, international (1952), 

442 
Tracing Service, International, agreements concern- 
ing administration, 289 
War criminals, German, procedures for granting of pa- 
roles, 887 
Glaser, Kurt, 83 
Goa, Portuguese dispute with India, statements (Dulles), 

263, 1007, 1008 
Gold Coast, future relationship to British Togoland, 159 
Cork, Haydar, 20 

Grant-aid. See Economic and technical aid 
Great Lakes fisheries convention with Canada, 678, 770 
Greece : 
Earthquake, U.S. aid, 100 
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S. re- 
garding use of proceeds from sale, 210 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55», 

290 
Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 1086 
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S. 

amending 1948 agreement, S6 
GATT, protocols amending, 164, 932 



1106 



Department of State Bulletin 



Greece — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Patent rights and technical information for defense 

purposes, agreement with U.S., 84, 164 
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on, 

164 
U.S. personnel in Greece, agreement with U.S. regard- 
ing importation of personal effects and equipment, 
210 
U.S. Refugee Kelief Act visas, cutoff date on applica- 
tions announced, 917 
Grew, Joseph C, 497 
Gruenther, Gen. Alfred M., 609 
Guadeloupe, conventions on seamen, 5S9 
Guatemala : 

Communist activities in, 386, 388, 601 

Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062 

International Bank loan, 307 

Military assistance, agreement with U.S., So, 80 

Plant protection convention, international, 85 

President, visit to U.S., 599, 790 

Trade agreement of 1936 with U.S., termination, 577, 

623, 695 
U.S. aid, 196, 790 
Guiana, French, conventions on seamen, 589 

Hagerty, James C, 218, 1049 
Hahn, Mrs. Lorena B., 206 
Haiti : 

Artibonite Valley, development of, agreement with U.S., 

369 
Economic aid, agreement with U.S. for a joint council to 
facilitate administration of emergency assistance 
program, 909, 1086 
GATT, declaration on continued application of schedules, 

769 
Military assistance agreements with U.S., 550, 813 
Hammnrskjold, Dag, 512 
Harrington, Julian F., 249 
Hays, Brooks, 672, 711, 804 
Heads of Government Conference, Geneva. See Geneva 

Heads of Government Conference 
Health Organization, World : 
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature regulations, 

589 
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712 
Health, public, agreement with Libya, 1086 
Health and sanitation, cooperative program agreements 
with — 
Colombia, extending 1950 agreement, 400 
Ecuador, extending 1950 agreement, 38 
El Salvador, extending 1950 agreement, 327 
Panama, extending 1951 agreement, 932 
Heath, Donald R., 1051 
Henderson, Loy, 420, 1051 
Hickerson, John D., 678 
Highway, Inter-American, U.S. assistance for financing, 

598, 898 
Highways, Atlantic and Pacific, in Guatemala, Interna- 
tional Bank loan for, 307 
Hill, Robert C, 722 

Index, July to December 1955 



History and Geography, Pan American Institute of, U.S. 

delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288 
Holidays with pay for seamen, convention on, 589 
Holland, Henry F., addresses and statements: 
Inter-American trade, 654, 959 
Responsibility of American Republics in world affairs, 

135 
Sugar legislation, Department's views on, 120 
Treaty of mutual understanding and cooperation witli 

Panama, 1S5 
U.S. contribution to economic development of Latin 

America, 595 
Visit to Latin America, departure statement, S97 
Hollister, John B. : 
Appointment to ICA, 124, 432 
Atomic energy, uses for economic and social prugress 

in Asia, statement, 747 
Visit to Far East, Colombo Plan meeting, 566, 567 
Holy See, universal copyright convention and related pro- 
tocols, 327 
Honduras : 

Inter-American convention on granting of political 

rights to women, 813 
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 86 
Hoover, Herbert, Jr. : 
Statements : 
Air transport agreement with Germany, 145 
Bulgarian patriot, anniversary of death, 529 
Guatemalan President, departure from Washington, 

790 
Soviet tanker Tuapse, 302 

U.S. delegation to 10th session of General Assembly, 
489 
Visit to Far East, 566 
Hopkins, Frederick Charles, 354 
Houghton, Dorothy D., 363 
Human rights, advisory services in field of: 
Statements (Lord), 1034 
U.N. resolution, 1039 
Human Rights, U.N. Commission on : 

11th session, accomplishments, article (Lord), 277 
Recommendations on self-determination and permanent 
sovereignty over natural wealth, S08n, 859 
Human Rights Day (1955), U.N. proclamation of, 1048 
Humphrey, G. M., 432 
Hungary : 
Assets in U.S., disposition of, 845 
Information activities of legation in U.S., suspension by 

U.S., 459 
United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071»i 
U.S. Legation local employees, harassment by police, 
U.S. protests and countermeasures, 459 

ICA. See International Cooperation Administration 
ICAO. See International Civil Aviation Organization 
Iceland : 
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Radio frequencies, registration, agreement with U.S., 

478 
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 722 
ICEM. See Intergovernmental Committee for European 
Migration 

1107 



Immigration : 
Administration of U.S. immigration and nationality 

laws, change in delegation of authority, 478 
Glaser, Kurt, denial of permanent residence status in 
U.S., 83 
Imports (see also Trade) : 
Commercial samples and advertising material, Interna- 
tional convention to facilitate importation, 406, 549, 
677, 769, 813, 861 
Danish import restrictions on U.S. goods, relaxation, 762 
Portugal, imports from dollar area, freed list, 542 
Private road vehicles, customs convention on temporary 

importation, 289, 931 
U.S. (see also Tariff policy, U.S.) : 

Agriculture, U.S. report to 10th session of GATT of 

restrictions on, 1019 
Certification of invoices, requirements concerning, 

399, 698 
Latin Americau, methods to increase, address (Hol- 
land), 961, 962 
Monkeys, rhesus, for medical research, 398 
Strategic materials, chart, 304 
Income tax, conventions for avoidance of double taxation. 

See Double taxation 
India : 
Chinese Communist civilians in U.S., good offices for re- 
turn of, 456 
Economic progress, 269, 1060, 1063 

GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Goa, dispute with Portugal concerning, statements 

(Dulles), 263, 1007, 1008 
Korean ex-prisoners of war in, request for financial 

assistance, statement (Blaustein), 1077 
Monkeys, rhesus, export to U.S., 398 
Soviet economic operations in, 347 
Telecommunication convention, international (1952), 

442 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request tor renegotia- 
tion, 26 
U.S. aid, 31, 617 
Indian Institute, Inter-American, apiwintmeat of U.S. 

representative to Governing Board, 247 
Indonesia : 
Informational media guaranty program, agreement 

with U.S., 516 
U.N. role in peaceful settlement, 741 
Industrial apprenticeship, agreemeut with Brazil extend- 
ing 1952 agreement for cooperative program, 368 
Industrial education, agreement with Brazil extending 

1950 agreement for cooperative program, 249 
Industrial productivity, agreement with Uruguay, 38 
Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123 
Industry, medium and small, agreement with Chile amend- 
ing 1952 agreement for cooperative program of tech- 
nical assistance, 1086 
Information, exchange of, with Soviet Union. See Geneva 
Foreign Ministers Meeting and Geneva Heads of Gov- 
ernment Conference: East-West contacts 
Information activities of Hungarian Legation in U.S., sus- 
pension by U.S., 459 



Information Agency, U.S. : 
Cultural centers, binational, administration of, 358 
Program of, need for expansion, 1049 
Informational media guaranty program, agreements 
with — 
Indonesia, 516 
Viet-Nam, 998 
Inspection plan, mutual. See under Disarmament 
Intelligence functions of CIA, address (A. Dulles), 602 
Inter- American Bank for Economic Development, U.S. 

position on establishment, 140 
Inter-American Commission of Women, 10th Assembly, 
addresses, article, and messages (Dulles, Eisenhower, 
Lee, Rinc6n de Gautier), 584 
Inter-American convention on copyrights, 702 
Inter-American convention on granting of political rights 

to women, 813 
Inter-American cultural relations, convention for promo- 
tion of, 441 
Inter-American Economic and Social Council of OAS, U.S. 

representative, 166 
Inter-American Highway, U.S. assistance for financing, 

598, 898 
Inter-American Indian Institute, Governing Board, ap- 
pointment of U.S. representative, 247 
Inter- American problems, gee Latin America 
Interdepartmental Committee on Trade Agreements, no- 
tice regarding tariff negotiations, 507, 1020, 1022, 1023 
Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration : 
Constitution of, 209 

Financing problems, article (Warren), 308 
Refugees, responsibility for transportation to U.S., 99 
3d session of Executive Committee and Council, U.S. 
delegation, 634 
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization, 

convention on, 478 
Interment of U.S. nationals, agreement with Belgium ex- 
tending 1947 agreement, 368 
International Astronomical Union, U.S. delegation to 9th 

General Assembly, 325 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development: 
Articles of agreement, 441 

Egypt, Aswan Dam, discussions concerning, 1050 
Loans to : Guatemala, 307 ; Latin America, 597, 961, 962 ; 

Lebanon, 427 ; Pakistan, 398 ; Peru, 338 
U.S. views on annual report, statement (Waugh), 626 
International Civil Aviation Organization : 
Conventions regarding, 123 

Germany, Federal Republic of, admission to member- 
ship, 810 
Meetings : 
Committee on Rules for the Settlement of Differences, 

440 
Diplomatic conference on amendment of the Warsaw 

Convention, 440 
Facilitation Division, 4th session, 588 
International Cooperation Administration (see also 
Foreign Operations Administration) : 
Appointment of Deputy Director for Congressional Re- 
lations, 910 
Economic officers, meeting, 454 



1108 



Department of State Bulletin 



International Cooperation Administration — Continued 
Educational exchange program, study of relationship to 

State Department exchange program, 906 
Establishment and functions, 124, 432, 767 
International Council of Scientific Unions, U.S. delega- 
tion to 7th General Assembly, 325 
International Court of Justice : 
Document, 248 

Statute of, declarations recognizing compulsory jurisdic- 
tion, 769, 1024 
U.N. Administrative Tribunal, judgments, statements on 
U.S. position regarding procedure (Merrow) and 
text of General Assembly resolution, 938 
U.S. aircraft case against Soviet Union (1952), U.S. 
application to Court, 65 
International Development Advisory Board, members, 493 
International Finance Corp., 598, 627, 858 
International Geophysical Year (1957-1958) : 

Address and article : Reiehelderfer, 436 ; Rudolph, 989 
U.S. plans for earth-circling satellite, 21S, 990 
International Joint Commission, U.S. and Canada: 
Columbia River power development, Canadian proposals 
and U.S. position, statements by Commission and 
U.S. chairman, 980 
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources, 
21 
International Labor Conference, 38th session, convention 
concerning abolition of penal sanctions for breaches 
of contract of employment, 406 
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement, 163, 

441 
International North Pacific Fisheries Commission, meet- 
ing, 357 
International organizations, application of universal copy- 
right convention to works of, 163, 326, 327, 328, 441 
International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, re- 
port on destructive effect of power projects on Fraser 
River salmon, 984, 9S5 
International Tracing Service, agreements concerning ad- 
ministration, 289 
Investment activity abroad, Soviet, 343, 344, 345, 348 
Investment of private capital abroad : 
Antitrust policies, effect on U.S. investments, 538, 540 
Argentina, incentives for U.S. capital, 462 
Asia, South and Southeast, recommendations of Colombo 

Plan meeting, 992 
International Finance Corp. as stimulus to, 858 
Investment guaranties agreements with — 
Bolivia, 769; Colombia, 998; Honduras, 86; Ireland, 
770 ; Paraguay, 998 
Latin America, addresses: Beaulac, 336; Holland, 596, 

960, 963 
Natural wealth and resources of nations, proposals con- 
cerning self-determination and permanent sover- 
eignty over, 808, 809, 859, S92, 893 
Statements concerning: Hays, 713; Kalijarvi, 850; 

Waugh, 627 
Underdeveloped countries, 267, 272, 858 
U.S. tax incentives, proposed legislation, 432, 597 
Investors and traders, agreement with Philippines relat- 
ing to, 476, 478 



Invoices, certification of, regulations eliminating, 399 
Iran : 
Amity, economic relations, and consular rights, treaty 

with U. S., 367, 369 
Attitude toward West, 683 
Baghdad Pact, adherence, 653 
Iraq : 

Civil aviation convention, international, protocols re- 
lating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO, 123 
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement for 

disposition of equipment and materials, 328 
Peace treaty with Japan, 368, 442 
Ireland : 

Guaranties against risks respecting inconvertibility of 
currencies and expropriation, agreement with U.S., 
770 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n 
Isle of Man, convention to facilitate importation of com- 
mercial samples and advertising material, 861 
Israel : 
Aircraft, destruction by Bulgaria, U.S. protest and Bul- 
garian note of regret, 263, 354 
American-Israel friendship, address (Brownell), 97 
Arab-Israeli dispute. Sec Arab-Israeli dispute 
Arms supply policy. See Arms supply 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural surpluses, agreements with U.S., 86, 

1086 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 164 
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending and 
annex, 590 
Italy : 

Soviet investment operations in, 344 

Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation of, 578 

Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 249 
Arbitral Commission on property, rights and interests 

in Germany, charter of, 442 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 290 
Atomic information, agreement for cooperation be- 
tween parties to NAT, 623 
Child feeding programs, agreement with U.S., 225, 249 
Double taxation, conventions with U.S. for avoidance 

of, estates and income, 290, 442 
Educational exchange programs, financing agreement 

with U.S. amending 1948 agreement, 210 
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74 
Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123 
Jet engines, agreement with U.S. for facilities for re- 
pair, 249 
Plant protection convention, international, 589 
Telecommunication convention, international, 677 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071» 
U.S. tariff concession to, GATT, 616 
Venice Film Festival, question of entering Blackboard 
Jungle, 537 

Jackson, William H., 529, 778 
Jacome, Alexander G., 247 
Jameson, Guilford S., 910 



Index, July fo December 1955 



1109 



Japan : 
Assets vested by U.S., proposed U.S. legislation for re- 
turn of, 119, 971 
Communist threat of subversion, 694, 755 
Cotton purchase in U.S., Export-Import Bank credit, 263 
Cotton textile exports to U.S., question of protective re- 
strictions by U.S., correspondence (Dulles, Smith), 
1064 
Foreign Minister, visit to U.S. : 
Announcement, 263 
Arrival statement, 420 
Joint statement with Secretary Dulles, 419 
Fur seals, North Pacific, international conference for 

conservation of, 437 
Korean-Japanese tension over so-called "Rhee" line, 

statement (Dulles), 1009 
Trade problems, addresses and article: Kalijarvi, 

1058 ; Murphy, 492 ; Waugh, 303 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S., 86, 

577 
Aircraft assembly or manufacture, agreement with 

U.S., 210 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S. for 

cooperation, 55», 909 
Children, convention fixing minimum age for em- 
ployment at sea, 1024 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation, 406 
Customs facilities for touring, multilaterial conven- 
tion, 516 
GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on 
Mutual defense assistance agreement with U.S., agree- 
ment for Japanese financial contributions under, 290 
Peace treaty : 

Ratification by Iraq, 368 

Settlement of disputes arising under article 15 (a), 
agreement for, 442 
Seafarers, convention concerning medical examina- 
tion of, 1024 
U.S. aircraft, agreement with U.S. for payment of 
damages to property of Japanese nationals, 998 
U.N. membership, U.S. efforts for and Soviet vetos, 1067, 

1068, 1070, 1071, 1071m, 1072, 1072», 1073 
War claims of American nationals against, 972 
War criminals, release of, 420, 421 
John Marshall Bicentennial, 133, 375, 449 
Johnson, U. Alexis, 219, 220, 456 
Johnston, Eric, 340 

Joint Council for Economic Aid, agreement with Haiti es- 
tablishing, 1086 
Jones, Howard P., 166 
Jordan : 

United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n 
World Meteorological Organization, convention of, 210 
Jordan, Len, 981 

Kalijarvi, Thorsten V. : 
Addresses and statement: 

Antitrust policies of U.S., relation to foreign trade 

and investment, 538 
Foreign economic policy of U.S., 846 



Kalijarvi, Thorsten V. — Continued 
Addresses and statement — Continued 

World economic situation, review of, 1057 
Colombo Plan meeting, 514, 567 
Karachi, port facilities, World Bank loan for improvement, 

398 
Keesing, Felix M., 300 
Key, David McK., 125 
Khouri, Victor, 916 

Khrushchev, Nikita, 603, 611, 1007, 1056 
King, Spencer M., 478 
Korea : 

Armistice agreement: 

Communist violations of, address, letter, and state- 
ments: Blaustein, 1076, 1078, 1080, 1082, 1084; 
Parks, 191, 396 ; Robertson, 693 
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission. See Neu- 
tral Nations Supervisory Commission 
Soviet and Polish charges of violation, refutation, 

1080, 1081 
U.N. Command, reduction in strength, 1076, 1080, 1084 
Belgian participation in U.N. operations, agreement to 

pay U.S. for logistic support, 189, 210 
Free elections, efforts for. See Unification, infra 
Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners of war, 

etc., application in Korean conflict, 75 
Unification : 

General Assembly resolution on, 1081, 1085 (text) 

Soviet proposals, 1079 

Statements on (Dulles), 51, 341 

U.N. actions and deliberations regarding : 

Addresses and statements : Blaustein, 1074 ; Lodge, 

737, 739; Wilcox, 741 
General Assembly resolution, 10S5 
U.S. position, statements (Blaustein), 1075, 1076, 
1077, 1078 
U.N. Commission for Unification and Rehabilitation of 
Korea, subcommittee, 1077 
Korea, Republic of: 

Communism, efforts to combat, 755 

Economic and military discussions with U.S., joint 

communique, 356 
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi), 

1059 
Exhibition of photographs of national treasures, 917 
Foreign Language Institute, 506 
Japanese-Korean tension over so-called "Rhee" line, 

statement (Dulles), 1009 
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war 
Taxation of U.S. businessmen, 618 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agreed minute of 1954, amendment establishing ex- 
change rate, 356 
Arsenal, agreement with U.S. for establishment of 

facilities for, 164 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55»i 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop- 
ment, articles of agreement, 441 
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement, 

441 
Naval vessels, agreement with U.S. for loan of, 550 



1110 



Department of State Bulletin 



Korea, Republic of — Continued 

U.N. Korean Reconstruction Agency, report of Agent 
General, statement (Hays) and U.N. draft resolu- 
tion, 672 
U.N. membership, U.S. position and Soviet veto, 1068, 

1069, 1070ji 
U.S. aid, 190, 398 
Kotschnig, Walter M., 317 
Krekeler, Dr. Heinz L., 19, 47 

Labor, penal sanctions for breaches of contract of em- 
ployment, convention concerning abolition of, 406 
Labor Conference, International, 38th session, convention 
concerning abolition of penal sanctions for breaches 
of contract of employment, 406 
Labor services, technical, agreement with El Salvador for 

cooperative program, 406 
Langley, James M., 464 
Laos: 

Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Communist threat of subversion, 694 
Legation in U.S., elevation to embassy status, 299 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n 
U.S. aid to famine victims, 536 
U.S. ambassador, confirmation, 249 
U.S. Legation in, elevation to embassy status, 299 
Lathrum, Wade, 329 

Latin America (see also Inter-American and individual 
countries) : 
Coffee trade, addresses: Holland, 656, 962; Kalijarvi, 

1062 
Cultural centers, bina'tional, U.S. assistance to, 35S 
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061, 1063 
Economic relations with U.S., addresses : Beaulac, 335 ; 

Holland, 595, 897 
Land settlement projects for European migrants, 311 
Responsibility of the American Republics in world af- 
fairs, address (Holland), 135 
Trade relations with U.S., addresses (Holland), 654, 959 
Travel, promotion of, to and within Latin America, 107 
U.N. Economic Commission for, U.S. delegation to 6th 

session, 405 
U. S. aid : 

Export-Import Bank loans, 597, 960, 961. 963 
Mutual security programs, 33, 269 
U. S. officials visit to discuss inter-American problems, 
delegation and departure statement (Holland), 
791, 897 
Women, economic and social progress, article and ad- 
dress (Lee), 584, 5S6 
Lausanne Peace Conference, 1922-23, effect on consolida- 
tion of Turkish Republic, 497 
Law, international, development of, as a basis for peace, 

address (Stassen), 416 
Law, progress in the rule of, address (Phleger), 647 
Lawrence, Ernest O., 706 
Lebanon : 
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210 
Telecommunication convention, international, and final 

and additional protocols, 164 
World Bank loan, 427 



Lee, Mrs. Frances M„ 584, 586 

Le Gallais, Hugues, 916 

Legislation. See under Congress 

Lend-lease operations, transmittal of President's report 

to Congress, 760 
Libby, Willard F., 381 

Liberia, technical cooperation agreement with U.S., 770 
Libya : 

Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Agriculture, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro- 
gram, 1086 
Economic aid, agreement with U.S. amending 1954 

agreement, 210 
Education, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro- 
gram, 1086 
Natural resources, agreement with U.S. for coopera- 
tive program, 10S6 
Public health, agreement with U.S. for cooperative 

program, 1086 
Technical cooperation, general agreement with U. S., 

328 
Technical cooperation, point 4 agreement with U.S. 

superseded by general agreement, 328 
Wheat agreement with U. S., 328 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n 
U.S. aid, wheat relief, 263, 328, 427 
Lindbeck, John M. H., 751 

Literary and artistic works, protection of. See Copyright 
Litoshko, Evgeni V., 134 
Loans, U.N. See International Bank 
Loans, U.S. (see also Export-Import Bank), agreement 

with Republic of China, 307 
Lodge, Henry Cabot, Jr. : 
Addresses and statements : 

Algerian question, proposed inscription on General 

Assembly agenda, U.S. position, 545, 582, 992 
Armaments, problems of inspection and control of, 

1033 
Atomic radiation, effects on human health, proposal 

for collation of data on, 54 
China, representation in U.N., 544 
Cyprus question, proposed inscription on General As- 
sembly agenda, U.S. position, 545 
Disarmament, President Eisenhower's proposals for 

inspection, 438, 528, 765 
Freedom, Responsibility, and Law, 696 
Moroccan question, postponement of discussion by 

U.N., U.S. position, 1040 
Palestine question, 458 

Soviet item on relaxing international tension, pro- 
posed inscription on General Assembly agenda, U.S. 
position, 583 
United Nations, admission of new members, U. S. po- 
sition, 1067 
United Nations after 10 years, 736 
Correspondence : 
Atomic radiation effects, request for agenda item for 

10th session of General Assembly, 365 
Peaceful uses of atomic energy, international coop- 
eration, request for General Assembly item, 384 
UNICEF, U.S. contribution, 513 
Lonardi, Maj. Gen. Eduardo, 560 



Index, July to December J 955 



1111 



Lord, Mrs. Oswald B., 277, 808, 1034 
Luce, Mrs. Clare Boothe, 537, 1010 
Luxembourg : 

Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 016 
Legation in U.S., elevation to embassy status, 478 
Tariff concessions by U.S., 226, 228, 231 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation regarding, 442 
Civil aviation convention, international, protocols 
relating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO, 
123 
Copyright convention, universal, and related proto- 
cols, 327 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74 
Off-shore procurement program, agreements with U.S., 

678 
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use 

of (1953), 289 
Private property, war damage to, agreement with U.S., 
124, 150 
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 516 
U.S. Legation in, elevation to embassy status, 478 
Lyon, Cecil B., 38 

Macomber, William B., Jr., 768 

Malaya, Communist subversion in, 694 

Manila Pact, address (Dulles), 526 

Maniu, Juliu, 786 

Mann, Thomas C, 678 

Maritime Consultative Organization, Intergovernmental, 

convention on, 478 
Marshall, John, Bicentennial. 13::, 375, 449 
Marshall Islands, resettlement of displaced persons, 158 
Martinique, convention on seamen, 589 
Marx, Walter J., 447 

Matsu and Quemoy Islands, Communist buildup of air- 
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009 
McDevitt, James A., 125 
Mcllvaine, Robinson, 537 
McLeod, Scott, 309, 311, 568, 634 
McMahon, Brien, 696 
McNaughton, Gen. A. G. L., 981, 982, 983 
McQueen, Lt. James T., 1012» 
Meagher, John P., 953 
Medicine : 

Atomic medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doc- 
tors, 264 
Medical films exchange, agreement with Soviet Union. 

785, 932 
Medical research, agreement with Republic of China 
relating to establishment of U.S. Navy unit in 
Taipei, Formosa, 862 
Merrow, Rep. Chester E., 715, 938 

Meteorological Organization, World. See World Meteor- 
ological Organization 
Mexico : 

Binational cultural center, U.S. and Mexico, 359 
Claims, final payment to U.S. under 1941 convention, 806 



Mexico — Continued 

Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123 
U.S. aid in Tampico disaster, 791 
Micronesia, report on U.S. administration of trust terri- 
tory, statements (Nucker), 153 
Middle East. See Near and Middle East 
Military and Defense Commissions, Joint Brazil-U.S., con- 
tinuation agreement, 769 
Military assistance (see also Military missions, Mutual 
defense, and Mutual security and other assistance 
programs) : 
Agreements, with — 

Cambodia, 290 ; Guatemala, 85, 86 ; Haiti, 550 ; Yugo- 
slavia, 770 
Agreements regarding disposition of equipment, mate- 
rials, and property, with — 
I lominican Republic, 406; Haiti, 813; Iraq, 328; Peru, 
164; Thailand, 290; Yugoslavia, 86 
U.S. program, readjustments, 266 
Military blueprints, President Eisenhower's proposals for 

exchange. See Disarmament: Aerial inspection 
Military dependents' housing and tobacco, agreement with 

U.K., 623 
Military facilities, importation of personal effects, equip- 
ment of U.S. personnel, agreement with Greece, 210 
Military information, exchange of. See Disarmament: 

Aerial inspection 
Military missions, U.S. : 
Agreements regarding duties of Army, Navy, and Air 
Force missions with — 
Colombia, 678 ; Cuba, 516, 590 ; Ecuador, 998 
Army mission agreements, with — 

Bolivia, extending 1942 agreement, 550 
Cuba, extending 1951 agreement, 38 
Paraguay, extending, amending 1943 agreement, 369 
Military program, U.S. See Mutual defense, Mutual secu- 
rity, and National Defense 
Mohammed V of Morocco, 894, 1040 
Molotov, Vyacheslav M., 605, 606, 784 
Monaco : 

Copyright convention, universal, and protocols 1 and 2, 

163 
Postal convention, universal, 813 
Monetary Fund, International, articles of agreement, 163, 

441 
Mongolia, Outer, U.N. membership, Soviet efforts for and 
U.S. position on, 1008, 1068, 1070, 1071», 1072n, 1073 
Monkeys, rhesus, export from India to U.S., 398 
Moore, Roger Allan, 575 
Morocco, French : 

Mohammed V, return to Morocco, 894, 1040 
Safety of life at sea convention, 249 
U.N. consideration of Moroccan question : 
General Assembly resolution to postpone, 1041 
Statement (Lodge), 1040 
Morocco, Spanish Zone, universal postal convention, 210 
Morrill, J. L., 966 
Morton, Thruston B., 79, 561 
Moulton, Harold, 706 
Muccio, John J., 722 
Mulcahey, Edward W., 285 
Murphy, Edmund R., 358 



1112 



Department of State Bulletin 



Murphy, Robert : 
Addresses and statements: 

American nationals' claims against Germany, pro- 
posed legislation for payment, 971 
Cauadian-U.S. relations, current aspects of, 411 
Education for Today's World, 1054 
European security, progress toward, 834 
Geneva conventions on prisoners of war, etc. 

(1949), 69 
German and Japanese vested assets in U.S., proposed 

legislation for return, 971 
Germany in the Free World, 43 

Self-determination in international relations, prin- 
ciple of, 889 
NATO status of forces agreement, 17S 
U.S. foreign policy, review of, 490 
Visit to Yugoslavia, 566 
Mutual defense, regional organizations, address (Hol- 
land), 137 
Mutual defense assistance agreements (see also Military 
missions), with — 
Belgium, agreement amending annex B, 550 
France, agreement for disposition of equipment, 99S 
Germany, Federal Republic of, 142, 164 
Japan, agreement for financial contributions, 290 
Turkey, agreement relating to equipment and materials, 
290 
Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act : 

Administration, statement (DeLany), 919, 920, 921 
FOA report to Congress on operation (July-Dec. 1954), 
excerpts, 342 
Mutual defense treaties and agreements (see also Baghdad 
Pact, Collective security, Mutual security, National 
defense, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and 
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) : 
Address (Phleger), 649 

Atomic information, exchange of, agreements with 
Canada and U.K., letters (Eisenhower, Wilson) and 
texts, 59 
China, Republic of, 756, 757 
Distant early warning system, agreement with Canada, 

22 
Far East, 756, 757 

Patent rights and technical information, exchange of, 
agreements with Greece, Netherlands, and Norway, 
84 
Western European Union, 44, 417 
Mutual Security Act (1955), 273 

Mutual security and other assistance programs (sec also 
Agricultural surpluses. Economic and technical aid, 
Military assistance, and Mutual defense) : 
Defense support to Spain and Yugoslavia, 31 
Far East, article (Lindbeck), 759 
FOA, final report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 

265 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, effect on U.S. pro- 
grams, statement (Dulles), 870 
President's report to Congress (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955), 

excerpt, 428 
Southeast Asia, ANZUS Council, meeting and state- 
ment, 534 
Statement (Stassen) on 1956 program, 29 



Mutual Security Appropriation Act (1956), Executive 
order implementing and statement (Eisenhower), 
273, 362 

Mutual understanding and cooperation, treaty with Pan- 
ama, 1S5, 290, 406, 516 

NAC. See North Atlantic Council 

Narcotic drugs. See Drugs, narcotic 

Nasser, Col. Gamal Abdel, 684 

NAT. See North Atlantic Treaty 

National City Bank v. Republic of China, question of 

Chinese immunity, 750 
National defense and security (see also Collective 
security; Mutual defense; and Mutual security) : 
Address (Dulles) 640 
Bipartisan discussion by President and congressional 

leaders, 1049 
Distant early warning system, U.S.-Canada : 
Texts of notes, 22 

U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495 
Intelligence and law enforcement agencies, cooperation 
against Communist subversion, address (A. Dulles), 
600 
Permanent Joint Board on Defense, U.S.-Canada, 412 
Personnel security program, U.S., address (McLeod), 

568 
Restrictions on photography, sketching, etc., by Rumani- 
ans in U.S., 105 
Strategic materials, release of stockpile in event of 

enemy attack, 701 
U.S. military programs, effect on, by Geneva Foreign 
Ministers Meeting, statement (Dulles), 870 
National Olympic Day, proclamation, 702 
Nationality of women, convention on, 550 
NATO. See North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
Natural resources, agreement with Libya for cooperative 

program, 10S6 
Natural wealth and resources, permanent sovereignty over, 

U.S. position, 808, 859, S92, 893 
Nauru, administration as trust territory, 282 
Navigation, treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation 

with Germany, 249 
Near and Middle East (see also individual countries) : 
Arab-Israeli dispute. See Arab-Israeli dispute 
Arms supply to. See Arms supply. 
Collective security (see also Baghdad Pact), addresses: 

Brownell, 99 ; Dulles, 378, 379 ; Murphy, 493 
Economic progress, address (Kalijarvi), 1060 
Foreign, Relations, volume on, published, 165 
Johnston, Eric, mission to, 340 

U.S. economic aid, statements : Dulles, 965 ; Stassen, 32 
U.S. policy in, addresses and statements : Allen, 6S3 ; 

Dulles, 378, 421, 6S8 ; Eisenhower, 845 
Vice President Nixon, visit of, 380 
Nelsen, Ancher, 907 

Nepal, admission to U.N., 1067, 106S, 1070, 1071w 
Netherlands : 

Refugee program, U.N., financial contributions, 630 
Tariff concessions by U.S., GATT, 226, 228, 231 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT. request for renego- 
tiation, 26 



Index, July to December 1955 



1113 



Netherlands — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Aircraft, imported, arrangement with U.S. relating to 

certificates of airworthiness, 909 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55», 

210 
Double taxation on income, 1948 convention with U.S. 
for avoidance of, extension to Antilles, 37, 38, 290, 
442, 907, 909 
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S., 

210 
GATT, declaration on continued application of 

schedules and protocols amending, 164, 702 
Patent rights and technical information, agreement 

with U.S. on exchange of, 84, 210 
Property rights and interests in Germany, charter of 

Arbitral Commission on, 813 
Safety of life at sea convention (1948), 677 
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending and 

annex, 327 
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on, 

702 
WHO Regulations, nomenclature of diseases and 
causes of death, 5S9 
Netherlands Antilles : 

Double taxation convention, U.S. -Netherlands, 37, 38, 

290, 440, 907, 909 
Safety of life at sea convention (194S), 677 
WHO Regulations, nomenclature of diseases and causes 
of death, 5S9 
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission (Korea) : 
Communist obstructions to work of, 1076, 1081, 1082, 

1083, 10S4, 1085 
South Korean objection to, statement (Dulles), 298 
U.S. attitude on modification of operations of, 340 
Neutrality, Austrian, U.S. recognition of, U.S. and Austrian 

notes, 1011 
Neutrality, Soviet theory and U.S. views, 641, 642 
New Guinea, administration as trust territory, 283 
New Zealand : 

ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules and protocols amending, 164, 931 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74 
German external debts, agreement on, 1024 
Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration, 
constitution of, 210 
Nicaragua : 

Costa Rican dispute, conciliation of, OAS Council reso- 
lution and committee report, 546 
Nationality of women, convention on, 550 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renego- 
tion, 26 
Nigeria, Minister of Transport, visit to U.S., 495 
Nixon, Richard M., visit to Near East and Africa, 380 
Nonintervention, principle of, U.S. policy, 138 
Non-Self-Governing Territories, Committee on Informa- 
tion from : 
Statement on report (Bell), 673 
U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell) , 906, 907» 



Non-self-governing territories (see also Self-determina- 
tion and Trust territories), U.N. action, 1954, report 
to Congress (Eisenhower), 393 
North Atlantic Council, 4th ministerial meeting of 1955 : 
Departure statement (Dulles), 1048 
Pinal communique, 1047 
North Atlantic Treaty: 

Atomic information, agreement between parties for co- 
operation, current actions, 442, 478, 623, 813, 931, 
1024, 1086 
Germany, Federal Republic of, protocol on accession of, 

406 
International military headquarters, protocol on status 

of, 998 
National representatives and international staff, agree- 
ment on status, 998 
Status of forces agreement: 
Basic issues, statement (Murphy), 178 
Current actions, 328, 998 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization: 

Addresses and statement: Dulles, 262, 1005; Gruenther, 

609 ; Murphy, 835 ; Wright, 699 
Agreements and protocols. See North Atlantic Treaty 
Defense planning, NAC actions, 1047 
Fellowship and scholarship program, 735 
German membership, question of, addresses and state- 
ments : Conant, 12 ; Dulles, 729, 781 ; Murphy, 44. 
Progress under mutual security program, 266, 271, 428 
U.S. military forces, relations with French local com- 
munities, address (Dillon), 1014 
North Atlantic union, proposed congressional resolution, 

views (Dulles), 224 
North Pacific Fisheries Commission, International, meet- 
ing, 357 
North Pacific Fur Seal Conference, meeting and U.S. dele- 
gation, 437, 952 
"Northern tier" pact. See Baghdad Pact 
Norway : 

Atomic information, agreement between parties to NAT 

for cooperation, 1086 
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S. 

amending 1949 agreement, 37, S6 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Patent rights and technical information, agreement with 
U.S. on exchange of, 84 
Nu, U, 50, 95, 96 
Nucker, Delmas H., 153 
Nuclear energy. See Atomic energy 
Nuesse, Celestine Joseph, 575 
Nutting, Antony, 709 
Nyasaland. See Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Federation of. 

OAS. See Organization of American States 
Oats, U.S. import quotas, expiration of, 543 
Occupation regime, protocol on termination of in Federal 

Republic of Germany, 406 
O'Connor, Roderic L., 678 
Off-shore procurement program, agreements with — 

Luxembourg, 678 

Turkey, 32S 



1114 



Department of State Bulletin 



Oil shale study, agreement with Brazil extending agree- 
ment for technical assistance, 861 
Olympic Day, National, proclamation, 702 
"Open sky" proposals of President Eisenhower. See Dis- 
armament : Aerial inspection 
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use of 

(1953), 86, 2S9, 442 
Organization for Trade Cooperation : 
Agreement on, signatures, 164, 368, 702, 931 
GATT, 10th session, reports on plans for, 1020 
U.S. membership: 

Addresses and statements : Bonbright, 860 ; Eisen- 
hower, 26; Kalijarvi, 848; Thibodeaux, 110, 112, 
113 ; Waugh, 305 
Congressional hearings postponed, letters (Cooper, 
Eisenhower), 188 
Organization of American States : 

Appointment of alternate U.S. representative, 589 
Charter of, 589 

Costa Rican-Niearaguan dispute, committee report and 
Council resolution terminating action under Rio 
treaty, 546 
Settlement of inter-American problems, addresses : 
Dulles, 525 ; Holland, 138 
Ostertag, Rep. Harold C, 1012m 
OTC. See Organization for Trade Cooperation 
Outer Mongolia, U.N. membership, Soviet efforts for and 
U.S. position on, 1008, 1068, 1070, 1071n, 1072w, 1073 

Pacific, North, International Fisheries Commission, meet- 
ing, 357 
Pacific and Atlantic Highways, International Bank loan 

to Guatemala, 307 
Pacific Islands, Trust Territory of. See tinder Trust ter- 
ritories 
Pacific settlement, American treaty on, 590 
Pact of Bogota, 590 

Pact of mutual cooperation. See Baghdad Pact 
Pakistan : 
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Port facilities at Karachi, World Bank loan for im- 
provement, 398 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia- 
tion, 26 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 678 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55w, 

328 
Baghdad Pact, 534 

GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 164 
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and 

text of schedules, 4th protocol, 368 
Slavery convention (1926), 769 
Palestine question. See Arab-Israeli dispute 
Pan American Institute of Geography and History, U.S. 

delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288 
Panama : 

Agriculture, agreement with U.S. extending 1952 agree- 
ment for cooperative program, 932 



Panama — Continued 

Education, agreement with U.S. extending 1950 agree- 
ment for cooperative program, 932 
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S. extending 

1951 agreement for cooperative program, 932 
Mutual understanding and cooperation, treaty with 
U.S. and memorandum of understandings, 185, 290, 
406, 516 
U.S. Ambassador, confirmation, 249 
Panama Canal, revision of U.S. Panamanian treaty rela- 
tions, 185, 290, 406, 516 
Paraguay : 

Road construction, U. S. training program, 177 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Air Force mission, agreement with U.S. extending 

and amending 1943 agreement, 406 
Army mission, agreement with U.S. extending and 

amending 1943 agreement, 369 
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 998 
UNESCO constitution, 368 
Tung oil, limit on export to U.S. discontinued, 792 
Paris agreements on European security, German ratifica- 
tion of, and Soviet opposition to, 47 
Parks, Maj. Gen. Harland C, 191, 396 

Passports, removal of U.S. restrictions on travel to Euro- 
pean Soviet-bloc countries, 777 
Pastore, Sen. John O., 366, 660, 796, 1030 
Patent rights and technical information for defense pur- 
poses, agreements to facilitate interchange of, signed 
with — 
Greece, 84, 164 
Netherlands, 84, 210 
Norway, S4 
Patriotism, address (Dulles), 639 
Peace : 
Addresses and statements on : Dulles, 218, 642 ; Eisen- 
hower, 5, 131, 215, 375; Phleger, 647; Robertson, 
690 ; Stassen, 416 ; Strauss. 558 
Joint statement (Eisenhower, Nu), 97 
U.S. Congress, resolution on renewed efforts for, 4 
Uniting for Peace resolution, U.N., 649 
World Peace Council, history of, letters (Morton, 
Powell), 79 
Peace Conference of Lausanne, 1922-23, effect on con- 
solidation of Turkish Republic, article (Grew), 497 
Peace treaty, Japan, Mils, 442 
Peaceful settlement of disputes. See Disputes 
Pearson, Lester, 704 
Penal sanctions for breaches of contract of employment, 

convention concerning abolition of, 406 
Permanent Joint Board on Defense, U.S.-Canada, 412 
Personnel, Public Committee on, meeting, 1053 
Persons, exchange of. See Exchange of persons 
Peru: 

Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation, 
meeting with U.S., Chile, and Ecuador, 384, 513, 1025 
Highway maintenance, World Bank loan for, 33S 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation of, 578 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n. 
Education program, agreement with U.S., extension, 38 



Index, July to December 1955 



1115 



Peru — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 702 
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 769 
Military assistance agreement, agreement on disposi- 
tion of U.S. equipment and materials, 164 
Military missions, agreement with U.S. for perform- 
ance of duties by members of, 909 
Surplus agricultural commodities, agreements with 
U.S. amending Feb. 7, 1955, agreement, 210 
Petkov, Nikola, 529 
Petroleum products pipeline, construction, agreement 

with Canada, 623 
Philippine-American Day, 974 
Philippines : 
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916 
Communism, resistance to, article (Lindbeck), 755 
Sugar legislation, U.S., effects of proposed revision of 

Sugar Act on imports of Philippine sugar, 122 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n, 

249 
Copyright convention, universal, and protocols, 1, 2, 

and 3, 441 
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use 

of (1953), 86 
Public schools within U.S. Naval Reservation at Subic 
Bay, agreement concerning administration by 
Philippine Department of Education, 862 
Slavery convention (1926), 368 
Telecommunication convention, international, and 

related protocols (1952), 289 
Trade agreement with U.S. (1946), revision. See 

Trade agreements 
Traders and investors, agreement with U.S. relating 
to, 476, 478 
U.S. policy regarding, address (Ferguson), 974 
Phillips, Christopher H., 255 
Phleger, Herman, 647 
Photography, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes, 

105 
Pinay, Antoine, 705 

Plant protection convention, international, 85, 931 
Plastic works of art, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian 

notes, 105 
Point 4 agreement with Libya, superseded by general 

agreement for technical cooperation, 32S 
Poland, universal postal convention, 86 
Political rights to women, inter-American convention for 

granting, 813 
Portugal : 

Goa, Portuguese dispute with India, statements 

(Dulles), 263, 1007, 1008 
Imports from dollar area, freed list, 542 
Minister of Foreign Affairs, .joint communique on con- 
versations with U.S. officials, 966 
Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 653 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55re, 
249 



Portugal — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Atomic information, agreement between parties to 

NAT for cooperation, 1024 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 75 
NATO international military headquarters, protocol 

on status of, 998 
NATO national representatives and international 

staff, agreement on status of, 99S 
NATO status of forces agreement, 998 
Plant protection, international convention for, 931 
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071m 
Postal convention, universal, current actions, 86, 210, 769, 

813 
Prisoners of war, Geneva conventions on treatment of. 

See Geneva conventions 
Prisoners of war, German, Soviet agreement to release, 494 
Prisoners of war, Korea : 

Communist illegal detention of, statement (Blaustein), 

107S 
Geneva conventions (1949), application to, 71, 75 
Indian request for financial assistance for ex-prisoners 

in India, statement (Blaustein), 1077 
Nonrepatriated, joint statement on status by Depart- 
ments of Defense, Justice, and State, 20 
Prisoners of war, U.S., detention and release by Com- 
munist China : 
Address and statements: Dulles, 220, 221, 262, 527; 
Eisenhower, 262; Lodge, 738, 739; Phillips, 258; 
Wilcox, 901 
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 386, 

390 
U.N. Command personnel, release of, report (Hammar- 
skjold), 512 
Private enterprise in Latin America, address (Holland), 

960, 962, 963 
Private property, war damage to, agreement with Luxem- 
bourg, 124 
Prochnow, Herbert V., 567, 678 
Proclamations by the President : 

Bicycles, imported, increased duty on, 400 

Clover seed, alsike, modification of import quota, 116 

Copyright convention, universal, and protocols 1, 2, and 

3, 326 
Courts of foreign forces in U.S., proclamation revoking 

1944 proclamation, 361 
Filberts, shelled, modification of restrictions on imports, 

275 
Human Rights Day (1955), U.N., 104S 
Japan, protocol of accession to GATT, 226 
John Marshall Bicentennial Month, 133 
National Olympic Day, 702 
Eye imports, quota, 117 
Trade agreements, with — 

Ecuador, termination of 1938 agreement, 511 
Guatemala, termination of 1936 agreement, 695 
Philippines, revision of 1946 agreement, 76S 
Switzerland, supplementary agreement, 113 
Productivity, industrial, agreement with Uruguay, 38 
Propaganda, Communist. See under Communism 



1116 



Department of State Bulletin 



Property, U.S. Government, in Austria, agreement with 

Austria regarding disposition, 677 
Property rights and interests in Germany, charter of 

Arbitral Commission on, 442, S13 
Protocol functions of State Department, address (Sim- 
mons), 93 
Public Committee on Personnel, meeting, 1053 
Publications : 

Commerce Department, Establishing a Business in the 
Federal Republic of Germany and Western Berlin, 
published, 886 
Congress, lists of current legislation on foreign policy, 

34, 152, 329, 357, 402, 434, 455, 495, 814 
Proposals for freer exchange at Geneva Foreign Min- 
isters Meeting and Soviet rejection, 776, 780, S77, 
880 
Santiago Negotiations on Fishery Conservation Prob- 
lems, published, 1025 
State Department: 
Foreign Relations of the United States, published : 

1939, vol. IV (Far East, Near Bast, Africa), 165 

1940, vol. IV (Far East), 517. 

Geneva Conference of Heads of Government, July 18- 

23, 1955, published, 686 
Genera Meeting of Foreign Ministers, Oct. 21-Nov. 16, 

1955, published, 916 
Lists of recent releases, 38, 165, 203, 249, 290, 309, 

518, 550, 590, 678, 770, 813, 862, 953, 1041 
United Nations : 
Lists of current documents, 207, 20S, 248, 366, 441, 514, 

583, 676, 714 
Publications and research policy, recommendations 

(Kotschnig) for reexamination of, 322 
Yearbook on Human Rights, 280 
Puerto Rico, economic and social progress of women, 5S7, 
588 

Quenioy and Matsu Islands, Communist buildup of air- 
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009 

Radar, distant early warning system : 
Agreement with Canada, 22 
U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495 

Radford, Adm. Arthur, 895 

Radiation, atomic, effects on human health : See under 
Atomic energy, peaceful uses 

Radio broadcasting, Western proposals at Geneva Foreign 
Ministers Meeting for exchange of radio broadcasts 
with Soviet Union, and Soviet rejection, 776, 877, 8S0 

Radio frequencies, registration, agreement with Iceland, 
478 

Randall, Harold M., 166 

Reciprocity Information, Committee for, notice regarding 
tariff negotiations, 508, 510, 579, 1021, 1023 

Reconstruction and Development, International P.ank for. 
See International Bank 

Red Cross, American National, letter (Eisenhower), con- 
cerning Geneva conventions (1949), 454 

Red Cross, International Committee of, agreements con- 
cerning administration of the International Tracing 
Service, 289 

Refugee Relief Act (1953), background, proposed amend- 
ments, 562, 563, 564 



Refugees and displaced persons : 
Arab refugee problem : 

Addresses (Dulles), 379, 526 
U.S. aid, 33 
Copyright convention, universal, protocol 1, application 
of convention to works of stateless persons and 
refugees : 
Current actions, 163, 327, 441 
Proclamation, text, 326 
Status list, 328 
Governors' committees for refugee relief, conference of, 

225 
Greek applications for U.S. visas, cutoff date announced, 

917 
ICEM. See Intergovernmental Committee for European 

Migration 
International Tracing Service, agreements concerning 

administration, 289 
Transportation of refugees to U.S., 99 
U.N. program for relief, statements (Blaustein) and 

resolutions, 628, 634w, 762, 811, S12n. 
U.S. program for relief : 
Address (Morton), 561 

Public Advisory Group, appointment of member, 363 
Reichelderfer, F. W., 435 
Reid, Sen. Thomas, 985 
Relief and rehabilitation. See Refugees and displaced 

persons and individual countries 
Relief supplies, agreement with Ecuador for duty-free 
entry and defrayment of inland transportation 
charges, 516 
"Renunciation of force" principle, U.S. policy, addresses 
and statements : Dulles, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690 ; Rob- 
ertson, 693 
Restitution, external, W. German agency established, 355 
Reunion, conventions on seamen, 5S9 
Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Federation of : 
GATT, amending protocols, 932 
ICEM, constitution of, 210 
OTC, agreement on, 931 
Rice, Cuban tariff quotas on, GATT, agreement with U.S., 

27 
Rincon de Gautier, Mrs. Felisa, 5S8 
Road service, establishment of, agreement with Bolivia, 

442 
Road traffic, convention on, 909 
Robbins, Robert R., 282, 283, 287 
Robertson, Walter S., 295, 690 
Rockefeller, Nelson A., 616 
Rogers, William P., 624 
Romulo, Carlos P., 465, 916 
Roosevelt Bridge, relocation of span for St. Lawrence 

seaway project, agreement with Canada, 932, 978 
Rountree, William M., 813 
Rudolph, Walter M., 989 
Rumania : 
Assets in U.S., disposition of, S45 
Maniu, Juliu, reported death of, 786 
Photography, sketching, and execution of plastic works 
of art, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes, 
105 
Soviet troops in, 339 



Index, July fo December 1955 



1117 



Rumania — Continued 

United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071w 

U.S. Minister, appointment, 369 
Rural Electrification, Working Party on, U.S. delegate to 

3d session, 907 
Ryan, Robert J., 166 
Rye imports : 

Investigation of effect on domestic price-support pro- 
gram, 28 

Proclamation limiting, 117 
Ryerson, Knowles A., 300 

St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources, 21 
St. Lawrence seaway, relocation of south span of Roose- 
velt Bridge, agreement with Canada, 932, 978 
Safety of life at sea, convention on, 249, 677 
Salmon Fisheries Commission, International, report on 
destructive effect of power projects on Fraser River, 
984, 985 
Salvage at sea, convention for unification of rules (1910), 

442 
Samoa, Western, administration as trust territory, 287 
San Francisco meeting on 10th anniversary of U.N., state- 
ment (Dulles) upon return, 50 
Sanitation. See Health and sanitation 
Santiago Negotiations on Fishery Conservation Problems, 

documents published, 1025 
Satellite nations: 
Captive peoples in, sacrifices of, address (E. Dulles), 

423 
Eastern and Central Europe, question of restoration of 
sovereignty, 172, 219, 525, 561, 562 
Satellites, earth-circling, plans for launching for Inter- 
national Geophysical Year, 218, 990 
Saudi Arabia, Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 361 
Scientific Unions, International Council of, U. S. delega- 
tion to 7th General Assembly, 325 
Scholarships, Foreign, Board of, appointments, 575 
Seafarers, convention concerning medical examination of, 

589, 1024 
Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit in State De- 
partment, remarks (Dulles), 94 
Seamen : 
Consular services to, article (Marx), 448, 450 
Conventions on : 

Certification of able seamen, 589 
Employment at sea, minimum age, 589, 1024 
Holidays with pay, 589 
Shipowners' liability, 589 
Sears, Mason, 159 

SEATO. See Southeast Asia Treaty Organization 
Secretariat, U.N., lists of documents, 248, 714 
Security and Consular Affairs, Bureau of, State Depart- 
ment, delegation of functions and authorities to ad- 
ministrator of, 910 
Security, national. See National defense and security. 
Security Council, U.N. : 

Documents, lists of, 209, 514, 676 
Resolutions : 

Admission of new members to U.N. See tinder United 

Nations 
Palestine question, 459 

1118 



Security Council, U.N. — Continued 
Voting procedure : 

Admission of new members, applicability, U.S. posi- 
tion, 607, 1008, 1011, 1067, 1068, 1071 
Soviet abuse of veto, 11, 1067 
Selection Boards, Foreign Service, meeting and member- 
ship, 125 
Self-defense, right of, address (Phleger), 649 
Self-determination : 
Discussions in U.N. Commission on Human Rights, 11th 

session, article (Lord), 280 
Natural wealth and resources, right to permanent sover- 
eignty over, U.S. position, SOS, 859, 892, 893 
Principle of, in international relations, and U.S. posi- 
tion, address and statement : Bell, 673 ; Murphy, 
889 
Problems facing Trusteeship Council, 159 
Seton Hall University, address (Murphy), 1054 
Shakespeare festival, permission for Soviet correspondent 

to visit, 134 
Shigemitsu, Mamoru, 263, 419, 420 
Ships and shipping (see also Seamen) : 
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization, 

convention on, 478 
Load line convention, international, 442 
Merchant ship masters and officers, minimum require- 
ment of professional capacity, convention on, 589 
Naval vessels, U.S., agreements with — 

Canada, for furnishing supplies and services to, 327 
China, for loan of, 86 

Ecuador, for furnishing supplies and services to, 249 
Korea, for loan of, 550 
Safety of life at sea, convention on, 249, 677 
Soviet bloc attempts to acquire merchant fleet, 351 
Soviet tanker Tuapse and crew, U.S. rejection of re- 
sponsibility for, 302 
Transportation of refugees to U.S., 99 
Silver, Rabbi Abba Hillel, 895 
Simmons, John F„ 91 
Singapore, Communist subversion in, 694 
Sketching, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes, 105 
Slavery convention (1926), amending protocol and annex, 

current actions, 327, 368, 442, 590, 769 
Smith, Lt. Gen. Walter B., 706 
Smith, Sen. Margaret Chase, 1065 
Solar Energy, World Symposium on, 836 
Solar energy activities, U.S., study by foreign scientists, 

836 
Somaliland, administration as trust territory, 285 
South Africa, Union of : 
GATT, declaration on continued application of schedules, 

164 
International Court of Justice, Statute of, declaration 

recognizing compulsory jurisdiction, 769 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation, 578 
South America. See Latin America 
South Asia. See Asia 

South Pacific Commission, appointment of U.S. Commis- 
sioners, 300 
Southeast Asia. See Asia 

Southeast Asia collective defense treaty, address (Dulles), 
526 

Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



Southeast Asia Treaty Organization : 
Cease-fire in Formosa, effect on, statement (Dulles), 261 
Military planners meeting, message (Radford), 895 
Southeastern Pacific fishery resources, meeting on con- 
servation (U.S., Chile, Ecuador, Peru), 384, 513, 1025 
South-West Africa, problem of self-determination, 891 
Souvannavong, Curot R., 299, 916 
Soviet-bloc countries : 
Captive peoples, question of restoration of sovereignty, 

172, 219, 561, 562, 833m. 
Economic activities in free world, Battle Act report 

(July-Dec. 1954), 342 
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi), 

1061 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservations to, 70, 73, 74 
Trade controls, U.S., relaxed on peaceful goods, 784 
Trade with free world, statement (DeLany), 918 
U.S. passport restrictions removed on certain countries, 

777 
Soviet Union (see also Communism) : 
Agricultural delegations, exchange with U.S., 151, 689 
American priest, U.S., protest against expulsion, U.S. 

and Soviet notes, 102 
Archbishop Boris, visa canceled by U.S., 102, 784, 888 
Armed forces, proposed reduction, statement (Dulles), 

338 
Arms, surplus, question of disposal, 879 
Arms shipments to Arab countries, statement (Dulles), 

604 
Atomic Energy, International Conference on Peaceful 

Uses of, exhibit, 556 
Atomic energy, proposed amendment to U.N. resolution 

on technical conference, 803 
Atomic energy agency proposal of U.S., U.S. reply to 

Soviet note, 264 
Atomic policy, 527, 528 
Berlin, Soviet obligation to West regarding access to, 

1010 
China, Communist: 

Representation in U.N., efforts for, 544 
Support to, 492 
Cultural exchange activities, 232 
Disarmament. See Disarmament 
Documentation required for nonofficial visitors to U.S., 

text of U.S. note, 104 
East-West tensions, disinterest in relaxation of, state- 
ment (Dulles), 1010 
East-West trade. See under Trade 
Economic activities in free world, Battle Act report 

(July-Dec. 1954), 342 
European security system, concept of, 53 
Foreign policy prior to Geneva "summit" conference, 

414, 415 
Fur seals, North Pacific, international conference for 

conservation of, 437 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva Foreign 

Ministers Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva 

Heads of Government Conference 
Germany, Federal Republic of, negotiations concerning 

diplomatic relations, release of prisoners, etc., 494 



Soviet Union — Continued 
Germany, position on reunification, IS, 46, 47, 51, 54, 916, 

1005 
Germany, Soviet obligations under 4-power agree- 
ments : 
Joint statement (U.S., U.K., France), and note to Mos- 
cow following Soviet agreements of Sept. 20 with 
East Germany, 559, 616 
U.S. position, exchange of notes between U.S. and 
Soviet Union, 734 
Korean unification, position on, statement (Blaustein), 

1079 
Medical films, exchange with U.S., U.S. and Soviet notes, 

785 
Middle East, psychological gains in, 965 
Military capability, 610, 611 
"New look" policy, 639 
Nuclear tests, 916, 964 

Political philosophy, address (Khrushchev), 603, 611 
Pravda correspondent, U.S. permission to attend 

Shakespeare festival, 134 
Propaganda in underdeveloped countries, 345, 346 
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 81 
Refugees, European, position on resettlement of, 632, 

634w, 811 
Rumania, Soviet troops in, 339 
Southeast Asia, psychological gains in, 965 
Subversion of free world, techniques, 600 
Tanker Tuapse, U.S. rejection of responsibility for, 302 
Trade policy, contrast with Western nations, state- 
ment (Dulles), 777 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Austrian state treaty, 209 
Berlin, Greater, protocol with U.S. defining boundary 

of, 165 
Germany, East, agreements of Sept. 20, 1955. U.S., 
U.K., and French position regarding Soviet obliga- 
tions in Germany, 559, 616 
Medical films, exchange with U.S., 932 
Underdeveloped countries, policy toward, 1005, 1007 
United Nations, inscription on General Assembly 
agenda of Soviet item on relaxing international 
tension, 583 
United Nations, position on admission of new members, 

statements (Lodge), 1067 
U.N. influence on policies of, address (Wilcox), 900 
U.N. specialized agencies, attitude toward, 902 
Unreliability of promises, 964 
U.S. aircraft, attacks on. See under Aviation 
U.S. attitude toward, statement (Eisenhower), 172 
U.S. citizens, release of, 354 
Visa to Father Louis Dion for entry, 784 
World domination, change of tactics for achievement of, 
address (Murphy), 1056 
Spain : 

Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. amend- 
ing 1955 agreement, 862 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210 
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S. 

extending, 210 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 75 



Index, July to December 7955 



1119 



Spain — Continued 

Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Narcotic drugs, protocol amending certain interna- 
tional agreements by transferring certain duties 
and functions from League of Nations to U.N. and 
WHO, 623 
Narcotic drugs, protocol bringing imder international 
control drugs outside scope of 1931 convention as 
amended by 1946 protocol, 623 
Postal convention, universal, extension to possessions, 

210 
Telecommunication convention, international, and 
final and additional protocols, 677 

United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071m 

U.S. defense support to, statement (Stassen), 31 
Specialized agencies, U.N. (see also name of agency) : 

Administrative problems, statement (Merrow), 715 

Aid to underdeveloped countries, statement (Hays), 
712 

Coordination of programs, statement (Kotschnig), 317 

Impact on, by Geneva Heads of Government Confer- 
ence, 257 

U.S. participation and Soviet attitude, addresses (Wil- 
cox), 745, 902 
"Spirit of Geneva" : 

Addresses and statement concerning: Eisenhower, 376, 
377, 728 ; Murphy, 414 ; Robertson, 691 ; Wadsworth, 
530 

Deterioration after Geneva Heads of Government Con- 
ference, statements (Dulles), 688, S27, 1056 

Developments after Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, 
addresses and statements (Dulles), 418, 524, 525, 
867, 868, 870, 1007 
Stassen, Harold E. : 

Activities regarding disarmament cited (Wadsworth), 
530, 531, 532, 533 

Addresses and statement : 
Disarmament, 703 

Peace founded on international law, 416 
Youth and the free world, 535 

Deputy U.S. representative on U.N. Disarmament Com- 
mission, 264, 440 

Special assistant to President on disarmament, 432 
State Department (see also Foreign Service) : 

Agriculture Dept. personnel abroad, Executive order 
concerning, 306 

Appointments and designations, 3S, 125, 166, 290, 329, 
369, 442, 478, 529, 549, 567w, 589. 678, 722, 768, 813, 
910, 953 

Assistant Secretary-Controller (Carpenter), designa- 
tion, 442 

Assistant Secretary for Policy Planning (Bowie), desig- 
nation, 442 

Assistant Secretary of State (Wilcox), confirmation, 249 

Deputy Under Secretary for Economic Affairs (Wangh, 
Prochnow) appointments, 442, 567», 678 

Economic officers, meeting, 454 

Educational exchange program, responsibilities under, 
238 

Educational exchange program, study of relationship to 
ICA exchange program, 966 



State Department — Continued 
Foreign-aid functions, Executive order regarding al- 
location of funds, 273 
Foreign policy, role in formulating, address (Simmons), 

92 
Foreign Service examinations announced, 575 
Functions and authorities, prescribed for certain posi- 
tions, 909 
ICA, establishment and functions, 124, 432, 767 
Personnel security program, address (McLeod), 568 
Publications. See Publications 
Resignation (Key), 125 
Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit, remarks 

(Dulles), 94 
Special Assistant to Secretary of State (Jackson), ap- 
pointment, 529 
Special Assistant to the Secretary of State (Macomber), 

designation, 768 
Wriston Committee program, report on progress of in- 
tegration and recruitment, 1053 
State treaty, Austria. See Austrian state treaty 
Stateless persons, universal copyright convention, pro- 
tocol 1, 441 
Status of forces agreement (NAT) : 
Basic issues, statement (Murphy), 178 
Current actions, 328, 99S 
Stevens, Eli, 369 
Stevens, Francis B., 910 
Strategic materials : 
East- West trade controls, statement (Del/any), 918 
Release of stockpile in event of enemy attack, 701 
U.S. imports, chart, 304 
Strauss, Lewis L., 300, 381, 555 
Streetcars for Korea, U.S., 190 
Strong, Curtis C, 300 
Stuart, R. Douglas, 927 
Stubbins, Hugh, 302 

Student-exchange program. See Educational exchange 
Students in U.S., Communist Chinese. See Geneva am- 
bassadorial talks : Civilians 
Sugar legislation, proposed revision of Sugar Act, state- 
ment (Holland), 120 
"Summit" conference, Geneva. See Geneva Heads of 

Government Conference 
Surinam, WHO Regulations regarding nomenclature of 

diseases and causes of death, 5S9 
Surplus agricultural commodities. See Agricultural sur- 
pluses 
Suydam, Henry, 494 
Sweden : 
Contributions to American culture, address (Warren), 

222 
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, report and 

refutation of Communist charges, 1082 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia- 
tion, 26 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 
Aircraft rights, international recognition of, 998 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n 



1120 



Department of State Bulletin 



Sweden — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
Switzerland : 
Atomic research reactor, agreement with U.S. relating 

to sale and purchase of, 210 
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization, 

convention on, 478 
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, report and 

refutation of Communist charges, 10S2 
Trade agreement, supplementary, with U.S., proclama- 
tion of, 113 
Syria : 
Air transport agreement with U.S. (1947), 86 
Genocide convention (1948), 368 

Taiwan (Formosa), defense of, U.S. position, 526 
Tariff policy, U.S. (see also Customs and Trade agree- 
ments) : 
Barley, expiration of quotas, 543 

Bicycles, increased duty on, 399, 794, 929, 930, 976, 977 
Clover seed, alsike, proclamation modifying quota, 116 
Concessions, care in negotiating, 303 
Cuba, possible adjustment in preferential rates, 509, 

510, 1022, 1023 
Edible tree nuts, hearing canceled, 276 
Escape clause provisions, 795, 930, 977 
Figs, dried, imports, 462 

Filberts, shelled, import restrictions modified, 275 
GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on 
Japanese cotton textiles, question of import restrictions, 

correspondence (Dulles, Smith), 1064 
Oats, expiration of quotas, 543 
Rye imports : 

Investigation of effect on domestic price-support pro- 
gram, 28 
Proclamation limiting, 117 
Tung oil quota, investigation to impose not requested, 
792 
Tariffs, customs. See Customs 
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on : 

Addresses and statement : Bonbright, 860 ; Thibodeaux, 

110 ; Waugh, 305 
Compensatory tariff concessions by U.S. to Belgium, 

Canada, Luxembourg, Netherlands, 226, 228, 231 
Concessions withheld by U.S., 397 
Cuba, rice quotas, agreement with U.S., 27 
Cuba, termination by U.S. of preferential tariff con- 
cessions to, 226, 228, 230 
Declaration on continued application of schedules, 164, 

702, 769, 931 
Italy, U.S. concessions to, 616 
Japan : 
Accession to, 305m, 397 

Declaration on continued application of schedules, 702 
Proces-verbal extending validity of 1953 declaration 
regulating commercial relations between contract- 
ing parties and Japan, 164 
Protocol on terms of accession, 164, 226, 478, 702, 769, 
932 



Tariffs and trade, general agreement on — Continued 
Japan — Continued 

Reciprocal application between Japan and other con- 
tracting parties, delays, 860, 977, 1017 
Rectifications and modifications to annexes and texts 
of schedules, 4th protocol, 702 
OTC. See Organization for Trade Cooperation 
Protocols amending, 164, 368, 702, 931 
Rectification to French text, 932, 1024 
Rectifications and modifications to annexes and texts 

of schedules, 4th protocol, 164, 368, 702, 931 
Renegotiation of tariff concessions between U.S. and 

Italy, Peru, Turkey, and South Africa, 578 
Requests for renegotiation of tariff concessions to U.S. 
by: Austria, 114; Dominican Republic, 274; Fin- 
land, 115 ; France, 114 ; India, 26 ; Netherlands, 26 ; 
Nicaragua, 26 ; Pakistan, 26 ; Sweden, 26 
10th session of contracting parties : 
Agenda and U.S. delegation, 721 
Review of, 1016 
U.S. tariff negotiations with contracting parties, 306, 507, 
579, 1020 
Task forces for study of disarmament, 706 
Taxation : 

Double taxation, avoidance of. See Double taxation 
Foreign business income, proposed legislation, 432, 597 
Korea, taxation of U.S. businessmen, 618 
U.S. expenditures for common defense, agreement with 
Federal Republic of Germany for tax relief on, S62 
Technical aid to foreign countries. See Economic and 

technical aid 
Technical assistance, U.N. See under United Nations 
Technical cooperation program, U.S. See Economic and 

technical aid 
Technical information and patent rights, exchange of, 
agreements signed with Greece, Netherlands, and 
Norway, 84 
Technical Property Committee, 85 

Telecommunication convention, international, (1952), and 
final and additional protocols, current actions, 164, 
289, 368, 442, 516, 677, 909 
Tello, Manuel, 791 
Thailand : 

Agricultural commodities, surplus, agreement with 

U.S., 164 
Communist threat of subversion, 694, 755 
Educational exchange programs, financing agreement 

with U.S. amending 1950 agreement, 164 
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement on 

disposition of equipment furnished under, 290 
Tin concentrates, agreements with U.S. for sale and pur- 
chase of, 590, 998 
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 998 
Thayer, Robert H., 369 
Thibodeaux, Ben H., 110 
Thors, Thor, 916 
Timber Committee, U.N., Economic Commission for 

Europe, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440 
Tin concentrates, agreements with Thailand for sale and 
purchase of, 590, 998 



Index, July to December 1955 



1121 



Tittman, Harold H., Jr., 310 

Tobacco and military dependents' housing, agreement with 

U.K., 623 
Togoland unification problem, statement (Sears), 159 
Tourism. See Travel, international 

Tracing Service, International, agreements concerning ad- 
ministration, 289 
Trade (see also Agricultural surpluses; Economic policy 
and relations, U. S. ; Imports ; and Tariff policy, U.S.) : 
Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and invest- 
ment, address ( Kali jar vi), 538 
East-West trade (see also Geneva Foreign Ministers 
Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Confer- 
ence: East-West contacts) : 
Battle Act report (July-Dec. 1954), 342 
Control of, statements : DeLany, 918 ; Weeks, 784 
Latin America, trade with, addresses: Beaulac, 337; 

Holland, 596, 654, 959 ; Kalijarvi, 1061 
Travel, international, importance to U.S. foreign trade, 

address (Waters), 620 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Bills of lading, international convention for unifica- 
tion of rules relating to, (1924), 441 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation, 406, 
549, 677, 769, 813, 861 
Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with 

Federal Republic of Germany, 249 
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on. See Tariffs 
and trade, general agreement on 
Trade agreements. See Trade agreements 
U.S. exports to Soviet bloc, controls relaxed, 784 
U.S. foreign trade policy, addresses, article, and state- 
ment : Aldrich, 793 ; Benson, 935 ; Thibodeaux, 110 ; 
Waugh, 303 
Trade Agreements, Interdepartmental Committee on, no- 
tice regarding tariff negotiations, 507, 1020, 1022, 1023 
Trade agreements, with — 

Ecuador, termination by U.S. of 1938 agreement, 86, 

140, 511, 516 
Guatemala, termination of 1936 agreement, 577, 623, 695 
Switzerland, supplementary agreement with U.S., text 

of proclamation, 113 
Philippines, agreement relating to traders and investors, 

476, 47S 
Philippines, revision of 1946 agreement : 

Announcement of signing, summary of provisions and 

statements (Langley, Eomulo), 463 
Current actions, 478, 813 

Text of agreement, proclamation, protocol, annexes, 
and understanding, 466, 768 
Trade Agreements Act, 305, 1021 
Trade Agreements Extension Act, 25, 1021 
Trade and Economic Affairs, Joint U.S.-Canadian Com- 
mittee on: 
Address (Stuart), 928 

2d meeting, announcement, delegations, functions, and 
text of joint communique, 274, 576 
Trade Cooperation, Organization for. See Organization 

for Trade Cooperation 
Trade fairs, Soviet-bloc countries participation in, 346 



Traders and investors, agreement with Philippines relat- 
ing to, 476, 478 
Transport insurance, proposal at 10th session of GATT, 

1020 
Transtrum, Orville H., 768 
Travel, international (see also Visas) : 
Encouragement of, address (Weeks), 106 
Freedom of: 

Statement (Eisenhower) at Geneva Heads of Gov- 
ernment Conference, 175 
Western and Soviet proposals at Geneva Foreign 
Ministers Meeting, 776, 779, 780, 880, 882 
Importance to U.S. foreign trade, address (Waters), 620 
Private road vehicles, customs convention concerning 

temporary importation of, 289, 931 
Touring, convention concerning customs facilities for, 
2S9, 516, 931 
Treaties, agreements, etc., international (for specific 
treaty, see country or suoject) : 
Atomic energy, civil uses, bilateral agreements for co- 
operation, 3S3, 598, 663 
Current actions on, listed, 37, 85, 123, 163, 209, 249, 289, 
327, 368, 406, 441, 478, 516, 549, 589, 623, 677, 702, 
769, 813, 861, 909, 931, 998, 1024, 1086 
Requirements for, under Agricultural Trade Develop- 
ment and Assistance Act, 198 
Troops, U.S. See Armed forces 
Trust territories, U.N. : 

Administration of Nauru, New Guinea, Somaliland, and 

Western Samoa, U. S. views, 282 
Pacific Islands, report on U.S. administration, state- 
ments (Nucker), 153 
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 393 
Trusteeship Council, U.N. : 
Documents, lists of, 248, 515 

Problems of self-determination, statement (Sears), 159 
Tuapse, Soviet tanker, U.S. rejection of responsibility, 302 
Tuna industry, domestic, study of, 119 
Tung oil import quota, investigation to impose not re- 
quested, 792 
Tunisia : 

Cooperation with France, statement (Dulles), 301 
Safety of life at sea convention, 249 
Turkey : 

Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 20 

Cyprus question. See Cyprus question 

Lausanne Peace Conference, effect on consolidation of 

Republic, 497 
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation, 578 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. modify- 
ing 1954 agreement, 998 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55 
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S., 

290 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and 

texts of schedules, 4th protocol, 164 
Load line convention, international, 442 



1122 



Department of State Bulletin 



Turkey — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Mutual defense assistance program, agreement with 
U.S. relating to redistributable and excess equip- 
ment and materials, 290 

Off-shore procurement, agreement with U.S., 328 

Salvage at sea, convention for unification of rules 
(1910), 442 

Status of forces agreement (NAT), agreement 
amending understanding on implementation, 328 

Telecommunication convention, international, 909 

Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on, 
164 
Tyranny, concerted efforts against, address (B. Dulles), 

422 

Underdeveloped countries : 
Aid to, by international community, statement (Hays), 

711 
Economic development, progress under mutual security 
program {see also Investment of private capital 
abroad), 266, 269, 270, 271, 272 
Soviet-bloc economic activities in, 342 
U.N. action during 1954, 390, 391 
U.S. policy in, addresses : Dulles, 1005 ; Holland, 139 
UNESCO. See United Nations Educational, Scientific and 

Cultural Organization. 
UNICEF. See United Nations Children's Fund. 
United Kingdom : 
Berlin, quadripartite status, position, 1013m, 1014 
Courts for armed forces in U.S., discontinuance, 361 
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question 
Disarmament, tripartite (with U.S. and France) draft 

statement on, 882 
Economic position, address (Kalijarvi), 1057, 1058, 1063 
Egypt, Aswan Dam project, discussions on financial 
support, 1050 
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva For- 
eign Ministers Meeting 
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva 

Heads of Government Conference 
German inland waterways control, British concession to 

E. Germany, statement (Dulles), 1011 
Near and Middle East : 

Arms supply policy, joint statement with U.S., 560 
Position regarding, 526 
Prime Minister Eden, visit to U.S., statement (Dulles), 

1009 
Quadripartite talks with U.S., France, and Yugoslavia, 

joint communique, 49 
Soviet obligations in Germany, U.S., U.K., and French 
joint statement and note to Moscow following 
Soviet-East German agreements of Sept. 20, 559, 
616 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Air service agreement with U.S., amended, 406 
Aircraft, civil, agreement with U.S. for use of facilities 

in the Bahamas long-range proving ground, 290 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreements with U.S., 38, 

58, 290, S62 
Atomic information, agreement between parties to 
NAT for cooperation regarding, 813 



United Kingdom — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued 

Atomic information for mutual defense, agreement 
with U.S. for exchange of, letters (Eisenhower, 
Wilson) and text, 62, 63, 290 
Austrian state treaty, 209 
British property in Austria, understanding regarding 

protection, 967, 1024 
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter- 
national convention to facilitate importation, 813, 
861 
Drugs, potent, protocol for termination of agreements 

for unification of formulas, 623 
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S. 

extending, 210 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, protocols amending, 702 
International Court of Justice statute, declaration 

recognizing compulsory jurisdiction, 1024 
Tobacco and military dependents' housing, agreement 

with U.S., 623 
U.S. Educational Commission, operational agreement, 

38 
Weather station at Betio Island, construction and op- 
eration, agreement with U.S., 932 
U.S. civilians in Communist China, good offices in re- 
turn of, 456 
U.S. Minister for Economic Affairs, appointment, 516 
U.S. trade with, 794 

Washington Old Hall, restoration, address (Aldrich), 
651 
United Nations : 
Addresses : 

Entering the Second Decade (Dulles), 523 
Moral Foundation of U.N. (Dulles), 10 
U.N. After 10 Years (Lodge, Wilcox), 736 
U.N. After the Summit Meeting (Phillips), 255 
U.S. participation in the U.N. (Wilcox), 899 
Administrative progress and problems, statement (Mer- 

row), 715 
Admission of new members : 

General Assembly resolution requesting Council con- 
sideration for admission of 18 nations, 1069 (text), 
1072, 1073 
Security Council draft resolution to admit 18 nations 
and proposed amendment to include Korea and 
Viet-Nam, 1069, 1070 (text), 1070k 
Security Council resolution to admit 16 nations, 
omitting Japan and Outer Mongolia, statements 
(Lodge) , voting in Council, and approval of General 
Assembly, 1071, 1071n. 
Security Council resolutions, proposed, to admit Japan 
and Outer Mongolia at 11th session, 1071», 1072», 
1073 
U.S. position, addresses and statements : Dulles, 607, 

523 ; Lodge, 1067 ; Wilcox, 743 
U.S. position on admission of Outer Mongolia, state- 
ment (Dulles), 1008 
Algerian question. See Algerian question 
Annual report for 1954 to Congress (Eisenhower), 385 



Index, July to December 1955 



1123 



United Nations — Continued 
Atomic energy, actions concerning. See Atomic energy 
Charter. See United Nations Charter 
China, question of representation, address and state- 
ments : Dulles, 1011 ; Lodge, 544 ; Wilcox, 744 
Claims of nationals. See under Claims 
Collective security system, 648, G49 
Disarmament, efforts for. See Disarmament 
Disputes, role in settlement of, addresses : Holland, 

135, 136, 137, 140; Lodge, 697; Phillips, 258 
General Assembly. See General Assembly 
International Atomic Energy Agency. See Atomic En- 
ergy Agency 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop- 
ment. See International Bank 
Korea, actions regarding. See Korea 
Publications. See under Publications 
Refugee relief program, statements (Blaustein) and 

resolutions, 628, 634», 762, 811, 812rc 
Security Council. See Security Council 
Specialized agencies. See Specialized agencies and 

name of agency 
Technical assistance in human rights field, article and 
statements (Lord), and text of U.N. resolution, 
279, 1034 
Technical assistance program : 
Address and statement : Hays, 804 ; Phillips, 257 
General Assembly resolution, S05 
U.S. contribution, statement (Hays), 712 
Tenth anniversary : 

Addresses : Dulles, 6 ; Eisenhower, 3 
San Francisco meeting on 10th anniversary, evalua- 
tion (Dulles), 50 
U.S. Congress, resolution on renewed efforts for peace, 
3, 4 
World Health Organization : 
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature of regula- 
tions, 589 
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712 
United Nations Administrative Tribunal, review of judg- 
ments by International Court of Justice, statements of 
U.S. position regarding procedure (Merrow) and 
text of General Assembly resolution, 93S 
United Nations Charter : 

League of Nations Covenant, contrast with, 739 
Review : 

General Assembly resolution, text, 949 
U.S. position, addresses and statements : Bell, 948 ; 
Dulles, 523 ; Wilcox, 484, 485, 744 
Tenth anniversary, addresses : Dulles, 6 ; Eisenhower, 3 
United Nations Children's Fund : 

U.S. alternate representative on Executive Board, ap- 
pointment, 316 
U.S. contribution to, 513 
United Nations Command (Korea) : 

Personnel, detention and release by Communist China. 

See Prisoners of war 
Protests of Communist violations of armistice agree- 
ment, 191, 396, 1076, 1078, 10S0, 1082, 1083, 1085 
United Nations Commission for Unification and Rehabili- 
tation of Korea, subcommittee, 1077 



United Nations Commission on Human Rights : 
11th session, article (Lord), 277 

Recommendations on self-determination and permanent 
sovereignty over natural wealth, 808», 859 
United Nations Commission on Status of Women, actions 

by 9th session, article (Hahn), 206 
United Nations Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic 

Energy. See Atomic energy, technical conferences 
United Nations Congress on Prevention of Crime and 
Treatment of Offenders : 
Address (Rogers), 624 
U.S. delegation, 243 
United Nations Day, proclamation, 615 
United Nations Disarmament Commission, U.S. deputy 

representative, confirmation, 264 
United Nations Economic and Social Council. See Eco- 
nomic and Social Council 
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe : 

Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th ses- 
sion, 907 
Timber Committee, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440 
United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America, 

U.S. delegation to 6th session, 405 
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or- 
ganization : 
Constitution, 368 

U.S. National Commission, 5th conference, 134 
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. See 

Food and Agriculture Organization 
United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency : 
Foreign Language Institute, 506 

Report of Agent General, statement (Hays) and U.N. 
draft resolution, 672 
United Nations Trusteeship Council : 
Documents, lists of, 248, 515 

Problems of self-determination, statement (Sears), 159 
United States citizens and nationals : 
Citizenship, possible loss by "dual citizens," 658 
Claims. See under Claims 

Interment in Belgium, agreement with Belgium extend- 
ing 1947 agreement, 368 
Protection of: 
Abroad, function of Foreign Service, 448, 450, 451 
Berlin, U.S. protest against detention in Soviet sector 

of U.S. Congressmen, 1012 
Bulgarian destruction of Israeli aircraft, death of 
U.S. citizens, U.S. protest and Bulgarian note of 
regret, 264, 354 
Communist China, detention and release of U.S. civil- 
ians. See under Geneva ambassadorial talks 
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of War 
Soviet Union, release of U.S. citizens, 354 
United States Educational Commission, operational agree- 
ment with U.K., 38 
United States Information Agency : 

Cultural centers, binational, administration of, 358 
Program of, need for expansion, 1049 
United States nationals. See United States citizens and 

nationals 
Uniting for Peace resolution, U.N., 649 
Universal postal convention, 210 



1124 



Department of State Bulletin 



Uranium resources, agreement with Brazil for cooperative 

program for reconnaissance, 516 
Urrutia-Holguin, Francisco, 916 
Uruguay : 

President of, visit to U.S., 338 
Treaties, agreements, etc. : 

Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55ro 
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched- 
ules, 164 
GATT, protocol of terms of accession of Japan, 164 
Industrial productivity, agreement with U.S., 38 
Organization of American States, charter, 589 
Pacific settlement, American treaty on, 590 
U.S.S.R. See Soviet Union 

Vatican City, international telecommunication convention 

(1952), 516 
Venezuela : 

Air transportation, international, convention for uni- 
fication of rules, 549 
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55m, 210 
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061 
Load line convention, international, 442 
Venice Film Festival, question of entering Blackboard 

Jungle, 537 
Vessels. See Ships and shipping 
Vested assets, return to Germany and Japan, proposed 

U.S. legislation, 119, 971 
Veto power in Security Council. See Security Council: 

Voting procedure 
Vice President, relationship to Cabinet during President's 

illness, statement (Dulles), 608 
Vienna Appeal, Communist propaganda campaign, SO, 81, 

82 
Vienna State Opera, reopening, statement (Dulles), 789 
Viet-Nam : 

Communism, resistance to, 755 

Elections, U.S. position, address and statement : Dulles, 

50 ; Robertson, 693 
Hanoi, U.S. consulate closed, 10S6 
Informational media guaranty program, agreement 

with U.S., 998 
President Diem, election, 760 

U.N. membership, U.S. position and Soviet veto, 1068, 
1069, 1070ji 
Visas : 

Archbishop Boris, issuance and cancellation of visa by 

U.S., 102, 784, 888 
Nonimmigrant, agreement with Australia concerning 
reciprocal changes in immigration regulations, 590 
U.S., issuance : 
Consular function, article (Marx) , 451, 453 
Nonimmigrant, changes in regulations, 10S 
Nonofficial visitors to U.S., clarification of provisions 
in note to Soviet Union, 104 
Visual and auditory materials, agreement for interna- 
tional circulation, 406 

Wadsworth, James J., 530, 851, 1031 
War claims. See Claims 



War criminals, German, procedures for granting paroles 

to, 887 
War criminals, Japanese : 

Paroles and reductions of sentences by U.S., 421 
Release of, U.S.-Japanese joint statement concerning, 
420 
War victims, protection of. See Geneva conventions 
Warren, Earl, 222 
W T arren, George L., 308 
Warren, Shields, 1031» 

Washington Old Hall, England, restoration of, and Wash- 
ington family history, 651 
Watch movements, modification of U.S. tariff concessions 

to Switzerland, 113 
Waters, Somerset R., 620 
Waugh, Samuel C, 303, 442, 626 
Weather, World Meteorological Organization, convention 

of the, 210 
Weather station at Betio Island, construction and opera- 
tion, agreement with U.K., 932 
Weeks, Sinclair, 106, 784 
Weimar Republic, comparison with Federal Republic of 

Germany, 13, 14, 15, 16 
West Africa, problems of self-government, 159 
Western European Union : 

Armaments control system, 417 
German membership, 44 
Wheat agreement, international, conference to consider 

renewal or replacement, U.S. delegation, 767 
Wheat agreements, with — ■ 
Libya, for grants, 328, 427 
Yugoslavia, 124, 1086 
Wheat Council, International, U.S. delegation to 18th 

session, 767 
White, Lincoln, 302, 786 
WHO. See World Health Organization 
Wilcox, Francis O., 249, 4S3, 736, 899 
Wilkins, Fraser, 290 
Willis, Frances E., 1051 
Willkie, Philip H, 575 
Wilson, Charles E., 59, 62 
Wilson, Thomas B., 5SS 
Women, convention on nationality of, 550 
Women, Inter-American Commission of, 10th Assembly, 
addresses, article, and messages ( Dulles, Eisenhower, 
Lee, Rinc6n de Gautier), 5S4 
Women, inter-American convention on granting of polit- 
ical rights to, S13 
Women, U.N. role in improving status of, article (Hahn), 

206 
Women in the Foreign Service, tribute to, address 

(Heath), 1051 
World Bank. See International Bank 
World Health Organization : 
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature of regula- 
tions, 5S9 
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712 
World Meteorological Organization : 
Convention, 210, 909 

2d Congress, U.S. delegation and accomplishments, ar- 
ticle (Reichelderfer), 435 



Index, July to December 1955 



1125 



World Peace Council, history of, letters (Morton, Powell), 

79 
World Symposium on Solar Energy, meeting, 836 
Wounded and sick, treatment in time of war. See Geneva 

conventions 
Wright, Adm. Jerauld, 699 

Yost, Charles W., 249, 300 
Young, Kenneth T., 843 

Youth and the Free World, address (Stassen), 535 
Yugoslavia : 
Quadripartite talks with U.S., U.K., and France, joint 
communique, 49 



Yugoslavia — Continued 
Treaties, agreements, etc.: 

Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S., 

124 
Austrian state treaty, 1086 
Facilities assistance, agreement with U.S., 770 
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74 
Military assistance property, agreement with U.S., 86 
Postal convention, universal, 210 
Wheat agreements with U.S., 124, 1086 
U.S. defense support to, statement (Stassen), 31 
U.S. Deputy Under Secretary of State Murphy, joint 

communique following visit, 566 
U.S. Secretary of State, visit, 733, 833 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE 
Publication 6373 

Released September 1956 



U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1956 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. - Price 25 cents 






■■-■■'' 






M: 



%€/ ^Deficwtmenl/ xw t/tat& 




XXXIII, No. 836 
July 4, 1955 




TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNITED NATIONS 

Address by the President 3 

Address by Secretary Dulles 6 

THE MORAL FOUNDATION OF THE UNITED 

NATIONS • Address by Secretary Dulles 10 

OURfNEW PARTNER— THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC 

OF GERMANY • by Ambassador James B. Conant . . 12 

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MUTUAL SECURITY PRO- 
GRAM FOR 1956 • Statement by Harold E. Stassen . 29 

U.S. -CANADIANS AGREEMENT ON DISTANT EARLY 

WARNING SYSTEM 22 



For index see inside back cover 



Boston Public Library 
Superintend-"^ of Documents 

AUG 1 1 1955 




an 



3fA 



Q)e/ia*hne7it cf 5/Lte -DUllGtlll 



Vol. X XXIII, No. 836 • Publication 5912 
July 4, 1955 



For sale by the Superintendent o( Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Prick: 

62 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.26 

Single copy, 20 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1956). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
or State Boilktin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication issued by the 
Public Services Division, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
selected press releases on foreign pol- 
icy, issued by the White House and 
the Department, and statements and 
addresses made by the President and 
by the Secretary of State and other 
officers of the Department, as well as 
special articles on various phases of 
international affairs and the func- 
tions of the Department. Informa- 
tion is included concerning treaties 
and international agreements to 
which the United States is or may 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



Tenth Anniversary of the United Nations 



The Tenth Anniversary Meeting of the United 
Nations was held at San Francisco, Calif., June 
20-26. Following are the texts of an address by 
President Eisenhower at the opening session on 
June 20 and an address by Secretary Dulles on 
June 24- 



ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT 

White House press release dated June 20 

This, my second appearance before the United 
Nations, gives me, as Chief Executive of the 
United States, the great privilege of joining with 
you in commemoration of an historic date — sig- 
nificant, momentous, for all mankind. 

I am privileged to bring you a special message 
from the Congress of the United States. Last 
week the Congress unanimously adopted a resolu- 
tion requesting me to express to all of you here, 
on behalf of the people of the United States, our 
deep desire for peace and our hope that all nations 
will join with us in a renewed effort for peace. 

Later this week my close friend and associate, 
Secretary John Foster Dulles, speaking with my 
full confidence and concurrence, will address you 
on appropriate elements in the foreign policy of 
the United States. Because of this circumstance, 
it seems fitting that I, today, speak principally in 
terms of my country's unswerving loyalty to the 
United Nations and of the reasons for our tireless 
support of it. 

A decade ago, in this city, the charter of the 
United Nations was signed by its 50 founding 
members. Into a world shattered and still at war, 
but hopeful and eager for a new dawn, was born 
an international organization fashioned to be the 
supreme instrument of world peace. 

For this Nation, I pay respectful tribute to you 
whose faith and patience and courage and wisdom 
have brought it through 10 tumultuous, frequently 
discouraging, sometimes terrifying — but often 



rewarding — years. That there have been failures 
in attempts to solve international difficulties by the 
principles of the charter, none can deny. That 
there have been victories, only the willfully blind 
can fail to see. But clear it is that without the 
United Nations the failures would still have been 
written as failures into history. And, certainly, 
without this organization the victories could not 
have been achieved ; instead, they might well have 
been recorded as human disasters. These the 
world has been spared. 

So, with the birthday congratulations I bring, I 
reaffirm to you the support of the Government of 
the United States in the purposes and aims of the 
United Nations and in the hopes that inspired its 
founders. 

Facing a Second Decade 

Today — together — we face a second decade. 
We face it with the accumulated experience of the 
first 10 years, as well as with the awful knowledge 
of nuclear weapons and the realization that a cer- 
tain and enduring peace still eludes our persistent 
search. 

But the summer of 1955, like that one of 1945, 
is another season of high hope for the world. 
There again stirs in the hearts of men a renewed 
devotion to the work for the elimination of war. 
Each of us here is witness that never in 10 years 
has the will of many nations seemed so resolved 
to wage an honest and sustained campaign for a 
just and lasting peace. True, none of us can pro- 
duce incontestable evidence to support this feel- 
ing. Nevertheless, all of us, I think, will testify 
that the heartfelt longings of countless millions 
for abundance and justice and peace seem to be 
commanding everywhere a response from their 
governments. These longings have strengthened 
the weak, encouraged the doubtful, heartened the 
tired, confirmed the believing. Almost it seems 
that men, with souls restored, are, with faith and 



July 4, 1955 



courage, resuming the march toward the greatest 
human goal. 

Within a month there will be a four-power con- 
ference of Heads of Government. Whether or not 
we shall then reach the initial decisions that will 
start dismantling the terrible apparatus of fear 
and mistrust and weapons erected since the end 
of World War II, I do not know. The basis for 
success is simply put: it is that every individual 
at that meeting be loyal to the spirit of the United 
Nations and dedicated to the principles of its 
charter. 

I can solemnly pledge to you here — and to all 
the men and women of the world who may hear 
or read my words — that those who represent the 
United States will strive to be thus loyal, thus 
dedicated. For us of the United States, there is 
no alternative, because our devotion to the United 
Nations Charter is the outgrowth of a faith deeply 
rooted in our cultural, political, spiritual tradi- 
tions. 



Principles of U.N. Charter 

Woven into the charter is the belief of its 
authors: 

— that man — a physical, intellectual, and spirit- 
ual being — has individual rights, divinely be- 
stowed, limited only by the obligation to avoid 
infringement upon the equal rights of others; 

— that justice, decency, and liberty in an orderly 
society are concepts which have raised men above 
the beasts of the field : to deny any person the op- 
portunity to live under their shelter is a crime 
against all humanity. 

Our Republic was born, grew, stands firm to- 
day in a similar belief. 

The charter assumes that every people has the 
inherent right to the kind of government under 
which it chooses to live and the right to select 
in full freedom the individuals who conduct that 
government. 

Hence the charter declares : 

— that on every nation in possession of foreign 
territories, there rests the responsibility to assist 
the peoples of those areas in the progressive de- 
velopment of free political institutions so that ulti- 
mately they can validly choose for themselves 
their permanent political status. 

Our long history as a Republic manifests a self- 



imposed compulsion to practice these same prin- 
ciples. 

The charter recognizes that only those who en- 
joy free access to historical and current facts and 
information, and through objective education 



Text of Concurrent Resolution 
on Renewed Efforts for Peace ' 

Whereas it is the hope and prayer of the American 
people that peace will be established among all the 
nations of the world, thus avoiding the oarnage 
and destruction of war, making possible the lifting 
of the burden of arms and thereby freeing the ener- 
gies of mankind to work more effectively to over- 
come the ravages of hunger, disease, illiteracy, and 
poverty : Therefore be it 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the 
Senate concurring). That the Congress reaffirms 
the deep desire of the people of the United States 
for an honorable and lasting peace, and expresses 
the hope that the people of all the nations of the 
world join with the people of the United States in 
a renewed effort for peace. 

Sec. 2. The President is requested to convey an 
expression of such reaffirmation and such hope to 
the representatives of the nations gathered in San 
Francisco to commemorate the tenth anniversary 
of the founding of the United Nations. 



1 H. Con. Res. 157, 84th Cong., 1st sess. ; adopted 
by the House of Representatives on June 14 and by 
the Senate on June 17. 



learn to comprehend their meanings, can success- 
fully maintain and operate a system of self- 
government. 

Our Republic, likewise, maintains that access to 
knowledge and education is the right of all its 
citizens — and of all mankind. 

Written under the shadow of war, the charter 
is strong in the conviction that no nation has a 
right to employ force aggressively against any 
other. To do so — or to threaten to do so — is to 
defy every moral law that has guided man in his 
long journey from darkness toward the light. 
Those who wrote it clearly realized that global 
war has come to pose for civilization a threat of 
shattering destruction and a sodden existence by 
the survivors in a dark and broken world. 

Likewise, they recognized that the first responsi- 
bility of every nation is to provide for its own 
defense; and, in pursuance of this responsibility, 
it has the clear right to associate itself with other 



Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



like-minded peoples for the promotion of their 
common security. 

But they who wrote the charter emphasized that 
in the formation of such associations, within the 
framework of the United Nations, it is incumbent 
upon the contracting parties to inform the world 
by solemn assurance, always supported by deeds, 
that the sole purpose is defense, devoid of aggres- 
sive aims. 

Pledge of U.S. Support 

We as a nati6n believe these truths that are ex- 
pressed in the charter. We strive to live by them. 
So: 

We shall always maintain a government at home 
that recognizes and constantly seeks to sustain for 
the individual those rich economic, intellectual, 
and spiritual opportunities to which his human 
rights entitle him. 

In our relations with all other nations, our atti- 
tude will reflect full recognition of their sovereign 
and equal status. We shall deal with common 
problems in a spirit of partnership. 

Insofar as our technical, material, and intel- 
lectual capacities permit and wherever our aid — 
including the peaceful use of atomic energy — may 
be needed and desired, we shall continue to help 
others achieve constantly rising economic levels. 
Thereby, we trust that they will have increased 
opportunity to attain their own cultural and 
spiritual aspirations. 

We shall work with all others — especially 
through this great organization, the United Na- 
tions — so that peaceful and reasonable negotia- 
tions may replace the clash of the battlefield. In 
this way we can in time make unnecessary the 
vast armaments that — even when maintained only 
for security — still terrify the world with their 
devastating potentiality and tax unbearably the 
creative energies of men. 

As some success in disarmament is achieved, we 
hope that each of the so-called great powers will 
contribute to the United Nations, for promoting 
the technical and economic progress of the less 
productive areas, a portion of the resultant sav- 
ings in military expenditures. 

An abiding faith inspired the men and women 
who devised the great charter under which you 
work. We of the United States share that faith. 
We hold fast to the hope that all nations in their 
intercourse with others will observe those ameni- 



ties of deportment, customs, and treatment of 
other nationals as are sanctioned by tradition, by 
logic, and by friendly purposes. 

We and a majority of all nations, I believe, are 
united in another hope: that every government 
will abstain from itself attempting, or aiding 
others to attempt, the coercion, infiltration, or de- 
struction of other governments in order to gain 
any political or material advantage or because of 
differences in philosophies, religions, or ideologies. 

We, with the rest of the world, know that a 
nation's vision of peace cannot be attained through 
any race in armaments. The munitions of peace 
are justice, honesty, mutual understanding, and 
respect for others. 

Working for Peace 

So believing and so motivated, the United States 
will leave no stone unturned to work for peace. 
We shall reject no method, however novel, that 
holds out any hope, however faint, for a just and 
lasting peace. 

May I recall to you the words of a great citizen 
of this country, Abraham Lincoln, which, though 
uttered in a different context, apply to the prob- 
lem which the world now seeks to solve. He said : 

The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the 
stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, 
and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, 
so we must think anew and act anew. We must dis- 
enthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country. 

In such a body as this, it seems fitting that we 
should add to Lincoln's words : "Each for himself , 
our country and humanity." 

The object of our second decade is still peace, 
but a peace of such new kind that all the world 
will think anew and act anew. It cannot be a 
mere stilling of the guns — it must be a glorious 
way of life. In that life the atom, dedicated once 
as man's slayer, will become his most productive 
servant. It will be a peace to inspire confidence 
and faith so that all peoples will be released from 
the fear of war. Scientists will be liberated to 
work always for men, never against them. Who 
can doubt that in the next 10 years world science 
can so beat down the ravages of disease and the 
pangs of poverty that humankind will experience 
a new expansion of living standards and of cul- 
tural and spiritual horizons. In this new kind 
of peace the artist, teacher, and philosopher, 
workman, farmer, producer, and scientist will 



July 4, 1955 



truly work together for the common welfare. 

These hopes are not new. They are as old as 
history. But now as we meet on this Tenth Anni- 
versary in the city where was born the United 
Nations, we must realize that at last they are 
steadily and surely attainable. This is new. 
Our part is to rededicate ourselves to the ideals 
of the United Nations Charter. May we here 
and now renew our determination to fulfill man's 
ancient dream, the dream which so inspired the 
founders of this organization! 

Thus our duty will be nobly done, and future 
generations will behold the United Nations and 
stand up to call it blessed. 



ADDRESS BY SECRETARY DULLES 

Press release 383 dated June 24 

Anniversaries can be both pleasant and useful 
occasions. This meeting is of that kind. We look 
backward and see much that was good. We look 
forward and see much of promise. 

The United Nations has already shown that it 
is here to stay. One proof is the presence here 
of 37 Foreign Ministers who have come from all 
parts of the earth. Another proof is the fact that, 
since its founding, no member nation has sought 
to withdraw ; and there is a long — too long — wait- 
ing list of qualified nations which want to become 
members. 

This esteem for the United Nations is based on 
solid accomplishments. 

In the political field there have been moments 
of triumph, as when the United Nations enabled 
Iran to bring about withdrawal of foreign troops 
from its soil. And when it helped Greece to over- 
come the threat of Communist subversion. And, 
above all, when it saved the Republic of Korea by 
organizing collective defense. 

In the field of non-self-governing territories, 
the United Nations, working through the Trustee- 
ship Council and otherwise, improves the lot of 
many dependent peoples and brings them nearer 
the goal of self-government or independence. 

Through its Declaration of Human Rights, the 
United Nations holds aloft a standard which will 
lead increasingly to respect for the individual 
human being and his sacred God-given rights. 

Through the Economic and Social Council, 
much is being done to improve the economic and 



social conditions of the less developed areas of 
the world. 

We live in the Atomic Age. And members of 
the United Nations, responding to President 
Eisenhower's stirring proposal, are joining to- 
gether to create an international agency which 
will harness for human welfare what was only 
a weapon of war. 

Above and beyond concrete actions is the all- 
pervading moral influence which the United Na- 
tions exerts. In fulfillment of the words of 
Arthur H. Vandenberg — a name never to be for- 
gotten here — our General Assembly has become 
a "town meeting of the world," exercising a guid- 
ing and enlightening influence on the conduct of 
all nations. 

These achievements explain why, throughout 
the world, the United Nations is held in high re- 
spect. As President Eisenhower said in his open- 
ing greeting to you, the United States takes pride 
in its loyal support of the United Nations in all 
these manifold activities which benefit mankind. 

Collective Effort To Preserve Freedom 

The vision of the founders was indeed a lofty 
one. They met, while war still raged, determined 
to save mankind from the scourge of future war. 
But the charter they wrote does not call for peace 
at any price. The peace of the charter is a peace 
of justice; it is a peace which will assure to all 
nations great and small the right to be genuinely 
independent; it is a peace which will enable all 
individuals, however humble, to enjoy their God- 
given right to freedom. 

To attain these high goals, the charter calls 
upon the nations to work together. Fellowship 
is indeed the essence of the charter. No solitary 
effort could win for any nation the charter's goals. 
Collective effort is needed to preserve freedom. 
Without collective strength despotism would have 
free rein ; the rights of nations would be trampled 
under foot, and human beings would be made 
slaves. 

The founders of the United Nations endowed 
the charter with the flexibility needed to keep alive 
this concept of collective effort that these unpre- 
dictable times demand. A secure peace still eludes 
us. But that spirit of collective effort implicit 
in the charter, if practiced in good faith and with 
creative will, can guide us toward the ultimate 
goal of man — peace with freedom. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Collective Protection Against Aggression 

We all know that certain of the activities of 
the United Nations have been gravely hampered 
by the use — abuse — of veto power in the Security 
Council. This has prevented the Security Council 
from discharging many of its intended functions. 
Also, the Security Council has never brought into 
being the security force which it was supposed 
to command. The reason is that the members 
have not sufficiently trusted each other to make it 
practicable for them to unite their forces. 

Happily, the framers of the charter realized the 
limitations under which the Security Council 
might operate. They did not require the members 
to risk their future on a rigid, all-or-nothing 
proposition. They provided alternatives. Ar- 
ticle 51 permits like-minded nations with common 
problems of defense to join together under the 
charter for their collective protection against ag- 
gression. This has been widely availed of by 
nations which trusted each other and which felt 
bound together by a sense of common destiny. 

The first so to act were the 21 American Re- 
publics. They had been closely associated for a 
century and a half. They knew each other, and 
they trusted each other. So in 1947 they made 
their Rio Pact. It recognized that an armed at- 
tack against any American state was an attack 
against them all. 

Others followed in that way. There was the 
Brussels Pact of 1948, the North Atlantic Treaty 
of 1949, and the Manila Pact of 1954. Now there 
are the London and Paris Accords of 1954, which 
bring about the beginning of Western European 
Union, a union long dreamed of by men of vision 
and good will but which, until now, has eluded 
human grasp. 

Every one of these collective security arrange- 
ments embodies the basic principle of the United 
Nations Charter, a principle which in turn de- 
rives from the teachings of all the great religions, 
that people have the right and the duty to help 
each other. 

Every one of these arrangements also gives 
added security even to the nonparticipants. 
There is less armament, because multiplication of 
armament is avoided when the force that protects 
one is equally at the service of many. Also, the 
military power and facilities of a coalition tend to 
become distributed and not within the control of 
any single nation. 



In international affairs, as in domestic affairs, 
the sharing of power is the best safeguard against 
abuse. Power which is shared among a group of 
independent, sovereign nations cannot be used ef- 
fectively unless the participating countries are in 
accord. Such accord would be totally unattain- 
able except for collective self-defense. 

Because collective security responds to the needs 
and highest aspirations of mankind, it has been 
invoked by many nations. The United States, 
which in 1914 and again in 1939 sought safety in 
neutrality, has now learned by that hard experi- 
ence that security lies in collective action. We 
believe that the power which we possess ought to 
be made available for the protection of others, just 
as we desire the help of others for our own defense. 
So the United States is today a party to mutual 
security treaties which bind us collectively with 
the defense of no less than 44 countries. We are 
proud to have these multiple ties of trust and 
confidence. 

These systems conform to the charter of the 
United Nations. They carry into effect the char- 
ter ideal of fellowship. They operate under the 
principles of the charter, and they are subject to 
the influence of this organization. They have at- 
tacked no nation; they have threatened no na- 
tion; and they thwart no nation that does not 
covet the land and peoples over which collective 
security stands guard. 

Collective Resolve To Back U.N. 

Out of the evolutionary process I describe, much 
good has come. Speakers who preceded me have 
referred to encouraging international develop- 
ments, particularly some of recent months. Wars 
have been ended in Korea and Indochina; the 
Austrian State Treaty has been signed ; relations 
between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have 
improved ; the Soviet Union seeks diplomatic and 
trade relations with the German Federal Repub- 
lic ; and peace talks have begun between the Soviet 
Union and Japan. 

These are indeed significant developments. But 
in our rejoicing, let us not forget lohy they have 
occurred or the sequence of events that have 
brought us where we are. If we forget that, we 
will have lost the key to a future of peace and 
prosperity. 

What has happened is because certain nations 
backed steadfastly the principles of the United 



July 4, J 955 



Nations and backed them with a resolve that, if 
need be, carried with it blood and treasure. 

Today there is no longer fighting in Korea. 
But wdry? The reason is that 16 members re- 
sponded to the call of the United Nations and 
fought the aggressor who had struck from the 
Communist north and almost immediately over- 
ran South Korea. After 3 years of bitter fight- 
ing, the aggressors were back at, or behind, their 
point of beginning. The aggression had failed. 
Then, and only then, did the aggressor accept an 
armistice and end the killing. It is indeed strange 
to hear this triumph of collective security now 
hailed as proof of the peaceloving character of 
the aggressor and its supporters. If they had had 
their way, we would today be commemorating the 
fifth anniversary of the demise of the United 
Nations. 

Today there is an armistice in Indochina. It 
was negotiated a year ago at Geneva. But shortly 
prior to the Geneva meeting, several members of 
the United Nations made clear that continuance 
of the fighting would carry a threat to all of South- 
east Asia and require consideration of collective 
defense within the framework of the United 
Nations Charter. 

Today there is an Austrian treaty. It is a 
treaty which could, and should, have been signed 
years ago. For nearly a decade Austria was de- 
prived of its freedom and its economy was ex- 
ploited by one of the occupying powers. During 
this period of travail Austria's courage was sus- 
tained by the moral and material succor of 
friendly powers and by the backing of its hopes 
by the United Nations. In the long run, that 
combination prevailed to win a victory for justice. 

Today Yugoslavia is no longer the target of 
abuse. An orchestrated threat began in 1948, 
when Yugoslavia asserted its national independ- 
ence and broke away from an alien yoke. During 
the next 7 years Yugoslavia was helped militarily 
and economically by nations which differed from 
its Government in almost every respect except for 
one, namely, the right of Yugoslavia to be a truly 
independent, sovereign nation. 

Today the Soviet Union seeks diplomatic and 
economic relations with the German Federal Re- 
public. That development comes after many 
years of hostility, during which the Federal 
Republic was given security and economic sup- 
port by those who believe in the right of the 



Germans to have an independent existence under 
a government of their own choosing. 

Today there is a possibility of peace between 
the Soviet Union and Japan. Four years ago, in 
this same room, 49 nations signed the Japanese 
Peace Treaty, a treaty of reconciliation. I recall 
how, from this very platform, that peace was 
bitterly assailed and rejected by some. But now, 
as a result of the treaty of San Francisco, Japan 
has resumed a place of honor and dignity in the 
community of nations, so that some nations now 
seek peaceful relations which 4 years ago they 
spurned. 

Sustaining the Collective Effort 

Throughout all of these events, there runs a 
common theme, the theme of fellowship. Those 
who believed in the principles of our charter have 
helped each other, and in so doing they have 
helped themselves. 

Some say that what has happened marks the 
beginning of an era. I believe that that can be. 
Certainly the United States, I pledge you, will 
do all that lies within its power to make it so. 
But we do not forget, we dare not forget, that 
some of those who now hail the recent develop- 
ments are precisely those who sought for years to 
stop them. 

It is not unprecedented to see men make a virtue 
of necessity. Today the necessity for virtue has 
been created by a stalwart thwarting of efforts to 
subvert our charter. If we want to see that virtue 
continue, I suggest that it may be prudent to con- 
tinue what has produced it. 

Steadfastness to principle and sacrifice for 
principle are the proven price of the good that we 
have won. It would be reckless to expect further 
good at any lesser price. To achieve peace with 
justice, peace with sovereignty for nations great 
and small, peace with respect for human beings 
without regard to class, will require sustaining 
the effort, the sacrifice, the solidarity which has 
brought us where we are today. Much has been 
accomplished, but more, much more, remains. 

There exists the problem of German unification. 
For 10 years part of Germany has been severed 
from the rest. That unnatural division of a great 
people constitutes a grave injustice. It is an evil 
which cannot be indefinitely prolonged without 
breeding more evil to plague the world. 



8 



Department of State Bulletin 



In Eastern Europe are nations, many with a 
long and proud record of national existence, 
which are in servitude. They were liberated 
from one despotism only to be subjected to another, 
in violation of solemn international undertakings. 

In Asia there is a Chinese Communist regime 
which became an aggressor in Korea, for which it 
stands condemned by the United Nations. It pro- 
moted aggression in Indochina and has used force 
and the threat of force to support its ambitions 
in the Taiwan area. Recent developments, includ- 
ing the influence of the Bandung conference, sug- 
gest that the immediate threat of war may have 
receded. Let us jtray that this is so. But the 
situation in Asia remains one that cannot be re- 
garded with equanimity. 

Also, we cannot forget the existence of that ap- 
paratus known as international communism. It 
constitutes a worldwide conspiracy to bring into 
power a form of government which never in any 
country, at any time, was freely chosen by the 
people and which destroys the reality of inde- 
pendence. At Caracas last year the Organization 
of American States found that the activities of 
international communism constituted alien inter- 
vention in the internal affairs of nations and were 
a threat to international peace and security. This 
threat should end. 

Finally, there is the urgent problem of limiting 
the crushing burden of armaments. For many 
years the United States and its friends have 
sought to find ways to carry out the mandate of 
the charter to reduce the diversion for armaments 
of the world's human and economic resources. 
Nearly a decade ago the United States made a 
proposal to internationalize atomic energy. This, 
if accepted, would have prevented the present 
competitive production of these weapons of awe- 
some destructive power. 

This unprecedented proposal was made at a 
time when the United States was sole possessor of 
this weapon. It was rejected. 

This proposal was subsequently followed up by 
new proposals for the control and regulation of 
armaments and the establishment of an interna- 
tional organ to supervise an honest disarmament 
program. These proposals too were spurned. But 
the Soviet Union recently indicated that it might 
be prepared seriously to consider the initiative 
which had been taken months before by other mem- 
bers of the United Nations Disarmament Subcom- 
mittee. Let us hope that these indications can be 



translated into concrete action making possible 
limitations of armament which are in fact de- 
pendable and not a fraud. 

Facing the Future 

These are some of the problems that confront 
us as we face the future. They are problems which 
cannot be met if we shut our eyes to them, or if 
we are weak, confused, or divided. They are 
problems that can be met if we are faithful to the 
principles of our charter, if we work collectively 
to achieve their application, and if we are pre- 
pared to labor and sacrifice for the future as we 
have in the past. 

The United States asks no nation to do what it 
is not prepared to do itself. Any nation that 
bases its actions and attitudes in international af- 
fairs on the principles of the charter will receive 
the wholehearted cooperation of the United States. 

Admittedly the problems we face are not easy 
to solve, and they will not be quickly solved. There 
is room for many honest differences of opinion. 
But the existence of hard, unsolved problems need 
not itself be a source of danger and hostility if the 
nations will bring to the common task the spirit 
of our charter. 

There is one extremely simple method of bring- 
ing an end to what is called the "cold war" — 
observe the charter of the United Nations ; refrain 
from the use of force or the threat of force in in- 
ternational relations and from the support and 
direction of subversion against the institutions of 
other countries. 

To bring the cold war to an end, seven points 
are not needed ; * this one is sufficient. 

It is in that spirit that we go to Geneva, and 
we hope to find that spirit shared. If so, we can 
find there new procedures, or at least develop a 
new impetus, which will help to solve some of 
these vast and stubborn problems that still con- 
front us. 

We shall not, at Geneva, assume to act as a 
world directorate with the right to determine the 
destinies of others. Good solutions do not come 
from such a mood. We shall seek to find pro- 
cedures such that all nations directly concerned 
can fully assert whatever rights and views they 
have. 



1 Mr. Dulles was referring to the seven proposals made 
by Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov in an address before 
the anniversary meeting on June 22. 



July 4, 1955 



In other words, we shall try to carry into the 
Geneva conference the spirit which has been gen- 
erated by this commemorative gathering of 60 
nations. The sentiments which have been here 
expressed can inspire new strength, new deter- 
mination, and a new spirit of fidelity to the prin- 
ciples of the United Nations founders. 

In conclusion, I can do no better than to cite the 
pledge made here last Monday by the President of 
the United States : 



"We, with the rest of the world, know that a 
nation's vision of peace cannot be attained 
through any race in armaments. The munitions 
of peace are justice, honesty, mutual understand- 
ing, and respect for others. 

"So believing and so motivated, the United 
States will leave no stone unturned to work for 
peace. We shall reject no method, however novel, 
that holds out any hope, however faint, for a just 
and lasting peace." 



The Moral Foundation of the United Nations 



Address by Secretary Dulles ] 



This "Festival of Faith" is held here today 
because 10 years ago the United Nations was cre- 
ated in this city. Also we are assembled here 
because the religious people of the world con- 
tributed largely to that great act of creation, and 
they have ever since been steadfast in their sup- 
port of the United Nations. Thus, it is particu- 
larly appropriate that those of many faiths should 
gather here to renew publicly their dedication to 
the purposes and principles of the United Nations. 

There are many who share credit for the great 
accomplishment that the United Nations repre- 
sents. But we can usefully recall that moral 
concepts largely prompted the political decisions 
that, 10 years ago, were recorded here. 

When the Atlantic Charter was drawn up in 
August 1941 to define the hopes for a better world, 
it was decided to omit reference to the creation of 
a world organization. It was judged that our 
people did not want to repeat the League of 
Nations experiment. That point of view was car- 
ried forward into the United Nations Declaration 
of January 1, 1942. The religious people then 
came to see their responsibility and opportunity. 
In this country they organized and campaigned 
widely to develop a public opinion favorable to 
world organization. The political leaders quickly 
responded on a bipartisan basis. 



1 Made at the "Festival of Faith" of the San Francisco 
Council of Churches, San Francisco, Calif., on June 19 
(press release 366). 



I recall that history in order to remind our- 
selves that under a representative system of gov- 
ernment it is private persons and organizations 
that must themselves make it possible to move 
ahead to develop great new institutions. 

Our religious people also exerted a profound 
influence upon the form and character which the 
world organization would take. As originally 
projected at Dumbarton Oaks, the organization 
was primarily a political device whereby the so- 
called great powers were to rule the world. The 
projected charter did not attempt to bind the 
organization to standards of justice or of law, and 
the General Assembly was cast for a subordinate 
role. A Security Council, dominated by five na- 
tions, each of which had veto power, was designed 
to be the mainspring of the organization. 

Religious Leadership 

It was the religious people who took the lead 
in seeking that the organization should be dedi- 
cated not merely to a peaceful order but to a just 
order. It was they who sought that reliance 
should be placed upon moral forces which could 
be reflected in the General Assembly, the Social 
and Economic Council, and the Trusteeship Coun- 
cil, rather than upon the power of a few militarily 
strong nations operating in the Security Council 
without commitment to any standards of law and 
justice. 

The great debates of the San Francisco confer- 



10 



Department of State Bulletin 



ence of 1945 centered on these issues. In the end 
the charter was written so as to require the organ- 
ization to conform to principles of justice and 
international law. Also, the powers of the Gen- 
eral Assembly were enlarged so that the influence 
of world opinion could be effectively brought to 
bear upon the conduct of the nations. 

As we can now see, looking back, these changes 
were of profound significance. Indeed, without 
them the United Nations might not have survived 
these early, difficult years. 

Weakness of Security Council 

The Security Council has grievously disap- 
pointed those who believed that the great powers 
would act in concert to maintain world order. Not 
once during the 10 years of its life has the U.N. 
Security Council taken direct action under the 
provisions of the charter. It could not do so be- 
cause the U.N. contingents of land, sea, and air 
power contemplated by the Charter have never 
been brought into being. Whatever the Security 
Council has done, as in the case of Korea, has been 
in the form of a recommendation, a request, or a 
plea — never a command. And even the scope of 
its recommending has been gravely limited by 
abuses of the so-called veto power. The political 
vitality of the organization has been found prin- 
cipally in the General Assembly and its right to 
recommend, a right which carries great authority 
because its recommendations reflect the judgment 
of 60 nations, representing many races, creeds, and 
areas. 

Significant achievements have been recorded by 
other organs of the United Nations which are not 
dominated by the so-called great powers and where 
no veto power exists. That is particularly true 
of the Economic and Social Council and the 
Trusteeship Council. By the Declaration of Hu- 
man Rights the United Nations has raised a stand- 
ard which will exert a profound influence 
throughout the world for all future time. 

So, as this past decade has unrolled, it has re- 
vealed that the power of the organization was pri- 
marily a moral power, derived from the judgment 
of the participating nations and their peoples as 
to what was right and what was wrong. 

The successes of the United Nations have been 
largely due to those throughout the world who 
believe that there is a God, a Divine Creator of 
us all; that He has prescribed moral principles 



which undergird this world with an ultimate au- 
thority equal to that of physical law ; that this 
moral law is one which every man can know if 
only he open his heart to what God has revealed ; 
that these moral principles enjoin not merely love 
and respect of the Creator but also love and re- 
spect for fellow man, because each individual 
embodies some element of the Divine; and that 
moral principles should also govern the conduct 
of the nations. 

It is a most encouraging fact that all govern- 
ments, even including those who deny the exist- 
ence of moral law, feel it necessary to try to de- 
fend their conduct, if it is challenged, in terms of 
moral principles. This is particularly the case 
when the challenge occurs, and when defense must 
take place, within the General Assembly. This 
is a testimonial to the power of moral law. 

Thus, as we gather here as representatives of 
many faiths held throughout the world, we can 
find much ground for satisfaction. It has been 
demonstrated that the religious people of the 
world can generate the motive power required to 
vitalize a world organization by providing it with 
principles which are guiding not merely in theory 
but in fact. 

Challenge for the Future 

We must, however, also recognize that, while 
the history of the United Nations shows what the 
religions people of the world can do, it equally dis- 
closes that they do not always do it. Sometimes 
they seem weak, so that moral principles do not 
make themselves felt. Sometimes they are con- 
fused and divided. Sometimes, also, they are in- 
tolerant and impractical, demanding solutions 
which do not take account of the fact that until 
individual human beings in sufficient numbers are 
themselves dedicated to high moral principles, the 
moral solutions which may be devised by political 
authorities have little effect. 

To recognize these facts is to accept a challenge 
for the future. The first 10 years of the United 
Nations teaches a clear lesson. The lesson is that 
the people of the world who are committed to the 
moral law have a great responsibility to assure the 
continued vitality of the United Nations and its 
capacity to influence the course of international 
conduct. 

If the world organization were primarily oper- 
ated by military power, those of us who are here 



July 4, 1955 



11 



would have little to do. If it were primarily op- 
erated by the self-interest of a few great powers, 
those of us here would have little to do. Since, 
however, the United Nations, as now constituted, 
derives its authority primarily from the moral 
forces generated by our respective faiths, then 
those who participate in this "Festival of Faith" 
have much to do. Indeed, we and our fellows 
throughout the world carry a primary responsi- 
bility. 
A Prophet of one of the faiths represented here 



said: "Not by might, nor by power, but by my 
Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." That sentiment is 
common to all of our faiths. It can well guide us 
as we look to a future which contains greater 
hazard than any future men have ever faced, but 
which also contains greater opportunity. That 
opportunity can be grasped with confident hope if 
men and women of faith throughout the world 
develop and mobilize moral strength so that moral 
standards will increasingly prevail in the United 
Nations. 



Our New Partner — The Federal Republic of Germany 

by James B. Conant 

Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany 1 



A few weeks ago the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization, which is so important for the de- 
fense of the free world, took in a new member, the 
Federal Republic of Germany. At the same time, 
the United States established formal diplomatic 
relations with the Federal Republic by exchanging 
accredited Ambassadors. Once again the historic 
ties between the German people and the American 
peojjle find their expression through conversa- 
tions and negotiations between representatives of 
two sovereign nations. But for the first time in 
history we find ourselves allied with the Germans 
on a military basis. The United States and 
the Federal Republic of Germany are now both 
members of an international organization of su- 
preme importance and with a high degree of 
power, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 
an alliance created to defend Europe against 
Soviet aggression. 

For 10 years the relationship of our country to 
Western Germany has been that of guardian to 
ward. Last month the ward came of age. On 
May 5 the Federal Republic of Germany, repre- 
senting 50 million German people, became our 
partner. 2 On May 9 it became a member of the 



1 Address made before the Union League Club, Chicago, 
111., on June 20 (press release 363 dated June 17). 
" Bulletin of May 16, 1955, p. 791. 



12 



Atlantic family of nations, with equal rights and 
duties. 3 

This new association of partnership requires 
that the United States and Germany become bet- 
ter acquainted. Above all it requires that the 
margin of error in our own judgment be reduced to 
a minimum. Over the past 10 years much has been 
done by both Germans and Americans to develop 
better understanding between us. It has not 
always been a simple task. Often our view was 
obstructed by the ugly wreckage left behind by 
National Socialism and the war. But now, 10 
years after, I may say that most of the rubble has 
been cleared away — both physically and spirit- 
ually — and the road is open for what we hope 
will be a long and satisfactory venture in coopera- 
tion. 

In the past month I have been aware of 
heightened mutual curiosity, and on both sides a 
certain concern is mixed with curiosity. Both 
curiosity and concern are natural; it is well for 
new partners to scrutinize each other. 

Let me assure you that in Germany this exercise 
is taking place in an atmosphere of friendliness 
and frankness toward the United States. This 
is not too surprising. One of my most positive 
impressions formed in my 2y 2 years of experience 



"Ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 831. 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



with the Federal Eepublic is that our relation- 
ship with Germany, on balance, is good and is 
sound. It does not exclude differences of opin- 
ion — which is all to the good. A degree of differ- 
ence is normal and desirable in any close relation- 
ship, whether of nations or individuals. 

As far as the Government of the Federal Re- 
public is concerned, fundamental differences are 
minimal — in fact, almost nonexistent. As for 
the opposition, the majority of Germany's Social 
Democrats today confine their criticism of us 
largely to policy matters and do not extend it to 
either the American people or the American way 
of life. Many Social Democrats have visited the 
United States in recent years and have returned 
to Germany deeply impressed by our institutions 
no less than by our hospitality. And I have in 
my files countless letters from Germans who have 
been discovering more and more points of similar- 
ity between Germans and Americans. 

Our View of the German People 

But before I talk about the German view of us, 
I want to talk about how many of us view the 
Germans and Germany and try to answer some 
of the questions that my countrymen have been 
putting to me on this visit. 

To begin with, I must remind you that as a 
people we are no less addicted to forming stereo- 
types of other people than they are of us. In re- 
gard to Germany, some of us cling to a two-sided 
cliche. On the negative side, some of us still 
see Germans as reckless militarists — people who 
love regimentation and are capable of great bru- 
tality. At the same time, some of us are prone 
to think of Germans as superhuman creatures 
insofar as industriousness, efficiency, and vigor are 
concerned. But this conception of the Germans 
is a stereotype too. And the real flesh and blood 
German of today has just about as much resem- 
blance to either image as any real American has 
to the preconceived notion that many Germans 
and other Europeans have of him. 

While the Federal Republic was moving toward 
sovereignty, integration with the West, and re- 
armament, Americans asked me repeatedly if we 
could really trust the new Germany. Now that 
the Federal Republic is a newly sovereign state, 
people ask me how I can be sure that an inde- 
pendent Germany won't reject a democratic gov- 
ernment and succumb once more to a dictatorship. 



They remind me of what happened to the Weimar 
Republic. Let me say emphatically that the Fed- 
eral Republic of today is a far cry from the Re- 
public of Weimar days. I know whereof I speak, 
for I have seen both. 



Days of the Weimar Republic 

In 1925, 7 years after the German surrender in 
World War I, I spent several months in the Wei- 
mar Republic. I was a young chemist then, and 
I was keenly interested in everything I saw and 
heard. I found a Germany that was suffering 
from the aftermath of a fabulous postwar infla- 
tion. Political assassinations and local uprisings 
had become commonplace. It was hard to find 
anyone who would acknowledge German respon- 
sibility for that First World War, harder yet to 
find anyone who did not rationalize German de- 
feat as a "stab in the back" administered by 
"traitors" at home. Many Germans with whom 
I talked were indifferent, if not definitely hostile, 
to the principles on which the Weimar Republic 
was founded. I felt that the new governmental 
structure, lacking the loyal support of the more 
influential sections of the German population, was 
in jeopardy. 

The democratic elements in Germany were 
struggling against heavy odds. Had these ele- 
ments received encouragement and support from 
the Western democracies, they might have pre- 
vailed. But they did not receive help from the 
West; and in Germany they were opposed by 
powerful conservative and reactionary forces that 
had never accepted the military defeat of World 
War I and that stubbornly refused to break with 
the imperialistic past. Almost from the begin- 
ning, the official government of the Weimar Re- 
public found itself competing for popular support 
with an oppositionist shadow system made up of 
antidemocratic elements that were determined to 
achieve a nationalistic restoration at any cost. 
That was the Germany of 1925. In 1930, when I 
returned briefly, the shadow of Hitler was already 
on the wall and the clays of the Weimar Republic 
were numbered. 



German Recovery 

It so happened that it was approximately 7 
years after the German surrender in World War 
II when I returned to Germany as High Com- 



Ju/y 4, 1955 



13 



missioner. That was in early 1953. The Ger- 
many of the Federal Republic, then in its fourth 
year of being and facing a national election, was 
the antithesis of the Weimar Republic of the 
twenties. It was brisk and prosperous, its people 
healthy-looking, alert, and well-dressed. Vast 
reconstruction projects were rapidly effacing the 
ruins of the war-blasted cities. The recovery 
from economic chaos had been nothing short of 
miraculous. By 1953 the industrial index had 
climbed to 158 percent of the 1936 index, 1936 
being generally accepted as the last normal pre- 
war year. Exports were increasing steadily. 
Banks were sound and currency was stable. Since 
the surrender of 1945 Western Germany had had 
no uprisings, no organized revolts, no political 
assassinations. The temper of the people was 
utterly different from what it was in the twenties. 
If there were people who denied the responsi- 
bility of the Nazis for starting World War II, 
their voices were not to be heard. But, above 
all, the Germans are not now looking backward 
through rose-colored glasses. They have rejected 
the past and are facing the future. 

Naturally I was deeply interested in the story 
behind Germany's remarkable recovery, and I 
soon discovered that it began with the currency 
reform which took place June 20, 1948, by order 
of the Allied Military Government. 1 

If anyone ever needed evidence of the impor- 
tance of a stable currency, the history of Germany 
from 1945 until the summer of 1948 provides 
ample material. During the first postwar years, 
when there was no stable currency, very little 
rebuilding took place and trade was at a stand- 
still. Plans for starting up the industries again 
were blocked by a depreciated currency. As soon 
as a stable currency was introduced by the three 
Occupying Powers in the Western Zones, West- 
ern Germany began to flourish. It has continued 
to do so. And the currency continues sound and 
stable, safeguarded by a law that established a 
central bank, largely independent of the Finance 
Ministry, to supervise banking functions within 
the Federal Republic. Under existing arrange- 
ments in the Federal Republic of Germany, the 
experts tell me it would be technically very diffi- 
cult for any government to solve its social prob- 
lems by inflation. 



1 IUd., June 27, 1948, p. 835, and Aug. 1, 1948, p. 141. 



Closely connected with the creation of a stable 
currency and a sound banking system was the 
introduction by the Government, which was 
formed in late 1949, of an economic policy based 
on private initiative and competition. The taxing 
system was designed to enable industry to put back 
into business its profits. The reconstruction of 
German industry owes much to this system, for 
the capital market in Germany is still inadequate 
and long-term interest rates are very high. 

Marshall Plan Aid 

Of course, the impetus given by the Marshall 
plan aid was of the greatest importance, as Ger- 
mans in all walks of life acknowledge freely. All 
told, the American taxpayer contributed some 
$3.5 billion to the reconstruction of Germany. 
Most of this was given in the form of foodstuffs 
purchased in the United States, shipped to Ger- 
many, and given to the Federal Republic, which 
sold the goods and with the payment received 
established what were called counterpart funds. 
The counterpart funds thus created were loaned 
to German industries to help them rebuild their 
plants and expand their businesses. Marshall 
plan aid to the Federal Republic ended 3 years 
ago — though we continue some aid to the city of 
Berlin because of its special problems. 

The "miracle" of German recovery can be 
summed up in a few words: currency reform by 
the Occupation authorities ; establishment by law 
of a stable banking system ; wise economic policies 
developed by the Government, with emphasis on 
private industry ; and Marshall plan aid from the 
United States. To these factors should be added 
two others: namely, the well-known ability of the 
Germans to work hard and effectively, and the 
attitude of German labor leaders, who during the 
critical years refrained from pushing unreason- 
able demands for higher wages. In combination, 
all these factors have produced what can only be 
described as the "amazing" economic recovery of 
that part of Germany which is now the Federal 
Republic. 

The Adenauer Government 

Had I had any doubts of the political sta- 
bility of the new Germany, they vanished away 
in the September elections of 1953. Some of 
you may recall that Chancellor Konrad Adenauer 
assumed office in 1949 by virtue of one vote and 



14 



Department of State Bulletin 



with an extremely shaky majority for his coali- 
tion in the Bundestag, or Lower House of Parlia- 
ment. A skeptical Europe gave the Adenauer gov- 
ernment 6 months, but that government survived 
the G months and is now well on in its sixth year. 
Indeed, its victory in the 1953 elections was the 
kind described as a landslide. Adenauer emerged 
with an absolute majority for his own Christian 
Democratic Party and a two-thirds majority for 
his coalition of moderately conservative and mod- 
erately liberal parties. The German people had 
demonstrated by their vote their support of a gov- 
ernment based on democratic principles and 
favoring European integration and German par- 
ticipation in European defense. And they demon- 
strated just as clearly their rejection of extremist 
doctrines. In that election of 1953 neither Com- 
munists nor extreme rightists were able to win a 
single seat in the Bundestag. More recently, local 
elections in various parts of Germany have con- 
firmed this trend against radicalism of either right 
or left. 

Chancellor Adenauer has done what no chan- 
cellor of the Weimar Republic was able to do. He 
has managed to draw all parties into the new 
state, disbarring only the unreconstructed elements 
of left and right extremism. Under his leadership 
Germany's conservative and liberal elements have 
jointly created a democratic political system. 

There is political opposition — as there is bound 
to be in a democratic state — but in the Federal 
Republic the opposition, with the exception of the 
far-right and far-left splinter parties, is not hos- 
tile to the state; in no sense is it antidemocratic. 
Quite the contrary. The Social Democratic Party, 
which constitutes the body of the opposition, takes 
issue with the administration on economic prin- 
ciples and matters of political strategy but never 
on the validity of democratic principles. The 
Social Democratic Party is and always has been 
a stalwart champion of democratic processes, civil 
rights, and international cooperation — and, what 
is most important, it is militantly anti-Communist. 

I believe that many of the difficulties of the old 
Weimar Republic were at least partly due to the 
worldwide economic crisis of the late twenties and 
early thirties. With the help of the United States, 
the new Germany has developed this present gov- 
ernment against a background of increasing pros 
perity and human well-being. I am sometimes 
asked by Americans : Would the Germans have a 



change of heart in the event of another great eco- 
nomic depression? Personally I would not dare 
to predict what might happen in any European 
country if we were to experience again such a ter- 
rible economic crisis. But let me repeat : the Ger- 
many of today is not the Germany of the Weimar 
Republic. 

Combining Democracy and Military Strength 

Other questions asked of me repeatedly in the 
United States concern the future German army. 
About half the questions express fear that German 
rearmament may revive German militarism; the 



Anniversary of June 17 Uprising 

Statement by James B. Conant 

Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Oermany ' 

On June 17 the world remembers with honor the 
desperate courage of those who claimed their po- 
litical and economic rights against armed force in 
Communist-occupied Germany. The sorrow that 
their demands were so ruthlessly suppressed will 
always be illuminated by the light of their sur- 
passing courage. Free men everywhere are 
strengthened by the knowledge of their endurance 
through many dark days of waiting for that demo- 
cratic life they have so richly earned. 



1 Made on the anniversary of the uprising of June 
17, 1953, in the Soviet Zone of Germany (press 
release 362 dated June 16). For background, see 
Bulletin of July 6, 1953, p. 8. 



other half express fear that the Germans might 
not be willing to defend themselves at all ! 
(Superficially these two worries cancel each other 
out. ) Regarding the first apprehension, the Ger- 
man Government seems to be determined that the 
new army shall be under strict civilian control by 
the Administration and Parliament. This is the 
stated view of the Chancellor and of the respon- 
sible leaders in the Government coalition parties 
as well as in the opposition. In recent months 
numerous Government officials and parliamentary 
deputies have visited various countries of the 
Nato alliance, including the United States, to 
study the constitutional and political safeguards 
which the Western democracies have devised to 
insure continuity of civilian controls over their 
military establishments. The accounts of those 



July 4, 1955 



15 



who have returned to Germany from these trips 
have, convinced me that their visits have been 
highly productive — and perhaps belong to the best 
projects that the Government has ever sponsored 
under the auspices of the Exchange Program. 
The German officials and politicians have returned 
from the United States profoundly impressed 
with both the legal framework and the adminis- 
tration of our defense system. They have de- 
clared time and again that the principles em- 
bodied in our defense system have universal sig- 
nificance and, with appropriate adaptation, can 
and should be applied in Germany. 

The Germans are very much aware of their 
problem. It was epitomized recently by the 
leader of the latest group of visitors — incidentally, 
Vice President of the Parliament and chairman 
of a committee that corresponds to our Armed 
Services Committee. He said: "We Germans 
had a good army in the past. We hope to have a 
good democracy. Our tragedy has been that we 
have never been able to have both simultaneously. 
You Americans have both. We are here to find 
out how you work it." 

This straightforward statement reveals the 
great German dilemma : how to reconcile the in- 
herent disorder of democracy with the order re- 
quired for military strength. 

During the time of the Weimar Republic, the 
Reichswehr observed at best a posture of political 
aloofness. It was a state within the state — an in- 
strument of the generals, not of the government. 
The new concept of a German army is that of a 
defense force fully integrated with the democratic 
state as its loyal defender against enemies from 
within as well as from without. 

I am quite aware of the reaction of some of my 
fellow Americans who deplore the creation of a 
national German army. I can assure them that 
they will find themselves in the company of many 
Germans, including men and women in the highest 
positions. Less than a year ago the Chancellor 
himself and his government were opposed to the 
proposal of a German national army. They pre- 
ferred a European army with a European general 
staff and integrated German contingents. But 
this idea collapsed on August 30, 1954, when the 
European Defense Community failed to material- 
ize — and through no fault of the German Govern- 
ment or of the German people or, I might add, 
of the United States Government either. Ever 



since, the Federal Republic, in close cooperation 
with the French, British, and American allies, has 
endeavored to solve the common defense problem 
in a way that would not sacrifice democratic free- 
dom on the altar of security. The formula em- 
bodied in the Paris Agreements, calling for the 
establishment of a Western European Union 
within the framework of the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization, was accepted as the best — at 
least the next best — alternative to Edc. 

Attitude of German Youth 

Now what about the other side of the coin, the 
reluctance of many Germans, especially of Ger- 
man youth, to shoulder arms again? Well, this 
attitude has both its positive and its negative 
aspects. On the positive side, it is often said — 
indeed by Germans themselves — that the attitude 
is the direct result of Allied postwar policy to 
demilitarize Germany and that in this respect we 
have been singularly successful. However, honest 
appraisals of the facts forbid me to take too much 
credit for my Government. Allied policy may 
have been a contributing factor, but anyone who 
has seen the devastation of the early postwar Ger- 
many, and then witnessed the Herculean efforts 
of the German people to rebuild their country, will 
understand the deep-seated desire of the German 
people to live in peace — and to preserve the fruits 
of their labors. These German people have no 
desire to jeopardize their new prosperity by new 
military and political adventure. Their pride of 
achievement and their growing sense of economic 
security, more than anything else, lend substance 
and reality to the official declaration of their Gov- 
ernment never to seek a solution to political and 
territorial problems by resort to force. And that 
declaration applies with equal validity to the ques- 
tion of German reunification. 

On the other hand, it is also being said that 
preoccupation with material comfort and personal 
advancement will make German youth an unwill- 
ing comrade-in-arms. Predictions of this nature 
originate most often with politicians and parties 
known to be opposed to the policy of the Govern- 
ment. I want neither to belittle the weight of the 
argument nor to reflect on the honesty of all who 
advance it, but I have no intention of letting this 
argument get out of bounds. 

German youth is not overly enthusiastic about 
the prospect of military service. Well and good. 



16 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



Neither is our own youth — or, for that matter, 
the youth of any country that can offer its young 
generation a chance to live decently and securely. 
How real, then, is the thesis of those who say that 
German youth would not volunteer for armed 
service or, if drafted, would resist? In other 
words, in what way and to what extent would the 
behavior of German youth differ from that of the 
youth of other nations ? 

I think a number of surveys conducted by vari- 
ous German polling institutes over the past 2 
years give us a basis for a fair estimate of the 
attitude of German youth. During 1953 one such 
institute asked German youngsters whether they 
would like to become soldiers. Twenty-eight per- 
cent replied in the affirmative; 42 percent said 
they were prepared to become soldiers under cer- 
tain conditions — that is to say, for purposes of 
defense, in the event of draft, if decent treatment 
was guaranteed; and 28 percent answered that 
they would not be willing under any circumstances 
to join any army whatsoever. 

Evidently the German soldier of 1955 or '56 
will be different from his predecessors under 
either Imperial Germany or National Socialism. 
I cannot help feeling that he will resemble more 
closely the GI's of the forties and the fifties. And 
I am confident that, when it comes to the test, the 
German youth will, by and large, follow the ex- 
ample of their British, French, Benelux, Italian, 
and American colleagues. They may not relish 
the idea of military service, but when their num- 
bers come up, they accept the necessity. I am sure 
that young Germans will respond in this way. I 
can scarcely imagine them wanting to leave the 
task of protecting Germany to the youth of the 
United States. 

German Questions About American Policy 

And now, I think you will be interested, in hear- 
ing some of the searching questions that the Ger- 
mans put to me about the United States. 

I am often asked : Is there not danger that the 
United States may some clay return to a policy of 
isolationism and abandon Europe to its fate? 

I ask, in return, just how unrealistic they think 
we could be. In today's world, in which air power 
devours space at an ever-increasing rate of speed, 
a policy of isolationism for this country is un- 
thinkable. Membership of the United States in 
Nato, and indeed the whole postwar policy of the 
United States, show that isolationism has ceased 

July 4, 1955 

349459—55 3 



to be an influential force in American life. Our 
actions have spoken and continue to speak louder 
than words, but some of the words spoken have 
produced action and continue to produce it. In 
April of 1954 and again this spring, the President 
has guaranteed that our troops will remain in 
Europe. In his message of April 20, 1955, to the 
Congress 5 he said : 

The other free nations need the United States, and we 
need them, if all are to be secure. Here is a clear case 
of interwoven self-interest. 

Rerjeatedly the President and the Secretary of 
State have reaffirmed a basic tenet of our policy, 
which is that we cannot be secure in our own free- 
dom or in our own economic well-being unless, as 
the President recently stated, "elsewhere in the 
world, we help to build the conditions under which 
freedom can flourish by destroying the conditions 
under which totalitarianism grows." 

It is a matter of public record that a tremendous 
diplomatic, financial, and psychological effort has 
gone into the buildup of the Western defense sys- 
tem. The United States Government has contrib- 
uted a mighty share. We have done so with a 
high sense of urgency and with complete convic- 
tion of the importance of the task before us. We 
would hardly have supported and committed our- 
selves to assist in the buildup of a system of for- 
ward defense for Western Europe had we intended 
to scrap it just when it has finally come to fruition. 
As our Government has indicated time and again, 
the existence of a coordinated defense effort by 
the European powers is essential to the effective- 
ness of the whole Nato defense system. It has 
been the position of this Government that German 
membership in Western European Union and 
through Weu in Nato is a vital requirement of 
the Atlantic defense and indeed of our own na- 
tional defense. By the same token, America's ac- 
tive participation in Nato is an indispensable 
element in the planning of Western defense. 

Until we can be satisfied that a revolutionary 
change in world conditions has taken place and 
that a state of global security exists which renders 
obsolete the need for large-scale collective defense 
on a regional basis, it would be the height of folly 
to abandon the position of strength which we are 
now about to achieve. 

Another question I am often asked is whether 
the United States will continue to protect Berlin. 



6 Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 711. 



17 



t remind them that our Government has com- 
mitted itself to regarding any attack upon Berlin 
as an attack upon the United States, and I assure 
them that we shall remain in Berlin until that 
city is the capital of a Germany reunited in peace 
and freedom. 

Any effort on the part of the Soviet authorities 
or their German puppets to tamper with the pres- 
ent status of Berlin or to harass the population 
will find this Government solidly on the side of 
the Berliners. The Soviet Government is well 
aware that, until Berlin can attain its full and 
legitimate status as the capital of a united Ger- 
many, we will not tolerate any changes that would 
interfere with the lifeline of the city or that 
would arrest the city's gradual process of recovery. 

Of course my German friends ask many ques- 
tions about United States foreign economic and 
trade policies. Despite the steady and very sub- 
stantial progress registered by our Government in 
the direction of an increasingly liberal foreign 
economic policy, one or two deviations from this 
overall course have been seized upon as evidence 
that the United States has abandoned its liberal 
policy. 

The Unification Issue 

I am sure that through such questions and 
answers as we are exchanging with the Germans 
we are achieving a better understanding of each 
other. I have offered you just a sampling of the 
questions asked me on each side of the Atlantic. 
There is another field of questioning, grounded in 
a profoundly human and personal problem, that 
I have left to the end of this talk. 

In German minds and hearts, this problem tends 
to overshadow all others. Americans are uneasy 
about certain possibilities of solution of this prob- 
lem simply because they can appreciate so fully 
what its solution means to the German people. 
I refer to the fact that Germany is a divided 
country, with 17 million Germans in Eastern Ger- 
many cut off by the Iron Curtain from the 50 
million Germans of the Federal Republic, and 
with Germany's historic capital, Berlin, an island 
in the Soviet Zone and divided as the country is 
divided. Part of Berlin is under Western pro- 
tection; the rest is under Communist control. 

This unhappy division was the work of the 
Soviet Union, which ever since has sought to make 
reunification a bargaining point and a political 



spider's web. It has consistently been United 
States policy to help restore unity to Germany 
by peaceful means. Britain and France have 
joined our Government in periodic requests to the 
Soviet Union to permit reunification of Germany 
on the basis of free democratic elections. Just 
as repeatedly, the Soviet Union has refused thus 
far to allow reunification on a basis acceptable to 
either the three Western nations or to divided 
Germany itself. Thus far the Soviet Union has 
offered Germany unification only on conditions 
which, if accepted, would not merely isolate Ger- 
many but would leave all of Germany at the mercy 
of the Soviets. The offer has not appealed to 
Germans in either east or west. 

The Soviet Union has bitterly opposed integra- 
tion of the Federal Eepublic with its Western 
neighbors, its membership in Nato, and its close 
ties with the United States. To the last moment, 
the Soviet Union fought against ratification of the 
Paris pacts — not only by the Federal Republic but 
also by Britain and France. It alternated threats 
and promises in its attempts to prevent German 
ratification. If the Federal Republic ratified the 
treaties, it could never hope for reunification, the 
Soviets said, but, if it rejected the treaties, it 
would be reunited with the Soviet Zone virtually 
by day after tomorrow. Nevertheless, ratifica- 
tion took place. The German Federal Republic 
is sovereign ; it is joined with six other nations in 
Western European Union ; and it is the 15th mem- 
ber of Nato. 

All along it has been the position of the United 
States that, once the arrangements provided for 
by the Paris pacts had become accomplished facts, 
the Western nations would be in a better and 
stronger position to negotiate with the Soviet 
Union. With Western unity a reality, the 
Soviet Union would be compelled to take West- 
ern strength respectfully into account and to for- 
mulate its own plans accordingly. The fact is that 
shortly after the ratification of the Paris Agree- 
ments, the Soviet Government ended its long- 
standing obstruction of an Austrian state treaty. 
The sequence is thought-provoking. It suggests 
that our position was well taken. It suggests fur- 
ther that the forthcoming "summit" meeting will 
provide a strategic opportunity to probe the 
nature and the scope of the Soviet Government's 
recently developed symptoms of flexibility. 

I am struck by the fact that the Germans are 
viewing the problem of German reunification not 



18 



Department of State Bulletin 



as an isolated problem that requires isolated treat- 
ment but as part and parcel of a global problem. 
Let me quote to you what the German Ambassador 
to the United States, Dr. Krekeler, said in a recent 
speech : "We know," Dr. Krekeler said, "that the 
greatest hope for the reunification of Germany lies 
within a worldwide settlement of the present ten- 
sions between East and West." 

He added a very significant statement: "We 
also know," he said, "that we must not try for a 
reunification of Germany at a price or under con- 
ditions which would endanger our security." And 
he concluded : "We cannot possibly agree, there- 
fore, to any plans for a neutralization of 
Germany." 

Let me remind you that the Ambassador had 
just returned from a very important conference 
with Chancellor Adenauer. It is safe to assume, 
therefore, that what he told the assembled Amer- 
ican and foreign press was no more and no less 
than the official position of the Government of 
the Federal Republic. 

To my mind, this has been the most conclusive 
rebuff to Mr. Molotov's recent remark that the 
formula found for Austria "shows clearly that 
there are ways" of solving the German problem. 
The Ambassador's statement also reflects what I 
regard as the position on which the Adenauer gov- 
ernment and the majority of all parties repre- 
sented in the Bundestag seem agreed. I would 
define the points of their agreement on the re- 
unification issue as follows: 

1. No military measures for reunification. 

2. Reunification only under conditions that in- 
sure freedom. This means that steps must be: (a) 
changing of conditions in the Soviet Zone to al- 
low a free election campaign and (b) free elec- 
tions through all the former zones to choose rep- 
resentatives to a new parliament which will create 
a new all-German government. 

3. The new entire-German government must be 
completely free to decide its own future position 
in Europe, including its own position at the peace 
conference which will decide the boundaries of 
Germany. 

4. Any offer from the Russians that an all-Ger- 
man government be formed by a combination of 
the Pankow regime 6 and Bonn would be rejected 



6 Pankow is the seat of government of the German Demo- 
cratic Republic, the puppet regime sponsored by the Soviet 
authorities and controlling the Soviet Zone of Germany. 



out of hand; there must be no recognition of 
Pankow. 

5. Any discussion at this time of the future 
boundaries of Germany is premature. 

6. A neutralized Germany is out of the question. 

Whatever the chances for reunification may be, 
we can rest assured that the Federal Government 
and the parties that support it have no intention 
of bartering away the measure of security they 
have now obtained for the doubtful promises of 
the Kremlin. Neither their alliance with the West 
nor their sovereignty, it seems, is negotiable. 

U.S. -German Relations 

It is good to know this, and it is also good to 
know that Chancellor Adenauer and his colleagues 
mean what they say. The relations between the 
United States Government and the German Gov- 
ernment have never been better than they are to- 
day. That this is so is, at least in part, due to 
the efforts of Mr. Adenauer. President Eisen- 
hower expressed this very thought when he re- 
cently restated his "utmost faith and confidence" 
in the Chancellor. That is why we can leave the 
decision regarding a visit to Moscow calmly with 
him. 

But, apart from £>ersonalities, it is particularly 
gratifying to know that their policy is so close 
to our own. The position of the United States 
Government with respect to German unification 
has been unambiguous and steadfast. We do not 
now and we shall not in the future recognize a 
status quo that is predicated on the willful, in- 
humanitarian, and unnatural dismemberment of 
a nation. We do not believe that an injustice 
created by force and maintained by force will 
generate anything but ill will, resistance, and a 
permanent state of insecurity. We will therefore 
continue our efforts to liquidate by peacef ul means 
the current state of affairs and work jointly with 
the Federal Republic and our other allies toward 
the restoration of German unity in freedom. This 
we will do not merely to right a major historical 
wrong, not only for Germany's sake, but also from 
motives of enlightened self-interest, to remove a 
major source of the friction that is splitting Ger- 
many, Europe, and indeed the world. 

We do not believe, however, that this can 
be accomplished through neutralization — and 



July 4, 7955 



19 



neither does the German Government. It is 
sometimes asserted that a reunified Germany 
might defend itself alone with only it own troops. 
But the idea that a country like Germany, which 
has no natural boundaries at all (and which is 
not a natural mountain fortress like Switzerland) , 
could defend itself alone outside a European de- 
fense system simply ignores the new military 
realities which have been created by nuclear weap- 
ons and advancing aeronautics. Comparisons of 
Germany with other countries that are strate- 
gically less important and lack Germany's indus- 
trial potential can only mislead. Germany is not 
Sweden; she is not Austria; she is not Switzer- 
land — from any angle you choose to view her, 
military, political, or economic. 

She is our new partner, and it would be hard 
for two independent nations to see more eye-to- 
eye on issues of foreign policy than do the United 
States and the Federal Republic of Germany. 
The thought is comforting in the face of the 
great common tasks that lie ahead. It is par- 
ticularly reassuring on the eve of the conference 
"at the summit." 

It is not for me to make predictions on the 
agenda or the outcome of the conference. As 
President Eisenhower and Secretary Dulles have 
indicated so clearly, the conference is a beginning, 
not an end. It will not and cannot bring the 
answer to all problems — considering that some 
have defied solution for years and some for gen- 
erations. It will, we hope, open new "avenues 
toward peace." If so, it will, we hope, bring into 
the open the problems we know to be so des- 
perately in need of solution. 

That is what we hope for. 

But we know that we will go to this conference 
with a feeling of confidence and strength — 
strength that flows from a new unity of purpose — 
and unity that is devoted solely to the attainment 
of a greater measure of peace and security for all. 

Letters of Credence 

Turkey 

The newly appointed Ambassador of the Turk- 
ish Republic, Haydar Gork, presented his creden- 
tials to the President on June 21. For the text 
of the Ambassador's remarks and the text of the 
President's reply, see Department of State press 
release 373. 



20 



Status of 21 Americans 
Who Refused Repatriation 

Press release 360 dated June 16 

Following is the text of a joint statement of the 
Departments of State, Defense, and Justice issued 
at Emergency Press Headquarters, Operation 
Alert, June 16, 1955. 

In order to further clarify the status of the 21 
former members of the American Armed Forces 
who while prisoners of war in Korea refused repa- 
triation, and who were given dishonorable dis- 
charges and are now in civilian status, the Defense, 
State, and Justice Departments today issued the 
following statement: 

1. The Military Departments will instruct 
their field commands that if any of the 21 presents 
himself to military authorities as an American 
desiring return to the jurisdiction of the United 
States, he will be turned over to the custody of 
the nearest U.S. Consular representatives. 

2. The State Department will instruct its Con- 
sular representatives that immediately upon mak- 
ing contact with any of these persons they would 
inform him that in event of return to the United 
States he, of course, would be subject to the laws 
of the United States including the U.S. Code of 
Military Justice for any wrongful act which he 
may have committed. 

3. Consistent with existing laws and regulations 
the State Department will arrange for the return 
of such persons to the continental United States. 
Upon the return to the United States of any of 
these individuals the appropriate federal author- 
ity will determine whether further action will be 
taken. 



U.S.S.R. Agrees on Time and Place 
for Four-Power Meeting 

Following is a translation of the Soviet note of 
June 13, delivered to the U.S. Embassy at Moscow, 
in reply to the tripartite note of June 6 J propos- 
ing that the four Heads of Government meet at 
Geneva July 18-21. 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics presents its com- 
pliments to the Embassy of the United States of 



1 Bulletin of June 20, 1955, p. 989. 

Department of State Bulletin 



America and in connection with the Embassy's 
note of June 6 has the honor to state the following : 

The Soviet Government, in its note of May 26 
in reply to the note of the Government of the 
United States of America of May 10, 2 has already 
stated its positive attitude to convene a conference 
of the Heads of Government of the United States 
of America, the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and 
France, having in mind that the objective of this 
conference is to lessen international tension and 
strengthen mutual trust in relations between states. 

The Soviet Government agrees that the confer- 
ence of the Heads of Government of the Four 
Powers should open July 18 in Geneva. At the 
same time, the Soviet Government cannot help 
but note that the note of the Government of the 
United States of America of June 6 displays con- 
cern that the conference should last for 3 to 4 days 
and also avoids the important question raised in 
the note of the Soviet Government of May 26 con- 
cerning the tasks of this conference. In the pres- 
ent situation, the efforts of the Governments of all 
Four Powers participating in the conference 
should be directed first of all to guaranteeing the 
fulfillment of the basic task of the conference — 
reducing tension in international relations. 

The Soviet Government notes with satisfaction 
the information that the Government of Switzer- 
land has expressed agreement to holding this con- 
ference in Geneva. 

Analogous notes are also being sent to the Gov- 
ernments of Great Britain and France. 



Joint Commission Asked To Investigate 
Resources of St. Croix River Basin 

Press release 349 dated June 13 

As a result of a request received from the Gov- 
ernment of Canada that arrangements be made to 
have the International Joint Commission conduct 
an investigation and report with regard to the 
water resources of the St. Croix River Basin, the 
United States joined with Canada in sending a 
Reference on June 10 to the International Joint 
Commission — United States and Canada, in ac- 
cordance with the provisions of article IX of the 
Boundary Waters Treaty of January 11, 1909 (36 
Stat. 2448). 



The Reference sent by the Department of State 
to the Chairman of the United States Section of 
the Commission reads as follows : 

Department of State, Washington. 

June 10, 1955 

The International Joint Commission — 
United States and Canada 
Washington, D. C, and Ottawa, Canada. 

Sirs : 

In order to determine whether greater use than is now 
being made of the waters of the St. Croix River Basin 
would be feasible and advantageous, the Governments of 
the United States of America and Canada have agreed 
to refer the matter to the International Joint Commission 
for investigation and report pursuant to Article IX of 
the Treaty concerning Boundary Waters between the 
United States and Canada, signed January 11, 1909. 

Having regard to the legal, engineering and economic 
aspects of the matter, it is desired that the Commission 
shall, after making the necessary preliminary investiga- 
tions, indicate whether, in its judgment, further develop- 
ment of the water resources of the St. Croix River Basin 
would be practicable and in the public interest from the 
point of view of the two Governments and which projects 
would seem to warrant further detailed study. 

In making its report the Commission should indicate : 

(a) what projects or regimens should be further con- 
sidered to improve the use, conservation and regu- 
lation of the waters of the Basin, taking into ac- 
count the previous actions of the Commission as 
well as the present and future interests of both 
countries in the Basin ; 

(b) how the interests on either side of the boundary 
would be benefited or adversely affected by any 
of the projects or regimens so indicated; 

(c) the order of magnitude of costs of the indicated 
projects or regimens, including indemnification for 
damage to public and private property ; 

(d) how the costs mentioned in (c) should be appor- 
tioned. 

In the conduct of its investigations and otherwise in 
the performance of its duties under this Reference, the 
Commission may utilize the services of engineers and 
other specially qualified personnel of the technical agen- 
cies of Canada and the United States and will, so far as 
possible, make use of information and technical data 
heretofore acquired or which may become available 
during the course of the investigation. 



Very truly yours, 



John Foster Dulles 



'Ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 832. 
July 4, 1955 



A Reference containing the same provisions was 
forwarded on June 10 from the Canadian Depart- 
ment of External Affairs to the Canadian Section 
of the International Joint Commission. 



21 



U. S.-Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning System 



Following are texts of notes exchanged on May 5 
by the Canadian Embassy and the Department of 
State. 



TEXT OF CANADIAN NOTE 

Washington, D. C. 

May 5, 1955 

No. 306 

SlB, 

I have the honour to refer to my Note No. 791 
of November 16, 1954, 1 regarding the joint estab- 
lishment by Canada and the United States of 
America of a comprehensive warning and control 
system against air attack. My Note read in part 
as follows : 

The Canadian Government has now considered a pro- 
posal put forward through the Permanent Joint Board on 
Defense that the construction of the Distant Early Warn- 
ing element of the over-all joint Canada-United States 
warning system should be the responsibility of the United 
States Government. The Canadian Government concurs 
in this proposal subject to the conclusion at an early date 
of an agreement as to the terms which shall govern the 
work. At the same time, however, the Canadian Gov- 
ernment wishes to state its intention to participate in 
the project, the nature and extent of such participation 
to be determined in the near future. 

I am instructed by my Government to inform 
you that its participation during the construction 
phase of the project will consist of giving assist- 
ance to the United States authorities in organizing 
and using Canadian resources, and to helping by 
making available the facilities of the armed forces 
and other agencies of the Canadian Government 
when appropriate. I am also instructed to state 
that the Canadian Government intends to parti- 
cipate effectively in the operation and maintenance 



1 Not printed. For a U.S.-Canadian statement of Nov. 
19, see Bulletin of Nov. 29, 1954, p. 539. 



phase of the project, the character of such partici- 
pation to be determined on the basis of studies to 
be carried out during the construction phase. 

My Government now proposes that the annexed 
conditions should govern the establishment by the 
United States of a distant early warning system in 
Canadian territory. If these conditions are ac- 
ceptable to your Government, I suggest that this 
Note and your reply should constitute an agree- 
ment effective from the date of your reply. 

Accept, Sir, the renewed assurances of my 
highest consideration. 

A. D. P. Heeney. 
The Honourable John Foster Dulles, 

Secretary of State of the United States, 
Washington, D. G. 

Annex 

Statement op Conditions to Govern the Establishment 
of a Distant Early Warning System in Canadian 
Territory 

(In this Statement of Conditions, unless the context 
otherwise requires, "Canada" means the Government of 
Canada ; "United States" means the Government of the 
United States of America; "Distant Early Warning 
(DEW) System" means all the detection stations, com- 
munications installations (including relay stations), and 
ancillary facilities, making up that part of the System in 
Canada ; "RCAF" means the Royal Canadian Air Force, 
and "USAF" means the United States Air Force.) 

1. Sites 

The location and size of all airstrips and the location 
of all sites, roads, wharves and jetties, required for the 
DEW System in Canada shall be a matter of mutual agree- 
ment by the appropriate agencies of the two Governments. 
Canada will acquire and retain title to all lands required 
for the system. Canada grants and assures to the United 
States, without charge, such rights of access, use, and 
occupancy as may be required for the construction, equip- 
ment and operation of the system. 

2. Liaison Arrangements 

It is anticipated that the United States will carry out 
the construction of the DEW System through a manage- 



22 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



ment contractor appointed by the United States. It is 
understood that the United States and the management 
contractor will establish a DEW Project Office, and that 
the participation of interested Canadian Government 
agencies in the Project Office is desired to the extent 
necessary for consultation on matters covered in this 
statement of conditions. In addition, the Canadian Gov- 
ernment may decide to appoint a Special Commissioner 
for the Project, and to assign liaison officers to the con- 
struction operations in Northern Canada. 

3. Plans 

Plans of the buildings, airstrips, roads (including ac- 
cess roads) and similar facilities, information concern- 
ing use of local materials, such as rock fill, sand and 
gravel, and information concerning other arrangements 
related to construction and major items of equipment, 
shall, if requested, be supplied to the appropriate Can- 
adian authorities in sufficient detail to give an adequate 
idea of the scope of the proposed construction. Canadian 
officials shall have the right of inspection during con- 
struction. Proposals for subsequent construction, or 
major alterations, shall be discussed with the appro- 
priate Canadian authorities. 

4. Provision of Electronic Equipment 

The Canadian Government reaffirms the principle that 
electronic equipment at installations on Canadian terri- 
tory should, as far as practicable, be manufactured in 
Canada. The question of practicability must, in each case, 
be a matter for consultation between the appropriate 
Canadian and United States agencies to determine the 
application of the principle. The factors to be taken into 
account shall include availability at the time period re- 
quired, cost and performance. For the purpose of apply- 
ing these principles to the DEW line, the DEW Project 
Office shall be used as far as possible as the instrument 
for effective consultation between the Canadian and 
United States agencies concerned. 

5. Construction and Procurement (other than Electronic 
Equipment) 

(a) Canadian contractors will be extended equal con- 
sideration with United States contractors in the 
awarding of construction contracts, and Canadian 
and United States contractors shall have equal 
consideration in the procurement of materials, 
equipment and supplies in either Canada or the 
United States; 

(b) Contractors awarded a contract for construction 
in Canada will be required to give preference to 
qualified Canadian labour for such construction. 
The rates of pay and working conditions for this 
labour will be set after consultation with the 
Canadian Department of Labour in accordance 
with the Canadian Fair Wages and Hours of 
Labour Act. 

6. Canadian Law 

Nothing in this Agreement shall derogate from the 
application of Canadian law in Canada, provided that, if 
in unusual circumstances its application may lead to un- 
reasonable delay or difficulty in construction or opera- 



tion, the United States authorities concerned may re- 
quest the assistance of Canadian authorities in seeking 
appropriate alleviation. In order to facilitate the rapid 
and efficient construction of the DEW System, Canadian 
authorities will give sympathetic consideration to any 
such request submitted by United States Government 
authorities. 

Particular attention is directed to the ordinances of 
the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory, including 
those relating to the following: 

(a) No game or wildlife shall be taken or molested 
in the Northwest Territories. Licences to hunt in 
Yukon Territory may be purchased from repre- 
sentatives of the Yukon Territorial Government. 

(b) No objects of archaeological interest or historic 
significance in the Northwest Territories or Yukon 
Territory will be disturbed or removed therefrom 
without first obtaining the approval of the Ca- 
nadian Department of Northern Affairs and Na- 
tional Resources. 

7. Operation and Manning 

(a) The extent of Canadian participation in the initial 
operation and manning of the DEW System shall 
be a matter for later decision by Canada after 
full consultation with the United States. It is 
understood that, in any event, Canada reserves 
the right, on reasonable notice, to take over the 
operation and manning of any or all of the in- 
stallations. Canada will ensure the effective op- 
eration, in association with the United States, of 
any installations it takes over. 

(b) Subject to the foregoing, the United States is au- 
thorized to station personnel at the sites, and to 
operate the DEW System, in accordance with the 
principles of command in effect from time to time 
between the military authorities of the two coun- 
tries. The overall manning policy as between the 
employment of military and civilian personnel 
shall be the subject of consultation and agreement 
between the two Governments. 

8. Financing 

Unless otherwise provided by Canada, the costs of con- 
struction and operation of the DEW System shall be the 
responsibility of the United States, with the exception of 
Canadian military personnel costs if Canada should man 
any of the installations. 

9. Period of Operation of the System 

Canada and the United States agree that, subject to 
the availability of funds, the DEW System shall be main- 
tained in operation for a period of ten years or such 
shorter period as shall be agreed by both countries in 
the light of their mutual defence interests. Thereafter, 
in the event that either Government concludes that any 
or all of the installations are no longer required, and 
the other Government does not agree, the question of 
continuing need will be referred to the Permanent Joint 
Board on Defence. In considering the question of need, 
the Permanent Joint Board on Defence will take into 



July 4, 1955 



23 



account the relationship of the DEW System to other 
radar installations established in the mutual defence in- 
terest of the two countries. Following consideration by 
the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, as provided 
above, either Government may decide that the installa- 
tions in question shall be closed, in which case the ar- 
rangements shown in paragraph 10 below regarding 
ownership and disposition of the installations will apply. 

10. Ownership of Removable Property 

Ownership of all removable property brought into 
Canada or purchased in Canada and placed on the sites, 
including readily demountable structures, shall remain 
in the United States. The United States shall have the 
unrestricted right of removing or disposing of all such 
property, PROVIDED that the removal or disposition 
shall not impair the operation of any installation whose 
discontinuance had not been determined in accordance 
with the provisions of paragraph 9 above, and PROVIDED 
further that removal or disposition takes place within 
a reasonable time after the date on which the operation 
of the installation has been discontinued. The disposal 
of United States excess property in Canada shall be 
carried out in accordance with the provisions of the 
Exchange of Notes of April 11 and 18, 1951, 2 between the 
Secretary of State for External Affairs and the United 
States Ambassador in Ottawa, concerning the disposal 
of excess property. 

11. Telecommunications 

The United States military authorities shall obtain 
the approval of the Canadian Department of Transport, 
through the Royal Canadian Air Force, for the establish- 
ment and operation (including the assignment of fre- 
quencies) of radio stations in Canadian territory. The 
provision of telecommunications circuits (both radio and 
land-line) required during the construction period and 
thereafter will be the subject of consultation between 
the appropriate authorities of the two governments, hav- 
ing regard to the desirability of using existing military 
circuits and existing Canadian public carriers where 
this may be feasible. 

12. Scientific Information 

Any geological, topographical, hydrographical, geo- 
physical, or other scientific data obtained in the course 
of the construction or operation of the DEW System 
shall be transmitted to the Canadian Government. 

13. Matters Affecting Canadian Eskimos 

The Eskimos of Canada are in a primitive state of 
social development. It is important that these people 
be not subjected unduly to disruption of their hunting 
economy, exposure to diseases against which their im- 
munity is often low, or other effects of the presence of 
white men which might be injurious to them. It is 
therefore necessary to have certain regulations to gov- 
ern contact with and matters affecting Canadian Eskimos. 
The following conditions are set forth for this purpose: 

(a) Any matters affecting the Eskimos, including the 
possibility of their employment in any area and 

2 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2298. 



the terms and arrangements for their employ- 
ment, if approved, will be subject to the con- 
currence of the Department of Northern Affairs 
and National Resources. 

(b) All contact with Eskimos, other than those whose 
employment on any aspect of the project is ap- 
proved, is to be avoided except in cases of emer- 
gency. If, in the opinion of the Department of 
Northern Affairs and National Resources, more 
specific provision in this connection is neces- 
sary in any particular area, the Department may, 
after consultation with the United States, pre- 
scribe geographical limits surrounding a station 
beyond which personnel associated with the proj- 
ect, other than those locally engaged may not go 

or may prohibit the entry of such personnel into 
any defined area. 

(c) Persons other than those locally engaged shall 
not be given leave or facilities for travel in the 
Canadian Arctic (other than in the course of 
their duties in operation of the project) without 
the approval of the Department of Northern Af- 
fairs and National Resources, or the Royal Cana- 
dian Mounted Police acting on its behalf. 

(d) There shall be no local disposal in the north 
of supplies or materials of any kind except with 
the concurrence of the Department of Northern 
Affairs and National Resources, or the Royal 
Canadian Mounted Police acting on its behalf. 

(e) Local disposal of waste shall be carried out in a 
manner acceptable to the Department of North- 
ern Affairs and National Resources, or the Royal 
Canadian Mounted Police acting on its behalf. 

(f ) In the event that any facilities required for the 
system have to encroach on or disturb past or 
present Eskimo settlements, burial places, hunt- 
ing grounds, etc., the United States shall be re- 
sponsible for the removal of the settlement, burial 
ground, etc., to a location acceptable to the De- 
partment of Northern Affairs and National 
Resources. 

14. Canadian Immigration and Customs Regulations 

(a) Except as otherwise agreed, the direct entry of 
United States personnel into the Northwest Ter- 
ritories or Yukon Territory from outside Canada 
shall be in accordance with Canadian customs 
and immigration procedures which will be ad- 
ministered by local Canadian officials designated 
by Canada. 

(b) Canada will take the necessary steps to facilitate 
the admission into the territory of Canada of 
such United States citizens as may be employed 
on the construction or operation of the DEW 
System, it being understood that the United 
States will undertake to repatriate at its expense 
any such persons if the contractors fail to do so. 

15. Use of Air Strips 

Air strips at installations in the DEW System shall 



24 



Department of State Bulletin 



be used by the United States solely for the support of the 
System. If it should be desired at any time by the United 
States to use an air strip for other purposes, requests 
should be forwarded through appropriate channels. The 
air strips shall be available for use by the RCAP as re- 
quired. The air strips shall also be available for use 
by Canadian civil air carriers operating into or through 
the area, whenever such use would not conflict with mili- 
tary requirements, and SUBJECT to the understanding 
that the United States Air Force will not be responsible 
for the provision of accommodation, fuel, or servicing 
facilities of any kind. Proposals and arrangements for 
such use of USAP operated air strips by Canadian air 
carriers shall be submitted to the RCAF, which shall 
consult the USAP before granting any such permission. 

16. Landing Facilities 

Landing facilities at any of the stations on tidewater 
will be available for use by Canadian Government ships 
and ships employed on Canadian Government business. 

17. Transportation 

Canadian commercial carriers will to the fullest ex- 
tent practicable be afforded the opportunity to participate 
in movements of project materials, equipment and person- 
nel within Canada. The United States will select the 
means of transportation and specific carriers for the 
movement of materiel, equipment, and personnel from 
points outside of Canada to DEW System sites, provided 
that in the case of air carriers applicable civil air trans- 
port agreements and procedures shall be observed. 

IS. Resupphj Arrangements 

Because of the special conditions in the Canadian 
Arctic, the Canadian Government has a particular in- 
terest in the arrangements for the resupply of the DEW 
System. These arrangements shall therefore be a matter 
for later consultation and agreement between the two 
Governments. 

19. Taxes 

The Canadian Government will grant remission of 
customs duties and excise taxes on goods imported and of 
federal sales and excise taxes on goods purchased in 
Canada which are or are to become the property of the 
United States Government and are to be used in the 
construction and/or operation of the DEW System, as 
well as refunds by way of drawback of the customs duty 
paid on goods imported by Canadian manufacturers and 
used in the manufacture or production of goods purchased 
by or on behalf of the United States Government and to 
become the property of the United States Government for 
the construction of the system. 

20. Status of forces 

The "Agreement between the Parties to the North 
Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces", 
signed in London on June 19, 1951, 3 shall apply. 



21. Supplementary Arrangements and Administrative 
Agreements 

Supplementary arrangements or administrative agree- 
ments between authorized agencies of the two Govern- 
ments may be made from time to time for the purpose of 
carrying out the intent of this agreement. 



TEXT OF U. S. REPLY 



Excellency : 



May 5, 1955 



I have the honor to acknowledge your Note No. 
306 of May 5, 1955. You refer to the construction 
by the United States of the Distant Early Warn- 
ing element of a comprehensive warning and 
control system, being established jointly by the 
United States and Canada, and annex a statement 
of conditions to govern the establishment of this 
line in Canadian territory which were developed 
in discussion between representatives of the two 
Governments. 

The United States Government notes the inten- 
tions of your Government with regard to partici- 
pation in the construction, operation and mainte- 
nance of the project and both concurs in the condi- 
tions annexed to your Note and confirms that 
your Note and this reply shall constitute an agree- 
ment of our two Governments effective today. 

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of 
my highest consideration. 

For the Secretary of State : 

Robert Murphy 

His Excellency 
A. D. P. Heeney 

Ambassador of Canada 



Enactment of Trade Agreements 
Extension Act of 1955 

Statement by the President^ 

Enactment of the Trade Agreements Extension 
Act of 1955 is an important milestone in the de- 
velopment of our country's foreign economic pol- 
icy. Supplemented by early approval of United 
States membership and participation in the pro- 



3 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2846. 
July 4, J 955 



1 Made on June 21 on the occasion of the signing of the 
Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1955 (White House 
press release). 



25 



posed Organization for Trade Cooperation, 2 the 
act can contribute significantly to economic growth 
and economic well-being throughout the free 
world. In this way it will materially strengthen 
the defense capabilities of our friends abroad and 
advance the mutual security of us all. 

I am particularly gratified that this measure 
was supported by overwhelming majorities in both 
political parties. This bipartisanship demon- 
strates anew our unity in dealing with matters 
affecting our relations with other countries. 



Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions 
Requested by Five Nations 

Press release 389 dated June 24 

Five nations — India, the Netherlands, Nicara- 
gua, Pakistan, and Sweden — have requested re- 
negotiations, under article XXVIII of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, of cer- 
tain tariff concessions granted to the. United 
States. 

At their ninth session, the Contracting Parties 
to the Gatt took action to extend the firm life of 
the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955, to De- 
cember 31, 1957. Prior to such extension, a 
country may renegotiate its individual tariff 
concessions with a view to their modification or 
withdrawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by 
June 30, 1955, may continue through September 
30, 1955. Under this procedure, these five nations 
have indicated that they wish to renegotiate cer- 
tain of their tariff concessions of interest to the 
United States. (As announced on June 10, 1955, 3 
Cuba has also given notice of intention to re- 
negotiate certain of its concessions.) 

Under article XXVIII, a country wishing to 
withdraw or modify a concession first must try 
to reach some basis of agreement with other inter- 
ested Contracting Parties concerning such with- 
drawal or modification. The usual basis for 
agreement would be the granting of new conces- 
sions as compensation for the withdrawn con- 
cession. 

Interested persons are invited to submit their 
views with regard to the possible effect on U.S. 



2 For text of proposed OTC agreement, see Bulletin of 
Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579 ; for a message from the President to 
the Congress, see ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p. 678. 

3 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057. 



trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of 
the concessions on the items in the attached list. 
In addition, views are also desired regarding im- 
ports into the above-mentioned countries from the 
United States on which the United States might 
request new or further tariff reductions as com- 
pensation to the United States for any modifica- 
tions or withdrawals of concessions on items in 
the attached list. 

Views on the foregoing matters should be sub- 
mitted to the Committee for Reciprocity Informa- 
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee 
established to receive views on trade-agreement 
matters. It is requested that any such views be 
submitted by the close of business on July 15, 1955. 

All communications on these matters, in 15 
copies, should be addressed to The Secretary of 
the Committee for Reciprocity Information, 
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D.C. 
If any interested party considers that his views 
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee 
in a written brief, he should make this known 
to the secretary of the committee, who will 
then arrange for oral presentation before the 
committee. 



Items on Which Concessions to the United States 
May Be Modified or Withdrawn Under Article XXVIII 
of the GATT 

India 

Fast color salts, rapid fast colors, rapidogens, 
rapidozols, solubilized vat dyes, vat dyes- 
paste, vats indigo, vats carbazol blue 

Naphthol, fast color bases 

Sulphur black, acid azo dyes, direct azo dyes 

Vats, powder 

The Netherlands 
Oranges and mandarins 

Nicaragua 

Flavoring preparations for nonalcoholic bever- 
ages, unsweetened 

Fabrics of pure artificial silk or of artificial silk 
with less than 20 percent of cotton threads 
(with the exception of plush velvet, corduroy, 
or triple-looped cloth) which weighs more 
than 50 grams per square meter 

Unexposed sensitized photographic film 

Transmitting and receiving tubes for radio 

Table radios of 6 tubes or less 



26 



Department of State Bulletin 



Typewriters and parts 

Adding machines, comptographs and other com- 
puting apparatus, and separate parts and ac- 
cessories including ribbons, n.e.s. 

Condensed and evaporated milk or cream 

Dried whole and skimmed milk or cream 

Boards of marble 

Sheet glass 

Cotton tulles and net fabrics 

Plywood 

Whiskey 

Newsprint 

Sewing machines 

Pakistan 

Canned vegetables other than tomatoes, potatoes, 

onions, and cauliflowers 
Paints, solutions, and compositions containing 

dangerous petroleum 
Fountain pens complete 
Safety razor blades 
Typewriter ribbons 
Juices, individually or mixed, of apricots, berries, 

grapes, pineapple, plums, and prunes 
Canned pineapples 
Unmanufactured tobacco 

Sweden 

Fresh apples 
Fresh pears 



Cuban Government Makes Payment 
of Adjudicated Claims 

Press release 390 dated June 25 

The Cuban Ambassador, Dr. Miguel Angel 
Campa, delivered to Acting Secretary of State 
Herbert Hoover, Jr., on June 25, bond certificates 
and a dollar draft of a total value of $885,696.44. 
This is in payment of six outstanding claims of 
American companies which have been adjudicated 
by the Cuban courts. 

These claims have been the subject of diplomatic 
negotiations between the Cuban and U.S. Govern- 
ments for several years, and their final settlement 
is a source of satisfaction to both Governments 
and to the American claimants. The bond cer- 
tificates will be exchanged by the claimants in 
Havana for 30-year negotiable dollar bonds bear- 
ing 4 percent interest. 



U.S.-Cuban Agreement on 
Rice Tariff Quotas 

Press release 348 dated June 13 

The Governments of Cuba and the United 
States have agreed upon new procedures for the 
administration of the rice tariff quota provisions 
contained in the note under tariff item No. 253-B 
in Part II of the Cuban Schedule IX of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. 

The new procedures are set forth in an exchange 
of notes signed on June 13, 1955, by the Cuban 
Minister of State, Carlos Saladrigas, and by the 
U.S. Charge d'Affaires ad interim, Carlos Hall. 

This exchange of notes will supersede the ex- 
change of notes of December 17, 1952, between the 
U.S. Ambassador and the Cuban Minister of 
State. 

Text of U.S. Note 

Habana, June 13, 1955 

Excellency : I have the honor to refer to your 
Excellency's note of June 13, 1955, which, in Eng- 
lish translation, reads as follows: 

I have the honor to refer to the negotiations just held in 
Habana relative to the exchange of notes made between 
my Government and that of Your Excellency on Decem- 
ber 17, 1952, which regulated the application of the note 
to Item 253-B in Part II of Schedule IX annexed to the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. 

My Government understands that in the negotiations 
mentioned in the preceding paragraph the following 
agreement was reached : 

1. The Agreement contained in the exchange of notes 
between the Government of Cuba and the Government 
of the United States of America on December 17, 1952, 
will expire as of June 30, 1955. 

2. Nevertheless, the text of the note to Item 253-B of 
Part II, Schedule IX annexed to the General Agree- 
ment on Tariffs and Trade, will remain in force in its 
present form. Consequently, the basic tariff quota of 
3,250,000 quintals set forth in said note will continue 
to become effective as of the first day of each quota 
year, that is, from July first, the imports of rice made 
against said basic tariff quota to be governed by the 
official internal regulations in force in Cuba. 

3. Likewise, in case the rice import requirements of 
Cuba during any quota year should be greater than the 
3,250,000 quintals before mentioned, the Government of 
the Republic of Cuba will announce, no later than 
February 15 of the quota year concerned, the amount 
of the additional quantity of rice needed, which rice 
shall be imported into Cuba as a deficit tariff quota. 
Said deficit tariff quota shall become effective not later 
than the first of April of the quota year concerned, and 



July 4, 1955 



27 



the imports of rice made against said tariff quota shall 
be governed by the official internal regulations in force 
in Cuba. 

4. The rice imported from the United States of America, 
against the basic tariff quota of 3,250,000 quintals or 
against the deficit tariff quota mentioned above, shall 
be subject, on importation into Cuba, to customs duties 
no higher than 1.85 pesos per one hundred kilograms 
in accordance with the provisions of Item 253-B, Part 
II, Schedule IX of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade and the note to that Item. 

5. This agreement shall be subject to review, if so re- 
quested by either the Government of the Republic of 
Cuba, or the Government of the United States of 
America. 

If the Government of the United States of America 
concurs in the above, the present note and the reply of 
Your Excellency to that effect will be considered as con- 
firmation of the agreement reached by our respective 
Governments in the negotiations referred to above. 

I take this opportunity to reiterate to Tour Excellency 
my most distinguished consideration. 

In reply thereto, I am pleased to inform your 
Excellency that my Government is in agreement 
with the contents of the note set forth above. 

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of 
my highest consideration. 

President Orders Investigation 
Into Effects of Rye Imports 

White House press release dated May 20 

The President on May 20 directed the U.S. 
Tariff Commission immediately to make a second 
investigation into the effects of imports of rye, 
including rye flour and meal, on the domestic 
support program for rye and on the amount of 
products processed in the United States from 
domestic rye. 

The President's action was taken in response 
to a request from the Secretary of Agriculture. 
The Commission's investigation will be made pur- 
suant to section 22 of the Agricultural Adjust- 
ment Act, as amended. 



On March 31, 1954, the President issued a pro- 
clamation 1 restricting imports of rye, including 
rye flour and meal, from all sources to 31 million 
pounds during the period April 1, 1954, through 
June 30, 1954, and restricting such imports from 
July 1, 1954, through June 30, 1955, to 186 million 
pounds. 



President's Letter to Chairman of Tariff Commission 

Dear Mr. Chairman : I have been advised by 
the Secretary of Agriculture that there is reason 
to believe that, in the absence of a continuation of 
import controls, rye, including flour and meal, is 
practically certain to be imported into the United 
States in 1955-56, under such conditions and in 
such quantities as to render or tend to render in- 
effective or materially interfere with the price sup- 
port program for rye undertaken by the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture pursuant to Sections 301 and 
401 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended, 
or to reduce substantially the amount of products 
processed in the United States from domestic rye. 
The Tariff Commission is directed to make an im- 
mediate investigation of this matter in accordance 
with Executive Order No. 7233, dated November 
23, 1935, promulgating regulations governing in- 
vestigations under Section 22 of the Agricultural 
Adjustment Act, as amended. The investigation 
and report of findings and recommendations of the 
Tariff Commission should be completed as 
promptly as practicable to permit a decision as to 
the proper action necessary under Section 22, prior 
to the expiration of present controls on June 30, 
1955. 

A copy of a letter from the Secretary of Agri- 
culture relative to this investigation is enclosed. 2 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 



1 Bulletin of Apr. 12, 1954, p. 565. 
3 Not printed. 



28 



Department of State Bulletin 



Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1956 



Statement by Harold E. Stassen 

Director, Foreign Operations Administration 1 



I appreciate the opportunity to appear before 
you today in support of President Eisenhower's 
request for authority and funds in the amount of 
$3.53 billion to carry out the mutual security pro- 
gram during fiscal year 1956. 

On May 25th the Secretary of State, in a bril- 
liant statement before this committee, outlined 
the basic foreign policy considerations which lay 
behind the President's request for this program 
during the coming fiscal year. 2 I will not presume 
to repeat or elaborate on his statement, except to 
add my own view that we are now entering a new 
era of tremendous challenge and opportunity for 
the United States and for the entire free world, 
an era which must not be approached in a spirit 
of complacency but which can be approached with 
great confidence and hope for all peoples. 

President Eisenhower, in his April 20th mes- 
sage transmitting the mutual security program 
request to the Congress, stated that this program 
is directed toward the fixed and unwavering ob- 
jective of a just, prosperous, and enduring peace 
and is an indispensable part of a realistic and en- 
lightened national policy for the United States. 3 



Significant Progress 

Throughout the period following World War 
II, this program and its predecessors have been 
an essential element in the attainment of important 
results in the direction of peace and security 



1 Made before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs 
on June 8. 

' Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 911. For Secretary Dulles' 
testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Rela- 
tions on May 5, see ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 854. 

"Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 711. 



throughout the world. The Marshall plan was 
an indispensable factor in the remarkable eco- 
nomic recovery which the countries of Western 
Europe have achieved. The military assistance 
which has been furnished to our allies in Nato and 
to other countries in the free world has provided 
a firm foundation for collective defensive strength 
and has served as an effective deterrent against 
Communist military aggression. Technical coop- 
eration and limited economic assistance to under- 
developed nations have aroused a spirit of hope 
and confidence for further progress for more than 
one-half of the world's population who have long 
suffered from extreme want and privation. 
Through contributions to programs of the United 
Nations and other multilateral organizations, the 
United States has played an important part in 
implementing the enlightened statement of objec- 
tives which were adhered to by a devastated but 
hopeful world 10 years ago in San Francisco. 

Progress has indeed been significant. There is 
a clear feeling, both at home and abroad, that a 
momentum of forward progress has been set in 
motion which, if sustained, may ultimately result 
in a basis for the solution of world problems 
through peaceful means and without recourse to a 
war which could mean the destruction of civiliza- 
tion. 

The people of the United States can indeed feel 
a deep and humble satisfaction from the important 
role which they have played in bringing the world 
this far along the road toward a secure peace. 
Throughout the critical years, this committee, 
the Foreign Eelations Committee of the Senate, 
and the Congress as a whole have displayed a lead- 
ership and an initiative which has made this prog- 
ress possible. 



July 4, 1955 



29 



As we move forward in hope and confidence, 
however, we must recognize that much remains 
to be done. Although the foundations for military 
security of the free world have been laid, we have 
not yet achieved a situation of strength sufficient 
to avert the risk of large-scale hostile attack. Al- 
though the beneficial effects of technical coopera- 
tion are being felt in 60 nations throughout the 
world, we must recognize that progress in reliev- 
ing the dire conditions of need in underdeveloped 
countries is only beginning, and we must plan to 
continue our cooperative efforts over a period of 
many years to come. Although immediate and 
pressing needs in the economic field have been met 
through the furnishing of economic assistance to 
certain key areas, critical situations still exist, and 
will arise, which must be met if friendly nations 
are to attain the political and economic capacity 
to exercise a constructive role as partners in meet- 



ing the common objectives of all free nations. It 
is for these reasons that the President has re- 
quested a continuation of the mutual security pro- 
gram as a concrete demonstration of the determi- 
nation of the American people to help carry this 
crucial work forward to a successful conclusion. 

The details of our program request are contained 
in the documents before you, and representatives 
of the Departments of State and of Defense and 
the Foreign Operations Administration are availa- 
ble to elaborate further and to answer questions 
which the members of this committee may wish to 
raise on any portion of the program. In view of 
the fact that this committee is already familiar 
with the basic elements of the request of the Presi- 
dent, I would like to confine my remarks this 
morning to a few of the highlights of the program 
which bear particular emphasis and to respond 
to any questions which you may wish to raise. 



SURPLUS AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES 

FOA Has Sold More Than $600 Million in FY 1954 and FY 1955 

l,on ^program Sales Proceeds Are to be Used 

Target , 

rt ... .. For These Purposes: 

Obligations r 

through 
April 30, '55 

Development 
$245 Million I 402 .^I Assistance^ 






FY 1954 FY 1955 

'Mutual Security Act of 1951, as amended. 

'Mutual Security Act of 1954. 

'Sales proceeds are 7.25 million in dollar equivalents under the dollar cost of commodities 



612 Million 
in Dollar Equivalents 



30 



Department of State Bulletin 



Funds for Europe 

You will note that no funds are requested for 
economic assistance to the original Marshall plan 
countries. Defense support assistance is requested, 
however, for Spain and Yugoslavia, who were not 
members of the Marshall plan. 

Spain has recently granted the United States 
access to valuable sites for military facilities, and 
her armed forces are being strengthened through 
military assistance, but the economy of the country 
lacks adequate strength. Under arrangements 
with the Spanish Government, a major portion 
of the local currency generated from the sale of 
defense support commodities in Spain is directly 
applied toward meeting the costs of construction 
and maintenance of United States facilities in the 
country. 

Yugoslavia remains firmly independent of the 
Cominform. This fact in itself is of considerable 
importance to the rest of Europe. In addition, this 
country has entered into cooperative arrangements 
with Turkey and with Greece. It is planned to 
continue defense support and direct-forces support 
assistance to this important country, to strengthen 
the economic base for their defense effort. 

The total of nonmilitary funds programed for 
Europe in the coming year amounts to $95 million, 
which includes, in addition to programs for Spain 
and Yugoslavia, continuing economic support for 
the city of Berlin and limited funds for technical 
exchange, directed primarily toward improving 
levels of productivity. The promotion of under- 
standing as to the means by which great economic 
and social advances have been made under our 
system of free institutions is playing its part in 
rolling back the threat of Communist subversion 
and domination on the continent of Europe, and 
this important work should be carried forward. 

Arc of Free Asia 

The most pressing threats to world security and 
stability are now centered in Asia, and the pre- 
ponderance of funds requested for fiscal year 1956 
are to be directed toward meeting the threats to 
this area. 

Asia is the focal point of present Communist 
pressure and the area whose future direction, 
either toward domination by communism, or free- 
dom and independence, will be crucial in the long- 
range struggle of freedom against oppression. 
In addition to direct military assistance, funds 



are requested in the amount of $1,113,500,000 
to meet the defense support and direct-forces 
support needs of free Asian countries which 
are under the constant threat of overt Com- 
munist aggression as well as internal subversion. 
A major part of these funds is proposed for pro- 
grams in Korea, Formosa, Cambodia, Laos, and 
Viet-Nam, all of which are confronted with situa- 
tions of immediate crisis. Funds are also included 
within this total for similar types of support to 
Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines, who have 
firmly and courageously taken their stand on the 
side of freedom against aggression and have 
joined with us in the Manila Pact organization. 

Funds are also requested for a continuation of 
development assistance in Asia, principally for 
India. The 370 million people of India are now 
engaged in an unprecedented effort to wage a suc- 
cessful struggle against serious economic distress, 
under a democratic form of government. The 
eyes of all of Asia are focused on this great effort. 
The recent election in Andhra, in which local 
Communist forces were roundly defeated, reflects 
real progress. If this progress is to be continued, 
the momentum of economic advance must be sus- 
tained, and it is proposed that the United States 
continue to play a marginal but important role 
in this process. 

In addition to regular country programs, the 
mutual security program for fiscal year 1956 con- 
tains a request for a special Presidential fund of 
$200 million for stimulating economic growth and 
development throughout the entire arc of free 
Asia. Within this area 770 million people, or 
one-third of the world's population, reside. It is 
important to the United States and to the entire 
free world that these countries, individually and 
through cooperation with one another, find the 
means of becoming effective and profitable part- 
ners in an expanding free-world economy and of 
providing a better life for their peoples. 

Success cannot come overnight and must depend 
largely on the efforts of the Asians themselves. 
A relatively modest amount of assistance from the 
United States, however, can be a crucial element 
in the process. In a recent meeting at Simla, 
India, involving technical representatives of 10 
of the most important free Asian countries, it was 
agreed that regional economic cooperation by 
Asian nations should be improved and that United 
States assistance on a bilateral basis would make 
a significant contribution toward needed economic 



July 4, J 955 



31 



growth. We welcome the initiative which these 
nations have taken and look forward to an in- 
creasing degree of consultation and cooperation 
among and with them in the future. 

The President has requested, and the Senate has 
approved, the use of funds for this new program 
on more than a 1-year basis. It is important that 
we move deliberately and carefully, in order to 
insure that our investment produces the best re- 
sults in the long range. Persistence, patience, care, 
and understanding, coupled with prompt, effec- 
tive action, are the keys to success of this program. 

Near East and Africa 

$309 million are requested in the mutual secu- 
rity program for nonmilitary assistance in the 
Near East and Africa. This amount includes 
funds for continued defense and direct- forces sup- 



port to our staunch Nato allies, Greece and Tur- 
key, and for similar assistance to Iran, which is 
on the threshold of achieving real progress in 
long-delayed economic development and improved 
military strength. Funds are also included for a 
continuation of technical cooperation with 11 
countries in the area and with the territories of 
Africa. Development assistance is proposed for 
Israel and for certain Arab States who presently 
lack the economic resources to provide for the 
basic needs of their peoples without external 
assistance. 

Dangerous tensions still exist between the Arab 
States and Israel, and as long as this situation 
persists the potentialities for progress and well- 
being for all nations in the area can never be fully 
realized. We are encouraged, however, by recent 
evidence of constructive attitudes toward reaching 
a solution to the international water problems of 




32 



Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



COMBINE? STRENGTH OF THE FREE WORLD 
IS THE KEY TO PEACE 




United States 



~ TTiy 1 f~ 



Coal 



Crude Petroleu m 



.■.■.■.■.•.'.■'.-.■.*.■.'.'.-. 



48%; 



Primary Aluminum 



47% 



Electric Power 



Merchant Fleets 



;29% 



Rest Of Free World 



Soviet Bloc 



69% 



59% 



35% 



39% 



42% 



41% 



43% 




68% 



JXJO 

3% 



the Jordan Valley. Real progress in this matter 
can make an important contribution to the ulti- 
mate solution of the tragic problem of the Pales- 
tine refugees. $65 million of the total requested 
for the Near East and Africa is planned for con- 
tinued support of the United Nations program 
providing relief and resettlement assistance for 
these long-suffering peoples. 

Latin America 

Funds are requested for a continuation of de- 
velopment assistance and technical cooperation in 
South and Central America. It is in this great 
neighboring area that the concept of point 4 was 
first tried and found successful. Today, technical 
cooperation programs are moving forward with 
19 independent nations and with overseas terri- 
tories. It is particularly important that progress 
be continued in this field. In addition to technical 



cooperation, development assistance funds are re- 
quested to meet critical economic problems in 
Guatemala and Bolivia. The funds originally 
estimated for Guatemala are likely to prove insuf- 
ficient to meet the economic needs in that country 
and other special problems in the area which may 
have to be dealt with during the coming year. The 
President had initially requested $21 million for 
development assistance to Latin America. The 
Senate, in its action on the mutual security bill on 
June 2, increased this authorization to $38 million. 
In addition to our bilateral programs with some 
60 nations throughout the world, the mutual secu- 
rity program contains requests for funds to permit 
continued support of a number of special pro- 
grams, such as assistance for refugees, migrants, 
and escapees, ocean freight for relief goods 
shipped through voluntary agencies, and the 
United Nations Children's Fund and expanded 



July 4, J 955 



33 



technical assistance program. The importance of 
unwavering United States support for these 
United Nations activities, which are constantly ex- 
panding their constructive influence throughout 
the world, is well known to this committee. 

Before concluding my statement, I would like 
to say a few words concerning the organization 
which I have been privileged to direct during the 
past 2y 2 years — the Foreign Operations Admin- 
istration. I am proud to have been associated 
with this agency and with the important work 
which it has done in furthering the foreign policy 
interests of our Government. In 3 weeks, the 
functions thus far ably performed by Foa are to 
be transferred by Executive order to the Inter- 
national Cooperation Administration, within the 
Department of State. 4 My best wishes go forward 
to Mr. John B. Hollister, who has been nominated 
by the President to head this new agency. I have, 
every confidence that under his leadership, and 
the leadership of the Secretary of State, this suc- 
cessful program will become an increasingly effec- 
tive element in furthering our national policy and 
improving the prospects for peace — with freedom, 
security, and economic well-being for ourselves 
and for others. 

In conclusion, I strongly urge that the Congress 
act favorably on the President's mutual security 
request and thus provide the basis for effective 
forward progress in this time of greatest challenge 
and opportunity for the free world. 



Current Legislation on Foreign Policy: 
84th Congress, 1st Session 

Report to Congress on the Mutual Security Program. H. 
Doc. 97, December 31, 1054, transmitted March 14, 1955. 
65 pp. 

Department of Defense Appropriations for 1956. Hearings 
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on 
Appropriations. January 31-April 20, 1955. 

Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings 
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on 
Appropriations. February 7-17, 1955. 558 pp. 

Report of the National Advisory Council on International 
Monetary and Financial Problems. Message from the 
President transmitting the Report for the period Octo- 
ber 1, 1953, to June 30, 1954, pursuant to section 4 (b) 
(5) of the Bretton Woods Agreements Act. H. Doc. 85, 
February 8, 1955. 60 pp. 



' Ibid., May 30, 1955, p. 889. 



United States Information Agency. Hearing before the 
House Committee on Foreign Affairs. February 16, 
1955. 28 pp. 

To Amend the Foreign Service Act of 1946. Hearings 
before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on H. R. 
4941, a bill to amend the Foreign Service Act of 1946, 
as amended, and for other purposes. February 17- 
March 8, 1955. 139 pp. 

Technical Assistance Programs. Hearings before a Sub- 
committee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Rela- 
tions. February 17 to March 4, 1955. 396 pp. 

Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings 
before the Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations on H. R. 5502, Making Appropriations 
for the Fiscal Tear Ending June 30, 1956. February 
18-May 17, 1955. 1,240 pp. 

Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings 
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on 
Appropriations : U.S. Information Agency. March 3-10, 
1955. 287 pp. 

Transportation on Canadian Vessels to and Within 
Alaska. Report to accompany S. 948. S. Rept. 59, 
March 11, 1955. 1 p. 

Mexican Farm Labor Program. Hearings before the Sub- 
committee on Equipment, Supplies, and Manpower of 
the House Committee on Agriculture on H. R. 3822. 
March 16-22, 1955. Serial H. 328 pp. 

Review of the United Nations Charter. Hearing before a 
Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Re- 
lations on proposals to amend or otherwise modify 
existing International peace and security organiza- 
tions, including the United Nations. Part 8: Atlanta, 
Ga., March 17, 1955, 1,040 pp. Part 9: Miami, Fla., 
March 18. 1955, 1,205 pp. Part 10 : San Francisco, Calif., 
April 9, 1955, 1,443 pp. Part 11 : Denver, Colo., April 
11, 1955. 1,615 pp. 

Foreign Service Act Amendments of 1955. Report to ac- 
company H. R. 4941. H. Rept. 229, March 18, 1955. 
23 pp. 

Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. Hearings before 
the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on draft legis- 
lation to amend the International Claims Settlement 
Act of 1949, as amended, and for other purposes. 
March 22-April 22, 1955. 230 pp. 

Report on Audit of Export-Import Bank of Washington 
for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1954. Letter from 
the Assistant Comptroller General of the United States 
transmitting a Report pursuant to the Government Cor- 
poration Control Act (31 U. S. C. 841). H. Doc. 116, 
March 24, 1955. 11 p. 

Survey Mission to the Far East, South Asia, and the 
Middle East. Report by Congressmen John M. Vorys 
and James P. Richards to the House Committee on 
Foreign Affairs. H. Rept. 295, March 24, 1955. 13 pp. 

Statement by Gen. Alfred M. Gruenther, USA, Supreme 
Allied Commander, Europe, and United States Com- 
mander In Chief, Europe. Hearing before the Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations on NATO and the Paris 
Accords relating to West Germany. March 26, 1955. 
17 pp. 

Protocol on the Termination of the Occupation Regime in 
the Federal Republic of Germany and Protocol to the 
North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of the Federal 
Republic of Germany. Hearings before the Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations on Executives L and 
M, S3d Congress, 2d Session. March 29-30, 1955. 93 
pp. 

FOA Grain Storage Elevators in Pakistan. Hearings be- 
fore the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of 
the Senate Committee on Government Operations. Part 
1 : March 31 and April 6, 1955. 120 pp. Part 2 : April 
14 and 15 and May 3, 1955. 2S2 pp. 



34 



Department of State Bulletin 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Calendar of Meetings 1 

Adjourned during June 195S 

Gatt Tariff Negotiations With Japan Geneva Feb. 21-June 8 

Fao Committee on Commodity Problems: 25th Session Rome May 23-June 3 

10th International Mediterranean Fair Palermo May 24-June 10 

International Sports Exhibition Turin May 24-June 19 

Inter-American Commission of Women: 10th Assembly San Juan May 29-June 18 

Canadian International Trade Fair Toronto May 30-June 10 

6th International Technical Conference on Lighthouses and Other The Hague May 31-June 4 

Aids to Navigation. 

Icao Assembly: 9th Session Montreal May 31-June 13 

5th International Congress on Large Dams Paris May 31-June 17 

International Samples Fair Barcelona June 1-20 

Ilo Annual Conference: 38th Session Geneva June 1-25 

International Sugar Council: 4th Session London June 1-3 

Iasi Committee on Statistical Education: 1st Session Quitandinha June 3-8 

I asi Committee on Improvement of National Statistics: 3d Session . Quitandinha June 3-8 

International Commission for Northwest Atlantic Fisheries: 5th Ottawa June 6-11 

Annual Meeting. 

Fao Council: 21st Session Rome June 6-17 

Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses: Paris June 7-9 

Annual Meeting. 

Agriculture Show Denbigh (Jamaica) June 8-9 

3d Inter-American Statistical Conference Quitandinha June 9-22 

Inter-American Statistical Institute: 3d General Assembly .... Quitandinha June 9 and 21 

21st International Aeronautical Exhibition Paris June 10-19 

Customs Cooperation Council Brussels June 13 (1 day) 

Unicef Committee on Administrative Budget New \ ork June 13-14 

Tripartite Meeting (France, U. K., U. S.) New York June 16-17 

International Cotton Advisory Committee: 14th Plenary Meeting . Paris June 20-25 

Inter-American Travel Congress, Permanent Executive Committee: Washington June 20-24 

1st Meeting. 

U. N. 10th Anniversary Commemorative Ceremony San Francisco June 20-26 

International Tin Study Group, Management Committee: 30th Bonn June 24-26 

Meeting. 

In Session as of June 30, 1955 

TJ. N. Trusteeship Council: 16th Session New York June 8— 

International Exhibition of Architecture, Industrial Design, Home Halsingborg June 10- 

Furnishings, and Crafts. 

Icao Airworthiness Panel of Airworthiness Division: 2d Meeting . Paris June 14- 

Council of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty: Meeting Karachi June 20- 

of Economic Advisers. 

Intersessional Committee of the Contracting Parties to the Gatt . Geneva June 23- 

5th International Film Festival Berlin June 24- 

International Statistical Institute: 29th Session Quitandinha June 24- 

Itu International Telegraph Consultative Committee: Study Geneva June 28- 

Group VI. 

International Wheat Council: 17th Session London June 28- 

Scheduled July 1-September 30, 1955 

UNESCO-International Bureau of Education: 18th International Geneva July 4- 

Conference on Public Education. 



'Prepared in the Office of International Conferences, June 22, 1955. Following is a list of abbreviations: Gatt, 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; Fao, Food and Agriculture Organization; Icao, International Civil Aviation 
Organization; Ilo, International Labor Organization; Iasi, Inter-American Statistical Institute; Unicef, United Na- 
tions Children's Fund ; U.N., United Nations ; Itu, International Telecommunication Union ; Unesco, United Nations 
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ; Ecafe, Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East; Paso, 
Pan American Sanitary Organization ; Who, World Health Organization. 



July 4, 1955 35 



Scheduled July 1-September 30, 1955 — Continued 

Ittt International Telegraph Consultative Committee: Study Geneva July 4- 

Group X. 

U. X. Economic and Social Council: 20th Session Geneva July 5 

International Whaling Commission: 7th Meeting Moscow July 16- 

18th Conference of International Union of Pure and Applied Chem- Zurich July 20- 

istry: and 14th International Congress of Pure and Applied 

Chemistry. 

American International Institute for the Protection of Childhood: Montevideo July 25 

Meeting of Directing Council. 

Pan American Institute of Geography and History (Paigh): 6th Mexico, D.F July 25- 

General Assembly. 

Paigh Commission on Cartography: 7th Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25- 

Paigh Commission on Geography: 4th Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25- 

Paigh Commission on History: 3d Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25- 

3d International Congress of Biochemistry Brussels Aug. 1— 

Advisory Committee to the I". N. Secretary-General on Peaceful Geneva Aug. 3— 

L'ses of Atomic Energy: 3d Meeting. 

U. N. International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Geneva Aug. 8— 

Energy. 

International Council of Scientific Unions: 7th General Assembly . Oslo Aug. 8- 

Conference of British Commonwealth Survey Officers Cambridge (England) . . . Aug. 15- 

9th International Edinburgh Film Festival Edinburgh Aug. 21— 

Fao Meeting on Livestock Production under Tropical Conditions . Brisbane Aug. 22- 

International Wool Textile Research Conference Sydney Aug. 22- 

lst U. X. Congress on Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Geneva Aug. 22— 

Offenders. 

16th International Exhibition of Cinematographic Art Venice Aug. 25- 

Inter-Parliamentary Union: 44th Congress Helsinki Aug. 25— 

International Committee on Military Medicine and Pharmacy . . Istanbul Aug. 28- 

International Astronomical Union: 9th General Assembly .... Dublin Aug. 29- 

14th International Horticultural Congress Scheveningen (Xetherlands) . Aug. 29— 

International Association for Hydraulic Research: 6th Plenary Delft (Xetherlands) .... Aug. 29- 

Meeting. 

U. X. Economic Commission for Latin America (Ecla) : 6th Bogotd Aug. 29- 

Session. 

Icao Second Air Xavigation Conference Montreal Aug. 30- 

U. N. Ecafe Iron and Steel Subcommittee: 6th Session .... Bangkok August 

Icao Legal Committee: Subcommittee on Chartering and Hiring Paris or The Hague .... Sept. 1- 

of Aircraft. 

Damascus International Fair Damascus Sept. 2— 

3d Pakistan International Industries Fair Karachi Sept. 2- 

20th Salonika International Trade Fair Salonika Sept. 4— 

International Commission for Criminal Police: 24th General Istanbul Sept. 5- 

Assembly. 

Icao Diplomatic Conference for the Purpose of Finalizing the Proto- The Hague Sept. 6- 

col of Amendment of the Warsaw Convention. 

Paso Executive Committee: 26th and 27th Meetings Washington Sept. 6— 

International Scientific Tobacco Congress Paris Sept. 6- 

Paso Directing Council: 8th Meeting; Regional Committee of Who: Washington Sept. 8- 

7th Meeting. 

Unicef Executive Board and Program Committee Xew York. Sept. 8- 

19th Levant Fair Bari Sept. 9- 

International Rubber Study Group: Management Committee London Sept. 9— 

Meeting. 

International Congress on Cosmic Radiation Mexico, D.F Sept. 10- 

International Union of Public Transport: 31st Congress Xaples Sept. 11- 

Unesco International Congress of Libraries and Documentation Brussels Sept. 11- 

Centers. 

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Istanbul Sept. 12- 

International Monetary Fund: 10th Annual Meeting of Boards 

of Governors. 

U. X. Ecafe Working Party of Experts on Hydrologic Terminology. Bangkok Sept. 12- 

U. X. Committee on Information from Xon-Self-Governing Ter- Xew York Sept. 15- 

ritories: Reconvened 6th Session. 

Marseille International Fair Marseille Sept. 17— 

U. X. General Assembly: 10th Session Xew York Sept. 20- 

Fao Latin American Forestry Commission: 5th Session Venezuela Sept. 26- 

Ilo Textiles Committee: 5th Session Geneva Sept. 26- 

U. X. Economic Commission for Europe (Ece): 3d Conference of Geneva Sept. 26- 

Statisticians. 

Consultative Committee for Economic Development in Southeast Singapore Sept. 29- 

Asia ("Colombo Plan"): Officials Meeting. 

Fao Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council: 6th Meeting Tokyo Sept. 30- 



36 Department of Stale Bulletin 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Educational Exchange Agreement 
With Norway Renewed 

The Department of State announced on June 
15 (press release 355) that the United States and 
Norway had that day renewed for a second 5-year 
period an educational exchange agreement under 
the Fulbright Act. 1 The agreement, signed in 
Oslo by U.S. Ambassador L. Corrin Strong and 
Norwegian Foreign Minister Halyard M. Lange, 
on behalf of their respective Governments, pro- 
vides the equivalent of $1,250,000 in Norwegian 
kroner to continue the program for another 5 years 
at an annual expenditure of the equivalent of 
$250,000 a year. These moneys will be used to 
finance travel of Norwegians to the United States 
for study, teaching, lecturing, or advanced re- 
search and to pay travel and maintenance costs 
for Americans to go to Norway for similar 
purposes. 

Nearly 900 exchanges have taken place since 
the program began in 1949. 



U.S. and Netherlands Sign 
Income-Tax Protocol 

Press release 357 dated June 15 

Joint Statement 

On June 15, 1955, Secretary of State John 
Foster Dulles and the Ambassador of the Nether- 
lands, His Excellency Dr. J. H. van Eoijen, signed 
a protocol supplementing the convention of April 
29, 1948 2 between the United States and the 
Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation 
with respect to taxes on income and certain other 
taxes. 

The object of the protocol is to effect certain 
modifications in the convention for the purpose of 
facilitating extension of the convention to the 
Netherlands Antilles (Dutch "West Indies). The 



1 For an announcement of the original agreement, signed 
at Oslo on May 25, 1949, see Bulletin of June 5, 1949, 
p. 731. 

s Bulletin- of May 9, 194S, p. 611. 



protocol will be submitted to the United States 
Senate for advice and consent to ratification and 
to be considered in conjunction with a proposal, 
presently under consideration in the Senate Com- 
mittee on Foreign Relations (S. Exec. I, 83d 
Cong., 2d sess.) , for extending the operation of the 
convention, with certain limitations, to the Neth- 
erlands Antilles. 

The protocol contains two substantive articles. 
One of them would have the effect of modifying 
the credit article of the 1948 convention in order 
to set forth precisely the deduction or credit which 
the Antilles shall allow against its tax for income 
tax paid to the United States by United States 
citizens resident in the Antilles with respect to 
income they receive from sources within the 
United States. The other substantive article 
would modify the extension-procedure article of 
the 1948 convention so that the convention would 
apply as between the United States and the 
Netherlands Antilles on and after January 1 im- 
mediately preceding the date on which the pro- 
cedure prescribed in the convention had been 
completed. 

A third article of the protocol provides that it 
shall be regarded as an integral part of the con- 
vention, that it shall be ratified and instruments of 
ratification shall be exchanged, and that the pro- 
tocol shall enter into force on the date of such 
exchange. 



Current Actions 

MULTILATERAL 

Austria 

State treaty for the re-establishment of an independent 
and democratic Austria. Signed at Vienna May 15, 
1955. 1 

Senate ml rice and consent to ratification given: June 
27, 1955. 



BILATERAL 

Belgium 

Agreement for cooperation concerning the civil uses of 
atomic energy. Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. 
Enters into force on the date of receipt by Belgium of 
a notification from the United States that a period of 
30 days has elapsed as required by United States law. 

Canada 

Agreement for cooperation on civil uses of atomic energy. 
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force 



1 Not in force. 



July 4, 1955 



37 



on the date of receipt by Canada of a notification from 
the United States that a period of 30 days has elapsed 
as required by United States law. 

Cuba 

Agreement extending the air force mission agreement of 
December 22, 1950, as extended (TIAS 2166, 2698, and 
2869). Effected by exchange of notes at Washington 
May 3 and 17, 1955. Entered into force May 17, 1955. 

Agreement extending the army mission agreement of Au- 
gust 28, 1951 (TIAS 2309), as extended. Effected by 
exchange of notes at Washington May 3 and 17, 1955. 
Entered into force May 17, 1955. 

Dominican Republic 

Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative edu- 
cation program of March 16, 1951 (TIAS 2244), as 
amended. Effected by exchange of notes at Ciudad 
Trujillo April 19 and May 5, 1955. Entered into force 
May 5, 1955. 

Ecuador 

Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative 
health and sanitation program of September 15, 1950 
(TIAS 2147). Effected by exchange of notes at Quito 
March 17 and April 12, 1955. Entered into force April 
18, 1955 (upon signature of operational extension 
agreement). 

Netherlands 

Protocol supplementing the convention with respect to 
taxes on income and certain other taxes for the purpose 
of facilitating extension to Netherlands Antilles. 
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force 
on the date of exchange of ratifications. 

Peru 

Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative edu- 
cation program of September 25 and 29, 1950 (TIAS 
2160). Effected by exchange of notes signed at Lima 
February 23 and April 26, 1955. Entered into force 
April 28, 1955 (upon signature of operational extension 
agreement). 

United Kingdom 

Agreement for cooperation on civil uses of atomic energy. 
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force 
on the date on which each Government receives from 
the other Government written notification that it has 
complied with all statutory and constitutional require- 
ments for entry into force. 

Agreement relating to additional funds to be made avail- 
able by the United Kingdom for the continued operation 
of the United States Educational Commission. Effected 
by exchange of notes at London May 23, 1955. Entered 
into force May 23, 1955. 

Uruguay 

Agreement for a program of industrial productivity. 
Signed at Montevideo May 23, 1955. Will enter into 
force on date of a communication in writing notifying 
the United States Government of Uruguay's ratification. 



PUBLICATIONS 



Recent Releases 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Gov- 
ernment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Address 
requests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, ex- 
cept in the case of free publications, which may be ob- 
tained from the Department of State. 



Tenth Inter-American Conference. Pub. 5692. Interna- 
tiona] Organization and Conference Series II, American 
Republics 14. 221 pp. 65<«. 

Report of the delegation of the United States of America, 
with related documents, on the Tenth Inter-American Con- 
ference held at Caracas, Venezuela, March 1-28, 1954. 

U.S. Policy in the Near East, South Asia, and Africa — 
1954. Pub. 5801. Near the Middle Eastern Series 18. 
72 pp. 30tf. 

A pamphlet dealing with some problems in the area, and 
the mutual security and assistance programs administered 
there. 

Your Department of State. Pub. 5839. Department and 
Foreign Service Series 43. 6 pp. 5tf. 

A 6-page leaflet which gives pertinent facts about the 
Department of State. 

Copyright. TIAS 2906. Pub. 5486. 18 pp. lOtf. 

Provisional arrangement between the United States and 
Japan. Exchange of notes — Signed at Tokyo November 
10, 1953. Entered into force November 10, 1953 ; operative 
retroactively April 2S, 1952 and related exchanges of 
notes — Signed at Tokyo November 10, 1953. 

Passport Visas, Validity of Nonimmigrant Visas and 
Schedule of Fees. TIAS 2912. Pub. 5411. 18 pp. 10tf. 

Agreement between the United States and Mexico. Ex- 
change of notes — Dated at Mexico October 28, November 
10 and 12, 1953. Entered into force November 12, 1953 
with related exchange of notes — Dated at Mexico Novem- 
ber 10 and 12, 1953. 

Health and Sanitation, Cooperative Program in Bolivia — 
Additional Financial Contributions. TIAS 2915. Pub. 
5401. 6 pp. 5tf. 

Agreement between the United States and Bolivia. Ex- 
change of notes — Dated at La Paz February 7 and June 27, 
1952. Entered into force June 27, 1952. 



THE DEPARTMENT 



Designations 

Cecil B. Lyon as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Inter- 
American Affairs, effective June 28 (press release 329 
dated June 8). 



Defense, Loan of Vessels to China. TIAS 2916. Pub. 
5406. 11 pp. 10tf. 

Agreement between the United States and China. Ex- 
change of notes — Signed at Taipei January 13, 1954. 
Entered into force January 13, 1954. 

Technical Cooperation, Litani River Survey Project. 
TIAS 2920. Pub. 5423. 4 pp. 5tf. 

Agreement between the United States and Lebanon. Ex- 
change of notes — Signed at Beirut February 15, 21, and 
24, 1951. Entered into force February 24, 1951. 



38 



Deparfmenf of State Bulletin 



July 4, 1955 



Ind 



ex 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 836 



Agriculture 

President Orders Investigation Into Effects of Rye 

Imports 28 

U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27 

Canada 

Joint Commission Asked To Investigate Resources of St. 

Croix River Basin 21 

U.S. Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys- 
tem (texts of notes) 22 

Claims and Property. Cuban Government Makes Payment 

of Adjudicated Claims 27 

Cuba 

Cuban Government Makes Payment of Adjudicated 

Claims 27 

U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27 

Congress. The 

Current Legislation 34 

Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1056 

(Stassen) , 29 

Text of Concurrent Resolution on Renewed Efforts for 

Peace 4 

Economic Affairs 

Enactment of Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1955 

(Eisenhower) 25 

Joint Commission Asked To Investigate Resources of St. 

Croix River Basin 21 

President Orders Investigation Into Effects of Rye 

Imports 28 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five 

Nations 26 

U.S. and Netherlands Sign Income-Tax Protocol .... 37 

U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27 

Educational Exchange. Educational Exchange Agreement 

With Norway Renewed 37 

Germany 

Anniversary of June 17 Uprising (Conant) 15 

Our New Partner — The Federal Republic of Germany 

(Conant) 12 

India. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by 

Five Nations 26 

International Organizations and Meetings. Calendar of 

Meetings 35 

Korea. Status of 21 Americans Who Refused Repatria- 
tion 20 

Military Affairs 

Status of 21 Americans Who Refused Repatriation ... 20 
U.S. -Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys- 
tem (texts of notes) 22 

Mutual Security 

Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1956 

(Stassen) . 29 

U.S. -Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys- 
tem (texts of notes) 22 

Netherlands 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five 

Nations 26 

U.S. and Netherlands Sign Iucome-Tax Protocol .... 37 

Nicaragua. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested 

by Five Nations 26 

Norway 

Educational Exchange Agreement With Norway Renewed . 37 

Pakistan. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested 

by Five Nations 26 

Presidential Documents. President Orders Investigation 

Into Effects of Rye Imports 28 

Publications. Recent Releases 38 

State, Department of. Designation (Lyon) 38 

Sweden. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested 

by Five Nations 26 

Treaty Information 

Current Actions 37 

Educational Exchange Agreement With Norway Renewed . 37 
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five 

Nations 26 

U.S. and Netherlands Sign Income-Tax Protocol .... 37 
U.S.-Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys- 
tem (texts of notes) 22 

U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27 



Turkey. Letters of Credence (Gork) 20 

U.S.S.R. U.S.S.R. Agrees on Time and Place for Four- 
Power Meeting (text of Soviet note) 20 

United Nations 

The Moral Foundation of the United Nations (Dulles) . . 10 

Tenth Anniversary of the United Nations (Eisenhower, 

Dulles) 3 

Name Index 

Dulles, Secretary 6, 10 

Eisenhower, President 3, 25, 28 

Gork, Haydar 20 

Lyon, Cecil B 38 

Stassen, Harold E 29 

Conant, James B 12, 15 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: June 20 26 

Releases may be obtained from the News Division, 
Department of State, Washington, D. C. 

Press releases issuetl prior to June 20 which ap- 
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 329 of 
June 8, 348 and 349 of June 13, 355 and 357 of June 
15, 360 and 362 of June 16, 363 of June 17, and 
366 of June 19. 

Subject 

Military assistance agreement with 

Guatemala. 
Baker nomination. 
U.S.-U.K. atomic agreement for mutual 

defense. 
TJ.S.-Canada atomic agreement for 

mutual defense. 
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Chile. 
Villard designation. 
Turkey credentials (rewrite). 
Study of domestic tuna industry. 
Committee on agriculturists visiting 

U.S.S.R. 
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Japan. 
Holland : testimony on sugar act. 
Educational exchange. 
Atoms-for-peace agreement with 

Greece. 
Agricultural representatives to 

U.S.S.R. 
Itinerary for Prime Minister U Nu. 
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Uru- 
guay. 
Dulles : U.N. 10th anniversary. 
Refugee ships. 
Aid to Greece. 
Surplus commodity agreement with 

Colombia. 
Murphy : "Germany in the Free World." 
Agricultural representative to U.S.S.R. 
Renegotiation of tariff concessions. 
Payment of claims by Cuba. 

*Not printed. 

fHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



No. 


Date 


t367 


6/20 


*368 


6/20 


t369 


6/20 


t370 


6/20 


*371 


6/20 


*372 


6/20 


373 


6/21 


f374 


6/21 


,375 


6/21 


•376 


6/21 


t377 


6/22 


*378 


6/22 


♦379 


6/22 



,380 6/22 



*381 


6/23 


*382 


6/24 


383 


6/24 


t384 


6/24 


t385 


6/24 


t386 


6/24 


t387 


6/24 


t388 


6/24 


389 


6/24 


390 


6/25 



U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: I95S 




<ms> 



the 
Department 

of 
State 



Order Form 

To: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Offic* 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed And: 



(cask, check, or 
maneu order). 



United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, £300 

(GPOI 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy 



Pub. 5888 



150 



An illustrated layman's guide to "The Atoms-for-Peace Pro- 
gram" to which President Eisenhower has committed the 
Nation, pledging it before the United Nations General As- 
sembly "to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way 
by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be 
dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life." 

The pamphlet offers a concise account of the history and 
development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. These 
are some of the subjects treated : 

The Promise of Atomic Energy 

The Origin of the Atoms-for-Peace Program 

The Background of the U.S. Proposals 

The United Nations Atoms-for-Peace Resolution 

The International Atomic Energy Agency — its origin, 

development, status, and future activities 
The International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of 

Atomic Energy 
Education and Training in Atomic Reactor Technology — 

which includes a description of the reactor school at 

Argonne National Laboratory and Aec's school for 

isotope study at Oak Ridge 

Copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy may be purchased 
for 15 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. 
Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. 

Please send me copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 






i 



<JJi€/ z!l)eAcwt'>nen>t/ xw <Jta/te/ 




Vol. XXXIII, No. 837 
July 11, 1955 




GERMANY IN THE FREE WORLD • by Deputy Under 

Secretary Murphy 43 

ATOMIC ENERGY AGREEMENTS 

Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text) .... 55 
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of 
Atomic Energy 58 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 
U.K. (texts) 59 

GENEVA CONVENTIONS FOR PROTECTION OF WAR 

VICTIMS • Statement by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy . 69 



For index see inside back cover 



Boston Public Library 
Superintend of Documents 

AUG 1 1 1955 



tJne z/)e/iawfone , yit c£ tftate 




bulletin 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 837 . Publication 5918 



July 11, 1955 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.O. 

Price: 

62 issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25 
Single copy, 20 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955) . 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
of State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication issued by the 
Public Services Division, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
selected press releases on foreign pol- 
icy, issued by the White House and 
the Department, and statements and 
addresses made by the President and 
by the Secretary of State and other 
officers of the Department, as well as 
special articles on various phases of 
international affairs and the func- 
tions of the Department. Informa- 
tion is included concerning treaties 
and international agreements to 
which the United States is or may 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



Germany in the Free World 



by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy x 



I count it a privilege to be among you on the 
occasion of this timely and instructive conference 
on Germany. And it has added to my pleasure in 
being here that I have been able to renew my asso- 
ciation with Chairman Wells. 2 It seems very 
natural and appropriate that a conference on 
Germany should bring us together now, for it was 
Germany that drew us together in the first place. 
Back in the military phase of occupation, we both 
served as advisers to our good friend Lucius Clay, 
President Wells on cultural and I on political 
affairs. And you of course know that in those 
clays Mr. Wells did the spade work for our suc- 
cessful long-range program of cultural exchange 
with Germany. 

When he and I were colleagues in Omgtts, the 
"German problem" was most conspicuously a mat- 
ter of economic, political, and social reconstruc- 
tion. However, it was also in our time over there 
that we had our first serious brush with the 
Soviets, answering their blockade of Berlin with 
the air lift. It was possible to recognize that epi- 
sode—although few did at the time— as the first 
major overt act in what is euphemistically called 
the cold war. Since then, development and prog- 
ress in Germany and in German- American rela- 
tions have been phenomenal. Yet degree and 
scope of progress notwithstanding, there is still 
and undoubtedly will be a continuing "German 
problem," but its factors have changed consider- 
ably since 1948. 

The participants of this conference under the 
happy auspices of this great university are to be 
complimented on their sense of timing and also 
on their sensitivity to political priorities. Ger- 

1 Address made before the Indiana University Confer- 
ence on Problems of American Foreign Policy at Blooming- 
ton, Ind., on June 25 (press release 387 dated June 24). 

2 Herman B. Wells, president of Indiana University. 



many is high on the list of political priorities. It 
is once again a focal point of world policies and 
world tensions. Divided itself, Germany has 
marked a division of Europe and, in fact, the 
world. And its division makes Germany a source 
of grave tensions. This role is not of Germany's 
choosing ; it was forced upon a prostrate Germany 
by world conditions. It is heartening on the eve 
of the Geneva Conference that the participants 
of this gathering should have been so quick to 
recognize the elements of the German situation 
for what they are and also the dependence of the 
German problem for solution upon responsible 
action taken by the major powers. 

In reviewing the highlights of this conference 
here in Bloomington as they have been related to 
me, it is difficult to find a common denominator 
for the variety of views expressed. Certainly the 
views reflect the intensity of public interest, and 
their variety reflects the controversial character 
of the subject. In a sense, the discussion has been 
typical. As John J. McCloy 3 once stated, Ger- 
many is a country that provokes strong positive 
or strong negative reactions, hardly ever permit- 
ting indifference or ambivalence of approach. 

Such discussions as yours provide Government 
officials with an excellent opportunity to be ap- 
prised of the informed opinion of private experts 
and interested laymen. Soundings of this nature 
are always important ; at a time when the Govern- 
ment may be entering into critical international 
discussion on a highly controversial subject, such 
soundings are vital. It is both gratifying and 
reassuring to know that the American people re- 
tain a strong and active interest in the German 
problem and that that interest is characterized 
by appreciation of the problem's fundamental, if 
not universal, implications. 

3 U. S. High Commissioner for Germany, 1949-1953. 



July 11, 1955 



43 



Your discussions have stressed a forward-look- 
ing and not merely a retrospective approach. In 
the past many of us have often shown a dispropor- 
tionate tendency to view Germany in the light of 
bygone issues, both good and bad. This is under- 
standable. Indeed, we require an integrated 
analysis of the past if we are to make a realistic 
appraisal of either present or future contingencies. 
However, in approaching the subject of Germany 
today, we have to realize that we are dealing with 
a new set of facts. 

German Sovereignty 

The first of these facts is German sovereignty. 
This means that the German Federal Republic has 
regained a political identity of its own. Thus it is 
imperative that we judge it on its own record, 
not on the record of its predecessors. It is equally 
imperative that we accord the Federal Republic 
the status and credit that we accord any other 
sovereign nation. The Federal Republic is no 
longer a dependent of the free world; it now 
stands on its own feet. On May 5 of this year 
the United States, with Britain and France, re- 
nounced the privilege of an occupying power to 
intervene in the national affairs of the Federal 
Republic. 4 We do have jurisdiction in two or 
three areas that were voluntarily agreed to by the 
Germans, but, aside from those, we have no au- 
thority over Germany. From here on out, the 
Federal Republic is on its own and the course of 
its internal and external policy will be deter- 
mined by its elected government. We have chosen 
to trust the new Germany, and we have satisfac- 
tory evidence that our trust is not misplaced. 
Without benefit of instructions or advice from 
us, Chancellor Adenauer has responded to recent 
Soviet overtures with firmness, dignity, and wis- 
dom. Whether and when he will go to Moscow, 
was and still is his decision and his decision 
alone — but whatever he will elect to do will, we 
are confident, be in the best interest not only of 
the Federal Republic but in the common interest 
of all free nations. 

Our Partnership With Germany 

The second of the facts which must be recognized 
in any discussion of Germany today is that Ger- 
many is our partner. Through Western European 

4 Bulletin of May 16, 1955, p. 791. 
44 



Union, Germany is in partnership with 6 and 
through Nato with 14 Western nations, not just 
with the United States. This fact of partnership 
introduces a set of conditions entirely different 
from those of any previous period. This is the 
first time in history that we and many other na- 
tions have entered into a defensive alliance with 
Germany. Moreover, the new relationship with 
Germany is now based on the principle of multi- 
lateralism and reciprocity instead of on the uni- 
lateralism and protective tutelage implicit in the 
occupation status. And this new relationship 
confers upon both the United States and the Fed- 
eral Republic certain rights and certain obliga- 
tions. 

The United States, for instance, is under obli- 
gation to continue active support of the Atlantic 
security system to make the system of Western 
defense truly effective. And it stands committed 
by the tripartite guaranty made by the United 
States, the United Kingdom, and France in 1950 
that they "will treat any attack against the Fed- 
eral Republic or Berlin from any quarter as an 
attack upon themselves." 5 These commitments 
have been reaffirmed in a formal declaration to 
the Federal Republic and West Berlin. 6 

For its part, the Federal Republic is committed 
to honoring its obligations under the Paris Agree- 
ments. This involves, as you know, the creation 
of an effective military establislunent as part and 
parcel of the common defense effort of the Western 
nations. The importance of the German contri- 
bution has not always been properly recognized — - 
in Germany as well as in the United States. It 
perhaps has escaped the attention of a good many 
that Germany's participation has been vital to 
the development of a realistic system of forward 
defense. The German effort and participation 
will mean a higher measure of security notably to 
the Federal Republic but also to the Western 
world. The political and technical difficulties 
and, above all, the psychological problems which 
confront any government which has to adjust the 
national community and the national economy to 
the requirements of defense are well understood. 
But we are also greatly impressed and heartened 
by the energetic efforts of the Federal Government 
and indeed of most political groups in Germany 
to create a defense establishment that will be under 



5 Ibid,, Oct. 2, 1950, p. 531. 

8 Ibid., Oct. 11, 1954, pp. 519, 521. 



Department of State Bulletin 



firm civilian control. It is a great comfort to 
know that the men at the helm of the new Germany 
have resolved to prevent at all costs a rebirth of 
old-fashioned militarism that would place in jeo- 
pardy the structure of the new democracy. 

Moreover, the new German defense force will 
he an instrument of collective security and not of 
secret national aspiration. Its size is known and 
its purpose clearly and openly defined. You may 
recall that at London, where the groundwork for 
the Paris Pacts was laid, Chancellor Adenauer 
voluntarily assumed two specific limitations. 7 
First he reaffirmed an earlier public announce- 
ment that Germany would of its own volition 
forego the right to manufacture certain types of 
weapons. Then he committed his country to re- 
taining the limitations on armament and the num- 
ber of divisions and size of air force laid down in 
the Edc Treaty. Furthermore, the German Fed- 
eral Government has agreed to conduct its policy 
in accordance with the principles of the United 
Nations Charter and never to resort to force in 
its attempts to achieve either reunification with 
the Soviet Zone of Germany or the modification 
of its present boundaries. 

The rights and duties of our new partnership 
are not limited to the military field. Its deeper 
and lasting purpose is to develop progressively 
new areas of cooperation designed increasingly to 
normalize our relations and to strengthen the 
bonds of friendship between our peoples. In a 
sense this is not actually a new departure. The 
trend toward a closer relationship started some 
time ago. Our agreement on cultural exchange s 
and more recently the Treaty of Friendship, Com- 
merce, and Navigation 9 were important mile- 
stones on this road to normalcy. Indeed, the new 
partnership is far more than the product of legal 
papers listing rights and obligations of both par- 
ties. It is more truly the expression of feelings of 
friendship between the peoples and the govern- 
ments and the culmination of a process of gradual 
rapprochement which has been progressing stead- 
ily over the past 10 years. 

The New Germany 

Third of the facts we must never lose sight of is 
this one: Germany has changed. The Federal 



' IUd., Oct. 11, 1954, p. 519. 
"IUd., Aug. 4, 1952, p. 179. 
"Ibid., June 22, 1953, p. 877. 



Republic is not the Second Reich; it is not the 
Weimar Republic; it is not the Third Reich. 
Quite possibly it is not the Germany of 1960, 
either. Germany is not static. It is developing 
and developing fast — and I use the word "develop- 
ing" in its connotation of maturing. Politically, 
economically, and socially this new Germany is a 
far cry from the Germany of Weimar Republic 
days — let alone the Germany of the Second or 
Third Reich. 

If I may be permitted a personal reference, I 
witnessed some of the troubles of the Weimar Re- 
public. I happened to be in Munich as a young 
consul from 1921 to 1925. That was in the years 
of struggle of that earlier and ill-fated Republic, 
and even then the handwriting was on the wall. 
That Republic was the victim of inflation, of mass 
unemployment, of bitterness and resentment over 
the loss of World War I, and of powerful opposi- 
tion from the country's most influential groups — 
conservatives, imperialists, and militarists. Un- 
rest, violent demonstrations, discontent were the 
keynote of the times. I was in Munich when 
Adolph Hitler attempted the Putsch that failed to 
come off — and when he was using his enforced 
leisure in Landsberg prison to write Mein Kampf. 

The whole world knows of the Federal Repub- 
lic's phenomenal economic recovery, and the na- 
tional election of September 1953, plus subsequent 
local elections, should have convinced the most 
skeptical of the political stability of the new Ger- 
many. The elections demonstrated clearly the 
broadly based support of the present government 
and established the fact that the German people 
repudiate extremism of either right or left. The 
radical fringe groups were unable to win a single 
seat in the Bundestag. There is an opposition, 
as there should be, but this one — unlike its pred- 
ecessors in Weimar days — is made up largely of 
champions of democratic principles, civil rights, 
and freedom of speech. 

In its economic well-being, its political stability, 
its Western orientation, and in its determination 
to keep the peace, are the assurances many of us 
need in contemplating German rearmament. If 
the efforts of the present German Government are 
successful — and there is no indication that they 
will not be — the new army it is creating will have 
no way of setting itself up once more as a "state 
within the state." The Federal Republic has its 
eyes on the future and has little inclination to 



July 71, 1955 



45 



dwell in the past, but it has been attentive to the 
lessons provided by its predecessors in what not 
to do. 

It is far from my thought to imply that there is 
no similarity at all between the Germany of today 
and the Germany of yesterday, but the differences 
are impressive and fundamental. And change and 
growth are continuing. The Germans are the 
first to attribute the change for the better to cer- 
tain external influences that have been brought to 
bear on Germany. They list among them the cur- 
rency reform introduced by General Clay and his 
British and French colleagues in 1948, Marshall 
plan aid, the McCloy fund, 10 and the cultural ex- 
changes as most responsible for their recovery 
and welfare. It is gratifying that they feel that 
way. It is important to remember that the effec- 
tiveness of the aid we provided has been due in 
large measure to the intelligent and scrupulous 
use to which the Germans put it and to their basic 
desire to undertake honest and thorough reforms 
in many important areas of public life. 

And there is one more element of change which 
is perhaps the most dramatic and a truly revolu- 
tionary one. I refer to the gradual rapproche- 
ment of France and Germany. This development, 
understandably, is still in an early stage. It has 
already produced tangible and most encouraging 
results. The Coal and Steel Community was the 
beginning of what we all hope to be an era of pro- 
gressive cooperation between these two nations; 
the Western European Union represents another 
important advance on the road to genuine and last- 
ing unity. For it is undoubtedly a truism that 
European unity must be built on Franco-German 
understanding — or it will never be built. 

Problem of Unification 

The fourth fact, and one that sometimes tends 
to overshadow the other three, is that Germany is 
divided and, in its division, is a potential of danger 
to Europe and lands beyond. This is not the first 
time that Germany has been a source of tension 
in Europe and a threat to world equilibrium. But 
in other times, Germany elected the role of dis- 
turber of the peace. Now, Germany is the un- 
happy victim of external forces — or, to be blunt, 
of Soviet strategy and maneuver. 

10 A Special Projects Fund established by Mr. McCloy 
and administered by Hicoo for German community proj- 
ects. 



46 



At Potsdam in the summer of 1945, our wartime 
Soviet ally gave lipservice to the agreement that 
there should be uniformity in the treatment of the 
German people and that the four zones of occupa- 
tion should be treated as an economic unit. The 
Allied Control Council, composed of the military 
governors of the four zones of occupation, was 
soon paralyzed by Soviet intransigence and the 
Soviet veto. The Soviets vetoed action to make 
an economic unit of Germany; they violated the 
Potsdam agreement. 

From the beginning our aims for Germany and 
the Soviet aspirations were at odds. Within a 
year of the installation of the machinery for quad- 
ripartite administration of Germany, it was ob- 
vious that the Western powers wanted a self- 
supporting Germany, while the Soviet Union was 
interested in exploiting German industry, agri- 
culture, and labor for the benefit of the U.S.S.R. 
It was and no doubt still is the Kremlin aim to 
draw all of Germany into the Soviet orbit. 

During the summer of 1946, in the course of the 
second session of the Council of Foreign Ministers 
of the four occupation powers held at Paris, Sec- 
retary of State James F. Byrnes stated the facts 
of quadripartite control of Germany very clearly. 
He said that the United States was unwilling to 
share responsibility for the economic paralysis 
and suffering that would result from continuation 
of administering Germany "in four closed com- 
partments." He invited the three other powers to 
join their zones of occupation with the American 
zone as an economic unit. In September 1946 at 
Stuttgart, Mr. Byrnes delivered a speech that was 
broadcast throughout Germany and brought hope 
and new courage to the peojne. 11 In it he laid down 
a constructive economic program for Germany 
and warned that only a drastic fiscal reform pro- 
gram applied uniformly throughout the country 
could prevent ruinous inflation. 

That was a turning point for Germany and for 
Europe, and it was the beginning of the end of 
quadripartite administration of Germany. The 
Western powers introduced the currency reform 
not only in their zones but also in the Western 
sectors of Berlin. The Soviets responded with 
the blockade — and we responded with the air lift. 

Under the administration of Britain, France, 
and the United States, Western Germany moved 



n Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1946, p. 496. 

Department of State Bulletin 



toward independence and recovery. On Septem- 
ber 21, 1949, the Federal Republic of Germany 
was established; military government gave way 
to civilian administration of the Allied High Com- 
mission. 12 The Federal Republic had been 
launched on troubled seas, but it charted its course 
toward sovereignty and freedom. 

A matter of days later, October 7 to be exact, 
the Soviet authorities created a puppet German 
government by military flat in the East Zone and 
announced that this so-called "German Democratic 
Republic," set up without benefit of elections, was 
the legitimate spokesman of the German people. 13 

Germany was divided, politically, economically, 
and physically. The Iron Curtain had been rung 
down, closing off 17 million German people in the 
Soviet Zone from their relatives and friends, and 
condemning them to the oppression of a Soviet- 
dominated police state. 

Since that time it has consistently been United 
States policy to work for the reunification of Ger- 
many by peaceful means. Britain and France 
have joined with our Government in repeated 
requests to the Soviet Union to permit reunifica- 
tion on the basis of free democratic elections. Up 
to the present moment, the Soviet Union has con- 
sistently refused to permit reunification on any 
basis that either Germany or the three Western 
nations could accept. While the United States 
has sought peaceful means of reunification for 
Germany and supported the Federal Republic's 
integration with the West, the Soviet Union has 
treated the reunification issue as a political bomb — 
or at times as a political prize. We all know how 
the Soviet Union fought against the ratification 
of the Paris Pacts to the bitter end, how it alter- 
nated threats and promises in its attempts to pre- 
vent German ratification. "Ratify the treaties," 
it said to the Federal Republic in effect, "and 
you'll never be reunited with your brothers of the 
German Democratic Republic." And out of the 
other side of its mouth, it said : "Reject the treaties 
and you can have reunification with free elections 
tossed in." In spite of this propaganda barrage, 
the German Federal Republic went ahead and 
ratified the treaties, and it is now joined with the 
West for purposes of defense and the common 
welfare. 



' Ibid., Oct. 3, 1949, p. 512. 
' Ibid., Nov. 21, 1949, p. 761. 



Question of German Neutrality 

Since the ratifications brought the treaties into 
effect, the world has been very attentive to cer- 
tain indications on the part of the Soviet Union 
that some kind of change is in process; whether 
the change is in their tactics, their strategy, or 
their hearts is a subject of widespread speculation. 
Soviet acquiescence to an Austrian state treaty 
after all these years raised hopes that the Soviet 
Union is genuinely interested in lessening ten- 
sions. Mr. Molotov's remarks made at the sign- 
ing of the Austrian treaty, in making it clear that 
the Soviet Union would exact German neutrality 
and the Federal Republic's disavowal of the Paris 
Pacts as the price of German reunification, have 
aroused more speculation. "With their natural 
and profound yearning for reunification," many 
people ask, "can we expect the Germans to with- 
stand the offer of the Soviet Union?" 

The answer to that is : We can and do. At this 
point, I should like to quote Secretary Dulles' 
remarks to the press on May 24, 14 when questioned 
about the policy of this country on the subject 
of German neutrality : 

It is the view of the United States that a policy of 
neutrality has no application to a country of the character 
of Germany. It is all well to talk about neutrality for 
a country such as Austria, a small country with 7 million 
people. But I do not believe that anybody realistically 
believes that the German people, 70-odd million of them, 
are destined to play the role of a neutral country- 

What is even more to the point than our posi- 
tion in regard to German neutrality, since the Fed- 
eral Republic is now a sovereign state, is the posi- 
tion of the Germans themselves. There is no 
denying the fact that the problem of German 
reunification is closely related to the important 
problem of disarmament. Recently the German 
Ambassador to this country, Dr. [Heinz L.] 
Krekeler said : "We know that the greatest hope 
for the reunification of Germany lies within a 
worldwide settlement of the present tensions be- 
tween East and West," and he added: "We also 
know that we must not try for a reunification of 
Germany at a price or under conditions which 
would endanger our security." He concluded: 
"We cannot possibly agree, therefore, to any plans 
for a neutralization of Germany." When he made 
that speech, Dr. Krekeler had just returned from 



' Ibid., June 6, 1955, p. 932. 



July II, 1955 



47 



a most important conference with Chancellor 
Adenauer. 

And as recently as June 14, on the occasion of 
the press reception in his honor in Washington, 
Chancellor Adenauer himself made a very clear 
policy statement: 

"In recent weeks," he said, "it has been said 
that we Germans might be prepared again to sac- 
rifice our partnership with the Western nations 
and the obligations which we have just undertaken. 
In answer to this I can assure you most emphati- 
cally — Germany will honor her obligations." 
"Then," he continued, "reference has also been 
made to the question of neutrality or neutraliza- 
tion. ... In my opinion, the neutrality or neu- 
tralization of Germany would in a relatively short 
time permit Soviet Kussia to extend her power 
over all of Western Europe. I do not think that 
the United States would desire such a thing." 

I believe that understanding of the far-reaching 
effects of this tragic division of Germany is in- 
creasing. It is not hard to understand how the 
division has set into action an element of universal 
uncertainty and insecurity. Every one of us can 
understand that it causes human suffering to many 
thousands of German families torn cruelly apart. 
And one does not need to be a psychologist to 
appreciate that continued division conceivably 
could stir up nationalist feelings and Irredentist 
aspirations. But it is reassuring to know that the 
parties supporting Chancellor Adenauer and the 
majority of the German people do not intend to 
barter away their new alliances with the West for 
specious promises. 

Unification and International Tension 

Our own position with respect to German uni- 
fication has been clearly defined. We have given 
wholehearted support to the Germans in their de- 
termination not to accept a status quo that is based 
on the dismemberment of their nation. As a mat- 
ter of fact, we Americans have never had much 
reverence for the sanctity of the status quo. A 
stafrts quo in this instance is unacceptable for both 
humanitarian and political reasons. To us the 
partition of Germany is far more than a mere 
symptom of global malaise. It cannot be said to 
be the cause, but this unnatural condition contrib- 
utes to it by intensifying and perpetuating a state 
of international tension. For that reason, our 



enlightened self-interest as well as our sympathy 
for the German people demands the restoration of 
German unity. And we shall continue our 
search — happily a joint search conducted with the 
Federal Republic and our other allies of Western 
Europe — for a solution. 

We are convinced that, as the division of Ger- 
many is an element in the worldwide dilemma and 
not an isolated problem, it may well be that the 
solution may be found in relationship to the world 
situation rather than in isolation. We all realize 
that there is a universal desire to ease tensions 
and for an enduring peace. As the President has 
promised, we will bend our efforts to the attain- 
ment of these objectives. Nevertheless, we reject 
utterly any formula advanced for the relaxation of 
tensions that depends upon a perpetuation of ex- 
isting injustices and dangers, including the divi- 
sion of Germany. Conversely, we hold that neither 
the reunification of Germany nor the resolution 
of any other outstanding question should or could 
be achieved at the expense of Western unity and 
strength. Relaxation of tension does not mean 
relaxation of vigilance or effort. On the contrary, 
it means continuing strain until we know for cer- 
tain whether present Soviet maneuvers signify a 
change of objectives or merely a change of tactics. 
As for the future — prophecy is always a thank- 
less undertaking. There are certainly solid rea- 
sons for the expectation that the Federal Republic 
of Germany will remain a devoted partner and 
ally. That expectation is based on the facts of 
Germany's postwar record, on the aspirations of 
the German people, and on the caliber of postwar 
Germany's leadership. We have every reason to 
believe that, given a fair chance, Germany's prog- 
ress guided by the Chancellor's wise policy of 
political and economic gradualism will continue, 
to the benefit of the German people as well as the 
free world. 

No discussion these days seems to be fashionable 
without a reference to the coming "summit" con- 
ference in Geneva. Its area of interest is, of 
course, important and comprehensive. There is a 
desire to avoid a rigid formal agenda. No doubt, 
a number of controversial subjects will come up for 
discussion. It would be surprising if the prob- 
lem of Germany were not among them. 

The coming conference we hope will provide a 
means of testing how substantial the apparent 



48 



Department of State Bulletin 



recent changes of attitude of the Russians may be. 
The conference may reveal and clarify the inten- 
tions of the Soviets even though the discussions 
will be limited to exploration of ways and means 
of identifying and then later tackling the prob- 
lems. This may call for a lengthy series of meet- 
ings at different levels over an extended period of 
time. 

As for us and our allies, well, with Western 
unity a reality instead of a hope, we face the 
Soviets at Geneva from a more comfortable and 
advantageous position of strength. We can af- 
ford to be patient as well as determined. We 
have learned to be cautious in these matters. It 
would be exceedingly witless of us after all these 
years of experience to let ourselves be trapped 
into unrealistic expectations or stampeded into 
unconsidered conclusions or actions. 

You may recall an exceedingly interesting com- 
ment made by Chancellor Adenauer at Harvard 
last week. There is food for thought in it. "I 
think," said our distinguished visitor, "that the 
West should keep in mind one thing above all 
others at the approaching conferences: For the 
people of the West time is important and therefore 
they are impatient and they press for an immediate 
and visible success. Time means nothing to the 
Russians; they are interested only in space and 
not in time. In this they have a definite advan- 
tage in negotiations which by their very nature are 
most complicated. In my opinion, the West can- 
not have too much patience." 

This is wise counsel. We shall heed it. And 
may I say that it is comforting to have associates 
like Chancellor Adenauer whose statesmanship 
will be a major factor in cementing our new alli- 
ance with the Federal Republic of Germany. 



Delegation to Heads of Government 
Meeting at Geneva 

The White House on July 1 announced the fol- 
lowing delegation to the four-power conference of 
Heads of Government at Geneva July 18. 

The President 
The Secretary of State 

Dillon Anderson, Special Assistant to the President 
Charles E. Bohlen, U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union 
Robert R. Bowie, Director, Policy Planning Staff, Depart- 
ment of State 



James C. Hagerty, Press Secretary to the President 
Douglas MacArthur II, Counselor, Department of State 
Livingston T. Merchant, Assistant Secretary of State for 

European Affairs 
Herman Phleger, Legal Adviser, Department of State 
Llewellyn E. Thompson, U.S. Ambassador to Austria 



U.S., U.K., and France Hold 
Talks With Yugoslavia 

Following is the text of a joint communique 
issued at Belgrade on June &7 following a series 
of quadripartite talks: 

Talks were held in Belgrade from June 24 to 27 
between the Yugoslav Under Secretary of State 
for Foreign Affairs, M. Prica, the Ambassadors 
of the United States, the United Kingdom and 
France on the general international situation and 
questions of direct mutual concern. 

These talks were a further step in a series of 
consultations, individual, or collective, between 
representatives of the three Western Governments 
and the Yugoslav Government. 

This exchange of views, which took place in an 
atmosphere of cordiality and mutual confidence, 
confirmed the wide measure of agreement among 
the four Governments in their approach to the 
various international questions under review. 

This meeting had special significance in view 
of the recent more favorable developments in the 
international situation. The four Governments 
were agreed that solutions to outstanding prob- 
lems should be sought by peaceful means and by 
negotiations based upon full respect for and recog- 
nition of the right of all nations to independence, 
equality, self-defense and collective security in 
conformity with the Charter of the United Na- 
tions. They will continue to promote such 
solutions. 

The four Governments express their firm con- 
viction that the existence of a strong and inde- 
pendent Yugoslavia and continued cooperation 
between them under conditions of full equality are 
a contribution to peace and stability. They con- 
sider that the fruitful cooperation being developed 
in all fields in the Balkan alliance is also an im- 
portant contribution to peace and stability in this 
part of the world. 

They believe that this method of exchange of 
views can help to promote an even closer under- 



July II, 1955 



49 



standing between themselves and can also contrib- 
ute to a further improvement in the general 
international situation and to world peace. They 
are confident that the good relations developed 
between them in recent years in so many fields will 
be maintained and further expanded. 



Assessment of San Francisco Meeting 

News Conference Statement by Secretary Dulles 

Press release 393 dated June 28 

I returned from a week in San Francisco which 
was very useful. I reported on it fully last night 
to the President. There were at San Francisco 
Foreign Ministers from 37 countries, and I had 
the opportunity of talking with many of them 
about matters of common concern. Thus the 
meeting not only served to renew the dedication 
of the members to the principles of the United 
Nations. It also served the charter purpose of 
jjroviding a place for "harmonizing" the action 
of the nations through high-level exchanges of 
views. 

The statements that were made by the Foreign 
Ministers of Great Britain, France, and by myself 
showed quite clearly the positions which we can 
be expected to take at the Geneva Conference. 
Also, the statement by Mr. Molotov indicated the 
position which the Soviet Union will probably 
take at that conference. There were a number of 
private conversations which, so far as substance 
was concerned, merely confirmed the positions 
w T hich were taken publicly. We were able to 
reach agreement upon all important procedural 
points so that it can be expected that the Geneva 
Conference will get under way promptly and 
smoothly. 

It is to be deplored that at this juncture, when 
we are trying to consolidate peace, Soviet air 
fighters seem to have been "trigger happy" in the 
Bering Sea. So far, however, we doubt that that 
represents a considered policy on the part of the 
Soviet Union. Certainly we hope not. At least, 
the Soviet Union has made an expression of regret 
which is, I believe, the first time that it has pub- 
licly indicated to us regret over the conduct of its 
armed forces. It is, therefore, to be hoped that 
the Geneva Conference can begin on the assump- 
tion that all of the four participants genuinely 
desire a secure peace. 

50 



Elections in Viet-Nam 



Press release 396 dated June 28 



At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles was asked the position of the United States 
with respect to elections in Viet-Nam. The Sec- 
retary replied: 

Neither the United States Government nor the 
Government of Viet-Nam is, of course, a party to 
the Geneva armistice agreements. We did not 
sign them, and the Government of Viet-Nam did 
not sign them and, indeed, protested against them. 
On the other hand, the United States believes, 
broadly speaking, in the unification of countries 
which have a historic unity, where the people are 
akin. We also believe that, if there are conditions 
of really free elections, there is no serious risk that 
the Communists would win. 

The Communists have never yet won any free 
election. I don't think they ever will. Therefore, 
we are not afraid at all of elections, provided they 
are held under conditions of genuine freedom 
which the Geneva armistice agreement calls for. 
If those conditions can be provided we would be 
in favor of elections, because we believe that they 
would bring about the unification of the country 
under free government auspices. 



Visit of Prime Minister U Nu 

Press release 397 dated June 28 

At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles was asked whether he would discuss with 
Prime Minister TJ Nu of Burma a relaxation of 
tensions. The Secretary replied: 

Yes, we no doubt will talk about that. We look 
forward very much to this visit tomorrow of U Nu. 
I had the pleasure of being the guest of his Gov- 
ernment at Burma last March, and we had very 
good talks at the time. I expect that this will give 
us occasion to renew those talks. He has an inter- 
esting point of view, and I am always happy to 
have a chance of exchanffins; views with him. 



Treatment of Far Eastern Questions 
at Heads of Government Meeting 

Press release 398 dated June 28 

At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles was asked about the possibility of Far East- 
Department of State Bulletin 



em questions being raised at the Geneva Heads of 
Government meeting. He replied: 

The Soviets have indicated that they may make 
certain proposals for a further conference at which 
Far Eastern matters might be discussed, but I do 
not think that, beyond that, the topic is likely to 
come up. 

Asked whether the Soviets had indicated whom 
they would want at this further conference, the 
Secretary replied: 

Well, they have given some indications. They 
at first indicated that they would probably renew 
the proposal which they made at the Berlin con- 
ference a year ago last January and February for 
a five-power conference. They have since indi- 
cated that they might suggest a somewhat larger 
conference than the five-power conference. 

Asked whether that would be an opportune time 
to go back to the question of the reunification of 
Korea, Secretary Dulles replied: 

Well, we doubt very much whether that will be 
a profitable subject for discussion at the Geneva 
conference. Of course you know that the Geneva 
conference is not designed in any event to reach 
any substantive decisions but merely to set up 
procedures for arriving at results which we both 
find acceptable in principle. I do not think that 
there is any reason to believe that a procedure 
could now be found for unifying Korea which 
would be any better, or which would be more apt 
to succeed, than the effort which was made at 
Geneva a year ago which failed. 

Asked about the possibility of a further confer- 
ence on the Far East, the Secretary said: 

Well, I would be surprised, in the light of what 
I now know, if it would be possible to agree upon 
a future procedure. The views of the Soviet 
Union and of ourselves seem to be quite far apart 
in that respect. 

Asked tohether that meant that he was not pre- 
pared at this time to agree to a later Far East 
conference which would include Communist 
China, the Secretary replied: 

Well, it would of course depend upon the com- 
position of the conference. We have taken the 
position, which in essence I reaffirmed in my 
speech at San Francisco last Friday, that we are 
not prepared to deal with the interests of countries 



behind their back. Therefore any conference 
which was designed to deal with the substantive 
matters which concerned the Republic of China we 
would not be prepared to deal with without its 
participation. So far the suggestions which have 
been made from the Communist side wholly ex- 
clude any participation by the Republic of China. 
Therefore, there seems to be an impasse on that 
topic. 

Asked about Mr. Molotov^s suggestion at his 
San Francisco news conference that the United 
States and Red China ought to have direct nego- 
tiations, Secretary Dulles replied: 

On the question of the direct talks between Com- 
munist China and the United States, I have al- 
ready indicated that there are certain matters 
which we are prepared to talk about. There are 
a good many people who are trying to be helpful 
and trying to tell us how those talks can be con- 
ducted, and we are accepting as much of that 
information as we think is dependable and useful 
and therefore have not yet come ourselves to the 
point of having any such direct talks. But we do 
not exclude them as a matter of principle. 

// we accept the idea of direct talks with Com- 
munist China, would that be interpreted by our 
own Government and others, perhaps, as recogni- 
tion of Red China, the Secretary was asked. He 
replied: 

It wouldn't involve recognition at all. We al- 
ready have talked with them. We talked with 
them at Panmunjom, we talked with them at 
Geneva last year. As I have said many times, 
you may have to recognize the fact of evil but 
that doesn't mean that you clasp it to your bosom. 
Where there are facts that you have to deal with 
we don't close our eyes to those facts. Talks have 
taken place and could take place without any 
diplomatic recognition at all. 



German Reunification 

Press release 399 dated June 28 

At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles was asked whether he would comment on 
the stress laid by Foreign Minister Molotov at a 
news conference at San Francisco on the fact that 
the Soviet Union is willing to postpone or defer 



July 7 7, 7955 



51 



the problem, of German reunification for some 
indefinite period. The Secretary replied: 

Well, it does seem as though the Soviet Union 
has lost interest in the reunification of Germany. 
It would seem, perhaps, that they talked about that 
when they thought it might be good bait to try to 
prevent the Republic of Germany from joining the 
Nato and Western European Union, and now that 
it ceases to serve as a bait for that purpose they 
have no interest in it. 

I would greatly deplore that loss of interest be- 
cause, if there is a genuine desire to advance the 
cause of peace and remove causes of international 
friction, certainly there should be a desire to unify 
Germany. The indefinite prolongation of that 
separation of part of a great people from their 
fellows is an evil. It is an evil which cannot be in- 
definitely prolonged without, as I said at San 
Francisco, leading to new evils and new trouble. 
Therefore, any realistic effort to solve problems 
which contain within them the seeds of injustice 
and greater evil must include the problem of the 
reunification of Germany. 

Bering Sea Plane Incident 

Press release 400 dated June 28 

At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles was asked a series of questions relating to 
the shooting down of a U. S. naval plane in the 
Bering Sea on June 23 by Soviet MIGs. The first 
question related to the amount of damage suffered 
by the United States. The Secretary said: 

I can't give you that in figures. The plane itself 
was a total loss, and there are injuries to some of 
the crew. But how to evaluate that in terms of 
dollars, I don't know yet. 

Asked whether the U.S. position is that the 
Soviet Union should pay the full amount of the 
damage, Secretary Dulles replied: 

That is what we asked, yes. 

Asked how far the scene of this shooting was 
from the respective air frontiers of the United 
States and the Soviet Union, the Secretary replied: 

Well we think we know exactly. There is al- 
ways a slight possibility of error within limited 
margins. But it seems quite clear that the air- 
plane was not within the air frontier of the Soviet 
Union, even by their own definition. They claim 



air space 12 miles out from the mainland. We do 
not accept that thesis, but even on that theory it 
would seem that the plane was outside of even 
their 12-mile limit. 

How much outside, the Secretary was asked. 
He replied: 

An appreciable amount. Of course the channel 
there between St. Lawrence Island and the Soviet 
mainland is itself only about 50 miles wide, so 
that the middle of the channel is about 25 miles 
from each side. So you are operating there with 
fairly narrow margins. 

Asked whether the United States will continue 
to request full payment and reparations for the 
crew, the Secretary replied: 

There has been no decision yet reached on that 
point. I discussed the matter with the President 
last night. There are some further facts which 
we are seeking to gather and probably no decision 
will be made until the matter has been further 
considered within the next day or two. 

Asked how close the Russian plane, that did the 
shooting was to our frontier, Secretary Dulles 
said: 

Well, our estimate is that the plane was slightly 
to the west of the middle of the channel. 

Are we asking that the Russian flyers be pun- 
ished in any way for this, the Secretary was asked. 
He replied: 

I asked of Mr. Molotov that appropriate action 
be taken in the event that it was clear that there 
had been a violation — a willful violation — by the 
Soviet flyers of the principle of international law. 

Asked where the Russian planes came from, the 
Secretary replied: 

They apparently came from the Soviet main- 
land, almost directly opposite St. Lawrence 
Island. 

Asked if he could elaborate on the slight possi- 
bility of error, the Secretary replied: 

All I mean is that there are no instruments 
which enable you to be absolutely sure as to pre- 
cisely where you are. There is a slight margin of 
error always present in these facilities for loca- 
tion. But we are as certain as it is humanly pos- 
sible to be that the plane was not within the Soviet 
air zone, even by their own definition. 



52 



Department of State Bulletin 



Iloto high was this aircraft when it was at- 
tacked, the Secretary was asked. He said : 

It was about 10,000 feet. 

Asked whether he thought Mr. Molotov was sur- 
prised when he heard about this event or expressed 
surprise, the Secretary replied: 

He gave every indication of being surprised, yes. 

Asked whether he had any information that 
Soviet fighter pilots have been operating in the 
Formosa Straits, Secretary Dulles replied that he 
did not. 

Asked whether he ruled out the possibility that 
the shooting was done deliberately because they 
were perhaps on the trail of something the Rus- 
sians did not want them to see, the Secretary 
replied: 

They were not on the trail, in fact, of anything. 
This flight was a routine flight which has been 
made, I think, approximately a hundred times 
within the last year. It's a flight which is nor- 
mally made about twice a week, and the course of 
the plane is the same each time, subject to minor 
deviations due to atmospheric conditions. It is a 
flight which starts at Kodiak, goes up north, 
swings around, and comes back into Kodiak. It's 
a plane which makes that flight for the purpose of 
observing vessels in distress and things of that 
sort. That has no relationship of any kind to any 
military activity, and, as I say, it's a routine flight. 
It's like a milk train — you can count on it almost 
as being in that particular area at a certain time 
twice a week. 



European Security System 

Press release 401 dated June 28 

At his news conference on June 28, Secretary 
Dulles toas asked what, in the light of his conver- 
sations at San Francisco, toas his understanding of 
the meaning of the phrase "European security sys- 
tem." He replied: 

Well, there has been developed under the Nato 
and Western European Union a system which is 
designed to give security for at least Western 
Europe in terms of controlling the degree of con- 
tinental armaments which will be permissible to 
the continental members of that organization, so 
as to be sure that while there is enough for defense 



there will not be enough for aggression. There 
has been worked out there the first effective sys- 
tem — I believe it will be effective — of multilateral 
land armaments control that the world has ever 
known. That marks a great advance. 

If it were feasible to have a system of limitation 
and controls applicable to the Eastern countries, 
that would be a further advance. Now, that is my 
idea of a European security system. I'm not sure 
that that is the same idea that the Soviet Union 
has. 

Would it go further into a system of nonaggres- 
sion agreements between the Eastern and Western 
blocs, or does it depend solely on armaments, the 
Secretary toas asked. He replied: 

My view about this nonaggression business is 
that all of us are either parties to or committed 
to the nonaggression principle of the United Na- 
tions Charter. It is provided there that none of 
the members will use force or the threat of force 
in its international relations. And while the Fed- 
eral Eepublic of Germany, because of the Soviet 
opposition, is not itself a member of the United 
Nations, it has agreed to abide by that principle. 

Furthermore, we are bound by the United Na- 
tions Charter to seek that those principles will 
be applied to nonmember states. So you have 
a nonaggression agreement in as formal and ex- 
plicit a way as you can have it. 

The problem is, are you going to, or can you, 
trust nations to abide by that and can you imple- 
ment that provision so as to make it less likely 
that nations will be able to violate it if they have 
the desire to do so? I think that something can 
be done to implement further that principle. But 
I do not see that it adds anything to pile promises 
on promises. If nations are faithful to their 
promises, there is already a nonaggression provi- 
sion which is broad in scope and specific in its 
terms. I would not think that any of us would 
feel any safer if countries agreed to do what they 
have already agreed to do. 

Asked what he thought the Soviet concept of 
European security was, the Secretary replied: 

Well, we know what that is because that plan 
was produced by Mr. Molotov at the Berlin con- 
ference a year ago last January. 1 He had his 
European security plan, which in effect involved a 

1 Bulletin of Feb. 22, 1954, p. 269. 



July 11, 1955 



53 



liquidation of Nato and the creation of a single 
regional security system covering all of Europe. 
Now that, as I pointed out at the time to him, 
is completely unacceptable to the United States; 
and, as the French and the British pointed 
out, it was unacceptable to them, because you can- 
not base a real security system through a joining 
of forces with those whom you don't trust. 

I pointed out in my speech at San Francisco 
the fact that these collective security systems have 
grown up under the authorization of the charter 
as between nations which trusted each other. 
They are needed because there is not trust as be- 
tween all nations. You cannot practically have 
the joining of forces for collective security as be- 
tween nations which do not trust each other. 

There are nations which believe in undermining 
the governments of others, nations which believe 
in reducing to a state of captivity other nations 
which have had a long record of independent 
existence. A joining of forces with nations who 
believe and act that way does not add to anybody's 
security at all. That is a fraud. Therefore, that 
kind of security system is not acceptable. It is 
designed to destroy a system which is effective, in 
which people do place confidence, and replace it by 
a system in which no confidence could be placed. 

Asked whether he was hopeful that an agree- 
ment can be reached for a sort of balance of forces 
which would diminish the possibility of war, the 
Secretary replied: 

I consider that that is a possibility ; not a possi- 
bility, obviously, to be realized at Geneva, because 
it is an extremely complicated subject and there 
are infinite varieties of formulae which might be 
applied. There are many permutations and com- 
binations which would all have to be explored. 
But if there is a desire to reduce the burden of 
armament, particularly as regards Europe, pend- 
ing the possibility of reduction on a global basis, 
then I think the prospect is not entirely without 
hope. 

Asked which he thought should come first in the 
discussions at Geneva, a European security system 
or the reunification of Germany, the Secretary 
replied: 

I think it is very difficult to deal with the one 
wholly apart from the other. I would think that 
both lines ought to be explored more or less at 
the same time. 



Ashed whether his doubts of the Russian in- 
terest in unifying Germany could be interpreted 
as meaning he doubted that the Russians really 
want a relaxation of tensions and frictions, Mr. 
Dulles replied: 

I mean to imply that, unless they are prepared 
to discuss such a problem as the reunification of 
Germany, that, in my opinion, would throw doubt 
upon the sincerity of their desire to remove causes 
of tension. 

Data on Atomic Radiation 

O.S./U.N. press release 2179 dated June 22 

The following statement was issued at San 
Francisco on June 21 by Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., 
U. S. Representative to the United Nations : 

Although the best scientific information known 
to us shows that properly safeguarded nuclear 
testing, in contrast with nuclear warfare, is not 
a threat to human health, there has been concern 
in several parts of the world over the problem of 
radiation from atomic tests and of its effect upon 
human health and safety. There is already a 
large body of scientific data in existence relating 
to this question and we in the United States are 
making intensive studies of it. 

These studies must and will continue. 

But the data which already exist and which will 
become available in the future, both in the United 
States of America and in other countries, have not 
been collated. We, therefore, propose that these 
data from all countries should be assembled, so 
that all nations can be satisfied that humanity is 
not endangered by these tests. 

We believe that the United Nations can perform 
an important service in undertaking to bring this 
about. The best place to assemble all available 
information is the United Nations. We think 
that the next General Assembly should establish 
a procedure to receive and assemble radiological 
information collected by the various states, as well 
as the results of national studies of radiation ef- 
fects on human health and safety. 

The collation by the United Nations of scientific 
reports and data on radiation levels could set at 
rest unjustified fears, combat sensational distor- 
tion in the light of truth, and lead to humanity's 
learning how to deal best with the problems of 
atomic radiation. 



54 



Department of State Bulletin 



Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey 



On May 3 the White House announced the ap- 
proval of the following proposed agreement be- 
tween the Governments of the Republic of Turkey 
and the United States for cooperation in the field 
of research in the peaceful uses of atomic energy} 
This is the first agreement of its hind proposed 
under the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954 (Public Laic 70S, 83d Cong.). 

Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Civil Uses of 
Atomic Energy Between the Government of the 
United States of America and the Government of 
the Turkish Republic 

Whereas the peaceful uses of atomic energy 
hold great promise for all mankind; and 

Whereas the Government of the United States 
of America and the Government of the Turkish 
Republic desire to cooperate with each other in 
the development of such peaceful uses of atomic 
energy; and 

Whereas there is well advanced the design and 
development of several types of research reactors 
(as defined in Article X of this Agreement) ; and 

Whereas research reactors are useful in the pro- 
duction of research quantities of radioisotopes, in 
medical therapy and in numerous other research 
activities and at the same time are a means of 



1 Bulletin of May 23, 1955, p. 865. For an announce- 
ment of the initialing of nine other agreements for coopera- 
tion, see ibid., June 20, 1955, p. 1018. Further atoms-for- 
peace agreements have since been initialed with the fol- 
lowing countries : on June 14 with Venezuela (press re- 
lease 350), Portugal (press release 351), the Netherlands 
(press release 352), the Philippines (press release 353), 
and China (press release 354) ; on June 15 with Pakistan 
(press release 356) ; on June 20 with Chile (press release 
371) ; on June 21 with Japan (press release 376) ; on 
June 22 with Greece (press release 379) ; on June 24 with 
Uruguay (press release 382) ; and on July 1 with Sweden 
(press release 412), Peru (press release 414), and Korea 
(press release 416). More extensive agreements were 
signed on June 15 with Belgium, Canada, and the United 
Kingdom. See p. 58. 



affording valuable training and experience in 
nuclear science and engineering useful in the de- 
velopment of other peaceful uses of atomic 
energy including civilian nuclear power ; and 

Whereas the Government of the Turkish Re- 
public desires to pursue a research and develop- 
ment program looking toward the realization of 
the peaceful and humanitarian uses of atomic en- 
ergy and desires to obtain assistance from the Gov- 
ernment of the United States of America and 
United States industry with respect to this pro- 
gram; and 

Whereas the Government of the United States 
of America, represented by the United States 
Atomic Energy Commission (hereinafter referred 
to as the "Commission"), desires to assist the 
Government of the Turkish Republic in such a 
program ; 

The Parties therefore agree as follows : 

Article I 

Subject to the limitations of Article V, the par- 
ties hereto will exchange information in the fol- 
lowing fields : 

A. Design, construction and operation of re- 
search reactors and their use as research, devel- 
opment, and engineering tools and in medical 
therapy. 

B. Health and safety problems related to the 
operation and use of research reactors. 

C. The use of radioactive isotopes in physical 
and biological research, medical therapy, agri- 
culture, and industry. 

Article II 
A. The Commission will lease to the Govern- 
ment of the Turkish Republic uranium enriched 
in the isotope U-235, subject to the terms and con- 
ditions provided herein, as may be required as in- 
itial and replacement fuel in the operation of re- 
search reactors which the Government of the 
Turkish Republic, in consultation with the Com- 



Jo/y 7 7, 7955 



55 



mission, decides to construct and as required in 
agreed experiments related thereto. Also, the 
Commission will lease to the Government of the 
Turkish Eepublic uranium enriched in the isotope 
U-235, subject to the terms and conditions pro- 
vided herein, as may be required as initial and re- 
placement fuel in the operation of such research 
reactors as the Government of the Turkish Ee- 
public may, in consultation with the Commission, 
decide to authorize private individuals or private 
organizations under its jurisdiction to construct 
and operate, provided the Government of the 
Turkish Eepublic shall at all times maintain suffi- 
cient control of the material and the operation of 
the reactor to enable the Government of the Turk- 
ish Eepublic to comply with the provisions of this 
Agreement and the applicable provisions of the 
lease arrangement. 

B. The quantity of uranium enriched in the 
isotope U-235 transferred by the Commission into 
the custody of the Government of the Turkish Ee- 
public shall not at any time be in excess of six 
(6) kilograms of contained U-235 in uranium en- 
riched up to a maximum of twenty percent (20%) 
U-235, unless the Commission shall specify that 
a greater quantity of such material may be trans- 
ferred under this Agreement to the Government of 
the Turkish Eepublic or authorized persons under 
its jurisdiction. 

C. When any fuel elements containing U-235 
leased by the Commission require replacement, 
they shall be returned to the Commission, and ex- 
cept as may be agreed, the f orm and content of the 
irradiated fuel elements shall not be altered after 
their removal from the reactor and prior to de- 
livery to the Commission. 

D. The lease of uranium enriched in the isotope 
U-235 under this Article shall be on such terms and 
conditions as may be mutually agreed and under 
the conditions stated in Articles VI and VII. 

Article III 

Subject to the availability of supply and as may 
be mutually agreed, the Commission will sell or 
lease through such means as it deems appropriate, 
to the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or au- 
thorized persons under its jurisdiction such reactor 
materials, other than special nuclear materials, as 
are not obtainable on the commercial market and 
which are required in the construction and opera- 
tion of research reactors in Turkey. The sale or 



lease of these materials shall be on such terms as 
may be agreed. 

Article IV 

It is contemplated that, as provided in this Ar- 
ticle, private individuals and private organiza- 
tions in either the United States or Turkey may 
deal directly with private individuals and private 
organizations in the other country. Accordingly, 
with respect to the subjects of agreed exchange of 
information as provided in Article I, the Govern- 
ment of the United States will permit persons 
under its jurisdiction to transfer and export ma- 
terials, including equipment and devices, to, and 
perform services for, the Government of the Turk- 
ish Eepublic and such persons under its jurisdic- 
tion as are authorized by the Government of the 
Turkish Eepublic to receive and possess such ma- 
terials and utilize such services, subject to: 

A. Limitations in Article V. 

B. Applicable laws, regulations and license re- 
quirements of the Government of the United 
States, and the Government of the Turkish 
Eepublic. 

Article V 

Eestricted Data shall not be communicated 
under this Agreement and no materials or equip- 
ment and devices shall be transferred and no serv- 
ices shall be furnished under this Agreement to 
the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or au- 
thorized persons under its jurisdiction if the 
transfer of any such materials or equipment and 
devices or the furnishing of any such services in- 
volves the communication of Eestricted Data. 

Article VI 

A. The Government of the Turkish Eepublic 
agrees to maintain such safeguards as are neces- 
sary to assure that the uranium enriched in the 
isotope U-235 leased from the Commission shall 
be used solely for the purposes agreed in accord- 
ance with this Agreement and to assure the safe- 
keeping of this material. 

B. The Government of the Turkish Eepublic 
agrees to maintain such safeguards as are neces- 
sary to assure that all other reactor materials, 
including equipment and devices, purchased in the 
United States of America under this Agreement 
by the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or 
authorized persons under its jurisdiction, shall be 



56 



Department of State Bulletin 



used solely for the design, construction, and opera- 
tion of research reactors which the Government 
of the Turkish Eepublic decides to construct and 
operate and for research in connection therewith, 
except as may otherwise be agreed. 

C. In regard to research reactors constructed 
pursuant to this Agreement the Government of 
the Turkish Eepublic agrees to maintain records 
relating to power levels of operation and burnup 
of reactor fuels and to make annual reports to the 
Commission on these subjects. If the Commission 
requests, the Government of the Turkish Eepublic 
will permit Commission representatives to observe 
from time to time the condition and use of any 
leased material and to observe the performance of 
the reactor in which the material is used. 

Article VII 

Guaranties Prescribed by the U. S. 
Atomic Energy Act of 195 It- 

The Government of the Turkish Eepublic guar- 
anties that : 

A. Safeguards provided in Article VI shall be 
maintained. 

B. No material, including equipment and de- 
vices, transferred to the Government of the Turk- 
ish Eepublic or authorized persons under its juris- 
diction, pursuant to this Agreement, by lease, sale, 
or otherwise will be used for atomic weapons or 
for research on or development of atomic weapons 
or for any other military purposes, and that no 
such material, including equipment and devices, 
will be transferred to unauthorized persons or 
beyond the jurisdiction of the Government of 
the Turkish Eepublic except as the Commission 
may agree to such transfer to another nation and 
then only if in the opinion of the Commission such 
transfer falls within the scope of an agreement 
for cooperation between the United States and 
the other nation. 

Article VIII 

This Agreement shall enter into force on June 
10, 1955 and remain in force until June 9, 1965, 
inclusively, and shall be subject to renewal as may 
be mutually agreed. 

At the expiration of this Agreement or any ex- 
tension thereof the Government of the Turkish 
Eepublic shall deliver to the United States all 
fuel elements containing reactor fuels leased by 

July 7 7, 7955 

350550 — 55 3 



the Commission and any other fuel material leased 
by the Commission. Such fuel elements and such 
fuel materials shall be delivered to the Commis- 
sion at a site in the United States designated by 
the Commission at the expense of the Govern- 
ment of the Turkish Eepublic, and such delivery 
shall be made under appropriate safeguards 
against radiation hazards while in transit. 

Article IX 

It is the hope and expectation of the parties 
that this initial Agreement for Cooperation will 
lead to consideration of further cooperation ex- 
tending to the design, construction, and operation 
of power producing reactors. Accordingly, the 
parties will consult with each other irom time to 
time concerning the feasibility of an additional 
agreement for cooperation with respect to the 
f)roduction of power from atomic energy in 
Turkey. 

Article X 
For purposes of this Agreement : 

A. "Commission" means the United States 
Atomic Energy Commission or its duly authorized 
representatives. 

B. "Equipment and devices" means any instru- 
ment or apparatus, and includes research reactors, 
as defined herein, and their component parts. 

C. "Eesearch reactor" means a reactor which is 
designed for the production of neutrons and other 
radiations for general research and development 
purposes, medical therapy, or training in nuclear 
science and engineering. The term does not cover 
power reactors, power demonstration reactors, or 
reactors designed primarily for the production of 
special nuclear materials. 

D. The terms "Eestricted Data", "atomic wea- 
pon", and "special nuclear material" are used in 
this Agreement as defined in the United States 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954. 

In witness whereof, the parties hereto have 
caused this Agreement to be executed pursuant 
to duly constituted authority. 

Done at Washington in duplicate this tenth 
day of June, 1955. 

For the Government of the United States of 
America : 

Geo. V. Allen 

Assistant Secretary of State for Near 
Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs 



57 



WlLLARD F. LlBBT 

Commissioner, United States 
Atomic Energy Commission 

For the Government of the Turkish Republic : 

Melih Esenbel 

Deputy Secretary General of the 

Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs 



Agreements With Belgium, Canada, 
U.K. on Civil Uses of Atomic Energy 

WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT 

White House press release dated June 15 

The President on June 15 approved three pro- 
posed bilateral agreements for cooperation con- 
cerning the civil uses of atomic energy between 
the Government of the United States and the 
Governments of Belgium, Canada, and the United 
Kingdom. 

The proposed agreements were signed at a 
White House ceremony. The Ambassador of Bel- 
gium, Baron Silvercruys, signed for his Govern- 
ment. For Canada the signers were Ambassador 
A. D. P. Heeney and W. J. Bennett, President 
of Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. and of El 
Dorado Mining and Refining Ltd., who came from 
Ottawa for the occasion. Sir Robert Scott, the 
British Minister, signed for the United Kingdom. 
Chairman Lewis L. Strauss of the Atomic Energy 
Commission and Robert Murphy, Deputy Under 
Secretary of State, signed each of the three agree- 
ments for the United States. 

Chairman Strauss presented to the President 
the Commission's formal recommendation that he 
approve each of the proposed agreements as one 
that would promote the defense and security of 
the United States. The President then signed 
letters of approval. As required by the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, the proposed agreements will 
be submitted by the Atomic Energy Commission 
to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of the 
Congress. 

Following this submission, and the tabling of 
the agreements in the Parliaments of other sig- 
natories, the texts of the documents will be issued 
in Brussels, Ottawa, London, and Washington. 1 



1 Texts were released by the U.S. Atomic Energy Com- 
mission on June 20. 



Each agreement provides for mutual coopera- 
tion between the Governments in classified and 
unclassified research leading to the development 
of peaceful uses for atomic energy, including the 
generation of power. The principles to govern 
and effectuate this cooperation are stated. 

Each agreement calls for exchange of classified 
and unclassified information relating to the ap- 
plication of atomic energy to peaceful uses (but 
excluding exchange of information on military 
application), for exchange of research materials 
not available commercially, for the use of research 
and testing facilities, and for the transfer of 
equipment and devices — all under prudent safe- 
guards. Each agreement provides that opportu- 
nity be opened for participation by industrial 
firms of the nations involved in the programs for 
developing peaceful uses of atomic energy. 



STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT 

White House press release dated June 15 

I am happy to accept the recommendation of 
the Atomic Energy Commission that approval be 
given the proposed bilateral agreements for co- 
operation concerning the civil uses of atomic en- 
ergy signed today on behalf of the Government of 
this Nation and the Governments of Belgium, 
Canada, and the United Kingdom. 

These proposed agreements are a logical exten- 
sion of the previous active partnership between 
these nations and the United States for the devel- 
opment of atomic energy. The United Kingdom 
and Canada supplied knowledge and skill and 
manpower to play a full and fruitful part in the 
wartime joint effort which culminated in the first 
release of atomic energy. Belgium and Canada 
have provided uranium, the basic raw material 
for the wartime and the postwar atomic energy 
programs. All three have freely cooperated to 
further our common defense and security, 
strengthen the bulwarks of the free world, and 
help to open the way into the development of 
peaceful uses of the atom which holds forth so 
much promise and hope for betterment of human 
living and easing of international tensions. 

Now, acting under the authorizations of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, we are privileged to 
enter into bilateral agreements which enlarge that 
promise and brighten that hope. The wisdom of 
the Congress in making this possible is exempli- 



58 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



fied by these proposed agreements. They lengthen 
the reach of cooperation among us looking toward 
the civil uses of atomic energy. 

The pace of progress toward the goal of the 
atoms-for-peace program is accelerating. Im- 
portant events are just ahead, such as the Inter- 
national Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic 
Energy at Geneva in August. 

Again on this occasion, as many times earlier, 
I pledge the unremitting cooperation of this Na- 
tion to realize the benefits of atomic energy as a 
measure to promote lasting peace. 



Atomic Agreements for Mutual 
Defense With Canada and U.K. 

On June 15 (press release 358) x the Department 
of State announced that representatives of the 
Government of the United States and the Govern- 
ment of Canada and representatives of the Gov- 
ernment of the United States and the Government 
of the United Kingdom had reached agreement on 
the terms of proposed agreements for the exchange 
of atomic information for mutual defense 
purposes. 

On June 20 (press releases 369 and 370) the 
Department released the texts of both agreements, 
including letters from Secretary of Defense 
Wilson, recommending to the President that he 
approve the agreements and letters of transmittal 
from the President to Senator Clinton P. Ander- 
son, Chairman of the Joint Committee on Atomic 
Energy. 



AGREEMENT WITH CANADA 

Letter From Secretary Wilson to the President 

June 10, 1955 

Dear Mr. President: Section 144 b. of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 empowers you to au- 
thorize the Department of Defense, with the as- 
sistance of the Atomic Energy Commission, to 
cooperate with another nation or regional defense 
organization to which the United States is a party 
and to communicate to that nation or organiza- 
tion such atomic information as is necessary to the 
development of defense plans, the training of per- 
sonnel in the employment of and defense against 

1 Not printed. 



atomic weapons, and the evaluation of the capa- 
bilities of potential enemies in the employment 
of atomic weapons. This cooperation and com- 
munication, however, may be undertaken only in 
accordance with the limitations imposed by the 
Act and under an agreement entered into pursuant 
to Section 123 thereof. 

The first of these agreements was with the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization. 2 It was approved 
by you on April 13, 1955, and has been before the 
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for the re- 
quired thirty-day period. With the cooperation of 
the Department of State, a separate agreement has 
now been negotiated with Canada and recom- 
mended for signature. This proposed agreement 
is submitted herewith for your approval. 

It is the view of this Department that this agree- 
ment is entirely in accord with the provisions of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The execution of 
this agreement should do much to advance our 
mutual defense interests, especially the vital cause 
of North American defense in which we have long 
been working closely with our Canadian neighbors, 
and will thereby aid materially in the defense of 
the United States. I therefore strongly recom- 
mend that you approve this proposed agreement 
as required by Section 123 of the Atomic Energy 
Act and transmit the agreement to the Joint Com- 
mittee on Atomic Energy together with your de- 
terminations and authorizations as to execution. 

With great respect, I am 
Faithfully yours, 

C. E. Wilson 

Letter From the President to Senator Anderson 

June 15, 1955 

Dear Senator Anderson : Pursuant to Section 
123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, I hereby 
submit to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy 
a proposed agreement between the Governments of 
the United States and Canada for cooperation re- 
garding communication of atomic information for 
mutual defense purposes under Section 144 b. of 
the Act. 

Under the terms of the proposed agreement, 
the United States may exchange with Canada, so 
long as Canada pursuant to an international ar- 
rangement continues to make substantial and ma- 
terial contributions to the mutual defense effort, 

2 Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 686. 



July 71, J 955 



59 



atomic information which the United States con- 
siders necessary to 

( 1 ) the development of defense plans ; 

(2) the training of personnel in the employ- 
ment of and defense against atomic weap- 
ons; and 

(3) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten- 
tial enemies in the employment of atomic 
weapons. 

Canada will make atomic information available 
to the United States on the same basis. 

Atomic information made available pursuant 
to the proposed agreement will not be transferred 
to unauthorized persons, or beyond the jurisdic- 
tion of the recipient government except where that 
information is to be communicated to another na- 
tion or regional organization which has already 
been given the same information under an agree- 
ment similar to this and then only to the extent 
such transfer is specifically authorized by the orig- 
inating government. 

Transfers of atomic information by the United 
States under the proposed agreement will be made 
only in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act 
of 1954 and such information will be safeguarded 
by the stringent security arrangements in effect 
between the United States and Canada when this 
agreement comes into force. 

The agreement will remain in effect until ter- 
minated by agreement between the two govern- 
ments, but the actual exchange of atomic infor- 
mation is entirely discretionary. 

The Department of Defense has strongly rec- 
ommended approval of this agreement. It is my 
firm conviction that through the cooperative meas- 
ures foreseen in this agreement we will have aided 
materially not only in strengthening our own de- 
fenses but also those of our Canadian ally and 
will thereby contribute greatly to the mutual de- 
fense efforts which are of such vital importance 
to the maintenance of our common freedom. 

Accordingly, I hereby determine that the per- 
formance of this proposed agreement will pro- 
mote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk 
to, the common defense and security, and approve 
this agreement. In addition, I hereby authorize, 
subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954, the Secretary of State to execute the 
proposed agreement and the Department of De- 
fense, with the assistance of the Atomic Energy 



Commission, to cooperate with Canada and to 
communicate Restricted Data to Canada under 
the agreement. 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 



Agreement Between the Government of the United 
States of America and the Government of Canada for 
Cooperation Regarding Atomic Information for 
Mutual Defense Purposes 

The Government of the United States of Amer- 
ica and the Government of Canada, 

Recognizing that their mutual security and de- 
fense requires that they be prepared to meet the 
contingencies of atomic warfare, 

Recognizing that their common interests will 
be advanced by the exchange of information per- 
tinent thereto, 

Believing that the exchange of such information 
can be undertaken without threat to the security 
of either country, and 

Taking into consideration the United States 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Canadian 
Atomic Energy Control Act and Atomic Energy 
Regulations, which were prepared with these pur- 
poses in mind, 

Agree as follows : 

Article I 

1. While the United States and Canada are par- 
ticipating in international arrangements for their 
mutual defense and security and making substan- 
tial and material contribution thereto, each Gov- 
ernment will from time to time make available to 
the other Government atomic information which 
the Government making such information avail- 
able deems necessary to : 

(a) the development of defense plans; 

(b) the training of personnel in the employ- 
ment of and defense against atomic weap- 
ons; and 

(c) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten- 
tial enemies in the employment of atomic 
weapons. 

2. Atomic information which is transferred by 
either Government pursuant to this Agreement 
shall be used by the other Government exclusively 
for the preparation and implementation of defense 
plans in the mutual interests of the two countries. 



60 



Department of State Bulletin 



Article II 

1. All transfers of atomic information to Can- 
ada by the United States pursuant to this Agree- 
ment will be made in compliance with the provi- 
sions of the United States Atomic Energy Act of 
1954 and any subsequent applicable United States 
legislation. All transfers of atomic information 
to the United States by Canada pursuant to this 
Agreement will be made in compliance with the 
Atomic Energy Control Act and the Atomic En- 
ergy Regulations of Canada or subsequent appli- 
cable Canadian legislation and regulations. 

2. Under this Agreement there will be no trans- 
fers by the United States or Canada of atomic 
weapons or special nuclear material, as these terms 
are defined in Section 11 d. and Section 11 t. of 
the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954. 

Article III 

1. Atomic information made available pursuant 
to this Agreement shall be accorded full security 
protection under applicable security arrangements 
between the United States and Canada and appli- 
cable national legislation and regulations of the 
two countries. In no case shall either Govern- 
ment maintain security standards for safeguard- 
ing atomic information made available pursuant 
to this Agreement lower than those set forth in 
the applicable security arrangements in effect on 
the date this Agreement comes into force. 

2. Atomic information which is exchanged pur- 
suant to this Agreement will be made available 
through channels existing or hereafter agreed for 
the exchange of classified defense information be- 
tween the two Governments. 

3. Atomic information received pursuant to this 
Agreement shall not be transferred by the recip- 
ient Government to any unauthorized person or, 
except as provided in Article V of this Agreement, 
beyond the jurisdiction of that Government. 
Each Government may stipulate the degree to 
which any of the categories of information made 
available to the other Government pursuant to 
this Agreement may be disseminated, may specify 
the categories of persons who may have access to 
such information, and may impose such other re- 
strictions on the dissemination of such informa- 
tion as it deems necessary. 

Article IV 

As used in this Agreement, "atomic informa- 
tion" means : 



(a) so far as concerns the information provided 
by the United States, Restricted Data, as 
defined in Section 11 r. of the United States 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which is per- 
mitted to be communicated pursuant to the 
provisions of Section 144 b. of that Act 
and information relating primarily to the 
military utilization of atomic weapons 
which has been removed from the Re- 
stricted Data category in accordance with 
the provisions of Section 142 d. of the 
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954 ; 

(b) so far as concerns the information provided 
by Canada, classified information relating 
to the military application of atomic 
energy. 

Article V 

Nothing herein shall be interpreted or operate 
as a bar or restriction to consultation and coopera- 
tion by the United States or Canada with other 
nations or regional organizations in any fields of 
defense. Neither Government, however, shall 
communicate atomic information made available 
by the other Government pursuant to this Agree- 
ment to any nation or regional organization unless 
the same information has been made available to 
that nation or regional organization by the other 
Government in accordance with its own legislative 
requirements and except to the extent that such 
communication is expressly authorized by such 
other Government. 

Article VI 

This Agreement shall enter into force on 
the date of receipt by the Government of Canada 
of a notification from the Government of the 
United States of America that the period of thirty 
days required by Section 123 c. of the U.S. Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954 has elapsed, and shall remain 
in effect until terminated by mutual agreement of 
both Governments. 

Done at Washington this fifteenth day of June 
1955 in two original texts. 

For the United States of America: 
C. Burke Elbrick 

For Canada : 

A. D. P. Heenet 



July 11, 1955 



61 



AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM 

Letter From Secretary Wilson to the President 

June Hi 1955 

Dear Mr. President: Section 144 b. of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 empowers you to 
authorize the Department of Defense, with the 
assistance of the Atomic Energy Commission, to 
cooperate with another nation or regional defense 
organization to which the United States is a party 
and to communicate to that nation or organization 
such atomic information as is necessary to the 
development of defense plans, the training of 
personnel in the employment of and defense 
against atomic weapons, and the evaluation of the 
capabilities of potential enemies in the employ- 
ment of atomic weapons. This cooperation and 
communication, however, may be undertaken only 
in accordance with the limitations imposed by 
the Act and under an agreement entered into pur- 
suant to Section 123 thereof. 

The first of these agreements was with the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization. 3 It was approved 
by you on April 13, 1955, and has been before the 
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for the re- 
quired thirty-day period. With the cooperation 
of the Department of State, a separate agreement 
has now been negotiated with the United King- 
dom and recommended for signature. This pro- 
posed agreement is submitted herewith for your 
approval. 

It is the view of this Department that this 
agreement is entirely in accord with the provision 
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. I am con- 
vinced that it will fully serve the best interests of 
the United States by making possible a further 
significant extension of the close cooperation in 
the field of mutual defense which has character- 
ized our relationships with the United Kingdom 
for so many years. I therefore strongly recom- 
mend that you approve this proposed agreement 
as required by Section 123 of the Atomic Energy 
Act and transmit the agreement to the Joint 
Committee on Atomic Energy together with your 
determinations and authorizations as to execution. 

With great respect, I am 
Faithfully yours, 

C. E. Wieson 



1 Ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p. 



Letter From the President to Senator Anderson 

June 15, 1955 

Dear Senator Anderson : Pursuant to Section 
123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, I hereby 
submit to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy 
a proposed agreement between the Governments of 
the United States and the United Kingdom for 
cooperation regarding communication of atomic 
information for mutual defense purposes under 
Section 144 b. of the Act. 

Under the terms of the proposed agreement, the 
United States may exchange with the United 
Kingdom, so long as the United Kingdom pur- 
suant to an international arrangement continues 
to make substantial and material contributions to 
the mutual defense effort, atomic information 
which the United States considers necessary to 

(1) the development of defense plans; 

(2) the training of personnel in the employ- 
ment of and defense against atomic weap- 
ons; and 

(3) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten- 
tial enemies in the employment of atomic 
weapons. 

The United Kingdom will make atomic infor- 
mation available to the United States on the same 
basis. 

Atomic information made available pursuant to 
the proposed agreement will not be transferred 
to unauthorized persons, or beyond the jurisdic- 
tion of the recipient government except where that 
information is to be communicated to another 
nation or regional organization which has already 
been given the same information under an agree- 
ment similar to this and then only to the extent 
such transfer is specifically authorized by the 
originating government. 

Transfers of atomic information by the United 
States under the proposed agreement will be made 
only in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act 
of 1954 and such information will be safeguarded 
by the stringent security arrangements in effect 
between the United States and the United King- 
dom when this agreement comes into force. 

The agreement will remain in effect until termi- 
nated by agreement between the two governments, 
but the actual exchange of atomic information is 
entirely discretionary. 

The Department of Defense has strongly recom- 



62 



Department of State Bulletin 



mended approval of this agreement. It is my 
firm conviction that through the cooperative meas- 
ures foreseen in this agreement we will have aided 
materially not only in strengthening our own de- 
fenses but also those of our British ally and will 
thereby contribute greatly to the mutual defense 
efforts which are of such vital importance to the 
maintenance of our common freedom. 

Accordingly, I hereby determine that the per- 
formance of this proposed agreement will pro- 
mote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk 
to, the common defense and security, and approve 
this agreement. In addition, I hereby authorize 
subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954, the Secretary of State to execute the 
proposed agreement and the Department of De- 
fense, with the assistance of the Atomic Energy 
Commission, to cooperate with the United King- 
dom and to communicate Restricted Data to the 
United Kingdom under the agreement. 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 

Agreement Between the Government of the United 
States of America and the Government of the United 
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for 
Cooperation Regarding Atomic Information for 
Mutual Defense Purposes 

The Government of the United States of Amer- 
ica and the Government of the United Kingdom 
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 

Recognizing that their mutual security and de- 
fense requires that they be prepared to meet the 
contingencies of atomic warfare, 

Recognizing that their common interests will 
be advanced by the exchange of information per- 
tinent thereto, 

Believing that the exchange of such information 
can be undertaken without threat to the security 
of either country, and 

Taking into consideration the United States 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which was prepared 
with these purposes in mind, 

Agree as follows : 

Article I 

1. "While the United States and the United 
Kingdom are participating in international ar- 
rangements for their mutual defense and security 
and making substantial and material contribution 
thereto, each Govermnent will from time to time 



make available to the other Government atomic 
information which the Government making such 
information available deems necessary to : 

(a) the development of defense plans; 

(b) the training of personnel in the employ- 
ment of and defense against atomic 
weapons; and 

(c) the evaluation of the capabilities of po- 
tential enemies in the employment of 
atomic weapons. 

2. Atomic information which is transferred by 
either Government pursuant to this Agreement 
shall be used by the other Government exclusively 
for the preparation and implementation of de- 
fense plans in the mutual interests of the two 
countries. 

Article II 

1. All transfers of atomic information to the 
United Kingdom by the United States pursuant 
to this Agreement will be made in compliance with 
the provisions of the United States Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954 and any subsequent appli- 
cable United States legislation. All transfers of 
atomic information to the United States by the 
United Kingdom pursuant to this Agreement will 
be made in compliance with the United Kingdom 
Official Secrets Acts, 1911-1939, and the United 
Kingdom Atomic Energy Act of 1946. 

2. Under this Agreement there will be no trans- 
fers by the United States or the United Kingdom 
of atomic weapons or special nuclear material, 
as these terms are defined in Section 11 d. and 
Section 11 1. of the United States Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954. 

Article III 

1. Atomic information made available pursu- 
ant to this Agreement shall be accorded full 
security protection under applicable security 
arrangements between the United States and the 
United Kingdom and applicable national legis- 
lation and regulations of the two countries. In 
no case shall either Government maintain security 
standards for safeguarding atomic information 
made available pursuant to this Agreement lower 
than those set forth in the applicable security 
arrangements in effect on the date this Agreement 
comes into force. 

2. Atomic information which is exchanged pur- 



July 11, 1955 



63 



suant to this Agreement will be made available 
through channels existing or hereafter agreed for 
the exchange of classified defense information be- 
tween the two Governments. 

3. Atomic information received pursuant to this 
Agreement shall not be transferred by the recipi- 
ent Government to any unauthorized person or, 
except as provided in Article V of this Agree- 
ment, beyond the jurisdiction of that Government. 
Each Government may stipulate the degree to 
which any of the categories of information made 
available to the other Government pursuant to 
this Agreement may be disseminated, may specify 
the categories of persons who may have access to 
such information, and may impose such other re- 
strictions on the dissemination of such informa- 
tion as it deems necessary. 

Article IV 

As used in this Agreement, "atomic informa- 
tion" means : 

(a) so far as concerns the information pro- 
vided by the United States, Eestricted 
Data, as denned in Section 11 r. of the 
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
which is permitted to be communicated pur- 
suant to the provisions of Section 144 b. of 
that Act, and information relating pri- 
marily to the military utilization of atomic 
weapons which has been removed from the 
Restricted Data category in accordance 
with the provisions of Section 142 d. of the 
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954; 

(b) so far as concerns the information pro- 
vided by the United Kingdom, information 
exchanged under this Agreement which is 
either classified atomic energy information 
or other United Kingdom defense infor- 
mation which it is decided to transfer to 
the United States in pursuance of Article I 
of this Agreement. 

Article V 

Nothing herein shall be interpreted or operate 
as a bar or restriction to consultation and co- 
operation by the United States or the United 
Kingdom with other nations or regional organi- 
zations in any fields of defense. Neither Govern- 
ment, however, shall communicate atomic infor- 
mation made available by the other Government 
pursuant to this Agreement to any nation or 



regional organization unless the same informa- 
tion has been made available to that nation or 
regional organization by the other Government 
in accordance with its own legislative require- 
ments and except to the extent that such communi- 
cation is expressly authorized by such other 
Government. 

Article VI 

This Agreement shall enter into force on the 
date on which each Government shall receive from 
the other Government written notification that 
it has complied with all statutory and constitu- 
tional requirements for the entry into force of such 
an Agreement, and shall remain in effect until ter- 
minated by mutual agreement of both Govern- 
ments. 

Done at Washington this Fifteenth day of June 
1955 in two original texts. 

For the United States of America : 

C. Burke Elbrick 
For the United Kingdom of Great Britain 
and Northern Ireland: 

R. H. Scott 



U.S. Delegations to 
International Conferences 

U.N. Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy 

The White House announced on July 1 that the 
President had approved the designations of the 
following principal members of the U. S. delega- 
tion to the United Nations Conference on the 
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy to be held at 
Geneva, Switzerland, August 8-20, 1955 : 

Chairman — Lewis L. Strauss, Chairman, U.S. Atomic 

Energy Commission 
Vice Chairman — Willard F. Libby, Chicago, 111., member, 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 
I. I. Rabi, New York, professor of physics, Columbia 

University ; Chairman, General Advisory Committee to 

the Atomic Energy Commission 
Detlev W. Bronk, Media, Pa., president, National Academy 

of Sciences : president, Rockefeller Institute for Medical 

Research 
Shields Warren, West Newton, Mass., Scientific Director, 

Cancer Research Institute, New England Deaconess 

Hospital, Boston, Mass. ; former director, Division of 

Biology and Medicine, Atomic Energy Commission 



64 



Department of State Bulletin 



Application for Proceedings Against U. S. S. R. 
for Destruction of B 29 off Hokkaido in 1952 



DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

Press release 326 dated June 7 

H. Freeman Matthews, U.S. Ambassador at The 
Hague, on June 2, 1955, filed with the Interna- 
tional Court of Justice an application by the U.S. 
Government instituting proceedings against the 
Soviet Government on account of the destruction 
off Hokkaido, Japan, on October 7, 1952, of a U.S. 
Air Force B-29 aircraft and the loss of its crew. 
The Legal Adviser of the Department of State, 
Herman Phleger, has been appointed agent of the 
United States for these proceedings. 

There were transmitted as annexes to the appli- 
cation a copy of the formal diplomatic note de- 
livered to the Soviet Government on September 
25, 1954, in which the Soviet Government was 
charged with liability for the incident in the 
amount of $1,620,295.01 1 and a copy of the Soviet 
Government's reply of December 30, 1954, disput- 
ing its liability. In this regard the application 
states that a dispute is therefore presented ap- 
propriate for hearing and decision by the Interna- 
tional Court of Justice in accordance with its 
statute and rules. 

Among the subjects in dispute are serious ques- 
tions of international law. These include the 
validity of the Soviet Government's claim to sov- 
ereignty over the Habomai Islands situated off 
Hokkaido, Japan. The U.S. Government sup- 
ports the Japanese Government's denial of the 
legal right of the Soviet Government to the 
Habomai Islands. 

In filing the present application, the U.S. Gov- 
ernment is pursuing the policy of exhausting ev- 
ery available legal means, including the presenta- 
tion of claims in the International Court of 
Justice, in order to bring an end to lawless attacks 
upon U.S. military aircraft and their crews. This 

1 Bulletin of Oct. 18, 1954, p. 579. 



policy of the U.S. Government was announced by 
ximbassador Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., on Septem- 
ber 10, 1954, in the Security Council of the United 
Nations 2 in the course of the debate on a compara- 
ble attack by Soviet fighters against a U.S. Navy 
Neptune-type aircraft over the Sea of Japan on 
September 4, 1954. On March 3, 1954, applica- 
tions were filed against the Soviet and Hungarian 
Governments on account of their treatment of four 
American airmen who came down on Hungarian 
soil in a U.S. Air Force C^7 aircraft. 3 On March 
29, 1955, an application was filed against the 
Czechoslovak Government on account of the de- 
struction of a U.S. Air Force F-84 aircraft over 
Germany. 4 



TEXT OF APPLICATION TO INTERNATIONAL 
COURT OF JUSTICE 

Mat 26, 1955 
Sir: 

1. This is a written application, in accordance 
with the Statute and Rules of the Court, submitted 
by the Government of the United States of Amer- 
ica instituting proceedings against the Govern- 
ment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
on account of certain willful acts committed by 
fighter aircraft of the Soviet Government against 
a United States Air Force B-29 aircraft and its 
crew off Hokkaido, Japan, on October 7, 1952. 

The subject of the dispute and a succinct state- 
ment of the facts and grounds upon which the 
claim of the Government of the United States of 
America is based are adequately set forth in a note 
delivered to the Soviet Government on September 
25, 1954. A copy of the note is attached to this 

'Ibid., Sept. 20, 1954, p. 417. 
3 Ibid., Mar. 22, 1954, p. 44'J. 
' Ibid., Apr. 18, 1955, p. 648. 



July 7 7, 7 955 



65 



application as an annex. The Soviet Govern- 
ment has asserted its contentions of fact and law 
with reference to the United States Government's 
claim in other diplomatic correspondence on this 
subject, most recently in a note dated December 
30, 1954, a copy of which is also attached to this 
application as an annex. 

2. The United States Government notes that the 
present dispute concerns matters of the character 
specified in Article 36 (2) of the Statute of the 
Court, including subdivisions (a) through (d). 
As will be seen from the annexes, the legal dispute 
of the United States Government with the Soviet 
Government involves serious questions of interna- 
tional law. Among them are the validity of the 
Soviet Government's claim to sovereignty over the 
Habomai Islands situated off Hokkaido, Japan, 
and in that connection the interpretation of the 
Treaty of Peace with Japan signed at San Fran- 
cisco on September 8, 1951. In addition there are 
involved the scope and application of international 
obligations relating to the overflight of intruding 
and intercepting military aircraft, together with 
numerous issues of fact which if resolved in favor 
of the United States Government would constitute 
breaches of international obligation by the Soviet 
Government ; and the nature and extent of repara- 
tions to be made by the Soviet Government to the 
United States Government for all these breaches. 

The United States Government, in filing this ap- 
plication with the Court, submits to the Court's 
jurisdiction for the purposes of this case. The 
Soviet Government appears not to have filed any 
declaration with the Court thus far, although it 
was invited to do so by the United States Govern- 
ment in the note annexed hereto. The Soviet 
Government is, however, qualified to submit to the 
jurisdiction of the Court in this matter and may 
upon notification of this application by the Reg- 
istrar, in accordance with the Rules of the Court, 
take the necessary steps to enable the Court's juris- 
diction over both parties to the dispute to be con- 
firmed. 

The United States Government thus founds the 
jurisdiction of this Court on the foregoing con- 
siderations and on Article 36 (1) of the Statute. 

3. The claim of the Government of the United 
States of America is briefly that the Government 
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on 
October 7, 1952 willfully and unlawfully caused 
fighter aircraft to overfly the territory of Japan, 



to hover over and pace a United States Air Force 
B-29 aircraft lawfully flying over Japan, the 
Soviet aircraft doing so unbeknown to the crew 
of the United States Air Force B-29, and without 
any provocation to attack and destroy the United 
States Air Force B-29, causing it to crash into the 
sea at a point between Yuri Island and Akiyuri 
Island in territory rightfully belonging to Japan ; 
that the crew of eight, all members of the United 
States Air Force and nationals of the United 
States, have failed to return ; and that the Soviet 
Government has concealed from the United 
States Government information as to the fate of 
the crew and has not made provision for the 
prompt return of any crew members whom it may 
still be holding or of whose whereabouts it is 
informed. The damages suffered by the United 
States Government and for which the Soviet 
Government is liable to it are specified in the 
annexed note. The United States Government 
claims that in the circumstances described in the 
annex the actions chargeable to the Soviet Gov- 
ernment constituted serious violations of inter- 
national obligation for which the United States 
Government has demanded and demands mone- 
tary and other reparation. 

In diplomatic correspondence with reference to 
this matter, including the Soviet Government's 
note a copy of which is attached hereto as an 
annex, constituting negotiations which must now 
be determined to have been exhausted, the Soviet 
Government has asserted a version of the facts 
and of the law contrary to that asserted by the 
United States Government. 

A dispute is therefore presented appropriate 
for hearing and decision by this Court in accord- 
ance with the Statute and Rules. 

The United States Government, in further 
pleadings herein, will more fully set forth the 
issues of fact and the issues of law in this dispute. 
It will request that the Court find that the Soviet 
Government is liable to the United States Gov- 
ernment for the damages caused ; that the Court 
award damages in favor of the United States 
Government against the Soviet Government in 
the sum of $1,620^95.01 with interest and such 
other reparation and redress as the Court may 
deem to be fit and proper ; and that the Court make 
all other necessary orders and awards, including 
an award of costs, to effectuate its determinations. 

4. The undersigned has been appointed by the 



66 



Department of State Bulletin 



Government of the United States of America as 
its agent for the purpose of this application and 
all proceedings thereon. 
Very truly yours, 

Herman Phleger 
The Legal Adviser 

of the 
Department of State 
The Registrar of the 
International Court of Justice, 
The Hague, Netherlands. 

[Annex (1) : Text of U.S. Note of September 25, 1954, 
to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.] 

Annex (2) 

(translation from Russian) 

Text of Soviet Note of December 30, 1954 to the 
United States 

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
USSR 

No. 114/OSA 

In connection with the note of the Government of the 
United States of America No. 270 of September 25 of 
this year the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics considers it necessary to state the following. 

Having examined the aforementioned note of the Gov- 
ernment of the United States of America concerning the 
incident, which took place in connection with the viola- 
tion of the State boundary of the USSR by an American 
B-29 bomber in the region of the island of Yuri on October 
7, 1952, the Soviet Government notes that this note con- 
tains essentially nothing new relating to the above-men- 
tioned incident in comparison with that which the Gov- 
ernment of the USA earlier reported on this question. In 
the note of the Government of the USA a version of the 
mentioned incident which is contrary to fact is again 
repeated, unsubstantiated suppositions relative to the 
fate of members of the crew of the aforementioned Amer- 
ican airplane are stated, and also certain questions un- 
related to the given affair are raised. 

The Soviet Government in its notes of October 12 " and 
November 24, 1952 6 has already set forth on the basis 
of factual data the circumstances relating to the viola- 
tion of the Soviet State boundary by an American mili- 
tary airplane. Information, supplementary hereto, in 
relation to the above-mentioned incident, is also con- 
tained in an extract appended to this note from a report 
of the circumstances of the violation of the State bound- 
ary of the USSR in the region of the island of Yuri on 
October 7, 1952 by an American B-29 airplane. 

The circumstances of this incident set forth in the 
mentioned notes of the Soviet Government and also in 
the above-mentioned Report show that the American air- 



'IMd., Oct. 27, 1952, p. 649. 
8 Not printed. 



plane on October 7, 1952 violated the State boundary of 
the USSR in the region of the island of Yuri and opened 
unprovoked fire on Soviet fighters guarding the State 
boundary of the USSR. 

The Soviet Government in a note of November 24, 1952 
has already reported that it does not dispose of informa- 
tion of the further fate of the American B-29 bomber 
and its crew. 

On the question touched upon in the note of the Gov- 
ernment of the USA of State sovereignty over the South 
Kurile islands the position of the Soviet Union has been 
set forth in the notes of the Soviet Government to the 
Government of the USA of November 24, 1952 and 
December 11, 1954." 

Since it has been precisely established that the Amer- 
ican military airplane violated the boundary of the USSR 
and without any reasons opened fire on the Soviet fighters 
the responsibility for the incident which took place and 
its consequences lies entirely on the American side. Un- 
der these conditions the Soviet Government cannot take 
into consideration the pretension contained in the note 
of the Government of the USA of September 25 of this 
year and considers without any foundation the proposal 
of the Government of the USA for submitting this matter 
for consideration by the International Court. 

With regard to the attempts of the Government of the 
USA to use the incident of October 7, 1952 in order to 
present in a false light the position of the Soviet Union 
with respect to Japan and the Japanese people, the Soviet 
Government considers it necessary to note that the at- 
titude of the Soviet Union toward Japan and the Japanese 
people is well known. 

The position of the Soviet Union, in particular, found 
its reflection in the Joint Declaration of the Government 
of the USSR and the Government of the CPR [Chinese 
People's Republic] concerning relations with Japan of 
October 12, 1954. In this Declaration it was noted that 
although nine years have passed since the end of the 
war, Japan has not received independence and continues 
to remain in the position of a semi-occupied country. The 
territory of Japan is covered with numerous American 
military bases, the industry and finances of Japan are 
dependent upon American military orders, its foreign 
trade is under the control of the United States of Amer- 
ica. All this causes the difficult economic position in 
which Japan continues to find itself. 

In the aforementioned Declaration the Soviet Union 
expressed sympathy for Japan and the Japanese people, 
which has found itself in a difficult position as a conse- 
quence of the San Francisco treaty imposed upon it by 
the United States and of other agreements, and stated 
its readiness to undertake steps for the purpose of nor- 
malizing its relations with Japan. The Soviet Union 
noted in addition that Japan will meet with full support 
in its effort to establish political and economic relations 
with it, just as all steps on her side directed toward 
insuring the conditions for its peaceful and independent 
development will meet with full support. 

Moscow, December SO, 195.'t 
The Embassy 

of the United States of America 
Moscow 



July 11, 1955 



67 



Extract From Report of Major General of Aviation 
Makhun to the Command of Air Forces of October 26, 
1952 on the Question of the Violation of the State 
Boundary of the USSR in the Region of the Southern 
Part of the Kurile Islands on October 7, 1952 by an 
American Type B-29 Military Airplane. 

The investigation was conducted by means of a thor- 
ough study of official documents, journal entries of radar 
stations and duty personnel at the airfield, the obtaining 
of written explanations of members of the border troops 
and fliers and also personal interrogation of eye witnesses 
and radar personnel and fliers who took part in observing 
the flight of the violator-airplane over our territory and 
in warning it of this. 

The investigation established : 

On October 7, 1952 at 14 hours 31 minutes Khabarovsk 
time an airplane of unidentified nationality which on a 
course of 40-45 degrees was flying in the direction of 
the southern part of the island of Tanfilev was detected 
in the immediate vicinity of our State boundary by radar 
installations. Continuing its flight on this course, the 
foreign airplane at 14 hours 33 minutes having violated 
the State boundary, entered the air space over the ter- 
ritorial waters of the USSR and, approaching the south- 
ern coast of the island of Tanfilev, turned and flew on 
a course to the northwest over the island of Tanfilev. 
Reaching the northwest end of the island of Tanfilev 
the violator-airplane, evidently, after having recon- 
noitered it, at 14 hours 35 minutes turned and went on 
a course of 285 degrees, and after two minutes departed 
from the air space of the USSR. Thus the violator- 
airplane in this case was over Soviet territory for four 
to five minutes. 

To all appearances, not having carefully enough ex- 
amined the island of Tanfilev, this same violator-airplane 
at 15 hours 20 minutes violated a second time the Soviet 
State boundary on a course of 40-45 degrees and, reach- 
ing the point latitude 43°24' longitude 145°56', turned 
to the northwest, passed over the southwestern part of 
the island of Tanfilev and at 15 hours 23 minutes left 
the air space of the Soviet Union. 

On its second violation of the State boundary of the 
Soviet Union the violator-airplane was over Soviet ter- 
ritory for another three-four minutes. 

Having remained several minutes outside the air space 
of the Soviet Union, the violator-airplane at 15 hours 27 
minutes Khabarovsk time at the point latitude 43° 18' 
longitude 145° 59' on a course 90-100 degrees for a third 
time violated the Soviet boundary and after crossing the 
State boundary the violator-airplane went in the direc- 
tion of the islands of Yuri, Zeleny, Shikotan, apparently 
with the same reconnaissance purpose with respect to 
these Soviet islands. 

After the first violation of the State boundary the avia- 
tion command, guided by the Instruction for the defense 
of the State air boundaries of the USSR, sent up a pair 
of fighters. The airborne fighters, having gained altitude 
over the airfield, headed toward the region of the island 
of Yuri. 

Taking a direct course toward the region of the island 
of Yuri, the pair of Soviet fighters at 15 hours 29 minutes 



detected south of the island of Demin at an altitude of 
5,000 meters a four-engine bomber of the B-29 type of 
a dark green color with American identification marks. 

After detecting the violator-airplane, which turned out 
to be an American bomber of the B-29 type, the Soviet 
fighters began to approach it for the purpose of warning 
it that it was over Soviet territory. 

During the approach the American B-29 bomber from 
a distance of approximately 1,000 meters opened fire on 
the Soviet fighters, one of the bursts passed near the left 
wing of the lead fighter-airplane. Despite the fact that 
the American aircraft had opened fire, the Soviet fliers, 
without opening fire, continued the approach in order to 
warn the violator-airplane that it was over our territory. 
While the Soviet fighters were continuing the approach 
without opening fire, the American bomber for a second 
time opened fire on them. 

The Soviet fighters, in view of the unsuccessful attempt 
to approach and warn the violator-airplane by maneuvers 
that it was over Soviet territory, were forced in answer 
to the manifestly hostile act by the American bomber to 
open answering fire, after which the violator-airplane 
turned and with loss of altitude went off into the direction 
of the sea at great speed. 

In view of the small amount of fuel which our fighters 
had left they took a course to their airfield after the en- 
counter with the mentioned American airplane. During 
the entire time of flight, including the encounter with the 
American bomber, our fighters did not leave the limits 
of the air space of the Soviet Union. 

The weather in the region of the violation of the Soviet 
boundary during the period from 14 to 16 hours Kha- 
barovsk time on October 7, 1952 was slightly cloudy with 
haze and visibility of 8-10 kilometers. 

Conclusions 

On October 7, 1952 an American four-engine bomber of 
the B-29 type from 14 hours 31 minutes until 15 hours 
30 minutes Khabarovsk time conducted flights obviously 
for reconnaissance purposes and during the first violation 
of the State boundary of the USSR in the period from 14 
hours 33 minutes to 14 hours 37 minutes a reconnaissance 
of the island of Tanfilev was conducted by it, during the 
second violation in the period from 15 hours 20 minutes 
to 15 hours 23 minutes the results of the first reconnais- 
sance flight over the southwestern part of the island of 
Tanfilev were verified by it. 

Having fulfilled, apparently, the first part of its task 
for the reconnaissance of the island of Tanfilev the Amer- 
ican B-29 airplane for a third time violated the State 
boundary at 15 hours 27 minutes and maintained a course 
toward the Soviet islands of Yuri, Zeleny, and Shikotan 
evidently for the fulfillment of the second part of its task, 
that is for the reconnaissance of these islands. 

Thus all three violations of the State boundary of the 
Soviet Union by the American military airplane were 
premeditated and were conducted with obviously hostile 
purposes. 

The Soviet fighters, sent to the region of the island 
of Yuri with the aim of wai-ning the violator-airplane 
of its presence over Soviet territory, acted in precise 



68 



Department of State Bulletin 



conformity with the instruction for the defense of the 
State boundary of the Soviet Union, took all necessary 
measures, risking life, in order to warn the violator by 
maneuvers without opening fire. However, in view of the 



manifestation by the violator-airplane of obviously hostile 
acts, after it opened Are for a second time the Soviet 
fighters were compelled to give answering fire with the 
aim of forcing it to quit the air space of the USSR. 



Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims 



The Senate on July 6, by a vote of 77-0, gave its 
advice and consent to ratification of the Geneva 
Conventions for Protection of War Victims. 
Following are a statement by Deputy Under 
Secretary Murphy before the Senate Foreign Re- 
lations Committee on June 3 {press release 311) 
in support of the conventions and a letter of March 
29 from Secretary Dulles to Senator Walter F. 
George, chairman of the committee, with an en- 
closure, "Statement on the Geneva Conventions of 

1949." 



STATEMENT BY MR. MURPHY 

The executive branch is requesting advice and 
consent to the ratification of the Geneva Conven- 
tions as the culmination of the efforts the United 
States has contributed to an international en- 
deavor to provide improved protection for the 
victims of war. These conventions are the prod- 
uct of long, hard, though unspectacular, labor. 
They represent a steady evolution of international 
law built upon experience. They were drawn up 
by the diplomatic conference held in Geneva from 
April to August 1949, which worked conscienti- 
ously and in a spirit in which it can be truthfully 
said political differences were largely subordi- 
nated to humanitarian objectives. 1 

The conventions have been in force since Octo- 
ber 1950, they have been ratified by 47 states, and 
they now represent an established body of inter- 
national law. Action by the United States is be- 

1 For a summary of the 1949 meeting, see Bulletin of 
Sept. 5, 1949, p. 339. For texts of conventions and reserva- 
tions made at time of signature, see S. Exec. D, E, F, and 
G, 82d Cong., 1st sess. 



ing sought at this time, not in order to meet a 
present emergency, or with the thought that war 
is inevitable ; we desire rather to confirm our sup- 
port of a humanitarian cause and to extend the 
protection of the conventions to our own citizens 
should it ever become necessary. 

Three of the conventions — those on the treat- 
ment of prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, 
and the wounded and sick at sea — modify previous 
international law on the same subject. This basic 
law had already been codified in treaties that the 
Senate has previously considered and approved 
and to which the United States is a party. The 
1949 conventions represent improvements sug- 
gested as a result of World War II experiences 
shared by many countries, including the United 
States. In some respects they afford more com- 
plete protection, and in others they are more prac- 
tical than earlier international statutes. The 1929 
Prisoners-of-War Convention, for example, pre- 
sented a difficulty in the provision that prisoners 
of war were to be given rations equivalent to those 
of garrison troops of the detaining power. Under 
that standard the health of prisoners held by a 
country whose garrison forces subsisted on a low- 
calorie diet was gravely impaired. The new con- 
vention obligates a detaining power to furnish 
food rations sufficient in quantity, quality, and 
variety to keep prisoners of war in good health. 
Among other improvements, the convention pro- 
vides for fair trial procedures for all offenses com- 
mitted by prisoners of war and establishes criteria 
for legitimate activity by resistance groups. 

The fourth convention — that on the treatment 
of civilians — is new in form and a fiords protec- 
tion to categories of civilians who are particularly 



July II, 7 955 



69 



exposed to mistreatment in time of war. The need 
for this convention has long been recognized and 
had been particularly urged by the European 
countries who were victims of Nazi aggression. 
The problems of enforcement by the United States 
would not be novel in most respects. The treat- 
ment envisaged for enemy aliens in this country 
largely corresponds with past United States prac- 
tice. During the last war civilian internees were 
afforded many of the benefits of the Prisoners-of- 
War Convention by mutual agreement, and the 
present convention formalizes and extends these 
benefits. As to occupied territory, the convention 
amplifies the 1907 Hague Regulations concerning 
the treatment of the general population, and it 
places restraints upon an occupying power from 
undertaking actions which are not reasonably nec- 
essary for the conduct of military operations. The 
convention for the first time codifies prescriptions 
regarding civilians in one body of legislation. 

The groundwork for all four conventions was 
carefully prepared. Prior to the Geneva confer- 
ence, two meetings enlisting authoritative and 
competent opinion were held — the meeting of gov- 
ernment experts in 1947 in Geneva 2 and the In- 
ternational Red Cross Conference in 1948 in Stock- 
holm 3 — in both of which American representa- 
tives participated. These meetings drafted work- 
ing papers for the 1949 Geneva conference. 

A large and representative number of states — 
59 in all — attended the 1949 conference at Geneva, 
including several Asian states. Delegations from 
former enemies — Germany and Japan — took part 
in an observer capacity. The United States, be- 
cause of its traditional regard for the welfare of 
war victims, played a major role both in the pre- 
paratory steps and in the conference proceedings. 
The large number of states which have already 
ratified represents a major portion of world opin- 
ion approving the work of the Geneva conference. 

The Soviet Union deposited its ratification last 
May. It has thereby gained a propaganda ad- 
vantage which it has been quick to use in recent 
international meetings. It has maintained three 
reservations which it put forward at the time of 
signature. As set forth in the letter from the 
Secretary of State to the Chairman of this com- 
mittee, the United States is unable to accept these 



: Bulletin of June 22, 1947, p. 1205. 
'Ibid., Oct. 10, 1948, p. 464. 



reservations and the similar reservations made by 
other states of the Soviet bloc. At the same time, 
it is in the interest of the United States that the 
rules of the Geneva conventions be applied as 
widely as possible in the event of armed conflict. 
This is true even in relationship to countries 
which have made reservations unacceptable to the 
United States. We would expect, therefore, to 
state in our instrument of ratification that, in be- 
coming a party to the conventions, the United 
States accepts treaty relations with reserving 
states on all matters not covered by reservations. 
If a reserving state later, through unwarranted 
use of its reservations, should seek to evade its 
obligations under unreserved portions of the con- 
ventions, with the effect of nullifying the objec- 
tives and broad humanitarian purpose of the Ge- 
neva rules, the United States would be free to 
consider whether in such circumstances it should 
continue to assume obligations under the conven- 
tion vis-a-vis a defaulting state. We believe an 
appropriate caveat on this score should also be 
indicated in our instrument of ratification. 

The executive branch wishes to maintain the 
single reservation which the United States for its 
part made at the time of signing the civilian con- 
vention. The present text of article 68 of that 
convention provides that the occupying power may 
impose the death penalty upon protected persons 
only in cases involving espionage, serious acts of 
sabotage, or offenses causing the death of one or 
more persons and, furthermore, only if such of- 
fenses were punishable by death under local law 
in force before the occupation began. This text 
was adopted by a majority of states at the Geneva 
conference who feared abuse of the death penalty 
in occupied territory or who had abolished the 
death penalty in their own domestic legislation. 
The United States is willing to agree not to im- 
pose the death penalty except for the three spec- 
ified offenses. It is unable, however, to accept 
the limitation that the death penalty should not 
be applied if it were not provided for the same 
offense by local law existing before the occupation 
started. The United States feels that the protec- 
tion of its own forces in occupied territory requires 
reserving to itself the power to enforce extreme 
legal action against illegal activities, if it should 
prove necessary. 

The conventions may present a first aspect of 
being complicated and untried. In actual fact, 
most of the prisoner-of-war provisions have stood 



70 



Department of State Bulletin 



the test of practical experience in the last two 
great wars. The mechanisms and institutions pro- 
vided for are substantially the same and could 
start operating when required, making use of es- 
tablished patterns and precedents. The innova- 
tions the conventions present are the result of a 
conscientious effort to correct abuses and to in- 
crease efficiency. 

The experiences of the Korean conflict empha- 
sized the importance of the conventions. Our 
side, in fact, applied their humanitarian provi- 
sions and offered victims the protection these were 
designed to achieve. The enemy's ruthless be- 
havior was exposed by their disregard of the 
Geneva rules. There is reason to believe that the 
moral acceptance of the conventions as a general 
norm did have some effect on the enemy. The 
Communists to some extent improved their treat- 
ment and eventually did repatriate a number of 
sick and wounded as well as numbers of other pris- 
oners after hostilities. With further regard to 
the Korean conflict, our Unified Command, in 
giving effect through the Armistice Agreement 
to the principle of release and repatriation em- 
ployed in the Prisoners-of-War Convention, suc- 
cessfully confirmed that a detaining power has 
the right to offer asylum to prisoners of war and 
is not obligated to repatriate them forcibly. These 
fundamental points have been upheld by an over- 
whelming vote in the United Nations General 
Assembly. 4 

The Geneva conventions are another long step 
forward toward mitigating the severities of war 
on its helpless victims. They reflect enlightened 
practices as carried out by the United States and 
other civilized countries, and they represent 
largely what the United States would do whether 
or not a party to the conventions. Our own con- 
duct has served to establish higher standards, and 
we can only benefit by having them incorporated 
in a stronger body of conventional wartime law. 
We know that many nations have looked to us 
for an indication as to what they should do and 
have supported and acted favorably on the Geneva 
conventions in the expectation that we would do 
the same. 

We feel that ratification of the conventions now 
before you would be fully in the interest of the 
United States. 



SECRETARY'S LETTER 

March 29, 1955 

The Honorable 
Walter F. George, 
United States Senate. 

Dear Senator George : From April 21 to Au- 
gust 12, 1949, at the invitation of the Govern- 
ment of Switzerland, a Diplomatic Conference for 
the Establishment of International Conventions 
for the Protection of War Victims was held in 
Geneva, Switzerland. Fifty-nine governments 
sent delegations to participate therein. The main 
purpose and chief result of the conference was the 
formulation and adoption of four conventions 
usually referred to as the "Geneva Conventions of 
1949", namely, (1) Convention for the Ameliora- 
tion of the Condition of Wounded and Sick in 
Armed Forces in the Field ; (2) Convention for the 
Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick, 
and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at 
Sea; (3) Convention Relative to the Treatment of 
Prisoners of War; and (4) Convention Relative to 
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of 
War. 

On April 26, 1951, the Conventions were trans- 
mitted to the Senate with a request for considera- 
tion and advice and consent to ratification. 5 Sub- 
sequently, the Department of State suggested that 
the Senate should not act on them in view of the 
Korean conflict. At the present time, however, 
forty-seven nations have ratified or acceded to the 
Conventions, making it a matter of importance 
to the United States, and to many other nations, 
that the Senate take action with respect to the Con- 
ventions. Therefore, I am transmitting herewith 
a statement supplementing the report and detailed 
commentaries accompanying the Presidential 
message by which the Conventions were referred 
to the Senate (Senate Executives D, E, F, and G, 
82d Congress, 1st Session). The supplementary 
statement now transmitted contains new material, 
and deals with the present status of the Conven- 
tions, the character of various reservations made 
to the Conventions by certain states, and the ap- 
plication of the Conventions in Korea, particu- 
larly with reference to Article 118 of the Prisoners 
of War Convention and the question of asylum. 
It is believed that this information will be of 
particular importance and interest to the Senate 



'For text of U.N. resolution, see Hid., Dec. 8, 1952, 
p. 916. 



1 Ibid., May 28, 1951, p. 866. 



July 7 7, 7955 



71 



in connection with its consideration of the 
Conventions. 

At the time the Conventions were submitted to 
the Senate, a request was made that, in the event 
the Senate advises and consents to the ratification 
of the Convention relative to the Protection of 
Civilian Persons in Time of War, it do so subject 
to a reservation regarding the right to impose the 
death penalty in accordance with the provisions of 
Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether 
the offenses referred to therein are punishable by 
death under the law of the occupied territory at 
the time the occupation begins. The Executive 
Branch still desires that the Senate approval be 
accompanied by such a reservation. 

Certain reservations have been made by other 
governments to Articles 10, 12, and 85 of the re- 
spective Conventions as explained in the accom- 
panying statement. It is particularly recom- 
mended that this Government should not accept 
these reservations. The United States should, 
however, express its intention to enter into treaty 
relations with the reserving states so that they 
will be bound toward the United States to carry 
out all the provisions of the Conventions on which 
no reservations were specifically made. It should 
be clear that we hope that the reserving states 
will at some time elect to withdraw their reserva- 
tions and become bound by the reserved balance 
of the Conventions. If they do not, and if in the 
event of conflict reserving states seek to use their 
reservations in an unwarranted fashion so as to 
defeat the broad humanitarian purposes of the 
Conventions, the United States would, of course, 
be in a position to consider that it was not re- 
quired further to apply the Conventions vis-a-vis 
such defaulting states. The Executive Branch is 
prepared to discuss with the Committee on For- 
eign Relations a statement with this general effect 
to accompany the United States instruments of 
ratification. 

Experience in World War II made apparent 
the need for revision of the previous conventions 
applicable to prisoners of war and the wounded 
and sick, and for a separate convention defining 
the treatment to be accorded certain categories 
of civilians in wartime. The Conventions as for- 
mulated generally reflect United States practice 
and prescribe methods of conduct which the 
United States would attempt to pursue in absence 



of such treaties. Historically, this Nation has 
always taken pride in its leading role of helping 
to establish and apply humane standards for the 
protection of the wounded, sick, and defenseless 
in time of war. The United States from the be- 
ginning supported the initiative taken by the In- 
ternational Committee of the Red Cross in the 
fall of 1945 to revise and extend the previous 
conventions. 

Accordingly, I believe the United States should 
no longer delay action; that it should clearly 
manifest its interest in these humanitarian con- 
ventions by ratification of them. I say this not 
in the belief of the inevitability of armed conflict, 
but with the thought that this Nation should asso- 
ciate itself with conventions which are designed to 
alleviate the sufferings of any victims in the event 
of a future conflict. Our participation is needed 
to enlist the authority of the United States in 
their interpretation and enforcement and to en- 
able us to invoke them for the protection of our 
nationals. 

For the foregoing reasons, it is hoped that the 
Conventions may receive early and favorable con- 
sideration by the United States Senate. 
Sincerely yours, 

John Foster Dulles 

Enclosure : Statement on the Geneva Conventions of 1949. 

Statement on the Geneva Conventions of 1949 

I 

Status of the Conventions 

The four Conventions, which entered into force 
on October 21, 1950, have been ratified by the 
following signatories: Austria, Belgium, Bul- 
garia, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, 
Chile, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Ecuador, 
Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, France, Guatemala, 
Hungary, the Holy See, India, Israel, Italy, Leb- 
anon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Mexico, Mon- 
aco, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Paki- 
stan, the Philippines, Poland, Rumania, Spain, 
Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Turkey, Ukrainian 
Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics, and Yugoslavia. Adherences 
have been deposited by the Federal Republic of 
Germany, Japan, Jordan, Liberia, San Marino, 
Thailand, the Union of South Africa, and Viet- 
Nam. 



71 



Department of State Bulletin 



II 

Reservations to the Conventions 

At the time of signing the Conventions, reserva- 
tions were made by certain of the signatory states. 
Those reservations have been confirmed by each 
of the reserving states which has since ratified the 
Conventions upon deposit of its instrument of 
ratification. It is anticipated that the other res- 
ervations will likewise be maintained when rati- 
fication takes place. Subject to the possibility 
that a state which is or becomes a party should 
seek to establish that the reservations are such as 
to preclude the reserving states from becoming a 
party at all in the absence of consent from all states 
concerned, the conventions have come or will come 
into force for the reserving states with their reser- 
vations maintained. 

Reservation by the United States and other States 
to Article 68 of the Civilian Convention 

The United States' only reservation at time of 
signature was with respect to Article 68 of the Con- 
vention relative to the Protection of Civilian Per- 
sons wherein there are set forth certain restrictions 
upon the imposition of the death penalty in oc- 
cupied territory. The Article provides that the 
Occupying Power may impose the death penalty 
upon protected persons in occupied territory for 
violation of its penal provisions issued and pro- 
mulgated under Articles 61 and 65 only in cases 
where the person is guilty of espionage, of seri- 
ous acts of sabotage against the military installa- 
tions of the Occupying Power, or of intentional 
offenses which have caused the death of one or 
more persons. The United States was willing to 
bind itself not to impose the death penalty for 
violation of occupation orders except for these 
three offenses. However, Article 68 further pro- 
vides that even in those cases the death penalty 
can be imposed only if such offenses were punish- 
able by death under the law of the occupied terri- 
tory in force before the occupation began. 

Adoption of this limitation at the Geneva Con- 
ference was brought about by those countries with 
recent experience under military occupation in 
which the death penalty was imposed upon a 
wholesale basis and by those countries which have 
abolished the death penalty in their penal systems. 
The United States and the United Kingdom 
strongly opposed the limitation in terms of the 



local law upon the ground that, unless an Occupy- 
ing Power possessed power to take drastic legal 
action against illegal combatant activities, it 
would be unable to protect itself against such 
activities. For these reasons, the United States 
signed the Civilian Convention with a reservation 
which reserves the right to impose the death 
penalty in accordance with the provisions of 
Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether 
the offenses referred to therein are punishable by 
death under the law of the occupied territory at 
the beginning of the occupation. A similar reser- 
vation to Article 68 was also made by Canada, 
New Zealand, the Netherlands, and the United 
Kingdom. Argentina also made a reservation 
with respect to Article 68, but phrased it in general 
terms and did not relate it specifically to para- 
graph 2 thereof. 

Common Article 10 

Common Article 10 (Article 11 of the Civilian 
Convention) provides for substitutes for Protect- 
ing Powers when protected persons for any reason 
do not benefit by the activities of such a Power. 
In such an event, the Detaining Power is required 
unilaterally to request a neutral state or an impar- 
tial humanitarian organization to undertake the 
functions performed by a Protecting Power. If 
such protection cannot be arranged, the Detaining 
Power is obligated to request or accept the offer of 
the services of a humanitarian organization, such 
as the International Committee of the Red Cross, 
to assume the humanitarian functions performed 
by Protecting Powers. 

These provisions were opposed at the Geneva 
Conference by the delegations of the Soviet bloc 
states (Albania, Bulgaria, Byelorussia, Czechoslo- 
vakia, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, the Ukraine, 
and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), Portu- 
gal, and Yugoslavia on the basis that they di- 
minish the belligerent rights of the state on which 
the protected persons depend. Accordingly, each 
of those states made a reservation thereto which 
stated that it will not recognize the validity of re- 
quests made by the Detaining Power to a neutral 
state or to a humanitarian organization to under- 
take the functions performed by a Protecting 
Power unless the consent of the government of the 
state of which the protected persons are nationals 
has been obtained. 



July II, 1955 



73 



Article 12 of the Prisoners of War Convention 

Article 12 of the Prisoners of War Convention 
(Article 45 of the Civilian Convention) contains 
provisions regulating the transfer of prisoners of 
war or protected persons from the capturing 
Power to another Power. Transfers between par- 
ties to the Convention are recognized, but in such 
cases the transferring Power must satisfy itself of 
the willingness and ability of the transferee Power 
to apply the Convention. Nevertheless, if the 
transferee Power fails to carry out the Convention, 
the transferring Power, upon being so informed 
by the Protecting Power, must take effective meas- 
ures to correct the situation or have the transferred 
persons returned to it. The transferee Power is 
obligated to honor a request for their return. 
These provisions are a compromise between the 
view that once a transfer was made the transfer- 
ring Power should be relieved of further responsi- 
bility and the view that responsibility for trans- 
ferees should at all times be joint. The Soviet 
bloc states and Yugoslavia supported the latter 
view and made reservations to the effect that they 
do not consider as valid the freeing of a Detaining 
Power, which has transf erred prisoners of war and 
protected persons to another Power, from respon- 
sibility for the application of the convention to 
such persons while in the custody of the Power 
accepting them. 

Article 85 of the Prisoners of War Convention 

Article 85 of the Prisoners of War Convention 
relates to the treatment of prisoners of war who 
are prosecuted and sentenced for precapture of- 
fenses. It provides that prisoners of war prose- 
cuted under the laws of the Detaining Power for 
acts committed prior to capture shall retain, even 
if convicted, the benefits of the Convention. The 
question whether such prisoners who might be war 
criminals should benefit in full by the guarantees 
of the Convention the same as other prisoners of 
war was the subject of extensive controversy at 
the Geneva Conference. The Soviet bloc states 
proposed to add to the Article : "Prisoners of war 
convicted under the laws of the country where 
they are in captivity for war crimes or crimes 
against humanity, in accordance with the prin- 
ciples laid down at Nuremberg, shall be subject to 
the prison regime laid down in that country for 
persons undergoing punishment." This amend- 
ment was rejected by a large majority of the Con- 



ference, resulting in a reservation by the Soviet 
bloc states to the effect that they do not consider 
themselves "bound by the obligation, which fol- 
lows from Article 85, to extend the application of 
the Convention to prisoners of war who have been 
convicted under the law of the Detaining Power, 
in accordance with the principles of the Nurem- 
berg trial, for war crimes and crimes against hu- 
manity, it being understood that prisoners con- 
victed of such crimes must be subject to the 
conditions obtaining in the country in question 
for those who undergo their punishment." 

Miscellaneous Reservations 

Certain other reservations were made at the time 
of signature of the Conventions. Argentina, in 
addition to the reservation noted above, signed the 
Conventions with a reservation that it would con- 
sider common Article 3 (Conflicts not of an In- 
ternational Character) to be the only article, to 
the exclusion of all others, which would be appli- 
cable in the case of armed conflicts not of an 
international character. Brazil made two express 
reservations to the Civilian Convention: one in 
regard to Article 44 (Treatment of Refugees) on 
the ground that it was liable to hamper the action 
of the Detaining Power, and another in regard to 
Article 46 (Cancellation of Restrictive Measures) 
on the ground that the matter dealt with in the 
second paragraph thereof was considered to be 
"outside the scope of the Convention, the essential 
and specific purpose of which is the protection of 
persons and not of their property." Italy reserved 
in respect of the last paragraph of Article 66 (Set- 
tlement of Prisoners of War Accounts) of the 
Prisoners of War Convention. 

As well as making a reservation regarding Ar- 
ticle 68, New Zealand also signed the Civilian 
Convention subject to the reservation that "in 
view of the fact that the General Assembly of the 
United Nations, having approved the principles 
established by the Charter and judgment of the 
Nuremberg Tribunal, has directed the Interna- 
tional Law Commission to include these principles 
in a General codification of offenses against the 
peace and security of mankind, New Zealand re- 
serves the right to take such action as may be nec- 
essary to ensure that such offenses are punished, 
notwithstanding the provisions of Article 70, par- 
agraph I." 

The Prisoners of War Convention was signed 
on behalf of Luxembourg with a reservation that 



74 



Department of State Bulletin 



its existing national law shall continue to be ap- 
plied to cases now under consideration. Spain 
made a broad reservation to that Convention stat- 
ing that in matters regarding procedural guar- 
antees and penal and disciplinary sanctions, Spain 
will grant prisoners of war the same treatment as 
is provided by its legislation for members of its 
own national forces. Also, with respect to the 
phrase "International Law in force" in Article 99 
(Judicial Proceedings against Prisoners of War), 
Spain declared that thereunder it only accepts in- 
ternational law which arises from contractual 
sources or which has been previously elaborated by 
organizations in which it participates. 

Portugal, along with the reservation to common 
Article 10 previously mentioned, reserved the 
right not to apply the provisions of common 
Article 3, in so far as they may be contrary to 
the provisions of Portuguese law, in all terri- 
tories subject to its sovereignty in any part of the 
world. With respect to Article 13 of the Sick and 
Wounded Convention and Article 4 of the Pris- 
oners of War Convention, relating to categories 
of persons protected, the Portuguese Government 
made a reservation regarding the application of 
those Articles "in all cases in which the legitimate 
Government has already asked for and agreed to 
an armistice or the suspension of military opera- 
tions of no matter what character, even if the 
armed forces in the field have not yet capitulated." 
Another Portuguese reservation provides that, 
with respect to Article 60 (Advances of Pay) of 
the Prisoners of War Convention, Portugal in no 
case binds itself to grant prisoners a monthly rate 
of pay in excess of 50% of the pay clue to Portu- 
guese soldiers of equivalent appointment or rank 
on active service in the combat zone. 

Finally the failure of the Geneva Convention 
to accept the Red Shield of David as one of the 
distinctive signs and emblems provided for in the 
Sick and Wounded Conventions, evoked a reser- 
vation from Israel that it would use that emblem 
on the flags, armlets, and on all equipment em- 
ployed in the medical services, and as the distinc- 
tive sign provided for in the Civilian Convention. 

Ill 

Application of the Geneva Conventions in the 
Korean Conflict 

Applicability of the Conventions 
The Prisoners of War Convention. When the 
Korean conflict broke out, none of the early par- 



ticipants was party to the Geneva Convention rela- 
tive to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 1949. 
During the course of hostilities, a number of the 
governments contributing troops to the Unified 
Command in Korea did ratify the Convention. It 
was, however, the Unified Command, exercised by 
the United States, which acted as the detaining 
power in the Korean conflict, and not the various 
states contributing troops. 

While the Convention was not recognized as 
being in force with respect to the parties to the 
Korean conflict, both sides stated they would apply 
its principles. Statements by the United States, 
the Republic of Korea and the North Korean 
regime had been made to this general effect by 
July 15, 1950, were never disavowed, and were 
supplemented by further statements on both 
sides. 

There is no record that the Chinese Commu- 
nist regime or the commander of its "volunteers" 
explicitly undertook to abide by the Convention. 
However, the Foreign Minister of the Communist 
regime during the course of the Korean hostilities, 
on July 16, 1952, informed the Swiss Government 
that the Chinese Communist Government had de- 
cided to "recognize" the Geneva Conventions of 
1949, subject to certain reservations. 

The General Assembly of the United Nations 
made clear its belief that the Convention should be 
regarded as applicable to the Korean conflict. 
Such was the basic assumption underlying the de- 
bate on release and repatriation of prisoners in 
the Assembly at the end of 1952. The General 
Assembly resolution of December 3, 1952 included 
the following: 

II. The release and repatriation of prisoners of war 
shall be effected in accordance with the Geneva Conven- 
tion relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, dated 
12 August 1949, the well-established principles and prac- 
tice of International law and the relevant provisions of 
the draft armistice agreement. 

Similarly, the prisoner of war agreement annexed 
to the armistice 6 provides, in regard to the activi- 
ties of the Neutral Nations Repatriation Com- 
mittee : "This Commission shall ensure that pris- 
oners of war shall at all times be treated humanely 
in accordance with the specific provisions of the 
Geneva Convention, and with the general spirit 
of that Convention." 

The other three Conventions (Sick and 
Wounded at Sea, Civilian) . Like the Prisoners 

' Ilia., June 22, 1953, p. 866. 



July 7 7, 7955 



75 



of War Convention, the other three Conventions 
did not become legally applicable in Korea. 
While the statement of the North Korean au- 
thorities regarding the voluntary application of 
the principles of the Prisoners of War Convention 
was limited to that Convention, statements of the 
United Nations side and the "recognition" by the 
Chinese Communists referred to all four Conven- 
tions. 

The United Nations Command in its treatment 
of the wounded and sick under its control in Korea 
acted in conformity with the humanitarian prin- 
ciples of the two 1949 Conventions for the Ameli- 
oration of the Wounded and Sick of forces re- 
spectively in the field and at sea. There was, of 
course, little or no naval action such as envisaged 
by the Convention relating to personnel at sea. 

Similarly throughout the conflict such civilians 
as were the responsibility of the United Nations 
Command were treated in conformity with the 
humanitarian principles of the 1949 Civilian Con- 
vention. The International Committee of the Red 
Cross was informed regarding such persons, and 
its delegates had access to them. However, the 
applicability of the Civilian Convention was lim- 
ited so far as the United Nations Command was 
concerned. Political authority in Southern Korea 
remained in the Republic of Korea and the United 
Nations Command did not, in general, assume 
responsibility for the civilian population. 

Centralized Responsibilities for Prisoners of War 
in the United Nations Command and the Uni- 
fied Command 

Shortly after the opening hostilities in Korea, 
the Security Council of the United Nations on 
July 7, 1950, requested members to contribute 
forces to a Unified Command under the United 
States and asked the United States to designate 
the Commander. The other U.N. Members which 
contributed units placed them under this Com- 
mand. By agreement Republic of Korea forces 
also came under this Command. The fact that the 
centralized command was established before other 
U.N. units entered the field, and that few other 
contingents were of sufficient size to handle pris- 
oners of war, resulted in centralized responsibility 
for prisoners in the hands of the United Nations 
Command. The United Nations Command — the 
military authority in the field — acted as the cap- 
turing force. The United States Government as 



the Unified Command — which exercised political 
authority over the United Nations Command — 
acted as the detaining power. 

Treatment of Prisoners of War in the Light of the 
Prisoners of War Convention 

Although both sides in the conflict stated that 
they would apply the humanitarian principles of 
the Geneva Convention, there was a stark differ- 
ence in the treatment which the two sides in fact 
accorded to prisoners of war captured by them. 
The United Nations Command, from the very be- 
ginning of hostilities until the release or transfer 
of the last prisoners in its hands following the 
armistice, scrupulously lived up to the principles 
of the Convention. The United Nations Com- 
mand sent lists of captured personnel to the Inter- 
national Committee of the Red Cross, as provided 
for in the Convention, which in turn transmitted 
them to the Communists. The United Nations 
Command welcomed the offer of services by the 
Icrc, admitted its representatives to its prisoner 
of war camps, gave them every reasonable facility, 
for inspection and reporting on the treatment of 
prisoners of war. The humane treatment of the 
prisoners was especially noteworthy in view of 
provocation by some Communist prisoners and 
their repeated efforts to foment disorder. The 
reports of the Icrc on the conditions in Unc 
camps were almost uniformly favorable. 

On the other hand, the Communists, while 
claiming they were abiding by the Convention, 
failed to live up to it in virtually every important 
respect. Except for two token lists totaling 110 
names transmitted to the Icrc in the early days of 
hostilities, the Communists did not inform the Unc 
through the Icrc, or in any other official manner, 
of the identity of captured personnel during more 
than 18 months of fighting. It was not until 
hostilities had been in progress for a year and a 
half, and after repeated insistence by the Unc 
armistice negotiators, that the Communists pro- 
vided any lists of captured prisoners. The Com- 
munists failed to designate an impartial humani- 
tarian organization such as the Icrc, and they 
rejected the persistent efforts of the Icrc to obtain 
entry into the Communist Prisoners of War 
camps. Until almost the very end of hos- 
tilities, they refused to exchange relief pack- 
ages, and even mail was not exchanged for 
most of the period and then only on a limited basis. 



76 



Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



The Communists did not report on the health of 
prisoners of war, and until the final stage of the 
conflict (April 1953) refused to exchange seriously 
sick and wounded. The Communists failed to 
give the accurate location of their prisoner of war 
camps and to mark them properly. They situated 
camps in positions of danger in proximity to 
legitimate military targets. Most serious was the 
record, established after careful investigation, of 
killings, beatings, starvation, and other atrocities 
against Unc troops taken prisoner by the Com- 
munists. 

These were respects in which the Communists 
were known to be violating the Geneva Conven- 
tion during the course of hostilities. Other vio- 
lations could not be investigated because the Com- 
munists had refused to allow inspection of their 
camps by representatives of an impartial humani- 
tarian organization like the Icrc, in direct viola- 
tion of the Geneva Convention. After the close 
of hostilities, returning prisoners of war brought 
additional evidence of numerous violations of the 
principles of the Geneva Convention. The Com- 
munists have not yet returned nor satisfactorily 
accounted for many prisoners of war, a number of 
whom are known to be still alive and in their 
custody. 

The Issue of Release and Repatriation of Prisoners 
of War 

Development of the Issue in the Armistice Nego- 
tiations. The most difficult issue in the Korean 
armistice negotiations concerned the release and 
repatriation of prisoners of war which was to 
follow the end of hostilities. The issue was the 
subject of negotiations over a period of a year 
and a half. 

As increasing numbers of prisoners came into 
Unc hands, it became clear that a substantial num- 
ber of them believed that they would suffer death 
or injury if returned to the Communists. Many 
of them made it clear that they would violently 
resist such return. The UN Command, with the 
unanimous agreement of the governments with 
forces in Korea, concluded, therefore, that the Unc 
should not use force to return to the Communists 
any prisoners who resisted repatriation. 

The Unc negotiators emphasized that the Unc 
did not wish to retain a single prisoner of war, 
nor did it wish to send a single prisoner to any 
particular destination. It agreed that all prison- 



ers who wished to be repatriated were entitled to 
be repatriated; it was willing to repatriate all 
who desired rejtatriation, but it would not agree 
that force should be used to repatriate any one 
of them who resisted. The Unc offered the Com- 
munists numerous proposals and agreed to con- 
sider any reasonable proposal so long as it was 
consistent with the principle that force should not 
be used to repatriate any prisoners. 

The Communists insisted that in fact there were 
no prisoners who refused to be repatriated and 
that those who were alleged to have refused re- 
patriation were intimidated into doing so. At the 
same time they refused to agree to any plan for 
impartially determining the true attitudes of 
individual prisoners. 

The Communists also insisted that the so-called 
principle of non-forceable repatriation was con- 
trary to the Geneva Convention. They cited in 
particular Article 118 which provides in part, 
"Prisoners of war shall be released and repatri- 
ated without delay after the cessation of active 
hostilities." This provision, they insisted, re- 
quired that every prisoner be handed back to the 
side he had fought on and allowed for no excep- 
tions. 

The Unc, on the other hand, insisted that the 
Geneva Convention of 1949 did not impose a duty 
on the prisoner of war to return. It did not 
impose on the detaining power the duty to return 
prisoners of war by force against the prisoner's 
wishes. It did impose on the detaining power the 
duty to offer every prisoner an unrestricted op- 
portunity to go home. The Unc's position was 
thus premised on the traditional right of a gov- 
ernment to grant asylum to prisoners of war, as 
well as civilians. Neither Article 118 nor any 
other provision of the Geneva Convention was de- 
signed to terminate the right of the detaining 
power to grant asylum if it so desired ; the nego- 
tiating history of the Geneva Convention of 1919 
so indicated and international practice, including 
the practice of the Soviet Government, affords au- 
thority for the granting of asylum to prisoners. 
The United Nations General Assembly had rec- 
ognized in General Assembly Eesolution 427 (V) 
of December 14, 1950, dealing with the problem 
of Axis prisoners of war not yet repatriated or 
accounted for by the Soviet Union, that the Ge- 
neva Convention Eelative to the Treatment of 
Prisoners of War of 1949 and existing interna- 



July 7 7, 7955 



77 



tional law established that the principle of release 
and repatriation means that prisoners should be 
"given an unrestricted opportunity of repatria- 
tion". 

Outcome of the Issue. The issue of release and 
repatriation in Korea was fully debated in the 
United Nations General Assembly at its Eighth 
Session at the end of 1952. Secretary Acheson 
put the legal position of the Unified Command 
succinctly in his report to the General Assembly 
on October 24, 1952, at the outset of its debate : 7 
"a detaining state retains discretion as to whether 
it shall honor a claim for asylum or not. It may, 
of course, exercise that right; it would be un- 
thinkable for anything else to be the case." The 
Problem, of Peace in Korea, 84 (Department of 
State Publication 4771, October 1952) . The Com- 
munist side was presented by the Soviet bloc, 
which made it clear that they conceded no right 
of asylum to a prisoner of war, who, they main- 
tained, remains subject to military discipline and 
must be repatriated whether or not he so desires. 

The position taken by the Unified Command 
won overwhelming support in the General Assem- 
bly. On December 3, 1952, at the end of the 
debate, the General Assembly adopted Resolu- 
tion 610 (VII), in which it affirmed that in the 
Korean conflict "force shall not be used against 
prisoners of war to prevent or effect their return 
to their homelands", that "they shall at all times 
be treated humanely in accordance with the spe- 
cific provisions of the Geneva Convention and 
with the general spirit of the Convention" and 
that "the release and repatriation of prisoners of 
war shall be effected in accordance with the 
'Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of 
Prisoners of War', dated 12 August 1949, the well- 
established principles and practice of inter- 
national law and the relevant provisions of the 
draft armistice agreement." The Soviet bloc 
voted against this resolution and maintained their 
position. 

The agreement on prisoners of war subsequently 
entered into by both sides at Panmunjom and 
made part of the Armistice Agreement provided 
an unrestricted opportunity of repatriation to all 
prisoners of war in the following manner: 

(a) It required that both sides "without offer- 
ing any hindrance, directly repatriate and hand 

7 Ibid., Nov. 3, 1952, p. 679, and Nov. 10, 1952, p. 744. 



over in groups all those prisoners of war in its 
custody who insist on repatriation to the side to 
which they belonged at the time of capture." 

(b) It further required that both sides "hand 
over all those remaining prisoners f war w h 
are not directly repatriated to the Neutral Nations 
Repatriation Commission for disposition in ac- 
cordance with the following provisions." 

(c) The provisions referred to established a 
Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission "in 
order to ensure that all prisoners of war have the 
opportunity to exercise their right to be repatri- 
ated following an armistice". They established 
procedures for "explanations and interviews". 
They provided that "No force or threat of force 
shall be used against the prisoners of war . . . 
and no violence to their persons or affront to their 
dignity or self-respect shall be permitted in any 
manner for any purpose whatsoever," except, of 
course, that the Commission was authorized "to 
exercise its legitimate functions and responsibili- 
ties for the control of the prisoners of war." The 
Commission was required, at the end of a specified 
period, and in the absence of other provision by the 
projected political conference, to "declare the re- 
lief from the prisoner of war status to civilian 
status of any prisoners of war who have not 
exercized their right to be repatriated." Pro- 
vision was made for such persons to be assisted 
if they should seek to go to neutral nations. 

The General Assembly returned to the problem 
of Axis prisoners of war in Soviet hands in De- 
cember 1953 and over the opposition of the Soviet 
bloc, reconfirmed the view of its resolution of 
December 14, 1950, as above quoted, that the prin- 
ciple of release and repatriation means granting 
an unrestricted opportunity of repatriation (Gen- 
eral Assembly Resolution 741 (VIII) of Decem- 
ber 7, 1953 ). 8 

The Korean experience has served to clarify 
and strengthen the humanitarian meaning and 
effect of Article 118. In short, the history and 
terms of the 1949 Convention, the resolutions and 
debates of the United Nations General Assembly, 
and the terms and effect of the. Korean Armistice 
Agreement, show that Article 118 is fully satisfied 
if the detaining power affords an unrestricted 
opportunity of rejjatriation, and that the principle 
of release and repatriation in this Article permits 
the grant of asylum to a prisoner of war. In any 

" Ibid., Dec. 28, 1953, p. 904. 



78 



Department of State Bulletin 



case, the provisions of the Convention for im- 
partial scrutiny would apply. 

Implementation of the Prisoner of War 
Provisions of the Armistice Agreement 

The position of the Unified Command in regard 
to nonforceable repatriation was fully vindicated 
in the experience following the Armistice. The 
Unc cooperated with the Neutral Nations Repa- 
triation Commission as required by the Armistice 
Agreement. The overwhelming majority of the 
prisoners whom the Unc had turned over to the 
custody of the Commission, however, made it quite 
clear that they would not accept repatriation to the 
Communists and generally they even refused to 
hear "explanations" from the Communists. 

The Unc refused to agree to re-open or extend 
the period of the explanations and insisted that 
the time table established in the Armistice Agree- 
ment must be scrupulously observed. When the 
Commission, instead of declaring the release of the 
prisoners in its custody to civilian status, as re- 
quired by the Armistice Agreement, proposed to 
return the prisoners to the custody of the two sides, 
the Unc permitted the prisoners to return as per- 
sons entitled to their freedom through expiration 
of the time set in the Armistice Agreement. 

The Unc thus respected the right of all pris- 
oners of war in its custody to be released from 
prisoner of war status in accordance with the 
Armistice Agreement and Article 118 of the Ge- 
neva Convention. It is clear, however, that the 
Communists have not yet released all the prisoners 
whom they hold and have not even accounted sat- 
isfactorily for all prisoners captured by them. 
Although the Communists continue to deny that 
there are other prisoners, they have in effect ad- 
mitted violation of the Geneva Convention and 
the Armistice Agreement by retaining U.S. armed 
forces personnel, 11 of whom they recently sen- 
tenced as spies despite the fact that they were shot 
down in uniform during the Korean hostilities. 9 
This action has been condemned by the U.N. Gen- 
eral Assembly which asked the Secretary-General 
to make efforts to obtain the release of those pris- 
oners and all other captured personnel of the Unc 
still detained. 10 These efforts are now in process. 11 



"Ibid., Dec. 6, 1954, p. 856. 

10 Ibid., Dec. 20, 1954, p. 931. 

11 For statements on the recent release of four U.S. fliers, 
see ibid., June 13, 1955, p. 953. 



Relevance of Korean Experience 

The Korean experience is only a partial and spe- 
cial example of how the Conventions may affect 
the United States in any future conflict. It does 
show, however, that the United States because of 
its traditional regard for human rights, welfare 
and dignity would support the humanitarian 
standards laid down in the Conventions in the 
event of future hostilities and would wish to be in 
the best position to invoke these standards. To 
the extent that the Geneva Conventions represent 
a standard of humanitarian behavior which world 
opinion recognizes, they may accordingly be ex- 
pected to constitute a deterrent to excesses in the 
treatment of victims of war. United States ratifi- 
cation of the Geneva Conventions, by lending fur- 
ther support to their standards should influence 
favorably future behavior toward prisoners of 
war. In short, the legal and psychological sanc- 
tions by which inhumane treatment may be mini- 
mized or prevented should be strengthened by ex- 
tending the binding character of these conventions. 



World Peace Council 

In response to an inquiry from Representative 
A. Clayton Powell, Jr., the Department of State 
prepared a detailed report on the history of the 
World Peace Council. Following are the texts 
of the Department's letter to Representative 
Powell dated May 27 and his reply of June 6. 



LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVE POWELL 

May 27, 1955 
Dear Mr. Powell: Your communication of 
May 4, 1955, receipt of which was acknowledged 
by telephone to your office on May 7, requested 
background information on the World Peace 
Council. 

With the thought that you would be interested 
in somewhat detailed information on the subject, 
the Department is replying herewith at some 
length. The letter and enclosure from the World 
Peace Council headquarters in Vienna which you 
thoughtfully transmitted to the Department are 
being returned with this letter, copies having been 
made for the Department files. 

It should be noted, as you may perhaps have 
become aware, that the meeting in Helsinki of 



July II, 7955 



79 



the World Peace Council-sponsored World As- 
sembly for Peace, originally scheduled to convene 
on May 22, has been postponed to June 22. 

The World Peace Council is the outgrowth of 
the Communist-sponsored World Congress of 
Intellectuals for Peace which was organized at 
Wroclow, Poland, in 1947, and the subsequent 
World Committee of Partisans of Peace organ- 
ized in April 1949. This committee was renamed 
the World Peace Council and its headquarters 
were established in Paris. After expulsion from 
Paris in 1951, the Council's headquarters were 
transferred first to Prague and subsequently to 
Vienna which is its present seat. 

Among the major international communist 
fronts, the World Peace Council has during the 
past few years emerged as one of the most active 
and influential. The executive officers of the 
World Peace Council constitute a group of indi- 
viduals who also are functionaries of such other 
Communist-front organizations as the World 
Federation of Trade Unions, the Women's Inter- 
national Democratic Federation, the World Fed- 
eration of Scientific Workers, and the Interna- 
tional Association of Democratic Lawyers. Some 
of these organizations are identified below. Not 
only does the World Peace Council coordinate its 
activities closely with Soviet policy, but it also 
serves to set the major themes and coordinates the 
"peace" campaigns of the world-wide Communist- 
front organizational apparatus. 

The World Peace Council is an assembly with 
some 400 seats. 77 of the seats belong to repre- 
sentatives of communist countries. The actual 
governing body is the Permanent Executive Bu- 
reau of 50 members, including a President and 
Secretary-General. The former, Professor Fred- 
eric Joliot-Curie, and the latter, Jean Lafitte, are 
both confirmed Communists. 

Collaborating organizations supporting World 
Peace Council programs include : 

The World Federation of Trade Unions 
(Wfttj). The Wfttj became a completely com- 
munist-dominated organization early in 1949, 
when the free unions seceded and formed their 
own organization. Nominal guidance comes from 
the World Trade Union Congresses, but real 
power rests with an 18-man Executive Bureau. 
Subordinate "Trade Departments" meet inde- 
pendently on an international scale, but serve 
primarily as propaganda adjuncts to the Wfttj. 



The World Federation of Democratic Youth 
(Wfdt), at first also a "non-political" movement, 
was isolated as communist-dominated in 1949, by 
which time most of its non-communist members 
had resigned and formed their own organization. 
The ruling group is an Executive Committee con- 
sisting of 23 officials. 

The International Union of Students (Ius), 
another arm of the Communist propaganda ap- 
paratus used by the World Peace Council is com- 
pletely dominated by Communists, even though 
it claims to represent the "democratic students of 
the whole world." Nominally the World Student 
Congress is the highest administrative body, but 
actual power resides in the Council and its smaller 
Executive Committee. 

To complete the list a number of other inter- 
national fronts may be cited which collaborate 
with the World Peace Council: Women's Inter- 
national Democratic Federation (Widf) ; Inter- 
national Federation of Resistance Fighters 
(Fie) ; International Association of Democratic 
Lawyers (Iadl) ; Committee for Promotion of 
International Trade (Cpit) ; International Or- 
ganization of Journalists (Ioj) ; World Federa- 
tion of Scientific Workers (Wfsw) ; Interna- 
tional Broadcasting Organization (Oir). 

Beginning in 1950, the World Peace Council 
has launched a series of world-wide campaigns 
involving collection of signatures for various ap- 
peals. Its current project of this nature is the 
so-called "Vienna Appeal Against Preparations 
for Atomic War", the text of which is as follows : 

Certain governments are today preparing to launch an 
atomic war. They are trying to make the peoples accept 
this as inevitable. The use of atomic weapons would 
result in a war of extermination. 

We declare that any government which unleashes 
atomic war will forfeit the confidence of its own people 
and find itself condemned by all nations. Now and in 
the future we will resist those who organize atomic war. 

We demand that all stocks of atomic weapons, wherever 
they may be, shall be destroyed and that their production 
shall cease immediately. 

The Vienna Appeal against atomic war was 
sponsored by 83 representatives representing 31 
countries. When Joliot-Curie presented it at a 
World Peace Council Bureau meeting in Vienna 
in January of this year he demanded that the 
signature campaign in its support "must start 
immediately." At a press conference after the 
Bureau meeting some of the more important par- 
ticipants in the World Peace Council stated that 



80 



Department of State Bulletin 



this appeal for one billion signatures "was not a 
propaganda campaign." 

Immediately after conclusion of the Vienna 
meeting preparations for the campaign started in 
France, Austria, East Germany, and Japan. In 
January the Cominform Journal endorsed the 
Vienna appeal with an article, "Struggle against 
Criminal Schemes of Atom Maniacs — Cause of all 
Peoples." 

The Vienna Appeal campaign is expected to 
serve as background for the Helsinki Conference. 
The conference itself will comprise the latest at- 
tempt of the World Peace Council to obtain par- 
ticipation of persons not previously associated 
with the World Peace Council and thus to acquire 
the appearance of legitimate and constructive ac- 
tivity in the interests of peace. 

The World Peace Assembly scheduled for Hel- 
sinki does not differ in kind from other post-war 
conferences of the World Peace Council. With- 
out exception, they are taken up with some aspect 
of the Soviet Union's peace campaign, e.g., out- 
lawry of the atomic bomb, five-power peace pacts 
and negotiations to end international disputes. 
These general appeals are usually linked to specific 
area problems (rearmament of Germany, armistice 
in Korea) or problems of special interest groups 
(speed-up and exploitation of workers in rearma- 
ment programs). The Peace Council invariably 
tries to influence non-Communists and attract 
them to their meetings. The major importance of 
these international Communist front peace meet- 
ings is not, paradoxically, the event itself. The 
meeting serves both as the climax to an intensive 
round of propaganda and agitation and often as 
the prelude to yet another round. And, in the 
same way, the intent of the meeting — to discuss 
"urgent questions relating to the struggle for 
peace" — is not the real intent, which has more to 
do with inoculating the people with a given set of 
prejudices and enthusiasms. 

An examination of Communist propaganda cen- 
tering on the "Vienna Appeal" for one billion sig- 
natures bears out these generalizations. There is 
a massive campaign going on within the Com- 
munist orbit not merely to collect signatures for 
the destruction of the bombs (for this routine is, 
of itself, of no practical importance) , but to con- 
vince the population of the "peaceful intentions" 
of the Soviet regime, its desire for disarmament 
and peaceful uses of atomic energy and for peace- 
ful settlement of international disputes in contrast 



to what is pictured as an aggressive United States 
policy which is described as testing and building 
bigger bombs, and calling into being a new Ger- 
man army directed against Eastern Europe. 

The campaign in the Communist areas is the 
occasion for another demonstration of the citizen's 
loyalty to the state, not merely in the form of his 
signature, but in his active participation in the 
campaign in pledging something concrete to the 
state. It is, in short, the kind of exercise that is 
intrinsic to a totalitarian state which can never 
take the loyalty of its citizens for granted and 
repeatedly resorts to contrived situations to shock 
and intimidate the population to greater per- 
formance. 

The collection of signatures in a Communist 
country is, therefore, not a mechanical affair. 
That is, the purpose is not merely to acquire a 
given quota of signatures. The Communists can 
announce any figure they please, as long as it is 
within reason, demographically speaking. What 
is more important for the Communist regime is to 
use the occasion to align their countries with the 
USSR in the "Vienna Appeal," to indoctrinate 
their citizens, to inoculate the population with 
anti-American feeling and to appeal for more pro- 
duction. The following excerpts from Communist 
propaganda illustrate the point: 

USSR (Radio Moscow) 

"The campaign (for the collection of signa- 
tures) must be conducted under the slogan of in- 
creased vigilance of the Soviet people against the 
intrigues of the war instigators, as well as under 
the sign of the mobilization of the efforts of the 
Soviet people for the further strengthening of the 
might of our Motherland and of winning further 
successes in their peaceful constructive labors." 

All Soviet people will respond as one man to the 
appeal of the Soviet peace committee. It can 
confidently be predicted that the campaign for the 
collection of signatures will be turned into a 
mighty demonstration of moral-political unity of 
our people, their solidarity around the Party and 
Government, the determination of the Soviet 
people to wage an untiring struggle for world 
peace against the imperialist warmongers. 

Czechoslovakia (Radio Prague) 

The statement of the central committee of the 
National Front calls on all the Czechoslovak 



July 11, 1955 



81 



people to fulfill their patriotic duty as conscious 
peace defenders and sign the appeal of the World 
Peace Council. 

The statement of the central committee of the 
National Front reads "Our struggle for peace is 
linked with diligent work, with the efforts to carry 
out the great tasks of the development of the na- 
tional economy in both industry and agriculture. 
Diligence in work, unselfishness, and the carrying 
out of working tasks is the most effective form of 
support for the struggle for the preservation of 
world peace. 

"We call on the citizens of the Republic to use 
all their strength, abilities, and skill in carrying 
out their tasks in the Socialist construction of the 
country. Each job well done, each job done on 
time, every improvement in production methods 
can be considered worthwhile contributions by our 
people to the struggle for peace and against the 
plans for atomic war. By earnest daily attention 
to work, the defense capacity of our republic will 
be strengthened." 

"On the occasion of the signing of the appeal, 
workers in Slovakia have made 167,109 pledges 
chiefly directed at raising agricultural and in- 
dustrial production." 

Communist China (Radio Moscow and Radio 
Peiping) 

"The collection of signatures to the appeal has 
become a nationwide campaign in China and one 
which is closely linked with the vital problems of 
safeguarding the security of our country and with 
the ardent desire to liberate Taiwan. We link the 
collection of signatures with our struggle for the 
liberation of Taiwan because those who seek to 
occupy Taiwan — which has been our territory 
from time immemorial — are also the chief insti- 
gators in the preparation of atomic war." 

"In response to the appeal of the World Peace 
Council, the Hopei Provincial Federation of Trade 
Unions and the Hopei Committee of the China 
New Democratic League called on workers and 
youths in the province to actively take part in 
the signature campaign against the use of atomic 
weapons. They also called for fulfillment of pro- 
duction assignments to support the liberation of 
Taiwan and peaceful uses of atomic energy." 

The positive affirmation demanded of the citi- 
zens is illustrated in a speech of Professor Gyorgy 
Lukacs at the Hungarian Fourth National Peace 



Congress charging the intellectuals with ". . . 
showing a very formalistic attitude toward the 
peace movement." They signed but, according to 
him, took no active part in the campaign, did not 
demonstrate to the world that the Hungarian 
people are free and prosperous, that the Hungar- 
ian Government is for peace and that it is sup- 
ported by millions of Hungarian people. There 
is little doubt that the act of signing is little 
more than a "formal" act not only for the intel- 
lectuals, but for others and not only in Hungary 
but in the entire Communist orbit as well. 

The success of the present Communist peace 
campaign in non-Communist areas will vary 
directly with its ability to involve non-Commu- 
nists. This point is made most clearly in an 
enlightening article about Communist organiza- 
tional techniques written by Emilio Sereni, a 
leading Italian Communist functionary. (For a 
Las fin;/ Peace, for a Peoples' Democracy ! March 
11, 1955, p. 5.) Sereni says that 

. . . for a Communist leader to do successful work in 
this campaign means that he must be able to do more than 
muster the maximum number of Communists in the local 
or provincial peace committee as canvassers ; above all, 
it means that he has to draw into this work the greatest 
possible number of Socialist comrades, of non-party 
people and members of other parties, whether or not 
they belong to any of the various mass organizations. 

It is only in this way that the peace movement can 
impress all citizens as a movement of the broadest politi- 
cal scope. . . . 

The United States has of course been actively 
engaged throughout the years since the war, in 
company with other nations, in seeking practical 
means of control of the production of atomic weap- 
ons. The many complex aspects of this impor- 
tant matter are constantly under study toward the 
end of providing for ourselves and all mankind 
in this nuclear age a tolerable security. Explora- 
tion into the peaceful uses of atomic energy is pro- 
viding a rich field of activity with promises of 
great benefit to man's physical standard of living 
and, even more importantly, to his spiritual and 
moral progress in learning how to utilize a force 
of potential mass destruction for the purposes 
of wide human advancement. In these studies 
and in international negotiations, this Govern- 
ment, sharing the desire of all men of good will 
for the establishment of peace, but mindful of the 
tragically illusory nature of any efforts purport- 
ing to be directed toward that end while actually 



82 



Department of State Bulletin 



aimed against the cause of freedom and human 
rights, is contributing its continuing efforts. 

There are evidences that in view of increasing 
public awareness of the spurious nature of the 
"peace" aims of the World Peace Council, its mask 
of legitimacy and respectability is becoming in- 
creasingly difficult to retain. As a particularly 
pertinent example, its exploitation in the interests 
of the Communist Party of the natural deep desire 
of all peoples for peace is detected and denounced 
in an editorial published in the Helsinki news- 
paper "Ilta Sanomat" of April 21, 1955, of which 
the following are excerpts in translation : 

At the moment there is being prepared a new demon- 
stration in the name of world peace, to take place at 
Helsinki in the latter weeks of May. It is organized by 
Communists led by the World Peace Council, having 
Vienna as its domicile. . . . The preservation of world 
peace is a matter for all people of the world, it is the 
cause of all humanity. It is nobody's monopoly, as certain 
circles at present believe, and least of all can it become 
a propaganda weapon under the disguise of which prep- 
aration is made for new unrest and a new war. 



Sincerely yours, 



Thrttston B. Morton 
Assistant Secretary 



MR. POWELL'S REPLY 

June 6, 1955 

Dear Mr. Morton: Thank you for your May 
27th communication in which you furnished back- 
ground information on the World Peace Council. 
Your attention to this matter is appreciated and 
I will abide by your advice. 
Very truly yours, 

Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. 
Metriber of Congress 



Exchangee Denied Permanent 
Residence Immigration Status 

Message from the President to the Senate x 

I return herewith, without my approval, S. 143, 
for the relief of Kurt Glaser. 

The bill would accord permanent residence im- 
migration status to a native of Czechoslovakia 
who entered this country in July 1951 from 



'Reprinted from S. Doc. 47, 84th Cong., 1st sess. 



Austria as an exchange visitor under one of the 
programs authorized by the United States Infor- 
mation and Educational Exchange Act of 1948. 

All of the exchange programs are founded upon 
good faith. We can maintain them as effective 
instruments for promoting international under- 
standing and good will only if we insist that the 
participants honor their commitments to observe 
the conditions of the exchange in the same way 
that they expect the United States to honor its 
obligations to them. On the one hand, exchange 
aliens must return to the country from which they 
came. On the other hand, the United States must 
not permit either immediate reentry or other eva- 
sion of the return rule. Otherwise, the countries 
from which our exchange visitors come will real- 
ize little or no benefit from the training and ex- 
perience received in the United States, and we 
shall fail to promote good will toward and better 
understanding of our way of life. 

Unfortunately, the United States Information 
and Educational Exchange Act does not specifi- 
cally obligate exchange personnel to return to the 
country from which admitted and to remain there 
for a minimum period before being eligible to re- 
gain admission to the United States. Adminis- 
trative requirements have been imposed to com- 
pensate for this lack of a specific statutory require- 
ment. Within the last year, however, a number 
of cases have arisen in which humanitarian and 
equitable considerations have argued so per- 
suasively against imposing such a requirement 
that the Congress has been willing to consider and 
to enact a number of private bills to adjust the 
status of exchange personnel. By permitting them 
to remain in the United States for permanent 
residence, these bills have granted them immigra- 
tion status without regard to the normal proce- 
dures under our immigration laws. 

Up to the present time, most of the circum- 
stances which have led to the enactment of each 
bill have been exceptional. Even though I have 
recognized that the principle underlying each bill 
was at variance with the basic concept and phil- 
osophy of the exchange programs, I have not been 
willing to require deportation at the possible risk 
of creating undue hardship and, in several cases, 
of jeopardizing the safety of the individual 
concerned. 

Such considerations are not present in the case 
of Mr. Glaser. I am satisfied that both he and 
his sponsor understood their obligations to ter- 



July 11, 1955 



83 



minate his stay. In fact, the State Department's 
records indicate that a basic purpose of the spon- 
soring company in seeking exchange visitors was 
to train foreign engineers in the company's spe- 
cialty in cooperation with the International 
Center of the University of Louisville. Further- 
more, certification was signed by the vice president 
of the company in which the following appears : 

An attempt will be made to insure, insofar as possible, 
that any exchange visitor coming under the program of 
the sponsoring agency will adhere to the conditions under 
which he was admitted to the United States and will 
depart from the United States on completion of the pur- 
pose of the visit. 

Finally, there is no evidence that a return to 
Austria will work any hardship on either the 
company or Mr. Glaser beyond that of disrupting 
an association which has proved productive, use- 
ful, friendly, and profitable. 

Under the circumstances, therefore, I feel it is 
my duty to disapprove this bill and at the same 
time to recommend enactment by the Congress 
of a clear statutory requirement that exchange 
personnel return home and remain there for a 
minimum period before being eligible to reenter 
the United States for permanent residence. Such 
provisions of law will protect the purposes of the 
exchange program, will prevent unjustifiable eva- 
sion of immigration procedures, and will establish 
legislative policy to guide the committees of Con- 
gress in taking action on future private bills 
which would set aside the general law. Legisla- 
tion for this purpose has been forwarded to the 
Congress by the Department of State this week. 
I urge its prompt consideration. 

Dwight D. Eisenhower. 
The White House, June 3, 1955. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Technology Agreements With Greece, 
Netherlands, and Norway 

Press release 365 dated Jime 17 

The Secretary of State announced on June 17 
the signing of agreements with Greece, the Neth- 
erlands, and Norway to facilitate the exchange of 



patent rights and technical information for de- 
fense purposes. 

The agreement with Greece was signed at 
Athens on June 16. The agreement with Norway 
was signed at Oslo on April 6 and the agreement 
with the Netherlands at The Hague on April 29. 
The agreement with the Netherlands is in force 
only provisionally until the Government of the 
United States is notified that the approval con- 
stitutionally required in the Netherlands has been 
obtained. 

These bilateral agreements are expected to 
foster the exchange of technology for defense 
purposes between the governments and between 
the private industries of the respective contract- 
ing countries. Thus they should prove of recipro- 
cal benefit in providing for national defense and 
in contributing to the mutual defense of the North 
Atlantic Treaty area. 

The agreements with Norway, the Netherlands, 
and Greece are the latest to be signed to date of a 
series being negotiated with the Nato countries 
and with Japan. Other agreements of this nature 
have been signed with Italy, 1 the United King- 
dom, 2 and Belgium. 3 

The agreements recognize that privately owned 
technology should, to the greatest extent prac- 
ticable, be exchanged through commercial agree- 
ments between owners and users. They also 
stipulate that rights of private owners of patents 
and technical information should be fully recog- 
nized and protected in accordance with laws ap- 
plicable to such rights. Other provisions are 
intended to assure fair treatment of private own- 
ers when they deal directly with a foreign govern- 
ment and in cases in which private information 
communicated through government channels 
might be used or disclosed without authorization. 
The agreements also provide for the establishment 
of arrangements by which owners of patentable 
inventions placed under secrecy by one govern- 
ment may obtain comparable protection in the 
other country. 

The agreements also provide as a general rule 
that government-owned inventions shall be inter- 
changed for defense purposes on a royalty-free 
basis. 



1 Oct. 3, 1902 ; provisionally in force. 

2 Jan. 19, 1953. For text see Treaties and Other Inter- 
national Acts Series 2773. 

8 Bulletin of Nov. 8, 1954, p. 712. 



84 



Department of State Bulletin 



Each of the agreements provides for the estab- 
lishment of a Technical Property Committee to 
be composed of a representative of each govern- 
ment. These committees are charged with gen- 
eral responsibility for considering and making 
recommendations on any matters relating to the 
agreements brought before them by either govern- 
ment either on their own behalf or on behalf of 
their nationals. One of the specific functions of 
the committee is to make recommendations to the 
governments, either in particular cases or in gen- 
eral, concerning disparities in their laws affecting 
the compensation of owners of patents and tech- 
nical information. 

The U.S. representative to the Technical Prop- 
erty Committees in Europe is assigned to the staff 
of the Defense Adviser, U.S. Mission to the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Re- 
gional Organizations (Usro), 2 Rue St. Florentin, 
Paris. 

Policy guidance for the U.S. representatives on 
the Technical Property Committees is provided by 
the Interagency Technical Property Committee 
for Defense, chaired by the Department of 
Defense and including representatives of the 
Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce; the 
Foreign Operations Administration ; and the Gov- 
ernment Patents Board. This committee is 
assisted by an industry advisory group repre- 
senting major sectors of American industry con- 
cerned with defense production. 



Military Assistance Agreement 
With Guatemala 

Press release 367 dated June 20 

The Departments of State and Defense an- 
nounced on June 20 that a bilateral military as- 
sistance agreement was signed with the Govern- 
ment of Guatemala on June 18. 

This agreement is the twelfth of its kind to be 
signed between the United States and a Latin 
American Republic and is consistent with, and 
conforms to, inter-American instruments already 
in effect, such as the Inter- American Treaty of 
Reciprocal Assistance (the Rio Treaty), the reso- 
lution on Inter-American Military Cooperation 
approved at the Washington Meeting of Foreign 
Ministers of 1951, and the continuous planning of 
the Inter- American Defense Board. 



The provision of military grant aid by the 
United States, in accordance with the agreements 
concluded with Latin American countries, is au- 
thorized by the Mutual Security Act and is in- 
tended to assist in the development of the capabil- 
ity of the countries concerned to join in perform- 
ing missions important to the collective defense of 
the Western Hemisphere. 



Surplus Commodity Agreement 
Signed With Colombia 

Press release 386 dated June 24 

Representatives of the Governments of Colom- 
bia and the United States signed an agreement at 
Bogota on June 23, 1955, for the sale and delivery 
to Colombia of surplus agricultural commodities, 
having a total value, including transportation 
costs, of about $5,300,000. 

These commodities will be made available pur- 
suant to title I of the Agriculture Trade Develop- 
ment and Assistance Act (Public Law 480, 83d 
Congress) . This sale will help to meet deficiencies 
in the normal Colombian supply of these com- 
modities. 

Payment for these commodities will be made in 
Colombian currency, some of which has been set 
aside for the use of the U.S. Government in the 
development of agricultural markets in Colombia, 
the payment of expenses of U.S. agencies in Co- 
lombia, and the carrying out of student exchange 
programs between the United States and 
Colombia. 



Current Actions 



MULTILATERAL 

Agriculture 

International plant protection convention. Done at Rome 
December 6, 1951. Entered into force April 3, 1952. 1 
Ratification deposited: Guatemala, May 25, 1955. 

Austria 

State treaty for the re-establishment of an independent 
and democratic Austria. Signed at Vienna May 15, 
1955. 2 

Ratification deposited: Austria, June 14, 1955. 
Ratified by the President: June 24, 1955. 
Ratification deposited: United States, July 9, 1955. 



1 Not in force for the United States. 

2 Not in force. 



July 11, 1955 



85 



Narcotic Drugs 

Protocol for limiting and regulating the cultivation of the 
poppy plant, the production of, international and whole- 
sale trade in, and use of opium. Dated at New York 
June 23, 1953. 2 
Ratification deposited: Philippines, June 1, 1955. 

Postal Matters 

Universal postal convention, with final protocol, annex, 
regulations of execution, and provisions regarding air- 
mail and final protocol thereto. Signed at Brussels 
July 11, 1952. Entered into force July 1, 1953. TIAS 
2800. 
Ratification deposited : Poland, June 3, 1955. 



BILATERAL 

Canada 

Agreement amending the agreement of November 4 and 8, 
1952, as amended (TIAS 2503 and 2810), regarding 
communication facilities in the vicinity of Stephenville, 
Newfoundland. Effected by exchange of notes at 
Ottawa March 31 and June 8, 1955. Entered into force 
June 8, 1955. 

China 

Agreement amending the annex to the agreement of May 
14, 1954, as amended (TIAS 2979 and 3215), relating 
to the loan of small naval craft to China. Effected by 
exchange of notes at Taipei June 18, 1955. Entered into 
force June 18, 1955. 

Colombia 

Agricultural commodities agreement pursuant to title I 
of Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act 
of 1954 (68 Stat. 454, 455). Signed at Bogota June 23, 
1955. Entered into force June 23, 1955. 

Ecuador 

Reciprocal trade agreement. Signed at Quito August 6, 
193S. Modified by exchange of notes at Quito March 2, 
1942. 53 Stat. (Pt. 3) 1951 and 56 Stat. 1472. 
Termination by the United States postponed:* July 8, 
1955. 

Greece 

Agreement amending the educational exchange program 
agreement of April 23, 1948, as amended (TIAS 1751 



2 Not in force. 

3 By a note of July S, 1955, the United States withdrew 
its notice of termination given Jan. 18, 1955, which would 
have terminated the agreement on July IS, 1955. However, 
the United States intends to give a new notice of termina- 
tion on July 18, 1955, which, by the provisions of article 
XIX, will terminate the agreement on Jan. IS, 1956, 
thereby providing, in effect, a 6 months* postponement of 
the termination of the agreement. 



Correction 

Bulletin of July 4, 1955, page 37 — In the entry 
under Austria on Senate advice and consent to rati- 
fication, the date should be June 17, 1955. 



and 3037). Effected by exchange of notes at Athens 
March 12 and June 4, 1955. Entered into force June 4, 
1955. 

Guatemala 

Military assistance agreement. Signed at Guatemala 
June 18, 1955. Entered into force June 18, 1955. 

Honduras 

Agreement providing for investment guaranties author- 
ized by section 413 (b) (4) of Mutual Security Act of 
1954 (68 Stat. 846-847). Effected by exchange of notes 
at Tegucigalpa April 22 and June 10, 1955. Entered 
into force June 10, 1955. 

Israel 

Supplementary agreement to the agricultural commodities 
agreement of April 29, 1955. Signed at Washington June 
15, 1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955. 

Japan 

Agreement on agricultural commodities, with agreed offi- 
cial minutes and exchange of notes. Signed at Tokyo 
May 31, 1955. 

Entered into force: June 25, 1955 (date of receipt by the 
United States of Japanese approval). 

Norway 

Agreement amending the agreement of May 25, 1949, as 
amended (TIAS 2000 and 3118), establishing the educa- 
tional exchange program. Effected by exchange of notes 
at Oslo June 15, 1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955. 

Syria 

Air transport agreement. Signed at Damascus April 28, 
1947. 1 

Entered into force: June 21, 1955 (date the United 
States given notification of approval by Syria). 

Yugoslavia 

Agreement amending the surplus agricultural commodi- 
ties agreement of January 5, 1955 (TIAS 3167). Ef- 
fected by exchange of notes at Belgrade May 12, 1955. 
Entered into force May 12, 1955. 

Agreement relating to the disposition of redistributable 
and excess military assistance property in Yugoslavia. 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Belgrade May 
19 and 22, 1955. Entered into force May 22, 1955. 



4 Agreement has been in force provisionally since Apr. 
28, 1947. 



86 



Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



July 11, 1955 Ind 

Asia. Treatment of Far Eastern Questions at Heads of 

Government Meeting 50 

Atomic Energy 

Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of 

Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 

U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59 

Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text of 

agreement) 55 

Data on Atomic Radiation (Lodge) 54 

U.S. Delegations to International Conferences (U.N. Con- 
ference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy) ... 64 

Austria. Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immi- 
gration Status (Presidential message) 83 

Belgium. Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on 
Civil Uses of Atomic Energy (Eisenhower state- 
ment) 58 

Burma. Visit of Prime Minister U Nu (Dulles) .... 50 

Canada 

Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses 

of Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) ... 58 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 

U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59 

China. Treatment of Far Eastern Questions at Heads of 

Government Meeting (Dulles) 50 

Claims and Property. Application for Proceedings Against 
U.S.S.R. for Destruction of B-29 off Hokkaido in 
1952 (text of application) 65 

Colombia. Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed With 

Colombia 85 

Communism. World Peace Council (Morton and Powell) . 79 

Congress, The 

Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immigration 

Status (Presidential message) 83 

Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims 

(Murphy and Dulles) 69 

World Peace Council (Morton and Powell) 79 

Economic Affairs. Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed 

With Colombia 85 

Educational Exchange. Exchangee Denied Permanent 
Residence Immigration Status (Presidential mes- 
sage) 83 

Europe 

Delegation to Heads of Government Meeting at Geneva . 49 

European Security System (Dulles) 53 

France. U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With Yugo- 
slavia (text of joint communique) 49 

Germany 

German Reunification (Dulles) 51 

Germany in the Free World (Murphy) 43 

Greece. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether- 
lands, and Norway 84 

Guatemala. Military Assistance Agreement With Guate- 
mala 85 

Health, Education, and Welfare. Geneva Conventions for 

Protection of War Victims (Murphy and Dulles) . . 69 

Immigration and Naturalization. Exchangee Denied Per- 
manent Residence Immigration Status (Presidential 
message) 83 

International Organizations and Meetings. U.S. Delegations 
to International Conferences (U.N. Conference on 
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy) 64 

Military Affairs. Application for Proceedings Against 
U.S.S.R. for Destruction of B-29 off Hokkaido in 
1952 (text of application) 65 

Mutual Security 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 

U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59 

Military Assistance Agreement With Guatemala ... 85 

Netherlands. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether- 
lands, and Norway 84 

Norway. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether- 
lands, and Norway 84 

Presidential Documents 

Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of 

Atomic Energy 58 

Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immigration 

Status 83 

Treaty Information 

Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of 

Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 

U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59 

Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text of agree- 
ment) 55 

Current Actions 85 

Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims 

(Murphy and Dulles) 69 

Military Assistance Agreement With Guatemala ... 85 

Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed With Colombia . 85 

Technology Agreements With Greece, Netherlands, and 

Norway 84 



e X Vol. XXXIII, No. 837 

Turkey. Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text 

of agreement) 55 

U.S.S.R. 

Application for Proceedings Against U.S.S.R. for Destruc- 
tion of B-29 off Hokkaido in 1952 (text of applica- 
tion) 65 

Bering Sea Plane Incident (Dulles) 52 

United Kingdom 

Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of 

Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58 

Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and 

U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59 

U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With Yugoslavia 

(text of joint communique) 49 

United Nations 

Assessment of San Francisco Meeting (Dulles) .... 50 

Data on Atomic Radiation (Lodge) 54 

Viet-Nam. Elections in Viet-Nam (Dulles) 50 

Yugoslavia. U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With 

Yugoslavia (text of joint communique) 49 

Name Index 

Dulles. Secretary 50, 51, 52, 53, 71 

Eisenhower, President 58, 59, 62, 83 

Lodge, Henry Cabot. Jr 54 

Morton, Thruston B 79 

Murphy, Robert 43, 69 

Nu, U 50 

Powell, Clayton, Jr 83 

Wilson, Charles E 59, 62 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: June 27-July 3 

Releases may be obtained from the News Division,. 
Department of State, Washington 25, D. C. 

Press releases issued prior to June 27 which appear in 
this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 311 of June 3, 326 of 
June 7, 365 of June 17, 367, 369, and 370 of June 20, and 
3S6 and 387 of June 24. 

Subject 

9th Foreign Service Selection Boards. 

Note to U.S.S.R. on Fr. Bissonnette. 

Dulles: assessment of San Francisco meet- 
ing. 

Plans for visiting Soviet agriculturists. 

Delegation of Soviet agriculturists. 

Dulles : elections in Viet-Xam. 

Dulles : visit of Prime Minister TJ Nu. 

Dulles : Far Eastern questions. 

Dulles : German reunification. 

Dulles : Bering Sea plane incident. 

Dulles : European security system. 

Termination date of Ecuadoran trade agree- 
ment. 

U.S.-Swiss supplementary trade agreement. 

Delegation to ECOSOC (rewrite). 

Educational exchange. 

Renegotiation of tariff concessions with 
Austria and France. 

Public exhibit of Great Seal. 

U.S.-German mutual defense assistance 
agreement. 

Dulles : establishment of ICA. 

Nonimmigrant visa regulations. 

Note to U.S.S.R. on documentation for non- 
official visitors. 

Atoms-for-peace agreement with Sweden. 

Dulles : exhibit of Great Seal. 

Atoms-for-peace agreement with Peru. 

U.S.-French educational exchange agreement. 

Atoms-for-peace agreement with Korea. 

Inter-American Bank for Economic Develop- 
ment. 



No. 


Date 


f391 


6/27 


f302 


6/28 


393 


6/28 


*394 


6/28 


*395 


6/28 


396 


6/28 


397 


6/28 


39S 


6/28 


399 


6/2S 


400 


6/28 


401 


6/28 


t402 


6/28 


t403 


6/29 


t404 


6/30 


*405 


6/30 


,406 


6/30 


*407 


6/30 


t408 


6/30 


1409 


6/30 


t410 


7/1 


T411 


7/1 


*412 


7/1 


t413 


7/1 


*414 


7/1 


,415 


7/1 


*416 


7/1 


t417 


7/1 



*Not printed. 

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 




Department 

of 

State 



Order Form 

To: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



$. 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, S300 

(GPOI 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy 



Pub. 5888 



150 



An illustrated layman's guide to "The Atoms-for-Peace Pro- 
gram" to which President Eisenhower has committed the 
Nation, pledging it before the United Nations General As- 
sembly "to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way 
by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be 
dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life." 

The pamphlet offers a concise account of the history and 
development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. These 
are some of the subjects treated : 

The Promise of Atomic Energy 

The Origin of the Atoms-for-Peace Program 

The Background of the U.S. Proposals 

The United Nations Atoms-for-Peace Resolution 

The International Atomic Energy Agency — its origin, 

development, status, and future activities 
The International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of 

Atomic Energy 
Education and Training in Atomic Reactor Technology — 

which includes a description of the reactor school at 

Argonne National Laboratory and Aec's school for 

isotope study at Oak Ridge 

Copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy may be purchased 
for 15 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. 
Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. 



Please send me copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 






~>RY 



*JAe/ zileficwtwient/ ,cfl trtafa 




r ol. XXXIII, No. 838 
July 18, 1955 




HOW WE WORK WITH OTHER NATIONS • by John 

F. Simmons, Chief of Protocol 91 

OPENING OF THE PUBLIC EXHIBIT OF THE SEAL 
OF THE UNITED STATES • Remarks by Secretary 
Dulles 94 

AMERICAN-ISRAEL FRIENDSHIP • Address by Attorney 

General Brownell 97 

IMPORTANCE OF INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL IN 

ADVANCING WORLD PEACE • Address by Secretary 

of Commerce Weeks 106 

DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON SUGAR LEGISLATION • 

Statement by Assistant Secretary Holland 120 

VISIT OF U NU, PRIME MINISTER OF BURMA 

Address to Senate 95 

Address to House of Representatives 95 

Joint Statement by Prime Minister U iVu and President 

Eisenhower 96 

THE FOREIGN TRADE POLICY OF THE UNITED 

STATES • by Ben H. Thibodeaux 110 



For index see inside back cover 



Boston Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

AUG 1 1 1955 




'■«»*» O* 



bulletin 



Vol. XXXIII,No.838 • Publication 5927 
July 18, 1955 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Price: 

62 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25 

Single copy. 20 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
or State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication issued by the 
Public Services Division, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government icith information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
selected press releases on foreign pol- 
icy, issued by the White House and 
the Department, and statements and 
addresses made by the President and 
by the Secretary of State and other 
officers of the Department, as well as 
special articles on various phases of 
international affairs and the func- 
tions of the Department. Informa- 
tion is included concerning treaties 
and international agreements to 
which the United States is or may 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



How We Work With Other Nations 



by John F. Simmons 
Chief of Protocol x 



Any meeting of the National 4-H Club is of 
interest to those of us who work professionally 
in international relations. This silver anniver- 
sary of your camp, however, has a special signifi- 
cance. It is the culmination of 25 years of prac- 
tical application to the tasks of citizenship and 
community service. As such it affirms the values, 
and deepens the meaning, of the principles our 
Nation has chosen to follow in the conduct of its 
foreign relations. 

American foreign policy is based on the char- 
acter of the American people, on the use they make 
of their heritage of cultural and political free- 
dom, and on their understanding of the actions 
necessary to protect their way of life. Years ago 
a Secretary of State defined it very simply. 
American foreign policy, he said, is the projection 
of the will of the American people beyond the 
borders of our country. What is basic here is an 
informed citizenry, a citizenry on the alert for 
problems and dangers and with practice in ap- 
proaching them in a human, American way. 

You can understand that I consider the record 
celebrated in your silver anniversary a reassuring 
one. As it happens, I have spent more than half 
of my life in the United States Foreign Service. 
I know that I draw strength and confidence from 
your example. When the Young America which 
you represent takes such an active interest in good 
government and in promoting friendly relations 
with foreign governments and foreign peoples, I 
have the feeling that our future will be in good 
hands. I am confident that more and more Amer- 
icans will find, as you have found at an early age, 



1 Address made before the 25th anniversary meeting 
of the National 4-H Club of America at Washington, 
D. C, on June 17 (press release 364). 

July 78, J 955 



the rich satisfactions of working personally to im- 
prove our international relations. 

In this regard there is much to be done. It is 
easy, so dangerously easy, to forget how important 
our personal attitudes are to the projection of 
American foreign policy. In the rush of modern 
life, many of us are apt to adopt a parochial at- 
titude toward foreigners. We have so much to do 
here at home that foreign relations have a tend- 
ency to become abstract and far away from our 
everyday lives. Without a continuing effort on 
our part, we could lapse readily into a state of 
indifference toward our dealings with other lands. 

To an internationally minded group such as 
yours, I need not expand on the difficulties that 
would be created by that state of mind if it became 
general throughout our country. We know that 
in the world of today there is no such thing as 
self-sufficiency. Our well-being depends upon the 
good will of other nations, as theirs depends upon 
us. This little planet, the third from the sun, has 
shrunk under the pressure of modern technology 
to the point where all peoples are neighbors, for 
better or for worse. It behooves us to do every- 
thing within our power to make ourselves good 
neighbors. For a long time to come, human sym- 
pathy and personal friendliness will have high 
values in our international affairs. 

When I was asked to talk to you on "How We 
Work With Other Nations," I felt alarmed at the 
scope of the subject. How could so much be cov- 
ered in so short a time? Then I found encour- 
agement in the memory of something that hap- 
pened a few years ago. I was rummaging 
through some old family papers in my home and 
ran across an English composition notebook of my 
great-grandfather, written when he was 14. This 
notebook covered a number of subjects which my 
revered ancestor did not hesitate to dispose of 



91 



completely within the space of 2 or 3 pages. One 
of these subjects bore the modest title, "The Cre- 
ation and Subsequent Events." 

Making Foreign Policy 

Properly chastened by the comparison, let me 
turn now to my little subject of "How We Work 
With Other Nations." The basic answer, of 
course, is that the President is the man who makes 
the decisions about our Nation's foreign policy. 
Only he may present programs to the Congress or 
decide which countries we shall recognize diplo- 
matically and which countries we shall not rec- 
ognize. At his right hand is the Secretary of 
State, his chief adviser on foreign affairs and the 
highest ranking member of the Cabinet. 

Secretary Dulles and his Department formulate 
and plan the broad aspects of new policy pro- 
grams. He and his staff take the national policies 
approved by the President and give them the spe- 
cific shape of foreign policies that can be put into 
action. Each new policy decision must be fitted 
into a body of previous decisions which have been 
the basis of agreement between the United States 
and other nations. As you know, the treaties and 
other agreements to which the United States is a 
party are the legal framework within which our 
foreign policy operates. 

Mo9t of the detailed action on foreign policy is 
also carried out by the Department of State — with 
the aid and cooperation, I hasten to add, of more 
than a score of major departments and agencies 
in the executive branch. Among the Depart- 
ment's functions are those of negotiating treaties 
and agreements, of representing our Nation at 
other seats of government throughout the world, 
of organizing and taking part in international 
conferences, and of handling day-to-day business 
with foreign governments. The latter function is 
carried out by our Foreign Service in 76 foreign 
countries. 

We have in Washington 69 embassies and 10 
legations. This total of 79 countries represented 
here exceeds by three the number of countries to 
which we have accredited ambassadors and min- 
isters. The apparent discrepancy is due to the 
fact that the three Baltic States of Estonia, Lat- 
via, and Lithuania, still recognized by us, no 
longer enjoy an independent status, although each 
of the three still maintains a legation in this 
country. 



Maintaining Friendly Relations 

Our friendly relations with other countries are 
vital. How do we maintain those relations? We 
have, of course, our own Foreign Service, a group 
of devoted men and women who have dedicated 
their lives to the service of their country. They 
represent the frontline of our foreign policy. It 
is they who do the spade work and who deal di- 
rectly with the day-by-day problems which arise. 
They submit to Washington their reports and ap- 
praisals of conditions abroad. Their activities 
cover many fields, including political and eco- 
nomic reporting, cultural relations, and technical 
aid. 

Then we have the United Nations, about which 
the Secretary of State said, in a recent speech, 

The people of the United States believe wholeheartedly 
in the purposes and the principles set out in the Charter 
of the United Nations. That document marks a mile- 
stone in the understanding of the nature of peace. It 
recognizes that peace is not a passive concept but a call 
to action. It is not enough to dislike war and to denounce 
it. War has been hated throughout the ages. Yet war 
has been recurrent throughout the ages. One reason is 
that men have never put into the winning of peace efforts 
comparable to those which they put into the winning of 
a war. 

In the Western Hemisphere the Organization of 
American States has given a marvelous example 
of Western Hemisphere cooperation and friend- 
ship. It has shown how neighbors can live like 
neighbors and how disputes may be settled with- 
out recourse to war. This organization was based 
upon a long tradition of cooperation for freedom 
and peace in this hemisphere. Elsewhere we have 
such recently organized entities as the Mutual 
Security Program, the Pacific Charter, the Manila 
Pact, the Southeast Asia Treaty, the North At- 
lantic Treaty, the Rio de Janeiro Treaty, and 
many others. These provide the machinery for 
maintaining peace, based on strength, in many 
parts of the world where Communist aggression 
is not an abstraction but a reality to be faced. 

One form of international cooperation which 
is perhaps not so spectacular as others is our 
program of cultural and educational exchanges 
with other countries. This is on a reciprocal basis 
and includes the sending abroad of an increasingly 
large number of selected American students, pro- 
fessors, and lecturers. This program is of vital 
importance. It means that ever-increasing num- 
bers of foreign people get to know and form 



92 



Department of State Bulletin 



friendships with Americans. This type of ex- 
change of persons, in our own case, is having won- 
derful results in dispelling international sus- 
picions and in building up an atmosphere abroad 
which is a basis for maintaining peace. It is a 
fine contribution to the friendship of the peoples 
of the world. 

That is the broad picture of how we work with 
other nations. In no part of it do we get away 
from people, from men and women who are loyal 
to their homelands just as we are loyal to ours. 
It has been my privilege for the past 5 years, as 
Chief of Protocol, to deal on a day-by-day basis 
with all the representatives of foreign nations who 
are stationed here in Washington. Judging by 
the fine caliber of this group and their staffs, it is 
apparent that Washington must be considered by 
the various countries represented here as a key 
post in their diplomatic services. I have been 
greatly privileged at the opportunity of dealing 
with and forming friendships with such outstand- 
ing personalities. It is they, together with our 
own ambassadors, ministers, and consuls abroad, 
who bear the main burden of carrying out the 
intricate relations between foreign countries and 
the United States. 

Visits of Foreign Officials 

An important part of our foreign relations con- 
sists in the visits to this country of a growing num- 
ber of high foreign officials. Within the past 5 
years such visitors have included the reigning 
monarchs of Greece, Iran, Netherlands; the 
Crown Prince of Japan ; the Governor General of 
Canada; Princess (now Queen) Elizabeth of 
Great Britain; Crown Prince (now King) Saud 
al Saud of Saudi Arabia; the Queen Mother of 
Great Britain ; Chancellor Adenauer of Germany ; 
and the Prime Ministers of most of the countries 
with which we have friendly relations. Each of 
these visits has been instrumental in improving 
our close ties with other parts of the world. 

The most recent of these visits, which is taking 
place during the present week, is that of Chan- 
cellor Adenauer. I hope that you will permit me, 
in connection with this visit, to recount to you 
briefly a little-known historical incident. This 
incident occurred in Cologne, Germany, in April 
1933, while I was stationed there as American 
Consul. Dr. Adenauer w 7 as the Mayor of Cologne 
and was naturally a close personal friend of mine. 



By way of background, Hitler had come into 
power in January 1933, but the national flag of 
Germany was still the red, black, and gold flag 
now used. The swastika flag was adopted for 
Hitler Germany only at a later date. 

As I was driving to my office early on that April 
morning, I noticed to my surprise that the four 
towers of the Hohenzollern Railway Bridge over 
the Rhine at Cologne displayed four swastika 
Nazi flags. On inquiry, I found that they had 
been placed there during the night by some Nazi 
enthusiasts, who had apparently climbed up the 
towers for that purpose. Dr. Adenauer, hearing 
of this, lost no time in performing a most coura- 
geous act. He had the flags removed, and he 
issued immediately a public statement to the citi- 
zens of Cologne, published in the local morning 
press. The statement was moderate in tone. It 
explained that the flags had been removed not 
through disrespect to any German political party 
but because he, as Mayor, would permit only the 
German national flag to be flown over any bridge 
in Cologne. 

The party reaction was immediate. A group 
of Nazi leaders served themselves on Mayor 
Adenauer in his office at 11 o'clock that very morn- 
ing. What they said to him and what he an- 
swered have not come to light. What we know is 
that he ceased being Mayor of Cologne that very 
day and retired into the obscurity of a monastery 
for the rest of the prewar and war period. This 
incident, to my mind, illustrates the remarkable 
character of the man whom the entire free world 
now admires so greatly as an outstanding inter- 
national leader. 

People-to-People Diplomacy 

I have been fortunate in making many other 
fine friendships during my years in the Foreign 
Service. I am deeply grateful for my opportu- 
nities to do so, and, if you will think back with 
me over what I have been saying to you, you will 
know that that is the real reason why I have put 
the conclusion of my speech first. International 
relations comes down to people, for governments 
are made up of people and agreements between 
states can be achieved only through the human 
beings who represent those states. 

Many have the impression that protocol, my 
present specialty, has to do merely with ritual and 
correct manners at social functions. That impres- 
sion is about as wrong as any impression can be. 



July 18, 7955 



93 



Protocol among nations is rooted in a sound knowl- 
edge of human relationships. It is basically prac- 
tical and purposeful. It reflects mutual respect 
and consideration. It is the mode of behavior 
most favorable to the achievement of understand- 
ing and cooperation. 

The Protocol Staff of the Department of State 
has the responsibility of seeing that all interna- 
tional courtesies and formalities required of the 
United States Government are properly met and 
that they are carried out with consideration and 
care and without unfortunate incident. As Chief 
of that Staff I can assure you that this means meet- 
ing the people of other lands with courtesy and 
friendliness and sharing with them the mutual 
respect of good manners. 

I could wish for the young people of the 4-H 
Club no better luck than the rich satisfactions I 
have had through the use of that simple formula. 
I hoj>e that you will remember it and make it a 
part of your international programs. 



U.S. Deposits Ratification 
of Austrian State Treaty 

Press release 424 dated July 9 

The Charge d'Affaires ad interim of the Ameri- 
can Embassy at Moscow, Walter N. Walmsley, Jr., 
on July 9 handed to the Deputy Foreign Minister 
of the U. S. S. R, V. A. Zorin, the instrument of 
ratification of the Austrian State Treaty of the 
Government of the United States. 1 By this act 
the United States has completed the process of 
ratification of the treaty which was signed by 
Austria, Britain, France, the U. S. S. R., and the 
United States in Vienna on May 15, 1955. The 
Senate of the United States approved the treaty 
on June 17, and the instrument of ratification was 
signed by President Eisenhower on June 24. 

The Austrian State Treaty provides for the re- 
establishment of an independent and democratic 
Austria. Under article 38 of the treaty the Gov- 
ernment of the U. S. S. R. was named as the de- 
pository of the instruments of ratification. The 
treaty comes into force immediately upon deposit 
of these instruments by the five signatory powers. 



1 For text of treaty, see Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 916. 



94 



Opening of the Public Exhibit of 
the Seal of the United States 

On July 1, in the lobby of the New State Build- 
ing, Secretary Dulles opened the first public ex- 
hibit of the Seal of the United States. Following 
is the text of his remarks (press release Jfl3 dated 
July 1). 

This is a proud moment for me as Secretary of 
State to participate in this commemoration of the 
Seal of the United States. This Seal typifies the 
continuity of all the basic qualities, the liberty 
and welfare of man, the resolute search for peace 
with freedom and justice, that have made our 
country great. 

In 17S9 the Secretary of State was designated by 
the Congress as the keeper of the Seal of the 
United States. So, from the very first year of the 
Eepublic, the keeping of the Great Seal — as it is so 
often called — has been entrusted to the safekeep- 
ing of the Secretary of State. Thomas Jefferson 
was the first to be responsible for the Seal. In 
the course of the 166 years that have passed since 
then, the Seal has been affixed to countless thou- 
sands of documents, in strict accordance with the 
Congressional Act of 17S9. A copy of that Act 
of Congress is also on exhibit here today. 

I would like to call attention to another docu- 
ment of great historical interest likewise on ex- 
hibit. That is the earliest known document on 
which a Seal of the United States, the Confedera- 
tion, was impressed, and is a commission dated 
September 16, 1782, granting full power and au- 
thority to Gen. George Washington to arrange 
with the British for the exchange of prisoners of 
war. 

Beginning today the Seal will be on view here 
in the State Department in a glass room specially 
prepared for it on the north balcony of this lobby. 
At a specified hour on each workday such docu- 
ments as require the Seal will have it impressed 
upon them in public view. 

Over and above its practical and continuing pur- 
pose, the Seal has, in the course of time, come to 
be a symbol of the growth and stability of the 
United States. All of us in the Department of 
State take pride in the custodianship of the Seal 
and the reminder that goes with it of our responsi- 
bilities in safeguarding the future of our great 
Nation. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma 



U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma, made an offi- 
cial visit to Washington from June 29 to July 3. 
Following are the texts of his addresses before the 
Senate and the House of Representatives on June 
SO and a joint statement by the Prime Minister 
and President Eisenhower released by the White 
House on July 2. 



ADDRESS TO SENATE > 

Mr. President and members of the United States 
Senate, it gives me very real pleasure to visit this 
body, which for so long has stood as one of the 
great symbols of government of the people, by the 
people, and for the people. 

As you know, I come to visit you from halfway 
around the world. 

We in Burma already feel very close to the 
United States, and I have long wanted to get to 
know you more intimately. This is the purpose 
of my visit. While I am here I expect to see your 
cities, your factories, and your farms, and to talk 
with as many Americans as I can. 

One reason why we in Burma feel a deep friend- 
ship for America is that your experience in many 
respects has been a shining example to us during 
many years of our struggle for independence, as 
well as in our effort to apply the principles of 
democracy. 

There are three aspects of your history that are 
particularly well known to us, perhaps the more 
so because they so strikingly parallel our own 
brief history as a free, independent, and demo- 
cratic nation. 

The first of these parallels is that we were both 
colonial possessions of the same empire, and both 
had to struggle to win our right to self-govern- 
ment. And I am happy to say that both of us 
now live in friendship with our former landlord, 



with whom I have just had a pleasant and con- 
structive visit. 

The second parallel is that both of our countries 
adopted constitutions designed to secure personal 
liberty to all of our peoples, to institute systems 
of government by law, to provide the institutions 
of democratic rule, and to insure political and 
economic and social justice. 

I dare to suggest that the leaders of our inde- 
pendence movement were as familiar with the Con- 
stitution of the United States as you yourselves. 
I mention this not to boast, but to remind you 
that the great document that was framed in Phila- 
delphia nearly 175 years ago has served through 
all the intervening time as a beacon to fighters for 
freedom everywhere. And it shines as brightly 
today as ever. 

The third parallel I should like to mention is 
that both of our nations adopted in their early 
years an independent foreign policy, designed to 
maintain the friendship of all nations and to avoid 
big-power alliances. You are aware that this 
policy of ours is not without its critics. Nor, for 
that matter, was yours. Be that as it may, it does 
offer another parallel between our early histories 
as independent nations. 

May I add, Mr. President, the fervent hope and 
confident expectation that two nations that started 
out in such similar fashion will continue along 
parallel paths in friendship and cooperation. 
Thank you. 



ADDRESS TO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES - 

Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Rep- 
resentatives, I have just had the pleasure of talk- 
ing briefly with your colleagues in the Senate. As 
you know, we also have a bicameral legislature in 
Burma ; but we adopted the parliamentary system 



1 Reprinted from Cong. Rec, June 30, 1955, p. 8188. 
July 78, 7955 



■ Reprinted from Cong. Rec, June 30, 1955, p. 8240. 



95 



of government so that one of my duties as Prime 
Minister is to serve as leader of the majority party 
in our Chamber of Deputies. So it is a special 
pleasure to stand here before the sister branch of 
the United States Government. 

I can tell your renowned Speaker that his repu- 
tation as a parliamentarian has been known to me 
for many years, and I must confess that I am 



Gift to U.S. in Appreciation of 
Sacrifices of Burma Campaign 

The White House on June 29 released the follow- 
ing letter to President Eisenhower from U Nu, 
Prime Minister of Burma. 

My dear Mr. President, The people and Govern- 
ment of the Union of Burma remember with grati- 
tude the valuable contribution made by the United 
States towards the liberation of their country from 
the Japanese militarist yoke. In particular they 
recall the heroic sacrifices made by the gallant 
members of the United States Armed Forces who 
took part in the liberation campaign. 

As a token of our appreciation of the sacrifices 
made by these gallant men, I would ask you to accept 
this cheque for five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), 
the money to be used in some appropriate manner 
for the benefit of the children of those who lost their 
lives or were incapacitated in the Burma campaign. 
Yours sincerely, 

Mauno Nu, 
Prime Minister of Burma 



pleased that our majority in the Chamber of Depu- 
ties is somewhat more substantial than his. 

I promise you that my remarks will be far 
more brief than they normally are before the 
Chamber in Rangoon, but there is one thing that 
I should like to mention because it makes me feel 
very close to the United States. It is this : In the 
very early days of our respective histories as inde- 
pendent nations, even under the greatest stress, we 
both maintained our faith in the democratic sys- 
tem and in democratic institutions. 

Like most fighters for independence, I studied 
the history of the American Revolution and draw 
sustenance from it. Therefore I am aware that 
in the darkest days of your revolution there were 
voices raised to advise you to forsake, for the time 
being at least, the methods of democracy in favor 
of some strong authority. But the founders of 
your country did not yield their faith. They 



dealt with the fearful, the apathetic, and even with 
the traitors, according to democratic principles. 

As you know, our new democracy in Burma was 
seriously threatened by subversive revolt almost 
as soon as it was born. Communists and anti- 
Communists, both inspired from abroad, took up 
arms against our Government. For a while it 
looked as though all was lost. Like your revolu- 
tionary leaders, we were advised to abandon the 
principles of democracy in favor of strong-arm 
methods. But I am proud to say that we kept 
faith and stuck to the methods of democracy. We 
also treated the fearful, the apathetic, and even 
the traitors, according to democratic principles. 

The history and experience of the founders of 
your country, Mr. Speaker, helped us to keep the 
faith during the darkest hours. For this, we 
shall always be grateful to the United States of 
America. 



JOINT STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF 
BURMA AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED 
STATES 

The Prime Minister of Burma, His Excellency 
U Nu, has visited Washington for three days at 
the invitation of President Eisenhower. The 
President and the Prime Minister discussed many 
matters of common concern and exchanged views 
on current international problems. 

The Prime Minister, the President and the Sec- 
retary of State reviewed problems of peace and 
security in Asia. They had a frank discussion of 
the complex economic problems arising from the 
existence of substantial surpluses of exportable 
rice both in Burma — one of the world's leading 
rice exporting countries — and in the United States. 

Note was taken of the salutary influence of re- 
ligion as exemplified by the Sixth Buddhist Synod 
presently being held in Rangoon and attended by 
leading Buddhist scholars from many nations. 

The problem of imprisoned American fliers in 
Communist China was reviewed. 

These talks have been of special value in increas- 
ing mutual understanding between Burma and the 
United States. There is a wide area of agreement 
and a traditional friendship between Burma and 
the United States resting firmly upon certain 
noble concepts to which both countries subscribe. 



96 



Department of State Bulletin 



Our two peoples, those of the United States and 
the Union of Burma, share two fundamental goals, 
a peaceful world and a democratic way of life. 

They reaffirmed their dedication to the ideal 
of peace and friendly cooperation amongst na- 
tions founded on international justice and mo- 
rality. Both countries are deeply concerned with 
a subject that is predominant in the minds of all 
responsible world leaders today — the problem of 
achieving peace with justice, a peace based upon 
the liberty of human beings and the security of 
nations. 

Such a peace can best be achieved by loyal stead- 
fast support for the Charter of the United Na- 
tions. That is the surest and most practical ave- 



nue along which to seek peace with justice in this 
world. A patient striving to uphold the funda- 
mental moral and religious beliefs underlying the 
Charter provides the best hope for the fulfillment 
of mankind's aspirations. 

The Prime Minister, the President and the Sec- 
retary of State deplored the conditions which force 
the peoples of the world to divert their energies 
and talents from a single-minded effort to improve 
and expand those cultural and economic oppor- 
tunities by which men can raise the levels of their 
existence. They renewed their own determina- 
tion to uphold the principles of the United Nations 
in its unceasing effort to save mankind from the 
scourge of future war. 



American- Israel Friendship 

by Herbert Brownell, Jr. 

Attorney General of the United States 1 



The theme of your convention — American- 
Israel friendship — is one with which I believe an 
overwhelming majority of our fellow Americans 
would wish to be identified, for the task of creat- 
ing understanding and promoting friendship be- 
tween our country and other free nations through- 
out the world is one of the supreme challenges to 
Americans at this moment in our country's history. 
If we are to discharge successfully the tremendous 
responsibility which America has been called upon 
to assume in our generation — the obligation to lead 
the free world toward security, progress, and 
peace— it is imperative that our life should be cor- 
rectly interpreted to our friends of other lands 
and that their hopes and aspirations should be 
fully explained to us. 

The young State of Israel stands high on the list 
of nations whose friendship is of great importance 
to the American Government and people. The 
significance of that friendship is not to be meas- 
ured by Israel's size and numbers, although that 
country's strategic location and the high caliber of 
its population are no doubt weighty factors which 
must be recognized. It is the spirit that animates 

1 Address made before the Zionist Organization of 
America at Washington, D.C., on June 18. 



Israel that is of primary importance to us. We 
see in Israel a pilot plant of American ideas in an 
area of the world that sorely needs these con- 
cepts — a striving after goals that are similar to 
our own. 



Similarity of Legal Systems 

I recently found striking evidence of this in a 
field in which I find myself continually occupied, 
the area of constitutional law. I have had occa- 
sion to read a fascinating account of four cases, 
involving important constitutional questions of 
law, which recently came before the Supreme 
Court of Israel. The central fact that emerged 
from this paper by Judge Cheshin, Deputy Presi- 
dent of Israel's Supreme Court, is that Israel's 
still-evolving system of justice not only shows a 
close affinity for our American system but often 
utilizes opinions delivered throughout the years 
by the Supreme Court of the United States. No 
one who is close to the legal procedures of our 
Nation can fail to be both proud and inspired 
by what I have just described. This trend 
augurs well for the citizens of Israel and the 
protection of their rights. It also reflects the 



July 18, 7955 



97 



continued vigor and health of our American legal 
system. 

As the chief legal officer of this country, I am 
naturally interested in comparative law. I am 
mindful that the Talmudic law has contributed 
to our own. During all the time that the Jews 
formed communities in one country after another, 
often only to be expelled, the elaboration of the 
Talmud continued. This was, and is, a manifes- 
tation of the creative spirit of Israel. 

I am also aware — sympathetically aware — of 
the complex structure of the law in Israel, con- 
sisting, as it does, of the law of the old Ottoman 
Empire, the British mandatory law, and the laws 
enacted by the new State. In addition, each 
religious community applies its own laws to all 
matters affecting personal status, such as mar- 
riage and divorce, guardianship, and alimony. 

This complicated structure of laws is undoubt- 
edly cumbersome. The Government of Israel 
long has recognized the necessity of developing a 
new legal system for Israel. It is approaching 
this momentous task in a manner which has im- 
pressed me from the beginning and which I have 
spoken of before. It manifests not only a cre- 
ative spirit but also a flexibility which is char- 
acteristic of youth, strength, and growth. 

About 3 years ago the Ministry of Justice of 
Israel joined with Harvard Law School in the 
establishment of the Harvard Law School-Israel 
Cooperative Research project, supported by vol- 
untary funds. Harvard University, on its part, 
has made available the resources of its outstanding 
Library of Comparative Law and the scholarly 
advice of its staff. But it has done more. It has 
enlisted the active participation of scholars from 
many other leading American law schools and is 
expanding their participation. On its part, 
Israel has provided representatives of the Min- 
istry of Justice and experts in Hebrew and in 
jurisprudence. In no sense, of course, are laws 
for Israel being drafted at the Harvard Law 
School-Israel Cooperative Research project cen- 
ter. What is being done is the collection and or- 
ganization of the infinite variety of information 
necessary to enable the Knesseth, Israel's legis- 
lative body, to draft the new code in the light of 
complete knowledge. 

This approach to this problem, which has such 
huge importance, is of particular significance in 
this day and age. How good it is to see scholarly 



98 



cooperation across continents in creating means 
to enable men and women to live in peace and 
confidence ! 

I have no doubt that from this present effort 
new concepts may arise. They will take their 
place along with the many gifts which the legal 
minds of Israel have bestowed upon the philoso- 
phy of the law. I believe that, when the work at 
Harvard is utilized by the Knesseth, it will carry 
with it the conviction that ultimate good and jus- 
tice can be achieved through peaceful cooperation 
with neighboring nations. 



Israel in the Community of Nations 

I am interested not only in the development of 
the law of Israel, but as a member of the Cabinet 
I have watched with admiration Israel's growth 
among the community of nations in almost every 
area of human endeavor — in science, industry, lit- 
erature, and other areas of mankind's never- 
ending struggle for progress. There is already 
a great deal of traffic over the American-Israel 
"friendship bridge." As time goes on, I am con- 
vinced, this will increasingly become a two-way 
movement, for we will surely have much to learn 
from a people that has produced the ethical values 
that are held in common by all Americans, par- 
ticularly after this people has resumed its normal 
existence in its ancestral homeland. This close 
collaboration extends to the most important areas 
of scientific research. All of us were gratified 
to hear of the atomic energy agreement recently 
concluded between the United States and Israel. 2 
The promise of nuclear energy means much to 
Israel, where natural resources are sparse. The 
prospect of Israel's scientific genius being brought 
to bear on the peaceful use of atomic energy 
means much to the United States and to free peo- 
ples everywhere. In dealing with the question of 
this two-way bridge between the United States 
and Israel, I wish to express my hearty congratu- 
lations to the Zionist Organization of America, 
whose current work in this field is no less im- 
portant than the historic role it played in the 
creation of the State of Israel. 

Now, I am persuaded that, in our relations with 
Israel, any differences which may arise from time 
to time will undoubtedly be resolved to the mutual 



- Bulletin of June 20, 1955, p. 1018, footnote 1. 

Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



satisfaction of both countries. Occasional dif- 
ferences are bound to arise between the friendliest 
of nations, and the Government of the United 
States has encountered this even in its dealings 
with its closest allies. But where there are strong 
ties of mutual interest, identity of outlook, and 
common aspirations, the disagreements are bound 
to be temporary. The geographic distance be- 
tween the Potomac and the Jordan Rivers may be 
great, but there is certainly little difference in 
spirit between the two countries. I, therefore, 
firmly believe that our initial premise is that 
Israel's destiny will remain linked with that of 
the United States of America. 



we shall be doing much to bring peace to the area. 
With respect to our planning for regional defense, 
I should like to say this : 

The United States Government, I assure you, is 
not unmindful of Israel's security and the pro- 
tection and welfare of its people. It is our hope 
and our desire that area defense arrangements will 
develop through which all countries in the area 
can contribute toward their mutual protection 
against aggression from the Communist menace. 
This is definitely in our own interest and repre- 
sents a major element in our policy for the Middle 
East and for strengthening the defense of the free 
world. 



Arab-Israel Conflict 

I know that the continuing tension between 
Israel and her neighbors figures prominently in 
your deliberations at this convention. The absence 
of peace between Israel and the Arab States cer- 
tainly provides ample reason for concern. The 
Government of the United States is not only mind- 
ful of the urgency of the problem but is actively 
seeking to bring about a solution. This was re- 
cently clearly expressed by President Eisenhower. 
In his message requesting congressional approval 
for the new Mutual Security Program, 3 the Presi- 
dent stated : 

The continuing tension between the Arab States and 
Israel handicaps the peoples of all Near East nations. 
We should continue to work with the governments and 
peoples of both sides to improve their economic status and 
accelerate their progress toward lasting peace between 
them. Our cooperation is beginning to bring results, par- 
ticularly in the development of water resources. Such 
developments in the Palestine area can go far to remove 
present causes of tension. 

This Government is determined to move for- 
ward in the spirit reflected in the President's mes- 
sage, and we shall persist in our efforts until we 
have achieved the peace which is required in the 
region by all those who seek to achieve a free 
world, and without which neither Israel nor the 
Arab States will be able to prosper. The issues 
of the Arab-Israel conflict can be resolved through 
patience and understanding. It is the task of 
everyone to recognize this and to work toward it. 

By continuing our economic and technical as- 
sistance to both Israel and the Arab States and 
by raising living standards throughout the region, 



3 Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 712. 
July 18, 7955 



Refugee Ships Begin 
Series of Trips 

The Department of State announced on June 24 
(press release 384) a series of trips by refugee 
ships to meet the need for supplementary ocean 
transportation created by the steadily increasing 
volume of visa issuance under the Refugee Relief 
Act. A series of 10 trips is planned before the end 
of 1955. 

The first of these ships is scheduled to arrive in 
New York harbor July 12 and is expected to have 
aboard the 30,000th person to arrive in the United 
States with a visa issued under the Refugee Act. 
The vessel is a Navy transport, General W. C. 
Langfttt. It is now en route to Bremerhaven, Ger- 
many, after being refitted in this country for refu- 
gee service. It is expected to leave Bremerhaven 
July 2, with 1,215 refugees from Germany and 
Austria. The General Langfttt is under charter 
to the Intergovernmental Committee for European 
Migration (Icem), which has responsibility for 
transportation of migrants who require ocean- 
crossing assistance. 

Plans for a ceremony marking the departure 
of the refugee ship from Bremerhaven are being 
made. In New York the newcomers will be 
greeted by officials and representatives of the re- 
ligious, fraternal, and nationality organizations 
that endorse individual sponsorships of the refu- 
gees and help sponsors in the details of the cases. 
The voluntary agency representatives will be at 
the dock to help the refugees reach the inland 
transportation that will take them to their new 
homes and jobs. The agency groups which have 

99 



endorsed assurances for refugees on the General 
Lang-fltt are Church World Service, International 
Rescue Committee, International Social Service, 
National Catholic Welfare Conference, National 
Lutheran Council, Tolstoy Foundation, United 
HIAS Service, and United Ukrainian American 
Relief Committee. Icem has arranged with the 
Council on Student Travel to provide shipboard 
orientation and language training for the refugee 
passengers. 

So far the more than 25,000 persons who have 
entered the United States under the Refugee Act 
have come in by plane or as passengers on reg- 
ularly scheduled ocean vessels. With issuance of 
Refugee Act visas having topped the 35,000 mark, 
10,000 persons are now having arrangements made 
for their transportation to this country. Icem 
plans the addition of a second vessel to its charter 
arrangements, to bring about a total of 10 cross- 
ings to the United States before the end of the 
year. These will convey approximately 12,000 
persons, in addition to others who will continue 
to come by air or other surface transportation. 

As of June 17, 35,096 Refugee Act visas have 
been issued and 131,529 persons are listed in the 
so-called pipeline — the cumulative total of all who 
have been asked to submit documents for the proc- 
essing of their cases. The weekly gain in visa 
issuance is running above 1,000 and the weekly 
gain in the pipeline total is above 2,000. Since 
the first of this year the visa issuance gain has 
been 50.4 percent, and the pipeline gain 51.18 
percent. 

The Refugee Act, which extends through 1956, 
provides for issuance overseas of 209,000 visas. 1 



Special Aid to Greece To Repair 
Earthquake Damage 

Press release 385 dated June 24 

The Department of State, in conjunction with 
the Department of Agriculture and the Foreign 
Operations Administration, announces new spe- 
cial aid for Greece in an amount totaling $19.2 
million. 

This assistance expresses the sympathy of the 
United States to the Government of Greece and 



to the Greek people for the suffering and devasta- 
tion caused by recent earthquake disasters. This 
new aid will help Greece to meet the heavy eco- 
nomic pressures resulting from the earthquake 
destruction. 

The special aid will be made up as follows : 

A grant of $7.5 million in defense-support 
funds will be made available to Greece under the 
current Mutual Security Program. The bulk of 
this assistance will be applied directly to the re- 
construction of earthquake-stricken areas and will 
take the form of construction materials. 

Programs for the sale of U.S. agricultural com- 
modities under title I of the Agricultural Trade 
Development and Assistance Act (P. L. 480, 83d 
Congress) have also been agreed to. In recogni- 
tion of the special situation in Greece, authoriza- 
tion has been made that the drachma equivalent of 
$7.5 million accruing from these sales will be 
made available to the Greek Government on a 
grant basis. Also, $4.2 million in drachma real- 
ized from these sales will be loaned to the Greek 
Government as further economic assistance. 

The agreements concerning the aid to be pro- 
vided under P. L. 480 were signed at Athens on 
June 24, 1955. 



Shooting Down of U.S. Plane 
by Soviet Aircraft 

Following is the text of a note delivered to the 
Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Jidy 7 re- 
garding the shooting down of a U.S. naval plane 
oy Soviet jet-propelled aircraft over the Bering 
Sea on June 23, together with a translation of a 
Soviet memorandum transmitted oy Soviet For- 
eign Minister Molotov to Secretary Dulles at San 
Francisco on June 25. 1 



U.S. NOTE OF JULY 7 

Press release 421 dated July 7 

The United States Government acknowledges 
receipt of the memorandum of the Soviet Govern- 
ment transmitted by the Soviet Foreign Minister, 
Mr. Molotov, to the Secretary of State, Mr. Dulles, 



1 For a message of the President to the Congress, trans- 
mitted May 27, with recommendations for amending the 
Refugee Relief Act, see Bulletin of June 13, 1955, p. 951. 



1 For remarks by Secretary Dulles at a news conference 
on June 28, see Bulletin of July 11, 1955, pp. 50 and 52. 



100 



Department of State Bulletin 



on June 25, regarding the shooting down of a 
United States naval aircraft by Soviet military 
jet-propelled aircraft on June 23. 

The facts in possession of the United States 
Government do not accord with the statements set 
forth in the Soviet memorandum under acknowl- 
edgment. The United States plane, of propeller 
type, was on a routine daylight shipping surveil- 
lance flight, of a regular and well-known char- 
acter. Such flights have been made at more or 
less regular intervals for some time past. The 
plane was on its regular route, which involved, at 
one point, flying over international waters in the 
channel between the United States (St. Lawrence 
Island) and the Soviet Union. 

Carefully verified information discloses : that 
the United States plane was at no time nearer the 
Soviet Union than the approximate middle of 
the above-mentioned channel and was always well 
over international waters; that it did not at any 
time fire on the attacking Soviet aircraft ; that no 
warning of any sort was given by the Soviet 
fighters before they opened fire on the United 
States plane. 

The United States Government notes the state- 
ment of the Soviet Government that clue to 
weather conditions, the possibility of error on the 
part of the Soviet planes existed in regard to this 
incident. It is presumed that this possibility of 
error refers to the geographic position and not the 
identity of the United States aircraft since it was 
flying in a clear area above broken lower cloud 
strata at the time it was attacked. 

Taking into account the regret expressed by the 
Soviet Government; its offer of compensation for 
damages to the plane and crew by the payment of 
50 percent thereof; and, in particular, the state- 
ment in the Soviet memorandum that strict orders 
have been issued by the Soviet Government to its 
military authorities to refrain from any future 
action of this character, the Government of the 
United States is prepared, for the reasons herein 
mentioned, to regard the Soviet memorandum as 
providing an acceptable basis for the disposal of 
this particular incident ; noting at the same time, 
however, that the United States plane acted 
throughout in a correct and blameless manner in 
pursuance of its peaceful mission and was in fact 
attacked over international waters. 

In conclusion, the United States Government 
expresses the hope that the Soviet Government 
will indeed in the future take all necessary meas- 



ures to avoid repetition of this and like incidents, 
a repetition which, if it occurred, would inevitably 
have a harmful effect upon the relations of our two 
nations, relations which the United States, for its 
part, desires to see improved. 



SOVIET MEMORANDUM OF JUNE 25 

[Translation] 

According to a communication from competent Soviet 
agencies, on June 23 of this year at 12:57 a.m., Moscow 
time (7: 57 a.m., Khabarovsk time), a military plane of the 
"Neptune" type, with identification marks of the Air Force 
of the U.S.A., violated the state border of the Soviet Union 
in the Bering Strait area east of Cape Chaplin (Chukotka) . 

At the approach of the Soviet fighters that flew toward 
it for the purpose of indicating that it was within the 
boundaries of the U. S. S. R. and of proposing that it quit 
the air space of the Soviet Union immediately, an exchange 
of shots occurred between the American and the Soviet 
planes. 

The Soviet Government has already called the attention 
of the Government of the U.S.A. to the necessity for the 
adoption of measures by the American military command 
which will prevent the possibility of repetition of the 
undesirable incidents which have taken place in the past 
in connection with repeated violations of the state borders 
of the U. S. S. R. by American military planes. This new 
violation of the Soviet state border by an American plane 
is proof that the American authorities have not taken the 
necessary steps that would prevent similar undesirable 
incidents. 

In a conversation with me on June 24, you stated, Mr. 
Dulles, that the American plane did not violate Soviet 
territorial waters, although you did admit that with the 
present speeds of planes some deviation of a plane might 
occur. Having investigated the circumstances of this 
incident, the competent Soviet agencies maintain that it 
occurred above territorial waters of the Soviet Union. The 
conclusions of the Soviet side do not confirm the statement 
that the incident was provoked by the actions of the Soviet 
planes. At the same time the said Soviet agencies re- 
ported that the planes met above dense clouds, with the 
absence of visual orientation. Under such conditions the 
possibility cannot be excluded that the incident was the 
result of an inaccurate determination of the location of the 
planes at the moment when they came together. Nor can 
the possibility be excluded that the violation of the air 
space of the Soviet Union by the American plane was the 
result of the actions of certain representatives of the 
American command who evidently are not interested in the 
prevention of such incidents. Whichever of these two cir- 
cumstances may have been the cause of the incident, the 
Soviet command has strict orders, in maintaining the de- 
fense of the Soviet border, to avoid at the same time any 
actions outside the limits of the Soviet state border. Such 
orders have been given, in particular, in connection with 
the said incident with the American plane which took place 
on June 23 of this year. The Soviet Government expects 



July 18, J 955 



101 



the Government of the United States to give strict orders 
to its military command not to permit American military 
planes to violate the Soviet state border. 

The Soviet Government expresses regrets in connection 
with the incident which has occurred. 

Considering that the incident with the American mili- 
tary plane took place under conditions which do not ex- 
clude the possibility of error on one side or the other, the 
Soviet Government expresses readiness to compensate for 
50% of the damage inflicted on the American side, consid- 
ering that the other 50% of the damage is to be borne by 
the American side. 



Protest Against Expulsion of 
American Priest From Moscow 

Press release 392 dated June 28 

Following is the text of a note delivered on June 
27 by the American Embassy at Moscow to the 
Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs concerning the 
expulsion from the U.S.S.E. of the Reverend 
Georges Bissonnette, a member of the Assumption- 
ist Order, in March 1955} 



U. S. NOTE OF JUNE 27 

The Embassy of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Re- 
publics and has the honor to refer to the Minis- 
try's note No. 20/OSA of March 8, 1955 in connec- 
tion with the expulsion from the Soviet Union of 
Father Bissonnette, an American priest residing 
in Moscow under the terms of the exchange of 
notes of November 16, 1933 between President 
Roosevelt and Mr. Litvinov relating to freedom 
of religion for American nationals residing in the 
Soviet Union. 1 The Ministry's note under refer- 
ence, which makes clear that the action taken 
against Father Bissonnette was in retaliation for 
the refusal of the United States Government to 
extend the visa issued to Archbishop Boris of the 
Eussian Orthodox Church, contends that in the 
agreement of November 16, 1933 both countries 
bound themselves to "extend on the territory of 
their countries to citizens of the other party the 
right to satisfaction of their spiritual needs by 
priests, pastors, rabbis, or other ecclesiastical func- 
tionaries who are citizens of the other party". 



1 Bulletin of Mar. 14, 1955, p. 424. 
102 



It will be recalled that the exchange of notes 
in 1933 was initiated by a note from President 
Roosevelt, the final paragraph of which reads as 
follows : 

We will expect that religious groups or congregations 
composed of nationals of the United States of America 
in the territory of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
will be given the right to have their spiritual needs min- 
istered to by clergymen, priests, rabbis or other ecclesiasti- 
cal functionaries who are nationals of the United States 
of America, and that such clergymen, priests, rabbis or 
other ecclesiastical functionaries will be protected from 
all disability or persecution and will not be denied entry 
into the territory of the Soviet Union because of their 
ecclesiastical status. 

This is the only paragraph of the note which deals 
with the question of the right of clergymen to 
enter the Soviet Union to minister to the religious 
needs of American nationals. The final paragraph 
of the Soviet reply of the same date reads as 
follows : 

Finally, I have the honor to inform you that the Gov- 
ernment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, while 
reserving to itself the right of refusing visas to Americans 
desiring to enter the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
on personal grounds, does not intend to base such refusals 
on the fact of such persons having an ecclesiastical status. 

It is apparent that, when considered together, 
these two notes can only mean that American 
clergymen will be permitted to enter the Soviet 
Union to minister to the needs of American na- 
tionals resident there, although it is recognized 
that the Soviet Government reserved the right to 
refuse a visa on "personal grounds". The mean- 
ing of this reservation would appear to be that a 
visa would be refused if an individual applicant 
were objectionable on some ground other than his 
being a clergyman. 

The reservation made by the Soviet Union is 
not applicable in the present instance, since 
Father Bissonnette was not expelled because of 
objection to him personally but simply in retalia- 
tion for action taken by the United States Govern- 
ment in connection with Archbishop Boris. 

There is no condition of reciprocity contained 
in the Soviet note of November 16, 1933, and the 
proposal in the United States note of that date 
was confined to rights for American clergymen. 
That no reciprocity was provided for in these par- 
ticular notes appears to have arisen from the fact 
that the Soviet Government gave no indication at 
that time of being concerned with the problem of 

Department of State Bulletin 



sending Soviet clergymen abroad. Furthermore, 
the fact that the notes contained no provision for 
reciprocity cannot be regarded as accidental, since 
another exchange of notes between President 
Roosevelt and Mr. Litvinov on the same date re- 
lating to noninterference in political matters con- 
tains a provision for reciprocal adherence to the 
engagements undertaken. 

It is therefore the view of the United States 
Government that there is no basis for the claim 
of the Soviet Government that the United States 
is bound by the terms of the November 16, 1933 
agreement to admit clergymen from the Soviet 
Union to minister to the religious needs of Soviet 
nationals in the United States. 

On the other hand, the United States Govern- 
ment regards the action of the Soviet Government 
in expelling Father Bissonnette as a violation of 
the terms of the 1933 agreement. This violation 
is all the more clear in that the expulsion of 
Father Bissonnette from the Soviet Union was 
undertaken, not because of objection to Father 
Bissonnette on personal grounds, but solely in 
retaliation for the refusal of the United States 
Government to permit the extension of stay in the 
United States of the Soviet Archbishop Boris, 
whose status in the United States was not com- 
parable to that of Father Bissonnette in the Soviet 
Union. Archbishop Boris was admitted into the 
United States on a temporary visa to deal with 
matters pertaining to that faction of the Russian 
Orthodox Church in the United States which is 
administratively subordinate to the Moscow 
Patriarchate. In this capacity, Archbishop Boris 
was in contact with American citizens who are 
members of the Russian Orthodox Church and 
had the possibility of holding religious services 
in many different churches in a number of Ameri- 
can cities which he visited during his stay in the 
United States. In contrast to Archbishop Boris' 
status, Father Bissonnette resided in Moscow un- 
der the terms of a formal agreement between the 
United States and the Soviet Union. He served 
the spiritual needs of Americans in Moscow and 
had no contact with Soviet citizens of the Roman 
Catholic faith. Due to action of the Soviet Gov- 
ernment, Father Bissonnette was unable to hold 
services in the Roman Catholic church in Moscow 
and was forced to use his small apartment for this 
purpose. 

The United States Government considers as ir- 
relevant to the matter at issue the question raised 



in the Ministry's note of March 8, 1955 with re- 
spect to the practice of the Moscow Patriarchate 
in designating heads of the Russian Orthodox 
Church in America. It may be noted, however, 
that no interference by the United States Govern- 
ment has ever been interposed to the appointment 
by the Moscow Patriarchate of officials of that 
segment of the Russian Orthodox Church in 
America which recognizes the right of the Moscow 
Patriarchate to make appointments of this kind. 
When such officials are not United States citizens, 
the conditions of their entry into the United States 
are necessarily determined in the context of per- 
tinent United States immigration laws and reg- 
ulations. As is evident from the action of the 
United States Government in permitting visits 
to the United States of Soviet clergymen, includ- 
ing most recently the late Archbishop Germogen 
and Archbishop Boris, the United States Govern- 
ment has not objected in principle to temporary 
visits to the United States of Soviet ecclesiastics 
for the purpose of conducting legitimate church 
a ff airs. 

In reiterating its protest against the expulsion 
of Father Bissonnette the United States Govern- 
ment requests that favorable action be taken with 
regard to issuance of a Soviet entry visa to Father 
Louis Dion, who has been designated by the As- 
sumptionist Order to succeed Father Bissonnette 
and who made application for a Soviet visa at the 
Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. on March 
23, 1955. 

If the Soviet Government now considers it de- 
sirable that Soviet clergymen be admitted to the 
United States in order to minister to the religious 
needs of Soviet nationals, the United States Gov- 
ernment is prepared in the interest of reciprocity 
to extend to a Soviet clergyman the same possibili- 
ties of entry and religious activity as those ac- 
corded to American clergymen in the Soviet 
Union under the terms of the November 16, 1933 
agreement. 



SOVIET NOTE OF MARCH 8 

[Unofficial translation] 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics presents its compliments to the Em- 
bassy of the United States of America and in connection 
with the Embassy's note No. 636 of March 2 ! of this 



1 Not printed. 



July 78, 7955 



103 



year has the honor to state the following: 

On February 24 of this year the State Department of 
the United States of America informed the Embassy of 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics at Washington 
by telephone that the State Department considered it 
impossible to extend the residence in the United States 
of America of the Exarch of the Russian Orthodox Church 
in America, Archbishop Boris and his secretary, Shishkin. 
In this connection the State Department did not indicate 
any reasons for this decision. 

This action of the State Department is a direct viola- 
tion of the Litvinov-Roosevelt agreement of November 16, 
1933. 

In the foregoing agreement the United States of Amer- 
ica and the Soviet Union mutually bound themselves to 
extend on the territory of their countries to citizens of 
the other party the right to satisfaction of their spiritual 
needs by priests, pastors, rabbis, or other ecclesiastical 
functionaries who are citizens of the other party. 

The refusal of the State Department to extend the 
visas of Archbishop Boris and his secretary is also a 
violation of established practice for a period of more than 
150 years whereby persons appointed by the Moscow 
patriarchy have headed the Russian Orthodox Church in 
America. 

In connection with the foregoing action of the State 
Department of the United States of America in respect 
of the Exarch of the Russian Orthodox Church in America 
Archbishop Boris and his secretary, Shishkin, the Minis- 
ter of Foreign Affairs found impossible the further resi- 
dence in the Soviet Union of the American priest 
Bissonnette. 



Documentation Required for 
Unofficial Visitors to U.S. 

On July 1 {press release 4-11) the Department 
of State released the text of the following note 
from Walter N. Walmsley, Jr., U.S. Charge 
d? Affaires at Moscow, delivered to the Soviet Min- 
istry of Foreign Affairs on June 28. 

I have the honor to refer to recent communica- 
tions between the United States and Soviet Gov- 
ernments relative to the documentation of Soviet 
citizens entering the United States in a nonofficial 
visitor capacity. 1 

It appears that there is some misunderstanding 
on the part of the Soviet Government concerning 

1 For an announcement of the canceling by a group of 
Soviet editors of their plans to visit the United States, 
see Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 695. 



the provisions of United States law with regard 
to the issuance of nonofficial visitors' visas. This 
misunderstanding may relate in part to the issu- 
ance by the American Embassy at Moscow of non- 
official visas to the Soviet chess team and the Soviet 
ski representatives without requiring fingerprint- 
ing and the signature of visa application forms. 
This action was taken through administrative in- 
advertence on the part of visa-issuing officials. 

For the information of the Soviet Government 
there are quoted below the pertinent provisions 
of the United States Immigration and Nationality 
Act (Public Law 414 — 82d Congress, approved 
June 26, 1952) which are applicable to all persons 
entering the United States as nonofficial temporary 
visitors : 

Section 221 (6). Each alien who applies for a visa shall 
be registered and fingerprinted in connection with his 
application, and shall furnish copies of his photograph 
signed by him for such use as may be by regulations re- 
quired. The requirements of this subsection may be 
waived in the discretion of the Secretary of State in the 
case of any alien who is within that class of nonimmi- 
grants enumerated in sections 101 (a) (15) (A), and 
101 (a) (15) (G), or in the case of any alien who is 
granted a diplomatic visa on a diplomatic passport or on 
the equivalent thereof. . . . 

Section 222 (e). Except as may be otherwise prescribed 
by regulations, each copy of an application required by 
this section shall be signed by the applicant in the pres- 
ence of the consular officer, and verified by the oath of the 
applicant administered by the consular officer. . . . 

There exists no authority whereby requirements 
of this statute may be waived. 

I should point out that the sections of the Im- 
migration and Nationality Act quoted above do 
not apply to foreign government officials so ac- 
credited by their governments and accepted by the 
United States Government in accordance with the 
pertinent provisions of this act including officials 
so accredited and accepted but who may not be 
permanently assigned to the United States, such 
as persons or members of groups visiting the 
United States who have been accredited by their 
respective governments as officials, nor to foreign 
officials connected with international organiza- 
tions within the meaning of the International 
Organizations and Immunities Act. 

There is enclosed a copy of the United States 
Immigration and Nationality Act. 



104 



Department of State Bulletin 



Restrictions on Photography and 
Sketching by Rumanians in U. S. 

Press release 334 dated June 9 
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

The U.S. Government has instituted regula- 
tions governing photography, sketching, and the 
execution of plastic works of art by Eumanian offi- 
cial personnel and their dependents in the United 
States. These regulations are comparable to pres- 
ent Rumanian regulations restricting photog- 
raphy, filming, and the execution of plastic works 
of art by U.S. citizens and other foreign nationals 
in Rumania, which presumably have been insti- 
tuted for reasons of security. 

Inasmuch as these regulations would be cir- 
cumvented by the procurement here of certain 
photographic or cartographic materials which are 
not available in Rumania for procurement by U.S. 
citizens, it was deemed necessary specifically to 
prohibit the procurement by Rumanian official 
personnel and their dependents of materials of 
this kind in the United States. 

As stated in the U.S. Government's note of June 
9, 1955, should the Government of the Rumanian 
People's Republic conclude that the international 
situation were such that security requirements en- 
abled it to reexamine its regulations restricting 
photography, filming, and the execution of plastic 
works of art by U.S. citizens in Rumania and to 
make available to them materials of the types 
noted, this Government in turn would be disposed 
to reconsider its own security requirements on the 
same basis. 



U.S. NOTE OF JUNE 9 

The Secretary of State presents his compliments 
to the Honorable the Minister of the Rumanian 
People's Republic 1 and has the honor to state 
that the following regulations have been instituted 
and will apply until further notice to photog- 
raphy, sketching, and the execution of works of 
plastic art in the United States by Rumanian offi- 
cial personnel and their dependents. 

1. Rumanian official personnel and their de- 
pendents in the United States may execute works 
of plastic art, take photographs, or make sketches 



1 Anton Moisescu. 
July 18, 7955 

351154— B5 



of historical and architectural monuments; the 
buildings of cultural, educational, and medical 
institutions; theaters, museums, city, state or na- 
tional parks; stadiums; and urban and rural 
scenes in the background of which there are none 
of the objects listed below in points 3a through 3g. 

2. Within the premises of economic enterprises 
and organizations engaged in the manufacture of 
civilian goods, as well as in cultural institutions, 
Rumanian official personnel and their dependents 
in the United States may, in individual cases, exe- 
cute works of plastic art, make sketches, or take 
photographs provided that they have first obtained 
the permission of the administration of these insti- 
tutions and organizations. 

3. Rumanian official personnel and their de- 
pendents in the United States may not execute 
works of plastic art, make sketches, or take pho- 
tographs of the objects listed below. This pro- 
vision is also applicable in cases where the spe- 
cified objects are under construction: 

a. Areas where Rumanian official personnel 
and their dependents do not have free access. 

b. Industrial enterprises of any kind. 

c. Fuel storage depots. 

d. Military objects, installations, technology 
and armaments. 

e. All water ports; airfields and airports; 
hydro-electric, thermo-electric or nuclear power 
installations; bridges; railroad junctions and 
terminals; tunnels; reservoirs and dams; silos; 
and water towers. 

f. Scientific research institutions, offices and 
laboratories. 

g. Radio, television, telephone and telegraph 
stations or facilities. 

4. Rumanian official personnel and their de- 
pendents may not execute works of plastic art, 
make sketches, or take photographs from air- 
planes on flights over territory of the United 
States. 

5. Rumanian official personnel and their de- 
pendents in the United States may not purchase 
or otherwise procure the following items except 
where such items appear in or are appendices to 
newspapers, periodicals, technical journals, at- 
lases and books commercially available to the 
general public: 

a. Aerial photographs, mosaics and photo- 
maps. 



105 



b. Maps and charts of scale of or larger than 
1 : 250,000. 

c. Navigational and hydrographic maps and 
charts. 

d. Panoramic photographs or detailed de- 
velopment plans of industrial cities. 

The foregoing regulations are comparable to 
present Rumanian regulations restricting the exe- 
cution of plastic works of art, photography and 
filming, by United States citizens in Rumania 
which presumably have been instituted for rea- 
sons of security. If the Government of the Ru- 
manian People's Republic should hereafter con- 
clude that the international situation were such 
that security requirements enabled it to reex- 
amine its regulations restricting the execution of 
plastic works of art, photography and filming by 
United States citizens in Riunania and to make 
available to them materials of the types noted 
above, the Government of the United States would, 
in turn, be disposed to reconsider its own security 
requirements on the same basis. 



artistic interest, as well as views of the city and land- 
scapes, which do not include items specified helow, which 
are prohibited. 

2. It is prohibited to photograph, film, and execute 
works of plastic art: 

(a) in areas where foreign citizens and members 
of diplomatic missions do not have free access; 

(b) from planes during flights; 

(c) of objects connected with: industrial enterprises 
of any kind, military armament, military constructions 
and establishments; railway junctions, marshaling 
yards of the C. F. R. (Rumanian State Railways), 
tunnels, railway and highway bridges ; airfields and 
airports, river and seaports, radio transmitting and 
telecommunications stations, electric power stations, 
including reservoirs, dams, etc. ; fuel depots, silos, and 
water towers. 

This provision applies also in cases where the above- 
mentioned items are under construction. 

3. Taking photographs, filming, or executing works of 
plastic art within the premises of economic enterprises 
and organizations working for civilian production, as 
well as in cultural institutions, is permitted with the 
prior approval of the head of the respective enterprise, 
organization or institution. 



RUMANIAN RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO 
PHOTOGRAPHY, FILMING, AND EXECUTION 
OF PLASTIC WORKS OF ART BY U.S. CITIZENS 
IN RUMANIA 

The Rumanian regulations which restrict 
photography, filming, and the execution of works 
of plastic art by U.S. citizens and other foreign 
nationals in Rumania are contained in the Ru- 
manian Ministry for Foreign Affairs note No. 
62217 of October 13, 1954, the text of which fol- 
lows: 

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Rumanian 
People's Republic presents its compliments to the Lega- 
tion of the United States of America and has the honor 
to inform the Legation herewith on the legal provisions 
concerning the conditions under which filming, photo- 
graphing and execution of works of plastic art may be 
carried out on the territory of the Rumanian People's 
Republic. 

Foreign citizens, including members of diplomatic 
missions accredited to the Rumanian People's Republic, 
may take films photographs and execute works of plastic 
art on the territory of the Rumanian People's Republic 
under the following conditions : 

1. Foreign citizens, including members of diplomatic 
missions accredited to the Rumanian People's Republic 
may execute works of plastic art, take photographs and 
films on the territory of the Rumanian People's Republic 
of buildings, monuments, and objects of cultural and 



Importance of International Travel 
in Advancing World Peace 

by Sinclair Weeks 
Secretary of Commerce 1 

It is a pleasure and a distinct honor to have the 
opportunity to welcome to Washington the Per- 
manent Executive Committee of the Inter- Ameri- 
can Travel Congresses. 

President Eisenhower has said that if there is a 
list in this world of enthusiastic boosters for inter- 
national travel he would like to be numbered 
among those close to the top of the list. Although 
I may not be able to match my chief in distances 
traveled or countries visited, I certainly claim 
equal status in terms of enthusiasm. 

To my mind there is no better way to improve 
understanding among the countries of this hemi- 
sphere than through exchange of tourists. As a 
bonus in this activity, we also stimulate the flow 
of currency and exchange of goods through the 
spending of these tourists. 

Since the Department of Commerce is the 
agency of our Government responsible for en- 



1 Address made before the inaugural meeting of the 
Permanent Executive Committee of the Inter-American 
Travel Congresses at Washington, D.C., on June 20 (De- 
partment of Commerce press release). 



106 



Department of State Bulletin 



couragement of international travel, I thought you 
might be interested in a few statistics on tourist 
travel and its relation to total foreign trade. This 
year U.S. citizens will spend approximately $1.5 
billion for foreign travel. More than $1 billion of 
this sum represents actual spending by U.S. resi- 
dents in foreign countries. The balance goes for 
payment of transportation fares to foreign and 
U.S. carriers. 

It is particularly interesting to note that, while 
our imports of merchandise have remained 
roughly level when compared to 1951, our foreign 
travel has increased so rapidly that it will be equal 
in value to almost 12 percent of our imports in 
1955 as compared to 7.6 percent in 1951. Thus, 
in many parts of the world, tourism is providing 
the fastest growing source of dollars, which in 
turn provide new funds for local investment in 
industries. 

Fully as important, our citizens are learning to 
understand and appreciate the cultures, traditions, 
and problems of other countries. As their inter- 
ests broaden, they read more and participate more 
in discussions concerning these other countries, 
and their desire to travel increases. 

Increasing Inter-American Travel 

Your primary interest, of course, is in the pro- 
motion of travel to and within Latin America. 
Frankly, the statistics reveal that many of the 
Latin American countries are not getting their 
due share of the American tourist dollar. With 
our residents spending $1 billion in foreign coun- 
tries this year, Mexico will receive about 20 per- 
cent and the West Indies and Central America 
another 9 percent. But South America will prob- 
ably receive only about 2 percent. Here is a meas- 
ure of the task confronting your organization, to 
increase its share of the growing American travel 
market. 

Some of your countries are far from the United 
States, and the cost of travel for American tourists 
is accordingly high. But many of them are close 
at hand, and their attractiveness should bring 
much larger numbers of visitors from our country. 
And in all of them, there is certainly the oppor- 
tunity to develop increased volumes of travel 
among themselves. 

We must recognize that a broad and intelligent 
program of travel development is necessary in 
each country if it wishes to attract visitors — and 



this means such items as the reduction of redtape 
formalities, provision of hotel facilities, improve- 
ment of centers of tourist interest, adequate ad- 
vertising budgets, and the establishment of tour- 
ist promotional offices in the main markets. All 
of these are matters with which your new Execu- 
tive Committee will deal, and I commend to you 
their careful study on a country-by-country basis. 
As you know, it is the policy of the United 
States Government to encourage the development 
of international travel for its economic, social, and 
cultural benefits. President Eisenhower has twice 
stated this policy in messages to the Congress, 
and the Commerce Department and other Govern- 
ment agencies are actively cooperating in imple- 
menting it. 

Simplifying Entry Procedures 

We well realize that the United States has cer- 
tain requirements applicable to tourists which may 
sometimes harass the visitor, but these are being 
carefully studied to determine all possible ways 
of simplifying nonimmigrant entry procedures. 
In any case, this factor does not affect the basic 
objective which is symbolized here today — that of 
encouraging U.S. residents to visit foreign coun- 
tries and to assist you in attracting them. 

The problem has been recognized at high levels, 
and the means are at hand to solve it. A note- 
worthy fact is the encouraging action taken by the 
1954 Meeting of Ministers of Finance or Economy 
at Kio de Janeiro in unanimously adopting a res- 
olution which recommends to all of the American 
Republics prompt and constructive action upon 
various specific problems in the field of travel 
development. 

In addition, the Economic and Social Council 
of the United Nations this year formally rec- 
ognized the importance of international travel and 
requested member governments to encourage its 
growth in numerous ways. 2 And, of course, the 
periodic Inter- American Travel Congresses have 
agreed to many useful conclusions and recommen- 
dations. 

The task now is to put these recommendations 
into actual effect among countries with which we 



! For a statement on "Increasing International Travel" 
by U.S. Representative Preston Hotchkis in the Economic 
and Social Council on Mar. 31, see Bulletin of May 2, 
1955, p. 741. 



July 18, 1955 



107 



have special ties of friendship and economic in- 
terest here in the Western Hemisphere; and this 
task, I am glad to say, is in the hands of your able 
committee. 

I congratulate you upon this auspicious inau- 
guration of your important work and express to 
you the best wishes of the United States Govern- 
ment for the success of your endeavors, which are 
so important in advancing world peace. 



Changes in Regulations on 
Issuance of Nonimmigrant Visas 

Press release 410 dated July 1 

Seeking to facilitate international travel, in ac- 
cord with the emphasis the President has given 
the subject in a message to the Congress, 1 the De- 
partment of State on July 1 announced changes 
in regulations concerning the issuance of non- 
immigrant visas. 

The changes were issued after consultation with 
other agencies of Government and Members of 
the Congress. In making these changes, the De- 
partment has adhered to the principles established 
by Congress that a differentiation must be made 
between an immigrant and nonimmigrant and that 
the "double check" system provided by law be 
maintained. This system provides that an immi- 
gration officer checks the alien on his arrival to 
make certain there has been no change in his status 
between the date the visa was issued and the time 
of his arrival in the United States. 

All U.S. Embassies have been instructed to 
negotiate with the governments to which they are 
accredited to work out broad agreements which 
will facilitate travel on a reciprocal basis and 
thereby assure to Americans the rights and priv- 
ileges which the United States is offering to for- 
eigners. 

Among the changes are the following : 

1. A nonimmigrant visa may be valid for any 
number of visits within a period of 4 years and 
with no fee. Two years was the previous maxi- 
mum validity. (A United States passport has a 
maximum validity of 4 years.) 2 

2. A nonimmigrant visa may be revalidated up 



1 Bulletin of Jan. 24, 1955, p. 121. 

2 The changes in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 are immedi- 
ately effective in all countries where visas are not required. 



to 4 years without a formal application. The pre- 
vious period was 2 years. 2 

3. A nonimmigrant visa may be revalidated 
within a year, rather than 3 months as previously 
required. This is to facilitate the travel of those 
who reside long distances from the United States 
and could hardly be expected to pay another visit 
to the United States within a short period of time. 2 

4. Consular officers have been instructed that 
they may issue a nonimmigrant visa valid for two 
entries in cases where this may be required when 
an alien wishes to visit the United States, proceed 
to a third country, and then return to the United 
States on his way home. Heretofore, in some in- 
stances an alien has been required to wait some 
time in the third country before he could get the 
visa to return to his home through the United 
States. The new provision for a round-trip visa 
will facilitate the travel of these people. 

5. Where foreign countries require single-entry 
visas on a reciprocal basis, the Department pro- 
poses a joint agreement to allow a citizen of either 
country to buy at any one time as many such visas, 
or entries, as he may desire. Now he must go to 
the issuing office every time he wants to make a 
trip. 

6. Heretofore, one type of visa has been required 
for a businessman and another type for a tourist 
for pleasure. The Department, after consultation 
with the Immigration and Naturalization Serv- 
ice, has instructed consuls to issue visas valid both 
for business and for pleasure where no fees are 
required, or where the fees for the two different 
types of visas are the same. If any other country 
charges different fees for these two types of visas, 
American consular officers may now issue a visa 
valid both for business or for pleasure, if the alien 
desires to pay the higher fee. 2 

7. The Department has also provided that aliens 
may have their names registered and maintained 
on quota waiting lists and still be issued nonimmi- 
grant visas for bona fide visits, with the proviso 
that any violation of nonimmigrant status will 
result in the removal of the name from the quota 
waiting list. Further, the name may not be re- 
instated as of the date of original priority. 2 

8. In cooperation with other agencies of Gov- 
ernment, the Department is adopting a new and 
simplified application form for a nonimmigrant 
visa. Questionnaire forms and preliminary ap- 
plication blanks which have been used in the past 
and which have slowed up the issuance of nonim- 



108 



Department of State Bulletin 



migrant visas will now be used only when it is 
necessary to mail them to persons living some 
distance from the consulate. 

9. A bill endorsed by the Department is pending 
in Congress which would eliminate the issuance of 
fee stamps, and the Department has under con- 
sideration a simplified system for recording fees 
in an effort to speed up the process of issuing a 
visa. 

During fiscal year 1954, American consulates 
issued 400,000 nonimmigrant visas, many of them 
valid for more than one entry, and 60 million 
visits were paid to the United States. This vast 
traffic has created many serious problems which 
the new regulations are designed to eliminate. 
The Department pointed out that any country 
handling this number of visitors must maintain 
orderly controls. In addition to the nonimmigrant 
visas issued, roughly a quarter of a million immi- 
grants enter the United States each year. It is 
not only required by law, but it is necessary, in 
order to maintain economic equilibrium, to make 
a distinction between an immigrant and a non- 
immigrant. 

These new regulations take this fully into ac- 
count but provide that upon the establishment of 
nonimmigrant status a visa shall consist of nothing 
more than a rubber stamp in a passport to identify 
the traveler and to establish his nonimmigrant 
status, and it may remain in effect for a long period 
of time unless there is a change in the status. The 
effort is directed toward making the issuance of a 
visa an extremely simple process, and, once it is in 
the passport, no further visits to an American 
consulate need to be made during the life of the 
visa unless the visitor changes his status. 



U.S. Delegations to 
International Conferences 

20th Session, ECOSOC 

The Department of State announced on June 30 
(press release 404) that John C. Baker, U.S. Rep- 
resentative on the U.N. Economic and Social 
Council, will head the U.S. delegation to the 20th 
session of the Council convening at Geneva on 
July 5. 

The other members of the U.S. delegation will 
be as follows : 



Deputy U.S. Representatives 

Walter M. Kotschnig, Director of the Office of Interna- 
tional Economic and Social Affairs, Department of 
State 

Nat B. King, U.S. Mission to United Nations, New York, 
N.T. 

Public Adviser 

Ellsworth Brewer Buck, chairman of the board of the L. A. 
Dreyfus Company, Staten Island, N.Y. 

Advisers 

Clarence Blau, Assistant to the Director, Bureau of For- 
eign Commerce, Department of Commerce 

Kathleen Bell, OtHce of International Economic and Social 
Affairs, Department of State 

Philip Burnett, OtEce of International Economic and Social 
Affairs, Department of State 

Kathryn G. Heath, Senior Staff Officer, Office of the Secre- 
tary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare 

Joseph C. Hickingbotham, Jr., Special Assistant to the 
Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs, Department 
of State 

Otis E. Mulliken, Office of International Economic and 
Social Affairs, Department of State 

Fred Ritchie, Office of Research Statistics and Reports, 
Foreign Operations Administration 

William J. Stibravy, Office of International Financial and 
Development Affairs, Department of State 

George Tobias, Labor Attache, U.S. Resident Delegation 
for International Organizations, Geneva, Switzerland 

Frederick D. Vreeland, U.S. Resident Delegation for Inter- 
national Organizations, Geneva, Switzerland 

William H. Wynne, Office of International Finance, De- 
partment of the Treasury 

Reports Officer 
Willard Elsbree 

The provisional agenda for the 20th session in- 
cludes major reviews of the world economic and 
social situation; general review of the develop- 
ment and coordination of the economic, social, and 
human-rights programs and activities of the 
United Nations and the specialized agencies as a 
whole; international commodity problems; fi- 
nancing of economic development ; and reports of 
various commissions and nongovernmental organ- 
izations. One of the primary tasks of the Council 
will be to review the activities of the United 
Nations programs of technical assistance, includ- 
ing the program for the coming year. 

U.S. Representative on ECOSOC 
Confirmed by Senate 

The Senate on June 29 confirmed John C. Baker 
to be U.S. Representative on the United Nations 
Economic and Social Council. 



July 78, 7955 



109 



The Foreign Trade Policy of the United States 



by Ben H. Thibodeaux 

Director, Office of International Trade and Resources 1 



In this group and in the kind of city that Pitts- 
burgh is, there is no need for me to attempt an 
inspirational talk on the importance of inter- 
national trade. It may suffice to recall the large 
part that exports play in the earnings of three of 
the industries which have helped make Pittsburgh 
great: steel, electrical equipment, and coal. These 
three industries alone exported products to the 
tune of $1.4 billion in 1954. And, of course, there 
are other important American export products, 
such as automobiles and farm machinery, which 
are derived in part from steel and other materials 
produced in Pittsburgh. The steel industry, in 
turn, is dependent upon imports of various alloy- 
ing elements and, increasingly, of iron ore. To 
you, as businessmen and civic leaders of Pitts- 
burgh, these illustrative facts are known. You 
are aware also of the importance of international 
trade, both exports and imports, to the economy 
of the United States. 

People generally in the United States are be- 
coming increasingly foreign-trade conscious. This 
is shown in a very interesting study being made by 
the League of Women Voters. In all parts of the 
country, the League members are conducting sur- 
veys to determine the importance of foreign trade 
in our local communities. The results are ex- 
tremely illuminating. In general they show that 
both exports and imports come right down to in- 
dividual businesses and to the daily lives of people. 
Often it is found that individual businessmen en- 
gage in foreign trade in ways that are obscure to 
them. An extreme illustration of this is the 
bottler of a famous soft drink who reportedly re- 

1 Address made before the World Trade Council of the 
Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce, Pittsburgh, Ta., on 
June 30. 



marked, "I'm not interested in foreign trade; I'm 
too busy shipping stuff to Cuba." I do not believe, 
however, that the case is typical. 

So much for the general aspects of our foreign 
trade. What I should like to discuss with you, 
rather, is the subject of what the United States can 
do both to facilitate trade and to reduce the ten- 
sions which can arise, from economic conflicts 
among nations. And make no mistake about it. 
The actions of the United States will determine 
to a large extent the kind of trade world in which 
we will live. This follows from our position of 
predominant economic strength and from the fact 
that we are now the largest importer and exporter 
in the world. We can exercise our economic 
leadership toward continued cooperation in the 
reduction of trade barriers and the expansion of 
trade among the free countries of the world. Or, 
if we do not, we face the risk of a return to the 
protectionism and trade restrictions of the period 
between the two world wars. 

Distinction Between GATT and OTC 

The instruments for international trade coop- 
eration are at hand. I should like to discuss them 
with you. One is the General Agreement on Tar- 
iffs and Trade, perhaps better known as the Gatt; 
the other is the proposed Organization for Trade 
Cooperation, now referred to by its initials, Otc. 

I should like to make clear the distinction be- 
tween the Gatt and the Otc. Very simply put, 
it is this : 

The Gatt is a trade agreement. It came into 
existence at the beginning of 194S. The United 
States has participated in the Gatt ever since that 
time under the authorization vested in the Presi- 
dent by the Trade Agreements Act ; and therefore, 



110 



Department of State Bulletin 



of course, the Gatt is not being submitted for 
congressional approval. 

The Organization for Trade Cooperation, on the 
other hand, would supply the much needed organ- 
izational machinery whose chief function would be 
to administer the Gatt. The proposed Ore would 
also serve as a forum for trade consultations and 
negotiations, and it would collect and publish in- 
formation on trade matters and commercial policy. 
The Otc would be a formal international organi- 
zation, and United States membership in it is con- 
ditioned upon congressional approval. This ap- 
proval was requested by President Eisenhower on 
April 14. 2 A bill, H. R. 5550, has been introduced 
for that purpose. 

Accomplishments of GATT 

Since a major function of the Otc would be to 
administer the Gatt, let us first look at the Gatt. 
What is it and how have we benefited from our 
participation in it? 

The Gatt, as I have said, is a trade agreement. 
It is a multilateral agreement. That is, instead of 
only two countries as in a bilateral agreement, the 
Gatt has 34 participants and Japan is soon to be 
added as a 35th. 3 These countries account for 
about 80 percent of total world trade. 

The purpose of the Gatt is to reduce tariffs and 
other barriers to trade and to insure fair play in 
international commerce. The agreement consists 
of two substantive parts: (1) tariff schedules, ne- 
gotiated multilaterally and applying to all the 
member countries; and (2) a set of rules of good 
behavior in international trade. 

What has been accomplished under the Gatt? 

On the tariff side, the Gatt countries have re- 
duced rates or have agreed not to raise existing 
rates on some 60,000 items since 1947. We have 
obtained tariff concessions covering approximately 
50 percent in value of our exports. These conces- 
sions have benefited every sector of our economy. 
I mentioned a moment ago the importance of 
steel-mill products to this area. Many blast-fur- 
nace and steel-mill products have benefited from 
concessions made by Gatt members, including 
Canada, the United Kingdom, South Africa, Cuba, 
and Sweden. Through the Gatt, electrical indus- 
trial equipment has been granted better tariff treat- 



' Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 67S 
' Ibid., June 27, 1955, p. 1051. 



ment in such important markets as France, Bel- 
gium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and others. 

The trade rules, the other major part of the 
Gatt, are to reduce trade barriers other than tar- 
iffs. We have found from experience that there 
is little use in having trade agreements that deal 
with tariff rates only. For example, another coun- 
try might give us a tariff reduction and then cancel 
it with an internal tax on the imported product. 
Or, it might simply restrict or prohibit the im- 
portation of the product. The trade rules in the 
Gatt are designed to protect the tariff concessions 
against such practices and to facilitate trade 
generally. 

My appreciation of the Gatt trade rules stems 
from personal experience. In the years imme- 
diately following World War II, I was stationed 
in Europe. Much of my time there was spent in 
assisting American businessmen to transact trade, 
despite a maze of governmental restrictions. And 
I can assure you, the difficulties were immense. 
Foreign exchange was scarce, and international 
trade was rigorously controlled by governments. 
Many governments were trying to move toward 
economic self-sufficiency — or rather, toward un- 
economic self-sufficiency. Practically every 
known device to restrict imjDorts was called into 
play. 

It was to help bring about the dismantling of 
this maze of restrictions that the United States 
and other countries joined in drawing up the 
trade rules that are now in the Gatt. I can tes- 
tify to the fact that these rules have been effec- 
tive. Of special interest to you would be the 
recent consultations with representatives of Bel- 
gium and Germany under the Gatt rules, in which 
I took part at various times. As a result of these 
consultations, both countries are loosening re- 
strictions on imports of American coal at a time 
when that coal sorely needs additional markets. 

Many other examples could be cited to show 
how Gatt has contributed to the tremendous ex- 
pansion in world trade that has occurred in recent 
years. With improved economic conditions and 
increased dollar earnings abroad, restrictions im- 
posed against dollar imports due to lack of for- 
eign exchange are being diminished. Without 
the Gatt, we can be fairly sure that the vested 
interests which inevitably grow up behind such 
restrictions would succeed in keeping those re- 
strictions long after the justification for them 
had disappeared. 



July 18, 1955 



111 



Thanks in large part to the Gatt, the American 
businessman is now able to do business abroad 
more freely than at any time since the end of the 
war. Governmental restrictions and redtape are 
being reduced, and private initiative is being given 
an opportunity to do business again on the basis of 
price and quality competition. 

Need for OTC 

The Gatt has been in existence for more than 7 
years. It has been highly successful in reducing 
trade barriers. Why, then, do we need an Otc to 
administer the Gatt ? There are two basic reasons. 
I will deal first with the most obvious one. 

The Gatt has been applied on a provisional 
basis. Its administration has been makeshift. 
Despite this handicap, the Gatt has proved its 
value. But because of the increasing volume of 
work and the need to deal quickly with urgent 
trade problems, it has become clear that an effec- 
tive and continuing organization must be estab- 
lished. To fill this need, the Gatt countries nego- 
tiated the Otc agreement. 4 

This brings us to the second reason why United 
States participation in the Otc will make the Gatt 
a more effective instrument of United States 
policy. It is a less tangible reason, but it may be 
as important as the improvement of the mechanics 
of administration. 

Approval of this organization by the United 
States Congress and by the other governments con- 
cerned will constitute an endorsement of the prin- 
ciple of international cooperation in trade, and 
as such will strengthen the Gatt. It will thus also 
strengthen the economic base upon which the col- 
lective security of the free world is so largely 
dependent. 

Structure of OTC 

Let me describe briefly the proposed Otc. 

Its structure is simple. Its members will be 
the countries participating in the Gatt. There 
will be an Assembly consisting of all the member 
countries. An Executive Committee comprising 
17 countries will meet between sessions of the 
Assembly and will carry on the work of the Otc. 
The membership of the Executive Committee will 
include the countries of chief economic impor- 
tance — a condition which insures that the United 



4 For text, see ibid., Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579. 
112 



States will always be a member. The organiza- 
tion will be serviced by a small secretariat. 

There are some serious misconceptions regard- 
ing the proposed Otc that I should like to correct. 
It lias been contended that our membership would 
mean a loss of United States sovereignty and that 
our tariffs would be governed by an international 
organization. These contentions have no basis in 
fact. The Otc would have no supranational 
powers. It would administer trade rules that 
have been voluntarily accepted by the member 
countries. It would have no power to impose 
obligations on any of its members. The Otc 
would have no power to fix or change tariff rates. 
Tariff negotiations would be sponsored by the 
Otc, but the actual negotiations would be car- 
ried on by the individual countries themselves 
on their own responsibility. Whenever the 
United States or any other member feels that it 
cannot live within the rules of the game as spelled 
out in the Otc and the Gatt, it would be free to 
withdraw. 

What, then, are the powers of the proposed 
Otc ? Actually, it has no powers of compulsion. 
It has only two means of inducing compliance 
with the trade rules. Neither infringes in any 
way on national sovereignty. 

The first means is the moral force of interna- 
tional public opinion. Needless to say, no coun- 
try lightly violates rules of the game that have 
been adopted voluntarily with a number of other 
sovereign countries. 

The second means of inducing compliance, go- 
ing beyond moral suasion, is that, if a member 
country has seriously infringed the trade rules, 
the Otc may authorize other members to withdraw 
trade benefits they were extending to the offend- 
ing member. 

The Otc would also have the power to waive 
obligations under the Gatt, in exceptional circum- 
stances. This flexibility in the trade rules to pro- 
vide for exceptional circumstances is an essential 
element, enabling governments to cooperate effec- 
tively in dealing with their various problems. 

Expanding Trade for Free-World Strength 

To summarize, the constructive achievements 
under the Gatt would be furthered by the organ- 
izational arrangements provided in the Otc. It 
is in our economic and security interests to par- 
ticipate in this cooperative effort. Since our for- 

Department of State Bulletin 



eign trade is now the largest in the world, we have 
the most to lose from barriers to it. The Otc 
would facilitate the expansion of trade in a 
friendly atmosphere. It would thus contribute to 
the economic strength and unity of the free world, 
and hence to the solidity of our military and po- 
litical alliances against the threat of communism. 
The United States has high stakes in H. R. 5550 
and in the decision by Congress as to United States 
membership in the Otc. For, as President Eisen- 
hower said in his message of April 14 to the 
Congress : 

"Failure to assume membership in the Organi- 
zation for Trade Cooperation would be inter- 
preted throughout the free world as a lack of gen- 
uine interest on the part of this country in the 
efforts to expand trade. It would constitute a 
serious setback to the momentum which has been 
generated toward that objective. It would strike 
a severe blow at the development of cooperative 
arrangements in defense of the free world. It 
could lead to the imposition of new trade restric- 
tions on the part of other countries, which would 
result in a contraction of world trade and con- 
stitute a sharp setback to United States exports. 
It could result in regional re-alignments of na- 
tions. Such developments, needless to say, would 
play directly into the hands of the Communists." 



Supplementary Trade Agreement 
With Switzerland 

Press release 403 dated June 29 

The President on June 25, 1955, signed a proc- 
lamation giving effect to the Supplementary 
Trade Agreement between the United States and 
Switzerland, which was signed on June 8, 1955. 1 
This agreement provides for compensatory tariff 
concessions by the United States to Switzerland, 
with a view to restoring the balance of the 1936 
Trade Agreement with Switzerland that was up- 
set by the increases in duties on watches pro- 
claimed last summer pursuant to the escape 
clause applicable to that agreement. The proc- 
lamation provides that the additional concessions 
will become effective on July 11, 1955, the date on 
which the Supplementary Agreement will enter 
into force. 



Proclamation 3099 ' 

1. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in the 
President by the Constitution and the statutes, including 
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on 
January 9, 1936, he entered into a trade agreement with 
the Swiss Federal Council, including two schedules and 
a declaration annexed thereto (49 Stat. (pt. 2) 3918), and 
by a proclamation of January 9, 1936 (49 Stat. (pt. 2) 
3917), he proclaimed the said trade agreement, which 
proclamation has been supplemented by a proclamation 
of May 7, 1936 (49 Stat. (pt. 2) 3959), and a proclamation 
of November 28, 1940 (54 Stat. (pt. 2) 2461) ; 

2. Whereas the said trade agreement specified in the 
first recital was supplemented on October 13, 1950, by 
certain provisions set forth in the 13th recital of the 
President's proclamation of November 26, 1951 (Procla- 
mation No. 2954, 66 Stat. C6) ; 

3. Whereas, by Proclamation No. 3062 of July 27, 1954 
(3 CFR, 1954 Supp., p. 29), s acting under and by virtue 
of the authority vested in the President by section 350 of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and by section 7(c) 
of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951, and in 
accordance with the said trade agreement specified in 
the first recital as supplemented on October 13, 1950, the 
President proclaimed modifications of duty concessions 
granted by the United States with respect to certain prod- 
ucts described in item 367 (a) of Schedule II of the said 
trade agreement, effective at the close of business July 
27, 1954; 

4. Whereas the said trade agreement specified in the 
first recital, as supplemented on October 13, 1950, provides 
for compensatory modifications thereof, whenever action 
is taken pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the supplemental 
provisions referred to in the second recital of this procla- 
mation, in order to maintain, to the extent practicable, the 
general level of reciprocal and mutually advantageous 
concessions in the said trade agreement ; 

5. Whereas I have found as a fact that under the 
circumstances recited above existing duties or other im- 
port restrictions of the United States of America or of 
Switzerland are unduly burdening and restricting the 
foreign trade of the United States of America ; 

6. Whereas, pursuant to section 3 (a) of the Trade 
Agreements Extension Act of 1951 (65 Stat. 72), I trans- 
mitted to the United States Tariff Commission for inves- 
tigation and report a list of all articles imported into 
the United States of America to be considered for possible 
modification of duties and other import restrictions, im- 
position of additional import restrictions, or continuance 
of existing customs or excise treatment in trade-agreement 
negotiations with Switzerland looking towards possible 
restoration of the general level of reciprocal and mutually 
advantageous concessions in the said trade agreement, 
and the said Tariff Commission has made an investiga- 
tion in accordance with section 3 of the said Trade Agree- 
ments Extension Act and thereafter reported to the Presi- 
dent its findings based thereon ; 

7. Whereas reasonable public notice of the intention 



1 For text, see Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1056. 
July 18, 1955 



3 20 Fed. Rep. 4561. 

3 Bulletin of Aug. 23, 1954, p. 275. 



113 



to negotiate a supplementary trade agreement with Swit- 
zerland was given 4 and the views presented by persons 
interested in the negotiation of such supplementary agree- 
ment were received and considered ; 

8. Whereas, after seeking and obtaining information 
and advice with respect thereto from the Departments of 
State, Agriculture, Commerce, and Defense, and from 
other sources, I entered into a trade agreement on June 8, 
1955, with the Swiss Federal Council, further supple- 
menting the said trade agreement specified in the first 
recital, a copy of which supplementary agreement of 
June 8, 1955, including the supplemental schedule 6 an- 
nexed thereto, authentic in both the English and French 
languages, is annexed to this proclamation ; 

9. Whereas I find that the compensatory modifications 
provided for in the said supplementary trade agreement 
specified in the eighth recital constitute appropriate action 
toward maintaining the general level of reciprocal and 
mutually advantageous concessions in the said trade agree- 
ment specified in the first recital, and that the purpose 
set forth in section 350 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended, will be promoted by such compensatory modifi- 
cations of existing duties and other import restrictions 
and continuance of existing customs and excise treatment 
as are set forth and provided for in the said supplementary 
trade agreement ; 

10. Whereas it is provided in paragraph numbered 4 
of the said supplementary agreement specified in the 
eighth recital that it shall enter into force on July 11, 1955 ; 

11. Whereas I find that such modifications of existing 
duties and other import restrictions and such continuance 
of existing customs and excise treatment of articles as are 
hereinafter proclaimed in Part I of this proclamation 
will be required or appropriate, on and after July 11, 
1955, to carry out the said supplementary trade agreement 
specified in the eighth recital ; 

12. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in the 
President by the Constitution and the statutes, including 
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on 
October 30, 1947, he entered into an exclusive trade agree- 
ment with the Government of the Republic of Cuba (61 
Stat. (pt. 4) 3699), and by Proclamation No. 2764 of 
January 1, 1948 (62 Stat. (pt. 2) 1465), he proclaimed 
such modifications of existing duties and other import 
restrictions of the United States of America in respect 
of the Republic of Cuba and such continuance of existing 
customs and excise treatment of products of the Republic 
of Cuba imported into the United States of America as 
were then found to be required or appropriate to carry 
out the said exclusive agreement, which proclamation 
has been supplemented by Proclamation 2929 of June 2, 
1951, (65 Stat. C12) and by the proclamations referred to 
in the twelfth recital thereof ; and 

13. Whereas I determine that, in view of the finding 
set forth in the eleventh recital of this proclamation, the 
deletion of the second item 28 (a) (as amended by the 
said proclamation of June 2, 1951) from the list set forth 
in the ninth recital of the said proclamation of January 1, 



4 Ibid., Feb. 28, 1955, p. 359. 

5 Schedule not printed. 



1948, as amended and rectified, will be required or appro- 
priate to carry out the said exclusive trade agreement 
specified in the twelfth recital of this proclamation on and 
after July 11, 1955: 

Now, therefore, I, Dwight D. Eisenhower, President 
of the United States of America, acting under and by 
virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 
and the statutes, including the said section 350 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, do proclaim as follows : 

PART I 

To the end that the said supplementary trade agree- 
ment specified in the eighth recital may be carried out, 
such modifications of existing duties and other import 
restrictions of the United States of America and such 
continuance of existing customs or excise treatment of 
articles imported into the United States of America as 
are provided for in the said supplementary agreement of 
June 8, 1955, shall be effective on and after July 11, 1955. 

PART II 

To the end that the said exclusive trade agreement 
specified in the twelfth recital may be carried out, the 
list set forth in the ninth recital of the said proclamation 
of January 1, 194S, as amended and rectified, shall be 
further amended by deleting therefrom the second item 
28 (a), as amended by the said proclamation of June 2, 
1951, effective on and after July 11, 1955. 

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand 
and caused the Seal of the United States of America 
to be affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this 25th day of June, 
in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and 
[seal] fifty-five, and of the Independence of the United 
States of America the one hundred and seventy- 
ninth. 

By the President: 

John Foster Dulles, 
Secretary of State. 



Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions 
Requested by Austria and France 

Press release 406 dated June 30 

Two more countries — Austria and France — have 
requested renegotiations under article XXVIII 
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
(Gatt) of certain tariff concessions granted to 
the United States. 

At their ninth session, the Contracting Parties 
to the Gatt took action to extend the firm life 



114 



Department of State Bulletin 



of the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955, to 
December 31, 1957. Prior to such extension, a 
country may renegotiate its individual tariff con- 
cessions with a view to their modification or with- 
drawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by June 
30, 1955, may continue through September 30, 
1955. Under this procedure these countries have 
indicated that they wish to renegotiate certain of 
their tariff concessions of interest to the United 
States. (As announced previously, Cuba, 1 India, 2 
the Netherlands, 2 Nicaragua, 2 Pakistan, 2 and 
Sweden 2 have also given notice of intention to re- 
negotiate certain of their concessions.) 

Under article XXVIII a country wishing to 
withdraw or modify a concession first must try 
to reach some basis of agreement with other in- 
terested Contracting Parties concerning such 
withdrawal or modification. The usual basis for 
agreement would be the granting of new conces- 
sions as compensation for the withdrawn 
concession. 

Interested persons are invited to submit their 
views with regard to the possible effect on U. S. 
trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of 
the concessions on the items in the attached list. 
In addition, views are also desired regarding im- 
ports into Austria and France from the United 
States on which the United States might request 
new or further tariff reductions as compensation 
to the United States for any modifications or 
withdrawals of concessions on items in the at- 
tached list. 

Views on the foregoing matters should be sub- 
mitted to the Committee for Eeciprocity Informa- 
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee 
established to receive views on trade agreement 
matters. It is requested that any such views be 
submitted by the close of business on July 21, 1955. 

All communications on these matters, in 15 
copies, should be addressed to : The Secretary of 
the Committee for Reciprocity Information, 
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D. C. 
If any interested party considers that his views 
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee in 
a written brief, he should make this known to the 
secretary of the committee, who will then arrange 
for oral presentation before the committee. 



Items on Which Concessions to the United 
States May Be Modified or Withdrawn Under 
Article XXVIII of the GATT 

Austria 

Dried eggs 

Soybean and cottonseed oil 

Turpentine oil for varnish factories 

Wool waste, raw 

Viscose rayon for tire cord, single 

Fountain pens 

Motion picture films, the sound tracks of which have been 

dubbed 
Penicillin as prepared medicine 
Other prepared medicine 
Clover seed 
Canned green peas, green beans, carrots, spinach, celery, 

mushrooms 
Elastic woven or netted articles 
Articles of artificial horn or artificial resin, except brush 

handles, buttons, and fountain pens 
Metal cutting saws and nontoothed saw blades 
Twist drills, milling cutters, and reamers 
Dynamos and electromotors 
Electric apparatus and devices, n.s.m. 
Certain mathematical and physical instruments 
Paraaminosalicylic acid 
Note to Class XXXVI : Parts of nonelectrical machinery 

except parts for assembly and for sewing and knitting 

machines now dutiable in a basket category 

France 

Grapefruit, fresh or dried, and pomelos dried 
Fruit, berry, vegetable juices, sweetened or unsweetened 
Ammonium nitrate 
Rubber thread, uncovered 

Cotton linters, washed, scoured (in the mass, slabs, or 
sheets) 



Renegotiation off Tariff Concessions 
Requested by Finland 

Press release 425 dated July 9 

Finland has requested renegotiation, under 
article XXVIII of the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade, of certain tariff concessions 
granted to the United States. Earlier announce- 
ments have been issued on the intention of Cuba, 1 
India, 2 the Netherlands, 2 Nicaragua, 2 Pakistan, 2 
Sweden, 2 Austria, 3 and France 3 to renegotiate cer- 
tain of their concessions. 

At their ninth session, the contracting parties 



1 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057. 

2 Ibid., July 4, 1955, p. 26. 



1 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057. 

2 Ibid., July 4, 1955, p. 26. 
8 Page 114. 



July 18, 1955 



115 



to the general agreement took action to extend the 
firm life of the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955, 
to December 31, 1957. Prior to such extension a 
country may renegotiate its individual tariff con- 
cessions with a view to their modification or with- 
drawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by June 
30, 1955, may continue through September 30, 
1955. In accordance with this procedure, Finland 
has indicated that it wishes to renegotiate certain 
of its tariff concessions of interest to the United 
States. 

Under article XXVIII a country wishing to 
withdraw or modify a concession first must try to 
reach some basis of agreement with other inter- 
ested contracting parties concerning such with- 
drawal or modification. The usual basis for agree- 
ment would be the granting of new concessions as 
compensation for the withdrawn concession. 

Interested persons are invited to submit their 
views with regard to the possible effect on U.S. 
trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of 
the concessions on the items in the attached list. 
In addition, views are also desired regarding im- 
ports into the above-mentioned countries from the 
United States on which the United States might 
request new or further tariff reductions as compen- 
sation to the United States for any modifications 
or withdrawals of concessions on items in the at- 
tached list. 

Views on the foregoing matters should be sub- 
mitted to the Committee for Reciprocity Informa- 
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee 
established to receive views on trade-agreement 
matters. It is requested that any such views be 
submitted by the close of business on July 30, 1955. 

All communications on these matters, in 15 
copies, should be addressed to: The Secretary of 
the Committee for Reciprocity Information, 
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D.C. 
If any interested party considers that his views 
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee 
in a written brief, he should make this known to 
the Secretary of the committee who will then 
arrange for oral presentation before the Com- 
mittee. 

List of Tariff Concessions 

Preparations and preserves, not including juice, of pine- 
apples, grapefruit, pears, apricots, peaches, or mixed 
fruits ; 

Pineapple and citrus fruit juices ; 

Transmission and conveyor belts ; 



Fabrics, ribbons, cords, and felts, treated with rubber or 
synthetic resins, except pile fabrics ; n. e. s. ; 

Stockings, socks, and gloves of artificial silk ; 

Drills, except stone drills and rock drills; reamers; mill- 
ing cutters, thread stocks, thread dies, and thread taps ; 

Files and rasps ; 

Compressors and air pumps ; 

Mechanical refrigerators ; 

Machinery and apparatus, n.e.s. ; 

Medical and surgical instruments, and parts thereof. 



Modification of Quota 
on Clover Seed Imports 

WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT 

White House press release dated June 30 

The President on June 29 issued a proclamation 
limiting imports of alsike clover seed during each 
of the two 12-month periods beginning July 1, 
1955, and July 1, 1956, to 2,500,000 pounds dutiable 
at 2 cents per pound, imports in excess thereof 
during each of the two periods to enter at 6 cents 
per pound. 

In its supplementary report which was sub- 
mitted to the President on April 28, 1955, 1 the 
Tariff Commission recommended that the restric- 
tions adopted by the President be imposed for 
successive 12-month periods indefinitely. The 
President, however, limited the effectiveness of his 
proclamation to the next two 12-month periods, 
or until June 30, 1957. 

On June 30, 1954, the President by proclama- 
tion imposed a quota of 1,500,000 pounds on im- 
ports of alsike clover seed during the year ending 
June 30, 1955, such imports to enter at a duty of 
2 cents per pound and imports in excess thereof 
to be subject to a duty of 6 cents per pound. 2 The 
Tariff Commission's latest investigation and re- 
port were made pursuant to section 7 of the Trade 
Agreements Extension Act and in accordance with 
the President's letter of July 14, 1954, in which he 
directed the Tariff Commission to continue its in- 
vestigation regarding alsike clover seed and to 
submit a supplementary report by May 2, 1955. 



1 Copies of the report may be obtained from the U.S. 
Tariff Commission, Washington 25, D.C. 

2 Bulletin of Aug. 2, 1954, p. 167. 



116 



Department of State Bulletin 



PROCLAMATION 3100 ' 

1. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in me by 
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and by 
section 7 (c) of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 
1951, as amended, on June 30, 1954, I issued Proclamation 
No. 3059 (19 P. R. 4103) modifying item 763 of Part I of 
Schedule XX (original) annexed to the General Agree- 
ment on Tariffs and Trade so as to provide that not more 
than 1,500,000 pounds of alsike clover seed described in the 
said item 763 entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption during the 12-month period beginning July 1, 

1954, should be dutiable at 2 cents per pound and that any 
such seed not subject to the rate of 2 cents per pound 
should be dutiable at 6 cents per pound : 

2. Whereas, on July 14, 1954, I directed the United 
States Tariff Commission to continue its investigation 
under section 7 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act 
of 1951, as amended, with regard to alsike clover seed, and 
to submit to me a supplementary report indicating whether 
the Commission considered the continuation of the tariff 
quota referred to in the previous recital beyond June 30, 

1955, to be necessary to prevent or remedy the serious 
injury to the domestic industry concerned which was re- 
ported to me by the Commission on May 21, 1954, to exist 
by reason of increased imports of such seed ; 

3. Whereas, on April 28, 1955, the United States Tariff 
Commission reported to me that as a result of its con- 
tinued investigation, including a public hearing, it has 
found that the continuation beyond June 30, 1955 of a 
modified tariff quota on alsike clover seed is necessary to 
prevent or remedy the serious injury to the domestic 
industry concerned ; 

4. Whereas section 350(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, authorizes the President to proclaim 
such modification of existing duties and such additional 
import restrictions as are required or appropriate to 
carry out any foreign trade agreement that the President 
has entered into under the said section 350(a) ; and 

5. Whereas I find that tie further modification of the 
concession granted in the said General Agreement with 
respect to alsike clover seed described in the said item 763 
to permit the application to such seed of the duty treat- 
ment hereinafter proclaimed is necessary to prevent seri- 
ous injury to the domestic industry producing the like 
or directly competitive product, and that upon such further 
modification of the said concession it will be appropriate 
to carry out the said General Agreement to apply to alsike 
clover seed the duty treatment hereinafter proclaimed : 

Now, therefore, I, Dwight D. Eisenhower, President 
of the United States of America, acting under the author- 
ity vested in me by section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 
as amended, and by section 7(c) of the Trade Agreements 
Extension Act of 1951, as amended, and in accordance 
with the provisions of the said General Agreement, do 
proclaim — ■ 

(a) That the provision in the said item 763 with respect 
to alsike clover seed shall be further modified during the 
period July 1, 1955 to June 30, 1957, both dates inclusive, 
to read as follows : 



Tariff Act 

of 1930, 
paragraph 


Description of products 


Rate of 
duty 






cents per 
pound 


763 


Grass seeds and other forage crop seeds: 








2 




Provided, That not more than 2,500,000 pounds 






of such seed entered during each 12-month 






period beginning July 1 in the years 1955 






and 1956 shall be dutiable at 2 cents per 






pound. Any such seed entered during any 






such period and not subject to the rate of 






2 cents per pound shall be dutiable at . . . 


6 



(b) That during the period July 1, 1955 to June 30, 
1957, both dates inclusive, alsike clover seed described in 
the said item 763, as modified by paragraph (a) above, 
shall be subject to the rates of duty specified in the said 
item 763 as so modified. 

Proclamation No. 2761A of December 16, 1947, as 
amended and supplemented, is modified accordingly during 
the period July 1, 1955 to June 30, 1957, both dates 
inclusive. 

In witness whekeof, I have hereunto set my hand and 

caused the seal of the United States of America to be 

affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this twenty-ninth day 

of June in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred 

[seal] and fifty-five, and of the Independence of the 

United States of America the one hundred and 

seventy-ninth. 



/j UL*y /J~ZJU-<^^ Xsk*~> 



3 20 Fed. Reg. 4699. 
July 18, 7955 



By the President : 

John Fosteb Dulles 

Secretary of State 



Quota on Rye Imports 



WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT 

White House press release dated June 30 

The President on June 29 issued a proclamation 
limiting imports of rye to 186,000,000 pounds dur- 
ing each of the nest two 12-month periods begin- 
ning July 1, 1955, and July 1, 1956. The Presi- 
dent's proclamation also provides for an alloca- 
tion of the 186,000,000-pound quota on an histori- 
cal basis between Canada, 182,280,000 pounds, and 
other foreign countries, 3,720,000 pounds. Not 



117 



more than 15,000 pounds of the total permissible 
imports may be of rye flour or rye meal. 

In its report to the President, the Tai*iff Com- 
mission recommended a quota of 95,200,000 pounds 
to be imposed indefinitely for succeeding 12-month 
periods. 1 The President, however, continued the 
limitation on imports of rye at the current level of 
186,000,000 pounds and limited the effectiveness of 
his proclamation to the next two 12-month periods, 
or until June 30, 1957. 

The Tariff Commission's investigation and re- 
port were made pursuant to section 22 of the Agri- 
cultural Adjustment Act, as amended, which au- 
thorizes limitations on imports when imports are 
interfering with or threaten to interfere with do- 
mestic price-support programs. The Tariff Com- 
mission found that continued restrictions on im- 
ports of rye were necessary to protect the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture's price-support program for 
rye. 

The President's proclamation does not apply to 
imports of certified or registered seed rye for seed- 
ing and crop-improvement purposes entered in 
accordance with safeguards prescribed in the 
proclamation. 

The Tariff Commission's report resulted from 
an investigation requested by the President on 
May 20, 1955. 2 The Tariff Commission's report 
was submitted to the President on June 24, 1955. 



PROCLAMATION 3101 3 

Whereas, pursuant to section 22 of the Agricultural 
Adjustment Act, as added by section 31 of the act of 
August 24, 1935, 49 Stat 773, reenacted by section 1 of 
the act of June 3, 1937, 50 Stat. 246, and as amended by 
section 3 of the act of July 3, 1948, 62 Stat. 1248, section 3 
of the act of June 28, 1950, 64 Stat. 261, and section 8(b) 
of the act of June 16, 1951, 65 Stat. 72 (7 U.S.C. 624), the 
Secretary of Agriculture advised me there was reason to 
believe that rye, rye flour, and rye meal are practically 
certain to be imported into the United States after June 
30, 1955, under such conditions and in such quantities as 
to render or tend to render ineffective, or materially inter- 
fere with, the price-support program undertaken by the 
Department of Agriculture with respect to rye pursuant to 
sections 301 and 401 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as 
amended, or to reduce substantially the amount of prod- 
ucts processed in the United States from domestic rye 



'Copies of the report may be obtained from the U.S. 
Tariff Commission, Washington 25, D. C. 
'Bulletin of July 4, 1955, p. 28. 
3 20 Fed. Reg. 4701. 



with respect to which such program of the Department of 
Agriculture is being undertaken; 

Whereas, on May 20, 1955, I caused the United States 
Tariff Commission to make an investigation under the 
said section 22 with respect to this matter ; 

Whereas, the said Tariff Commission has made such 
investigation and has reported to me its findings and 
recommendations made in connection therewith ; 

Whereas, on the basis of the said investigation and 
report of the Tariff Commission, I find that rye, rye flour, 
and rye meal, in the aggregate, are practically certain to 
be imported into the United States after June 30, 1955, 
under such conditions and in such quantities as to inter- 
fere materially with and to tend to render ineffective the 
said price-support program with respect to rye, and to 
reduce substantially the amount of products processed in 
the United States from domestic rye with respect to which 
said price-support program is being understaken ; and 

Whereas I find and declare that the imposition of the 
quantitative limitations hereinafter proclaimed is shown 
by such investigation of the Tariff Commission to be neces- 
sary in order that the entry, or withdrawal from ware- 
house, for consumption after June 30, 1955, of rye, rye 
flour, and rye meal will not render ineffective, or mate- 
rially interfere with, the said price-support program : 

Now, therefore, I, Dwtght D. Eisenhower, President 
of the United States of America, acting under and by 
virtue of the authority vested in me by the said section 
22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, do 
hereby proclaim that — 

(1) the total aggregate quantity of rye, rye flour, and 
rye meal which may be entered, or withdrawn from ware- 
house, for consumption in each of the 12-month periods 
beginning July 1 in 1955 or in 1956 shall not exceed 
186,000,000 pounds, of which not more than 15,000 pounds 
may be in the form of rye flour or rye meal, which per- 
missible total quantities I find and declare to be propor- 
tionately not less than 50 per centum of the total quantity 
of such rye, rye flour, and rye meal entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption during the represen- 
tative period July 1, 1950 to June 30, 1953, inclusive, and 

(2) during each such 12-month period, of the foregoing 
permissible total quantity not more than 182,280,000 
pounds shall be imported from Canada and not more than 
3,720,000 pounds shall be imported from other foreign 
countries. 

The provisions of this proclamation shall not apply to 
certified or registered seed rye for use for seeding and 
crop-improvement purposes, in bags tagged and sealed by 
an officially recognized seed-certifying agency of the 
country of production, if — 

(a) the individual shipment amounts to 100 bushels (of 
56 pounds each ) or less, or 

(b) the individual shipment amounts to more than 100 
bushels (of 56 pounds each) and the written approval of 
the Secretary of Agriculture or his designated representa- 
tive is presented at the time of entry, or bond is furnished 
in a form prescribed by the Commissioner of Customs in 
an amount equal to the value of the merchandise as set 
forth in the entry, plus the estimated duty as determined 



118 



Department of State Bulletin 



at the time of entry, conditioned upon the production of 
such written approval within six months from the date 
of entry. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and 

caused the seal of the United States of America to be 

affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this twenty-ninth day 

of June in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred 

[seal] and fifty-five, and of the Independence of the 

United States of America the one hundred and 

seventy-ninth. 

By the President: 

John Foster Dulles 

Secretary of State 



Study of Domestic Tuna Industry 

Press release 374 dated June 21 

A delegation representing the California Com- 
mission on Interstate Cooperation, composed of 
California State officials accompanied by repre- 
sentatives of the canning and fishing segments of 
the tuna industry and of the Council of State 
Governments, called on Under Secretary Hoover 
and other officials of the U.S. Government on 
June 20 to discuss the situation which has arisen 
in the industry in California. Maurice C. Spar- 
ling, chairman of the Commission, and Vincent 
Thomas, vice chairman of the Commission, headed 
the delegation. The delegation was accompanied 
by Representative Robert C. Wilson of the Thir- 
tieth Congressional District of California and 
Merrell F. Small, administrative assistant to 
Senator Thomas Kuchel. 

In addition to representatives of the Department 
of State, representatives of the Departments of 
Interior, Commerce, and Treasury were also 
present to meet with members of the delegation. 

Various related aspects of the tuna situation in 
California were discussed. The delegation pre- 
sented information bearing on the matter and ad- 
vanced a number of suggestions to deal with the 
situation. The Government representatives indi- 
cated that this matter is now under immediate and 
active study by the executive branch. It is ex- 
pected that this study will be completed in the 
very near future. 



The delegation is planning to meet further with 
other agencies of the Government to consider the 
situation in the tuna industry in California. 



THE CONGRESS 



Return of German and Japanese 
Vested Assets 

Following is the text of a letter from Secretary 
Dulles to Congressman James F. Richards, chair- 
man of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

June 30, 1955 
Dear Mr. Richards: I refer to Mr. Morton's 
letter of March 30, 1955, on the subject of H. J. 
Res. 265, which provides for full compensation 
for vested German and Japanese assets. 1 In his 
letter he described a proposal dealing with vested 
assets and war claims held by American nationals 
against Germany which had been discussed with 
the Governments of the Federal German Republic 
and of Japan and said that recommendations for 
legislation embodying the proposal would be for- 
warded to the Congress. It was requested in that 
letter that consideration of H. J. Res. 265 be de- 
ferred until the legislation referred to had been 
prepared. 

A draft of the legislation was sent to the Con- 
gress on June 6, 1955, accompanied by my letter 
in which the background of the proposal was set 
forth in detail. The legislation was introduced 
in the House as H. R. 6730 and in the Senate as 
S. 2227. A copy of my letter and an accompany- 
ing memorandum commenting on the specific pro- 
visions of the proposed draft appear in the Con- 
gressional Record for June 14, 1955 at pages 
6872 ff. Copies of the letter and memorandum 
are enclosed for your convenience. 2 



'For background, see Bulletin of July 12, 1954, p. 69; 
Nov. 8, 1954, p. 6S0 ; Feb. 21, 1955, p. 290 ; Mar. 14, 1955, 
pp. 437, 43S ; and May 23, 1955, p. 848. 

2 Not printed here. 



July 18, 1955 



119 



PI. R. 6730 provides for a limited return of Ger- 
man and Japanese assets to natural persons up to 
a maximum of $10,000 per individual. It also 
provides for the return of trademarks and copy- 
rights, and of assets of educational, charitable, and 
religious organizations. It is estimated that the 
cost of the return program can be covered out of 
assets presently held by the Attorney General. 
The bill also establishes a fund for the compen- 
sation of war claims of American nationals against 
Germany. The compensation payable to any 
single claimant probably would not exceed $10,000. 
The fund is the equivalent of funds derived from 
vested German assets used for other purposes un- 
der the War Claims Act of 1948. 

In a letter to the Chancellor of the Federal Ger- 
man Republic on August 7, 1954 3 the President 
referred to hardships which arose on the one hand 
out of the vesting program in the United States 
and on the other out of the absence of compensa- 
tion for war claims of American nationals against 
Germany. The President said that none of the 
bills then pending in Congress with regard to the 
return of vested assets had the approval of his 
Administration. He expressed the hope that an 
equitable and satisfactory solution could be 
achieved. 

The agencies which formulated the proposal 
contained in H.R. 6730 estimated that it would 
provide for a full return to approximately 90% 
of the former owners of vested assets, and con- 
sider that it would achieve the equitable solution 
sought by the President. It represents the con- 
sidered position of the Administration, and it is 
hoped that the proposal will be acted upon 
promptly and favorably by the Congress. 

In providing for full compensation for vested 
assets, H.J. Res. 265, on the other hand, does not 
differ materially from bills introduced in the pre- 
vious Congress, providing for a full return of 
vested assets to which the President referred in 
his letter of August 7, 1954, stating that such bills 
did not meet with the approval of his Adminis- 
tration. The payment, as a matter of grace, of 
full compensation for vested German and Japa- 
nese assets would require the appropriation of 
substantial sums. Inasmuch as the Congress has 
already authorized the expenditure of $225 million 
of the proceeds derived from vested assets for 



war claims, the net burden upon the taxpayer 
would be heavy. At the same time, no provision 
is made for the compensation of war claims of 
American nationals against Germany. For these 
reasons, the Department is unable to recommend 
that H.J. Res. 265 receive favorable consideration. 
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is 
no objection to the submission of this report. 
Sincerely yours, 

John Foster Dulles 

Enclosures : 

1. From the Secretary dated June 6. 

2. Explanatory Memorandum on Draft Bill. 



Department's Views on 
Sugar Legislation 

Statement oy Henri/ F. Holland 

Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs 1 

Sugar is of very great importance in United 
States relations with a large number of foreign 
countries, especially the Latin American coun- 
tries. The State Department therefore greatly 
appreciates the opportunity to comment on the 
question of sugar legislation which you are now 
considering. 

The Department's general position is contained 
in its report on H. R. 5406. As was indicated in 
the report, the Department recognizes that the 
domestic sugar industry faces a serious problem in 
the disposal of surplus stocks. The Department is 
also sympathetic toward the desire of domestic 
producers to share in the growth of the domestic 
market. The Department believes that a con- 
siderable measure of relief could be afforded the 
domestic industry during the fiscal year begin- 
ning July 1, 1955, through Government purchase 
of sugar for use in foreign relief programs. The 
Department is also in favor of permitting do- 
mestic producers to share in increases of sugar 
consumption in the United States beginning Jan- 
uary 1, 1956, and measuring increases in consump- 
tion from the level of 8,350,000 tons. The De- 
partment believes, however, that the proposed 



8 Ibid., Aug. 23, 1954, p. 
120 



1 Made before the House Committee on Agriculture on 
June 22 (press release 377) regarding H. R. 5406, "A Bill 
To Amend the Sugar Act of 1948, as Amended." 

Department of State Bulletin 



legislation should not take effect before January 1, 
1956, and that increases in consumption should not 
be measured from a level lower than 8,350,000 tons. 
The principal questions raised by the proposed 
legislation for the Department are: 

1. The time when it should take effect. 

2. The extent to which domestic producers 
should share in increased consumption. 

3. The way in which the sugar which is to be 
supplied by foreign countries should be shared 
among such countries. 



The Time When Legislation Should Take Effect 

To change the legislation to take effect before 
January 1, 1956, would mean a worsening of the 
position of foreign producers in this market with 
regard to sugar they have already produced in the 
expectation of selling it here in accordance with 
legislation which still has more than iy 2 years 
to run; to measure "increases in consumption" 
from a level less than 8,350,000 tons would, in fact, 
give a retroactive effect to the legislation, since 
sugar consumption in the United States will un- 
doubtedly reach the level of 8,350,000 tons before 
the end of the present year, if it has not already 
done so. 

Although Congress may, of course, alter sugar 
legislation at any time, it is the Department's be- 
lief that Members of the Congress, even in the 
absence of State Department recommendations, 
would wish to take the following into account in 
deciding whether to give a retroactive effect to 
the legislation : 

1. Since 1937 sugar legislation has customarily 
been enacted for 4- or 5-year periods and has been 
allowed to run its course without substantial modi- 
fication during such periods. 

2. Foreign countries whose exports of sugar to 
the United States are limited by the Sugar Act 
have come to rely on the stability of our sugar 
policy over these 4- or 5-year periods. 

3. Frequent references have been made, during 
previous congressional hearings and debates on 
sugar legislation, to the need for providing legis- 
lation, in advance, for a term of years in order 
that domestic and foreign producers may plan 
their production with greater assurance. To 
change the legislation to take effect this year 
would, of course, mean worsening of the position of 
foreign producers in this market with regard to 



sugar which they have already produced in the 
expectation of selling it here. 

4. The structure of the quota system under the 
present act, with fixed quotas for domestic areas 
and with foreign producers meeting residual 
requirements, was established in 1947, to become 
effective in 1948, on the initiative of our domestic 
sugar producers- 

5. Other domestic producers volunteered in 
1951, when the act was revised, to have their quotas 
remain unchanged if something could be done to 
increase the quota of Puerto Rico, one of the do- 
mestic areas. 

6. The duration of the Sugar Act was an in- 
tegral part of the "package" which the executive 
branch recommended in 1951 as an equitable com- 
promise between foreign and domestic producers 
supplying this market, and the testimony on be- 
half of the executive branch indicated its expecta- 
tion that the act would remain in effect for a 4- 
year period. 



Sharing Increases in Consumption 

There are also a number of considerations which 
support the view that it would be undesirable for 
new sugar legislation to accord less favorable 
quotas to foreign producers than those being rec- 
ommended by the executive branch. These include 
the following: 

1. Any reduction in the foreign share of our 
sugar market will involve a loss for the United 
States which is at least as large as the amount of 
the reduction. For example, our exports and our 
production for export will be less by virtually the 
same dollar amount. Since almost every State in 
the Union produces articles that are exported to 
Cuba and other foreign countries which ship 
sugar to the United States, a reduction of our pur- 
chases of their sugar would be a serious matter to 
our export trade and would affect many United 
States industries throughout the entire country. 
Generally speaking, the prosperity of our export 
industries depends on the ability of foreign pur- 
chasers to buy our goods; and this, in turn, de- 
pends on the number of dollars which these coun- 
tries can obtain by selling their products in the 
United States market. The dollars which Cuba 
and other foreign countries receive for sugar sold 
in the United States are returned almost imme- 
diately in payment for such products as pork, rice, 



July 18, 7955 



121 



apples, and manufactures of various types. Most 
of the countries which sell sugar to the United 
States have an unfavorable trade balance with 
the United States. They wish to buy an increased 
volume of our export products but are able to do so 
only by increasing their sales here. 

2. To adopt legislation less favorable than that 
recommended by the executive branch would mean 
a further worsening of economic conditions in 
Cuba. Cuba's sugar production has already been 
reduced from 8,000,000 short tons in 1952 to 5,- 
000,000 short tons in 1955. Cuba is financing a 
very large surplus of sugar of 1,200,000 short tons. 
The Cuban Government estimates that, because 
of the cutback already made in its sugar produc- 
tion, salaries in the industry have had to be re- 
duced by approximately 13 percent. The take- 
home pay of workers has been reduced by a fur- 
ther 27 percent cut during the "dead season." Any 
action on our part which would materially worsen 
Cuba's present economic position would, of course, 
mean reduced public support in Cuba for that 
Government's present policy of close cooperation 
with the United States. It would also mean 
strengthening the hand of 25,000 active Commu- 
nists in Cuba just after the Cuban Government 
has established a new organization for the repres- 
sion of Communist activities. 

Sharing the Foreign Quota 

Principally because of the quota system, the 
price of sugar in the United States market is usu- 
ally considerably higher than in the world mar- 
ket. Last year domestic prices exceeded world 
prices by an average of approximately 2 cents 
per pound, or the equivalent of about 60 percent 
of the world market price during the year. Fur- 
thermore, foreign sugar consumed in the United 
States receives tax and tariff treatment which 
varies widely depending upon the area in which 
it is produced. 

In view of the price at which sugar sells in the 
United States in comparison with the price it 
brings in the world market, it is only natural that 
foreign suppliers should urge that their quotas 
be increased. It is also not surprising, in view 
of the difference in quota and tariff treatment 
accorded to different foreign suppliers, that many 
of the suppliers should believe that they are re- 
ceiving less favorable treatment than is accorded 
to other suppliers. The Department has received 



communications from a considerable number of 
foreign governments during the past year while 
possible revision of the Sugar Act has been under 
consideration. These communications have come 
from Cuba and the Philippines, our largest and 
second-largest foreign suppliers, respectively. 
Communications have also been received from a 
number of the governments of the full-duty coun- 
tries, including Peru, the Dominican Eepublic, 
Mexico, Formosa, and Panama. 

The position of the executive branch to the ef- 
fect that domestic producers should be permitted 
to share in increases in consumption above the 
level of 8,350,000 tons to the extent of 55 percent 
is, of course, now known to governments of these 
countries. Cuba is urging that increases in con- 
sumption continue to be divided on the basis of 
96 percent to Cuba and 4 percent to the full-duty 
countries. The full-duty countries are alleging 
that they have always been discriminated against 
in relation to Cuba and the Philippines, and they 
are urging that they be given greatly increased 
quotas. Some of these countries which have been 
unable, because of the restriction on imports of 
sugar contained in the Sugar Act, to establish a 
record of supplying sugar to this market over any 
considerable period of time, such as Formosa and 
Panama, are pressing for quotas that are very 
large in relation to the small quantities which they 
have shipped to us in the past. 

The Philippines, which has a maximum quota 
of 977,000 tons, raw value, as provided in the Phil- 
ippine Trade Act of 1946, is urging that they also 
be given the right to participate in increases in 
consumption, stating that their quota should not 
be the only one, foreign or domestic, which is not 
increased. The revised Philippine Trade Act, 
now pending before Congress, would remove the 
present maximum limitation on the Philippine 
quota. 2 Philippine sugar is not now subject to 
duty but is scheduled, under the new Trade Act, 
to begin paying a nominal rate of duty in 1956, 
equal to 5 percent of the rate applicable to sugar 
from Cuba. This is to be increased to 10 percent 
of the Cuban rate in 1959 and to 20 percent in 
1962. 

The decision concerning the relative shares of 



2 For a statement on the proposed revision of the Phil- 
ippine Trade Act by William J. Sebald, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Far Eastern Affairs, see Bulletin of June 
13, 1955, p. 971. 



122 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



the foreign suppliers should, of course, be made 
on the basis of standards which can be applied 
as uniformly as possible among the various coun- 
tries. The decision must also be made within the 
framework of the decision which will be taken 
regarding the recommendation of the executive 
branch that increases in consumption should be 
shared by domestic producers. 

The recommendation that domestic producers be 
permitted to share in increases in future con- 
sumption beginning January 1, 1956, to the extent 
of 55 percent of such increases will mean that the 
share of Cuba and the full-duty countries will be 
reduced to 45 percent, at the maximum. Most of 
this reduction will, of course, be borne by Cuba. 
Furthermore, Cuba and the full-duty countries to- 
gether will lose to domestic producers an estimated 
80,000 to 100,000 tons of sugar during 1956 which 
would have gone to them under present legislation. 
Any increase in the share of the full-duty countries 
would reduce Cuba's share further. It is believed, 
nevertheless, that the share of the full-duty coun- 
tries is so small in relation to the share of Cuba 
and the Philippines (because of favorable treat- 
ment accorded by us in the past to the latter two 
countries) that the participation of the full-duty 
countries in increases in consumption should be 
materially increased beginning January 1, 1957. 

The Department does not recommend an in- 
crease in the Philippine quota at this time. The 
Department believes, however, as is indicated in 
its report on H. E. 5106, that consideration should 
be given to allowing the Philippines to share in 
increased consumption when sugar legislation is 
next amended and after sugar from the Philip- 
pines begins to pay a tariff. 

Dividing the quota of the full-duty countries 
among such countries involves a problem some- 
what like that of dividing the quota for foreign 
countries other than the Philippines among Cuba 
and the full-duty countries. As was suggested 
earlier, some of the full-duty countries have been 
unable, because of the limitations imposed by the 
Sugar Act, to establish any record as a substantial 
supplier of sugar to the United States market. 
The Department believes that special considera- 
tion should be given to the countries in this group 
which, during the past 2 years, have taken full 
advantage of the provision of the act which per- 
mits them to supply 1,000 tons of sugar to this 
market on a first-come, first-sei*ved basis. The 
Department supports the proposal contained in the 



legislation being submitted by the Department 
of Agriculture which would triple the amount of 
sugar that such countries can supply. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Current Actions 



MULTILATERAL 



Aviation 

Protocol amending article 45 of Convention on Interna- 
tional Civil Aviation (TIAS 1581) which provides for 
the permanent seat of ICAO. Done at Montreal June 
14, 1954. 1 

Ratifications deposited: Egypt, March 15, 1955; Luxem- 
bourg, March 17, 1955; Iraq, March 25, 1955. 
Protocol relating to certain amendments to the Conven- 
tion on International Civil Aviation (TIAS 1581), pro- 
viding that sessions of the ICAO Assembly shall be held 
not less than once in 3 years instead of annually. Done 
at Montreal June 14, 1954. 1 

Ratifications deposited: Egypt, March 15, 1955; Luxem- 
bourg, March 17, 1955; Iraq, March 25, 1955; Aus- 
tralia, April 22, 1955. 

Property 

Convention for the protection of industrial property. 
Signed at London June 2, 1934. Entered into force 
August 1, 1938. 53 Stat. 1748. 

Adherences effective: Mexico, July 14, 1955; Italy, July 
15, 1955. 

War 

Geneva convention relative to treatment of prisoners of 
war. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. Entered into 
force October 21, 1950. 2 
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a 

statement): July 6, 1955. 
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955. 

Geneva convention for amelioration of the condition of 
the wounded and sick in armed forces in the field. 
Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. Entered into force 
October 21, 1950.= 
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a 

reservation and a statement ) : July 6, 1955. 
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955. 

Geneva convention for amelioration of the condition of 
wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of armed 
forces at sea. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. En- 
tered into force October 21, 1950. 2 
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a 

statement) : July 6, 1955. 
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955. 

Geneva convention relative to protection of civilian per- 
sons in time of war. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. 
Entered into force October 21, 1950. 2 
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with 
the reservation made at time of signing and with a 
statement) : July 6, 1955. 
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955. 

' Not in force. 

" Not in force for the United States. 



July 7 8, J 955 



123 



BILATERAL 



Austria 

Agricultural commodities agreement. Signed at Vienna 
June 14, 1955. Entered into force June 14, 1955. 

Luxembourg 

Agreement relating to war damage to private property. 
Effected by exchange of notes at Luxembourg June 15, 
1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955. 

Yugoslavia 

Agreement providing for the furnishing of additional 
wheat to Yugoslavia. Effected by exchange of notes at 
Belgrade May 12, 1955. Entered into force May 12, 
1955. 

Agreement relating to the disbursement of dinars made 
available for the procurement of certain agricultural 
commodities. Effected by exchange of notes at Bel- 
grade May 12, 1955. Entered into force May 12, 1955. 

Agreement relating to the use of economic assistance funds 
for the financing of wheat purchases. Effected by ex- 
change of notes at Belgrade May 12, 1955. Entered 
into force May 12, 1955. 



THE DEPARTMENT 



ICA Set Up in Department of State 

The Department of State announced on June 
30 {press release 4.09) that Secretary Dulles had 
issued an order establishing the International Co- 
operation Administration effective at the close of 
business on June 30, 1955. Pursuant to the Pres- 
ident's Executive Order 10610 of May 9, 1955, 1 
this Administration, under the direction and con- 
trol of the Secretary of State, will carry out the 
functions previously exercised by the Foreign Op- 
erations Administration under the Mutual Secu- 
rity Act of 1951f. and related acts and executive 
orders, except for certain functions transferred to 
the Department of Defense. Secretary Dulles' 
order maintains in the International Cooperation 
Administration and its Director, John B. Hol- 
lister, essentially the same functions as have been 
carried out by the Foreign Operations Adminis- 
tration under Harold E. Stassen. The text of 
the order follows: 



1 Bulletin of May 30, 1955, p. 889. 
124 



Establishment of International Cooperation 
Administration and Delegation of Certain Related 
Functions 

Department circular 156 dated 1 June 30 

By virtue of the authority vested in me by 
Executive Order No. 10610, the Mutual Security 
Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 832), and section 4 of the 
act of May 26, 1949 (63 Stat. Ill, 5 U. S. C. sec. 
151c), and in accordance with the requirements of 
section 3(a) ( 1 ) of Public Law 404, 79th Congress 
(60 Stat. 238, 5 U. S. C. sec. 1002 (a) (1) ), estab- 
lishment of the International Cooperation Admin- 
istration is effected and assignment of mutual 
security and related functions and delegations of 
authority are made as follows : 

1. Establishment of the International Coopera- 
tion Administration. There is established in the 
Department of State an agency which shall be 
known as the International Cooperation Admin- 
istration. The Institute of Inter-American Af- 
fairs, the Office of Small Business provided for in 
section 504 (b) of the Mutual Security Act of 
1954, and the International Development Advi- 
sory Board shall be a part of or attached to the 
International Cooperation Administration. 

2. The Director of the International Coopera- 
tion Administration. As provided in section 103 
(a) of Executive Order No. 10610 the Interna- 
tional Cooperation Administration shall be headed 
by the Director of the International Cooperation 
Administration. 

3. Functions Delegated to the International, Go- 
operation Administration or the Director Thereof. 
a. The Director of the International Cooperation 
Administration shall, under the direction and con- 
trol of the Secretary of State, carry out the fol- 
lowing functions: 

(1) the functions which section 103 (a) of 
Executive Order No. 10610 directs be carried out 
by or under the Administration or the Director; 

(2) the functions under the Mutual Defense 
Assistance Control Act of 1951 transferred to the 
Secretary of State by section 101 of Executive 
Order No. 10610; 

(3) subject to consultation with the Secretary 
of Defense and the concurrence of the Secretary 
of State, (a) the function of having primary re- 
sponsibility for preparation and presentation to 
the Congress of such programs of foreign military, 
economic, and technical assistance as may be re- 
quired in the interest of the security of the United 

Department of State Bulletin 



States; (b) the function of coordination referred 
to in section 102 (c) (1) of Executive Order No. 
10575; (c) the function of determining the value 
of the program for any country under chapter 1 
of title I of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (re- 
lating to military assistance) ; and (d) the func- 
tion of determining the value of the program for 
any country under so much of chapter 2 of title I 
of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 as pertains 
to the functions transferred to the Secretary of 
Defense and the Department of Defense by section 
201 of Executive Order No. 10610 (relating to 
assistance directly to military forces). 

b. Nothing in this order shall be construed to 
derogate from any authority, responsibilities or 
functions previously held or exercised by the Sec- 
retary of State or the various bureaus and other 
offices of the Department of State. 

If,. Functions Reserved to the Secretary of State. 
The responsibility for coordinating the functions 
of the International Cooperation Administration 
with other affairs of the Department of State is 
hereby reserved to the Secretary of State. 

5. Records, Property, Personnel, Positions, and 
Funds. The records, property, personnel, posi- 
tions, and unexpended balances of appropriations, 
allocations, and other funds of the Foreign Opera- 
tions Administration transferred to the Depart- 
ment of State by section 302 of Executive Order 
No. 10610 are hereby placed in the International 
Cooperation Administration. Nothing in this sec- 
tion shall be construed to derogate from the au- 
thority of the Secretary of State within the terms 
of Executive Order No. 10610 to place elsewhere 
in the Department of State at a later date or dates 
records, property, personnel, positions and funds 
which relate to functions which are not to be per- 
formed by the International Cooperation Admin- 
istration or the Director thereof. 

6. Successor ship. Except as may be otherwise 
provided from time to time, and consistent with 
law and with Executive Order No. 10610, the In- 
ternational Cooperation Administration and the 
Director thereof shall be deemed to be the succes- 
sors of the Foreign Operations Administration 
and the Director thereof, respectively, in respect 
to all functions required to be carried out by or 
under the International Cooperation Administra- 
tion or the Director thereof pursuant to section 
103 (a ) of Executive Order No. 10610, or delegated 
to the Administration or the Director by the Sec- 
retary of State. 



7. Effective Date. a. This order shall become 
effective immediately upon the coming into effect 
of Executive Order No. 10610. 

b. Nothing in this order shall be construed to 
derogate from the authority of the Secretary of 
State to amend this order at any time. 

John Foster Dulles 

Secretary of State 



Resignations 

David McK. Key, Assistant Secretary for International 
Organization Affairs, effective July 31. 



Designations 

James A. McDevitt as Director, Executive Staff, Office 
of the Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs, effective 
July 5. 



THE FOREIGN SERVICE 



Ninth Foreign Service 
Selection Boards Meet 

Press release 391 dated June 27 

The Ninth Foreign Service Selection Boards 
convened in Washington for their initial joint 
meeting on June 27. The boards will be in session 
about 2 months. 

The duty of the five boards is to evaluate the 
performance of all members of the Foreign Serv- 
ice Officer Corps for purposes of promotion, selec- 
tion-out, training, and assignment. Each board 
is composed of career Foreign Service officers, 
public members, and nonvoting observers from the 
Departments of Labor and Commerce. 

The members and observers were welcomed and 
addressed by Loy Henderson, Deputy Under Sec- 
retary of State for Administration, and George 
Wilson, Assistant Controller for Personnel. 

A list of members and observers for each of the 
five boards follows : 



July 18, 7955 



125 



1955 
NINTH FOREIGN SERVICE SELECTION BOARDS 



Rodney L. Mott 



Board A 



Christian M. Ravndal 
Herbert S. Bursley . . 
John D. Hickerson . . 



Adam Sutcliffe . 



John Brophy 



FSO-Career Minister, 
Minister to Hungary 
FSO-Career Minister, 
Foreign Service Inspector 
FSO-Career Minister, 
Deputy for Foreign Affairs, 
National War College 
Inventor, former treasurer 
and general manager, The 
Adam Sutcliffe Company 
Coordinator, C.I.O. World 
Labor Fund 



Professor of Political Science 
and Director, Division of So- 
cial Science, Colgate Uni- 
versity 



Observers 



Department of Commerce 



Department of Labor 



Serge G. Koushnareff, Deputy 
Director, Transportation and 
Utilities Division, Bureau of 
Foreign Commerce 
Samuel M. Justice, Chief, 
International Branch, Bu- 
reau of Apprenticeship 

E. Willis Whited (alternate), 
Assistant Chief, Interna- 
tional Branch, Bureau of Ap- 
prenticeship 



Observers 



Board D 



Department of Labor 



Department of Commerce 



Herman B. Byer, Assistant 
Commissioner, Bureau of 
Labor Statistics 
G. Harold Keatley, Liaison 
Officer, Foreign Service Op- 
erations, Bureau of Foreign 
Commerce 



Board B 



Lester D. Mallory . . 
John Wesley Jones . . 

John H. Burns 

George J. Richardson 



FSO-1, Ambassador to Jor- 
dan 

FSO-1, Director, Office of 
Western European Affairs 
FSO-2, Consul General at 
Frankfort 

Secretary-Treasurer, Inter- 
national Association of Fire 
Fighters, American Federa- 
tion of Labor 



Observers 



Department of Commerce 



Department of Labor 



G. Harold Keatley, Liaison 
Officer, Foreign Service Op- 
erations, Bureau of Foreign 
Commerce 

Frederick R. Schoenborn, 
Chief, Division of Labor 
Clearance and Immigration, 
Bureau of Employment Secu- 
rity 



Board G 

E. Tomlin Bailey FSO-1, Counselor of Embassy 

at London, Supervising Con- 
sul General for the United 
Kingdom 

Aaron S. Brown FSO-2, Counselor of Embassy 

at Lisbon 



Edward E. Rice . . . . 
Leon L. Cowles . . . . 
Wilson T. M. Beale, Jr. 



Herbert M. Bratter 



FSO-2, Consul General at 
Stuttgart 

FSO-2, Foreign Service In- 
spector 

FSO-2, Officer - in - Charge, 
United Kingdom and Ireland 
Affairs, Bureau of European 
Affairs 

Author, free-lance writer, and 
consultant on international 
financial and economic affairs 



Observers 



Department of Commerce 



Department of Labor 



Constance R. Harvey 
Houston S. Lay .... 



Don V. Catlett 



Francis E. Simmons 



Arley Caudill, Country Desk 
Officer for Spain and Portu- 
gal, European Division, Bu- 
reau of Foreign Commerce 
. Mrs. Margaret Sheridan, De- 
partment of State Liaison 
Officer, Office of International 
Trade 

Board E 

. FSO-2, First Secretary of 
Embassy and Consul at Bonn 

. FSO-2, Deputy Director, Of- 
fice of Special Consular Serv- 
ices 

. FSO-3, International Econo- 
mist, Office of Philippine and 
Southeast Asian Affairs, Bu- 
reau of Far Eastern Affairs 

. Manager, Washington office, 
American Viscose Corpora- 
tion 



Observer 



Department of Commerce. 



Serge G. Koushnareff, Dep- 
uty Director, Transportation 
and Utilities Division, Bureau 
of Foreign Commerce 



126 



Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



July 18, 1955 

Agriculture. Department's Views on Sugar Legislation 
(Holland) 

American Republics. Importance of International Travel 
in Advancing World Peace (Weeks) 

Austria 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Austria 

and France 

U.S. Deposits Ratification of Austrian State Treaty . . . 

Burma. Visit of D Nu, Prime Minister of Burma (texts 
of addresses, letter, and joint statement) 

Claims and Property. Return of German and Japanese 
Vested Assets (text of letter) 

Congress, The 

Department's Views on Sugar Legislation (Holland) . . 

Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets (text of 
letter) 

Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma (texts of ad- 
dresses, letter, and joint statement) 

Economic Affairs 

Department's Views on Sugar Legislation (Holland) . . 
The Foreign Trade Policy of the U.S. (Thibodeaux) . . 
Importance of International Travel in Advancing World 

Peace (Weeks) 

Modification of Quota on Clover Seed Imports (text of 

proclamation) 

Quota on Rye Imports (text of proclamation) 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Austria 

and France 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Finland . 

Study of Domestic Tuna Industry 

Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland (text 

of proclamation) 

Finland. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested 
by Finland 

Foreign Service. Ninth Foreign Service Selection Boards 
Meet 

France. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by 
Austria and France 

Germany. Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets 
(text of letter) 

Greece. Special Aid to Greece To Repair Earthquake 
Damage 

International Organizations and Meetings. U.S. Delega- 
tions to International Conferences (20th Session, 
ECOSOC) 

Israel. American-Israel Friendship (Brownell) .... 

Japan. Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets 
(text of letter) 

Military Affairs. Shooting Down of U.S. Plane by Soviet 
Aircraft (texts of U.S. note and Soviet memo- 
randum) 

Mutual Security 

ICA Set Up in Department of State (text of order) . . . 
Special Aid to Greece To Repair Earthquake Damage . . 
Presidential Documents 

Modification of Quota on Clover Seed Imports 

Quota on Rye Imports 

Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland . . . 
Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma 

Protection of U.S. Nationals and Property. Shooting Down 
of U.S. Plane by Soviet Aircraft (texts of U.S. note 
and Soviet memorandum) . 

Refugees and Displaced Persons. Refugee Ships Begin Series 
of Trips 

Rumania. Restrictions on Photography and Sketching by 
Rumanians in U.S. (texts of U.S. and Rumanian 
notes) 

State, Department of 

Changes in Regulations on Issuance of Nonimmigrant 
Visas 

Designations (McDevitt) 

Documentation Required for Unofficial Visitors to U.S. 
(text of U.S. note) 

How We Work With Other Nations (Simmons) .... 

ICA Set Up in Department of State (text of order) . . . 



Index 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 838 



120 
106 

114 
94 

95 

119 

120 

119 

95 

120 
110 

106 

116 
117 

114 
115 
119 

113 
115 
125 
114 
119 
100 

109 

97 

119 

100 

124 
100 

116 

118 

113 

95 

100 
99 

105 



108 
125 

104 

91 

124 



Opening of the Public Exhibit of the Seal of the United 

States (Dulles) 

Resignations (Key) 

Switzerland. Supplementary Trade Agreement With Swit- 
zerland (text of proclamation) 

Treaty Information 

Current Actions 

Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Finland . 
Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland (text 

of proclamation) 

U.S. Deposits Ratification of Austrian State Treaty . . . 
U.S.S.R. 

Documentation Required for Unofficial Visitors to U.S. 
(text of U.S. note) 

Protest Against Expulsion of American Priest From Mos- 
cow (texts of U.S. and Soviet notes) 

Shooting Down of U.S. Plane by Soviet Aircraft (texts of 
U.S. note and Soviet memorandum) 

United Nations 

U.S. Delegations to International Conferences (20th Ses- 
sion, ECOSOC) 

U.S. Representative on ECOSOC (Baker) Confirmed by 
Senate 



94 
125 



113 



123 
115 



113 
94 



104 
102 
100 

109 

109 



Name Index 



Baker, John C 

Bissonnette, Rev. Georges 
Brownell, Herbert, Jr. . 
Dulles. Secretary 



109 

102 

97 

94, 119 

Eisenhower, President 96, 113, 117, 118 

Holland, Henry F 120 

Key, David McK 125 

McDevitt, James A 125 

Nu, U 95,96 

Simmons, John F 91 

Thibodeaux, Ben H 110 

Walmsley, Walter N., Jr 104 

Weeks, Sinclair 106 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: July 4-10 

Releases may be obtained from the News Division, 
Department of State, Washington 25, D. O. 

Press releases issued prior to July 4 which ap- 
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 334 of 
June 9, 364 of June 17, 374 of June 21, 377 of June 
22, 384 and 385 of June 24, 391 of June 27, 392 of 
June 28, 403 of June 29, 404, 406, and 409 of June 30, 
410, 411, and 413 of July 1. 

No. Date Subject 

*418 7/6 Agricultural representative to U.S.S.R. 
f419 7/7 War damage agreement with Luxem- 
bourg. 
*420 7/7 Parkman resignation. 
421 7/7 Note to U.S.S.R. on Bering Sea plane 
incident. 
t422 7/7 Air transport agreement with Germany. 
f423 7/7 Hoover : statement at signing of air 
transport agreement with Germany. 

424 7/9 Deposit of U.S. ratification of Austrian 

treaty. 

425 7/9 Renegotiation of tariff concessions with 

Finland. 



* Not printed. 

t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin. 




United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300 

(GPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



the 

Department 

of 

State 



The United States and Germany: 1945-1955 



Order Form 

Fo: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed And: 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



Publication 5827 



25 cents 



The story of the shaping of American policy toward Germany 
during the 10 years which culminated in Germany's return to 
the community of free nations is told officially for the first time 
in The United States and Germany: 1945-1955, a 56-page illus- 
trated pamphlet. 

Ways and means of attaining U.S. goals in Germany have 
changed since 1945, the booklet notes, "but so have we changed, 
and so has Germany, and so has the world." To appreciate the 
significance of this change, it continues, "it is necessary to look 
back to the beginning of the postwar decade and note the factors 
that have influenced our course." 

Much of the story is appropriately concerned with the im- 
portant developments of 1954-55. Of these the document 
says: "The events of the past year more than any other have 
tested the validity of our policy. In spite of obstacles and re- 
verses, our policy for Germany has achieved in a decade what 
we once believed would require a full generation. A new 
Germany, risen from the ruins of Nazi Germany, has reached 
the status of well-earned sovereignty and acceptance as an equal 
into the partnership of free nations." 

Copies of The United States and Germany: 19U5-1955 may be 
purchased for 25 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, 
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. 



Please send me copies of The United States and Germany: 1945- 

1955. 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 









*s/t<>' ^/)e/ictw6m&n6 /0& t/tcde< 




•I. XXA7/J, No. 839 




TO SEEK THE ROAD TO PEACE • Address by the 

President 131 

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AMERICAN 
REPUBLICS IN WORLD AFFAIRS • by Assistant 
Secretary Holland 135 

MUTUAL DEFENSE ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT 
WITH GERMANY 

Department Announcement 142 

Text of Agreement 142 

AIR TRANSPORT AGREEMENT WITH GERMANY 

Department Announcement 145 

Text of Agreement 146 

Excliange of Notes on Route Scltedulc 149 

PROGRESS IN THE TRUST TERRITORY OF THE 

PACIFIC ISLANDS • Statements by Delmas H. Nucher 153 



For index see inside back cover 



Superintendent of Documents 

AUG 2 6 1955 




'•*t«» e* 



«ub Zii lybb i ll 

zJne z/)efvaw6me'rit c& t/late Y^J kA. A. J. \D L J. JL JL 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 839 • Publication 5929 



July 25, 1955 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

0.8. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Prick: 

52 issues, domestic $7.60, foreign $10.26 
Single copy, 20 cents 

The printing of this publication has been 
approved by the Director of the Bureau of 
the Budget (January 19, 1955). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
of State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication issued by the 
Public Services Division, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of t/i« 
Department of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes se- 
lected press releases on foreign policy, 
issued by the White House and the 
Department, and statements and ad- 
dresses made by the President and by 
the Secretary of State and other offi- 
cers of the Department, as well as 
special articles on various phases of 
international affairs and the func- 
tions of the Department. Informa- 
tion is included concerning treaties 
and international agreements to 
which the United States is or nuiy 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



To Seek the Road to Peace 



Address by the President ' 



Within a matter of minutes I shall leave the 
United States on a trip that in some respects is 
unprecedented for a President of the United 
States. Other Presidents have left the continental 
limits of our country for the purpose of discharg- 
ing their duties as Commander in Chief in time of 
war, or to participate in conferences at the end of 
the war and to provide for the measures that would 
bring about a peace. 

But now, for the first time, a President goes to 
engage in a conference with heads of other govern- 
ments in order to prevent war — in order to see 
whether, in this time of stress and strain, we can- 
not devise measures that will keep from us this 
terrible scourge that afflicts mankind. 

Now, manifestly, there are many difficulties in 
the way of a President going abroad for a period, 
particularly while Congress is in session. He has 
many constitutional duties. He must be here to 
perform them. I am able to go on this trip only 
because of the generous cooperation of the political 
leaders in Congress of both parties who have ar- 
ranged their work so that my absence for a period 
will not interfere with the business of the 
Government. 

On my part I have promised them that by a week 
from Sunday, on July 24th, I shall be back here 
ready to carry on my accustomed duties. 

Establishing a New Spirit 

Now, it is manifest that in a period such as this, 
the time I am able to spend abroad, we cannot set- 
tle the details of the many problems that afflict the 
world. But, of course, I go for a very serious pur- 
pose. This purpose is to attempt, with my col- 
leagues, to change the spirit that has characterized 

1 Delivered to the Nation over radio and television on 
July 15 before his departure for the Heads of Government 
meeting opening at Geneva, Switzerland, on July 18. 



the intergovernmental relationships of the world 
during the past 10 years. 

Now, let us think for a moment about this pur- 
pose. Let us just enumerate a few of the problems 
that plague the world — the problem of armaments 
and the burdens that people are forced to carry 
because of the necessity for these armaments; the 
problem of the captive states, once proud people, 
that are not allowed their own form of govern- 
ment freely chosen by themselves and under indi- 
viduals freely elected by themselves; the problem 
of divided countries, people who are related to each 
other by blood kinship and divided by force of 
arms into two camps that are indeed expected to be 
hostile to each other. Then we have the problem 
of international interference in the internal af- 
fairs of free governments, bringing about a situa- 
tion that leads to subversion, difficulties, and re- 
criminations within a country — sometimes even 
revolution. 

These problems are made all the more serious 
by complications between governments. These 
problems of which I speak have often arisen as 
the aftermath of wars and conflicts. But govern- 
ments are divided also by differing ambitions, by 
differing ideologies, by mutual distrust and the 
alarms that these create, and because of the alarms, 
they build up armaments and place their trust for 
peace and protection in those armaments, and 
these armaments create greater alarm, and so we 
have a spiral of growing uneasiness, suspicion, 
and distrust. 

That is the kind of thing that the world faces 
today. 

No Easy Settlement 

Now for these things there is no easy settlement. 
In the brief time that this conference can exist, it 
is impossible to pursue all of the long and tedious 



July 25, 7955 



131 



Paris and Geneva Meetings 

Statement by Secretary Dulles 1 

I am leaving in advance of President Eisenhower 
in order to help prepare for the Geneva meeting. 
Tomorrow and Friday I shall be conferring with the 
French and British Foreign Ministers in Paris and 
hearing the report of our preparatory group which 
has been working in Paris for the past week. Then 
on Saturday I shall attend a meeting of the Council 
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Most, 
if not all, of the Foreign Ministers of the 15 member 
nations will be present. That Organization is much 
interested in some of the problems which may come 
up at Geneva, particularly in relation to the Federal 
Republic of Germany, which is now a member of 
Nato. Then on Saturday evening I shall fly to 
Geneva to meet President Eisenhower on his arrival 
and to acquaint him with the results of our Paris 
talks. 

There is every reason to believe that the three 
Western powers see eye to eye with reference to 
the matters which are likely to come up at Geneva. 
This initial unity is a good beginning of our efforts 
to reach agreement with the Soviet Union on the 
stated purposes of the Geneva conference, namely 
to identify the issues to be worked on in the future 
and to agree on the international procedures to be 
established for finding solutions. 

The Geneva conference will be a beginning and 
not an end. It is not to be expected that great de- 
cisions of substance will be made there. What is 
to be hoped is that the Geneva conference will im- 
plement our unceasing quest for a secure and just 
peace and breathe a new spirit into the future 
efforts needed to achieve that result. 



1 Made on the occasion of the Secretary's depar- 
ture for Paris and Geneva on July 13 (press release 
430). 



negotiations that must take place before the details 
of these problems can be settled. 

Our many postwar conferences have been char- 
acterized too much by attention to details — by an 
effort apparently to work on specific problems 
rather than to establish the spirit and the attitude 
in which we shall approach them. Success, there- 
fore, has been meager. Too often, indeed, these 
conferences have been mere opportunities for ex- 
ploitation of nationalistic ambitions, or indeed 
only for sounding boards for the propaganda that 
the participants want to spread to the world. 

If we look at this record, we would say, "Why 
another conference ? What hope is there for suc- 



cess?" Well now, the first question I ask you — 
"Do we want to do nothing? Do we want to sit 
and drift along to the inevitable end in such a 
contest of war or increased tensions?" We want 
peace. We cannot look at this whole situation 
without realizing first that pessimism never won 
any battle, whether it was in peace or it was in 
war. 

Next we will understand that one ingredient has 
been missing from all these conferences — an honest 
intent to conciliate, to understand, to be tolerant, 
to try to see the other fellow's viewpoint as well 
as we see our own. I say to you, if we can change 
the spirit in which these conferences are con- 
ducted, we will have taken the greatest step toward 
peace, toward future prosperity and tranquillity 
that has ever been taken in all the history of 
mankind. 

I want to give you a few reasons for hope in 
this project. 

The People Want Peace 

First, the people of all the world desire peace. 
This is peace for people everywhere. I distinguish 
between people and governments here for the 
moment when we know that the great hordes of 
men and women who make up the world do not 
want to go to the battlefield. They want to live 
in peace — not a peace that is a mere stilling of 
the guns but a peace in which they can live hap- 
pily, tranquilly, and in confidence that they can 
raise their children in a world of which they will 
be proud. That common desire for peace is some- 
thing that is a terrific force in this world and to 
which I believe all political leaders in the world 
are beginning to respond. They must recognize it. 

Another item — Did you note this morning the 
speech made by Premier Bulganin in Moscow? 
Every word he said was along the line that I am 
now speaking. He talked of conciliation and tol- 
erance and understanding. I say to you — I say 
to all the world — if the words that he expressed are 
as truly reflective of the hearts and minds of the 
men in the Kremlin as we are sure they are reflec- 
tive of the hearts and minds of all the people in 
Russia, as in the hearts and minds of all the people 
in the world everywhere, then there will be no 
trouble between the Eussian delegation and our 
own at this coming conference. 

Now I want to mention another item that is 
important in this problem. The free world is 



132 



Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



divided from the Communist world by an Iron 
Curtain. The free world has one great factor 
in common. We are not held together by force, 
but we are held together by this great factor, 
and it is this : The free world believes, under one 
religion or another, in a Divine Power. It be- 
lieves in a Supreme Being. Now this, my friends, 
is a very great factor for conciliation and peace at 
this time because each of those religions — each 
one of them — has as one of its basic command- 
ments the words — -the terminology — that is simi- 
lar to our Golden Rule. "Do unto others as you 
would have them do unto you." This means that 
the thinking of those people is based upon ideas 
of right and justice and mutual self-respect, con- 
sideration for the other man. And this means 
peace, because only in peace can such conceptions 
as these prevail. This means that the free people 
of the world hate war, and they want peace and 
are fully dedicated to it. 

Now this country, as other free countries, main- 
tains arms. We maintain formations of war and 
all the modern weapons. Why? Because we 
must. As long as this spirit that has prevailed 
up to now is going to prevail in the world, we can- 
not expose our rights, our privileges, our homes, 
our wives, our children, to the risk that would 
come to an unarmed country. But we want to 
make it perfectly clear these armaments do not 
reflect the way we want to live; they merely re- 
flect the way under present conditions we have to 
live. 

Power of Prayer 

Now, it is natural for a people, steeped in a re- 
ligious civilization, when they come to moments 
of great importance — maybe even crisis — such as 
now we face, to turn to the Divine Power that 
each has in his own heart, believes in his own heart, 
for guidance, for wisdom, for some help in doing 
the thing that is honorable and is right. I have 
no doubt that tonight, throughout this country 
and, indeed, throughout the free world, such 
prayers are ascending. This is a mighty force. 
And this brings to me the thought that through 
prayer we could also achieve a very definite and 
practical result at this very moment. Suppose, 
on the next Sabbath Day observed by each of our 
religions, America, 165 million people of us, went 
to our accustomed places of worship and, crowd- 
ing those places, asked for help and, by so doing, 



demonstrated to all the world the sincerity and 
depth of our aspirations for peace. 

This would be a mighty force. 

None could then say that we preserve armaments 
because we want to — we preserve them because 
we must. 

My friend, Secretary Dulles, and I go to this 
conference in the earnest hope that we may ac- 
curately represent your convictions, your beliefs, 
your aspirations. We shall be conciliatory be- 
cause our country seeks no conquest, no property 
of others. We shall be tolerant, because this Na- 
tion does not seek to impose our way of life upon 
others. We shall be firm in the consciousness of 
your spiritual and material strength and your de- 
fense of the right. 

But we shall extend the hand of friendship to 
all who will grasp it honestly and concede to us 
the same rights, the same understanding, the same 
freedom, that we accord to them. 

We — the Secretary and I — shall do our best with 
others there to start the world on the beginning 
of a new road, a road that may be long and diffi- 
cult but which, if faithfully followed, will lead us 
all into a better and fuller life. 



John Marshall Bicentennial Month 

Proclamation 3102 > 

Whereas John Marshall, soldier, diplomat, leg- 
islator, and fourth Chief Justice of the United 
States, played a vital role in the strengthening of 
our constitutional form of government; and 

Whereas his long and distinguished term of 
office as Chief Justice, from 1801 to 1835, was 
marked by precedent-setting decisions which have 
been important factors in developing and main- 
taining the historic liberties of the people of the 
United States ; and 

Whereas a wider public knowledge and appre- 
ciation of the work and achievements of the great 
Chief Justice are desirable today in order to 
strengthen the moral, social, and political struc- 
ture of our Nation, and to help in the preservation 
and protection of the lives, liberties, and property 
of all our people; and 

Whereas September 24, 1955, is the two hun- 



1 20 Fed,. Reg. 5089. 



July 25, 1955 



133 



dredth anniversary of the birth of John Marshall, 
and the Congress, by joint resolution approved on 
August 13, 1954 (68 Stat. 702), has designated 
the month of September 1955 as John Marshall 
Bicentennial Month and has requested the Presi- 
dent to issue a proclamation calling upon the 
people of the United States to observe that month 
by paying tribute to the achievements and memory 
of John Marshall : 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DwiGHT D. EISENHOWER, 

President of the United States of America, do 
hereby call upon all interested agencies and 
organizations throughout the Nation to observe 
the month of September 1955 as John Marshall 
Bicentennial Month with appropriate activities 
and ceremonies commemorative of the inspiring 
role of John Marshall in our national life, and I 
urge the people of the United States to take part 
in such activities and ceremonies. 

I also urge the people of the United States to 
read the Constitution, and to study its history and 
its interpretations, for a better understanding and 
appreciation of our country and of John Marshall. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my 
hand and caused the Seal of the United States of 
America to be affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this thirteenth 

day of July in the year of our Lord 

[seal] nineteen hundred and fifty-five, and of 

the Independence of the United States 

of America the one hundred and eightieth. 

By the President : 

John Foster Dulles 

Secretary of State 



Fifth National UNESCO Conference 
To Meet at Cincinnati 

Press release 427 dated July 11 

The United States National Commission for 
Unesco (United Nations Educational, Scientific 
and Cultural Organization) will sponsor a na- 
tional conference at Cincinnati, Ohio, on Novem- 
ber 3, 4, and 5, Commission Chairman Milton G. 
Baker announced on July 11. The conference 
theme is: "Unesco: The First Ten Years — An 
American Appraisal and Forecast." It is the fifth 



conference convened by the National Commission 
under its legislative mandate to call "general con- 
ferences for the discussion of matters relating to 
the activities of the Organization." Previous 
meetings were held at Philadelphia, Cleveland, 
New York, and Minneapolis at 2-year intervals 
beginning in 1947. 

The conference program committee, headed by 
Raymond McCoy of Xavier University, Cincin- 
nati, Ohio, has scheduled 3 general conference 
sessions to be addressed by nationally known 
speakers and 21 discussion groups which will ap- 
praise various phases of the Unesco programs and 
activities. These group meetings will be under 
the direction of appropriate national organiza- 
tions including the American Council on Educa- 
tion, the National Planning Association, the Na- 
tional Academy of Science-National Research 
Council, and the National Education Association. 
Also included are the Social Science Research 
Council, the American National Theatre and 
Academy, and a number of others. 

More than 500 institutions of higher learning 
and national organizations concerned with inter- 
national cooperation in education, science, and 
culture will be invited to send representatives. 
About a thousand persons are expected to attend. 
Lucien Wulsin, Sr., president of the Baldwin 
Piano Company, heads the Cincinnati sponsoring 
committee. 

A 2-day meeting of the U.S. National Commis- 
sion will precede the conference. 



Pravda Correspondent Permitted 
To Attend Shakespeare Festival 

Press release 428 dated July 11 

Follotving is the text of a note delivered to the 
Soviet Embassy on July 11 regarding the visit of 
a Pravda correspondent to Stratford, Conn. : 

The Secretary of State presents his compliments 
to the Charge dAffaires ad interim of the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics and referring to the 
Embassy's note of July 9, 1955 1 and to the De- 
partment's note of January 3, 1955 2 grants per- 
mission for "Pravda" correspondent Evgeni V. 
Litoshko and Madame Litoshko to travel by rail 



1 Not printed. 

2 Bulletin of Jan. 31, 1955, p. 193. 



134 



Department of State Bulletin 



from New York, New York to Stratford, Connec- 
ticut on July 12, 1955, returning several days later 
by the same means. 

This permission has been granted in order to 
facilitate Mr. Litoshko's acceptance of the invita- 
tion tendered him by the Bridgeport Herald of 
Bridgeport, Connecticut to attend a Shakespear- 



ean Festival sponsored by that newspaper. It is 
to be hoped that the Soviet Government will ap- 
ply its regulations restricting travel by foreign 
citizens in the Soviet Union with equal liberality 
should an American press representative wish to 
visit an area of the Soviet Union normally closed 
to such travel. 



The Responsibility of the American Republics in World Affairs 

by Henry F. Holland 

Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs x 



We live in an age in which man has the power 
to blast himself from the earth. The very sur- 
vival of humanity depends upon our ability to de- 
vise a structure of international relations within 
which widely divergent nations can live at peace 
with sufficient mutual respect and understanding 
to insure the peaceful settlement of disputes aris- 
ing between them. 

Perhaps it is unfortunate that man's capacity 
to destroy himself as a species should have been 
achieved at a time when the nations of the world 
still diifer so widely as regards size and popula- 
tion, as well as their degree of industrial, political, 
military, and cultural development. These wide 
differences between us complicate our efforts to 
devise a workable international system adequate 
to maintain peace. On the other hand, this same 
awesome capacity for self-destruction may prove 
to be the catalyst without which such a system 
could never be developed. 

The United Nations Organization has proved 
invaluable as a device for focusing the influence 
of world opinion on the peaceful solution of inter- 
national problems, as a testing ground where the 
real facts regarding these problems can be estab- 
lished through debate and impartial investigation, 
as a forum in which large and small nations can 
speak with more nearly equal voices than when 
engaged in bilateral negotiation. The United 
Nations and its subsidiary organizations mark 
the closest approach yet achieved by man to that 



1 Address made at the Conference on American Foreign 
Policy of Colgate University at Hamilton, N.Y., on July 11. 



worldwide law and order which is today so clearly 
essential to our survival. 

Much has been said of the world leadership 
which history has in our times imposed upon the 
United States. But there is another need whose 
urgency increases — that for a community of 
leaders. The free nations of the world are strug- 
gling to establish a workable international system 
which will maintain peace. The frustrations and 
obstacles we encounter are discouraging. If 
somewhere in the world a group of nations can 
give a continuing, successful demonstration of 
such a system actually working on a regional basis, 
the inspiration to the remainder of the world will 
be great. What any substantial group of nations 
actually achieves can eventually and surely be 
achieved by a worldwide community of nations 
if they so will. 

We know that a peace sustained by force is not 
lasting. There can be no lasting peace until all 
nations voluntarily identify themselves with an 
international structure erected upon principles 
guaranteeing the independence, security, and in- 
tegrity of the individual members. Such an in- 
ternational organization, once established, will not 
survive unless men are convinced that it will 
eventually be successful in meeting and solving 
the problems arising among its members. Should 
the United Nations fail, man's disillusionment 
may well be such that years could pass before des- 
peration again drove him to undertake another 
worldwide organization for the peaceful solution 
of disputes between nations. 



July 25. 1955 



135 



Evolution of a World Organization 

From our experience in the United Nations we 
know now that an international structure embrac- 
ing the whole world and functioning effectively 
can be achieved only by years of trial and error, 
by a process of evolution. The United Nations 
as it exists today, with all of its virtues and its 
defects, must be conceded to mark no more than 
a transitional stage in a process of evolution which 
must extend for we know not how many more years 
before a satisfactory result is achieved. Peace 
today is uneasily preserved by the harsh certainty 
that the combined military power of free nations 
is adequate to crush any combination of forces 
that Soviet Russia might lead or inspire. Such 
a peace falls far short of our aspirations. Yet 
such a peace preserved by the growing military 
strength of the free nations of the world does af- 
ford us time in which to perfect the essential 
framework of a successful worldwide system. 

Ten years of work in the United Nations have 
put behind us a part of the tortuous and often 
discouraging road which we must travel if men are 
to reach that goal which lies somewhere in the 
future. The fact that thorny and stubborn prob- 
lems have been solved in the United Nations gives 
us courage to attack those which, like the heads of 
the dragon, seem to replace each that is removed. 
So, too, does the somber conviction that the alter- 
native to such efforts may be the frightful one of 
nuclear warfare. 

These limited achievements, these frightful al- 
ternatives will suffice, I believe, to keep the free 
world constant in its course despite the strain 
and cost. But how much more willing would be 
our own effort and that of others, with what rising 
enthusiasm would the free world press forward 
if our ultimate goal could seem but nearer at hand ! 
Mankind needs urgently a demonstration that the 
goal we have set for ourselves can in fact be 
achieved. 

Nations at times become disheartened by the 
number and complexity of the problems, domestic 
and international, which obstruct their progress 
to a more abundant and dignified life. They need 
the incentive that can best derive from a living 
example of the rewards which can be achieved 
through the essentially spiritual and religious 
philosophy of the free world. These are rewards 
assured not only to powerful nations but to all 
nations, great and small, that identify themselves 



with an international order based upon these 
principles. 

The Example of the American Republics 

If our present evolutionary process is not to 
stagnate, if it is to avoid retrogressive phases, it 
becomes imperative that there emerge today a 
group of nations which all men can recognize as 
an example of that larger global community which 
must be our ultimate goal. That group of nations 
does exist in the 21 American Republics. Their 
association for military, political, cultural, and 
economic collaboration is the most successful and 
advanced yet achieved by man. 

Not until some such relationship as that which 
for a century has been evolving in this hemisphere 
is extended to embrace all nations can we hope for 
more than a passing "peace in our time." 

The success of the American Republics in the 
conduct of our international relations is of vital 
importance to all Americans. But today I want 
to talk of its importance to the rest of the world. 
It may well determine the direction in which world 
history will move in the years ahead. Why should 
such decisive influence with its correlative respon- 
sibility be vested in the 21 American Republics? 
Until recent decades no American State identified 
itself intimately with the trend of world events. 
The answer is that our relations with each other 
over the past century have been in a sense a pilot 
plant. Its successful operation through the 
stresses and shocks of international relations has 
offered a real incentive to the world at large to 
entrust its hopes to the United Nations. The vis- 
ible, measurable success of the inter-American 
system, which included more than a third of the 
founders of the United Nations, gave that pro- 
jected organization a basis in demonstrated ex- 
perience rather than theory. The knowledge that 
21 of the 51 nations assembled at San Francisco 
had made such an international system succeed, 
and had done so under conditions of adversity not 
unlike those existing elsewhere in the world, must 
have afforded a powerful incentive. 

A century ago we undertook in this hemisphere 
to demonstrate that widely dissimilar states can 
devise a way of life which gradually eliminates 
harmful or unnecessary differences between them, 
while preserving and even perfecting those differ- 
ences held sacred by their various peoples. Many 
of the problems which today imperil the success of 



136 



Department of State Bulletin 



the United Nations likewise, to a greater or lesser 
degree, obstructed our path at that time. 

Here, as in the United Nations now, were coun- 
tries ranging from the earth's smallest to its larg- 
est ; states peopled by men of different race, culture, 
language, religion, and history. There were states 
separated by what traditionally would have repre- 
sented a century of progress along the road of eco- 
nomic development and industrialization. There 
were nations whose relations were constantly trou- 
bled by the strain of old, unsettled disputes ; people 
separated from each other by distances almost as 
great as those from pole to pole, by some of the 
world's highest mountain barriers, or by vast ex- 
panses of untraversable wilderness. 

Any system of international relationships which 
could weld 21 such states into a tightly knit group 
which proudly refers to itself as a "family" must 
offer great hope to a troubled world which desper- 
ately seeks some device to preserve peace without 
sacrifice of freedom, honor, or national sover- 
eignty, some means of averting a third world war 
from which civilization could not hope to recover. 

The American Republics are a living example 
of the fruits of an international system designed to 
insure the peaceful settlement of disputes, to in- 
sure to each state an opportunity to achieve its eco- 
nomic, cultural, and political aspirations with the 
active assistance of other members of the com- 
munity. 

Regional Organizations 

In 1945 when the United Nations Organization 
was established, the inter- American system had 
not yet reached its present state of development. 
Even so, its demonstrated success exerted an influ- 
ence so powerful that many of the principles upon 
which it was founded were carried forward as key- 
stones of the larger structure. Ten years ago in 
San Francisco the representatives of the American 
States were so convinced of the crucial importance 
of regional structures such as theirs that they 
joined in a gallant and successful fight to overturn 
the principle of universalism accepted at Dumbar- 
ton Oaks and to establish the concept of regional 
organizations within the United Nations. That 
concept is now embodied in such mutual security 
organizations throughout the world as the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Southeast 
Asia Treaty Organization. Without them the 
postwar threat of Communist subversion and im- 



perialism might not have been met and checked. 

Many of us feel deeply that for civilization to 
survive, to avert a spiritual and moral retreat that 
would sacrifice centuries of progress, the world as 
a whole must proceed along some such path of de- 
velopment as that down which we in this hemi- 
sphere have toiled for more than a century. Man- 
kind may be willing to do that so long as, and only 
so long as, we in our lives as nations demonstrate 
that this road does in fact lead to the fulfillment 
of man's ancient yearning for peace with freedom 
and dignity. If we succeed in our own quest, then 
others will surely follow us. If each new decade 
reaffirms that in the Americas it is law and not 
force or threat of force which sustains the sov- 
ereignty and integrity of nations, then, though 
elsewhere international despotisms may arise, they 
will not endure. These principles which here have 
proved effective to guarantee to the smallest and 
weakest state that same degree of national dignity 
and sovereignty which is the most cherished 
achievement of the strongest will surely spread to 
the rest of this world. 

What is the genius of our relationship in this 
hemisphere? First, perhaps, it is the knowledge 
that neither as individual states nor as a commu- 
nity have we yet achieved a level of progress which 
is acceptable to us as free and religious men. Yet, 
singly and collectively, the material and spiritual 
growth we can record at each successive inter- 
American conference makes us content to press 
forward confidently toward the next. 

The Spiritual Bond 

It i9 the essentially spiritual stuff of which our 
bond is made which has given it the strength to 
preserve its intended design despite the shocks 
of global wars and the constant erosion of those 
lesser disagreements which must occasionally arise 
among so large a group of vigorous and pro- 
gressive nations. 

Our relationship contemplates that all will, if 
necessary, by force of arms protect whichever 
may find itself attacked. Yet it is not primarily 
a military alliance. By treaties, resolutions, and 
international contracts we are committed to the 
principle that the economic development of each 
benefits the entire community. Yet we are far 
more than a trading or economic community. 
Our procedures for the peaceful settlement of dis- 
putes arising between us are among the finest 



July 25, 1955 



137 



achievements of our relationship. Yet the deter- 
mination which more than all of these unites us 
and gives meaning and direction to our bond goes 
far beyond these which I have mentioned. It is 
to establish and constantly to strengthen through- 
out this new world and its 350 million peoples 
those principles of the sanctity of the individual 
and his freedom, of the brotherhood of man, which 
are common to all the different faiths that we pro- 
fess. On many things our views may differ. Our 
right to hold such differences is one of those which 
we most cherish. But on these basic tenets of our 
American creed we are solidly united. 

There are, I believe, other convictions shared by 
all of us and which should be mentioned here. 
They and others of like nature are preserved in 
our inter- American treaties and resolutions. 

Nonintervention in Domestic Affairs 

As a man has the right to pursue the fulfillment 
of his aspirations without unlawful interference 
from his fellows, we are as states each irrevocably 
committed to the principle of nonintervention in 
the domestic affairs of every other. As the most 
powerful member of the community we are prone 
to think that the principle of nonintervention is 
one which restrains the United States for the bene- 
fit of the other American Republics. On the con- 
trary, there is not a one of us but has felt both 
the benefits and the obligations of this principle. 

Each of our governments is from time to time 
subjected to strong pressure from its own domestic 
groups to criticize or meddle in the domestic 
activities of some other American State. Were 
we to be swayed by these pressures, I doubt that 
our inter-American system could long endure. 
It was not until the doctrine of nonintervention 
was firmly established that the system achieved 
real grandeur. 

An important companion to the principle of 
nonintervention is our conviction that the well- 
being of every American State is basically im- 
portant to that of every other. The misfortunes 
of each member of this community vitally concern 
every other. In the military field this has led us 
to adopt the principle set out in article 3 of the 
Rio Treaty of 1947, which provides that "an armed 
attack by any State against an American State 
shall be considered as an attack against all the 
American States." That article served as the in- 
spiration for article 5 of the North Atlantic 



138 



Treaty of 1949, which provides that "an armed 
attack against one or more of them [the sub- 
scribers to the treaty] in Europe or North Amer- 
ica shall be considered an attack against them all." 
This interpretation of an attack on one as an 
attack on all marks a milestone in our defensive 
security arrangements. 

In the political field, our universal concern with 
the well-being of every member state inspired the 
Caracas Resolution, 2 which declares that domina- 
tion by international communism of the political 
institutions of any of our states imperils the peace 
of America. In the economic field, it leads each 
of U9 in its own realistic self-interest to seek means 
effectively to contribute to the well-being of every 
other. 

Our belief in the sovereign equality of the 
American States recognizes the obvious fact that 
the dimensions of our statesmen are not deter- 
mined by those of the sovereign territories they 
represent. In this hemisphere we deal as equals, 
as adult and mature states. We have no caste 
system. In our councils, from the smallest of us 
to the largest, we debate with the vigor and con- 
viction of equals. And well we might, for all have 
contributed, and importantly, in forging the struc- 
ture within which we reside. We are, I believe, 
all proud that the inter- American system as it 
exists today was neither an Anglo-Saxon nor a 
Latin vision. It is, instead, a marvelous composite 
which might never have existed had it not drawn 
upon the finest concepts of these two cultures. 

Lastly, in referring to the basic convictions 
underlying our inter- American system, one is im- 
pressed by the profound assurance in the minds 
of Americans everywhere that we are in fact on 
the right road. Our inter-American system 
affords all the assurance that any nation needs 
that industry, resourcefulness, and self -discipline 
mean sure and steady progress toward the fulfill- 
ment of its just aspirations. 

Successes of the Inter-American System 

This kind of confidence can only come from 
success. What are our successes which would 
justify such a conviction? 

In the political field our experience during the 
past years justifies our belief that the Organiza- 
tion of American States is capable of dealing with 



2 Bulletin of Mar. 22, 1954, p. 420. 

Department of State Bulletin 



any inter-American problem brought before it. 
It is no reflection upon the liberation movement 
which so gallantly overcame the Communist- 
dominated regime in Guatemala to recall that for 
weeks earlier the Organization of American States 
had been readying an extraordinary meeting of 
Foreign Ministers to decide upon the measures 
which might be required to eliminate this threat 
to the peace of the Americas. 

Earlier in this year that same organization, 
determined that its actions would be worthy of 
the trust reposed in it to preserve our peace, under- 
took in the Costa Rican outbreak a whole series of 
unprecedented measures. It established an inter- 
national aerial patrol, coordinating aircraft sup- 
plied by several states. 3 When circumstances re- 
quired, it affirmatively requested the other Ameri- 
can Governments to make war planes avail- 
able to the Government of Costa Eica. 4 If, loyal 
to our tradition and our trust, we resolve to go 
even beyond these unprecedented measures should 
the nature of the problem require, then we can 
indeed feel that aggression will never prevail in 
our hemisphere. 

In the economic field our progress is as hearten- 
ing as in the political. We hear talk of "under- 
developed nations" both in the hemisphere and 
out. I have often wondered just what those who 
use this phrase mean. If it means a nation whose 
progress is unjustly obstructed by its neighbors, 
then we can proudly sustain that there are no 
underdeveloped countries in this hemisphere. 
Here, as I have said, each of us in its own self- 
interest seeks to further the economic develop- 
ment of every other. Our own contribution to 
this joint effort is being made through expanded 
opportunities for inter- American trade, through 
substantially greater access to sound loans for 
developmental purposes, and through intensified 
programs of technical assistance. I believe that 
these contributions are recognized as constructive 
by the other members of this family of nations. 

On the other hand, if an "underdeveloped na- 
tion" is one which has not yet attained that level 
of economic development to which its human and 
its natural resources give it the right to aspire, 
then we can thank God that we are all under- 
developed nations in this hemisphere. The feeling 
that in this sense we are underdeveloped is a 



' IUd., Jan. 24, 1955, p. 131. 
'Ibid., Jan. 31, 1955, p. 182. 



wholesome one and furnishes a constant incentive 
to make greater use of our resources for the benefit 
of our people. It is true that we are experiencing 
an era of development which, judged by any stand- 
ard, exceeds anything which the world has ever 
seen in a comparable area. Nevertheless, there is 
not a country in the hemisphere whose resources 
are not abundantly adequate to provide substan- 
tially higher living standards to its people. 

Some of us are passing through temporary 
periods of adversity, but there are no cripples 
among us. There is not a stagnant economy in 
the hemisphere. On all sides there is activity and 
progress. 

We are certainly not immune to the problems 
of inflation and instability of currencies which 
have plagued the entire world. In each of our 
states continued progress will depend upon the 
degree of courage and self-discipline which we 
demonstrate in meeting and solving these purely 
domestic problems. They are difficult, and their 
solution at times raises domestic political obstruc- 
tions which may seem insurmountable. Their 
solution is complicated by the fact that the very 
people who cry out against the suffering which 
such problems cause often resist the measures of 
self-discipline inevitably required for their solu- 
tion. 

No Insurmountable Obstacles 

Without minimizing the thorniness of our eco- 
nomic problems we must never lose sight of the 
fact that they are all of a kind that can be solved. 
They are often a product of that rapid develop- 
ment which will in the end enormously benefit 
our peoples. We can take courage from the fact 
that there is not one nation in the hemisphere 
whose further substantial and lasting progress is 
obstructed by really insurmountable obstacles. 
Every one of us has progressed enormously in 
the last quarter of a century. Yet every one of 
us has access to all the elements necessary for 
further substantial progress. 

I have said that our future here in the United 
States and throughout the hemisphere must de- 
pend on work, self-discipline, and a willingness 
to undertake sacrifices where necessary for the 
greater good. These have produced for us the 
progress we have achieved. It has abundantly 
justified the cost. We would be foolhardy indeed 
if we allowed ourselves to be persuaded that like 



July 25, 7955 



139 



progress in the future can be had at any different 
price. 

What I have said of the responsibility of the 
American States to serve as an example and an 
inspiration to the world is not new. I recall with 
some pride that at the San Francisco meeting 
commemorating the tenth anniversary of the 
United Nations the 21 American Republics met 
separately to exchange views. Also, just last 
week President Eisenhower and Secretary Dulles 
met with the Ambassadors of the other American 
Republics to discuss problems which will be raised 
at the forthcoming four-power conference and 
solutions which may be advanced for them. Such 
meetings evidence the growing conviction of our 
Governments and peoples that as partners in this 
hemisphere we owe a responsibility not only to 
our own people but to the entire world. We must 
succeed in our stewardship of our inter- American 
affairs, not only because of what it means to this 
hemisphere but because of the inspiration which 
such an example will afford to the rest of the 
world. 

Those who attended the San Francisco meeting 
were deeply impressed by the speeches of the 37 
Foreign Ministers and other heads of delegations 
who attended. They demonstrated beyond all 
question that national leaders today are keenly 
aware that the alternative to some reasonably ef- 
fective international system may well be the de- 
struction of the human race. 



U.S. Position on Proposed 
Inter-American Bank 

Press release 417 dated July 1 

On July 1 the Department of State and the 
Treasury Department, in reply to inquiries from 
the press, issued the following statement concern- 
ing the proposed Inter-American Bank for Eco- 
nomic Development. 

The proposal for the establishment of an Inter- 
American Bank was made by a Committee of Ex- 
perts consisting of representatives of nine Latin 
American Central Banks and the Secretariat of 
the Economic Commission for Latin America. 
This Committee was established by a resolution 
of the Meeting of Ministers of Finance or Econ- 
omy in the Fourth Extraordinary Session of the 



Inter-American Economic and Social Council 
held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in November- 
December 1954, to make specific plans for an inter- 
American financing institution. 1 

The United States Delegation at that Meeting 
abstained from voting on the resolution, stating 
that the United States had given a great deal of 
thought to the problem of Latin American needs 
for credit and investment facilities, and had con- 
cluded that in its opinion the facilities available 
through the International Bank for Reconstruc- 
tion and Development, the Export-Import Bank, 
the proposed International Finance Corporation, 
and private organizations, will be adequate to 
meet all demands for sound purposes. It also in- 
dicated that if we find at some later date that this 
program is not achieving the results which we 
believe it can, we shall be glad to discuss other 
solutions. The United States Delegation there- 
fore expressed its regret that it could not at that 
time join in the proposed inter- American regional 
financing institution, and indicated it would ab- 
stain from participating in drafting specific plans 
for it. There have been no developments which 
would justify a change in the position expressed 
by the United States Delegation at that time. 



Change in Termination Date 
of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement 

Press release 402 dated June 28 

Steps are being taken to change the termination 
date of the 1938 bilateral trade agreement with 
Ecuador from July 18, 1955, as had previously 
been announced, 2 to January 18, 1956. This does 
not constitute a reversal of the decision to end the 
trade agreement but is only a postponement. 

The postponement was agreed to in order to af- 
ford Ecuador an opportunity to deal with eco- 
nomic distress in the Ecuadoran hat industry, 
especially in the provinces of Azuay and Canar, 
which the Ecuadorans believe would be seriously 
hurt by earlier termination. Termination of the 

1 For an address by Secretary of the Treasury George 
M. Humphrey at this meeting, see Bulletin of Dec. 6, 
1954, p. 863 ; for a statement by Henry F. Holland, As- 
sistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, on 
the U.S. position at this meeting, see ibid., Nov. 8, 1954, 
p. 684. 

2 Bulletin of Feb. 21, 1955, p. 313. 



140 



Department of State Bulletin 



agreement will have the effect of restoring the 
duty on unbleached and undyed hat bodies of 
toquilla fiber to 25 percent as provided in the Tariff 
Act of 1930, in place of the 12 J /2 percent trade- 
agreement rate. 

The Ecuadoran hat industry has recently fallen 
into a depressed state, resulting in serious eco- 
nomic distress in the affected provinces. The 
Ecuadorans have plans under way to deal with 
the situation in those provinces. The U.S. For- 
eign Operations Administration has established a 
technical cooperation program in Ecuador to assist 
the Ecuadoran Government in its program of eco- 
nomic development. Both the Ecuadoran pro- 
grams and the Foa assistance will be more effec- 
tive, it is believed, if the U.S. tariff on Ecuadoran 
hat bodies is maintained at its present level for 
an additional 6 months. 

Ecuador is not one of the 34 countries in the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Ter- 
mination of tins agreement will leave in effect 
nine bilateral trade agreements to which the 
United States is a party. 



Renewal of Educational Exchange 
Agreement With France 

Press release 415 dated July 1 

The United States and France on June 30 re- 
newed for a second 5-year period an educational 
exchange agreement under the Fulbright Act. 
The two Governments, represented respectively by 
the American Ambassador to France, C. Douglas 
Dillon, and the French Foreign Minister, An- 
toine Pinay, exchanged notes in a brief ceremony 
at the Quai D'Orsay in Paris. 

Under the agreement up to $1 million in Ameri- 
can-owned francs will be spent annually for the 
next 5 years to finance travel of French citizens 



to the United States for study, teaching, lecturing, 
or advanced research and to pay travel and main- 
tenance costs for Americans to go to France for 
similar purposes. 

More than 3,000 exchanges have taken place 
during the past 5 years under the original 
agreement. 1 

In presenting the American note proposing ex- 
tension of the original agreement, Ambassador 
Dillon noted that this act shows more clearly than 
words could how fully convinced the United States 
is of the value of these educational exchanges, now 
proven by experience. He added : 

Our two countries have given to their visitors priceless 
treasure of experience and understanding. These ex- 
changes have contributed and will contribute to deepen 
yet further the historic friendship which unites our two 
peoples. 

He went on to say that to extend the realm of 
learning and to share its benefits is a noble task, 
and he was convinced that France and the United 
States have acted wisely in deciding to continue 
the program. 

M. Pinay replied that the exchange of these 
notes gave him great satisfaction. He said 
further : 

It is significant that it has been possible to set money 
aside out of lend-lease credits to strengthen our cultural 
ties, and I must pay homage to the generosity of purposes 
which presided over the development of the Fulbright 
Agreement. . . . Thanks to the agreement of our two 
Governments, hundreds more American and French intel- 
lectuals will be able to find the road to scientific 
cooperation. 

The Foreign Minister concluded his remarks as 

follows : 

The decision we seal today thus inscribes itself most 
auspiciously within the framework of our traditional 
friendship, and that is why I have desired to express 
to you very simply my satisfaction and my happiness in it. 



'For an announcement of the signing of the original 
agreement, see Bulletin of Nov. 21, 1948, p. 650. 



July 25, 1955 



141 



Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of Germany 



DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

Press release 408 dated June 30 

Negotiations for a mutual defense assistance 
agreement under which the United States will 
render military assistance to the Federal Republic 
of Germany in the creation of her new defense 
forces have been concluded and the agreement was 
signed at Bonn on June 30. 

The agreement follows closely the general pat- 
tern of the mutual defense assistance agreements 
under which the United States is supplying other 
Nato countries with military assistance pursuant 
to the Mutual Security Act of 1954. The furnish- 
ing and use of such assistance will also accord with 
the principles of the United Nations Charter and 
the North Atlantic Treaty. 

The agreement provides that the United States 
will make available equipment, materiel, services, 
or other assistance, without specifying the extent 
of the aid or the details of the conditions under 
which it will be given. It further pledges the two 
Governments to take appropriate measures to 
keep their publics informed of operations under 
the agreement to the fullest extent consistent with 
security requirements. 

The Federal Republic will use this assistance in 
promoting an integrated defense of the North 
Atlantic area in accordance with defense plans 
formulated by Nato, will join in promoting inter- 
national understanding and good will, and will 
make the full contribution consistent with its re- 
sources to its own defensive strength and the de- 
fensive strength of the free world. 

Other articles in the agreement cover such mat- 
ters as the supply by the Federal Republic of 
certain raw and semiprocessed materials required 
by the United States, the exchange of patent rights 
and technical information, security measures, tax 
relief, and conditions under which United States 
personnel assigned to implement the agreement 
will operate. 



The agreement must be ratified by the German 
Bundestag before it can enter into force. 



TEXT OF AGREEMENT 

The United States of America and the Federal Republic 
of Germany, 

Being parties to the North Atlantic Treaty signed at 
Washington on April 4, 1949 ; 

Considering their reciprocal pledges under Article 3 of 
the North Atlantic Treaty separately and jointly with 
the other parties, by means of continuous and effective 
self-help and mutual aid, to maintain and develop their 
individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack ; 

Consciods of the desire to foster international peace 
and security through measures which further the ability 
of nations dedicated to the purposes and principles of the 
Charter of the United Nations to participate effectively in 
arrangements for collective self-defense in support of 
those purposes and principles, and conscious of the deter- 
mination to give their full cooperation to United Nations 
collective security arrangements and measures and efforts 
to obtain agreement on universal regulation and reduction 
of armaments under adequate guarantees against viola- 
tion or evasion ; 

Considering the support which the Government of the 
United States of America has brought to these principles 
by enacting the Mutual Security Act of 1954, which au- 
thorizes the furnishing of military assistance to certain 
nations ; 

Desiring to set forth the conditions which wiU govern 
the furnishing of such assistance ; 

Have agreed as follows : 

Article I 

1. The Government of the United States of America will 
make available to the Government of the Federal Republic 
of Germany such equipment, materials, services, or other 
assistance as the Government of the United States of 
America may authorize and in accordance with such terms 
and conditions as may be agreed. Such assistance as may 
be made available by the Government of the United States 
of America under the agreement will be furnished under 
the authority and subject to all of the terms, conditions 
and termination provisions of the Mutual Security Act of 
1954, acts amendatory and supplementary thereto and 
appropriation acts thereunder. The furnishing and use 



142 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



of any such assistance shall be consistent with the prin- 
ciples of the Charter of the United Nations and with the 
principles of Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty. 

2. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will make effective use of assistance received under this 
agreement for the purpose of promoting an integrated de- 
fense of the North Atlantic area in accordance with de- 
fense plans formulated by the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization, and will not use such assistance for any 
act inconsistent with the strictly defensive character of 
the North Atlantic Treaty, or, without the prior consent 
of the Government of the United States of America, for 
any other purpose. The two Governments will establish 
arrangements in which both Governments will participate 
to ensure that equipment and materials received under 
this agreement, other than equipment or material sold 
under Section 106 of the Mutual Security Act of 1954, 
and no longer required or used exclusively for the purpose 
for which they were furnished or in accordance with the 
terms and conditions under which they were furnished 
will be offered for return to the Government of the United 
States of America for appropriate disposition. 

3. In the common security interest of the parties, the 
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will not 
transfer to any person not an officer or agent of that 
Government, or to any nation other than the United 
States of America, title to or possession of any equip- 
ment, materials, property, information, or services fur- 
nished pursuant to this Agreement without the prior con- 
sent of the Government of the United States of America. 

4. The Government of the Federal Republic of Ger- 
many may use equipment, materials, or services acquired 
from the Government of the United States of America on 
a reimbursable basis under the agreement (exchange of 
notes) of November 23, 1953, 1 for the purpose for which 
it will use equipment, materials, or services acquired 
under this Agreement. 

Article II 

1. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will make available to the Government of the United 
States of America and to such other governments as the 
parties hereto may in each case agree upon, such equip- 
ment, materials, services, or other assistance as may be 
authorized, in accordance with such terms and conditions 
as may be agreed between the two Governments. The 
furnishing and use of such assistance shall be consistent 
with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations 
and with the obligations under Article 3 of the North 
Atlantic Treaty. 

2. In conformity with the principle of mutual aid, the 
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will 
facilitate the production and transfer to the Govern- 
ment of the United States of America for such period of 
time, in such quantities and upon such terms and condi- 
tions as may be agreed, of raw and semi-processed ma- 
terials required by the United States of America as a 
result of deficiencies or potential deficiencies in its own 
resources, and which may be available in the territory of 
the Federal Republic of Germany. Arrangements shall 



give due regard to the requirements of the Federal Re- 
public of Germany for domestic use and commercial 
export of such materials. 

Article III 

The two Governments will, upon the request of either 
of them, negotiate appropriate arrangements relating to 
the exchange of patent rights and technical information 
for defense, in order to expedite such exchanges and at 
the same time protect private interests and maintain 
necessary security safeguards. 

Article IV 

1. The Government of the Federal Republic of Ger- 
many will take such security measures as may be agreed 
between the two Governments in order to prevent the 
disclosure or compromise of classified equipment, ma- 
terials, services, or information furnished pursuant to 
this Agreement. 

2. Each Government will, consistent with security re- 
quirements, take appropriate measures to keep the public 
informed of operations under this Agreement. 

Article V 

The two Governments will establish procedures whereby 
the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will 
so deposit, segregate or assure title to all funds allocated 
to or derived from any program of assistance undertaken 
by the Government of the United States of America so 
that such funds shall not, unless otherwise agreed here- 
after, be subject to garnishment, attachment, seizure or 
other legal process by any person, firm, agency, corpora- 
tion, organization or government. 

Article VI 

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will grant tax relief to activities of the Government of 
the United States of America under this Agreement, or 
any similar agreement between the Government of the 
United States of America and the government of any 
other country receiving military assistance, in accord- 
ance with the Agreement between the United States of 
America and the Federal Republic of Germany Concern- 
ing Tax Relief to be Accorded by the Federal Republic 
to United States Expenditures in the Interest of the Com- 
mon Defense, signed at Bonn, October 15, 1954. 2 

Article VII 

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will make available to the Government of the United 
States of America German currency for the use of the 
Government of the United States of America in adequate 
amounts for its administrative and operating expendi- 
tures in connection with this agreement. Discussions will 
be initiated forthwith with a view to determining the 
nature of the expenditures and the amount of such 
currency. 



1 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2911. 
July 25, 1955 



' Not printed. 



143 



Article VIII 

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will receive in its territory personnel of the Government 
of the United States of America, including personnel tem- 
porarily assigned, who will discharge the responsibilities 
of the Government of the United States of America with 
respect to the equipment, materials, and services fur- 
nished by the latter Government. Such personnel will 
operate as part of the Embassy of the United States of 
America under the direction and control of the Chief of 
the Diplomatic Mission of the United States of America. 
These personnel will be accorded authority and facilities 
to carry out continuous observation and review of oper- 
ations under the program of assistance provided under 
this agreement, including the utilization of military as- 
sistance furnished by the Government of the United States 
of America, and the Government of the Federal Republic 
of Germany will provide any information as to these mat- 
ters which may be requested by the Government of the 
United States of America. The personnel, including de- 
pendents, will be divided into two categories : 

a) Upon appropriate notification by the Chief of the 
Diplomatic Mission of the United States of America, full 
diplomatic status will be granted to the senior military 
member and the senior Army, Navy and Air Force officer 
assigned thereto, and to their respective immediate 
deputies. 

b) The second category of personnel will enjoy privi- 
leges and immunities conferred by international custom, 
as recognized by each Government, to certain categories 
of personnel of the Embassy of the United States of 
America, such as the immunity from civil and criminal 
Jurisdiction of the host country, immunity of official 
papers from search and seizure, right of free egress, 
exemption from custom duties or similar taxes or restric- 
tions in respect of personally owned property imported 
into the host country by such personnel for their personal 
use and consumption, without prejudice to the existing 
regulations on foreign exchange, exemption from internal 
taxation by the host country upon salaries of such per- 
sonnel. Privileges and courtesies incident to diplomatic 
status, such as diplomatic automobile license plates, in- 
clusion on the "diplomatic list", and social courtesies 
may be waived by the Government of the United States 
of America for this category of personnel. 

It is understood between the two Governments that the 
number of personnel in the two categories above will be 
kept as low as possible. In the event that the status, 
privileges and immunities of such personnel in any other 
North Atlantic Treaty country are modified pursuant to 
agreement with such other country, the Government of 
the United States of America will interpose no objection 
to amending this agreement in order that the status, 
privileges and immunities provided shall conform to those 
in such other North Atlantic Treaty country. 

Article EX 

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany 
will consistent with its rights and obligations as a mem- 
ber of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and under 



The Convention on Relations Between the Three Powers 
and the Federal Republic of Germany and its Related 
Conventions as amended by the Protocol on the Termina- 
tion of the Occupation Regime in the Federal Republic 
of Germany : 

a) join in promoting international understanding and 
good will and maintaining world peace ; take such action 
as may be mutually agreed upon to eliminate causes of 
international tension ; and fulfill the military obliga- 
tions which it has assumed under multilateral or bilateral 
agreements, treaties or other instruments to which the 
United States of America is a party or in which the United 
States of America has an interest ; 

b) make, consistent with its political and economic 
stability and international obligations the full contribu- 
tion permitted by its manpower, resources, facilities, and 
general economic condition to the development and main- 
tenance of its own defensive strength and the defensive 
strength of the free world and take all reasonable meas- 
ures which may be needed to develop its defense 
capacities. 

Article X 

In order to safeguard the common interests and the 
resources of the two Governments, the Government of 
the Federal Republic of Germany will cooperate with the 
Government of the United States of America in the im- 
plementation of security controls agreed or to be agreed 
over the export of strategic goods. 

Article XI 

1. This Agreement shall enter into force upon the 
deposit of an instrument of ratification by the Federal 
Republic of Germany with the Government of the United 
States of America and shall continue in force until one 
year after the receipt by either party of written notice 
of the intention of the other party to terminate it, except 
that the provisions of Article I, paragraphs 2 and 3, and 
arrangements entered into under Article I, paragraph 2, 
Article III, Article IV, paragraph 1, and Article V, shall 
remain in force unless otherwise agreed by the two 
Governments. 

2. The two Governments shall, upon the request of 
either of them, consult regarding any matter relating to 
the application or amendment of this Agreement. Such 
consultation shall take into account, where appropriate, 
agreements concluded by either Government in connection 
with the carrying out of Article 9 of the North Atlantic 
Treaty. 

3. The two Governments will, from time to time, nego- 
tiate detailed arrangements necessary to carry out the 
provisions of this Agreement. 

4. This Agreement shall be registered with the Secre- 
tariat of the United Nations. 

Done at Bonn, in duplicate in the English and German 
languages, both texts authentic, this thirtieth day of June 
1955. 

For the United States of America 
James Bryant Conant 

For the Federal Republic of Germany 
v. Brentano 



144 



Department of State Bulletin 



Air Transport Agreement With Germany 



DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

The Department of State and the Civil Aero- 
nautics Board announced on July 7 (Department 
of State press release 422) that Under Secretary 
of State Herbert Hoover, Jr., and German Charge 
d'Affaires ad interim Albrecht von Kessel had that 
day signed an air transport agreement between 
the Federal Republic of Germany and the United 
States providing the basic principles to govern air 
transport relations between the two countries and 
setting forth routes to be operated by their air- 
lines. 

The agreement contains the fundamental prin- 
ciples relating to air transport operations which 
have been standard in air transport agreements 
negotiated by the United States since the signing 
of the air transport agreement between the United 
States and the United Kingdom in Bermuda in 
February 1946. 1 Approximately 40 agreements 
concluded by the United States contain these 
principles. 

Negotiations leading to the United States- 
German agreement were completed on June 10. 
Since that time the subject of the agreement has 
been discussed by the airlines, the Civil Aeronau- 
tics Board, and the Department of State at hear- 
ings before the Senate Committee on Interstate 
and Foreign Commerce. Later the airlines pre- 
sented their views before the Civil Aeronautics 
Board. Subsequent to these further discussions 
and after careful deliberation, the Civil Aeronau- 
tics Board and the Department of State have con- 
cluded that, in consideration of all aspects of the 
national interest, the agreement as reached by the 
representatives of the United States and the Fed- 
eral Republic of Germany should be signed 
immediately. 

In signing the agreement, the United States re- 

1 For text of the Bermuda agreement, see Bulletin of 
Apr. 7, 1946, p. 586. 

Ju/y 25, 7955 

351800—55 3 



affirms its adherence to the Bermuda principles as 
setting forth a sound basis on which to develop 
international air transport services. These prin- 
ciples, under which airlines of the United States 
and of many foreign nations have now had almost 
10 years of practical operations, afford ample pro- 
tection for local and regional services while per- 
mitting a reasonable degree of flexibility to the 
operators of trunk-line services. 

The routes to be operated by the airlines of the 
two countries are as follows : 

For airlines of the United States : 

1. From the United States of America to Ham- 
burg and beyond to points in Europe north and east 
of the Federal Republic of Germany. 

2. From the United States of America to Dus- 
seldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfort, Stuttgart, and 
Munich and beyond to points in Europe east and 



Air Transport Agreement With Germany 

Statement by Under Secretary Hoover 1 

Mr. Minister : It gives me great pleasure to be 
meeting with you to sign still another agreement 
normalizing relations between the Federal Republic 
of Germany and the United States. 

This agreement will permit the normal operation 
of air transport services between our two countries. 
While these services have been performed in recent 
years by United States and other airlines, this 
agreement and the recent inauguration of Lufthansa 
service will place our air transport services on a 
reciprocal basis. 

I hope that the air traffic authorized by this 
agreement will prove to be another means of bring- 
ing our two nations still closer together. 



1 Made on July 7 (press release 423) on the occa- 
sion of the signing of the Air Transport Agreement 
by Mr. Hoover and German Charge d'Affaires ad 
interim Albrecht von Kessel. 



145 



southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany 
and beyond. 

3. From the United States of America to Frank- 
fort and beyond to points in Europe south and 
southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and 
beyond to North Africa, the Near East, and be- 
yond. 

For airlines of Germany : 

1. From the Federal Republic of Germany to 
Boston, New York, and Philadelphia and beyond 
to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to 
South America. 

2. From the Federal Republic of Germany to 
Chicago. 

3. From the Federal Republic of Germany to 
San Francisco or Los Angeles. (Selection of the 
terminal point in the United States of America to 
be determined by the Federal Republic of Ger- 
many at a later date.) 

The airlines of each country also have the right 
to make traffic stops at intermediate points between 
the two countries. The detailed route descrip- 
tions are listed in a note attached to the agreement. 



TEXT OF AGREEMENT 

The United States of America and the Federal Republic 
of Germany, 

Desiring to conclude an Agreement for the purpose 
of promoting air communications between their respec- 
tive territories, 

Have accordingly appointed authorized representatives 
for this purpose, who have agreed as follows : 

ARTICLE 1 

For the purposes of the present Agreement : 

a) The term "aeronautical authorities" shall mean in 
the case of the United States of America, the Civil Aero- 
nautics Board and any person or agency authorized to 
perform the functions exercised by the Civil Aeronautics 
Board and, in the case of the Federal Republic of Ger- 
many, the Federal Minister of Transport and any person 
or agency authorized to perform the functions exercised 
by the said Federal Minister of Transport. 

b) The term "territory" in relation to a State shall 
mean the land areas and territorial waters adjacent 
thereto under the sovereignty, suzerainty, protection, 
mandate or trusteeship of that State. 

c) The term "designated airline" shall mean an airline 
that one contracting party has notified the other contract- 
ing party, in writing, to be the airline which will operate 
a specific route or routes listed in the exchange of notes 
in accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this 
Agreement. 



d) The term "air service" shall mean any scheduled air 
service performed by aircraft for the public transport of 
passengers, mail or cargo. 

e) The term "international air service" shall mean an 
air service which passes through the air space over the 
territory of more than one State. 

f ) The term "stop for non-traffic purposes" shall mean 
a landing for any purpose other than taking on or dis- 
charging passengers, cargo or mail. 

ARTICLE 2 

(1) Each contracting party grants to the other con- 
tracting party rights necessary for the conduct of inter- 
national air services by the designated airlines, as follows: 
the rights of transit, of stops for non-traffic purposes, and 
of commercial entry and departure for international 
traffic in passengers, mail and cargo at the points in its 
territory named on each of the routes specified in accord- 
ance with paragraph (2). 

(2) The routes over which the designated airlines of the 
two contracting parties will be authorized to operate will 
be specified in a Route Schedule, mutually agreed upon, 
and set forth in an exchange of diplomatic notes. 

ARTICLE 3 

Air service on a specified route may be inaugurated by 
an airline or airlines of one contracting party at any time 
after that contracting party has designated such airline or 
airlines for that route and the other contracting party has 
given the appropriate operating permission. Such other 
party shall, subject to Article 4, be bound to give this per- 
mission provided that the designated airline or airlines 
may be required to qualify before the competent aeronau- 
tical authorities of that party, under the laws and regula- 
tions normally applied by these authorities, before being 
permitted to engage in the operations contemplated by this 
Agreement. 

ARTICLE 4 

Each contracting party reserves the right to withhold 
or revoke the operating permission provided for in Article 
3 of this Agreement from an airline designated by the 
other contracting party in the event that it is not satisfied 
that substantial ownership and effective control of such 
airline are vested in nationals of the other contracting 
party, or in case of failure by such airline to comply with 
the laws and regulations referred to in Article 5 hereof, 
or in case of the failure of the airline or the government 
designating it otherwise to perform its obligations here- 
under, or to fulfill the conditions under which the rights 
are granted in accordance with this Agreement. 

ARTICLE 5 

(1) The laws and regulations of one contracting party 
relating to the admission to or departure from its territory 
of aircraft engaged in international air navigation, or to 
the operation and navigation of such aircraft while within 
its territory, shall be applied to the aircraft utilized by the 
airline or airlines designated by the other contracting 
party, and shall be complied with by such aircraft upon 
entering or departing from and while within the territory 
of the first contracting party. 



146 



Department of State Bulletin 



(2) The laws and regulations of one contracting party 
relating to the admission to or departure from its terri- 
tory of passengers, crew, or cargo of aircraft, such as 
regulations relating to entry, clearance, immigration, 
passports, customs, and quarantine shall be complied with 
by or on behalf of such passengers, crew or cargo of the 
other contracting party upon entrance into or departure 
from, and while within the territory of the first contract- 
ing party. 

ARTICLE 6 

Certificates of airworthiness, certificates of compe- 
tency and licenses issued or rendered valid by one con- 
tracting party, and still in force, shall be recognized as 
valid by the other contracting party for the purpose of 
operating the routes and services provided for in this 
Agreement, provided that the requirements under which 
such certificates or licenses were issued or rendered valid 
are equal to or above the minimum standards which may 
be established pursuant to the Convention on Inter- 
national Civil Aviation. Each contracting party reserves 
the right, however, to refuse to recognize, for the purpose 
of flight above its own territory, certificates of compe- 
tency and licenses granted to its own nationals by another 
State. 

ARTICLE 7 

In order to prevent discriminatory practices and to 
assure equality of treatment, both contracting parties 
agree that : 

a) Each of the contracting parties may impose or 
permit to be imposed just and reasonable charges for the 
use of public airports and other facilities under its con- 
trol. Each of the contracting parties agrees, however, 
that these charges shall not be higher than would be 
paid for the use of such airports and facilities by its 
national aircraft engaged in similar international 
services. 

b) Fuel, lubricating oils, consumable technical sup- 
plies, spare parts, regular equipment, and stores on board 
aircraft of the designated airlines of one contracting 
party on arrival in the territory of the other contracting 
party and retained on board on leaving the territory 
of that party shall be exempt, on a basis of reciprocity, 
from customs duties, inspection fees and other national 
duties or charges. Such supplies may also be used or 
consumed free of customs duties and other entrance taxes 
aboard aircraft while in flight over the territory of the 
other contracting party. With respect to food stores, 
however, this shall apply only if the food stores are 
issued for immediate consumption aboard aircraft carry- 
ing passengers on international air services exclusively 
and furthermore if such aircraft can be continuously 
supervised by customs authorities in case of intermediate 
landings. 

c) Fuel, lubricating oils, consumable technical sup- 
plies, spare parts, and regular equipment introduced into 
the territory of one contracting party by or on behalf of 
the other contracting party or its nationals under customs 
supervision and control, intended solely for use on, and 
used on, aircraft of the designated airlines of such con- 
tracting party in international services shall be exempt 



on a basis of reciprocity from customs duties, inspection 
fees and other national duties or charges. 

d) Insofar as the above-mentioned supplies are ex- 
empted from duties, fees and charges, they shall not be 
subject to the otherwise applicable economic prohibitions 
and restrictions relating to import, export and transit. 

ARTICLE 8 

There shall be a fair and equal opportunity for the 

airlines of each contracting party to operate on any 

route specified in accordance with paragraph (2) of 
Article 2 of this Agreement. 

ARTICLE 9 

In the operation by the airlines of either contracting 
party of the air services over the routes described in 
accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree- 
ment, the interest of the airlines of the other contracting 
party shall be taken into consideration so as not to affect 
unduly the services which the latter provide on all or 
part of the same routes. 

ARTICLE 10 

(1) The air services made available to the public by 
the airlines operating under this Agreement shall bear a 
close relationship to the requirements of the public for 
such services. 

(2) It is the understanding of both contracting parties 
that services provided by a designated airline under the 
present Agreement shall retain as their primary objective 
the provision of capacity adequate to the traffic demands 
between the country of which such airline is a national 
and the countries of ultimate destination of the traffic. 
The right to embark or disembark on such services inter- 
national traffic destined for or coming from third countries 
at a point or points on the routes specified in accordance 
with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agreement shall 
be applied in accordance with the general principles of 
orderly development to which both contracting parties 
subscribe and shall be subject to the general principle that 
capacity should be related : 

a) to traffic requirements between the country of origin 
and the countries of ultimate destination of the traffic ; 

b) to the requirements of through airline operation; 
and, 

c) to the traffic requirements of the area through which 
the airline passes after taking account of local and re- 
gional services. 

ARTICLE 11 

Rates to be charged on the routes provided for in 
accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree- 
ment shall be reasonable, due regard being paid to all 
relevant factors, such as cost of operation, reasonable 
profit, and the rates charged by any other carriers, as well 
as the characteristics of each service, and shall be deter- 
mined in accordance with the following paragraphs : 

a) The rates to be charged by the airlines of either 
contracting party between points in the territory of the 
United States and points in the territory of the Federal 



July 25, 1955 



147 



Republic of Germany referred to in the Route Schedule 
provided for in paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree- 
ment shall, consistent with the provisions of the present 
Agreement, he subject to the approval of the aeronautical 
authorities of the contracting parties, who shall act in 
accordance with their obligations under this Agreement, 
within the limits of their legal powers. 

b) Any rate proposed by an airline of either contract- 
ing party shall be filed with the aeronautical authorities of 
both contracting parties at least thirty (30) days before 
the proposed date of introduction; provided that this 
period of thirty (30) days may be reduced in particular 
cases if so agreed by the aeronautical authorities of each 
contracting party. 

c) During any period for which the Civil Aeronautics 
Board of the United States has approved the traffic con- 
ference procedures of the International Air Transport 
Association (hereinafter called IATA), any rate agree- 
ments concluded through these procedures and involving 
United States airlines will be subject to approval of the 
Board. Rate agreements concluded through this ma- 
chinery may also be required to be subject to the approval 
of the aeronautical authorities of the Federal Republic 
of Germany pursuant to the principles enunciated in 
paragraph b) above. 

d) The contracting parties agree that the procedure 
described in paragraphs e), f) and g) of this Article shall 
apply : 

aa) If, during the period of the approval by both con- 
tracting parties of the IATA traffic conference procedure, 
either, any specific rate agreement is not approved with- 
in a reasonable time by either contracting party, or, a 
conference of IATA is unable to agree on a rate, or 
bb) At any time no IATA procedure is applicable, or 
cc) If either contracting party at any time withdraws 
or fails to renew its approval of that part of the IATA 
traffic conference procedure relevant to this Article. 

e) In the event that power is conferred by law upon 
the aeronautical authorities of the United States to fix 
fair and economic rates for the transport of persons and 
property by air on international services and to suspend 
proposed rates in a manner comparable to that in which 
the Civil Aeronautics Board at present is empowered to 
act with respect to such rates for the transport of per- 
sons and property by air within the United States, each 
of the contracting parties shall thereafter exercise its 
authority in such manner as to prevent any rate or rates 
proposed by one of its airlines for services from the 
territory of one contracting party to a point or points in 
the territory of the other contracting party from becom- 
ing effective, if in the judgment of the aeronautical 
authorities of the contracting party whose airline or air- 
lines is or are proposing such rate, that rate is unfair or 
uneconomic. If one of the contracting parties on receipt 
of the notification referred to in paragraph b) above 
is dissatisfied with the rate proposed by the airline or 
airlines of the other contracting party, it shall so notify 
the other contracting party prior to the expiry of the 
first fifteen (15) of the thirty (30) days referred to, and 
the contracting parties shall endeavor to reach agreement 
on the appropriate rate. 



aa) In the event that such agreement is reached, each 
contracting party will exercise its best efforts to put 
such rate into effect as regards its airline or airlines. 

bb) If agreement has not been reached at the end of 
the thirty (30) day period referred to in paragraph b) 
above, the proposed rate may, unless the aeronautical 
authorities of the country of the air carrier concerned see 
fit to suspend its application, go into effect provisionally 
pending the settlement of any dispute in accordance with 
the procedure outlined in paragraph g) below. 

f ) Prior to the time when such power may be conferred 
upon the aeronautical authorities of the United States, 
if one of the contracting parties is dissatisfied with any 
rate proposed by the airline or airlines of either contract- 
ing party for services from the territory of one contract- 
ing party to a point or points in the territory of the 
other contracting party, it shall so notify the other prior 
to the expiry of the first fifteen (15) of the thirty (30) 
day period referred to in paragraph b) above, and the 
contracting parties shall endeavor to reach agreement on 
the appropriate rate. 

aa) In the event that such agreement is reached, each 
contracting party will use its best efforts to cause such 
agreed rate to be put into effect by its airline or airlines. 

bb) It is recognized that if no such agreement can 
be reached prior to the expiry of such thirty (30) days, 
the contracting party raising the objection to the rate 
may take such steps as it may consider necessary to 
prevent the inauguration or continuation of the service 
in question at the rate complained of. 

g) When in any case under paragraphs e) or f ) of this 
Article the aeronautical authorities of the two contract- 
ing parties cannot agree within a reasonable time upon 
the appropriate rate after consultation initiated by the 
complaint of one contracting party concerning the pro- 
posed rate or an existing rate of the airline or airlines 
of the other contracting party, upon the request of either, 
the terms of Article 13 of this Agreement shall apply. 

ARTICLE 12 

(1) Consultation between the competent authorities of 
both contracting parties may be requested at any time 
by either contracting party for the purpose of discussing 
the interpretation, application, or amendment of the 
Agreement or Route Schedule. Such consultation shall 
begin within a period of sixty (60) days from the date 
of the receipt of the request by the Department of State 
of the United States of America or the Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany as the 
case may be. 

(2) Should agreement be reached on amendment of 
this Agreement such amendment shall become effective 
when it has been approved in accordance with the pro- 
cedure set forth in Article 17 of this Agreement. 

(3) Should agreement be reached on amendment of 
the Route Schedule, such agreement shall become effec- 
tive on the date of an exchange of diplomatic notes in 
accordance with the procedure provided in paragraph (2) 
of Article 2 for the initial establishment of the Route 
Schedule. 



148 



Department of State Bulletin 



(4) A frequent exchange of ideas will take place be- 
tween the aeronautical authorities of the two parties in 
order to achieve close cooperation in all matters concern- 
ing the present Agreement. 

ARTICLE 13 

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, 
any dispute between contracting parties relative to the 
interpretation or application of this Agreement which can- 
not he settled through consultation shall be submitted for 
an advisory report to a mixed commission of three mem- 
bers, one to be named by each contracting party, and the 
third to be agreed upon by the two members so chosen, 
provided that such third member shall not be a national 
of either contracting party. Each of the contracting 
parties shall designate a member within two months of the 
date of delivery by either party to the other party of a 
diplomatic note requesting settlement of a dispute ; and the 
third member shall be agreed upon within one month after 
such period of two months. 

(2) If either of the contracting parties fails to desig- 
nate its own member within two months, or if the third 
member is not agreed upon within the time limit indicated, 
either party may request the President of the Inter- 
national Court of Justice to make the necessary appoint- 
ment or appointments by choosing the member or members. 

(3) The contracting parties will use their best efforts 
under the powers available to them to put into effect the 
opinion expressed in any such advisory report. Each con- 
tracting party shall bear the expenses arising out of the 
activity of its member as well as one half of the expenses 
arising out of the activity of the third member. 

ARTICLE 14 

This Agreement, all amendments thereto, and contracts 
connected therewith shall be registered with the Inter- 
national Civil Aviation Organization. 

ARTICLE 15 

If a general multilateral air transport convention ac- 
cepted by both contracting parties enters into force, the 
provisions of the multilateral convention shall prevail. 
Consultations under the provisions of Article 12 may be 
held to determine the extent to which the present Agree- 
ment is amended, supplemented or revoked by the pro- 
visions of the multilateral convention. 

ARTICLE 16 

Either of the contracting parties may at any time 
notify the other of its intention to terminate the present 
Agreement. Such a notice shall be sent simultaneously 
to the International Civil Aviation Organization. In the 
event such communication is made, this Agreement shall 
terminate one year after the date of its receipt, unless by 
agreement between the contracting parties the notice of 
intention to terminate is withdrawn before the expiration 
of that time. If the other contracting party fails to 
acknowledge receipt, notice shall be deemed as having 
been received fourteen (14) days after its receipt by the 
International Civil Aviation Organization. 



ARTICLE 17 

The present Agreement shall enter into force on the date 
of receipt by the United States of America of notification 
of its approval by the Federal Republic of Germany. 

In witness whereof, the undersigned representatives 
have signed the present Agreement. 

Done at Washington this seventh day of July 1955, in 
duplicate in the English and German languages, each of 
which shall be of equal authenticity. 

FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : 

HeRHERT HOOVER Jr. 

FOR THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY: 

Kessel 



EXCHANGE OF NOTES ON ROUTE SCHEDULE 

U.S. Note of July 7 

Department of State 
Washington 

July 7, 1955 
Sir: I refer to paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Air 
Transport Agreement between the United States of 
America and the Federal Republic of Germany, signed 
on July 7, 1955. 

In the negotiations which have been conducted in con- 
nection with the above-mentioned Agreement, it has been 
agreed that air services may be operated in accordance 
with the following route schedule. 

Route Schedule 

A. An airline or airlines designated by the Government 
of the United States of America shall be entitled to oper- 
ate air services on each of the air routes specified via 
intermediate points, in both directions, and to make 
scheduled landings in the Federal Republic of Germany 
at the points specified in this paragraph : 

1. From the United States of America via intermediate 
points to Hamburg and beyond to points in Europe north 
and east of the Federal Republic of Germany. 

2. From the United States of America via intermediate 
points to Dusseldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfort, Stutt- 
gart and Munich and beyond to points in Europe east 
and southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and 
beyond. 

3. From the United States of America via intermediate 
points to Frankfort and beyond to points in Europe south 
and southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and 
beyond to North Africa, the Near East and beyond. 

B. An airline or airlines designated by the Govern- 
ment of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be en- 
titled to operate air services on each of the air routes 
specified via intermediate points, in both directions, and 
to make scheduled landings in the United States of 
America at the points specified in this paragraph : 

1. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to Boston, New York and Philadelphia 



July 25, 1955 



149 



anfl beyond to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to 
South America. 

2. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to Chicago. 

3. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to San Francisco or Los Angeles.* 

^Selection of the terminal point in the United States 
of America to be determined by the Federal Republic of 
Germany at a later date. 

C. Points on any of the specified routes may at the 
option of the designated airline be omitted on any or all 
flights. 

I should be very grateful if you would inform me of 
the concurrence of the Government of the Federal Re- 
public of Germany in the foregoing route schedule. 

Accept, Sir, the renewed assurances of my high consid- 
eration. 

For the Secretary of State: 
Herbert Hoover Jr. 

The Honorable 

Albrecht von Kessel, 

Charge' d'Affnires ad interim of the Federal 
Republic of Germany. 



German Note of July 7 

Embassy of the 

Federal Republic of Germany 

Washington, D. C. 

My dear Mr. Secretary : I have the honor to ac- 
knowledge the receipt of your note dated July 7, 1955, re- 
ferring to paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Air Transport 
Agreement between the United States of America and 
the Federal Republic of Germany, signed on July 7, 
1955, and I wish to state that in the negotiations which 
have been conducted in connection with said agreement 
it has been agreed that air services may be operated in 
accordance with the following route schedule: 

Route Schedule 

A. An airline or airlines designated by the Govern- 
ment of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be en- 
titled to operate air services on each of the air routes 
specified via intermediate points, in both directions, and 
to make scheduled landings in the United States of 
America at the points specified in this paragraph : 

1. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to Boston, New York and Philadelphia and 
beyond to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to 
South America. 

2. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to Chicago. 

3. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter- 
mediate points to San Francisco or Los Angeles.* 



* Selection of the terminal point in the United States 
to be determined by the Federal Republic of Germany at 
a later date. (Footnote in original.) 



4. Points on any of the specified routes may at the 
option of the designated airline be omitted on any or all 
flights. 

B. An airline or airlines designated by the Government 
of the United States of America shall be entitled to 
operate air services on each of the air routes specified via 
intermediate points, in both directions, and to make 
scheduled landings in the Federal Republic of Germany 
at the points specified in this paragraph : 

1. From the United States via intermediate points to 
Hamburg and beyond to points in Europe north and 
east of the Federal Republic of Germany. 

2. From the United States via intermediate points to 
Diisseldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfurt, Stuttgart and 
Munich and beyond to points in Europe east and south- 
east of the Federal Republic of Germany and beyond. 

3. From the United States via intermediate points to 
Frankfurt and beyond to points in Europe south and 
southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and be- 
yond to North Africa, the Near East and beyond. 

Accept, Mr. Secretary, the renewed assurances of my 
highest consideration. 

Washington, D. C, 
the 7th of July 1955. 

For the Ambassador 

Kessel 
Minister 

The Honorable 

John Foster Dulles 
Secretary of State 

Department of State 

Washington 25, D. C. 



Reciprocal War Damage Agreement 
With Luxembourg 

Press release 419 dated July 7 

An agreement signed on June 15, 1955, between 
the Government of the United States and the 
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg grants reciprocal 
national treatment to American nationals who 
have, sustained war damage to their private prop- 
erty in the territory of Luxembourg and to Lux- 
embourg nationals who have sustained war dam- 
age to their private property in the territory of 
the United States, Hawaii, and Alaska. 

American nationals seeking indemnification for 
war damage to their private property sustained in 
Luxembourg have until January 7, 1956, to address 
a brief declaration in the French language to the 
Office cle l'Etat des Dommages de Guerre, Luxem 
bourg, which office will furnish them the necessary 
forms. The duly completed forms, in the French 



150 



Department of State Bulletin 



language, are to be sent by the claimant to the 
mayor of the commune in which the war damage 
was sustained. After certification, the mayor will 
transmit the declaration to the Office de l'Etat des 
Dommages de Guerre. 

American nationals seeking indemnification 
must have possessed either American or Luxem- 
bourg nationality on the date of the loss and must 
also possess American nationality on the date of 
the payment of the compensation. 

Luxembourg nationals seeking indemnification 
for war damage sustained in the United States, 
Hawaii, and Alaska have until January 7, 1956, 
to file their statement of claim in the English lan- 
guage with the American Legation at Luxembourg 
or with the Department of State at Washing- 
ton, D.C. 

American nationals who have previously de- 
clared their war damage to the Luxembourg au- 
thorities are not required to make new declarations 
unless requested to do so by the Luxembourg au- 
thorities. Any declarations made prior to the 
coming into force of the agreement on reciprocity 
will be regarded as having been filed within the 
time allowed by the agreement. 

Luxembourg nationals who filed a declaration 
of war damage with the American authorities and 
whose compensation has not been settled must file a 
new declaration in the English language with the 
American Legation at Luxembourg or the Depart- 
ment of State at Washington, D.C. 



Exchange of Agricultural Delegations 
With U.S.S.R. 

Departure of U.S. Representatives 

The Departments of Agriculture and State an- 
nounced on July 12 (press release 429) that a 
group of 12 American agricultural people were 
leaving that day to begin a month's unofficial tour 
of Soviet Russia. 1 

It is expected that the group will be given a 
broad view of Soviet Russia's agricultural econ- 
omy and will be invited to see collective farms, 
state farms, machine tractor stations, experiment 



stations, agricultural colleges, and agricultural 
machinery and food-processing plants. The 
itinerary indicates that some time will be spent in 
the Moscow area, followed by visits to the Ukraine, 
one of the rich agricultural areas of Eastern 
Europe; the Kuban area of North Caucasus and 
the Don and Volga regions; the central Asiatic 
part of the U.S.S.R., where irrigated cotton is pro- 
duced ; and the new land development in Western 
Siberia and Kazakhstan, a pioneering attempt to 
open new lands to grain production. 

The American group is paying its own expenses. 
Members were selected by a nonofficial public com- 
mittee 2 and include eight practicing farmers. The 
trip is an outgrowth of an editorial suggestion 
made earlier this year by the Des Moines Register 
and Tribune, Des Moines, Iowa, that U.S.- 
U.S.S.R. relations might be improved through ex- 
change of agricultural visitors. Also, as a result 
of the suggestion, Soviet Russia is sending an of- 
ficial agricultural delegation to the United States 
during approximately the same period that the 
American group will visit there. 

W. V. Lambert, dean of the College of Agricul- 
ture and director of the Experiment Station and 
Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lin- 
coln, Neb., is chairman of the American group. 
Other members of the group are Asa V. Clark, 
Pullman, Wash. ; Charles J. Hearst, Cedar Falls, 
Iowa; John M. Jacobs, Phoenix, Ariz.; David 
Gale Johnson, University of Chicago, Chicago, 
111.; J. M. Kleiner, Nampa, Idaho; Ralph Ainslee 
Olsen, Ellsworth, Iowa; Ferris Owen, Newark, 
Ohio; Herbert W. Pike, Whiting, Iowa; W. E. 
Reed, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical 
College, Greensboro, N. C. ; Lauren K. Soth, Des 
Moines, Iowa; and John M. Steddon, Granger, 
Iowa. 3 



Travel Schedule for Soviet Visitors 

Press release 394 dated June 28 

Tentative tour plans for a group of leading 
agricultural administrative and technical officials 
of the Soviet Union who are scheduled to visit the 
United States during the approximate period 
July 14-August 20, 1955, were announced on June 



1 For background, see Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 932, 
and June 13, 1955, p. 970. 



2 See press release 375 of June 21. 

3 For additional biographical data on the American 
group, see press releases 3S0 of June 22, 3S8 of June 24, 
and 418 of July 6. 



July 25, 1955 



151 



28 by the Departments of Agriculture and State. 4 
The itinerary has been developed cooperatively 
with the land-grant colleges and private industry 
and reflects the interests expressed by the Soviet 
delegation. 

The prospective tour is part of an exchange of 
visits. The U. S. S. R. has agreed that a group 
of U.S. agricultural representatives may visit the 
Soviet Union during the same period. The visits 
are the outgrowth of an editorial suggestion orig- 
inally made by the Des Moines Register and Trib- 
une, Des Moines, Iowa, to the effect that such an 
exchange could promote better understanding be- 
tween the two nations. Both delegations are pay- 
ing their own travel and other costs. 

The tentative travel schedule will take in a 
broad representative section of the American 
economy, both agricultural and industrial. The 
tour will give the visitors an opportunity to ob- 
serve the high productivity of the American free 
enterprise system. 

The present schedule calls for the group to ar- 
rive at Des Moines, Iowa, on July 15. Several 
days will be spent in Iowa, following out a pro- 
gram developed under the leadership of Iowa 
State College. The central focus will be on the 
economic production and marketing of corn and 
hogs. It is expected that the visitors will see Iowa 
State College; corn-hog, dairy, and diversified 
farms; a meat packing plant and a milk process- 
ing plant; county extension offices; and typical 
rural communities. 

In Nebraska the visitors will have an oppor- 
tunity to see poultry processing, hybrid corn pro- 
duction, sprinkler irrigation, and grain storage 
methods. Next, the group is scheduled to travel 
through South Dakota, with special attention to 
livestock and grain farming. 

In Minnesota they will be given an opportunity 
to visit typical farms, a seed plant, cooperative 
dairies and creameries, educational and experi- 
mental institutions, the Minneapolis Grain Ex- 
change, flour mills, and a farm equipment factory. 

In Chicago, a 3-day itinerary is being set up 
under the leadership of the Institute of Interna- 
tional Education, working with a local public ad- 
visory committee. It is expected to include such 
divergent interests as a musical concert and a visit 
to the stockyards. 



* For a list of the 13 Soviet officials, see press release 
305 of June 28. 



The group will pay a brief visit to the citrus and 
grape producing areas of California. 

Upon completion of the tour, the delegation will 
come to Washington. Here the members will visit 
the Agriculture Department's Agricultural Re- 
search Center at Beltsville, Md., and will be re- 
ceived by the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Four Americans will accompany the group 
throughout the trip. One is John Strohm of 
Woodstock, 111., editor of Ford Almanac, associate 
editor of Better Farming Magazine, and past pres- 
ident of the American Agricultural Editors Asso- 
ciation. Following World War II, Mr. Strohm 
traveled extensively in the Soviet Union as a guest 
of the Ministry of Agriculture. At the request 
of the Departments of Agriculture and State, he 
is acting as U.S. public representative and will 
coordinate arrangements with assisting groups. 

The others assigned to the trip are Raymond P. 
Christensen, agricultural economist of the Agri- 
cultural Research Service, who will assist with 
general arrangements; and Vladimir P. Prokofieff 
and Vasia Gmirkin of the Department of State, 
who will serve as interpreters. 



Current Legislation on Foreign Policy: 
84th Congress, 1st Session 

Trade Agreements Extension. Hearings before the 
Senate Committee on Finance on H. R. 1, an act to 
extend the authority of the President to enter into 
trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes. Part 1 : 
March 2-S, 1955, 626 pp. Part 2: March 8-14, 1955, 
1,267 pp. Part 3 : March 15-18, 1955, 1,909 pp. Part 4 : 
March 21-23, 1955, 2,352 pp. 

Extending the Existing Authority for the Loan of a Small 
Aircraft Carrier to the Government of France. Report 
to accompany S. 1139. S. Rept. 133, April 1, 1955. 3 pp. 

Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and Re- 
lated Agencies Appropriation Bill, Fiscal Year 1956. 
Report to accompany H. R. 5502. H. Rept. 417, April 13, 
1955. 25 pp. 

United States Membership in an Organization for Trade 
Cooperation. Message from the President requesting 
enactment of legislation recommending U.S. member- 
ship in an Organization for Trade Cooperation. H. Doc. 
140, April 14, 1955. 12 pp. 

Surplus Property. Letter from Chairman, Commission on 
Organization of the Executive Branch of the Govern- 
ment transmitting the Report on Use and Disposal of 
Federal Surplus Property, pursuant to Public Law 108, 
83d Congress. H. Doc. 141, April 18, 1955. 96 pp. 

Second Supplemental Appropriation Bill, 1955. Confer- 
ence report to accompany H. R. 4903. H. Rept. 426, 
April 19, 1955. 7 pp. 

Mutual Security Program. Message from the President 
transmitting recommendations relative to a Mutual 
Security Program. H. Doe. 144, April 20, 1955. 7 pp. 

Transportation on Canadian Vessels to and Within 
Alaska. Report to accompany S. 948. H. ReDt. 431 
April 21, 1955. 3 pp. 



152 



Department of State Bulletin 



Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands 

Statements by Delmas H. Nucker 

U.S. Special Representative in the Trusteeship Council 



OPENING STATEMENT! 

It is a privilege to appear before you as the Spe- 
cial Representative of the Trust Territory of the 
Pacific Islands to report the principal events 
marking the progress of our administration since 
July 1, 1954. 2 I shall try to discuss these events 
briefly and comprehensively. Their details and 
relevant statistics will be presented during the 
question period to the extent they are called for by 
specific inquiries. It is my hope that through this 
meeting you may appraise the progress we have 
made and I, in turn, may receive the benefits of the 
views and recommendations of this Council. 

This is the first time I have served in the capac- 
ity of reporter to you. On August 16 of last year 
I was appointed Deputy High Commissioner of 
the trust territory, and since the resignation of 
Mr. Midkiff on September 1 I have served also in 
the higher role of Acting High Commissioner. 
These dual responsibilities have caused me to make, 
during the past 9 months, three complete tours 
through the territory and three trips, prior to the 
present, to Washington. While time consuming, 
they have enabled me on the one hand to compre- 
hend more clearly district-level problems and needs 
and on the other to perceive better our relationship 
to other agencies with which we must work. My 
trips to the districts also enable me to attest to 
several peculiar difficulties which confront the ad- 
ministration of the trust territory. Chief among 
these are the great expanses over which the terri- 
tory extends, its small, scattered land area, its 

' Made in the U. N. Trusteeship Council on June 14 
(TJ. S./TJ. N. press release 2169). Mr. Nucker is Acting 
High Commissioner of the Trust Territory of the Pacific 
Islands. 

2 For a review of the previous year by the former High 
Commissioner, Frank E. Midkiff, see Bulletin of July 19, 
1954, p. 96. 



meager natural resources, the diversity of its insti- 
tutions and languages, and the general simplicity 
of its cultural background. 



Administration 

Most important among the events of general 
administrative significance was the removal of 
headquarters from Honolulu to Guam on Septem- 
ber 29, 1954. This move brought our headquarters 
into a more central position from the point of view 
of the seven districts of the trust territory. It has 
resulted in improved radio communication, more 
frequent staff visits to the field, and a greater 
number of district personnel visits to headquarters. 
These have made possible an increased interchange 
of ideas and views among our staff. 

A second administrative change was the estab- 
lishment of Rota as the seventh district of the 
territory on March 10 of this year. This action 
removed Rota from the anomalous position it had 
previously occupied as neither district nor district 
part, and permits the supervision of its activities 
on the same basis as with the rest of the territory. 

In numbers, our permanent personnel remains 
substantially the same as last year. The slight 
increase in our total staff — American from about 
215 to 250 and Micronesian from about 1,260 to 
1,475 — is primarily the result of our intensified 
construction program. Hence it consists largely 
of temporary personnel additions. 

Economic Improvement 

Several important events with fundamental 
economic implications occurred during the past 
year. Foremost among these was the December 
31 liquidation of the Island Trading Company. 
Though this government-sponsored company con- 



July 25, 1955 



153 



tributed greatly to the economic development of 
the territory to its very last, careful advance 
planning prevented its liquidation from creating 
an economic vacuum. The Micronesian-owned, 
limited stock companies were strengthened in each 
district so that they could adequately purchase 
and collect the copra in the field. A contract was 
entered into with a private firm under which it 
took over the marketing of copra for the entire 
territory under the jurisdiction of the Copra 
Stabilization Board. The terms under which this 
firm operates are as favorable to the Micronesians 
as those previously offered by the Island Trading 
Company. The sale of trade commodities to the 
Micronesians, a service formerly performed by the 
Trading Company, has also been assumed with 
highly encouraging success by the local trading 
companies. 

In the second place, it has been decided to estab- 
lish Majuro, the Marshalls District center, as a 
world port for the entire trust territory and to 
provide there the various facilities required. As 
such a port, it is to function as the general copra- 
shipping center for the trust territory. This plan 
was put into effect in mid-October of last year 
when the first strictly commercial ship called at 
Majuro and took aboard 1,000 metric tons of copra 
for Japanese discharge. Since then four other 
ships have made this port of call. The establish- 
ment of this important shipping point in the Mar- 
shall Islands, while dictated by other considera- 
tions, serves to aid the economy of the Marshalls, 
which is particularly in need of help, and hence to 
reduce the dependency of these islands on outside 
assistance. Moreover, the lower freight rates 
which have resulted constitute a direct benefit to 
the producers. 

Thirdly, the past year has marked the conclud- 
ing phase of the Phosphate Mining Company's 
operation on Angaur in the Palaus. All mining 
has now ceased and efforts are concentrated in 
backfilling, as I myself observed during my visit 
to the island in May. The contract of this Jap- 
anese owned and directed company will terminate 
on June 30; it is our opinion that the limit to 
which productive agricultural land can safely be 
mined and therefore removed from crop produc- 
tion has now been reached. 

Indicative, too, of our gradual progress in the 
economic sphere are three additional facts. First, 
copra production again increased during the past 



year. Whereas only 10,214 short tons were mar- 
keted in the preceding fiscal year, in the present 
fiscal year an estimated 12,120 short tons will be 
sold, an increase of almost 20 percent. The mar- 
keting of this copra crop will result in a revenue 
of approximately $1,190,000. Secondly, trochus 
production increased fourfold from 102 short tons 
in 1953 to 449 short tons in 1954, and the income de- 
rived from its sale soared from $18,439 to $151,310. 
Third, during this fiscal year handicraft items 
will produce a revenue of approximately $40,000, 
a sum twice that realized in calendar year 1953. 

Agriculture 

During the past year, major moves have been 
made to strengthen the agricultural program. 
The funds allotted to it have been materially in- 
creased. The agriculturists authorized for each 
district have been increased to two, one to direct 
the agricultural center and one to function as an 
extension agent. In order to develop our cash 
crops as well as the subsistence crops, two experts 
have just been added to the staff ; they will assume 
charge of our coconut improvement program and 
will supervise our fishery and trochus-harvesting 
programs. 

In the Marshalls the pressure of the population 
upon the land is greatest, the crop capabilities of 
the soil are most limited, and the presence of dis- 
placed island groups creates special problems. 
There during the past year agriculture has re- 
ceived particular attention. Perhaps our most 
important action, from an agricultural point of 
view, has been the establishment of the Jaluit 
project. Tliis project will improve the subsistence 
and cash crops most suited to the Marshallese soil 
and climate, will develop superior cultivation 
practices, and will disseminate these improved 
plants and agricultural practices through the 
atolls of the district. 

In each district we are creating an agricultural 
center, consisting of nurseries and experimental 
plots, livestock and poultry breeding facilities, and 
laboratories and offices. Experimental plantings 
of cacao continue to be expanded in Yap, Ponape, 
and Palau. An agricultural extension service is 
being organized to offer Micronesians technical 
advice on cultivation practices, to aid in the pro- 
curing of their needed agricultm-al supplies, and 
to help market their crops. A broad agricultural 
education program, now being designed, will bring 



154 



Department of State Bulletin 



important information on cultivation techniques 
and conservation methods to both youth and 
adult groups. 

The Metalanim Plantation was placed on a 
self-sustaining basis on July 1, 1954. The oper- 
ation is sustained by the proceeds of its copra pro- 
duction. It continues to experiment in coconut 
and cacao cultivation and the breeding of cattle 
and swine. The results of these experiments and, 
to some extent, the actual improved plant and ani- 
mal stock are made available to the Micronesians. 

Our rhinoceros beetle eradication program con- 
tinues to receive attention. It is being concen- 
trated in the Palaus, where the ravages of this in- 
sect were most severe. Although the pest is still 
not eliminated, gradual progress in its control 
and extermination is being made and new plant- 
ings of coconut trees are now being started in 
pest-free areas. 

Finally, our agricultural program has as one of 
its goals the improvement of the quality of the 
present Micronesian animal and plant strains. 
With this idea in mind, swine, poultry, and seeds 
of commercial and subsistence crops have been 
imported and distributed in the several districts. 
Similar distributions have also been made from 
the improved stock of our own Agriculture De- 
partment. 

Land Resettlement 

A homesteading program has been inaugurated 
to augment the economic resources of the Micro- 
nesians and to alleviate the economic and social 
pressures resulting from overpopulation. Under 
this program plots of cultivable government land 
are being placed in the hands of needy Microne- 
sians. On Ponape, settlers from the densely pop- 
ulated islands of Pingelap and Kapingamarangi 
are already homesteading several thousand acres 
of excellent land, most of which is planted to ma- 
ture coconut trees. The Micronesian settlers 
themselves shoulder the chief burdens incident to 
their establishment in their new home. However, 
they are being aided during their period of ad- 
justment by their stay-at-home coislanders and, 
primarily in transportation and initial financing, 
by the trust territory administration. 

In the Palaus the municipality of Peleliu has 
started a 400-acre coconut plantation under pro- 
visions of the homesteading program. 

During the ensuing months the homesteading 



program will move forward with the settling of 
additional families from Pingelap and Kaping- 
amarangi on Ponape. Homesteaders from other 
overcrowded areas will also be placed on produc- 
tive plots on Ponape and Rota, and in the Palaus, 
and to a lesser extent in Truk and the Marshalls. 

On Rota, Songsong Village, the only true com- 
munity on the island, has been surveyed prelimi- 
nary to the formal assigning of the village lots to 
their present occupants. Also on this island the 
boundaries between public and private lands are 
now being mapped so that a broad homesteading 
program may be inaugurated. Such a program 
will mean much to the Rotanese, for 80 percent of 
the land falls within the public domain. In the 
Palaus approximately 300 acres have been made 
available for home sites and garden plots and are 
scheduled to be homesteaded by those families who 
currently possess them under lease. 

The administrative areas required for each of 
our seven districts have either been determined or 
are now being delineated by cadastral surveys. 
As a result these areas in the Marshalls, Ponape, 
Truk, and Palau will be reduced in size and the 
released land will be returned to the Micronesians. 

Claim Settlement 

Definite progress is being made in the direction 
of settling the several classes of claims held by the 
Micronesians against the United States. 

All property loss claims of the Rongelapese and 
Uterikese resulting from the unfortunate fallout 
of March 1 of last year have now been settled. 
Several months prior to settlement, meetings were 
held and notices posted to insure that each person 
fully understands his rights. Many discussions 
were held with the leaders. The attitude of the 
Rongelapese and Uterikese people was very fair. 
They took into consideration only actual "out of 
pocket" losses. They gave the administration full 
credit for past help given. These claims amounted 
to $6,869.80. No personal injury claims were sub- 
mitted by members of these two groups. 

Funds have now been allocated to settle all yen 
redemption claims, and wide publicity has been 
given to the program throughout the territory. 
By the end of April of this year a total of almost 
$14,000 had been paid to Micronesians in full set- 
tlement of all yen claims received to that time. It 
is believed that this redemption program is now 
virtually completed. 



July 25, J 955 



155 



Work leading toward the settlement of our out- 
standing land claims has continued with additional 
impetus, with the establishment of new Land 
Transfer Boards on Rota and in the Marshalls. 
These important boards, which exercise general 
advisory responsibility with regard to land mat- 
ters, are now functioning in all districts. The 
Land Claims Staff has been strengthened by the 
addition of new employees, both American and 
Micronesian. As a result, it has been able to make 
more rapid progress in cadastral surveying, in 
determining land ownership, and in supporting the 
homesteading program. 

The United States Government and certain of its 
agencies continue to find it necessary to make use 
of some land privately owned by Micronesians. 
A careful study of the just claims for compensa- 
tion of these territory citizens has been completed. 
Much thought has been given to the question of the 
compensation arrangements most appropriate to 
the situation. Now at last we should be in a posi- 
tion to effect claim settlements in the near future. 

Education 

The education of the Micronesians for their more 
effective participation in their developing society 
is regarded as one of the primary responsibilities 
of our administration. 

As with our other departments, both Microne- 
sians and Americans comprise the personnel of the 
Education Department. During the past year 
three important positions were taken over by Mi- 
cronesians for the first time. These were the po- 
sition of Educational Administrator in the Mar- 
shalls, which is occupied by Dwight Heine, 
who appeared before you last year as the spokes- 
man for the Marshallese; that of Supervisor of 
Teacher Education in the Marshalls ; and that of 
Principal of the Intermediate School at Palau. 
Other administrative and advisory positions are 
also coming to be held increasingly by Microne- 
sians. The number of Micronesians in these posi- 
tions increased last year from 63 to 75, a favor- 
able change of 19 percent. 

The increase in our Micronesian staff is making 
it possible for our American educational person- 
nel to devote less time to student teaching duties 
and more to teacher aid and training. In Ponape 
the entire American staff is now chiefly concerned 
with the improvement of education in the off- 
island and more rural communities, sometimes 



spending months living in the villages themselves 
so that they can become familiar with the local 
cultural patterns and the teachers' problems. 

According to preliminary estimates, our stu- 
dent enrollment has climbed during the past year 
from 8,113 students to 8,438 students, an increase 
of about 4 percent. Moreover, the number of 
Micronesian students who have sought education 
outside the territory in this period has risen to 
173, a gain of 31 percent over the preceding year. 
To improve education at the elementary level, 
minimum qualifications have now been estab- 
lished for elementary teachers in two districts. 
All elementary school teachers are now being paid 
by their local communities. Boards of Education 
have been organized in Palau and Truk during the 
past year to match the boards and councils already 
functioning in other areas. These boards and 
councils are already giving important guidance to 
the education administrators on special educa- 
tional needs and desires of the people of their 
communities. 

During the year, 20 new elementary school 
buildings or additions to old buildings have been 
constructed. These have been built by the local 
communities in accordance with our considered 
policy of encouraging the Micronesians to develop 
self-sufficiency to the maximum extent possible. 

A territory-wide health education program, in 
which both the education and the public-health 
departments cooperate, is being developed. The 
elements of hygiene and public health are being 
brought to communities through extension pro- 
grams and are being emphasized in all school 
curricula. A school garden program has been in- 
stituted with the aid of our agricultural depart- 
ment in each of our intermediate schools and at 
Pacific Island Central School at Truk. This is 
designed to afford the students an opportunity to 
learn the fundamentals of agricultural science and 
to gain practical experience in cultivation pro- 
cedures. It also allows the students to contribute 
materially to their own maintenance, since the 
food is served at their table. This program like- 
wise is in line with our basic aim of encouraging 
the development of local self-reliance. 

Teaching aids, texts, and literature adapted to 

the local environment and culture continue to be 

prepared in English and in the languages of each 

district and to be published on our own presses. 

The Koror Community Center, an experiment in 



156 



Department of Slate Bulletin 



community education, continues to make progress. 
It is gradually achieving the development of a 
community consciousness by bringing together the 
dissident elements of Palauan society. Whereas 
the center had previously been sponsored by the 
South Pacific Commission, its support during the 
present fiscal year has come entirely from trust 
territory funds. 

Public Health 

The health of the Micronesians continues to 
receive our closest attention. 

The major illnesses of the territory remain tuber- 
culosis and parasitic diseases of the gastrointes- 
tinal tract. However, through the wide applica- 
tion of new drugs, tuberculosis at last shows un- 
mistakable signs of diminishing. The frequency 
of leprosy is also declining. Moreover, the appli- 
cation of the new curative techniques is shortening 
the treatment time of the disease. This and other 
factors are permitting us to move our leprous 
patients from Tinian, where they have been receiv- 
ing treatment, to the more familiar surroundings 
of their home districts. There they will be given 
further medication in leprosaria presently under 
construction. It is expected that all will be 
"home" by June 30 of this year. Fortunately no 
epidemics of any sort occurred in the territory 
during the past year. 

As a result of our Micronesian training program, 
our Public Health Department has found it pos- 
sible to place greater responsibility upon Micro- 
nesians in all its branches, ranging from medical 
and nursing care to teaching and hospital adminis- 
tration. Seven medical interns and 12 dental in- 
terns — all 19 being graduates of the Central Med- 
ical School at Suva — as well as 7 graduate nurses 
from our Ponape Nursing School and a smaller 
number of sanitarians and laboratory technicians 
joined the staff this year. These personnel 
changes have at the same time improved our health 
program by strengthening the Micronesian con- 
tribution to it and have allowed some reductions to 
be made in our American staff with consequent sav- 
ings to the administration. Continued progress 
in this direction may be anticipated in the future. 
This is foreshadowed by our present medical train- 
ing program: during the current year, for ex- 
ample, the number of medical graduates from Suva 
receiving postgraduate training in Hawaii has 
been increased from two to four. 



The past year brought true hospital service to 
Rota for the first time ; previously only dispensary 
care was provided the Rotanese. New hospital 
facilities are soon to be available in all districts but 
the Marshalls. With these new facilities and an 
increasing number of Micronesian practitioners, 
we are confident that our medical program will 
continue to progress in a satisfactory manner. 

Given the cultural background of Micronesia, 
the training of efficient local sanitation officers is a 
difficult task. Nonetheless, through our newly 
instituted formal program of sanitation education, 
a general improvement in health conditions can 
also be reported. 

Construction 

For the first time since the Department of the 
Interior assumed the responsibility of the trust 
territory administration, the United States Con- 
gress has appropriated funds for the specific pur- 
pose of constructing new facilities and undertak- 
ing the much needed rehabilitation of present in- 
stallations. A sum of $700,000 was made available 
for this purpose on July 1, 1954. Since that date 
we have been engaged energetically in getting the 
program under way. This year we have confined 
our activities to projects which are most sorely 
needed to aid the economy of the islands. These 
have included the construction of power plants, 
warehouses, reefers, petroleum and water storage 
facilities, roads, and harbor and docking installa- 
tions. These projects have been divided among 
all districts as need dictated. 

It is hoped that an additional $700,000 will be 
allocated to permit a continuation of the program 
this year. In the belief that this will be so, our 
present plans call for continuing our construction 
and rehabilitation activities through the coming 
year without interruption and at an accelerated 
pace. 

Our construction program, while impressive in 
its extent and comprehensiveness, is closely geared 
to the local economy. It is being carried out under 
the direction of our own personnel, not by outside 
private contractors. Moreover, we are employ- 
ing local Micronesians as workers. Through this 
employment policy the economic position of the 
Micronesians is being enhanced, for the wages 
paid them augment their purchasing power and 
raise their standard of living to that extent. 



July 25, 7955 



157 



Communication 

Because of the enormous area over which the 
trust territory extends and its small and scattered 
land units, the problem of communication be- 
tween and even within districts is one which is 
constantly before us. 

With regard to shipping, our present program 
looks toward the achievement of three goals. We 
desire first to place in the hands of established 
shipping firms the total responsibility of maintain- 
ing surface contact between the trust territory and 
the outside world. Secondly, we desire to have the 
Micronesians themselves, in the name of local trad- 
ing companies or as individuals, assume the task 
of providing intradistrict shipping to the largest 
extent possible. During the fiscal year the first 
two ships have been made available to the Micro- 
nesians to further this aim. So that they may in- 
creasingly assume this important function, we are 
now taking action to place additional ships under 
their ownership and control. Thirdly, it is our 
hope that we may limit the role of the administra- 
tion in the area of shipping to the operation of 
interdistrict vessels. By the gradual attainment 
of the first two of our objectives, the third comes 
closer to our grasp. 

In the realm of air transportation the past year 
has seen us replace our amphibian PBY planes 
with more modern amphibian SA-16's. These 
afford us larger passenger accommodations, cruise 
at greater speed, and possess safety features not 
present in our former equipment. 

Our radio communications system has been 
measurably strengthened during the past fiscal 
year. The broadcasting power of our established 
stations at the district centers has been increased. 
From our Guam headquarters, which is now our 
main traffic station, we maintain voice contact 
with each of the districts. Moreover, new second- 
ary stations have been constructed on several of 
the outer islands in the Truk and Marshalls dis- 
tricts, and others are now being built in these dis- 
tricts and in Ponape district. We hope that by 
the close of fiscal year 1956 all important popula- 
tion centers in the trust territory will have radio- 
telephone contact with their respective district 
centers. It is noteworthy, too, that Micronesians, 
trained by us in radio skills, are filling both main- 
tenance and operating positions more and more, 
including even those with supervisory responsi- 
bilities. 



Displaced Marshallese 

The displaced Bikini people, now settled on 
Kili, have moved into the final phases of their eco- 
nomic and social adjustment to their new environ- 
ment. Continued aid, both material and directive, 
has been given them during this past year. The 
material assistance has included the importation 
of thousands of superior taro plants to improve 
their economic position and the installation of a 
voice-radio link which permits communication, 
through new facilities at Jaluit, with the district 
center at Majuro. Their social and political prob- 
lems are receiving the closest attention of our 
Marshallese Kili project manager. His efforts are 
being rewarded by a constant lessening of their 
problems and the gradual emergence of a truly 
integrated community. Arrangements are cur- 
rently under way to purchase for the Kilians an 
auxiliary schooner which they will be competent 
to operate and by which they can maintain that 
outside contact so necessary for their economic and 
social progress. 

A recent extensive survey of the Eniwetok peo- 
ple now living on Ujelang in the Western Mar- 
shalls indicates they have made great strides 
toward complete adaptation to their new island. 
Their needs are limited to that of improving their 
cultivated plants and domestic animals and to that 
of relieving their difficult logistic position. 
Specific steps are being taken to meet both of these 
needs. 

The Rongelapese continue to be temporarily 
settled in a specially constructed small village on 
the island of Ejit, where they will remain until the 
radioactivity on their home atoll has decayed suf- 
ficiently so as to be safe for residence. Since the 
March 1 test of 1954 a total of about $63,500 has 
been spent in caring for these people and the 
Uterikese, who, having been unharmed by the 
fallout, were repatriated in May 1954. The direct 
financial support which is being given the 
Rongelapese now amounts to $1,300 monthly. 
This sum provides for their subsistence and for 
compensation for their lost copra production as 
well as for incidental supplies necessary for their 
maintenance. I am happy to report that the 
periodic medical examinations given these Ronge- 
lap people, both by special medical teams and by 
our own Marshalls District physicians, continue 
to reveal that they are in fine health, and all of 
the skin lesions have healed. Frequent medical 



158 



Department of State Bulletin 



examinations indicate likewise that the health of 
the Uterikese remains excellent. 

Government 

In the area of native government the event of 
greatest significance since July 1 of last year has 
been the granting of a formal charter to the Palau 
Congress. By this act the Congress was given a 
certain measure of legislative power and with it 
the responsibility of participating in the direction 
of the political, economic, and social development 
of their district. 

In each district, island councils or congresses 
have deliberated at some length during the year 
upon the various problems affecting their respec- 
tive areas. Their deliberations and conclusions 
have greatly helped the district administration 
staffs in their program and policy planning. One 
of the foremost problems of general prevalence 
has been that of instituting a taxation program. 
This question has been met courageously by the 
enactment of tax legislation. During this fiscal 
year the Truk Congress has put into effect a one- 
mill-per-pound sales tax on copra sold for export, 
and the Marshallese Congress an import tax of 10 
per 10 cigarettes. With its tax revenue each dis- 
trict pays the salaries of its elementary school 
teachers and health aides as well as the moderate 
meeting expenses of the council or congress mem- 
bers themselves. All these officials are now fully 
paid. It is encouraging that the Micronesians are 
willing to assume the financial burden of their 
essential government services to the extent their 
resources make this possible. It is obvious, how- 
ever, that for some time local revenue must con- 
tinue to be supplemented by sizable appropria- 
tions from the United States Congress. 

Conclusion 

In this brief review I have attempted to enumer- 
ate only what we believe to be our chief accomplish- 
ments of the past year. I have not taken your time 
to summarize our achievements of a less important 
nature. Nor have I devoted attention to the more 
general, basic propositions which underlie the 
thinking of our administration in establishing its 
policies and set the pattern of its actions. 

I desire now only to assure you once more that 
all our actions are taken with the aim of adminis- 
tering the territory so as to bring to the Micro- 

Jo/y 25, 7955 



Trusteeship Council Faces New Year 

Statement by Mason Sears 

U.S. Representative in the Trusteeship Council 1 

It looks as if the Trusteeship Council faces a year 
of high purpose and great interest. 

For the first time we will be concerned with the 
mechanics of territorial self-determination. There 
are also other developments of an extremely impor- 
tant nature to be considered. These will involve two 
missions to West Africa in the summer. 

A special mission will go to British Togoland to 
find out how Togolauders can best express their 
wishes about uniting with the Gold Coast upon its 
independence, which may come next year. This will 
probably lead to the first popular referendum under 
the international trusteeship system. 

Another mission will go to the British Cameroons, 
where there may be a second referendum in the near 
future in connection with prospective Nigerian in- 
dependence. I may say here that if Nigerian inde- 
pendence works out in the near future and they be- 
come self-governing as a federation, it will be by far 
the largest nation south of the Equator in Africa. 

These missions will be most important because 
West African developments are going to be followed 
with the closest attention throughout Africa. 

At all events, the Council, operating as the eyes 
and ears of the United Nations, may be expected to 
play an increasingly useful role in the progress of 
trust territories toward self-government. 

In the Pacific we operate at the center of the ad- 
justment of formerly isolated peoples to a rapidly 
contracting world. Some people, like those in New 
Guinea, are just emerging from isolation and from a 
condition of almost perpetual tribal warfare. Oth- 
ers, like those in Western Samoa, are considering 
the form of self-government most suitable to their 
society. 

In Africa particularly, we operate at the very 
heart of the awakening of a modern African society. 
And the course Africa chooses to take in the coming 
years and its importance to the peace and security 
of the world cannot be overstressed and should be 
more widely recognized. 

In the meantime we have before us the prospect of 
millions of Africans and Pacific Islanders who, if 
given the proper impetus, can contribute enormously 
to the welfare of themselves and all mankind. 

It is this that makes the work of this Council so 
challenging. 



1 Made in the U.N. Trusteeship Council on June 8, 
after Mr. Sears had been elected President of the 
Council (U.S./U.N. press release 2167). 



nesians a maximum of benefit. Our administra- 
tion continues to honor their customs and desires 
by taking them into serious consideration in every 

159 



way possible. It is the firm intention of our 
administration to guide the Micronesians through 
a gradual, evolutionary development in which the 
new may be blended with the familiar old. We 
desire to avoid whenever we can abrupt modifica- 
tions of their customs and ways of thought, for 
these are potentially disruptive to their society. 
When possible, we intend to aid them, not to direct 
them; we intend to assist them to attain the 
changes they themselves desire, not to compel them 
to adopt innovations which seem wise to us but are 
unacceptable to them. Finally, by following these 
principles we desire to increase their economic and 
political strength in the direction of self-suffi- 
ciency. 

I am grateful for this opportunity to present this 
report and will be pleased to provide, to the best of 
my ability, any additional information which 
members of the Council may desire in connection 
with either this statement or our annual report. 3 



CLOSING STATEMENT « 

May I first say how sincerely I appreciate the 
generous remarks of the various representatives 
yesterday concerning both myself and our admin- 
istration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific 
Islands. It has been a very enjoyable experience 
for me to appear here, and I have been most grate- 
ful for the understanding that has been shown for 
the problems involved in our administration. 

There were a few comments made yesterday re- 
garding which it might be of assistance to the 
Council if I were to comment. Several delegates 
expressed their concern that coordination be- 
tween the Navy administration in Saipan and the 
administration of the remainder of the territory 
is not as close as it might be. I appreciate that 
this division in the administrative structure of 
the trust territory easily gives rise to such con- 
cern. Nevertheless, with the Commander of 
Naval Forces Marianas and myself both being lo- 
cated on Guam, close liaison between us is easily 
achieved. Our respective staffs are likewise in 
ready contact with one another, and a constant ex- 
change of information takes place. Moreover, a 
free and easy exchange of views and discussion 



a U.N. doc. T/1173 dated May 3, 1955. 
1 Made in the U. N. Trusteeship Council on June 21 
(U. S./U. N. press release 2177). 



of problems takes place in Washington between 
staffs of the Interior and Navy Departments. As 
a result, I believe that the programs in Saipan 
and the remainder of the trust territory are closely 
comparable. I do not envisage any problems aris- 
ing that could not be resolved by agreement be- 
tween the Departments of the Navy and Interior. 
Obviously, if they could not be so resolved, the 
decision would be made at the White House. 



Political Development Program 

I am indeed grateful that so many members of 
the Council expressed satisfaction in the manner 
in which our political development program is 
being conducted, and I was particularly gratified 
to hear the representative of India describe it as 
"realistic." We sincerely believe it to be so. We 
also agree with the comment of the representa- 
tive of India that much remains to be done. The 
district advisory bodies are at this time only ad- 
visory. However, the establishment of a broad 
base of elected municipal officials and the setting 
up of advisory bodies are themselves significant 
steps in the light of the past history of the area. 
The district bodies will steadily gain in experience, 
and, when they do, they will take on increased 
powers. To force such powers upon them before 
they are truly representative of their districts and 
before they have sufficient position and experience 
might well result in a disservice to the progress of 
self-government in the territory. Likewise, the 
too rapid establishment of formal interdistrict 
organs without a solid foundation of community 
feeling based upon knowledge and experience in 
common problems could result in emphasizing 
differences rather than unity. Such governmental 
machinery is always more successful when estab- 
lished as a result of desire than when created pre- 
maturely without the foundation to appreciate its 
function and purpose. 

The time will come when an interdistrict link 
will fit well into place. As the Council has previ- 
ously been advised, it is our feeling that a central 
legislative body will not come about for some years. 
In the meantime, I believe it is wisest to insure the 
effectiveness of the municipal and district govern- 
mental machinery. Our educational program, 
further territory-wide meetings such as that held 
at Truk, our continued advancement of Micro- 
nesians in the administration, and similar steps 



160 



Department of State Bulletin 



will increase the knowledge and understanding of 
common problems and interests between the dis- 
tricts. 

The fact that only 8 chiefs are appointed as 
magistrates, that only 12 chiefs were elected as 
magistrates while 80 nonchiefs were elected as 
magistrates, is in my opinion a sign of a growing 
acceptance of democratic principle — not the re- 
verse, as indicated by the delegate from the 
U.S.S.R. Moreover, the district advisory bodies 
are presently exercising a valuable role as a result 
of the consultations held with them by the district 
administrators. In expressing their views on 
questions of district administration, these bodies 
are not only providing us with guidance but are 
also obtaining valuable experience in democratic 
government. 



Communications 

The representative of India has suggested that 
greater emphasis on communications is needed. 
We have recognized the importance of communica- 
tions, and significant steps are being taken to im- 
prove it. We are continually increasing the num- 
ber of outer islands upon which radios are being 
placed for contact with the district centers. Addi- 
tionally, two privately owned radio broadcast sta- 
tions have been established, one at Majuro and one 
at Truk. We look forward to further such devel- 
opments as a means of bringing the people closer 
together and of disseminating information. 

The other day, when asked if there were a news- 
paper published for circulation in the entire trust 
territory, I neglected to mention the Micronesian 
Monthly, which is a periodical published at our 
office on Guam and distributed to the districts. 
This publication contains news about each of the 
districts and carries feature stories on the history 
and culture of the area as well as on our various 
programs. It serves perhaps to fill somewhat the 
purpose the delegate of India had in mind. 

I have already commented in my opening state- 
ment upon our continued advancement of Micro- 
nesians to fill positions of increased responsibility 
in the territory. It is not our intention to create 
an ever-growing civil service for Americans in the 
trust territory. It is rather our intention to re- 
place stateside employees with Micronesians just 
as soon as possible. Here again, however, training 
and experience are required. We have made the 



greatest progress in this replacement program in 
our educational and health departments. It has 
contributed to the reduced expenditures in those 
departments regarding which several delegations 
have expressed their concern. 

I believe one of the objectives of this Council, as 
well as our administration, is to create self-reliance 
in the Micronesians. This can only come about as 
Micronesians become capable of accepting and 
discharging those responsibilities inherent in any 
effort to become self-governing and self-support- 
ing. 

I believe, therefore, the Council should look 
forward to further and continued reductions in the 
number of American personnel in the administra- 
tion. This will come about as we feel we can do so 
without jeopardizing either the needed programs 
in the territory or the Micronesians' ability to con- 
tinually move toward the ultimate goals of self- 
government and economic independence. 

In the economic field I believe the land situa- 
tion requires some clarification. I would like to 
assure the representative of Syria that our home- 
steading program is not a substitute for the set- 
tlement of land claims. It is rather a means for 
placing into the hands of the people unclaimed 
land which is owned by the government of the 
trust territory. The land against which the. 
Micronesians have unsettled claims is only that 
privately owned land which has been utilized in 
the past, or is presently being utilized, for ad- 
ministrative or other purposes. With respect to 
the public domain, which is the land previously 
acquired in title by the Japanese administration, 
there are very few claims. It is from this public 
domain that land is being returned to the people 
by means of the homesteading program. In gen- 
eral, virtually all of this land that is arable and 
not required for watersheds, forest reserve, or 
similar public purpose will in time go into the 
hands of the people. It must, however, be turned 
over in an orderly manner according to need. Rec- 
ognition must be given to the fact that one reason 
the Japanese took over the land as public domain 
is because the Micronesians were not settled upon 
it. Much of it is not suitable for settlement. 
Those areas that are so suited should go into the 
hands of those who need it most. This is the pur- 
pose of our homesteading program. 

With respect to the overall economy of the trust 
territory I wish to assure the Council that we will 



July 25, 1955 



161 



continue our stepped-up efforts to improve both 
subsistence and export crops. The Council may 
be interested to know that over 100,000 cacao 
trees have already been set out in the territory. 
I anticipate that the experts we are employing for 
our copra program and for trochus and fisheries 
will be of considerable benefit in improving pro- 
duction in these items. We are hopeful that the 
increase in handicraft exports can be continued. 
The fight against the rhinoceros beetle and the 
giant African snail will also continue. 

"We. shall look further into the possibility of 
mining the bauxite and manganese deposits. On 
the basis of our past experience and knowledge of 
the quality of these deposits, however, I cannot 
be too sanguine. 



Taxation 

Several suggestions regarding additional means 
of taxation have been made. Copra is already 
carrying a heavy burden of taxation. Whether 
additional taxes on it would be wise is a matter 
that will require further study. As regards the 
possibility of an income tax, I believe that the 
administrative expense in collecting such a tax 
would be out of proportion to the returns. More- 
over, it is not a tax flexible enough to take into 
account the extended family or group-type of 
effort such as is used for the production of copra, 
handicraft, trochus, and other items. 

I appreciate the suggestions that have been 
made regarding training in seamanship and the 
formation of producer and consumer coopera- 
tives. We shall study both of these matters fur- 
ther upon my return to Guam. 

The suggestion has been made that we should 
have two budgets for the territory, one for local 
revenues and one for appropriated funds. While 
the suggestion has some merit in letting the people 
know what their money is spent for, I feel that as 
yet the complications of budgeting on a territory- 
wide basis are not sufficiently understood by the 
people to permit them to benefit from such a pro- 
cedure. Moreover, until the local revenues con- 
stitute a greater portion of the total budget, I 
question whether the additional complications in- 
volved in a dual budgeting process would be off- 
set by the value of such a technique. At the 
present time, experience is being gained by the 
people through their municipal budgets. 



Public Health Program 

In the field of public health we intend to con- 
tinue our presently effective program. Attention 
has been called to our reduced expenditures, and 
the conclusion has been drawn by some that be- 
cause we are spending less money the public health 
program is not continuing to progress. I believe 
the real test lies in the health of the people rather 
than in the expenditure of money. And, as I men- 
tioned in my opening statement, continued 
progress is being made in reducing tuberculosis, 
leprosy, and other health problems. Environ- 
mental sanitation requires additional attention 
and is receiving it through education and the train- 
ing of Micronesian sanitarians. 

As it was brought out during the questioning 
period, two reasons for the lower expenditures on 
public health during the year were the return of 
additional medical and dental graduates from the 
Suva Medical School and the acquisition without 
cost of materials surplus to the needs of federal 
government agencies. A further contributing fac- 
tor was a reduction in the number of leper pa- 
tients being maintained at the leper colony on 
Tinian. Nevertheless, I do not feel that the test 
of the effectiveness of the program lies entirely in 
whether or not a certain sum of money is spent 
upon it. 

Several members of the Council recommended 
that the adoption of certain International Labor 
Organization conventions would benefit the in- 
habitants of the territory. I wish to assure the 
Council that the Ilo conventions are not casu- 
ally dismissed or shunted aside. Each one is care- 
fully studied as to its appropriateness for condi- 
tions in the territory. We generally find that we 
do not disagree with the objectives of such con- 
ventions, but we do find that for the most part they 
are directed to conditions quite different from 
those prevailing in the territory. 

Also in the social field the suggestion was made 
yesterday that we should reduce the differences in 
standards of living throughout the territory. I 
believe there will always be substantial difference 
in standards of living between the small outlying 
islands and the larger islands and also between 
the larger islands themselves. This seems inevi- 
table simply because of the differences in the suit- 
ability of these islands for the production of vari- 
ous crops and the amount of land available. Our 
efforts to introduce new crops and to expand pro- 



162 



Department of State Bulletin 



duction in old ones will help to modify differences 
in the productivity and income of various areas. 
It will not, however, equalize them, and I cannot 
visualize a subsidization program to create such 
equality. 

Education 

With respect to our educational program, I was 
most pleased that the orientation of our curricu- 
lum to the needs of the people in Micronesia met 
with the approval of several members of the Coun- 
cil. Other comments in this field centered first 
upon the administration providing increased and 
better school facilities for communities that can- 
not afford them, and second upon the leveling of 
teachers' salaries throughout the territory. 

Both of these points touch upon what to my 
mind are fundamental problems. I do not believe 
there is a single island or community in the trust 
territory that cannot provide an adequate elemen- 
tary school. It must be remembered that a school 
building in this area need not be an expensive 
undertaking. The basic materials are usually at 
hand, and virtually all that is required is com- 
munity effort to erect the building. We endeavor 
to instill this effort into the community because it 
helps to increase the value attached to, and the 
support given, the educational program. On the 
other hand, at the intermediate and the Pacific 
Islands Central School level the administration 
itself accepts the direct responsibility for school 
facilities. 

As regards the salaries of the elementary school 
teachers, it is to my knowledge an accepted fact 
that teaching salaries vary with the economic con- 
ditions of areas in which the services are per- 
formed. Within the United States itself, for in- 
stance, salaries of teachers vary between different 
sections of the country and between states within 
an area. To make all teachers' salaries the same 
throughout the trust territory would overlook the 
basic fact that the level of economy in the trust 
territory is not uniform throughout and that sal- 
aries in any given area must bear a relationship to 
the economy and to the income of other persons 
on the island. I believe it has been most hearten- 
ing that the local communities are now giving 
additional support to their teachers and that in 
several cases action has been recommended by the 
advisory bodies for district-wide action to insure 
the payment of elementary teachers' salaries. This 



is the type of support and understanding we have 
been seeking to engender by calling upon munici- 
palities to accept their responsibilities for ele- 
mentary education. 

As this support grows further, and as apprecia- 
tion for the benefit of education grows, I am con- 
fident that voluntary action will be taken to insure 
that elementary school teachers' salaries are at an 
equitable level. Moreover, our educational ad- 
ministrators will constantly be discussing the ques- 
tion with local leaders to insure that elementary 
education and the position of teachers are receiv- 
ing the proper support of the communities. We 
recognize that in the long run education is basic to 
all that we are trying to accomplish in the terri- 
tory. We cannot, therefore, permit the program 
to fail. 

We have noted the comments of the United Na- 
tions Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi- 
zation and will take them into account in the 
planning of our future educational program as 
Several representatives in the Council have sug- 
gested. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Current Actions 

MULTILATERAL 

Copyright 

Universal copyright convention. Done at Geneva Septem- 
ber 6, 1952. 
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco, 

June 16, 1955. 
Enters into force: September 16, 1955. 

Protocol 1 concerning the application of the convention to 
the works of stateless persons and refugees. Done at 
Geneva September 6, 1952. 
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco, 

June 16, 1955. 
Enters into force: September 16, 1955. 

Protocol 2 concerning the application of the convention to 
the works of certain international organizations. Done 
at Geneva September 6, 1952. 
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco, 

June 16, 1955. 
Enters into force: September 16, 1955. 

Protocol 3 concerning the effective date of instruments of 
ratification, or acceptance of, or accession to the con- 
vention. Done at Geneva September 6, 1952. Entered 
into force August 19, 1954; for the United States De- 
cember 6, 1954. 
Ratification deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955. 

Finance 

Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary 
Fund. Opened for signature at Washington December 



July 25, 7955 



163 



27, 1945. Entered into force December 27, 1945. TIAS 
1501. 

Signature and acceptance: Afghanistan, July 14, 1955. 
Articles of Agreement of the International Bank for Re- 
construction and Development. Opened for signature 
at Washington December 27, 1945. Entered into force 
December 27, 1945. TIAS 1502. 
Signature and acceptance: Afghanistan, July 14, 1955. 

Germany 

Agreement on German external debts. Signed at London 
February 27, 1953. Entered into force September 16, 
1953. TIAS 2792. 
Accession deposited: Finland, May 26, 1955. 

Telecommunications 

International telecommunication convention. Signed at 
Buenos Aires December 22, 1952. Entered into force 
January 1, 1954. 

Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955; United 
States, June 27, 1955. 

Final protocol to the international telecommunication 
convention. Signed at Buenos Aires December 22, 1952. 
Entered into force January 1, 1954. 
Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955; United 
States, June 27, 1955. 

Additional protocols to the international telecommunica- 
tion convention. Signed at Buenos Aires December 22, 
1952. Entered into force December 22, 1952. 
Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955! 

Trade and Commerce 

Agreement on Organization for Trade Cooperation Done 
at Geneva March 10, 1955. 1 
Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Turkey, 2 June 21. 

Proces-verbal extending validity of the declaration of Oc- 
tober 24, 1953, regulating commercial relations between 
certain contracting parties to the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade and Japan. Done at Geneva Febru- 
ary 1, 1955. Entered into force February 1, 1955. 
Declaration deposited (recognizing signature as bind- 
ing) : Austria, June 28, 1955. 

Fourth protocol of rectifications and modifications to an- 
nexes and texts of the schedules to the General Agree- 
ment on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva March 7 
1955. 1 

Signatures: Canada, June 6, 1955; Greece, June 21 1955- 
Turkey, 2 June 21, 1955. 
Declaration on continued application of schedules to the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Ge- 
neva March 10, 1955. Entered into force March 10 1955 
Signatures: Australia June 30, 1955' 

Canada June 23, 1955 

Cuba June 30, 1955 

Czechoslovakia June 29, 1955 

France June 30, 1955 

India June 27, 1955 

Luxembourg June 24, 1955 

Netherlands June 28, 1955 

New Zealand June 25, 1955 

Norway June 30, 1955 

Pakistan June 30, 1955 

Turkey June 21, 1955 

Union of South Africa June 28, 1955 
United Kingdom June 23, 1955 

Uruguay June 30, 1955 

Declaration dejjosited {recognizing signature as bind- 
ing): Sweden, June 15, 1955. 
Protocol amending part I and articles XXIX and XXX of 
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at 
Geneva March 10, 1955. 1 

Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Canada, June 23, 
1955. 



1 Not in force. 

2 Signed ad referendum. 



Protocol amending preamble and parts II and III of the 

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Ge- 
neva March 10, 1955. 1 

Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Canada, June 23, 
1955. 
Protocol of organizational amendments to the General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva 

March 10, 1955. 1 

Signature: Greece, June 21, 1955. 
Protocol of terms of accession of Japan to the General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva June 

7, 1955. 1 

Signatures: Chile, 2 June 13, 1955; Pakistan, June 30, 
1955. 

Declaration deposited (recognising signature as bind- 
ing) : Uruguay, June 22, 1955. 



BILATERAL 
Chile 

Agreement extending and amending the agreement for 
a cooperative program of technical assistance to medium 
and small industry of June 30, 1952 (TIAS 2750), and 
providing financial contributions therefor. Signed at 
Santiago March 17, 1955. Entered 1 into force March 
17, 1955. 

Germany 

Mutual defense assistance agreement. Signed at Bonn 
June 30, 1955. Enters into force upon the deposit of 
an instrument of ratification by the Federal Republic 
with the United States. 

Arrangement for the return of equipment pursuant to the 
mutual defense assistance agreement of June 30, 1955. 
Effected by exchange of notes at Bonn June 30, 1955. 
Enters into force on the same date as the mutual defense 
assistance agreement of June 30, 1955. 

Air transport agreement, with exchanges of notes. Signed 
at Washington July 7, 1955. Enters into force on the 
date of receipt by the United States of notification of 
approval by the Federal Republic of Germany. 

Greece 

Agreement to facilitate interchange of patent rights and 
technical information for defense purposes. Signed at 
Athens June 16, 1955. Entered into force June 16, 1955. 

Israel 

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of atomic 
energy. Signed at Washington July 12, 1955. Entered 
into force July 12, 1955. 

Korea 

Agreement relating to the establishment of minimum fa- 
cilities for an arsenal and the reworking of ammuni- 
tion. Effected bv exchange of notes at Seoul May 29, 
1955. Entered into force May 29, 1955. 

Peru 

Agreement providing for disposition of equipment and 
materials furnished by the United States under the 
military assistance agreement of February 22, 1952 
(TIAS 2466). Effected by exchange of notes at Lima 
March 22 and April 30, 1955. Entered into force April 
30, 1955. 



Thailand 

Agreement relating to surplus agricultural commodities. 
Signed at Bangkok June 21, 1955. Entered into force 
June 21, 1955. 

Agreement amending the agreement of July 1, 1950, as 
amended (TIAS 2095 and 2809), relating to the financ- 
ing of certain educational exchange programs. Effected 
by exchange of notes at Bangkok June 23, 1955. Entered 
into force J*une 23, 1955. 



164 



Department of State Bulletin 



U.S.S.R. 

Protocol defining the location of the boundary of Greater 
Berlin, with annex. Signed at Berlin June 25, 1955. 
Entered into force June 25, 1955. 



PUBLICATIONS 



Foreign Relations Volume 

Press release 343 dated June 10 

The Department of State on June 18 released 
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1939, 
Volume IV. This is the second in a series of five 
volumes of diplomatic correspondence to be pub- 
lished for the year 1939. Volume III, already 
published, deals with the undeclared war in the 
Far East between China and Japan. The present 
volume completes the record on the Far East and 
also gives that on the Near East and Africa. 

The first 441 pages of volume IV give docu- 
mentation on particular problems arising from 
Japan's undeclared war on China: American in- 
terest in Japanese demands threatening the in- 
tegrity of the International Settlements at 
Shanghai and Amoy and the British Concession 
at Tientsin, the protection of American lives and 
property, the drug traffic in occupied China, and 
rights of American citizens in Manchuria. 

There is no separate section on China for 1939, 
all subjects treated regarding that country being 
covered by the record on the undeclared war. 

A section on Japan, 33 pages, completes the 
documentation on the Far East. Political devel- 
opments in Japan of special importance with re- 
gard to international relations are reported, 
notably the resignation of the Baron Hiranuma 
Cabinet resulting from "the colossal miscalcula- 
tions of the military with regard to European 
affairs" in failing to foresee the Hitler-Stalin deal 
(pp. 447^49). 

A friendly gesture by the United States to Ja- 
pan is recorded in papers on the return to Japan 
of the ashes of the late Japanese Ambassador 
Hirosi Saito on the United States cruiser Astoria 
(pp. 455^161). Other subjects treated regarding 
Japan are trade matters. 

The remainder of the documentation in this 
volume, covering the Near East and Africa, 415 



pages, contains sections on Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, 
Iraq, Liberia, Morocco, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, 
Syria and Lebanon, and Turkey. 

The major portion of the subjects for the Near 
East and Africa concerns trade relations and the 
protection of the rights of American citizens and 
of American educational and missionary interests. 
Questions of political importance are the interest 
of the United States in the defense and security of 
Liberia and in British policy regarding Palestine 
and the establishment of diplomatic relations with 
Saudi Arabia. 

Copies of this volume (iv, 905 pp.) may be pur- 
chased from the Superintendent of Documents, 
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 
25, D. O, for $3.50 each. 



Recent Releases 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Gov- 
ernment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. O. Address 
requests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, ex- 
cept in the case of free publications, which may be obtained 
from the Department of State. 

Education, Cooperative Program in Bolivia, Additional 
Financial Contributions. TIAS 2939. Pub. 5476. 4 
pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Bolivia. Ex- 
change of notes — Signed at La Paz June 30, 1952. En- 
tered into force June 30, 1952. 

Consular Officers, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS 2956. 
Pub. 5501. 3 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Iraq. Ex- 
change of notes— Dated at Washington March 14, May 15, 
June 19, and August 8, 1951. Entered into force August 8, 
1951. 

Mutual Defense Assistance. TIAS 2957. Pub. 5523. 46 
pp. 200. 

Agreement, with annexes, between the United States and 
Japan— Signed at Tokyo March 8, 1954. Entered into 
force May 1, 1954. 

Mutual Defense Assistance, Arrangements for Return of 
Equipment. TIAS 2958. Pub. 5525. 8 pp. 100. 

Agreement between the United States and Japan— Signed 
at Tokyo March 8, 1954. Entered into force May 1, 1954. 

Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS 
2961. Pub. 5505. 2 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Liberia. Ex- 
change of notes— Signed at Washington May 2 and July 22, 
1949. Entered into force July 22, 1949. 

Colon Free Zone, Sump-Pump Station. TIAS 2966. 
Pub. 5516. 5 pp. 5$. 

Agreement between the United States and Panama. 
Exchange of notes— Signed at Panama March 8 and 25, 
1954. Entered into force March 25, 1954. 

Military Advisory Mission to Brazil. TIAS 2970. Pub. 
5520. 3 pp. 5tf. 



July 25, 1955 



165 



Agreement between the United States and Brazil, extend- 
ing agreement of July 29, 1948. Exchange of notes — 
Signed at Washington July 21 and September 23, 1952. 
Entered into force September 23, 1952; operative retro- 
actively July 29, 1952. 

Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS 
2971. Pub. 5521. 2 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Uruguay. 
Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington October 31 
and November 12, 1952. Entered into force November 12, 
1952. 

Technical Cooperation, Erosion Control and Soil Con- 
servation Programs in British Caribbean Area. TIAS 
2974. Pub. 5529. 6 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and the United 
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ex- 
change of notes— Signed at Washington January 12 and 
20, 1954. Entered into force January 20, 1954. 

Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges. 
TIAS 2989. Pub. 5552. 2 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and the Dominican 
Republic. Exchange of notes — Dated at Washington 
January 12 and 23, 1950. Entered into force January 23, 
1950. 

Mutual Defense Assistance, Disposition of Surplus Equip- 
ment and Materials. TIAS 3029. Pub. 5628. 8 pp. 100. 

Memorandum of Understanding and exchange of notes 
between the United States and Luxembourg, implement- 
ing agreement of January 8, 1952 — Signed at Luxembourg 
July 7, 1954. Entered into force July 7, 1954. 

Friendship, Commerce and Navigation. TIAS 3057. 
Pub. 5677. 91 pp. 300 

Treaty between the United States and Greece — Signed 
at Athens August 3, 1951. Entered into force October 13, 
1954. And exchange of notes— Dated at Athens August 3 
and December 26, 1951. 

Mutual Defense Treaty. TIAS 3097. Pub. 5720. 9 
pp. 100. 

Treaty between the United States and the Republic of 
Korea — Signed at Washington October 1, 1953. Entered 
into force November 17, 1954. 

North Atlantic Treaty, Headquarters of the Supreme 
Allied Commander Atlantic. TIAS 3113. Pub. 5757. 
4 pp. 54. 

Agreement and exchange of letters between the United 
States and the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Com- 
mander Atlantic — Signed at Washington October 22, 1954. 
Entered into force October 22, 1954; operative retro- 
actively April 10, 1954. 

Education, Cooperative Program in Panama— Additional 
Financial Contributions. TIAS 2925. Pub. 5440. 4 pp. 

50. 

Agreement between the United States and Panama. Ex- 
change of notes — Signed at Panama February 29 and April 
9, 1952. Entered into force April 9, 1952. 

Loan to Pakistan for Emergency Wheat Purchase. TIAS 
2927. Pub. 5445. 4 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Pakistan. Ex- 
change of notes — Dated at Washington September 17, 
1952. Entered into force September 17, 1952. 



Agreement between the United States and Afghanistan. 
Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington March 20, 1954. 
Entered into force March 20, 1954. 

Termination of Reciprocal Trade Agreement of July 21, 
1942. TIAS 2937. Pub. 5474. 6 pp. 50. 

Agreement between the United States and Uruguay. Ex- 
change of notes — Signed at Montevideo November 30, 
1953 ; operative December 28, 1953 and related exchange 
of notes — Signed at Montevideo January 7 and March 
17, 1954. 

Military Assistance. TIAS 2940. Pub. 5477. 19 pp. 150. 

Agreement between the United States and Nicaragua — 
Siened at Managua April 23, 1954. Entered into force 
April 23, 1954. 

Customs Concessions on Automobiles. TIAS 2941. 
Pub. 5478. 3 pp. 50. 

Provisional agreement between the United States and 
Chile. Exchange of notes — Signed at Santiago June 8 
and 23, 1953. Entered into force June 23, 1953 ; operative 
retroactively March 16, 1953. 

Technical Cooperation, Program of Water Utilization in 
Agricultural Production in Provinces of Concepcion, 
Nuble, and Maule. TIAS 2942. Pub. 5479. 20 pp. 150. 

Agreement between the United States and Chile — Signed 
at Santiago June 27, 1953. Entered into force June 27, 
1953. 



THE DEPARTMENT 



Appointments 

Howard P. Jones as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Far 
Eastern Economic Affairs, effective July 16 (press release 
432 dated July 15). 



Designations 

Robert J. Ryan as Executive Director of the Bureau of 
Near Eastern, South Asian and African Affairs, effective 
July 11. 



FOREIGN SERVICE 



Emergency Wheat Aid to Afghanistan. 
Pub. 5463. 3 pp. 50. 



TIAS 2934. 



Designations 

Harold M. Randall as U.S. Representative on the Inter- 
American Economic and Social Council of the Organiza- 
tion of American States, effective July 15 (press release 
434). 



166 



Department of State Bulletin 



July 25, 1955 



Index 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 839 



Agriculture. Exchange of Agricultural Delegations With U.S.S.R . 161 

American Republics 

The Responsibility of the American Republics in World Affairs 

(Holland) 135 

U.S. Position on Proposed Inter-American Bank 140 

Aviation. Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agree- 
ment, statement, and U.S. and German notes) 146 

Claims and Property. Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With 

Luxembourg 150 

Congress, The. Current Legislation 162 

Economic Affairs 

Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agreement, state- 
ment, and U.S. and German notes) 145 

Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement .... 140 

U.S. Position on Proposed Inter-American Bank 140 

Ecuador. Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement . 140 
Educational Exchange. Renewal of Educational Exchange Agree- 
ment With France 141 

Europe 

Paris and Geneva Meetings (Dulles) 132 

To Seek the Road to Peace (Eisenhower) 131 

Foreign Service. Appointment (RandBll) 166 

France. Renewal of Educational Exchange Agreement With France . 141 
Germany 

Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agreement, state- 
ment, and U.S. and German notes) 145 

Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of 

Germany (text of agreement) 142 

International Organizations and Meetings. Appointment (Randall). 166 
Luxembourg. Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With Luxem- 
bourg 150 

Military Affairs. Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Fed- 
eral Republic of Germany (text of agreement) 142 

Mutual Security. Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With 

Federal Republic of Germany (text of agreement) 142 

Non-Self-Governing Territories 

Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Nucker) ... 153 

Trusteeship Council Faces New Year (Sears) 169 

North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Paris and Geneva Meetings 

(Dulles) 132 

Presidential Documents 

John Marshall Bicentennial Month 133 

To Seek the Road to Peace 131 

Publications 

Foreign Relations Volume 166 

Recent Releases 165 

State, Department of 

Appointment (Jones) 166 

Designations (Ryan) 166 

Treaty Information 

Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement 140 

Current Actions 163 

Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of 

Germany (text of agreement) 142 



Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With Luxembourg 150 

Renewal of Educational Exchange Agreement With France 141 

U.S.S.R. 

Exchange of Agricultural Delegations With U.S.S.R 161 

Pravda Correspondent Permitted To Attend Shakespeare Festival 

(text of U.S. note) 134 

United Nations 

Fifth National UNESCO Conference To Meet at Cincinnati .... 134 

Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Nucker) . . . 163 

Trusteeship Council Faces New Year (Sears) 169 

Name Index 

Dulles, Secretary 132 

Eisenhower, President 131, 133 

Holland, Henry F 135 

Hoover, Herbert, Jr 145 

Jones, Howard P 166 

Nucker, Delmas H 153 

Randall, Harold M 166 

Ryan, Robert J 166 

Sears, Mason 159 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: July 11 — 17 

Releases may be obtained from the News Division, 
Department of State, Washington 25, D. C. 

Press releases issued prior to July 11 which ap- 
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 343 of 
June 10, 394 and 402 of June 28, 408 of June 30, 415 
and 417 of July 1, and 419, 422, and 423 of July 7. 



Subject 

Atoms-for-peace agreement with Thai- 
land. 

UNESCO conference. 

Note to U.S.S.R. concerning Pravda 
correspondent. 

Agricultural group leaves for U.S.S.R. 

Dulles : departure for Geneva. 

Holland : testimony on Panama treaty. 

Jones appointment (rewrite). 

Agreement with Belgium on forces in 
Korea. 

Randall designation (rewrite). 



*Not printed. 

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



No. 


Date 


*426 


7/11 


427 


7/11 


42S 


'7/11 


429 


7/12 


430 


7/13 


t431 


7/15 


432 


7/15 


t433 


7/15 


434 


7/15 



U. 5. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19BB 




United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300 

IGPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



the 

Department 

of 

State 



The United States and Germany: 1945-1955 



Order Form 

Voi Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



$- 



Publication 5827 



25 cents 



The story of the shaping of American policy toward Germany 
during the 10 years which culminated in Germany's return to 
the community of free nations is told officially for the first time 
in The United States and Germany: 1945-1955, a 56-page illus- 
trated pamphlet. 

Ways and means of attaining U.S. goals in Germany have 
changed since 1945, the booklet notes, "but so have we changed, 
and so has Germany, and so has the world." To appreciate the 
significance of this change, it continues, "it is necessary to look 
back to the beginning of the postwar decade and note the factors 
that have influenced our course." 

Much of the story is appropriately concerned with the im- 
portant developments of 1954-55. Of these the document 
says: "The events of the past year more than any other have 
tested the validity of our policy. In spite of obstacles and re- 
verses, our policy for Germany has achieved in a decade what 
we once believed would require a full generation. A new 
Germany, risen from the ruins of Nazi Germany, has reached 
the status of well-earned sovereignty and acceptance as an equal 
into the partnership of free nations." 

Copies of The United States and Germany: 1945-1955 may be 
purchased for 25 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, 
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. 



(cash, cheek, or 
money order). 



Please send me copies of The United States and Germany: 1945- 

1955. 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 









rve/ 




twh 



& 




Vol. XXXIII, No. 840 
August 1, 1955 



^ie NT o*. 




MEETING OF HEADS OF GOVERNMENT AT 
GENEVA 

Statements by the President 171 

Directive to Foreign Ministers 176 

BASIC ISSUES IN THE NATO STATUS OF FORCES 

AGREEMENT • Statement by Deputy Under Secretary 
Murphy 178 

TREATY OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AND CO- 
OPERATION WITH PANAMA • Statement by Assist- 
ant Secretary Holland . 185 

AGREEMENT ON PARTICIPATION OF BELGIAN 

FORCES IN KOREA (text) 189 

U.N. COMMAND CITES VIOLATIONS OF KOREAN 
ARMISTICE AGREEMENT • Statement by Maj. Gen. 
Harlan C. Parks 191 

SECOND PROGRESS REPORT ON THE AGRICUL- 
TURAL TRADE DEVELOPMENT AND ASSIST- 
ANCE ACT 197 

THE UNITED NATIONS AND EQUALITY FOR 

WOMEN • Article by Mrs. Lorena B. Hahn 206 



For index see inside back cover 



■ary 

:i:;win<,.: V ! .m ,,, Documents 

AUG 2 6 1955 




'•»»«» o* 



Me Qjefuwtmewt *>f £/Lte JOllllGllIl 



Vol. XXXIII, No. 840 • Publication 5940 
August 1, 1955 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Price: 

52 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25 
Single copy, 20 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and Items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
o? State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication issued by the 
Public Services Division, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
selected press releases on foreign pol- 
icy, issued by the White House and 
the Department, and statements and 
addresses made by the President and 
by the Secretary of State and other 
officers of the Department, as tvell as 
special articles on various phases of 
international affairs and the func- 
tions of the Department. Informa- 
tion is included concerning treaties 
and international agreements to 
which the United States is or may 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



Meeting of Heads of Government at Geneva 



Following are the texts of four statements by 
President Eisenhower at the Heads of Govern- 
ment meeting at Geneva, Switzerland, July 18-23, 
and the directive handed to the Big Four Foreign 
Ministers on the closing day of the Geneva 
meeting. 



OPENING STATEMENT, JULY 18 

Press release 435 dated July 18 

We meet here for a simple purpose. We have 
come to find a basis for accommodation which will 
make life safer and happier not only for the 
nations we represent but for people elsewhere. 

We are here in response to a universal urge, 
recognized by Premier Bulganin in his speech of 
July 15, that the political leaders of our great 
countries find a path to peace. We cannot expect 
here, in the few hours of a few days, to solve all 
the problems of all the world that need to be 
solved. Indeed, the four of us meeting here have 
no authority from others that could justify us 
even in attempting that. The roots of many of 
these problems are buried deep in war, conflicts, 
and history. They are made even more difficult 
by the differences in governmental ideologies and 
ambitions. Manifestly it is out of the question in 
the short time available to the Heads of Govern- 
ment meeting here to trace out the causes and 
origins of these problems and to devise agree- 
ments that could, with complete fairness to all, 
eliminate them. 

Nevertheless, we can, perhaps, create a new 
spirit that will make possible future solutions of 
problems which are within our responsibilities. 
And, equally important, we can try to take here 
and now at Geneva the first steps on a new road 
to a just and durable peace. 

The problems that concern us are not inherently 
insoluble. Of course, they are difficult; but their 
solution is not beyond the wisdom of man. They 



seem insoluble under conditions of fear, distrust, 
and even hostility, where every move is weighed 
in terms of whether it will help or weaken a 
potential enemy. If those conditions can be 
changed, then much can be done. Under such cir- 
cumstances I am confident that at a later stage our 
Foreign Ministers will be able to carry on from 
where we leave off to find, either by themselves or 
with others, solutions to our problems. 

No doubt there are among our nations philo- 
sophical convictions which are in many respects 
irreconcilable. Nothing that we can say or do 
here will change that fact. However, it is not 
always necessary that people should think alike 
and believe alike before they can work together. 
The essential thing is that none should attempt by 
force or trickery to make his beliefs prevail and 
thus to impose his system on the unwilling. 

The new approach we of this conference should 
seek cannot be found merely by talking in terms 
of abstractions and generalities. It is necessary 
that we talk frankly about the concrete problems 
which create tension between us and about the 
way to begin in solving them. 

As a preface, may I indicate some of the issues 
I think we should discuss. 

The German Question 

First is the problem of unifying Germany and 
forming an all-German government based on free 
elections. Ten years have passed since the Ger- 
man armistice, and Germany is still divided. 
That division does a grievous wrong to a people 
which is entitled, like any other, to pursue to- 
gether a common destiny. While that division 
continues, it creates a basic source of instability in 
Europe. Our talk of peace has little meaning if 
at the same time we perpetuate conditions en- 
dangering the peace. Toward Germans, the four 
of us bear special responsibilities. While any con- 
clusions we reach would be invalid unless sup- 
ported by majority opinion in Germany, this prob- 



August 1, 1955 



171 



lem should be a topic for our meeting here. Must 
we not consider ways to solve it promptly and 
justly? 

In the interest of enduring peace, our solution 
should take account of the legitimate security 
interests of all concerned. That is why we insist 
a united Germany is entitled, at its choice, to 
exercise its inherent right of collective self-de- 
fense. By the same token, we are ready to take 
account of legitimate security interests of the 
Soviet Union. The Paris agreements contain 
many provisions which serve this purpose. But 
we are quite ready to consider further reciprocal 
safeguards which are reasonable and practical and 
compatible with the security of all concerned. 

On a broader plane, there is the problem of re- 
specting the right of peoples to choose the form of 
government under which they will live; and of 
restoring sovereign rights and self-government to 
those who have been deprived of them. The 
American people feel strongly that certain peoples 
of Eastern Europe, many with a long and proud 
record of national existence, have not yet been 
given the benefit of this pledge of our United 
Nations wartime declaration, reinforced by other 
wartime agreements. 

There is the problem of communication and 
human contacts as among our peoples. We 
frankly fear the consequences of a situation where 
whole peoples are isolated from the outside world. 
The American people want to be friends with the 
Soviet peoples. There are no natural differences 
between our peoples or our nations. There are 
no territorial conflicts or commercial rivalries. 
Historically, our two countries have always been 
at peace. But friendly understanding between 
peoples does not readily develop when there are 
artificial barriers such as now interfere with com- 
munication. It is time that all curtains, whether 
of guns or laws or regulations, should begin to 
come down. But this can only be done in an at- 
mosphere of mutual respect and confidence. 

There is the problem of international commu- 
nism. For 38 years now its activities have dis- 
turbed relations between other nations and the 
Soviet Union. Its activities are not confined to 
efforts to persuade. It seeks throughout the world 
to subvert lawful governments and to subject na- 
tions to an alien domination. We cannot ignore 
the distrust created by the support of such activi- 
ties. In my nation and elsewhere it adds to dis- 
trust and therefore to international tension. 



Armaments 

Finally, there is the overriding problem of 
armament. This is at once a result and a cause of 
existing tension and distrust. Contrary to a basic 
purpose of the United Nations Charter, arma- 
ments now divert much of men's effort from crea- 
tive to nonproductive uses. We would all like to 
end that. But apparently none dares to do so 
because of fear of attack. 

Surprise attack has a capacity for destruction 
far beyond anything which man has yet known. 
So each of us deems it vital that there should be 
means to deter such attack. Perhaps, therefore, we 
should consider whether the problem of limitation 
of armament may not best be approached by seek- 
ing — as a first step — dependable ways to super- 
vise and inspect military establishments, so that 
there can be no frightful surprises, whether by 
sudden attack or by secret violation of agreed re- 
strictions. In this field nothing is more important 
than that we explore together the challenging and 
central problem of effective mutual inspection. 
Such a system is the foundation for real disarma- 
ment. 

As we think of this problem of armament, we 
need to remember that the present burden of costly 
armaments not only deprives our own people of 
higher living standards, but it also denies the peo- 
ples of underdeveloped areas of resources which 
would improve their lot. These areas contain 
much of the world's population and many nations 
now emerging for the first time into political inde- 
pendence. They are grappling with the urgent 
problem of economic growth. Normally they 
would receive assistance, particularly for capital 
development, from the more developed nations of 
the world. However, that normal process is 
gravely retarded by the fact that the more devel- 
oped industrial countries are dedicating so much 
of their productive effort to armament. Arma- 
ment reduction would and should insure that part 
of the savings would flow into the less developed 
areas of the world to assist their economic develop- 
ment. 

Atoms for Peace 

In addition, we must press forward in develop- 
ing the use of atomic energy for constructive pur- 
poses. We regret that the Soviet Union has never 
accepted our proposal of December 1953 that na- 
tions possessing stockpiles of fissionable material 



172 



Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



should join to contribute to a "world bank" so as, 
in steadily increasing measure, to substitute co- 
operation in human welfare for competition in 
means of human destruction. We still believe that 
if the Soviet Union would, according to its ability, 
contribute to this great project, that act would im- 
prove the international climate. 

In this first statement of the conference, I have 
indicated very briefly some of the problems that 
weigh upon my mind and upon the people of the 
United States and where solution is largely within 
the competence of the four of us. As our work 
here progresses, I hope that all of us will have sug- 
gestions as to how we might promote the search for 
the solution of these problems. 

Perhaps it would be well if each of us would in 
turn give a similar indication of his country's 
views. Then we can quickly see the scope of the 
matters which it might be useful to discuss here 
and arrange our time accordingly. 

Let me repeat, I trust that we are not here 
merely to catalog our differences. We are not 
here to repeat the same dreary exercises that have 
characterized most of our negotiations of the past 
10 years. We are here in response to the peaceful 
aspirations of mankind to start the kind of discus- 
sions which will inject a new spirit into our 
diplomacy and to launch fresh negotiations under 
conditions of good augury. 

In that way, and perhaps only in that way, can 
our meeting, necessarily brief, serve to generate 
and put in motion the new forces needed to set us 
truly on the path to peace. For this I am sure all 
humanity will devoutly pray. 



STATEMENT ON DISARMAMENT, JULY 21 

White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 21 

Disarmament is one of the most important sub- 
jects on our agenda. It is also extremely diffi- 
cult. In recent years the scientists have dis- 
covered methods of making weapons many, many 
times more destructive of opposing armed forces — 
but also of homes and industries and lives — than 
ever known or even imagined before. These same 
scientific discoveries have made much more com- 
plex the problems of limitation and control and 
reduction of armament. 

After our victory as allies in World War II, my 
country rapidly disarmed. Within a few years 
our armament was at a very low level. Then events 



occurred beyond our borders which caused us to 
realize that we had disarmed too much. For our 
own security and to safeguard peace we needed 
greater strength. Therefore we proceeded to re- 
arm and to associate with others in a partnership 
for peace and for mutual security. 

The American people are determined to main- 
tain and, if necessary, increase this armed strength 
for as long a period as is necessary to safeguard 
peace and to maintain our security. 

But we know that a mutually dependable system 
for less armament on the part of all nations would 
be a better way to safeguard peace and to main- 
tain our security. 

It would ease the fears of war in the anxious 
hearts of people everywhere. It would lighten 
the burdens upon the backs of the people. It 
would make it possible for every nation, great and 
small, developed and less developed, to advance 
the standards of living of its people, to attain bet- 
ter food and clothing and shelter, more of educa- 
tion and larger enjoyment of life. 

Therefore the United States Government is pre- 
pared to enter into a sound and reliable agreement 
making possible the reduction of armament. I 
have directed that an intensive and thorough study 
of this subject be made within our own Govern- 
ment. From these studies, which are continuing, 
a very important principle is emerging to which I 
referred in my opening statement on Monday. 

Adequate Inspection and Reporting Essential 

No sound and reliable agreement can be made 
unless it is completely covered by an inspection 
and reporting system adequate to support every 
portion of the agreement. The lessons of history 
teach us that disarmament agreements without 
adequate reciprocal inspection increase the dangers 
of war and do not brighten the prospects of peace. 

Thus it is my view that the priority attention of 
our combined study of disarmament should be 
upon the subject of inspection and reporting. 

Questions suggest themselves. 

How effective an inspection system can be de- 
signed which would be mutually and reciprocally 
acceptable within our countries and the other 
nations of the world ? How would such a system 
operate? What could it accomplish? Is cer- 
tainty against surprise aggression attainable by 
inspection? Could violations be discovered 
promptly and effectively counteracted? 



August 1, 1955 



173 



We have not as yet been able to discover any 
scientific or other inspection method which would 
make certain of the elimination of nuclear weap- 
ons. So far as we are aware no other nation 
has made such a discovery. Our study of this 
problem is continuing. We have not as yet been 
able to discover any accounting or other inspection 
method of being certain of the true budgetary facts 
of total expenditures for armament. Our study 
of this problem is continuing. We by no means 
exclude the possibility of finding useful checks in 
these fields. 

As you can see from these statements, it is our 
impression that many past proposals of disarma- 
ment are more sweeping than can be insured by 
effective inspection. 

Gentlemen, since I have been working on this 
memorandum to present to this conference, I 
have been searching my heart and mind for some- 
thing that I could say here that could convince 
everyone of the great sincerity of the United 
States in approaching this problem of disarma- 
ment. I should address myself for a moment 
principally to the delegates from the Soviet Union, 
because our two great countries admittedly possess 
new and terrible weapons in quantities which do 
give rise in other parts of the world, or recipro- 
cally, to the fears and dangers of surprise attack. 

U.S. Proposal 

I propose, therefore, that we take a practical 
step, that we begin an arrangement, very quickly, 
as between ourselves — immediately. These steps 
would include : 

To give to each other a complete blueprint of 
our military establishments, from beginning to 
end, from one end of our countries to the other; 
lay out the establishments and provide the blue- 
prints to each other. 

Next, to provide within our countries facilities 
for aerial photography to the other country — we 
to provide you the facilities within our country, 
ample facilities for aerial reconnaissance, where 
you can make all the pictures you choose and take 
them to your own country to study ; you to provide 
exactly the same facilities for us and we to make 
these examinations — and by this step to convince 
the world that we are providing as between our- 
selves against the possibility of great surprise 
attack, thus lessening danger and relaxing tension. 
Likewise we will make more easily attainable a 



comprehensive and effective system of inspection 
and disarmament, because what I propose, I assure 
you, would be but a beginning. 

Now from my statements I believe you will 
anticipate my suggestion. It is that we instruct 
our representatives in the Subcommittee on Dis- 
armament in discharge of their mandate from the 
United Nations to give priority effort to the study 
of inspection and reporting. Such a study could 
well include a step-by-step testing of inspection 
and reporting methods. 

The United States is ready to proceed in the 
study and testing of a reliable system of inspec- 
tions and reporting and, when that system is 
proved, then to reduce armaments with all others 
to the extent that the system will provide assured 
results. The successful working out of such a 
system would do much to develop the mutual con- 
fidence which will open wide the avenues of prog- 
ress for all our peoples. 

The quest for peace is the statesman's most ex- 
acting duty. Security of the nation entrusted to 
his care is his greatest responsibility. Practical 
progress to lasting peace is his fondest hope. Yet 
in pursuit of his hope he must not betray the trust 
placed in him as guardian of the people's security. 
A sound peace — with security, justice, well-being, 
and freedom for the people of the world — can be 
achieved, but only by patiently and thoughtfully 
followinc a hard and sure and tested road. 



STATEMENT ON EAST-WEST CONTACTS, 
JULY 22 

White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 22 

According to the adopted agenda, today we meet 
to discuss methods of normalizing and increasing 
the contacts between our nations in many fields. I 
am heartened by the deep interest in this question, 
which interest implies a common purpose to under- 
stand each other better. Unfortunately there exist 
unnecessary restrictions on the flow between us of 
ideas, of things, and of people. 

Like other questions we have considered during 
the past 4 days, this one cannot be considered in- 
dependently or in isolation. All are related by 
their direct importance to the general objective of 
lessening world fears and tensions. 

To help achieve the goal of peace based on justice 
and right and mutual understanding, there are cer- 
tain concrete steps that could be taken : 



174 



Department of State Bulletin 



( 1 ) To lower the barriers which now impede the 
interchange of information and ideas between our 
peoples. 

(2) To lower the barriers which now impede the 
opportunities of people to travel anywhere in the 
world for peaceful, friendly purposes, so that all 
will have a chance to know each other face to face. 

(3) To create conditions which will encourage 
nations to increase the exchange of peaceful goods 
throughout the world. 

Success in these endeavors should improve the 
conditions of life for all our citizens and elsewhere 
in the world. By helping eliminate poverty and 
ignorance, we can take another step in progress 
toward peace. 

Communications and Travel 

^Restrictions on communications of all kinds, in- 
cluding radio and travel, existing in extreme form 
in some places, have operated as causes of mutual 
distrust. In America, the fervent belief in free- 
dom of thought, of expression, and of movement 
is a vital part of our heritage. Yet during these 
past 10 years even we have felt compelled, in the 
protection of our own interests, to place some 
restrictions upon the movement of persons and 
communications across our national frontiers. 

This conference has the opportunity, I believe, 
to initiate concrete steps to permit the breaking 
down of both mild and severe barriers to mutual 
understanding and trust. 

Trade 

Now I should like to turn to the question of 
trade. I assume that each of us here is dedicated 
to the improvement of the conditions of life of 
our own citizens. Trade in peaceful goods is an 
important factor in achieving this goal. If trade 
is to reach its maximum capability in this regard, 
it must be both voluminous and worldwide. 

The United Nations has properly been con- 
cerned in making available to the people of the 
underdeveloped areas modern technology and 
managerial abilities, as well as capital and credit. 
My country not only supports these efforts but has 
undertaken parallel projects outside the United 
Nations. 

Potential of Atomic Science 

In this connection the new atomic science pos- 
sesses a tremendous potential for helping raise 
the standards of living and providing greater 



opportunity for all the world. Worldwide inter- 
est in overcoming poverty and ignorance is grow- 
ing by leaps and bounds, and each of the great 
nations should do its utmost to assist in this 
development. 

As a result new desires, new requirements, new 
aspirations are emerging almost everywhere as 
man climbs the upward path of his destiny. Most 
encouraging of all is the evidence that, after cen- 
turies of fatalism and resignation, the hopeless of 
the world are beginning to hope. 

But regardless of the results achieved through 
the United Nations effort or the individual efforts 
of helpful nations, trade remains the indispen- 
sable arterial system of a flourishing world 
prosperity. If we could create conditions in 
which unnecessary restrictions on trade would be 
progressively eliminated and under which there 
would be free and friendly exchange of ideas and 
of people, we should have done much to chart the 
paths toward the objectives we commonly seek. 

By working together toward all these goals, we 
can do much to transform this century of recur- 
ring conflict into a century of enduring and 
invigorating peace. This, I assure you, the 
United States of America devoutly desires — as I 
know all of us do. 



CLOSING STATEMENT, JULY 23 

White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 23 

I welcome and warmly reciprocate the spirit of 
friendliness and good intent that have character- 
ized the statements of the two preceding speakers 
[Prime Ministers Eden and Bulganin], but I do 
hope that my silence respecting certain of the 
statements made by the immediately preceding 
speaker [Bulganin] will not by any means be in- 
terpreted as acquiescence on my part. Far from 
it. 

But it has seemed to me that in the closing 
minutes of this conference there is no necessity 
for me to announce to this conference and to the 
world the United States position on the important 
questions we have discussed. These I hope and 
believe have already been made clear. There- 
fore, it has not seemed particularly fitting once 
more to recite them in detail. Bather I content 
myself with some reflections on our work of the 
past week and an expression of some hopes for the 
future. 



August J, J 955 



175 



Followthrough Will Be Decisive 

This has been an historic meeting. It has been 
on the whole a good week. But only history will 
tell the true worth and real values of our session 
together. The followthrough from this beginning 
by our respective governments will be decisive in 
the measure of this conference. 

We have talked over plainly a number of the 
most difficult and perplexing questions affecting 
our several peoples and indeed the peoples of the 
entire world. We did not come here to reach final 
solutions. We came to see if we might together 
find the path that would lead to solutions and 
would brighten the prospects of world peace. 

In this final hour of our assembly, it is my 
judgment that the prospects of a lasting peace 
with justice, well-being, and broader freedom are 
brighter. The dangers of the overwhelming 
tragedy of modern war are less. 

The work of our Foreign Ministers as they 
strive to implement our directives will be of great 
importance, perhaps of even more than what we 
have done here. Theirs is the task, reflecting the 
substantive policies of their governments, to reach 
agreement on courses of action which we here 
could discuss only in broad terms. I know we all 
wish them well. I trust we will all support the 
necessary adjustments which they may find our 
governments must make if we are to resolve our 
differences in these matters. 

The Hope of All Mankind 

If our peoples, in the months and years ahead, 
broaden their knowledge and their understanding 
of each other, as we, during this week, have broad- 
ened our knowledge of each other, further agree- 
ment between our governments may be facilitated. 

May this occur in a spirit of justice. May it 
result in improved well-being, greater freedom, 
and less of fear or suffering or distress for man- 
kind. May it be marked by more of good will 
among men. These days will then indeed be ever 
remembered. 

I came to Geneva because I believe mankind 
longs for freedom from war and rumors of war. 
I came here because of my lasting faith in the 
decent instincts and good sense of the people who 
populate this world of ours. I shall return home 
tonight with these convictions unshaken and with 
the prayer that the hope of mankind will one day 
be realized. 



DIRECTIVE TO FOREIGN MINISTERS, JULY 23 

The Heads of Government of France, the United 
Kingdom, the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A., guided by 
the desire to contribute to the relaxation of inter- 
national tension and to the consolidation of confi- 
dence between states, instruct their Foreign Min- 
isters to continue the consideration of the 
following questions with regard to which an ex- 
change of views has taken place at the Geneva 
Conference, and to propose effective means for 
their solution, taking account of the close link be- 
tween the reunification of Germany and the prob- 
lems of European security, and the fact that the 
successful settlement of each of these problems 
would serve the interests of consolidating peace. 

1. European Security and Germany. For the 
purpose of establishing European security with 
due regard to the legitimate interests of all nations 
and their inherent right to individual and collec- 
tive self-defence, the Ministers are instructed to 
consider various proposals to this end, including 
the following: A security pact for Europe or for 
a part of Europe, including provision for the as- 
sumption by member nations of an obligation not 
to resort to force and to deny assistance to an ag- 
gressor; limitation, control, and inspection in re- 
gard to armed forces and armaments; establish- 
ment between East and West of a zone in which the 
disposition of armed forces will be subject to 
mutual agreement; and also to consider other 
possible proposals pertaining to the solution of 
this problem. 

The Heads of Government, recognizing their 
common responsibility for the settlement of the 
German question and the re-unification of Ger- 
many, have agreed the settlement of the German 
question and the re-unification of Germany by 
means of free elections shall be carried out in con- 
formity with the national interests of the German 
people and the interests of European security. 
The Foreign Ministers will make whatever ar- 
rangements they may consider desirable for the 
participation of, or for consultation with, other 
interested parties. 

2. Disarmament 

The Four Heads of Government, 

Desirous of removing the threat of war and 
lessening the burden of armaments, 

Convinced of the necessity, for secure peace and 
for the welfare of mankind, of achieving a system 



176 



Department of State Bulletin 



for the control and reduction of all armaments and 
armed forces under effective safeguards, 

Recognizing that achievements in this field 
would release vast material resources to be devoted 
to the peaceful economic development of nations, 
for raising, their well-being, as well as for assist- 
ance to underdeveloped countries, 

Agree : 

( 1 ) for these purposes to work together to de- 
velop an acceptable system for disarmament 
through the Sub-Committee of the United Nations 
Disarmament Commission ; 

(2) to instruct their representatives in the Sub- 
Committee in the discharge of their mandate from 
the United Nations to take account in their work 
of the views and proposals advanced by the Heads 
of Government at this Conference; 

(3) to propose that the next meeting of the 
Sub-Committee be held on August 29, 1955, at New 
York; 

(4) to instruct the Foreign Ministers to take 
note of the proceedings in the Disarmament Com- 
mission, to take account of the views and proposals 
advanced by the Heads of Government at this 
Conference and to consider whether the four Gov- 
ernments can take any further useful initiative in 
the field of disarmament. 

3. Development of Contacts between East and 
West 

The Foreign Ministers should by means of ex- 
perts study measures, including those possible in 
organs and agencies of the United Nations, which 
could (a) bring about a progressive elimination of 
barriers which interfere with free communications 
and peaceful trade between people and (b) bring 
about such freer contacts and exchanges as are to 
the mutual advantage of the countries and peoples 
concerned. 

4. The Foreign Ministers of the Four Powers 
will meet at Geneva during October to initiate 
their consideration of these questions and to deter- 
mine the organisation of their work. 



Training Program for Paraguayan 
Farm-to-Market Road 

The Foreign Operations Administration an- 
nounced on June 27 that it will provide $100,000 
to train Paraguayans in the use and maintenance 
of highway construction equipment as an adjunct 
to the building of an important dry-weather road 
through the rich agricultural Chaco area of west- 
ern Paraguay. The funds will also be used for a 
small amount of equipment. 

The Chaco Eoad, to run a distance of 250 miles 
between Asuncion and Filadelf ia, is the result of 
an agreement between the Government of Para- 
guay, Chaco ranchers, and Mennonite colonists to 
provide $300,000 for its construction. Asuncion 
is the capital of Paraguay ; Filadelfia, hub of the 
Mennonite colonies. It is hoped the road eventu- 
ally can be extended to Villa Montes, Bolivia, as 
the first major access road between the two 
countries. 

The Mennonites, a denomination of evangelical 
Protestant Christians who number about 12,000 
in Paraguay, have successfully colonized a large 
area in the interior during the past 25 years. They 
have been so successful in their agricultural ven- 
ture that the Government of Paraguay has au- 
thorized them to take all possible steps to fulfill 
goals set in a recent trade treaty with Bolivia. 

The greatest problem confronting the Chaco 
Mennonites is the lack of good transportation fa- 
cilities to carry their products to market. Crops 
must now be transported to Asuncion by a long 
and devious route, by truck, railroad, and boat. 

The service of an Foa engineer in the layout and 
construction of the Chaco Road will be provided 
under a cooperative agreement with the Para- 
guayan Ministry of Public Works, Mennonite 
authorities, and Chaco ranchers. Every 6 months 
the supervising engineer, assisted by a group of 
skilled Mennonites, will train a crew of workers, 
who will then be assigned to roadbuilding projects 
throughout Paraguay. Initial concentration will 
be on the training of crews for the Chaco Road. 



August 1, 7955 



177 



Basic Issues in the NATO Status of Forces Agreement 



Statement by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy 1 



Let me begin with a word about the testimony 
which the committee has heard until now. The 
Department of State — and I am sure I can speak 
also for the Department of Defense in this re- 
gard — fully sympathizes with the concern ex- 
pressed by the witnesses who have appeared before 
this committee. It is not, I trust, necessary to 
say that this concern for the members of our forces 
is fully shared by the Department of State and 
by the Department of Defense. Their welfare, 
indeed, is not only our concern but our responsi- 
bility. 

Unfortunately, some of the statements made 
before this committee, and much that has ap- 
peared in public print, reflect basic misconceptions 
and misinformation. Our efforts to inform the 
American people on the very important matter 
with which this committee is concerned have ap- 
parently been less successful than we had hoped. 
It is for that reason that the Department is par- 
ticularly grateful for the opportunity you have 
offered this morning to inform and to explain to 
this committee, and to the American people, what 
are the basic issues involved, what is the legal 
situation, and what are the facts. 

By way of preface to my remarks, let me sum- 
marize what we believe to be the situation. We 
believe that the arrangements we do have are, in 
general, the best that we can obtain today. We 
believe that maintaining these arrangements, 
while remaining ever on the alert to protect the 
individual member of our forces against possible 



1 Made before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs 
on July 19 (press release 440) at public hearings on H. J. 
Res. 309 and similar resolutions providing for revision of 
the Nato Status of Forces Agreement and other agree- 
ments relating to criminal jurisdiction over members of 
the armed forces serving overseas. 



error or abuse, is in the national interest. We be- 
lieve that these arrangements are reasonable and 
practicable and represent considerable concessions 
to the viewpoint of the United States by our 
allies. We believe that the experience to date — 
which the representative of Defense is prepared 
to summarize for you — shows that our status-of- 
forces arrangements have worked in favor of the 
members of our military forces abroad. 

This experience, as you will see, shows how 
small is the percentage of servicemen tried by 
foreign courts and how few of these were actually 
sent to jail. As to the handful who went to jail, 
we can say this: In every one of these cases a 
United States representative carefully followed 
the trial. In not one of these cases do we believe 
that an innocent man has gone to jail. In not one 
of these cases did we feel warranted in objecting 
that there had been an unfair trial. In not one 
of these cases was there cruel or unusual punish- 
ment. In not one of these cases can we say that 
the sentence meted out was substantially more 
severe than that which would probably have been 
imposed by a United States court martial. 

In the history of American treatymaking there 
have been few agreements more carefully and 
painstakingly negotiated than the Nato Status of 
Forces Agreement. 2 There are few agreements 
which have received more widespread support 
from military and diplomatic officials familiar 
with the circumstances. The terms of the agree- 
ment were worked out by diplomatic and military 
officials of two administrations. The treaty was 



2 S. Exec. T, S2d Cong., 2d sess. For text, see Treaties 
and Other International Acts Series 2846. For an 
announcement of the signing of the treaty, see Bulletin 
of July 2, 1951, p. 16. 



178 



Department of State Bulletin 



presented to the Senate by President Eisenhower 3 
and received his full support, as well as that of 
Secretary Dulles, and Secretary Wilson, General 
Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
General Kidgway, Supreme Allied Commander in 
Europe, and Admiral McCormick, Supreme Allied 
Commander in the Atlantic. In the Senate the 
treaty received careful consideration, much of it 
centering on the issue of criminal jurisdiction with 
which you are now concerned. The Senate ap- 
proved the treaty by a 72-15 vote. Among its 
supporters were Senator Knowland, Senator Taf t, 
Senator George, and Senator Johnson. Yet there 
is today a certain amount of confusion concerning 
the meaning of the status-of- forces treaty. 

Background of Agreement 

Earlier in the hearings members of this com- 
mittee expressed an interest in how the Nato 
status-of-forces treaty came about. When the 
United States decided that the defense of this 
country and of the free world required the sta- 
tioning of American forces on foreign soil, we 
were concerned to assure these forces the maximum 
protection possible. Recognizing that, unless 
there were agreements with the governments con- 
cerned, our troops might be subjected to local 
jurisdiction for all kinds of offenses, even those 
committed while the serviceman was on duty, 
bilateral arrangements were negotiated. These 
were interim arrangements in the form of execu- 
tive agreements, varying from country to country. 
The lack of uniformity and the interim character 
of the arrangements raised problems in various 
countries. When the North Atlantic Treaty came 
into force and an integrated Western defense was 
begun, it became clear that a more formal and 
more permanent definition of status was neces- 
sary. Everyone agreed that it should be arrived 
at on a uniform and multilateral basis. It was 
also necessary to deal with many other subjects, 
such as travel, customs, taxes, civil claims, etc. 
( In the Nato status-of-forces treaty the article on 
criminal law is only 1 of 20.) 

The status of forces of one friendly power in 
the country of another in time of peace had already 
been the subject of negotiation among the coun- 
tries of Europe. The Brussels Agreement of 1949 



3 For statements in support of the agreement at the time 
of its submission to the Senate, see ibid., Apr. 27, 1953, 
p. 628. 



grovemins: the status of forces of Western Union 
powers had established a precedent which the Eu- 
ropean countries thought should be continued in 
the Nato framework. This became the basis for 
study, but the United States sought to assure 
greater protections for our servicemen. 

The countries involved in the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization believe that their system of 
justice is civilized and fair. They were not will- 
ing to recognize an extralegal status for forces of 
other friendly states. Although some of them 
feel as strongly as we do about protecting the 
members of their forces, they were willing, in the 
common defense, to send forces to friendly states, 
recognizing that they would be subject to the juris- 
diction of those states, within certain limitations 
to be established in the status-of-forces treaty, and 
they believed that the other Nato members should 
be willing to do likewise. 

The United States sought to obtain for its forces 
the maximum privileges and protection possible. 
We sought and obtained more, in most countries, 
than was granted by the interim arrangements. 
Of course, we could not ask, in a multilateral 
agreement, for provisions which we were not pre- 
pared to grant in the United States. We believe 
that the Nato status-of-forces treaty was, and is, in 
the circumstances the best possible multilateral 
agreement obtainable. 

One principal source of confusion about the 
criminal jurisdiction provisions, I believe, is the 
notion that the treaty gave away something — that 
it surrendered certain rights and privileges to 
which American servicemen would otherwise have 
been entitled. Now this idea is simply not true. 
It is without foundation. The contrary is true. 
As Attorney General Brownell has testified, the 
treaty gained certain important rights and privi- 
leges for American servicemen abroad that they 
would not otherwise possess. That was one of the 
principal purposes of the treaty, and that has been 
its principal effect. 

The major criticism directed against the crim- 
inal jurisdiction provisions of the treaty stems 
from the fact that, under its terms, foreign law- 
enforcement agencies retain a measure of jurisdic- 
tion over American servicemen who are accused of 
crimes. Somehow, the idea arose that the treaty 
gave foreign governments this criminal jurisdic- 
tion. This idea seems to be based on the false 
premise that the soldiers of one country who are 
stationed in another country normally remain 



August J, 1955 



179 



under the exclusive jurisdiction of their com- 
manders and are not subject to local laws. I 
understand that certain American judicial opin- 
ions have been cited to support this view. 

Views of Justice Department 

The committee will hear from the representative 
of the Department of Justice. I should like, 
nevertheless, to read the committee Attorney Gen- 
eral Brownell's conclusions about the treaty. Be- 
fore the Senate Foreign Relations Committee con- 
sidering the treaty, he said, in part : 

. . . we believe that this does not change the rule of 
international law to the detriment of any American citizen. 

Now our second conclusion is that the treaty affords to 
our forces abroad more immunity from local criminal 
jurisdiction than they would have in the absence of an 
agreement. 

Our third conclusion is that this treaty affords our 
forces abroad more immunity than is afforded under the 
agreements which we think are directly comparable. 

And our final conclusion is that the treaty gives to the 
members of our forces when they are to be tried in the 
courts of the receiving state adequate safeguards in ac- 
cordance with civilized standards of justice. 

Even if the legal conclusions were disputable, 
however, we cannot escape the hard facts. The 
governments of allied countries — the govern- 
ments directly concerned here — certainly do not 
recognize legal doctrines like that suggested. 
They are sovereign nations. As such, they have 
criminal jurisdiction over every individual ac- 
cused of offenses within their boundaries — 
whether soldier or civilian, whether citizen or 
alien — unless they voluntarily choose to waive 
this jurisdiction. Under longstanding custom 
they have waived it in the case of certain diplo- 
matic officials. Under wartime conditions they 
have sometimes waived it with respect to allied 
military personnel. Under the Status of Forces 
Agreement they have waived a considerable part 
of their jurisdiction with respect to allied soldiers 
stationed in their country in peacetime. But the 
choice always lies with the sovereign host govern- 
ment. If it does not waive its jurisdiction or 
modify it, it retains jurisdiction, and this applies 
to soldiers as well as to tourists and businessmen 
who are visiting its country. 

In the absence of the status-of-forces treaty or 
other voluntary waiver, therefore, these govern- 
ments would have the right to arrest and try any 
American accused of criminal offenses within 



their borders. If the treaty now existing should 
be revoked, that is exactly the situation that 
would immediately come into being. For this 
reason, it is entirely incorrect to argue that, if we 
got rid of the status-of-forces treaty, the rights 
of American soldiers abroad would be restored. 
As Attorney General Brownell said, without the 
Nato agreement our forces would have much less 
and would be worse off. 

Now, in view of the fact that foreign govern- 
ments normally have full jurisdiction over mili- 
tary and civilian personnel within their bound- 
aries, there are some who recognize that the treaty 
has added substantially to the protection afforded 
American servicemen but who nevertheless argue 
that allied governments should have gone even 
further than they did. They believe that the 
United States Government, in return for assigning 
soldiers, sailors, and airmen abroad, should de- 
mand that allied governments completely sur- 
render their criminal jurisdiction over these 
troops. In effect, they seem to be saying that 
American forces are sent abroad as a special favor 
to allied nations and that these nations ought to be 
willing to give up a part of their sovereign author- 
ity in payment for this favor. If these govern- 
ments are unwilling to do this, it is argued, the 
United States should withdraw its troops. 

NATO Forces and Collective Security 

This argument raises the gravest issues of for- 
eign policy and national security. This commit- 
tee has by its action on legislation indicated its 
understanding of the reasons for stationing Amer- 
ican servicemen abroad and of the international 
circumstances which make this action essential to 
our national safety. Nevertheless, it may be use- 
ful to review briefly some of the basic principles 
upon which the Nato alliance is founded. The 
Status of Forces Agreement can only be under- 
stood within the context of the broader collective 
security system of which it is a part. 

This country long ago accepted the fact that the 
only true security available in this modern world 
is collective security. The Congress has demon- 
strated time and again its recognition of this 
proposition. We have entered alliances with many 
countries throughout the world, not just to protect 
other nations but also to protect ourselves. One 
of the most important of these alliances is the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Our Nato 



180 



Department of State Bulletin 



allies have raised sizable military forces and now 
have more men under arms than we do. They are 
producing military equipment and supplies in sig- 
nificant quantities. They have provided many 
important ports and bases for the common defense. 
"While the United States Government has con- 
tributed substantial amounts in money and equip- 
ment to support their defense efforts, these govern- 
ments are paying most of the cost themselves. As 
a result they are supplying more military power 
to supplement and reinforce American defense 
efforts than we can find anywhere else in the world. 
Nato represents our first line of defense, and the 
degree of its effectiveness has a tremendous im- 
pact upon the dependability of our own national 
defense system. To put it simply, the success of 
Nato may make the difference between war and 
peace — may some day determine whether millions 
of Americans will live or die. 

U.S. Troops Indispensable to NATO 

As part of our contribution to the Nato partner- 
ship, we have stationed a sizable number of U.S. 
military forces in Europe. While these forces are 
a minority of the total, their presence is indis- 
pensable to Nato. In political and psychological 
terms their presence demonstrates our continuing 
determination to participate actively in the Atlan- 
tic defense system. In military terms they repre- 
sent a body of trained and skilled manpower for 
which no substitution from European sources is 
practical. They operate ports and air bases and 
other technical facilities which are vital to effec- 
tive defense in modern warfare. Our allies want 
these troops to stay in Europe. We recognize the 
need to have them there. They are part of an 
overall pattern of defense which could not be dis- 
rupted without fatal injury to the entire structure. 

The important point for us to remember is that 
American troops are not in Europe as a favor to 
our allies. Their principal purpose is to protect 
the United States itself. They are there because 
we know that we can get more total protection by 
combining our strength with that of other nations 
than by standing alone. They are there because we 
want to prevent war altogether — to stop it before 
it starts. And if war comes despite our best efforts 
to prevent it, these military forces are in the place 
where they can do the most good — where they can 
help to halt an enemy attack and to retaliate with 
immediate and devastating effect. No credence is 



given today to the idea that American soldiers, 
sailors, and airmen can best protect American cit- 
izens by staying at home and waiting for an enemy 
to strike the United States. 

Let me repeat — American troops are not in al- 
lied countries as a favor to our allies. We know 
this, and our allies know it. It would be ridiculous 
for us to try to pretend that our troops are there 
just to help them. It is impossible for us to say, 
"Put Americans above the law or we'll go home," 
because it is not in our own interest to go home, 
any more than it is in their interest for us to go 
home. Only one interest would be served by the 
withdrawal of American forces from Europe, and 
that is the interest of Communist imperialism. 

The Communists themselves are well aware of 
this fact. Most of you know, I am sure, that the 
Communists have labored increasingly to get 
American troops out of Europe. You will note 
that one key element of most recent Soviet pro- 
posals is to eliminate U.S. bases in Europe and 
to get American troops out. Local Communist 
parties are constantly carrying on propaganda 
campaigns to convince the local population that 
American soldiers should go home. They are con- 
stantly trying to stir up trouble between our 
troops and local citizens. They know that Euro- 
peans have bad memories of previous military oc- 
cupation, and so they try to pretend that our 
troops are "occupation forces." To support this 
theme, the Communists steadily criticize local offi- 
cials for giving privileges to American troops and 
argue loudly that the Status of Forces Agreement 
has given away too much of the local government's 
authority. Adding all these things together we 
can see clearly that the withdrawal of American 
forces from Europe is a major Communist objec- 
tive, because they know that such action would 
weaken American defense as well as European 
defense. 

In the context of the mutual defense program 
conducted through Nato, I believe the Status of 
Forces Agreement can be viewed in better perspec- 
tive. Nato has not only led to the stationing of 
American troops in Europe ; it has also made nec- 
essary the stationing of troops from several Euro- 
pean countries in other European countries. One 
aspect of the Mutual Security Program involves 
the assignment of thousands of allied servicemen 
to the United States each year for special train- 
ing. All these exchanges of military personnel 



August 1, 1955 



181 



inevitably produce certain administrative and 
personal problems. In wartime, most of these 
problems seem relatively minor. When soldiers 
are dying every day under enemy fire, there is 
little tendency to worry very much about second- 
ary sacrifices and inconveniences. In peacetime, 
however, it is more difficult for people to accept 
the necessity of these inconveniences. It is some- 
times hard to realize the full importance of suc- 
cess on our part in fighting the "cold war" — in 
conducting a dynamic peace effort to prevent war. 

Criminal Jurisdiction of Host Government 

It is natural that we should try to minimize 
the personal difficulties that result from the sta- 
tioning of troops of certain Nato countries in 
other Nato countries. One of the most thorny 
problems is that of criminal jurisdiction. Under 
normal circumstances, as we have seen, the sov- 
ereign host government has criminal jurisdiction. 
In the absence of waiver by the host country, mil- 
itary personnel would be subject to local jurisdic- 
tion, as are local citizens or visiting businessmen 
or tourists. The United States Government be- 
lieves that these military personnel deserve special 
protection. Most allied governments agree with 
this principle. During World War II, in fact, 
there were various legislative enactments and spe- 
cial agreements that provided special protection. 
However, as the time for the expiration of these 
wartime agreements drew near, it became neces- 
sary for the Nato governments to work out new 
arrangements which would afford protection to in- 
dividual servicemen consistent with the sovereign 
authority of the host countries. It is strangely 
ironic that this effort should later have been in- 
terpreted as a denial or surrender of American 
rights, when in fact American servicemen have 
gained substantial advantages. 

Let's take a look at some of these advantages. 
In the first place, the Status of Forces Agreement 
provides that United States servicemen remain un- 
der United States jurisdiction with respect to 
offenses committed while on duty. In other words, 
foreign governments have voluntarily limited 
their jurisdiction to criminal offenses occurring 
while soldiers are off duty, on leave, or a. w. o. 1. 
President Eisenhower once addressed himself to 
this important feature of the agreement. He said, 
in effect, that he believed servicemen deserved 
special treatment while carrying out their assign- 



ments but that, when these servicemen were on 
leave and were following personal interests, they 
should be subject to the same basic responsibilities 
as other citizens. 

Next, even if a serviceman is accused of an of- 
fense during his off-duty hours, United States au- 
thorities have the right to request local law en- 
forcement agencies to waive jurisdiction and turn 
the man over to the United States military com- 
manders for trial and punishment. The treaty 
provides that the local authorities shall give sym- 
pathetic consideration to such requests. As the 
representative of the Department of Defense will 
be prepared to testify, jurisdiction has been waived 
voluntarily in the overwhelming majority of cases. 

Finally, in those cases where the local authori- 
ties believe they must retain criminal jurisdiction, 
the Status of Forces Agreement guarantees cer- 
tain basic rights to the American serviceman. 
They are comparable to the safeguards which the 
serviceman would enjoy in a United States court 
martial. For example, he has the right to counsel. 
He has the right to confrontation by witnesses. 
He has the right to use of compulsory process for 
the purpose of obtaining witnesses in his own 
behalf. He has the right to contact United States 
military authorities. He has the right to have 
United States officials present at his trial when 
rules of the court permit, and in practice a United 
States representative has never been barred from 
the trial. Attorney General Brownell has testified 
that these provisions add up to "adequate safe- 
guards in accordance with civilized standards of 
justice." These and other rights would not neces- 
sarily be available if the Status of Forces Agree- 
ment did not exist. 

Results of the Agreement 

It has often been said that "the test of the 
pudding is in the eating." I think all of you are 
undoubtedly interested in knowing how the 
agreement has worked out in actual practice. The 
detailed information will be presented by the De- 
partment of Defense. However, I should like to 
summarize in general terms the results of the 
agreement thus far. 

In general, both the Department of State and 
the Department of Defense agree that the status- 
of-forces arrangements have worked unusually 
well. This view is supported by the commanders 
in the field. Some commanders apparently feel 



182 



Department of State Bulletin 



that the local courts have actually been too lenient 
on American offenders. As I have said, of the 
very small number who were sentenced to prison 
by a foreign court there was not a single case in 
which we have a clear feeling that a court martial 
would have given a lighter sentence than that im- 
posed by the local court. There was not a single 
case in which there was a basis for the United 
States to protest that the safeguards assured by 
the Status of Forces Agreement for a fair trial 
were not met, or that there was any other unfair- 
ness. There has been not a single instance of cruel 
or unusual punishment. A United States repre- 
sentative has been present at every one of the trials 
in these cases. 

Of the many American servicemen, military 
employees, and dependents sent abroad, where the 
Nato status-of -forces treaty applied, there have 
been approximately 6,000 cases which fell within 
the primary jurisdiction of the local courts. In 
some 70 percent of these cases the local authorities 
have either dropped the charges entirely or waived 
jurisdiction voluntarily and have surrendered the 
accused person to United States military authori- 
ties. In the very large majority of the cases 
where Americans have stood trials, the courts 
have either found the accused innocent or have 
only imposed a fine. Out of the many hundreds of 
thousands of service personnel abroad, out of a 
total of 6,000 cases, only 85 persons have been im- 
prisoned by local authorities in Nato countries, 
and, as of May 31, 1955, only 22 were actually in 
prison in these countries. Most of these sentences 
have been very short. The maximum sentence 
thus far imposed is 5 years for highway robbery 
with violence at night by two men against an old 
taxi driver. 

Offenses Arousing Strong Local Feeling 

You will note from the figures mentioned that 
local authorities have usually been quite willing to 
grant waivers of jurisdiction. In many instances, 
one might say, the cases for which we have been 
unable to obtain waivers and which have led to 
sentences of imprisonment have involved offenses 
arousing strong local feeling. Even in these cases, 
the courts have acted with moderation and have 
often been criticized for doing so. A British 
newspaper, for example, complained bitterly sev- 
eral months ago that an American soldier nor- 
mally gets fined 10 shillings for an offense which 



would cause a local citizen to spend 6 months in 
jail. I do not know whether this complaint is 
justified, but I mention it to illustrate that there 
are definitely two sides to this question. When 
an American soldier assaults, robs, or murders a 
local citizen, you have a political and emotional 
problem on your hands that is not too easy to settle 
unless it is handled in a spirit of justice and mutual 
understanding. 

I have concentrated on the Nato countries and 
the Nato Status of Forces Agreement because of 
the importance of Nato in our foreign policy, as 
well as because the resolution introduced in the 
House of ^Representatives also concentrated on the 
Nato status-of-forces treaty. In fact, there are 
more or less formal arrangements governing the 
status of our forces wherever they are stationed. 
Some of these agreements or arrangements must 
remain confidential. Let me explain. These ar- 
rangements are not classified at our request be- 
cause of any desire by the executive branch to keep 
something hidden. They are classified at the re- 
quest of the other governments involved largely 
because of the generosity of these arrangements to 
our forces. We could not, of course, reveal a clas- 
sified international agreement without the consent 
of the other party. Nor is it in our interest to 
publicize these favorable arrangements. To do 
so would jeopardize the arrangements and render 
it unlikely that our servicemen could continue to 
enjoy the benefits which they confer. We can 
assure the committee that the arrangements gen- 
erally have worked no less favorably to the inter- 
ests of our servicemen than the Nato Status of 
Forces Agreement. 

As to the experience in the non-NATO countries 
generally, the Department of Defense will be able 
to give you the figures and facts; in general, the 
experience is the same as or, in some cases, even 
better than in the Nato countries, both as regards 
the high percentage of waivers and the fairness of 
treatment. 

Civilians Seldom Have Immunity 

Questions have been raised before this com- 
mittee about the diplomatic status of State 
Department and other civilian officials. In the 
first place, it should be made clear that the great 
majority of State Department personnel overseas 
do not have immunity from local criminal juris- 
diction. On the contrary, most United States 



August 7, J955 



183 



civilian officers and employees abroad, including 
those of other governmental agencies as well as 
the State Department, have neither immunity nor 
the special guaranties provided United States 
servicemen by the Status of Forces Agreement. 
They are completely subject to local criminal 
jurisdiction, whether on duty or off duty. 

A small minority possesses diplomatic immu- 
nity by long custom and tradition. This im- 
munity is granted not for the advantage of the 
individual but for the benefit of the government 
he is representing, and the government can waive, 
and has waived, the immunity. And our diplo- 
matic personnel are often required to live and 
work in hostile lands where immunity is essential 
to their work and to their safety. This immunity 
is enjoyed by a small number of people who, in 
fact, represent their government, and military 
officers who represent the United States (e. g., our 
Maag [Military Assistance Advisory Group] 
officers) also enjoy diplomatic status. 

Incidentally, nobody has diplomatic immunity 
except in the country to which he is accredited. 
So, even Secretary Dulles does not strictly have 
diplomatic immunity when he is abroad, since he 
is not accredited to any of the governments. And 
even an ambassador has diplomatic immunity 
only where he is accredited, not when he is on 
vacation in another country. A diplomatic pass- 
port by itself gives no immunity from jurisdiction. 

Theoretical Alternatives 

As I see it, there are three theoretical alterna- 
tives suggested, or implied, by those who attack 
the treaty. None of them is good. 

First, we might try to revoke the treaty. Even 
if we were willing to ignore the solemn commit- 
ment undertaken by the United States with the 
overwhelming consent of the Senate, it should be 
clear that revocation of the agreement — or de- 
nouncing it — would not be an acceptable alterna- 
tive. Ke vocation or denunciation would merely 
leave foreign jurisdiction undiminished and re- 
move the guaranties now assured to an individual 
serviceman. I don't think anyone desires this 
result. 

The second alternative is to withdraw Ameri- 
can forces from Nato. This action would make 
no sense either in terms of our foreign policy or 
our national defense. It would play into the 
hands of the Communists and permit them to 



achieve one of their most eagerly sought objec- 
tives. It would gravely weaken Europe and 
gravely weaken our own security. I think it 
would be a catastrophe for free nations to wreck 
their entire system of collective defense simply 
because of their inability to agree on reasonable 
arrangements for handling an admittedly difficult 
legal and administrative problem. Nothing 
could do more to justify the ancient Communist 
theory that the free nations are incapable of long- 
term cooperation and will eventually be divided 
by conflicts among themselves. Nothing could do 
more to free the Soviet empire from the fear that 
any aggression on its part will be met by instan- 
taneous retaliation — a fear that has served as a 
powerful deterrent to Soviet aggression. 

The third alternative, of course, would be to try 
to negotiate a new agreement. Because of a wide- 
spread feeling in many areas that allied authori- 
ties have been excessively lenient toward Ameri- 
cans, political pressures might cause a new agree- 
ment to be considerably less favorable to United 
States servicemen. In any event, it can be safely 
predicted that a new agreement woidd not solve 
the fundamental problem posed by the critics of 
the present agreement — that allied governments 
would not surrender all criminal jurisdiction over 
American forces. For just a moment, let us look 
at this problem from their viewpoint. 

Our allies know, as we do, that the cold war may 
continue for a long time. We all hope that we will 
be able to maintain a collective defense system as 
long as the threat exists. Could sovereign gov- 
ernments permit United States armed forces to 
remain "above the law" — to constitute a sort of 
"state within a state" — for an indefinite period of 
time? 

As I have mentioned, these governments are 
already under attack for special treatment given 
to American servicemen. Their leaders are re- 
sponsible to the people just as ours are and are 
necessarily guided by similar political considera- 
tions. Would they be able to sign and secure 
ratification of a new agreement which would de- 
prive local law enforcement authorities of all 
power to deal with crimes committed by Ameri- 
cans within their communities? I think not. 

If American forces should be made completely 
immune to local jurisdiction, or even if this im- 
munity should be seriously proposed, we could be 
sure that the Communist propagandists would 



184 



Department of State Bulletin 



have a field day. Their phony claim that Ameri- 
can troops are "occupation forces" would be given 
color, and they would have vastly increased oppor- 
tunities to nourish and exploit resentments among 
the local population. 

Reciprocity 

We must also remember that this treaty pro- 
vides for reciprocity in the treatment of service- 
men. Countries other than the United States are 
concerned, and it is essential that the rules which 
apply to one nation should apply to all. While 
the number of Nato military personnel stationed 
in this country is comparatively small, it is doubt- 
ful that our federal and state governments would 
wish to surrender all criminal jurisdiction over 
these visitors. The Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee in recommending consent to ratifica- 
tion of the Nato Status of Forces Agreement 
agreed that the United States should not divest 
itself entirely of jurisdiction over foreign service- 
men in this country. 

Question of Sovereignty 

Finally, is it reasonable that any free nation 
demand that its allies surrender a fundamental 
aspect of their sovereignty as the price of co- 
operation? We Americans and other Western 
peoples have vigorously and justifiably criticized 
the Soviet Union for reducing the nations of East- 
ern Europe to the status of satellites. We do not 
expect our allies to be satellites. None of these 
countries would accept a satellite role. 

The Status of Forces Agreement goes to the very 
heart of American foreign policy. If American 
troops were not needed in Europe, the Status of 
Forces Agreement would not be necessary. In- 
stead the troops would be brought home. Further- 
more, if it were assumed that the Nato alliance is 
unimportant — that this country could get along 
without allies — no doubt the same conclusion 
would be reached. We recognize that our troops 
are in Europe to protect our own interests, that 
the alliance is vital to world peace and the survival 
of human freedom, and that we must work with 
our allies on the basis of equality and mutual re- 
spect. With that recognition the Status of Forces 
Agreement can be understood as a reasonable and 
intelligent effort to solve one of the inevitable 
problems of international partnership. 

August 1, 1955 

352555 — 55 3 



Treaty off Mutual Understanding 
and Cooperation With Panama 

Statement by Henry F. Holland 

Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs 1 

The Treaty of Mutual Understanding and Co- 
operation between the United States and Panama 
and the accompanying Memorandum of Under- 
standings Reached, both of which were signed at 
Panama City on January 25, 1955, 2 resulted from 
negotiations which were begun in September 1953 
at the request of Panama. 

The last revision of our treaty relations with 
Panama relating to the construction and opera- 
tion of the Panama Canal took the form of the 
General Treaty of March 2, 1936. While that 
treaty satisfied certain Panamanian aspirations 
which had grown up over the years since the orig- 
inal treaty of 1903, it failed to satisfy Panama's 
desire that its commerce share more fully in the 
benefits to be derived from the market in the 
Canal Zone and from ships transitting the 
Canal. However, local prosperity resulting from 
United States wartime expenditures in that region 
diminished the importance accorded these matters 
during the war and the immediate postwar period. 
As United States expenditures progressively 
tapered off in the postwar period and Panama 
began to encounter greater economic problems, 
these requests for greater commercial advantages 
were revived. Panama also took the position that 
it would be equitable to accord her a greater direct 
benefit from the Canal enterprise, in the form 
of increased annuity payments. 

Shortly after taking office in 1952, President 
Jose Antonio Remon Cantera announced his in- 
tention to seek United States agreement to a re- 
view of treaty relations pertaining to the Canal. 
In the spring of 1953 the United States agreed to 
embark upon such discussions, which were begun 
in Washington in September 1953, 3 on the basis of 
a list of requests presented by Panama. At this 
same time President Remon made a State visit to 
Washington, at the conclusion of which Presidents 
Eisenhower and Remon issued a joint statement 



1 Made before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 
on July 15 (press release 431). 

* For text of treaty and accompanying memorandum, 
together with announcement of the signing, see Bulletin 
of Feb. 7, 1955, p. 237. 

3 Ibid., Sept. 28, 1953, p. 418. 

185 



setting forth the principles which were to guide 
the subsequent negotiations. 4 The discussions 
continued in Washington until August 1954, at 
which time the Panamanian delegation returned 
to Panama to consult with their Government with 
regard to the positions expressed by the United 
States on the various Panamanian requests. Pres- 
ident Eisenhower then informed President Remon 
by letter of those matters on which the United 
States was prepared to take affirmative action and 
listed certain requests on the part of the United 
States which, taken together, formed the basis on 
which the United States was willing to formulate 
agreements. The Panamanian President indi- 
cated that his Government was disposed to pro- 
ceed to the drafting of agreements on the basis of 
President Eisenhower's communication, and 
drafting negotiations were begun in Panama in 
September. Final texts were agreed to in De- 
cember, and the signing of the official texts took 
place in Panama January 25, 1955. 

These negotiations, in all phases, were carried 
on in close consultation with the Department of 
Defense and the Governor of the Panama Canal 
Zone, as well as other agencies of the Government 
which were interested in certain of the matters 
under consideration. The agreements which are 
now before the Senate are supported by all the 
executive agencies whose respective areas of re- 
sponsibility are touched upon by provisions of the 
agreements. 

Development of Panamanian Economy 

In a general way, I would say to the committee 
that our consideration of the Panamanian pro- 
posals was based on most careful analysis and 
study of each individual problem. We adopted 
the general principle, in considering these pro- 
posals, that it was to the interest of the United 
States to assist Panama to develop its economy so 
that Panama will be less dependent on the Canal 
as such as a major source of income, so long as 
any arrangements in this regard would not con- 
flict with the essential interests of the United 
States and those of individuals resident in the 
Zone. It was possible to take a number of steps 
of this nature in the hope of building greater 
economic and political stability in this area so 
vital to us. On the other hand, Panama made a 

' Ibid., Oct. 12, 1953, p. 487. 



number of requests which, if accepted, might have 
weakened the jurisdictional position of the United 
States in the Canal Zone, or might have accorded 
Panama a special position in economic relations 
with the United States or required the United 
States to assume financial obligations in matters 
for which the United States was not prepared to 
accept responsibility. The United States could 
not favorably consider these requests. 

The United States, for its part, obtained certain 
concessions which are beneficial to the United 
States in the discharge of its responsibilities in 
the Canal Zone. 

A detailed analysis of the provisions of the 
agreements will be found in the memorandum of 
the Secretary of State to the President dated May 
5, 1955, which was transmitted to the Senate as 
an enclosure to the President's letter of May 9, 
1955. 5 In view of the Secretary's explanation of 
the provisions of the agreements set forth in his 
memorandum, it would be repetitious for me to 
go into the background of each provision in this 
presentation. These agreements cover such a wide 
range of subject matter, however, that I think it 
might be helpful to review with you some of their 
more important provisions. 

Increased Annuity to Panama 

Article I of the treaty provides for an increase 
in the annuity paid to Panama for our rights in 
the Canal Zone from the present $430,000 to 
$1,930,000. Panama's request for an increased 
annuity became the key issue in the negotiations. 
A mutually satisfactory resolution of this issue 
was indispensable to the successful conclusion of 
the negotiations and to bringing about greater 
harmony in relations between the two countries. 
It was felt that while no legal obligation existed 
an increase in the annuity was justified, bearing 
in mind the rights, powers, and privileges granted 
to the United States in the Zone and their stra- 
tegic and commercial value to the United States. 
The offer of an increased annuity was made con- 
ditional upon Panama's accepting language, in- 
serted in the preamble and in article I, designed to 
safeguard the rights and jurisdictional position 
of the United States in the Zone, This language 
provides express recognition that the provisions 
of the 1903 Convention, the 1936 General Treaty, 
and the present treaty may be modified only by 

' S. Exec. F, 84th Cong., 1st sess. 



186 



Department of State Bulletin 



mutual consent; and both parties recognize the 
absence of any obligation on the part of either 
party to alter the amount of the annuity. 

Article II of the treaty enables the Republic 
of Panama to levy income taxes on Panamanian 
citizens employed by Canal Zone agencies, irre- 
spective of their place of residence, and citizens 
of third countries so employed who reside in ter- 
ritory under the jurisdiction of Panama. United 
States citizens and members of the Armed Forces 
(irrespective of nationality) who are employed 
by Canal Zone agencies are exempt from Pana- 
manian income tax regardless of their place of 
residence. 

Panama has been precluded from such taxation 
by article X of the 1903 Convention. Our agree- 
ment to such taxation expresses a principle which 
is recognized in United States tax legislation that 
a government may impose taxes on its citizens 
wherever resident and on noncitizens who actually 
reside within its jurisdiction. Panama's request 
for permission to tax these categories of Canal 
Zone employees was agreed to since the present 
situation with respect to their taxation is con- 
sidered inequitable and to serve no real interest 
of the United States. It is provided that any such 
tax imposed by Panama shall be on a nondiscrimi- 
natory basis. 

Under article V of the treaty the United States 
agrees, subject to enactment of legislation by the 
United States Congress, to transfer to Panama 
certain lands, with improvements thereon, in ter- 
ritory under Panamanian jurisdiction and in the 
Canal Zone when and as determined by the United 
States to be no longer needed for United States 
Government purposes. This agreement accords 
with our policy of not retaining properties within 
Panamanian jurisdiction past the time when they 
are in fact required for Canal purposes. The 
lands and improvements to which this article re- 
fers, as well as the conditions governing the trans- 
fers, are set forth in item 2 of the Memorandum 
of Understandings Reached. 

In article VIII of the treaty Panama agrees to 
reserve an area of some 19,000 acres in the Rio 
Hato region for the exclusive use of the United 
States Armed Forces for maneuvers and military 
training for a period of 15 years, without cost to 
the United States, subject to extension as may be 
agreed by the two Governments. Panama also 
has agreed in the memorandum to lease to the 
United States for 99 years, for a nominal con- 



sideration, two parcels of land contiguous to the 
United States Embassy residence and to preserve 
permanently the area in front of the Embassy 
office building as a park. 

In article IX Panama waives its right under 
article XIX of the 1903 Convention to free trans- 
portation over the Panama Railroad for persons 
in its service, and in article X Panama waives 
certain rights under the 1903 Convention in order 
to enable the United States in its discretion to 
prohibit or restrict certain specified bus and truck 
traffic on a possible new strategic highway across 
the Isthmus within the Zone, in the event of the 
discontinuance of the Panama Railroad and the 
construction of the road. 

Several of the provisions in both the treaty and 
the memorandum were negotiated for the purpose 
of affording Panama greater commercial oppor- 
tunities in the Canal Zone subject, where deemed 
necessary, to appropriate competitive safeguards. 
I refer in this connection to article XII of the 
treaty and items 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the United 
States undertakings in the memorandum. Sub- 
ject to specified conditions and qualifications, we 
propose to exempt Panamanian products from the 
Buy American Act when purchased for use in the 
Zone; to withdraw from the business of selling 
supplies to ships in the Zone, with certain excep- 
tions; to withdraw service and commissary privi- 
leges and free import privileges from non-United 
States citizen Zone employees resident in Panama ; 
to afford the economy of Panama full opportunity 
to compete for purchases by Canal Zone agencies ; 
to import merchandise for resale in the Zone from 
either United States or Panamanian sources inso- 
far as feasible; and to withdraw from certain 
manufacturing and processing activities in the 
Zone. The conditions to which these items are 
subject are those deemed necessary for the pro- 
tection of the essential interests of this Govern- 
ment and of the residents of the Zone. 

Panamanian Labor 

Item 1 of the United States undertakings in 
the memorandum eanbodies certain agreements 
reached with respect to the employment of Pana- 
manian labor in the Zone. It was considered to 
be in the interest of the United States, not only in 
its relations with Panama but also in regard to 
its position throughout Latin America, to elimi- 
nate any appearance of discrimination in the treat- 



August 1, 1955 



187 



ment of such labor. Such a policy is in accord 
with the exchange of notes dated March 2, 1936, 
ancillary to the 1936 General Treaty and with the 
joint statement issued October 1, 1953, by the 
Presidents of the United States and Panama. 
Accordingly we have agreed, subject to the enact- 
ment of the necessary legislation by the Congress, 
to the establishment of a single basic wage level 
for all employees in a given category regardless 
of citizenship, with certain increments to be added 
to the pay of a United States citizen employee ; to 
uniform application of the Civil Service Retire- 
ment Act to all United States and Panamanian 
citizen employees of this Government in the Zone; 
to equality of opportunity for Panamanian citi- 
zens for employment in all United States Gov- 
ernment positions in the Zone for which they are 
qualified except where security considerations re- 
quire the employment of United States citizens 
only; and admission of Panamanian citizens to 
participation in job training programs. 

The executive branch considers that these agree- 
ments mark a step forward in our relations with 
Panama and that their approval is in the national 
interest. 

I, and other representatives of the interested 
executive agencies, will be happy to respond to 
any questions the committee may wish to ask 
regarding the agreements. 



Postponement of Hearings on 
Organization for Trade Cooperation 

White House press release dated July 15 

The White House on July 15 made public the 
following exchange of co-rrespondence between 
the President and Congressman Jere Cooper, 
Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means 
of the House of Representatives. 



President Eisenhower to Congressman Cooper 

July 15, 1955 
Dear Mr. Chairman : I appreciate your July 
fourteenth letter and readily understand your 
problem of arranging adequate Committee con- 
sideration of H. R. 5550 which would authorize 
U.S. membership in the Organization for Trade 
Cooperation. 1 



The Committee on Ways and Means has borne 
a heavy burden of difficult and constructive legis- 
lation in this session of Congress. Much of that 
constructive effort has been concerned with legis- 
lation implementing various parts of the Admin- 
istration's program in the field of foreign eco- 
nomic policy. 

More remains to be done in this field. As your 
letter indicates, and as we recently discussed in 
my office, the passage of H. R. 5550 is especially 
important. This legislation will do much to 
vouchsafe to the American people and the free 
world the gains which will accrue from continua- 
tion of the enlightened trade policy provided for 
in H. R. 1. To assure orderly consideration of 
trade problems arising between nations is vital to 
our own interests as a great trading nation and to 
the interests of those joined with us in the cause 
of freedom. This great purpose will be power- 
fully advanced by Congressional approval of the 
proposed Organization for Trade Cooperation. 

I share your view that it would be ill-advised to 
launch consideration of H. R. 5550 in your Com- 
mittee when so little time remains in this session. 
A matter of this vital importance should have 
thorough hearings, discussion and debate. 

The wise course of action, therefore, it seems to 
me, is the one you suggest in your letter. I am 
pleased indeed to have your assurance that H. R. 
5550 will be among the very first measures to be 
considered by your Committee next year. 

With kind regard, 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 

The Honorable Jere Cooper 
Chairman 

Committee on Ways and Means 
House of Representatives 
Washington, D. C. 



Congressman Cooper to President Eisenhower 

July 14, 1955 

Mt dear Mr. President : I am writing you in 
reference to your message 2 and our recent personal 
conversation relative to your request urging that 
the Congress enact legislation authorizing United 



1 For text of agreement on Organization for Trade 
Cooperation, see Bulletin of Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579. 

2 Ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p. 678. 



188 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



States membership in the Organization for Trade 
Cooperation. As you know, pursuant to your 
message I introduced H. R. 5550 on April 14, 1955, 
which would carry out your request. 

I agree with you that enactment of this legisla- 
tion is of vital importance to the continued ex- 
pansion of markets for our products abroad. I 
am more aware of this due to the fact that I was 
fortunate enough to have been chosen as one of 
the Members of the Congress to attend the meet- 
ings in Geneva last fall, when the participating 
countries in the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade were working out the proposals for the 
establishment of the Organization for Trade Co- 
operation. 

Due to the very heavy work load of our Com- 
mittee and the necessity for the enactment of legis- 
lation which you and your Administration have 
requested regarding laws in which time elements 
have been involved, as well as other legislation 
which our Committee has considered, it appears 
that there may not be time to give the full hear- 
ings and consideration to this subject which it de- 
serves before the adjournment of Congress. In 
planning ahead for our Committee activities 
around the first of July, I had listed hearings on 
H. R. 5550 tentatively to begin on July 13. How- 
ever, other Committee work demanded more of 
our Committee time than I had originally ex- 
pected. 

Due to the prospect of an early adjournment of 
the Congress and the necessity for ample notice 
for hearings on the Organization for Trade Co- 
operation legislation, it appears unlikely that 
proper notice and consideration could be given at 
this late date. Due to your so strongly urging 
enactment of this legislation, I would appreciate 
hearing from you your desire as to whether or not 
we should try to proceed on the Organization for 
Trade Cooperation legislation in the limited time 
which remains in this session of the Congress. 

I realize full well the extreme importance of this 
legislation from the international point of view, 
and it would be my intent, if you feel that full 
hearings and consideration is necessary on this 
legislation, to schedule it for consideration very 
early in the next session of the Congress. 

With my kindest personal regards and sincere 
best wishes, I am 

Very respectfully yours, 

Jere Cooper 



Agreement on Participation 
of Belgian Forces in Korea 

Press release 433 dated July 15 

Acting Secretary of State Herbert Hoover, Jr., 
and Baron Silvercruys, Ambassador of Belgium, 
on July 15 signed an agreement providing for the 
settlement of Belgium's obligations for the logis- 
tical support furnished by the United States to 
the Belgian forces participating in the U.N. col- 
lective action in Korea. The agreement provides 
for reimbursement by Belgium in dollars upon 
presentation of statements of account by the U.S. 
Government. 

The Belgian battalion arrived in Korea in 
January 1951 and was soon pressed into combat, 
where its gallantry contributed to the U.N. efforts 
in the fight against Communist aggression. The 
Belgian battalion together with the Luxembourg 
detachment received a U.S. Distinguished Unit 
Citation on November 1, 1951, for "outstanding 
performance of duty and extraordinary heroism 
in action against the enemy" on the Imjin River 
during the period April 20-26, 1951. The citation 
states: "The Belgian battalion and the Luxem- 
bourg detachment displayed such gallantry, de- 
termination, and esprit de corps in accomplish- 
ing their missions under extremely difficult and 
hazardous conditions as to set them apart and 
above other units participating in the action." 



TEXT OF AGREEMENT 

Agreement Between the Government of the United 
States of America and the Government of Belgium 
Concerning Participation of the Belgian Forces in 
United Nations Operations in Korea 

This Agreement between the Government of the United 
States of America (the executive agent of the United 
Nations Forces in Korea) and the Government of Belgium 
shall govern relationships in matters specified herein for 
forces furnished by the Government of Belgium for the 
operations under the Commanding General of the Armed 
Forces of the Member States of the United Nations in 
Korea (hereinafter referred to as "Commander") desig- 
nated by the Government of the United States of America 
pursuant to resolutions of United Nations Security 
Council of June 25, 1950, June 27, 1950, and July 7, 1950. 

ARTICLE 1 

The Government of the United States of America agrees 
to furnish the Belgian forces with available materials, 
supplies, services, and facilities which the Belgian forces 
will require for these operations, and which the Govern- 



August 1, 7955 



189 



meut of Belgium is unable to furnish. The Government 
of the United States of America and the Government of 
Belgium will maintain accounts of materials, supplies, 
services, and facilities furnished by the Government of the 
United States of America to the Government of Belgium, 
its forces, or agencies. Reimbursement for such materi- 
als, supplies, services, and facilities will be accomplished 
by the Government of Belgium upon presentation of state- 
ments of account by the Government of the United States 
of America. Such payment will be effected by the Govern- 
ment of Belgium in United States dollars. Issues of ma- 
terials and supplies to the Belgian forces will not operate 
to transfer title to the Government of Belgium in advance 
of reimbursement. 

ARTICLE 2 

Pursuant to Article 1, appropriate technical and admin- 
istrative arrangements will be concluded between author- 
ized representatives of the Government of the United 
States of America and authorized representatives of the 
Government of Belgium. 

ARTICLE 3 

Classified items, specialized items, or items in short sup- 
ply furnished to the Government of Belgium by the Gov- 
ernment of the United States of America will be returned 
to the Government of the United States of America upon 
request, as a credit against the cost of materials, supplies, 
and services previously furnished. If the Government of 
Belgium determines at the time of redeployment of its 
forces that materials er supplies received from the Gov- 
ernment of the United States of America hereunder are 
not desired for retention, such materials or supplies may 
be offered to the Government of the United States of Amer- 
ica and, if accepted, their residual value as determined by 
the Government of the United States of America will be 
used as a credit against reimbursement for materials, sup- 
plies, and services previously furnished. 

ARTICLE 4 

Each of the parties to this agreement agrees not to as- 
sert any claim against the other party for injury or death 
of members of its armed forces or for loss, damage, or 
destruction of its property or property of members of its 
armed forces caused in Korea by members of the armed 
forces of the other party. Claims of any other Govern- 
ment or its nationals against the Government or nationals 
of the Government of Belgium or vice versa shall be a 
matter for disposition between the Government of Belgium 
and such third government or its nationals. 

ARTICLE 5 

The Government of Belgium will maintain accounts of 
materials, supplies, services, and facilities furnished by 
other governments to personnel or agencies of the Gov- 
ernment of Belgium, either directly or through the Com- 
mander. Settlement of any claim arising as a result of 
the furnishing of such materials, supplies, services, and 
facilities to the Government of Belgium by such third 
governments, whether directly or through the Commander, 
shall be a matter for consideration between such third 
governments and the Government of Belgium. 



ARTICLE 6 

The requirements of the Belgian forces for Korean 
currency will be supplied under arrangements approved 
by the Commander; provided, however, that settlement 
of any obligation of the Government of Belgium for use 
of such currency will be a matter of consideration between 
the Government of Belgium and the competent authori- 
ties of Korea. If, with the approval of the Commander, 
personnel and agencies of the Government of Belgium use 
media of exchange other than Korean currency in Korea, 
obligations arising therefrom will be a matter for con- 
sideration and settlement between the Government of 
Belgium and the other concerned governments. 

ARTICLE 7 

The Government of Belgium agrees that all orders, 
directives, and policies of the Commander issued to the 
Belgian forces or its personnel shall be accepted and car- 
ried out by them as given and that in the event of dis- 
agreement with such orders, directives, or policies, for- 
mal protest may be presented subsequently. 

ARTICLE 8 

Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to affect 
existing agreements or arrangements between the parties 
for the furnishing of materials, supplies, services, or 
facilities. 

ARTICLE 9 

This agreement shall come into force upon the date of 
signature thereof, and shall apply to all materials, sup- 
plies, services, and facilities furnished or rendered on, 
before, or after that date, to all claims referred to in 
Article 4 arising on, before, or after that date, and to 
all technical and administrative arrangements concluded 
pursuant to Article 2 on, before, or after that date. 

In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly au- 
thorized by their respective governments, have signed this 
agreement. 

Done at Washington, in the English and French lan- 
guages, the two texts having equal authenticity, this 
fifteenth day of July, 1955. 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES 
OF AMERICA : 

Herbert Hoover Jr. 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF BELGIUM: 

SlLVERCRUTS 



Korea To Get 62 Used Streetcars 
as Part of U.S. Aid Program 

The International Cooperation Administration 
announced on July 1 that about 62 used American 
streetcars are to be purchased with U.S. aid funds 
and sent to Korea as part of a $900,000 rehabilita- 



190 



Department of State Bulletin 



tion of the street railway systems in Seoul and 
Pusan. The project will also include purchases 
of a wide variety of motors, generators, car shop 
equipment, parts, and other supplies needed to 
restore the Seoul and Pusan trolley systems. 

Seoul has 30 miles of streetcar track and 135 
serviceable streetcars, most of them from 30 to 
40 years old. This is half the number of cars 
operated before the Communist invasion of 1950, 
but the number of passengers carried daily still 
averages some 600,000 and is increasing. The 



street railway system is the principal means of 
transportation for Seoul's 2,000,000 population, 
and block-long queues of men, women, and chil- 
dren stand for long periods at trolley stops wait- 
ing to crowd onto the antiquated cars. 

Similar conditions exist in Pusan, a city of a 
million people, where 110,000 persons daily ride 
over 10 miles of tracks. Only 29 of Pusan's 79 
cars are operable on an average day. Seventy 
percent of Pusan's cars are at least 20 years old. 



U. N. Command Cites Violations of Korean Armistice Agreement 



Department of Defense press release dated July 11 

Following is the verbatim text of a statement 
made by Map Gen. Harlan C. Parks, USAF, 
Senior Member of the United Nations Command 
Military Armistice Commission, at the 60th meet- 
ing of the Military Armistice Commission held 
July 5, 1955: 

A concept basic to the establishment and main- 
tenance of the Armistice in Korea was that the 
balance which existed between the military forces 
of the opposing sides on July 27, 1953, would not 
be altered thereafter by the opposing command- 
ers through the introduction of reinforcing mili- 
tary personnel or combat materiel. Provisions 
for implementing this basic concept were clearly 
spelled out in detail in paragraph 13 of the Arm- 
istice Agreement. 1 

Shortly after the signing of the Armistice it 
became apparent to the United Nations Command 
that the Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteers were resorting to every pos- 
sible subterfuge to avoid compliance with the 
provisions of paragraphs 13 (c) and (d) of the 
Armistice Agreement. Whereas the United Na- 
tions Command submitted its first combat materiel 
and personnel report as prescribed in paragraphs 
13 (c) and (d) of the Armistice Agreement on 28 
July 1953, the day following the signing of the 
Armistice, it was not until 12 September 1953 that 

1 For the text of the Armistice Agreement, see Bulletin 
of Aug. 3, 1953, p. 132. 



your side submitted its first report of rotation 
personnel and not until 6 October 1953 that you 
submitted your first combat materiel report. 
Your first personnel report dated 12 September 
1953 instead of reflecting actual arrivals and de- 
partures merely listed 964 departures and no 
arrivals for the 24-hour period of 15-16 Septem- 
ber 1953. Apparently you would have the United 
Nations Command and Neutral Nations Super- 
visory Commission believe that from 28 July to 15 
September, with a military force exceeding 1,200,- 
000 men, the majority of whom came from Red 
China, not one soldier arrived or left Korea during 
that 7-week period. 

Your first combat materiel report of 6 October 
1953 reflected an outgoing shipment of four 57 
mm. anti-tank guns with 20 rounds of ammuni- 
tion, and it was not until 9 February 1954 that you 
submitted your first legitimate combat materiel 
report reflecting an incoming shipment — cover- 
ing one 37 mm. AA gun. Again, you would ap- 
parently have us believe that you could logistically 
support your huge military force in war-torn and 
ravaged North Korea for the entire first 6 months 
of the Armistice without a single incoming ship- 
ment. 

That the United Nations Command has contin- 
ued scrupulously to comply with provisions of 13 
(c) and (d) is reflected in the following figures 
taken from the official records covering the first 
year of the Armistice. From 27 July 1953, to 31 
July 1954, the United Nations Command submitted 



August 7, 1955 



191 



370 personnel reports covering 287,343 permanent 
arrivals and 362,122 departures. During this same 
period the Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteers side submitted only 42 reports 
covering the ridiculous figures of 12,748 permanent 
arrivals and 31,201 departures. 

The United Nations Command during this pe- 
riod submitted 1,057 combat materiel reports cov- 
ering the movement of 9,717 combat aircraft, 1,034 
armored vehicles, 194,385 weapons, and 386,828,087 
rounds of ammunition. 

The Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteer side, on the other hand, sub- 
mitted only 24 combat materiel reports covering 
the movement of zero combat aircraft, 14 armored 
vehicles, 1,848 weapons, and 746,500 rounds of 
ammunition. 

The United Nations Command established a sys- 
tem and procedures to insure that all incoming 
and outgoing combat materiel and personnel were 
shipped only through designated ports of entry 
and took necessary measures to facilitate free and 
open inspections of these shipments by the Neutral 
Nations inspection teams. The Korean People's 
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers, on the 
other hand, established no such system or proce- 
dures, failed to use your designated ports of entry, 
and resorted to every conceivable pretext to cir- 
cumvent the provisions of 13 (c) and (d). At- 
tempts by the Swiss and Swedish members of the 
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission to carry 
out their functions of inspection and observation 
were effectively blocked by the Czechs and Poles. 

Relative Merits of Inspection Systems 

The relative merits of the inspection system es- 
tablished in the South as compared with that 
established in the North was the subject of consid- 
erable discussion and deliberation by the Neutral 
Nations Supervisory Commission. 

In the 107th plenary session of the Neutral Na- 
tions Supervisory Commission on 23 February 
1954, General Wacker, the Senior Swiss Member, 
made these observations : 

In the South, rotation takes place every day and every 
hour in all ports of entry with the exception of one, 
whereas in the North some spare parts are shipped out 
once a month through one or two ports of entry and then 
introduced again a few weeks after. I have never heard 
anything about rotation of aircraft, armored vehicles, or 
even complete weapons and ammunition in the North. I 
think we have the right to ask ourselves how it is possible 



that an army counting several one hundred thousand sol- 
diers can be logisticaUy supported by the amount of mate- 
rial as shown by the figures which are being submitted to 
us. ... in the South the teams control ... all 
material being brought into Korea — a control which is be- 
ing carried out, thanks to documents submitted by the 
local authorities (load manifests, ship manifests) as well 
as by means of inspections on the spot. I emphasize the 
fact that in the South these documents and inspections 
concern non-combat material as well as combat material. 
In contrast to this, we find that in the North not more than 
two to four inspections of spare parts of war material have 
been carried out every month only in the ports of entry 
of Sinuiju and Manpo. 

General Mohn, the Senior Swedish Member of 
the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, ob- 
served that, 

Gradually the teams in the South secured an insight 
in the movements of all cargo in their respective ports 
of entry. The Polish and Czechoslovakian members of 
the teams were only too eager to inspect all sorts of 
goods which did not even remotely have any connection 
with combat material. They were not in the slightest 
embarrassed by the restrictive interpretation of the arm- 
istice agreement apparently held by their principals in 
Panmunjom. . . . Well, what happened in the North? 
As we all know, the teams in North Korea had to wait 
an unusually long time before they found anything to 
put their teeth in. They wandered about aimlessly in 
their ports of entry, not knowing exactly what to do. 

The airfield situation that existed in the terri- 
tory under your control at the time the Armistice 
Agreement was signed is well known by your side 
as well as ours. All airfields under the control of 
the Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteers had been under continuous 
attack and were inoperative. Photographs taken 
by the United Nations Command on 27 July 1953 
prove that on that date the Korean People's Army 
and the Chinese People's Volunteers had no Air 
Force and not one usable airfield. Our side has 
presented these official photographs to the Neutral 
Nations Supervisory Commission and the evidence 
disclosed by them has never been challenged or 
refuted. 

Within a few months after the Armistice 
Agreement was signed our radar surveillance de- 
tected continuously increasing jet aircraft activity 
in the territory occupied by the Korean People's 
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers side. 
Such radar detection was irrefutable proof of your 
violation of paragraph 13 (d). 

On 21 September 1953 this evidence was fur- 
ther confirmed when Senior Lieutenant Ro Kum 
Suk, a Korean People's Army and the Chinese 



192 



Department of State Bulletin 



People's Volunteers pilot officer who deserted 
from the Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteers side, landed at a Kepublic of 
Korea airport and surrendered a MIG-15 combat 
aircraft which had been illegally introduced into 
Korean People's Army and the Chinese People's 
Volunteers territory in defiance of paragraph 13 
(d) of the Armistice Agreement. This pilot 
offered irrefutable proof that from 27 July 1953 
until 21 September 1953 he was engaged in the air 
movement of MIG-15 aircraft. These combat 
planes were introduced into the territory under 
the military control of your side subsequent to 
the signing of the Armistice Agreement and in 
direct and willful violation thereof. This pilot 
had personally observed at least 80 combat air- 
craft that were brought into the territory of your 
side contrary to paragraph 13 (d). 



Series of Official Protests 

Faced by this serious development and possessed 
with irrefutable evidence, the United Nations 
Command, on 12 October 1953, lodged its first 
official protest against the Korean People's Army 
and the Chinese People's Volunteers for violating 
the provisions of paragraph 13 (d) of the Armis- 
tice Agreement by the illegal introduction of air- 
craft into the territory under your control. The 
United Nations Command requested the Neutral 
Nations Supervisory Commission to conduct an 
investigation on an airfield near Uiju, where such 
aircraft were definitely known to be located. De- 
spite the attempts of your Czech and Pole mem- 
bers on the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commis- 
sion to forestall this investigation, the Neutral 
Nations Supervisory Commission finally agreed to 
dispatch a mobile inspection team, but due to 
collusion between the Czech and Pole members 
of the mobile inspection team with the Korean 
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun- 
teers military representatives at the scene of the 
investigation, you were successful in thwarting 
any realistic investigation. Documents requested 
by the Swiss and Swede members of the team were 
refused on grounds that they were secret, requests 
by Swiss and Swede members to conduct inspec- 
tions at the railroad station and other shipping 
points around the Uiju airfield were denied, and 
visual observations of the Uiju airfield were care- 
fully restricted and controlled to insure that the 
team would observe no incriminating evidence. 



Based upon new and additional evidence of your 
continued secret Air Force build-up, on 9 Febru- 
ary 1954, the United Nations Command lodged 
its second official protest against your illegal in- 
troduction of combat aircraft. A letter was dis- 
patched to the Neutral Nations Supervisory Com- 
mission outlining our charges and requesting that 
mobile inspection teams be dispatched to conduct 
special observations, inspections, and investiga- 
tions at the following airfields: Pyong-Ni, 
Taechon, Pyongyang East, Uiju, Pyongyang 
Main, Sinuiju Northeast, Wonsan, Saamcham, 
and Sunan, as well as road and rail by-passes in 
the vicinity of the ports of entry of Sinuiju, 
Chongjin and Manpo. 

Although the Swiss and Swedish members of 
the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission were 
in favor of dispatching the requested mobile in- 
spection teams, the action was blocked by the veto 
power of your Polish and Czech comrades, and 
the investigation was thereby prevented. Previ- 
ously, General Bures, Czechoslovak, on 29 Janu- 
ary 1954, had summed up the attitudes always 
taken by the Czech and Polish members in regard 
to United Nations Command requests for inves- 
tigations when he said, "All accusations against 
the Korean People's Army and the Chinese Peo- 
ple's Volunteers side are nothing but groundless 
fabrications. . . ." Later, 10 February 1954, Colo- 
nel Bibrowski, Polish member, in speaking of a 
United Nations Command request for a mobile 
inspection team, states, "The Polish delegation 
cannot agree to consider such a request and in no 
case is it ready to comply with it." 

From the actions of your side and the actions 
of your unneutral Czech and Pole representation 
in the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission 
on this and the previous United Nations Command 
protest it became obvious that any realistic neutral 
inspection of your illegal activities was virtually 
impossible. Although the United Nations Com- 
mand was cognizant throughout the following 
year of your continued illegal Air Force build-up, 
it was not until you overtly employed your ille- 
gally amassed air power on 5 February 1955 by 
making an unprovoked attack against United Na- 
tions Command aircraft on a routine training mis- 
sion over international waters that the United 
Nations Command lodged another protest against 
your side. 2 

2 Ibid., Mar. 14, 1955, p. 426. 



August I, 1955 



193 



In the Military Armistice Commission negoti- 
ations on this incident you inadvertently admitted 
that your own MIG aircraft participated in this 
air battle. This admission constituted conclusive 
corroboration of your illegal introduction of com- 
bat aircraft, of not making the proper combat ma- 
teriel reports and of by-passing the designated 
ports of entry, all in violation of the Armistice 
Agreement. 

The third official protest against your illegal in- 
troduction of combat materiel was therefore made 
by the United Nations Command on 21 February 
1955. Again the complaint was spelled out in 
detail. 

The United Nations Command charges that the Korean 
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers have 
between the dates of 27 July 1953 and 5 February 1955 
introduced into the territory under the military control 
of their side combat aircraft of the MIG type, arms, and 
ammunition therefor, in excess of combat aircraft of 
the MIG type, arms, and ammunition therefor in the 
territory under the military control of the Korean People's 
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers side on 27 July 
1953, and have failed to report them in the prescribed 
manner and form to the Neutral Nations Supervisory 
Commission, in violation of paragraph 13 (d) and other 
provisions of the Armistice Agreement. 

Again the United Nations Command requested a 
mobile inspection team investigation of six air- 
fields where your illegally introduced MIG air- 
craft were known to be based. Again your Czech 
and Pole cohorts on the Neutral Nations Super- 
visory Commission ably represented your side and 
successfully stalled the dispatch of the mobile in- 
spection teams for one week, enabling you to fly 
your MIG's away from the bases to be investigated 
and otherwise remove or hide incriminating evi- 
dence. That most of your MIG's were flown out 
was irrefutably established by our radar surveil- 
lance. When the mobile inspection teams reached 
your airfields, every effort of the Swiss and Swede 
members to make full and impartial investigations 
was thwarted by the Czech and Polish members, 
just as they had thwarted the investigation of 
Uiju in October 1953. Although the official re- 
ports submitted by these teams reveal that at least 
88 MIG's were observed on those fields, the Czechs 
and Poles vetoed requests by the Swiss and Swedes 
for available documents which could have estab- 
lished the dates when those aircraft were brought 
into the territory under your control. It is sig- 
nificant to note that these documents were the 
same type documents that were freely offered by 



194 



the United Nations Command side to mobile in- 
spection teams operating in the South. 

On 10 May 1955 again your illegally introduced 
aircraft made an unprovoked attack against 
United Nations Command aircraft on a routine 
training mission over international waters. On 
13 May 1955 the United Nations Command lodged 
a strong letter of protest against the Korean 
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun- 
teers for this hostile act and for the fourth time 
charged your side with illegally introducing 
combat aircraft in violation of the Armistice 
Agreement. 3 

An analysis of the official reports submitted by 
the United Nations Command and the Korean 
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun- 
teers covering combat materiel shipments for the 
period 28 July 1953 to 31 May 1955, reflects the 
following : 

The United Nations Command has submitted 
1,969 combat materiel reports, covering movement 
of 16,141 combat aircraft, 2,492 armored vehicles, 
447,803 weapons, and 608,386,231 rounds of 
ammunition. 

The Korean People's Army and the Chinese 
People's Volunteers has submitted 162 combat ma- 
teriel reports, covering the movement of zero com- 
bat aircraft, 245 armored vehicles, 144,808 weap- 
ons, and 50,674,619 rounds of ammunition. I 
repeat, in the first 22 months of the Armistice, 
despite the fact that you have twice openly em- 
ployed your illegally acquired combat aircraft in 
large numbers in hostile and unwarranted attacks 
against the United Nations Command, your side 
has not yet submitted the report covering the 
movement of combat aircraft in or out of Korea. 



Evidence Provided by Defectors 

At approximately 1315 hours 21 June 1955, 
Senior Lieutenant Lee Un Yong, pilot, and 
Junior Lieutenant Lee In Son, navigator, both 
members of the Korean People's Armed Forces 
Air Force, after defecting from your side and 
leaving Pyongyang Main airfield, landed at Seoul 
airbase and surrendered a YAK-18 aircraft to our 
side. These men have also surrendered them- 
selves and have asked for asylum from the tyranny 
and abuse they suffered under your control. This 
has been granted. Moreover, they have offered to 



'Ibid., May 30, 1955, p. 891. 

Department of State Bulletin 



make their full contribution toward the defeat of 
your iniquitous conspiracy. 

Your side will recognize their names. They 
are men who have held positions of high trust 
and responsibility in your forces. Senior Lieu- 
tenant Lee, the pilot, had served 8 years and 6 
months in your armed forces. He graduated 
from the Air Academy in Chkalov, U. S. S. R., 
and the Air Officers' School in Yenchi, Man- 
churia. Your side has rewarded him with the 3d 
Class Order of the National Flag Medal, 2d Clas9 
Order of the National Flag Medal, 2d Class Free- 
dom and Independence Medal, Air Merit Medal. 
Senior Lieutenant Lee was a member of the 
Korean People's Armed Forces Air Force, 858th 
Independent Night-Bomber Regiment. 

Junior Lieutenant Lee In Son has served in 
your forces for 4 years and 9 months. His serv- 
ices have been rewarded by the presentation of 
the Merit Medal. He was a member of the 
Korean People's Armed Forces Air Force, 858th 
Independent Night-Bomber Regiment. 

Senior Lieutenant Lee, the pilot of the YAK-18 
aircraft, was stationed at Pyongyang Main air- 
field from July 1953 until September 1954 and 
again from February 1955 until 21 June 1955, 
the date of his defection. The navigator was at 
Pyongyang Main from July of 1953 until his 
defection with Senior Lieutenant Lee on 21 June 
1955. Both men had made frequent and regular 
flights to other principal bases used by your air 
forces. Consequently both men were well in- 
formed on the airfield development in North 
Korea, and the strength, composition, deployment, 
and operations of your illegally established Air 
Force. 

I now present you with the evidence provided 
freely and voluntarily to our 9ide by these two 
former members of your Air Force : 

1. The YAK-18 aircraft which Senior Lieu- 
tenant Lee and Junior Lieutenant Lee flew from 
Pyongyang Main to Seoul on 21 June 1955 bears 
serial number 8715. The YAK-18 is fitted with 
one under-wing bomb rack under each wing, and 
each rack is capable of carrying a 100 kilogram 
bomb. Senior Lieutenant Lee stated that while 
stationed at Antung, Manchuria, he flew aircraft 
of this type in night bombing combat operations 
from October 1951, to March 1952, and that he 
has flown 600 hours in this type of aircraft, of 
which 200 hours were in combat. The YAK-18 



in which the defectors came to Seoul is a combat 
aircraft as defined by the Military Armistice Com- 
mission ; it was brought to Korea in April, 1954, 
in direct violation of paragraph 13 (d) . 

2. Although we know, and our photographs 
taken on 27 July 1953 prove that at the time of 
the Armistice Agreement there were no airfields 
in the territory under your command capable of 
supporting combat aircraft, these defectors have 
stated that Uiju, Sunan, Sunchon, Pyongyang 
East (Mirin-Ni) and Onkong-Ni, have been re- 
stored to full operation and are supporting com- 
bat aircraft. Our radar tracks have verified the 
flying activity at these fields. The defectors also 
stated that more fields are being built to support 
the growing strength of the Korean People's 
Armed Forces Air Force. This is further evi- 
dence of your expanding Air Force strength. 

3. The two defectors were stationed at Pyong- 
yang in March, 1955 during the period mobile 
inspection teams 6, 7, and 8 were conducting their 
investigations. Senior Lieutenant Lee and 
Junior Lieutenant Lee provided specific informa- 
tion on steps your side took to remove, disguise 
and conceal incriminating evidence during the 
mobile inspection team investigations. Among 
the ruses employed by your side were the fol- 
lowing : 

A. Your side flew many combat aircraft away 
from the inspected airfields. 

B. Your side hid combat aircraft in ravines in 
the hills in the vicinity of the airfields and camou- 
flaged them. 

C. Your side dismantled some of the aircraft 
and concealed them. 

D. Your side stationed heavy guards about the 
hiding places and prevented inspection of these 
areas by the mobije inspection teams. 

E. Your side arbitrarily reduced the bound- 
aries of the airfields, thereby restricting the scope 
of the mobile inspection team inspection. 

F. Your side prepared false testimony by long, 
detailed coaching of probable witnesses and by 
substituting politically indoctrinated higher 
ranking officers for lower ranking officei-s by 
switching insignias. 

G. Your side delayed the assembly of newly 
arrived combat aircraft at Taechon by leaving 
them in their crates until the mobile inspection 
team investigations were completed. Senior Lieu- 
tenant Lee, who reads Russian, noticed the word- 



August J, 7955 



195 



ing "Kiev Aircraft Factory" on tags attached to 
one of his unit's combat aircraft. This aircraft's 
log book showed that the plane left the Russian 
factory in March 1955. 

4. The defectors have also stated that since the 
signing of the Armistice Agreement the illegal 
build-up of the Korean People's Armed Forces 
Air Force has been taking place, so that at the 
present time there are more than 300 combat air- 
craft, the majority of which are jet fighters of the 
MIG-15 type. This has also been confirmed by 
our radar and by the incidents where our aircraft 
have been attacked over international waters by 
Korean People's Armed Forces Air Force fighters. 

5. The two defectors confirmed the fact that the 
MIG-15 jet fighters, which attacked United Na- 
tions planes over international waters on the 5th 
of February, 1955, and on the 10th of May, 1955, 
flew from bases in the territory under the military 
control of your side, and that these MIG aircraft 
belonged to your air forces. 

List of Charges 

The information provided our side by your two 
most recent defectors merely served to confirm 
existing evidence and provide another link in the 
long chain the United Nations Command has con- 
structed to irrefutably prove your illegal Air 
Force build-up. 

I have presented to you today the official record 
of your continuous and numerous violations of 
paragraph 13 (d), paragraph 17, and other fun- 
damental provisions of the Armistice Agreement, 
throughout the Armistice period. It stands as 
monumental evidence to the United Nations Com- 
mand and the free world of your complete insin- 
cerity, dishonesty, and utter lack of integrity. 
The combat forces, and particularly the air forces, 
that you have built up illegally and covei-tly since 
the signing of the Armistice, constitute a grave 
situation which threatens seriously the very struc- 
ture and stability of the Armistice itself. 

The United Nations Command, at this time, 
lodges the strongest and most serious protest made 
against your side since the signing of the Armi- 
stice and charges that, through your willful, 
deliberate and illegal build-up of your combat 
forces, you have: 

1. Flagrantly violated every basic provision of 
the Armistice Agreement, including the spirit and 
intent of that document. 



2. Clearly demonstrated your aggressive intent 
of acquiring a favorable military position over 
the forces of the United Nations Command. 

The United Nations Command demands that: 

1. You provide the United Nations Command, 
without delay, an accurate accounting of all com- 
bat materiel and combat aircraft introduced into 
the territory of your side since the signing of the 
Armistice. 

2. You immediately provide the Neutral Na- 
tions Supervisory Commission with corrected 
combat materiel reports which reflect the mass of 
combat materiel and hundreds of aircraft you 
have illegally introduced into Korea. 

3. You cease immediately the illegal introduc- 
tion of additional combat materiel and combat 
aircraft into the territory of your side. 

We have listened since last summer to the 
soothing music of your peaceful propaganda and 
your expressions for a free and independent 
united Korea, while at the same time contending 
with your continued willful and flagrant viola- 
tions of the Armistice Agreement, your hostile 
and aggressive actions, and your murderous and 
inhumane atrocities. The time has come to de- 
mand that the powers who are directing your 
iniquitous activities start trying to reconcile your 
Dr. Jekyll with your Mr. Hyde. 

Guatemala To Receive More Corn 
To Help Meet Drought Shortage 

The International Cooperation Administration 
announced on July 7 that it is granting an addi- 
tional 12,300 tons of corn to Guatemala, bringing 
to approximately 30,000 tons the total authorized 
to help that country meet a critical shortage. 

The corn, the first of which was authorized in 
April, is being given to the Government of Guate- 
mala, which will sell it through normal channels. 
Local currency proceeds from this sale will be used 
for economic development projects which will 
complement Ica's regular technical cooperation 
programs in Guatemala. 

The corn is being granted to Guatemala under 
Title II, Public Law 480, through which surplus 
agricultural commodity stocks of the Commodity 
Credit Corporation are made available to friendly 
peoples faced with famine or other disaster re- 
quiring relief. 



196 



Department of State Bulletin 



Second Progress Report on the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act 



MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE CONGRESS 1 



To the Congress of the United States : 

I transmit herewith the second semiannual re- 
port of the President on the activities carried on 
under Public Law 480, 83d Congress, as required 
by that law. 

This report contains the details of the programs 
carried out under the act through June 30, 1955, 
including the volume and dollar value of com- 
modities agreed on as well as of those already 
shipped, together with the planned uses of the 
foreign currencies generated by sales. 

With experience under the act now running to 
some 10 months, a study is being initiated to 
analyze the whole problem of disposal of our agri- 
cultural surpluses. It will be the intent of this 
study to try to appraise objectively what the 
potentialities are for disposals of such surpluses 
within the framework of the legislative and execu- 
tive policies that are applicable to legislation such 
as Public Law 480. 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 

The White House, July 12, 1955 

Introduction 

The first progress report on the disposal of 
United States surplus agricultural commodities 
under the Agricultural Trade Development and 
Assistance Act of 1954 (Public Law 480, 83d 
Cong., 2d sess.) covered the first 6 months of fiscal 
year 1955. 2 This report deals with further de- 
velopments under the several Public Law 480 
programs during the last 6 months of fiscal year 
1955. 

As of June 30, 1955, a total of $1,200 million of 
commodities had been sold, distributed or com- 
mitted under the three titles of the act. Agree- 



1 H. Doc. 216, S4th Cong., 1st sess. ; transmitted on 
July 12. 
■ Bulletin of Jan. 31, 1955, p. 200. 



ments for the sale of surplus agricultural com- 
modities for foreign currencies under title I 
totaled $468.8 million at Ccc [Commodity Credit 
Corporation] cost. Shipments made or author- 
ized under title II of the act totaled $109 million 
at Ceo cost. Contracts negotiated for the ex- 
change of agricultural commodities for strategic 
or other materials under title III totaled $281 
million at export market value except for wheat 
exchanges registered under the International 
Wheat Agreement. Donations for domestic relief 
purposes and foreign relief purposes under this 
title amounted to $341.7 million at Ccc cost. Al- 
though the figures cited for the different programs 
are not strictly comparable, the total of $1,200 
million does give an indication of the volume of 
commodities moving or committed under these 
programs. 

Interagency Relationships 

Several agencies of the Government were as- 
signed responsibilities under the act by Executive 
Order 10560 issued September 9, 1954. 3 Primary 
responsibility for sales under title I and for pro- 
grams under title III rests with the Secretary of 
Agriculture. Responsibility for programs under 
title II of the act was vested in the Director of the 
Foreign Operations Administration. 

To assist the various agencies in carrying out 
their respective responsibilities, the Interagency 
Committee on Agricultural Surplus Disposal was 
established. This Committee, which is chaired by 
Mr. Clarence Francis, special consultant to the 
President, has been concerned primarily with the 
resolution of policy issues that developed in the 
course of program operations under Public Law 
480. Responsibility for coordinating operations 
has been vested in the Interagency Staff Commit- 

3 /&;<*., Oct. 4, 1954, p. 501. 



August 7, 7955 



197 



tee on Agricultural Surplus Disposal, established 
under the chairmanship of a representative of the 
Secretary of Agriculture. This Committee has 
held 65 meetings during the last fiscal year. The 
effectiveness of the cooperative efforts in these two 
Committees is illustrated by program results to 
this time. 



TITLE I OF PUBLIC LAW 480 

Agreements Signed 

Title I requires that formal agreements be en- 
tered into between the United States Government 
and the friendly foreign government concerned 
before commodities may be sold for foreign cur- 
rencies. When the first progress report was made 
to Congress on January 10, 1955, agreements had 
been signed with two countries — Turkey 4 and 
Yugoslavia. 5 A preliminary understanding had 
been reached with representatives of the Govern- 
ment of Japan for a large program, and active 
negotiations were underway with a number of 
additional countries. 

As of June 30, 1955, a total of 21 agreements had 
been signed with 17 foreign governments. The 
total value of these agreements at Ccc cost is 
approximately $468.8 million. 

A number of negotiations initiated last year 
have carried over into the current year involving 
an additional total of approximately $100 million 
at Ccc cost. Agreements with some of these coun- 
tries may be concluded shortly. In addition, a 
survey is being completed of other sales possibili- 
ties. Some of these involve potential agreements 
with countries with which agreements were con- 
cluded during the first year. 

As of June 30, 1955, somewhat less than one- 
third of the value of the commodities included in 
signed agreements had been exported. Most of 
the remaining commodities authorized under 
signed agreements are expected to be exported 
during the first quarter of the current fiscal year. 



Commodity Composition 

The commodity composition of agreements con- 
cluded through June 30, 1955, is as follows : 

'Ibid., Nov. 29, 1954, p. 814. 
' Ibid., Jan. 24, 1955, p. 138. 



Commodity 


Quantity 


Market value CCC 
cost (million dollars) 


Feed grains .... 


52.6 mil. bu . . . 
22.5 mil. bu. . . . 
2.2 mil. cwt. . 


93.0 
27.75 
14.7 
124. 15 
40. 1 
6.6 
22.2 


167.9 
40.7 
21. 4 


Dairy products . . 
Vegetable oils . . . 


647.2 thous. bales . 
61.8 mil. lbs. . . . 
52.2 mil. lbs. . . . 
149.4 mil. lbs . . . 


124.2 
40. 1 
10.4 
31.8 


Total commodi- 


328.5 
32.3 


436. 5 


ties. 
Ocean transporta- 
tion. 

Total, including 
ocean trans- 
portation. 




32. 3 






360.8 


468. 8 







It should be noted that approximately two- 
thirds of the value of programs authorized during 
the last year provided for the financing of export 
sales of two of our most burdensome surplus com- 
modities — wheat and cotton. These amounts 
equal about 25 percent of U.S. exports of wheat 
and about 17 percent of U.S. exports of cotton 
during 1954-55. 



Relationship to Usual Marketings 

Public Law 480 provides that sales of agricul- 
tural commodities for foreign currencies should 
be in addition to our usual marketings and should 
not be unduly disruptive of world market prices. 
In order to provide reasonable safeguards against 
displacement of usual United States marketings, 
appropriate assurances have been obtained from 
foreign governments. In addition, sales for 
foreign currency under title I have been made at 
the same price level at which these commodities 
were available for export sales for dollars. 

As used in this report Ccc cost represents the 
cost of commodities to Ccc, including investment, 
processing, and handling charges. Export mar- 
ket value reflects the price at which these com- 
modities are sold to foreign buyers under the pro- 
gram. The export market value figures are less 
than the Ccc cost for those commodities for which 
special export programs have been developed for 
dollar as well as foreign currency sales to meet 
competition in international trade. 

Ocean Transportation 

The total dollar cost of financing ocean trans- 
portation under agreements entered into with for- 
eign countries under title I is estimated at $32.3 



198 



Department of State Bulletin 



million. Reimbursement is required in foreign 
currencies for the ocean freight financed by the 
United States except for any amount by -which 
the cost of shipment on United States vessels re- 
quired under the law exceeds prevailing freight 
rates on foreign-flag vessels. 



Currency Uses 

The use of foreign currencies acquired through 
sales under title I are set forth in the sales agree- 
ments entered into with foreign governments. In 
the agreements signed with 17 countries, totaling 
approximately $360.8 million at export market 
value, 27.6 percent of the proceeds are scheduled 
to be used in payment of United States obligations 
in these countries. About 42.6 percent will be 
loaned to foreign governments to promote multi- 
lateral trade and economic development, and 20.4 
percent will be used to procure items for the com- 
mon defense of the United States and allied na- 



tions. For the agreements concluded as of June 
30, the dollar values of planned foreign currency 
uses under the eight categories authorized in sec- 
tion 104 of title I of the act are as follows : 





Million 
dollars 


Percent 


Market development (sec. 104 


8.2 


2.3 


(a)). 






Purchase of strategic material 


2.8 


0.8 


(sec. 104 (b)). 






Military procurement (sec. 104 


73.5 


20.4 


(c)). 






Purchase of goods for other 


13.2 


3.6 


countries (sec. 104 (d)). 






Grants for multilateral trade and 


7.5 


2. 1 


economic development (sec. 






104 (e)). 






Payment of U.S. obligations 


99.5 


27.6 


(sec. 104 (f)). 






Loans for multilateral trade and 


153. 17 


42.6 


economic development (sec. 






104 (g)). 






International educational ex- 


2.94 


0.8 


change (sec. 104 (h)). 






Total signed agreements 


360. 82 


100.0 



TABLE I 
Planned Uses op Foreign Currency Under Public Law 480 as op June 30, 1955 



Country 


Total amt. 
programed 
(Mkt. value 
lncl. O. T.) 


Market 
develop- 
ment l 


Purchase 

of 
strategic 
material 


Military 
procure- 
ment 


Purchase 
of goods 
for other 
countries 


Grants for 
multi. trade 
and 
economic 
develop- 
ment 


Payment 
of U.S. 
obliga- 
tions ' 


Loans for 
multi. trade 
and 
economio 
develop- 
ment 


Int. ed. 
exchange ' 






(.104 a) 


(104 b) 


(104 e) 


(104 d) 


(104 t) 


(104 n 


(104 S) 


(104 h) 


Signed agreements 


Million dollars 


Argentina 


5.8 

6. 1 

5.0 

5.3 

5.3 

14.3 

13. 

50.0 

85.0 

15. 

29. 4 

7.5 

21. 

2.0 

28.9 

15 2 


0.2 
0.2 
0.2 
0.2 
0.2 










3.0 
3.4 
0.5 
1.9 
4.8 
2.6 
1.8 
12.7 
17.25 
9.0 
2.9 
2. 
8.0 
1.0 
14.47 


2.3 
1.5 
4. 
3.0 

4. 2 ' 

7.4 
30.0 
59.5 


0.3 


0.8 








0.2 


Chile . 








0.3 












0.2 












0.3 










7.5 






0.3 

1.7 
2.0 






3. 1 

4.6 
5. 5 


0.4 


Italy 


1.0 




0.'75 






6.0 
14.5 






2.0 








10. 
5.5 

10.5 
0.8 

14.47 














1.0 
0.2 


1. 








0.5 


























* 15.2 
37.8 








52. 










14.2 




















Total signed agreements . 
Uses as percent of total .... 


360. 8 
100.0 


8.2 
2.3 


2.8 
0.8 


73.5 
20. 4 


13. 2 
3.6 


7.5 

2. 1 


99.5 
27.6 


153. 17 
42. 6 


2.95 
0.8 



1 Some agreements lump authorized currency uses, especially under section 104 (a), (f), and (h). Where estimates 
of distribution among the authorized uses are available, the estimate is shown under the specific section. Otherwise 
104 (f) may include sums which may be distributed over a number of U.S. uses. The amount shown for Yugoslavia 
covers unspecified U.S. uses. 

2 In return for this currency use, the U.K. Air Ministry will construct and make available to U.S. Armed Forces an 
equivalent value of dependent housing in the United Kingdom. 



August 7, 7955 



199 



Details of the schedule of planned currency uses 
are shown in table I. Loans for the promotion 
of multilateral trade and economic development 
authorized under section 104 (g) are the largest 
single planned use of foreign currencies under 
agreements signed through June 30. These loans 
are being made on the basis of standard terms. 
These terms provide for (1) denominating the 
loans in United States dollars, (2) an interest rate 
of 3 percent if repayment is made in dollars and a 
rate of 4 percent if repayment is made in foreign 
currency, (3) repayment of the principal within 
a period not in excess of 40 years. Actual repay- 
ment periods have varied between 9 and 40 years. 
In a few cases provision has been made for accept- 
ing strategic materials in repayment of the loan. 



Detail of Country Agreements 

On the following page is a tabulation showing 
for each country with which agreements have been 
concluded, the date of signing, the Ccc cost and the 
export market value of commodities included, the 
value of ocean transportation financed by Ccc, 
and the total cost of the program. 



CCC cost and Investment 
(/re millions of dollars) 

Danube flood 10. 2 

Austria 1. 9 

Czechoslovakia 1. 7 

Germany (Fed. Rep.) 1.0 

Germany ( Sov. Occ. ) 0. 7 

Hungary 2. 7 

Yugoslavia 2. 2 

Total 109.4 



TITLE III 

Sec. 302 — Domestic Donations 

During the current fiscal year, this authority has 
been used for donations to school-lunch programs, 
charitable institutions, and programs for relief of 
needy persons. In May 1955, 11 million children 
were being fed through the school lunch program, 
1.2 million persons in charitable institutions, and 
2.5 million in programs for relief of needy persons. 
The following table shows the estimated quantities 
distributed under this authority. 



Estimated Quantities of Surplus Foods Donated to 
Domestic Recipients Undee Public Law 480 Fiscal 
Tear 1955 



TITLE II COMMITMENTS 

Title II programs already authorized or under 
active consideration at the end of June 1955 ap- 
proximate $150 million. 

Shipments already authorized total $109 million 
including $81 million in grain, $15 million in fats, 
$5 million each of cotton and milk products, and 
$3 million dry beans. This compares with the total 
authorized by the end of December of $68 million. 
The programs include assistance to 15 countries, 
as well as a Christmas holiday program in 45 coun- 
tries. The $109 million of shipments made or 
under way is composed as follows : 



CCC cost and Investment 
(In millions of dollars) 

Yugoslavia 44. 5 

Bolivia 15. 2 

Christmas food packages (45 countries) .... 16. 7 

Pakistan 10.0 

Libya 4. 2 

Haiti 3.2 

Nepal 0. 2 

Italy 1.2 

Viet-Nam 0. 8 

Guatemala 3. 

Honduras 0. 2 



Commodity 


School 
lunches 


Chari- 
table 

institu- 
tions 


Needy 

Jll'l S«>I1.S 


Total 
millions 

of 
pounds 


Total in 
millions 
of dollars 




{Millions of 
pounds) 


cost 


Butter 

Cheese 

Nonfat dry milk . . 


41.0 
24.5 
18.0 


22. 8 
13. 8 
12.8 


28.2 
36.8 
41.4 


92.0 
75. 1 
72.2 


$64. 6 
37.0 
16.6 



Section 302 — Foreign Donations 

In the first semiannual report on foreign opera- 
tions under section 302 it was indicated that 
greater use would be made of agricultural com- 
modities for charitable purposes abroad this year 
than last year. Donations of commodities for dis- 
tribution to needy persons abroad this year are 
estimated at 568.7 million pounds. This is an in- 
crease of approximately 200 percent in volume as 
compared with the 183.9 million pounds which 
were donated for this purpose in fiscal year 1954. 
{Continued on page 202) 



200 



Department of Slate Bulletin 



Country 



Date signed 



Commodity composition 



Market value 



CCC cost 



(Thousands of dollars) 



Argentina . 



Austria 



Chile . 



Colombia 



4/25/55 



6/14/55 



1/27/55 



6/24/55 



Finland. 



Greece 



5/5/55 



6/24/55 



Israel. 



4/29/55 



Italy 



Japan 



5/23/55 



5/31/55 



Cotton