(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"

r^ 



7 



jw. 



4a£AJ!30 
















United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, 0300 

IGPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



DISARMAMENT 




The Intensified Effort, 1955-1958 





This 65-page pamphlet discusses U.S. efforts over the last 3 years 
to negotiate a sound disarmament agreement. 

The narrative begins with a brief summary of U.S. disarmament 
efforts during the decade of deadlock from 1945-55. This is followed 
by an account of evolving U.S. disarmament policy during the past 
3 years and of negotiations carried on within the U.N. Disarmament 
Commission and its Subcommittee. 

The pamphlet covers in detail the gradual development of U.S. 
policy from the President's "open skies" proposal at Geneva to the 
new approach presented at the 1957 London Disarmament Subcom- 
mittee meetings and the U.N. General Assembly. It discusses the 
long and intensive negotiations in London in 1957 and various 
proposals for a first stage agreement. It ends with a brief overall 
appraisal of accomplishments and prospects for the future. 



Publication 6676 



30 cents 



Order Form 

To: Supt. of Doe.umentR 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



$—- - .... 

(cash, cheek, or 
money order). 



For your convenience, the Order Form is printed below: 

ADDRESS ORDER FORM TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 

REMITTANCES, PAYABLE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

SHOULD ACCOMPANY ORDERS. 



Please send me copies of Disarmament — The Intensified Effort, 1955-1958 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 



DEPOSITORY 







Vol. XXXIX, No. 1006 



October 6, 1958 



PROBLEMS OF PFACE AND PROGRESS • Address by 

Secretary Dulles 525 

PRESIDENT EXPRESSES VIEWS ON MUTUAL SE- 
CURITY PROGRAM • Exchange of Letters Between 
President Eisenhower and Members oj Senate Committee 
on Foreign Relations 546 

INTERNATIONAL ORDER UNDER LAW o by Attorney 

General William P. Rogers 536 

PRINCIPAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRADE AGREE- 
MENTS EXTENSION ACT OF 1958 • Article by 

Selma G. Kallis 542 



For index see inside back cover 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1006 • Publication 6709 
October 6, 1958 



Boston Public Library 
Snper«n*"vW of Documents 

OCT 2 9 1958 



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 20, 1958). 

Note: Contonts 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 
pub'ic and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the 
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 
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 .he United States is or may 
become a party and treaties of gen- 
eral international interest. 

Publications of the Department, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



Problems of Peace and Progress 



Address by Secretary Didles x 



The United Nations, now in its 13th year, con- 
tinues to work constructively for peace and order. 
It has promoted the peaceful adjustment of sharp 
political differences. It has advanced the inde- 
pendence or self-government of peoples ready for 
such responsibilities. It has stimulated economic 
development and human betterment. 

But much remains to be done to reinforce peace 
and to hasten the progress that can then be 
achieved. 

I shall speak first of the problems of peace and 
then of the opportunities for progress. 

The Far East 

Let me first turn to the situation in the Taiwan 
(Formosa) Straits area. 

On August 23 the Chinese Communists sud- 
denly launched a heavy bombardment of the 
Quemoy Islands. The artillery was largely that 
supplied by the Soviet Union. Hundreds of 
thousands of shells rained down on those islands 
during the ensuing weeks, bringing death and de- 
struction, particularly to civilians. This cannon- 
ading was accompanied by attempted naval inter- 
diction of the islands and by calls to the 
defenders of the islands to surrender or be anni- 
hilated. 

There are, I know, in this situation many com- 
plicating factors. But there are two facts that 
are both undisputed and decisive. These are : 

1. The Chinese Communist regime has never 
during its 9 years of existence exercised any 



1 Made before the opening session of the 13th General 
Assembly at New York, N. Y., on Sept. 18 (press release 
543, revised as delivered). 



authority over Taiwan, the Penghus, or the Que- 
moy or Matsu Islands. 

2. The Chinese Communist regime is now at- 
tempting to extend its authority to these areas by 
the use of naked force. 

The issue is thus a simple one: armed conquest. 

In 1950 the United Nations met that issue 
squarely. By overwhelming vote it found that the 
attack of north Korea to "unify" Korea was armed 
aggression. It condemned the Chinese Commu- 
nist regime as an aggressor because of its part 
in that armed attack. 

I do not ignore the argument that todays Chi- 
nese Communist attack is a "civil war" operation. 
Mr. Vishinsky made a parallel argument in 1950. 
He told us that the war in Korea was purely a 
"civil war" and that outsiders who intervened 
were "aggressors." The United Nations over- 
whelmingly rejected that contention. 

Also I do not ignore the fact that the offshore 
islands are physically close to mainland China. 
But we can scarcely accept the view that nations 
are entitled to seize territory by force just because 
it is near at hand. 

The fact is that, when one regime attempts by 
force to take additional territory which has long 
been under the authority of another government, 
recognized as such by a respectable part of the 
world community, that is a use of force which 
endangers world order. 

The United States considers that Chinese Com- 
munist armed aggression poses a grave threat, with 
ominous implications. Surely it demonstrates 
again that the Chinese Communist regime is not 
"peace-loving" — to use the language of our 
charter. 



Ocfober 6, 7958 



525 



We hope that a peaceful solution can be found. 
Talks are going on between the United States and 
Chinese Communist Ambassadors in Warsaw. We 
seek a prompt cease-fire and equitable conditions 
which will eliminate provocations and leave for 
peaceful resolution the different claims and coun- 
terclaims that are involved. 

The United States reserves the right to bring 
this matter to the United Nations if it should seem 
that the bilateral talks between ambassadors are 
not going to succeed. 

Hungary and Germany 

I turn now to Hungary. There tragedy con- 
tinues. The whole civilized world is shocked by 
the cruel measures of terror and reprisal. The 
grim hangings of former Hungarian Premier 
Nagy and General Maleter were perpetrated in 
shameful secrecy, violated assurances of safe con- 
duct and no reprisals, and defied the resolutions of 
the United Nations General Assembly. 

Such reprisals are symptoms of a more basic 
crime — the continued brutal suppression of the 
Hungarian people by a puppet regime imposed 
by Soviet military power. 

The United Nations cannot let itself be dis- 
couraged because its past appeals have been ig- 
nored. Every government which believes in the 
principle of self-determination, in fundamental 
human rights, or in the protection of small nations 
has a solemn duty to continue to make its position 
unmistakably clear. 

The Soviet Government also defies all efforts to 
achieve the reunification of Germany in freedom. 
Members of the United Nations which believe in 
freedom and self-determination for Asia and 
Africa should equally support it in Eastern 
Europe. 

The Near East 

I turn now to the Near East. 

Just 3 weeks ago the General Assembly took 
unanimous action designed to ease a serious situ- 
ation in the Near East. 2 Significant agreement 
was reached on three crucial points. 

First, states should respect the freedom, in- 
dependence, and integrity of other states and 
avoid fomenting civil strife; 

Second, the United Nations should buttress this 
pledge of noninterference in the Near East; and 



Third, United Nations measures to insure the 
territorial integrity and independence of these 
countries would facilitate the early withdrawal 
of foreign troops from Lebanon and Jordan. 

It is significant that it was the Arab nations 
of the Near East which themselves developed the 
agreed formula. Thereby they assumed a major 
responsibility. If, through deeds, the words are 
given reality, there will be a new opportunity to 
promote political, economic, and social welfare 
in the area. 

We are somewhat, but not wholly, reassured by 
the course of events thus far. It has seemed 
practicable, in agreement with the President and 
President-elect of Lebanon, to withdraw a second 
contingent of United States forces. Also, the 
United States expects to discuss with the new 
President of Lebanon, soon after he takes office 
next Tuesday [September 23], a specific schedule 
for early withdrawal of the remaining American 
forces. 

Our able Secretary-General, who has just 
visited the area, will shortly make his report, and 
we hope that it will indicate that the objectives 
of our resolution are being given practical effect, 
so that a schedule for early withdrawal of forces 
can be carried out. 

Inflammatory Propaganda 

I turn now to a related proposal made by Presi- 
dent Eisenhower at the emergency special ses- 
sion — for monitoring of inflammatory propa- 
ganda. 3 

Inflammatory propaganda has been repeatedly 
condemned by this organization. Nevertheless, it 
persists. One of the contributory causes to recent 
tension in the Near East was broadcasts from 
certain countries, inciting peoples of other coun- 
tries to violent acts against the established order. 

It is our conviction that measures can be taken 
by the United Nations which will discourage such 
broadcasts. This would reinforce the solemn com- 
mitment of states in the Near East to "respect the 
systems of government established in the other 
member States and regard them as exclusive con- 
cerns of these States." 4 

One possibility is a United Nations monitoring 
system for radio broadcasts, from whatever 



2 Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1958, p. 409. 
526 



' Ibid., Sept. 1, 1958, p. 337. 

4 For text of U.N. resolution, see ibid., Sept. 15, 1958, 
p. 411. 

Department of State Bulletin 



source, crossing national borders in the- Near East. 
Such a system could have a salutary effect. If 
propagandists realized their words are being 
heard in this forum of the world, and being re- 
corded here for future action, they might exercise 
moderation. 

I hope this Assembly will consider this problem. 

United Nations Peace Force 

Another matter before this session of the Gen- 
eral Assembly is the possible creation of a stand- 
by United Nations Peace Force. This was urged 
by President Eisenhower when he addressed us 
last month. , 

The United States suggests the following points 
for consideration : 

1. We conceive of the "Peace Force" not as a 
combat force, but rather as a group that would 
observe and patrol, and by its very presence make 
visible the interest of the world community in the 
maintenance of tranquillity. Also, we believe 
that members other than the permanent members 
of the Security Council can most usefully con- 
tribute, personnel. 

2. A small planning staff might be created 
within the Secretariat to develop standby plans 
for calling into being, deploying, and supporting 
such a Peace Force. 

3. The planning staff could develop concrete 
arrangements so that a United Nations decision 
to employ such a Peace Force could be promptly 
implemented. 

4. The costs of the standby arrangements en- 
visaged should be kept small, and that should 
be possible if there is no force-in-being to be 
maintained. 

These arrangements should make it possible to 
bring together on short notice a United Nations 
group to meet a need which has become evident 
over recent years. They would be an important 
bulwark of the pacific settlement objectives of 
our charter. 

Disarmament 

I turn now to measures which will advance hu- 
man progress as well as the cause of peace. Most 
important is arms control to reduce the risk of 
war and the cost of being ready for it. Today 
colossal sums which could be devoted to human 
betterment go into armament. 



In past months there has been a significant 
breakthrough on the arms control front. The 
United States has long urged that verification 
techniques were essential to any disarmament by 
agreement, We believe that governments must 
have a clear understanding of the practical capa- 
bilities of a verification system. The Soviet 
Union apparently has finally recognized this prin- 
ciple in connection with a possible arrangement 
to suspend the testing of nuclear weapons. 

A technical consensus as to the necessary moni- 
toring system has been reached by qualified ex- 
perts of different nations. We hope now to be- 
gin to negotiate at Geneva a substantive agree- 
ment. 6 We do this in expectation that further 
arms control arrangements will shortly come into 
effect, 

The General Assembly may desire, by appro- 
priate resolution, to give encouragement to the 
forthcoming negotiations. 

The best, hope for progress in arms control now 
seems to rest in taking moderate but concrete 
steps to reduce the dangers of war. 

I recall that, some months ago, the Soviet 
Union complained in the Security Council of Arc- 
tic flights of United States military aircraft. The 
United States, denying that any such flights had 
occurred, proposed the establishment of an inspec- 
tion zone in the polar regions. 7 Such a zone 
would increase security because it would lessen 
the possibility of great surprise attack across the 
top of the world. This beneficial proposal re- 
ceived wide acclaim, and the world was shocked 
when it was vetoed by the Soviet Union. 

In any event we will continue to press for world- 
wide measures to reduce the dangers of surprise 
attack. There is now a prospect that technical 
talks in this field may start in Geneva in 
November. 



Economic Development 

I turn now to economic development, 
President Eisenhower at the recent emergency 
special session made a significant proposal look- 



' For text of the final report of the conference of ex- 
perts studying methods of detecting violations of a pos- 
sible agreement on the suspension of nuclear tests, made 
public at Geneva Aug. 30, see ibid., Sept. 22, 1958, p. 453. 

" For an exchange of notes with the Soviet Union, see 
ibid,, Sept. 29, 1958, p. 503. 

'Ibid., May 12, 1958, p. 760, and May 19, 1958, p. 816. 



October 6, 1958 



527 



ing to more rapid economic growth in the Near 
East. The United States hopes that conditions 
in that area will lead to the effective fulfillment 
of that proposal. 

Economic development is, of course, an aspira- 
tion shared by all peoples. In the newly inde- 
pendent nations, and indeed in many long 
independent, there is a burning desire for eco- 
nomic and social progress, for higher levels of 
living, for freedom from the slavery of poverty. 

Much has been accomplished already. The 
American people admire the vigorous efforts of 
the leaders and the peoples of less developed 
countries to help themselves. Yet much remains 
to be done. 

The United States believes the time has come 
for the nations of the world to take stock of ac- 
complishments to date and to chart anew long- 
term courses of cooperative action. We propose 
that the nations dedicate the year 1959 to these 
purposes. 

Let me mention some of the major steps that 
the United States would be prepared to take or 
support in the coming year, subject to action by 
Congress as appropriate : 

1. The United States will carry forward its ex- 
isting development financing programs on a vig- 
orous and effective basis. 

2. The United States will undertake increased 
efforts to emphasize the constructive role that 
private initiative can play in economic develop- 
ment. We hope that other nations will also ex- 
plore these important potentialities. 

3. The United States will consider how we 
might cooperate with regional development pro- 
grams, where desired by the countries of the re- 
gion. The wish for a regional approach should 
be clearly manifested and supported by the gov- 
ernments of the areas concerned, and there should 
be evidence that a regional approach has advan- 
tage over a bilateral approach. 

4. The United States will suggest that consid- 
eration be given to the advisability of increasing 
the capital of the World Bank and the quotas 
of the International Monetary Fund. 

5. The United States is prepared to consider 
the feasibility of creating an International De- 
velopment Association, as an affiliate of the World 
Bank, under conditions likely to assure broad and 
effective support. 



6. The United States is ready to provide vigor- 
ous support for technical assistance. It will do so 
through its own programs, through the Expanded 
Technical Assistance Program of the United Na- 
tions, and through a substantial initial contribu- 
tion to its new Special Projects Fund. This will 
greatly enlarge the technical assistance activity 
of the United Nations. 

7. The United States will enlist the assistance of 
our universities and scientific institutions, joining 
with those of other cooperating countries, to 
achieve scientific and technological breakthroughs 
on problems of particular concern to less de- 
veloped countries. 

8. The President will seek funds from the Con- 
gress for health programs. 

We hope that other countries may, during the 
coming year, also chart long-term programs to 
assist economic growth. In thus paving the way 
for sound, continuing action by many countries, 
1959 could become a year of outstanding initiative 
in the long-term process of economic growth. 

The great challenge of poverty and disease can 
only be met through vigorous realistic action. 
The United States stands ready to play its full 
part in this great peaceful crusade. 

The major obstacle to maximum economic de- 
velopment is the ever-present danger of direct or 
indirect aggression and the consequent stagger- 
ing cost of armament and of collective security. 
Wienever there is an outburst of military activ- 
ity, as now in the Taiwan Straits, that is a set- 
back, not merely to peace but to economic progress. 

The United States feels obligated to devote to 
defense programs some $45 billion a year, and 
that will lead us, this year, into a large budgetary 
deficit. Despite this fact we are determined to 
move forward in this field of international eco- 
nomic development. 

Outer Space 

Major strides in man's conquest of his newest 
and most exciting frontier, outer space, have 
taken place in the past year. How shall outer 
space be used? That is of intense interest and 
importance to all mankind. We must make every 
effort to dedicate outer space exclusively to con- 
structive pursuits. 

To this end the United States, in January 1957, 



528 



Department of State Bulletin 



proposed that interested countries seek to develop 
an international system. s We recognize that 
the problems involved in establishing such a sys- 
tem are very complex. We cannot await a com- 
prehensive disarmament agreement. Meaningful 
steps can now be taken at least to assure that the 
exploitation of outer space results in maximum 
benefit to humanity. 

Ten precious years were lost in the development 
of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy before full 
international cooperation was begun. We cannot 
afford a similar delay in this vast new dimension 
of human experience which offers perhaps an even 
greater challenge and opportunity than the split- 
ting of the atom. 

The United States believes that the United Na- 
tions should take immediate steps to prepare for 
a fruitful program of international cooperation 
in the peaceful uses of outer space. We suggest 
that a representative committee be established 
to make the necessary preparatory studies and 
recommendations. 

The United States is submitting to the Assem- 
bly a resolution with the following significant 
operative paragraph : 

The General Assembly: 

1. Establishes an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of 
and requests it to report to the Fourteenth 



General Assembly on the following : 

(a) The activities and resources of the United Nations 
and its specialized agencies relating to outer space ; 

(b) the nature of specific projects of international co- 
operation in outer space which could be undertaken 
under United Nations auspices; 

(c) useful United Nations organizational arrange- 
ments to facilitate international cooperation in this field. 

The United States hopes that this resolution 
will find unanimous approval. As we reach be- 
yond this planet, we should move as truly "united 
nations." 



Double Standards 

I have discussed some of the current problems 
now confronting this Assembly. I should like now 
to refer to a major concern of the United States 
which stems from the fact that our membership 
seems sharply divided in its attitude toward this 
organization. 



Most members look upon the United Nations as 
a means to promote world order, and they are 
willing to adapt their national policies to this 
great goal. But there are a potent few who parti- 
cipate in the United Nations only as it gives them 
an opportunity for maneuvers which will advance 
their own narrow nationalistic purposes even at 
the expense of world order. Otherwise they flout 
the United Nations. 

In the Security Council 85 vetoes have been cast 
by one of the permanent members. In most of 
these cases the veto vote was the only negative 
vote and the vetoed proposal was objected to only 
because it would have interfered with some am- 
bitious objective, of the state in question. 

It is difficult to reconcile that conduct with the 
spirit of our charter. 

In the General Assembly there is a similar pat- 
tern. Most of the governments represented here 
give great weight to the recommendations of this 
Assembly. But there are others which defy those 
recommendations whenever they interfere with 
national policies. Hungary is an example. 

In consequence of this there is no uniformity 
in the acceptance and application of our charter 
and our processes. There are tw T o different stand- 
ards of conduct. 

The United States believes that this double 
standard is incompatible with the basic purposes 
of our organization. It poses a challenge which 
we shall have to meet. 

A related concern is the apparent reluctance of 
some nations to support those basic principles of 
the charter which outlaw aggression, direct or in- 
direct. Our charter by the first paragraph of the 
first article calls for "suppression of acts of ag- 
gression or other breaches of the peace." This 
represents international law that all should recog- 
nize and all should seek to enforce. 

After World War I the United States, like 
others, failed adequately to support world order. 
But during World War II and ever since, the 
United States has strongly supported that con- 
cept. 

President Truman, speaking in April 1951, said 
"If history has taught us anything, it is that ag- 
gression anywhere in the world is a threat to 
peace everywhere in the world." 9 And President 



' Ibid., Feb. 11. 1957, p. 225. 
Ocfober 6, 7 958 



1 Ibid., Apr. 16, 1951, p. G03. 



529 



Eisenhower, speaking last week, called upon us 
to "defend the principle that armed force shall 
not be used for aggressive purposes. Upon ob- 
servance of that principle," he said, "depends a 
lasting and just peace." 10 

But the teachings of history tend to be for- 
gotten. There is some evidence that we are for- 
getting them here. We have our charter and our 
implementing resolutions. These, when adopted, 
clearly represented the will of the world commu- 
nity, which this organization was prepared vigor- 
ously to support. But is that still the case? If 
not, that would mark the beginning of the end of 
this organization and its effort to achieve world 
order and world peace. 

The United States as one of the great powers 
continues to stand ready to dedicate that power to 
world order. That is an asset which I suggest 
ought not lightly to be thrown away. 

Conclusion 

The future of the United Nations and indeed 
the prospect for the successful building of a 
peaceful world depend upon the way in which 
all of us here in this Assembly discharge the 
solemn obligations of the charter. We have the 
two great purposes which I have discussed; 
namely, the maintenance of a just peace and the 
development of human betterment in the world. 

We need to see more clearly that progress in 
raising living standards and in extending free- 
doms around the world is being held back because 
of aggressions engineered to advance the expan- 
sionist urges of certain countries. The treasures 
and energies of the nations are largely being di- 
rected into a tragic and vain search for armed 
security in a world in which aggression is not 
yet effectively outlawed. Every aggression is not 
only a threat to the fragile barrier that stands 
between us and general nuclear war but also 
another setback for the aspirations of mankind. 

May we not hope that, if the minds and efforts 
of governments concentrate more fully upon the 
welfare of their own peoples and creative tasks 
of universal import, the issues that divide the 
world may fade away and the cold war become 
a thing of the past. 



' Ibid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 481. 



U.S. Rejects Soviet Note 
on Far East Situation 

Following are the texts of two statements re- 
leased by the White House at Newport, R. /., on 
September £0. 

First Statement 

President Eisenhower received this morning 
[September 20] from the United States Embassy 
in Moscow text of a lengthy communication from 
Chairman Khrushchev regarding the Far Eastern 
situation. 

This communication is replete with false accusa- 
tions ; it is couched in language that is abusive and 
intemperate; it indulges in personalities; it con- 
tains inadmissible threats. All of this renders the 
communication unacceptable under established in- 
ternational practice. 

Accordingly, it has been rejected and the United 
States Charge dAffaires in Moscow has been in- 
structed to return the communication to the Soviet 
Government. 

Second Statement 

The letter from Chairman Khrushchev which 
the President has rejected dealt with the serious 
situation that has developed in the area of Taiwan 
(Formosa) since the Chinese Communists, on Au- 
gust 23, began their armed attack. Mr. Khrush- 
chev demanded that the United States fleet and 
armed forces should at once withdraw from Tai- 
wan (Formosa) and neighboring waters and "go 
home." He said that unless this were done, the 
Chinese Communists, with the support of the 
Soviet Union, would have no choice except "the 
expulsion" of United States forces. 

It is tragic that Soviet military despotism 
should support the use of force to achieve expan- 
sionist ends. 

The charter of the United Nations requires that 
the nations shall settle their disputes by "peaceful 
means." The United States stands ready to do 
that and indeed is now seeking a peaceful solution 
through ambassadorial talks at AVarsaw. But it 
is not easy to negotiate under such threats as the 
Soviet Union now makes. We deeply deplore the 
use of such threats. 



530 



Department of State Bulletin 



The United States considers the Soviet view- 
point to be grotesque and dangerous. Indeed 
only in an "upside down" world could it be argued 
that it is "aggression" when the United States 
cooperates with a friendly government purely for 
defense but that it is "peace" for the Soviet Union 
to pledge its support to the Chinese Communist 
regime in its effort to acquire by armed force ter- 
ritory over which it has never exercised authority. 



United States Seeks Information 
on Missing Airmen 

DEPARTMENT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 12 

Press release 534 dated September 12 

On September 6, 1958 the United States Gov- 
ernment in a note to the Soviet Government l 
requested any available information concerning 
an unarmed United States Air Force C-130 trans- 
port plane, carrying a crew of seventeen men, 
which had disappeared on September 2, 1958, dur- 
ing a flight within Turkey from Adana to Trab- 
zon to Van and back to Adana. 

The Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs in- 
formed the American Embassy at Moscow today 
that the remnants of a destroyed and burned air- 
plane have been found at a point fifty-five kilo- 
meters northwest of Yerevan, the capital of the 
Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, and that 
judging by remains discovered there it may be 
assumed that six of the members of the crew 
perished. 

The Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs further 
declared that there was no doubt that the airplane 
belongs to the United States Air Force. It al- 
leged that the aircraft had penetrated for a sig- 
nificant distance into Soviet air space and had 
fallen within Soviet territory, and had thus in- 
tentionally violated the Soviet border. The Min- 
istry protested this alleged border violation and 
referred to previous Soviet protests regarding 
alleged similar past incidents. 

Charge d' Affaires of the United States at Mos- 
cow Richard H. Davis pressed the Ministry for 
information about the eleven men unaccounted 



for. The Ministry did not provide further in- 
formation on this point. The Charge d'Affaires 
requested that a further search for the missing 
men be made, that an Embassy officer or other 
United States official be allowed to visit the site 
of the crash, and that arrangements be made to 
transfer to United States authorities the remains 
of the six crew members. 

The investigation conducted by the United 
States Air Force in Europe (USAFE) has 
elicited information to the effect that an aircraft 
identified as a C-130 was intercepted at about 
2 : 00 P. M. on September 2 by fighter planes in 
the area of the Turkish- Soviet border near Kars. 
The course of the C-130 was then directed east- 
ward under control of the Soviet aircraft. Fol- 
lowing this the sound of an explosion was heard 
and a column of smoke was seen rising from be- 
hind a range of hills within Soviet territory. 

Instructions are being sent to the American 
Embassy at Moscow to press the Soviet Govern- 
ment on an urgent basis to locate and return the 
eleven members of the crew not accounted for. 



U.S. NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 13 

The Embassy of the United States of America presents 
its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and has the honor 
to refer to the Ministry's note No. 520SA of September 
12, 1958, 2 in reply to the Embassy's note No. 252 of Sep- 
tember 6, 1958, and to communicate the following on in- 
structions from its Government : 

The Soviet note states that the wreckage of a burned 
and destroyed American Air Force plane has been found 
55 kilometers northwest of the city of Yerevan, and that 
the bodies of six members of the crew have been discov- 
ered at the spot. The Ministry was informed in the 
Embassy's note of September 6 that the crew of the plane 
totalled 17 persons but no mention is made of the where- 
abouts or fate of the remaining eleven crewmen. Infor- 
mation as to their whereabouts and condition is urgently 
requested. If these men have not been located, it is 
requested that every effort be made to find them. The 
United States Government expects full cooperation from 
the Soviet Government in granting access to the crewmen 
in the custody of the Soviet authorities and in returning 
them at the earliest possible moment. 

The Ministry's note does not identify the bodies found 
with the wrecked plane. The United States Government 
requests that representatives of the Embassy accompa- 
nied by such technical experts as may be required to in- 
vestigate the circumstances of the crash be permitted 



1 For text, see Bulletin of Sept. 29, 1958, p. 505. 



1 Not printed here. 



October 6, 7 958 



531 



to visit the scene of the crash of this plane, and that 
facilities be extended to them for effecting identification 
of the victims of the crash and arranging for the trans- 
fer of their remains to appropriate United States author- 
ities. 

There is no foundation for the charge contained in the 
Soviet note that the C-130 aircraft intentionally violated 
the frontier of the Soviet Union and the United States 
Government rejects the Soviet Government's protest in 
this regard. The United States Government does not 
understand either earlier oral denials of any knowledge 
of this incident made by an official of the Ministry or the 
delay in furnishing the United States Government with 
the limited information contained in the note of Septem- 
ber 12, in view of the involvement of Soviet armed forces 
in this incident. The investigation conducted by the 
United States Air Force in Europe (USAFB) in connec- 
tion with the disappearance of this plane has elicited 
information to the effect that it was intercepted by three 
Soviet fighter aircraft at about 2 : 00 p. m. September 2, 
1958, in the region of the Turkish-Soviet frontier near 
Kars, and that following interception the American plane 
proceeded eastward under control of the Soviet aircraft. 
Shortly after this an explosion was heard and a large 
column of smoke was observed rising at a point within 
Soviet territory. 

The United States Government emphasizes that the 
missing C-130 aircraft was an unarmed transport air- 
craft clearly marked and operating on an instrument 
flight plan duly filed in advance in accordance with the 
regulations of the International Civil Aviation Organi- 
zation. As the Government of the Union of Soviet So- 
cialist Republics is aware, it is recognized international 
custom when intercepting an unarmed aircraft to indi- 
cate by signals that the intercepted aircraft shall follow 
the intercepting aircraft to the nearest appropriate air- 
field for investigation. As information available to this 
Government indicates that the C-130 aircraft was inter- 
cepted by Soviet Air Force planes, the United States 
Government expects that complete information as to the 
circumstances surrounding and following the intercep- 
tion will be made available to it without further delay. 



Mr. Dillon To Visit 11 Countries 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 18 (press release 544) that Douglas Dil- 
lon, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, was 
leaving on September 19 on a trip that will take 
him to 11 countries: Spain, Tunisia, Greece, 
Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, India, Lebanon, Switzer- 
land, Germany, and the United Kingdom. 

The general purpose of Mr. Dillon's trip is to 
give him an opportunity to confer with U.S. 
Ambassadors and other senior U.S. Government 



officials regarding operations conducted under 
the mutual security program, as well as on certain 
major economic problems, and to meet with senior 
government officials of those countries which he 
is visiting for conversations on matters of mutual 
interest. 



Japanese and U.S. Officials 
Conclude Talks 

Following are joint statements issued to the press 
following meetings of visiting Japanese officials 
and, U.S. officials. 

JOINT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 11 

Press release 528 dated September 11 

The Secretary of State and the Foreign Minister 
of Japan met together at the Department of State 
this afternoon and had a constructive exchange of 
views in an atmosphere of cordiality and mutual 
understanding. They reviewed the international 
situation, discussed Japanese-American security 
arrangements and took up other matters pending 
between their two countries. Others present at 
the meeting included Ambassador Asakai, Ambas- 
sador MacArthur, Assistant Secretary Robertson, 
Assistant Secretary (Defense) Sprague and Gen- 
eral Lemnitzer. 

Security problems facing the two countries were 
the principal subjects of the discussion today. It 
was agreed that the Japanese-American Commit- 
tee on Security, whose establishment was agreed 
upon in the talks between President Eisenhower 
and Prime Minister Kishi last year, had been 
successful in strengthening mutual cooperation 
and understanding in the security field. Foreign 
Minister Fujiyama pointed out at the same time 
that seven years have passed since the United 
States-Japan Security Treaty was signed. He 
stated that with the re-established position of 
Japan in the intervening years the situation has 
now evolved to the point where it would be ad- 
vantageous to re-examine the present security ar- 
rangements with a view to adjusting them on a 
basis entirely consistent with the new era in rela- 
tions between the two countries affirmed by Prime 
Minister Kishi and President Eisenhower in the 



532 



Department of State Bulletin 



Joint Communique of June 21, 1957. 1 It was 
agreed that the two governments will consult fur- 
ther on this matter through diplomatic channels 
following Mr. Fujiyama's return to Tokyo. 

With respect to the Eyukyu Islands, Foreign 
Minister Fujiyama welcomed the current discus- 
sions taking place between the United States au- 
thorities and Ryukyuan representatives looking 
toward a satisfactory resolution of the land prob- 
lem. Secretary Dulles expressed his understand- 
ing of Japanese interest in the Ryukyus and it 
was agreed that on Ryukyuan matters the two 
governments would continue to exchange views 
through diplomatic channels. 

The Foreign Minister also touched upon spe- 
cific issues among which was included the 
Japanese desire for compensation of former 
inhabitants of the Bonin Islands who are unable 
to return to their former homes. The Secretary 
assured Mr. Fujiyama that the United States is 
sympathetically aware of the problem and is 
studying it carefully in the hope of achieving a 
reasonable solution. 

Discussions will be continued tomorrow. 



JOINT STATEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 12 

Press release 533 dated September 12 

Foreign Minister Fujiyama met today with 
Secretary Dulles and Under Secretary Dillon to 
discuss a wide range of subjects of interest to 
Japan and the United States. Topics discussed 
included United States-Japan trade relations, 
Asian economic development, and the actions and 
intentions of Communist China, with specific ref- 
erence to the Taiwan Straits. 

In connection with trade between the United 
States and Japan, the Foreign Minister pointed 
out the importance of trade with the United 
States and other industrial nations. He noted 
that, in relation to trade with the United States, 
particular attention would be paid to orderly 
trade and marketing procedures to avoid sudden 
changes in volume and prices which might have 
damaging effects. Mr. Dillon expressed apprecia- 
tion of Japan's efforts in connection with orderly 
trade and marketing procedures. He referred to 



' For text, see Bulletin of July 8, 1957, p. 51. 



the recent extension of the Trade Agreements Act 
as evidence of United States interest in pursuing 
liberal trade policies. 

The question of the need for increasing the rate 
of economic growth in South and Southeast Asia 
was discussed, and opinions were exchanged with 
a view to achieving such economic growth in the 
interest of the free world. 

In their discussion of the international situa- 
tion, the Secretary and the Foreign Minister 
agreed that international Communism remains the 
major threat to peace in the world. They also ex- 
changed views on the forthcoming session of the 
General Assembly of the United Nations, and re- 
cent developments in the Taiwan Straits. With 
respect to the latter they agreed that the use of 
force by Communist China created grave tension 
in the Far East. They also agreed that the situa- 
tion in the Taiwan Straits should be settled by 
peaceful means and without recourse to force. 

The Secretary and the Foreign Minister agreed 
that their talks during the past two days have 
been most helpful both in achieving closer under- 
standing and in enabling a higher degree of 
coordination in fields of mutual interest. 

Today's meetings concluded the Washington 
talks. 



United States and Turkey 
Hold Economic Discussions 

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

Press release 521 dated September 9 

The Minister of Finance of Turkey, Hasan 
Polatkan, arrives at Washington on September 
10 to discuss implementation of the recently 
agreed upon financial assistance program to 
Turkey with officials of the U.S. Government. 
During his 3-day visit Mr. Polatkan will meet 
with the Secretary of State and the Under Secre- 
tary for Economic Affairs, the Secretary of the 
Treasury, and senior officials of the Export- 
Import Bank and the International Coopera- 
tion Administration. It is expected that he 
will also confer with the International Monetary 
Fund and the International Bank for Recon- 
struction and Development. 



October 6, 1958 



533 



He will be accompanied by Hasan Isik, Secre- 
tary General of the Turkish International Co- 
operation Organization, Memduh Aytur, Director 
General of the Turkish Treasury, Ziya Muez- 
zinoglu, Counselor of the Turkish Treasury, 
Munir Mostar, Inspector General of the Ministry 
of Finance, and Fikri Diker, Assistant Director 
General of the Central Bank of Turkey. 

JOINT STATEMENT 

Press release 535 dated September 13 

A Turkish Mission headed by His Excellency, 
Hasan Polatkan, the Turkish Minister of Finance 
and Acting Minister of Industry, has been in 
Washington the past three days as the guest of 
Treasury Secretary Robert B. Anderson and 
Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs 
C. Douglas Dillon. 

In addition to talks with Secretary Anderson 
and Under Secretary Dillon, Minister Polatkan 
met with Mr. James H. Smith, Jr., Director, 
International Cooperation Administration; Mr. 
Samuel C. Waugh, President and Chairman of 
the Export-Import Bank, and Mr. Dempster Mc- 
intosh, Managing Director of the Development 
Loan Fund. The Minister also took advantage of 
his presence in Washington to visit with Mr. Per 
Jacobsson, Managing Director of the Inter- 
national Monetary Fund and Mr. Eugene Black, 
President of the International Bank for Re- 
construction and Development. 

During his visit the Minister called upon the 
Secretary of State. 

In his talks with United States officials, Minis- 
ter Polatkan reviewed the progress to date of the 
economic stabilization program which the Turkish 
Government introduced on August 3, 1958 and 
made clear the firm determination of the Turkish 
Government to carry out this program vigorously. 
Officials of the United States Government were 
greatly encouraged by the measures the Turkish 
Government has taken and by its determination to 
carry through the new program to a successful 
conclusion. Given this determination it was the 
view of United States officials that the stabiliza- 
tion program of the Turkish Government prom- 
ises to assure adequate supplies of goods to the 
Turkish economy and to bring about stability and 
economic strength in the future. 

During the course of the talks, Minister Polat- 



534 



kan discussed with United States officials the ques- 
tion of implementing the aid agreements with the 
United States which were announced on August 
3, 1 and which involved $234 million of various 
forms of assistance. As a result of these talks ar- 
rangements were made that $75 million would be 
made available immediately to finance imports 
during the remainder of 1958. In addition it was 
agreed that 225 million Turkish lira, equivalent 
to 25 million dollars, which has been generated 
from previous sales of surplus agricultural com- 
modities (P.L. 480) would be granted to the Turk- 
ish Government in order to provide immediate 
local currency financing. 

In further implementation of the program of fi- 
nancial assistance to Turkey, the Export-Import 
Bank signed on September 12 an agreement with 
Turkey establishing a line of credit in the amount 
of $37.5 million to assist in financing projects in 
the private as well as public sectors of the Turk- 
ish economy. The line of credit will be available 
up to December 31, 1959 and the principal amount, 
rate of interest, repayment period and related con- 
ditions for each project will be subject to separate 
agreement between Turkey and the Export-Im- 
port Bank. 

Discussions with the Development Loan Fund 
concerned the selection of development projects 
totaling $37.5 million to be financed by the institu- 
tion under the August 4 agreement. Progress was 
made toward reaching agreement on projects in 
the fields of mining, agriculture, power and indus- 
try and final decisions are expected in the near fu- 
ture. At the conclusion of the Development Loan 
Fund discussions with Minister Polatkan, Am- 
bassador Mcintosh signed an agreement finaliz- 
ing a $10 million DLF loan to the Industrial De- 
velopment Bank of Turkey which had been an- 
nounced by the DLF in May of this year. This 
loan is in addition to the $37.5 million of project 
loans now under discussion between the Turkish 
Government and the DLF. 

The United States officials expressed the active 
and continuing interest of the United States in 
the economic development of Turkey. 

Minister Polatkan was accompanied by Hasan 
Isik, Assistant Secretary General for Economic 
Affairs of the Foreign Ministry ; Memduh Aytur, 
Director General of the Treasury; Ziya Muez- 
zinoglu, Counselor to the Treasury ; Fikri Diker, 



1 Bulletin of Aug. 25, 1958, p. 322. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Assistant Director General of the Central Bank 
and Munir Mostar, Financial Inspector, Ministry 
of Finance. 



Indian Finance Minister 
Visits United States 

Press release 52G dated September 9 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 9 that Morarji R. Desai, Finance Minister 
of the Government of India, during his 3-day visit 
to "Washington, met and had discussions with the 
Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, 
the Secretary of Agriculture, the Acting Secretary 
of Commerce, and Douglas Dillon, Under Secre- 
tary of State for Economic Affairs, Samuel C. 
Waugh, President and Chairman of the Export- 
Import Bank, J. H. Smith, Jr., Director, Interna- 
tional Cooperation Administration, and Tom B. 
Coughran, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. 
Discussion covered a wide range of topics, prin- 
cipally in the economic and financial field with 
particular reference to India's foreign-exchange 
needs for economic development. 

Mr. Desai was informed that, in connection with 
recent discussions held under the auspices of the 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Devel- 
opment on the Indian financial problem, the 
United States is prepared in the U.S. fiscal year 
ending June 1959 to finance through the Devel- 
opment Loan Fund a series of economic develop- 
ment projects in India which are expected to total 
about $100 million. Loans for these projects 
would be long-term and repayable in Indian ru- 
pees. In addition the Finance Minister was in- 
formed that the United States is prepared to begin 
discussions leading to the conclusion of an agri- 
cultural commodities agreement under title I of 
the Agricultural Trade Development and Assist- 
ance Act (P.L. 480) which would provide for the 
sale for local currency of surplus agricultural 
commodities. Such an agreement would provide 
food grains having an export value of about $200 
million. Finally Mr. Desai was informed that the 
United States has authorized its Embassy in New 



Delhi to exchange notes with the Indian Govern- 
ment to amend the present repayment schedule of 
the $190 million wheat loan extended to India in 
1951 to defer the interest and amortization pay- 
ments which are due over the next 9 years. 

Mr. Desai was accompanied in his meetings with 
U.S. Government representatives by H. Dayal, In- 
dian Charge d'Affaires ad interim, and B. K. 
Nehru, Commissioner General for Economic Af- 
fairs. 



International Aviation Authorities 
To Hold Symposium in U.S. 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 16 (press release 539) that an interna- 
tional symposium on "The United States 
Domestic Short Distance Navigation System — 
VORTAC— and Its Relationship to the Interna- 
tional Air Navigation System" will be held at 
Washington October 1-2, 1958, and at Indianap- 
olis October 3-4, 1958. Invitations have been 
issued to aviation authorities of foreign govern- 
ments and to other international aviation 
organizations. 

This international meeting is designed to 
better acquaint the responsible aviation authori- 
ties of governments and other aviation interests 
with the bearing and distance concept of the U.S. 
air-navigation and traffic-control system. The 
International Civil Aviation Organization has 
scheduled a special meeting for February 1959 
on the subject of short-distance aids and their 
relationship to other elements of the air-naviga- 
tion system. The symposium is being held to 
assist nations and their aviation interests in prep- 
aration for the ICAO meeting. 

Present plans call for the symposium to last 
from October 1 to 4, with 2 days of presentation 
and discussion of papers at "Washington and 2 
days of demonstrations of equipment at the CAA 
Technical Development Center at Indianapolis. 
An operational flight demonstration will take 
place during the flight from Washington to 
Indianapolis. 



October 6, 1958 



535 



International Order Under Law 



by William P. Rogers 

Attorney General of the United States x 



It is an honor and a privilege to address the 
48th biennial conference of the International Law 
Association. As a representative of the Govern- 
ment of the United States it is with warm pleas- 
ure that I welcome you to our country and ex- 
press the hope that you will have a most success- 
ful conference. 

Since the association was founded, it has been 
the innovator, architect, and craftsman of many 
important contributions within the field of inter- 
national law. These contributions have been the 
product of painstaking research, informed judg- 
ment, and effective advocacy. 

You have long recognized the necessity for the 
supremacy of law and have defended it against 
overwhelming and recurrent tides of recalcitrance 
and inertia. It is my belief that those tides are 
ebbing. I believe that we are at the threshold of 
new and far-reaching developments in the fields 
of both public and private international law. 

The same forces that within a decade have in- 
duced science to develop the atom and have 
brought man to the verge of outer space are exert- 
ing a relentless pressure on mankind to bring it 
to its senses to prevent its self-destruction. As 
President Eisenhower said, the world situation 
today makes it imperative to depose the rule of 
force and to enthrone the rule of law in interna- 
tional differences. 

Our primary concern, therefore, is the attain- 
ment of peace and international order under law. 
There are many hopeful signs of progress. 

In this country there is a substantial step-up 
in activities by such organizations as bar associa- 



1 Address made before the 48th biennial conference of 
the International Law Association at New York, N. Y., on 
Sept. 2. 



tions, foundations, and universities in working 
toward greater reliance on international rules of 
law. Cornell, Harvard, and Southern Methodist 
University are among the institutions that have 
actively been working on important phases of the 
problems. The most recent development in this 
field is the announcement that a Rule of Law Cen- 
ter is being established under the auspices of Duke 
University Law School with Mr. Arthur Larson, 
a former Special Assistant to the President, as 
director. 

There are a number of worthwhile steps to be 
taken within the not-too-distant future. As you 
know, much study will be given to the possibility 
of international agreements applying impartial 
judicial machinery to the question of compensa- 
tion for nationalization of foreign investments. 
Success in this direction could have dramatic ef- 
fects in facilitating vast new surges of private in- 
vestment in newly developing countries. 

Another worthwhile possibility is the gradual 
development of effective regional international 
courts, perhaps for a specific function, as in the 
case of the judicial machinery of the European 
Common Market. 

Moreover, there is much work to be done in 
bringing together in usable and convenient form 
the existing international law precedents that are 
now scattered in many places. As you know, the 
International Law Commission is presently en- 
gaged in codifying such law. If we are to live 
by an international rule of law, one of the in- 
dispensable steps is to clarify the law and make 
it accessible, understandable, and usable. Here 
again the lawyers and scholars and universities of 
every country must help if the job is to be done. 



536 



Department of State Bulletin 



Making the Rule of Law an International Reality 

A part of the overall task of making the rule 
of law an international reality lies in the creation 
of a worldwide state of opinion which more and 
more accepts law as normal in international 
settlements. Designations such as "Law Day, 
U.S.A.," which this year concentrated on stress- 
ing the international-rule-of-law theme, may be 
expanded upon and improved. There are many 
other ways of working toward greater public ac- 
ceptance of the rule of law in international 
affairs, including the use of conferences, radio 
and television shows, and thoughtful and forceful 
presentations through the press and in other pub- 
lications. One of the planning committee for this 
conference, Henry Luce, has assumed a major role 
in gaining this acceptance, not only through the 
Time and Life publications but in a quiet and 
effective personal way. 

The United States Government has recently 
taken an important step in furtherance of inter- 
national order under law. It touches primarily 
the field of private international law. As you 
may know, Congress last month enacted legisla- 
tion establishing a Commission on International 
Eules of Judicial Procedure. The statutory func- 
tion of the commission is to investigate and study 
existing practices of judicial assistance and co- 
operation between the United States and foreign 
countries with a view to achieving improvements. 

The scope of the commission's work will be 
broad. It will investigate procedures for inter- 
national judicial assistance incident to litigation, 
including such matters as the service of judicial 
documents, the obtaining of evidence, and the 
proof of foreign law. Its objective will be to 
evolve, on a reciprocal basis, procedures which 
are "more readily ascertainable, efficient, econom- 
ical, and expeditious." To that end, the commis- 
sion is directed to draft and recommend to the 
Government appropriate international agree- 
ments and draft legislation. 

Principles of Law Applicable to Outer Space 

Another matter of increasing public concern 
involves the principles of law applicable to the 
exploration and development of outer space. 
Today, less than 50 years after its meetings in 
Europe in 1911 and 1912, your association and 
others have an opportunity to aid in the formu- 



lation and development of a system of interna- 
tional law to meet this challenge. 

The immediate problems concern matters relat- 
ing to flight instrumentalities in space. Ulti- 
mately the questions may require a consideration 
of such complex and challenging legal problems 
as those relating to the development and utiliza- 
tion of the natural resources of celestial bodies 
not yet within the reach of any nation or group 
of nations. 

Some of these questions may be: What is the 
legal status of those areas of space used in the 
passage of a satellite? Can existing jurispru- 
dence be adapted to the problems that astro- 
nautics poses? How may one ascertain the legal 
status of a satellite for purposes of protection 
or control, regulation of flight paths and orbits? 
Can the existing principles of international air law 
be applied to each zone as man is able to reach 
it? Or is it advisable to lay aside for the time 
being the entire problem of national sovereignty 
in outer space? 

Jurisdiction of International Court of Justice 

One area which holds promise for progress re- 
lates to the jurisdiction of the International Court 
of Justice. 

You will recall that, prior to adoption of the 
U.N. Charter, international law did not compel 
any state to submit its disputes for determination 
to the International Court against its will. The 
same policy was followed when the U.N. Charter 
was adopted. Article 2 (7) of the charter ex- 
cludes intervention by the United Nations in 
matters which are essentially within the domestic 
jurisdiction of any state. 

In the statute which creates the Court and which 
defines its authority, it is optional for states to 
accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. 
When the United States filed its declaration of ac- 
ceptance of the Court's jurisdiction, it attached 
certain conditions to its acceptance. 

Among specific limitations the declaration of 
the United States stated that the jurisdiction of 
the Court shall not apply to matters which are 
essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the 
United States. No one could question this limi- 
tation, for it safeguards the national independence 
of a country and its internal affairs. It was also 
consistent with the charter of the U.N. Further- 



Ocfober 6, 7958 



537 



more, it was implicit in the nature of international 
law itself, which the Court under its statute was 
bound to apply, for, by definition, international 
law governs the body of rights and duties in the 
relations of states with each other and thereby 
excludes itself from domestic-jurisdiction matters. 

There was, however, an additional specific limi- 
tation attached by the United States which created 
concern among many of our statesmen and many 
international lawyers of repute. This limitation 
reserved the right of the United States, rather 
than the Court, to determine whether a matter fell 
within this country's domestic jurisdiction. 

The events leading to this decision are of in- 
terest, for the decision, in my judgment, needs 
reexamination. 

Senate Debate on International Court 

The matter of domestic-jurisdiction reservations 
came up during 1946 upon consideration of the 
Senate resolution to accept the jurisdiction of the 
International Court of Justice established under 
the U.N. Charter. This resolution was unani- 
mously reported by the Committee on Foreign 
Relations to the Senate for favorable action. Its 
report recommended a reservation of "disputes 
with regard to matters which are essentially with- 
in the domestic jurisdiction of the United States." 
In urging the Senate to adopt the resolution, the 
committee expressed the hope of placing interna- 
tional relations on a legal basis. It recognized 
that a regime of law in the international commun- 
ity could never be fully realized so long as any in- 
dividual members could refuse to be bound by the 
jurisdiction of the Court. To achieve this aim 
it felt that the Court must have jurisdiction of 
the parties and the subject matter. 

The Senate committee rejected any suggestion 
that the United States should reserve to itself the 
right to decide what disputes were domestic. It 
was its view that such a provision would be self- 
defeating. If this matter were left to the decision 
of each individual state, it would be possible to 
withhold any case from adjudication on the plea 
that it was a matter of domestic jurisdiction. 

It was only after Senate Resolution 196 reached 
the floor of the Senate that objections arose re- 
garding the reservation of domestic jurisdiction. 
The question was raised in debate as to who would 
determine whether a matter was of a domestic 
character not subject to the jurisdiction of the In- 
ternational Court. Apprehension was expressed 



that, unless it was the United States rather than 
the Court which made this determination, the In- 
ternational Court could readily extend its juris- 
diction to various domestic issues, particularly im- 
migration and trade barriers. 

There were several answers to this contention 
in the debate. One was that it is the function 
of the Court under the compulsory-jurisdiction 
clause to decide cases in accordance with estab- 
lished rules of international law. Since there is 
no international law dealing with the subject of 
immigration and since this has been traditionally 
a matter for domestic determination, it was ar- 
gued that the International Court could not take 
jurisdiction over this kind of case. As far as 
tariffs are concerned, it was shown that, unless 
the United States enters into an international 
treaty subscribing to certain rights and duties, 
there is no international law on the subject which 
the Court may apply. Thus it was argued that 
the anxiety expressed respecting possible exten- 
sion of the Court's jurisdiction to such tradi- 
tionally domestic matters as immigration and 
trade restrictions was wholly unfounded. 

Despite these arguments, the fears of those who 
opposed the committee's report were accepted and 
the report was overridden. The Senate voted to 
reserve to the United States the right to decide 
whether a matter was within its domestic juris- 
diction. 

When a country, rather than a court, has the 
power to decide whether a matter relates to its 
domestic jurisdiction, it may be difficult because 
of the political realities of life for even the most 
cooperative government to concede jurisdiction. 
The result is that controversies over which the 
court has jurisdiction can readily be converted 
into controversies not within its jurisdiction by 
mei-e decision of the party nation rather than by 
decree of the court. 

In addition, a reservation which enables one 
country to decide whether domestic jurisdiction 
is involved is an invitation for other countries 
to assert a like limitation. Thus, similar reser- 
vations permitting the declaring state to deter- 
mine what is domestic have been filed by several 
countries. 

With this history of the domestic-jurisdiction 
reservation before us, the question is whether this 
type of specific reservation by several nations as 
to the jurisdiction of the Court tends to impair 
or enhance a rule of law in international affairs. 



538 



Department of State Bulletin 



Should sucli reservations be retained in their pres- 
ent form ? Just as domestic courts could not func- 
tion effectively if parties chose not to appear, so, 
too, the administration of justice by international 
courts is impaired and may be nullified if the na- 
tions can refuse to submit their differences to it. 
It is important, too, to bear in mind that the 
mere fact that a court is open for dealing with 
disputes and that the parties may be compelled 
to appear before it is often enough to spur parties 
into settling their differences amicably out of 
court. This might well be the case in some inter- 
national disputes as well as in cases of a private 
nature. 

Effect of Domestic-Jurisdiction Reservation 

In over 10 years of the Court's operation, we 
have seen that the effect of one country's domes- 
tic-jurisdiction reservation, unilaterally deter- 
mined, has spawned many others. Tims the area 
of international adjudication has been tragically 
limited. We have seen the "boomerang" effect 
of this type of reservation when even a nation 
not having such a reservation employed it on the 
basis of reciprocity. 

The record of the International Court makes 
it clear that this Court of distinguished jurists 
has not engaged or attempted to engage in usur- 
pation of jurisdiction which does not belong to it. 
Nor is there any reason to believe that it ever 
would. As we are aware, relatively few cases 
have been before the Court. 

Our courts in the United States, because of the 
great increase in the volume of work, are con- 
gested with cases. One could fairly say, con- 
versely, that the International Court is isolated 
from cases. 

The time has come, I think, in the light of ex- 
perience with the Court to reexamine the domestic- 
jurisdiction reservation of the unilateral type to 
determine if it should be retained or changed. 
If retained, it might be limited in some more 
reasonable way. 

The International Court needs more support 
if it is to succeed in the accomplishment of its 
puqioses. Without some step looking toward 
some enlarged jurisdiction it cannot hope to attain 
the position it should occupy in the world com- 
munity striving toward a ride of law and justice. 

Once nations begin to submit some of their in- 
ternational disputes to impartial international 

October 6, 1958 

482584—58 3 



adjudication— and I mean as an established pro- 
cedure and not as the voluntary exception — we 
will have taken another important step toward 
justice under an international rule of law. 

We must, I believe, make more progress, even 
if limited progress, toward the proposition put 
forward by Woodrow Wilson in 1918 : "What we 
seek is the reign of law, based upon the consent 
of the governed and sustained by the organized 
opinion of mankind." 



U.S. and Czechoslovakia Exchange 
Views on Summit Conference 

U.S. NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 12' 

The United States Government refers to the 
memorandum of the Czechoslovak Government of 
May 31 stating that Government's views with re- 
gard to the holding of a Summit conference and 
participation of Czechoslovakia in it. 

The considerations set forth in the Czechoslovak 
memorandum present an erroneous picture of the 
attitude of the United States Government. The 
United States does not underestimate the signifi- 
cance of a Summit meeting nor is it attempting to 
delay its convocation. However, the United 
States attaches more importance to the achieve- 
ment of genuine agreements than to the forum in 
which those agreements are reached. 

The unanimity reached at the Third Emergency 
Special Session of the United Nations General As- 
sembly 2 and the successful outcome of the techni- 
cal talks at Geneva 3 demonstrate that useful agree- 
ments can be attained in various appropriate ways. 
With regard to a Summit conference, the United 
States continues to hold that it would be desirable 
if it would provide opportunity for serious dis- 
cussion of major problems and if it would be an 
effective means for reaching agreement on signifi- 
cant subjects. 



1 Delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Czech- 
oslovakia by the American Embassy at Prague on Sept. 12 
(press release 537 dated Sept. 15). 

3 For background, see Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1958, p. 409. 

'For background and the text of the technical experts' 
final report, see ibid., Sept. 22, 1958, p. 452. 



539 



A concrete effort to prepare for such a confer- 
ence was made on March 31 by the three Western 
powers when they invited the Soviet Government 
to initiate diplomatic talks in Moscow for this pur- 
pose. 4 The preparatory discussions met with diffi- 
culties arising from the fact that the proposals 
as to what problems shoidd be examined by the 
Heads of Government put forward by both sides 
were too diverse to be acceptable to either. The 
Western powers attempted to resolve these difficul- 
ties by proposing on May 31 5 that all specific pro- 
posals be reviewed in diplomatic talks in Moscow 
under general categories in order to determine 
which should be submitted for examination by 
Heads of Government. On July 1 6 and again on 
August 22, 7 the United States, together with 
France and the United Kingdom, expressed regret 
that the preparatory discussions in Moscow were 
at a standstill and called upon the Soviet Govern- 
ment to consider the practical procedure for dis- 
cussing a Summit conference agenda which they 
had suggested on May 31. It is the Soviet Union 
that has blocked any progress on this matter by 
its failure to accept this proposal or to submit an 
equally effective and workable alternative. There 
is no basis for the Czechoslovak assertion that 
the United States is endeavoring to delay the con- 
vocation of a Summit meeting. 

In discussing the Western proposal concerning 
Eastern Europe, the Czechoslovak memorandum 
seeks to create the impression that the Western 
powers wish to interfere in the internal affairs of 
the Eastern European countries. It has been the 
traditional policy of the United States Govern- 
ment to support the right of all countries to free- 
dom and independence and the right of their 
peoples to choose their own form of government. 
The United States Government therefore seeks to 
develop adequate guarantees against any interfer- 
ence in the internal affairs of all countries and 
against the use of force in the settlement of dis- 
putes which may arise. In accord with this pol- 
icy the United States Government agrees that the 



* For text of a three-power declaration presented to the 
■Soviet Government on Mar. 31, 1958, see ibid., Apr. 21, 
1958, p. 648. 

5 For background, see ibid., July 7, 1958, p. 12. 

8 For text of a letter from the President to Premier 
Khrushchev released by the White House on July 2, 1958, 
see ibid., July 21, 1958, p. 95. 

7 For text of U. S. note, see ibid,, Sept. 22, 1958, p. 462. 



political and economic systems of the Eastern 
European coimtries are the exclusive concern of 
their peoples. 

The United States Government believes that it 
would be premature to consider the composition 
of a Summit conference until the agenda for such 
a conference has been agreed upon. If, after 
agreement is reached on an agenda, it appears 
that Czechoslovakia's participation would serve a 
useful and constructive purpose, the United States 
Government would welcome such participation. 
The Czechoslovak Government will understand, of 
course, that although many countries would likely 
believe that their interests would be involved in 
any discussions carried out at a Summit confer- 
ence, such a conference to be effective would have 
to be limited in size. 

The Government of the United States agrees 
that the object in determining the composition of 
a Summit conference should be to promote to the 
utmost the achievement of positive results, and 
welcomes the Czechoslovak Government's assur- 
ance that it is ready to create favorable condi- 
tions for the success of a Summit, conference. 



CZECHOSLOVAK MEMORANDUM OF MAY 31 

Unofficial translation 

Bearing in mind the interests of strengthening world 
peace and security, The Government of the Czechoslovak 
Republic has more than once expressed its conviction as 
to the urgency of an early convocation of a summit Con- 
ference which would provide a forum for discussing the 
most important and most pressing international issues, 
the solution of which would contribute to the relaxation 
of tension in the world, to the restoration of confidence 
and to the promotion of peaceful coexistence among 
states. 

The idea of convening a Conference of the Heads of 
Governments is already deeply rooted in world public 
opinion. The nations are justified in expecting that it 
will take place as early as possible. Under the pressure 
of world public opinion even the Western Powers have 
expressed their concurrence in principle with the holding 
of the Conference. 

On the other hand, however, there have recently been 
intensified attempts at belittling the significance of the 
Conference and at delaying its convocation. As a result 
of the assumption that the concern of the world public 
opinion has already been sufficiently lulled, the adver- 
saries of the Conference seek to cast in doubt its purpose 
and opportuneness. In this connexion it is not possible 
to disregard the position taken in respect of the Confer- 



I 



540 



Department of State Bulletin 



ence of the Heads of Governments by the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization Council at its recent session in 
Copenhagen. In the closing communique of the session " 
doubt is expressed whether at the present time the sum- 
mit Conference is the best means for the lessening of 
international tension. However, the development of 
events in recent years has shown quite clearly that after 
the consideration of these important questions of inter- 
national policy in other world forums failed to produce 
the expected results, a summit Conference, attended by 
the Heads of Governments, appears to be the most ef- 
fective means for a discussion which would undoubtedly 
be instrumental in the relaxation of international tension. 

The Government of the Czechoslovak Republic are of 
the opinion that the summit Conference should discuss 
the problems contained in the proposals submitted by 
the Government of the U.S.S.R., which received full sup- 
port in the Declaration of the Member States of the War- 
saw Treaty of May 24, 1958, including such serious and 
pressing problems, for the settlement of which there 
exist today genuine prerequisites, as the cessation of 
nuclear tests, the pledge of the Great Powers to renounce 
the use of nuclear weapons, and the conclusion of a non- 
aggression pact between the States Members of the North 
Atlantic Treaty and the States Members of the Warsaw 
Treaty. The broad masses of world public opinion have 
accepted and greatly appreciate the proposal submitted 
by the Polish People's Republic for the establishment 
of an atom-free zone in Central Europe as an important 
contribution to the lessening of international tension and 
the elimination of the threat of an atomic war in Eu- 
rope. The more regrettable is, therefore, the position 
held by certain Western Powers which are rejecting this 
proposal. The reasons given for this rejection cannot 
weaken the conviction of the broadest masses of the 
population of the European as well as non-European 
countries that the proposal is beneficial to the cause of 
peace and security. 

None of these problems is being submitted for discus- 
sion in the interest of one side alone. It is life itself 
that has placed them before the nations of the world, 
and their consideration and settlement would not harm 
the interests of any country, but, to the contrary, would 
help to improve the international situation, strengthen 
security in Europe and eliminate mutual distrust. 

The Government of the Czechoslovak Republic, as well 
as the other States Members of the Warsaw Treaty, cate- 
gorically reject the consideration of the provocative and 
construed question of the so-called situation in the coun- 
tries of Eastern Europe, for the inclusion of which in 
the agenda of the summit Conference the ruling circles 
of some NATO States are pressing. Similar proposals 
constitute inadmissible interference in the internal af- 
fairs of sovereign states, incompatible with international 
law and the United Nations Charter. 



Nor can the question of the unification of Germany, 
which the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Council 
at its last session sought to force onto the agenda of the 
Conference, constitute an item suitable for consideration 
by the Conference. This question can only be resolved 
by the German people themselves, represented by the two 
German States — the German Democratic Republic and 
the German Federal Republic. 

Neither the raising of such conditions as the discus- 
sion at the Conference of the question of disarmament 
on the basis of the proposals submitted by the Western 
Powers on August 29, 1957° can, in the opinion of the 
Czechoslovak Government, in any way be regarded as a 
constructive approach to expediting its convocation. 
These proposals have already been rejected as imprac- 
ticable and inacceptable. 

The requirement of a speedy convocation of the Con- 
ference at the siunmit is fully met by the last Memo- 
randum of the Government of the Soviet Union of May 
5 10 of this year, which fully opens the prospects for an 
expeditious termination of the preparatory work result- 
ing in agreement and followed by an early convocation 
of the Conference of the Heads of Governments. 

The questions to be considered are of such gravity 
that they impose the categorical demand to refrain from 
further delays, to bring the negotiations through diplo- 
matic channels to a speedy conclusion and to proceed to 
the conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs followed 
by that of the Heads of Governments. 

Regarding the composition of the parties to the talks, 
it is necessary to proceed from the real situation in such 
a manner as to promote to the utmost the achievement 
of positive results. This requirement is fully met by that 
part of the Declaration where the States Members of the 
Warsaw Treaty have expressed their consent with a 
limited participation at the summit Conference of three 
/four/ Countries Members of the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization and three Countries Members of the War- 
saw Treaty and have authorized the Soviet Union, the 
Polish People's Republic and the Czechoslovak Republic 
/the People's Republic of Roumania/ to attend the Con- 
ference on behalf of the countries which are signatories 
of the Warsaw Treaty. 

The Government of the Czechoslovak Republic wishes 
to seize this opportunity to stress once again its pre- 
viously expressed readiness to contribute by all means at 
its command to a speedy convocation of the summit Con- 
ference and to the creation of the most favourable pre- 
requisites for its successful result. 

The Czechoslovak Government expects that also the 
Governments which today have major resi>onsibility for 
the convocation of the Conference at the summit will on 
their part not fail to do everything in order to fulfill 
the hopes that the nations have placed in the summit 
Conference. 



1 Ibid., May 26, 1958, p. 850. 



9 Ibid., Sept. 16, 1957, p. 451. 
" Ibid., July 7, 1958, p. 17. 



October 6, J 958 



54! 



Principal Provisions of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1958 



by Selma G. Kallis 



For the lltli time since the enactment of the 
original Trade Agreements Act in 1934, action was 
taken during the 85th session of Congress to ex- 
tend the President's authority to enter into trade 
agreements with foreign countries for the recipro- 
cal reduction of tariffs and other import restric- 
tions. On August 20, 1958, the President signed 
into law the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 
1958, Public Law 85-686. Following is a sum- 
mary of the principal provisions of the act. 

Extension of Period 

The 1958 act extends for 4 years, i. e., from 
the close of June 30, 1958, through June 30, 1962, 
the period during which the President is author- 
ized to enter into trade agreements. This is the 
longest period for which authority has been 
granted in the history of the trade agreements 
program. Previous periods have ranged from 1 
to 3 years. 

Authority To Decrease Rates of Duty 

In trade agreements entered into during this 4- 
year period the President is authorized to reduce 
U.S. duties in stages by any one of three alter- 
native methods as follows: 

1. Reducing the rate existing on July 1, 1958, 
by not more than 20 percent, provided that no 
more than a 10 percent reduction can be made 
effective in any one year. 1 



• Mrs. Kallis, author of the above article, 
is Acting Special Assistant in the Trade 



Agreements Division. 



2. Reducing the rate existing on July 1, 
1958, by not more than 2 percentage points ad 
valorem (or its ad valorem equivalent in the case 
of a specific rate, or a combination of ad valorem 
and specific rates). The reduction in any one 
year under this alternative may not exceed 1 per- 
centage point. On rates of duty below 10 percent 
ad valorem or its equivalent, this alternative will 
permit a larger reduction than the maximum de- 
crease obtainable under (1) above. Thus if the 
July 1, 1958, rate on an article was 5 percent ad 
valorem, a reduction by 20 percent would yield 
a rate of 4 percent ad valorem whereas a reduc- 
tion by 2 percentage points would yield a rate of 
3 percent ad valorem. Consistent with the pro- 
visions of existing legislation, this alternative can 
not be used to transfer an item from the dutiable 
list to the free list. 1 

3. Reducing to 50 percent ad valorem or its 
equivalent a rate which is in excess of that level, 
provided that not more than one-third of the 
total reduction may become effective in any one 
year. Similar authority was contained in the 
1955 Extension Act. On rates in excess of 62 per- 
cent, this alternative would permit a greater re- 
duction than that obtainable under alternatives 
(1) or (2). 



1 With respect to alternatives (1) and (2), in the ex- 
ceptional cases where a rate may have been increased 
between July 1, 1958, and the date of a trade agreement 
concluded under the authority of the 1958 act, the maxi- 
mum reduction which may be put into effect in any one 
year is one-third of the total reduction made under the 
trade agreement, if such one-third Is greater than the 
10 percent reduction or the 1 percentage point reduction 
stipulated as the maximum under alternatives (1) and 
(2) respectively. 



542 



Department of State Bulletin 



In no case may reductions be made in more than 
four stages, nor may separate stages be less than a 
year apart, nor may the last stage be later than 
3 years after the first stage. Authority to reduce 
tariffs is not lost year by year if not put into 
effect, as was the case under the 1955 act. The 
full amount of the authority provided by any of 
the three alternatives in the 1958 act may be used 
on any article in a trade agreement entered into 
at any time during the 4-year period ending June 
30, 1962. The reduction may be put into effect 
either during that period or thereafter, except 
that no part of any decrease is permitted to come 
into effect for the first time later than June 30, 
1966. 

Authority To Increase Rates of Duty 

The President's authority to raise rates of duty, 
which is of principal significance in escape-clause 
cases, is amended for the purpose of minimizing 
the need to resort to quotas. The amendments 
are as follows : 

1. The President is authorized to raise duties 
as much as 50 percent over the rates which existed 
on July 1, 1934. Previous legislation provided 
authority to increase by 50 percent rates existing 
on January 1, 1945. In the case of items on which 
the rates of duty had been decreased in trade 
agreements between these two dates, the change 
in the base date will correspondingly increase the 
extent to which rates can be raised. 

2. Another amendment permits conversion of a 
specific duty, e. g., a duty expressed in such terms 
as cents per pound or per gallon, to the ad va- 
lorem equivalent which the 1934 rate had in terms 
of imports in 1934, when prices were generally 
lower than now and the ad valorem equivalent 
of a specific rate was correspondingly higher. 
The authority to increase 1934 rates by 50 per- 
cent could be applied to the ad valorem equiva- 
lents calculated on the 1934 basis. 

Both the authority to increase tariff rates and 
to recalculate specific rates is permissive, not man- 
datory. 

Escape-Clause Provision 

The escape-clause pro-vision, which was first 
added to the trade agreements legislation in 1951, 
is amended in several respects, as outlined below : 

1. If the President disapproves the Tariff Com- 



mission's recommendations in escape-clause cases 
in whole or in part, the Congress may override 
the President by approval within 60 days of a con- 
current resolution passed by a two-thirds vote of 
each House. Such a resolution would be given 
privileged status in order to expedite congres- 
sional consideration, and if the resolution were 
adopted, prompt implementation of the Commis- 
sion's recommendations would ensue. The pro- 
vision does not eliminate Presidential discretion in 
escape-clause cases since the President's decision 
would stand unless the Congress approved a reso- 
lution to override his decision. 

2. The President is authorized in escape-clause 
cases to impose a duty up to 50 percent ad valorem 
on a duty-free item which is bound free in a trade 
agreement. This is a departure from the previous 
denial of authority to the President to transfer 
items between the dutiable and free lists. The 
new authority is permissive, not mandatory. Un- 
der previous legislation the only remedy available 
in the case of escape-clause action on a duty-free 
item would have been the imposition of an import 
quota. (See also the immediately preceding sec- 
tion on authority to increase rates on dutiable 
items. ) 

3. Escape-clause investigations and reports are 
to be completed by the Tariff Commission in 6 
months instead of the 9 months provided in pre- 
vious legislation. This change will permit expe- 
diting any relief to domestic industry which may 
be found necessary. 

4. The 1958 act specifically provides that organi- 
zations or groups of employees are eligible to 
apply for escape-clause investigations, thus mak- 
ing clear that such bodies may apply even though 
management is not a party to the application. 

Peril-Point Provision 

The so-called peril-point provision of the Trade 
Agreements Extension Act of 1951 requires the 
Tariff Commission to investigate and report to 
the President with respect to each article under 
consideration for possible modification of tariff 
treatment in a trade agreement negotiation: (a) 
the limit to which U.S. duties may be reduced 
without causing or threatening serious injury to 
the domestic industry producing like or competi- 
tive articles, or (b) the minimum increases in U.S. 
duties or additional import restrictions which may 
be required to avoid serious injury. If the Presi- 



Ocfober 6, 7 958 



543 



dent enters into a trade agreement in which reduc- 
tions go below the limits found by the Tariff Com- 
mission or which fails to include increases found 
necessary by the Commission, he must within 30 
days report to the Congress his reasons for the 
action taken. The 1958 act makes the following 
modifications in the peril-point provision : 

1. The period of time provided for the Tariff 
Commission's peril-point investigations and re- 
ports is increased to 6 months from the 120 days 
provided in previous legislation. 

2. With respect to each article covered by a 
peril-point investigation, the Tariff Commission 
shall to the extent practicable and without 
excluding other factors : 

(a) ascertain the average invoice price, on a 
country-of-origin basis, at which the foreign arti- 
cle was sold for export to the United States, and 
the average price at which the like or directly 
competitive domestic articles were sold at whole- 
sale in the principal U.S. markets during the last 
calendar year preceding the investigation, and 

(b) estimate the maximum increase in annual 
imports which may occur without causing seri- 
ous injury to the domestic industry producing like 
or directly competitive articles. The Tariff Com- 
mission is directed to ask the executive depart- 
ments and agencies for information in their pos- 
session concerning prices and pertinent economic 
data in the foreign country which is the principal 
supplier of each such article. 

3. Whenever the Tariff Commission, during the 
course of a peril-point investigation, finds with 
respect to an article on which a previous tariff con- 
cession has been made that an increase in duty or 
additional import restriction is required to avoid 
serious injury to the domestic industry producing 
a like or competitive article, the Commission is di- 
rected to start an escape-clause investigation im- 
mediately, thus facilitating early settlement of the 
issues in such cases. 

National Security Provision 

The national security provision, first introduced 
in the 1954 extension act and substantially 
amended in the 1955 act, is retained in the 1958 
act with significant amendments as follows : 

1. The duty on any article is not to be reduced 
if the President finds that such reduction would 



threaten to impair the national security. The 
corresponding provision in previous legislation 
barred any such reduction if the President found 
it would threaten domestic production needed for 
projected national defense requirements. 

2. On request of any U. S. Government de- 
partment or agency, on application by any inter- 
ested party, or on his own motion, the Director of 
the Office of Defense and Civilian Mobilization 
(ODCM) is immediately to make an appropriate 
investigation to determine the effects on the na- 
tional security of imports of the article in ques- 
tion. This section of the bill provides the follow- 
ing with respect to possible action by the Presi- 
dent : 

... If, as a result of such investigation, the Director 
is of the opinion that the said article is being imported 
into the United States in such quantities or under such 
circumstances as to threaten to impair the national se- 
curity, he shall promptly so advise the President and, 
unless the President determines that the article is not 
being imported into the United States in such quantities 
or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the 
national security as set forth in this section, he shall 
take such action, and for such time, as he deems neces- 
sary to adjust the imports of such article and its deriva- 
tives so that such imports will not so threaten to impair 
the national security. 

3. As guidance to the Director of ODCM and 
the President in considering and determining 
whether imports are threatening to impair the na- 
tional security, the 1958 act sets forth certain fac- 
tors in detail but provides that other relevant fac- 
tors are. not to be excluded. The following is the 
pertinent language of the act: 

For the purposes of this section, the Director and the 
President shall, in the light of the requirements of na- 
tional security and without excluding other relevant fac- 
tors, give consideration to domestic production needed for 
projected national defense requirements, the capacity of 
domestic industries to meet such requirements, existing 
and anticipated availabilities of the human resources, 
products, raw materials, and other supplies and services 
essential to the national defense, the requirements of 
growth of such industries and such supplies and services 
including the investment, exploration, and development 
necessary to assure such growth, and the importation of 
goods in terms of their quantities, availabilities, charac- 
ter, and use as those affect such industries and the ca- 
pacity of the United States to meet national security re- 
quirements. In the administration of this section, the 
Director and the President shall further recognize the 
close relation of the economic welfare of the Nation to our 
national security, and shall take into consideration the 
impact of foreign competition on the economic welfare of 



544 



Department of State Bulletin 



Individual domestic industries; and any substantial un- 
employment, decrease in revenues of government, loss of 
skills or investment, or other serious effects resulting 
from the displacement of any domestic products by exces- 
sive Imports shall be considered, without excluding other 
factors, in determining whether such weakening of our in- 
ternal economy may impair the national security. 

i. A report is to be issued on the outcome of 
each case. The Director of ODCM is required to : 
(a) publish procedural regulations to give effect 
to his authority to make investigations under the 
national security provision, and (b) in consulta- 
tion with other Government agencies and with 
the approval of the President, to submit, to the 
Congress by February 1, 1959, a report on the ad- 
ministration of the national security amendment. 

5. The 195S act specifies that the changes in the 
national security provision shall not require the 
reopening of any actions taken or determinations 
made under previous legislation. 

Other Provisions 

1. Under existing legislation the President is 
required to submit to the Congress an annual re- 
port on the operation of the trade agreements 
program. The 1958 act directs the President to 
include in such reports a statement on progress 
made in obtaining the removal of foreign restric- 
tions against U.S. exports, including restrictions 
which discriminate against the United States, and 
the measures available to secure their removal in 
accordance with the objectives of the act. 

2. The 1958 act declares it to be the sense of 
the Congress that the President, during the course 
of negotiating a foreign trade agreement under 
the authority of the act, should secure information 
and advice with respect thereto from represen- 
tatives of American industry, agriculture, and 
labor. 

3. The Tariff Commission is expressly provided 
with the power of subpena and related authority 
to obtain information hi connection with its re- 
sponsibilities under the trade agreements and 
other legislation. This amendment will aid in 
assuring that the Commission will have access to 
any pertinent available information in escape- 
clause and other investigations. 

■4. The new legislation repeats standard lan- 
guage, which the Congress has embodied in the 
last several extension acts, providing that enact- 



ment of the 1958 act shall not be construed as 
either approval or disapproval of the executive 
agreement known as the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade. 



World Bank Grants Loan to India 
for Railway Improvement 

The World Bank announced on September 12 
that it has approved a loan equivalent to $85 
million to India to help meet the foreign-ex- 
change costs of a program to improve and expand 
the Indian railways, an important part of India's 
Second Five- Year Plan. 

The First Pennsylvania Banking and Trust 
Company of Philadelphia will participate in the 
loan, without the World Bank's guaranty, to the 
extent of $500,000 representing parts of the first 
five maturities which fall due between January 
15, 1963, and January 15, 1965. 

The bank's loan will help pay part of the cost 
of rolling stock, locomotives, and other equipment 
required for the expansion program and will meet 
a large part of the payments already made or to 
be made for such equipment during 1958 and the 
first quarter of 1959. 

The loan should be completely disbursed by the 
end of March 1959. By that time, it is expected 
that $15 million will have been disbursed from the 
bank's recent $25 million loan for electric power 
development in the Damodar Valley. As a result, 
the equivalent of some $100 million, over and 
above disbursements on earlier bank loans, will 
be made available to India by the bank during the 
remainder of India's current fiscal year. This 
constitutes the bank's part in the arrangements 
recently discussed by the bank with representa- 
tives of the Governments of Canada, Germany, 
Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States for covering India's additional foreign- 
exchange requirements of $350 million during this 
period. 

The Indian railway system, the fourth largest 
in the world, is owned by the Government and 
managed and operated by the Railway Board, a 
part of the Ministry of Railways. The railways 
are by far the most important form of transport 
in India and carry large volumes of long-haul 
traffic that highways and river and coastal ship- 
ping do not handle. 



Ocfober 6, J 958 



545 



Improvement and expansion of the railways has 
progressed satisfactorily in the Second Five- Year 
Plan and the shortage of rail transport is now 
less acute than it was 2 years ago. Adjustments 
in the program are continually made to meet the 
needs of traffic as they develop. Since July 1957, 
when the bank lent India the equivalent of $90 
million for the railways, the program has been 
revised to provide for an increase in freight-car- 
rying capacity. During the plan period, it is now 
intended to increase freight capacity of the rail- 
ways from 114 million tons annually to 168 mil- 
lion tons, instead of the 162 million originally 
planned. This will require the purchase of 11,000 
additional freight cars over the 107,000 originally 
intended. Plans to meet a 15 percent increase in 
passenger traffic during the plan period remain 
unchanged. 

The approved expenditures on the railway pro- 
gram under the Second Five- Year Plan were to 
be 11,250 million rupees ($2,363 million equiv- 
alent) of which some 4,250 million rupees 
($893 million equivalent) would be required in 
foreign currencies for the purchase of essential 
goods, materials, and equipment which are either 
not produced in India or of which the domestic 
supply is insufficient. 

The additional increase now planned in freight 
capacity should be attained without adding sub- 
stantially to the original estimates of total costs 
and with an actual reduction in the foreign-ex- 
change costs. This will be achieved by improved 
operating efficiency and the postponement of cer- 
tain less essential parts of the railway program. 

The loan will be for a term of 20 years and will 
bear interest of 5% percent including the 1 percent 
commission which is allocated to the bank's special 
reserve. Amortization will begin January 15, 
1963. This will bring the total amount of loans 
which the bank has made to India, net of cancel- 
lations, to $507 million ; the net amount held by 
the bank, after allowing for repayments and 
amounts sold to third parties, is $450 million. 

The loan was approved today by the bank's 
executive directors and the loan documents are to 
be signed on Tuesday, September 16, by Harishwar 
Dayal, Minister and Charge d'Affaires of the Em- 
bassy of India at Washington, on behalf of the 
Government of India, and by Eugene R. Black, 
President, on behalf of the World Bank. 



THE CONGRESS 



President Expresses Views 
on Mutual Security Program 

Folloiving is an exchange of letters between 
President Eisenhower and members of the Sen- 
ate Committee on Foreign Relations concerning 
the mutual security program. 



PRESIDENT EISENHOWER TO SENATOR GREEN 

September 11, 1958 

Dear Mr. Chairman : I appreciate your August 
25 letter, co-signed by several of your colleagues, 
and also the separate comments of Senators 
Smith and Capehart. Certainly we agree fully 
as to the already great and steadily growing im- 
portance of our economic assistance programs. 
For a considerable time I have urged their ex- 
pansion and have been gratified by your Commit- 
tee's support, but unfortunately the Congress as 
a whole has sharply reduced the appropriations. 
Additional emphasis on these programs is being 
considered, and I judge from your letter that in 
this effort I can continue to count on your Com- 
mittee's support. 

As for the military part of mutual security, I 
am acutely conscious of its world-wide implica- 
tions. Not only have requests for funds for the 
military programs been reduced appreciably since 
this Administration took office, but the percentage 
of the total effort devoted to military and related 
aid has been also substantially decreased. En- 
largement of our economic programs next year 
would of course further decrease the military 
proportion. 

Because both of these programs — the military 
as well as the economic — serve our national in- 
terests, an increasing of one at the expense of the 
other could have very harmful effects. Without 
prejudging the matter, I must say that the threat- 
ening posture of the Sino-Soviet Bloc, the impor- 
tance of our collective security relationships, and 
the increasing cost of weapons will require a most 



546 



Department of State Bulletin 



careful weighing of the security impact of fur- 
ther reductions in military programs before they 
can be seriously contemplated. 

I have sent copies of your letter to Secretary 
Dulles and Secretary McElroy. Please give your 
colleagues my assurance that their views will have 
thoughtful attention as next year's program is 
readied for submission to Congress. 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 

The Honorable Theodore Francis Green 
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations, 
United States Senate, 
Washington, D. C. 



COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO THE PRESIDENT 

August 25, 1958 
The President, 

The White House 

Dear Mr. President: On August 23, the Mu- 
tual Security Appropriations Bill for 1959 was 
approved by the Congress. The undersigned 
members of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
voted in favor of this bill as they had previously 
done with respect to the authorizing legislation. 

The experience was not a new one for us. 
Every member who has affixed his signature to 
this letter has generally supported Mutual Secu- 
rity legislation throughout the years of your 
Administration as well as of the previous Ad- 
ministration. We have been aware of the great 
monetary cost to the people of the United States 
which the policy of mutual security has involved. 
We have measured that cost, however, against the 
even greater cost of a spread of totalitarianism 
and the ultimate cost of another war to the United 
States. On balance, it has been clear to us that 
the monetary cost of mutual security has been 
warranted by the service which that policy has 
heretofore performed in strengthening the resist- 
ance of other nations to totalitarianism and 
thereby reducing the danger of another great war. 

In writing you concerning the Mutual Security 
Program, we do so with a sense of non-partisan- 
ship in matters which concern the vital interests 
of the nation. This is why we have delayed this 
letter until after the completion of the legislative 
process on this program. We write now to in- 
form you of our deep concern over the present 



concept and administration of the program. We 
do not presume to trespass on your authority as 
President of the United States to administer the 
law of the United States. We do believe, how- 
ever, as individual members of the Senate with 
some experience and understanding of the pro- 
gram and a full appreciation of its importance, 
that with respect to the less developed countries 
there is a serious distortion in the present relative 
importance which is attached to military and re- 
lated aid on the one hand and technical assist- 
ance and self-liquidating economic development 
assistance on the other. For several years, we 
have received testimony and otherwise obtained 
information which tends to support this opinion. 
Furthermore, we have seen of late many state- 
ments in the press by members of your Adminis- 
tration which suggest that the primary threat of 
Soviet totalitarianism lies in the political and eco- 
nomic realm. Yet the Mutual Security Program 
which the Administration presented to the Con- 
gress reflects little responsiveness to these ob- 
servations. 

Overemphasis on military assistance has tended 
unavoidably to involve the United States in situa- 
tions in which our aid may have contributed to the 
maintenance in power of regimes which have 
lacked broad support within the countries we have 
assisted. It has helped to create abroad a mili- 
taristic image of the United States which is a 
distortion of our national character. It has dis- 
tracted attention, energy and perhaps economic 
aid, from more pressing problems. And finally, 
we believe military assistance by its very nature 
tends to create and then to perpetuate military 
hierarchies which even in the most well-developed 
countries may endanger the very values of indi- 
vidual freedom which we seek to safeguard. 

In support of these views, we refer to the unani- 
mous report last year of the Special Committee 
to Study the Foreign Aid Program, 1 in which 
it was recommended that although "military aid 
should be continued," "efforts consistent with na- 
tional security should be made to reduce the rate 
of expenditures". That same report drew at- 
tention to three specific questions which the Com- 
mittee felt required careful examination, namely : 



* For the final report of the committee, see S. Rept. 
300, 85th Cong., 1st sess. 



Oc/ober 6, 7 958 



547 



"(1) The suitability of the level of military aid 
and the types of arms being provided to less de- 
veloped countries; (2) the possibility that com- 
petition for arms aid among recipients is adding 
unduly to the cost of the program; (3) the pos- 
sibility that, in planning foreign aid programs, 
insufficient consideration is given to the impact of 
arms aid as a factor in generating increased 
needs for supporting aid." 

While we know you have had considerations of 
this kind in mind in preparing annual presenta- 
tions of the Mutual Security Program, we believe 
that there may have been a tendency to believe 
that Congress blindly supports military assist- 
ance but looks with disfavor on economic assist- 
ance. So far as the undersigned are concerned 
that is not the case. Indeed, during considera- 
tion this year of the Mutual Security legislation, 
various of the undersigned gave serious consid- 
eration, or urged, or voted for substantial reduc- 
tions of the funds available for military assistance. 
Such reductions either were not proposed or were 
not adopted because of the possibility of serious 
foreign policy repercussions unless reductions in 
military assistance can be carefully planned and 
phased into being over a period of time. 

It seems to us of the greatest national impor- 
tance that you give personal attention to this mat- 
ter in the time which will elapse before the Mu- 
tual Security legislation is again presented to the 
Congress. We, urge most respectfully that you 
study the Mutual Security Program in the light 
of the views of members of your Administration, 
of members of Congress and many others who 
have stressed that it is in the political and eco- 
nomic realm that the concepts of freedom are now 
undergoing a universal trial. It may be that such 
a study will lead you, Mr. President, as it has led 
us to the conclusion that the principal and most 
costly shortcoming in the Mutual Security Pro- 
gram remains as it has been for some time — the 
failure to emphasize military aid less and to stress 
economic aid and technical assistance more. It 
may be that such a study will reveal that the mili- 
tary and non-military portions of the program 
are drawn up independently to an undue extent 
and then put together automatically in the same 
package. 

We are anxious to do what is necessary for the 
welfare of the nation. So long as an aid program 
serves the enlightened self-interest of the people 



of the United States, we shall support it. We can 
do so, however, only if it is reasonably clear that 
it is administered in a fashion which does, in fact, 
contribute to that end. Therefore, we express to 
you our concern that we may be pursuing a pat- 
tern of foreign aid drawn by force of habit rather 
than one adjusted to current international 
realities. 

We write you at this time because we are aware 
that budgets for the Mutual Security Program 
are prepared many months in advance. If there 
is to be an adjustment in this program in 1959, 
then the most appropriate time to act is now. We 
hope that before this program is again presented 
to Congress you will have had opportunity to 
re-appraise the relationship between the military 
and economic assistance aspects of the Mutual 
Security Program. 

Yours respectfully, 

Theodore Francis Green 
j. w. fulbright 
John J. Sparkman 
Hubert H. Humphrey 
Mike Mansfield 
Wayne Morse 
John F. Kennedy 
William Langer 

Enclosures 

senator smith to senator fulbright 

August 21, 1958 

Dear Bill : I apologize for my delay in answering your 
letter of August 13th. 

On reflection, while I feel that your emphasis on eco- 
nomic aid rather than military aid is a sound approach, 
I would prefer not to join in a letter from the entire 
Committee which would seem to imply that the opera- 
tions of the Administration were open to criticism. 

My own feeling is that while I would favor less mili- 
tary aid, nevertheless we have been compelled to think 
of the security of our country in light of the Soviet 
threat. These security needs must be balanced with our 
consideration of what might be called the wider range 
of our activities in supporting a positive program for the 
betterment of the other countries of the world. 

My hope is that we can ultimately work out disarma- 
ment movements and UN responsibilities so that by de- 
grees the military side can be substantially reduced. As 
rapidly as this can be accomplished we can move into the 
constructive build-up side in order that there may be a 
broad area of cooperation between the better-to-do na- 
tions of the world, and the underdeveloped areas, in 



548 



Department of State Bulletin 



terms of insuring the freedom, independence and self- 
determination, and especially economic stability of the 
latter. 

This is doubtless along the same lines as your thinking, 
but just as I am leaving the Senate I do not wish to 
join in what might be construed to be a criticism of the 
Administration's policies which I have been defending 
vigorously since the mutual security concept was inaugu- 
rated. 

Should you and your colleagues decide to forward the 
letter you have sent to us, I would be glad to have you 
enclose this letter with it, indicating that I am in agree- 
ment with your thoughts of moving more and more 
towards the constructive, positive side and ultimately 
reducing the defensive, negative side. 
Always cordially yours, 

H. Alexander Smith, U.S.S. 

The Honorable J. W. Fulbbight 
United States Senate 
Washington, D. C. 

senator capehart to senator fulbright 

August 22, 1958 

Dear Bill: I am sorry that I have delayed so long 
in replying to your letter of August 13th with reference 
to your proposal to forward a letter on the subject of 
mutual security appropriations to President Eisenhower. 

Bill, I would say frankly that I am not in a position 
to join as a co-signer of the proposed letter which you en- 
closed. My position on the matter of military and eco- 
nomic aid is well known and I feel that it would be in- 
appropriate for me to join as co-signer of a communica- 
tion which might be interpreted to contain implications of 
criticism to the Administration. 

I am sure you know, because you have heard me say 
so many, many times, that I favor the appropriation of 
military aid funds directly to our own military to be ad- 
ministered by our own military establishment. I likewise 
have favored converting whatever economic aid program 
is dictated by the circumstances of the moment into a 
loan program. 

I hope with you that the day will come when the 
necessity for military aid is reduced or eliminated en- 
tirely. I do not see that possibility at the moment in the 
light of continuing Soviet threats. 

While I am sure that you and I are in complete agree- 
ment on the objectives of the mutual security program, 
I do not feel that I can completely endorse the views 
expressed in the proposed draft of your letter at this 
time. Thus, if you and other members of the committee 



do decide to send your letter to the President, I hope 
you will feel that it is appropriate to include this letter 
as an expression of my own views on the subject. 

I very much appreciate your giving me the opportunity 
to express my views with respect to this very, very im- 
portant matter. 

Regards. 

Sincerely, 



Homer E. Capehart 



Honorable J. William Fulbright 
Room 409 

United States Senate 
Washington, D. C. 



Congressional Documents 
Relating to Foreign Policy 

85th Congress, 2d Session 

Operation of Article VII, NATO Status of Forces Treaty. 
Report of the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
made by its Subcommittee on the Operation of Article 
VII of the NATO Status of Forces Agreement to review 
operation of article VII of the agreement between the 
parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the 
status of their forces covering period from December 
1, 1956, through November 30, 1957. S. Rept. 2497, 
August 23, 1958. 15 pp. 

Mutual Security Act of 1959. Conference report to ac- 
company H. R. 13192. H. Rept. 2704, August 23, 1958. 
4 pp. 




Designations 

James R. Johnstone as Executive Director, Bureau of 
Far Eastern Affairs, effective September 16. 

Turner C. Cameron as Deputy Director, Office of 
Western European Affairs, effective September 21. 

Russell Fessenden as Deputy Director, Office of Euro- 
pean Regional Affairs, effective September 21. 

Robert H. McBride as Director, Office of Western 
Euroi ican Affairs, effective September 21. 



October 6, 1958 



549 



t 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Calendar of International Conferences and Meetings ' 



Adjourned During September 1958 

ICAO Special Communications Preparatory Meeting for the ITU 

Radio Conference. 

19th International Exhibition of Cinematographic Art 

19th International Exhibition of Feature Film 

12th International Edinburgh Film Festival 

International Union of Biochemistry: 3d General Assembly . . . 
ICAO Development/Implementation Panel for the Meteorological 

Operational Telecommunications Network for Europe. 
2d U.N. International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic 

Energy. 

U.N. Committee on South-West Africa 

UNICEF Executive Board and Program Committee 

U.N. ECAFE Working Party on Economic Development and 

Planning: 4th Meeting. 

International Statistical Institute: Special Session 

6th International Congress of Tropical Medicine and Malaria . . 
World Power Conference: International Executive Council . . . 

World Power Conference: 12th Sectional Meeting 

U.N. Exploratory Meeting on Copper 

18th International Congress of Ophthalmology 

FAO Governmental Experts on the Use of Designations, Definitions, 

and Standards for Milk and Milk Products. 
FAO Technical Meeting on the Costs and Earnings of Fishing 

Enterprises. 
ICAO Legal Committee: Subcommittee on Legal Status of Air- 
craft. 

U.N. Exploratory Meeting on Lead and Zinc 

FAO Experts on National Dairy Policies 

U.N. Trusteeship Council: 8th Special Session 

International Commission for Criminal Police: 27th Session of the 

General Assembly. 

6th International Congress on Large Dams 

IAEA Board of Governors: 8th Session 

FAO International Chestnut Commission: 4th Session 

11th World Poultry Congress 

Informal Meeting of American Foreign Ministers 

UNREF Executive Committee: 9th (Special) Session 



Montreal Aug. 19-Sept. 9 



Venice . 
Venice . 
Edinburgh 
Vienna . 
Paris . . 

Geneva . 

New York 
New York 
Bangkok 

Brussels 

Lisbon . 

Montreal 

Montreal 

London 

Brussels 

Rome . 

London 

Montreal 

London 
Rome . 
New York 
London 



New York 
Vienna . 
Yugoslavia 
Mexico, D 
Washington 
Geneva . . 



Aug. 24-Sept. 1 
Aug. 24-Sept. 7 
Aug. 24-Sept. 14 
Sept. 1-6 
Sept. 1-10 

Sept. 1-13 

Sept. 2-5 
Sept. 2-11 
Sept. 2-13 

Sept. 3-8 
Sept. 5-13 
Sept. 6 and 10 
Sept. 7-11 
Sept. 8-10 
Sept. 8-12 
Sept. 8-13 

Sept. 8-13 

Sept. 9-20 

Sept. 11-13 
Sept. 15-19 
Sept. 15-19 
Sept. 15-20 

Sept. 15-20 
Sept. 16-20 
Sept. 22-30 
Sept. 21-28 
Sept. 23-24 
Sept. 25-26* 



In Session as of September 30, 1958 

U.N. General Assembly: 13th ^ession New York Sept. 

San Juan Sept. 

Geneva Sept. 

Vienna Sept. 



15th Pan American Sanitary Conference and 10th Meeting of the 
Regional Committee of WHO for the Americas. 

GATT Intersessional Committee 

International Atomic Energy Agency: 2d General Conference 

U.N. Sugar Conference Geneva. 

WHO Regional Committee for the Western Pacific: 9th Session . 

South Pacific Commission: 18th Session 

ICAO Panel of Teletypewriter Specialists: 3d Meeting .... 
Commonwealth Specialist Subcommittee of Service Psychologists 
WMO Commission on Agricultural Meteorology: 2d Session 



Sept. 



16- 
21- 

22- 
22- 
22- 
26- 
2fi- 



FAO/UNICEF Joint Policy Committee Rome 



Manila Sept 

Noumea, New Caledonia . . Sept, 

Montreal Sept. 29 

Melbourne Sept. 29 

Warsaw Sept. 29 



Sept. 29- 



1 Prepared in the Office of International Conferences, Sept. 18, 1958. Asterisks indicate tentative dates and places. 
Following is a list of abbreviations: ANZUS, Australia, New Zealand, United States Treaty; ECAFE, Economic Com- 
mission for Asia and the Far East; ECE, Economic Commission for Europe; ECOSOC, Economic and Social Council; 
FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization; GATT, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; ICAO, International Civil 
Aviation Organization; ICEM, Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration; ILO, International Labor Or- 
ganization; PASO, Pan American Sanitary Organization; UNESCO, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 
Organization; UNICEF, United Nations Children's Fund; UNREF, United Nations Refugee Fund; WHO, World Health 
Organization; WMO, World Meteorological Organization. 



550 



Department of State Bulletin 






Calendar of International Conferences and Meetings — Continued 

Scheduled October 1-December 31, 1958 

International Symposium on U.S. Domestic Short Distance Navi- Washington Oct. 1- 

gation System (VORTAC) and Its Relationship to the Interna- and 

tional Air Navigation System. Indianapolis Oct. 3- 

ANZUS: 6th Meeting Washington Oct. 1- 

Internationnl Council of Scientific Unions: 8th General Assembly . Washington Oct. 2- 

FAO International Rice Commission: 6th Session Tokyo Oct. 3- 

International Union of Official Travel Organizations: 13th General Brussels Oct. 3- 

Assembly. 

Diplomatic Conference for Revision of Convention for the Protec- Lisbon Oct. 6- 

tion of Industrial Property. 

4th FAO Regional Conference for Asia and the Far East .... Tokyo Oct. 6- 

International Monetary Fund, International Bank for Reconstruc- New Delhi Oct. 6- 

tion and Development, and International Finance Corporation: 

Annual Meetings of Boards of Governors. 

PASO Executive Committee: 36th Meeting San Juan Oct. 6- 

U.N. ECE Working Party on Electric Power Statistics Geneva Oct. 6- 

Commonwealth Advisory Committee on Defense Sciences .... Canberra Oct. 7- 

U.N. ECE Working Party on Rural Electrification Geneva Oct. 7- 

FAO General Fisheries Council of the Mediterranean: 5th Meet- Rome Oct. 13- 

ing. 

Structural Division of American Society of Civil Engineers and In- New York Oct. 13- 

ternational Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering: 

Joint Meeting. 

U.N. ECE Timber Committee: 16th Session Geneva Oct. 13- 

GATT Contracting Parties: 13th Session Geneva Oct. 16- 

9th U.N. ECOSOC Technical Assistance Conference New York Oct. 16- 

FAO Near East Forestry Commission: 2d Session Iraq Oct. 18- 

Consultative Committee for Cooperative Economic Development 

in South and Southeast Asia ("Colombo Plan"): 10th Meeting. 

Preliminary Working Group Seattle Oct. 20- 

Officials Meeting Seattle Oct. 27- 

Ministerial Meeting Seattle Nov. 10- 

Intemational North Pacific Fisheries Commission: 6th Meeting . . Tokyo Oct. 20- 

U. N. ECAFE Regional Cartographic Conference for Asia and the Tokyo Oct. 20- 

Far East. 

FAO Group on Coconut: 2d Session Manila Oct. 21- 

ICAO Rules of the Air and Air Traffic Control/Search and Rescue Montreal Oct. 21- 

Divisional Meeting. 

U.N. ECAFE Industry and Natural Resources Committee: 8th Bangkok Oct. 21- 

Session of Subcommittee on Iron and Steel. 

FAO Council: 29th Session Rome Oct. 27- 

U. N. ECE Committee on Development of Trade and East- West Geneva Oct. 27- 

Trade Consultations. 

UNESCO Executive Board: 52d Session Paris Oct. 27- 

U. N. Preliminary Wheat Conference Geneva Oct. 28- 

UNESCO Directors of National Cultural Relations: 2d Meeting . Paris Oct. 28- 

South Pacific Commission: Special Conference on Tuberculosis . . Pago Pago Oct. 31- 

International Sugar Council: 16th Session Geneva October 

International S':gar Council: Executive Committee Geneva October 

International S'gar Council: Statistical Committee Geneva October 

International Wheat Council: 25th Session Geneva October 

2d Pan American Congress of the Theater Habana October 

6th Inter-American Congress of Radiology Lima Nov. 2- 

ILO Governing Body: 140th Session (and Committees) Geneva Nov. 3- 

FAO Latin American Forestry Commission: 6th Session Guatemala City Nov. 4- 

ICEM Exec utive Committee: 11th Session Geneva Nov. 4- 

U.N. ECAFE Inland Transport Committee: 4th Session of High- Bangkok Nov. 4- 

way Subcommittee. 

UNESCO General Conference: 10th Session Paris Nov. 4- 

U.N. ECE Housing Committee: 17th Session and Working Parties . Geneva Nov. 0- 

Technical Discissions on Prevention of Surprise Attack Geneva Nov. 10-* 

U.N. Wheat Conference: Preparatory Committee London Nov. 10- 

ICEM Council: 9th Session Geneva Nov. 12- 

U.N. ECAFE Working Party on Customs Administration .... Bangkok Nov. 12- 

FAO Latin American Regional Conference San Jos6 Nov. 17- 

FAO/WHO Near East Regional Nutrition Meeting Cairo Nov. 18- 

ICA0 Statistics Division: 3d Session Montreal Nov. 18- 

Caribbean Commission: Conference on Revision of Agreement for Trinidad Nov. 24— 

Establishment of the Commission. 

Customs Cooperation Council: 13th Session Brussels Nov. 24- 

ILO Asian Advisory Committee: 9th Session Geneva Nov. 24- 

U.N. ECAFE Working Party on Railway Mechanical Engineers . . undetermined Nov. 24- 



Ocfober 6, 7 958 551 



Calendar of International Conferences and Meetings — Continued 



Scheduled October 1-December 31, 1958 — Continued 

IT.N. ECE Committee on Agricultural Problems: 10th Session . . . 
International Fisheries Convention 1946, Permanent Commission: 

7th Meeting. 
U.N. ECAFE Working Party on Coordination of Transport . . . 

U.N. ECOSOC Technical Assistance Committee 

FAO Cocoa Study Group: Committee on Statistics 

FAO Cocoa Study Group: Executive Committee 

Inter-American Technical Meeting on Housing and Planning. . . 
International North Pacific Fisheries Commission: Committee on 

Biologv and Research. 

ICAO Map Panel: 2d Meeting 

FAO/WHO Technical Meeting on Food Additives 

WMO Regional Association for North and Central America: 2d 

Session. 
U.N. ECAFE Symposium on Petroleum Resources Development. 

FAO Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council: 8th Meeting 

North Pacific Fur Seal Commission: 2d Meeting 

ILO Technical Tripartite Committee on Timber Industry 

U.N. ECAFE Conference of Asian Statisticians: 2d Session . . . . 

U.N. ECE Steel Committee and Working Parties 

7th Inter-American Travel Congress 

FAO Regional Conference for Near East 

Caribbean Commission: 27th Meeting 

U.N. ECE Coal Trade Subcommittee (and related meetings) . . . 

U.N. ECE Inland Transport Committee: 18th Session 

U.N. Economic Commission for Africa: 1st Session 



Geneva 
Dublin . 



Nov. 24- 
Nov. 25- 



Bangkok Nov. 25- 

New York November 

Rome November 

Rome November 

Lima November 

Tokyo November 



Montreal Dec. 1- 

Rome Dec. 1— 

Washington Dec. 1- 

New Delhi Dec. 3- 

Colombo Dec. 6- 

Washington Dec. 8- 

Geneva Dec. 8— 

Bangkok Dec. 8- 

Geneva Dec. 8- 

Montevideo Dec. 9- 

Damascus* Dec. 10- 

Cayenne Dec. 15- 

Geneva Dec. 15- 

Geneva Dec. 15- 

Addis Ababa Dec. 29- 



Secretary Dulles Congratulates 
U.S. Delegation to UNESCO 

Following are remarks made by Secretary Dul- 
les on September 12 at swearing-in ceremonies of 
the U.S. delegation to the 10th session of the 
General Conference of UNESCO. 

I am delighted to be here at the swearing-in of 
the United States delegation to the UNESCO 
General Conference. 1 It is a distinguished delega- 
tion, and it properly reflects the leadership which 
the United States must provide to the world in the 
intellectual field. It also reflects the importance 
which the United States and its citizens attach to 
the work of UNESCO in the fields of education, 
science, and the arts. 

I am particularly well acquainted with the 
chairman and vice chairman of your delegation. 
I have, for a number of years admired Max Eabb's 
work as secretary to the Cabinet, and I know that 
he is well qualified to lead a delegation such as 
this. I am delighted at this evidence that his re- 
cent return to private life has not meant that the 



Government will totally lose his services. Johnnie 
Hanes I have known perhaps even better, because 
he was my special and trusted assistant for 4 years. 

I am glad, too, that this ceremony could take 
place so fittingly in the presence of the UNESCO 
National Commission. 2 It is the function of the 
National Commission to advise the Government 
in the development of U.S. policies toward 
UNESCO. The U.S. delegation to the General 
Conference is the means whereby such policies are 
carried out. I am doubly pleased, therefore, first, 
that the delegation includes so many members of 
the National Commission, including your chair- 
man, Dr. [John R.] Richards; and, second, that 
it has been possible to arrange this joint meeting 
today between the entire National Commission and 
the delegation. 

Today's meeting marks two important innova- 
tions. Never before has a UNESCO delegation 
met together so long prior to the conference or 
had the resulting opportunity to become a full 
partner in the policy-making process of develop- 
ing U.S. positions. Also, no previous delegation 
has met with and received firsthand the advice of 



1 For an announcement of the U.S. delegation, see 
Bulletin of Sept. 8, 1958, p. 401. 



2 The U.S. National Commission for UNESCO met at 
Washington, D.C., Sept. 11-12. 



552 



Department of State Bulletin 



the National Commission. I hope both of these 
precedents will be continued in the future. 

We in the Department of State appreciate 
deeply the effective work of the National Commis- 
sion. We know of the long study which you have 
given to the UNESCO program that will be con- 
sidered at the November conference. We are cer- 
tain that the work of our delegation will benefit 
immensely from your recommendations and your 
mutual discussions today. 

The things which UNESCO symbolizes have 
always been important, but today their impor- 
tance is growing — to the United States as well 
as to the world. 

When UNESCO was founded, all of us hoped 
its work could be carried out in a world of 
lessened international tensions and of growing 
good will among nations. Instead, the hostility 
that exists in the world today, the tensions that 
continue to find expression, make it far more diffi- 
cult to carry out successful programs of cultural 
relations among nations. But the very existence 
of these tensions and hostilities makes it more nec- 
essary than ever to strengthen and use every means 
to exchange ideas. It is clear that cultural con- 
tacts alone will not be likely to bring peace to the 
world, but it is equally true that political and eco- 
nomic arrangements alone are not likely to bring a 
peace which can secure the lasting support, of the 
peoples of the world. True peace with justice 
must rest upon a greater measure of intellectual 
and moral understanding among all peoples. Your 
work in the National Commission and the work 
of our delegation are powerful forces increasing 
that understanding. 

I want to thank the members of this delegation 
for the service they are performing. The United 
States is tremendously fortunate in having citi- 
zens willing to give their time and energy to 
represent the United States in international meet- 
ings. Very few people realize the long prepara- 
tion required for these conferences, or the time 
delegation members must be away from their own 
business, or the pressure under which they work 
during the sessions. We — and I — do appreciate 
that, and your Government appreciates greatly 
this contribution that you are making to our 
representation in UNESCO and therefore to our 
foreign policy and the welfare of the whole 
United States. 



U.S. Delegations to 
International Conferences 

Pan American Sanitary Conference and WHO 
Regional Committee for the Americas 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 17 (press release 542) that, the 15th Pan 
American Sanitary Conference and the 10th 
meeting of the World Health Organization Ee- 
gional Committee for the Americas will convene 
at San Juan, P. R., September 21. The U.S. 
delegation to this conference is as follows: 

Delegates 

Leroy E. Burney, M. D., chairman. Surgeon General, Pub- 
lie Ilealth Service, Department of Health, Education, 
and Welfare 

Guillermo Arbona, M. D., Secretary of Health, Common- 
wealth of Puerto Rico 

H. van Zile Hyde, M. D., Special Assistant to the Sur- 
geon General for International Affairs, Department of 
Health, Education, and Welfare 

Advisers 

Roberto Francisco Azize, M. D., Director, Department of 
Cardiology, San Juan Diagnostic Clinic, San Juan, P. R. 

John B. Grant, M. D., Department of Preventive Medi- 
cine and Public Health, School of Medicine, Uni»rer- 
sity of Puerto Rico 

Luis Guzman, M. D., President, Medical Association, San 
Juan, P. R. 

Harold Hinman, M. D., Dean, School of Medicine, Uni- 
versity of Puerto Rico 

Matthew R. Kinde, M. D., Kellogg Foundation, Battle 
Creek, Mich. 

Erie L. O'Neal, M. D., Commissioner of Health, Virgin 
Islands 

Charles G. Sommer, Office of International Administra- 
tion, Department of State 

Charles L. Williams, Jr., M. D., Deputy Chief, Public 
Health Division, International Cooperation Adminis- 
tration 

Simon N. Wilson, Office of Inter-American Regional Po- 
litical Affairs, Department of State 

Secretary of Delegation 

3. Harlan Southerland, Office of International Confer- 
ences, Department of State 

Members of the Staff 

Louise Beane, Office of the Surgeon General, Public 

Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and 

Welfare 
Betty L. Groves, Library Division, Department of State 
Barbara Younghans, Employment Division, Department 

of State 

The Pan American Sanitary Conference is the 
governing body of the Pan American Sanitary 



October 6, 1958 



553 



Organization (PASO), the international cooi-di- 
nating autliority for public health in the Amer- 
icas, and serves as the Regional Committee for 
the Americas of the World Health Organization. 
Between quadrennial conferences the Directing 
Council serves in the same capacity. The 14th 
Conference was held at Santiago, Chile, October 
8-22, 1954. 

The 15th Conference will plan the activities of 
the Pan American Sanitary Organization for the 
next 4 years. It will consider the proposed pro- 
grams and budgets of WHO for the Americas 
and PASO for 19G0 and adopt the program and 
budget for PASO for 1959, based upon the pro- 
posals submitted by the director and the Execu- 
tive Committee. 

It will also elect the director of PASB (Pan 
American Sanitary Bureau) for the next 4 years, 
elect three members to the Executive Board, and 
consider certain technical amendments to the con- 
stitution. Dr. Fred C. Soper has been director 
of the Bureau since 1947. 

The principal technical programs to be dis- 
cussed are status of malaria eradication in the 
Americas, eradication of smallpox, work of the 
Institution of Nutrition of Central America and 
Panama (INCAP), and the status of Aedes 
aegypti (yellow-fever eradication campaign). 
Other highlights of the conference will be con- 
sideration of reports of member states on public 
health conditions and achievements during the 
last 4 years, and technical discussions on the pre- 
vention of accidents in childhood. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Current Actions 



MULTILATERAL 

Atomic Energy 

Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Done 
at New York October 26, 1956. Entered into force July 
29, 1957. TIAS 3873. 
Ratification deposited: Iran, September 16, 1958. 

Finance 

Articles of agreement of the International Monetary Fund. 
Opened for signature at Washington December 27, 1945. 
Entered into force December 27, 1945. TIAS 1501. 



Signatures and acceptances: Spain, September 15, 1958; 
Libya, September 17, 1958. 

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. 

Signatures and acceptances: Spain, September 15, 1958; 
Libya, September 17, 1958. 

Protocol terminating obligations arising from the accord 
of May 10, 1948 (TIAS 1773), regarding German as- 
sets in Spain, and exchange of notes. Signed at Madrid 
August 9, 1958. Enters into force on date of entry into 
force of agreement between the Federal Republic of 
Germany and Spain on certain consequences of the 
Second World War, signed April 8, 1958. 
Signatures : France, Spain, United Kingdom, and United 
States. 

Articles of agreement of the International Finance Cor- 
poration. Done at Washington May 25, 1955. Entered 
into force July 20, 1956. TIAS 3620. 
Signature and acceptance: Ireland, September 11, 1958. 

International Court of Justice 

Statute of the International Court of Justice (59 Stat. 
1055). 
Declaration recognizing compulsory jurisdiction re- 
newed: Turkey, August 7, 1958. Effective for a fur- 
ther 5-year period from May 23, 1957. 

Law of the Sea 

Convention on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone. 
Done at Geneva April 29, 1908. Enters into force on 
the 30th day following the deposit of the 22d ratification 
or accession. 1 

Signatures: Argentina, Canada, China, Colombia (with 
reservation), Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican 
Republic, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland. Israel, 
Nepal, Thailand, Uruguay, Yugoslavia, April 29, 1958 ; 
Holy See, April 30, 1958; Panama, May 2, 1958; 
Liberia, May 27, 1958; Iran (with reservation). May 
28, 1958; United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland. September 9, 1958 ; United States, 
September 15, 1958. 
Convention on the high seas. Done at Geneva April 29, 
1958. Enters into force on the 30th day following the 
deposit of the 22d ratification or accession. 1 
Signatures: Argentina, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa 
Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ghana, 
Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Israel, Nepal, Thailand, 
Uruguay, Yugoslavia, April 29, 1958 ; Holy See, April 
30, 1958; Panama, May 2, 1958; Indonesia, May 8, 
1958; Switzerland, May 24, 1958; Liberia, May 27, 
1958; Iran (with reservatisHs), May 28, 1958; Leb- 
anon, May 29, 1958; United Kingdom of Great 
Britain and Northern Ireland, September 9, 1958 ; 
United States, September 15, 1958. 
Convention on fishing and conservation of living resources 
of the high seas. Done at Geneva April 29, 1958. En- 
ters into force on the 30th day following the deposit 
of the 22d ratification or accession. 1 
Signatures: Argentina, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa 
Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ghana, 
Haiti, Iceland, Israel, Nepal, Thailand, Uruguay, 
Yugoslavia, April 29, 1958; Panama, May 2, 1958; 
Indonesia, May 8, 1958 ; Liberia, May 27, 1958 ; Iran, 
May 28, 1958 ; Lebanon, May 29, 1958 ; United King- 
dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Septem- 
ber 9, 1958 ; United States, September 15, 1958. 
Convention on the continental shelf. Done at Geneva 
April 29, 1958. Enters into force the 30th day follow- 
ing the deposit of the 22d ratification or accession. 1 



1 Not in force. 



554 



Department of State Bulletin 



Signatures: Argentina, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa 
Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ghana, 
Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Israel, Nepal, Thailand, 
Uruguay, Yugoslavia, April 29, 1958; Panama, May 
2, 195S; Liberia, May 27, 1958; Iran (with reserva- 
tions), May 28, 1958; Lebanon, May 29, 1958; United 
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 
September 9, 1958; United States, September 15, 1958. 
Optional protocol of signature concerning the compulsory 
settlement of disputes. Done at Geneva April 29, 1958. 
Enters into force upon signature unless ratification is 
required by the constitution of the signatory state. 2 
Signatures: Canada, China, Colombia (with reserva- 
tion), Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Re- 
public, Ghana, Haiti, Israel (ad referendum), Nepal, 
Uruguay, Yugoslavia (subject to ratification), April 
29, 195S; Holy See, April 30, 195S; Panama, May 2, 
195S; Indonesia, May 8, 1958; Switzerland (subject 
to ratification), May 24, 1958; Liberia, May 27, 1958; 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ire- 
land. September 9, 1958; United States, September 
15, 1958. 

Salvage 

Convention for the unification of certain rules with re- 
spect to assistance and salvage at sea. Signed at Brus- 
sels September 23, 1910. Entered into force March 1, 
1913. 37 Stat. 1658. 

Adherence deposited: Dominican Republic, July 23, 
1958. 

Trade and Commerce 

Protocol amending part I and articles XXIX and XXX 

of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done 

at Geneva March 10, 1955. 1 

Declaration deposited recognizing signature as fully 
binding: Netherlands, August 26, 1958. 
Protocol of organizational amendments to the General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva 

March 10, 1955. 1 

Declaration deposited recognizing signature as fully 
binding: Netherlands, August 26, 195S. 

War 

Geneva convention relative to treatment of prisoners of 

war ; 
Geneva convention for amelioration of condition of 

wounded and sick in armed forces in the field ; 
Geneva convention for amelioration of condition of 

wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of armed 

forces at sea ; 
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 ; for the United States February 2, 
1956. TIAS 3364, 3362, 3363, and 3365, respectively. 

Accession deposited: Ghana, August 2, 1958. 



Prince September S and 9, 1958. Entered into force 
September 9, 1958. 

Israel 

Agreement amending the agricultural commodities agree- 
ments of April 29, 1955, as supplemented (TIAS 3228 
and 3261), November 10, 1955, as amended (TIAS 
3429, 3489, and 3497), September 11, 1956 (TIAS 3635), 
and November 7, 1957, as supplemented (TIAS 3945 
and 4063). Effected by exchange of notes at Washing- 
ton August 28, 1958. Entered into force September 9, 
1958. 

Nicaragua 

Agreement for the establishment of a Loran Transmitting 
Station. Signed at Managua September 5, 1958. En- 
tered into force September 5, 1958. 

Yugoslavia 

Agreement providing special economic assistance to Yugo- 
slavia. Effected by exchange of notes at Belgrade 
April 4 and 5, 1958. Entered into force April 5, 1958. 



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, 
except in the case of free publications, which may be 
obtained from the Department of State. 

Passport Visa Fees. TIAS 4053. 10 pp. 10<J. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
New Zealand. Exchange of notes — Dated at Wellington 
December 16, 1957, and May 2 and 5, 1958. Entered 
into force on May 5, 1958. And amending agreement. 
Exchange of notes — Dated at Wellington May 13, 1958. 
Entered into force May 13, 1958. 

Mutual Defense Assistance — Equipment, Materials, and 
Services. TIAS 4055. 2 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Lebanon, amending agreement of June 3 and 6, 1957. 
Exchange of notes — Signed at Beirut June 9 and 12, 1958. 
Entered into force June 12, 1958; operative retroactively 
June 6, 1957. 

Surplus Agricultural Commodities. TIAS 4056. 2 pp. 



BILATERAL 

Canada 

Agreement providing for the establishment of a Canada- 
1 nited States Committee on Joint Defense. Effected 
by exchange of notes at Ottawa August 29 and Sep- 
tember 2, 1958. Entered into force September 2, 1958. 

Haiti 

Agreement providing for duty-free entry into Haiti and 

exemption from internal taxation of relief supplies and 

* packages. Effected by exchange of notes at Port-au- 

1 Not in force. 

! Not in force for the United States. 



Agreement between the United States of America and 
Turkey, supplementing agreement of January 20, 1958 — 
Signed at Ankara June 25, 1958. Entered into force June 
25, 1958. 

Surplus Agricultural Commodities. TIAS 4057. 4 pp. 
5<*. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Spain, supplementing agreement of January 27, 1958, as 
supplemented — Signed at Madrid June 30, 1958. Entered 
into force June 30, 1958. 

Surplus Agricultural Commodities. TIAS 4058. 7 pp. 
UH. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 



Ocfober 6, J 958 



555 



India — Signed at New Delhi June 23, 1958, with related 
letter. Entered into force June 23, 1958. 

Atomic Energy — Cooperation for Civil Uses. TIAS 4059. 
6 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Ireland — Signed at Washington March 16, 1956. Entered 
into force July 9, 1958. 



TIAS 4060. 4 pp. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. 

54. 

Agreement, with exchange of letters, between the United 
States of America and Yugoslavia — Signed at Belgrade 
June 26, 1958. Entered into force June 26, 1958. 

Mutual Defense Assistance — Equipment, Materials, and 
Services. TIAS 4061. 5 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Bolivia. Exchange of notes — Signed at La Paz March 21 
and April 22, 1958. Entered into force April 22, 1958. 

Air Service — Lease of Equipment, Return of Certain 
Items. TIAS 4062. 9 pp. 10#. 

Agreement between the United States of America and the 
Federal Republic of Germany, extending agreement of 
August 2, 1955. Exchange of notes — Dated at Bonn/Bad 
Godesberg and Bonn February 24 and May 24, 1958. En- 
tered into force May 24, 1958 ; operative retroactively 
August 2, 1957. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. TIAS 4063. 4 
54. 



pp. 



Agreement between the United States of America and 
Israel, supplementing agreement of November 7, 1957, 
as amended. Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington 
June 30, 1958. Entered into force June 30, 1958. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. 

54. 



TIAS 4065. 3 pp. 



Agreement between the United States of America and Ice- 
land, supplementing agreement of May 3, 1958. Exchange 
of notes — Signed at Reykjavik June 25 and 26, 1958. 
Entered into force June 26, 1958. 



TIAS 4066. 10 pp. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. 

104. 

Agreement, with memorandum of understanding and ex- 
change of notes, between the United States of America 
and Viet-Nam — Signed at Saigon June 17, 1958. Entered 
into force June 17, 1958. 

Use of Veterans Memorial Hospital — Grants-in-Aid for 
Medical Care and Treatment of Veterans. TIAS 4067. 
7 pp. 100. 

Agreement between the United States of America and the 
Republic of the Philippines — Signed at Manila June 30, 
1958. Entered into force July 1, 1958. 

Surplus Agricultural Commodities. TIAS 4068. 3 pp. 5<f. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Ceylon, amending agreement of June 18, 1958. Exchange 
of notes — Signed at Washington June 30, 1958. Entered 
into force June 30, 1958. 

Cultural Relations. TIAS 4069. 5 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Afghanistan. Exchange of notes — Dated at Washington 
June 26, 1958. Entered into force June 26, 1958. 



Agreement between the United States of America and 
Mexico, amending agreement of October 23, 1957. Ex- 
change of notes — Dated at Mexico June 30, 1958. En- 
tered into force June 30, 1958. 

Air Transport Services. TIAS 4071. 4 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Denmark, amending agreement of December 16, 1944, as 
amended. Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington 
July 8, 1958. Entered into force July 8, 1958. 

Air Transport Services. TIAS 4072. 3 pp. 5<f. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Norway, amending agreement of October 6, 1945, as 
amended. Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington 
July 8, 1958. Entered into force July 8, 1958. 

Air Transport Services. TIAS 4073. 3 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and 
Sweden, amending agreement of December 16, 1944, as 
amended. Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington 
July 8, 1958. Entered into force July 8, 1958. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. 

5<f. 



TIAS 4074. 4 pp. 



Agreement between the United States of America and 
Brazil, amending agreement of December 31, 1956, as cor- 
rected. Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington June 
30, 1958. Entered into force June 30, 1958. 

Passport Visas. TIAS 4076. 2 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States of America and the 
Union of South Africa, amending agreement of March 28 
and April 3, 1956. Exchange of notes — Signed at Pre- 
toria March 31, 1958. Entered into force April 1, 1958. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodities. 

54. 



TIAS 4070. 3 pp. 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: September 15-21 

Press releases may be obtained from the News 
Division, Department of State, Washington 25, D.C. 

Releases issued prior to September 15 which 
appear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 521 
and 526 of September 9, 528 of September 11, 533 
and 534 of September 12, and 535 of September 13. 

No. Date Subject 

Note to Czechoslovakia on summit 
meeting. 

Agreement with U.S.S.R. on exchange 
of national exhibitions in 1959. 

Symposium on air navigation. 

Educational exchange (Egypt, Haiti, 
Switzerland). 

U.S. company to make surgical dress- 
ings in India. 

Delegation to 15th PASO conference 
and 10th meeting of WHO Regional 
Committee for the Americas (re- 
write). 

Dulles : U.N. General Assembly. 

Dillon trip to 11 countries (rewrite). 

Informal meeting of Foreign Ministers 
of American Republics (rewrite). 

*Not printed. 

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



537 


9/15 


t538 


9/15 


539 

*540 


9/16 
9/16 


*541 


9/17 


542 


9/17 


543 

544 
t545 


9/18 
9/18 
9/19 



556 



Department of State Bulletin 



October 6, 1958 



Ind 



ex 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1006 



American Republics. Pan American Sanitary 
Conference and WHO Regional Committee for 
the Americas (delegation) 553 

Aviation. International Aviation Authorities To 
Hold Symposium in U.S 535 

China 

Problems of Peace and Progress (Dulles) .... 525 

U.S. Rejects Soviet Note on Far East Situation 530 

Congress, The 

Congressional Documents Relating to Foreign 
Policy 549 

President Expresses Views on Mutual Security Pro- 
gram (Eisenhower, Green) 546 

Czechoslovakia. U.S. and Czechoslovakia Ex- 
change Views on Summit Conference (texts of 
U.S. note and Czechoslovak memorandum) . . . 539 

Department and Foreign Service. Designations 

(Cameron, Fessenden, Johnstone, McBride) . . 549 

Disarmament. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

Economic Affairs 

Mr. Dillon To Visit 11 Countries 532 

Indian Finance Minister Visits United States . . . 535 

Principal Provisions of the Trade Agreements Ex- 
tension Act of 1958 (Kallis) 542 

United States and Turkey Hold Economic Discus- 
sions 533 

World Bank Loan to India for Railway Improve- 
ment 545 

Germany. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

Hungary. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

India 

Indian Finance Minister Visits United States . . 535 
World Bank Loan to India for Railway Improve- 
ment 545 

International Law. International Order Under 
Law (Rogers) 536 

International Organizations and Conferences 
Calendar of International Conferences and Meet- 
ings 550 

Pan American Sanitary Conference and WHO Re- 
gional Committee for the Americas (delegation) . 553 



Secretary Dulles Congratulates U.S. Delegation to 

UNESCO 552 

Japan. Japanese and U.S. Officials Conclude 

Talks (text of joint statement) 532 

Middle East. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

Military Affairs. United States Seeks Informa- 
tion on Missing Airmen (text of U.S. note) . . . 531 
Mutual Security 

Mr. Dillon To Visit 11 Countries 532 

Indian Finance Minister Visits United States . . . 535 
President Expresses Views on Mutual Security Pro- 
gram (Eisenhower, Green) 546 

Problems of Peace and Progress (Dulles) .... 525 
United States and Turkey Hold Economic Discus- 
sions (text of joint statement) 533 

Presidential Documents 

President Expresses Views on Mutual Security Pro- 
gram 546 

U.S. Rejects Soviet Note on Far East Situation . . 530 

Publications. Recent Releases 555 

Science. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

Treaty Information. Current Actions 554 

Turkey. United States and Turkey Hold Eco- 
nomic Discussions (text of joint statement) . . 533 
U.S.S.R. 

U.S. Rejects Soviet Note on Far East Situation . . 530 
United States Seeks Information on Missing Airmen 

(text of U.S. note) 531 

United Nations. Problems of Peace and Progress 

(Dulles) 525 

Name Index 

Cameron, Turner C 549 

Desai, Morarji R 535 

Dillon, Douglas 532 

Dulles, Secretary 525, 552 

Eisenhower, President 530, 544, 546 

Fessenden, Russell 549 

Green, Theodore Francis 547 

Johnstone, James R 549 

Kallis, Selma G 542 

McBride, Robert H 549 

Polatkan, Hasan 533 

Rogers, William P 536 



U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICtl IBM 




the 
Department 

of 
State 



United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE. S300 

IGPO) 



I 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



DISARMAMENT 

The Intensified Effort, 1955-1958 



This 65-page pamphlet discusses U.S. efforts over the last 3 years 
to negotiate a sound disarmament agreement. 

The narrative begins with a brief summary of U.S. disarmament 
efforts during the decade of deadlock from 1945-55. This is followed 
by an account of evolving U.S. disarmament policy during the past 
3 years and of negotiations carried on within the U.N. Disarmament 
Commission and its Subcommittee. 

The pamphlet covers in detail the gradual development of U.S. 
policy from the President's "open skies" proposal at Geneva to the 
new approach presented at the 1957 London Disarmament Subcom- 
mittee meetings and the U.N. General Assembly. It discusses the 
long and intensive negotiations in London in 1957 and various 
proposals for a first stage agreement. It ends with a brief overall 
appraisal of accomplishments and prospects for the future. 



Publication 6676 



30 cents 



Order Form 

To: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



For your convenience, the Order Form is printed below: 

ADDRESS ORDER FORM TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 

REMITTANCES, PAYABLE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

SHOULD ACCOMPANY ORDERS. 



Please send me copies of Disarmament — The Intensified Effort, 1955-1958 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 





Vol. XXXIX, No. 1007 October 13, 1958 

CHALLENGE TO PEACE IN THE FAR EAST • Address 

by Secretary Dulles 561 

NATO: INTERDEPENDENCE IN ACTION • Address by 

Secretary Dulles 571 

PRESIDENT LIMITS IMPORTS OF LEAD AND 

ZINC • White House Announcement and Text of Proc- 
lanuition , 579 

FOREIGN RELATIONS ASPECTS OF LEAD AND ZINC 

PROBLEM • by Assistant Secretary Mann 583 

FOREIGN TRADE: WELFARE OR WARFARE • by 

J. Graham Parsons 566 

AMERICAN FOREIGN MINISTERS DISCUSS COM- 
MON PROBLEMS • Announcement of Meeting and 
Text of Communique 574, 

GENERAL ASSEMBLY AGAIN REJECTS INDIAN 
PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER QUESTION OF REPRE- 
SENTATION OF CHINA • Statements by Ambassador 
Henry Cabot Lodge 535 

For index see inside back cover 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1007 • Publication 6711 
October 13, 1958 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Pbice: 

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 20, 1958). 

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 
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 
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, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



Challenge to Peace in the Far East 



Address by Secretai'y Dulles x 



This Far East-American conference has dealt 
"with economic relations between the United States 
and the countries of Asia. I shall talk about these 
economic matters for a few minutes, but I shall 
then speak of the various facets of the China 
problem — where there is a threat of war which 
could submerge all of our peaceful plans. 

Trade 

Trade between the United States and South 
and East Asia has steadily grown. In 1957 its 
value totaled nearly $5 billion. And we can expect 
it to increase. 

One important way in which our Government 
has promoted this growth is through the reciprocal 
trade agreements program. At the request of 
the President the Congress this year extended this 
program for a further period of 4 years. That 
is the longest single extension that has been en- 
acted during the 25-year history of the program. 
Traders of other nations are thus assured of a con- 
tinuity of United States trade policy which, on the 
one hand, contains reasonable protective features 
and, on the other hand, will promote trade. It 
will thus serve the overall economic strength and 
security both of the United States and of its free- 
world friends. 

Another governmental help to trade is the Ex- 
port-Import Bank. The last Congress increased 
its capital from $5 billion to $7 billion. It thus 
has new resources to supplement, but not supplant, 
the resources of private institutions. 

Also the United States contributes to the Inter- 



' Made before the Far East-America Council of Com- 
neree and Industry, Inc., at New York, N. Y., on Sept. 
!5 (press release 560). 



national Monetary Fund, which helps trade be- 
cause it helps to keep currencies on a stable basis. 

Economic Development 

In much of South and East Asia political free- 
dom has recently come, bringing with it aspira- 
tions for economic improvement. Peoples long 
bogged down in the stagnation of poverty strive 
for a better life. It is vital that the free world 
should find ways to assist them. Otherwise the 
materialistic approach of communism may be ir- 
resistible. 

The United States knows that it is possible to 
have both freedom and economic development. 
But we must help other free societies to demon- 
strate that human freedom and economic welfare 
can go hand in hand and that it is not necessary 
to sacrifice human freedom in order to achieve ma- 
terial advancement. 

Last week I proposed to the General Assembly 
of the United Nations that the members should, in 
1959, make a special effort to develop long-term, 
cooperative plans for assisting the processes of 
economic growth in less developed areas. 2 The 
United States feels that the time has come for the 
nations to make an unusual and significant effort 
to demonstrate both the will and the capacity to 
help economic growth throughout the world. 

Private initiative and private resources can and 
should have a primary role in providing the capi- 
tal development needed to meet these goals. But 
abnormal risks are sometimes involved; so the 
United States Government has a part to play. 

Last year the Congress created the United 



1 Bulletin of Oct. 6, 1958, p. 525. 



Dcfober 73, J958 



561 



States Development Loan Fund and has provided 
it with capitalization of $700 million. We hope 
that this capital will shortly be increased, so that 
the fund can make significant loans over a period 
of years for development projects on liberal repay- 
ment terms, including repayment in local cur- 
rency. In this way the fund can play an impor- 
tant role in cooperation with other lending bodies, 
public and private. 

An additional governmental measure is our 
investment guaranty program. It provides in- 
surance against the noncommercial risks of non- 
convertibility of currency, expropriation, and war. 
Nearly 40 nations have signed agreements under 
this program, and over $200 million of insurance 
contracts have been issued. Nations of Asia 
which have not yet qualified for agreements may 
wish to consider doing so. 

The United States is the largest contributor to 
the capital of the International Bank for Recon- 
struction and Development, commonly called the 
World Bank. This institution has already in- 
vested over a billion dollars in Asia. Its initial 
resources have now largely been committed, and 
there may be need to increase its capital, as well 
as the resources of the International Monetary 
Fund. This will be dealt with within a few 
days at New Delhi at the annual meeting of the 
Governors of the bank and the fund. 

In some areas of the world regional develop- 
ment institutions are being planned. 

However, in the cases of most of the Asian coun- 
tries, there are well-established, successful, bilat- 
eral relationships which are internationally co- 
ordinated, notably through what is called the 
Colombo Plan. This year the United States will 
be the host to the ministerial meeting of the mem- 
ber governments of this plan. We are happy to 
have this opportunity to evidence once again our 
warm support of its efforts. 

The United States attaches the utmost impor- 
tance to trade relations and economic development. 
These serve the legitimate aspirations of people 
everywhere for a better material life. 

Unfortunately these aspirations are obstructed 
by the ever-present danger of aggression. This 
requires that the free world expend vast sums for 
defense. For example, the United States defense 
budget this year will be about $45 billion. This 
is not a situation which we happily tolerate. We 
would prefer that the resources of men every- 



562 



where could be devoted to exclusively creative 
tasks rather than to sterile tasks of creating in- 
struments of destruction. It is not beyond the 
realm of hope that, if the free-world nations de- 
vote themselves even more to creative tasks, their 
example and its results could bring about, even 
within the Sino-Soviet world, a greater use of 
human effort for human betterment. That woidd 
be a development to which the United States 
would respond with joy and alacrity. 

China Trade 

I turn now to China. 

This conference has, no doubt, noted the lack 
of United States economic relations with Com- 
munist China. Such relations have been barred 
under our Trading With the Enemy Act since De- 
cember 1950, when Communist China attacked 
the United Nations forces in Korea. At that time 
our Government said : 3 

If the Chinese Communists choose to withdraw their 
forces of aggression and act in conformity with United 
Nations principles, this Government will be prepared 
promptly to consider removing restrictions and restoring 
normal trade relations. 

However, the Chinese Communists still main- 
tain forces of aggression in and about Korea. 
They do not act in conformity with the United 
Nations principles. They are threatening war 
against us in the Formosa area. Therefore the 
1950 restrictions on trade have not been lifted. 

Some of our allies do, however, trade with 
Communist China, and recently at their behest we 
accepted some liberalization of the international 
list of strategic goods not to be sold to Soviet 
Russia or Communist China. The result has not 
been an increase in China trade. Actually, China 
trade is meager because Chinese Communist for 
eign buying power is limited and is used largely 
for war purposes. Tempting Communist trade 
offers are largely political bait. 

It seems clear that, even if trade were today 
permitted between Communist China and th 
United States, it would be of insignificant pr< 
portions. 

Moreover, developments in the Far East con- 
firm the soundness of United States policy in not 
helping to build up a war machine which, it is 
now threatened, may be used against us. 



' IMd., Dec. 25, 1950, p. 1004. 

Department of State Bulletin 



United States Recognition of Communist China 

I turn now to consider the policy of the United 
States toward what is called "recognizing" Com- 
munist China. 

Let me, first of all, make clear that we do not 
pretend that the Chinese Communist regime does 
not exist. We know, at heavy cost, that it does 
exist. We do not refuse to deal with its repre- 
sentatives whenever it seems that that might 
serve a useful national purpose. 

We negotiated the Korean armistice with 
Chinese Communists. We took part with them in 
the Geneva conference of 1954 which ended the 
hostilities in Indochina. Since August 1955 we 
have conducted negotiations at the ambassadorial 
level with them, first at Geneva and now at 
Warsaw. 

But it is one thing to deal with the Chinese 
Communist regime in relation to specific problems. 
It is another thing to accord it general diplomatic 
recognition. That would greatly increase its in- 
fluence and prestige and correspondingly increase 
its ability to do us harm. 

There is no reasonable doubt that the basic for- 
eign policy goals of the Chinese Communists are 
not reconcilable with our own. We seek friendly 
free-world governments in the Western Pacific 
and Southeast Asia. The Chinese Communists 
want to overthrow such governments, to domi- 
nate the western area of the Pacific, and to make 
Japan into a workshop for the Sino-Soviet Asian 
world. 

Mao Tse-tung, immediately following his 1919 
military successes on the mainland of China and 
a visit to Moscow, broadcast (February 1950) an 
appeal to the peoples of Southeast Asia calling 
upon them to rise up against their political lead- 
ers, whom he termed "colonial puppets" and "lack- 
eys" of the "imperialists." At the same time the 
propaganda organs of the Chinese Communists 
went into high gear against the United States 
because we were a principal support, of the free 
Asian governments. A typical example is a 1950 
pamphlet of three sections. The first was entitled 
"We Must Hate America Because She Is the 
Chinese People's Implacable Enemy." The sec- 
ond section was entitled "We Must Despise 
America Because It Is a Corrupt, Imperialist 
Nation, the World Center of Reaction and De- 
cadency." The third section was entitled "We 
Must Look Down Upon America Because She Is 



a Paper Tiger and Entirely Vulnerable to 
Defeat." 

This attitude of the Chinese Communists has 
continued consistently. Its expansionist policy 
has been shown in Tibet, in Korea, in Indochina, 
and now in the Formosa area. 

The purpose of the present Chinese Communist 
activities in the Formosa area has been put cate- 
gorically and brutally by Mr. Khrushchev in his 
letter of September 19 to President Eisenhower — 
the letter which the President returned un- 
answered. 4 Mr. Khrushchev said, "The American 
naval fleet must be withdrawn from the Formosa 
Straits and American soldiers must leave Formosa 
and go home. Without this," Mr. Khrushchev said, 
"there cannot be lasting peace in the Far East." 

Were the United States now to extend general 
diplomatic recognition to the Chinese Communist 
regime, this would be of immense help to them in 
carrying out their Asian policy. 

Such recognition would, for example, gravely 
jeopardize the authority of the Republic of China 
on Formosa and its good relations with us. It 
would, in other Asian countries, mean that the 
influential Chinese communities would increas- 
ingly take political guidance from the Communist 
authorities and become a tool for the overthrowing 
of now friendly governments. 

It is suggested by some that the Chinese Com- 
munists might alter their character and become 
friendly to the United States if we would grant 
them general diplomatic recognition. That is not 
realism but extreme romanticism which flies in the 
face of all actual experience. 

We have given general diplomatic recognition 
to several countries which are dominated by inter- 
national communism. Never once has such recog- 
nition served to alter the character or creed or 
hostile purpose of the recognized government or 
to deflect it from its expansionist policies. 

In the face of this actual experience it would be 
reckless to take action which would immensely in- 
crease the capacity of the present Chinese Com- 
munist regime to carry forward policies which are 
not only hostile to the United States but highly 
dangerous to our security. 

China and the United Nations 

I turn now to efforts that are made to bring the 
Chinese Communists into the United Nations, ef- 

4 Ibid., Oct. 6, 1958, p. 530. 



October 73, 7958 



563 



forts which the present session of the General As- 
sembly rebuffed. 6 

The United States does not approach this matter 
purely from the standpoint of United States na- 
tional policies. We believe that in such a matter 
the members of the United Nations have a duty 
to apply the charter tests and not national tests. 

The charter of the United Nations provides that 
membership is open to "peace-loving states which 
accept the obligations contained in the present 
Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, 
are able and willing to carry out these obligations." 
Also the charter provides that any member which 
persistently violates the principles contained in the 
present charter may be expelled. 

The Chinese Communist regime has on no less 
than five occasions since 1949 resorted to armed 
force in an effort to expand its domain. Today 
it stands formally condemned by the United Na- 
tions as an armed aggressor. It has repeatedly and 
viciously expressed its contempt for the United 
Nations and its principles. 

Some argue that the Communist Chinese regime 
would be "reformed" if it were in the United 
Nations. But the United Nations is not a reforma- 
tory. There was debate at San Francisco as to 
whether the United Nations should be a universal 
institution or whether its membership should be 
selective. The choice was in favor of a selectivity. 

Let me read you an extract from the report of 
Secretary of State Stettinius to President Truman 
on the results of the San Francisco conference 
which created the United Nations. 6 He said : 

... It was pointed out by a number of delegations, and 
particularly by the Delegation of the Soviet Union, that it 
would be unfortunate to have a Member persistently vio- 
lating the principles of the Charter while continuing to 
remain a Member of the Organization. Such a Member 
would be like a cancerous growth and ought not, it was 
thought, to be associated in any way with the Organiza- 
tion. In the end this view prevailed at the Con- 
ference. . . . 

Since then we have had some practical experi- 
ence. Communist nations which became mem- 
bers — and which cannot be expelled because of 
the veto — have not in fact been reformed. They 
have used force and violence as in Korea and 
Hungary and have consistently rebuffed the 



11 See p. 585. 

"Report to the President on the Results of the San 
Francisco Conference, June 26, 1945 (Department of State 
publication 2349), p. 49. 



efforts of the United Nations to put peace and 
order upon a stable basis. 

If the Chinese Communist regime were brought 
into the United Nations, it would have shot its 
way in. 

It is sometimes argued that the Chinese Com- 
munist regime does not have to meet the charter 
tests because the Republic of China is already a 
member and the so-called People's Republic of 
China inherits the rights in this respect of the 
Republic of China. That is an argument of 
dubious validity. Irrespective of it, the fact is 
that the membership of the United Nations has a 
choice of whether or not to bring into its midst 
and to give veto power on the Security Council to 
a regime which has flagrantly defied the United 
Nations; which has fought it; which has been 
found to be an aggressor; and which far from 
being "peace-loving" — the test for membership- 
has persistently violated the principles contained 
in the charter — which is the test for expulsion. 
It would in the words of Secretary Stettinius be 
"a cancerous growth and ought not to be associated 
in any way with the Organization." 

Taiwan (Formosa) 

Let me in conclusion speak briefly about the 
immediate situation in the Formosa Straits. 

The Chinese Communists, starting last August 
23, launched a major artillery attack against Que- 
moy. They say, and the Soviet Union says, that 
this is the beginning of an effort to take Formosa. 
They probably hope that by capturing the offshore 
islands of Quemoy and Matsu they will so destroy 
the prestige and authority of the Republic of 
China on Formosa that they can then quickly take 
over Formosa by a subversive coup. But they 
insist they will take it, if need be, by open force. 
And the Soviet Union offers its help. 

Now, of course, the offshore islands do not 
constitute an ideal defensive position. The United 
States has not been blind to that fact, nor have 
we been unconcerned about it. But there are 
other facts also to which we cannot be blind. 

Let us recall that a last phase of the ground 
fighting between Communists and Nationalists 
was a Communist effort to take Quemoy. This 
occurred in October 1949. Communist troops 
were landed, but they were driven off by the 
Nationalist forces in bitter battle. Ever since 
then — now for 9 years — the National forces have 



564 



Department of State Bulletin 



been in possession of Formosa, the Pescadores, 
Quemoy, and Matsu. 

Like the Korean armistice line, that situation in 
the Formosa Straits reflects the actual military 
position when the main fighting stopped. It is 
this situation that the Chinese Communists are 
now attempting to alter by the use of armed force. 

The Republic of China has under its authority 
relatively small amounts of territory. Among 
these, the offshore islands, including Quemoy and 
Matsu, have, for the Republic of China, a great 
significance, comparable to the significance of 
Berlin to the West. 

Berlin is militarily indefensible. It is a small 
island of freedom totally surrounded by Soviet 
power. Nevertheless, the German Federal Repub- 
lic and its allies, including the United States, have 
risked war, and today stand committed to risk 
war, rather than surrender Berlin. 

That there is a close relationship between For- 
mosa and the offshore islands is attested not 
merely by the Republic of China, but it is asserted 
by the Chinese Communists. When all factors, 
moral and material, are taken into account, the 
defense of one may not be divisible from the de- 
fense of the other. So the United States is as- 
sisting the Chinese Nationalists logistically in 
their gallant and inspiring defense of these off- 
shore positions. And President Eisenhower has 
in relation to these islands made clear that United 
States forces may be used more actively if the 
Chinese Communists push further a military ef- 
fort which they themselves proclaim has Formosa 
as its goal. 

The stakes involved are not just some square 
miles of real estate. What is involved is a Com- 
munist challenge to the basic principle of peace 
that armed force should not be used for aggres- 
sion. Upon the observance and enforcement of 
that principle depends world order everywhere. 
Once exceptions are begun to be made, that marks 
the breakdown of the peaceful order sought to be 
established by the principles of the United Na- 
tions. 

If the challenge is to world society in general, it 
is particularly a challenge to the United States. 
If we were to show indecision or weakness in the 
face of this challenge, we would merely confirm 
the rulers of the Sino-Soviet bloc, the leaders of 
communism, in their hope that, by threatening 
anywhere around them, they can compel submis- 
sion or surrender. 



If we must meet that challenge, it is better met 
directly and at the beginning rather than after our 
friends become disheartened and our enemies over- 
confident and miscalculating. 

Although the United States is not prepared to 
retreat in the face of armed force, our position is 
otherwise flexible. We have welcomed the will- 
ingness of the Chinese Communists to resume am- 
bassadorial talks at Warsaw. We stand ready, 
in accord with our United Nations Charter obliga- 
tion, to settle the dispute "by peaceful means in 
such a manner that international peace and secu- 
rity, and justice, are not endangered." 

President Eisenhower and I have made clear 
that in these Warsaw talks we will not be a party 
to any arrangements which would prejudice the 
rights of our trusted and loyal ally, the Republic 
of China. But so far as we are concerned we would 
find acceptable any arrangement which, on the one 
hand, did not involve surrender to force or the 
threat of force and, on the other hand, eliminated 
from the situation features that could reasonably 
be regarded as provocative or which, to use Presi- 
dent Eisenhower's words, were a "thorn in the 
side of peace." 

So far, however, both the Chinese and Soviet 
Communists publicly reject in advance any set- 
tlement involving a cease-fire or which deals only 
with the offshore islands. They demand Formosa 
itself and the withdrawal of United States de- 
fensive forces from the Western Pacific area. 

Obviously any readjustment of free-world po- 
sitions which would add strength and security is 
desirable. But strength is not merely material. 
It is a compound of many elements. In the face 
of such threats as the Communists are now mak- 
ing, and the extreme position they are now pub- 
licly taking, it would be reckless to take action 
which, so far as can be judged, would not lead 
to peace but would dismay and dishearten our 
free-world friends and allies in the area and en- 
courage our enemies to be more bold and reckless. 

We believe that the Soviet Union, if it wanted 
to see a peaceful solution, could make that pos- 
sible. That is why President Eisenhower in his 
letter of September 12 7 to Chairman Khru- 
shchev suggested that he should urge the Chinese 
Communist leaders to turn to a policy of peaceful 
settlement in the Formosa area. So far, however, 



' For text, see ibid., Sept. 29, 195S, p. 498. 



Ocfober 13, 7958 



565 



the situation is a study in contrasts. Let me 
briefly portray it: 

On the other hand, the United States has a col- 
lective-defense treaty with the Republic of China. 
Pursuant to this treaty the United States has 
given substantial military assistance to the Re- 
public of China. But it is agreed between us that 
the use of force in the area "will be a matter of 
joint agreement, subject to action of an emergency 
character which is clearly an exercise of the in- 
herent right of self-defense." 8 Pursuant to this 
arrangement there has been no aggressive or of- 
fensive use of force by the United States or by the 
Republic of China against Communist China. 

Now consider the other side. The Soviet Union 
has a treaty of alliance with Communist China. 
Pursuant to this treaty it has given vast amounts 
of military aid to Communist China. But, in- 
stead of assuring that this aid shall not be used 
for aggressive purposes, the Soviet Union is aid- 



ing and abetting the Chinese Communists in a use 
of force against the Republic of China to con- 
quer territory which the United States is by 
treaty obligated to help to defend. The latest 
Khrushchev letter, the letter rejected by President 
Eisenhower, boasted that the Chinese Communists, 
with Soviet support, would bring about the "ex- 
pulsion" — that was Khrushchev's word — of the 
United States from the entire Formosa area. 

The world may judge, from this contrast, which 
of our two nations serves the cause of peace and 
where lies the responsibility for the danger of 
war. 

We refuse, however, to be discouraged. We 
continue the challenge of a peaceful settlement, a 
settlement which would meet every reasonable de- 
mand of the situation. That is our rejoinder to 
the Communist challenge of force. Let us hope 
and pray and work that our peaceful challenge 
will be accepted. 



Foreign Trade: Welfare or Warfare 

by J. Graham Parsons 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Far Eastern Affairs 1 



I welcome this opportunity to participate in the 
distinguished forum provided by the Far East- 
America Council of Commerce and Industry, 
which has already done so much to promote the 
mutual welfare of Asia and the United States. It 
is an honor to meet with this outstanding group of 
citizens and businessmen who are personally con- 
tributing such a great deal to the realization of the 
theme of this year's conference: "Asia-US. Eco- 
nomic Relations, a Challenge of Mutual Under- 
standing and Cooperative Action." 

"Mutual Understanding" and "Cooperative Action" 

"Mutual understanding" is a phrase which is 
constantly on the lips both of men of good will and 

8 For the text of the agreement, see ibid., Dee. 13, 1954, 
p. 899 ; for an exchange of notes between Secretary Dulles 
and the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs on Dec. 10, 
1954, see ibid., Jan. 24, 1955, p. 152. 

1 Remarks made before the Far East-America Council 
of Commerce and Industry, Inc., at New York, N. Y., on 
Sept. 25 (press release 559). 



those of dark purpose. Our view of what it means 
is that both parties make an objective effort to put 
themselves in the other's place when they scru- 
tinize their counterparts' aspirations and motives. 
Thus, for example, in examining Japanese aspira- 
tions to contribute to the economic development 
of Southeast Asia, and in responding to their 
overtures to enlist United States support and 
sympathy with those objectives, we seek, in the 
spirit of mutual understanding, to devise ways in 
which Japan as well as the United States and the 
other free nations can most effectively support 
the common purposes of the free world. In con- 
trast, the Sino-Soviet bloc's interpretation of such 
mutual understanding is that it represents "a con- 
spiracy of American- Japanese monopoly capital- 
ism to reimpose colonialism" on the area. 

The theme of this conference also stresses "co- 
operative action." Cooperative action is the 
basis of the United States approach to the prob- 
lems of the Far East as in the rest of the world. 



566 



Department of State Bulletin 



The United States seeks to achieve its purposes 
by encouraging cooperation on the part of those 
with a stake in the creation of a free and bountiful 
society in the Far East. I have deliberately 
stressed the word "encouraging" in order to make 
two points: first, the United States cannot, and 
would not if it could, impose cooperation, and sec- 
ond, the difficulties of promoting cooperation in an 
area of such diverse cultures, societies, and econo- 
mies, still not recovered from its tragic wartime 
experiences and exposed to the relentless pressures 
of Communist China, are enormous. Their solu- 
tion will indeed require the all-out efforts of men 
of good will such as those assembled here. 

What do the objectives of mutual understanding 
and cooperative action in the economic relations 
of Asia and the United States require today ? I 
would say that they require a common apprecia- 
tion of the present situation in the Far East and 
a common program of action based on that ap- 
preciation. In the United States view the Far 
Eastern situation, even apart from the Chinese 
Communist resort to military force in the Taiwan 
Strait, has for some time been dominated by one 
fact : the emergence of a dynamic, aggressive re- 
gime, restrained by no moral law, by no economic 
considerations, and little respect for world opinion. 
There was a time when Communist China, though 
not concealing its hostility toward the United 
States, operated behind a mask of benevolence to- 
ward the countries of the Far East. More re- 
cently, however, its trading tactics have once again 
unmasked it as the unregenerate disciple of Lenin 
and Stalin. 

Chinese Communist Economic Offensive 

It is peculiarly fitting that we should discuss 
such a development in this afternoon's panel, since 
it is the Japanese who thus far have been the 
principal targets of the Chinese Communist of- 
fensive. This campaign has been in progress for 
several years, but until recently it has not pri- 
marily been aimed at the Japanese and it has been 
pursued mainly in the form of cut-price trade, 
which by those who wished to interpret it in the 
best light could be labeled peaceful penetration — 
or even a rather backhanded variety of economic 
aid. It may not be generally recognized what re- 
markable gains the Chinese Communists have 
scored in their cut-price trade offensive. Unre- 
strained by any political necessity to devote re- 



sources to the improvement of living standards in 
their own country, the Communists in China, as the 
Soviet Union in the 1920's, have had no compunc- 
tion in resorting to hunger exports in order to 
militarize their economy and to pervert their trade 
for political ends. The trade offensive, in which 
food exports have been a prominent item, has gone 
forward despite widespread shortages and hunger 
on the mainland. Not all of the figures are yet 
available, but estimates of the total trade of Com- 
munist China with South and Southeast Asia now 
range about one-half billion dollars per year. In 
Indonesia, a traditional market for Japanese and 
Indian cotton textiles, Chinese Communist exports 
grew from 8.4 million square yards in 1954 to 100 
million in 1957. 

In Hong Kong the Communist Chinese have in- 
creased their share of the grey cotton-goods mar- 
ket from percent in 1953 to 84 percent in 1957 
and their share of the window-glass market from 
percent to 47 percent. Hong Kong cement and 
textile mills have shut down because of increased 
Chinese Communist exports to Hong Kong, and 
the markets of Burma, Malaya, Thailand, Cam- 
bodia, Singapore, and Ceylon are all suffering 
from the Chinese Communist offensive. 

Apart from foodstuffs, textiles, cement, and 
window glass, the Chinese Communists have also 
made great strides in many other specific fields. 
Lest we assume that the effort to win control has 
been centered on just a handful of products, let 
me enumerate a few other markets in which the 
Chinese Communists offer strong competition: 
building materials, such as building tiles; hard- 
ware, such as hammers, nails, padlocks, pliers, 
and wrenches; iron and steel products, such as 
bars, shapes, and wire; and manufactured goods, 
such as enamelware, pottery, fountain pens, 
thermos bottles, flashlights, aluminum and steel 
pots, alarm clocks, electric fans, radios, tape re- 
corders, small three-speed phonographs, toys, sew- 
ing machines, wrist watches, bicycles, typewriters, 
adding machines, small electric motors, combs, 
hair brushes, medicines, chemicals, asphalt, bake- 
lite, glucose, gelatin, and paper and paper board. 

Although the Japanese have been the chief, they 
are not the only exporters suffering from this Chi- 
nese Communist offensive. Indian exports of tex- 
tiles into the Federation of Malaya and Singapore 
shrank from 18.6 million square yards in the first 
calendar quarter of 1957 to 6.4 million square 



Ocfober 13, 7958 



567 



yards in the first 3 months of 1958. Indian textile 
exports are also under great pressure from Com- 
munist Chinese exports in Thailand, Burma, and 
Indonesia. 

The real significance for this panel of the Chi- 
nese Communist trade offensive, however, is not 
in the gains which they have made but in the ob- 
jectives of their campaign and the methods by 
which their successes have been achieved. For- 
eign trade normally increases the welfare of those 
who participate in it. It is for this reason that 
the United States Government has for so long 
actively promoted, through its trade agreements 
program and the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade, a continual increase in world trade 
levels. Trade, however, is not per se good; in- 
creased trade does not guarantee increased wel- 
fare. It can be used as an instrument of warfare, 
and that is how the Chinese Communists have 
been using it. 

I have spoken of hunger exports. I could speak 
of dumping, which the Chinese Communists have 
extensively engaged in, apparently pursuant to a 
consistent policy of undercutting the lowest com- 
petitor by 10 percent — or more, if necessary. I 
could speak of the monopolistic exploitations of 
which the Chinese state-trading corporations are 
guilty. I could speak of any number of trading 
practices which sacrifice welfare to political ob- 
jectives. I shall, however, confine my remarks to 
the clearest example, of the way in which the Chi- 
nese Communists utilize trade for warfare rather 
than welfare. 

This has been the campaign of all-out economic 
warfare launched by the Chinese Government 
against the Government of Japan in April 1958, 
when the Japanese refused to accept, a Chinese 
Communist ultimatum that the Japanese pay an 
exorbitant political price in order to preserve 
trade relations with Communist China. 

This episode is worth studying as a case study 
in Chinese Communist tactics. I hope that my 
friend, Ambassador Asakai, will forgive me for 
dwelling on it for a moment. Many Japanese 
honestly believe that trade with Communist China 
is possible on a welfare basis. Trying to exploit 
the lively desire of these Japanese to resume their 
prewar trade with the China mainland, the Chi- 
nese Communists had for some time been seeking 
to bring the Japanese Government to recognize 
their regime and to break off relations with the 



Republic of China — which, by the way, has been 
a more valuable trade partner to Japan than Com- 
munist China. The Chinese Communists sent a 
stream of "trade delegations" to Japan which 
invariably held out hopes of a great deal of 
trade — subject to concessions in the political field. 
At first it was urged that, if only the so-called 
"China differential," which maintained a volun- 
tary system of free-world multilateral controls on 
strategic trade with Communist China higher 
than that on the rest of the Soviet bloc, were 
eliminated, trade would expand. The "China dif- 
ferential" was abolished in July 1957, and trade 
dropped from $67.3 million in 1956 to $60.5 
million in 1957. 

Then after protracted negotiations between 
representatives of private Japanese trade associa- 
tions and the Communist Chinese trade authori- 
ties, a fourth private trade agreement was signed 
on March 5, 1958, in Peiping. The agreement 
provided for total trade amounting to nearly $200 
million during the 1-year period. The Japanese 
negotiated this agreement in good faith, hoping 
for a beneficial increase in trade. The Chinese, 
for their part, seemed interested above all in a 
memorandum accompanying the agreement which 
specified that both parties should urge their re- 
spective governments to facilitate the execution 
of the agreement and to grant certain privileges, 
including the "right" to fly their respective na- 
tional flags, to members of the respective trade 
missions. Naturally Japan, which strongly 
desires to increase trade with all countries, was 
opposed to the exploitation of trade for the 
achievement of political objectives. The Japanese 
therefore agreed to "extend support and coopera- 
tion" to the trade associations that would execute 
the agreement but noted that Japan did not recog- 
nize the Chinese Communist Government. It 
therefore refused to recognize "as a right, the 
hoisting of the so-called national flag of Commu- 
nist China over the private trade missions." 

When the Chinese Communists realized that 
they had failed to back the Japanese Government 
into diplomatic recognition through a so-called 
"private" trade agreement, they in effect declared 
economic war on Japan. 

On April 13, just before the Japanese elections, 
the Chinese Communists denounced the Kishi 
government, accused it of sabotaging the trade 
agreement, withdrew its trade offers, and can- 



568 



Department of State Bulletin 



celed a 5-year $280 million barter agreement in 
force between Communist China and the private 
Japanese steel industry. Japanese fishing boats 
were seized off the China coast. Pending trade 
fairs were canceled. Cultural relations were 
broken off. The repatriation of Japanese na- 
tionals, long held hostages on the China mainland, 
was stopped. In a short time all trade ground to 
a halt. Even with trade nonexistent, however, the 
Chinese Reds continued to exploit trade as a 
weapon. Following the elections they continued 
their vicious attacks, accusing Japan, a stanch 
and independent member of the free-world com- 
munity, of subservience to United States inter- 
ests and stigmatizing it as hostile to the Chinese 
nation and indifferent to the rich prospects of 
trade with Communist China. 

Blatant as was this use of trade as a political 
weapon, the Chinese Communists went further 
in economic warfare against Japan. They ap- 
plied pressure, as they have done before, to the 
overseas Chinese merchant communities, which 
occupy positions of economic importance in many 
Far Eastern countries, demanding a boycott of 
all Japanese goods. At the same time, Chinese- 
mainland goods were dumped at prices ranging 
from 10 to 20 percent below competing Japanese 
products, in an effort to eliminate Japanese goods 
from these important markets so as to bring pres- 
sure on the Japanese Government. From every 
part of South Asia evidence is accumulating that 
Communist Chinese prices are fixed without re- 
gard to cost, human or material, to undersell the 
products of free countries. 

Ladies and gentlemen, this is foreign trade used 
not to promote welfare but to wage warfare. 

Implications of Chinese Communists' Trade Warfare 

"What are the implications of such trade war- 
fare for this group ? 

As I said earlier, we must agree first on our 
analysis of the problem and second on a common 
approach to the problem. On the analytical side 
can we not agree, despite widespread temptations 
to hope the contrary, that the record clearly 
shows that the attitude of Communist China, as 
of all Communist states, toward foreign trade, is 
that: 

(1) Commercial considerations are subordinate 
to political goals; 



(2) The less a Communist state depends on 
trade with the free world, the better off it is; and 
that 

(3) Trade with the non-Communist world is 
simply another form of warfare. 

Under these circumstances we must recognize 
that the free nations as a whole have an immense 
stake in meeting the problem of the expansion of 
Chinese Communist trade, with its political im- 
plications and its demonstrated practice of using 
trade as a weapon of warfare in Southeast Asia. 
This can be brought about by both negative and 
positive measures. On the negative side, the free 
world still maintains a system of voluntary con- 
trols over the exportation to the Sino-Soviet bloc 
of strategic goods. This should be preserved and 
strengthened in its effectiveness, lest we con- 
tribute to the strength of those who are avowedly 
hostile to us and our friends. There is also an 
important task of public enlightenment to be ac- 
complished in every country. The Chinese Com- 
munists risk little and often gain much by their 
dumping in countries with relatively little domes- 
tic industry. Consumers receive goods at lower 
prices, and producer interests suffer little. None- 
theless it is extremely dangerous for government 
to rely on Communist countries for a regular sup- 
ply of important goods or consumers to acquire a 
taste for the products of Communist nations, 
since they may, like the Japanese, suddenly see 
their source of supply cut off or maintained only 
at the cost of important political concessions. In 
self-defense certain governments are alreacty con- 
sidering the imposition of quantitative restric- 
tions and antidumping duties on Chinese Com- 
munist goods. 



Trade Policy for the Free World 

These measures, important as they are, how- 
ever, are negative and defensive in nature, and the 
free world requires equally effective and more 
imaginative positive policy. 

It should be an important purpose of a group 
such as this, with its immense resources of corpo- 
rate know-how and personal acquaintance with 
Asian economic problems, to suggest ways in 
which the challenge and thrust of Chinese Com- 
munist pressure in the area can be successfully re- 
pelled. In the struggle for Asia, the free world is 



October 73, 7958 



569 



at a certain disadvantage: It cannot formulate a 
master design and require the obedience of its con- 
stituent parts in accomplishing the plan. The 
free world must rely on the ingenuity and dyna- 
mism of business and government, international 
and national action. Each must consider what it 
is best equipped to do. 

The list of possibilities is long and ranges from 
the most pedestrian to the most visionary. Sim- 
ply for its value in stimulating discussion, and 
without either endorsement or rejection, we might 
mention, under economic countermeasures, such 
things as joint undertakings to favor free-world 
over Communist suppliers, cooperative private ef- 
forts to supply critically needed consumer or cap- 
ital items at prices and on terms competitive with 
Communist suppliers, and the encouragement of 
the adoption by governments of penalties on un- 
fair trade competition. In the field of economic 
development, steps might include free-world 
cooperation in supplying private credit, joint gov- 
ernment efforts to coordinate national economic 
planning and bilateral economic development 
plans, multilateral economic development plan- 
ning and training programs, and the encourage- 
ment of long-range production plans or purchas- 
ing contracts for raw materials in order to avoid 
sharp fluctuations in export incomes in the area. 

The Japanese, for their part, have strongly 
favored the establishment of a regional economic 
development fund, similar either to that proposed 
for Latin America or the Near East. The United 
States, on the other hand, in the absence of any 
expressed desire on the part of the other nations 
of this area, has not favored such a fund, which 
would not in any case add financial resources to 
the area, but it has encouraged applications to al- 
ready existing multilateral lending institutions 
such as the IBRD and the IMF. It has also 
sought to assure no worthy development project 
would be permitted to fail for lack of funds to 
finance it. 

Additionally, the United States has told the na- 
tions of the Far East, including Japan, that they 
may seek the assistance of the Export-Import 
Bank and the DLF as sources of additional fi- 
nancing in promoting economic development in 
the Far East. We have also agreed to consider in 
what ways our bilateral aid programs may be 
coordinated with the various economic programs, 
including those of the Japanese, in the Far East. 

570 



Finally, we have indicated that we sympathize 
with the Japanese in their unsought role of in- 
tended victim of Chinese Communist economic 
warfare and that we shall assist them in any way 
compatible with controlling statutes and policies 
to resist the Chinese Communist campaign to eject 
them from their traditional markets. 

Ladies and gentlemen, what we require to 
achieve mutual understanding and cooperative ac- 
tion in Asia is what joint action in the face of 
diverse background, traditions, and immediate in- 
terests has always required : an appreciation of the 
true nature of the problem and the recognition 
that only in cooperative action is there security. 
The meaning of the Chinese Communists' trade 
offensive should by this time be clear to all : How- 
ever much they speak of welfare, their methods 
are those of warfare — trade warfare — whose pur- 
pose is to pave the way for the only export com- 
modity in which they are really interested, namely, 
communism. A constant recognition of this fact 
will assist us not only to design measures for deal- 
ing with their methods; it will remind us that 
Communist tactics whether they be in the field of 
trade, of propaganda, of infiltration and subver- 
sion, or an actual resort to force, as in the Taiwan 
Strait, have only one end in view, namely, the ex- 
tinction of human liberties and Communist 
domination of the world. 



NATO Foreign Ministers 
To Meet at Washington 

Press release 558 dated September 24 

The U.S. Government has invited the North 
Atlantic Council to hold the spring meeting of 
NATO Foreign Ministers at Washington, D. C, 
from April 2 to 4, 1959. The Council has ac- 
cepted the invitation. 

This will be the regular spring meeting of the 
Foreign Ministers of the NATO countries. 

The regular business meeting of the NATO 
Foreign Ministers will be concluded on April 4 
by appropriate ceremonies in commemoration of 
the 10th anniversary of the signing of the North 
Atlantic Treaty. It will be recalled that the 
North Atlantic Treaty was signed by the 12 origi- 
nal signatories at Washington on April 4, 1949. 



Department of State Bulletin 






NATO: Interdependence in Action 



Address by Secretary Dulles ' 



The strength of NATO lies in the understand- 
ing, and in the faith, of the peoples who make 
up the member states. Such understanding and 
faith do not come about automatically. They 
depend upon knowledge. And assemblies such 
as this contribute indispensably to that knowledge 
and help to keep the Atlantic Community a living 
reality. 

Independence and Interdependence 

What is NATO \ NATO is basically an exer- 
cise in interdependence. It is coming more and 
more to be realized that independence, which each 
of our nations rightly cherishes, can only be pre- 
served by the practice of interdependence. The 
early history of our own nation can perhaps guide 
us even today. Our nation was founded by men of 
faith who were seeking not just to achieve security 
for themselves but to conduct a great experiment 
in human liberty, the impact of which would be 
felt throughout the world. But the 13 original 
States could not have performed this mission, or 
even survived in independence, had they rejected 
interdependence as between themselves. 

The precise federal formula they adopted is, of 
course, not applicable to the group of 15 nations 
which make up NATO. But it is imperative that 
they find some way to apply the truth that, under 
present world conditions, free nations cannot en- 
joy the glories of prosperous independence if they 
neglect interdependence. It is self-evident that no 
single nation can be truly independent and the 
master of its own destiny if it stands alone against 
the massive menace of 900 million people and 
their military and economic resources, solidified 

1 Made before the Atlantic Treaty Association at Boston, 
Mass., on Sept. 27 (press release 566). 



by international communism into a monolithic, 
aggressive force dedicated to world domination. 

Regional Collective Security 

The United Nations was, of course, designed as 
an effort to achieve worldwide order and security. 
But we are compelled to recognize that fulfill- 
ment of that goal has been seriously obstructed by 
the policies and conduct of the Soviet Union. 
Each NATO member of the United Nations 
strives to play a positive role in the functioning 
of that organization. But in the face of the de- 
fiance of the Soviet-bloc states it has been necessary 
to supplement the United Nations by other secu- 
rity measures. Such measures take the form prin- 
cipally of regional collective-defense associations 
such as NATO. These are specifically authorized 
by the United Nations Charter and supplement, 
but do not derogate from, the authority of the 
United Nations. These regional associations, each 
in accordance with the genius of its group, ai*e in- 
dispensable to enable the members adequately to 
help one another. 

Military Interdependence 

The interdependence of our nations is most evi- 
dent in the military field. It would be a grievous 
burden for all, and impossible for some, to find 
the funds required to maintain alone the military 
strength to deter or repel armed aggression. So 
we have, within NATO, established machinery 
to share the tasks of defense. Land, sea, and air 
commands of NATO are effectively organized and 
well equipped — although not perhaps as fully 
equipped as purely military considerations would 
suggest. 



Ocfober 13, 1958 



571 



As the engines of war grow ever more compli- 
cated, they grow ever more expensive and the con- 
sequences of their use ever more horrible to con- 
template. "We do not devote our energies and our 
resources so wholly to the proliferation of such 
weapons that we undermine the economies which 
the weapons are designed to defend. NATO has, 
however, acquired what George Washington called 
"a respectable military posture." NATO military 
power is such as to command the respect of any 
potential aggressor. 

It has not always been easy to sustain this pos- 
ture, and there are inadequacies. But in the last 
analysis recognition of our essential interdepend- 
ence has guided NATO well. 

Economic Interdependence 

An essential complement to military defense is 
economic cooperation. Article 2 of the North 
Atlantic Treaty commits the parties to encourage 
economic collaboration between them. 

Today, despite some specific economic troubles 
there is a good overall situation on both sides of 
the Atlantic. Western Europe has fully recovered 
from war's devastation and there is confident ex- 
pectation of long-term growth. In 1938 the com- 
bined gross national product for the European 
NATO countries was $85 billion. In 1957 the 
comparable figure was $228 billion. While some 
of this increase is due to price changes, real growth 
has been tremendous. 

The hopeful economic situation is attributable 
in no small part to NATO's protective shield. Be- 
hind it our peoples are able to pursue their peace- 
ful endeavors. 

In addition to general cooperation there have 
developed in Europe special organs of economic 
cooperation supplementing the general coopera- 
tion of all the members. For example, there is 
the Organization for European Economic Co- 
operation (OEEC) and the European Payments 
Union (EPU). These include some European 
countries which are not members of NATO. Then 
there is the community of six, represented by the 
Coal and Steel Community, EURATOM, and the 
Common Market. 

Such special economic efforts, while they do not 
precisely coincide with NATO, can fairly be con- 
sidered, in their present form, to reflect the ad- 
monition of the NATO treaty that there should be 
economic cooperation. 



Consolidating the Peace 

As we have improved the quality of the shield 
and the sword that preserve the peace, and as we 
have, behind that shield, strengthened our econo- 
mies, we have also worked more closely together 
in harmonizing our foreign policies. In the last 
few years the place of political consultations in 
the North Atlantic Council has become ever more 
prominent. It is now something unique in history. 

We have a high-level Council of Permanent 
Representatives. This is in virtually continuous 
session. It regularly considers and helps to co- 
ordinate allied policies which deal with matters of 
direct concern to the organization, notably politi- 
cal and military relations with the Soviet Union. 

The United States and others directly involved 
use the Council as the means of exchanging viows 
with other members with respect to such matters 
as a possible summit meeting and preparations 
therefor, the reunification of Germany, the suspen- 
sion of nuclear tests, the establishment of zones for 
inspection against surprise attack, and disarma- 
ment matters in general. 

NATO consultations are, however, not limited 
to matters which directly affect the treaty area. 
We have begun the practice of talking over situ- 
ations anywhere which might have worldwide re- 
percussions. For example, the United States and 
the United Kingdom discussed in the Council the 
situation which led them to send troops to Lebanon 
and to Jordan. The United States has similarly 
discussed its policies in relation to Formosa and 
the offshore islands. 

Such presentations are not designed to enlarge 
the treaty area which the members are bound to 
defend. They result from recognition of the fact 
that misunderstandings anywhere impair coopera- 
tion in the treaty area. Also we know that hos- 
tilities anywhere could spread and quickly affect 
the treaty area. Therefore there is a legitimate 
desire on the part of all the members to be in- 
formed about such situations and to have an op- 
portunity to express their views. Also those who 
have to take serious responsibilities in other areas 
welcome the viewpoint of others and the oppor- 
tunity to promote understanding and unity. 

A new development, which reflects this concept 
of the indivisibility of peace, is the contact being 
established between the Secretary General of 
NATO and other regional organizations such as 
the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization, the 



572 



Department of State Bulletin 



Baghdad Pact, and the Organization of American 
States. This liaison is still in an early develop- 
ment stage. It is, however, a beginning from 
which good results can be expected. 

Preserving Unity 

Despite accomplishments of which we can 
be proud and which justify our continuing faith, 
it remains the fact that the unity of NATO is at 
times disturbed and its future placed in jeopardy. 
There are sometimes sharp differences within our 
membership. That unhappily is the case now in 
relation to Cyprus. 

None of the differences which have shaken 
NATO result from any weakening on the part of 
the members in their determination to maintain 
their independence and freedom as against the 
menace of Soviet communism. But the fact is 
that communism gains whenever there are differ- 
ences. Also communism, recognizing such possi- 
bilities of gain, always attempts to create and 
exacerbate differences. 

Recognizing this dangerous fact, the NATO 
Council approved, in December 1956, procedures 
for the peaceful settlement of intermember dis- 
putes. The members were invited to submit dis- 
putes between them to good-offices procedures 
within the NATO framework, and the Secretary 
General was empowered to offer his good offices 
informally at any time to the parties in dispute. 

Our present Secretary General, the able and dis- 
tinguished Paul-Henri Spaak, has taken a promi- 
nent role in efforts to develop the NATO practices 
in this respect. It is wholly consistent with inde- 
pendence and interdependence, and vital to the 
survival of NATO, that procedures be found to as- 
sure that NATO will not fall apart because of 
internal differences. 

The Far East 

I will now say a few words about the situation 
in the Far East because it could affect NATO. 
The basic principle applicable there which is chal- 
lenged by the Chinese Communists is that interna- 
tional disputes should be settled by peaceful means 
in such a manner that international peace and se- 
curity and justice are not endangered. That lan- 
guage derives from article 1 of the United Nations 
Charter and constitutes article 1 of the North At- 
lantic Treaty. In Formosa and the Formosa 



Straits the Chinese Communists, with Soviet back- 
ing, seek by force to enlarge the area of their 
control and threaten to "expel" the United States 
from Formosa, which is covered by a collective- 
security treaty. The United States seeks a solu- 
tion by peaceful means. If that principle of 
peaceful settlement is abandoned in the Far East, 
it is undermined everywhere. 

Our NATO partners have a natural concern 
that the United States should not become so in- 
volved in Asia that its contribution to NATO 
strength would be impaired. We do not expect 
that to happen. 

But something else needs also to be borne in 
mind. The strength of NATO and the immunity 
of the NATO area from aggression depend very 
largely upon what the Soviet leaders consider 
to be the will of the United States. Is the United 
States in fact willing to defend territory other 
than its own, in support of collective security? 
Mr. Khrushchev in his rejected letter of Septem- 
ber 19 to President Eisenhower demanded cate- 
gorically that the United States should — as he put 
it — "go home." He said that, if we did not with- 
draw the forces committed to collective defense 
with the Republic of China, they would be 
forcibly expelled. 

If the United States should give in to that arro- 
gant demand in Asia, the consequences would be 
felt in Western Europe. 

The Soviet rulers have been seeking intensively 
to undermine the concept of collective security. 
They claim that the collective-security arrange- 
ments such as NATO are "aggressive groupings." 
They violently condemn what they call "foreign 
bases" and the presence of troops upon foreign 
soil. They now demand that our Navy should 
be confined to its home waters. 

All of this is designed to destroy the basic prin- 
ciples upon which NATO is founded. 

It is quite true that that effort at destruction 
is now concentrated at a point geographically on 
the other side of the world. The Communists as- 
tutely picked a point where the Communists judge 
retreat was most likely. But nonetheless the prin- 
ciples at stake there are the principles upon which 
NATO rests. If the principles are not valid and 
not sustained in Asia, it cannot be confidently as- 
sumed that they are valid and will be sustained in 
Europe. 

I am happy to feel that the governments of 
NATO understand the position we are taking. 



October 73, J958 



573 



They devoutly hope, as does the United States, 
that there will be a peaceful settlement — but not 
a surrender of the principles upon which rests 
all world order. 

Of course, the United States has not asked for 
and does not expect NATO military support in 
the Formosa area. That would be far beyond any 
commitment of the North Atlantic Treaty. 



develop solidarity and thus serve itself and the 
world. 

NATO serves that indispensable purpose. Thus 
it deserves the understanding and support of all 
who would preserve and carry forward the great 
traditions of which they are the heirs. 



Conclusion 

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization rep- 
resents a significant experiment which, we are 
confident, is proving its worth. In the United 
States it used to be accepted doctrine that alliances 
which left each member sovereign were valid only 
for a period of war and that in times of peace 
they inevitably broke apart. That theory is, we 
believe, being disproved in the case of NATO. 
That is because NATO is now much more than a 
military alliance. It began with primary em- 
phasis upon the military aspect, and that is still 
important. But out of the relationship is de- 
veloping something more, which is proving of 
great value. 

The possibilities inherent in this relationship 
are not yet by any means fully developed. It is 
only within the last 2 or 3 years that there has 
been a serious effort to give NATO much more 
than the characteristics of a military alliance. 
What has already been achieved in that short time 
shows the vast possibilities that lie ahead. 

Western civilization has made an immense con- 
tribution to the welfare of the whole world. It 
has been a dynamic force which, on the whole, 
has reflected an enlightened view of the nature 
of man and of his God-given right to enjoy life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It has 
brought to much of the world a knowledge, a 
political freedom, and an economic opportunity 
which it had never enjoyed before. 

But the mission of the West is not completed. 
The Atlantic Community has a possibility of fur- 
ther greatly enriching the lives of its own peoples 
and of others. However, this can never be done 
unless the West overcomes its great weakness, 
which has been its disunity. Out of this disimity 
came wars which have taken the life blood of its 
finest youth and weakened its economies. A major 
task of postwar statesmanship has been and is to 
find ways whereby the West can maintain and 



American Foreign Ministers 
Discuss Common Problems 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF MEETING 

The Department of State announced on Septem- 
ber 19 (press release 545) that an informal meet- 
ing of the Foreign Ministers of the American 
Republics will be held at Washington September 
23 and 24. The meeting, which is being held at 
the invitation of the Secretary of State, will be of 
a private and informal character for the purpose 
of exchanging views on current matters of com- 
mon interest. There will be no formal agenda. 

The names of the Foreign Ministers who will 
attend the meetings are as follows: 
Argentina 

Carlos A. Florit, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship 
Bolivia 

Victor Andrade, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship 
Brazil 

Francisco Nagrao de Lima, Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Chile 

Alberto Sepulveda Contreras, Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Colombia 

Julio Cesar Turbay Ayala, Minister of Foreign Relations 
Costa Rica 
Alfredo Vargas Fernandez, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

and Worship 

Cuba 

Gonzalo Guell y Morales de los Rios, Prime Minister and 
Minister of State 

Dominican Republic 

Porfirio Herrera Baez, Secretary of State for Foreign 
Affairs 

Ecuador 

Carlos Tobar Zaldumbide, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

El Salvador 

Alfredo Ortiz Mancia, Minister of Foreign Affairs 



574 



Department of State Bulletin 



Guatemala 

Jesus Victor Unda Murillo, Minister of Foreign Relations 
Haiti 

Louis Mars, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and 
Worship 

Honduras 

Andres Alvarado Puerto, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

Mexico 

Luis Padilla Nervo, Minister of Foreign Relations 

Nicaragua 

Alejandro Montiel Arguello. Minister of Foreign Affairs 

Panama 

Miguel J. Moreno, Jr.. Minister of Foreign Relations 

Paraguay 

Haul Sapena Pastor. Minister of Foreign Relations 

Peru 

Haul Porras Barrenechea, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

Uruguay 

i (scar Se > Ellauri, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

Venezuela 

Rene de Sola, Minister of Foreign Affairs 

The Foreign Ministers will arrive on Septem- 
ber 22 from New York, where they are attending 
the 13th session of the U.N. General Assembly. 
Their program will include, in addition to the 
scheduled meetings, a luncheon given in their 
honor by President Eisenhower at the White 
House, a dinner at which Secretary Dulles will be 
their host, and a luncheon given by the chairman 
and members of the Council of the Organization 
of American States. 



TEXT OF COMMUNIQUE' 

The Foreign Ministers of the 21 American Re- 
publics met informally in Washington on Sep- 
tember 23 and 24. at the invitation of the Secre- 
tary of State of the United States, and discussed 
important current questions of common interest. 
In three sessions, the Foreign Ministers exchanged 
views regarding inter-American relations and 
problems, particularly those of an economic na- 
ture, and also reviewed the international scene. 

The Ministers recognize that in the history of 
the world, the solidarity of the American States 
has been of great importance, and that at the pres- 
ent time it acquires special significance. They 

' Approved on Sept. 24. 1958. 
Ocfober 73, 1958 

483364—58 3 



reaffirm that solidarity, which is founded on the 
principles of the ('barter of the Organization 
[of American States]. The present period of 
evolutionary change in the political, economic and 
social structure of society calls for a renewed dedi- 
cation to the inter-American ideals of independ- 
ence, political liberty, and economic and cultural 
progress, and for a reaffirmation of the faith of the 
American nations in their capacity to proceed 
dynamically toward the realization of those high 
ideals. 

The Ministers are confident that their exchange 
of views and informal conversations will have 
fruitful results. They agree to recommend that 
their governments instruct their representatives 
on the Council of the Organization of American 
States to consider the desirability of holding more 
frequently similar informal meetings of Foreign 
Ministers and other high-ranking government 
representatives. 

The Ministers are of the opinion that, in keep- 
ing with the aspirations and needs of the peoples 
of America expressed on numerous occasions, ac- 
tion to promote the greatest possible economic 
development of the continent must be intensified. 
They are certain that a harmonious and carefully 
planned joint effort to that end will contribute 
enormously to strengthening the solidarity of 
the hemisphere and to the well-being of all 
Americans. 

The Foreign Ministers are deeply gratified at 
the affirmation made by President Eisenhower, 
that the Government, of the United States is pre- 
pared to lend its full cooperation in achieving con- 
crete results in the common effort to promote the 
economic development of the American countries, 
for it considers that peace, prosperity and se- 
curity are in the end, indivisible. 

They furthermore consider that this is the 
proper time to review and strengthen inter- 
American cooperation in the economic field, as has 
been suggested by President Kubitschek 2 and in 
the proposals of various American Governments. 
The Ministers recommend that, during the com- 
in<r period before the Eleventh Inter-American 
Conference, special attention be given to working 
out additional measures of economic cooperation 
taking as the point of departure the six topics 
proposed by the Government of Brazil in its 

2 For an exchange of correspondence between President 
Eisenhower and President Juscelino Kubitschek of 
Brazil, see I'.iuetin of June 30, 1958, p. 1090. 



575 



memorandum of August 9, 1958 concerning the 
plan known as "Operation Pan America", any 
other specific topics that the other governments of 
the Republics of the hemisphere may wish to sub- 
mit in connection with the general topic under 
consideration, namely, the promotion of economic 
development, and the following topic proposed by 
the Foreign Minister of Argentina : 

Preparation and immediate execution of a broad 
hemispheric program to train experts for eco- 
nomic development, chiefly in the fields of engi- 
neering, agronomy, industrial engineering, 
economics, public administration, and bvisiness 
administration. 

For this purpose and to facilitate other informal 
talks, the Ministers are of the opinion that the 
Council of the Organization of American States 
should set up a Special Commission of the Council 
on which the governments of the 21 American 
Republics would be represented. As the Com- 
mission reaches conclusions regarding measures 
that might be taken, it should submit its reports 
to the Council of the Organization. Then the 
necessary action may be taken to have those pro- 
posals or measures carried out through the organs 
of the Organization, or directly by the govern- 
ments, as may be appropriate. 

Also, the Ministers are of the opinion that 
practical measures may be taken now in connec- 
tion with certain specific proposals. These are: 

1. The establishment of an inter-American 
economic development institution in which all the 
American countries would participate. For this 
purpose the Inter- American Economic and Social 
Council should convene as soon as possible a 
specialized committee of government representa- 
tives, as recommended in Resolution XVIII of the 
Buenos Aires Economic Conference. It is recom- 
mended that this committee meet in continuous 
session until it completes draft articles of the 
agreement for the proposed institution, which will 
be signed at a later date. 

2. Intensification of efforts to establish regional 
markets in Latin America. It would be well for 
the governments directly concerned and the inter- 
national organizations directly interested, chiefly 
the Organization of American States, the Eco- 
nomic Commission for Latin America, and the 
Organization of Central American States, to 
expedite their studies and concrete measures di- 



576 



rected toward the establishment of regional 
markets in Central and South America. The 
Ministers suggest that a report on this important 
project be submitted to the members of the OAS 
not later than the Eleventh Inter- American Con- 
ference. In this connection the Ministers note 
that the United States Government has made 
known that it is prepared to assist financially in 
the establishment of solvent industries, through 
appropriate agencies, under suitable conditions, 
with a view to promoting enjoyment of the bene- 
fits of regional markets through public and pri- 
vate investment. 

The Ministers again express their constant 
concern about the problems of markets for basic 
products. They are in agreement that the eco- 
nomic structure of the majority of the American 
Republics requires that solutions to these problems 
be sought urgently, for which purpose consulta- 
tions should be carried out between the interested 
members of the Organization of American States, 
on bilateral and multilateral bases, as well as with 
the producer and consumer countries of other 
geographic areas. 

In concluding this communique, the Ministers 
expressed that there prevailed at this meeting an 
atmosphere of frankness, sincerity, and under- 
standing which contributed greatly to the estab- 
lishment of a feeling of confidence that the im- 
portant tasks being started at this time will be 
completed successfully. 



ICA Allocates Aid for Civilians 
on Chinese Offshore Islands 

Press release 562 dated September 26 

The International Cooperation Administration 
has authorized its mission at Taipei to use local 
currency, equivalent to $180,000, for civilian relief 
on the offshore islands in the Taiwan Straits, in- 
cluding Quemoy and Matsu. Quemoy has been 
subjected to intensive artillery bombardment by 
the Chinese Communists since August 23, 1958. 

The action was taken at the request of the Minis- 
try of Interior of the Republic of China. The 
relief work will be handled by the Free China 
Relief Association in cooperation with Taiwan 
officials and the Chinese- American Joint Commis- 
sion on Rural Reconstruction, the organization 

Department of State Bulletin 



directing U.S. technical and economic aid to the 
Republic of China. 

Much of the money will be used to assist in- 
habitants of the islands to strengthen their air 
raid shelters, provide temporary housing for per- 
sons whose homes have been destroyed by Com- 
munist shelling, and for medical supplies, includ- 
ing first-aid kits. This unprovoked shelling has 
been characterized by a Chinese general officer as 
a "shameful act of wanton cruelty." Over 250 
civilians have been killed or wounded by Com- 
munist shellfire in the 1-month period. About 
1,900 civilian houses have been totally destroyed 
and 1,800 partially destroyed in the same period. 

Some funds may be used to build up an emer- 
gency stockpile of civilian foodstuffs, including 
rice, flour, and cooking oil, although the Chinese 
director of agricultural extension and 4-H Club 
work on Quemoy has reported that the people at 
present do not need to worry seriously about food 
supplies. 



Visit of Prime Minister 
of Cambodia 

Press release 565 dated September 27 

Prince Norodom Sihanouk, Prime Minister of 
Cambodia and head of the Cambodian delegation 
to the United Nations General Assembly, will ar- 
rive at Washington September 28 for an unofficial 
visit. 

After a luncheon at the White House on Sep- 
tember ,30 with President Eisenhower, Prince 
Sihanouk will meet with Secretary Dulles. In the 
evening the Prince will be host at a dinner in 
honor of the Secretary. During the week Prince 
Sihanouk will talk with officials of the Depart- 
ment of State and other Government agencies. 
He also will lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Un- 
known Soldier. On October 3 Nong Kimny, Am- 
bassador of Cambodia, will be host at a reception 
in honor of the Prince. 

The Royal Court ballet will perform at Prince 
Sihanouk's dinner in honor of the Secretary and 
at the Cambodian Ambassador's reception. The 
ballet includes a son and a daughter of Prince 
Sihanouk. 

On conclusion of his Washington visit Prince 
Sihanouk will return to New York to resume his 



responsibilities as head of the Cambodian delega- 
tion at the United Nations General Assembly. 



United States and Soviet Union 
To Exchange National Exhibits 

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

The State Department announced on September 
15 (press release 538) an agreement with the 
Soviet Government for an exchange of national 
exhibitions in the summer of 1959. 

This exchange is in accordance with section 
XIII of the U.S.-U.S.S.E. exchange agreement 
of January 27, 1958, 1 negotiated by Ambassadors 
W. S. B. Lacy and Georgi Zaroubin, wherein it 
was agreed in principle that exhibits are an effec- 
tive means of developing mutual understanding 
between the peoples of the United States and the 
Soviet Union. 

The American exhibit, which will be staged in 
Gorki Park, Moscow, will be the first major one 
ever held in the Soviet Union under U.S. Govern- 
ment auspices. The Soviets will hold their exhibit 
in the New York Coliseum. Both exhibits will 
open in early summer. 

Several agencies of the U.S. Government will 
assist in organizing the Gorki Park exhibit, and 
the U.S. Information Agency has been designated 
to coordinate it. It is expected that American 
private industry will participate. 

The agreement, which was signed for the Soviet 
Embassy by Vladimir S. Alkhimov, Commercial 
Counselor, and for the Department of State by 
Frederick T. Merrill, Director of East-West Con- 
tacts, provides that each exhibit will be devoted 
on a reciprocal basis to the demonstration by each 
country of its development in science, technology, 
and culture. The details remain to be worked out. 



TEXT OF AGREEMENT 

Referring to Section XIII (1) of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. 
Agreement, signed January 27, 1958, on exchanges in 
the field of culture, technology, and education and to the 
Aide-Mernoire dated July 7, 1958, from the Embassy of 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the Depart- 



1 For text, see Bulletin of Feb. 17, 1958, p. 243. 



October 13, 7958 



577 



inent of State of the United States of America, the Em- 
bassy of the U.S.S.R. and the Department of State 
hereby agree to the exchange on a reciprocal basis of 
exhibits devoted to the demonstration of the development 
of science, technology, and culture, in accordance with 
the above-mentioned Agreement. It has been agreed that 
the American exhibit in Moscow and the Soviet exhibit 
in New York be held in the summer of 1959, further de- 
tails to be decided upon at the working level between 
appropriate organizations and representatives of the two 
parties concerned, which would be authorized to organize 
the above-mentioned exhibits. 

Frederick T. Merrill, 

Department of State of the 
United, States of America 

V. Alkhimov 

Embassy of the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 

Washington, September 10, 1958 
EX. No. 79 

Soviet Oceanographic Vessel 
To Call at U.S. Ports 

Press release 549- dated September 22 

The Department of State on September 22 in- 
formed the Soviet Embassy that the U.S. Govern- 
ment would permit the Soviet oceanographic sur- 
vey vessel Yityaz to call at San Francisco in No- 
vember and Honolulu in December 1958 for the 
purpose of replenishing- its stores of fresh .water, 
fuel, and food products and to allow scientific per- 
sonnel and officers and men of the ship's crew to 
go ashore. The Yityaz is engaged in scientific 
investigations in the North and South Pacific 
Oceans which are a part of the program of the 
International Geophysical Year. It is assumed 
that the data collected will be made available to 
scientists of the other nations participating in 
the IGY. 



West Germany's Decision To Limit 
Coal Imports Discussed 

Press release 554 dated September 23 

Under Secretary of State Herter and Acting 
Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs W. T. M. 
Beale on September 23 received a committee of 
the U.S. Coal Exporters Association in connection 
with the recently announced decision of the West 



German Government to restrict coal imports into 
the Federal Republic. During the meeting the 
export association committee was informed of the 
representations made to the Federal German 
Government. 

Discussions are taking place at Bonn between 
representatives of the American Embassy and the 
German Federal Republic concerning the German 
action announced September 2, 1958, to limit the 
conclusion of new coal import contracts. From 
these discussions it is understood that this action 
was taken as a temporary measure on the ground 
that a further increase of imports would threaten 
the German coal mining industry with widespread 
unemployment in view of (a) already existing im- 
port contracts involving about 40 million tons of 
American coal and (b) the very large coal stocks 
on hand at the mines and in the possession of Ger- 
man consumers, particularly industrial consumers. 

Representatives of the Federal Government 
pointed out that there was no intention of inter- 
fering with already existing coal import contracts. 
The importation of American coal may, therefore, 
continue. German authorities are at present gath- 
ering further detailed data in order to obtain as 
complete a picture as possible of the total volume 
of coal involved in contracts already concluded. 
On the basis of these discussions with the Ger- 
man authorities, it is expected that the limitations 
on German coal imports will be eliminated as soon 
as the coal stocks are brought down to manage- 
able levels. 

U.S. officials have emphasized that the German 
action in placing coal imports under quantitative 
restrictions could be seriously prejudicial to the 
U.S. coal industry and that the question of the 
consistency of this action with the General Agree- 
ment on Tariffs and Trade is now under study. 
The German Government has sent a statement 
concerning its action to the GATT Secretariat for 
circulation to all contracting parties. 

In the meantime, discussions between U.S. and 
German authorities are continuing at Bonn with 
a view to obtaining the removal of these tempo- 
rary restrictions on contracts for U.S. coal exports 
to Germany after the reduction of the coal 
stockpiles. 

The U.S. Coal Exporters Association committee 
was made up of the following members : 

S. P. Hutchinson, General Coal Company, Philadelphia, 
Pa. 






578 



Department of State Bulletin 



D. T. Buckley, Castner, Curran & Bullitt, Inc., New York, 

NY. 
J. W. Haley, Jewell Ridge Coal Corporation, Washington, 

D.C. 
P. F. Masse, C. H. Sprague & Son Company, Inc., New 

V.. rlc, X.Y. 
J. S. Routh, Routh Coal Export Corporation, New York, 

N.Y. 



President Limits Imports 
of Lead and Zinc 

White House (Newport, R. I.) press release dated September 22 
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT 

The President on September 22 agreed with the 
unanimous finding of the U.S. Tariff Commission 
that escape-clause relief is warranted in the case 
of lead and zinc. To provide an appropriate and 
immediate remedy, the President issued a procla- 
mation limiting imports by an annual quota equiv- 
alent in amount to 80 percent of average annual 
commercial imports during the 5-year period 
1953-57. The quota is allocated among exporting 
countries and subdivided by calendar quarters 
and by tariff-scheduled classifications. 

In identical letters to the chairmen of the Senate 
Finance and House Ways and Means Committees, 
the President recognized that "the imposition of 
quotas is an unusual step, but it is better suited 
than a tariff increase to the unique circumstances 
of the case and more likely to lead to enduring 
solutions beneficial to the entire lead and zinc 
industry." He agreed with the Tariff Commis- 
sion with respect to the distressed condition of 
domestic producers and pointed out that the pro- 
claimed import limitation, which represented an 
equitable approach to a worldwide problem, 
should be of real benefit to the lead and zinc in- 
dustry. As our economy moves upward, he 
pointed out, that benefit should increase. 

The President's letter also emphasized the im- 
portance to friendly countries of their exports to 
us, the worldwide nature of the present condition 
of lead and zinc overproduction, and the need for 
sharing the burdens of this problem. The United 
States has been discussing this problem with other 
countries, and the President is hopeful that mu- 
tually acceptable solutions can be found. 



Meanwhile, the proclamation provides immedi- 
ate relief for this problem which the President 
has several times set before the Congress. In 1957 
the administration presented a long-range min- 
erals program, but it was not enacted. During the 
past legislative session, the administration pro- 
posed a domestic minerals stabilization plan which 
would have assisted not only the lead and zinc in- 
dustry but also domestic producers of copper, 
acid-grade fluorspar, and tungsten. In suspend- 
ing action on the Tariff Commission report last 
June, the President stressed the problems and 
urgent needs of domestic minerals producers. 1 
The letter noted that the Congress did not enact 
that plan for promoting a healthy and vigorous 
mining industry. 

The proclamation of September 22 was issued 
pursuant to section 7 of the Trade Agreements Ex- 
tension Act of 1951, as amended. That provision 
authorizes import restrictions to remedy serious 
injury or the threat of serious injury as determined 
by the U.S. Tariff Commission. The Commission 
reported its unanimous finding of injury on April 
24, 1958. 2 The report contained alternative reme- 
dial recommendations. Three Commissioners pro- 
posed a restoration of the tariff rates provided in 
the Tariff Act of 1930. The remaining three Com- 
missioners favored a larger tariff increase to- 
gether with quantitative limitations. 



LETTER TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES » 

September 22, 1958 

Dear Mr. Chairman : In my letter to you of 
June. 19, 1958, 1 stated that I was suspending con- 
sideration of the recommendations of the United 
States Tariff Commission in Escape-Clause In- 
vestigation No. 65 on lead and zinc. I pointed 
out that a final decision would be appropriate after 
the Congress had completed its consideration of 
the proposed Minerals Stabilization Plan. The 
Congress did not, as you know, enact this Plan. 

After full consultation with the Trade Policy 
Committee and other interested agencies of the 

1 Bulletin of July 14, 1958, p. 69. 

2 Copies of the Commission's report may be obtained 
from the U.S. Tariff Commission, Washington 25, D.C. 

'Addressed to Harry Flood Byrd, chairman of the 
Senate Committee on Finance, and Wilbur D. Mills, chair- 
man of the House Ways and Means Committee. 



October 73, 1958 



579 



Executive Branch, I have decided to accept the 
unanimous findings of the Tariff Commission re- 
specting injury. There is no doubt that the do- 
mestic producers are in genuine distress. They 
have substantially curtailed their production, and 
large commercial stocks have accumulated within 
this country. At the same time, the prices of both 
lead and zinc have declined and, despite decreased 
demand, import levels have remained high. 

In seeking a solution which will afford adequate 
relief to the domestic industry, I am also conscious 
of the importance to the economies of friendly 
countries of exports of lead and zinc to the United 
States. There is no doubt that in the long term 
the United States will continue to be an important 
market for lead and zinc producers abroad. With 
these considerations in mind, and with the aim of 
finding a way to share with exporting countries 
the burdens caused by the present condition of 
world over-production, representatives of this 
Government have recently participated in discus- 
sions of this problem with other nations. I am 
hopeful that, with the good will and cooperation 
of all major exporting and importing countries, 
mutually acceptable solutions can be found. 

Meanwhile, the condition of the domestic 
producers admits of no further delay in taking 
remedial measures. After a careful examination 
of the Commission's report, including its alterna- 
tive proposals for meeting the problem, I have 
decided to establish a quota limiting imports to 
eighty percent of average annual commercial im- 
ports during the five years 1953-57, as set forth 
in the attached copy of my Proclamation of today. 
This quota is allocated by countries and represents 
an equitable approach to a difficult problem affect- 
ing many sources of supply. 

I recognize that the imposition of quotas is an 
unusual step, but it is better suited than a tariff 
increase to the unique circumstances of the case 
and more likely to lead to enduring solutions 
beneficial to the entire lead and zinc industry. 
These limitations represent a twenty percent re- 
duction from the level of average annual imports 
during the last five years. This action should be 
of real benefit to the lead and zinc industry, and 
that benefit should increase as our economy moves 
upward. 

Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 



PROCLAMATION 3257 * 

Modification op Trade Agreement Concessions and 
Imposition of Quotas on Unmanufactured Lead and 
Zinc 

1. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in him by 
the Constitution and the statutes, including section 350 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U. S. 0. 1351), 
the President, on October 30, 1947, entered into a trade 
agreement with foreign countries, which consists of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the related 
Protocol of Provisional Application thereof, together with 
the Final Act Adopted at the Conclusion of the Second 
Session of the Preparatory Committee of the United Na- 
tions Conference on Trade and Employment (61 Stat. 
(Parts 5 and 6) A 7, A 11, and A 2051), and, by Procla- 
mation No. 2761 A of December 16, 1947 (61 Stat. (Part 
2) 1103), proclaimed such modifications of existing duties 
and other import restrictions of the United States and such 
continuance of existing customs or excise treatment of 
articles imported into the United States as were then 
found to be required or appropriate to carry out that 
agreement on and after January 1, 1948 ; 

2. Whereas, pursuant to the said authority, the Presi- 
dent, on April 21, 1951, entered into a trade agreement 
consisting of the Torquay Protocol to the General Agree- 
ment on Tariffs and Trade, including the annexes thereto 
(3 UST (Part 1) 588), and, by Proclamation No. 2929 of 
June 2, 1951 (3 CFR, 1951 Supp., p. 27), proclaimed such 
modification of existing duties and other import restric- 
tions of the United States and such continuance of exist- 
ing customs or excise treatment of articles imported into 
the United States as were then found to be required or 
appropriate to carry out that agreement on and after 
June 6, 1951, which proclamation has been supplemented 
by several notifications of the President to the Secretary 
of the Treasury, including a notification dated June 2, 
1951 (3 CFR, 1951 Supp., p. 530) ; 

3. Whereas the second item 394 in Part I of Schedule 
XX annexed to the agreement referred to in the first recital 
of this proclamation (61 Stat. (Part 5) A 1219) reads as 
follows : 



Tariff 
act of 
1930, 
para- 
graph 


Description of products 


Rate of duty 


394 


Old and worn-out zinc, fit only to be remanu- 
factured, zinc dross, and zinc skimmings. 


54 cent per pound. 



4. Whereas item 391, the first item 392, item 393, and 
item 394 in Part I of Schedule XX annexed to the trade 
agreement referred to in the second recital of this proc- 
lamation (3 UST (Part I) 1167), read, respectively, as 
follows : 



' 23 Fed. Reg. 7475. 



580 



Department of State Bulletin 



TarilT 






act of 






1930, 


Description of products 


Rate of duty 


para- 






graph 






391 


Lead-bearing ores, flue dust, and mattes of a]] 


% cent per pound 




kinds. 


on lead content. 


392 


Lead bullion or base bullion, lead In pigs and 


1 H o cents per pound 




b US, tead dross, reclaimed lead, scrap lead, 


on lead content. 




antimonial lead, antimonial scrap lead, 






type metal. Babbitt metal, solder, all alloys 






or combinations of lead not specially pro- 






vided for. 




393 


Zinc-bearing ores of all kinds, except pyrites 


0.6 cent per pound 




containing not over 3% of zinc. 


on zinc content. 


394 


Zinc in blocks, pigs, or slabs, and zinc dust... 


0.7 cent per pound. 



5. Whereas, in accordance with Articles II and XI of 
the said General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the 
United States customs treatment reflecting the conces- 
sions granted in the said trade agreements with respect 
to the articles described in the items reproduced in the 
third and fourth recitals of this proclamation has been 
the application of the respective rates of duty specified 
in such items, without quantitative limitation ; 

6. Whereas the United States Tariff Commission has 
submitted to me a report of its Investigation No. 65 under 
section 7 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951, 
as amended (19 U.S.C. 1364), as a result of which the 
Co mm ission has found that the articles described in the 
said items (except Babbitt metal, solder, and zinc dust) 
are, as a result in part of the customs treatment specified 
iu the fifth recital of this proclamation, being imported 
into the United States in such increased quantities, both 
actual and relative, as to cause serious injury to the do- 
mestic industries producing like or directly competitive 
products ; 

7. Whereas I find that the modifications of the con- 
cessions granted in the said agreements with respect to 
such articles to permit the application to such articles of 
the customs treatment hereinafter proclaimed is neces- 
sary to remedy the serious injury to the domestic indus- 
tries producing like or directly competitive products ; 

8. Whereas the said section 350 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, authorizes the President to proclaim 
such modifications 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 ; and 

9. Whereas, upon modification of the said concessions 
as hereinafter proclaimed, it will be appropriate, to carry 
out t::e General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, to apply 
to the said articles the customs treatment hereinafter 
proclaimed : 

Xow, therefore, I, Dwioht 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 Agree- 
ments Extension Act of 1951, as amended, and in accord- 



ance with the provisions of Article XIX of the said 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, do proclaim as 
follows : 

(a) Item 391, the first item 392, item 393, and item 394, 
referred to in the fourth recital of this proclamation, shall 
each be modified, effective October 1, 1958, so as to read, 
respectively, as follows : 



392 



Lead-bearing ores, flue dust, and mattes of 
all kinds. 

Whenever, in any three-month period be- 
ginning October 1 in 1958, and January 1, 
April 1, July 1, and October 1 in any sub- 
sequent year — 

(1) the dutiable lead content (as shown on 
the entry in accordance with the applicable 
customs regulations) of lead-bearing ores, flue 
dust, and mattes the product of a country 
specified below, entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption, and 

(2) the dutiable lead content (as shown on 
the warehouse withdrawal for consumption 
In accordance with the applicable customs 
regulations) of lead-bearing ores, flue dust, or 
mattes the product of such country, with 
respect to which duty was collected under 
section 312 of the Tariff Act of 1930 upon with- 
drawal for consumption from customs bonded 
warehouse of "metal producible" within the 
meaning of the said section 312, 

are determined by the Secretary of the Treas- 
ury of the United States to have reached the 
aggregate quantity specified below for such 
country, no lead-bearing ores, flue dust, or 
mattes the product of such country may be 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption during the remainder of such 
period; and no article may be withdrawn for 
consumption from any customs bonded ware- 
house during the remainder of such period if 
by reason of such withdrawal duty would be- 
come collectible under section 312 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930 in cancellation of a bond charge 
covering any lead-bearing ore, flue dust, or 
matte the product of such country: 

Short 
tons 

Peru 8,080 

Union of South Africa 7, 440 

Canada 6. 720 

Australia 5,040 

Bolivia 2,520 

All other foreign countries (total) . 3, 280 

The foregoing quantitative restrictions 
shall not apply to any ore, flue dust, or matte 
the lead content of which Is not subject to 
duty or which contains less than two per 
centum of lead (whether or not the lead con- 
tent thereof Is subject to duty); to any article 
imported by or for the account of the Govern- 
ment of the United States; or to any imported 
article which is under contract for delivery in 
the United States for the account of a corpora- 
tion wholly owned by the Government of the 
United States. 

Lead bullion or base bullion, lead In pigs and 
bars, lead dross, reclaimed lead, scrap lead, 
antimonial lead, antimonial scrap lead, 
type metal, Babbitt metal, solder, all alloys 
or combinations of lead not specially pro- 
vided for. 



Yt cent per pound 
on lead content. 



lMe cents per 
pound on lead 
content. 



Ocfober 13, 7958 



581 



Whenever, in any three-month period be- 
ginning October 1 in 1958, and January 1, 
April 1, July 1, and October 1 in any subse- 
quent year, the dutiable lead content (as 
shown on the entry in accordance with the 
applicable customs regulations) of the articles 
described above in this item (except Babbitt 
metal and solder) the product of a country 
specified below, entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption, is determined 
by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United 
States to have reached the aggregate quantity 
specified below for such country, no such 
articles the product of such country may be 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption during the remainder of such 
period: 

Short 
tons 

Mexico 18,440 

Australia 11,840 

Canada 7,960 

Yugoslavia 7,880 

Peru 6,440 

All other foreign countries (total) . 3, 010 

The foregoing quantitative restrictions 
shall not apply to any article described in 
this item which is not subject to duty; to any 
such article imported by or for the account of 
the Government of the United States; or to 
any imported article which is under contract 
for delivery in the United States for the ac- 
count of a corporation wholly owned by the 
Government of the United States. 

! »'■ : 1 . ! ; : 

Zinc-bearing ores of all kinds, except pyrites 
containing not over 3% of zinc. 

Whenever, In any three-month period 
beginning October 1 in 1958, and January 1, 
April 1, July 1, and October 1 in any subse- 
quent year 

(1) the dutiable zinc content (as shown on 
the entry in accordance with the applicable 
customs regulations) of zinc-bearing ores the 
product of a country specified below, entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consump- 
tion, and 

(2) the dutiable zinc content (as shown on 
the warehouse withdrawal for consumption 
in accordance with the applicable customs 
regulations) of zinc-bearing ores the product of 
such country, with respect to which duty was 
collected under section 312 of the Tariff. Act of 
1930 upon withdrawal for consumption from 
customs bonded warehouse of "metal pro- 
ducible" within the meaning of the said 
section 312, 

are determined by the Secretary of the Treas- 
ury of the United States to have reached the 
aggregate quantity specified below for such 
country, no zinc-bearing ores the product of 
such country may be entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption during the 
remainder of such period; and no article may 
be withdrawn for consumption from any 
customs bonded warehouse during the re- 
mainder of such period if by reason of such 
withdrawal duty would become collectible 
under section 312 of the Tarifl Act of 1930 in 
cancellation of a bond charge covering any 
zinc-bearing ore the product of such country: 



O.fi cent per pound 
on zinc content. 



Short 
tons 

Mexico 35, 240 

Canada 33,240 

Peru 17,560 

All other foreign countries (total) . 8, 920 

The foregoing quantitative restrictions 
shall not apply to any ore the zinc content of 
which is not subject to duty or which con- 
tains less than one per centum of zinc (wheth- 
er or not the zinc content thereof is subject 
to duty) ; to any article imported by or for the 
account of the Government of the United 
States; or to any imported article which is 
under contract for delivery in the United 
States for the account of a corporation wholly 
owned by the Government of the United 
States. 

Zinc in blocks, pigs, or slabs, and zinc dust. . 

Whenever, in any three-month period, be- 
ginning October 1 in 1958, and January 1, 
April 1, July 1, and October 1 in any subse- 
quent year, the total aggregate quantity of 
the articles described above in this item (ex- 
cept zinc dust) and in the second item 394 in 
Part I of Schedule XX annexed to the Gen- 
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade as au- 
thenticated on October 30, 1947 (old and worn- 
out zinc, fit only to be remanufactured, zinc 
dross, and zinc skimmings), the product of a 
country specified below, entered, or with- 
drawn from warehouse, for consumption, is 
determined by the Secretary of the Treasury 
of the United States to have reached the aggre- 
gatequantity specified below for such country, 
no such articles the product of such country 
may be entered, or withdrawn from ware- 
house, for consumption during the remainder 
of such period: 

Short 
tons 

Canada 18,920 

Belgium and Luxembourg (total) . 3,760 

Mexico 3, 160 

Belgium Congo 2, 720 

Peru 1,880 

Italy 1,800 

All other foreign countries (total) . 3,040 

The foregoing quantitative restrictions 
shall not apply to any article described in this 
item which is not subject to duty; to any such 
article imported by or for the account of the 
Government of the United States; or to any 
imported article which is under contract for 
delivery in the United States for the account 
of a corporation wholly owned by the Gov- 
ernment of the United States. 



0.7 cent per pound. 



(b) The articles described in the said items entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after October 1, 1958, and until the President otherwise 
proclaims, shall be subject to the quantitative limitations 
specified in the said items, as modified by paragraph (a) 
above, except that no such quantitative limitation shall 
be applied to any article described in item 392 or item 
394 or in clause numbered (1) of item 391 or clause 
numbered (1) of item 393 which was exported to the 
United States prior to the date of this proclamation. 



I 



582 



Department of State Bulletin 



In witness wur.KKOF, 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-second 
day of September in the year of our Lord nine- 
[seal] teen hundred and fifty-eight, and of the Inde- 
pendence of the United States of America the one 
hundred and eighty-third. 

By the President : 
John Foster Dulles 
Secretary of State 



Foreign Relations Aspects 
of Lead and Zinc Problem 

by Thomas C. Mann 

Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs x 

The lead and zinc industry throughout the free 
world is faced with an immediate problem of a 
serious imbalance between production and demand. 
The principal causes of this imbalance are ob- 
vious. The high level of demand and prices during 
and after the Second "World War, and again in the 
Korean conflict, stimulated production both in the 
United States and elsewhere. United States Gov- 
ernment acquisition for our strategic and supple- 
mentary stockpiles helped to absorb the excess 
production, and the completion of that program, 
coinciding as it did with an economic recession, had 
the combined effect of sharply reducing the total 
volume of world demand. 

Notwithstanding these factors, nearly all pro- 
ducing countries, including the United States, 
continued to produce at high levels throughout 
most of 1957. By 1958 the dimensions of the 
problem were clear to all with the inevitable signs 
of imbalance — falling prices and the accumulation 
of large inventories. Under these market pres- 
sures, United States producers cut back produc- 
tion by about 25 percent, but unfortunately the 
level of imports remained at high levels and pro- 
duction in some countries continued to expand. 



1 Address made before the American Mining Congress 
at San Francisco, Calif., on Sept. 23 (press release 551). 



Economic Consequences to Domestic Industry 

I do not need to describe to this gathering the 
economic consequences to the domestic industry 
of this imbalance between supply and demand. 
They include unemployment, the shutting down 
of some mines and the curtailment of production 
to uneconomic levels in others, accumulation of 
large commercial stocks, and falling prices. The 
plight of the domestic industry in turn affected 
not only those directly employed in the mines and 
smelters but entire communities dependent on the 
industry. 

These trends were known to the United States 
Tariff Commission when it made its unanimous 
finding of injury. There was, moreover, the 
broader national interest to be considered: En- 
tirely apart from purely economic considerations, 
healthy industry is important to our national 
economy. 

But there is another side to this coin. The im- 
balance between supply and demand is not just a 
United States problem. It is a world problem. 
Difficulties resulting from industry dislocations 
have occurred not only in the United States ; they 
have occurred in other countries too. The lead 
and zinc industry in some countries constitutes 
an even more important segment of their total 
economies than it does in ours. It is not an exag- 
geration to say that for some, already beset with 
serious problems of declines in price and demand 
for other primary commodities, trade in lead and 
zinc can be the decisive factor In their ability to 
maintain viable economies. 

Most of us now accept the fact that we live, 
more than ever before, in an interdependent world 
where social, political, and economic problems are 
so interrelated as to be indivisible. We cannot, 
without the direst consequences, insulate ourselves 
against the distress of others. I hope that the 
lessons of the early 1930's, when we learned that 
trade barriers impeded rather than aided eco- 
nomic recovery, will not be soon forgotten. We 
learned then that the consequences of such a policy 
were disastrous for industries, for the national 
economy, and, as well, for free-world strength and 
unity. 

Search for Solution to Problem 

It has been for these reasons of enlightened self- 
interest that our Government has consistently 



October 73, 7958 



583 



sought for solutions that will meet the needs of 
the domestic industry with due regard for the 
needs of other economies. You will recall that, 
in 1954, when the Tariff Commission in an escape- 
clause action found injury, the President decided 
upon a stockpiling program which had the effect 
of withdrawing excess inventories from the 
market. In 1958, when the Tariff Commission 
again found injury, the minerals stabilization plan 
was proposed to our Congress as an alternative 
to tariffs and quotas. When that plan was de- 
feated by a narrow margin, the Department of 
State promptly consulted with a number of coun- 
tries interested in lead and zinc, both in bilateral 
discussions and in the international meeting which 
took place in London recently, in an effort to find 
an effective formula which would be acceptable 
to all. 

These discussions did not result in unanimous 
agreement on all issues. But they did reveal that 
a majority recognized that the task of bringing 
production and demand into some degree of order 
and balance must be faced. This would take time 
and would require difficult adjustments in many 
countries. They also revealed a majority senti- 
ment in favor of the creation of an international 
study group to study the problem in all of its 
aspects and to explore the possibility of finding 
economically sound ways of dealing effectively 
with the problem. 

The London conference has requested all inter- 
ested governments to state not later than October 
15, 1958, whether they will participate in these 
exploratory discussions. We intend to reply in 
the affirmative. If these ex2iloratory discussions 
should be held, as I hope they will be, I should hope 
that the lead and zinc industry would welcome 
the prospect of coordinated multilateral action to 
at least diminish the severity of "boom" and "bust" 
cycles which have been so common in past years 
and of giving the world industry at least a measure 
of enduring stability without sacrifice of the es- 
sential needs of industries and economies at home 
or abroad. We recognize that this road will not 
be easy and that there are many difficulties to be 
overcome. We hope that we may have your ad- 
vice and help each step of the way. And we can 



be encouraged in this task by prospects of an in- 
creased demand for lead and zinc in the United 
States market, by our knowledge that the United 
States will be a growing market, and by the fact 
that we will continue to be dependent on imports 
to a substantial degree. 

The long-term prospects, favorable as they are, 
are not an answer to the present emergency. As 
Secretary [of the Interior Fred A.] Seaton has 
already informed you, the President, acting on the 
findings of the Tariff Commission, has decided in 
favor of a quota allocated by countries on a quar- 
terly basis. There are a number of reasons why 
quotas are more appropriate than tariffs in this 
unique situation. First is the circumstance that 
multilateral discussions are already under way in 
search of a solution to the long-term problem of 
chronic imbalance between production and de- 
mand. Quotas, whether they be export or import, 
are consistent with the suggestions for voluntary 
export quotas made in the course of these discus- 
sions and are a sign of our intention to seek multi- 
lateral solutions. Second, quotas in this situation 
will help, better than any available alternative, to 
stabilize prices which will benefit not only do- 
mestic producers but foreign producers as well. 
Third, quotas avoid the necessity of the foreign 
producer having to absorb the cost of increased 
tariffs and thus will allow the foreign suppliers 
a larger part of the proceeds of their sales in the 
United States market. This is a factor of con- 
siderable importance to exporting countries faced 
with balance-of-payments difficulties. Fourth, 
quotas assure all countries a definite market in the 
United States during the emergency, based on 
their average commercial exports to the United 
States during the last 5 years. And, finally, it 
has the aspect, allowing of course for a margin of 
error in estimates of United States consumption 
in the coming months, of encouraging equitable 
distribution of the burden of readjustment. 

Thus, the action we have taken aims to meet the 
urgent needs of the domestic industry, on the one 
hand, and, on the other, to share the burdens and 
difficulties resulting from world industry imbal- 
ances with our friends and allies in keeping with 
United States traditions. 



584 



Department of State Bulletin 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



General Assembly Again Rejects Indian Proposal To Consider 
Question of Representation of China 



Follow/ ng are tioo statements made by Henry 
Cabot Lodge, U.S. Representative to the United 
Nations, (hiring debate on an Indian proposal to 
in, !u,l, in tli, agenda of the 13th <•', nt ral Ass, m~ 
bly an item entitled "The Question of the Repre- 
sentation of China, in the United Nations.'''' 



STATEMENT IN GENERAL COMMITTEE, SEP- 
TEMBER 19 

U.S. delegation press release 2995 

Mr. President, although we have arguments of 
an overwhelmingly persuasive character, I am 
mindful of the admonition which you made to us at 
the opening meeting that we should confine our- 
selves to procedural arguments entirely here and 
totally to avoid substance. Therefore, with great 
respect, I shall not go into the substance of this 
question here at this procedural meeting and also 
why this year, of all years, is the year not to take 
the type of action which the distinguished repre- 
sentative of India proposes. 

As in years past, the delegation of India has re- 
quested the inclusion in our agenda of an item 
entitled "The Question of the Representation of 
China in the United Nations." We believe that 
this request should be rejected. We have made 
known our views before and will do so again at 
the proper time, together with added reasons 
which have come about because of recent develop- 
ments. We believe that the General Assembly 
should adopt a decision not to consider this matter 
during its 13th regular session. 

With these views in mind, the United States 
proposes that the General Committee recommend 
to the Assembly the adoption of the following 



proposal : (Let me say before I read it that a copy 
of this is being circulated to all members and it is 
the same proposition as the one that has been 
before us before.) 

The General Assembly, 

(1) Decides to reject the request of India for the in- 
clusion in the agenda of its thirteenth regular session 
of the item entitled: Question of the Representation 
of China in the United Nations ; and 

(2) Decides not to consider, at its thirteenth regular 
session, any proposals to exclude the representatives 
of the Government of the Republic of China or to seat 
representatives of the Central People's Government of 
the People's Republic of China. 

Let me say, Mr. President, that there is very 
ample precedent for this procedure. It was 
established in this General Committee on several 
occasions and was supported by the General As- 
sembly in its 6th, in its 11th, and in its 12th ses- 
sions. So we are not asking the General 
Committee to do anything that it has not done 
many times before. Part 1 of our resolution is a 
decision on the question of inscription, namely, 
to reject the request for inscription. Part 2 of 
the resolution falls within the competence of the 
General Committee to make recommendations to 
the Assembly on the conduct of its business, and 
in this form it is a proposal which has been 
adopted by the General Assembly many times. 

Mr. President, the distinguished representative 
of India has referred to resolution 396 of the 
5th session. I think it is fallacious to say that 
this imposes the kind of mandate on us that he 
contends that it does. There is no conflict, in 
our opinion, between resolution 396 and what we 
propose. Our resolution deals with the matter 
here in the General Committee, and it also pro- 
vides the basis for dealing with it in the General 



Ocfofaer 73, 7958 



585 



Assembly. What we propose is completely con- 
sistent with resolution 396. 1 

Resolution 396 is a document that aims at get- 
ting a decision. Moreover, resolution 396 does not 
say that the issue has to be met at any particular 
time. Certainly, it cannot be contended that this 
resolution says that the issue cannot be postponed 
or that the General Assembly has not got the 
right or the power not to consider it. I am sure 
that the representative of India would not con- 
tend that the 5th General Assembly had the right 
to bind all future Assemblies in their right to 
say that they do not wish to consider a subject. 



1 Resolution 396 of the 5th session reads as follows : 

Recognition by the United Nations of the Representa- 
tion op a Member State 

The General Assembly, 

Considering that difficulties may arise regarding the 
representation of a Member State in the United Nations 
and that there is a risk that conflicting decisions may be 
reached by its various organs, 

Considering that it is in the interest of the proper 
functioning of the Organization that there should be uni- 
formity in the procedure applicable whenever more than 
one authority claims to be the government entitled to 
represent a Member State in the United Nations, and 
this question becomes the subject of controversy in the 
United Nations, 

Considering that, in virtue of its composition, the Gen- 
eral Assembly is the organ of the United Nations in 
which consideration can best be given to the views of all 
Member States in matters affecting the functioning of 
the Organization as a whole, 

1. Recommends that, whenever more than one authority 
claims to be the government entitled to represent a Mem- 
ber State in the United Nations and this question becomes 
the subject of controversy in the United Nations, the 
question should be considered in the light of the Pur- 
poses and Principles of the Charter and the circumstances 
of each case ; 

2. Recommends that, when any such question arises, it 
should be considered by the General Assembly, or by the 
Interim Committee if the General Assembly is not in 
session ; 

3. Recommends that the attitude adopted by the General 
Assembly or its Interim Committee concerning any such 
question should be taken into account in other organs of 
the United Nations and in the specialized agencies; 

4. Declares that the attitude adopted by the General 
Assembly or its Interim Committee concerning any such 
question shall not of itself affect the direct relations of 
individual Member States with the State concerned ; 

5. Requests the Secretary-General to transmit the 
present resolution to the other organs of the United 
Nations and to the specialized agencies for such action 
as may be appropriate. 



This question of resolution 396 was brought up 
at the 11th General Assembly by the distin- 
guished representative of India, and I spent last 
night in reading his speech on the subject. So I 
think I am familiar with it. And this was before 
the General Committee and the General Assembly 
last year and the General Assembly acted in full 
knowledge of it. I hope, therefore, that the reso- 
lution which we propose can be adopted. 2 



STATEMENT IN PLENARY, SEPTEMBER 22 

U.S. delegation preas release 3000 

In the General Committee and now again in the 
General Assembly the Soviet Union has seen fit to 
engage in talk of a kind which is clearly subject 
to a point of order. I did not raise the point of 
order in the General Committee because I want to 
be very slow to engage in parliamentary tactics 
of any kind. I would have been well within my 
rights here this afternoon to interrupt the repre- 
sentative of the Soviet Union [Foreign Minister 
Andrei Gromyko] because at least on 12 different 
occasions he was clearly out of order. That is 
not right and should not happen in this body. 

But far more important than his being out of 
order is the fact that his whole speech was noth- 
ing but an attack on the United States. He did 
not address himself to the China question. He 
took advantage of this opportunity to make an 
attack on the United States. Every member here 
may well ask himself what his motive was and 
what kind of a game he is playing here this 
afternoon. 

Now, I would like to cite specific illustrations 
to back up what I say. 

On page 2 of his speech he says, "It suffices to 
point out the fact that the United States already 
for 8 years has been occupying a part of Chinese 
territory, the island of Taiwan and the Penghu 
Islands, whose seizure was an act of direct aggres- 
sion with regard to China." 

We did not occupy that territory. We did not 
seize it. That statement is totally wrong. 

The next statement : "It is known also that the 
United States Government does not approve of 
the social order established by the Chinese people 
in that country after the popular revolution did 



2 The General Committee on Sept. 19 approved the U.S. 
draft resolution by a vote of 12 to 7, with 2 abstentions. 



586 



Department of State Bulletin 



away with the rule of foreign imperialists and 
their henchmen." 

That implies that we approve of foreign imperi- 
alism. Of course, our -whole history is against all 
forms of foreign imperialism. 

It goes on to say: "Not to approve of the in- 
ternal order in this or that country more often 
than not means for the United States Government 
with its policy 'from positions of strength' to 
undertake attempts of direct interference in the 
affairs of this country with the object of imposing 
its will upon it and establishing in it such rule as 
is to the liking of the ruling circles of the United 
States." 

Now, let us just analyze that. He objects to our 
having a position of strength. All right for him 
to have a position of strength, but we must have 
a position of weakness. Now, what kind of a 
consideration is that to bring into a debate on 
Chinese representation ? 

He speaks of "direct interference in the affairs 
of countries," with "imposing our will." We 
have never interfered. We have never sought to 
impose our will. There is no country on the face 
of this earth that has ever been enslaved by the 
United States. It ill becomes the Soviet Union 
with its record of slavery to make such charges 
against us. 

He speaks of the "ruling circles of the United 
States." Here again he is confusing our situa- 
tion with his. In this country the people rule. 
There is not a little clique that have managed to 
get xvp to the top of the slippery pole who are 
giving orders to execute this brutality or that. 

Now I come to the next one: "In Washington 
such plans have not yet been laid aside also with 
regard to the People's Republic of China although 
it should be clear to everyone that these are but 
illusory dreams of certain American politicians 
whose appetites, it would seem, are greatly in 
excess of their possibilities." 

The inference that the men who have been duly 
elected to govern this country are conducting the 
policy of the United States in order to gratify 
their appetites is an unworthy insinuation which 
reflects no credit on the Foreign Minister of the 
Soviet Union. 

The next point: "The United States Govern- 
ment must not regard so lightheartedly the prov- 
ocations that it has initiated in the Far East seek- 
ing to spread aggression against China, the region 
of the offshore islands included." 



The United States has initiated no provocat ions 
in the Far East. We are not seeking to spread 
aggression against China. We are seeking peace, 
and every single statement that President Eisen- 
hower has made — and you have all read them — 
is proof of that fact. 

On page 4 : "Extremely unsightly are today the. 
efforts of a group of United States politicians to 
close the eyes of the whole world to the existence 
of China, to declare 'nonexistent' a great country 
which at this very time has entered into a period 
of might and prosperous development after the 
victory of the popular revolution in China put 
an end to the long period of disunity, constant 
strife artificially instigated from outside, brutal 
foreign exploitation and the ensuing backward- 
ness and poverty of the people." 

Well, Mr. President, it seems hardly necessary 
to say that there are no United States politicians, 
there are no Americans in official positions, who 
are trying to close the eyes of the world to the 
existence of China. We deplore the fact that this 
group has taken possession of China, yes, in the 
same way that we deplore the group that took 
possession of Germany under the Hitler regime. 
We can deplore that without being accused of 
denying the existence of China. It is because we 
value the existence of China that we hold to the 
policy that we hold. 

We are enemies of foreign exploitation and 
backwardness and poverty, and we will match 
our record against that of the Soviet Union in 
trying to be helpful to people with no strings at- 
tached to end that backwardness and end that 
poverty. 

The next point : "If the United Nations wishes 
to deal with reality and not to live in the world 
of illusions in whose grip the United States Gov- 
ernment has found itself as a result of the failure 
9 years ago of its imperialist policy with respect 
to China," and so forth and so forth. 

Mr. President, we have never had an imperialist 
policy with respect to China. I suggest that Mr. 
Gromyko read history and read about John Hay 
and the Open Door policy of 50 years ago. He 
will see to what extent our policy has always been 
that of keeping China free from foreign domina- 
tion. 

The next point : "We are certainly aware of 
the fact that the majority of countries espousing 
the United States Government's position in the 
question of China's representation in the United 



Ocfober 73, 1958 



587 



Nations are doing this only for the reason that 
they are under United States pressure." 

Isn't that a polite, charming thing to say about 
the members of this body who happen out of their 
convictions to stand with us ? Isn't that a delicate, 
gentlemanly way for one member of a body to 
talk to his colleagues? Apparently nobody here 
can have an honest agreement with us. If they 
vote with us, it is because they are under United 
States pressure. There again I say to him he is 
confusing our position with his, because his Gov- 
ernment operates by pressure, by putting 
the screws on people, by intimidating people, by 
threatening people. He thinks that is the way we 
operate. Mr. President, we could not operate that 
way — we do not know how to. 

The same thing can be said about this : "The 
United States abuses its position, imposing its will 
on states which are dependent on it and which 
are entangled with a net of military and other 
treaties." 

He cannot find one state on which we have 
imposed our will. He knows very well that it 
is on his side that the iron discipline exists. Our 
side is voluntary, and he knows that as well as 
I do. 

Another quotation: "It is not difficult to con- 
ceive that those countries which the United States 
Government is dragging" — dragging in its wake, 
if you please — "compelling them to follow its pol- 
icy, feel it as a burden." 

I have already commented on that type of ac- 
cusation. 

Then there is this one here : "Such an illustra- 
tion is provided by the consideration at the UN". 
General Assembly emergency session of the ques- 
tion concerning the withdrawal of American 
forces from Lebanon and of British forces from 
Jordan and the decision adopted by it." 

He cites that as a defeat for the United States. 
Well, now, as a matter of fact, Mr. President, we 
announced that we were delighted when the 10 
Arab countries, under the distinguished leader- 
ship of Foreign Minister Mahgoub of the Sudan, 
had agreed upon this resolution, which was on all 
fours with the resolution which Norway had 
sponsored and which we were supporting. We 
expressed our great pleasure. I did not call atten- 
tion to it at the time because I am a kindly sort of 
a man who does not go around looking for an ar- 



588 



gument, but, as he has brought this up, I will call 
attention to the fact that the Soviet Union had to 
withdraw its resolution, which called upon us to 
withdraw from Lebanon. So they withdrew the 
resolution for us to withdraw because they knew 
they did not have the votes. So if anybody got a 
defeat in that session, it was the Soviet Union. 

I quote one more: "The responsibility for fur- 
ther delay in solving this question will certainly 
continue to rest with the United States Govern- 
ment, which inspires and organizes sabotage 
against the restoration of the legitimate rights of 
China in the United Nations." 

I need scarcely say we do not inspire nor do we 
organize any sabotage. 

Before I take my seat, Mr. President, let me 
say that an accusation of the kind which Mr. 
Gromyko has just made against the United States 
ill becomes the spokesman of a government with 
the brutal record of the Soviet Union. I just 
heard last week from a very dependable source, a 
man who just returned from Eastern Europe, that 
the number of people currently escaping from 
East Germany to West Germany has reached a 
new high of 5,000 persons a week. Now, that is 
the argument to end all arguments. That is the 
most eloquent testimony to the humane character 
of Soviet communism. Whenever they get a 
chance to get away from it, they get away from 
it. 

No, Mr. President, the fact is that the Chinese 
Communists are at this moment seeking, by force 
of arms and in flagrant contravention of the 
United Nations Charter, to conquer territory they 
have never possessed. They have fired some 
300,000 rounds of high explosive shells at the is- 
land of Quemoy. That is in the neighborhood of 
three rounds of high explosives for every man, 
woman, and child on the island. This barrage 
against Quemoy, which was started less than a 
month ago, recalls the attempted invasion in Oc- 
tober 1949 and the attack against Quemoy in 
September 1954. In this latest barrage a thou- 
sand civilians have already been killed. 

We think that this is not only a further dis- 
qualification to be added to the already long list, 
insofar as the United Nations membership is con- 
cerned; we also think it would justify the United 
Nations in taking strong steps against that kind 
of behavior. The Chinese Communists are rap- 

Department of State Bulletin 






idly shooting themselves — and shooting the 
world — out of a chance to settle this question as 
it should be settled. 

I suggest to the representative of the Soviet 
Union that, instead of vilifying us, he use what- 
ever influence he may have with the group now 
in power in Peking — and we can all of us imagine 
how great or how small that influence is — to cease 
their violent and their murderous activities. 3 



U.S. Supports Inclusion 
of Item on Hungary 

Statement by Henry Cabot Lodge 

U.S. Representative to the United Nations 1 

The United States strongly supports the in- 
scription of this item ["The situation in Hun- 
gary"]. 

The report of the Special Committee on the 
Problem of Hungary dated July 14, 1958, 2 re- 
veals that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
and the authorities of the present regime in Hun- 
gary continue to act in complete defiance — in com- 
plete defiance, Mr. President — of the many 
resolutions passed in the General Assembly by 
overwhelming majorities of the members of the 
United Nations. Let me specify : 

Armed forces of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics remain in Hungary to deprive Hun- 
gary, in violation of the charter of the United 
Nations, of its liberty and political independence 
and the Hungarian people of the exercise of their 
fundamental human rights; 

The present Hungarian regime, imposed forci- 
bly on the Hungarian people by and maintained 
solely through the pi*esence of Soviet armed 
forces, continues its repressive measures against 
the Hungarian people and deprives the Hungar- 
ian people of the enjoyment of their fundamental 
human rights and freedoms. 



3 The General Assembly in plenary session on Sept. 23 
adopted the resolution recommended by the General Com- 
mittee by a vote of 44 to 28, with 9 abstentions. 

1 Made in the General Committee on Sept. 17 (U.S. dele- 
gation press release 2993) . 

2 U.N. doc. A/3849. 



The present Hungarian regime, in violation of 
its pledged word, continues its policy of brutal 
reprisals against leaders and participants in the 
national uprising of 1956, including the practice 
of secret arrests, trials, and executions so shock- 
ingly revealed to the world in the tragic case of 
former Premier Imre Nagy, General Pal Maleter, 
and their companions. 3 

I have just seen a United Press dispatch from 
Vienna dated September 16, from which I shall 
read. 

Four more leaders of the abortive Hungarian revolu- 
tion in 1956 have been convicted and sentenced to prison 
terms ranging from 3 years to life, reliable sources said 
here today. 

They were identified as Gabor Tanczos, secretary of the 
"Petoefi circle" of intellectuals and writers in Hungary ; 
journalists Sandor Haraszti and Gyoergy Fazekas ; and 
former secretary of the Budapest Communist Party Com- 
mittee Joszef Surec. 

The sources said Tanczos was sentenced to life, Faze- 
kas to 11 years, Haraszti 8 years, and Surec 3 years. 
The trials were understood to have been held in Buda- 
pest last week. 

Tanczos, Fazekas, and Haraszti were among the group 
that sought and was granted political asylum in the 
Yugoslav Legation in Budapest after Soviet troops 
moved into the Hungarian capital and crushed the revo- 
lution on November 4, 1956. 

The Russians promised them safe conduct, but arrested 
them as soon as they left the legation. 

Mr. President, the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics and the present Hungarian regime have 
willfully refused to recognize the competence of 
the Special Committee on the Problem of Hun- 
gary, which was established by resolution 1132 
(XI) of the General Assembly 4 and that of the 
General Assembly's Special Representative on 
Hungary, Prince Wan Waithayakon, who was ap- 
pointed by resolution 1133 (XI), and have re- 
fused all cooperation with the Special Committee 
and the Special Representative. 

In these circumstances, the General Assembly 
should consider additional measures designed to 
secure the withdrawal of Soviet armed forces 
from Hungary, bring an end to the present armed 
repression, and alleviate the plight of the Hun- 
garian people. 5 



3 For background, see Bulletin of July 7, 1958, p. 7. 
' For text, see ibid., Jan. 28, 1957, p. 140. 
' "The situation in Hungary" became item 69 in the 
agenda as adopted in plenary session. 



October 13, J958 



589 



G.A. Agrees to Rewording of Item 
on Peaceful Coexistence 



Current U.N. Documents: 
A Selected Bibliography 1 



Statement oy Henry Cabot Lodge 

U.S. Representative to the United Nations 1 

The United States in the General Committee 
moved to change the wording of this item so that, 
instead of reading "Measures aimed at implemen- 
tation and promotion of principles of peaceful 
coexistence among States," it reads "Measures 
aimed at implementation and promotion of peace- 
ful and neighborly relations among States." 

We made this motion because it reflects the title 
of the resolution which was presented by India, 
Yugoslavia, and Sweden last year, and that reso- 
lution received unanimous support. We note that 
the explanatory memorandum specifically refers 
to this resolution and to the development of 
friendly relations among nations as a primary 
task of the United Nations. 

Let me point out that the United Nations Char- 
ter states in the preamble that one of the purposes 
of the United Nations is for members "to pract ice 
tolerance and live together in peace with one an- 
other as good neighbors." The promotion of 
peaceful and neighborly relations is therefore an 
important concern of the General Assembly. 

Mr. President, we should not stop at peaceful 
coexistence. We should go further and live up to 
the full spirit of the charter. 

There is not only no shortcoming, to use the 
phrase of the representative of Czechoslovakia, in 
this language; it is actually more comprehensive. 
We feel that this revised phrasing, so that it will 
correspond with the action taken by the General 
Assembly last year, will contribute to a serious 
consideration of measures that might be recom- 
mended to member states. We cannot coexist 
peacefully, Mr. President, unless we behave peace- 
fully and, I might add, justly. 2 



1 Made during debate on the agenda in the plenary 
session of the 13th General Assembly on Sept. 22 (U.S. 
delegation press release 2997). 

' "Measures aimed at implementation and promotion 
of peaceful and neighborly relations among States" be- 
came item 61 in the agenda as adopted in plenary session. 



General Assembly 

UNREP Executive Committee. Report on a Survey of 
Difficult Cases Living Outside Official Camps in Aus- 
tria, 1957-1958. A/AC.79/126, July 9, 1958. 59 pp. 
mimeo. Note by the High Commissioner. A/AC.79/126/ 
Add. 1. July i6, 1958. 4 pp. mimeo. 

Provisional Agenda of the Thirteenth Session of the Gen- 
eral Assembly: Item proposed by Czechoslovakia. 
Measures Aimed at Implementation and Promotion of 
Principles of Peaceful Co-Existence Among States. 
A/3847/ Add. 1. August 19, 1958. 3 pp. mimeo. 

Constitutions, Electoral Laws and Other Legal Instru- 
ments Relating to Political Rights of Women. Memo- 
randum by the Secretary-General. A/38S9. August 20, 
1958. 18 pp. mimeo. 

Supplementary List of Items for the Agenda of the 
Thirteenth Regular Session of the General Assembly. 
A/3S94. August 25, 1958. 1 p. mimeo. 

Effects of Atomic Radiation. Report of the Secretary- 
General on the strengthening and widening of scientific 
activities in the field of the effects of atomic radiation. 
A/3S64/Add. 1. August 26, 1958. 3 pp. mimeo. 

Supplementary List of Items for the Agenda of the 
Thirteenth Regular Session of the General Assembly : 
Item Proposed by Australia. The Situation in Hun- 
gary. A/3875/Add. 1. August 26. 195s. 2 pp. mimeo. 

United Nations Emergency Force. Report of the Secre- 
tary-General. A/3899. August 27, 1958. 12 pp. mimeo. 

Report of the United Nations Good Offices Committee on 
South West Africa. Letter to the Secretary-General 
from the Chairman of the United Nations Good Offices 
Committee on South West Africa. A/3900. August 27, 



195S. 



:i pp. mimeo. 



Report of the Conference of Experts To Study the Possi- 
bility of Detecting Violations of a Possible Agreement 
on the Suspension of Nuclear Tests. Note by the Secre- 
tary-General. A/3S97. August 28, 1958. 39 pp. mimeo. 

Request for the Inclusion of an Additional Item in the 
Agenda of the Thirteenth Regular Session : Programme 
for International Co-Operatiou in the Field of Outer 
Space. Letter from the Permanent Representative of 
the United States Addressed to the Secretary-General. 
A/3902. September 2, 1958. 3 pp. mimeo. 

Letter Dated 6 September 1958 From the Acting Perma- 
nent Representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics to the United Nations Addressed to the Secre- 
tary-General. A/3904. September 9. 1958. 9 pp. mimeo. 

Adoption of the Agenda and Allocation of Items to Com- 
mittees. Memorandum by the Secretary-General. 
A/BUR/148. September 11. 1958. 17 pp. mimeo. 

Supplementary List of Items for the Agenda of the 
Thirteenth Regular Session of the General Assembly: 
Item Proposed by Greece. The Question of Cyprus. 
A/3874/Add. 1. September 12, 1958. 5 pp. mimeo. 

Economic Development of Under-Developed Countries. 
Report and Recommendations of the Preparatory Com- 
mittee for the Special Fund. A/3908. September 15, 
1958. 33 pp. mimeo. 

Request for the Inclusion of an Additional Item in the 
Agenda of the Thirteenth Regular Session. The Dis- 
continuance of Atomic and Hydrogen Weapons Tests. 
Letter from the Chairman of the Delegation of the 



1 Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 2960 Broadway, New York 27, N. Y. 
Other materials (mimeographed or processed documents) 
may be consulted at certain designated libraries in the 
United States. 



590 



Department of State Bulletin 



Union of soviet Socialist Bepnblics Addressed to tbe 
- retary-GeneraL A 3915. September 15, 1958. ;> pp. 
mimeo. 

Ass iciation of Non-Self-Governing Territories With the 
European Economic Community. Report of the Secre- 
tariat. A, 3916. September 17. 1958. 28 pp. mimeo. 

Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories. Offers 
of study ami Training Facilities Under Resolution 845 
ii\i of 22 November 1954. Report of the Secretary- 
General. A/3917. September 17. 1958. 11 pp. mimeo, 
with tables. 

Economic Development of Under-Developed Countries. 
Replies received to an inquiry by the Secretary-General 
regarding the extent of willingness of Governments 
to contribute to the Special Fund. A 3910. September 
is. 1958. 13 pp. mimeo. 

Appointment of Members of the Disarmament Commis- 
sion. Note by the Secretary-General. A 3913. Septem- 
ber IS, 195S. 1 p. mimeo. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Educational Exchange Agreement 
With United Kingdom 

Press release 548 dated September T2 

In an exchange of notes at London on Septem- 
ber 22 the United Stales and the United King- 
dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 
agreed to extend the educational exchange pro- 
gram carried out under the Fulbright Act for 
another 5-year period. The brief ceremony took 
place in the Foreign Office with Ambassador John 
Hay Whitney representing the United States and 
David Onnsby-Gore, British Minister of State 
for Foreign Affairs, representing his country. It 
was exactly 10 years ago that the original agree- 
ment was concluded under which educational ex- 
changes between the two countries were initiated. 

This amendment authorizes the expenditure of 
British currency equivalent to $5 million during 
the next 5 years for exchanges of persons between 
the United States and the United Kingdom and 
colonial areas for purposes of study, teaching. 
university lecturing, and conducting advanced re- 
search. It is estimated that this amount v\ill 
provide for nearly 3,000 exchanges. Approxi- 
mately 0.000 persons have been exchanged follow- 
ing the signing of the original agreement and 
several amendments to extend the program. 

The Fulbright Act. approved in 1946, author- 
izes the use of certain foreign currencies owed to 



or owned by the United States which are derived 
from the sale of war-surplus property for educa- 
tional exchanges between the United States and 
other countries. 



Surplus Agricultural Commodity 
Agreement With India 

Press release 563 dated September 26 

An agreement to finance the sale to India of 
$238.8 million worth of U.S. surplus agricultural 
commodities under the Agricultural Trade De- 
velopment and Assistance Act (P.L. 480) was 
signed on September 20 at Washington, D.C. The 
agreement was signed, in the presence of officials 
from both Governments, by the Acting Secretary 
of State. Christian Herter, and H. Dayal, Charge 
d'All'aires of India, True D. Morse, Under Sec- 
retary of Agriculture, represented the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture. 

This is the third agreement to be concluded be- 
tween India and the United States under title I of 
the agricultural surplus disposal authority. Pre- 
vious agreements, totaling $425.4 million, were 
concluded in August 1956 and June 1958. 

The new agreement provides for financing the 
sale for Indian rupees of wheat, corn, and grain 
sorghums. The agreement also provides that the 
Indian rupees accruing under the agreement will 
be used for loans to the Indian Government for the 
financing of economic development projects, some 
grants, and for meeting U.S. expenditures in 
India. 

This agreement brings to a total of 8004.2 mil- 
lion the U.S. surplus agricultural commodities 
sold to India under title I of P.L. 4S0. 



Current Actions 

MULTILATERAL 



Automotive Traffic 

Convention concerning customs facilities for touring. 

Done at New York, June 4. 1954. Entered into force 

September 11. 1957. TIAS 3879. 

Ratification deposited: Spain. Angus! 18, I! 58 
Customs convention on temporary importation of private 

road vehicles. Done at New York June 4. 1054. Entered 

into force December 1.".. 1957. TIAS 3943. 

Ratification deposited: Spain, August 18, 1958. 



Ocfofaer 13, 1958 



591 



Finance 

Articles of agreement of the International Finance Cor- 
poration. Done at Washington May 25, 1955. Entered 
into force July 20, 1956. TIAS 3620. 
Signature and acceptance: Libya, September 18, 1958. 

Warfare, Rules of 

Convention respecting the laws and customs of war on 
land, and annex. Signed at The Hague October 18, 1907. 
Entered into force January 26, 1910. 36 Stat. 2277. 
Ratification deposited: Dominican Republic, May 16, 
1958. 



DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE 



State Department Reorganizes 
Bureau of Inter- American Affairs 



BILATERAL 

Burma 

Agreement providing currency of India, generated under 
the agricultural commodities agreement of August 29, 
1956, between the United States and India (TIAS 3661), 
to Burma for the purchase of textiles in India. Effected 
by exchange of notes at Rangoon August 25, 1958. 
Entered into force August 25, 1958. 

Japan 

Agreement relating to Japanese contributions during 
Japanese fiscal year 1958 under article XXV of the 
administrative agreement of February 28, 1952 (TIAS 
2492), for United States services and supplies in Japan. 
Effected by exchange of notes at Tokyo August 12, 1958. 
Entered into force August 12, 1958. 

Lebanon 

Agreement providing for special assistance on a grant 
basis to Lebanon for budgetary support Effected by 
exchange of notes at Beirut September 2 and 3, 1958. 
Entered into force September 3, 1958. 

Mexico 

Agreement amending the Memorandum of Understanding 
of the provisional air transport agreement. Effected 
by exchange of notes at Mexico February 24 and July 
28, 1958. Entered into force July 28, 1958. 

Thailand 

Agreement further amending and extending the agreement 
of July 1, 1950, as amended and extended (TIAS 2095, 
2809, 3277, and 3740), for financing certain educational 
exchange programs. Effected by exchange of notes at 
Bangkok September 12, 1958. Entered into force Sep- 
tember 12, 1958. 

Turkey 

Agreement regarding the ownership and use of local 
currency repayments made by Turkey to the Develop- 
ment Loan Fund. Effected by exchange of notes at 
Ankara September 6, 1958. Entered into force Septem- 
ber 6, 1958. 

United Kingdom 

Agreement relating to additional funds to be made avail- 
able by the United Kingdom for the continued operation 
of the United States Educational Commission in the 
United Kingdom. Effected by exchange of notes at 
London September 22, 1958. Entered into force Sep- 
tember 22, 1958. 

Yugoslavia 

Agreement amending the agricultural commodities agree- 
ments of Januarv 5, 1955, as amended (TIAS 3167, 3253, 
and 3446), and January 19, 1956 (TIAS 3486). Effected 
by exchange of notes at Belgrade September 10 and 11, 
1958. Entered into force September 15, 1958. 



The Department of State announced on Septem- 
ber 23 (press release 552) that the Bureau of Inter- 
American Affairs (AKA) had concluded a re- 
organization of its operational structure under 
plans drawn up in January of this year following 
several months of detailed study and consulta- 
tions. Instead of the previous two geographic 
offices — Office of South American Affairs (OS A) 
and Office of Middle American Affairs (MID) — 
there are now four geographic offices responsible 
for the conduct of U.S. foreign relations with 
the 20 republics of Latin America. The creation 
of two additional offices is designed to enable each 
office director to concentrate to a greater extent 
on his area and to effect closer coordination be- 
tween Foreign Service posts and the Department 
on significant political, economic, and consular 
activities. 

The new offices, their areas of responsibility, 
and directors are as follows : 

Office of East Coast Affairs (EST) — Argentina, Brazil, 
Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela— Maurice M. Bern- 
baum; Office of West Coast Affairs (WST)— Bolivia, 
Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru — Ernest V. Siracusa ; 
Office of Central American and Panamanian Affairs 
(OAP) — Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, 
Nicaragua, and Panama — C. Allan Stewart ; Office of 
Caribbean and Mexican Affairs (CMA) — Cuba, Domini- 
can Republic, Haiti, and Mexico — William A. Wieland. 

No changes were made in the two offices respon- 
sible for regional political affairs (RPA) and re- 
gional economic affairs (REA) . 



Designations 

Edwin M. J. Kretzmann as Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Public Affairs, effective September 21. (For bio- 
graphic details, see Department of State press release 
556 dated September 24.) 

John A. Calhoun as Director, Executive Secretariat, 
effective September 29. 

Lawrence Koegel as Deputy Executive Director, Bureau 
of African Affairs, effective September 29. 

Thomas W. McElhiney as Deputy Director, Executive 
Secretariat, effective September 29. 



592 



Department of State Bulletin 



October 13, 1958 



Index 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1007 



American Republics 

American Foreign Ministers Discuss Common Prob- 
lems i t*'Xt Of communique) 574 

State Department Reorganizes Bureau of Inter- 
American Affairs 592 

Asia. Challenge to Peace in the Far East 

(Dulles) 561 

Cambodia. Visit of Prime Minister of Cambodia . 577 

China 

Challenge to Peace in the Far East (Dulles) . . . 561 

General Assembly Again Rejects Indian Proposal 
To Consider Question of Representation of 
China (Lodge) 5S5 

ICA Allocates Aid for Civilians on Chinese Off- 
shore Islands 576 

China, Communist. Foreign Trade: Welfare or 
Warfare (Parsons) 566 

Department and Foreign Service 

Designations (Calhoun, Koegel, Kretzmann, Mc- 

Elhiney) 592 

State Department Reorganizes Bureau of Inter- 
American Affairs 592 

Economic Affairs 

Challenge to Peace in the Far East (Dulles) . . . 561 
Foreign Relations Aspects of Lead and Zinc Prob- 
lem (Mann) 583 

Foreign Trade : Welfare or Warfare (Parsons) . . 566 
President Limits Imports of Lead and Zinc (texts 

of letter and proclamation) 579 

West Germany's Decision To Limit Coal Imports 

Discussed 57S 

Educational Exchange. Educational Exchange 
Agreement With United Kingdom 591 

Germany. West Germany's Decision To Limit Coal 

Imports Discussed 578 

Hungary. U.S. Supports Inclusion of Item on Hun- 
gary (Lodge) 589 

India. Surplus Agricultural Commodity Agree- 
ment With India 591 

International Information. United States and So- 
viet Union To Exchange National Exhibits (text 
of agreement) 577 

Mutual Security 

ICA Allocates Aid for Civilians on Chinese Off- 
shore Islands 576 

NATO : Interdependence in Action (Dulles) . . . 571 

North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

NATO Foreign Ministers To Meet at Washington . 570 
NATO: Interdependence in Action (Dulles) . . . 571 

Presidential Documents. President Limits Im- 
ports of Lead and Zinc 579 

Science. Soviet Oceanographic Vessel To Call at 

U.S. Ports 578 

Treaty Information 

Current Actions 591 

Educational Exchange Agreement With United 

Kingdom 591 

Surplus Agricultural Commodity Agreement With 

India 591 

U.S.S.R. 

Soviet Oceanographic Vessel To Call at U.S. Ports . 578 
United States and Soviet Union To Exchange Na- 
tional Exhibits (text of agreement) 577 

United Kingdom. Educational Exchange Agree- 
ment With United Kingdom 591 



United Nations 

Current U.N. Documents 590 

General Assembly Again Rejects Indian Proposal 
To Consider Question of Representation of 

China (Lodge) 585 

G. A. Agrees to Rewording of Item on Peaceful Co- 
existence (Lodge) 590 

U.S. Supports Inclusion of Item on Hungary 

(Lodge) 589 

Name Index 

Calhoun, John A 592 

Dulles, Secretary 561, 571 

Eisenhower, President 579 

Koegel, Lawrence 592 

Kretzmann, Edwin M. J 592 

Lodge, Henry Cabot 585,589,590 

Mann, Thomas C 583 

MeElhiuey, Thomas W 592 

Parsons, J. Graham 566 

Sihanouk, Norodom 577 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: September 22-28 

Press releases may be obtained from the News 
Division, Department of State, Washington 25, D.C. 

Releases issued prior to September 22 which ap- 
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 538 of 
September 15 and 545 of September 19. 

Subject 

IAEA delegation (rewrite). 

New advanced course at Foreign Serv- 
ice Institute. 

U.S.-U.K. educational exchange agree- 
ment. 

Soviet oceanographic survey vessel to 
call at San Francisco and Honolulu. 

Record number of visitors visas. 

Mann : "Foreign Relations Aspects of 
Lead and Zinc Problem." 

Reorganization of Bureau of Inter- 
American Affairs. 

Adams sworn in as IJC Commissioner. 

Coal exporters meet with Under Secre- 
tary Herter. 

Case of plane crashed in U.S.S.R. 

Kretzmann appointed Deputy Assist- 
ant Secretary for Public Affairs 
(biographic details). 

Loan for development project in 
Liberia. 

April 1959 NATO meeting to be held at 
Washington. 

Parsons : "Foreign Trade : Welfare or 
Warfare." 

Dulles : Far East-America Council of 
Commerce and Industry. 

Auerbach : "The Administration of Im- 
migration Laws by the Department 
of State and the Foreign Service." 

ICA aid to Chinese civilians on off- 
shore islands. 

U.S.-India agreement on surplus agri- 
cultural commodities. 

Thai parliamentary group visits U.S. 

Visit of Prime Minister of Cambodia. 

Dulles : Atlantic Treaty Association. 

•Not printed. 

tlleld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



No. 


Date 


f546 
t547 


9/22 
9/22 


548 


9/22 


549 


9/22 


f550 
551 


9/23 
9/23 


552 


9/23 


♦553 
554 


9/23 
9/23 


1555 
*556 


9/23 
9/24 


•557 


9/24 


558 


9/24 


559 


9/25 


560 


9/25 


t561 


9/26 


562 


9/26 


563 


9/26 


*564 
56.-, 
566 


9/26 

9/27 
9/27 



U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1958 




the 



-DEC 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 
STATISTICAL DEPARTMENT 
COPLEY SQUARE 
G BOSTON 17, MASS 

Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, S30O 

(GPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



United Nations — Meeting Place of 81 Countries 

Publication 6695 10 cents 

This folder briefly describes the United States position on the United 
Nations, some of the highlights in the record of the United Nations, 
and the functions and accomplishments of the specialized agencies. 



Department 

of 
State 



The International Atomic Energy Agency — The First Year 

Publication 6696 20 cents 

The IAEA completed its first year of operation in July 1958. Its 
organization, activities, and hopes for the future are the subjects of 
this 32-page pamphlet. 

U.S. Participation in the UN- — Report by the 
President to the Congress for the Year 1 957 

Publication 6654 75 cents 

This twelfth annual report is a summary of problems and achieve- 
ments of the United Nations and specialized agencies in connection 
with the maintenance of peace and security, economic and social co- 
operation and human rights, dependent territories, legal and constitu- 
tional developments, and budgetary, financial, and administrative 
matters during 1957. 



Order Form 

o: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



(Orders should be addressed to the Superintendent of Documents, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C.) 

Please send me 
copies 

□ United Nations — Meeting Place of 81 Countries 

□ The International Atomic Energy Agency — The First Year 

□ US. Participation in the UN — Report by the President to 
the Congress for the Year 1957 



Enclosed find: 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



Name: 

Street Address : 

City, Zone, and State : 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 



73 



■EPOSiTORY 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1008 



October 20, 1958 



PRESIDENT EXPLAINS PRINCIPLES GUIDING U.S. 

POLICY IN TAIWAN AREA. • Exchange of Letters 
Between President Eisenhower and Senator Theodore Francis 
Green 605 

SECRETARY DULLES' NEWS CONFERENCE OF 

SEPTEMBER 30 597 

NATO AND THE COMMUNIST CHALLENGE • by 

Paul-Henri Spaak 607 

FOUR POWERS EXCHANGE VIEWS ON THE GERMAN 
PROBLEM 

U.S. Aide Memoire to Federal Republic, September 30 . . . 613 

German Aide Memoire, September 9 614 

U.S. Note to U.S.S.R., September 30 615 

Soviet Note, September 18 616 

ADMINISTRATION OF THE IMMIGRATION LAWS BY 
THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND THE 

FOREIGN SERVICE • by Frank L. Auerbaeh 621 

AGENDA OF THE 13th REGULAR SESSION OF THE 

U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY 630 



For index see inside back cover 



THE DEPARTME 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1008 • Publication 6715 
October 20, 1958 



Boston Public Library 
Super n— * «•♦ «* nncomentt 

OCT 2 9 1958 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Price: 

52 issues, domestic $8.50, foreign $12.25 

Single copy, 25 cents 

The printing of this publication has been 
approved by the Director of the Bureau of 
the Budget (January 20, 1958). 

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 bo 
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 
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 f»y 
the Secretary of Slate 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, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



Secretary Dulles' News Conference of September 30 



Press release 574 dated September 30 

Secretary Dulles: Before we have questions, I 
would like to take a moment to call attention to 
the speech which Paul-Henri Spaak made in Bos- 
ton on Saturday night [September 27] at the meet- 
ing there of a group supporting NATO [Boston 
Atlantic Assembly]. It was a very important 
speech which, unfortunately, was not released to 
the press in time to get much attention in the 
Sunday morning newspapers. But it really de- 
serves consideration because it was a profound 
and masterful speech. 

There is one paragraph of it I would like to 
read. 1 

. . . we must assess the magnitude of the challenge 
thrown out to us. It must be clearly understood that the 
challenge is not that of the U.S.S.R. to the United States. 
It is the challenge of the whole Communist world to the 
Whole free world, and the countries of the free world 
must accept the challenge collectively, in all fields and 
everywhere. That is their only chance of winning. 

Now if you have questions. 

Quotas on Lead and Zinc 

Q. Mr. Secretary, before you are bombarded 
with questions on Quemoy, I am going to ask you 
a relatively mild one. Up in Montreal the Com- 
monwealth Trade and Economic Conference, 
which was a rather sober affair, had a moment of 
excitement when a stinging attack was made by 
the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, Mr. John 
McEicen, against the imposition of quotas on lead 
and zinc. Were you axoare of that, and what is 
your reaction? 

A. I am aware of the fact that there is very 
considerable dissatisfaction in Australia and Peru 
and other countries over the imposition of quotas 



on lead and zinc. And the United States is at- 
tempting to explain the situation and to alleviate 
it. 2 

There seems to be an impression that the United 
States is trying to thrust upon foreign countries 
the entire burden of the imbalance that exists 
between current production and consumption of 
lead and zinc. That is not the case. What we 
are trying to do is to distribute that harden 
equitably among the countries of the world. 

There was an international conference held in 
London to try to deal with that problem. It al- 
most succeeded but failed because there were one 
or two producing countries which had not gone 
along with the international handling of the prob- 
lem. So the United States acted unilaterally. It 
acted along general lines, however, which seemed 
to commend themselves to the majority of the 
members of the international conference. 

Now it is quite possible that this action may 
have had in it some inequities. It had to be taken 
rather promptly. But the basic fact is that the 
United States is not trying to push onto the rest 
of the world all of the burdens involved. This 
quota system that we have adopted will still in- 
volve the assumption of a very heavy burden in 
terms of cutback of production upon the producers 
in the United States. 



State Department Mail on Offshore Islands 

Q. Mr. Secretary, do you think that some sub- 
ordinate in the State Department is trying to 
sabotage your Formosa-Quemoy policy? 



1 For complete text, see p. 007. 
October 20, 1958 



2 For text of President Eisenhower's proclamation im- 
posing import quotas and for an address by Assistant 
Secretary Thomas C. Mann on the foreign relations 
aspects of lead and zinc, see Bulletin of Oct. 13, 1958, 
p. 579 and p. 583. 

597 



A. That could be a matter of opinion. I would 
say this : that I believe that the information given 
out was ill-advised — not in what was given out but 
what was not given out alongside of it. 

You see, this isn't a normal situation. We are 
having a very critical negotiation with the Chi- 
nese Communists. They are pushing and probing 
to find out whether we are weak or whether we are 
strong. There is a great likelihood that the fact 
that the State Department itself, without any 
adequate explanation, gave out information indi- 
cating that its policy was not supported by most 
of the people who wrote in — that could have had, 
and perhaps has had, a very serious effect upon 
our negotiations and even a serious effect upon the 
issue of war and peace. 

I don't think that that aspect of the matter 
was adequately taken into account. The fact is 
that there is no intention of modifying our policy. 
The letters that have come in are interesting and 
useful but also difficult to evaluate. But, in my 
opinion, in giving out a statement of that sort 
there should have been an adequate evaluation 
of it and, above all, an indication that that did 
not imply that our policy was weakening. 

You see, the Soviets, from the standpoint of 
their system, could not conceive of the Soviet 
Foreign Office giving out a statement of this kind 
unless it was designed to foreshadow a change 
of policy. And I think the great mistake was 
that this was given out in a way which could be, 
and probably was, misinterpreted by the Com- 
munists as indicating a prospective change of 
policy. 

And I want to make clear for the benefit — not 
of you gentlemen here, because I know you don't 
misunderstand these things — (laughter) — but for 
the benefit of our Communist associates (I don't 
know whether we would call them "associates" or 
not) — (laughter) — that this action was designed 
to give out what I think was legitimate informa- 
tion. But the fact that we did give it out did not 
portend in any way a weakening of our policy in 
this situation. I think that is very important. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, speaking of policy, you have 
said on many occasions in the past that, if the Chi- 
nese Communists would renounce the use of force 
in the Formosa area, it might have a very bene- 
ficial effect on negotiations. Does it not logically 
follow then that we ourselves have to make a simi- 
lar declaration and say that we would not support 



any armed operation by the Chiang Kai-sliek gov- 
ernment against the Chinese mainland? 

A. We obviously believe that, if there was a 
renunciation of force, it should be a renunciation 
on both sides. We could not expect a unilateral 
renunciation of force. It should be on the basis 
of and conditioned upon reciprocity. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, in connection with these let- 
ters a?id public support of your policy, how much 
weight do you think in this situation the Govern- 
ment should give to public opinion? 

A. Well, I think public opinion is always im- 
portant because obviously you cannot carry out 
effectively a public policy without the support of 
public opinion. The question is always present as 
to whether the public opinion is sound or not. 
Certainly you cannot allow your foreign policy to 
be dictated by public opinion. I recall that polls 
taken in the winter of '39-'40, I think it was, 
showed that 95 percent of the American people 
were strongly opposed to the United States getting 
into the World War. We all know that public 
opinion as indicated by polls and by letters can- 
not be the basis of public policy. 

And let me, gentlemen, say something about 
these letters. Before I came down here, I asked 
somebody to give me a handful of them, just 
picked at hazard. I would challenge any expert 
evaluator who works for Mr. Gallup or some of 
these professionals to go through those letters and 
decide just are they for or against. Evaluation 
of these letters would be extremely difficult. 

Most of the letters are letters written by people 
who don't want to have a war, that say, "Let's 
not get into a war." Well, I can assure you that 
there is nobody that is less anxious to have a 
war than President Eisenhower is. The question 
of how to keep out of war is a much more com- 
plicated question, and again that is a matter on 
which President Eisenhower, I think, knows as 
much as anybody as to how to get into wars and 
perhaps how you get out of them. He has had a 
very considerable experience in both aspects of 
this matter. 

There are other people who say, "Don't let's 
have a war just on account of Quemoy and 
Matsu." Well, we agree with that. We don't 
intend to have a war just on account of Quemoy 
and Matsu. If that was all there was to it, there 
wouldn't be any problem. The problem is, how 



598 



Department of State Bulletin 



do you prevent a retreat at the initial point of a 
thrust from gathering a momentum which will 
go on from there? That is the problem, and that 
is an extremely difficult problem to evaluate. The 
impact of that upon the governments and the 
thinking of the peoples of Asia is a very, very 
difficult problem to evaluate. I am quite sure 
that none of the people that write these letters 
would claim that they are experts in that phase 
of the matter. 

U.S. Views on Return of Nationalists to Mainland 

Q. Mr. Secretary, in referring to the previous 
question on the renunciation of force, is it the 
position of this Government that the United 
States expects or supports the idea that the Na- 
tionalist Chinese Government is someday going 
to return to the mainland either by force or some 
other means? 

A. "Well, that is a highly hypothetical matter. 
I think it all depends upon what happens on the 
mainland. I don't think that just by their own 
steam they are going to get there. If you had 
on the mainland a sort of unrest and revolt, like, 
for example, what broke out in Hungary, then 
the presence of a free China with considerable 
power a few miles away could be a very impor- 
tant element in the situation. I think that we 
would all feel that, if there had been a free gov- 
ernment of Hungary in existence within a few 
miles of Hungary at the time when that revolt 
took place, the situation might have developed 
in a different way from what it did. 

So I wouldn't want to exclude any possibility 
of a situation developing on the mainland of 
China, or on parts of the mainland of China, 
which might not lead to reunification of some 
sort between mainland China, or that part of 
mainland China, and the free Government of 
China, the Eepublic of China, now on Formosa. 
I do not exclude it. 

Q. Would that have to he entirely on the 
s/ri ni/fh of the Government on Formosa, or is 
there any American commitment, explicit or im- 
plied, to aid in the kind of situation that you 
have described? 

A. Xo. There is no commitment of any kind 
to aid in that. As I think you know, the only 
commitment that there is in this connection is 
the agreement involved in the exchange of letters 



between the Chinese Foreign Minister and myself 
which says that no force will be used from the 
treaty areas except in agreement between us. 3 
So neither of us is free to use force from the 
areas of the treaty against the mainland except, 
I think it says, in the case of emergency require- 
ments of self-defense. But that exception would 
not cover the kind of a situation that you are 
speaking of. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, if there were a rebellion or 
revolt in China, would you expect its leaders to, 
if they wanted to, turn over their mandate to 
Chiang Kai-shek? 

A. Well, I really don't think that is a question 
that I can answer very well. It all — it depends 
upon the nature of the revolution. I would think 
that it would probably be primarily under local 
auspices and local leadership. And while outside 
cooperation and assistance might be sought, it 
would be hypothetical and problematical as to 
whether or not it would involve the going back of 
Chiang as the head of the government. I don't 
exclude that as a possibility. On the other hand, 
the situation is so hypothetical at the present 
time that it is almost unwise, I think, to try to 
guess about it. 

Negotiations With Communist China 

Q. Mr. Secretary, what is the exact status of 
our negotiations in Warsaw? 

A. A meeting was held today. I have had no 
word on what the outcome of the meeting was. 
You know, I think, that the meetings are held 
with the understanding on both sides that in- 
formation will not be given out as to what trans- 
pired at those meetings, and under those circum- 
stances I can't give you information as to what 
the exact status is. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, would you be willing to meet 
with Chou En-lai if such a meeting appeared to 
offer any prospect of progress toward settlement 
of the tensions in the Far East? 

A. "Well, President Eisenhower has said that, as 
far as he was concerned, there was nothing he 
would not do, no place to which he would not go, 
if he thought that it would really promote the 
prospects of a just and durable peace. Certainly, 



1 For test, see ibid., Jan. 24, 1055, p. 152. 



October 20, 7 958 



599 



if that applies to him, it would equally apply to 
me. On the other hand, we all, I think, realize 
that, while there are sometimes some advantages 
in raising the level, there are also disadvantages 
in raising the level. It tends to bring matters into 
a sharp focus and to a climax. So unless there 
is reason in advance to believe that something 
positive, constructive, will come out of such a 
meeting, it would probably be a disadvantage to 
have it. 

The meetings at the ambassadorial level can go 
on more or less indefinitely. The previous series 
of meetings went on for 3 years and perhaps 
served a useful purpose in helping to keep the 
situation free of hostilities during that period. 
These present talks that are now going on at War- 
saw have been going on — I forget just how long — 
between 2 and 3 weeks, I think. Any meeting at 
a higher level, such as the foreign-ministers level, 
would have to be a short meeting. The matter 
would almost automatically come to a head, to a 
climax. Therefore, unless there were reason to 
think that something positive would come out of 
it, it might do more harm than good, because it 
would compel rapid and definitive decisions at 
a time when perhaps a slower pace will better 
serve the cause of peace. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned a few minutes 
ago an exchange of letters between yourself and 
Foreign Minister Yeh in December 1954- l n that 
exchange it was agreed that military elements 
tohich are the product of joint effort of the two 
countries ivould not be removed from the treaty 
area without mutual consent. Did we agree, as 
President Chiang said yesterday, to the fortifica- 
tion of the offshore islands and their buildup? 

A. The United States did not feel that it was 
sound to make the major commitment of force to 
those areas that the Chinese Government wished 
to make. In view, however, of the very strong 
views of the Eepublic of China, we were acquies- 
cent in that. We did not attempt to veto it. The 
result is, I might say, one of acquiescence on the 
part of the United States, not of approval. Nor 
did we attempt to veto it after having used per- 
suasion. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you spoke of the Warsaw 
talks going on indefinitely, or the possibility of 
their going on indefinitely. Does that mean you 
do not foresee the crisis in the Far East would go 
to the U.N. in any form at any time soon? 



A. The talks could go on in Warsaw for a con- 
siderable time. I did not use the word "indefi- 
nitely" as implying "forever." But they could go 
on for some little time. I think if they tended to 
break down, or if the situation in the area became 
more acute, and if the level of military activity was 
substantially raised, that that might be an oc- 
casion for bringing the situation to the United 
Nations. Of course, as you recall, the view of the 
Chinese Communists and, indeed, of the National- 
ists, for that matter, is that this is essentially a 
civil war and is not properly within the jurisdic- 
tion of the United Nations. The Communists 
took that same position as regards Korea in 1950 
when they came temporarily to the United Nations 
and then walked out. They took the same position 
in early '55 when the Formosa matter was before 
the Security Council. They take the same position 
now. Nevertheless, if, as I say, the level of mili- 
tary activity increased and the likelihood of a 
general war increased with it, I believe that the 
matter ought to be brought to the United Nations. 
The United Nations is the agency which we have 
agreed is the agency which should be called upon 
in the event of a real threat to international peace. 
I do not think that the situation should be allowed 
to deteriorate without at least an effort in the 
United Nations. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, in that connection the Chinese 
Communists are claiming that the United States 
supply of sidewinder guided missiles to Nationalist 
planes is an act of bad faith while the talks are 
going on because it is increasing their military po- 
tential. First, is it true that they do have the side- 
winders, and, secondly, xvJiat is your view on that 
concept? 

A. It is true they have the sidewinders. The 
sidewinders are nothing that was just injected 
into the situation during the Warsaw talks. That 
has been a part of the effort on the part of the 
United States to train better, to equip better, the 
Chinese Nationalist Air Force. If it happens to 
coincide with the Warsaw talks that is purely ac- 
cidental. If there had not been any Warsaw talks 
this would have happened just the same. 

Meeting of American Foreign Ministers 

Q. Mr. Secretary, some months ago you claimed I 
that the United States press was not giving an 
adequate picture of the situatio-n in Lathi America. 



600 



Department of State Bulletin 



/ think you said it emphasised the negative and did 
not report adequately the positive developments in 
the area. Last week there was a conference of 
Foreign Ministers which the Latin Americans, at 
least, considered as one of the most fruitful talks 
in the last 10 years of inter-American relations. 4. 
The Department's preparations in handling the 
press and informing the press we all thought, I 
think, were absolutely inadequate compared to 
similar conferences of other areas, and, in fact, 
people had to scurry all over town to get second- 
and third-hand versions of what you told the con- 
ference and of your point of view. I wonder how 
you can reconcile this situation. 

A. Well, I will tell you this — I know it won't be 
popular for me to say it — but I would say one of 
the reasons why this conference was such a suc- 
cess was that it was understood at the beginning 
that nobody was talking for the record. I am 
quite sure that, if it had been the kind of a con- 
ference where people made speeches that were 
going to be publicized and so forth, we would not 
have accomplished nearly what we did holding 
the conference on an informal basis. I may say 
that the Foreign Ministers were, I think, on the 
whole amazed that there was so much that could 
be actually accomplished, so much practical work 
actually gotten under way, within a meeting 
which lasted roughly for a day and a half. (The 
second half day was a little long; it lasted until 
five o'clock.) But we did accomplish a great deal, 
and we could not possibly have gotten the accom- 
plishments done that we did, I think, if we had 
not said at the beginning, "This is going to be an 
entirely informal meeting. It is going to be off 
the record. People can say anything that is on 
their minds, and there is not going to be any rec- 
ord kept of what takes place." And there was no 
record kept. You know that it is human nature 
with all of us that, when there is a record kept, 
when speeches are made which are going to be 
published in the home papers, and so forth, we all 
want to talk quite a bil more than we do when 
we are talking where there is no record being 
kept. 

I believe that the meeting did achieve very ex- 
traordinary results in the short span of time, 
largely because it was operated on this quite in- 
formal basis. 



' For an announcement of the meeting and text of the 
final communique, see ibid., Oct. 13, 1958, p. 574. 



Q. So toould you think that that would make it 
impossible to brief the press adequately before- 
hand, that is, on a background basis? And I 
dorCt think this was done. 

A. Well, it would have been very difficult to 
have briefed the press in advance about this meet- 
ing because, frankly, when we went into it we 
didn't know where we were going to come out. 
I may say in all frankness that I went into this 
meeting with very considerable trepidation. The 
auguries were not entirely good. I knew we were 
going to make this announcement about lead and 
zinc the day before the meeting was held, and I 
didn't know what the result of that would be. 
Some people are critical of the fact that we made 
that announcement just the day before. But I 
felt that, as long as the decision had been taken 
that we had to go in for quotas, it was more hon- 
orable and straightforward to put it on the table 
before the meeting took place rather than to keep 
it up our sleeve — to have the meeting and then to 
pull it immediately after the meeting. But I say 
very frankly that I went into the meeting with 
trepidation, with worriment as to what would 
come out of the meeting. And what came out of 
the meeting was nothing that could have been 
foreseen. It gathered a momentum as it went 
along largely because, as I say, people did speak 
with perfect frankness. The Minister of Peru 
didn't spare any words at all in what he said 
about what he thought about our quotas. We 
talked very frankly with each other, and there 
was an atmosphere of real comradeship in that 
meeting which was quite unusual (laughter) and 
which, I think, was an eye opener to all of us. 
But we couldn't have briefed all that in advance. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, can we go back to the State 
Departments mail a minute? I am not sure I 
understand your attitude toward the information 
which was put out. I think you said, in answer 
to the question, that it was a matter of opinion 
whether sabotage was involved, but I wasn't clear 
whether you think that there was a deliberate at- 
tempt, as has been charged by somebody, to under- 
cut your policy. 

A. Well, you know there is a legal maxim 
which says that a person is presumed to intend 
the natural consequences of his acts. Now if you 
apply that maxim you can impute an intent. But 
I think that is very largely a matter of opinion 



October 20, 1958 



601 



which I don't think it is necessary or fruitful for 
me to get into. The important thing was some- 
thing else and that was made clear by the Vice 
President's statement. He said this [sabotage] 
aspect of it was relatively unimportant. What 
was important was that the information should 
have been given out in the way it was, unevaluated, 
without being accompanied by any adequate ex- 
planation of the reason why it was done and that 
it did not imply any intent to weaken our policy. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, do you really mean to leave 
the impression that someone in the Department 
was subversive? I mean do you really feel — / 
mean is that your honest opinion? In other words, 
if you had no specific evidence that that is true? 

A. I don't think that anything I said indicated 
that. I certainly did not intend to. 

Q. That is what I wanted to know. 

Question of Withdrawal of Nationalist Forces 

Q. Mr. Secretary, inasmuch as you say you do 

not think it was sound for the Nationalist Chinese 
to have built up their forces on Quemoy and 
Matsu, I would like to ask you if you now think 
it would be sound to work out some arrangement 
for the withdrawal of those forces from those two 
islands? 

A. It all depends upon the circumstances under 
which they would be withdrawn. I think to with- 
draw as a retreat under fire would not be a wise 
step to take because of the probable impact of 
that upon other peoples, other countries, and upon 
the morale, indeed, on Formosa itself. 

Q. Would you state, sir, the circumstances un- 
der which you think a withdrawal could be 
achieved? 

A. If there were a cease-fire in the area which 
seemed to be reasonably dependable, I think it 
would be foolish to keep these large forces on 
these islands. We thought that it was rather 
foolish to put them there, and, as I say, if there 
were a cease-fire it would be our judgment, mili- 
tary judgment even, that it would not be wise or 
prudent to keep them there. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you seem to emphasize the 
need for a dependable cease-fire. Could you tell 
us how you can get a dependable cease-fire with 
the Communists, whose promises you don't like to 
accept? 



602 



A. That is certainly a fair question and a dif- 
ficult one to answer. I believe that promises of 
the Communists are never dependable merely be- 
cause they are promises. They are only depend- 
able if there are unpleasant consequences in case 
the Communists break their promises. And I be- 
lieve that circumstances could be created where it 
would be felt that the consequences of breaking 
this promise would be so undesirable to the Com- 
munists that we could assume that they would 
probably live up to their promise, not because of 
the sanctity of the given word — which they do 
not believe in — but because of expediency. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, would it be necessary for a 
cease-fire to be written or unwritten? Could it 
be a de facto cease-fire gained simply by the cessa- 
tion of shooting without anything being written? 

A. I think it could be de facto. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, some Senators seem to believe 
that the administration is extending the area of 
the security treaty with the Republic of China, 
and they are recalling that in February when you 
went before the Senate Foreign Relations Com- 
mittee and said if you had any intention of ex- 
tending the area you would return to the Senate. 
Is this a proper construction, you think, that is be- 
ing put upon our activity there? 

A. No, I do not. The situation is that we do 
not have any legal commitment to defend the off- 
shore islands. We do not want to make any such 
commitment. We do not have it today. What 
we are acting under is the authority of the joint 
resolution, 5 which is equally the law of the land, 
which says that, if the President believes that the 
defense of those offshore islands is necessary or 
appropriate for the defense of the treaty area, 
then he can use the forces of the United States 
for that purpose. And that is the way it was un- 
derstood, and that is the way we want it. I would 
say today, if the United States believed that these 
islands could be abandoned without its having any 
adverse impact upon the potential defense of For- 
mosa and the treaty area, we would not be think- 
ing of using forces there. It's because there is 
that relationship, under present conditions, con- 
ditions primarily of the Communists' making, that 
there is the tie-in there. 

They say this is a push which is designed not 
merely to push the Chinese Nationalists out of 



' For text, see ibid., Feb. 7, 1955. p. 213. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Quemoy and Matsu but to push the United States 
out of Formosa. And when you have the edge, 
the front edge, of a wedge that is driving in, and 
where they say they are not going to stop at the 
first obstacle but to go on, then you have to decide 
whether by allowing the wedge to gather momen- 
tum and go on you are strengthening or weaken- 
ing the defense of the area you are committed to 
defend. That is the problem we have to think 
about. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, do you see any progress so 
far in a little more than 2 weeks of negotiation 
and crisis that now has gone on for more than a 
month? Do you see any progress at all toward 
a peaceful settlement either on an agreed basis or 
onade facto basis? 

A. I feel that there is a slight tendency toward 
a stabilization of the situation, and I feel on the 
whole that there is less likelihood of the hostilities 
intensifying and enlarging than I thought was 
the case a couple of weeks ago. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, what do you have in mind 
when you say you think the circumstances could 
be created which would make breaking a cease- 
fire commitment by the Communists unpleasant? 
Were you talking about some joint allied commit- 
ment for Formosa itself, or something else? 

A. I am thinking of sanctions that might be 
applied, perhaps by other nations in addition to 
the United States. For example, possible trade 
sanctions and the like. 

Q. Have you made any effort with other nations 
to work out something like that? 

A. I would not think that what we have done 
could be elevated to the role of what you might 
call an effort. There have been very widespread 
general discussions that have taken place between 
me and the Foreign Ministers of 15 or 20 countries 
about this whole situation. There are very few 
ideas that have not been batted back and forth on 
a tentative basis. I would not say that there has 
been any real effort to organize such a program 
because so far the premise of it does not seem to 
be sufficiently likely as to make it worth while. 
But we have a good many thoughts in our minds 
about such possibilities. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you said that the renunciation 
of force, if it occurs, should be reciprocal. Would 
you consider that under this reciprocal agreement 



would come renunciation by Chiang to intervene 
in a Hungarian-type revolt, or would you say that 
the reciprocal agreement to renounce force ceases 
the minute there is a revolution in China? 

A. Well, you see, in Hungary you had, at least 
for a time, a government which sought assistance 
from outside and which asked the Soviet Union 
to withdraw. If there should be a recognized 
government in China which called for help, I 
would not consider that that involved an armed 
intervention in China. 

Q. Under Secretary Herter said in a speech 
yesterday that the Quemoy and Matsu Islands are 
"not defensible in the defense of Formosa''' and 
that the Chinese Nationalists'' very devotion to 
them is "almost pathological.''' Do you subscribe 
to those views? 

A. I didn't hear the first sentence that you read. 
Are not defensible ? 

Q. Are not defensible in the defense of Formosa. 
It is phrased rather awkwardly, but it is a direct 
quote. 

Q. In the New York Times it says, "not strate- 
gically defensible in the defense of Formosa?' 1 

A. "Well, I don't like to comment on isolated 
quotations from a speech. I'd rather see what the 
full text said. I'm not familiar with it. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you said twice at the outset 
this morning that the United States policy has 
not changed. Yet during the course of the news 
conference you have seemed to clarify at least 
two major points that, so far as I know, have not 
been publicly clarified by the Department before, 
to wit: the reciprocal aspect of renunciation of 
force and the fact that the United States con- 
sidered it foolish to build up military force on 
the islands and that under certain circumstances 
they should be withdrawn. If these two points 
are major and important, as they seem to be, why 
haven't they been expressed publicly before? 

A. Well, there is nothing really new in our atti- 
tude on either of those propositions. I think, if 
you will go back, for example, to study the record 
of our prior talks with the Chinese Communists, 
we have assumed that the renunciation of force 
should be reciprocal if it occurs and that it would 
be obviously quite impractical and quite wrong to 
ask the Chinese Communists to abandon use of 
force if they were being attacked by the Chinese 



Ocfober 20, 1958 



603 



Nationalists. I might say that when we speak 
about renunciation of force it has always been a 
renunciation of force except for purposes of self- 
defense. Perhaps I did not make that clear 
before. So that if anybody is attacked, then the 
renunciation of force would, of course, not apply. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it fair to say that, while 
United States policy has not changed as of now, 
there is a possibility of some important changes, 
provided there is some give on the Chinese Com- 
munist side? 

A. Yes, I would say so. Our policy in these re- 
spects is flexible and adapted to the situation that 
we have to meet. If the situation we have to meet 
changes, our policies change with it. 

Question of Taiwan Situation as "Civil War" 

Q. Mr. Secretary, the Chinese Communists say 
that to renounce force in what they considered an 
internal affair is practically to renounce sover- 
eignty and is tantamount, if one considered an 
American example, to renouncing the right of the 
United States Government to use, say, troops in 
Little Rock to prevent disorder. Is there any toay 
that you think you could put this renunciation 
of force so that the Chinese Communists do not 
feel they are thereby renouncing their claim on 
Formosa? 

A. Well, we have always made clear that re- 
nunciation of force, except for self-defense, on 
a reciprocal basis did not involve a renunciation 
of claims. You have comparable situations, I 
might say, all around the world. This is not a 
unique situation. In Korea, Viet-Nam, India, 
Pakistan, and Indonesia you might say that cer- 
tain governments claim that a territory held by 
others is rightfully theirs. They could claim that 
to take it is purely a civil-war operation. 

Now you have got to use, you might say, a rule 
of reason in trying to decide whether, in fact, a 
situation is a civil war or whether it involves a 
threat to international peace. And the Com- 
munists, as you know, made the argument in the 
case of Korea that that was purely a civil war, 
an effort by the north Koreans to reunite their 
country, that they had a right to do it, and that 
the United Nations and the United States were 
aggressors when they came in there to stop this 
effort of the Korean people to reunite their own 
country. Similar positions could be made in the 



case of other countries. You could say if the 
Federal Republic of Germany tried to reunite 
Germany that it was a civil operation. But none 
of us treat it that way. 

You have a very practical situation to take 
into account, which is, will it, in fact, involve 
world peace ? When you apply that test, I think 
there is no possible doubt but what this effort to 
take not just the offshore islands but Formosa 
and the Penghu Islands (the Pescadores) that 
that will involve world peace. 

Here you have the Chinese Communists, with 
a treaty alliance with the Soviet Union, making 
these claims, and the Soviet Union saying they 
are prepared to back them up to the hilt. Here 
you have the Republic of China, which has a 
treaty of collective self-defense with the United 
States, which we are prepared to live up to. Now 
when those two forces come to clash, nobody in 
his senses could say, "This is purely a civil war 
and doesn't affect international peace." It does. 
And therefore it is properly a matter to be dealt 
with from the standpoint of international peace 
and the welfare of the world. You cannot treat 
it purely as a civil-war matter. You can say, 
"Well, the United States should stop helping the 
Nationalists, and the Soviet Union should stop 
helping Communist China," That is quite im- 
practical. As far as we can tell, every plane, 
every piece of artillery, and practically all the 
ammunition that is being shot there today is of 
Soviet origin. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, Chiang Kai-shek yesterday 
made statements about a cease-fire and the im- 
portance of Quemoy and Matsu which xoould 
seem to be quite different from some that you 
have made here this morning. My question is: 
Have you discussed your ideas about the cease-fire 
and possible withdrawal of the bulk of the forces 
from Quemoy and Matsu with the Nationalist 
Chinese? 

A. Yes. We keep in pretty close touch with 
each other. We express our views. I wouldn't 
want to imply that they accept our views. And 
we don't accept their views in all respects, just 
as they don't accept ours. But we have a friendly 
exchange, and I think that, if it ever came down 
to a point where it was important practically to 
carry out these things, we would find a way to 
agree. At least I hope so. 

Q. Thank you, sir. 



604 



Department of State Bulletin 



President Explains Principles 
Guiding U.S. Policy in Taiwan Area 



Following is an exchange of letters between 
President Eisenhower and Senator Theodore 
Francis Green, chairman of the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee, together with a statement 
released by Senator Green on October 5. 



PRESIDENT EISENHOWER TO SENATOR GREEN 

White House press release dated October 4 

October 2, 1958 

Dear Senator Green : I acknowledge your let- 
ter of September twenty-ninth with reference to 
the situation in the Far East. I note that you 
are concerned that the United States might be- 
come involved in hostilities in defense of Quemoy 
and Matsu; that it does not appear to you that 
Quemoy is vital to the defense of Formosa or the 
United States; that in such hostilities we would 
be without allies, and, finally, that military in- 
volvement in the defense of Quemoy would not 
command that support of the American people 
essential to successful military action. 

Let me take up these points in order: 

1. Neither you nor any other American need 
feci that the United States will be involved in 
military hostilities merely in defense of Quemoy 
or Matsu. I am quite aware of the fact that the 
Joint Resolution of Congress (January 29, 1955), 
which authorized the President to employ the 
armed forces of the United States in the Formosa 
area, authorized the securing and protection of 
such positions as Quemoy and Matsu only if the 
President judges that to be required or appro- 
priate in assuring the defense of Formosa and the 
Pescadores. 1 

I shall scrupulously observe that limitation 
contained in the Congressional authority granted 
me. 

2. The Congressional Resolution had, of course, 
not merely negative but positive implications. I 
shall also observe these. I note that it does not 
appear to you that Quemoy is vital to the defense 



1 For background and text of resolution, see Bulletin 
of Feb. 7, 1055, p. 211. 

Ocrober 20, 1958 



of Formosa or the United States. But the test 
which the Congress established was whether or 
not the defense of these positions was judged by 
the President to be required or appropriate in 
assuring the defense of Formosa. The Congres- 
sional Resolution conferring that responsibility 
on the President was adopted by almost unani- 
mous vote of both Houses of the Congress. Since 
then the people of the United States reelected me 
to be that President. I shall, as President and 
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of 
the United States, exercise my lawful authority 
and judgment in discharging the responsibility 
thus laid upon me. 

I welcome the opinions and counsel of others. 
But in the last analysis such opinions cannot 
legally replace my own. 

The Chinese and Soviet Communist leaders as- 
sert, and have reason to believe, that if they can 
take Quemoy and Matsu by armed assault that 
will open the way for them to take Formosa and 
the Pescadores and, as they put it, "expel'' the 
United States from the West Pacific and cause 
its Fleet to leave international waters and "go 
home." 

I cannot dismiss these boastings as mere bluff. 
Certainly there is always the possibility that it 
may in certain contingencies, after taking ac- 
count of all relevant facts, become necessary or 
appropriate for the defense of Formosa and the 
Pescadores also to take measures to secure and 
protect the related positions of Quemoy and 
Matsu. 

I am striving to the best of my ability to avoid 
hostilities; to achieve a cease-fire, and a reason- 
able adjustment of the situation. You, I think, 
know my deep dedication to peace. It is second 
only to my dedication to the safety of the United 
States and its honorable discharge of obligations 
to its allies and to world order which have been 
assumed by constitutional process. We must not 
forget that the whole Formosa Straits situation 
is intimately connected with the security of the 
United States and the free world. 

3. You say that in the event of hostilities we 
would be without allies "in fact or in heart." Of 
course, no nation other than the Republic of China 
has a treaty alliance with us in relation to the 
Formosa area. That is a well known fact — known 
to the Congress when it adopted the Formosa 
Joint Resolution and known to the Senate when 



605 






it approved of our Treaty of Mutual Security 
with the Kepublic of China. But if you mean 
that the United States action in standing firm 
against armed Communist assault would not have 
the approval of our allies, then I believe that you 
are misinformed. Not only do I believe that our 
friends and allies would support the United States 
if hostilities should tragically, and against our 
will, be forced upon us, I believe that most of them 
would be appalled if the United States were spine- 
lessly to retreat before the threat of Sino-Soviet 
armed aggression. 

4. Finally, you state that even if the United 
States should become engaged in hostilities, there 
would not be "that support of the American people 
essential to successful military action." 

"With respect to those islands, I have often 
pointed out that the only way the United States 
could become involved in hostilities would be be- 
cause of its firm stand against Communist at- 
tempts to gain their declared aims by force. 1 
have also often said that firmness in supporting 
principle makes war less, rather than more, likely 
of occurrence. 

I feel certain, beyond the shadow of a doubt, 
that if the United States became engaged in hos- 
tilities on account of the evil and aggressive 
assaults of the forces of Communism, the Ameri- 
can people would unite as one to assure the success 
and triumph of our effort. 

I deeply deplore the effect upon hostile forces of 
a statement that if we became engaged in battle, 
the United States would be defeated because of 
disunity at home. If that were believed, it would 
embolden our enemies and make almost inevitable 
the conflict which, I am sure, we both seek to avoid 
provided it can be avoided consistently with the 
honor and security of our country. 

Though in this letter I have explained the facts 
and the principles that guide the government in 
dealing with the critical Formosa Straits situa- 
tion, I cannot close without saying that our whole 
effort is now, and has always been, the preserva- 
tion of a peace with honor and with justice. After 
all, this is the basic aspiration of all Americans, 
indeed of all peoples. 

Inasmuch as there have been public reports on 
the essence of your letter, I feel I should make this 
reply public. 

With great respect and best wishes, 
Sincerely, 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 

606 



STATEMENT BY SENATOR GREEN, OCTOBER 5 

On receipt of the President's reply dated October 2, 
1958, to my letter to him of last September 29, 1 am making 
public my letter so that the opposing points of view may 
be compared. 

It is worth noting, however, that during the past week 
both the President and Secretary Dulles have shown a 
more realistic attitude than before toward the situation 
in the Far East. This is encouraging and may be attribut- 
able in part to various expressions of the kind to which 
I have given voice. 

There has been widespread public concern lest our posi- 
tion in the Far East has been too aggressive and I wel- 
come the President's letter which shows a more realistic 
present approach to the problems in that area. 



SENATOR GREEN TO PRESIDENT EISENHOWER 

September 29, 1958 

Deak Mb. President : There are many indications of a 
real danger that the United States may become involved 
in military hostilities in defense of Quemoy and Matsu. 
These indications comprise newspaper reports from the 
Far East, communications which I have received from 
very many Americans, dispatches from friendly nations 
throughout the world, as well as concern expressed pub- 
licly by many prominent Americans well informed in the 
field of foreign policy, and your own statements to the 
American people. 

Recently I have expressed my own views stating that 
"it does not appear to me that Quemoy is vital to the 
defense of either Formosa or the United States". I have 
suggested that military action in the area should not be 
ordered unless you, Mr. President, are sure beyond any 
reasonable doubt that the security of Formosa itself is in 
fact directly threatened. Subsequent to your address of 
September ll, a I proposed that if there is danger of mili- 
tary involvement in this area — a danger which you indi- 
cated existed — Congress should be called immediately into 
session. 

The purpose of this letter, Mr. President, is to bring 
to your attention my deep concern that the course of 
events in the Far East may result in military involve- 
ment at the wrong time, in the wrong place, and on issues 
not of vital concern to our own security, and all this 
without allies either in fact or in heart. Furthermore, 
it is my impression, confirmed by the press and by my 
own mail, that United States military involvement in 
defense of Quemoy would not command that support of 
the American people essential to successful military ac- 
tion. 

My decision to send this letter to you has involved a 
great deal of soul-searching on my part. At one point, 
I seriously contemplated calling the Committee on For- 
eign Relations back to Washington so that it might meet 
with cabinet members to learn fully the nature of our 
possible involvement. That course was rejected for the 
present because I felt such a public act might interfere 



1 Ibid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 481. 

Department of State Bulletin 



with the conduct of negotiations in which your represent- 
atives are now engaged. I also contemplated the advisa- 
bility of seeking in advance of this letter the consensus 
of views of the members of the Committee so that our 
joint views might be brought to your attention. But 
that action was rejected because it would be time con- 
suming and because of the possibility that such action 
might be construed as a political maneuver. 

It is not my intention to make this letter to you public 
at this time. I am sending copies of it, however, to each 



member of the Committee on Foreign Relations with the 
thought that he may wish to provide you independently 
with his views, particularly with reference to those I have 
set forth in this letter. I am sending a copy also to Sen- 
ator Lyndon Johnson. 

With respect and deep concern, I remain 
Sincerely yours, 

Theodore Francis Green 
Chairman 
Committee on Foreign Relations 



NATO and the Communist Challenge 



by Paul-Henri Spaak 

Secretary General, North Atlantic Treaty Organization- 



NATO lacks many things for it to be a perfect 
organization. What is chiefly lacking is the con- 
fident backing of public opinion which, aware of 
the importance of its role, is determined to give 
NATO its active support. 

It is because the main purpose of your Associa- 
tions is to fill this gap that they are so important. 
That is why I have made a point of being with 
you today and why I am happy to be able to 
share with you my cares and hopes. 

I intend to be quite frank with you, to explain 
tilings as I see them and to set out before you 
what I believe to be the sum of nearly 10 years 
of existence and accomplishment. However, as 
time is short, I shall have to cut out the details 
and confine myself to the basic outline, to the 
main features of what we have done. 

Atmosphere of 1949 

In the first place, in order to get the picture 
into perspective, we must try to recapture the 
atmosphere of 1949, the year of the signing of 
the Washington Treaty, the year which saw the 
birth of the Atlantic Alliance. 

The situation of the free world, and especially 
of Europe, was far from brilliant at the time. 
We had by no means recovered, financially and 
economically, from the effects of the war. True, 
the Marshall plan, which saved Western Europe 
from poverty and communism — although this is 



1 Address made before the Atlantic Treaty Association 
at Boston, Mass., on Sept. 27. 



now too often forgotten by so many ungrateful 
people — had become a reality and, since the spring 
of 1948, had even begun to operate ; but its results 
were necessarily patchy, and many of the ruins 
still had to be rebuilt. 

The political event of the moment was the 
Prague coup d'etat, the consummation of Soviet 
policy. This policy, a combination of internal 
subversion and external pressures, had enabled 
the U.S.S.R. to add several thousands of square 
miles to its territory in the space of a few years, 
to bring under its jurisdiction, and against the 
will of those concerned, several millions of human 
beings, and to set up, in the Balkans and Eastern 
Europe, minority governments completely sub- 
servient to its wishes. 

The Communist coup d'etat in Czechoslovakia 
marked a turning point in the postwar foreign 
policy of the Western World. 

Until then, many well-meaning people in 
Europe, and probably in the United States as well, 
had hoped for a reasonable compromise between 
the Communist world and the free world which 
would preserve the alliance that had made the 
victory over the Nazis and Fascists possible. 

So as to be able to follow this course — no doubt 
a wise one seen in the light of the prevailing cir- 
cumstances in those days — the West had made 
many concessions and proved its evident good will. 
The historian of the future will perhaps add "and 
displayed too much weakness." 

Be that as it may, the Western World reacted 
at last and did so in time to prevent the worst. 



Ocfofaer 20, 1958 



607 



One year after the Prague coup d'etat the Wash- 
ington Treaty was signed. Its main purpose was 
to put a stop to the expansion of Soviet impe- 
rialism and to achieve this purpose without having 
to resort to war. 

Although I have said this so many times be- 
fore, I wish to repeat, if possible with added em- 
phasis, that this purpose has been achieved 100 
percent. 

No one can believe that, if communism, after 
its many spectacular successes between 1919 and 
1948, has made no further progress for now 10 
years, precisely since the day when the Western 
powers joined forces, it is a mere coincidence. No, 
the credit for this must be given to NATO. That 
is why, whatever its defects and shortcomings — 
and as we shall see, they exist — all free men should 
be deeply grateful to the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization for having served the cause of free- 
dom so well and for having so successfully de- 
fended the independence of the democratic coun- 
tries of Europe. 

"In that case," you may say, "why continue 
your talk ? Why attempt to add anything to such 
a satisfactory balance sheet? Are you not well 
satisfied to be the Secretary General of an organ- 
ization that has fully achieved its main purpose? 
What more can you want?" 

I must now take the plunge and speak of my 
worries and anxieties. 



Reappraisal of NATO's Task 

This is the moment to ask a vital question : Is 
NATO, with its present composition, spirit, and 
machinery, still the right answer to the threat 
which communism represents for the free world? 

Let me explain. In 1949, as I have already 
said, the Communist threat was essentially Euro- 
pean and military. In 1958 I see it as more par- 
ticularly Asian and African and as more economic 
and social than military. 

I can put the idea differently: Is it sufficient, 
at the present time, to construct a solid military 
barrier along the Elbe, on the eastern frontier 
of the free world, if the free world is to be out- 
flanked politically, militarily, and economically in 
the Middle East and Africa? In other words: 
Has the time not come for a reappraisal of NATO 
to adapt it to what is obviously the new plan of 
campaign of the Communist offensive? 



608 



To my mind, when certain dates are lined up, 
their special significance becomes apparent: 

4th April 1949 : Signing of the Washington 
Treaty establishing the Atlantic Alliance. 

12th May 1949: End of the Berlin blockade. 

October 1949 : End of the civil war in Greece, 
marking the end of the Communist offensive in 
Europe. 

25th June 1950 : Invasion of south Korea. This 
major event marks the preliminary stage of the 
period in which we are still living today. There 
is a displacement of the center of international 
difficulties. It is no longer in Europe. The Far 
East and the Middle East take first place in our 
worries, soon to be followed by Africa. 

Can we still afford, nowadays, to maintain atti- 
tudes, however excellent, which are beginning to 
be outdated ? We adopted them 10 years ago, and 
this is a fast-moving world. 

Very fortunately, the Washington Treaty and 
the organization which issued from it have one 
outstanding quality: a degree of flexibility that 
provides for the possibility of almost endless 
adaptations. 

Look at what the North Atlantic Treaty Organ- 
ization is today : not only the most powerful mili- 
tary alliance known to history but also an inter- 
national political council, the like of which has 
never before been seen ; a secretary general, a com- 
mander in chief, two routine ministerial meetings 
every year, a council of 15 ambassadors in perma- 
nent session in Paris, a military standing group 
in Washington, a military command for Europe 
with its numerous subdivisions, a naval command 
for the Atlantic, another for the Channel. This 
entire formidable organization has come into be- 
ing as the result of the following five rather 
loosely worded lines of article 9 of the treaty : 

The Parties hereby establish a council, on which each 
of them shall be represented, to consider matters con- 
cerning the implementation of this Treaty. The council 
shall be so organized as to be able to meet promptly 
at any time. The council shall set up such subsidiary 
bodies as may be necessary ; in particular it shall estab- 
lish immediately a defense committee. . . . 

This, I think, justifies my claim that the North 
Atlantic Treaty is sufficiently flexible to adapt 
itself to all conceivable contingencies and shows 
that those who have to interpret or implement it 
have sufficient imagination to find in its text all 

Department of State Bulletin 






they need in order to cope with even the most 
recent eventualities. 

Understanding the Communist Threat 

I believe it to be essential, before we define our 
new positions, to make sure that we thoroughly 
understand the problem we have to solve, by 
which I mean that we must correctly assess the 
nature and magnitude of the Communist challenge 
sent out to the free world and to its civilization. 

I am astounded to see that in Europe, at all 
events, there are still so many people who do not 
understand the first thing about communism, its 
reality, its hopes, and its ambitions. To a lot of 
people the Communists are no more than political 
extremists. What frightens and shocks a great 
many of them are the economic changes and so- 
cial reforms accomplished in the U.S.S.E. and 
the satellite countries. 

To my mind, this is quite the wrong attitude 
to adopt. Personally, I do not shrink from any 
social reform. On the contrary, I am convinced 
that one of the peremptory requirements of our 
times is the emergence of a form of society in 
which the weak will be protected and will find 
acceptable living conditions, in which all will 
have equal opportunities and the "elite" will really 
consist of the most intelligent, the most indus- 
trious, and the most talented. 

As for economic doctrines — the virtues of free 
enterprise compared with those of a planned 
economy — I must confess that, although I find 
the controversy extremely interesting and useful 
sometimes, I cannot bring myself to believe that 
this is an issue worthy of violent passions and 
that the world should divide, quarrel, and, worst 
of all, go to war to insure the triumph of one or 
other of these theories. 

This, however, is not all. There is something 
far more important, something far more funda- 
mental. 

Communism aspires to be a new form of civili- 
zation. "What it wants to do is to bring the 
world — or rather, to impose on it — a new concep- 
tion of man, of his rights and duties, of his 
relationship to other men, to society, and to the 
state. This conception marks a very evident 
backward movement away from what it has taken 
such long and patient efforts to build up over 
centuries of struggle and sacrifice. 

While we, for our part, are doing our best — ■ 



though possibly not always with complete suc- 
cess — to infuse a moral character into our private 
lives and into our institutions as well as to follow 
principles calculated to make a reality of "re- 
spect of the individual," the core of Western 
civilization — while we, for our part, are doing 
our best to safeguard human freedom and to 
shape society with that end in view, communism 
proposes a formula the outstanding features of 
which are the most extreme form of intolerance, 
blind obedience, political dictatorship. 

There lies the true cause of the opposition be- 
tween the free world and communism. This is 
the measure of the magnitude of the struggle and 
of its vital significance for the future of mankind. 

Communism, moreover, views its role as uni- 
versal in scope. On the basis of a somewhat ele- 
mentary theory of historical fatalism and a de- 
pressing materialism, it reasons that its victory 
is inevitable, that, to quote the proud, if rather 
childish, boast of the Communists: "It is borne 
forward by the current of history," that its tri- 
umph is certain. 

From these assertions, which I believe to be as 
sincere as they are false, there are several con- 
clusions to be drawn. 

In the first place, there is little likelihood that 
those who profess such doctrines will take the risk 
of starting a world war which, whatever its final 
outcome, would leave in its wake such an accumu- 
lation of ruins as to retard for several dozens of 
years the achievement of their hopes. W^e must 
therefore not be unduly alarmed by their threats. 
Our policy must, of course, never be aggressive or 
unjust, but neither must it reflect any weakness 
which would be regarded as an expression of fear. 

Recent history has shown only too clearly that 
the systematic appeasement of dictators leads to 
the most harrowing experiences. Such a lesson 
must not be lost. We must therefore pursue our 
military effort, for, although it imposes a heavy, 
costly burden on us, it is essential, not as a means 
of intimidation but as a guaranty against threats 
and blackmail. 

But, above all, before we decide what action to 
take, we must assess the magnitude of the chal- 
lenge thrown out to us. It must be clearly under- 
stood that the challenge is not that of the U.S.S.R. 
to the United States. It is the challenge of the 
whole Communist world to the whole free world, 
and the countries of the free world must accept 



October 20, J 958 



609 



the challenge collectively, in all fields and every- 
where. That is their only chance of winning. 

NATO's Changing Role 

The concept of a military Atlantic Alliance re- 
stricted to a specific geographical area, adequate 
in 1949, is therefore no longer so in 1958. A com- 
mon policy, probably of worldwide scope, must 
be added to it. And this must be done at once. 

Another thing which should be done as quickly 
as possible is the organization of scientific co- 
operation, and even economic and social action 
should be harmonized. In a word, the Atlantic 
Alliance should become the Atlantic Community. 

Where do we stand today? What is the posi- 
tion as regards these important projects? 

Let us face it. We still have a long way to go. 
What has been achieved with respect to economic 
cooperation within NATO is definitely not 
enough. 

It is true, of course, that in Europe great 
strides have been made with the assent and ef- 
fective help of the United States and Canada, 
and thanks to the Organization for European 
Economic Cooperation, the European Payments 
Union, the European Coal and Steel Community, 
the Common Market, and EURATOM, and soon, 
perhaps, to the Free Exchange Area. Although 
these great strides have been made, I still do not 
consider that they fully meet the requirements 
though they augur well for the future. However, 
within NATO, in the wider Atlantic framework, 
article 2 of the treaty, in spite of all the declara- 
tions to which it has given rise, is still practically 
a dead letter. 

I see yet another glimmer of hope: the start 
made with scientific cooperation and some encour- 
aging progress in the production in common of 
the modern weapons. 

The need and urgency of scientific cooperation 
were the subject of a stirring announcement made 
by President Eisenhower and Mr. Macmillan at 
the end of last year. 2 Their bold appeal was not 
made in vain. NATO now has a scientific adviser, 
and the science committee, composed of very emi- 
nent men, has held several sessions. A number of 
modest schemes have been launched : summer semi- 
nars, scholarships, and fellowships. This is all to 
the good, and it is a promising start but is frankly 
inadequate. 



Carry your minds back to the humiliating 
astonishment with which the West was struck 
when the first sputnik soared into outer space. 
Do you remember the despondency and even the 
fear — in reality very unjustified — that gripped 
certain people at that time ? 

Neither the United States sputnik nor the ex- 
ploits of the Nautilus must lead to the abandon- 
ment of the pooling of our efforts which only a 
few months ago was declared by our most respon- 
sible thinkers to be a vital necessity. 

Give us your support to prevent the initial 
impetus from tailing off. 

Political Cooperation 

In the political field, I am pleased to say that 
far better results have been obtained. 

The Three Wise Men had told us: "For your 
foreign policy, consult together." 3 

I can give you an assurance that we have taken 
this advice, that we have put it into practice, and 
that consultation is now very comprehensive and 
very thorough. The general public has no con- 
ception of the progress NATO has made in this 
respect during the last 12 months. 

Take the preparation of the proposed summit 
conference, for instance. I can tell you today 
without disclosing any official secrets that, 
throughout the past year, the United States Gov- 
ernment did not send the Soviet Government a 
single note on the proposed summit conference 
without first submitting it to the NATO Perma- 
nent Council. 

The Government of the United States deserves 
special mention in this connection — and it is a 
point I wish to underline — because of all the 
countries in our alliance it is the one which has 
most consistently and most widely applied the 
principle of prior consultation. It has not been 
content with giving a fairly general indication of 
its intention but has accepted to submit the actual 
text of its notes to its allies for study and, if con- 
sidered necessary, for criticism. 

You will, I am sure, realize that this is an 
innovation, even a revolution, in diplomatic prac- 
tice. It is really extremely significant that the 
most powerful nation in the world should accept 
this form of consultation and adopt the new prac- 
tice of inviting even the smallest of its allies to 



3 Bulletin of Nov. 11, 1957, p. 739. 
610 



3 For text of the report of the Committee of Three on 
Non-Military Co-operation in NATO, see ibid., Jan. 7, 
1957, p. 18. 

Department of State Bulletin 



discuss with it on a footing of complete equality 
matters of mutual interest, and that in the vast 
majority of cases it should take account of sug- 
gestions it receives. This is of cardinal impor- 
tance if the alliance is to live and develop. If 
successful, this practice may well be the beginning 
of something very important and very new. 

This is a gratifying prospect but would perhaps 
not be an unmixed blessing. 

Why is this? Because the practice of consulta- 
tion as we know it has revealed to us its limitations. 
When the Three Wise Men told us to "consult to- 
gether," what they certainly meant was : "Consult 
together so as to reach agreement." 

It must be acknowledged that, although we 
have followed the method advocated, we have not 
always achieved the desired end. 

Putting this experiment into practice has been 
an exciting experience for me. It has convinced 
me that the idea for which I have striven to gain 
acceptance over the last 10 years is sound and 
workable. It is this : International organizations 
will not be really successful and produce all the 
results which can legitimately be expected of them 
until all their member countries, large and small, 
accept some measure of supranational control. 

It is not right that, because one nation is head- 
strong, thinskinned, or obstinate, the combined 
wisdom of the others should be set at nought. 

True, I am well aware that this idea is probably 
still in advance of the times. It does not fit in 
with what governments and possibly their peoples 
are prepared to accept. However, I do not despair 
of its ultimate triumph and of its lasting benefit 
to the security of the Western community. You 
have only to measure the progress already achieved 
in the fields of cooperation and mutual under- 
standing, you have only to think of the many 
things inconceivable only a few years ago and 
which have now become realities, to realize that 
there are no grounds for discouragement or 
skepticism. Quite the contrary. 

Ladies and gentlemen, have I succeeded in show- 
ing you the number and magnitude of the questions 
which face the Atlantic Alliance? I hope so. 

I fully sympathize with those of you who, while 
recognizing the importance of our organization, 
see it as a strictly military one and take a greater 
interest in the efforts made elsewhere. NATO, 
however, must remain a powerful military ma- 
chine, and it is our duty, and not always an easy 

October 20, 1958 

484031— BS 8 



one, to explain why the effort needed for this must 
be made. 

But even today NATO is a great deal more than 
this. It is the very center of the most significant 
diplomatic innovation ever attempted and is not 
only creating new methods but even a new spirit 
where the relations of nations to each other are 
concerned. 

If the experiment in progress is crowned with 
success, the West will present a very different ap- 
pearance, for the individualism, the national sel- 
fishness, perhaps wholly admirable in the past but 
which are out of harmony with our own times, will 
make way for new concepts: agreement, mutual 
aid, cooperation, the common good. 

If we can successfully accomplish this revolu- 
tion by and for ourselves, we can without fear or 
hesitation accept the great challenge which, under 
the name of "peaceful coexistence," is, in fact, a 
struggle between two civilizations. 

First to safeguard, reaffirm, and consolidate — 
and then make effective down to the last details and 
the ultimate issues — the ethical principles of 
Christianity and the political principles of the 
great Western revolutions which, on both conti- 
nents, have permitted the rise of democracy: 
There is the task history has entrusted to the men 
of today. 

It is a mighty and magnificent task. The At- 
lantic Alliance is the most useful and powerful 
instrument for its accomplishment. 



U. S. Officials in Europe 
Hold Regional Conference 

Press release 567 dated September 29 

In keeping with the general Department of 
State practice of holding regional conferences 
periodically, ambassadors and other officers from 
the U.S. missions at Copenhagen, Dublin, Hel- 
sinki, London, Moscow, Oslo, Ottawa, Reykjavik, 
and Stockholm will meet at London from October 
6 to 8 with Loy W. Henderson, Deputy Under 
Secretary of State, C. Burke Elbrick, Assistant 
Secretary of State for European Affairs, and 
other U.S. officials for a general exchange of 
views on matters of current interest. 

Among others who will attend are Robert H. 
Thayer, Special Assistant to the Director of the 
Bureau of Intelligence and Research; William 

611 



Clark, Assistant Director, U.S. Information 
Agency; and Frederick E. Nolting, Jr., Deputy 
U.S. Representative to the North Atlantic Council. 



President Sends Congratulations 
to General de Gaulle 

White House press release dated September 30 

The White House on September SO made pub- 
lic the following message from the President to 
Gen. Charles de Gaulle, President of the Council 
of Ministers of the Republic of France. 

September 29, 1958 

Dear Mr. President: As an old friend of 
France, I extend my personal congratulations to 
you on the outcome of the referendum on the new- 
French Constitution. To me the decisive result 
recorded by yesterday's voting is not only an out- 
standing success for yourself but also a most in- 
spiring development for France. The outcome 
is greatly encouraging to France's friends 
throughout the world. For me it demonstrates 
the determination of the French people to build 
anew for the future. 

Please accept, General, my heartfelt congratu- 
lations and best personal wishes. 
Sincerely, 

Dwtght D. Eisenhower 

ANZUS Council Meets 
at Washington 

Following is the text of an agreed announce- 
ment released at the close of a meeting of the 
ANZUS Council at Washington on October 1. 

Press release 577 dated October 1 

A meeting of the ANZUS Council was held at 
Washington October 1, 1958. Australia was rep- 
resented by The Right Honorable Richard G. 
Casey, Minister for External Affairs; New Zea- 
land was represented by The Right Honorable 
Walter Nash, Prime Minister and Minister of 
External Affairs ; and the United States was repre- 
sented by The Honorable John Foster Dulles, 
Secretary of State. 

The Ministers reviewed events over the last 
year which were of interest and concern to the 



three countries. They agreed that militant and 
subversive Communist expansionism remains the 
greatest threat to the peaceful progress of the 
free world. The Ministers expressed their satis- 
faction with the opportunities presented by this 
meeting to strengthen further their close relation- 
ships in matters affecting the maintenance of in- 
ternational peace and security. 

The Council noted that the Southeast Asia 
Treaty Organization, to which all three nations 
adhere, continues to grow in its capacity to pro- 
mote the security and well-being of the peoples 
of the countries of Southeast Asia. 

The members of the ANZUS Council have dis- 
cussed the Chinese Communist attacks on the 
Quemoy and Matsu islands and threats to seize 
Taiwan. They agreed that the resort to force 
and threat of force constitute a serious menace 
to the peace of the area and is a matter in which 
they are therefore deeply concerned. 

The representatives of Australia and New Zea- 
land, noting that the United States is now en- 
gaged in bilateral negotiations with the Chinese 
Communists in Warsaw in an effort to resolve 
the crisis and arrive at an arrangement whereby 
its recurrence might be avoided, affirmed their 
resolution to support the bringing of these nego- 
tiations to a peaceful conclusion. They joined 
the United States in calling on the Chinese Com- 
munists at once to discontinue their attacks on the 
Quemoy and Matsu islands in the interests of the 
peace of the area and as a first step to a peaceful 
settlement. 

They hold that, regardless of the merits of 
claims and counter-claims, the use of aggressive 
force is a violation of the basic principle on which 
world order depends. Armed force should not 
be used to achieve territorial ambitions. 

The delegations also included, for Australia: 
The Honorable Howard Beale, the Ambassador to 
the United States ; Lieutenant General Sir Henry 
Wells, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; 
Air Marshal Sir Frederick Scherger, Chief of Air 
Force Staff; Mr. J. Plimsoll, Assistant Secretary, 
Department of External Affairs. For New Zea- 
land: Mr. G. D. L. White, Charge d'Affaires ad 
interim, New Zealand Embassy; Major General 
C. E. Weir, Chief of the General Staff; and Mr. 
A. D. Mcintosh, Secretary of External Affairs. 
For the United States : Mr. Walter S. Robertson, 



612 



Department of State Bulletin 



Assistant Secretary of State; Mr. G. Frederick 
Bernhardt, Counselor, Department of State; 
Mr. John W. Irwin II, Deputy Assistant Secre- 
tary of Defense; and Admiral Harry D. Felt, 
Commander-in-Chief, Pacific. 



Letters of Credence 

Ethiopia 

The newly appointed Ambassador of Ethiopia, 
Zaude Gabre Heywot, presented his credentials 
to President Eisenhower on September 30. For 
texts of the Ambassador's remarks and the Presi- 
dent's reply, see Department of State press release 
570. 

Republic of China 

The newly appointed Ambassador of the Re- 
public of China, George Kung-chao Yeh, present- 
ed his credentials to President Eisenhower on 
September 30. For texts of the Ambassador's 
remarks and the President's reply, see Department 
of State press release 571. 



Visit the United States 
of America Year, 1960 

A PROCLAMATION 1 

Whebeas travel is an important element in the develop- 
ment of greater international understanding and thus 
tends to promote international peace ; and 

Whereas visitors from other lands have traditionally 
found in the United States a friendly welcome from a 
people whose primary concern is for peaceful accomplish- 
ments in their economic, social, and cultural life ; and 

Whereas the citizens of this Nation are desirous of 
sharing with our world neighbors the pleasure and ad- 
venture of visiting our country and of viewing its natural 
beauties, its cities and villages, and its historic shrines ; 
and 

Whereas special preparations are being made by both 
private and public agencies to encourage and facilitate 
travel to and within the United States during the year 
1960: 

Now, therefore, I, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, 
President of the United States of America, do proclaim 
the year 1960 as Visit the United States of America Year ; 
and I request the appropriate officials of the Federal Gov- 
ernment and of the several States, Territories, possessions, 
and municipalities of the United States to cooperate in 
the preparation for, and observance of, that year. 

I also urge business, labor, agricultural, educational, 
and civic groups, as well as the people of the United States 



generally to observe 1960 as Visit the United States of 
America Year with exhibits, ceremonies, and other ap- 
propriate activities designed to forward the purpose of 
promoting international understanding and world peace. 
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-sixth day 

of September in the year of our Lord nineteen 
[seal] hundred and fifty-eight, and of the Independence 

of the United States of America the one hundred 
and eighty-third. 

By the President : 
John Foster Dulles, 
Secretary of State. 



Four Powers Exchange Views 
on the German Problem 

Following are two exchanges of correspondence 
on the German problem,, one between the United 
States and the Federal Republic of Germany and 
the other between the United States and the Soviet 
Union. 



U.S. AIDE MEMOIRE TO FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF 
GERMANY, SEPTEMBER 30 ' 

Press release 572 dated September 30 

The Embassy of the U.S.A. has been instructed 
to inform the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
as follows : 

The Government of the United States refers to 
the Aide Memoire of the Federal Government of 
September 9, 1958, which draws attention to a 
resolution passed by the German Federal Parlia- 
ment and endorsed by the German Federal Coun- 
cil. This resolution calls for the establishment 
of a Four Power group composed of representa- 
tives of the powers responsible for solution of the 
German problem with a mandate to prepare joint 
proposals for the solution of the German problem. 
It also suggests that the group envisaged would 
be set up either at a future international con- 
ference of Heads of Government or independently 
thereof. 



1 No. 3258 ; 23 Fed. Reg. 7619. 
October 20, 1958 



1 Identical notes were delivered on Sept. 30 to the 
Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs by the U.S., U.K., 
and French representatives at Bonn. 



613 



The Government of the United States notes that 
the Government of the Federal Eepublic shares 
the desire expressed in the resolution of the 
German Legislature and that it hopes that this 
group will study proposals concerning the re- 
establishment of German unity and carry out the 
preparatory work necessary for final negotiations 
to be held at a later date. 

The Government of the United States welcomes 
the initiative of the Federal Government. As the 
latter is aware, the German problem is an im- 
portant element in the proposals put forward by 
the Western Powers to the Soviet Government on 
May 28 2 for an agenda for a meeting of Heads 
of Government. The preparatory talks in Mos- 
cow for such a meeting, mentioned in the Federal 
Republic's Aide Memoire, have been in suspense 
since the end of May because of the Soviet Govern- 
ment's failure to reply to the Western proposal of 
May 31 3 for overcoming the procedural difficulty 
caused by the divergence in the Soviet and West- 
ern sets of agenda proposals. Additional efforts 
to obtain a response, made by the Western Powers 
on July 1 4 and August 22, 6 have also so far been 
to no avail. 

The Western Powers continue to hold that a 
summit meeting would be desirable if it would 
provide opportunity for serious discussions of 
major problems and if it would be an effective 
means of reaching agreement on significant sub- 
jects. The Government of the United States hopes 
that the Soviet Government will now reply to the 
Western proposal so that the preparatory talks 
which would cover the important question of 
Germany, may continue. At the same time, in 
view of the crucial importance of the settlement 
of the German problem to the relaxation of world 
tensions, the Government of the United States is 
also prepared to discuss the German problem in 
a separate Four Power group to be set up in ac- 
cordance with the desire of the Federal Govern- 
ment expressed in its Aide Memoire of Septem- 
ber 9. 

The Government of the United States has con- 
stantly sought to bring about the creation of a 



' Bulletin of July 7, 1958, p. 12. 

' Ibid., p. 16. 

' For an exchange of correspondence between President 
Eisenhower and Premier Khrushchev, see ibid., July 21, 
1958, p. 95. 

" For texts of U.S. and Soviet notes, see ibid., Sept. 22, 
1958, p. 462. 



freely-elected all-German Government which 
would be truly representative of the German 
people and which could conclude a peace treaty. 
Until such a Government is created the continued 
division of Germany maintains a situation in 
which a segment of the German people is forced 
to suffer the oppression of a regime imposed on it 
from without. 

For a long time, efforts to resolve German ques- 
tions have been thwarted by the refusal of the 
Soviet Government to agree to any plan which 
would make reunification possible in a way which 
would insure the freedom of the whole German 
people. Once a freely-elected all-German Govern- 
ment truly representative of the German people 
has been created, it would be possible to proceed 
with such a Government to the conclusion of a 
peace treaty. The Government of the United 
States is informing the Soviet Government of its 
support of the initiative of the Federal Republic 
and urging the Soviet Government to give it 
favorable consideration. 



GERMAN AIDE MEMOIRE, SEPTEMBER 9» 

The German Federal Parliament (Bundestag) at its 
meeting July 2, 1958, unanimously passed the following 
resolution, which was endorsed by the German Federal 
Council (Bundesrat) at its meeting July 18, 1958: 

In order to promote the reestablishment of German 
unity, the Federal Government is herewith directed to 
request the four powers, France, the Union of Socialist 
Soviet Republics, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States, to set up, either at a future international con- 
ference (summit conference) or independently thereof, a 
four-power group (at least at the level of an ambassadors' 
conference) with a mandate to prepare joint proposals for 
the solution of the German problem. 

The Federal Government shares the desire expressed in 
the Bundestag resolution, that a group of the four powers 
responsible for the solution of the German problem be set 
up either at a future international conference (summit 
conference) or independently thereof. It hopes that this 
group will study proposals concerning the reestablishment 
of German unity, and carry out the preparatory work nec- 
essary for final negotiations to be held at a later date. 

In compliance with the mandate given to it by the 
Bundestag and the Bundesrat, and in view of the talks 
in preparation for an international conference which have 
been taking place in Moscow between representatives of 
the four powers responsible for the reunification of 



" Identical aide memoire were delivered on Sept. 9 
to the U.S., U.K., French, and Soviet representatives at 
Bonn. 



614 



Department of State Bulletin 



Germany, the Federal Government begs to direct the 
attention of the Government of the United States of Amer- 
ica to the desire expressed in tie above resolution. 



U.S. NOTE TO U.S.S.R., SEPTEMBER 30 ' 

Press release 573 dated September 30 

The Embassy of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics and on instruction of its Government 
has the honor to state the following: 

The United States Government wishes to refer 
to the Soviet Government's note of September 18. 
It regrets that the Soviet note ignores the pro- 
posals made by the Government of the Federal 
Republic of Germany, which were contained in an 
Aide Memoire of September 9 addressed to the 
Governments of France, the Soviet Union, the 
United Kingdom and the United States. These 
proposals, based on an unanimous resolution of 
the German Federal Parliament which was en- 
dorsed by the German Federal Council, also called 
for the establishment of a Four Power group to 
discuss the German problem. The United States 
Government observes that instead, the Soviet note 
is based on proposals made by the so-called "Gov- 
ernment of the German Democratic Republic". 

The United States Government fully shares the 
view expressed in the Soviet Government's note 
that "no one has the right to deprive the German 
people for such a long time of the opportunity to 
enjoy all the advantages of a state of peace". 

It also notes with satisfaction the statement that 
the Soviet Government is "in favor of a funda- 
mental settlement of the German question". It 
is well known to the Soviet Government that this 
has long been the aim of the United States 
Government. It is sufficient to recall the opening 
words of the Berlin Declaration which was made 
by the Governments of France, the Federal Re- 
public of Germany, the United Kingdom and the 
United States on July 29, 1957 : 8 

Twelve years have elapsed since the end of the war 
in Europe. The hopes of the peoples of the world for 
the establishment of a basis for a just and lasting peace 
have nevertheless not been fulfilled. One of the basic 
reasons for the failure to reach a settlement is the 



T Identical notes were delivered on Sept. 30 to the Soviet 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs by the U.S., U.K., and French 
Embassies. 

8 Bulletin of Aug. 19. 19.">7. p. 304. 

October 20, J 958 

484031—58 4 



iiintinued division of Germany, which is a grave in- 
justice to the German people and a major source of 
international tension in Europe. 

The United States Government agrees that, as 
stated in the Soviet note, 4t the conclusion of a 
peace treaty with Germany would finally draw 
the line below the last war", and that the German 
people should themselves participate in the prep- 
aration of such a treaty. An essential prerequi- 
site for the negotiation of a peace treaty is, how- 
ever, the creation of a Government which truly 
reflects the will of the German people. Only a 
Government created on such a basis could under- 
take obligations which would inspire confidence 
on the part of other countries and which would be 
considered just and binding by the people of 
Germany themselves. Moreover, German repre- 
sentatives at any discussions about a peace treaty 
which were held in advance of the reunification 
of Germany would, as the Soviet Government 
must be aware, have no power to commit a future 
all-German Government to any of the conclusions 
reached. For these reasons, the United States 
Government considers that the first task in any 
discussion of the German problem must be the 
reunification of Germany and the formation of 
an all-German Government by means of free 
elections. 

On the method by which such Government 
should be formed, the United States Government 
finds the proposals in the Soviet Government's 
note both unrealistic and unsatisfactory. Accord- 
ing to these proposals, the question of the reuni- 
fication of Germany is to be left to a commission 
composed of representatives of the Federal Re- 
public and the Soviet Zone. The regime estab- 
lished in the Soviet Zone of Germany does not 
represent the will of the people of Eastern Ger- 
many. It is rightly regarded by the people of all 
parts of Germany as a regime imposed by ;> 
foreign power and maintained in power by foreign 
forces. Since his regime has no mandate from 
the people it purports to speak for, it would vio- 
late any genuine concern for the interests of the 
German people to allow such a regime to partici- 
pate in any discussions involving their future 
Government. 

In the Directive issued by the Four Heads of 
Government at Geneva in 1955, 9 the Soviet Gov- 



" Ibid., Aug. 1, 1955, p. 170. 



615 



eminent .recognized its responsibility for the re- 
unification of Germany. The Directive provides 
inter alia: "The Heads of Government, recogniz- 
ing their common responsibility for the settlement 
of the German question and the re-unification of 
Germany, have agreed that the settlement of the 
German question and the re-unification of Ger- 
many by means of free elections shall be carried 
out in conformity with the national interests of 
the German people and the interests of European 
security". The United States Government cannot 
accept that the Soviet Government has the right 
unilaterally to evade this responsibility or this 
agreement. In accordance with its similar re- 
sponsibility the United States Government, in 
conjunction with the Governments of France and 
the United Kingdom, has on many occasions put 
forward proposals designed to achieve the restora- 
tion of German unity. These Western proposals 
recognize the right of the German people to de- 
termine their own way of life in freedom, to de- 
termine for themselves their own political, 
economic and social system, and to provide for 
their security with due regard to the legitimate 
interests of other nations. They provide for the 
exercise of this right through the holding of free 
elections throughout Germany, the establishment 
of an all-German Government, and the negotia- 
tion with this Government of the terms of a peace 
treaty. 

The Government of the United States is ready 
at any time to enter into discussions with the 
Soviet Govermnent on the basis of these proposals, 
or of any other proposals genuinely designed to 
insure the reunification of Germany in freedom, 
in any appropriate forum. It regards the solu- 
tion of the German problem as essential if a last- 
ing settlement in Europe is to be achieved. This 
problem has been included as one of the subjects 
which the Western Powers put forward on May 
28 for examination at a conference of Heads of 
Government. Although the Soviet Government 
agreed that preparations for such a conference 
should be made between representatives of the 
Four Powers in Moscow, these preparations have 
been in suspense since the end of May because of 
the Soviet Government's failure to reply to the 
Western proposals of May 31 for overcoming the 
procedural difficulty caused by the divergence in 
the Soviet and Western sets of agenda proposals. 
The further Western communications of July 1 



and August 22 have so far also remained un- 
answered. Since the Soviet Government has in- 
dicated in its note that it, too, attaches importance 
to the solution of the German problem, the United 
States Government hopes that the Soviet Govern- 
ment will now reply to the Western proposal so 
that the preparatory talks may continue. 

In the interests of making progress on this sub- 
ject, the Government of the United States is, how- 
ever, prepared to discuss the German problem in 
a separate Four Power group to be set up in ac- 
cordance with the desire of the Federal Govern- 
ment expressed in its Aide Memoire of September 
9. The purpose of the group would be to discuss 
proposals connected with the German problem and 
to carry out the preparatory work necessary for 
final negotiations to be held at a later date either 
at a conference of Heads of Govermnent, if one 
can be arranged, or otherwise. 

The Govermnent of the United States hopes 
that, in view of the importance of settling the 
German problem, not only for the German people 
but also as a contribution towards the relaxation 
of tension in Europe, the Soviet Government will 
agree to the procedure set out above. 

A copy of the United States Government's re- 
ply to the Federal Government's Aide Memoire of 
September 9 is attached. The United States Gov- 
ernment is also informing the Federal Govern- 
ment of the terms of this note. 



SOVIET NOTE, SEPTEMBER 18'° 

Unofficial translation 

The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Re- 
publics presents its compliments to the Government of 
the United States of America and considers it necessary 
to transmit the following for its information. 

On 5 September of this year the Soviet Government 
received the note of the Government of the German Dem- 
ocratic Republic in which disquiet is expressed in con- 
nection with the impermissibly delayed preparation of 
a peace treaty with Germany. In the note a proposal 
is advanced about the urgent creation of a commission 
of representatives of the four great powers whose tasks 
would be the carrying out of consultations about the 
preparation of a peace treaty with Germany. As the 
Government of the G.D.R. communicated, notes to the 
same effect were addressed also to the Governments of 
the United States of America, Great Britain and the 



10 Identical notes were delivered on Sept. 18 to the 
U.S., U.K., and French Embassies at Moscow. 



616 



Department of State Bulletin 



French Republic. Moreover, the G.D.R. Government 
made it known that it simultaneously proposed to the 
Government of the F.R.G. to create a commission of rep- 
resentatives of both German states which would examine 
from a German point of Tiew all questions connected 
with the preparation of a peace treaty with Germany. 
According to the proposal of the G.D.R. Government, 
this commission will occupy itself also with questions 
relevant to the competence of the two German states, 
connected with the creation of a united peace-loving 
democratic Germany. 

Taking into account that the question about preparing 
a peace treaty is that part of the German problem for 
the decision of which all states which participated in 
the war, and in the first place the four great powers, 
bear responsibility, the Soviet Government would like 
to express to the Government of the U.S.A. its consid- 
erations regarding the proposals advanced by the Gov- 
ernment of the G.D.R. so that in the nearest future it 
might be possible to undertake joint steps in the interest 
of a peaceful settlement with Germany. The statement 
of the G.D.R. Government points out how acutely the 
German people feel that abnormal situation which al- 
ready in the course of 13 years has been preserved in 
Germany as result of the absence of a peace treaty with 
this country. It is a new reminder to the great powers 
on whom lies the main responsibility for a peaceful set- 
tlement with Germany about the need at least to fulfill 
their duty before the German people. The proposal of 
the G.D.R. Government about the creation of a commis- 
sion of representatives of the four powers and also of 
a corresponding German commission for the preparation 
of a peace treaty with Germany takes into account the 
concrete conditions which have arisen up to the present 
and opens the way for a practical solution of this long 
since matured problem. 

The Soviet Government being an advocate of the basic 
solution of the German question has repeatedly come 
out in the past with proposals, directed toward an ur- 
gent conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany, which 
unfortunately have not at that time met support on the 
part of the Western powers. Recently it once more 
advanced this question in connection with the prepara- 
tion for the convocation of a summit meeting consider- 
ing it necessary to examine this as one of the important 
problems of the agenda of such a meeting. 

The indisputable fact is evident to all that the ab- 
sence of a peace treaty with Germany leaves open many 
questions which profoundly disturb the whole German 
people and affect important interests of the other Euro- 
pean peoples who took part in the war with Germany, 
including the interests of their security. No one has 
the right in the course of such a long time to deprive 
the German people of a possibility of enjoying all the 
benefits of a peaceful situation, all the more since the 
solution of analogous questions in connection with all 
the countries drawn into the war on the side of Hitlerite 
Germany has long since been a passed stage. 

The conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany would 
finally draw a line under the past war and its heavy 
consequences for the European peoples and would un- 
doubtedly have important significance for reducing ten- 



sion and guaranteeing security in Europe. At the same 
time it would permit the guarding from any outside 
interference the internal development of Germany and 
the restoring in full measure of its sovereignty and inde- 
pendence. Germany would be placed in all relations in 
a position of equality with other states and would receive 
access to the U.N. The working out of the draft of a 
peace treaty, which would define the political and eco- 
nomic conditions of the development of Germany and its 
military status, is dictated also by a real need to give 
the German people clear perspectives for the development 
of Germany in the future. 

In supporting the initiative of the Government of the 
German Democratic Republic, the Soviet Government 
has also in mind that the preparatory work's concluding 
a peace treaty with the participation of the Govern- 
ments of both German states would facilitate a rap- 
prochement between them and the unification of their 
efforts for the purpose of restoring the state unity of 
Germany. 

The Soviet Government hereby informs the Govern- 
ment of the U.S.A. that it has notified the G.D.R. Gov- 
ernment about its agreement with its proposal to create 
a commission of representatives of the four powers with 
the aim of carrying out consultations about preparing 
a peace treaty with Germany. 

It also supports the idea of the creation of a commis- 
sion of representatives of both German states and de- 
clares its readiness to render any aid for the activity 
of such a commission. The Soviet Government expects 
that the Government of the United States of America, 
in accordance with the obligations lying on it in connec- 
tion with the peaceful settlement with Germany, also 
will support the said proposals of the Government of 
the G.D.R. and will adopt the necessary steps for their 
realization. The Soviet Government would be grateful 
to the Government of the U.S.A. for the receipt in a 
short time of its considerations on the question touched 
upon. 

Notes of identical content have been addressed by the 
Soviet Government also to the Governments of Great Brit- 
ain and Prance. 



U.S. Views on Recent Soviet Testing 
of Nuclear Weapons 

Following is the text of a Department an- 
nouncement released to the press on September 30 
{press release 575). 

We have learned that two nuclear explosions 
occurred today in the Soviet Union. 

On March 31 the Soviet Union, having then 
completed an intensive series of atomic weapons 
tests, announced that it would discontinue further 
testing but reserved the right to resume if the 
United States and the United Kingdom should 



Ocfober 20, 1958 



617 



continue testing. 1 It was known at the time that, 
in accordance with normal planning, the United 
States and the United Kingdom series of tests 
would shortly begin. 

It was suspected at that time that the Soviet 
announcement was primarily a propaganda ex- 
ercise and that there was no real intention to 
suspend testing. This now seems to be confirmed 
by the event. 

Despite the foregoing the United States expects 
that negotiations for safeguarded nuclear test sus- 
pension will begin in Geneva on October 31 as 
scheduled. 2 Unless the Soviet Union holds fur- 
ther tests after negotiations have begun, the 
United States remains prepared to withhold 
further testing of atomic and hydrogen weapons 
for a period of 1 year from the beginning of the 
negotiations on October 31. 



U.S. Confers With U.S.S.R. 
on Case of Crashed Plane 

U.S. NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 21 

The Embassy of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics and has the honor to refer to the Min- 
istry's note No. 57/OSA of September 19, 1958, 3 
in reply to the Embassy's note No. 270 of Sep- 
tember 13, 1958, 4 and to communicate the follow • 
ing on instructions from its Government : 

The Ministry's note fails to furnish any 
information regarding eleven members of the crew 
of the American C-130 transport aircraft which 
crashed 55 kilometers northwest of Yerevan on 
September 2, 1958. The clearly established fact 
that this aircraft crashed in Soviet territory com- 
pels the Government of the United States of 
America again to request full information re- 
garding the whereabouts and condition of the 
eleven crew members unaccounted for. 



1 Bulletin of Apr. 21, 1958, p. 646. 

2 For an exchange of notes between the United States 
and the Soviet Union, see Hid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 503. 

3 Not printed here. 

* For text, see Bulletin of Oct. 6, 1958, p. 531. 



The Embassy notes that the Soviet Government 
is prepared to transfer to a representative of the 
American authorities the remains of six members 
of the crew of the crashed American airplane. In 
requesting that this transfer take place as soon 
as possible, the Embassy reiterates the importance 
of establishing the identity of the victims of this 
crash. It is, therefore, requested that there be 
delivered the remains of these persons as found 
and all material which will assist in establishing 
their precise individual identification. Such ma- 
terials should include military identification tags, 
parachutes, personal effects, clothing and personal 
flying equipment and all fragments thereof. 

In requesting the full cooperation of the Soviet 
Government in facilitating the identification of 
the dead airmen, the Government of the United 
States of America emphasizes the humanitarian 
considerations which must be recognized in this 
situation. Since September 2 the families of the 
seventeen members of the crew of the missing air- 
craft have received no information concerning the 
individual fates of their close relatives. The 
Ministry's notes of September 12 and September 
19 made no attempt to relieve the anxiety of these 
families by communicating information available 
to the Soviet Government regarding the identity 
of the six persons whose remains have been re- 
covered. 

The Government of the United States, there- 
fore, hopes and expects that the transfer of these 
remains and all materials which will facilitate 
identification will be effected without delay and 
requests that the Embassy promptly be notified 
of the place and tune the transfer will take place. 



DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT OF 
SEPTEMBER 23 

Press release 555 dated September 23 

The Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs has in- 
formed the American Embassy at Moscow that 
the remains of six members of the crew of the 
U.S. Air Force plane which crashed 55 kilometers 
northwest of Yerevan, Armenian S.S.R., would 
be turned over to American authorities at the 
Turkish-Soviet border near Leninakan, Armenian 
S.S.R., at 5 : 00 p. m. Moscow time on September 
24, 1958. 

The American Charge d'Affaires at Moscow has 
informed the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs 



618 



Department of State Bulletin 



that the U.S. air attache stationed at the Ameri- 
can Embassy at Ankara, Turkey, would receive 
the remains. The air attache planned to fly to 
Erzerum, Turkey, on September 23 and to drive 
from there to the border near Leninakan to re- 
ceive the remains on September 24.° 



Recent Austrian Legislation 

on War Damage and Restitution 

Press release 568 dated September 29 

The Department of State has received informa- 
tion about recent Austrian legislation with respect 
to war damage and restitution which may be of 
interest to American citizens and other residents 
of the United States who were Nazi persecutees 
or sustained damage to property in Austria dur- 
ing World War II and the postwar occupation 
period. This information is summarized below. 

Restoration of Life Insurance Policies 

The Austrian Parliament enacted a law con- 
cerning the restoration of life insurance policies 
which were confiscated in Austria by the German 
Reich between 1938 and 1945. The law specifies 
the amounts which will be payable to the bene- 
ficiaries of the confiscated insurance policies. 
Claims for the restoration of the policies should 
be filed immediately with the insurance company 
in Austria which issued the policy, referring to the 
Regelung vom Deutschen Reiche eingezogener 
Anspruche aus Lebensversicherungen. Claims 
must be filed not later than June 30, 1959. 

Restoration of Pensions 

Arrangements have been made by the Austrian 
authorities for the restoration of pension rights, 
retroactive to May 1, 1950, of former employees 
of the Austrian Social Insurance Institutes and 
Austrian municipalities if the pension rights were 
suspended in the course of Nazi persecution. 
Persons entitled to the restoration of such pension 
rights should file their claims with the Austrian 
Social Insurance Institute or municipality where 
they were formerly employed. 



* Col. John S. Chalfant, U.S. air attache^ took delivery 
of six coffins near Kars at 5 p. m. Moscow time Sept. 24. 



Tax Exemption for Persecutees 

A decree was issued by the Austrian Govern- 
ment granting exemption from the Austrian occu- 
pation cost tax on property to former Nazi per- 
secutees if they were nationals of one of the 
United Nations on July 27, 1955, when the Aus- 
trian State Treaty entered into force. Claims for 
exemption from this tax should be filed with the 
finance office in Austria where the property is 
located or the tax was paid. 

Compensation for Confiscated Furniture and 
Equipment 

An Austrian war damage and persecution law 
grants limited compensation to qualified persons 
for ordinary household furniture and furnishings 
and for the equipment necessary for the practice 
of a profession, the following of a trade, and the 
operation of a business enterprise, if such property 
was lost or damaged as the result of war activities 
or confiscated in the course of Nazi persecution. 
Claimants whose income in 1955 exceeded the 
amount specified in the law do not qualify for 
compensation, and certain payments already made 
out of Austrian Government funds are applied 
against any compensation which might otherwise 
become payable under the law. Claims under this 
law must be filed not later than June 30, 1959, 
with the Finanzlandesdirektion (district finance 
office) in Austria for the district where the prop- 
erty was located at the time of seizure or loss, mak- 
ing reference to the Eriegs und Verfolgungs- 
sachschaedengesetz. Claims must be filed on the 
official forms prepared by the Austrian Govern- 
ment, which will be obtainable at the Austrian 
Embassy in Washington and the Austrian con- 
sulates in New York, Chicago, Detroit, Portland, 
San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas, Miami, At- 
lanta, Memphis, and Cleveland after October 10, 
1958. The forms will also contain information 
concerning the laws. 

Occupation Damage Law 

Austrian legislation now makes provision for 
compensation for certain property damage caused 
by the occupation powers after September 11, 
1945, providing the owners have not already re- 
ceived compensation for such damage from the 
Austrian Government or one of the former occu- 
pation powers. Claims for compensation must 



October 20, J 958 



619 



be filed not later than June 30, 1959, with the 
Finanzlandesdirektion (district finance office) in 
Austria for the district where the property was 
located at the time of damage, making reference 
to the Besatzungsschaedengesetz. 

German Federal Restitution Law 

Persons who sustained losses due to an unlawful 
taking by certain German entities of tangible and 
intangible identifiable property outside West Ger- 
many, which property was subsequently sent into 
West Germany or Berlin, are reminded that 
claims for compensation for such property under 
the German Federal Restitution Law must be filed 
with the German authorities not later than 
December 31, 1958. Claims for compensation 
under the German Federal Restitution Law for 
such property, which was confiscated in Austria 
but can no longer be found, should be filed with 
the German authorities even if a claim with re- 
gard to the property has already been filed with 
the Austrian authorities. 

The Austrian authorities will cooperate in fur- 
nishing available information to claimants about 
any transfer to West Germany or Berlin of any 
property confiscated in Austria during the Nazi 
regime. The Finanzlandesdirektionen in Austria 
will frequently be able to furnish a statement as 
to whether property confiscated in Austria was 
sent to West Germany or Berlin. Requests for 
such information should be addressed directly to 
the Finanzlandesdirektion (district finance office) 
for the area where the property was located at 
the time of the confiscation or to the bank or 
other institution where the property was depos- 
ited. 



U.S. and Ghana Sign Agreement 
on Investment Guaranty Program 

Press release 581 dated October 2 

The United States and Ghana have reached an 
agreement to institute the investment guaranty 
program of the International Cooperation Ad- 
ministration in Ghana and thus encourage the in- 
vestment of private American capital in the 
economic and industrial development of the new 
West African nation. 

Ghana became the 38th country to enter into 
the U.S. investment guaranty program when the 
agreement was signed on September 30 at Accra 
by Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah for Ghana 
and Charge dAffaires Peter Rutter for the United 
States. 

Under the agreement the U.S. Government will 
offer two types of guaranties to cover new invest- 
ment of private American capital in business en- 
terprises in Ghana. The first type is a guaranty 
that investors will be able to convert Ghanaian 
local currency receipts from new investments in 
Ghana into U.S. dollars. The second type offers 
insurance against losses which may result from 
expropriation or confiscation. 

The guaranties are available for new invest- 
ments of cash, commodities, patents, or services 
made by U.S. individuals or firms in countries 
participating in the program. The investor pays 
a small premium, usually one-half of one percent 
for each type of insurance. In all countries, 
guaranties totaling almost $300 million have been 
issued since the program was authorized by the 
Congress of the United States in 1948. There 
are currently applications of several hundred mil- 
lion dollars pending. 



620 



Department of State Bulletin 



Administration of the Immigration Laws by the Department of State 
and the Foreign Service 



by Frank L. Auerbach 
Assistant Director, Visa Office 1 



An alien in the immigration process has usually 
two, sometimes three or even four, procedural 
contacts with the United States Government. 
First, he applies abroad to an American consul 
for a visa. If issued, the visa permits him to 
apply at a port of entry to the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service for admission to the 
United States. Once admitted to the United 
States he may become involved in deportation 
proceedings before the Immigration and Natu- 
ralization Service. If he desires to become a 
citizen of the United States, he will petition a Fed- 
eral or State court. Corresponding to the alien's 
increasingly closer ties with the United States, 
each of these steps is surrounded with additional 
procedural safeguards for the alien. The four pro- 
cedures develop from visa proceedings, subject 
only to internal administrative scrutiny, to natu- 
ralization proceedings in which the United States 
becomes a party before the courts. I am to discuss 
with you the first of these procedures, the consular 
visa procedure. 

The role played by the Secretary of State and 
American consular officers in the issuance and re- 
fusal of visas to aliens is one of the least under- 
stood administrative functions carried out under 
the provisions of our immigration laws. I am 
grateful for the invitation to address this dis- 
tinguished audience as it offers a welcome oppor- 
tunity to explain these operations. 

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 
requires, as did prior law, that aliens who apply 
for admission to the United States be, with few 
exceptions, in possession of a valid visa. The 



1 Address made before the Committee on Immigration 
and Nationality of the Federal Bar Association at Wash- 
ington, D. C, on Sept. 26 (press release 561). 



issuance of visas has been the responsibility of 
American consular officers since 1917, when the 
visa requirement was first established by joint 
order of the Departments of State and Labor. 

In determining whether an applicant is eligible 
to receive a visa, American consular officers apply 
the same criteria as do officers of the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service at the time the alien 
applies for admission at a port of entry. This 
is required by the introductory language of sec- 
tion 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 
which lists 31 classes of aliens who "shall be in- 
eligible to receive visas and shall be excluded from 
admission into the United States." 

Responsibilities of Secretary of State 

The basic responsibilities of the Secretary of 
State and American consular officers in the ad- 
ministration of the immigration laws are defined 
in section 104 of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act. This section charges the Secretary of State 
with the administration and enforcement of the 
provisions of the immigration laws relating to the 
powers, duties, and functions of diplomatic and 
consular officers of the United States, except those 
conferred upon the consular officers relating to 
the granting or refusal of visas. The same section 
of law requires the Secretary of State to estab- 
lish such regulations and issue such instructions 
as he deems necessary for carrying out the pro- 
visions of the immigration laws. 

The statutory responsibility of consular officers 
relating to the refusal of visas is dealt with in 
section 221(g) of the Immigration and Na- 
tionality Act. It prescribes that no visa shall be 
issued to an alien if it appears to the consular 
officer from statements in his application that the 
alien is ineligible to receive a visa under the law, 



October 20, 7958 



621 



if the alien's application fails to comply with the 
provisions of law or regulations, or if the con- 
sular officer has reason to believe or knows that 
the alien is ineligible to receive a visa under the 
law. 

The fact that the law specifies that the respon- 
sibility of the Secretary of State for the enforce- 
ment of the immigration laws does not extend to 
the powers, duties, and functions of consular of- 
ficers relating to the granting or refusal of visas 
has led to demands for amendatory action pro- 
viding for the review of consular decisions by 
formally established administrative review bodies 
in the United States or by the courts. The 
existing procedure has been referred to as a unique 
vestige of administrative absolutism, and occa- 
sionally consuls, in the performance of the visa 
function, have been called "little Caesars" who 
arbitrarily and whimsically issue or deny visas. 

The Department of State is very mindful of 
the fact that each of the nearly 850,000 visas issued 
every year as well as each of those refused have a 
direct bearing on our relations with foreign coun- 
tries. There are few areas in which the action of 
the United States Government affects so in- 
timately so many foreign citizens as does the visa 
function. It appears to be an outgrowth of this 
recognition that the Congress has exempted con- 
sular proceedings from formal administrative 
and court review. The Administrative Procedure 
Act exempts foreign affairs functions from its 
adjudication procedures and from the require- 
ment of notice of proposed rulemaking. The 
courts have consistently held that the action of 
a consular officer in refusing a visa is not review- 
able judicially. 

To provide formal administrative or judicial 
review of consular decisions would seriously ham- 
per the administration of the immigration laws 
and would not be in the best interest of the con- 
duct of our foreign relations. Frequently deci- 
sions relating to the denial of a visa are based 
on information obtained from confidential sources, 
the disclosure of which would compromise our 
sources of information and would sometimes ad- 
versely affect our foreign relations. Obviously 
this is the case in decisions relating to the security 
of the United States. But by no means is the 
validity of this observation limited to security 
cases. For example, the immigration laws render 
ineligible to receive a visa aliens who have been 



illicit traffickers in narcotics, prostitutes, and 
aliens who have been convicted of crimes involv- 
ing moral turpitude. The fact that an alien is a 
narcotic trafficker or a prostitute frequently is 
established through confidential information. In 
countries in which the conviction of an alien is 
stricken from his court records as a result of a 
pardon or good conduct over a period of time, an 
action immaterial under our immigration laws, 
the consular officer must rely occasionally on con- 
fidential information to gain knowledge of such 
a conviction. Formal administrative and judicial 
review in these instances would leave the execu- 
tive branch with the alternative of divulging a 
confidential source of information or to issue a 
visa to an alien who is ineligible to receive a visa. 
The exemption of the visa process from the pro- 
cedural provisions of the Administrative Proce- 
dure Act and its nonreviewability by American 
courts is, therefore, not a historical accident but 
rather is necessitated by the unique conditions 
under which it takes place. 

Safeguards In Administration of Visa Function 

What safeguards does the Secretary of State 
provide in the face of this situation so as to attain 
the highest administrative standards in the per- 
formance of the visa function? Applicants for 
the Foreign Service have to meet most exacting 
requirements with respect to both their intellec- 
tual and personal qualifications. After their 
selection these officers undergo a rigorous train- 
ing for their future duties. This training in- 
cludes an intensive visa training course during 
which the new officers are required to acquaint 
themselves with the immigration laws, regula- 
tions, and procedures. In addition, each officer 
is required to take a comprehensive examination 
on the completion of the visa training course. 
The results of this examination are incorporated 
in his personnel file. Before going to a visa post 
these officers are briefed on their specific responsi- 
bilities by senior officers of the Visa Office and 
sometimes are assigned to the Visa Office for a 
period of consultation. 

Once in the field the consular officer assigned 
to visa work has available to assist him in the 
administration of the immigration laws and reg- 
ulations elaborate interpretative note material, 
precedent decisions, and visa instructions. Before 
making decisions in certain types of visa cases 



622 



Department of State Bulletin 



consular officers are required by published regu- 
lations or internal instructions to obtain the De- 
partment's views. If the officer is in doubt on any 
aspect of a visa case, current instructions require 
the submission of the case to the Department for 
an advisory opinion to be rendered by the Visa 
Office. 

When an immigrant visa is refused, the appli- 
cant is always informed of the specific provision 
of law on which the refusal is based. Except 
when the finding is based on confidential informa- 
tion, the facts relating to the decision are also 
stated. Published regulations require the con- 
sular officer to prepare a memorandum of refusal, 
which is retained in the consular file. Published 
regulations also provide that the action of refus- 
ing an immigrant visa must be reviewed by the 
consular officer in charge of visa work at the post. 
If he concurs in the refusal, he countersigns the 
memorandum of refusal. If the reviewing officer 
or the principal officer at the post does not concur 
in the refusal, the case must be referred to the 
Department for an advisory opinion. 

One of the major functions of the Visa Office 
of the Department of State, which is statutorily 
established by the Immigration and Nationality 
Act, is to render advisory opinions to consular 
officers on substantive and procedural questions 
which arise in connection with the visa function. 
In rendering these advisory opinions the Visa Of- 
fice is bound by decisions and rulings of the At- 
torney General with respect to all questions of 
law. It is also bound by controlling decisions of 
the courts. It is guided by precedent-making de- 
cisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals, and 
it cooperates with the Immigration and Natural- 
ization Service with a view to securing uniform 
interpretations of the immigration law. For legal 
questions of far-reaching importance it seeks the 
advice of the Department's Legal Adviser. Prece- 
dent-making opinions of the Visa Office are made 
available to all consular posts in the form of an- 
notations to the law and regulations. 

Informal Review of Consular Decisions 

These are the major internal procedures the 
Department of State follows in assisting consular 
officers with their responsibility for the issuance 
and denial of visas. It remains to discuss how 
the general public can seek an informal review 
of a consular decision. 



While a case is pending before a consular of- 
ficer as well as after a visa has been denied, in 
addition to the applicant, every person with a 
legitimate interest, whether Member of Congress, 
attorney, prospective employer, relative, or friend, 
may directly approach a consular officer if he feels 
that a case does not find or has not found prompt 
or proper attention. In addition the Visa Office 
will accept inquiries from these same sources in 
all visa cases and will review the consular de- 
cision if it is alleged that the denial of a visa was 
in error or that the procedures followed were not 
consistent with established standards. In such 
cases the Department will request the consular 
officer to submit a report on his action and, if 
necessary, will require that the entire visa file be 
submitted to the Department for review. Based 
on this review the Department will render an ad- 
visory opinion which will either concur in the con- 
sul's action or will point out to him that in the 
Department's opinion the decision was in error. 
In some cases the Department might suggest that 
additional evidence be examined or secured or 
that the alien be interrogated more fully along 
certain lines. 

The critical question is, of course, what happens 
if the Department disagrees with the consul's de- 
cision to refuse a visa, in view of the provision of 
the law that the responsibility of the Secretary 
of State for the administration and enforcement 
of the immigration laws does not extend to the 
powers, duties, and functions conferred upon con- 
sular officers relating to the granting or refusing 
of visas? This provision is held to preclude the 
Secretary of State from directing a specific con- 
sular officer to grant or refuse a visa in a particu- 
lar case. However, it appears consistent with the 
Secretary's responsibility for the prescription of 
regulations and the issuance of instructions which 
to a considerable extent embody interpretations 
of law that Congress intended the Department's 
rulings on questions of law to be controlling on 
consular officers. To the best of my knowledge 
there has not been one case in which a consular 
officer has disregarded the opinion of the Depart- 
ment on a question of law. 

When the evaluation of facts is at issue the 
Department will give great weight to the consu- 
lar officer's judgment who has the facts and the 
applicant before him. However, should there be 
a serious disagreement between the Department 
and the consular officer in a particular case, it 



Ocfober 20, 1958 



623 



could be assigned to another officer, thereby sub- 
stituting the judgment of one consular officer for 
that of another. Such action has become neces- 
sary in only one case during the last 6 years. 

The formulation of an advisory opinion in the 
Department itself is subject to review on several 
levels and may, as it sometimes is, be reviewed 
on the highest level. 

The Department is keenly aware of its responsi- 
bility to assure an accurate, uniform, and fair 
interpretation of our immigration laws and, there- 
fore, in addition to the procedural steps already 
discussed, has taken other steps to fulfill its obli- 
gation. Precedent-making rulings on the inter- 
pretation of the immigration laws are made 
available by the Department in the form of Visa 
Office bulletins to attorneys, voluntary social 
agencies, carriers, and to any others who have 
asked for this service. At consular conferences 
held throughout the world representatives of the 
Visa Office discuss problems of law to insure uni- 
form application. New Foreign Service officers 
during their training and in the field are impressed 
with their responsibilities by senior officers of the 
Department and the Foreign Service. In order to 
increase their proficiency, staff members engaged 
in visa work are encouraged to participate m a 
visa training course by correspondence offered by 
the Foreign Service Institute of the Department 
in cooperation with the University of Wisconsin. 
The administration of the immigration laws by 
the Department of State and the Foreign Service 
is guided by the recognition that, although the 
law does not give the alien an enforceable right to 
obtain a visa, the consular officer has no authority 
to deny a visa, except for the reasons stated m the 
law. A consular officer who would act in dis- 
regard of this concept would not measure up to 
the standards set for his satisfactory performance. 
No procedure, whether judicial or administra- 
tive, whether or not subject to the safeguards of 
the Administrative Procedure Act, is foolproof 
against errors in legal interpretations, m evaluat- 
ing facts, or in the use of discretion. If we make 
this general allowance which is applicable to all 
human endeavor, I believe we can conclude that 
existing visa procedures are responsive to the con- 
duct of our foreign relations and by internal ad- 
ministrative safeguards effectively protect the 
interests of an alien who applies for a visa under 
our immigration laws. 



624 



Record Number of Visitors Visas 
Issued in 1958 

Press release 550 dated September 23 

The State Department announced on September 
23 that a recordbreaking 612,824 visitors visas 
were issued during the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1958, to persons desiring to enter the United States 
for business or pleasure or both. 

In publishing annual statistics prepared by the 
Visa Office on nonimmigrant and immigrant visas 
issued by Foreign Service officers all over the 
world, Roderic L. O'Connor, Administrator of the 
Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, pointed 
out that the number of visitors visas issued was 5 
percent higher than during the previous year. 
This increase, according to Mr. O'Connor, demon- 
strates the continuing effectiveness of President 
Eisenhower's leadership in seeking to promote the 
interchange of friendly visits among the peoples 
of the world and to facilitate international travel 
as a means of insuring peace. 

A total of 259,789 visas were also issued during 
the 1958 fiscal year to aliens coming to reside per- 
manently in the United States as both quota and 
nonquota immigrants. More immigrant visas 
were issued to persons of German nationality than 
to those of any other nationality. Canadians 
came next, followed by British nationals and Mex- 
icans, in that order. 



TMMIflBANT VISAS ISSUED BY DIPLOMATIC 
IM AND CONSULAR OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE 
WORLD 

Fiscal Year 1958 



Nationality 



Afghanistan . . . 

Albania 

Andorra 

Arabian Peninsula 

Argentina .... 

Asia Pacific Tri- 
angle 

Australia .... 

Austria 

Belgium .... 
Belgian Congo. 

Bhutan 

Bolivia 

Brazil 

Bulgaria .... 

Burma 

Cambodia . . . 



Annual 
quota 



100 
100 
100 
100 



100 

100 

1, 405 

1,297 



Immigrant visas 
issued 



Quota ' Nonquota 



28 
94 



Total 



30 
102 



100 



100 
100 
100 



94 
66 

1, 329 

1,246 

14 



89 
89 



2,757 

6 
239 
495 
103 

3 



394 

1,429 

12 

4 



7 
2,757 

100 

305 

1,824 

1,349 

17 



394 

1,429 

101 

93 



Department of State Bulletin 



IMMIGRANT VISAS ISSUED BY DIPLOMATIC 
AND CONSULAR OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE 
WORLD— Continued 

Fiscal Year 1958 



Nationality 


\nnu:il 

quota 


Immigrant visas 


Total 




Quota i 


Nonquota 




Cameroons . 


100 
100 








Cameroun .... 


2 


30', 275 

2 

2 

643 

1,583 

' 2, 912 

735 

11, 337 

396 

17 

300 

1, 205 

1,264 

84 

753 

28 

4 

107 

1, 746 

1 

1 

'8 
3 

' i 

9, 699 
3 

1,259 
2 

8 
241 
176 

14 

37 
32 

9 
36 

3* 

' 7' 

789 

3 

120 

1 

123 

' 4' 


2 

30, 275 

2 


Canal Zone .... 






CeyloD 

Chile 


100 


29 


31 
643 


China 

Chinese (Racial) . . 
Colombia 


too 

105 


88 
50 


1,671 
50 

2, 912 


Costa Rica .... 






735 


Cuba 






11, 337 


Czechoslovakia. . . 

Danzig 

Denmark 

Dominican Repub- 
lic 


2, 859 

100 

1, 175 


2, 723 

97 

1, 144 


3, 119 

114 

1,444 

1, 205 


Ecuador 






1, 264 


Egypt 

El Salvador .... 


100 


94 


178 
753 


Estonia 

Finland 

France 


11.5 

100 

560 

3, 009 


99 

70 

546 

2,832 
8 

1 

2 

3 

60 

20 

6 

3 

25, 513 

18 

27, 831 
36 
15 
93 
83 
4 
79 
77 
96 

14 

98 

5 

1 

6 

35 

1 
20 
100 
40 
19 
76 

4 
97 

9 
19 

1 


127 

74 

653 

4,578 

9 


French Equato- 
rial Africa . . 




2 


French West 

Africa .... 
French Guiana 
Guadaloupe . . . 




2 

3 

68 


Martinique . . . 




23 


New Caledonia 
Oceania .... 




6 
5 


Germany 

Ghana 

Great Britain and 

Northern 
Ireland .... 
Aden 


25, 814 
100 

05, 361 


35, 212 
21 

29, 090 
38 


Antigua 




23 






334 


Barbados .... 




259 


Basutoland . . . 




4 


Bermuda .... 




93 


Briti-h Guiana 
British Honduras 
British Virgin 




114 
128 

23 


Cyprus 




134 


Dominica .... 




5 


Falkland Islands 
Fiji 




1 
6 


Gibraltar .... 




38 


Gilbert and 

Ellice Islands 
Grenada .... 




1 
20 


Hong Kong . . . 




107 


Jamaica .... 




829 


Kenva 




22 


Leeward Islands 




190 
5 


Malta 




220 


Mauritius 




9 


Montserrat . . . 




23 






1 







19 


1 


20 






3 


1 


4 


Northern 














11 




11 


Nvasaland . . . 




3 




3 


St. Christopher . 




18 


5 


23 


St. Helena . . . 




2 




2 


St. Lucia .... 




4 
9 


1 
2 


5 






11 


Seychelles . . . 




4 




4 






14 




14 


Singapore .... 




59 


6 


65 


Somaliland Pro- 










tectorate . . . 




1 




1 


Southern 














23 
2 


1 


24 






2 


Trinidad and 






Tobago .... 




81 


121 


202 


Windward 






Islands .... 




80 


40 
3 

1, 729 


120 


St. Kitts .... 




3 


Greece 


308 


247 


1,976 


Guatemala .... 






590 


590 








800 

1,011 

300 


800 


Honduras 






1, 011 


Hungary 


805 


819 


1, 125 


Iceland 


100 


100 


58 


158 


India 


100 


78 


123 


201 


Indonesia 


100 


86 


38 


124 




100 


68 


59 


127 




100 


66 


49 


115 


Ireland 


17, 750 


10, 608 


54 


10, 002 


Israel 


100 


75 


158 


233 


Italy 


5,645 


5, 379 


4, 012 


9, 991 


Japan 


185 


91 


0, 425 


6, 516 




100 


98 


104 


202 




100 


47 


486 


533 














100 
235 










221 


44 


265 


Lebanon 


100 


74 


196 


270 


Liberia 


100 


23 


2 


25 




100 


100 


11 


111 


Liechtenstein. . . . 


100 


8 




8 


Lithuania 


384 


361 


66 


427 


Luxembourg. . . . 


100 


73 


22 


95 


Malaya 


•96 


4 


1 


5 


Mexico 






26, 142 
1 


26, 142 




100 


14 


15 


Morocco 


100 


94 


110 


204 




100 
100 
100 








Nauru 








Nepal 

Netherlands .... 








3, 136 


2,904 


465 


3,369 


Netherlands An- 










tilles 




90 
53 


15 
9 


105 






62 


New Guinea .... 


100 
100 




New Zealand. . . . 


89 


99 


188 


Nicaragua 






1, 337 


1, 337 




2, 364 


2, 323 


224 


2,547 


Pacific Islands . . . 


100 


100 


12 


112 




100 


74 


23 


97 




100 


76 


25 


101 


Panama. 






1,997 
73 


1, 997 


Paraguay 






73 


Peru 






896 
1,815 


896 




100 


34 


1,849 


Poland 


6, 488 


6,217 


910 


7, 127 




438 


407 


1,063 


1,470 


Angola 






1 


1 


Cape Verde Is- 










lands 




6 

2 


7S 
4 


84 


Macau 




6 


Ruanda-Urundi . . 


100 





October 20, J 958 



625 



IMMIGRANT VISAS ISSUED BY DIPLOMATIC 
AND CONSULAR OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE 
WORLD— Continued 

Fiscal Year 1958 







Immigrant visas 






Annual 


issued 




Nationality 


quota 




Total 






Quota ■ 


Nonquota 






289 


241 


178 


419 


Samoa 


100 


47 


7 


54 


San Marino 


100 


98 


1 


99 


Saudi Arabia. . . . 


100 


1 




1 




100 


1 




1 


South West Africa . 


100 


12 




12 


Spain 


250 


196 


829 


1,025 




100 


52 


1 


53 






2, 302 


58 


2,360 


Switzerland 


1,698 


1,649 


166 


1,815 


Syria 


100 


76 


44 


120 


Tanganyika .... 


100 


11 




11 


Thailand 


100 


23 


2 


25 


Togo 

Trieste 


100 








100 


98 


38 


136 




100 


100 


12 


112 




225 


182 


252 


434 



Union of South 










Africa 


100 


83 


88 


171 


U. S. S. R 


2,697 


2, 578 


126 


2, 704 


Uruguay 






116 


116 


Venezuela 






627 
3 


627 


Viet-Nam 


100 


30 


33 


Yemen 


100 


67 


1 


68 


Yugoslavia 


933 


862 


708 


1,570 


Total .... 


154, 953 


105, 474 


127, 113 


232, 587 


Nonquota Symbol 










K visas issued 










under the act of 










September 11, 










1957 (Public Law 










85-316) 






27, 202 


27, 202 










Grand total . 






154, 315 


259, 789 











1 Figures represent actual quota visa issuances by con- 
sular offices and do not include quota numbers used for 
adjustments of status under section 245 of the Immigra- 
tion and Nationality Act, reductions of quotas by private 
laws, and other provisions of law. 

"Annual quota of 100 established pursuant to Procla- 
mation 3206, Oct. 10, 1957 (Bulletin of Nov. 11, 1957, 
p. 758). For fiscal year 1958 only, adjusted to 96 for 
administrative purposes. 



BREAKDOWN AND TOTAL OF VISAS ISSUED BY DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR OFFICES 

THROUGHOUT THE WORLD 

Fiscal Years 1946 through 1958 





Immigrant 












Fiscal year 






Total 


Nonimmigrant 


Nonimmigrant 
revalidations 


Total 


Grand total 












Quota ' 


Nonquota 












1946 


37, 083 


47, 327 


84, 410 


247, 672 


5,306 


252, 978 


337, 388 


1947 


78, S73 


66, 844 


145, 717 


313, 279 


32 


313,311 


459, 028 


1948 


93, 222 


72, 869 


166, 091 


309, 730 


2, 164 


311,894 


477, 985 


1949 


» 133, 839 


b 70, 096 


203, 935 


261, 071 


7,487 


268, 558 


472, 493 


1950 


• 205, 365 


■» 63, 541 


268, 906 


242, 784 


11, 199 


253, 983 


522, 889 


1951 


• 170, 166 


' 61, 137 


231, 303 


271, 706 


23, 108 


294, 814 


526, 117 


1952 


* 180, 660 


h 88, 286 


268, 946 


318. 872 


21,017 


339, 889 


608, 835 


1953 


! 87, 211 


94, 306 


181,517 


349, 388 


11, 990 


361,378 


542, 895 


1954 


i 86, 356 


k 122, 866 


209, 222 


399, 994 


18, 197 


418, 191 


627, 413 


1955 


81, 027 


' 163, 844 


244, 871 


420, 095 


24, 943 


445, 038 


689, 909 


1956 


86, 449 


m 245, 958 


332, 407 


425, 421 


70, 666 


496, 087 


828, 494 


1957 


97, 684 


"219,728 


317, 412 


501, 692 


87, 495 


589, 187 


906, 599 


1958 


105, 474 


° 154, 315 


259, 789 


530, 857 


81, 967 


612, 824 


872, 613 



1 Does not include 19 (c) cases, special acts of Congress, adjustments, sec. 245 and see. 4 cases. 
a Includes 55,639 quota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 
b Includes 339 nonquota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 

Includes 131,901 quota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 
d Includes 261 nonquota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 
■ Includes 104,571 quota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 
' Includes 747 nonquota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 
8 Includes 106,497 quota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 

h Includes 3,037 nonquota visas issued pursuant to the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 

' Includes 459 (sheepherders) quota visas issued under Public Law 307 (82d Cong.) and 5,089 cases of aliens who en- 
joyed a preference under sec. 3 (c) of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended. 

> Includes 5,722 cases of aliens who enjoyed a preference under sec. 3 (c) of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as 
amended. 

k Includes 500 nonquota visas issued to orphans under Public Law 162 (83d Cong.) and 5,633 nonquota visas issued 
pursuant to the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, as amended. 

1 Includes 353 nonquota visas issued under Public Law 770 (sheepherders) 83d Cong., 2d sess., and 32,009 nonquota 
visas issued pursuant to the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, as amended. 

m Includes 32 nonquota visas issued under Public Law 770 (sheepherders) 83d Cong., 2d sess., and 84,151 visas issued 
under the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, as amended. 

"Includes 68,442 nonquota visas issued under the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, as amended. 

° Includes 27,202 nonquota Symbol K visas issued pursuant to the act of Sept. 11, 1957 (Public Law 85-316). 



626 



Department of State Bulletin 



Duty on Umbrella Frames 
To Remain Unchanged 

White House Announcement 

White House press release dated September 30 

The President on Septeml>er 30 decided that he 
would not approve the increased tariff on imported 
umbrella frames which the U.S. Tariff Commis- 
sion had recommended in a three-to-two decision 
under the escape clause. The facts of the case, 
the President said, compelled him to conclude that 
the present rate of duty should remain unchanged. 

This conclusion was set forth in identical letters 
to the chairmen of the Senate Finance Committee 
and the House Ways and Means Committee. The 
President's letter called attention to improvements 
in the condition of the domestic industry. Im- 
ports during 1957, he added, were 61 percent less 
than imports of the previous year. The letter also 
pointed out that employment and productivity 
had improved, that inventories were reduced, and 
that sales of domestically produced umbrella 
frames had climbed. 

On August 11, 1958, the Tariff Commission sub- 
mitted the supplemental data that the President 
requested on March 12, 1958, when he also wrote 
the two congressional chairmen that, although 
some clear conclusions could be draw T n from the 
original report in this case, the domestic industry 
should be given the opportunity to present further 
information. 1 The Commission had reported on 
January 1-1, 1958, the results of its investigation 
under section 7 of the Trade Agreements Ex- 
tension Act of 1951, as amended. Three members 
of the Commission found that the domestic in- 
dustry was experiencing serious injury ; two Com- 
missioners reached the contrary conclusion that 
escape-clause relief was not warranted in this case. 
One member of the Commission did not partic- 
ipate. 

Letter to Chairmen of Congressional Committees 2 

September 80, 1958 

Dear Mr. Chairman: Under Section 7 of the 
Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951, as 



1 For text of the President's letter of Mar. 12, see 
Bulletin of Apr. 28, 1958, p. 696. 

' Identical letters were sent to Senator Harry F. Byrd, 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance, and Repre- 
sentative Wilbur D. Mills, chairman of the House Com- 
mittee on Ways and Means. 



amended, the United States Tariff Commission 
submitted to me its report on Escape Clause In- 
vestigation No. G2 concerning umbrella frames. 
Three members of the Commission found that the 
domestic producers were experiencing serious in- 
jury; two Commission members concluded that 
escape clause relief was not warranted in this case. 
One Commissioner did not participate. 

My letter to you of March 12, 1958 set forth 
the salient facts of the case and my conclusion 
that although some clear interpretations could be 
drawn from the report, the domestic producers 
should be given the opportunity to present further 
information. On August 11, 1958, the Tariff 
Commission submitted the supplemental report 
that I had requested. I have carefully considered 
it together with the original report and have had 
the advice of the Trade Policy Committee and 
other departments and agencies of the Executive 
Branch. 

The supplemental report confirms the trends 
suggested in the earlier report. The aggregate 
financial experience of the domestic industry con- 
tinues to reflect substantial variations among the 
four firms of the industry. Nevertheless, the sup- 
plemental report shows improvements in the in- 
dustry's 1957 earnings over those of the previous 
year. 

The volume of imports, which dropped 
markedly during the last two months of 1956, ap- 
peal's to have stabilized at a much lower point 
than the peak levels of 1956. Imports during 
the first quarter of 1958 were below those of the 
equivalent period last year, and total 1957 imports 
were 61 percent less than imports during 1956. 

While imports declined, both employment and 
productivity improved in the domestic industry. 
Inventories were reduced, and sales climbed. 
Sales of domestically-produced umbrella frames 
last year exceeded those of 1956 by 8.2 percent. 
During the first three months of 1958, moreover, 
domestic sales were up 11.3 percent from the 
equivalent period of last year. 

In view of the above considerations, the facts of 
this case compel me to conclude that the present 
rate of duty should remain unchanged. 

Sincerely, 

Dwiciit D. Eisenhower 



Ocfober 20, 1958 



627 



President Defers Investigation 
of Tariffs on Certain Imports 

White House press release dated October 3 

The President has concurred with the U.S. 
Tariff Commission's recent findings that no formal 
investigation should be instituted at this time to 
determine whether the tariff should be reduced on 
imports of linen toweling, watch movements, bi- 
cycles, and dried figs. The President found, with 
the Tariff Commission, that there is not sufficient 
reason at this time to reopen the escape-clause ac- 
tions of several previous years which resulted in 
increases in the tariffs on these items. The Presi- 
dent's decision means that the increased rates of 
duty previously established as the result of escape- 
clause actions will continue to apply without re- 
duction or other modification. 

The President's action was taken after con- 
sultation with the Trade Policy Committee. The 
Tariff Commission studies were made pursuant to 
Executive Order 10401, which requires the peri- 
odic review of affirmative actions taken under the 
escape clause. The Commission's conclusions on 
four such reviews were stated in the following re- 
ports which it submitted to the President: (a) 
first review of the 1956 tariff increase on linen 
toweling, reported July 25, 1958; (b) second re- 
view of the 1955 increase in bicycle tariffs, re- 
ported August 18, 1958; (c) third review of the 
1954 increase in duty on watch movements, re- 
ported July 25, 1958; and (d) sixth review of the 
1952 tariff increase on dried figs, reported August 
28, 1958. 



World Bank Loan to Peru 
To Improve Port of Callao 

The World Bank announced on September 17 
that it had made a loan equivalent to $6,575,000 
for the expansion and improvement of the port 
of Callao, the main port of Peru. Better accom- 
modation and service for ships calling at Callao 
will improve Peru's competitive position in world 
markets, particularly for its important minerals 
exports, and should residt in increased foreign 
trade earnings. 

The Royal Bank of Canada, New York Agency, 
and the Philadelphia National Bank are partici- 
pating in the loan, without the World Bank's 



guaranty, for a total amount of $395,000. This 
represents the first three maturities, which fall due 
between March 1, 1963, and March 1, 1964. 

The loan was made to the Port of Callao Au- 
thority, an autonomous agency which operates the 
port, The Authority was established in 1952 
shortly after the bank had made a loan of $2.5 
million to the Government for the construction of 
grain-discharging and storage facilities at Callao 
and for the purchase of mechanical cargo-handling 
equipment. Since its inception the Authority has 
operated the port successfully, and the facilities 
financed by the bank have contributed to a marked 
improvement in the efficiency of the port. 

The port of Callao serves the mining and agri- 
cultural areas of the Central Sierra and Lima, the 
capital and chief commercial and industrial center 
of Peru. About 60 percent of the country's ex- 
ports and imports pass through the port, and there 
is a considerable volume of coastal traffic. In 
terms of tonnage, the principal exports are min- 
erals, refined metals, and general cargo such as 
cotton, wool, hides, fishmeal, etc.; and the chief 
imports are petroleum products, wheat, and gen- 
eral cargo such as machinery, lumber, newsprint, 
automobiles, etc. Between 1951 and 1956 traffic 
rose from 2.4 million to 3.1 million tons annually, 
and forecasts indicate an additional 25 percent in- 
crease by 1963. 

The expansion now being undertaken by the 
Port Authority consists of the construction of a 
new two-berth pier for the handling of petroleum 
products, a new berth with mechanical equipment 
for the loading of minerals, two new general-car- 
go berths, three new storage sheds, improved ac- 
commodations for passengers, the purchase of two 
diesel tugs and a cutter suction dredge, new main- 
tenance shops, and a gear store. 

The new petroleum pier will permit tankers dis- 
charging inflammable loads to berth away from 
other ships and thus greatly reduce the risks of ex- 
plosion and fire now involved with general-cargo 
ships using the same pier as tankers. The new 
installation for handling bulk minerals will be able 
to move up to 14,000 tons of minerals daily, com- 
pared with the present loading rate of between 500 
and 850 tons. Ships calling at Callao for min- 
erals will thus be able to leave much faster; this 
will help keep down ocean freight rates to Peru. 

The addition of two new general-cargo berths, 
together with those released when the petroleum 



628 



Department of State Bulletin 



and mineral berths are commissioned, will give 
Callao a total of 12 general-cargo berths, which 
will enable it to cope with the long-term growth 
of general-cargo and refined-metals traffic. The 
dredge will be used for work in connection with 
the new piers ami to dredge and maintain the 
harbor, which has been silting up during recent 
years. When it is not in use at Callao the dredge 
will be rented out for work at other ports. The 
new transit sheds and warehouses will reduce 
transfer costs between piers and sheds and pro- 
vide long-term storage capacity now lacking. 
The new maintenance shops, gear store, and tugs 
will replace existing facilities which are inade- 
quate and obsolete. 

The Port Authority will retain the services of 
consulting engineers to plan and supervise the 
project and will award contracts for the work 



to be undertaken on the basis of international bids. 

The loan is for a term of 20 years and bears 
interest at 5% percent per annum including the 
1 percent commission which is allocated to the 
bank's special reserve. Amortization will begin 
March 1, 1963. The loan is guaranteed by the 
Government of Peru. 

After having been approved by the bank's ex- 
ecutive directors, the loan documents were signed 
by the Peruvian Ambassador at Washington, 
Fernando Berckemeyer, on behalf of the Gov- 
ernment of Peru, by both Jorge Chamot, Vice 
President of the Board of Directors of the Port 
Authority, and Carlos Gibson, Commercial Coun- 
selor of the Peruvian Embassy at Washington, on 
behalf of the Port of Callao Authority, and by 
W. A. B. Iliff, Vice President, on behalf of the 
World Bank. 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Question of Troop Withdrawal 

From the Middle East 

Statement by Henry Cabot Lodge 

U.S. Representative to the General Assembly J 

Mr. [Andrei A.] Gromyko always has it in his 
power to start an altercation here in the General 
A--i-n]l>]y. whatever may be said aboui his abil 
ity to finish an altercation or to influence mem- 
bers in favor of his contention. 

The latest strictures from the Moscow propa- 
ganda factory against the United States which 
he has just made are both violent and untrue. 

We have made no aggression against Lebanon. 
We were invited in, as the whole world knows. 
\<>t only has there been no aggression; not one 
shot has been fired by an American against the 
Lebanese in the whole time that we have been 



'Made in plenary session on Oct. 2 (U.S. delegation 
press release 3007) in reply to Soviet Representative 
Gromyko's charges against the United States for not hav- 
ing withdrawn all its troops from Lebanon immedi- 
ately. 



there — by invitation of the Government of Leb- 
anon. 

We do not wish to delay implementation of the 
resolution. 2 Our forces are not there for reasons 
alien to the interests of the Near East — on the 
contrary. 

We are not — and I quote again his phrase — - 
"practicing obstruction." In fact, the United 
States has already pulled out three battalions of 
marines — and those are the large-sized battalions. 

We will scrupulously live up to the United Na- 
tions resolution and are complying fully with it. 

This resolution represents in every respect what 
the United States favored, and it received the 
overwhelming support of the members of the Gen- 
eral Assembly. Our actions have not been uni- 
versally condemned. In fact, the Soviet Union 
withdrew its resolution which would have criti- 
cized the United States for what it has done in 



2 For text of the resolution on the Middle East adopted 
at the third emergency special session of the General 
Assembly on Aug. 21, see Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1958, 
p. 411. 



Ocfober 20, 7 958 



629 



Lebanon, which is some reflection on how much 
they really believe what they are saying them- 
selves. 

We have not incited one Arab state against 
another. We have no aim of creating provoca- 
tion. 

Our aim is a peaceful world. And if Soviet 
communism did not keep the world stirred up 
all the time, we would have a peaceful world. 

Mr. President, Mr. Gromyko has not offered 
one scintilla of proof of one single thing that 
he has said. The speech was straight, unadul- 
terated vilification. It is mere billingsgate. It 
is abuse with a sinister, ulterior motive. Speeches 
of this kind make a travesty of the United Na- 
tions. They reveal all too clearly Mr. Gromyko's 
contempt for the United Nations. It insults the 
intelligence of the members. It casts grave doubts 
on Mr. Gromyko's intentions. And I have al- 
ready given the whole speech far more attention 
than it deserves. 



Agenda of the 13th Regular Session 
of the U.N. General Assembly 1 

U.N 
1. 



10. 

11. 

12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 

16. 

17. 
18. 



. doc. A/3030 dated September 23 

Opening of the session by the Chairman of the delega- 
tion of New Zealand. 
Minute of silent prayer or meditation. 
Credentials of representatives to the thirteenth ses- 
sion of the General Assembly : 

(a) Appointment of the Credentials Committee; 

(b) Report of the Credentials Committee. 
Election of the President. 

Constitution of the Main Committees and election of 
officers. 

Election of Vice-Presidents. 

Notification by the Secretary-General under Article 
12, paragraph 2, of the Charter. 
Adoption of the agenda. 
Opening of the general debate. 

Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the 
Organization. 

Report of the Security Council. 
Report of the Economic and Social Council. 
Report of the Trusteeship Council. 
Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency. 
Election of three non-permanent members of the Se- 
curity Council. 

Election of six members of the Economic and Social 
Council. 

Election of three members of the Trusteeship Council. 
Appointment of the members of the Peace Observa- 
tion Commission. 



1 Adopted by the General Assembly at plenary sessions 
on Sept. 22 and 23, 1958. 



19. Appointment of members of the Disarmament 
Commission. 

20. Election of the United Nations High Commissioner 
for Refugees. 

21. Question of amending the United Nations Charter, in 
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 
10S of the Charter, to increase the number of non- 
permanent members of the Security Council and the 
number of votes required for decisions of the Council. 

22. Question of amending the United Nations Charter, in 
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 
108 of the Charter, to increase the membership of the 
Economic and Social Council. 

23. Question of amending the Statute of the International 
Court of Justice, in accordance with the procedure 
laid down in Article 108 of the Charter of the United 
Nations and Article 69 of the Statute of the Court, 
with respect to an increase in the number of judges 
of the International Court of Justice. 

24. The Korean question : report of the United Nations 
Commission for the Unification and Rehabilitation of 
Korea. 

25. Effects of atomic radiation : 

(a) Report of the United Nations Scientific Commit- 
tee on the effects of Atomic Radiation ; 

(b) Report of the Secretary-General on the strength- 
ening and widening of scientific activities in this 
field. 

26. Report of the Director of the United Nations Relief 
and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near 
East. 

27. United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency. 

(a) Report of the Agent General of the Agency; 

(b) Progress report of the Administrator for Resid- 
ual Affairs of the Agency. 

28. Economic development of under-developed countries, 
(a) Establishment of the Special Fund: reports of 

the Preparatory Committee for the Special Fund 
and of the Economic and Social Council ; 
(to) International tax problems: report of the Eco- 
nomic and Social Council. 

29. Programmes of technical assistance. 

( a ) Report of the Economic and Social Council ; 

(b) Confirmation of the allocation of funds under 
the Expanded Programme of Technical Assist- 
ance : 

(c) Establishment of an international administrative 
service. 

30. Question of assistance to Libya. 

31. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for 
Refugees. 

32. Draft International Covenants on Human Rights. 

33. Recommendations concerning international respect 
for the right of peoples and nations to self- 
determination. 

34. Advisory services in the field of human rights : re- 
port of the Economic and Social Council. 

35. Freedom of information : report of the Secretary- 
General on consultations concerning the draft Con- 
vention on Freedom of Information. 

36. Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories 
transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter: 



630 



Department of State Bulletin 



reports of the Secretary-General and of the Com- 
mittee on Information from Non-Self-Governing 
Territories. 

(a) Information on social conditions; 

(b) Information on other conditions; 

(c) General questions relating to the transmission 

and examination of information ; 46, 

(d) Methods of reproducing summaries of informa- 
tion concerning Non-Self-Goveruing Territories : 47. 
report of the Secretary-General ; 

(e) Report of the Secretary-General on developments 
connected with the association of Non-Self- 48. 

Governing Territories with the European Eco- 
nomic Community ; 49. 

(f) Offers of study and training facilities under 
resolution S45 (IX) of 22 November 1954: report 

of the Secretary-General. 50, 

37. Question of the renewal of the Committee on Infor- 
mation from Non-Self-Governing Territories : report 
of the Committee on Information from Non-Self -Gov- 
erning Territories. 51. 

38. Election, if required, to fill vacancies in the member- 
ship of the Committee on Information from Non-Self- 
Governing Territories. 

39. Question of South West Africa : 52. 

(a) Report of the Good Offices Committee on South 
West Africa ; 

(b) Report of the Committee on South West Africa; 

(c) Study of legal action to ensure the fulfilment of 
the obligations assumed by the Mandatory Power 
under the Mandate for South West Africa : re- 53. 
sumed consideration of the special report of the 
Committee on South West Africa ; 

(d) Election of three members of the Committee on 
South West Africa. 

40. The future of Togoland under French administration : 
report of the United Nations Commissioner for the 
Supervision of the Elections and report of the Trus- 
teeship Council thereon. 

41. Question of the frontier between the Trust Territory 
of Somaliland under Italian administration and 
Ethiopia : reports of the Governments of Ethiopia 
and of Italy. 

42. Financial reports and accounts and reports of the 
Board of Auditors : 

(a) United Nations (for the financial year ended 
31 December 1957) ; 

(b) United Nations Children's Fund (for the finan- 
cial year ended 31 December 19.57) ; 

(c) United Nations Relief and Works Agency for 
Palestine Refugees in the Near East (for the 
financial period ended 31 December 1957) ; 

(d) United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency 
(for the financial year ended 30 June 1958) ; 

(e) United Nations Refugee Fund (for the financial 
year ended 31 December 1957). 

43. Supplementary estimates for the financial year 1958. 

44. Budget estimates for the financial year 1959. 

45. Appointments to fill vacancies in the membership of 
subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly. 

(a) Advisory Committee on Administrative and 61. 
Budgetary Questions ; 



54. 
55. 

56. 

57. 
58. 

59. 

60. 



(b) Committee on Contributions; 

(c) Board of Auditors ; 

(d) Investments Committee: confirmation of the ap- 
pointment made by the Secretary-General ; 

(e) United Nations Administrative Tribunal ; 

(f) United Nations Staff Pension Committee. 
Report of the Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budg- 
etary Funds. 

Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the 
expenses of the United Nations : report of the Commit- 
tee on Contributions. 

United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund : annual re- 
port of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board. 
Audit reports relating to expenditure by specialized 
agencies of technical assistance funds allocated from 
the special account. 

Administrative and budgetary co-ordination between 
the United Nations and the specialized agencies : re- 
port of the Advisory Committee on Administrative 
and Budgetary Questions. 
Control and limitation of documentation. 

(a) Report of the Committee on the Control and 
Limitation of Documentation ; 

(b) Report of the Secretary -General. 

Offer by the Government of Chile of land in Santiago 
to be used as office site for the United Nations and 
other international organizations : report of the Sec- 
retary-General and observations thereon by the Ad- 
visory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary 
Questions. 
Personnel questions : 

(a) Geographical distribution of the staff of the Sec- 
retariat of the United Nations : report of the Sec- 
retary-General ; 

(b) Proportion of fixed-term staff; 

(c) Pensionable remuneration of the staff; 

(d) Staff Regulations of the United Nations: report 
of the Secretary-General. 

United Nations International School and delegation 
office facilities : reports of the Secretary-General. 
Public information activities of the United Nations : 
report of the Committee of Experts on United Na- 
tions Public Information and comments and recom- 
mendations thereon by the Secretary-General. 
Report of the International Law Commission on the 
work of its tenth session. 
Question of arbitral procedure. 

Question of initiating a study of the juridical regime 
of historic waters, including historic bays. 
Question of convening a second United Nations con- 
ference on the law of the sea. 
Question of the peaceful use of outer space : 

(a) The banning of the use of cosmic space for mili- 
tary purposes, the elimination of foreign military 
bases on the territories of other countries and 
international co-operation in the study of cosmic 
space ; 

(b) Programme for international co-operation in the 
field of outer space. 

Measures aimed at implementation and promotion of 
peaceful and neighbourly relations among States. 



October 20, 1958 



631 



62. Treatment of people of Indian origin in the Union of 
South Africa : 

(a) Report of the Government of India; 

(b) Report of the Government of Pakistan. 

63. Question of Algeria. 

64. Question of disarmament. 

65. United Nations Emergency Force: 

(a) Cost estimates for the maintenance of the Force; 

(b) Progress report on the Force; 

(c) Summary study of the experience derived from 
the establishment and operation of the Force. 

66. Report of the Secretary-General on the Second United 
Nations International Conference on the Peaceful 
Uses of Atomic Energy. 

67. Question of race conflict in South Africa resulting 
from the policies of apartheid of the Government of 
the Union of South Africa. 

68. Question of Cyprus. 

69. The situation in Hungary. 

70. The discontinuance of atomic and hydrogen weapons 
tests. 

71. The organization of an international public health and 
medical research year. 

72. The reduction of the military budgets of the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States of 
America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland and France by 10-15 per cent and 
the use of part of the savings so effected for assist- 
ance to the under-developed countries. 



World Bank Sets New Records 
in Lending and Borrowing 

The International Bank for Reconstruction and 
Development reported on October 6 that in the 
year ended June 30, 1958, it had set new records 
in both its lending and its borrowing operations. 
The 34 loans made during the year amounted to 
the equivalent of $711 million, and the funds 
raised by the bank through the sale of its bonds 
and notes to other investors amounted to $650 
million. At the same time, disbursements on the 
bank's own loans, at $499 million, also exceeded 
previous levels. 

These facts are reported in the bank's 13th 
annual report, which Bank President Eugene R. 
Black presented on October 6 at New Delhi, India, 
to the annual meeting of the bank's Board of 
Governors. The growing number of economic de- 
velopment projects that are ready and eligible 
for financing by the bank, says the report, "indi- 
cates that the rise in lending during the year may 
have signaled the start of a new and higher level 
of operations." 

The bank continued to cover out of its own re- 
sources all its operating expenses and continued 



to show a surplus of earnings over expenditures. 
Net income during the year amounted to $42 
million, the highest figure yet recorded. The 
bank's reserves reached a figure of $350 million. 

Apart from its lending activities, the bank made 
its good offices available to member countries in 
negotiations looking toward the solution of im- 
portant international issues. It assisted in the 
settlement, signed on July 13 this year, of the 
terms of the compensation to be paid by the United 
Arab Republic for the nationalization of the Suez 
Canal. W. A. B. Iliff, a vice president of the 
bank, together with a team of experts, assisted 
in the negotiations leading up to this settlement. 
The bank agreed to act as fiscal agent for the com- 
pensation payments to be made. 

The bank also collaborated in the discussions 
between India and Pakistan on the sharing of the 
waters of the Indus Basin. As part of the con- 
tinuing search for agreement on this subject, meet- 
ings were held during the year at Washington, 
Rome, and London, as well as in India and Paki- 
stan. "The need for a definitive settlement," says 
the annual report, "becomes more urgent as the 
various clearance, irrigation and resettlement 
schemes of the two Governments . . . get under 
way." 

Jointly with the Italian Government, the bank 
undertook a study of a nuclear power station to 
be constructed in southern Italy as part of the 
Government's atomic energy program. Bids for 
a station with a capacity of 130,000-150,000 kilo- 
watts were opened to international competition, 
and the bank organized an internationally re- 
cruited panel of experts to make an analysis of 
the tenders. Nine tenders were received and at 
the end of the fiscal year were under review by 
the international panel. 

The Year's Lending 

Loans were made for projects in 18 countries, 
two of which — the Philippines and Nigeria — had 
not previously benefited from bank loans. 

Nearly half the year's lending was to strengthen 
transportation services. Loans were made to im- 
prove railways in Ecuador, India, Nigeria, Paki- 
stan, Peru, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Other 
lending was directed to road construction and 
maintenance in the Belgian Congo, Ecuador, and 
Honduras, the expansion of port services in India, 
and the improvement of the Belgian canal system. 



632 



Department of State Bulletin 



One of the year's largest loans, an amount of 
$('.() million, was for the Yanhee Dam in Thailand. 
This will add 140,000 kilowatts to generating 
capacity serving the Bangkok area and help to 
improve irrigation on 214 million acres of farm- 
land. Other loans that will increase electric 
power supplies were made in Austria, Brazil, 
Ecuador, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Pakistan, and the 
Philippines. 

The year's loans will spur agricultural produc- 
tion in several member countries. Investment 
intended to bring higher farm yields was the 
object of lending in Italy and Japan, as well as 
in Thailand. 

More than $100 million was lent during the 
year for industry. The projects financed will 
nearly double the steel capacity of the Tata Iron 
and Steel Company in India and will expand pro- 
duction at another privately owned steel enter- 
prise in Asia, the Kawasaki Steel Corporation of 
Japan. Two private coal-mining companies in 
Chile received loans, while part of a loan made 
in Italy will help private firms to develop potash 
resources in Sicily and to promote industrial 
growth elsewhere in the south of Italy. Other 
bank lending helped newly established financing 
agencies in Austria and Pakistan to assist private 
industrial ventures. 

Progress Under Earlier Loans 

The report also refers to the progress made in 
carrying out projects financed in earlier years. 
It describes the damming of the Zambezi River in 
the Kariba Gorge — the largest hydroelectric proj- 
ect ever undertaken in Africa; the rapid industrial 
growth of India's Damodar Valley; and the re- 
construction of the Pacific Railroad along the 
northwest coast of Mexico. 

The bank's technical assistance activities during 
the year included the maintenance of resident 
representatives in Ecuador, Haiti, Honduras, 
Panama, and Peru and the sending of a general 
survey mission to Thailand. The Economic De- 
velopment Institute, a staff college established by 
the bank for senior development officials of less 
developed member countries, carried out its third 
6-month study course in Washington. The bank 
continued to explore the role of specialized financ- 
ing agencies set up to stimulate economic growth 
and in May sponsored a conference of develop- 
ment bank officials from 11 countries. 



To make possible the expansion of its lending 
activities, the bank borrowed larger sums from 
the capital market than in any earlier year. Net 
borrowing of $625 million raised the bank's 
funded debt to $1,658 million. More than half 
the new funds came from public issues of long- 
term bonds in the United States; the year's three 
issues totaled $375 million. The remaining $250 
million was raised by private placements of short- 
term U.S. dollar bonds with the Deutsche Bundes- 
bank, central bank of the Federal Republic of 
Germany. Pointing out that a worldwide market 
exists for the bank's bonds, the report notes that 
at the end of the fiscal year an estimated 47 per- 
cent of the total outstanding debt was held by 
investors outside the United States. 

The bank continued to replenish its resources 
by sales of parts of its loans. Banks and other 
institutions agreed to participate in this way at 
the time of signing of 22 of the year's 34 loans. 
Approximately $4S million was thus raised. 
Nearly as large a sum was raised through sales 
of parts of loans already made. 

Funds available for lending were also increased 
by further releases made by member countries 
from the 18 percent of their capital subscriptions 
that is payable in their own currency and can only 
be used with their permission. These releases 
were equivalent to $149 million. 

Reflecting the higher capital market rates, 
upon which the charges on bank loans are based, 
the interest payable by bank borrowers rose to 6 
percent in October 1957. With the subsequent 
easing in rates, the bank's charges were gradually 
reduced, reaching 5% percent at the end of the 
fiscal year. 

Seven countries joined the bank in 1957-58 — 
Ghana, Ireland, Malaya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, 
the Sudan, and Tunisia. This brought member- 
ship to 67 and subscribed capital to $9,405 million 
on June 30, 1958. 



U.S. Delegations to 
International Conferences 

Second Regular Session of the IAEA 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 22 (press release 546) that President 
Eisenhower on September 19 had appointed John 
A. McCone, Chairman of the Atomic Energy 
Commission, and Robert M. McKinney, the per- 



Ocrober 20, J 958 



633 



manent U.S. Representative to the International 
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as the U.S. Rep- 
resentative and the Alternate U.S. Representa- 
tive, respectively, to the second regular session of 
the General Conference of the IAEA, which con- 
venes at Vienna September 22. 

Lewis L. Strauss, Special Assistant to the 
President, will be a special observer at the meet- 
ing, and Representative Carl T. Durham of the 
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy will be act- 
ing as a congressional adviser. AEC Commis- 
sioners John F. Floberg and Harold S. Vance will 
serve as special advisers to the delegation. 

Other members of the U.S. delegation will 
include : 

Senior Advisers 

W. Tapley Bennett, Jr.. American Embassy, Vienna, Aus- 
tria 

John A. Hall. Acting Assistant General Manager for In- 
ternational Activities. Atomic Energy Commission 

John H. Manley, U.S. Mission to the International Atomic 
Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 

Harold C. Yedeler, U.S. Mission to the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 

Advisers 

Kathleen Bell, Department of State 

William I. Cargo, Department of State 

Halvor O. Ekern, Department of State 

Charter Heslop. Atomic Energy Commission 

Myron B. Kratzer, Atomic Energy Commission 

Clyde L. McClelland, U.S. Mission to the International 

Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. Austria 
Alfred Puhan, Department of State 
Edwin E. Spingarn, Atomic Energy Commission 
Ernest L. Stanger, Department of State 
John P. Trevithick. U.S. Mission to the International 

Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 
Luther J. Reid, Department of State 
Richard E. Wright, Atomic Energy Commission 

Special Assistant to the United States Representative 
John L. McGruder, Atomic Energy Commission 

Executive Officer 

Richard S. Wheeler. U.S. Mission to the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 

Administrative Officer 

Maurice J. Scanlon, Department of State 

Staff Observers 

Edward Bauser, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy 
George Brown. Joint Committee on Atomic Energy 
Byron LaPlante, Atomic Energy Commission 
James T. Ramey, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy 

The inspiration for creating the Agency 
stemmed from President Eisenhower's atoms-for- 
peace address before the U.N. General Assembly 



on December 8, 1953. The text of the present 
statute was unanimously approved by an Sl-nation 
conference at U.X. Headquarters on October 26, 
1956. The Agency officially came into being on 
July 29, 1957, after the necessary ratifications of 
the statute had been deposited. 

The Agency, a worldwide intergovernmental 
organization under the aegis of the United Na- 
tions, furthers the peaceful uses of atomic energy. 
Its statute provides for an annual General Con- 
ference and for a Board of Governors to carry out 
the functions of the Agency. The Agency has 69 
members, and its Board of Governors consists of 
23 members. 

The first General Conference of the Agency 
was held at Vienna from October 1 to 23, 1957. 
Among the decisions taken at the Conference was 
the election of W. Sterling Cole, former Member 
of the U.S. House of Representatives, as the 
Agency's first Director General for a 4-year pe- 
riod beginning December 1, 1957, and the selec- 
tion of Vienna as the permanent headquarters 
of the Agency. 

The principal items which the second Confer- 
ence will discuss include the report of the Board 
of Governors on progress made during the year 
1957-5S, the program and budget for 1959, pos- 
sible participation of the Agency in the United 
Nations Expanded Program of Technical As- 
sistance, the election of five members to the Board 
of Governors, and relations with specialized 
agencies of the United Nations and intergovern- 
mental organizations. 

ITU Telegraph and Telephone Conference 

The Department of State announced on Sep- 
tember 29 (press release 569) the U.S. delegation 
to the Administrative Telegraph and Telephone 
Conference which is being convened at Geneva 
by the International Telecommunication Union 
on that date. The U.S. delegation is as follows: 

Chairman 

John C. Doerfer, Chairman, Federal Communications 
Commission 

Vice Chairmen 

John J. Xordberg, Chief. Common Carrier Bureau. Fed- 
eral Communications Commission 

Marion H. Woodward. Chief, International Division, 
Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications 
Commission 






634 



Department of State Bulletin 



Member* 

Thomas J. Allen, European Communications Manager. 
United Press International, New York. X. Y. 

Richard T. Black, Telecommunications Division, Depart- 
ment of State 

Angus M. Dowling. American Telephone and Telegraph 
r.... New Y rk. X. Y. 

Ronald C. Egan, European Director of International 
Communications. Western Union, London, England 

Asher H. Ende. Chief. Rates and Revenue Requirements 
Branch. International Division, Common Carrier Bu- 
reau. Federal Communications Commission 

Eugene B. English. Special Representative in Europe for 
Western Union, Paris. France 

Thomas S. Greenish. Vice President, Mackay Radio and 
Telegraph Co.. Paris. France 

Donald E. Hempstead, Traffic Engineer, RCA Communi- 
cations, Inc.. New York, X. Y. 

Alfred A. Hennings, Superintendent of Tariffs, Ameri- 
can ("able and Radio Corp.. New York, X. Y. 

John R. Lambert, Chief, Telegraph Division. Common 
Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission 

Charles M. Mapes. Assistant Chief Engineer, American 
Telephone and Telegraph Co.. New York. X. Y'. 

Frank T. McGann, International Division, Common Car- 
rier Bureau. Federal Communications Commission 

Fred E. Meinholtz. Director of Communications, the Xew 
York Timet, Xew York. X. Y. 

Thomas D. Meola, Vice President and European Manager, 
RCA Communications, Inc.. Rome. Italy 

Edwin W. Peterson. Controller, RCA Communications, 
Inc.. Xew York. X". Y. 

Ernest E. Peterson, President. Peterson Cipher Code 
Corp.. X'ew Y'ork. X". Y". 

Maurine P. Rhodes, Telecommunications Division, De- 
partment of State 

Terrence L. Slater, International Division, Common Car- 
rier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission 

The purpose of the Conference is to revise the 
international telegraph and telephone regulations. 
A special plenary assembly of the International 
Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee 
(CCITT) was convened at Geneva September 22. 
The recommendations of this meeting will serve 
as guidelines in the work of the Administrative 
Telegraph and Telephone Conference. 

The main interest of the Uniced States is in 
the telegraph regulations, to which the Govern- 
ment became a party in 1950. These regulations 
govern classes of telegraph traffic, rates, composi- 
tion of traffic, word count, codes which may be 
used, pick-up, transmission and delivery practices, 
operating practices, and methods of establishing 
and settling accounts among telegraph operating 
agencies. 

The conference is expected to last for about 8 
weeks. The last conference was held at Paris. 
May lS-August 5, 1949. 



Diplomatic Conference for Revision of the Interna- 
tional Convention forProtectionof Industrial Property 

The Department of State announced on October 
3 (press release 583) the following delegation to 
the Diplomatic Conference for the Revision of the 
International Convention for the Protection of 
Industrial Property, which will convene at Lisbon 
October 6, 1958. 

Delegate 

Robert C. Watson. Commissioner of Patents, Department 
of Commerce 

Congressional Adviser 

Alexander Wiley, United States Senate 

Congressional Observer 

Roland V. Libonati, House of Representatives 

Advisers 

Roger C. Dixon, chief, International Business Practices 

Division. Department of State 
Pasquale J. Federieo, Examiner-in-Chief, Patent Office, 

Department of Commerce 
Stephen P. Ladas. Xew York. X. Y. 
Stanley D. Metzger. Assistant Legal Adviser for Economic 

Affairs. Department of State 
John Dashiell Myers. Marion, Pa. 
Albert R. Teare. Cleveland, Ohio 

Congressional Staff Observers 

Carlile Bolton-Smith. Counsel for the Antitrust and 

Monopoly Subcommittee, Senate Judiciary Committee 
Cyril F. Brickfield, Counsel of the Judiciary Committee, 

House of Representatives 
Robert L. Wright. Counsel for the Subcommittee on 

Patents. Trademarks and Copyrights, United States 

Senate. 

Observer 

George F. Westerman. Lt. Col., USA Patent Adviser to 
the Defense Adviser. U.S.R.O., Paris 

This convention, to which the United States and 
44 other countries adhere, was established in 1883. 
It is the major intergovernmental instrument 
assuring international protection of industrial 
property rights, such as patents, utility models, in- 
dustrial designs, trademarks, and commercial 
names. It provides basically that each country 
shall provide to foreign nationals the same protec- 
tion with respect to industrial property rights that 
it provides to its own nationals. It also contains 
provisions assuring to inventors and trademark 
owners sufficient time to file applications for 
protection abroad after original home applications 
have been made. 

Conferences of revision are held periodically to 
bring the convention up to date with technical and 



October 20, 1953 



635 



commercial developments. The United States was 
a party to the original convention and has ratified 
the successive revisions of 1900, 1911, 1925, and 
1934. 

The conference will consider a number of pro- 
posals which have been advanced for improving 
the international protection of patents, trade- 
marks, and related rights. It will also consider 
the creation of a permanent intergovernmental 
council to assist in carrying out the objectives of 
the convention. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Current Actions 

MULTILATERAL 

Pacific Settlement of Disputes 

Convention for the pacific settlement of international 

disputes. Signed at The Hague October 18, 1907. 

Entered into force January 26, 1910. 36 Stat. 2199. 

Ratification deposited: Dominican Republic, July 9, 

1958. 

Postal Services 

Universal postal convention with final protocol, annex, 
regulations of execution, and provisions regarding air- 
mail with final protocol. Done at Ottawa October 3, 
1957.' 

Ratifications deposited: Lebanon, July 23, 1958; 
Canada, August 11, 1958; Denmark, August 13, 195S; 
Norway, August 19, 1958. 

Sugar 

Protocol amending the international sugar agreement 
(TIAS 3177), with annex. Done at Loudon December 
1, 1956. Entered into force January 1, 1957 ; for the 
United States September 25, 1957. TIAS 3937. 
Ratification deposited: Mexico, September 25, 1957. 
Acceptance deposited: Federal Republic of Germany, 
July 24, 1958. 

Trade and Commerce 

Sixth protocol of supplementary concessions to the Gen- 
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva 
May 23, 1956. Entered into force June 30, 1956. TIAS 
3591. 



Schedule of concessions entered into force: Austria, 
September 1, 1958. 

BILATERAL 

Chile 

Agreement amending the agreement of March 31, 1955 
(TIAS 3235), for financing certain educational ex- 
change programs. Effected by exchange of notes at 
Santiago August IS and September 17, 1958. Entered 
into force September 17, 1958. 

India 

Agricultural commodities agreement under title I of the 
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 
1954, as amended (68 Stat. 455; 7 U. S. C. 1701-1709), 
with memorandum of understanding and exchange 
of notes. Signed at Washington September 26, 1958. 
Entered into force September 26, 195S. 



1 Not in force. 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: September 29 October 5 

Press releases may be obtained from the News 
Division, Department of State, Washington 25, D. C. 

Releases issued prior to September 29 which ap- 
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 546 of 
September 22, 550 and 555 of September 23, and 
561 of September 26. 

Subject 

Regional conference of U.S. ambassa- 
dors in London. 

Austrian war damage and restitution 
legislation. 

Delegation to ITU conference (re- 
write). 

Ethiopia credentials (rewrite). 

China credentials (rewrite). 

Reply to German aide memoire of 
Sept. 9. 

Reply to Soviet note of Sept. IS. 

Dulles : news conference. 

Nuclear explosions in U.S.S.R. 

Murphy : Catholic Lawyers' Guild. 

ANZUS Council meeting. 

Reply to Czech protest on border viola- 
tions. 

Educational exchange (U.S.S.R.). 

Investment guaranty contracts for 
tire-making plant in Iran. 

Investment guaranty agreement with 
Ghana. 

Educational exchange (Venezuela). 

Delegation to conference for revision 
of convention for protection of in- 
dustrial property (rewrite). 

*Not printed. 

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



No. 


Date 


567 


9/29 


568 


9/29 


569 


9/29 


570 
571 

572 


9/30 
9/30 
9/30 


573 
574 
575 

t576 
577 

t578 


9/30 
9/30 
9/30 
10/1 
10/1 
10/2 


•579 
*5S0 


10/2 
10/2 


5S1 


10/2 


*5S2 
583 


10/3 
10/3 



636 



Department of State Bulletin 



October 20. 1958 



Ind 



ex 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1008 



American Republics. Secretary Dulles' News Con- 
ference of September 30 597 

Atomic Energy 

Second Regular Session of tbe IAEA (delegation) . 033 
U.S. Views on Recent Soviet Testing of Nuclear 
Weapons 617 

Australia. ANZUS Council Meets at Washington . 612 

Austria. Recent Austrian Legislation on War 

Damage and Restitution 619 

China 

ANZUS Council Meets at Washington 612 

President Explains Principles Guiding U.S. Policy 

in Taiwan Area (Eisenhower, Green) .... 605 
Secretary Dulles' News Conference of September 30 597 

China, Republic of. Letters of Credence (Yeh) . 613 

Claims and Property. Recent Austrian Legislation 

on War Damage and Restitution 619 

Communism. NATO and the Communist Chal- 
lenge (Spaak) 607 

Congress, The. President Explains Principles 
Guiding U. S. Policy in Taiwan Area (Eisen- 
hower, Green) 605 

Department and Foreign Service 

Administration of the Immigration Laws by the 
Department of State and the Foreign Service 
(Anerbach) .... 621 

Record Number of Visitors Visas Issued in 1958 . 624 

Economic Affairs 

ITU Telegraph and Telephone Conference (delega- 
tion) 631 

Diplomatic Conference for Revision of the Interna- 
tional Convention for Protection of Industrial 
Property (delegation) 635 

Duty on Umbrella Frames To Remain Unchanged 

(Eisenhower) 627 

President Defers Investigation of Tariffs on Cer- 
tain Imports 628 

Secretary Dulles' News Conference of Septem- 
ber 30 597 

U.S. and Ghana Sign Agreement on Investment 
Guaranty Program 620 

World Bank Loan to Peru To Improve Port of 
Callao 628 

World Bank Sets New Records in Lending and 
Borrowing 632 

Ethiopia. Letters of Credence (Zaude Gabre Hey- 
wot) 613 

Europe. U.S. Officials in Europe Hold Regional 
Conference 611 

France. President Sends Congratulations to Gen- 
eral de Gaulle 612 

Germany. Four Powers Exchange Views on the 
German Problem (tests of U.S. and German aide 
memoire, U.S. and Soviet notes) 613 

Ghana. U.S. and Ghana Sign Agreement on In- 
vestment Guaranty Program 620 



Immigration and Naturalization 

Administration of the Immigration Laws by the 
Department of State and the Foreign Service 
(Anerbach) 621 

Record Number of Visitors Visas Issued in 1958 . 624 

International Organizations and Conferences 

ITU Telegraph and Telephone Conference (delega- 
tion) 634 

Diplomatic Conference for Revision of the Interna- 
tional Convention for Protection of Industrial 
Property (delegation) 635 

Second Regular Session of the IAEA (delegation) . 633 

World Bank Sets New Records in Lending and 
Borrowing 632 

Lebanon. Question of Troop Withdrawal From 

the Middle East (Lodge) 629 

Military Affairs. U.S. Confers With U.S.S.R. on 

Case of Crashed Plane 618 

New Zealand. ANZUS Council Meets at Wash- 
ington 612 

NATO. NATO and the Communist Challenge 

(Spaak) 607 

Peru. World Bank Loan to Peru To Improve Port 

of Callao 628 

Presidential Documents 

Duty on Umbrella Frames To Remain Unchanged . 627 

President Explains Principles Guiding U.S. Policy 

in Taiwan Area 605 

President Sends Congratulations to General de 
Gaulle 612 

Visit the United States of America Year, 1960 . . 613 

Treaty Information. Current Actions 636 

U.S.S.R. 

Four Powers Exchange Views on the German Prob- 
lem (texts of U.S. and German aide memoire, 
U.S. and Soviet notes) 613 

U.S. Confers With U.S.S.R. on Case of Crashed 

Plane 618 

U.S. Views on Recent Soviet Testing of Nuclear 
Weapons 617 

United Nations 

Agenda of the 13th Regular Session of the U.N. 

General Assembly 630 

Question of Troop Withdrawal From the Middle 

East (Lodge) 629 

Name Index 

Auerbach, Frank L 621 

Dulles, Secretary 597 

Eisenhower, President 605, 612, 613, 627, 628 

Green, Theodore Francis 605 

Lodge, Henry Cabot 629 

Spaak, Paul-Henri 607 

Yeh, George Kung-chao 613 

Zaude Gabre Hey wot 613 



U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE- 1958 




the 



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 



United Nations — Meeting Place of 81 Countries 

Publication 6695 10 cents 

This folder briefly describes the United States position on the United 
Nations, some of the highlights in the record of the United Nations, 
and the functions and accomplishments of the specialized agencies. 



Department 

of 

State 



The International Atomic Energy Agency — The First Year 

Publication 6696 20 cents 

The IAEA completed its first year of operation in July 1958. Its 
organization, activities, and hopes for the future are the subjects of 
this 32-page pamphlet. 

U.S. Participation in the UN — Report by the 
President to the Congress for the Year 1957 

Publication 6654 75 cents 

This twelfth annual report is a summary of problems and achieve- 
ments of the United Nations and specialized agencies in connection 
with the maintenance of peace and security, economic and social co- 
operation and human rights, dependent territories, legal and constitu- 
tional developments, and budgetary, financial, and administrative 
matters during 1957. 



Order Form 

To: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



(Orders should be addressed to the Superintendent of Documents, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C.) 

Please send me 
copies 

□ United Nations — Meeting Place of 81 Countries 

□ The International Atomic Energy Agency — The First Year 

□ U.S. Participation in the UN — Report by the President to 
the Congress for the Year 1957 



Enclosed And: 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



Name: 

Street Address : 

City, Zone, and State : 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 



EPOSITORY 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1009 



October 27, 1958 



THE UNITED STATES AND AFRICA: CHALLENGE 

AND OPPORTUNITY • by Assistant Secretary 
Satterthtvaite 641 

DATE SET FOR TECHNICAL TALKS ON PREVENT- 
ING SURPRISE ATTACK • Exchange of Notes Between 
U.S. and U.S.S.R 648 

DEVELOPING UNrVERSAL RESPECT FOR THE RULE 

OF LAW • Remarks by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy . 651 

COMPONENTS OF INTER- AMERICAN UNDERSTAND- 
ING • by Assistant Secretary Rubottom 654 

U.N. COMMITTEE AGREES ON PROCEDURE FOR 

DISARMAMENT ITEMS • Statements by Ambassador 
Henry Cabot Lodge 666 

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN FIELD OF 

ATOMIC ENERGY • Remarks by John A. McCone . . 668 



For index see inside back cover 



Boston . . blic Library 



Juperintor 



it of Documents 



NOV 17 1958 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1009 • Publication 6718 
October 27, 1958 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Peice: 

62 Issues, domestic $8.50, foreign $12.25 

Single copy, 25 cents 

The printing of this publication has been 
approved by the Director of tho Bureau of 
the Budget (January 20, 1958). 
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 
pubHc and interested agencies of 
the Government with infornuition on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the 
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 
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, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



The United States and Africa: Challenge and Opportunity 



by Joseph C. Satterthwaite 

Assistant Secretary for African Affairs x 



Since last May, when the American Assembly 
held its seminar at Arden House, much has hap- 
pened on the African scene. In fact the available 
topics one might consider are too numerous to 
consider adequately in a single talk. Consequently 
I shall limit my discourse tonight to sketching the 
current status of African nationalism, Africa's 
struggle for economic development, and our poli- 
cies relating to these two basic topics. 

The Status of Nationalism in Africa Today 

As has been said again and again, the urge to 
create a national entity and to exercise the pre- 
rogatives of self-government is clearly the major 
political, social, and economic force at work in 
most of Africa today. This great drive — this 
dynamic force of nationalism — is weaving pro- 
found changes in the pattern of African society 
and is of direct and fundamental importance, first, 
to Europe and, of course, to the United States, the 
Americas, and Asia. 

Political observers predict that within the next 
few years nearly 75 percent of the 140 million 
Africans still living in dependent territories will 
be governing themselves. Yet this great sociopo- 
litical drama is taking place largely without the 
glare of publicity, for the spotlight of world at- 
tention is focused on more spectacular develop- 
ments in the Near and Far East. 

African nationalism, like the continent itself, is 
diverse. "We cannot therefore expect to find many 
generalizations that will clearly interpret all the 
national dramas unfolding on this great conti- 

Address made before the Western Regional Assembly 
(University of California at Los Angeles) at Lake Arrow- 
bead, Calif., on Oct. 9 (press release 590 dated Oct. 8). 

Ocfober 27, 7958 



nent. Let us, then, survey some recent develop- 
ments there and analyze their significance. 

In northwest Africa, for example, dynamic na- 
tionalism is expressing itself among the independ- 
ent states in strenuous efforts to realize a fuller 
sense of independence and complete sovereignty— 
in a word, to consolidate the gains of the last few 
years. 

In the continent's oldest independent states, 
Ethiopia and Liberia, the prevailing spirit today 
can be described as that of awakening fervor, a 
growing sense of belonging to a new Africa on the 
move, and an increasing desire for national prog- 
ress on all fronts— social, economic, and political. 

In vast sub-Sahara Africa the trend is toward 
regional cooperation in quest of a greater unity 
of purpose in the nationalist movement, which, 
however, has still not reached every territory in' 
the region. 

The first conference of independent African 
states was held at Accra last April 15 to 22 on the 
invitation of Prime Minister Nkrumah. This 
conference made clear that a major objective of 
the eight independent states of Africa participat- 
ing is the rapid end of the continent's colonial 
system and the strengthening of their own inde- 
pendence. 

Perhaps the most ambitious effort since World 
War II to revitalize the pan-African movement 
will be the All-African Peoples Conference, 
which has been called by the Convention Peoples 
Party of Ghana to convene in Accra from De- 
cember 5 to 12 of this year. Its sponsors report 
they are inviting all known African political par- 

641 



ties to attend. About 60 such parties and organ- 
izations from countries and territories throughout 
the continent are already associated with the proj- 
ect, and the sponsors hope to have delegates from 
100 organizations on hand by the time the con- 
ference convenes. 

The main purpose of this assemblage, in the 
words of its hosts, is 

... to formulate concrete plans and work out the 
G-andhian tactics and strategy of the African non-violent 
revolution in relation to colonialism and imperialism ; 
racialism and discriminatory laws and practices ; tribal- 
ism and religious separatism ; and the position of chief- 
taincy under colonial rule and under a democratic 
society. 

The United States will not be alone in watch- 
ing with great interest the outcome of this con- 
ference. 

It is clear that the majority of Africans today 
are seeking political unity of purpose, energy, and 
endeavor. The evolving European Community 
and other European efforts to achieve unity are 
in themselves examples for such endeavor. We 
may ask, then, where are the militant forces of 
nationalism leading Africa? 

To answer this question, we need first to ex- 
amine African objectives as stated by the conti- 
nent's leaders themselves. 

For example, Prime Minister Nkrumah of 
Ghana wrote in an article entitled "African Pros- 
pect" in the October issue of Foreign Affairs that, 
despite the diversity of Africa and the diver- 
gences, differences, and varying points of em- 
phasis one finds in the continent, there are cur- 
rently three traits common to all Africa. In his 
own words these are : 

1. Our desire to see Africa free and independent. 

2. Our determination to pursue foreign policies based 
upon non-alignment. 

3. Our urgent need for economic development. 

In short, responsible and articulate Africans 
today seek equality, dignity, and justice for them- 
selves and their fellow countrymen. They seek 
to bridge as rapidly as possible the great gulf be- 
tween conditions on their continent and in the 
Western World. They are clearly determined to 
eliminate old-fashioned colonialism and racial dis- 
crimination from the African Continent. They 
seek to play an important and expanding role in 
world affairs — to project the new "African per- 
sonality" on the world scene. As indicated by the 



642 



various all- African conferences to which I have 
just referred, they seek to gain their objectives 
by achieving a greater unity of purpose among 
their diverse and disparate peoples. 

What should the United States attitude toward 
these African nationalist objectives be ? 

Insofar as these objectives are progressive, just, 
and constructive, insofar as the methods employed 
to achieve the objectives are nonviolent and equi- 
table, our attitude — in accordance with our na- 
tional history, character, and tradition — should 
obviously be one of sympathy and support. 

Secretary Dulles in his personal message to 
Prime Minister Nkrumah delivered at the opening 
of the Accra conference of independent states last 
April, 2 declared : 

Through you, I wish to assure the African nations that 
they can count on the sympathetic interest of the people 
and Government of the United States. The United States 
will continue to stand ready to support the constructive 
efforts of the states of Africa to achieve a stable, pros- 
perous community, conscious of its interdependence within 
the family of nations and dedicated to the principles of 
the United Nations Charter. 

What should be our policy toward the diverse 
dependent territories now emerging toward vary- 
ing forms of self-government and aspiring for 
independence ? 

Having long recognized that traditional colo- 
nialism is coming to an end, the United States 
supports the principle of orderly transition to self- 
government and eventual self-determination in 
the interests of all parties and peoples involved. 
The speed of this evolution, we believe, should be 
determined by the capacity of the African popu- 
lations concerned to assume and discharge the 
responsibilities of self-government. 

The United States supports European measures 
designed to provide self-government and eventual 
autonomy to dependent African territories. Inso- 
far as we are able to do so, we also encourage 
moderate African leaders who recognize the bene- 
fit to their own people of evolutionary rather than 
revolutionary progress. In this connection the 
United States believes that all concerned should 
consider seriously the dangerous pitfalls that con- 
front a newly independent state today. Economic 
viability, established and stable political, social, 
and cultural institutions, trained cadres of civil i 
servants, and at least a modicum of experienced 



' Bulletin of May 12, 1958, p. 765. 

Department of State Bulletin 



technicians are generally regarded as essential to 
a modern nation. 

I should also like to point out that many Afri- 
cans now look with gratitude and appreciation on 
their associations with the European powers, and 
we believe that the time may well come when most 
Africans will do so. For it is these powers which 
have brought Africa advanced administrative 
techniques, modern economic-development meth- 
ods, needed public-health and educational meas- 
ures, and great capital investment and con- 
struction. 

The U.N. Trusteeship System 

And speaking of constructive assistance in de- 
velopment, let us turn now to a consideration of 
one of the most important systems for political 
advancement in operation on the African Conti- 
nent, the United Nations trusteeship system, which 
is designed to bring about "independence by or- 
derly evolution." 

This system is responsible for six trust 
territories: French Togo, British and French 
Cameroons, Ruanda-Urundi, Tanganyika, and 
Somalia. A seventh territory — British Togo — 
joined the newly independent state of Ghana in 
March of 1957 in accordance with the will of the 
Togo population expressed in a popular plebis- 
cite supervised by the United Nations. 

Provision is made under this system for periodic 
visiting missions to the territories under trustee- 
ship and also for hearing petitioners in person at 
sessions of the Trusteeship Council and the United 
Nations General Assembly. 

A U.N. Trusteeship Council visiting mission 
will leave later this month for the British and 
French Cameroons, under the chairmanship of 
Mr. Benjamin Gerig of the United States. Rep- 
resentatives from Haiti, India, and New Zealand 
complete the mission, which has been requested 
to include in its report on the British Cameroons 
its views on the methods of consultation which 
should be adopted when the time comes for the 
people to express their wishes concerning their fu- 
ture. The mission will subsequently also examine 
conditions in French Cameroun, where important 
constitutional advances have been made in the 
past 2 years. 

We are encouraged by a recent statement from 
French official sources to the effect that agreement 



has been reached between the French and Togo 
governments on plans which it is hoped will result 
in independence for Togo within the framework 
of the U.N. Charter. Progress is also being made 
toward this same objective in negotiations between 
the French and Cameroun governments, an agree- 
ment having been drafted which now awaits ap- 
proval of the two governments. 

In accordance with the trusteeship agreement 
entered into by Italy and the General Assembly 
of the United Nations in 1950, the Trust Territory 
of Somaliland under Italian administration is 
scheduled to become the independent state of 
Somalia in 1960. Elections will probably be held 
early next year for a new legislative assembly 
which will be authorized to prepare the constitu- 
tion for the new state. Although Somalia is faced 
with a large budgetary deficit and has a disputed 
border with Ethiopia, there is no reason to doubt 
that the orderly transition of this country to full 
independence will unfold as expected. The 
Trusteeship Council is concerned with exploring 
the possibilities of providing the necessary eco- 
nomic assistance when independence is achieved, 
and the disputed border problem has been sub- 
mitted to arbitration. 

Tanganyika, a British East African trust terri- 
tory, the largest and most populous of all African 
trust territories, held its first national elections 
in 5 of its 10 electoral districts last month. It 
will hold elections in the remaining 5 districts next 
spring to complete its new 67-member Legislative 
Council. The Council is formed on the multi- 
racial principle, with representatives from the 
African, Indian, and European communities. 
These elections have been held on the basis of a 
common roll, with each voter voting for three 
candidates — one each from the African, Asian, 
and European communities. 

Following completion of these elections next 
year, the Constitutional Committee of the Tan- 
ganyika Legislative Council will be established to 
consider further constitutional steps to take, such 
as a review of the parity system of equal com- 
munal representation and of the possibility of in- 
creasing African representation on the Council. 
The Trusteeship Council at its 21st session this 
spring expressed the hope that the Tanganyika 
government would review its national electoral 
qualifications with a view to introducing univer- 
sal suffrage with the least possible delay. 



October 27, 1958 



643 



A 1957 visiting mission to the Belgian Trust 
Territory of Ruanda-Urundi reported that that 
territory was making encouraging progress to- 
ward the goals of the trusteeship system. Steps 
are being taken to eliminate the remaining ves- 
tiges of feudalistic society and to install institu- 
tions more in keeping with the principles of mod- 
ern democracy ; public opinion is making a greater 
effort to express itself, and the ultimate develop- 
ment of Ruanda-Urundi into a modern African 
state can now be envisaged. 

Reviewing the progress of trust areas toward 
self-government or independence over the past 10 
years, I believe we can fairly conclude that these 
areas are not only keeping pace with the non- 
trust territories emerging into independent states 
in Africa but will develop toward fuller autonomy 
at least as well-organized and experienced as those 
areas which have not had the benefits of the 
trusteeship system. 

The United States is proud of the role it has 
played in the trusteeship process and will con- 
tinue, where appropriate, to assist those African 
leaders who, during the trusteeship period, have 
sought to bring their countries into independence 
through the full exercise of democratic principles 
and practices. 

Before I turn to other aspects of African na- 
tionalist development, I feel that I also should 
mention the constructive work of a less publicized 
and nonpermanent United Nations body that has 
concerned itself with conditions in African de- 
pendent areas — the Committee on Information 
from Non-Self-Governing Territories. The 
United Nations, of course, has no responsibility 
for the supervision of dependent areas other than 
trust territories. However, all governments hav- 
ing dependent territories are obligated by the 
charter of the United Nations to report regu- 
larly to the United Nations on the economic, so- 
cial, and educational conditions in these areas. 

The 14-member Committee on Information from 
Non-Self-Governing Territories, of which the 
United States has been a member since its incep- 
tion, was created by the United Nations to review 
these reports and to make general recommenda- 
tions on economic, social, and educational condi- 
tions. These recommendations can be very useful 
to governments which are engaged in promoting 
the orderly social and political evolution of the 
dependent territories under their jurisdiction. 

Turning to developments in other parts of 



Africa, our attention first logically focuses on the 
recent constitutional referendum held in the 14 
African territories of France (including Mada- 
gascar) on September 28. This single, dramatic 
action was one of the most significant and far- 
reaching developments in the political evolution 
of Africa this year and should result in a new 
and mutually beneficial association between 
France and French African territories. 

As a result of this election, held on the basis of 
universal suffrage for all over 21, the territory 
of French Guinea, which voted in favor of its 
independence, is taking steps to withdraw from 
the French West African Federation. The 13 
other African territories of France will presum- 
ably be organized into the new French Community 
within the next 6 months. Each territory will 
apparently have full local autonomy. Matters 
common to members of the Community, such as 
defense, foreign relations, and currency, will be 
handled by special federal institutions in which the 
French Government will have the dominant voice. 

The executive of the new Community will be 
the President of the French Republic, assisted by 
a government composed of the French and terri- 
torial premiers and French ministers dealing with 
matters of community interest. A senate and a 
court of arbitration to settle disputes between 
territories are also provided. 

According to the constitution, those territories 
which choose to join the Community may subse- 
quently leave it and become independent. This 
independence, however, is to be negotiated between 
the territory and metropolitan France. It is 
hoped that a continuing close and profitable re- 
lationship will be maintained between France and 
these areas. 

Developments in British African territories are 
equally encouraging. Forty-five delegates from 
Nigeria are currently holding a constitutional con- 
ference in London to determine the steps to be 
taken to lead the giant West African Federation 
of some 35 million people to independence in 1960. 
The conferees are struggling to settle such prob- 
lems as the question of creating new states within 
the Federation, which now is divided into three 
large regions, the problem of the allocation of 
revenues between the regional and federal gov- 
ernments, the control of police, and electoral laws. 
In 1957, at another constitutional conference held 
in London, the Eastern and Western Regions re- 



644 



Department of State Bulletin 



([nested internal self-government and have since 
achieved it. The Northern Region — the most 
populous and predominantly Muslim — wants self- 
government by March of 1959, and the southern 
Cameroons, a British trust territory -which is rep- 
resented in the federal Nigerian government, seeks 
internal self-government by October 1959. 

Next year federal elections will be held through- 
out Nigeria, and the new House of Assembly will 
be asked to approve a motion formally requesting 
the British to grant independence to the Federa- 
tion in 1960. Great Britain indicated last year 
that it would receive such a resolution sympatheti- 
cally and be prepared to fix the date for ending the 
colonial rule which began about 100 years ago. 

British Sierra Leone in west Africa and Uganda 
in east Africa are also making important strides 
toward autonomy and self-government. Kenya 
has held elections to fill the larger representation 
accorded Africans in the Legislative Council. 
Pressure for still greater African participation 
in the multiracial crown colony's government con- 
tinues very strong, however. 

The Search for a Just Racial Policy 

The major political problem of east and central 
Africa, of course, is that of working out equitable 
policies to govern relations between the many 
races living side by side there. 

Prime Minister Sir Roy Welensky of the Fed- 
eration of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, in an article 
in the October edition of Western World pub- 
lished in Paris on September 24, said : 

It is my firm belief that the regime of friendship, of 
cooperation between the races which we endeavor to 
practice in the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, 
does the most for the people of Africa. 

The Federation, in effect, hopes to settle the race 
problem through a policy of racial partnership. 

On the other hand, in such regions as w T est Af- 
rica, where white settlers are few or come almost 
exclusively as missionaries, traders, teachers, ad- 
ministrators, or technicians, racial problems have 
been relatively minor. 

One can conclude then that contact between 
Africans and Europeans alone does not give rise 
to serious race problems, but social and economic 
competition between two permanently established 
racial groups — such as in settler areas — does seem 
to do so. The problem resolves essentially around 
the African aspiration to approximate more 



nearly the higher European living standard and 
to increase his share of his country's great natural 
resources and production. 

Although we cannot ignore the many dangers 
inherent in any failure to meet the problem of 
harmonious relationships betw r een the several 
races inhabiting Africa's dependent and inde- 
pendent territories, we must recognize that at the 
present time — in view of our own domestic prob- 
lems^ — we must in humility avoid proposing spe- 
cific solutions. We can and must, however, con- 
tinue to stand steadfastly for the universal prin- 
ciple of nondiscrimination and racial equality. 

Insofar as we are able to solve this knotty prob- 
lem of harmonious race relationships within our 
own borders we will be in a better moral position 
to exercise greater influence for moderate solu- 
tions of racial problems in Africa and elsewhere 
in the world. 

Alien Pressures: Communism 

In addition to the disturbing influence of racial 
friction, the nationalist movement in Africa is 
further harassed by the machinations of inter- 
national communism, forever seeking to turn fluid 
situations to advantage for the Communist bloc. 

At the Cairo Afro- Asian Solidarity Conference 
held last December and January, the Communists 
notified the world that Africa was to be the next 
arena of their anticolonial subversion. 

In recent months the Communists have vigor- 
ously continued their work of penetrating individ- 
ual African labor organizations, youth groups, 
and nationalist organizations. They continue 
working overtime in Egypt and western Europe 
to influence the thousands of African students 
now studying there, bringing many either to bloc 
countries or the Soviet Union on scholarships or 
"guided" tours. They are devoting greatly in- 
creased study and research to African subjects 
and training more specialists in African affaire 
both in the Soviet Union and its satellites. In the 
last 2 years they have signed trade agreements 
witli most of the independent African states. 
They are pressing to exchange diplomatic repre- 
sentatives with those independent states with 
which they have not yet done so. 

Although the current Soviet economic, cultural, 
and diplomatic offensive has not shown important 
results in Africa, no one can afford to be com- 
placent. Persistent and ingenious Communists, 



October 27, 1958 



645 



skilled in subversive and revolutionary tactics, 
must be reckoned with. Success in meeting the 
Communist challenge in Africa will directly de- 
pend on success in helping Africans realize their 
legitimate political and economic aspirations in 
a progressive manner. 

The Struggle for Economic Development 

Africa's economic and social needs, closely re- 
lated to her political and racial problems, are 
numerous and pressing. Among them are the 
need for more public and private capital for in- 
vestment and development; for more technical, 
executive, and organizational skills and abilities; 
for more transportation and communication fa- 
cilities; and for diversification of one-crop 
economies. 

Constituting a major challenge to our wisdom, 
good will, and generosity, these economic prob- 
lems require prompt remedial action. They are 
so numerous that no one nation can possibly solve 
them alone. Africa must have and deserves the 
cooperative support of all nations of the free 
world in this endeavor. Much is already being 
done. 

The United Nations is contributing in numer- 
ous ways to assisting Africa's development. One- 
sixth of all loans made by the International Bank 
for Reconstruction and Development since 1951 
have gone to African states and territories. Mr. 
Eugene R. Black, bank president, estimates that 
the International Bank's lending in Africa this 
year will be approximately $100 million. He has 
indicated, further, that he foresees a growing 
amount of bank activity there. The United States, 
it should be stressed, contributes at least 40 per- 
cent of the funds of the bank. The Soviet Union, 
it is equally important to note, is not even a 
member. 

The United Nations Technical Assistance Pro- 
gram has been devoting more than $3 million an- 
nually to African development and is expected to 
expand this sum considerably in the years ahead. 

This spring the Economic and Social Council 
of the United Nations created a new Economic 
Commission for Africa, which will establish its 
headquarters in Addis Ababa. The first session 
of this body will be held in December of this year. 
The United States is not a member of the Com- 
mission but will be represented by observers at 
its opening session. 



We believe this new United Nations organ will 
be able to bring into focus Africa's many economic 
problems as well as its opportunities. It will be 
in a position to help the states of Africa find ef- 
fective answers to their problems. It will also 
provide a forum for a broad exchange of views 
and ideas as well as for the more detailed con- 
sideration of future plans and new techniques for 
accelerating African economic development. 

Side by side with economic development, of 
course, must come social progress. Both the 
United Nations and the countries of the free world 
must contribute to Africa's social advancement, 
for the advancement of African agriculture and 
its progress in industrialization must take into ac- 
count available human resources and the social 
patterns within which economic development takes 
place. This is particularly true since social pat- 
terns in Africa range from primitive tribal or- 
ganizations to highly developed urban societies. 

In this connection we can note happily the 
important contributions to African social as well 
as economic development of the United Nations 
technical agencies — the World Health Organiza- 
tion (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organi- 
zation (FAO), the United Nations Children's 
Fund (UNICEF), the International Labor 
Organization (ILO) , and the United Nations Ed- 
ucational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 
(UNESCO) . The newly created Economic Com- 
mission for Africa will also consider social ques- 
tions insofar as they are related to economic 
development. 

United States and European private invest- 
ments are of growing significance to African 
economic development. Our investment in the 
continent now totals about $624 million, one-half 
of which is in the Union of South Africa. 
European investment is many times that sum. 
European governments are expending between 
$600 and $700 million annually in African areas, 
principally for economic assistance to their de- 
pendent territories. 

The United States reciprocal trade agreement 
and mutual security programs, which have been 
in effect for some years now, demonstrate clear 
recognition of our interdependence and mutuality 
of interest with other nations of the free world, 
including the African nations. For the last 2 
fiscal years, the mutual security program alone 
has provided more than $70 million annually in 



646 



Department of State Bulletin 



economic and technical assistance to Morocco, 
Tunisia, Libya, Ethiopia, Somalia, Ghana, Li- 
beria, and British African territories. Our 1959 
fiscal year aid level will be greater than that of 
last year. 

The United States Export-Import Bank has 
been providing African countries $10 to $15 mil- 
lion annually in development loans. The new 
Development Loan Fund is now beginning to an- 
nounce approval of loans for African states. It is 
hoped that the volume of these loans can be in- 
creased, providing sufficient capital is made avail- 
able by Congress. 

In order to build sound and enduring economies 
in African territories, investment and expanding 
trade are necessary. Here private investment 
must play its part. In this connection it is of 
interest to note that the Stanford Eesearch Insti- 
tute has just recently announced a program to 
stimulate private overseas investment in Africa. 
This new program, made possible by funds from 
private industries and foundations, will compile 
information on investment opportunities through- 
out the continent. 

In his address before the United Nations Gen- 
eral Assembly on September 18, 3 Secretary Dulles 
outlined eight steps that the United States would 
be prepared, subject to action by Congress as 
appropriate, to take or support in the coming year 
for worldwide economic-development purposes. 

These steps, which bear repeating at this time 
because of their applicability to African needs, 
would include: 

1. Pressing vigorously and effectively forward 
with existing development financing programs; 

2. Increasing efforts to emphasize the con- 
structive role that private initiative can play in 
economic development ; 

3. Considering how the United States might 
cooperate with regional development programs, 
where desired by the countries of the region and 
where the advantage of the regional over the 
bilateral approach would be evident; 

4. Considering the advisability of increasing the 
capital of the International Bank for Reconstruc- 
tion and Development and the quotas of the Inter- 
national Monetary Fund; 

5. Considering the feasibility of creating an 
International Development Association, as an 



' Ibid., Oct. 6. 1958, p. 525. 
October 27, T958 



affiliate of the International Bank, under condi- 
tions likely to assure broad and effective support; 

6. Supporting vigorously technical assistance 
through our own programs, through the expanded 
United Nations technical assistance programs, and 
through a substantial initial contribution to the 
new United Nations Special Projects Fund; 

7. Eidisting the assistance of United States uni- 
versities and scientific institutions, joining with 
those of other cooperating countries to achieve 
scientific and technological breakthroughs on prob- 
lems of particular concern to less developed coun- 
tries; and 

8. Seeking funds from the Congress for health 
programs. 

It is anticipated that in the months ahead the 
administration will set forth fuller details of these 
programs. 

Conclusions 

I have spoken at some length on Africa's politi- 
cal, economic, and social problems and develop- 
ments and our relationship thereto. Let us 
summarize our conclusions. 

First, the United States must properly evaluate 
the dynamic political forces currently at work in 
Africa. Recognizing the vital interdependence of 
Africa and Europe, we must also support con- 
structive African political evolution and work for 
mutual understanding of our own policies and sup- 
port for our common ideals as set forth in the 
United Nations Charter. 

Africa is generally friendly to the West, 
although independent African states have evinced 
no apparent desire to formulate formal alliances. 
Threatening this basic attitude of friendliness, 
however, is the insidious international Communist 
force, which would deny the area to the West and 
ensnare it into the political and socioeconomic 
slavery of communism. We of the West have no 
time to lose. We must anticipate events, sympa- 
thetically understand African aspirations, and 
help to meet them. 

Second, as it is clear that a basic African need is 
for timely help in economic and social develop- 
ment and the eradication of disease, ignorance, 
and poverty, the United States must act promptly, 
generously, and wisely with adequate economic 
and technical assistance to this vast underdevel- 
oped continent. To do so we must have the full 

647 



understanding and support of the American 
people. 

The opportunity to develop a sound base for 
enduring friendly relations and mutual coopera- 
tion with an emerging Africa is ours today. We 
must make the most of this opportunity without 
delay. 



Date Set for Technical Talks 
on Preventing Surprise Attack 

Following is an exchange of notes between the 
Governments of the United States and the 
U.S.S.R. concerning a meeting of technical ex- 
perts to study methods to lessen the danger of 
surprise inilitai-y attach. 

U.S. NOTE OF OCTOBER 10 ' 

Press release 600 dated October 10 

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 note 53/OSA 
of September 15, 1958, regarding a meeting of 
technical experts to study the practical aspects 
of minimizing the possibility of surprise attack. 

The Government of the United States believes 
that the primary purpose of \h^ meeting should 
be to examine the methods and objects of control 
and to assess the results that might be obtained 
from the adoption of those methods in lessening 
the danger of surprise military attack. The study 
should be undertaken with a view to the prepara- 
tion of a technical report which could be recom- 
mended for consideration by governments. The 
report would be useful in the subsequent exami- 
nation among governments at an appropriate 
level of the problem of introducing measures 
against surprise attack. As stated in its note of 
July 31, 2 the United States considers that the dis- 
cussions should take place without prejudice to 
the respective positions of the two Governments 
as to the delimitation of areas within which meas- 
ures might be established, or as to the timing or 



1 Delivered by the American Embassy to the Soviet 
Foreign Office at Moscow on Oct. 10. 

2 For text, see Bulletin of Aug. 18, 1958, p. 278. 

648 



interdependence of various aspects of disarma- 
ment. 

With this understanding, the Government of the 
United States agrees to commencement of this 
meeting at Geneva on November 10. The United 
States hopes that substantial progress could be 
made in a meeting of four to five weeks as sug- 
gested by the Soviet Government. 

With regard to the question of participation in 
the proposed meeting, the United States believes 
it would be appropriate to include experts from 
countries other than the United States and the 
U.S.S.R. in order to provide the broadest possible 
base of technical experience under varying condi- 
tions. After consultation with other nations the 
United States proposes that, for the Western 
countries, there will be experts from the United 
States, the U.K., France, Canada, Italy and possi- 
bly other countries. The names of the experts 
who will participate will be communicated in due 
course. 

The comments in the United States note of July 
31, with regard to the question of flights of United 
States aircraft carrying nuclear weapons, with 
which the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
takes issue in its note of September 15, were di- 
rected to the charges made by the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics' representative in the Security 
Council of the United Nations in April of this 
year. 3 At that time, the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics' representative spoke of the "practice 
of regular United States bomber flights armed 
with atomic and hydrogen bombs which proceed 
towards the borders of the Soviet Union upon the 
giving of an alarm." The United States reaffirms 
the statement contained in its note of July 31 
"that the United States has never had the need to 
launch nor has it in fact ever launched any atomic 
bomber flights of this type." 

SOVIET NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 15 

Unofficial translation 
Note No. 53/OSA 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR presents 
its compliments to the Embassy of the USA, and referring 
to note number 128 of July 31, 1958, has the honor to state 
the following : 

The Soviet Government notes the favorable attitude of 
the Government of the USA towards the proposal set 



1 For background, see ibid., May 12, 1958, p. 760. 

Department of State Bulletin 



forth in the message of the Chairman of the Council of 
Ministers of the USSR, N. S. Khrushchev, to the President 
of the USA, D. Eisenhower, of July 2, 1958' that in the 
near future appropriate representatives, including repre- 
sentatives of military agencies of both countries, desig- 
nated by the Governments of the USSR, USA, and also, 
possibly by the governments of some other states should 
meet for the joint study of practical aspects of the prob- 
lem of preventing surprise attack and should work out, 
during the course of a definite period of time limit put in 
advance, recommendations concerning measures for pre- 
venting the possibility of a surprise attack. 

In advancing the proposal concerning the conducting of 
a meeting on the level of experts, the Soviet Government 
proceeded from the fact that such a meeting would be 
fruitful if its work is directed toward the working out of 
practical recommendations concerning measures to pre- 
vent surprise attack in combination with definite steps in 
the field of disarmament. As the Government of the USA 
is aware, in the message of the Chairman of the Council 
of Ministers of the USSR of July 2 it is stated that the 
Soviet Union proposes the reaching of agreement on es- 
tablishment of control posts at railroad junctions, at large 
ports and on principal automobile thoroughfares, in com- 
bination with specific steps in disarmament, and also 
concerning the carrying out of aerial photography in 
areas having an important significance from the point of 
view of the prevention of the danger of surprise attack. 

Therefore the assertion of the Government of the US 
that allegedly the Soviet Government agrees that these dis- 
cussions should not predetermine the corresponding posi- 
tions of both governments in connection with the time and 
the interdependence of the different aspects of disarma- 
ment has no foundation. Moreover, it is clear that the 
experts will have to give serious attention also to such 
technical questions as means and objects of control and 
the results which might be secured by these measures. 

As the Soviet Government has already stated an un- 
derstanding on the measures of preventing surprise attack 
is completely possible given conditions of fair considera- 
tion of mutual interests and rejection of such actions as 
would lead to a sharpening of the international situation 
and the increasing of the danger of war. Of course, a 
decision on the creation of mutual principles of a system 
of preventing the possibility of surprise attack must be 
adopted by the governments and not by the experts who 
will only conduct preparatory work. However, the work- 
ing out by the experts and practical recommendations on 
concrete ways to prevent surprise attack undoubtedly will 
necessitate fruitful examination of the question about 
prevention of surprise attack at a meeting of heads of 
governments. 

In the note of the Embassy of the USA, the question is 
again raised about the flights of military planes of the 
USA in the region of the Arctic and about an Arctic zone 
of inspection. The Government of the US in this note 
gives categoric assurance that the US has never had the 
need to carry out flights of military planes with hydrogen 



and atomic bombs in the direction of the frontiers of the 
Soviet Union. It is impossible, however, not to note that 
statements of the Government of the US that allegedly 
American atomic bombers are not carrying out flights in 
the direction of the frontiers of the USSR look uncon- 
vincing in the light of the statements of its representatives 
in the U.N. Security Council and also the statement of 
US Secretary of State Dulles at the press conference which 
took place on 1 May." As is known, in this statement Mr. 
Dulles directly announced that if the Soviet Union agrees 
to the establishment of international inspection in the 
Arctic, then the USA "would then feel it safe greatly to 
reduee to a minimum these flights against which the 
Soviet Union protests". Answering a question whether 
the US will cease such flights in case of establishment of 
inspection in the Arctic Mr. Dulles declared that this will 
depend on what information the US receives as a result of 
realization of inspection. These statements of Mr. Dulles 
clearly confirm the flights of American planes loaded with 
atomic and hydrogen bombs in the direction of the fron- 
tiers of the Soviet Union. As for the question about an 
Arctic zone of inspection which is broached in the note 
of the Embassy of the USA the position of the Soviet 
Union on this question was set forth earlier with ex- 
haustive fullness. 

In connection with the practical side of the convocation 
of a meeting of experts the Soviet Government has no 
objection to the time and place proposed by the US in 
the note of 31 July for convocation of a meeting of ex- 
perts. But if the Government of the USA is not ready 
for this in the said time, on our part there is no objection 
also that the meeting be called later as is proposed in 
the note of the Embassy of the USA of 8 September." 
Proceeding from this, the Soviet Government proposes 
that a meeting of experts should begin in Geneva on 10 
November having in mind that its work should be con- 
cluded in the shortest possible time, for example in the 
course of four to five weeks. 

In the opinion of the Soviet Government it seems ex- 
pedient that in the meeting of experts besides the USSR 
and the USA other countries should also take part. More- 
over, the Soviet Government considers it necessary to 
proceed from the principle of equal representation of 
countries which are members of the Atlantic Pact and 
countries included in the organization of the Warsaw 
Treaty. Taking this into account the Soviet Govern- 
ment proposes that in a meeting of experts representatives 
should take part from the USA, Great Britain, France, 
Belgium, USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Rumania. 

It goes without saying, the U.N. organization will be 
informed about the course of the experts' negotiations 
through the U.N. Secretary-General. 

The Soviet Government hopes that the Government of 
the USA will carefully examine the considerations set 
forth in the present note and give a positive reply to the 
proposals advanced in it. 

Moscow 

September 15, 1958 



' For text, see ibid., Aug. 18, 1958, p. 279. 
Ocfober 27, 7958 



'Ibid., May 19, 1958. p. 804. 

1 For text, see ibid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 504. 



649 



U.S. Views on Communist Cease-Fire 
in Taiwan Straits Area 

Statement by Acting Secretary Herter, October 6 

Press release 585 dated October 6 

The Department has noted a broadcast by the 
Peiping Eadio of a statement attributed to the 
Chinese Communist Minister of National De- 
fense. This statement, though replete with famil- 
iar Communist propaganda distortions regarding 
U.S. policies, seems to move in the direction of 
a cease-fire. It is therefore being carefully studied 
by the U.S. Government in close consultation with 
its ally, the Government of the Eepublic of China, 
which of course is primarily concerned. What- 
ever the Chinese Communist motivations, the 
United States welcomes their declared intentions 
to suspend bombardment of the offshore islands 
for 1 week and hopes this foreshadows a perma- 
nent cessation of their armed attack. Should this 
prove to be the case, there would seem to be no 
further necessity for the convoy of supply ship- 
ments to the offshore island positions. This ques- 
tion is being given careful consideration. It 
should be pointed out that U.S. escorts for these 
convoys in the offshore-island area have been 
limited strictly to international waters. The De- 
partment is glad to note the official statement 
made today by the Ministry of National Defense 
at Taipei that the Government of the Republic 
of China would not break the cease-fire. 

Statement by Secretary Dulles, October 7 > 

The Chinese Communists, after having brutally 
and incessantly bombarded Quemoy for over 6 
weeks, now say they will be humanitarian and 
peaceful for 1 week. 

It is not easy to evaluate that statement, but at 
least for the moment there is a cessation of the 
bombing. This the United States has been vigor- 
ously seeking, and also the development assures 
worldwide condemnation of the Chinese Com- 
munists if they again resume the fighting. 

Department Statement, October 8 

Press release 593 dated October 8 

At the request of the Government of the Re- 
public of China, the United States has engaged in 



the escort of Chinese vessels resupplying Quemoy. 
This escort activity was ordered to the extent 
militarily necessary. No modification of this 
order is needed. 

The Chinese Communists' halt of attacks on the 
offshore islands and on resupply operations to 
these islands suspends the military necessity for 
United States escort operations. If the Chinese 
Communist attacks are resumed, then, under the 
order, United States escort activity will be re- 
sumed forthwith to the extent necessary. 

There has been full consultation between the 
Government of the United States and the Govern- 
ment of the Republic of China as to this matter. 



U.S. Announces Withdrawal 
of Forces From Lebanon 

Department Statement 

Press release 589 dated October 8 

The Government of the United States an- 
nounces that by agreement with the Government 
of the Republic of Lebanon it has now been de- 
cided to complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from 
Lebanon. It is expected that, barring unforeseen 
developments, the forces will all be withdrawn 
by the end of October. 

The United States sent forces to Lebanon in re- 
sponse to the urgent appeal of the then govern- 
ment of that country for assistance in maintaining 
Lebanese independence and integrity. 1 At the 
same time the United States took steps in the 
United Nations with a view to having it take 
measures to preserve the independence and terri- 
torial integrity of Lebanon and thus facilitate the 
withdrawal of the U.S. forces. Subsequently the 
U.N. General Assembly unanimously adopted a 
resolution 2 developed by the Arab states and de- 
signed to insure respect by states for the freedom, 
independence, and integrity of other states and to 
establish practical arrangements to uphold the 
purposes and principles of the charter in relation 
to Lebanon. 

The steps which have been taken with respect 
to the situation in Lebanon have led to a substan- 
tial improvement in the international aspects of 



1 Made at the Washington National Airport. 
650 



1 For background, see Bulletin of Aug. 4, 1958, p. 181. 
' Ibid., Sept. 15, 1958, p. 409. 

Department of State Bulletin 



the Lebanese security situation. The current un- 
rest appears to have essentially domestic origins. 
In view of the progress made toward more stable 
international conditions in the area, it has been 
concluded that U.S. forces can now be totally with- 
drawn from Lebanon. It is the confident hope of 
the U.S. Government that the Kepublic of Leba- 
non, its sovereignty and independence strength- 
ened, will move forward in unity, peace, and 
prosperity. 



Military Survey Team 
Sent to Jordan 

Press release 605 dated October 11 

A military survey team headed by Brig. Gen. 
Richard A. Risden, U.S. Army, has been dis- 
patched to Jordan at the request of the Jordanian 
Government to make a study of the organization, 
administration, and equipment of the Arab 
Army of Jordan. The survey team is due to 
arrive in Jordan on October 14. 



Developing Universal Respect for the Rule of Law 

by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy x 



The thought of the probity and compassion, 
the morality and charity of St. Ives, your patron 
saint, led me, in traveling from Washington to 
Boston this morning, into an intriguing specula- 
tion as to the reactions which that saintly man 
might have experienced were he involved in to- 
day's international politics. What would he have 
said, for example, after listening to a few sample 
broadcasts in the daily output of Moscow and 
Peiping ? What would he have thought of their 
distortions, their bland disregard for elemental 
honesty, their vicious purpose to destroy a form 
of society which recognizes the Deity and to re- 
place it with an atheistic materialism? 

I am sure that, had he been asked, St. Ives 
would have expressed confidence that, during the 
700 years after his birth, the world would have 
been wise enough to have developed a universal 
respect for the rule of law. Perhaps he himself 
was too wise to have attempted to prophesy. 

What could be more repugnant to the rule of 
law than military suppression by a foreign power 
of the national aspiration of an entire people to 
enjoy national independence? Yet in this 20th 
century the Soviet Union, whose radio daily de- 
scribes it as a peace-loving government, sent its 



1 Remarks made before the Catholic Lawyers' Guild 
of the Archdiocese of Boston at Boston, Mass., on Oct. 1 
(press release S7T6). Mr. Murphy became on this occa- 
sion the first recipient of the St. Ives Award, which the 
Guild will present annually to a person of international 
preeminence in some branch of the law. 



armies across the Carpathian frontier in a brutal 
suppression of the aspirations of the Hungarian 
people to regain their independence, after many 
years of occupation by Soviet forces and an im- 
posed satellite government. Despite this classical 
act of aggression which belies any pretense of 
respect for the rule of law, the Soviet official posi- 
tion continues to give lip service to the rule of 
law by leveling synthetic charges of aggressive 
acts and intent against our Government. 

The Middle East Situation 

For our part we believe that the charter of the 
United Nations and the processes of that organ- 
ization are powerful instruments of world law. I 
know that you do not want to be burdened with 
a lengthy expose of the Middle East situation. It 
provides, however, an excellent example of the 
respect which this country has for the ride of law. 
As you know, during the critical situation which 
developed in the Middle East this summer, Presi- 
dent Eisenhower took the grave decision of send- 
ing American troops to that country, at the ex- 
press request of the duly constituted authorities 
of Lebanon, to assist Lebanon to maintain its in- 
dependence. This decision was taken in full con- 
formity with the United Nations Charter, which 
recognizes the inherent right of collective self- 
defense. It was a step taken in the certain con- 
viction that, if the West were to ignore the appeal 
of this peaceful Middle East state, in grave dan- 



Ocfober 27, 1958 



651 



ger of losing its independence, one small nation 
after another could be destroyed in a fashion 
which in the 1930's led inevitably to global con- 
flict. 

We were prompt to report our move to the Se- 
curity Council of the United Nations, making 
clear that the military measures would be termi- 
nated "as soon as the Security Council has taken 
the measures necessary to maintain international 
peace and security." The Security Council, ham- 
strung by Soviet veto (I believe its 85th veto in 
that organization), was unable to take further 
action. But we did not stop there, and in the 
special session of the General Assembly our Presi- 
dent presented his six-point plan for peace, 2 which 
would provide a setting for political order respon- 
sive to the will of the people of each nation, which 
would avoid the dangers of a regional arms race 
and would permit the peoples of the area to de- 
vote their energies to the tasks of development 
and human progress. As you know, much of the 
President's program was reflected in the resolu- 
tion sponsored by the Arab countries themselves 
and unanimously adopted by the General Assem- 
bly on August 21. 3 

Thus significant agreement was reached on 
three crucial points: (1) that states should respect 
the freedom, independence, and integrity of other 
states and avoid fomenting civil strife; (2) that 
the United Nations should buttress this pledge of 
noninterference in the Middle East; and (3) that 
United Nations measures to insure the territorial 
integrity and independence of these countries 
would facilitate the early withdrawal of foreign 
troops from the Lebanon and Jordan. Subse- 
quently the distinguished Secretary-General of 
the United Nations, Mr. Dag Hammarskjold, un- 
dertook a useful mission to the Middle East, and 
his initial report 4 has yesterday been submitted 
to the United Nations General Assembly. In the 
light of all these developments it has been possi- 
ble to begin the withdrawal of U.S. forces from 
Lebanon. 5 Thus it is clear that American respect 
for the rule of law as represented in the legal 
processes of the United Nations and our coopera- 
tion with that organization, in the interests of 
world peace and the rights of small nations, has 



provided a classic demonstration which, I be- 
lieve, were he here today, would be pleasing to 
your patron saint. The contrast with the be- 
havior of the Soviet Union has never been made 
clearer. 



Situation in the Far East 

I would ask your indulgence to add a brief 
comment regarding a situation in another world 
area which is not without current interest. I 
refer to the Far East. 

Our Secretary of State in his able address in 
September 1957 to the United Nations General 
Assembly 6 said: 

If there is any one thing that history demonstrates 
is that it is impossible to preserve peace indefinitely un 
less that peace is based upon justice and upon law. 



411. 



2 Bulletin of Sept. 1, 1958, p. 337. 

3 For text, see iUd., Sept. 15, 1958, p. 
'U.N. doc. A/3934/Rev. 1. 

* For text of a Department statement, see p. 650. 

652 



» 



Now what can we say of the progress of the 
rule of law in the light of the Chinese Communist 
attack? Certainly it is clear that the brutal as- 
sault by the military forces of the Soviet Union 
upon the freedom-loving people of Hungary has 
now been followed by the equally outrageous re- 
sort to naked force of Communist China. After a 
period of relative and extended calm there began 
on August 23 a violent and intense artillery attack 
against the offshore islands of Formosa. A day 
and night bombardment by literally hundreds of 
heavy-caliber guns of Soviet origin has continued 
for over a month now, largely concentrated on 
Little and Big Quemoy Islands. Significantly this 
bombardment has been accompanied by a barrage 
of Peiping Kadio announcements that it is 
Peiping's purpose to force the capitulation of the 
Government of the Kepublic of China and to 
drive out the military forces of the United States 
from the entire Taiwan area. The announcements 
have been couched in the hostile terms of threats 
and have been repeated in the same tone by the 
Soviet Union. 

The offshore islands, the Quemoys and Matsu, 
have never been in the possession of the Commu- 
nist regime on the mainland. It might be well 
for us to recall that a last phase of the ground 
fighting between Communists and Nationalists in 
China was a Communist effort to take Quemoy 
in October of 1949. Communist troops were 
landed but were driven off by Nationalist forces 
in a bitter battle. Just as in the case of the Ko- 



" Bulletin of Oct. 7, 1957, p. 555. 

Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



mm armistice lines, the situation in the Formosa 
Strait reflects essentially the actual military posi- 
tion when the main fighting stopped. It is this 
situation the Chinese Communists are now at- 
tempting to alter by force. 

Obviously when a government has certain ter- 
ritories under its authority it does not easily 
abandon them. The fact that the islands are 
close to the mainland is hardly an excuse to seize 
them. When one regime attempts by force to 
take additional territory which has long been un- 
der the authority of another government, world 
order is endangered, especially when the two con- 
testing parties are allied, each, respectively, with 
one of two major powers. 

The Republic of China is determined to hold 
these territories, and that determination stems 
from many factors. 

The United States has a collective-defense 
treaty with the Republic of China. Pursuant to 
that treaty our country has given substantial mil- 
itary assistance to the Republic. But it is agreed 
between us that the use of force by either of the 
signatories "will be a matter of joint agreement, 
subject to action of an emergency character which 
is clearly an exercise of the inherent right of self- 
defense." 7 There has been no aggressive or of- 
fensive use of force by the United States or by 
the Republic of China against Communist China. 

We are convinced that it is in the interest 
neither of the United States, nor of its allies in 
Asia, nor of the free world to retreat in the face 
of a blatant display of force or of threats such 
as those recently expressed in the letter of Chair- 
man Khrushchev to President. Eisenhower. That 
letter was couched in terms so gross that it was 
unacceptable, and it had to be returned. 8 We be- 
lieve that to fall back under such circumstances 
would merely encourage the leadership of the 
Sino-Soviet bloc in the false belief that it is in 
a position to threaten anywhere and to force con- 
cessions under a threat of force. Thus a retreat 
would not mark the end. It would simply mean 
that the bloc would continue with greater arro- 



' Ibid., Jan. 24, 1955, p. 152. 

9 For background, see ibid., Oct. 6, 1958, p. 530. 



gance and perhaps with more miscalculation its 
utter disregard for international law and order, 
thus increasing the danger of general war. 

Therefore we find that it is in our own inter- 
ests to assist the Republic of China in the defense 
of its present position. Moreover, we believe — 
and I think you as distinguished jurists particu- 
larly will understand this — that there should be 
active public opinion in the world at large which 
would recognize the danger and assist in making 
it possible to achieve a cease-fire in the area. It 
is our purpose to create an atmosphere in which 
features that could reasonably be regarded as pro- 
vocative might be eliminated through peaceful 
negotiation. We are, of course, pledged to take 
no action which would prejudice the rights of our 
valiant ally, the Government of the Republic of 
China. 

The American Ambassador in Warsaw [Jacob 
I). Beam] is, as you know, engaged in negotia- 
tions with the Chinese Communist representative, 
Ambassador Wang Ping-nan. This is a practi- 
cal attempt, using customary diplomatic means, 
to arrive at a peaceful settlement. Our objec- 
tive, first, is to obtain a cease-fire in the area. 
There have been five meetings thus far, but we 
do not despair of the possibility that, even if no 
formalized agreement is achieved, there may be 
developed a situation of de facto tranquillity 
comparable to that which has existed for most of 
the time during the past 9 years. Should these 
discussions fail, there could be further recourse 
if necessary to the forum of the United Nations. 
In any event, it is the purpose of the United 
States to pursue every opportunity of achieving 
a peaceful solution of a situation which is both 
grave and dangerous. 



Letters of Credence 

Finland 

The newly appointed Ambassador of Finland, 
Richard Rafael Seppala, presented his credentials 
to President Eisenhower on October 8. For texts 
of the Ambassador's remarks and the President's 
reply, see Department of State press release 588. 



October 27, J 958 



653 



Components of Inter-American Understanding 



by Roy R. Rubottom, Jr. 

Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs 1 

The governments and peoples of Latin America 
and the United States have traditionally been the 
best of friends. This friendship is not only de- 
rived from our geographical relationship, the 
broad identity of our aims and interests, and our 
similar traditions but from understanding of each 
other's history, culture, political philosophies, 
aspirations, and problems. You may be certain 
that our policies are based on further strengthen- 
ing these ties. 

Kecently much public attention has been 
focused on United States policy toward Latin 
America. I trust that just as much soul search- 
ing has gone into the examination of the policies 
of Latin America toward the United States. 

Today's challenge in this friendly setting of 
America is principally that of understanding one 
another. In Latin America there are serious mis- 
understandings and misconceptions with respect 
to the United States and its attitudes toward 
Latin America. In the United States there is an 
equally serious lack of understanding with respect 
to Latin America. Both of these problems can 
best be treated with the helping remedy of truth. 
Let me review briefly what the United States 
has done to ascertain the facts about Latin 
America's situation during the past year and a 
half. Early in 1957 we realized all too well the 
extent of the adverse economic factors which were 
creating problems for our friends to the south. 
There began a series of factfinding visits to the 
area by high officials of this Government who 
wanted to learn about the problems at first hand. 
In August of 1957 the Buenos Aires Economic 



Conference gave Secretary of the Treasury Ander- 
son an opportunity to visit Argentina, with a brief 
stopover in Brazil. Mr. C. Douglas Dillon, Under 
Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, and Mr. 
Samuel C. Waugh, President of the Export- 
Import Bank, were also on the delegation to the 
conference and visited other countries en route. 2 

In May of this year Vice President Nixon made 
his eventful visit to eight South American coun- 
tries, including Argentina, where he represented 
President Eisenhower at the inauguration of 
President Frondizi. 3 This was followed by a trip 
in July to Central America and Panama by Dr. 
Milton S. Eisenhower, as personal representative 
of the President. 4 He was accompanied by Mr. 
Waugh, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury 
Tom Coughran, and Mr. Dempster Mcintosh, 
Director of the Development Loan Fund. 

Most recently Secretary Dulles visited Brazil, 
where bilateral and hemisphere matters of interest 
to the two countries were discussed with Presi- 
dent Kubitschek and other high Brazilian of- 
ficials. 5 I accompanied the Secretary and was 
also on the other trips mentioned above. 

While such visits as these do not in themselves 
provide the solutions to the problems between the 
United States and Latin America, they certainly 



1 Address made before the Pacific Coast Council on 
Latin American Studies at Santa Barbara, Calif., on Oct. 
10 (press release 595 dated Oct. 9). 



s For statements by President Eisenhower and Mr. Dil- 
lon and text of the Economic Declaration of Buenos Aires. 
see Bulletin of Sept. 30, 1957, p. 539. 

* For remarks made by President Eisenhower and Vice 
President Nixon on Mr. Nixon's return to Washington, see 
ibid., June 9, 1958, p. 950. 

1 For a statement made by Dr. Eisenhower on his return, 
see Hid., Aug. 25, 1958, p. 309. 

For texts of two joint communiques issued on Aug. 6 
at the close of Secretary Dulles' visit, together with re- 
marks and an address by Secretary Dulles, see ibid., p. 
301. 



654 



Department of State Bulletin 



indicate our deep interest, in the area and are 
mentioned here to provide the necessary back- 
ground against which to appraise the recent steps 
taken by the Governments of the United States 
and the other American Republics to meet with 
positive action the complex problems confronting 
them. 

The meeting in "Washington 2 weeks ago between 
the Foreign Ministers of the American Re- 
publics was but the most recent of a series of 
significant developments. 6 That meeting crystal- 
lized in dramatic fashion the desire for coopera- 
tion and mutual understanding and the determi- 
nation jointly to tackle the serious problems which 
are of concern to us all. It set into motion spe- 
cific consultative processes aimed at concrete prob- 
lems of economic development and trade. As the 
Foreign Ministers themselves announced at the 
end of their meeting, "a harmonious and care- 
fully planned joint effort . . . will contribute 
enormously to strengthening the solidarity of the 
hemisphere and to the well-being of all Ameri- 
cans." 

A few weeks before the Foreign Ministers meet- 
ing — on August 12 — Under Secretary Dillon an- 
nounced that the United States was prepared to 
consider the establishment of an inter-American 
regional development institution. 7 Studies look- 
ing forward to this additional resource for eco- 
nomic improvement in the hemisphere are now in 
process. Their completion was given a new note 
of urgency by the American Foreign Ministers. 

Since last June the United States has been par- 
ticipating in an international coffee study group 
established to examine coffee trade problems and 
recommend measures to be taken to meet them. 
The extension by the United States Congress this 
year of the reciprocal trade agreement authoriza- 
tion and the increase of $2 billion in the lending 
authority of the Export-Import Bank are addi- 
tional measures which will benefit Latin America 
economically. Congress also took notice of another 
important front and voted an increase of $2 mil- 
lion in the Latin American educational and cul- 
tural exchange program. 

The foregoing are illustrative of the positive 
steps which are being taken to fulfill our pledge 
that, as Latin America's problems increase, our 



6 For a Department announcement of the meeting and 
text of communique approved on Sept. 24, see ibid., Oct. 
13, 1958, p. 574. 

7 Ibid., Sept. 1, 1958, p. 347. 



desire to cooperate in finding solutions increases 
correspondingly. They presage new efforts to- 
ward understanding and toward progress on the 
part of all concerned and testify to the effective- 
ness of good will, fact finding, and international 
cooperation in coping with the demands of an 
ever-changing world. Now let us examine certain 
of Latin America's aspirations and the extent to 
which we have been able to identify ourselves 
with them. 

Economic Development 

Nowhere in the world is there a greater demand 
for economic development than from the people 
of Latin America. Their population is increasing 
explosively, approximately 2.7 percent per year, 
the fastest in the world. Housing and educational 
facilities are inadequate. The countries want to 
industrialize just as fast as possible. Everywhere 
I traveled over the past 5 months — and I covered 
more than 50 thousand miles in visiting nearly 
every country in Latin America — I heard similar 
expressions : "We must have loans for housing — 
for irrigation facilities — for new factories — for 
modern equipment — for highways and railroads, 
indeed for airplanes too — for schools." The list 
is long. 

The United States is trying to help Latin 
America to meet some of these goals. Loans to 
Latin American countries by the United States 
Export-Import Bank totaled $2.2 billion during 
the 10-year period from 1948 to 1958. This repre- 
sented more than 40 percent of the total of all 
loans made by the bank during that time. The 
United States stands ready to make additional 
loans for sound projects. Yet it becomes obvious 
that, no matter what our desires to be helpful, we 
can only meet a small part of the tremendous 
capital needs for development out of public funds. 
It is for that reason that we are convinced that 
the main reliance for the rapid economic develop- 
ment of Latin America must necessarily be placed 
on private enterprise — not just from the United 
States and other foreign sources but also from 
domestic private sources. Fortunately, in our 
opinion, these private resources are not only avail- 
able to fill a need which public resources simply 
are unable to fill, but they also have proven them- 
selves to be efficient and effective down through 
the years. 

In the past 12 years the book value of direct 
private United States investment in Latin 



Ocfober 27, 1958 

4S4S39— 58 3 



655 



America has grown from $3 billion to almost $9 
billion, this accounting for more than one-third of 
our total private investment abroad. The rate of 
flow has been about $600 million annually, al- 
though the 1957 total reached $1.3 billion. This 
flow can be speeded up, provided conditions are 
established which attract private capital. 

Obviously, capital is most attracted to those 
places where budgets are balanced, currencies are 
properly valued, credit is held to manageable 
proportions, and production is encouraged — in 
short, where inflation has been held in check. 

But the contribution of private capital cannot 
be measured in money resources alone. Along 
with it come the results of research, technology, 
know-how, new skills, and new products, as well 
as expanded opportunity for the individual and 
a higher standard of living for all. 

As Secretary Dulles stated in his address to 
the United Nations General Assembly on Sep- 
tember 18 : 8 

The United States will undertake increased efforts to 
emphasize the constructive role that private initiative can 
play in economic development. We hope that other na- 
tions will also explore these important potentialities. 

In this connection I would like to emphasize 
that the United States recognizes each country's 
right to develop its resources as it sees fit. By the 
same token, and recognizing the limitations on 
public funds available for lending, we do not 
wish to be misunderstood when we state that, 
based on our own experience, these limited public 
funds can only supplement and strengthen the ef- 
forts of private enterprise and are not available as 
a substitute for, or to compete with, private enter- 
prise. 

The record does show, however, that the United 
States has loaned funds to state-owned enter- 
prises where private capital was not available. 
Without taking the time to mention all such in- 
stances, we have authorized credits in Brazil, 
Bolivia, Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, and 
Mexico for the purpose of helping to develop 
public-owned steel plants, hydroelectric power 
installations, transportation systems, port im- 
provements, and other projects. 

Basic Commodities 

There is need for sober discussion on the im- 
portant subject of basic commodities. Certainly 



'ma., Oct. 6, 1958, p. 525. 
656 



one of the major objectives of Latin Americans 
is to receive stable and remunerative prices for 
their primary commodities. We share this as- 
piration, and indeed it is in our interest to have 
them achieve it. It is generally agreed that 
prices of primary commodities are subject to wider 
fluctuations than are those of manufactured goods 
and that in times of recession these prices tend 
to drop sooner and farther than prices of manu- 
factured products. To those countries whose 
economies rest on one or a very few export prod- 
ucts this fact illustrates all too clearly their 
vulnerability. 

I wish to emphasize that it would be a basic 
error to assume that the United States is indiffer- 
ent to or complacent about this general problem. 
Quite the contrary. We recognize the serious 
difficulties confronting many of the Latin Ameri- 
can countries by reason of wide fluctuation in 
prices of basic commodities. We recognize that 
it is a problem vital to Latin America. We recog- 
nize, moreover, that it is a mutual problem, that 
violent fluctuations in prices help nobody but 
speculators, and that depressed prices of raw 
materials result immediately in lowered capacity 
of Latin America to import from the United 
States. We are, in short, deeply concerned with 
this whole matter. 

The United States has no ready or simple an- 
swer to the complex problem of terms of trade 
and primary commodity prices. Solutions pro- 
posed in the past have usually tended to center 
almost entirely upon the commodity agreement as 
the instrument to stabilize commodity prices and 
the relationship with manufactured products. 
Recently there has been a growing understanding 
of the technical complexity of commodity prob- 
lems and an interest in a more careful analysis of 
these problems aimed at finding areas of agree- 
ment and of feasible cooperative effort. The 
United States is prepared to sit down and discuss 
these problems. We are prepared to examine 
pragmatically and on a case-by-case basis the ques- 
tion of what measures might offer a solution to 
commodity problems. This, as you know, is what 
we are doing in the case of coffee. AVe likewise 
participate in the Committee of Basic Products 
established in the Inter- American Economic and 
Social Council in compliance with a recommenda- 
tion of the Buenos Aires conference. The com- 
munique of the American Foreign Ministers re- 

Department of State Bulletin 



leased at the close of the informal meeting in 
Washington last month expressed the concern of 
the Ministers over this very problem. It urged 
consultations between interested members of the 
Organization of American States, on a bilateral 
and multilateral basis as well as with producer and 
consumer countries of other geographic areas. 

Whatever solutions may appear to be indicated, 
I think it must be realized that there will be 
definite limits to what the United States itself 
can do. Aid in these problems, whether it be 
monetary-stabilization loans or economic coopera- 
tion in some other form, cannot do more than 
provide time for sound policies by the affected 
countries themselves to become effective. Aid will 
be useless if it supports policies which run counter 
to the fundamental forces of the market. 

Regional Markets 

The United States has followed with keen in- 
terest Latin American proposals for attaining 
closer economic integration as a means to promote 
economic development. It is fully aware of the 
studies made and those in process in the Economic- 
Commission for Latin America. Only a few 
months ago the Central American countries 
signed a multilateral trade treaty and an agree- 
ment on industrial integration, both of which 
are now pending ratification. 

This country has looked with favor upon the 
European undertaking toward economic integra- 
tion through a customs union or a free-trade area 
designed to eliminate duties and other trade re- 
strictions on substantially all intraregional trade 
and, at the same time, to maintain duties on trade 
with countries outside the area at approximately 
current levels. It is also recognized that, in spe- 
cific cases, exceptions in the application of these 
criteria may be necessary. Each such exception 
must be judged on its individual merit, and agree- 
ment therewith must depend largely on assessment 
of the extent to which it. would contribute to the 
establishment of a true common market, to the 
promotion of competition, and to the bringing 
about of increased trade with nonmember coun- 
tries as well as within the area. 

Economic circumstances in Latin America are, 
of course, quite different from those in Western 
Europe, but the United States believes that the 
possible advantages of closer Latin American eco- 
nomic integration justify the careful consideration 



now being given to this problem. It further be- 
lieves that the integration sought would best be 
advanced by regional agreements based on the 
criteria above outlined, and it continues to stand 
ready to assist, as appropriate, in financing eco- 
nomically sound industries established under 
agreements conforming to these criteria. Avail- 
ability of such financing would likewise, the U.S. 
believes, encourage private capital investment in 
those industries. 

Dedication to Democracy 

In thinking about how best to convey the spirit 
of devotion with which the United States holds to 
democratic principles, I decided to use the words 
of President Eisenhower addressed to the new 
Ambassador of Venezuela [Marcos Falcon- 
Briceno] last August : 

The United States believes firmly in the democratic 
elective process and the choice by the people, through 
free and fair elections, of democratic governments re- 
sponsive to them. Authoritarianism and autocracy, of 
whatever form, are incompatible with the ideals of our 
great leaders of the past. Free institutions, respect for 
individual rights, and the inherent dignity of man are 
the heritage of our Western civilization. 

The price of this devotion has been the lives of 
hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens, given not 
that we alone could be free but that others too 
could have the kind of life they want. 

There are some important corollaries to this 
statement by the President. One is that states, 
irrespective of size or place, are juridically equal. 
Another is that states do not intervene in the 
affairs of others, perhaps the most widely cher- 
ished of all American credos. Still another, ap- 
proved in 1948 at the Bogota conference, stated 
that continuity of diplomatic relations among the 
American states was desirable and declared that 
the maintenance of such relations does not involve 
any judgment of the internal policies of another 
government. These principles, I would like to 
reiterate, were not merely pious hopes. They 
were formally voted on and agreed to by all the 
American Republics, the United States included, 
and form a large part, of the foundation on which 
inter-American solidarity and cooperation rest. 

Xow the mere restatement of such principles as 
these does not automatically result in democracy. 
In the first place democracy can only be achieved 
from within a country when a people want it — 



October 27, 1958 



657 



certainly nobody can impose it against a people's 
will. Then I think we should recognize that de- 
mocracy may assume different forms in different 
countries. No two methods of government, any 
more than two individuals, can be exactly alike. 
Thus we should not be surprised when the emerg- 
ing patterns of government, indeed democratic 
government, differ from country to country. 

Finally, on this subject, democracy is not 
achieved all at once. It is a continuing process 
of growth and development. Its attainment is the 
result of the unselfish efforts of countless indi- 
viduals who together mold a country along the 
lines they want. We can be encouraged by the 
progress made in the past few years. Democratic 
institutions throughout the Americas have been 
notably strengthened. 

Mutuality of Understanding 

The theme of mutuality has been woven 
throughout my remarks tonight. Certainly the 
problems we face in the Americas are mutual, 
but. there is also a need for us to understand each 
other better. We err just as much when we mis- 
understand as we do when we lack the knowledge 
on which understanding is based. 

No matter how much the United States wants 
to assist Latin America, there are limits on its 
field of action and its power of decision. Many 
factors are joined in the determination of what 
the United States can and cannot do in any given 
instance. Our friends must not forget that we 
are a democracy. Such factors as public opinion, 
congressional attitudes, and legislation itself must 
be weighed in the scales. We are quite human 
and finite and have the same kind of internal prob- 
lems as do other countries themselves. 

When considering problems related to eco- 
nomic development, especially the provision of 
needed capital, no outside assistance, whether 
from public or private sources, will be truly ef- 
fective in achieving strong, self-reliant economies 
in the absence of rational, sound economic policies 
to go with it. In fact, primary responsibility for 
remedial action to solve economic problems rests 
with the affected countries themselves, and the 
most the United States can do is to assist in pro- 
viding some of the missing ingredients. 

It should not be overlooked that the U.S. is also 
a "deA r eloping'' country. Our citizens work and 

658 



live in a dynamic, not a static, society. Our needs 
are never fully met. To provide for this nation 
in motion is a costly undertaking, especially when 
more than half our budget is for national and 
free- world defense; yet our people have not 
flinched when called upon for individual and na- 
tional cooperation. I think President Eisenhower 
voiced a national realization when he told the 
American Foreign Ministers only 16 days ago that 
peace, prosperity, and security are in the long 
run indivisible. 

Fortunately the awareness that these problems 
are indeed mutual and that each country must 
work energetically and harmoniously to resolve 
them is more widespread than ever before. This 
sense of joint effort is in fact now a dynamic prin- 
ciple in the American family. Let me refer once 
again to the remarkable meeting of the Foreign 
Ministers which took place last month as a graphic 
and dramatic example of this. The American 
Republics have fortunately developed over the 
years a unity of purpose, spirit, and accomplish- 
ment truly unique in the world. Our present sense 
of solidarity, of the necessity for truly construc- 
tive cooperation, and the awareness of the world 
context in which events are transpiring make it 
possible to foresee very effective joint action rooted 
in mutual respect and clear understanding of each 
other's problems, difficulties, and limitations. We 
acknowledge human frailty and the finiteness of 
all human endeavor, but we have faith in the 
common ideals that unite us. If we can continue 
to work together with courage, imagination, 
mutual respect, and understanding, then I sug- 
gest that it would not be too naive to expect the 
American family to demonstrate to the world an 
effective means of meeting the age-old challenges 
of poverty, disease, security, and peace with jus- 
tice, without at the same time sacrificing our 
cherished ideals of freedom and the dignity of 
the individual. 



General Pulaski's Memorial Day, 1958 

A PROCLAMATION 1 

Whereas during the war for American independence 
brave men from across the seas left their homelands to 
fight by our side for the cause of liberty ; and 

Whereas one of the most valiant of these warriors was 
Casimir Pulaski, a Polish count who, after distinguishing 



1 No. 3260 ; 23 Fed. Reg. 7833. 

Department of Sfafo Bulletin 



himself in several encounters, died at the age of thirty-one 
from a wound received while leading a cavalry attack 
to relieve the city of Savannah ; and 

Wiiereas October 11, 195S, is the one hundred and 
seventy-ninth anniversary of the death of this youthful 
foe of tyranny, whose ideals and selfless purpose set a 
glorious example to all men who are willing to give their 
strength for freedom ; and 

Whereas it is fitting that we should mark this anni- 
versary with ceremonies designed to honor this gallant 
Pole, who attained the rank of Brigadier General in our 
Continental Army : 

Now, therefore, I, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, 
President of the United States of America, do hereby 
designate Saturday, October 11, 195S, as General Pulaski's 
Memorial Day; and I direct that the flag of the United 
States be displayed on all Government buildings on that 
day. I also invite our people to observe the day with 
suitable manifestations of respect for the memory of 
General Castmir Pulaski and for the cause which com- 
manded his allegiance. 

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 seventh day of 

October in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred 

[seal] and fifty-eight, and of the Independence of the 

United States of America the one hundred and 

eighty-third. 



X_J (^LS-yL^tZ-JO-*^* A*K^^ 



By the President : 
John Foster Dulles, 
Secretary of State. 



U.S. Sells Antipolio Vaccine 
to Poland 

Press release 601 dated October 10 

A cargo of Salk antipolio vaccine, purchased 
by the Polish Government, is scheduled to leave 
Indianapolis on October 12 by a U.S. commercial 
airplane bound for Warsaw. This shipment will 
provide the first round of antipolio inoculations 
for 3 million Polish children of preschool age in 
selected areas of Poland where poliomyelitis has 
been prevalent in recent years. A further ship- 
ment to provide a second round of shots for these 
children will be made from the United States 
later in the year. 

An earlier program to inoculate children with 
Salk vaccine began in the flooded areas in Poland 
last July when the American Junior Red Cross 
airshipped to the Polish Red Cross nearly 11,000 
doses of antipolio vaccine. This was followed by 



a program to inoculate the most vulnerable groups 
in the Polish population, undertaken by the 
Polish Medical Aid Project in cooperation with 
CARE, through contributions of vaccine from 
pharmaceutical companies in the United States. 
Enough Salk vaccine was contributed to provide 
for 900,000 inoculations. The Polish Medical Aid 
Project enabled the Polish health authorities to 
institute at an early date an expanded program to 
combat the incidence of infantile paralysis in 
Poland. 

The U.S. and Polish Governments have agreed 
to allocate $1,200,000 for the purchase of Salk 
vaccine from funds available under the credits for 
Poland administered by the Export-Import Bank. 
The shipment which left Indianapolis on October 
12 was purchased from these funds. Agencies of 
the U.S. and Polish Governments have cooperated 
in arranging to expedite the shipment of Salk 
vaccine so that the first round of inoculations can 
be completed by the end of October 1958. 

This vaccine was licensed for shipment by the 
Department of Commerce under the Export Con- 
trol Act. 



U.S. Seeks Further Information 
From U.S.S.R. on Crashed Plane 

Press release 587 dated October 7 

Department Announcement 

On October 3, 1958, the American Ambassador 
to the U.S.S.R., Llewellyn E. Thompson, delivered 
to Acting Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Vasili Kuznetsov a note requesting further in- 
formation on the USAF C-130 transport plane 
which crashed on September 2, 1958, in Soviet 
Armenia. 1 Mr. Kuznetsov said that he would 
convey the contents of the note to the appropriate 
Soviet authorities. 

Text of U.S. Note 

October 3, 1958 
The Embassy of the United States of America 
refers to the following notes which have been ex- 
changed in connection with the crash of a United 



1 For background and texts of U.S. notes, see Bulletin 
of Sept. 29, 1958, p. 505 ; Oct. 6, 1958, p. 531 ; and Oct. 20, 
1958, p. 618. 



October 27, 1958 



659 



States C-130 transport aircraft on September 2, 
1958 : the Ministry's notes Nos. 52/OSA, Septem- 
ber 12, 1958, and 57/OSA, September 19, 1958; 
and the Embassy's notes Nos. 252, September 6, 
1958, 270, September 13, 1958, and 291, September 
21, 1958. 

On September 24, a representative of the United 
States Government received at the Soviet- Turkish 
frontier near Leninakan the remains of six air- 
men, transferred in accordance with the under- 
taking of the Soviet Government in the Ministry's 
note of September 19, 1958. 

Although the Soviet Government has not given 
identification of the crashed and burned aircraft 
found 55 kilometers northwest of Yerevan, the 
United States Government considers that the 
wreckage mentioned in the Ministry's note of 
September 12 is that of the missing C-130 trans- 
port plane. Investigations undertaken by the 
Headquarters of the United States Air Forces in 
Europe (USAFE) and by the appropriate Turk- 
ish authorities establish that the C-130 aircraft 
was intercepted at about 2 P. M. on September 2 
by Soviet fighter aircraft in the area of the Turk- 
ish-Soviet frontier west of the Aragats Mountain 
(Gora Aragats). The investigations also disclose 
that this C-130 aircraft was last seen flying on an 
easterly course in the direction of the mountain 
and that the Soviet aircraft were then in close 
proximity to it. A few minutes after the aircraft 
disappeared, an explosion occurred and a large 
column of smoke was seen rising from behind hills 
in Soviet territory in the direction of Aragats 
Mountain. In view of the proximity of the Soviet 
fighter planes to the C-130 aircraft, it must be as- 
sumed that the pilots of the Soviet aircraft in- 
volved in this interception had knowledge of the 
circumstances surrounding the crash of this un- 
armed American aircraft. 

The Government of the United States, there- 
fore, is still unable to understand the assertions by 
the Soviet Government that it has no knowledge 
of the circumstances surrounding the crash of 
the American aircraft. Nor does the United 
States Government understand why the Soviet 
Government appears unable to furnish any in- 
formation regarding the whereabouts and condi- 
tion of 11 members of the crew of this aircraft who 
are unaccounted for and still missing. The 
United States Government is prepared to extend 
whatever assistance the Soviet Government might 



consider helpful in the search for these missing 
airmen. 

As stated in the Embassy's note of September 
13, the United States Government categorically 
rejects the Ministry's charge that this American 
aircraft intentionally violated Soviet airspace. 
This aircraft, based in Germany, was engaged in 
a routine flight over eastern Turkey and had filed 
in advance a standard instrument flight plan in 
accordance with international regulations. The 
commanding officer of the aircraft was under 
strict, standing orders not to violate Soviet air- 
space and the Government of the United States is 
convinced that he did not knowingly commit such 
a violation. 

Under these circumstances, the Government of 
the United States repeats its request that complete 
information be furnished regarding the where- 
abouts and condition of the eleven members of the 
crew of the aircraft who are still missing; that a 
comprehensive report describing all pertinent facts 
surrounding the crash of this American aircraft 
be furnished the Embassy by the Soviet Govern- 
ment ; and that United States Air Force technical 
experts be permitted to examine the plane wreck- 
age at the crash site. The United States Govern- 
ment reserves the right to full compensation for 
the loss of life incurred and for the loss of this air- 
craft and its equipment. 



U.S. Replies to Czechoslovak 
Protest on Border Violations 

Following is a Department announcement and 
the text of a U.S. note to the Czechoslovak Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs (press release 578 dated October 
#), together with the text of the Czechoslovak 
note to the U.S. Embassy at Prague. 

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

In a note delivered on September 25, 1958, to 
the Czechoslovak Ministry of Foreign Affairs by 
the American Embassy at Prague, the U.S. Gov- 
ernment documents the innocent nature of recent 
violations of the Czechoslovak frontier by Ameri- 
can citizens and expresses the hope that the 
Czechoslovak Government would "take steps to 
permit the immediate departure from Czecho- 



660 



Department of State Bulletin 



Slovakia" of Pfc. Andrew A. Bellrichard of Ne- 
koosa, Wis., Pvt. Cole Youngert of Detroit, Mich., 
and Specialist Fourth Class John Kennedy of 
Philadelphia, Pa. The U.S. note, which replies 
to a Czechoslovak note of September 16, 1958, also 
refers to the 2-week detention of M. Sgt. James 
E. Cole of Connellsville, Pa., who has indicated 
that he was forced into Czechoslovakia at gun- 
point by Czechoslovak border guards, and to the 
detention of John B. Hardcastle of Nashville, 
Tenn., an American student. The U.S. note con- 
cludes that the American Embassy expects that, 
in all cases in which U.S. citizens are apprehended 
within the borders of Czechoslovakia, U.S. repre- 
sentatives will be granted immediate access to the 
individuals detained, in accordance with interna- 
tional comity and practice, and permitted to be 
present at any trial which may be held. 

U.S. NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 25 

The Embassy of the United States presents its 
compliments to the Czechoslovak Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs and has the honor to refer to the 
Ministry's protest of September 16, 1958 which 
refers to the unauthorized crossings of the Czecho- 
slovak border by citizens of the United States. 
The Embassy acting under instructions would like 
to review briefly the facts of the incidents which 
are the subject of these protests. 

Master Sergeant James E. Cole 

Sergeant Cole disappeared on the morning of 
June 10, 1958 while fishing with a relative on the 
Dyje River near Hardegg on the Austro-Czecho- 
slovak border. At the time of his disappearance, 
he was on authorized military leave from his unit 
in Germany and was visiting his wife's family in 
Austria. The Czechoslovak Border Guards as- 
sert that Sergeant Cole stepped onto an island in 
the river and, by so doing, violated Czechoslovak 
territory. Sergeant Cole has stated under oath 
that he did not leave the Austrian side of the 
river until forced to do so at gun point by Czecho- 
slovak Border Guards. Sergeant Cole's state- 
ments have been carefully investigated and have 
been corroborated by all available evidence. 
Even if the Czechoslovak Border Guard version 
were correct, it is difficult for the United States 
to understand how a transgression under such 
circumstances could be branded as a "criminal 



offense" and justify the three months' sentence im- 
posed by the People's Court of Justice at Brno. 
Sergeant Cole was incarcerated from June 10 to 
June 24. Although he repeatedly requested ac- 
cess to American officials, he was held incommuni- 
cado throughout his entire period of detention. 
The Government of the United States was how- 
ever gratified that Sergeant Cole was not required 
to complete the term of the sentence but was en- 
abled to depart from Czechoslovakia on June 24, 
1958. 

John B. Hardcastle 

American student John B. Hardcastle and two 
youthful companions visited the Austro- Czecho- 
slovak border early in the afternoon of August 9, 
1958. Mr. Hardcastle expressed the desire to be 
photographed while standing on the barrier across 
the road leading into Czechoslovakia. While 
doing so, he was arrested by two Czechoslovak 
Border Guards armed with machine guns. Three 
days of interrogation apparently convinced the 
Czechoslovak authorities that Mr. Hardcastle was 
not motivated by any evil intent and he was al- 
lowed to return to Austrian territory on August 
12, 1958. Once again, United States authorities 
were not permitted access to an American citizen 
jailed in Czechoslovakia, and the Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs as late as August 12 maintained that 
it had no knowledge of the incident. 

Andrew A. Bellrichard 

Private First Class Bellrichard disappeared 
from his post on the German side of the German- 
Czechoslovak border about noon on July 7, 1958 
after having been found asleep on duty some hours 
previously by a fellow soldier. Fearing that he 
would be punished for his negligence, Private 
Bellrichard, while apparently emotionally dis- 
turbed as a result of this incident, crossed into 
Czechoslovak territory, attracting attention to 
himself by firing three random bursts from the 
automatic weapon he was carrying. On August 
15, 1958 he was sentenced by the District Court at 
Pilsen to two years' imprisonment for illegal 
border crossing. This severe sentence was upheld 
by the Czechoslovak Supreme Court, and Private 
Bellrichard has begun serving his term. Pro- 
longed interrogation of this soldier by the Czecho- 
slovak authorities must have established the facts 
as they are stated above. Accordingly while the 
Czechoslovak border may have been violated in a 



Ocfober 27, 1958 



661 



technical sense, once again it appears perfectly 
clear that this was not covert entry for inimical 
purposes which could justify the punishment im- 
posed. 

Private Cole Youngert and Specialist John P. 

Kennedy 

Although these two American soldiers have been 
in Czechoslovak custody since August 24, 1958 
access to them has not been permitted, and there- 
fore it has not been possible to determine the cir- 
cumstances of their entry into Czechoslovakia. 
It has been ascertained however that these 
soldiers became intoxicated on the evening of Au- 
gust 23 in Weiden, Germany and that they took 
a taxicab from Weiden to the German Custom 
House at Waidhaus near the Czechoslovak border. 
The taxi driver has reported seeing these men dis- 
appear in the direction of Czechoslovakia, but no 
additional information is available to United 
States authorities. 

In spite of the best intentions and careful con- 
trols, border violations are bound to occur. Al- 
though the Government of the United States has 
made every effort to prevent violations of Czech- 
oslovak territory by American citizens and will 
continue to do so, it is only realistic to recognize 
that incidents such as those outlined above will 
happen and should not be regarded as an affront 
to the sovereignty of the country whose border 
may have been violated in a technical sense. The 
United States believes the Czechoslovak authori- 
ties should bear in mind that the innocent nature 
of the action in each individual case is proved by 
the openness of each incident and the absence of 
any evidence whatsoever that the individuals con- 
cerned acted with any intent to damage Czech- 
oslovak interests. 

Incidents of this type may be handled in a 
friendly and cooperative manner as is the usual 
international practice or they may be magnified 
into a major issue. The extreme sensitivity dis- 
played by the Czechoslovak authorities in rela- 
tion to these cases is regrettable. It is hoped that 
after reconsideration the Government of Czech- 
oslovakia will take steps to permit the immediate 
departure from Czechoslovakia of the three sol- 
diers still in custody. It is also hoped that the 
Czechoslovak authorities will demonstrate a more 
cooperative attitude in future so that technical 
border violations of an obviously innocent char- 
acter will not be made to interfere with the de- 



velopment of better relations between Czecho- 
slovakia and the United States. The Embassy 
expects that in all cases when United States citi- 
zens are apprehended within the borders of Czech- 
oslovakia, United States representatives will, in 
accordance with accepted international comity 
and practice, be promptly notified, granted im- 
mediate access to the individuals detained, and 
permitted to be present at any trial which may 
be held. 

The Embassy of the United States of America 
avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs the assurances of its 
high consideration. 



CZECHOSLOVAK NOTE OF SEPTEMBER 16 

Unofficial translation 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs presents its compli- 
ments to the Embassy of the United States of America 
and with reference to the Embassy's notes No. 37 of 
August 29, 1958 l and No. 42 of September 4, 1958, 1 has the 
honor to advise that the number of unauthorized crossings 
of the Czechoslovak border by United States citizens is 
increasing constantly in spite of the repeated assurances 
by the Embassy of the United States of America that 
all necessary measures would be taken to prevent this 
from happening. 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs lodges the strongest 
protest against these lately ever more numerous cross- 
ings, among which belongs also the case of Andrew A. 
Bellrichard, and expects that the American authorities 
will immediately take measures to prevent the repetition 
of similar incidents in the future. 

As the Embassy was already advised by the note of 
August 19, 1958, Private First Class Andrew A. Bell- 
richard crossed the Czechoslovak border without per- 
mission, with a firearm in his bands. For this unauthor- 
ized crossing of the border, he was sentenced by the 
District Court at Plzen to 2 years of deprivation of 
liberty and an accessory punishment of expulsion from 
the territory of Czechoslovakia. In view of an appeal 
lodged by Andrew A. Bellrichard, his case was brought 
before the Supreme Court in Praha, which upheld and 
confirmed the sentence passed by the District Court, 
so far as the punishment of deprivation of liberty and 
the accessory penalty of expulsion are concerned. 

As to the protest of the Embassy of the United States 
of America that a representative of the Embassy was 
barred from the appeals trial as an observer, the Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs advises that the Czechoslovak authori- 
ties permitted the Embassy of the United States of 
America to pay a consular visit to Andrew A. Bellrichard, 
prior to the date on which the sentence acquires legal 
power. The public was not permitted to be present at 
the appeals trial on the basis of Section 215 Paragraph 



1 Not printed here. 



662 



Department of State Bulletin 



1 of the Czechoslovak Penal Code for reasons of endanger- 
ing State secrets/Reconstruction of the offense, proved 
by photographs/ ; thus it was impossible for a representa- 
tive of the Embassy to attend the appeals trial. The 
Ministry would like further to advise that, according to 
a communication of the competent Czechoslovak authori- 
ties, the sentenced Bellrichard has already started to 
serve his sentence of deprivation of liberty. 

Another proof of the fact that no improvement has 
been effected by the American authorities in the case of 
frontier Incidents, is a fresh case of an unauthorized 
crossing of the Czechoslovak border by Private Cole 
Toungert and Specialist John Kennedy, mentioned in the 
Embassy's note No. 42 of September 4, 1958, who, accord- 
ing to a communication from the competent Czechoslovak 
authorities, are within the territory of Czechoslovakia. 
As soon as the Ministry is in possession of further informa- 
tion relating to the investigation carried out in this 
respect, it will not fail to inform the Embassy thereof. 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs avails itself of this 
opportunity to renew to the Embassy of the United States 
of America the assurances of its high consideration. 

Praha, September 16, 195S. 



World Bank Makes Loan in Brazil 
for Hydroelectric Project 

The World Bank announced on October 3 that 
it had made a loan equivalent to $73 million in 
Brazil for the first stage of the largest hydroelec- 
tric project ever undertaken in Latin America. 
The completed project will bring an increase 
equal to 50 percent of the power capacity now 
available in central-southern Brazil, the area in 
which four-fifths of Brazil's industry and much 
of the agricultural activity is concentrated. The 
loan is, with the exception of that made 2 years 
ago for the Kariba Dam in Rhodesia, the largest 
the bank has ever made for a single project. 

This project is the first in which private compa- 
nies have joined official Brazilian agencies to 
carry out a large power development. Hitherto, 
additions to generating capacity in Brazil have 
been undertaken by private power companies to 
meet their own requirements or by public bodies 
set up to exploit particular reaches of the main 
rivers. In this case the borrower is Central Ele- 
trica de Furnas, S.A., a joint enterprise formed 
1% years ago to construct, own, and operate the 
new plant. The common stock of the company, 
representing 50 percent of the equity capital, is 
held by the Brazilian Government, by the State 
of Sao Paulo, and by CEMIG (a corporation 
owned by the State of Minas Gerais) ; all three 



of these stockholders have already received bank 
loans for power enterprises. The greater part 
of the preferred stock is held by private compa- 
nies — 51 percent by Sao Paulo Light Co., an 
affiliate of the Brazilian Traction, Light and 
Power Co. of Canada (already a bank borrower), 
and 9 percent by Companhia Paulista de Forca e 
Luz, an affiliate of the American and Foreign 
Power Co. 

The power station, to be built at Furnas Rapids 
on the Rio Grande 200 miles north of Siio Paulo, 
will ultimately have a capacity of 1,100,000 kilo- 
watts, of which about 460,000 kilowatts will be 
installed as the first stage. The earth- and rock- 
fill dam will be nearly 400 feet high and will 
create a reservoir 150 miles long, having sufficient 
storage capacity to provide year-to-year regula- 
tion of the flow to the power station. Three 
other hydroelectric stations, one of them bank- 
financed, are already in operation or under con- 
struction on the Rio Grande. But the potential 
of this river is so immense that, even after the 
completion of Furnas, only about one-fifth of 
the total will have been realized. 

All the power generated at Furnas will be sold 
in bulk to private and public suppliers in the 
States of Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo. The de- 
mand for power in the various parts of the area 
to be served by the new power station is growing 
at between 9 and 14 percent annually. By 1970 
it is expected to have increased more than three- 
fold. 

The main industrial concentration in the area 
to be served is around the city of Sao Paulo. In- 
dustry is also rapidly expanding northward. The 
manufacture of motorcars, trucks, and tractors, 
chemical and metallurgical production, oil refin- 
ing, and many other industries are already estab- 
lished, and as new products are introduced the 
need for power will continue to rise. Belo Hori- 
zonte, capital of the State of Minas Gerais, is the 
center of Brazil's iron, manganese, bauxite, and 
other mineral production and has a large steel 
mill. Nearly 60 percent of power sales in the 
area is already accounted for by industrial and 
commercial users. 

Construction of access roads and service build- 
ings at Furnas is well under way. The civil-works 
contract has been allotted, after international 
bidding, to a British firm in association with a 
Brazilian contractor. A U.S. firm has been ap- 



Oc/ober 27, J 958 



663 



pointed as consultant. Contracts for electrical 
equipment are to be placed within the next 6 
months, and the project is expected to be com- 
pleted by the middle of 1963. Since the capacity 
included in the first stage is likely to be needed 
at once, it is planned that work on the second 
stage will follow quickly and be completed by 
1965. 

The cost of the first stage is estimated at the 
equivalent of approximately $210 million. The 
bank's loan will cover the foreign-exchange ex- 
penditure included in this total. The balance will 
be met by share capital supplemented by loans 
from the National Development Bank of Brazil 
and the Federal Electrification Fund. 

The loan is for a term of 25 years, with repay- 
ment starting on April 1, 1964. The rate of in- 
terest, including the 1 percent commission charged 
on bank loans and added to its special reserve, is 
5% percent. The loan is guaranteed by the Gov- 
ernment of Brazil. 



Exemption of Functions 
Under Mutual Security Act 

White House press release dated October 1 
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT 

The President on October 1 issued an Execu- 
tive order specifying laws from which functions 
authorized by the Mutual Security Act of 1954, 
as amended, shall be exempt.- 

Under section 533 of the Mutual Security Act 
of 1954, as amended, the President is authorized 
to waive various restrictive provisions of law as 
they relate to the mutual security program. The 
waivers are made in furtherance of purposes de- 
clared in the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as 
amended. The laws which may be waived are 
those regulating the making, performance, amend- 
ment, or modification of contracts and the ex- 
penditure of Government funds. 

The order of October 1, which continues in 
force a number of prior waivers, extends them 
in two respects: 

(1) With respect to contracts entered into 
with foreign governments or agencies thereof for 
the rendering of services to the United States or 
to an agency thereof within the continental limits 
of the United States, this order waives the statute 
requiring that Government contracts include pro- 



visions for the examination of the records of con- 
tractors by the General Accounting Office (section 
1 (h)). This waiver will be used principally in 
connection with interpreter services obtained by 
contract from foreign governments. 

(2) The Government agencies concerned — 
principally the International Cooperation Ad- 
ministration — will be authorized to amend cer- 
tain contracts with nonprofit institutions without 
regard to the legal requirements of consideration 
(section 3). This change will facilitate the cor- 
rection of inequities arising under long-term con- 
tracts with universities. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10784 > 

Specification of Laws From Which Functions Au- 
thorized by the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as 
Amended, Shall Be Exempt 

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 533 
of the Mutual Security Act of 1954, 68 Stat. 860 (22 
U. S. C. 1793), it is hereby determined that, to the extent 
hereinafter indicated, the performance of functions au- 
thorized by that act, as amended (including: the perform- 
ance of functions authorized by section 544 thereof), 
without regard to the laws specified in the lettered sub- 
divisions of sections 1 and 2 of this order and without 
regard to consideration as specified in section 3 of this 
order will further the purposes of the Mutual Security 
Act of 1954, as amended : 

Section 1. With respect to functions authorized by the 
Mutual Security Act of 1954, as amended (22 U. S. C. 
1750 et scq.), except those exercised by the Department 
of Defense under authority of sections 521 and 524 of 
that act (22 U. S. C. 1781, 1784) : 

(a) The act of March 26, 1934, c. 90, 4S Stat. 500, as 
amended (15 U. S. C. 616a). 

(b) Section 3648 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, 
60 Stat. S09 (31 U. S. C. 529). 

(c) Section 305 of the Federal Property and Adminis- 
trative Services Act of 1949, c. 288, 63 Stat. 396, as 
amended (41 U. S. C. 255). 

( d ) Section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, as amended 
(41 U. S. C. 5). 

(e) Section 3710 of the Revised Statutes (41 U. S. C. 
S). 

(f) Section 2 of Title III of the act of March 3, 1933, 
c. 212, 47 Stat. 1520 (41 U. S. C. 10a). 

(g) Section 3735 of the Revised Statutes (41 U. S. C. 
13). 

(h) Section 304 (c) of the Federal Property and Ad- 
ministrative Services Act of 1949, as added by the act of 
October 31, 1951, c. 652, 65 Stat. 700 (41 U. S. C. 254 (c) ), 
but only with respect to contracts entered into with for- 
eign governments or agencies thereof for the rendering of 



'23 Fed. Reg. 7691. 



664 



Department of State Bulletin 



services to the United States or an agency thereof within 
the continental limits of the United States. 

(i) Section 901 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, c. 
S5S, 49 Stat. 2015, as amended (-16 U. S. C. 1241 (a)). 

Sec. 2. With respect to purchases authorized to be 
made outside the continental limits of the United States 
under the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as amended : 

(a) Section 2276 (a) of title 10 of the United States 
Code. 

(b) Section 2313 (b) of title 10 of the United States 
Code. 

(c) Section 304 (e) of the Federal Property and Ad- 
ministrative Services Act of 1949, as added by the act of 
October 31, 1951, e. 652, 65 Stat. 700 (41 U. S. C. 254 (c) ). 

(d) Section 1301 of the Second War Powers Act, 1942, 
c. 199, 56 Stat. 185 (50 U. S. C. App. 643), as extended 
by the provisions of the act of June 30, 1953, c. 169, 67 
Stat 120. 

Sec. 3. With respect to cost-type contracts heretofore 
or hereafter made under authority of the Mutual Security 
Act of 1954, as amended, with non-profit institutions 
under which no fee is charged or paid, amendments and 
modifications of such contracts may be made with or 
without consideration and may be utilized to accomplish 
the same things as any original contract could have ac- 
complished, irrespective of the time or circumstances of 
the making, or the form of the contract amended or modi- 
fied, or of the amending or modifying contract, and irre- 
spective of rights which may have accrued under the 
contract or the amendments or modifications thereof. 

This order supersedes Executive Order No. 10519 of 
March 5, 1954 (3 CFR, 1954 Supp., p. 48) ,' entitled 
"Specifications of Laws from Which Functions Author- 
ized by Mutual Security Act of 1951, as Amended, Shall 
Be Exempt" 



A 



(^KS-y C^tA^J C*-*U-l» Asv^s^ 



TnE White House, 
October 1, 1958. 



Japanese Trade Mission 
Visits United States 

Press release 603 dated October 10 

The Japanese Trade Mission headed by Heitaro 
Inagaki, president of the Japan Foreign Trade 
Council, Inc., arrived at Washington October 9 
for a 6-week tour of the United States, which 
will take its members to Xew York, Providence, 
Boston, Chicago, Atlanta, New Orleans, Dallas, 
Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, and 
Seattle. 



' Bulletin of Mar. 29, 1954, p. 481. 
Ocfober 27, J 958 



The mission consists of 11 Japanese business- 
men representing various branches of Japanese 
industry and commerce and two Government offi- 
cials representing the Ministries of Foreign Af- 
fairs and of International Trade and Industry. 
The leader of the mission, Mr. Inagaki, is a 
former Minister of International Trade and In- 
dustry. 

The program of the mission's 6-day visit at 
Washington, which opened with a call on the As- 
sistant Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, 
Thomas C. Mann, on October 10, includes calls at 
the Departments of Commerce, Interior, and 
Agriculture, and the Export-Import Bank. As- 
sistant Secretary Mann held a reception in honor 
of the mission at the President's Guest House on 
October 10. 

A conference at the U.S. Chamber of Com- 
merce, followed by a luncheon of the Japan- 
America Society of Washington, will conclude 
the program of the mission's visit to Washington 
on October 15. 

The Japanese Trade Mission has come to the 
United States in response to an invitation issued 
by the U.S. Trade Mission which visited Japan 
last spring. The Japanese Trade Mission to the 
United States has the same purpose as previous 
U.S. Trade Missions to Japan, namely, to pro- 
mote good will and trade between the two nations. 



Ghana To Receive American Corn 
To Combat Food Shortage 

Press release 594 dated October 8 

An agreement to supply $650,000 worth of yel- 
low-dent corn to Ghana under the Agricultural 
Trade Development and Assistance Act (P. L. 
480) was signed on October 8 by the Govern- 
ments of the United States and Ghana. The 
agreement was signed for Ghana by R. M. Akwei, 
second secretary of the Embassy of Ghana, at the 
office of Stuart H. Van Dyke, regional director 
of the Intel-national Cooperation Administration. 

The agreement under title II of P. L. 480 will 
permit the early shipment of the 5,000 tons of 
corn to Ghana, where it will be used to combat 
food shortages which have developed as a result 
of extremely dry weather conditions in the areas 
of South Mamprusi, Nanumba, Dagomba, and 
Gonja, which have a population of about 400,000. 

665 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



U. N. Committee Agrees on Procedure 
for Disarmament Items 

Statements oy Henry Cabot Lodge 

U.S. Representative to the General Assemhly 

STATEMENT OF OCTOBER 8 > 

The United States is glad that the Soviet Union 
considers that the disarmament question as a whole 
should he considered first in this committee, al- 
though we disagree with the Soviet proposal that 
the item on the discontinuance of tests should be 
put ahead of the other disarmament items. Let 
me say that this is an unusual procedure; it is 
distinctly out of the ordinary. The usual practice 
is to take these items in the order in which they 
have been introduced. In the total list of agenda 
items for the 13th regular session of the General 
Assembly the question of disarmament appears as 
item 64; the question of the discontinuance of 
atomic and hydrogen weapons tests is item 70 ; and 
the question of the reduction of the military budg- 
ets of the Soviet Union, the United States, the 
United Kingdom, and France is item 72. And of 
course this is reflected in document A/C.l/806, 2 in 
which disarmament is item 4, the discontinuance 
of tests item 7, and the reduction of military budg- 
ets item 8. Naturally, the question of the dis- 
continuance of tests is going to be discussed here. 
The procedure which we propose, which is to dis- 
cuss these items as a group, will permit the Soviet 
representative to deal with the discontinuance of 
tests first if he wishes to do so, and it will enable 
any other member of the committee to discuss that 
item first if he so desires. But we think that test- 
ing is only one part of the many complex issues 
involved in disarmament, and by no means the 
most dangerous. Action on it alone would not 
bring us closer to our goal of universal disarma- 
ment under effective control. 



J Made in Committee I (Political and Security) (U.S. 
delegation press release 3010) . 

' "Allocation of agenda items to the First Committee." 

666 



All that we are proposing is that we should pro- 
ceed here in a way that would permit each one of 
us to deal with the subject of disarmament in the 
way which he believes would be the most con- 
structive. We do not think that any one member 
should seek to impose its way of discussing the 
subject on other members. Let each member 
choose for itself how it wants to discuss this ques- 
tion and the three items that make up the total 
disarmament problem. 

I say in passing that, of course, I reject the 
Soviet representative's insinuation that those who 
do not agree with him are not interested in prompt 
results on disarmament. That kind of talk is very 
regrettable and certainly has no justification as far 
as the United States is concerned, because Presi- 
dent Eisenhower has made it abundantly clear how 
anxious we are to obtain an agreement for the 
suspension of tests. 

We think that the First Committee not only 
should take up disarmament as the first item of 
business — that is, items 4, 7, and 8 of our agenda, 
all of which relate directly to disarmament — but 
that the committee should now decide to discuss 
these three items as a group in such a way that they 
can be discussed together, if a representative 
wishes to do so ; or, if a representative wishes to 
discuss them separately in any order which he may 
desire, he can do so. 

The procedure which we advocate follows past 
practices. I have looked up the precedents and I 
find that at the sixth session the First Committee 
discussed simultaneously agenda item 1 — regula- 
tion, limitation and reduction of all armed forces — 
and item 2 — international control of atomic en- 
ergy : report of the Committee of Twelve. I find 
that at the ninth session the First Committee con- 
sidered simultaneously agenda item 1 — regulation, 
limitation and the balanced reduction of all 
armed forces and armaments : report of the Dis- 
armament Commission — and agenda item 2 — con- 
clusion of an international convention on the re- 
duction of armaments and the prohibition of 
atomic, hydrogen and other weapons of mass de- 

Department of State Bulletin 






struction. Thus, this is our usual way of doing 
things. Besides, it is a convenient way; it will 
promote orderly discussion. The three items are 
in themselves interrelated. Were we to consider 
each individually, we would waste valuable time 
by duplication of discussion. 

Let me repeat: This does not prevent anyone 
from speaking on each item if he wishes to, or 
from covering all of them in a single statement if 
he so desires. It does not in any way prejudge 
what kind of action the committee may ultimately 
take. We already have before us two proposals 
on one item, and undoubtedly there will be others. 
The procedure which we propose will not exclude 
separate voting; there will be separate votes on 
each proposal should the committee decide to pro- 
ceed in that way. 

If the procedure which we suggest is adopted, 
each representative would be able to speak to any 
aspect of a question and there would be no need 
to change the order of the items that already ap- 
pear on the agenda. We believe that the commit- 
tee should not now decide on the order of the 
remaining items of the agenda but should content 
itself at this meeting with taking this decision on 
the disarmament contemplation as a whole. 

[In a further intervention Mr. Lodge said:] 

I will be guided by the desires of the committee 
as far as voting today or tomorrow is concerned. 

I merely want to take one minute to say that 
the United States is anxious to have progress in 
this field. We see the possibility of progress in 
the talks to begin on October 31 3 and on Novem- 
ber 10. 4 We therefore think that this committee 
should avoid three separate debates on disarma- 
ment, which we contend is what the Soviet pro- 
posal amounts to. We think that dealing with 
the three items — that is, item 4, item 7, and item 
8 — as part of one disarmament debate gives full 
scope for full debate without delay, and we hope 
that this will be the decision of the committee. 

FIRST STATEMENT OF OCTOBER 9« 

Let me first say that there is absolutely no foun- 
dation for the statements which have been made 



' For background, see Bulletin of Sept. 8, 1958, p. 378, 
and Sept. 29, 1958, p. 503. 

* For background, see p. 648. 

'Made in Committee I (Political and Security) (U.S. 
delegation press release 3011). 



here today that the United States desires a new 
item, or that the United States desires to reword 
existing items, or that we are going to ask for a 
meeting of the General Committee. I really think 
I know what the United States proposal is and 
that I am in a better position to describe it than 
are those who have described it so erroneously. 

The proposition of the United States, if 
adopted, would mean that the agenda of the First 
Committee will read as follows— I will read it out 
with all the punctuation marks, so that members 
can be perfectly clear as to what our proposal is : 

1. Question of disarmament. 

2. The discontinuance of atomic and hydrogen weapons 
tests. 

3. The reduction of the military budgets of the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States of 
America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland, and France by 10-15 percent and the 
use of part of the savings so effected for assistance to 
the under-developed countries. 

That is how the agenda of the committee would 
read if our proposal were adopted. 

We think that these three items would be con- 
sidered together. Each representative could deal 
with them as he saw fit. He can discuss them 
separately. He could take them up in any order 
he wished. He could talk about all three in one 
speech. 

It is obvious that these three items are inter- 
related. All of them deal with different aspects 
of disarmament. We think that the most prac- 
tical and most efficient way to deal with them is 
in the way that I have proposed. It does not 
prejudge in any way the committee's eventual 
decision on the result of our discussions. 

Now, as far as the question raised by the rep- 
resentatives of Mexico and of Panama is con- 
cerned — and I understand they did not make mo- 
tions, they raised questions — we think this: that 
the committee should decide at the time in what 
order it wishes to take up specific resolutions. 

Now, we could not decide today in what order 
to take up resolutions if we wanted to because we 
do not know what all the resolutions are. Two 
resolutions are pending, but I know of one that 
has not been introduced yet and will be intro- 
duced. And I have heard rumors of several 
others. 

So it is, of course, an absolute practical im- 
possibility for us to decide here this afternoon in 
what order we are going to take up the resolutions 



Ocfober 27, 7958 



667 



when we end our general debate. The only time 
we can make that decision is after the general de- 
bate is over, and then we can decide it in the light 
of the debate — which we hope will lead to some 
enlightenment — and in the light of the resolutions 
which are before us at the time. 

I do not think we can say now that when the 
general debate is over we are going to limit our- 
selves to resolutions which correspond exactly 
with the limits of each agenda item. It seems to 
me that, if a member wants to introduce a resolu- 
tion which deals with subjects that are included 
in various agenda items, he has got a right to do 
it. That happens here all the time. To seek to 
limit the discussion in that way would, we think, 
be self-defeating. 

We do not think that the question of tests 
should be singled out and put first either today or 
after the general debate is over. We say that be- 
cause we think tests are part of the whole con- 
templation and also because we do not think that 
tests are by any means the most dangerous aspect 
of this whole question. Furthermore, we do not 
think that the decision to put tests first can be 
accurately called a procedural motion. 

It follows from what I have said, therefore, Mr. 
President, that we would be agreeable to your 
proposal No. 1 — your compromise proposal No. 
1 — which would have a general debate on these 
three items together and then leave for a later 
stage the question of how we will deal with the 
resolutions. We think that is a good compromise 
and we would support that. 



SECOND STATEMENT OF OCTOBER 9« 

Certain remarks that have been made lead me 
to ask the indulgence of the committee for just 
one minute to say that the United States wants 
to move ahead on this whole subject. We are 
getting our hopes up about Geneva because it is 
the first sign of progress on the cessation of tests. 
In fact, it is the indispensable first step. 

Let me tell the committee that we hope to intro- 
duce a resolution with a number of other co- 
sponsors very soon which will clearly show to all 
the world the importance which we attach to this 
first step. 



We think that we here in this committee have 
the opportunity to do something that bids fair to 
get some real results on this matter of cessation 
of nuclear tests, and that is the spirit which 
animates us. 7 



International Cooperation 
in Field of Atomic Energy 

by John A.M. cC one 

Chairman, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission 1 

Mr. President [Tjondronegoro Sudjarwo of 
Indonesia], my delegation wishes to thank you for 
assuming the tasks of presiding at this meeting 
and to congratulate you on your skillful handling 
of the problems that have arisen. I personally 
feel that as you attend international conferences 
of various kinds in the future you will find 
yourself, because of your knowledge of procedure, 
sitting in an elevated chair and, therefore, unable 
to enjoy the flexibility and latitude of other dele- 
gates. 

It is a great honor to represent my country at 
this General Conference and to participate in its 
deliberations. We hope our work here will lead 
to the adoption of policies which will enable the 
Agency to progress more rapidly toward a realiza- 
tion of the basic objective stated in its charter, 
and that is: "to accelerate and enlarge the con- 
tribution of atomic energy to peace, health, and 
prosperity throughout the world." 

What is said and done at this conference may 
well determine the future of the Agency as a 
significant force in the field of the peaceful appli- 
cation of nuclear energy. 

I deeply believe in this Agency — in its purpose, 
its hopes, and in its expectations. More important 
than my personal views, however, are those of my 
Government. 
States stands firm in its support and resolute in 

I can assure this conference that the United 
its conviction that the Agency offers to men of 
good will throughout the world a response to the 



"Made in Committee I (Political and Security) (U.S. 
delegation press release 3012). 



7 Committee I on Oct. 9 adopted the procedure advo- 
cated by the United States by a vote of 50 to 9 (Soviet 
bloc), with 19 abstentions. 

1 Remarks made at the 2d General Conference of the 
International Atomic Energy Agency at Vienna on Sept. 
25. Mr. MeCone was chairman of the U.S. delegation. 



668 



Department of State Bulletin 



challenge "to find the way by which the miracu- 
lous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated 
to his death, but consecrated to his life." 

The United States is prepared to exert all pos- 
sible effort to maintain the Agency as the organi- 
zation of primary importance in the field of inter- 
national cooperation. This means that we will 
botli initiate and we will support programs 
designed to strengthen and to advance the Agency 
as the preeminent international body in its field 
of competence. 

As time and experience progress, and consistent 
with our existing obligations, the United States 
will look to the Agency as the major institutional 
channel through which international peaceful-use 
programs of the United States will be carried for- 
ward. 

Basis for Cooperative Programs 

The recently concluded United Nations Inter- 
national Conference on the Peaceful Uses of 
Atomic Energy demonstrated the importance of 
international cooperation. The great wealth of 
technological material on civilian applications of 
the atom presented at Geneva provides a basis for 
specific programs which this Agency is uniquely 
qualified to undertake. 

The United States welcomes and endorses the 
statement by the Japanese delegate signifying 
the intention of his Government to request this 
Agency to administer the safeguards provided in 
the agreement for cooperation between the 
United States and Japan and to do this when the 
Agency is prepared to undertake this service. 

The vigor and imagination with which Japan is 
developing a program for peaceful utilization of 
atomic energy indicates the speed with which the 
Agency must move in this area. This work must 
be put in hand at once if the Agency is to assume 
this function, which the Japanese Government 
and the U.S. Government in consultation intend 
to request. We therefore join wholeheartedly 
witli the Japanese delegation in support of an 
immediate approach to this task on the part of the 
Secretariat. 

We are convinced that in this new field there 
are many important matters which must be dealt 
with on an international basis. Such matters in- 
clude the necessary development of universal 
standards and regulations relating to protection 
against hazards of radiation, the enactment of an 



international convention to meet the problems of 
third-party liability, and the careful utilization 
of technical manpower. Only an international 
organization such as this Agency can meet these 
and other similar issues. 

I would like to speak particularly to the ques- 
tion of third-party liability. It has been referred 
to by several of the speakers who addressed this 
conference yesterday. It is my opinion and the 
opinion of my delegation that these references are 
an order to the Director General to immediately 
institute necessary studies and proposals for ac- 
tion. 

It seems to me, Mr. President, and to my Gov- 
ernment, that this conference must make a frank 
and open appraisal of the problems before us. 
We must unite in a constructive effort to resolve 
them just as we united in September 1956 to forge 
the Agency statute. 2 

The Agency may not have met all hopes and 
aspirations, but then no promising youth ever 
does. The United States believes, however, that 
the record to date, considered fairly and in proper 
perspective, is indeed encouraging. The report 
of the Board of Governors gives evidence of sub- 
stantive accomplishment greater, perhaps, than 
we had any right to expect. One needs only to 
recall some of the highlights given by our Direc- 
tor General, Mr. [W. Sterling] Cole, in his open- 
ing statement at this conference. 

He indicated the Agency's fellowship program 
is now in operation. Procedures for the dissemi- 
nation of information have been devised. Tech- 
nical experts have been made available for 
consultation, and field missions have been com- 
pleted. A manual relating to protection against 
hazards of radiation has been drafted. The in- 
evitable difficulties of initial organization have 
been met. We have before us for approval sev- 
eral agreements with other international organi- 
zations which provide for pooling many different 
talents to promote the uses of nuclear energy. 

In spite of this very substantial progress} how- 
ever, we must recognize that there remain major 
problems of organization and of substance which 
the Agency must face. These must be overcome 
if we are to achieve the objectives set forth in our 
charter, and it is the responsibility of all here to 
contribute to the solution of these problems. 



1 For background on the establishment of the IAEA and 
text of the statute, see Bulletin of Nov. 19, 1956, p. 813. 



October 27, 7958 



669 



With respect to substantive matters, the United 
States recognizes the collective responsibility that 
it shares with other atomically advanced nations 
to provide initiative and leadership in the devel- 
opment of concrete proposals for long-term 
Agency activity. We accept our share of this re- 
sponsibility. We are prepared to submit certain 
suggestions to that end and emphasize that others 
must do likewise. 

The United States does not consider this con- 
ference of member states merely a forum. Nor is 
this meeting limited only to a consideration of 
immediate activities proposed by our Board of 
Governors. This is a conference where the wide- 
spread exchange of views can become the source 
of fresh ideas from which the Board and the Di- 
rector General can develop a full range of future 
activities. I note that many of the speakers have 
expressed similar ideas. These statements in 
their composite will, in the opinion of my delega- 
tion, serve as useful guidance to our Board and to 
the Director General of our Agency. 

At the outset, I wish to state that my Govern- 
ment unequivocally supports the budget for next 
year's operations as proposed to the conference 
by the Board of Governors. 

The United States attaches paramount impor- 
tance to the funds recommended for Agency fel- 
lowships and for grant-in-aid assistance. The 
need for training in the nuclear field is universally 
recognized; and it is obvious that trained men 
require appropriate facilities with which to apply 
and develop the knowledge they have acquired. 

We also support the provision for a central lab- 
oratory facility as we feel that the existence of 
such a laboratory is necessary. There can be no 
reasonable doubt in our opinion with respect to 
the necessity for permanent laboratory facilities 
placed at the Agency's exclusive responsibility 
and disposal. 

U.S. Makes Six Proposals 

In addition to the program outlined in the 
budget, my Government has given careful con- 
sideration to other desirable Agency activities. 
Accordingly, I should like to place before this 
conference six proposals. In some cases these 
involve new activities not incorporated in the 
budget; in other cases we are suggesting in- 
creased emphasis on activities already under way 
or planned. 



1. Radioisotopes. The Agency as a major en- 
deavor should inaugurate a program of training, 
research, and application in the field of radioiso- 
topes. This program should have as its major 
emphasis applications of radioisotopes in the 
fields of medicine, biology, and agriculture. 

The benefits of radioisotopes are available to 
us today. We do not need to await the develop- 
ment of more advanced or more efficient tech- 
. niques although we confidently expect that such 
advances will extend the already impressive cata- 
log of uses of the radioisotope. Further, medical, 
biological, and agricultural uses are immediately 
applicable to many of the problems of the less 
developed areas. 

We emphasize particularly the contributions 
that the radioisotope can make to alleviate the 
crushing burden of hunger that is a primary prob- 
lem in many parts of the world. 

The Agency, through its fellowship plans, its 
equipment grant arrangements, and with the aid 
of its mobile radioisotope laboratories, can embark 
on a coordinated program for establishing radio- 
isotope training and research centers in many 
member states. We urge that this area be pur- 
sued energetically. 

My Government is prepared to cooperate di- 
rectly with this effort through joint sponsorship 
with the Agency of specialized symposia, semi- 
nars, and short training courses in specific fields 
of isotope application. Our own training facili- 
ties in our country, in our laboratories and our 
research centers, remain open to students from 
foreign lands as they have in the past. 

2. Safety. We urge that the Agency intensify 
efforts to develop international standards and reg- 
ulations for the safe transportation, handling, and 
use of radioactive materials and the disposal of 
radioactive wastes. The Agency should also 
press forward with safety codes relating to re- 
actor operation, reactor siting, and the protection 
of workers at atomic energy establishments. 

Procedures for the accountability of material 
and a convention covering third-party liability 
are other important matters which should re- 
ceive intense and early attention of the Interna- 
tional Agency. Since common measuring de- 
vices are essential, steps should be taken also to 
establish the Agency as the central authority for 
the standardization of isotopes and instrument 
calibration. 



670 



Department of State Bulletin 



3. Training. All of us recognize the absolute 
need of training scientists from those nations 
which are as yet but on the threshold of this new 
era. In the deep conviction that the inherent 
powers of the atom for good must be shared by 
all nations of good will, my Government urges 
most strongly that steps be taken beyond the 
planned fellowship programs. The Agency 
should be a central coordinating body for the 
training of personnel in these areas. 

•i. Research. We believe that there exists 
throughout the world today a wealth of scientific 
and technical competence which is not being 
brought fully to bear on the development of the 
peaceful uses of atomic energy. We believe that 
the Agency can draw upon this unused talent to 
the benefit of all. 

Accordingly, we are prepared to explore with 
the Agency the development of a program where- 
by specific research projects can be assigned by 
the United States Government to this Agency. 
The Agency, in turn, could develop contracts 
with existing research centers and universities 
throughout the world to perform the specific proj- 
ects assigned to them. 

As examples, we have in mind areas of re- 
search relating to ceramic fuel elements, to high- 
temperature metallurgy, to the study of metabolic 
processes of the human bod} 7 , and the methodology 
of using radioisotopes in agriculture. In this way 
we may bring within the program additional tal- 
ents not now available. My Government will 
bear all the contract costs involved, and, may I 
emphasize, the results of projects undertaken 
would be made available through the Agency to 
all member states. 

We are offering to bear the costs of these con- 
tracts because we recognize that the Agency does 
not include funds in this year's budget for this 
purpose and because we believe f hese activities 
should be undertaken promptly. We are hopeful 
that, in due course, the results of this offer will 
encourage other participating governments to fol- 
low a similar course. 

5. Nuclear Power. The Geneva conference — 
and particularly the opening address of its Presi- 
dent, M . [Francis] Perrin — did much to place 
this subject in proper perspective. 

There is no doubt but that nuclear power will 
be a significant economic factor in the world — in 
some countries sooner than in others. However, 



we have come to that sophisticated stage in the 
development when we now know that, before eco- 
nomic nuclear power can become a widespread 
reality, many financial, scientific, and engineering 
problems must be solved. Of particular impor- 
tance are problems of physics and metallurgy. 

Today we have the technology to produce nu- 
clear power. However, in many instances costs 
are substantially greater than conventional power. 
That, I might say, is the current condition. How- 
ever, as we look down the road to the further de- 
velopment of nuclear power and to the long-range 
availability of other fuels, we can see that it is 
crystal clear that nuclear power will have its 
very important place in the industrial develop- 
ment of this world. 

We therefore urge that the member states not 
be discouraged by the facts that control the im- 
mediate future but look a little longer down the 
road because it is our opinion that the long-range 
problem cannot be solved by our country or by 
any other country unless we come to grips with 
the whole technology and do so in the immediate 
future. 

Even though there is some apparent higher cost 
of nuclear power as compared to other sources 
of power available at this time, this will not always 
be the case. We have to take a longer-range view 
than tomorrow, or a year from now, or even 5 years 
from now, for we must plan this on a 50-year 
basis. 

The Agency should encourage the development 
of atomic power with due consideration to the 
special needs and conditions — particularly the 
timing of projects — of undeveloped areas of the 
world. Obviously, guidance is necessary in pro- 
moting a concentration of effort, a pooling of tal- 
ents and resources, and encouraging a cooperative 
effort. 

One important Agency function will be to assure 
the distribution and use of fuel for power reactors 
under conditions providing for their safe handling 
and accountability. In this connection the sug- 
gestion of the Director General for all shipments 
of source materials to be registered with this 
Agency should be carefully studied. 

Research and development achievements are al- 
ready impressive when viewed in the aggregate. 
The Agency can render a valuable service to its 
member states by making available to them, on a 
continuing basis, the results of current research 



October 27, 1958 



671 



and development programs and by undertaking 
programs which form the basis for intelligent 
future planning. The Geneva conference did much 
to accomplish this. Further frequent meetings 
and exchanges should be planned by this Agency. 
My country therefore proposes the following as 
an essential and immediate first step : the Agency 
undertake an intensive and continuing study and 
survey of existing reactor types, their costs, the 
criteria for the introduction of them into new 
areas, and means by which the Agency could ac- 
celerate the availability of nuclear power within 
reasonable economic dimensions. 

We believe also that the Agency should be di- 
rected by this conference to formulate, for 
presentation at our next meeting, a coordinated 
long-range program for Agency assistance in the 
development and acquisition of nuclear-power 
facilities by member states. Additional emphasis 
might well be given to the development of smaller 
power-reactor designs suited to areas of more 
limited demand. 

6. Information Exchange. The Agency should 
continue to develop into a major center for the 
acquisition, collection, and the distribution of 
scientific information on the peaceful uses of 
atomic energy. This will require the Agency to 
tap existing extensive sources of technical infor- 
mation. It should assemble and prepare these data 
in readily accessible form and encourage member 
states to avail themselves of this service. My 
Government will continue to forward to the 
Agency the immense volume of data being pro- 
duced in our country. 

We hope that the Agency will undertake the 
sponsorship of scientific conferences and symposia 
to make the most effective use of knowledge gained 
at Geneva and available here and elsewhere, This 
is an opportunity which the Agency should pur- 
sue with vigor and imagination. 

Futhermore, the United States considers the 
future conferences of a type just concluded in 
Geneva should be undertaken under the auspices 
of this Agency. 

More specifically, in the field of controlled 
thermonuclear fusion the United States proposes 
that the Agency undertake to serve as the medium 
through which its members engaged in controlled 
fusion research freely exchange technical infor- 
mation. This is, of course, an extension of the 
constructive cooperation which prevailed at the 
meeting earlier this month in Geneva. I can as- 



672 



sure you of the full cooperation of my Govern- 
ment. 

Premise of U.S. Proposals 

Mr. President, the program that my Govern- 
ment is suggesting is based on two factors: the 
sober recognition of the state of nuclear science 
and technology as it exists today, and the knowl- 
edge that the resources of this Agency are unfortu- 
nately limited. 

My Government believes that to propose major 
program expenditures at this time would disrupt 
orderly progress. We feel it would impede rather 
than promote the attainment of the Agency's 
statutory objectives. We believe that the sug- 
gested program is soundly conceived and em- 
braces projects of practical assistance to all of the 
Agency members, large and small. 

I sincerely believe, Mr. President, that, if dur- 
ing the coming year the program outlined in the 
budget is implemented as planned and if further 
realistic projects such as those previously out- 
lined are accepted, the International Atomic 
Energy Agency will have made firm and signifi- 
cant strides toward its goals. 

President Eisenhower in his historic address be- 
fore the United Nations in 1953 envisaged the In- 
ternational Atomic Energy Agency as a symbol 
which would "allow all peoples of all nations to 
see that ... the great powers of the earth . . . 
are interested in human aspirations first, rather 
than in building up the armaments of war. ' 

To promote the attainment of this objective the 
United States reaffirmed its offer of 5,000 kilo- 
grams of uranium U-235 for use by this Agency. 
Also we reaffirm that we will continue to match, 
quantity by quantity, until July 1, I960, the offers 
of all other member states. -We believe that it is 
not unrealistic to hope that such steps, coupled 
with appropriate progress in disarmament, will 
bring closer the day when the International 
Atomic Energy Agency will be the principal cus- 
todian of the world's fissionable material. 

The Agency is now only at the threshold of its 
destiny. Before it lies the great challenge of 
realizing to the fullest extent the benefits of the 
atom. If we move forward wisely, the world will 
be infinitely richer. The example we set of inter- 
national cooperation toward this common end 
might lead us in turn to the lasting peace all man- 
kind seeks. 

Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



Robert McKinney Resigns 

as U.S. Representative to IAEA 

The President on October 3 accepted the resig- 
nation of Robert McKinney as U.S. Representa- 
tive to the International Atomic Energy Agency 
effective October 4, following conclusion of the 
second General Conference of the IAEA meeting 
at Vienna. 



Arnie J. Suomela Appointed 
to Fisheries Commission 

The "White House on October 9 announced the 
appointment by the President of Arnie J. Suomela 
to be a Commissioner of the U.S. Section of the 
International North Pacific Fisheries Commis- 
sion, vice Ross L. Leffler, resigned. 

Current U.N. Documents: 
A Selected Bibliography 1 

Security Council 

Letter Dated 15 August 1058 From the Permanent Repre- 
sentative of India Addressed to the President of the 
Security Council. S/4086. August 18, 1958. 2 pp. 
mimeo. 

Letter Dated 18 August 1958 From the Permanent Repre- 
sentative of India Addressed to the President of the 
Security Council. S/408S. August 19, 1958. 2 pp. 
mimeo. 

Report of the Conference of Experts To Study the Pos- 
sibility of Detecting Violations of a Possible Agree- 
ment on the Suspension of Nuclear Tests. Note by 
the Secretary-General. S/4091. August 28, 1958. 3 
pp. mimeo. 

Letter Dated 27 August 1958 From the Acting Permanent 
Representative of Pakistan Addressed to the President 
of the Security Council. S, 4092. August 28, 1958. 8 
pp. mimeo. 

Economic and Social Council 

Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. Com- 
mittee on Industry and Natural Resources. Official 
records, Kith session. 24 February-3 March 1958. 
E CX.11/I&NR/8. June 4, 1958. 100 pp. mimeo. 

Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. In- 
land Transport Committee. Official records, 7th ses- 
sion, 11-18 February 1958. E/CN.ll/TRANS/135. 77 
pp. mimeo. 

Annual Report of the United Nations High Commissioner 
for Refugees. E/3138. June 18, 1958. 100 pp. mimeo. 



Report of the World Health Organization. Supplemen- 
tary Report. E/3106/Add. 1. June 26, 1958. 16 pp. 
mimeo. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



1 Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 2960 Broadway, New York 27, N.Y. 
Other materials (mimeographed or processed documents) 
may be consulted at certain designated libraries in the 
United States. 



Venezuela and United States 
Sign Nuclear Power Agreement 

The Atomic Energy Commission and the De- 
partment of State (press release 591) announced 
on October 8 that the Governments of Venezuela 
and the United States had on that day signed a 
comprehensive agreement for cooperation in the 
peaceful uses of atomic energy for power and 
research. 

Signing the agreement for the United States 
were Assistant Secretary of State for Inter- 
American Affairs Roy R. Rubottom, Jr., and 
John A. McCone, Chairman of the Atomic Energy 
Commission, and for Venezuela Ambassador 
Marcos Falcon-Briceno. 

The new agreement will broaden the scope of ex- 
change with Venezuela by providing for coopera- 
tion on the development, design, construction, and 
operation of both power and research reactors. 
Under the terms of the agreement, which runs 
for 20 years, the Atomic Energy Commission 
will sell or lease fuel to Venezuela for use in 
research reactors and sell fuel for use in power 
reactors, providing a maximum of 800 kilograms 
of contained uranium 235 up to 20 percent enrich- 
ment. This fuel is allocated for use in a research 
reactor now under construction near Caracas, a 
materials-testing reactor, and three 15,000-kilo- 
watt (electrical) boiling-water power reactors 
planned for future construction in Venezuela. In 
the case of the materials-testing reactor, the 
United States is authorized to provide a maximum 
of six kilograms of fuel at 90 percent enrichment 
in U-235. 

The agreement will become effective after pro- 
cedural requirements on the part of both Govern- 
ments have been satisfied. It will supersede a re- 
search agreement for cooperation with Venezuela 
which has been in effect since July 21, 1955. 1 



1 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 3323. 



October 27, 7958 



673 



U.S. and Japan Sign Protocol 
to Atomic Energy Agreement 

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

The Department of State and the U.S. Atomic 
Energy Commission announced on October 9 
(press release 598) that the Governments of Ja- 
pan and the United States had on that day 
signed a protocol amending the agreement for 
cooperation between the two countries concerning 
the peaceful uses of nuclear energy signed June 
16, 1958. 1 The Assistant Secretary of State for 
Far Eastern Affairs and the Chairman of the 
Atomic Energy Commission signed the protocol 
for the United States and the Ambassador of Ja- 
pan signed for Japan. 

Under the agreement for cooperation signed in 
June, the United States will make available as 
needed over a term of 10 years a net amount of 
2,700 kilograms of uranium 235 to be contained in 
fuel sold or leased to Japan for use in research, 
experimental and demonstration power, and 
power reactors. 

The amendment increases by 250 grams the 
quantity of plutonium which Japan may obtain 
for use in connection with denned research proj- 
ects. It is anticipated that the increased quantity 
will be used principally to provide plutonium- 
beryllium sources for subcritical assemblies which 
are used for training and research in the field of 
reactor physics. 

This protocol provides for the transfer of high- 
ly enriched uranium for use as fuel in research 
and materials-testing reactors where use of such 
material is technically and economically justified 
and the core loading does not exceed 8 kilograms. 

The protocol further provides that byproduct 
special nuclear material produced in Japanese re- 
actors fueled with U.S. materials, when it is pur- 
chased by the United States under the purchase 
option, as provided in article VII of the agree- 
ment, will be used only for peaceful purposes. 
This provision affirms U.S. policy concerning the 
use of such material as announced by the Presi- 
dent on November 17, 1956. 2 

The agreement and the protocol will go into ef- 
fect when the statutory and constitutional re- 
quirements of the two nations have been fulfilled. 



1 Bulletin of July 7, 1958, p. 40. 

2 Ibid., Dec. 10, 1956, p. 926. 

674 



TEXT OF PROTOCOL 

Protocol Amending the Agreement for Cooperation 
Between the Government of the United States of 
America and the Government of Japan Concerning 
Civil Uses of Atomic Energt 

The Government of the United States of America and 
the Government of Japan ; 

Desiring to amend the Agreement for Cooperation be- 
tween the Government of the United States of America 
and the Government of Japan Concerning Civil Uses of 
Atomic Energy, signed at Washington on June 16, 1958, 
hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement for Coopera- 
tion" ; 

Have agreed as follows : 

Article I 
Article V paragraph A, of the Agreement for Coopera- 
tion is amended by deleting the phrase "10 grams of 
plutonium, and 10 grams of U-233" and substituting in 
lieu thereof the phrase "10 grams of U-233, 250 grams of 
plutonium in the form of fabricated foils and sources, 
and 10 grams of plutonium in other forms". 

Article II 

Article VII, paragraph C, of the Agreement for Co- 
operation is amended to read as follows : 

"C. The United States Commission may, upon request 
and in its discretion, make a portion of the foregoing 
special nuclear material available as material enriched 
up to ninety per cent (90%) for use in research and 
materials testing reactors, each capable of operating 
with a fuel load not to exceed eight (8) kilograms of con- 
tained U-235 in uranium." 

Article III 
Article VII, paragraph F, of the Agreement for Co- 
operation is amended by inserting the phrase "for use 
for peaceful purposes only" immediately after the phrase 
"a first option to purchase". 

Article IV 

This Protocol shall enter into force on the day on which 
each Government shall receive from the other Govern- 
ment written notification that it has complied with all 
statutory and constitutional requirements for the entry 
into force of such Protocol and shall remain in force for 
the period of the Agreement for Cooperation. 

In witness whereof, the undersigned, duly authorized, 
have signed this Protocol. 

Done at Washington, in duplicate, in the English and 
Japanese languages, both texts being equally authentic, 
this Ninth day of October, 1958. 

For the Government of the United States of America : 

Walter S. Robertson 

John McCone 

For the Government of Japan : 

KOICHIRO ASAKAI 

Ambassador of Japan 

Department of State Bulletin 






Current Actions 

MULTILATERAL 

Automotive Traffic 

Convention on road traffic, with annexes. Done at Ge- 
neva September 19, 1949. Entered into force March 26, 
1962. TIAS2487. 

Accession deposited: Malaya (excluding annexes 1 and 
2), September 10, 1958. 

International Court of Justice 

Statute of the International Court of Justice (59 Stat. 

1055). 

Declaration recognizing compulsory jurisdiction depos- 
ited: Japan, September 15, 1958. 1 Effective for 5 years 
from September 15, 195S, and thereafter until termi- 
nated by written notice. 

Law of the Sea 

Convention on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone ; 

Convention on the high seas ; 

Convention on fishing and conservation of living resources 

of the high seas ; 
Convention on the continental shelf. 

Done at Geneva April 29, 195S. 2 

Signature: Ireland, October 2, 1958. 

Safety at Sea 

Convention on safety of life at sea. Signed at London 

June 10, T94S. Entered into force November 19, 1952. 

TIAS 2495. 

Acceptance deposited: Ghana, November 22, 1957. 
Regulations for preventing collisions at sea. Done at 

London June 10, 1948. Entered into force January 1, 

1954. TIAS 2899. 

Acceptance deposited: Ghana, July 10, 1958. 

Shipping 

International load line convention. Signed at London 
July 5, 1930. Entered into force January 1, 1933. 47 
Stat. 2228. 
Accession deposited: Ghana, November 22, 1957. 



BILATERAL 

Federation of Malaya 

Agreement relating to the sale of military equipment, ma- 
terials, and services to the Federation of Malaya. Ef- 
fected by exchange of notes at Washington June 30 and 
July 9, 1958. Entered into force July 9, 1958. 

Ghana 

Agreement relating to investment guaranties under sec- 
tion 413 (b) (4) of the Mutual Security Act of 1954, 
as amended (68 Stat. 832, 847; 22 U. S. C. 1933). Ef- 
fected by exchange of notes at Accra September 30, 1958. 
Entered into force September 30, 1958. 

Japan 

Protocol amending research and power reactor agree- 
ment concerning civil uses of atomic energy of June 16, 
1958. 2 Signed at Washington October 9, 195S. Enters 
into force on date on which each Government receives 
from the other written notification that it has complied 
with statutory and constitutional requirements. 

Venezuela 

Research and power reactor agreement concerning civil 
uses of atomic energy, and superseding research reactor 
agreement of July 21, 1955 (TIAS 3323). Signed at 



Washington October S, 1958. Enters into force on date 
on which each Government receives from the other writ- 
ten notification that it has complied with statutory and 
constitutional requirements. 



DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE 



1 With conditions. 
* Not in force. 



Secretary Dulles Inaugurates 
Senior Officer Course at FSI 

Press release 547 dated September 22 

Secretary Dulles on September 22 officially in- 
augurated a new advanced course for senior officers 
of the Department of State at the Foreign Service 
Institute. 

The senior officer course represents a further 
step by the Department to carry out recommenda- 
tions for improving the training of career For- 
eign Service officers made in 1954 by the Public 
Committee on State Department Personnel, 
chaired by Henry Wriston, then president of 
Brown University. The House Committee on 
Foreign Affairs earlier had recommended that the 
Foreign Seiwice Institute "provide adequate in- 
service training for Foreign Service Officers as 
well as for other officers and employees of the 
Service similar to that provided for Army and 
Navy officers in the command schools, and the 
Army and Navy War Colleges." 

Inauguration of this course completes a cycle 
of specialized training provided for officers be- 
ginning at junior grade through midcareer on to 
the policy-making level. 

The senior officer course will be the most ad- 
vanced program in the field of international rela- 
tions and foreign policy offered by the Depart- 
ment of State. Participation in the course tins 
year is limited to 20 individuals comprising care- 
fully selected senior officers of the Foreign Serv- 
ice, with a small number of spaces for officers 
of equivalent rank from those other agencies of 
the Government particularly involved in different 
aspects of U.S. foreign policy. The course will 
continue through June 1959. 

The purpose of the course is to prepare officers 
for the highest positions of responsibility in 
policy recommendation and execution, coordina- 



Ocfober 27, 1958 



675 



tion, planning, and administration in the Depart- 
ment, in diplomatic posts abroad, and in inter- 
agency and international organizations. 

Harold B. Hoskins, director of the Foreign 
Service Institute, announced that the institute will 
call upon outstanding representatives of U.S. 
Government, industry, and labor as well as aca- 
demic specialists to participate hi directing semi- 
nar studies and discussions. Special library and 
other facilities have been installed at the institute 
to carry out the objectives of the senior officer 
program. The course is under the supervision 
of Willard F. Barber, a career Foreign Service 
officer of class one. 

The course will include study of the following 
subjects: (1) the bases for American foreign 
policy; (2) domestic influences on U.S. foreign 
policy; (3) review of recent U.S. diplomacy; (4) 
foreign policy objectives of allied and neutral 
states and the Sino-Soviet bloc; (5) current for- 
eign policy problems. 



Recess Appointments 

The President on October 10 appointed Lampton Berry 
to be Ambassador to Ceylon, vice Maxwell H. Gluck, re- 
signed. (For biographic details, see press release 602 
dated October 10.) 



Designations 

Holland Welch as Special Assistant (Consular Affairs) 
to the Deputy Under Secretary for Administration, effec- 
tive October 5. 




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, ivhich may be ob- 
tained from the Department of State. 

Visa Work of the Department of State and the Foreign 
Service. Pub. 6510. Department and Foreign Service 
Series 69. 80 pp. $2.25. 

This report is a resume of visa procedures under the im- 
migration acts which have been passed by Congress, as 



well as statistical tables of visas issued and quotas es- 
tablished under the Immigration Act of 1924. 

International Educational Exchange Program 1948-1958. 
Pub. 6647. International Information and Cultural Series 
58. 66 pp. Limited distribution. 

19th semiannual report to Congress containing selected 
highlights of exchange accomplishments during the last 
10 years and a review of exchange activities from Janu- 
ary to June 1957. 

When You Go Abroad — Information for Bearers of Pass- 
ports. Pub. 6065. Department and Foreign Service 
Series 78. 109 pp. 35tf. 

This pamphlet, which is an informative guide to Ameri- 
can citizens traveling abroad, points out general rules, 
regulations, and responsibilities of passport holders in 
foreign countries. 

Fact Sheet on the Mutual Security Program. Pub. 6673. 
General Foreign Policy Series 129. 6 pp. Limited 
distribution. 

A folder explaining the need for a mutual security pro- 
gram. 



Check List of Department of State 


Press Releases: October 6-12 


Press releases may be obtained from the News 


Division, Department of State, Washington 25, D. C. 


Releases issued prior to October 6 which appear 


in this issue 


of the Bulletin are Nos. 547 of Sep- 


tember 22, 576 of October 1, and 578 of October 2. 


No. 


Date 


Snbject 


t584 


10/6 


General War Sequel Law of German 
Federal Republic. 


585 


10/6 


Herter : Chinese Communist cease- 
fire. 


*586 


10/7 


Educational exchange (Italy). 


587 


10/7 


Note to U.S.S.R. on crashed U.S. 
plane. 


588 


10/8 


Finland credentials (rewrite). 


589 


10/8 


Withdrawal of U.S. forces from 
Lebanon. 


590 


10/8 


Satterthwaite : "The United States 
and Africa : Challenge and Opportu- 
nity." 


591 


10/8 


Atomic energy agreement with Vene- 
zuela. 


*592 


10/8 


Educational exchange (U.S.). 


593 


10/8 


Convoy activities in Taiwan area. 


594 


10/8 


Agricultural surpluses to Ghana. 


595 


10/9 


Rubottom : "Components of Inter- 
American Understanding." 


t596 


10/9 


Delegation to GATT (rewrite). 


*597 


10/9 


Dulles: message on death of Pope. 


598 


10/9 


Protocol amending atomic energy 
agreement with Japan. 


t599 


10/9 


U.S.-U.S.S.R. agreement on cinema- 
tography. 


600 


10/10 


Note to U.S.S.R. on surprise attack. 


601 


10/10 


Salk vaccine to Poland. 


♦602 


10/10 


Recess appointment of Berry as am- 
bassador to Ceylon (biographic de- 
tails). 


603 


10/10 


Visit of Japanese trade mission. 


*604 


10/11 


Educational exchange (Poland). 


605 


10/11 


Military survey team to Jordan, 
ed. 


* Not prin 


t Held for 


a later issue of the Bulletin. 



676 



Department of State Bulletin 



October 27, 1958 

Africa. The United States and Africa : Challenge 
ami Opportunity (Satterthwaite) 

American Republics. Components of Inter-Ameri- 
can Understanding (Rubottom) 

Atomic Energy 

International Cooperation in Field of Atomic En- 
ergy (McCone) 

Robert MeKinney Resigns as U.S. Representative 
to IAEA 

U.S. and Japan Sign Protocol to Atomic Energy 
Agreement 

Venezuela and United States Sign Nuclear Power 
Agreement 

Brazil. World Bank Makes Loan in Brazil for 
Hydroelectric Project 

Ceylon. Berry appointed ambassador 

China 

Developing Universal Respect for the Rule of 

Law (Murphy) 

U.S. Views on Communist Cease-Fire in Taiwan 

Straits Area (Dulles, Herter) 

Czechoslovakia. U.S. Replies to Czechoslovak Pro- 
test on Border Violations (texts of U.S. and 
Czechoslovak notes) 

Department and Foreign Service 

Designations (Welch) 

Recess Appointments (Berry) 

Secretary Dulles Inaugurates Senior Officer Course 
at FSI 

Disarmament 

Date Set for Technical Talks on Preventing Sur- 
prise Attack (texts of U.S. and Soviet notes) . . 

U.N. Committee Agrees on Procedure for Disarma- 
ment Items (Lodge) 

Economic Affairs 

Arnie J. Suomela Appointed to Fisheries Commis- 
sion 

Components of Inter-American Understanding (Ru- 
bottom) 

Japanese Trade Mission Visits United States . . 

World Bank Makes Loan in Brazil for Hydroelec- 
tric Project 

Finland. Letters of Credence (Seppala) . . . . 

Ghana. Ghana To Receive American Corn To Com- 
bat Food Shortage 

International Law. Developing Universal Respect 
for the Rule of Law (Murphy) 

International Organizations and Conferences 

International Cooperation in Field of Atomic En- 
ergy (McCone) 

Robert MeKinney Resigns as U.S. Representative 
to IAEA 

Japan 

Japanese Trade Mission Visits United States . . 

U.S. and Japan Sign Protocol to Atomic Energy 

Agreement 

Jordan. Military Survey Team Sent to Jordan . 



Index Vol. XXXIX, No. 1009 

Lebanon. U.S. Announces Withdrawal of Forces 
641 From Lebanon 650 

Middle East. Developing Universal Respect for 
654 the Rule of Law (Murphy) 651 

Military Affairs 

Military Survey Team Sent to Jordan 651 

60S U.S. Announces Withdrawal of Forces From 

Lebanon 650 

673 U.S. Seeks Further Information From U.S.S.R on 

Crashed Plane (text of U.S. note) 659 

674 Mutual Security 

Exemption of Functions Under Mutual Security Act 
o'" 4 (text of Executive order) 664 

Ghana To Receive American Corn To Combat Food 
663 Shortage 6 65 

676 Poland 

General Pulaski's Memorial Day, 1958 (text of 

proclamation) 658 

U.S. Sells Antipolio Vaccine to Poland . . . . 659 
Presidential Documents 

650 Exemption of Functions Under Mutual Security 

A<* 664 

General Pulaski's Memorial Day, 1958 .... 658 

660 Protection of Nationals. U.S. Replies to Czecho- 
slovak Protest on Border Violations (texts of 
U.S. and Czechoslovak notes) 660 

676 Publications. Recent releases 676 

Treaty Information 

6«5 Current Actions 575 

U.S. and Japan Sign Protocol to Atomic Energy 

Agreement 674 

648 Venezuela and United States Sign Nuclear Power 

Agreement 673 

666 U.S.S.R. 

Date Set for Technical Talks on Preventing Sur- 
prise Attack (texts of U.S. and Soviet notes) . . 648 
673 U.S. Seeks Further Information From U.S.S R on 

Crashed Plane (text of U.S. note) 659 

654 United Nations 

665 Current U.N. Documents 673 

„ UN ' Committ ee Agrees on Procedure for Disarma- 

bbd ment Items (Lodge) 666 

653 Venezuela. Venezuela and United States Sign Nu- 
clear Power Agreement 673 

665 , J 

Name Index 

651 ^erry, Hampton 676 

Dulles. Secretary 6 50, 675 

Eisenhower, President 658 664 

Herter, Christian A ' ' ' 650 

668 Lodge, Henry Cabot 666 

McCone, John A [ 668 

673 MeKinney, Robert '.'.'., ' 673 

Murphy, Robert ' ' 6 51 

665 Rubottom, Roy R., Jr ....... \ '. 654 

Satterthwaite, Joseph C • • • ^ 

674 Seppala, Richard Rafael . 653 

Suomela, Arnie J . . . ' a 7 >> 

651 Welch. Rolland .'.'.'.'...'. 676 



U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 195S 




the 

Department 

of 

State 



United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, SSOO 

(GPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



YOU . . . 



and the UNITED NATIONS 

1958-59 



Henry Cabot Lodge, United States Representative to the United 
Nations, answers 24 questions frequently asked by citizens in this 
newly revised pamphlet on the functions and accomplishments of the 
U.N. 

Among the questions : 

"Can the United Nations do anything about disarmament?" 
"How much does our membership in the United Nations cost?" 
"What about outer space? Can the U.N. do anything to see that 

nations use outer space for peace instead of war?" 

"How would you sum up the value of the United Nations to the 

United States?" 

An introductory section outlines U.S. representation in the U.N. 
The 48-page pamphlet is illustrated. 



Publication 6692 



25 cents 



Order Form 

fox Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



(cash, cheek, or 
money order). 



For your convenience, the Order Form is printed below: 

ADDRESS ORDER FORM TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 

REMITTANCES, PAYABLE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

SHOULD ACCOMPANY ORDERS. 



Please send me copies of You . . . and the United Nations, 1958S9 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 



THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 



TbS'V I f}3 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1010 



November 3, 1958 



IAL 

.Y RECORD 



SECRETARY DULLES' NEWS CONFERENCE OF 

OCTORER 14 681 

ACADEMIC TRAINING FOR THE FOREIGN SERV- 
ICE • Remarks by President Eisenhower and Deputy Under 
Secretary Murphy ggg 

REFLECTIONS ON U.S.-CANADIAN RELATIONS • by 

Assistant Secretary Elbrick 694 

UNITED NATIONS ESTABLISHES SPECIAL FUND • 

Statements by Senator Mike Mansfield and Christopher H. 
Phillips and Text of Resolution 702 



For index see inside back cover 



Boston Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

DEC 9 - 1958 



DEPOSITORY 



Vol. XXXIX, No. 1010 • Publication 6722 
November 3, 1958 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Price: 

52 issues, domestic $8.50, foreign $12.25 

Single copy, 25 cents 

The printing of this publication has been 
approved by the Director of the Bureau of 
the Budget (January 19, 1958). 

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 ivith information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the 
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 
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, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



Secretary Dulles' News Conference of October 14 



Press release 614 dated October 14 

Secretary Dulles: I have a short statement. 
Mimeographed copies will be available as you 
leave. 1 

The United States welcomes the Chinese Com- 
munist decision of October 12 to continue to sus- 
pend the shelling of Quemoy. We hope that this 
suspension will in fact be for more than the 2 
weeks mentioned. Short suspensions of armed at- 
tack do not provide a solid foundation upon which 
to stabilize the situation in the intei'est of peace. 

The Peiping cease-fire order says that the Amer- 
ican nation is a "great nation" and that its people 
"do not want war. They welcome peace." That 
is very true. So we shall strive for peace con- 
sistently with the honorable performance of our 
obligations to our allies and to world order. 

It is, however, not easy to reconcile these basic 
obligations of ours with the announced Chinese 
Communist objectives. The Chinese Communists' 
statement again makes it crystal clear that their 
objective in the Far East goes far beyond the off- 
shore islands and has as its primary, if not ex- 
clusive, purpose to take over Taiwan (Formosa). 

The offshore islands are treated as a matter of 
indifference. Indeed, the statement says that the 
suspension of shelling is "to enable our com- 
patriots on Quemoy, both military and civilian, to 
get sufficient supplies, including food and military 
equipment, to strengthen their entrenchment." 

The main theme constantly reiterated is that the 
Americans must abandon Taiwan and their alli- 
ance with the Republic of China made for the de- 
fense of Taiwan and "go home." 

The United States remains loyal to its treaty of 
mutual security with the Republic of China. It 
believes that this treaty is not just an intergovern- 



The following six paragraphs were also released sep- 
, arately as press release 613 dated Oct. 14. 

November 3, 1958 



mental arrangement but one that is responsive to 
the aspirations of all Chinese who cherish freedom. 
Now questions. 

Question of Reduction of Garrisons 

Q. Mr. Secretary, there has been a lot of inter- 
est in the question whether the United States feels 
that there is now a basis for reducing the garrisons 
on Quemoy and Matsu, particularly Quemoy. 
What is United States policy on that problem 
now? 

A. I would not say we had a United States 
policy at all on the problem. It is primarily a 
matter for the Republic of China to decide. I 
have made no secret of the fact that over the past 
the United States has been inclined to feel that 
the troops there were excessive for the needs of the 
situation, and that view we still hold. But the Re- 
public of China holds its views, and, after all, it 
is its territory that is primarily involved. The 
statement I just made indicates that I really think 
this question is somewhat exaggerated in its im- 
portance. It is very strange, if it is as important 
as some people think, that the Chinese Commu- 
nists should have suspended the shelling in order, 
as they say, to enable the people in Quemoy to get 
more military equipment and to dig in and en- 
trench themselves more firmly. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, over the weekend Governor 
[Thomas EJ] Dewey suggested that the question of 
the offshore islands might be settled by the World 
Court. Would you favor such an action? 

A. I made clear in my speech recently in New 
York, 2 and elsewhere, that the United States be- 
lieves in invoking the provisions of the United Na- 
tions Charter, which call for settlement by media- 



1 Bulletin of Oct. 13, 1958, p. 561. 



681 






tion and judicial means, among others, of disputes 
which might have international consequences. 
We adhere to that view in relation to the Quemoy 
situation. The Communists have never been will- 
ing to submit any case to the World Court, and I 
doubt whether that is a practical avenue of ap- 
proach that offers much hope. Nevertheless, we 
have extended that idea. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, have you urged or do you in- 
tend to urge Chiang Kai-shek to reduce the mili- 
tary strength of forces on Quemoy f 

A. We have no plans whatsoever for urging him 
to do that, although no doubt there are discussions 
that are going on over there probably at the pres- 
ent time between Secretary [of Defense Neil H.] 
McElroy and others as to the most useful disposi- 
tion of the forces of the Republic of China. But 
I would not want to give the impression that we 
are pressing or plan to press the Eepublic of 
China to do something against its own better 
judgment. The important thing to bear in mind 
here is, as this Chinese Communist statement 
makes clear, what the Communists are working 
for now is primarily to drive a wedge between the 
Chinese on Taiwan and the United States. They 
say that that is their political objective, that is now 
the way they are going to try to get us out of the 
area. We must be very careful not to play the 
game of the Communists in this respect. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, did you talk to Governor 
Dewey about the World Court idea at any time? 

A. No. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you said we Jwd extended that 
idea with the idea of judicial settlement. You 
mean formally extended it to the Communist 
Chinese at Warsaw, for example? 

A. I am sorry that, under the rules under which 
that Warsaw conference is being held, I am pre- 
cluded from giving any specific statements about 
what we have done or said there ; but I think you 
can draw certain inferences from what I have said. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, in response to the question 
about Governor Dewey's World Court suggestion, 
the question was based on Formosa, and you re- 
ferred in your answer to Quemoy. Is there any- 
thing significant to tliat or does that apply to 
Formosa? He was suggesting World Court de- 
termination as to the status of Formosa. 



A. I did not so understand it. 

Q. I think I am wrong on that. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, Mr. Dewey also said that he 
thought that we would agree to the submission 
to the World Court and the Chinese Nationalists 
would too. Do you think the Chiang Kai-shek 
government would agree to submitting it to the 
World Court? 

A. I have no idea at all. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, this morning the wires out 
of Formosa %oere saying that Chinese Nationalist 
publications, presumably from official sources, 
said, in fact, that Chiang Kai-shek was willing to 
reduce his garrisons at Quemoy and Matsu pro- 
vided tlie United States would guarantee their 
protection with American military aid. Can you 
comment on that? Is that in a state of negotia- 
tions between Secretary McElroy and Chiang 
Kai-shek? 

A. I do not think that any political negotia- 
tions are being conducted there by Secretary of 
Defense McElroy. I am not aware of that fact, 
and I think I would be aware of it if there were 
such negotiations. 

Q. That would be political? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, following that up, there 
have been reports, however, t/iat the Secretary 
might be looking for a formula whereby they re- 
duce the amount of their troops on Quemoy and 
Matsu in exchange for an increase in firepower. 
Could you comment on that, please? 

A. That would be entirely a military matter. 
We are constantly in our own military establish- 
ment striving to find ways whereby manpower can 
be reduced and firepower increased. We have to 
some extent found those ways. We have discussed 
similar ways with our allies in Europe, and it 
would not be surprising if they were being dis- 
cussed with our allies in Asia. But I am not 
aware of just what, if any, discussions of that sort 



Q. Mr. Secretary, has there been any indica- 
tion that the garrison on Quemoy is possibly mak- 
ing any deal with the mainland? 

A. We have no evidence at all to that effect, 



682 



Department of State Bulleth \ 



On the contrary, all the evidence that we have is 
that the morale is very high and anti-Communist 
feeling is running very strong. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, to clear up that one point, 
sir, generally a saving in manpower is effected 
through the use of atomic weapons. Did you 
mean in the discussions in the Far East that the 
placement of iceapons with atomic capability is 
being discussed? 

A. No. 

Foreign Policy and the Congressional Campaign 

Q. Mr. Secretary, there is considerable discus- 
sion these days as to whether it is wise or not to 
| let foreign policy be injected into the present con- 
gressional, campaign. Could you comment upon 
this? 

A. I do not think that it is wise that current 
aspects of foreign policy should be injected in the 
campaign. I think there are some basic problems 
of foreign policy which can be discussed in terms 
of underlying principles. But when you begin to 
discuss what you might call current aspects, topi- 
cal aspects, of foreign policy during the campaign, 
I think that is highly undesirable. 

I saw a statement that ex-President Truman 
made on that subject this morning, and I want to 
say I am in complete agreement with the point of 
view he expressed. I also would like to take this 
occasion to express my own appreciation of the 
very strong statements which he has made, both 
in support of the position we took in Lebanon and 
in support of the position we have taken in rela- 
tion to Quemoy and Matsu. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, in that article this morning, 
President Truman said there had been some 
"speeches'''' of what he described as "narrow and 
harmful partisanship" made, and he said he hoped 
the administration would stop this. Are you 
making any effort with the President or Vice 
President, members of the Cabinet, or the Repub- 
lican National Committee to keep these topical 
references out of campaign speeches? 

A. "Well, my general views about this subject 
are well known. I myself have not taken part, as 
I think you ladies and gentlemen know, in any 
political aspects of the campaign. In the 1956 
presidential election, I did not take part at all, 



nor am I taking any part this year. There are 
statements being made on both sides, and when a 
statement is made on one side it is hardly practical 
to prevent an answer being made from the other 
side. I would hope that both sides woidd calm 
down on this aspect of the debate. 

Q. Have you discussed it xoith the President 
or at a Cabinet meeting? 

A. We have discussed the general topic, yes, 
of trying to keep foreign policy out of partisan 
debate. 3 

Q. Mr. Secretary, is the thinning down of 
Chiang's garrison on Quemoy the absolute limits 
of our bargaining position? 

A. Bargaining with whom ? 

Q. With the Chinese Communists. 

A. Well, I don't think that that has anything 
to do with bargaining with the Chinese Commu- 
nists. The Chinese Communists have said, "Bring 
all the supplies, entrench your position all you 
want to in Quemoy." There is nothing whatso- 
ever to indicate that there is any bargaining posi- 
tion in that whatsoever with the Chinese Commu- 
nists. The question of the disposition of troops 
is entirely a matter of what is the most effective, 
efficient use of available forces. The question is 
whether, given the number of forces that are 
there, is it more effective to have them in their 
present numbers on Quemoy and Matsu or to 
have a greater number on Formosa, which would 
have greater flexibility and greater range of action 
under certain contingencies and they could go 
back to Quemoy if the necessity came. It is a 
military problem of the disposition of forces. I 
have no evidence whatever to suggest that there 
is in that any basis whatever for bargaining with 
the Chinese Communists. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, if the Chinese Nationalists 
did not reduce their forces on these islands, hmv 
will the situation in the Far East be different than 
it was before the shooting started? 

A. Well, it is different in the respect that the 
Chinese Communists have learned through actual 
experience that Quemoy is a hard nut to crack, 
that they are up against strong will and resolu- 
tion, and they may have decided to try other 



See also p. 687. 



November 3, 1958 



683 



means. Now I do not say that steps cannot be 
taken to assure that these islands will not be a 
source of provocation, as I said before, or that 
they would not be "a thorn in the side of peace." 
Actually very little, if anything, has been done 
from these islands in recent months to make them 
a thorn in the side of peace. They have not been 
used to blockade the ports of Amoy or Fuchow. 
They have not been staging commando raids from 
them or trying to infiltrate agents from them. I 
think the situation in that respect can be clarified, 
but there is not a great deal to be done. We are 
not in favor of turning over these islands to the 
Chinese Communists. After all, there are 45,000 
civilians (on Quemoy alone) who would have 
been turned over and who don't want to be turned 
over. We are not in the business of giving away 
people, even if the Republic of China woidd agree. 

We have to be very careful to handle this in a 
way which, on the one hand, avoids anything 
which can reasonably be regarded as provocative 
of war or causes irritations, which would almost 
inevitably provoke violent reactions, and, on the 
other hand, avoids exhibiting a weakness which 
would instill concern throughout the Far East as 
to what our purposes were. 

I think we can find a course which will be along 
that route and that there is no reason to antici- 
pate that there will be provocations from these 
islands. But I do not think that there is much 
in the way of a bargaining position with the 
Communists in that respect, because, as I em- 
phasize in all of our talks, whether at Warsaw 
or elsewhere, in every statement that they have 
made there has been nothing whatever to suggest 
that you could strike a bargain with the Commu- 
nists in terms of these islands. They are gunning 
for something far bigger than that — they want to 
drive the United States from the Western Pacific. 
That is what has been made clear by the statement 
made only a few days ago by the Chinese Foreign 
Minister, reinforced by this statement of Sunday. 
They are thinking in those terms. And I think 
it is up to us, also, to think in those same terms 
and not get our sights so minute, upon a little 
thing, that we overlook the big thing which is at 
stake in this situation. 

Application of Treaty With Republic of China 

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it correct that under the 
mutual defense treaty with Chiang we have a veto 

684 



power over aggressive actions from Formosa and 
the Pescadores? Does that also apply to the off- 
shore islands which are not named in the treaty? 

A. I think that it does. That's my recollection. 
You say a "veto power"? It is agreed, I think, 
that neither of us will use force for purposes other 
than emergency action as against attack, except 
through joint agreement. It is a reciprocal agree- 
ment. It doesn't give us an exclusive veto power ; 
it works both ways. 4 

Q. Then could the U.S. give assurances that it 
would not approve provocative or aggressive ac- 
tions totoard the mainland from the offshore 
islands under the treaty? 

A. I think technically that we could, and, in- 
deed, I think we have made it clear that we do 
not intend to agree to provocative action of that 
sort. Whether we could make an arrangement 
that would be binding upon us in the future, I 
don't know. I would somewhat doubt that. But 
the existence of that arrangement does provide 
assurance to all people who have confidence that 
the United States does not favor aggression. I 
think we have made it abundantly clear that we 
do not favor aggression, and wherever we have an 
opportunity to apply that principle against the 
use of force for aggressive purposes, we do it. 
We would use our rights and prerogatives in this 
respect in that same sense. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, just before the Red Chinese 
cease-fire offer, I think you inade it pretty clear 
that, if there were a cease-fire, certain good conse- 
quences would flow. And now today you seem 
to be saying that the thinning out of forces is not 
part of the bargaining position here on either 
side. And I wonder now, sir, if you coidd say 
what the Red Chinese can expect in the way of 
further developments now that a cease-fire has 
been put forth. 

A. Well, let me just beg of you this: We are 
conducting a negotiation, a tough negotiation, 
with the Chinese Communists, and you are asking 
me here to expose to all of you and, in that way, 
to the Chinese Communists, just what our bargain- 
ing position is, just what we will do and what 
we won't do. Now I am anxious to throw all the 



' For background and text of the treaty, see Bulletin 
of Dec. 13, 1954, p. 895. 

Department of State Bulletin 






light I reasonably can on the situation, but I just 
can't destroy our whole bargaining position by 
giving an advance preview of it to the Commu- 
nists via this press conference. 

New Chinese Communist Tactic 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you have said that the new 
Chinese Communist tactic could drive a wedge 
between us and our Nationalist allies. Could you 
amplify that a bit? In what way? I mean, is 
it going to be a political attack, or is it under way, 
or is it going to invoice more than the Chinese 
Nationalists, or what? 

A. The Communist statement says that they 
must conduct efforts day by day, week by week, 
gradually to educate the Chinese on Taiwan, in 
particular, to the fact that the Americans are 
really their enemies, and that the Chinese should 
all be one happy family together, and that the 
thing to do is to kick the Americans out, tell 
them to go home. That is what they announce as 
their program. I suppose they will carry it out 
by propaganda, by subversive agents, and so forth. 
They have been trying to do that in the past with, 
I think, no significant success. But the statement, 
at least if you take it at face value — as probably 
you can't — would indicate that that is where they 
are going to concentrate from now on. 

Now, as I say, and as they say, this may be just 
a trick. "We are dealing with very shifty people. 
I am not certain how much reliance is to be placed 
upon the Sunday statement. Maybe that is just 
to get us thinking along other lines, and then 
the}' may resume this armed attack again sud- 
denly. They say, "It is up to us to decide when 
we fight and when we stop fighting." So that 
there is nothing very solid in their position that 
we can depend upon. But they do say at least 
that they intend to concentrate upon propaganda 
and subversive efforts designed to woo the Chinese 
so that they will get rid of the Americans. 

Q. Mr. St cretary, if there is a de facto truce 
in the Formosa area, do you expect there will be 
probes in other parts of the Far East by the 
Chinese Communists — in Indochina and Malaya 
and other places? Have you any evidence of that? 

A. I think that there is less likelihood of that 
because of the fact that we did stand firm here 
and that this particular probe, at least for the 
moment, doesn't seem to pay off for the probers. 

November 3, 1958 



Q. Mr. Secretary, do you think perhaps your 
remarks at your last news conference, with respect 
to Chiang's prospects of getting back to the main- 
land, might have induced the Communists to try 
this wedge-driving process you now speak of? 

A. I do not think so. There is nothing to indi- 
cate that, certainly. I think that one has to be 
careful not to make statements which will be mis- 
interpreted in Taiwan, and it is very easy to have 
that happen. But I do not think, in fact, that 
that was a consequence of what I said. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, I have a question on freedom 
of the press, please. In the Worthy passport case 
in the District Court, the pleadings argue that 
freedom of the press is merely freedom to publish 
and not freedom of access to news sources as by 
foreign travel. Could you throw some light on 
that and on what seems to be its discriminatory 
application, since, while Worthy is refused the 
passport for refusing to say that he won't go to 
China with it, another American neivspaperman, 
without having his passport withdrawn, is run- 
ning a series in the Washington News on a visit 
to Red China? 

A. I am not very familiar with the Worthy 
case. I do know that passports to go to mainland 
China were issued to an appreciable number of 
newspaper people about a year ago, I think, or 
thereabouts. I think they originally ran out, and 
I think their renewal has now been authorized. 
So that there are representative newspaper people 
who are authorized to go to China. I did not 
know that any of them had received visas. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, are you saying that the ap- 
parently viidespread interpretation after your last 
news conference 2 xoeeks ago that, if the cease-fire 
changed, Chiang might be encouraged to get some 
of his troops off Quemoy — that that interpreta- 
tion was wrong? 

A. No, I believe that, if there is a dependable 
cease-fire there, quite a few things will happen 
as a natural consequence of that. At the moment 
it doesn't seem to be very dependable when it is 
only done first for 1 week and then for 14 days. 
But I believe that, if there were anything like a 
dependable cease-fire in the area, there would 
automatically, almost as a matter of cold logic, 
come about quite considerable changes in the 
situation. 



685 



Q. Mr. Secretary, on another subject, have you 
considered going to Geneva at any stage in the 
negotiations with the Soviet Union on the test ban 
due to begin the end of the month? 

A. Naturally, I have given thought to that 
in view of the suggestion that was made by the 
Soviet Union. And I would certainly go there if 
I felt that my presence was necessary or helpful 
to assure the success of that conference. At the 
moment I do not see that that is likely to be the 
case. But I keep an open mind on the subject. 
There are very many aspects of it. Certainly the 
initial aspects are, I think, highly complicated, 
highly technical, where I am not versed at all. I 
believe that the group we will have there, headed 
by Ambassador Wadsworth, will be able to bring 
to bear the knowledge that is required, and devote 
to it the time that is required, to a better degree 
than I could. But if a situation should arise 
making it seem desirable for me to go there, I 
would certainly be prepared to go. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, you have spohen of a reason- 
able, dependable cease-fire. Could you give us 
your requirements for that and some idea of the 
duration of the cease-fire before you would feel 
that a reasonable cease-fire had come about? 

A. I doubt whether I could usefully try to 
answer that question. What is dependable, when 
you are dealing with the Communists, is a very 
difficult question indeed. It is made up of quite 
a few components, not merely what they say, but 
on what they do, and upon what other people do 
as indicating that violations might carry with 
them economic or political sanctions of a kind 
which the Chinese Communists wouldn't like. It 
is a complex business. But, as I say, if the total 
of it all added up to something that we felt that 
we could rely upon and that efforts would not be 
used by the Communist side to take these islands 
by force, then I think one can see that logically 
certain consequences would flow from that. 

Arab League 

Q. Mr. Secretary, on another subject, there has 
recently been made an attempt to revive some of 
the functions of the League of Arab Nations, and 
Tunisia and Morocco have joined it. Is this, in 
your view, a welcomed development? Wliat use- 
ful purposes could the Arab League fulfill on 
this in your view? 

686 



A. In relation to Tunisia and Morocco? 

Q. In relation to the area as a whole. The point 
of my question is, is it your view that the Arab 
League would be a useful instrument to facilitate 
the peaceful change and otherwise serve the pur- 
poses of peace in the area? 

A. I think it could be, yes. We in general 
favor, and indeed the charter of the United Na- 
tions favors, the development of regional associa- 
tions, and it calls for the solution of differences 
by regional associations if that is practical. At 
this last special emergency meeting of the Gen- 
eral Assembly the unanimous vote was obtained 
in the last analysis because the members of the 
Arab League came together and agreed upon a 
resolution which was acceptable to them all and 
consequently was acceptable to the General 

Assembly. 

Now that illustrates, I think, that they do have 
a potential of being constructive and helpful. 
Whether they always will be or not is a question. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, if the loss of Quemoy and 
Matsu woxdd be so weakening and be so dis- 
astrous to the free-world alliances, why do you 
think it is that more of our allies do not see their 
own interests in the Nationalist Chinese retention 
of the islands? 

A. I think that most of our allies, indeed, all 
their governmental representatives, either foreign 
ministers or ambassadors, that I have talked to— 
and I have talked to quite a few— have been in 
entire accord with the position which we have 
taken there of strength and resoluteness and not 
giving in. There have been some public state- 
ments' of that sort made which, however, didn't 
seem to make our press. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, a few moments ago you spoke 
on the desirability of having both the Republican 
and Democratic leaders calm down on discussing 
topical foreign policy issues, and you said it 
would be all right to discuss what you considered 
to be the general principles on both sides. What 
would you think of a statement such as this: "The 
Acheson-Truman foreign policy resulted in war 
and the Eisenhower-Dulles policy resulted^ in 
peace'''? Now this comes from a speech last night 
by Vice President Nixon, and he explained that 
he said this in answer to the statement put out 

Department of Sfafe Bulletin 



over the weekend by the Democrats. My question 
is, does this statement fit within the limits that 
you would hope both sides would observe? 

A. Well, both statements might fit without the 
limits which I hope both sides would observe. 

[The Department of State on October 15 (press release 
616) released the following statement by Secretary Dulles. 

Statements which I made at yesterday's press confer- 
ence have been interpreted in some quarters as implying 
criticism of Vice President Nixon for having replied last 
Monday to the foreign policy challenge issued on Sunday 
by the Democratic Advisory Committee. 

AetuaUy, my criticism applied to that Committee, al- 
though I refrained from naming it. It had injected for- 
eign policy into the political campaign in a manner that 
required, indeed specifically called for, an answer. 

In my press conference, I expressed the view that, in 
the interest of the Nation, foreign policy should be kept 
out of partisan politics. But I went on to say, "When a 
statement is made on one side it is hardly practical to 
prevent an answer being made from the other side." It 
was the statement issued by the Democratic Advisory 
Committee challenging Republicans to "defend" the ad- 
ministration's foreign policy that evoked the answer from 
the Vice President. In those circumstances I fully con- 
curred in the need for that answer. I would, however, 
have preferred it if the Democratic Advisory Committee 
had not issued its highly partisan political challenge, so 
that no reply would have been required. 

The Vice President's statement made quite clear that 
he, too, does not favor injecting foreign policy into politics 
and that he only replied because, he said, "those in the 
Democratic Party who insist on making foreign policy 
an issue in this campaign have left us no choice." He 
paid tribute, as did I, to the many Democrats who have 
acted without partisanship in respect of foreign policy. 
It is essential that this should continue, for if there is 
partisan division in this field the results would be dis- 
astrous for the Nation.] 

Q. Mr. Secretary, did you have any word from 
the Norwegians that influenced your statement in 

(your press conference of last week on the thinning 
down of forces in Quemoy and Matsu? 
A. I have had talks with the representatives 
at the United Nations of a large number of for- 
eign countries, including the Foreign Minister of 
» Norway, Mr. [Halvard] Lange, who is a man 
whom I greatly respect and admire. From all of 
them I have gotten comment or observations about 
how they think the problem should be solved. 
But I have not gotten from any source anything 
to indicate that a deal could be made with the 
Communists which was confined to the Quemoy 
or Matsu situation. 



Settling of Taiwan Dispute in U.N. or World Court 

Q. Mr. Secretary, something you said about the 
Court a while ago made me think that the United 
States had suggested this as a possible forum, of 
settlement on the Formosa problem and that Com- 
munist China had not been interested in such a 
procedure. I wondered, going beyond that, 
whether you have thought of or might take some 
action to take this whole matter now to the United 
Nations or, unilaterally, to take it to the World 
Court. 

A. As the Chinese Communist statement of 
Sunday made clear and, indeed, as they made 
clear many times, they are absolutely opposed to 
any consideration of this matter by the United 
Nations. They took that position in relation to 
the Korean war when they were there in 1950, 
where they claimed it was just a civil war and that 
the United Nations and the United States were 
aggressors and they would only discuss this ag- 
gression but not any aspects of the civil war. 
They took the same position in 1955 when the 
Taiwan Straits situation came up before the Se- 
curity Council. And in the statement made on 
Sunday they said that this was no business what- 
soever of the United Nations, being purely a civil 
war. 

I am very dubious whether, in the light of that, 
we could expect a positive solution of this prob- 
lem through the United Nations. I have always 
felt that, if there was in this situation a threat 
of wai", we had a duty under the charter to bring 
it to the United Nations which has that responsi- 
bility. As the threat of war recedes, and I hope 
that it has receded, there is perhaps less reason to 
bring it to the United Nations, knowing as we do 
know — not only from these official statements but 
from unofficial activities of the Chinese Com- 
munists — that they are doing everything possible 
to prevent its being brought in any way before 
the United Nations and would refuse to accept 
any resolution by the United Nations on the sub- 
ject except a resolution condemning the United 
States and calling upon it to get out of Taiwan. 
Under those circumstances I do not feel that this 
present aspect of the matter can constructively 
be brought to the United Nations. 

Now, as far as the World Court is concerned, 
there is no way the United States can unilaterally 



November 3, 1958 



687 



bring it to the World Court. There would have 
to be action by the United Nations in the Security 
Council or the General Assembly, which would 
require two-thirds vote. I'm very dubious 
whether that would be obtained. There would 
probably be veto action in the Security Council 
by the Soviet Union, and probably, in view of 
the Communists' attitude toward the World 
Court, it would not be possible to get a two-thirds 
vote in the General Assembly. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, Senator Mike Mansfield 
today suggested that, if the negotiations bogged 
down in Warsaw, you meet with Chou En-lai. 
Would you be willing to? 

A. I answered that question at my last press 
conference, 6 and I think that I'd like to stand on 
that answer. If you don't recall it, I can — 

Q. This is a fresh suggestion. 

A. Well, I have no i - eason to alter the position 
I expressed 2 weeks ago. 

Q. Thank you, sir. 

U.S. Dependents Authorized 
To Return to Lebanon 

Press release 627 dated October 18 

The Department of State on October 18 au- 
thorized dependents of U.S. officials stationed in 
Lebanon to return to that country. All such 
dependents were evacuated in June and July 1958. 

The Department took this action as a result of 
the improved conditions which have developed in 
Lebanon in recent days. 

U.S. Experts Named for Talks 

on Preventing Surprise Attack 

The Department of State announced on Octo- 
ber 13 (press release 606) that William C. Foster, 
vice president for public affaire and a director of 
the Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation; 
George B. Kistiakowsky, professor of chemistry 
at Harvard University and a member of the Pres- 
ident's Science Advisory Committee; and Gen. 
Otto P. Weyland, commander of the Tactical Air 
Command at Langley Air Force Base, have been 
asked and have agreed to serve as experts in the 



forthcoming talks, beginning November 10, on the 
technical aspects of minimizing the possibility of 
surprise military attack. 1 For the Western coun- 
tries there will also be experts from the United 
Kingdom, France, Canada, Italy, and possibly 
other countries. 



Economic Officers in Europe 
Hold Regional Meeting 

Press release 611 dated October 14 

A 3-day meeting of senior economic officers 
from U.S. Foreign Service posts in 25 European 
countries will be held at Berlin from October 20 
to 22. The meeting will bring together the prin- 
cipal officers engaged in economic work at each of 
the Foreign Service posts involved. 

Like similar meetings held in the past, this con- 
ference will provide an opportunity for these offi- 
cers to discuss current European and worldwide 
economic developments and U.S. economic pro- 
grams and policies among themselves and with 
officials from Washington. 

Officials from Washington participating in the 
meeting will include : Douglas Dillon, Under Sec- 
retary of State for Economic Affairs; Henry 
Kearns, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for In- 
ternational Affairs; Foy D. Kohler, Deputy As- 
sistant Secretary of State for European Affairs; 
and W. T. M. Beale, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
of State for Economic Affairs. 



Columbus Day, 1958 

Remarks by President Eisenhower 2 

It is an honor to join the Columbus Citizens 
Committee in this traditional ceremony. As 
dwellers in this mighty continent, whether in its 
northern or in its southern half, we cannot fail 
to honor the memory of Christopher Columbus 
and acknowledge our debt to him. 

Columbus opened the door to the New World, 
to a new world of opportunity for the millions 
who have followed the path he blazed. Coming 
from every land and race and creed, our own fore- 
fathers came together and built a nation. 



' mil.. Oct. 20, 195S, p. 597. 
688 



1 For an exchange of notes between the U.S. and the 
U.S.S.R., see Bulletin of Oct. 27, 1958, p. 648. 

2 Made at a wreath-laying ceremony at Columbus Circle, 
New York, N.Y., on Oct. 12 (White House press release). 

Department of State Bulletin 



Our people have made their own distinctive 
contributions to mankind. We have forged a new 
pattern of democracy. We established a new na- 
tion, where men were and are free to live their 
own lives. 

Over the decades, blessed by a generous Provi- 
dence, we have grown in strength and in tradi- 
tion. We began to believe that we were set apart, 
a new creation entirely. Surrounded on both 
sides by two mighty oceans, we developed our 
productive capacity and nourished in a world of 
our own. 

But in recent years we have witnessed a pro- 
found change in the life and attitude of our peo- 
ple. We know that we are no longer living in 
a "new" world ; we are rather living in a part of 
the whole world, and our fortunes are intimately 
related to the fortunes of our neighbors over- 
seas — on every continent. 

Our wisest men have known this from the be- 



ginning. We have always been part of the whole 
fabric of human life. 

As a part of the world's life — and especially 
with those that, with us, respect human liberty 
and dignity — we must, if we are to advance our 
common fortunes, live as a family of equals. Co- 
operation among us, whether it be in trade for 
increased prosperity or in the task of protecting 
our free institutions from aggression, is the com- 
mon obligation of all. Unless each nation per- 
forms this task to the extent of its capacity, then 
none of us can long live in peace. 

But, as long as we are faithful to these self- 
evident truths, we can proudly say that we are a 
new world. As long as our minds and hearts 
are as wide open as the Atlantic Ocean and our 
understanding as deep, we will continue to wel- 
come new Christopher Columbuses to our shores 
and with them push forward toward that goal of 
all mankind, a just and permanent peace. 



Academic Training for the Foreign Service 



Following are remarks made by President 
Eisenhower at ceremonies dedicating the Edmund 
A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at George- 
town University, Washington, D.C., on October 
13 and remarks made by Deputy Under Secre- 
tary of State Robert Murphy at a symposium on 
foreign service on the same date. 

REMARKS BY PRESIDENT EISENHOWER 

White House press release dated October 13 

As President, the highest executive official of 
this Government, I want to thank the university 
and the Society [of Jesus] and all of their sup- 
porters for the work they are doing in educating 
soldiers of peace. Certainly this is what we ex- 
pect our diplomats to do — to be officers of the great 
army that has as its first business the developing 
and sustaining of a peace with justice and with 
honor. 

I am told, on figures that were of no later vin- 
tage than April 10.")7, that 87 of your graduates 
are actively working now in the Foreign Service. 



Possibly there have been hundreds through these 
40 years. That seemed to be the figure now ac- 
tively working. 

I woidd hope your number would increase. We 
need people who will find, in the service of their 
country and of peace, their great satisfaction. 
We need people who will apply themselves to 
understanding that the Avorld, as we saw symbol- 
ized in the revolving globe at the entrance to the 
hall, is a single entity. We need people who are 
not too much concerned by the immediate consid- 
erations of private gain, or the effect on our own 
particular community of a wool importation, or 
the bad effect that is caused at times by some in- 
temperate, ill-tempered description of other peo- 
ple in the world. We need people who see that 
no part, no matter how important, can be greater 
than the whole. In developing our country they 
recognize that they must help to develop under- 
standing and knowledge throughout the world; 
they recognize peaceful intentions, and they are 
determined to make those intentions reality. 

So, to say that I am honored today by the uni- 
versity — that I am complimented by its present- 



November 3, 1958 



689 



ing to me its honorary doctorate — is a great 
understatement. I assure you that the presence 
here of these dedicated men and instructors and 
students in this audience is an inspiration, a mem- 
ory that I shall carry with me. 
Thank you. 

REMARKS BY DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY 
MURPHY 

Press release 608 dated October 13 

The Secretary of State has asked me to convey 
his cordial greetings to the Georgetown Univer- 
sity School of Foreign Service and to the par- 
ticipants in this symposium. It is a distinct priv- 
ilege and inspiration to be associated today with 
the dedication of the Edmund A. Walsh Memo- 
rial Building in this great university. 

I would like to discuss the subject "Academic 
Training and Diplomacy" in terms of the emer- 
gence of the new United States Foreign Service 
which, as a result of the social, political, and 
technological revolutions of our time, has had to 
develop capacity in the last decade or two to per- 
form an increasingly important, inclusive, and 
difficult role. Of course what is true of our Amer- 
ican organization applies in varying degrees, de- 
pending on a number of factors, to other nations. 
Our Service has had to assume a more important 
role because failure of diplomacy to meet the chal- 
lenge of the times could prove disastrous to our 
civilization; a more inclusive role because diplo- 
macy today enters into many fields other than the 
traditional ones of the past; a more difficult role 
because the extent of specific knowledge demanded 
in each field is growing and with it simultane- 
ously the need for a broad perspective and under- 
standing of many fields. 

The demands on the individual diplomat have 
increased by virtue of the increases of the demands 
upon the organization within which he works. 
The United States State Department today, as an 
organization, has responsibilities not only in the 
conduct of traditional consular activities and in- 
ternational relations in the political field but also 
in diplomatic negotiation and in the policy as- 
pects of such programs as economic aid, military 
security, science, public information, cultural ac- 
tivities, and many others. 

Not only must our Foreign Service personnel 
engage in programs of such diversity but they 



must be equipped to understand the cultures and 
values of many new and emergent countries and 
areas of the world which were almost completely 
beyond the ken of the United States diplomatic 
service of yesteryear. Also today, and perhaps 
first in importance, is the driving necessity of 
understanding the nature, purpose, and methods 
of the international Communist movement. No 
Foreign Service officer, no matter where he may 
be situated, can perform his job adequately with- 
out such understanding. I am sure it would be 
safe to say that Father Walsh, were he with us 
today, could endorse that statement. 

Broadening of the Foreign Service 

The above factors roughly illustrate the scope 
anil dimensions of our new Foreign Service. It is 
the responsibility of our Government to organize 
itself and to use its available human resources to 
meet these new challenges. Since 1954 the State 
Department has expanded and reorganized to this 
purpose. Among the most important steps taken 
has been the broadening of the Foreign Service 
to bring in such functions as administration, in- 
telligence and research, higher economics and 
science, among others, under the diplomatic 
umbrella. 

Many positions located in Washington and 
formerly filled by departmental civil servants 
have been designated as Foreign Service officer 
positions and will be staffed by officers subject to 
Foreign Service regulations, including service 
anywhere in the world. Many of the depart- 
mental civil servants accepted the opportunity to 
enter the Foreign Service, and the number of dip- 
lomatic career positions was increased in this 
process from about 1,300 to more than 4,000. 

It is this group of officer positions of which we 
are speaking today as being the Foreign Service 
of the United States. Despite the obvious need 
to respect economy, it would appear that there 
will be inevitable growth as new responsibilities 
are thrust upon us. There is, of course, constant 
turnover as well. Most of the new blood to be 
brought into the Service in the future will come 
in at the entrance level (the class 8 Foreign Serv- 
ice officer) and will be recruited from our colleges 
and universities. To insure that young men and 
women throughout the entire country in all types 
of educational institutions will have access to the 
Foreign Service, we have established liaison with 



690 



Department of State Bulletin 



nearly 500 colleges and universities. We are in- 
terested in the most highly qualified candidates, 
many of whom will require training in many di- 
versified fields not traditionally connected with 
diplomacy. A tabulation of the educational 
background of present Foreign Service officers 
shows, in addition to the majority trained in the 
social sciences, such specializations as accounting, 
biological sciences, science, business administra- 
tion, engineering, fine arts, journalism, and medi- 
cine. The list is likely to become more rather 
than less diversified in the future and with in- 
creased stress on those with administrative skill 
and training. Our colleges and universities can 
and do help us to find able young people with di- 
versified skills and interests. 

Our written entrance examinations were re- 
vised in 1955, shifting emphasis from detailed 
knowledge in specific fields to a broader testing 
of the candidate's understanding of the ideas and 
concepts basic to the development of the United 
States and other countries and on his ability to 
write correctly and effectively and to interpret 
tabular and quantitative data. The large ma- 
jority of those who pass these written examina- 
tions are college graduates. Many have advanced 
degrees, although there is a small percentage who 
succeed despite the fact they had only partial or 
no college education. The subsequent oral ex- 
amination evaluates the candidate's personality, 
attitudes, behavior, and ability to think. The ex- 
aminers are instructed to be skeptical of "parrot- 
like answers" which may reflect a "cram" course, 
dogmatic teaching, or rote memorization rather 
than analytical ability. It is of interest to note 
that more than 12,000 applications to the Foreign 
Service were received in 1956 in contrast to 1,200 
in 1954, reflecting interest on a countrywide basis 
and at all economic levels. 

The role of the universities and colleges as 
training centers for this new and broader For- 
eign Service has consequently been enlarged. In- 
creasing emphasis among educators on dynamic 
as opposed to static knowledge fits in well with 
the new approach of the Foreign Service entrance 
examinations. The humanizing of the humanities 
and social sciences and the close application of 
theory to the problems of reality is proving in- 
creasingly valuable in the intellectual training 
and equipment of Foreign Service officers. There 
is one serious weakness, however, which the De- 



partment and the colleges have shared, and that 
is their failure to emphasize the study of foreign 
languages. 

While I note that Dr. [Leon] Dostert [director 
of the Foreign Service School's Institute of Lan- 
guages and Linguistics] is going to talk to us later 
about "Language Communication in Diplomacy," 
I do feel it important that I emphasize that in the 
new career Foreign Service knowledge of foreign 
languages is indispensable. Each Foreign Serv- 
ice officer is now required to have, or to gain, a 
working knowledge of at least one modem- world 
language. We hope in addition that he will have 
or develop proficiency in the language of the coun- 
try to which he is assigned. 

Despite this increased emphasis on knowledge 
of foreign languages, however, the Department 
has been forced to change foreign language 
from a required to an optional part of the en- 
trance examination. Foreign-language examina- 
tions proved such a difficult hurdle to candidates in 
the past that the Department feared it would lose 
otherwise potentially excellent officers. Indeed, 
70 percent of the new officers who came in under the 
new examination do not have a useful knowledge 
of any modern foreign language. The Depart- 
ment has undertaken to train them, adding a con- 
siderable burden to its language-training pro- 
gram, which also carries the responsibility of 
teaching officers the more exotic or hard-to-learn 
languages. 

Training and Career Development 

Of course, the Department of State obviously 
does not expect that the academic institutions of 
America can do the entire job of equipping our 
young people for a Foreign Service career. The 
needs of the Service and its changing emphasis 
have required us to set up a Career Development 
and Counseling Staff and to greatly expand the 
Foreign Service Institute in order to effectively 
develop and utilize our manpower. The Career 
Development and Counseling Staff maintains a 
continuing evaluation of the performance, abili- 
ties, and potential of each officer as he progresses 
from one assignment to another. It also is con- 
stantly assessing both current and future person- 
nel requirements of the Service, coordinating offi- 
cer potential and Service needs. The Foreign 
Service Institute provides training for junior, 
midcareer, and senior officers, study in 31 Ian- 



November 3, 1958 



691 



guages, and short lecture courses in special fields. 
An academic year of advanced study at a uni- 
versity, either in connection with an area special- 
ization or in some academic discipline, such as 
economics or political science, is also made avail- 
able to officers who show marked potential. 

The Department now has 2,600 officer positions 
in 249 embassies, legations, and considates 
scattered all over the world and nearly 1,400 more 
in the United States. Our first job is to keep 
these positions filled with the best qualified people 
and to assure that there is enough reserve man- 
power to fill positions which are vacated on an 
emergency basis through incapacitation, illness, 
or death, as well as to be able to meet unexpected 
crises in almost any part of the globe. The De- 
partment of State does not have a sufficiently 
large manpower pool to meet both its operational 
needs and its needed training responsibilities; so 
training and career development often defer to 
emergency requirements. We hope this situation 
will improve, allowing more margin for training. 

There is one last point I would like briefly to 
make. The very nature of the Foreign Service 
is such that an officer cannot expect to go through 
his career serving always in the area and in the 
capacity he would choose. The Department of 
State, like so many other organizations in our 
country, is large, compartmentalized, and com- 
plex. The problems the individual faces in adapt- 
ing himself to any organization without blunting 
his initiative, enthusiasm, and imagination are 
also very much a part of our Foreign Service. 
Under present world conditions, when a great 
number of problems have to be absorbed and co- 
ordinated on their way from lower to higher 
levels of authority, some form of pyramidal 
hierarchy is inevitable, whether it be called a 
system, an organization, a corporation, or a 
bureaucracy. Yet forcefulness, intellectual cour- 
age, judgment, and imagination have never been 
needed more than they are today. Organization 
is essential to order; individual enterprise is 
essential to progress. No society can afford to 
stress one at the expense of the other. 

In our country the system has the responsi- 
bility of keeping a maximum flexibility in order 
to provide the individual with the greatest scope 
possible for his development and maximum pro- 
ductivity. The new Foreign Service is designed 
and administered, we hope, to provide that flex- 



ibility. It can achieve the union between order 
and progress only if its officers, during the forma- 
tive years they have spent in their institutions 
of learning, achieve within themselves a happy 
balance between individual drive and organiza- 
tional discipline. In the molding of character 
and personality, the development of a fine per- 
ception which can avoid a destructive individu- 
alism as well as an uninspired and routine con- 
formity, the colleges and universities, just as this 
great university of Georgetown, can make their 
greatest contribution to the new career Foreign 
Service. 



47th Anniversary of Founding 
of Republic of China 

Following is an exchange of messages between 
President Eisenhower and Chiang Kai-shek, Pres- 
ident of the Republic of China. 

Message From President Eisenhower 

White House press release dated October 10 

October 10, 1958 

The people of the United States join me in send- 
ing Your Excellency and the people of China their 
sincerest felicitations on the forty-seventh anni- 
versary of the founding of the Republic of China. 

We gladly recall on this occasion the Treaty of 
Mutual Defense between the Republic of China 
and the United States. We pay tribute to the in- 
domitable spirit of Free China which, tested so 
often in recent years by invasion and war, has once 
again been demonstrated in the face of Communist 
attack. We recognize that the sacrifices of Free 
China contribute to the survival of freedom every- 
where. We extend our sympathy and friendship 
to all the Chinese people, being deeply conscious 
of the hardships and denials of freedom that so 
many of them are enduring. 

Dwight D. Eisenhower 



Message From President Chiang Kai-shek 

White House press release dated October 14 

October 12, 1958 

On behalf of the Chinese Government and peo- 
ple I thank Your Excellency sincerely for the 
cordial greetings and good wishes contained in 



692 



Department of State Bulletin 



your kind message on our National Day. In com- 
memorating this occasion amidst unprovoked 
Communist attacks, we are also mindful of the 
community of interests and unity of purpose be- 
tween our two countries as symbolized by the 
Mutual Defence Treaty. This solemn instrument 
binds us more closely together in our common ef- 
fort to safeguard peace and security in this pail 
of the world. 

I wish to express to Your Excellency the deep 
appreciation of my Government and people for 
the support rendered us by the United States Gov- 
ernment to meet Communist aggression. I must 
pay special tribute to the gallant officers and men 
of United States Armed Forces who have been 
sharing hardships with us and making invaluable 
contributions to us, particularly in helping solve 
problems of resupply to Kinmen Garrison and 
civilian populace. The zest and courage they 
have displayed in their endeavours deserve our 
high admiration and commendation. 

I feel sure that all Chinese people, including 
those on the Mainland now under the yoke of 
Communist tyranny, are encouraged by the deter- 
mined effort our two countries are making for the 
cause of freedom and democracy. I am confident 
that our continuing solidarity and exertions will 
bring about the ultimate attainment of our com- 
mon goal. 

Accept, Mr. President, my best wishes for your 
good health and prosperity of your country. 

Chiang Kai-shek 



Korean Minister of Reconstruction 
Visits United States 

The Department of State announced on October 
17 (press release 626) that the Minister of Re- 
construction and Economic Coordinator of the 
Republic of Korea, Song In-sang, would arrive 
at "Washington on October 18 for a 2-week visit. 
He is accompanied by the Economic Coordinator 
of the United Nations Command, William E. 
Warne; by Kim Tai-dong, Chief of the Require- 
ments and Coordination Bureau of the Ministry 
of Reconstruction: and by Lee Han-bin, Chief of 
the Bureau of the Budget of the Ministry of 
Finance of the Republic of Korea. 

During his visit to Washington Minister Song 
will confer with officials of the Department of 



State, the Department of Defense, and the Inter- 
national Cooperation Administration concerning 
the execution of the mutual security program in 
Korea. 

Minister Song will call on the Acting Secretary 
of State and the Director of the International 
Cooperation Administration. He will also call 
on Assistant Secretary of State for Economic 
Affairs Thomas C. Mann and on Deputy Assist- 
ant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs 
J. Graham Parsons. Other meetings will be 
scheduled as the program of Minister Song's visit 
develops. He is expected to go to New York about 
November 1 for several days and then return to 
Washington for another week before his departure 
for Korea. 



Thai National Assemblymen 
Visit United States 

Press release 61S dated October 15 

Secretary Dulles on October 15 welcomed 12 
members of the National Assembly of Thailand 
who are visiting the United States under the De- 
partment's leader exchange program. 

The 3-day Washington visit of the Assembly- 
men included a meeting with President Eisen- 
hower at the White House, conferences with 
Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Af- 
fairs Walter S. Robertson and Deputy Director 
of the International Cooperation Administration 
D. A. Fitzgerald, luncheon with representatives 
of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 
and a visit to the Capitol, a reception given by 
Mr. Robertson at the President's Guest House, and 
a dinner given by Thanat Kh.om.an, Ambassador 
from Thailand. 

On October 16 the Assemblymen leave for New 
York City, where they will be honored at a lunch- 
eon given by Columbia Univei'sity and another 
on October 17 given by Prince Wan Waithayakon, 
Foreign Minister of Thailand and head of Thai- 
land's delegation at the United Nations. 

Secretary Dulles, in outlining for the visitors 
his views on the world situation, emphasized the 
necessity for all free nations to cooperate in main- 
taining their freedom in the face of the Commu- 
nist threat. The goal of communism is not to 
further the welfare of peoples but to exploit them 
for the purpose of extending its sway throughout 
the world, he stated. To combat this force the 



November 3, 1958 



693 



free nations must have a resolute faith in free- 
dom and a belief in the rights of individuals and 
be willing to accept risks if necessary to withhold 
the advance of communism. The Secretary told 



the group of legislators that the United States con- 
siders Thailand a nation deeply dedicated to free- 
dom and rejoices in the friendship and alliance of 
the two countries. 



Reflections on U.S.-Canadian Relations 



by G. Burke ETbrich 

Assistant Secretary for European Affairs 1 



I would like to convey to this distinguished au- 
dience the regrets of the Secretary of State that 
he is unable to be here in person this evening. 
On his behalf, however, I want to express the 
pleasure felt by the United States Government 
at the opening of Canada House. It is an honor 
for me to participate in the dedication of this 
magnificent monument to Canadian- American re- 
lations. The institutions and business concerns 
housed here will, in their own way, be carrying 
on international relations of considerable impor- 
tance and, as such, will be pai'tners in the happy 
chore of furthering United States-Canadian re- 
lations. The Department of State wishes you 
many years of fruitful and profitable tenancy. 

A great deal has been said and written about 
the unique relationship existing between Canada 
and the United States. Some of these things, in 
fact, have been said so often that they have be- 
come somewhat trite. At the same time, we 
should remember that many statements become 
trite simply by the process of being true. The 
relationship between Canada and the United 
States is indeed unique, not only in our own era 
but in the entire history of mankind. What other 
two nations have ever maintained between them- 
selves so large a volume of trade in peaceful 
goods? What other two nations have lived to- 
gether in peace for more than a hundred years 
while sharing a 3,000-mile border unguarded by 
armed forces ? What other two nations have ex- 
perienced so striking a parallel in their historical, 
political, economic, and cultural development? 



1 Remarks made at the inaugural ceremonies for Can- 
ada House at New York, N.Y., on Sept. 30. 



The extraordinary relationship between Can- 
ada and the United States is not always under- 
stood in other parts of the world and is sometimes 
confusing even to a part of our own populations. 
In our early history, of course, many Americans 
were anxious to force Canada into a union with 
the United States, perhaps on the theory that we 
would be doing Canada a big favor. But this 
illusory ambition is now deeply buried in the 
ashes of time. I am confident the Canadians 
have long since forgiven us for trying to impose 
American citizenship upon them, and I am even 
more confident that the people of the United 
States would like to forget the whole matter. I 
might mention, in this connection, that those 
Americans who proudly boast that our country 
has never lost a war would do well to remember 
that our invasion of Canada in 1813 was not 
exactly a howling success. 

Canada, a Major World Power 

Another widely prevalent misconception about 
the nature of Canadian-American ties is the ten- 
dency to interpret this relationship as one be- 
tween a "big power" and a "small power." This 
notion has always seemed a bit odd to me. By 
almost every meaningful standard of interna- 
tional relations, Canada stands as a major world 
power. It ranks third in area among the nations 
of the world. It also ranks third in agricultural 
production and more than 10 years ago reached 
third position in its volume of international trade. 
It has enormous physical resources and technical 
skills. It is one of the principal contributors to 
economic and teclmological development in other 
parts of the world. It has a well-deserved repu- 



694 



Department of State Bulletin 



tut ion for military prowess. Even the cynical 
Joseph Stalin, who rated a nation's importance 
solely in terms of the number of divisions it had 
at its disposal, could hardly sneeze at the fact that 
Canada mobilized more than 600,000 men during 
the Second World War. 

Actually, it is obvious that Canada ranks as a 
truly great power by every known test except the 
test of population. I feel sure that the Canadian 
people are quite capable of dealing with this prob- 
lem without any advice or assistance from the 
outside. 

When a professional diplomat such as myself 
considers the relationship between the United 
States and Canada, lie inevitably must exercise a 
certain humility. He knows that this relation- 
ship has not been primarily a product of diplo- 
macy at the governmental level. Rather, it is his- 
tory's most outstanding example of successful peo- 
ple-to-people diplomacy. It is based upon a com- 
munity of real interests — upon ties of blood and 
intermarriage, upon trade and investment, upon 
the joint development of resources, upon the shar- 
ing of literature and communications, upon sim- 
ilar cultural roots, and upon a common adherence 
to the ideals of freedom and human dignity. 
What our two countries have in common is some- 
thing which no professional diplomat, however 
good, could have created and which no profes- 
sional diplomat, however maladroit, could ever 
destroy. 

Close Working Relationships 

Before I go any further, however, let me say 
that I do not want to overdo this humility theme. 
Actually, the intricate relationships between our 
two countries manage to keep the professional 
diplomats in both Governments fairly busy. At 
least this is true in my own Government. Our 
ties with Canada regularly give rise to a large 
volume of important and difficult problems. Some 
of these problems involve complex questions of 
commerce and investment, and others arise from 
the highly coordinated defensive arrangements 
developed and maintained between the two Gov- 
ernments. Still others are connected with the 
prominent roles which both our Governments 
play in global political and economic affairs. 

In dealing with this host of problems our two 
Governments maintain a remarkably close and 
active day-to-day working relationship. We 

November 3, 7958 

485615 — 58 3 



have learned to work together at subordinate lev- 
els of our respective ministries and agencies in the 
same spirit that our Chiefs of State visit with each 
other to confer on national policies and our Cab- 
inets meet in joint discussion of trade and eco- 
nomic affairs. 

It would be foolish to pretend that this process 
of working together involves an identity of view- 
point. There are inevitable differences and dis- 
agreements between independent governments. 
Moreover, familiarity and proximity, in them- 
selves, often breed irritations. Some of these ir- 
ritations arise paradoxically enough in the field 
of commercial relations, where we enjoy unusual 
advantages as each other's principal trading part- 
ners. Another source, of irritation is the vast ex- 
change of information and opinion over our news- 
stands and networks. Sometimes, in fact, Ca- 
nadians are probably irritated by the impression 
that their American neighbors are taking them 
for granted. 

As far as the great mass of Americans are con- 
cerned, nothing could be further from the truth. 
Far from taking Canadians for granted, we have 
come to think of them as our best friends and 
severest critics. In a world in which there is little 
room left for national privacy, we. Americans can 
be sure that we hold no secrets or mysteries for 
Canadians. They probably know exactly what we 
paid for Manhattan Island and rightly conclude 
that we are making a tidy profit in selling them 
a small corner of Fifth Avenue ! 

I am sure we all realize that the differences and 
irritations I have mentioned are little more than 
ripples in the vast ocean of common interests 
which bind our two peoples. While Americans 
and Canadians are naturally concerned about our 
disagreements, w 7 e should remember that there are 
others in the world who seem very unhappy be- 
cause we do not manage to disagree often enough. 
In recent months, for example, the Soviet Union 
has been putting out quite a barrage of propa- 
ganda designed to insinuate that those govern- 
ments which cooperate closely with the United 
States are really nothing more than American 
satellites. The Soviet emphasis upon this propa- 
ganda theme is a rather interesting development. 
Its main purpose, of course, is fairly obvious. 
Having failed to disrupt the basic unity of the 
free world either by impassioned argument or by 
tin-eats of military force, the Soviet rulers are now 

695 



attempting to embarrass free, governments by cast- 
ing aspersions upon their sovereignty. 

Even though we appropriately discount this 
tactic of "diplomacy by insult," we must also be 
aware of the possibility that the Soviet rulers may 
have deluded themselves by their own propa- 
ganda. Because of their own experience, they 
may indeed be incapable of conceiving of any 
relationship among nations other than a master- 
slave relationship. They may actually be puzzled 
by the fact that a large number of free nations 
with similar interests and common ideals very 
frequently reach identical conclusions about the 
great political and moral issues confronting the 
world. 

In any event, the Canadian and American 
peoples have no reason to apologize to anyone for 
our community of interests and similarity of atti- 
tudes. On the contrary, we can say without boast - 
fulness that we have given the world an example 
of constructive cooperation which many other 
nations would do well to emulate. We have rea- 
son to be proud of our special relationship and 
to bend our future efforts toward making this 
relationship more intimate and more rewarding. 

This, of course, is one of the purposes of the 
establishment we are dedicating today. I feel 
the decision of our Canadian neighbors to erect 
a handsome and permanent structure here is per- 
haps the finest compliment they could pay to the 
United States and the city of New York. "We 
welcome to Fifth Avenue this symbol of Canadian 
participation in American commercial life and 
in the commerce of the world at large. We are 
proud to have Canada House on United States 
soil. 



Mr. McClellan To Manage 
U. S. Exhibit at Moscow 

The White House announced on October 17 
that, witli the approval of the President, Harold 
Chadick McClellan, president of the Old Colony 
Paint and Chemical Co., Los Angeles, Calif., and 
former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 
International Affairs, will serve as general man- 
ager of the U.S. Government exhibition to be held 
at Gorki Park, Moscow, next summer. 

The exhibition will be held in accordance with 
an agreement, signed on September 10 between 



the United States and the Soviet Union, 1 which 
provides, reciprocally, for exhibits to be held at 
Moscow and New York during the summer of 
1959 "devoted to the demonstration of the de- 
velopment of science, technology, and culture." 



United States and U.S.S.R. Agree 
on Films To Be Exchanged 

Press release 599 dated October 9 
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT 

In accordance with an agreement between the 
United States of America and the U.S.S.R. in 
cultural, technical, and educational fields, which 
was signed at Washington on January 27, 1958, 2 
meetings of representatives of the United States 
of America and the U.S.S.E. for the implementa- 
tion of contacts in the field of the cinema for 
1958-59 provided for in section VII of the 
Washington agreement, were held at Moscow in 
September-October 1958. 

Participants in the negotiations from the Soviet 
side were: V. Surin, Vice Minister of Culture, 
U.S.S.R., A. Davydov, director of Sovexportfilm, 
A. Slavnov, head of the Foreign Relations De- 
partment of the Ministry of Culture; and 
E. Kachugin, assistant director of Sovexportfilm. 

Participants from the American side were : Eric 
Johnston, president, Motion Picture Export Asso- 
ciation of America, Turner B. Shelton, director, 
Motion Picture Service, United States Informa- 
tion Agency; Ken Clark, vice president, Motion 
Picture Export Association of America; and Hans 
Tuch, attache, American Embassy, Moscow. 

The negotiators have considered the questions 
of the sale and purchase of feature films, the ex- 
change of documentary films, the holding of film 
weeks and film premieres in the United States of 
America and the U.S.S.R., the exchange of film 
delegations, and the joint production of feature, 
popular science, and documentary films. 

In the course of the negotiations the American 
and Soviet sides have reached an agreement on 
all the above questions. 



1 For text of agreement, see Bulletin of Oct. 13, 1958, 
p. 577. 

2 For text, see Bulletin of Feb. 17, 1958, p. 243. 



696 



Department of State Bulletin 



In accordance with item 8, section VII, of the 
Washington agreement both sides have extended 
until January 27, L960, the powers of the standing 
committee designated in the agreement and have 
agreed that the committee's next meeting will be 
held at Washington during the first quarter 
of 1959. 

A memorandum has been drawn up by both 
sides on the results of the negotiations and signed 
in behalf of the American side by Messrs. John- 
ston and Shelton, and in behalf of the Soviet side 
by Messrs. Surin and Davydov. 



MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 

Memorandum ox Soviet-American Negotiations on Mo- 
tion* Pictures Held in Moscow During September- 
October 19ns, Under the Cultural, Technical and 
Educational Exchange Agreement Between the 
U.S.S.R. and the United States op America, Signed 
on January 27, 1958 

In the course of the negotiations consideration has heen 
given to the questions of the sale and purchase of feature 
films, the exchange of documentary films, the holding of 
a film week, in the Soviet Union and in the United States, 
the premiere of the first film shown in each country under 
this Agreement, the exchange of delegations of leading 
motion picture personalities, and the joint production of 
feature, popular science and documentary films during 
1958 and 1959. The results of these considerations are 
as follows : 

Purchase of Feature Films 

As the first step in this field agreement has been 
reached whereby motion picture companies of the United 
States will purchase 7 Soviet feature films, and Sovex- 
portfilm will purchase 10 U.S. feature films. The follow- 
ing 4 Soviet films have been selected : "The Cranes Are 
Flying". "The Idiot", "The Captain's Daughter", and 
"Swan Lake". The other 3 will be selected by U.S. com- 
panies within thirty days from the date of the signing 
of this Memorandum. The following 6 U.S. films have 
been selected : "The Great Caruso", "Lili", "Roman Holi- 
day", "Marty", "The Old Man and the Sea", "Oklahoma". 
The other four will be selected by Sovexportfilm within 
thirty days from the signing of this Memorandum. 

The prices for each Soviet or American film shall be 
$60,000 for each standard size film and $67,000 for each 
widescreen film, including the cost of preprint material. 
The payments shall be made in dollars. 

It has been agreed that each side would release all 
films of the other side in dubbed or subtitled versions. 
The contents of the films must be preserved and any 
changes must be agreed upon by the other side. The 
release version must be agreed m>on prior to its distribu- 
tion by a representative designated by the other side. 



The American companies and Sovexportfilm will use 
their best efforts to assure maximum commercial distri- 
bution of the films purchased and to arrange for wide 
publicity for these films. The films are for theatrical 
showing only. 

Sovexportfilm and American companies have the right 
in the future to carry on negotiations for the purchase 
and sale of films and to conclude agreements under the 
provisions set forth in the Cultural, Technical and Educa- 
tional Exchange Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and 
the United States of America. 

Any problem arising in connection with this provision 
shall be referred to the Standing Committee. 

Exchange of Documentary Films 

Consideration has been given regarding the selection of 
documentary films and it has been agreed that the fifteen 
documentary films tentatively selected by the Soviet Em- 
bassy in the United States would be sent to Moscow for 
final approval by the Ministry of Culture, while the 
fifteen Soviet documentary films tentatively selected by 
the American Embassy in Moscow would be sent to the 
United States for final approval by the United States 
Information Agency. 

The selection of films will be completed in an expedi- 
tious manner in order that the broad distribution of docu- 
mentary films would begin no later than January 31, 1959 
in accordance with the provisions of Item 3 of Section VII 
of the Cultural, Technical and Educational Exchange 
Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A., and de- 
pending on the distribution situation in each country. 

Film Weeks 

Both sides have recognized the desirability of holding 
on a mutual basis an American film week in the U.S.S.R. 
and a Soviet film week in the U.S.A. To implement 
this item in the Cultural Agreement and in order to bring 
about the making of firm arrangements for such film 
weeks, it has been agreed that an officer of the Soviet 
Embassy in Washington would be designated to deal with 
an official of the Government of the United States, and an 
officer of the American Embassy in Moscow would be des- 
ignated to deal with an official of the Soviet Union to take 
proper steps to establish the necessary procedures. The 
names of the officials to be designated under this Item 
shall be exchanged no later than January 1, 1959. 

The Standing Committee will act on concrete recom- 
mendations, including dates for the holding of film weeks, 
within the framework of the Cultural, Technical and Edu- 
cational Exchange Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and the 
U.S.A., made to it. by these representatives at its next meet- 
ing to be held in Washington. 

Film Premieres 

It has been agreed that a premiere would be held in Mos- 
cow of the first American film shown in the Soviet Union 
under this Agreement, and that a premiere would be held 
in Washington of the first Soviet film shown in the United 
States under this Agreement and that two or three lead- 



November 3, 1958 



697 



Ing motion picture personalities, preferably from the film 
being shown, would be invited to attend the respective 
premieres. Film organizations of each side shall pay 
the travel expenses of its motion pictures personalities, 
and the motion picture interests of each country shall 
pay the expenses of film personalities during their at- 
tendance at the respective premieres. 

It has been agreed that film organizations of each side 
would assume all the expenses connected with the prep- 
aration and holding of each premiere. 

Practical problems such as the date, the composition 
of delegations to the premieres, etc., shall be resolved di- 
rectly between Sovexportfilm and the American company 
concerned with the premiere. The Standing Committee 
will consider the question of the holding of subsequent 
premieres at its next meeting to be held in Washington. 

Exchange of Film Delegations 

It has been agreed that delegations of up to ten leading 
motion picture personalities, to be approved by both sides, 
would be exchanged for the purpose of becoming acquaint- 
ed with experiences in the production of motion pictures. 
These delegations will include scenario writers and tech- 
nical personnel. Their stay shall be for a period of up to 
one month. 

Appropriate organizations on each side shall pay the 
travel expenses of its delegation and shall assume ex- 
penses connected with the stay of the visiting delegation. 
It was decided to schedule the visits during May-June 
1959 and each side agreed to inform the other of the 
composition of its delegation before April 1, 1959. 

Joint Production 

The matter of the joint production of feature, popular 
science and documentary films was referred to the Stand- 
ing Committee. 

The Standing Committee decided that Soviet studios 
and American motion picture producing organizations 
may carry on negotiations and conclude agreements for 
joint production of films in accordance with the provisions 
of Section VII of the Cultural, Technical and Educational 
Exchange Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and the United 
States of America. 

The Standing Committee 

It has been agreed to extend until January 27, 1960 
the powers of the Standing Committee appointed under 
Item 8, Section VII, of the Cultural, Technical and Edu- 
cational Exchange Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and 
the United States of America. The Standing Committee 
will meet next in Washington during the first quarter 
of 1959. 

Signed in Moscow on the ninth day of October, 1958. 

Representatives of the United States of America. 

Ebic Johnston 
tctbneb b. shelton 

Representatives of the U.S.S.R. 

V. Surin 
A. Davydov 



698 



Soviet Union Rejects Arbitration 
of Navy Neptune Case by ICJ 

Press release 610 dated October 13 

It will be recalled that on August 22 the Legal 
Adviser of the State Department filed an appli- 
cation in the International Court of Justice as 
agent for the United States * instituting proceed- 
ings against the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub- 
lics on account of the destruction on September 
4, 1954, of a Navy Neptune plane in the interna- 
tional airspace over the Sea of Japan in the area 
of Vladivostok. This was done because the 
United States had exhausted all other diplomatic 
remedies to obtain compensation from the Soviet 
Government. In the incident an aircraft was 
destroyed, one crew member was killed, and other 
crew members injured. 

The application appended copies of the diplo- 
matic correspondence. These showed that there 
existed between the United States and the Soviet 
Union disputes of fact and of law with respect 
to the case and emphasized that the Soviet Gov- 
ernment, although qualified to do so, had not 
submitted to the Court's jurisdiction. Among the 
questions of fact were the circumstances under 
which the shooting took place and whether the 
shooting took place over the high seas. Among 
the questions of law were the validity of the 
Soviet Government's claim that it may, under 
international law, unilaterally extend its terri- 
torial limits in the international airspace in excess 
of 3 nautical miles ; the application of international 
obligations relating to the flight of military 
aircraft claimed to be intruding and the inter- 
ception and attack of such aircraft; the nature 
of the rights of the United States to conduct 
flights of military aircraft in the international 
aii-space over the Sea of Japan; together with 
other issues of law and fact which, if resolved in 
favor of the United States, would prove breaches 
of international obligation by the Soviet Govern- 
ment; and the nature and extent of reparations to 
be made by the Soviet Government for all these 
breaches. 

Now the U.S. Government has been informed 
by the International Court of Justice that on Sep- 
tember 26, 1958, the Soviet Charge d'Affaires in 
The Hague sent a letter stating that "there are 



1 Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1958, p. 420. 

Department of State Bulletin 



no questions which are of need to be considered 
by the International Court." 

Thus again the Soviet Government, while claim- 
ing international legal justification for its wrong- 
ful conduct, has refused to permit, the one tribunal 
set. up by the nations of the world as the "princi- 
pal judicial organ of the United Nations'' to ad- 
judicate both disputes of fact and disputes of law 
between governments to obtain jurisdiction over 
the parties to such a case. 

The U.S. Government, will continue to attempt 
to exhaust the institutions of law and order to 
settle disputes of fact and of law. It regrets that 
thus far the record of the Soviet Union in this 
regard has been negative. 



U.S. Sends Salk Vaccine 
to San Marino 

Press release 607 dated October 13 

The U.S. Government has sent a shipment of 
2,600 cc. of Salk vaccine to the Republic of San 
Marino. The tiny republic, faced with an increase 
in polio cases in the area and a treasury left empty 
by the previous Communist-controlled govern- 
ment, appealed to the Department of State for as- 
sistance so that all children up through 6 years of 
age could be inoculated. The problem was called 
to the attention of Eli Lilly & Co. by the Depart- 
ment of State and the International Cooperation 
Administration. The Lilly Company generously 
responded with an offer to donate the vaccine and 
immediately delivered the required amount to ICA 
in Washington. 

The U.S. Air Force and Army assumed the re- 
sponsibility of speeding the donation to San 
Marino. The Tactical Air Command placed the 
shipment aboard one of its F-100S super sabrejet 
aircraft making a normal high-flight mission. 
The aircraft, piloted by Capt. W. A. Merrill, de- 
parted Langley Field, was refueled in the air 500 
miles east of Bermuda, and proceeded to Aviano 
Air Base, Italy, via U.S. air bases in the Azores. 
Morocco, and France. Weather permitting, a 
U.S. Army helicopter from Southern European 
Task Force Headquarters in Verona will fly the 
vaccine from Aviano to San Marino. At San 
Marino it will be received by U.S. consular offi- 
cials who will deliver it to San Marino public- 
health authorities. 



General War Sequel Law 
of German Federal Republic 

Press release 584 dated October 6 

The Finance Ministry of the Federal Republic 
of Germany made an announcement on October 
6 concerning the General War Sequel Law, which 
was enacted on November 5, 1957, and came into 
force on January 1, 1958. Claims under this law 
must be filed before January 1, 1959, except that 
the law provides for later dates for certain cate- 
gories of cases. 

The General War Sequel Law deals with claims 
of foreign creditors against the former German 
Reich (including the Reichsbahn, the Reichspost, 
the Reichsautobahnen, and the former State of 
Prussia) arising from capital investments ex- 
pressed in reichsmarks and certain other reichs- 
mark claims against these debtors. The law does 
not deal with claims arising from racial, religious, 
or political persecution or with claims arising out 
of World War II. 

Detailed information concerning this law and 
concerning the filing of claims under it will be 
found in an information sheet which is available 
at the Securities Settlement Advisory Agency of 
the Federal Republic of Germany, 30 Broad St., 
Suite 3601, New York 4, N. Y., or at the. German 
Embassy in Washington, D.C., and at all German 
consulates general and consulates in the United 
States. 



Congressional Documents 
Relating to Foreign Policy 

85th Congress, 2d Session 

International Cooperation Administration Replies to 
Criticisms of the Foreign Aid Program. March 14, 
1958. 88 pp. [Committee Print.] 

Export Program for Dairy Products. Hearing before a 
subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Agriculture 
and Forestry on S. 4013, a bill to provide an export pro- 
gram for dairy products. July 14, 1958. 81 pp. 

Passport Legislation. Hearings before the Senate Com- 
mittee on Foreign Relations on S. 2770, S. 3998, S. 4110, 
and S. 4137, bills relating to the issuance of passports. 
July 16-28, 1958. 225 pp. 

Diversion of Water From Lake Michigan. Hearings be- 
fore a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Public 
Works on H. R. 2 and S. 1123, bills to authorize the 
State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District 
of Greater Chicago, under the direction of the -Secretary 
of the Army to test, on a 3-year basis, the effect of 
increasing the diversion of water from Lake Michigan 
into the Illinois waterway. July 28-August 7, 1958. 
407 pp. 



November 3, 1958 



699 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Calendar of International Conferences and Meetings ' 

Adjourned During October 1958 

15th Pan American Sanitary Conference and 10th Meeting of San Juan Sept. 21-Oct. 6 

the Regional Committee of WHO for the Americas. 

International Atomic Energy Agency: 2d General Conference . Vienna Sept. 22-Oct. 4 

U. N. Sugar Conference Geneva Sept. 22-Oct. 25 

GATT Intersessional Committee Geneva Sept. 24-Oct.l 

UNESCO Promotion of Peaceful Cooperation and International Prague Sept. 24-Oct. 1 

Understanding Among Nations: 1st Meeting. 

WHO Regional Committee for the Western Pacific: 9th Session Manila Sept. 26-Oct. 2 

South Pacific Commission: 18th Session Noumea, New Caledonia . . . Sept. 26-Oct. 13 

UNESCO Executive Board: 51st Session Brussels Sept. 29-Oct. 2 

FAO/UNICEF Joint Policy Committee Rome Sept. 29-Oct. 2 

U.N. ECE Inland Transport Committee: Working Party on Geneva Sept. 29-Oct. 3 

Construction of Road Vehicles. 

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea: 46th Copenhagen Sept. 29-Oct. 4 

Annual Meeting. 

Commonwealth Specialist Subcommittee of Service Psycholo- Melbourne Sept. 29-Oct. 8 

gists. 

WMO Commission on Agricultural Meteorologv : 2d Session . . Warsaw Sept. 29-Oct. 17 

ICAO Panel of Teletypewriter Specialists: 3d Meeting .... Montreal Sept. 29-Oct. 27 

ANZUS Council: 6th Meeting Washington Oct. 1 (1 day) 

International Symposium on U. S. Domestic Short Distance Washington Oct. 1-2 

Navigation System (VORTAC) and Its Relationship to the and 

Air Navigation System. Indianapolis Oct. 2-4 

International Council of Scientific Unions: 8th General As- Washington Oct. 2-6 

sembly. 

PASO Executive Committee: 36th Meeting San Juan Oct. 3 (1 day) 

FAO International Rice Commission: 6th Session Tokyo Oct. 3-4 

International Union of Official Travel Organizations: 13th Gen- Brussels Oct. 3-11 

eral Assembly. 

IAEA Board of Governors: 9th Session Vienna Oct. 6-7 

U. N. ECE Working Party on Electric Power Statistics Geneva Oct. 6-8 

U. N. ECE Working Party on Rural Electrification Geneva Oct. 6-9 

International Monetary Fund, International Bank for Recon- New Delhi Oct. 6-10 

struction and Development, International Finance Corpora- 
tion : Annual Meetings of Boards of Governors. 

4th FAO Regional Conference for Asia and the Far East .... Tokyo Oct. 6-16 

Diplomatic Conference for Revision of the Convention for the Lisbon Oct. 6-31 

Protection of Industrial Property. 

Commonwealth Advisory Committee on Defense Sciences . . . Canberra Oct. 7-28 

Caribbean Commission: Special Meeting Washington Oct. 8-9 

Special Five-Power Meeting on North Atlantic Cable System . . London Oct. 9-16 

U. N. ECOSOC/ILO Consultation New York Oct. 13-15 

U. N. ECE Timber Committee: 16th Session Geneva Oct. 13-17 

Structural Division of American Society of Civil Engineers and New York Oct. 13-17 

International Association for Bridge and Structural Engi- 
neering: Joint Meeting. 

FAO General Fisheries Council of the Mediterranean: 5th Rome Oct. 13-18 

Meeting. 

GATT Intersessional Committee Geneva Oct. 15 (1 day) 

9th U. N.ECOSOC Technical Assistance Conference New York Oct. 16 (1 day) 

U. N. ECE Committee on Development of Trade and East-West Geneva Oct. 16-24 

Trade Consultations: Working Party on Arbitration. 

'Prepared in the Office of International Conferences, Oct. 15, 1958. Asterisks indicate tentative dates and places. 
Following is a list of abbreviations: ANZUS, Australia, New Zealand, United States Treaty; ECAFE, Economic Com- 
mission for Asia and the Far East; ECE, Economic Commission for Europe; ECLA, Economic Commission for Latin 
America; ECOSOC, Economic and Social Council; FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization; GATT, General Agreement 
on Tariffs and Trade; IAEA, International Atomic Energy Agency; ICAO, International Civil Aviation Organization; 
ICEM, Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration; ILO, International Labor Organization; IMCO. Inter- 
governmental Maritime Consultative Organization; ITU, International Telecommunication Union; NATO, North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization; PASO, Pan American Sanitary Organization; U.N., United Nations; UNESCO, United Nations 
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; "UNICEF, United Nations Children's Fund; WHO, World Health 
Organization; WMO, World Meteorological Organization. 

700 Department of State Bulletin 



FAO Group on Coconut and Coconut Products: 2d Session . . . Manila Oct. 20-29 

I N I CAFE Industry and Natural Resources Committee: Bangkok Oct. 21-28 

8th Session of Subcommittee on Iron and Steel. 

FAO Cocoa Study Group: 3d Meeting of Committee on Statistics. Rome Oct. 23-24 

UNESCO Directors of National Cultural Relations: 2d Meeting . Paris Oct. 28-31 

In Session as of October 31, 1958 

U. N, General Assembly: 13th Session New York Sept. 16- 

[TTJ International Administrative Telephone and Telegraph Geneva Sept. 29- 

Conference. 

GATT Contracting Parties: 13th Session Geneva Oct. 16- 

Consultative Committee for Cooperative Economic Development 

in Smith and Southeast Asia ("Colombo Plan"): 10th Meeting. 

Preliminary Working Group Seattle Oct. 20- 

Officials' Meeting Seattle Oct. 27- 

Ministerial Meeting Seattle Nov. 10- 

International North Pacific Fisheries Commission: 6th Meeting. Tokyo Oct. 20- 

ILO Experts on Teachers' Problems Geneva Oct. 20- 

U. N. ECAFE Regional Cartographic Conference for Asia and Tokyo Oct. 20- 

the Far East. 

ICAO Rules of the Air and Air Traffic Control/Search and Rescue Montreal Oct. 21- 

Divisional Meeting. 

FAO Council: 29th Session Rome Oct. 27- 

FAO Near East Forestry Commission: 2d Session Cairo Oct. 27- 

ILO Experts on the International Classification of Radiographs Geneva Oct. 27- 

of Pneumoconioses. 

UNESCO Executive Board: 52d Session Paris Oct. 27- 

U. N. ECE Committee on Development of Trade and East- West Geneva Oct. 27- 

Trade Consultations. 

U. N. Wheat Conference: Preliminary Meeting Geneva Oct. 28- 

South Pacific Commission: Special Conference on Tuberculosis. Pago Pago, American Samoa . Oct. 31- 

Negotiations on Political Aspects of Suspension of Nuclear Tests . Geneva Oct. 31- 

Scheduled November 1, 1958, Through January 31, 1959 

6th Inter-American Congress of Radiology Lima Nov. 2— 

ILO Governing Body and Committees: 140th Session Geneva Nov. 3- 

FAO Latin American Forestry Commission: 6th Session. . . . Antigua Nov. 4- 

[CEM Executive Committee: 11th Session Geneva Nov. 4- 

U.N. E( 'AFE Inland Transport Committee: 4th Session of High- Bangkok Nov. 4- 

N\av Subcommittee. 

UNESCO General Conference: 10th Session Paris Nov. 4- 

U.N. ECE Housing Committee: 17th Session and Working Geneva Nov. 6- 

Parties. 

2d Inter-American Technical Meeting on Housing and Planning . Lima Nov. 10* 

Technical Discussions on Prevention of Surprise Attack .... Geneva Nov. 10- 

U.N. Wheat Conference: Preparatory Committee London Nov. 10- 

ICEM Council: 9th Session ..." Geneva Nov. 12- 

7th International Congress of Leprology Tokyo Nov. 12- 

t'.N. Advisory Committee on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy . New York Nov. 12- 

U.N. ECAFE Committee on Trade: Working Party on Customs Bangkok Nov. 12- 

Administration. 

FAO Latin American Regional Conference San Jos6, Costa Rica Nov. 17- 

K \<> Statistics Division: 3d Session Montreal Nov. 18- 

FAO/WHO Regional Nutrition Meeting (Near East) Cairo Nov. 18- 

International Child Welfare Study Conference Tokyo Nov. 23- 

Conference on Revision of Agreement for Establishment of the Trinidad Nov. 24- 

Caribbean Commission. 

ims Cooperation Council: 13th Session Brussels Nov. 24- 

l". N. ECE Committee on Agricultural Problems: 10th Session . Geneva Nov. 24- 

U. N. ECAFE Working Party of Railway Mechanical Engineers . undetermined Nov. 24- 

International Fisheries Convention 1946, Permanent Commis- Dublin Nov. 25- 

sion: 7th Meeting. 

U. N. ECAFE Working Party on Coordination of Transport . . Bangkok Nov. 25- 

ICAO Special North Atlantic Fixed Services: 2d Meeting . . . Paris November 

U. N. ECOSOC Technical Assistance Committee New York November 

International North Pacific Fisheries Commission: Committee Tokyo November 

on Biology and Research. 

FAO WII Technical Meeting on Food Additives Rome Dec. 1- 

ICAO Map Panel: 2d Meeting Montreal Dec. 1- 

U. N. ECAFE Committee on Industry and Natural Resources: New Delhi Dec. 3- 

Symposium on Petrol iim Development. 

FAO Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council: 8th Meeting Colombo Dec. 6- 

U. N. ECAFE Conference of Asian Statisticians: 2d Session . . Bangkok Dec. 8- 

North Pacific Fur Seal Commission: 2d Meeting Washington Dec. 8- 

November 3, 1958 701 



Calendar off International Conferences and Meetings — Continued 
Scheduled November 1, 1958, Through January 31, 1959 — Continued 



ILO Technical Tripartite Committee on Timber Industry . . . 

U. N. ECE Steel Committee and Working Parties 

7th Inter-American Travel Congress 

FAO Regional Conference for Near East 

Caribbean Commission: 27th Meeting , 

U. N. ECE Coal Trade Subcommittee (and related meetings) . 

U. N. ECE Inland Transport Committee: 18th Session . . . . 

NATO Council: Ministerial Session 

U. N. Economic Commission for Africa: 1st Session 

Inter-American Child Institute: Directing Council 

U.N. ECOSOC: 26th Session (resumed) 

UNESCO Executive Board: 53d Session 

U.N. ECAFE Committee on Trade: Intraregional Trade Pro- 
motion Talks. 

ICAO Southeast Asia-Limited Middle East Regional Air Naviga- 
tion Meeting. 

IMCO Assembly: 1st Session 

IMCO Council: 1st Session 

5th Pan American Consultation on Geography 

ICAO Meeting of Panel on Vertical Separation of Aircraft . . . 

4th Pan American Consultation on History 

Inter-American Council of Jurists: 4th Meeting 

WHO Standing Committee on Administration and Finance . . . 

U.N. Wheat Conference: Negotiating Conference 

WHO Executive Board: 23d Session 

(J.N. ECLA Committee on Trade 



Geneva Dec. 8- 

Geneva Dec. 8- 

Montevideo Dec. 9- 

Damascus* Dec. 10- 

Cayenne Dec. 15* 



Geneva 
Geneva 
Paris .... 
Addis Ababa 
Montevideo . 
New York . . 
Paris . 



Dec. 15- 
Dec. 15- 
Dec. 16- 
Dec. 29- 
December* 
December 
December 



Bangkok Jan. 5- 



Rome 



Jan. 6- 



London Jan. 6- 

London Jan. 6- 

Quito Jan. 7- 

Montreal Jan. 12* 

Cuenca, Ecuador Jan. 19- 

Santiago Jan. 19- 

Geneva Jan. 20- 

New York or Rome Jan. 26* 

Geneva January 

Mexico, D.F January 



United Nations Establishes Special Fund 



Following is a series of statements on the estab- 
lishment of the Special Fund made in the 13th 
session of the V.N. General Assembly by Senator 
Mike Mansfield and Christopher H. Phillips, 
U.S. representatives, together with the text of the 
resolution adopted in plenary session on October 
H 



STATEMENT BY SENATOR MANSFIELD, SEP- 
TEMBER 30' 

It was my privilege to represent the United 
States in the Second Committee of the Sixth Gen- 
eral Assembly. At that time a new experiment 
in international cooperation — the United Nations 
Expanded Program of Technical Assistance — was 
barely a year old. The International Bank had 
concentrated its energies mainly on the recon- 
struction of war-devastated areas and was only 
then in the process of shifting its activities more 
and more to the underdeveloped countries. The 
problems of economic development were, increas- 
ingly, commanding the attention of the members 



'Made in Committee II (Economic and Financial) 
(U.S. delegation press release 3004). 



of the United Nations. With growing recogni- 
tion of these problems as they affected underde- 
veloped countries, the General Assembly was 
deeply concerned with ways and means of stimu- 
lating the international flow of public and private 
investment capital. 

During the years since the Sixth General As- 
sembly, as a member of the United States Senate, 
I have been in a position to continue to follow 
events in this field of economic development. I 
have been able to see for myself, in visits to many 
of your countries, the efforts being made, the suc- 
cesses achieved, and, I might say, some of the fail- 
ures as well. May I add that I have also been 
able to understand some of the complex difficulties 
which remain to be surmounted. 

There are many dark spots in the picture of 
economic development around the world. The 
great bulk of the job still remains to be done. But 
there are also encouraging aspects. You know 
them. You have seen them in the widespread de- 
termination of underdeveloped countries to rid 
themselves of institutions and practices which no 
longer respond to the needs of their peoples. You 
have witnessed them in the willingness of many 
countries to assist others to achieve more rapid 



702 



Department of State Bulletin 



economic and social progress. You have sensed 
them in the development of institutions which 
provide the framework for international cooper- 
ation of a scope and variety little dreamed of only 
a few years ago. You have experienced them in 
the continuous search in which many of you have 
participated personally — the search for effective 
ways and means to help achieve our common goal 
of economic progress. 

Report of Preparatory Committee 

The report of the Preparatory Committee on 
the Special Fund, 2 which is now before this com- 
mittee, is one result of this search. 

Teclinology — that common treasury of tools 
and tecliniques — has been called man's primary 
economic resource. Without it, other resources 
continue to stagnate. "With it, other resources 
may take on new dimensions of usefulness. Few 
questions are more urgent today than the question 
of how modern teclinology can be most quickly ap- 
plied in underdeveloped countries. How can its 
benefits be spread to all the world's people? 

At the last General Assembly my Government 
was convinced that the United Nations had a sig- 
nificant opportunity to assist in answering this 
question by making available technical aid of a 
kind not possible under the Expanded Program 
of Technical Assistance. To this end the United 
States delegation proposed and the General As- 
sembly voted unanimously for the establisliment 
of the Special Fund. 3 

The United States had the honor to serve on 
the Preparatory Committee, and the United 
States representative on that committee concurred 
in the report which is now before us. My delega- 
tion is happy, therefore, to join in cosponsoring 
the draft resolution* which, as recommended by 
the Economic and Social Council, incorporates 
the proposals of the Preparatory Committee. 

That we concurred in the report of the Pre- 
paratory Committee does not mean that we were 
completely satisfied with the report in all respects. 
We had hoped, for example, that the Preparatory 
Committee would recommend that governments 
provide some minimum of convertibility in their 
contributions to the Special Fund. It was not 
possible to agree on this point. In view of the de- 
sirability of affording the fund maximum flexi- 

1 U.N. doc. A/3908 and Corr. 1. 
* Bulletin of Jan. 13, 1958, p. 57. 
4 U.N. doc. A/C.2/L.363. 

November 3, 1958 






bility and efficiency in its operations, we urge now 
that contributing governments make every effort 
to have their contributions readily usable by the 
fund for approved programs. 

Another point, the question of the governing 
body to exercise control of the Special Fund, was 
one of the most difficult problems considered by 
the Preparatory Committee. As many of you 
know, the United States was convinced that the 
most efficient organization would be to have a 
single governing body responsible for both the 
Special Fund and the Expanded Program. In 
the interest of harmony, however, we agreed to 
the compromise arrangements contained in the 
committee's report. 

We are acutely aware of the fact — a fact al- 
ready emphasized by previous speakers — that the 
committee's recommendations represent the end 
product of weeks of careful negotiation and the 
accommodation of different views. My delega- 
tion, for one, can testify to the painstaking effort 
which was required to produce the structure 
which finally obtained the unanimous support of 
the committee. The difficulty was especially great 
because, as many of you are aware, the member- 
ship of the Preparatory Committee was very care- 
fully selected so as to assure full consideration of 
the whole range of views represented in the 
United Nations. 

In the light of these considerations my delega- 
tion hopes that all members of this committee will 
be prepared to accept the recommendations which 
have been submitted to us. "We are convinced that 
to attempt now to recast the work of the com- 
mittee in any significant way would reopen ques- 
tions which might well cause the greatest 
difficulty. 

Purpose of Special Fund 

It is true, as has been so often emphasized, that 
the process of economic development requires not 
only such ingredients as domestic effort and tech- 
nical assistance but also a crucial margin of for- 
eign capital. It is also true that the Special 
Fund cannot do the job envisaged for a capital 
development fund. Does that mean, however, 
that it can make no contribution ? Is it not a fact 
that a significant momentum of development 
cannot be obtained without knowledge of basic re- 
sources, without the technical skills to put them 
to use, and without trained personnel to work in 



703 



agriculture, industry, and administration? Is it 
not a fact that the Special Fund is designed pre- 
cisely to assist countries in dealing with these 
basic requirements of economic growth? I urge, 
therefore, that we grasp this opportunity to make 
a new and important contribution to the economic 
development of the less developed countries. 

The United States representative emphasized 
in this committee last year and the General As- 
sembly recognized in resolution 1219 5 that the 
Special Fund, by creating conditions in under- 
developed areas that will make investment either 
feasible or more effective, will facilitate new in- 
vestment of all types. In this way it will help to 
meet urgent requirements for capital in all under- 
developed countries. 

The establishment of the Special Fund repre- 
sents an important extension of the activities of 
the United Nations in the field of economic de- 
velopment. Success or failure in this effort will 
do much to determine the directions in which the 
United Nations may move in the same field in the 
future. This success or failure will be governed 
in large part by two factors: One is the extent 
to which projects into which the Special Fund is 
projected are well planned and integrated into 
national development programs. The other is the 
extent to which member states give the Special 
Fund their financial support. 

With some exceptions, my Government has 
been disappointed by the responses thus far made 
to the Secretary-General's request that govern- 
ments indicate the extent of their support of the 
Special Fund. My delegation hopes that final 
action by this General Assembly on the nature 
and structure of the Special Fund will make 
it possible for all member states, developed and 
underdeveloped, to give the fund their full 
financial support at the forthcoming pledging 
conference. 

U.S. Contribution 

My Government stands ready to help translate, 
this project into the kind of concrete action which 
we believe will pay important dividends in the 
development of underdeveloped countries. As 
some of you may be aware, the Congress lias pro- 
vided for a combined U.S. contribution to both 
the Special Fund and the Expanded Program of 



Technical Assistance of $38 million — subject only 
to the percentage limitation prescribed by law. 

Those of you who participated in the discussions 
on the establishment of the Special Fund during 
the 12th session will recall that at that time our 
legislation required a reduction in the United 
States share of contributions to the Expanded 
Program from 38 percent in 1959 to 33% percent 
thereafter. You will also recall that Congressman 
Judd, who represented the United States in this 
committee, stated that he was prepared to go be- 
fore the Congress to urge that the percentage 
of the United States contribution be stabilized at 
40 percent, at least for several years. I, as a 
Democrat, can attest to the effectiveness of the 
efforts which Mr. Judd, as a Republican, put 
forth in the Congress of the United States in this 
connection. The Congress agreed to a 40 percent 
contribution to the Special Fund and the Ex- 
panded Program for the coming year. May I 
say out of the experience of many years of serv- 
ice in the Congress of the United States that that 
body may be counted upon to act generously in 
international matters if the ends for which it is 
called upon to act are clearly constructive and 
if other nations do their part. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been said that the choice 
before us today is whether the world will pro- 
duce for the needs of families or for the needs of 
armies. The world of tomorrow can be a world 
of peace, of growth, and of a progressive reduction 
of crushing and degrading poverty wherever it 
may exist. Working together through the United 
Nations, we have an opportunity to bring that 
kind of world into being. The Special Fund can 
be a milestone pointing in the direction of that 
kind of world. The United States delegation is 
prepared to join with others in erecting this mile- 
stone now. 



STATEMENT BY MR. PHILLIPS, OCTOBER 6 s 

The most striking feature of the debate we have 
had on the Special Fund is not the small area of 
disagreement but rather the large area of agree- 
ment. Even the Soviet Union and Czechoslo- 
vakia, which last December were very critical of 
resolution 1219, have now come to look upon the 
Special Fund as a genuine step forward in pro- 



5 For text, see Bulletin of Jan. 13, 1958, p. 71. 
704 



"Made in Committee II (U.S. delegation press release 
.3008). 

Department of State Bulletin 






viding assistance to the economic development of 
underdeveloped countries. This is encouraging. 
I recall that the Soviet Union at one time de- 
nounced the Expanded Program of Technical As- 
sist ance as a "cloak for imperialism" but 3 years 
later decided to participate in the Expanded Pro- 
gram. Mr. [G. P.] Arkadev's statement last week 
raises the hope that the Soviet Union this time 
may be somewhat quicker to recognize the value 
of a new program important to the development 
of underdeveloped countries — and to contribute 
resources to the program. 

The Soviet representative also referred to a pro- 
posal by his Foreign Minister that the major pow- 
ers reduce armaments by 10 to 15 percent and 
devote the savings therefrom to assistance for the 
economic development of the underdeveloped 
countries. Let us hope that this statement too 
will foreshadow a more generous attitude by the 
Soviet Government in contributing toward United 
Nations programs than has so far been the case. 
"What is frankly needed is less talk and invective 
and more action in the form of material support. 
The Soviet Union currently contributes about one- 
fifteenth of the sum provided to the Expanded 
Program of Technical Assistance by the United 
States, although it boasts of military forces second 
to none and is constantly telling us of its amazing 
economic progress. 

The idea of devoting savings from a reduction 
in armament expenditures for economic develop- 
ment is a very good one to which my country has 
subscribed for many years. You will recall that 
President Eisenhower in 1953 7 declared his readi- 
ness to recommend to Congress that part of the 
savings achieved through an agreement on inter- 
nationally controlled disarmament should be de- 
voted to a multilateral fund for economic assist- 
ance to underdeveloped countries. We have been 
striving for many years for such a disarmament 
agreement. We will continue to strive for it with 
every means at our command. In the meantime, 
however, we have not waited for disarmament be- 
fore giving increased assistance to the less de- 
veloped countries. As I mentioned earlier, the 
United States has been contributing from 14 to 15 
times as much as the Soviet Union to the United 
Xations Expanded Program of Technical Assist- 
ance. Moreover, a very large part of the funds 
for the loans of over $700 million in the past fiscal 



year by the International Bank — most of which 
went to underdeveloped countries — came from 
United States sources. 

In bilateral programs United Nations document 
E/3131 shows that during 1957 United States 
Government loans and grants to the less developed 
countries amounted to almost $iy 2 billion. New 
United States private investments in these areas 
were of about the same magnitude. Thus, the 
United States provided almost $3 billion in one 
form or another to help finance the economic de- 
velopment of the underdeveloped countries. 

As for the immediate future, the United States 
Congress this spring authorized additional capital 
amounting to $2 billion for the Export-Import 
Bank to be used in providing loans to foreign 
countries and an additional $400 million for the 
Development Loan Fund for "soft" loans. In 
New Delhi this month my Government will pro- 
pose substantial increases in the capital of the In- 
ternational Bank and in the quotas of the Interna- 
tional Monetary Fund. It will also explore in- 
formally whether there is international support 
for the establishment of an International Develoj)- 
ment Association affiliated with the International 
Bank which would extend the same kind of as- 
sistance to the less developed countries which the 
advocates of a United Nations capital fund have 
long had in mind. I underscore the importance 
of this proposal. Its feasibility will largely de- 
pend on the willingness of members to contribute 
financial support. This, Mr. Chairman, repre- 
sents action, not just words, in the field of economic 
assistance to the less developed countries. 

Question of Election of Governing Council 

We have before us two draft resolutions. 8 As 
several of our cosponsors have indicated, the only 
essential difference between them is on the ques- 
tion of whether the Economic and Social Council 
nr the General Assembly should elect the Govern- 
ing Council. The distinguished representative of 
Iraq has noted that there are five Council mem- 
bers cosponsoring L. 362 and eight cosponsoring 
L. 363 ; this happens to represent 30 percent of the 
number of cosponsors in each case. Both resolu- 
tions have many sponsors from the less developed 
countries. Moreover, as some of our cosponsors 



7 Bulletin of Apr. 27, 1953, p. 599. 
November 3, 7958 



8 U.N. does. A/C. 2/L. 362, with 17 sponsors, and L. 
303. with 27 sponsors, including the United States. 



705 



have indicated, a large number of sponsors of each 
resolution have long supported SUNFED. My 
delegation assumes that representatives — whether 
from India or Japan, the United Arab Republic 
or Argentina — have the will and the competence 
to protect the interests of their own governments 
and to cooperate in advancing the work of the 
United Nations. 

We have given the most careful consideration 
to this question over the past 9 months, while pre- 
paring for the discussions of the Special Fund 
in the Preparatory Committee, the Economic and 
Social Council, and here at the General Assembly. 
The burden of proof for bypassing the Economic 
and Social Council in the election of the Gov- 
erning Council would seem to us to lie with those 
who propose a departure from established prac- 
tice. Yet we have heard no convincing argument 
for refusing to the Economic and Social Council 
its normal responsibility for electing the member- 
ship of United Nations bodies active in the eco- 
nomic and social field. 

True to form, the Soviet representative has im- 
plied that there is some sinister motive behind the 
United States position — and, incidentally, the 
position of 26 cosponsors and many other delega- 
tions — on this basic matter of principle. It is an 
old trick in debate to question the motives of your 
opponent if you have no strong arguments against 
his position. The Soviet representative has im- 
plied that ECOSOC does not accurately reflect the 
United Nations membership and that therefore it 
should not be entrusted with the responsibility of 
electing the Governing Council. If he believes 
this, he will soon have an opportunity in this com- 
mittee to support an appropriate increase in the 
membership of ECOSOC. The proposal to do so 
was endorsed by the ECOSOC at its 26th session. 
The vote was 16 for and 2 against. The negative 
votes were cast by the Soviet Union and Poland. 

Those of us who support the Preparatory Com- 
mittee's recommendation on election of the Gov- 
erning Council by ECOSOC do so because we sin- 
cerely believe that both a principle and a precedent 
are involved. As far as the composition of the 
Governing Council is concerned, we believe it will 
not differ markedly whether the election is held 
by ECOSOC or by the General Assembly. 
Furthermore, the fact that six members of the 
Council must be elected annually affords ample 
opportunity for eventual participation by a large 
number of countries. 



The overwhelming weight of principle and 
precedent favor election by ECOSOC. Let us 
look first at the United Nations Charter. Under 
articles 1 and 61-72, the Economic and Social 
Council is the United Nations body which has 
direct responsibility for United Nations activities 
". . . to achieve international cooperation in solv- 
ing international problems of an economic, social, 
cultural, or humanitarian character." 

In particular, article 63 makes the Council re- 
sponsible for coordinating the activities of the 
specialized agencies in economic, social, cultural, 
educational, health, and related fields. It is there- 
fore entirely natural that in the case of all existing 
U.N. bodies in these fields election of members is 
by the Economic and Social Council. This ap- 
plies to the Technical Assistance Committee, the 
Executive Board of the United Nations Children's 
Fund, the Executive Committee of the High Com- 
missioner for Refugees, the Commission on Hu- 
man Rights, the Commission on International 
Commodity Trade, and many others. 

We agree with those who say that the Special 
Fund will be a very important program; we 
thought so when we proposed it last year and we 
still do. But would anyone argue that the pro- 
tection of human rights, the welfare of children, 
social progress, and the Expanded Program of 
Technical Assistance are not important? The 
United Nations has given the Economic and So- 
cial Council full confidence in being directly re- 
sponsible for these programs and in electing the 
governing bodies. This history and precedent 
was undoubtedly what the distinguished repre- 
sentative of Mexico had in mind when he said: 

It appears regrettably that there is being created a sort 
of antagonism between the Assembly and the Council, the 
organ to which have been entrusted — and should continue i 
to be entrusted — functions of great importance in matters 
which are precisely of its competence. If the Assembly 
entrusts to the Council the delicate task of supervising 
the activities of the Special Fund, how can it not show 
the same confidence with regard to the election of mem- 
bers of its Governing Council? 

May I add that, if the Economic and Social Coun- 
cil were not worthy of confidence, it woidd be a 
serious reflection on the General Assembly, which, 
after all, elects the Council. 

The distinguished representative of the Nether- 
lands, in a cogent statement on this point, care- 
fully outlined the reasons why the Preparatory 
Committee recommended that the Economic and 



706 



Department of Stafe Bulletin 



Social Council should elect the members of the 
Special Fund Governing Council. He said as 
follows: 

At the present time there is no body operating within 
the United Nations in the economic and social framework 
of which the members are not elected by the Economic 
and Social Council. To deviate from the accepted princi- 
ple that the Economic and Social Council will elect the 
members of bodies in the economic field might create in 
certain countries the impression that political motives 
had contributed to the decision to have the General As- 
sembly perform this election. Such a belief could, even 
though it would probably be erroneous, in itself be detri- 
mental to the widest possible support, especially financial 
support, to the Special Fund. On the other hand elec- 
tion by the Economic and Social Council would fit into a 
well established pattern. 

The Netherlands representative made it very clear 
that this position on this matter of principle has 
nothing to do with the future of SUNFED. He 
emphasized that his delegation as well as many 
others cosponsoring resolution L. 363 continue to 
be firm supporters of SUNFED. 

Making the Special Fund Successful 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I should like to 
say a few words about section III of resolution 
1219. My delegation cooperated in drafting that 
section and has supported it fully. We continue 
to support it fully. Our only stipulation is that it 
be read to mean exactly what it says. It reads, 

Decides that as and when the resources prospectively 
available are considered by the General Assembly to be 
sufficient to enter into the field of capital development, 
principally the development of the economic and social 
infrastructure of the less developed countries, the General 
Assembly shall review the scope and future activities of 
the Fund and take such action as it may deem appro- 
priate. 

Please note that the paragraph does not "bury" 
the idea of a U.N. capital development fund. 
Neither does it provide that the Special Fund 
shall become such a fund. It provides that, as 
and when resources prospectively available are 
considered by the General Assembly to be suffi- 
cient to enter into the field of capital development, 
the Assembly shall take such action as it may 
deem appropriate. Some delegations have ex- 
pressed the hope that such action will be the estab- 
lishment of SUNFED. I would assume this 
might mean a substantial reorganization of the 
machinery proposed for the Special Fund. It 



might also take the form of encouraging the estab- 
lishment of an international development associa- 
tion affiliated with the International Bank. In 
any event, we shall know better when the time 
comes what the appropriate action of the General 
Assembly will be. 

My Government fully agrees that there should 
be a review at that time, and we attach no im- 
portance to the word "possible" appearing in para- 
graph I of the Preparatory Committee recommen- 
dation. In the meantime let us dedicate ourselves 
to making the Special Fund a successful venture 
fully supported by all members. Let us not so 
concentrate our thoughts on the future as to miss 
the constructive possibilities of the present. The 
Special Fund will not solve all problems of devel- 
opment, but it will, if properly supported and ad- 
ministered, make a highly significant contribution. 
My Government pledges its full support for the 
speedy establishment of this new and important 
addition to United Nations activities on behalf of 
the economic development of the less developed 
countries. 



STATEMENT BY MR. PHILLIPS, OCTOBER 13 » 

As you know, section III of resolution 1219 was 
a very carefully balanced compromise between 
those who looked upon the Special Fund as a step 
toward a U.N. capital development f imd and those 
who regarded it as a concrete step f orward in its 
own right, leaving for future consideration the 
question of establishing a capital development 
fund. This compromise took a long time to work 
out and was accepted unanimously by Commit- 
tee II. 

On the basis of resolution 1219, including sec- 
tion III, my Government has been cooperating for 
almost a year with other governments in working 
out the terms of reference for the Special Fund. 
Now, as this fund is about to be born, we have had 
introduced at the very last moment — Friday, to be 
exact — an addition to section III which, in the 
view of my Government, upsets the carefully bal- 
anced compromise of last year. It is unfortunate 
that this new and very delicate element was intro- 
duced just at this moment. Having gone very far 
indeed in accepting and reaffirming the carefully 



'Made in Committee II (U.S. delegation press release 
3018). 



November 3, 1958 



707 



United States Pledges $38 Million 
to ETAP and Special Fund 

Statement by Senator Mansfield 1 

The United States has been interested in the 
technical assistance activities of the United Na- 
tions and the specialized agencies since their be- 
ginnings. We regard the establishment of the 
Special Fund, which was ratified by this Assembly 
on Tuesday, as a step forward toward meeting the 
needs of newly developing countries which cannot 
now be met by the Expanded Program of Technical 
Assistance. 

While these programs are specifically designed 
to meet the needs of less developed countries, in 
actuality they serve to benefit all countries through 
the interchange of peoples and ideas. 

The United States Government is prepared to 
do its share in supporting these programs. We 
are hopeful that other governments will find them- 
selves in a similar position and will be able not 
only to provide adequate funds for the Expanded 
Technical Assistance Program but also to make 
generous contributions to the Special Fund. 

For calendar year 1958 the United States pledged 
the amount of $15.5 million to the Expanded Tech- 
nical Assistance Program subject to the limitation 
that the United States share would not exceed 45 
percent of the total contributions to the central 
fund. The United States now pledges the amount 
of $38 million to the Expanded Technical Assist- 
ance Program and the Special Fund for the calen- 
dar year 1959. This is subject to the limitation 
that the United States contribution will not exceed 
40 percent of the total amount contributed to the 
two funds. The specific amounts to be made avail- 
able to each fund will be announced at a later date 
after pledges from other governments are known. 

We hope that this pledge, together with those 
of the other governments represented here, will 
enable the Expanded Technical Assistance Pro- 
gram to continue to develop and will permit the 
Special Fund to make an auspicious start in the 
important task which has been set for it. 



1 Made on Oct. 16 before the Pledging Conference 
on the Expanded Technical Assistance Program and 
the Special Fund (U.S./U.N. press release 3025). 



balanced formula in section III of resolution 1210, 
my Government is unable at this time to accept 
any alteration in that balance. If the proposed 
amendment is pressed to a vote, the United States 
delegation will have to vote against it. More- 
over, should the amendment be adopted, my dele- 
gation will be unable to accept the resolution as 



a whole. It woidd in this case be necessary to 
refer the resolution to my Government for fur- 
ther review. 

Most of you know how wholeheartedly my Gov- 
ernment has been engaged in working with other 
governments to establish a Special Fund. You 
must know, therefore, how much we would regret 
any move that would jeopardize this program. I 
would, therefore, appeal to those who are support- 
ing the amendment not to press it to a vote. 

I know that some of you here attach impor- 
tance to the idea of the proposed amendment. I 
fully respect your views and would certainly have 
no objection to having this same issue placed be- 
fore the committee at a future date. I hope that 
others will have the same regard for the very 
strong feelings of the United States Government 
on this issue. With my faith in the usual good 
sense of this committee, I cannot believe that it 
will permit itself to be stampeded into a hasty act 
which might jeopardize the fullest possible co- 
operation by member governments in this pro- 
gram. The Special Fund is ready. As I sug- 
gested last week, let us not so concentrate our 
thoughts on the future as to miss the construc- 
tive opportunities of the present. Let us rather 
dedicate ourselves to making the Special Fund 
a successful venture fully supported by all 
members. 10 



STATEMENT BY SENATOR MANSFIELD, OCTO- 
BER 14" 

Mr. President, the resolution on which we are 
about to vote represents many weeks of effort by 
many delegations. Very difficult questions were 
involved in defining the nature and structure of 
the Special Fund. However, the spirit of under- 
standing and conciliation displayed has now made 
it possible to translate an idea into action. 

During consideration of this matter in commit- 
tee, many interpretations were made concerning 
the nature and significance of the Special Fund 
in the general context of efforts by the United 



10 On Oct. 13 Committee II, by a vote of 73 to 0, with 
1 abstention, approved a draft resolution (U.N. doc. 
A/C.2/L.364, as amended) which consisted of the text 
common to the revised draft resolutions contained in A/C 
.2/L.362/Rev. 1 and A/C.2/L.363/Rev. 1. 

"Made in plenary session (U.S. delegation press re- 
lease 3021). 



708 



Department of State Bulletin 



Nations to assist the economic development of the 
less developed countries. So far as the United 
States is concerned, let me say at the outset that 
its views remain those expressed by the United 
States representative to the General Assembly on 
December 14, 1D57. 12 

Despite differences of view on this and other 
matters, however, the United States is persuaded 
that the establishment of the Special Fund will 
make the beginning of a new and important phase 
in the war which the United Nations has under- 
taken to wage against poverty, hunger, and dis- 
ease wherever these may be found. 

My delegation is satisfied that the Special Fund 
gives real promise of making a contribution to the 
progress of the less developed countries. As I 
emphasized previously in a statement in commit- 
tee, no significant momentum of development can 
be attained without knowledge of basic resources, 
without the skills to put them to use, and without 
trained personnel to work in agriculture, indus- 
try, administration, and health. It is at these 
key points that the Special Fund can assist in 
bringing the world's knowledge and experience to 
bear on the problems of economic development. 

The support which this resolution received in 
committee indicates the hope which nations place 
in the Special Fund. The fund is not, however, a 
self -operative or magical formula. If it is to ful- 
fill its promise, all nations must make the effort — 
financial and otherwise — which will translate a 
paper resolution into an effective device of inter- 
national cooperation. The first test of the will 
to make this effort shall come in just 2 days. At 
that time member states will be called upon to 
indicate the extent of their financial support for 
the fund. As has already been announced, the 
United States stands ready to make a combined 
contribution to both the Special Fund and the Ex- 
panded Program of Technical Assistance of $38 
million, provided adequate contributions are 
forthcoming from other member nations. I can 
only express the hope that others will see the po- 
tential benefits of this fund to the world as we 
see them and that they will dig down deeply in 
support of it. With mutual effort and determi- 
nation, we can make the Special Fund an effective 
instrument for the greater well-being of all 
peoples. 

My delegation is happy to vote for this resolu- 



tion as is. It is with deep regret that we cannot 
subscribe to the amendment offered by the distin- 
guished delegate from India. 13 

RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SPECIAL FUND M 

The General Assembly, 

In conformity with the determination of the United 
Nations, as expressed in its Charter, to promote social 
progress and better standards of life in larger freedom 
and, for these ends, to employ international machinery 
for the promotion of the economic and social advance- 
ment of all peoples, 

Conscious of the particular needs of the less developed 
countries for international aid in achieving accelerated 
development of their economic and social infrastructure, 

Recalling its resolution 1219 (XII) of 14 December 1957, 

Further recalling previous resolutions on the establish- 
ment of an international fund for economic development 
within the framework of the United Nations, 

Noting the recommendations contained in Economic 
and Social Council resolution 692 (XXVI) of 31 July 1958, 

Part A 

1. Commends the Preparatory Committee on its work; 

2. Establishes a Special Fund in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in part B below : 

Part B 

I. Guiding principles and criteria 

1. Pursuant to the provisions of General Assembly 
resolution 1219 (XII) and pending a review by the As- 
sembly of the scope and future activities of the Special 
Fund, as envisaged in section III of that resolution, the 
Special Fund shall : 

(a) Be a separate fund ; 

(&) Provide systematic and sustained assistance in 
fields essential to the integrated technical, economic and 
social development of the less developed countries ; 

(c) In view of the resources prospectively available at 
this time, which are not likely to exceed $100 million 
annually, direct its operations towards enlarging the 
scope of the United Nations programmes of technical 
assistance so as to include special projects in certain 
basic fields as outlined hereunder. 

The Special Fund is thus envisaged as a constructive ad- 
vance in United Nations assistance to the less developed 
countries which should be of immediate significance in 
accelerating their economic development by, inter alia, 



"Bulletin- of Jan. 13, 1958, p. 69. 
November 3, 1958 



1J In plenary session on Oct. 14 the representative of 
India reintroduced, as an amendment to paragraph 13 
of the draft resolution, the proposal that the states mem- 
bers of the Governing Council be elected by the General 
Assembly instead of by the Economic and Social Council. 
The Indian proposal was rejected by a vote of 30 to 45, 
with '.', abstentions. 

"U.N. doe. A/Res/1240 (XIII) (A/C.2/L.364, as 
amended) ; adopted in plenary session Oct. 14 by a vote 
of 77 to 0, with 1 abstention. 



709 



facilitating new capital investments of all types by creat- 
ing conditions which would make such investments either 
feasible or more effective. 

2. In establishing programmes, the Managing Director 
and the Governing Council of the Special Fund shall be 
guided by the following principles and criteria : 

(a) The Special Fund shall concentrate, as far as 
practicable, on relatively large projects and avoid allo- 
cation of its resources over a great number of small 
projects ; 

(6) Due consideration shall be given to the urgency 
of the needs of the requesting countries ; 

(c) Projects shall be undertaken which will lead to 
early results and have the widest possible impact in 
advancing the economic, social or technical development 
of the country or countries concerned, in particular by 
facilitating new capital investment ; 

(d) Due consideration shall be given to a wide geo- 
graphical distribution in allocations over a period of 
years ; 

(e) Due consideration shall be given to technical or- 
ganizational and financial problems likely to be encoun- 
tered in executing a proposed project ; 

(f) Due consideration shall be given to the 
arrangements made for the integration of projects into 
national development programmes and for effective co- 
ordination of the project with other multilateral and bi- 
lateral programmes ; 

(<7) In accordance with the principles of the Charter 
of the United Nations, the assistance furnished by the 
Special Fund shall not be a means of foreign economic 
and political interference in the internal affairs of the 
country or countries concerned and shall not be accom- 
panied by any conditions of a political nature ; 

(h) Projects shall be devised in such a way as to 
facilitate transfer, as soon as practicable, of the respon- 
sibilities of the Special Fund to assisted countries or to 
organizations designated by them. 

3. Projects may be for one country or a group of 
countries or a region. 

4. Projects may be approved for the period of time 
needed for their execution, even if more than one year. 

II. Basic fields of assistance and types of project 

5. The Special Fund shall assist projects in the fields 
of resources, including the assessment and development 
of manpower, industry, including handicrafts and cot- 
tage industries, agriculture, transport and communica- 
tions, building and housing, health, education, statistics 
and public administration. 

6. In view of the resources prospectively available at 
the time of the initial period of the Special Fund's 
operations, projects to be assisted by the Special Fund 
might be in one or a combination of the following forms : 
surveys ; research and training ; demonstration, inclwl- 
ing pilot projects. These may be implemented by the 
provision of staff, experts, equipment, supplies and serv- 
ices, as well as the establishment of institutes, demon- 
stration centres, plants or works, and other appropriate 
means, including fellowships, in so far as they are inte- 
gral parts of a specific project financed by the Special 
Fund, in such proportions as are judged necessary by 



the Managing Director for each project, taking into ac- 
count the type of assistance requested by Governments. 

III. Participation in the Special Fund 

7. Participation in the Special Fund shall be open to 
any States Members of the United Nations, or members 
of the specialized agencies or of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency. 

IV. Organization and management 

8. There are established as organs of the Special Fund : 
a Governing Council, a Managing Director and his staff, 
and a consultative board. The Special Fund shall be an 
organ of the United Nations administered under the 
authority of the Economic and Social Council and of the 
General Assembly, which will exercise in respect of the 
Special Fund their powers under the Charter. 

9. The Economic and Social Council shall be respon- 
sible for the formulation of the general rules and prin- 
ciples which will govern the administration and 
operations of the Special Fund ; the review of the opera- 
tions of the Special Fund on the basis of the annual 
reports to be submitted by the Governing Council ; and 
the consideration of the Expanded Programme of Techni- 
cal Assistance and of the Special Fund in relation to 
each other. 

10. The Economic and Social Council shall transmit 
the report of the Governing Council, together with its 
own comments, to the General Assembly. The Assembly 
will review the progress and operations of the Special 
Fund as a separate subject of its agenda and make any 
appropriate recommendations. 

Governing Council 

11. The immediate inter-governmental control of the 
policies and operations of the Special Fund shall be ex- 
ercised by a Governing Council which will consist of 
representatives of eighteen States. 

12. The Governing Council shall provide general policy 
guidance on the administration and operations of the 
Special Fund. It shall have final authority for the ap- 
proval of the projects and programmes recommended by 
the Managing Director. It shall review the administra- 
tion and the execution of the Special Fund's approved 
projects, and shall submit reports and recommendations 
to the Economic and Social Council, including such 
recommendations as the Governing Council may deem ap- 
propriate in the light of the relevant provisions of Gen- 
eral Assembly resolution 1219 (XII). 

13. The States members of the Governing Council shall 
be elected by the Economic and Social Council from 
among Members of the United Nations or members of 
the specialized agencies or of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency. 

14. There shall be equal representation on the Gov- 
erning Council of economically more developed countries, 
having due regard to their contributions to the Special 
Fund, on the one hand, and of less developed countries, 
on the other hand, taking into account the need for 
equitable geographical distribution among the latter 
members. 

15. States members of the Governing Council shall be 



710 



Department of State Bulletin 



elected for a term of three years, provided, however, that 
of the members elected at the first election, the terms of 
six members shall expire at the end of one year and the 
terms of six other members at the end of two years. 
Retiring members shall be eligible for re-election. 

16. Decisions of the Governing Council on important 
questions shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the 
members present and voting. These questions shall in- 
clude questions of policy, the approval of projects and the 
allocation of funds. Decisions of the Governing Council 
on other questions shall be made by a majority of the 
members present and voting. 

IT. The Governing Council shall adopt its own rules of 
procedure, including the method of selecting its officers. 

18. The Governing Council shall normally meet twice a 
year and on such occasions as may be necessary, in con- 
formity with its rules of procedure. 

19. The Managing Director of the Special Fund shall 
participate without vote in the deliberations of the Gov- 
erning Council. 

20. The Governing Council shall make appropriate ar- 
rangements in its rules of procedure for the representa- 
tion of the specialized agencies, the International Atomic 
Energy Agency and the Executive Chairman of the Tech- 
nical Assistance Board. To this end, it shall take due 
account of the practice followed by the Economic and 
Social Council. 

Managing Director 

21. The Special Fund shall be administered by a Man- 
aging Director under the policy guidance of the Govern- 
ing Council. The Managing Director shall have the over- 
all responsibility for the operations of the Fund, with sole 
authority to recommend to the Governing Council projects 
submitted by Governments. 

22. After having consulted the Governing Council, the 
Secretary-General will appoint the Managing Director, 
subject to confirmation by the General Assembly. 

23. The Managing Director shall be appointed for a 
term of four years, or for a shorter period. He shall be 
eligible for reappointment. 

24. Appropriate arrangements shall be made for the 
participation of the Managing Director in the Technical 
Assistance Board. 

25. The Managing Director shall establish and main- 
tain close and continuing working relationships with the 
specialized agencies concerned with those fields of activity 
in which the Special Fund will operate, and with the In- 
ternational Atomic Energy Agency. He may also estab- 
lish appropriate contacts with other organizations which 
may be concerned with the activities of the Fund. 

Consultative Board 

26. A Consultative Board shall be established to advise 
the Managing Director. The function of the Board shall 
be to assist the Managing Director with advice in the ex- 
amination and appraisal of project requests and proposed 
programmes of the Special Fund. The Board -shall be 
composed of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, 
the Executive Chairman of the Technical Assistance 
Board and the President of the International Bank for 



Reconstruction and Development or their designated rep- 
resentatives. 

27. The Managing Director shall make, as appropriate, 
arrangements for representatives of the specialized agen- 
cies and of the International Atomic Energy Agency to 
be invited to the deliberations of the Consultative Board 
when projects falling mainly within their fields of activity 
are considered. 

Staff 

28. The Managing Director shall be assisted by a small 
group of officials to be selected by, or in consultation with 
him, on the basis of their special competence. 

29. For other services, the Managing Director shall 
rely as far as possible on the existing facilities of the 
United Nations, the specialized agencies, the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, and the Technical Assistance 
Board. These facilities should be made available to the 
Special Fund without charge except when clearly iden- 
tifiable additional expenses are involved. The Managing 
Director may also, as required, engage expert consultants. 

30. To facilitate the field co-ordination between the 
Special Fund and the Expanded Programme of Technical 
Assistance in the countries seeking assistance, the Man- 
aging Director shall enter into an agreement with the 
Executive Chairman of the Technical Assistance Board 
concerning the role of the resident representatives in the 
work of the Fund. 

V. Procedures 
Sources and formulation of requests 

31. Projects shall be undertaken only at the request of 
a Government or group of Governments eligible to partici- 
pate in the Special Fund. 

32. Governments shall present their requests for assist- 
ance in a form indicated by the Managing Director. Re- 
quests shall include all possible information on the in- 
tended use and benefits expected to be derived from the 
Special Fund's assistance, evidence of a technical nature 
regarding the projects for which assistance is requested, 
data bearing upon the economic appraisal of such proj- 
ects, and statements concerning the part of costs which 
the Government itself would be ready to assume. The 
Special Fund, the Expanded Programme of Technical As- 
sistance, the United Nations, the specialized agencies and 
the International Atomic Energy Agency should be ready 
to assist and advise Governments at their request, in the 
preparation of their applications for assistance. 

33. The Special Fund shall utilize only the oflSeial 
channel designated by each Government for the submis- 
sion of requests. 

Evaluation and approval of requests 

34. The Managing Director shall be responsible for the 
evaluation of project requests. In this evaluation, he will 
normally be expected to rely upon the assistance of exist- 
ing services within the Expanded Programme of Techni- 
cal Assistance, the United Nations, the specialized agen- 
cies and the International Atomic Energy Agency. He 
shall also be authorized to contract the services of other 
agencies, private firms or individual experts for this pur- 
pose, in case the services of the United Nations, the spe- 



November 3, 1958 



711 



cialized agencies or the International Atomic Energy 
Agency are wholly or partly unavailable or inadequate. 

35. On the basis of the evaluation of project requests, 
the Managing Director shall periodically develop pro- 
grammes for submission to the Governing Council. In 
developing his recommendations to the Governing Coun- 
cil, he shall consult the Consultative Board. 

36. The Managing Director shall, at the request of the 
Government or Governments which have submitted such 
projects, submit to the Governing Council for its consider- 
ation a report on project requests which he has been un- 
able to include in his programme. 

37. The Governing Council shall examine the pro- 
grammes and projects submitted by the Managing Di- 
rector. Each project shall be accompanied by : 

(a) An evaluation of the benefits expected to be de- 
rived by the requesting country or countries ; 

(b) A summary of its technical evaluation; 

(c) A proposed budget showing the financial implica- 
tions of the project in their entirety, including a state- 
ment on the costs which would be borne by the recipient 
Governments ; 

(d) A draft agreement with the requesting Government 
or Governments ; 

(e) When appropriate, a draft agreement with the 
agent or agents responsible for execution of the project. 

38. The Governing Council shall take a final decision 
on the projects and programmes recommended by the 
Managing Director and authorize him to conclude the 
appropriate agreements. 

Execution of projects 

39. Projects shall be executed, whenever possible, by 
the United Nations, by the specialized agencies con- 
cerned, or by the International Atomic Energy Agency, 
it being understood that the Managing Director shall 
also be authorized to contract for the services of other 
agencies, private firms or individual experts in the cases 
mentioned in paragraph 34 above. 

40. Arrangements for the execution of projects shall 
be subject to the approval of the requesting Government 
or Governments, and shall be specified in an agreement 
with these Governments. Such arrangements shall con- 
tain provisions regarding the cost, including any local 
costs, which the requesting Government will assume and 
those facilities and services it will provide. 

41. Where requests for assistance fall within the 
sphere of two or more organizations, arrangements shall 
be made for joint execution by the organizations con- 
cerned and for proper co-ordination. 

42. The Managing Director shall make appropriate ar- 
rangements to follow the execution of projects. 

43. The Managing Director shall report to the Govern- 
ing Council on the status of projects and the financial 
position of the projects and programmes. 

44. The Managing Director and the Governing Council 
shall take appropriate measures to ensure an objective 
evaluation of the results of projects and programmes. 

VI. Finances 

45. The financial resources of the Special Fund shall 
be derived from voluntary contributions by Governments 



of States Members of the United Nations, or members of 
the specialized agencies or of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency. The Fund is also authorized to receive 
donations from non-governmental sources. It is recom- 
mended that contributions by Governments should be 
paid as early in each year as possible. Furthermore, 
while contributions will normally be on an annual basis, 
it is recommended, in view of the expected longer term of 
many of the Fund's projects, that contributions be 
pledged or indicated, whenever possible, for a number of 
years. 

46. The Secretary-General is requested to convene 
annually a pledging conference at which Governments 
would announce their contributions to the Expanded 
Programme of Technical Assistance and to the Special 
Fund respectively. If a Government pledges an initial 
lump sum, it should, within a reasonably short period, 
indicate the division of its contribution between the two 
programmes. 

47. Contributions shall be made by Governments in cur- 
rency readily usable by the Special Fund consistent with 
the need for efficiency and economy of the Fund's 
operations, or shall be transferable to the greatest possi- 
ble extent into currency readily usable by the Fund. To 
this end, Governments are urged to make available as 
large a percentage as they may find possible of their 
contributions in such currency or currencies as the Man- 
aging Director may indicate are required for the execu- 
tion of the Fund's programme. The Managing Director 
should, consistent with the criteria set forth respecting 
the nature and utilization of contributions, endeavour to 
make the fullest possible use of available currencies. 

48. The Managing Director shall, at the end of the 
first year of the operations of the Special Fund and sub- 
sequently as he deems necessary, report to the Govern- 
ing Council for its consideration on the extent to which 
restrictions which may have been maintained on con- 
tributions have affected the flexibility, efficiency and 
economy of the Fund's operations. The Governing Coun- 
cil shall also consider what action may be necessary with 
respect to currency found not readily usable in order to 
facilitate the Fund's operations. Any action in this re- 
spect shall be subject to review by the Economic and 
Social Council and the General Assembly. 

49. Contributions shall be made without limitation as 
to use by a specific agency or in a specific recipient coun- 
try or for a specific project. 

50. To the end that the multilateral character of the 
Special Fund shall be strictly respected, no contributing 
country should receive special treatment with respect to 
its contribution nor should negotiations for the use of 
currencies take place between contributing and receiving 
countries. 

51. Since programmes shall be developed on a project 
basis, there should be no a priori allocation of funds on 
a country basis or among basic fields of assistance. 

52. Recipient Governments shall be expected to finance 
part of the costs of projects, at least that part payable 
in local currency. This general rule may, however, be 
waived in the case of countries deemed financially un- 
able to make even a local currency payment. 

53. The Special Fund shall be governed by financial 



712 



Department of State Bulletin 



regulations consistent with the financial regulations and 
policies of the United Nations. The financial regula- 
tions for the Fund shall be drafted by the Secretary-Gen- 
eral lit' the 1'nited Nations, in consultation with the 
Managing Director, for approval by the Governing Coun- 
cil, after review by the Advisory Committee for Admin- 
istrative and Budgetary Questions. In the preparation 
of these regulations, account shall be taken of the special 
requirements of the Fund's operations ; in particular, 
appropriate provision shall be made to permit the ap- 
proval of projects of more than one year's duration and 
for an exchange of currencies between the Fund and 
the Special Account for the Expanded Programme of 
Technical Assistance. Provision should also exist under 
which the Managing Director is authorized in consulta- 
tion with the Governing Council to establish appropriate 
financial rules and procedures. 

54. The administrative budget prepared by the Manag- 
ing Director with the assistance of the Secretary-Gen- 
eral of the United Nations shall be submitted for ap- 
proval to the Governing Council with the comments, if 
any, of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and 
Budgetary Questions. It shall be submitted to the Gen- 
eral Assembly at the same time as the annual report of 
the Governing Council with the comments of the Ad- 
visory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary 
Questions. 

55. The Special Fund shall be authorized to build up 
gradually a reserve fund by earmarking a specific per- 
centage of the total contributions of each year up to an 
amount to be determined by the Governing Council on 
recommendation of the Managing Director. 

56. The Governing Council shall be authorized to con- 
sider allocating part of the resources of the Special 
Fund for assistance on a refundable basis at the re- 
quest of Governments for projects within the terms of 
reference of the Fund. 

Part C 

Reaffirms the conditions set forth in section III of Gen- 
eral Assembly resolution 1219 (XII), under which the 
Assembly shall review the scope and future activities of 
the Special Fund and take such action as it may deem 
appropriate. 



Mr. Dillon Named Representative 
to OAS Special Committee 

Press release 612 dated October 14 

Douglas Dillon, Under Secretary of State for 
Economic Affairs, has been named representative 
of the United States on the Special Committee of 
the Council of the Organization of American 
States that has been established to consider addi- 
tional measures of inter-American economic 
cooperation. 

The Special Committee was established by the 
Council of the Organization of American States 



pursuant to a recommendation of the 21 Foreign 
Ministers of the American Republics at the close 
of their 2-day informal meeting at Washington 
September 23 to 24. 1 The Council has fixed 
November 17 as the date for the first meeting of 
the Special Committee. 

Named as alternates to Under Secretary Dillon 
are Assistant Secretary of State for Inter- Ameri- 
can Affairs Roy R. Rubottom, Jr., Assistant Sec- 
retary of State for Economic Affairs Thomas C. 
Mann, and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury 
Tom B. Coughran. 



U.S. Delegations to 
International Conferences 

13th Session of Contracting Parties to GATT 

The Department of State announced on Oc- 
tober 9 (press release 596) that two U.S. Senators 
and four prominent citizens will serve as advisers 
to the U.S. delegation to the 13th session of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
(GATT) at Geneva. 

Senator Prescott Bush, a member of the Senate 
Banking and Currency Committee and the Senate 
Armed Services Committee, and Senator George 
A. Smathers, a member of the Senate Finance 
Committee and the Senate Interstate and Foreign 
Commerce Committee, will be congressional ad- 
visers to the delegation. The four nongovern- 
mental advisers will be Mrs. Enid H. Robinson, 
Stanley H. Ruttenberg, Richard Wagner, and 
George H. Wilson. 

The Department announced on October 15 
(press release 615) that Under Secretary of State 
Douglas Dillon and Assistant Secretary of Com- 
merce Henry Kearns will attend the 13th session 
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
(GATT), which opens at Geneva on October 16 
and will participate in the proceedings during the 
O] lening days of the session. The chairman of the 
U.S. delegation to the 13th session will be W. T. 
M. Beale, Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State 
for Economic A Hairs. 

The United States played a leading role in nego- 
tiating the GATT in 1947 and since that date has 
made it the cornerstone of its commercial policy. 



1 For an announcement of the meeting and test of the 
communique, see Bulletin of Oct. 13, 1958, p. 574. 



November 3, 1958 



713 



The rules of the GATT are designed to reduce 
governmental interference with the flow of trade 
and with the exercise of private business initiative. 
It has become the basic instrument, governing com- 
mercial relations between the United States and 
the principal trading nations of the free world. 
All together the 37 Contracting Parties to the 
GATT account for more than 80 percent of inter- 
national trade. 

The session will be confronted with trade mat- 
ters of long-range importance and continuing con- 
cern as well as with a number of immediate prob- 
lems that have arisen during the past year and 
that should be settled during the 4 to 6 weeks 
that the session is expected to last. Cabinet min- 
isters from a number of GATT countries will 
attend the. opening days of the session. 

One feature of the 13th session will be the pres- 
entation of a report on long-term trends in inter- 
national trade prepared by a panel of four inter- 
nationally recognized economists headed by Prof. 
Gottfried Haberler of Harvard University. The 
panel's report was released to the public on Oc- 
tober 12, under the title of Trends in International 
Trade. Among the matters dealt with in the re- 
port are trade problems of underdeveloped coun- 
tries, price fluctuations of primary products, and 
agricultural protection. 

A matter of immediate importance to the Con- 
tracting Parties is the question of the continued 
maintenance of import restrictions by the German 
Federal Republic. The GATT permits a country 
to place quotas on imports so long as such controls 
are required to safeguard its foreign-exchange re- 
serves. The International Monetary Fund de- 
termined last year that, as a concomitant of Ger- 
many's economic revival, the Federal Republic 
was no longer experiencing balance-of-payments 
difficulties. Last spring the Intersessional Com- 
mittee of the GATT reviewed this matter and 
urged Germany to bring its policies into con- 
formity with the GATT. 

At the intersessional meeting last spring the six 
signatories to the Koine treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community agreed to consult 
with those countries that were concerned over the 
possible effects of the treaty on their trade. It is 
hoped that these consultations will begin within 
the GATT framework while the 13th session is 
still in progress. 

The agenda of the session also provides for con- 



sultations with countries that are still imposing 
import restrictions to safeguard their balance of 
payments. Originally proposed by the United 
States, these consultations are intended to explore 
the need for and the techniques of applying 
quantitative restrictions. It is one of several 
methods whereby the U.S. Government seeks to 
reduce discrimination against American exports 
and to promote greater freedom of commerce. 

Other matters to come before the Contracting 
Parties include annual reports under certain de- 
cisions taken in previous years, customs adminis- 
tration matters, comments on trends and develop- 
ments in trade in primary commodities, and an 
exchange of views on the related issue of disposal 
of agricultural surpluses. 

The U.S. delegation to the GATT is as follows : 

Ministerial Representatives 

Douglas Dillon, Under Secretary of State for Economic 
Affairs 

Henry Kearns, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for In- 
ternational Affairs 

Chairman 

W. T. M. Beale, Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State 
for Economic Affairs 

Vice Chairmen 

Marshall M. Smith, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Com- 
merce for International Affairs 

Albert E. Pappano, Chief, Commercial Policy and 
Treaties Division, Office of International Trade, De- 
partment of State 

Senatorial Advisers 
Prescott Bush 
George A. Smathers 

Public Members 

Airs. Enid H. Robinson, Hampton, Iowa 

Richard Wagner, Champlin Oil and Refining Co. 

George H. Wilson, American Farm Bureau Federation 

Stanley Ruttenberg, AFL-CIO 

Advisers 

Myron Black, Officer-in-Charge, Economic Organization 
Affairs, Office of European Regional Affairs, Depart- 
ment of State 

Emerson Brown, Commercial Policy and Treaties Divi- 
sion, Office of International Trade, Department of State 

Carl Corse, U.S. Mission to the European Communities, 
Department of State 

John Czyzak, Office of the Legal Adviser, Department of 
State 

A. Richard DeFelice, Deputy Assistant Administrator, 
Agricultural Trade Policy and Analysis Division, For- 
eign Agricultural Service, Department of Agriculture 

Ethel Dietrich, Director of the Trade Division, U.S. Mis- 
sion to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Inter- 
national Cooperation Administration 



714 



Department of State Bulletin 



Morris J. Fields, Chief of the Commercial Policy and 
United Nations Division, ( ifliee of International Fi- 
nance, Treasury Department 

Earle Fox, Trade Policy Division, Foreign Agricultural 
Service, Department of Agriculture 

Mortimer Goldstein, Assistant Chief, International Fi- 
nance Division, Office of International Financial and 
Development Affairs, Department of State 

G. Edward Galbreath, Executive Office of the President 

Leonard R. Linsenmayer, Associate Director, Office of 
International Labor Affairs, Department of Labor 

Richard L. Mattheisen, Assistant to the Director, Office 
of Economic Affairs, Bureau of Foreign Commerce, 
Department of Commerce 

Virginia H. McClung, Office of International Resources. 
Department of State 

Margaret Potter, U.S. Resident Delegation, Geneva, De- 
partment of State 

John J. Schalet, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for 
International Affairs, Department of Commerce 

Harry Shooshan, International Activities Assistant, 
Technical Review Staff, Department of the Interior 

Clarence Siegel, Deputy Director, European Division, 
Office of Economic Affairs, Bureau of Foreign Com- 
merce, Department of Commerce 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Educational Exchange Agreement 
Signed With Spain 

Presa release 621 dated October 16 

Spain and the United States on October 16 
signed an agreement putting into operation a new 
program of educational exchanges authorized by 
the Fulbright Act. The signing took place at 
Madrid with Fernando Maria Castiella, Minister 
of Foreign Affairs, representing the Spanish Gov- 
ernment and John Lodge, Ambassador of the 
United States, representing the U.S. Government. 

The agreement provides for the expenditure, 
over a 3-year period, of Spanish currency equiva- 
lent to $000,000, received from the sale of surplus 
agricultural products in Spain, to finance ex- 
changes of persons between the two countries to 
study, conduct advanced research, teach, or to en- 
gage in other educational activities. The purpose 
of this program will be to further mutual under- 
standing between the peoples of Spain and the 



United States through a wider exchange of knowl- 
edge and professional skills. Exchanges of per- 
sons under the Fulbright Act are carried out as 
a regular part of the international educational ex- 
change program of the Department of State. 

Under the terms of the agreement a binational 
commission, to be known as the Commission for 
Educational Exchange Between the United States 
and Spain, will be established in Madrid to facil- 
itate the administration of the program. The 
Commission's board of directors will consist of 
10 members with equal representation as to Span- 
ish and U.S. citizens, in addition to the U.S. Am- 
bassador, who will serve as honorary chairman. 
All recipients of awards under the program au- 
thorized by the Fulbright Act are selected by 
the Board of Foreign Scholarships, whose mem- 
bers are appointed by the President of the United 
States. The Board maintains a secretariat in 
the Department of State. 

With the signing of this agreement Spain be- 
comes the 40th country to participate in the edu- 
cational exchange program authorized by the Ful- 
bright Act. Approximately 33,000 exchanges 
have taken place since the legislation was enacted 
a little over 10 years ago. Educational exchanges 
heretofore have been carried out with Spain under 
the Smith-Mundt Act, the United States Infor- 
mation and Educational Exchange Act of 1948. 
The agreement will considerably augment the 
present number of exchanges with that country. 
Following appointment of the members of the 
Commission in Madrid and the formulation of 
a program of operations, information about spe- 
cific opportunities available will be released. 



Current Actions 



MULTILATERAL 

Austria 

State treaty for the reestablishment of an independent 
and democratic Austria. Signed at Vienna May 15, 
1955. Entered into force July 27, 1955. TIAS 3298. 
Accession deposited: Brazil, September 15, 1958. 

BILATERAL 

Australia 

Agreement for exchange of postal parcels between tne 
United States and the Territory of Papua and the Trust 
Territory of New Guinea. Signed at Canberra May 22 
and at Washington June 20, 1958. Entered into force 
October 1, 1958. 



November 3, 1958 



715 



DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE 



with special reference to areas of substantial labor sur- 
plus. Such study shall include specific recommendations 
for such legislative and administrative action as may be 
necessary to expand the role of private enterprise in ad- 
vancing the foreign policy objectives of the United States. 



Ralph I. Straus To Assist 
With Mutual Security Study 

Press release 628 dated October 18 
Department Announcement 

The Department of State announced on Octo- 
ber 18 the appointment of Ralph I. Straus as a 
consultant to Douglas Dillon, Under Secretary 
for Economic Affairs, to assist in preparing a 
study of ways and mean to expand the role of 
private enterprise in advancing the foreign pol- 
icy objectives of the United States, and related 
matters. This study is called for by section 413 
(c) of the Mutual Security Act, as amended, 
which requests that specific recommendations for 
legislative and administrative action be submitted 
to the next session of Congress. 

The study will be conducted under the direc- 
tion of Mr. Dillon, in collaboration with the 
Department of Commerce as well as the Interna- 
tional Cooperation Administration and other 
interested agencies. Individuals and private or- 
ganizations concerned with international trade, 
foreign investment, and business operations 
abroad will be consulted, as well as others in- 
terested in the conduct of the mutual security 
program. 

Mr. Straus is a member of the board of R. H. 
Macy and Co., Inc., and has had several assign- 
ments with the International Cooperation Ad- 
ministration and its predecessor agencies. 

Section 413 (c) of Mutual Security Act of 1954, as 
Amended ' 

Under the direction of the President, the Departments 
of State and Commerce and such other agencies of the 
Government as the President shall deem appropriate, in 
cooperation to the fullest extent practicable with pri- 
vate enterprise concerned with international trade, for- 
eign investment, and business operations in foreign coun- 
tries, shall conduct a study of the ways and means in 
which the role of the private sector of the national econ- 
omy can be more effectively utilized and protected in 
carrying out the purposes of this Act, so as to promote 
the foreign policy of the United States, to stabilize and 
to expand its economy and to prevent adverse effects, 



Designations 

Parker T. Hart as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near 
Eastern and South Asian Affairs, effective October 19. 



Appointments 

Robert Lawrence Berenson as director of the U.S. 
Operations Mission, Yugoslavia, effective October 16. 
(For biographic details, see Department of State press 
release 620 dated October 16. ) 



Section 205 (j) (2) of Mutual Security Act of 1958. 
716 



Check List of Department of State 
Press Releases: October 13-19 

Press releases may be obtained from the News 

Division, Department of State, Washington 25, D.C. 

Releases issued prior to October 13 which appear 

in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 584 of October 

6 and 596 and 599 of October 9. 

Subject 

U.S. representatives named to sur- 
prise-attack talks (rewrite). 

Salk vaccine to San Marino. 

Murphy : "Academic Training and 
Career Diplomacy." 

Muller appointed ICA representative 
to Somalia (biographic details). 

Navy Neptune case. 

Meeting of U.S. senior economic 
officers in Europe. 

Dillon named U.S. representative on 
OAS Special Committee. 

Suspension of shelling of Quemoy 
(combined with No. 614). 

Dulles : news conference. 

13th GATT session delegation 
(rewrite). 

Dulles : congressional political cam- 
paign (combined with No. 614). 

Investment guaranties. 

Thai parliamentary group visits U.S. 

Supplementary income-tax protocol 
with U.K. 

Berenson named ICA director in 
Yugoslavia (biographic details). 

Educational exchange agreement with 
Spain. 

Educational exchange (Netherlands). 

Dillon : "Problems Affecting Interna- 
tional Trade." 

Educational exchange (Guatemala). 

Educational exchange (India, Latin 
America ) . 

Korean Minister of Reconstruction 
visits U.S. 

U.S. dependents allowed to return to 
Lebanon. 

Straus appointed consultant to Under 
Secretary Dillon. 

* Not printed. 

t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin. 



No. 


Date 


606 


10/13 


607 
608 


10/13 
10/13 


*609 


10/13 


610 
611 


10/13 
10/14 


612 


10/14 


613 


10/14 


614 
615 


10/14 
10/15 


616 


10/15 


*617 

618 

t619 


10/15 
10/15 
10/16 


*620 


10/16 


621 


10/16 


*622 
t623 


10/17 
10/17 


*624 
*625 


10/17 
10/17 


626 


10/17 


627 


10/18 


628 


10/18 



Department of Stafe Bulletin 



November 3, 1958 

American Republics. Mr. Dillon Named Represent- 
ative to OSA Special Committee 

Canada. Reflections on U.S.-Canadian Relations 
(Elbrick) 

China, Republic of 

47th Anniversary of Founding of Republic of China 
(Eisenhower, Chiang Kai-shek) 

Secretary Dulles' News Conference of October 14 . 

Claims and Property. General War Sequel Law of 
German Federal Republic 

Congress, The. Congressional Documents Relating 
to Foreign Policy 

Department and Foreign Service 

Academic Training for the Foreign Service (Eisen- 
hower, Murphy) 

Appointments (Berenson) 

Designations (Hart) 

Economic Officers in Europe Hold Regional Meet- 
ing 

Ralph I. Straus To Assist With Mutual Security 
Study 

Disarmament. U.S. Experts Named for Talks on 
Preventing Surprise Attack 

Economic Affairs 

Economic Officers in Europe Hold Regional Meet- 
ing 

General War Sequel Law of German Federal Re- 
public 

Mr. Dillon Named Representative to OAS Special 
Committee 

13th Session of Contracting Parties to GATT (dele- 
gation) 

United Nations Establishes Special Fund (Mans- 
field, Phillips, text of resolution) 

Educational Exchange 

Educational Exchange Agreement Signed With 
Spain 

Thai National Assemblymen Visit United States . . 

Europe. Economic Officers in Europe Hold Re- 
gional Meeting 

Germany. General War Sequel Law of German 
Federal Republic 

Health, Education, and Welfare. U.S. Sends Salk 

Vaccine to San Marino 

International Information 

Mr. Mci lellan To Manage U.S. Exhibit at Moscow . 
United States and U.S.S.R. Agree on Films To Be 
Exchanged (text of memorandum of agreement) . 
International Law. Soviet Union Rejects Arbitra- 
tion of Navy Neptune Case by ICJ 

International Organizations and Conferences 
Calendar of International Conferences and Meet- 
ings 

13th Session of Contracting Parties to GATT (dele- 
gation) 



Index Vol. XXXIX, No. 1010 

Korea. Korean Minister of Reconstruction Visits 
713 United States 693 

Lebanon. U.S. Dependents Authorized To Return 
094 to Lebanon 088 

Middle East. Secretary Dulles' News Conference 

of October 14 681 

692 Mutual Security 

Berenson appointed chief, USOM, Yugoslavia . . 716 

Korean Minister of Reconstruction Visits United 
699 States 693 

Ralph I. Straus To Assist With Mutual Security 
699 Study 710 

U.S. Sends Salk Vaccine to San Marino 699 

Presidential Documents 
6S9 Academic Training for the Foreign Service .... 6S9 
J 16 Columbus Day, 1958 688 

47th Anniversary of Founding of Republic of China . 692 
688 San Marino. U.S. Sends Salk Vaccine to San 

Marino 699 

716 Spain. Educational Exchange Agreement Signed 

With Spain 715 

688 Thailand. Thai National Assemblymen Visit 

United States 693 

Treaty Information 
688 Current Treaty Actions 715 

Educational Exchange Agreement Signed With 
699 Spain 715 

United States and U.S.S.R. Agree on Films To Be 

Exchanged (text of memorandum of agreement) . 696 
713 U.S.S.R. 

Mr. McClellan To Manage U.S. Exhibit at Moscow . 696 
702 Soviet Union Rejects Arbitration of Navy Neptune 

Case by ICJ 698 

United States and U.S.S.R. Agree on Films To Be 
715 Exchanged (text of memorandum of agreement) . 696 
693 United Nations. United Nations Establishes Spe- 
cial Fund (Mansfield, Phillips, text of resolu- 
688 tion) 702 

Yugoslavia. Berenson appointed chief, USOM . . 716 
099 

Name Index 

699 Berenson, Robert Lawrence 710 

Chiang Kai-shek 692 

696 Dillon, Douglas 713 

Dulles, Secretary 681 

696 Eisenhower, President 688, 689, 692 

Elbrick, C. Burke 694 

698 Hart, Parker T 716 

Mansfield, Mike 702 

McClellan, Harold Chadick 696 

700 Murphy, Robert 689 

Phillips, Christopher H 702 

713 Straus, Ralph I 716 



U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1958 



* 

s *** a, 




the 

Department 

of 

State 



United States 
Government Printing Office 

DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 

Washington 25, D. C. 



PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID 

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, S30O 

(GPO) 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 



YOU . . . 

and the UNITED NATIONS 

1958-59 



Henry Cabot Lodge, United States Representative to the United 
Nations, answers 24 questions frequently asked by citizens in this 
newly revised pamphlet on the functions and accomplishments of the 
U.N. 

Among the questions : 

"Can the United Nations do anything about disarmament?" 
"How much does our membership in the United Nations cost?" 
"What about outer space? Can the U.N. do anything to see that 

nations use outer space for peace instead of war?" 

"How would you sum up the value of the United Nations to the 

United States?" 

An introductory section outlines U.S. representation in the U.N. 
The 48-page pamphlet is illustrated. 



Publication 6692 



25 cents 



Order Form 

o: Supt. of Documents 
Govt. Printing Office 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Enclosed find: 



$- 



(cash, check, or 
money order). 



For your convenience, the Order Form is printed below: 

ADDRESS ORDER FORM TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D.C. 

REMITTANCES, PAYABLE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, 

SHOULD ACCOMPANY ORDERS. 



Please send me copies of You . . . and the United Nations, 1958-59 

Name: 

Street Address: 

City, Zone, and State: 



HE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 




/ 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1011 




November 10. 1958 



E 
ILL 

iEKLY RECORD 

STATES 
N POLICY 



UNITED STATES AND REPUBLIC OF CHINA RE- 
AFFIRM SOLIDARITY • Joint Communique and State- 
ment by Secretary Dulles 721 

SECRETARY DULLES DISCUSSES U.S. FOREIGN 
POLICY FOR BRITISH TELEVISION BROAD- 
CAST • Transcript of Interview With William D. Clark . . 733 

THE BASES OF PEACE • Remarks by Deputy Under 

Secretary Murphy 74Q 

THE UNITED NATIONS AND NATIONAL SECURITY • 

by William I. Cargo 725 

PROBLEMS AFFECTING INTERNATIONAL TRADE • 

Statement by Under Secretary Dillon 742 

U.N. COMMITTEE OPENS DEBATE ON DISARMA- 
MENT • Statements by Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge 
and James W. Barco 747 



For index see inside back cover 



JE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 




Vol. XXXIX, No. 1011 • Publication 6724 
November 10, 1958 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.O. 

Price: 

62 Issues, domestic $8.50, foreign $12.25 

Single copy, 25 cents 

The printing of this publication has been 
approved by the Director of the Bureau of 
the Budget (January 20, 1958). 

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 
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 
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, 
United Nations documents, and legis- 
lative material in the field of inter- 
national relations are listed currently. 



United States and Republic of China Reaffirm Solidarity 



JOINT COMMUNIQUE 



Press release 634 dated October 23 



The following is the full text of the communi- 
que issued at the conclusion of the meetings be- 
tween President Chiang Kai-shek and Secretary 
of State John Foster Dulles, Taipei, October 23, 
1958. 

Consultations have been taking place over the 
past three days between the Government of the 
United States and the Government of the Re- 
public of China pursuant to Article IV of the 
Mutual Defense. Treaty. 1 These consultations 
had been invited by President Chiang Kai-shek. 
The following are among those who took part in 
the consultations : 

For the Republic of China : 

President Chiang Kai-shek 

Vice President-Premier Chen Cheng 

Secretary General to the President Chang Chun 

Minister of Foreign Affairs Huang Shao-ku 

Ambassador to the United States George K. C. Yeh 

For the United States of America : 

Secretary of State John Foster Dulles 
Assistant Secretary of State Walter S. Robertson 
Ambassador to the Republic of China Everett F. Drum- 
right 

The consultations had been arranged to be held 
during the two weeks when the Chinese Commu- 
nists had declared they would cease fire upon 
Quemoy. It had been hoped that, under these 
circumstances, primary consideration could have 
been given to measures which would have con- 
tributed to stabilizing an actual situation of non- 
militancy. However, on the eve of the consulta- 
tions, the Chinese Communists, in violation of 
their declaration, resumed artillery fire against 
the Quemoys. It was recognized that under the 
present conditions the defense of the Quemoys, 

1 For text, see Bulletin of Dee. 13. 1954, p. 809. 
November JO, 1958 



together with the Matsus, is closely related to the 
defense of Taiwan and Penghu. 

The two Governments recalled that their Mu- 
tual Defense Treaty had had the purpose of man- 
ifesting their unity "so that no potential aggres- 
sor could be under the illusion that either of them 
stands alone in the West Pacific Area." The con- 
sultations provided a fresh occasion for demon- 
strating that unity. 

The two Governments reaffirmed their solidar- 
ity in the face of the new Chinese Communist 
aggression now manifesting itself in the bom- 
bardment of the Quemoys. This aggression and 
the accompanying Chinese Communist propa- 
ganda have not divided them, as the Communists 
have hoped. On the contrary, it has drawn them 
closer together. They believe that by unitedly 
opposing aggression they serve not only them- 
selves but the cause of peace. As President Eis- 
enhower said on September ll, 2 the position of 
opposing aggression by force is the only position 
consistent with the peace of the world. 

The two Governments took note of the fact that 
the Chinese Communists, with the backing of the 
Soviet Union, avowedly seek to conquer Taiwan, 
to eliminate Free China and to expel the United 
States from the Western Pacific generally, com- 
pelling the United States to abandon its collec- 
tive security arrangements with free countries of 
that area. This policy cannot possibly succeed. 
It is hoped and believed that the Communists, 
faced by the proven unity, resolution and strength 
of the Governments of the United States and the 
Republic of China, will not put their policy to 
the test of general war and that they will abandon 
the military steps which they have already taken 
to initiate their futile and dangerous policy. 

In addition to dealing with the current mili- 
tary situation, the two Governments considered 



1 Ibid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 481. 



721 



Chinese Communist Resumption 
of Firing in Taiwan Straits Area 

Statement by Secretary Dulles 1 

I am informed that the Chinese Communists have 
resumed sporadic firing in the Taiwan (Formosa) 
Straits area. I am nevertheless continuing my trip 
to Taipei. I had embarked on what I believed and 
hoped was a mission of peace. I shall persist in 
that purpose. 

One week ago the Chinese Communists announced 
that they would suspend their attacks for at least 
2 weeks more. It seemed to President Chiang Kai- 
shek and President Eisenhower that under those 
circumstances it would be useful for me to go to 
Taiwan for consultations. It is obvious that if the 
Communists resume their fighting to achieve their 
political goals our consultations cannot have the 
same scope and character that would have been 
possible if there were a cease-fire. Nevertheless, I 
believe that consultations can usefully be held. 

It is a tragedy that the Chinese Communists have 
again displayed their warlike disposition. All who 
love peace must hope that the present resumption 
of fighting will be of short duration and that the 
world may be spared the grave consequences of 
Communist persistence in aggression. 



1 Made at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, on 
Oct. 20 (press release 629) . 



the broad and long-range aspects of their rela- 
tionship. 

The United States, its Government and its peo- 
ple, have an abiding faith in the Chinese people 
and profound respect for the great contribution 
which they have made and will continue to make 
to a civilization that respects and honors the in- 
dividual and his family life. The United States 
recognizes that the Republic of China is the au- 
thentic spokesman for Free China and of the 
hopes and aspirations entertained by the great 
mass of the Chinese people. 

The Government of the Republic of China de- 
clared its purpose to be a worthy representative 
of the Chinese people and to strive to preserve 
those qualities and characteristics which have en- 
abled the Chinese to contribute so much of benefit 
to humanity. 

The two Governments reaffirmed their dedica- 
tion to the principles of the Charter of the United 
Nations. They recalled that the treaty under 
which they are acting is defensive in character. 
The Government of the Republic of China con- 



siders that the restoration of freedom to its peo- 
ple on the mainland is its sacred mission. It be- 
lieves that the foundation of this mission resides 
in the minds and the hearts of the Chinese people 
and that the principal means of successfully 
achieving its mission is the implementation of 
Dr. Sim Yat-sen's three people's principles (na- 
tionalism, democracy and social well-being) and 
not the use of force. 

The consultations which took place permitted a 
thorough study and reexamination of the pressing 
problems of mutual concern. As such they have 
proved to be of great value to both Governments. 
It is believed that such consultations should con- 
tinue to be held at appropriate intervals. 

STATEMENT BY SECRETARY DULLES 

White House press release dated October 24 

I returned last night from 3 days in Taipei, 
Formosa. There we held consultations with the 
Government of the Republic of China pursuant 
to our Treaty of Mutual Defense. These con- 
sultations had been planned to occur during the 
period when the Chinese Communists had said 
they would not carry out their bombardments 
from the mainland. However, while we were en 
route to Formosa, the Chinese Communists re- 
sumed firing on Quemoy in violation of their cease- 
fire pledge. 

It is possible that the firing is more for psycho- 
logical than for military purposes. Apparently 
the Communists desire to throw roadblocks in the 
way of stabilized tranquillity. Last night the 
Chinese Communist official press agency boasted 
that "the United States has met with defeat in her 
original plot to use the Chinese temporary suspen- 
sion of shelling Quemoy to promote a permanent 
cease-fire," The Communists seem to believe that 
they can best achieve domination of the western 
Pacific if they perpetuate confusion and uncer- 
tainty and if they alternatively give hopes for 
peace and fears of war. They accompany their 
erratic action with intensive propaganda to the ef- 
fect that, if the people of Asia would unite to ex- 
pel the United States from the western Pacific, 
then all would be well. 

We return confident that the Chinese Com- 
munists will not gain their ends either through 
their military efforts or their propaganda guile. 
Free China is resolute — its Government, its armed 



722 



Department of State Bulletin 



forces, and its people. All of the free countries of 
the Far East increasingly realize that Chinese 
communism is a mortal danger. They are heart- 
ened by the manifest power of the United States 
and our stand against retreat in the face of armed 
aggression. 

The will of the free peoples of Asia to resist 
Chinese communism intrusions is, I judge, more 
solid than ever before. 

While at Taipei I was again made aware, at 
first hand, that the dominant spirit within the 
Republic of China is not mere military defense 
but rather that of peacefully bringing freedom to 
all China. The Government realizes its responsi- 
bilities as the authentic custodian and defender of 
those honored cultural and spiritual values long 
identified with China. It believes that its mis- 
sion is to bring about the restoration of freedom 
to the people on the mainland and to do so, not 
by the use of force but by conduct and example 
which will sustain the minds and hearts of the 
mainland Chinese so that they are unconquerable. 

I return convinced that the Government of Free 
China is prudent, resolute, and dedicated to the 
peaceful achievement of its high mission as spokes- 
man for the aspirations and traditions of China. 
The American nation can be thankful that there 
exists a Free China animated by these sentiments. 
It resists those forces whose central purpose is 
world rule and, to that end, the encirclement and 
ultimate defeat of the United States. 



Negotiations for the Suspension 
of Nuclear Weapons Tests 

Following are the texts of a statement by Presi- 
dent Eisenhower and an exchange of notes be- 
tween the United States and the Soviet Union on 
negotiations for the suspension of nuclear weapons 
tests, together vrith a list of the members of the 
U.S. delegation. 



STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT EISENHOWER 

White House pre6S release dated October 2u 

On August 22, 1958, the United States declared 
its willingness, in order to facilitate negotiations 
for the suspension of nuclear weapons tests and 
establishment of an international control system, 



to withhold testing of atomic and hydrogen weap- 
ons for a period of 1 year from the beginning of 
these negotiations on October 31. The sole con- 
dition for this voluntary 1-year suspension is that 
the Soviet Union should not itself conduct tests 
during this period. 

The United Kingdom has similarly declared its 
willingness to suspend tests. It thus lies with 
the Soviet Union to decide whether on October 
31st all countries which have tested nuclear weap- 
ons will have voluntarily suspended testing. 

The United States regrets that the Soviet Union 
has not accepted the offer of the United States 
and the United Kingdom, although we still hope 
that it will do so. 

U.S. NOTE OF OCTOBER 20' 

The Embassy of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics and has the honor to refer to note 58/ 
OSA of October 1, 1958, regarding arrangements 
for the meeting on suspension of nuclear tests and 
establishment of an international control system 
scheduled to begin in Geneva among the U.S., 
U.K., and U.S.S.R. on October 31. 2 

The United States takes note of the Soviet 
statement that the aim of the conference would be 
the conclusion of an agreement to cease tests of 
atomic and hydrogen weapons by all states forever, 
and the establishment of appropriate control over 
the implementation of such an agreement. It is 
the sincere hope of the United States that the 
conference will make sufficient progress to justify 
the expectation that the final termination of all 
nuclear weapons test explosions may in due course 
be achieved. The United States has always 
accepted as a most desirable objective the final 
termination of nuclear weapons test explosions. 
However, the United States feels it necessary to 
refer once again to the terms of the statement of 
the President of the United States of August 22, 
1958. 3 In this statement, President Eisenhower 
declared that the United States would be prepared 



1 Delivered on Oct. 20 by the U.S. Embassy at Moscow 
to the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs (press release 
630). 

2 For a previous exchange of notes, see Bulletin of 
Sept. 29, 1958, p. 503. 

* lhid., Sept. 8, 1958, p. 378. 



November 10, 1958 



723 



to refrain from nuclear weapons tests for further 
successive periods of one year after the initial 
suspension of one year, provided that the Soviet 
Union would do the same, that the agreed in- 
spection system is installed and working effec- 
tively, and that satisfactory progress is being 
made in reacliing agreement on and implementing 
major and substantive arms control measures. If 
sufficient progress can be made at the Geneva con- 
ference which is to open on the 31st of October 
and if subsequently these objectives are effec- 
tively achieved without undue delays, the world 
could then be confident that nuclear weapons test- 
ing would never be resumed by the parties to the 
agreement. 

The United States considers that an agreement 
for the suspension of nuclear weapons testing 
under international control should be worked out 
as rapidly as possible. In view of the complexities 
of detecting and verifying violations of an agree- 
ment on suspension of nuclear tests which are 
revealed in the report of the Geneva Conference 
of Experts, 4 careful and detailed negotiations will 
be required for an agreement of such importance, 
however, and the United States considers that this 
work should be initiated on October 31 at the 
diplomatic level. If, as the discussions at the 
diplomatic level proceed, the presence of Foreign 
Ministers seems necessary and desirable, the Sec- 
retary of State would be prepared to attend. 

SOVIET NOTE OF OCTOBER 1 

Unofficial translation 

No. 58/0 SA 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR presents 
its compliments to the Embassy of the United States of 
America and in connection with Embassy note No. 262 
of 10 September has the honor upon instructions of the 
Soviet Government to state the following. 

Account is taken of the positive reply of the Govern- 
ment of the United States concerning the proposal of 
the Government of the Soviet Union that negotiations 
on the cessation of tests of nuclear weapons, by all 
powers having such weapons at their disposal, should 
be conducted in Geneva. Thus the question about the 
date of the start of the talks, 31 October this year, and 
the place of their conduct can be considered agreed upon. 

As for the task of the coming meeting, the Soviet 
Government deems it necessary to confirm its position 
set forth in the Ministry's note of 30 August, 6 and spe- 
cifically that the aim of such a meeting is the conclusion 



' For text, see ibid., Sept. 22, 1958, p. 453. 
5 For text, see ibid., Sept. 29, 1958, p. 503. 



724 



of an agreement on the cessation forever of tests of 
atomic and hydrogen weapons by states with the estab- 
lishment of appropriate control for the fulfillment of such 
an agreement. 

At present when it has been confirmed by the Geneva 
meeting of experts that any testing of atomic and hy- 
drogen weapons cannot remain unnoticed, there should 
not be any obstacles in order that the powers possessing 
nuclear weapons should conclude an agreement on the 
immediate cessation of tests of all types of atomic and 
hydrogen weapons everlastingly. 

Taking into account that the immediate and universal 
cessation of tests of nuclear weapons is an urgent prob- 
lem, involving the vital interests of all mankind, the So- 
viet Government hopes that the participants of the meet- 
ing will apply all efforts in order in the briefest period 
possible to reach and sign the appropriate agreement. 
Having this in mind, the Soviet Government proposes 
that the meeting should be called on the level of Minis- 
ters of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union, USA, and 
Great Britain. 

The Soviet Government expresses the hope that the 
Government of the USA will attentively study these pro- 
posals of the Soviet Government and give a positive 
answer to them. 

MEMBERS OF U.S. DELEGATION 

Press release 643 dated October 25 

The State Department on October 25 announced 
the members of the U.S. delegation to the confer- 
ence on suspension of nuclear tests, to be held at 
Geneva beginning October 31, 1958 : 

U.S. Representative 

James J. Wadsworth, Ambassador Extraordinary and 
Plenipotentiary, U.S. Representative on Disarmament 

Deputy U.S. Representative 

Robert F. Bacher, member, President's Science Advisory 
Committee 

Senior Advisers 

Charles C. Stelle, Department of State 
Alfonzo P. Fox, Lt. Gen., USA (retired), Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs 
George M. Kavanaugh, Atomic Energy Commission 

Congressional Advisers 

Albert Gore, United States Senate 

(Hubert H. Humphrey, United States Senate, alternate) 

Bourke B. Hickenlooper, United States Senate 

Advisers 

Vincent Baker, Department of State 

Robert G. Baraz, Department of State 

Stephen Benedict, U.S. Information Agency 

Hans A. Bethe, member, President's Science Advisory 

Committee 
Darcy Brent, Department of State 
Harold Brown, Atomic Energy Commission 

Department of State Bulletin 






Charles E. Collett, Col., USAF, Departmeut of Defense 
Spurgeon M. Keeuy, Jr., Office of the Special Assistant to 

the President for Science and Technology 
Richard Latter, Rand Corporation 
Doyle L. Northrup, Department of Defense 
David H. Popper, American Consulate General, Geneva 
Luther Reid, Department of State 



Malcolm Toon, Department of State 

Paul Toussaint, Department of State 

Henry S. Villard, American Consul General, Geneva 

John N. Washburn, Department of State 

Secretary of Delegation 

Virgil L. Moore, American Consulate General, Geneva. 



The United Nations and National Security 

by William I. Cargo 
Director, Office of United Nations Political and Security Affairs 1 



The problem of our national security in the 
world of today is of direct personal concern to 
every American. It is a potent truism that war 
with modern weapons would weigh heavily on 
civilian populations. Our citizens throughout the 
country, particularly in urban areas, would face 
the threat of destruction of life and property. In 
broader terms the question of our national se- 
curity is the question of our right and ability to 
develop American life and institutions for the 
well-being of present and future generations. 

It is most appropriate also to relate Ameri- 
can security to the role of the United Nations. 
The United Nations is now well into its second 
decade. At this same point in history the Ameri- 
can people face a threat to their security greater 
than ever before. We may well inquire, there- 
fore: What is the role of the United Nations in 
promoting the peace and security of the world 
and, accordingly, our own security ? 

In dealing with this question, I propose first 
to comment on the nature of the security posi- 
tion in which the United States now finds itself. 
Against this background I will then discuss the 
role of the United Nations in relation to our na- 
tional security. 

American Security in a Changing World 

The security position of the United States has 
been sharply affected by developments since 
World War II. There was a long period in our 



1 Address made before the Rochester Citizens Com- 
mittee for United Nations Day at Rochester, N. Y., on 
Oct. 24. 



history when this country, flanked by two great 
oceans, was nearly invulnerable. This, unhap- 
pily, is no longer the case. What has brought 
about this tremendous change ? 

First of all, there is the enormous destructive 
power of modern weapons. Notwithstanding all 
of the publicity about nuclear and thermonuclear 
explosions there is a real lag in our thinking 
about them. Perhaps we tend to think in terms 
of World War II. Perhaps the human mind re- 
coils at the terrible destructiveness of these new 
weapons. Yet these weapons of tremendous power 
exist; they are possessed not only by the United 
States and the United Kingdom but also by the 
Soviet Union ; and other countries are striving to 
develop them. These facts are of major impor- 
tance in appraising the present security position 
of the United States. 

Another factor of first magnitude in our 
changed strategic position is the reduction of the 
built-in safety factor which the United States 
has historically enjoyed. Our classical strategic 
position is that we have been geographically iso- 
lated from those who might threaten our security. 
We have been endowed with an abundance of nat- 
ural and human resources which could, in good 
time, be converted to military strength. Should a 
threat to our security emerge, as in the case of the 
growth of ambitious military power in Europe 
or military action against our bases in the Pacific, 
we could rely upon our basic position of strength 
to permit us months and even years to develop 
the military power to turn back the threat to our 
security. Our national security could thus be 
based on the presumption that the permissible re- 



November 70, J 958 



725 



action time between threat and response could be 
relatively long. 

This pattern has been radically changed by 
modern technology. High-speed military aircraft 
can already span the oceans or the polar wastes 
in a matter of hours. Faster aircraft are con- 
stantly being developed. And as we progress into 
the missile era we must reckon with the fact that 
weapons of massive destructive power could ap- 
proach our great cities at thousands of miles per 
hour and arrive within minutes of the time 
launched. Thus our permissible reaction time 
may now need to be measured in hours or in 
minutes rather than in months or years. The era 
of our history when we could build up our mili- 
tary strength after a threat to our survival had 
been launched is gone, probably forever. And 
gone with it are concepts of security which are no 
longer adequate to meet our requirements in this 
changed world. 

The Soviet Challenge 

In considering our current security position we 
should recall that there was a time when many 
tended to cite our large population, our seem- 
ingly ample resources, our scientific and tech- 
nological skills, and our enormous industrial 
capacity as the answer to all existing or prospec- 
tive problems. While no one would deny that our 
strength is great and the capacities of our coun- 
try and its people enormous, I think we now see 
these things in somewhat more realistic perspec- 
tive. We recognize that, populous as this coun- 
try is, we represent only about one-twentieth of 
the population of the world. The Soviet and 
Chinese Communists control nearly one-third. 
We recognize that our resources, great as they are, 
are not unlimited. We are by no means self- 
sufficient. We know, in fact, that we import 
substantial quantities of some 50 commodities of 
fundamental economic and strategic importance. 
We also realize that we do not have a monopoly 
on scientific achievement or technical know-how. 
We have not failed, for example, to realize the 
contribution of scientists from friendly European 
countries to the development of the nuclear sci- 
ences and the first atomic weapons. We have had 
impressed upon us by visible signs in the night 
skies the achievements of Soviet scientists. 

These developments which I have noted affect- 
ing the United States security position in the 



world are largely a reflection of scientific and 
technological developments. These have made a 
deep imprint upon our traditional strategic posi- 
tion and have greatly compounded our security 
problem. These developments would be in them- 
selves highly significant. But we have also had, 
following World War II, a concentration of 
power in two main centers. To appreciate the 
problem fully in its present magnitude, we must 
assess the Soviet challenge to our security. 

The Soviet Union, as the leader of world com- 
munism, is a country whose rulers are dedicated 
to the proposition that communism will inevitably 
be adopted throughout the world. They are dedi- 
cated to the achievement of this objective, however 
long it may take and irrespective of possible 
tactical deviations. Khrushchev has made this 
clear in his frank connnent : "We will bury you." 

Now this objective of Soviet communism, in- 
compatible as it is with American security in- 
terests, would not necessarily be in itself a matter 
of serious proportions. The seriousness of the 
Soviet threat to United States security arises 
precisely because this objective of world domina- 
tion is held by those who also control a political, 
industrial, and military system of great and in- 
creasing power. 

What is the basis of this enhanced power posi- 
tion of the Soviet Union ? 

First of all, there is the rapid growth of Soviet 
economic capacity. The Soviet Union in its four 
decades of existence, and at incredible cost in 
human terms, has developed an industrial base 
second only to that of the United States. The 
Soviet gross national product is increasing by 
more than 5 percent per year — a rapid rate, in- 
deed — and is expected to reach nearly $350 billion 
by 1965. During the past decade the Soviet out- 
put of electrical power and oil has nearly quad- 
rupled. Soviet steel production has shown a simi- 
lar rate of growth. There are many other graphic 
illustrations of the rapidly expanding Soviet 
economy. And the Soviet Union has just this 
week announced that its new 7-year plan will 
call for the achievement by 1965 of production 
goals for steel, electric power, coal, and oil origi- 
nally set for 1972. 

We are sharply aware also of the increased So- 
viet scientific and technical capacity. The Soviet 
Union has developed its capabilities in the atomic 
field and devised nuclear and thermonuclear 



726 



Department of State Bulletin 



weapons at a rate which many people in the West 
did not consider possible. The advanced state of 
Soviet technical capabilities has also been appar- 
ent in their development of long-range ballistic 
missiles and in the launching of earth satellites. 
The very term "sputnik" has entered the inter- 
national vocabulary, an achievement no doubt rel- 
ished by Soviet propagandists. 

Closely related to the growing scientific and 
technical capacity of the Soviet Union is the role 
of Soviet education. The Soviet Union syste- 
matically molds its educational system and regi- 
ments its students to serve the objectives of the 
Soviet Communist Party and the state. Heavy 
emphasis is placed on scientific training and its 
practical application in industrial engineering and 
technology. The vigor with which the Soviet 
educational program has been pursued should be 
carefully noted in this country. In 1914 only some 
10.7(10 "specialists" graduated from secondary 
and higher special educational institutions in 
Russia. In 1955 such graduates totaled 1,634,000. 

The Soviet educational system is also designed 
to iit the pattern of Soviet world objectives in its 
emphasis on languages. Every high school stu- 
dent in the Soviet Union must study a foreign 
language for 6 years. If he goes on to university 
work, he must learn one of the languages of Asia 
or Africa, a significant point in itself. Some 8,000 
American students are studying Russian; 10 mil- 
lion Soviet students are studying English. 

Here then is Soviet education : It is geared in a 
massive way to the development of the industrial 
and military power of the Soviet Union and to the 
world objectives of Soviet leaders. 

Soviet scientific, technological, and industrial 
achievements have been directed toward the build- 
ing of a powerful military machine. Since the 
end of World War II the Soviet Union has re- 
equipped massive ground forces, built fleets of 
modern jet aircraft and submarines, and devel- 
oped stockpiles of nuclear weapons and missiles. 
This direct translation by the Soviet Union of 
scientific and industrial potential into military 
power is a salient factor in the world security 
situation. 

Implications for United States Security 

In this brief way I have sought to indicate what 
seem to me to be certain of the principal features 
of America's security position in the world to- 



United Nations Day, 1958 

Statement by Henry Cabot Lodr/e 

U.S. Representative to the United Nations 

U.S. /U.N. press release 3027 

As the United Nations reaches its 13th birthday 
it is proper for us to reflect on what the United 
Nations means to the United States. 

Americans want a foreign policy which does two 
things — promotes world peace and upholds our na- 
tional interests and ideals. 

The United Nations is a place where we pursue 
that foreign policy. In it we work together with 
like-minded nations, not only to solve disputes but 
also promote positive things like the atoms-for- 
peace program, worldwide malaria control, and bet- 
ter living standards for people all over the world. 
We seek by persuasion and diplomacy to increase 
the number of our friends and decrease the number 
of our opponents. 

The United Nations also serves as a great loud- 
speaker which can expose Communist fallacies and 
mobilize world public opinion against aggressors. 
It is the most effective single engine in the world 
for the influencing of world opinion. 

The world today is a dangerous place. The 
United Nations is not going to take us to heaven. 
But it has already done much — in Korea, the Mid- 
dle East, and elsewhere — to prevent wars, punish 
aggressors, and make the world a more decent place 
in which to live. 

It is up to the member nations, including partic- 
ularly the United States, to make the United Na- 
tions work. On this anniversary, therefore, we 
should remember how much an effective U.N. adds 
to the peace and safety of the American people. 



day. Modern technological developments and the 
growth of an aggressive power system under the 
control of the Soviet Union pose for us serious 
challenges which we can ignore only at our peril. 
There are, in my view, some rather clear im- 
plications in the situation which I have outlined. 
I would summarize these as follows : 

1. The thought of war, with the colossal destruc- 
tiveness which it might now bring — far exceeding 
anything else in human experience — is repugnant 
to most Americans. But security for this country 
cannot be found in recoiling from grim facts. We 
cannot allow the Soviet rulers the freedom to take 
the world at their leisure. 

2. We cannot — and do not — rest our security 
on the potential military strength residing in our 
great industrial capacity and our reservoir of 
scientific achievement and technical skills. The 



November 10, 1958 



727 



United States and its free- world allies must have 
adequate military forces ready at all times. This 
concept of "force in being" is, for example, the 
basis of the formation of our Strategic Air Com- 
mand. It is fundamental also to the organization 
and purposes of that great defensive alliance of 
free nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organiza- 
tion. The concept of adequate "force in being" is, 
in short, the essential basis of the ability of the 
free world to deter those who might contemplate 
aggression. 

3. We must recognize, as indeed I think we all 
do, the long-term character of the Soviet challenge 
to the security of the free world. We are not deal- 
ing with some transient political system that 
might be changed or obliterated by a "palace revo- 
lution." We must therefore place our reliance not 
in the presumed or hoped-for weakness of others 
but in our own strength, deeply rooted in the 
physical power and moral fiber of our people and 
properly adjusted to meet the challenges of our 
age. 

4. "Go-it-alone-ism" is not a feasible policy for 
the United States. Despite our considerable re- 
sources it is clear that our national defense re- 
quires the maintenance of strong collective-se- 
curity arrangements with other free nations. We 
depend upon our friends and allies for vital raw 
materials, for manpower and equipment to oppose 
Communist aggression, for access to bases and 
facilities essential to our capacity to deter aggres- 
sion, and for significant contributions in science 
and technology. Free Europe contains the world's 
largest industrial complex outside the United 
States. With this European industrial establish- 
ment, the free world has a substantial preponder- 
ance of productive capacity over the Communist 
world. Were this great industrial plant of free 
Europe to fall into Communist hands, the produc- 
tive capacity of the Soviet Union would be more 
than doubled. The serious implications of such 
an eventuality for American security are self-evi- 
dent. For comparable reasons we need our other 
friends and allies of the free world in the quest 
for mutual security just as they need us. 

5. Security is indivisible. It is indivisible in a 
geographic sense. An act of aggression cannot be 
ignored simply because it may seem to be far 
away. A threat to the independence and integrity 
of a state is no less serious because the intended 
victim may be small. The teaching of history in 



this matter is precise. Freedom everywhere has 
paid the price when free men have stood aside and 
watched aggression triumph in areas which they 
conceived to be not of direct concern to them. 

Security is also indivisible in the sense that the 
battle for security in the world today must be 
fought on many fronts. It must be fought in 
political, psychological, economic, and social areas 
even more continuously than in purely military 
terms. The era of the A-bomb and the H-bomb is 
likewise the era of indirect aggression, of sub- 
versive efforts to destroy independent states. We 
have become well acquainted with the technique of 
so-called "volunteers" who somehow turn up in 
areas of tension. The battle for security today is 
also a struggle for the minds of men — and for 
their stomachs as well. Our own security is thus 
increasingly bound up with political, economic, 
and social conditions in allied and friendly coun- 
tries and with the advancement of dependent 
peoples toward self-government or independence. 
We must therefore see American security today in 
broad perspective. It is notable that the United 
Nations operates on a similar broad basis. 

Meeting the Challenge 

In the light of this developing world situation, 
our Government and the American people have 
engaged in a broad program of action. 

• The United States has built up its own defense 
establishment to insure against the dangers of 
surprise attack. The Strategic Air Command, 
maintained in a high state of readiness, provides 
the backbone of our strong deterrent against ag- 
gression. Our recent achievements with nuclear 
submarines are further evidence of the constant 
labor of science, industry, and government to in- 
sure the primacy of our modern weapons systems. 

• We have pursued vigorously the mutual se- 
curity program designed to assist friendly nations 
and allies in building up their economic strength 
and to maintain forces essential for their own de- 
fense and the defense of the free world. 

• Through collective-security arrangements 
such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
and the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization, we 
have developed regional collective-security sys- 
tems welding the free world together and stand- 
ing as barriers to possible aggression. 

• We have developed a program of counter- 
ing Soviet propaganda, making it possible for 



728 



Department of State Bulletin 



others to hear the truth about this country and 
world problems. I refer to the programs of the 
United States Information Agency, particularly 
the broadcasts of the Voice of America. Am- 
bassador Henry Cabot Lodge, the United States 
Representative to the United Nations, challenged 
the Soviet Union to permit the peoples under its 
control to hear without obstruction the broadcasts 
of the full proceedings of the recent emergency 
special session of the United Nations General 
Assembly on the Near East. The Soviet Union 
sought to jam these broadcasts, once again illus- 
trating their extreme sensitivity to efforts to pro- 
vide the truth to people behind the Iron Curtain. 
• We have strongly supported the United Na- 
tions as a force for international peace and se- 
curity and in its program to advance human well- 
being. This is a key element in the conduct of 
our foreign policy. 

The Role of the United Nations 

I have dealt with the challenges of world 
change to our national security and the measures 
we have taken to meet them. I would now like 
to turn to the question with which we began, 
namely, what can the United Nations do to pro- 
mote international peace and security and accord- 
ingly that of the United States? 

The overall answer to this question is, I think, 
clear : A strong and effective United Nations con- 
tributes to international peace, security, and sta- 
bility, and consequently it also enhances the secu- 
rity and strength of the United States. To the 
extent that the United Nations is successful in its 
efforts to stop or prevent aggression and to find 
peaceful adjustments in disputes which might 
otherwise lead to war, the interests of the United 
States and United States security are advanced. 
To the extent that the United Nations contributes 
to economic and social well-being, it contributes 
to stability and expands the area of security 
around us. In my judgment the record shows that 
the United Nations has been both responsive to 
American interests and a force for peace in the 
world. 

The United Nations and Collective Security 

Now let us look at some of the specifics. First 
of all, the United Nations as an instrument of 
collective security : 



It would be a mistake to seek to assess the U.N. 
in purely military terms. We should recall here, 
however, the role played by the United Nations in 
repelling Communist aggression in Korea. Forces 
from some 17 countries gathered under the U.N. 
symbol and, for the first time in history, an inter- 
national organization took successful action to 
counter affjjression. The circumstances surround- 
ing the U.N. role on the Korean question were, 
however, somewhat unusual. For example, the 
Security Council was able to act effectively be- 
cause the Soviet Union was absent and therefore 
did not interpose the veto. 

We must realistically recognize the basic dif- 
ferences of view which exist between the Soviet 
Union and the United States sharply limit the 
ability of the U.N. to carry out the collective- 
security role envisaged in the U.N. Charter. In 
this situation the United States places its primary 
reliance for collective security on regional ar- 
rangements such as the North Atlantic Treaty Or- 
ganization. These regional defense arrangements 
are within the framework of the charter and sup- 
port its broad objectives of maintaining interna- 
tional peace and security. 

I would add this : The United Nations has the 
necessary flexibility to facilitate the establishment 
of a broader collective-security system whenever 
the fundamental attitudes and policies of govern- 
ments will make this possible of achievement. 

Disarmament 

No question dealt with by the United Nations 
is of greater potential significance to our national 
security than the question of disarmament. The 
destructive power of modern weapons and the 
development of newer and more effective means 
of launching surprise attacks make it clear that 
our security would be enhanced if we could achieve 
a limitation and reduction of armaments and 
armed forces under effective safeguards and con- 
trols that would insure that the agreed terms 
would be observed by all sides. 

The crux of the disarmament problem seems to 
me to be whether agreement can be reached on the 
necessary controls and safeguards. Concretely, 
this means that there should be sufficient interna- 
tional control and inspection to insure that all dis- 
armament measures agreed upon will in fact be 
faithfully carried out by all the governments con- 
cerned. A disarmament agreement cannot be a 
mere paper agreement. In clear terms : we must 



November 10, 1958 



729 



be assured that it will be carried out by the Soviet 
Union. Otherwise, our security would be dimin- 
ished rather than enhanced. 

Now it is precisely this question of safeguards 
and controls which the Soviet Union is likely to 
find the most difficult. The Soviets, with their 
emphasis on secrecy, will be clearly reluctant to 
open their territory to the required international 
inspection. 

Some encouraging developments in the disarma- 
ment picture have taken place, however, in recent 
months. A conference of experts in Geneva, in- 
cluding both American and Soviet personnel, 
reached agreement on the technical requirements 
for a workable system to detect and identify nu- 
clear explosions. 2 Further discussions are sched- 
uled to begin in Geneva on October 31 to seek 
agreement on the suspension of nuclear weapons 
tests and the actual establishment of a control 
system for monitoring a suspension. 3 We will 
discover in this conference whether the Soviet 
Union is actually prepared to agree to establish 
the required inspection system and to provide the 
necessary facilities for it to function effectively 
within the Soviet Union. 

Beginning on November 10 a conference of 
experts, also including both American and Soviet 
personnel, will convene in Geneva to explore the 
practical aspects of guarding against surprise 
attack. 4 

The United Nations has had, and will continue 
to have, an important role to play in the search 
for meaningful disarmament. The United Na- 
tions has provided an opportunity for all members 
to contribute their ideas on disarmament. It has 
facilitated actual negotiations by establishing 
bodies such as the Disarmament Subcommittee, 
through which extensive negotiations were car- 
ried out in London between the Soviet Union and 
Western states. The United Nations, by resolu- 
tions it has adopted, has recognized the im- 
portance of balanced measures of disarmament 
under appropriate safeguards. The United Na- 
tions might well provide the framework within 
which a control and inspection system might be 
established under the provisions of any disarma- 
ment agreement with the Soviet Union. 



2 For background and text of the final report, see 
Bulletin of Sept. 22, 1958, p. 452. 

3 See p. 723. 

4 Bulletin of Oct. 27, 1958, p. 648. 



Disarmament is being discussed at this very time 
in the General Assembly of the United Nations. 5 
It is our hope that the Assembly by its discussions 
will assist in maintaining the forward momentum 
we have gained in the disarmament field. 

Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy 

In addition to seeking appropriate agreed con- 
trols for nuclear weapons in disarmament nego- 
tiations, the United States has taken the lead in 
promoting international cooperation in the peace- 
ful uses of atomic energy. In 1953 President 
Eisenhower, in his "Atoms for Peace" speech, 
called for the establishment of an international 
agency for this purpose. The International 
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has now been 
established with headquarters in Vienna. Among 
its tasks, it will promote the application of radio- 
isotopes to agriculture, medicine, and industry; 
facilitate the exchange and training of experts 
and technicians in the nuclear sciences ; serve as a 
channel for exchange of information resulting 
from research ; and undertake studies and surveys 
to encourage the development of atomic power. 

The Agency is also designed to assist in estab- 
lishing safeguards to prevent the diversion of 
fissionable materials to weapons purposes. It is 
in the interest of our own security to encourage 
the IAEA in this task so that we may be assured 
that exports of fissionable materials for peaceful 
purposes do not breed military dangers. 

Outer Space 

Although little is known about the nature of 
outer space, recent developments have made it 
clear that the potential uses of this new frontier 
for peaceful or destructive purposes are enormous. 
The United States has proposed technical dis- 
cussions with the Soviet Union to see whether a 
system of control can be established that will in- 
sure that outer space will be used only for peace- 
ful purposes. 6 Although the Soviet response has 
not yet been favorable, we hope that the Geneva 
talks on nuclear weapons testing and the projected 
technical discussions on surprise attack will lead 
to similar discussions on outer space. 

The United States supports international co- 
operation in the peaceful uses of outer space. The 



5 See p. 747. 

8 Bulletin of Sept. 16, 1957, p. 451. 



730 



Department of State Bulletin 



United States has proposed that the present Gen- 
eral Assembly of the United Nations establish an 
Ad Hoc Committee on the peaceful uses of outer 
space to survey the problem and consider what 
the U.N. might appropriately do in this field. A 
program of international cooperation in the peace- 
ful uses of outer space was undertaken during the 
International Geophysical Year imder the Inter- 
national Council of Scientific Unions. This co- 
operative endeavor of scientists, including scien- 
tists of the Soviet Union, is to be continued. We 
hope this will set a constructive precedent for the 
future. 

Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes 

One of the major purposes of the United Na- 
tions is to bring about by peaceful means the ad- 
justment or settlement of international disputes 
which might lead to a breach of the peace. It is 
clearly of the highest importance to settle dif- 
ferences between members of the world commu- 
nity before they become accentuated, possibly re- 
sulting in armed conflict. This is not to suggest 
that disputes which reach the United Nations are 
likely to be small. In many cases they are serious 
indeed. 

The record of the United Nations as a force for 
averting war by settling differences through 
peaceful means is an outstanding one. It is well 
to recall some of the major achievements of the 
U.N. over the 13 years of its life thus far. By its 
actions the United Nations: 

• Focused world opinion on the Soviet refusal 
to withdraw its forces from Iran and played a 
major role in the withdrawal of these troops in 
1946. 

• Helped bring an end to Communist inter- 
vention in Greece, which was threatening the in- 
tegrity and independence of that state. 

• Assisted in halting the fighting in Palestine 
and in implementing the Armistice Agreements 
between Israel and the neighboring Arab states. 

• Brought about a truce between India and 
Pakistan in the Kashmir dispute and offered a 
forum in which this question could be discussed 
with a view to peaceful adjustment. 

• Brought about a settlement of the future 
status of the former Italian colonies, a difficult 
question resulting from "World War II. 

• Avoided a major war in the Suez crisis by 



bringing the pressure of world opinion to bear for 
a quick end to hostilities. 

• Supervised the clearance of the Suez Canal 
and assisted in reopening it to the commerce of 
the world. 

• Established a United Nations Observation 
Group in Lebanon in view of the external threats 
to the independence of that country. 

• Worked out, through the Secretary-General, 
arrangements to assist in preserving the independ- 
ence and integrity of Jordan. 

This incomplete list graphically illustrates the 
breadth of United Nations activities to preserve 
the peace. 

The United Nations has in fact developed as 
the greatest single center the world has known 
for harmonizing the actions of nations. Quite 
apart from the formal agenda of United Nations 
meetings, we can never know the scope of the in- 
formal conversations which take place in the cor- 
ridors and lounges of the United Nations. I have 
never walked through the Delegates Lounge of 
the United Nations when the General Assembly 
is in session without being sharply aware of this 
great gathering of leader's from all over the world 
and the many opportunities this affords for useful 
discussions of mutual problems. At the current 
session of the General Assembly, for example, 
some 65 foreign ministers and prime ministers 
have been in attendance. 

The Secretary-General of the United Nations, 
Mr. Hammarskjold, by his quiet and effective ef- 
forts has come to play a major role in the peaceful 
settlement activities of the United Nations. He 
is increasingly called on by the General Assembly 
and the Security Council to undertake tasks of 
composing differences between members. In his 
position as Secretary-General he commands the 
respect of the entire membership of the United 
Nations. The efforts of the Secretary-General and 
his associates, particularly Dr. Kalph Bunche, 
have been notably effective in the troubled area of 
the Near East. 

In its efforts to preserve the peace and to pre- 
vent small incidents from becoming major ones, 
the United Nations has developed a flexible tech- 
nique of employing military personnel in obser- 
vation or patrol work. Many of these groups are 
now widely known by their initials : UNEF, the 
United Nations Emergency Force in the Suez 
area; UNTSO, the United Nations Truce Super- 



November JO, 1958 



731 



vision Organization in the Palestine area; and 
UNOGIL, the United Nations Observation Group 
in Lebanon. Beyond the value of the'ir specific 
duties, it has become apparent that the interests 
of peace are well served by the symbol which 
such groups provide of a "United Nations pres- 
ence 1 ' in a troubled area. This in itself is testi- 
mony to the stature which the United Nations has 
achieved not only here but in distant places 
throughout the world. 

The experience of UNEF and the other groups 
I have referred to has been found to be so useful 
that there is wide opinion in the United Nations 
that steps should be taken looking toward some 
kind of a standby United Nations force. The 
U.N. Secretariat, for example, might develop 
plans for calling into being and supporting such 
a force in implementation of a United Nations 
decision to employ it. The United States sup- 
ports such a concept. The General Assembly at 
its current session will consider this question. 

Economic and Social Progress 

The United Nations is broadly engaged in pro- 
moting economic and social advancement and the 
betterment of conditions of life of peoples 
throughout the world. Through the United Na- 
tions General Assembly, the Economic and Social 
Council, and the specialized agencies, the United 
Nations is making steady progress in combating 
disease, poverty, ignorance, and hunger. This 
work is done quietly ; it does not usually result in 
newspaper headlines. 

The United Nations has economic commissions 
for Latin America, the Far East, and Europe and 
a newly created Economic Commission for Africa. 
There are funds for technical assistance to under- 
developed areas and a new Special Projects Fund 
is now being created by the General Assembly. 7 
There are programs for refugees and emergency 
funds for children. There are broad programs 
for health, programs for education and training, 
and scholarship activities of many kinds. 

Here are three specific examples of the work 
of the United Nations in this important area, im- 
portant not only in terms of human values but 
also in terms of world peace and U.S. security : 

1. The World Health Organization is engaged 
in a campaign, with every prospect of success, to 



' Ibid., Nov. 3, 1958, p. 702. 



eliminate malaria from the face of the earth — 
malaria which strikes 200 million persons an- 
nually, of whom 2 million die and countless others 
are permanently afflicted. 

2. The Food and Agriculture Organization has 
taught the Indonesian techniques of growing ed- 
ible fish in rice paddies to farmers elsewhere in 
Southeast Asia, and even in the Caribbean. This 
has resulted in greatly supplementing existing 
food supplies and in providing a better diet by 
adding new and valuable sources of protein. 

3. The United Nations Children's Fund now 
helps more than 50 million children and mothers 
each year to better health. For many millions of 
these, it has granted life in place of death. 

I need not dwell upon the obvious relationship 
of the economic and social activities of the United 
Nations to our own security interests. People who 
are imbued with the sense of hope, the eagerness 
for tomorrow, which economic and social well- 
being can give, do not respond to the propaganda 
appeals of Soviet communism. When the United 
Nations helps people increase their food supplies, 
reduce sickness, learn productive crafts and trades, 
it is taking constructive actions for peace — and we 
should lend it our continued support in such 
actions. 

Conclusion 

In order to safeguard our national security in 
the world of today, we must be acutely conscious 
of the difficulties we face and we must work as 
individuals and as a people to meet them. We 
must continue to build our strength on the national 
level. We must continue to work with allied and 
friendly countries in establishing the conditions 
for mutual and collective security. And we must 
continue to give strong support to the United 
Nations. This I am sure we will do. As Presi- 
dent Eisenhower has said in his United Nations 
Day proclamation : 

. . . firm support of the United Nations has always 
been a fundamental element of our foreign policy. 

The United States has a vital and direct concern 
in the success of the United Nations. The efforts 
of the United Nations to avert or repel aggression, 
to settle disputes among nations by peaceful means, 
to promote economic and social advancement and 
otherwise to eliminate the causes of international 
friction are consistent with United States objec- 
tives and promote our security interests. 



732 



Department of Sfofo Bulletin 



The I 'nil eel Nations is not a substitute for Amer- 
ican policy. As we face the world's problems, we 
cannot step back and leave them to the United 
Nations. Tbe United Nations is strong when its 
members give it strength. As we look to the fu- 



ture, wo must be prepared to work through the 
United Nations with vigor, imagination, and 
leadership. We should thus move forward with 
the United Nations in its continual quest for peace 
and justice in the world. 



Secretary Duiles Discusses U.S. Foreign Policy for British Television Broadcast 



Following is the transcript of an interview re- 
corded at Washington on October 17 between Sec- 
r< tary Dulles and William D. Clark and broadcast 
on October 23 over the Independent Television 
Network of the United Kingdom. 



Press release 635 dated October 23 

Mr. Clark: Mr. Secretary, I am extremely grate- 
ful to you for finding time to come and answer the 
sort of questions that are bubbling up in Britain. 
As you know, there has been a good deal of criti- 
cism of American policy and perhaps some mis- 
understanding. I wonder if you would care to 
reply to what is probably the commonest form of 
their criticism, which is that America is missing 
opportunities for improving peace or the chances 
of peace by your being too rigid? 

Secretary Dulles: I am delighted, Mr. Clark, to 
have the opportunity to talk with you and through 
you to our friends in Britain about these aspects 
of our foreign policy. On this question of rigid- 
ity, I do believe that there are certain basic prin- 
ciples in which we believe and to which we must 
hold steadfastly. We are up against a creed which 
believes almost fanatically in a different concept 
of the nature of the world, the kind of a civiliza- 
tion we should have, and above all the nature of 
man and the part man plays in it. It should be 
just a mechanistic particle to be dealt with by gov- 
ernment in the interests of material welfare. 

We have a totally different concept, always have 
had; and this struggle of man for freedom has 
been going on over the centuries, and we cannot 
conduct it successfully unless we believe in it and 
are steadfast and strong for it. Now, in those 
basic things I admit to being rigid, to standing 
firm and standing solid. 

Now, as to the mechanics with which you carry 



tilings out, your day-to-day tactics, I do not think 
the charge of rigidity can be made against me. 
Indeed, over here oftentimes I am accused not of 
being rigid and consistent but of being incon- 
sistent. So I think when it comes down to the 
details, the tactics, there is room for flexibility. I 
try to show it. But on the basic principles I do 
believe in standing strong and steadfast, and I 
think without that we will never survive the as- 
sault to which our civilization is being subjected. 

Nature of Struggle With Communism 

Q. Do you then see the struggle with commu- 
nism as primarily a moral or primarily a power 
political struggle? 

A. Primarily a moral struggle. Because, if it 
was only power politics and did not involve a basic 
threat to the whole moral values of our civiliza- 
tion, we wouldn't treat it as a worldwide struggle. 
The question of which regime exercises power here 
and there is of itself unimportant in many parts 
of the world, as far as we are concerned. It is 
only because that power is becoming a challenge 
to the basic moral principles of our Judeo-Chris- 
tian civilization, and indeed the civilization which 
is based upon other great religions— it is only be- 
cause of that that it becomes a worldwide struggle 
and a struggle where we must all stand together. 

As Mr. Spaak said the other day, speaking here 
in Boston, 1 we must come to recognize that the 
struggle is a struggle against our civilization be- 
ing conducted all over the world, and unless the 
free nations meet it everywhere we will be de- 
feated. 

Q. Then do you foresee in the reasonably near 
future any possibility that there toill be some sort 



1 Bulletin of Oct. 20, 1958, p. G07. 



November 10, 7958 



733 



of a possibility of peaceful coexistence perhaps 
reached through the disarmament talks? 

A. Well, I think that it's possible perhaps to 
improve the armament situation. That is one 
of these, what I call, tactical situations where 
there is no reason why there should not be flexi- 
bility To my mind, the most important aspect 
there is the possibility of developing these areas 
where there is protection against surprise attack 
It's when people live under the menace of almost 
instant annihilation that they become nervous, 
somewhat jittery, where they concentrate them- 
selves upon building up defensive weapons, deter- 
rent weapons. Here today we go to meetings ol 
the National Security Council, as I went this 
week, and are told that we probably will not get 
more than 15 minutes' warning before practically 
our entire country will be obliterated. 

Now, when you face that kind of a threat, you 
have to build up counterthreats, deterrents, and 
so the thing goes on mounting, mounting, mount- 
ing And I do not see the likelihood of a formula 
for a disarmament which can work unless you 
strike at the heart, the root of the trouble, which 
is the fear of massive surprise attack. And 1 
place the greatest hope upon the possibility of 
developing zones of strategic importance m crit- 
ical parts of the world where you could develop 
areas where the likelihood of surprise attack would 
be substantially diminished. We tried to do that, 
you know, in the Arctic zone, and the Soviets com- 
plained about flights in the Arctic area, but we 
said, "Let's set up a zone so neither of us will be 
afraid" Everybody thought that would be a 
wonderful idea, except the Soviet Union, and 
they vetoed it when it came to the Security Coun- 
cil 2 But I still have hope. And you know we 
are planning to have talks with the Soviets about 
that subject I hope in November. 3 

Q. Then the thing that one wonders is what will 
be the end of all this. When one has got per- 
haps some slight lessening of tension as the result 
of a disarmament agreement of any sort, what do 
you look forward to then— a period of negotia- 
tions? Or do you think that communism will 
wither away? 

A. Well, I am not sure that communism as a 
social and economic structure will wither away. I 



8 IMd., May 19, 1958, p. 816. 
» Ibid., Oct. 27, 1958, p. 648. 



734 



do see an evolution away from what I call inter- 
national communism, that is the kind of com- 
munism which tries to spread its creed all over 
the world, which believes that you cannot have 
world order, world peace, unless it controls every- 
thing and brings about a state of conformity with 
its principles everywhere. Now that is a form of 
warfare which can only be ended, in my opinion, 
by a change away from that policy. I don't see 
how we can ever capitulate to that. And it is 
not willing to compromise. It believes, just as 
strongly as we believe in our faith, that their 
system is the answer but it can't work until it is 
worldwide. 

Now that will evolve, in my opinion, gradually 
to a system which puts more emphasis upon na- 
tional welfare, the welfare of the peoples. There 
is no dispute at all between the United States and 
the peoples of Russia. If only the Government of 
Russia was interested in looking out for the wel- 
fare of Russia, the people of Russia, we would 
have a state of nontension right away. The trou- 
ble is these areas, the Sino-Soviet area, the Rus- 
sians and the Chinese Communists, are not work- 
ing for the benefit of their own people. They are 
working to spread throughout the world a creed 
which is irreconcilable with our own. 

You take China. Here you have got people 
where millions of them are starving, and what 
does that government do? It ships food out m 
order to get a political conquest somewhere else. 
At my staff meeting yesterday I was told that 
they are sending 70 technicians and $20 million, 
approximately, to Yemen. Why are they doing 
that * Not because there isn't need for these tech- 
nicians, for this money, in China, but because they 
think that is an opportunity to get a political con- 
quest in Yemen. And you cannot, as I see it have 
peace with that kind of a society. But I do be- 
lieve that there will be an evolution of this com- 
munism, so more and more it will come to concen- 
trate upon the welfare of its own people and will 
give up this fantastic dream of world conquest. 

Q. Is there anything we can do to hasten that 
day, in which there will be an increase? 

A Yes, there is, certainly. And the thing that 
we can do is to make it apparent that it can't 
succeed. You may recall in the speech that 
Khrushchev made where he denounced the evils 
of Stalinism and the "cult of personality" and all 
the cruelties of that police state. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Q. Yes, I know. 

A. And in it he said lie was asked, "Well, why 
didn't you do something about it earlier?" He 
said, "We couldn't do anything about it earlier 
because it was gaining such victories." Now, as 
long as it gains victories, it's not going to change, 
knowing it contributes to its going on more and 
gaining successes. If we stand stout and resolute 
and oppose it everywhere, whenever we can, and 
it doesn't gain successes, then it will almost auto- 
mat ically change and be more of a domestic phe- 
nomenon and less of an international phenomenon. 

U.S. Policy of Nonrecognition of Communist China 

Q. You have just mentioned China, and re- 
cently the danger of war seems to have been more 
from China than it has been in Europe. There 
is a lot of criticism in Britain of America 's China 
policy and, I think, very little understanding of 
it. There are two main criticisms. Pll put the 
first one to you and ask you to say something. It 
is this: that we feel, many of us — not necessarily 
the government — that the policy of nonrecogni- 
tion of the government in Peking is both unreal- 
istic and has involved you, so to speak, in taking 
sides in what is virtually a dead civil war. Would 
you say something on that? 

A. The question of recognition involves to some 
extent a play on words. There is no doubt we 
recognize Communist China as a fact, as we deal 
with Communist China. Indeed, I suspect that the 
United States has had more continuous serious 
dealings with Communist China than any other 
free-world country over the last 10 years. We 
have dealt with it in Korea in terms of the Ko- 
rean armistice. We, with you and France and 
others, dealt with it at Geneva at the Indochina 
armistice. We have had talks at the diplomatic 
level, first at Geneva and now in Warsaw, over the 
last 4 years with the Chinese Communists. It's a 
fact and we deal with it as a fact, and whenever 
it is advantageous to the world or for peace to do 
business with it, we don't hesitate to do business 
with it. 

Then there is another form of recognition which 
means diplomatic recognition. That carries with 
it very great advantages to the recognized state. 
It turns over assets throughout all the world to its 
control. It puts it in a position of prestige as re- 
gards the Chinese overseas populations which look 

November JO, 7958 

486276 — 58 3 



very largely to it for guidance. In many coun- 
tries of the world if they recognize the Chinese 
Communists they would turn over an asset in 
terms of those overseas Chinese which would prob- 
ably result in the subversion and overthrow of 
the Government. 

Now we don't see any particular reason why 
we should give this great advantage to a regime 
which announces its bitter hostility to us and to 
all the principles upon which we stand. That isn't 
a policy of blindness. That is a policy of realism. 
As I say, we recognize it exists. We negotiate 
with it. We deal with it, wherever that will serve 
a useful purpose. But we do not give it all the 
surplus advantages which would flow from gen- 
eral diplomatic recognition, because those added 
advantages would merely be used against us and 
against all the things we believe in. So we think 
the practical policy of realism is to do that. 

Now let me remind you that this policy of so- 
called nonrecognition is equally applied by the 
rest of us. You can take East Germany. There 
is a so-called People's Republic of East Germany. 
It's a fact, but neither your government nor ours 
recognizes it. Why? Because we believe it is 
politically disadvantageous and harmful to our 
interests to do it. So the guide in these things 
isn't something doctrinaire, that you have to give 
recognition of a diplomatic character to a regime 
which is hostile to you and where it involves great 
disadvantages to do it. You have a choice about 
that. But, on the other hand, we do not accept 
the blind policy of pretending that it doesn't ex- 
ist. It does exist. We know it exists. It has 
killed and wounded about a hundred thousand 
Americans; so obviously it exists. 

Q. I think the other part of the criticism which 
stems from this, though, is that, as a result of non- 
recognition and as a result of recognition of an 
alternative regime in Formosa, you became in- 
volved, not just immediately but over the years, 
in hostilities which are very dangerous to world 
peace and aren't getting us anywhere. I won- 
der if you could say something about the positive 
aspects of American policy, where it is getting us 
toward China? 

A. Well, we have not, in fact, become involved 
in hostilities, except where the Chinese Commu- 
nists intervened in Korea and fought us and the 
United Nations and you and others who had 
forces in the Republic of Korea. There we 



735 



fought, and we fought together, against the Chi- 
nese People's Kepublic and its Ked forces. Other- 
wise we have not engaged in hostilities toward it. 
We have supported the Government of China 
which was the recognized Government of China 
which we all recognized before 1945, which we 
have continued to recognize, despite the partial 
results of the revolution. 

But, you see, this question of its being a civil 
war is exactly the same as the situation in Korea, 
where it was claimed that that was a civil war. 
And the Russians and the Chinese Communists 
and the north Koreans took the position there 
that we were intervening in a civil war, that this 
was just an effort of the Koreans to unite them- 
selves. The same thing in the case of Viet-Nam. 
But we don't believe that, in the case of civil wars 
of this sort, force ought to be used by either side 
at a point where it involves great international 
complications. 

The Federal Bepublic of Germany has agreed 
not to use force to unite Germany. And we re- 
joice that it has taken that decision. The Re- 
public of China on Formosa has agreed with us 
not to use force to go back to the mainland or 
against the mainland in any way except in joint 
agreement with us. The only threat comes from 
the Chinese Communists. They have attacked 
and may attack again. 

Now then, the question comes, if they attack 
what do you do? Do you fall back, or do you 
retreat? We believe that the whole position of 
the free world in the western Pacific, running 
from Japan, Korea, Okinawa, Formosa, the Phil- 
ippines, down to Viet-Nam, Australia, and New 
Zealand, depends upon maintaining a strong line 
against the thrusts of the Chinese Communists 
against that insular and peninsular position of 
the free world, which is held with difficulty. It's 
a thin line. It's not a continuous line such as you 
have in western Europe. And it can only be 
held, in our opinion, if we stand firm. 

We are not going to attack or tolerate attacks 
against the Chinese Communists, but when they 
attack then I think we have to stand firm. If we 
don't I think that there will be a breach in the 
line, and the effect of that will be felt all along 
and that whole position of the free world in the 
western Pacific will be lost. We will be driven 
back home, and indeed that is the avowed goal 
of the Sino-Soviet policy. They say that. "Go 



736 



back home. You belong in your own side of the 
Pacific and get away from the western Pacific." 
Q. We tend to look at Asia not as the Pacific 
but from the Indian Ocean, up from India, from 
our traditional history. What part do you see 
is going to he played in Western policy in Asia 
by the great neutralist power of India in Asia? 
What part do you think the United States can 
play in helping India? 

A. Well, I think we can play a very consider- 
able part, and indeed we are. We have given a 
tremendous assistance to India. And India is 
neutralist in only one sense of the word. India 
is neutralist in the sense that it has not joined up 
in any of the collective-security organizations. I 
think they may be wrong, but I think on the whole 
the free nations are more apt to stay free if they 
unite in collective security. But each country can 
make that decision for itself. We don't quarrel 
with the Indian decision. India is not neutral in j 
the sense that it is indifferent to the threat of com- 
munism. It is fighting it, fighting it vigorously, 
hard, and is attempting to demonstrate for its own 
people that a free way of life can improve human 
welfare. And in that struggle, that competition 
with communism, we are all for it, and we believe 
it is extremely important that it should succeed. 

U.S. Economic Aid Programs 

Q. Do you think that economic aid programs of 
the United States are really as important as the 
military alliances? 

A. You know, that is one of the great troubles 
that we have in dealing with you gentlemen of 
the news media. Whenever we make a speech, you 
may have in it 90 percent about economic develop- 
ment, improvement, and so forth, and 10 percent 
about some military business. The thing that 
makes the headlines, that makes the news, is the 
10 percent about the military. That always seems 
to attract more attention, be more newsworthy; 
and I have made speech after speech about the 
nonmilitary aspect of our foreign policy, and it 
never makes a headline or even a subheadline. 
But if you talk about the military business and 
retaliatory power and deterrent power and so 
forth, that is a screaming headline right away. 
So oftentimes your own views get distorted, your 
policies get distorted, because the human interest 

Department of State Bulletin 



■J 



attaches more to the military than the nonmilitary. 
I attach, myself, more importance to the nonmili- 
tary than to the military. 

Q. And do you think — incidentally, I have just 
been in hidia and come back from there — do you 
think that the -programs that you are doing, and 
that we are taking some part in too, are beginning 
to have an effect, that, on the whole, xoe are stabi- 
lizing free Asia? 

A. I think so. I think that this Indian second 
5-year program is going to be carried through. 
It has had very great, help from various free-world 
countries, most of all from the United States ; con- 
siderable help from you and from others. And I 
believe that it will succeed, and, as I have said be- 
fore, I think it is extremely important that it 
should succeed. Because while I attach the great- 
est importance to the maintenance of the spiritual 
values — the moral values of the free world, in 
terms of the right of individuals to think as they 
wish, to believe as they wish, to get information, 
and so forth — one cannot realistically expect that 
human values will be preserved in an atmosphere 
of squalor and misery. And there is a dynamic 
spirit — in recent years, with the development and 
spread of political independence, there has along- 
side of that developed a feeling on the part of the 
people that that political independence must bring 
them better economic and social conditions. And 
I think it is vitally important that there should be 
a response to that. I think, if there is no response 
to that, then the democratic institutions of these 
newborn countries will fade away and they will be 
replaced by some form of Communist or State 
Socialist scheme, which will, in fact, destroy hu- 
man liberties in an effort in that way to achieve 
greater economic welfare. We have got to prove 
that the two things will go hand in hand: human 
freedom and human rights, and economic welfare. 

Q. What about the Middle East? Recently the 
President announced a plan for economic develop- 
in > nt with American help in that area. Do you 
think that is going to do anything to produce sta- 
bility and some protection for our interests in the 
Middli East? 

A. I hope so very much. Of course, as the 
President said when he addressed the extraordi- 
nary United Nations General Assembly on the 
subject, 4 the desire for it has got to be manifested 

* Ibid., Sept. 1, 1958, p. 337. 



by the Arab peoples themselves. They are ex- 
tremely sensitive, as all peoples are who have 
been in the past subjected to colonial rule and who 
now feel that they have gotten their independence. 
And they are suspicious, and they do not want to 
be subjected to the risk of political domination 
again under the guise of economic assistance. So 
that the plan must originate really with them. 

Now what we have made clear, and I think 
others have made clear, is that if there is such a 
desire they will find a ready response. Mr. Ham- 
marskjold, the Secretary-General of the United 
Nations, has been working on that general idea, 
and certainly there is desperate need for a greater 
economic welfare there. The misery, the squalor, 
the disease there are terrible. One can't visit those 
countries without being impressed by it. And I 
would hope very much that the Arab countries 
would see that their own legitimate national as- 
pirations can be combined with a joint economic 
program which would stabilize the area and im- 
prove the welfare of their people. 

Middle East Oil — Mutuality of Interests 

Q. Do you think that will also do something to 
protect our interests, particularly our interests in 
oil in that area, or would one realize — that is of 
importance after all? 

A. I think it will, but — if you will permit me to 
take exception when you say "our" interests in 
oil — the interests there are mutual. It is just as 
important and vital to the peoples of those areas 
to have a market for their oil as that we should be 
able to buy the oil. As a matter of fact, the oil 
is obtainable — not quite as readily or as cheaply, 
but it is obtainable elsewhere in the world. And 
the important thing to recognize, I think, when 
we talk about this matter is that we are providing 
a market which provides the resources which can 
tremendously help the welfare of those countries. 
And there is a growing development there of plans 
to use oil royalties and so forth for economic wel- 
fare, and that is not just a development of some- 
thing that is of interest to the West. It is of in- 
terest to the West, of course, but it is equally im- 
portant to have a market. A pool of oil is about 
the most worthless thing there is in the world un- 
less you have the machinery for marketing it. And 
we provide that, and that is a joint enterprise 
between the West and the Arab countries. 



November 10, 1958 



737 



Q. You mentioned a moment ago the ex-colonial 
peoples and their feelings. I think one of the 
things that has divided Britain and America since 
1776 has been America's great suspicion of British 
imperialism. Do you think the country now, 
America now, recognizes how much British co- 
lonialism is a thing of the past and the British 
Commonwealth is a thing of the future? 

A. I think so. Naturally our history books 
still carry the memories of the distant past. But 
I think that there is by and large in this country 
a tremendous admiration for the way in which — 
our own country being an exception — there has 
been a peaceful evolution of the countries of the 
British Empire, what used to be the British 
Empire, to independence; now the British Com- 
monwealth. And, although it is under no writ- 
ten constitution, one of the great facts of the 
world and one of the brilliant feats, I think, of 
statesmanship, is to have brought about that 
peaceful evolution so that now, whereas you had 
an empire with a single rule in London, you have 
a commonwealth of free countries all voluntarily 
participating and each under a government of its 
own choosing. 

Q. Mr. Secretary, I wonder if I could ask you 
one at least rather more personal question, which 
is this: You have been Secretary of State now for 
6 pretty gruelling years, and you seem to be doing 
very well and very healthy on it. Tell me, what 
is it that keeps you going? Is it faith, hope, or do 
you somehoio enjoy all the pressures and the 
power that go with this great post? 

A. You know, I don't think anybody is a very 
good analyst of himself, and I have never psy- 
choanalyzed myself; so I don't really know the 
answer to this. But I can say this, Mr. Clark: 
These are times of tremendous importance. Any- 
body who has a tradition, as exists in my family, 
of public service in the international field cannot 
but feel the challenge of these times. And when 
you have a President, such as President Eisen- 
hower, whom I consider a very great President, 
one who himself knows a great deal about 
international affairs, problems of war and peace— 
if he says, "I think you are the fellow to carry 
this job at this time," I think one cannot but take 
satisfaction and do one's best to justify the faith 
that President Eisenhower puts in you. And I 



think it is that perhaps more than anything else 
that keeps me going. 

Role of English-Speaking Countries 

Q. Then a last question arising really out of 
that. You say these are really very stirring times; 
we would all agree. What sort of a world — tak- 
ing a pioneer's -eye view of the whole world — 
what sort of a world do you see emerging in the 
next quarter century or so? And, incidentally, 
what part do you think the English-speaking peo- 
ples, Britain and America, are going to play in 
that? 

A. I think that we are developing into a world 
where there must be far greater interdependence 
between all nations, and "interdependence" is a 
phrase which was particularly emphasized when 
your very great Prime Minister, Harold Macmil- 
lan, was here talking with President Eisenhower 
a year or so ago, 5 and it is a key word — 
interdependence. 

You cannot preserve independence nowadays 
without interdependence. Now who are the peo- 
ple who should set the first example in interde- 
pendence ? Shouldn't it be our peoples who derive 
from the same traditions, speak the same lan- 
guage, have the same religion, have the same 
common-law principles, and so forth ? If we can't 
do it, who can you expect to do it? And I look 
upon the extremely close cooperation which now 
exists happily between our countries as setting 
an example of interdependence. It is not any- 
thing which is exclusive to us. It is not an at- 
tempt on our part to set ourselves up over the 
rest of the world. It is setting an example which 
needs to be set and carried out so that all of us 
are cooperating more and more. But we, with 
certain common heritage, have certainly an ex- 
ample to set, and I think we are setting that 
example. 

Q. Today, do you think that the English- 
speaking — that Britain and America are really 
cooperating well again? 

A. I think I can say without fear of challenge 
that never since this nation became independent 
has there been the close cooperation that exists at 
the present time. And indeed I doubt whether 
history shows ever that two countries have been 



'Ibid., Nov. 11, 1957, p. 739. 



738 



Department of State Bulletin 



cooperating as closely as we are cooperating at 
the present time. And let me emphasize again 
tlia( is not an effort to set up a family of two over 
the rest of the world. It is setting an example 
of the kind of thing which we are prepared to do 
and want to do with other countries, but, because 
of certain elements in common, we perhaps can 
set the stage, for doing this thing. But we want 
to have it — I know your country and our country 
want to develop this theme of interdependence 
everywhere. But surely we are setting a good 
example ourselves. 

Q. That is a very hopeful note to end on. And 
thank you very much indeed, Mr. Dulles, for giv- 
ing us your views in this way. 

A. Well, I am delighted to have had this 
opportunity. 

Q. Thank you. 

Second Anniversary 
of Hungarian Revolt 

Department Statement 

Press release C38 dated October 23 

Two years ago, on October 23, the people 
of Hungary rose in spontaneous revolt 
against a Soviet-imposed Communist regime 
which for many years had suppressed their lib- 
erties and subverted their national independence. 
Their courageous struggle to free themselves from 
Soviet domination and to institute a government 
of their own choosing evoked worldwide sympa- 
thy. Tragically, this national effort to achieve 
freedom did not succeed because of the ruthless 
intervention of the armed forces of the Soviet 
Union. 

Since the suppression of the revolt, the present 
Hungarian regime has carried out systematic re- 
prisals against those who led or participated in 
the uprising. Many reports of secret trials, im- 
prisonment, and executions have reached the. out- 
side world. Their authenticity was shockingly 
attested in June of this year in the executions of 
former Premier Imre Nagy, General Pal Maleter, 
and two of their companions. 1 

The United Nations has repeatedly called upon 
the Soviet and Hungarian Governments to comply 



with the terms of the resolutions on Hungary 
which were adopted in the General Assembly by 
overwhelming majorities. The Soviet and Hun- 
garian Governments have willfully refused, how- 
ever, to act in accordance with these resolutions. 
They have also refused to cooperate in any way 
with the United Nations Special Committee on 
the Problem of Hungary and with the United 
Nations Special Representative on the Hungarian 
Problem. These actions of the Soviet and Hun- 
garian Governments in defiance of the United 
Nations, no less than their repressive actions 
within Hungary itself, have occasioned deep con- 
cern in the United States and elsewhere through- 
out the world. They cannot and will not be 
ignored. 

On this second anniversary of the Hungarian 
revolt, the people and Government of the United 
States recall with profound respect the valiant 
struggle of the Hungarian nation. The sacrifices 
which the Hungarian people have made in the 
cause of their own freedom are indeed an inspir- 
ing contribution to the cause of freedom for all 
mankind. 



U.S. Replies to Soviet Note 
on Balloons 

Press release 636 dated October 23 

On October 22, the American Embassy at Mos- 
cow delivered the following note to the Soviet 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 

The United States Government acknowledges 
the receipt of the note of the Soviet Government 
of October 13 1 concerning aerial balloons of 
American manufacture which the Soviet Govern- 
ment states recently landed in the Soviet Union. 

The position of the United States Government 
regarding this matter has been set forth in a note 
delivered by the American Embassy at Moscow 
to the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Sep- 
tember 5, 1958. 2 In that note the United States 
Government pointed out that the balloons referred 
to by the Soviet Government might have been 
among those unrecovered by the Cambridge Re- 
search Center of the United States Air Force, 



1 For a Department statement of June 17, 1958, see 
Bulletin of July 7, 1958, p. 7. 



1 Not printed. 

" For text, see Bulletin of Sept. 29, 1958, p. 504. 



November TO, 1958 



739 



which had launched from the West Coast of the 
United States a number of high-altitude weather 
research balloons in connection with a program de- 
signed to gather meteorological information on the 
earth's atmosphere. If this proved to be the case, 
the Soviet Government was requested to return 
the scientific recording instruments attached to the 
balloons in order that the data collected might 
be evaluated and made available for use through- 
out the world scientific community. With this 
objective in mind and if these instruments are in 
fact among those unrecovered by the Cambridge 
Research Center, the United States Government 
renews its request that the Soviet Government re- 
turn this equipment through the American Em- 
bassy at Moscow. 



U.S. Sends Radio and Television 
Specialists to U.S.S.R. 

Press release 637 dated October 23 

The Department of State announced on Octo- 
ber 23 that a delegation of American radio and 
television specialists would arrive in the Soviet 
Union that week in furtherance of section II (5) 
of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. agreement on exchanges. 1 
This section states : 

Both parties will provide for an exchange of delegations 
of specialists in 1958 to study the production of radio and 
television programs, the techniques of sound recording, 
the equipment of radio and television studios, and the 
manufacture of films, recording tape, tape recorders, and 
records. 



The members of the delegation are : 



Ralph N. Harmon, vice president of engineering, Westing- 
house Broadcasting Co., Inc. 

Jerry Danzig, vice president in charge of radio network 
programs, National Broadcasting Co., Inc. 

Ralph Conn, president, Screen Gems, Inc. 

Mike Wallace, American Broadcasting Co. 

Burton Paulu, director of radio and television broadcast- 
ing, General Extension Division, University of Minne- 
sota 
In reciprocity a Soviet delegation is expected 

to visit the United States in November. 



The Bases of Peace 

hy Deputy Under Secretary Murphy 1 

When we speak of peace we must always re- 
member that peace is subject to more than one def- 
inition. Peace with the Communists can always 
be had if we are prepared to surrender. When- 
ever a condition of apparent peacefulness is 
pursued too narrowly or bought at the price of un- 
wise concessions, real peace eludes us. Meaning- 
ful and lasting peace can only come as the end 
result of persistence and determination to main- 
tain our ideals and strength with understanding 
and compassion. 

Genuine peace obviously must rest upon a 
foundation of economic health and the political 
stability which flows from it. That applies to 
others as well as to ourselves. 

There is often a lack of appreciation of the 
close relationship that exists between international 
trade, economic development, and the question of 
war or peace. We at times identify the causes of 
the Second World War, for example, with the 
personalities of certain political leaders— the 
Hitlers, the Mussolinis. We would do well to 
think also of the unhappy and tragic economic and 
social conditions of the twenties, which brought 
these leaders into power. We might bear in mind 
that any serious interruption of world trade and 
economic development, or frustrated hopes for 
better living standards, could again bring des- 
perate men to power in one world area or another 
and thus evoke the threat of disturbance and war. 
In a world where war is unthinkable as a means 
of settlement of disputes, an alternative must be 
devised. As our able Secretary of State John 
Foster Dulles has many times pointed out, the 
only substitute for the rule of war for the settle- 
ment of disputes is a rule of law. 

International law has developed in several im- 
portant ways in the past two decades. Yesterday 
we celebrated throughout the Nation the 13th 
anniversary of the coming into force of the United 
Nations Charter. This charter established certain 
basic principles of international law, notably in 



'For text of agreement on exchanges in the cultural, 
technical, and educational fields, see Bulletin of Feb. 17, 
1958, p. 243. 

740 






1 Remarks made at the Peace Award luncheon of the 
Catholic Association for International Peace at Washing- 
ton, D.C., on Oct. 25 (press release 641 dated Oct. 24). Mr. 
Murphy was on this occasion the recipient of the associa- 
tion's annual Peace Award. 

Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



article 2, which deals with sovereign equality, the 
settlement of international disputes by peaceful 
means, and the renunciation of the threat or use 
of force. These principles have been usefully ap- 
plied, and thereby strengthened, in the settlement 
of an increasing number of disputes which in 
former times might have generated hostilities. It 
is a hopeful trend. 

There has also been a healthy growth of the 
multilateral treaties. These prescribe rules of 
conduct in such matters as the treatment of aliens 
and international trade and constitute interna- 
tional law. 

Another powerful force, perhaps the most 
powerful, is world opinion, sometimes expressed 
in gatherings of the United Nations General As- 
sembly, at other times through diplomatic chan- 
nels or in the press. World public opinion, 
wherever it enjoys freedom of the press, has come 
to play a role comparable to "common law" in the 
earlier days of our history. This force operates 
as a vital factor in the settlement of disputes and 
as a deterrent to the use of force. The assiduous 
attention to world opinion paid by the dictators 
of the Kremlin, even though cynical, bears testi- 
mony to the power it exercises. 

Despite recent progress there is still more left 
to be done than has been done in developing inter- 
national law to a point of full effectiveness as an 
instrument of guarding peace. That is where this 
association can be and is a most valuable instru- 
ment in promoting the rule of law in international 
relations. 

Whatever our economic and legal achievements 
in behalf of peace, in the world as we know it 
we must unfortunately expect periodic crises. 
There will, no doubt, be attempts by ambitious 
and hostile elements to gain their ends by unlaw- 
ful means. Each time this happens there are 
flashes of danger to the peace of the world. Then 
we usually witness agitation to make concessions, 
to "adjust" our foreign policy, to yield a point or 
two, to give away territory. If we do, it is then 
urged, we will regain control of leadership, this 
aggressor — the tiger — will be assuaged, tranquil- 
lity will be restored. Thus it was at the time of 
the Berlin blockade, of Korea, and in the Middle 
East, and most recently in the Formosa Strait. 
But, if we have learned anything as the result of 
experience in dealing with international commu- 



nism since World War II, it is that our conces- 
sions are invariably considered a sign of weakness 
and stimulate a demand for more. It is our des- 
tiny to live in an era of struggle with an interna- 
tional movement intent on the creation of a new 
social order which would involve the destruction 
of the ideals of a Christian society. Until that 
movement is spent, we must be prepared for 
periodic crises in a series of probings and testing 
by the leadership of that movement. These prob- 
ings and testing seek to ascertain points of weak- 
ness and disunity in the free world to promote the 
expansion of international communism. The 
tiger is never assuaged. He does understand and 
respect positions of strength. 

For resisting and deterring aggression, and for 
containing violent outbreaks in the present world 
situation, there is no substitute for our strength, 
moral and physical, to stand firm. 

At the start of the crisis in Taiwan Strait there 
were those who declared that our firm stand risked 
war. It is true that the stand we took involved 
risk, as will almost any course of action taken at 
a difficult time. But in our judgment a firm stand 
at that time and place involved the least risk, in 
the long run, to peace with freedom and honor in 
the world. 

Essential to a sound foreign policy is our aware- 
ness that there is no riskless road to peace. 

In guarding peace one further instrument al- 
ways plays its quiet but essential part: That is 
diplomacy. In this connection it is to be re- 
membered that His Holiness Pius XII was a high- 
ly skilled diplomat as well as a churchman. 

I have spent most of my adult years in the 
United States Foreign Service; so it is perhaps 
natural that I should be a partisan of diplomacy 
as a force in world affairs. It would be difficult to 
overestimate the importance of the contribution 
diplomacy can make to strengthening the safe- 
guards of peace and lessening the chance of war. 
In the shorter run diplomacy plays a necessary 
part in moderating or deflecting the perils of a 
crisis until time and better reason can open up 
alternatives. In the longer run the skills of 
diplomacy are essential for putting into effect the 
decisions of the statesman, thereby diverting the 
energies of men increasingly toward peaceful 
enterprises. Diplomacy has been justly called the 
first line of our defense. 



November 10, J 958 



741 



It is my conviction that peace cannot be an end 
in itself, will never be won by itself. World peace 
is the result of economic health and political 
stability; of a rule of law gradually coming to 
supplant the rule of war; of the strength, physi- 
cal and spiritual, to hold steady in the face of 



crisis and to stand firm in resistance to aggressive 
force; of skilled and tireless diplomacy. 

With you I pray that our nation may continue 
successfully to follow these four paths to peace 
and good will among men. 



Problems Affecting International Trade 



by Under Secretary Dillon * 



It is a great pleasure to me to have this oppor- 
tunity to participate, for the first time, in an an- 
nual meeting of the Contracting Parties to the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The 
general agreement has steadily gained in strength 
and influence year by year, so that the meetings 
of the Contracting Parties have now become the 
major world forum for the discussion of trade 
policies on a broad international basis and for 
the settlement of international trade disputes. 
I think it is of considerable importance to the con- 
tinuing vitality of the GATT institution that 
those of us who carry substantial responsibilities 
at home in the field of trade policy should meet 
from time to time, even if for only a few days, to 
become acquainted with one another, to exchange 
views, and to clarify the positions of our govern- 
ments on important issues of concern to GATT. 

U.S. Domestic Economy and International Trade 

In my remarks today I would like first of all to 
say a few words about the state of our domestic 
economy. Then I will turn to some of the specific 
problems with which our various delegations will 
be concerned in the weeks ahead. 

Since the 12th session held a year ago, the 
United States has gone through a business reces- 
sion and is now well on the road to complete re- 
covery. Our business contraction has had two 
major characteristics : 

First, it has been short. The decline lasted only 
8 months from the peak of economic activity, 



1 Address made before the 13th -ession of the Contract- 
ing Parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade at the ministerial level, at Geneva on Oct. 16 (press 
release 623 dated Oct. 17). 



which was reached in the third quarter of 1957, to 
the bottom, which was reached early in the second 
quarter of 1958. Since then our rate of recovery 
has been extraordinarily rapid. Present indica- 
tions are that the whole of the drop will have 
been recovered by the end of the year, when our 
economy will begin once again to record new all- 
time highs. 

Second, the recession has been relatively mild. 
The maximum drop in gross national production 
was only 4 percent. The maximum drop in per- 
sonal income was only 2 percent. 

The economy of the United States has shown 
remarkable strength and resiliency since the end 
of the war. While the expansion of our economy 
has been interrupted three times in the postwar 
period, in each case the halt was mild and brief. 
Powerful long-term forces for economic growth 
have dominated and continue to dominate the 
American economy. In addition,' governmental 
measures — both automatic, built-in stabilizers and 
specific actions designed to meet the particular 
problems of each of the downturns — have played 
an important role in keeping these readjustments 
limited in time and extent. In short, the record of 
the economy of the United States since the war 
indicates that economic growth with reasonable 
stability can be achieved in a free society. 

Of course, the chief anxiety of the rest of the 
world is that an American recession will ad- 
versely affect the international trade and mone- 
tary reserves of other countries. The interna- 
tional transactions of the United States during 
the 1957-58 recession have been characterized by 
a high level of American imports and a marked 
decline in American exports. These develop- 
ments have been largely responsible for the recent 



742 



Department of Siate Bulletin 



substantial improvement in the foreign-exchange 
position of the rest of the world as a whole. Also, 
I think that it is true, as mentioned by Mr. Per 
Jacobbson, the Managing Director of the Inter- 
national Monetary Fund, at the recent meeting in 
New Delhi, that "the brunt of the reduced de- 
mand in the United States has, over a large field, 
so far fallen on the marginal domestic producers." 
Looking back over developments in our foreign 
trade in recent years, I am led to make certain 
observations about the vulnerability of the rest of 
the world to economic fluctuations in the United 
States : 

1. When consumer expenditures in the United 
States have been well maintained, as has been the 
case in each of our postwar recessions, our de- 
mand has remained strong for many types of im- 
ports, notably food and manufactures. This was 
particularly true in 1957-58, when our imports of 
manufactures actually increased. 

2. Our demand for imports of industrial mate- 
rials may be more adversely affected. The de- 
cline in the value of United States imports of in- 
dustrial materials in 1957-58, however, was in 
large part a function of the drop in price. The 
reduction in the volume of these imports was 
quite mild. 

3. United States Government transactions — 
foreign assistance and other Government expendi- 
tures abroad — have come to be a sizable part of 
our total outpayments to foreign countries. 
They are not directly responsive to changes in do- 
mestic business activity. 

4. Our exports, on the other hand, seem to 
have become more sensitive to cyclical fluctua- 
tions abroad. After responding vigorously at 
times of peak foreign demand, as in early 1957, 
they have fallen off sharply when some slackening 
of foreign demand has appeared. There is no 
doubt that, because of the postwar growth and 
modernization of the productive capacity of other 
countries. United States exports face stronger 
competition in world markets today than they did 
a few years ago. 

These various factors taken together clearly in- 
dicate that the effects of an American recession 
on the balance of payments of the United States, 
and hence on foreign countries, have been less 
than it was earlier thought they would be. The 
conclusions to be drawn from (his are clear. It 



is that government need not continue to be so ap- 
prehensive about periodic business movements in 
the American economy. In particular, the fear of 
a so-called dollar shortage should no longer be 
allowed to impede our common effort to move for- 
ward toward a fully liberalized multilateral trad- 
ing system. 

There are, however, other problems affecting 
international trade and payments. It is true, for 
example, that the less developed countries have 
encountered difficulties in their foreign trade and 
payments. This has been in large part the result 
of declining prices for primary products, a trend 
which began prior to the beginning of the reces- 
sion in the United States and which, in the case 
of a number of commodities, was due to an im- 
balance between world supply and demand for 
basic products. A contributing cause in the case 
of some countries has been a continuing level of 
internal demand larger than could be justified by 
the total resources, domestic and foreign, at their 
disposal. 

A new danger, which so far has principally af- 
fected the economies of the less developed coun- 
tries, has been the recent dumping activities in 
a few key items by the Soviet Union and Commu- 
nist China. The dumping of tin by the Soviet 
Union has served to disrupt the economy of Bo- 
livia and to deal severe blows to the hopes of the 
peoples of Malaya and Indonesia for an improve- 
ment in their economic well-being. The dumping 
of textile products by Communist China is severe- 
ly affecting the traditional export markets of 
India and Japan. It is thus making far more 
difficult the achievement on schedule of the sec- 
ond 5-year plan of India and hampering the 
economic growth of Japan. 

As long as the Soviet Union and Communist 
China persist in these destructive trade practices 
the hope for a better life for millions of people 
in the less developed countries of the world will 
become even more difficult of realization. 

I would like now to turn to some of the specific 
problems on our agenda. 

Primary Commodities and Agricultural Protec- 
tionism 

A few weeks ago we received the preliminary 
draft of the report 2 of our panel of experts on 
trends in international trade, with special em- 



1 Doc. MGT/80/58. 



November 10, 7958 



743 



phasis on primary commodities and agricultural 
protectionism. This is, of course, a difficult as 
well as a controversial field, and it is not to be ex- 
pected that governments will find all of the policy 
conclusions of the experts to their liking. Never- 
theless, I think we can all agree that the report 
provides us with an excellent analysis on which 
to base our further examination of these prob- 
lems and that the distinguished economists who 
prepared it — Professor [Gottfried] Haberler, 
Professor [James] Meade, Professor [Jan] Tin- 
bergen, and Dr. [Koberto de Oliveira] Campos — 
deserve our warmest thanks. 

This report will obviously require careful and 
thorough study. However, from a preliminary 
reading, there are two observations which I wish 
to make at this time. 

First, we are impressed by the sections of the 
report dealing with the impact of internal taxes 
levied by certain industrialized countries, which 
severely limit the consumption of primary prod- 
ucts such as coffee and tea, the market for which 
is of importance to the economic development of 
many countries in Latin America, Africa, and 
Asia. While recognizing the problems involved 
for certain countries in lifting the basis of their 
taxation, we hope that this portion of the report 
will receive serious attention with a resulting in- 
crease in the markets for these basic commodities. 

Second, we welcome the emphasis in the report 
on the fact that the maintenance of a healthy in- 
ternational economic system is of much greater 
significance for the well-being of primary pro- 
ducers than are efforts to regulate production, 
prices, and trade in particular commodities. 
However, we find ourselves unable to concur with 
certain conclusions in the report relating to com- 
modity stabilization schemes. Whereas the report 
appears to endorse the notion of the simultaneous 
negotiation of international stabilization schemes 
for a substantial number of commodities, we our- 
selves believe that commodity problems can best 
be approached on a case-by-case basis, taking ac- 
count of the particular problem to be solved and 
the special circumstances surrounding production 
and trade for the commodity concerned. We note 
that the countries of the Commonwealth ex- 
pressed much the same view as ours in the com- 
munique which they issued at the close of the re- 
cent Commonwealth Trade and Economic Confer- 
ence at Montreal. 



The United States is now prepared to join in 
discussion of commodity problems on a case-by- 
case basis. We are already doing so with respect 
to coffee, and lead and zinc. Coffee, of course, is 
a commodity which we do not produce in the 
United States but which we heavily consume. 
Yet we have recognized the serious difficulties 
with which coffee producers in Latin America 
and Africa have been confronted and have been 
willing to sit down with them to try to work out 
a means of ameliorating these problems. In the 
case of lead and zinc, producers in the United 
States have been seriously injured by the world- 
wide decline in prices accompanied by extremely 
heavy increases in imports. This has forced a re- 
duction in our domestic output of about 25 per- 
cent. In this situation we sought a multilateral 
solution by agreement between exporting and im- 
porting countries. When we found that there 
was no early prospect of dealing mnltilaterally 
with the problem, we were compelled to apply im- 
port restrictions on these products. 3 We continue, 
however, to hope that it will be possible in the 
near future to reach multilateral understanding 
which will be acceptable to all. 

My colleague from the U.K. this morning sug- 
gested that our recent actions on lead and zinc 
might well be discussed at this session. If the 
other Contracting Parties so desire we are, of 
course, prepared to join in such a discussion. 
However, I should like to point out that this sub- 
ject is already being discussed by the countries 
directly concerned. The meeting of lead and zinc 
producing and consuming countries held in Lon- 
don early in September looked toward a further 
meeting of technical experts this fall for the pur- 
pose of seeking agreement on a multilateral pro- 
gram for these two commodities. The United 
States, as I have said, is prepared to take an active 
part in this endeavor. Until we know the results 
of these efforts, I seriously doubt the wisdom of 
initiating discussions on the same subject here in 
Geneva. 

As regards the suggestion of my British col- 
league that there be a broad discussion of agri- 
cultural policies, the United States always stands 
ready to discuss its policies and is prepared to 
join in such a discussion if the other Contracting 
Parties so desire. Of course, the detailed pro- 



* For background, see Bulletin of Oct. 13, 1958, p. 579 
and p. 583. 



744 



Department of State Bulletin 



cedural arrangements for such a discussion would 
necessarily be subject to further consideration by 
our various delegations. 

The report of the panel of experts also speaks 
well, although with certain reservations, of the 
technique of achieving commodity price stabiliza- 
tion through the use of buffer stocks. The theory 
appears to be that by this means governments may 
be able to even out price fluctuations without re- 
sort to direct controls over production and trade. 
"While recognizing the theoretical attraction of 
this approach, it is our view that international 
buffer-stock schemes do not offer a hopeful method 
of solving commodity problems. As the body of 
the report itself implies, the successful manage- 
ment of any buffer stock presumes an exceptional 
accuracy of human judgment and demands a fore- 
knowledge of future economic events which we do 
not in fact possess. Because of these factors, it is 
our view that buffer-stock schemes are all too 
likely to break down completely or to lead to an 
aggravated form of the very restrictions on pro- 
duction and trade which they were originally de- 
signed to prevent. 

GATT'S Relations With EEC 

At their last annual session the Contracting 
Parties began to consider their future relation- 
ships with the European Economic Community. 
It was recognized then that the objectives of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and 
those of the Treaty of Rome were basically in 
harmony, that together they aimed at the eco- 
nomic integration of countries in Western Europe 
within the framework of a liberal trading philos- 
ophy embracing the whole of the free world. The 
Contracting Parties recognized, too, that much 
thought would have to be given to the develop- 
ment of day-to-day working relationships with 
the Community of Six, so that the broad objec- 
tives of these two great international instruments 
would in fact be translated into practical achieve- 
ments. My Government believes that this work 
has been well begun and should be continued on 
the present basis. 

One of the most important aspects of the future 
relationship between the Common Market and the 
general agreement relates to the level of the Com- 
mon Market tariff to be applied to imports into 
the Common Market from the territories of the 
other Contracting Parties. As a result of the ap- 



proval by the United States Congress of the Re- 
ciprocal Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1958, 
my Government is now prepared to participate in 
tariff negotiations with the members of the Euro- 
pean Economic Commimity and with other coun- 
tries, to the end that mutually beneficial tariff 
concessions may be agreed upon. The trade 
agreements extension approved by our Congress — 
for a period of 4 years from July 1, 1958 — is the 
longest in the history of our trade agreements 
legislation. Also, the extent of the basic author- 
ity granted to our President to reduce tariff rates 
makes it desirable that the Contracting Parties 
prepare for negotiations looking toward their 
completion prior to the expiration of our negotiat- 
ing authority on July 1, 1962. 

We also hope that, either during these negotia- 
tions or separately, the Community of Six will 
find it possible to reduce the Common Market 
tariffs on a number of tropical products which, 
under the Treaty of Rome, would be imported 
free of duty from the overseas territories of the 
Common Market while being subject to duty when 
imported from many of the less developed coun- 
tries which are Contracting Parties to the general 
agreement. 

There has been considerable concern in some 
quarters regarding the agricultural policies to be 
followed by the European Economic Community. 
For ourselves we believe that a guiding principle 
in the establishment of these policies should be 
the principle embodied in the general agreement; 
that is, that the trade of other Contracting Par- 
ties should not be faced with higher or more re- 
strictive barriers to agricultural trade because of 
the formation of the Community. We are confi- 
dent that this is the intention of the Community 
of Six. It is of course appropriate that the action 
of the Six in the agricultural field should come 
within the purview of the general agreement in 
the same way as other commercial regulations ap- 
plied by the European Economic Community. 

Dollar Liberalization 

Finally I would like to say a word about dollar 
liberalization. The international payments situa- 
tion of the countries of the free world has, by 
and large, continued to improve. Yet, in our 
judgment, the removal of balance-of -payments re- 
strictions has not adequately kept pace with this 
improvement. On the one hand, we certainly 



November 10, 1958 



745 



welcome the effective steps taken during the past 
year by the United Kingdom and Australia to 
remove or relax their remaining balance-of-pay- 
ments restrictions. On the other hand, we regret 
that certain countries in a position to make 
greater progress in removing restrictions have 
failed so far to do so. In particular we hope that 
Germany and Austria will now agree to adequate 
measures of liberalization. 

In the case of Germany this should in our view 
result in the elimination of the remaining restric- 
tions on imports of industrial items and, with re- 
spect to agricultural items, either the elimination 
of restrictions or the negotiation of an agreed 
waiver of the applicable provisions of the gen- 
eral agreement. 

We recognize that the substance of a waiver is 
naturally subject to negotiation and agreement 
between the Federal Republic and the other Con- 
tracting Parties, but we see no reason why a 
waiver should not be negotiated at this time so as 
to regularize the position of the Federal Repub- 
lic in the same manner as other countries, includ- 
ing the United States, have regularized their 
position. We do not feel that the negotiation of 
a waiver should await a possible renegotiation of 
the GATT provisions on agriculture. Such a re- 
negotiation would inevitably involve complex and 
difficult negotiations which might well take a 
number of years. The negotiation of a waiver 
would be a much simpler matter and could be ac- 
complished at this session. We think this should 
be done so as to avoid the necessity for action un- 
der article XXIII. 

In the case of Austria, her improved financial 
position is such that we see no reason why dollar 
discrimination on nonagricultural goods should 
not be substantially eliminated or why a further 
substantial step should not be taken in the reduc- 
tion of discrimination on agricultural products. 

We recognize, of course, that the sudden re- 
moval of balance-of-payments restrictions main- 
tained for a long time may create real hardships 



for domestic producers. Yet the answer to this 
problem is not the indefinite continuance of such 
restrictions contrary to the applicable provisions 
of the general agreement. If a country considers 
that it cannot promptly remove balance-of-pay- 
ments restrictions which are no longer needed for 
financial reasons, then we think that the appropri- 
ate course is for such a country to agree with the 
Contracting Parties on the terms of a mutually 
acceptable waiver from the provisions of the gen- 
eral agreement. 

In his excellent address to us this morning, our 
distinguished chairman [L. K. Jha] has made sev- 
eral suggestions as to how we might further 
strengthen the general agreement and better or- 
ganize the work of the Contracting Parties. In 
particular, we wish to support the plan which he 
has outlined, whereby the Contracting Parties 
would meet in several sessions throughout the year, 
thus enabling them to handle their ordinary busi- 
ness with greater dispatch and to eliminate the 
present system of a single annual session which 
necessarily requires many weeks to complete. We 
also agree with the chairman that one of the most 
practicable means of overcoming some of GATT's 
administrative problems would be to create 
stronger permanent delegations of the Contracting 
Parties in Geneva so that urgent problems could 
be effectively discussed without the need for a 
formal session. The United States would be pre- 
pared to strengthen its permanent delegation for 
this purpose. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you 
on behalf of my Government for the wise guidance 
and outstanding qualities of leadership which you 
have brought to the deliberations of the Con- 
tracting Parties during the past year. I also want 
to pay tribute once again to our executive secre- 
tary, Mr. Wyndham White, who with his excellent 
and hard-working staff has so greatly helped to 
build the general agreement into the truly effective 
international economic institution which it is 
today. 



746 



Department of State Bulletin 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



U.N. Committee Opens Debate on Disarmament 



Following is a series of statements made in 
Committee I {Political and Security) by Henry 
Cabot Lodge and James W. Barco, U.S. 
Representatives to the General Assembly. 



FIRST STATEMENT BY MR. LODGE, OCTOBER 10 

U.S. delegation press release 3013 

We turn once again to the subject of disarma- 
ment, a subject in which the deep tensions afflict- 
ing the world are all too clearly reflected. It is 
a subject "piled high with difficulty," but so im- 
portant for humanity that we must not become 
discouraged. 

In this past year of disarmament talks the 
world had its share of difficulty — perhaps more 
than its share. There has also been progress. The 
scientists who met at Geneva have proved the 
worth of technical talks in one field of widespread 
concern — the means of detecting nuclear explo- 
sions. This is significant. There is also ground 
for hope that technical talks will open the way for 
forward steps to lessen the possibility of surprise 
attack. Indeed, this approach has wider implica- 
tions for the whole field of disarmament. 

Secretary-General Hammarskjold took a com- 
mendable initiative in proposing this item for our 
agenda this year. In his memorandum 1 he says, 
and we fully agree, "The attainment of balanced, 
worldwide disarmament through the United Na- 
tions must remain a primary objective of the or- 
ganization." His is a most useful memorandum. 
I shall refer to it more than once in this 
statement. 

The United States has always recognized the 
fundamental responsibility of the United Nations 
in the held of disarmament. We have cooperated 
wholeheartedly in every effort of this organiza- 
tion to solve the disarmament dilemma. We are 



glad to give to this committee, and to the General 
Assembly, an accounting of our efforts in the past 
year. 

To put our present work in perspective, let me 
recall briefly, and without any recrimination, 
some of the events of the past year. A year ago, 
in the 12th General Assembly, our debates on dis- 
armament began under a cloud. All the hopes of 
agreement built up during months of careful di- 
plomacy in the London Subcommittee talks had 
suddenly been disappointed. 

The General Assembly responded wisely to that 
rather frustrating situation. It endorsed a rea- 
sonable set of principles for a disarmament agree- 
ment. It also enlarged the Disarmament Com- 
mission to its present composition of 25 members, 
in the well-justified expectation that this would 
meet the Soviet view. 2 

However, Mr. Chairman, it must be set down 
as a fact that up to this moment the Disarmament 
Commission and its Subcommittee have been pre- 
vented by the Soviet Union from any further 
useful efforts. 

Much as we regretted the Soviet attitude, we 
refused to be deterred. The most important thing 
was to keep working on the job which the United 
Nations had given us, even if this meant doing 
our work outside the formal structure of the 
United Nations. 

Question of Nuclear Weapons Tests 

We concentrated first on the problem of sus- 
pending nuclear weapons tests — the first point in 
the program endorsed by the General Assembly 
a year ago. One big difficulty here has always 
been how to make sure that a pledge to refrain 
from testing was not being violated in secret. On 
April 28 President Eisenhower proposed to 
Premier Khrushchev that technical discussions be 



'U.N*. doc. A/3936. 
November 10, 1958 



'Bulletin of Dec. 16, 1957, p. 961. 



747 



held to see whether scientists from both sides 
could work out a practical way to detect nuclear 
explosions. 3 

These talks actually began in Geneva on July 
1. Scientific experts from both sides met at the 
European Office of the United Nations, with a 
representative of the Secretary-General present 
at all the meetings. Three of the most eminent 
scientists of the United States attended the meet- 
ings : Dr. James B. Fisk, Dr. Eobert F. Bacher, 
and the late Dr. Ernest O. Lawrence. The other 
participants were of similar standing in their 
countries. We are glad to say that the discussions 
from start to finish remained almost completely 
scientific and nonpolitical. 

After 7 weeks the talks resulted in an agreed 
report. The means of detecting violations of a 
possible test suspension are set forth in the report 
which was submitted to the United Nations by 
United States and Soviet representatives and 
which has been circulated as document A/3897 
[dated September 30]. 4 

Mr. Chairman, when this technical agreement 
was reached on August 21 we lost no time in tak- 
ing the next forward step. The following day 
President Eisenhower proposed prompt negotia- 
tions for an actual agreement "for the suspension 
of nuclear weapons tests and the actual establish- 
ment of an international control system on the 
basis of the experts' report." 5 We are gratified 
that the United States, the United Kingdom, and 
the Soviet Union have now agreed on the proposed 
negotiations, which are scheduled to begin in 
Geneva on October 31. 

Making his proposal President Eisenhower an- 
nounced that the United States was willing, "un- 
less testing is resumed by the Soviet Union, to 
withhold further testing on its part of atomic and 
hydrogen weapons for a period of one year from 
the beginning of the negotiations." We regret 
that Mr. Gromyko in his press conference the 
other day threw doubt upon his Government's 
willingness to stop tests. We hope that what Mr. 
Gromyko said does not mean that he is looking 



"For text of President Eisenhower's letter, see ibid., 
May 19, 1958, p. 811. 

4 For a statement by Dr. Fisk and tests of a com- 
munique and the final report (without annexes), see ibid., 
Sept. 22, 195S, p. 452. 

' Ibid., Sept. 8, 1958, p. 378. 

748 



for a way to justify continued unrestricted test- 
ing by the Soviet Union now that some progress 
has been made toward agreement. We hope that 
his Government is not trying to evade acceptance 
of the offer the United States made. This offer 
was made to facilitate these negotiations, and it 
would be regrettable indeed if the Soviet Union 
took steps which had the opposite effect. 

When the United States made that offer, Mr. 
Chairman, the Soviet Union had not carried out 
any nuclear tests since March — about 5 months. 
In recent weeks they have resumed testing. The 
question may therefore be asked whether the 
United States offer still holds. I am authorized 
to assure the United Nations on behalf of the 
United States Government that, as President 
Eisenhower announced, we will withhold further 
testing for 1 year from the date the negotiations 
begin — unless, of course, the Soviet Union con- 
ducts further tests beyond that date. 

The question of nuclear testing has been the 
subject of many proposals. We are especially 
glad that progress has been possible this year on 
this particular aspect of the complex armaments 
question. We are measurably closer than we were 
a year ago to an actual long-range suspension of 
nuclear tests. The reason for this is that both 
sides recognized the need for control. The scien- 
tists have shown that a technique for detection is 
possible. Thus the vital element has been sup- 
plied without which confidence is impossible and 
without which any agreement in this field must 
end in disillusionment : the element of inspection 
and control. 

It remains to be seen whether this technical 
agreement can be translated into political reality. 
We will go into the Geneva talks determined to 
achieve an agreement. 

It is apparent to everyone in this room that 
United States policy on the question of tests has 
evolved considerably in the last year. Perhaps I 
may be forgiven for saying that it is a good thing 
when government policies do evolve and are not 
frozen for all time. And I should add that one of 
the big factors in our evolution has been the 
opinions expressed here in the United Nations. 
We are a country which respects the United Na- 
tions and which heeds its expressions of opinion— 
and which takes account of minorities views ex- 
pressed here. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Guarding Against Surprise Attack 

The method of technical talks among experts 
gives promise of progress in a second field — 
guarding against surprise attack. Since 1955, 
when President Eisenhower made his open-skies 
proposal, the United States has sought persistently 
to curb the danger of surprise attack by air and 
ground inspection. 

Since last spring the United States has been 
discussing this matter with the Soviet Govern- 
ment. We now have good reason to expect that 
a meeting of experts, to explore the practical 
aspects of safeguarding against surprise attack, 
will begin in Geneva on November 10. 6 "We will 
do our best to see that these technical discussions 
are as successful as those on nuclear testing. "We 
hope that these talks, too, will be followed by 
negotiations which will in turn lead to measures 
to minimize the dangers of surprise attack. And 
if that is done, a great step will have been taken 
toward the mutual confidence we all seek and away 
from the fear of global war. 

Mr. Chairman, the momentum created by these 
developments must not be lost. The Secretary- 
General, in his memorandum of September 30 on 
disarmament, has stated very well the hopeful 
prospects before us. After referring to the con- 
ference of experts on detecting nuclear explosions, 
he says : 

... a technical approach to such subjects as leave 
room for study of a non-political nature, similar to that 
employed in the Geneva talks, would seem to provide 
possibilities for further progress in disarmament. I 
believe that all such possibilities should be fully explored. 
Steps in this direction, as the work of the Scientific 
Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation and the 
Second International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of 
Atomic Energy has demonstrated, might also lead to a 
steady and progressive exchange of information concern- 
ing military technologies and armaments. The lack of 
confidence between States in this respect hitherto has been 
one of the major causes of fear, suspicion and interna- 
tional tension. The General Assembly might wish to 
consider the value of endorsing the principle of openness 
of information in the armaments and allied fields as one 
which could contribute significantly to reduce interna- 
tional tension and promote progress toward disarm- 
ament. 

We agree with those observations. The United 
States believes in the principle of openness. We 

" For background, see ibid., Oct. 27, 1958, p. 648 : for an 
announcement of the U.S. delegation, see ibid., Nov. 3, 
1958, p. 688. 



agree with Mr. Hammarskjold that it has partic- 
ular significance in the disarmament field. We 
are encouraged by its success in the fields which 
he has mentioned. We would like to apply it in 
the future in new technical discussions on several 
different fronts in the disarmament field. 

A New Approach to Disarmament 

Now, encouraging and important as these de- 
velopments which I have described are, it is only 
prudent to recognize that, as isolated steps, they 
do not deal witli the heart of the problem of dis- 
armament. But these developments illustrate the 
fruitfulness of the new approach we have taken — 
an approach which means that we should stop 
arguing about generalities and get down to prac- 
tical and specific discussions on how various dis- 
armament measures, which we all agree desirable, 
can actually be applied and enforced. We need 
no longer argue theory. Let us jointly explore the 
facts. It has been shown that such discussions — 
technical discussions — can be undertaken without 
prejudice to the basic position of the various 
governments concerned. We should, therefore, 
make the most of these discussions. 

I should like now to set down some of the signif- 
icant questions to which this new approach might 
ultimately be applied. 

1. Conventional Arms and Armed Forces. This 
remains a vitally important part of disarmament. 
We have through the years confronted such ques- 
tions as conventional armaments and the size of 
standing armies. All of those concerned have 
agreed that any significant disarmament agree- 
ment must meet the issue of controlled limitations 
on armaments and armed forces and the con- 
sequent reductions in military expenditures. 
There is agreement on figures for levels of armed 
forces. There is, of course, dispute about the ex- 
tent to which these reductions could be put into 
effect without regard to the settlement of certain 
political issues which cause states to regard armed 
forces as necessary for their security. But there 
is no agreement on the measures which would be 
required to insure the faithful carrying out of any 
reductions on which agreement might be obtained. 
Surely an exploration of the technical aspects of 
controlling conventional armaments and armed 
forces would be worth while. If nothing else, it 
would bring us closer to agreement on what it 



November 10, 1958 



749 



would be feasible to do to lessen the threat of 
large armies and great stocks of modern weapons. 
This alone would constitute substantial progress 
in a field now devoid of it. 

2. Nuclear Weapons. Both sides have likewise 
agreed that the objective of a disarmament agree- 
ment would be to deal realistically with the nu- 
clear threat. The United States, United King- 
dom, Canada, and France have proposed that early 
steps be taken to insure the cessation of manu- 
facture of fissionable materials for weapons pur- 
poses and the beginning of transfer to peaceful 
uses of the fissionable materials presently tied up 
in stocks of nuclear weapons. The U.S.S.R. has 
spoken of the "cessation of manufacture" of these 
weapons but has tied this action to the complete 
prohibition and liquidation of weapons stockpiles. 
This is a measure which, however desirable, we 
believe is uncontrollable. Here is another prob- 
lem where, by technical discussions, again with- 
out prejudice to the basic position of either side, 
we might be able to find out just what it would 
be humanly possible to do and what kind of con- 
trol system could be devised to insure the carry- 
ing out of these measures. 

3. Outer Space. A year ago in this committee 
the United States asked that a beginning be made 
on control of the disarmament aspect of outer 
space. 7 We proposed that the Soviet Union join 
us in studying the terms of an inspection system 
which would assure that outer space would not be 
used for military purposes. Outer-space missiles 
armed with nuclear warheads are now a reality. 
With particular emphasis, therefore, the United 
States reaffirms this proposal and its willingness 
to take part in technical discussions in this field. 

Studies of the measures I have mentioned would 
only be a first, though indispensable, step. What 
counts is actually putting them into effect. In all 
these regards the United States is willing to move 
ahead on any measures which offer reasonable 
prospects for agreement. But if such negotiations 
are to hold promise we believe they should be 
based on a solid technical groundwork which sets 
forth the facts on what is feasible and controllable. 

Mr. Chairman, these brief remarks have summed 
up what the United States regards as the most 
hopeful and worthwhile events of the past year 
in the disarmament field. We have sketched out 
what we think are the most promising possibili- 



7 Ibid., Oct. 28, 1957, p. 667. 
750 



ties for immediate progress. We have by no 
means mentioned all the major events of the year, 
some of which have been bitterly disappointing. 
In a field so demanding and so difficult as this 
we must try not to "look back in anger." We 
must look forward to those points of light which 
show us the way out of the forest. 

The United States believes that the most light 
at this stage can be shed by the scientific and tech- 
nical approach, because in that way we can lay a 
sound basis for actual disarmament measures, in 
that way we can talk the same language, and in 
that way we can avoid the distressing recrimina- 
tions of past years. We believe that the construc- 
tive thing for the General Assembly to do at this 
point is to encourage the forthcoming talks. 

This is a time for self-restraint. It is a time 
when the General Assembly can act most construc- 
tively not by raising for further discussions var- 
ious issues well known to us from past debates 
but by lending its support to the delicate and 
promising work which is already in hand or 
about to begin in Geneva. 

Many good possibilities lie. beyond that work. 
The important thing is that the next step should 
succeed. 

Valuable Principles for Negotiations 

From our 12 years' experience in disarmament 
negotiations a number of valuable principles have 
emerged. 

1. Any measures undertaken must be capable of 
verification and control. We have learned through 
the past lessons of history that any agreement 
based on good faith and promises alone leads to 
an increase rather than a lessening of tensions. 
Confidence created by confirmation is the only sure 
foundation for progress toward effective arms 
limitation and control. 

2. Drastic reduction of our armaments and 
armed forces can be realistically expected when 
the existing political situation has improved. We 
continue to believe that the partial approach 
adopted by the Assembly in 1955 is the proper 
one. We believe that high armaments levels are 
the product of international tensions and also that 
they tend to increase these tensions. Accordingly 
we believe that limited conventional arms reduc- 
tions along with other measures can be taken 
now — without awaiting political settlements. 
Such reductions would lead to a lessening of ten- 

Department of State Bulletin 



sions. This would facilitate political agreements 
and would, in turn, allow states to accept with 
confidence more drastic cuts. 

3. The relationship between conventional and 
nuclear armaments dictates the need for arms 
limitations in both fields to proceed concurrently. 
The United States believes that disarmament must 
be balanced to assure each state that its security 
is not impaired. We coidd not accept nor do we 
expect others to accept unbalanced measures of 
disarmament which call for abandonment of a 
nuclear deterrent while allowing conventional 
arms and manpower in unlimited quantities. If 
they are to be controlled, the measures for so 
doing should proceed in a manner which does not 
offer one side a military advantage over the other. 

4. A complete and permanent cessation of nu- 
clear weapons testing can come with progress to- 
ward lessening the nuclear threat; reducing the 
high level of nonnuclear arms; and minimizing 
the danger of surprise attack. In other words, if 
the United States is to give up its ability to im- 
prove its defensive weapons, then there must be 
corresponding limitations on the ability of other 
states to increase their weapons stocks and to 
maintain large armed forces. 

President Eisenhower in his statement of Au- 
gust 22, to which I have already referred, an- 
nouncing the United States test suspension, said : 

As the United States has frequently made clear, the 
suspension of testing of atomic and hydrogen weapons 
is not, in itself, a measure of disarmament or a limitation 
of armament. An agreement in this respect is significant 
if it leads to other and more substantial agreements re- 
lating to limitation and reduction of fissionable material 
for weapons and to other essential phases of disarmament. 
It is in this hope that the United States makes this pro- 
posal. 

We sincerely hope that an agreement on the 
cessation of nuclear weapons tests will be reached 
at the coming negotiations. It is our hope that 
this will eventually lead to a permanent test sus- 
pension. Let me add that the United States has 
stated its willingness to negotiate a cessation of 
nuclear weapons tests in the interests of encour- 
aging the Soviet Union to make a comparable 
move forward. 

The present situation, wherein states have a 
capability for mutual destruction, is fraught witli 
danger for all the world. We must not allow this 
dangerous state of affairs to go on. Unilateral or 



unbalanced disarmament, or disarmament based 
on good faith alone, would but add to the danger 
of war. For those who cherish peace and justice 
and do not harbor aggressive purposes, other ways 
must be found. We offer a practical, positive be- 
ginning. Let us not miss this opportunity. Let us 
turn the corner toward a relaxation of the present 
tension and danger. The survival of civilization 
is at stake. 

There exists today some real momentum toward 
progress in the disarmament effort, with all that 
this implies for humanity. We ask the Assembly 
to help us maintain that momentum. Thus we 
can hope to move toward the day when the na- 
tions can lay down their burden of armaments and 
their still heavier burden of fear. 

SECOND STATEMENT BY MR. LODGE, OCTO- 
BER 10 

U.S. delegation press release 3014 

I merely want to take a moment, under the right 
of reply. 

Mr. Zorin s has given you words about the 
United States position. I would like to give you 
some facts. 

The United States position on suspension of nu- 
clear weapons tests is not conditional on the exist- 
ence of an entire disarmament plan. W T e will 
suspend for 1 year without controls, unless the 
Soviet Union continues testing during that period. 
And we are ready to extend our suspension indefi- 
nitely as long as each year we know that the in- 
spection system is working and we are making 
reasonable progress on other aspects of disarma- 
ment. 

Then, Mr. Chairman, we are in favor of compre- 
hensive disarmament. It is the fact that the 
Soviet Union has always prevented agreement on 
this which has impelled us to go ahead on test 
suspension as something which may be possible 
to attain. But we shall continue to work for com- 
prehensive disarmament. 

In one breath Mr. Zorin criticizes us for not be- 
ing in favor of a comprehensive plan, and in the 
next breath he criticizes us for not being in favor 
of going ahead on an individual basis. No matter 
what we do we are wrong, according to Mr. Zorin. 



November 10, 1958 



8 Valerian A. Zorin, Soviet representative to the Gen- 
eral Assembly. 



751 



Our policy has evolved, as anyone who could 
remember last year knows. He would have you 
believe that it has not evolved. 

Mr. Chairman, future historians may be able to 
explain why the Soviet Union in this year of 1958 
thought it worth while to make these flagrant and 
obvious distortions of United States policy, even 
including the imputing to us of unworthy motives, 
in this committee which contains many of the most 
sophisticated and the most experienced men in the 
world in the field of diplomacy and of world poli- 
tics. Surely he cannot hope to delude the mem- 
bers of this committee. Maybe his hope is that 
bits and pieces of these distortions will find their 
way into the press of the world and will influence 
the public. But here too he underestimates the 
public and its knowledge of what the truth 
really is. 

STATEMENT BY MR. LODGE, OCTOBER 13 

U.S. delegation press release 3017 

I have asked to speak again in order to explain 
the draft resolution sponsored by Argentina, 
Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, 
Ecuador, Iran, Italy, Laos, Netherlands, New 
Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Thailand, United 
Kingdom, and United States, which has been cir- 
culated as document A/C.1/L.205. This resolu- 
tion outlines policies and procedures which would 
make a concrete contribution to disarmament. It 
deals with test suspension, surprise attack, further 
initiatives, and the relationship of the United 
Nations to them. 

Let me comment briefly on these matters in the 
order that they appear in the operative para- 
graphs. 

1. Test Suspension. There is a widespread de- 
sire among all members of the United Nations — 
a desire fully shared by the United States — for 
an early agreement on the suspension of nuclear 
weapons tests under effective international control. 
Paragraph 1 of the resolution stresses the impor- 
tance which the General Assembly attaches to the 
success of the October 31 conference between the 
U.S.S.R., the United States, and the United King- 
dom. It urges the parties to "make every effort 
to reach early agreement." This is strong lan- 
guage. Such action by the General Assembly 
should encourage the participants to do everything 
in their power to make the conference a success. 



Paragraph 2 urges the parties involved not to 
undertake further testing of nuclear weapons 
while the negotiations are going on. The United 
States and the United Kingdom have already vol- 
unteered to stop nuclear weapons tests for 1 year 
beginning October 31, provided the Soviet Union 
does not conduct tests during that period. We 
hope the Soviet Union will stop its tests. The 
cosponsors considered that a halt on tests during 
the negotiations will facilitate a lasting agree- 
ment. As I said Friday [October 10], we are 
ready to extend our suspension indefinitely as 
long as each year we know that an agreed inspec- 
tion system is working and that we are making 
reasonable progress on other aspects of disarma- 
ment. 

2. Surprise Attack. Another important issue 
which has concerned us all has been the increas- 
ing danger of surprise attack in an era when the 
warning time has been reduced to minutes. Presi- 
dent Eisenhower's open-skies proposal of 1955 
and the recent United States efforts in the Secu- 
rity Council to achieve agreement on an Arctic 
inspection zone 9 exemplify this concern. It has 
also been reflected in the disarmament proposals 
of the Soviet Union. 

We hope there will be a serious effort to reach 
understanding in the November 10 Geneva meet- 
ing on the technical aspects of measures against 
the possibility of surprise attack. If these talks 
are successfully concluded and an agreement is 
subsequently reached, its practical benefits would 
be of great value. Among other things it would 
increase the confidence among states which is in- 
dispensable for rapid progress on disarmament. 
Reflecting these considerations, paragraph 3 calls 
attention to the urgency of reaching the widest 
possible measure of agreement in the prospective 
technical talks on measures against surprise 
attack. 

3. Objectives. Paragraph 4 reflects the deter- 
mination of the sponsors that the technical ap- 
proach, as well as other approaches, should be 
pursued vigorously toward achieving the ultimate 
goal of a comprehensive disarmament agreement. 
It has become apparent that technical studies can 
be an effective means to this end. The General 
Assembly should build on the recent success of 
the Geneva technical talks on nuclear testing. 

The resolution therefore encourages an exten- 



9 Bulletin of May 19, 1958, p. 816. 



752 



Department of State Bulletin 



sion of this approach to other aspects of the dis- 
armament problem with a view toward finally 
achieving the longstanding goal of the United 
Nations — a balanced and effectively controlled 
worldwide system of disarmament. 

4. Role of the United Natiotis. The United 
Nations has a vital responsibility in the field of 
disarmament. The last section of the resolution 
slates explicitly how the conferences and the 
United Nations can assist each other. 

Paragraph 5 invites the forthcoming confer- 
ences to avail themselves of the assistance and 
services of the Secretary-General. We are pleased 
that both sides in these conferences have, in fact, 
already been working with the Secretary-General 
to this end. 

Paragraph 5 also calls for the United Nations 
to be kept informed about the forthcoming con- 
ferences. This is obviously important. 

Paragraph 6 reflects the significant role that 
the Secretary-General can play. He is invited, 
in consultation with the governments concerned, 
not only to give such advice as may seem appro- 
priate to facilitate the current developments but 
also with respect to any further initiatives on 
disarmament. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, paragraph 7 assures 
that the deliberations of the General Assembly 
and the proposals made here should be taken into 
account by the states and experts involved in the 
forthcoming conferences. 

The United States hopes that the General As- 
sembly will unanimously endorse the principles 
outlined in this resolution. They are positive, 
forward-looking measures consistent with the ob- 
ligations of this body and with the overwhelming 
aspirations of mankind. 



STATEMENT BY MR. LODGE, OCTOBER 15 

U.S. delegation press release 3023 

Let me advert briefly to the statement by the 
representative of the Soviet Union yesterday that 
the Soviet Union had accepted the system of con- 
trol proposed by the conference of experts on 
nuclear tests while the United States and the 
United Kingdom had not. 

I am glad to state here and now in the clearest 
possible language that the United States has ac- 
cepted and does accept the report of the experts, 



including the control system therein contained. 
Let that be understood. 

Let me also remind the committee that Presi- 
dent Eisenhower welcomed what he called the 
"successful conclusion" of the talks on the very 
day after they ended. He proposed that the So- 
viet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States meet to reach agreement on the suspension 
of tests "on the basis" of that report, and the 
Soviet Union accepted this. 

The United States has also stated that the find- 
ings of the experts at Geneva should form the 
basis for the actual establishment of an interna- 
tional control system for any agreed suspension 
of nuclear weapons testing. The experts made 
recommendations, and everyone understood that 
the next step was for governmental representa- 
tives to act on these recommendations. We are 
convinced that putting into effect the recommenda- 
tions of the experts will make the conference a 
success. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, why the Soviet Union tries 
to obscure these facts or appears to engage in a 
quibble about them is a mystery to me. I there- 
fore repeat categorically, so that there is no con- 
fusion, that the United States accepts the report 
of the experts, including the control system con- 
tained therein. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, having said this, I think we 
should remove the implication which Mr. Zorin 
sought to read into what either his or our "ac- 
ceptance" means. 

The report contains a set of scientific facts 
arrived at by some of the world's best experts after 
mature deliberation. They are scientific facts, 
and we accept them. The controls recommended 
are those which would be needed to police a dis- 
continuance of tests. They can, if the nations 
will it, be translated into practical arrangements 
at the forthcoming political conference. 

The Geneva report says that most tests can be 
detected by inspection machinery including 170 
to 180 inspection posts, by aerial observations, and 
by on-the-spot investigations. To this the Soviet 
Union has agreed. 

But the Soviet Union has not yet agreed on the 
nature of the supervisory body, the composition 
of the inspection teams, the location of control 
posts, the immunities and privileges of inspecting 
personnel, and the like. These were not discussed 
in Geneva. As mutually agreed, they did not fall 



November 70, 1958 



753 



within the provisions of the technical conference. 
They had to be left for political negotiations. 
The "acceptance" of a control system by the So- 
viet Union at this stage means no more than So- 
viet recognition that the technical conclusions are 
correct. The task remains to put living flesh onto 
these bones. 

In short, the Soviet Union has not yet agreed to 
the actual establishment of effective controls. 

The Soviet Union can destroy all the progress 
made this summer by refusing at the forthcoming 
talks to give the inspection machinery proper 
facilities to function in the Soviet Union. We 
hope they will not, but the world should be aware 
that they will have ample opportunity to do so. 

So much, Mr. Chairman, for the report of the 
experts. 

Then Mr. Zorin alleged that our position on the 
suspension of nuclear weapons tests has not 
evolved since the 1957 London disarmament meet- 
ing. Such a statement on his part in the face 
of our offer to suspend tests for 1 year reflects a 
complete unwillingness to recognize a gesture of 
compromise. 

Then, too, the representative of the Soviet 
Union also said that the question of a suspension 
of nuclear weajjons tests was simply one of halt- 
ing the tests. According to him, you just stop, 
pure and simple. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, that is not the question. 
The question is whether we achieve a discontinu- 
ance of tests under controls so that the discon- 
tinuance is real and whether this agreement will 
lead to further progress on the disarmament prob- 
lem. When the Soviet representative takes the 
line that he has taken, he invariably opens himself 
up to this kind of question : Is the Soviet Union 
against real controls? One is bound to ask one- 
self that question. Does the Soviet Union wish 
to evade test suspension once it has agreed to it? 
Is the Soviet Union reluctant to reach agreement 
on armsdimitation problems? Does the Soviet 
Union object to substantial progress being made in 
disarmament ? These, I submit very candidly, are 
the types of questions to which Mr. Zorin's re- 
marks naturally give rise. 

I note that the Soviet resolution 10 does not men- 
tion controls at all. It is, as well, devoid of any 
reference to real disarmament. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, there is a road to a per- 



10 U.N. doc. A/C. 1/L. 203. 
754 



manent cessation of testing. It is through agree- 
ment, not through pronouncements. If the Soviet 
Union wants to continue its propaganda slogan 
"stop the tests" — period, full stop — it can do so. 
If it shares the desires of others to achieve a real 
and effective cessation, it can go to Geneva and ne- 
gotiate with candor and in good faith. 

We offer a workable, quick plan to halt nuclear 
tests. Mr. Zorin appears to spurn it. I hope I 
misunderstand him, but I warn him now that, if he 
persists in vetoing inspection schemes and in turn- 
ing down offers to suspend tests, the world will be 
able to draw only the most unfortunate conclusions 
about the Soviet Union's true intentions. 

The United States will go to the Geneva ne- 
gotiations on nuclear testing with the determina- 
tion to reach an equitable and lasting agreement. 
We want to make this conference, as well as the 
technical talks on surprise attack, a success. We 
hope that in spite of their disquieting attitude 
here in this committee the Soviet Union will do 
the same. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to remind 
the committee once again that in accordance with 
our frequently restated announcements the United 
States and the United Kingdom will discontinue 
tests on October 31, the end of this month, pro- 
vided the Soviet Union does the same. 

The Soviet Union has been totally and monu- 
mentally silent on this point. 

Will the Soviet Union stop ? 

We would like to have a clear answer to that. 

STATEMENT BY MR. BARCO, OCTOBER 17 

U.S. delegation press release 3028 

The representative of the Soviet Union made a 
number of assertions which are so far from the 
truth that I feel compelled to reply to him. 

The Soviet representative stated that what the 
United States has in mind is a temporary sus- 
pension only and only for 1 year. He asks the 
question, "Why do not the sponsors of the 17- 
power resolution set cessation as a goal?" And 
he answers the question by saying, "Because they 
do not think in these terms; they do not think of 
cessation as a goal, but only in terms of a suspen- 
sion for 1 year, and not for a definitive solution." 
Then he makes the totally outrageous suggestion 
that the United States wants to suspend only for 
1 year to give time to prepare for another series 
of tests. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Mr. Chairman, these assertions are just totally 
wrong. They are totally upside down. I do not 
know what one can say here to convince Mr. 
Zorin. 

The representative of the United States has 
made very clear what the goal is, as far as we 
are concerned. He has made very clear that we 
are working for an agreement that can lead to the 
cessation of tests. But none of this seems to af- 
fect the attitude of the Soviet representative. 

We have said that we will discontinue for 1 
year our tests beginning October 31 if the 
U.S.S.R. also does so. Mr. Lodge asked Mr. 
Zorin the question, "Is the U.S.S.R. going to do 
the same?'' And we have not had an answer to 
that question. I would like to have an answer to 
that question. 

[In a further intervention Mr. Barco said :] 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to remind the rep- 
resentative of the Soviet Union that the repre- 
sentative of the United States has also asked him 
the question whether he disagrees that there 
should be further progress on disarmament. I 
think this is a matter which requires some clarifi- 
cation from him. 

I would like to say one more thing about the 
use of these words of "cessation" and "suspen- 
sion"' and "discontinuance"' and so forth. We are 
not dealing here with slogans, however much the 
representative of the Soviet Union would like us 
to. We are dealing with serious problems of how 
to achieve disarmament and all the things that 
go with it. And these slogans which he likes to 
foist upon us are not going to achieve that. 



Current U.N. Documents: 
A Selected Bibliography 1 

Security Council 

Fourth Report of the United Nations Observation Group 
in Lebanon. Submitted through the Secretary-Gen- 
eral in pursuance of the resolution of the Security 
Council of 11 June 1958 (S/4023). S/4100. Septem- 
ber 29, 1958. 21 pp.. map. mimeo. 



1 1'rinted materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 296(1 Broadway, New York 27, N. Y. 
Other materials (mimeographed or processed documents) 
may be consulted at certain designated libraries in the 
United States. 



General Assembly 

Supplementary Estimates for the Financial Year 1958. 
Report of the Secretary-General. A/3922. September 
22, 1958. 36 pp. mimeo. 

Association of Non-Self-Governing Territories With the 
European Economic Community. Report of the Sec- 
retary-General. A/3916/Rev. 1. September 24, 195a 
28 pp. mimeo. 

UNREF Executive Committee. Report on the First Ses- 
sion of the Working Party on Future International 
Assistance to Refugees, 21-27 August 1958. 
A/AC.79/130. September 25, 1958. 12 pp. mimeo. 

Question of Disarmament. Memorandum by the Secre- 
tary-General. A/3936. September 30, 1958. 4 pp. 
mimeo. 

Report of the Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budgetary 
Funds. A/3944. October 9, 1958. 16 pp. mimeo. 

United Nations Emergency Force : Summary Study of 
the Experience Derived From the Establishment and 
Operation of the Force. Report of the Secretary- 
General. A/3943. October 9, 1958. 81 pp. mimeo. 

Economic Development of Under-Developed Countries: 
Establishment of the Special Fund. Report of the 
Secretary-General. A/3947. October 13, 1958. 20 pp. 
mimeo. 



U.S. Views on the U.N. Budget for 1959 

Statement by Senator Bourke B. Ilickenlooper 
I '>'. Representative to the General Assembly 1 

Once again this year we are indebted to the 
Secretary-General and to the chairman of the 
Advisory Committee for their general statements 
on the budget of the organization for 1959. These 
statements, I am certain, have been helpful to all 
members of this committee in our approach to the 
budgetary problems which face us for the coming 
year. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to comment briefly 
on the present level of the budget and the increase 
forecast by the Secretary-General for the 1959 
budget. We all consider that the budget level is 
high, but frankly, Mr. Chairman, we do not be- 
lieve that it is too high when we view the responsi- 
bilities which governments have placed upon the 
organization in recent years. By the same token, 
while we are concerned at the size of the increase 
for 1959 forecast by the Secretary-General, we 
cannot say that the increase is excessive in view 
of the activities which we expect the organization 
to carry on in the coming year. Having said 
this, Mr. Chairman, I must caution that the pres- 
ent budget level and the rate of increase has be- 
come such that the Secretary-General, the 
Advisory Committee, and the Fifth Committee 



1 Made in Committee V (Administrative and Budgetary) 
on Oct. 14 (U.S. delegation press release 3020). 



November 10, 1958 



755 



must exercise the greatest care to assure that no 
unwise or unnecessary expenditures are incurred. 

Recommendations of Secretary-General 
and Advisory Committee 

Before discussing any of the specific problems 
involved, I would like to indicate the general ap- 
proach of the United States delegation to a con- 
sideration of the estimates. First of all, we have 
full confidence in the Secretary-General and the 
Controller, and we consider that any budget esti- 
mates which they present to us have been most 
carefully prepared with a view to the greatest 
possible economy consistent with the efficient op- 
eration of the organization. However, the Gen- 
eral Assembly has created the mechanism of the 
Advisory Committee — a committee of administra- 
tive and financial experts — to examine in detail 
the estimates prepared by the Secretary-General 
and to bring a competent and objective judgment 
to bear upon those estimates. As we all know, 
that committee spends many months in examining 
the estimates and it provides us with its recom- 
mendations with respect to them. It is obvious 
that the Fifth Committee cannot repeat the de- 
tailed examination carried out by the Advisory 
Committee, and it would seem equally obvious 
that we should not spend our time in a detailed 
discussion of all budget sections when we have on 
our agenda so many matters of principle requir- 
ing decisions. However, we do believe we should 
make a careful examination of the items as to 
which there is a difference between the request of 
the Secretary-General and the recommendation 
of the Advisory Committee. 2 

It follows, Mr. Chairman, that it is the view of 
the United States delegation that this committee 
should give most serious consideration to the 
recommendations of the Advisory Committee and 
should support those recommendations except in 
those instances of disagreement where the Secre- 
tary-General can make a clear and compelling case 
of his original estimates. It is our position that a 
recommendation of the Advisory Committee for a 
modification of the original estimates does not 
constitute an attack upon the judgment or admin- 
istrative approach of the Secretary-General but 

2 For the budget estimates of the Secretary-General for 
1959, see U.N. doc. A/3825 ; for the report of the Advisory 
Committee and recommendations on revised estimates, see 
U.N. docs. A/3860, 3923, 3924, and 3933. 

756 



rather represents an objective judgment and ap- 
praisal of the situation which results in a con- 
clusion different from that of the Secretary- 
General. We believe that the Secretary-General 
should, and no doubt does, give serious considera- 
tion to the recommendations of the Advisory 
Committee which differ from his own and that 
he should accept them unless he believes he can 
clearly and persuasively demonstrate that the 
recommendations of the Advisory Committee are 
not in the best interests of the organization. 

The administrator proposing a budget and the 
policy-determining body may well view the same 
problem from different angles and may therefore 
reach different conclusions. 

Applying these principles to the budget esti- 
mates and to the report of the Advisory Com- 
mittee which are before us, we are prepared, in 
general, to support the recommendations of the 
Advisory Committee. I have used the phrase "in 
general," Mr. Chairman, because we retain an 
open mind and are prepared to hear any case 
which the Secretary-General may wish to put be- 
fore us. 

We listened carefully to the statement made by 
the Secretary-General on October 9 3 in which he 
asked for a restoration of $170,000 of the amount 
which the Advisory Committee has recommended 
be cut from his budget request. I must say, Mr. 
Chairman, that only with respect to the restora- 
tion of an amount of $27,800 in Section 11 [Gen- 
eral Expenses] do we presently agree, but we still 
reserve our final position on this section. I 
might say at this point that, if it is decided that 
a restoration is warranted in section 11, we ex- 
pect that every possible effort will be made to 
avoid supplementary estimates with respect to this 
section next year. We do not believe that a rise 
in prices or increased cost for utilities should 
automatically become a basis for supplementary 
estimates, and we would expect that every effort 
would be made to find economies which would 
compensate for these factors. 

Salaries and Wages 

With respect to Section 6 [Salaries and Wages], 
my delegation does not feel that a case has been 
made for rejecting the recommendations of the 
Advisory Committee. While we appreciate the 



1 For text, see U.N. doc. A/C.5/748. 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



willingness of the Secretary-General not to con- 
test the major portion of the recommended cut 
and not to insist upon the addition of professional 
posts, we are not prepared to agree to the estab- 
lishment of 21 General Service posts. We realize, 
of course, that a strong argument can be made for 
the necessity of many of these posts as essential 
requirements for existing regional commissions; 
nevertheless we believe that we must look at the 
picture of regional commissions and economic ac- 
tivities as a whole. 

In view of the fact that a new regional economic 
commission is being established for Africa, with 
a consequent substantial increase in expenditures, 
my delegation believes we should go more slowly 
with respect to the other commissions for the 
time being. In other words, we are quite pre- 
pared to accept a growth of expenditure with re- 
spect to the regional economic commissions as a 
whole, but we believe that the pace of this growth 
must be maintained within the financial capa- 
bilities of the organization. 

Travel 

With respect to Section 8 [Travel], we again 
are not persuaded that the Advisory Committee's 
recommendation should be rejected. I might recall 
at this point, Mr. Chairman, that last year we 
supported the Secretary-General's request for res- 
toration of a cut proposed in the estimates for 
travel on official business. This year, however, 
we believe that the situation is somewhat different 
and we believe that the cut proposed by the Ad- 
visory Committee will not make impossible any 
travel which is really necessary. In this connec- 
tion we have noted the recent statement of the 
Controller that an attempt is being made to reach 
agreement with the specialized agencies on a modi- 
fication of certain of the regulations presently in 
force with respect to travel. We hope that any 
agreement which is reached will make it possiblo 
to achieve additional economies. 

As regards Section 10 [Office of the High Com- 
missioner for Refugees], the U.S. delegation is, of 
course, prepared to withhold any judgment until 
we have heard the views of the High Commissioner 
himself. 

The last item of reduction which is contested by 
the Secretary-General relates to the proposed ap- 
propriation of $2,000 for the payment of 



honoraria to the president and members of the 
Administrative Tribunal. We regret that this 
proposal has been made by the Secretary-General 
in view of the decision arrived at by this com- 
mittee 2 years ago on the matter of paying hono- 
raria. We are not aware of any change in circum- 
stance during the past 2 years. Accordingly, it is 
our present feeling that we should not change our 
earlier decision in this matter. 

I would like to refer, Mr. Chairman, to several 
other matters which were mentioned by the Secre- 
tary-General and by the chairman of the Advisory 
Committee in their statements to us. First of all, 
my delegation believes that an increase in the level 
of the Working Capital Fund is fully justified. 
We would be prepared to support an increase to 
the level of $30 million. However, if the majority 
of this committee believes that such an increase 
would impose too great a burden, we would be 
prepared to concur in the Advisory Committee's 
recommendation to increase the level to $25 mil- 
lion spread over 2 or 3 years. 

One of the most important and helpful portions 
of this year's Advisory Committee report is the 
section covering the special study made of the 
Offices of the Controller and of Personnel. We 
consider that such special studies of particular 
areas of the Secretariat are highly useful, and 
we look forward to similar efforts in the future. 
The study made this year impels us to conclude 
that, the level of performance of the two offices 
studied is high, and accordingly we wish to com- 
pliment the responsible Secretariat officials in 
those offices. 

However, Mr. Chairman, we are surprised at an 
omission from the Advisory Committee's report 
on its special study of the Controller's office. Last 
year the United States delegation placed great 
emphasis on the establishment in that office of a 
small management staff which would have as one 
of it9 principal functions the making of periodic 
surveys of overseas establishments. We under- 
stood that the Controller intended to create such 
a unit, and yet we find no specific mention of it in 
the Advisory Committee's report. Accordingly, 
we hope to hear the comment of the Controller 
and of the chairman of the Advisory Committee 
on this matter. At this time I will limit myself 
to saying that we consider the establishment of 
this management staff so important that we would 



November 10, J 958 



757 



be prepared to see the addition, if necessary, of 
several new posts in the Controller's office for this 
purpose. 

Control of Administrative and Financial Services 

It is with some hesitation, Mr. Chairman, that 
I now mention a point of some delicacy. This is 
the matter, mentioned in paragraphs 256-258 and 
paragraph 295 of the Advisory Committee's re- 
port, on the question of the overall direction of 
the administrative and financial services of the 
organization. We listened very carefully to the 
Secretary-General's statement on this point, and 
we realize that it was with all sincerity that he 
assured us that the present arrangements are fully 
satisfactory. He stated that his personal exper- 
ience did not lead him to share the views of the 
Advisory Committee. Mr. Chairman, our ex- 
perience in observing the functioning of the or- 
ganization from the outside — as opposed to the 
Secretary-General's observation of the function- 
ing from within — leads us respectfully to differ 
with his conclusion. 

The Secretary-General states that he does not 
see the slightest justification for proposing a new 
post in the organization, a position with special 
senior status and relationship to the Secretary- 
General, which would combine overall control of 
the administrative and financial services. 

We are all well aware of the Secretary-General's 
outstanding capabilities for harmonizing conflict- 
ing views in the political sphere. We are also 
well aware of his superior ability in dealing with 
the numerous complex problems of operating as 
widespread and varied an organization as the 
Secretariat. However, we believe that the com- 
bination of these two roles creates a burden greater 
than any one man — even one with the ability and 
devotion of the Secretary-General — should be 
called upon to carry. We feel that we should not 
impose such a burden on him and that likewise he 
should not be required to impose it on himself. 
We, therefore, continue to believe that the center- 
ing of staff work on the administrative and finan- 
cial services of the organization in a special senior 
post would be in the best interest of the organi- 
zation. 

We, of course, realize, Mr. Chairman, that this 
is a matter which is in the hands of the Secretary- 
General to decide. Nevertheless, it is our duty 



as a member of the organization to point to this 
problem as one which should be solved. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we would like to assure 
the Secretary- General that, in considering his 
budget estimates for 1959, we are fully aware of 
the tremendous responsibilities which events and 
decisions of various organs have placed upon him 
and the Secretariat as a whole. We are also fully 
aware of the very high level of performance which 
has been obtained in dealing with these responsi- 
bilities. We realize that the budget estimates 
represent the judgment of the Secretary-General 
as to the financial support which he believes will 
be required in carrying out his responsibilities. I 
am sure that he will understand that, wherever we 
may disagree with him concerning particular ex- 
penditures, it is only because we believe that we 
too have a responsibility to the organization which 
we must fulfill. 

Human Rights and the Covenants 

Statement by Mrs. Osioald B. Lord 

U.S. Representative to the General Assembly ' 

We have, in the past., stated our position on the 
[human rights] covenants and the reasons for our 
intention not to sign or ratify the covenants. We 
have felt that the covenants are not the means best 
suited to facilitate the promotion and preserva- 
tion of human rights throughout the world. We 
do want to reiterate, however, that the United 
States Government wishes to encourage the pro- 
motion of human rights and individual freedoms 
everywhere, both at home and abroad. We in the 
United States have a profound interest in human 
rights and fundamental freedoms, as outlined in 
our own Bill of Eights. It has been the firm pol- 
icy of our Government to support all efforts made 
to improve the lot of human beings the world 
over. Progress has been slow and often disheart- 
ening, but we are confident of ultimately achiev- 
ing our goal. 

The U.S. Government has firmly supported the 
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights, which the General Assembly proclaimed 
10 years ago. We support the efforts the United 
Nations has taken and will take to bring about the 
fulfillment of these principles in every part of the 
world. I am sure that we share with everyone 



'Made in Committee III (Social, Humanitarian and 
Cultural) on Oct. 10 (U.S. delegation press release 3015). 



758 



Department of State Bulletin 



here genuine devotion bo the cause of human 
rights throughout the world. We differ only as 
to method, feeling that more can be accomplished 
through persuasion and example rather than 
through what we deem to be the coercion inherent 
in the treaty approach. 

This year we are joining with other nations of 
the world to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We are 
planning to organize programs in all our schools 
and churches and other institutions throughout 
America and, in this connection, to establish close 
liaison with nongovernmental organizations. 

I hope, Madam Chairman, that we may have the 
opportunity, either at the special plenary or at 
some other time, to hear from other delegations 
as to their detailed plans for the observance in 
their own countries of this 10th anniversary of 
the Universal Declaration of Human Eights. 

In closing may I say that it is our intention to 
consult with other delegations, to offer sugges- 
tions, and to participate in drafting the language 
of the draft covenants so as to produce the best 
possible formulation. We hope, Madam Chair- 
man, that we can be constructive and helpful. 



TREATY INFORMATION 



Supplementary Income-Tax Protocol 
With U.K. Enters Into Force 

Press release 619 dated October 16 

On October 15, 1958, the supplementary in- 
come-tax protocol of August 19, 1957, between 
the United States and the United Kingdom was 
brought into force by the exchange of instru- 
ments of ratification at London. 

The supplementary protocol amends the con- 
vention of April 16, 1945, for the avoidance of 
double taxation and the prevention of fiscal eva- 
sion with respect to taxes on income, as modified 
by supplementary protocols of June 6, 1946, and 
May 25, 1954. 1 

The new supplementary protocol contains three 
articles. Article I amends article VIII of the 
1945 convention relating to exemption from tax- 



1 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 1540 
and 3165. 



ation, on certain conditions, of royalties and other 
amounts paid as consideration for the use of, or 
for the privilege of using, copyrights, patents, de- 
signs, secret processes and formulas, trade marks, 
and other like property. Article II amends arti- 
cle XIII of the 1945 convention relating to credits 
against the tax paid to one country for tax paid 
to the other country. The combined effect of 
those amendments is to eliminate double taxation 
with respect to royalty payments received from a 
U.K. licensee by a U.S. licensor having a perma- 
nent establishment in the United Kingdom. 

Article III provides for ratification and the ex- 
change of instruments of ratification and speci- 
fies the dates on and after which the provisions 
shall be effective with respect to U.S. and British 
taxes. In the case of U.S. taxes the protocol is 
effective for taxable years beginning on or after 
January 1, 1956. In the case of U.K. taxes the 
protocol is effective (a) as respects income tax 
and surtax for any year of assessment beginning 
on or after April 6, 1956, and (b) as respects 
profits tax for any chargeable accounting period 
beginning on or after April 1, 1956, and for the 
unexpired portion of any chargeable accounting 
period current at that date. 

Current Actions 



MULTILATERAL 

Automotive Traffic 

Convention on road traffic, with annexes. Done at Ge- 
neva September 19, 1949. Entered into force March 26, 
1952. TIAS 2487. 

Notification by United Kingdom of application to {with 
reservations) : Aden, British Guiana, Seychelles, 
Cyprus, Gibraltar, British Honduras, and Uganda, 
August 27, 1958. 

Cultural Property 

Convention for the protection of cultural property in the 
event of armed conflict, and regulations of execution. 
Done at The Hague May 14, 1954. Entered into force 
August 7, 1956.' 
Ratification deposited: Brazil, September 12, 1958. 

Protocol for the protection of cultural property in the 
event of armed co