Full text of "Department of State bulletin"

Given By

Vl s. supt. of documents

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY' RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

Boston Public Library
Superintendent of Documents

JUL 23 1969
DEPCSlTOPvY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXl, No. 1567

July 7, 1969

PRESIDENT NIXON'S NEWS CONFERENCE OF JUNE 19 1

PRESIDENT NIXON AND PRESIDENT LLERAS OF COLOMBIA
REVIEW COJVIMON GOALS OF THE AMERICAS

Exchanges of Remarks 8

For index see inside back cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1567
July 7, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PKICE:

S2 Issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January 11, 1966).

Note: Contents of this publication are not

copjTighted and items contained herein may be

reprinted. Citation of the DEPARTMENT OP

STATE BULLETIN as the source will be

appreciated. The BULLETIN is indexed In

the lieaders' Qulde to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a xceekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
tcith 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 selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the IFliite House and the Depart'
ntent, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on various phases of interrui-
tional affairs and the functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY

President Nixon's News Conference of June 19

Following are excerpts from the transcript of
a news conference lield hy President Nixon in
the East Room of the White House on June 19.

Q. Mr. President, on the Midway trip we
were told by an official of your administration
that he felt the time had come for substantive
negotiations to begin at Paris. Do you agree
with this assessment, and if so, what evidence is
tliere to point it up?

The President: I agree with the conclusion
that the time has come for some substantive
negotiations in Paris. As far as evidence that
such negotiations have begun, there is no sub-
stantial evidence, publicly, to report.

However, I am not pessimistic about the out-
come. As you may recall, when these questions
were first raised, when the talks in Paris were
beginning, I pointed out that it would be a long,
hard road after we got over the procedural
points.

When this administration came in, all that
had been decided was the shape of the table.
Now we are down to substance. The two sides
are far apart. But we believe that the time has
come for a discussion of substance, and we hope
within the next 2 to 3 months to see some prog-
ress in substantive discussions.

Q. Mr. President, former Defense Secretary
Clark Clifford has suggested that 100,000 Amer-
ican troops ought to be out by the end of this
year and we ought to say that all grou/nd troops
will be out by the end of 1970. 1 wonder if you
think that is a realistic timetable?

The President: Well, I noted Mr. Clifford's
comments in the magazine Foreign Affairs, and,
naturally, I respect his judgment as a former
Secretary of Defense.

I would point out, however, that for 5 years
in the administration in which he was Secretary

of Defense in the last part, we had a continued
escalation of the war; we had 500,000 Americans
in Viet-Nam ; we had 35,000 killed ; we had over
200,000 injured.

And in addition to that, we found that in the
year, the full year, in which he was Secretary
of Defense our casualties were the highest of the
whole 5-year period ; and as far as negotiations
were concerned, all that had been accomplished,
as I indicated earlier, was that we had agreed on
the shape of the table.

This is not to say that Mr. Clifford's present
judgment is not to be considered because of the
past record. It does indicate, however, that he
did have a chance in this particular respect and
did not move on it then.

I believe that we have changed that policy.
We have started to withdraw forces. We will
withdraw more. Another decision will be made
in August. I will not indicate the nimiber, be-
cause the number wUl depend upon the extent
of the training of the South Vietnamese, as well
as developments in Paris and the other factors
that I have mentioned previously.

As far as how many wUl be withdrawn by
the end of this year, or the end of next year,
I would hope that we could beat Mr. Clifford's
timetable, just as I think we have done a little
better than he did when he was in charge of our
national defense.

Q. Mr. President, Mr. Clifford goes on to urge
that you order our military commanders to
ceojse the policy of applying maxim/um military
pressure against the enemy and switch instead
to a policy of reducing the level of confibat opera-
tions. Do you intend to issue any such
instructions?

The President: Mr. Scali [John Scali, ABC
News], I have checked the situation with re-
gard to our operations as compared with the
enemy's since this administration took over. I
find that our casualties are in direct ratio to the

JTTLT 7, 1969

level of enemy attacks. We have not escalated
our attacks. We have only responded to what
the enemy has done.

As far as Mr. Clifford's suggestion is con-
cerned, it implies that the United States is at
the present time responsible for the level of
fighting. It takes two in order to reduce the
level of fighting, and I would only siiggest that
if the enemy now will withdraw forces, one-
tenth of its forces, as we have withdrawn one-
tenth of our combat forces, that would tend to
reduce the level of fighting.

As far as the orders to General [Creighton
W.] Abrams are concerned, they are very
simply this: He is to conduct this war with a
minimtun of American casualties. I believe he is
carrying out that order with great effectiveness
in the field.

Q. Mr. President, Juwe you had any response
from the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong, either
in Paris or on the tattle-field, to the withdrawal
of the first 25,000 American troops?

The President: No, we have not.

Strategic Arms Limitation Talks

Q. When and where do you expect to begin
arms talks with the Soviet Union, and do you
favor suspension of the testing of multiple war-
heads in the meantime?

The President: We are just completing our
own strategic review; and as a matter of fact,
the National Security Coimcil meeting dealing
with our position on the SALT talks, as they are
described — the first was held this last Friday,
and the second will be held on Wednesday. Con-
sultation with our allies will then proceed
through the balance of June and through July.

We have set July 31st as a target date for the
beginning of talks, and Secretary Rogers has
so informed the Soviet Ambassador. We have
not had a reply from them.

Assuming that our consultations are com-
pleted and that the Soviets find this date is ac-
ceptable to them, I would say that sometime
between July 31st and the 15th of August there
would be a meeting. As far as the place of the
meeting is concerned, it could be Vienna, it
could be Geneva. We are open on that question.

Q. Mr. President, the Viet Cong and/or
Hanoi recently announced the creation of a
new provisional government for South Viet-

Nam. There have been many interpretive re-
ports of what that may mean for the political
stability or instability of South Viet-Nam and
its portent on the international scene for prog-
ress toward peace. Could you give u^ an as-
sessment of the new government?

The President: The new government is sim-
ply a new name for the same activity that was
there previously, the NLF, or National Libera-
tion Front, as it was called. There is no new
blood ia it. It has no capital. As a matter of
fact, I do not know where ambassadors would
present their diplomatic credentials, because it
has no major city or town which it controls in
South Viet-Nam.

As far as the changed situation is concerned,
however, I would make this suggestion : Presi-
dent Thieu has offered to have internationally
supervised elections to let the people of South
Viet-Nam determine whether they want his
government or some other government.

It would seem that if the provisional govern-
ment, which also claims to represent the people
of South Viet-Nam, really means that, they
would accede to this request and agree to inter-
nationally supervised elections.

As far as the United States is concerned, we
will accept any decision that is made by the peo-
ple of South Viet-Nam, but we think that the
provisional government should join with the
Government of South Viet-Nam and any other
political parties in South Viet-Nam in partici-
pating in supervised elections.

Testing of Multiple Warheads

Q. Mr. President, referring to an earlier
question by Mr. Valeriani [Richard Valeriani,
NBC News'], do you regard further testing of
MIRVs [multiple independently targeted re-
entry vehicles] as an obstacle to reaching an
arms control agreement?

The President: I am sorry, Mr. Semple
[Eobert B. Semple, New York Times], I forgot
the last part of his question. I am glad you
brought it back.

As far as the further testing is concerned, this
suggestion was made to me by Senator Brooke
and by others in the Senate. I know that it is
certainly a very constructive proposal insofar as
they themselves are thinking about it. We are
considering the possibility of a moratorium on
tests as part of any arms control agreement.

DEPAKTMENT OF STATE BUIXETIir

However, as far as any unilateral stopping of
tests on our part, I do not think that would be
in our interest. Only in the event that the Soviet
Union and we could agree that a moratorium on
tests could be mutually beneficial to us, would
we be able to agree to do so.

Views on Cease-Fire in Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. President., several prominent Ameri-
cans have urged you to frcpose a cease-fire in
Viet-Nam as a means of reducing American
casualties. Why does that idea not cormnend it-
self to you?

The President: Well, the idea of a cease-fire,
Mr. Lisagor [Peter Lisagor, Chicago Daily
News], does coromend itself to me. But I do not
want us to cease and have the other side contiaue
to fire, because, basically, as I have pointed out
ia a previous press conference, where we have
a conventional war, cease-fire is very relevant;
then we know that the guns have stopped firing.
In the case of a guerrilla war, unless you have
an international force or some outside force to
guarantee it, a cease-fire is a grave disadvantage
to those forces that are in place.

I should point out, however, that in my
May 14th speech,' I advocated supervised cease-
fires. That is the position of this administration.
It is the position of Mr. Thieu.

We want cease-fires, but we want them super-
vised. We don't want us to cease fire and the
other side to continue to kill our men.

Support of Thieu Government

Q. Mr. President, you expressed the hope
earlier for substantive talks on Viet-Nam, per-
haps in the next 3 months. I wonder, sir, in this
process, and before elections are held in Viet-
Nam, are we wedded, to whatever degree, to the
government of President Thieu?

The President: When you use the term
"wedded to the government of President Thieu,"
I would not say that the United States, insofar
as any government in the world is concerned,
is wedded to it in the sense that we cannot take
any course of action that that government does
not approve.

On the other hand, I do not want to leave any

' Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

doubt on this score: President Thieu is the
elected President of Viet-Nam. He is cooperat-
ing with the United States in attempting to
bring this war to a conclusion. He has made a
very forthright offer and has supported our
position that we have made — and I know will
be making an ojffer of his own with regard to a
political settlement. Under those circumstances,
there is no question about our standing with
President Tliieu.

I would also say further that insofar as our
offers are concerned, we are not going to accede
to the demands of the enemy that we have to
dispose of President Thieu before they wUl
talk. That would mean a surrender on our part,
a defeat on our part, and turning over South
Viet-Nam to the tender mercies of those who
have done a great deal of damage — to those in
North Viet-Nam.

Q. Mr. President, although not all of his
recommendations were accepted, Mr. Clifford
did reverse himself while in office, a rather rare
thing for a public official to do. My question to
you is perhaps somewhat philosophical: How do
you heep from being loched in on a decision in-
volving something as pressurized as Viet-Nam?
How do you determine once a policy is adopted
that it continues to be right?

The President: This is one of my major con-
cerns, and it is one of the reasons why I perhaps
allow more controversy and, frankly, even open
dissent — as I note from reading all the news-
papers — witliin our administration than any in
recent years.

I beheve that a President must constantly re-
examine the policies, and I am reexamining our
policy on Viet-Nam every day. I am examining
the military policy. I am examining the politi-
cal policy, our diplomatic options, and I will
not be frozen in.

With regard to my comment on Mr. Clifford,
I do not mean to suggest that because he, in a
very difficult position, was imable to do anything
about it, his words should not now be given
some weight. They should be given some weight,
and a man should be given credit for changing
his mind if the facts have changed.

But I am only suggesting that, as I make up
my own mind at this time, I have to look at the
facts as they are presented to me today; and
as they are presented to me today I think we
are on the right road in Viet-Nam.

We have started toward the withdrawal that

JtTLT 7, 1969

Mr. Clifford has advocated; and I hope, as I
said earlier, that we will be able to beat his time-
table and that we will not be in Viet-Nam as
long as he suggests we will have to be there.

Q. Mr. President, your predecessor in oiJice
ttsed to quite often solicit the advice of one of
his predecessors, General Eisenhower, particu-
larly with respect to foreign policy. Have you
solicited Mr. Johnson's advice, and have you
got any that is comparable to Clifford's, and
does he hack your policy?

The President: I have talked to Mr. Jolrn-
son on the telephone, Mr. Potter [Philip Potter,
Baltimore Sun], on two occasions, and he has
been regularly briefed by members of the Na-
tional Security Council, by Dr. Kissinger, and
also by our economic advisers, and those
briefings, of course, have provided an occasion
for him to give his ideas to us. He has been very
helpful in tenns of advice, and I think he will
be more helpful in the future.

Presidential Powers

Q. Mr. President, what do you think of the
Fulbright proposal that would limit the Presi-
dential power to act militarily in an etnergency?

The President : Well, I understand the senti-
ment behind the jDroposal. When I was a Mem-
ber of the Senate and a Member of the House,
I will have to admit that I felt that there should
be more consultation with the Senate and that
Presidents should not have unlimited power to
commit this nation, militarily as well as
politically.

On the other hand, as I now assume the re-
sponsibilities of power, I of course see it from a
different vantage point. And for the President
of the United States to have his hands tied in
a crisis in the fast-moving world in wliich we
live would not be in the best interests of the
United States.

As President, I intend to consult with the
Senate, with Senator Fulbright and with his
colleagues on the Foreign Relations Committee
and the Armed Services Conmaittee before tak-
ing any action whenever I can.

But look, for example, at President Eisen-
hower in 1958. He had to move very fast in order
to save the situation in Lebanon. There was no

time to consult, and also it would have tipped
off the enemy.

Look at President Johnson when he sent in
airplanes to save the missionaries in the Congo
in 1964. He had to move fast. He had no time
to consult.

I don't think a President of the United States
should be tied down by a commitment which will
not allow him to take the action that needs to be
taken to defend American interests and to
defend American lives where there is no time
to consult.

Situation in the Middle East

Q. Mr. President, 5 months ago at your first
7iews conference you described the Middle East
as a dangerously explosive situation in need of
defusing. In the 5 months since that time, do you
think there has been any defusing that you can
nfieasure, or do you think tlie situatio7i has be-
come acutely worse?

The President: I would have to admit that I
see very little defusing. The situation is better
only from the standpoint that we do have some
four-power talks going, and we would trust
that from those talks we might get some basis of
communication between the two sides and par-
ticularly that we might get all parties involved,
including the Soviet Union, to use their influ-
ence to defuse a crisis. The talks will serve that
interest if they serve no other interest.

Also in that connection, I would like to say
that I, as you know, have met already with the
King of Jordan, and I am hoping to meet some-
time within the next month with the Prime
Minister of Israel.

We intend to have bilateral talks, multilateral
talks — anything that we can do to attempt to
defuse the situation.

Demonstrations in Latin America

Q. Mr. President, due to Governor Rocke-
feller\'? difficulties on his Latin Am-erican jaunt,
do you see any usefulness coming out of the
trips, and could you tell us what it might be?

The President: A great deal of usefulness.
For example, in my conversations with Presi-
dent Lleras, the talking paper that President —
Governor Rockefeller, a Freudian slip — ^the
talking paper that Governor Rockefeller gave

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN

me was extremely helpful, extremely helpful
because it gave me the background of his con-
versation with President Lleras.

I -woidd say further that the very fact that
there are these rather explosive demonstrations
indicates that such a trip was necessary. The
United States can't be penned up within our
borders simply because of the fear of
demonstrations.

I remember very well when I planned my
trip to Europe, there were several editorials
to the effect that I shouldn't take the trip be-
cause of the possibility of demonstrations. As
those of you who were with me will remember,
there were demonstrations in every major city
I visited. Yet the trip was worthwhile.

As far as I am concerned, I am very happy
that Governor Kockefeller has made this trip.
He is getting valuable information which we
needed to get.

I would add one further thought: We must
not interpret these demonstrations as reflect-
ing the will of the people of Latin America.
The few demonstrators, violent as they are, in
Latin America, no more represent the 200 mil-
lion people of Latin America than the Black
Panthers represent the 11 million law-abiding
Negro citizens of this country. That is what we
have to get across.

Safeguard ABM System

Q. Mr. President., wh^n you proposed the
Safeguard antibaUistic system., you said it was
vital to the interests of the United States. Nev-
ertheless, reports persist that it is in trouble,
the program is in trouble, in the Senate, and
there is n&io talh of a possible compi'omise in
our program. What is your position on Safe-
guard, and what do you intend to do to loin
passage for the program?

The President: On March 8th, before I an-
nounced my decision on Safeguard, a story ap-
peared m the Washington Post indicating that
the coimt at that time was 20 Senators for it,
46 against it, with the rest undecided.

The latest count I have seen indicates that
there are 50 or 51 for it, 46 against it, and the
rest undecided. We will win the fight on Safe-
guard. It will not be necessary to compromise.

I don't mean by that that every section of
the bill as presented to the Armed Services
Committee has to be kept as it is. That is up

to the conunittee and to the chairman to work
out.

But in recommending Safeguard, I did so
based on intelligence information at that time.
Since that time new intelligence information
with regard to the Soviet success in testing mul-
tiple reentry vehicles — ^that kind of informa-
tion has convinced me that Safeguard is even
more important. However we may argue about
that intelligence, as to whether it has an mde-
pendent guidance system as ours will have, there
isn't any question but that it is a multiple
weapon and its footprints indicate that it just
happens to fall in somewhat the precise area
in which our Minutemen silos are located.

This would mean that by the year 1973, in
the event the Soviet Union goes forward with
that program, that 80 percent of our Minute-
men would be in danger. ABM is needed par-
ticularly in order to meet that eventuality.

The press: Thanh you, Mr. President.

22d Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made by
Lawrence Walsh, deputy liead of the U.S. dele-
gation, at the 22d plenary session of the new
meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on June 19.

Press release 166 dated June 19

Ladies and gentlemen : We have searched the
record of the past several sessions of the Paris
meetings for evidence of your side's readiness to
engage in constructive negotiations. Despite
your rhetoric about good will and serious at-
titude, we find that on the major issues your
side's positions remain inflexible. Moreover, you
insist on prior conditions being met before seri-
ous negotiations can begin.

By adopting rigid positions and demanding
preconditions before real negotiations can begin,
you block progress here in Paris. At the same
time, you step up your calls for military vic-
tory. We can only interpret your attitude as
meaning that you still seek to achieve your ob-
jective in South Viet-Nam tlirough the use of
force and terror and not tlirough negotiation.

Let us look at the positions your side has

JULY 7, 1969

taken on the principal questions involved in a
settlement.

On tlie question of withdrawal of forces, you
say U.S. and Allied forces must withdraw from
South Viet-Nam unconditionally. You refer to
the problem of Vietnamese forces in South Viet-
Nam as one to be resolved by the Vietnamese
parties among themselves.

That position gets us nowhere. Why do you
avoid stating whether North Vietnamese forces
in South Viet-Nam are going to go back to
North Viet-Nam? Vague reference that the
Vietnamese parties will resolve that problem is
not enough.

Tliat position of the United States Govern-
ment on the question of withdrawals must be
clearly imderstood. We will not accept a one-
sided withdrawal from South Viet-Nam. Tliere
must be a withdrawal of all non-South Viet-
namese forces.

You reject the idea of mutual withdrawal be-
cause you say it places the aggressor on the same
level as the victim of aggression.

We could, with more justification, argue that
in reality it is your side which seeks to confuse
the aggressor — North Viet-Nam — with the vic-
tim of aggression — South Viet-Nam. This kind
of argument, however, does not help to advance
the negotiations. The practical fact is that
North Viet-Nam, as well as the United States
and its allies, has forces in South Viet-Nam. A
negotiated settlement requires that all non-
South Vietnamese forces be withdrawn from
South Viet-Nam.

Last week a spokesman of your side asked
about the significance of the replacement of
25,000 American troops announced at Midway.
As President Nixon said on his return home
from ilidway : ". . . we have opened wide the
door to peace." ^ The President has invited the
leaders of North Viet-Nam to walk with us
through that door both by action in the field
and by negotiation in Paris. He said:

We believe this ia the time for them (the other side)
to act. We have acted, and acted In good faith. And if
they fail to act In one direction or the other, they
must bear the responsibility for blocking the road to
peace and not walking through that door which we
have opened.

Let me now turn to the question of political
settlement. You call for the overtlirow of the

'Bulletin of June 30, 1969, p. 553.

Government of the Republic of Viet-Nam. You
demand the formation of a coalition govern-
ment. And you state that until these demands
are met, progress cannot be made in the Paris
meetings. This amounts to saying that you will
not enter into meaningful negotiations with our
side unless we accept in advance the outcome
which you seek. That is a position which seems
designed to block progress at these negotiations.

Your side came t« tliese Paris meetings which
were convened for the purpose of trying to
bring the war in Viet-Nam to an end through
negotiations in which the Government of the
Republic of Viet-Nam would participate. Yet
you now say that you will noi negotiate unless
that Government is first eliminated.

The Government of the Republic of Viet-
Nam has indicated that it is prepared to dis-
cuss all aspects of a political settlement. It has
not demanded that your side accept any precon-
ditions before negotiations can begin. Rather,
the Government of the Republic of Viet-Nam
has made clear that it is prepared to discuss a
political settlement without preconditions. That
offer still stands.

The Government of the Republic of Viet-
Nam is prepared to accept free elections under
international supervision. It has offered guaran-
tees and safeguards for free elections. There-
fore, if you truly believe you have the support
of the people of South Viet-Nam, you should be
prepared to test your claims in genuinely free
elections rather than trying to impose your
views at these negotiations.

Your side's unreasonable positions are omi-
nously combined with your renewed calls for
military victory in Viet-Nam.

Your side charges the United States and the
Republic of Viet-Nam with being bellicist. Yet
what is tlie truth? Our side has stated flatly
that we do not seek to impose a military solu-
tion and that we seek no winners or losers. In
contrast, your side makes hollow boasts of so-
called "brilliant victories" since Tet of last year,
and you continue to call for more military at-
tacks and "greater victories." At the last
plenary session, both spokesmen for your side
called for a "glorious struggle" until "total vic-
tory." These warlike declarations by your side
are inconsistent with your claimed good will
and serious attitude concerning a negotiated
end to the war in Viet-Nam.

The United States and the Government of

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLITrnT

the Republic of Viet-Nam are determined to
continue the search for a negotiated solution to
the Viet-Nam problem. We regret that instead
of engaging in the give-and-take process of
true negotiation, you instead exhort your troops
to try to compel a final solution by increased
violence and terror.

Ladies and gentlemen, we urge your side to
drop its insistence that we accept your unreason-
able preconditions before serious negotiations
can begin. We urge you to turn away from the
pursuit of military victory. A basis for true
negotiations now exists in President Nixon's
proposals for peace,^ in President Thieu's pro-
posals, and in the NLF's 10 points. We should
begin meaningful exchange immediately.

Last week, your side accused us of not re-
sponding seriously to your 10-point proposal.
The truth is that we have at every plenary
meeting since your side presented these pro-
posals examined your points, asking for clarifi-
cation of them, comparing them with our own
proposals, and seeking common ground between
your proposals and ours.

At the 20th plenary session. Ambassador
Lodge explained our proposals and asked a
number of questions about your 10 points. He
did this in the hope that clarification of your
proposals would help to define the issues and
would assist us in seeking common ground and
eventual agreement between us.

' For President Nixon's address to the Nation on
May 14, see Buixetin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

We still await your response to our questions.
Let me recall those questions :

a. Does the first point of your side's 10-point
program mean that in order to achieve the
fundamental national rights of the Vietnamese
people, North Viet-Nam is prepared to carry
out the principles of the 1954 Geneva accords,
namely, withdrawal of forces, noninterference,
and reimification through free choice ?

b. Are North Vietnamese forces prepared to
withdraw from South Viet-Nam?

c. Does your 10-point program mean that
North Viet-Nam is prepared to withdraw its
forces from Cambodia and Laos ?

d. What are your views on international
supervision of other aspects of a settlement
beyond that mentioned in your 10th point ?

e. Why does your side hesitate to enter into
productive negotiations of a political settlement
with the Government of the Republic of
Viet-Nam?

We hope that your replies to these questions
and your clarification of other aspects of your
10 points will show the flexibility necessary for
the success of our negotiations here in Paris.
We on our part will be glad to continue to
answer questions that your side may have about
President Nixon's eight points, which Ambas-
sador Lodge introduced here at the 17th session,
and to explore the common ground between your
points and ours. We hope that you will join us
in that endeavor.

JULY 7, 1969

President Nixon and President Lleras of Colombia
Review Common Goals of the Americas

President Carlos Lleras Restrepo of the Re-
public of Colombia made a state visit to the
United States June 11-18. During his visit in
Washington June 12-14-, he met with President
Nixon and Secretary Rogers. Following are
texts of the exchange of greetings between
President Nixon and President Lleras at a wel-
coming ceremony on the South Lawn of the
White House on June IS, their exchange of
toasts at a dinner at the White House that eve-
ning, and remarks exchanged at the conclusion
of their meetings on June 13.

EXCHANGE OF GREETINGS

White House press release dated June 12

President Nixon

Mr. President, I am very honored to welcome
you and the members of your party here to
Washington today in three capacities: first, as
the representative of your country, which I have
had the privilege of visiting ; second, as the rep-
resentative of a great continent; and, third, as
an individual.

As a representative of your country, it is very
appropriate to note that you were the first state
visitor to the United States from the American
family to the south. It is very appropriate that
you should be the first, coming as you do from
Colombia, because we all recall the great events
in which your country played such an important
role in developing the organization which
created the American family that we know
today.

It was in 1948 in Bogota that the Organiza-
tion of American States was set up. It was in
1960 that the Act of Bogota was adopted, which
became the foundation for the Alliance for
Progress.

And just a month ago — and, incidentally,
primarily through your leadership — the Andean
Common Market had its birth in Bogota.

So the role that Colombia has played in the
greater problems of the hemisphere, in develop-
ing the spirit of the American family, we honor
today in receiving you in Washington, D.C.

We also welcome you today in your capacity
as an individual. We know your backgroimd,
being back over many years in the field of gov-
ernment, in the field of education, in the field of
politics in the very broadest sense.

And we know that you have contributed
through your thought to the ideas, the exciting
ideas, which we are going to need if we in this
American Hemisphere develop the programs
which are adequate to the tremendous challenges
that we face.

I am looking forward to the talks we will
have, not only in the bipartisan and also bilat-
eral context in which they will be conducted—
because it is bipartisan in this country whenever
we speak of foreign policy, but particularly
whenever we speak of the American family —
but also because, in the broader sense, we believe
that you are one of the new voices speaking for
the American family that needs to be heard.

We know that your ideas will be ideas that
should be considered in developing new policies
which will meet the common goals that we all
want to achieve for the Americas.

So because you represent a great country, a
country with which we have had such friendly
relations, because you represent a great conti-
nent, a continent so close to us not only geo-
graphically but in our hearts, and because as
an individual you represent ideas that we need
to hear and that we want to discuss with you,
we welcome you most warmly today to the
United States.

DEPAKTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN

President Lleras

Thiuik j'ou, iVIr. President, for your generous
words of welcome. They are an admirable reflec-
tion of the traditionally warm friendship that
exists between Colombia and the United States,
of your special interest in inter-American af-
fairs, and your own personal awareness of the
issues and problems pertinent to the common
welfare of the hemisphere.

Several years ago I had the honor of greeting
you and Mrs. Nixon in Bogota. As Vice Presi-
dent of the United States you were providing
at that time ample proof of your desire to obtain
firsthand information on all the foreign policy
matters concerning your country.

Today, as I arrive in response to your kind
invitation, you are burdened with the full weight
of the supreme responsibility for the direction
of United States foreign policy as head of state.

You have shouldered that burden, Mr. Presi-
dent, with admirable decision and courage. You
have imderstood that the leadei-ship role of the
United States requires no less. You have con-
sidered useful for the relations between our
peoples and our Governments an exchange of
ideas, and I greatly appreciate this opportunity
to express to you, with frankness, my view-
points.

I am grateful for your kind references to the
achievements of the Colombian Government,
the Colombian people, and to my personal con-
tribution in that task. I have tried to be con-
sistent with my belief that a man that has
chosen public service as a career must dedicate
all his energy and all his time, as you have done,
to the welfare of his fellow men.

This is my only merit, and the words with
which you have enhanced my efforts are, Mr.
President, a further demonstration of your
friendsliip.

You have mentioned Colombia's contribution
to the economic integration of the Andean
countries. This is, I hope, another step toward a
closer economic union of Latin America as a
whole and to a more comprehensive economic
relationship with the other countries of this
hemisphere.

I look forward to our talks with interest and
hope, in the firm conviction that they will be
fruitful. They will be inspired by our common
ideals of fraternity between nations and my

mutually shared awareness of the problems of
mankind.

The days which my wife, my companions,
and myself will spend here will undoubtedly be
very pleasant. I believe that they will also be
useful for a more complete understanding of
our problems and for the strengthening of the
links which have traditionally existed between
our countries.

Please accept, Mr. President, the most cordial
and friendly greeting on behalf of the people
of Colombia.

EXCHANGE OF TOASTS
President Nixon

White House press release dated June 12

I suppose that many of you wondered, among
the repertoire of Strolling Strings, what that
delightful number was, the third one that they
played, the second from the end.

Senor Lleras tells me that is the Por un Beso
de tu Boca, which is the great Colombian dance ;
and in playing that number we were trying
through music to express a sentiment that I
will try to express in my very limited Spanish,
a sentiment that everyone in this room feels.

Mr. President, in this room, as you know from
having met them in the receiving line, we have
young and old, we have Republicans and Demo-
crats, we have businessmen, we have people from
government and other areas, but they are alike
in one respect, in their affection for your coim-
try, the people of your country, and their re-
spect for you and your family who are with
you.

And we want you to know, as you come to
this house today, that many distinguished
visitors have come but none who receives a
warmer reception from us, and the best way
that I can express that sentiment is not through
the way we would say it in English, "Slake
yourself at home," but the way it is said in
Spanish, when you arrive in a Spanish home:
Haga usted esta su casa.

And to everybody in this room we say : You
are in your own house tonight.

Mr. President, on this occasion I could speak
of many things, of the matters that I spoke
of when we welcomed you on the "\Yliite House
lawn earlier today: the role that your country

JULY 7, 1969

354-259—69-

and that you have played in the problems of
this hemisphere and, particularly, in terms of
the American family and the friendship that
we want to develop Avithin that family among
the nations that are members of it.

But I think that our guests tonight^since
this is truly a personal dinner in honor of you
and of your wife and your family— that they
would like for me to speak of you, what you
stand for, what you stand for in your country,
what you stand for in this continent, in this
hemisphere.

First, you have our respect because of your
background. We know that at a very early age
you entered the field of politics, and you were
very successful in that area.

You not only have been successful in the field
of politics, but you are quite unusual among
politicians. You are a scholar, also. I do not
mean that politicians may not be scholars
sometimes, but not always.

We are aware of the fact that you are an
economist and a very distinguished economist
with a world reputation. And when we hear of
that, we are reminded that the study of eco-
nomics is called "the dismal science."

I suppose it acquired that description because
in the days of Malthus all economists had a dis-
mal prediction about the future. They predicted
then that population would outrun the produc-
tion of food in the world.

Well, several hundred years have passed and
it has not yet happened, although we still have
an enormous problem, both with regard to
hunger in the world and in regard to
population.

But while you are an economist, I would say
that you are an economist in a new tradition,
the tradition of pragmatism coupled with ideal-
ism and optimism, an economist with a philo-
sophical view of the great problems of your
country and the great problems of the world.

And that is one of the reasons why you have
been so successful in the political leadei-ship of
your country, one of the reasons why j'our ideas
about how we can better develop together with
the great natural and human resources of this
hemisphere, why your ideas have spread far be-
yond your country, are respected all over this
hemisphere, and are particularly respected here
in the United States.

That is one of the reasons why your coming
here, as the first official visitor to this country
from the Latin American area, I think, is par-
ticularly appropriate, apart from the fact that
your country has meant so much in terms of its

background insofar as the development of the
Latin American institutions is concerned : the
development of the Organization of American
States, the Act of Bogota, the other matters to
which I referred earlier today.

But speaking quite directly and simply to
you, Mr. President, we respect you today as a
man who has devoted your life to the service
of your people, to the service of your country,
and to the servdce of a cause that is bigger than
either of our countries, as big as this whole
hemisphere, as big as the whole world itself.

We live in a very troubled time. We all know
that, and the problems that you have are quite
similar to the problems we have within our own
country.

And I was very interested to note that the na-
tional motto of Colombia is "Liberty and
Order." And I don't know of any man among
the world leaders that it has been my privilege
to meet who more symbolizes and represents
that kind of leadership in the world than our
guest of honor tonight.

"Liberty and Order'' — we all know that that
is the art of politics. We realize that liberty in
itself and by itself, if we have it without order,
means that we can have in effect anarchy. And
we know that if we have order without liberty,
we have dictatorship.

And it is only that delicate balance between
the two which you have maintained in your
country and in your leadership which we try
to maintain here. It is that liberty and order,
liberty with order, that provides the basis for
progress.

So we respect you for that kind of leadership.
We hope we can learn from you and that we will
all profit from this visit that you have paid us.

So tonight I know that all of you around
this table will want to join me in raising your
glasses to you ; and in doing so I am reminded
of the crop that is very famous in Colombia,
among many others, the crop of coffee and the
advertisement that the Pan American coffee
group had a few years ago. They said : "Coffee
is like friendship. It is rich, and it is very strong
and very warm."

And I would like to reverse it by saying to-
night that we speak to you in friendship, friend-
ship between the United States and Colombia,
friendship that is rich and warm and very
strong. And your visit has helped to make it
richer and warmer and stronger.

So to the friendship of our two countries and
to you and your family, I ask all of you to raise
your glasses to the President of Colombia.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN

President Lleras

White House press release dated June 12

I cordially thcank you, Mr. President, for your
gi-acious toast. It expresses once more the friend-
liness that has surrounded my wife and daugh-
ter, my companions, and myself from the very
moment of our arrival in this counti-y. It also
shows your great interest in Latin America and
the particular attention you give to those mat-
ters concerning the relations between our two
countries. In spite of the ponderous legacy of
world conflicts and complex domestic situations
that your Government has to confront, you
have recognized that this hemisphere should
have a high priority in the framework of United
States foreign policy. Your invitation to me re-
flects, I believe, tliis priority. It also shows your
understanding of Colombia's internal and in-
ternational policies: democratic, progressive,
friendly, and independent.

I have struggled, Mr. President, as you have,
throughout a lifetime in the political arena,
maintaining thereby close contact with public
affairs. We belong to a generation that has wit-
nessed miprecedented change, some of us as as-
tonished spectators, some as victims, some as
voluntary or as imwilling actors. Now, in one
of the most contradictory moments of history,
we feel bound to examine the world situation
with an open mind, trying to see clearly through
the clouds that encircle us, without any prej-
udice and also without allowing ourselves to
become bewitched followere of new myths or
coward deserters from principles which are vital
to organized society.

It is not easy, indeed, to abandon ideas, at-
titudes, aspirations that at one time or another
were respected and cherished and that have be-
come obsolete in the present erratic world. It is
difficult sometimes to sacrifice certain economic
interests that fight to survive even when they
contradict the more essential needs of larger
human groups or international solidarity. It is
not easy either to know whether some beliefs
and ideals must be considered as unrealistic or
unattainable. Are we not often mistaking our
o\vn human inconstancy and skepticism for an
obsolescence of rightful social concepts ? Are we
looking carefully enough to discover all the rich
realities that are concealed behind some dis-
couraging facts or apparent failures ?

These reflections come to me as I review in
my mind the history of the inter- American sys-
tem and of the many efforts directed toward the
achievement of a higher degree of cooperation
in the hemisphere.

Simon Bolivar's "Letter from Jamaica" ini-
tiated the ideological process of union then con-
fined to the Latin American countries. The
circular letter addressed also by Bolivar, from
Lima in 1824, already contained the main jurid-
ical and political elements which we are still
trying to apply after nearly a century of inter-
American conferences. There that great man
outlined the organization of an assembly that
could give us its advice whenever a conflict
should arise and arrange for consultation in
case of danger, act as an arbiter or judge for
the resolution of eventual differences, and pro-
vide the proper interpretation of treaties. Co-
lombia and Mexico then sought to associate the
United States witliin the projected system, but
without positive residts.

The long evolution that followed is well
laiowni, and its different aspects are too complex
to be summarized tonight. They include such
subjects as the relations between the regional
organization and the United Nations; the na-
ture of the inter- American system itself and the
cooperation of all the members for the economic,
social, and cultural development of the Ameri-
cas, a cooperation considered essential for the
common welfare and prosperity. No agreement,
of course, can be so perfect as to cover the in-
finite number of contingencies that may arise
in the internal life or the international links of
so many countries, living in great diversity of
material and institutional conditions. Still, the
Protocol of Buenos Aires, signed in 1967, leaves
little room for new declarations of principles
concerning relations between the member states.
Almost all the matters that need to be agreed
upon in general terms have already been dis-
cussed, shaped, and stipulated in writing. We
laiow, nevertheless, that neither today nor in
the past have the great principles of the inter-
American system been faithfully observed.

No practical man, therefore, regards today
the great questions of the continent simply
through Alice's mirror of statutes and declara-
tions. Of course, we do not want to break the
miiTor. We will always have to base our daily
conduct upon written rules, freely arrived at,
inspired by equity and human solidarity. But
now the most important task seems to be to
advance further in the useful and effective im-
plementation of already accepted policies. Let
us translate into simple, day-to-day practices
those images that still remain nebulous in the
magic glass.

We can not and shoidd not underestimate the
magnitude and significance of what has already

JULY 7, 1969

been achieved. Neither can we ignore the ex-
istence of a system capable, if properly oriented,
of gradually fulfilling the better part of our
common hopes. The peaceful solution of polit-
ical and juridical diiferences, the narrowing of
the dangerous gaps that divide nations and
societies, are well within tlie power of the pres-
ent inter- American organization, provided all
the necessary support from the member states
is forthcoming. Unfortunately, no one could as-
sert that this support has always been given
with an identical degree of conviction and
enthusiasm.

I trust the inter- American system. It is the
best instrument for the defense and promotion
of what has been from the beginning the ideo-
logical patrimony of this continent: liberty,
equality, and justice. It constitutes the full
recognition of human solidarity as the source
of international law. The Americas were once
called the "land of hope," and I am sure this
title can and should be preserved as the symbol
and guide of our common conduct.

Still, Mr. President, we must not disregard
the great material, psychological, and political
obstacles already apparent and those that are
emerging with dreadful implications. The fu-
ture is full of ominous dangers, open to sudden
eruptions. It could be disturbed by new and
more serious misunderstandings.

You, Mr. President, were already familiar
with inter-American affairs when, during the
Eisenhower administration, you played such a
constructive role in the proceedings that led to
the Act of Bogota. This document was the prel-
ude to the Alliance for Progress. It is a well-
known fact that in the following years you have
maintained a lively interest in Latin American
problems and in their possible solutions.

During the presidential campaign, you
pointed out some grim facts and disappointing
figures concerning the pace of development in
Latin America. You enunciated also some new
means of action and attractive solutions. Re-
viewing your speeches I find in them an objec-
tive recognition of hard realities, coupled with
a strong faith in our ability to change them. This
is the same spirit with wliich 1 view the prob-
lems of the hemisphere.

Kecently the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, on
behalf of the Latin American States, described
some of these obstacles and enunciated jiractical
rules to facilitate commercial and financial rela-
tions in the hemisphere. The document signed
in Vina del Mar, wliich collects the results of

many experiences and technical studies, has
already been delivered to you.

I am sure you have received it as a positive
contribution for the improvement of inter-
American relations. Working together on the
subjects contemplated therein, the Latin Amer-
ican countries and the United States surely
could generate new patterns of trade and remove
harmful practices and irritating stipulations.
We must avoid as much as possible whatever can
disrupt tlie efforts to develop Latin America
economically and socially within an atmosphere
of understanding and cordiality. This common
effort can influence also, in the right direction,
the economic relations with other continents and
put an end to the existing discriminations
against Latin America.

I would emphasize the importance of sharing
science and technology for the development of
the hemisphere, an issue which is also analyzed
in the above-mentioned document.

A new demonstration of the interest with
which you want to study and to conduct a
continental policy has been provided by the
special mission entrusted to Governor Nelson
Rockefeller. I can assure you that, in the case
of Colombia, an almost unanimous welcome was
extended to your representative. The fruitful
exchange of information and opinions covered
a wide spectrum and left behind a warm and
friendly memory. I thank you for having given
us this opportunity to discuss our common prob-
lems with such an enlightened friend.

Colombia is facing its great political, eco-
nomic, and social challenges with resolution and,
I venture to say, with a bold and comprehensive
policy. The diagnosis of our specific situation is
not difficult and is already well known, as are the
factors that can be considered common to most
of the developing countries. This is not the oc-
casion to make a new analysis of matters that,
furthermore, have been a part of our dialogue.
But I should like to assert that Colombia is fid-
filling the conditions that the Alliance for
Progress requires from her.

If these efforts have been great, so has the
cooperation rendered by the United States and
by the international organizations. I wish to
reaffinn tonight that Colombia fully values and
deeply appreciates that support.

It is regrettable that this support, as well as
our hard work, has been at times partiall}' frus-
trated, mainly by the inequities of the world
economic mechanism and by unjust patterns
of trade. On the other hand, the views of the

DEP^VRTMENT OF STATE BXILLETIN

Colombian Government and those of our part-
ners in the Alliance have not always coincided.
But, as the head of a nation determined to pro-
mote its development, both through its own
efforts and joint international action, my mes-
sage is not one of complaint. I speak the lan-
guage of resolute realism, a realism inspired by
attainable goals but aware of the obstacles that
must be overcome.

If ever my perseverance should lag or my
confidence in the future fail, I would look back
upon your kind words tonight for encourage-
ment and inspiration.

Before raising my glass to propose a toast
to the Government and the people of the United
States, to our kind host and Mrs. Nixon, and
to Colombian- American friendship, let me pray
that, in the words of Whitman, democracy may
sing in the future throughout the Americas:
"Come, I will make the continent indissoluble."

EXCHANGE OF REMARKS

White House press release dated June 13

President Nixon

As you, Mr. President, complete your official
visit here, I want you to know first how much
we have enjoyed knowing you and your family
personally and how much we have profited
from the opportunity of exchanging views with
you, not only on the bilateral matters which
we have discussed and on which we have made
considerable progress, I believe — as I under-
stand you will cover some of those matters in
your own statements, both here and when you
return — but also in terms of the broader as-
pects of the policies of the United States in the
American Hemisphere.

You are the first visitor, as we have pointed
out, from Latin America during tliis new ad-
ministration. "We recognize the urgency of this
problem. We recognize the need for new ideas.
We recognize the need for new programs; and
we want those new ideas and those new pro-
grams to be ones that we share together, in
which we not just talk but in which we listen
and in which we learn.

In our wide-ranging discussions, not only of
our bilateral problems but in a broader sense
of the problems of the hemisphere, I cannot
think of any leader in Latin America who could
have contributed more to our own thinking.

I think your visit will mark a major step

forward m the development of new policies by
the United States in its relationship with our
friends in Latin America. I think that next
week at the economic conference that is being
held at Trinidad we will see some of the first
fruits of those new directions, and certainly the
credit for these new departures— they will be
modest to begin with, but the promise for the
future will be very great — the credit will go to
you and to this visit. Without your visit we
might not have moved as fast as we should have.

President Lleras

The talks which President Nixon and I held
during my visit to Washington were fruitful
and comprehensive. They have reaffirmed the
traditionally warm friendship which exists be-
tween Colombia and the United States. They
have given us an opportunity to review the prin-
cipal issues on the inter-American agenda. I
believe they will contribute to the new era of
hemispheric cooperation which Latin America
as well as the United States is looking forward
to.

I have found an open and understanding at-
titude everywhere, in the White House and at all
levels of the United States Government, toward
the problems that confront the hemisphere.

Both President Nixon and I are convinced
of the need to continue the inter-American
dialogue in an atmosphere of cordiality and
friendship and of the urgency of implementing
adequate solutions.

Our discussions covered such topics as the
improvement of financial and commercial rela-
tionships within the hemisphere ; basic commod-
ities, with special references to coffee; the
physical integration of the Americas, including
the accelerated completion of the Pan American
Highway; the transfer of science and tech-
nology ; and, of course, the ways and means of
working together in close collaboration on these
issues.

I am certain that this exchange between our
two Governments on matters of mutual interest
will strengthen our bilateral relations and will
lead to the enhancement of the Americas' role
in the world.

I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to Presi-
dent Nixon and the United States Government
for the warmth and friendship extended to me,
my family, and my fellow Colombians.

Seldom in my public life have I encountered
a comparable openmindedness or a more pleas-
ant human relationsliip.

JULY

1969

Nigerian Relief Effort Improved

by Agreement on New Surface Route

Following is a statement read to news cor-
respondents at the Department of State on
June 18 by C. Clyde Ferguson, Jr., Special Co-
ordinator on relief to civilian victims of the
Nigerian civil war.

The U.S. Government is pleased to note that
the Federal Military Government and the
Biafran authorities have agreed to a surface
relief route into Biafra. This corridor has been
the subject of intensive multilateral negotiations
over the past 3 months.

As a part of its relief effort in Nigeria, the
International Committee of the Red Cross has
undertaken to manage this new relief arrange-
ment. Although some technical details remain
to be worked out, it is expected that operations
will conamence shortly.

At the time of my appointment. President
Nixon stated with regard to the problem of
supplying relief to the Biafran enclave : ^

The major obstacle to expanded relief is neither
money, food, nor means of transport. The main problem
is the absence of relief arrangements acceptable to the
two sides which would overcome the limitations posed
by the present hazardous and inadequate nighttime
airlift

This problem has been the focus of my efforts.
I have made two trips to each side of the battle
lines, have met with representatives of both
parties, both here and in other countries, with
the representatives of other governments, the
ICRC, private groups, and international orga-
nizations in an effort to resolve the problem of
obtaining a more secure relief route into the
presently landlocked Biafran enclave. New ac-
cess routes were necessary because the intensi-
fication of the war had rendered a night airlift
extremely dangerous. Moreover, due to inlierent
logistic limitations, the airlift was incapable
of carrying the tonnages necessary to assure an
adequate level of food and medical supplies
for the civilian victims of this very destructive
and tragic war.

The airlifts operated by the International
Committee of the Red Cross and the Joint

' For a statement by President Nixon on Feb. 22, see
Bulletin of Mar. 17, 1969, p. 222.

Church Aid organization have saved countless
numbers of people in Biafra from death
through malnutrition or actual starvation. This
international effort has testifed to a magnificent
spirit of humanitarianism. Tliese airlifts have
delivered into Biafra tonnages of relief sup-
plies which have run as high as 300 tons per
day and are feeding well over 2 million persons.
Tliis has dramatically alleviated starvation and
suffering. At the same time, the relief effort by
the Federal Military Government and the
ICRC has been feeding over a million people on
the Federal side.

Throughout the period since the airlift came
into being, a number of proposals were ad-
vanced, either to assure maximum use of avail-
able airlift capacity or to obtain more secure
and larger capacity means of transport. These
proposals included a daylight airlift to Uli air-
strip, the use of Obilago airfield with a con-
necting surface corridor into Biafra, a surface
corridor from Enugu into the enclave, and a
water route to Oguta. None of these proposals
were acceptable for a variety of military and
political reasons.

A study of the available surface routes indi-
cated that a corridor up the Cross River of-
fered the greatest promise. Tliis route has suf-
ficient year-roimd deptlis to permit the utiliza-
tion of shipping equipment carrying large ton-
nages and having shallow drafts. Moreover, the
Cross River route has the major advantage of
being out of the path of significant military ac-
tivity and in its upper reaches provides a water
barrier between the two sides.

Two landing ships mediiun were located
through the efforts of the United States Gov-
ernment and were chartered by the Interna-
tional Committee of the Red Cross. The first of
these ships — the Dona Mercedes — will arrive at
Lagos tomorrow [June 19]. The second is due
there in a few days. Both of these sliips can
navigate the Cross River to Biafran territory
and on one voyage each of them can carry
approximately 900 tons of general cargo, the
equivalent of some 90 aircraft landings.

The first ship, the Dona Mercedes, will be
ready within a few days to proceed up the Cross
River to the Biafran enclave. Its cargo will be
limited for this voyage to urgently needed
medical supplies.

It should be stressed that for the present
these two landing ships alone will not be able

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BTJIXETIN

to meet the fiill need for relief supplies. It is
still necessary that some flights continue, and
negotiations toward that end are underway.
Furthermore, it is essential that agreement be
reached on some of the teclmical details of the
Cross Eiver operation. Nevertheless, we are
greatly encouraged by the actions of the two
sides in agreeing to this new relief corridor and
believe it represents a major breakthrough. It
will assure the continuation of the great
humanitarian effort of saving the lives of in-
nocent victims of this conflict.

U.S. and Spain Extend
Defense Agreement

Press release 170 dated June 20

JOINT STATEMENT

Spanish Foreign Minister Castiella and Sec-
retary of State Kogers today [June 20] ex-
changed diplomatic notes extending the De-
fense Agreement of September 26, 1953,^ until
September 26, 1970. Under the terms of the
extension the two Govermnents will use this
period to determine the new relationship of
cooperation between the two countries that
would follow the present Agreement. Secre-
tary Rogers has invited Spanish Foreign Min-
ister Castiella to return to Washington about
July 15 to continue the negotiation which
opened today.

In conjunction with this extension, the
United States Government, as authorized by
the Congress, will provide grant military as-
sistance and credit facilities to Spain for the
purchase of military equipment.

TEXT OF U.S. NOTE

June 20, 1969
ExcELLENCT : I have the honor to refer to your note
of today's date regarding the extension of the Defense
Agreement between Spain and the United States dated
September 26, 1953, which reads in translation as
follows :

"Mr. Secbetaet op State : I have the honor to refer
to the recent negotiations between our two Govern-
ments with respect to the extension of the Defense

Agreement signed at Madrid on September 26, 1953.

"I am pleased to confirm that the Government of
Spain agrees with the Government of the United States
that the Defense Agreement be extended from Septem-
ber 26, 1968, to September 26, 1970, and shall, in the
absence of any further agreement, terminate one year
after the conclusion of the extension period, that is,
on September 26, 1971.

"This extension period will enable both Governments
to determine through negotiation the nature, scope and
form of any new relationship that may succeed this
extension of the Defense Agreement of 1953.

"The Defense Agreement will continue to be applied
during the period of this extension in the spirit of the
Joint Declaration of September 26, 1963," which we
have agreed both Governments regard as continuing
in effect.

"If the foregoing is acceptable to the Government of
the United States, I have the honor to propose that this
note and Tour Excellency's reply note indicating con-
currence shall constitute an Agreement between our
two Governments on this matter.

"Accept, Mr. Secretary of State, the renewed assur-
ances of my highest consideration and personal
friendship."

I have the honor to confirm that the United States
Government concurs in the terms of your note.

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my
highest consideration.

WnxiAM P. Rogers

His Excellency

Fernando MABfA Castiella t MaIz,

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain

TEXTS OF RELATED U.S. LEHERS

Letter on Military Assistance

June 20, 1969
Dear Mr. Minister: In connection with the ex-
tension for a two-year period of the Defense Agree-
ment of September 26, 1953, between our two Govern-
ments, the United States Government confirms that,
subject to authorizing legislation and to the provision
of necessary funds by the Congress, the United States
Government will continue to provide at an appropriate
level during the period of this extension military as-
sistance to contribute to the modernization of the
Spanish armed forces and defense industries.
Sincerely yours,

William P. Rogers

His Excellency

Fernando Maria Castiella y MaIz,

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain.

' Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2850.
' For text, see Bulletin of Oct. 28, 1963, p. 686.

JULY 7, 1969

Letter on Export-Import Bank Credits

June 20, 1969
Dear Mr. JIimster : I am informed by Mr. Kearus,
the Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the
United .States, that, should the Spanish Government
so desire, up to $35 million in new credits or guaran-
tees of that Bank could be made available for the pur-
chase in the United States by the Spanish Government
of military equipment, reasonably spaced over the pe-
riod of the two-year extension of the Defense Agree-
ment.

In addition, the Bank would expect to look with

favor on requests from the Spanish Government re-
ceived in the normal course for credits or guarantees
to finance procurement of United States goods and
services.

Any credits or guarantees would, of course, be sub-
ject to the normal terms and conditions of the Bank
in effect at the time of their approval.
Sincerely yours,

WiLUAM P. Rogers

His Excellency

Fernando Maria Castiella t Maiz,

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES

Calendar of International Conferences'

Scheduled July Through September

Conference of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament (to be Geneva .

resumed July 3).

IMCO .(4d Hoc Working Group on Facilitation: 3d Session London .

GATT Committee on Balance of Payments Restrictions Geneva .

Inter- American Indian Institute: Executive Board Mexico City

FAO/WHO Committee of Experts on Principles of Milk and Milk Rome . .

Products: 12th Session.

Sixth International Film Festival Moscow .

World Health Organization: 22d Assembly Boston . .

OECD Tourism Committee Paris . . .

OECD Committee on Research Cooperation Paris . . .

OECD Economic Policy Committee: Working Party II Paris. . .

ITU/CCITT Working Party on Telegraph Regulations Geneva .

U.N. Economic and Social Council: 47th Session Geneva

FAO Technical Conference on Fish Inspection and Quality Control . . Halifax . .

International Rubber Study Group: 20th Assembly London

ECOSOC Group of Rapporteurs on Packaging of Dangerous Articles Geneva .

and Group of Experts on Explosives.

U.N. Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space: Working Group on Geneva .

Direct Broadcast Satellites.

Mar. 14, 1962-

July 1-4
July 1-10
July 2-5
July 7-12

July 7-22
July 7-27
July 8-9
July 8-9
July 9-10
July 10-23
July 14- Aug. 8
July 15-25
July 21-25
July 21- Aug. 9

July 28- Aug. 8

'This schedule, which was prepared in the Office of International Conferences on June 16, 1969, lists inter-
national conferences in which the U.S. Government expects to participate officially in the period July-September
1969. Nongovernmental conferences and meetings are not included; these are listed in the World List of Future
International Meetings, compUed by the Library of Congress and available from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.

Following is a key to the abbreviations: ANZUS, Australia, New Zealand, and United States Security Treaty;
BIRPI, United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property; CCIR, International Radio
Consultative Committee; CCITT, International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee; ECE, Economic
Commission for Europe; ECOSOC, Economic and Social CouncU; FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization;
GATT, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; ICAO, International Civil Aviation Organization; IMCO,
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization; ITU, International Telecommunication Union; OECD,
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; PAHO, Pan American Health Organization; U.N.,
United Nations; UNCTAD, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development; UNESCO, United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; WHO, World Health Organization; WMO, World Meteorological
Organization.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BXTLLETIK

Calendar of International Conferences — Continued

Scheduled July Through September — Continued

FAO Fertilizer Advisory Panel Rome .

ICAO Technical Panel on Supersonic Transport Operations Montreal

International Wheat Council London

GATT CouncU of Representatives Geneva

GATT Working Party on the Turkish Stamp Duty Geneva

FAO Consultation on Forest Tree Breeding Washington

ANZUS Council: 19th Meeting Canberra .

U.N. Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea Bed and the Ocean New York

Floor Beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction.

Inter- American Port and Harbor Conferences: Permanent Committee Bogotd . .

on Ports.

U.N. Human Rights Commission: 22d Session of Subcommission on New York

Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities.

UNCTAD Trade and Development Board Geneva.

International Coffee Council London .

International Coffee Organization: Executive Board London.

Inter- American Travel Congresses: Permanent Executive Committee . Quito

Inter- American Travel Congresses: Technical Committee on Facili- San JosS

tation.

PAHO Executive Committee: 60th Meeting Washington

UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission: 10th Meet- Paris. .

iug of Bureau and Consultative Council.

Inter- American Special Conference on Human Rights San Jos6

ECOSOC Committee on Housing, Building and Planning New York

UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission: 6th Session. Paris. .

ICAO Legal Subcommittee on Warsaw Convention Montreal

ITU/CCIR Study Groups Geneva

UNESCO Executive Committee of the International Campaign To Paris .

Save the Monuments of Nubia: 18th Meeting.

FAO Ad Hoc Technical Conference on Grassland Production and Fodder Nairobi

Management in Africa South of the Sahara.

IMCO Subcommittee on Marine Pollution: 7th Session London

IMCO Maritime Safety Committee: 20th Session London

ITU/CCITT Plan Committee for Latin America , . . . Asunci6n

FAO Committee on Commodity Problems Rome

WMO Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observation: 5th Paris.

Session.

UNESCO Executive Board: 83d Session Paris.

IMCO Subcommittee on Safety of Navigation: 8th Session London

IMCO Subcommittee on Containers and Cargoes: 19th Session . . . London

UNCTAD Committee on Manufactures Geneva

U.N. General Assembly: 24th Session New York

International Wool Study Group London

FAO International Conference on Investment in Fisheries Rome .

FAO/ECE Codex Alimentarius Group of Experts on Standardization Rome .

of Quick-Frozen Foods: 5th Session.

BIRPI Paris Union: Executive Committee Geneva

IMCO Subcommittee on Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Sea: 16th London

Session.

ITU/CCIR Civil/Military Committee Athens . .

UNESCO/BIRPI Working Party on Problems of International Copy- Washington

right in Relation to Different Existing Multilateral Conventions.

IMCO Subcommittee on Safety of Fishing Vessels: 9th Session . . . London

U.N. Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space New York

UNCTAD Development Decade II: 4th Session Geneva

ECOSOC Commission on Narcotic Drugs: Special Session Geneva

ECOSOC Enlarged Committee for Program and Coordination .... New York

WHO Regional Committee for Western Pacific: 21st Session .... Manila . .

Inter-American Permanent Technical Committee on Labor Matters: undetermined

4th Meeting.

Inter-American Nuclear Energy Commission Washington .

Inter-American Nuclear Energy Commission: Special Legal Committee. Rio de Janeiro

OECD Economic Policy Committee Paris . .

OECD Economic Policy Committee: Working Party III Paris . .

OECD Trade Committee Paris . .

South Pacific Commission: Informal Meeting Noumea

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea: 57th Statutory Dublin .

Meeting.

July

Aug. 7-16

Aug. 8 (1 dav)

Aug. 11-28

Aug. 12-15

Aug. 25-Sept. 12

Aug. 26-Sept. 2

August
August
August
August

August
Sept. 1-2

Sept. 1-13
Sept. 2-12
Sept. 2-13
Sept. 2-22
Sept. 3-Oct. 15
Sept. 4-5

Sept. 7 (1 day)

Sept. 8-12
Sept. 8-12
Sept. 15-26
Sept. 15-26
Sept. 15-30

Sept. 15-Oct. 10
Sept. 16-19
Sept. 16-19
Sept. 16-Oct. 3
Sept. 16-Dec. 19
Sept. 17-18
Sept. 18-24
Sept. 22-26

Sept. 22-27
Sept. 23-26

Sept. 25-26
Sept. 29-Oct. 3

Sept. 30-Oct. 3

September

September
September
September
September
September
September
September or
October

JULY 7, 1969

TREATY INFORMATION

Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Antarctica

Measures relatiBg to the furtherance of the principles
and puri)oses of the Antarctic treaty of December 1,
1959 (TIAS 4780). Adopted at Paris November 29,
1968.'

notification of acceptance: United States, recom-
mendations V-5 and V-6.

Atomic Energy

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to tlie bilateral
agreement between the United States and Turkey of
June 10, 1955, as amended (TIAS 3320, 4748, 5828,
6040 ) , for cooperation concerning civil uses of atomic
energy. Signed at Vienna September 30, 1968.
Entered into force: June 5, 1969.

Aviation

Protocol on the authentic trilingual text of the conven-
tion on international civU aviation, Chicago, 1944,
as amended (TIAS 1591, 3756, 5170), with annex.
Done at Buenos Aires September 24, 1968. Entered
into force October 24, 1968. TIAS 6605.
Signature: Saudi Arabia, June 19, 1969.

Coffee

International coffee agreement, 1968, with annexes.
Open for signature at United Nations Headquarters,
New York, March 18 through March 31, 1968.
Entered into force December 30, 1968. TIAS 6584.
Accession deposited: Japan, May 28, 1969.

Customs

Customs convention on containers, with annexes and
protocol of signature. Opened for signature at
Geneva, May 18, 1956. Entered into force August 4,
19,59; for the United States, March 3, 1969. TIAS
6634.
Accession deposited: Malawi, May 24, 1969.

International Court of Justice

Statute of the International Court of Justice (59 Stat
1055).

Declaration recognizing compulsory jurisdiction de-
posited: Swaziland, May 26, 1969.

Postal Matters

Constitution of the Universal Postal Union with final
protocol, general regulations with final protocol, and
convention with final protocol and regulations of
execution. Done at Vienna, July 10, 1964. Entered
into force January 1, 1966. TIAS 5881.
Ratifications deposited: Burundi, May 9, 1969;
Romania (with a declaration), April 28, 1969.

Trade, Transit

Convention on transit trade of land-locked states. Done

at New York, July 8, 1965. Entered into force June 9,
1967 ; for the United States, November 28, 1968. TIAS
6592.

Accessions deposited: Lesotho, May 28, 1969 ; Swazi-
land, May 26, 1969.

Whaling

International whaling convention and schedule of
whaling regulations. Done at Washington Decem-
ber 2, 1946. Entered into force November 10, 1948.
TIAS 1849.

Cancellation of notice of rcithdrawal: Panama,
June 13, 1969.

Women — Political Rights

Convention on the political rights of women. Done at
New York March 31, 1953. Entered into force July 7,
1954.'
Higtuiture: Luxembourg, June 4, 1969.

BILATERAL

France

Agreement amending the air transport agreement of
March 27, 1946, as amended (TIAS 1679, 2106, 2257,
2258, 4336, 5135). Effected by exchange of notes at
Paris May 28 and 29, 1969. Entered Into force
May 29, 1969.

Ghana

Agreement for sales of agricultural conunodities, relat-
ing to the agreements of March 3, 1967 (TIAS 6245),
and January 3, 1968 (TIAS 6453). Signed at Accra
June 9, 1969. Entered into force June 9, 19C9.

Mexico

Agreement concerning broadcasting in the standard
broadcasting band (535-1605 kHz), with annexes.
Signed at Mt^xico December 11, 1968.'
Senate advice and consent to ratification: June 19,
1969.

Agreement concerning the operation of broadcasting
stations in the standard band (535-1605 kHz) during
a limited period prior to sunrise ("presunrise") and
after sunset ( "postsunset" ) , with annexes. Signed at
Mexico December 11, 1968.'

Senate advice and consent to ratification: June 19,
1969.

Spain

Agreement extending the defense agreement of Sep-
tember 26, 1953, as extended (TIAS 2850, 5437). Ef-
fected by exchange of notes at Washington June 20,
1969. Entered into force June 20, 1969, effective from
September 26, 1968.

Agreement extending the agreement of March 9, 1957,
as amended and extended (TIAS 3789, 5096), for
the loan of certain vessels to Spain. Effected by
exchange of notes at Washington June 20, 1969.
Entered into force June 20, 1969.

Sweden

Agreement relating to the reciprocal granting of au-
thorizations to permit licensed amateur radio c^)era-
tors of either country to operate their stations in
the other country. Effected by exchange of notes at
Stockholm May 27 and June 2, 1969. Entered into
force June 2, 1969.

' Not in force.

^ Not in force for the United States.

DEPAETMENT OF STATE BUIiLEmN

PUBLICATIONS

Volume VIII in Foreign Relations
Series for 1945 Released

On May 19 the Department of State released
Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic
Papers, 1945, Volume VIII, The Near East and Africa
(vii, 1,339 pp.). The volume includes documentation on
United States policies toward the Near East as a
whole and on American relations with individual
states of the area.

Of particular interest to historians and students of
foreign policy and diplomacy in the immediate postwar
period are the compilations reflecting American con-
cern for the recovery of Greece and the preservation
of its independence and integrity. Similar concern for
the survival of Iran is Ukevrise fully documented, as
are the efforts of the United States to support Turkey
in its determination to resist Soviet demands for
revision of the regime of the Turkish Straits.

The volume also includes documents on American
involvement in the Arab-Zionist controversy over the
future status of Palestine, as well as on United States
relations with Egypt, Iraq, Liberia, Morocco, Saudi
Arabia, Syria and Lebanon, and Yemen.

Copies of volume VIII (Department of State pub-
lication 8427) may be obtained from the Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402, for $6.50 each.

United States Treaties and Other International
Agreements (UST).)

Volume 2 covers the period of the First World War
and contains many documents relating to the war and
its aftermath. Although the United States never be-
came a party to the Treaty of Versailles, the editors
have included the text of that historic docu-
ment because of its great interest to scholars and
other researchers. Among the agreements printed in
volume 2 are those adopted by the Conference on the
Limitation of Armament, which met at Washington
from November 12, 1921, to February 6, 1922, and
dealt with two groups of questions : those having to
do with limitation of armament and those relating
to Paciflc and Far Eastern problems. There were also
three full-scale inter-American conferences in the
1920's which produced numerous agreements dealing
with matters of particular concern to the nations of
the Western Hemisphere. In the slavery convention
of September 25, 1926, countries undertook to sup-
press the slave trade and to bring about as soon as
possible the complete abolition of slavery In all its
forms. In the city of Geneva on July 27, 1929, pleni-
potentiaries representing 47 countries signed the
widely acclaimed prisoners-of-war and Red Cross con-
ventions. One of the last documents in volume 2 is the
London Naval Treaty of 1930.

Copies of volumes 1 and 2 are for sale by the Super-
intendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (price: vol. 1, $8.50;
vol. 2, $10.25).

Recent Releases

Department Releases Second Volume
of New Compilation of Treaties

Press release 160 dated June 16

The second volume of the new compilation entitled
Treaties and Other International Agreements of the
United States of America 1776-1949 was released on
Jime 16 by the Department of State. The first volume,
covering multilateral agreements from 1776 to 1917,
was released in January; this second volume con-
tinues with multilateral agreements and covers the
period from 1918 to 1930. The two remaining volumes
of multilateral agreements (1931^5 and 1946-49) will
be completed in the next few months. There wiU then
follow approximately 10 volumes of bilateral agree-
ments arranged by country in alphabetical order.

The series, which is being compiled under the di-
rection of Charles I. Bevans, Assistant Legal Adviser
for Treaty Affairs, will include the English texts or,
in cases where no English text was signed, the
official United States Government translations of
treaties and other international agreements entered
into by the United States from 1776 to 1950. (Instru-
ments brought into force after January 1, 1950, are
published at regular intervals in the series entitled

For sale t>y the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
Address requests direct to the Superintendent of Docu-
ments. A 25-percent discount is made on orders of 100
or more copies of any one puhlication mailed to the
same address. Remittances, payable to the Superin-
tendent of Documents, must accompany orders.

Achievements and Problems of the Central American
Common Market. A report prepared under contract
for the Office of External Research, Department of
State, describing the operations of the Central Ameri-
can Common Market and discussing the more impor-
tant problems it confronts. Pub. 8437. Inter-American
Series 95. 46 pp. 50(S.

NATO : Protection-Peace-Progress — 20th Anniver-
sary 1949-1969. Leaflet smnmarizing background, pur-
pose, and organization. Pub. 8439. International Or-
ganization and Conference Series 84. 10^.

A Report on Our Foreign Relations. Text of President
Nixon's televised press conference of March 4, 1969,
held in the East Room of the White House following
his visit to Western Europe. Pub. 8445. General Foreign
Policy Series 230. 26 pp. 25^.

Inter-American Development Bank. Amendment to the
agreement of April 8, 1959. TIAS 6591. 2 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with the Re-
pubUc of Korea. TIAS 6595. 5 pp. 10^.

Investment Guaranties. Agreement with St. Chris-
topher, Nevis and Anguilla. TIAS 6596. 3 pp. 10<?

JTJLY 7, 1969

Fisheries— Certain Fishery Problems on the High
Seas in the Western Areas of the Middle Atlantic
Ocean. Agreement with the Union of Soviet Socialist
RepubUcs. TIAS 6603. 13 pp. 10«.

Trade in Cotton Textiles. Arrangement with Singapore.
TIAS 6607. 8 pp. 10^.

Double Taxation— Taxes on Income. Agreement with
Trinidad and Tobago extending the agreement of
December 22, 1906, as extended. TIAS 6609. 3 pp. 10«f.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreements with Poland
amending certain agreements. TIAS 6610. 14 pp. 10(S.

International Institute for the Unification of Private
Law (UNIDROIT). Amendments to articles 5, 16 and 18
of the Institute Statute. TIAS 6611. 5 pp. 10«;.

Customs — Free Entry Privileges in the Philippines to
Dependents of United States Personnel Assigned to
South Viet-Nam. Agreement with the Philippines.
TIAS 6612. 2 pp. 10<(.

Earth Resources — Cooperative Research in Remote
Sensing for Earth Surveys. Agreement with Mexico.
TIAS 6613. 8 pp. 10(^.

Extension of Loan Vessels — Eeermann, Dortch and
Stcmbcll. Agreement with Argentina. TIAS 6614.
3 pp. 10(f.

Weather Stations — Continuation of Cooperative Mete-
orological Program. Agreement with Colombia. TIAS
6615. 12 pp. 10(J.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Tunisia.
TIAS 6616. 4 pp. 100.

Relief Supplies and Packages. Agreement with India.
TIAS 6617. 2 pp. 100.

Surplus Property — Second Rescheduling of Payments
Under Agreement of May 28, 1947. Memorandum of
agreement with Indonesia. TIAS 6618. 4 pp. 100.

Defense — Ballistic Missile Early Warning Station at
Fylingdales Moor, Yorkshire. Agreement with the
United Kingdom amending the agreement of February
15, 1960. TIAS 6619. 2 pp. 100.

Agricultural Commodities — Sales Under Title IV.

Agreement with Yugoslavia modifying the agreements
of April 21, 1962, as amended April 27, 1964, March 16,
1965, and July 16, 1965. TIAS 6620. 4 pp. 100.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Ghana.
TIAS 6621. 4 pp. 100.

Alien Amateur Radio Operators. Agreement with
Monaco. TIAS 6622. 5 pp. 100.

Transfer of Vessel — U.S.S. Geronimo. Agreement with
the RepubUc of China. TIAS 6623. ,6 pp. 100.

Settlement of Claims Relating to Gut Dam. Agreement
with Canada. TIAS 6024. 3 pp. 100.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Israel.
TIAS 6625. 6 pp. 100.

Telecommunications — Pre-sunrise Operation of Cer-
tain Standard (AM) Radio Broadcasting Stations.

Agreement with Canada amending the agreement of
March 31 and June 12, 1967. TIAS 6626. 3 pp. 100.

Defense — Release of Certain Lands from the Leased
Areas at Goose Bay, Newfoundland. Agreement with
Canada. TIAS 6627. 3 pp. 100.

Technical Cooperation. Agreement with Afghanistan
extending the agreement of June 30, 1953, as extended.
TIAS 6628. 3 pp. 100.

Load Lines. Procfes-verbal of rectification to the con-
vention of April 5, 1966, and its annexes. TIAS 6629.
16 pp. 150.

Customs — Temporary Importation of Professional
Equipment. Convention, with annexes, done at Brus-
sels Jime 8, 1961. TIAS 6630. 25 pp. 200.

Customs — A.T.A. Carnet for the Temporary Admission
of Goods. Convention, with annex, done at Brussels
December 6, 1961. TIAS 6631. 62 pp. 300.

Customs — E.C.S. Carnets for Commercial Samples.

Convention, with protocol of signature and annex.
TIAS 6632. 64 pp. 300.

Customs — Containers. Convention, with annexes and
protocol of signature. TIAS 6634. 33 pp. 200.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN

INDEX July 7, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1567

Colombia. President Nixon and President Lleras
of Colombia Review Common Goals of the
Americas (exchanges of remarks) .... S

Disarmament. President Nixon's News Confer-
ence of June 19 (excerpts) 1

International Organizations and Conferences.

Calendar of International Conferences ... 16

Latin America

President Nixon and President Lleras of Co-
lombia Review Common Goals of the Americas
(exchanges of remarks) 8

President Nixon's News Conference of June 19
(excerpts) 1

Military Affairs. U.S. and Spain Extend Defense
Agreement (joint statement, U.S. note, related
U.S. letters) 15

Near East. President Nixon's News Conference
of June 10 (excerpts) 1

Nigeria. Nigerian Relief Effort Improved by-
Agreement on New Surface Route (Fergu-
son) 14

Presidential Documents

President Nixon and President Lleras of Co-
lomliia Review Common Goals of the
Americas 8

President Nixon's News Conference of June 19
(excerpts) 1

Publications

Department Releases Second Volume of New

Compilation of Treaties 19

Recent Releases 19

Volume VIII In Foreign Relations Series for

1945 Released 19

Spain. U.S. and Spain Extend Defense Agree-
ment (joint statement, U.S. note, related U.S.
letters) 15

Treaty Information

Current Actions 18

Department Releases Second Volume of New

Compilation of Treaties 19

U.S. and Spain Extend Defense Agreement

(joint statement, U.S. note, related U.S.

letters) 15

U.S.S.R. President Nixon's News Conference of
June 19 (excerpts) 1

Viet-Nam

President Nixon's News Conference of June 19

(excerpts) 1

22d Plenary Session on Viet-Nam Held at Paris

(Walsh) 5

Name Index

Ferguson, C. Clyde, Jr 14

Lleras Restrepo, Carlos 8

Nixon, President 1, 8

Walsh, Lawrence 5

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: June 16-22

Press releases may be obtained from the OflBce
of News, Department of State, Washington, D.C.
20520.

No. Date Subject

*159 6/16 Popper sworn in as Ambassador

to Cyprus (biographic details).
160 G/16 Second volume of new treaty series
released.

♦161 6/17 Keating sworn in as Ambassador to
India (biographic details).

*162 6/17 Vance sworn in as Ambassador to
the Congo (Kinshasa) (bio-
graphic details).

*163 6/18 Gould sworn in as Ambassador to
Luxembourg (biographic details).

*164 6/18 Elbrick sworn in as Ambassador to
Brazil (biographic details).

*165 6/18 Toon sworn in as Ambassador to
Czechoslovakia (biographic de-
tails).
166 6/19 AValsh : 22d plenary session on
Viet-Nam at Paris.

*167 C/19 Looram sworn in as Ambassador to
Dahomey (biographic details).

*168 6/19 Davis sworn in as Ambassador to
Switzerland (biographic details).

tl69 6/19 Representatives to meeting of Joint
United States-Canadian Com-
mittee on Trade and Economic Af-
fairs, Washington, June 25-26.

170 6/20 Extension of defense agreement
with Spain.

tl71 6/20 Meyer : Inter-American Economic
and Social Coimcil, Port-of- Spain.

•Not printed.

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin.

Superintendent of Documents

u.s. oovernment printino office

washington. d.c. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. OOVERNMENT PHINTINO OFPICI

IM AVT O

20YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

Vol LXI, No. 1568

July H, 1969

INTER-AMERICAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAi COUNCIL
JMEETS AT PORT-OF-SPAIN

Statement hi/ Assistant Secretar-y Meyer
and Text of the Declaration of Port-of -Spain 21

THE ALTERED SHAPE OF WORLD POWER

Address hy Under Secretary Richardson. 27

THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

by Allen V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards 32

For index see inside hack cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1568
July 14, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

62 Issues, domestic $16, foreign $23
Single copy 30 cents
Use of funds for printing of this publication
approved by the Director of the Bureau of
the Budget (January 11, 1966).
Note: Contents of this pubUcation are not
copyrighted and items contained herein may be
reprinted. Citation of the DEPARTMENT OF
STATE BULLETIN as the source will be
appreciated. The BULLETIN Is indexed In
the Readers' Oulde to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
tcith 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 selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the Tf^hite House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as u-ell as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to uihich the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

Inter-American Economic and Social Council
Meets at Port-of-Spain

The sixth ministerial meeting of the Inter-
American Economic and Social Council teas
held at Port-of-SjJain, Trinidad and Tohago,
June 20-23. Folloxoing is a statement made in
plenary session on June 20 l>y Assistant Secre-
tary for Inter-American Affairs Charles A.
Meyer, the head of the U.S. delegation, together
with the text of the Declaration of Port-of-
Spain, which was adopted hy the Council on
June 23.

STATEMENT BY MR. MEYER

Before you, you see one of you who is proud —
not prideful in the sense of the deadly sins, but
rather one Noith American who has had the op-
portunity to redirect his attention to the service
of his country.

This man before you is also proud of serv-
ing in the American community of nations and
of his nation's partnersliip in that community.
This estadounidense is proud of President
Nixon's commitment to the hemisphere, recently
demonstrated by his request to the Congress for
funds to carry on the U.S. portion of the Al-
liance for Progress during the next fiscal year.

And I am proud for all of you, proud for the
progress — never adequately rapid when human
beings and historic cultures are involved —
which has been achieved under the Alliance for
Progress.

Particularly, perhaps, I am proud to have
been a part of the last week in Washmgton, D.C.
It was an exciting week for mter- American re-
lations. Foreign Minister Valdes of Cliile and
the Ambassadors of your coimtries called on
President Nixon June 11 to present the Consen-
sus of Vina del Mar. My President made clear
that he took tliis as a major and constructive
step. In the next 3 days, my wife and I were also
privileged to participate in the program of Co-
lombian President Carlos Lleras Eestrepo, his

wife, and his family. He was received with ex-
ceptional warmth ; and as you may know from
the U.S. press, he made a deep unpression on
my countrymen.

The first time, and imtil now the only time,
that I was privileged to attend a conference
such as this was in Buenos Aires in August
1957 — almost 12 full years ago. I have reviewed
the declaration of that conference, and I re-
spectfully suggest that this review is significant.
Twelve years have passed, and we are once again
preoccupied with substantially tlie same subject
matter, not, I submit, because there has been a
lack of good will on anyone's part but because
the process of development — which, after all, is
what we have been, are here, and in the future
will be concerned with — is a difficult, complex
process.

I have no magic solutions to offer. I doubt
anyone has. But with resolve, determination,
and the cooperation and mutual assistance of all
the nations of the hemisphere, we can neverthe-
less offer our peoples the promise of a better life
that will be theirs all the sooner, the harder we
work and the more effectively we cooperate.
There is, nevertheless, an essential ingredient to
which President Lleras referred last Saturday
at the Pan American Union: "Imagination."
Although our problems are great, so are our
resources and so is our determination. With
imagination and good will, our task will not be
insuperable.

I know that in any family circle, from your
family or mine to a family of nations, there will
always be disagreement; yet we can disagree
with each other without being disagreeable to
each other. We all have had challenges to our
internal societies and our external relationships.
Change is upon us, most of it good and most of
it, of coui-se, uncomfortable for some among us.

Change and imagination must go together. To
manage them, we need the clearest vision ever

JULY 14, 1969

President Nixon Sends Greetings
to lA-ECOSOC

Following is a message from President Nixon
which xcas read by Assistant Secretary Meyer in
plenary session of the Intcr-Amcrican Economic
and Social Council on June 20.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to ex-
press through Assistant Secretary Meyer my best
wishes for the Sixth Meeting of the lA-ECOSOC
and to thank its executive orjjan, CIAP [Inter-
American Committee on the Alliance for Prog-
ress!, for its contributions to the strengthening
of the development efforts of member states.

I am well aware that your countries are faced
with the immense task of speeding up economic
and social development over the next decade.
Demands on United States resources from grow-
ing domestic needs and our continuing world-
wide obligations are great. I assure you, however,
that my country is prepared to continue to assist
your efforts in a significant and meaningful way,
based on our belief in the close interdependence
of Latin America and the United States. Our
cooperation will naturally take into account your
views as expressed to Governor Rockefeller, in
CECLA [Special Committee for Latin Ameri-
can Coordination] and during your current
discussions.

I am confident that this meeting will focus on
approaches that will move all of us toward our
common goals in the quickest and most eflicient
way.

and perhaps the hardest work in modern his-
tory.

Here let me express some thoughts drawn
from my experience with a variety of people :

First, recognize that quality of leadership is
the difference between success and failure.

Second, remember that money is vital, but
only when its investment in people or projects
is ably managed.

Tliird, accept the fact that instant success is
impossible. Given the human cost of our prob-
lems, speed in solving them is essential; but
speed must not be at the expense of soundness.

Fourth, search for hidden human talents and
capacities, and then delegate authority and re-
sponsibility.

No one man nor group of men can plan suc-
cessfully for all men. Our job in government is
to create and maintain an environment in which
men and women can prosper. And this thought
is inherent in the purpose of the Alliance for
Progress.

So here we are — and now what?

Gentlemen, I suggest that we must do better.
I suggest that we must build, and build solidly,
and accept the respoiLsibility for what we do.

Landmarks such as the Act of Bogota, the
Charter of Pimta del Este, the Protocol of
Buenos Aires, and the Punta del Este Declara-
tion of Presidents affirm the inter-American
community's basic conviction that the status quo
must give way to constructive, peaceful change.
Building on the foundation of these landmarks,
we are still trjdng to fulfill all our hopes. In
striving now to give substance to our ideal, we
dare not, liowever, break down the institutions
on which we have labored over many difficult
years: the institutions of freedom and democ-
racy in the Americas, the heritage of a hemi-
sphere in which each nation respects the rights
of others, the indispensable mechanism of a com-
munity that affords equal respect and attention
to the wishes of large and small, wealthy and
poor, developed and underdeveloped.

If political democracy is to be meaningful,
after all, it must function within the framework
of an economic democracy that offers every man,
woman, and child the realistic expectation of
sharing in the opportunities and attaimnents of
our day. In the final analysis, economics must be
the servant of the people, one that advances
their hope and goals and brings about needed
social refonns and justice. This is our pui-pose
here today, and it is in this context, I believe,
that we must approach the task before us. It is
in this context that we must look at our past
record.

If we look for dramatic gains in the areas
of economic and social development, it is all
too clear that we have not accomplished all that
we should or all that we could. It is also clear
that the people of the Americas are impatient,
that they want to see more in terms of concrete
results and not merely hear more in the terms of
new promises.

Recognizing these inescapable facts for what
they are — and they are without doubt the most
crucial ones confronting this hemisphere — we
can nonetheless point to some very positive
achievements.

Indeed, there is much in the record to give
us reason for satisfaction in the partnership
for development we have forged in the Americas
during this decade of the sixties.

It is a partnership that now reaches into every
aspect of our inter- American life.

Its impact is evident on economic growth
charts in many areas of the hemisphere,

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BITLLETIN

although — this point camiot be emphasized too
strongly — it is entirely true that this impact has
not reached the level we hoped it would by
this time.

But economic growth must be seen in perspec-
tive with growth and progress in areas such as
school enrollment, numbers of teachers and
classrooms, health and life exjoectancy, science
and teclinology, regional integration, and bat-
tles against inflation.

I will not tell you of statistics or facts j^ou
already know. What it comes down to is that
good j^rogress has been made in some areas,
insufficient progress is all too evident in others,
and we are all in agreement that we must do
better.

I believe we should look upon the decade of
the sixties as a decade in which we built sound
economic and institutional bases for develop-
ment. Now we must build on those bases. I
think we have also established an awareness of,
a mentality toward, development that will con-
tinue to lead us in the future.

U.S. Commitment to Hemispheric Development

I know there have been many questions put
forward in the past months about where the new
United States administration stands on the pur-
poses and objectives of the Alliance for Prog-
ress. Therefore, to anyone who asks if we will
stick with them, I am here to tell you that our
answer is an unequivocal "Yes."

Requests now before the Congi-ess in support
of these purposes and objectives total ahnost $1
billion. As you know, President Nixon requested
the United States Congress to approve an ap-
propi'iation of $605 million for United States
economic assistance programs in Latin America.
He has also requested the Congress to approve
an appropriation of $300 million for our sched-
uled contributions to the Fund for Special
Operations of the Liter- American Development
Bank.

Supplementing these are the programs and
resources we make available to all developing
countries through the bilateral and multilateral
channels. The programs of the Organization of
American States, for instance, are becoming in-
creasingly important.

I could mention other items, and so could
each of you, but my intention is not to compose
a catalogue. I do want to demonstrate that this
administration is determined to continue and
improve our efforts in hemispheric develop-

ment. Such continuity is basic to our foreign
policy.

The United States, after all, is an integral
part of the Americas. Even as we believe in our
own national future, we believe in the future of
a hemisphere in which all nations are economi-
cally viable, socially conscious, and politically
responsive to the will of their peoples.

President Eisenhower affirmed this principle.
President Kennedy did likewise, as did Presi-
dent Johnson. Now, as the decade of the sixties
draws to a close, I am here to tell you that Presi-
dent Nixon has given liis solemn pledge that
his administration will do all within its power
not only to continue working toward this goal
but, in concert with the other nations of the
Americas, to help revitalize and give new direc-
tions to the effort needed to achieve it.

In short, what it comes down to is that United
States policy toward Latin America is in the
fullest sense a bipartisan policy in our national
political life, a policy subject — correctly — to
deep procedural review, but not to a relaxation
of commitment. As we have seen in the decade
of the sixties, there is wide agreement in the
United States over the high priority attached
to our relationship with Latin America. There
is also wide agreement that the priority must
find more effective expression.

The reports now before this Council under-
score what is all too clear: that the major part
of the job is yet before us. It is the extent to
which we will get on with it in the seventies,
and how we will get on with it, that we must
now search out.

And if we determine that the seventies will be
both a decade of consolidation and implementa-
tion, a decade in which we will seek ends as well
as beginnings, we have a chance to write an un-
paralleled chapter of achievement.

Continuing the Dialogue

I paint no glowing picture, nor do I imply
that we have but to wish to make it so. I do
mean to urge that, in the months ahead, we con-
tinue our earnest dialogue.

Governor Eockefeller is contributing to the
dialogue by carrying out liis mission for the
President, learning what you believe should be
the methods and procedures of our future part-
nership. Through this mission we are learning
facts, and though the learning process may be
difficult, we are determined — here, too — to stick
with it.

JTJLY 14, 1969

The Consensus of Vina del Mar is another
part of tliis dialogue. I believe everyone present
understood, even before our meeting, that we
would not be ready to respond to all of the points
it touches on a week after it was presented to
us, but we consider it a constructive and im-
portant contribution to today's agenda and to-
morrow's work.

Even at this early stage in this portion of
our dialogue, there are several points iu the
Consensus of Vina del Mar to which we can
respond.

1. Additioncdity and Aid Conditions

In our aid program we wish to reduce to the
extent possible requirements and practices ex-
traneous to develojjment which can impair the
quality of our assistance. In this regard the
President has authorized me to say that, effec-
tive immediately, the present practice of apply-
ing so-called "additionality" requirements to
U.S. aid will be discontinued. This action re-
flects the earnest desire of the President and his
administration to improve the effectiveness of
our assistance in doing what it is supposed to
do : promote development.

Moreover, the President will set up a task
force of distinguished citizens to make a com-
prehensive review of U.S. assistance programs.
One of the questions it will consider is the ap-
propriateness of the other special conditions at-
tached to our assistance that are mentioned in
the Consensus of Viiia del Mar.

2. Preferences

We were, of course, well aware of Latin Amer-
ica's interest in the trade preference issue, which
has been before UNCTAD [United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development] for
some time.

Nevertheless, this interest was dramatically
miderscored for the Secretary of State and my-
self when, recently, 22 Latin American cliiefs
of mission in Waslungton called on the Secre-
tary to express the great importance which the
American Republics attach to the establishment
of a system of generalized preferences. The
President a few days later authorized us to in-
form you that although our study of the prefer-
ences issue had not been concluded, he had
authorized the preparation of illustrative lists
for submission to the OECD [Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development] group
in Paris. We have now reached a point in our

work where it is clear that we can submit these
lists to the OECD in July, which will facilitate
preparations for early discussion in the
UNCTAD Special Committee on Preferences.

3. Coffee Diversification Fund

Consonant with the call in the Consensus of
Vina del Mar for broadening the sphei-e of ac-
tion of existing commodity agreements, I can
reaffirm the pledge of the United States for a
$15 million loan to the Diversification Fimd of
the International Coffee Organization. My Gov-
ernment looks forward to entering into negotia-
tion of this loan with the Fund at the meeting
of the International Coffee Council in August
of this year. We remain prepared to make a fur-
ther loan of up to $15 million to match contri-
butions of other consumer members of the coffee
agreement.

4. Multilateralization of Aid

President Nixon has already made clear his
deep pei-sonal interest in the Inter- American
Bank as an embodiment of the multilateral con-
cept in Western Hemisphere develoj^ment. In
a message read by Treasury Secretary Kennedy
to the Bank's Board of Governors at their 10th
annual meeting in Guatemala City, President
Nixon said : "The Inter- American Development
Bank stands as an outstanding example of
multilateral financial cooperation among the
nations of the Americas."

Still more recently, in his message to the Con-
gress on foreign assistance,^ President Nixon
said that we would direct our efforts to :

— Increasing jointly our contributions to in-
ternational development banks.

— Increasing jointly our contributions to the
United Nations technical assistance program.

— Acting in concert with other advanced
countries to share the cost of aid to individual
developing comitries.

One of his early acts as President was also to
endorse fuUy and urge congressional authoriza-
tion for the U.S. contribution of $480 million
to the second replenislmient of IDA [Interna-
tional Development Association]. Congress has
now granted that authorization. Moreover, as
the level of IDA operations increases, the United
States will support appropriate efforts leading
to a larger share of IDA resources for Latin
America.

^ For text, see Buixetin of June IC, 1969, p. 515.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLimN

5. Technical Cooperation

The cogent sections of the Consensus of Vina
del Mar on teclmical cooperation and scientific
and teclmological development include much of
the new direction President Nixon is giving to
U.S. teclinical assistance efforts. "We intend to
fit our teclinical cooperation to the national ob-
jectives of tlie host coimtry, to use and
strengthen host country technical agencies, to
increase multilateral teclmical cooperation.

6. Scientifio and Technological Development

In his message to last week's very fruitful
meeting of the Inter- American Cultural Coun-
cil, which considered a number of the problems
referi'ed to in the Consensus of Vina del Mar,
President Nixon said :

The United States has consistently advocated a vig-
orous approach to developing the ideas on education,
science, and technology that were expressed by the
Heads of American States In the Declaration of Punta
del Este. We continue to support the multinational
plans which will permit education, science, and tech-
nology to contribute even more fully to the development
of Latin America.

In consonance with this positive attitude, the
U.S. delegation to the lACC, as you know,
pledged full support to the Coimcil's programs
for the coming year. It is, moreover, the inten-
tion of the United States to improve methods
for the transfer of advanced teclmology to
Latin America and other regions of the devel-
oping world.

Contribution of Private Investment

At this point I would also like to reiterate
that my Government does not believe that pri-
vate investment can be the only vehicle for the
transfer of teclmology to the developing world,
just as we do not believe that such investment
can be the sole means of transferring resources.

In saying this, however, I am not saying that
private investment is unimportant. Such invest-
ment represents by far the largest source of
capital, teclmological, and managerial resources
available ; and as such its potential contribution
to development cannot be surpassed.

It is said that private investment results in a
net outflow of resources from the recipient coun-
try. To me this is like trying to capture a moving
situation with a still camera. Investment cannot
be considered simply as an accounting proce-
dure in which the direct inflow of new invest-

ment is measured against the direct outflow of
remittances. What must be considered is the
overall contribution in terms of increased pro-
duction, added employment, new exports
created, and impoits replaced. In short, it is the
continuing effect on economic activity and wel-
fare and not the short-term and partial effect
on the balance of payments in a fixed period
that is the true measure of the contribution of
investment

Objectives of Inter-American Cooperation

There are many more areas of cooperation
covered in the Consensus of Vina del Mar. Our
initial response after having the document such
a brief time necessarily must be incomplete. But
the most valuable proposal of the document is
its invitation to a new dialogue — which the
United States accepts.

And it is with tliis in mind that we have come
here prepared to agree that an ad hoc commit-
tee be established under the aegis of the lA-
ECOSOC, in which all member governments
would participate to review urgently the prin-
ciples, objectives, and methods of inter-
American cooperation to see if the process of
economic and social development in the area can
be accelerated through the adoption of new
policies, approaches, and programs.

I would anticipate that we could agree that
this ad hoc committee would begin its work in
October of this year and meet as frequently or
as long as necessary so that it can prepare rea-
soned, mature recommendations for eventual
adoption by the highest organ of our Organiza-
tion of American States next year.

For our part, my Government wiU plan to re-
examine all aspects of its policies. In the course
of this examination we wiU have very much
in mind the various positions set forth in the
Latin American Consensus of Vina del Mar, the
discussions we are having at this meeting, as
well as the observations your governments will
have made to Governor Rockefeller and the
report and recommendations that he will be
making to President Nixon.

I anticipate, too, that when we meet once
again in this ad hoc committee, fundamental
to the work of that committee will be the under-
standing that the economic and social develop-
ment of Latin America is a process that must
be conceived and carried out exclusively by the
peoples of Latin xVmerica in keeping with the

decisions that they adopt in accordance vdth
freely established national and regional objec-
tives. There can, of course, be no doubt that it
is a national responsibility to create domestic
conditions that will make possible an equitable,
rapid, and efficient economic and social devel-
opment ; and, I submit, imless this national re-
sponsibility is recognized and accepted, external
cooperation will be of little avail.

Finally, one last thought: As we go about
our work, here and in the future, let us be
guided by the words that greet us each time
we step from the elevator into the lobby of
this upside-down hotel — "Together we aspire,
together we acliieve." I am sure you will rec-
ognize this as the motto of Trinidad and
Tobago, our hosts here at this sixth annual
meeting of the Inter-American Economic and
Social Council,

DECLARATION OF PORT-OF-SPAIN =

Whereas :

The governments of the American states, inspired
by the principles of inter-American solidarity and
cooperation contained in the Declaration to the Peo-
ples of America, the Charter of Punta del E«te, the
Economic and Social Act of Rio de Janeiro, the
Declaration of the Presidents of America, and the Plan
of Action of Villa del Mar, pledged themselves, through
programs of common action, to a united effort to en-
sure social justice and dynamic and balanced economic
development for their peoples ;

As we near the end of the present decade, there is
still a serious disparity between aspirations and
achievements in meeting the economic and social needs
of the developing countries of the hemisphere, and
more rapid progress is needed in removing obstacles
to attainment of the goals enunicated in the inter-
American instruments mentioned above ;

There has been recognition of the urgent need to
define a new approach to hemispheric cooperation and
to seek new policies, objectives, and programs leading,
in the decade ahead, to balanced economic and social
development of the region at a significantly more rapid
pace. This development must be accelerated and must
respond to the legitimate aspirations of the peoiJles of
Latin America ;

The countries of the inter-American system are pre-

' Adopted on June 23.

paring themselves for a fruitful exchange of views
within the framework of that system aimed at ex-
panding the prospects for hemispheric cooperation.
As part of these preparations, the member countries
of the Special Committee for Latin American Coordi-
nation (CECLA) agreed upon a common position in
the Consensus of A'ina del Mar, a document of basic
importance as their contribution to the formulation of
new bases for inter-American economic and .social
cooperation. For the same puri)ose the United States
of America is carrying out the consultations and the
studies required for a review and reformulation of its
hemispheric policies ;

Any review of the policy of inter-American coopera-
tion must be based upon the understanding that:

a. The economic and social development of Latin
America is a process that must be conceived and
decided upon exclusively by its peoples ;

b. It is a national responsibility to create domestic
conditions and determine national and regional objec-
tives that will make possible an equitable, rapid, and
efficient economic and social development ; and

External cooperation has an essential complementary
function in economic and social development, w.hich
should evolve within a framework of solidarity and
mutual respect for the particular political, economic,
and cultural characteristics of each state.

The Sixth Annual Meeting of the Inter-American
Economic and Social Council at the Ministerial Level

Resolves :

1. To establish a Special Committee of the Inter-
American Economic and Social Council, on which all
its members will be represented, for the purpose of
preparing the bases and proposing suitable instru-
ments of action, in coordination with the Inter-Ameri-
can Cultural Council whenever appropriate, of a new
policy to strengthen hemispheric cooperation.

2. Based on the principles and objectives already
defined within the inter-American system, this new
policy shall be adapted to the Latin American pro-
posals contained in the Consensus of Vliia del Mar
and to the proposals to be presented by the United
States of America.

3. The Special Committee shall meet at the head-
quarters of the General Secretariat of the Organiza-
tion of American States, on October 20 of this year.

4. The conclusions and recommendations of this
Committee shall be submitted to a special meeting of
the Inter-American Economic and Social Council at
the ministerial level to begin on December 1, 1969, in
the Republic of Venezuela, in order to consider and
decide on these conclusions and recommendations. Also
the Council will establish or promote the establishment
of such mechanisms within the inter-American system
as may be necessary for their implementation.

DEPAKT31ENT OF STATE BULLETIN

The Altered Shape of World Power

hy Under Secretary Elliot L. Richardson ^

Seeing so many heads of large organizations
here is very impressive. However, we think that
the Department of State does pretty well when
it comes to organization, too. However, some-
times people say exaggerated things about us.
Professor Galbraith, for example, has called the
State Department the "most ornate bureaucracy
since the Ming Dynasty."

Well, we do have a Secretary, two Under
Secretaries, two Deputy Under Secretaries, 10
Assistant Secretaries, 35 Deputy Assistant Sec-
retaries, and assorted administrators, office di-
rectors, executive directors, directors general,
inspectors general, counselors, advisers, coordi-
nators, chairmen, chiefs, ambassadors, consuls,
and ministers, not to mention vast coveys of spe-
cial assistants, executive assistants, and liaison
officers. But to compare the Department of State
to the Ming Dynasty is a gross exaggeration.

Someone once said that doing busmess with-
out advertising is like winldng at a girl in the
dark. You know what you're doing, but nobody
else does.

Sometimes we feel a little bit like that here
in the Department. The requirements of di-
plomacy cause us to do most of our winking
in the dark. It is only when some crisis comes
along or some goof is exposed that the liglits
go on and everyone sees us thrashing about.

Today, rather than concentrating on crises
or mistakes I would like to speak rather broad-
ly about our apjDroach to foreign affairs and
to tell you what we think the changes that are
going on in the international political situation
mean for American foreign policy.

One of the more common human failings is
man's tendency to react to new phenomena with
old reflexes. We develop a set of attitudes and

^ Address made before the Advertising Council at
Washington, D.C., on June 9 (press release 157 dated
June 13).

way of seeing things — a gestalt, the psycholo-
gists call it — wliich makes us squeeze new or
unfamiliar information into precast and often
inappropriate conceptual molds.

Frequently we do not even realize that our
responses are so geared. "Practical men," Lord
Keynes wrote, "who believe themselves to be
quite exempt from any intellectual influ-
ences are usually the slaves of some defunct
economist."

Similarly, generals are often the slaves of
strategies designed for other wars and diplo-
mats are prone to retain postures and policies
based on conditions of a world that has passed.

But in today's rapidly changing world, tliis
kind of perceptual lag can be dangerous and
costly.

For the world of 1969 is not the world of
1959, and it certainly is not the world of 1949.
Two decades ago the cold war was at its peak.
The alliance formed in the Second World War
had come apart. In the familiar words of Win-
ston Churchill: From Stettin in the Baltic to
Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain de-
scended across the Continent of Europe. Com-
munism had taken over Poland, Bulgaria, Ro-
mania, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia. Greece,
Turkey, and Finland were under serious threat.
The world was polarized into two camps, armed
aiad hostile.

Today the situation has improved. The viru-
lent hostility that marked the Stalin era has
diminished, and we and the Soviet Union are
seeking accommodation in areas of mutual in-
terest. Power alignments are more confused,
and the world is generally less polarized.

Let me outline for you what I believe to be
some of the most significant elements of the
emerging situation :

First, the driving force of political ideologies
is receding. Nationalism, which seemed on the

JULY 14, 1969

wane 20 years ago, has not only proved its dura-
bility but has shown itself as perhaps the major
political motivating force of our time. National
interests continue to bo the primary influence in
determining international behavior. At times
even subnational interests appear the strongest
driving force. The tribal warfare that has
ripped apart Nigeria, the racial, religious,
ethnic, and linguistic quarrels that have caused
periodic eruptions in nations as diverse as
Canada, Belgium, Northern Ireland, and
Malaysia, are examples.

Secondly, the unity of Communist discipline
or dogma is increasingly a phenomenon of the
past. In fact, the term "Commmiist" now covers
such a multiplicity of states, parties, and tend-
encies as to have little usefulness.

Last year's invasion of Czechoslovakia by the
Soviet Union and five of the eight "Warsaw
Pact nations rocked the Communist movement
and pro\dded a striking illustration of the wide
divergencies that now exist. Condemnation by
Communist parties in Western Europe was
almost universal, and several of them became
embroiled in bitter internal disputes with ele-
ments remaining loyal to Moscow, Romania
and Yugoslavia publicly criticized the invasion.
The Chinese Communists and the Albanians also
blasted the move with their usual vociferous
polemics. In his rather mimitable fashion Fidel
Castro managed the feat of being at odds with
both Communist China and the Soviet Union,

The break between Peking and Moscow pro-
vides a vivid example not only of the split in
the Communist world but also of the priority
given to national interests over the require-
ments of ideology. As border conflict and ten-
sions have built up, both Moscow and Peking
have cast aside ideological niceties for consider-
ations of security and self-interest. Moscow is
showing interest in Nationalist China, A Soviet
journalist believed to have high governmental
connections recently journeyed to Taiwan and
conferred at length with Chiang Kai-shek's son
Chiang Ching-kuo.

Meanwhile, Peking, when it is not alleging
dark schemes of collusion between Moscow and
Washington, has been making friendly noises
toward Yugoslavia, which until recently it had
pictured as the blackest of all the black revision-
ist states. In March it signed a trade agreement
with Belgrade, the first in over 10 years.

Along with the decline in the unity of the
Communist world has come a decline in com-
mumsm's appeal to the underdeveloped coim-
tries. Two decades ago there was widespread

fear that conamunism would sweep Africa and
Asia like a brushfire. The strong demand for
economic development, it was thought, would
make the central j^lanning aspects of commu-
nism appealing, if only on the grounds of
efficiency. Not only have these fears proved
unfounded, but communism has made surpris-
ingly little headway anywhere in the under-
developed world. Both the Russians and Chinese
have been rebuffed by many Afi'ican countries
in their attempts to gain influence. Commu-
nism was also rejected by Indonesia. The desire
of the new countries to preserve their hard-
won national independence caused them to fend .
off any aid or influence which looked as if it
might limit their freedom. Many nationalist
revolutions have occurred, but Commimists have
been unable to take them over. During the past
year two of Africa's better known Communist
parties have even resorted to changing their
names to enhance their appeal,

I might add, parenthetically, that the decline
of ideology in international affairs seems to be
matched by a parallel decline in domestic poli-
tics. Today's electorate often cares less about a
man's views than about such intangibles as
"style" or "subliminal appeal." The dissatisfied
or confused voter seems often to be more im-
pressed by the fact that a candidate offers ac-
tion, change, excitement, or movement than by
the ideological content of what he espouses. He
may back the man even if he is opposed to the
direction he advocates or does not understand
what it is. One of the puzzling political phe-
nomena of last year, for example, was that
some backers of Robert Kennedy turned to sup-
port George Wallace after Kennedy's death.

Finally, the resurgence of nationalism has
been accompanied by a decline in the ability of
the great powers to impose their will and en-
force their authority on their allies. The physi-
cal strength of the great powers is greater than
ever, but their authority is not commensurate
with that strength. Witness, for example, the
difficulties the Soviet Union has had in keeping
its satellites in line.

Theodore Draper puts it this way:

Power that cannot be used or can be used only in
rare, special and self-destructive circumstances is
a different kind of power from the one on which he-
gemonies have traditionally been based. . . . The
smaller powers have not become so much stronger ; the
great powers have become somewhat weaker.

The large powers have found it increasingly
difficult to determine the appropriate response
to small-power provocation. The strategic con-

DEPAKTMENT OF STATE BtJtX.ETrN'

cept of a graduated response has been under-
mined by the Viet- Nam experience. If the large
power voluntarily abstains from using its full
power or feels the strategic situation to be such
that it cannot do so, it in effect loses the ad-
vantages of being a big power.

In its brutal occupation of Czechoslovakia,
the Soviet Union was forced to revert to a tra-
ditional massive use of power far exceeding the
need at the cost of international prestige and
good will. Even then, it was not able to force all
its demands.

What do tliese metamorphoses in the world
situation mean for United States policy? They
mean, I believe, some readjustment of our
sights.

Our objectives must be reshaped and brought
into line with current realities. In the more
fluid, less polarized world that is emerging, it
is necessary to stay more loose and act more
pragmatically. The criteria for judgment are
more subtle. Doctrinaire analysis and categori-
cal assumptions are less useful. More than ever
the assumptions which guide international po-
litical life are impressionistic and empirical
rather than highly determinate or ideological.

For this reason, historical analogy is more
dangerous than ever. I question, for instance,
the relevance of Munich to Viet-Nam, but I
also question whether our experience in Viet-
Nam should preca.st future decisions for differ-
ent situations under different circumstances.

We must also be mindful of the fact that we
cannot accomplish everything both at home and
abroad that we might like to accomplish. Nor
are all our objectives equally important. We
must weigh the benefits of foreign involvement
in relation to their costs more carefully than we
have done in recent years.

In his last state of the Union message. Presi-
dent Eisenhower said : "We must not return to
the crash-program psychology of the past when
each new feint by the Communists was re-
sponded to in panic." ~

This is advice it would be well to heed.

It is especially important that we not react
precipitously. Any new American responsibili-
ties overseas must be undertaken only with
great care and upon sober study and reflection.
We must avoid sliding into any foreign com-
mitment through neglect, by inadvertence, or
by rash or overquick response.

Greater emphasis must also be put on the use
of influence and example as opposed to the di-

' Bulletin of Jan. 30, 1961, p. 139.

rect instruments of power. In the last analysis,
the influence we can-y in the world will derive
not from the power of our weapons but from
the worth of our example. How persuasive we
are will to large extent depend on how well
we heal our own divisions and how effectively
we carry out our work.

The altered shape of world power requires
that we judge each threat or crisis carefully
and on its merits, without regard to rigid pre-
conception. Such a workmanlike, quiet, nondoc-
trinaire approach is, I believe, the best way to
strengthen the foundations of peace in the era
we now enter.

23d Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made hy
Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge, head of the
U.S. delegation, at the 23d plenary session of
the new meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on
June 26.

Press release 175 dated June 26

Ladies and gentlemen : The United States is
participating in these Paris meetings because
it wants the war in Viet-Nam to come to a
negotiated end. Our country will examine every
avenue that may lead to peace.

It is unfortunate, therefore, that your side
persistently distorts the meaning of our words
and of our actions. It is unfortunate that while
we search for common ground, you reject, as
you did last week, our efforts to build a base for
progress in these negotiations.

Last week a spokesman for your side depre-
cated our effort to find common ground between
us. He argued that it was not possible to find
such common ground. To prove his point, he
once again levied unreasonable unilateral de-
mands. He demanded that we withdraw our
forces unconditionally from South Viet-Nam.
He insisted that we simply accept the formation
of a so-called provisional coalition government,
trying to create the impression — which must be
described as misleading — that the imposition of
such a government on the South Vietnamese
people would preserve their right of self-deter-
mination even though it would be imposed with-
out either consulting the people or obtaining
their approval. Finally, he continued to charge
us with intensifying the war. This was your

JULY 14, 1969

side's answer to our continuing search for com-
mon ground and a path to progress. It must be
described as negative.

To us, "common ground" involves negotia-
tions and compromise, examination and ex-
change of views. At Midway, President Thieu
and President Nixon carefully reviewed their
own proposals as well as your side's 10 points.'
The two Presidents indicated their conviction
that their proposals represent a reasonable basis
for peace. They also observed that despite the
fact that your side's 10-point proposal con-
tained certain unacceptable provisions, there
were certain points which appear not too far
from the positions taken by the Government
of the Eepublic of Viet-Nam and the United
States.

We will continue to search for common
ground on the key issues of self-determination
of the South Vietnamese people. You claim that
you seek self-determination for the people of
South Viet-Nam. If in fact you mean what you
say, there is no reason why the South Vietnamese
themselves cannot get together to discuss and
determine their political future. I remind you
once again that the President of the Republic
of Viet-Nam has long since made clear his will-
ingness to talk directly with your side on these
matters. As President Nixon said in his press
conference of June 19 : -

. . . President Thieu has offered to have inter-
nationally supervised elections to let the people of
South Viet-Nam determine whether they want his
government or some other government.

It would seem that if the provisional government,
which also claims to represent the people of South
Viet-Nam, really means that, they would accede to
this request and agree to internationally supervised
elections.

Your side came to these Paris meetings know-
ing they had as a purpose negotiations with the
Government of the Rei^ublic of Viet-Nam.

President Nixon also stated in iiis press con-
ference on June 19 :

As far as the United States is concerned, we will
accept any decision that is made by the people of South
Viet-Nam, but we think that the provisional govern-
ment should join with the Government of South Viet-
Nam and any other political parties in South Viet-Nam
in participating in supervised elections.

' For remarks by President Nixon and President
Thieu and text of a joint statement issued following
their talks at Midway Island on June 8, see Bulletin
of June 30, 1969. p. 549.

'■' Bulletin of July 7, 1969, p. 1.

Instead of a genuine effort to achieve freedom
of choice for the people of South Viet-Nam,
your side unfortunately continues to demand the
replacement of the legitimate government in
South Viet-Nam before serious negotiations can
begin. This cannot be described as a sincere ef-
fort to find common ground or to negotiate ; it
is an effort to predetermine the outcome of the
negotiation before it has begun. It must be char-
acterized as an unreasonable position which
delays progress at these meetings. As President
Nixon made clear in his press conference on
June 19, we categorically reject your demand
that we "replace" the legitimate Government of
the Republic of Viet-Nam.

At the 18th plenary session, I reviewed sev-
eral issues on which there appeared to be some
common ground between us. President Nixon,
in his address on May 14, said : ^

We have no objection to reunification, if that turns
out to be what the people of South Viet-Nam and the
people of North Viet-Nam want ; we ask only that the
decision reflect the free choice of the people concerned.

Your point 7 states that the reunification of
Viet-Nam will be achieved step by step, by
peaceful means ; through discussions and agree-
ment between the two zones, without foreign
interference. If your position is that the people
of North Viet-Nam and the people of South
Viet-Nam should decide this question, there is
considerable common ground between our posi-
tion and yours.

Another such issue is the question of relations
between North and South Viet-Nam pending
reunification, which is a matter for North Viet-
Nam and South Viet-Nam to decide.

Another issue is restoration of the demili-
tarized zone and respect for the provisional mili-
tary demarcation line. Your point 7 states that
the military demarcation line is only provisional
and does not constitute a permanent political
boundary. We agree to that. We also agree that
precise arrangements should be worked out re-
garding the status of the DMZ and movements
across the provisional military demarcation line.

Another issue on which there seems to be com-
mon groimd is that of prisoners of war. Presi-
dent Nixon's proposals call for arrangements to
be made for the earliest possible release of pris-
oners of war on both sides. Your point 9 states
that the parties will negotiate the release of
prisoners captured in the war.

' For text, see Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

DEPARTSIENT OF STATE BULLETIN

President Nixon's proposals provide that all
parties would agree to observe the Geneva ac-
cords of 1954 regarding Cambodia and the Laos
agreements of 1962. Your side's 10-point pro-
gram calls for respect for the 1962 Geneva
agreements on Laos and for Cambodia's inde-
pendence, sovereignty, neutrality, and terri-
torial integrity. Wliile your program states that
this is a policy wliich South Viet- Nam should
carry out, we believe it is necessary that North
Viet-Nam also follow the same policy. In fact,
North Viet-Nam is already a party to the 1954
Geneva accords relating to Cambodia and to the
1962 Laos agreements.

We also support the principles of independ-
ence, sovereignty, unity, and territorial integ-
rity, as recognized by the 1954 Geneva accords
and which you mention in your first, point.

There seems to be common ground on a num-
ber of other military questions. For example,
President Nixon has stated that we seek no bases
in Viet-Nam and that we insist on no military
ties. We have also said in the past that we seek
no permanent military establishment in Viet-
Nam. In this connection it is to be noted that
your program would prohibit foreign military
bases, foreign troops, and foreign military
alliances for North and South Viet-Nam.

We also will continue to search for common
ground on the key military issue: the with-
drawal of all non-South Vietnamese forces. I
continue to regret that on these major military
questions your side distorts not only our words
but our deeds.

Last week, for example, you termed the
planned replacement of 25,000 U.S. troops by
the end of August as opening a "door to war."
This is a complete and irresponsible misrepre-
sentation of a major initiative taken by Presi-
dent Nixon and President Thieu. As President
Nixon said at Midway June 8, the decision
"marks a significant step forward in achieving
our goal of protecting the right of self-determi-
nation for the people of South Viet-Nam and
in bringing lasting peace to the Pacific." As he

has said since Midway, fm^ier reductions will
take place, and their niunbers will depend upon
any or all of three factors: the training and
equipment of the South Vietnamese armed
forces, the military situation in South Viet-
Nam, and the progress which can be made in the
Paris talks.

If you join us in a mutual withdrawal of non-
South Vietnamese forces, movement toward
peace — toward an end to the suffering and de-
struction in South Viet-Nam — could be quick.
As we said last week, tlie simplest solution is for
the United States and the DEV both to with-
draw their armed forces. We have agreed to do
this if you will. We are readj' to withdraw our
armed forces from South Viet-Nam as the forces
of the DEV are withdrawn from South Viet-
Nam, Cambodia, and Laos to North Viet-Nam.
Meanwhile, the war goes on. You have accused
us of intensifying it. The truth, as President
Nixon made clear in his press conference
June 19, is that United States forces have not
intensified their military operation but have
only responded to what the other side has done.
The United States is not responsible for the
present level of fighting. President Nixon said :

It takes two in order to reduce the level of fighting,
and I would only suggest that if the enemy now will
withdraw forces, one-tenth of its forces, as we have
withdrawn one-tenth of our combat forces, that would
tend to reduce the level of fighting.

The President also said in that press conference
that we want supervised cease-fires.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are here to seek
a negotiated settlement of the war in Viet-Nam.
By concrete actions the United States and the
Eepublic of Viet-Nam have shown that our side
seeks peace. Further, we will continue to search
at these meetings for common ground between
the positions of your side and the positions of
ours. If you will not join us in this search, then
the responsibility for the continuation of the
war will rest with you. We in this room have an
obligation to move toward peace. It is in that
spirit that we should proceed.

JtTLY 14, 1969

The Scientific Community and International Cooperation

Jy Allen V. Astin

Director, National Bureau of Standards ^

Throughout history men have struggled to
overcome their distrust and control their ag-
gressiveness in order to work cooperatively with
their neighbors. Because acts of defense and
aggression are usually more dramatic than those
of cooperation, they receive primary emphasis
in the history books; but it is acts of coopera-
tion which have brought us out of savagery
into today's advanced and highly interdepend-
ent society.

We still have disadvantaged nations, and in
the more fortunate nations we have entirely too
many millions of disadvantaged people. We now
stand in the shadow of nuclear catastrophe, and
if we avoid that trap we still will be confronted
by the population "bomb," which may be just
as threatening to the world as we know it. But
as the TV advertising jingle puts it, we've "come
a long, long way."

As a man who has devoted his life to the
work of science, it pleases me to look about and
see that the example and the determination of
the scientific community have been important
factors in promoting international understand-
ing and cooperation. Even when nations have
been unable to cooperate on anything else, there
has been international cooperation in scientific
research and the dissemination of scientific
knowledge.

It is not that scientists as individuals are
unusually free from emotional bias or that they
necessarily see more clearly than others as they
look ahead toward the improvement of the qual-
ity of life. I think the explanation lies in the

' Address made before the Beta Epsilon Chapter of
Phi Lambda Upsilon at the Drexel Institute of Tech-
nology, Philadelphia, Pa., on Apr. 8.

nature of science itself. Since science is con-
cerned with external phenomena which are usu-
ally measurable and whose manifestations are
demonstrable and repeatable, there is less cause
for disagreement, for controversy, than there
is, say, in politics or even economics. Further-
more, the preoccupations of the scientists are
usually less charged with emotion than are those
of the politician or the economist. The con-
sideration of political or economic plans or
policies tends to arouse the passions; whereas
deliberations on the origin of cosmic rays, the
structure of the atomic nucleus, or the weight
of a cubic centimeter of water tend to proceed
more calmly.

One of the earliest examples of international
cooperation in science, however, came about
largely as the result of an economic pressure:
the need for a uniform system of weights and
measures which would bring convenience and
honesty to commercial transactions.

As late as the middle of the 19th century, the
measurement systems in the various countries
engaged in international commerce added up to
a state of considerable confusion. Encouraged
by men of science, who were beginning to need
uniformity in measurement far more than did
the merchants, governments were seeking to im-
prove the measurement systems, and basic meas-
urement standards were being made more pre-
cise. But it was not until 1872 that the French
Government brought together delegates from
26 states to form the Commission Internationale
du Metre. It was the work of this body which,
in 1875, brought fortli the Convention du Metre
and established the permanent International
Bureau of Weights and Measures.

This action accelerated the already growing

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN

spread of the metric system throughout the
world, until today approximately 90 percent
of the world's population uses or is com-
mitted to the metric system in its commerce
and the United States is virtually isolated. The
use of the metric system was made legal in this
country in 1866, but 102 years passed before the
Congress authorized a study to determine if
it should be our dominant or sole system of
measurement. A major study is now underway
at the National Bureau of Standards to evalu-
ate the pros and cons of conversion. The results
of that study may well determine this coun-
try's course of action.

In the world of science, however, the metric
language is the universal language. In the
United States, as well as in Great Britain and
the U.S.S.R., the meter and the gram have long
since displaced units such as the yard and the
ounce in scientific measurement and communi-
cation. As we shall see, this tendency toward
cooperation despite all obstacles is a character-
istic of the international scientific community.

The International Bureau of Weights and
Jleasures, which is maintained at the common
expense of the cooperating nations, has its head-
quarters in the beautiful Pavilion Breteuil and
functions as a tiny international enclave within
French territory. Its primary function has been
to provide the basis for compatible measure-
ments tliroughout the world. It also serves to
encourage the development of more precise
standards of measurement and to coordinate the
improvements in both technology and methods
of measurement as they are developed by such
agencies as our National Bureau of Standards.

International Council of Scientific Unions

The success of the International Bureau of
Weights and Measures encouraged scientists to
seek other and broader avenues of cooperation.
As the early decades of the 20th century un-
folded, it was increasingly obvious that science
was becoming a new and immensely powerful
force in the world. National scientific acade-
mies and national institutes or councils for sci-
entific research were proliferating, numbering
on their rosters a large percentage of the scien-
tists of the world.

To avoid duplication of efi'ort, and to serve
as a nucleus for the promotion of large interna-
tional scientific projects, a central body made

up of representatives of the various national
bodies was needed. The International Council of
Scientific Unions was created for this purpose.
ICSU has grown until it now includes in its
membersliip some 51 national academies of
science or national councils for scientific re-
search and 14 international unions.

"Wlien scientists from several countries are
interested in projects which call for collabora-
tion of several disciplines, joint committees are
formed under the umbrella of ICSU. The Joint
Commission on Applied Eadioactivity, for
example, brought together members of the
Unions of Geodesy and Geophysics, Pure and
Applied Physics, Pure and Applied Chemistry,
Biology, Physiology, and Biochemistry to study
problems arising in the use of basic research in
techniques of radioactivity.

When ICSU is faced with a project which
is very large, drawing from a number of na-
tions and disciplines, requiring large amounts
of money and manpower, and presenting com-
plex problems in logistics, a special committee
is formed whose sole charge is to carry forward
this particular project. Certainly the most fa-
mous of these was the Comit« Special Annce
Geophysique Internationale, which was respon-
sible for the International Geophysical Year
(IGY). I'll have some comments about IGY
in a moment.

Scientific committees are also set up for con-
tinuing work in areas of great international
interest. For example, the Scientific Committee
on Oceanic Research was set up to undertake
studies such as the influence of the oceans on
world climate, the fertility of the sea, and the
disposal of radioactive wastes. The Scientific
Committee on Antarctic Research was set up
to continue scientific activities in the Antarctic
begun during the IGY. The Scientific Commit-
tee on Space Research was created in 1960 to
promote the use of satellites in scientific re-
search and to arrange for the exchange of data
derived from satellite research.

Success of the International Geophysical Year

The IGY, wliich was organized under ICSU
auspices, began on July 1, 1957, and extended
through December 1958. It was an important
milestone on the road to international scientific
cooperation. Some 50,000 scientists, teclinicians,
and observers f I'om more than 60 nations made

JULY 14, 1969

simultaneous worldwide observations of the
earth and its immediate cosmic environment and
carried out a broad program of experimentation.
United States participation was planned and
directed by the U.S. National Committee, which
was organized by the National Academy of
Sciences and the National Kesearch Council.
The National Bureau of Standards was respon-
sible for the ionospheric data program in the
"Western Hemisphere.

Long before ICSU was formed, IGY had two
antecedents. In 1882-1883 some 20 coimtries
joined forces in the first International Polar
Year. This was a program of observation and
experimentation carried out in the high north-
em latitudes and was concerned principally
with surface meteorology, geomagnetism, and
the aurora borealis. The second International
Polar Year, 50 years later, involved scientists
from 40 countries, and the range of experiments
was broadened to include ionospheric studies.

IGY, building upon these two previous pro-
grams, was a success probably far exceeding the
dreams of its originators. Experimenters or ob-
servers worked at more than 4,000 stations rang-
ing from icepacks in the Arctic to the South
Pole in Antarctica; from underwater trenches
in the Pacific Ocean to satellites in space orbit.
Among its offspring are the Antarctic research
program, the World Magnetic Survey, the In-
dian Ocean Survey, the International Year of
the Quiet Sun, and a variety of research projects
in connection with the space program.

The Antarctic Treaty

IGY had one other result which may, in the
long run, prove to be of even greater impor-
tance : the Antarctic Treaty. Encouraged by the
cooperative attitude of the various nations en-
gaged in the IGY program, the United States
took the initiative in suggesting a permanent
arrangement for international research in Ant-
arctica and a guarantee that this great frontier
region would be used for peaceful purposes
only.

An international conference on Antarctica
was held in "Washington in 1959, with 12 nations
attending. The outcome of the conference was
the Antarctic Treaty, which was signed, subject
to ratification by the governments concerned,
on December 1, 1959.^ It provides that in the
Antarctic area there shall be freedom of scien-

tific investigation and that the area shall be
used for peaceful purposes only. It bans nuclear
explosions and the disposal of radioactive
wastes in Antarctica, pending general interna-
tional agreement on the subject, but does not
prohibit the use of nuclear reactors. It grants
to the signatories the right of inspection and
aerial observation in all areas of Antarctica and
obligates the parties to ensure that no one en-
gages in activities conti-ary to the principles or
purposes of the treaty. For the duration of the
treaty it prohibits the making of new territorial
claims, the enlarging of existing claims, and the
use of activities in Antarctica as a basis for as-
serting, supporting, or denying territorial
claims. Finally, the treaty provides for periodic
meetings among the signatories and includes an
accession clause permitting members of the
United Nations or other countries unanimously
agreed upon to acquire the rights and obliga-
tions set forth in the treaty.

The United Kingdom was the first state to
ratify the treaty. The United States was the
fifth. The treaty entered into force on June 23,
1961, after Argentina, Australia, and Chile de-
posited their instruments of ratification.

Since that time the signatories have demon-
strated that nations can work together in a
permanent arrangement which requires a high
degree of cooj^eration and mutual trust. Nations
send official representatives on one another's
relief and supply expeditions, exchange person-
nel and information on their Antarctic proj-
ects, and participate in joint research projects.
Despite some early apprehensions of possible
difficulty, numerous inspections have been car-
ried out under the provision of the treaty with
complete cooperation of everyone concerned.

Thus it appears that valid and unportant
scientific goals can lead governments away from
narrow nationalistic rigidities toward free and
constructive international cooperation.

The results of these activities culminating in
the IGY and the Antarctic Treaty were spec-
tacular. For the first time, the way was open
to coordinated and continuing investigations
in the atmospheric and earth sciences on a global
scale. Instead of limited bilateral cooperation
in developing and exchanging information, we
now began to enjoy true mternational coopera-
tion in a wide range of activities.

'For text, see Bulletin of Dec. 21, 1959, p. 914.

DEPARTirENT OF STATE BULLETIN

Standard Reference Data

Fundamental to the advancement of science
and technology is the compilation, evaluation,
and dissemination of data; for example, on the
properties of matter and materials. In June
1963, the United States Government established
the National Keference Data System (NEDS)
under the administration of the National
Bureau of Standards. The Office of Standard
Reference Data was formed within the Bureau
and assigned coordination and contracting
responsibility for the NEDS.

Data collected include nuclear, atomic and
molecular, solid state, crystallographic, ther-
modynamics and transport, chemical kinetics,
colloid and surface properties, and mechanical
properties. Eaw data result from measure-
ments made by scientists in any part of the
world. Critical evaluation varies widely from
project to project but normally includes a re-
view of the experimental teclinique and the
accuracy of calculations, a check on the values
and measurement bases used, and an assess-
ment of the limits of experimental uncertainty.

International cooperation in standard refer-
ence data activities is of long standing. The In-
ternational Critical Tables, produced mainly in
the 1920-1930 decade, contain contributions
from scientists all over the world. The Tables of
Landolt-Bornstein, once a German effort, now
are produced through the cooperative effort of
scientists from many countries.

Bilateral arrangements relating to standard
reference data involve the United States with
the United Kingdom, Japan, France, and the
U.S.S.E. But perhaps the most promising de-
velopment came in 1966 when the International
Council of Scientific Unions established a Com-
mittee on Data for Science and Technology
(CODATA). This committee serves as a chan-
nel of communication among various standard
reference data projects around the world, en-
courages scientists to partake in projects of this
type, and makes recommendations about needs
and priorities.

Membership in CODATA at this time in-
cludes representatives from the United States,
United Kingdom, U.S.S.E., France, Germany,
and Japan, plus representatives of scientific
unions which want to participate.

Several standard reference data projects
which began unilaterally have become bases for

international cooperation. An example is the
reception whicli the recent Madrid Conference
on Molecular Spectroscopy gave to recommen-
dations on applications of computers to digiti-
zation, storage, and retrieval of spectral data.
The presentation was derived from conclusions
reached previously at the ad hoc Conference on
Computer Utilization in Spectroscopy, orga-
nized for the Office of Standard Eeference Data
by the National Academy of Sciences-National
Eesearch Council. These recommendations pro-
vided the basis for a voluntary set of contribu-
tions and eventual exchange of high-quality
infrared spectra.

Calibration of Instruments

Another approach to accuracy in interna-
tional measurements is through dependable and
precise instriunent calibration. Each comitry
has its own system, and these systems are inter-
connected through a pyramidal network termi-
nating at the International Bureau of Weights
and Measures. But even though this system has
improved the compatibility of measurements,
frequent loss of accuracy at different levels of
the pyramid and the delays and inconveniences
associated with packing and shipping instru-
ments to and from calibration centers leave
much to be desired.

A partial solution is the growing use of
Standard Eeference Materials. These materials
provide a reference point for calibration
through a certifiable physical or chemical prop-
erty of a particular material and permit on-site
calibration.

A program to furnish such Standard Eefer-
ence Materials has been operated by the Na-
tional Bureau of Standards for over 66 years.
It now has over 650 SEM's in more than 70
different categories in stock. Last year alone
saw 66 new SEM's produced, certified, and is-
sued ; 74 renewed ; 146 started as renewal items ;
and 54 discontinued.

Of the 40,000 imits which have been sold to
customers, about 10,000 have been purchased by
other comitries. These materials occupy almost
a unique position of recognition and acceptance
throughout the world.

In pursuit of the goal of broadening the in-
ternational scope of the Standard Eeference
Material program, the National Bureau of

JTJIiT 14, 1969

Standards is holding an international meeting
at Gaithersburg, Maryland, in 1969. Partici-
pants will include representatives from coun-
tries which at present make available Standard
Reference Materials for industrial use. The
sponsor for the meeting will be the Interna-
tional Committee on Weights and Measures.
Tlie meeting will focus on ways and means to
establish a coordinated international program
in Standard Reference Materials.

International Standards Organizations

As the world's technology and commerce be-
came more complex, it was increasingly appar-
ent that the establishment of standards —
engineering, product, safety — was vital to prog-
ress. To meet this need, three international
groups have been formed: the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO), the
International Electrotechnical Commission
(lEC) , and the Pan American Standards Com-
mission (COPANT). National standards orga-
nizations work with and through these interna-
tional organizations to develop voluntary
standards which are mutually acceptable and
which bring order to the marketplace.

In the United States, the original national
group was formed in 1918 as the American En-
gineering Standards Committee. It was expand-
ed in 1928 to become the American Standards
Association; and in 1966, under a new consti-
tution and bylaws, it became the USA Stand-
ards Institute. USASI is a federation of more
than 100 technical, professional, and trade orga-
nizations. The voluntary standards developed
by these groups are used nationally after the
institute determines that they have been devel-
oped in accordance with its procedures.

USASI also represents the United States in
ISO, lEC, and COPANT. In view of the fact
that ISO has some 55 member countries, and
lEC approximately 40, the importance of this
representation becomes apparent. Standards
which are in conflict with U.S. standards can
seriously interfere with sales of our goods and
services abroad. Standards which are compati-
ble with U.S. standards improve the acceptabil-
ity of our products and services.

Unfortunately, our participation in the de-
velopment of international standards has not
been as active as it might have been. Currently,
in the approximately 122 committees active in
ISO, the United States holds only 13 secretar-
iats; in the 66 committees of lEC we have 19

secretariats. However, efforts are underway to
correct this situation, and I think we can expect
considerable progress in the near future.

International Meteorological Programs

The all-pervasive importance of weather is
opening up another major area of international
scientific cooperation. In the weather satellites,
the airborne instrument packages, the ground-
based stations, the ships and buoys dotting the
oceans, and high-speed digital computers we
have the technology for observing, collecting, ■
and interpreting comprehensive weather data
for the entire globe. But this system for
accurate, worldwide weather prediction can-
not be implemented by any single nation.
It can be achieved only through international
cooperation.

An increasing spirit of cooperation in the
meteorological field during the past century,
coupled with the rapid advances in technology
since World War II, prompted the President
of the United States in 1961 to propose to the
United Nations a new and stronger effort to
solve the world weather prediction problem.
The response was two resolutions which called
upon the World Meteorological Organization
and the ICSU to develop measures to improve
weather forecasting and to advance our knowl-
edge of the forces that determine climate.

The WMO developed the concept of the
World Weather Watch, a system designed to
bring the global atmosphere imder continuous
surveillance and provide for rapid collection
and exchange of weather data, as well as the
dissemination of weather reports and warnings
from centralized processing centers.

The WMO, along with ICSU, recognized the
need for a program of intensified investigations
of the physical processes governing atmospheric
motions, and their formulation in mathemati-
cal models. The resulting program, formulated
by the ICSU, is called the Global Atmospheric
Research Program. The World Weather Watch
and the Global Atmospheric Research Pro-
gram together constitute the World Weather
Progi'am.

U.S. participation in this progi-am involves
a number of agencies, but the principal respon-
sibility falls upon the Environmental Science
Services Administration in the Department of
Commerce. Through the Office of World
Weather Systems, ESSA coordinates our na-
tional efforts, implements those service improve-

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETTN

ments in the existing international weather
system for wliich the United States assumes re-
sponsibility, develops new technology, and co-
operates with the National Science Foundation
to stimulate general research in weather-related
areas.

The plan approved by the "WlIO Congress
for the years through 1971 is to increase the
density of conventional observation networks
o\ cr land areas and oceans and to increase the
use of weather satellites.

World Meteorological Centers located in
Wasliington, Moscow, and Melbourne will pre-
pare weather analyses and predictions on a
global basis; Regional Meteorological Centers
will prepare analyses and predictions within
national boundaries. A reliable global weather
communications system is under development
linking all continents, and regional and national
systems are being upgraded.

The Global Atmospheric Research Program is
concentrating on two broad thrusts : theoretical
research on physical processes in the atmosphere
and the development of mathematical models
which simulate atmospheric activity with
greater accuracy ; and field observational proj-
ects which will provide the data needed for
theoretical research and the development of
computer models.

ESSA's Environmental Survey Satellite Sys-
tem uses paired satellites. One stores its cloud
photographs and transmits them to ground sta-
tions in the United States, providing daily cov-
erage of global cloud cover. The other carries
Automatic Picture Transmission (APT) equip-
ment which transmits photographs of regional
cloud cover to anyone having the necessary re-
ceiving equipment within range.

Satellites are also improving the accuracy of
geodetic surveys, the foimdation of positional
accuracy upon which most of the world's en-
gineering works depend. Satellite geodesy is
beginning to bridge the oceans and link up the
geodetic networks of continents and islands
around the world.

Space Research

Space research has opened up valuable areas
of cooperation and collaboration in addition to
the weather satellite program. U.S. cooperation
with the European Space Research Organiza-
tion has led to the launching of nme interna-
tional scientific satellites. Seven experiments
proposed and developed by foreign scientists

JtTLY 14, 1969

have been successfully flown on U.S. spacecraft,
and 11 more are scheduled. Joint ventures with
19 foreign coimtries have resulted in the launch-
ing of more than 400 sounding rockets, seeking
data not only in meteorology and aeronomy but
also in ionospheric physics and astronomy.

One of the most fruitful areas of cooperation
has been in global communications. In 1960,
using the passive Echo satellite, scientists were
able to achieve successful transmissions between
the United States and Jodrell Bank at Malvern,
England, and Issy-les-Molineaux, France. When
Telstar I opened the active repeater satellite
program, other nations were invited to partici-
pate, including Brazil, Italy, Germany, Japan,
Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Spain, and Canada.
Virtually all of these nations took part in ex-
periments involving the transmission of tele-
phone and telegraph communications, high
speed data, and television programs.

Out of this experience came the Intelsat agree-
ment of 1964, the first major step toward a global
communications system. The Intelsat concept
and structure is now under review, and it is my
hope that it will be strengthened and made a
permanent foundation upon which to build an
international communications system adequate
to the needs of tomorrow's society.

Tliis brief summary has covered only a few of
the more visible cooperative progi'ams now un-
derway. The fields of science and technology are
broad, and international cooperation is grow-
ing throughout the entire range of work. And
that is a good omen for the future. As the dis-
ciplines grow more complex, the meeting of
minds among top scientists and engineers — or as
one scientist puts it, "the rubbing of brains" —
is coming to be of crucial importance.

The remaining decades of this century will be
more exciting and challenging than any that
have gone before — and more dangerous. They
wiU strain our adaptability as well as our in-
genuity, our patience as well as our courage, our
wisdom as well as our knowledge. Our survival
will depend upon our ability to temper the de-
mands of traditional nationalism with the hard
realities of the era of hydrogen weapons and
biological warfare. As individuals must learn to
compromise and work together in order to live
at peace within the family group, so individual
nations must learn to compromise and work to-
gether in order to live at peace within the family
of nations. It may well be that the rich expe-
rience now being accumulated in international
scientific cooperation will point the way.

U.S.-Canadian Economic Committee
Holcis 12th Meeting

Following is the text of a communique is-
sued at WwiUngton on June 26 at the close of
the 12th meeting of the Joint United States-
Canadian Committee on Trade and Economic
Affairs.

Press release 176 dated June 26

The Joint United States-Canadian Commit-
tee on Trade and Economic Affairs held its
twelfth meetinfr in Washington, D.C., Jmie 25
and 26, 1969. This Committee was established
in 1953 to provide a forum for consultations at
Cabinet level between the United States and
Canadian Govenunents. The most recent meet-
ing of the Committee was in Montreal in Jmie,

1967.

2. The members of the Conunittee reviewed
the international political and economic sit-
uation. They reaffirmed the support of the two
Governments for policies aimed at expanding
world trade. The Committee recognized the im-
portance of efforts to achieve a smoother func-
tioning of the international monetary system
and agreed on the desirability of an early
activation of the plan for Special Drawmg
Eights within the International Monetary
Fund. It confirmed the concern of both Govern-
ments for the economic growth of developing
countries and their willingness to participate
with other countries in exploring ways of ex-
panding trade opportunities of developing
countries.

3. The Committee noted with concern cur-
rent developments in international wheat mar-
keting wliich have placed serious pressure on
the price provisions of the International Grains
Arrangement. The members emphasized their
readiness to consult bilaterally and with the gov-
ernments of other countries concerned to seek
to overcome these difficidties and restore stabil-
ity in world markets, in conformity with the
objectives of the International Grains Arrange-
ment, an important outcome of the Kennedy
Kound.

4. The Committee reviewed the extensive
trade and economic relationships between the
two countries. Ministers reaffirmed the desire
of the two Governments to cooperate closely in

strengthening these relationships. They em-
phasized the importance of close consultation
on matters of mutual interest.

5. The Committee agreed that inflation and
the need to cool their overheated economies were
serious problems facing both countries. They
reviewed their fiscal and monetary policies,
which in both countries are directed towards
ending inflation and reversing expectations of
its continuance.

6. The Committee discussed important
bilateral trade and economic matters including
energy, developments mider the Automotive
Agreement, and specific agricultural commod-
ity problems.

7. The Committee noted the impressive con-
tribution made to world trade by the St. Law-
rence Seaway, the 10th Anniversary of which
will be celebrated tomorrow by President Xixon
and Prime Minister Trudeau in joint cere-
monies at Massena and Montreal.

8. The United States Delegation was headed
by the Honorable William P. Eogers, the Sec-
retary of State, and included the Honorable
David M. Kennedy, Secretary of the Treasury ;
the Honorable Walter J. Hickel, Secretary of
the Interior ; the Honorable Clifford ]M. Hardin,
Secretary of Agriculture; the Honorable
Maurice H. Stans, Secretary of Commerce; the
Honorable Paul W. McCracken, Chairman,
Council of Economic Advisers; the Honorable
Carl J. Gilbert, Special Eepresentative Desig-
nate for Trade Negotiations; the Honorable
Nathaniel Samuels, Deputy Under Secretary
[of State] for Economic Affairs; the Honorable
Harold F. Linder, United States Ambassador
to Canada, and advisers.

9. The Canadian Delegation was headed by
the Honorable Mitchell Sharp, Secretary of
State for External Affairs, and included the
Honorable Edgar J. Benson, ISIinister of Fi-
nance; the Plonorable Jean-Luc Pepin, Minis-
ter of Industry, Trade and Commerce; the
Honorable Horace Andrew Olson, ISIinister of
Agriculture; the Honorable Otto E. Lang,
Minister without Portfolio; ]SIr. Louis Easmin-
sky. Governor of the Bank of Canada; the
Honorable A. Edgar Eitchie, Canadian Ambas-
sador to the United States, and advisers.

10. Further details of the discussion are set
forth in the attached Annex.

DEPAETMENT OF STATE BULLETnT

Annex

(1) As background to the discussions on
trade and economic matters, the United States
Secretary of State and the Canadian Secretary
of State for External Affairs reviewed major
recent international developments.

(2) United States members pointed to the
substantial deterioration of the global United
States trade balance in recent years and noted
that appropriate world payments equilibrium
would require that the United States rebuild a
substantial surplus on current account and that
this would entail adjustments in the pattern
of world payments. Canadian Ministers re-
ferred to Canada's longer term objective of
greater balance in its overall current account
which would reduce Canada's dependence on
net inflows of cajDital.

(3) The Committee reviewed the operation
of the international monetary system. The mem-
bers agreed that an important step in its further
evolution should be the early activation of the
Special Drawing Eights facility in the Inter-
national Monetary Fund in adequate amounts.

(4) The United States members noted with
satisfaction the fact that Canada has accelerated
its Kennedy Round tariff reductions, putting
them into effect immediately and that Canada
is liberalizing its tourist allowances.

(5) The Committee examined post Kemiedy
Round trade problems. They noted the encour-
aging progress being made in the GATT [Gen-
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade]
examination of non-tariff barriers and discussed
possible approaches toward the multilateral re-
duction of these barriers. They reviewed world
developments affecting agricultural trade and
noted that serious distortions have resulted from
price support policies and subsidy practices in
other areas of the world. The two Governments
agreed to coordinate their efforts to reduce dis-
tortions and unpediments to agricultural trade.

(6) United States members reviewed the
problem caused by rising textile imports into
the United States and the desirability of an
international solution for it. Canadian mem-
bers expressed concern about tlie possible impli-
cations of the United States proposals and ex-
pressed the hope that a solution would be found
which would not be prejudicial to the develop-
ment of world trade.

(7) The Committee reviewed the trade and
development problems of the developing coun-
tries. It recognized the importance of revitaliz-
ing the common aid effort. Special reference
was made to the importance of expanding pri-
vate investment and to the growing problem
of debt repayment. It was noted that Canada
had increased its aid appropriations at a time
of Iieavy demands on its resources.

The Committee agreed that improvement in
the trade of developing countries requires a
concerted effort by both industrialized and low
income countries. The Committee discussed the
current examination in the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development of a
generalized scheme of preferences. The Cana-
dian delegation referred to its submission to the
OECD on this subject. In this context. United
States members said tliat the United States
had not completed its policy review of the sub-
ject of preferential access for developing coun-
try exports. Nevertheless, they affirmed the
United States intention to contribute illustra-
tive lists m July to the study of a generalized
preference system now in progress in the Orga-
nization for Economic Cooperation and Devel-
opment.

( 8 ) The Committee considered problems that
from time to time arise in cross-border trade in
certain agricultural commodities and agreed
that early consultations should take place to
achieve an understanding on how to deal with
these problems.

(9) The Committee examined achievements
under the Automotive Agreement of 1965 wliich
they recognized had led to a greater rationali-
zation of the industry and to an increased flow
of trade. The Committee agreed that there
should be consultations in the fall on ways and
means of making further progress towards the
full objectives of the Agreement.

(10) The Committee discussed trade in
energy resources and the current oil export sit-
uation between the two countries. They re-
viewed progress of arrangements for discussions
and studies pursuant to the meetmg of Presi-
dent Nixon and Prime Minister Trudeau in
March. They recognized the importance of tliis
subject for the two countries and agreed that
officials should meet to discuss current problems
and longer range prospects. In this connection,
the United States members described the inten-

JULT 14, 1969

sive review being undertaken of United States
oil import policies.

(11) The Committee discussed developments
relating to the Law of the Sea and agreed to an
early negotiation on the delineation of United
States-Canada continental shelf boundaries.

(12) The Committee agreed tliat the limita-
tions on immigration into the United States
which became effective a year ago have given
rise to problems of concern to both Govern-
ments. Accordingly, they agreed to consult
together with a view to resolving these
problems.

(13) The unportant role of the International
Joint Commission in seeking solutions to water
and air pollution problems along the common
frontier was recognized. The Committee dis-
cussed certain common water pollution prob-
lems, especially in the Great Lakes, and agreed
that the two Governments should strengthen
their efforts to safeguard these vital water
resources.

Partial revision of the radio regulations, Geneva, 1959,
as amended (TIAS 4803, 5603, 0332), relating to
maritime mobile service, with annexes and final pro-
tocol. Done at Geneva November 3, 1967. Entered into
force April 1, 19G9. TIAS 6590.
Notification of approval: India, April 7, 1969.

BILATERAL

Argentina

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington June 25, 1969.
Enters into force on the date on which each Gov-
ernment shall have received from the other written
notification that it has complied with all statutory
and constitutional requirements for entry into force.

Italy

Agreement confirming a memorandum of understand-
ing regarding the launching of NASA satellites from
the San Marco Range. Effected by exchange of notes
at Rome April 30 and June 12, 1969. Entered into
force June 12, 1969.

TREATY INFORMATION

PUBLICATIONS

Recent Releases

Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Disputes

Convention on the settlement of investment disputes
between states and nationals of other states. Done at
Washington March 18, 1065. Entered into force Octo-
ber 14. 1966. TIAS 6090.
Signature and ratification: Mauritius, June 2, 1969.

Nuclear Weapons — Nonproliferation

Treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons.
Done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1,
1968.'
Ratification deposited: Austria, June 27, 1969.

Telecommunications

International telecommunication convention, with an-
nexes. Done at Montreux November 12, 1965. Entered
into force January 1, 1967; for the United States
May 29, 1967. TIAS 6207.

Ratifications deposited: Malta, May 9, 1969; Monaco,
April 22, 1969 ; Union of Soriet Socialist Republics
(with declarations contained in final protocol),
April 16, 1969.

• Not in force.

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.G.
20402. Address requests direct to the Superintendent
of Documents. A 25-percent discount is made on orders
for 100 or more copies of any one publication mailed
to the same address. Remittances, payable to the Su-
perintendent of Documents, must accompany orders.

The Organization of African Unity. A pamphlet con-
taining information on the structure, activities, and
future prospects of the OAU. Pub. 8444. International
Organizations Series 2. 8 pp. 10^.

Atlantic Consultation — President Nixon in Europe
February 23-March 2, 1969. Excerpts from the principal
statements made on the trip by the President and by
the foreign government officials with whom he con-
ferred. Pub. 8447. European and British Common-
wealth Series 71. 44 pp. 75^.

Customs — International Transport of Goods Under
Cover of T I R Camets. Convention, with annexes and
protocol of signature. TIAS 6633. 118 pp. 70«^.

Fisheries — King Crab. Agreement with the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics amending and extending the
agreement of February 5, 1965, as amended and ex-
tended. TIAS 6635. 6 pp. 10(J.

Fisheries — Northeastern Part of the Pacific Ocean off
the United States Coast. Agreement with the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics amending and extending the
agreement of February 13, 1967, as amended and ex-
tended. TIAS 6636. 18 pp. 15^.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE BXJLLETIN

INDEX July H, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1568

Canada. U.S.-Oanadian Economic Committee
Holds 12th Meeting (communique) .... 38

Communism. The Altered Shape of World Power

(Richardson) 27

Diplomacy. The Altered Shape of World Power

(Richardson) 27

Economic Affairs

Inter-American Economic and Social Council
Meets at Port-of-Spain (Meyer, Declaration
of Port-of-Spain) 21

U.S.-Canadian Economic Committee Holds 12th
Meeting (communique) 38

Foreign Aid. Inter-American Economic and
Social Council Meets at Port-of-Spain (Meyer,
Declaration of Port-of-Spain) 21

International Organizations and Conferences

Inter-American Economic and Social Council
Meets at Port-of-Spain (Meyer, Declaration of
Port-of-Spain) 21

President Nixon Sends Greetings to lA-

ECOSOC 22

Latin America

Inter-American Economic and Social Council
Meets at Port-of-Spain (Meyer, Declaration
of Port-of-Spain) 21

President Nixon Sends Greetings to lA-
ECOSOC 22

Presidential Documents. President Nixon Sends
Greetings to lA-ECOSOC 22

Publications. Recent Releases 40

Science. The Scientific Community and Inter-
national Cooperation (Astin) 32

Trade. U.S.-Canadian Economic Committee
Holds 12th Meeting (communique) .... 38

Treaty Information. Current Actions .... 40

Viet-Nam. 23d Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris (Lodge) 29

'Name Index

Astin, Allen V 32

Lodge, Henry Cabot 29

Meyer, Charles A 21

Nixon, President 22

Richardson, Elliot L 27

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: June 23-29

Press releases may be obtained from the Office
of News, Department of State, Washington, D.C.
20520.

Release issued prior to June 23 which appears
In this issue of the Bulletin is No. 157 of June 13.

No. Date Subject

*172 6/24 U.S.-Japan civil aviation consulta-
tions at Washington.

*173 6/24 McBride sworn in as Ambassador to
Mexico (biographic details).

*174 6/24 Funkhouser sworn in as Ambassador
to Gabon (biographic details).

175 6/26 Lodge : 23d session on Viet-Nam at

Paris.

176 6/26 Communique of Joint U.S.-Cana-

dian Committee on Trade and
Economic Affairs.
tl77 6/26 Four new U.S. members designated
to Permanent Court of Arbitra-
tion (rewrite).

* Not printed.

t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin.

DSD DEC F

DOS TON PUDLI C LI DRARY

SERIALS - RECEIPTS

p OOA c'-36

DOSTON, MASS 02117

Superintendent of Docume

u.s. government printing of

washington. d.c. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFII

N AVT a

20YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1569

July 21,1969

SECRETARY ROGERS' NEWS CONFERENCE OF JULY 2 4I

UNDER SECRETARY RICHARDSON INTERVIEWED
ON CBS TELEVISION W

U.S. DEPLORES MINORITY RULE IN SOUTHERN RHODESLA

Statements hy Ambassador Yost in U.N. Security Council 55

For index see inside back cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI. No. 1569
July 21, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

82 issues, domestic $16. foreign $23
Single copy 30 cents
Use of Tunds for printing of this publication
approved by the Director of tlie Bureau of
tlie Budget (January 11, 1966).
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 wUl be
appreciated. The BULLETIN is indexed In
the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BVLLETllS,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
with information on developments in
the field of foreign rela tions and on
the tvork of the Department of State
and the Foreign Service.
The BULLETIN includes selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the JPTiitc House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on ixirious phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of tlie
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

Publications of the Department,
United Nations documents, and leg'
islative nuiterial in tlie field of inter-
national relations are listed currently.

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of July 2

Press release 181 dated July 2

Secretary Rogers: Ladies and gentlemen, I
have a couple of brief announcements to make.

First, I am pleased to announce that the
United States Govermnent and the Royal Cam-
bodian Government have agreed to the imme-
diate resumption of diplomatic relations. I be-
lieve that the normalization of our diplomatic
relations with the Kingdom of Cambodia is a
positive step looking toward peace in Southeast
Asia. It symbolizes our overall policy in that
area of favoring the independence and terri-
torial integrity of all countries in Southeast
Asia.

I will shortly be receiving Mr. Thay Sok,
who has been designated by the Royal Cam-
bodian Government as its Charge d'Affaires in
Washington. We expect very soon to designate
an American Charge d'Aifaires in Plmom Penh.
Pending his arrival and reception by the Cam-
bodian Government, the Australian Embassy
will continue to represent the United States
interests in Cambodia.

Turning now to the SALT talks, I want to
lay to rest speculation by some that this admin-
istration has been dragging its feet on the
strategic arms limitation talks. This is not the
fact. The United States will enter into the
strategic arms limitation talks with the hope
that they will provide an opportunity for prog-
ress in halting the arms race, in limiting inter-
national tension, and, most hopefully, building
an international structure aimed at a more
peaceful and secure world.

By the same token, since the terms of refer-
ence of the arms limitation talks go to the heart
of the security of the American people and
that of our allies, the administration has the
responsibility to approach the talks carefully
and after a thorough review of the issues at
stake. This has been our approach and will con-
tinue to be our approach.

We do believe, though, that there may be a
mutuality of interest between the United States
and the Soviet Union in halting the arms race ;
and in that hope and with the thought that we

may be presented with an unusual opportunity
to make progress in this area by negotiations
rather than confrontation, we are looking for-
ward to the beginning of these talks.

Turning just for a moment now to the Middle
East, I have been giving the problem of the
Middle East a good deal of my time lately. Al-
though the four-power talks in New York have
recessed for a while, we are going to continue
consultations with the other three major powers.
I expect the U.S.-Soviet bilateral talks to re-
main particularly active in the immediate
future. We intend to persist in our efforts, since
we are convinced that peace in that area of
the world is of such vital and overriding
importance.

As you know, we believe that a permanent
peace should include an agreement covering
borders, withdrawal from occupied territories,
respect for the sovereignty of every state in the
area, and freedom of navigation, a solution of
the difficult refugee problem, and practical se-
curity arrangements.

In short, peace should be based on all the
elements of the U.N. Security Council resolu-
tion of November 1967.^

We recently received some proposals from
the Soviet Union in response to some concrete
plans which we gave them in May — concrete
points, actually, which we gave them in May.
There are some advances in these proposals, but
there are, without any doubt, very substantial
remaining difficulties.

We intend to continue these talks with the
Soviets in the hope that these difficulties could
be resolved. Our objective is to get Ambassador
Jarring [Gunnar Jarring, U.N. Secretary Gen-
eral's special representative to the Middle East]
back to work with the parties on a possible
settlement based on the Security Council
resolution.

I hope that we can avoid adding up the box
score on these talks. This is a tough and intrac-
table problem which has escaped solution for
nearly 20 years. We want to help the parties

^ For text, see Bulletin of Dec. 18, 1967, p. 843.

July 21, 1969

move toward a permanent peace as quickly as
we can. But in the last analysis, the views of
the parties principally concerned in the area
are going to determine whether these efforts
will succeed or fail.

As I say, in the months ahead we are going
to be very actively pursuing these bilateral
talks.

The President's Trip to Asia and Romania

Q. Mr. Secretai-y^ I wonder^ if you donH
mind my changing tlie subject for one
moment — President Nixon's trij) around the
world and to Roinania has intrigued many of
us. I wonder if you would explain to us in some
detail hoto Romania was included in that trip
and whether., at the end of tlie trip., there is any
chance that Nixon will take Senator Mansfield'' s
suggestion and fly from Bucharest to Moscow
for talks there?

A. Well, President Nixon and I talked about
the trip several weeks ago ; and he discussed the
fact that the trip to the moon by the American
astronauts would be one of the most historic
events, certainly in our lifetime, and suggested
then that he thought he might, on the way back
from that trip that he plans to take to watch
the splashdown, visit some countries in Asia.

He knew that I was going to Indonesia and
to the Philippines and Japan and other coun-
tries there — Taiwan, Korea, Australia, and New
Zealand — and he asked about whether we could
combine the trips to Indonesia and the Philip-
pines without too much difficulty. And I said,
"Yes," that the scheduling turned out to be
very fortmiate.

He also talked about other stops he might
make on the way back to the United States. And
he talked about his interest in Asia — continu-
ing to show our interest, particularly after the
war in Viet-Nam is ended — and he talked about
some of the places that I had gone on my
trip.

In connection with that, we talked about
Romania. As you know, he had been in
Romania as a private citizen and received a
very warm welcome from the Government.
They extended an invitation to him to return
and to pay another visit as President very early
in the administration.

In discussions that I have had with the
Romanian Ambassador, he extended such an
invitation. So the President thought that he
would stop to accept the invitation, because it
had been extended, it was a convenient time to

go to Romania, and he wants to do what we
can to improve our relations with the East bloc.
He wants to do all we can to improve, to make
our relations m that area of the world more
friendly.

Now, he plans to discuss with Romanian lead-
ers the East- West problems. He will be inter-
ested to hear their views on other international
matters. I am sure he will talk about trade, be-
cause they are interested in improving their
trade relations with us.

I don't think he intends to make any decisions
on the spot. I think it is more a trip wliich will,
we hope, make our relations more friendly, give
us a better understanding of the Romanian at-
titude on some of these problems; and, hope-
fully, in later trips he may be able to cover other
countries.

Now, insofar as the last part of your question
is concerned, the President, I do not think, has
any intention of going to the Soviet Union on
this trip.

Relations With the Soviet Union

Q. Mr. Secretary., of your first three state-
ments, txoo stress the importance of relations
with the Soviet Union. There has been a lot of
speculation that the President's visit to RovuLnia
might somehow he construed hy tlie Soviet Un-
ion as a challenge or as antagonistic to them.
The specific question I have in mind is tohether
the United States., as a m,atter of diplomatic
courtesy., informed the Soviet Union tliat the
President was planning to visit Romaniaf

A. No, we did not inform the Soviet Union
of that plan. But we do not think there is any-
thing inconsistent with this trip and with
friendly relations with the Soviet Union. We
have said from the beginning of this adminis-
tration that we intend to do what we can to
improve relations, to make relations more
friendly, with all countries in the world. And
we also have said we did not intend to exploit
any differences that might exist between the
Soviet Union and Communist China. So we
don't think that this trip should do anything to
exacerbate relations between us and the Soviet
Union.

Q. Sir, do we know whether the Soviet Union
has been informed of this visit hy the
Romanians?

A. No, we do not.

Q. Mr. Secretai'y, there has heen in recent

Department of State Bulletin

weeks a great deal of speculation about the So-
viet announcef)ient that they would like an
Asian collective security ar'rangejnent, and this
has aroused tlie interest among Asians. Could
you, say wliat the United States knmos ahout it
and how you regard this?

A. Yes. "We don't know much more about it
tlian wliat has appeared in the speech itself,
and so we are not really in a position to make
a very thoughtful comment on it. We have at-
tempted to find out what Mr. Brezhnev [Leonid
I. Brezhnev, First Secretary of the Soviet Com-
miuiist Party] had in mind by inquiring from
other representatives of the Soviet Union, and
so far they have not given us any assistance.
They have all said they were not too sure of
what he meant ; they were interested in our re-
action to his comments, and we said we were
also interested in any kind of arrangements that
added to the security and peace in the world.

Q. Mr. Secretary —

A. Chal [Chalmers Eoberts, "Washington
Post] ?

Q. The Vice President seems to give the im-
pression that the negotiations in Paris on Viet-
Nam are in a deep-freeze. But Under Secretary
Richardson this morning is giving a much more
hopeful view. Would you tell us your view of
whether, in fact, anything is happening in
Paris and- the general state of the negotiations
at this point?

A. "Well, I, as you know, have hesitated to
try to characterize our feelings from day to day
on the Paris negotiations. I will say we are
happy that they are still in jjrogress. "We think
they are a useful forum, and I would merely
say that I agree with what Under Secretary
of State Eichardson said this morning on
television.-

Q. Mr. Secretary, the Vice President also
said yesterday that criticism of Viet-Nam pol-
icy im.pedes those negotiations. Do you agree
with that?

A. I think that in a coimtiy that believes, as
we do, in free speech and freedom of the press,
we have to expect criticism.

Now, I think it's up to everyone in his own
conscience to think about how he is going to
criticize the Government before he does it. I
think it is true that a constant barrage of criti-
cism, sometimes almost before the leaders have

United States and Cambodia
Resume Diplomatic Relations

Press release ISO dated July 2

The United States Government and the Royal
Cambodian Government have agreed upon the
immediate resumption of diplomatic relations
between their two countries, Secretary Rogers
announced on July 2.

Mr. Thay Sok, who has been designated by
the Royal Cambodian Government as its Chargg
d'Affaires in Washington, will be received by the
Secretary shortly.

The United States Government expects very
shortly to designate a Charge d'Affaires ad in-
terim in Phnom Penh. Pending his arrival and
reception by the Cambodian Government, the
Australian Embassy in Phnom Penh will con-
tinue to represent United States interests in
Cambodia.

As a step in the process of reopening, a For-
eign Service officer, Elden B. Erickson, has been
directed to proceed to Phnom Penh to make pre-
liminary administrative arrangements for the
reopening of a United States diplomatic mission,
such as locating suitable premises and arrang-
ing for communications facilities.

See p. 49.

had a chance to think about the proposal that is
being made, probably is not helpful in our ne-
gotiations.

On the other hand, I am sure that a lot of
people who speak on the subject of "Viet-Nam
do it because they feel very deeply on the sub-
ject and do it because they think they are being
helpful and constructive in attempting to per-
suade the Government to adopt a policy which
they think is sound.

So I don't like to make any blanket condem-
nation. I would hope that eveiyone who is
tempted to criticize the Government would be
quite thoughtful about it and ask himself
whether he is really just heckling us or whether
he thinks it's a constructive criticism.

Level of Combat Activity in Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary, there liave ieen reports
from Viet-Nam over the past few days that
show a dropoff in enemy -initiated attacks, and
this has occurred at a time tvhen there appears
to he a falloff in enemy infiltration from the
North. Do you see this in any way as a signal
that the other side might he interested in a de-
escalation of the ground fighting?

A. John [John Hightower, Associated

July 21, 1969

Press], we just don't know what it means. I
talked to the Secretary of Defense just before
I came to this press conference and he told me,
as I suspected from our briefings, that during
the last week we have had the lowest level
of combat activity in Viet-Nam for a long time,
possibly during the whole war.

Now, whether this has any meaning along
the lines of your suggestion or not, I don't know.
We will have to wait and see. Certainly we hope
that it has some significance. We hope that it's
a response to the statement by President Nixon
and President Thieu at Midway.

But it's possible it has no relationship to that
at all. It's possible that they are just withdraw-
ing and regrouping for another attack. Or it's
possible that the losses that they have sustained
lately have seriously affected their combat capa-
bilities. So we will just have to wait and see
what the facts show in the next few weeks.

Q. Mr. Secretary^ there has heen some sug-
gestion in various speculative reports that the
Soviets may he less eager to go ahead with
SALT talks now. In that connection, some have
mentioned the possibility that the President's
trip to Romania may he taken a7niss hy them.
How do we know? How can we he sure?

A. Well, I guess the only way we can be sure
is by what they say. So far they have not indi-
cated anything along that line at all. As a matter
of fact, Mr. Dobrynin [Soviet Ambassador Ana-
toliy F. Dobrynin] seemed to be very pleased
when we talked about the beginning of the talks.
I think he talked to some of the press about his
pleasure. And we have seen nothing since that
time that would suggest that there is any lack
of interest on their part to proceed with the
talks.

Q. Have we had any response yet to the sug-
gestion that we would he ready as of July 31st?

A. No, we have not yet.

Q. Mr. Secretary, if the reduction in the level
of combat continues, is it the intention of the
United States also to reduce its level of combat?

A. As you know, in the three criteria which
the President has set forth for detemiining
troop replacements and the schedule of troop
replacements, one of those is the level of hostili-
ties by the enemy. So, obviously, if the level of
hostilities decreases and it's significant, other
than just as part of their short-term strategy,

that would affect our decisions on the question
of troop replacements.

Q. Mr. Secretary, there have heen North Viet-
namese charges, and these have been answered
hy fears in the United States, that American
combat troops, ground combat troops, are in-
volved in Laos. How deeply are we involved
and committed in Laos?

A. We have no combat troops in Laos. So I
think their fears are false. Ajid I tliink they
are probably just saying that for propaganda
purposes.

East-West Trade

Q. Mr. Secretary, you metitioned trade as one
of the topics ivhich might come up in Bucha-
rest. Now, ifs safe to assume that they will
ask of the President when they can expect MEN
[most-favored-nation] treat?nent for their ex-
ports and also they will ask when they can ex-
pect relaxation of the Export Control Act
a-ffecting their imports. What will the President
answer?

A. Of course, I don't want to tell you what
the President is going to answer.

Q. Wh at is his policy on this ?

A. Well, I will tell you what I think our
policy in this area is. Our policy in connection
with East- West trade is that we want to do
whatever we can sensibly to liberalize it. We
want to increase trade with Eastern Europe
in matters and goods that are not of any mili-
tary importance.

But in order to do that we have to have some
mutuality. Our interests have to be favorably
affected, too. So that in discussing trade with
the Eastern European countries, we want to
consider specifically what we are going to send
to them and what they are going to send to us.

Now, there has been some suggestion in the
press to the effect that we are not following
that policy because we favor the enactment of
the Export Control Act of 1949 — the reenact-
ment. That is not the case. We think that the
present law does permit considerable liberali-
zation of trade ; and if we find in our discussions
with Eastern European countries that it is in
the best interests of the United States to in-
crease trade, then we can ask for legislation
which would give them most- favored-nation
treatment.

Department of State Bulletin

Key Issues in the Middle East

Q. Mr. Secretary, on the Middle East, you
said that you had detected some advances in
our talks with the Soviets.

A. Yes.

Q. And yet the public picture that we have
is that on the Tcey issue of the territories, ques-
tion and on the refugee question, we are about
as far apart as we were when we started the
conversations hack in February. Can you share
with us some of the reasons why you sense ad-
vances here when the public picture seems to
be quite the opposite?

A. Well, as I said, Mr. Smith [Hedrick L.
Smith, New York Times], it's difficult to con-
duct negotiations and keep a public box score
about how you're making out. When you say
the key issue is borders — there are a lot of key
issues. That is one of them. The refugee prob-
lem is another. Withdrawal of troops is an-
other. Status of Jerusalem is another.

So there are a lot of key issues. And it is true
that in some of these issues, very little progress
has been made. But in other issues, it seems to
us that some progress has been made. And we
are going to proceed in that belief, certainly in
that hope that we can make further progress.

Q. Well, without going into the details, can
you indicate the areas where there is some
progress?

A. I don't think I will. [Laughter.]

Question of Cease-Fire in Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary, there have been some sug-
gestions that the administration is reexamining
the possibility of a standstill cease-fire in Viet-
Nam. In the light of what you just said about
perhaps the level of fighting has lowered to the
lowest level of the war, do you think it makes
it feasible now for a proposal for a standstill
cease-fire?

A. No. I think that the comments that the
President has made in his press conference on
cease-fire still apply.'

As you know, in his May 14 speech he did
refer to cease-fires.* But we don't want to pro-

' For President Nixon's news conference of June 19,
see Bttlletin of July 7, 1969, p. 1.
* BuiiETiN of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

pose something that just is a gimmick that
doesn't have any practical application. And we
think at the moment a proposal for a cease-fire
without some sort of an overall agreement prob-
ably is impractical.

Now, obviously, if the other side withdraws
its forces and we continue to reduce our troop
strength in Viet-Nam, that will inevitably de-
escalate the war. So we would hope that would
continue. But insofar as a proposal at the
moment for a cease-fire, in the absence of an
agreement we don't think it's very practical.

Deescalating tlie War

Q. Can I come back to that point that was
raised earlier, which you didn't really answer,
if I may say so?

A. That's all right. I know you do, Chal.

Q. If it is true, as Secretary [of Defense
Melvin R.^ Laird indicates, that the level of
violence is at this low level and it goes on, you
said that would have an effect on our troop
tvithdrawals. But would it possibly lead to the
United States reciprocating by lowering its
military activity? Is that a possibility?

A. Well, I never have understood quite what
you mean by our lowering our activity. The last
week or so, as I said, it has been the lowest com-
bat activity for some time. Now, our military
plans haven't changed. So something the enemy
has done is different.

Now, as far as we are concerned, if the other
side wants to deescalate the war, the best way
to deescalate the war is to withdraw troops. It's
very difficult to conceive of how troops can be
near each other and be engaging in warfare and
not attempt to kill the enemy.

Now, I have never quite imderstood the ques-
tion. I tliink the way to deescalate tliis war is
to do what the President has suggested : to have
troop replacements. If the enemy wants to de-
escalate the war, have him withdraw his troops
to North Viet-Nam ; then the war is deescalated.

Q. I think it comes to the question of the
orders to General {Creighton TF.] Abrams,
which under the last administration were to
keep the pressure on the enemy, and that those
orders, the President has told us, have been
continued. The question really is: Is there a
possibility of changing those orders, if in fact
the other side has reduced its level of violence?

July 21, 1969

A. Well, as you remember, Mr. Roberts, the
President said at his press conference that the
orders to General Abrams were to conduct the
■war in such a way that the American casualties
and the casualties of our allies would be the
lowest possible.

Now, there seems to be a school of thought
that says the way to lower our casualties is to
let the enemy make the initial attacks. Military
authorities say that that is the way to increase
our casualties.

And also tlie argument has been made that
the reason the war has continued at a fairly
high level of activity is because of our activity.
But the fact of the matter is that the level is
reduced, as it has been for the last week, because
of the enemy's change of plans apparently.

Q. Mr. Secretary., in that connectiov, what is
your reaction to Senator McGovern's speech
today disclosing his private meeting with the
NLF [National Liheration Front] and Hanoi
representatives in Paris and his conviction from
his conversations with them that the negotia-
tions are going to go no place without a com-
plete unilateral withdraioalf

A. When had he made the speech ?

Q. Today.

A. When? This afternoon?

Q. Tes.

A. I haven't heard it yet. [Laughter.]

Q. Mr. Secretary., would —

A. Well, let me say, obviously I don't mean
to make a wisecrack here, but I just haven't
seen the speech. I gather it hasn't been made
yet.

Q. Pardon?

A. That the speech hasn't been made yet?

Q. No. It will he made in the Senate today.

A. Well, I haven't seen it.

I don't think there is anything unusual about
that. No matter which American talks to the
other side, they are going to tell that American
what they say publicly. That is their propa-
ganda line.

So I don't think there is anything imusual
about the fact that they tell Senator McGovern
that. They tell everyone they see that.

Political Future in South Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary., in his press conference..
President Nixon said that he expected that
President Thieu would he putting forth some
concrete proposals on a political program in
the near future. Can you tell us what the pros-
pects are for that now? There are these reports
out of Saigon that he has backtracked on this.

A. Well, we haven't had any such reports,
George [George Sherman, Washington Eve-
ning Star] . Wlien the President and President
Thieu met at Midway, they did talk about this.
The decision, of course, is up to President Tliieu
when he makes it. It's a decision that he has to
make, and it's one he will make, and I don't
think there is any reluctance on his part to do
it. The political future in South Viet-Nam has
to be decided by the people in South Viet-Nam,
and that was the discussion.

Now, we expect that there will be some pro-
posals made by President Thieu in the near
future, and we haven't seen any change of mind
on liis part.

Q. Mr. Secretary, the last administration
always looked toward the Soviet Union to he
helpful in negotiating an end to the Viet-Nam
war. Is this administration satisfied with
Russian help in that direction?

A. Well, we are never satisfied on this point
until the war is ended. We have had some dis-
cussions with the Soviet Union representatives
about the war. I don't think I'd want to make
any further comment at this time about it. ■!

Q. Mr. Secretm^, to return to another un-
finished topic, you say we have no combat troops
in Laos. Wlmt is the extent of our commitment,
and is there a point at which toe would put in
combat troops — if Laos were threatened by the
North Vietnamese, for example?

A. I don't foresee any possibility of putting
combat troops in Laos.

Q. Pursuing this one step further, Mr. Secre-
tary, lohat is our air activity over Laos, if at

all?

A. Well, I think Mr. McCloskey [Robert J.
McCloskey, Department press spokesman] has
gone into that subject with you on several
occasions, and I don't have anything to add to
that.

Department of State Bulletin

Q. Mr. Secretary, Pd like to make one more
attempt to see if I can clarify this point on the
level of comhat. Is the reverse of what yoii're
saying that if there is a reduction of comhat on
the Commtinist side, that the United States
position is that it will only respond hy with-
drawal? Are you saying that the United States
will not change its orders on the level of com-
hat until there is an agreement, tacit or formal,
on the withdrawal question?

A. Well, I think what I attempted to say to
Mr. Roberts is this: that we don't tliink the
orders, as they now exist, are responsible for
the level of combat activities.

Now, if the other side withdraws its troops
to North Viet-Nam, we will withdraw our
troops.

Secondly, if the other side reduces its ag-
gressiveness and its combat activities, then that
will be a factor which the President will con-
sider in the number of troops that we withdraw
and the timing of that withdrawal.

Now, insofar as the last part of your question
is concerned, if the rate of combat falls off to
a very small level, then obviously our plans will
change. How they will change will depend on
what the enemy's activity is.

Drop in Infiltration Into South Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary, a clarifying question. One
of the earlier questions asked on this paint re-
ferred to a reported drop in infiltration. "We
have understood there were reports, at least, to
that effect. This, of course, could have the ef-
fect — with a high level of enemy casualties —
of reducing the number of enemy troops in the
country if sustained. I wondered what your
judgment was. Also, can you give us some
indication of the range of magnitude that Secre-
tary Laird is talking about? Do you mean that
the American casualties in the last reportable
week have fallen substantially below 100?

A. Oh, no. I think probably the casualty
rate — the reported casualty rates will be some-
what ia the same neighborhood as they have been
in the past.

First, as you know, they reported on Thurs-
day, but they included what happened the pre-
vious week from Saturday to Saturday. I'm
talking about the engagements, the number of
engagements. So that the combat activity in that
sense, the nimaber of engagements between the

enemy forces and ours, is considerably reduced.

Insofar as your question on infiltration is
concerned, wo do have evidence that the infiltra-
tion in the last 2 or 3 months has been at a
fairly low level. "Wlien I say "infiltration," I'm
talking about troops from North Viet-Nam, men
from North Viet-Nam. At the present time, or
at least when I was in Viet-Nam, it was believed
that the ratio of North Vietnamese troops to
the Viet Cong was about 70 : 30. It was 70 per-
cent North Vietnamese troops and about 30 per-
cent Viet Cong. So the replacement problem for
the North Vietnamese is a difficult problem.

Whether the fact that the infiltration has
declined in the last 2 or 3 months has any sig-
nificance or not, we are not sure. It's too early,
I think, to say.

Now, there have been cycles in the past when
the infiltration has gone down. Sometimes it's
a weather problem. Sometimes it's because of
their planning of future activities. So we are not
sure what it means, except that we know pretty
conclusively that there has been a reduction in
the infiltration in the last 2 or 3 months.

Q. Mr. Secretary, there has been the sugges-
tion made, I think by the Russians, that the So-
viet-Amei^an talks be moved to Moscow, at
least temporarily. How do you feel about that?

A. Well, that is one of the things we have
imder consideration. When we started these
talks with Ambassador Dobrynin, we did say
that there might come a time when we would
talk with them in Moscow in return for the dis-
cussions they have had here. They have asked
that we do that.

So it's possible that we will, at least for a
short period of time, have some talks there —
either we might send someone for a short period
of time or we might do it through our Ambas-
sador in Moscow. But I would not say that we
will make any permanent move in that direc-
tion.

Q. Mr. Secretary, you state that there has
been this diminution in input into the infiltra-
tion in the last 2 or 3 months. Have you in-
quired as to the meaning of that of the repre-
sentatives of the enemy in Paris at all, cur-
rently? And have you talked to the Russians
about that, whether it has any meaning or sig-
nificance?

A. Well, as I say, I'm not sure they would
admit it. And we have to pick it up from differ-

July 21, 1969

ent sources. We get some of this information
from jjrisoners. "We get some of it from cap-
tured dociunents and other ways.

We -will talk to them about it when the right
time comes, but we want to be sure that it's as
significant as we think. And I have attempted
to point out here that we do not attach too much
significance to it at tlais time.

Election Commission for South Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary, at your last news confer-
ence,^ you put forward a suggestion for a mhsed
commission to supervise free elections in South
Viet-Nam. Does that idea have the support of
President Thieuf And have the Communhts
shoton any interest at all in that suggestion?

A. Well, I think that suggestion does have
the support, of President Tliieu. And I am sure
that in the days ahead there will be some
further reference to a composition of a mixed
commission.

So far, the other side has been very unrespon-
sive, as you know. They have used what we tliink
are reasonable proposals by the President, by
President Thieu, for propaganda purposes. So
they have not, up to the present time, responded
in an affirmative way on that suggestion.

Q. They haven't asked for any clarification
in the Paris peace talks of what we had in mind
hy sv^h a mixed commission?

A. Well, they haven't, certainly, in the public
sessions made any such requests. And, as you
know, I am not going to make any conmients
about aiiy other talks that might or might not
have been held.

U.S. Policy on Nigeria-Biafra

Q. Mr. Secretary, yesterday the President's
Special Consultant on Hunger [Jean Mayer\
said tluit 2 inillion Biafrans will die in the
next few weeks of starvation. Is the central
Nigerian Government going to take over the
relief effort? I have two or three questions. The
first is : Is the United States willing to support
any independent relief missions aside from the
central Nigerian Government? And, secondly, is
our tacit support of that government on this
question irrevocable?

" For Secretary Rogers' news confereace of June 5,
see Bulletin of June 23, 1969, p. 529.

A. Well, we have never given any support to
the government on this question. Let me explain
our policy on the Nigeria-Biafra matter.

We have — we the United States — have pro-
vided about $60 million worth of food and medi-
cines to Biafra, and the private organizations
in this country have supplied about $10 million
worth.

Tlie prospect of mass starvation is so abhor-
rent and so almost incomprehensible in this day
and age that we are going to do everything we
can to attempt to get further food and supplies
to people who are faced with starvation.

Now, we have a lot of irons in the fire. We
have discussions that are taking place with
the Nigerian Government in Lagos. We are go-
ing to talk further with the International Eed
Cross people. We have Dr. Ferguson [C. Clyde
Ferguson, Jr., Special Coordinator on relief to
civilian victims of the Nigerian civil war], who
is working full time on it. We have attempted
to get two shiploads of food down the. Cross
River, which would relieve the situation con-
siderably. We are trying to get interim night
flights started. We are working on the possi-
bility of getting daylight flights out of Lagos
with some proper inspections so that the
Biafrans would accept the food.

Now, we consider it extremely serious. We
deplore the thought that mass destruction
should be used as an instrument of warfare and
we are going to do everything we can to help
prevent this mass starvation.

Q. Are we willing to do it even if the Nigerian
Government protests vehemently and says we
are interfering? Are we willing to do it?

A. I don't want to add anything to what I
just said. We are going to do everytliing that
we can to relieve this mass starvation.

Q. Mr. Secretary, there is a school of thought
that advocates tlmt vie should read the hest into
what the other side has to offer. And, indeed,
in Paris Ambassador Lodge has tried to pick
out those points that the other side has indi-
cated they would like to talk about — that we
would like to talk about. Would you, as Secre-
tary of State, advocate that we read into the
lower level of fighting a significance and take
whatever risk is involved to cut down the fight-
ing and see if this would in fact lower the level?

A. Well, we are certainly willing to take
some risk to end the war. Now, we will watch

Department of State Bulletin

the military activity in Viet-Nam very care-
fully, and we will try to be sure that we inter-
pret it correctly. I don't think I can say more
than that.

Q. Mr. Secretary, are you saying tliat if the
other side — if North Viet-Nam orders its troops
to drop the level of fighting, that toe will not
change the orders to oxir troops in response to

that?

A. No, I didn't say that. I say if we find that
the other side is not fightuig as they have been,
then -we will have to review our military plan-
ning; but it depends on what happens. And
if that hapi^ens, if the other side stops fighting
or almost stops fighting, ob%aously we will have
to review our planning.

Q. Thanh you, sir.

President Nixon To Visit Asia
and Romania

White House Announcement

White House press release (New York, N.T.) dated June 28

The President will travel to the Pacific to ob-
serve the Apollo 11 splashdown and recovery on
board the U.S.S. Hornet. He will depart from
Washington on the morning of July 23.

From the Apollo 11 recover}' area, the Presi-
dent will proceed to the Pliilippines, Indonesia,
Thailand, India, and Pakistan. The Secretary
of State will accompany the President to the
Philippines and Indonesia and will then go on
to Japan, Korea, the Republic of China, Aus-
tralia, and NeAv Zealand.

The President's objective is to reemphasize
his longstanding concern with peace and prog-
ress in Asia. In his meetings with Asian lead-
er, the President plans to explore problems and
opportunities related to securing and sustain-
ing a lasting peace in Asia, as well as measures
for enhancing progi-ess and human well-bemg.
As was the case on his European trip, the Presi-
dent is looking fonvard to frank and intimate
consultations. Most of liis time in each country
will be allocated to face-to-face discussions with
heads of government and other leaders.

He will arrive back ui Washington on or
about August 3. The pi-ecise schedule is cur-

July 21, 1969

356-^85—69-

rently being discussed with the governments of
the countries to be visited and will be made
available when it is completed.

Mrs. Nixon will accompany the President.

At the in\atation of the President of the State
Council of Romania, Nicolae Ceausescu, Presi-
dent Nixon will pay an official visit to Romania
at the begimiing of August this year.

Under Secretary Richardson
Interviewed on CBS Television

Following is the transcript of an interview
with Under Secretary Elliot L. Richardson on
the Colunib'ia Broadcasting System's morning
news program on July 2. Interviewing the Un-
der Secretary was Marvin Kalh of CBS News.

Q. Mr. Secretary, the President has said that
the major problem that the administration faces
i^s trying to win the war in Viet-Nam. In the
5 months that this administration has been in
power, have you made progress toivard ending
the war?

A. Well, I think we have, yes. It has been
slow and more frustrating in many respects
than we had hoped it would be, and yet I think
there have been signs that point the way toward,
hopefully, an end of the war. Certainly the
announcement at Midway about the reduction
of U.S. forces in Viet-Nam was a major turning
point.^

Q. What are some of these signs? What are
the points that we should look for?

A. Well, of course, the most important single
factor about the current situation is that talks
dealing with substance are at least luiderway
in Paris. The troop reduction and Vietnamiza-
tion of the war is a significant step. Beyond
that, I think we can look f oi-ward at least to the
possibility that the discussions of political set-
tlement will get underway between the South
Vietnamese parties. There have been indications

' For exchanges of remarks and a joint statement
issued by President Nixon and President Tliieu of the
Republic of Viet-Nam at Midway Island on June 8, see
Bui>LETiN of .Tune 30, 1969, p. 549.

at least that they were edging to a point where
tliey would be ready to do this.

Q. The South Vietnamese farties being the
Tiew revolutionary govemmsnt and the Saigon
government themselves, lolthout Hanoi?

A. Hopefully, without Hanoi, since — I say
"hopefully," because in our Tiew the question of
political settlement within South Viet-Nam is
a question for the South Vietnamese themselves
to deal with in negotiations among themselves.

Q. Mr. Secretary, if there are issues of sub-
stance being discussed in Paris, why do we con-
tinually get these reports of stenle stalemate
and nothing happening?

A. Well, when I say "substance," I mean that
the parties, even though they have reiterated
their positions again and again in the public
sessions, are talking about the elements that
would have to enter into a settlement. The
points that were set forth, for example, by
the President in his May 14 speech - and the 10
points of the NLF [National Liberation Front] ;
these points deal with substance, even though
substantial gaps remain in the negotiating con-
ditions of each side.

Q. So tJiat, at this point, it^s fair to say that
the President's plan and the NLF proposals are
the basis now upon which discu,ssions of sub-
stance are taking place?

A. Yes. I thint this is true, and I tliink, of
course, there have been statements by President
Thieu himself and undoubtedly there will be
other statements in the course of time which will
help to fill in the position of both sides.

Q. Gould you help us understand the main
jnirpose of the Presidenfs trip out to Asia?

A. I tliink the jjurpose was to lay founda-
tions for our own thinking, as well as theirs,
about the future of Southeast Asia, looking to
the day wlien tlie war in Viet-Nam has been
concluded one way or another.

Q. When the President finishes his trip in
the Far East, he goes on to Romania. I liave
txoo qusstions: Why Romania? And why the
beginning of August?

A. Well, the beginning of August part is
accounted for by the fact that he will be on his
way back from the Far Eastern trip, and it
makes a convenient stopover more or less half-

' For text, see Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

way between. Why Romania? The country has
extended an invitation to him, back around
February or March. I think he felt that this
was a — ^that this was an opportunity to begin
to open up a dialogue with a country of Eastern
Europe which in ttirn might lead to a broader
base of closer relations between the United
States and Eastern Europe.

Q. I ash the question about '■''Why the begin-
ning of August" because it has been said that by
the middle of August the administration was
hoping to enter into missile limitation talks.
Do you believe that the Presidential visit to
Romania — which is a maverick in the Com-
munist world and has done definitely what
Mosco-io does not wish it to do — is conducive to
creating the right atmosphere for missile talks?

A. I don't believe that it will affect the
atmosphere for missile talks one way or another,
really. The Soviet Union, I'm sure, recognizes
that the United States can and should develop
its relationship with other sovereign countries
on an independent basis — certainly, this is the
manner in wliich they conduct their relation-
sliips with other countries — and I would not
look for any connection between the stopover in
early August and what we still hope will be the
start of missile talks on or about the middle of
August.

Q. Do we have reason to believe that they
tvill get going in the middle of August? Have
you heard from the Russians?

A. No, we haven't. We haven't gotten any
definite response yet to our suggestion that we
be prepared to start sometime between July
31st and the middle of August.

Q. The President has said often that he
wishes to replace the policy of confrontation
loith accommodation. Have you noted — can you
give us illustrations of any success in that
policy?

A. Well, I think it would be premature to try
to rack up successes. I think the most we could
do at this stage is to point to efforts underway,
of which certainly a notable example is our
attempt to bring about a negotiated settlement
in the Middle East.

Q. Whafs going on?

A. Well, as you know, there have been con-
versations both at the four-power level and also
between representatives of the United States
and the Soviet Union. We liave submitted vari-

Department of State Bulletin

ous suggestions for principles that might form
the basis of a settlement, so that the Soviet
Union has given us their responses to these sug-
gestions. We have their responses under study,
and we anticipate that there might be another
roimd of discussions which could take place in
Moscow.

Q. What do you mean iy that? Why Moscow?

A. Well, it was suggested at the beginning of
our convei-sations with the Soviet Union that
there be some shifting back and forth, that not
all the conversations on the subject take place
in Washington, and we recognize that it may
be appropriate at this time to change tlie
base with this in view. We would expect,
perhaps, that thereafter they would revert to
Washington.

There is real reason to be concerned that the
situation is, if anji^liing, deteriorating, and of
course, this lends urgency to the talks. On the
other hand, we are hopeful while the talks are
underway that we, on the one side, and the other
three powers associated u\ discussions with us
can exercise a moderating influence which may
help to contain the process — at least keep it
from getting out of hand.

U.S. Seeks Resumption of Relief
to Victims of Nigerian Civil War

Statement hy Secretary Rogers ^

In view of the present seriousness of the
relief problem arising from the Nigerian civil
war, I wish to issue the following statement.

From the beginning of this conflict, the
United States has shared the veiy deep humani-
tarian concern of much of the rest of the world
with respect to the civilian victims of this war.
We have steadfastly refrained from any in-
volvement in the conflict itself and sought to
avoid interference in its politics. We have tried
in every way possible to divorce these consid-
erations from the human task of impartially
succoring the innocent victims of the war on
both sides. All of these considerations led to the
very narrowly jarescribed mandate we gave to
Ambassador Clyde Ferguson as Special Coor-
dinator for these relief efforts when he was
appointed to that position on February 22.^

There is no reason of a theoretical or practi-
cal nature why the hvunanitarian aspects of this

problem cannot be separated from the political
and military aspects. But this requires the co-
operation of the two parties and of the inter-
national community in adliering to certain
fundamental concepts : first, that the provision
by the international community of assistance to
both sides in a civil war should have inter-
national participation to assure that it is
administered for the benefit of the civilian
victims of the war; secondly, that the relief
should be transported and distributed in ways
that convey no military advantage or incur no
military liability to either side; thirdly and
finally, that the parties to the conflict should
refrain from exploiting relief issues for parti-
san political and propaganda purposes.

The United States deplores the severe cur-
taihnent of the role of the International Com-
mittee of the Bed Cross by the Federal Nigerian
Govermnent. It does so because it believes that
Nigeria, Africa, and the entire world need a
strong and truly impartial organization to
carry out the hmnanitarian mandate of the
Geneva conventions. For these same reasons,
this Government equally deplores the fre-
quently expressed criticisms and imsubstanti-
ated charges leveled by the Biafran authorities
against the ICEC. Such attitudes by both sides
to the conflict confirm, in the view of this
Government, not only the fact of ICRC impar-
tiality in a difficult situation but also a regret-
table lack of imderstanding by both parties to
the conflict of the organization's nonpolitical
mandate. It is deplorable that this organization
is condemned because it is in fact neutral.

The time is not too late to look at new
arrangements which will repair the damage
that has been done and make possible a new
approach to assist effectively women, children,
and the aged, who are once again threatened
with becoming the mass victims of a failure to
meet common and decent obligations to assist
them. But the essential rethinking to make this
possible must come from the parties themselves.
The planes stand ready, the vessels are at hand,
the food is stockpiled, the medicines are avail-
able, all within hours of the victims themselves.
All that is required is compassion, mutual for-
bearance, and will.

As a specific illustration of this point : The
United States recently provided financing to
the International Committee of the Eed Cross
for the chartering of two shallow-draft vessels

' Issued on July 2 (press release 183).
^For a statement by President Nixon issued on
Feb. 22, see Bulletin of Mar. 17, 1969, p. 222.

July 21, 1969

to operate on tlie Cross River. These vessels ai-e
now in Lagos harbor and are ready to move. But
the necessary safe-conduct assurances have not
so far been forthcoming from eitlier the
Biafran authorities or the Federal Military
Government.

In connection with the above-enumerated
principles, the United States knows that the
Fetleral Military' Government is concerned
tliat night relief flights provide cover for arms
flights. We also imderstand the desire of the
Federal Militaiy Government for an inspec-
tion system to satisfy itself of the integrity of
cargoes carried over or through its territories.
We believe that controlled daylight flights
would be both an efl'ective and proper means of
divoi'cing the air relief routes from any taint
of militaiy operations. FMG agreement to such
procedures should assure the safety of the relief
flights and the int«grity of the air approaches
used by such flights. Under such controls and
agreement, there are no reasons which would
justify the Biafrans in refusing relief merely be-
cause it passes through Federal territory. Satis-
factoiy arrangements for a daytime airlift can
be quickly worked out; and such an airlift,
together with a water route, could me«t the sup-
plementary food needs of the civilian popula-
tion. The United States sees no reason why an
internationally operated water route with in-
spection procedures could not quickly be
brought into being under simple conditions that
immunize it from military taint. But to make
any or all of this jiossible will, we repeat, require
the compassion, the forbearance, and the will
of both parties.

It is in this spirit that we appeal to both par-
ties to the conflict to pause, to think again, and
cooperate with their fellow men in other coun-
tries in isolating the task of saving untold thou-
sands of their brothers — and our brothers.

Specifically, we seek to bring about a resump-
tion of the flow of relief svipplies through a four-
point ajjproach:

a. We are urging the Biafran autliorities to
accept daylight relief flights with assurance of
neutral air corridors and with I'easonable in-
spection on Nigerian territoi-j', over which all
relief flights must pass.

b. We are urging the Federal Military Gov-
ernment to facilitate arrangements for daylight
fliglits mider these conditions so that they can
begin at the earliest possible time.

c. In order to feed the needy while the day-
time airlift is being established on an effective

basis, we are appealing to the FMG to permit
night relief flights to resume for a period of
2 weeks.

d. Lastly, we are appealing to both parties to
give their final agi'eemcnt to arrangements
worked out by Ambassador Clyde Ferguson, our
Special llelief Coordinator, that will peiTnit the
Cross River water route to get imderway under
the operating control of the International Com-
mittee of the Red Cross. It is this route which
may be the most workable for providing large
amounts of relief to the enclave under mutually
acceptable conditions.

The United States — as over the past months —
will do all we can to help prevent a repetition
of last summer's tragedy. But we should be ab-
solutely clear that in the last account only the
parties them.selves have the choice of life or
death for their people.

24th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made by
Ajiibassador Hem^ Cabot Lodge^ head of the
UjS. delegation, at the 2^th plenary session of
the neto meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on
July 3.

Press release 185 dated July 3

Ladies and gentlemen: From the beginnmg
of these meetings your side has persistently
charged our side with responsibility for block-
ing progress toward peace in Viet-Nam. Yet
what are the facts? Which side has taken the
initiative for peace in Viet-Nam? Who has
taken measures aimed at reducing the fighting ?
Today I shall review the facts, which are as
follows :

On March 31, 1968, the United States limited
the bombardment of North Viet-Nam to mili-
tary targets located south of the 20th parallel.
In fact, after that date we attacked no targets
north of the 19th parallel.

Since that time — for well over a year —
United States forces in South Viet-Nam have
operated at approximately the same level. Those
forces have also remained below the troop ceil-
ings announced by President Johnson in March
1968. The number of B-52 strikes each month
has not increased from the level established in
March 1968. President Nixon pointed out as
recently as June 19 that United States forces

Department of State Bulletin

have not intensified their military operations
but have only responded to what your side has
done.^

On November 1, 1968, on the basis of the
official conversations with the North Vietnamese
representatives here in Paris, the United States
carried out its undertaking to stop all acts in-
volving the use of force against the entire ter-
ritory of North Viet-Nam. As of that date, the
United States and other Allied forces also
stopped all acts of force in the demilitarized
zone. As of that date, none of our forces were
in the zone. There was no firing by our forces
into or across the demDitarized zone. And there
was no massing or movement of our forces near
the demilitarized zone in a manner threatening
to your side.

At the first plenary session of the Paris meet-
ings on Viet-Nam, on January 25, 1969,^ the
United States and the Government of the Re-
public of Viet-Nam presented specific proposals
designed to reduce further the level of violence
in Viet-Nam and to open the way toward a nego-
tiated peace. These included an offer to begin
immediately the mutual withdrawal of non-
South Vietnamese forces from South Viet-Nam.

On March 25th of this year, the President of
the Republic of Viet-Nam announced his read-
iness to have private talks on a political settle-
ment with representatives of the National Lib-
eration Front without any prior conditions.

On April 7th President Thieu set forth six
principles upon which a peace settlement could
be based.

On May 14th the President of the United
States made a new proposal for peace — a pro-
posal which could end the fighting in Viet-Nam
and establish peace on a just and durable basis.^
President Nixon's eight points offered flexible
and reasonable proposals for serious negotia-
tion. He mdicated his willuigness to consider
other approaches consistent with our principles.

On June 8th President Thieu and President
Nixon met at Midway Island in the Pacific*
They expressed their intention to seek a just
settlement in Paris in the spirit of patience and
good will. They carefully reviewed their own
proposals, as well as your side's 10 points. They
expressed their conviction that their proposals

^ For President Nixon's news conference of June 19,
see Bulletin of July 7, 1969, p. 1.

' Bulletin of Feb. 10, 1969, p. 124.

' For President Nixon's address to the Nation on
May 14, see Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

* For background, see Bulletin of June 30, 1969, p.
549.

represent a reasonable basis for peace. They also
observed that, despite the fact that your side's
10-point proposal contains certain unacceptable
provisions, there were certain points which ap-
pear not too far from the positions taken by the
Government of the Republic of Viet-Nam and
the United States.

At Midway the two Presidents also announced
the replacement of 25,000 American combat
troops by South Vietnamese forces. Tliis re-
duction of American combat strength — one-
tenth of our combat units in South Viet-Nam —
will begin in the next few days. It will be com-
pleted by the end of August. Also in August,
the United States and South Viet-Nam will con-
sider a further reduction in U.S. forces based
on the three factors announced by President
Nixon : the training and equipment of the South
Vietnamese armed forces, the military situation
in South Viet-Nam, and the progress which
can be made in the Paris meetings.

In his press conference immediately follow-
ing the Midway meeting, on Jime 9th President
Thieu reaffirmed his offer of March 25th to hold
private talks with the National Liberation
Front without conditions. President Thieu also
said: "Everything can be discussed at a con-
ference table if both sides show good will to
meet and hold serious discussions." As Presi-
dent Thieu said, if your side has good will to
negotiate, "everything has to be negotiated and
is negotiable."

This recital of the facts outlines the numer-
ous concrete actions which our side has taken
to bring peace to Viet-Nam. In addition to these
actions, we have at this table consistently sought
to find the points of similarity between us.
We have sought to exchange views and exam-
ine positions, to explore and to query, and to
offer clarification of our own positions. We have
done this from the beginning of these meetings.
More recently, we have sought to open mean-
ingful negotiations on the basis of your side's
10-point proposal and President Nixon's and
President Thieu's proposals.

We submit this statement of fact concerning
our side because we believe it is pertinent to
have it in the record of these Paris meetings at
this time.

For 5 months now, your side continues to in-
sist that it will not deal with the Government
of the Republic of Viet-Nam. Your side came
to these meetings in Paris knowing that they
had as a purpose negotiations with the Govern-
ment of the Republic of Viet-Nam. It is a fact
that you have been willing right along to sit

I July 21, 1969

here at this table with the representatives of
that Government. Yet you refuse to enter into
serious negotiations with them, and you also
demand that this Government, which is legiti-
mate, be replaced by a government of your
choosing before serious negotiations can begin.

Ladies and gentlemen, we do not think that
your attitude in this respect is conducive to pro-
ductive negotiations. Our proposals remain be-
fore you, and we remain ready to negotiate.

We have just seen press reports that North
Viet-Nam has announced the release of three
American prisoners of war and that it will
allow other American prisoners of war to re-
ceive gifts from their families.

If this report is accurate, I express appreci-
ation on belialf of the U.S. Government. I hope
that this action will lead to further and more
general prisoner releases by your side and to
such other humanitarian acts as a list of names
of prisoners, permission for all prisoners to
correspond with their families, and release of
sick and woimded prisoners.

We stand ready to discuss here in Paris what-
ever detailed arrangements may be necessary.

U.S. Regards Southern Rhodesian
Referendum as Travesty

Following is a statement read to news corre-
spondents hy Department press spokesman Carl
Bartch on June 23.

The United States deplores the fact that con-
stitutional proposals clearly designed to inten-
sify and institutionalize political control by the
small wliit« minority population of Southern
Rhodesia are now about to be given effect as a
result of the referendum. The United States
regards a referendum in which only 1.1 percent
of the population of Southern Ehodesia ap-
proved the results to be a travesty of commonly
accepted methods of ascertaining the popular
will.

Now, I might point out that Ambassador Yost
in New York detailed the U.S. attitude toward
the constitutional proposals in his speech of
June 13th before the U.N. Security Council.

U.S. Designates Four New Members
of Permanent Court of Arbitration

The Department of State announced on
June 26 (press release 177) that the Secretary
of State has designated four new United States
members of the Permanent Court, of Arbitra-
tion. They are Eichard R. Baxter of Cambridge,
Mass., Herbert Brownell of New York, N.Y.,
Herman Phleger of San Francisco, Calif., and
John R. Stevenson of New York, N.Y. (For
biographic details, see press release 177.)

Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitra-
tion serve in their personal capacities and not
as officers of the United States. They are ap-
pointed for terms of 6 years.

Under the Statute of the International Court
of Justice, the members of the Permanent Court
of Arbitration nominate persons for election by
the United Nations Security Council and Gen-
eral Assembly as judges of the International
Court of Justice. Tlie Statute recommends that
each national gi-oup of Permanent Court mem-
bers "consult its highest court of justice, its
legal faculties and schools of law, and its na-
tional academies and national sections of inter-
national academies devoted to the study of
law," before making these nominations. Five
vacancies will occur on the International Court
of Justice this year, including tliat of the U.S.
Judge.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration was
created by the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conven-
tions for the Pacific Settlement of Interna-
tional Disputes "With the object of facilitating
an immediate recourse to arbitration for inter-
national differences, which it has not been pos-
sible to settle by diplomacy. . . ." In accord-
ance with the two Hague conventions, each
signatory power selects four persons as mem-
bers of the Court. The Hague conventions pro-
vide that when any contracting powers desire
to seek recourse to the Pei-manent Court of
Arbitration for the settlement of a difference
that has arisen between them, the tribunal to
decide the difference shall bo chosen from the
general list of the members of the Court.

The secretariat of the Court maintains
quarters in the Peace Palace at The Hague,
Netherlands.

Department of State Bulletin

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES

U.S. Deplores Minority Rule in Southern Rhodesia

Following are statements made in the V.N.
Security Council on June 13 and ^4 ^V U^.
Representative Charles W. Yost, togetlier with
the text of a draft resolution which was voted
on hy the Council on June 24 ^ut failed to
obtain the nine votes necessary for adoption.

STATEMENT OF JUNE 13

U.S./O.N. press release 6 dated June 13

The Security Council meets at a deeply dis-
turbing moment in the troubled history of the
problem of Southern Rhodesia. On June 20
there will be presented to the voters in that ter-
ritory certain proposals for a new "constitu-
tion," and for the conversion of the territory
into a so-called republic. These proposals ema-
nate not from the United lungdom, which is the
lawful sovereign power, but from an illegal
white minority regime. They will be voted on
not by an electorate representative of the 4.5
million people of the territory, but by some
90,000 voters, nine-tenths of whom are white —
in a country whose population is about 95 per-
cent black.

The proposals themselves are conceived in
racism. Their design is to perpetuate the rule
of the white minority and to render majority
rule, or the attainment of political equality by
members of the black majority, forever
impossible.

That this is the deliberate aim of the new
constitutional proposals is undeniable. The evi-
dence on this point is clear. It can be found in
the introduction to the document published on
May 21 by the regime in Salisbury and entitled
"Proposals for a New Constitution for
Rhodesia." The first paragraph of that docu-
ment explains the need for a new constitution
by declaring that the Constitution of 1961 "con-
tains a number of objectionable features, the
principal ones being that it provides for even-

July 21, 1969

tual African rule and, inevitably, the domina-
tion of one race by another and that it does not
guarantee that government vdll be retained in
responsible hands." It then asserts that the new
constitution "will ensure that government will
be retained in responsible hands." By this phrase
the authors clearly mean that the rule of the
white minority is to be guaranteed in perpetu-
ity. Evidently they do not object to "the domina-
tion of one race by another" so long as the
dominant race is white.

The intentions of the regime have been fur-
ther expounded in recent statements by Mr. Ian
Smith. In a speech on May 7 he explained the
purpose of the new constitution as "to retain
Western civilization in Rhodesia" and "to stem
the tide of rampant black nationalism on the
Zambezi." In a radio address on May 20 he com-
plained that throughout the discussions with
the United Kingdom "the British have been
obsessed with the question of majority rule." It
is a curious view indeed wliich sees nothing in
common between Western civilization and the
concept of majority rule, but that is the view
which appears to prevail among the constitu-
tion writers in Salisbury.

I shall comment only briefly on the constitu-
tional provisions. The provisions on franchise
and on the composition and powers of the leg-
islature were written to assure that the decisive
jDolitical power will remain forever in wliite
hands. The main legislative power is to be
lodged in a lower house consisting at the outset
of 50 Europeans and 16 Africans. Half of the
Africans will be chosen by tribal councils.
Provision for an eventual increase in African
representation in the lower house is tied to an
income tax formula that is virtually certain to
prevent any such increase for many years to
come, and an African majority in either house
is completely ruled out.

The provisions on land tenure stipulate that
the European and African areas are to be ap-

proximately equal in size, if not in quality —
meaning the same quantity of land for the 5
percent who are white as for the 95 percent
who are black. Given the distribution of politi-
cal power, it would not be surprising to see the
ruling minority change the recipe even further
to their advantage.

One other feature deserves notice : a chapter
entitled "Declaration of Rights." It is a curi-
ously ironic title for a chapter which explicitly
authorizes, among other things, preventive
detention; restriction of individuals without
bail or trial ; the power to require an accused
person to testify against himself; and censor-
ship of broadcasting and newspapers and other
publications.

As if these provisions did not give enough
scope to a police state, it is further provided that
if a bill in parliament is found to violate the
declaration of rights, it can nevertheless be en-
acted if the upper house holds it to be necessary
in the national interest or if the lower house
decides to pass it anyway.

With such a flimsy bill of rights as this, no
man, whether white or black, can feel that his
liberty is safe. For the sake of denying the
rights of the black majority, the members of the
white minority are being asked to leave their
own liberties unprotected.

Since these proposals — despite all the trap-
pings of law in which they are dressed — are
intrinsically imjust and since they emanate from
an unlawful regime, they will be without legal
effect regardless of the results of the voting
on June 20. Nevertheless, their political signifi-
cance is a matter of grave concern. By these
steps the present authorities in Salisbury pro-
pose to turn their backs on the United Kingdom
and on the long effort to find a basis for in-
dependence which would be lawful, acceptable
to all the people, and compatible with the prin-
ciple of majority rule. The same authorities
who announced a spurious independence in 1965
have now, it seems, abandoned all pretense of
wishing to legitimize their country's status
in the international community. They have
abandoned all pretense that the 95 percent of
Ehodesians who are black might ever, at any
time, aspire to their just share in the govern-
ment of their own country. They have set their
faces toward a bogus, usurped independence
based on perpetual white supremacy in a nation
that is overwhelmingly black. The road which

they thus propose to travel is lonesome and
dangerous. It is all too likely to lead to the racial
polarization, extremism, and lawless violence
which its proponents profess to fear.

The conclusion is inescapable that the regime
in Salisbuiy has arrived at this racist policy
because of a fundamental misreading of the
events of recent years in Africa. They seem
literally to see all events in terms of black
against white — and to perceive no alternative
except that one must dominate the other. If
this were to become the ruling principle of
political life in Africa, the destiny of that con-
tinent would be tragic indeed.

Fortunately, other and wiser voices can be
heard in Africa today. There are many among
the white minority in Southern Ehodesia itself
who have expressed deep misgivings about the
policy of the Smith regime. In recent weeks we
have seen growing evidence of such misgivings
among churclimen, educators, students, journal-
ists, and business leaders within the white
community.

Their views, in turn, are in harmony with a
larger body of opinion elsewhere in Africa. I
refer to those who see the future hopes of Africa
for peace and progress founded on the prin-
ciple of nonracialism. Only 2 months ago that
principle was given particularly eloquent ex-
pression in what may well become a major docu-
ment in African history : the Lusaka Manifesto
of East and Central African States, signed by
the leaders of 13 nations on April 16. Proceed-
ing from the belief "that all men are equal," the
manifesto contains a passage so precisely rele-
vant to the situation in Southern Rhodesia that
I wish to quote it at this point :

Our stand towards Southern Africa . . . involves a
rejection of racialism, not a reversal of the existing
racial doniLnation. We believe that all the peoples who
have made their homes in the countries of Southern
Africa are Africans, regardless of the colour of their
skins ; and we would oppose a racialist majority gov-
ernment which adopted a philosophy of deliberate and
permanent discrimination between its citizens on
grounds of racial origin. We are not talking racialism
when we reject the colonialism and apartheid policies
now operating in those areas; we are demanding an
opportunity for all the people of these States, working
together as equal individual citizens, to work out for
themselves the institutions and the system of govern- I
ment under which they will, by general consent, live
together and work together to build a harmonioua
society.

Department of State Bulletin

To talk of the liberation of Africa is thus to say two
things. First, that the peoples in the territories still
under colonial rule shall be free to deternaine for them-
selves their own institutions of self-government. Sec-
ondly, that the individuals in Southern Africa shall be
freed from an environment poisoned by the propaganda
of racialism, and given an opportunity to be men — not
white men, brown men, yellow men, or black men.

In the light of the Lusaka Manifesto, words
about "stemming the tide of rampant black na-
tionalism along the Zambezi" come with singu-
lar ill grace from Mr. Ian Smith. Not only from
London but also from his neighbors in Africa,
he and his associates have been mvited for years
to accept the hand of friendship and coopera-
tion. They have spurned that invitation, appar-
ently in the belief that either the white minority
must suppress the black majority or the other
way around — that no middle ground, no equal-
ity, is possible. Yet in truth the only possible
ground on which to build peace and progress in
Africa is precisely the middle ground of non-
racialism. The course of action which Mr. Smith
and his colleagues now advocate cannot lead to
peace and progress, but rather to extremism and
bitter strife in which the cause of peace is sure
to suffer.

We have all learned that the evils of white
racism in southern Africa, and particularly in
Southern Khodesia, are more durable than we
had thought. But their duration does not make
them any less evil, nor does it make our united
opposition to them any less important.

In November 1965, when the Ehodesian au-
thorities first announced the purported inde-
pendence of their country, they sought to mis-
lead public opinion by dressing up their an-
nouncement in plumage stolen from the Amer-
ican Declaration of Independence.

Never were noble words borrowed to camou-
flage a more sordid enterprise. This so-caUed
independence was claimed, and is still claimed
today, not for the 4.5 million people of Southern
Ehodesia, but only for the 5 percent of them who
happen to be white. It is an independence con-
ceived from the outset in racism and main-
tained — as the new constitutional provisions
clearly show — by the ugly practices of the po-
lice stat«. From those practices no dissenter, be
he black, brown, or white, can hope to remain
immune.

It is little wonder that the so-called unilateral
declaration of independence in 1965, even while
it borrowed the celebrated phrases of Thomas

Jefferson, skipped silently over the most fa-
mous words of all from the American original
of 1776: the self-evident truth that "all men
are created equal." For obvious reasons the au-
thors of the Salisbury document had no stomach
for that little word "equal." Yet it is a word
that wiU not die — indeed, we live in a time when
it has begim at last to take on its full meaning
for men of all races. It finds expression in the
United Nations Charter, in the Universal
Declaration of Human Eights, and now in the
Lusaka Manifesto. No amount of censorship or
of police repression can bury it. Its realization
is one of the essentials of enduring peace in
Africa and in the entire world, and one of the
goals to which my Government remains unal-
terably committed.

I can only conclude, Mr. President, that at this
tune and before the referendum among the
minority takes place, we in this Council should
condemn the proposed constitution which would
further entrench the illegal racist regime and
should also again condemn that regime itself.
This action should be taken at once — well before
June 20. Having taken this action, we can then
consult together as to what further steps on the
part of this Council in regard to Southern Eho-
desia might be appropriate, useful, and effective.

STATEMENT OF JUNE 24

U.S./U.N. press release 87 dated June 24

The United States deeply deplores the spec-
tacle of 1 percent of the population of Southern
Ehodesia deciding to impose on the vast ma-
jority of voteless Ehodesians Smith's proposals
for a new "constitution" which would clearly in-
tensify and institutionalize political control of
Southern Ehodesia by that minority.

As I said on June 13 in this Coimcil, my Gov-
ernment believes this Council should condemn
both the illegal regime and the proposed consti-
tution. I argued that we should have taken such
action before Jime 20. Unfortunately, we could
not seem to reach a consensus on a form of word-
ing which would have expressed the condemna-
tion which we all believe is both deserved and
required.

We have been faced with a draft resolution
which my Government could not support. I
regret that we have all been placed in this situa-
tion, because the only beneficiary of our differ-

July 21, 1969

ences is the illegal regime we seek to condemn.
This Council has exerted an effective influence
on the Iihodesian situation only when it worked
on the basis of unanimity. I find it disturbing
that in consideration of a subject we have pre-
viously acted upon effectively, we now find our-
selves divided in opinion as to what our next
step should be. Clearly the only ones who will
find any solace in this state of affairs are Mr.
Smith and his friends.

To turn specifically to the language of the
resolution before us, I would like to point out
that while the United States finds itself in broad
agreement with the aims of the draft resolution
and agrees fully with many of its provisions,
there are other portions to which our objection
is well known.

In particular, we have consistently main-
tained that the use of force is not the appropriate
way to bring this problem to a solution. We have
heard the Representative of the United King-
dom say his Government is not prepared to use
force in this situation, and we respect the cogent
reasons he has set forth for not doing so. The
duty of this Council is to maintain international
peace and security. The use of force in this case
would in our view serve to jeopardize rather
than support that objective.

Another major defect in the draft resolution
was its extension of economic sanctions to South
Africa and Portugal. The United States has
frequently explained why we consider such ex-
tension would not be productive in dealing with
the situation in Southern Rhodesia. To apply
sanctions to neighboring countries simply be-
cause they have not yet been adequately or suc-
cessfully applied to Rhodesia itself would seem
to us to be a dubious course introducing addi-
tional grave complications into a situation al-
ready complicated enough. "We cannot agree that
it would be either wise or responsible for this
Council to do so.

Finally, my Government also had difficulty
with paragraph 3 of the draft resolution, in
view of our traditional position supporting a
free flow of information throughout the world.

In sum, Mr. President, the United States
deeply regi"ets the travesty foisted upon the
world by Mr. Smith and his friends in Southern
Rhodesia, and we are particularly distressed
that the members of this Council have been un-
able to find agreement as to how we should pro-
ceed in the face of this continuing injustice.

TEXT OF DRAFT RESOLUTION ^

The Security Council,

Recalling and reaffirming its resolutions 216 (1965)
of 12 November 1965, 217 (1965) of 20 November 1965,
221 (1966) of 9 April 1966, 232 (1966) of 16 December
1966 and 253 (1968) of 29 May 1968,

Reafflrming in particular its resolution 232 (1966) in
which it determined that the situation in Southern
Rhodesia constitutes a threat to international peace
and security.

Taking into account reports of the Committee estab-
lished in pursuance of Security Council resolution 253
( IOCS) ( S/8954 and S/9252) ,

Gravely concerned that the measures so far taken
have failed to resolve the situation in Southern
Rhodesia,

Gravely concerned further that the measures taken
by the Security Council have not been fully complied
with by all States,

looting that the Governments of the Republic of South
Africa and Portugal, in particular, in contravention
of their obligation under Article 25 of the Charter of
the United Nations, have not only carried on trade
with the illegal racist minority regime of Southern
Rhodesia contrary to the terms of Security Council
resolutions 232 (1966) and 253 (1968) but have, in fact,
given active assistance to that regime, enabling it to
counter the effects of measures decided upon by the
Security Council,

Affirming the primary responsibility of the Govern-
ment of the United Kingdom to enable the people of
Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia) to exercise their right
of self-determination and independence,

Reaffirming Its recognition of the legitimacy of the
struggle of the people of Zimbabwe (Southern
Rhodesia) for freedom and independence,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the
United Nations,

1. Emphasizes the responsibility of the Government
of the United Kingdom, as the administering Power,
for the situation that prevails in Southern Rhodesia
and condemns the so-called constitutional proposals of
the illegal racist minority regime aimed at perpetuat-
ing its power and sanctioning the system of apartheid
in Southern Rhodesia ;

2. Urges the United Kingdom, as the administering
Power, to take urgently all necessary measures, includ-
ing the use of force, to bring an end to the rebellion
in Southern Rhodesia and enable the people of Zim-
babwe (Southern Rhodesia) to exercise their right
to self-determination and independence in accordance
with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) ;

3. Decides that all States shall sever immediately all
economic and other relations with the illegal racist

' U.N. doc. S/9270/Rev. 1 ; the draft resolution was
voted upon by the Council on June 24 but failed to
obtain the nine votes necessary for adoption, the vote
being eight in favor (Algeria, China, Hungary, Nepal,
Pakistan, Senegal, U.S.S.R., and Zambia) and none
opposed, with seven abstentions (Colombia, Finland,
France, Paraguay, Spain, U.K., and U.S.).

Deparfment of State Bulletin

minority regime in Southern Rhodesia, including rail-
way, maritime, air transport, postal, telephonic and
wireless communications and other means of
communication :

4. Censures the assistance given by the Governments
of Portugal and South Africa to the illegal racist
minority regime in defiance of resolutions of the
Security Council ;

5. Decides that Member States and members of the
specialized agencies shall carry out the measures deal-
ing with imports and exports envisaged in resolution
253 (196S) and in the present resolution against the
Republic of South Africa and the Portuguese colony of
Mozambique ;

6. CaJls upon all Member States and members of the
specialized agencies to carry out the decisions of the
Security Council in accordance with their obligations
under the Charter of the United Nations;

7. Calls upon Member States and, in particular, those
with primary responsibility under the Charter for the
maintenance of international peace and security to
assist effectively in the implementation of the meas-
ures called for by the present resolution ;

8. Urges all States to render moral and material as-
sistance to the national liberation movements of Zim-
babwe ( Southern Rhodesia ) in order to enable them to
achieve their freedom and independence;

9. Requests all States to report to the Secretary-
General on the measures taken to implement the pres-
ent resolution ;

10. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the
Security Council on the progress of the implementation
of this resolution.

United Nations Documents:
A Selected Bibliography

Mimeographed or processed documents (such as those
listed beloic) may he consulted at depository libraries
in the United States. U.N. printed publications may be
purchased from the Sales Section of the United Na-
tions, United Nations Plaza, N.Y.

Security Council

Report by the Secretary General in pursuance of Res-
olution 264 (1969) adopted by the Security Council
on March 20, 1969, concerning the situation in Nami-
bia. S/9204. May 14, 1969. 18 pp.

Second report of the committee established in pur-
suance of Security Council Resolution 253 (1968) of
Mav 29, 1968, relating to Southern Rhodesia. S/9252,
June 12, 1969. 16 pp.

>c General Assembly

te ^

il^ M International Law Commission:

^ I The Most-Favoured-Nation Clause. First report by

Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur. A/CN.4/213.

April 18, 1969. 80 pp.

Second Report on Succession in Respect of Treaties,
by Sir Humphrey Waldoeli, Special Rapporteur.
A/CN.4/214. AprU 18, 1969. 24 pp.

Report on the 1968 Meeting of the Inter-American
Juridical Committee, by Jos6 Maria Ruda, Ob-
server for the Commission. A/CN.4/215. AprU 24,
1969, 15 pp.
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space :

Information furnished by the United States con-
cerning objects launched into orbit or beyond.
A/AC.105/INF.204, May 28, 1969, 2 pp. ; A/AC.105/
INF.205, May 29, 1969, 3 pp.

Information furnished by the U.S.S.R. concerning
objects launched into orbit around the earth or
into outer space. A/AC.105/206. June 2, 1969. 2 pp.

TREATY INFORMATION

Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Atomic Energy

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to the bilateral
agreement of June 25, 1969, between the United
States and Argentina for cooperation concerning
civil uses of atomic energy. Signed at Vienna June 13,
1969. Enters into force on the date the agreement
for cooperation of June 25, 1969, enters into force.
Signatures : Argentina, International Atomic Energy
Agency, United States.

Aviation

Protocol on the authentic trilingual text of the con-
vention on international civil aviation, Chicago, 1944
(TIAS 1591, 3756, 5170), with annex. Done at Buenos
Aires September 24, 1968. Entered into force Octo-
ber 24, 1968. TIAS 6605.
Signature: Lebanon, June 30, 1969.
Acceptance deposited: Belgium, July 2, 1969.

Convention on offenses and certain other acts
committed on board aircraft. Done at Tokyo
September 14, 1963.'
Ratified by the President: June 30, 1969.

Consular

Vienna convention on consular relations. Done at
Vienna April 24, 1963. Entered into force March 19,
1967.^^
Ratification deposited: Austria, June 12, 1969.

Grains

International grains arrangement, 1967, with annexes.
Open for signature at W^ashington October 15 through

' Not in force.

- Not in force for the United States.

July 21, 1969

November 30, 1967. Entered into force July 1, 1968.

TIAS 6537.

Ratification to the Wheat Trade Convention de-
posited: Lebanon, June 30, 1969.

Accessions to the Wheat Trade Convention deposited:
Austria, June 30, 1969 ; Venezuela, June 30, 1969.

Narcotic Drugs

Single convention on narcotic drugs, 1961. Done at
New York March 30, 1961. Entered into force Decem-
ber 13, 1964; for the United States June 24, 1967.
Ratification deposited: Nigeria, June 6, 1969.

Refugees

Protocol relating to the status of refugees. Done at New
York January 31, 1967. Entered into force October 4,
1967 ; for the United States November 1, 1968. TIAS
6577.
Accession deposited: Canada, June 4, 1969.

Space

Treaty on principles governing the activities of states
in the exploration and use of outer space, including
the moon and other cele.stial bodies. Opened for sig-
nature at Washington, London, and Moscow Janu-
ary 27, 1967. Entered into force October 10, 1967.
TIAS 6347.

Ratifications deposited at Washington: Lebanon,
June 30, 1969; Norway, July 1, 1969.

Agreement on the rescue of astronauts, the return of
astronauts, and the return of objects launched into
outer space. Opened for signature at Washington,
London, and Moscow April 22, 1968. Entered into
force December 3, 1968. TIAS 6599.
Ratification deposited at Washington: Lebanon,
June 30, 1969.

Telecommunications

International telecommunication convention, with
annexes. Done at Montreux November 12, 1965.
Entered into force January 1, 1967; for the United
States May 29, 1967. TIAS 6267.
Accession deposited: Nauru, June 10, 1969.

BILATERAL

Italy

Japan

Agreement extending the loan of the ex-U.S.S. Edwards
and the ex-U.S.S. Leary pursuant to the agreement
of May 14, 1954, as amended and extended (TIAS
29S5, 4171, 5834), relating to tie loan of vessels.
Effected by exchange of notes at Tokyo June 20,
1969. Entered into force June 20, 1969, effective
March 10, 1969.

Portugal

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington July 3, 1969.
Enters into force on the date on which each Govern-

ment shall have received from the other written
notification that it has complied with aU statutory
and constitutional requirements for entry into force.

Spain

Agreement extending the agreement of January 29,
1964, as amended, for a tracking and data acquisi-
tion station (TIAS 5533, 5896). Effected by exchange
of notes at Madrid, June 25, 1969. Entered into force
June 25, 1969.

PUBLICATIONS

Volume V in Foreign Relations Series
for 1946 Released

On Jime 23 the Department of State released For-
eign Relations of the United States, 19J,ti, volume V,
The British Commonwealth; Western and Central
Europe (xiv, 1,109 pp.). This volume, the first to be
published for 1946, includes documentation on American
relations with all the nations of the Commonwealth,
including India and Ireland, as weU as most of the
governments of Western and Central Europe.

Of particular interest are compilations documenting
United States efforts to assist France and Italy to
recover from the effects of the war and to maintain
free and democratic governments. The severe problems
that the United States encoimtered with regard to the
quadripartite control of Germany are of special sig-
nificance in connection with the development of the
cold war.

The volume also contains documentation on American
efforts to alleviate the sufferings of displaced persons,
refugees, and minorities.

Copies of volume V (Department of State publication
8453) may be obtained from the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
ton, D.C. 20402, for $6 each.

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

Designations

Margaret Joy Tibbetts as Deputy Assistant Secre-
tary for European Affairs, effective July 1.

Department of State Bulletin

INDEX July 21, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1569

,\sia. Secretary Rogers' News Conference of
July 2 41

Cambodia

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of July 2 . . 41
United States and Cambodia Resume Diplomatic
Relations 43

Department and Foreign Service. Designations

(Tibbetts) 60

Disarmament. Secretary Rogers' News Confer-
ence of July 2 41

Europe. Miss Tibbetts designated Deputy Assist-
ant Secretary for European Affairs .... 60

India. President Nixon To Visit Asia and
Romania 40

Indonesia. President Nixon To Visit Asia and
Romania 49

International Law. U.S. Designates Four New
Members of Permanent Court of Arbitra-
tion 54

Near East

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of July 2 . 41
Under Secretary Richardson Interviewed on CBS
Television (transcript) 40

Nigeria. U.S. Seeks Resumption of Relief to
Victims of Nigerian Civil War (statement by
Secretary Rogers) 51

Pakistan. President Nixon To Visit Asia and
Romania 49

Pliilippines. President Nixon To Visit Asia and
Romania 49

Publications. Volume V in Foreign Relations

Series for 1946 Released 60

Romania

President Nixon To Visit Asia and Romania . . 49
Secretary Rogers' News Conference of July 2 . 41

Southern Rhodesia

U.S. Deplores Minority Rule in Southern Rho-
desia (Yost) 55

U.S. Regards Southern Rhodesian Referendum
as Travesty (statement by Department press
spokesman) 54

Thailand. President Nixon To Visit Asia and

Romania 49

Trade. Secretary Rogers' News Conference of
July 2 41

Treaty Information. Current Actions .... 59

U.S.S.R.

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of July 2 . 41
Under Secretary Richardson Interviewed on
CBS Television (transcript) 49

United Nations

United Nations Documents 59

U.S. Deplores Minority Rule in Southern Rho-
desia (Tost) 55

Viet-Nam

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of .July 2 . 41

24th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam Held at Paris

(Lodge) 52

Under Secretary Richardson Interviewed on

CBS Television (transcript) 49

Name Index

Ijodge, Henry Cabot 52

Nixon, President 49

Richardson, Elliot L 49

Rogers, Secretary 41,51

Tibbetts, Margaret Joy 60

Yost, Charles W 55

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: June 30-July 6

Press releases may be obtained from the
Office of News, Department of State, Washing-
ton, D.C. 20520.

Release issued prior to June 29 which appears
in this issue of the Bulletin is No. 177 of
June 26.

No.

*17S

Date

T/2

Subject

180 7/2

King sworn in as Ambassador to
Guyana (biographic details).
179 7/1 Eliot designated Special Assistant to
the Secretary and Executive Sec-
retary of the Department (bio-
graphic details).

U.S. and Cambodia resume diplo-
matic relations.

Rogers : news conference.

Program for the visit of Emperor
Haile Selassie of Ethiopia.

Rogers : statement on relief problem
arising from the Nigerian civil
war.

Middendorf sworn in as Ambassador
to the Netherlands (biographic
details).

Lodge : 24th session on Viet-Nam at
Paris.

Establishment of Planning and Co-
ordination Staff.

181

"182

183

*1S4

185
tlS6

7/2
7/2

7/2

7/3

7/3
7/3

* Not printed.

t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1969

Superintendent of Documents
U.S. government printing office

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICK

N AVT O

20YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

PRESIDENT NIXON HAILS SAIGON PROPOSALS
FOR POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN SOUTH VIET-NAM 61

UNITED STATES RExVFFIRjMS POSITION ON JERUSALEM

Statements hrj Ambassador Yost
and Text of U.N. Security Council Resolution 76

TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ST. LA^VRENCE SEAWAY
Remarks hy President Nixon and Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada 67

PRESIDENT NIXON CALLS FOR COMPREHENSIVE EFFORTS
IN MULTILATERAL DISAR]\L\MENT NEGOTIATIONS

Message to Geneva Disarmament Conference 65

For index see inside hack cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1570
July 28, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Qoverament Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

52 issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January 11. 1966).

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 BULLETIN is Indexed in

the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
tcith information on developments in
the field of foreign relations and on
the ivork of the Department of State
and the Foreign Service.
The BULLETIN includes selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and tlie functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

President Nixon Hails Saigon Proposals
for Political Settlement in South Viet-Nam

Statement by President Nixon '

President Thieu lias put forward a compre-
lieiisive, statesmanlike, and eminently fair
profDOsal for a political settlement in South
Viet-Nam. It deserves the support of all who
seek peace in that tortured land.

President Thieu's proposal would establish
a set of procedures and guarantees to ensure
that the political future of South Viet-Nam
would reflect, as accurately and as fairly as
possible, the will of the people of South Viet-
Nam — including those whose allegiance is to the
other side as well as those whose allegiance is
to his own government.

In my television address of May 14 I said : -

What the United States wants for South Viet-Nam
is not the important thing. What North Viet-Xam wants
for South Viet-Nam is not the important thing. What
is important is what the people of South Viet-Nam
want for South Viet-Nam.

I believe President Thieu's proposal is in this
spirit and that it would genuinely give the
people of South Viet-Nam — all of them — ^the
opportunity to determine their own fate for
themselves. If the other side is prejiared for
serious negotiations and willmg to abide by the
free choice of the South Vietnamese people, this
should open the way at last for a rapid settle-
ment of the conflict.

President Thieu has proposed elections in
which all political parties and groups can par-
ticipate, specifically including the National Lib-
eration Front. He has ofl^ered to set up special
giiarantees to ensure fairness :

'Issued on July 11 (White House press release)
following an address made that day at Saigon by
President Nguyen Van Thieu of the Republic of Viet-
Nam.

" Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

— Establishment of an election commission,
on which the NLF and all other parties would
be represented.

— Empowering this commission to assure all
candidates equal oportunity to campaign and
all parties equal opportunity to participate in
watching the polls and in supervising the count-
ing of ballots.

— Establishment of an international body to
supervise the elections.

Beyond this. President Thieu has indicated
his willingness to discuss with the other side
the timetable and details of these elections. He
has declared that his government will abide by
the results of such elections and has asked that
the other side do the same. He also has renewed
his offer of private talks with the NLF without
preconditions.

President Thieu's offer marks the culmination
of a long series of steps by the South Vietnam-
ese and American Go\emments, all of which
together demonstrate clearly the sincere desire
of our two Governments to negotiate an honor-
able and rapid settlement of the war.

Let us look at the record :

Prior to January 20 the United States had
halted the bombing of North Viet-Nam and
agreed to sit down at the conference table with
the NLF, as well as with the governments of
Hanoi and Saigon. We have remained at that
table and refrained from a resumption of the
bombing, despite Hanoi's shelling of South
Viet-Nam 's major cities, its violation of the de-
militarized zone, and its refusal to deal with
the Saigon Government.

On March 25 President Thieu offered to meet
with the NLF for private talks without pre-

July 28, 1969

conditions on a political settlement. This was
refused.

On May 14, with the full support of President
Thieu, I put forward an eight-point plan for
peace. In this plan I renounced reliance on a
military solution. I oifered a withdrawal of U.S.
and Allied forces within 12 mouths. I suggested
placing the process of mutual withdrawal un-
der international guarantees. I said that we
sought no militarj' bases and no militaiy ties,
but only to secure the right of the people of
South Viet-Nam to determine their own future
without outside interference.

On June 8 at Midway, with the agreement
of President Thieu, I announced the withdrawal
of 25,000 American troops.' The fact that the
troops being withdrawn are actual combat
forces, not logistical units, should underscore
the fact that our desire is to reduce violence and
achieve a negotiated peace. The program of
replacing U.S. forces with South Vietnamese
will be reviewed again in August.

At that same Midway meeting President
Thieu and I declared our readiness to accept
any political outcome which is arrived at
through free elections.

President Thieu has now offered a concrete
program by which free elections can be held
and the will of the South Vietnamese people
can be determined. He has challenged the other
side to test its claims to popular support at
the polls. He has offered means by which the
other side can participate in developing elec-
tion procedures and by which the elections
themselves can take place under international
supervision.

If the other side genuinely -wants peace, it
now has a comprehensive set of offers which
permit a fair and reasonable settlement. If it
approaches us in this spirit, it will find us rea-
sonable. Hanoi has nothing to gain by waiting.

I also want to repeat to the American people
what I said in my speech of May 14 :

Nothing could have a greater effect in convincing
the enemy that he should negotiate in good faith than
to see the American people united behind a generous
and reasonable peace offer.

We and the South Vietnamese Government
have made such an offer.

I call upon the leaders of the other side to
respond in a spirit of peace and let the political
issues be resolved by the political process.

' Bulletin of June 30, 1960, p. 549.

25th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made hy
Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge, head of the
U.S. delegation, at the 25th flenain/ session of
the meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on July 10.

Press release 189 dated July 10

Ladies and gentlemen : The United States will
continue its efforts to turn these meetings into
serious negotiations. Our objective of a peace-
ful and lasting settlement of the Viet-Nam con-
flict requires meaningful negotiation and com-
promise, leading to a resolution of the crucial
issues which divide us, and not rigid insistence
upon one's own individual position.

At our last meeting your side announced the
release of three American prisoners of war and
that you would permit American prisoners of
war in North Viet-Nam to receive pi-esents from
home.

We welcomed this action because of its hu-
manitarian nature. We hope that it will lead
to further, more general releases. We also hope
that you will join us in discussing other hu-
manitarian measures, such as furnisliing lists
of names of all prisoners and the early release
of the seriously sick and wounded.

Two weeks ago I reviewed the efforts of our
side to find and examine points of similarity
between our two positions. Last week I reviewed
the many steps wliich our side has taken to
bring the conflict to an end and to find a serious
basis for negotiation.

Today I discuss our side's efforts and actions
to stimulate serious discussion of two particu-
larly crucial issues: the mutual withdrawal of
all non-South Vietnamese forces and the way
in which the political future of South Viet-Nam
can be determined.

On the withdrawal issue, we are ready to
negotiate but we have seen no sign yet that
your side is similarly ready. You continue to
demand the unilateral withdrawal of Allied
forces from South Viet-Nam and reject out of
hand any proposals for mutual withdrawal of
North Vietnamese and Allied forces. To hold
to such a position is to demand capitulation by
our side. This is imreasonable. We shall not ca-
pitulate. No negotiated settlement of the war in
Viet-Nam is possible until you modify that
demand.

Department of State Bulletin

Let me remind you that President Nixon said
in his speech on May 14 : ^

We have ruled out attempting to impose a purely
military solution on the battlefield.

We have also ruled out either a one-sided withdrawal
from Viet-Nam or the acceptance In Paris of terms that
would amount to a disguised defeat.

Our objective in Viet-Nam is limited, as we
have stated many times. We seek the oppor-
tunity for the Soutli Vietnamese people to de-
termine their own political future without out-
side interference. As President Nixon said in
his May 14 speech:

In pursuing our limited objective, we Insist on no
rigid diplomatic formula. Peace could be achieved by
a formal negotiated settlement. Peace could be
achieved by an informal understanding, provided that
the understanding is clear and that there were ade-
; quate assurances that it would be observed. Peace on
paper is not as important as peace in fact.

In that same speech the President reaffirmed
our willingness to withdraw our forces on a
specified timetable. He said that we asked only
that North Viet-Nam withdraw its forces from
South Viet-Nam, Cambodia, and Laos into
North Viet-Nam, also in accordance with a time-
table. The President's offer provides for a simul-
taneous start on withdrawal by both sides, for
agreement on a mutually acceptable timetable,
and for the withdrawal to be accomplished
quickly. The President said that if North Viet-
Nam wants to insist that it has no forces in
South Viet-Nam, we will no longer debate the
point — provided that those forces cease to be
there and that we have reliable assurances that
they will not return.

The President went on to propose concrete
measures for the withdrawal of all non-South
Vietnamese forces. These proposals are on the
record and remain open for discussion and ne-
gotiation. He has stressed that these proposals,
as well as the others he had made, are not offered
on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. He has said that
we are quite willing to accept other approaches
consistent with our principles.

In contrast, when we have tried to elucidate
the meaning of your side's position contained in
pomts 2 and 3 of your 10-point proposal, the
spokesmen of your side simply repeat those
points back to us. TViien we offer to clarify our
side's proposals, you persist in rejecting our pro-
posals out of hand and in repeating your own
categorical demands. You accuse us of not being

willing to withdraw our forces for so-called
"neocolonialist" purposes, and yet you condemn
our decision to take 25,000 combat troops out of
South Viet-Nam. You charge us with "Viet-
namizing" the war, and yet you complain that
we do not withdraw our forces from Viet-Nam
fast enough or completely enough.

Ladies and gentlemen, what in your side's
presentation can be considered to be the basis of
serious negotiation, a process that requires ex-
amination and compromise, give-and-take? We
are prepared to negotiate and compromise.
Wliile you continue to refuse to join us in nego-
tiation and compromise, the tragedy of war
continues.

As regards the determination of the political
future of South Viet-Nam, our position is quite
simple. We seek the establisliment of demo-
cratic procedures that give all individuals and
all significant political groups in South Viet-
Nam a real opportunity to participate freely in
the political life of the nation. This requires two
things: first, a process that would allow the
South Vietnamese people to express their
choice ; and second, a guarantee that tliis process
would be a fair one. As President Nixon said in
his May 14 speech :

We do not insist on a particular form of guarantee.
The important thing is that the guarantees should
have the confidence of the South Vietnamese people
and that they should be broad enough and strong
enough to protect the interests of all major South Viet-
namese groups.

At their Midway meeting. President Nixon
and President Tliieu declared "for their part
they will respect any decision by the people of
South Viet-Nam that is arrived at through
free elections." ^ The two Presidents agreed
"that it would be appropriate to offer guarantees
and safeguards for free elections." They also
agreed that "Provisions for international
supervision could be written into the political
settlement."

Now, what does this mean? You constantly
assert — at these meetings and in your propa-
ganda — that elections organized by the legal
government of South Viet-Nam and, as you put
it, under the menace of American bayonets,
would be unfair to your side. But President
Nixon has agreed to withdraw American troops
as you withdraw yours, and President Tliieu
more than 3 months ago offered to sit down with

' For text, see Buixetin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

' For a joint statement Issued at Midway Island on
June 8, see Buixetin of June 30, 1969, p. 550.

July 28, 1969

you and work out mutually acceptable ^aran-
tees and safeguards. Your reaction to these rea-
sonable proposals has been nefiative. Can it be
that you fear that in an honest election you
would lose?

Toadies and jrentlemen, tlie proposals we have
made are flexible and reasonable. We are will-
inw to consider other proposals. But as Presi-
dent Nixon has said : "No greater mistake coiikl
be made than to confuse flexibility with
weakness or being reasonable with lack of
resolution." In that same speech, the President
also said : "Our fighting men are not going to
be worn down ; our negotiators are not going to
be talked down ; our allies are not going to be
let down."

Ladies and gentlemen, the United States and
the Government of the Republic of Viet-Nam
are prepared to negotiate realistically. "We call
on your side to be just as realistic and to enter
into serious negotiations. Delay only brings
more death and destruction.

U.S. Comments on Soviet Statement
on East-West Relations

Statement by Secretary Rogers ^

I read with interest the press accoimts of the
speech of Mr. Gromyko, the Soviet Foreign
Minister, before the Supreme Soviet [on July
10]. Unfortunately, we have not received the
complete text and I have not had an oppor-
tunity to analyze the speech fully.

Nevertheless, the speech seems to be positive
in tone regarding relations with the United
States. We welcome Mr. Gromyko's acknowl-

edgment of President Nixon's premise that we
are moving from an era of confrontation to
an era of negotiation. We note Mr. Gromyko's
statement that "when it comes to problems of
safegiuirding peace, the Soviet I'nion and the
United States can find a conmion language."

He referred specifically to the willingness of
the Soviet Union to enter into talks on strategic
arms limitations. As you know, we believe that
this would be a significant step forward in our
relations with the Soviet Union and we are
awaiting their response to our proposals for a
time and place for such meetings.

We shall contijiue to examine other aspects
of the speech to see, in consultation with our
allies, whether any of them may offer them-
selves as vehicles for early resolution of out-
standing problems between us.

You will recall that last April, as regards the
European area, the NATO ministers indicated
that they were prepared to exjilore with the
Soviet Union and other countries of Eastern
Europe which concrete issues best lend them-
selves to fruitful negotiation and early resolu-
tion.^ This remains our policy.

Letters of Credence

Austria

The newly appointed Ambassador of the Re-
public of Austria, Karl Gruber, presented his
credentials to President Nixon on July 1. For
texts of the Ambassador's remarks and the
President's reply, see Department of State press
release dated July 1.

' Read to news correspondents by Department press
spokesman Robert J. McCloskey on July 11.

" For test of a communique issued at Washington on
Apr. 11 at the close of the ministerial meeting of the
North Atlantic Council, see Bulletin of Apr. 28, 1069,
p. 3.54.

Department of State Bulletin

President Nixon Calls for Comprehensive Efforts
in Multilateral Disarmament Negotiations

Following is the text of a message from Presi-
dent Nixon to tJie Conference of tlie Eighteen-
Nation Committee on Disai^mament, which re-
convened at Geneva July 3.

White House press release (Key Biscaync, Fla.) dated July 3

I have followed closely the activities of the
spi'ing session of the Disarmament Commit-
tee, and Ambassador [Gerard C] Smith has
reported to me on the prospects for progress in
the near future.

As the Conference resumes its work after a
recess of six weeks, I would like to address the
following thoughts to the members of the
Conunittee :

First, the ground has been prepared for con-
crete arms control negotiations. In addition to
the valuable suggestions by many members of
the Committee, draft agreements have been sub-
mitted by the United States and by the Soviet
Union to i>re.vent an arms race on the seabeds.^
Although differences exist, it should not prove
beyond our ability to find common ground so
that a realistic agi-eement may be achieved that
enhances the security of all countries.

The framing of an international agreement
to apply to more than 100 million square miles
of the earth's surface lying imder the oceans
is a high challenge to our vision and statesman-
ship. I ask the participants in this Committee
to join with us m elaborating a measure that
is both practical and significant. With good will
on all sides and a fair measure of hard work,
we may achieve agreement in the course of this
session. With each passing day the seabed be-
comes more important for the security and well-
being of all nations. Our goal shoukl be to pre-
sent a sound seabed arms control measure to
the 24th General Assembly of the United
Nations.

Second, the Secretary General of the United
Nations has just issued his study on the effects
of chemical and biological warfare." Experts
from many countries have contributed to this
important work. I am pleased that an expert
from the United States, Dr. Ivan Bennett, has
also played a role in the study. We welcome the
Secretary General's study, since it will draw
the attention of all mankind to an area of com-
mon concern. The specter of chemical and bio-
logical warfare arouses horror and revulsion
throughout the world.

The delegation of the United States is pre-
pared to examine carefully, together with other
delegations, any approaches that offer tlie pros-
pect of reliable arms control in this field.

Third, in my letter to Ambassador Smith on
March 18 at the opening of the first session of
this Committee,^ I reaffirmed United States sup-
port for the conclusion of a comprehensive test
ban adequately verified ; I stated my conviction
that efforts must be made toward greater under-
standing of the verification issue. I am pleased
that, during your first session, serious exjjlora-
tion of verification problems took place. The
United States delegation will be prepared to
contmue to participate in efforts toward greater
understanding of this key issue. It is only by
means of careful study, with due regard for all
of the relevant technical and political consider-
ations, that progress can be made.

Fourth, I recently announced that the United
States hopes to be able to commence talks with
the Soviet Union on strategic arms limitations
around July 31 or shortly thereafter. Wlien
these talks begm, which I hope and trust will be
soon, they will of necessity be bilateral negoti-
ations between the United States and the Soviet
Union. The United States Government is, how-

' For background and text of the U.S. draft treaty,
see Bulletin of June 16, 1969, p. 520.

" U.N. doe. S/9292.

" For text, see Bulletin of Apr. 7, 1969, p. 289.

July 28, 1969

ever, deeply conscious of its responsibilities to
its allies and to the community of nations.

"Wliile these talks progress, it is particularly
important that multilateral negotiations con-
tinue in this Committee in an atmosphere of
determination and promise. Arms control is
without dispute a subject of direct concern to
all nations, large and small. The wisdom, the
advice, and the informed concern of many na-
tions are needed in a continuing body such as
this to ensure that no opportunities are missed
to achieve genuine progress.

This Committee clearly is the world's pre-
eminent multilateral disarmament forum. Its
record of accomplisliment, which needs no re-
cital here, is greater than that of any other dis-
armament committee in history. I trust that
your Committee will continue its efforts with all
of the combined skill and dedication which its
members have demonstrated in the past.

The negotiation of sound arms control and
disarmament, like all work contributing to
peace, must be an integrated and comprehensive
effoit. Progress in the tasks of your Committee
will be a contribution to a world of peaceful in-
ternational cooperation, a world where fear and
conflict are supplanted by the honest give-and-
take of negotiation aimed at meeting the legit-
imate aspirations of all.

The United States will work in every way to
bring us closer to such a world.

U.S. Delegation Named for Talks
on Arms Limitations With U.S.S.R.

White House press release dated July 5

President Nixon on July 5 announced the
composition of senior membership of the United
States delegation for the proposed talks with
the Soviet Union on strategic arms limitations.

The delegation is headed by Ambassador
Gerard C. Smith, Director of the United States
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and
will include Ambassador Philip J. Farley,
senior State Department member and alternate
U.S. Representative to the talks ; former Deputy
Secretary of Defense Paul Nitze ; former Secre-

tary of the Air Force Harold Brown ; Ambas-
sador Llewellyn Thompson; and Maj. Gen.
Royal B. Allison, USAF.

Ambassador Smith, a former Assistant Sec-
retary of State and Director of the Policy
Planning Staff, has played a major role in prep-
arations for the SALT talks since he took charge
of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
last February.

Ambassador Farley is the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Politico-Military Affairs.
He is a former Chief of the Political Section of
the United States Mission to NATO, a former
Special Assistant to the Secretary of State on
Disarmament, Atomic, and Outer Space Mat-
ters, and a former member of the staff of the
Atomic Energy Commission.

Mr. Nitze, who served as Deputy Secretary of
Defense in the administration of President
Johnson, is a former Secretary of the Xavy and
a former Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs. He is also a
former Director of the Policy Planning Staff of
the Department of State.

Former Air Force Secretary Brown is presi-
dent of the California Institute of Technology
and was recently nominated by President Nixon
to be a member of the General Advisory Com-
mittee of the Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency. Dr. Brown is a former member of the
President's Science Advisory Committee and a
former Director of Defense Research and Engi-
neering in the Department of Defense. He will
serve as the senior technical member of the
delegation.

Ambassador Thompson was twice Ambassa-
dor to the Soviet Union and also served as Am-
bassador at Large in the Department of State.
He is a former High Commissioner and Ambas-
sador to Austria, served as Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for European Affairs, and
was an Acting Under Secretary of State for
Political Affairs.

General Allison is Deputy Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff Special Studies Group.
He has served as an Assistant for National
Security Council Affairs and is a former Di-
rector of Plans and Assistant Deputy Chief of
Staff for Operations at Headquarters, USAF,
Germany.

Department of State Bulletin

Tenth Anniversary of the St. Lawrence Seaway

On June 27 President Nixon and Prime
Minister Pien-e Elliott Trudeau of Canada
joined in ceremonies at the Dwight D. Eisen-
hower Lock at Massena, N.Y., and at Montreal
marhing the 10th anniversary of the opening of
the St. Lawrence Seaway. FoUoioing are intro-
ductoi'y remarks made iy Governor Nelson D,
Rockefeller of New York at Massena and the
exchanges of remarks iy President Nixon and
Prime Minister Trudeau there and at Montreal.

CEREMONY AT MASSENA, N.Y.

White House press release dated June 27

Governor Rockefeller

President and Mrs. Nixon, Prime Min-
ister and Mrs. Trudeau, Secretary and
[Laughter.] — Prime Minister Trudeau, Secre-
tary of State Bill Rogers . . . Excellencies,
distinguished guests, and friends: It is my
privilege as Governor to extend a welcome to
all and especially on this occasion to President
and Mrs. Nixon for their first visit to New York
State since he was elected President and to
Prime Minister Tnideau for his first official
visit to New York State and to the hundreds
of dignitaries and the thousands of visitors
from both coimtries.

The seaway and the power project demon-
strate that two nations can, by reasoned discus-
sion followed by progressive action, create for
the benefit of both.

New York is proud of the power project,
that it is a joint effort of New York State Power
Authority and the Hydroelectric Power Com-
mission of Ontario, a State-Provincial project
that brings economic progress to both sides of
the border and strengthens the bonds between
our two nations as well as the State of New
York and the Province of Ontario.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, it is my privilege
to welcome a man who has dedicated his life
in public service in the House of Eepresenta-
tives, in the Senate of the United States, as
Vice President for two terms under President
Eisenhower, and now the President of the
United States, that great leader, Richard Nixon.

President Nixon

I want to express first my appreciation to
Governor Rockefeller for his very generous and
warm welcome. It is good to be here in New
York State again.

It is good to see this wonderful turnout in
the interest of international friendship. And I
particularly was glad to note that when the
Secretary of State was introduced that the peo-
ple from Norfolk were here to welcome him.
Because I think, as you may know. Secretary
Dulles also came from northern New York. Sec-
retary Rogers was born in Norfolk and grew
up in northern New York State. I think you
will be interested to note that while we com-
memorate 10 years for the seaway today, this is
also the 33d wedding anniversary of Secretary
and Mrs. Rogers. So we give them our special
greetings today.

Now, on this occasion, I realize, too, that we
thinli of the closeness of our two countries,
Canada and the United States. We think also
of the speed of change, the fact that 10 years
ago we were celebrating the opening of a sea-
way and that within a month we hope to see
the landing of the first man on the moon.

I would only suggest that when Governor
Rockefeller made his introductions, that per-
haps he may have been a bit prophetic. Our two
nations are indeed close together. And when
he presented "Mrs. Trudeau," she might be out
there on the American side here in this audience.

On this occasion, in trying to think of what
would be appropriate to say in presenting to

July 28, 1969

you the Prime Minister of Canada, I think that
the inscription wliich api>ears on tlie jjreat in-
stallation [the Kol)ert Moses-Robert Saunders
Power Dam] in which we met just a few min-
utes apo is one to which I can refer.

Ten years ago when Queen Elizabeth, on this
vei7 day, met witli me after having met with
President Eisenhower the preceding day on the
Canadian side, she unveiled a plaque; and that
plaque set forth the common purposes of our
two countries. It pointed out that our frontiers
are tlie frontiers of friendship, our ways are the
ways of peace, and our works are the works of
progress and of freedom.

I think that as we stand here today and we
think of the United States and Canada — fron-
tiers of friendship, ways of freedom, works of
peace — that what we have done in this great
cooperative venture is certainly an example for
the world in terms of the relations between
nations.

Sometimes we just take for granted the fact
that we have the longest unguarded frontier
between two nations in the world. Sometimes we
just take for granted the fact that our two coun-
tries have had a period in which we have fought
togetlier in war, in which we have worked to-
gether in peace, and in which we have been
joined in really true friendship for over a cen-
tury and a half.

But we should not take for gi-anted these
magnificent accomplishments. And this seaway
which opened the heartland of Canada and the
heartland of America, this seaway which was
conceived by men who dreamed of great things
and was put into being by men who were able
to produce them — the practical engineers — tliis
is an indication of what can happen when na-
tions can work together, when they can be at
peace with each other.

And today, as I walked with the Prime Minis-
ter up this avenue of flags, with the flags of
all the nations, and then the flags of Canada on
the one side and the flags of the United States
on the other, I was proud to be an American
citizen.

I was proud, also, of the relations between
our two countries, and I am particularly proud
today to present to you the man who heads the
Government of our neighbor to the north.

It was altogether appropriate that the first
official visitor to the United States of America
after my inauguration as President was Prime

Minister Trudeau, because our two countries
are so close in the ways that I have mentioned.

And on that visit, he made a great impres-
sion on our Government officials and also on
the American people. We are glad to have him
back here today on what is, in effect, a semi-
official occasion.

We welcome the Prime Minister to the Ameri-
can shore just as he will welcome me in a few
moments to Canada.

Ai\d we can only say in welcoming him that
we look forward to that continuing friendship
which has produced so much in the way of prog-
ress in i:)eace and freedom for the American
Continent and the Northern Hemisphere of the
great continent in which we live.

I am proud to present to this audience of
Americans and Canadians the Prime Minister
of Canada.

Prime Minister Trudeau

I want to thank you, particularly Governor
Rockefeller, for having invited us, so many
Canadians both on and off the platform, to visit
the State of New York.

This is a unique occasion. It is the first half
of a ceremony, the second half of which will
take place in Montreal, and which celebrates a
truly unique event.

President Nixon reminded us that it was the
lOth anniversary of the oiiening of the seaway
but also the 10th anniversary to the day of his
meeting with Queen Elizabeth on the Canadian-
U.S. border 10 years ago.

The dream of a seaway permitting the ships
of the world to sail into the heart of the Ameri-
can Continent was a dream in the minds of men
in these lands for many centuries and also the
dream — no doubt because of their industry,
because of tlieir inventiveness — the dream of
harnessing the falling water from the Great
Lakes, falling toward the seas, this tremendous
source of energy which could be harnessed for
the use of both nations.

This dream was realized thanks to the coop-
eration not only of the Governments of two
great countries and of several of the Provinces
and States therein but thanks to the cooi^eration
of the peojDle of these countries and of the many
institutions, public and private, on both sides
of the border.

And, now today, 10 years later, we see the

Department of State Bulletin

benefits of tliis. Those who live along these
shores see the ships of many nations. Ships of
over 30 nations, I am told, will go through these
locks and up and down these waters from far-
away lands of Japan and Thailand and the So-
viet Union, bearing cargoes as diverse as Scotch
whisky and soybeans.

This also residted in the development of in-
dustries and also, because the creators of this
vast work were careful to preserve its beauty,
in the development of the tourist trade and
more and more intensified exchanges between
the people of the United States and the people
of Canada.

But more than showing cooperation between
two peoples for economic benefits, I tliink this
great work, as the President said, has given
spirit and imagination to the people of these
two lands.

I remember when I was a boy in Montreal we
used to say that Montreal was the harbor which
was the seagoing harbor which was furthest
inland of any seagoing harbor in the world,
some thousand miles inland. And now I am sure
it is the school boys and girls of the cities of
Duluth and of the lakehead who are saying that
of their cities some 2,000 miles away from the
sea.

And this tremendous work of engineering,
this tremendous work built on cooperation by
two countries, symbolizes the imity and friend-
ship between our two countries.

And I thuik it is proper that this ceremony
should take place beside the lock named after
General Eisenhower, because General Eisen-
hower will long be remembered in esteem by
Canadians, those who remember the ceremonj'
10 years ago and more still by those Canadians
who followed him as the general to victory in
Europe.

Another American we will remember, an
American who is well known, a poet, Eobert
Frost, who wrote a poem called "Mendmg
"Walls," and in which he tells of two neighbor-
ing farmers bringing stones from their lands
and replacing them on the wall that has been
a bit damaged by the frost swells durmg the
winter. And they talked and one feels that per-
haps they don't need a wall so strong, so long,
because they are friends. But one says to the
other, perhaps to justify his work : "Good fences
make good neighbors."

Perhaps it is also true, Mr. President, that
good ditches make good neighbors.

And this day is one wliich permits us to cele-
brate the opening of this seaway which unites
our countries and which is truly a marvelous
ditch.

And may that ditch long run between our
countries and ensure the friendship of the peo-
ple of the United States of America and of the
people of Canada.

CEREMONY AT MONTREAL

Prime Minister Trudeau

It is fitting, Mr. President, that we should
meet at this site to celebrate the 10th anniver-
sary of the great work which our two peoples
have built together. For several centuries, the
inliabitants of North America, the settlers from
Europe and before them the Indians, considered
this great river as a waterway opening into the
mysterious and the unknown; and from the
begimiing explorers have plied it from the ocean
to its most distant sources.

It is truly a fine thing that this river has, like
the open arms of a continent, drawn to the inte-
rior peoples ever eager to discover unimaginable
beauties and unhoped-for wealth. It is these peo-
ple who have enabled our two coimtries to de-
velop, and it is this river which has made it
possible for our countries to go to the source.
It has truly been the path of progress — the path
of physical progress but also the path of mate-
rial, social, and economic progress. All these
villages, towns, and cities extending along its
course actually served as a link between those
who were pressing onward and tliose who were
planting roots and developing their country.

And it is for this reason that we are happy
to welcome you here, Mr. President, and to
salute the great work which our peoples have
undertaken together.

It is proof not only that the economic prog-
ress which resulted from it was essential to
the happiness of men but also that this water-
way which nature has given us, labored upon
by men working together, can serve not as a
barrier between peoples but as a path of wel-
come, of progress, and of access. And in this
way, the symbol of our river, the symbol of the
seaway, this gigantic and marvelous work, sym-

July 28, 1969

356-931—69-

bolizes friendship and cooperation between our
two peoples.

[Tlic remarks printed ahove were delivered in
French; a translation was furnished by the Canadian
Emhassy. Prime Minister Trudeau continued, speaking
in English .-I

White House press release dated June 27

It is a great pleasure, Mr. President, to wel-
come you here with Mrs. Nixon and with mem-
bers of your family.

And it is truly appropriate that on this, the
first visit to Canada since your election, the
meeting should take place here at the Place des
Nations. This open forum, which knows no
division, was during the year of EXPO 67 the
nieetingplace of peoples of many lands who came
here to share knowledge, friendship, acquaint-
ances, in a spirit of brotherhood and under-
standing.

I know this lesson, Mr. President, of men
building together with what nature has given
them so that they should be freer and more
prosperous — this lesson is one that we will all
remember and imitate.

And I am very happy to welcome you here,
and I am very pleased that you should have
come with Mrs. Nixon and with members of
your family and with many of your colleagues.

I remember well when I was in Washington
in March the welcome that Mrs. Nixon extended
to me at the Wliite House, the charm, the
warmth of the welcome, and I am very glad
that you came with her today. Because we are
told — at least I have heard — that wives have
a great influence on the travel plans of their
husbands, and I hope that Mrs. Nixon will im-
press on you the warm welcome that we will
always have in the heart of Canadians whenever
you come to visit us.

You are the head of state of a very great na-
tion, Mr. President, a nation which has immense
resources and extraordinary people, which al-
ways knows great difficulties, which we know
that your people, your Government, is attempt-
ing to solve in a spirit of friendship and equity ;
and we realize the difficulty of the problem.
But we want to say to you not only that you
are welcome here but that we understand, that
we want to share in the spirit of friendship that
is in the hearts of the American people.
It is my great privilege to introduce to you

today the head of state of Canada's closest friend
and ally, and to introduce also the members of
the first family.
Mr. President.

President Nixon

Mr. Prime Minister, all of the distinguished
guests on the platform, and all of the very
friendly audience here in Canada : I express my
deep appreciation to the Prime Minister and to
his colleagues here in Canada for the very
gracious words of welcome that they have ut-
tered on this occasion.

As I noted the bilingual characteristics of the
remarks that have preceded me, I realized that
I perhaps have a responsibility in that respect
that I might not be able to fill as well as I would
like. However, whatever my pronunciation may
be, what I now say will come from the heart:
Je sww tres heureux d'etre au Canada dans la
Belle Province de Quebec.

And if you understood that, give the credit to
a senior at McGill University who just before
me said that that meant "I am very happy to be
in Canada in the beautiful Province of Quebec."

Now, on this occasion, we celebrate the 10th
anniversary of the seaway. Earlier, on the
United States side, we pointed out the signifi-
cance of that celebration.

But the seaway has meant to the United States
what it has meant to Canada, what it has meant
to all the nations of the world whose flags are
there before us in the breeze.

We also spoke of what the seaway has meant
in a larger sense, as a lesson as to how two na-
tions can work together — how they can dream
together and make those dreams come true.

And if I have one thought today to leave with
this great audience, it is this : I believe that the
spirit that built this seaway is the spirit that
the world needs today to bring the people of the
world together.

Second, I would like to express on behalf of
all of us from the United States side the great
pleasure that is ours to be here at the site of
EXPO 67, which, as I understand from Mayor
Drapeau, will go on and on and on — EXPO 68
and EXPO 69.

I was thinking of the heritage of EXPO 67.
My family and I were not as fortunate as some
to visit it then, and we are so fortunate to have
seen it today and we are glad you kept it so we

Department of State Bulletin

could see it today. And that heritage is in many
ways the millions of people, 50 million •who
came that first year in 1967, most of them from
the United States, and as a result of having come
here took away with them an understanding of
and an affection for Canada and the people of
Canada that they will carry with them the rest
of their lives.

And second, EXPO 67 will live on not only in
the physical environment that we see here but
also, of course, in the Expos who now play in
the National League.

I should point out to you that I am somewhat
of a baseball fan. I know the record of the Ex-
pos to date. Some of my friends in Montreal and
in Canada have expressed some concern about
that record. But I have noted that despite the
place in the standings that the Expos presently
occupy, the attendance of the fans from Mon-
treal is still at an all-time high for any new team
in the League. And to those who may have any
question about the future, just let me say I speak
from experience. For 14 years in Washington I
rooted for the Washington Senatore, and they
were in the cellar every year. And now they
are out of the cellar. So will the Exjjos be, if you
just stick with them, as I know the fans in Mon-
treal will in the years ahead.

But now, on a more serious subject, serious in
the sense that it transcends all of the interests
that we have already spoken of— the seaway,
the field of sports — and it is what this exposi-
tion stands for today: "Man and his World."
And we all think what a great and profoimd

theme that truly is — not the Canadian in his
world, not the American in his world, not the
Russian in his world, but man and his world.

And here at this exposition we get a feeling
of what that really means to all of us. We rec-
ognize here in this Place of Nations that witliin
a month when the first man lands on the moon,
it will happen that he will be an American. But
it is significant to note that when he lands there,
he will come m peace and he will come from all
the world and not just the American part of the
world.

And so, today, as we think of what our two
great comitries have done together in building
this seaway, as we think of the record of peace
and friendship that we have built together over
150 years, as we think of what we can do to-
gether in the future in workmg for the cause of
progress and freedom and peace in the world,
I think that we will leave this occasion not with
the sense of desperation about the admittedly
difficult problems the Prime Minister has re-
ferred to that we have — that you have and other
nations have — but with the sense of hope, a sense
of hope because in a moment like this we realize
that those great principles and those great de-
sires and those great dreams that vmite men are
infinitely stronger than those that divide them.

And as we learn to dream together, we shall
learn to work together, we shall live in peace
together, as Canada and America have always
lived in peace together and will for the time that
we can see ahead.

Thank you.

July 28, 1969

The International Dimension of American Education

hy Under Secretary Elliot L. Richardson'^

The reason why, I might point out, it has
been determined that my remarks will be on the
record is very simple: You will find there are
no disclosures of state secrets, simply a few
observations and remarks, both of welcome and
of appreciation for the role of education as it
ajiplies to world affairs.

The Department of State would particularly
like to acknowledge vsdth gratitude and appreci-
ation the role of the National Association of
Secondary School Principals in the develop-
ment of this conference. And especially — I
must say it's a warm pleasure for me to have the
opportunity to say this — to acknowledge the
role of the executive secretary of the National
Association, my old friend and colleague in
Massachusetts government, Dr. Owen Eaeman.
It's a pleasure to see you here, Owen, and all
of you.

Secretary Kogers would, I know, very much
like to have had the opportunity of welcoming
you here himself; but as it turns out, this is
also one of the scheduled dates for a Cabinet-
level delegation of Canadians, who are here at
this very moment.

We hope very much that the briefings and
discussions you will be having today and
tomorrow prove useful and enlightening, that
they may even provoke some new thoughts
about our foreign policy and the teaching of
international affairs.

Shaping foreign policy in a democratic
society depends, of course, upon our success in
the development of public understanding. The
public must have an appreciation of the com-
plexity of foreign affairs, of the subtlety and

' Remarks made before the National Foreign Policy
Conference for Leaders In Secondary Education at the
Department of State on June 26.

intricate mterrelationship of events, and of the
incredibly rapid pace of change. It must be
aware that there are few rules of the game in
the molding of foreign policy, no foolproof
appeal to precedent, few hard guidelines of
resort to ultimate authority.

One new problem is the pace of change. I
remember not long ago hearing a story of a
stranger who came up to Thomas Carlyle as he
walked, plunged in tliought, along the embank-
ment of the Thames in London something over
a hundred years ago, and the stranger, in great
excitement, said to Mr. Carlyle: "Sir, did you
know that the telegraph has been put through
to India?" And Mr. Carlyle looked at him,
frowned, and said : "Yes, and what have we to
say to India?"

Wlien you consider that this was only a little
more than a hundred years ago, this helps you
to sense the rapidity of change which we are
all experiencing.

Barbara Ward has given us, I think, a
sharper image than any other I have seen to
express the general awareness we all have that
we occupy one world :

The most rational way (she said) of considering
the whole human race today is to see it as the ship's
crew on a single spaceship on which all of us, with
a remarkable combination of security and vulner-
ability, are making our pilgrimage through infinity.

This, of course, is an awareness that is
growing on the part of the people of the United
States and other peoples around the world.
But at the same time it is important that
people also develop an imderstanding of the
intricacies, details, and, indeed, the underlying
substratum of fact involving our responsibilities
and relationships in the world.

People often tend to feel that they can be ex-
cused from an involvement, or for not involving

Department of State Bulletin

themselves, in questions of foreign policy on
the theory that somehow most of the facts are
classified and inaccessible to them and that
therefore such issues are the exclusive province
of the expert and the person who has access to
this presumed large body of material not other-
wise available to the citizen.

The fact is that there are relatively few issues,
even very complicated ones, on which the essen-
tials for an informed judgment are not avail-
able if one cares to look for them. Indeed,
without naming any newspapers, I think I
could say that for virtually everyone in this
building the reading of at least one newspaper
is an essential first step into the day's business.
And much of what we get in addition to this,
though important for close questions of judg-
ment, is, I would judge, not fundamental to the
kinds of considerations that are basic to in-
formed public understanding.

So when you recognize that the material for
infonned understanding really is available to
the general public, is available to you and to
your students, we can see even more clearly why
the role you play is essential and why, from
our standpoint in the Department of State, it
is impoitant to us to try and persuade you to
instill in the young men and women M'hose edu-
cation is in your hands a sense of involvement
in world affairs.

"We count on you, as a matter of fact, to
impress on them the importance of this involve-
ment for their and the Nation's future. And
we count on you to stir their curiosity and prod
them to form their own views on international
issues.

It is important, of course, that this interest
l)egin while they are young. If the excitement
and significance of foreign affairs is brought to
them during their high school years, it is more
likely to stay with them than if it is an after-
acquired taste.

You may recall that just a little over a decade
ago I was at the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare at the time the Soviet Sput-
nik was launched. We were already working in
a task force on education beyond the high
scliool, in association with a former occupant,
I think, of the very role that Dr. Kiernan has
now, then U.S. Commissioner of Education,
Lawrence Derthick.

I remember a later controversy over the
relationship of the laimching of Sputnik to
the National Defense Education Act. The fact

is that much of what we were woi'king on at
that point later emerged in the National De-
fense Education Act and was not brought about
by the launching of Sputnik in the sense that
the concepts came later, after Sputnik. Cer-
tainly, however, the spur to enactment was pro-
foundly increased by the launcliing of Sputnik.
And at that time Dr. Edward Teller, express-
ing a common view, told a Senate Conunittee :

It seems clear that the young i)eople in Russia, let
us say between the ages of 10 and 20, have a con-
siderably better science education than the similar
age group in this country. Ten years from now, these
young people will carry the burden of science in Russia
and in our country, and therefore, since they are better
prepared. I feel that it is a foregone conclusion that
they will do a better job. It is most neces,sary that
we change the situation in the schools, I mean the high
schools and I mean the elementary .schools, because
by the time a kid is 12 years old, he probably has
adopted the mental attitudes which will make him a
good scientist or else which will definitely get him
interested in some field other than .science.

Dr. Teller was undoubtedly correct in saying
that the mental attitudes developed at an early
age will have a profound influence on the
pupil's later interest. Now, the Department of
State is not against science. But our interest is
in stimulating an awareness of foreign affairs
and foreign countries at an early age, not be-
cause we are seeking to compete with the Soviet
Union or anyone else, but because a vigorous
interest in international affairs is necessary to
live in this era.

Furthermore, the fact is we are not doing
well enough. American education has not yet
caught up with our world role. We are in our
third decade as a preeminent world power, with
interests in every part of the globe; and it's
fair to say, quite aside from real and semantic
questions over neoisolationism, that our role is
a large and responsible one by any standard.
Yet much of our education is still tailored to
the needs of an earlier, more insular time.

In his 2-year study of "The World and the
American Teacher," published last year, Harold
Taylor found that :

Not more tlian 3 to 5 percent of all teachers . . .
have had in the cour.se of their preparation to become
teachers in the social sciences or any other area of
the curriculum any formal study of cultures other
than their own in the West, or have studied in a field
which could properly be described as woijd affairs.

Not more than 10 ijercent of American undergradu-
ates, on graduation, have taken courses containing

July 28, 1969

other than Western materials; 2 percent Is approxi-
mately the amount of curricular time spent by high
school students in studying cultures and societies out-
side the Western world. In many high schools there
are no courses which deal in any way with world
affairs or non-Western cultures.

Other such surveys could be cited. All sug-
<iest that our education continues to be very
parochial. The young people we are educating
•will be in constant contact with other peoples
and other cultures. But the international dimen-
sion we give them is paper-thin.

It may not be of momentous importance, but
a majority of Americans cannot place Afghani-
stan on the right continent and scarcely 10 per-
cent can correctly locate Bulgaria on a map of
Europe, as recent studies have found. "Wliat is
important and disturbing is what this informa-
tion gap suggests about our competence as a
people to make the awesome decisions confront-
ing us.

Our own State Department experience with
foreign language capability presents an inter-
esting footnote. Knowledge of foreign lan-
guages is certainly a significant indicator of
interest in and knowledge of other countries
and cultures. Yet even among the young men
and women who apply for and are accepted by
the Foreign Service, only about one in five can
pass an oral language test at the minimum level
required to carry on a nontechnical conversa-
tion. And this is true for young men and women
who are motivated to seek a career in the
Foreign Service and who have passed a difficult
competitive examination !

The Department of State's small contribution
to foreign affairs education is rooted in the
broad purposes of the International Education
Act of 1966. In that act, the Congress declared
that knowledge and understanding of other
countries is "of the utmost importance" to the
Nation and that "it is therefore both necessary
and appropriate for the Federal Government
to assist in the development of resources for
international study and research ... to meet
the requirements of world leadership."

The act thus takes official cognizance of the
principle that young Americans must be made
aware of, and educated as citizens of, the
broader world commimity. Many from our
business community and our foundations and
in Government itself must share in the respon-
sibility of realizing this objective.

However, as the men and women in charge
of our nation's schools, yours is the major bur-

den. The ultimate strength of American foreign
policy lies in the foreign affairs knowledge,
understanding, and awareness of our people.
The stimulus you provide to j-our students will
thus bear heavily on its future direction.

That is why we in the State Department are
interested in your work and that is why we are
pleased and grateful that you are interested in
ours.

Department Establishes New Staff
for Planning and Coordination

Press release 186 dated July 3

The Secretary of State announced on July 3
the formation of a new Planning and Coordina-
tion Staff in the Department of State and the
designation of "William I. Cargo as its Staff
Director.

Since early in the year the Department has
been studying ways to improve its organiza-
tion, management, and staffing. Particular at-
tention has been given to improving the staff
resources to assist the top officials of the Depart-
ment in fulfilling their responsibilities.

The purpose of this staff will be:

a. To effect a more relevant and useful role
for policy planning in the Department's policy-
formulating process ;

b. To make directly available to the Secre-
tary and his principal associates staff analysis
and advice particularly focusing on the world-
wide and long-range implications of important
policy issues;

c. To assist in assuring the coordinated and
most effective interagency participation of the
Department on foreign policy matters.

The Policy Planning Council's functions will
be amalgamated into and given special identity
within the new staff. By this action, an institu-
tional role will be provided for policy planning
which will give it more impact on continuing
operational decisions.

The new staff will be compact in size and will
serve the Department's top officials collectively.
It will complement the work of the various bu-
reaus and of the Executive Secretariat and will
function only in an advisory capacity.

Mr. Cargo is a Foreign Service officer with a

Department of State Bulletin

distinguished record and broad experience, who
is now serving as Deputy Chief of our NATO
Mission in Brussels. Staff members of the high-
est qualifications will be named to serve imder
Mr. Cargo. They will have both general and
specialized competence and wide diversity of
experience. They will come not only from within
the Foreign Service, but also from other Fed-
eral agencies, the academic community, and else-
where outside the Government.

During the course of talks, substantial prog-
ress was made, but it was not possible to com-
plete discussions in the time available. There-
fore, the two delegations agreed to recess the
present consultations and meet again in Tokyo
on or about September 16, 1969.

The two delegations expressed the hope that,
in view of the close relations between Japan and
the United States, it would be possible to reach
a satisfactory agreement during the resumed
consultations.

U.S. and Japan Hold Consultations
on Civil Aviation

Joint Com/munique ^

In view of the change in the situations
brought about by the decision of the Trans-
Pacific Route Case of the United States of
America, consultations for the review of over-
all matters relating to the civil aviation rela-
tions between the two countries were conducted,
upon the request of the Government of Japan,
in accordance with the provisions of the Civil
Air Transpoi't Agreement between Japan and
the United States of America ^ in Washington,
D.C., between June 23 and July 9, 1969.

The delegations of Japan and of the United
States, in a cordial and frank atmosphere, held
intensive discussions on the modification of Jap-
anese air routes prescribed in the present Sched-
ule of the Agi-eement ^ as well as on the charter
service problems.

'Issued at Washington on July 10 (press release
190).
^ Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2854.
»TIAS 5939.

Congressional Documents
Relating to Foreign Policy

91st Congress, 1st Session

Peking's Approach to Negotiation. Selected writings
compiled by the Subcommittee on National Security
and International Operations of the Senate Com-
mittee on Government Operations. March 10, 1069.
94 pp. [Committee print.]

Report of Special Factfinding Mission to Nigeria
February 7-20, 1969, by Representatives Charles C.
Diggs, Jr., chairman, and J. Herbert Burke. Sub-
mitted to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
March 12, 1969. 59 pp. [Committee print]

The State-Defense Officer Exchange Program. Analysis
and assessment submitted by the Subcommittee on
National Security and International Operations of
the Senate Committee on Government Operations.
March 20, 1969. 16 pp. [Committee print.]

Review of United States Foreign Policy and Operations.
Report of Senator Allen J. Ellender to the Senate
Committee on Appropriations. S. Doc. 91-13. March
26, 1969. 272 pp.

An Audit of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation, Calendar Year 1967. Letter from the
Acting Comptroller General of the United States
transmitting a report of audit. H. Doc. 91-93.
March 26, 1969. 33 pp.

Elimination of Duty on Crude Chicory Roots. Report
to accompany H.R. 8644. S. Rept. 91-223. May 29,
1969. 6 pp.

« July 28, 1969

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES

United States Reaffirms Position on Jerusalem

Following are statements made in the U.N.
Security CoMneil on July 1 and 3 hy U.S. Rep-
resentative Charles W. Yost, together with the
text of a resolution adopted hy the Council on
July 3.

STATEMENT OF JULY 1

U.S./CN. press release 70 dated July 1

Once again the Council has been suiunioned
to deal with certain actions taken by the Gov-
ernment of Israel in Jerusalem. We have
listened carefully to the statements of the
Permanent Eep resent at ive of Jordan and other
Arab ^Vjnbassadore, as well as the reply of the
Representative of Israel.

The discussion thus far has made amply
clear that tlie status of Jerusalem is not an
isolated problem, but rather an integral 2>art of
a whole complex of issues in the current Mid-
dle Eastern conflict wliich must be resolved.
Tliis is not a novel conclusion. The Council
clearly recognized that fact in Resolution
242, which treats the entire Middle East-
em situation as a package.^ This resolution
remains the basis of our approacli to a just and
lasting peace in the area.

You are all well aware of the strenuous
efforts my own Government is making to help
Ambassador Jarring [Gunnar Jarring, the
U.N. Secretary General's special representa-
tive] promote a peaceful settlement. Progress
in these efforts has, admittedly, been slow. This
is perhaps not surprising when one reflects on
how deep the roots of the conflict go. But the

' For text of the resolution, see Bulletin of Dec. 18,
19G7, p. 843.

imijortant thing is that some progress is being
made. The fact that it has not been crowned
with dramatic success should not give grounds
for despair. Nor should it be exploited as jus-
tification for actions wliich will make greater
progress even more difficult. This applies to
actions in Jerusalem as elsewhere in the area.

Indeed, Jerusalem occupies a very special
place in all our minds and all our hearts as one
of the holiest cities in the entire world. For
Jerusalem is a sacred shrine to three of the
world's largest and oldest religious faiths:
Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. By virtue of
that fact the United States has always consid-
ered tliat Jerusalem enjoj's a unique interna-
tional standing and that no action should be
taken there without full regard to Jerusalem's
special history and special place in the world
community. I'nfortunately there have been acts
of many kinds which have broken the peace
in Jerusalem and which are of deep concern
to my Government and to the international
community.

Mr. President, we understand the deep emo-
tional concerns which move all parties to the
Arab-Israeli dispute on the subject of Jeru-
salem. We do not believe, however, that any of
these concerns are served by what is now taking
place in East Jerusalem, whether it be actions
by those now exercising authority there or by
individuals considering themselves aggrieved
and therefore justified in resorting to violence.
The expropriation or confiscation of land, the
constniction of housing on such land, the demo-
lition or confiscation of buildings, including
those having liistoric or religious significance,
and the application of Israeli law to occupied
portions of the city are detrimental to our com-
mon interests in the city. The United States
considers that the part of Jerusalem that came

Department of State Bulletin

under the control of Israel in the June war,
like otJier areas occupied by Israel, is occupied
territory and hence subject to the provisions
of international law governing the rights and
obligations of an occupying power.

Among the provisions of international law
which bind Israel, as they would bind any
occupier, are the provisions that the occupier
lias no right to make changes in laws or in
administration other than those which are
temporarily necessitated by his security inter-
est and that an occupier may not confiscate or
destroy private property. The pattern of be-
havior authorized under the Geneva conven-
tion and international law is clear: The
occupier must maintain the occupied area as
intact and unaltered as possible, without inter-
fering with the customary life of the area, and
any changes must be necessitated by immediate
needs of the occupation.

I regret to say that the actions of Israel in
the occupied portion of Jenisalem present a
diti'erent picture, one which gives rise to under-
standable concerns that the eventual disposition
of East Jerusalem may be prejudiced and that
the rights and activities of the population are
already being aft'ected and altered.

jMy Government regrets and deplores this
pattern of activity, and it has so informed the
Government of Israel on numerous occasions
since June 1967. "We have consistently refused
to recognize these measures as having anything
but a provisional character and do not accept
them as affecting tlie ultimate status of
Jerusalem.

I have explained in some detail the opposi-
tion of the United States to certain measures
taken by the Government of Israel in Jeru-
salem, since this is the precise object of the
complaint brought before us by the Govern-
ment of Jordan. But as I suggested earlier, we
cannot logically and intelligently consider the
problem of Jerusalem without putting it in its
proper perspective: the Middle East situation
as a whole. In this connection I would recall
that one of the first major policy decisions
taken by President Nixon after assuming office
this year was that the United States Govern-
ment should take new initiatives in helping to
try to bring peace in the iliddle East. For the
[last several months we have been devoting our
best efforts to this task. AVe shall continue to

do so, but for these efforts to succeed we will
require the good will and cooperation of the
parties themselves.

A just and lasting peace in the Middle East
is long and tragically overdue. It will not be
found through terror bombings, which inevi-
tably harm innocent civilians, any more than
thi'ough unilateral attempts to alter the status
of Jerusalem. It will be found only through
tlie instruments and processes of negotiation,
accommodation, and agreement. It will come
only through the exercise by the parties of the
utmost restraint, not just along the cease-fire
lines or in public statements but also on the
ground in Jerusalem itself.

In treating the problem of Jerusalem, since
we deal with it in the context of the total situ-
ation in the Middle East, my delegation will
subject any proposal for Council action, first
of all, to the test of whether that proposal is
likely to help or liinder the peaceful settlement
process. I hope all members will do likewise.
For example, one constructive move the Coun-
cil might make would be to request the parties
to lay aside their recriminations, to desist from
any action — in Jerusalem or elsewhere — that
might be construed as prejudicing or prejudg-
ing a final, comprehensive settlement, a just
and lasting peace. Thus, our consideration of
the situation in Jerusalem could provide a fit-
ting occasion on which to insist once more tliat
the parties to a dispute which keeps the world's
holiest city in turmoil act responsibly to resolve
the whole dispute and, until it is resolved, that
they take no action anywhere which could
further jeopardize its resolution.

STATEMENT OF JULY 3

U.S. /U.N. press release 71 dated July 3

The United States voted for the re.solution
just adopted by the Council because it is con-
sonant with our position on Jeinisalem as
described in my statement to the Council on
July 1.

In the separate vote taken on operative para-
graph 5, the United States abstained because
the language of that paragraph, by describing
the actions which Israel has taken as measures
"which may tend to change the status of the
City of Jerusalem"' and calling on Israel to

July 28, 1969

rescind them, is inconsistent witli tlie clear
language of the preceding paragraph of the
resolution, wliich confirms that the measures
in question cannot change the status of the city.
Moreover, we do not consider tliis suggestion
is practical and believe it is likely to place the
Security Council in an invidious position in the
future.

In supporting the resolution, Mr. President,
my Government wishes to make clear that it
does not consider itself conunitted to any spe-
cific course of action during any future Coun-
cil consideration of tliis issue. We continue to
believe Jerusalem cannot be dealt with on a
piecemeal basis, and we i-ededicate ourselves
to a determined effort to help bring about
agreement on a just and lasting peace in the
area, in the context of which Jerusalem should
not again become a bone of contention among
religions and nations but an example of unity.

without any further delay of its intentions with
regard to the implementation of the provisions of this
resolution ;

7. Determines that, in the event of a negative re-
sponse or no resjwnse from Israel, the Security Council
shall reconvene without delay to consider what
further action should be taken in this matter;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the
Security Ck)uncil on the implementation of this
resolution.

United Nations Documents:
A Selected Bibliography

ilimeographed or processed documents (such as those
listed below) may be consulted at depository libraries
in the United States. U.N. printed publications may be
purchased from the Sales Section of the United Na-
tions, United Nations Plaza, N.Y.

TEXT OF RESOLUTION''

The Security Council,

Recalling its resolution 252 of 21 May 1968 and the
earlier General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V)
and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967 respectively
concerning measures and actions by Israel aflfecting
the status of the City of Jerusalem,

Having heard the statements of the parties con-
cerned on the question.

Noting that since the adoption of the above-men-
tioned resolutions Israel has taken further measures
tending to change the status of the City of Jerusalem,

Reaffirming the established principle that acquisi-
tion of territory by military conquest is inadmissible,

1. Reaffirms its resolution 252 (1968) ;'

2. Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard
for the General Assembly and Security Council reso-
lutions mentioned above ;

3. Censures in the strongest terms all measures
taken to change the status of the City of Jerusalem ;

4. Confirms that all legislative and administrative
measures and actions by Israel which purport to alter
the status of Jerusalem including expropriation of
land and properties thereon are invalid and cannot
change that status ;

5. Urgently calls once more upon Israel to rescind
forthwith all measures taken by it which may tend
to change the status of the City of Jerusalem, and in
future to refrain from all actions likely to have such
an effect ;

6. Requests Israel to inform the Security Council

'U.N. doc. S/RES/267 (1969) ; adopted unanimously
by the Council on July 3.
' For test, see Bulletin of June 24, 1968, p. 851.

Economic and Social Council

Economic Commission for Africa. Report of the Activ-
ities of the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization's World Food Program in Africa. E/
CX.14/436. December 27, 1968. 17 pp.
Economic Commission for Latin America. Second
United Nations Development Decade. Latin Amer-
ica's Foreign Trade PoUcy. E/CN.12/816. March 19,
1969. 99 pp.
Commission on Human Rights. Report on the 2.5th

session. E/4621 (Summary). April 24, 1969. 28 pp.
Regional Co-Operation :

Activities of the United Nations Economic and Social

Otfice in Beirut. Report of the Secretary GeneraL

E/4659. May 6, 1969. 12 pp.
Annual report of the Economic Commission for Latin

America, April 26, 1968-April 23, 1969. E/4639

( Summary). May 28, 1969. 5 pp.
Annual report of the Economic Commission for

Europe, May 3, 196S-April 23, 1969. E/4641 (Sum-
mary). May 27, 1969. 6 pp.
Annual report of the Economic Commission for

Africa, .March 1, 1968-February 14, 1969. E/4651

(Summary). May 27, 1969. 11 pp.
Annual report of the Economic Commission for Asia

and the Far East, May 1, 1968-April 28, 1969.

E/4640 (Summary). June 12, 1969. 10 pp.
Non-Governmental Organizations. Review of Non-
Governmental Organizations Granted Consultative
Status. Report of the Council Committee on Non-
Governmental Organizations. E/4647. May 7, 1969.
16 pp.
Marine Science and Technology. Note by the Secretary

General. E/4665. May 8, 1969. 23 pp.
Financing of Economic Development of the Develop-
ing Countries. Export Credits. Report of the Secre-
tary General on the conclusions of the Round Table
on Export Credit as a Means of Promoting Exports
from Developing Countries. E/4662. May 14, 1969.
9 pp.
Mineral Resources of the Sea. Report of the Secretary
General. E/4680. June 2, 1969. 124 pp.

Department of State Bulletin

TREATY INFORMATION

Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Aviation

Protocol on the authentic trilingual text of the con-
vention on international civil aviation, Chicago, 1944
(TIAS 1591, 3756, 5170), with annex. Done at Buenos
Aires September 24, 1968. Entered into force October
24, 1968. TIAS 6605.
Acceptance deposited: United Kingdom, July 9, 1969.

Hydrography

Convention on the International Hydrographic Organi-
zation, with annexes. Done at Monaco May 3, 1967.'
Ratifications deposited: Federal Republic of Ger-
many (with reservation), June 12, 1969;" Japan,
June 12, 1969; Netherlands, June 6, 1969.

law of the Sea

Convention on the high seas. Done at Geneva April 29,
1958. Entered into force September 30, 1062. TIAS
5200;

■ Convention on the continental shelf. Done at Geneva
April 29, 1958. Entered into force June 10, 1964.
TIAS 5578 ;

' Convention on the territorial sea and the contiguous
zone. Done at Geneva April 29, 1958. Entered into
force September 10, 1964. TIAS 5639 ;
Convention on fishing and conservation of living re-
sources of the high seas. Done at Geneva AprU 29,
1958. Entered into force March 20, 1966. TIAS 5969.
Accession deposited: Kenya, June 20, 1969.

Load Lines

International convention on load lines, 1966. Done at
London April 5, 1966. Entered into force July 21.
1968. TIAS 6331.

Acceptance deposited: Poland, May 28, 1969.
Accessions deposited: Czechoslovakia, June 16, 1969 ;
Southern Yemen, May 20, 1969.

Oil Pollution

International convention for the prevention of pollu-
tion of the sea by oil, with annexes, as amended
(TIAS 6109). Done at London May 12, 1954. Entered
into force for the United States December 8, 1961.
TIAS 4900.
Acceptance deposited: Southern Yemen, May 20, 1969.

Property

Convention establishing the World Intellectual Prop-
erty Organization. Done at Stockholm July 14, 1967.'
Ratification deposited: Spain, June 6, 1969.

' Not in force.

' Applicable to Land Berlin.

Safety at Sea

International convention for the safety of life at .sea,

1960. Done at Loudon June 17, 1960. Entered into

force May 26, 1965. TIAS 5780.

Acceptance deposited: Southern Yemen, May 20, 1969.
Amendments to the international convention for the

safety of life at sea, 1960 (TIAS 5780). Adopted at

London November 30, 1966.'

Acceptance deposited: Southern Yemen. May 20, 1969.
Amendments to the international convention for the

safety of life at sea, 1960 (TIAS 5780). Adopted at

London October 25, 1967.'

Acceptance deposited: Canada, June 2, 1969; South-
ern Yemen, May 20, 1969.

Space

Ratification deposited at Washington: New Zealand
July 8, 1969.

BILATERAL

Afghanistan

Agreement extending the technical cooperation pro-
gram agreement of June 30, 19.53, as extended (TIAS
2S56, 4670, 4979, 524.3, 5477, 5714, 5S07, 5901, 5993,
6123, 62.53, 6321, 6468, 6552, 6628). Effected by ex-
change of notes at Kabul June 16 and 17, 1969 En-
tered into force June 17, 1069.

Austria

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington July 11, 1969.
Enters into force on the date on which each Govern-
ment shall have received from the other written noti-
fication that it has complied with all statutory and
constitutional requirements for entry into force.

China

Agreement extending the loan of the U.S.S. Benson
U.S.S. Uilary P. Jones, and the U.S.S. Plunkett pur-
suant to the agreements of January 13, 1954, and
February 7, 19.59, as amended and extended (TIAS
2916, 4180, 5771), relating to the loan of vessels.
Effected by exchange of notes at Taipei June 11 and
18, 1969. Entered into force June 18, 1969.

Malta

Agreement relating to the deployment of the United
States repair ships U.S.S. Yosemite and U.S.S. Grand
Canyon to Malta. Effected by exchange of notes at
Valletta June 6 and 18, 1969. Entered into force June
18, 1969.

Mexico

Agreement concerning broadcasting in the standard
broadcasting band (535-1605 kHz), with annexes
Signed at Mexico December 11, 1968.'
Ratified by the President: July 2, 1909.

Agreement concerning the operation of broadcasting
stations in the standard band (535-1605 kHz), dur-
ing a limited ix-riod prior to .sunrise (presunri.se) and

July 28, 1969

after sunset (postsuiiset), with annexes. Signed at

Mi'xico Decenilwr 11, l'J6.S.'

U'atificd by the President: July 2, IWJ'J.

Paraguay

Agrc'i>ment for sales of agricultural commodities, with
annex. Signed at Asnnciun .June 7, 1909. Entered into
force June 7, 1969.

Viet-Nam

Agreement for sales of agricultural commodities, re-
lating to the agreement of March 13, 19(57 (TIAS
6271). Signed at Saigon June 27, 1969. Entered into
force June 27, 1969.

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

of State. (For biographic details, see Department of
State press release 197 dated July 1.5.)

Kenneth Rush to be Ambassador to the Federal
Republic of Germany. ( For biographic details, see
AAliite House press release dated June 16. )

Adolph W. Schmidt to be Ambassador to Canada.
( For biographic details, see White House pre.ss release
dated June 13.)

John R. Stevenson to be Legal Adviser of the De-
partment of State. (B^r biographic details, see
Department of State press release 193 dated July 14.)

J. Fife Symington, Jr.. to be Ambassador to Trini-
dad and Tobago. (For biographic details, see White
House press release dated June 18. )

Terence A. Todman to l>e Ambassador to the Repub-
lic of Chad. (For biographic details, see Department
of State press relea.se 2(X) dated July 16. )

Philip H. Trezise to be an Assistant Secretary of
State. ( For biographic details, .see Department of State
press release 194 dated July 14. )

Samuel Z. Westerfield, Jr., to be Amlwssador to
Liberia. (For biographic details, see White House press
release dated June 16. )

Confirmations

The Senate on July 8 confirmed the following
nominations :

John A. Calhoun to be Ambassador to the Republic
of Tunisia. ( For biographic details, see Department of
State press relea.se 191 dated July 9. )

Joseph J. Jova to be representative of the United
States on the Council of the Organization of American
States, with the rank of Ambassador. (For biographic
details, see Department of State press release 19."i dated
July 1.5.)

Ridgway B. Knight to be Ambassador to Portugal.
(For biographic details, see Department of State press
release 188 dated July 9.)

David D. Newsom to be an Assistant Secretary of
State. ( For biographic details, see Department of State
press release 203 dated July 17.)

Joseph Palmer 2d to be Ambassador to the Kingdom
of Libya. (For biographic details, see Department of
State press release 204 dated July 17.)

John C. Pritzlaff, Jr., to be Ambassador to Malta.
(For biographic details, .see White House press release
dated June 6.)

Luther L Replogle to be Ambassador to Iceland. (For
biographic details, see White House press release dated
June 16. )

John Richardson, Jr., to be an Assistant Secretary

' Not in force.

No.

Date

*187 7/9

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 7-13

Press relea.ses may be obtained from the OlBce
of News, Department of State, Washington, D.C.
20.520.

Relea.se issued prior to Jul.v 7 which apiiears
in this is.sue of the Bulletin is Xo. 186 of
July .3.

Subject

Leaders of U.S. voluntary agencies
active in Arab relief work meet
with Department oflScials.

Knight .sworn in as Ambassador to
Poi-tugal (biographic details).

Lodge : 2.5th session on \'iet-Nam at
Parit!.

U.S. -Japan civil aviation consulta-
tions : communique.

Calhoun sworn in as Ambassador to
Tunisia (biographic details).

Joint Committee on U.S. -Japan Cul-
tural and Educational Coo]>era-
tion.

* Not printed.

t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin.

*188

7/9

189

7/10

190

7/10

*191

7/9

1192

7/11

Department of State Bulletin

INDEX July 28, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1570

Africa. Newsom confirmed as Assistant Secre-
tary for African Affairs 80

Austria. Letters of Credence (Gruber) ... 64

Aviation. U.S. and Japan Hold Consultations on
Civil Aviation (joint communique) .... 75

Canada

Schmidt confii-med as Ambassador 80

Tenth Anniversary of the St. Lawrence Seaway

(Nixon, Rockefeller, Trudeau) 67

Chad. Todman confirmed as Ambassador ... 80

Congress

Confirmations (Calhoun, Jova, Knight, Newsom,
I'.ilmer, Pritzlaff, Replogle, Richardson, Rush,
Schmidt, Stevenson, Symington, Todman,
Trezise, Westerfield) SO

Congre-ssional Documents Relating to Foreign
Policy 75

Department and Foreign Service

Confirmations (Calhoun, Jova, Knight, Newsom,
Palmer, PritzlafC, Replogle, Richard.»on, Rush,
Schmidt, Stevenson, Symington, Todman,
Trezise, Westerfield) 80

Department Establishes New Staff for Planning
and Coordination 74

Disarmament

President Nixon Calls for Comprehensive Ef-
forts in Multilateral Disarmament Negotia-
tions (message to Geneva Disarmament
Conference) (>5

U.S. Delegation Named for Talks on Arms
Limitations With U.S.S.R 66

Economic Affairs. Trezise confirmed as Assist-
ant Secretary 80

Education. The International Dimension of
American Education (Richardson) 72

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Richardson

confirmed as Assistant Secretary 80

Germany. Rush confirmed as Ambassador . . 80
Iceland. Replogle confirmed as Ambas.sador . . 80

International Organizations and Conferences.

Jova confirmed as U.S. representative on the

OAS Council 80

Israel. United States Reaffirms Position on
Jerusalem (Yost, text of U.N. Security Counc-il
resolution) 7g

Japan. U.S. and Japan Hold Consultations on
Civil Aviation (joint communique) .... 75

Latin America. Jova confirmed as U.S. repre-
sentative on the OAS Council 80

Liberia. Westerfield confirmed as Ambassador . 80

Libya. Palmer confirmed as Amba.ssador ... SO

Malta. PritzlafC confirmed as Ambassador . . 80

Near East. United States Reaffirms Position on
Jerusalem (Yost, text of U.N. Security Coim-

cil resolution) jg

Portugal. Knight confirmed as Ambassador . . 80
Presidential Documents

President Nixon Calls for Comprehensive Efforts

in Multilateral Disarmament Negotiations . 65

President Nixon Hails Saigon Proposals for

Political Settlement in South Viet-Nam . . 61

Tenth Anniversary of the St. Lawrence

Seaway q-j

Treaty Information. Current Actions .... 79

Trinidad and Tobago. Symington confirmed as

Ambassador gQ

Tunisia. Calhoun confirmed as Ambassador . . 80
U.S.S.R. U.S. Comments on Soviet Statement on

East-West Relations (Rogers) 6i

United Nations

United Nations Documents jg

United States Reafl3nns Position on Jerusa-
lem (Yost, text of U.K Security Council

resolution) ^g

Viet-Nam

President Nixon Hails Saigon Proposals for
Political Settlement in South Viet-Nam

(statement) gj

25th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam Held at Paris

(Lodge) 62

Name Index

Allison, Maj. Gen. Royal B gg

Brown, Harold _ [ gg

Calhoun, John A . 80

Farley, I'hilip J . . 66

Gruber, Karl . . 64

Jova, .Joseph J gQ

Knight, Ridgway B . . 80

Lodge, Henry Cabot . . 62

Newsom, David D [ [ go

Nitze, Paul [ [ gg

Nixon, President 61, 65 67

Palmer, Joseph, 2d ' ' 80

PritzlafC, John C, Jr . . '. 80

Replogle, Luther I go

Richard.son, Elliot L [ 72

Richard.son, John, Jr go

Rockefeller, Nelson [ qj

Rogers, Secretary \ gj

Rush, Kenneth go

Schmidt, Adolph C [ 80

Smith, Gerard C gg

Steven.son, John R go

Symington, J. Fife, Jr , go

Thompson, Llewellyn B gg

Todman, Terence A ' go

Trezise, Philip H go

Trudeau, Pierre Elliott g7

Westerfield, Samuel Z., Jr gO

Yost, Charles W 7g

U.S. QOVERNMEMT rRINTINS OFFICE: 1969

Superintendent of Documents
U.S. government printing office

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OF 3

l\l AVT O

20YEARS OF PEACE

^THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAil FOR FISCAL YEAR 1970
Statement hy Secretary Rogers 81

U.S. MILITARY ASSISTANCE POLICY TOWARD LATIN AJMERICA

Statement hy Assistant Secretai^y Meyer 100

EMPEROR HAILE SELASSIE OF ETHIOPIA VISITS THE UNITED STATES

AS GUEST OF PRESIDENT NIXON

Exchange of Remarks 86

DEPARTMENT REVIEWS U.S. EFFORTS TO AID VICTISIS OF THE

NIGERIAN CIVIL WAR

Statements hy Under Secretary Richardson
and Ambassador C. Clyde Ferguson 9^.

For index see inside back cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1571
August 4, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Government Printing Office

WasUngton, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

B2 issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January U, 1966).

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 BULLETIN is indeied In

the Readers' Qulde to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN^
a tceekly publication issued by the '
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interestedagenciesofthe 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 selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

The Foreign Assistance Program for Fiscal Year 1970

Statement hy Secretary Rogers '■

I am glad to be here today in support of the
administration's program of foreign economic
and military assistance. Dr. [John A.] Han-
nah, the AID [Agency for International Devel-
opment] Administrator, will answer questions
on the details of the economic assistance pro-
gram and the justification for it. Secretary [of
Defense Melvin R.] Laird will be here
tomorrow to discuss the military assistance pro-
gram in detail.

I think that Americans can be proud of the
pioneering role that our Government has
played in responding to the peaceful revolu-
tion in economic and social development that
is now taking place in every major region of
the world. This is one of the major trends of
recent and contemporary history. It has had
enormous implications for the evolution of
world affairs and for the future position and
prospects for our own country.

We have helped, by example and contribu-
tion, to raise the expectations for a better life
among masses of the people on every conti-
nent. We have encouraged them to believe that
poverty and misery are not foreordained. We
have responded generously to their need for
help in the earlier stages of growth — both
directly and by supporting a range of United
Nations, regional, and other international
organizations engaged in aiding economic and
social development of the poorer nations, which
make up the majority of the world community.

From this I believe we can derive a large
measure of satisfaction and, I would hope, a
certain zest for working hard at this construc-
tive, humane, and promising enterprise which
means so much to so many.

^Made before the Senate Committee on Forei^
Relations on JiUy 14 (press release 201). The complete
hearings will be published by the committee.

The proposed program for fiscal year 1970
is strongly concentrated on major problem areas
and has clear program priorities.

The President's foreign aid message to the
Congress in May set forth the administration's
initial proposals for redirecting and strengthen-
ing our programs which we believe are required
by present needs and circumstances to assist
less developed countries in their efforts to
develop.^ At the same time, the President
announced that he would appoint a public
advisory group to recommend U.S. policies and
programs of international development coopera-
tion for the decade of the 1970's.

Pending a full-scale review of U.S. foreign
assistance policies and programs to be under-
taken by the President's task force, we have
decided to place greater stress on four aspects
of our foreign aid programs :

1. We will increase the opportunities for
private enterprise and private initiative to
apply these vast resources and energies to the
work of development.

2. We will emphasize the transfer of Ameri-
can knowledge and skills through technical
assistance.

3. We will increase our support for multi-
lateral aid programs and our efforts to coordi-
nate our aid with other donors.

4. We will continue to place the highest
priority on food production and reduction of
population growth.

Private enterprise is vital to development.
The less developed countries wliich have taken
full advantage of the incentives of private
enterprise have made the most rapid progress

' For text of President Nixon's message to the Con-
gress on May 28, see Bulletin of June 16, 1969, p. 515.

August 4, 1969

and achieved the fullest degree of development.
The AID program will focus more sharply than
ever on stunulating private enterprise. In addi-
tion, -we will try to channel U.S. investment into
the economies of less developed countries in
ways which wiU most benefit the development of
those countries. In order to carry out tliis pur-
pose in the most efficient and businesslike fash-
ion, we propose to establish an Overseas Private
Investment Corporation which will:

— take over the programs of investment in-
surance against certain political risks and the
preinvestment promotion and survey programs
which AID now administers ;

— provide guaranties and loans to help pri-
vate investment succeed in high-priority
ventures ;

— provide teclinical assistance and services to
private enterprise in less developed countries.

Technical assistance is e.ssential to the effi-
cient use of financial resources from the outside
and mobilization of a country's own natural
and other resources. We are doing everything
we can to develop the most efficient means of
transmitting our skills and Imowledge to the
less developed countries and improving the
quality of our advice, our training, and our re-
search. We are also requesting a 2-year author-
ization for teclmical assistance to strengthen
this important activity and to make it clear to
the American universities, colleges, and other
private groups which, for the most part, carry
out this work for us that we view this as a con-
tinuing, long-range program.

Our support of the drive for development is
also expressed through multilateral programs —
our contributions to the multilateral banks and
to the technical assistance programs of the
United Nations, our participation in aid co-
ordination groups for recipient coimtries led by
the World Bank or other international agencies,
and our participation in other cooperative ar-
rangements among donor nations. We believe
that multilateral aid can help equitably increase
the total amoimt of assistance available for de-
velopment and at the same time focus the com-
bined resources and skills of many economically
advanced nations on the problems that the
poorer countries face in their efforts to develop.

We are convinced that the amount of aid
which we provide in a multilateral way sliould
increase. We propose to increase our contribu-

tion to the United Nations Development Pro-
gram from $71 million in FY 1960 to $100
million this year. Other nations are expected to
contribute some $160 million — 62 percent of the
total. Depending, of course, on the results of
the President's task force report and the Pear-
son Commission recommendations, we expect to
encourage further increased contributions to the
various multilateral banks. We are especially
pleased that the Congress last week appro-
priated the first $160 million of the $480 million
authorized for the second replenislunent of the
International Development Association. We ap-
preciate the support this committee has con-
sistently given this program.

Growing enough food to feed the world's
burgeoning population remains one of the most
critical problems we face. Many less developed
countries appear to be on the verge of sus-
tained increases in their levels of food pro-
duction as a result of new strains of wheat,
rice, and other grains, together with fertilizer
and other necessary agricultural requirements
partly financed by AID. But the dramatic gains
wliich some less developed countries are now
experiencing must be consolidated and the new
teclmiques must be spread to more coimtries.
Another decade of continued effort on the part
of the less developed countries will be neces-
sary if widespread famine is to be avoided.
With our help and the help of other aid donors,
it now appears that this can be done.

It cannot be done, however, \vithout increased
attention to the reduction of population growth.
Although progress has been slow, more and
more countries which we are assisting are under-
taking family planning programs. The less
developed countries themselves, the aid-giving
nations, international organizations, and pri-
vate groups are showing an increasing aware-
ness of the enormous problems caused by rapid
population growth. We will devote as large a
part of our AID program as we can to help
the less developed countries come to grips with
this problem.

The President's task force will carry out a
further comprehensive review of our foreign
assistance programs and will also consider other
studies, such as the internationally sponsored
Pearson Commission report. This review by the
task force will serve as the basis for our final
response to the Javits amendment to the
Foreign Assistance Act.

Department of State Bulletin

II.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, let me outline
for the committee the major elements of the
economic assistance program proposed for fiscal
year 1970. We are requesting $2.2 billion, con-
sisting of:

— $463 million for technical assistance ;

— $1.1 billion for development loans, includ-
ing $438 million for Latin America ;

— $515 million for supporting assistance;

— $115 million for contingency fund, admin-
istrative expenses, and other requests.

In an effort to meet the special needs of the
less developed countries for modern technical
skills and strong institutions to train large
numbers of people more effectively, we will
reemphasize and expand our support for techni-
cal assistance, both bilateral and multilateral.
Over one-fifth of our request for economic
assistance is for technical assistance programs.

Development loans continue to be the largest
share of the program and the most important
means of providing essential goods and services
required to fuel agricultural and industrial
development in the poor countries. In addition,
they are the primary means AID has to stimu-
late borrowing countries to make the self-help
reforms needed for their development. Eight
countries — Brazil, Cliile, Colombia, India, In-
donesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Turkey — vdll
receive 86 percent of the development loan
coimtry programs proposed for this fiscal year.

In addition to the two major forms of devel-
opment assistance, AID also helps a few coun-
tries maintain political and economic stability
through supporting assistance. In FY 1970 only
seven coimtries will receive such assistance, and
93 percent of the supporting assistance comitry
. programs will be concentrated in Viet-Nam,
Laos, and Thailand. In addition, nearly $20
million will help support the U.N. peacekeeping
force in Cyprus and the refugee programs
carried out by UNRWA [United Nations Ee-
lief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees
in the Near East] .

The contingency fund is necessary to meet
urgent needs for disasters such as earthquakes
and floods, as well as for unforeseen require-
ments, often in situations of security interest
to the United States.

Other requests provide funds for salaries and
related administrative expenses, support for

American-sponsored schools and hospitals
abroad, and grants for the Indus Basin Devel-
opment Fund.

III.

Our FY 1970 request will fund the following
regional programs:

— East Asia, $234 million ;

— Viet-Nam, $440 million ;

— ^Near East and South Asia, $625 million ;

— Latin America, $605 million ;

— Africa, $186 million.

In East Asia our aid is focused on both
development and security purposes. Indonesia
has come back from the brink of economic chaos
and is launching a comprehensive development
program, the success of which will depend very
heavily on outside support for some time to
come. The Eepublic of Korea is moving toward
self-sustaining growth, and we expect to be able
to continue to phase down the aid we provide to
it. In both Laos and Thailand our assistance
programs are for the most part an outgrowth of
the hostilities in Viet-Nam and will depend in
form and amount on the course of the war there.

In Viet-Nam we are prepared to shift the aid
program toward greater emphasis on economic
and social development if there is a resolution
of the conflict or a significant deescalation of
the war in the months ahead.

In the Near East and South Asia our economic
aid program is concentrated almost entirely on
the subcontinent and on Turkey.

In India and Pakistan — which have a popu-
lation greater than that of Latin America and
Africa combined — we have a testing ground of
whether man can check the ravages of mal-
nutrition and escape from the grip of poverty.
The success or failure of the long-term drive
which both India and Pakistan are making for
their economic development will have ramifica-
tions throughout the world. That is why there is
such wide participation of aid-giving countries
in the consortia led by the World Bank for these
two countries. That is also why over two-thirds
of our proposed AID development loan pro-
gram outside Latin America is planned for these
two major countries.

The previous pessimistic assessment that
mass starvation would face the Indian Subcon-
tinent and some other regions by 1980 has given
way to hope that, with continued local effort

August 4, 1969

and adequate outside help, the "green revolu-
tion" in agriculture can lead the way to overall
economic development and progress. India and
Pakistan will require development assistance
for some years to come. But local as well as for-
eign experts now are convinced that with good
performance and substantial aid these countries
can in fact achieve self-sustaining gro^-th in the
not too distant future.

Turkey, like Korea, is approaching the time
when she will no longer need concessional loans
to keep her economy moving ahead.

In Latin America our program is a continua-
tion of the historically close and special rela-
tions between us and the other coimtries of the
hemisphere. The President has expressed our
determination to strengthen and improve these
relations. Continuation of our assistance
obviously is essential to constructive changes in
an atmosphere of purposeful cooperation. The
alternative to any refusal on our part to col-
laborate in their development risks continued
social and economic stagnation, with its great
explosive potential. The present request for
Latin America provides an important bridge to
the new policy and program directions that will
emerge as a result of the executive branch re-
views now underway. Further reductions in
our assistance to this hemisphere this year, fol-
lowing last year's deep cuts, could badly erode
confidence in the reliability of our special re-
lationship.

Our aid program for Africa extends a modest
amount of help to an area which is the least
developed of all the continents and which con-
tains one-third of all members in the United
Nations. Our aid complements that of the
former administering nations of Europe. Apart
from contributions to 10 African states, the
United States is emphasizing the advantages of
expanded markets and joint approaches to com-
mon development problems by focusing its as-
sistance elsewhere on the continent on regional
activities which reflect African initiatives.

We also recommend a military assistance pro-
gram at the level of last year's appropriation.
For the past few years, we have actively
pursued a policy of phasing out military assist-
ance for those countries whose economies have
developed sufficiently so that they are able to
provide for their own defense needs.

The bulk of the FY 1970 military assistance
request presented to you — almost 80 percent —
continues to be planned for four strategic coun-

tries — the Republics of Korea and Cliina,
Greece and Turkey. Military assistance is also
programed for countries which provide to the
United States facilities important to the defense
posture of the United States and its allies.

Small amounts of military assistance are also
planned for other countries, most of which are
to receive only training.

IV.

These, in broad outline, Mr. ChaiiTuan, are
the proposals wliich President Nixon is making
to the Congress for the foreign assistance pro-
gram for the curi-ent fiscal year.

Foreign assistance is integral to the conduct
of our foreign policy because of a nimiber of
fundamental facts about the world in which
we live:

— More than two-thirds of the world's people
live in less developed countries. In the next 12
years the number of people in the poor coun-
tries will grow by about a billion, increasing
their present population by almost one-half.

■ — In recent years the less developed countries
in the non-Communist world as a whole ex-
panded tlieir production at a faster rate —
roughly 5 percent annually — than the United
States achieved in most of our history. In this
sense it can be said that foreign aid is working.
But unprecedented rat«s of population growth
are denying the individual citizens of the less
developed countries much of the benefits of
these gains in national production.

— About four-fifths of the savings and invest-
ment necessary for sustained growth in the poor
coimtries must be raised from their own re-
sources, out of economies whose per capita
national production averages about one-tenth
that of the industrialized countries.

— In some of the less developed countries the
threat of aggression or insurgency requires the
diversion of scarce resources to maintain secu-
rity forces.

— More rapid economic and social progress
is the goal of every constructive political leader |
in the developing nations.

— If the rich countries do not provide the
critical margin of assistance to these construc-
tive forces, the resulting frustration is certain
to be exploited politically, and in the long run
it will be detrimental to our national interests.

On my recent trip to Asia I found, in the
countries I visited, shared convictions on the

Department of State Bulletin

overriding importance of breaking out of
poverty, a new sense of confidence that real
economic progress is possible, a growing com-
mitment to regional cooperation, and a strong
desire to stand as soon as possible independent
of external support.

To the extent that our aid policies and pro-
grams foster these trends — and it is clear that
they do — they directly support the conduct of
our foreign policy.

As you consider the program before the com-
mittee, j-ou inevitably will be looking at details
and at requirements in the immediate future.

But in considering immediate needs in pri-
ority areas for the next few years we should
not lose sight of a broader issue involved. Tliis
issue is whether the East-West polarization that
characterized the postwar world is going to be
followed by a different polarization that divides
the world into the rich and the poor.

You have statistics at hand that measure
the gap between the rich and the poor nations.
Although the less developed nations as a group
have improved their growth rate in the 1960's
and are slowly improving their living stand-
ards, the absolute gap continues to widen from
year to year. Even with great generosity in our
efforts to encourage the development process in
poorer parts of the world, the foreseeable pros-
pects are for that gap to increase still further.

In the face of this possibility it would be
shortsighted indeed if the United States failed
to do its part with the other developed coun-
tries in providing assistance to the poor coun-
tries. I have been asked frequently by repre-
sentatives of both rich and poor whether the
sharp cutback in our aid level last year signaled
a turn down such a path. I could only express
the hope that this was not the case.

Mr. Chairman, I said at the opening of these
remarks that I believe Americans have the right
to be proud of our role in pioneering the lend-

ing of a helping hand to nations straining to
set themselves on the road to more decent
standards of living, because this is a construc-
tive and humane thing to do.

I also have tried to suggest that since this is
a process now engaging the priority attention
of most of the people of the world, it would be
somehow incongruous if we were not engaged in
this powerful current in human affairs.

In closing this statement I should like to
stress tliat the conduct of an active and adequate
developn^eut assistance program also serves our
interests in creating a more stable and progres-
sive world.

There can be no doubt of the close relation-
ship between the development process, on the
one hand, and security on the other. If there
is a sense of security, it encourages people and
leaders to make the necessary sacrifices for
development because they have grounds for
hope in the future. If there is a satisfactory
rate of economic and social progress, it rein-
forces that sense of security. When both of these
factors are present, the political structures of
the less developed countries are strengthened,
which in turn contributes to order in inter-
national affairs.

Mr. Chairman, I want to emphasize that we
consider the President's budget request for
economic and military assistance for fiscal year
1970 to be important to our long-range national
interests. We are conscious of competing de-
mands upon our resources. The amounts re-
quested, we believe, reflect that awareness. The
budget this year is the smallest ever requested —
in absolute amount, in relation to the budget,
and in relation to the U.S. gross national
product — since the Marshall Plan was launched
two decades ago. President Nixon has therefore
asked me to tell tliis committee that it is his
firm conviction that the authorization request
for $2.6 billion tliis year is necessary to meet
essential r'^quirements.

I respectfully ask the members of this com-
mittee to support this request.

August 4, 1969

Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia Visits

the United States as Guest of President Nixon

Emperor Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia made
a state visit to the United States July 7-11. He
met with President Nixon at Washington July
8-9. Following is their excha/nge of greetings at
a welcoming ceremony in the East Room of the
White House on July 8, their exchange of toasts
at a state dinner at the White House that eve-
ning., and their exchange of remarks in the
White House Rose Garden on July 9 upon con-
clusion of their meetings.

EXCHANGE OF GREETINGS

White House press release dated July 8

President Nixon

Your Majesty, this historic house has -wit-
nessed many historic occasions, but as all of
our guests here today I am sure will agree and
as those who are listening on television and
radio will vmderstand, no visit to this house
has a greater historical significance than your
visit to the Wliite House again.

First, because in all the world today you, as
chief of state, have served longer — 53 years —
than any chief of state in the world, and we
honor you for that.

Second, because I am the fourth President
of the United States to have the honor of re-
ceiving you here in the "Wliite House as an
official state visitor. In the whole history of the
United States, over 190 years, this has not been
the case with any official visitor. You broke the
record with four Presidents today.

Third, because you are the first visitor — offi-
cial visitor to this country since my inaugura-
tion as President of the United States — from
the great continent of Africa, to which you
have offered such outstanding leadership.

For these reasons we honor you today and
also for others that I will mention briefly.

We honor you because of the personal leader-
ship that you have provided for your country,

an ancient land, a proud people, but one which
under your leadership has moved forward in
the field of economic and social progress dra-
matically in these last years.

Second, because in this great continent of
Africa, a very old continent with manj' new
nations, you have provided the counsel and the
guidance and the leadership to the new nations,
to the new leaders, which was so essential, and
also the example for unity, unity which tran-
scends differences in the continent. The fact
that the Organization of African Unity is in
your capital city is an indication of that
leadership.

But finally, to all of us who are here, those
of us who go back a few years, we welcome you
as one who appealed to and inspired the whole
conscience of the world in 1936, when you,
standing virtually alone, spoke out against ag-
gressive totalitarianism; and as a result of
speaking out, you gave an example, an example
which should have been followed then, but an
example which today historians will recall pro-
vided inspiration to leaders and people through-
out the world.

As we look back over your life, and as we look
back over your leadership, we can truly say
that no chief of state or head of government
can be welcomed to the United States of Amer-
ica who really touches our hearts more than you
touch our hearts, because you stand for those
great principles, principles of independence,
principles of national dignity, principles of
unity, which transcend differences between
nations.

You stand for those principles and have stood
for them through the years — in difficult years
as well as those in which you have had perliaps
a better opportunity than in times past.

So today we welcome you. "We regret that our
weather last night was difficult so that you were
unable to be received by the great throngs who
wanted to welcome you if we could have had this
ceremony outside. But I can assure you that

Department of State Bulletin

small though our numbers may be because of the
restrictions of this room, the hearts of all Amer-
icans — 200 million Americans — are full with
respect as you return again to this country,
and we look forward to our conversations with
you and we wish you good health.

We wish you, also, a good visit here, and we
wish you the very best for the years of leader-
ship which we know you will provide not only
to your nation, not only to your continent, but
to those who cherish and honor freedom
throughout the world.

Emperor Haile Selassie ^

Mr. President, first of all I wish to take this
opportunity to thank you for the most kind
words you have uttered about my country and
myself.

I also wish to take this opportunity to thank
you for extending an invitation for me to come
and visit the United States of America once
more. I hope in my brief sojourn to this country
I will have the opportunity of renewing old
acquaintances as well as making new friends.

As you have said, Mr. President, the relations
between the United States and Ethiopia are not
new ones. We have, for many decades, main-
tained the most friendly relations. We have
manifested this friendship not merely by words
but in terms of specific concrete and joint efforts
and sacrifices we have made.

Our friendship has been based on certain
solid common interests which, as time goes on,
rather than being weakened are strengthening
themselves each day.

Mr. President, I am happy today to be here,
particularly to meet you again in your own
country. I have vivid recollections of your visit
to Ethiopia and the extensive exchange of views
we have had concerning the bilateral relations
between the United States and Ethiopia, as well
as multilateral relations and questions affecting
international peace and security.

I am glad that my arrival here in the United
States yesterday is affording me another oppor-
tunity to exchange views with you, Mr. Presi-
dent, with a view toward strengthening further
the good and friendly relations that have for
long remained as the basis of the relations be-
tween Ethiopia and the United States.

'His Imperial Majesty spoke in Amharic: his re-
marks were translated by Ethiopian Ambassador
Minassie Haile.

I also wish to emphasize that the friendship
between our two coimtries has not been solely
confined to relations between us, such as my
visit here or President Nixon's visit to Ethi-
opia; but many people in different walks of life,
both from Ethiopia as well as from the United
States, visit each other's country, and we con-
sider this to be indispensable in strengthening
already existing friendly ties.

Mr. President, you have mentioned African
problems. You have mentioned the Organiza-
tion of African Unity, an organization which
the people of our vast continent have estab-
lished with a view to performing certain spe-
cific tasks.

Briefly speaking, the organization is estab-
lished for the purpose of protecting in a better
fashion the independence of African states. It is
also meant to expedite the economic and social
progress through cooperation of African
peoples.

It also has the important task of assisting in
the maintenance of international peace and se-
curity. Because this very principle, for which
that organization is established, is in accord
with the basic policy of the Government of the
United States, the organization has had ample
support on the part of the people and Gov-
ernment of this country.

I hope that in the time to come the United
States Government and people would find it
possible to come to even a greater assistance of
that organization, for the principles for which it
stands are of universal value and never-
changing ones.

Mr. President, I hope, as I see it, as a result
of my visit and exchange of views I will have
the pleasure of having with you, the relations
between our two countries will be strengthened
further.

In this time of a fast-changing world, where
new things come about, and so forth, it is essen-
tial for leaders to come together to exchange
and consider views to see by what joint effort
they will be able to strengthen that relation.

I hope that as a result of the broad general
understanding we are going to arrive at dur-
ing my visit here, our understanding will be
reflected in the kind of policy that will fol-
low and the kind of consideration and atti-
tude we will have regarding each other's vital
problems.

I hope in broad terms, as I see it, the good
relation between our two coimtries will be

August 4, 1969

further broadened, not to the exclusive ad-
vantage of one party but with a view toward
bringing forth mutual benefits and mutual
advantage.

I wish to thank you again, Mr. President,
for the very kind words you have said. I also
wish to thank the people and the Govern-
ment of the United States for giving me such
a cordial reception.

Thank you very much.

EXCHANGE OF TOASTS

White House press release dated July 8

President Nixon

As we welcome His Majesty again to this
house, our thoughts must go back to the many
events that have occurred in tliis room, be-
cause no one can be in the presence of His
Majesty without thinking of all the history
which he has seen and which he has made.

So tonight we honor hun as the leader of
a great country with whom the United States
is very fortunate to have the most cordial and
close relations.

We honor him as the leader and counselor
and adviser to the great new nations of Africa,
in which he has played such a significant role ;
and we honor him also for his world leadership,
with which all of us are familiar.

I have been trying to think of something
that would be appropriate to say that has not
already been said about His Majesty on what is
now the fourth occasion that he has been in this
room as the official guest of a President of the
United States.

As I pomted out when we welcomed him in
the Wliite House this morning, this is a record
that has never been equaled before and may
never be equaled again : the head of state being
received by four different Presidents as an offi-
cial guest.

Those things that occur to me I am sure occur
to all of you. He is a respected leader of his
own country. He is a respected leader of a great
continent, and he is a respected leader of the
world.

But he is more than that and will be remem-
bered by all of us, not only in this country but
throughout the world, for more than those
things, because that could be said about many

of the official guests who are honored in this
room.

I can think of the fact that His Majesty, of
course, is a descendant of Solomon. If I can
recall the Biblical phrase correctly, when King
David died and the Lord asked Solomon what
he wanted most, Solomon said, "Lord, give me
an imderstanding heart." And because he asked
for that, he received great wisdom, a long life,
and, of course, he had an understanding heart.

So it is with His Majesty. He has wisdom.
He has had a long life and, I know from per-
sonal experience, an understanding heart.

I share that with you for one moment. I had
the great privilege, which some in tliis room
have enjoyed, of visiting his country in 1957.
My wife and I were received as royal guests at
that time and treated royally. I returned again
to his country in 1967, holding no office, having i
no portfolio whatever. I was received again as \
a royal guest and treated royally. This is a man
with an understanding heart. [Laughter.]

So tonight we honor him for what he has been
to his country, to his continent, and to the
world. We honor him also for what he means
to histoi-y. '\ATiat he means to history is some-
thing more than that of national leader or con-
tinental leader or world leader. "Wliat he means
is a spirit, a spirit that in these days we some-
times think is lost : the spirit that does not give
up when all the odds seem too difficult to over-
come, the spirit that will not compromise when
there is no compromise which would not de-
stroy that in which he believed, the spirit that
inspired us all in 1936 when we saw Mm stand-
ing tall and proud before the League of Na-
tions talking for what all of the pragmatists,
all of the realists, said was a lost cause.

Because he spoke so strongly and proudly and
vigorously for what was said to be a lost cause,
he was victorious, his nation was victorious, but
what was more important, the cause of freedom,
of strong men who refuse to be overcome by the
odds and by the difficulties — that survived.

What His Majesty leaves, that heritage, on
his pages of the history books of the world
means more than the leadership of a nation, or
a continent, or, for that matter, the world, and
for that moment of inspirational leadership we
are all in his debt.

And tonight, therefore, I know that all of you
will welcome the opportunity to join with me —
as has been the occasion on four different times.

Department of State Bulletin

as I have indicated before, in this room — to
drink to his health. And in drinking to his
health, I have found that there is a phrase in his
country, a phrase of salutation, which I think
is particularly appropriate. Translated from the
Amliaric it reads as follows : "May he live long
for our glory."

I think there is notliing more appropriate
that we can say to His Imperial Majesty tonight
than that we trust he may live long for our
glory.

Let us raise om* glasses to His Imperial
jMajesty Haile Selassie.

Emperor Haile Selassie^

I wish to express our heartfelt gratitude to
Your Excellencies, to you, the Government and
the people of the United States of America, for
the very warm welcome and cordial hospitality
accorded to me ever since my arrival to this
great and friendly country.

The kind and generous words which you have
just addressed to me and my people are deeply
appreciated. As you have rightly said, the
friendship existing between us is of long stand-
ing and goes far back, to when you were the
Vice President of the United States of America.

The discussions and the exchange of views
which I have had with you during your two
visits to our country have certainly helped in
strengthening this friendship.

This is not the first time, as I said today,
for us to visit this great land. Upon the invita-
tions that have been previously extended to us
by your predecessors to visit this country, we
have come here and learned at first hand how
much the American people treasure the friend-
ship of our people.

Tliis friendship has been tested in times of
war and peace, and it has proven to be a firm
and lasting one.

Thirty -three years have lapsed since our inno-
cent and defenseless people suffered the agonies
and atrocities of Fascist aggressors whose ac-
tion irked and aroused the consciences of men
and women everywhere.

It was following this most brutal aggression,
as you have already mentioned this evening and
this morning, that we made our appeal to the

' As translated from Amharic by Ambassador
Mlnassie.

League of Nations to condemn this inexcusable
aggression and to support Ethiopia's just cause.

Though the League of Nations failed us, we
continued to seek its support because we were
convinced that only through this world body
could this aggression be checked in time before
the whole world was engulfed in a great
catastrophe.

Our warnings were not heeded. However, we
were proven right in the ensuing years. The
moral force of our cause and the refusal of
friendly countries like the United States of
America to recognize the aimexation of Ethi-
opia by force helped to sustain us and our gal-
lant people in the struggle for total liberation
of Ethiopia.

I myself and our people are most grateful for
this contribution of the United States. Ever
since Ethiopia liberated herself from enemy oc-
cupation, the Government and the people of the
United States of America have generously con-
tributed to our effort of reconstruction and
development.

Ethiopia, as other developing coimtries, has
numerous problems in the field of education,
public health, agriculture, communication, and
other things related to development.

With regard to education, the people of the
United States of America have given invaluable
assistance by building schools in Ethiopia and
by providing teachers. They have further
granted scholarships to Ethiopian students to
pursue their higher education in the United
States of America and also have given assist-
ance to the Haile Selassie University, the first
university.

One of the principals of American assistance
to Ethiopia has also been in the field of com-
munications. The friendly Government of the
United States of America continues to partici-
pate in Ethiopia's efforts to modernize its agri-
culture and improve the health of its people.

We wish to express our appreciation and
heartfelt thanks for the continued assistance
given to us by the American people in our
endeavor to maintain the security and territorial
integrity of our nation.

In the field of international relations the
United States and Ethiopia have similar inter-
ests and objectives, which give more reason for
our two countries and peoples to increase that
area of cooperation.

The age-old friendship existing between

August 4, 1969

357-533—69—

Ethiopia and the United States of America, we
believe, has flourished as a result of our close
cooperation both in the interest of our two peo-
ples and in the general cause of world peace.
It is our belief that our two countries should
continue to cooperate even more closely.

Ethiopia is a nation fully committed to Afri-
can vmity and to the greater cause of world
peace and subsequently shall continue to sup-
port and strengthen the Organization of Afri-
can Unity, wliich was established as an African
instrument for peace and progress.

The Organization of African Unity, consult-
ing its Committee on Nigeria, of which I have
the honor of being Chairman, has so far done
its utmost to find ways and means of ending
the tragic war in Nigeria. Without despair, we
shall continue to exert our eiforts with a view
to finding an acceptable formula for peace.

It was very gratifying for me when I read
the fact that you, Mr. President, have selected
a competent individual to represent you in the
humanitarian effort of the United States in Ni-
geria. I have had the privilege of talking with
your representative, and I am glad to report
that our ideas about relief operations are very
close and coincide on many points.

The history of the Ethiopian people is a his-
tory of a peace-loving nation. The annals of
history are proof of the general stand of Ethi-
opia in this regard. However, there are still cer-
tain quarters who seek to compromise the
territorial integrity and unity of our country.
Such a smister attitude will only strengthen our
determination to safeguard the freedom and in-
dependence of our nation.

The reality of our position has impressed
upon us the need to remain strong in all aspects
of defense, a measure which can only be realized
through the accelerated development of our na-
tion. We are confident that the friendly peo-
ple and Government of the United States of
America will continue to give Ethiopia their
usual encouragement and support in our de-
termination to advance the good and well-being
of our people in a climate of peace and stability.

Mr. President, Mrs. Nixon, and distinguished
guests: I would like to ask all present here to
join me in a toast to the good health and happi-
ness of President and Mrs. Nixon and to the
continued well-being and prosperity of the
American people and to the lasting friendship
between the people of the United States and the
people of Ethiopia.

EXCHANGE OF REMARKS

White House press release d&ted July 9

President Nixon

Your Imperial Majesty: As you leave the
White House I want to thank you for coming to
the United States and for giving us the oppor-
tunity to meet with you again. I thank you first
personally as an old friend, and I appreciated
the chance that has been provided to renew our
personal acquaintance.

I want to thank you, too, because it provided
the opportunity to discuss the bilateral prob-
lems that we have between our two countries.
Certainly those were easy problems to discuss,
easy because our traditional friendship led to
the constructive type of solutions which we both
expected when our conversations began.

But beyond that, I want to express to you my
appreciation for your coming to this country,
because you gave the opportunity for all of us
who met you to see not only the relations be-
tween Ethiopia and the United States in a better
light but to see the problems of the continent of
Africa and of the whole world from the long
perspective of histoi-y which you have and also
from the understanding of the whole world
which has always been yours.

Our discussions covered, as you know, the
problems of the new nations of Africa and U.S.
policy toward those nations, the agony of Ni-
geria and Biafra and what steps might be taken
by this country and steps that could be taken by
you to bring a solution to that problem, and also
the problems of the Mideast which are so much
in our minds as well as in yours.

This type of opportunity that it has provided
for discussion at the highest level of problems
that affect the future of both of our countries —
but beyond that, the future of a whole contin-
ent and the whole world — is one that made this
visit very worthwhile, certainly from my stand-
point and from the standpoint of my colleague
in government and I hope from yours and
your colleagues'.

As you leave I say again, as I said last night,
that perhaps the most appropriate words are the
words from a greeting from your own language
which, as I understand, literally translated to
the English means "May you live long for our
glory."

We all feel that. We feel it in our hearts. May
you live long, live long not just for yourself,

Department of State Bulletin

not just for your people, but for the greater
service that you can render to the cause of peace
and progress in the continent of Africa, in the
IMideast, and in the whole world.

Emperor Haile Selassie ^

Mr. President : As I have already said, this is
not the first visit I am paying to the United
States. Each time I have come to this country, I
have been impressed by the friendsliip that has
been manifested to me by responsible American
officials, as well as by the people in all walks of
] ife that I have encountered.

I am happy to have gotten another oppor-
tunity to come to the United States with a view
of discussing problems of common concern with
the President of the United States and other
distinguished officials of this Government.

In our discussions, Mr. President, as you have
indicated, we have considered the possibility of
expanding the relations between Ethiopia and
the United States on a bilateral basis. We have
also considered problems affecting our region,
as well as problems affecting international peace
and security.

I am confident that, as the result of the discus-
sions I have had, the relations between our two
countries will be strengthened further. There
are many matters regarding which we have
achieved a measure of understanding, and the
details about how to implement specific ideas
will be left to officials, both of Ethiopia and
the United States Government, who will be
working on the details.

Mr. President, I also wish to take this oppor-
tunity of publicly extending to you an invita-
tion to visit our country for a third time. This is
an opportunity which I myself and the people
of my country will be looking forward to.

I am sure that in accordance with the general
understanding and views we have expressed and
understanding we have achieved, the detailed
consideration of problems will also be satisfac-
tory. The discussion has been most rewarding
to me and I am satisfied with the opmions which
have been expressed and with the meeting of
minds that has been achieved.

Mr. President, may God bless you, your fam-
ily, and may God bless the American people.
Thank you.

'As translated from Amharic by Ambassador
Mlnassie.

26th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made hy
Ambassador Henry Cahot Lodge, head of the
U.S. delegation, at the 26th plenary session of
the meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on July 17.

Press release 205 dated July 17

Ladies and gentlemen: Tlie United States
welcomes and supports President Thieu's pro-
posals for political settlement in South Viet-
Nam. They are comprehensive, statesmanlike,
and eminently fair. They would establish a set
of procedui'es and guarantees to ensure that the
political future of South Viet-Nam would re-
flect, as accurately and as fairly as possible, the
will of the people of South Viet-Nam. And tliis
would include those whose allegiance is to your
side, as well as those whose allegiance is to the
Government of the Kepublic of Viet-Nam.

As President Nixon said, in commenting on
President Thieu's proposals of July 11 : ^

President Thieu has proposed elections in which all
political parties and groups can participate, specifically
including the National Liberation Front. He has
ofCered to set up special guarantees to ensure
fairness. . . .

Beyond this, President Thieu has indicated his will-
ingness to discuss with the other side the timetable
and details of these elections. He has declared that
his government will abide by the results of such elec-
tions and has asked that the other side do the same.
He has also renewed his offer of private talks with the
NLF without preconditions.

As President Nixon also said:

President Thieu's offer marks the culmination of a
long series of steps by the South Vietnamese and Amer-
ican Governments, all of which together demonstrate
clearly the sincere desire of our two Governments to
negotiate an honorable and rapid settlement of the
war. . . .

If the other side genuinely wants peace, it now has a
comprehensive set of offers which permit a fair and
reasonable settlement. If it approaches us in this spirit,
it will find us reasonable. Hanoi has nothing to gain
by waiting.

These proposals should receive the most care-
ful and sympathetic study by all who want to
bring jjeace to Viet-Nam. We commend them
to your side as a basis for serious negotiations.

We believe that the Government of the Re-
public of Viet-Nam has taken a momentous step
toward a negotiated peace. That Government,

* Bui-LETIN of July 28, 1969, p. 61.

August 4, 1969

by these proposals, would put into the hands of
the voters a genuine opportunity for self-deter-
mination. Moreover, President Tlueu has stated
that his personal position and interests do not
count in the face of the supreme interests of the
country and the aspirations of the people. Thus,
if your side rejects these proposals out of hand,
or even refuses to discuss them, the gravest
doubt will be cast on your interest in a negoti-
ated settlement of the wa r .

Since the question of elections in South Viet-
Nam is one primarily for discussion by the
South Vietnamese, I now close my statement,
repeating once again my earnest request that
President Thieu's proposals be discussed care-
fidly and constructively.

U.S. and Germany Conclude
New Offset Agreement

Following is a joint statement issued on
July 9 at the conclusion of V.S.-German tdhs
at Washington.

The U.S. and German delegations announced
today [July 9] the conclusion of a new agree-
ment for offsetting foreign exchange costs of
American forces in Germany for U.S. fiscal
years 1970 and 1971. The delegations have been
conferring in Washington this week on the third
and concluding round of their talks.

The agreement provides for an inflow of for-
eign exchange to the United States in the
amount of $1.52 billion. These inflows will be
achieved by $925 million of procurement of
U.S. goods and services (61 percent of total
agreement) and $595 million of financial meas-
ures (39 percent of total) .

Details are as follows :

Milliont
oj dollars

Military procurement in the TJ.S 800

FRG loan to the U.S. (repayable after 10

years) 250

Purchase by FRG of loans held in portfolio
of Eximbank and of outstanding Marshall
Plan loans H?. 75

Civil procurement in the U.S. by FRG . . - 125

Creation of fund in U.S. by FRG to en-
courage German Investment in U.S . . . 150

Advance transfers by the FRG for debt re-
payment to the U.S 43. 75

Retention in the U.S. of interest earned by
the FRG on U.S. Treasury deposits ... 32. 50

1,520

It was agreed that the interest rate which
would apply to the inter-Government loan and
to certain Federal Republic of Germany de-
posits in the U.S. Treasury for procurement
would be 3.5 percent.

The Export-Import Bank and Marshall Plan
loans purchased by the Federal Republic of
Germany would bear, on the average, a rate
of interest at 4 percent with respect to certain
loans and 5 percent with respect to others.

The U.S. delegation was led by Deputy Under
Secretary of State Nathaniel Samuels ; the Ger-
man delegation was headed by State Secretary
Guenther Harkort of the Foreign Office.

President Nixon Orders Reduction
in U.S. Personnel Abroad

White House press release dated July 9

The President on July 9 ordered a, 10-percent
reduction in American direct-hire civilian per-
sonnel serving abroad during the current fiscal
year, as well as certain U.S. military forces
overseas. This decision was made in the inter-
ests of lessening budget and balance-of -payment
costs and of reducing the American presence
overseas.

These reductions do not apply to military
forces committed to NATO or in Berlin, to
forces stationed in Korea or in Viet-Nam, or to
units stationed elsewhere in Southeast Asia that
are directly engaged in related military opera-
tions. The exception in these areas does not,
however, apply to U.S. direct-hire civilian per-
sonnel working with our commands there.
Troop reductions in Viet-Nam will be con-
sidered under separate programs.

Peace Corps volunteers will also be excluded
from the cut.

Direct-hire civilian personnel in South Viet-
Nam will be cut by over 10 percent during the
current fiscal year.

The President directed that these reductions
should commence as soon as possible.

The Under Secretaries Committee of the Na-
tional Security Council, chaired by Elliot
Richardson, will supervise the implementation
of this reduction. It will assure that essential
fimctions are not impaired and that the cuts are
fairly apportioned among the agencies involved.

Tlie President's decision is part of his con-
tinuing effort to carry out his pledge to stream-

Department of State Bulletin

line Government operations and reduce Federal
budget costs. This decision is expected to result
in a reduction of approximately 5,100 civilian
personnel. The reduction in U.S. military
abroad will include approximately 14,900 men.

CommiUee on U.S.-Japan Cultural
Cooperation Meets at Honolulu

Press release 192 dated July 11

The Governments of Japan and the United
States on July 11 announced that the first meet-
ing of the new Joint Committee on United
States-Japan Cultural and Educational Co-
operation was to be held in Honolulu July 14-
16 to review educational and cultural relations
between the two countries and to prepare plans
for the fifth United States-Japan Conference
on Cultural and Educational Interchange in
Tokyo in 1970. At the fourth conference in
Washington in April 1968, it was recom-
mended that the Joint Committee be established
to give more continuity to the work of cultural
and educational exchange between the two
countries.^ In the first Hawaii meeting of the
Joint Committee, each country will be repre-
sented by seven participants. The American
participants include John W. Hall, chairman,
Joint Committee on Japanese Studies of the
Social Science Research Coimcil and the Ameri-
can Council of Learned Societies; Hugh Bor-
ton, vice president, the Japan Society; W. B.
Cleveland, president, Esso Standard Eastern;
Richard B. Finn, Country Director for Japan,
Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, De-
partment of State ; Jolm H. Esterline, Director,
Office of East Asian and Pacific Programs,
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs,
Department of State; Robert C. Leestma, As-
sociate Commissioner for International Educa-
tion and Director, Institute of International
Studies, Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare ; and James Hoyt, Japan Desk Officer,
Office of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, United
States Infonnation Agency. The Japanese par-
ticipants include Tatsuo Morito, president of
the Japan Scholarship Foundation ; Junichi Na-

^ For background, see Buixetin of May 6, 1968, p. 587.

tori, dean, International Department, Waseda
University; Masao Yoshiki, chief director of
the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science ;
Shintaro Fukushima, president of Kyodo News
Service; Naoya Uchimura, playwright; Ryoko
Ishikawa, Assistant Director-General, Public
Information Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Af-
fairs; and Kohei Shinozawa, Head, Interna-
tional Cultural Relations Division, Director-
General's Secretariat, Agency for Cultural
Affairs.

Intelsat Preparatory Committee
Meets at Washington

The frefaratory com/mittee of tlie Intelsat
Conference {Plenipotentiary Conference on
Definitive Arrangements for the International
T elecomnnunications Satellite Consortium) met
at Washington June 23-July 11. Following is
a statement issued by Willia7n W. Scranton,
cJiairman of the U.S. delegation to the confer-
ence, at the close of the preparatory committee
meeting on July 11.

Following 3 weeks of work by the 37 member
countries and 10 observer delegations of the
preparatory committee, it is the clear consensus
of the delegates that very encouraging progress
had been made in narrowing our differences.
Further progi-ess, broadening the areas of
agreement, can be expected in further meetings
which the preparatory committee has scheduled
for September and November.

During the first week of the September
meeting, financial and legal matters of concern
to the Consortimn will be dealt with by experts
in these fields, with the full membership of the
preparatory committee participating.

The committee's new schedule of meetings
later this year ensures progi'ess toward comple-
tion of a working draft of the definitive ar-
rangements for consideration by the 68 partner-
nations of the Consortium at its plenipotentiary
conference next Febraary. It also ensures that
all member countries of the Consortium will
have adequate time to examine the draft care-
fully before it is formally considered in the
plenary sessions in February.

August 4, 1969

THE CONGRESS

Department Reviews U.S. Efforts To Aid Victims
of the Nigerian Civil War

Following is a statement made hefore tJie
Subcommittee on Refugees of the Senate Com-
mittee on the Judiciary on Jidy 15 iy Under
Secretary Elliot L. Richardson, together with
a statement submitted for the record on the same
day hy Ambassador C. Clyde Ferguson, Jr.,
Special Coordinator on relief to civilian victims
of the Nigerian civil war.

UNDER SECRETARY RICHARDSON

Press release 199 dated July 15

I genuinely welcome the opportunity to dis-
cuss with tliis committee the Nigerian civil war
and the agonizing problems we are encounter-
ing in our efforts to aid the innocent \actims of
this conflict. I would value your advice on this
matter which is of such deej) and common
concern.

Let me begin by outlining what the difficulties
are and what the United States has done to
date to deal with them.

This administration recognizes that we
neither can nor should impose our own moral
concepts on other nations. At the same time, we
believe the United States has an obligation —
an obligation that is internationally recog-
nized — to seek to relieve human suffering in
a conflict such as that now going on in Nigeria.

On February 22 President Nixon said : ^

I know tliat I speak for all Americans in expressing
this nation's deep anguish. ... It is tragic enough to
watch a military conflict between peoples who once
lived together in peace and developing prosperity. But
that tragedy has been compounded, and the conscience
of the world engaged, by the starvation threatening
millions of innocent civilians on both sides of the battle.

The United States has been at the forefront

' BTn^LETiN of Mar. 17, 1969, p. 222.

of the international relief effort ever since it
began. We have played a central role in two
respects :

— Eoughly one-half of all international relief
contributions have come from the United
States ;

— Secondly, over the past 414 months we have
led a major diplomatic effort seeking to obtain
the agreement of both sides on an expansion of
international relief arrangements.

Specifically, since January 20, this adminis-
tration has taken the following steps :

— New financial pledges have been made to
the International Committee of the Red Cross
in the amount of $15 million. These pledges
have brought total U.S. contributions since the
beginning of the relief effort to $75 million,
including $65 million from official and $10
million from private sources.

— Ambassador Ferguson was appointed as
Special Relief Coordinator to direct all United
States Government activities in tliis field and,
most important, to make an all-out effort to
negotiate new arrangements that would permit
a more adequate flow of relief to victims on
both sides of the battle line.

— Ambassador Ferguson has sponsored ex-
tensive logistical surveys of possible relief routes
into the Biafran enclave. The major result of
these surveys has been the formulation of a new
relief route proposal : the so-called Cross River
route through the port of Calabar north to
Biafran-controlled territoiy. We also assisted
the ICRC in the chartering of two shallow-
draft vessels which could operate on the Cross
River. Ambassador Ferguson has pursued vig-
orous diplomatic efforts to obtain the agreement
of both sides to this corridor, which we regard
as an effective and workable supplement to the
airlift.

Department of State Bulletin

— In addition, Ambassador Ferguson exten-
sively explored with both sides the acceptability
o±' other relief arrangements, including expan-
sion of the airlift, the possibility of daylight
flights, and the feasibility of land corridors.

Curtailment of Relief Airlift

Until recently, the international airlift by
ICRC and Joint Church Aid had been effective
in preventing a recurrence of last summer's
mass starvation in the Biafran enclave. By the
common agreement of observers visiting the
area, the airlift helped substantially to meet
minimum food requirements. However, the flow
of supplies was never fully adequate. Medical
surveys foimd a serious dietary imbalance, and
thus a great danger of epidemics, ilost tragi-
cally of all, the enclave's children were — and
remain — dependent on shipments of protein-
rich foods to ward off cripjjling and ultimately
fatal deficiencies.

It is often overlooked that a relief problem of
almost comparable scope exists on the Federal
side. There, too, the margin of survival is peril-
ously slim. The international relief agencies re-
port that they care for approximately 1 million
people on the Federal side and between 2 and
3 million people in the Biafran enclave.

Such, then, is the stark outline of tragedy.
Yet, despite our most energetic efforts, we were
unable to obtain the agreement of the parties
to an expansion of I'elief beyond the hazardous
and sporadic night airlift which had been op-
eratmg for more than a year into Biafra. Now
even this airlift has been severely curtailed. The
curtailment followed the shooting down of an
ICRC aircraft by the Nigerian Air Force and
a subsequent imposition by the Federal Military
Government of strict new conditions on relief
flights into the Biafran enclave.

The ICRC has now suspended its airlift pend-
ing agreement by the two parties on flight
arrangements. Religious and voluntary agen-
cies have continued occasional flights despite
these new restrictions. The flow of airborne
relief into the enclave has been reduced by more
I than 75 percent.

President Naville of the International Com-
mittee of the Red Cross flew to Lagos last
weekend to explore with the Federal Military
Government possible arrangements to resume
the airlift. Negotiations are proceeding. Thus
far, no specific agreement has been reached even
with the Federal side. The Biafran authorities

contmue their longstanding objections to a day-
light airlift under the conditions upon which
the Federal Nigerian Government now insists.

At present, therefore, not only is there an
impasse on negotiations for new arrangements ;
most of the fragile nighttime airlift has been
lost as well.

What are the obstacles to agreement ?

There exist on the Federal side :

— First, a concern that international relief
has aided the Biafran war effort. For example,
the Federal Military Govermnent charges that
the relief effort generates foreign exchange
which the Biafrans use for the purchase of
arms, that the nighttime airlift provides a cover
for arms flights, and that food and medicine
intended for civilians are allocated to Biafran
troops.

— Second, a belief that starvation in the
enclave is exaggerated by Biafran propaganda
to enlist international sympathy and political
support.

— Third, popular pressiires on the Federal
Military Government, as the war drags on, to
exercise the most stringent controls over inter-
national relief, regardless of the consequences.

There exist on the Biafran side :

— First, a fear that Federal control over relief
shipments would enable the Federal Military
Government to regulate the flow and contents
to serve its own political or military purposes.

^Second, a professed fear that food passing
through Federal territory might be poisoned.

— Third, a belief that Biafran military secu-
rity would be jeopardized by relief corridors,
including daylight flights, that were not guaran-
teed by third parties.

As a result of all these factors, we have been
unable to break the unpasse. For example, al-
though both sides had agreed in principle to
the Cross River proposal and there are vessels
now standing by in West African watei-s, neither
of the parties has allowed the use of the route.

U.S. Efforts To Restore Flow of Relief

What is the United States now doing to cope
with this situation ? Our immediate objective is,
of course, to restore the flow of relief into the
Biafran enclave.

We have moved ahead with several urgent
steps to pursue this goal. The committee will
appreciate, I know, that I am not at liberty to

August 4, 1969

discuss all the details of our actions. However,
I can outline some of them :

— The United States is addressing appeals
to all parties to agree promptly to resume the
airlift and to implement the Cross River route.

— We have approached the Secretary General
regarding the role of the United Nations in
resolution of the relief impasse.

— We have just concluded intensive discus-
sions on the Nigerian problem with Emperor
Haile Selassie, during his visit here last week.
We shall continue the closest consultations with
the Emperor and, through him, the Organiza-
tion of African Unity.

— We have exchanged views with the British
and French Goverimients on the relief problem
and asked their help in breaking the impasse.

— Ambassador Ferguson will leave shortly
after this hearing on an urgent mission to
Europe, where he will discuss relief prob-
lems with His Holiness Pope Paul, with the
Red Cross in Geneva, and with the French
Government.

— We are also in close touch with other con-
cerned goveriunents to coordinate our efforts.

We are under no illusions that there are
quick and easy answers, however vigorously we
pursue new initiatives. But this administration
remains committed, despite the obstacles, to do
all it can to work with others and to encourage
the two parties to save innocent lives.

Question of U.S. Political Involvement

I should stress once more that the focus of
all these efforts is relief. I fully recognize the
argument has been made that relief questions
are inextricably bound to the political and mili-
tary issues of the civil war. It is true that relief
is haunted by the bitter passions of civil strife
and the military demands of the two sides. It
is true that the oidy lasting solution to the relief
l^roblem is an end to the war.

I shall not, therefore, beg the question of
U.S. political involvement in the Nigerian civil
war as a logical step in the relief effort. Tliis
administration has faced that question directly,
and I want to address the committee with equal
candor on that subject today. There are really
two questions here :

— First, should we intervene in an effort to
bring an end to the fighting and eventually to
bring about some sort of political settlement?

— Second, would such a direct political ini-

tiative by the United States serve our immedi-
ate and ui'gent objective of restoring and even
increasing relief?

To be concise, a United States political ini-
tiative in the civil war must reckon immediately
with several obdurate realities :

1. At present the two sides show no \villing-
ness to agree even on the context for political
discussions, let alone terms of a possible settle-
ment. The Federal Military Government has
insisted adamantly on the principle of a unified
Nigeria as the only basis for settlement. The
Biafran authorities have rigidly refused to re-
nounce their claim to independence as a basis
for settlement. The Federal Government has
insisted on negotiations prior to a cease-fire.
The Biafrans have insisted on a cease-fire or
truce prior to negotiations.

Tliese positions rest on a hard truth: Both
sides continue to believe that they can gain by
fighting what they might lose by talking. There
is, at present, no readiness to compromise. This
is the reality that thwarted the most recent
OAU mediation effort in Monrovia last April.
This is the obstacle that has frustrated numer-
ous unpublicized efforts by third parties.

2. The United States has had to face the fact
that we have no effective influence with either
party to alter these realities. Our influence rests
largely on the moral suasion of world opinion.
Since both parties see their vital interests at
stake, they subordinate the opinion of others to
their own concerns and interests. We are not,
as this conunittee knows, a supplier of arms to
either party. This administration certainly does
not intend to alter the arms embargo the United
States wisely adopted at the onset of the conflict.

3. Finally, we labor under self-imposed limi-
tations, which we believe have wide support in
the U.S. Congress and among the American
people. We do not intend to become militarily
involved in this conflict.

Beyond this question of influence with the
two sides, there are equally serious limits to our
ability to influence other parties whose role
would be crucial to the end of the conflict.

The British strongly support the Federal
side. They have important political and eco-
nomic interests at stake in Nigeria.

The Soviet Union supplies arms to the Fed-
eral side. This also constitutes a major political
factor in the conflict.

On the other hand, governments which have
given their support to the Biafran cause have

Department of State Bulletin

done so as a matter of national policy. Thus far
we see no sign that the policies of these nations
will change or that the United States could in-
duce such change.

The United Nations has been unable to take
up this problem because strong African opposi-
tion has precluded the introduction of the Ni-
gerian civil war before the Security Council or
the General Assembly.

Witliin tliis context, let me now discuss our
views on certain specific proposals that have
been put forward.

First, an arms embargo. The difficulties of
obtaining agreement on this directly relate to
the national policies I have just discussed. How-
ever, even if agreement could be obtained among
major suppliers, an embargo would still be most
difficidt to enforce. The two parties could read-
ily obtain arms on the international market —
as, in fact, they now do. Then, too, our spon-
sorship of an embargo would be regarded as
hostile by at least one side and perhaps both,
thereby undercutting whatever effectiveness we
may now retain as a mediator on relief. Of
course, we would not oppose an arms embargo
if one were negotiated.

Four-power talks. We must recognize that
there are serious problems here. The day is past,
Mr. Chairman, when outside powers can im-
pose a peace or redraw the map for the people
of Africa. Talks among non-African powers,
in and of themselves, are not an answer to the
problem.

Peaceful and Jusi Reconciliation

This brings me to the ultimate political ques-
tion which has been raised so often in criticism
of our official posture toward the Nigerian civil
war. Is our relief policy hostage to some deeper
political commitment to the luiity of Nigeria?
And in the same vein, is United States recog-
nition of an independent Biafra the answer to
our dilemma?

Mr. ChaiiTOan, this administration has tried
to consider every aspect of the Nigerian
question.

Recognition of an independent Biafra is not
a panacea, either for relief, an end to the war,
or for the future stability of West Africa. We
understand the concern of the Ibo people. We
appreciate their insistence on guarantees for
their personal safety, just as we appreciate the
desire of the Federal Government to restore tlie
high promise of a unified Nigeria. We have
irepeatedly urged the Federal Military Govern-

ment to make a precise and unequivocal declara-
tion of these guarantees.

Furthermore, recognition would have no tan-
gible effect on the liostilities. To the contrary,
it would only harden the positions of both sides,
at the risk of rising Soviet influence in Federal
Nigeria.

Whatever the course of the present fighting,
an independent Biafra could be a source of re-
curring conflict. Within the territory claimed
by the Biafrans there are numerous tribes with
a history of hostility to the dominant Ibo tribe.
It would be ironic indeed if we validated one
claim for self-determination only to incite new
and equally bitter irredentisms threatening the
stability of the area.

This administration, therefore, does not con-
template either support for or recognition of
the secessionist authorities. We regard a peace-
ful and just reconciliation of Nigeria as in the
best iutei-ests of Africa and all those, like the
United States, who wish her weU.

In summary, then, we plan to pursue urgent
steps in two directions :

1. Our immediate concern is relief. This
means a way must be found to reach agreement
on daylight flights and the Cross River route.
We shall do all we can to make this possible.

2. We shall give continuing support and en-
couragement to any efforts that might produce
constructive talks between the two sides and an
end to the fighting. We will be exploring possi-
bilities with other concerned governments in
the days and weeks ahead.

The administration recognizes that the Ni-
gerian tragedy deeply concerns the Congress
and the American public. We share this concern
and we welcome every suggestion in the common
interest of saving lives.

STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR FERGUSON

I appreciate very much the invitation you
have extended to me to appear before your sub-
committee this morning.

It is now almost 5 months since the President
announced my appointment as Special Coordi-
nator on relief to the civilian victims of the Ni-
gerian civil war. During that tune, as you know,
I have had the opportunity to meet on several
occasions with individual members of your sub-
committee and members of the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, to appear before the House
Subcommittee on Africa, and meet with other

August 4, 1969

interested Members of Congress who are deeply
concerned by tlie tragic iinfoldings in this con-
flict. I should like to say, Mr. Chairman, that
these meetings have been most helpful to me in
my deliberations and efforts these past, all too
few, months.

As Secretary Richardson has said, the United
States has been in the forefront of the efforts to
alleviate suffering among innocent victims on
both sides. This is a fact that has not been suf-
ficiently recognized. I regret that, because we
can be proud of our uniquely humanitarian role.
Let me review that role briefly :

Over $75 million has been contributed by
American sources, both governmental and pri-
vate, to the relief effort on both sides of the lines.
This sum, wliich includes not only supplies but
also the means of delivering them, represents
49 jiercent of the worldwide contribution. "We
have provided more than 83,000 tons of food.
We have transported needed supplies to the
area of conflict. We have seen to it that the
International Committee of the Eed Cross and
the Joint Church Aid group have each had four
C-97 aircraft for their airlifts. We have assisted
the ICRC ill chartering two LSM's, which we
still hope to get into operation carrying relief
supplies to Biafra via the Cross River. The fact
is, Mr. Chainnan, that we are deeply involved
in the Nigerian relief effort.

Up to this tune, all relief supplies to the
Biafran enclave have been delivered by hazard-
ous night airlift, through Nigerian airspace,
without explicit Nigerian authorization, to a
primitive airstrip which is also used by aircraft
delivering arms. From my own experience I can
describe that airlift as an operation into Africa's
second busiest airport, with four-engined air-
craft landing on a 75-foot-wide highway in the
dead of night, all under visual flight rules—
with runway lights for 30 seconds. For a long
time the Federal Government had offered im-
mmiity for daylight airlifts. The Biafrans have,
however, refused them for security reasons. The
Nigerians had not seriously interfered with
night relief flights until fairly recently. With
the introduction of offensive airstrikes by
Biafra, however, the Federal authorities have
taken a much harder position on violations of
their airspace. On June 30 the Nigerian Gov-
ernment announced it would thereafter assert
control over all relief efforts, including relief
deliveries to Biafra through or over Nigeria.
The Federal Military Government stated that
only aircraft whose contents were first inspected
on Federal territory would be allowed to fly into

Biafra, and then only during daylight hours.
These conditions are largely unacceptable to
the Biafrans, who have consistently refused to
accept supplies of any kind from Nigerian ter-
ritory. Both sides have sought to gain advan-
tage by the restrictions they have imposed on
relief shipments, unhappily, even at the cost
of starvation among their own people.

It is fair to say, Mr. Chairman, that criticism
leveled at the U.S. Government for lack of hu-
manitarian concern in Nigeria is indeed badly
misdirected. The U.S. Government has been ex-
tremely active in trying to get the supplies
through. Until new roadblocks were put to re-
lief efforts recently, shipments of food and
medicines had brought dramatic reductions in
suffering in the Biafran enclave.

Despite the discouraging developments of re-
cent days, our efforts to bring about early agree-
ment on daylight flights and surface corridors,
particularly the Cross River route, are con-
tinuing. We hope that the discussions underway
between Federal and Biafran authorities and
the International Committee of the Red Cross
will lead to a resumption of relief deliveries to
the enclave.

The central problem has been, and is now,
simply that of finding or creating a system
capable of delivering approximately 500 tons
a day to a people who can virtually count a life
saved for eveiy pound of relief received. From
a technical logistical standpoint, surface relief
routes were the obvious answer to the problem
of delivery. Thus, the quest for an agreement
on surface corridors was, from the very begin-
ning, both the critical concern and my primary
mandate. As President Nixon stated at the time
of my appointment : ^

The major obstacle to expanded relief is neither
money, food, nor means of transport. The main prob-
lem is the absence of relief arrangements acceptable
to the two sides which would overcome the limitations
posed by the present hazardous and inadequate night-
time airlift.

In seeking relief corridors acceptable to the
belligerents, I twice visited both sides of the
conflict and discussed the problems with the
opposing leaders. I met with their representa-
tives here and in other countries. My first pro-
posal, made after careful preliminary studies,
was a package proposition : Both Biafran air-
fields at Uli and Obilago were to be utilized for
daylight relief flights for a period of 60 days
or until a surface route could be ojiened into

' Ibid.

Department of State Bulletin

the enclave. With regard to the surface routing,
I proposed that the Cross Elver be utilized as
the major relief route. Tliis route could be
served by landing ships able to use primitive
discharge facilities in Biafra.

At the time of this first proposal the Biafran
leader, General Ojukwu, rejected the daylight
flight plan. Both sides, however, agreed in
principle to the Cross River surface route.

During my second visit to each side in May
and early June, events occurred wliich caused
significant changes in the positions of the par-
ties. The appearance of Count von Kosen with
the Biafran "mini" air force, and the FMG re-
action — the interception of a Ked Cross plane —
greatly poisoned the atmosphere. Since June 5
the relief flow has slowed to a mere trickle. The
Red Cross completely suspended its airlift,
and the JCA maintained what can be described
as a token operation.

With the interruption of the relief airlift to
Biafra, requirements for a surface route became
even more urgent. The two landing ships
medium which were obtained through the U.S.
Government and chartered by the ICRC are in
Lagos harbor and still await appropriate guar-
antees before they can be used in the relief
effort. One of the ships — each of wliich is able
to carry 900 tons of cargo and discharge vir-
tually anywhere^— is partially loaded with dur-
able relief goods: beds, mattresses, cloth, and
other relief supplies.

The events which followed the written and
annoxmced agreements by the two sides to the
Cross River route demonstrated again that the
efforts of outside governments and organiza-
tions to expand relief are subjected to the laby-
rinthian complexities of the political and mili-
tary issues which divide the belligerents.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to
state emphatically that the efforts of the Inter-
national Committee of the Red Cross have been
magnificent, especially given the difficult logis-
tical enviromnent in which the relief effort is
working. The ICRC was effective and impartial
in its humanitarian relief role on both sides. The
Red Cross airlift, together with that of Joint
Church Aid, was literally the lifeline for mil-
lions of civilian victims of the war.

Our own stake in that airlift has been sub-
stantial. The U.S. Government has underwrit-
ten a large portion of its cost. Eight C-97
aircraft in the fleet were provided by the United
States. It is the United States that is the ulti-
mate supplier of spare parts and replacements.
And it is Americans who have volunteered to

August 4, 1969

fly them. We are the prime supporters of and
have thus become closely identified with this
stopgap effort, which in the absence of other
relief arrangements has been the only hu-
manitarian link to the landlocked Biafran
population.

With the implementation of the Cross River
project, delayed emphasis has shifted back to
finding a way to begin daylight relief flights
to Biafra. At this time, discussions are in
progress between the parties for the commence-
ment of daylight flights. The Federal Military
Government recently stated that it would allow
relief flights only if the aircraft either took off
from Nigerian territory or touched down at
Lagos for inspection before jiroceeding to Uli.
The Biafrans rejected the Nigerian proposal
but countered with a plan calling for flights
originating in neutral territory — Cotonou or
Fernando Po — and flying directly to Uli. The
Biafrans apparently view inspection of relief
aircraft in Nigeria as totally unacceptable.
They add, however, that Nigerians could par-
ticipate in inspection of cargo conducted at the
neutral airpoii:s.

The discussions on relief, both surface and
air corridors, remain at these points.

In spite of the difficulties met in our efforts
to obtain surface relief routes and a daylight
flight plan agreeable to both sides, we have not
been without success in increasing relief on the
Federal side and into the Biafran enclave, rela-
tive to the capacity of the former night airlift.

To date, the total contribution to the ICRC
is nearly $19 million, which has helped to pay
for the airlift to Biafra from the airports at
Cotonou and Fernando Po, relief personnel and
equipment on both sides, for the purchases of
the high-protein Icelandic stockfish, and for the
use of the landing ships. For the needy of botli
Nigeria and Biafra, we authorized $29 million
worth of U.S. food, including rice, beans,
cereals, milk, and a high-protein cereal-soya-
milk combination. The sea and air transjiorta-
tion of relief cargo continues to be subsidized
by the U.S. Government. At this time, Mr.
Chairman, there are adequate stocks of food in
warehouses throughout the Federal territory
and at the relief staging areas for Biafra. The
resiilt of these efforts has been the feeding of
nearly 1 million people in Federal Nigeria and,
depending upon the airlift, 2 million persons in
the enclave.

We have had some success in coordinating
the relief efforts of donor governments other
than our own. We have contributed to the

design of a logistics flow system which has elimi-
nated problems of port congestion and imbal-
ance in relief stocks. "We have taken steps to
increase the level of black involvement in the
relief system. We have initiated comprehensive
reporting on the total input into the Nigerian
relief effort.

We have not been able to persuade the parties
to cast aside military, political, and psycho-
logical considerations in responding to the

urgent demand to save human lives. However,
we have not abandoned the effort to induce the
parties to agree to arrangements for the resump-
tion of a substantial flow of relief. I shall in
fact be departing shortly after these hearings
on a further mission for this purpose.

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcom-
mittee, I should lilce again to express my appre-
ciation for having had this opportunity to
appear before you.

U.S. Military Assistance Policy Toward Latin America

Statement hy Charles A. Meyer

Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs '■

I welcome this occasion to appear today be-
fore this subcommittee, since it affords me an
excellent opportunity to exchange viewpoints
with you on our military assistance policy to-
ward the countries of Latin America.

As I believe you know, our military presence
in Latin America is sharply diminishing. Total
U.S. military personnel assigned to our military
groups, amounting to almost 800 in 1967, is in
the process of being reduced to 505 — more than
35 percent — by July of 1970. And this, gentle-
men, is in an area almost 21/4 times the size of
the United States. Moreover, the question of
persomiel strength and their roles will continue
to be subject to frequent review. The amount of
money expended in our grant military assistance
program to Latin America has already been
reduced by almost 75 percent from the FY 1966
level of $80.7 million to the FY 1970 request
of $21.4 million.

As you also know, all aspects of our policy
toward Latin America have been undergoing
intensive review and appraisal for the past sev-
eral months. Along with the studies being car-
ried out within the executive branch, I am
certain that these hearings will provide a very
useful part of our policy review.

'Made before the Subcommittee on Western Hemi-
sphere Affairs of the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations on July 8.

Our military assistance program includes
three components: furnislung technical advis-
ers, supplying some grant materiel, and spon-
soring formal training.

Although our military assistance program
does not play a large role in terms of money
expended or personnel involvement, it never-
theless is a significant element in our general
overall Latin American policy. It is not, as
perhaps some would contend, a program pri-
marily based on such an outdated rationale as
"hemispheric defense." Neither is it a program
divorced or isolated from or inconsistent with
our overall concern : social and economic reform
leading to a better and more rewarding life for
our Latin American neighbors.

On the contrary, one primary purpose of our
military assistance program is to help our Latin
American neighbors attain socioeconomic de-
velopment by systematic evolution rather than
in the volatile atmosphere of destructive revo-
lution. Therefore, this program is a concomi-
tant to the broader reform programs in such
areas as education, land reform, and the like,
which are the top-priority objectives of our
participation in the Alliance for Progress. The
Departments of State and Defense both continu-
ously work together to ensure that this relation-
ship prevails, as it should.

Some of the earlier witnesses who appeared

100

Department of State Bulletin

before this subcommittee have correctly made
the long-accepted and recognized point that the
acceleration of the movement in Latin America
toward the social and economic reform goals
of the Alliance for Progress will natui'ally and
inevitably be accompanied by instability. It can,
moreover, be argued that social tensions and
conflicts are necessary ingredients in promoting
the accelerated structural changes the Alliance
seeks. At the same time, there can be little doubt
that the painful and dynamic process of change
is exploited by elements which have no real
interest in the kind of change sought under the
Alliance and, indeed, seek to frustrate it. Conse-
quently, there is legitimate and responsible con-
cern that instability not attain such a level as
to destroy the reform process itself.

There is, then, a very close relationship be-
tween the prospects for achieving social and
economic reform and development goals and a
necessary level of internal security and stability.
This relationship between modernization and
stability is complex even in a fully democratic,
pluralistic, highly developed society such as
ours. If constructive reform is to proceed, how-
ever, the acceptable forms of legitimate, healthy,
necessary dissent preclude terrorism and armed
insurgency.

Inasmuch as our military assistance program
was shifted in the early sixties, in recognition
of changed cii-cumstances, toward strengthen-
ing the Latin American national capabilities to
counter Communist sponsored or supported
insurgency movements, how do we assess the
threat today and for the near future? We be-
lieve that there is veiy little likeliliood of a
major external threat to the area in the fore-
seeable future. Communist insurgencies are
currently at a relatively low ebb in Latin
America. At the present time, active insurgen-
cies of a sporadic nature continue to exist only
in Venezuela, Colombia, and Guatemala.

The defeat of the Che Guevara-led guerrillas
in 1967 by elements of the Bolivian Army,
largely equipped and trained in counterguer-
rilla warfare by the United States, seems to
have made the Cuban regime more cautious
about initiating new areas of insurgency in the
hemisphere. In view of the improved coimter-
insurgency capabilities of the Latin American
military forces achieved by our joint efforts and
programs, and the declining appeal of the
, Cuban-style revolution to the Latin Americans,
a significant increase in insurgency movements

is not likely at this time. We must recognize,
however, that despite the relatively lower
emphasis Havana seems to be giving for tactical
reasons to overt support of insurgencies in their
various forms, we have no evidence of any
fundamental change in their interest in the ex-
port of revolution.

Inasmuch as the threat of an external attack
is unlikely and the danger of formidable in-
surgencies is today reduced, legitimate questions
arise as to the desirability or need to continue
with a military assistance program to Latin
America.

Although today insurgent forces are not a
direct threat to the governments in any of the
Latin American countries, they do continue to
represent, in varying degrees, a nucleus which
can be further supported from outside in the
event of deteriorating economic or social con-
ditions. This factor, coupled with the continu-
ance of inadequate and inequitable economic
and social structures wliich are vulnerable to
subversion, necessitates the maintenance of the
counterinsurgency capabilities of Latin Ameri-
can forces in order that an internal atmosphere
conducive to social and economic progress can
prevail. Our training of small, mobile, rapid-
reaction forces and our grant materiel program
geared to maintaining equipment for the sup-
port of such forces play fundamental roles in
this respect.

Wliereas formal training is provided to 17
countries, our grant materiel assistance has now
been limited to 11 countries which remain rela-
tively vulnerable to subversive threats and
which, at the same time, are less able to cope
with internal security problems solely wdth
their own limited resources. Such materiel as-
sistance will, of course, be phased out when
these coimtries are able to attain and maintain
on their own an effective counterinsurgency
capability or the insurgent threat further
declines.

Now let us look at a different and important
relationship; namely, that relationship wliich
has existed since or before World War II be-
tween the U.S. military services and the match-
ing services of the larger Latin American coun-
tries. In these countries we have maintained
military groups which were originally desig-
nated as military servnc« missions in concert
with the request or continued invitation of the
host governments (often under contractual
terms). These military groups have under-

August 4, 1969

101

gone reductions of personnel, to which I re-
ferred at the outset, and are subject to current
and continuous reexamination botli as to func-
tions and numbers. Because, however, this
relationship is longstanding, because it is a rela-
tionship with the larger nations, because three
of these nations are governed by leaders from
their military, and because the relative size and
sopliistieation of these nations produce requests
for up-to-date major military equipment, we,
the United States, ask ourselves whether our
military presence is responsible (1) for encour-
aging military governments, (2) for providing
repressive influences against the dissent inherent
in today's worldwide struggle for self-fulfill-
ment, (3) for encouraging and then financing
the acquisition of armaments which are either
an imnecessary diversion of national resources
or are the beginning of an "arms race."

I am not a militaij man. Like many in this
room, I have served in one war and have seen
the postwar revulsion to things military. To-
day, the Nixon administration is dedicated to
a just and honorable termination of a contro-
versial military action. This action has caused
or has given focus to dissent within our own
country, dissent which is clearly discernible
around the world. But recognizing this as a
conmion current does not convince me that our
politicomilitary relationsliips in Latin America
are responsible per se for its internal political
struggles. Nor do I believe that our inter-
American relationships will be improved by
any attitude on our part which, in effect, says
to the sovereign states of Latin America: "You
don't need anything more advanced in military
equipment than the 20-year-old items you have;
and furthermore, if you elect to buy anything
more advanced than what you already have
from anybody, we will consider it an irrespon-
sible act and penalize you accordingly."

In all fairness, it must be said that the record
of amis expenditures by Latin America has to
date been the lowest of any world area, with the
sole exception of sub-Sahara Africa. Only about
2 percent of their GNP and less than 13 percent
of their total central governments' expenditures
have been expended for total defense costs.
Moreover, only approximately 10 percent of
their annual defense expenditures has been
devoted to new military equipment. Naturally,
we would hope that such restraint on their part
would continue.

However, the time has now arrived when

these nations consider that they caimot further
delay their military modernization programs.
They would much prefer to purchase U.S.-
manufactured equipment. In tliis regard our
policy objectives have been entirely consistent
with the purposes of legislative restrictions to
discourage Latin American governments from
diverting their limited economic resources to
unnecessary military items at the expense of
development programs. However, these legisla-
tive restrictions, intended to inhibit their pur-
chase of "sophisticated weapons systems," are,
I am afraid, sowing the seeds of political
estrangement with the major countries of that
ai-ea.

Latin Americans have become puzzled and
even suspicious of our motives. Strong na-
tionalist resentment has arisen over what is
seen as United States efforts to infringe on the
sovereign rights of a country to determine its
own military requirements; it is especially hard
to understand in those countries which cherish
the sense of close alliance with us and have
showed the value they place on this association.
The net result has been negative in terms of
broader U.S. political interests. There has been
an increasing disposition on their part to turn
to European suppliers who are able to respond
promptly with firm offers of much more sophis-
ticated as well as correspondingly more expen-
sive equipment for early delivery on attractive
credit terms. Unfortimately the long-term con-
sequence of our paternalistic, even patronizing,
restrictions will be the acquisition of more
expensive items, higher maintenance costs, and
greater diversion of financial resources from
civilian purposes. The end result could be a real
arms race, which fortunately, thus far, has been
avoided in Latin America.

In conclusion, let me assure you that we
believe strongly that all of our policies and
activities in Latin America should be reexam-
ined periodically to evaluate their net utility
and their consistency with changing conditions.
Our politicomilitary policies and acti^aties will
be no exception to this scnitiny. We are mindful
that the decade of the seventies may require
different levels of effort in each neighboring
nation, be those efforts social, economic, or
politicomilitary. And we submit with convic-
tion that balanced attention to Latin American
needs in the totality of their national personali-
ties is a desirable objective.

102

Department of State Bulletin

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

Secretary Announces Establishment
of New OfRce of Press Relations

Press release 209 dated July 18

Secretary Rogers announced on July 18 the
appointment of Deputy Assistant Secretary
Robert J. McCloskey as head of a newly des-
isfnated Office of Press Relations of the
Department of State.

Formerly a part of the Bureau of Public
Affairs, the Department's press staff is now as-
signed to the Office of the Secretary. Under the
reorganization Mr. McCloskey will continue his
fimction as official press spokesman for the De-
partment and also act as a Special Assistant to
the Secretary.

As a result of this appointment, Mr. Mc-
Closkey will assume responsibility for the direc-
tion, development, and execution of news policy,
plans, and programs. In addition to serving as
principal adviser to the Secretary and other offi-
cials of the Department on all aspects of the
Department's press relations he will be respon-
sible for maintaining liaison on press matters
with the White House and other Government
agencies.

Mr. McCloskey's new title will be Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Press Relations and
Special Assistant to the Secretary.

TREATY INFORMATION

Current Actions

P MULTILATERAL

Atomic Energy

Agreement for the application of safeguards to the
bUateral agreement between the United States and
Portugal of July 3, 1969, for cooperation concerning
civil uses of atomic energy. Signed at Vienna July 11,

1969. Enters into force on the date the agreement for
cooperation of July 3, 1969, enters into force.
Signatures: International Atomic Energy Agency,
Portugal, United States.

Aviation

Protocol on the authentic trilingual text of the conven-
tion on international civil aviation, Chicago, 1944
(TIAS 1591, 3756, 5170), with annex. Done at Buenos
Aires September 24, 19(38. Entered into force Octo-
ber 24, 1968. TIAS 6605.

Signature: Tunisia (vcith reservation as to accept-
ance), July 15, 1969.

Consular Relations

Vienna convention on consular relations. Done at

Vienna April 24, 1963. Entered into force March 19,

1967.'
Optional protocol to the Vienna convention on consular

relations concerning the compulsory settlement of

disputes. Done at Vienna April 24, 1963. Entered into

force March 19, 1967.'
Optional protocol to the Vienna convention on consular

relations concerning the acquisition of nationality.

Done at Vienna April 24, 1963. Entered into force

March 19, 1967.'

Ratification deposited: Italy (with reservation to
convention), June 25, 1969.

Diplomatic Relations

Vienna convention on diplomatic relations. Done at
Vienna April 18, 1961. Entered into force AprU 24,
1964.'

Optional protocol to the Vienna convention on diplo-
matic relations concerning the compulsory settlement
of disputes. Done at Vienna April 18, 1961. Entered
into force April 24, 1964.'

Optional protocol to the Vienna convention on diplo-
matic relations concerning acquisition of nationality.
Done at Vienna April 18, 1961. Entered into force
April 24, 1964.'
Ratification deposited: Italy, June 25, 1969.

Disputes

Convention on the settlement of investment disputes
between states and nationals of other states. Done at
Washington March 18, 1965. Entered into force
October 14, 1966. TIAS 6090.
Signature: Guyana, July 3, 1969.
Ratification deposited: Lesotho, July 8, 1969.

Meteorology

Convention of the World Meteorological Organization.
Opened for signature at Washington October 11,
1947. Entered into force March 23, 1950. TIAS 2052.
Accession deposited: Mauritius, July 17, 1969.

Nuclear Weapons — Nonproliferation

Treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons.
Done at Washington, London, and Moscow
July 1, 1968.'

Signature at Washington: Mali, July 14, 1969.
Ratification deposited at Washington: Iceland,
July 18, 1969.

Telecommunications

International telecommunication convention, with an-
nexes. Done at Montreux November 12, 1965. En-

' Not in force for the United States.
" Not in force.

August 4, 1969

103

tered into force January 1, 1967; for the United

States May 29, 1967. TIAS 6267.

Ratiflcution deposited: Byelorussian Soviet Socialist

Republic, May 29. 1969.=
Partial revision of the radio regulations, Geneva, 1959,
as amended (TIAS 4893, 5603, 6332), relating to
maritime mobile service, with annexes and final
protocol. Done at Geneva November 3, 1967. Entered
into force April 1, 1969. TIAS 6590.
Notification of approval: United Kingdom, June 2,

1969.*

BILATERAL

Ecuador

Agreement for sales of agricnltiiral commodities.
Signed at Quito June 30, 1969. Entered into force
June 30, 1969.

Japan

Agreement relating to the change in designation of the
organization of personnel from the Military Assist-
ance Advisory Group to the Mutual Defense Assist-
ance Office pursuant to the mutual defense assistance
agreement of March 8, 1954 (TIAS 2957). Effected
by exchange of notes at Tokyo July 4, 1969. Entered
into force July 4, 1969.

Netherlands

Convention for the avoidance of double taxation and
the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes
on estates and inheritances, with protocol. Signed at
Washington July 15, 1969. Enters into force on the
date of exchange of instruments of ratification.

Pakistan

Fourth supplementary agreement for sales of agricul-
tural commodities, relating to the agreement of
August 3, 1967 (TIAS 6,320). Signed at Islamabad
July 3, 1969. Entered into force July 3, 1969.

PUBLICATIONS

Volume VI in Foreign Relations
Series for 1945 Released

On July 2 the Department of State released For-
eign Relations of the United States, 1945, Volume VI,
The British Commonwealth ; The Far East (vii, 1,436
pages). This volume includes extensive documentation
on negotiations leading to the financial agreement of
December 6, 1945, with the United Kingdom as well

' With declarations contained in final protocol.
* Applicable to Channel Islands and Isle of Man.

as on relations of the United States with other nations
of the Commonwealth.

Documentation is also provided on tie attitudes and
policies of the United States with respect to the future
status of French Indochina, the Netherlands East In-
dies, Korea, the Philippine Commonwealth, and Siam
subsequent to their liberation from the Japanese.

Extensive coverage is given to the final months of
the war against Japan and to the occupation and con- i
trol after the signing of the instrument of surrender on j
September 2.

Documentation on American relations with China in
1945 will be provided in a separate volume to be issued i
subsequently.

Copies of volume VI (Department of State publi- .
cation 8451) may be obtained from the Superintend-
ent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402, for $7 each.

Recent Releases

For sale iy the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Offlce, Washington. D.C.
ZOIiOZ. Address requests direct to the Superintendent
of Documents. A 25-pcrcent discount is made on orders
for 100 or more copies of any one publication mailed
to the same address. Remittances, payable to the Su-
perintendent of Documents, must accompany orders.

Background Notes. Short, factual summaries which
describe the people, history, government, economy,
and foreign relations of each country. Each contains
a map, a list of principal government officials and
U.S. diplomatic and consular officers and, in some
cases, a selected bibliography. (A complete set of all
Background Notes currently in stock (at least 125) —
$6; 1-year subscription service for approximately 75
updated or new Notes — $3.50; plastic binder — $1.50.)
Single copies of those listed below are available at 10<(
each.

China, Republic of

Pub.

7791

7 pp.

Equatorial Guinea

Pub.

8025

6 pp.

The Gambia

Pub.

8014

4 pp.

Germany, Federal Republic of

Pub.

7834

8 pp.

Portuguese Guinea

Pub.

7966

4 pp.

Spain

Pub.

7800

4 pp.

Syria

Pub.

7761

5 pp.

The Anti-Ballistic-Missile System. Text of President
Nixon's prepared statement on the anti-ballistic-missile
system and those portions of his televised news con-
ference riertaining to the ABM system. Pub. 8449.
General Foreign Policy Series 231. 14 pp. 15^.

Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Docu-
ments. Convention. TIAS 6638. 13 pp. 10(f.

Scientific Cooperation. Agreement with the Republic of
China. TIAS 6639. 6 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Guinea.
TIAS 6640. 8 pp. 10<S.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Chile
amending the agreement of December 29, 1967. TIAS
6641. 6 pp. 10*.

104

Department of State Bulletin

INDEX August 4, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1571

Communications. Intelsat Preparatory Commit-
tee Meets at Washington (Scranton) ... 93

Congrress

Department Reviews U.S. Efforts To Aid Victims
of the Nigerian OivU War (Ferguson, Richard-
son) 94

The Foreign Assistance Program for Fiscal Tear

1970 (Rogers) 81

U.S. Military Assistance Policy Toward Latin

America (Meyer) 100

Department and Foreign Service. Secretary An-
nounces Establishment of New Office of Press
Relations 103

Economic AfiFairs

President Nixon Orders Reduction in U.S. Per-
sonnel Abroad 92

U.S. and Germany CJonclude New Offset Agree-
ment (joint statement) 92

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Committee
on U.S.-Japan Cultural Cooperation Meets at
Honolulu 93

Ethiopia. Emperor Haile Selassie of E)thiopia
Visits the United States as Guest of President
Nixon (exchanges of remarlis) 86

Foreign Aid

The Foreign Assistance Program for Fiscal Year

1970 (Rogers) 81

U.S. Military Assistance Policy Toward Latin

America (Meyer) 100

Germany. U.S. and Germany Conclude New Off-
set Agreement (joint statement) 92

International Organizations and Conferences.

Intelstat Preparatory Committee Meets at
Washington (Scranton) 93

Japan. Committee on U.S.-Japan Cultural Co-
operation Meets at Honolulu 93

Latin America. U.S. Military Assistance Policy
Toward Latin America (Meyer) 100

Military Affairs. President Nixon Orders Re-
duction in U.S. Personnel Abroad 92

Nigeria. Department Reviews U.S. Efforts To
Aid Victims of the Nigerian Civil War (Fer-
guson, Richardson) 94

Presidential Documents. Emperor Haile Selassie
of Ethiopia Visits the United States as Guest
of President Nixon 86

Public Affairs. Secretary Announces Establish-
ment of New Office of Press Relations . . . 103

Publications

Recent Releases 104

Volume VI in Foreign Relations Series for 1945
Released 104

Treaty Information. Current Actions .... 103

Viet-Nam. 26th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris (Lodge) 91

Name Index

Emperor Haile Selassie I 86

Ferguson, C. Clyde, Jr 94

Lodge, Henry Cabot 91

McCloskey, Robert J 103

Meyer, Charles A 100

Nixon, President 86

Richardson, Elliot L 94

Rogers, Secretary 81

Scranton, William W 93

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 14-20

Press releases may be obtained from the Of-
fice of Press Relations, Department of State,
Washington, D.C. 20520.

Release issued prior to July 14 which appears
in this issue of the Bulletin is No. 192 of
July 11.

Subject

Stevenson sworn in as Legal Ad-
viser (biographic details).

Trezise sworn in as Assistant Sec-
retary for Economic AfEairs (bio-
graphic details).

Jova sworn in as U.S. Representa-
tive on the OAS Council (bio-
graphic details).

Estate tax convention with the
Netherlands.

Richardson sworn in as Assistant
Secretary for Educational and
Cultural Affairs (biographic de-
tails).

Stevenson : International Law Semi-
nar for Government Legal Of-
ficers.

Under Secretary Richardson : Sub-
committee on Refugees of Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations.

Todman sworn in as Ambassador
to Chad (biographic details).

Rogers : Senate Committee on For-
eign Relations.

Rogers : House Committee on For-
eign AfEairs.

Newsom sworn in as Assistant Sec-
retary for African Affairs (bio-
graphic details).

Palmer sworn in as Ambassador to
Libya (biographic details).

Lodge : 26th session on Viet-Nam at
Paris.

Rush sworn in as Ambassador to
Germany (biographic details).

Schmidt sworn in as Ambassador
to Canada (biographic details).

U.S.-Netherlands aviation negotia-
tions.

Secretary announces new Office of
Press Relations.

Itinerary for Secretary Rogers' trip
to East Asia and the Pacific.

* Not printed.

t Held for a later issue of the BtrLLETTir.

No.

Date

*193

7/14

*194

7/14

*195

7/15

tl96

7/15

*197

7/15

tl9S

7/15

199

7/15

*200

7/16

201

7/14

t202

7/17

*203

7/17

*204

7/17

205

7/17

*206

7/18

*207

7/18

t208

7/18

209

7/18

*212

7/19

Superintendent of Documents
U.S. government printing office

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

IM AVT O

20YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

PROBLEMS OF POPULATION GROWTH

President Nixon's Message to the Congress 105

FOREIGN POLICY ASPECTS OF THE FOREIGN AID PROGRAM

Statement by Secretary Rogers

Before the House Committee on Foi^eign Affairs 116

For index see inside hack cover

Boston Public L;l)i-ary
Superintendent of Document?

AUG 26 1969
DEPOSITORY

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vou LXI, No. 1572
August 11, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Oovemment Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PEICE:

82 Issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January 11, 1966).

Note: Contents of this publication are not

copyrighted and Items contained herein may bo

reprinted. Citation of the DEPARTMENT OF

STATE BULLETIN as the source will be

appreciated. The BULLETIN Is indexed In

the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
icith infornxation on developments in
the field of foreign relations and on
the work of the Department of State
and the Foreign Service,
Tlie BULLETIN includes selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White Uou^e and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of ttie
Department. Infornuition is included
concerning treaties and internatioruil
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general interruitional
interest.

Publications of the Department,
United Nations documents, and leg'
islative nuiterial in the field of inter-
national relations are listed currently.

1
J

Problems of Population Growth

Message From President Nixon to the Congress '■

To the Congress of the United States:

In 1830 there were one billion people on the
planet earth. By 1930 there were two billion, and
by 1960 there were three billion. Today the
world population is three and one-half billion
persons.

These statistics illustrate the dramatically in-
creasing rate of population growth. It took
many thousands of years to produce the first
billion people ; the next billion took a century ;
the third came after thirty years; the fourth
will be produced in just fifteen.

If this rate of population growth continues,
it is likely that the earth will contain over seven
billion human beings by the end of this century.
Over the next thirty years, in other words, the
world's population could double. And at the
end of that time, each new addition of one bil-
lion persons would not come over the millennia
nor over a century nor even over a decade. If
present trends were to continue until the year
i^OOO, the eighth billion would be added in only
five years and each additional billion in an even
shorter period.

"Wliile there are a variety of opinions as to
precisely how fast population will grow in the
coming decades, most informed observers have
a similar response to all such jirojections. They
agree that population growth is among the most
important issues we face. They agree that it can
be met only if there is a great deal of advance
plaiming. And they agree that the time for such
planning is growing very short. It is for all
these reasons that I address myself to the popu-
lation problem in this message, first to its inter-
national dimensions and then to its domestic
implications.

'Transmitted on July 18 (White House press re-
lease) ; also printed as H. Doc. 91-139, 91st Cong., 1st

SPSS.

In the Developing Nations

It is in the developing nations of the world
that population is growing most rapidly today.
In these areas we often find rates of natural in-
crease higher than any which have been experi-
enced in all of human history. With their birth
rates remaining high and with death rates drop-
ping sharply, many coimtries of Latin America,
Asia, and Africa now grow ten times as fast as
they did a century ago. At present rates, many
will double and some may even triple their
present populations before the year 2000. This
fact is in large measure a consequence of rising
health standards and economic progress
throughout the world, improvements which al-
low more people to live longer and more of their
children to survive to maturity.

As a result, many already impoverished na-
tions are stiiiggling imder a handicap of intense
population increase which the industrialized
nations never had to bear. Even though most
of these countries have made rapid progress in
total economic growth — faster in percentage
terms than many of the more industrialized na-
tions — their far greater rates of population
growth have made development in per capita
terms very slow. Their standards of living are
not rising quickly, and the gap between life in
the rich nations and life in the poor nations is
not closing.

There are some respects, in fact, in which
economic development threatens to fall behind
population growth, so that the quality of life
actually worsens. For example, despite consid-
erable improvements in agricultural technology
and some dramatic increases in grain produc-
tion, it is still difficult to feed these added peo-
ple at adequate levels of nutrition. Protein
malnutrition is widespread. It is estimated that
every day some 10,000 people — most of them

August n, 1969

105

children — are dying from diseases of which mal-
nutrition has been at least a partial cause. More-
over, the physical and mental potential of mil-
lions of youngsters is not realized because of
a lack of proper food. The promise for increased
production and better distribution of food is
great, but not great enough to counter these
bleak realities.

The burden of population growth is also felt
in the field of social progress. In many countries,
despite increases in the nim:iber of schools and
teachers, there are more and more children for
whom there is no schooling. Despite construction
of new homes, more and more families are with-
out adequate shelter. Unemployment and under-
employment are increasing and the situation
could be aggravated as more young people grow
up and seek to enter the work force.

Nor has development yet reached the stage
where it brings with it diminished family size.
Many parents in developing countries are still
victimized by forces such as poverty and igno-
rance which make it difficult for them to exer-
cise control over the size of their families. In
sum, population growth is a world problem
which no country can ignore, whether it is
moved by the narrowest perception of national
self-interest or the widest vision of a common
humanity.

International Cooperation

It is our belief that the United Nations, its
specialized agencies, and other international
bodies should take the leadership in responding
to world population growth. The United States
will cooperate fully with their programs, I
would note in this connection that I am most im-
pressed by the scope and thrust of the recent
report of the Panel of the United Nations Asso-
ciation, chaired by John D. Rockefeller III. The
report stresses the need for expanded action
and greater coordination, concerns which should
be high on the agenda of the United Nations.

In addition to working with international
organizations, the United States can help by
supporting efforts which are initiated by other
governments. Already we are doing a great deal
in this field. For example, we provide assistance
to countries which seek our help in reducing
high birthrates — provided always that the serv-
ices we help to make available can be freely
accepted or rejected by the individuals who re-
ceive them. Through our aid programs, we have
worked to improve agricultural production and
bolster economic growth in developing nations.

106

As I pointed out in my recent message on
Foreign Aid,^ we are making important efforts
to improve these programs. In fact, I have asked
the Secretary of State and the Administrator
of the Agency for International Development
to give population and family planning high
priority for attention, personnel, research, and
funding among our several aid programs. Simi-
larly, I am asking the Secretaries of Commerce
and Health, Education, and Welfare and the
Directors of the Peace Corps and the United
States Information Agency to give close atten-
tion to population matters as they plan their
overseas operations. I also call on the Depart-
ment of Agi'iculture and the Agency for Inter-
national Development to investigate ways of
adapting and extending our agricultural experi-
ence and capabilities to improve food produc-
tion and distribution in developing coimtries.
In all of these international efforts, our pro-
grams should give further recognition to the im-
portant resources of private organizations and
university research centers. As we increase our
population and family planning efforts abroad,
we also call upon other nations to enlarge their
programs in this area.

Prompt action in all these areas is essential.
For high rates of population growth, as the re-
port of the Panel of the United Nations Asso-
ciation puts it, "impair individual rights, jeop-
ardize national goals, and threaten interna-
tional stability."

In the United States

For some time population growth has been
seen as a problem for developing countries. Only
recently has it come to be seen that pressing
problems are also posed for advanced indus-
trial countries when their populations increase
at the rate that the United States, for example,
must now anticipate. Food supplies may be am-
ple in such nations, but social supplies— the
capacity to educate youth, to provide privacy
and living space, to maintain the processes of
open, democratic government — may be griev-
ously strained.

In the United States our rate of population
growth is not as great as that of developing na-
tions. In this country, in fact, the growth rate
has generally declined since the eighteenth cen-
tury. The present growth rate of about one per-
cent per year is still significant, however. More-

' For text, see Bulletin of June 16, 1969, p. 515.

Department of State Bulletin

over, current statistics indicate that the fertility
rate may be approaching the end of its recent
decline.

Several factors contribute to the yearly in-
crease, including the large number of couples
of childbearing age, the typical size of Amer-
ican families, and our increased longevity. "We
are rapidly reaching the point in this country
where a family reunion, which has typically
brought together children, parents, and grand-
parents, will instead gather family members
from four generations. This is a development
for which we are grateful and of which we can
be proud. But we must also recognize that it
will mean a far larger population if the number
of children born to each set of parents remains
the same.

In 1917 the total number of Americans passed
100 million, after three full centuries of steady
growth. In 1967 — just half a century later —
the 200 million mark was passed. If the present
rate of growth continues, the third hundred
million persons will be added in roughly a
thirty-year period. This means that by the year
2000, or shortly thereafter, there will be more
than 300 million Americans.

This growth will produce serious challenges
for our society. I believe that many of our pres-
ent social problems may be related to the fact
that we have had only fifty years in which to
accommodate the second hundred million Amer-
icans. In fact, since 1945 alone son.e 90 million
babies have been born in tliis country. We have
thus had to accomplish in a very few decades
an adjustment to population growth which was
once spread over centuries. And it now appears
that we will have to provide for a third hundred
million Americans in a period of just 30 years.

The great majority of the next hundred mil-
lion Americans will be born to families which
looked forward to their birth and are prepared
to love them and care for them as they grow
up. The critical issue is whether social institu-
tions will also plan for their arrival and be able
to accommodate them in a humane and intelli-
gent way. TVe can be sure that society will not
be ready for this growth unless it begins its
planning immediately. And adequate planning,
in turn, requires that we ask ourselves a number
of important questions.

Where, for example, will the next hundred
million Americans live? If the patterns of the
last few decades hold for the rest of the cen-
tury, tlien at least three quarters of the next
hundred million persons will locate in highly
urbanized areas. Are our cities prepared for

such an influx? The chaotic history of urban
growth suggests that they are not and that
many of their existing problems will be severely
aggravated by a dramatic increase in numbers.
Are there ways, then, of readying our cities?
Alternatively, can the trend toward greater
concentration of population be reversed ? Is it a
dcsiral)le thing, for example, that lialf of all the
counties in the United States actually lost popu-
lation in the 1950's, despite the growing number
of inhabitants in the country as a whole? Are
there ways of fostering a better distribution of
the growing population?

Some have suggested that systems of satellite
cities or completely new towns can accomplish
this goal. The National Commission on Urban
Growth has recently produced a stimulating re-
port on this matter, one wliich recommends the
creation of 100 new communities averaging
100,000 people each, and ten new communities
averaging at least one million persons. But the
total nmnber of people who would be accom-
modated if even this bold plan were imple-
mented is only twenty million — a mere one-fifth
of the expected thirty-year increase. If we were
to accommodate the full 100 million persons
in new communities, we would have to build a
new city of 250,000 persons each month from
now until the end of the century. That means
constructing a city the size of Tulsa, Dayton,
or Jersey City every tliirty days for over thirty
years. Clearly, the problem is enormous, and
we must examine the alternative solutions very
carefully.

Other questions also confront us. How, for
example, will we house the next lumdred million
Americans? Already economical and attractive
housing is in very short supply. New architec-
tural forms, construction techniques, and financ-
ing strategies must be aggressively pioneered
if we are to provide the needed dwellings.

What of our natural resources and the quality
of our environment? Pure air and water are
fundamental to life itself. Parks, recreational
facilities, and an attractive countryside are es-
sential to our emotional well-being. Plant and
animal and mineral resources are also vital. A
growing population will increase the demand
for such resources. But in many cases their sup-
ply will not be increased and may even be endan-
gered. The ecological system upon which we
now depend may seriously deteriorate if our ef-
forts to conserve and enliance the environment
do not match the gro\\-th of the population.

How will we educate and employ such a large
number of people? Will our transportation sys-

August n, 1969

107

terns move them about as quickly and econom-
ically as necessary? How will we provide ade-
quate health care when our population reaches
300 million? Will our political structures have
to be reordered, too, when our society grows to
such proportions? ]\Iany of our institutions are
already under tremendous strain as they try to
respond to the demands of 1969. Will they be
swamped by a growing flood of people in the
next thirty years? How easily can they be re-
placed or altered?

Finally we must ask : how can we better assist
American families so that they will have no
more children than they wish to have? In my
first message to Congress on domestic affairs, 1
called for a national commitment to provide a
healthful and stimulating environment for all
children during their first five years of life. One
of the ways in which we can promote that goal
is to provide assistance for more parents in ef-
fectively planning their families. We know that
involuntary childbearing often results in poor
physical and emotional health for all members
of the family. It is one of the factors which con-
tribute to our distressmgly high infant mor-
tality rate, the unacceptable level of malnutri-
tion, and the disappointing performance of
some children in our schools. Unwanted or un-
timely childbearing is one of several forces
which are driving many families into poverty or
keeping them in that condition. Its threat helps
to produce the dangerous incidence of illegal
abortion. And finally, of course, it needlessly
adds to the burdens placed on all our resources
by increasing population.

None of the questions I have raised here is
new. But all of these questions must now be
asked and answered with a new sense of ur-
gency. The answers cannot be given by govern-
ment alone, nor can government alone turn the
answers into programs and policies. I believe,
however, that the Federal Government does have
a special responsibility for defining these prob-
lems and for stimulating thoughtful responses.

Perhaps the most dangerous element in the
present situation is the fact that so few people
are examining these questions from the view-
lioint of the whole society. Perceptive business-
men project the demand for their products many
years into the future by studying population
trends. Other private institutions develop so-
phisticated planning mechanisms which allow
them to account for rapidly changing condi-
tions. In the governmental sphere, however,
there is virtually no machinery through which

we can develop a detailed understanding of
demographic changes and bring that under-
standing to bear on public policy. The federal
government makes only a minimal effort in this
area. The efforts of state and local governments
are also inadequate. Most importantly, the plan-
ning which does take place at some levels is
poorly understood at others and is often based
on unexamined assumptions.

In short, the questions I have posed in this
message too often go unasked, and when they
are asked, they seldom are adequately answered.

Commission on Population Growth
and the American Future

It is for all these reasons that I today propose
the creation by Congress of a Commission on
Population Growth and the American Future.

The Congress should give the Commission re-
sponsibility for inquiry and recommendations
in three specific areas.

First, the prohahle course of population
growth, internal migration and related demo-
graphic developments between noto and the year
2000.

As much as possible, these projections should
be made by regions, states, and metropolitan
areas. Because there is an element of uncer-
tainty in such projections, various alternative
possibilities should be plotted.

It is of special importance to note that, begin-
ning in August of 1970, population data by
county will become available from the decennial
census, which will have been taken in April of
that year. By April 1971, computer summaries
of first-coimt data will be available by census
tract and an important range of information on
income, occupations, education, household com-
position, and other vital considerations will also
be in hand. The Federal government can make
better use of such demographic information
than it has done in the past, and state govern-
ments and other political subdivisions can also
use such data to better advantage. The Commis-
sion on Population Growth and the American
Future will be an appropriate instrument for
this important initiative.

Second, the resources in the public sector of
the economy that will he required to deal with
the anticipated growth in population.

The single gi'eatest failure of foresight — at
all levels of government — over the past genera-
tion has been in areas connected with expanding
population. Government and legislatures have

108

Department of State Bulletin

frequently failed to appreciate the demands
which continued population growth would im-
pose on the public sector. These demands are
myriad : they will range from pre-school class-
rooms to post-doctoral fellowships ; from public
works which carry water over thousands of
miles to highways which carry people and prod-
ucts from region to region; from vest pocket
parks in crowded cities to forest preserves and
quiet lakes in the countryside. Perhaps espe-
cially, such demands will assert themselves in
forms that affect the quality of life. The time
is at hand for a serious assessment of such needs.

Third, ways in which population groioth may
affect the activities of Federal, state and local
government.

In some respects, population growth affects
everything that American government does. Yet
only occasionally do our governmental units
pay sufficient attention to population growth in
their own planning. Only occasionally do they
consider the serious implications of demo-
graphic trends for their present and future
acti^dties.

Yet some of the necessary information is at
hand and can be made available to all levels of
government. Much of the rest will be obtained
by the Commission. For such information to be
of greatest use, however, it should also be inter-
preted and analyzed and its implications should
be made more evident. It is particularly in this
connection that the work of the Conmiission on
Population Growth and the American Future
will be as much educational as investigative.
The American public and its governing miits
are not as alert as they should be to these grow-
ing challenges. A responsible but insistent voice
of reason and foresight is needed. Tlie Com-
mission can provide that voice in the years
immediately before us.

The membership of the Commission should
include two members from each house of the
Congress, together with knowledgeable men and
women who are broadly representative of our
society. Tlie majority should be citizens who
have demonstrated a capacity to deal with im-
portant questions of public policy. The mem-
bership should also include specialists in the
biological, social, and environmental sciences,
in theology and law, in the arts and in engineer-
ing. The Conunission should be empowered to
create advisory panels to consider subdivisions
of its broad subject area and to invite experts
and leaders from all parts of the world to join
these panels in their deliberations.

The Commission should be provided with an
adequate staff and budget, under the supervision
of an executive director of exceptional experi-
ence and understanding.

In order that the Commission will have time
to utilize the initial data which results from the
1970 census, I ask that it be established for a
period of two years. An interim report to the
President and Congress should be required at
the end of the first year.

Other Government Activities

I would take this opportunity to mention a
number of additional government activities
dealing with population growth which need not
await the report of the Commission.

First, increased research is essential. It is
clear, for example, that we need additional re-
search on birth control methods of all types and
the sociology of population growth. Utilizing its
Center for Population Eesearch, the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare sliould
take the lead in developing, with other federal
agencies, an expanded research effort, one which
is carefully related to those of private organi-
zations, university research centers, interna-
tional organizations, and other countries.

Second, we need jnore trained people to work
in population and family planning programs^
hoth in this country and abroad. I am therefore
asking the Secretaries of State, Labor, Health,
Education, and Welfare, and Interior along
with the Administrator of the Agency for In-
ternational Development and the Director of
the Office of Economic Opportunity to partici-
pate in a comprehensive survey of our efforts
to attract people to such programs and to train
them properly. The same group — in consulta-
tion with appropriate state, local, and private
officials — should develop recommendations for
improvements in this area. I am asking the
Assistant to the President for Urban Affairs to
coordinate this project.

Third, the effects of population growth on our
environment and on the worWs food supply call
for careful attention and immediate action. I am
therefore asking the Environmental Quality
Council to give carefid attention to these mat-
ters in its deliberations. I am also asking the
Secretaries of Interior, Agriculture, and Health,
Education, and Welfare to give the highest
priority to research into new teclmiques and to
other proposals that can help safeguard the en-

August n, 1969

109

vironment and increase the world's supply of
food.

Fourth, it is clear that the domestic family
planning services supported hy the Federal
Government should be expanded and better inte-
grated. Both the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare and the Office of Economic
Opportunity are now involved in this important
work, yet their combined efforts are not ade-
quate to provide information and services to all
who want them. In particular, most of an esti-
mated five million low income women of child-
bearing age in this country do not now have
adequate access to family planning assistance,
even though their wishes concerning family size
are usually the same as those of parents of
higher income groups.

It is my view that no American woman should
be denied access to family planning assistance
because of her economic condition. I believe,
therefore, that we should establish as a national
goal the provision of adequate family planning
services within the next five years to all those
who want them but cannot afford them. This we
have the capacity to do.

Clearly, in no circumstances will the activities
associated with our pursuit of this goal be al-
lowed to infringe upon the religious convictions
or personal wishes and freedom of any individ-
ual, nor will they be allowed to impair the ab-
solute right of all individuals to have such
matters of conscience respected by public
authorities.

In order to achieve this national goal, we will
have to increase the amount we are spending on
population and family planning. But success
in this endeavor will not result from higher ex-
penditures alone. Because the life circiunstances
and family planning wishes of those who re-
ceive services vary considerably, an effective
program must be more flexible in its design than
are many present efforts. In addition, programs
should be better coordinated and more effec-
tively administered. Under current legislation,
a comprehensive State or local project must,
assemble a patchwork of funds from many dif-
ferent sources — a time-consuming and confus-
ing process. Moreover, under existing legisla-
tion, requests for funds for family planning
services must often compete with requests for
other deserving health endeavors.

But these problems can be overcome. Tlie Sec-
retary of Health, Education, and Welfare —
whose Department is responsible for the largest

part of our domestic family planning services —
has developed plans to reorganize the major
family planning service activities of this agency.
A separate unit for these services will be estab-
lished within the Health Services and Mental
Health Administration. The Secretary will send
to Congress in the near future legislation which
will help the Department implement this im-
portant program by providing broader and
more precise legislative authority and a clearer
source of financial support.

The Office of Economic Opportunity can also
contribute to progress in this area by strength-
ening its innovative programs and pilot projects
in the delivery of family planning services to
the needy. The existing network of O.E.O. sup-
ported community groups should also be used
more extensively to provide family planning
assistance and information. I am asking the
Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity
to determine the ways in which his Agency can
best structure and extend its programs in order
to help achieve our national goal in the coming
years.

As they develop their own plans, the Secre-
tary of Health, Education and Welfare and
the Director of the Office of Economic Oppor-
tunity should also determine the most effective
means of coordinating all our domestic family
planning programs and should include in their
deliberations representatives of the other agen-
cies that share in this important work. It is my
intention that such plaiming should also involve
state and local governments and private
agencies, for it is clear that the increased activ-
ity of the Federal government in this area
must be matched by a sizeable increase in effort
at other levels. It would be unrealistic for the
Federal Government alone to shoulder the en-
tire burden, but this Administration does accept
a clear responsibility to provide essential
leadership.

For the Future

One of the most serious challenges to human
destiny in the last third of this century will be
the growth of the population. Wliether man's
response to that challenge will be a cause for
pride or for despair in the year 2000 will de-
pend very much on what we do today. If we
now begin our work in an appropriate manner,
and if we continue to devote a considerable
amount of attention and energy to this problem,
then mankind will be able to surmount this

110

Department of State Bulletin

challenge as it has surmounted so many during
the long march of civilization.

When future generations evaluate the record
of our time, one of the most important factors
in their judgment will be the way in which we
responded to population growth. Let us act in
such a way tliat those who come after us — even
as they lift their eyes beyond earth's bounds —

can do so with pride in the planet on which they
live, with gratitude to those who lived on it in
the past, and with continuing confidence in its
future.

KiOHARD Nixon

The Whfte House,
July 18, 1969.

President Nixon Meets With Foreign Exchange Students

Following are remarks made hy President
Nixon on the South Lawn of the White House
on July 22 hefore a group of American Field
Service exchange students.

White House press release dated July 22

. • • • •

Could I speak seriously to you for just a
moment as I welcome you to the Wliite House
and in effect say goodby to you as you return to
your own countries ?

I want to say, first, that my only regret is that
our family could not have had some of you visit
us in our homes during this last year. Of course,
in this last year I have been a little busy ; but
nevertheless, we have so many friends who have
had the privilege of having students from this
group in tlieir homes, and many of them have
said that it was really the best thing that ever
happened in their lives. We thank you all for
giving so many Americans the privilege of
knowing your countries tlirough you, the youth
of your countries. This is a great privilege ; it is
a privilege that many American families have
never had before, and we are very grateful for
that.

Second, I want you to know that as I meet you
and realize your ages and all the years ahead of
you, I think what a wonderful time it is for you
to be alive. I suppose that that sounds rather
strange these days when we read of some of the
problems in the world — problems in Latin
America, Africa, Asia, and the Mideast, and the
like, a war in Viet-Nam, all of these problems —
but let us look at it, if we can, for a moment,
without being Pollyannaish, but look at it with
the true realism that an idealist must have, look-
ing at the facts but also looking beyond them,

as we really should, to the future which you can
help to build.

You could not find a more exciting time to be
bom ; you could not find a more exciting time to
finish high school and then go on to college and
then pick your profession, because when you are
my age — or perhaps a little younger than I am —
in the year 2000 and you celebrate tlie new year
that comes once in a thousand years, look at
what you look back on and look at what you will
see then and what you will look forward to in
the 21st century.

We think of those men who are returning
from the moon. Wasn't that a great thing to
see ? In the year 2000 I believe — and I am sure
that those in this audience who are so young
and so full of life and so full of optimism will
agree with me — in the year 2000 we will on this
earth have visited new worlds where there will
be a form of life.

I know this will happen, and I want to tell
you as I look forward and dream about tliat
future, as I am sure you look forward to it and
dream about it, this is the kind of world I would
like to see and the kind of exploration of that
new world that I know all Americans want.

I hope that when the next great venture into
space takes place that it will be one in which
Americans will be joined by representatives of
other countries so that we can go to the new
world together. I know from the telegrams that
I have received around the world that the spirit
of all the people of the world was with those
three brave men. They are not just Americans,
they represented all of mankind.

Tliat is why, as we look at the future adven-
tures into the free world, let them not be
adventures of conquest but adventures of ex-

Aogust n, 1969

111

ploration which tend to unite us all into one
people, which we truly are, and we feel that
today in a crowd like this.

What those new worlds will be like, whether
on Mars or Venus or any of the other areas we
may be able to explore, no one can presently
say; but let me say a word about what tliis
world can be like and what you can make it
like.

Sometimes we get very pessimistic about
problems. We see the population curve going
up, we see the food production not going up as
fast, and we look at great areas of the world in
Asia and Africa and Latin America and wonder
if those two curves are going to pass and that
dire prediction of Malthus, made a century or
two centuries ago, may prove true in our time —
later than he thought, but yet prove true. I don't
think so, because I am convinced that we have
the genius — genius represented by young peo-
ple in this group, but genius represented by
people all over the world — so that we can pro-
duce the food and the clothing, the health care,
the housing, the shelter, all the things that we
need to keep ahead of population and continue
to progress.

That is the challenge you have ; it is the chal-
lenge you, I am very confident, are going to
meet.

I think, too, that as we look to the future we
think of the possibilities not only of the new
worlds, what may not be or may be on the Moon
or ]\Iars or Venus, but we think of what that
moon achievement means in terms of what we
can do on this Earth.

So often we hear : "This cannot be done. The
problem is too great." But when I saw, or at
least heard and saw, the simulation of those
two space vehicles traveling at 4,500 miles an
hour, coupling together in space, let alone land-
ing on the moon and the takeoff on the moon,
but saw that take place out there in outer space,
as I realized all of the scientific genius and the
teclmical ability, let alone the human factors
that went into that decision, I realized that this
is no time for the pessimists ; this is the time for
the optimists and the idealists.

Be optimistic and idealistic about the future.
I realize the kind of teamwork, the kind of sci-
entific achievement, the kind of idealism that
we saw in that space shot, that landing on the
moon — if we could just bring all that to bear on
the problems here on earth, the problems of our
environment, the problems of adequate food and
health and shelter and progress, a fair share

for everybody on this earth — if that can be done,
what a world we can create.

Let me look just a little further ahead in an-
other way. I thought one of the, shall we say,
rather sad things about that great day on Mon-
day when man first stepped on the moon was
that, while most of the peoples of the world saw
it on television or participated in it on televi-
sion or radio, tliere was approximately one-half
the world that did not see it : the whole of Com-
munist China and the world of the Soviet
Union.

I thought how sad that was, sad not in terms
of East- West conflict, because this is no time to
discuss that, but sad in terms of the people in-
volved because, you see, I know the Russian
people. I have visited them. They are a great
people, and their young people are like you
people.

And I know the Chinese people. I have never
seen tliem on the mainland of China, but I have
seen them in Taiwan and in Manila and in In-
donesia and Thailand and New York and San
Francisco, and I want the time to come when
the Chinese people and the Eussian people and
all the peoples of this world can walk together
and talk together.

I want to say to you that in the time that I
am in this Office, however long it will be, the
major goal that I will have will be to bring peace
to this world — real peace — and also to hasten
the day when we can have a truly open world,
open cities, open borders, open countries, open
minds, open hearts, open ideas. That is what we
want. Tliat is what you want. And that is what
we are going to build for us.

Now, I suppose that when we look at the
world today and those great political differences
that divide us and the war that goes on, we
sometimes perhaps would be pessimistic and
say, "Well, you are just dreaming." I don't think
so. I want you to know that as I see you today,
as I realize the experience that you have, as I
know the spirit you will cari-y back to your own
countries, you are going to help to make these
dreams come tnie; and I would simply add to
that great slogan that I understand all of you
have of walking together and talking together —
let's add to it : Let's dream together, too. Let's
dream about the future.

I know of no group of young people in the
world who can help more to make those dreams
come true than all of you, and I ask all of you
as you leave the United States of America —
remember, of course, the differences that you

112

Department of State Bulletin

saw here, have in mind the problems you saw
here, and try to avoid them in your own coun-
tries — but remember, above everything else, the
American people are with you in their hearts,
they want for you what we want for ourselves :
the right to be free, the right to move ahead, the
right to talk together and walk together and to
dream together.

All of these things you believe in and all of
these things, I am sure, the world believes in,
if the leaders of the world simply have the abil-
ity to allow the people of the world to let their
views be felt and their views prevail.

So to my good friends — and some of you I
hope to meet in some of my future journeys
around the world — I can only say : Thank you
for coming to America. As one who was born
in this coimtry, I love my country and I think
it is a great country ; but I can tell you, as one
who has visited over 60 countries in the world,
I think every people in this world is a great
people and a great coimtry. If we think that
way, we are going to go a long way.

27th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

Following are texts of the opening statement
and additional remarhs made hy Ambassador
Henry Cabot Lodge, head of the U.S. delega-
tion, at the 27th plenary session of the meetings
on Viet-Nain at Paris on July 24-

FiesB release 215 dated 3n\j 24

OPENING STATEMENT

Ladies and gentlemen: At recent sessions
spokesmen for your side have repeatedly al-
leged that our side was not showing good will
and a sincere attitude toward the 10 points
proposed by the NLF [National Liberation
Front]. You have charged that our side must
therefore bear full responsibility for the pro-
longation of the war.

The truth is that, at Midway, President Nixon
and President Thieu took note of the 10-point
proposal.^ They observed that, despite the fact
that it contained certain imacceptable pro-
visions, there were certain points which ap-

' For background, see Bulletin of June 30, 1969, p.
549.

peared not too far from the positions taken by
our two Governments.

Since their statement, we have tried to ex-
amine your 10 points at these sessions. In my
statement at the 23d plenary session, for ex-
ample, I pointed to several issues raised by the

10 points on which there appeared to be com-
mon ground.^ I also discussed the major issues
on which we are still far apart.

Your side has responded merely by repeating
your own demands, rejecting our requests for
clarification, and, indeed, denying that there
was any common ground between our respective
positions.

The Republic of Viet-Nam and the United
States have gone far beyond a willingness to
consider and discuss the NLF 10 points. Both
Governments have made important proposals
designed to establish a basis for a negotiated
settlement. The most recent of these proposals
was President Thieu's major initiative of July

11 on the organization of free elections. The
representative of the Republic of Viet-Nam pre-
sented that proposal last week at these sessions.

"Wliat has been the response of your side to
all of these efforts for peace? Not once at these
meetings has your side tried to find in our pro-
posals common elements on which we might
agree or which we even might examine further.
On the contrary, you always reject them flatly.
Surely this is not a reasonable position for a
serious negotiation.

Your side continues to demand the unilateral
withdrawal of the United States and of Allied
forces in South Viet-Nam. You denounce as
imreasonable any proposals for mutual with-
drawal of all non-South Vietnamese forces. You
assert that our unilateral withdrawal is the
only way we can show respect for the "fimda-
mental national rights" of the Vietnamese
people.

We are ready, as we have always been, to re-
spect the fundamental national rights of the
Vietnamese people. And the simultaneous with-
drawal of all non-South Vietnamese forces is,
in truth, wholly compatible with those funda-
mental rights.

As we have stated many times, we are fully
prepared to negotiate the terms of mutual with-
drawal and all other aspects of a Viet-Nam set-
tlement. As President Nixon said in presenting
his eight proposals on May 14, 1969 : *

' Bulletin of July 14, 1969, p. 29.
• Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

August n, 1969

113

... I would stress that these proposals are not
offered on a take-it-or-leave-lt basis. We are quite will-
ing to consider other approaches consistent with our
principles.

At last week's meeting, your side chose to
give a most superficial and hasty response to
President Thieu's constructive and reasonable
proposal for organizing free elections. You did
not ask questions about that proposal or express
a willingness to discuss seriously with the Gov-
ernment of the Republic of Viet-Nam the ques-
tion of how free elections should be conducted.
You simply rejected President Thieu's proposal
out of hand and characterized it as a "swindle,"
a "maneuver," and a "treachery." It is none of
these things. It is a sincere proposition which
deserves to be considered carefully on its merits.
And its merits are considerable.

Your denigration of the July 11 proposal
cannot conceal its meaningful and generous of-
fer for truly free elections. President Thieu
made it clear that all political parties and
groups, including the NLF, could participate
in the elections and in an electoral conmiission.
He said that his commission would assure all
candidates equal opportunity to campaign; it
would enable all the parties and groups to par-
ticipate in poll watcliing and to watch the count-
ing of the ballots. He said further that an inter-
national body would be established to supervise
the elections ..nd assure their fairness.

"VVe regret your initial, negative reaction to
these proposals by the Republic of Viet-Nam.
"We are sorry that you have deliberately mis-
construed them. You try to mislead public
opinion by alleging that we are insisting that
elections be conducted under the bayonets of a
half million United States soldiers, which is the
reverse of the truth.

The truth is, as President Thieu made clear,
that his government wishes to discuss with your
side the ways in which the South Vietnamese
people — all of them — can exercise their choice
free from violence, terrorism, fear, and coercion
from any source. With respect to the presence
of United States and other Allied forces, both
President Nixon's speech of May 14 and Presi-
dent Thieu's statement of July 11 recognized
the relationship between elections and the with-
drawal of all non-South Vietnamese armed
forces. Indeed, how can the South Vietnamese
people freely exercise their fundamental right
of self-determination if tens of thousands of

North Vietnamese troops continue to be main-
tained in the South and in the neighboring
countries of Laos and Cambodia? In this re-
gard our proposals for mutual withdrawal are
well known. Wiat is needed is a willingness by
your side to explore and negotiate these critical
issues in good faith.

The Government of the Republic of Viet-
Nam has made a proposal for free elections,
elections in which the people of South Viet-Nam
would be free to express their choice and in
which coercion and repression play no part on
either side. President Thieu has said his govern-
ment is prepared to discuss with your side the
timetable and the details of these elections. He
pledged that the Government of the Republic
of Viet-Nam would abide by the results of the
elections whatever they may be.

If your side really supports the right of the
South Vietnamese people to self-determination
as you claim, you should welcome President
Thieu's proposal as a constructive and major
contribution to these negotiations. The basic
purpose of a free electoral system is to allow
the people freely to choose the representatives
of their choice.

In the interests of serious negotiations, your
side should reconsider its hasty reaction to Pres-
ident Tliieu's proposal. You should discuss it
seriously with the Government of the Republic
of Viet-Nam, with whom you meet here every
Thursday. That proposal offers a genuine op-
portunity for the people of South Viet-Nam to
enjoy now, and in the future, a continuing right
of self-determination. It goes to the heart of the
political issues involved in the Viet-Nam war.
It would bring friend and foe together into the
future life of the nation. It merits serious con-
sideration if we are to find a negotiated peace
in Viet-Nam.

"We are ready to negotiate. "We are willing to
seek agreed solutions to different problems. "We
are willing to discuss your proposals. "We have
tried to do so. You should also be willing to
discuss our proposals. So far you have not been
willing to do so. There must be negotiation if
the Viet-Nam problem is to be solved. By re-
fusing to engage in that process, your side is
prolonging the war.

As President Nixon said on July 11 : * "If the

' For a statement by President Nixon issued on
July 11, see Bulletin of July 28, 1969, p. 61.

114

Department of State Bulletin

other side genuinely wants peace, it now has
a comprehensive set of offers which permit a
fair and reasonable settlement. If it approaches
us in this spirit, it will find us reasonable. Hanoi
has nothing to gain by waiting."

ADDITIONAL REMARKS

I will say to the representative of the DRV
that his charge of United States aggression
against Laos is as groundless as are his charges
of United States aggression against Viet-Nam.
As in the case of South Viet-Nam, the presence
of North Vietnamese armed forces in Laos in
large numbers is a well-demonstrated fact. That
presence lies at the heart of the Laos problem.

The presence of North Vietnamese troops in
Laos is in the first instance of concern to the
Eoyal Lao Government. That Government has
repeatedly called for their withdrawal to North
Viet-Nam and for full application of the 1962
Geneva agreements on Laos. As a signatory of
the 1962 agreements, the United States supports
these demands. The United States withdrew all
its military personnel from Laos in 1962 and
hoped that all parties would live up to the agree-
ments. The United States itself is fully prepared
to observe those agreements if the other parties
will and to do its share to bring about their
full observance to maintain Laotian neutrality.

Similar considerations apply with resjDect to
the illegal presence of your troops in Cambodia.
The United States respects the independence
and territory of Cambodia under the terms of
the 1954 Geneva accords on Cambodia. There are
no U.S. troops stationed in Cambodia! There
are North Vietnamese troops in Cambodia !
That is a fact knovni throughout the world.

Mr. Rives Named U.S. Charge
in Phnom Penh, Cambodia

The Department of State announced on
July 21 (press release 210) that Lloyd M. Rives,
a career Foreign Service officer, has been ap-
pointed United States Charge d'Affaires ad in-
terim in Phnom Penli,^ and the Royal Cam-
bodian Government has announced its accept-
ance of this designation.

As Secretary Rogers announced July 2,' the
Royal Cambodian Government had designated
Thay Sok as its Charge d'Affaires ad interim
in Washington, and the United States Gov-
ernment has accepted this designation.

U.S. and Netherlands Conclude
Aviation Negotiations

Joint Press Statement

Press release 208 dated July 18

Delegations representing the United States
and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concluded
aviation negotiations today [July 18] in Wash-
ington. These negotiations were called at the
request of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Government to review certain aspects of the bi-
lateral air transport agreement, including the
question of routes. Recommendations of the
delegations are being forwarded to the respec-
tive Governments for their consideration.

' For biographic details, see Department of State
press release 210 dated July 21.
" Bulletin of July 21, 1969, p. 41.

August 11, 1969

115

THE CONGRESS

Foreign Policy Aspects of the Foreign Aid Program

Statement hy Secretary Rogers '

I am glad to be here today to support the ad-
ministration's authorization request for $2.G bil-
lion for economic and military assistance for fis-
cal year 1970. As you know, I was out of the
country when hearings began before your com-
mittee, and for that reason the opening presenta-
tion for the State Department was made by
Under Secretary Richardson.' You also have
heard extensive testimony from Dr. Hannah, the
AID [Agency for International Development]
Administrator, and other witnesses on the eco-
nomic assistance program and from Secretary
[of Defense Melvin R.] Laird and the military
area commanders on the military assistance re-
quest. Dr. Hannah is here again today to answer
any additional questions on the AID program.

In these circumstances, I believe it would be
appropriate for me briefly to focus my remarks
this morning on certain foreign policy aspects
of the aid proposals which President NLxon has
laid before the Congress.'

Foreign assistance is part and parcel of our
foreign policy because of some very fundamen-
tal facts about the world around us.

Two out of every three people in the world
live in less developed countries. A dozen years
from now there will be about a billion more of
them than there are today.

While in recent years the less developed coun-
tries in the non-Communist world as a whole
expanded their production at roughly 5 percent

' Made before the House Committee on Foreign Af-
fairs on July 17 (press release 202).

• Bulletin of June 30, 1969, p. 569.

• For President Nixon's message to the Congress on
May 28, see Bulletin of June 16, 1969, p. 515.

annually, population growth is cutting heavOy
into per capita benefits from these gains.

If sustained growth is to be achieved in the
poor countries, they must raise about four-fifths
of the necessary savings and investment from
their o-wn meager resources ; but a critical mar-
gin of external assistance is needed from others.

This set of circumstances is clear. One of the
dominant political facts of international life
today is that more rapid economic and social
progress is a major goal of every constructive
political leader in the developing nations, which
are a large majority of all nations.

Our aid policies and programs foster these
trends. Thus they support directly our foreign
policy interests. If economic progress in the less
developed countries should falter, the resulting
frustration would almost certainly be exploited
politically, to the detriment of our long-range
national interests.

II.

ISIr. Chairman, the peaceful revolution in eco-
nomic and social development now taking place
in most regions of the world is one of the major
phenomena of our time. IVhether it maintains
a satisfactory momentum or not will have a lot
to do with the future shape of world affaire and
for the position of our own country in relation to
vast areas of the world.

We have helped to raise expectations for a
better life among masses of the people every-
where. Our help has led them to believe that
poverty is not the inevitable condition for most
of humanity. We have provided help to gen-
erate growth in the critical early stages —
both directly and through international
organizations.

116

Department of State Bulletin

Five successive Presidents and many Con-
gresses have reached the conclusion that par-
ticipation by the United States in this historic
development process is not only desirable but es-
sential in support of our foreign policy. Public
groups representing a wide range of interests
and professions have made intensive studies
and consistently arrive at similar conclusions.

Nevertheless, continuity of policy should not
be allowed to obscure the need for adaptation
and change in the direction and techniques of
foreign assistance in the light of new conditions
and our own experience.

To this end the President has announced that
he would appoint a public advisory group to
recommend U.S. policies and programs of in-
ternational development cooperation for the
decade of the 1970'3.

Meanwhile we have identified several lines
of action for immediate emphasis. These are:

— To increase the opportunities for private
enterprise to engage more directly in the devel-
opment process.

— To lay heavier stress on the transfer of
American knowledge and skills through tech-
nical assistance.

— To increase support for multilateral aid
programs and make new efforts to coordinate
our aid with other donors.

— To place the highest priority on agricul-
tural production and family planning.

Let me say a few words about the reasons for
the points of emphasis.

1. Mobilization of private enterprise and its
resources through popular involvement is vital
to development. The new AID program will
focus more sharply on stimulating such involve-
ment in the countries receiving our aid. We will
also encourage investment by American firms,
with their management skills and modem tech-
nology, in ways which will benefit the develop-
ment of those countries. To support such invest-
ment, we are proposing to establish an Overseas
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).

We believe that programs to encourage par-
ticipation by U.S. investors and assist private
investment projects in the developing countries
can best be managed by a specialized business-
type organization, operating on a self-sustain-
ing basis and subject to the businesslike disci-
plines of the balance sheet and the earnings
statement. OPIC is specifically designed to pro-
vide that framework. OPIC would permit the

handling of business questions in a business en-
vironment. The businessman's need for prompt,
knowledgeable, and authoritative decisions,
whether favorable or unfavorable, would be
met. The use of investment guaranties and in-
surance would be expanded, and investment and
credit institutions in the less developed coun-
tries would be promoted through financial and
professional advisory assistance by OPIC.

For the Congress, OPIC would mean that
the balance sheet, earnings statement, and opera-
tions report will present a complete picture of
costs and benefits. The role and responsibility
of Congress would not change.

For the executive branch, OPIC would mean
that the best available talent can be attracted
and that the joint objectives of public and pri-
vate interests will be assured through the com-
position of the board of directors and the pro-
visions for coordination with overall foreign
economic policy.

2. To capitalize on recent progress and ac-
celerate the pace of development, we also pro-
pose to reemphasize the role of technical assist-
ance. The challenge of development lies in part
in the transfer of skills and the creation of the
institutional capacity necessary to expand the
role of modem technology in the less developed
countries. Large amoimts of capital are re-
quired to support industrial and agricultural
growth. But the capacity of private enterprise
and government to use such assistance wisely
and effectively is limited in large part by the
lack of skills — administrative, mechanical, man-
agerial, and technical. We hope to devise im-
proved applications of teclmical assistance in
such fields as agriculture, family planning, edu-
cation, community action, public administra-
tion, and other areas.

3. Multilateral assistance increases the total
amount of development assistance available and
does so on a basis of equitable sharing. Other
countries have been increasing their contribu-
tions to multilateral banks, to teclmical assist-
ance programs, and to other cooperative inter-
national arrangements. Tliis is a good trend and
one which we have helped to stimulate and
should continue to help stimulate.

4. One of the most urgent problems we con-
tinue to face is the critical balance between food
production and population grovrth. Many less
developed coimtries appear to be on the verge
of sustained increases in agricultural outputs,
thanks to new strains of wheat, rice, and other

August n, 1969

117

grains, plus increased use of fertilizer and other
modem agi-icultural practices. AID has helped
to generate these encouraging improvements in
food production. But the dramatic gains whicli
have been made in some less developed coun-
tries must now be consolidated, and the new
techniques must be adopted in more countries.
Another decade of continued effort on the part
of the less developed countries will still be
needed if widespread famine is to be avoided.
But this appears within the realm of the possi-
ble, with continued help from the United States
and other aid donors.

It cannot be done, however, without increased
attention by rich and poor alike to the reduc-
tion of population growth. More and more coun-
tries which we are assisting are undertaking
family planning programs. We propose to de-
vote as large a part of our AID program as
we reasonably can to help the less developed
countries come to grips with this problem.

III.

On a regional basis the objectives of our aid
programs vary according to differing needs.

Our program for East Asia, for example, is
focused on both development and security re-
quirements. Indonesia has pulled back from the
edge of economic chaos to launch a comprehen-
sive rehabilitation and development effort,
which will depend very heavily on external sup-
port for some time to come. In the Kepublic of
Korea we expect to be able to continue to phase
do^vn our aid as this country moves on toward
self-sustaining growth.

If there is a resolution of the conflict in Viet-
Nam, we are prepared to shift the aid program
toward greater emphasis on economic and so-
cial development.

In the Near East and South Asia the major
share of our economic aid is concentrated on
the subcontinent. India and Pakistan are major
testing grounds in the global war on hunger,
and the outcome will have ramifications
throughout the world. As things stand now, the
widespread fears of a few years ago that mass
starvation would face the Indian Subcontinent
and some other regions by 1980 have yielded to
the hope that the "green revolution" in agricul-
ture can lead the way to overall economic devel-
opment and progress, assimiing continued local
effort and adequate outside help.

In Latin America our relations have always
been close, and the President has expressed our
determination to strengthen and improve them.
Our assistance in the hemisphere is essential

to constructive change. Any refusal on our part
to collaborate actively in the development of
Latin America would risk social and economic
stagnation with its great explosive potential.
This year's request is important as a bridge to
maintain development momentum pending new
policy and program directions tliat will result
from executive branch reviews now underway.
After the sharp reductions in U.S. aid to Latin
America last year, further cuts in our assistance
this year could badly erode Latin confidence in
the reliability of our special relationship.

Our aid program for Africa extends help to
an area which is the least developed of all the
continents and which contains one-third of all
members in the United Nations. Apart from
significant programs in 10 African states, the
United States is focusing a large part of its
assistance on support of joint African initia-
tives to expand markets and attack common
development problems.

IV.

For military assistance, as the Secretary of
Defense has testified, we propose a program at
the level of last year's appropriation. "We shall
continue the practice of the past several years
of phasing out military assistance for countries
whose economies have developed sufficiently to
enable them to provide for their own defense
needs.

Mr. Chairman, I said earlier that five Presi-
dents and many Congresses have concluded that
it is in our national interest to participate in
the international development process.

In the day-to-day conduct of our foreign pol-
icy we are concerned with negotiations among
states over present or potential conflicts and
deterring the threat of war.

The foreign aid program, on the other hand,
is not concerned with conflicting national in-
terests but with shared aspirations and needs
of human beings. Cooperative work on develop-
ment goes forward on what is recognized as
common ground.

Through the foreign assistance program, our
foreign policy touches the lives of individual
people. Food affects their health ; family plan-
ning affects their standards of life; technical
assistance affects their skills and their chance
to earn a decent livelihood.

Cooperation in pursuit of common interests
must someday become the prevailing way of
international life if we are to find our way to

118

Department of State Bulletin

permanent peace. I believe that cooperation on
the broad common gi-ound of meeting the human
needs of individual people can help the leaders
of the world to learn that lesson.

The amounts requested in the proposals be-
fore you reflect our awareness of competing de-
mands upon our resources. In absolute amount,
in relation to the budget, and in relation to the
U.S. gross national product, the budget this
year is the smallest ever requested. I have been
asked by President Nixon to say to this com-
mittee tliat he is convinced that the authoriza-
tion request for $2.6 billion this year is neces-
sary to meet essential requirements.

I respectfully ask the members of this com-
mittee to support this request.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
AND CONFERENCES

U.S. Asks Security Council Meeting
on Criteria for U.N. Membership

Following is the text of a letter from Ambas-
sador William B. Buffum^ Acting Permanent
Representative of the United States to the
United Nations, to the President of the Secu-
rity Council.

U.S./U.N. presa release 73 dated July 14

July 14, 1969
His Excellency
M. Ibrahima Boye
President of the Security Council

I Excellency : As indicated orally when Am-
bassador Yost and I called on you July 8, the
United States is interested in having the Secu-
rity Council and its Committee on the Admis-
sion of New Members give early consideration
to the subject of the so-called micro-states. This
same matter was initially the subject of a letter
addressed to the then President of the Security
Council, His Excellency Chief S. O. Adebo, by
United States Permanent Representative Ar-
thur J. Goldberg, dated December 13, 1967
(S/8296).i

As you know, the Secretary General has twice
made special reference to this subject in the
"introduction of the Annual Report of the Sec-

retary General on the Work of the Organiza-
tion" to the 22nd and the 23rd Sessions of the
General Assembly.

The United States believes consideration is
long overdue of the problems raised by the Sec-
retary General in these reports, wherein he sug-
gested a comprehensive study of the criteria for
membership in the United Nations with a view
to laying down the necessary limitations on full
membership for the emerging states which are
exceptionally small in area, population, and
human and economic resources, while also de-
fining other forms of association which would
benefit both the "micro-states" and the United
Nations.

Accordingly, we would appreciate your initi-
ating appropriate consultations looking toward
an early meeting of the Security Council and its
Committee on the Admission of New Members
on this subject.

I would appreciate your circulating this letter
as a document of the Security Council.*

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of
my highest consideration.

William B. Butfum

Ambassador

Acting Permanent Representative

of the United States

to the United Nations

TREATY INFORMATION

Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Atomic Energy

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to the bilateral
agreement between the United States and Portugal
of JiUy 21, 1955, as amended (TIAS 3317, 3899, 4519,
5111, 5679), for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Vienna February 24, 1965.
Entered into force December 15, 1965. TIAS 5915.
Terminated: July 19, 1969.

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to the bilateral
agreement between the United States and Portugal

' For text, see Bulletin of Jan. 29, 1968, p. 159.
• U.N. doc. S/9327.

August n, 1969

119

of July 3, 1069, for cooperation concerning civil nses
of atomic energy. Signed at Vienna July 11, 1909.
Entered into force: July 19, 1969.

Aviation

Oinventlon on offenses and certain other acts com-
mitted on board aircraft. Done at Tokyo Septem-
ber 14, 1963.'

Signature: Barbados, June 25, 1969.
Ratification deposited: Upper Volta, June 6, 1909.

Disputes

Convention on the settlement of investment disputes
between states and nationals of other states. Done
at Washington, March 18, 1905. Entered into force
October 14, 1906. TIAS 6090.
Ratification deposited: Guyana, July 11, 1969.

Fisheries

Convention on conduct of fishing operations In the
North Atlantic, with annexes. Done at London June
1, 1967.'
Ratification deposited: Iceland, May 12, 1969.

Nuclear Weapons — Nonproliferation

Treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons.
Done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1,
1968.'

Ratification deposited at Washington: Czechoslo-
vakia, July 22, 1909.

Safety at Sea

Amendments to the international convention for the

safety of life at sea, 1960 (TIAS 5780). Adopted at

London November 30, 1906."

Acceptance deposited: Federal Eepublic of Ger-
many, June 25, 1969.'
Amendments to the international convention for the

safety of life at sea, 1960 (TIAS 5780). Adopted at

London October 25, 1967.'

Acceptance deposited: Kuwait, July 7, 1969.

Space

Agreement on the rescue of astronauts, the return of
astronauts, and the return of objects launched into
outer space. Opened for signature at Washington,
London, and Moscow April 22, 1968. Entered into
force December 3, 1968. TIAS 6599.
Accession deposited in Washington: Sweden, July
21, 1969 .

' Not in force.

• Applicable to Land Berlin.

BILATERAL

Portugal

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington July 3, 1969.
Entered into force: July 19, 1969.

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil nses of
atomic energy, as amended. Signed at Washington
July 21, 1955. Entered into force July 21, 1955. TIAS
3317, 3899, 4519, 5111, 5679.
Terminated: July 19, 1969.

Tunisia

Agreement for sales of agricultural commodities relat-
ing to the agreement of December 24, 1968 (TIAS
6616). Signed at Tunis July 11, 1969. Entered into
force July 11, 1969.

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

Confirmotions

The Senate on July 22 confirmed the following
nominations :

Henry A. Byroade to be Ambassador to the Philii>-
pines. ( For biographic details, see Department of State
press release 226 dated August 1.)

Eileen R. Donovan to be Ambassador to Barbados.
(For biographic details, see Department of State press
release 214 dated July 23.)

Joseph A. Greenwald to be the representative of the
United States to the Organization for Economic Coop-
eration and Development. (For biographic details,
see Department of State press release 220 dated
July 30.)

Leonard C. Meeker to be Ambassador to Romania.
(For biographic details, see White House press release
dated July 5.)

J. Raymond Tlitalo to be Ambassador to Paraguay.
(For biographic details, see Department of State press
release 217 dated July 2a)

120

Department of State Bulletin

INDEX August 11, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1572

Aviation. U.S. and Netherlands Conclude Avia-
tion Negotiations 115

Barbados. Miss Donovan confirmed as Ambassa-
dor 120

Cambodia. Mr. Rives Named U.S. Charg6 in
Phnom Penh, Cambodia 115

Congress

Confirmations (Byroade, Donovan, Greenwald,
Meeker, Tlltalo) 120

Foreign Policy Aspects of the Foreign Aid Pro-
gram (Rogers) 116

Problems of Population Growth (message from
President Nixon to the Congress) 105

Department and Foreign Service

Confirmations (Byroade, Donovan, Greenwald,
Meeker, Ylitalo) 120

Mr. Rives Named U.S. Charge in Phnom Penh,
Cambodia 115

Economic Affairs. Greenwald confirmed as U.S.
Repre.sentative to the Organization for Eco-
nomic Cooperation and Development . . . 120

Educational and Cultural Affairs. President
Nixon Meets With Foreign Exchange Students
(remarks) Ill

Foreign Aid. Foreign Policy Aspects of the For-
eign Aid Program (Rogers) 116

International Organizations and Conferences.

Greenwald confirmed as U.S. Representative
to the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development 120

Netherlands. U.S. and Netherlands Conclude
Aviation Negotiations 115

Paraguay. Ylitalo confirmed as Ambassador . . 120

Philippines. Byroade confirmed as Ambassa-
dor 120

Population. Problems of Population Growth
(message from President Nixon to the Con-
gress) 105

Presidential Documents

President Nixon Meets With Foreign Exchange

Students Ill

Problems of Population Growth 105

Romania. Meeker confirmed as Ambassador . . 120

Treaty Information. Current Actions .... 119

United Nations. U.S. Asks Security Council
Meeting on Criteria for U.N. Membership (let-
ter from Ambassador Buffum to President of
Security Coimeil) 119

Viet-Nam. 27th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam

Held at Paris (Lodge) 113

Name Index

Buffum, William B 119

Byroade, Henry A 120

Donovan, Miss Eileen B 120

Greenwald, Joseph A 120

Lodge, Henry Cabot 113

Meeker, Leonard C 120

Nixon, President 105, 111

Rives, Lloyd M 115

Rogers, Secretary 116

Ylitalo, J. Raymond 120

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 21-27

Press releases may be obtained from the OflSce
of Press Relations, Department of State, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20520.

Releases issued prior to July 21 which appear
in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 202 of
July 17 and 208 of July 18.

No. Dale

Snbject

210 7/21 Rives designated Charg6 d' Affaires
ad interim in Phnom Penh (re-
write).

t211 7/21 New regulations on purchases of
(corrected) Chinese Communist goods and
validation of certain passports for
travel to Communist China (re-
write).

*213 7/22 Joint U.S.-Japan Committee on
Trade and Economic Affairs,
Tokyo, July 29-31.

*214 7/23 Miss Donovan sworn in as Ambas-
sador to Barbados (biographic
details).
215 7/24 Lodge : 27th plenary session on Viet-
Nam at Paris.

*216 7/25 Under Secretary Richardson to be
U.S. Special Delegate to OAS For-
eign Ministers meeting on El Sal-
vador-Honduras dispute.

*Not printed.

fHeld for a later issue of tlie Bulletin.

Superintendent of Documents

u.s. government printing office

washington. d.c. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICI

IM AVT O

20 YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

Boston Public Library
Superiatendcat of Documents

SEP 4 1969
DEPOSITORY

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1573

August 18, 1969

U.S.-JAPAN JOINT ECONOMIC COALMITTEE IMEETS AT TOKYO

Statement hy Secretary Rogers and TeM of C'onwMcnique 121

THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES

hy John R. Steven-son, Legal Adviser 1^7

HONDURAN-SALVADORAN CONFLICT RESOLVED BY OAS

Department Statement. Texts of Resolutions and Declaration
of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of American States 132

PROVISIONAL AGENDA, TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION
OF U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY 135

For index see inside ha/ik cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1573
August 18, 1969

For sale by the Superinti>ndDnt o( Documents

U.S. Govemment PrintiDR Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

52 issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January 11, 1966).

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 BULLETIN is indexed in

the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
tcith 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 selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as icell as special
articles on various pluises of interna-
tiotutl affairs and the functions of the
Department. Infornuition is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general interruitional
interest.

Publications of the Department,
United Nations documents, and leg'
islative material in the field of inter-
national relationn are listed currently.

U.S.-Japan Joint Economic CommiHee Meets at Tokyo

The sixth meeting of the Joint U.S.-Japan
Committee on Trade and Economic Develop-
ment was held at Tokyo July 29-31. Following
is the opening statement made by Secretary
Rogers on July 29., together with the text of a
communique issited at the close of the meeting
on July 31.

STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ROGERS

Press release 218 dated Jnly 29

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my colleagues I
Avish to express our appreciation for your warm
words of welcome. It is a very great pleasure for
us to be in Japan for this seventh meeting of the
Joint U.S.-Japan Committee on Trade and
Economic Affairs.

We come together at a dramatic moment in the
history of mankind. For the first time two men
have landed on the moon, walked on the moon,
and returned to earth. No longer is man earth-
bound. No longer is the sky the limit for man-
kind. This moon landing, although achieved by
America, is in reality a triumph for mankind.

We in the United States thank the people of
Japan for your contribution and support. It is
the hope of President Nixon that in some future
space program other nations will participate —
and, of course, Japan is high on that list. Cer-
I tainly no nation could contribute more or be
welcomed more by America than Japan.

Today, however, we must deal with our prob-
lems here on earth. Japan has forged ahead eco-
nomically at an amazing pace. Today j-ou stand
as the second greatest economic power in the
free world. You are tlie fastest growing nation
in the world in gross national product.

We have become interdependent. Our ex-
change of goods has reached the highest level

August 18, 1969

ever maintained between any two coimtries in
transoceanic trade. This requires that the close
association symbolized by these meetings of
Cabinet officers and their representatives must
be maintained and reinforced.

Our economic relationsliip will not be free of
difficulties. But these must be seen as the natural
outgi-owth of the immense successes of our two
economies and our trading relationship. I am
confident that we can adjust any imbalances and
remove any frictions in a spirit of good will and
due regard for our common interests.

Apart from the problems in our bilateral re-
lations, there are other important problems and
opportmiities common to us that will demand
an increasing amount of time and effort in the
years to come. I refer to the opportunities we
each have to contribute to the development of
those countries in Asia which are in need of, and
can most benefit from, our assistance.

It has been a matter of gratification to observe
Japan's effoi-ts to assist the economic growth of
the developing countries. In important cases we
have worked in cooperation in this field, too. We
look forward to even greater cooperation in the
future.

We applaud Japan's increasing support for
such programs as the Asian Development Bank,
whose distinguished president I had the pleas-
ure of visiting in Manila last week.

Our countries have much to offer in support
of programs designed to bring a better life to the
people of Asia and thus to build economic and
political stability, which is a prerequisite for the
peace we all desire so much.

]\Ir. Chairman, may I again express our pleas-
ure at being in this beautiful and dynamic
country. We welcome this opportunity to work
with you and your colleagues in a meeting
which has become an important tradition link-
ing our two countries. I am sure that the present

121

meeting will help draw Japan and the United
States even closer together in our daily
associations.

So in a spirit of mutual respect, mutual trust,
and mutual confidence we begin our work today.

TEXT OF COMMUNIQUE

Press release 225 dated July 31

The Seventh Meeting of the Joint Japan-U.S.
Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs was
held in Tokyo, July 29, 30 and 31, 1969, under
the Chairmanship of Foreign Minister Kiiclii
Aichi.

The Committee discussed trading and eco-
nomic relationships between the U.S. and Japan.
The two delegations expressed great satisfaction
with the strength and dynamic grovsth of their
economies and over the extensive trading rela-
tionsliips that bind Japan and the U.S. closely
together. They viewed current matters under
discussion as being within the context of these
outstanding successes.

At the beginning of the Conference, the
Japanese Delegation congratulated the U.S.
Delegation on the success of the historic mission
to the moon of the Apollo 11 Spacecraft. The
Committee observed that this spectacular
achievement demonstrated the boundless poten-
tialities of mankind.

The Conmiittee welcomed the exchange of
notes between the Foreign Minister and the
Secretary of State for cooperation in space ac-
tivities for peaceful purposes. The Committee
viewed the arrangements as another step in
U.S.-Japan cooperation in this exciting and
important field.

In reviewing current developments in world
affairs, the Committee noted tensions still exist
in Asia, but it welcomed, with approval, the
initiatives being taken by the United States and
allies in seeking ways to end the war in
Viet-Nam.

Recognizing that economic development and
stability in Asia have an important bearing on
the peace and prosperity of the entire world, the
Committee stressed the importance to the area
of economic and social growth, development of
democratic institutions and multilateral
economic cooperation.

The U.S. Delegation welcomed the accession
of Japan to the United Nations Disarmament
Committee and expressed the view that Japan

would make a valuable contribution to
disarmament talks.

During the course of the Conference, the For-
eign Minister and the Secretary of State dis-
cussed the problem of reversion to Japan of
administrative rights over Okinawa.

The Committee reviewed the state of econo-
mies and fiscal and monetary policies of the
United States and Japan. The U.S. Delegation
expressed confidence that a strengthened budget
position and policies of monetary restraint will
have a cooling effect on the U.S. economy. The
Japanese Delegation outlined its intention to
continue to pursue policies of balanced and con-
tinuous economic growth. The Committee
agreed that respective economic policies should
be directed toward achieving world economic
growth and progress.

The Committee reviewed the current state of
trade and economic relations between Japan
and tlie U.S. and took note of the continuing
growth in trade between the U.S. and Japan
which had surpassed $7 billion in 1968 — largest
overseas trade ever conducted by any two
nations.

The U.S. Delegation emphasized that the im-
balance in favor of Japan in U.S.-Japan trade
relations is causing serious problems in the U.S.
and that concerted measures should be taken to
solve these problems. Tlie Japanese Delegation
pointed out that trade balances should be con-
sidered in a global context and that complex fac-
tors imderlying trade relations should be given
full consideration, but expressed readiness to
continue to consult with the U.S. in the search
for mutually acceptable solutions to bilateral
trade problems.

In any case, both Delegations agreed that
trade problems, however difficult, could be over-
come in a spirit of mutual understanding and
common interest.

The Committee agreed it is in the interests of
both nations to promote the principle of freer
trade tliroughout the world. In this connection,
the Japanese Delegation expressed its strong
apprehension over the increase in protectionist
views within the U.S. The U.S. Delegation ex-
pressed deep concern at Japan's many trade
restrictions, particularly in view of Japan's
large trade surplus, and expressed the strong
desire that Japan would move towards full reci-
procity in U.S.-Japan trade relationship by ac-
celerating removal of restrictions. The Japanese
Delegation stated that the Japanese Govem-

122

Department of State Bulletin

ment will liberalize a considerable part of re-
maining residual import quota restrictions by
the end of 1971. The Committee agreed that a
meeting would be held in autumn of 1969 to
discuss further progress in trade liberalization.

In this connection, the Japanese Delegation
stated that despite difficulties involved in im-
port liberalization of agricultural products, due
to serious economic and social problems, the
Government of Japan would be ready to discuss
trade liberalization and other agricultural trade
problems in that meeting.

Tlie U.S. Delegation expressed its view that
serious problems arose from the rapidly growing
imports into the United States of wool and
man-made fiber textiles and stressed the impor-
tance of finding an international solution. The
Japanese Delegation stated that although it is
not convinced of the necessity for an interna-
tional solution, it would be ready to continue
discussions without any commitment to a future
course of action.

The Committee discussed non-tariff barriers,
took note of lists submitted by both sides, and
agreed to an exchange of comments on the list
submitted by the other counti'y within the com-
ing two months, to be followed by discussions
on a technical level.

The U.S. Delegation expressed the strong
desire that Japan should move toward full reci-
procity in investment by accelerating the pro-
gram of capital liberalization in order that each
nation might benefit from the resulting freer
flow of capital and technology. The Japanese
Delegation stated that its Government would
implement the third stage of its capital liberal-
ization program during 1970 and continue re-
view of the program so that a considerable
number of sectors in the Japanese economy will
be liberalized by early 1972.

The Committee had a useful exchange of
views on a number of matters related to
fisheries.

The Committee reviewed recent developments
in aviation, shipping and travel, and agreed to
continue to consult on these matters. The Com-
mittee also took note of the results of recent
consultations concerning the Civil Air Trans-
jjoit Agreement and expressed hope that satis-
factory agreement would be reached at consul-
tations to be resumed in Tokyo in September.

The Committee welcomed the initiative of
Asian countries in exploring new means to assist
each other, and indicated that both countries

would support social and economic progress of
these countries.

The Japanese Delegation declared the inten-
tion of the Government of Japan to expand
substantially its economic assistance particu-
larly for Asia despite various domestic prob-
lems. The U.S. Delegation welcomed this
development and stated that the U.S. also will
continue to participate in programs desigTied to
accelerate economic development of the region.

In this connection, the Committee hoped that
cessation of hostilities in Viet-Nam would lead
to broad international participation in economic
assistance for Viet-Nam and neighboring
countries.

The Committee also noted the important role
of the Asian Development Bank in the economic
development of Asia and agreed on the impor-
tance of further strengthening that role. The
Committee observed the effectiveness of the
multilateral approach to aid as demonstrated
in the experience of their two governments in
the Asian Development Bank and in other in-
ternational assistance programs.

The Conunittee reviewed the operation of the
international monetary system and emphasized
the importance of improving the adjustment
process and, in this regard, recognized the role
of national economic policies conducted in a
manner consistent with the adjustment process.
It welcomed prospects of early activation of
special drawing rights as well as enlargement
quotas in the IMF [International Monetary
Fund].

The Committee agreed that, in parallel with
development assistance, the continuing expan-
sion of trade opportunities of developing coun-
tries was essential to their sustained economic
growth and to establishment of a sound basis
for international trade. The Committee re-
viewed the discussions now being held in the
OECD [Organization for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development] and UNCTAD [United
Nations Conference on Trade and Develop-
ment] with the view to formulating a general
preferential scheme for developing countries.
It was agreed to continue close consultations be-
tween the two countries in this matter.

The Committee noted the successful conclu-
sion of the U.S.-Japan Joint Study of Employ-
ment wliich the Sixth Meeting of the Joint
Committee agreed to imdertake and expressed
satisfaction with the agreement to explore the
possibility for a Joint Study of Occupations

August 18, 1969

123

with a view to contributing to the development
of human capacities in both countries.

The Committee also found it useful to ex-
chanj^e views on problems in labor policy arising
from recent technological innovations.

The Committee agreed to establish a U.S.-
Japan Panel on Transportation Research to
study transportation technology and systems,
demand for, and social and economic value of,
ultra high speed ground transportation systems,
and means to ameliorating the impact of trans-
portation on environment.

The C/ommittee reviewed mutual environ-
mental problems and approved the Annual
Progress Report on Cooperation in Develop-
ment and Utilization of Natural Resources, not-
ing in particular the expansion of the program
into marine sciences and forestry management.

The Japanese Delegation expressed its appre-
ciation for U.S. participation and cooperation
in Expo '70. The U.S. Delegation extended its
best wishes for the success of this significant
international exposition.

Tlie Committee agreed that the next meeting
would be held in Washington at a mutually con-
venient date to be determined through diploma-
tic channels.

Japan was represented by Foreign Minister
Kiichi Aichi ; Mr. Takeo Fukuda, of the Minis-
try of Finance; Mr. Shiro Hasegawa, of the
Ministry of Agriculture; Mr. Masaj'oshi Ohira,
of the Ministry of International Trade and In-
dustry; Mr. Ken Harada, of the Ministry of
Transportation; Mr. Kenzaburo Hara, of the
Ministry of Labor ; and Mr. Wataro Kanno, of
the Economic Planning Agency. Ambassador
Takeso Shimoda, Mr. Haruki Mori, Deputy
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, and advisers
from the ministries concerned were also present.

The United States was represented by Secre-
tary of State William P. Rogers; Secretary of
Agriculture Clifford M. Hardin; Secretary of
Commerce Maurice H. Stans; Under Secretary
of Interior Russell E. Train ; Under Secretary
of Labor James D. Hodgson; Under Secretary
of Transportation James M. Beggs ; Chairman,
Council of Economic Advisers, Paul W. Mc-
Cracken; Assistant Secretary of Treasury
[John R.] Petty. Special Trade Representa-
tive Carl J. Gilbert participated. Ambassador
Armin H. Meyer, United States Ambassador to
Japan, and advisers from various Departments
also attended.

28th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris

FoUowing are texts of the opening statement
and additional remarhs Tnade hy Atribassador
Henry Cabot Lodge, head of the U.S. delega-
tion, at tlie 28th plenary session of the vieetings
on Viet-Nam at Paris on July 31.

OPENING STATEMENT

Press release 223 dated July 31

Ladies and gentlemen : At the last two meet-
ings the representative of the Government of
the Republic of Viet-Nam formally presented
the proposals for political settlement made by
President Thieu on July 11. As I said at those
two meetings, the United States believes these
proposals are comprehensive, statesmanlike, and
eminently reasonable.

It may, accordingly, be useful now to recall
certain principles which guide the American
attitude toward a settlement in Viet-Nam, as
they have been stated by President Nixon. They
are:

— We seek no bases in Viet-Nam.

— 'Wq do not insist on any military ties.

— ^We are willing to agree to neutrality for
South Viet-Nam if that is what the South Viet-
namese people freely choose.

— We believe there should be an opportunity
for full participation in the political life of
South Viet-Nam by all political elements that
are prepared to do so without the use of force or
intimidation.

— We are prepared to accept any govern-
ment in South Viet-Nam that results from the
free choice of the South Vietnamese people
themselves.

— We have no intention of imposing any form
of government upon the people of South Viet-
Nam, nor will we be a party to such coercion.

— 'Wq have no objection to reunification, if
that is what the people of South Viet-Nam and
the people of North Viet-Nam want; we ask
only that the decision reflect the free choice of
the people concerned.

In this spirit the United States and the Gov-
ernment of the Republic of Viet-Nam have
taken several series of actions and have made

124

Department of State Bulletin

a number of forthcoming proposals since these
Paris meetings began.

Unfortunately, your side's demands do not
indicate a similar desire for an early negotiated
settlement. "Whenever we make reasonable com-
promise proposals designed to begin serious
negotiations, you continue to insist that we
accept your proposals in their entirety^ — on a
take-it-or-leave-it basis — without real discussion
or negotiation.

On the question of withdrawing all non-
South Vietnamese troops from South Viet-
Nam, we have proposed not just the removal of
North Vietnamese units but the mutual with-
drawal of all such forces from both sides. We
have offered a specific timetable under which
the major portions of those forces could with-
draw during a 12-month period, with the re-
maining forces in base areas preparatory to
departure by agreement. "We have said that if
you have another timetable for mutual with-
drawal, we would be glad to consider it. Yet
your side continues to insist on a one-sided un-
conditional withdrawal of only American and
Allied forces. Apparently, you think it reason-
able for North Vietnamese forces to be left alone
to ravage the South and to try to dominate it.
"We, of course, cannot agree to this.

On the matter of self-determination in South
Viet-Nam, the Republic of Viet- Nam has pro-
posed a program allowing for free elections
with full participation by all political elements
in South Viet-Nam, including the NLF [Na-
tional Liberation Front]. Our side has also
agreed to abide by the results of free political
choice. Yet — while professing to support self-
determination for the Vietnamese people — your
side assumes the right to prejudge the outcome
of elections and attempts to limit the partici-
pants in the political process to those whose
qualifications would be arbitrarily defined by
your side alone. You refuse to begin the ac-
commodation process by going first to the peo-
ple of South Viet-Nam and asking them what
they want. You even ask that the Government
of the Republic of Viet-Nam, which has been a
full participant at these Paris meetings, be over-
thrown before any real negotiation can begin.
Your demands do not show faith in a demo-
cratic solution to the political problems of Soutli
Viet-Nam. They show contempt for it.

Our side has also proposed international
supervision and verification machinery as an

integral part of a settlement. We believe this is
a fair and reasonable way to provide each side
with assurances as to compliance with the terms
of the settlement by the other and to establish
confidence in the durability of the settlement.
You seem to have accepted the principle of
international supervision in your 10 points, but
you want to limit its application to the with-
drawal of American and Allied forces. "Wliy
should we forbid this international body from
supervising actions to be taken by botli sides?
We welcome supervision and verification of
what our side agrees to do. Your side should do
likewise.

The obvious explanation of your attitude is
that you think that time will work to your
advantage. If this is what you think, you make
the same mistake that others have made who
do not understand American history. You
should realize that the United States will not
break its word.

The United States will remain committed to
our objective of giving the South Vietnamese
people the opportunity for genuine self-deter-
mination. Of course, the United States wants
peace, as do all the people of South Viet-Nam ;
but if you continue to insist that our side accept
your proposals without compromise or real
negotiation, progress in these talks will be
blocked and the responsibility will be yours.

"We have suggested the terms of a reasonable
settlement, terms which would give the South
Vietnamese people an opportunity to determine
their own future without outside interference.
We have also stated that we are not proposing
them on a take-it-or-leave-it basis; we are
prepared to negotiate. In contrast, your side
maintains a rigid insistence on your own terms.
To say the least, that is not the way to peace.

ADDITIONAL REMARKS

Press release 223A dated July 31

You misinterpret and misrepresent the pur-
pose and nature of President Nixon's visit to
Viet-Nam. So that his statement and his mean-
ing will be clear, I call your attention to liis
words and urge you to consider them carefully,
as follows :

We have stopped the bombing of North Viet-Nam.
We have withdrawn 25.000 American troops. They have
been replaced with South A'ietnamese. We have made

August 18, 1969

125

... a peace offer which is as generous as any ever
made in the history of warfare. It is a peace of recon-
ciliation that is offered; a peace in which the people
will decide ; a peace that is just for both sides ; a peace
which is fair to both sides ; a peace which offers an
equal chance to both sides. We have gone as far as
we can or should go in opening the door to peace, and
now it is time for the other side to respond. Other-
wise, the other side must assume the responsibility
for the continuing suffering among a people who have
already suffered much too long both in South and
North Viet-Nam.

The truth is that during President Nixon's
visit to Viet-Nam he spoke of peace and how
it could be achieved for the benefit of the every-
day man in North Viet-Nam, in South Viet-
Nam, and in tlie United States — and it is the
everyday man who has carried the load of suf-
fering in this war.

And now concerning another question : Your
attempt at arithmetical proof that the 25,000
troops who are leaving Viet-Nam have not
really left cannot be sustained by facts. Tlie
facts and the figures are simple — 25,000 fewer
U.S. troops will be in Viet-Nam as of the end
of August, which is precisely what President
Nixon said would be done. The articles which
you cite are therefore in error. I hope these facts
will be clear to you.

Restrictions Eased on U.S. Travel
to Communist China

The Department of State announced on
July 21 (press release 211, corrected) that new
regulations will permit American tourists and
residents abroad to purchase limited quantities
of goods originating in Conmiunist China. This
modification, made by the Treasury Department
in its Foreign Assets Control Kegulations, will
reduce the inconvenience caused to American
travelers desiring to purchase Chinese goods for
noncommercial purposes.'

In this same spirit of reducing restrictions on
U.S. citizens' activities abroad, the Department
of State has decided to authorize automatic
validations of passports for travel to Com-
munist China for the following categories of
persons: (1) Members of Congress; (2) jour-
nalists; (3) members of the teaching profes-
sion; (4) scholars with postgraduate degrees

' For text of the amendment to the regulations, see
34 Fed. Reg. 12179.

and students currently enrolled in colleges and
universities; (5) scientists and medical doc-
tors; (6) representatives of the American Red
Cross.

These new measures became effective on
July 23.^ Consistent with this decision, persons
in these categories receiving new passports can
have the restriction on travel to Communist
China automatically removed from their pass-
ports. To facilitate the processing of requests
for removal of this restriction in passports
which already have been issued to persons in
these categories, the Department is authorizing
all Foreign Service posts to validate their pass-
ports for travel to Communist China, without
reference to the Department.

These changes do not affect restrictions on use
of passports for travel to North Viet-Nam,
North Korea, or Cuba or restrictions on
financial transactions relating to these areas.

Senate Confirms Members
of ACDA Advisory Committee

The Senate on July 30 confirmed the nomina-
tion of the following-named persons to be mem-
bers of the General Advisory Committee of the
U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency : '

I. W. Abel
Harold Brown
William J. Casey
Douglas Dillon
William C. Foster
Kermit Gordon
James R. Killian, Jr.
John J. McCloy
Lauris Norstad
Peter G. Peterson
J. P. Ruina
Dean Rusk
William W. Scranton
Cyrus Roberts Vance
John Archibald Wheeler

The General Advisory Committee is ap-
pointed by the President, with the advice and
consent of the Senate, to advise the President,
the Secretary of State, and the Director of the
U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
on matters affecting arms control, disarmament,
and world peace.

= For text of Public Notice 311. see 34 Fed.. Rc(j. 12401.
' For biographic details, see White House press re-
lease (San Clemente, Calif.) dated June 5.

126

Department of State Bulletin

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

hy John R. Stevenson
Legal Adviser^

In the introduction to "International Legal
Process," which I understand is the basic text
for your seminar, Professor Abram Chayes and
his colleagues state that the "demands of con-
temporary international life have sharply
altered the procedures of laTrmaking and the
sources of international law." They point out
that international relations are increasingly
ordered by treaties. The participation of so
many of you and your colleagues in the legal
offices of foreign ministries in seminars on draft-
ing and negotiating development agreements
and commodity agreements persuades me that
the trend is likely to continue.

As the role of treaties in international affairs
grows in importance, it becomes increasingly
desirable that the rules of international law ap-
plicable to such treaties be widely accepted,
readily ascertainable, and practically sound. I
believe that after substantial scholarly and
governmental effort the international communi-
ty has generally agreed on such rules. They may
be found in the Convention on the Law of
Treaties, about which I will speak this evening.

At its first session in 1949 the International
Law Commission of the United Nations selected
the law of treaties as a priority topic for codi-
fication. In selecting this topic the Commission
seems to have been motivated by two factors:
the desirability of clarifying the uncertain state
of the law of treaties and the availability of
substantial research into treaty practice pre-
pared for the League by such groups as the
International Commission of American Jurists
and the Harvard Research in International
Law.

' Address made before the International Law Seminar
for Government Legal Officers, sponsored by the Amer-
ican Society of International Law and the Harvard
Law School, at Cambridge, Mass., on July 15 (press
release 198).

What was the state of the law when the Com-
mission embarked on its task ? According to the
Secretary General's "Survey of International
Law in relation to the Work of Codification of
the International Law Commission," despite
the fundamental importance of treaties in inter-
national law and an attempt at codification of
that branch of the law imder the League, there
was hardly an aspect of the subject which was
"free from doubt and confusion." This judg-
ment pertained "not only to the question of the
terminology applied to the conception of trea-
ties, to the legal consequences of the distinction
between treaties proper and (other) inter-
governmental agreements, and to the designa-
tion of the parties to treaties"; there was
"uncertainty as to the necessity of ratification
with regard to treaties which have no provision
for ratification ; in the matter of the important
subject of the relevance of the constitutional
limitations upon the treaty-making power ; and
in respect of conferment of benefits upon third
parties."

The Treaties Convention adopted in Vienna
this year should go far to dispel the doubt and
confusion in the law of treaties to which the
Secretary General's report referred. But the
preparation of the text was slow and arduous.

From 194:9 to 1966 the Commission discussed
the law of treaties at 292 meetings. Four
rapporteurs, Brierly, Lauterpacht, Fitzmaurice,
and Waldock, prepared successive drafts. Gov-
ermnents commented on the drafts ; and as evi-
dence of state practice in certain areas emerged,
articles were changed to conform with that
practice. At its 18th session in 1966 the Com-
mission adopted a draft convention on the law
of treaties which contained 75 articles. The con-
vention dealt with the subject as a whole. The
following titles of parts of the convention will
give you an idea of its scope : Conclusion and

August 18, 1969

127

Entry into Force of Treaties ; Observance, Ap-
plication and Interpretation of Treaties;
Amendment and Modification of Treaties ; and
Invalidity, Termination and Suspension of the
Operation of Treaties. The Commission recom-
mended that the General Assembly of the
United Nations convene an international confer-
ence of plenipotentiaries to study the draft
articles and to conclude a convention on the
subject.

In the course of the debate in the General
Assembly with respect to the recommendation
of the Commission, a number of members
pointed out the desirability of holding the con-
ference in two stages: the committee-of-the-
whole stage the first year and the plenary stage
the second. They argued that this would give
governments and publicists an opportunity to
look at the text emerging from the committee
stage before giving the product a final seal of
approval. The General Assembly accepted this
suggestion when it passed Resolution 2166 con-
vening the conference. The first session was to
be held in the spiing of 1968; the second, in
1969.

Preparations for the Conference

There was little more than a year between the
passage of General Assembly Resolution 2166
and the opening of the first session of the con-
ference. Governments were faced with the prob-
lem of how to prepare for a conference which
would deal with such esoteric matters as full
powers, reservations to treaties, rehus sic stan-
tibus, jus cogens, and depositary practice. In
some governments, I understand that cabinet
committees were appointed to study the articles.
In others, the foreign ministry or the academic
community or both assumed the principal re-
sponsibility. I had the privilege of participating
in the joint governmental-professional effort
in the United States. Perhaps you would
be interested in how we discharged this
responsibility.

In 1966 the American Society of Interna-
tional Law established a study group on the law
of treaties vmder the chairmanship of Professor
Oliver Lissitzyn of Columbia. Wlien the
State Department later that year designated
Ambassador [Richard D.] Kearney as chair-
man of the United States delegation to the law
of treaties conference, he approached the Soci-
ety and asked if the group would be willing to
discuss the articles with him and other pro-

spective members of the delegation. The study
group held a series of meetings in 1967 and 1968
(both before and after the first session) at which
the draft articles were discussed in detail. I can
testify that the examination of the articles was
thorough. A numljer of members of the group
made suggestions for improving specific ar-
ticles. "VVliile some of the suggestions dealt with
points of substance — for example, many mem-
bers of the group felt that insufficient attention
had been given to the importance of travaux
]yreparatoires in the articles on interpretation of
treaties — most of the suggestions were of a
drafting or technical nature. With some chagrin
I confess that the gi'oup suggested that the De-
partment consider amendments to nearly two-
thirds of the draft articles. You will be glad to
know that the Department substantially short-
ened the list.

First Session of the Conference

At the opening meeting of the first session of
the conference in March 1968, the Representa-
tive of the Secretary General, Constantin
Stavi'opoulos, described it as the "most impor-
tant . , . and perhaps also the most difficult"
of the series of codification conferences called
by the United Nations. In his view, "the clari-
fication and the embodiment in a multilateral
convention of the rules of law applicable to
treaties would have immense significance for
the whole future of international law and conse-
quently for the practice of States in almost
every field of international relations."

The next day the 104 delegations taking part
in the conference began an article-by-article
consideration of the International Law Com-
mission's text. They were soon overwhelmed by
more than 400 proposed amendments. All were
to be considered before the first session could
adjourn.

Many scholars who had commented on the
draft articles had expressed the opinion that the
Connnission's articles showed greater breadth
of vision, greater completeness, and greater skill
in working out acceptable compromises than any
other draft on the law of treaties. The adoption
by the committee of the whole of two-thirds of
the Commission's proposed articles without sub-
stantive amendments tends to confirm the sound-
ness of that view.

Although the reaction of delegations to pro-
posed amendments was by no means uniform,
the theme that the Commission had carefully

128

Department of State Bulletin

considered the views of states and had adopted
a reasonable or practicable solution in formu-
lating a given article was a frequent refrain
during the first session of the conference. It was
not unusual for the head of a delegation who
had introduced an amendment to a technical
article to state that he would not press for the
adoption of his amendment. He might add, as
did many delegates, that with respect to a num-
ber of technical articles relating to the conclu-
sion and entry into force of treaties and their
amendment, the important consideration was
not so much the content of the rule as that the
international community as a whole should
agree on a uniform rule to govern state practice.

At the same time, the wisdom of the Commis-
sion in incorporating elements of flexibility in
a number of technical articles, especially those
dealing with the conclusion and entry into force
of treaties, should not be overlooked. Those
articles are designed piincipally to promote
clarity and certainty in the law. The convention
underlines the residual nature of such articles
by incorporating in the formulation of those
rules clauses such as "unless the treaty other-
wise provides," thus giving to the parties the
right to specify a different rule in a treaty. Such
"escape clauses," as one writer has called them,
increased the general acceptability of these
articles in the committee of the whole and
should facilitate the widespread ratification of
the convention.

Notwithstanding the disposition of the con-
ference to adopt the text proposed by the Inter-
national Law Commission, several provisions
which had been adopted by close majorities in
the Commission were rejected by the committee
of the whole. In addition, a number of articles —
notably article 53 on jus cogens — were substan-
tially improved.

It is generally agreed that article 53 on
treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of
general international law {jus cogens) is one of
the most important articles in the convention.
In formulating this rule the Commission started
from the basis that there are in contemporary
international law certain rules from which
states may not derogate by treaty. The examples
given in the Commission's commentary —
treaties contemplating unlawful use of force
contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter
and those envisioning cooperation in genocide
or piracy — are almost imiversally accepted as
categories of treaties which states may not
validly conclude.

The Commission proposed the following text :

A treaty is void if it conflicts with a peremptory
norm of general international law from which no der-
ogation is permitted and which can be modified only
by a subsequent norm of general international law hav-
ing the same character.

Prior to the opening of the conference 49
countries had expressed views on tlie Commis-
sion's text. Only one state questioned the exist-
ence of the inile, but many commented on the
imprecision with which it had been formulated.
Others expressed concern that the abstract na-
ture of the rule made it impossible to appreciate
its practical effects.

Debate was extensive in the committee of the
whole, where six amendments and one sub-
amendment were introduced. Three of the
amendments and the subamendment were with-
drawn; two amendments and part of a tliird
were referred to the drafting committee.

The amendment proposed by Finland, Greece,
and Spain was intended to incorporate in the
article a standard by which to gauge whether a
norm cited by a state invoking invalidity under
article 53 is one from which no derogation by
treaty is permitted. Many delegations expressed
the view that a treaty violating norms accepted
as peremptory by only a few states ought not
to be void under article 53. By incorporating
the requirement that the peremptory character
of the norm "be recognized by the international
community of States as a whole" the drafting
committee ensured the broad acceptability of
the article, which was adopted with only three
negative votes at the close of the first session.

To many governments the most important
weakness of the International Law Commis-
sion's draft was its failure to contain meaning-
ful procedures for the settlement of disputes
relating to the validity of treaties. They argued
that if new or hitheiio not generally recognized
grounds of invalidity were to be included, new
procedures to govern disputes under those
articles should also be adopted. It was impossi-
ble to reach agreement on this question in the
committee of the whole. Accordingly, the com-
mittee decided to deal with the subject again
at the beginning of the 1969 session.

Second Session of the Conference

I had the good fortime to serve on the
United States delegation to the second session
of the conference, which met from April 9 to
May 23, 1969. One hundred and ten states par-

August 18, 1969

358-890—69 2

129

ticipated. At the beginning, the committee of
the whole reexamined the basic questions which
the conference had not been able to resolve at
the first session. A number of countries, includ-
ing the United States, considered the question
of the inclusion of satisfactory procedures for
the settlement of disputes arising under the
invalidity articles the fundamental issue before
the second session. It certainly was the one to
which the most attention was devoted.

Notwithstanding that more than 60 states had
spoken on the question in 1968, eight sessions
were necessary for the debate on this topic in
the reconvened committee of the whole. At the
conclusion of the debate the committee adopted
a compulsory conciliation-arbitration formula
proposed by 19 states. Perhaps a contributing
factor to the adoption of that formula for
settlement of disputes was the introduction and
adoption of a new article limiting the applica-
tion of the Convention on the Law of Treaties
to treaties concluded after its entry into force.
A number of nations in all parts of the world
which had been reluctant to accept compulsory
settlement for disputes arising under old
treaties were willing to accept such a procedure
for future treaties.

Following the consideration of the deferred
articles by the committee of the whole, the
committee was dissolved and the conference re-
convened in plenary session. In plenary, articles
adopted by the committee of the whole are given
a second reading. The basic difference between
the two stages is that a two-thirds majority is
required for the adoption of an article in
plenary, whereas a simple majority suffices at
the committee stage.

Most of the articles recommended by the com-
mittee of the whole were adopted by the plenary
without change. Few amendments were intro-
duced. It was not unusual for technical articles
to be adopted without any negative vote.

A serious floor debate and vote contest devel-
oped with respect to the new article on settle-
ment of disputes. The Soviet Union, the Com-
munist-bloc states, and most of the Arab states
voted against the article recommended by the
committee of the whole. They were joined by
several African states and by India, Indonesia,
and Malaysia. Although receiving more votes
than it had received in the committee of the
whole, the mandatory conciliation-arbitration
formula failed to secure the necessary two-
thirds majority. Inasmuch as a number of states

had unequivocally indicated they would not be-
come parties to the convention if it did not con-
tain adequate procedures for settlement of dis-
putes arising under the invalidity articles, it
appeared that the conference had failed.

On the final full day of the second session —
a day marked by soaring hopes and crashing
despair as a fragile coalition sought to save the
conference — ten states, Ghana, Ivory Coast,
Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria,
Sudan, Tunisia, and the United Republic of
Tanzania, submitted a proposal which included
a new article entitled "Procedures for judicial
settlement, arbitration and conciliation." By a
vote of 61 for, 20 against, with 26 abstentions,
the proposal carried.

The new article, article 66, requires referral
of disputes arising under the jiis cogens or pe-
remptory norm articles to adjudication by the
International Court of Justice whenever the
procedures in article 33 of the charter have not
led to the solution of the dispute within 12
months. Because some states have strong na-
tional traditions in favor of arbitration, article
66 permits both parties to a dispute to agree
instead to submit the dispute to arbitration.

Since the concept of JTis cogens on the inter-
national plane is an abstract and novel one, it
is appropriate that disputes arising under the
articles of the convention dealing with that
subject should be considered by the principal
judicial organ of the United Nations. The action
of the conference on this article is a doubly
welcome one. In my view the international com-
munity participating in the conference has, by
the adoption of article 66, demonstrated anew
its confidence in the abiding value of the Inter-
national Court.

In other disputes arising under the invalidity
articles, either party may request the Secretary
General of the United Nations to set in motion
the mandatory conciliation procedures con-
tained in the annex to the convention, which
includes rules for the establishment of a concili-
ation commission in each case. The commission
hears the parties, examines their claims, and
makes proposals calculated to lead to an ami-
cable settlement. The commission is required to
file a report with the Secretary General. The
report may contain findings of fact and con-
clusions of law, but it is not binding upon the
parties. Paragraph 7 of the annex provides that
the expenses of the commission will be borne
by the United Nations. The conference re-

130

Department of State Bulletin

quested the General Assembly to note and
ai^prove that provision at its 24th session.

I believe that the provisions for the settle-
ment of disputes contained in the convention are
highly satisfactory. By contributing to the
prompt resolution of disputes relating to valid-
ity of treaties they should go far in helping
maintain the stability of treaty relationships
throughout the world. The provision for ex-
penses is a desirable innovation and a worth-
while investment, since the concern of many
newly independent and small states with the
cost of third-party settlement procedures has
been a very real obstacle to their general
acceptability.

I mentioned earlier the introduction in the
committee of the whole of a new article re-
stricting the application of the convention to
treaties concluded by states after the enti-y into
force with regard to such states of the Conven-
tion on the Law of Treaties.

The text which was adopted by the committee
and the plenary is now article 4. Unfortunately
it does not lay down a clear uniform rule that
all parties to the Treaties Convention, regard-
less of when it shall enter into force as to them,
will upon becoming parties be subject to the
Treaties Convention in their mutual relations
under treaties concluded after the entry into
force of the Convention on the Law of Treaties.
It would ensure the greatest uniformity in the
application of the multilateral treaty among all
the parties and avoid the confusion inherent
in having different dates of api^licability for
states parties to the Treaties Convention if
states were to follow such a rule. I hope that
state practice in the application of article 4 will
develop along these lines.

Significance of the Convention

The adoption of the Convention on the Law
of Treaties is, in my view, a milestone in the
development and codification of international
law. The international community as a whole
will, of course, benefit from the establislunent of
generally recognized legal rules on such sub-
jects as the conclusion and entry into force of
treaties, the observance, application, and inter-
pretation of treaties, and depositary and regis-
tration procedures.

But the larger significance of the convention,
it seems to me, is the fair balance it strikes
between the forces of change and stability. By

August 18, 1969

codifying the doctrines of jus cogens and reb%is
sic stantibus it provides a framework for deal-
ing with change. By reasserting the principle of
pacta sunt servanda and by incorporating im-
partial procedures for settlement of disputes it
provides a safeguard which will go far in help-
ing to maintain the stability of treaty relations.

While in large measure a restatement of cus-
tomary international law rules relating to trea-
ties, the convention also includes a number of
articles which clearly constitute "progressive
development," as that term is used in the Com-
mission's statute. Taken as a whole, the conven-
tion represents a highly satisfactory formula-
tion of contemporary treaty law. Although the
convention is not yet in force — indeed, the ink
on the final act is scarcely di-y — a nmnber of its
provisions have already been invoked to settle
differences of opinion with respect to treaty
practice which arose during the recent negotia-
tion of an international agreement on measure-
ment of ships. Pending its entry into force —
35 ratifications are required — the convention
seems likely to be the authoritative guide to
modern treaty practice. The 32 states which
signed the convention at Vienna, and perhaps
other states as well, will begin to cite its pro-
visions in diplomatic correspondence and to take
steps to bring their treaty practice in line with
the provisions of the convention.

The educational effect of the convention
should not be overlooked. Participating in the
conference has required our lawyers and schol-
ars to focus sharply on treaty -making practices ;
we suspect that a similar development occurred
in other countries. The existence of the conven-
tion and the growing body of "teachings of pub-
licists" which its conclusion must inevitably
stimulate will encourage the development of
treat}' experts in most countries and facilitate
the understanding of the law of treaties by per-
sonnel in foreign offices and students of inter-
national affairs.

It has been both a challenging and rewarding
experience to have participated in the codifica-
tion of the law of treaties. I hope in the months
ahead to continue that participation.

I appreciate very much the opportunity of
discussing with you tonight some aspects of
this significant international convention, the
i"ules of which may be expected to govern treaty
relations between our respective countries for
many years to come.

131

Honduran-Salvadoran Conflict
Resolved by OAS

DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ^

The United States is deeply gratified that the
Tliirteenth Meeting of Consultation of Foreign
Ministers of the Organization of American
States has resolved the crisis of the Honduran-
Salvadoran confiict and that the Government of
El Salvador has decided to withdraw its troops
immediately from Honduras. In addition, a
separate program for the resolution of the
underlying issues in this conflict has been agreed
to and set in motion.

The inter-American system, in which we
proudly participate, has met a major challenge
and has demonstrated its ability to act effec-
tively to assist the residents of El Salvador and
Honduras who have been displaced. The OAS
Foreign Ministers have asked member states to
make additional contributions of funds, food-
stuffs, medicines, and services to the Inter-
American Emergency Aid Fmid.

The Foreign Ministers also have requested
member states to provide services, material, and
equipment, including transport and communi-
cations, to help the Seven-Nation Special Com-
mittee observe the fulfillment of the guarantees
given by the Governments of El Salvador and
Honduras to ensure respect for the lives, per-
sonal safety, and property of Hondurans living
in El Salvador and of Salvadorans living in
Honduras.

The United States has contributed and will
continue to contribute to these efforts as
required.

RESOLUTIONS AND DECLARATION'

Resolution I

The Thibteenth Meeting of Consultation op Min-
isters OF Foreign Affairs,

Con sidekinq :

That, by a resolution adopted on July 23, 1969, the
Council of the Organization, acting provisionally as
Organ of Consultation, convoked a Meeting of Consulta-
tion of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, in accordance with
the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance
and the pertinent articles of the Charter of the Or-
ganization of American States, and that as of 10 :00
P.M. Central American time, on July 22, 1969, the with-

drawal of the Salvadorian troops from Honduran ter-
ritory, as called for by that Council under the terms of
the Inter- American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance,
had not been carried out ; and

Taking Into Account that at 4 :00 P.M. on July 29,
1969, the Government of El Salvador, through His Ex-
cellency, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, made the fol-
lowing statement to the Organ of Consultation : "...
the Government of El Salvador declares that, in its
steadfast purpose of finding a peaceful solution to the
conflict that concerns us today, it has decided to with-
draw the Salvadorian troops that are occupying Hon-
duran territory. The Government is confident that you,
gentlemen, will be able to find formulas that will fiilly
and effectively guarantee the lives, personal safety, and
property of the Salvadorian people who have resided ,
or are now residing in Honduras,"

Resolves :

1. To take note of the statement made by the Govern-
ment of El Salvador.

2. To order that the withdrawal of the troops be ef-
fected immediately, under the terms set forth in para-
graphs 2 and 3 of the operative part of Resolution II,
adopted on July 18, 1969, by the Council of the Organi-
zation, acting provisionally as Organ of Consultation.

3. To instruct the committee established by the Coun-
cil of the Organization, acting provisionally as Organ
of Consultation, in accordance with its resolution of
July 14, 1969, to watch over the timing and manner in
which the withdrawal of the troops is carried out and
to report to the Meeting of Consultation, using as a
basis the reports submitted to it in due course by the
military observers.

Resolution II

Whereas :

The Council of the Organization, acting provisionally
as Organ of Consultation, stated that, to ensure peace
and security, it is necessary to give adequate and ef-
fective protection to all citizens of El Salvador residing
in Honduras and also to Hondurans residing in El Sal-
vador, and that Article 13 of the Charter of the Organi-
zation of American States provides that in the exercise
of its right to develop its cultural, political, and eco-
nomic life freely and naturally, the state shall respect
the rights of the individual and the principles of uni-
versal morality ;

The Government of El Salvador has asked repeatedly
for adequate and effective guarantees of the lives, per-
sonal safety, and property of its nationals residing in
Honduras ;

The Government of Honduras has requested equal
guarantees of the lives, personal safety, and property
of its nationals residing in El Salvador ;

The governments of El Salvador and Honduras
have formally bound themselves to provide these
guarantees ;

For the purposes of this resolution, it is also neces-
sary to maintain and strengthen the inter- American in-

'■ Read to news correspondents by Department press
spokesman Carl E. Bartch on July 31.

'Approved at the second plenary session, held on
July 30.

132

Department of State Bulletin

stitutional mechanism established by the Council of the
Organization, acting provisionally as Organ of Consul-
tation, to see to full compliance with this reciprocal
commitment made by the governments mentioned ; and
In accordance with the provisions of the Inter-Ameri-
can Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, the Charter of the
Organization of American States, and the American
Treaty on Pacific Settlement (Pact of Bogota ), dis-
putes arising between American nations should be re-
solved by peaceful procedures,

The Thirteenth Meeting of Ministebs of Foreign

Affairs

Resolves :

1. To instruct the Committee named by the Council
of the Organization, acting provisionally as Organ of
Consultation, in accordance with the resolution of July
14, 1969, to continue to perform the work entrusted to
it through Resolution III of July 18, and to adopt all
the measures necessary for seeing to the faithful and
precise fulfillment of the effective guarantees given by
the govei'nments of El Salvador and Honduras, for the
purpose of ensuring respect for the lives, personal
safety, and property of the nationals of each of these
countries residing in the other. It shall also watch over
compliance with the terms of this resolution and report
in due course to the Meeting of Consultation.

2. To entrust the Secretary General of the Organiza-
tion with maintaining the observers designated in ac-
cordance with paragraph 5 of the operative part of the
aforementioned Resolution III and increasing their
number if necessary, so that they may perform the
functions assigned to them by the committee referred
to in this resolution and provide it with the facilities
and services it requires.

3. To request the Inter- American Commission on Hu-
man Rights to cooperate with the above-mentioned
Committee.

4. To take note that the governments of El Salvador
and Honduras agreed to submit within two months
their demands and the differences tliat have arisen be-
tween them to any one of the procedures for pacific

I settlement provided for in the American Treaty on
Pacific Settlement (Pact of Bogotd), to which both
countries are parties, and if this does not happen, to
submit them to the procedure of arbitration in accord-
ance with the same pact.

5. To urge each one of the parties to bring to trial
those responsible for crimes and violation of human
rights, in accordance with their respective judicial sys-
tems. The Committee mentioned in operative para-
graph 1 of this resolution shall report to the Meeting

I of Consultation on this matter.

6. To recommend the taking of a census of the na-
tionals of each country residing in the other, with a
view to the study and appropriate solution of the
migration problems.

7. To request the international organs, agencies, and
entities, especially those of the inter-American sys-
tem, to cooperate with both parties in the solution of
their population and development problems, in co-
ordination with the other countries of Central America,
taking into account the program for the integration of
the i.sthmus, and acting through the Central American
regional institutions. The Secretary General of the Or-
ganization is charged with providing the personnel, ob-

taining funds, and supplying any other facilities that
may be necessary in order appropriately to carry out
this task.

8. To appeal once again to the member states of the
Organization to provide funds, food, medicines, serv-
ices, and the like to assist the inhabitants of El Salva-
dor and of Honduras, who have been displaced, in ac-
cordance with the spirit of the resolution that created
the Inter-American Emergency Aid Fund and under
the terms of its statutes.

9. To recommend to the governments of El Salva-
dor and Honduras, in view of the unusual situation
caused by the events that occurred between the two
countries, that they provide facilities for the return
to their homes of displaced persons so requesting. The
Committee shall see to the reuniting of the families
scattered as a result of those events.

10. To request that member states in a position to
do so make available to the Committee the facilities
and equipment it needs for the accomplishment of
its mission, including means of transportation and
communication.

Resolution III

The Thirteenth Meeting of Consxtltation of Min-
isters OF Foreign Affairs

Resolves :

1. To keep the Thirteenth Meeting of Consultation
in session, especially for the purpose of seeing that the
resolutions adopted by the Organ of Consultation are
carried out faithfully and taking such additional meas-
ures as it may deem necessary to reestablish and pre-
serve inter-American peace and security and to resolve
the conflict between El Salvador and Honduras by
peaceful means.

2. To instruct the Secretary General of the Organiza-
tion of American States to transmit the text of the
resolution adopted by this Meeting of Consultation to
the Security Council of the United Nations, in accord-
ance with the provisions of Article 54 of the United
Nations Charter.

Declaration

Whereas :

During the course of this Meeting of Consultation
there has been a clear and categorical manifestation
of the unanimous rejection by the American states of
the use of force for the settlement of disputes among
the member states of the Organization ;

The procedures instituted by the inter-American sys-
tem afford proper means for the peaceful solution of
conflicts ;

Nonetheless, it is the firm desire and continuing
concern of the member states to intensify action lead-
ing to the elimination of underdevelopment as an
underlying cause of such conflicts ; and

The member states of the Organization of American
States have invariably reaffirmed the rights of man
and the principles of universal morality, in the full
exercise of their sovereignty and of the jurisdiction
they have over all inhabitants of their territory,
whether nationals or aliens.

August 10, 1969

133

The Thieteenth Meetino op
MiNisTEBS OF Foreign Affaibs

Consultation of

Declabes :

1. Its unswerving adherence to the principle set forth
in Article 1 of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance and Article 18 of the Charter of the Organi-
zation of American States, that the use of force as a
means for the settlement of disputes has been detini-
tively proscribed among the member states of the
Organization ;

2. That, as provided in Articles 5 (e) and 17 of the
Charter of the Organization of American States, there
shall be no recognition of conquests and no occupation
of territory through the use of force ;

3. That the status of immigrants is regulated by the
laws of the countries in which they reside and to whose
jurisdiction they are subject ;

4. That the application of the above principles must
be carried out with maximum respect for the protection
of human rights, the full validity of which has been
declared repeatedly by the American states ;

5. That it notes with satisfaction the willingness
shown by the governments of El Salvador and Hon-
duras to consolidate in fact the permanent applica-
bility of the principles enunciated in this declaration.

U.S. and France To Confer
on Scientific Cooperation

Folloioing is the text of a U.S -French state-
ment on scientifiG and technical cooperation,
which was released July S9 by tli-e Office of
Science and Techrwlogy, Executive Office of the
President.

Following the conversations which took place
in Paris earlier this year between President
Nixon and General de Gaulle, and in accordance
with the intentions which have been expressed
on both sides of extending the areas of U.S.-
French scientific cooperation, M. F.X. Ortoli,
Minister of Industrial Development and Scien-
tific Research of France, has invited Dr. Lee
A. DuBridge, Science Adviser to the President
of the United States, to visit France in late
September. At the invitation of Dr. DuBridge,
Minister Ortoli will visit the United States be-
fore the end of the year.

Interested agencies of the two countries are
already in contact as a first step toward defining
the areas of maximum mutual benefit. Dr. Du-
Bridge and Mmister Ortoli will discuss possible
new fields of cooperation, such as areas of ap-
plied research relating to the environment and

the city. They will also review ongoing coopera-
tion in sjDace and oceanography and the long-
standing relationship between the two countries
in fundamental research. Dr. DuBridge and
ilinister Ortoli will also discuss the develop-
ment of simple and flexible procedures to allow
the two Governments to follow the expanded
cooperation and to ensure steady and timely
progress.

Tetiuhe Mining, Lena Goldfields
Claims Receivable Through 1969

Department of State press release dated July 23

The United Kingdom Foreign and Common-
wealth Office has called the attention of the
Department of State to Foreign Compensation
(U.S.S.R.) Order 1969, wliich provides for the
Foreign Claims Commission to receive and de-
termine claims that have arisen since January 1,
1939, in relation to the unredeemed U.S.S.R.
state notes whicli were issued to the Tetiuhe
Mining Corporation, Ltd., and Lena Goldfields,
Ltd. These claims are receivable irrespective of
the nationality of the holders. It is believed that
there are a substantial number of the notes in
possession of other than British nationals, many
in the possession of United States nationals.

Holders of these notes who have not previ-
ously registered their claims under the For-
eign Compensation (U.S.S.R.) (Registration)
Order 1959 should write promptly to the For-
eign Claims Commission, Alexandra House,
Kingsway, London, "VY.C. 2, giving brief par-
ticulars of their claims. The cutoff date for
receipt of applications is December 31, 1969.

Mr. Gilbert Named Representative
for Trade Negotiations

The Senate on July 29 confirmed the nomina-
tion of Carl J. Gilbert to be Special Representa-
tive for Trade Negotiations. (For biographic
details, see White House press release dated
April 10.)

134

Department of State Bulletin

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES

Provisional Agenda, Twenty-fourth
Session of U.N. General Assembly '

U.N. doc. A/7600

1. Opening of the session by the Chairman of the
delegation of Guatemala.

2. Minute of silent prayer or meditation.

3. Credentials of representatives to the twenty-fourth
session of the General Assembly :

(a) Appointment of the Credentials Committee ;

(b) Report of the Credentials Committee.

4. Election of the President.

5. Constitution of the Main Committees and election
of officers.

6. Election of Vice-Presidents.

7. Notification by the Secretary-General under Article
12, paragraph 2, of the Charter of the United
Nations.

8. Adoption of the agenda.

9. General debate.

10. Report of the Secretary-General on the work of
the Organization.

11. Report of the Security Council.

12. Report of the Economic and Social Council.

13. Report of the Trusteeship Council.

14. Report of the International Court of Justice.

15. Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

16. Election of five non-permanent members of the
Security Council.

17. Election of nine members of the Economic and
Social Council.

18. Election of five members of the International Court
of Justice.

19. Election of fifteen members of the Industrial Devel-
opment Board.

20. Appointment of the members of the Peace Observa-
tion Commission.

21. Problems of the human environment : report of the
Secretary-General [resolution 2398 (XXIII) of 3
December 19G8].

22. Fourth International Conference on the Peaceful
Uses of Atomic Energy : report of the Secretary-
General [resolution 2406 (XXIII) of 16 December
1968].

23. Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting
of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples :
report of the Special Committee on the Situation
with regard to the Implementation of the Declara-
tion on the Granting of Independence to Colonial
Coimtries and Peoples [resolutions 2379 (XXIII)
of 25 October 1968, 23.83 (XXIII) of 7 November
1968, 2395 (XXIII) of 29 November 1968. 2403

, (XXIII) and 2404 (XXIII) of 16 December 1968,
2422 (XXIII), 2424 (XXIII), 2425 (XXIII), 2426

1 (XXIII), 2427 (XXIII), 2428 (XXIII), 2429

rXXIII) and 2430 (XXIII) of 18 December 1968,
2465 (XXIII) of 20 December 1968 and decision
of 18 December 1968].

24. Special programme of activities in connexion with
the tenth anniversary of the Declaration on the
Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples : report of the Preparatory Committee for
the Tenth Anniversary of the Declaration on the
Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries
and Peoples [resolution 2465 (XXIII) of 20 De-
cember 1968].

25. Celebration of the twenty-fiith anniversary of the
United Nations : report of the Preparatory Commit-
tee for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the United
Nations [decision of 19 December 1968].

26. Installation of mechanical means of voting : report
of the Secretary -General [decision of 16 December
1968].

27. The situation in the Middle East [decision of 21
December 1968].

28. International co-operation in the peaceful uses of
outer space : report of the Committee on the Peace-
ful Uses of Outer Space [resolution 2453 (XXIII)
of 20 December 1968].

29. Question of general and complete disarmament
[resolution 24.54 (XXIII) of 20 December 1968] :

(a) Report of the Conference of the Eighteen-
Nation Committee on Disarmament ;

(b) Report of the Secretary-General.

30. Urgent need for suspension of nuclear and thermo-
nuclear tests : report of the Conference of the
Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament [reso-
lution 2455 (XXIII) of 20 December 1968].

31. Conference of Non-Nuelear- Weapon States [reso-
lution 2456 (XXIII) of 20 December 1968] :

(a) Implementation of the results of the Confer-
ence : report of the Secretary-General ;

(b) Establishment, within the framework of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, of an
international service for nuclear explosions
for peaceful purposes under appropriate inter-
national control : report of the Secretary-
General ;

(c) Contributions of nuclear technology to the
economic and scientific advancement of the
developing countries : report of the Secretary-
General.

32. Question of the reservation exclusively for peaceful
purposes of the sea-bed and the ocean floor, and
the subsoil thereof, underlying the high seas beyond
the limits of present national jurisdiction, and
the use of their resources in the interests of man-
kind [resolution 2467 (XXIII) of 21 December
1968] :

(a) Report of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses
of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond
the Limits of National Jurisdiction ;

(b) Report of the Secretary-General.

33. Effects of atomic radiation : report of the United
Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of
Atomic Radiation [resolution 2382 (XXIII) of
1 November 1968].

' Scheduled to convene at Headquarters, New York,
on Sept. 16.

August 18, 1969

135

S4. The policies of apartheid of the Government of
South Africa : report of the Special Committee on
the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the
Republic of South Africa [resolution 2396 (XXIII)
of 2 December 1968].

35. Comprehensive review of the whole question of
peace-keeping operations in all their aspects : re-
port of the Special Committee on Peace-keeping
Operations [resolution 2451 (XXIII) of 19 Decem-
ber 1968].

36. United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Pales-
tine Refugees in the Near East [resolution 2452
(XXIII) of 19 December 1968] :

(a) Report of the Commissioner-General;

(b) Report of the Secretary-General.

37. United Nations Conference on Trade and Develop-
ment : report of the Trade and Development Board
[resolution 2402 (XXIII) of 13 December 1968].

38. United Nations Industrial Development Organiza-
tion : report of the Industrial Development Board
[resolution 2407 (XXIII) of 17 December 1968].

39. United Nations Capital Development Fund [reso-
lution 2410 (XXIII) of 17 December 1968].

40. Second United Nations Development Decade : re-
port of the Preparatory Committee for the Second
United Nations Development Decade [resolution
2411 (XXIII) of 17 December 1968].

41. International Education Tear : report of the Secre-
tary-General [resolution 2412 (XXIII) of 17
December 1968].

42. One day of war for peace [resolution 2418 (XXIII)
of 17 December 1968].

43. The role of the United Nations in training national
technical personnel for the accelerated industriali-
zation of the developing countries: report of the
Secretary-General [decision of 27 September
1968].

44. United Nations Institute for Training and Re-
search : report of the Executive Director [resolu-
tion 2388 (XXIII) of 19 November 1968].

45. Operational activities for development [resolutions
2408 (XXIII) and 2409 (XXIII) of 17 December
1968] :

(a) Activities of the United Nations Development
Programme : reports of the Governing Council ;

(b) Activities undertaken by the Secretary-
General.

46. Review of the World Food Programme [resolution
2290 (XXII) of 8 December 1967].

47. General review of the programmes and activities
in the economic, social, technical co-operation and
related fields of the United Nations, the specialized
agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency,
the United Nations Children's Fund and all other
institutions and agencies related to the United
Nations system [resolution 2188 (XXI) of 13
December 1966].

48. Draft Declaration on Social Progress and Develop-
ment [decision of 6 December 1968].

49. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees [resolution 2399 (XXIII) of 6 Decem-
ber 1968].

50. Housing, building and planning: report of the
Secretary-General [decision of 19 December 1968].

51. Town twinning as a means of international co-
operation : report of the Economic and Social Coun-
cil [decision of 19 December 1968].

52. Elimination of all forms of religious Intolerance
[decision of 19 December 1968] :

(a) Draft Declaration on the Elimination of All
Forms of Religious Intolerance ;

(b) Draft International Convention on the Elim-
ination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.

53. Creation of the post of United Nations High Com-
missioner for Human Rights [resolution 2437
(XXIII) of 19 December 1068].

54. Freedom of information [resolution 2448 (XXIII)
of 19 December 1968] :

(a) Draft Declaration on Freedom of Information ;

(b) Draft Convention on Freedom of Information.

55. Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination:

(a) Implementation of the United Nations Decla-
ration on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Di.scrimination ;

(b) Status of the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimi-
nation : report of the Secretary-General ;

(c) Programme for the celebration in 1971 of the
International Year for Action to Combat
Racism and Racial Discrimination : report of
the Secretary-General [resolution 2446
(XXIII) of 19 December 1968].

56. Measures to be taken against nazism and racial
intolerance : report of the Secretary-General [reso-
lution 2438 (XXIII) of 19 December 1968].

57. Question of the violation of human rights and
fundamental freedoms, including policies of racial
discrimination and segregation and of apartheid, in
all countries, with particular reference to colonial
and other dependent countries and territories:

(a) Measures for effectively combating racial dis-
crimination and the policies of apartheid and
segregation In southern Africa : report of the
Secretary-General [resolution 2439 (XXIII)
of 19 December 1968] ;

(b) Report of the Ad Hoc Working Group of Ex-
perts on the treatment of political prisoners in
South Africa : report of the Secretary-General
[resolution 2440 (XXIII) of 19 December
1968].

Status of the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, the International Cove-
nant on Civil and Political Rights and the Optional
Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights : report of the Secretary-General
[decision of 19 December 1968].
International Year for Human Rights : report of
the Secretary-General [re.solution 2441 (XXIII) of
19 December 1968].

60. Implementation of the recommendations of the
International Conference on Human Rights : report
of the Secretary-General [resolution 2442 (XXIII)
of 19 December 1968].

61. Resi>ect for human rights in armed conflicts : report
of the Secretary-General [resolution 2444 (XXIII)
of 19 December 1968].

62. Education of youth in the respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms : report of the Secre-
tary-General [resolution 2447 (XXIII) of 19 De-
cember 1968].

63. Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories
tran.smitted imder Article 73e of the Charter of
the United Nations [resolution 2422 (XXIII) of
18 December 1968] :

58,

59,

136

Department of State Bulletin

(a) Report of the Secretary -General :

(b) Report of the Special Committee on the Situa-
tion with regard to the Implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

64. Question of Namibia [resolutions 2403 (XXIII)
and 2404 (XXIII) and decision of 16 December
1968]:

(a) Report of the Special Committee on the Situa-
tion with regard to the Implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples ;

(b) Report of the United Nations Council for
Namibia ;

65. Question of Territories under Portuguese admin-
istration [resolution 2395 (XXIII) of 29 November
1968] :

(a) Report of the Special Committee on the Situa-
tion with regard to the Implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples ;

(b) Report of the Secretary -General.

66. Question of Fiji : report of the Special Committee
on the Situation with regard to the Implementation
of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples [decision of 18
December 1968].

67. Question of Oman : report of the Special Commit-
tee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen-
tation of the Declaration on the Granting of
Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
[resolution 2424 (XXIII) of 18 December 1968].

68. Activities of foreign economic and other interests
which are impeding the implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples in Southern Rho-
desia, Namibia and Territories under Portuguese
domination and in all other Territories under
colonial domination and efforts to eliminate
colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimination
in southern Africa : report of the Special Committee
on the Situation with regard to the Implementation
of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples [resolution 2425
(XXIII) of 18 December 1968].

69. Implementation of the Declaration on the Grant-
ing of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples by the specialized agencies and the inter-
national institutions a.ssociated with the United
Nations [resolution 2426 (XXIII) of 18 December
1968] :

(a) Report of the Special Committee on the Situa-
tion with regard to the Implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples ;

(b) Report of the Secretary-General.

TO. United Nations Educational and Training Pro-
gramme for Southern Africa : report of the Secre-
tary-General [resolution 2431 (XXIII) of 18 De-
cember 1968].

71. Offers by Member States of study and training
facilities for inhabitants of Non-Self-Goveming
Territories : report of the Secretary-General [reso-
lution 2423 (XXIII) of 18 December 1908].

72. Financial rei)orts and accounts for the financial

73.

74.
75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.
83.

84.
85.

86.

87.

year ended 31 December 1968 and reports of the
Boai-d of Auditors :

( a ) United Nations ;

(b) United Nations Development Programme ;

(d) United Nations Relief and Works Agency for
Palestine Refugees in the Near East;

(e) United Nations Institute for Training and
Research ;

(f) Voluntary funds administered by the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Supplementary estimates for the financial year
19(1'.».

Budget estimates for the financial year 1970.
Planning estimate for the financial year 1971 [reso-
lution 2370 (XXII) of 19 December 1967].
Pattern of conferences : report of the Committee on
Conferences [resolution 2478 (XXIII) of 21
December 1968].

Appointments to fUl vacancies in the membership of
subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly :

(a) Advisory Committee on Administrative and
Budgetary Questions ;

(b) Committee on Contributions ;

(d) United Nations Administrative Tribunal.
Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the
expenses of the United Nations: report of the
Committee on Contributions.

Audit reports relating to expenditure by the spe-
cialized agencies and the International Atomic
Energy Agency :

(a) Allocations from the Technical Assistance
Account of the United Nations Development
Programme ;

(b) Allocations from the Special Fund Account of
the United Nations Development Programme.

Administrative and budgetary co-ordination of the
United Nations with the specialized agencies and
the International Atomic Energy Agency : reports
of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and
Budgetary Questions [resolution 2474 (XXIII) of
21 December 1968].

Implementation of the recommendations of the Ad
Hoc Committee of Experts to Examine the Finances
of the United Nations and the Specialized Agen-
cies: report of the Advisory Committee on Ad-
ministrative and Budgetary Questions [resolution
2475 (XXIII) of 21 December 1968].
Publications and documentation of the United Na-
tions: report of the Secretary-General [resolution
2292 (XXII) of 8 December 1967].
Personnel questions [resolution 2480 (XXIII j of
21 December 1968] :

(a) Composition of the Secretariat: report of the
Secretary-General ;

( b ) ther personnel questions.

Report of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension

Board.

United Nations International School : report of the

Secretary-General [resolution 2477 (XXIII) of

21 December 1968].

Report of the International Law Commission on

the work of its twenty-first session.

Draft Convention on Special Missions [resolution

2419 (XXIII) and decision of IS December 1968].

Report of the Special Committee on the Question of

August 18, 1969

137

Defining Aggression [resolution 2420 (XXIII) of
18 December 1968].

89. Consideration of principles of international law
concerning friendly relations and co-operation
among States in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations: report of the Special Committee
on Principles of International Law concerning
Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States
[resolution 2463 (XXIII) of 20 December 1968].

90. Report of the United Nations Commission on Inter-
national Trade Law on the work of its second
session.

91. United Nations Programme of Assistance in the
Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appre-
ciation of International Law: report of the
Secretary-General [resolution 2464 (XXIII) of
20 December 1968].

92. The problems and needs of youth and its participa-
tion in national development [E3conomic and Social
Council resolution 1407 (XLVI) of 5 June 1969].

93. Amendment to Article 22 of the Statute of the Inter-
national Court of Justice (Seat of the Court) and
consequential amendments to Articles 23 and 28
[item proposed by the International Court of Jus-
tice (A/7591)].

94. Declaration and resolutions adopted by the United
Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties [item
proposed by the Secretary-General (A/7592)]:

(a) Declaration on Universal Participation in the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties;

(b) Resolution relating to article 1 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties;

95. Fiftieth anniversary of the International Labour
Organisation [item proposed by the Secretary-
General (A/7593)].

96. Amendments to the rules of procedure of the Gen-
eral Assembly resulting from the amendment to
rule 51 [item proposed by the Secretary-General
(A/7594)].

United Nations Documents:
A Selected Bibliography

Mimeographed or processed documents {such as those
listed below) may 6e consulted at depository libraries
in the United States. V.N. printed publications may be
purchased from the Sales Section of the United Nations,
United Nations Plaza, N.Y.

Security Council

Report of the Secretary General on Chemical and
Bacteriological (Biological) Weapons and the
Effects of Their Possible Use. S/9292. July 1, 1969.
124 pp.

Special Report of the Secretary General on the In-
creasing Ineffectiveness of the Cease-Fire in the
Suez Canal Sector. S/9316. July 5, 1969. 3 pp.

Letter dated July 10 from the Chars^ d' Affaires a.i. of
the United Arab Republic, in response to the special
report of the Secretary General. S/9321. July 10,
1969. 3 pp.

TREATY INFORMATION

Estate Tax Convention Signed
With the Netherlands

Press release 196 dated July 15

Secretary Rogers and the Netherlands Minis-
ter, Hendrik C. Maclaine Pont, on July 15
signed a convention and protocol between the
United States and the Netherlands for the
avoidance of double taxation and the prevention
of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on estates
and inheritances.

The convention follows in general the pur-
pose and substantive pattern of estate tax con-
ventions now in force between the United States
and 12 other countries, but is based in large
part on the model estate tax convention pub-
lished in 1966 by the Organization for Eco-
nomic Cooperation and Development.

The convention with the Netherlands is the
first of its kind to be negotiated since the enact-
ment of the Foreign Investors Tax Act of 1966
and reflects provisions of that act designed to
encourage portfolio investment in this country.
On a reciprocal basis the convention exempts
stock and obligations held by portfolio investors
domiciled in the other country. United States
estate tax jurisdiction is retained with respect
to foreign portfolio investments in this country,
with reduced rates and increased exemptions.

One of the most significant features of the
convention is a newly developed provision
whereby a citizen of one of the comitries
domiciled in that country would be able to live
up to 7 years in the other country without hav-
ing his estate become subject (if he should die
there) to the estate or inheritance tax juris-
diction of such other country if he does not have
a clear intention of remaining there indefinitely.
Under Netherlands law and the OECD model
convention the estate of a decedent who was
only temporarily present in the country may
be subject to estate or inheritance tax. Such tax
rules have posed problems for American busi-
nessmen in Europe working for a branch or
corporate affiliate of an American firm. The
convention with the Netherlands deals with
such problems in a manner not dealt with in
the OECD model convention.

138

Department of State Bulletin

Chapter I (articles 1 and 2) of the convention
with the Netherlands relates to the scope of the
convention, defining the taxes to which it
applies: (a) in the case of the United States,
the Federal estate tax; and (b) in the case of
the Netherlands, the succession duty and the
transfer duty at death.

Chapter II (articles 3 and 4) contains defini-
tions of terms found in the convention. Article
3 contains general definitions, and article 4
deals particularly with the question of fiscal
domicile.

Chapter III (articles 5-10) sets forth taxing
mles. Article 5 relates to the api^lication of
domestic laws. Article 6 relates to immovable
property. Article 7 relates to business property
of a permanent establishment and assets per-
taining to a fixed base used for the performance
of professional services. Article 8 relates to
taxation on the basis of domicile. Article 9 re-
lates to taxation on the basis of citizenship. Ar-
ticle 10 relates to exemptions in certain cases
where property may be taxed solely by reason
of article 6 or 7.

The accompanying protocol sets forth certain
understandings concerning the interpretation
and application of the convention.

i Current Actions

MULTILATERAL

Atomic Energy

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to the bilateral
agreement between the United States and Argentina
of June 22, 1962, as amended (TIAS 5125, 5660), for
cooperation concerning civil uses of atomic energy.
Signed at Vienna December 2, 1964. Entered into
force March 1, 1966. TIAS 6004.
Terminated: July 25, 1969.

Agreement for the application of safeguards by the
International Atomic Energy Agency to the bilateral
agreement between the United States and Argentina
of June 25, 1969, for eooi)eration concerning civil
uses of atomic energy. Signed at Vienna June 13,
1969.
Entered into force: July 25, 1969.

Aviation

Convention for the unification of certain rules relating
to international transportation by air with protocol.
Done at Warsaw October 12, 1929. Entered into
force February 13, 1933 ; for the United States Octo-
ber 29, 1934. 49 Stat. 3000.
Accession deposited: Libya, May 16, 1969.

Finance

Amendment to the articles of agreement of the Inter-

national Monetary Fund (TIAS 1501). Done at
Washington May 31, 1968.
Entered into force: July 28, 1969.

Grains

International grains arrangement, 1967, with annexes.

Open for signature at Washington October 15

through November 30, 1967. Entered into force

July 1, 1968. TIAS 6537.

Ratification of the Wheat Trade Convention de-
posited: Netherlands, April 29, 1969."

Ratification of the Food Aid Convention deposited:
Netherlands, April 29, 1969."

Postal Matters

Constitution of the Universal Postal Union with final
protocol, general regulations with final protocol, and
convention with final protocol and regulations of
execution. Done at Vienna July 10, 1964. Entered
into force January 1, 1966. TIAS 5881.
Ratification deposited: Ethiopia, June 18, 1969.

BILATERAL

Argentina

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy, as amended. Signed at Washington
June 22, 1962. Entered into force July 27, 1962. TIAS
5125, 5660.
Terminated: July 25, 1969.

Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington June 25, 1969.
Entered into force: July 25, 1969.

Canada

Agreement governing the coordination of pilotage
services on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Sea-
way, as amended. Effected by exchange of notes at
Washington April 13, 1967. Entered into force
April 13, 1967. TIAS 6252, 6352, 6477.
Terminated: July 31, 1969.

Agreement governing the operation of pilotage on the
Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, vrith memo-
randum of arrangements. Effected by exchange of
notes at Washington July 31, 1969. Entered into
force July 31, 1969.

Japan

Agreement concerning the Trust Territory of the Paci-
fic Islands, with exchanges of notes. Signed at Tokyo
AprU 18, 1969.
Entered into force: July 7, 1969.

Pakistan

Agreement relating to the establishment and operation
of a communications center at Peshawar, with min-
ute of understanding and exchange of letters. Ef-
fected by exchange of notes at Karachi July 18, 1959.
Entered into force July 18, 1959. TIAS 4281.
Terminated: July 17, 1969.

Agreement amending the agricultural commodities
agreement of May 16, 1968 (TIAS 6496). Effected by
exchange of notes at Rawalpindi and Islamabad
May 16 and June 13, 1969. Entered into force June 13,
1969.

' For the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Europe,
Surinam, and the Netherlands Antilles.
- For the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Europe.

August 18, 1969

139

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

United States Embassy Opened
in Equatorial Guinea

Press release 224 aated July 31

The American Embassy at Santa Isabel, Capital
of the ReiJublic of Equatorial Guinea, will be officially
opened on August 1.

The official opening will follow by approximately 10
months the October 12, 1968, date of Equatorial
Guinea's independence. However, the United States has
maintained official diplomatic relations since Albert
W. Sherer presented his Ambassadorial credentials
to Equatorial Guinea's President Francisco Macias
Nguema on November 21, 1968. Ambassador Sherer is
also accredited to Togo and is resident in Lom4, the
Togolese Capital. His Deputy Chief of Mission for
Equatorial Guinea is Albert N. Williams, who has
served as the resident U.S. representative in the coun-
try since arriving in Santa Isabel in January of this
year.

After the official opening of the Embassy, Mr. Wil-
liams will be designated U.S. Charge d'Affaires ad
interim when acting for Ambassador Sherer.

Confirmations

The Senate on July 30 confirmed the nomination of
Kenneth Franzheim II to be Ambassador to New Zea-
land. (For biographic details, see White House press
release dated June 23.)

PUBLICATIONS

Volume IX in Foreign Relations
Series for 1945 Released

On July 17 the Department of State released Foreign
Relations of the United States, 19^5, Volume IX, The
American RepiMies (x, 1,466 pages). This volume in-
cludes documentation on the relations of the United
States with each of its Latin American neighbors.
Much of the documentation relates to winding up situ-
ations created by the Second World War, including
provision for the continuing development of hemisphere
defense and efforts to ease the impact of the economic
slowdown consequent upon the end of hostilities.

Besides the compilations devoted to the relations of
the United States with the individual Republics of
Latin America, considerable space is allocated to multi-
lateral policies and relations with the region as a
whole. Among the most important of these were the
Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and
Peace, held at Mexico City (the Chapultepec Con-
ference), and preparations for the proposed Inter-
American Conference for the Maintenance of Conti-
nental Peace and Security, which met ultimately at Rio
de Janeiro in 1947.

Copies of volume IX (Department of State publica-
tion 8452) may be obtained from the Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20402, for $7 each.

Recent Releases

For sale hy the Superintendent o/ Documents, V.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20^02.
Address requests direct to the Superintendent of Docu-
ments. A 25-percent discount is made on orders for 100
or more copies of any one puhlication mailed to the
same address. Remittances, payable to the Superintend-
ent of Documents, must accompany orders.

United States Foreign Policy: Some Major Issues — A
Statement by Secretary Rogers Before the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reprinted from the
Department of State Bulletin of April 14, 1969. Pub.
8456. General Foreign Policy Series 232. 8 pp. 25(f.

Fishing Operations — Northeastern Pacific Ocean.

Agreement with the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub-
lics relating to the agreement of December 14, 19(i4.
TIAS 6637. 3 pp. lOf*.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with India.
TIAS 6&42. 6 pp. \0(t.

Columbia River Basin — Special Operating Program for
Canadian Storage. Agreement with Canada. TIAS
6643. 8 pp. 10^.

Air Transport Services. Agreement, with exchange of
letters, with Czechoslovakia. TIAS 6644. 30 pp. 20('.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Turkey.
TIAS 664.5. IS pp. 15«*.

Seismic Observations — Project Vela Uniform. Agree-
ment with Canada extending the agreement of Mav 18,
June 28 and 29, 1965. TIAS 6646. 3 pp. lO^*.

Telecommunication — Facility on Norfolk Island To
Study Ionospheric Propagation in Relation to Lonp:
Range Radio Paths. Agreement with Australia. TIAS
6647. 5 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Morocco.
TIAS 6648. 7 pp. 10(^.

Atomic Energy — Application of Safeguards by the
United States to Natural Uranium Transferred From
Canada, Agreement with Canada. TIAS 6649. 4 pp-
10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Viot-Nam. ,
TIAS 6650. 3 pp. lO^*.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Viet-Nam.
TIAS 6651. 3 pp. 10^.

140

Department of State Bulletin i

INDEX August 18, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1573

China. Restrictions Eased on U.S. Travel to Ck)m-
monist China 126

Congress

Confirmations (Franzheim) 140

Mr. Gilbert Named Representative for Trade

Negotiations 134

Senate Confirms Members of ACDA Advisory

Committee 126

Department and Foreign Service

Confirmations (Franzheim) 140

United States Embassy Opened in Equatorial
Guinea 1-10

Disarmament. Senate Confirms Members of
ACDA Advisory Committee 126

Economic Affairs

Estate Tax Convention Signed With the Nether-
lands 138

Bestrictions Eased on U.S. Travel to Communist
China 126

Tetiuhe Mining, Lena Goldfields Claims Receiv-
able Through 1969 134

C.S.-Japan Joint Economic Committee Meets at
Tokyo (Rogers, text of communique) . . . 121

El Salvador. Honduran-Salvadoran Conflict Re-
solved by OAS (Department statement, texts
of resolutions and declaration) 132

Equatorial Guinea. United States Embassy
Opened in Equatorial Guinea 140

France. U.S. and France To Confer on Scientific
Cooperation 134

Honduras. Honduran-Salvadoran Conflict Re-
solved by OAS (Department statement, texts
of resolutions and declaration) 132

International Law. The Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties (Stevenson) 127

International Organizations and Conferences.

Honduran-Salvadoran Conflict Resolved by
OAS (Department statement, texts of resolu-
tions and declaration) 132

Japan. D.S.-Japan Joint Economic Committee
-Meets at Tokyo (Rogers, text of communi-
que) 121

Netherlands. Estate Tax Convention Signed
With the Netherlands 138

New Zealand. Franzheim confirmed as Ambas-
sador 140

Passports. Restrictions Eased on U.S. Travel to
Communist China 126

Publications

Recent Releases 140

Volume IX in Foreign Relations Series for 1945
Released 140

Science. U.S. and France To Confer on Scientific
Cooperation 134

Trade

Mr. Gilbert Named Representative for Trade

Negotiations 134

U.S.-Japan Joint Ecouomic Committee Meets at

Tokyo (Rogers, text of communique) . . . 121

Treaty Information

Current Actions 139

Estate Tax ConvenHon Signed With the Nether-
lands 138

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

(Stevenson) 127

United Nations

United Nations Documents 138

Provisional Agenda, Twenty-fourth Session of
U.N. General Assembly 135

Viet-Nam. 28th Plenary Session on Viet-Nam
Held at Paris (Lodge) 124

'Name Index

Franzheim, Kenneth, II 140

Gilbert, Carl J 134

Lodge, Henry Cabot 124

Rogers, Secretary 121

Stevenson, John R 127

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 28-August 3

Press releases may be obtained from the Office
of Press Relations, Department of State, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20520.

Releases issued prior to July 28 which appear
in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 196 and
198 of July 15 and 211 (corrected) of July 29.

No. Date Suljjctt

*217 7/28 Xlitalo sworn in as Ambassador to

Paraguay (biographic details).
218 7/29 Rogers: Joint U.S.-Japan Commit-
tee on Trade and Economic
Affairs.

'219 7/29 U.S. delegation to fisheries confer-
ence, Buenos Aires, July 30.

*220 7/30 Greenwald sworn in as U.S. Repre-
sentative to OECD (biographic
details).

t221 7/31 Rogers: U.S.-Japan space coopera-
tion agreement.

t222 7/30 Johnson : Ocean Space Subcommit-
tee of Senate Foreign Relations
Committee.

223 7/31 Lodge: 28th plenary session on

Viet-Nam at Paris.
223A7/31 Lodge: additional remarks.

224 7/31 U.S. Embassy in Equatorial Guinea

opened.

225 7/31 Communique of Joint U.S.-Japan

Committee on Trade and Eco-
nomic Affairs.

*226 8/1 Byroade sworn in as Ambassador
to the Philippines (biographic
details) .

*227 8/1 Program for visit of Chancellor
Kiesinger of the Federal Republic
of Germany, August 5-9.

t228 8/1 Candidates nominated for election
to International Court of Justice
(rewrite).

*Not printed.

tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin.

Superintendent of Documents
U.S. government printing office

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING Ola

IM AVT O

20 YEARS OF PEACE

:0V

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECOKD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1574

August 25, 1969

PRESIDENT NIXON'S ROUND-THE-WORLD TRIP
JULY 26-AUGUST 3

Selected Documentation

Supen;

Boston Public Library
int^ndent of Documents

sr? 1 1969

DEPOSITORY

For contents see inside back cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1574
August 25, 1969

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Government Printing OflBco

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

62 Issues, domestic $16, foreign $23
Single copy 30 cents
XTso of funds for printing of this publication
approved by the Director of the Bureau of
the Budget (January 11, 1966).
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 BULLETIN is indexed In
the Readers' Qulde to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, 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 selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
nuide by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as u^ll as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of tlie
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

President Nixon's Round-the-World Trip

On July 24, from the deck of the U.S.S. Hornet, President Nixon
observed the splashdown and recovery of the Apollo 11 spacecraft and
afterward flew to Guam for an overnight stop. On July 26 the Presi-
dent hegan a series of official visits to m,eet with chiefs of state and
heads of government in the Philippines {July 26-27), Indonesia
{July 27-28), Thailand {July 28-30), India {July 31-August 1),
and Pakistan {August 1-2) . On July 30 the President made a previ-
ously unannounced visit to the Republic of Viet-Nam, ^ohere he met
with President Nguyen Van Thieu at Saigon. Later that day he
visited the headquarters of the First Infantry Division at Di An. On
August 2 and 3 President Nixon made an official visit to Romania at
the invitation of President Nicolae Ceausescu. En route to Washington
on August 3, the President stopped at Mildenhall Air Force Base in
England for a brief meeting with Prime Minister Harold Wilson.

Following are texts of remarks and statements made on various
occasions throughout the President's trip.

MANILA, THE PHILIPPINES

Exchange of Greetings, Manila
International Airport, July 26

White House press release (Manila, the Philippines) dated
July 26

President Marcos

In the name of the Filipino people I bid you
and Mrs. Nixon welcome to the Philippines, to
this country which has welcomed you before
with open arms and to whom you are no
stranger.

Gratefully we remember one of your previous
visits. As Vice President of the United States
you came to solemnly affirm your Government's
recognition of Philippine ownership and sov-
ereignty over the American bases on our soil.

Today you honor us again by coming to these
shores as the President of the United States.
And you come at a time when the imagination
of the whole world has been fired by America's
historic achievement in space exploration.

It is for us significant that the Philippines
should be your first stop in your journey through
Asia after witnessing two of three American

astronauts on the moon and their return, a feat
unparalleled in implications, in radicalism, and
in the prospects of hope it promises man in the
entire history of human achievement.

Your visit, too, makes us feel ourselves to be
part of this meaningful triimiph, vicariously a
partner in the conquest of a new frontier ; just
as over 60 years ago the Philippines became the
first major involvement of the United States in
Asian affairs.

At that time we could not join in any celebra-
tion, but changing circumstances enable us
today to stand straight and strong, thanks also
to the great coimtry, the United States of
America, to join them in applauding this feat
not of arms but of mind and fortitude. Even as
we do this, we are mindful that yours is a
triumph also of Asians, as well as of all man-
kind. For today every human being, every na-
tion, all humanity, partake of the labor, of the
hope, and of the responsibility that goes into the
invention or discovery of whatever is new.

In recalling the beginning of the association
between our two peoples on this, the occasion of
America's victory in outer space, we are also
reminded that many things remain to be

August 25, 1969

141

achieved in the mutual relations between our
two countries. But I am confident that in any
future history, it shall not be said that America
was a success in all its undertakings except in
the si:)here of human and social relations. I
trust it shall not be said that America success-
fully breached the frontiers of space and tech-
nology but failed in matters close to the heart
and mind, the relations of man with other men.

I am certain this will not be so, because in-
creasingly today teclmology and science are
bound up with the things that concern the wel-
fare and the happiness of human beings, as the
negative example of war has shown us. It is my
hope — one that is shared by all of my country-
men, regardless of partisan belief — that the
powerful thrust of technology and science shall
be applied, not only by the United States but
by all countries, on unresolved problems of hu-
man misery and imhappiness everywhere. Let
this present triumph be the springboard for a
more vigorous attack on these problems in this
region.

Your visit to the Philippines gives us the
distinct honor of being able to be the first to
personally congratulate you on this historic
achievement, which we very much appreciate. It
also affords us the opportunity, during your
brief stay with us, to resume our discussions on
outstanding issues affecting our two countries'
relations in Southeast Asia and to advance our
countries' interests, but not at the expense of
the others.

It is hoped that out of these discussions a new
consensus can be achieved between us whose
basis will be a dignified and self-respecting
mutual regard for each other. For this I voice
the hope of millions of my countrymen for the
coming of a new era of peace and prosperity
not only in the Pliilippines but for all of Asia,
which they believe these great events which you
lead portend.

Let your coming, therefore, signal the start
of a new series of constructive breakthroughs in
the relations between us and among the coun-
tries of the Pacific and Asia, and let your
courageous astronauts symbolize our quest for
peace and partnership for global welfare and
prosperity among all peoples, a goal worthy of
our utmost dedication. On the ethics of gen-
erosity and of responsibility, America's record
is clear that it had been exemplary both in its
commitment and its fulfillment.

In the list of Presidents who have flashed
through the brilliant pages of America's history,
you are to us in Asia the most knowledgeable
about the problems and the aspirations of the
countries and of the peoples of Asia. To Asia
you are no stranger ; to the Philippines you are
more than a friend, for you first came as a
guarantor of the sovereign rights of the Filipino
people. By a fortunate coincidence this triumph
of American science and spirit comes at a time,
during your administration, when the United
States is anxious to reexamine her national pur-
poses in relation to the rest of the world.

Thus, as you commence tliis visit, its mani-
fold meanings will not be lost to Asia and to
all who long for peace and prosperity. For you
come, we trust, not only to reinforce the tradi-
tional guarantees that bind your world to ours ;
you come also to proffer new gifts that science
can brijig to all mankind ; and you come, we are
certain, to forge in the smithies of the world,
because of your courage, your vision, your states-
manship, a brilliant new role for America; and
history will remember you as its wise and far-
seeing architect.

In this spirit, I bid you once again welcome to
the Pliilippines and to Asia.

President Nixon

. . . the first Asian capital that I am visiting
on this trip which takes me around the world
is very appropriately Manila and the coimtry is
the Philippines. The reasons for that have al-
ready been mentioned by President Marcos.

I would like to add to what he has said in just
a few words.

As we think of that great venture into space,
as we think of the first man setting foot on the
moon, we realize the meaning that that has,
clearly apart from the teclmical achievement
that if man can reach the moon, we can bring
peace to the earth. And that should be the great
lesson of that great space journey for all of us.

This mission, which begins here, is in the quest
of peace, peace in the Pacific, peace in Asia,
peace in the world.

I come here because the Philippines, the
leaders of this country, have played and will
play a great role in bringing that peace. And it
seems to me that we must think of the Pacific
and of Asia in terms of the past, of the present,
and the future.

142

Department of State Bulletin

We went through "World War II together.
We have gone through Korea together. We now
have a war in Viet-Nam. And when we look at
the possibilities of potential war, down to the
end of this century, perhaps we would have to
say that the greatest danger exists in Asia and
ill the Pacific.

But that also presents the greatest challenge.
And the challenge I think can be met — it must
be met.

And I want to speak very candidly to my
friends in the Philippines, because I know you
like straight talk. I know that in your political
campaigns you have a lot of straight talk, just
as we have in the United States.

But if peace is to come from Asia — and I
emphasize this point — the United States will
play its part and provide its fair share. But
peace in Asia cannot come from the United
States. It must come from Asia. The people of
Asia, the governments of Asia — they are the
ones who must lead the way to peace in Asia.

That is why I compliment the leaders of the
Philippines in playing a role in Asian coopera-
tion economically, politically, and otherwise to
bring about the peace that we all seek.

And then in another vein, we realize, as we
look at that great venture in sjjace, the larger
meaning that it has for all of us in terms of
seeking peace.

A great French philosopher once said that
true friendship comes not when we look at each
other but when we look outward together in the
same direction. And for just a few moments,
the whole world looks outward together in the
same direction — toward the moon. And as we
did that, we were brought closer together.

Your own great President Quezon put it very
eloquently when he said that nationalism can be
a very constructive force in the world but that
nationalism is most constructive when we re-
member that we are all part of the great human
family; that being part of that great human
family, the greatest role that any nation can
play is the role of serving the interests of all
mankind and of, therefore, serving the interests
of peace.

As I conclude, I want to speak very directly,
too, about the relations between our two coun-
tries, relations that I have a very strong feeling
about, as I am sure that everybody here, be he

Filipino or American, has a strong feeling
about. Let me be quite candid.

It is true that our relations with the Philip-
pines go back further than that of any Asian
nation. It is true that the people of the United
States feel closer to the people of the Philip-
pines than we do to the people of any Asian
nation. This is because of those thmgs that we
have shared together.

It is also true that our relations have been
strained, strained recently for a variety of rea-
sons. We are still very good friends, but even
among fi-iends it is possible to have strained
relations.

And I want everybody here to know that as
I come to the Philippines in this brief stay, I
hope that we can initiate a new era in Philip-
pine-American relations, not returning to the
old special relationships — because the winds of
change have swept away those factors — but
building a new relationship, a new relationship
which will be based on mutual trust, on mutual
respect, on mutual confidence, on mutual
cooperation.

That is what we want, and that is what I tliink
the people of the Pliilippines and of the United
States will support.

So, Mr. President, in that spirit and in the
spirit of your %^ery eloquent remarks, again I
thank you for this wonderful welcome.

In that spirit, also, I say from the bottom of
my heart to all of our friends in the Pliilippines :
Mubuhay.

Statement by President Nixon
on the Asian Development Bank

White House press release (Manila, Uie Philippines) dated
July 27

On this first trip which I have made to Asia
as President of the United States, I will be able
to visit only five nations. I am particularly hap-
py, therefore, to have this opportimity to ad-
dress a statement to the Asian Development
Bank. For in that way I can, on behalf of my
countrymen, express my appreciation to all 20
of the Asian nations wliich belong to the Bank.

The United States firmly supports the cause
of economic development in Asia. And we there-
fore support the work of the Asian Development
Bank, for we believe that this Bank will play a
critical role in that development. That is why
I requested in May that our Congress appropri-

August 25, 1969

143

ate $20 million for the ordinary capital of the
Asian Development Bank and $25 million to its
Special Fund during the next fiscal year.

The Asian Development Bank was bom be-
cause its founders recognized the importance of
international cooperation — both within Asia
and between this continent and the rest of the
world — in achieving economic progress.

This Bank, with its 33 member nations, exem-
plifies such cooperation. ^\nien our Secretary of
the Treasury attended the Bank's Board of
Governors meeting in Sycbiey this past April, he
underscored tliis point. The Asian Development
Bank can "point the way to even greater co-
operation among nations . . ." he said, and he
described it, therefore, as a "unique and inspir-
ing step in the history of man." I wholeheart-
edly endorse liis statement.

In addition, the Asian Development Bank is a
prime example of what President Marcos has
called "Asian solutions to Asian problems." It is,
above all else, an Asian institution, with its
headquarters in a key Asian commercial and eco-
nomic center, and with a requirement tliat the
Bank's President, seven of its 10 directors, and
60 percent of its capital must come from Asia.
This is as it should be. Only a great sense of
commitment and cooperation among the Asian
peoples themselves can make this institution
successful and bring the development that all of
us seek. The United States and other non-Asian
nations can play a certain role within that
framework, but the leadership must always
come from Asia.

The future of the Bank is Asia's potential;
and Asia is on the move. A number of Asian
countries have experienced economic growth
rates in excess of 10 percent annually over the
last 5 years. Taiwan's trade has quadrupled since
1958, and its GNP has doubled. Korea, whose
exports were only $16 million in 1958, exported
20 times that much— $320 million— in 1967. Like
Taiwan, its increased exports were from new in-
dustries; the traditional agricultural exports
have given way to a wide variety of industrial
products, most of which are exported to de-
veloped countries. The Philippines has devel-
oped new high-yield strains of rice which are
now being planted in India, Indonesia, and
Laos. Singapore, like Hong Kong, is changing
from a center of transit trade to a center of
industry.

This astonisliing growth in the past few years

of trade, industry, agricultural production, and
the exchange of ideas is only a beginning. I ap-
plaud the Bank's accomplishments and extend
my best wishes as it serves as a catalyst to this
exciting new Asian dynamism. I also take this
opportimity to extend my personal regards to
the Bank's President, Mr. Watanabe.

Exchange of Remarks, Manila
International Airport, July 27

White House press release (Manila, the Philippines) dated
July 27

President Marcos

The time has come for us, the Filipino people,
to say goodby to our friend from the great
American nation, their leader and President,
President Richard Nixon. It is with a heavy
heart that we do say goodby.

But we have, I hope, been able to present to
them a country that since the beginning of the
century has welcomed them with open arms.

I believe you go to your other destinations,
Mr. President, with the same thought that we
have ; that is, that there are no friends like old
friends.

"We are indeed honored and pleased that you
came to visit with us. More than the importance
of the subject or the specific issues that may
have been taken up in the conversations between
the two heads of state is the fact tliat tliere have
been consultations and that the leader of the
greatest power on earth at the height of its
greatest triumph, the success of space explora-
tion, should see fit to come and consult with the
nations of Asia, not only about policy but about
the future of Asia.

We must, indeed, say that the candor, frank-
ness, and the openness being shown in these con-
ferences and consultations have led us to clear
all the doubts that we had about the policies of
the United States of America ; for before you
came, Mr. President, I was not alone in feeling
dread and doubt about the emerging policies of
the United States in Asia. You have met us with
frankness, and from these conversations I can
now announce to our people that, while before
we dreaded the possibility that the United
States was going to abandon Asia completely
and on the other extreme that there might be
again reestablished the policy of colonial domi-
nance over the Asian countries, the President of

144

Department of State Bulletin

the United States has made it clear, first, that
he encourages nationalism in each and every
Asian country, including that of the Philip-
pines.

"VVe are happy to note that in accordance with
the libertarian traditions of the United States
of America he recognizes the need for the treat-
ment of his Asian allies and friends with dig-
nity. It is indeed gratifj'ing to note, too, that
while treating Asia with the policy of encour-
agement of nationalism, independence, and free-
dom, he does not intend to abandon Asia ; that
while we are moving toward what we have
always hoped for, through political and eco-
nomic independence, he supports the idea of
Asian countries being able to defend themselves
alone if necessary and helping them and sup-
porting them with whatever aid he can extend
to them in these particular tasks.

"We are happy, Mr. President, that you have
come to us to consult with us on matters that
involve Asia. I have said before that the Philip-
pines feels that the greatest danger to it is not
external aggression but internal subversion.

Our history indicates that we are capable of
meeting internal subversion with our own troops
and that we do not intend to call upon any for-
eign power to help us with foreign troops. We
have demonstrated this in fighting the Huk-
balahaps, and we intend to protect and defend
our free institutions with our lives, alone if
necessary. But we are happy that you guaran-
tee to us that the treaties that we have entered
into shall be complied with and that you are an
ally, indeed, who understands our problems.

So, Mr. President, may I repeat what the
Asians say in saying goodby: "I die a small
death, we die a small death, as you go and we
say goodby, but it is our hope that we shall live
continuously in the friendship and affection
that we have for each other."

We hope, Mr. President and Mrs. Nixon, that
you have a happy voyage and happy landings
and that your trips to other nations will be as
productive as your trip to the Philippines.

Thank you.

President Nixon

I begin by saying that the eloquent remarks
that President Marcos has just uttered are ones
that I subscribe to, because they in a very defini-
tive way sum up the conversations that we have

had during the period that we have been
together.

I would also say that if this trip, which will
take me to several other Asian nations as well
as to two European nations — if this trip were to
have included only the Philippines, our coming
here, the conversations that we have had, the
welcome that we have received, would have
made it all worth while. We are deeply grateful
to those of you who have welcomed us so warm-
ly and also to the President and to Mrs. Marcos
for their very gracious hospitality.

I believe that, as one who has been here in that
period of time when so many changes have oc-
curred in Asia, I can really evaluate what has
happened and what will happen in the future.

When I was first here in 1953, the countries
of Asia were moving out of a period of colonial-
ism. They had a new sense of independence — a
new sense of independence but not the ability
and, in some instances, not the means, the desire,
to use that independence to create the self-reli-
ance which true independence requires.

Then after moving from the period of colo-
nialism to independence there came an imeasy
period of dependence upon others for their se-
curity and also for their progress.

Now we reach a new period — a period in
which there will continue to be assistance and
cooperation, particularly from the United
States of America as a Pacific power, and the
economic and other developments that are go-
ing forward in this exciting part of the world,
and in which there will continue to be, insofar
as any intervention by major powers, a military
presence as far as the United States is con-
cerned so that these nations can have that inde-
pendence which they have fought so hard to
get — where our desire is like the desire of the
l^eople of the Philippines and, I am sure, of the
other peoples of the other great nations that we
will visit : that each of them can now acquire a
new sense of independence in the most complete
sense that we can describe it.

I mean the independence that comes with eco-
nomic strength, with political stability, and also
with the means insofar as any threat internally
that may occur in those countries — the ability to
handle those internal problems without outside
assistance, except that kind of assistance which
is limited to material support and which, of
course, would therefore exclude the kind of sup-

August 25, 1969

145

port which would involve a commitment of
manpower.

This is a goal. It is a goal that we can now
achieve. It is a goal that all the nations of Asia
want to achieve, and it is one that we, the people
of the United States and the Government of the
United States, want to work with them to
acliieve. Certainly there is no coimtry in Asia,
than the country which I am now leaving, which
more symbolizes the truth of what I have said
tlian the Philippines.

We have a special relationship with the Phil-
ippines which will always be in our hearts. But
we also recognize that the Pliilippines, which
was once in a colonial status as far as the United
States is concerned and then in a dependent
status, is now feeling, as it should feel, that sense
of constructive nationalism, as President
Quezon has described it so many years ago,
which is so, it seems to me : the wave of the fu-
ture in Asia and also in all of the world in which
nations have gone through these same phases.

It is good that we came here first — good that
we saw our oldest friends and our closest friends
first ; got their advice as we did on these subjects
that I have described and also on the compli-
cated problems of Viet-Nam, bringing peace to
Viet-Nam — how that peace then can be achieved
in the balance of Asia, what U.S. policies should
be in Asia after Viet-Nam — all of these, as well
as the many bilateral subjects, were those that
were covered in our conversations.

... we will cari"y from this visit many mem-
ories, the memories of our conversations and the
constructive activities that will come from them.
But above everything else, we will remember
yesterday, that drive into the city, the hundreds
of thousands of people that lined the streets —
and particularly the faces of the children, the
children of the Philippines, the children of
Asia, the children of all mankind, smiling,
happy, looking to the future.

The President and I share one thing in com-
mon. We are both lawyers. Today I would say
that we could say, as Woodrow Wilson once
said, that we have only as our clients the chil-
dren of the world, the children of this country,
of our country, and of all the others of the
world, because what we do in these years ahead
will determine the future of those wonderful
children that we saw j-esterday.

This is the sentiment that I take away in my
heart today. We thank you for giving us that
warm welcome and this great send off on the bal-
ance of a trip that will take us on around the
world.

DJAKARTA, INDONESIA

Exchange of Greetings, Kemayoran
International Airport, July 27

President Suharto ^

First of all, in the name of the Government of
Indonesia, of the whole people of Indonesia, and
on my own behalf, allow me to extend to you,
Mr. President, and to the distinguished mem-
bers of your party, a warm welcome.

This moment and the recent past are ex-
tremely memorable to the relation between the
United States of America and Indonesia, to the
Americans themselves, and to the future of
mankind.

Your Excellency has previously visited In-
donesia, but today for the first time a President
of the United States of America pays a visit
to the Eepublic of Indonesia.

A few days ago, three brave American astro-
nauts, the first human beings, have set their feet
on the moon ; they are now safe and soimd back
in this world. Once again, on behalf of the
people of Indonesia and in my personal behalf,
I would like to congratulate the United States
of America for their extraordinary acliieve-
ment; and as a member of the community of
nations, we take pride in your brilliant success.
I am sure that, in essence, the objective of the
United States of America and other advanced
countries is part of the efforts in attaining
greater happiness for men in a peacefid world.

Likewise, I am convinced that your visit to
this country and to several others is to pave the
way toward the realization of men's welfare and
to strengthen the foundations of that peaceful
world.

We know the United States of America not
merely as the richest coimtry in the world, nor
for their extraordinary technological poten-

' Translation made available by the White House
Press Office (Weekly Compilation of Presidential Docu-
ments dated Aug. 4).

146

Department of State Bulletin

tiality, but rather as a nation which strives for
equality of all mankind.

As a free nation, we are also very grateful to
the United States of America, which left us a
profound impression, because the United States
of America is one among many other nations
which comprehends our national aspirations at
the time when the Republic of Indonesia
proclaimed its independence almost a quarter
of a century ago.

At present, we are implementing our develop-
ment program as a sequel of replenishing it. We
highly appi-eciate that during the difficult early
stages of our development, the United States of
America, as a friendly country, has once again
shown its understanding and provided Indo-
nesia with the necessary assistance.

Mr. President, I hope that during your pres-
ent visit you may observe closely the determina-
tion and the efforts of the people of Indonesia
in building their future.

I also expect that our forthcoming discussions
wiU be extremely valuable in exchanging views
relating various problems toward world peace
and a more extensive people's welfare, precisely
because today the nations in the world, par-
ticularly in Asia, are still alarmed by war, by
the threat of war which menaces world peace.
All of us, without exception, should safeguard
mankind.

It is my ardent desire, and I am sure it will
be also cherished by Your Excellency, that this
momentous visit constitutes a new page to foster
mutual understanding, strengthen friendly rela-
tions, and to expand cooperation between both
our countries.

We wholeheartedly welcome Your Excel-
lency, Mrs. Nixon, and members of your party,
and we hope that you will enjoy your stay in our
country among the people of Iiidonesia.

I thank you.

President Nixon

White House press release (Djakarta, Indonesia) dated
July 27

As I stand here in Djakarta on this beauti-
fully brilliant day, I realize that this is a very
special occasion for me and for my wife and,
in a sense, in the relations between our two
countries.

It was 16 years ago that I first visited Indo-
nesia, and Indonesia's was the first Asian capital
that I visited as Vice President of the United

States. I remember the warm welcome we re-
ceived all over the coimtry on that occasion, and
we have always wanted to return.

Then again in 1967 I had the privilege of re-
turning as a private citizen, and at that time,
Mr. President, it was my privilege to meet you
and to talk to you and to others in your
Government.

Now, as I stand here today, I realize that for
the first time in liistory, a President of the
United States of America is visiting Indonesia.
This is a privilege for me, to be the President
at tliis time — at this time in the history of our
country, of your country, and the history of
civilization — because this is a momentous time,
a time that we will always remember.

We realize that just a few days ago tlie first
men from earth set foot on the moon, and all of
our ideas about the heavens and the limitations
that we have on earth thereby were changed.

We have a saying in our country : The sky is
the limit. And up imtil the time that these two
men set foot on the moon, that was the ultimate
that anyone coidd say — the sky is the limit.

And now no longer is the sky the limit. Be-
cause of what happened — not simply because
two Americans set foot on the moon but because
two men who represented all mankind, all the
people on earth, set foot on the moon — the sky
is no longer the limit. And if we can soar beyond
the sky, certainly we can find the way to bring
peace and progress to those who live beneath
the sky on this earth.

That is the lesson for all of us of tliis great
adventure in which we have shared.

As I stand here in Indonesia today, I realize
what a great part this country will play in that
great adventure for the future, not only because
it is a major comitry in Asia and in the Pacific,
not only because it is one of the great and most
populous democracies in all the world, but
because this country has its future before it.

It has a great past, a past full of tradition,
tradition which I was able to see along with Mrs.
Nixon when we traveled over the country.

But as one that has moved from colonial status
to independent status and now looks to the fu-
ture, as a nation with great numbers of people,
with imbounded natural resources, Indonesia is
a nation that excites the imagmation of all the
peojDles of the world.

Mr. President, I want you to know, the mem-
bers of your government and all the people of

August 25, 1969

147

your country to know, that the people of the
United States wish to share with you in this
adventure in progress, share in this way: "We
know you want to be independent, and we un-
derstand that. We know that you wish to be self-
reliant, and we understand that. We know, too,
that there is much in the way of resources that
needs to be developed, and to the extent that
we and other nations on a multilateral basis or
a bilateral basis can be of assistance, we want to
play our fair part.

So I look forward to the talks that we will
have, talks that I trust will bring a better under-
standing between our two countries, between In-
donesia and the United States of America, talks
that will promote the cause of peace in the
Pacific — and that means in the world — and talks
that, above all, will provide for the future of
this great country and of all the countries in the
world the progress, the peace, the independence,
and the right to choose their own way that all
people want.

With these thoughts in mind, I thank you
again, Mr. President, for your welcoming re-
marks. It is very good to return for the fourth
time to this great country.

Thank you.

Exchange of Toasts at a State Dinner
at Negara Palace, July 27

President Suharto ^

It is for me a great privilege that this eve-
ning I have the opportunity of holding a ban-
quet in honor of the President of the United
States of America. But beyond this formal
banquet, leaders of both our countries assembled
here at tliis moment are delegates representing
the friendship of our two coimtries.

Mr. President, although this is not your first
visit to Indonesia, as I stated earlier this after-
noon, your present visit is very important to us
and also to the relation of both our countries.
In addition to being the first American Presi-
dential visit to Indonesia, it also coincides with
the early stages of the implementation of our
5-year development plan. I hope that Your Ex-
cellency will discern the differences, the altera-

' Translation made available by the White House
Press Office (Weekly Compilation of Presidential
Documents dated Aug. 4).

tions and the spirit of the Indonesian people
today as compared to 2 years ago.

The target of our development is very simple
indeed. This is not owing to our lack of liigher
aspirations, but because we have to admit our
limited potentiality. This does not reflect a
lamentation either, but rather a consciousness
coupled with full responsibilities. This reality
and potentiality are still far away from our
ideals. The Indonesian people, through a
planned and progressive development, are work-
ing hard to change the present shortcomings,
wliich hamper us in realizing our high aims.

Food, clotliing, infrastructure, building mate-
rials, the extension of labor facilities, and spir-
itual welfare are the prime targets of our 5-year
development plan. It aims at raising tlie people's
standard of living and at the same time at estab-
lishing solid bases for subsequent developments.

We have labored and lived tightly for al-
most 3 years, so that we are now able to create
the bases of future developments on the rem-
nants of a deplorable past. Lamentable, owing
either to the negligence of economic problems, or
to aberrations of political ideologies, reaching
their climax with the G-30-S/PKI [the 30th of
September Movement of the Indonesian Com-
munist Party] putsch in 1965, which was quelled
by the Indonesian people themselves.

We believe that we will be successful in our
great tasks to develop our coimtry, because we
have already succeeded in our great struggles,
which are full of sufferings in the past, that is,
to maintain Indonesias independence based on
a solid political ideology, the Pantjasila.

Similar to the American nation about two
centuries ago, this national independence repre-
sents our very capital and our greatest honor.
Based on this asset, we have to attain phj'sical
and spiritual welfare for the 115 million inhab-
itants of Indonesia, the number of which in-
crease annually, and which stretches from Sa-
bang to Merauke, possessing a democratic way
of life, politically and economically, based on
the Pantjasila. Our national ideals go beyond
the boundaries of our territory. As a member of
the community of nations, we are responsible in
establishing a lasting peace in the world, in a
friendly atmosphere, based on mutual respect
and assistance, in order to create a veritable
welfare of mankind.

We do not neglect our responsibility toward
world peace; however, in order to give effective

148

Department of State Bulletin

contribution to it, we have to be strong at home,
Tre have to possess national endurance in all
fields, in ideologj', politics, social-economy, in
defense and security. We are nov? concentrating
on the economic potentiality, which is indeed
very pressing. We fulfill our other obligations,
internal or external, in harmony with our po-
tentiality in this economic field.

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, our
world today seems to be dotted with controver-
sial realities, toward annihilation, on the one
liand, and toward welfare on the other. On the
one side a strong spirit of nationalism and inde-
pendence is flourishing — on the other, wanton
wishes of certain forces to impose their will on
other nations.

Aspirations toward peace are contending
against a limited war, which is terrifying and
threatening world peace. On the one side, a
number of nations owing to their backwardness
have to strive to build their countries, but due
to their limited potentialities, they feel that they
have made but a slow progress ; whereas on the
other, capital, energy, and other elements
in large quantities are utilized for armament
race which obviously will lead to disaster.

Mankind, the world over, is actually for peace
and prosperity. However, it seems that there
exists a widening gap between nations in this
world.

The sj'nchronization of efficiency, with ad-
vanced technology, capital, and extraordinary
courage, has enabled American astronauts to
land on the moon. Man is now able to pass a tre-
mendous distance in the outer space and to sur-
mount delicate journeys. But, ironically, our
hearts in this world are still far apart and some-
times the distance stretches even further. The
gap between advanced countries and the devel-
oping ones is still great. On the one side there
are nations living in abundance furnished with
computers ; on the other, millions of people lead
an existence full of fear, work with primitive
implements — there are even those who still live
in a stone age.

Mr. President, I underline Mr. Armstrong's
momentous enunciation, when he, as the first
human being, put his feet on the moon, declar-
ing : "These are small human steps which form
a great leap to mankind." This leap has occurred
in the outer space, a very expansive space full of
mysteries, but it has not taken place in this
world of ours, which seems to be contracting and

is relatively simpler. The flags of aU nations,
representing peace and unity of mankind, have
been planted on the moon. It is the task of all
nations in this world to realize peace and unity.

I believe that your visit to our country and to
other countries having different social and po-
litical systems will promote world peace, close
in the relations among nations, master their
rupture arising from bias and prejudice, en-
hance closer cooperation among nations in order
to flatten this gap between advanced and devel-
oping coimtries and create instead a more equi-
table prosperity.

Yesterday all men followed anxiously and
prayed for the safety of three American astro-
nauts. Today the world is witnessing very close-
ly your steps during your journey and further
measures which vdll be taken by the great
American people.

Mr. President, during our struggle for inde-
pendence in 1945, we were set alight by the
American spirit and independence. In the course
of our patriotic war, slogans like "A govern-
ment from the people, by the people and for the
people," "For existence, for freedom and for
happiness," were written everywhere, on walls,
trains, vehicles in Djakarta up to the remotest
villages; they are even rooted deep in our heart.
I see similarities between the Declaration of the
Independence of America and the Preamble of
the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia. Both con-
tain a promise and solemn determination of free
and responsible nations, either to ourselves or
to the world at large.

The relations between our two countries have
indeed passed through delicate periods ; it was
even very tense several years ago. Thank God
that we have passed those difficult moments. We
have opened a new page in our friendly relation
full of expectations.

I earnestly hope that your present visit con-
stitutes the zenith of a friendly manifestation,
of a mutual understanding and assistance bene-
ficial to both our countries or to the welfare of
mankind. We will not stop at this pinnacle,
because there is quite a lot to do and our aims
are still distant.

On this occasion, on behalf of the people of
Indonesia, I would like to express our highest
appreciation and our heartfelt thanks for the
understanding and the effective assistance ren-
dered to us by the Government and the people
of America. Those aids are very significant and

Augusf 25, 1969

149

of great use to our efforts in developing Indo-
nesia's economy.

Once again, I wholeheartedly welcome you
and members of your party. Your visit is a
great honor to us.

In conclusion, allow me to invite you all to
raise our glasses and propose a toast to the health
and happiness of Mr. President and Mrs. Nixon
and to the welfare and glory of the people of
America.

Thank you.

President Nixon

White House press release (Djakarta, Indonesia) dated
July 27

I first wish to express on behalf of those who
are your guests from the United States our
grateful appreciation for this beautiful dinner
and also for the kind remarks that you have just
made about our country and particularly about
our astronauts, whose great feat, as I mentioned
earlier today, we considered as one that was
beyond the acliievement of a nation but which
belonged to all mankind.

Also on this occasion I realize that the posi-
tion that I am in is a unique one — one that will
not come again — because since I am the first
American President ever to pay a state visit
to Indonesia, the next American President who
comes here will not be in the position I presently
find myself in.

Consequently, I would like to respond to your
very gi-acious remarks by trying to relate our
policy as I miderstand it to the hopes and
desires of your great people.

You have spoken very properly of the fact
that we in many ways have similarities in back-
grovmd, the fact that we both were once colonies
and had revolutions.

Ours is older than yours by almost 200 years,
but we went through many of tlie same prob-
lems that your nation has gone tlirough and is
going through today. And because we are a na-
tion that has an immense interest in all the de-
velopments in the world, we have followed what
has happened in Indonesia. We have followed
it because this is one of the major countries of
the world. "What happens here, the future of the
115 million people of Indonesia, will have an
enormous effect on the future of peace in the
Pacific and, therefore, on peace in the world.

We, therefore, are interested in Indonesia for

that reason, but we are also interested in Indo-
nesia for another one, because those of us who
have had the privilege — a privilege that I have
had — of visiting this country, of knowing your
people, realize how rich this country is in its
resources and, more important, how rich it is in
its people.

Today, again, we were reminded of that
wealth as we visited the Djakarta Fair. We saw
many, many people. But we saw represented
there, too, all of the coimtry, the customs and
the culture of the past, and the diversity of this
country which gives it such wealth.

But we saw also the plans for the future — the
exciting 5-year plan which your Government
has initiated.

As I thought of those things, the past and the
plans for the future, I realized that our country
is privileged to play a part with you in helping
to achieve those plans, those ideals, and those
goals. I say "privileged," because sometimes we
think of the assistance that we provide to other
countries as being a burden. I do not consider
it that way. As I see it, only wlien it is mutually
helpful to us both is such assistance something
that either of us would want.

As I consider Indonesia and all that it means
to peace in the Pacific and in the world, as I
consider the possibilities for progress in this
country in the years ahead — possibilities that
probably are as exciting as for any nation in the
world today — then I realize that the United
States of America should welcome the role of
being of some assistance in achieving that goal.

Let me be also quite precise in another respect.
You referred in your remarks to the fact that
when our astronaut first set foot on the moon
that he uttered the liistoric words that it was:
"One small step for man and a giant leap for
mankind." And so it was. But you also very
appropriately referred to the fact that, here on
earth, too often the steps for mankind are very,
very small, if at all.

That is why, as we consider your country, all
the countries of Asia that I will visit, we will be
thinking of how those steps can be larger, how
they can become, finally, a giant leap for man-
kind on earth at a time that we have made a
giant leap for mankind in expanding his knowl-
edge beyond the earth — toward the heavens.

I would like to say in this connection that we
have admired, Mr. President, your policies, ad-

150

Department of State Bulletin

mired them because, as we study the history of
nations, it can truly be said that while a revolu-
tion is very difficult — difficult and costly in men,
in treasure and in lives — many times the more
difficult part of a nation's development is what
comes after a revolution: that hard, daily
drudgery of building again after the revolution
has necessarily destroyed some of the institu-
tions of the past.

So we see you engaging in tliat task, you and
your colleagues repi-esented in this room today.
We saw evidence of it at the fair and your 5-
year plan.

I liave seen it quite precisely in an issue that
we are trying to deal with in the United States.
I noted that 3 years ago Indonesia had one
of the highest rates of inflation in the whole
world, and today it is one of the lowest. If you
would tell us the secret, that would be very
helpful for me to take back to the United States.

But as we look at that achievement, as we
look at the stability, the strength, the political
stability, the economic stability, that you have
provided to this country during the time that
you have been present — you and your col-
leagues — we have confidence that Indonesia now
is ready to move forward — move forward with
just small steps, but bigger and bigger steps, so
that in the end it will mean a giant leap forward.

We want to be with you. We want to assist
you in any way that you think is appropriate,
we along with other nations who have the capac-
ity to do so.

For that reason, it is a very great privilege
for me to return to this country for the third
time, to return in an official capacity as Presi-
dent of my country, and to reaffirm the ties of
friendship which sometimes, as you have in-
dicated, have been strained but which, for-
tunately, today are very, very strong.

If tliere is one goal that the administration
which I now head in Washington will have, it
will be to see that the ties of friendship, coopera-
tion, mutual trust and assistance between In-
donesia and America will be stronger and
stronger, because this is in our interest as well
as in yours. It is in both of our interests, because
what happens here, as I have indicated earlier,
may well determine whether peace and inde-
pendence survives in the Pacific and, therefore,
in the world.

I ask all of you to join me in raising your

glasses to the President and Mrs. Suharto and to
the great Indonesian people, to their prosperity,
their progress, their independence, and the
peace that we will all enjoy.

Exchange of Remarks, Kemoyoran
International Airport, July 28

President Suharto ^

In a few moments you are leaving Indonesia.
Although your visit is very brief, you have
nonetheless left us with a profound impression.

You have held discussions with leaders of In-
donesia ; you have also had the opportunity to
mingle among the people of the capital and
talked with some of them. I am sure that you
have a clearer picture on our ideals, on our views
with regard to world problems in general, as
well as on our current issues, on our working
programs and our firm determination in build-
ing a better future.

The frank discussion held in an understand-
ing atmosphere, the desire to enhance fi-iendly
I'elations in a sincere and straightforward man-
ner, are indeed very fruitful to us.

I greatly value your comprehension with re-
gard to our identity. On behalf of the people of
Indonesia, I would like also to express our ap-
preciation to the United States of America,
which is constantly disposed to assist us in build-
ing our fiiture, in harmony with our principles,
aspirations, and our own ways.

The mid-20th century is characterized by the
emergence of nations having their own identi-
ties. Every nation which has earlier gained in-
dependence should understand and accept this
reality. One cannot evade this obligation, be-
cause it consititutes a guarantee to world peace.

Mr. President, on this occasion, I would like
to express my thanks for your kind invitation to
visit the United States of America. God willing,
I will gladly honor it on an appropriate time.

You have added some pillars to the "bridge"
of friendly relations between our two countries ;
it is our conmion duty to foster and strengthen
it further. We should launch on it a closer co-
operation, beneficial to both our countries, which
may contribute to the welfare of a new South-

' Translation made available by the White House
Press Office (Weekly Compilation of Presidential Docu-
ments dated Aug. 4).

August 25, 1969

151

east Asia, to world peace, and to the prosperity
of mankind.

I wish, with your intermediary, Mr. Presi-
dent, to extend a warm greeting from the people
of Indonesia to the great people of America. The
whole people of Indonesia and I personally wish
you and l\Irs. Nixon a great success in your jour-
ney to other countries and a safe homecoming
in the United States of America.

Plave a nice trip, and till we meet again.

May God the Almighty perpetually bless all
mankind.

President Nixon

White House press release (Djakarta, Indonesia) dated
July 28

This is the third time that I have said good-
hy at this airport to the people of this country.
As I leave, I leave with the most pleasant
memories of a wonderfully warm recejition
evervjilace that we were. I only wish that we
could have stayed longer. I look forward to
the time that we can return.

Also, as I leave, I leave with the conviction
that the future of this country is in good hands
and that the chances for a great breakthrough
for progress, economically, are better than they
have ever been before in the history of this
country.

I am confident that is the case because of my
meetings with the leaders of tliis nation and also
because of what I have seen insofar as the 5-
year plan and the other policies that have been
adopted by your government, Jfr. President. I
can only say that the future of Indonesia is, of
course, important to the 115 million people who
live in Indonesia, but it is also vital to the fu-
ture of the billions of people who live on this
earth and particularly who live in the Pacific
and the Asian area, because what happens here
will have a dramatic effect on what happens
everyplace else.

So we in the United States are proud that we
have the opportunity to not only visit your
country but, to the extent that you desire, to
work with you in building tliat new future,
to work with you always with the idea that we
will work together, but always also with the idea
that you choose your own way and you develop
your own policies ; that there will never be any
domination ; that there will always be the free-
dom, the merdeka that means so much to the
hearts of all the people of tliis country.

And, Mr. President, I can say that I am par-
ticularly pleased that you may be able to come
to the United States. We want you to come on a
return visit at a time that will be convenient
for you, and we only hope that we can give you
and Mrs. Suharto and the members of your
party as warm a welcome, as friendly a welcome,
that all of us found everyplace that we were on
this visit. I can say, in conclusion, that I have
appreciated the great numbers of people that
we have seen and the very friendly signs that
we have seen from place to place, some in Eng-
lish and some in your language. I have learned
a little of your language while I have been here.
One word I learned from you, and I heard it on
several occasions. I repeat it as I leave. Hidup,
President Suharto. Hidup, Indonesian and
American friendship.

BANGKOK, THAILAND

Exchange of Greetings,

Phan Fah Bridge Pavilion, July 28

White House press release (Bangkok, Thailand) dated July 28

Lord Mayor Chalit Kulhanthom

Tlie citizens of Bangkok consider today as a
wonderful occasion in the history of the city of
Bangkok, for it is a great honor for us to wel-
come you once again.

Mr. President, you have honored us \vith five
previous visits over the past 15 years : first as
Vice President of the United States and more
recently as a private citizen. You know of the
great and rapid progress of our country during
these years. Together with the material progress
evident, we are fast developing our latent
abilities in order that we may secure maximum
benefit in the near future. These developments
have been enhanced through various sources,
and one is the strong cooperation wliich we have
received from your country. We owe a great deal
to the United States. We have changed for the
better since your first visit, Mr. President.

That great respect and admiration with
which we greeted you previously also has de-
veloped into something greater, at once a pro-
found friendship and an unshakable trust. We
look to you as the leader of the peaceseelung na-
tions. We are deeply honored by your presence
in our city.

152

Department of State Bulletin

To indicate the warmth of our welcome, may
I present to you, sir, the key to our city. Never
was a key more symbolic than this, for the gates
of our city already are open wide to you, Mr.
President.

President Nixon

Your Majesties, Mr. Lord Mayor, Your Ex-
cellencies, and all of the citizens of Bangkok
and those from the United States who are gath-
ered here today : I want to express my deepest
appreciation for receiving the key to this city — a
city that I have known and, lilve anyone who
knows this city, I have come to love.

As I think back on the many occasions that I
have been here, I realize why this city means so
much to so many people, not only in Thailand
but throughout the world.

Some of you who are listening to me today
may recall that not long ago an article appeared
in an American magazine in which I was asked
to describe among all the great cities of the
world I had visited the one that I would recom-
mend first and above all to any tourist, and I
chose the city of Bangkok.

I did so for a niunber of reasons: first, be-
cause it is truly a beautiful city; and second,
because here, as much as any city in the world,
we have combined the old with the new, a great
sense of history with all of the monuments that
remind us of a magnificent past, and yet all of
the progress of a modern city.

But there was a deeper reason that I chose
this city, as I called it, "the perfect city," if I
were to pick one of all the cities of the world
that I would like to visit again : It is because of
the people of this city and the people of this
nation. They are a people who command respect
from all those who know them. They are a
people who have a proud tradition of freedom.
This is truly the land of the free. And they are
also a people who have a capacity for hospitality
that is unequaled anywhere in the world.

I speak deeply from my heart when I say
that this key will be a treasured possession — a
treasured possession as President of the United
States but, more than that, as a citizen of the
United States and as a citizen of the world who
knows most of the great cities and who comes
back to this city with a deep feeling of affection.

I would like to add one other thought. As we
drove in through the streets from the airport

and saw the thousands of people gathered there,
including many of the schoolchildren, we were
reminded again of the association between the
American people and the Thai people, associa-
tion in war and association in peace.

We wei'e reminded, too, of that when we came
by the SEATO Treaty Building and realized
that the SEATO organization has its offices
here. That leads me to say that everyone knows
that Thailand and the United States are signa-
tories of that treaty. We are bound together by
that treaty.

A treaty can have many meanings. It can be
]"ust a scrap of paper with no meaning at all.
But as far as Thailand and the United States
are concerned, a treaty means far more, because
we share common ideals ; because what we want
for Asia and the world is the right of freedom
which Thailand enjoys for all peoples here;
because we have been willing to fight for that
as we are fighting for it together in Viet-Nam ;
because of these deep spiritual and ideological
ties that bind us.

The treaty that we have with Thailand means
that it is not just another treaty, not just an-
other piece of paper, but that it is one that has a
significance far beyond that — a significance
which I have indicated time and agam in public
statements and I indicate today in my first
public statement as I visit Bangkok and this
coimtry.

We will honor our obligations under that
treaty. We will honor them not simply because
we have to because of the words that we have
signed but because we believe in those words,
and particularly believe in them in the associa-
tion that we have with a proud and a strong
people — the people of Thailand.

We have been together in the past. We are
together at the present. And the United States
will stand proudly with Thailand against those
who might threaten it from abroad or from
within.

So, again, Mr. Lord Mayor, I thank you for
presenting the key to the city. I can only say
that I hope that on many occasions in the fiiture,
both in a public capacity and a private capacity,
I will have the opportunity to use this key and
to return again to Bangkok, the great city for
all the tourists and for others in the world.

Thank you.

August 25, 1969

153

Statement by President Nixon *

In returning once again to Thailand, I am
deeply conscious of the fact that Thailand has a
special interest in the strength of America's
determination to honor its commitments in Asia
and the Pacific. We will honor those commit-
ments — not only because we consider them
solemn obligations but, equally importantly, be-
cause we fully recognize that we and the nations
of Southeast Asia share a vital stake in the fu-
ture peace and prosperity of this region.

Both geography and common interest link
the United States with the nations of South-
east Asia. We recognize the Pacific Ocean not as
a barrier but as a bridge. We recognize also that
whether peace can be maintained in Asia and the
Pacific will determine whether peace can be
maintained in the world, and we recognize here
in Asia the beginnings of patterns of dynamic
development that can be of enormous
significance.

Our determination to honor our commitments
is fully consistent with our conviction that the
nations of Asia can and must increasingly
shoulder the responsibility for achieving peace
and progress in the area. The challenge to our
wisdom is to support the Asian coimtries' efforts
to defend and develop themselves, without at-
tempting to take from them the responsibilities
which should be theirs. For if domination
by the aggressor can destroy the freedom of a
nation, too much dependence on a protector can
eventually erode its dignity.

What we seek for Asia is a community of free
nations able to go their own way and seek their
own destiny with whatever cooperation we can
provide — a commimity of independent Asian
coimtries, each maintaining its own traditions
and yet each developing through mutual co-
operation. In such an arrangement, we stand
ready to play a responsible role in accordance
with our commitments and basic interests.

Seven centuries ago the great Thai King
Eama Kamheng, father of the Thai alphabet,
had his belief inscribed in the new written lan-
guage : "In the water there are fish ; in the fields
there is rice. . . . Wlioever wants to trade in
elephants so trades. Whoever wants to trade in

♦ Issued at Bangkok on JtUy 28 (White House press
release (Bangkok, Thailand) ). The President's arrival
remarks at the Phan Fah Bridge Pavilion were de-
livered extemporaneously; this is an additional
statement.

horses so trades; whoever wants to trade in
silver and gold so trades."

These words expressed the philosophy that a
nation, like a man, should be free to seek its own
destiny. In Korea, and again in Viet-Nam,
Thailand has been in the forefront of those na-
tions actively engaged in protecting this prin-
ciple. The Thai contribution to the struggle to
preserve the independence of South Viet-Nam
has been of great significance, as befits a na-
tion that places so high a value on its own long
history of independence. As a nation wliich has
shared so generously in the burdens of war,
Thailand has a special interest in the strategy
for achieving a durable peace ; that is, one which
guarantees to the people of South Viet-Nam the
right to determine their own future without
outside coercion. In developing tlais policy, the
Government of Thailand has been fully con-
sulted and will continue to be so in the future.

I believe that the greatest problem before us
is not the war in Viet-Nam, but the bringing
about of a dynamic set of international relation-
ships which guarantee peace and progress. This
camiot be done by the United States alone; it
must be a cooperative effort. We must con-
tribute to relationsliips by which the peoples
of the area can master their challenges and
shape their future.

Thailand is one of the foremost examples of
the promise that the future holds in Asia— in
terms of its economic development, its commit-
ment to advancing the welfare of its people, and
its larger view of new patterns of regional co-
operation that can benefit all the nations and
peoples of Asia. We are proud to consider Thai-
land our friend.

In this spirit, I see the vision of King Rama
coming time not only for Thailand, but for all of
Asia. !

Remarks by President Nixon at a Reception,
Sanfi Matri Hall, Government House, July 29

White House press release (Bangkok, Thailand) dated July 29

I thmk it is well for all of us here who are
Americans — and there are a number of Ameri-
cans—to be reminded of the fact that Thailand
is a country that not only stands on its own two
feet, handling its own problems, dealing with
subversive forces in this country which are par-
ticularly difficult to deal with m the North and

154

Department of State Bulletin

Northeast, but in addition to that, Thailand
lias furnished armed forces to fight beside those
of South Viet-Nam and the United States and
other Asian countries in Viet-Nam.

This can only mean one thing : that it would
be easy for this Government and the people of
Thailand to say simply that their problems are
enough and that if they can defend their own
freedom without asking for outside manpower,
a point which the Prune Minister has made in
the talks that we have had today, they should
not be asked to undertake in addition the bur-
den of sending troops to Viet-Nam.

But the fact that the people of Thailand value
freedom so much for themselves that they are
willing also to fight for it for others is an in-
dication of why this country has a special mean-
ing to us who visit you from the United States,
or Americans who may live here.

This is truly the land of the free ; and it is this
same sense of self-reliance, of freedom, of will-
ingness to fight for freedom both at home and
abroad, that we wish to develop all over the
world as something we are very proud to be
associated with, with our friends from Thailand.

SAIGON, REPUBLIC OF VIET-NAM

Statement by President Nixon °

I am happy that the moon landing, which in
its universality signifies a symbolic drawing to-
gether of all mankind, has provided an occasion
for me to meet with President Thieu in the capi-
tal of his country.

We have reviewed the developments which
have taken place since Midway :

— ^the steady progress in pacification, involv-
ing the people in greater political participation
and in decisions about their future ;

— the elections of village and hamlet officials,
and in training for more effective local
administration ;

— the improving performance of the Viet-
namese armed forces, and in their equipment
and training, and their determination to take

over an increasing share of the burden of the
conflict ;

— the plans for a revolutionary land reform
program ;

— and, most importantly, the moves we to-
gether have made toward peace.

Our purpose is peace.

We have repeatedly come forward with pro-
posals which could lead to the beginning of the
end of this tragic conflict.

On March 25 President Thieu offered to talk
with the NLF [National Liberation Front]
without preconditions.

In the six points of Ms speech of April 6 he
proposed a basis on which those opposed to the
government would be welcomed as full mem-
bers of the national commimity.

On May 14 I proposed eight points which
could lead to the withdrawal of all non-South
Vietnamese forces, a cease-fire, and elections
under international supervision."

On July 11 President Thieu midertook an-
other major step in lus six-point proposal,
through which all the people of South Viet-Nam
could exercise their right of self-determination
through internationally supervised elections in
which they can genuinely express their choice,
free from fear and coercion. An electoral com-
mission in which all political parties would be
represented would assure equal opportunities to
all candidates.

The GVN has offered to abide by the results
of the elections, whatever they may be.

On July 20 President Thieu made the offer to
North Viet-Nam for direct discussions toward
reunification through free and internationally
supervised elections.

President Thieu, after his return from Mid-
way, said "everything is negotiable."

We have gone as far as we can or should go
in opening the door to negotiations which will
bring peace. It is now time for the other side
to sit down with us and talk seriously about
ways to stop the killing, to put an end to tliis
tragic war which has brought so great destruc-
tion to friend and foe alike. We have put for-
ward constructive proposals to bring an end
to the conflict. We are ready to talk with the
other side about their proposals. Let us with

' Issued July 30 (White House press release (Saigon,
Republic of Viet-Nam) ).

" Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

August 25, 1969

155

determination and good will seek to put an
end to the destruction and suffering which the
people of Viet-Nam, North and South, have

borne so long

Statements Following a Meeting
at Independence Palace, July 30

President Nixon

White House press release (Saigon, Republic of Vlet-Nam)
dated July 30

As I evaluate the situation today, I wish
first to point out that what happens in Viet-
Nam, the kind of peace that we are able to
achieve in Viet-Nam, will have an enormous
impact on the future of peace and freedom
in all of Asia. I say this based on what I have
been told by the leaders of the countries I
have already visited on my Asian trip.

So the stakes here, important as they are
for the people of North and South Viet-Nam,
are important also to all the people of the
Asian area and, of course, the people of the
world. That is why the sacrifices that your peo-
ple, our people, and other Allied forces have
been making in Viet-Nam are so important — so
important beyond simply the vitally important
object of seeing that the people of South Viet-
Nam have the right to choose their own future.

I also wish to point out that when I first
came here in 1953, I had the opportunity not
only of visiting Saigon but also Hanoi. Since
then the country has been divided. But as I think
back over those 16 years and as I think of your
statement pointing out that for 20 years you
have been engaged in what is all of the diffi-
culty of war in this now divided country, I
realize how much suffering the people of South
Viet-Nam have gone through — and also the
people of North Viet-Nam. The time has come
to stop that suffering.

Mrs. Nixon today, accompanied by Mrs.
Tliieu, has visited an orphanage. The children
in that orphanage are there because tlieir par-
ents, both mother and father, were killed in
this war.

These tragedies, whether they are in Nortli
or South Viet-Nam, have been going on long
enough and it is time to bring an end to the
war, but to bring an end to the war in a way
that will not encourage another war; bring an

end to the war in a way which will provide the
right to choose the kind of government they
want for the people of South Viet-Nam and,
in providing that right, make it more possible
for the other nations in Southeast Asia to retain
that same right for themselves.

I say to you, too, Mr. President, that as I look
over the period that has elapsed since the time I
became President of the United States, I believe
the record is clear as to which side has gone the
extra mile in behalf of peace. "We have stopped
the bombing of North Viet-Nam. "We have with-
drawn 25,000 American troops. They have been
replaced by South Vietnamese. "We have made,
and you have made, a peace offer which is as
generous as any ever made in the liistory of
warfare. It is a peace of reconciliation that is
offered, a peace in which the people will decide,
a peace that is just for both sides, a peace which
is fair to both sides, a peace which offers an equal
chance to both sides.

"We have gone as far as we can or should go in
opening the door to peace, and now it is time for
the other side to respond. Otherwise, the other
side must assume the responsibility for the con-
tinuing suffering among a people who have al-
ready suffered much too long both in South and
North Viet-Nam.

And finally, Mr. President, I can say that as
I leave Saigon on this very short visit, I go
away with, again, the admiration for the brave
men who have fought for their freedom and in
fighting for their freedom have helped the cause
of freedom and peace for all of their neighbors
in the Pacific area, and I go away with a deep
appreciation for the hospitality that you and
Madame Thieu have extended to Mrs. Nixon
and me on this occasion.

President Thieu '

It is a very great pleasure for Madame Thieu
and me to welcome President and Mrs. Richard
Nixon in Viet-Nam.

President Richard Nixon has been well ac-
quainted with Viet-Nam, having made many
trips to our covmtry in the past years. This is,
howe\-er, the first time that he visits Viet-Nam
as President of the United States, and, indeed,
the first time that we have the privilege of re-

' Translation made available by the White House
Press Office (Weekly Compilation of Presidential Docu-
ments dated Aug. 4) .

156

Department of State Bulletin

ceiving the President of the United States in
Saigon.

Mr. President, in the name of the Vietnamese
Government and the Vietnamese people, I am
very happy to extend to you and Mrs. Nixon
our heartiest welcome.

I would like also to take this opportunity to
convey to you again our warmest congratula-
tions for the historic achievement of the United
States in landing men on the moon, and open-
ing new frontiers for human knowledge, and
broadening human horizons in the universe. The
Vietnamese people fully concur in the message
of peace which the three brave American astro-
nauts deposited on the moon for all mankind.

With other Asian chiefs of state, I welcome
the President of the United States to Asia. We
are happy to hear liis statement, made a few
days ago, that the United States is a power
turned also toward the Pacific and is searching
in coimnon with Asian nations the best formula
for fruitful cooperation among the countries in
the Pacific conmiunity, in peace and prosperity.

At the Midway summit meeting last month,^
President Richard Nixon and I have agreed to
meet at regular intervals to review the problems
confronting the two countries in the common
defense of freedom in Viet-Nam. In this spirit,
we have just reviewed together, in an atmos-
phere of utmost cordiality, the questions of
mutual concern.

I expressed again to President Richard Nixon
the steadfast purpose of the GVN to assume
again the major share in the struggle, which the
people of SVN have undertaken for more than
10 years, in facing Communist aggression.

President Richard Nixon and I noted with
satisfaction the smooth and efficient replace-
ment by the ARVN of the first U.S. troop
reduction of 25,000 men, which we decided upon
jointly at Midway. As stated at Midway, the
three criteria for further U.S. troop reductions
are:

1. The progress in equipping, modernizing,
and strengthening the ARVN;

2. The reduction in the level of Communist
hostilities ;

3. The progress in peace negotiations.

After the initial reductions, increasing atten-

' For background, see BuixBrriN of June 30, 1969,
p. 549.

tion will be given to the second and third cri-
teria, and especially the third criterion relating
to the progress in the peace negotiations, for
subsequent U.S. troop reductions.

Concerning the first criterion, President Rich-
ard Nixon expressed the readiness of the U.S.
Government to help the ARVN to strengthen
and modernize, as promptly and completely as
possible.

I also discussed with President Richard
Nixon my major peace initiative of July 11, in
which I offered free and internationally super-
vised elections, in wliich the NLF can partici-
pate not only in the elections but also in the
control of the elections. I also recalled the re-
iteration of my offer of private talks, without
preconditions, with the NLF, for detailed dis-
cussions of the various modalities of the elec-
tions, and other relevant questions.

President Richard Nixon concurred with me
that this constitutes a most reasonable and gen-
erous offer toward national reconciliation and a
peaceful settlement and that the Communist
side has nothing to gain by waiting.

I also discussed with President Richard
Nixon the offer I recently made to NVN for
direct talks to discuss the question of reunifica-
tion of the two Viet-Nams through free and in-
ternationally supervised elections, the offer I
made on July 20, the 15th amiiversary of the
1954 Geneva agreement, which partitioned Viet-
Nam along the I7th parallel. President Richard
Nixon expressed warm support for this addi-
tional initiative I made toward the restoration
of peace.

President Richard Nixon and I reviewed the
general situation in this area, and we viewed
with great concern the intensification of Com-
munist North Viet-Nam's military activities in
Laos and Cambodia, in violation of the neu-
trality and territorial integrity of these neigh-
boring countries, and threatening at the same
time the security of the RVN.

On the domestic front I expressed to Presi-
dent Richard Nixon the great importance that
the RVN attaches to economic development to-
ward gradual economic self-sufficiency, at the
same time that the RVN is making efforts to
shoulder an increasingly larger share in the
military struggle. President Richard Nixon
wholeheartedly supported these goals of the
RVN and expressed the readiness of the U.S.

August 25, 1969

359-68S— 69 3

157

Government to provide energetic assistance to
the RVN in these efforts.

Discussing the future of Southeast Asia, Pres-
ident Richard Nixon and I shared the view that
a lasting peace can be secured only when the
peoples of this area can live free from fear and
coercion and when an equilibrium of powers can
be maintained in this part of the world.

We also agreed that most promising perspec-
tives await all the countries in this area, when a
just and durable peace can be restored, laying
the foimdations for constructive regional co-
operation and development, in which all the
countries can participate, irrespective of their
social systems.

I am most happy to have this opportunity to
fully exchange views with President Richard
Nixon on a wide range of questions of mutual
interest. I greatly appreciate his visit and
would like to take this opportmiity to convey
to him, in the name of the Vietnamese Govern-
ment and Vietnamese people, our heartfelt
gratitude for the noble and valiant part which
the United States has taken in the struggle to
defend freedom in Viet-Nam, and to secure a
just and long-lasting peace for tliis part of the
world.

Thank you, Mr. President.

NEW DELHI, INDIA

Statement by President Nixon °

It is a privilege and a pleasure for me to re-
turn for my fourth visit to India, the largest
nation in free Asia. I first came here m 1953 as
Vice President of the United States, and since
then I have followed with particular interest the
steady progress that has been made in this land
that has the sublime combination of great tradi-
tion, deep philosophical and religious insight,
and enormous progressive spirit.

The first principle of the relationship between
India and the United States is that our two
countries share fully the basic objective of peace
in Asia and peace in the world.

Only in peace can Asian nations devote their
full energy and attention to the most important
pi-oblem they face: the grave human problem
of meeting the expectations of men, women, and

" Issued on July 31 (White House press release (New
Delhi, India)).

children to share in all the benefits of modern
science and technology. Mankind has reached
the moon. Now we must improve the quality of
life here on earth.

India's leaders have a vision, a vision of Asian
nations working together bilaterally and in re-
gional groupings reflecting shared interests.

The United States shares that vision. The
United States will support efforts toward that
goal — when we are asked and when our con-
tribution can be significant.

The United States respects the determina-
tion of Indians — and of their Asian neighbors —
to work out their destiny and their security in
their own way. We respect India's way^ em-
phasizing national independence while accept-
ing the interdependence of nations. We firmly
believe that Asian problems must be resolved
by the people of Asia. But we stand ready to
help.

We stand ready to help because of our friend-
ship and human concern for the people of Asia
and because we have our own interest in helping.
The United States has an important stake in the
stability of Asia, and the United States knows
that the changes taking place in Asia in the last
third of this century will have an impact on the
history of the world over the next several cen-
turies. As we apply the scientific, technological,
agricultural, and industrial achievements of this
age to all of our national and human problems,
Asia can be the area of greatest opportunity.
India will be a leader in that Asian future.

The United States is proud of the role it has
played, through economic assistance, in India's
economic progress. We honor the people and
leaders of India for what they have achieved
with their own resources and their own hard
woi-k — their genuine revolution in agriculture
and their progress in industry. But Indian
leaders know, as do we, that problems, large
problems, remain to be solved.

Coming to India, I fuid this a time to remem-
ber the words of President Eisenhower when he
addressed a joint session of the Parliament of
India in 1959 : ^»

Before us we see long years of what can be a new
era — mankind in each year reaping a richer harvest
from the fields of earth, gaining a more sure mastery
of elemental power for human benefit, sharing an ex-
panding commerce in goods and in knowledge and In
wisdom, dwelling together in peace.

' Bulletin of Jan. 11, 1960, p. 46.

158

Department of State Bulletin

The new era spoken of by President Eisen-
hower 10 years ago is within our reach. Let us
cooperate to grasp it, knowing that peace is not
only the absence of war but a process of crea-
tive order, of orderly change.

I am certain that this new era will be one in
which the ancient goal of dwelling together in
peace finds inspiration in the title of a collection
of the writings of Mahatma Gandhi : "All Men
Are Brothers."

It is in this spirit that I come to New Delhi,
and it is in this spirit that I look forward to
fruitful discussions with Prime Minister
Gandhi and the other leaders of this bastion of
democracy in Asia.

Exchange of Toasts at a State Dinner,
July 31

White House press release (New Delhi, India) dated July 31

Acting President Hidayatullah

Your visit, Mr. President, though very brief,
brings the United States of America close to
India. Such visits are helpful in promoting
international imderstanding. It would be a bet-
ter world if all the sovereign states came close
in harmony and became interdependent. It is
fortunate that the advance of science and tech-
nology has conquered space and nations far
apart are yet near enough for their leaders to
get together and frame policies. We value tliis
opportunity to welcome you and to be able to
exchange thoughts on subjects of great moment.

Mr. President, you come to us after your coun-
try and particularly your spacemen have blazed
a new trail. The epic flight to the moon and back
by three of your countrymen has amazed the
world and marks a new stage in science and tech-
nology. On behalf of the Government and
people of India and myself, I congratulate you
and, through you, the people of your country on
tliis historic occasion.

This achievement is symbolic of the restless
spirit of man and his desire to widen the hori-
zons. We are glad to laiow that you are sliaring
the knowledge you have gained with the rest
of the world, and this leads us to hope that the
new knowledge of science and technology will
always be shared between the more advanced
and the less developed countries of the world.

We, of course, wish that you and Mrs. Nixon
had spent some more time in our country,

traveled in it, and seen the problems we face
and the efforts we are making to overcome those
problems and the measure of our success. This
would have also given you an opportunity to
sense and feel the warmth of our friendship and
the depth of our good will for you and the
people of your great country. We can only hope
that you and Mrs. Nixon will come to India
again soon and for a longer visit. You will be
most welcome.

Mr. President, your journey to India and
some other countries of Asia in the wake of
peaceful exploration of our satellite may be
described as a journey in quest of peace. We
sincerely appreciate it. We firmly believe that
peace and security, pi-ogress and stability, par-
ticularly in the developing countries, can only
come by waging a ceaseless war on poverty,
hunger, ignorance, and disease.

Asian countries can have security and sta-
bility only if the economic conditions are
healthy. Political stability is tied to economic
well-being.

Most of the coxmtries of Asia have won
their independence recently, and they desire to
achieve stability and economic self-sufficiency
under their own leadership. They do not want
to work alone, but in cooperation with other
friendly countries in Asia and outside.

In this behalf, your country, ]\Ir. President,
has a distinguished record of economic aid to
and cooperation with many countries in tliis
region. We ourselves have received much as-
sistance from your country, for which we are
grateful.

We have, however, many difficult problems
which we are trying to solve in our own way
and according to our own traditions and con-
victions. Our policy of nonalignment and
peaceful coexistence is not a mere slogan but
stems from oiir history, traditions, and beliefs
and from our determination to remain inde-
pendent and to exist in peace and friendsliip
with others. As Jawaharlal Nehru said, our
freedom and independence are but a part of
freedom and independence of all nations.

]Mr. President, I believe this world is now
entering a new era. It has already learned
the hard way that slogans must be mistrusted
and seldom relate to the complex realities of
changing situations. Decisionmaking today re-
quires thinkers and intellectuals wlio share the

August 25, 1969

159

hopes and aspirations of the masses and feel
with them, thus wiiming their willing consent.

Our two countries have a very similar sys-
tem of govermnent, and we have adopted a
social organization which is based on the cor-
nerstones of individual liberty, democracy, and
security.

We in India are at the same time face to
face with the problem of ensuring that the
weaker elements in our society are not made
victims of uncontrolled economic forces. For
this purpose we believe that capital, which is
scarce, must often be employed in certain
priority sectors for the nation's collective good.

We are apt to hear that ours is a mixed
economy; but our economy, by reason of our
situation, is incapable of being interpreted in
strict ideological terms. The real and prac-
tical problem in India today is how to increase
production and attain equitable distribution
of wealth with equal opportunity for all. Our
Constitution emphasizes these as the directive
principles in the governance of the country.

In many ways your coimtry, Mr. President,
was a pioneer in what we are ourselves trying
to achieve, but in more difficult circumstances
and in a comparatively shorter time.

We in Asia are facing major changes, more
fundamental than elsewhere in the world. It
is no coincidence that everywhere tliere is a
call for a fresh look at old presumptions. The
traditional concepts of friend and enemy, of
war and peace, of spheres of influence and bal-
ance of power, have to be modified.

In Asia we have to remove the basic causes
of tension and insecurity. The discontent of a
deprived and underprivileged people is a more
potent danger than any that an enemy can
devise. The people must have rights to protect
and happiness to defend. If they have these,
they will gladly share responsibilities and make
sacrifices.

There are tensions, both national and inter-
national, which arise from basic factors — eco-
nomic, social, and political. They are not
amenable to simple explanations of power pol-
itics and power vacuum. A military solution
cannot remove the main causes of weakness and
tension.

The emphasis must, therefore, shift from a
military solution to peaceful settlement, to
economic and social development, so that people

may have adequate food and shelter, health and
education, employment and leisure, with peace
and freedom.

Mr. President, we are making in India a
concerted effort both to improve the lot of our
people and build friendsMps with our neigh-
bors and with others. We are glad that rela-
tions between most Asian nations are better
today than befoi-e. Certain tensions and con-
flicts remain still, but they can and must be
resolved only through peaceful means and not
by force.

Your country, Mr. President, has a deep and
abiding interest in the peace and progress of
tliis region. The prestige and potential of
America can be of great help in strengthening
the framework of economic cooperation in this
area. We in this country have admiration for
the high sense of responsibility and earnest-
ness and the new and realistic approach to Asia
which has been shown by your administration.

We hope that your visit to India and other
countries will open a new ei-a of friendships.
We also hope that your visit, brief though it is,
will enable you to have a glimpse of the im-
mense good will and friendship that exists in
India for your country. Though sometimes
there have been differences, they are but natural
between friendly sovereign and independent
countries. These differences are not in the aims
and objectives but only in the means to achieve
tliem.

It is our hope, Mr. President, that India and
the United States can go forward together in
friendship and cooperation for their mutual
benefit and for the benefit of Asia and the world
community.

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen: May I
request you to join me in a toast to the health of
the President and Mrs. Nixon, to the happiness
and welfare of the people of the United States
of America, and to the growing friendship be-
tween our two countries and peace in the world.
To your health, Mr. President, and to the pros-
perity and greatness of the American people.

President Nixon

I want to thank you first, Mr. President, for
your very generous and gracious remarks and to
tell you, indeed, though this visit is a short one,
that Mrs. Nixon and I have already felt the
warmth of the friendship of the people of India.

160

Department of State Bulletin

We regret that we have only this brief time to
be here, but we think tliat had we only planned
this trip to come to India for one day, it would
have been worthwhile — worthwhile because of
the opportunity that was provided to see and
know this country again but, more important,
for the opportunity that was provided to see
and know the people of India and the leaders of
India and to talk to them face to face about some
of the great problems that we face together.

It was appropriate that you spoke of peace
and progress and cooperation. As you noted,
this journey that I am now on is a journey in
quest of peace. This afternoon I had a very
great privilege, that of laying a wreath, a me-
morial, to a great man of peace, one of the truly
great men of all times and of all nations.

It was an honor for me, a great honor, to pay
homage to Mahatma Gandlii in this his cen-
tennial year.

In responding to your remarks, Mr. Presi-
dent, I find myself reflecting on the lessons of
Gandhi. If I would not presume before this
audience that knew him much better than I, I
would like to talk about those lessons, what they
mean to me, what they mean to the world.

Forty years ago, speaking from a personal
standpoint, when I was graduated from high
school, my grandmother, who was a devout
Quaker and a deeply believing pacifist, gave me
as a graduation present a biography of Gandhi.
I learned to know him through that book.

And since then I, of course, like many
throughout the world who never met liim, knew
him through his writings, knew him for what
he stood for. Gandhi's life was inspired by
truths which know no boundary of space or
tune, because they are eternal truths.

There is a greatness which transcends the
ordinary meaning of that word, a greatness at
once mysterious and self-evident, a greatness
beyond the trappings of power, beyond the opin-
ions of men, a greatness of the spirit. Such a
greatness was his.

He was, above all, a man of peace who knew
both the need for peace and the power of peace.
He once wrote : "Love is the strongest force the
world possesses and yet it is the humblest imag-
inable." Love was at the center of his greatness —
a love of India, a love of mankind, a love of
peace — and he forged it into a power that moved
nations and transformed the world.

As we reflect on his greatness, it is appropri-
ate that we reflect also on the nature of peace.

The concept of peace is as old as civilization,
but the requirements of peace change with a
changing world. Today we need a new definition
of peace, one which recognizes not only the many
threats to peace but also the many dimensions of
peace.

Peace is much more than the absence of war ;
and as Gandhi's life reminds us, peace is not the
absence of change. Gandhi was a disciple of
peace. He also was an architect of profound and
far-reaching change. He stood for the achieve-
ment of change through peaceful methods, for
belief in the power of conscience, for faith in the
dignity and grace of the human spirit and in
the rights of man.

In today's rapidly changing world there is no
such thing as a static peace or a stagnant order.
To stand still is to build pressures that are
bound to explode the peace; and more funda-
mentally, to stand still is to deny the universal
aspirations of mankind. Peace today must be a
creative force, a dynamic process, that embraces
both the satisfaction of man's material needs
and the fulfillment of liis spiritual needs.

The pursuit of peace means building a struc-
ture of stability with wliich the rights of
each nation are respected : the rights of national
independence, of self-determination, the right
to be secure within its own borders and to be
free from intimidation.

This structure of stability can take many
forms. Some may choose to join in foraial al-
liances ; some may choose to go their own inde-
pendent way. We respect India's policy of non-
alignment and its determination to play its role
in the search for peace in its own way. What
matters is not how peace is preserved, but that it
be preser\'ed ; not the formal structure of trea-
ties, but the informal network of common ideals
and common purposes that together become a
fabric of peace. Wliat matters is not whether the
principles of international behavior these rep-
resent are written or unwritten principles, but
rather that they are accepted principles.

Peace demands restraint. The truest peace ex-
presses itself in self-restraint, in the voluntary
acceptance, whether by men or by nations, of
those basic rules of behavior that are rooted in
mutual respect and demonstrated in mutual
forbearance.

August 25, 1969

161

"When one nation claims the right to dictate
the internal affairs of another, there is no peace.

"NAHien nations arm for the purpose of threat-
ening their weaker neighbors, there is no peace.

There is true peace only when the weak are
as safe as the strong, only when the poor can
share the benefits of progress with the rich, and
only when those who cherish freedom can ex-
ercise freedom.

Gandhi touched sometlung deep in the spirit
of man. He forced the world to confront its con-
science, and the world is better for having done
so. Yet we still hear other cries, other appeals
to our collective conscience as a commimity of
man.

The process of peace is one of answering those
cries, yet doing so in a manner that preserves
the right of each people to seek its own destiny
in its own way and strengthens the principles of
national sovereignty and national integrity, on
wliich the structure of peace among nations
depends.

However fervently we believe in our own
ideals, we cannot impose those ideals on others
and still call ourselves men of peace. But we can
assist others who share those ideals and who
seek to give them life. As fellow members of
the world community, we can assist the people of
India in their heroic struggle to make the
world's most populous democracy a model of
orderly development and progress.

There is a relationsliip between peace and
freedom. Because man yearns for peace, when
the people are free to choose their choice is more
likely to be peace among nations ; and because
man yearns for freedom, when peace is secure
the thrust of social evolution is toward greater
freedom within nations.

Essentially, peace is rooted in a sense of com-
munity : in a recognition of the common destiny
of mankind, in a respect for the common dignity
of mankind, and in the patterns of cooperation
that make common enterprises possible. This is
why the new patterns of regional cooperation
emerging in Asia can be bulwarks of peace.

In the final analysis, however, peace is a
spiritual condition. All religions pray for it.
Man must build it by reason and patience.

On the moon, now, is a plaque bearing these
simple words: "We came in peace for all
mankind."

Mahatma Gandhi came in peace to all
mankind.

In this spirit, then, let us all together com-
mit ourselves to a new concept of peace :

— A concept that combines continuity and
change, stability and progress, tradition and
innovation ;

— A peace that turns the wonders of science
to the service of man ;

— A peace that is both a condition and a proc-
ess, a state of being and a pattern of change, a
renunciation of war and a constructive alterna-
tive to revolution ;

— A peace that values diversity and respects
the right of different peoples to live by different
systems — and freely to choose the systems they
live by ;

— A peace that rests on the determination of
those who value it to preserve it but that looks
forward to the reduction of arms and the
ascendancy of reason;

— A peace responsive to the human spirit, re-
spectful of the divinely inspired dignity of
man, one that lifts the eyes of all to what man in
brotherhood can accomplish and that now, as
man crosses the threshold of the heavens, is more
necessary than ever.

It is, then, in a spirit of peace, in a spirit of
brotherhood, and in a spirit of confident hope
that I ask you to join me in a toast to the Acting
President, the Prime Minister, and the people
of India — a nation rich in spirit, proud of its
heritage, advancing toward a future bright with
promise, and marked by destiny to play an his-
toric role in man's progress toward that peace we
all so fervently seek.

LAHORE, PAKISTAN

Exchange of Greetings, August 1

White House press release (Lahore, Pakistan) dated Aneast 1

President Yahya

It gives me great pleasure to welcome Your
Excellency and Mrs. Nixon and the members of
your distinguished party to Pakistan.

In your person, Mr. President, we are not only
welcoming you as the head of a great and
friendly country, but also an old friend whose

162

Department of State Bulletin

abiding interest in Pakistan and its people is
demonstrated by several visits over the years.
We still remember your first visit in 1953, when
you came as your country's Vice President.
That was the beginning of a new era of coopera-
tion and mutual collaboration between our two
countries.

The pattern of our relations has changed
somewhat since then, but there is no diminution
in our mutual regard nor, I am happy to say,
in your coimtry's interest in Pakistan's
well-being. The United States contribution to
Pakistan's development efforts has been very
substantial and will always be remembered with
gratitude.

Your visit, Mr. President, is taking place at a
critical time. It will provide us with an oppor-
tunity to get to know each other and exchange
views on mutual interests.

The city of Lahore is happy to receive you on
its historic soil and to share your joy at the
most recent and the most memorable triumph of
human courage, determuiation, and scientific
skill which was achieved by your astronauts
when they were the first to land on the moon.

I hope during your all-too-brief stay, Mr.
President, you and Mrs. Nixon will have a
glimpse of Lahore's unique character and its
traditional hospitality.

I wish you and Mrs. Nixon and your party a
pleasant stay, Mr. President.

President Nixon

This is the sixth time I have had the privilege
of visiting Pakistan. And, as I stand here, I am
aware of some of the impressions that were
deeply imbedded in my mind on those previous
visits: first, of a people with great courage;
second, of a people with great vitality; tliird, of
a people with a great idealism and great con-
fidence insofar as their future is concerned ; and
fourth, of a people in terms of hospitality who
cannot be exceeded by any people in the world.

And I come, Mr. President, here today in a
different capacity than on previous occasions:
the first two times as Vice President of the
United States, the next two times as a private
citizen, and now in an official capacity as Presi-
dent of the United States.

And, as I speak today, I want the people of
this coimtry to know, and I want those with
whom I will be talking to know, that I come

just not as the political leader, the head of state
of my comitry, but I come as a friend of Paki-
stan. I value the friendships that I have had
here over the years and that my wife has had on
those occasions that she has accompanied me.

I know, too, that, as you have indicated, there
have been some strains in our relationships over
recent years. And I do not suggest that on one
visit that all differences will be resolved.

But I do know this: that what we can do
and what we intend to do on this visit is to
restore a relationship of friendship based on
mutual trust, which is so essential to good rela-
tions between two countries. That is what we
will do.

And so in that spirit I welcome the oppor-
tunity to visit this coimtry again, to meet with
you and your colleagues in government, and to
extend to all of the people of Pakistan from all
of the people of the United States our warm
good wishes and our friendship as a people from
one great people to another great people.

Thank you.

Statement by President Nixon "

It is a great pleasure for me to visit Pakistan,
where I always have foimd a warm welcome
from a great and friendly people. It is a special
pleasure for me to return on this, my sixth
visit, but my first as President.

This will be a working visit, during wliich I
look forward to discussing many matters of
mutual interest with Pakistan's leaders. At the
outset, however, there are several points I
would like to emphasize.

First, I want to convey the sense of friend-
sliip and respect that the people of my country
feel for the people of Pakistan and that my
GoveiTunent feels for the Government of
Pakistan. This is a feelmg that has existed
between our countries for many years and
under a variety of circumstances. There have
been good times, and there have been some dif-
ficult times. There have been times when we
have not understood each other as well as we
might, and there have been other times when
we have worked veiy closely together. But
through all of these experiences, the basic feel-

" Issued at Lahore on Aug. 1 ( White House press
release (Lahore, Pakistan) ).

August 25, 1969

163

ing of friendship and respect has not been lost.
I come here today to reexpress that feeling and
to reaffirm the stable and cordial relationship
between our nations which that feeling makes
possible.

Second, a stable and cordial relationship must
be built on a clear understanding by each of
our Governments of the interests and view-
points of the other and of the way in wMch the
other sees important problems. I look forward
on this visit to our sharing in candor our re-
spective assessments of our national interests
and informing each other of our views on a
wide variety of subjects.

Third, I want to stress the continuing inter-
est of the United States in the progress of
Pakistan and all of Asia. Just as the historic
trip to the moon has opened a new era in human
history, so the dramatic changes taking place
in this part of the world will have an enormous
impact on men everywhere. The United States
will continue to give strong encouragement to
Asian development.

Fourth, I wish to communicate my Govern-
ment's conviction that Asian hands must shape
the Asian future. Tliis is true, for example,
with respect to economic aid, for it must be
related to the total pattern of a nation's life.
It must support the vmique aspirations of each
people. Its purpose is to encourage self-reliance,
not dependence. And this it has done in
Pakistan.

Fifth, I want to say that we share your con-
cern for the well-being of the great numbers of
individuals who form the backbone of our so-
cieties. Governments are at their best when they
look not just to the overall well-being of the
nation but to the opportunity of individual
men, women, and children. That is where the
strength of a nation lies.

Finally, it is our hope that Asians will work
more closely with each other in a variety of
constructive bilateral and regional projects.
The Regional Cooperation for Development
organization, in which Pakistan participates
with Iran and Turkey, is one encouraging ex-
ample of such activity.

I mention all these points because I believe
these policies represent the best way of bring-
ing peace and progress to Asia. I am confident
that our talks here in Lahore will advance that
common goal.

Exchange of Remarks on Presentation
of Nishan-e-Pakistan Medal, August 1

White House press release (Lahore, Pakistan) datod August 1

Pakistan Chief of Procotol Anwar Khan ■

Mr. President, the Government and people of
Pakistan have the highest regard for your con-
stant efforts to strengthen the ties of friendship
and cooperation between Pakistan and the
United States of America.

For your personal contribution in bringing
about a closer understanding between the peo- J
pies of our two countries, and for the deep "
interest you have shown in Pakistan during
your previous visits to our country, for the way
in which you have upheld the right of indi-
vidual freedom and dignity, for your constant
efforts to promote greater collaboration between
the industrially advanced and developing na-
tions of the world, for your education in the
advancement of science and technology that has
led to the attainment of new frontiers in human
knowledge, and for your unfailing support of
the Charter of the United Nations to serve as
a bulwark for peace and a just order in the
world :

In recognition of these contributions, I, on
behalf of the Government and people of Paki-
stan, give expression to our sentiments of deep
regard by presenting to you, Mr. President, the
Nishan-e- Pakistan, which is the highest civilian
award in our country.

President Nixon \

Mr. President, I wish to express my deep
appreciation to you and the Government of
Pakistan and the people of Pakistan for honor-
ing me tliis way.

I think you would be interested to'lmow that
for me this is the first time since becoming
President of the United States — this is the first
citation of this type or any decoration that I
have received. I am proud of it.

I want you to know, too, that the citation^
the eloquent words expressed — I only hope that
I can be worthy of those words, of those senti-
ments — and also to say finally that I accept this
award as President of the United States for
the American people, but also I accept it in
another sense, for personal reasons, as one who
has been, is, and always will be a friend of
Pakistan.

164

Department of State Bulletin m

Exchange of Toasts at a State Dinner
at Government House, August 1

WUte House press release (Lahore, Pakistan) dated August 1

President Yahya

We are glad, Mr. President, that you decided
to undertake your present tour and tlius afforded
us this early opportunity to meet you and some
of your distinguished officials for an exchange
of views on important questions of the day.

Our discussions today were wide-ranging.
They were marked with cordiality and frank-
ness, and I found them very useful. I trust, as a
result, both of us understand each other's view-
point on bilateral, regional, and world affairs a
little bit better. We were greatly interested to
know how you viewed the current situation in
this region, the intraregional problems, and the
shape of things after, as everyone hopes, peac«
comes to the troubled land of Viet-Nam. We
are grateful to you, Jilr. President, for giving us
your assessment.

It is natural that in the course of our discus-
sions we should have covered our bilateral re-
lations. We attach great importance to con-
tinued friendly and meaningful relations with
the United States.

We are grateful for the generous assistance
your coimtry has given us in the past, and your
own personal initiative and role, Mr. President,
therein is remembered with gratitude and ap-
preciation. We hope that we shall continue to
receive this assistance, of which in the past we
have made excellent use.

As you know so well, we are at a critical stage
in our efforts to attain the takeoff stage for self-
sustaining economic growth. "Wliile endeavor-
ing to sustain a high rate of economic growth,
we must ensure that progress in the social sec-
tor goes hand in hand with economic develop-
ment and does not lag behind.

With the demands of the social sector being
accorded high priority, our main hope for pre-
^■enting the rate of development from slipping
below the rate of population growth lies in the
continued adequate availability of aid from
friendly coimtries like the United States.

Mr. President, the world is passing through
deeply troubled times. There is hardly a coun-
try which is not going through an excruciating
self-examination over domestic conflicts or tor-

mented by one aspect or another of the interna-
tional situation. We in Pakistan are convinced
that peace is mankind's most urgent need of the
day. Nations need peace at home and peace
abroad.

As a developing country, we regard peace
among nations as the most essential prerequisite
of progress. It is out of this conviction that we
actively seek, and not merely desire, durable
f riendlj' relations with all countries, especially
our neighbors.

It is for this reason that we have always been
urging that the basic disputes between India
and Pakistan be resolved and got out of the way
so that the two of us can live in peace and amity
and bend all our energies for the betterment
of our people.

This also explains our deep concern over the
dangerous situation in the Middle East and
over the Viet-Nam conflict. We know, Sir. Presi-
dent, how strongly you and your countrymen
feel on the peace issue. We earnestly hope that
through your policies and your administration's
endeavors a way will be found to reduce tensions
everywhere and to bring peace to the embattled
lands.

Your countrymen have just performed what
may be rightly regarded as man's most outstand-
ing feat in science, technology, and high adven-
ture. Wliile sharing your joy and pride in this
historic achievement, it is our fervent hope that
this feat, and the many further triumphs that
await man, will be used solely in the sei-vice of
man and for peace and prosperity of the human
race.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would request you
now to join me in a hearty toast to the health
and happiness of our distinguished guest. His
Excellency Mr. Eichard M. Nixon, President
of the United States, and Mrs. Nixon, and to
the lasting friendship between Pakistan and
the United States.

President Nixon

I have the privilege of responding to the very
gracious and eloquent words of the Pi-esident on
this occasion, and in doing so I want to respond
for all of those from the United States that are
here and for the many who are friends of Paki-
stan in the United States who could not be here.

Mr. President, I can say that this has been a
very memorable day for all of us, and particu-

August 25, 1969

165

larly for me and for Mrs. Xixon — memorable
from the time that vrc arrived at the airport,
when we saw the very friendly people who wel-
comed us as we drove through the roads on the
way here to this residence, and then the very
constructive talks that we had during the after-
noon, the truly magnificent presentation on the
grounds, where we saw not only the dances but
in addition the splendid — I perhaps should say
the best — bagpipe group that probably exists in
the world.

Then tonight at this dinner, one that we shall
always remember because of the historic setting
in which it takes place, because of the good com-
pany that is here, and because of the really
superb way in wliich this dinner has been
presented.

In that connection, if I could be permitted one
personal comment, we have particularly enjoyed
the music, the chance alternately to appreciate
and understand the music of Pakistan and then
the music of the United States. "We are most
grateful to the orchestra, and we thank you for
that.

But if I may turn to what are more serious
thoughts for a moment, earlier this evening in
the reception, one of your guests pointed out
that on tliis occasion our stay in Pakistan would
be exactly 22 hours, which happens to coincide
with the exact number of hours that the two
astronauts spent on the moon.

I think there is a lesson in that, a lesson in it
that I would like to expand on very briefly. Tliis
journey came about due to the fact that I wanted
to be present when our astronauts came back
from the moon. It was truly a very exciting ex-
perience, after having talked to them on the tele-
phone when they were on the moon, to be there
in the Pacific when they completed their success-
ful journey.

• • • • ■

Now, with this visit to Pakistan, we complete
the Asian phase of our journey around the
world. It is true that the visits have been brief,
only 1 day in each country — except for a longer
stay in Bangkok, where we had 2 days. But in
that period of time it gave us the opportunity —
and particularly me the opportunity — to revisit
a number of coimtries that I had known before,
to talk to a number of leaders that I have met
before, and to meet some that I had not had the
opportimity to talk to before; but beyond that,

putting it in the perspective of that 22 hours on
the moon and the 22 hours that we are spending
in Pakistan, it brmgs home this one thought :

Unfortunately — I say "unfortunately" be-
cause all around this table, I am sure, would like
to participate in the high adventure of being the
first to go to the Moon or the first to go to Slars,
provided we had an absolute, guaranteed, free
ticket, whatever the case might be — but we all
know that that is not possible, that none of us
here will be in that experience, although we will
share in it, share in it through the medium of
television and radio and communication which
now brings the world together as it has never
been brought together before.

On the other hand, while that was a very great
adventure and, as the President very generously
has pointed out, an achievement which we are
very proud of, I tliink that what we have seen
in this less than a week in Asia is also adventure
of the very highest order.

I visited all of these coimtries 16 years ago.
Many problems have developed since that time,
and I know that there are still many problems
today. But looking at the perspective of 16
years, I know that virtually all of the nations
that I visited then have moved forward sub-
stantially from where they were. That is true
of Pakistan. It is true in terms of your eco-
nomic development. It is true in terms of your
industrial development. Despite whatever other
problems may have occurred in the meantime,
keeping it in the long perspective of history,
this is something we must always have in mind
as a symbol of hope for the future.

But looking further down the road, in the
countries that we have visited and the area that
we have covered, what we see are li/o billion
people in Asia. In 25 years there will be 3 bU-
lion people in Asia. And from this part of the
world will either come the greatest progress,
and thereby the peace that we all want in the
Pacific and in the world, or the greatest destruc-
tion tliat the world has ever known.

I do not think I am overstating in putting it
that way. So we look at these coimtries, we look
at the hope, and we look also at the problems.
We can see that all of our hopes are bound to-
gether. "We have our differences, yes, between
nations in the area, on tliis ijolicy or that policy,
but looking toward the future, it is essential,
absolutely essential, that we have a generation
of peace for Asia and the world.

We in the United States want to play our part

166

Department of State Bulletin

in attempting to begin that generation by end-
ing a war in which we are presently engaged on
a basis that will promote that real peace that we
all want, and then to work on for peaceful
policies all over the world in the future.

But beyond that, and responding particularly
to what the President has said, as we consider
this explosion in population from IV2 billion to
3 billion people over 25 years — the greatest ex-
plosion that has ever occurred in the history of
the world — it means that there must be an in-
crease in agricultural production, in industrial
production, and also the ability to handle this
period of tremendous change in a peaceful way.

"Wliat I am really trying to say is, as great and
exciting as was the accomplishment of those men
landing on the moon, those of us who have the
opportunity and the responsibility and the chal-
lenge of dealing with this problem also have
an exciting and, it seems to me, great adventure,
because what we do, what we do day by day in
making the decisions that will determine
whether peace and freedom and justice and
progress go forward together in Asia and the
world, what we do, can affect the future of not
just a billion and a half, not just 3 billion, but of
the iVi to 5 billion people that will live on tlus
earth 25 years from now.

Talking in such big numbers, I am sure, seems
to raise the whole problem beyond the ability
to comprehend. But, again, we get back to the
moon. Who would have thought 25 years ago
that two men from earth would stand on the
moon ? It was too much to comprehend. But it
happened. It happened because men worked to-
gether and they planned together, and as a
result, they acliieved success.

And I say that that kind of planning and
working, that kind of genius, is not limited to
one nation, but that comes from all peoples all
over the world, that kind of genius applied to
these enormous problems and these enormous
challenges that we see, particularly in Asia.

We can have a period of peace, uninterrupted
peace, for a generation. And that can mean the
progress that we want for this area and for all
of the world.

And I just want to say, finally, Mr. President,
I came here, as everybody around this table
knows, as one who has long been a friend of
Pakistan. You were generous to state that while
I was Vice President of the United States, I
played some role in seeing that the friendship

between our two countries remained strong and
became stronger.

Now that I am President of the United States,
with somewhat more influence than I had as
Vice President, I can assure you that I am going
to continue to work for a cause that is very close
to my heart : the friendship, the friendship be-
tween two great peoples, so that we can work
together m the solutions of these great prob-
lems — work together, possibly not in going to
the Moon or to Mars, although we can partici-
pate also in those great adventures in one way or
another — but work together in the equally excit-
ing adventure that I have described, of the
future, the future of the hundreds of thousands,
yes, I would say millions of children that I have
seen on the streets of the cities of Asia over these
past 6 days.

And, so, with that, I conclude simply by say-
ing that I am proud to be in this room to re-
spond to this toast in this way, in a country
where I have been received so often officially in
such a generous way, and when I came as a pri-
vate citizen in just as hospitable a way.

Mr. President, I ask that all here stand and
raise their glasses to the President of Pakistan
and to the continumg and increasing friendship
between the people of Pakistan and the people
of the United States.

BUCHAREST, ROMANIA

Exchange of Greetings, Otopeni Airport,
August 2

White House press release (Bucharest, Romania) dated
August 2

President Ceausescu

I am pleased to extend to you, the first Presi-
dent of the United States of America ever visit-
ing Eomania, the cordial greetings of the Coun-
cil of State and of the Government, to express
the feelings of sympathy of the Romanian peo-
ple toward the American people, whose contri-
bution to the cause of world progress and civili-
zation is unanimously appreciated m this
country.

I hope that your visit to Eomania, though a
short one, will enable you to get more closely ac-
quainted with the endeavors made by the Ro-
manian people for the development of economy,
science, and culture, their determination to build

August 25, 1969

167

a dignified, free, and prosperous life, and also
with their aspirations for peace and cooperation
with all of the states of the world, irrespective
of their social system.

Personally, I recall with satisfaction, Mr.
President, the meeting we had together 2 years
ago, the spirit of frankness and sincerity during
our discussions at that time, and I have no doubt
that the same spirit will characterize the ex-
change of views we are going to have together
these days.

We believe that in the complex conditions of
international affairs today, the development of
relations between states on the basis of the prin-
ciples of peaceful coexistence and respect for the
independence, sovereignty, equal rights, and
noninterference in the internal affairs, repre-
sents the safe way toward promoting a climate
of confidence and understanding among peoples
and of peace and security in the world.

In this direction an important contribution
can be made through the contacts, meetings, and
discussions between the leaders of states. We
are confident that your visit and the talks we
shall have will contribute toward the develop-
ment of relations between our two countries,
that they will prove useful and fruitful for the
cause of cooperation between nations for gen-
eral peace.

It is with these feelings and convictions that
we welcome you in Romania today, Mr. Presi-
dent, with the traditional greeting of our peo-
ple : Birie c'ati venit.

President Nixon

Speaking on behalf of all of the American
people, I wish to express my deep appreciation
for the very warm welcome that you have ex-
tended to us on this occasion, and I bring with
me the warm good wishes and feelings of friend-
ship from all of the American people to all the
people of Romania.

As you pointed out, this is not my first visit
to your country. I recall with pleasure that first
visit. It was at the very end of winter, at the
beginning of a new spring, and I had very use-
ful talks with you at that time, and other
Romanian Government oiRcials. I recall vivndly
the warm welcome extended to me by the people
of Romania.

This is an historic occasion. While this is not
my first visit to your country, it is the first visit

of a President of the United States to Romania,
the first state visit by an American President to
a Socialist country or to this region of the con-
tment of Europe.

Mr. President, this significant moment in the
Mstory of relations between our two countries
coincides with a great moment in the history
of the human race. Mankind has landed on the
moon. We have established a foothold in outer
space. But there are goals that we have not
reached here on earth. We are still building a
just peace in the world. This is a work that re-
quires the same cooperation and patience and
perseverance from men of good will that it took
to launch that vehicle to the moon.

I believe that if human beings can reach the
moon, human beings can reach an understand-
ing with each other.

If we are to make progress in this lifetime
effort, we must see the world as it is — a world
of different races, of different nations, of dif-
ferent social systems — the real world, where
many interests divide men and many unite them.

Our meetings represent, I am sure, the desire
of the Romanian people and the American peo-
ple that we do not allow our differences to pre-
vent a deeper understanding of our national
points of view. Yours is a European country,
and your most direct concern is, therefore, with
the security of this continent. I come from an-
other continent, but from a country that twice
in this century has shed the blood of its sons in
the pursuit of that European security.

We are prepared to do our part, also, in this
era of negotiations so that all in Europe can
pursue the fulfillment of their just aspirations
for a better life, free from the fear of war or
threats of war, and in constractive cooperation
with others, near and far.

Let us agree at the outset to be frank with
each other. Our differences are matters of sub-
stance; indeed, no nation's range of interests
are identical to any other nation's. But nations
can have widely different internal orders and
live in peace. Nations can have widely differing
economic interests and live in peace.

The United States believes that the rights of
all nations must be equal, but we do not believe
that the character of all nations must be the
same.

My country has already undertaken new ini-
tiatives to reduce the tensions that exist in the
world. We stand ready to respond firmly and

168

Department of State Bulletin

positively to sincere and concrete initiatives
that others may take. Every nation, of what-
ever size and whatever region of the world, will
find us receptive to realistic new departures on
the path to peace.

The purpose of your invitation, Mr. Presi-
dent, and the purpose of my visit here, is to
improve communications between our two na-
tions. Tliis is a useful and a peaceful purpose.

In that spirit of realism and of open-minded-
ness, I look forward to our talks, and I thank
you for your hospitality.

Tralasca pnetenia Romana- Americana.
(Long live Romanian-American friendship.)

Exchange of Toasts at an Official Dinner
at the Council of State, August 2

President Ceausescu "

I am glad to be in a position to greet you, high
representatives of the American people, at tliis
dinner. The welcome given to you, Mr. Presi-
dent, by the citizens of our capital reflects the
feelings of appreciation and esteem which our
two peoples have for each other ; it expresses our
people's desire to live in peace and friendship
witli the American people, with all the peoples
of the world. It is an undisputed fact that the
presence in Romania, for the first time in his-
tory, of the President of the United States of
America, has a special significance for the de-
velopment of the relations between our two
states.

At the same time this visit mirrors the favor-
able changes which have taken place in the
modern world and bears proof to the vitality of
the policy of peaceful coexistence, which asserts
itself in international affairs ever more strongly.

It is notorious that Romania and the United
States are two countries with different systems
and therefore our views on the social and politi-
cal development of the world also differ. We
believe, however, that the existing difference
between social systems should not prevent the
development of relations and cooperation be-
tween nations; on the contrary, this very fact
calls for active work to promote in interna-
tional affairs the policies of peaceful coexist-
ence, a realistic, sober, and constructive policy,

"Translation made available by the White House
Press Office (Weekly Compilation of Presidential
Documents dated Aug. 4 ) .

the wide cooperation of all countries with an
aim to consolidate peace and security.

Your visit to Romania, Mr. President, takes
place on the eve of the anniversary of a quarter-
century since the liberation of our people from
the Fascist yoke. Taking its fate in its own
hands and energetically proceeding along the
path of a free and independent life, the Roma-
nian people was able, during a short period in
history, to change the country image, from the
very foundations, to develop the economy, sci-
ence, and culture to build a new system, the
paramount goal of which is the well-being and
happiness of those who work. Our people is de-
termined to continue with intensity its vast,
peaceful, and creative work, to ensure the steady
and many-sided progress of the nation to turn
Romania into an advanced country of the world.
It is on this basis that it participates more and
more actively in the exchange of material and
spiritual assets of the contemporary world.

In our comitry the outstanding achievements
of your people in the field of economy, science,
technology, and culture are well known. The
magnificent space voyage of the American as-
tronauts — the first inhabitants of the earth who
stepped on the moon and brought back to our
planet fragments of matter from another celes-
tial body — was a source of joy for us for it rep-
resents a brilliant victory of human genius and
of universal knowledge. This event shows once
more how necessary it is to establish peaceful
coexistence and cooperation between all nations
on our own planet. We express our hope that
this achievement of the human mind will con-
tribute not only to the progress of science and
teclinology but also to the development of co-
operation between peoples, in the interest of
peace and civilization.

We appreciate the fact that the relations be-
tween Romania and the United States — two
countries between which there are no interstate
disputes — have seen an upward trend of devel-
opment. During our talks it has been put into
evidence that the stage reached by the coopera-
tion between our two countries is still far from
exhausting the existing opportunities, and a mu-
tual desire has been expressed to explore new
ways of expanding our economic, scientific,
technological, and cultural exchanges and co-
operation. I express my firm belief that your
visit to Romania, Mr. President, will prove to be
a significant step in the development of many-

August 25, 1969

169

sided, mutually advantageous relations between
our two countries.

We also appreciate favorably the fact that our
talks have outlined some possibilities to broaden
our cooperation in the world arena, in the inter-
est of the cause of peace. Naturally, in the course
of our discussions different oi^inions were also
voiced on certain problems pertaining to the
present international situation; but this cannot
inliibit joint action along the way of detente and
the search for new ways of improving the world
political atmosphere. Romania proceeds from
the idea that all the countries of the world, big
and small, bear the responsibility for the fate of
peace, for the development of international rela-
tions, and that they are dutybound to contribute
to the settlement of the thorny issues of contem-
porary life and to the establishment of confi-
dence and cooperation between nations.

Being a Socialist country, Eomania places in
the center of her foreign policy the many-sided
cooperation with the Socialist countries, to
which she is boimd by a common social system.
At the same time, she steadily develops fruitful
relations in all the fields with the other countries
of the world. In our opinion, when more and
more new nations assert themselves in the world
arena, showing their firm desire to step as in-
dependent entities on the way to progress and
civilization to secure the conditions enabline:
each nation to decide its own future and the road
of its social and political development is the es-
sential imperative requirement of international
life. In our view, at present the condition sine
qua non of peace is to establish in the relations
between all states the i^rLnciples of independence
and national sovereignty, to liquidate once and
for all the policy of domination and interfer-
ence in the internal affairs of others, to instate
the full equality among nations. These i^rinci-
ples acquire an ever wider international recogni-
tion, they assert themselves more and more
strongly in the relations between countries and
enjoy broad adhesion from public opinion everj'-
wliere. The infringements upon these principles
endanger world security, breed tension, con-
flicts, and new hotbeds of war.

In this connection, we cannot fail to express
our concern, which is indeed the concern of the
whole world, about the continuation of the war
in Viet-Nam. During our discussions we ex-
plained our position on this problem. "We hope
that the negotiations in Paris will lead to the

cessation of the war and the withdrawal of
troops from Viet-Xam, thus creating the condi-
tions for the Vietnamese people to decide by it-
self the course of its economic and social de-
velopment, in an independent way, without any
interference from outside. Eomania also believes
that it is necessary that all efforts should be
made to solve the conflict in the Middle East in
the spirit of the Security Council resolution of
19G7, aiming to bring about the withdrawal of
the Israeli troops from the occupied territories
and to ensure the right of every state in the area
to independent existence, to development and
progress.

Romania believes that one of the crucial prob-
lems of the international affairs today, the solu-
tion of which could make a radical contribu-
tion to the strengthening of peace, is to achieve
disarmament, nuclear disarmament in the first
place, to carry out concrete measures aimed at
reducing and liquidating the thermonuclear
danger. To this effect, the liquidation of the
present division of the world into military blocs
confronting each other, the dissolution of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization and, con-
currently, of the "Warsaw Treaty, the liquidation
of the foreign military bases, and the with-
drawal of all troops within their national bomid-
aries would be of particular importance.

An important progress in the direction of
detente would be achieved, in our opinion, by the
establishment of lasting security on the Euro-
pean Continent. European security can be ac-
complished only by proceeding from the real-
ities established as a result of "World "War II,
from the existence of the two German states,
from the recognition of the inviolability of the
postwar frontiers, including the frontier on
Oder-Neisse. A favorable impact would be pro-
duced by holding an European conference, a
desideratum expressed by an increasing number
of states. The accomplishment of security on
tlais continent is a matter in which not only the
European peoples are vitally interested, but also
all the peoples of the world ; the attainment of
tliis objective would exert a particularly favor-
able influence on the political climate, on all
coimtries.

I express my firm belief, Mr. President, that
the meeting and the talks we had together, our
determination to develop the cooperation be-
tween Romania and the United States, will make
a substantive contribution to the cause of peace

170

Department of State Bulletin A

and international cooperation, to the ever-wide
promotion of the principles of peaceful co-
existence in the world.

Our meeting, taking place only a few days
after the accomplisliment of the millenary
dream of mankind to voyage on celestial bodies,
gets a particular significance. It symbolizes the
possibility for peoples to live in peace and mu-
tual understanding on this planet — the ancient
cradle of their existence — to unite their efforts
for the achievement of the other millenary
dream : a world without war, without destruc-
tion, a world of cooperation and progress. We
are confident that this meeting and our talks
signify a decisive moment in expanding the
many-sided cooperation and collaboration be-
tween Romania and the United States, between
our two peoples. At the same time we would like
this visit, wliich is appreciated by the public
opinion as an outstanding event of the interna-
tional life, to mark a progress on the way of im-
proving the relations between all nations of the
world, free and equal in rights.

Allow me to propose this toast to the triumph
of peace, this grand ideal of human beings on
all continents regardless of their race, creed,
political and philosopliical beliefs.

To your health, Mr. President, to your health,
dear Mrs. Nixon, to the health of our other
guests, to the health of all here present.

President Nixon

White House press release (Bucharest, Romania) dated
August 2

Before I make my formal reply to the very
eloquent remarks of the President, I would like
to say that for all of us today, the wonderful
welcome we received here in Bucharest, in
Romania, has touched our hearts, and we are
most grateful for the reception we have
received.

I have traveled to many countries in the world
and have gone through the great capital cities
of the world, but perhaps never in all of the
years I have traveled have we received a warmer
welcome, and we are most gratefid to the people
of Romania for the warmth of your hearts.

This visit to your coimtry is a brief one and I
regret that it is not longer, for though your
coimtry is smaller geographically than ours,
we share many of the same qualities of diversity.

You have magnificent valleys and great
mountains and seashores and forests and farm-

lands. In addition, several peoples make up the
Romanian nation, just as the American nation
is made up of many different peoples who came
to our country from different lands.

Indeed, one bond we share is that of ancestiy.
Almost a quarter of a million Americans can
claim one or both parents born in Romania.

"While our visit here is brief, we will have the
opportunity to view some of your nation's
natural beauty and also some visible manifesta-
tions of your economic progress in recent years.

From my previous visit in 1967, and also be-
cause of our information, we are aware in the
United States of the strides your nation has
made in building a modern industrial society.
We welcome the opportunity to see examples of
that progress, as we will tomorrow, and we wish
you more progress in the future.

'W'lien I arrived, I spoke of a cause very close
to the hearts of the American people, the cause
of a just peace, a peace among peoples of differ-
ing races and differing beliefs about the nature
of man and of God, a peace among nations of
different interests and vastly different social
systems.

Of tliis one tiling we are sure : We know man-
kind cannot build a just and lasting peace until
all nations recognize and respect the sovereignty
and rights of other nations, large and small.
There are great similarities between the United
States and Romania; but as I have mentioned,
there are also great differences. Our political
and social systems are different. Our economic
policies are different. We do not share each
other's views on many issues about the nature
of our world and the shape of the future. But
having mentioned the differences, let us look at
some of those areas where we agree.

Both Romania and the United States are
members of the family of nations, and we both
enjoy the rights of all nations. Each of us wishes
to preserve its national institutions and to
advance the economic well-being of its own
people. Each of us seeks peaceful solutions to
international disagreements; each believes in
better understanding and greater communica-
tion between those who disagree — and that is
why these meetings are being held.

Mr. President, your coimtry pursues a policy
of communication and contact with all nations — ■
you have actively sought the reduction of inter-
national tensions. My coimtry shares those
objectives.

August 25, 1969

171

We are seeking ways of ensuring the security,
progress, and independence of the nations of
Asia, for, as recent history has shown, if there
is no peace in Asia there is no peace in the world.
My country will bear the proper sliare of the
burdens in that part of the world.

In Europe we are prepared to consider all
concrete and promising possibilities of remov-
ing tensions. We favor negotiations on disputed
issues — not just for the sake of negotiations, but
for the sake of resolving the disputes in order to
improve the existing situation and advance the
security of all nations.

We are prepared to negotiate seriously on the
crucial and complex problem of strategic arms
and will consider any arrangement that equi-
tably protects the security of all concerned while
bringing the qualitative and quantitative
growth of arsenals under control.

We seek a stable peace in the Middle East, a
peace in which all the countries of the region,
and those outside of it, can repose confidence —
and a peace which no one, whether inside the
region or outside, will seek to exploit for narrow
purposes.

Mr. President, as I told you today in our meet-
ings, we seek normal relations with all coun-
tries, regardless of their domestic systems. We
stand ready to reciprocate the efforts of any
country that seeks normal relations with us.

We are flexible about the methods by which
peace is to be sought and built. We see value
neither in the exchange of polemics nor in a
false euphoria. We seek the substance of de-
tente, not its mere atmosphere.

We seek, in sum, a peace not of hegemonies
and not of artificial uniformity, but a peace
in which the legitimate interests of each are
respected and all are safeguarded.

Mr. President, as we came into the city today,
I noticed a number of people holding up signs
with a picture of the three astronauts on them.
More than a billion people around the world
saw and heard the landing on the moon. And
thoughtful men all over the world saw the earth
in a new perspective — as the home of a human
family whose similarities and common interests
far outweigh their differences.

Because all nations must search for imder-
standing, I value the very frank discussions
we had today, and I look forward to those that
we will have tomorrow. I note the growth of bi-
lateral relations between us in recent years ; our
bilateral ties in many fields have expanded and

as a result of our talks they will continue to
grow.

And now, Mr. President, I wish to express
again to you and on behalf of all of the mem-
bers of our party our appreciation for this su-
perb dinner tonight, for the magnificent music,
and for the warm welcome you have extended
to us.

I know that the welcome we received, as we
rode in from the airport, was not for me or for
my wife individually, but for our country, for
the American people, and for all of the Ameri-
can people we express our appreciation. And
speaking for the American people, I want you
to know that we respect and admire your na-
tional independence and sovereignty. We wish
you success and prosperity in the development
of your country.

In the United States, as you may know, if you
followed our inaugural ceremonies, we have oc-
casionally used the phrase "Forward together."
I have discovered that that concept is not origi-
nal with me. And for my toast tonight, may I,
therefore, use the words of a great Romanian
poet, Miliai Eminescu : "May your sons go for-
ward, brothers hand in hand."

And so I ask you all to join me in raising
your glasses to the President of Romania and
to Romanian-American friendsliip.

Exchange of Toasts at a Luncheon

at the Government Guest House, August 3

White House press release (Bucharest, Komania) dated
August 3

President Nixon

As we near the end of our brief visit to Ro-
mania, we only regret that we were unable to
entertain the President and the members of the
Romanian Government at the American Em-
bassy. I recall in 1967, when Ambassador Davis
had a luncheon for me at the Embassy, that it
was rather difficult to get more than 25 or 30 in
the room. So regardless of whatever else comes
out of these talks that we have had — and much
good will come from them — one decision I have
made: We will build a new embassy residence
so that we can have this party next time in the
embassy residence.

After seeing the splendid Titan Housing
Project, I am sure we can find a good architect
for the residence.

Mr. President, it is very difficult on this oc-
casion to tell you how deeply we have appre-

172

Department of State Bulletin

ciated the courtesies that j'ou have extended to
us and also to tell you how deeply moved we
have been by the reception we have received
from the people of Bucharest on this visit.

We have tried on this occasion to bring as
much of the United States to Bucharest as we
could. The placecards, the matches, and the
menus were all printed in the United States.
The beef came from Kansas City; the peas
came from California ; the tomatoes came from
Florida; and the hearts of palm came from
Hawaii. But one thing we could not bring were
the flowers, because no place in the world can
you go and find more beautiful flowers than in
Bucharest.

So, consequently, I simply want to conclude
by saying that we have had very exhaustive
talks but they have not been exhausting, be-
cause talk is exhausting only when it is boring;
and wlien President Ceausescu and I talk, it is
never boring. TVe have discussed matters of
tremendous importance to relations between the
United States and Romania and also the whole
problem of world peace. I know that from the
talks we have had that much good will come in
terms of bringing closer the day when we can
have world peace.

President Ceausescu

I should like first of all to express on behalf
of all of my associates present here our thanks
for the warm welcome, for the good welcome,
given to us, and particularly for the things you
have treated us with, brought over from the
United States.

Listening to President Nixon saying that
beef, matches, cigarettes, wine, champagne, were
all brought over from the United States, a
thought crossed my mind : that it is unjust when
people say that Romanians are nationalistic. I
see that United States representatives are able
to go faster than we do in this field, too.

Secondly, I should beg to apologize to Mrs.
Nixon and the President for the fact that we
organized a tough program for them and left
no time for them to have a rest during the visit.

As to the talks we had yesterday and today,
it is true that they covered a broad range of
subjects. Some parts of our discussion were
rather lively, but I have to say that they were
always civilized and constructive. Of course,
not on all problems did we share the same poiat

August 25, 1969

of view, but I wonder that if the representatives
of states had the same point of view on all
things, on all problems, then they would cer-
tainly meet much less frequently than they do
now.

We hope, however, that notwithstanding the
differences of views even on such problems, our
two sides would work together toward finding
appropriate solutions in order to strengthen
cooperation between peoples and bring about
peace to the world.

I should also like to express my gratitude to
the President for having especially brought over
the band of the Air Force, bypassing at the same
time both NATO and the Warsaw Treaty.

It is true that music is called upon to serve
friendship between peoples and peace. It might
be a good thing in order that music should not
follow roimdabout ways in order to get to
places, and just to dismantle the military blocs
in order to let music free. We could turn both
the Warsaw Pact and the NATO into instru-
ments of international cooperation in the field
of music, for instance, and let us have competi-
tion between the two blocs then.

President Nixon: I agree.

President Ceausescu: May I be permitted to
propose this toast to the President of the United
States and to ]\Irs. Nixon, who has already
promised to come again to Romania one day : To
the friendship between the United States and
Romania ; to the peace in the world.

Exchange of Remarks, Otopeni Airport,
August 3

White House press release (Bucbarest, Romania) dated
August 3

President Nixon

It has been a privilege to visit over 60 coun-
tries in the world, and of all the countries I have
visited, there has been none that has been more
memorable than the visit to Romania. This is
true not only because of the very substantive
talks you, Mr. President, and I have had on is-
sues — talks which I am convinced history will
record will serve the cause of peace, but it is
true also because of the wonderfully heartwarm-
ing welcome we have received from the people
of Romania everyplace we have gone.

Mr. President, I am convinced, after this visit,
as I am sure you are, that regardless of the dif-
ferences in policies, the peoples of the world

173

are determined to be one and, Mr. President,
from the bottom of my heart, as I leave your
country, I want to say, in your own language
as well as I can : Traiasca prietenia noastra. La
revedei'e.

President Ceausescu

As President Nixon has already said, in the
brief period of time he spent, together with
Mrs. Nixon and accompanying persons, in the
territory of Romania, I should also like to men-
tion that the conversations we had together
were focused on the concern for the develop-
ment of relations between our two countries
and also for finding new avenues to contribute
to the cause of cooperation among peoples and
peace in the world.

The welcome extended to you, Mr. President,
by the population of the city of Bucharest is an
expression of the feelings of friendship our peo-
ple have for the American people, and it mir-
rors the hospitality of the Romanian people and
the desire to live in friendship and peace with
the people of America, with all the nations of
the world.

Upon your return to your homeland, sir, I
should like you to convey, on my own behalf,
on behalf of the Romanian people, our friendly
greeting to the people of America, our best
wishes for prosperity and peace. And now al-
low me to bid you hon voyage.

MILDENHALL AIR FORCE BASE, ENGLAND
Exchange of Greetings, August 3

White House press release (Mildenhall Air Force Base, Eng-
land) dated August 3

Prime Minister Wilson

Mr. President, it is a very real pleasure for
me to welcome you and Mrs. Nixon this evening
as you touch down on British soil — currently
here in a very real sense Anglo-American
soil — at the last stage of a round-the-world
tour wliich I hope you, Mr. President, feel has
been as rewarding as it has been arduous and
which, when its full implications have been
worked out, may well prove to have been
historic.

While your mind must be teeming, Mr. Presi-

dent, with the accmnulated thoughts of your
talks and your welcome in seven different
countries, I am sure that even these will not
have displaced your memory of seeing the
splashdown after the momentous and successful
Apollo mission.

This evening gives me the opportunity to ex-
tend to you, and this time without the aid of a
hot line, the congratulations of Her Majesty's
Government and of the whole British people
on what has been acliieved.

IMeanwhile and immediately, j-ou, Mr. Presi-
dent, and I seek to make the maximum use of
the short time that you are here with us. "While
we have kept in the closest touch since your
visit in February, I look forward to this chance
of hearing from you, firsthand, your first im-
pressions of your discussions on your world
tour; equally, to exchange views on the sub-
jects of our informal agenda, for both of us are
conscious of the possible developments, chal-
lenges, and opportunities that lie ahead as we
pursue our common tasks together.

President Nixon

I wish to express to you, Mr. Prime Minister,
my grateful appreciation for tliose very warm
words of welcome, and to tell you that, though
tliis is but a brief stop, I welcome the opportu-
nity that is provided to talk with you again
about some of the problems that we mutually
face in the world and to discuss them in the con-
text of the trip that I am now bringing to a
conclusion.

You have graciously mentioned the adventure
which took three Americans to the vicinity of
the moon, and two to step on the moon. I found
that as I traveled all over the world, in every
nation, whether it was in Asia or in Eastern
Europe, this was uppermost in the minds of all
people, leaders and people that I met from all
walks of life.

I think in this is perhaps a lesson for all of us.
There are differences that divide the world to-
day — very deep differences. But as we saw very
dramatically and very movingly in Bucharest
today and yesterday, those things which unite
men and women in the world are much stronger
than those which divide us.

I can assure all who are listening to me now
that while the path to peace may seem veiy

174

Department of State Bulletin

difScult — and preserving the peace is, of course,
a task which we have found to be tremendously
arduous and hazardous over these past few
years — that the people of the world deep in
their liearts want peace.

They are on tlie side of peace. That is the
message that comes from all over Asia ; it comes
from Eastern Europe; and I sense it agam as
I step here on British soil.

It is the responsibility of leaders — leaders
like those that I had the privilege of meeting
on this trip, leaders, Mr. Prime Minister, like
yourself — it is our responsibility to develop
those policies that will reflect the deep yearn-
ing of people to be together rather than apart,
to commimicat© rather than being denied the
opportunity to know each other.

It is this great goal to which we are
dedicated.

I believe that this trip may have served a use-
ful purpose in bringing us closer to that goal.
I am confident that our conversations will also
further that purpose as they have in the past.

Finally, I say again, it is always a great
privilege to come here, to be welcomed here on
British soil, and I can only say that I wish my
stay were longer; but there will be another day.
On this occasion, at least, for this one hour,
we can talk about the world and perhaps de-
velop some constructive thoughts that would
further that cause of peace, to which we are all
so deeply dedicated.

Thank you.

, THE RETURN TO WASHINGTON

Exchange of Remarks, Andrews Air Force Base,
August 3

White House press release dated Au^st 3

Vice President Agnew

1 1 Mr. President, it is indeed a privilege to wel-
come you back. This return from a successful
trip in Asia in many waj-s represents a repeti-
tion of a return from a successful trip earlier
this year in Europe. There is one distinct dif-
ference that I appreciate very much, and that
is that the runway is not icy.

However, as successful as both those trips
were, ilr. President, this one has a significant

difference in that it began on a soaring of the
spirit as you stood on the deck of the carrier
Hornet and watched the astronauts return to
safety again.

We could see mirrored in your face, sir, a re-
action that was within each one of us, of pride
and indeed, in awe, that man has come to this
great accomplishment.

Mr. President, I tliink that spirit accomjDa-
nied you on your trip throughout the Asian na-
tions, to the Philippines, to Indonesia, to Thai-
land, and then that trip to Viet-Nam, where
you visited our battleline troops. I think it was
reflected on the faces of the troops and on the
faces of the people of Asia, as they heard you
say what I thought was your most significant
remark: that we are not going to treat the
Pacific Ocean as a barrier, but as a bridge.

Then after Viet-Nam, your visits to India
and Pakistan and finally that wonderful experi-
ence that each of us shared with you when you
went to Romania and received that tremendous
outpouring of spirit that could not conceivably
be arranged by any nation under any circum-
stances. It assured us that there is a brother-
hood of man — a brotherhood of man that in-
dicates that there is a brotherhood for peace,
peace for all nations — and we should all strive
for this.

"We should all be determined that the people
can prosper and grow together as long as the
people's wishes are being met and I tliink that
basically is the message that you so successfully
put around the world, and we are so pleased to
have you back and so proud of what you have
accomplished.

President Nixon

It seems the way to get weather is for me to
return from either Europe or Asia. Wlaen I
returned from Europe it snowed, and when I
returned from Asia it rained. So that means
from now on I will be called "Nixon the Rain-
maker." That is better than being called a
"troublemaker."

I do want to say in response to your very
warm remarks of welcome that we have had
very warm receptions around the world in seven
countries. I knew those receptions were not for
me as an individual, but for what this country
stands for.

August 25, 1969

175

America has many friends in this world and
we can be proud of America, and I was proud to
represent America as I visited these nations and
saw friendship for Americans in the eyes of
people from seven countries that you have
mentioned.

I would also like to point out that on this trip
the theme was as pretty well stated as it could
be, by the Acting President of India, when he
proposed a toast a few nights ago : that it is a
trip in quest of peace.

"VVliat we were trying to do was to bring this
message to the world : that the United States
wants to bring peace to the world and we want
to do our fair share in working with others
to maintain peace in the world. That feeling,
believe me, is shared by people all over the
world.

Another thought that occurs to me is with
regard to the visit to Bucharest. This was the
most moving experience that I have had in trav-
eling to over 60 countries in the world, not that
all the other countries were also not extremely
exciting and interesting and receptive ; but here
in this country, in which we have an entirely
different political philosophy from our own,
people were out by the hundreds of thou-
sands — not ordered by their Government, but
cheering and shouting; not against anybody,

but simply showing their affection and friend-
ship for the people of the United States.

This means to me one simple thing : that dif-
ferences in political pliilosophy cannot perma-
nently divide the people of the world. This has
a great meaning to the future. It means that we
can live in peace in the world, live in peace with
other nations who may have different political
philosophies.

Finally, another thought occurs to me. I want
to bring this to a conclusion, because I know
this has been a long day for you and this is the
end of a 24-hour day for me. It is raining; so
imder the circumstances, I do want to leave one
final thought that you touched upon.

In Bucharest I noted that so many, particu-
larly of the young people, held up a newspaper
picture of the astronauts landing on the moon,
and everywhere we went it was the same. Some
way, when those two Americans stepped on the
moon, the people of this world were brought
closer together.

As I stand here today, I really feel in my
heart that it is that spirit, the spirit of Apollo,
that America can now help to bring to all rela-
tions witli other nations. The spirit of Apollo
transcends geographical barriers of other na-
tions. It can bring the people of the world
together in peace.

176

Department of State Bulletin

President Nixon's Round-the-World Trip
July 26-Aogust 3

Selected Documentation

Page

Manila, the Philippines

Exchange of greetings between President Ferdinand E. Marcos and President

NLxon, July 26 141

Statement by President Nixon on the Asian Development Bank 143

Exchange of remarks between President Marcos and President Nixon at de-
parture ceremonies, July 27 144

Djakarta, Indonesia

Exchange of greetings between President Suharto and President Nixon,

July 27 146

Exchange of toasts between President Suharto and President Nixon at a

state dinner, July 27 148

Exchange of remarks between President Suharto and President Nixon at de-
parture ceremonies, July 28 . 151

Bangkok, Thailand

Exchange of remarks between Lord Mayor Chalit Kulkanthorn and President

Nixon, July 28 152

Statement by President Nixon, July 28 154

Remarks by President Nixon at a reception at Government House, July 29

(excerpt) 154

Saigon, Republic of Viet-Nam

Statement by President Nixon, July 30 155

Statements by President Nixon and President Nguyen Van Thieu following

their meeting at Independence Palace, July 30 156

New Delhi, India

Statement by President Nixon, July 31 158

Exchange of toasts between Acting President Mohammed Hidayatullah and

President Nixon at a state dinner, July 31 159

Lahore, Pakistan

Exchange of greetings between President Yahya Khan and President Nixon,

August 1 162

Statement by President Nixon, August 1 163

Exchange of remarks between Chief of Protocol Anwar Khan and President

Nixon upon presentation of Nishan-e-Pakistan Medal, August 1 . . . . 164

Exchange of toasts between President Yahya and President Nixon at a state

dinner, August 1 165

Bucharest, Romania

Exchange of greetings between President Nicolae Ceausescu and President

Nixon, August 2 167

Exchange of toasts between President Ceausescu and President Nixon at an

official dinner, August 2 169

Exchange of toasts between President Nixon and President Ceausescu at a

luncheon, August 3 172

Exchange of remarks between President Nixon and President Ceausescu at

departure ceremonies, August 3 173

Mildenhall Air Force Base, England

Exchange of greetings between Prime Minister Harold Wilson and President

Nixon, August 3 174

The Return to Washington

Remarks by Vice President Agnew and President Nixon, August 3 . . . . 175

Superintendent of Documents

u.s. government printing office

washington. d.c. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFI

N AVT O

20 YEARS OF PEACE

■]C THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

SECRETARY ROGERS' TRIP TO ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

Statements and News Conferences 177

ANZUS COUNCIL HOLDS 19TH MEETING AT CANBERRA

Text of Communique 186

DEPARTMENT REVIEWS HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS
GOVERNING ACTIVITIES ON THE SEABED - ■''

Statement by Under Secretary Johnson 191

For index see inside hack cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETI

VOL. LXI, No. 1575
September 1, 1969

For sale by tbe Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Qovemment Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PRICE:

62 issues, domestic $16, foreign $23

Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication

approved by the Director of the Bureau of

the Budget (January 11, 1966).

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 BULLETIN is indexed In

tbe Readers' Qulde to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN^
a uxekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
with information on developments in
the field of foreign relations and on
the u>ork of the Department of State
and the Foreign Service.
The BULLETIN includes selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and tlte Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as well as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

Publications of the Department,
United Nations documents, and leg'
islative material in the field of inter'
national relations are listed currentfyi

Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the Pacific

Secretary Rogers met tvith President Nixon
at the Western White House, San Clemente,
Calif., on August 11 to report on his trip to Asia
and the Pacific. Following is the transcript of
a news conference the Secretary held after that
meeting and ths text of his address iefore the
National Press Club at Canberra, Australia, on
August 8, together with tlie Secretary's state-
ments and news conferences at Taipei August 1
and 3 and at Hong Kong August 3.

NEWS CONFERENCE, SAN CLEMENTE, CALIF.,
AUGUST 11

White House press release (San Clemente, Calif.) dated
August 11

Gentlemen, I have just had an opportunity to
report to the President about the trip that I
took in Asia after I left him.

I told the President that I had found sup-
port, great support, for his Asian policy in all
the countries that I visited. I visited Japan,
South Korea, the Republic of China, and then
returned to Indonesia for a few days, went to
Australia and New Zealand. Without exception,
the leaders of those countries were enthusiastic,
strongly supported the positions the President
was taking on this trip.

I tliink that— at least I felt and those in my
party felt — our trip was most successful. The
joint Cabinet meeting we had in Japan was said
by the Foreign Minister, after I left, to be the
most successful joint Cabinet meeting that he
had attended, and I felt the same way.^

At the ANZUS meeting in Australia,^ Prime
Minister Holyoake, who I think has been at all
the meetings, stated publicly that he thought it

' For Secretary Rogers' opening statement before the
Joint U.S.-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic
Development on July 29 and the text of a joint com-
munique issued at Tokyo on July 31, see Bulletin of
Aug. 18, 1969, p. 121.

* For text of a communique issued at the conclusion
of the ANZUS Council meeting, see p. 186.

was one of the most successful meetings that he
had attended.

So I am encouraged by what I think was the
success of the trip. Certainly the President's
trip was most successful. I am encouraged to
think that our trip was, too.

Q. Mr. Secretary, did you find any thought
that some of our Pacific allies would like to
withdraio their troops from, Viet-Nam?

A. No, I did not find that sentiment ex-
pressed. I did find that, naturally, they were
interested in our program and how fast it would
proceed and how many troops would be re-
placed. And they did show an interest, as you
might expect, in wanting to be phased in at
some point along the line. But there was no
feeling, I think, on the part of any that I talked
to that any immediate withdrawal on their part
should take place.

Q. Do you have any new sign of encourage-
ment of a lessening of hostilities in the war
zone?

A. Nothing other than what you have read.
There still seems to be a lull in the activity, al-
though I noticed that 1 or 2 days we have had
some increased activity. But I think on the whole
the conclusion is that the lull is still in existence.

I talked to Admiral McCain [Adm. John S.
McCain, Jr., Commander in Chief, Pacific Com-
mand] last night on the way in Honolulu. He
felt that way.

Q. Mr. Secretary, do you feel that the Presi-
dent's conditions for the further withdrawal of
American troops are being met?

A. I don't think the President has made any
decision on that. He is considering that now. I
tliink it will be some time before he will make a
decision on whether to announce any further
troop replacements or not.

Q. Is there any indication that this new mili-
tary activity by the enemy in Viet-Nam is going

September 1, 1969

177

to continue and that the lull is ending? How do
you interpret this new activity?

A. I think it is too early. You can never tell
what the enemy is up to. I wouldn't say that
just because there was a little flurry that was
the end of the lull. You just have to wait and see.
We don't have any hard intelligence whether
this is symptomatic of the future plans or not.
But our general feeling is that the lull wliich
has been in existence now for some time, 7
weeks or so, probably is still continuing.

Q. Do you drmo any diplomatic conclusions
from the continuing lull? Does this mean they
are trying to signal, us, that they are in effect
deescalating the war?

A. There again, it is difficult to draw any
conclusions from that at the moment. As I said
in a press conference, I think in New Zealand,
the other day, I don't imderstand why, if they
are trying to give us a signal, they don't just
tell us. They are in communication with us all
the time. We will have to analyze their activity
and make our decisions based on what they do
rather than what they say.

Q. Is tJiere any new sign of encouragement
coming from Paris?

A. I don't think I have anything to add to
what has been in the press on the Paris
negotiations.

Q. Is enemy infiltration from, the North still
down?

A. Yes, it is. It is down to a considerable
extent.

Q. Can you give us any figures on what it is
running now?

A. No, I can't.

Q. Mr. Secretary, toliat was your reaction to
Red China's bellicose reaction to your proposals
to reopen talks?

A. It is a little difficult to figure out. Wlien I
was in Hong Kong I made some statements to
the effect that the United States was prepared
to attempt to normalize some of our relations
with them to see if it was possible to become
somewhat more friendly in order to reduce
tensions.

In the next day, there was a very vitriolic
attack on me calling me a "plague of war." I

have a little difficulty in the logic of that, why
when you say you would like to be a little friend-
lier, they call you a warlord. So I have difficulty
in giving any answer to your question.

Q. Is it about what you expected or does it go
beyond what you expected?

A. It is about what I expected. This seems to
be their propaganda attack. Whether this is
what they mean or not is another thing. But
they seem to love to engage in this hyperbole
and venomous attacks on people without any
reason.

I want to say our point is that we would like
to reduce tensions in the world. Obviously, a
nation that is causing a great deal of tension is
Communist China. We can't reduce tensions if
they are not willing to. We are willing to. We
are willing to discuss matters with them. We
are willing to be more friendly. If they don't
want to, that is up to them. We would like to
very much.

ADDRESS BEFORE THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB,
CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA, AUGUST 8

Press release 238 dated August 8

I am happy to be vasiting Australia toward
the end of what I believe has been a useful and
constructive trip.

It began by watching the return of men from
the moon — an experience shared through the
magic of television by over 500 million people,
the largest audience in history.

The success of Apollo 11 makes any extended
comment about it unnecessary.

Over 17,000 Americans — scientists, techni-
cians, engineers, military personnel, and
others — were involved in direct support of the
mission. But the achievement was a cooperative
effort. Facilities were made available from 20
other countries. Some 2,000 people in six other
nations were directly involved. Notable among
these was Australia, whose longstanding co-
operation and help on space matters we deeply
appreciate.

On behalf of the American people, let me ex-
tend our thanks to the people of Australia for
your help and your enthusiastic support.

I would like to turn now to more immediate
matters which have been central to the purposes
of my trip. These have to do with the future

178

Department of State Bulletin

security and progress of the Pacific community.

First, let me refer briefly to the situation in
Viet-Nam.

We had hoped that the carefully prepared
proposals for a negotiated solution put forwai-d
by the United States and its allies would meet
with reciprocity from Hanoi and lead to serious
negotiations. So far, this has not been the case.

We have proposed mutual withdrawal of
troops and thus the deescalation of the war.
President Tliieu has proposed free elections for
all of the people of South Viet-Nam, including
those in the NLF [National Liberation Front] ;
he has proposed international supervision that
would assure the fairness of such elections.

Unfortunately, the position of Hanoi is
against mutual force withdrawals, against free
elections, against international supervision. In
fact, it persists in its position — an inhumane
position — of refusing even to provide us with
the names of American military personnel they
hold prisoners. These positions are indefensible
and are recei^^ng little international support,
and they are inherently untenable.

We are convinced that settlement of the war
in Viet-Nam under circumstances permitting
the South Vietnamese people to decide their
own destiny is a necessary foundation stone for
future security in Southeast Asia and in the
whole Asian-Pacific area. We firmly believe
that self-determination is the political force of
the future. We also believe that so-called
"struggles of national liberation," organized
and supported from the outside, increasingly
i will become recognized for what they are:
vehicles for Communist colonialism.

We are entering an interesting period in the
affairs of Asia and the Pacific community. Not
only in Viet-Nam but elsewhere, new chapters
are about to be written.

Virtually all of the ambassadors of Com-
munist China have been in Peking for the past
3 years. Now, since the Ninth Party Congress
in Peking, many ambassadors are leaving
Peking for new posts.
|| Before the Moscow meeting of the Com-
■ munist parties in May, all of the Soviet Union's
ambassadors to East Asia were recalled to Rus-
sia. They — or their successors — are returning to
their posts. The deep and bitter conflict be-
tween the Soviet Union and Communist China
continues to fester and broaden.

At the recent Moscow meeting, Mr. Brezhnev
[Leonid I. Brezhnev, First Secretary of the

Soviet Communist Party] made his elliptical
reference to the need for an Asian collective
security system, obviously directed against
Communist China. Thus, it is clear there is great
uncertainty in the Communist world about the
course of recent events.

By the way of contrast, there has been great
progress in recent years in non-Communist
Asia. Indeed, I believe, it is here that the most
exciting success story of the next decade may
be written. As leading members of the Pacific
community, Australia and New Zealand are
playing an important role in that story.

Japan has already become the second most
productive economy in the free world.

The Republics of Korea and China, Thai-
land, Singapore, and Malaysia have all doubled
their gross national product in the last decade.

Indonesia is putting its financial house in
order and is launched on a development pro-
gram which, hopefully, will put an end to the
long stagnation under the previous regime.
India, Pakistan, and the Philippines have
achieved significant breakthroughs in agricul-
tural production. These are dramatic examples
of what free societies can accomplish.

Before World War II the only independent
countries in East Asia were China, Japan, and
Thailand. Today, more than three times as
many countries of this area are independent.

Regional cooperation is becoming more of a
rule and less of an exception. This strengthens
political confidence and cohesion.

This is not to deny the existence of many
dangers and unresolved problems in and among
Asian countries. But it does show the many
changes that have occurred in Asia.

It was against this background of change, of
new expectations, and of many uncertainties
that President Nixon has just visited a number
of countries and I have made two trips to Asia
in the past several months. There are a few
observations I would like to share with you as a
result of these trips.

First, a few words about the greatest ques-
tion mark over the future of Asia and the
Pacific: Communist China.

We recognize, of course, that the Republic of
China on Taiwan and Communist China on the
mainland are facts of life. We know, too, that
mainland China will eventually play an impor-
tant role in Asian and Pacific affairs — but cer-
tainly not as long as its leaders continue to have
such an introspective view of the world.

September 1, 1969

179

It goes without saying that most of the world
is concerned about a nation which opposes a ne-
gotiated settlement of the Vietnamese conflict,
which has such belligerent policies toward its
neighbors, which provides training and supplies
for insurrectionist groups, and which is now
exhorting her people to make sacrifices in antici-
pation of war with the Soviet Union.

Although we are inclined to speak of China
as a "great power," we should remember that
this power is potential more than actual. I be-
lieve there is a tendency in many quarters to
build up the Chinese Communists by equating
their capabilities with their rhetoric.

Public expressions of attitude toward the
United States from Communist China since the
inauguration of our administration in Wash-
ington certainly have been strident. They pre-
tend to feel they are encircled by hostile forces.

I doubt very much if Peking's leaders really
consider that they are threatened by the mili-
tary strength of the United States. I suspect
they sense that the real threat to them comes
from the superior performance of open societies.
The evidence is all around them.

While the Chinese Communists seek to repair
the economic damage of the so-called cultural
revolution — following the disaster of the Great
Leap Forward — many of their neighbors are
experiencing economic growth at rates among
the highest in the world.

Alone among major nations, Conununist
China has at best stood still. Communist China
obviously has long been too isolated from world
affairs.

This is one reason why we have been seeking
to open up channels of communication. Just a
few days ago we liberalized our policies toward
purchase of their goods by American travelers
and toward validating passports for travel to
China.^ Our purpose was to remove irritants in
our relations and to help remind people on
mainland China of our historic friendship for
them.

Previously, we had suggested other steps such
as an exchange of persons and selected trade in
such goods as food and pharmaceuticals. As I
have said on previous occasions, we were pre-
pared to offer specific suggestions on an agree-
ment for more normal relations when the Chi-
nese canceled the scheduled resumption of the
ambassadorial talks in Warsaw last February.

126.

' For background, see Bulletin of Aug. 18, 1969, p.

None of our initiatives has met with a posi-
tive response.

Apparently the present leaders in Peking
believe that it serves their purposes to maintain
a posture of hostility toward the United States.
They seem unprepared for any accommodation.
Their central position is that they will discuss
nothing with us unless we first abandon support
of our ally, the Republic of China. This we do
not propose to do.

We nonetheless look forward to a time when
we can enter into a useful dialogue and to a
reduction of tensions. We would welcome a re-
newal of the talks with Communist China. We
shall soon be making another approach to see if
a dialogue wdth Peking can be resumed. This
could take place in Wai-saw or at another mutu-
ally acceptable site. We would like to resume
this dialogue ; we would hope that they do, too.

One of the main motivations of the trips the
President and I have made recently to Asia has
been to reaffirm the permanence of American
foreign policy interests in the well-being and
security of Asia and the Pacific. We are a Pacific
power, and we intend to remain so. We
have every intention of remaining constant to
our commitments in Asia — to SEATO, to
ANZUS, and to our several bilateral defense ar-
rangements. Geography, history, economics, and
mutual interest make us a part of the Pacific
community, and we intend to continue to play
the supporting role to which we are committed
by treaty. There is no equivocation in our deter-
mination in this regard, and we have made
this clear.

At the same time we are changing the empha-
sis of our relationships in line with current
realities.

Policies designed to meet one set of conditions
should not remain frozen in the face of new
conditions. New conditions do exist in Asia.
There is a new dynamism, a new sense of confi-
dence, a new impulse toward regional coopera-
tion and regional responsibility in Asia. There
is an enhanced desire and capability among
Asian nations to assume larger shares of their
own security.

We thus increasingly look to the independent
countries of Asia to enlarge their own capacities
and responsibilities.

In particular we have stressed the need for
them to assume full i-esponsibility for their in-
ternal security problems, and they agree. We
will continue, of course, to supply material as-

180

Department of State Bulletin

sistance to countries which are subject to exter-
nally instigated subversion or insurgency.

I have had extensive consultations with Asian
leaders. I am persuaded that they are highly
responsive to this approach. So the new direc-
tion toward greater responsibility for security
and economic development and political com-
mimity is something we want — and Asians
want — because it is natural and because it is
increasingly possible.

Security must continue to have a high prior-
ity in the quest for peace. Only with a sense of
security will governments and people make the
necessary efforts and sacrifices required for eco-
nomic and social progress.

The Soviet Union has floated the idea of a
new system of regional collective security in
Asia. We do not know exactly what the Rus-
sians had in mind when they broached this
vague idea. It must have been clear to everyone,
however, that the Soviet objective was the con-
tainment of Communist China. Reactions in
Asia generally, as they have been reported to
us, have been something less than enthusiastic.

Obviously any Soviet proposal to cooperate
witli non-Communist states in a security system
directed against another Communist state is an
interesting political development in itself. But
our own view is that the more constructive
course would be for the countries of Asia
to continue to develop mstitutions they already
have created, to expand associations among
themselves.

Meanwhile, it is our intention not to take
sides in the struggle between China and the
Soviet Union but to seek to improve our rela-
tionships with either or both.

We do not intend to abandon negotiations
with the Soviet Union because tlie Chinese do
not like it nor to give up pursuit of contacts
with the Chinese because the Soviets do not like
it.

We intend to disregard Peking's denuncia-
tions of United States efforts to negotiate with
the Soviet Union. And we intend to disregard
Soviet nervousness at steps we take to reestab-
lish contacts between us and the Cliinese
Connnmiists.

In summary, then, I can outline our present
policy in Asia along the following lines :

— To achieve a peace in Viet-Nam which per-
mits the people of South Viet-Nam to determine
their own future free of external pressures from
anvone.

— To reafiirm our role as a Pacific power and
our determination to meet our treaty obliga-
tions in the area.

— To encourage the leaders of Asia to meet
their own internal security needs while provid-
ing material assistance when required.

— To encourage continued rapid economic de-
velopment of the area with emphasis on increas-
ing regional cooperation.

—To stand unaligned in the Sino-Soviet con-
flict while persisting in efforts to engage in a
constructive dialogue with both.

— To play a full supporting role in the gen-
eral evolution of a secure and progressive Pacific
community.

Ours is a world of pluralism and diversity.
But we know that beneath diversity there are
shared needs and universal aspirations. We
know that there is common ground between na-
tions which are different in their cultural back-
grounds, historical experience, and social pref-
erences. We know that we are interdependent
in the modern world. In the recognition of this
interdependence lies the road to i^eace.

TAIPEI, TAIWAN

Arrival Statement, August 1

Press release 230 dated August 4

I have looked forward for many years to the
opportunity to visit the Republic of China.
Your nation has a reputation, which it so justly
deserves, for preserving the best in the moral
and cultural values of Chinese life. In addition
to that, Taiwan's outstanding economic prog-
ress has won wide admiration and respect.
And you have been willing to share that success
with other nations by providing economic aid
to 21 coimtries in Asia, Africa, and Latin
America.

During my brief stay I hope to be able to
carry away a better and more personal appreci-
ation of your great cultural tradition, now en-
hanced by the rapid progress you have made in
improving the well-being of your people.

This is what I wish to gain during my stay.
Wliat I wish to give while I am here is an as-
surance of my country's continuing deep con-
cern for East Asia, a concern having firm roots
in history. We will continue to meet our treaty
obligations to our allies, including, of course,
our ally of long standing, the Republic of

September 1, 1969

181

China. The United States seeks nothing more
fervently than a lasting peace in Asia. In this
effort we welcome the continued cooperation
and imderstanding of your Government.

I hope in my exchanges with your President
and others to convey the warm affection and
sincere admiration which my countrymen have
always felt for the Chinese people. I also hope
that our talks will further that mutual under-
standing and trust which has been the hallmark
of the long association between our peoples.

In closing these brief remarks let me, on be-
half of President Nixon, extend his warm re-
gards to the President of the Republic of China
and the people of the Republic of China.

Statement and News Conference
on Departure, August 3

Press release 231 dated August 4

Since arriving in the Republic of China a
little less than 2 days ago, I have had a series
of meetings witli officials of the Government
and, of course, with Ambassador McConaughy
and officers of the Embassy.

I met with the Vice President, the Foreign
Minister, and the Vice Premier, and later they
were joined by members of their staffs.

Yesterday afternoon I met with President
Chiang Kai-shek and had a good talk before
dinner and then we had another talk during
the dinner. This morning we had still another
meeting, wliich had not been scheduled but
which was held at the request of the President.

We covered a broad range of topics in these
conversations. One of these, of course, was Viet-
Nam. I think it is fair to say that there is no
fundamental difference between us on the objec-
tive of bringing this conflict to an end at the
earliest possible time so that the people of South
Viet-Nam can be guaranteed the right to make
their own decisions without interference or
pressure from any outside quarter.

I think it is also fair to say that in a general
way we were in agreement on the program of
troop replacement that President Nixon has
initiated.

I feel that this visit has been a full one and
a valuable one from my point of view.

This is especially so because we have been
talking primarily about favorable trends in free
Asia over the past several years, the new ele-
ments of dynamism that exist in this area, and
the kind of future that we both want in the
Asian and Pacific community.

Of course, we do not underrate the very real

threats and dangers that may lie ahead. Obvi-
ously, we must remain alert. But we will not
allow the dangers to deflect us from the con-
structive policies and pi'ograms that can lead to
a more stable and progressive and dynamic
community of nations in this area.

As your leaders fully recognize, the Republic
of China has an important role in that future.

In an area where the major drive is toward
economic and social progress in an atmosphere
of security, you already have reached the stage
of self-sustaining economic growth.

This is an extraordmary achievement in it-
self. But there is something even more hearten-
ing and, I believe, more significant than the na-
tional achievement of independence from exter-
nal aid. You needed a certain amount of help
to reach that stage. We are pleased to have been
in a position to provide it. Now you have taken
up your role as a provider of aid to others.

Now we are in a position — the Republic of
China and the United States — of being co-
sponsors of economic and social growth for our
other Asian neighbors and, indeed, the nations
of Africa and Latin America. We have other as-
sociates among the more developed nations, and
still others will join us as they, in turn, come to
stand on their feet economically.

So we applaud not only the internal accom-
plishments of your Government but your gen-
erosity in assisting others less f ortimate.

I cannot leave Taiwan without expressing
deep gratitude on behalf of myself, Mrs.
Rogers, and the members of my party for the
hospitality and the close spirit of friendship
that has been so evident throughout our meet-
ings and consultations.

We are truly friends and allies now and in
the future.

Q. Mr. Secretai'y^ we understand that the
United States has been expressing support for
a regional collective security system in Asia
among non-Comrrvunist nations. Have you any
comment on that, and have you discussed this
topic icith the leaders of the three countries ymi
have visited?

A. Well, I think it's important to be sure we
understand the terms that you use. We have had
several discussions about regional cooperation
and we have talked some about security mat-
ters, but we have not talked about any par-
ticular security arrangement at the moment.
We think it's im]iortant for more regional co-
operation to take place, and we think it is im-
portant for the Asian nations to consider

182

Department of State Bulletin

possibilities in this regard and to work more
closely together in economic and cultural and
social projects; but that is not directly related
to any particular security arrangement at tliis
time.

Q. As you know, our people are very much
concerned about your Govem'nient''s decision to
ease the travel and trade ban against Peiping,
a/nd so far as I know, your spokesman, Mr. Mc-
Closkey, has expressed his doubts over the pos-
sibility of a favorable response to this question.
But the reports from Tokyo indicate that such
a favorable response had not been received, as
you expected. Why, Mr. Rogers, do you intend
to pursue this policy? Is this due to the pres-
sure of a segment of popxdar opinion in your
country?

A. We intend to pursue tliis policy because
we want to make it clear that the reason Com-
munist China is not a member of the inter-
national community is because of its own at-
titude. Communist China refuses to take its
rightful place in the international community ;
it is intransigent in its opposition to the United
Nations ; it uses vitriolic language against many
other nations, including the Soviet Union, the
United States, and the Republic of China,
Japan, and so forth. So we want to make it clear
to the rest of the world tliat the United States,
for its part, is willing to try to have more
friendly relations with Communist China. The
fact is that they refuse to; so it's quite clear
who the responsible nation is.

Q. Mr. Secretary, does that mean the begin-
ning of a change in your China policy?

A. Well, to the extent that we have done this,
it's a very minor change. No, it means that we
have done what I've just, said : We want to make
it clear to the rest of the world that the reason
tensions exist in the world is because of the
attitude of Communist China. The steps that
we have taken are fairly minor steps, but they
are symbolic of the fact that we think that it's
important for nations to attempt to live to-
gether in peace and we are willing to discuss the
future in terms of how we can better achieve
peace with any nation. I tliink it's quite clear,
because there has been total silence on the part
of the CMnese Communists, that they have no
intention of playing any such role.

Q. Sir, do you plan any more moves along
this line in the near future?

A. We have nothing planned at the moment.

Q. Mr. Rogers, according to Lin Piao^s
[Minister of National Defense of the PeopWs
Republic of China^ political report given at
the Ninth Congress, the United States once
again has been named its archenemy.

A. Number-two archenemy.

Q. Oh, well. . . . Do you think there is any
possibility tliat your recent move will cause the
Chinese Com/munists to modify their attitude?
If so, is there any evidence to warrant such a
belief? If not, what is your reason for adopting
such a conciliatoi^ posture?

A. I just tried to explain why we have : We
want to be conciliatory, we want to try to make
it clear that we're willing to get along with any
nation in the world. Secondly, we want to make
it clear that the reason that the Communist
Chinese are playing the role that they are in
the world is because of their own attitude. We
didn't expect that they would respond, because
of what they've said in the past ; but we want to
make it clear that we're ready to become friendly
with any nation, if it's reciprocal.

Q. {Unclear)

A. Well, other than what I've just said, that's
all it indicates. It indicates that we would be
willing, if the Communist Chinese were willing,
to discuss international matters, to discuss ways
that might relieve the tensions in the world,
particularly the tensions that are caused by the
Chinese Communists. We have not had any re-
sponse, and we doubt if we're going to get any ;
but we want to make it clear that the failure to
get a response, the failure to reduce these ten-
sions, is the fault of the Communist Chinese.

Q. Mr. Secretary, you spent quite some tims
in talking with the President. Would you
characterize these discussions as lively?

A. Well, they were very frank and direct.
They were extremely interesting and I think
each of us has a better idea of the other's views,
and I think we ended up with an understanding
that maybe did not exist before. For my part,
they were helpful, and I think we ended the dis-
cussions with the feeling that we were friends.
Certainly, he expressed the thought and I did,
too.

Q. Mr. Secretary, as you mentioned on your
arrival, the United States is one of the Pacific
nations. Will you consider joining the Asia and
Pacific concert in the future?

September 1, 1969

183

A. No, vre don't at the moment contemplate
joining any other associations or pacts. We have,
as you know, many agreements, treaty obliga-
tions, -with nations in this area, including multi-
lateral treaty obligations, but we don't foresee
any additional security arrangements or any
additional memberships in organizations at
this time.

Q. Would you Kafpen to buy up to 100 U.S.
dollars of Communist products when you stop
in Hong Kong because of minor change in your
policy toward Red China?

A. I'm sorry, I didn't quite get the question —
I know you are talking about the change in our
trade restrictions —

Q. Are you yourself going to buy $100 worth
of Communist products?

A. I'm afraid my wife will. [Laughter.] But
I don't have any intention of buying Communist
Chinese goods, if that's what you mean. I think
we might have time for another question.

Q. Did you discuss with the Chinese Govern-
ment the renewal of the Sino-American re-
sources exchange program?

A. Yes, we did. We had a very satisfactory
discussion on the whole Vanguard program and
the future of the Vanguard program, and I
must say it's one of the most encouraging things
that I've listened to. The Kepublic of China has
contributed, now, aid to about 40 other nations.
It's made a very important impact, particularly
in Africa, and it shows what a nation like the
Republic of China can do when it's willing to
assist others; and we not only congratulated
the officials who are responsible for its success,
but we indicated our willingness to do what we
could within our ability to assist in the future.

Q. Mr. Secretary, according to press reports,
the United States is ivilling to consider Japan'' s
request that the U.S. nuclear base be removed
from Okinawa. Would you care to elaborate on
this?

A. No, except to say that we are willing to
consider it. Mr. McCloskey just reminded me —
I thought it went without saying, but I want to
be sure there's no misunderstanding — that in
commenting on our policy toward Communist
China and what we thought might be the result
of our initiatives, I did not want to leave any
implications about our policy toward the Eepub-
lic of China. Our policy toward the Republic of

China is going to remain constant ; it's going to
remain firm ; we expect to live up to our treaty
obligations ; we intend to continue to work very
closely with the Republic of China in the future,
and I think that this short visit of mine has
helped to reassure the officials of your Govern-
ment that this is the case and that nothing we
do in Viet-Nam or other areas is going to affect
our relationship with the Republic of China.

NEWS CONFERENCE, HONG KONG,
AUGUST 3

Press release 232 dated August 4

Q. Is there any possibility of a resumption of
the Warsaw talks with China?

A. That depends on Communist China; we
have indicated a willingness from the beginning
of this administration to enter into such talks.
The failure of the other side to be willing to
engage in such talks is the reason the talks are
not in progress. So the answer to your question
is, yes, we would be willing to talk with Com-
munist China.

Q. Have there been any roundabout contacts
toward Peking, aimed at getting the talks
started again?

A. We are not making any roundabout at-
tempts. The Communist Chinese know we are
ready to talk. All they have to do is indicate
that they are willing to talk.

Q. Is it possible in the coming session of the
U.N. General Assembly that the A?nerican stand
on voting in connection with China^s admission
to the U.N. will be changed, in that it might
not go for it being an important question requir-
ing a two-thirds majority?

A. If I understand your question, we do not
intend to change our policy vis-a-vis Communist
China in this session of the General Assembly.

Q. Do you feel the easing of travel and trade
restrictions announced by President Nixon last
jnonth will have a significant effect on tlie Sino-
American relations?

A. We do not know. Of course, it depends on
Communist China. We have attempted from the
beginning of tliis administration to make it
clear that we would like to do what we can to
eliminate some of the tensions in the world ; and
we think discussions with the Chinese Commu-

184

Department of State Bulletin

nists, if they were willing to engage in such dis-
cussions, might lead to that end. So far, they
have not been willing to enter into any such
discussions. As far as these steps that were taken
recently by the President are concerned, they
show our willingness to be forthcoming in our
attempts to be on better terms with the Chinese
Communists. So far, they have not reacted, and
I would be inclined to think that they would
not. Their statements in their recent Congress
would indicate that they are as intransigent as
ever.

Q. How did you explain the relaxation to the
Nationalist Chinese Government?

A. Well, just as I have explained it to you.
We are not going to change our policy vis-a-vis
the Republic of China. On the other hand, we
are willing to talk to the Chinese Communists.
We are willing to take steps such as we have
taken to show that we are very serious in our
attempts to try to relieve tensions in the world.
One of the ways to relieve tensions is to talk to
the people who are causing the tensions.

Q, Do you think hy easing some restrictioTis,
it will be easier to talk with the Chinese
Communists?

A. No, I do not think it makes much differ-
ence on talking to them. But I think it certainly
is an indication of our willingness to be a little
more relaxed in our approach to Communist
Cliina.

Q. On the Presidents Asian trip, what has
been the reaction am,ong Asian leaders to the
new American posture in Asia — the new Am,eri-
can thoughts for Asia?

A. In the countries that I have been in — and
I have not been with him in the last few coun-
tries, Thailand, India, or Pakistan — the reac-
tion has been quite favorable, because they, I
tliink — the countries that I have visited — have
been quite reassured by the statements we have
made and by the explanations of our new policy,
and I tliink they understand that they do have
to take on a greater share of the burden in the
future. So I would say that the visits I have
made, I believe, have been rather successful in
doing what we sought to do, and that is to re-
assure them on the one hand and on the other
hand to explain that we think there is an obli-
gation on the part of these nations to take over
a greater share of the burden.

Q. Will you take to Australia any specific
September 1, 1969

360-316—69 2

thoughts, proposals, or plans for Australia and
New Zealand to take a greater role in Asia?

A. No. I am going to Australia because of
the ANZUS meeting. I saw the Australian For-
eign aiinister at the SEATO meeting and had
a good talk with him there. So that is my real
purpose. Of course, we have been pleased by the
attitude of Australia toward Malaysia and
Singapore, and I will express that again.

Q. If the V.8. is not going to change its pol-
icy vis-a-vis the Republic of China, what might
we have to discuss with the People^s Republic
of China?

A. Oh, we have a lot of things to discuss with
them other than that.

Q. Can you give us an example?

A. Trade would be one. But another would
be these vitriolic attacks that they make on the
rest of the world. We would like to know why
they feel that they have to be so virulent in
their attitude toward the outside world. Sec-
ondly, we would like to know why they don't
take part in world activities. For instance, I'd
be interested in knowing why they didn't even
have any publicity about Apollo 11. Do they
expect it is going to be kept a secret ?

Q. In other words, you would encourage their
increased jjarticipation?

A. Of course, we would like to encourage
them to quit their belligerent attitude toward
the rest of the world.

Q. Did you repeat tlie expression of concern
about the recent Chinese Nationalist raid on the
mainland which the State Departm,ent has
made?

A. No, I didn't think it was necessary.

Q. Are they going to persist in that kind of
thing?

A. We had had previous talks on the matter.
So it wasn't necessary for me to make any
comments —

Q. Where does the U.S. stand on recognizing
Mongolia?

A. We haven't come to any final decision.
That is one of the matters we are considering
now, and when we get ready to make a decision
on it we will announce it. No final decision has
been made.

Q . Was it discussed in Taiwan ?

185

A. No, it wasn't.

Q. You said trade would he one of the itemfi
to discuss with the Chinese. Would you amplify
this?

A. No, I don't think so. I mean there are a lot
of things we could discuss with them. The fact
of the matter is — No, I say I don't want to dis-
cuss what we would talk to them about. I think
it's quite premature, because they don't indicate
any interest in talking to us about it.

Q. Since you left Japan, the Japanese For-
eign Ministry sources say you have agreed to
return Okinawa hy 1972. Would you comment?

A. We have agreed in principle to the rever-
sion of Okinawa. We have not agreed as to any
particular date. I did indicate that we are quite
anxious to resolve this matter before Prime
Minister Sato comes to the United States in
November or December, but I did not say any-
thing specific of that kind. I do not believe he
said that. I think he said we agreed in principle
to the reversion, but the particular date has not
been set yet.

Q. Has anything heen done about the release
of the American yachtsmen seized hy the Chi-
nese last February?

A. We have made some attempts.

Q. Has therebeen any response?

A. No. We regret that very much, and we do
not imderstand it. It is another example of the
almost inhuman or inhumane kind of conduct
they engage in. Why wouldn't they let us know
about it ? Wliy wouldn't they release them ?

Q. The United States has made it very clear
that she would like Asian countries to play a
greater role as far as their domestic affairs are
concerned. What caused this change in Ameri-
can foreign policy toward Asia, and what toere
the factors affecting this change?

A. Like most tilings in foreign affairs, the
events change attitudes and the passage of time
changes attitudes. The fact of the matter is that
there have been developments in the last few
years that we think are significant. For ex-
ample, there has been a great deal of economic
progress in some of the countries, particularly
Japan, Korea, the Republic of China, Thailand.
So those developments in themselves require a
reevaluation of the policy, and I do not think
it is any particular thing. I think it is just the
course of history.

Q. The withdrawal of U.S. presence is going
to create a vacuum in Asia. Can Asian countries
stand up to any form of aggression — and I am
referring here to Communist aggression?

A. No decision has been made about total
withdrawal. This is not an east-of-the-Suez
kind of policy, and I think the policy that we
are pursuing will permit greater cooperation
among the Asian nations on a regional basis and
still permit a presence of the United States
which will be significant and which will add to
the stability of this area.

Q. There have been reports that while you
were in Tokyo you reached with the Japanese
an agreement &n textiles exports to the United
States. Is this correct?

A. No, this is not correct. The reports are
quite clear. A Japanese committee, a group, is
going to Washmgton to discuss the matter in
September. No decision has been made.

Q. Will you have any discussions with offi-
cials here on the problem?

A. I don't think so.

I just wanted to say I am very happy to be
here, and I think I'm the first Secretary of State
of the United States to have visited Hong
Kong. So I am looking forward to a pleasant
stay.

ANZUS Council Holds 19th Meeting
at Canberra

Following is the text of the communique is-
sued at the conclusion of the ANZUS [Austra-
lia, New Zealand, and United States Secunty
Treaty'] Council meeting at Canberra August 8.

Press release 239 dated August 8

The ANZUS Council held its Nineteenth
Meeting in Canberra on 8th August, 19G9. The
Right Honourable Keith Holyoake, Prime Min-
ister and Minister of External Affairs, repre-
sented New Zealand; the Honourable William
Rogers, Secretary of State, represented the
United States; and the Honourable Gordon
Freeth, Jklinister for External Affairs, repre-
sented Australia. The Australian IMinister for
Defence, the Honourable Allen Fairhall, also
participated.

The Ministers had a general exchange of

186

Department of State Bulletin

views on the world situation and on major ques-
tions atl'ecting international security and sta-
bility, since such questions are of concern to all
the ANZUS partners and have implications for
regional security and progress everywhere. Tliey
expressed hope for improvement in the climate
between the major powers and for greater un-
derstanding and cooperation in specific areas.
In the context of the global situation they dis-
cussed such matters as the prospects for the
forthcoming talks between the United States
and the Soviet Union on strategic arms
limitation.

In discussing Viet-Nam, the IVIinisters re-
gretted that the North Vietnamese and their as-
sociates had still not responded positively to
proposals for a settlement put forward by Pres-
ident Xixon on 14th May ^ and by President
Thieu on 11th July. Those proposals were in
accord with the policies of countries contribut-
ing forces to the defence of the Republic of
Viet-Nam, and had the full support of the three
members of ANZUS. They regretted that the
reductions in American force levels announced
by President Nixon and President Thieu at
Midway on 8th June had been denounced by the
other side. In talks in Paris, the other side had
shown no readiness for serious negotiation. The
ANZUS partners now looked to them for a
serious response permitting early movement
towards the just and lasting settlement which
remained the allied objective. Meanwhile, the
representatives welcomed the increased capacity
of the South Vietnamese to defend themselves.
It was also agreed that the ANZUS partners
would continue to consult on such matters as
the rate at which forces of the Republic of Viet-
Nam are going to be increasingly able to take
over from forces of other countries the defence
of the country against aggression and external
penetration, thereby permitting the reduction
of those forces. The representatives reaffirmed
the determination of their govermnents to con-
tinue support for the Republic of Viet-Nam and
for the right of the people of South Viet-Nam
to exercise self-determination.

The Ministers expressed concern at the dete-
riorating military situation in Laos. They de-
plored North Viet-Nam's failure to honour
obligations it had assumed imder the 1954 and
1962 Geneva Accords, its continued unwilling-
ness to stop its military attacks against that
coimtry and its use of Lao territory to support
aggression against South Viet-Nam.

The Ministers discussed the problem of Com-
munist China's continued isolation from the

world commimity. They considered that this
isolation was essentially self-imposed and that
the situation was unlikely to improve imless
there was a change in the attitude of the Peking
regime itself. Nevertheless the ANZUS Council
members agreed that efforts should be con-
tinued to resume a dialogue with the regime.
They noted the recent decision by the United
States Government to relax its restrictions on
travel and commercial relations with Com-
munist China and expressed the hope that the
Conmiimist Chinese might be prepared to
resume conversations with United States
representatives.

The Ministers welcomed the further progress
made by the five powers concerned at their
meeting in Canberra in June on questions aris-
ing from the withdrawal of British forces from
Malaysia and Singapore and on the larger ques-
tions of peace and stability in the area. The rep-
resentative of the United States commended
the decisions of the Governments of Australia
and New Zealand to continue maintaining ele-
ments of their armed forces in Malaysia and
Singapore after the British withdrawal in 1971
and expressed the view that these decisions con-
tributed in a practical way to the defence cap-
ability of these two countries and to the general
stability and security of the area. The Ministers
welcomed the reaffirmation of Britain's inten-
tion, expressed at the five-power meeting, to
continue exercises and training in the area. The
Ministers saw these arrangements as a sig-
nificant part of the wider trends towards the
desirable increase in cooperation among the
countries of the Asian and Pacific region.

The representatives of Australia and New
Zealand took note of and commended the
American decision recently enimciated by
President Nixon to continue contributing in ac-
cordance with its treaty commitments to collec-
tive security in Asia. They shared with Asians
the view that the responsibility for internal
security could be increasingly assumed by
Asian nations themselves.

They noted that consultations had been held
among ANZUS officials since their last meeting
and that further considtations at that level will
be held later this year. They expressed their
belief that such meetings from time to time
were a usefid supplement to regular consulta-
tions and exchanges at ministerial level.

The Ministers reaffirmed the continuing im-

'■ For President Nixon's address to ttie Nation on May
14, see Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

September 1, 1969

187

portanco and significance which their govern-
ments attached to mutual undertakings in the
ANZUS Treaty. The ANZUS relationsliip
wliich supports collective security and regional
cooperation had grown in strength from year to
year, reflecting the depth of mutual imder-
standing among the three partners and their
conunon determination, in cooperation, to main-
tam and strengthen peace and prosperity in the
Pacific area.

29th and 30th Plenary Sessions
on Viet-Nam Held at Paris

Following are texts of opening statements
made by Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge., head
of the U.S. delegation, at the 29th plenary ses-
sion of the meetings on Viet-Nam at Paris on
August 7 and at the 30th plenary session on
August H.

29th PLENARY SESSION

Press release 237 dated August 7

Ladies and gentlemen : In Saigon on July 30
President Nixon summarized in a few words
the history of the repeated efforts for peace
made by the Kepublic of Viet-Nam and bj' the
United States. He said : "Our purpose is peace.
We have repeatedly come forward with pro-
posals which could lead to the beginning of the
end of tliis tragic conflict." ^

Let me recall some of the most significant of
these proposals and the concrete actions we have
taken. On November 1, 1968, we stopped all acts
involving the use of foi-ce against the entire
territory of North Viet-Nam. The limited aerial
reconnaissance that was continued is not an act
involving the use of force. Only when our re-
connaissance planes have been attacked have we
responded in defense to protect our aircraft and
pilots.

On January 25, 1969, at the first plenary ses-
sion of these meetings, the United States and
the Kepublic of Viet-Nam presented proposals
aimed at reducing the degree of violence and at
moving us all toward a negotiated peace. In
particular, we made it clear that we and our

allies were prepared to begin the immediate and
mutual withdrawal of non-South Vietnamese
forces from South Viet-Nam.

On March 25, 1969, President Thieu stated
his readiness to hold private talks, without any
prior conditions, with representatives of the
National Liberation Front on the question of a
political settlement.

On April 7, 1969, President Thieu proposed
six principles ujjon which a peace settlement
could be based and made it clear that those
South Vietnamese who were bearing arms
against the Government of the Eepublic of
Viet-Nam would be welcomed as full members
of the national community in a spirit of
national reconciliation.

On May 14, 1969, President Nixon made an
eight-pohat proposal aimed at bringing about:
the withdrawal of all non-South Vietnamese
forces, cease-fires, and free elections under inter-
national supervision.^ The eight points consti-
tuted a reasonable basis for negotiations. The
President made clear the willingness of the
United States to consider other approaches
consistent with those principles.

On June 5, 1969, at these meetings, I dis-
cussed in considerable detail the 10-point pro-
gram proposed by the NLF and pointed out
areas in which there seemed to be common
ground. I also asked questions about ambigui-
ties in that proposal. I regret to say those ques-
tions have never been answered.

On June 8, 1969, President Thieu and Presi-
dent Nixon met at Midway Island and reviewed
the proposals that had been made by both sides.'
They reiterated their determination to seek a
just settlement in a spirit of patience and good
will. They also observed that, despite the fact
that the NLF 10-point proposal contained cer-
tain unacceptable provisions, there were certain
points in it which appeared to be not too far
from positions taken by the Eepublic of Viet-
Nam and the United States.

At their Midway meetings, the two Presidents
also announced a reduction by 25,000 in the
number of United States military personnel in
South Viet-Nam, to be completed by the end of
this month. They stated that further reductions
would be considered on the basis of the following
three factors: the progress in training and
equipment of the armed forces of the Republic

• Bulletin of Aug. 25, 19C9, p. 155.

- Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.
' For background, see Bulletin of June 30, 1969,
p. 549.

188

Department of State Bulletin

of Viet-Nam, the level of enemy activity, and
the progress made in the Paris meetings.

On July 11, 1969, President Thieu made a
generous and unprecedented proposal for free
elections in which all the people and political
parties of South Viet-Nam could participate,
including the NLF and its adlierents. President
Thieu's proposal called for an electoral commis-
sion in which all political parties and groups
would be represented, including the KLF, and
which would have the responsibility for ensur-
ing equal opportunities to all candidates. Presi-
dent Thieu also proposed international super-
vision for these elections to guarantee their free
and fair conduct. He made it clear that the Gov-
ernment of the Eepublic of Viet-Nam would
abide by the results of the elections, whatever
they may be.

On July 20, 1969, President Thieu proposed
direct discussions with North Viet-Nam on the
question of unification of North and South
Viet-Nam, with the object of bringing about
unification through free and internationally
supervised elections.

Wliat has been the response by your side to
these many proposals for peace? It has been
flatly and consistently negative. You refuse to
discuss and explore our proposals, much less
negotiate about them. You denigrate our efforts
to find common ground between our proposals
and yours. You reject discussion of mutual
withdrawal, including the withdrawal of North
Vietnamese forces from South Viet-Nam, Laos,
and Cambodia to North Viet-Nam. You reject
consideration of proposals for early free elec-
tions that would be fair to all and would ensure
early exercise of the right of self-determination
by the people of South Viet-Nam.

We speak as persons who still desire to move
from confrontation to negotiation. We are thus
constrained to say that the record which I have
just reviewed is a history of constant efforts to
negotiate by our side and of constant rejection
by yours. The lack of progress at these meet-
ings is not the result of a lack of proposals by
our side. It is because you have shown no inclina-
tion to negotiate on any of the many proposals
which we have made.

You reject all thought of compromise, and
you consistently reiterate your demands — which
you have made ever since I arrived here in Janu-
ary — that we withdraw all United States and
Allied forces, while all North Vietnamese forces
remain behind. You also demand that we over-
throw the legitimate Government of the Eepub-

lic of Viet-Nam and impose in its place a so-
called "coalition" government. Your consistent
position since January has thus been to refuse
to negotiate and to insist on actions by us which
will enable you to dominate South Viet-Nam.

We make reasonable proposals which take
into consideration the legitimate interest of all
parties. We are not making demands; we are
making reasonable proposals. We are prepared
to discuss and examine both our proposals and
yours. Our offers remain open, and we remain
ready for serious negotiation.

But until your side shows a similar readiness,
we can expect no progress. We have done all
that we can do by ourselves to bring a negotiated
peace to Viet-Nam. Now it is time for you to
respond.

30th PLENARY SESSION

Press release 240 dated August 14

Ladies and gentlemen: At the 25th plenary
session, on July 10, 1969, I concluded my re-
marks by calling on your side to negotiate
realistically and sincerely, and I pointed out
that "Delay only brings more death and de-
struction." Since that meetmg, thousands of
people, Vietnamese, American, and others, have
died in the Viet-Nam war. This is tragic and
inexcusable.

It is clear that a negotiated settlement of the
war in Viet-Nam requires serious consideration
of the positions put forward by both sides, fol-
lowed by examination, discussion, and compro-
mise. Each day of delay in beginning this
process brings another day of death and destinic-
tion to South Viet-Nam. We have made it clear
that we are prepared to negotiate sincerely. By
word and by deed, you show that you are not
prepared for genuine negotiation.

In Paris, in Hanoi, and wherever your propa-
ganda can reach, your words are words of war.
We hear of General Giap's resolve to fight on,
no matter how protracted the war, until your
forces win complete victory over ours. We hear
your repetition of the false charge that our
forces are intensifying the war. We hear your
demands for unilateral withdrawal of our
forces while your forces remain in South Viet-
Nam. We hear your continued refusal to negoti-
ate sincerely with the Government of the Eepub-
lic of Viet-Nam and your continued demand
that that constitutionally elected government be
overthrown. From an American recently in

September 1, 1969

189

Hanoi, we hear that Premier Pham Van Dong
predicts that the coming year will witness the
fiercest fighting yet.

In South Viet-Nam your actions match your
bellicose words. 'WTiile 25,000 American soldiers
are in the process of departing from South Viet-
Nam and decisions are being taken on the de-
parture of additional American forces, your
army has been preparing systematically for a
new offensive. Within the past 2 weeks, we have
seen growing evidence tliat major units of your
forces are being moved to launch new attacks
and supplies are being pre-positioned to support
such attacks. Two North Vietnamese divisions
and a number of Viet Cong battalions have
massed around Binh Long Province north of
Saigon and mounted attacks there. Near the
DMZ [demilitarized zone], in Quang Tri Prov-
ince, tliere is another new concentration of
troops — including the 9th Regiment of the 304th
Division, wliich recently launched large-scale
attacks just after returning to South Viet-Nam
for the first time since the siege of Khe Sanh in
1968. And there are other places in South Viet-
Nam similarly threatened.

Wliat useful purpose can be served by inten-
sifying the fighting in South Viet-Nam? What
goals do you expect to achieve? How can your
violent acts move us closer to a negotiated settle-
ment of the war ? There can only be one certain
result : the death of many brave soldiers on both
sides and of many innocent and helpless
civilians.

Your statements and your acts can have only
one meaning: You are unprepared to compro-
mise and negotiate, and you continue to place
your trust in violence and terror.

It is revealing that your armed forces have
recently perpetrated terror raids directed prin-
cipally against schools and hospitals. On Au-
gust 7 you sent terrorists armed with explosive
charges into the middle of a well-lighted and
well-marked military hospital at Cam Eanh. On
August 12 j'our forces shelled another hosj^ital
near Da Nang. There can be no question of a
mistake ; your forces deliberately chose to strike
at the sick and wounded in an effort to cause
maximiun injury and terror at minimum cost.
This is unfortunately typical of your acts of
terror to those who are helpless.

These recent acts of terrorism are nothing
new, but they demonstrate the means upon
which you have continued to rely for victory
in South Viet-Nam. This is vain and futile. The

people of South Viet-Nam have experienced
your campaigns of terror for many years, and
their resolve to defend themselves against you
has not been shaken. I can assure you that the
people of the United States also detest such
atrocities.

We have hoped that the reports of a relative
lull in the fighting in South Viet-Nam and the
beginning of the reduction of American forces
in South Viet-Nam would begin to create an
atmosphere in which genuine negotiations could
take place, leading eventually to peace. We still
hope that this can happen, but we are deeply
concerned at the indications I have described
which point to intensification of the war by your
side. Now is the time to break out of the cyclic
pattern of lull and offensive and establish a pat-
tern of deescalation and negotiation. As Presi-
dent Nixon said on July 30 :

It is now time for the other side to sit down with us
and talk seriously about ways to stop the liUIlng, to put
an end to this tragic war which has brought so great
destruction to friend and foe alike. We have put for-
ward constructive proposals to bring an end to the
conflict. We are ready to talk to the other side about
their proposals. Let us with determination and good
will seek to put an end to the destruction and suffer-
ing which the people of Viet-Nam, North and South,
have borne so long.

Last week, at the 29th plenary session, I sum-
marized the repeated efforts for peace made by
the United States and the Eepublic of Viet-
Nam. I emphasized the fact that the proposals
we have made constitute a reasonable basis for
negotiation and that we have put them forward
not as demands but in a sincere effort to
negotiate.

I think there can be no doubt about our inten-
tions. We want to bring the war to an end. AVe
want to reach agreement on a settlement that
will be fair to all parties. Such a settlement will
ensure the withdrawal of all non-South Viet-
namese forces and will enable the people of
South Viet-Nam freelj' to exercise their right
of self-determination. We are fully prepared to
discuss and consider both your proposals and
ours. We want genuine negotiation.

We hope that your response to these moves
will be positive, directed toward a negotiated
settlement, rather than negative, directed to-
ward a military victory. All Americans hope
you will respond both here and in Viet-Nam in
ways that will permit this war to be brought
quickly to an end.

190

Department of State Bulletin

THE CONGRESS

Department Reviews History of International Efforts
Governing Activities on the Seabed

Statement hy V. Alexis Johnson
Under Secretary for Political Affairs '■

It is a pleasure today to testify on behalf of
the Dejjartment of State on Senate Resolution
33 and the international legal and political as-
pects of developing principles governing ac-
tivities on the seabed. Accompanying me are Mr.
Samuel DePalma, Assistant Secretary for
International Organization Affairs; Mr. Jolin
R. Stevenson, the Legal Adviser ; and Mr. Her-
man Pollack, the Director of International
Scientific and Technological Affairs of the De-
partment. Mr. Donald L. McKernan, the Spe-
cial Assistant to the Secretary for Fisheries and
Wildlife, has already testified before the com-
nuttee on the fisheries aspects of the resolution.
I would like to state for the record that we have
also had the opportunity to review Senate Res-
olution 92, wliich is a further refinement of the
earlier resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I would note at the outset that
the resolutions we are addressing today have
an impressive history which antedates the 91st
Congress. The problems addressed in these res-
olutions were the subject of earlier resolutions
which have already made an important contribu-
tion to consideration of the matter, both within
the United States Government and elsewhere.
We in the Department have foimd our continu-
mg dialogue with interested congressional com-
mittees and Members of Congress to be most
helpful in our efforts to deal with the problems
confronting the United States in international
negotiations and discussions regarding the
seabed.

The range of subjects involved in the resolu-

tions before us is extremely broad. It would be
impossible to address any one of them with the
necessary degree of precision and detail at this
time. I will, however, briefly review the history
of our international efforts and outline our ap-
Ijroach to current problems.

After Ambassador Pardo of Malta raised in
1967 the question of the peaceful uses of the sea-
bed and ocean floor beyond the limits of national
jurisdiction, the United Nations General As-
sembly established an Ad Hoc Committee to
look into the matter.

The United States played a leading role in
this Committee, mtroducing at its June 1968
meeting a draft statement of prmciples con-
cerning the deep ocean floor.^ The United States,
noting the need for further scientific and techni-
cal knowledge, also proposed an International
Decade of Ocean Exploration.^

Further, the United States proposed the
establishment of international marine preserves
in selected areas of particular scientific interest.^

The 23d General Assembly adopted three res-
olutions last December cosponsored by the
United States.

The first resolution [A/RES/2467 A
(XXIII) ] created a Committee on the Peaceful
Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor
beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction,
composed of 42 states. The new Committee was
mstructed to study the elaboration of the legal
principles and norms to promote international

' Made before the Subcommittee on Ocean Space of
the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on July 30
(press release 222).

'■ For test, see Bulletin of Aug. 5, 1968, p. 152.

' For background, see Bulletin of Apr. 22, 1968,
p. 543.

' For background, see Bulletin of July 22, 1968,
p. KM.

September 1, 1969

191

cooperation in the exploration and use of the
seabed and ocean floor beyond the limits of
national jurisdiction.

The second resolution [A/RKS/24:67 B
(XXIII)] welcomed the adoption by states of
appropriate safeguards against the dangers of
marine pollution.

The third resolution [A/KES/2467 D
(XXIII)] supported the International Decade
of Ocean Exploration proposed by the United
States.

A fourth resolution [A/RES/2467 C
(XXIII)], on which tlie United States ab-
stained, requested the Secretary General to
undertake a study on the question of establish-
ing in due time appropriate international ma-
chinery for the exploration and exploitation of
the seabed resources. The United States ab-
stained on tliis resolution because it had made
no decision as t-o the desirability of such inter-
national machinery and felt the resolution,
wliich called for a study on the question by the
Secretary General, in effect prejudged tliis issue.

The Secretary General has now completed his
report, which sets forth a wide range of possi-
bilities with respect to a possible regime. This
report, among other subjects, will be discussed
at the August session of the Seabed Committee.

Among the many political and economic
forces at work in the seabed debates, the follow-
ing four stood out :

1. Rapidly emerging recognition of the im-
portance of the seabed, covering thi-ee- fourths
the earth's surface, from political, economic, and
other points of view ;

2. The desire of the lesser developed countries
to play a substantial role in the development of
seabed policies and to ensure that the seabed be
exploited in ways wliich will benefit all coun-
tries and not merely the teclmologicaUy ad-
vanced countries ;

3. The underlying conflict as to where the
boundary of the area beyond national jurisdic-
tion should be located ; and

4. The demand of many countries that the
arms race not be extended to this new
environment.

Seabed Arms Control Proposals

At the start of this spring's meeting of the
Eighteen-Nation Disarmament Committee,
President Nixon instructed the U.S. delegation
to seek discussion of the factors necessary for
an international agreement that would prohibit

the emplacement or fixing of nuclear weapons or
other weapons of mass destruction on the sea-
bed.^ Several weeks later, the United States in-
troduced a draft treaty on this subject.'' This
conmiittee has already heard detailed testimony
from the Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency on our efforts in respect to a seabed arms
control agreement.

In the broadest sense of foreign policy, our
objectives with regard to the seabed are an as-
pect of our general foreign policy objectives. We
wish to achieve effective arms control measures.
In this field this desire is clearly manifested in
our seabed arms control proposals. We desire to
ensure that relations among nations are con-
ducted in a manner which avoids disputes and
which accommodates the broadest possible range
of interests and which will provide optimum
understanding and use of tlie world s environ-
ment and its natural resources. This is reflected
in our concerted efforts to encourage the devel-
opment of rules of uiternational law which will
be respected by all nations regarding the use of
ocean space.

Tliis is a complex process, the completion of
which will require both time and continuing
effort. Because of its teclinological capabilities
and its established role in the development of
the law of the sea, the United States has in-
evitable responsibilities of leadership in this
field. For the United States there can be no es-
caping the necessity for timely decisions; the
failure to make such decisions will in itself be
a decision to encourage the likely results of
nonaction.

Exploitation of Seabed Resources

Much of the recent attention being devoted to
the oceans has focused largely on the problems
arising from the exploitation of seabed
resources. I would point out that older, more
traditional uses of the oceans are also of great
importance to the United States and the world.
Among them are navigation, including air navi-
gation, telecommunications, fisheries, as well as
national and international security. There are
many well-developed rules of international law
regarding these activities, and yet imi^ortant
problems persist.

When we turn to the seabed, we discover that
the development of a comprehensive set of legal

' For President Nixon's letter of Mar. 15, see Bul-
letin of Apr. 7, 19G9, p. 289.
" For text, see Bulletin of June 16, 1969, p. 523.

192

Department of State Bulletin

rules governing exploitation of seabed resources
dates back less than 25 years to President Tru-
man's proclamation on the continental shelf/
The principle that the coastal state enjoys ex-
clusive rights to explore and exploit the natural
resources of the continental shelf adjacent to its
coast was incorporated into the Convention on
the Continental Shelf at the 1958 Geneva Law
of the Sea Conference.* At the time, it was gen-
erally assvuned that the establishment of rules
governing the exploitation of other seabed areas
was unnecessary. I note, for example, the com-
ment of the International Law Commission re-
garding its enumeration of the freedoms of the
high seas :

The Commission has not made specific mention of
the freedom to explore or exploit the subsoil of the
high seas. It Is considered that apart from the case of
the exploitation or exploration of the soil or subsoil of
a continental shelf — a case dealt with separately — such
exploitation had not yet assumed sufficient practical
importance to justify special regulation.

As in so many other areas of human endeavor,
it seems that technology may soon exceed our
expectations. With regard to seabed exploita-
tion, this poses two important questions for the
iuternational community :

First, what should be the legal regime govern-
ing exploitation of seabed resources beyond the
limits of national jurisdiction?

Second, where should a boundary fixing the
limits of national jurisdiction be established?

Existing principles of international law pro-
vide some relevant guidelines in answering these
questions, but there is serious doubt whether
these are sufEciently precise and whether there
is sufficient agreement on them to meet our fu-
ture needs for a body of rules which will avoid
international conflict and at the same time pro-
vide a sound basis for further exploitation of the
seabed.

Senate Resolution .33 provides very detailed
answers to these questions : the establislmient of
an international licensing authority to license
exploration and exploitation activities of states
and tlieir nationals and the establislmient of a
precise continental shelf boundary at a depth of
550 meters or a distance of 50 miles from shore,
whichever is farther seaward. There can be no
doubt tliat the provisions of the resolution are
a useful and timely contribution to our consider-
ation of this matter. We are also reviewing other

' For text of Proclamation 2667 dated Sept. 28, 1945,
see Bulletin of Sept. 30, 1945, p. 485.
' For text, see Bulletin of June 30, 1958, p. 1121.

contributions to this endeavor, including the
U.N. Secretary General's report on machinery
regarding the exploration and exploitation of
seabed resources, the report to the President and
Members of Congress by the Commission on
Marine Science, Engineering and Resources, the
report of the National Petroleum Coimcil, and
many other materials. In addition, the executive
branch is conducting and commissioning numer-
ous independent studies, including a projected
study by the Brookings Institution on the ques-
tion of a deep seabed regime. Pending comple-
tion of this evaluation process and further
progress in international negotiations in and
outside the United Nations Seabed Committee,
it would be premature for me to comment in spe-
cific terms on the question of the location of a
boundary or on the details of a regime.

Boundary and Regime Issues

An additional question arises as to how these
issues win be settled. If we are to further our
foreign policy objective of avoiding interna-
tional conflict with respect to rights to exploit
the seabed, I think it is clear that we must avoid
an escalation of claims and counterclaims both
as to the boundary of national jurisdiction over
exploitation and rights to exploit the area be-
yond. The very expectation of great wealth in
the seabed could stimulate such an escalation of
claims and result in extremely serious disputes
between states, which could involve the United
States either directly or indirectly. I therefore
believe it is in the long-range interests of the
United States and the world to assure that the
boundary and regime issues are resolved by
widespread international agreement. The draft
statement of principles introduced by the
United States in June 1968 called for an inter-
nationally agreed boimdary and internationally
agreed arrangements regarding the area beyond.
The so-called Set B principles, which received
substantial support at the meeting of the Ad
Hoc Committee in Rio de Janeiro last summer,
particularly from Western countries, also called
for an agreed precise boundary and an agreed
international regime governing the exploitation
of resources in the area beyond. It is clear that
this is one of the major objectives of Senate
Resolution 33 as well.

In the Seabed Committee, which meets Au-
gust 11-28, we hope that it will be possible to
make substantial progress on agreement on a
set of principles governmg exploration and ex-
ploitation of the area beyond national jurisdic-

September 1, 1969

193

tion. We are involved in informal talks in New
York on these principles at the present time. We
hope that ultimately the principles which are
accepted will form the basis of a regime which
will govern the orderly exploration and use of
the seabed and avoid dangerous conflict in this
last great frontier on earth.

The Seabed Committee will also discuss the
international machinery report, to which I have
already referred, some safeguards against
marine pollution, and our proposal for an Inter-
national Decade of Ocean Exploration. The
Committee will report to the 24th General As-
sembly on its deliberations. I hope that suiEcient
progress will be made on principles so that the
General Assembly may be able to take favorable
action on them.

We are well aware of the problems which can
arise during the time necessary to achieve sub-
stantial international progress on these issues.
This does not mean that we should arrive at
precise conclusions on the boimdary or regime
issue before we and other nations have a better
understanding of what the most desirable result
would be. Nor does it mean that the need to keep
options open with respect to certain aspects of
the ultimate result prevents us or other nations
from taking affirmative actions. For example,
agreement on principles would clearly be a ma-
jor step in averting some of the problems wliich
could arise in the interim.

There are, in particular, some problems aris-
ing out of the steady seaward expansion of both
capabilities and grants of concessions for ex-
ploration and exploitation of the seabed which
relate directly to our freedom of choice with
respect to the precise location of a boundary of
national jurisdiction. We share the concerns ex-

pressed by the chairman in his recent address
to the Senate on this subject and can assure the
committee that we do not intend to remain silent
on the question of a new round of expansive uni-
lateral claims. Nevertheless, exploitation must
go forward during this period, and there should
be due protection for the integrity of invest-
ments made in the exploitation of natural re-
sources in areas which might subsequently be
determined by international agreement to be
beyond the boimdary. I am confident that we
can arrive at an approach which will permit ex-
ploitation to continue on an economically sound
basis without prejudicing the ultimate location
of the boundary.

In summary, Mr. Chairman, the conmiunity
of nations in focusing on these seabed problems
has taken the first step on a very difficult road.
It should not and will not stop there. In every
way possible we are encouraging identification
and discussion of the relevant issues and encour-
aging all nations to keep an open mind on these
issues. We fully intend to exercise an appropri-
ate role of leadership in this international proc-
ess and intend to set an example by avoiding the
premature adoption of definitive conclusions
ourselves. It is our sincere hope that the national
and international decisionmaking processes will
proceed together, each influencing the other, so
that in the end we may arrive at a result with
a minimum of disputes which reflects the broad-
est possible accommodation of the interests in-
volved. In many ways this is an entirely new
type of endeavor, and I cannot assure this com-
mittee how soon it will succeed. I can say that it
is, in our view, the proper way to approach ques-
tions involving the oceans and that we will do
everything possible to assure its success.

194

Department of State Bulletin

TREATY INFORMATION

United States and Japan Conclude Space Cooperation Agreement

A U.S.-Japanese agreement providing for co-
operation in space activities for peaceful pur-
poses was effected iy an exchange of notes at
Tokyo on July SI signed iy Secretary Rogers
and Foreign Minister Kiichi Aichi. Following
is a statement made at the signing ceremony hy
Secretary Rogers, together with the texts of
the notes.

poses, navigation, communication, search for
natural resources, and the like.

I am confident that this is just the beginning
of cooperation between our countries in the
great adventure of exploring outer space.

EXCHANGE OF NOTES

STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ROGERS

Press release 221 dated July 31

I find it a very happy coincidence that this
agreement for United States-Japan coopera-
tion in the further development of outer space
comes in the immediate aftermath of the Apollo
11 moon landing.

The act of Congress which authorized our
space program not only authorized but directed
the United States space agency to promote the
maximum feasible degree of mtemational co-
operation in the exploration of outer space.

Wlien members of the crew of Apollo 11 set
foot on the moon last week, they left a plaque
saying that they had come in the name of all
mankind.

Today we, Japan and the United States, have
concluded an agreement which symbolizes our
joint participation in the age of space. But this
is more than a symbolic step. It will bring the
great talents and energies of Japanese science
and technology more actively into the adven-
tures of space exploration. It will facilitate
Japanese initiatives in outer space. This will
complement what others are doing in the field
of observation and communication satellites —
that in turn will add to the fund of knowledge
and to the capacity of the international commu-
nity to use outer space for socially useful pur-

Japanese Note

Tgkyo, July 31,1969
Excellency, I have the honour to refer to
recent conversations between the representa-
tives of the Government of Japan and the Gov-
ernment of the United States of America con-
cerning cooperation between the two countries
in space activities for peaceful purposes. The
understanding of my Government of the re-
sults of these conversations is as follows :

(1) The United States Government imder-
takes, in accordance with United States laws
and administrative procedures, to permit
United States industry to provide to the Jap-
anese Government or to Japanese industry
under contract with the Japanese Government,
unclassified technology and equipment listed in
the attachment to this Note for the development
of Japanese Q and N launch vehicles and com-
munications and other satellites for peaceful
applications.

(2) The Japanese Government undertakes
(a) to ensure that any teclmology or equip-
ment transferred to Japan under paragraph
(1) above will be used solely for peaceful pur-
poses; (b) to take all available steps in accord-
ance with Japanese laws, regulations and
administrative procedures to prevent transfer to
third countries of such technology and equip-
ment, and any launch vehicles and communica-

September 1, 1969

195

tions or other satellites, and components, parts,
accessories and attachments thereof manufac-
tured by use of such teclmology or equipment
except by mutual agreement between the two
Governments; and (c) to use communication
satellites developed or launched with United
States cooperation compatibly with the objec-
tives and purposes of the Intelsat arrangements
as they exist or evolve.

I have the honour to propose that the present
note and your note in reply confirming the fore-
going understandings on behalf of the Govern-
ment of the United States shall constitute an
Agreement wliich shall enter into force on the
date of your Note.

I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to
Your Excellency the assurance of my highest
consideration.

KncHi AiCHi

Attachment to U.S. /Japanese Agreement Concebn-

INO THE PBOVISION BT U.S. INDUSTRY OF CERTAIN

Categories op Unclassified Technology and
Equipment for the Development op Japanese Q
and N Launch Vehicles and Communications and
Other Satellites for Peaceful Applications

TECHNOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT

A. The technology and equipment referred to in this
Agreement include that software and hardware per-
taining to communications and other satellites for
peaceful applications, and to Q and N launch vehicles
technology, and to associated ground support technol-
ogy related directly to, and necessary for, placing
satellites in geo-stationary orbit

Software is understood to comprise information con-
cerning program management, systems engineering and
design, testing and manufacture. Hardware is under-
stood to comprise components, parts, accessories,
attachments and associated equipment

B. This agreement will cover unclassified technology
and equipment up to the level of the Thor-Delta
vehicle systems, exclusive of reentry and related
technology.

0. In exceptional cases, the United States may li-
cense the export of hardware rather than export of
design, development or production information.

D. United States supplying companies will be re-
sponsible for filing application for all United States
export licenses required. To facilitate the provision of
United States technology and equipment, it is under-
stood that each export license application under this
program will include a statement by the Japanese
Government as to whether the technology or equipment
requested is (i) directly for a specified Japanese Gov-
ernment agency or (ii) for a Japanese company which
is acting pursuant to a Japanese Government contract

B. The Japanese Government, as referred to In para-

graph (1) of the agreement and in subparagraphs D
(i) and (ii) of the Attachment, is understood to in-
clude the Space Development Corporation, a public
corporation which will come into operation in October,
1969.

U.S. Note

Tokyo, July 31, 1969
Excellency: I have the honor to acknowl-
edge receipt of Your Excellency's Note of to-
day's date reading as follows:

[Full text of Japanese note and attachment.]

In reply, I have the honor to confirm on behalf
of the United States Government that the fore-
going also represents the understanding of my
Government. It is the understanding of the
United States Government that this Agreement
enters into force as of the date of this Note.

I avail myself of this opportunity to renew
to Your Excellency the assurance of my highest
consideration.

WiLLLiM p. EOGERS

United States and Romania Sign
Understanding on Libraries

Following is the text of an understanding
between the United States and RoTuania signed
at Bucharest on August 3 hy Richard H. Davis,
American Ambassador to Rotnania, and Vasile
Gliga. Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of
the Socialist Republic of Romania.

Press release 233 dated August 6

Understanding between the Government of
THE Untted States of America and the
Government of the Socialist Kepublic of
Romania

The Government of the United States of
America and the Government of the Socialist
Kepublic of Eomania (hereinafter designated
as the Parties) , in accordance with the arrange-
ment relating to a program of exchanges in
cultural, educational, scientific and other fields
between the United States of America and the
Socialist Republic of Romania, and in accord-
ance with the desire of the two countries to con-

196

Department of State Bulletin

[tribute to a better mutual understanding
between their peoples, agree to conclude the fol-
lowing understanding regarding the establish-
ment and operation in the United States and
Romania of an American and a Romanian
library, respectively.

Article 1

I The Government of the United States of
America will establish and operate a library in
Romania and the Government of the Socialist
Republic of Romania will establish and operate
a library in the United States. The Library in
Romania will be known as the American Li-
brary and the Library in the United States will
I be known as the Romanian Library. They will
■ be entitled to use the designations on their letter-
head, posters, signs and other materials.

Article 2

The American Library in Romania will func-
tion mider the sponsorship of the United States
Information Agency ; the Romanian Library in
the United States will function under the spon-
sorship of the State Committee for Culture and
Art of the Socialist Republic of Romania.

Article 3

The sending government will appoint a di-
rector to carry out the administrative manage-
ment of its library.

Article ^

The director of each library will carry out
the development of the library's activities in
accordance with the laws and regulations of the
host country.

Article 5

The director of the library will not permit
the sponsorship of activities or distribution of
publications or materials critical of the host
country or of the government of any other
country which maintains diplomatic relations
with the host country.

Article 6

For the resolution of problems concerning
these two institvitions, the director of the Ro-
manian Library in the United States will be able
to maintain relations with the appropriate U.S.

government agencies, and the director of the
American Library in Bucharest will be able to
maintain relations with the Romanian State
Committee for Culture and Art.

Article 7

The director of the American Library will
inform the Romanian State Committee for Cul-
ture and Art and the director of the Romanian
Library will inform the appropriate U.S. Gov-
ernment agencies, in advance, of programs of
activities which will be carried out by the
libraries.

Article 8

In cooperation with other appropriate insti-
tutions of the two coimtries, the Romanian
State Committee for Culture and Art and the
appropriate U.S. government agencies wiU
facilitate the operation of the libraries in order
to help them realize the cultural objectives for
which they have been created.

Article 9

The Parties agree that the following activi-
ties be developed within the libraries :

a) reference use and lending of books, peri-
odicals, films and recordings, musical scores and
tapes in the stock of the library ;

b) sponsoring of lectures on cultural, scien-
tific and teclinical themes;

c) sponsoring of concerts, recitals, exhibits,
movie showings, meetings with scientists and
cultural personalities ;

d) sponsoring of courses of the English and
Romanian languages, respectively;

e) the distribution to institutions or persons,
of bulletins, periodicals, art books, folders and
other printed materials.

Article 10

The public shall have unrestricted access to
the libraries and their circulating and reference
books as well as to the cultural and scientific
events organized by the libraries.

Article 11

If Nationals of the host country are em-
ployed in connection with the operation of the
library, their employment shall be in compli-
ance with the applicable laws of that country.

September 1, 1969

197

Article 12

The activities of the respective libraries will
ordinarily take place on the premises of the
libraries.

The Parties will facilitate, through the com-
petent authorities of the two countries, the rent-
ing (or making available on a reciprocal basis)
of appropriate sites for the activities of the
respective libraries.

Article 13

The present Understanding shall come into
force upon signature.

Either of the Parties may terminate this
Understanding by written notice to the other
Party, such termination to become effective
ninety days following the date of such notice.

Done in duplicate in the English and
Komanian languages, both of which shall be of
equal authenticity, at Bucharest this 3rd day of
August 1969.

Richard H. Davis V. Gliga

For the Government
of the United
States of America

Current Actions

For the Government
of the Socialist Re-
public of Romania

MULTILATERAL

Antarctica

Measures relating to the furtherance of the principles
and purposes of the Antarctic treaty of December 1,
1959 (TIAS 4780). Adopted at Paris November 29,
1968.'

Notifications of approval: Belgium, July 31, 1969, rec-
ommendations V-1 through V-4, V-7 through V-9 ;
Norway, July 18, 1969, recommendation V-2.

Aviation

Convention on the international recognition of rights
in aircraft. Done at Geneva June 19, 1948. Entered
into force September 17, 1953. TIAS 2847.
Adherence deposited: Central African Republic,
June 2, 1969.

Cultural Relations

Agreement on the importation of educational, scientific,
and cultural materials, with protocol. Done at Lake
Success November 22, 1950. Entered into force May
21, 1952; for the United States November 2, 1966.
TIAS 6129.
Acceptance deposited: Singapore, July 11, 1969.

Health

International health regulations, with appendixes
Adopted at Boston July 25, 1969. Enters into force
January 1, 1971.

Judicial Procedures

Convention on the service abroad of judicial and ex-
trajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters
Done at The Hague November 15, 1965. Entered into
force February 10, 1969. TIAS 6638.
Ratifications deposited: Denmark. Norway. Sweden
August 2, 1969.''

Labor

International Labor Organization Convention (No 58)
fixing the minimum age for the admission of children
to employment at sea (revLsed 1936). Adopted by
the International Labor Conference, 22d session
Geneva, October 24, 1936 (TS 952).
Ratification registered: Southern Yemen April 14
1969. '

Load Lines

International load line convention, final protocol, and
annexes. Signed at London July 5, 1930, with ex-
changes of notes at Washington February 8, June 1
and 28, August 9, and October 5, 1932. Entered into
force January 1, 1933. 47 Stat 2228.
Denunciations deposited: United Kingdom, July 10
1969 ; United States, July 29, 1969. '

International convention on load lines, 1966. Done at
London April 5, 1966. Entered into force July 21
1968. TIAS 6.331. '

Acceptance deposited: Korea, July 10, 1969.

Marriage

Convention on consent to marriage, minimum age for
marriage, and registration of marriages. Signed at
New York December 10, 1962. Entered into force
December 9, 1964.^

Accession deposited: Federal Republic of Germany
July 9, 1969.*

Satellite Communications System

Agreement establishing interim arrangements for a
global commercial communications satellite system.
Done at Washington August 20, 1964. Entered into
force August 20, 1964. TIAS 5616.
Ratification deposited: Belgium, definitively. Au-
gust 5, 1969. V. u

Trade

Certification relating to rectifications and modifica-
tions of schedules to the General Agreement on Tar-
iffs and Trade. Done at Geneva January 15, 1963.
Entered into force: July 12, 1969.

Second certification relating to rectifications and modi-
fications of schedules to the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva April 29, 1964.
Entered into force: July 12, 1969.

Third certification relating to rectifications and modi-
fications of schedules to the General Agreement on

' Not in force.

" With declarations.

' Not in force for the United States.

* Applicable to Land Berlin.

198

Department of State Bulletin

Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva May 5, 1967.
Entered into force: July 12, 1969.
First certification of changes to schedules to the Gen-
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Ge-
neva July 12, 1969. Entered into force July 12, 1969.

BILATERAL

Australia

Agreement extending the agreement of January 13,
1969 (TIAS 6647), relating to the establishment and
operation of a receiving station on Norfolk Island to
study ionospheric propagation in relation to long-
range radio paths. Effected by exchange of notes at
Canberra July 10, 1969. Entered into force July 10,
1969.

Belgium

Agreement amending annex B of the mutual defense
assistance agreement of January 27, 1950 (TIAS
2010). Effected by exchange of notes at Brussels
June 20 and 30, 1969. Entered into force June 30,
1969.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Agreement extending the agreement of June 15, 1964
(TIAS 5621), for the application of safeguards to
United States reactor facilities. Effected by exchange
of letters at Vienna July 28 and 31, 1969. Entered
into force July 31, 1969.

Iran

Amendment to the agreement of March 5, 1957, as
amended (TIAS 4207, 6219), for cooperation con-
cerning civil uses of atomic energy. Signed at Wash-
ington March 18, 1969.
Entered into force: August 1, 1969.

Agreement extending the military mission agreement
of November 27, 1943, as amended (57 Stat 1262,
TIAS 1941, 2946, 3207, 3519, 6594). Effected by ex-
change of notes at Tehran June 29 and July 23, 1969.
Entered into force July 23, 1969.

Japan

Agreement concerning cooperation in space activities
for peaceful purposes. Effected by exchange of notes
at Tokyo July 31, 1969. Entered into force July 31,
1969.

Luxembourg

Agreement amending annex B of the mutual defense
assistance agreement of January 27, 1950 (TIAS
2014). Effected by exchange of notes at Luxembourg
July 11 and 24, 1969. Entered into force July 24, 1969.

Romania

Understanding regarding the establishment and opera-
tion of an American library in Bomania and a
Romanian library in the United States. Signed at
Bucharest August 3, 1969. Entered into force
August 3, 1969.

Trinidad and Tobago

Agreement relating to training programs in Trinidad
and Tobago for Peace Corps volunteers. Effected by

exchange of notes at Port-of-Spain July 11 and 21,
1969. Entered into force July 21, 1969.

Turkey

Agreement amending the agreement for sales of agri-
cultural commodities of February 6, 1969 (TIAS
6645). Effected by exchange of notes at Ankara
July 22 and 24, 1969. Entered into force July 24, 1969.

Viet-Nam

Agreement for sales of agricultural commodities, relat-
ing to the agreement of March 13, 1967 (TIAS 6271).
Signed at Saigon July 28, 1969. Entered into force
July 28, 1969.

Recent Releases

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C. 20402.
Address requests direct to the Superintendent of
Documents. A 25-percent discount is made on orders
for 100 or more copies of any one puMication 7nailed
to the same address. Remittances, payable to the Su-
perintendent of Documents, must accompany orders.

Background Notes. Short, factual summaries which
describe the people, history, government, economy, and
foreign relations of each country. Bach contains a map,
a list of principal government officials and U.S. diplo-
matic and consular officers and, in some cases, a se-
lected bibliography. (A complete set of all Background
Notes currently in stock (at least 125) — $6; 1-year
subscription service for approximately 75 updated or
new Notes — $3.50 ; plastic binder — $1.50. ) Single copies
of those listed below are available at 100 each.

Argentina

Pub.

7836

6 pp.

Finland

Pub.

8262

5 pp.

Iceland

Pub.

8227

4 pp.

Italy

Pub.

7861

7 pp.

Mexico

Pub.

7865

6 pp.

Nepal

Pub.

7904

5 pp.

The Netherlands

Pub.

8223

4 pp.

Antilles

Nigeria

Pub.

7953

5 pp.

Rwanda

Pub.

7916

4 pp.

Senegal

Pub.

7820

4 pp.

Seychelles

Pub.

8246

4 pp.

Thailand

Pub.

7961

6 pp.

A Pocket Guide to Foreign Policy Information Ma-
terials and Services of the U.S. Department of State.
This revised pamphlet describes how the public can
obtain Information on services and materials from the
Department of State. Pub. 8382. 18 pp. 200.

International Exchange, 1968. A report of the Bureau
of Educational and Cultural Affairs; includes tables
and graphs. Pub. 8459. International Information and
Cultural Series 99. 37 pp. 45i.

September 1, 1969

199

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Bolivia.
TIAS 6652. 5 pp. 100.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Bolivia.
TIAS 6653. 4 pp. 10*.

Alien Amateur Radio Operators. Agreement with Indo-
nesia. TIAS 6654. 4 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities — Rescheduling of Payments
Under the Agreement of April 18, 1966, as Amended.
Agreement with Indonesia. TIAS 6655. 7 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities — Rescheduling of PajTnents
Under the Agreement of June 28, 1966. Memoranda of
agreement with Indonesia. TIAS 6656. 7 pp. 10#.

Education — Financing of Exchange Programs. Agree-
ment with the Philippines amending the agreement of
March 23, 1963. TIAS 6657. 4 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Ceylon.
TIAS 6658. 6 pp. 10^

Atomic Energy — Cooperation for Mutual Defense Pur-
poses. Agreement with the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland amending the agreement
of July 3, 1958, as amended. TIAS 6659. 2 pp. 10^.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with Afghanis-
tan amending the agreement of July 2, 1968. TIAS 6660.
2 pp. 10<}.

Agricultural Commodities. Agreement with the Repub-
Uc of Korea. TIAS 6661. 8 pp. 100.

Sea Level Canal Site — Geologic Studies on Route 10.
Agreement with Panama. TIAS 6662. 6 pp. 10*.

Social Security — Coverage of Philippine Citizens Em-
ployed by USAID, JUSMAG, and Peace Corps. Agree-
ments with the Philippines. TIAS 6663. 9 pp. lO^J.

Defense — Acquisition and Production of F-4EJ Air-
craft. Agreement with Japan. TIAS 6664. 7 pp. 10*.

Weather Stations. Agreement with Mexico extending
the agreement of February 4, 1966. TIAS 6666. 3 pp.
10*.

DEPARTMENT AND FOREIGN SERVICE

Confirmations

The Senate on August 13 confirmed the following
nominations :

Taylor G. Belcher to be Ambassador to Peru. ( For i
biographic details, see Department of State press re-
lease 248 dated August 21. )

Walter L. Rice to be Ambassador to Australia. ( For i
biographic details, see Department of State press re-
lease 245 dated August 20.)

Designations

John Howard Burns as Director General of the For-
eign Service, effective August 1. ( For biographic details, i
see Department of State press release dated May 29. ) |

Miriam Camps as Deputy Director for Planning,
Planning and Coordination Staff, effective August 5.
(For biographic details, see Department of State press t
release 235 dated August 5. )

Theodore L. Eliot, Jr., as Special Assistant to the
Secretary and Executive Secretary of the Department,
effective August 4. ( For biographic details, see Depart-
ment of State press release 179 dated July 1.)

Joseph N. Greene, Jr., as Deputy Assistant Secretary
for International Organization Affairs, effective Au-
gust 6.

Arthur A. Hartman as Deputy Director for Co-
ordination, Planning and Coordination Staff, effective
August 5. (For biographic details, see Department of
State press release 235 dated August 5. )

200

Department of State Bulletin

INDEX September 1, 1969 Vol. LXI, No. 1576

Asia

ANZUS Council Holds 19th Meeting at Canberra

(text of communique) 186

Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the Pacific
(news conference at the Western White House,
address at Canberra, statements and news con-
ferences at Taijiei and Hong Kong) . . . 177

Australia

ANZUS Council Holds 19th Meeting at Canberra

(text of communique) 186

Rice confirmed as Ambassador 200

Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the Pacific
(news conference at the Western White House,
address at Canberra, statements and news con-
ferences at Taipei and Hong Kong) .... 177

China. Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the
Pacific (news conference at the Western White
House, address at Canberra, statements and
news conferences at Taipei and Hong
Kong) 177

Ongress

Confirmations (Belcher, Rice) 200

Department Reviews History of International
Efforts Governing Activities on the Seabed
(Johnson) 191

Department and Foreign Service

Confirmations (Belcher, Rice) 200

Designations (Burns, Camps, Eliot, Greene,
Hartman) 200

Educational and Cultural Affairs. United States
and Romania Sign Understanding on Libraries
(text) 196

Hong Hong. Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and
the Pacific (news conference at the Western
White House, address at Canberra, state-
ments and news conferences at Taipei and
Hong Kong) 177

International Organizations and Conferences.
Greene designated Deputy Assistant Secretary
for International Organization Affairs . . . 200

Japan

Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the Pacific
(news conference at the Western White House,
address at Canberra, statements and news con-
ferences at Taipei and Hong Kong) .... 177

United States and Japan Conclude Space
Cooperation Agreement (Rogers, exchange of
notes) 195

Marine Science. Department Reviews History
of International Efforts GovemiDg Activities
on the Seabed (Johnson) 191

New Zealand. ANZUS Council Holds 19th Meet-
ing at Canberra (text of communique) . . . 186

Peru. Belcher confirmed as Ambassador . . . 200

Publications. Recent Releases 199

Romania. United States and Romania Sign
Understanding on Libraries (text) .... 196

Space. United States and Japan Conclude Space
Cooperation Agreement (Rogers, exchange of
notes) 195

Treaty Information

Current Actions 198

United States and Japan Conclude Space
Cooperation Agreement (Rogers, exchange of
notes) 195

United States and Romania Sign Understanding
on Libraries (text) 196

United Nations. Department Reviews History
of International Efforts Governing Activities
on the Seabed (Johnson) 191

Viet-Nam

Secretary Rogers' Trip to Asia and the Pacific
(news conference at the Western White House,
address at Canberra, statements and news con-
ferences at Taipei and Hong Kong) . . , . 177

29th and 30th Plenary Sessions on Viet-Nam

Held at Paris (Lodge) 188

Name Index

Belcher, Taylor G 200

Burns, John Howard 200

Camps, Mrs. Miriam 200

Eliot, Theodore L., Jr 200

Greene, Joseph N., Jr 200

Hartman, Arthur A 200

Johnson, U., Alexis 191

Lodge, Henry Cabot 188

Rice, Walter L 200

Rogers, Secretary 177, 195

Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: August 4-17

Press releases may be obtained from the OflBce
of Press Relations, Department of State, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20520.

Releases issued prior to August 4 which appear
in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 221 of
July 31 and 222 of July 30.

Subject

Pritzlaff sworn in as Ambassador to
Malta (biographic details).

Rogers : arrival statement, Taipei,
August 1.

Rogers : departure statement, Taipei,
August 3.

Rogers : news conference. Hong
Kong, August 3.

Understanding with Romania on
establishment of libraries.

Replogle sworn in as Ambassador to
Iceland (biographic details).

Designations of Deputy Directors of
Planning and Coordination Staff
(biographic details).

Meeker sworn in as Ambassador to
Romania (biographic details).

Lodge : 29th plenary session on Viet-
Nam at Paris.

Rogers : National Press Club, Can-
berra, Australia.

ANZUS communique.

Lodge : 30th plenary session on Viet-
Nam at Paris.

Symington sworn in as Ambassador
to Trinidad and Tobago (biogra-
phic details).

U.S.-Hungarian understanding on
establishment of Hungarian com-
mercial office in New York, means
of payment of Hungarian post-
World War II surplus property
debt, staffing of Embassies.

Meyer: eighth anniversary, Alliance
for Progress.

No.

Date

■229

8/4

230

8/4

231

8/4

232

8/4

233

8/5

234

S/5

•235

8/5

'236

8/6

237

8/7

238

8/8

239
240

8/8
8A4

241

8/14

242

8A5

243 8/16

•Not printed.

fHeld for a later issue of the Bdixetin.

Superintendent of Documents

u.s. government printing office

washington, d.c. 20402

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID H

U.S. GOVERNMENT POINTING OPFI . I

^ A 7^

20YEARS OF PEACE

THE OFFICIAL WEEKLY RECORD OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

t^O

THE

DEPARTMENT

STATE

BULLETIN

SECRETARY ROGERS' NEWS CONFERENCE OF AUGUST 20 201

31st PLENARY SESSION ON VIETNAM HELD AT PARIS

Statement by Philip C. Habih and Text of Statement iy U.S. Senators
on Treatment of American Prisoners of War

PRESIDENT NIXON MEETS WITH CHANCELLOR KIESINGER

OF THE FEDERAL, REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

ExcJumges of Remarks and Joint Statement 211

Boston Public Library
- ' nt of Documents

SFP 2 9 1969

For index see inside haxik cover

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BULLETIN

Vol. LXI, No. 1576
September 8, 1969

(

For sale b7 tbe Superintendent of Documents

U.S. Qovemment Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

PEIOE:

62 Issues, domestic $16, foreign $23
Single copy 30 cents

Use of funds for printing of this publication
approved by the Director of the Bureau of
the Budget (January 11, 1966).
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 BULLETIN Is indexed In
the Beaders' Guide to Periodical Literature.

The Department of State BULLETIN^
a weekly publication issued by the
Office of Media Services, Bureau of
Public Affairs, provides the public and
interested agencies of the Government
tvith information on developments in
the field of foreign relations and on
the tpork of the Department of State
and the Foreign Service.
The BULLETIN includes selected
press releases on foreign policy, issued
by the White House and the Depart-
ment, and statements and addresses
made by the President and by the
Secretary of State and other officers
of the Department, as iceU as special
articles on various phases of interna-
tional affairs and the functions of the
Department. Information is included
concerning treaties and international
agreements to which the United
States is or may become a party
and treaties of general international
interest.

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

Secretary Rogers' News Conference of August 20

Press release 246 dated August 20

Q. Mr. Secretary, at your most recent press
conference here in W ashington early in July^
you took note of the lull in battlefield activity
in Viet-Nam. At that time you said it was too
early to tell whether this had any political sig-
nificance. Since that time the lull has continued,
although activity has flared up and down from
time to time. My question is: Do you find any
political significance in it? have you since that
timie? do you now? And in that connection,
how about significance in Paris? In other
words, are we getting any closer to peace?

A. Well, in answer to the question about
whether the lull has any political significance
or not, I thiak that I would have to say that it
cannot be determined now. There was a while
that it looked as if it might have some signifi-
cance. But I think the events of August 11 and
12, which resulted, as you know, in very intense
enemy activity, made it very difficult to say that
the lull had any political significance.

So we are disappointed at the activity on
August 11 and 12, and we had hoped that the
enemy was continuing to pursue less intense
offensive activity in Viet-Nam.

I think, though, that I do want to say that
since then, since August 11 and 12, the activity
is back to what it was prior to that time. And
although we cannot be sure that it has any
political significance, we do not want to put too
much emphasis on the activity of those days,
because, as you know, the President listed three
criteria that he was going to use to determine
the future troop replacements: One was the
level of activity of the enemy ; two was the abil-
ity of the South Vietnamese to take over the
combat responsibilities; and three was the
negotiations in Paris.

' For a transcript of Secretary Rogers' news confer-
ence of July 2, see Bulletin of July 21, 1969, p. 41.

Now, insofar as the level of activity is con-
cerned, over the last 9 weeks it has been rela-
tively low. We recognize that — I think all of
us recognize that war itself has grave risks.
And we are willing to take sensible risks for
peace.

So in deciding what to do in terms of troop
replacements in the future, the President and
all of us are going to keep those considerations
in mind.

We are prepared to take sensible risks for
peace.

Q. Mr. Secretary, does the lull in actuality
have any effect on the Presidents immediate
decisions to make a further announcement of
troop replacements this month?

A. Yes, it wUl be taken into consideration by
the President. Secretary [of Defense Melvin
E.] Laird and I will see the President from time
to time the remainder of the month, and the
President intends to make a decision before the
month is up.

We will take into consideration the oifensive
activity of the enemy for the last 2 montlis. We
will obviously have to consider the activity of
August 11 and 12.

But as I say, on the whole the enemy activity,
the offensive activity of the enemy, has been
somewhat less these last 2 months than
previously.

I think I should also point out that the infil-
tration that I referred to in my last press
conference is still down. It is considerably
down.

So that would indicate that although the
enemy may have the ability to launch offensive
actions, as he did August 11 and 12, he might
have more difficulty in launching a sustained
offensive action.

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it a fair conclusion from,
ivhat you have said that the United States has
done nothing in response to this lull, whatever
its political meaning may he?

September 8, 1969

201

A. No, I hiiven't said anything to suggest
that at alL

Q. What have we done?

A. What I have indicated is that we are
taking what we think are sensible risks for
peace. And we are going to proceed with a pro-
gram of troop replacement with that basic
principle in mind.

Now, insofar — I gather what you are talking
about, Mr. Roberts [Chalmers Roberts, Wash-
ington Post] , is whether there has been a change
of battle plans, orders. Is that what you have
reference to?

Q. Well, that is one of the things. Secretary
Laird has mentioned the change there. But it
has never been very clear as to whether in
fact this is an official policy change by the
Government.

A. Well, I don't want to get into an extended
discussion about military orders, except to say
that the military activity on our part since —
well, certainly for the last couple of months, has
been consistent with the President's sjjeech on
May 14,^ which is to Vietnamize the war to the
fullest possible extent, to conduct our opera-
tions in a way to protect American lives, and
to take into consideration the activity of the
enemy.

Now, this has occurred. And until August 11
and 12 the level of activity, as you know, was
very low ; casualty rates were down. So that the
increase in activity is a result of the enemy's
action.

Q. What I am trying to get at. if I may pur-
sue that — following Mr. Hensley's [Stewart
Hensley. United Press Intemationall question^
you said at that last press conference, if I
remem,her correctly, that if after a couple of
weeks' examination of the lull then beginning,
you would make some decision, or the Govern-
ment might make some decision, in response.
Now are you saying that the lull continued oidy
because of the Communist activity, level of
activity, or decision or that the United States
also did something to lower the level of
hostilities?

A. I think that the T'nited States did
something to lower the level of activity.

Q. What did we do?

A. Well, we are not going to disclose, Sir.
Roberts, all the orders in a war. And you under-
stand why we can't do that. The fact is that the
lull was partly because of the reaction of the
United States, and the reason that the activity |
increased was because of the enemy's action, ,
Now, I am not going to get into military orders,
except to say we did respond and we are
prepared to if the other side wants to.

Strategic Arms Limitation Talks

Q. Mr. Secretary, can you tell us what the
prospects are at the moment on getting
something from the Russians on SALT talks?

A. Mr. Bailey [Charles W. Bailey, Minneap-
olis Tribune], we have not heard from them.
We have been somewhat surprised that we have
not, because when I spoke originally to Mr.
Dobrynin [Soviet Ambassador Anatoliy F.
Dobrynin] about our wishes to proceed in Au-
gust, he indicated some enthusiasm, was pleased
that we had so indicated. But we have not heard
from them since. They know that we are willing
and would like to proceed with these talks.

I am informed that IVIr. Dobrjmin has been
having some health problem, minor health prob-
lem. But I tliink he is expected to return to
Washington in the near future.

Q. Mr. Secretary, has the Sino-Soviet border
confict in any way interrupted your initiative
toward Communist China for resumption of
our Warsaio talks?

A. No, not at all. We have indicated from the '
beginning of this administration — and I re-
peated it in Canberra in a speech there at the
Press Club ^ — our willingness to enter into these
discussions with Communist China. I also in- ,
dicated at the time that we would, at the
appropriate tune, attempt through diplomatic
channels to see if it was possible to get these
talks resumed. At the appropriate time, when it
seems the best opportiuiity to elicit a favorable •■
response from tlie Communist Chinese, we will
renew that offer.

Q. Mr. Secretary, how do you appraise the
situation in Laos? <

A. Well, since my last press conference there
has not been a great deal of change. We have ,
obviously felt that this was a matter of grave i

' For text, see Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457. ' For text, see Bulletin of Sept. 1, 1969, p. 178.

202

Department of State Bulletin

concern. We have discussed the matter with the
Soviet Union and the U.K., who are cochairmen
of the Geneva agreements. We think that Laos
and Cambodia should be inchided in any settle-
ment involving Viet-Nam. At the moment we
are watching it very carefully.

Q. Mr: Secretary, there are some people who
ielieve that the Soviets are not doing all that
they can to help achieve an end to the fighting
in Viet-Nam aiid Laos. Do you agree?

A. Yes, I agree. I don't think they are doing
as much as they could. I suppose they have a
problem. At least they say they have a problem
with their constituencies. They are supplying
most of the military equipment for the North.
And I suppose that if they were willing to and
felt politically they could, they could be of
greater help. I have not detected recently any
help at all on their part.

" Q. Mr. Secretary, could you give us the
scenario for the evolution of the administra-
tiorCs policy on Latin Amenca? Where do we

■■•■ stand now on the nsw policy?

i\ A. Well, we talked to Governor [Nelson A.]
, Rockefeller, who is working on his report, and
3: I think when the President returns to Wash-
ington, Governor Eockefeller will make a re-
port. We intend to discuss the matter with
" Latin American coimtries further, and we
1 would hope that we can have some decisions in
ii the next few months.

Troop Replacement Program in Viet-Nam

Q. Mr. Secretary, toe have been led to believe
that the process of disengage?nent, withdrawal,
or replacement of American troops in Viet-
Nam doesn't necessarily depend upon the enemy
cuition, lulls or non-lulls.

A. That is correct.

Q. Is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. So we could continue the withdrawal
whether there was a high level or a low level
of enemy activity in Viet-Nam?

^ A. Yes. Of course, a high level of activity

kill would make it less likely and make the troop

ji'l replacement program more difficult. As I said,

the President aimounced three criteria, and

we will consider all of them in making the

decision. But one of the most important factors
in that decision is the ability of the South Viet-
namese to handle the combat responsibilities in
that area. And I must say that they have — so
far they have taken over the responsibilities
very well, and we are pleased with the develop-
ments up to this time.

Q. My point is that all three cnteria do not
have to apply at the same time — any one is
applicable?

A. That is correct.

Q. Mr. Secretary, there has been some report
here that you have a neic front opening up on
reorganizing the State Department. Is that

true?

A. I don't think we have a new front. We
have pretty well completed our personnel
changes. We have a few staffing problems left.
But on the whole the Department, I think, so
far as administration is concerned, is in good
shape. We have, as I say — I\Ir. Cargo's [William
I. Cargo, Director of the Planning and Coor-
dination Staff] operation still has some peo-
ple — we have some places to fill. But on the
whole, I think it is well staffed. And I am very
proud of the people we have. I think they are
unusually capable.

Anniversary of Invasion of Czechoslovakia

Q. Mr. Secretary, tomorrow is the first anni-
versary since the Soviet invasion of Czechoslo-
vakia. A year ago, adrninistration officials had
quite a lot to say on that subject. Do you have
anything to say on that subject today?

A. Well, the anniversary of the military in-
vasion of Czechoslovakia by the Soviet LTnion
and four of its allies is a reminder, a grim re-
minder, of the difficulty we face in entering an
era of negotiation with the Soviet Union.

Certainly, the American people are still
firmly convinced that this was a profound
tragedy, not only for the people of Czechoslo-
vakia but for all people that believe in peace
and security and justice. We believe — our peo-
ple believe and our country believes — that all
nations, large and small, have the right to pur-
sue their own interests and aspirations. And no
doctrine, whether it's the doctrine of limited
sovereignty or any other doctrine, can interfei'e
with that right.

So I think I can say that this anniversary

September 8, 1969

203

serves as a grim reminder, with ominous over-
tones, of the difficulty that we have in trying
to resolve some of these differences among na-
tions by peaceful means. And it does point up
life as it is, as distinguished from life as we
wish it were.

U.S. Position on Mutual MIRV Test Ban

Q. Mr. Secretary, there seems to he some open
disagreement now in the adyninistration on how
to approach the question of a mutual test tan
on MIRV \7nultiple independently targeted re-
entry vehicle^ . We have Jieard fro?n, the Penta-
gon, from Dr. Foster [John S. Foster, Director
of Defense Research and Engineering'^ and
also from Dr. Nutter [G. Warren Nutter, As-
sistant Secretary of Defense {International Se-
curity Affairs)^ in their testimony iefore the
House suhcommittee, that they don't feel that
our MIRV^s and the Soviet MIRVs are appro-
priate trade-offs, while at the same time we have
the release of a letter frotn Mr. \_Oerard (7.]
Smith of the Arms Control Agency, in which
he states his personal opinion to Senator Brooke
that he felt that a MIRV test ban, a mutual
MIRV test ban, should he given priority, and
so on. Can you tell us where you stand on this
issue and when we can get an administration
position on this?

A. Yes. The President has said — and I'll re-
iterate — that we think this is a very important
matter. And although there may be slight dif-
ferences of opinion, I don't think they are very
serious in the administration.

The President has announced that we are
willing to consider some kind of a mutual mora-
torium on MIRVs if it's beneficial to both the
Soviet Union and the United States.

Now, that is a matter that he has now under
consideration, and when the SALT talks start
it will be one of the items that he will have to
decide upon.

I think that we have talked to Senator
Brooke on two or three occasions. We think that
his proposal has been helpful, and we have it
under consideration. We will give it full
consideration.

Q. Mr. Secretary, returning to Viet-Nam for
a moment, would you define further what you
inean by "sensible risks for peace"?

A. No, I don't think I will. [Laughter.]

Q. Mr. Secretary, pursuing the SALT talks

204

question for a minute, do you think there is a
possibility — II

A. — Excuse me. I don't mean to be flippant.
But I don't think j'ou can define what's sensible.
It depends on the facts in the situation, and
when we analyze them we recognize that — in
other words, if we were going to give, to guaran-
tee everything, then I suppose we just maintaia
a status quo. I mean, if we wanted to be sure
that we took no chances at all.

Now, the President has decided on another
policy. The policy is that we will proceed to
Vietnamize the war. And in that process there
are certain risks that have to be taken, and we
are prepared to take those risks as long as they
are sensible.

What we do want to emphasize to the other
side is that that does not indicate at all that
we are going to be softheaded about it. The
President's policy, as announced on May 14, is
the policy of this administration. And if they
read it again, they will see that there is nothing
in there that suggests that we are going to
either take careless risks — be careless in taking
risks — or that we are going to back away from
our responsibilities.

On the other hand, we are going to proceed
with the policy as he announced it.

Sino-Soviet Conflict

Q. Mr. Secretary, is it possible, in your view,
that the Soviet Union is hacking away from the
SALT talks because of our foot-dragging on
the MIRV issue?

A. No, I don't tliink so at all. I think that
they probably — and this is speculation — they
are probably preoccupied with a lot of things.
The most important is the Sino-Soviet conflict.

As you know, they have had their ambassa-
dore back in Moscow for some time. And you
also know that they have been acting in a way
which is quite dilferent than they have ever
acted before. They have gone to embassies aU
over Western Europe and tliis hemisphere pre-
senting their case against the Chinese, which is
really quite unusual. They have gone into West
Germany, for example, and pleaded their case
and pointed out that the Chinese are responsible
and they aren't. It's pretty clear that they are
really preoccupied with the Chinese problem.
They moved a lot of equipment toward the
border.

So I don't believe that it's that. And the word

Department of State Bulletin

we get back throiigh diplomatic sources is that
I they plan to let us know. But I think they have
their problems.

Q. Mr. Secretary., soTne of the Navy spokes-
men ielieve that the Soviet Union is practicing
seapower diplomacy. They have had a flotUla
in the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico., and
noio they have got over 60 ships in the
Mediterranean. Would you want to comment on
that?

A. Yes. Since 1967, in the Mediterranean, they
have varied from having about 30 ships — and
I"m speaking of both combat and auxiliary
ships — to about 60. Recently, they have had
really a high point; they have had about 63
vessels in there.

We have not noticed any correlation between
their naval activity and political activity as
such. But we are watcliing it very closely ; and
as you know, NATO particularly has been ob-
serving this. And they are going to take any
necessary action to be sure that the security of
the area is not in any way impaired.

Contingency Plan With Thailand

Q. On the subject of the contingency agree-
ment loith Thailand, do you regard this as a
common and standard type of agreement of this
sort? Or do you regard it — does it give you any
concern?

A. No, it doesn't give me any concern, and
I think it has gotten sort of blown out of
proportion. It's a contingency plan, and it's
based on a lot of assumj)tions, just as all mili-
tary planning is. And we have a good many of
them. All nations have a lot of contingency mili-
tary plans. Obviously, they can't be made pub-
lic. If they were made public, they wouldn't be
of any value.

Now, that is all this is. It was started in 1964,
completed in 1965. It's an old plan. It's pur-
suant to the SEATO Treaty. It expressly pro-
vides that it cannot be operative, that it's just
for planning purposes, and that it requires a
mutual agreement and consent of both nations
liefore it could ever become operative.

So I honestly don't see what the problem is.
I have talked — I have sent a long letter to Sena-
tor Fulbright. It's something that we haven't —
that we were not involved in, we are not re-
sponsible for. And we are perfectly willing to
make it available for his inspection and the in-

spection of the committee. Two of the Senators
have already seen it, and I vmderstand Secre-
tary Laird has extended an invitation — and
Senator Fulbright, I think, has accepted — for
hmch to discuss the matter. So I don't really
believe it's a problem.

Q. Then why was it necessary to enter into
the agreement?

A. It isn't an agreement. It's like all military
plans, it's a contingency plan. And as you know,
the President of the United States, all of us in
the administration, say that it has no binding
effect. It's a plan pursuant to the SEATO
Treaty, just as we have plans pursuant to trea-
ties all over. NATO has a lot of military plan-
ning, contingency planning. All nations do.

Now, that is all it is. And the President has
agreed that it doesn't have any binding ef-
fect. The Prime Muiister of Thailand has said
so. The Foreign Minister of Tliailand has
said so. The Foreign Minister announced yes-
terday that it had no binding effect.

Now, why we keep insisting that it somehow
is binding I don't understand. It isn't binding.
It's a contingency plan. We are willing to let
the Senate look at it. And it has no meaning
beyond that.

Q. Mr. Secretary., would it require action by
Congress before it became effective?

A. Well before it gets to Congress, it would
require action on the part of both governments,
just as if it hadn't existed. Any plan requires
action on the part of both governments. And
whether you have one in existence or whether
you took one up a week before trouble arises, it
requires action on the part of both govermnents.

Now—

Q. What about Congress?

A. Well, it depends, of course, on what was
involved finally. As I say, this plan assumes a
lot of things which obviously wouldn't all oc-
cur, just as all military planning does. I mean,
the actual military situation never really fits
into a plan completely.

Now, in terms — I think what Congress prob-
ably is concerned about is the prospect that
somehow we could be dragged into another land
war in Thailand. And I have said to the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee and the House
Foreign Affairs Committee that we fully un-
derstand the necessity for support of any mili-

September 8, 1969

205

tary venture both by Congress and the public.
If there is one thing that Viet-Nam has made
clear, it's that.

Now, we will, to the full extent of our abil-
ity, get the advice of Congress, consult with
them along the way, and in any approi^riate
circumstances we will get their consent.

Q. Mr. Secretary, you said earlier that the
United States did its part in contributing to
the lull. Has that situation changed since the
enemy resumed its activity, or are we still —

A. No, it has not changed.

Q. Mr. Secretary, in connection with Viet-
Nam, what are the -prospects for what some
people have called '■'-territorial accommoda-
tions^' ivhere there are areas where the enemy
has bases and strong either support or control
of the population wliere we donH send our mili-
tary forces, and vice versa. Is that the situation
on the ground in some areas now?

A. Well, I wouldn't want to describe it quite
that way, I think, on the broad question that
you pose. If the other side wanted to negotiate
a political settlement and they did have politi-
cal strength in certain areas, I think that would
be a factor we'd have to consider. But at the
moment, I don't think it's under consideration.

The War in Nigeria

Q. Mr. Secretary, as head of the State De-
partment, do you see any reasons for optitnism
in regard to the Nigerian war, now in its second
year?

A. No, unfortvmately, I don't. It's a tragic
war. We applaud the efforts of so many people
who have attempted to help, the latest being the
efforts of Pope Paul. The chiefs of state of the
Organization of African Unity are going to
meet next month. All we can say is that we
hope that some negotiated settlement could be
worked out.

We have made, as you know, the largest con-
tribution in terms of food and medicine. In
other words, we have done more than our part
in a humanitarian way. And we have urged
others to attempt to help in resolving the prob-
lem. It is one of those problems that occur in
foreign affairs, and it's extremely difficult. I
must say that I don't see any particular hoj^e.

Q. Mr. Secretary, Ambassador Lodge has re-
turned to this country for consultation, at a

time when it appears there is absolutely no
progress of any sort in Paiis, unless it is prog-
ress in circles. Why should he come back now
for consultation?

A. Well, I agree with you that there cer-
tainly has been very little progress in Paris.
We always have hope that something may
develop, and we are constantly attempting to
think of new approaches, new suggestions, new
ways to discuss our common problems.

He is going to talk with the President and
me in San Francisco tomorrow. We're going
back to San Clemente and have further dis-
cussions about it, still hopeful that we can find
some avenue that will lead to negotiations that
will result in peace. So far we haven't found
any willingness on the part of the other side
to enter into meaningful discussions. i

Q. Mr. Secretai-y, you have said that we
dont have any ground combat troops in Laos.
But it is a fact Jcnown to everybody, even
though not conceded by the last administration
or this one, that we are bombing in Laos, that
we have special force units in Laos. What is
our coTnmitjnent to the Government of Laos?

A. Well, we have, as I said a little earlier —
under the Geneva accords we have all pledged,
and the nations who were involved pledged, the
independence and neutrality of Laos. And
our commitment is the same as other nations',
and that is we hope that they will remaia
independent.

At the moment, there is the very serious
threat of aggression by the North Vietnamese.
We haven't any commitment beyond what you
have just referred to. We do not have combat
troops in Laos. We are quite concerned about
the problem. But there hasn't been any
particular deterioration since my last press
conference.

President Nixon's Trip to Romania

Q. Mr. Secretary, would you address your- ;
self to the Presidents visit to Romania on two
scores? One, has it complicated and hurt our
relations with the Soviet Union? And number
tioo, what about the reports that yoxtr people in
the State Department didnH want tlie President
to go to Romania?

A. Well, let me talk about the latter part of
your question first. I don't know where those
reports emanated from. The President spoke to

206

Department of State Bulletin

I me about 10 days before he decided to announce
his trip to Eomania, and I was enthusiastic
about it. It was consistent with everything that
I had said. If you go back and look at my state-
ments about attempting to improve our rela-
tions with all countries, and whether they are
in Eastern Europe or Communist China, I had
indicated that we were willing to do that.

Now, I talked with the top people concerned
with Eomania in the Department, and they
agreed with me. They all thought it was a fine
idea. So I just don't know where the stories
emanated from. It may well be that some of the
subordinates in the State Department had some
questions about it.

And I think any one of these trips does
involve pros and cons. There are certain risks
and advantages and disadvantages. And I don't
think the fact that someone suggested that there
might be some disadvantages is a really serious
matter. I would hope that in all these cases
people in the Department will express their
honest points of view. But I didn't detect any
opposition to the trip. And certainly I was
enthusiastic about it.

Now, the first part of your question, dealing
with the result of the trip — I think that the
result of the trip has been very good. I think it
was most successful. I haven ■t--there is no way
of knowing whether it has affected the Soviet
thinking or not. And as I said in Australia, I
don't think we can conduct our foreign policy
based on whether it's going to make Communist
China unhappy or the Soviet Union unhappy.
We are going to try to improve our relations
with all countries, includmg countries in
Eastern Europe.

On the trip as a whole, I tliink that the trips
that we took were extremely successful. And I
think that our prestige in all the countries that
I visited has never been higher. I didn't detect
any opposition on the part of government ofii-
] cials, on the part of the public, on the part of
' the press, or anywhere else, about our policies in
Asia ; with a single exception of some question
raised in the Republic of China about our new
policy toward — in the Republic of China con-
cerning our new policy toward Communist
China, I didn't find any reservation about our
policy. It met with enthusiastic response in all
of these countries.

Q. Mr. Secretary, along with this China pol-
icy., are you at all concerned that this may he
at least making it a hit difficult for the Soviet

Union to get around to talking on the SALT
matter ivith us?

A. No, I am not. And I don't see why it
should. I mean I don't see why, if we make sen-
sible approaches to Communist China and we
indicate a willingness to become more friendly
with them and improve our relations, in the
hope that we can reduce tensions in that area —
why that should cause the Soviet Union to have
any doubts about their willingness to pursue
the SALT talks. I just don't understand that
logic. And if they are reasoning that way, then
we cannot figure out their logic because it is so
illojrical.

U.S. Policy Toward Communist China

Q. In connection with the China question,
you talked about it a great deal on your recent
trip. Is this administration deliberately head-
ing into or toward a two-Chinas policy? Do we
recognize both the mainland regiine and the
regime on Formosa?

A. No, I don't think we are headed in any
generalization of that kind. What we have said
is our policy. We have taken initiatives in both
the field of trade and travel. And we intend in
the future, if we think it is wise, to take further
steps in that direction. We would like to enter
into discussions with Communist China. After
that, depending on their reaction, if they show
any interest in improving relations, then we
will decide how to proceed.

But we want to make it clear that their isola-
tion from the rest of the world is of their own
choosing. It is not our policy ; it is their policy.
And if they have this belligerent attitude
toward the rest of the world and toward the
United States, it is their attitude, their
belligerency.

Q. Mr. Secretary, I have been frying to in-
voke your considerable legal ability to ask a
legal question which concerns the Thai and
Laotian situation. It has been contended on
the Hill — or it has been stated as a matter of
record — that when the SEATO Treaty was up
for discussion. Secretary Dtdles said that '■'■con-
stitutional processes,^'' as defined in the treaty,
meant consideration by the executive branch
and by the legislative branch. Noio, you have
said here this morning that the administration
will, to the fullest extent possible, get the advice
of Congress and consult with them in any fu-

September 8, 1969

207

ture operations concerning the use of troops.

A. And I said their consent, when
appropriate.

Q. Their consent when appropriate. Well, is
it possible for you to say in any 'broad way in
regard to the application of a treaty, such as the
SEATO Treaty, whether in your legal jjidg-
ment constitutional processes do involve action
hy the legislative branch as well as by the execu-
tive branch, or do you define it more narrowly?

A. Well, I tliink that when we say "constitu-
tional processes" it involves a whole bundle of
things. Now, in terms of declaration of war, ob-
viously it requires action by the Congress. In
other areas it may not. But it may require con-
gressional action — I mean appropriations, all
kinds of things, require congressional action.

But what I am saying, rather than trying to
now decide and to tell you what we do under
any given set of hypothetical facts — which I
think would be most unwise— I do want to say

that we intend to do our utmost to consult with
Congress, to get their advice, and to get their
approval and in any appropriate circumstance
get their consent.

We don't have any intention of having a run-
ning battle with Congress. And I have a feeling
that some of this is sort of an appendage that
is a hangover from bygone days. It is not our
attitude. We are not going to do that. And I
woixld hope that in the discussions that Secre-
tary Laird has with Senator Fulbright this
could be made clear.

Certainly Thailand is not asking for any-
thing. Thailand has said yesterday that they
will not ask for any help from us by way of
armed forces, either in terms of insurgency
created by internal conditions or insurgency
resulting from outside instigation and support
and direction. I don't know how you could say
it more directly than that.

The press : Mr. Secretary, thank you, sir.

A. OK— thank you.

31st Plenary Session on Viet-Nam Held at Paris

Following is the opening statement made by
Philip C. Habib, acting chief of the U.S. dele-
gation, at the 31st plenary session of the meet-
ings on Viet-Nam at Paris on August 21, to-
gether with the text of an August 13 statement
by U.S. Senators on the treatment of American
prisoners of war, which Mr. Habib distributed
at the meeting.

Press release 247 dated August 21

STATEMENT BY MR. HABIB

Ladies and gentlemen : The United States
and the Government of the Republic of Viet-
Nam have put forward a series of reasonable
proposals for the settlement of the Viet-Nam
war. We are waiting for you to respond and
engage in serious discussions of the issues.

Your side has continually denigrated and
vilified our proposals and our motives. You
have also failed to face up to and deal with
some of the most important issues. The with-

drawal of non-South Vietnamese forces is a key
issue. Yet you continue to insist upon unilateral
withdrawal from South Viet-Nam of United
States and Allied forces, while North Viet-
namese forces remain behind. That cannot be
considered a serious proposal — nor is it reason-
able. The basic terms of our position can be
stated simply : mutual withdrawal of all non-
South Vietnamese forces from South Viet-
Nam and free choice for the people of South
Viet-Nam.

Mutual withdrawal is essential if the people
of South Viet-Nam are to be ensured the oppor-
tunity to exercise freely the right of self-
determination. We will not agree to imilateral
Allied withdrawal. The withdrawal of our
forces must be linked to the withdrawal of
North Vietnamese forces.

I^t me recall the specific proposals for
mutual withdrawal made by President Nixon
on May 14, 1969.' He proposed that :

' Bulletin of June 2, 1969, p. 457.

208

Department of State Bulletin

— As soon as agreement can be reached, all non-
South Vietnamese forces would begin withdrawals
I'i'om South Viet-Nam.

— Over a period of 12 months, by agreed-upon stages,
the major portions of all U.S., Allied, and other non-
South Vietnamese forces would be withdrawn. At the
eud of this 12-month period, the remaining D.S., Allied,
and other non-South Vietnamese forces would move
into designated base areas and would not engage in
combat operations.

— The remaining U.S. and Allied forces would move
to complete their withdrawals as the remaining North
Vietnamese forces were withdrawn and returned to
North Viet-Nam.

— An international supervisory body, acceptable to
both sides, would be created for the purpose of veri-
fying withdrawals and for any other purposes agreed
upon between the two sides.

— This international body would begin operating
in accordance with an agreed timetable and would
participate in arranging supervised cease-fires.

There can be no negotiated settlement to the
war in Viet-Xam unless you are prepared to
withdraw all North Vietnamese troops and ele-
ments from South Viet-Nam, Laos, and Cam-
bodia back to North Viet-Nam. We are flexible
as to how this withdrawal is arranged and car-
ried out. As President Nixon said on May 14 :

If North Viet-Nam wants to insist that it has no
forces in South Viet-Nam, we will no longer debate the
point — provided that its forces cease to be there and
that we have reliable assurances that they will not
return.

In setting forth your views on withdrawal,
as on many other issues, you have tried to avoid
the problems and principles that must be faced.
You continually repeat your insistence on your
own demands, and you distort our position in
order to evade discussion of the real issues. Your
voice is that of the propagandist, not the
negotiator.

We do not choose to debate your tortured
propaganda. We do not believe anyone is con-
vinced by your exaggerations, your misconcep-
tions, or your false allegations. Your statements
about the war, its origins and its conduct, are
tlioroughly inaccurate and self-serving. Your
words and your actions are inconsistent with
peaceful intentions. They underline your con-
tinued reliance on violence and terror. They
illustrate your lack of interest in negotiating a
settlement and your misuse of these meetings
for purposes of propaganda.

We have set forth reasonable proposals, and
we are prepared for serious negotiations. Only
when you begin to address the real issues and
show an interest in serious negotiation shall we
be able to move toward an end to this tragic war.

I wish to add a few remarks on another

subject. On August 13, 40 members of the
Senate of the United States signed a statement
condemning North Viet-Nam's treatment of
American prisoners.^ These Senators speak on
this issue for all Americans.

The Senators denounced your continued re-
fusal to inform the families which of the miss-
ing men are alive and which are dead. I wish
to underline for your attention some of the
things they said :

It is hard for us to understand how Hanoi can main-
tain so callous a position. By our own standards, this
kind of cruelty imposed on innocent bystanders is both
repugnant and virtually unthinkable.

Yet it may be that North Vietnam hopes through
such cruel pressure to influence the policy of the United
States toward the Vietnam conflict.

If this is their intention, they are doomed to failure.
Neither we in Congress, nor the Administration, nor
the American people as a whole, nor indeed the fami-
lies directly affected, will be swayed by this crude
attempt.

The Senators endorsed the position taken by
the United States Govermnent in protesting the
mistreatment of American prisoners. They also
said:

With the Administration, we too ask Hanoi to prove
the "humane and generous" policy it claims to follow
in treatment of prisoners by naming the men in cap-
tivity, by immediately repatriating the sick and
woimded, by permitting impartial inspection of prison
facilities, by assuring proper treatment of all prison-
ers, by making possible a regular flow of mail, and by
undertaking serious negotiations for the prompt re-
lease of all American prisoners in their custody.

We shall now hand you copies of the complete
senatorial statement, with the request that you
consider it carefully. This demand for humani-
tarian treatment of our prisoners reflects the
view of all who cannot accept your excuses, your
self -justification, or your continued neglect of
commonly accepted standards.

TEXT OF SENATORIAL STATEMENT
OF AUGUST 13

Along with Americans everywhere, we too rejoiced
with the families of the three servicemen freed from
North Vietnamese captivity.

These gallant men emerged from their ordeal physi-
cally weakened, but unwavering in their courage and
loyalty.

Yet even as we share the joy of their release, our
happiness is clouded by the knowledge that 1,365 other
American families are stiU waiting — some for the re-

^ Two additional Senators, Howard W. Cannon, Nev.,
and Ted Stevens, Alaska, also signed the statement.

September 8, 1969

209

lease of a husband or son, some even for definite word
whether a loved one Is dead or alive.

For many of these families, the North Vietnamese
could devise no subtler cruelty than their persistent
refusal even to provide a list of names of the prisoners
in their custody. Each of us regularly receives poignant
letters from parents and wives of the more than 1,000
men who are missing and thought to be prisoners of
the North Vietnamese and the more than 300 known
to be in custody.

When, they ask, will our men be able to come home?

And, all too often, how can we find out if they are
still alive?

It is hard for us to understand how Hanoi can main-
tain so callous a position. By our own standards, this
kind of cruelty imposed on innocent bystanders is both
repugnant and virtually unthinkable.

Yet it may be that North Vietnam hopes through
such cruel pressure to influence the policy of the United
States toward the Vietnam conflict.

Though we may differ in our views on the future
course of American policy in Vietnam, we are firmly
united in support of the position on our prisoners made
clear both by the present Administration and by its
predecessor.

In 1967, for example, the United States formally
protested mistreatment of American prisoners and
urged North Vietnam to observe the provisions of the
1949 Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War.'' Equally important, our government
asked Hanoi to permit impartial observers to verify
its claims that our men were being treated humanely —
claims contradicted by a growing body of evidence
that prisoners were being subjected to emotional and
physical duress.

Indeed, Hanoi had threatened a year earlier to put
American prisoners on trial as war criminals, a clear
violation of the Geneva Convention. Fortunately, they
were dissuaded from their plans by worldwide pro-
tests against this extreme form of inhumane
treatment.

Efforts to help our servicemen held by North Viet-
nam have been pursued with equal vigor by the present
Administration. Secretary of State Rogers, Secretary
of Defense Laird, and Ambassador Lodge in Paris have
all pressed North Vietnam in recent months for com-
pliance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention.
In particular, they have urged such basic steps as
repatriation of sick and wounded prisoners and the
furnishing of a list of men actually in North Viet-
namese hands.

This latter, most basic, request was brutally rebuffed
by North Vietnamese representative Xuan Thuy in

'For a Department statement of May 8, 1967, see
Bulletin of May 29, 1967, p. 825.

Paris, who flatly refused even to identify the American
prisoners held in his country so long as the United
States "continued its aggressive war in Vietnam."

This obvious attempt by Hanoi to capitalize on our
deep concern for these men, and to turn it to their
propaganda or political advantage, is inhumane and
inexcusable.

We urge Hanoi not to be misled by our divergences
on policy into believing that we are not united on this
issue of simple humanity. Cruelty of the kind being
practiced in this instance by North Vietnam can serve
only to increase our determination and, in the words
of Ambassador Lodge, "cannot have a favorable effect
on our negotiations."

We therefore pledge our full support to the Admin-
istration in its efforts on behalf of the American service-
men held captive in North Vietnam.

With the Administration, we too ask Hanoi to prove
the "humane and generous" policy it claims to follow
in treatment of prisoners by naming the men in cap-
tivity, by immediately repatriating the sick and
wounded, by permitting impartial inspection of prison
facilities, by assuring proper treatment of all prison-
ers, by making possible a regular flow of mail, and by
undertaking serious negotiations for the prompt re-
lease of all American prisoners in their custody.

And, finally, we urge the governments, the states-
men, and the ordinary men and women around the
world who spoke out against "war crimes trials" in
1966 to make their voices heard once more. Then, as
now, the issue was not political but humanitarian —
and Hanoi responded to the force of world public
opinion. If that force can again be mobilized, this too
may contribute to inducing from Hanoi greater respect
for human decency and for the rule of law.

Following is the complete list of Senators signing
the statement:

Democrats :

Birch Bayh, Ind. ; Alan Bible, Nev. ; Robert C. Byrd,
W.Va. ; Howard W. Cannon, Nev. ; Alan Cranston,
Calif.; Thomas F. Eagleton, Mo.; Allen J. Ellender,
La. ; Mike Gravel, Alaska ; Fred R. Harris, Okla. ;
Philip A. Hart, Mich. ; Ernest F. Hollings, S.C. ; Harold
E. Hughes, Iowa ; Henry M. Jackson, Wash. ; Thomas
J. Mclntyre, N.H. ; Walter F. Mondale, Minn. ; Joseph
M. Montoya, N.Mex. ; Edmund S. Muskie, Maine ; Gay-
lord Nelson, Wis. ; Claiborne PeU, R.I. ; William Prox-
mire. Wis. ; Abraham Ribicoff, Conn. ; William B.
Spong, Jr., Va. ; Joseph D. Tydings, Md. ; and Harrison
A. Williams, Jr., N.J.

Republicans :

Gordon Allott, Colo. ; J. Caleb Boggs, Del. ; Edward
W. Brooke, Mass. ; Marlow W. Cook, Ky. ; Peter H.
Dominick, Colo. ; Barry Goldwater, Ariz. ; Charles E.
Goodell, N.Y. ; Robert P. Grifl3n, Mich. ; Edward J.
Gurney, Fla. ; Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., Md. ;
George Murphy, Calif. ; Robert W. Packwood, Oreg. ;
James B. Pearson, Kans. ; Charles H. Percy, 111. ;
Richard S. Schweiker, Pa. ; Hugh Scott, Pa. ; Ted
Stevens, Alaska; and Strom Thurmond, S.C.

210

Department of State Bulletin

President Nixon Meets With Chancellor Kiesinger
of the Federal Republic of Germany

Kurt Georg Kiesinger, Chancellor of tlie Fed-
eral Repitlilic of Germany, made an official visit
to Washington August 7-9. Following are an ex-
change of remarks between President Nixon and
Chancellor Kiesinger at a welcoming ceremony
on the South Lawn of the White House on Au-
gust 7 and their exchange of remarks and joint
statement issued after their meeting on
August 8.

EXCHANGE OF GREETINGS

White House press release dated August 7

President Nixon

I want to take this opportunity to extend on
behalf of 200 million Americans a very warm
welcome to the Chancellor of the Federal Re-
public to our country, and particularly a warm
welcome of the millions of Americans who are
proud of their German background, including,
incidentally, my wife, whose mother was bom
in Germany, and our two daughters, who there-
fore are one-fourth German.

Mr. Chancellor, as you come here today, this
visit is tremendously significant because the dis-
cussions that now are taking place on East-West
relations revolve around the problem of Eu-
rope and the heart, of the problem of Europe is
the Federal Republic.

I know from our previous discussions, and
from my analysis of events in Europe, that your
country has almost inevitably been the focus of
not only discussion but sometimes of violent at-
tack. Sometimes I am sure that you and your
colleagues and those who live in the Federal Re-
public and those who live in Berlin must think
that you are somewhat lonely with all of the at-
tacks that are made on you, at least verbally.

We just want you to know that here in the
United States we proudly stand with you as
friends and allies. Here in the United States
we are proud to welcome you as the leader of
your country to our nation.

I know that the talks that we will have will

continue — as did our talks in February, when I
visited your country — to advance the cause of
our mutual defense but, beyond that, to expand
the great alliance of which we are a part into
one which will deal not only with those problems
that result from fear but with the more exciting
problems in which we can make progress to-
ward the peace and the understanding in all
areas which people throughout this world so
deeply seek.

Finally, I would add — having come recently
from a visit to Eastern Europe, knowing, there-
fore, that what seems to divide Eastern Europe
from Western Europe may be a barrier which
seems insurmountable at times — that deep down
the peoples of all of Europe, of all of the world,
for that matter, are determined to be together,
together in their search for peace and together
in their determination to have progress.

Having seen all this, I know that the spirit of
our talks and the result of our talks will be most
helpful, most helpful because you, coming from
the Federal Republic, are so keenly aware of
what it means to live in a divided country.

Mr. Chancellor, finally, I simply want to say
to you that I will always remember the warm
welcome that we received on our visit to your
country, in Bonn and Berlin. I can assure you
that everyplace you go in the United States you
will receive an equally warm welcome from all
of your friends in America.

Chancellor Kiesinger^

First of all, thank you very much, Mr. Presi-
dent, for these very kind words of welcome that
you have extended to us on your own behalf and
on behalf of the American people.

I, for my part, would like to extend to you the
cordial and respectful greetings of the German
people living in the Federal Republic of Ger-
many, and I know that I could extend this to
mean and include the entire German people.

You have mentioned, Mr. President, the ties
that exist between our two nations, through the

' Chancellor Kiesinger spoke in German.

September 8, 1969

211

fact that many Germans have come over here to
America, and in that way, Mr. President, they
are participating. My two grandcliildren today
are citizens of the United States and in fact
citizens of Washington, and I should like to say
that they rejoice in this relationship, this direct
tie that exists.

We have had, several times, the opportunity
of talking to each other and exchanging our
views.

I am gladly remembering your stay in Bonn,
when you came at the time as a private citizen,
and you came to me and spoke to me about your
ideas concerning the situation in the world and
the situation of the United States. I must say
that you spoke very clearly.

Now in these 2 past years since I have been
here at this place last time, and at that time
greeted by President Lyndon B. Jolinson, in
these 2 years a lot of things have happened in
the world. You, Mr. President, have been elected
President of the United States ; and very soon
after having taken that very high office, you
have come to Germany.

I will never forget the very overwhelming
impression during the long drive from Tempel-
hof Air Field in Berlin to Charlottenburg
Castle, the drive of many miles where hundreds
of thousands of Berliners cheered you and ex-
pressed to you their confidence and trust in your
personality and in your policy.

I was here again, for a sad occasion, par-
ticipating in the funeral of that great son of the
United States, President Eisenhower, and at
that occasion also we had the opportunity of
exchanging views.

I say a lot has happened during these 2 years.
A lot has happened in the world, a lot that causes
us concern in Europe, too.

I just recall the events in Czechoslovakia and
the military intervention of the Soviet Union.

We know, Mr. President, that you are under-
taking everj' effort in order to secure peace and
consolidate peace in tliis world. In that under-
taking of yours, you enjoy the wholehearted
support and sympathy of the German people
and tlie wholehearted support of my Govern-
ment, any support that we are capable to give.

It is not an easy task, and it is not one that
one will resolve overnight. What is required is
patience and that power of endurance which
many people in our hectic times imfortunately
no longer have. But I know that you, Mr. Presi-
dent, have that patience and that power.

We wish you luck, and wherever you are di-
recting these efforts — be it in Viet-Nam, be it in

your efforts to find a solution to the Middle East
conflict, be it in your attempt to improve the
situation with Europe — you can be sure that
wherever we can we will cooperate with you in
these efforts.

We are looking forward to the attempts. We
are closely following and sympathetically fol-
lowing all the attempts you are undertaking in
tliis respect and especially in these days when
you try to get into contact with the Soviet
Union in trying to improve the situation in and
around Berlm and between the two parts of
Germany.

Let me tell you that we are grateful to you, to
the United Kingdom and to France for taking
that initiative and that we hope that that initia-
tive will be successful. Without illusion, but
with a firm determination never to slacken in
our efforts toward peace in this world, we shall
continue to support and join our efforts with
those of your administration.

]\Iay you, the representative of the great
leaders of the Western World, succeed ; and as
I said, we shall do our share in contributing to
that. May you succeed in securing to the nations
and to the world the achievement of their long
aspiration to enjoy the happiness of freedom and
the blessings of peace.

What human beings are capable of doing, I
think, has been most strikingly demonstrated to
us by Americans in these very weeks ; that great
event, the landing of the first human beings on
the moon, has proved what humans are capable
of doing. This feat should encourage us to try
and join our forces, the forces of all mankind. I
think if all mankind joined forces we would be
living the days where we would really be able
to experience what the combined efforts of men
of good will are capable of achieving.

Thank you again, Mr. President, for this very
kind and honoring reception, and I am now
looking forward to exchanging views with you.

EXCHANGE OF REMARKS

White House press release dated August S

President Nixon

I want to express on behalf of all of us who
have had the opportunity to talk to you and your
colleagues our appreciation for your making
this journey and for paying us this visit.

Our talks in February in Bonn were ex-
tremely useful, and our talks here in Washing-
ton have been equally useful — even more so,

212

Department of State Bulletin

because we were able to go into matters that
then we could only touch upon at the beginning.
We were further along, and we were able to get
into more depth and more detail.

As we complete these talks, I would say first
that the joint statement that has been issued sets
forth some of the substance. Beyond that, I
would add that the bilateral relations between
our two countries have never been closer. They
will continue to be close, because we are friends,
we are allies, and each coimtry is proud of that
alliance and of that friendship and will seek to
maintain it.

However, clearly beyond our bilateral rela-
tions, we are glad that you came, because it was
very valuable for me to get your views on the
situation in Europe generally and in the world.
It is vitally important that we recognize that
tlie best thinking of the world's statesmen must
be applied to the terribly difficult problems we
face in the world.

Finally, I would say that when I speak of our
alliance, it is truly an alliance in the very best
sense. It threatens no one. It is an alliance
which is strong enough to defend ourselves but
also strong enough to negotiate with those who
might oppose us — negotiate as freely, as can-
didly, as openly as we possibly can with the
thought that we can reduce those tensions that
divide the world, that we can bring down the
barriers that divide the world and that divide
Europe. This is our goal, and I believe we have
made progress in achieving that goal.

Thank you.

Chancellor Kiesinger

May I say first that I and my countrymen who
are here are deeply impressed by the cordiality
and generosity of the hospitality we found here,
which you gave us, and likewise deeply im-
pressed by the i"esults of our consultations.

I was very glad that we had no difficult bi-
lateral problems to talk about, so we found time
to cover all the field of world politics.

I must confess, Mr. President, that you, in a
masterful way, portrayed this picture of world
politics, wliich impressed me deeply. It is a very
sound policy. I just said to you, listening to you
when you summarized the results of our discus-
sions, that I should have wanted our people to
listen, to be aljle to listen to you, because I am
quite sure that that would have been most valu-
able because they would have seen that the lead-
ing power of the West is led by a statesman of
clear and realistic outlook.

I am glad to say that I fully agree with what
you said in our talks, and that is not only a
polite formula. I am quite sure that this visit
vrill contribute to strengthening the bonds of
friendship and cooperation between our two
countries, within NATO and outside NATO.

I wish you full success, Mr. President, in
whatever you have started to do.

JOINT STATEMENT

White House press release dated August 8

President Nixon and Chancellor Kiesinger is-
sued the following joint statement at the con-
clusion of their meeting at the White House on
August 8 :

The President and Chancellor Kiesinger are
very pleased to have had the opportunity to meet
together during the past two days and to con-
tinue their personal consultations on important
issues which they had begun during President
Nixon's visit to Germany in February. They
agreed that the meetings just concluded were
extremely useful. They were characterized by
an atmosphere of warm friendship and mutual
confidence which is an important element in re-
lations between the United States of America
and the Federal Republic of Germany.

During their meetings President Nixon and
Chancellor Kiesinger agreed on the importance
of staying in close communication with one
another. In order to assure that they will be able
to commimicate rapidly in case of emergency,
the President and the Chancellor have agreed to
the establishment of a "hot line" between the
White House and the Chancellor's office. The
line will be installed as soon as technical
arrangements are completed.

The Chancellor and the President exchanged
views on the international situation. In par-
ticular, they discussed the full range of issues
affecting relations between East and West, in-
cluding prospects for strategic arms limitation
talks and broadening discussions on European
security. They agreed on the desirability of con-
tinuing efforts to bring existing international
conflicts to a just end, to achieve progress toward
disarmament and to seek to eliminate the causes
of tensions in Europe. The President and the
Chancellor agreed that negotiations to this end
are desirable. The Chancellor welcomed the op-
portunity for full consultation in NATO on the
strategic arms limitation talks and on issues
affecting European security. The President as-
sured the Chancellor that the United States

September 8, 1969

213

would take full account of the interests of its
Allies in the strategic arms limitation talks.
They were of the opinion that progress in stra-
tegic arms limitation is interrelated with a cli-
mate faA'orable for dealing with long-existing
European problems.

President Nixon took the opportunity during
the meetings to give Chancellor Kiesinger a de-
tailed account of the impressions he gained dur-
ing his recent trip to Asia and Komania.

Chancellor Kiesinger reported on develop-
ments in Berlin and Germany which have oc-
curred since the last meeting between the Chan-
cellor and the President. Chancellor Kiesinger
and President Nixon share the liojDe that the
Soviet Union will respond in a constructive
manner to the tripartite initiative aimed at im-
proving the situation in and around Berlin and
between the two parts of Germany. President
Nixon expressed his strong support of the efforts
of the Federal Republic of Germany to alleviate
the hardships that result from the division of
Germany.

The Chancellor and the President reaffirmed
their conviction that the North Atlantic Alli-
ance is an essential instrument in the mainte-
nance of i>eace and stability in the North
Atlantic area. They agreed that the proposed
NATO committee on the challenges of modern
society would add a new dimension to the Alli-
ance and give it a direct part in the challenging
task of marshalling resources of member nations
to improve the quality of life for all people.

The President and the Chancellor welcomed
the recently-concluded offset agreement between
the United States and the Federal Eepublic
which they regarded as symbolic of the deter-
mination of the two governments to cooperate
in the maintenance of a sound defense posture
within the necessary framework of economic
stability.

The Chancellor and the President expressed
satisfaction over the agreement envisioned on
Special Drawing Rights which is one important
step to an orderly development of the interna-
tional monetary system. The President and the
Chancellor are confident that agreement on
SDR's will facilitate the continued advance of
world trade and investment. President Nixon
outlined his Government's resolve to bring in-
flation mider control and to strengthen the posi-
tion of the dollar as a world currency. In the
interest of international trade and monetary de-
velopments, the Chancellor and the President
agreed on the continued necessity of maintain-
ing closest cooperation between the United

States and Germany. Both opposed additional
barriers to international trade.

Chancellor Kiesinger reported to the Presi-
dent on recent developments in the European
Community and on prospects for future de-
velopment. The President affirmed that the
United States has consistently sujjported Euro-
pean unity, and expressed his conviction that
European nations will move forward in a way
which will meet their interests and at the same
time contribute to an international climate of
cooperation and prosperity.

On the subject of bilateral teclmological co-
operation, the Pi-esident and the Chancellor wel-
comed the progi-ess made, especially in the field
of space research, where the joint Project Helios
is of great importance. They agreed to continue
and to widen this cooperation.

The Chancellor extended the invitation to the
astronauts of Apollo 11 to visit Germany as liis
guests in the near future.

At the conclusion of their talks the President
and the Chancellor expressed their renewed con-
viction that the close undei*standing and har-
mony of interests between the United States
and the Federal Republic provide a soimd basis
for continuing constructive cooperation between
the two countries and, beyond that, constitute a
very important element of strength in the search
for the resolution of international problems and
the acliievement of a just and lasting peace to
which both countries are dedicated.

U.S. and Hungary Reach
Understanding on Certain Matters

Press release 242 dated August 15

As the result of U.S.-Hungarian talks in
Budapest, letters have been exchanged reflect-
ing understanding reached on the following ■
points : the establishment of a Hmigarian com- l|
mercial office in New York City, means of pay-
ment of the Hungarian surplus property debt
that was incurred following World War II, and I
staffing of the United States Embassy in Buda-
pest and the Hungarian Embassy in "Washing-
ton. It was also noted that the United States
would begin making Federal pension ijayments
to certain beneficiaries in Hungary.

The exchange of letters followed discussions
between Hungarian Deputy Foreign Minister
Bela Szilngyi and United States Ambassador
Alfred Pub an.

214

Department of State Bulletin

Eighth Anniversary,
Alliance for Progress

FoUowlng is a statement issued on August 16
by Cliarles A. Meyer, Assistant Secretary for
Inter-American Affairs and U.S. Coordinator,
Alliance for Progress.

Press release 243 dated August 16

Sunday, August 17, marks the eighth anni-
versary of the Alliance for Progress. On Sun-
day millions of people in this hemisphere could
well pause for a moment to reflect that never
before in history have so many dedicated men
and women participated in a program of devel-
opment on such a scale — never have so many
done so much for so many.

In the years ahead, the Americas will build
on the foundation laid down in these past 8
years. Those who dreamed 8 j'ears ago, those of
us who have been part of that dream for 8
years, and those who will be the architects of
ongoing adaptations will be united, even though
unknown to one another, by a dedication to a
nation, to a hemisphere, and to a way of life.

U.S.-Japan Medical Science
Committee Meets at Washington

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT

The Department of State announced on
July 31 (unnumbered iiress release) that the
fifth meeting of the U.S.-Japan Cooperative
Medical Science Committee would be held at the
Department of State in Washington Au-
gust 7-8.^ Previous meetmgs were held in
Honolulu, Hakone, Palo Alto, and Tokyo.

The Committee was to hear and review reports
from the six panels on tuberculosis, leprosy,
cholera, parasitic diseases, viral diseases, and
malnutrition on their research activities during
the past year and their proposals for future
projects. The Committee was to make prepara-
tions for a comprehensive review of the first 5
years of its activities and discuss future policies
of the U.S.-Japan Cooperative Medical Science
Program.

On August 4r-6, the panels on parasitic dis-
eases and viral diseases were to convene at the

Pan American Health Organization head-
quarters in Washington to review their past ac-
tivities and consider future research activities
designed to meet the objective of the program.
This objective is to undertake a greatly ex-
panded joint research program of medical sci-
ence in areas of human health which are of
great concern to all the people of Asia.

The primary emphasis of the Conmaittee has
been placed on medical research as the basis for
advanced knowledge necessary for effective
action.

TEXT OF JOINT COMMUNIQUE -

The fifth meeting of the United States-Japan
Cooperative Medical Science Committee was
held at the Department of State in Washington,
D.C., on August 7 and 8, 1969. This was the
third meeting of the Committee held in the
United States but the first held in Washington.
Welcoming remarks were made by Mr. U.
Alexis Jolinson, Under Secretary of State for
Political Affairs, and Minister Bunroku Yo-
shino, Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of
Japan, Washington, D.C. Dr. Colin MacLeod,
Chairman of the United States Delegation, and
Dr. Toshio Kurokawa, Chairman of the
Japanese Delegation, alternately chaired the
meeting.

The Committee listened to reports of achieve-
ments of cooperating scientists working under
the supervision of the Joint Panels responsible
for research on tuberculosis, leprosy, cholera,
viral diseases, parasitic diseases, and malnutri-
tion, respectively. These efforts have been under-
way for several years, and now show significant
results, some of which are summarized at the
end of this Communique.

The Committee recommended that two sub-
committees be appointed, one to consider exten-
sion of cooperative activities into new areas of
medical science important for understanding
health problems of the people of Asia, and the
other to prepare a report of the work accom-
plished during the first five years of the activi-
ties of the Joint Committee.

The Committee decided to meet again in
Japan on September 3 and 4, 1970, and to hold

' For names of members of the U.S. and Japanese
delegations, see Department of State press release
dated July 31.

' Issued at Washington on Aug. 8 at the close of the
meeting.

September 8, 1969

215

conferences sponsored by the Joint Panels on
Cholera and Tuberculosis just prior to those
dates.

Members of the Committee and Panel Chair-
men from both countries attended Panel con-
ferences on viral vaccines with special emphasis
on Japanese encephalitis, and on parasitic dis-
eases, respectively, held on August 4, 5 and 6,
1969, immediately prior to the meeting of the
Committee itself.

Highlights of scientific results achieved under
the joint program are now summarized:

The most intensive efforts of the U.S.-Japan
tuberculosis research are aimed at understand-
ing mechanisms of immunity against the dis-
ease. Cooperating investigators are attempting
to standardize animal models which may clarify
some of the immunological problems of
tuberculosis.

Important accomplishments in leprosy re-
search included recognition of genetic differ-
ences in individuals which reflect variation in
ability to metabolize drugs used in treatment of
the disease, and differences in strains of leprosy
bacilli which reflect variation in their responses
to the same drugs. Strains resistant to certain
drugs have been isolated from patients who,
after initial favorable response, subsequently
failed to benefit from treatment with those
drugs. To the well-established teclmique for cul-
tivating leprosy organisms in the foot pads of
mice, there has been added the use of thymecto-
mized and irradiated mice, and the hamster.

Joint studies have clarified the nature of
cholera antigens necessary for developing effec-
tive vaccines. Vaccines of the toxoid type are
now being prepared commercially and will be
available soon for field trials. It has been found
that the severe, dehydrating diarrhea of cholera
is due to an exotoxin produced by the cholera
vibrio. Immunity directed against this toxin
may be more important in affording protection
against the disease than is immunity directed
against cholera cell wall components. Experi-
mental cholera has been produced in baby mice.
This achievement has provided a valuable new
tool for study of treatment and immunity of
this disease.

Joint studies of virus diseases have empha-
sized development of improved vaccines for the
control of Japanese encephalitis. Efforts are
directed towards purification and concentration
of viral antigens based on killed virus material

for purposes of immunization, and towards de-
velopment of attenuated virus, living or dead,
as vaccine base. Field trials of such vaccines are
planned.

Laboratory models of the parasitic diseases,
schistosomiasis and filariasis, in various experi-
mental hosts, have provided new inf onnation on
the mechanisms of disease production, inmiu-
nity and treatment. The development of new
effective drugs has been reported. New knowl-
edge of the genetics and physiology of snails
and mosquitoes, which serve as carriers of
schistosomes and filariids, offers promise of
biological control of the infection.

In the field of malnutrition, Japanese and
American investigators are pursuing leads
which may clarify variation in the nutritional
requirements of different racial groups. It has
been discovered that dietary deficiency in preg-
nancy and in infancy may lead to impaired men-
tal development, learning and behavior in the
child. Such children show abnormal electro-
encephalograms and a deficiency in numbers of
brain cells. Correction of such deficiencies may
be possible through dietary reinforcement early
in life. It has been discovered that nutritional
anaemias involving folic acid deficiency are of
considerable public health importance. J

The Panel Chairmen also reported on con- |
ferences and meetings sponsored by the several
panels.

U.S., Chile, Ecuador, Peru Hold
First Session of Fisheries Talks

DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT

The Department of State amiounced on
July 29 (press release 219) that Ambassador
Donald L. McKernan, Special Assistant for
Fisheries and Wildlife to the Secretary of State,
would be chairman of the U.S. delegation to a
fisheries conference vsdth Chile, Ecuador, and
Peru begimiing on July 30 in Buenos Aires,
Argentina.

On July 3 the United States invited those
countries by diplomatic note to meet with the
United States for this purpose. On July 9 the
three countries, meeting in Lima, Peru, an-

216

Department of State Bulletin

nounced their acceptance of the U.S. invitation.
Several U.S. Government departments and
the fishing industry are represented in the dele-
gation, which includes: Charles A. Meacham,
Commissioner of Fisheries and Wildlife, U.S.
Department of Int«rior; Ernest V. Siracusa,
Deputy Chief of Mission and Charge d'Affaires
a.i.. Embassy of the United States, Lima, Peru ;
Rear Adm. Joseph B. McDevitt, Judge Advo-
cate General, U.S. Navy ; William P. Stedman,
Jr., Counti-y Director for Ecuador and Peru,
Department of State.

JOINT DECLARATION '

Delegations from the Governments of Chile,
Ecuador, Peru and the United States have met
in conference in the city of Buenos Aires from
the 1st to the 19th of August, 1969, to seek prac-
tical solutions to problems of mutual concern
related to fishing in the Southeast Pacific. To
this end, the delegations of the four govern-
ments had at their disposal for the meeting the
exceptional and pleasant facilities graciously
provided by the government of the Argentine
Republic.

The above delegations have engaged in inten-
sive discussions on the different points of the
agenda which was approved at their prelimi-
nary meeting. This agenda was based on the
imderstanding of the juridical positions of the
parties regai-ding maritime jurisdiction and on
agreement not to debate or alter any aspects of
these positions.

As a result of these conversations, carried out
in a permanent atmosphere of cordiality and
respect, the four delegations arrived at a better
understanding and appreciation of the points of
view of their respective countries. It is antici-
pated that further exploration of the subjects of
the agenda and a continuation of the talks in
the future may permit an understanding and,
eventually, an agreement, always within the
purpose of not altering the above-mentioned
juridical systems. As a means of improving this
opportunity for eventual agreement, the delega-
tions agreed to suspend their meeting, in order
to carry out the necessary consultations with
their governments during the recess.

Delegations from the four coimtries will meet

again in the course of the present year, in the
city of Buenos Aires, at a date that the cor-
responding governments will agree to and
announce in a short time.

The results of the talks carried out in the dif-
ferent conunittees will be considered by the gov-
ernments in order to promote greater progress
in the next session of the conference.

The delegations of Cliile, Ecuador, Peru and
the United States want to express their deep
gratitude to the Argentine Government, its
Ministry of Foreign Relations and their
pertinent authorities for their contributions to
the administrative work of the conference, for
their splendid and imparalleled cooperation and
for the deep sense of hemispheric concern that
their contribution has meant for the develop-
ment of the meetings.

United Nations Day, 1969

A PROCLAMATION!

On December 22, 1968, the crew of Apollo Eight
transmitted a television picture of the entire planet
Earth. The inescapable unity of mankind was dramati-
cally and forcefully presented for aU to see.

The realization of this unity has been at the heart
of the United Nations since its creation twenty-four
years ago. The United Nations has long realized that
the world abounds with problems which call for a co-
operative international approach : problems of conflict
and war and the keeping of peace in troubled areas ; the
settlements of disputes by i)eaceful methods ; the con-
trol and reduction of nuclear and other weapons, and
many other problems ranging from hunger to the shar-
ing of the manifold benefits of science and technology.

Yet the history of the last twenty-four years tells us
that the realization of mankind's unity is not enough ;
men must constantly strive to see to it that in inter-
national practice, as well as physical fact, mankind
realizes its unity.

On United Nations Day, 1969, it should be the resolve
of the American people that our Nation, conscious of
mankind's growing interdependence on this planet,
shall be a steadfast partner with all who strive for the
fulfillment of those hopes.

Now, THEEEFOKE, I, RICHARD NixoN, President of the
United States of America, do hereby proclaim Friday,
October 24, 1969, as United Nations Day and I urge the
citizens of this Nation to observe that day by means
of community programs which will contribute to a
realistic understanding of the United Nations and its
associated organizations.

I also call upon officials of the Federal and State
governments and upon local officials to encourage

' Issued at Buenos Aires on Aug. 19 upon recess of
the conference.

' No. 3924 ; 34 Fed. Reg. 13357.

September 8, 1969

361-053—69 3

217

citizens' groups and agencies of commnnleation — press,
radio, television, and motion pictures — to engage In
appropriate observance of United Nations Day tills
year in cooperation with the United Nations Associa-
tion of the United States of America and other inter-
ested organizations.

Moreover, in anticipation of the Twenty-fifth An-
niversary Year of the United Nations, I call upon the
citizens of this Nation and its citizens' groups to plan
such community and organization programs for 1970 as
will contribute both to an appreciation of the accom-
plishments of the United Nations and to a realistic
understanding of its aims, its limitations, and its
potentialities.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
this fifteenth day of August, in the year of our Lord
nineteen hundred and sixty-nine, and of the Independ-
ence of the United States of America the one hundred
and ninety-fourth.

Interoceanic Canal Study Commission
Submits Fifth Annual Report

Following is the text of a letter from Presi-
dent Nixon transmitting to the Congress the
fifth annual report of the Atlantic- Pacific Inter-
oceanic Canal Study Commission.'^

White House press release dated August 6

To the Congress of the United States:

I am transmitting the fifth annual report of
the Atlantic-Pacific Interoceanic Canal Study
Commission. The report covers the period
July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1969.

The Commission has now completed its data
collection activities on all of the five sea-level
canal routes under investigation. Field opera-
tions have been terminated, and all facilities
and equipment not removed from the routes
have been turned over to host-country govern-
ments under the terms of the survey agreements.
Within the United States the office and labo-
ratory evaluations of route data are well-
advanced, as are the Conunission's studies of

' H. Doc. 91-14.3, 91st Cong., 1st sess. Single copies of
the 56-page illustrated report are available upon re-
quest from the Atlantic-Pacific Interoceanic Canal
Study Commission, Room 6217, 726 Jackson Pi. NVT.,
Washington, D.C. 20506.

the diplomatic, economic, and military consid-
erations that bear on the feasibility of a new,
sea-level canal constructed by conventional or
nuclear excavation. The Commission will ren-
der its final report not later than December 1,
1970, pursuant to its authorizing legislation.

During the year the Atomic Energy Com-
mission conducted the third of its planned series
of nuclear excavation experiments in support of
the canal investigation. Although all the now
planned nuclear cratering experiments will not
be completed soon enough for full evaluation by
the Commission, it is expected that the Com-
mission will be able to reach general conclusions
as to the feasibility of employment of nuclear
explosives for canal excavation.

This anniversary sees the canal investigation
entering its final phase, and I take great pleasure
in forwarding the Commission's fifth annual
report to the Congress.

Richard Nixon
The White House, August 6, 1969.

Nominations to International Court
of Justice Announced

Press release 228 dated August 1

Tlie United States National Group in the
Permanent Court of Arbitration announced on
August 1 its nomination of four candidates for
election to the International Court of Justice.
They are :

Hardy C. Dillard of the United States
Eduardo Jimenez de Arechaga of Uruguay
Thanat Khoman of Thailand
Constantin Stavropoulos of Greece

Dr. Arechaga is a professor of international
law and a member of the International Law
Commission. Dr. Thanat Khoman is Foreign
Minister of Thailand and a former member of
the International Law Commission. Mr. Stav-
ropoulos has for many years been Legal Coimsel
of the United Nations.

Professor Dillard is James Monroe Professor
of Law at the University of Virginia Law
School and a past president of the American
Society of International Law. He was bom in

218

Department of State Bulletin

Xew Orleans on October 23, 1902, and received
a B.S. degree from the United States Military
Academy in 1924, an LL.B. degree from the
University of Virginia Law School in 1927, and
was a Carnegie Fellow at the University of Paris
1930-31. He has taught at the University of
Virginia Law School since 1931 and was dean
of the Law School from 1963 to 1968. In 1953
Professor Dillard was Fulbright Lecturer at
Oxford University and in 1957 was Carnegie
Lecturer at the Hague Academy of Interna-
tional Law. He is a member of the Coimcil of
the American Law Institute, a Fellow of the
American Bar Foundation, and a member of
the boards of editors of the American Journal
of International Law and the American Journal
of Comparative Law. He is the author of nu-
merous articles and reviews, including many
articles on international law and legal
education.

The nominations were made by the U.S. Na-
tional Group in response to an invitation from
the United Nations Secretariat to nominate, not
later than August 1, 1969, successors to the
members of the International Court of Justice
whose terms expire on February 5, 1970. The
new members of the International Court will be
elected by the General Assembly and the Se-
curity Council of the United Nations during the
21th regular meeting of the General Assembly,
commencing in September.

Among the members of the Court whose terms
win expire next February is Philip C. Jessup
of the United States. Prior to liis election to the
Court in 1960, Judge Jessup was Hamilton Fish
Professor of International Law and Diplomacy
at Columbia Univei'sity.

The members of the United States National
Group in the Permanent Court of Arbitration

are Kichard R. Baxter, professor of interna-
tional law at Harvard Law School; Herbert
Brownell, former U. S. Attorney General, now
a practicing lawyer in New York City ; Herman
Phleger, former Legal Adviser of the Depart-
ment of State, now a practicing lawyer in San
Francisco; and John R. Stevenson, Legal
Adviser of the Department of State.

Congressional Documents
Relating to Foreign Policy

91st Congress, 1st Session

On Unking Reserve Creation and Development Assist-
ance. A staff study prepared for the Subcommittee
on International Exchange and Payments of the
Joint Economic Committee. April 1969. 14 pp. [Joint
Committee print.]

1969 Joint Economic Report. Report of the Joint Eco-
nomic Committee on the January 1969 Economic
Report of the President, together with minority, sup-
plementary, and dissenting views. H. Rept 91-142.
April 1, 1969. 165 pp.

Political Advisers to U.S. Military Commanders. Analy-
sis and assessment submitted by the Subcommittee on
National Security and International Operations of
the Senate Committee on Government Operations.
April 10, 1969. 18 pp. [Committee print.]

Extension of Temporary Duty Suspension on Certain
Classifications of Yam of Silk. Reports to accompany
H.R. 2718. H. Rept. 91-159; April 23, 1969; 3 pp.
S. Rept. 91-218 ; May 29, 1969 ; 3 pp.

Increasing U.S. Participation in the International De-
velopment Association. Report, together with sup-
plementary views, to accompany H.R. 33. S. Rept.
91-100. May 8. 1969. 15 pp.

Extension of Temporary Duty Suspension on Elec-
trodes for Use in Producing Aluminum. Report to
accompany H.R. 10015. S. Rept. 91-220. May 29,
1969. 2 pp.

Temporary Suspension of Duties on Metal Scrap. Re-
port to accompany H.R. 10016. S. Rept 91-221.
May 29, 1969. 4 pp.

September 8, 1969

219

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES

The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

Following are statements made in the 36th
session of tlie United Nations Trusteeship Coun-
cil hy Christopher H. Phillips, V.S. Representa-
tive on the Trusteeship Council; Edward E.
Johnston, High Corwmissioner of the Trust
Territory of the Pacific Islands and UjS. Spe-
cial Representative on the Trusteeship Council;
and Olympic Borja and Chutomu Ninvwes,
special advisers to the U.S. delegation.

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR PHILLIPS, JUNE 6

U.S./D.N. press release 54 dated June 6

The United States delegation is pleased to
report on our administration of the Trust Ter-
ritory of the Pacific Islands during the past
12-month period. It is a great privilege for me
personally to be able to do so for the first time.

In reviewing the United States administra-
tion of the territory not only during the past
year but earlier, I have been struck by the im-
mense problems which the territory faces —
problems of geography, of history, as well as
economics.

But I have also been struck by the serious
effort which the United States has made to meet
its obligations under the charter and under the
trusteeship agreement to bring about the polit-
ical, economic, educational, and social develop-
ment of the people of the territory. I have been
particularly impressed by the new determina-
tion displayed by Secretary of the Interior
Hickel and by our newly appointed High Com-
missioner to accelerate this process.

Althougli the U.S. Special Representative
will discuss in detail the developments which
have taken place in the territory since the last
Trusteeship Coimcil session ^ and will describe
the program for the future, I would like to
highlight a few of the major events of the past

' For U.S. statementa m.ade In the Trusteeship
Council on May 27 and June 5, 1968, see Bdixetin of
Aug. 26, 1968, p. 225.

year and several of the new steps in progress.

The Congress of Micronesia met twice in
1968-69. Its regular session in July and August
last year was followed, on November 5, 1968, by
the third general election in the territory. Three
new Senators (two of whom had served in the
previous House) and 10 new Representatives
were elected at that time. Thus the democratic
process continued to gain strength in the ter-
ritory, with new members filling one-third of
the seats in the Congress. The new Congress
held its first regular session in Januaiy of this
year.

The year has also witnessed the beginning of
a major effort which will result in the complete
rehabilitation of Bikini Atoll and the return
and resettlement of its former inhabitants. The
return will have to be gradual, however, since
not only is it necessary to complete the cleanup
efforts, which were begun in March 1969 and
should be completed by this coming fall, but
steps also must be taken to rebuild the villages,
replant coconut trees, and otherwise prepare for
the people's return. Once the clearing of debris
is completed, the former residents of Bikini will
participate in the replanting and rebuilding.
Tliey are currently involved in the planning
process for resettlement.

New Team of Officials

Perhaps the most significant event of the year
has been the assumption of responsibility for
the territory by a new team of dedicated and
experienced officials, both in Washington and in
the territory.

Tliis team is headed by Secretary of the In-
terior Walter J. Hickel. Secretary Hickel, as the
Council is undoubtedly aware, is a former
Governor of Alaska and thus brings not only
administrative experience and skills to his new
position but also the invaluable experience of
having worked with territorial problems from
the territorial point of view.

220

Department of State Bulletin

Secretary Hickel has also appointed a new-
Director for the OiSce of Territories in the De-
partment of the Interior, Mrs. Elizabeth Far-
rington of Hawaii, who is responsible for the
Washington end of the territory's administra-
tion. We are happy to have her with us today as
a member of the United States delegation.

Finally, President Nixon has appointed a new
High Commissioner for the trust territory, Mr.
Edward E. Johnston. Mr. Jolmst