Full text of "Department of State bulletin"

• 



tQ^£5AtM 




Given By 
U. S. SUPT. OF DOCUMENTS 



^^mmwmmm'mm 



^Ae/ ^e^a^t7}^en{/ x)^ tnate/ 



•y";.: "z-'S^WiWi-'j.'' 



::ULTURAL RELATIONS: U.S.— U.S.S.R. 
Efforts to Establish Cultural-Scientific 
Exchange Blocked by the U.S.S.R 403 

PROVISIONAL RECTIFICATIONS ALONG 
THE WESTERN GERMAN FRONTIER 
Communique of the Belgium, France, 
Luxembourg, Netherlands, United King- 
dom, and the United States 427 

THE NORTH ATLANTIC PACT: A HISTORIC 
STEP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF 
AMERICAN FOREIGN RELATIONS • By 

Charles E. Bohlen 428 

THIRD SESSION OF THE ILO PERMA- 
NENT MIGRATION COMMITTEE • Article 

by Irivin Tobin 421 



For complete contents see back cover 



Vol, XX, No. 509 
April 3, 1949 





^.^..^y^. bulletin 



Vol. XX, No. 509 • Publication 3479 
April 3, 1949 



For sala by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.B. Oovemment Printing Office 

Washington 25, DC. 

Prick: 

M Issues, domestic $6, foreign $7.29 

Single copy, 16ceDt« 

The printing n{ this publication lin« 

been approved hy the Director of the 

Bureau uf tbc Diiileet (February 18, l*) 19) 

^ote: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Clt»tlon of the Dkpartment 
OF Statp: imi.iiiTiN as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a tceekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Division of Publicationa, 
Office 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 urork of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
press releases on foreign policy issued 
by the White House and the Depart- 
ment, and statements and addresses 
made by the Presidrnt and by the 
Secretary of State and other officers 
of the Department, as trell as special 
articles on ixirious phases of inter- 
national affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to which th« 
United States is or may beconte a 
party and treaties of general inter' 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, at 
xcell as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 






Cultural Relations: U.S.— U.S.S.R.^ 

Efforts to Establish Cultural-Scientific Exchange Blocked by the U.S.S.R, 



PARTI: INTRODUCTION 

The United States and the Problem 
of Cultural Exchange 

THE free interchange of ideas and persons be- 
tween nations has always been a cardinal Amer- 
ican principle. In a real sense the cultural 
structure of the United States has been derived 
from an interplay of outside and native influences. 
Without outside contacts the United States could 
not have developed as it has, nor would its further 
development be enriched and diversified without a 
continuation of such contacts. 

The United States is not unique in its inherit- 
ance of cultural influences from other countries of 
the world ; all civilized nations owe a considerable 
debt to ideas and art forms borrowed from outside 
their borders and amalgamated with their own 
contributions to produce a new and richer product. 

Individuals and private groups in the United 
States have long actively sponsored cultural- 
exchange activities. In addition, the United 
States Government recently adopted an official 
program for international information and educa- 
tional exchange. Its objectives, as defined by law, 
are "to promote a better understanding of the 
United States in other countries, and to increase 
mutual understanding between the people of the 
United States and the people of other countries." ^ 

Cultural Exchange and the U.S.S.R. 

Because relations between the United States and 
the U.S.S.K. are obviously of great importance to 
both nations and to the world at large, special em- 
phasis has been placed by Americans on cultural 
exchange with the U.S.S.R. 

It became apparent during World War II that 
an interchange of ideas and a mutual understand- 
ing between the two peoples would constitute a 
prime necessity for the building of a healthy world 
society after the victory was won. The political, 
economic, and cultural traditions of these two 

April 3, 1949 



peoples differed so vastly that only a tolerant ac- 
ceptance of each other's viewpoints could prevent 
unfortunate misunderstandings. This problem 
was recognized as particularly acute when it be- 
came obvious that in the postwar era the United 
States and the Soviet Union would control the pre- 
ponderance of the world's military and economic 
power. Therefore, as early as the Moscow con- 
ference of October 1943, the American Government 
sought to establish an information and exchange 
program with the Soviet Union. The United 
States continued these efforts throughout the re- 
mainder of the war and long after the military vic- 
tory was gained. The postwar Aiiibassador to the 
Soviet Union, Gen. Walter Bedell Smith, succinctly 
stated the American interest in cultural inter- 
change when he said, "the more the people of the 
world know about each other, the better they under- 
stand each other, and the less friction there is likely 
to be." ^ 

It soon became obvious, however, that the Soviet 
Government did not share the U. S. Government's 
views on the importance of creating genuine instru- 
ments for bridging the gulf between the two 
peoples. In putting forth concrete proposals for 
cultural cooperation, American officials consistent- 
ly encountered obstacles placed in their path by the 
Soviet authorities. Whether U. S. efforts were 
aimed at establishing an exchange of students, pro- 
fessors, and artists, or books, research findings, and 
films, the results were the same. The uncoopera- 
tive attitude, the lack of interest, the interminable 
delay or absence of replies by the Soviet Govern- 
ment thwarted American attempts at establishing 



Department of 



' Released to the press Mar. 24, 1949. 
State publication 3480. 

' United States Information and Educational Exchange 
Act of 1948, Public Law 402 (80th Cong., 2d sess.). 

' United States Information and Educational Exchange 
Act of 1947 : Hearings Before a Special Subcommittee of 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representa- 
tives, SOth Congress, 1st session, on H. R. 3342, p. 48. 



403 



cultural relations between the two wartime Allies. 
Furthermore, since the middle of 1947 the Soviet 
Government has embarked upon a campaign to 
place every sort of legal obstacle (backed by the 
threat of heavy punishment) in the way of contacts 
between the Russian people and foreigners and to 
instill in the Russian people the belief that cul- 
tural relations with Americans and other outsiders 
carry a threat to the well-being of the Soviet state, 

American Technical and Material Aid to the 
Soviet Union 

Long before the war the Soviet Union experi- 
enced concretely and to its benefit one of the many 
contributions which American culture could render 
in the international field — namely, technical know- 
how. Stalin himself acknowledged this in 1932 
when he stated that "We observe the United States 
with interest, since this country ranks high as re- 
gards science and techniques. We should be glad 
to have American scientists and technicians as our 
teachers and in the technical field to be their 
pupils."* 

During the first two Five Year Plans of the 
Soviet Union, American aid in technical assistance 
and equipment was very important, as the Soviet 
Government itself admitted. During a conversa- 
tion with Eric Johnston, then president of the 
U. S. Chamber of Commerce, in June 1944, Mar- 
shal Stalin asserted that about two thirds of all 
the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Union 
had been built with United States material aid or 
technical assistance. Col. Hugh Cooper was in- 
strumental in designing and constructing the 
power project Dneprostroi, for which, according 
to the Soviet encyclopedia, the machinery was fur- 
nished by the American concerns, Newport News 
Drydock Company and General Electric. In the 
play Tempo, which deals with the efforts of the 
Soviet people in building a construction project, 
the American engineer, Mr. Carter, a symbol of 
efficiency, was patterned after Colonel Cooper. 
John Littlepage was a principal technical adviser 
to the Soviet gold-mining trust. United States 
engineers helped design and erect the most famous 
plants of the Soviet auto, truck, and tractor indus- 
try, which was modeled after the United States 
automotive industry. Stalin himself said that 
"The Soviet Union is indebted to Mr. Ford. He 



'Amtorg, Review of the Soviet Union (no. 2, Fel)ruary 
1934), "Soviet Industry and US," by Z. Suchliov, p. 45. 
•Eric .lolinston, We're All In It, p. 81. 



helped build our tractor and automobile indus- 
tries." ' The Ford Motor Car Company, Hercules 
Motor Car Company, Electric Autolite Company, 
and many others, mentioned in the Bohhaya So- 
vetskaya Entsiklopediya, contributed to building 
of the Soviet automotive industry. The Soviet 
petroleum industry was patterned after the U. S. 
industry, the Entsiklopediya stating that much of 
U. S. equipment and processes was used. Also, 
E konomicheskaya Zhizn (June 26, 1930) credited 
American techniques with increasing the efficiency 
of the sugar industry. Ralph Budd, president of 
Great Northern Railway, was an important ad- 
viser to the Soviet engineers charged with the re- 
organization of railroad transport during the first 
two Five Year Plans. 

Peter Bogdanov, head of Amtorg, said that in 
1930 there were 600 to 700 American engineers in 
the Soviet Union and publicly thanked the many 
American companies and individuals for their aid 
to the Soviet Union. 

During World War II the American people 
contributed to the war effort of their Ally by send- 
ing tlie Soviet Union whole plants, together with 
the newest machinery, and the necessary tech- 
nicians to supervise the erection of the plants and 
the installation of machinery. Much of the equip- 
ment has been invaluable in Soviet reconstruc- 
tion — for example, electric-power-generating 
equipment totaling some one and a half million 
kilowatts capacity (total installed capacity in the 
U.S.S.Ii. at the time of the invasion was less than 
eleven and a half million kilowatts) ; four huge 
refineries using the most advanced Houdry avia- 
tion-gasoline process, which gives a higher-content 
octane than the Soviet ever had ; thousands of 
macliine tools, 50 million dollars' worth of con- 
struction machinery, 1,900 locomotives (in 1935 
only 1,500 locomotives were in operation through- 
out the U.S.S.R.), 427,000 trucks (approximately 
half as many as the U.S.S.R. produced in its entire 
history before the Nazi invasion) ; a lO-million- 
dollar tire plant bought from the Ford Company 
by the U. S. Government and given to the 
U.S.S.R. — to mention but a few of the more nota- 
ble contributions. 

During the immediate postwar period the United 
States exported industrial equipment to the 
U.S.S.R., and at the same time United States engi- 
neers engaged in aiding the Soviet workers rebuild 
Dneprostroi, for which a considerable part of the 



404 



Department of State Bulletin 



key equipment was supplied by the General Elec- 
tric Company. 

The United States supplied more commodities 
to the U.S.S.R. during the period 1917-1947 than 
did any other country ; the total value was roughly 
12 billion dollars, of which 9.5 billion dollars was 
lend-lease material, much of which has been indis- 
pensable in Soviet reconstruction and for which 
the United States has not been remunerated to 
date. From 1921 to 1947 the United States fur- 
nished the Soviet Union with 3.3 billion dollars' 
worth of essential machinery and 2 billion doUai^s' 
worth of metals (1.3 and 0.9 billion dollars' worth 
respectively under lend-lease). (See Soviet Sup- 
ply Protocols, Department of State publication 
2759.) 

The people of the Soviet Union are aware of the 
United States aid to their economy, and they ad- 
mire the technical efficiency of the American engi- 
neer and workman. They also remember the 
tanks, trucks, and food which America sent to 
them during the war against the Nazi, despite their 
Government's attempts to belittle the flow of 
American equipment and foodstuffs to the U.S.S.R. 
The Soviet peoi^le have some notion about the 
high living standards of the American people. 
They realize that the political system which has 
produced such achievements must possess consid- 
erable merit. This situation confronts the Soviet 
Government with a serious problem in its attempt 
to persuade its people that the Soviet system is 
superior, that America is decadent and its people 
starving and oppressed. Yet this it must seek to 
do, since it is essential for the Kremlin to induce 
its citizens to tolerate the obvious failure of the 
Soviet system to provide for their needs and to 
accept, at least passively, the oppressive aspects of 
the Soviet state. It is also necessary to keep gul- 
lible and misguided Soviet sympathizers beyond 
the U.S.S.R.'s borders ignorant of actual condi- 
tions prevailing in the Soviet Union. 

The foregoing considerations in large part may 
explain the refusal of Soviet authorities to permit 
a genuine interchange of ideas and persons with 
the United States. Information about the pros- 
perity and freedom of the world outside the 
U.S.S.R. would leak in ; information about actual 
conditions within the Soviet Union would leak 
out. Seepage in either direction would weaken 
the Soviet Government. 

Soviet authorities are faced in this policy, how- 
ever, with a disturbing balance of alternative po- 

AprW 3, J 949 



tential damages to their regime. On the one hand, 
free interchange of information would weaken 
their iron grip on the Soviet people ; on the other, 
the exclusion of expert knowledge from abroad 
would in the long run hold back the development 
of the backward economy of the U.S.S.R. Per- 
haps this dilemma explains occasional apparent 
inconsistencies in what has otherwise become an 
iron-clad Soviet policy of noncooperation in cul- 
tural exchange. Certainly it suggests the reason 
why the small flow of persons between the U.S.S.R. 
and the United States has included preponderately 
technical and scientific personnel and why the in- 
formation stimulated by these visits has gone in 
one direction only — to the U.S.S.R. 

PART II: CULTURAL EXCHANGE OF PERSONS 

U. S. Attempts To Establish a Basis for Cultural 
Interchange During the War 

While World War II was still in progress, the 
American Government sought to establish the first 
concrete acts of cultural cooperation with the 
Soviet Union which would pave the way for close 
postwar ties. Following the Moscow conference 
of October 1943, Ambassador Averell Harriman 
took the initiative in a note to Foreign Minister 
Molotov, in which he expressed the desire of the 
United States to institute a program of cultural 
interchange in the realization that "The relations 
between our two countries must, to be enduring, 
be based on sympathetic understanding of and 
friendship between our peoples." Mr. Harriman 
requested Soviet approval for American dis- 
tribution in the U.S.S.R. of two bimonthly 
magazines designed to explain to the Russian pub- 
lic the nature of the American war effort and 
the outstanding features of American life; he 
submitted suggestions for direct contact with 
Soviet news editors for the exchange of in- 
formation and the dissemination of American 
news ; he proposed the publication of a daily news 
bulletin for the Embassy and diplomatic missions 
which might also be made available to Tass, the 
Soviet news agency, for distribution as it saw fit ; 
he advocated the continued distribution of Amer- 
ican films to the Soviet Film Committee, the latter 
to negotiate directly with producers in the United 
States if it so wished; and finally he asked that 
VOKS (All-Union Society for Cultural Relations 
Abroad) serve as a contact for "cultural purposes." 
Mr. Molotov replied on December 31, 1943, in a 
letter in which he acknowledged "the importance 



of an exchange of press information between the 
U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. for mutual understand- 
ing between the two peoples" and in which he 
stated that "With regard to . . . the exchange of 
ideas, materials, and assistance in the fields of 
radio and motion pictures, the Embassy of the 
United States and its representatives can count 
on the assistance of the Press Section of Xarko- 
mindel." 

Unfortunately, the implementation by Soviet 
authorities of Mr. Molotov's favorable reply never 
reflected any enthusiasm for the spirit of Mr. 
Harriman's proposal nor any understanding of 
the nature of genuine cultural interchange. Dur- 
ing the succeeding 18 months of the war period, 
Soviet cooperation in advancing the mutual under- 
standing of the two peoples through cultural 
media was indeed much greater than it was after 
the war ended. But even during those relatively 
friendly months Soviet reactions to American 
overtures were hesitant, sporadic, and usually 
artificial. Despite continual efforts from the 
American side, Soviet intransigence made it im- 
possible to build a solid foundation of cultural 
relations upon which to erect a firm structure after 
the war. 

Soviet Passive Resistance to American Overtures 

From the end of the war until mid-1947, the 
Soviet authorities treated American overtures to 
establish cultural interchange with obvious cool- 
ness, delaying aclniowledgement of notes, offering 
various specious excuses for their inability to 
respond favorable to American proposals, or com- 
pletely failing to respond. 

In October 1945, shortly after the termination 
of hostilities, the U. S. Department of State 
evinced its interest in establishing a firm basis for 
postwar cultural relations with the U.S.S.R. 
It informed the Embassy at Moscow that the U. S. 
Government would be interested in Imowing the 
earliest practical date at which the Soviet Union 
would consider sending the Red Army Chorus or 
other similar groups to the United States for a 
tour, possibly in exchange for a visit to the Soviet 
Union of similar United States groups. It also 
expressed the interest of the United States Gov- 
ernment in instituting an exchange of ballet 
groups, theater groups, and orchestras and of hold- 
ing reciprocal exhibits of art, architecture, and 
handicraft as means of increasing the mutual \m- 
derstanding of the Soviet and American people. 



Shortly thereafter, on November 13, 1945, Am- 
bassador Harriman informed Deputy Foreign 
Minister Vyshinsky that the State Department 
would appreciate a frank discussion of the possi- 
bilities of student exchange and asked the Soviet 
Government whether it had any objection in prin- 
ciple to starting such an exchange in the 1946-47 
academic year. A reply was never received to this 
overture. 

In 1946 there were a number of offers on the part 
of various interested groups and individuals who 
hoped to establish cultural interchange with the 
Soviet Union. The United States Office of Educa- 
tion on behalf of an American university sought 
to obtain a Soviet professor to lecture on Soviet 
education for a year, but VOKS, through which 
the request was made, did not respond. Texas, 
Amherst, and Columbia, among other institutions, 
were interested in offering tuition scholarships to 
Soviet students ; the American Council of Learned 
Societies was interested in sending ten or twelve 
professors and research workers to the U.S.S.R. ; 
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and 
Princeton, among others, expressed their desire to 
exchange scientific personnel. Nothing mate- 
rialized. 

In February 1946 the president of Princeton 
University, through the Soviet Ambassador in 
"Washington, extended invitations to the Univer- 
sity's bicentennial celebration to a number of dis- 
tinguished Soviet scholars, including Peter L. 
Kapitsa, L. D. Landau, Sergei I. Vavilov, and 
others. The invitations, extended on two other 
occasions later in the year, never were acknowl- 
edged. The Rockefeller Foundation also ex- 
tended invitations to Professors Ivan Vinogradov 
and Lev 8. Pontryagin without eliciting anj' re- 
sponses. 

An invitation tendered Eugene Mravinsky, of 
the I^ningrad Philharmonic, to be a guest of the 
Boston Symphony in Boston on one of several 
dates kept open for him in October, November, or 
December was unanswered. 

In May and again in July 1946, Sergei Kousse- 
vitzky and the members of the Boston Symphony 
offered to travel to the Soviet Union for twt) weeks 
in September at their own expense and give a series 
of performances, the proceeds to be used for what- 
ever local benefits the Soviet Government might 
select. This offer was not acknowledged. 

In August 1946 the Soviet Ministry of Health 
failed to respond to the proposal of Dr. E. D. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Young, representative of Russian War Relief, to 
provide the Soviet Government witli a complete 
penicillin plant and to work out a mutual exchange 
of scientists, particularly in the medical field. 

Following her visit to the Soviet Union, at the 
invitation of the Soviet Government, Mrs. La Fell 
Dickinson, president of the General Federation 
of Women's Clubs in the United States, offered a 
scholarship to a Soviet girl student, but the Soviet 
Union failed to display any interest. 

In July 1946 Mr. E. C. Ropes and Dr. Lorwin 
of the Department of Commerce discussed with 
the Soviet Ministry of Higher Education pro- 
posals which Cornell University had submitted for 
acceptmg four Soviet students to engage in 
graduate work and give instruction in the Russian 
language. The university did not insist upon any 
reciprocal arrangement. Failing to elicit any re- 
sponse, Cornell found it necessary to abandon the 
project in November. On January 29, 1947, A. 
Samarin, Deputy Minister of Higher Education, 
amiounced that the Ministry regarded the pro- 
posal favorably but could not realize its execution 
during the current 1946^7 year. He did not sug- 
gest that the invitation might be accepted for the 
next academic year, nor did Soviet authorities 
even refer to the matter again. 

On December 16, 1946, the Presidium of the 
Soviet Academy of Sciences received the biog- 
raphy and request of Professor Richard Foster 
Flint of Yale to engage in some field work with 
Soviet geologists and to confer with them on 
Pleistocene features of the U.S.S.R. On March 
31 of the following year the Soviet Government 
informed the American Embassy that since the 
Academy of Sciences would not be working in the 
districts of interest to Flint there was not any 
reason for his visit. 

A Soviet ballet company was invited through 
VOKS to participate in the International Dance 
Spring Festival which was held in New York City 
in 1947 and then to go on tour, but nothing de- 
veloped. Certain Soviet institutions were ap- 
proved under the G. I. Bill of Rights in the hope 
that American veterans might study in the 
U.S.S.R. It was impossible, however, to make 
arrangements for their admittance. 

There were additional proposals similar to the 
foregoing, all of which met with the same lack of 
favorable response from the Soviet Union. 

Through 1946, despite the general recalcitrance 
of the Kremlin in effecting any cultural inter- 
Apr;/ 3, 7949 



change, some persons did visit the Soviet Union, 
while a few Soviet scientists and writers traveled 
in the United States. 

The Soviet authorities cordially received play- 
wright Lillian Hellman ; John Strohm, president 
of the Association of United States Agricultural 
Publications; Edwin S. Smith, President of the 
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship; 
and scientists, including Professors Shapley, of 
Harvard, Langmuir, of General Electric, and 
McBain, of Stanford, who were invited to the 
220th anniversary of the Russian Academy of 
Sciences. The scientists were invited to deliver 
reports to the Academy, and all visitors were 
granted extensive latitude in their sight-seeing. 
However, this spasmodic hospitality, extended also 
to a few additional persons not mentioned above, 
was not long continued. The following year visas 
were denied to such distinguished applicants as 
Dr. George Schadt, Director of the New England 
Laboratories, who was interested in an interchange 
of information on clinical pathology; Reeves 
Lewenthal, representative of the Associated 
American Artists, who sought to acquire firsthand 
information about Soviet art; Dr. Elliott P. 
Joslin, world-famous Boston diabetes specialist; 
and others. 

During the war period American industry had 
opened wide its portals to Soviet engineers, tech- 
nicians, and scholars. This continued in 1946, 
when leading industrial plants and radio corpora- 
tions provided the limited number of young 
Soviet technicians whom the Soviet Government 
permitted to visit the United States with tecluiical 
training in machine tooling and radio manufac- 
ture; and some 15 Russian students working for 
the Ministry of Foreign Trade continued to ob- 
tain technical instruction at Columbia University. 

In 1946 a group of Soviet astronomers, headed 
by Professor A. A. Mikhailov, Chairman of the 
Astronomy Council of the Soviet Academy of 
Sciences, spent six months in the United States, 
where they were familiarized with the latest 
astronomical instruments and research projects in 
astronomy. 

For a ten weeks' period in the early summer of 
1946 the prominent Soviet writers, Ilya Ehren- 
burg, Major General Galaktionov, and Konstantin 
Simonov toured the United States as guests of the 
Department of State. During their visit they 
attended the convention of the American Society 
of Newspaper Editors, which they were invited to 



address. In a farewell article Ehrcnburg, who has 
frequently attacked the United States in full ac- 
cordance with the approved Party line, acknowl- 
edged the freedom of movement afforded him. He 
wrote: "When I traveled through the United 
States I was accompanied by representatives of the 
State Department, and I not only do not complain 
about any restriction of freedom, but I am sin- 
cerely thankful for the attention shown to me."'° 
In November-December 1946 Dr. Thomas Par- 
ran, Surgeon General of the U. S. Public Health 
Service, invited four prominent Soviet doctors, in- 
cluding the eminent Dr. Vasili V. Parin, then Sec- 
retary General of the Soviet Academy of Medical 
Sciences, to make an extensive inspection tour of 
United States hospitals and 12 main cancer re- 
search centers. All the latest scientific develop- 
ments were shown the group during its visit. By 
this time, however, the Soviet Government ap- 
parently began to look with suspicion upon those 
having contacts with the free world. Upon his 
return to Moscow Dr. Parin apparently vanishodi 
Then, possibly as a sequel, the Soviet Minister of 
Health was shortly thereafter dismissed. 

Hopes Raised by Stalin's Statements; 
Ambassador Smith's Notes 

American officials and representatives of Amer- 
ican intellectual and artistic life still were reluc- 
tant to accept the long record of lack of coopera- 
tion as conclusive evidence that the Soviet Govern- 
ment refused to accept cultural exchange on 
principle. They clung to the hope that some rela- 
tively unimportant and nonpolitical factors might 
underlie Soviet intransigence. Even those whose 
study of the basis of Soviet conduct led them to 
consider remote the possibility of effective coopera- 
tion with the U.S.S.R. in the cultural field reserved 
judgment and remained patient. 

Many who had been waiting hopefully believed 
that their patience was rewarded and that the 
U. S. S. R.'s cultural-exchange policy was on the 
verge of becoming cooperative when Stalin him- 
self expressed publicly a favorable attitude in the 
matter. 

On December 21, 1940, during an interview with 
Elliott Roosevelt at the Kremlin, Marshal Stalin 
was asked : "Do j'ou favor a broad exchange of cul- 

•New York Tinim, June 26, l!)4n. 

'/,ooA-, Fob. 4. 10-17. 

'New York Timen, May 4, 1947; Pravda, May 8, 1047. 

•Bulletin of Mar. 2, 1047, p. 303. 

" See pp. 405 and 406. 



tural and scientific information between our two 
nations? Also are you in favor of the exchange 
of students, artists, scientists, and professors?" 
Marshal Stalin's reply was an unequivocal "Of 
course." ' In an interview with Harold Stassen 
on April 9, 1947," Marshal Stalin again expressed 
his assent to the desirability of a cultural ex- 
change. According to the Tass account of the 
meeting : "Stassen would like to know whether J. 
V. Stalin hopes for a wider exchange of ideas, 
students, teachers, artists and tourists in the future 
in the event that collaboration [i. e. economic and 
commercial] is established between the U.S.S.R. 
and the U. S. A. J. V. Stalin replies that this will 
be inevitable if collaboration is established. An 
exchange of goods will lead to an exchange of 
people." Mr. Stassen reverted to this question 
later in the interview in saying (Tass version) : 
"The press, trade and cultural exchange are the 
spheres in which the two systems must find ways 
of setting to right their mutual relations. J. V. 
Stalin says that this is true." 

The U. S. Government accepted Stalin's reply 
to Elliott Roosevelt at its face value. Ambassador 
Smith in February wrote Foreign Minister 
Molotov that the view expressed by Stalin is — 
". . . gratifying to me since, as you know, I have 
strongly advocated such exchange to broaden the 
base of contact which is necessary in order that 
the people of each of our nations may understand 
and appreciate the cultural life and objectives of 
the other. ... I am encouraged by Generalissimo 
Stalin's expression of views to bring to your per- 
sonal attention a number of proposals for ex- 
change of the nature referred to above which 
have recently been made through this Embassy 
by organizations and institutions in the United 
States, and which are awaiting Soviet agreement 
to be put into effect."' 

Ambassador Smith then enumerated a number 
of offers " which had been made, and asserted 
that he was certain that most of them still were 
open to Soviet acceptance. 

After a reasonable period of time had elapsed 
without an}' response from the Soviet Foreign 
Ministry, Ambassador Smith in April passed on 
to Mr. Vj'shinsky a si^ecific proposal to the effect 
that the United States would welcome visits to 
the United States of approximately 50 Soviet 
scholars in various fields of science and cultural 
studies "to confer with American scholars in the 



Deparfmenf of Sfate Bulletin 



same fields on matters of mutual professional in- 
terest," and that it would welcome a similar invi- 
tation by the Soviet Union to American scholars. 
The Foreign Ministry acknowledged receipt of 
the note and advised the American Embassy that 
the note had been forwarded for consideration to 
the appropriate authorities. There the matter 
ended. Ambassador Smith's letter to Mr. Molotov 
was never answered in full. After a delay of 
several weeks the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Af- 
fairs sent to the American Embassy a few sporadic 
notes referring to some but by no means all of 
the proposals made in the Ambassador's letter 
and rejecting them for various specious reasons, 
often transparent, or without explanation. 

Dr. Simmons Visits the U.S.S.R.; Turning Point in 
Soviet Attitude Toward Cultural Excliange 

The American Council of Learned Societies, in- 
terested in establishing cultural exchange with 
the Soviet Union and deciding that perhaps a 
direct approach rather than one through the nor- 
mal diplomatic channels might be more successful, 
sent Professor Ernest J. Simmons of Columbia 
University to Moscow in the summer of 1947. He 
carried specific proposals concerning cultural 
exchange. 

Although the specific proposals which Professor 
Simmons presented offered the U.S.S.R. greater 
benefits than were asked in return, he encountered 
an utter lack of response, delaying tactics, and 
outright refusals based upon obviously trivial 
excuses. 

Professor Simmons proffered five definite invi- 
tations from major universities for Soviet pro- 
fessors of Russian literature and culture, Soviet 
economics, Soviet jurisprudence, international re- 
lations, and Russian history to deliver courses, 
four in English and one in Russian. An American 
Embassy aide-memoire dealing with these invita- 
tions of Columbia, Yale, Chicago, and Washington 
Universities was acknowledged but was never 
satisfactorily answered. 

Not only was Professor Simmons met with offi- 
cial coolness, and his proposals in effect ignored, 
but soon after his return to the United States 
Soviet officialdom deemed it opportune to launch 
a crude personal attack on him for his Outline of 
Modern Russian Literature. In Izvestiya of Octo- 
ber 19, Miss T. Motyleva termed him "the learned 
servant of the 'Yellow Devil' " (Gorky's name for 
the "all powerful" dollar). This personal attack 

April 3, 1949 



was undoubtedly the answer to the proposal sub- 
mitted by Professor Simmons on behalf of the 
American Council of Learned Societies. 

Even the cold reception encountered by Dr. Sim- 
mons did not stem the flow of proposals from pri- 
vate institutions. A Soviet delegation was invited 
to a convention of military surgeons held in Bos- 
ton, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs an- 
nounced in November 1947 that those invited would 
be "unable to attend." 

Invitations extended to either the Moscow or 
Leningrad Ballet and the Moiseyev dance ensemble 
to participate in an International Dance Festival 
in the United States in the spring of 1948 elicited 
no response. As recently as January 1949 Pro- 
fessor Shapley of Harvard submitted a request, 
which as yet has not borne any fruit, to the Soviet 
Ambassador in Washington for Dr. Ambarzumian, 
distinguished Soviet astrophysicist, to present a 
series of lectures at Chicago and Princeton Uni- 
versities. He also asserted that Harvard would 
welcome a visit by Dr. Kukarkin or Dr. Parengago 
of the Sternberg Astronomical Institute in Mos- 
cow, and that M. I. T. and Princeton would be 
pleased to have Professors Alexandrov, Pontri- 
jagin, or others to confer with American mathema- 
ticians on specific mathematical problems, and that 
various universities were interested in having as 
guest lecturers in mathematics any one of half a 
dozen distinguished Soviet mathematicians, such 
as Professors Komogorov, Vinogradov, Golfand, 
Markov, Pontrijagin, Alexandrov, Khintchine, 
and Kurosch. Several of those invited had been 
highly honored by their fellow scientists in the 
United States. In 1948 Professor Ambarzumian 
was elected a member of the American Astronom- 
ical Society; Professors Vinogradov and Gregory 
Shain were elected honorary fellows of the Amer- 
ican Academy of Arts and Sciences, and Dr. Alex- 
ander G. Vologdin was awarded a medal and an 
honorarium by the National Academy of Sciences 
for individual achievement in paleontology. 

From the first proposals of Ambassador Harri- 
man in 1943 for developing cultural interchange 
until Professor Simmons' visit, Soviet officials had 
maintained a practice of either ignoring proposals 
or offering an excuse for refusing a specific one. 
Not before the middle of the year 1947 were rea- 
sons officially proffered which would apply gener- 
ally to all cases. Then, during Professor Simmons' 
visit, he was told by Jacob Malik, Deputy Foreign 
Mmister, that since there were hundreds of appli- 



cants for each place in the Soviet higher schools, it 
was extremely difficult for the Soviet Union to 
accept foreijrn students. Similarly the demand 
for teachers in the U.S.S.R. made it very difl&cult 
to send professors abroad to teach or lecture at 
American universities. Of course this was a spe- 
cious argiunent even theoretically, since the United 
States was willing to accept as students at Amer- 
ican universities at least as many if not more stu- 
dents than the number of Americans who might be 
involved in study at Soviet universities, and simi- 
larly would have been willing to send interested 
professors to lecture at Soviet higher institutions. 
In practice, the excuses appeared even more poorly 
concocted in the light of Soviet policy of extensive 
student exchange with satellite nations. 

On September 25, 194f), Izveatiya announced 
that "The Ministry of Higher Education of the 
U.S.S.R. has made it possible for students from 
Slavic countries to study in institutions of higher 
education in Moscow, Leningrad, Sverdlovsk and 
other cities, where they will go through a full 
course of instruction." On October 2-1, 1946, Mos- 
cow News stated that 500 students from Slavic 
countries were studying in the Soviet Union, and 
ai)parently receiving extraordinary treatment, 
since the article related that the Director of the 
Sverdlovsk Industrial Institute was treating as his 
own sons several Albanians studying there. In- 
formation coming from Seoul. Korea, in December 
1940 related that over 300 Koreans were studying 
in the Soviet Union. By May 1947 there were 
apparently 700 students in the U.S.S.R. from the 
Balkans alone.'' Facts were hardly consistent 
with the Soviet plea of overcrowded schools as an 
excuse for rejecting exchange of students with the 
United States. 

Soviet officials also utilized another excuse for 
the general refusal of all United States proposals 
for exchange of scholars. Deputy Foreign Min- 
ister Malik in his conversation with Ambassador 
Smith and Professor Simmons raised the issue of 
the U. S. Alien Registration Act. He averred that 
Soviet students and professors were unwilling to 
visit the United States, where they would be com- 
pelled to register as agents of a foreign power un- 
der the provisions of that law. Ambassador 
Smith pointed out that he had taken special pains 
to remove this alleged barrier in connection with 



" New York Times, May 7, 1947. 

" Uchitelskava Oaeeta (Teachers Gazette) , Jan. 31, 1948. 



his previous invitation to 50 Soviet scholars. At 
that time he had obtained a ruling by the Attorney 
General to the effect that students traveling to the 
United States to engage in educational pursuits 
would not be required to register under the act so 
long as they limited their activities to cultural ac- 
tivities. While here they could, if they wished, 
engage in political affairs, but if they chose to do 
so, they would then be required to register. To 
this Malik replied evasively that the act still con- 
stituted a psychological hazard for prospective 
Soviet students and professors, though he did not 
explain how. 

Campaign Against Alleged "Ulterior Motives" 
Underlying U.S. Cultural-Exchange Policy 

Although the iUiti-American propaganda cam- 
paign had been increasing in momentum during 
1947. and although the "State Secrets Act'" of June 
1947, a supplementary decree of December 1947, 
and press attacks upon scientists maintaining 
Western contacts were indicative of a new Soviet 
line towards the question of cultural relations with 
the United States, it was not before early 1948 that 
the American proposals were vehemently attacked 
on the ground that they concealed ulterior and evil 
motives. A Soviet Professor Bernstein bitterly 
denounced the Institute of International Educa- 
tion of New York and its director, Stephen Dug- 
ganr- Obviously with official approval, Bernstein 
described the organization as a "monopoly Ameri- 
can institution for international pedagogic rela- 
tions, for training legal 'pedagogic' spies and 
informers, and for establishing an 'American col- 
umn' in every country." 

This article placed Soviet actions of the pre- 
vious three years in proper focus. It verified what 
seasoned observers of Soviet society had known to 
be the underlying cause of Soviet coolness to sug- 
gestions for cultural exchanges: i. e. feelings of 
inferiority, lack of confidence that Soviet ideas 
and ways of life would withstand competition with 
the capitalist world, and stemming from these, 
suspicions that Americans intended eventually to 
undermine the Soviet system, Professor Bern- 
stein's views were only a logical development in 
the increasingly chauvinistic and xenophobic path 
taken by the Kremlin. 

The secrecy act of June 1947 had provided severe 
penalties for Soviet citizens divulging information 
which is regarded in other countries as perfectly 
normal data for publication and free dissemination 

Department of Sfofe Bulletin 



domestically and internationally. The decree 
promulgated in December 1947 forbade any Soviet 
institution other than the Ministry of Foreign Af- 
fairs and the Ministry of Foreign Trade to have 
any relations with representatives of foreign 
states. The perverted apprehensiveness regard- 
ing espionage which Soviet propaganda had beaten 
into the consciousness of Soviet citizens was re- 
vealed in Professor Bernstein's charge of malicious 
intent in the fact that "Students sent abroad by 
the Institute of International Education are ad- 
vised not to confine themselves to their academic 
pursuits, but to study the cultural, political and 
social life of the country to which they are sent, 
make friends with the local students and visit their 
homes, and establish friendly relations with the 
population." Official mentalities so warped as to 
see evil in this vital basis of mutual understanding 
could not be expected to comprehend the American 
approach to studying in other countries, as defined 
by Ambassador Smith : 

"Of course, naturally, all Soviet colleges teach the 
Soviet political ideology and political economy, 
the doctrines promulgated by Marx, Engels, and 
later, Lenin. An American student going there to 
attend a university would study the same thing, 
and I think it well that he should, because I think 
the people of this country ought to understand the 
political ideology that motivates the one other 
country in the world which corresponds to ours in 
size and potential strength." " 

Having disposed of one of the lanes of what 
should be a two-way traffic highway in student 
exchange, Professor Bernstein proceeded to at- 
tack the other. Pointing out that the Institute 
also arranges for foreign students to study in the 
United States, he found that "The selection of 
scholars invited to America, like the selection of 
American professors sent abroad, has a specific 
character. Both, as a rule, belong to the openly 
reactionary camp." 

The patent foolishness of this charge was espe- 
cially laid open when applied to Soviet citizens to 
whom invitations had been extended and to those 
who had actually visited the United States. No 
questions were asked about their politics, and it 
could hardly be said that any of them belonged to 
the "openly reactionary camp," since, if they had, 
they would have been confined to a Soviet concen- 
tration camp. 



Individual Scientists Want Cultural Exchange 

The Soviet Union has been eminently successful 
in exercising almost complete control over the 
actions and words of its citizens, but it has not been 
able entirely to enslave their minds. 

Unfortunately for the Kremlin, men of science 
still think. They realize that as broad as possible 
an interchange of ideas is necessai-y for scientific 
advancement. They understand that widespread 
exchange of information pertaining to projects- 
in-work, to preliminary findings, to new tech- 
niques and methods saves many long hours of 
wasted and fruitless effort and is essential to scien- 
tific progress. Consequently, scientists and men 
of letters in the Soviet Union have been exceed- 
ingly desirous of the development of cultural ex- 
change between the United States and the Soviet 
Union, and for a time freely expressed their views. 
The ill-fated Dr. Vasili V. Parin, when he ad- 
dressed the American-Soviet Medical Society in 
New York in December 1946, said : "It is obvious 
that our plan includes practically the same prob- 
lems as those studied in the U.S.A. It indicates 
once more that modern science is really interna- 
tional in character, and proves once more the need 
for scientific interchange." ^^ 

The Soviet representative on the United Nations 
Atomic Energy Commission, Professor Simon P. 
Alexandrov, recognized the desirability of reduc- 
ing the impediments making cultural interchange 
between his country and the United States dif- 
ficult. He urged an easing of visa restrictions, 
reduced costs of travel between the two countries, 
and an increased study of one another's language. 
Alexandrov strongly advocated the use of the 
press, radio, and movies to promote better under- 
standing, and the desirability of an interchange 
of large numbers of business and professional men, 
engineers and students. 

Even those journalistic pillars of the Soviet way 
of life, Messrs. Ehrenburg, Galaktionov and 
Simonov, wrote the Department of State to thank 
it for its assistance during their visit to the United 
States and said: "We think mutual travels of 
representatives of culture will assist the coopera- 
tion and friendship between our countries." 



" Hearings on H. R. 3342, as cited, p. 52. 
"^^ American Revieio of Soviet Medicine, April 1947, p. 
297. 



April 3, 7949 



However, such views ran contrary to the views 
of the Soviet leadei-s wl>o are desirous of keepin<; 
their people uninformed about the progress tak- 
ing phice in the free world. Consequently, it was 
deemed necessary to launch an all-out attack upon 
the Soviet people to intimidate them and make 
them afraid to engage in any relations with the 
West. 

In June 1947 there was the State Secrets Act, 
by which almost any information became suscepti- 
ble to interpretation as a state secret, so that a 
Soviet citizen would avoid any conversation that 
he might have with a foreigner for fear of being 
charged with violating the act. 

On July 24, 1947, in a broadcast speech on the 
subject of "Soviet Patriotism," a writer, P. 
Vyshinsky, stated that "every Soviet patriot must 
realize the importance of keeping secret our 
scientific discoveries and inventions." " 

The theory behind this statement is that since 
in the Soviet Union the state makes possible the 
education of the scientist, the engineer, and the 
technician, their work becomes completely the 
property of the state. It then becomes a criminal 
offense, from the view of the Soviet leaders, for 
anyone within the Soviet Union to make available 
any of the products of his research to other coun- 
tries, unless with the permission of the state. Add 
to this the theme running through Soviet propa- 
ganda at home and abroad that all the people be- 
yond the Iron Curtain are engaged in a continuous 
espionage campaign to pry loose from the Soviet 
Union the secrets of its "unrivalled discoveries", 
and the reason is clear why the Soviet Govern- 
ment, infallible as always, is acting for the welfare 
of its people in its refusal to participate in cul- 
tural exchange with the West. Recently, to "but- 
tress" its ridiculous contention that Westerners 
are assigned to spy on it, the Soviet Union has 
published the absurdly distorted writings of a 
former administrative clerk of the American Em- 
bassy in Moscow, in which she asserts that every 
American in the Soviet Union, herself excluded, 
is engaged in espionage activities. Implicit is 
the warning that the Soviet citizen should not risk 
involvement by having any contact with these 
spies. 



"Also in Bolshevik, No. 18, 1947, p. 37. 
" Literatumaya Oazeta (Literary Gazette), Aug. 30, 
1947. 

" Partiinaya Zhizn (Party Life), No. 14, 1047. 



Cultural Interchange Becomes Disgraceful and 
Unpatriotic 

Evidently having decided in mid- 1947 that they 
would not engage in any cultural exchange with 
the United States, and in consonance with the 
implication of Vyshinsky *s speech on patriotism, 
Soviet policy-makers began to attack those of its 
citizens who favored or engaged in cultural in- 
terchange. For a scientist or artist to maintain 
any correspondence with foi-eign colleagues be- 
came in Soviet eyes a sin defined as "obsequious- 
ness before bourgeois cosmopolitanism", and took 
on the connotation of a treasonable act. The cru- 
sade against cultural interchange became inextri- 
cably interwoven with spy phobia on the one hand 
and blatant chauvinism in scientific and cultural 
matters on the other. As a result of this atmos- 
phere, scientists, well-known and obscure alike, 
were attacked in the press for having been so "un- 
patriotic" as to publish their works in foreign 
periodicals. 

In September, 1947, A. R. Zhebrak, the Soviet 
geneticist, who had been a delegate to the United 
Nations at San Francisco and who had established 
friendships among American scientists, was at- 
tacked for criticizing the work of a fellow scientist, 
Lysenko, in an American magazine. This act was 
called inconsonant "with an elementary under- 
standing of the civil honor of a Soviet man."" 
Zhebrak was promptly deposed as president of the 
Academy of Sciences of the Byelorussian S.S.R. 
for his crime. 

At the same time, Dr. X. P. Dubinin, of the In- 
stitute of Experimental Biology of the U. S.S.R. 
Academy of Sciences, was blasted for "pandering 
to the West" by publishing articles in foreign 
periodicals. 

The effrontry of an obscure Soviet professor in 
publishing in a French journal material pertain- 
ing to Soviet research in perfume chemistry drew 
a stinging rebuke from a Communist Party maga- 
zine. "Unfortunately," wrote the author of the 
tirade, "persons are still to be found among the 
oflicials of the machinery of state, in particular 
among the scientific workers, who indulge in ob- 
sequiousness and fawning to bourgeois culture." 
Why should any loyal Soviet citizen wish to pub- 
lish his ideas or views in the capitalist press, it was 
asked, when "to have an article published in 
Soviet periodicals is not a smaller, but a greater 
honor than in the foreign periodicals." ^" 

Department of State Bulletin 



In February 1948, Professor Y. I. Frenkel, a 
highly esteemed atomic physicist, was similarly 
called to task for having published some of his 
works abroad, but because of the importance of his 
work to the Government he was not denounced. 

Apparently, despite the State Secrets Act, 
various speeches, and the attacks on scientists for 
having published works abroad, there were still 
many people who believed in the desirability of 
cultural exchange . Therefore, it was necessary to 
strike hard at such evil thoughts by damning those 
holding them before the entire people. This could 
best be accomplished through the medium of the 
stage, and so came into being the "propaganda 
piece". Court of Honor, a viciously anti-American, 
but hardly original play, which is closely pat- 
terned after an earlier Soviet play. Fear, by Afino- 
genov. The play primarily rails against the mis- 
guided villains in the Soviet Union who believe in 
the universality of science and the interchange of 
information. Such a view, it is explained, is dan- 
gerous to hold since all American scientists are 
either intelligence agents or the slaves of monopoly 
corporations anxious to obtain Soviet scientific 
secrets which they can use in their preparations for 
an aggressive war. Thus does the Soviet Govern- 
ment seek to justify to its people its refusal to 
grant visas to such capable medical men as Doctor 
Dixon of the Mayo Clinic and Doctors Hauschka, 
Shimkin, and Shear, who wished to study cancer 
research with the world-famous Soviet Doctors 
Roskin, Klueva, and their associates. 

The many attacks upon eminent men in the 
scientific world, the publication of the ex-Amer- 
ican Embassy clerk's concoctions about American 
espionage, and the scurrilous attacks on American 
scientists and international-minded scientists in 
the U.S.S.R. are all obviously motivated by the 
Kremlin's determination to discourage the Soviet 
citizen from maintaining any contacts with the 
outside world, and to justify the Kremlin's rejec- 
tion of the multifold American attempts to effect a 
genuine program of mutually beneficial cultural 
interchange. 

PART III: EXCHANGE OF PUBLICATIONS 

In its efforts to facilitate the exchange of pub- 
lications, the United States has been confronted 
with the same Soviet obstructionist tactics which 
it faced in its attempts to obtain an exchange of 
persons between the two countries. Generally, 
Soviet librarians and heads of cultural institu- 

Apri7 3, 7949 



tions have manifested a sincere interest in ex- 
panding the international exchange of books, pe- 
riodicals, newspapers, and government documents. 
However, the official Soviet policy has been de- 
signed to impede such an exchange. 

The crux of the problem has been the difference 
between the attitudes of the American Govern- 
ment and the Soviet Government on dissemination 
of information. The former, believing in the de- 
sirability of the widest possible international ex- 
change of publications as a basis for enabling 
people in all fields to understand better develop- 
ments in other countries, has made available to all 
interested governments, institutions, and individ- 
uals all publications printed within the United 
States. Similarly, libraries, scholarly institutions 
and publishers in the United States have always 
been very liberal in their distribution of printed 
materials. 

In the Soviet Union, on the other hand, an en- 
tirely different attitude exists toward the distribu- 
tion of publications. The Goverimient is by no 
means inclined to make available to foreign gov- 
ermnents and institutions all the printed mate- 
rials published in the U.S.S.R. It is suspicious 
of the interest of foreign countries in Soviet pub- 
lished materials, and is even unwilling to make 
available important bibliographies, to say nothing 
of materials included in such bibliographies. At 
the same time, since the Soviet leaders wish to 
keep their people ignorant of progressive develop- 
ments in the West, they are not motivated by the 
same enthusiasm for an exchange of publications 
as the United States, which seeks to make avail- 
able to its citizens all the products of domestic and 
foreign thought. 

It is not to be thought, however, that the Soviet 
Union is disinterested in the acquisition of Ameri- 
can publications. On the contrary, it has in the 
United States two agencies whose duty it is to 
make extensive purchases of American publica- 
tions, which are used by Soviet institutions for 
official research on American affairs but not made 
accessible to the Soviet public. These organiza- 
tions are Amtorg and the Four Continents Book 
Store in New York City. The latter, supposedly 
primarily a commercial outlet for Soviet publica- 
tions, actually devotes about 80 percent of its 
business to the purchase of American publications 
for export to the U.S.S.R. Amtorg, which also 
spends large sums in the purchase of American 
publications for the U.S.S.R., devotes considerable 



time to compiling information obtained from in- 
formative American industrial publications and 
investment manuals, such as those published by 
Standard Statistics Company, Poor's, Moody's 
and Thompson's. Whereas American scholars 
find it almost impossible to obtain adequate eco- 
nomic information about the Soviet Union, 
Amtorg has been free to gather so much economic 
information about the United States that it has 
been able to issue annual comprehensive volumes 
entitled S]>ravochnik Amerikanskoi Tekhniki i 
Promyshlennosti (Handbook of American Tech- 
nique and Industry), which contain extraordi- 
narily detailed information, including photo- 
graphs. Thase give information on plant loca- 
tion, performance, and types of products of United 
States plants. In addition to its interest in pur- 
chasing certain United States publications, the 
Soviet Union is also interested in acquiring some 
printed material by exchange. The Government 
has created a system for the ostensible purpose of 
facilitating international exchange. Through 
1S)45, Soviet exchange was handled primarily 
through VOKS and the All-Union Lenin Library 
in Moscow, with the Library of the Academy of 
Sciences sometimes acting independently and 
sometimes through the All-Union Lenin Library. 
Actually, exchange of materials has been increas- 
ingly centralized in the All-Union Lenin Library. 
However, regardless of the organs handling ex- 
change, the attitude has continually been that of 
attempting to secure as much as possible for the 
Soviet Union while giving as little as possible to 
American libraries. This becomes clear in a re- 
view of the course of American efforts to improve 
exchange relationships. 

At the close of the recent war, American organi- 
zations, commercial as well as professional, liber- 
ally participated in campaigns to send gift books 
to the Soviet Union. In 1945, the members of the 
U. S. International Book Association contributed 
a hundred books, chiefly medical, to Soviet librar- 
ies; the American Medical Association sent the 
All-Union Lenin Library 75 copies of an 18-volume 
medical encyclopedia, purchased with A.M.A. 
funds. In April of the following year, the Amer- 
ican Library Association sent as a gift to the 
U.S.S.R. 300 copies of its bibliography, Book.^ Pvh- 
lished in the United ,States ID.ID-WP, as well as 
over 2,400 different books published during that 
period valued at over $13,000. Other institutions 
forwarded similar gifts to fill out gaps in Soviet 



libraries. These gifts were in addition to the large 
quantity of books, periodicals, newspapers, and 
government documents which were sent to the 
U.S.S.R. under established exchange procedures 
by the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian In- 
stitution, the U. S. Department of Agriculture, 
and many other organizations. 

However, in contrast to the attitude of American 
institutions, Soviet publication institutions were 
not at all helpful. Not only were American librar- 
ies finding it diflScult to acquire desired publica- 
tions through exchange, but conmaercial dealings 
with Vsesoyuznoye Obedineniye Mezhdunarod- 
naya Kniga (All-Union Combine for International 
liooks — the centralized book-export firm of the 
U.S.S.R.) were found to be extremely ineffectual 
because it often was unable to meet requests for 
material which it claimed to have, and because of 
the frequent changes in methods which it pre- 
.scribed for dealing with it. For instance, in No- 
vember 1945 it advised one large purchaser of 
Soviet materials that all requests should be made 
directly to it. On the other hand, in its more 
widely distributed advertisements, potential pur- 
chasers are instructed to place their orders with 
Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga "s ^Vmerican representa- 
tive, the Four Continents Book Corporation in 
New York City. Regardless of which organiza- 
tion handled purchase orders, those submitting 
tliem received but a fractional part of the material 
requested. 

To remedy the unsatisfactory status of affairs in 
the purchase and exchange of publications with the 
Soviet Union, a plan was worked out by the De- 
jiartment of State, the Library of Congress, and 
fourteen other libraries to expedite the acquisition 
of Soviet materials, and a special representative 
was sent to the Soviet Union, as an attache to the 
United States Embassj', for the purpose of imple- 
menting the program. He was instructed not only 
to investigate ways of enlarging the flow of Soviet 
materials to American libraries, but to be attentive 
to Soviet suggestions for improving the flow of 
materials to the U.S.S.R. 

This representative of the Embassy quickly dis- 
covered that VOKS, which had been established 
for the purpose of facilitating cultural relations 
between foreigners and Soviet institutions, was 
extremely reluctant to arrange any contacts for 
him with individual Soviet libraries; all ex- 
changes were to be effected through the All-Union 
Lenin Library. At the latter, the American rep- 



Deparlment of State Bulletin 



resentative learned the reason for the inadequate 
and delayed flow of publications to the United 
States. First, the deposit of books in the library 
for the purpose of exchange is a matter deter- 
mined by each of the dozens of publishers in the 
Soviet Union, and consequently many publica- 
tions are not available to the library for use in 
exchange. More important, however, is the fact 
that of these books the library receives only three 
copies, with which it is expected to meet the ex- 
change requests of all foreign libraries. 

There might have been some excuse for such a 
limited number of copies to be set aside during the 
war when there was a considerable paper shortage 
in the Soviet Union. But after the war it was 
quite ridiculous that such an enormous country as 
the U.S.S.R., with all its resources was unable to 
spare a lai^ge enough number of books to supply 
the needs of foreign scholars interested in study- 
ing all the work being turned out by Soviet authors 
and institutions, and to reciprocate for the large 
quantities of publications sent from abroad for 
which exchange in kind was expected. 

Another dead end was encountered by American 
attempts to obtain Soviet bibliographies. Where- 
as the Library of Congress made available to the 
U.S.S.R. bibliographies containing the titles of the 
full output of American publishers, including 
United States Government publications, the All- 
Union Lenin Library, in answer to a request, in- 
formed the American representative that the 1946 
files of the Soviet National Bibliography, Knizh- 
naya Letopis, could not be obtained in sufficient 
quantity by the Lenin Library for exchange pur- 
poses. To date, United States institutions have 
not been able to purchase or secure in exchange this 
bibliography, which is of the greatest importance 
to any American libraries interested in selecting 
the best or most appropriate books published in 
the Soviet Union. 

When Professor Ernest J. Simmons visited the 
Soviet Union in the summer of 1947, he experi- 
enced the lack of cooperative spirit which had 
characterized the Soviet side of the publications- 
exchange program. He had brought with him a 
proposal by the Library of Congress to establish 
a combined American-Soviet bibliography of all 
available materials on pre-Revolution and post- 
Revolution materials on United States-Soviet re- 
lations. This suggestion was turned down on the 
grounds that the AU-Union Lenin Library was too 
busy reorganizing its own files, bibliographies, etc. 

April 3, 7949 



Professor Simmons also submitted a proposal for 
an exchange of two research library representa- 
tives between the Library of Congress and the All- 
Union Lenin Library for a period of six months. 
The answer was negative, and the excuse flimsy. 

In the past, the Soviet Government has closely 
pursued a policy of channeling all its own export 
of publications through two main agencies, 
Mezhdunarodnaya &iiga for sales, and the All- 
Union Lenin Library for exchange, while mani- 
festing its disinclination to negotiate with any 
central exchange agent of the United States, 
whether that be the United States Embassy in 
Moscow or the Library of Congress. In January 
1946 the Lenin Library informed the United States 
Embassy in Moscow that whereas during wartime, 
when the mails were unreliable, it was desirable 
to utilize diplomatic channels for book exchange, 
it was now preferable to revert to "normal" chan- 
nels. It was also asserted that the All-Union 
Library preferred to deal directly with individual 
American libraries. 

The net result of conducting publications inter- 
change with the Soviet Union under "normal" 
conditions has been that the many interested 
American institutions which have forwarded ma- 
terials to the All-Union Lenin Library for ex- 
change purposes have been competing for the very 
limited number of desired publications which the 
Lenin Library has available. 

When exchange has taken place, it has been made 
less valuable to the recipient libraries in the 
United States by two facts. On the one hand, the 
necessary bibliographical material of Soviet pub- 
lications is lacking or arrives so late that desired 
books are out of print; on the other, when selec- 
tion is left up to the Soviet Union the results are 
unsatisfactory, partly because of the limited choice 
open to the Soviet librarians. 

Not only has the actual number of publications 
sent to the Soviet Union by American institutions 
always far exceeded the number received in re- 
turn, but the substance (quite apart from the stul- 
tification inherent in Soviet works due to the con- 
fining strictures of Marxian dogma) of the former 
is vastly superior. The American contributions 
include mostly volumes containing considerable 
amounts of solid information. Most of the Soviet 
publications consist of periodicals, newspapers, 
brochures, pamphlets, posters, and theater pro- 
grams, with the latter two categories predominat- 
ing. Each of these items is counted separately by 



Soviet library officials, and the total is cited as 
the number of publications sent on exchange. The 
operation of Soviet cooperation under "normal"' 
conditions is further illustrated by the refusal of 
the Lenin Library on more than one occasion after 
the war to provide American libraries with micro- 
films of essential out-of-print materials, though 
the requests included offers to reimburse the li- 
brary for the costs involved. 

Lack of resources, due largely to the war, and 
the traditional inefficiency of the Soviet bureauc- 
racy might have explained in part the early post- 
war failure of the Soviet Union to cooperate in the 
matter of publications exchange. American insti- 
tutions for a long period gave Soviet libraries and 
other book organizations generous benefits of the 
doubt on this score. But as the record became re- 
plete with case after case in which the Soviet un- 
cooperative attitude could not be explained in these 
terms, it became clear that the refusal to engage 
in genuine book exchange was a fixed Soviet official 
policy. It became evident that in book exchange, 
as in international politics, it is possible to deal 
■with the Soviet Union only so long as the business 
is conducted according to the rules established by 
the Soviet Union, and so long as the major share 
of benefits involved accrue to the U.S.S.R. As in 
international politics, too, the basis of the rela- 
tionship is a deep undercurrent of official Soviet 
distrust and antipathy toward the Western world. 

PART iV: CONCLUSIONS 

Present conditions do not indicate that cultural 
relations between the United States and the 
U.S.S.R. will develop to the mutual benefit of the 
peoples of both countries. 

Despite Pravda's assertion of November 3, 104(), 
that "There are absolutely no obstacles, unless they 
are created by non-Soviet parties, to the most lively 
trade, scientific, and cultural bonds between our 
countries based on a firm foundation of mutual 
respect and equal rights," the events of the past 
four years of continuous efforts upon the part of 
the American Government, American institutions, 
and American individuals to establish cultural ex- 
change in the realm of education, science, or publi- 
cations, thoroughly invalidate Pravda''s statement. 

The United States repeated proposals for an ex- 
change of persons has met with scant success. A 
handful of persons have been granted visas by the 
Soviet Government, but with few exceptions they 



have been people thought "politically acceptable" 
by Soviet authorities. On the other hand, the 
United States has accorded visas to any outstand- 
ing Soviet citizen in the field of the arts and sci- 
ences, regardless of his political views. The 
United States has recently granted visas to notable 
Communist propagandists to attend the Interna- 
tional Cultural and Scientific Conference for 
World Peace, fully conscious of the party line to 
which such artists, writers, and scientists have 
adhered at past gatherings. However, to do so 
is in accordance with the American view of free- 
dom of intellectual interchange. 

To do so also demonstrates the vast difference 
between the policies of the two governments, for 
the Soviet Government has never permitted within 
its borders a nongovernmental international meet- 
ing representing a wide range of political views. 

Despite the postwar efforts of the United States 
Government to widen the channels of cultural 
interchange, the Soviet Government persistently 
pursued an obdurate policy. First the resistance 
was of a passive nature, delayed replies, incom- 
plete replies, failures to reply. Then after the 
summer of 1947, rejections became more definite, 
based upon positive although specious reasons such 
as overcrowded housing conditions and psycho- 
logical fears allegedly incited by the U. S. Alien 
Registration Act. Finally, in 1948, the Soviet 
Government took the open position of refusal to 
participate in cultural interchange with the 
United States because of suspicions that American 
motives behind the program were aimed at under- 
mining Soviet security. 

Concomitant with the increasingly vehement 
opposition to cultural interchange has been the 
increasing emphasis upon Soviet priorities and 
Soviet superiority in the realm of the arts and 
sciences. The mounting tight control exercised 
over Soviet artists and scientists, and the increas- 
ing attack upon those who maintained contacts 
with fellow specialists in the free world have also 
poisoned the atmosphere and inhibited Soviet in- 
tellectuals. 

The only conclusion that can be drawn from 
Soviet opposition to an exchange of students and 
professors and an expansion of publications ex- 
change is that the Soviet Government fears a free 
interchange of ideas because of a realization that 
thirty years of Communism have failed to provide 
the patient Soviet people with a living standard 
anywhere approximating that enjoyed by the 



Department of %tate Bulletin 



workers in the United States ; because thirty years 
of Communism have deprived the Soviet people of 
freedom of thought and action, freedom which 
once experienced through contact with American 
people or American books will make them ill- 
content with their life in the Soviet Union. 

Unfortunately, the attitude of the Soviet Gov- 
ernment determines the course of the U.S.- 
U.S.S.R. cultural interchange; its opposition de- 
prives almost 350 million people of the multifold 
advantages to be derived from a broader range 
of understanding of peoples, their views, and their 
accomplishments. 

President Truman related the concept of cul- 
tural exchange to the vital issue of peace in an 
address on July 4, 1947, in which he said : 

"The third requisite of peace is the free and full 
exchange of knowledge, ideas, and information 
among the peoples of the earth. . . ." 



Research and Teaching Opportunities 
in United Kingdom 

[Released to tlie press March 25] 

Announcement of opportunities for American 
citizens to undertake advanced research or serve 
as visiting professors in the United Kingdom was 
made by the Department of State on March 25. 
The awards will be made, under the provisions of 
the Fulbright Act, in pound sterling. Grants for 
research and teaching under the Fulbright pro- 
gram ordinarily cover round-trip transportation 
for the grantee, a stipend, a living and quarters 
allowance, and an allowance for the purchase of 
necessary books and equipment. 

The awards announced include visiting profes- 
sorships at British universities and university col- 
leges. Although well qualified applicants in other 
fields will be considered also, the following subjects 
are among those which have been suggested as 
ajjpropriate by the British host institutions: 

Economics, geography of North America, Amer- 
ican history, history of the American Revolution, 
economic history, Russian history, philosophy. 

Chemical engineering, crystallography, physics, 
physiology, social psychology, statistical genetics, 
operative dental surgery. 

English literature, Elizabethan literature, 
American literature, Biblical criticism. 

Final selection of professorial condidates will be 
made by the Board of Foreign Scholarships upon 
the basis of the personal qualifications of the indi- 
viduals. Definite assignment to one of the British 
universities or university colleges will be made at 
the time of selection. 

April 3, 7949 

830397 — 49 3 



Awards were also announced for advanced re- 
search under the sponsorship of British institu- 
tions of higher learning in the humanities, the 
social sciences, the natural and mathematical 
sciences, medicine, and dentistry. Library and 
laboratory facilities for studies in many special- 
ized branches of these fields will be placed at the 
disposal of the grantees by the host universities. 
Although well qualified candidates in other fields 
will receive consideration also, the British institu- 
tions have indicated the existence of appropriate 
research facilities in various specialized branches 
of the following fields : 

Archeology, linguistics, literature. Oriental 
studies, theology, anthropology, economics, edu- 
cation, geography, history, international relations, 
law, philosophy, political science, sociology, agri- 
culture, biology, chemistry, biochemistry, en- 
gineering, geology, mathematics, physics, psy- 
chology, medicine, surgery, psychiatry, dentistry, 
veterinary medicine. 

Final selection of candidates for advanced re- 
search grants will be made by the Board of Foreign 
Scholarships upon the basis of the personal quali- 
fications of the applicants, the merit of their re- 
search projects, and the facilities available in the 
United Kingdom for the accomplishment of their 
projects. 

British universities which have expressed a de- 
sire to be sponsors either to American visiting pro- 
fessors or research scholars include: Aberdeen, 
Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Dur- 
ham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, 
London, Manchester, Nottingham, Oxford, Read- 
ing, Sheffield, St. Andrews, Swansea, Abery- 
stwyth, Bangor, Cardiff, Exeter, Hull, Leicester, 
Southampton, Welsh National School of Medicine. 

Candidates for all grants will be selected on the 
basis of merit by the Board of Foreign Scholar- 
ships. Veterans will be given preference provided 
their other qualifications are approximately equal 
to those of other candidates. Persons receiving 
awards will normally be expected to remain abroad 
for one academic year. 

The awards are offered under Public Law 584 
(79th Congress), the Fulbright Act, which 
authorizes the Department of State to use certain 
foreign currencies and credits acquired through 
the sale of surplus property abroad for programs 
of educational exchange with other nations. 

Persons interested in the opportunities listed 
above for visiting professors and research scholars 
should write to the Conference Board of As- 
sociated Research Councils, 2101 Constitution 
Avenue, Washington 25, D.C., for application 
forms and additional information concerning 
fields of teaching and research, sponsoring in- 
stitutions, and conditions of award. 



The United States in the United Nations 



General Assembly 

IMarcb 26-April 1) 
Delegation 

Secretary Acheson will join the United States 
Delegation for the opening session of the United 
Nations General Assembly on April 5, it was an- 
nounced on March 28 by Assistant Secretary Rusk. 
The United States Delegation, with one exception, 
will be the same as for the first part of the As- 
sembly session, wliich met in Paris from mid- 
September to mid-December of last year.' Erwin 
D. Canham, editor of the Christian Science Moni- 
tor and president of the American Society of 
Newspaper Editors, joins the delegation as an al- 
ternate delegate in lieu of Assistant Secretary 
Gross, who is now carrying the responsibility of 
congressional relations for the Department of 
State. Mr. Canham will take part in the consid- 
eration of three draft conventions on freedom of 
information which will come before the Third 
Committee of the Assembly. 

The United States Delegation will be composed 
of Ambassador Warren R. Austin, United States 
Representative and Chief of the United States 
Mission to the United Nations, John Foster Dulles, 
Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Ambassador Philip 
C. Jessup, and Benjamin V. Cohen. Alternate 
delegates are Assistant Secretary Thorp, Ambas- 
sador Ray Atherton, Ambassador Francis B. 
Sayre, Mr. Canham, and Assistant Secretary Rusk. 
The delegation will meet in Washington on Satur- 
day, April 2, for preliminary consultation with 
the Secretary of otate and other departmental 
officers before moving to New York. 

Interim Committee 

A long-range plan for the study of methods of 
pacific settlement of disputes and of promoting 
international cooperation in the j'jolitical field was 
approved by the Interim Committee of the Gen- 
eral Assembly (familiarly known as the ''Little 
Assembly") at its meeting on March 31. 

The plan was presented to the Interim Com- 
mittee by James N. Hyde of the United States, 
who acted as rapporteur of Subcommittee 6, which 
had been given the responsibility for prei:)aring 
implementation of Paragraph 2 (c) of a Greneral 
Assembly resolution of December 3, 1948, request- 
ing systematic study of these matters. 

As the first step in the series of studies proposed 
to the Interim Committee over the next several 
years, the subcommittee recommended that an 
analysis be made of the operation of United Na- 
tions Commissions. The Secretariat will be asked 
to record and synthesize the experience of Com- 
missions appointed by the General Assembly and 
the Security Council during the past several years 
in eflForts to investigate, conciliate, and prevent 
hostilities. 

' Bi-iiETiN of Sept. 12, 1948, p. 330. 



The program of study proposed by the sub- 
committee was given wholehearted support by 
the United States. Charles P. Noyes, sitting for 
the fli-st time as Deputy Representative for the 
United States on the Interim Committee, spoke 
of the proposed studies as being "of inestimable 
value to the United Nations." He pointed out 
that they would "add very greatly to the under- 
standing which member nations and the public 
at large have regarding the processes of peaceful 
settlement available under the United Nations 
Charter, as well as the other aspects of political 
cooperation." 

The Interim Committee, in giving its unani- 
mous approval to the subcommittee proposal, made 
provision for the consultation of individual ex- 
perts and learned societies outside of the United 
Nations. 

At the same meeting, the Interim Committee 
designated a subcommittee to study and formulate 
proposals regarding the present constitution, du- 
ration and terms of reference of the Interim Com- 
mittee. The subcommittee was asked to submit by 
August 15, 1949 concrete proposals which might 
be put before the General Assembly in September. 

Transport and Communications 

The third session of the Transport and Com- 
munications Commission, which began on March 
21, ended on March 30 with the adoption of the 
Commission's report to the Economic and Social 
Council containing ten resolutions. Among 
those approved at its final meetings was one re- 
questing the Secretary General to ascertain the 
views of governments, in order to facilitate Com- 
mission consideration of the problems of maritime 
shipping affecting Latin America at its next ses- 
sion. Another defined "inland transport" to in- 
clude rail, road, inland waterways, and pipe lines. 
A third resolution called the Economic and Social 
Council's attention to the fact that solution of 
problems facing the Commission would be greatly 
•facilitated when the International Trade Organ- 
ization and Inter-governmental Maritime Consul- 
tative Organization conventions came into force. 
Another recommended continued study of the 
problem of coordination of inland transport. 

Unesco 

More than 2,500 delegates from this country 
and representatives from 22 other countries as- 
sembled in Cleveland March 30 for the second na- 
tional conference of the United States National 
Commission for tiie United Nations Educational, 
Scientific and Cultural Organization (Uxesco) to 
learn of Unesco's accomplishments to date and of 
its plans for the future. The primary function 
of Unesoo is the promotion of international coop- 
eration through tlie free exchange of infonnation 
and ideas on education, art, and science. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Fleet Admiral Nimitz Nominated 
as Kashmir Plebiscite Administrator 

Statement hy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press March 23] 

Since the beginning of the year, when India and 
Pakistan put into effect a cease-fire in Kashmir, 
the two Governments have shown a most coopera- 
tive and praisewoi'thj' spirit in working toward 
a final settlement of the Kashmir issue with the 
assistance of the United Nations Commission for 
India and Pakistan (Uncip). The nomination 
of Fleet Admiral Nimitz as Plebiscite Adminis- 
trator is further evidence of the progress being 
made toward a peaceful solution of this difficult 
question. Wliile the task which Admiral Nimitz 
will now assume is one in which he will act as an 
international public servant of the United Nations 
and not as a representative of this Government, 
we feel honored that India and Pakistan have 
agreed to repose their confidence in an outstanding 
American whose immeasurable contribution to the 
successful conclusion of the recent war in the Pa- 
cific remains vividly in our memories. 

We hope that with these various recent encour- 
aging developments the Kashmir issue will be 
brought to an early and satisfactory settlement. 

The Kashmir issue arose in the fall of 1947 
following the partition of India into the separate 
dominions of India and Pakistan. The Maharaja 
of Kashmir, a Hindu who rules over a predom- 
inantly Moslem population, acceded to India, 
thereby causing fightmg between the Indian forces 
on the one hand and rebel insurgents aided by 
raiding tribesmen and later augmented by Pak- 
istan troops. This issue was brought to the Se- 
curity Council on January 1, 1948, by India. The 
United Nations Commission (Uncip) composed 
of representatives of Argentina, Belgium, Colom- 
bia, Czechoslovakia, and United States was estab- 
lished. This Commission has succeeded in effect- 
ing as of January 1 of this year a cease-fire, and 
conversations are now being held in New Delhi 
between the United Nations Commission and the 
disputants regarding the implementation of a 
truce. Both India and Pakistan have agreed to 
a plebiscite in Kashmir to determine the will of 
the people. Admiral Nimitz as Plebiscite Ad- 
ministrator will take over this difficult task. 



U.S. Contribution for Relief of 
Palestine Refugees 

Statement hy the President 

[Released to the press by the White House March 24] 

It is with gratification that I have today signed 
Senate Joint Resolution 36 authorizing a special 
contribution by the United States of $16 million 
for the relief of Palestine refugees. 



The United Nations General Assembly on No- 
vember 19, 1948, urged all States members of the 
United Nations to make voluntary contributions as 
soon as possible to a relief fund totaling $32 mil- 
lion. The Secretary of State informs me that thus 
far fifteen other Members of the United Nations 
have contributed and that other Governments have 
signified their intention to send money or contri- 
butions in kind. Tliere is a pressing need for this 
fund, for seven hundred thousand refugees are 
living almost on starvation level. It is the hope 
of the United States that very promptly the total 
$32 million fund will be subscribed by the mem- 
bers of tlie United Nations, or other countries, 
which have not yet given to the fund. 

I trust that before this relief program is ended 
means will be devised for the permanent solution 
of the refugee problem, and that the efforts of 
the Palestine Conciliation Commission to estab- 
lish a lasting peace will bring hope of a brighter 
future to these destitute victims of the recent hos- 
tilities in the Holy Land. 



Current United Nations Documents: 
A Selected Bibliography ' 

General Assembly 

Official Records of the Second Session 

First Committee, Political and Security Questions 

including Regulation of Armaments. Summary Rec- 
ord of Meetings. 16 September-19 November 1947. 
xsii, 628 pp. Printed. $6.50. 

• Fifth Committee, Administrative and Budgetary 

Questions. Summary Record of Meetings. 16 Sep- 
tember-18 November 1947. xxii, 500 pp. Printed. 
$5.00. 

General Committee. Summary Records of Meetings, 

17 September-3 November 1947. vii, 47 pp. Printed. 
50(i. 

Joint Committee of the Second and Third Com- 
mittees. Summary Record of Meetings. 8 October- 
5 November 1947. xix, 98 pp. printed. $1.25. 

Official Records of the Second Session. Plenary Meetings. 

Volume I. 80th-109th Meetings. 16 September-13 

November 1947. LXXVI, 753 pp. printed. $8.00. 

—Volume II. 110th-12Sth Meetings. 13 November- 
29 November 1947. pp. 753-1637. printed. $10.00. 

Survey of International Law in relation to the work of 
codification of the International Law Commission. 
. . . [A/CN.4/1, November 5, 1948] 70 pp. Printed. 
500. 



' Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia Uni- 
versity Press, 2960 Broadway, New York City. Other ma- 
terials (mimeographed, or processed documents) may be 
consulted at certain designated libraries in the United 
States. 



AptW 3, 1949 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 

Calendar of Meetings ^ 



Adjourned during March 

IcAO (InteriiHlioiial Civil Aviation Organization): 

Council: Bixlh Session 

Operations Division 

Airworlliincs.s Division 

International Wheat Conference 

L'liitod Nations: 

Ecosoc (Economic and Social Council): 

Einhth Session 

Who (World Health Organization): 

E.\ecutive Board: Third Session 

Fao (Food and Agricultural Organization): 

Near East Regional Meeting on Animal Breeding Under Tropical 
and Subtropical Conditions. 

International Bice Commission: First Meeting 

IcEF (International Children's Emergency Fund): 

Executive Board 

Ilo (International Labor Organization): 

Industrial Committee on Civil Engineering and Public Works: 
Second Session. 

In Session as of April 1, 1949 

United Nations: 

Commission on Korea 



Commission on India and Pakistan 

Conciliation Commission for Palestine 

Trusteeship Council: Fourth Session 

Ecosoc (Economic and Social Council): 

Commission on the Status of Women: Third Session. . . . . . 

Subcommission on Economic Development: Third Session . . 
Transport and Communications Commission: Third Session ._ . 
Economic Commission for Europe: Committee on Electric 

Power. 
Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East: Committee 
of the Whole. 
Itu (International Telecommunication Union): 

Provisional Frequency Board 

International Confere'nce on High Frequency Broadcasting . . . 



Cfm (Council of Foreign Ministers) : Deputies for Austria 

Itu (International Telecommunication Union) : 

Aeronautical Radio Committee 

IcAO (International Civil Aviation Organization): African-Indian 

Ocean Regional Meeting. 
Fad (Food and Agriculture Organization): Indo-Pacific Fisheries 
Council. 

Rubber Study Group: Sixth Session 

Ino (International Refugee Organization): Second Session of the 

General Council. 
Ilo (International Labor Organization) : 

Committee on Application for Conventions and Recommenda- 
tions. 
Conference of European Experts on Training of Supervisors and 
Instructors within Industry. 

Scheduled for April 

American Internation.al Institute for the Protection of Childhood: 
Annual Meeting of the Directing Council. 

Tin Study Group: Management Committee 

United Nations: 

Ecosoc (Economic and Social Council): 

Economic Commission for Europe: Committee on Industry and 

Materials. 
Population Commission: Fourth Session .......... 

Subcommission on Employment and Economic Stability: Third 

Session. 
Statistical Commission: Fourth Session 



Montreal . 
Montreal . 
Montreal 
Washington 



Lake Success . 
Geneva . . . 
Cairo . . . . 
Bangkok . . . 
Lake Success . 
Rome . . . . 



Seoul 



Lake Success . 
Jerusalem . . 
Lake Success , 



Beirut. . . . 
Lake Success . 
Lake Success . 
Geneva . . . 



Bangkok 



Geneva . . 
Mexico City 

London . . 



Washington 
Londoh . . 



Singapore 

London . 
Geneva . 



Geneva 
Geneva 



Montevideo 
London . . 



Geneva 



Geneva . . . 
Lake Success . 



Geneva 



1949 



Jan. 18-Mar. 
Feb. 8-Mar. 
Feb. 22-Mar 
Jan. 26-Mar. 


ls 
13 
29 
23 


Feb. 7-Mar. 


18 


Feb. 21-Mar 


. 9 


Mar. 1-12 




Mar. 7-15 




Mar. 9-10 




Mar. 15-26 




1948 




Dec. 12- 




1949 




Jan. 3- 
Jan. 17- 
Jan. 24- 




Mar. 21- 
Mar. 21- 
Mar. 21- 
Mar. 21- 




Mar. 28- 




1948 




Jan. 15- 
Oct. 22- 




1949 




Feb. 9- 




Mar. 15- 
Mar. 22- 




Mar. 24- 




Mar. 28- 
Mar. 29- 




Mar. 23- 




Mar. so- 





Apr. 1-2 
Apr. 4 

Apr. 4- 

Apr. 11- 
Apr. 11- 



420 



Apr. 25- 
Department of State Bulletin 



Calendar of Meetings — Continued 



General Assembly : Second Part of Third Session 

International Law Commission 

Permanent Central Opium Board 

Sixteenth International Congress of Geography 

Gatt (Genera! Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) : Third Session of 

Contracting Parties. 
Ilo (International Labor Organization) : 

Coal Mining Committee: Third Session 

Fourth Regional Conference of American States Members . . . . 
IcAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) : 

North Atlantic Meteorological Communications Meeting . . . . 

European Frequency Meeting: Second Session 

Special Meeting on Notices to Air Men 

Meeting on Joint Support for Ocean Weather Ship Stations and 
Joint Support for Air Navigation Facilities in Danish Territory 
and in Creels Territory. 

XXIV Italian Congress of Stomatology 

Diplomatic Conference for the Drawing Up of a New Convention 

Intended to Protect War Victims. 
Fag (Food and Agriculture Organization) : 

Preparatory Conference on World Wood Pulp Problems 

Conference on Rice Breeding 

Southeast Asia Conference on Rinderpest Control Problems . . . 
International Cotton Advisory Committee: Eighth Meeting . . . . 
First International Congress on Civil Engineering 



Lake Success 

Lake Success 

Geneva 

Lisbon 

Annecy, France 

Pittsburgh 

Montevideo 

London 

Paris 

Montreal 

London 

Taormina and Catania, Italy 
Geneva 

Montreal 

Bangkok 

Bangkok 

Brussels 

Mexico City 



1949 

Apr. 5- 
Apr. 
Apr. 

Apr. 8-15 
Apr. 11- 



Apr. 19- 
Apr. 25- 

Apr. 11- 
Apr. 10- 
Apr. 19- 
Apr. 20- 



Apr. 20-24 
Apr. 21- 



Apr. 25- 

Apr. 

Apr. 

Apr. 2.5-30 

Apr. 30- 



Prepared in the Division of International Conferences, Department of State. 



Third Session of the ILO Permanent Migration Committee 



BY IRWIN M. TOBIN 



Background 

The Pei'manent Migration Committee (Pmc) 
of the International Labor Organization, which 
held its Third Session at Geneva, January 13-27, 
1949, was set up by the Govei'uing Body of the 
International Labor Office as a result of a recom- 
mendation made by the Conference of Experts on 
Migration for Settlement, held at the Office in 1938. 
Its terms of reference were originally limited to 
migration for settlement, but in 1944, when it 
became clear that migration for employment 
might also become a problem of considerable im- 
portance after the war, the terms of reference of 
the Committee were broadened to enable it to deal 
with all forms of migration. 

The membership of the Committee consists of 
representatives of the governments of all states 
members of the International Labor Organization 
which wish to participate, representatives of the 
Governing Body, and three experts appointed by 
the Governing Body, together with advisory mem- 
bers representing the United Nations and other 
intergovernmental organizations. 

The First Session of the Committee, which con- 
vened in Montreal in August 1946, exchanged 
views on postwar migration prospects, discussed 
the forms of international cooperation capable of 
facilitating an organized resumption of migration, 
and also considered the effect of racial discrimina- 
tion upon migration. 



The Second Session, held in Geneva in Febru- 
ary-March 1948, drafted a migration for employ- 
ment convention and related instruments, and thus 
laid the basis for the subsequent inquiries to gov- 
ernments by the Ilo and the preparation of 
amended draft texts submitted to the present meet- 
ing of the Committee. The Second Session also 
considered the division of responsibilities between 
the Ilo and other international organizations con- 
cerned with migration. 

In order to develop fully the background of the 
Third Session there must also be taken into ac- 
count the increasingly active role of the Ilo in 
migration as it is related to manpower and eco- 
nomic-development programs. As a result of this 
growing interest, which was formalized at the 
107th Session of the Ilo Governing Body in De- 
cember 1948, there were added to the agenda of 
the Third Session of the Pmc three new items re- 
lating to the migration aspects of the Ilo man- 
power program. 

Agenda 

The agenda of the Third Session was thus com- 
posed of two items referred to the Committee by 
the previous session of the Permanent Migration 
Committee, and three further items which were 
later placed on the agenda at the instance of the 



April 3, J949 



IiiO Governing Bod}-. The agenda read as 
follows : 

1. Miirration for Kinployiiif'nt : Revision ct tli<> Miprra- 
tlon for Eniplo.viiK'iit ('"nvciiti<in, l!t39; tlie MigTiiticm for 
EniplD.vinent Kecoiiiiiu'inlation, 19H9 ; and the SliKnition 
for Einployraent (Cooperation between States) Kt-coni- 
niendMtion, 1939. 

2. Foniiulation of Principles concerning MiRtation for 
I.anil Si'ltlenient, ini'liulins Preparation of a Model Agree- 
nii'iit on Mi^'ration for Land Sfttlenicnt. 

3. Migration within the Manpower Program of the Ilo. 

4. Migration and Uesettlement of "Specialists." 

i). Metliods to P'urther Exchanges of Trainees, including 
Preparation of a Model Agreement. 

Participation 

T\venty-fo\ir governments were represented at 
the Third Session by fully accredited delegations, 
two additional governments having sent observers. 
The Committee also included two representatives 
each of the three groups (government, employers, 
workers) which compose the Ilo Governing Body. 
Advisory members were also present from the 
United Nations, International Bank and Fund, 
Ito Interim Commission, Fad, Iro, Who, and 
ITxEsco. Observers representing the Economic 
Commission for Europe, the Oe?:c ^lanpower 
Committee, and the Labor Division of ECA at- 
tended some of the sessions; however, tlie repre- 
sentative of the International Committee for 
European Migratory Movements, who was origi- 
nally scheduled to attend, did not appear. 

The number of governments represented was 
approximately the same as at the 1948 session, thus 
indicating a sustained interest in migration on the 
part of a substantial number of governments in 
almost every part of the world. The wide rep- 
resentation of specialized agencies indicated both 
an alertness of interest and the desire to coordinate 
as closely as possible the activities of the various 
organizations interested in the migration field. 
Governing Body representation was double that 
of the previous year, with the possible implication 
that the Ilo felt that greater participation of rep- 
resentatives of employers and workers in the de- 
liberations of a Committee basically governmental 
in composition was desirable, especially in con- 
sidering the manpower items. 

Proceedings and Recommendations 

Opening address 

The opening plenary meeting was featured by 
the address ot Jef Reus, Assistant Director Gen- 
eral of the Ilo and Secretary General of the 
Session. Mr. Rens outlined the background of the 
Committee's agenda and stated tlie problems with 
wiiich it was confronted, in particular those in- 
volved in tlie newly undertaken manpower pro- 
gram of the lu). Delegates showed special inter- 
est in tlie schedule of conferences contemplated by 
David Morse, the Director General, whicli was to 
include (1) a meeting of re]iresenta(ives of the 
I'nited Nations and s[)('cializ(>d agencies to be held 
in Geneva in February 104!) to study the measures 



to be taken to insure as complete coordination as 
possible of their manpower and migration activi- 
ties and (2) an international conference of govern- 
ments directly concerned with migration, the task 
of wliicli would he to negotiate and conclude multi- 
lateral and bilateral agreements for the transfer of 
migrants from manpower surplus to manpower 
deficit countries. The Permanent Migration Com- 
mittee was asked to indicate the conditions which 
it considered must be fulfilled to assure that the 
latter meeting could be successfully held, since the 
Office recognized that most careful preparation for 
it would be required. The Committee was also 
asked to advise (he Governing Body concerning the 
projected manpower program as a whole. 

Commenting upon the proposed migration con- 
vention, Mr. Rens, after describing the earlier his- 
tory of the draft convention on migration for em- 
ployment and related instruments, stated that the 
texts prepared by the Office on the basis of previ- 
ous discussions by the Committee and the subse- 
quent comments of governments were designed 
"to give the greatest possible protection to mi- 
grants, while at the same time facilitating mi- 
gration." 
The Rights of Migrants 

The main business before the Session was to 
redraft for presentation to the forthcoming con- 
ference of the Il(5 the texts of the -convention, 
reconunendation, and model agreement on migra- 
tion for empIo3ment and a separate proposed con- 
vention concerning the personal effects and tools 
of migrants for employment. These instruments, 
in the form in which they came before Subcom- 
mittee I, had been drawn u]) by the Office upon 
the basis of the proposals of the Second Session 
of the Pmc and the observations made by govern- 
ments on the drafts circulated to them. Ihe key 
instrument, the convention on migration for em- 
ploj'inent (referred to hereafter as the convention) 
contained two principal parts: I, applicable to 
migration in general: and II, applii'ablc to mi- 
grants recruited to till particular jobs. Taking 
into account the changes made in the text by the 
Tliird Session, part I of the draft convention now 
embraces obligations by signatory states to (1) 
provide accurate information concerning employ- 
ment opportunities and regulations atfecting mi- 
gration for emploj'ment; ('2) take measures to fa- 
cilitate the dej)arture, journe}-, and receiation of 
migi-ants, with special concern for their health and 
welfare; and (3) assure to migrants treatment 
equal to that of domestic labor, so far as law or 
government regulations a])ply, in fields such as 
remuneration, housing, social security, trade union 
membership and collective-bargaining rights, and 
access to schools. Part II, applicable to migrants 
recruited for specific employment, provides for 
(1) regulation of procedures governing recruit- 
ment, introduction, and placement of migrants; 
(li) free access to i)ublic employment services: ('.)) 
written contracts; and (4) special types of pro- 

Departmenf of State Bulletin 



tective supervision for migrants under govern- 
ment-si3onsored group migration schemes. 

The principal controversy which dominated the 
deliberations of Subcommittee I had been fore- 
shadowed in the statements made at the opening 
plenary session. One group, led by the United 
Kingdom, favored a drastic reorganization of the 
texts, with a view to limiting the convention on 
migration for employment to an agreement on the 
basic rights of all migrants. It was argued that 
such a procedure would facilitate ratification by 
a wide circle of governments of immigration 
countries, thus giving the convention greater 
force and influence. This point of view was in 
the end rejected by the majority of the Committee 
on the ground that a convention limited to such 
general provisions would withhold from migrants 
the protection they require and thus fail to serve 
the purposes of the convention as originally con- 
templated. It was also considered by many dele- 
gations that such a drastic change in procedure 
would require new instructions from their Gov- 
ernments, prolong the period required for prepa- 
ration of the convention, and thus make it im- 
possible to fulfil the Committee's mandate to 
propose a test for adoption by the forthcoming 
Ilo conference. This difference in over-all ap- 
proach necessarily determined the spirit in which 
many delegates discussed the convention draft as 
it was examined article by article. In the end the 
revised text as reported out by the subcommittee 
and approved by the closing plenary session gave 
more detailed and specific protection to migrants 
than the text prepared by the Office. 

The dilemma involved in redrafting the con- 
vention was stated succinctly in the final report 
of the Session, which drew attention to "the de- 
tailed and often teclmical character, and the ex- 
tensive implications of many of the provisions of 
the texts," and remarked that at its deliberations 
Subcommittee I "had as its aim to arrive at a 
satisfactory compromise on the various provisions 
which would adequately protect the interests of 
migrants but which would not at the same time 
effect such a radical departure from the practices 
and policies of Members as to endanger the accept- 
ability of the instruments to a sufficient number of 
Governments. The latter result would, of course, 
be to deprive migrants of that very protection 
which it is the aim of the Conventions and the 
other instruments to achieve." 

While the United States Delegation was of the 
opinion that some of the proposed detailed amend- 
ments were inappropriate to a convention, it took 
the view — in accordance with its instructions— 
that the draft convention was in general satisfac- 
tory to the U.S. Government, and that a radical 
revision, such as that proposed by the U.K. Rep- 
resentatives, would render impossible the prepa- 
ration by this Session of the Pmc of a draft text 
to be placed before the 1949 Ilo conference for 
adoption. The U.S. Representatives therefore 

April 3, 1949 



participated in the discussion of the text princi- 
pally in order to forestall the adoption of amend- 
ments which would run counter to American 
policy and practice with respect to migration. 
On specific controversies as they emerged between 
countries of immigration and emigration the 
United States Representatives generally took the 
attitude that the countries particularly concerned 
with migration movements of the kind covered by 
the text should play the principal role in drafting 
the appropriate articles. 
ILO Manpower Program 

The Ilo manpower program, submitted to the 
±^Mc tor Its advice, was greeted with substantial 
but cautious approval. After a discussion of the 
prospects of migration and the practical difficul- 
ties encountered by countries of immigration and 
emigration, the Committee welcomed the initiative 
being taken by the Ilo in dealing with migration 
questions, and m particular endorsed the proposed 
meeting of the United Nations and specialized 
agencies to be held in February 1949, with a view 
to coordinating activities in this field. The Com- 
mittee also considered a number of specific prob- 
lems which might be dealt with by the forthcom- 
ing Ilo Governing Body Session, such as the 
absorptive capacity of possible countries of immi- 
gration, the adaptability of migrants to their new 
environments, and certain practical aspects of the 
international mobility of labor. The Committee 
noted with approval the intention of the Office to 
call a conference of interested governments to 
negotiate bilateral and multilateral migration 
agreements, but emphasized in this connection the 
need for the most careful preparatory planning 
and consultation of goverimients before such a 
conference could be convened with a reasonable 
prospect of achieving practical results. 

The Committee also considered a proposal put 
forward by Albert Monk, workers' delegate, that 
the Permanent Migration Committee should as- 
sume a tripartite character representative of 
governments, employers, and workers according 
to the customary Ilo pattern. It was generally 
felt that such tripartite representation might be 
accorded in the regional manpower committees 
being established by the Governing Body, of which 
those for Europe and Asia have already been set 
up, while another for Latin America is under con- 
sideration. It was the sense of the Committee that 
the Pmc should continue to exist essentially in its 
present form, open to membership on a universal 
basis, and serving as a technical advisory com- 
mittee on migration and manpower questions. 
Finally, the Committee took note of a recommen- 
dation from Subcommittee III, which resulted 
from a U.S. proposal, to the effect that the Ilo 
should undertake to make studies and provide 
technical advice with a view to assisting govern- 
ments interested in developing land-settlement 
projects capable of absorbing surplus manpower 
available for migration. 



Land Settlement 

Tlie discussion of niignition for laiul settlement, 
in Subcommittee III, was, in view of limitations 
of time and the complexity of the subject, confined 
to general principles, leaving it to the Office to 
draft a model agreement text for circulation to 
governments and discussion by the next session of 
the Pmc. The Subcommittee was also in agree- 
ment that, in addition to considering the stand- 
ards which should be applied in the treatment of 
migrants for land settlement, the Ilo should take 
practical steps within its competence to facilitate 
migration for land settlement at the request of in- 
terested governments. The recommendations of 
the Subcommittee, whicli were adopted by the full 
Committee at the final plenary session, proposed 
(1) that the Office submit to governments for their 
comments the texts of the general principles for- 
mulated by the Committee and the model agree- 
ment to be drafted by the Office ; (2) that the ques- 
tion of the model agreement be taken up by the 
next session of the Pmc; and (3) that the Office, 
with the agreement and cooperation of interested 
governments and specialized agencies, study pos- 
sibilities for land settlement and make available 
to governments, upon their request, the Ilo's tech- 
nical facilities to assist them in preparing land- 
settlement projects. 

Specialists and Trainees 

Discussion by Subcommittee II of the migra- 
tion and resettlement of specialists and methods to 
further the excliange of trainees resulted in rec- 
ommendations, approved by the full Committee, 
designed to give tlie Ilo limited, but nevertheless 
practical, responsibilities in both fields. With re- 
gard to the migration of specialists and techni- 
cians, particularly those who are DP's under the 
care of the Iro, it was proposed that the Office cir- 
cularize information concerning the availability 
of such technicians, request member governments 
to inform it of opportunities for their resettle- 
ment, and attempt in other ways to build a bridge 
between known surpluses and known demands. 
With regard to the exchange of trainees it was 
proposed that the Office be requested to make a 
survey of regulations concerning the exchange of 
trainees and the organizations, private and public, 
having responsibilities in this field. The Office 
was also requested to assist governments, upon re- 
quest, in facilitating the international movement 
of trainees. The question was further to be re- 
ferred to the industrial committees and regional 
conferences of the Ilo and to the next session of 
the Permanent Migration Committee. 

Conclusions 

Summary of the Session 

In certain respects the Third Session of the Pmo 
marked a turning point in the conception of the 
Conmiittee's task and gave a pi-actical impetus to 
the new role being played by the Ilo in the field 
of migration. There was a marked bipolarity in 



the discussions of the Committee, which, on the one 
hand, was moving toward completion of work pre- 
viously initiated dealing with the protection of 
migrants and, on the other hand, was exploring 
available and effective means to facilitate migra- 
tion movements wherever such movements would 
promote individual and national welfare. It was 
observed by many delegates that the framework 
of discussion had changed considerably since the 
organization of the Pmc in 1940 in tlie light of 
the experience of migration acquired by various 
governments during the postwar years and the 
new awai-eness on tne part of many governments 
of the relationship between migration and a high 
level of employment and prosperity. 

The Convention on Migration for Employment 

The U.S. Delegation believes that it would be 
in the interest of the U.S. Government to ratify 
the convention on migration for employment, 
sliould the forthcoming Ilo conference adopt the 
text recommended by the Third Session of the 
Pmc. However, the Delegation believes that con- 
sideration should be given to the possibility of 
separating the present text into two conventions, 
one containing general provisions applicable to 
all migrants for employment, the other laying 
down detailed rules for the recruitment, transfer, 
and conditions of labor of group migrants. Such 
an approach would insure the greatest possible 
protection to all types of migrants, while avoiding 
the danger that a single detailed convention may 
not meet with ratification on a sufficiently wide 
scale to bring it into force. Such separation would 
also be better adapted to the needs and practices of 
the United States, which must necessarily draw 
a distinction between the position of immigrants 
entering normally under our immigration laws 
and those brought to this country under group 
schemes for limited periods to engage in agricul- 
tural and other pursuits for which domestic labor 
is unavailable. 

Migration and the ILO Manpoicer Program 

Tlie U.S. Government should welcome the in- 
itiative now being taken by the Ilo to assist gov- 
ernments which have an interest in the promotion 
of emigration and immigration. Broadly speak- 
ing, such a program is in line with those objectives 
of U.S. foreign policy which are related to the 
maximum utilization of resources, including man- 
power, and the fullest realization of the capabili- 
ties of the so-called underdeveloped areas. The 
regional economic conunissions of the Ecosoc and 
the Manpower Conunittee of the Oeec are looking 
to the Ilo for concrete assistance towards attain- 
ing these objectives. The U.S. Government 
should, through continued participation in Ilo 
conferences dealing with migration and man- 
power, contribute advice derived from its own 
experience to (he fullest possible development of 
this Ilo i)rogram. 



Department of State Bulletin 



U.S. Delegations to International Conferences 



ICAO: African-Indian Ocean Regional Meeting 

Tlie Department of State announced on March 
21 the United States Delegation to the first In- 
ternational Civil Aviation Organization (Icao) 
regional air navigation meeting for the African- 
Indian Ocean region, which convened at London, 
March 22, 1949. The United States Delegation is 
as follows: 



Clifford P. Burton, Chief of Tt>chnical Mission, Civil Aero- 
nautics Administration, Department of Commerce 

Vice Chairman 

Reuben H. CUnkscales, Technical Assistant, International 
Standards Division, Civil Aeronautics Board 

Alternates 

James F. Angier, Chief, Foreign Section, Civil Aeronautics 
Administration, Department of Commerce 

Norman R. Hagen, Meteorological Attache, American Em- 
bassy, London 

Victor J. Kayne, Airways Operations Specialist (Icao) 
Civil Aeronautics Administration, Department of 
Commerce 

Ray F. Nicholson, Representative, Flight Operations 
(Icao) Civil Aeronautics Administration, Depart- 
ment of Commerce 

George L. Rand, Representative, International Telecom- 
munications Standards, Civil Aeronautics Adminis- 
tration, Department of Commerce 

Robert Lawrence Stark, Assistant Branch Chief, Inter- 
national Branch, Aviation Division, Bureau of En- 
gineering, Federal Communications Commission 

Lieut. Comdr. Clement Vaughn, Jr., U.S.N., Search and 
Rescue Agency, United States Coast Guard, Depart- 
ment of the Treasury 

Advisers 

Alden Patterson Bowser, Radio Engineer in Charge, 
Terminal Aids, Civil Aeronautics Administration, 
Department of Commerce 

Alick B. Currie, Airways Operations Specialist, Civil 
Aeronautics Administration, Department of Com- 
merce 

Maj. Paul M. Hulier, U.S.A.F., United States Air Force, 
Germany 

Maj. Grove C. Johnson, U.S.A.F., Icao Liaison Section, 
Headquarters Military Air Transport Service, Depart- 
ment of the Air Force 

Comdr. Herman T. Krol, U.S.N., Head, Airspace Section, 
Civil Aviation Branch, Department of the Navy 

Scott Magness, Civil Aeronautics Administration Coordi- 
nator, London 

William C. Peck, Deputy Chief, Planning and Develop- 
ment Branch, Engineering Division, Directorate of 
Installations, Department of the Air Force 

Ralph D. Rhea, Division Communications Superintendent, 
Atlantic Division, Pan American World Airways 

Comdr. William N. Stevens, U.S.N.. Staff Aerologist for the 
Commander-in-chief of Naval Forces, Eastern Atlantic 
and Mediterranean, Department of the Navy 

Secretary of Delegation 

Mason LaSelle, Division of International Conferences, 
Department of State 



Staff 

Mary E. Bean, Office of Chief of Technical Mission, Civil 
Aeronautics Administration, Department of Commerce 

Isabell Erzen, Division of International Conferences, De- 
partment of State 

It is expected that about 20 governments will 
attend this meeting for the purpose of examining 
the problems of air navigation and operations in 
the region. The delegates will prepare a plan of 
aids to navigation and recommended practices in 
the region, make recommendations to the Council 
of Icao regarding facilities, services, and priori- 
ties on the international civil air routes, and stim- 
ulate the development of aviation and safety 
methods and measures in the region. It is ex- 
pected that the meeting will follow the usual pat- 
tern of regional meetings of the Icao and that the 
principal committees formed will inclitde aero- 
dromes, air routes, and ground aids, air-traiBc con- 
trol, communications, meteorology, and search and 
rescue. The practices and procedures recom- 
mended by the meeting will be forwarded to the 
Icao Council at Montreal for consideration and 
approval. 

The African-Indian Ocean meeting will be the 
last in the original series of ten regional meetings 
scheduled by the Icao to survey aviation facilities 
throughout the world. 

U.S. Observers Attend World Engineering 
Conference 

The Department of State announced on March 
21 that the following United States unofficial ob- 
servers are attending the Second International 
Technical Congress of the World Engineering 
Conference, which convened at Cairo on March 
20, 1949 : 

Charles R. Enlow, Agricultural Attach^, American Em- 
bassy, Ankara 
T. W. Mermel, Engineering Assistant to the Commissioner 

of Reclamation, Department of the Interior 
Edwin R. Raymond, Agricultural Attach^, American Em- 
bassy, Cairo 
Commander Robert D. Thorson, Assistant Naval Attach^, 

American Embassy, Cairo 
Col. Theodore A. Weyher, Assistant Military Attach^, 
American Legation, Bern 

One of the major sections of the Congress will 
be devoted to the problem of water in the Middle 
East. This problem of the Middle Eastern coun- 
tries is in many respects similar to that of our 
AVestern States, and the Congress will provide an 
opportunity to exchange views on the subject. 
Other subjects to be discussed will be industrial 
raw materials and their rational utilization 
throughout the world and the social aspect of 
technical development and of raw material. 



April 3, 7949 



IRO: Executive Committee and General Council 

Tlio Department of State announced on March 
22 tlie f<tllf)winp U. S. Delepiitions to meetings of 
the Executive Committees and the General Council 
of the International Refugee Organization (Iro) 
scheduled to meet at Geneva, March 24-28 and 
March 2!)-April 9, 1949, respectively: 

Fourth Meeting of the Executire Committee 

United States Representative 

George L. Warren, Adviser on Refugees and Displaced 
Persons, Department of State 

Adviser 

Alvin J. Roseinan, Cliief, International Activities Branch, 
Bureau of the Budget 

Second Session of the General Council 

United States Representative 

George L. Warren, Adviser on Refugees and Displaced 
Persons, Department of State 

Advisers 

Koswell D. McClelland, Economic Analyst, American 

Legation. Bern 
Paul McCormack, Chief, Repatriation and Resettlement 

Office, Operations Uraneh, Civil Affairs Division, 

European Command 
Alvin J. Roseman, Chief. International Activities Branch, 

Bureau of the Budget 
Lt. Col. R()l)eit L. Walton, Deputy Chief, Internal Affairs 

Branch, Civil Affairs Division, United States Forces, 

Austria 

These meetings will consider the Director Gen- 
eral's report on the activities of the Iro for the 
period July 1-Decemher 31, 1948, the financial 
report for the same period, the question of i>ay- 
ment by the Iito for the movement of Jewish 
refugees from Central Europe to Palestine, the 
Director General's statement on plans for the 
liquidation of the Iro and his recommendations 
with respect to proposals which may be made by 
the Iro to the United Nations Economic and Social 
Council concerning action which may be taken by 
the United Nations with regard to problems of 
refugees after tlie liquidation of the Iro. 

Protection of Childhood 

The Department of State announced on March 
17 that Elisabeth Shirley Enochs, Director of the 
International Cooperation Service, Children's 
Bureau, Federal Security Agency, will attend the 
annual meeting of the Directing Council of the 
American Intei-nsitional Institute for the Protec- 
tion of Childliood as alternate technical delegate 
of the United States. The meeting is scheduled 
to be held at Montevideo, April 1-2. Katharine 
F. Lenroot, Chief of the Children's Bureau, who 
is technical delegate of the United States to the 
Directing Council is unable to attend the forth- 
coming meeting. United States participation in 
the Institute was authorized by a joint resolution 
of Congress in May 1928. 



ITU: U.S. Submits Proposal on Telegraph 
Regulations 

Tlie United States Government will send rep- 
resentatives, to be named at a later date, to the 
Administrative Conference to Revise the Inter- 
national Telephone and Telegraph Regulations. 
This meeting, sponsored by the International Tele- 
communication Union (Itu), is being held under 
the auspices of the French Government and is 
scheduled to convene at Paris on May 19. 1949. 

Although for many years a party to international 
communication conventions, the United States has 
not heretofore become a party to the International 
Telegraph Regulations. After consideration of 
the views of the telegraph industry and users, this 
Government has concluded that it should partici- 
pate in the Paris meeting in the interest of devel- 
oping regidations to which the United States may 
adhere. A letter has been forwarded to the Secre- 
tary General of the International Telecommunica- 
tion Union, at Geneva, containing the text of the 
United States proposals for revising the existing 
International Telegraph Regulations (Cairo, 
1938). These proposals will be placed on the 
agenda for consideration by the conference when 
it convenes in May. 

The United States does not expect to adhere to 
the International Telephone Regulations, but will 
be represented by observers on the committees of 
the conference relating to the International Tele- 
phone Regulations. 

The proposals of the United States include pro- 
visions regarding the classifications of telegrams 
and rates. These provisions were made public in 
a report of tlie Federal Communications Commis- 
sion dated February 23, 1949, Docket 9094, and 
propose that there should be unification of the rates 
for ordinary telegrams composed of plain lan- 
guage, cipher language, code language, or any 
mixture thereof. Such unification of rates would 
take place initially at 75 percent of the prevailing 
rates for ordinary full-rate messages. Other pro- 
posals refer to the revision of the existing Inter- 
national Telegraph Regidations and are of a 
technical nature concerning accounting and tariffs, 
and operations. 

These proposals were formulated by the Federal 
Comnuinications Commission and submitted to the 
Department of State for transmission to the Inter- 
national Telecommunication Union. The Com- 
mission held public hearings and sponsored two 
working groujis, composed of government experts 
ami representatives of the telegraiih industry and 
users, lor liie purpose of drafting the proposals. 

This (iovernment participated in the Telegraph 
Regulations Revision Committee of the Itu, which 
met at Geneva in January of this year. At this 
meeting the United States made known its objec- 
tions to the existing telegraph regidations and 
indicated the form that the new regulations should 
take in order to be acceptable to it. 



Departmenl of State Bulletin 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



Provisional Rectifications Along the Western German Frontier 

COMMUNEQUE OF BELGIUM, FRANCE, LUXEMBOURG, NETHERLANDS, 
UNITED KINGDOM, AND THE UNITED STATES' 



It was announced at the conclusion of the Lon- 
don talks on Germany on June 7, 1948, that pro- 
posals were being submitted to the Governments 
of the United States, France, the United Kingdom, 
and the Benelux countries for bringing about pro- 
visionallv certain minor territorial adjustments in 
the western boundary of Germany.^ 

The six governments, taking into account the un- 
foreseen delays to which the conclusion of a final 
peace settlement with Germany has been subjected, 
consider it necessary to proceed to a preliminary 
examination of the problem of frontiers and to put 
into effect the minor adjustments justified by ad- 
ministrative necessities and by conditions affecting 
communications along Germany's western frontier. 
The problem of Germany's frontiers will be re- 
examined and settled definitively in its entirety 
at the time of final peace settlement. 

After detailed study, the six governments have 
approved the proposals for provisional adjust- 
ments of the frontier which have been submitted 
to them by a working-party meeting in Paris. 

The six governments have also examined the 
frontiers of the Saar territory and have agreed 
that, pending confirmation or modification by the 
terms of the final peace settlement, the present 
frontier shall be maintained with the minor 
modifications. 

The areas affected by the adjustments will be 
placed under the administration of the countries 
adjacent to Germany. 

These adjustments may be confirmed or modified 
by the terms of the final settlement concerning 
Germany. 

The London recommendations fixed a very re- 
stricted frame of reference for the working party. 
Only those proposals might be examined which 
involved no appreciable loss to the German econ- 
omy and which, being of minor character only, 
could be regarded as desirable to eliminate local 
anomalies and improve communications. 



This limited frame of reference did not permit 
the working party to take into consideration cer- 
tain major territorial claims of Germany's western 
neighbors. 

Within the limits thus defined, 31 minor rectifi- 
cations will be effected at a date to be announced 
later, along the frontier between Germanj% on the 
one hand and the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxem- 
bourg, the Saar, and France, on the other. 

These will affect a total area of approximately 
135 square kilometers (approximately 52 square 
miles) and a population of some 13,500 persons. 

These modifications have been defined in general 
outline. Their exact limits will be fixed by de- 
limitation commissions. These commissions will 
make their decision after having heard if this ap- 
pears desirable, the local authorities and persons 
in the area capable of giving information or ex- 
planations necessary for the accomplishment of 
the commissions' task. 

All measures will be taken with a view to safe- 
guarding the interests of the inhabitants, as re- 
gards both their personal status and their movable 
and real property. No one will be forced to ac- 
cept the nationality of the country to which the 
area is attached. Persons not desiring to accept 
this nationality will enjoy the protection accorded 
to persons and property by the laws of the country 
and no crimination will be exercised against them. 
They will have the right to settle in Germany, in 
which case they will be allowed to take with them 
their movable property, either retaining owner- 
ship of their real property or selling it and being 
permitted to transfer the funds to Germany under 
the special regulations which will be prescribed. 
They will, on the other hand, have the right to 
continue to reside in the area concerned, if they 
so desire. 

' Released to the press simultaneously by all countries 
on Mar. 26, 1949. 

' Bulletin of June 20, 1948, p. 807. For communique 
on the Ruhr, see Bulletin of Jan. 9, 1949, p. 43. 



April 3, 1949 



The North Atlantic Pact: A Historic Step in the Development 
of American Foreign Relations 



BY CHARLES E. BOHLEN > 
Counselor of the Department of State 



The text of the proposed North Atlantic pact 
has been made public' The Secretary of State, in 
a Nation-wide broadcast last Friday nif^iit, has 
explained to the American people the general pur- 
poses of the pact and most of its specific provisions. 

It will be signed during the first week of April 
by the Foreign Ministers of the participating 
countries, who will come to Washington for that 
purpose. It will then be submitted by the Presi- 
dent to the Senate of the United States for the con- 
sent of that body to its ratification. 

In accordance with our Constitutional processes 
and operation of our democratic system, tlie execu- 
tive branch of the Government is submitting to the 
judgment of tlie people and their elected repre- 
sentatives this measure to enhance the preservation 
of peace in the world and the security of the 
United States. 

This treaty, which has been laid before you, was 
not hastily improvised. It has not been considered 
and negotiated in an atmosphere of alarm and 
hysteria. Tliat has been reserved for those who 
do not wish to see the purposes of this pact 
achieved. 

It has received the most careful consideration 
possible from the executive branch of this Govern- 
ment, which has kept in close touch with the 
leaders of the United States Senate. 

It is in full conformity with the advice of the 
Senate embodied in the resolution passed by a vote 
of 64 to 4 on June 11, 1948.' 

It has been carefully worked out with the repre- 
sentatives of the nations forming part of the North 
Atlantic connnunitj' to which we belong in order 
to give the clearest expression possible to their 
joint aims and purposes. It has been drafted with 
the most scrupulous regard for the Constitutional 
processes of this and of the other countries which 
have joined with us in the association. 

It is an historic step in the development of the 
foreign relations of this Republic. But it is not in 
any sense a sudden or sharp departure from the 
policy which this Government has pursued since 
the end of the war. On the contrary, it is the 
logical development of those policies and also of 
those of the nations sharing our concept of civi- 
lization, who together with us have formed, and 

' Address delivered before the Philadelphia Bulletin 
Forum on Mar. 23, 19-19, and released to the press on the 
same date. 

'Buu.icTiN of Mar. liO, 1949, p. 339; also printed as De- 
partment of State publication 34G4. 

'Bulletin of July 18, 1948, p. 79. 

428 



U.S. Interest in Security of Areas Outside 
North Atlantic Community 

STATEMENT OF SECRETARY ACHESON 

Duriug the drafting of the North Atlantic pact, 
we were aware of the possibility that our formal 
expression of serious interest in the security of 
countries in the North Atlantic area might be mis- 
interpreted as implying a lessening of our interest 
in the security of countries in other areas, particu- 
larly the Near and .Middle East. 

In my radio discu.ssion of the North Atlantic 
pact last Friday night, I tried to make clear our 
continuing interest in the security of areas out- 
side tlie North -Atlantic community, particularly in 
Greece, Turkey, and Iran.' I will repeat the por- 
tion of my speech bearing upon this subject : 

"In the compact world of today, the security of 
the United States cannot be defined in terms of 
boundaries and frontiers. A .serious threat to in- 
ternational peace and .security anywhere in the 
world is of direct concern to this country. There- 
fore it is our policy to help free peoples to maintain 
their integrity and independence, not only in West- 
ern Europe or the Americas, but wherever the aid 
we are able to provide can be effective. Our actions 
in supporting the integrity and independence of 
Greece, Turkey, and Iran are expressions of that 
determination. Our interest in the security of 
these countries has been made clear, and we shall 
continue to pursue that policy." 

I think that should speak for itself. 

' BuLLETi.N of Mar. 27, 1949, p. 384. 



still do, the chief supporters of the United Na- 
tions. 

Tonight I propose to deal primarily with those 
questions or doubts which may perhaps arise in 
the minds of the people of the United States in 
relation to this treaty. 

For example : Why is such a treaty necessary 
when the Charter of the United Nations was con- 
ceived as a means of assuring protection and se- 
curit V to all the nations of the world ? 

I tliink the answer is familiar to all of us and 
is to be found in the chronicle of events since the 
end of World War II. It is to be found in the 
fate of Eastern Europe, in the record of ob.'^truc- 
tion in tiie United Nations itself, and in the fact 
which cannot be ignored — that formal peace has 
not brought security or banished fear from the 
world. 

The United Nations, whose Charter bears so 
strong an imprint of American thought and initia- 
tive, was and .^till is based on the concept that 
aggression anywhere is a mutter of concern to 

Department of State Bulletin 



all the peoples and nations of the world. It was 
intended to provide a meclianisni whereby this con- 
cern could be translated into action in order to 
enfoi-ce peace against any would-be aggressor. It 
was further based upon the belief that the prin- 
cipal powers which had borne the greatest respon- 
sibility in the last war would act in unison in 
defense of the purposes and principles of the Char- 
ter to which they had solemnly subscribed. The 
unity of the great powers was to be a unity brought 
about by an honest observation on their part of 
the rules of international conduct set forth in the 
Charter. It was not, as some state, to be a unity 
achieved at the expense of principle and through 
a series of deals in order to preserve a solid front 
of the great powers against the I'est of the world. 

I think the record shows that four of the five 
permanent members of the Security Council who 
were given this special position have, on the whole, 
faithfully and honestly been guided in their for- 
eign relations by the Charter. The same cannot 
be said of the fifth member — the Soviet Union. 

I shall not recite the dreary record of Soviet 
frustration and obstruction in the United Na- 
tions — the abuse of the veto, the defiance of resolu- 
tions of the General Assembly. 

I mention it merely to show that the fault lies 
not in the United Nations itself, nor in the mech- 
anism set up under the Charter, but in the policies 
and attitude which the Government of one of the 
great powers has pursued in relation to the or- 
ganization. As a result, the United Nations has 
not been permitted to establish throughout the 
world the condition of security for which it was 
designed. 

However, the great objectives of the Charter — 
the maintenance of international peace and secu- 
rity, the creation of conditions which will foster 
and encourage the rule of law rather than force 
and anarchy in international affairs — still remain 
valid. They still remain the aims of the United 
States and those like-minded countries which have 
joined with us in the Atlantic pact. 

The North Atlantic pact is no substitute in any 
way for the United Nations, but the utilization of 
what Secretary Marshall referred to before the 
General Assembly in 1947 as the "untapped re- 
sources" of the Charter for the advancement of 
the purposes for which the United Nations was 
founded. The pact is not only in full conformity 
with the great aims of the Charter but it is, as the 
published text reveals, squarely within its pro- 
visions. 

Under article 51, the Charter expressly recog- 
nizes the inherent right of individual and collective 
self-defense, which is the birthright of every free 
and independent nation. It makes clear that it 
was not the intention of the framers of the Charter 
to favor anj' potential aggressor by denying to the 
law-abiding and pacific state the exercise of the 
elementary right of self-defense. 



The pact specifically recognizes the overriding 
responsibility of the Security Council for the 
maintenance of international peace and security. 
Article 5 states that any measures adopted by the 
parties to the present treaty to resist armed attack 
shall not only be reported to the Security Council 
as the Charter provides but shall be terminated as 
soon as the Security Council has taken the neces- 
sary measures to restore international peace and 
security. 

In certain quarters it has already been asserted 
that this treaty is provocative and aggressive in 
relation to the Soviet Union. This will continue to 
be asserted by certain Governments, organizations, 
and persons who do not wish to see confidence, 
securit\', and recovery return to the world. 

There are a number of answers to this question. 
The terms of the treaty themselves make very clear 
the defensive nature of this pact. Article 1 specifi- 
cally binds the parties to settle any international 
dispute in which they may be involved bj' pacific 
means and furthermore contains a solemn re- 
affirmation of their obligation under the Charter 
to refrain from armed force or threat of armed 
force in the conduct of their international affairs. 
Behind this pledge stand the character and policies 
of the countries which are parties to this treaty. 
The very nature of their institutions makes a cal- 
culated plan of aggression a virtual impossibility. 
They are the countries who have not only demon- 
strated their will for peace, but who have the most 
to lose and the least to gain from war. There is, 
however, one very simple and, I think, overriding 
answer to any doubts on this subject which are 
honestly held. The common power of defense au- 
thorized by this treaty will never be exercised un- 
less some country resorts to armed attack against 
one of the parties. The obligation under article 5, 
which, under the conditions stated, might involve 
the use of armed force to meet such an attack, will 
not and cannot be put into effect unless an actual 
armed attack occurs. 

Any nation which professes fears as to this pact 
has the power to render its military aspects non- 
operative by the simple expedient of abiding by the 
commitment in the Charter — not to use force in 
its international relations. Should, however, any 
nation be so unwise, and so criminal, as to launch 
an attack against any member of this community, 
then it would know in advance that it could not 
deal with its intended victim without bringing 
against itself the full weight of the community 
as a whole. 

The Secretary of State has already explained, 
and the public debates and the hearings before the 
Senate will undoubtedly make even clearer, that 
this treaty contains no automatic obligation for 
this country to go to war. We assume the obliga- 
tion to exercise an honest judgment as to what, 
in the face of an armed attack on one of the mem- 
bers, is required to restore and maintain the secu- 
rity of the North Atlantic area. 



April 3, 1949 



In adding to the security of the Xorth Atlantic 
area this treaty is not only contributing to the 
sense of confiaence of the nations involved in 
this treaty, and directly to that of the United 
States, it is also contributing to the maintenance 
of international peace and security in the world, 
for under modern conditions it is difficult to imag- 
ine any war that does not involve the vital area 
covered by the treaty. 

If the would-be aggressor knows in advance that 
this area — without question one of the most vital 
strategic areas in the world — has been rendered 
secure by the voluntary and defensive association 
of the nations joined by this ocean, it is doubtful 
if it would be tempted to take the first step leading 
to the outbreak of general hostilities. 

Another question which inevitably arises with 
respect to tliis pact is its connection with any 
future program of military supplies from this 
country. In other words: Is there a price tag 
attached to flie Atlantic pact? 

Tlie answer to that is "No." 

Under article 3 of the treaty, we undertake with 
the other signatories to act togetlier as follows : 

In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of 
this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means 
of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will 
maintain and develop tlieir individual and collective 
capacity to resist armed attack. 

Under this article, the United States accepts an 
obligation to use its honest judgment as to the 
wisest and most effective contribution it can make 
to further the purposes of this treaty. 

The President has already announced his inten- 
tion to present to Congress a recommendation pro- 
viding for American assistance in the form of arms 
and equipment to other countries when, in the 
opinion of this Government, such assistance is in 
our national interest. 

A number of considerations will, of course, enter 
into the drawing up of any such program, with 
particular reference to the effect upon our do- 
mestic economy, the state of our own national de- 
fense establishment, and full recognition that it 
is the policy of tliis Government and of the 
countries associated with us in this pact to give 
clear priority to economic recoverj'. This means 
that the supply of any arms and equipment under 
the proposed program to foreign countries will 
be done in such a manner as not to impair but 
rather to assist the major goal of economic re- 
covery and reconstruction. If Congress approves 
this measure and appropriates the funds necessary 
for its execution, it would clearly become one of 
the principal means by which the United States 
could make its contribution to the effectiveness of 
the pact. 

I said, in the beginning, that this treaty repre- 
sents an historic step in the development of Ameri- 
can foreign relations. This is true in the sense that 
for the first time in our historj' we are prepared 
formally to enter into an association for 20 years 



with countries outside this hemisphere, under 
wiiich we undertake to regard an attack on any of 
tliose countries as the equivalent of an attack on 
the United States. 

It is a recognition of the fact that in the inter- 
dependence of the modern world there are certain 
geogi'aphic areas whose safety is directly and 
vitally linked with the safety of the United States. 
It is a recognition, furthermore, of a community 
of interest and civilization which, twice in history, 
has found its expression in unity only after ag- 
gression occurred, but which now is clearly, 
calmly, and explicitly proclaimed to the whole 
world. 

It should remove from the mind of any aggres- 
sor the tempting prospect of being able to deal 
with its victims one by one. 

It permits the nations who joined in this pact 
to work out an integrated and intelligent system 
of defense for the whole area so that if, despite 
every effort, the pact should fail of its chief i)ur- 
pose of preventing a recourse to armed attack, the 
victims of this attack will not, as in the past, have 
to improvise in haste and in mortal jieril the 
measures essential for their self-preservation. 

This pact effectively links the two comnumities 
which stem from a common civilization on both 
sides of tlie Atlantic. 

It is limited in its operation to an attack in 
Europe, including the French departments of 
Algiers, or North America and the intervening air 
and sea spaces between them. It is so limited not 
by any intention to be an exclusive arrangement, 
but simply because, in a formal association of this 
kind dealing with a specific area, there must be 
some relation between the extent of the commit- 
ment and the possibility of makino; it effective. 
But any would-be aggressor would, I think, be 
making a tragic mistake if he believed that non- 
inclusion, for geographic or other reasons, of other 
nations in this pact means that the independence 
and integrity of such nations are not a matter of 
deep concern to us. 

Tliis pact is designed to contriiiute to world 
peace by securing an area of vital interest to the 
t'nited States and to the European nations which 
form a natural part of that area. It does not 
imply by any means that it is only in this area that 
we have an interest in preserving peace. 

Many of the aspects of this treaty cannot pos- 
sibly be covered in so limited a time. It is of ex- 
treme importance that the people of the United 
States thoroughl}' understand the meaninji and 
intent of this treaty. An undertaking of this na- 
ture cannot possibly succeed unless its full signifi- 
cance is understood and supported by the jieople. 
It is not tlie type of measure that can be entered 
into halfheartedly or superliciallv if it is to 
achieve its purpose. AYe are confident that with 
full understanding will come full support and that 
the people of this country will thereby demon- 
strate to the world that they have not only learned 
the lessons of history but have learned them well. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Voice of America to Iran Inaugurated 



On March 21 the Voice of America beamed to 
Iran the first of a daily, 30-minute Persian broad- 
cast of information and commentary. It was the 
first Voice of America broadcast to the Near East 
since the war. 

The voices of Mr. Barkley and Mr. Allen were 
heard in English and also in Persian translations. 
Ambassador Ala spoke in Persian. 

The remainder of the broadcast consisted of 
news, a roundup of editorial opinion from Ameri- 
can newspapers, and a feature about Iranians in 
the United States. 

The program will be beamed to Iran daily from 
11 : 30 a. m. to 12 : 00 noon e. s. t. (8 to 8 : 30 p. m. 
Iranian time) and relayed by American trans- 
mitters at Munich and by facilities leased from 
BBC. The new broadcast series will increase to 
20 the number of languages beamed by the Voice 
of America. 

President Truman's Message 

On behalf of the people of the United States, I 
take great pleasure in extending cordial greetings 
and best wishes to the people of Iran, on this, 
the first Persian-language broadcast of the Voice 
of America. 

It is my sincere hope that this program will 
serve to strengthen the historic bond of friend- 
ship which already links the Iranian and Amer- 
ican peoples. We look forward to a period of 
continued good will and of increased understand- 
ing between your nation and mine. 

Such understanding will help toward the cre- 
ation of tlie kind of world the American people 
and their government most desire: a peaceful 
world, free of the fears of war, free of oppression, 
and free of want: a prosperous world in which 
peoples of every creed, color and nationality can 
live together as good neighbors in friendship and 
fellowship. I am certain that your people arid 
ours stand earnestly together in this desire. May 
the new year, which you celebrate today, see great 
achievement towards the goal of peace and free- 
dom for all mankind. 

Vice President Barkley^s Message 

I take great pleasure in extending greetings to 
the people of Iran. 

Our admiration goes to the Iranian people for 
their past resistance to antidemocratic forces and 
we look forward to continued good will between 
your nation and ours — to a period of increased 
understanding. 

Seldom if ever in recorded history has there 
been a greater need for international understand- 
ing — for intelligent separation of truth from dis- 



tortion. Much of the friction which has devel- 
oped in the wake of the war could be dispelled 
if the true desires of the people and their leaders 
could be brought into clear focus. 

Assistant Secretary Allen's Message 

It was my privilege, while serving as American 
Ambassador in Iran, to have frequent opportunity 
to speak directly with the Iranian people. I have 
missed this privilege keenly since my return to 
the United States. 

I am therefore especially glad to be able to speak 
directly to you again, this time over the Voice 
of America. 

The broadcasting service which we are inaugu- 
rating to Iran today is dedicated to bringing the 
people of our two countries closer together in 
international friendship. Through these broad- 
casts we shall seek to convey the good will which 
our people hold for your country. 

We shall attempt, in our Persian language trans- 
missions, to let the people of Iran know more 
about America and the American people: about 
our genuine efforts to achieve lasting world peace ; 
about our hopes for a world of greater prosperity 
in which we can all share ; but above all, our desire 
that Iran shall always be a strong and indepen- 
dent nation. 

It is my sincere hope that these broadcasts will 
give the Iranian people a fuller appreciation of 
America's deep interest in the welfare of Iran, 
which I assure you, is constant. 

It is now my honor and pleasure to present to 
you the Ambassador of your own Government, 
His Excellency, Hussein Ala. 

Ambassador Aid's Message 

Mt dear fellow countrymen, On the occasion 
of the New Year, I am delighted and proud to 
convey to you two congratulations. Firstly, on 
account of the Noi'ouz celebration and the safety 
and well being of our beloved King, who by the 
Grace of God, was saved from the attempt made 
on his life by an evil element, and was preserved 
to continue to render everlasting public service to 
the country and the people of Iran. 

My other congratulation is for the inauguration 
of the program of the Voice of America to Iran; 
one of the services under the charge of a true 
friend of Iran, Mr. George Allen. 

As American Ambassador to Iran, Mr. Allen 
manifested his friendly feelings towards our 
country, at a very critical time, and used all his 
eifoi'ts to strengthen sincere relations between the 
two countries. 

Now in his new post, animated by the same 
feelings, he desires to bring to the people of Iran 



April 3, J 949 



news and interesting information about the cus- 
toms and the way of life in America as well as 
world events. 

I do not believe that anyone can deny that the 
most effective means of good understanding among 
nations and the maintenance of world peace is the 
freedom of the press, exchange of views, and dis- 
semination of correct information. I am. tiiere- 
fore, certain that this new step of the American 
Government in extending the Voice of America to 
the far-olT land of Iran will be received by you 
with eagerness and good will and that you will 
draw due benefit from it. 

On my part, I will do my best, with the co- 
operation of my colleagues, to reciprocate this pro- 
gram by informing the American nation of the 
events and happenings in Iran. 

During my stay of over three years in Wash- 
ington, I have become convinced that this great 
country has no other purpose or aim but the main- 
tenance of peace and good will in the world ; it 
desires to cooperate in the progress, and social 
and economic development of other nations, so 
that America too might benefit from the fruits 
of such a desirable state of affairs. 

American foreign policy is based on the support 
and strengthening of the United Nations and the 
observance of the Charter. This is the vei\y policy 
and ideal of the Government and people of Iran. 

Our country has the distinction of being the 
only country in the Middle East which during the 
war gave real and valuable assistance to the Allies 
and made outstanding contributions and sacrifices 
to further the common cause in the defeat of 
aggression and oppression. Having done this, 
Iran later realized the necessity of devoting atten- 
tion to rehabilitation in the postwar period. She 
has undertaken an economic development program 
to raise the standard of living and bring prosperity 
to the people. Under His Majesty's auspices, firm 
steps are being taken to improve economic condi- 
tions and promote the welfare of the people, more 
especially in tlie fields of health, education, and 
agriculture. This desirable policy and self-help 
will enable us to obtain considerable assistance. 

All the Iranians residing in America, loving 
their country as they do, pray that, under tiie lead- 
ership of their benevolent Shah-in-Shah, the 
Majlis, the Senate, and the Government may suc- 
ceed in bringing about basic reforms and pre- 
serving the rigiits, independence, and territorial 
integrity of Iran. They earnestly trust that in 
the coming year and for many long years to come, 
Iran may enjoy happiness and prosperity. 

May gladness come to the land of Iran, our country, 
May the land and its people ever enjoj' prosperity ; 
Should there be no Iran, let me not be; 
Let there be no Iranian alive such condition to see.' 



' Translated from the Shah-Ncmch, famous Iranian epic, 
by the Iraniau Ambassador. 



Reports of the Exertion of Soviet 
Pressure on Iran 

Statement by Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press March 23) 

For some time now, our Embassy at Tehran has 
reported Soviet pressure upon Iran in the form of 
persistent press and radio propaganda, alleging, 
among other things, activities by United States 
advisers in Iran hostile to the Soviet Union. That 
pressure seems to have intensified in recent weeks. 
AVhen Ambassador Ala called on me on the four- 
teenth of this month, he iianded me a copy of a 
memorandum to the Soviet Ambassador in Tehran 
in which the Iranian Government protested against 
disturbing Soviet press and radio attacks upon 
Iran. This memorandum was also released to the 
press in the Iranian capital. One type of Soviet 
allegation mentioned in the Iranian memorandum 
is that "American advisers intend to transform 
Iran into a military base to be used against the 
Soviet Union." Such charges are altogether false 
and demonstrably untrue. In this connection, I 
might refer to certain statements which I tried to 
emphasize in my radio talk last Friday : "This 
country is not planning to make war against any- 
one. It is not seeking war. It abhors war." 

I might say in connection with Soviet allega- 
tions of hostile United States activity in Iran what 
I have already said with regard to allegations that 
aggressive designs underlie our particijiation in 
the Atlantic pact, namely, tliat this "can rest only 
on a malicious misrepresentation or a fantastic mis- 
understanding of tlie nature and aims of American 
society." 



Chester H. Opal Transferred From 
Post in Warsaw 

[Released to the press March 23] 

Assistant Secretary George V. Allen announced 
on March 23 the transfer to another post of Chester 
H. Opal, attache at the Embassy in Warsaw, 
wliose recall was requested by the Polish Foreign 
Office because tlie ^VircIc^<H BitUetin issued by the 
United States Information Service in Warsaw re- 
ferred to Poland as a "Soviet satellite."' Mr. Allen 
said that the United States Government was ac- 
ceding to the request of the Polish Government 
that Mr. Opal leave Poland. 

Mr. Allen pointed out that the article in the 
Polish edition of the Wireless Bulletin to which 
the Polisli Government took exception contained, 
among other tilings, an immoderately worded de- 
nunciation of "point 4" in tlie President's inau- 
gural achhess l)y a duly accredited representative 
of tlie Polish Cioveinnient. This kind of fair and 
unprejudiced reporting is not to be found in the 
controlled press of Poland. 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



Procedure for Filing Claims for Looted 
Property in Japan 

[Released to the press March 21] 

On March 21 the Department of State called 
attention to the fact that April 5, 1949, is the 
closing date, established under the Far Eastern 
Commission policy for the filing of claims with 
the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers 
for the restitution of identified property looted 
from areas occupied by the Japanese. After that 
date tlie Supreme Commander may, in his dis- 
cretion, accept only claims for property known 
to have been looted but not yet identified as to 
ownership. 

In an earlier announcement, persons whose 
property was looted from occupied areas were 
urged to file claims for restitution since substan- 
tial quantities of looted property unidentified as 
to ownership or origin which had been recovered 
in Japan may be liquidated unless valid claims 
are forthcoming.^ 

It was pointed out that, in general, claims for 
restitution must be filed with the Supreme Com- 
mander througli the present government of the 
area from which the property was looted. The 
Department of State is prepared to accept such 
claims on behalf of United States nationals for 
forwarding to appropriate foreign governments. 
Claims should describe the jDroperty as fully as 
possible to facilitate its identification, should 
state the ciicumstances under which it disap- 
peared, and should be accompanied by proof of 
ownership. 



Work and Victory Demonstration in Greece ^ 

Statement iy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press March 23] 

As you may know, the Greek Government and 
people are this week conducting a series of demon- 
strations for "work and victory"' to assert tlieir 
determination to preserve their independence in 
the face of rebellion from within, which is largely 
directed by antidemocratic forces outside Greece's 
borders. 

The demonstrations being held throughout 
Greece today are devoted to the theme of "inter- 
national solidarity." I am happy to reaffirm the 
solidarity of the Government and people of the 
United States with the Government and people 
of Greece in their struggle to preserve Greek in- 
dependence and democracy. 

Greece, which gave democracy to the world, was 
also the site of one of history's earliest attempts 
to give legal expression to international solidarity 
on behalf of peace. This was the Amphictyonic 
League, founded by the independent city states of 



ancient Greece five hundred years before Christ. 

Today, Greece is again a testing ground of a 
new organization, the United Nations, established 
to provide a means for the peaceful settlement of 
international disputes. By extending their sup- 
port to Greece at the present time, the American 
people are endeavoring not only to act as good 
neighbors, but also to give practical effect to their 
determination that the principle of collective or- 
ganization for peace, to which the Amphictyonic 
League pointed the way, shall be made to work. 

The present rededication of the Greek people to 
"work and victory" is a renewed manifestation of 
the valor of the Hellenic race. The final success 
of their efforts and of those being made by the 
United States and other members of the United 
Nations on their behalf will insure the pi'eserva- 
tion of that race. It will also mark important 
progress in mankind's long quest for enduring 
peace. 

Statement hy the President 

[Released to the press by the White House March 25] 

I have been deeply impressed by the "work and 
victory" manifestations in Greece, demonstrating 
the united will of the Greek people to labor and 
fight for the preservation of their ancient demo- 
cratic heritage and of their independence, so 
jjroudly proclaimed 128 years ago today. I have 
also been moved by the concurrent expressions of 
Greek ajjpreciation of American aid and of the 
Greek people's determination to use the help ex- 
tended by their American and other friends to the 
best advantage. 

Greek heroism displayed in the Greek War of 
Independence and in the First and Second World 
Wars evoked the admiration and enlisted the sup- 
port of Americans. Today, on this anniversary 
of Greek independence, the reaffirmation of Greek 
resistance to a new alien threat is a further shining 
example of courage in the face of adversity. 

Despite the continuing ravages of the foreign- 
inspired guerrilla warfare, the Greek people re- 
main determined to rebuild their own land in their 
own way, in freedom and in peace. This is the 
significance of the "work and victory" rally. The 
spirit of the people and the recent successes of the 
Greek armed forces confirm my confidence that 
the new totalitarian pressure will be contained, 
whatever difficulties may lie ahead. 

The American people are proud of their part 
in helping to preserve Greek independence and the 
structure of world peace through the Greek aid 
program. 

' Bulletin of Aug. 22, 1948, p. 245. 

■ Tlie President of tlie United States named Henry F. 
Grady, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary 
of the United States of America to Greece, as his Personal 
Representative with the rank of Special Ambassador to at- 
tend the celebration. 



Apn7 3, 1949 



Korean Ambassador Presents Credentials 

[Released to the press March 25] 

The remarks of the newly appointed Amha^mdor 
of Korea, Dr. John M. Chang, upon the occa- 
sion of the presentation of his letter of credence, 
on March 25 follow : 

Mr. President: It is my proud and unique 
privilege to deliver into Your Excellency's hands 
this letter of credence of the Honorable President 
of the Republic of Korea, Dr. Syngman Rhee, 
accrediting me before Your Excellency as his first 
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary 
in the United States of America. 

This historic ceremony today is evidence of the 
earnest desire of the people and the Government 
of Korea to maintain and to make even closer the 
most friendly relations between our two Govern- 
ments, united by strong bonds of sympathy and 
mutual interest.' My people have watched and 
studied with profound admiration and interest the 
political, economic and cultural achievements of 
3'our great people. 

I wish to express to Your Excellency that my 
Government and my people are sincerely ap- 
preciative of the part played by the United States 
of America within very recent memory in helping 
us in our efforts to regain independence and 
establish a constitutional democracv. We re- 
member particularly, with profound gratitude, 
your very gi-acious action in according the first de 
jure recognition to the Republic of Korea on Jan- 
uary first of this year, thereby restoring the posi- 
tion of our country to an international standing as 
a duly qualified member of the community of the 
freedom-loving nations. 

I am entrusted, Mr. President, with the pleasant 
commission to express to Your Excellency in the 
name of the President of the Republic of Korea 
and our Government the sincere wishes, to which 
I have the honor to join mine, for the personal 
happiness of Your Excellency, who has won by 
such magnificent statesmanship the love and ad- 
miration and respect of all the nations, and the 
prosperity of this gi-eat country. I may assure 
you that my people and my Government are also 
anxious to cooperate with your great people and 
Government in any effort that may be inspired by 
principles of justice and democracy directed to the 
task of establishing a permanent basis for a demo- 
cratic and peaceful workL 

I am aware of the very heavy responsibility of 
my mission, but with the friendship and coopera- 
tion which I feel confident that I shall receive from 
your people and your Government, I will do my 
utmost to carry out my Government's instructions 
with the greatest care and devotion to deserve the 
confidence of Your Excellency and your Govern- 
ment. 

In entering upon my duties, I am fully confident 



that the machinery of diplomatic intercourse set 
in motion today will be productive of results which 
will not only be conducive to our mutual benefit 
but will prove to be an appreciable contribution to 
the task of building a free and prosperous world. 

The Presidents reply to the remarks of the newly 
appointed Ambassador of Korea, Dr. John M. 
Chang, upon the occasion of the presentation of 
his letter of credence follows: 

Mr. Ambassador : It is with sincere pleasure that 
I accept from you, as the first Ambassador Ex- 
traordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Govern- 
ment of the Republic of Korea to the United 
States, this letter of credence from your President, 
Dr. Syngman Rhee. 

This occasion, indeed, marks a significant and 
happy day in both Korean and American history. 
It is a great step toward the fulfilment of the de- 
sires of both our countries and of the objectives of 
United States foreign policy with respect to Korea, 
wherein your country puts on the formal mantle 
of freedom and independence. Over the past 
years, our two Governments and our peoples have 
worked together to achieve these ends, which were 
so clearly stated in the Cairo and Potsdam Declara- 
tions, subscribed to by four of the Allied Nations, 
and the principles of which have since been sup- 
ported by an overwhelming majority of the mem- 
l)er states of the United Nations. 

May I express, Mr. Ambassador, on behalf of 
the people and the Government of the United 
States the deep appreciation we feel for the gra- 
cious sentiments of President Rhee which you 
have conveyed and for your own kind thoughts 
on this memorable day. I may tell you that it 
is the desire of the people of this country that the 
friendly relations existing between our two Gov- 
ernments, which this occasion so eloquently rep- 
resents, shall prosper and grow strong. 

I welcome you, Dr. Chang, in your position as 
Ambassador of the Government of the Republic 
of Korea, and extend to you my congi-atulations, 
sure in the knoweldge of your capabilities and ef- 
forts on the behalf of your own country and of the 
freedom-loving nations of the world. 



Letters of Credence 

Honduras 

The newly appointed Ambassador of Honduras, 
Sefior Dr. Rafael Heliodoro Valle, presented his 
letters of credence to the President on IMarch 24, 
1949. For texts of the ^Vmbassador's remarks and 
the President's reply, see Department of State 
press release 18S of March 24. 

Department of State Bulletin i 



Proclamation Supplement on Trade With Cuba 

The President of the United States issued 
Proclamation 2829,^ supplementing proclamations 
of December 16, 1947, and January 1, 1948, and 
carrying out general agreement on tariffs and trade 
and exclusive trade agreement with Cuba.^ 



THE FOREIGN SERVICE 

American Legation at Pretoria Elevated 
to Embassy 

[Released to the press March 23] 

The American Legation at Pretoria, Union of 
South Africa, will be elevated to Embassy status 
on March 23, when Ambassador-designate North 
Winship presents his credentials to the Governor- 
General of the Union of South Africa at Capetown. 
Mr. Winship has been serving as Minister to the 
Union of South Africa since June 11, 1948, 



THE DEPARTMENT 
Appointment of Officers 

James S. Moose, Jr. as Chief of the Division of African 
Aff.iirs, effective February 9, 1949. 

Donald L. Nicholson as Chief of the Division of Secu- 
rity, effective August 27, 1948. 



Joint Brazil-U.S. Technical Commission 
Report Released 

[Released to the press March 24] 

The Department of State released on March 24 
the full text of the Joint Brazil-United States 
Technical Commission Report. Release was made 
simultaneously in Rio de Janeiro and Washington. 
A summary of this report was released in Wash- 
ington on March 10.^ The Commission, which was 
established by authority of President Dutra and 
President Truman, functioned under the joint 
chairmanship of Octavio Gouvea de Bulhoes and 
John Abbink. It completed its work in Brazil on 
February 7. 

Copies of the report of the Commission, includ- 
ing several special sub-commission studies, are 
expected to be made available to the public in a 
few weeks and will be sold by the Superintendent 
of Documents, Government Printing Office, Wash- 
ington, D.C. Agencies of the Government and 
representatives of private organizations may now 
obtain copies of the report without the special 
studies from the Division of Publications of the 
Department of State which has a limited supply. 



PUBLICATIONS 



Department of State 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Oovem- 
ment Printing Office. Washington 25, D. C. Address re- 
quests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, except 
in the case of free puhlications, which may he obtained 
from the Department of State. 

Naval Forces on the American Lakes: Application and 
Interpretation of the Rush-Bagot Agreement. Treaties 
and Otlier International Acts Series 1830. Pub. 3369. 17 
pp. 10<>. 

Understandings Between the United States and Can- 
ada regarding the Agreement of Apr. 28 and 29, 1817, 
effected b.v Exchange of Notes— Signed at Ottawa 
June 9 and 10, 1930 ; entered into force June 10, 1939; 
signed at Ottawa Oct. 30 and Nov. 2, 1940; entered 
into force Nov. 2, 1940; signed at Ottawa Feb. 26 and 
Mar. 9, 1942; entered into force Mar. 9, 1942; signed 
at Washington Nov. 18 and Dec. 6, 1946 ; entered into 
force Dec. 6, 1946. 

Whaling. Treaties and Other International Acts Series 
1849. Pub. 3383. 17 pp. 200. 

Convention Between the United States and Other Gov- 
ernments—Signed at Washington under date of Dec. 
2, 1946 ; entered into force Nov. 10, 1948. 

Initial Financial and Property Settlement. Treaties and 
Other International Acts Series 1851. Pub. 3395. 25 pp 

m. 

Agreement and Supplement thereto Between the 
United States and Korea— Signed at Seoul Sept. 11, 
1948 ; entered into force Sept. 20, 1948. 

The United States Goal in Tomorrow's World. General 
Foreign Policy Series 6. Pub. 3450. 6 pp. 50. 

A discussion of American foreign policy by Ambassa- 
dor Philip C. Jessup. 

The North Atlantic Pact. General Foreign Policy Series 

7. Pub. 3462. 16 pp. 100. 

The fact sheet on the treaty for collective defense and 
the preservation of peace, security, and freedom in the 
North Atlantic community. 

North Atlantic Treaty: Proposed for Signature During 
First Week in April 1949. General Foreign Policy Series 

8. Pub. 3464. 5 pp. 50. 

Includes the preamble and 14 articles of treaty. 



CORRECTION 

"Security Council Studies Berlin Currency and 
Trade Problems," in the Bulletin of March 27, 
1949, page 377, second line: The date should be 
identified as "released for publication on March 16." 



' 14 Fed. Reg. 1151. 
' Bulletin of Jan. 4, 1948, p. 28. 

'For text of the summary see Documents and State 
Papers for March-April 1949. 



April 3, 1949 



-^' .•■!"l??;?;-^ 







wyyvC€^nl6^ 



. OTit-^^^^/fv-W.." 







General Policy Page 

Cultural Relations: U.S. — U.S.S.R. Efforts To 
Establish Cultural-Scientific Exchange 
Blocked by the U.S.S.R 403 

U.S. Contribution for Relief of Palestine Ref- 
ugees. Statement by the President . . . 419 

U.S. Interest in Security of Areas Outside North 
Atlantic Community. Statement by Sec- 
retary Acheson 428 

Reports of the E.xerlion of Soviet Pressure on 

Iran. Statement by Secretary Acheson . 432 

Work and Victory Demonstration in Greece: 

Statement by Secretary Acheson 433 

Statement by the President 433 

Letters of Credence: Honduras 434 

Korean Ambassador Presents Credentials . . . 434 

The United Nations and 

Specialized Agencies 

The United States in the United Nations . . . 418 
Fleet Admiral Nimitz Nominated as Kashmir 
Plebiscite Administrator. Statement by 

Secretary Acheson 419 

U.N. Documents: A Selected Bibliography . . 419 
Third Session of the Ilo Permanent Migration 

Committee. By Irwin Tobin 421 

U.S. Delegations to International Conferences: 
\ctfo: African-Indian Ocean Regional Meet- 
ing 425 

U.S. Observers Attend World Engineering 

Conference 425 

Iro: E.xecutive Committee and General 

Council 426 

Protection of Childhood 420 

Occupation Matters 

Provisional Rectifications Along the Western 
German Frontier. Communique of Bel- 
gium, France, Luxembourg, Netherlands, 
United Kingdom, and the United States . . 427 



Economic Affairs Page 

U.S. Observers Attend World Engineering Con- 
ference 425 

Itxj: U.S. Submits Proposal on Telegraph 

Regulations 426 

Procedure for Filing Claims for Looted Property 

in Japan 433 

Treaty information 

Provisional Rectifications Along the Western 
German Frontier. Communique of Bel- 
gium, France, Luxembourg, Netherlands, 
United Kingdom, and the United States . . 427 

The North Atlantic Pact: A Historic Step in 
the Development of American Foreign Re- 
lations. By Charles E. Bohlen 428 

Proclamation Supplement on Trade With Cuba . 435 

International Information and 
Cultural Affairs 

Cultural Relations: U.S.— U.S.S.R. Efforts 
To Establish Cultural-Scientific Exchange 
Blocked by the U.S.S.R 403 

Research and Teaching Opportunities in the 

United Kingdom 417 

Voice of America to Iran Inaugurated .... 431 

Calendar of Meetings 420 

The Foreign Service 

Chester H. Opal Transferred From Post in War- 
saw 432 

American Legation at Pretoria Elevated to 

Embassy 435 

The Department 

Apijoiiiimi'iit of Officers 435 

Publications 

Joint Brazil-U. S. Technical Commission Report 

Released 435 

Department of State 435 



m/?i^iwlo^ 



Irtcin M. Tohin, author of the article on the Third Session of 
the Ii.o Permanent Migration Committee, is an International 
Labor Economist in the Division of International Labor and 
Social Affairs, Depiirtment of State. Mr. Tobin was Adviser to 
the U.S. Delegate, and Secretary of the U.S. Delegation to the 
Third Session of the Ii.o Permanent Migration Committee. 






^^m^mm^^mmmmmmmm 



fj/ie/ ^e/ict'y^^^teni/ ^ t/iaie/ 




BULGARIA, HUNGARY, AND RUMANIA 
ACCUSED OF VIOLATING FUNDA- 
MENTAL FREEDOMS 450 

NINTH GENERAL CONFERENCE ON 
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES • Article by 

Dr. Edward (J. Condon 447 

DEVELOPING INTERNATIONAL UNDER- 
STANDING • An Article 439 



Vol. XX, No. 510 
April 10, 1949 



For complete contents see back cover 





^.s,w^./r.. bulletin 



Vol. XX, No. 510 • Pubucation 34S3 
April 10, 1949 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

" U.S. Qovemraent Printing Oflice 

Washington 26, D.C. 

Price: 

62 issues, domestic $5.00, foreign $7.25 

Single copy, 16 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (February 18, 
1849). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and Items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
or State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a tceekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Division of Publications, 
Office of Public Affairs, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government icith information on 
devtlopments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
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 inter- 
national affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to which the 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
tcell as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



U. S. SUPERIHTENOENT Of OOCtlEAiilSI 

Developing International Understanding 

An Article 



Few incidents demonstrate more clearly the in- 
tense interest of other peoples in things American 
than the reaction to the recent display of an Amer- 
ican mail-order company catalog in one of the 
United States Information Service libraries in 
Eastern Europe. Scores of people formed a line 
outside the building before the library opened and 
stood in line for hours waiting their turn to look 
at the catalog. The librarian and her assistant 
received innumerable requests for translations of 
descripitions of the articles it offered for sale. So 
many people wanted to see the catalog that the 
normal functioning of the library was seriously 
interfered with, and the catalog was withdrawn. 
Not only did visitors request that the catalog be 
put back on display but they also called at both 
the library and the librarian's home pleading for 
an opportunity to look at the catalog and for in- 
formation on how they could buy the articles 
described. 

This incident illustrates the reception given the 
many and varied activities of this Government's 
International Information and Educational Ex- 
change Program throughout the world. Through 
libraries, press services, radio broadcasts, and doc- 
umentary motion pictures the program is pro- 
viding peoples of other nations with a balanced 
picture of American life and thought. Under this 
program students, teachers, experts in various 
fields, and professors are helped to come to this 
country for serious work in recognized fields of 
scientific and cultural learning. The program also 
seeks to facilitate travel and study abroad by com- 
petent Americans capable of contributing to the 
knowledge and skills of other people and of add- 
ing, on their i-eturn, to the store of knowledge in 
their respective fields. 

The Government's educational-exchange pro- 
gram originated in 1939 with Congressional au- 
thorization for scientific and cultural exchanges 
between the United States and the other American 



republics and the Philippines. The Smith-Mundt 
Act (Public Law 402) of January 1948 for the 
first time provided legislative authority for the 
conduct of a com^jrehensive overseas information 
program and at the same time extended authority 
for the conduct of educational-exchange activities 
to include the Eastern Hemisphere. No new funds 
were appropriated, however, for this latter activ- 
ity, and plans for the development of government- 
sponsored educational exchanges outside the west- 
ern hemisphere, except for such activities under 
the Fulbright Act (Public Law 584), await Con- 
gressional appropriation. The Fulbright Act 
authorizes the use of certain foreign currencies 
obtained from the sale abroad of United States 
surplus property for study and teaching by 
American scholars and professors wishing to pur- 
sue their work overseas, and for the round trip 
transportation to the United States of foreign 
nationals for similar purposes. 

Equally valuable in the impact on international 
understanding and in contributions to teclinical, 
scientific, and cultural knowledge in the United 
States are the exchanges of scholars and technical 
experts between the United States and other coun- 
tries facilitated by the Government's educational- 
exchange program. The sending of American 
teachers and professional persons to other coun- 
tries is complemented by the award of grants 
and fellowships to outstanding experts from other 
nations for training or study in the United States. 

The Philippine Training Program exemplifies 
one type of exchange now being carried on. Under 
this program 196 Filipinos were brought to the 
United States in 1948 and about 170 more are 
expected in 1949 for training in government ad- 
ministration and other fields. 

An example of a mutually beneficial exchange 
is Oscar Barahona Streber of Costa Rica, who 
came to the United States in 1945 to study our 
civil-service laws and social legislation. He had 



April 10, J 949 



already compiled Costa Rica's codigo del trahajo 
and the ganmtias sociales and was an adviser 
on labor matters to liis Government. To assist Mr. 
Barahona, the Department of State awarded him 
a six-month field study j?rant which enabled him 
to continue research in his field. 

Partly as a result of his work in the United 
States he was recalled to Costa Rica to draw up 
their civil-service law. As a further result of his 
studies, he was later called upon by the Govern- 
ment of Guatemala to assist in drawing up social 
legislation of great importance to that country and 
in establishing the Instituto Guatemalteco de 
Seguridad Social, of which he is President. In 
June 1948, the Guatemalan Government presented 
to Mr. Barahona the "Orden del Quetzal" in recog- 
nition of his services to the country. 

In writing of his studies in the United States, 
Mr. Barahona makes the following remarks about 
the general value of his stay in the United States : 

"While studying here I have learned to speak 
and write fairly the English language; I have 
been making lots of friends and pei-sonal acquaint- 
ances, who enable me to know exactly which are 
your ways of thinking and your social realities; 
I am nowadays familiar and extremely fond of 
the American way of life; I have been visiting 
museums, theatres, galleries, monuments, collec- 
tions of painting and numerous other places of 
art ; and not to make this a very large enumeration, 
I must tell you that I have tried to be as open- 
minded as possible in order to grasp all that I can 
of this wonderful environment." 

Dr. C. E. Pomes, of Guatemala, was awarded a 
fellowship in 1944 to pursue studies in dentistry at 
the University of Chicago. Following his work 
at Chicago, Dr. Pomes accepted a fellowship to 
teach and undertake further studies at Northwest- 
ern University Dental School. On his return to 
Guatemala, Dr. Pomes wrote, "I wish to express at 
this time my sincerest gratitude to the Department 
of State for its valuable assistance to further my 
knowledge in dental science. I bought a substan- 
tial amount of scientific material for my school 
and have a number of plans to further dental 
education in Guatemala. 

Another type of exchange is exemplified by ac- 
tivities undertaken several years ago during an 
outbreak of poliomyelitis in Ecuador. The Gov- 
ernment of Ecuador asked the United States for 
an orthopedic surgeon to work with the Ecuadoran 
public-health administration and a technician to 



organize hospital techniques for getting the af- 
flicted children back on their feet. After the sur- 
geon had been in Ecuador for several months and 
her work had been reported in the newspapers, she 
was approached on the street one day by a taxi 
driver, who took off his sombrero and said, 
"Senorita, I am sent by my fellow taxi drivers to 
tell you how grateful we are for what you are do- 
ing for the children of Ecuador. They asked me 
to tell you that if at any time of the day or night 
you need a taxi, they are at your service.'' 

After the surgeon returned to the United States, 
the American technician remained to help reor- 
ganize the National School of Social Service in 
Ecuador. A member of the faculty of the school 
came to Washington for training in the Children's 
Bureau. Last June the school graduated its first 
class of 17 specialists, most of whom were taken 
into the Ecuadoran Government to continue their 
work. Meanwhile the United States had been 
sending to Ecuador translations in Spanish of 
widely-known authoritative books on children's 
problems. 

Cooperative agricultural experiment stations 
are maintained in a number of Latin American 
countries. At these stations American technical 
experts work side by side with local technicians on 
soil, fertilizer, crop, and pest problems. For ex- 
ample, a farmer came to the San Andres Valley 
Station in El Salvador for advice on corn pro- 
duction. After a study of his farm, specialists 
from the station recommended the use of sodium 
nitrate fertilizer. The farmer, after following 
the station's advice, reported a tripled corn yield. 

Several years ago production of the cocoa bean 
in Ecuador was steadily declining because of a 
disease which in twenty j'ears reduced production 
approximately 75 percent. Ecuadoran cocoa 
production, comparable in importance to cotton 
growing in the United States, affects employment, 
government revenue, and many other economic and 
social conditions. In addition to the hardship 
caused Ecuadorans by the decline of this crop, 
American chocolate manufacturers began to ex- 
perience increasing difficulty in obtaining adequate 
supplies of Ecuadoran cocoa bean. By agree- 
ment between the United States Department of 
Agriculture and the Ecuadoran Ministry of Ag- 
riculture a joint experiment station was set up. 
The United States supplied the technical experts; 
Ecuador furnished the land, buildings, and local 
staff required. Within two years the experiment 

DepaMmeni of State Bulletin 



station had developed two specific insecticides and 
fungicides for treating the disease. 

Long-range research programs of this kind have 
been developed in collaboration with Brazil, Cuba, 
Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and 
Peru. Each experiment station is governed by a 
supervisory commission on which both the United 
States and the other country are represented. 
Projects are under the guidance of United States 
technicians, who assist local technicians in acquir- 
ing increased technical knowledge. As the local 
technicians gain experience, they assume increas- 
ing responsibility for the M'ork of the station. 
Projects include soil technology, plant diseases 
and pests, farm building construction, drainage 
and irrigation, crop rotation, and studies of the 
uses of fertilizers. 

Work at the agricultural experiment stations 
is based on the fact that the economies of the 
other American republics are primarily agricul- 
tural and that increased production of complemen- 
tary crops will raise living standards, add to the 
purchasing power of the countries, and aid in de- 
veloping more stable and diversified economies. 
Here is the good-neighbor policy at work. 

In Sao F'aulo, Brazil, during 1948 over 6,700 
persons attended English classes of the Uniao 
Cultural Brazil-Estados Unidos, using American 
teaching materials supplied by this center. The 
Uniao is one of twenty-eight such cultural centers 
in the other American republics. Persons study- 
ing English at these centers pay for their lessons 
and the receipts, and other local revenue secured 
by the centers cover more than sixty percent of 
the cost of operating the centers. The United 
States Government contributes the remainder of 
the cost. 

The cultural centers are independent organiza- 
tions cooperatively directel by local boards com- 
posed of American residents and nationals of the 
countries in which they are located. 

President Truman in his inaugural address on 
January 20 pointed out that "our imponderable 
resources in technical knowledge are constantly 
growing and are inexhaustible" and that by mak- 
ing them available to other peoples we can lielp 
them to realize their aspirations for a better life. 

A project in which this type of technical assist- 
ance is being made available to the mutual benefit 
of the United States and the other nations con- 
cerned is the preparation for the 1950 census of 
the jVmericas. Periodic censuses of population, 

April 10, 1949 



agriculture, mining, industry, business, housing, 
and other subjects are essential to an analysis of 
the economic and social problems of any country. 
There are serious gaps in information of this kind 
concerning many of the countries of the Western 
Hemisphere. 

Eecognizing this lack, the Inter-American Sta- 
tistical Institute in 1946 appointed a committee 
composed of one technician from each country to 
develop procedures and standards to be used in 
taking a hemisphere census in 1950. The United 
States Government has been actively aiding in 
preparations for the census by giving technical 
assistance to ofiicials preparing for the census, 
by assisting in integrating census work with re- 
lated statistical activities, and by strengthening 
statistical staffs and organizations. 

United States assistance has included the send- 
ing of consultants to the other American repub- 
lics and training Latin American statisticians in 
this country. Special statistical consultant serv- 
ices have been provided to Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecua- 
dor, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and 
Uruguay in the fields of foreign trade, agricul- 
ture, labor, prices, vital statistics, and national 
income. 

Nearly one hundred technicians have been 
awarded training gi'ants for intensive study in 
the United States of census and other statistical 
metliods. A number of young economists and 
statisticians have come to the United States for 
advanced study. 

The attitude of local peoples to the American 
libraries in other countries is typified by a recent 
incident of the United States Information Service 
library in Shanghai. A devoted reader of medical 
books at the library told the desk attendant one 
morning that he was sure he had identified one of 
the library's books on sale in a second-hand book- 
shop. When the library staff investigated, they 
found that several b»ooks had been stolen, the 
identifying library stamps defaced or removed, 
and the books offered for sale. The interest of 
local people in the maintenance of American li- 
braries has led to many incidents illustrating the 
value which is placed on the books and facilities 
made available by the United States Information 
Service. Sixty-six libraries containing a cross 
section of America's literary, scholastic, and tech- 
nical traditions are today being maintained in 44 
countries. These libraries, like good libraries in 
the United States, have in addition to their book 



collection, a broad selection of United States Gov- 
ernment documents, subscriptions to American 
periodicals, music scores, and commercial record- 
ings of American music. It is hoped to expand the 
number of libraries to 80 and to add around 
50,000 volumes as well as several hundred thou- 
sand technical documents, ^Vmerican magazines. 
and congressional and other significant publica- 
tions to their collections. 

With millions of people throughout the world 
eager to learn more about the United States, its 
people and their way of life, the Information and 
Educational Exchange Program is becoming an in- 
creasingly important factor in supplementing the 
private media of information and exchange in fur- 
nishing a true picture of America and thus helping 
to promote mutual understanding among peoples 
in all parts of the world. The American libraries 
in foreign cities have become focal points for con- 
tacts between nationals of the countries in which 
they are located and the best of American litera- 
ture, art, music, technical, and scientific writings. 
The role of the government's information program 
is to make available information about the United 
States where it would be unprofitable or otherwise 
impossible for private American groups or enter- 
prises to operate. 

In several countries of Eastern Europe, Ameri- 
can books and magazines are difficult if not im- 
possible to obtain. However access to American 
thought is maintained through these United States 
libraries even though citizens of these nations are 
discouraged in many ways from using this source 
of information. So eager are citizens of these 
countries to study American books, that in spite of 
persecution, they are resorting to a number of 
methods for obtaining books. One of these was 
sending an elderly, illiterate peasant woman to the 
library to borrow technical treatises on medical 
engineering and other scientific subjects. 

A technical school in an Eastern Euroj^ean coun- 
try recently wrote to the American library : 

"We wish to express our deep gratitude for of- 
fering to allow us to consult American reviews and 
technical books from the American Library. Al- 
though some time has elapsed since the end of the 
war, it has not been possible for us to renew our 
subscriptions to scientific i-eviews or to procure 
those American technical books which are so im- 
portant for us and which we need in our scientific 

•Department of State publication 3313. 
442 



work. Tliis same situation also prevails in other 
branches. The interruption of cultural contacts 
with other countries will have serious eflfects on the 
progress of civilization in this country and this 
situation is becoming more serious with the pass- 
ing of time. Were it not for the American 
Library, our isolation would have been complete. 
The American generosity in opening this Library 
has greatly alleviated one of the most fatal conse- 
quencies of the war." 

Refusing to pull down an Iron Curtain on this 
side of the Atlantic, the United States has adopted 
the policy of stimulating private exchange-of- 
persons programs, maintaining at the same time 
its standards for assurance of safeguards against 
subversive activities. Government-supported ex- 
changes, however, will not be initiated before funds 
are provided nor before the other Governments 
evidence a desire to cooperate in the helpful and 
friendly spirit of the Smith-Mundt Act. Although 
this policy had been in eflFect for some time on 
informal case-by-case basis, it was formally 
adopted as a result of recommendations by the 
United States Advisory Commission on Educa- 
tional Exchange on October 19, 1948.^ This Com- 
mission urged in its report to the Secretary that 
we not close our doors to all contacts with those 
nations whose philosophy disagrees with ours. 
The report maintained that for the United States 
to cut off contacts with totalitarian nations 
through fear of the effects of such contacts on our 
democratic institutions implies weakness in our 
own institutions. 

The policies and activities of the State Depart- 
ment's Educational Exchange Program are an 
arm of United States foreign policy — one of the 
ways in which the United States is continually 
seeking to achieve international peace and secu- 
rity, increased material well-being for its own and 
other peoples, and the extension and protection of 
fundamental human rights and freedoms. 

Vigorous efforts b}- the government to supple- 
ment private activities in the field of educational 
and cultural intercliange are helping to achieve 
the objectives of United States foreign policj'. 
The promotion of international understanding 
througli tlie exchange of persons and ideas is one 
of the strongest weapons we have in the struggle 
to maintain democratic institutions against the 
subtle attempts by totalitarian states to under- 
mine human liberty and freedom. 

DeparfmenI of State Bulletin 



Resolutions and Decisions of Eighth Session of the ECOSOC 



U.N. doc. E/1309 
Dated Mar. 24, 1949 



The following is a list of resolutions and de- 
cisions of the Council at its eighth session. The 
number under which each will appear in printed 



form in the five official languages is given (VIII 
denotes the eighth session) , together with the doc- 
ument symbol under which it has been issued in 
mimeographed form and the agenda item to which 
it relates : 



Agenda item no.' 



16 
17 
18 
54 

19 

20 
52 

21 
22 
23 

24 

25 

26 

28 

27 

6 
14 
3 
7 

29 

41 
32 

33 

8 

34 
36 

11 
35 

30 

31 
38 

39 

15 



World economic situation 

Economic development of under-developed countries .... 

Technical assistance for economic development 

Creation of a central publication for the promotion of and 

advising on development projects. 
Report of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the 

United Nations on progress in the co-ordination of studies 

of suitable measures to bring about an increase in food 

production. 

The problem of wasting food in certain countries 

Availability of DDT insecticides for combatting malaria in 

agricultural areas. 

Proceeds of sale of Unrra supplies 

Interim report of the Economic Commission for Europe . . 
Interim report of the Economic Commission for Asia and 

the Far East. 
Interim report of the Economic Commission for Latin 

America. 
Report of the International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development. 

Report of the International Monetary Fund 

General Assembly resolution 217 (III) regarding human 

rights. 
Report of the third session of the Commission on Human 

Rights. 

Trade union rights (freedom of association) 

Infringements of trade union rights 

Survey of forced labour and measures for its abolition . . . 
Principle of equal pay for equal work for men and women 

workers. 
Sub-Commissions on Freedom of Information and of the 

Press. 

Declaration of old age rights 

Question of procedure for the election of members of the 

Commission on Narcotic Drugs. 
Annual report of the Permanent Central Opium Board . . . 
Administrative arrangements between the Council and the 

Permanent Central Opium Board. 
Appointment of members of the commission of inquiry into 

the effects of chewing the coca leaf. 
Teaching of the purposes and principles, the structure and 

activities of the United Nations in the schools of Member 

States. 

Translation of the classics 

Use of the central library at Geneva by the United Nations 

and the specialized agencies. 
Reports of the Executive Board of the International Chil- 
dren's Emergency Fund. 

United Nations Appeal for Children 

Report of the International Refugee Organization on resettle- 
ment of non-repatriable refugees and displaced persons. 
Procedure to be followed in connection with the draft con- 
vention on declaration of death of missing persons. 
Implementation of recommendations on economic and social 

matters. 



E/1195 
E/1215 
E/1216 
E/1263 

E/1258 



E/1259 
E/1262 

E/1156 
E/1274 
E/1275 

E/1276 

E/1260 

E/1261 
E/1162 

E/1163/Rev. 1 

E/1300 
E/1236 
E/1237 
E/1177 

E/1193 

E/1219 
E/1205 

E/1203 
E/1202 

E/1204 

E/1155/Rev. 1 



E/1250 
E/1157 



E/1306 



E/1305 
E/1251 



E/1220 
E/1307 



April JO, 1949 



RcsolutloD no. 


Agenda Item no.' 


Title 


Document 


211 (VIII) . . . 


42 


Relations with and co-ordination of specialized agencies . . 


E/1178 


212 (VIII) . . . 


Suppl. item 3 . . 


Convention on privileges and imnniiiiiies of the specialized 
agencies: Annex relating to the International Refugee Or- 
ganization. 


E/I253 


213 (VIII) . . . 


53 


Application of Ceylon for raembership in the United Nations 
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 


E/1153 








214 (VIII) . . . 


9 

47 


Reports of the Council Nao Committee 


E/1179 


215 (VIII) . . . 


Distribution of membership in subsidiary organs of the Eco- 


E/1152 






nomic and Social Council. 




216 (VIII) . . . 


55 


Report of the Joint Committee of the Economic and Social 
Council and the Trusteeship Council on arrangements for 


E/1154 












co-operation in matters of common concern. 




217 (VIII) . . . 


43 


Revision of the rules of procedure of the Council 


E/1304 


218 (VIII) . . . 


49 

44 


Agenda Committee 


E/1289 
E/1299 


219 (VIII) . . . 


Revision of the rules of procedure of the functional commis- 


220 (VIII) . . . 


13 


Draft rules for the calling of international conferences . . . 


E/1221 


DECISIONS 








(a) 


1 

58 


Election of officers of the Council 


See E/SR.226 
See E/SR.282 


(b) 


Election of members of the Agenda Committee 


(c) 


57 


Confirmation of members of functional commissions .... 


See E/1235, E/- 
1235/Add 1, E/- 
1235/ Add l/Corr 

1, E/1235/ Add. 

2, E/1235 /Add. 
3,E/SR.272and 


(d) 


45 (i) 


Interim Committee on Programme of Meetings 


See E/SR.231 


(e) 


45 (ii) 


Date of the second session of the Sub-Commission on the 
Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minor- 
ities. 

Deferment of agenda items 


See E/SR.232 


(f) 


(') 


See E/SR.227, 
272, and 282 








(g) 


50 


Discharge of agenda item 


See E/SR.282 







' See documents E/1090 and E/1090/Corr. 1. 
» Items deferred: 4, 5, 10, 12, 37, 40, 46. 



Current United Nations Documents: A Selected Bibliography^ 



27 pp. 



Security Council 

Official Records of the Second Year 

No 69, 174th meeting: 4 August 1947. 

printed. 25^. 

Supplement No. 13. 

Supplement No. 14. 

Supplement No. 15. 

Supplement No. 16. 

Supplement No. 17. 

Supplement No. 10. 

Official Records of the Third Year 

360th Meeting: 28 September 1948, No. 112. 

Printed. 30^. 

Supplement for September 1948. 10 pp. Printed. 100 

361st Meeting: 4 October 1948. No. 113. 30 pp. 

Printed. 30^. 



s 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 


3 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 


4 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 


2 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 


3 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 


9 


pp. 


printed. 


10*. 



30 pp. 



'Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the Inteinatlonal Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 2960 Broadway, New York 27, N. Y. 
Other materials (mimeographed or processed documents) 
may be consulted at certain designated libraries in the 
United States. 



-362nd Meeting : 5 October 1, 1948. No. 114. 23 pp, 

Printed. 25*. 
-363r(l and 364th Meetings : 6 October 1948. No. 115, 

46 pp. Printed. 50(!i. 
-365th Meeting; 14 October 1948. No. 116. 38 pp. 

Printed. 40*. 
-366th Meeting: 15 October 1948. No. 117. 17 pp. 

Printed. 20^. 
-367th and 36Sth Meetings: 19 October 1948. No. 118. 

67 pp. Printed. 700. 
-369th. 370th and 371st Meetings: 22 October 1948. 

No. 119. IS pp. Printed. 20*. 
-372nd .Meeting: 25 October 1948. No. 120. 14 pp, 

Printed. 15*. 
-373rd Meeting: 26 October 1948. No. 121. 27 pp. 

Printed. .30*. 
-374th Meeting: 28 October 1948. No. 122. 40 pp. 

Printed. 40*. 
-375th Meeting: 29 October 1948. No. 123. 25 pp. 

Printed. 25*. 
-Supplement for October 1948. 72 pp. Printed. 70f!. 
-376th and 377th Meetings: 4 November 1948; 378th 

Meeting: 9 November 1948; 379th Meeting: 10 No- 
vember 1948. No. 124. 64 pp. Printed, mi. 
— No. 130. 3S,'')th and 386th meetings: 17 December 

1948 37 pp. printed. 35*. 

Department of State Bulletin 



The United States in the United Nations 



Italian Colonies 

John Foster Dulles, U.S. Representative, initi- 
ated the debate in Committee I (Political and Se- 
curity), consisting of 58 members, on the disposal 
of Italy's prewar colonies in Africa. His specific 
suggestions were that eastern Eritrea be ceded to 
Ethiopia; that Italy be invited to administer 
Italian Somaliland under a trusteeship; and 
that Cyrenaica, which is in eastern Libya, be 
placed under British administration, regardless of 
whether the General Assembly decided to deal 
with Libya as a whole or in part. Mr. Dulles said 
that Libya should be placed under the U. N. 
trusteeship system with primary emphasis on 
achieving early independence. He also urged 
finding a separate solution for western Eritrea, 
which is more closely allied to the peoples to its 
west. 

Mr. Dulles gave two principles as a basis for his 
suggestions : first, that the interests of the inliabi- 
tants are paramount, and second, that regard 
should be had for international peace and security. 

Prior to the U.S. statement, Ethiopia renewed 
her bid to receive two of the colonies, Eritrea and 
Italian Somaliland. Italy has expressed the view 
that she should be granted administration over all 
three. 

Approval of a United States motion per- 
mitted Italian participation in the Committee's 
discussion. 

Human Rights in Bulgaria and Hungary 

After a lengthy debate, the General Committee 
of the General Assembly voted on April 7, 11 to 2, 
(U.S.S.R. and Poland), to include in the General 
Assembly agenda a combination of the Bolivian- 
proposed item on the Mindszenty case and the Aus- 
tralian proposal on the observance of fundamental 
freedoms and human rights in Bulgaria and 
Hungary. The United States had proposed com- 
bining these two items, and as amended by Aus- 
tralia, the item reads : "Having regard to the pro- 
visions of the Charter and of the peace treaties, 
the question of the observance in Bulgaria and 
Hungary of human rights and fundamental free- 
doms, including questions of religious and civil 
liberties, with special reference to recent trials of 
church leaders." 

Palestine 

A general armistice agreement between Israel 
and Hashemite Jordan Kingdom [Transjordan] 
was signed in Rhodes April 3 by their delegations 
after 33 days of negotiations. Thus all of Israel's 
immediate neighbors except Syria have signed 

April TO, 1949 



armistice documents as a major step toward a 
permanent peace settlement in Palestine. 

Discussions of the Palestine Conciliation Com- 
mission with representatives of six Arab states 
in Beirut on implementation of the General As- 
sembly resolution on repatriation of refugees 
came to a close on April 5. Five of the Arab 
states, Egyi^t, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and 
Ti'ansjordan, approved the Commission's sugges- 
tion to continue the exchange of views on a broader 
basis with all governments concerned in the near 
future at some neutral place. The representative 
of Iraq declared that in the view of his Govern- 
ment, there would be no useful purpose in con- 
tinuing the exchange of views before the refugee 
problem is solved. 

Commission on Status of Women 

More than a score of proposals, aimed at help- 
ing women everywhere to lead a fuller and happier 
life on the basis of equality with men, were made 
at the third session of the Commission on the 
Status of Women which is now drawing to a close. 

The proposed measures include steps to secure 
voting and other political rights for women the 
world over, to remove outdated, conflicting na- 
tionality laws which often deprive married or 
divorced women of their nationality and even 
confound the citizenship status of their children, 
to improve educational and professional facilities 
for women in metropolitan as well as in depend- 
ent areas, and to give increasing recognition to 
the principle that women doing the same work 
as men should be paid equal wages. 

In the field of equal pay for equal work, the 
resolution decided to enlist the aid of the Ilo 
in drawing up a plan to secure international aboli- 
tion of restrictions on the pay of women workers 
and to grant women the equal technical training 
and access to jobs. After studying numerous re- 
ports showing gross discrimination in the field 
of education in many comitries, the Commission 
decided to request the Secretary-General to organ- 
ize a world-wide study, in collaboration with 

UNESCO. 

Indonesia 

Secretary Acheson in his talk with the Nether- 
lands' Foreign Minister, Dirk U. Stikker, reiter- 
ated the hope that the instructions sent from the 
Security Council to the Commission for Indonesia 
on March 23 be put into effect at the earliest possi- 
ble date. 

This March 23 resolution called on the Cormnis- 
sion for Indonesia, of which the United States is 



a member, to assist the Dutch and Republican 
authorities to reach agreement on three points: 
(1) restoration of tlie republican government in 
its capital, now occupied by the Dutch; (2) dis- 
continuance of Dutch military action and of re- 
publican guerrilla operations; and (3) the time 
and conditions for holding a subsequent confer- 
ence at The Hague to negotiate a final settlement 
of the over-all Indonesian dispute. 

Mr. Stikker, who was in Washington to partici- 
pate in the North Atlantic Treaty signing, after 
making cleiir that the suggestions of the Security 
Council have been accepted by the Netherlands 
Government, expressed similar desires and out- 
lined to the Secretary the paths along which he 
believed progress could be achieved most effec- 
tively. 

Australia and India have asked for discussion 
of the Indonesian situation by the General As- 
ssembly at this session. Though the Assembly can- 
not make any recommendations while the item 
is on the Security Council agenda, it can discuss 
the question. 

Promotion of International Cooperation in 
Political Field 

The Ad Hoc Political Committee of the Gen- 
eral Assembly approved on April 7 a recommenda- 
tion of the Interim Committee dealing with IT. S.- 
Chinese proposal for creation of a panel of ex- 
perts to serve on commissions of inquiry and con- 
ciliation. There was strong Soviet opposition and 
the six nations forming the Slav bloc voted against 
the proposal. Tliis recommendation, together 
with three others which have already been dealt 
with by the Ad Hoc Political Committee and now 
await action liy the General xVssembly, represents 
specific proposals submitted by the Interim Com- 
mittee in its report to the General Assembly. 

U.N. Special Committee on the Balkans 

The U.N. Special Committee on the Balkans, 
on which tlie United States is represented, has 
ordered its northern Greek border observation 
teams to report whether aid from Albania, Bul- 
garia, and Yugoslavia to the Greek guerrillas has 
increased within recent months. The Greek Gov- 
ernment has pre.sented new complaints to the Sec- 
retarj'-General as evidence of increasing aid to 
guerrillas, one of which alleges that late last month 
a guerrilla brigade of some 800 men entered Al- 
bania, obtained fresh supplies, and then slipped 
back across the border into Greece. 



International Refugee Organization 

'I'iie Iro's General Council of 10 members is de- 
bating in Geneva whether to approve an extension 
of one year of the Iro, which expires Jidy 1, 1950. 
Although each of the Council's members has ex- 
pressed his government's views, no final vote has 
tjeen taken. According to Director General Wil- 
liam Hallam Tuck, "It has been my impression 
that there has been in a broad sense a general 
recognition — often a reluctant recognition — of the 
fact that some functions of Iro must continue be- 
yond the original target date for termination." 
Mr. Tuck favors a j'ear's extension for resettlement 
work, but suggested that the care and maintenance 
of refugees in camps cease in June 1950. 

World Medical Council Planned 

A conference composed of representatives from 
more than oO nongovernmental health agencies be- 
gan April 1 at Brussels to consider creation of a 
permanent council to coordinate congresses of 
medical science on a world-wide basis. This con- 
ference is being held under the sponsorship of 
l^NKsco and the World Health Organization. The 
jjermanent council would strive to unify the work 
of medical congi-esses and other agencies, inter- 
nationally, in order to avoid duplication of studies 
and gathering. World scientific gi'oups would 
have a central bureau of information. In addi- 
tion, the permanent council is expected to give 
financial assistance to scientific works of con- 
gresses and to organize courses in connection with 
such gatherings for the benefit of i)hysicians. 

Conservation and Utilization of Resources 

Secretary C)f the Interior Krug has announced 
the names of 119 outstanding United States scien- 
tists and experts who will present treatises at the 
U.N. Scientific Conference on the Conservation 
and Utilization of Resources convening August 17 
at Lake Success. This world meeting to pool the 
most advanced scientific knowledge oi resources of 
all nations was proposed by President Truman in 
September 1946. The conference will have no 
policy-making responsibilities, since the experts 
will represent the sciences rather than govern- 
ments. During the three-week conference, experts 
will exchange ideas and experiences on the tech- 
niques of resources conservation and use. costs and 
l)enefits, and tested waj's of setting projects into 
operation. 



Department of State Bulletin 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Ninth General Conference on Weights and Measures 



BY DR. EDWARD U. CONDON 
Director, National Bureau of Standards 



The Ninth General Conference on Weights and 
Measures, hekl at Paris and Sevres October 12-21, 
1948, marked the revival of an international or- 
ganization which was established by treaty in 1875 
and which has held regular meetings since 1889 
with the exception of interruptions due to the two 
World Wars. The Eighth General Conference 
was held in 1933. The Ninth General Conference 
was originally scheduled for October 1939 but was 
postponed because of the outbreak of war in Sep- 
tember of that year. The Conference, therefore, 
had to consider developments which had taken 
place over a period of 15 years. 

Thirty-three countries now belong to the inter- 
national organization. Twenty-eight of these 
named fifty-five delegates to the Ninth General 
Conference. The United States delegates were Dr. 
Edward U. Condon, Director of the National Bu- 
reau of Standards, and Dr. E. C. Crittenden, 
Associate Director. 

The International Bureau of Weights and Meas- 
ures, located at Sevres, serves both as a laboratory 
and as a secretariat for the General Conference and 
for the permanent International Committee on 
Weights and Measures. The Bureau was able to 
continue its work throughout the war period, al- 
though working under difficult conditions. The 
buildings of the Bureau suffered some damage 
from aerial bombardment, but the "prototype" 
international standards of length and mass, the 
International Meter and the International Kilo- 
gram, were not damaged since they were stored in 
well-protected, subterranean chambers. 

Among the functions of the International Bu- 
reau is the periodic comparison of national stand- 
ards with the international prototypes stored at 
Sevres. At the Ninth General Conference the 
Bureau reported measurements on a few national 
meters and on a considerable number of national 
kilograms. With the exception of two kilograms 
which were known to have been used a great deal, 
no one of the national standards supplied for com- 
parison showed changes from its original value 
greater than the possible errors of measurement. 
For example, among the standards compared was 
the kilogram No. 20, which constitutes the basic 
standard of mass, or "weight," of the United 
States. This kilogram was compared with the in- 
ternational standards in 1937. The measurements 

April 10, 1949 



obtained in 1948 differed from those found in 1937 
by only two parts in a thousand million. 

In spite of the excellent performance of the 
platinum-iridium meter bars during the 60 years 
since they were distributed, the search for a less 
arbitrary standard of length has gone on. In 
particular it is expected that eventually the wave 
length of some spectral line might be used as such 
a standard. Reports made to the Conference in- 
dicated very definite progress in this direction. 
The production of several materials consisting of 
a single isotope of an element rather than a mixture 
of several isotopes has made it possible to obtain 
lines of simple structure giving sharp patterns in 
the optical instruments by which measurements 
are made. One of the most promising of these is 
the green line of mercury-198, an isotope produced 
by transmutation of gold under neutron bombard- 
ment. While not sj^ecifically mentioning mer- 
cury-198, the Conference formally recognized the 
fact that spectral lines of this type combine in the 
highest degree the qualities required to constitute 
satisfactory standards of length. It requested the 
national laboratories and the International Bureau 
to continue the study of such lines with the expec- 
tation of establishing eventually a new definition 
of the meter based upon the wave length of a 
particular line emitted under specified conditions. 

In the field of electrical measurements the con- 
summation of the plan approved by the Eighth 
Conference, in 1933, to redefine the units so as to 
make them concordant with the basic mechanical 
units of length, mass, and time was reported to 
the Conference, The revised values of electrical 
units were in fact introduced into use as of Janu- 
ary 1, 1948, in accordance with action taken by 
the Intei-national Committee on Weights and 
Measures.^ At the same time a new system of 
photometric units was introduced replacing the 
two diverse systems which had been in use previ- 
ously. The Ninth General Conference confirmed 
both of these actions. 

The most important new teclmical development 
dealt with by the Conference was the adoption of 
a revised text describing the International Tem- 
perature Scale. This scale, extending from — 190° 
C. to temperatures in the neighborhood of 4000° C, 

'Announced in National Bureau of Standards Circular 
No. C459. 



has been in use since 1027. The changes made 
are largely in details of procedure for making 
measurements in various parts of this range. The 
lower limit to which the scale is to apply is raised 
to the boiling point of oxygen, —182.970° C. ; the 
upper range is changed somewhat and made to 
extend to extremely high temperatures by adopt- 
ing improved constants and a better expression for 
the lelation between temperature and the energj' 
radiated (Planck's Law instead of Wien's, and 
1.438 cm-degrees for the second constant of radia- 
tion, instead of 1.432). Numerical values for 
temperatures in the neighborhood of 1000° C. are 
raised a few tenths of a degree because the melting 
point of silver is taken as 960.8° instead of 960.5°. 
A translation of the complete revised text is being 
published in the March 1949 issue of the Journal 
of Research of the National Bureau of Standards. 

Incidentally, as a result of discussion of the two 
terms "centigrade" and "centesimal," which liave 
been applied to the temperature scale used in 
metric countries and in scientific work elsewhere, 
the Conference recommended the adoption of the 
name "celsius" in preference to either of the two 
other terms. 

The International Temperature Scale is a prac- 
tical realization of the theoretical thermodynamic 
scale, which has commonly been defined by refer- 
ence to two fixed points — the freezing point and 
the boiling point of water. Following a proposal 
of the International Union of Physics, the Confer- 
ence recognized the possibility of defining an abso- 
lute thermodynamic scale of temperature by fixing 
a single fundamental point, for which the triple 
point of water would now be taken. However, to 
make a scale so defined agree with the Kelvin scale 
now in use it would be necessary to determine 
precisely the numerical value for that fixed point, 
and on this numerical value the Conference could 
not agree, opinion being divided between 273.16° 
and 273.17° C. 

Another point on which there was much discus- 
sion was definition of units of heat. The joule 
was unanimously recommended as a preferred 
unit, but some workers prefer to continue the use 
of a calorie, and it has not been possible to reach 
agreement on the definition of any single unit 
bearing this name. The Conference, therefore, 
recommended that the workers using the calorie 
should furnish all the information necessary to 
convert their results into joules. 



From various sources the Conference received 
recommendations for the establishment of a gen- 
eral international system of practical units. 
(These recommendations of course referred to 
metric units, since the international organization 
does not attempt to deal with the Anglo-Saxon 
system of units.) The French national office of 
weights and measures presented detailed proposals 
regarding such a general system. The Conference 
instructed the International Committee on 
Weights and Mea.sures to undertake a survey of 
opinions in scientific, technical, and pedagogical 
circles of all countries in the hope of establishing 
a single system of units. Inquiries to this end will 
be transmitted through official governmental 
agencies. 

Various other technical questions were con- 
sidered by the Conference. One of these which 
may be of general interest was the naming of large 
numbers. In many countries names ending in 
illion are applied to digits in groups of six where- 
as in other countries, including the United States, 
such names are applied to groups of three digits. 
For example, in the United States a thou.sand mil- 
lion is called a billion and a thousand billion a 
trillion, but in Great Britain a "billion" is a million 
million, and a "trillion" is a million "billion." In 
tlie hope of reconciling this difference the Confer- 
ence adopted a recommendation favoring the use 
of six-digit groups; but, since the United States 
delegates could not agree to such a recommenda- 
tion, the resolution as adopted proposed the use 
of that particular system in European countries. 

In addition to the technical problems mentioned, 
the Conference had also to deal with various ad- 
ministrative matters affecting the International 
Bureau. For example, a new scale of contribu- 
tions to be paid by member countries was estab- 
lished, and it was agreed that the basic contribu- 
tion to the International Bureau should be raised 
from 150.000 gold francs ($49,005) to 175,000 gold 
francs ($57,172.50) as soon as the major countries 
which are not now able to pay their dues (Japan 
and Germany) resume payments . The amount of 
the contribution paid by each member country 
depends upon its population. The United States, 
one of the largest countries, pays 15 percent of the 
total. Event\ially, therefore, when the new scale 
comes into effect, the regular annual dues of the 
United States will become 26,250 gold francs 
($8,575.88) instead of 22,500 gold francs ($7,- 
350.75). 



Deparlment of %»aie Bulletin 



Significance of New International Wheat Agreement to U.S. Wheat Farmers 



STATEMENT BY CHARLES F. BRANNAN 
Secretary of Agriculture 



[Released to the press by the 
Department of Agriculture March 23] 

The United States and other nations have just 
concluded an international wheat agreement 
which, if put into effect, will be of great benefit 
to the farmers of this country. 

It has not been done without difficulty. This 
agreement has been concluded only through a 
great demonstration of international cooperation. 

You know how much the world wheat situa- 
tion has changed within the jjast year. The se- 
vere shortage that prevailed a year ago has been 
modified. The price has dropped sharply. These 
changes weakened our hands and sti'engthened 
those of the importers. In spite of that change 
the ceiling price in this agreement is only 20 cents 
a bushel lower than the agi'eement drawn last 
year, while the floor price for the next four years 
is 10 cents higher than was provided by the 1948 
agi-eement. If a world wheat surplus develops, 
that increase in the floor will be extremely bene- 
ficial to U.S. farmers. 

There are three basic reasons why I feel that 
this agi-eement is of great benefit to our farmers. 

In the fii-st place, it will stabilize our foreign 
market for wheat. Under this agreement we will 
have a guaranteed market for 167.5 million busliels 
of wheat each year.^ In addition, we are obliged 
to supply large quantities of wheat to occupied 
areas in Germany and Japan. Together, those 
two obligations will amount, at the present time, 
to well over 300 million bushels a year. That 
is about as much wheat as we feel we could guaran- 
tee to deliver annually over a four-year period. 
We expect some years to have more wheat for 
export than that. But considering the possibility 
of unfavorable weather, we would not want to 
guarantee delivery of much more. 

Between the Wars our wheat exports dwindled 
to next to nothing while wheat stocks in this coun- 
try rose higher and higher and prices fell lower 
and lower. Our normal customers were raising 
more and more wheat themselves even though it 
was extremely uneconomical to do so. That was 
the outcome of a chain of events which I don't 



have to recount here. But our farmers don't want 
to go through that again. They are able to raise 
wheat efficiently for export, and they want to 
retain a reasonable foreign market. Because of 
the acute dollar shortage throughout much of the 
world, some of those same tendencies toward un- 
econmic self-sufficiency are again manifesting 
themselves. By assuring those countries a stable 
supply we believe that this agreement will help 
stem that tide and protect our foreign wheat 
market. 

Second, this agreement will complement our 
domestic wheat program. As you know, in our 
domestic agi-icultural program we are attempting 
to assure an abundance of food and fiber to our 
consumers, at the same time making sure that our 
farmers are not penalized for producing abun- 
dantly. This is the aim of our price-supi^ort pro- 
gram. Yet with a commodity which we export in 
large quantities, such as wheat, it will be difficult 
to support the price at home should world prices 
fall to very low levels. This agreement puts a 
floor under the foreign price for much of our ex- 
port wheat. To the extent that the government 
finds it necessary to support the domestic price of 
wheat, this agreement will considerably reduce 
the cost of that operation. 

My third and last point is that this agreement, 
if put into operation, will set a pattern of inter- 
national cooperation in solving agricultural 
problems which can be carried over to other com- 
modities. We have proved to ourselves and to the 
wox'ld that a large body of nations can agree on 
solutions to complex agricultural problems. This 
is a ijostwar "first" in its field. We have, in the 
case of this commodity at least, shown that inter- 
national cooperation can be substituted for eco- 
nomic warfare. 



' Later, on March 23, the Brazilian Government re- 
quested an increase in its import quota, which in turn 
will cause a slight increase in the aforesaid published 
quota for the United States export market above the 
167.5 million busliels given. 



April 10, J 949 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania Accused of Violating Human Rights 
and Fundamental Freedoms 



[Released to the press April 21 

The United States representatives in Bulgaria, 
Hungary, and Kuniania delivered the notes given 
below to the respective Ministries of Foreign Af- 
fairs of those countries on Saturday, April 2. In 
these notes the United States Government charges 
the Bulgarian, Hungarian, and Rumanian (io\ern- 
ments with having repeatedly violated their obli- 
gations nnder the respective peace treaty articles 
requiring them to secure to all persons under their 
jurisdiction the enjoyment of human rights and 
of the fundamental freedoms.^ 

At tlie reiiuest of the Canadian Government, 
whicli does not maintain direct diplomatic rela- 
tions with those governments, the United States 
representatives simultaneously gave formal notifi- 
cation to the Hungarian and Rumanian (lovern- 
ments that the Canadian Government associates 
itself with the contents of the respective United 
States notes. The United States representative 
in Bulgaria, at the time of presenting the United 
States note, stated that, while Canada is not a 
signatory of the peace treaty with Bulgaria and 
accordingly is not in a position to make represen- 
tations on the basis of the peace treaty, the views of 
the Canadian Government in this matter are 
identical with those expressed in the United 
States note. 

U.S. NOTE TO BULGARIAN GOVERNMENT 

March 29. 19J,9 
The Legation of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of For- 
eign Alfairs of Bul<;aria and, acting under the in- 
structions of the Uiiited States Government, has 
the honor to refer to Article 2 of the Treaty of 
Peace with Bulgaria, and to the Bulgarian Gov- 
ernment's record with respect to fulfillment of its 
obligations under that Article to protect luunan 
rights and the fundamental freedoms. 

Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace reads as follows : 

Bulgaria shall take all measures necessary to secure 
to all persons under Bulgarian jurisfiiction, without dis- 
tinction as to race, .sex, language or religion, tlio enjo.vment 
of human rights ami of the fundanient.'il frt'i'ilmiis, includ- 
ing freedom of osprcssion, of press and i>uliliraticin, of re- 
ligious worship, of political opinion and of public meeting. 

Since the entry into force on September 15, 
1047 of the Treaty of Peace with Bulgaria, the 
United States Government, as a signatory of that 
instrument, has observed closely clevelopments in 
Bulgaria with a view to ascertaining whether the 

' See also Buu.etin of Mar. 27, 1949, p. 391. 
450 



Bulgarian Government has been fulfilling its obli- 
gations under the Treaty. The United States 
Government attaches particular importance to 
the obligations, set forth in the aforementioned 
Article, which require the Bulgarian Government 
to secure to all persons under Bulgarian jurisdic- 
tion the enjoyment of human rights and of the 
fundamental freedoms. On the basis of its ob- 
servations during this period, the United States 
Government concludes that the Bulgarian Gov- 
ernment, although it has had ample opportunity 
to carry out its commitments in good faith, has 
deliberately and systematically denied to the Bul- 
garian people, by means of privative measures 
and oppressive acts, the exercise of the very rights 
and freedoms which it has pledged to secure to 
them under Article 2 of the Treaty. The disre- 
gard shown by the Bulgarian Government for 
the rights and liberties of persons under its juris- 
diction, as illustrated below, has indeed become 
so notorious as to evoke the condemnation of free 
peoples everywhere. 

Through the exercise of police power the Bul- 
garian Government has deprived large numbers 
of its citizens of their basic human rights, assured 
to them under the Treaty of Peace. These depri- 
vations have been manifested by arbitrary ar- 
rests, systematic perversion of the judicial proc- 
ess, and the prolonged detention in prisons and 
camps, without public trial, of persons whose 
views are opposed to those of the regime. 

Similarly, the Bulgarian Government has de- 
nied to persons living under its jurisdiction, as 
individuals and as organized groups including 
democratic political parties, the fundamental free- 
doms of political opinion and of public meeting. 
It has dissolved the National Agrarian Union, the 
Bulgarian Socialist Party and other groups, and 
has imprisoned many of their leaders. With the 
Treaty of I'eace barely in eifect and in the face 
of world opinion, the Bulgarian Government or- 
dered the execution of Ni1<ola Petkov. National 
Agrarian Union leader, who dared to express 
democratic political opinions which did not cor- 
respoiui to those of the Bulgarian Government. 
I*roceediiigs were instituted against those deputies 
who did not agree with its policies, with the re- 
sult that no vestige of parliamentary opposition 
now remains, an illustration of the effective denial 
of freedom of political opinion in Bulgaria. 

By restrictions on the press and on other publi- 
cations, the Bulgarian Government has denied to 
persons under its jurisdiction the freedom of ex- 

Department of State Bulletin 



pression guaranteed to them under the Treaty 
of Peace. By laws, administrative acts, and the 
use of force and intimidation on the part of its 
officials, the Bulgarian Government has made it 
impossible for individual citizens openly to ex- 
press views not in conformity to those officially 
prescribed. Freedom of the press does not exist in 
Bulgaria. 

By legislation, by the acts of its officials, and by 
"trials" of religious leaders, the Bulgarian Govern- 
ment has acted in contravention of the express 
provision of the Treaty of Peace in respect of free- 
dom of worship. Recent measures directed 
against the Protestant denominations in Bulgaria, 
for example, are clearly incompatible with the 
Bulgarian Government's obligation to secure free- 
dom of religious worship to all persons under its 
jurisdiction. 

Tlie Bulgarian Government bears full responsi- 
bility not only for acts committed since the effec- 
tive date of the Treaty of Peace which are in 
contravention of Article 2, but also for its failure 
to redress the consequences of acts committed prior 
to that date which have continued to prejudice 
the enjoyment of human rights and of the funda- 
mental freedoms. The United States Government, 
mindful of its responsibilities under the Treaty 
of Peace, has drawn attention on appropriate oc- 
casions to the flagrant conduct of the Bulgarian 
authorities in this regard. The Bulgarian Gov- 
ernment, however, has failed to modify its conduct 
in conformity with the stipulations of the Treaty. 

In the circumstances, the United States Govern- 
ment, as a signatory of the Treaty of Peace, finds 
that the Bulgarian Govermnent has repeatedly 
violated the provisions of Article 2 of that Treaty. 
In as much as the obligation of the Government of 
Bulgaria to secure to all persons under Bulgarian 
jurisdiction the enjoyment of hinnan rights and 
fundamental freedoms is expressly stipulated in 
the Treaty, no specious argument that the matters 
raised in the present note are purely of a domestic 
character can be accepted. The United States 
Government, accordingly, calls upon the Bulgar- 
ian Government to adopt prompt remedial meas- 
ures in respect of the violations referred to above 
and requests the Bulgarian Government to specify 
the steps which it is prepared to take in imple- 
menting fully the terms of Article 2 of the Treaty 
of Peace. 

U.S. NOTE TO HUNGARIAN GOVERNMENT 

March 29^ 19J,9 
The Legation of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of For- 
eign Affairs of Hungary and, acting under the 
instructions of the United States Government, has 
the honor to refer to Article 2 of the Treaty of 
Peace with Hungary, and to the Hungarian Gov- 
ernment's record with respect to fulfillment of its 
obligations under that Article to protect human 
rights and the fundamental freedoms. 

Apr/7 JO, J 949 



Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace reads as follows : 

1. Hungary shall take all measures necessary to secure 
to all persons under Hungarian jurisdiction, without dis- 
tinction as to race, sex, language or religion, the enjoyment 
of human rights and of the fundamental freedoms, in- 
cluding freedom of expression, of press and publication, 
of religious worship, of political opinion and of public 
meeting. 

2. Hungary further undertakes that the laws in force 
in Hungary shall not, either in their content or in their 
application, discriminate or entail any discrimination be- 
tween persons of Hungarian nationality on the ground 
of their race, sex, language or religion, whether in ref- 
erence to their persons, property, business, professional 
or financial interests, status, political or civil rights or 
any other matter. 

Since the entry into force on September 15, 
1947 of the Treaty of Peace with Hungary, the 
United States Government, as a signatory of that 
instrument, has observed closely developments in 
Hungary with a view to ascertaining whether the 
Hungarian Government has been fulfilling its ob- 
ligations under the Treaty. The United States 
Government attaches particular importance to the 
obligations, set forth in the aforementioned 
Article, which require the Hungarian Government 
to secure to all persons under Hungarian juris- 
diction the enjoyment of human rights and of 
the fundamental freedoms. On the basis of its 
observations during this period, the United States 
Government concludes that the Hungarian Gov- 
ernment, although it has had ample opportunity to 
carry out its commitments in good faith, has de- 
liberately and systematically denied to the Hun- 
garian people, by means of privative measures 
and oppressive acts, the exercise of the very rights 
and freedoms which it has pledged to secure to 
them under Article 2 of the Treaty. The dis- 
regard shown by the Hungarian Government for 
the rights and liberties of persons under its juris- 
diction, as illustrated below, has indeed become 
so notorious as to evoke the condemnation of free 
peoples everywhere. 

The abridgment of rights and freedoms begun 
by the Hungarian Government in the armistice 
period has continued without abatement since the 
entry into force of tlie Treaty of Peace. Through 
arbitrary exercise of police power and perversion 
of judicial process, tlie Hungarian Government 
and its agencies have violated the rights of citizens 
as free men to life and liberty. Denial of free- 
dom of political opinion is complete in Hungary. 
Democratic political parties which held substan- 
tial mandates from people have been through the 
Government's initiative successively purged, si- 
lenced in Parliament, fragmentized and dissolved. 
To enforce rigid political conformity the Hun- 
garian Government and the Communist Party 
which controls it have established a vast and insid- 
ious network of police and other agents who ob- 
serve, report on, and seek to control the private 
opinions, associations, and activities of its citizens. 

The Hungarian Govermnent, despite the pro- 
visions of the Treaty of Peace, has circumscribed 



freedom of expression. Freedom of press and 
publication does not exist. Basic decrees pertain- 
ing to the pre.ss are restrictive in character and are 
so interpreted in practice. No substantive criti- 
cism of the Government of the Communist Party 
is permitted. Government control of printing es- 
tablishments and of the distribution of newsprint 
has been exercised to deny freedom of expression 
to individuals or groups whose political opinions 
are at variance with those of the Government. 
In the field of reporting, absence of formal cen- 
sorship has not obscured the record of the Hun- 
farian Government in excluding or expelling 
oreign correspondents who have written des- 
patches critical of the regime or in intimidating 
local correspondents into writing only what is ac- 
ceptable or favorable to the regfme. 

Freedom of public meeting on political matters 
has been re^jularly denied to all except Communist 
groups and their collaboratoi-s. In the case of 
religious meetings, on various occasions attendance 
at such gatherings has been obstructed and the 
principals subjected to harassment. The Hun- 
garian Government, moreover, has pursued policies 
detrimental to freedom of religious worship. It 
has sought by coercive measures to undermine the 
influence of the churches and of religious leaders 
and to restrict their legitimate functions. By 
arbitrary and unjustified proceedings against re- 
ligious leaders on fabricated grounds, as in the 
cases of Cardinal Mindszenty and Lutheran 
Bishop Ordass, the Hungarian dovernment has at- 
tempted to force the submission of independent 
church leaders and to bring about their replace- 
ment witli collaborators subservient to the Com- 
munist Party and its program. Such measures 
constitute violations of the freedom of religious 
worship guaranteed by the Treaty of Peace. 

The Hungarian Government bears full respon- 
sibility not only for acts committed since the effec- 
tive date of the Treaty of Peace which are in con- 
travention of Article 2, but also for its failure to 
redress the consequences of acts committed prior 
to that date which have continued to prejudice the 
enjoyment of human rights and of the fundamen- 
tal freedoms. The United States Government, 
mindful of its responsibilities under the Treaty of 
Peace, had drawn attention on appropriate occa- 
sions to the flagrant conduct of the Hungarian 
authorities in this regard. The Hungarian Gov- 
ernment, however, has failed to modifv its conduct 
in conformity with the stipulations of the Treaty. 

In the circumstances, the United States Gov- 
ernment, as a signatory of the Treaty of Peace, 
finds that the Hungarian Government has re- 
peatedly violated the provisions of Article 2 of 
that Treaty. In as much as the obligation of the 
Government of Hungary to secure to all persons 
under Hungarian jurisdiction, the enjoyment of 
human rights and the fundamental freedoms is 
expressly stipulated in the Treaty, no specious 
argument that the matters raised in the present 
Note are purely of a domestic character can be ac- 



cepted. The United States Government, accord- 
ingly, calls upon the Hungarian Government to 
adopt prompt remedial measures in respect of the 
violations referred to above and requests the Hun- 
garian Government to specify the steps which it 
IS prepared to take in implementing full}' the 
terms of Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace. 

U.S. NOTE TO RUMANIAN GOVERNMENT 

March 29, IBlfi. 

The Legation of the United States of America 
presents its compliments to the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs of Rumania and, acting under the 
instructions of the United States Government, has 
the honor to refer to Article 3 of the Treaty of 
Peace with Rumania, and to the Rumanian Gov- 
ernment's record with respect to fulfillment of its 
obligations under that Article to protect human 
rights and the fundamental freedoms. 

Article 3 of Treaty of Peace reads as follows : 

1. Rouijiania shall take all measures necessary to se- 
cure to all iXTsoiis under Roumanian jurisdiction, with- 
out distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, the 
enjoyment of human rights and of the fundamental free- 
doms, including freedom of expression, of press and pub- 
lication, of religious worship, of political opinion and of 
pultlic meeting. 

2. Itouniania further undertakes that the laws in force 
in Roumania shall not, either in their content or in their 
application, discriminate or entail any discrimination 
between persons of Roumanian nationality on tlie ground 
of their race, sex, language or religion, whether in ref- 
erence to their persons, property, business, profession or 
financial interests, status, political or civil rights or any 
otlier matter. 

Since the entry into force on September 15, 
1947 of the Treaty of Peace with Rumania, the 
United States Government, as a signatory of that 
instrument, has observed closely developments in 
Rumania with a view to ascertaining whether the 
RuiiKinian Government has been fulfilling its obli- 
gations under the Treaty. The United States 
Government attaches particular importance to the 
obligations, set forth in the aforementioned 
Article, which require the Rumanian Government 
to secure to all persons under Rumanian juris- 
diction the enjoj'inent of human rights and of the 
fundamental freedoms. On the basis of its ob- 
servations during this period, the United States 
Government concludes that the Rumanian Gov- 
ernment, although it has had ample opportunity 
to carry out its commitments in good faith, has 
deliberately and systematically denied to the Ru- 
manian jieople, by means of privative measures 
and oppressive acts, the exercise of the very rights 
and freedoms which it has pledged to secure to 
them under Article 3 of the Treaty. The disre- 
gard shown by the Rumanian Government for 
the rights and liberties of persons under its juris- 
diction, as illustrated below, has indeed become 
so notorious as to evoke the condemnation of free 
peoples everywhere. 

During the Armistice period the Rumanian 
Government took or countenanced actions which 

Department of State Bulletin 



progi-essively deprived persons under its jurisdic- 
tion of their essential rights and freedoms. The 
Kumanian Government accelerated these depriva- 
tions after it had signed the Treaty of Peace on 
February 10, 1947, and in June and August 1947, 
the United States Government warned the Ku- 
manian Government concerning such actions as 
being prejudicial to the fulfillment of provisions 
of the Treaty. The Rumanian Government, how- 
ever, took no corrective measures. This process 
was not only not revei-sed but continued without 
abatement after the Treaty came into force. 

In violation of freedom of political opinion, 
assured by the Treaty of Peace, the Kumanian 
Government and the minority Communist Party 
which controls it disrupted, silenced and outlawed 
democratic political parties and deprived demo- 
cratic leaders of their liberty. To this end, the 
Rumanian Government employed methods of in- 
timidation and perversions of the judicial process. 
The inequities of these actions, as exemplified by 
the "trial" and condemnation to life imprison- 
ment of luliu Maniu, President of the National 
Peasant Party, and other leaders were recited by 
the United States Government in the Legation's 
note No. 61 of Februaiy 2, 1948. Moreover, large 
numbers of Rumanian citizens have been seized 
and held for long periods without public trial. 

By laws, decrees and administrative measures 
as well as by extra-legal acts of organizations 
affiliated with the Government and the Com- 
munist Party, the Rumanian Government has 
stifled all expression of political opinion at vari- 
ance with its own. Freedom of press and publi- 
cation, guaranteed by the Treaty of Peace, does 
not exist in Rumania. No substantive criticism 
of the Government is permitted. The Rumanian 
Goveriunent has taken control of printing estab- 
lishments and has suppressed all publications 
which are not responsive to its direction or which 
do not serve the purposes of the Communist Party. 

Despite the express provision of the Treaty of 
Peace, only Communist and Communist-approved 
organizations are able in practice to hold public 
meetings. In view of the threat of forcible inter- 
vention and reprisals by the Government or by the 
Communist Party, other groups have not at- 
tempted to hold such meetings. 

The Rumanian Government has likewise 
abridged freedom of religious worship, guaran- 
teed under Article 3 of the Treaty of Peace, by 
legislation and by other measures which effectively 
deny such freedom. It has assumed extensive con- 
trol over the practice of religion, including the 
application of political tests, which is incom- 
patible with freedom of worship. These powers 
have been used in at least one instance to destroy 
by Governnaent decree a major religious body and 
to transfer its property to the state. 

The Rumanian Government bears full respon- 
sibility not only for acts committed since tlae 

April 10, 1949 



effective date of the Treaty of Peace which are 
in contravention of Article 3, but also for its fail- 
ure to redress the consequences of acts committed 
prior to that date which have continued to preju- 
dice the enjoyment of human rights and of the 
fundamental freedoms. The United States Gov- 
ernment, mindful of its responsibilities under the 
Treaty of Peace, has drawn attention on appro- 
priate occasions to the flagrant conduct of the 
Rumanian authorities in this regard. The Ru- 
manian Government, however, has failed to modify 
its conduct in conformity with the stipulations of 
tne Treaty. 

In the circumstances, the United States Govern- 
ment, as a signatory of the Treaty of Peace, finds 
that the Riunanian Government has repeatedly 
violated the provisions of Article 3 of that Treaty. 
In as much as the obligation of the Government of 
Rumania to secure to all persons under Rumanian 
jurisdiction the enjoyment of human rights and 
the fundamental freedoms is expressly stipulated 
in the Treaty, no specious argument that the 
matters raised in the present note are purely of a 
domestic character can be accepted. The United 
States Government, accordingly, calls upon the 
Rumanian Government to adopt prompt remedial 
measures in respect of the violations referred to 
above and requests the Rumanian Goveriunent to 
specify the steps which it is prepared to take in 
implementing fully the terms of Article 3 of the 
Treaty of Peace. 



THE CONGRESS 

U.S. Extends Invitation for 195610lymplc 
Games ' 

Whereas the United States Olympic Association 
will invite the International Olympic Commit- 
tee to hold the Olympic Games in the United 
States at Detroit, Michigan, in 1956: Now, 
therefore, be it 

Resolved hy the Senate and House of Repre- 
sentatives of the United States of America in Con- 
gress as'sembled, That the Government of the 
United States joins in the invitation of the United 
States Olympic Association to the International 
Olympic Committee to hold the 1956 Olympic 
Games in the United States at Detroit, Michigan ; 
and expresses the hospitable hope that the United 
States may be selected as the site for this great 
enterprise in international good will. 

Sec. 2. The Secretary of State is directed to 
transmit a copy of this joint resolution to the 
International Olympic Committee, 
Approved March 23, 1949. 

' Public Law 22, 81st Cong., 1st sess. 



National Conference of Christians and Jews Protest Denial of 
Religious Freedom in Hungary and Bulgaria 



[Released to the press March ;!1] 

Text of Petition 

March 28, 1949 

Sir : It has become tragically clear to the world 
that calculated assaults on and suppression of free- 
dom of religion are now practiced in various na- 
tions as matters of national policy. These actions 
imdermine tlie cornerstone of world peace which 
55 nations laid in San Francisco. 

There the peoples of those nations proclaimed 
"faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity 
and worth of the human person, the equal rights of 
men and women'' and undertook to "achieve inter- 
national cooperation ... in promoting and en- 
couraging respect for human rights and funda- 
mental freedoms for all without distinction as to 
race, sex, language or religion'*. 

Lest these solemn covenants with the peoples 
of the world become empty phi-ases. tlio n'ligious 
rights thus guaranteed must, in deeds as well as in 
words, be protected. Such safeguards the United 
Nations was constituted to provide. 

In furtherance of the Charter's provisions, the 
General Assembly of the United Nations, in De- 
cember, 1948, by Vote of 48 nations, none dissent- 
ing, proclaimed a Universal Declaration of Hu- 
man Rights which provides that "everyone has 
the right to freedom of thought, conscience and 
religion'", and the right "in public or private to 
manifest his religion or beliefs in teaching, prac- 
tices, worship and observance"; that "everyone is 
entitled in full equality to a fair and public hear- 
ing by an independent and impartial tribunal in 
tiie determination of . . . any criminal charge 
against him". 

These fundamental rights, we submit, have been 
violated in recent prosecutions of religious leaders 
in Hungary and Bulgaria. An issue of para- 
mount importance tliercfore confronts the United 
Nations, which both its General Assembly and its 
Economic and Social Council have power to 
examine. 

The Charter not only authorizes but directs the 
General Assembly (Chap. IV, Art. 13) to "initiate 
studies and make recommendations for the pur- 



pose of . . . assisting in the realization of human 
rights and fundamental freedoms for all". Like 
powers are granted to the Economic and Social 
Council (Chap. X, Art. C2). The Member States 
of the United Nations (Chap. IX, Art. 55 and 56) 
"pledge themselves" to promote "universal respect 
for. and observance of. liuman rights and funda- 
mental freedoms for all." Chapter I, Article 2, 
Section 6 of the Charter also enacts that the United 
Nations "shall ensure that states which are not 
members of the United Nations act in accordance 
with these principles so far as may be necessary 
for the manitenance of international peace and 
security". 

Pursuant to these and other mandates of the 
Charter, treaties were made on Februarj- 10, 1947, 
bv twelve of the victorious Allies including the 
U.S.S.R., Great Britain, U. S. A., China and 
France, with the vanquished governments of Bul- 
garia. Hungary and Roumania. These treaties 
declare that in their respective territorial jurisdic- 
tion each of these states "shall take all measures to 
secure to all persons . . . without distinction as 
to race, sex, language or religion the enjoyment of 
human rights and of the fundamental freedoms 
including freedom of expression, of press and pub- 
lication, of religious worship, of political opinion 
and of public meeting". These treaties declare 
that the parties thereto shall appoint a commis- 
sion to consider disputes arising from their 
violation. 

Pursuant to those treaties, to the United Na- 
tions Chaiter and the Universal Declaration of 
Human Rights ample jurisdiction exists for in- 
quiry into the grave violations of religious rights 
whicli have lately occurred. The authority to 
conduct such inquiries carries with it a commen- 
surate duty. 

"Wlierefore, we urge that our Government raise 
these issues, either in the United Nations, or by 
sucli other means as may be inost appropriate, to 
the end that recent imprisonments, trials and con- 
victions of religious leaders by the Governments of 
Bulgaria and Hungary shall be made the subject of 
jjrompt. impartial, public examination. 

Very respectfully, 
National Conference of Christians and Jews. 



Deparfmenf of Sfofe Bullelin 



[Here follow the signatures of the members of the Human 
Rights Committee, the National Co-Chairman, the 
President, and other participants of the Conference] 

Reply of Secretary Acheson to the President and 
Chairman of the Human Rights Commiittee 

Sirs : The Department of State welcomes your 
petition of Marcli 29 protesting against tlie denial 
of religious freedom in Hungary and Bulgaria. 

We Americans know the importance of freedom 
of religion. Our country was settled very largely 
by individuals who fled intolerance to find free- 
dom to worship their God according to the dictates 
of their conscience. In the United States they 
established a haven of individual freedoms which 
we, their inheritors, enjoy in full measure today. 

With other nations which share our belief in 
individual liberty, we are now seeking to promote 
fundamental human rights through the United 
Nations and other means. What appears to be a 
brutal threat to freedom of thought, conscience 
and religion has been developed by the authori- 
tarian regimes which control Eastern European 
peoples. A Godless Inquisition has apparently 
been set in operation to abolish, through thought 
police, the right of the individual to follow any 
kind of religious belief. 

The United States will join with like-minded 
nations in focusing world attention on this 
tyranny through appropriate means. 

To the best of our national ability, your petition 
will be answered. 

Very truly yours. 

Dean G. Acheson 
Secretary of State 



ECA] Anniversary 

Voice of America Broadcast 

[Released to the press April 1] 

The Voice of America will commemorate the 
first anniversary of the Economic Cooperation Ad- 
ministration with a series of special broadcasts to 
the world this week end. 

George V. Allen, Assistant Secretary of State 
for public affairs, said the special broadcasts are 
designed to give overseas listeners a clear and 
accurate picture of the true aims of the European 
Recovery Programs and the accomplishments that 
have been made under it. 

The commemoration will be climaxed with a 
Voice of America broadcast on Sunday of a 30- 
minute documentary entitled "The Marshall 
Plan." Paul Hoffman, Eca Administrator; 
Christian Christiansen, editor of Verdensgang, of 
Oslo; A. P. Wadsworth, editor of the Manchester 
Guardian, and Raymond Aron, editor of Figaro, 
of Paris, will participate in the program. 

Another special broadcast Sunday will be a 
radio forum, "One Year of Eca." during which 
Anne O'Hare McCormick of the New York Times 

April 10, 1949 



and Quincy Howe of the Columbia Broadcasting 
System will be interviewed. 

During the week leading up to the Eca anni- 
versary, the Voice of America has broadcast state- 
ments by a number of officials and private citizens 
of nations cooperating in the recovery program. 

Participants include : Erik Brof oss, Norwegian 
Minister of Commerce; J. O. Krag, Danish Minis- 
ter of Commerce; Sean McBride, Irish Minister 
of External Affairs; Maurice Petsche, French 
Minister of Finance; Moens de Fernig, Belgian 
Minister of Foreign Trade; Stephan Stephano- 
poulos, Greek Minister of Coordination; P. 
Makris, Secretary General of the Greek Federa- 
tion of Labor; Dr. Peter Krauland, Austrian 
Minister for Economic Planning ; Tage Erlander, 
Swedish Prime Minister; Sir Stafford Cripps, 
British Chancellor of the Exchequer ; and Robert 
Marjolin of France, Secretary of the Organiza- 
tion of European Economic Cooperation. 

Eca ofiicials who made special talks for over- 
seas broadcast included T. K. Finletter, Chief of 
the Eca Mission to the United Kingdom; J. D. 
Zellerbach, Chief of the Eca Mission to Italy ; W. 
Averell Harriman, Eca Ambassador; John Nu- 
veen, Jr., Chief of the Eca Mission to Greece ; and 
David K. E. Bruce, Chief of the Eca Mission to 
France. Other anniversary statements include 
those by AVilliam Green, President of the Ameri- 
can Federation of Labor, and Vera Micheles Dean 
of the Foreign Policy Association. 

Additional statements are being recorded in the 
United States and abroad for use in connection 
with the Eca anniversary broadcasts. 

■Message to the President From Prime Minister Attlee 

[Released to the press by the White House April 2] 

A year has now gone by since you signed the 
Foreign Assistance Act of 1948 and gave us hope 
and help when most we needed it. In the short 
space of these twelve months, nineteen free na- 
tions and territories, joining together in the organ- 
ization for Euroi^ean Economic Co-operation, 
have embarked on a co-operative effort which is 
without precedent in times of peace. As a result, 
during the last year the whole economic scene in 
Western Europe has been transformed to a degree 
which must astonish all of us when we recall the 
uncertainties and perils of the immediately pre- 
ceding years. 

That this progress towards full recovery has 
been and continues to be accomplished, is due to 
the generosity and far-sightedness of the people 
and Government of the United States. Without 
their help the achievements of the past year would 
not have been possible nor would Europe now 
have the confidence to go forward to grapple the 
great tasks which yet remain to be fulfilled. On 
this happy anniversary, so pregnant for the peace 
of civilization, we send to you and to the American 
peoi^le our heartfelt thanks. 



Selecting Our Future Citizens 



BY HERVE J. L'HEUREUXi 
Chief, Visa Division 



Thore are two basic theories or fundamental sys- 
tems for the control of immigration into any coun- 
try. One is that no alien shall be permitted to 
enter the national territory of a country unless 
there is some specific provision of the law of the 
country concerned which authorizes the admission 
of the individual alien or the particular class of 
aliens to which he belongs. In other words, under 
this theory the national law of the particular coun- 
try bars ail aliens from admission into the national 
territory except in such cases or classes of cases 
as the law may specifically provide for the ad- 
mission of aliens. 

The other basic concept of iramigi-ation control 
is predicated upon the theory that all aliens may 
have the privilege of entering the national terri- 
tory of a country, so far as the fundamental law 
of the country is concerned, unless there is some 
particular provision in the national law which 
specifically provides for the exclusion of an alien 
in an individual case, according to the excluded 
class of aliens to which he belongs. This is the 
fundamental concept of immigration control 
which is followed by the United States, although 
most countries of the world follow the first basic 
principle I have mentioned. 

You can appreciate the reason why our immigra- 
tion laws are based upon the second theoretical 
concept. It is simply a matter of our historical 
development as a nation of immigrant people. In 
the early days of our history we welcomed and 
encouraged all immigrants who wanted to come 
here. We needed manpower to develop the vast 
wilderness which has become what we know today 
as the United States of America. AVe were looking 
for men and women who wanted to start a new 
life in this new world of rugged individualism and 
collective opportunity — men and women who loved 
human freedom and who cherished political and 
religious liberty. We wanted immigrants who 
would leave their old-world problems and contro- 
versies behind them and come here to establish 
upon the continent of North America a new nation 
of people from many lands — a new nation based 
upon new political and economic concepts of na- 
tional life. That we have succeeded so well is in 

' Adflre.ss delivered at the Annual Conference of National 
Council of Naturalization and Citizenship, New York Cit.v, 
on Mar. 25, 1949, and released to the press on the same 
date. 



itself a tribute to the sturdy character of our early 
immigrants. 

We want to keep the doors open for worthy im- 
migrants and yet preserve our heritage. We do 
not wish to see our favorable position in the world 
frittered away by a lackadaisical immigration 
policy which would permit a vast influx of people 
from other countries of the world who would 
create insurmountable problems for those who are 
already here. 

This is a time of great and far-reaching achieve- 
ment in the fields of science and invention. In 
these modern days of global-freinjht aircraft, ra- 
dio, radar, television, and other electronic as well 
as mass-production developments, not to mention 
atomic energj'. we are living in a much smaller 
world. It is also a more highly developed civili- 
zation from many points of view. There is, there- 
fore, sound basis for a new concept of immigration 
control. We need to have a more selective immi- 
gration policy in the interests of our own people, 
and yet we would not close the door to immigrants 
who, for their own benefit alone, may desire to 
come to this country. 

In a more technical sense, it has been our prac- 
tice in past years to follow the "first-come-first- 
served'" rule in granting the privilege of immigra- 
tion into the United States. This was necessary 
because of the fact that we have imposed numerical 
as well as qualitative restrictions upon the entry 
of immigrants into this country. In other words, 
when you have more applicants for permission to 
enter than there are seats in the hall, it is custom- 
ary for people to line up at the entrance. Those 
first in line may be admitted, but the hall may be 
filled before the last person in line is reached. 

In enacting our quota immigration laws. Con- 
gress has provided that we may take certain immi- 
grants out of line and move them ahead of others. 
This we call granting a preference. But Congress 
has stipulated precisely in the law the classes 
which may be granted such a preference over 
others, whom we call nonpreference immigrants. 
We are therefore precluded from taking other per- 
sons out of their normal order and. in effect, gi'ant- 
ing to them an unathorized preference, or a 
l^reference not provided by law. 

The only occupational preference authorized by 
law is for aliens having skill in agriculture above 
that of an ordinary farm laborer, but the law pro- 
vides that this shall not apply to applicants who 

Department of State Bulletin 



are chargeable to quotas of less than 300 annually, 
and it is, of course, in the quotas smaller than 300 
annually that preference may mean the difference 
between coming to the United States or not being 
able to come at all, because of the heavy demand 
for visas on the part of aliens who are the close 
relatives of citizens or residents and who are en- 
titled to preference as such in accordance with 
the law. 

Our experience of a quarter of a century in 
the work of controlling immigi-ation into the 
United States, primarily at the foreign source, 
through the visa or double-check system shows that 
there is sound basis for an amendment of the law 
which will enable us to penetrate further into the 
field of selective immigration. We have been 
obliged to tell American industrial, commercial, 
and scientific institutions and firms that they may 
not bring to the United States as immigrants out 
of the regular turn on a quota waiting list, a highly 
skilled and greatly needed technician or scientist. 
In some such cases it may be many years before 
the aliens they may desire to bring to this country 
can be reached on the waiting list. 

This situation, in my opinion, is one that would 
justify early remedial legislation, not for the pur- 
pose of assisting for his own sake an immigrant 
who wants to come here as soon as possible but for 
the purpose of enabling the important American 
interests involved to fill an urgent need, which in 
turn will provide for greater activity and expan- 
sion of our business and industry and provide more 
and greater employment for our citizens and resi- 
dents. In other words, a sovereign nation should 
have the power to select and bring immigrants 
into its territory whenever it is in the national in- 
terest to do so, instead of filling up the quotas year 
in and year out with immigrants who, for their 
own sakes, desire to enter, regardless of whether 
they may be able to make any appreciable contri- 
bution to the national welfare. 



Nonimmigrant Passport Visa Fee Arrangement 
With France 

[Released to the press March 30] 

Effective April 1, 1949, American citizens in 
possession of valid American passports may enter 
Metropolitan France and the following French 
territories without French visas for a temporary 
period of stay provided they comply with other 
laws and regulations of Metropolitan France and 
of such territories concerning the entry, residence, 
and employment or occupation of foreigners or 
travelers: Metropolitan France, Andorra, Al- 
geria, Morocco, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Guiana, 
Reunion, Tunisia. 

Statutory and other restrictions preclude the 
United Sates from granting identical concessions, 
but French nationals resident in Metropolitan 

April 10, 1949 



France and the above-mentioned territories who 
are in possession of valid French passports and 
who are eligible to receive visas with which to 
apply for admission into the United Sates as bona 
fide nonimmigrants will be granted, effective April 
1, 1949, gratis passport visas, and in cases of 

?ualified temporary visitors, visas may be valid 
or 24 months provided the passports of the bearers 
remain valid for that period of time. All other 
nonimmigrant passport visas granted French na- 
tionals resident in Metropolitan France and in the 
above-mentioned territories will have a maximum 
period of validity of 12 months provided the pass- 
ports of the bearers remain valid for that period 
of time. 

French citizens resident outside Metropolitan 
France and the above-mentioned French terri- 
tories and who are eligible to receive American 
visas, may be gi-anted nonimmigrant passport 
visas valid for a maximum period of 12 months at 
prescribed visa fees. 

American citizens entering French territories 
other than those above-mentioned are subject to 
French visa requirements and visa fees. 

This arrangement will be put into effect outside 
Metropolitan France. United Kingdom, Belgium, 
and Switzerland for French citizens residing in the 
specified territories but temporarily absent there- 
from and who are proceeding to the United States 
as nonimmigrants, as soon as American diplomatic 
and consular officers are notified. 



Atlantic Pact Countries Take Note of Soviet 
Views of tiie Treaty 

Statement hy the Foreign Ministers 

[Released to the press April 2] 

Tlie Foreign Ministers of the countries assem- 
bled here in Washington for the signing of the 
North Atlantic pact have taken note of the views of 
the Soviet Government made public by that Gov- 
ernment on March 31, 1949. 

The Foreign Ministers note that the views ex- 
pressed by the Soviet Government on March 31 
are identical in their misinterpretation of the 
nature and intent of this association with those 
published by the Soviet Foreign Office in January, 
before the text of the pact was even in existence. 
It would thus appear that the views of the Soviet 
Government on this subject do not arise from an 
examination of the character and text of the North 
Atlantic pact but from other considerations. 

The text of the treaty itself is the best answer 
to such misrepresentations and allegations. The 
text makes clear the completely defensive nature 
of this pact, its conformity with both the spirit and 
letter of the Charter of the United Nations, and 
also the fact that the pact is not directed against 
any nation or groUp of nations but only against 
armed aggression. 



Voice of America Broadcasts Atlantic Pact 
Ceremonies 

The largest concentration of short-wave radio 
facilities ever assembled for a single program will 
be used to broadcast to the world the address of 
President Truman, the 12 Foreign Ministers, and 
the other ceremonies of the signing of the North 
Atlantic security pact in Washington on Monday 
(April 4 at 2 : 45 to 5 : 00 p. m., e. s. t.) 

The Voice of America, originating the broad- 
casts in the Departmental Auditorium, where the 
signing takes place, will be joined by the British 
Broadcasting Corjjoration. the Canadian Broad- 
casting Company and the U.S. Armed Forces Net- 
work, to bring the signing ceremonies to a world- 
wide audience and in the major languages of the 
world — 43 in all. 

People of the Eastern European countries, in- 
cluding Soviet Russia, will be able to listen to the 
ceremony either in English as it actually takes 
place, or to listen to the detailed description of the 
event and the summary translations of the speeches 
in their own languages. 

This double coverage to Iron Curtain areas, in 
which government censorship might otherwise 
keep accurate news of the event from the people, 
will be provided through additional relays put into 
service for this purpose, and the regular language 
programs beamed to Russia and her satellites by 
both the Voice of America and the BBC. These 
facilities will include the four powerful transmit- 
ters of the American relay liase in Munich in addi- 
tion to the BBC relays for Eastern Europe. 

The Voice and BBC will have a team of com- 
mentators near the signing table to give the con- 
tinuing description of the event. All of the com- 
mentary originating during the ceremony will be 
in Engli.sh, with the translations being made by 
the language experts in the Xew York studios of 
the Voice. Immediately after the signing, a VOA 
French commentator will give a complete resume 
of the event at the AVashington studios of the Voice 
for direct broadcast to Europe. 

The Voice of America broadcast will begin at 
2 : 45 p. m., Monday with a background commen- 
tary on the pact. At 3 : 00 p. m., the British 
Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian Broad- 
casting Comi)any, and the U.S. Armed Forces Net- 
work will join the network just before the 
speeches by the Foreign Ministers begin on the 
stage. 

The entire ceremony consisting of speeches by 
Secretary Acheson and the Foreign Ministers, the 
address by President Truman, and the signing 
ceremonies will go over the air simultaneously to 
Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Latin 
America. 



After the ceremonies are over, the Voice of 
America will rebroadcast a half-hour summarized 
version to Latin America and to the Far East. 

During the 24 hours following the ceremonies, 
sunmiaries of the event will be broadcast on all 
regular Voice of America programs. 

In addition to the broadcasting of the ceremony, 
the texts of all speeches and news stories of the 
event will be sent to U..S. Embassies and Legations 
abroad and made available to the press in foreign 
countries. Photographic exhibits of the signing 
will also be sent out. 



Foreign Ministers Approve Atlantic Treaty 

CommMnique 

[Released to the press AprU 2] 

Tlie Foreign Ministers of Belgium. Canada, 
Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, 
the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and the 
United Kingdom and the Secretary of State of the 
United States met on April 2 and formally ap- 
proved the text of the North Atlantic Treaty, to 
be signed on April 4. 

Preliminary consideration was given to the 
nature of the council to be established under article 
9 of the treaty. It was agreed that the council 
should be composed of Foreign Ministers or other 
representatives of governments. It was agreed 
that tlie council should meet immediately after the 
treaty goes into effect for the purpose of establish- 
ing the defense committee. 



Mutual Problems Discussed With Netherlands 

Joint Statement hi/ Secretary Acheson and 
Foreign Minister Stikker of the Netherlands 

[Released to the press March 31] 

Mr. Stikker, in his talk with tlie Secretary of 
State, went over several matters of interest to the 
Netherlands Government in connection with the 
Atlantic pact and Western European questions. 
He also discussed fully and frankly the Indonesian 
situation. In this connection, the Secretary in- 
dicated to him the strong hope of the United States 
Government that the instructions sent from the 
Security Council to the Commission for Indonesia 
on March 23 might be put into effect at the earliest 
possible date. The Secretary expressed full con- 
fidence that both parties would enter into pre- 
liminary negotiations called for by the Security 
Council action promptly and in good faith. 

Mr. Stikker. after making clear tliat the sugges- 
tions of the Security Council had been accepted by 
the Netherlands Government, expressed similar 
desires and outlined to the Secretary the paths 
along which he believed progress could be achieved 
most effectively aiul expeditiously. 



Department of State Bulletin 



U.S. and U.K. Discuss Germany and Greece 

Joint Statement hy Secretary Acheson and 
Foreign Secretary Bevin 

[Released to the press March 31] 

The Secretary of State reviewed with Mr. Bevin 
a number of European questions of common con- 
cern. In particular, they gave general considera- 
tion to the problems of Western Germany and ex- 
changed views on the situation in Greece. The 
Secretary of State and Mr. Bevin met in order to 
have a general exchange of views on these sub- 
jects, and no decisions were taken at the meeting. 

Definition of Term "German Etiinic Origin" 

[Released to the press March 30] 

The Department of State has formulated the 
following definition of the term "German ethnic 
origin" for the guidance of American consular of- 
ficers in Germany and Austria in implementation 
of section 12 of the Displaced Persons Act of 
1948: 

In order to qualify for an immigration visa under tlie 
"German ethnic origin" iportions of tlie German and Aus- 
trian quotas ttie burden of proof shall be upon each ap- 
plicant to establish that he is not subject to exclusion 
from the United States under any provision of the im- 
migration laws and to establish the following qualifica- 
tions as a person of "German ethnic origin" as intended by 
Congress in enacting the provisions of section 12 of the 
Displaced Persons Act of June 25, 1948: 

1. That be was born in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hun- 
gary, Rumania, or Yugoslavia. The statute specifically 
requires this as an element of classification. 

2. That he resided in any part of Germany or Austria 
on June 25, 1948, when the Displaced Persons Act became 
effective. This is also a specific statutory requirement. 

3. That he does not come under the jurisdiction of the 
International Refugee Organization. The statute classi- 
fies as displaced persons certain aliens who are under the 
jurisdiction of the International Refugee Organization, 
and provides a special procedure for dealing with them 
as "eligible displaced persons". 

4. (a) That he is a German expellee, or the accom- 
panying wife or minor child of a German expellee, pur- 
suant to the Potsdam Agreement of August 1, 1945, from 
Poland, Czechoslovakia, or Hungary, or (b) that he is a 
a refugee, or the accompanying wife or minor child of a 
refugee from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, 
or Yugoslavia. 

5. That he is characteristically Germanic, a status which 
is to be determined upon the basis of the following com- 
bination of factors, the presence or absence of any par- 
ticular one of which will not, in itself, be considered as 
conclusive, but any combination of which may be con- 
sidered as providing satisfactory evidence of German 
ethnic origin: 

(a) Antecedents emigrated from Germany. 

(b) Use of any of the German dialects as the common 
language of the home or for social communications. 

(c) Resided in the country of birth in an area popu- 
lated predominantly by persons of Germanic origin or 
stock who have retained German social characteristics 
and group homogeneity as distinguished from the sur- 
rounding population. 

(d) Evidences common attributes or social characteris- 
tics of the Germanic group in which he resided in the 
country of his birth, such as educational institutions at- 
tended, church afliliation, social and jwlitical associations 

April JO, 1949 



and affiliations, name, business or commercial practices 
and associations, and secondary languages or dialects. 

6. Any person who fails to qualify under 1 or 2 is 
statutorily ineligible to receive an immigration visa under 
the "German ethnic origin" clause in section 12 of the 
Displaced Persons Act, but such person may apply in the 
usual manner for an appropriate immigration visa under 
the quota of the country of his birth, at such time as 
his turn is reached on the waiting list, and his priority 
on such waiting list shall be determined as of the date 
of his registration for an immigration visa under the 
"German ethnic origin" program. 

7. In the case of any applicant who qualifies under 1 
and 2, but who fails to qualify under 3, 4, or 5, action 
should be suspended and a full report should be sub- 
mitted to the Department for an advisory opinion con- 
cerning the alien's proper classification. 

Persons in Germany and Austria who were bom 
in one of the five countries mentioned in the above 
definition may submit to the American consular 
office at which they are registered appropriate evi- 
dence to establish that they are classifiable as 
persons of German ethnic origin. Such evidence 
should not be sent to the Department of State. 

American Soldiers Convicted in Czeclioslovakia 
on Cliarges of Espionage 

Statement hy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press March 30] 

The United States Government views with 
grave concern the conviction on March 26 of two 
American soldiers, George R. Jones and Clarence 
R. Hill, to ten to twelve years at hard labor, re- 
spectively, on charges of espionage after deten- 
tion since December 10, 1948, without access to 
our Embassy and without due regard for the 
normal rights and safeguards to which an ac- 
cused should be entitled insofar as this Govern- 
ment is aware. The conviction was suddenly 
announced on March 29 without prior notification 
to our Embassy in Praha that the men had been 
brought to trial. Earlier background informa- 
tion on this case was made available to the press 
in the Department's announcement of February 
18, 1949, and in subsequent reports from our Em- 
bassy in Pralia.^ 

This Government fully supports the action of 
the United States Ambassador in Praha in pro- 
testing the procedure of the Czechoslovak au- 
thorities in this matter. The Czechoslovak Min- 
istry of Foreign Affairs has stated that a note 
is being addressed to the Embassy on this sub- 
ject, and has further promised that arrangements 
would be made next week for our Embassy to 
interview them. 

Before determining what further measures 
may be taken in this matter on behalf of the 
American citizens involved, the Department of 
State will await the Czechoslovak official com- 
munication in this matter and the results of the 
interviews with the prisoners by our representa- 
tives in Praha. 



' BtrrxETiN of Feb. 27, 1949, p. 266. 



Influence of Inter-American Relations on U.S. Foreign Policy 



BY PAUL C. DANIELS' 
Director for American Republic Affairs 



You are all familiar with the history of re- 
lations between the United States and its good 
neighboi-s in the other American republics. These 
relations are of long standing. There have been 
ups and downs, to be sure, but the outstanding 
feature through many decades has been the de- 
termination of the American nations to get along 
together for the benefit of all. 

At the root of this liistoric cooperation is the 
factor of geography, which binds us together. 
Deeper still is the strong psychological factor of 
love of liberty and freedom and the aspirations of 
democracy which we share. Nearly all the Ameri- 
can republics, like our own country, obtained their 
freedom by fighting for it. They have carefully 
guarded their hard-won independence ever since. 

The ability of the American republics to get 
along together has never stood out in sharper 
relief than it does today. Not only does it stand 
out by contrast with conflicts elsewhere, but it 
serves as a powerful beacon to guide the rest of the 
world. I look upon the evolution of Pan-Ameri- 
canism as the source and the proving ground of 
some of the major programs of the United States 
foreign policy of today. A brief look into the 
background and some of the latest developments 
in the political, technical, and economic phases of 
our cooperation with tlie other American nations 
will illustrate this point. 

Ever since the days of President Monroe, the 
American Eepublics. This, in turn, became the 
cooperation among themselves for the protection 
of their individual and collective freedom. This 
need, of course, has its basis in the community of 
interests of the Americas. 

This community of interests, through the years, 
became more widely recognized. It found its first 
expression in organized form in 1890 with es- 
tablishment of the Commercial Bureau of the 
American Republics. This, in turn, became the 
Pan American Union in 1910. There followed a 
step-by-step development, entirely healthy and 
logical in cliaractor, that led to the creation of the 
Organization of American States at the Bogota 
conference of 1948. The Pan American Union, 
today, is the permanent general secretariat of that 
organization. 

AVliile political and economic considerations 

' An address delivered at the University of Wisconsin, at 
Madison, on Mar. 30, 1949, and released to the press on the 
same date. 



were in the process of development, there was a 
similar evolution of the concept of mutual aid for 
security. Beginning with the principle of con- 
sultation in the event of a threat to peace, this 
mutual concern developed into the doctrine of "all 
for one and one for all." At Habana in 1940, the 
year before Pearl Harbor, the concept that an 
attack on an American state by a non-American 
state would be considered as an attack on all be- 
came generally accepted. This was reaffiniied in 
1945, in the Act of Chapultepec. This act pro- 
vided that in the event of an attack, there would 
be general consultation to decide on counter 
measures, including the use of armed force. 

Thus, there emerged an entirely new principle 
in international cooperation. The thought, to be 
sure, was not of itself a new one, but in its applica- 
tion to international treaties and commitments, it 
was a fundamental innovation. Today, as we 
know, it is having a tremendous influence in woi-ld 
afl'airs. 

These and other important concepts found their 
practical application in the treaty of Rio de 
Janeiro, signed in 1947. The treaty embodies the 
principle of "all for one and one for all" should 
an attack occur within the geographic limits en- 
compassing the Western Hemisphere. It goes 
still further than that. It extends the obligation 
of tlie adherents to consult for collective action 
when an attack anywhere in the world threatens 
the security of America. This is a realistic recog- 
nition that Western-Hemisphere security is in- 
separably bound up with the security of the rest 
of the world. 

It is an interesting fact that although the Mexico 
City conference preceded the San Francisco con- 
ference on the United Nations, the Act of Chapul- 
tepec provided that any treaty which mi^ht grow 
out of it should be consistent with the U.N. Char- 
ter. This reflects the basic faith of the Americas 
in the concej^t that the United Nations is the para- 
mount authority for the preservation of world 
peace. It is not without significance that all of 
the American republics are members in good 
standing of the United Nations. 

Tiien, wlien the U.N. Charter was being evolved, 
in San Francisco, the United States together with 
the other American republics introduced the prin- 
ciple of regional security arrangements. Sub- 
sequent developments have confirmed the wisdom 
of this proposal. The American republics had 
behind them the experience of nearly GO years of 

Department of Slate Bulletin 



collective action for their mutual welfare. They 
had demonstrated the complete feasibility of sucFi 
action. By their foresight at San Francisco, they 
placed the benefit of this successful experience at 
the disposal of the world. It is this experience 
which has guided us in our policy of strengthening 
freedom-loving nations against aggression, in 
order that they may attain economic security. 

The North Atlantic pact is the latest applica- 
tion of our policy of helping democratic nations 
protect themselves against aggression. You have 
had occasion to familiarize yourselves with its pro- 
visions since it was published a few days ago. 
The basic structure of the North Atlantic pact, 
you will note, is very similar to that of the Rio 
treaty. The pact, like the Rio treaty, contains 
provisions for consultation for collective action as 
well as for unified common defense, should an 
armed attack be made on any one or more of the 
contracting parties. Both are regional arrange- 
ments, with both pursuing the same goal in their 
respective areas. 

Only recently we saw the effectiveness of the 
Rio de Janeiro treaty positively demonstrated. 
Since I have first-hand knowledge of the circum- 
stances, I would like to review them in some detail. 

Eight days after the treaty became effective, the 
Council of the Organization of American States, 
the permanent executive agency of the Organiza- 
tion, received from Costa Rica a request that the 
treaty be invoked against Nicaragua. It is a strik- 
ing coincidence that Costa Rica should be the first 
to call the treaty into operation, since it was Costa 
Rica's ratification, deposited on the third of last 
December, that made the treaty a binding instru- 
ment. 

Costa Rica charged that it had been invaded by 
forces organized within Nicaragua and contended 
that this constituted a threat to the peace within 
the meaning of article 6 of the Rio treaty. 

The next day, Sunday, the 12th of December, 
the Council met but found it had insufficient in- 
formation on which to invoke the pact and thereby 
to establish far-reacliing precedents. Under the 
able chairmanship of Ambassador Corominas of 
Argentina, the Council requested by telegram 
more information from the governments con- 
cerned and from other American governments as 
well. On December 14, 48 hours later, it met again 
and on the basis of the information that had been 
supplied, the treaty was invoked and the Council 
set itself up as the provisional organ of consulta- 
tion, pending the convocation of a meeting of 
Foreign Ministers. 

A five-member commission was named on De- 
cember 15 and left the following day by special 
airplane for San Jose and Managua to investigate 
on the spot. Appointed to this group were the 
Ambassadors of Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia, 
and myself as representative of the United States. 
The commission was able to carry out its instruc- 
tions in an atmosphere of willing cooperation of 

April 10, 1949 



the two nations involved in the dispute. The job 
was done expeditiously and the commission re- 
turned to Washington on December 23 to report 
its findings. 

On the 24th, the Council met again and after 
hearing the Commission's report agreed on a reso- 
lution which called on both parties to cease all 
hostile acts and urged them to come to an ami- 
cable agreement. This was accomplished without 
the Council having to call a meeting of Foreign 
Ministers for consultation on further action. Ne- 
gotiations went on between the two countries, 
while at the same time compliance with the resolu- 
tion was observed by a military commission ap- 
pointed by the Council. On the 21st of February, 
a little more than a month ago, Nicaragua and 
Costa Rica signed a friendship pact which not 
only ended the entire incident peacefully, but also 
constitutes an added guarantee of tranquility for 
years to come. 

I have given you this quick review of these de- 
velopments in order to impress upon you the speed 
with which this Rio treaty mechanism woi-ked. 
The Rio treaty merits special mention because 
it proves that a group of representatives of many 
countries, animated by good will, is able to move 
with speed and decisiveness. On the other hand, 
thoroughness and justice were not sacrificed for 
the sake of speed. The Council took great care 
to obtain reliable information which made it pos- 
sible to take intelligent, well-founded decisions. 
Solid precedents were set on which to base future 
procedure and decisions. 

Other tried and proved features of United 
States relations with Latin America are being 
elaborated and extended in our current mterna- 
tional programs. You will recall that President 
Truman at liis inauguration called for a "bold new 
program for making the benefits of our scientific 
advances and industrial progress available for 
the improvement and growth of underdeveloped 
areas." This program is, indeed, both new and 
bold, if only by virtue of the vast scope it em- 
braces. In its principal elements, however, its 
prototype may be found in the technical and scien- 
tific programs of cooperation, which we have been 
conducting with Latin America for many years. 

The experience we have gained in the last 10 
years of coordinated effort in this field will prove 
to be of untold value in the formulation and execu- 
tion of the new "Point-4" program. Indeed, in 
its early phases, this program will consist largely 
of a continuation and extension of our work in 
this field with the other American republics. As 
it takes shape, it will undoubtedly rely heavily 
on the wealth of experience and know-how that 
we already possess. 

Let me review, for a moment, some of the basic 
considerations that have been guiding our tech- 
nical cooperation efforts. First of all, we enter 
into projects only at the request of the individual 
governments and when we are convinced that a 
project is desirable for its effects on national and 



international welfare. There must also be i-eal 
evidence that the other government is eager to 
pursue the project to a successful finish. Our 
cooperation is intended to help the other countries 
to help themselves. Their self-help is expressed 
in difterent ways: by dollar reimbursements or 
advance of funds for services rendered; bj- pro- 
viding land, buildings, and other facilities and 
equipment within the foreign country; by making 
available the best qualified nationals of the re- 
cipient country or other countries to work with 
American technicians; by providing maintenance 
personnel ; and, in other constructive ways. 

The important thing that has stood out in some 
of these ventures is that as the progi-ams became 
larger and more effective, a correspondingly larger 
percentage of the total costs was borne by the other 
governments and less and less by the United States. 
At the outset most of the programs of the In- 
stitute of Intpr-American Affairs were almost 
wholly financed by the United States. Today, the 
United States contributions to those same pro- 
grams are down to below 10 percent in one in- 
stance and in every case below 50 percent. Tlie 
cooperative approach to these projects has al- 
ready served as a pattern for comparable activities 
in other parts of the world and undoubtedly will 
provide valuable experience in further develop- 
ment of the President's program. 

Anotlier characteristic of our technical and 
scientific programs is that they are flexible. Not 
only do they vary in form and method from 
country to country, but they are actually spon- 
sored and carried out by many different agencies. 

In addition to the Institute of Inter-American 
Affairs, the United States Government cooper- 
ates with other governments through the Inter- 
departmental Committee on Scientific and Cul- 
tural Cooperation. This committee coordinates 
the technical operations abroad of some '25 bu- 
reaus with 10 Federal departments. The Govern- 
ment also participates in constructive cooperative 
programs througli such inter- American agencies 
as the Pan American Sanitary Bureau. Other 
operations have long been conducted by private 
nonprofit organizations such as the Rockefeller 
Institute, the Institute of International Educa- 
tion, to name but two. 

A considerable amount of technical assistance, 
on the other hand, is directly related to and de- 
pendent upon private business enterprises. Priv- 
ate investments through contracts with foreign 
governments or with private foreign firms are 
frequently accompanied by American technology. 
American business firms not only furnish detailed 
technical information with the capital goods tliey 
send abroad, but they fn'(|U('ntly send along tech- 
nicians to supervise installations and operations 
and, at the same time, to train local national per- 
sonnel.. In addition manj' firms bring personnel 
to this country for intensive training in their 
plants and hiboratoi'ies. There are, also, many 
private engineering considtant linns engaged in 



making available to the Latin Americans our tech- 
nical know-how and services. 

This sort of private enterprise is welcomed 
wholeheartedly by the Department of State. The 
Department attempts to encourage private agen- 
cies to the greatest extent possible, to supplement 
the limited government-sponsored programs. It 
recognizes the importance of the role of private 
activities in contributing to our common objectives 
of economic and social advancement. In attempt- 
ing to avoid past errors, which came to be known 
as "dollar diplomacy," we expect that American 
citizens and enterprises will interfere in no way 
with the political affairs of the country in which 
they are engaged. 

The specific projects, both official and private, 
now being carried on in Latin America, are far 
too numerous to enumerate here. Sufiice it to say 
they have dealt with public health, education, in- 
dustry, agriculture, aviation, geologic investiga- 
tions, and many other subjects. 

Economic cooperation with Latin America has 
long since gone beyond the basic and essential 
considerations of trade for private gain. It has 
taken the shape of sincere attempts to develop and 
bolster the economies of the respective countries 
for the betterment of all concerned. This is a 
lofty goal; it is difficult to realize. Nevertheless 
it is constantly before us. It is a basic objective 
sought in the technical and scientific cooperation 
programs I have mentioned. We also seek that 
goal through other means. 

I will not attempt a discussion of all the various 
factors and conditions which enter into the eco- 
nomic relationship of the Americas. Wliat we are 
seeking is a healthy economy, based on the fullest 
possible development, increased trade, and a 
liiglier standard of living for all the people, with 
its obvious influence on political stability. 

At Rio, when the politico-military cooperative 
agreement was reached, it was proposed that 
similar cooperation be sought in the economic 
field. This would be a continuation of other long 
standing cooperative efforts and would put them 
on a well-defined and firmer basis. The Inter- 
American Economic and Social Council prepared 
a basic draft to be considered at the Bogota con- 
ference. The basic draft was formalized at Bo- 
gota as an agreement among the states "to cooper- 
ate individually and collectively and with other 
nations to carry out the principles of facilitating 
access, on equal terms, to the trade, ]irodiicts, and 
means of j^roduction, including scientific and tech- 
nical advances, that are needed for their industrial 
and general economic development." 

Tiie economic agreement of Bogota is important 
because it sets forth a detailed set of principles for 
economic cooperation and development. We have 
not yet been able to see it through to ratification 
because of numerous reservations that were made 
at Bogota. However, we are now exerting every 
effort to reduce these reservations, in order to 

Department of State Bvlletin 



make the document comprehensible when it is 
presented for ratification. To this end the United 
States took the initiative in having it referred to 
the Inter- American Economic and Social Council, 
which is now attempting to eliminate duplications 
and consolidate the others into a draft protocol 
form. According to present plans, it will be re- 
studied at the economic conference which is sched- 
uled to be held in Buenos Aires the latter part of 
this year. 

Meanwhile, various economic programs of the 
United States are contributing to the alleviation 
of the economic difficulties of Latin America. 
These are fully in keeping with our history of 
cooperation, as well as with the objectives of the 
Bogota agreement. 

Moreover, the great economic momentum which 
has gathered in this country under our system of 
individual enterprise could easily expand into 
Latin America to an extent never before visualized. 
There is an abundance of business and private 
capital which could be poured into the countries 
to the south of us. The economic and social bet- 
terment in those countries that would derive from 
this capital is almost boundless. The obstacles 
that stand in the way of this development are not 
insurmountable. Guaranties against expropria- 
tion and other hazards would open the way to 
thousands of prospective investors bringing in a 
short time results that it will otherwise require a 
great span of years to accomplish. 

It is unfortunate that the conditions in Europe 
that followed in the wake of the last war were so 
severe that we have had to concentrate our efforts 
upon them. The war, as you know, left the econ- 
omy of Europe in virtual chaos. It was obvious 
that no recovery would be possible without outside 
assistance and we were the only nation in a posi- 
tion to help the European countries get back on 
their feet. 

It has been our confident hope and belief that 
the urgent assistance we are now providing under 
the European Recovery Program will have a bene- 
ficial effect on Latin America. This effect will be 
felt in the availability in Europe of materials and 
capital goods that are needed for the further devel- 
opment of the other American republics. At the 
same time, it will serve to restore to their former 
extent and even to widen traditional European 
markets for Latin American exports. 

This is not to say that these benefits are the 
solution to the economic problems of Latin Amer- 
ica. Far from it. We, in this country, are acutely 
aware of the existence of those problems. How- 
ever, it is apparent that while there is no limit to 
the political cooperation we can give to Latin 
America at the present time, and while we have 



an abundance of technical and scientific skill to 
export, we cannot stretch the burden on our tax- 
payers or the limited resources of the United States 
Treasury to fill all of the world's needs at once. 
We must be guided, primarily, by considerations 
of security and our own available resoui'ces. 

From the security aspect alone, the logic of the 
great effort we are placing on the recovery of the 
European democracies is readily apparent. Secu- 
rity and a sound economy go hand in hand. 

Naturally, European recovery will have effects 
that go well beyond the limited spheres of Europe, 
or of the United States. The American com- 
munity of interests will be served at the same time, 
since, in the Western Hemisphere, the security of 
one country is the security of all, and Western 
Hemisphere security is dependent upon world 
security. 

We hope to be able to increase the degree of co- 
operation between ourselves and our immediate 
neighboi-s. We will continue to respect the soyei*- 
eignty and juridical equality of all the American 
nations. We will continue to abide by the soleimi 
inter-American commitments of nonintervention 
in the internal and external affairs of those coun- 
tries. We will continue to give tangible evidence 
of our good neighborliness and of our faith in the 
Americas. Our history, our traditions, and our 
international goals stand as guarantees to that 
effect. These same objectives represent, I am 
confident, the deep conviction of every individual 
American citizen. 

U.S.-Mexican International Convention for 
Tuna investigation Sent to the Senate 

To the Senate of the United States: 

With a view to receiving the advice and con- 
sent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit here- 
with a convention between the United States of 
America and Mexico for the establisliment of an 
International Commission for the Scientific In- 
vestigation of Tuna, signed at Mexico City Jan- 
uary 25, 1949. 

I transmit also, for the information of the Sen- 
ate, the report which the Secretary of State has 
addressed to me in regard to this convention.^ 

The purpose of this convention has my com- 
plete and wholehearted approval and I recom- 
mend the convention to the favorable considera- 
tion of the Senate. 

Harry S. Truman 
The White House, 

March 23, 19J,9. 

^ Documents not here printed. 



AprW 10, 1949 



Report to the Congress by Advisory Commission on Information 



[Released to tbe press March 30] 

Congress was advised by the United State,s Ad- 
visory Commission on Information on March 30 
that the glowing importance of our international 
information program as a tool of America's for- 
eign policy requires an immediate and broad ex- 
pansion of the world-wide information program, 
including activities of the Voice of America, now 
being conducted by the State Department. 

The Commission, created by Congress last year 
under Public Law 402, is made up of : 

Mark Ethrldge, publisher, Louisville Courier-Journal, 
Chairman 

Erwin D. Canham, editor, Christian Science Monitor, 
Acting Chairman 

Philip D. Reed, chairman, the General Electric Company 

Mark A. May, director of the Institute of Human Rela- 
tions. Yale University 

Justin Miller, president of the National Association of 
Broadcasters 

Mr. Canham is acting as cliairman of the Com- 
mission in the absence of Mr. Ethridge, who is 
serving on the United Nations Conciliation Com- 
mission for Palestine. 

While the present information program was 
found by the Commission to be effective "as far as 
it goes,'* its operations now were described as in- 
adequate to meet the pressing needs of our inter- 
national responsibilities. The report held that 
the budgetary recommendations sent to Congress 
by the Department of State for the program in 
1950 provide a "bare minimum" for continuing the 
beginning that has been made.^ 

Wliile it is important to spend well rather than 
merely to spend a lot," the Commission's report 
said, "the vital need for broadening this program 
as speedily and effectively as possible calls for a 
much larger expenditure." 

"Indeed," the Commission said, "a realistic ap- 
proach requires that we provide a budget better 
balanced between the three-pronged program of 
military, economic, and information policy. A 
budget which contemplates $1.''),000.000,000 for 
military, $5,000,000,000 for economic, and only 
$36,000,000 for information and educational 
services, does not provide an effective tool for 
cleaning out the Augean stables of international 
confusion and misunderstanding." 

"It is in the information field", the Commission 
said, "that we meet the rival forces head on. The 
Soviet Union, for example, places by all odds its 
heaviest reliance on 'propaganda', spending enor- 
mous sums and using its best and most imaginative 
brains. Other governments are acutely conscious 
of the importance of information programs and 
are spending more in proportion to their capacities 



"The report will be printed as Department of State 
publication 3485. 



than is the United States in telling its story 
abroad." 

The Commission's recommendations were based 
not only upon its study of the program here, but 
also upon a survey in the field made by Mr. May 
on behalf of the Commission which took him into 
ten European countries early this year. 

Based on Mr. May's report and on extensive 
additional information from the field, the Com- 
mission reported that behind the Iron Curtain, the 
Voice of America is getting through not only to the 
people who have access to radio sets but also to 
many more by word of mouth. 

"The Voice is heard, and it is effective," the re- 
port said. "It is effective partly because it tells 
the people the truth about what is going on in the 
world outside and in their own countries; partly 
because it counteracts Russian propaganda; 
mainly and fundamentally because it brings hope 
and encouragement." 

The Commission estimated that the Voice has 
an audience of a million people in Poland; that it 
may be reaching more than a tenth of the people 
in Czechoslovakia ; that it is by far our most impor- 
tant medium in bringing the message of America 
to the peoples of Bulgaria, Hungary, and Ru- 
mania, and that it is reaching "millions of Rus- 
sians today." 

In the free countries of Europe, the information 
program is steadily gaining in effectiveness among 
leadership groups, but information about the 
United States is not yet effectively reaching 
farmers, industrial workers, owners of small 
businesses, etc. 

The Commission particularly ui'ged that im- 
mediate steps be taken to improve the channels of 
information about America to the peoples of 
Middle East and South Asian countries. 

This problem is greatly complicated by the high 
rate of illiteracy among the peoples of some of 
these countries, and the vigor with which the 
Soviet propaganda machine is trying to win them 
over to Communism. 

To illustrate the enormity of the problem, the 
Commission pointed out that for almost two years, 
one information officer in Calcutta has been trying 
to present American news to 60 local newspapers 
and maintain a United State Information Service 
operation in a region of S3 million people. 

The program was described as playing an im- 
portant role in implementing U.S. foreign policy 
in the Far East, with printed materials and posters 
pla3'ing the most important role, motion pictures 
next, and libraries, film strips, and radio broad- 
casting adding their parts to the total program. 

Calling attention to the permanent im])ortance 
of Latin America as co-members of the Western 
Hemisphere area, the Commission said that the 
United States Information Service in that field 
must be a well-rounded and constant effort. 

Department of State Bulletin 



"The urgent and critical problem in Latin 
America," the report said, "is to counteract the po- 
tent attraction which Communism has for the 
underprivileged, particularly the semiliterate la- 
bor groups — the petroleum workers of Venezuela, 
the industrial workers and miners of Chile, and 
the laborers, both industrial and agricultural, of 
Mexico. Leaders who are backed by local Party 
organizations and the whole Soviet propaganda 
machine untiringly urge Communist doctrine upon 
these masses and, as is well known, the present 
Communist 'line' in Latin America is to turn their 
every natural aspiration, their every legitimate 
grudge, against the United States as the op- 
pressor of their class and their nation. 

"The maximum efficiency of the USIS opera- 
tion in Latin America, within its present author- 
ized level, cannot do more than scratch the surface 
in bringing about an understanding of the United 
States and its policies to the 150,000,000 people of 
the twenty Latin Republics." 

The Commission placed emphasis upon the im- 
portance of the part which private agencies, 
groups, and individuals can play in disseminat- 
ing information about the United States abroad 
and noted that dollar limitations abroad prevent 
the dissemination of adequate amounts of Ameri- 
can reading matter despite the great demand for it. 

"In this connection," the report said, "the Com- 
mission is puzzled by the fact that the Congress 
saw fit to make available to the Economic Coopera- 
tion Administration ten million dollars (almost 
equal to one third of the total appropriation for 
the purposes of Public Law 402) to stimulate the 
dissemination of private media (through currency- 
exchange aid) in the countries receiving assistance 
under the European Recovery Act. 

"It is suggested that the dissemination of Amer- 
ican private media abroad is primarily and essen- 
tially an informational activity of the kind 
contemplated by Public Law 402. It is further 
suggested that responsibility and funds for this 
activity should be placed with the Department of 
State which is responsible for the administration 
of Public Law 402, and that the activity should 
not be limited to countries receiving aid under 
the European Recovery Act." 

The Commission found, on the basis of Mr. 
May's report, that the Voice of America's opera- 
tions should be improved by increasing the physi- 
cal facilities to increase the strength of its signal ; 
by increasing the number of broadcasts and by 
improving the attractiveness of the programs. 
It recommended expansion of mobile unit facili- 
ties to take motion pictures, exhibits, and other 
visual materials to the less literate populations of 
foreign countries and to those who have no access 
to radio. 

The program to Russia, with respect both to 
the Voice of America programs and the distribu- 
tion of the magazine Amerika, the Commission re- 

April 10, 7949 



Eorted, is achieving an invaluable result in that 
oth the broadcasts and the magazine are di- 
minishing the effectiveness of Soviet internal 
propaganda. 

"Without these media," the report said, "our 
battle would not be a contest, even a losing one. 
We would lose out entirely and only too quickly." 
The Commission presented the following con- 
clusions in its report : 

(1) Events in the past year have made a Unit«d 
States Government information program more 
important than ever. The Commission feels that 
every opportunity for expansion should be em- 
braced immediately. 

(2) To make the program effective at home, the 
most important step is to close the gap in policy 
between other parts of the Department and the 
information area. 

(3) The budgetary recommendations which 
have been sent to the Congress for this program 
for 1950 are a bare minimum for continuing the 
beginning which has been made. 

(4) To improve the effectiveness of information 
by radio we should increase its physical facilities 
in order to strengthen its signal and provide more 
medium-wave relay bases ; increase the number of 
broadcasts; improve the attractiveness of Ameri- 
can progi-ams; and increase the number of radio 
officers in countries that have large national net- 
works. Wherever possible we should endeavor to 
buy time on local radio stations. 

(5) Visual materials (motion pictures, displays, 
and exhibits) should be carried to the small towns, 
villages, and rural areas, and this can be done most 
effectively and efficiently with mobile units. 

(6) There is a great need for more motion pic- 
tures of a documentary and informational charac- 
ter, and the procurement of language adaptation 
of films should be rapidly and substantially in- 
creased. 

(7) Funds for travel and entertainment are 
very limited, and an increase in these funds may 
very well be one of the best investments that could 
be made. It is impossible to do a good informa- 
tion job without doing at the same time a good 
public-relations job, 

(8) In a few key cities of the world we do not 
have a wireless monitoring service. Such a serv- 
ice should be established for reception of the Wire- 
less Bulletin, and it is vitally important that the 
Bulletin be translated into the languages of the 
various coimtries. 

(9) There is a great need for additional re- 
gional offices and branch libraries to be established 
outside the capital cities. 

(10) The dissemination of American private 
media abroad is primarily and essentially an in- 
formational activity and the responsibility and 
f imds for this activity should be placed with the 
Department of State, and the activities should not 
be limited to the countries receiving aid under 
the European Recovery Act. 



Air Transport Agreement With Finland 

The De]>artinuut (jf Statu aniiouiiced on March 
29 the signature in Helsinki of an air-transport 
agreement on March 29, 1949, between the Govern- 
ment of the United States and the Government 
of Finhmd.' The agi-eement was signed on behalf 
of the Government of the United States by the 
United States Minister, Avra M. Warren, and on 
behalf of the Government of Finland by the Act- 
ing Minister of Foreign Affairs, Uuno Takki. 

This agreement incorporates the Bermuda prin- 
ciples and conforms to the general pattern of air- 
transport agreements which the United States has 
entei'ed into with many other countries. By the 
terms of the annex to the agreement, an air car- 
rier, or air carriers, of the United States are 
granted the right to operate a service from the 
United States over a North Atlantic route to Hel- 
sinki and an air carrier, or air carriers, of Finland 
are extended the right to operate a service from 
Finland over a North Atlantic route to New York. 
It is the thirty-seventh bilateral air-transport 
agreement entered into by the Government of the 
United States. 



Air Transport Agreement With Panama 

Tlie Department of State announced that an air- 
transport agreement with the Republic of Panama 
was signed in Panama City on March 31. This is 
the thirty-eighth such agreement concluded by the 
United States.^ 

This agreement is of the so-called "Bermuda" 
type, upon which the great majority of the bi- 
lateral air-transport agreements of the United 
States are based. This agreement grants traffic 
rights to United States air lines at Panama City 
and David and traffic rights to Panamanian air 
lines at a point or points in the United States to be 
agreed upon when Panama is ready to operate a 
service to the United States. 

Concurrent with the signing of the aviation 
agreement, two ancillary exchanges of notes were 
executed between the American Ambassador and 
the Panamanian Foreign Minister, under which 
the United States agreed to furnish certain com- 
munications cable for the operation of additional 
communication facilities at Tocumen National 
Airport and a technical aviation mission, if so 
requested by the Republic of Panama. 

The Panamanian Foreign Minister signed this 
agreement subject to the concurrence of and rati- 
fication by the Panama Assembly. 



'For text of tho fii-'roement, see Dopartment of State 
pre.is release lOfi of Mni-. 2!), liMft. 

' For text of the agreement, see Department of State 
press release 208 of Mar. 31, 1049. 

466 



Discussions With Mexico on Developing 
Oil Industry 

[Eeleaued to the press March 31] 

The Department of State announced on March 
31 that Senator Antonio J. Bermudez, Director 
General of Petroleos Mexicanos, the petroleum 
entity of the Mexican Government, has been in 
Washington for the past several days and that he 
has discussed with officers of the Department and 
other agencies of the Government the plan of 
Petroleos Mexicanos for the development of the 
oil industry of Mexico. Among matters dis- 
cussed were the terms of the contract recently con- 
cluded by Petroleos Mexicanos witli a group of 
private United States oil companies, the need of 
Petroleos Mexicanos for material and technical 
assistance, and the details of the project pertain- 
ing to dollar requirements. 

The Department and officers of other interested 
agencies of the Government are studying the 
project presented by Senator Bermudez from the 
points of view of the development of additional 
petroleum resources in the North American conti- 
nent, the foreign exchange position, the general 
economic development of Mexico, and the tradi- 
tional view of this Government as to the role of 
private capital in economic development both at 
home and abroad. The general plan for the de- 
velopment of the Mexican petroleum industry in- 
cludes the construction of a pipe line across the 
Isthmus of Tehuantepec, a plant for the produc- 
tion of lubricating oils, the construction of new re- 
fineries, the modernization of refineries now in op- 
eration, and the construction of additional trans- 
portation facilities in northeast Mexico in order 
that reserves of industrial gas may be utilized as 
fuel for industrial developments in Monterrey, 
Torreon, and other cities in the area. The appro- 
priate United States authorities are studying this 
proposal in the expectation of further conversa- 
tions with Senator Bermudez. 



THE DEPARTMENT 

Lloyd V. Berkner Appointed To Direct 
Military Assistance Program 

Statement hy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press March 30] 

I have today appointed Lloyd V. Berkner to be 
a Special Assistant to the Secretary to direct the 
work concerned with the military assistance pro- 
gi'am. This function has previously been per- 
formed by Assistant Secretary Gross, and Mr. 
Borkner's appointment is designed to free Mr. 
Gross of this responsibility in order that he may 
devote his entire time to the most important func- 
tion of congressional relations. 

As to the general information, the Department 
of State in consultation witli representatives of the 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



Ncational Military Establishment and the Eca is 
still considering draft legislation on the military 
assistance program. The legislation has not yet 
been submitted to the Bureau of the Budget, and 
there has been no final decision as to when the draft 
legislation will be submitted to the Congress. We 
hope to have the draft legislation available for 
study by the time the Senate is considering the 
Atlantic pact. 

The draft legislation will probably contain a 
specific authorization for an over-all amount 
needed for a program one year in duration. It 
seems likely that authority will be sought for a 
program extending; over a longer period of time, 
but the authorization of funds would be for only 
one year. 

The legislation as it is now contemplated would 
not name countries specifically eligible for mili- 
tary assistance. In a program of this type, it 
is essential that the President have considerable 
discretion in its administration. 

Although it is not contemplated at this time that 
the draft legislation will indicate the countries 
specifically eligible, no final decision has been 
reached as to whether the authorization will be 
sought on an area or a global basis. 

THE FOREIGN SERVICE 
Resignations 

The President accepted the resignations of Josiah Mar- 
vel, Jr. and Walter Bedell Smith as American Ambassa- 
dors to Denmark and to the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics, respectively. For the texts of Mr. Truman's 
letters accepting their resignations, see White House 
press releases of March 24 and March 25, 1949. 

PUBLICATIONS 
Department of State 

For sale hy the Superintendent of Documents, Qovern- 
ment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Address re- 
quests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, except 
in the case of free publications, which may be obtained 
from the Department of State. 

The Kansas Story on UNESCO. International Organiza- 
tion and Conference Series IV, United Nations Educa- 
tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7. Pub. 3378. 
41 pp. 200. 

How a state council was organized and is contributing 
to international understanding and peace. 



Universal Postal Union. Treaties and Other International 
Series 1850. Pub. 3384. 283 pp. 500. 

Convention, Final Protocol, Regulations, Air-Mail 
Provisions, and Final Protocol to Air-Mall Provisions 
Between the United States and Other Governments 
Revising the Universal Postal Convention of May 23, 
1939 — Signed at Paris July 5, 1947 ; entered into force 
July 1, 1948. 

Joint Commission on Rural Reconstruction in China. 

Treaties and Other International Acts Series 1848. Pub. 
3389. 19 pp. 10<J. 

Agreement Between the United States and China — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Nanking Aug. 
3, and 5, 1948 ; entered into force Aug. 5, 1948. 

Education: Cooperative Program in Paraguay. Treaties 
and Other International Acts Series 1856. Pub. 3399. 
4 pp. 5^. 

Agreement Between the United States and Paraguay 
Extending Agreement of Mar. 8, 1948, Between Para- 
guay and the Institute of Inter-American Affairs — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Asuncion 
June 30, 1948; entered into force Aug. 2, 1948. 

The Far Eastern Commission. Second Report by the 
Secretary General, July 10, 1947-Dec. 23, 1948. Far East- 
ern Series 29. Pub. 3420. 65 pp. 200. 

National Commission News, March 1949. Pub. 3449. 10 
pp. 100 a copy ; $1 a year domestic, $1.25 a year foreign. 

The monthly publication of the United States National 
Commission for Unesco. 



Diplomatic List, March 1949. Pub. 3451. 196 pp. 

copy ; $3.25 a year domestic, $4.50 a year foreign. 



30^ a 



Monthly list of foreign diplomatic representatives in 
Washington, with their addresses. 



Caribbean Commission Releases Report 
of West Indian Conference 

The Caribbean Commission Central Secretariat 
released in March a three-part report of the Third 
Session of the West Indian Conference. It in- 
cludes a summary of the Secretary General's re- 
port to the Conference, the report of the Con- 
ference, and a report of action taken by the 
Commission on the recommendations of the Con- 
ference. 

Copies of this publication (99 pp.) may be pur- 
chased from the International Documents Service, 
Columbia University Press, 2960 Broadway, New 
York 27, New York. Price not listed. 



April 10, 1949 



^orvCeo^t^ 



International Information and 

Cultural Affairs Pago 

Developing International Understanding. An 

Article 439 

ECA Anniversary: 

Voice of America Broadcast 455 

Message to the President from Prime 
Minister Attlee 455 

Voice of America Broadcasts Atlantic Pact 

Ceremonies 458 

Report to the Congress by Advisory Com- 
mission on Information 464 

General Policy 

Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania Accused of 
Violating Human Rights and Funda- 
mental Freedoms: 
U.S. Note to Bulgarian Government . . . 450 
U.S. Note to Hungarian Government . . 451 
U.S. Note to Rumanian Government . . 452 

National Conference of Christians and Jews 
Protest Denial of Religious Freedom in 
Hungary and Bulgaria: 

Text of Petition 454 

Reply of Secretary Acheson 455 

Selecting Our Future Citizens. By Herve J. 

L'Heureux 456 

Nonimmigrant Passport Visa Fee Arrange- 
ment With France 457 

Mutual Problems Discussed With Nether- 
lands 458 

U.S. and U.K. Discuss Germany and Greece. 
Joint Statement by Secretary Acheson 
and Foreign Secretary Bevin 459 

Definition of Term "German Ethnic Origin" . 459 

American Soldiers Convicted in Czecho- 
slovakia on Charges of Espionage. State- 
ment by Secretary Acheson 459 

Influence of Inter-American Relations on 

U.S. Foreign Policy. By Paul C.Daniels. 460 

Treaty Information 

Significance of New International Wheat 
Agreement to U.S. Wheat Farmers. 
Statement by Charles F. Brannan . . 449 



Treaty Information — Continued Page 

Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania Accused of 
Violating Human Rights and Funda- 
mental Freedoms: 
U.S. Note to Bulgarian Government . . . 450 
U.S. Note to Hungarian Government . . 451 
U.S. Note to Rumanian Government . . 452 

Atlantic Pact Countries Take Note of Soviet 
Views of the Treaty. Statement by the 
Foreign Ministers 457 

Foreign Ministers Approve Atlantic Treaty. 

Communique 458 

U.S. -Mexican International Convention for 

Tuna Investigation Sent to the Senate . 463 

Air Transport Agreement With Finland . . 466 

Air Transport Agreement With Panama . . 466 

The United Nations and 
Specialized Agencies 

Resolutions and Decisions of Eighth Session 

of Ecosoc 443 

U.N. Documents: A Selected Bibliography . 444 
The United States in the United Nations . . 445 

Economic Affairs 

Ninth General Conference on Weights and 

Measures. By Dr. Edward U. Condon . 447 

Discussions With Mexico on Developing Oil 

Industry 466 

The Department 

Lloyd V. Berkner Appointed To Direct Mili- 
tary Assistance Program. Statement by 
Secretary Acheson 466 

The Foreign Service 

Resignations of Ambassadors Josiah Marvel, 

Jr., and Walter Bedell Smith 467 

The Congress 

U.S. Extends Invitation for 1956 Olympic 

Games 453 

Publications 

Department of State 467 

Caritibean Commission Releases Report of 

West Indian Conference 467 



^ne/ ^€^v(i^tme/n(/ aw tftcUe/ 



SIGNING CEREMONY OF THE NORTH 
ATLANTIC TREATY 

Statements by the Foreign Ministers 
and President Truman 471 

REQUEST FOR MILITARY ASSISTANCE 
FROM ATLANTIC PACT COUNTRIES: 

Statement by Secretary Acheson . . . 493 
Exchange of Communications 494 

U.S., U.K., AND FRANCE REACH AGREE- 
MENT ON ALL QUESTIONS RELATING 
TO GERMANY 

Communique 499 

Statement by Secretary Acheson . . . 499 

Message to the Military Governors . . 500 

Text of Occupation Statute 500 



For complete contents see back cover 



Vol. XX, No. 511 
April 17, 1949 




Supt- 0. Oocurncn*': 



<J/t€ ^eficvrdme^t ^£ c/ta^ 




bulletin 

Vol. XX, No. 511 • Publication 3490 
April 17, 1949 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. OoTemmcnt Printing OCBce 

Wnshington 26, D.C. 

Price: 

62 Issues, domestic $5, toreien $7.25 

Single copy, 15 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (February 18,1949). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
or State Bitlletin as the source will be 
spprecisted. 



The Department of State BVLLETIN, 
a weekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Division of Publications, 
Office 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 De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BVLLETIN includes 
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 tcell as special 
articles on various phases of inter- 
national affairs and tlie functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to which the 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



Signing Ceremony of the North Atlantic Treaty, Departmental Auditorium, 
Washington, April 4, 1949 > 



REMARKS BY DEAN ACHESON 
Secretary of State of the United States 



On behalf of the Government and the people 
of the United States, I warmly welcome to our 
country and our capital the Foreign Ministers 
who have assembled here to sign the North At- 
lantic Treaty.- We are honored by their presence, 
both as individuals who have done much for peace 
and as representatives of nations and peoples who 
have conti'ibuted notably to the welfare and 
progress of mankind. 

We are met together to consummate a solenrn 
act. Those who participated in the drafting of 
this treaty must leave to others judgment of the 
significance and value of this act. They cannot 
appraise the achievement but they can and should 
declare the purposes of their minds and hearts. 

It was, I think, their purpose — like the pur- 
pose of those who chart the stars — not to create 
what they record, but to set down realities for 
the guidance of men, whether well or ill-disposed. 
For those who seek peace it is a guide to refuge 
and strength, a very present help in trouble. For 
those who set their feet upon the path of aggres- 
sion, it is a warning that if it must needs be that 
offenses come, then woe unto them by whom the 
offense cometh. 

For the reality which is set down here is not 
created here. The reality is the unity of belief, 
of spirit, of interest of the community of nations 
represented here. It is the product of many cen- 
turies of common thought and of the blood of 
many simple and brave men and women. 

The reality lies not in the common pursuit of 
a material goal or of a power to dominate others. 
It lies in the aiSrmation of moral and spiritual 
values which govern the kind of life they pro- 
pose to lead and which they propose to defend, by 
all possible means, should that necessity be thrust 
upon them. Even this purpose is a fact which 
has been demonstrated twice in this present cen- 
tury. 



PROGRAM 

2 : 30 p. m. Music by United States Marine Band 

2:45 p. m. Arrival of the Foreign Ministers (West 
Entrance) 

3 : 00 p. m. Entrance of the Foreign Ministers 

3 : 05 p. m. Welcome and remarks by the Secretary 
of State of the United States 

3 : 10 p. m. Introduction of the Foreign Ministers 
by the Secretary of State of the 
United States 

Remarks of the Foreign Ministers on the occasion 
of the signing of the treaty. (Each Foreign 
Minister is expected to speak for five minutes 
in the language of his choice. Those speeches 
not made in English will be translated immedi- 
ately following the speaker.) 

Entrance of the President of the United States 

Remarks of the President 

Formal signing of the North Atlantic Treaty 

Closing remarks of the Secretary of State 

Adjournment 



It is well that these truths be kirown. The pur- 
pose of this treaty is to publish them and give 
them form. 

From this act, taken here today, will flow in- 
creasing good for all peoples. From this joining 
of many wills in one purpose will come new in- 
spiration for the future. New strength and cour- 
age will accrue not only to the peoples of the At- 
lantic community but to all peoples of the world 
conrmunity who seek for themselves, and for 
others equally, freedom and peace. 



■ Released to the press Apr. 4, 1949 ; President Truman's 
remarks were released to the press by the White House 
on the same date. 

'Bulletin of Mar. 20, 1949, p. 339; also printed as 
Department of State Publication 3464. 



April 17, 1949 



471 



REMARKS BY PAUL-HENRI SPAAK 
Prime Minister and Ministerlof Foreign Affairs of Belgium 



In signing tlie North Atlantic pact, we are going 
to participate in the most important political 
event that has occurred since the creation of the 
United Nations. 

The great defensive alliance about to be created 
is an essential milestone on the road leading to the 
consolidation of peace. 

The peoples of the world have therefore the 
right to rejoice over it. 

The North Atlantic pact conforms with the 
letter and the spirit of the San Francisco Charter 
since, inspired solely by a sense of defense, it is, 
through the magnitude of the forces which it 
brings together, of a nature to discourage any 
future aggressor and since it gives to article 51, 
which proclaims the right to legitimate individual 
and collective defense, a practical and effective 
form without which it would be but a mockery. 

The new pact is purely defensive; it is directed 
against no one; it threatens no one; it should 
therefore disturb no one; save, of course, any 
person or persons who might foster the criminal 
idea of having recourse to war. To be convinced 
of this, one has only to read it; but, one must do 
so without a preconceived idea. 

The peoples here represented detest war, and 
their Governments share their sentiments. 

War is a hateful and absurd thing. It settles 
nothing, and its consequences constitute almost 
as heavy a burden for the conquerors as for the 
conquered. Democracies are essentially pacific. 
Wliere peoples have something to say, where 
thought is not in chains and opposition muzzled, 
the idea that an aggressive policy could be pur- 
sued is inconceivable. If the whole world ac- 
cepted and practiced the democratic principles 
which are ours, there would be no more war. But 
until that is the case, we have the right and the 
duty to be prudent and prepared. 

Twice within less than 25 years the democra- 
cies of Western Europe, the United States of 
America, and Canada have faced terrible dangers. 
Twice the civilization that they represent, their 
way of life and of thought have been jeopardized. 



Twice it has required military miracles to save 
them. Twice an overblind trust has all but ruined 
them. It would be unpardonable to ignore the 
repeated lessons of history. 

Those who today are angered or saddened be- 
cause the principles of universal collective security 
contemplated in the United Nations Charter are 
to be supplemented by a system more restricted, 
but having the same goal and observing the same 
principles, will find some subjects for reflection in 
the signing of the pact. They will regret, per- 
haps, having seen the rostrum of the United Na- 
tions transformed into an instrument of propa- 
ganda in which vehemence and insult have fre- 
quently replaced the essential desire for coopera- 
tion; perhaps also they will regret that the abuse 
of the veto and refusal to collaborate have so often 
rendered ineffective the decisions of the Security 
Council or the recommendations of the Assembly. 
The United Nations remain our great hope. 
We continue to desire and to believe that one day 
all nations may find their security in this world 
organization and that all Governments, having at 
last recognized the precedence of international 
law over their own will, may make of the United 
Nations the mighty instrument that we have al- 
ways wished for. 

But until that day, no one can contest our right 
to gather together and organize in one corner of 
the world all the forces of those who, having fi- 
nally and wholly renounced all idea of aggressive 
warfare, do not wish to find themselves one day 
without defense before an attack upon them. 

The North Atlantic pact is an act of faith in the 
destiny of Western civilization. Based on the 
exercise of civil and political liberties, on respect 
for the human person, it cannot perish. 

The North Atlantic pact places in the service of 
this civilization and of peace the most powerful 
means of defense that has ever been created. That 
is why, in the name of an overwhelming majority 
of the Belgian people, I shall sign it in a few mo- 
ments with confidence and pride. 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



REMARKS BY L. B. PEARSON 
Secretary of State for External Affairs of Canada 



Last week the Parliament of Canada, with only 
two dissenting voices, endorsed the treaty which 
we sign here today. This virtual unanimity re- 
flected the views of the Canadian people who feel 
deeply and instinctively that this treaty is not 
a pact for war, but a pledge for peace and progress. 

The North Atlantic Treaty was born out of fear 
and frustration; fear of the aggi'essive and sub- 
versive policies of Communism and the effect of 
those policies on our own peace and security and 
well-being ; frustration over the obstinate obstruc- 
tion by Communist states of our efforts to make 
the United Nations function effectively as a uni- 
versal security system. This treaty, though born 
of fear and frustration, must, however, lead to 
positive social, economic, and political achieve- 
ments if it is to live; achievements which will 
extend beyond the time of emergency which gave 
it birth or the geographical area which it now 
includes. 

This treaty does not of itself ensure peace. It 
does, however, give us the promise of far gi-eater 
security and stability than we possess today. By 
our combined efforts, we must convert this promise 
into performance or the treaty will remain no 
more than yet another expression of high but un- 
attained ideals. That will not happen to our 
North Atlantic pact if each of us accepts the chal- 
lenge it proclaims; if each of us, with trust in 
the good will and peaceful policies of the others, 
will strive to make it something more than words. 
We know that we can do this. If it were not so, 
we would not today be giving this pledge to stand 
together in danger and to work together in peace. 

We, in this North Atlantic community, the 
structure of which we now consolidate, must jeal- 
ously guard the defensive and progressive nature 
of our league. There can be no place in this gi-oup 
for power politics or imperialist ambitions on the 
part of any of its members. This is more than 



a treaty for defence. We must, of course, defend 
ourselves, and that is the first purpose of our 
pact; but, in doing so, we must never forget that 
we are now organizing force for peace, so that 
peace can one day be preserved without force. 

We are a North Atlantic community of twelve 
nations, and three hundred and fifty million peo- 
ple. We are strong in our lands and resources, in 
our industry and manpower. We are strong above 
all in our common tradition of liberty, in our 
common belief in the dignity of the individual, in 
our common heritage of social and political 
thought, and in our resolve to defend our freedoms 
together. Security and progress, however, like 
peace and war, are indivisible. So there must be 
nothing narrow or exclusive about our league, no 
slackening of our interest in the welfare and se- 
curity of all friendly people. 

The North Atlantic community is part of the 
world community and as we grow stronger to pre- 
serve the peace, all free men grow stronger with 
us. The world today is too small, too interde- 
pendent, for even regional isolation. 

This treaty is a forward move in man's progi-ess 
from the wasteland of his postwar world, to better, 
safer ground. But as we reach the distant paS' 
tures, we see greener ones far on. As we reach the 
summit of this lofty peak, higher ones loom up 
beyond. We are forever climbing the ever- 
mounting slope and must not rest until we reach 
the last objective of a sane and moral world. 

Our treaty is no mere Maginot Line against an- 
nihilation, no mere fox hole from fear, but the 
point from which we start for yet one more attack 
on all those evil forces that would block our way 
to justice and to peace. 

In that spirit, and with great pride, I sign this 
treaty as the delegate and the servant of my 
country. 



April 17, 1949 



REMARKS BY GUSTAV RASMUSSEN 
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 



Wlien today, on behalf of Denniiuk, I .sign the 
North Atlantic Treaty, I do so because it is an 
instrument of peace, and because it has no otlier 
purpose than defense in case an armed attack 
should occur against any one of the sigiuitory 
powers. 

Under article 1 of the treaty, the parties under- 
take to settle any international dispute by peace- 
ful means. As has been recently said by a high 
American official, behind this pledge stand the 
character and policies of the countries which are 
parties to the treaty. The very nature of their 
institutions makes a calculated plan of aggression 
a virtual impossibility. 

The North Atlantic Treaty contains a solemn 
reaffirmation of the pledges given by those coun- 
tries under the United Nations Cliarter. The 



treaty is therefore designed to strengthen the sys- 
tem of the United Nations. It constitutes a cor- 
nerstone in the fundamental structure of general 
security. 

Twice in this century, the United States of 
America has gone to war in order to come to the 
aid of the democratic nations of Europe in their 
fight against aggression. 

By this treaty the United States has in advance 
expressed her readiness also in the future to stand 
by democratic and peace-loving peoples, and has 
thereby contributed in a magnanimous way to the 
maintenance of peace. 

This goal, the preservation of peace, is also Den- 
mark's, in deep accord with the ardent desire and 
old tradition of the Danish nation. 



REMARKS BY ROBERT SCHUMAN 
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Frencli Republic 



The history of contemporary France is a succes- 
sion of aggressions she endured and of attempts 
she has made to avoid them. 

Three times in seventy years .she has been in- 
vaded. The first time, she was the sole victim of 
the aggressor. From 1914 to 1918 half of our con- 
tinent was submerged under the wave of aggres- 
sion. And the last war overflowed Europe, the 
invasion became transcontinental, not only because 
of alliances, but also because of the immensity of 
the means of action. Invasion crosses neutral 
frontiers; neither distance nor natural obstacles 
can stop it any longer. 

In the past, the peoples menaced by it too often 
allowed themselves to be surprised by it. The 
teaching of experience has led them to draw to- 
gether. They have placed their confidence in in- 
ternational organization for peace and security. 
France has constantly supported these efforts and 
nurtured this great hope. She remains fei'vently 
attached to it because she is convinced that in the 
end humanity will submit to the exigencies of 
solidarity. 

But she is obliged also to recognize that collec- 
tive organizations, as they function today, have 



not yet acquired the necessary efficacy. The Cliar- 
ter envisages the possibility of regional pacts. It 
authorizes its members to organize individually 
or collectively for self-defense in conformity with 
the principles of the Charter. 

France ardently desires that the United Nations 
may become one day strong enough to assure by 
itself peace and security in the world, thus render- 
ing any individual initiative unnecessary. 

But, meanwhile, the Governments which bear 
the fearsome responsibility of guarding the inde- 
pendence of their countries have no right to put 
their trust in partial guarantees. It would be 
criminal for them to neglect a single opportunity, 
or a possible aid, for the preservation of peace. 

The exclusive concern of France is to make im- 
possible any invasion of her own territory or of 
the territory of peace-loving nations. Our aim 
cannot be restricted to the winning of a war which 
might be forced upon us, a war which, even if we 
win it, would leave Europe ravaged and depopu- 
lated. We want to avoid such a war by becoming, 
together, strong enough, together to safeguard 
peace. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Wlio, in justice, could reproach us for such an 
attempt ? Wliat sincere friend could take offense 
at it? In the past, France has been sufficiently 
respectful of her obligations and true to her 
friendships, sufficiently alerted also by dreadful 
experience, to be beyond all suspicion. 

There is no contradiction between two treaties 
when both have as their object to guarantee the 
security of the same country but are concluded 
with different guarantors. The multiplicity of 
possible risks necessitates a multiplicity of pre- 
cautions. This answer we gave to Germany when, 
in 1935, she took objection to the Franco-Russian 
treaty, incompatible, according to her, with the 
Locarno pact. Today, we give it to the U.S.S.R. 
with whom we remain bound by a defense pact 
against a possible German menace and by the obli- 
gation we accepted never to associate ourselves 
with any threat directed against her. We shall 
scrupulously honor this obligation. When we ex- 
pand the network of our friendships, old and new, 
do we in fact repudiate a friendship which does 
not satisfy all our need for security? Is it a 



threat to anyone when we take our insurance 
against all risks, when we organize a system of 
common defense against any attack, whatever its 
nature ? 

We are uniting, with the intention of providing 
a common and reciprocal protection. We want 
to discourage in advance any aggression, by mak- 
ing it more and more dangerous for the aggres- 
sor. Only a potential aggressor could legitimately 
consider it aimed at him. Our conscience is clear. 
In signing this pact, France solemnly proclaims 
her absolute determination to maintain peace. It 
is not for herself iilone that France wants peace, 
for she knows that peace has become the indivisible 
property of all, and that, by allowing it to be 
compromised by one of us, we would all lose it 
together. 

Nations are more and more convinced that their 
fates are closely bound together, that their salva- 
tion and their welfare can no longer be based 
upon an egotistical and aggi'essive nationalism 
but must rest upon the progressive application 
of human solidarity. 



REMARKS BY BJARNI BENEDIKTSSON 
Minister of Foreign AKairs of Iceland 



The nations who are now forming this new 
brotherhood are unlike each other in many re- 
spects: Some of them are the greatest and most 
powerful in the world — others are small and weak. 

None is smaller or weaker than my one — the Ice- 
landic nation. My people are unarmed and have 
been unarmed since the days of our Viking fore- 
fathers. We neither have nor can have an army. 
My country has never waged war on any country 
and as an unarmed comitry we neither can nor will 
declare war against any nation as we stated when 
entering the United Nations. In truth we are 
quite unable to defend ourselves from any foreign 
armed attack. 

There was, therefore, hesitation in our minds as 
to whether there was a place for us as participants 
in this defensive pact. But our country is under 
certain circumstances of vital importance for the 
safety of the North Atlantic area. In the last war 
Great Britain took over the defense of Iceland, 
and later we concluded an agreement with the 
United States Government for military protection 
of Iceland during the war. Our participation in 



this pact shows that for our own sake, as well as 
for the sake of others, we want similar arrange- 
ments in case of a new war, which we all indeed 
hope and pray never will occur. 

But it is not only this realistic reason which has 
decided our attitude. We also want to make it 
crystal clear that we belong, and want to belong, 
to this free commvuiity of free nations which now 
is being formally founded. 

It is a fact, as I said before, that we are unlike 
each other in many respects but there are many 
things which bind us solidly together. 

We all face the same danger. In this world 
of ours, where distances have vanished, peace in- 
deed is indivisible. The same disruptive elements 
are everywhere at this sinister work. Everywhere 
they are accusing us, who are workmg for peace, 
of being warmongers. 

Wlien we were discussing this pact in the Par- 
liament of Iceland, those elements tried with force 
to hinder that venerable institution in its work. 
Such violence has never before been tried against 
the thousand years old Parliament of Iceland. 



April 17, 1949 



The misguided crowd which tried this pretended 
they were shouting for peace. This contradictory 
behaviour of throwing stones with your hands 
while you are clamouring for peace with your lips 
is not in accordance with Icelandic tradition, nor 
is it in conformity with Western culture. We all 
know where those habits originate, and this men- 
tality certainly is the greatest menace to the world 
today. 

But it is not only this threat to world peace and 
human well-being which unites us. Neither is it 



only the fact that we all live in the same part of 
the world. There are stronger bonds which bind 
us together. 

We all belong to the same culture. We would 
all prefer to lose our lives rather than lose our 
freedom, either as individuals or nations. We 
all believe in friendly cooperation among nations. 
We all want peace for all the world and well-being 
for mankind. 

Therefore, we gather here today hopefully to 
sign this solemn treaty. 



REMARKS BY CARLO SFORZA 
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy 



The Italian nation, after two world wars, in the 
space of one generation, looks with confidence and 
hope to this treaty; it sees in it a decisive step 
towards the advent of peace in a free and united 
world. 

This pact is a complex and articulate instru- 
ment in which the will prevails to discourage, 
through our unity, any aggi'essive move, prepos- 
terous and unlikely as this may appear. To the 
very few who in good faith still hesitate, be it 
enough to remind that, had this treaty existed in 
1914 and in 1939, there wouldn't have been the 
battles which spread ruins from Italy to England, 
from France to Russia. 

Indeed, it is not without significance that the 
European peoples should have apprehended with 
joy that this treaty would be signed on the free 
American soil. It helps everybody realize that 
oceans are on the way of becoming small lakes and 
that even the most different historical formations 
represent no more than a variety of folklore in 
front of the necessity of uniting all of us, in order 
to save our most cherished common patrimony: 
peace and democracy. 



Signing a pact, however, is not enough. Life 
shall have to circulate through it, as a result of a 
constant free collaboration in the service of peace 
between all its members, present and future. 

It is not without a reference to the spirit of this 
pact, that two of its signatories, the French and 
the Italian, signed a week ago in Paris a treaty of 
economic cooperation between our two peoples. 
Not only would we fail the spirit of the pact, we 
would also belittle its force if we considered it 
only as a protective umbrella. We must pray to 
God that this pact will prove to be like the English 
Magna Charta: on one side intangible, on the 
other side a continuous creation. 

The North Atlantic pact will constitute one 
among the noblest and most generous events in 
human history if all its members will show- 
within and outside the pact— that the melancholy 
history of Europe has taught them this supreme 
lesson : that no nation in the world can feel secure 
in its prosperity and peace if all its neighbors are 
not as safely marching towards the same goals of 
prosperity and security. 



REMARKS BY JOSEPH BECH 

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg 



Grouped around tlie most powerful democracy 
in the world, the states signatory to the Atlantic 
pact constitute at once the most formidable and 
the most sincerely peaceful coalition of material 
and moral forces that has ever been set up by na- 



tions to insure their security and to spare the 
world the horrors of war. 

In the absence of any coercive force belonging 
to the United Nations, the treaty of assistance and 
mutual aid among the twelve Western countries 



476 



Departmenf of Slate Bulletin 



constitutes the most effective guarantee possible 
for tliem, a guarantee that is essential in a world 
where distrust prevails, a world divided by politi- 
cal and ideological conceptions that are radically 
opposed, with all the risks and dangers that this 
state of things and of mind involves. 

The nations of the West never wanted this divi- 
sion. It is not their concern that other nations 
have a regime different from theirs, and they ask 
only normal relations with the East. If, a year 
ago, five of them placed themselves on the defen- 
sive in concluding the Brussels pact, and if, today, 
the United States and Canada are in their turn 
joining the ten European countries to organize 
collective defense and the maintenance of peace, 
security, and liberty in the North Atlantic com- 
munity, it is because their unceasing efforts to 
find common solutions with the countries of the 
East in important matters have encountered con- 
stant intransigence and because, in a word, the 
policy of conciliation followed by the Western 
countries has found no echo in the East. 

These causes which have given birth to our 
pact determine and limit its purpose and scope. 

The North Atlantic pact is the logical supple- 
ment to the Brussels pact. 

Like the latter, its purpose is both to prevent 
war from breaking out, by establishing a balance 
between the forces confronting each other and 
to win any war of aggression that may be directed 
against one or all of the signatory states. 

The defensive alliance that we are concluding 
today cannot of course establish true peace, which 



is more than the absence of war, but, like other 
similar alliances in the past, it may give the world 
a salutary period of lasting truce. I am sure that 
that is the fervent desire of the signatories to this 
pact, all of whom believe that peaceful coexistence 
of the two regimes is possible and all of whom 
wish it. 

With the aid given to Europe by the Marshall 
Plan, the Atlantic pact opens a new era of the 
closest solidarity between the democratic countries 
of Europe and the new world. 

Nothing proves better this ineluctable solidarity 
of the destinies of our countries than the fact that 
the United States, breaking with a tradition two 
centuries old, is concluding a military alliance in 
peacetime. That is an event of extraordinary 
historical significance for the United States and 
of the utmost importance for Europe. 

The peoples of Europe note with profound 
gratitude what the presence at their sides of this 
mighty and generous country signifies. 

They approve and acclaim the pact, and accept 
the real risks and the heavy obligations that it 
imposes upon them. They accept it with active 
faith in the necessity for and the efficacy of the 
union that has been achieved. 

It is in this same spirit that, with the prior 
assent of nine-tenths of the members of the Luxem- 
bourg Parliament, I set the signature of my small 
country beside those of so many friendly nations 
at the bottom of this instrument of peace, the 
Atlantic pact. 



REMARKS BY DIRK U. STIKKER 
Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netlieriands 



The treaty we are about to sign marks the end 
of an illusion : the hope that the United Nations 
would, by itself, ensure international peace. 

Regretfully, we were driven to the conclusion 
that the Charter, though essential, is not enough, 
in the world as it is, to protect those vital principles 
for which we of the Western world who have 
gathered here, stand. 

Tlierefore, we felt it our duty to make this 
treaty. So far from merely marking the end of 
an illusion, it most especially marks the birth of a 
new hope of enduring peace. 

Its opponents are clamoring that this treaty aims 



at war. That is a lie. Its aim is peace — peace, 
not after a new war, but peace now, and from 
now on. 

We who are vitally interested in the security 
of the North Atlantic area, henceforth stand united 
in our resolve to repel aggression, just as we stand 
united in our resolve not to attack others. 

Such, then, is the treaty's unshakable moral 
basis. We shall sign with a clear conscience in the 
face of God. 

Various aspects of the new treaty are being ex- 
plained by my fellow speakers. Let me add and 
stress this : 



April 17, 7949 



Together we are determined in our mutual in- 
terest to gird the North Atlantic with a chain of 
strength. That chain is, necessarily, as strong as 
its weakest link. Let us then strive together, on 
a basis of equal treatment for all, to uphold the 
strength of the strongest links, and to increase that 
of the weakest, for weak links are a common peril. 
This is a dictate of plain common sense. 

Here, as in so many other fields of international 
cooperation and integration, the Netherlands will 
not be found wanting. As we have participated 
in making and implementing the Brussels pact, 
and Benelux, and Okkc. and a Western Euro- 
pean Federation (to name only these), so shall we 
participate in making the treaty now before us a 
living and inspiring reality. We know that you 
all in turn will not fail us. 

We rejoice at the thought that at last the truth 
prevails that the North Atlantic is a highway that 



unites, not a barrier that divides. We rejoice at 
the thought that North Americans and Western 
Europeans have found each other in a common 
edifice dedicated to peace. Freedom from fear is 
being brought nearer to all of us today. 

Let me close with a word of Netherlands grati- 
tude to all those who have labored towards bring- 
ing us here together. In saj'ing this, I am think- 
ing not only of the negotiators, who I thank most 
warmly, but also, and no less of those enlightened 
men who built that massive pedestal of popular 
support on which this treat}' now securely stands : 
members of Congress, parliamentarians, moulders 
and interpreters of public opinion in all our 
countries. 

And so, with a humble prayer for God's merciful 
blessing, I declare the Netherlands Government's 
readiness to sign this treaty for peace. 



REMARKS BY HALVARD LANGE 
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Norway 



As I am about to sign, on behalf of the Nor- 
wegian Government, the North Atlantic pact, I 
sti'ongly feel that it is a logical sequence to a line 
which we have followed since the liberation of oru" 
country in May, 1945. The five long years of Nazi 
occupation had given our people a new and deeper 
conception of freedom, law, and democracy. 

And so we were determined that never again 
must Norway risk the loss of her freedom and all 
that goes with it. 

With great faith and hope the Norwegian Gov- 
ernment had taken an active part in the United 
Nations Conference in San Francisco. When 
after many divergencies the nations represented 
there reached agreement and the Charter was 
solemnly signed, we sincerely believed that a foun- 
dation had been laid upon which we — allies and 
friends of the great war — could build together a 
future of peace and freedom. 

We believe today as firmly as ever in the right- 
ness of the words and spirit of that great Charter 
and in the fundamental soundness and necessity 
of the universal idea of the United Nations. 

We cannot close our eyes, however, to the fact, 
that — for reasons which we all know — the United 
Nations cannot today give us or any other nation 



the security to which we had confidently looked 
forward. 

Under these circumstances my country tem- 
porarily had to look for a greater measure of 
security, beyond that provided by membership in 
the United Nations. 

Our first thought, naturally, was to turn to 
our neighboi-s and friends in the north of Europe 
to see what the three of us together could do. As 
we Norwegians saw it, the best solution would be 
a Scandinavian regional pact under the Charter 
of the United Nations, in some way affiliated with 
the great Western democracies, to which we are 
so closely related economically, culturally, and 
ideologically. 

As we could not fully agree, however, on the 
basis for such a Scandinavian defense union and 
on the necessity of establishing solidarity with a 
broader and stronger regional defense grouping, 
the logical .solution for Norway was to join the 
North Atlantic pact. We have a longer coast 
line on the North Atlantic than any other country. 
Our experience through the centuries has been 
that the ocean did not separate. On the contrary, 
for us it has been the highway of coniniercial and 
cultural intercourse. 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



Before doing so, we asked ourselves some search- 
ing questions : 

Can the proposed pact offer the protection we 
need if the worst shoukl happen ? Will our obli- 
gations under the pact be within our means, with- 
out jeopardizing our economic reconstruction 
program ? 

We further asked: Is the pact in full accord- 
ance with the Charter of the United Nations? 

And, last but not least, is the proposed pact 
of a clearly defensive nature? Will it promote 
our foremost aim: Peace with freedom? 

Studying the text of the pact, we found satis- 
factory answers to all these questions. 

We felt convinced that the prospective signers 
of the pact considered the preservation of peace 
and freedom their foremost aim. They would 
regard any idea of aggression contrary to their 
most basic instincts and fundamental policies. 

Our pact is a pact of peace. It is directed 
against no nation. It is directed solely against 
aggression itself. 



The moment the United Nations through the 
common efforts of all its member nations is ca- 
pable of functioning in accordance with the inten- 
tion of its founders and with the letter and spirit 
of the Charter, at that moment the need for such 
regional arrangements will become much less ur- 
gent, and will ultimately be eliminated altogether. 

The overwhelming majority of the Norwegian 
people deeply believes that the signing of the At- 
lantic pact is an event which may decisively in- 
fluence the course of history and hasten the day 
when all nations can work together for peace and 
freedom. 

On this solemn occasion I wish to take the 
opportunity to express our deep-felt appreciation 
of the tremendous contribution of the United 
States of America during and after the war. 
The scope and vision of the undertakings which 
the United States have originated for the recon- 
struction and stabilization of a war-torn world, 
have seldom been equalled in human history. 



REMARKS BY JOSE CAEIRO DA MATTA 
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Portugal 



The Government of Portugal, which I have the 
honor to represent here on this occasion, received 
with pleasure the invitation extended by the Gov- 
ernment of the United States in its name and in 
the name of Belgium, Canada, France, Luxem- 
bourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and the United 
Kingdom, to take part in the North Atlantic pact. 

The time has now come where we see the con- 
cept of this pact become a reality; and, before 
our signatures are affixed to it, allow me to say a 
few words in the name of Portugal. 

To President Truman, who, with his strong 
personality, so well symbolizes in this hour the 
clear political vision and the decisive entry of the 
United States into this undertaking, go the cordial 
greetings of the Government and people of 
Portugal. 

My country, in accepting the invitation ex- 
tended to her to take her place among the original 
participating nations in the Atlantic pact, was 
not — I can affirm — concerned exclusively with con- 
siderations of her own security : she did so much 
more because of her recognition of the need of giv- 
ing her cooperation to this gi-eat effort. More than 



ever it is necessary to defend the principles and 
the positions which those peoples that are the 
depository of the ideals of Western civilization 
occupy in the world. It can be said that there is 
now being repeated around the shores of the At- 
lantic — and on a much vaster scale — the picture 
which the ancient peoples knew at the time when 
the finest conquests of the human mind and the 
highest exponents of civilization were centered in 
the small but fertile area of the classical world. 

Portugal is an Atlantic country whose activities 
throughout the long centuries of history took place 
to a great extent on the broad sea which forms 
her boundary. To those countries to which we 
are bound by the seaways of the Atlantic, we are 
brought near by friendly relations. The memory 
of our first contacts with some of them are lost in 
the night of time. With one of them we can point 
to centuries of the closest collaboration. 

Europe, which has such a great moral heritage to 
defend, Europe, reduced in political values, strug- 
gling against the greatest and most dangerous 
mental epidemic of all times, which threatens to 
destroy the flower of our culture, Europe is anx- 



April 17, J 949 



iously seeking a formula for peace. Her moral 
forces are now exerted in the will to correct her 
ills. And the evidence of what might be a dis- 
quieting shadow on her horizon finds her facing 
with courage and decision the reality of her pres- 
ent position, appreciative and gi-ateful for the 
moral and material solidarity nobly offered to her 
from this side of the Atlantic. 

Portugal wishes to assert that she sees in the 
North Atlantic pact, not only an instrument of 
defense and international cooperation, but also, for 



the reasons and for the aims which govern it, 
a precious instrument for peace. And she con- 
siders herself fortunate to be able to find that, 
once again, none of the instruments on which her 
foreign relations are based is in conflict with its 
letter or its spirit. 

May the thought which has made of these na- 
tions living examples of true social progi-ess, in 
work, in freedom, and in peace, keep intact the 
ties which are being formed today and ensure that 
this pact may bear the fruit which we expect of it. 



REMARKS BY ERNEST BEVIN 
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom 



Sir, In appending my signature to this pact 
today, I am doing so on behalf of a free parlia- 
mentary nation, and I am satisfied that the step 
■we are taking has the almost unanimous approval 
of the British people. 

Like other signatories, my country has had 
forced upon it the great task of fighting two world 
wars against aggression within a period of a 
quarter of a century. 

The cost in human life and treasure was appall- 
ing. Succeeding generations in the period fol- 
lowing each struggle over a wide area of the world 
■were thrown into a state of uncertainty and har- 
assed by wars of nerves and civil wars. 

The common people (who only want to live in 
peace) have been unable to follow their peaceful 
pursuits or to sleep safely in their beds. 

They have seen their constitutions crushed — 
constitutions in which they thought they had made 
their liberty secure. 

We have witnessed a period in which, while the 
countries represented here liave been striving to 
rehabilitate the ■world and to restore it to prosper- 
ity and sanity, they have been constantly frus- 
trated in their efforts. 

We have all tried with a genuine desire and firm 
purpose to build an effective United Nations. 

We have endeavored to make its machinery 
work and to create such confidence in this great 
■world organisation as will enable it to establish 
security for all the peoples of the world. 

But so far our hopes have not been fully realised. 

What course then was open to us? 

We had to get together and build with such ma- 
terial as was available to us, and this material 



was happily at hand in (his great Atlantic com- 
munity, with a common outlook and desire for 
peace. 

Countries whose representatives are signing this 
great pact today are composed of peace-loving peo- 
ples with spiritual affinities, but ■who also have 
great pride in their skill and their production and 
in their achievements in mastering the forces of 
nature and harnessing the great resources of the 
world for the benefit of mankind. 

Our peoples do not glorify war, but they will 
not shrink from it if aggression is threatened. 

This pact is a concrete proof of the determina- 
tion of a group of like-minded nations never to 
fight one another. 

These nations are, in addition, linked with many 
other peoples, who equally will never indulge in 
aggression. 

All these peoples are united in a common line 
of thought and desire. 

Today is not only the day of the signature of 
this pact, it is also a day of solemn thought — and, 
may I say, of consecration for peace and resistance 
to aggression. 

Speaking for the British people, I can assure 
you that they have agreed to make their contri- 
bution to the pool for peace. 

Although this pact is called the Atlantic pact and 
is defined as covering the Atlantic area, I must 
repeat what I stated recently in the British House 
of Commons, that it does not minimise either our 
interest in or determination to support others not 
included in this pact, with whom we have had 
long years of friendship and alliances. 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



We are in the process of enthroning and making 
paramount the use of reason as against force. 

The day may come when all the world will 
accept that view. 

Today will bring a great feeling of relief to 
millions of people. 

At last democracy is no longer a series of iso- 
lated units. 

It has become a cohesive organism, determined 
to fulfil its great purpose. 

But it is not the final end. 



We shall pursue with every endeavour the build- 
ing up of a truly universal United Nations, to 
which this group of countries will be no mean 
contributor. 

In the solemnity of this moment, I put my sig- 
nature to this pact in the name of a people who 
join with other signatories for the preservation of 
the great freedoms, and in giving an assurance to 
mankind of our determination to assist all the 
peoples of the world to live in understanding and 
good-neighborliness. 



ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 



On this historic occasion, I am hajjpy to welcome 
the Foreign Ministers of the countries which, 
together with the United States, form the North 
Atlantic community of nations. 

The purpose of this meeting is to take the first 
step toward putting into effect an international 
agreement to safegiiard the peace and prosperity 
of this community of nations. 

It is altogether appropriate that nations so 
deeply conscious of their common interests should 
join in expressing their determination to preserve 
their present peacefid situation and to pi'otect it 
in the future. 

What we are about to do here is a neighborly act* 
We are like a group of householders, living in the 
same locality, who decide to express their com- 
munity of interests by entering into a formal as- 
sociation for their mutual self-protection. 

This treaty is a simple document. The nations 
which sign it agree to abide by the peaceful prin- 
ciples of the United Nations, to maintain friendly 
relations and economic cooperation with one 
another, to consult together whenever the terri- 
tory or independence of any one of them is 
thi-eatened, and to come to the aid of any one of 
them which may be attacked. 

It is a simple document, but if it had existed in 
1914 and in 1939, supported bj' the nations which 
are represented here today, I believe it would have 
prevented the acts of aggression which led to two 
World Wars. 

The nations represented here have fnown the 
tragedy of those two wars. As a result, many of 
us took part in the founding of the United Nations. 
Each member of the United Nations is under a 
solemn obligation to maintain international peace 



and security. Each is bound to settle international 
disputes by peaceful means, to refrain from the 
threat or use of force against the territory or in- 
dei^endence of any country, and to support the 
United Nations in any action it takes to preserve 
the peace. 

That solemn pledge — that abiding obligation — 
we reaffirm here today. 

We rededicate ourselves to that obligation, and 
propose this North Atlantic Treaty as one of the 
means to carry it out. 

Through this treaty we undertake to conduct 
our international affairs in accordance with the 
provisions of the United Nations Charter. We 
undertake to exercise our right of collective or in- 
dividual self-defense against armed attack, in ac- 
cordance with article 51 of the Charter, and sub- 
ject to such measures as the Security Council may 
take to maintain and restore international peace 
and security. 

Within the United Nations, this country and 
other countries have hoped to establish an inter- 
national force for the use of the United Nations 
in preserving peace throughout the world. Our 
efforts to establish this force, however, have been 
blocked by one of the major powers. 

This lack of unanimous agreement in the Se- 
curity Council does not mean that we must aban- 
don our attempts to make peace secure. 

Even without that agreement, which we still 
hope for, we shall do as much as we can. And 
every bit that we do will add to the strength of 
the fabric of peace throughout the world. 

In this treaty, we seek to establish freedom from 
aggression and from the use of force in the North 
Atlantic community. This is the area which 



April 17, 1949 



has been at the heart of the last two world con- 
flicts. To protect this area against war will be a 
long step toward permanent peace in the whole 
world. 

There are those who claim that this treaty is an 
aggressive act on the part of the nations which 
ring the North Atlantic. 

This is absolutely untrue. 

The pact will be a positive, not a negative, in- 
fluence for peace, and its influence will be felt 
not only in the area it specifically covers but 
throughout the world. Its conclusion does not 
mean a narrowing of the interests of its members. 
Under my authority and instructions, the Secre- 
tary of State has recently made it abundantly 
clear that the adherence of the United States to 
this pact does not signify a lessening of American 
concern for the security and welfare of other areas, 
such as the Near East. The step we are taking 
today should serve to reassure peace-loving peoples 
everywhere and pave the way for the world-wide 
stability and peaceful development which we all 
seek. 

Twice in recent years, nations have felt the sick- 
ening blow of unprovoked aggression. Our 
peoples, to whom our Governments are responsible, 
demand that these things shall not happen again. 

We are determined that they shall not happen 
again. 

In taking steps to prevent aggression against 
our own peoples, we have no purpose of aggres- 
sion against others. To suggest the contrary is 
to slander our institutions and defame our ideals 
and our aspirations. 

The nations represented here are bound together 
by ties of long standing. We are joined by a 
common heritage of democracy, individual liberty, 
and the rule of law. These are the ties of a peace- 
ful way of life. In this pact we merely give them 
formal recognition. 

With our common traditions we face common 
problems. We are, to a large degree, industrial 
nations, and we face the problem of mastering 
the forces of modern technology in tlio pulilic 
interest. 

To meet this problem successfully, we must have 
a world in which we can exchange the products 
of our labor not only among ourselves, but with 
other nations. We have come together in a great 
cooperative economic effort to estal)lish this kind 
of world. 



We are determined to work together to provide 
better lives for our people without sacrificing our 
common ideals of justice and human worth. 

But we cannot succeed if our people are haunted 
by the constant fear of aggression, and burdened 
by the cost of preparing their nations individu- 
ally against attack. 

In this pact, we hope to create a shield against 
aggi-ession and the fear of aggression — a bulwark 
which will permit us to get on with the real busi- 
ness of government and society, the business of 
achieving a fuller and happier life for our citizens. 

We shall, no doubt, go about tliis business in 
different ways. There are different kinds of gov- 
ernmental and economic systems, just as there are 
different languages and different cultures. But 
these differences present no real obstacle to the 
voluntary association of free nations devoted to 
the common cause of peace. 

We believe that it is possible for nations to 
achieve unity on the gi'eat principles of human 
fi-eedom and justice, and at the same time to jDer- 
niit, in other respects, the greatest diversity of 
which the human mind is capable. 

Our faith in this kind of unity is borne out 
by our experience here in the United States in 
creating one nation out of the variety of our con- 
tinental resources and the peoples of many lands. 

This method of organizing diverse peoples and 
cultures is in direct contrast to the method of the 
police state, which attempts to achieve unity by 
imposing the same beliefs and the same rule of 
force on everyone. 

We believe that our methotl of achieving inter- 
national unity through the voluntary association 
of different countries dedicated to a common cause 
is an effective step toward bringing order to our 
troubled world. 

For us, w^ar is not inevitable. We do not believe 
that there are blind tides of history which sweep 
men one way or the other. In our own time 
we have seen brave men overcome obstacles that 
seemed insurmountable and forces that seemed 
overwhelming. ]\Ien with courage and vision can 
still determine their own destiny. They can 
choose slavery or freedom — war or peace. 

I have no doubt which they will choose. The 
treaty we are signing here today is evidence of 
the path they will follow. 

If there is anything certain today, if there is 
anything inevitable in the future, it is the will 
of the people of the world for freedom and jieace. 



482 



Department of State Bulletin 



UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES 



Reconvening of the Third Session of the General Assembly 



Statement by Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press by the U.S. Mission 
to the United Nations April 5] 

On the occasion of the reconvening of the Gen- 
eral Assembly, I should like to express what I be- 
lieve is the conviction of the Ameiican people that 
the United Nations is our best hope of building a 
peaceful world community. 

It embodies the hopes and aspirations to which 
we dedicated ourselves in the War. We are de- 
termined that these purposes shall not be lost, 
however great are the difficulties to be surmounted. 
In order to help create those conditions of stability 
and security which are essential to the full effec- 
tiveness of the United Nations, this country has 
cooperated with other peace-loving nations in ef- 
forts to achieve world economic recovery and as- 
surances against aggression. We look upon these 
as necessary foundations for the kind of construc- 
tive and peaceful cooperation among nations 
which the founders at San Francisco visualized 
as the real work of the United Nations. 

Agenda 

A/808 

Dated Dec. 15, 1948 

I. Committee Reports Awaiting Action by the 
General Assembly in Plenary Meeting. 

1. The problem of voting in the Security Coun- 

cil: 

(a) Report of the ad hoc Political Committee 
(A/792) ; 

(6) Draft resolution proposed by the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics (A/793). 

2. Study of methods for the promotion of inter- 

national co-operation in the political field: 
report of the ad hoc Political Committee. 

3. Report of the Economic and Social Council 

(Chapter III) : report of the Third Com- 
mittee (A/783). 

4. Violation by the Union of Soviet Socialist 

Republics of fiuidamental human rights, 
traditional diplomatic practices and other 
I^rinciples of the Charter: report of the 
Sixth Committee (A/787). 

5. Reports of the Advisory Committee on Ad- 

ministi'ative and Budgetary Questions : I'e- 
port of the Fifth Committee (A/802). 

II. Items Awaiting Action by the Committees. 

A. First Committee 

1. Treatment of Indians in the Union of South 
Africa : item proposed by India. 



2. Question of Franco Spain: implementation 

of the resolutions and recommendations of 
the General Assembly of 12 December 1946 
and of 17 November 1947: item proposed 
by Poland. 

3. Question of the disposal of the former Italian 

colonies: item proposed by the United 
States of America, France, the United 
Kingdom and the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics. 

B. Ad hoc Political Committee 

1. Study of methods for the promotion of inter- 

national co-operation: report of the In- 
terim Committee of the General Assembly. 

2. United Nations Guard : item proposed by the 

Secretary-General. 

3. Report of the Security Council. 

C. Third Committee 

1. Report of the Economic and Social Council 

(Chapter III). 

2. Refugees and displaced persons: 

(a) Pi'oblem of refugees and displaced per- 
sons : item proposed by Poland. 

(b) Repatriation, resettlement and immigra- 
tion of refugees and displaced persons: report 
of the Economic and Social Council. 

3. Freedom of information : report of the Eco- 

nomic and Social Council. 

4. Discriminations practised by certain States 

against immigrating labour, and in par- 
ticular against labour recruited from the 
rans of refugees: item proposed by 
Poland. 

5. Creation of a sub-commission of the Social 

Commission of the Economic and Social 
Council on the study of the Social problems 
of the aboriginal populations of the Amer- 
ican continent: item proposed by Bolivia. 



A/BUR/AGENDA/57 
April 1, 1949 

1. Organization of the third regular session 
(Part II) : memorandum by the Secretary-Gen- 
eral (A/BUR/115). 

2. Allocation of agenda items among Commit- 
tees (A/808) : 

(a) Creation of an ad hoc committee to consider 
methods and procedures which woidd enable the 
General Assembly to discharge its functions more 
effectively and expeditiously: item proposed by 



Apn\ 17, 7949 



Denmark, Norway and Sweden (A/743, A/825) ; 

(b) Proposal for the adoption of Russian as one 
of the working languages of the General Assem- 
bly : item proposed bv the Union of Soviet Social- 
ist Republics (A/BUR/112) ; 

(c) Proposal for the adoption of Chinese as one 
of the working languages of the General As- 
sembly: item proposed by China (A/BI'R/113). 

3. Consideration of requests for the inclusion of 
additional items in the agenda of the third regular 
session : 

(a) Study of the legal proceedings against 
Cardinal Mindszenty of Hungary in relation to 
Article 1, paragraph 3, and Article 55, paragraph 
c, of the Charter: item proposed by Bolivia 
(A/820) ; 

(b) Observance of fundamental freedoms and 
human rights in Bulgaria and Hungary, includ- 
ing the question of religious and civil liberty in 



special relation to recent trials of church leaders: 
item proposed by Australia (A/821) ; 
(c) Question of Indonesia 

(i) Item proposed by India (A/826) 

(ii) Item proposed by Australia (A/827). 

4. Application of Israel for admission to mem- 
bership in the United Nations: letter, dated 7 
March 1949, from the President of the Security 
Council to the President of the General Assembly 
(A/818). 

5. Application of Ceylon for admission to mem- 
bership in the United Nations: letter, dated 17 
March 1949. from the President of the Security 
Council to the President of the General Assembly 
(A/823). 

6. Appointments to fill vacancies in the member- 
ship of subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly, 
Committee on Contributions : note bv the Secre- 
tary-General (A/BUR/114). 



U.S. Views on Former Italian Colonies 



STATEMENT BY JOHN FOSTER DULLES' 
U.S. Representative to the General Assembly 



In this matter of the former Italian colonies, the 
General Assembly exercises an authority which is 
unique in the history of the United Nations. Nor- 
mally the Assembly can only make recommenda- 
tions, which are without binding effect upon the 
member states. In this case, however, the four 
states which under the Italian peace treaty were 
charged with the responsibility of disposing of the 
colonies have agreed in advance to be bound by 
this Assembly's recommendations. Therefore, the 
Assembly in the present instance is acting in effect 
as the supreme legislative authority. 

The responsibility which the Assembly thus as- 
sumes is a heavy one. The problem does not lend 
itself to easy solution. Indeed, if there had been 
an easy solution, the problem would not now be 
here. The Council of Foreign Ministers has 
struggled vainly with the matter ever since its 
first meeting in September 1945. Not only did 
its three yeai-s of effort fail to produce a solution, 
but in the course of the effort all the Governments 
concerned have shifted their positions, thus also 
demonstrating the close balance of many conflict- 
ing factors. 

It is, as I say, because the problem has proved 
baffling, that it has at last come to us here, and 

' Mafle in Committee I (Political and Security) of the 
General A.^sonihly at Lake Success, N.Y., on Apr. 6, 1949, 
and released to the press by the U.S. Deiegatiou to the 
General Assembly on the same date. 



what we do with it will not merely affect the des- 
tinies of some 3 million people, it will also affect 
the future of the United Nations itself. Here we 
are, a body not hampered by the veto, with final 
authority with respect to a vexing problem which 
has defied solution by what is commonly referred 
to as "))ower politics."' If this Assembly proceeds 
comjietently to find a just and practical solution, 
that will add greatly to the prestige of the United 
Nations. If, on the other hand, the Assembly 
proves itself impotent, then the result will be that 
international problems will more and more be dealt 
with on the basis of applicable national power, 
rather than on the basis of high principles inter- 
nationally applied. 

The provisions of the Italian peace treaty repre- 
sented an act of faith in the Assembly of the 
United Nations. It devolves upon us to justify 
that faith. 

We are dealing here with non-self-governing 
territories, and we shall, I assume, want to apply 
the principles of the Charter, which are found 
notalily in chapter XI. Two basic principles are 
there laid down. First, the interests of the in- 
habitants are paramount. Second, regard should 
be had for international peace and security. On 
behalf of the United States, I shall indicate briefly 
and in a preliminary way the conclusions which 
seem to us to be suggested by the application of 
these two principles to the three colonial areas in 
question; namely, Libya, Eritrea, and Italian So- 



484 



Department of Slate Bulletin 



maliland. In this connection, we have relied 
largely upon the report of the Commission of 
Investigation, which in 1947 the Four Powers sent 
to ascertain the wishes of the inhabitants and to 
gather other pertinent information. 

Let us turn first to Libya. The inhabitants 
seem well advanced toward self-government and 
independence, and we believe any Assembly de- 
cision should put the primary emphasis on achiev- 
ing early independence. 

Also, the relevancy of this area to international 
peace and security cannot be ignored. Names 
such as Tobruk and Bengasi have not been for- 
gotten, and Egj'ptian and other Arab states are 
entitled to a solution that does not again place 
them in jeopardy. The future of Libya, indeed, 
intimately affects the whole strategic position in 
the Mediterranean and the Near East. 

It seems, therefore, that both the welfare of the 
inhabitants and international peace and security 
require that Libya should be placed under the 
trusteeship system and the administration en- 
trusted to the care of a state or states which have 
demonstrated the capacity and the will to develop 
independence, in accordance with article 76 of the 
Charter, and also to assure that the trust territory 
shall play its part in the maintenance of inter- 
national peace and security, in accordance with 
article 84 of the Charter. 

In tliis connection we believe that the Assembly 
will wish to consider carefully the view of the 
Government of the United Kingdom and of the 
other members of the British Commonwealth. 
Libya was liberated as the result of a great Allied 
offensive in which British Commonwealth troops 
bore the brunt of the fighting. Also, the United 
Kingdom Government is, under the peace treaty, 
actually administering all of Libj'a except Fezzan, 
and such administration, which has now lasted for 
upwards of five years, has given intimate knowl- 
edge from which this Assembly can, no doubt, 
profit. Furthermore, the United Kingdom has 
given ample evidence, not merely by word but by 
deed, that it genuinely believes in the principle 
of developing non-self-governing areas so as to 
make them independent. For this reason, we 
consider that regardless of whether the General 
Assembly decides to deal with Libya as a whole 
or in part, the United Kingdom should be invited 
to undertake the administration of Cyrenaica. 

If we turn to Eritrea, we find people who are 
neither homogeneous nor ready for self-govern- 
ment. However, in the case of much of Eritrea, 
there is close affinity with the neighboring people 
of Ethiopia. Also, in the case of this part of 
Eritrea, there has been a demonstrated relation- 
ship to international peace and securitj'. We feel 
that it is important that the disposition of the 
territory be such as to insure that it cannot again 
be used by any nation as a base of operations 
against Ethiopia. Furthermore, it seems reason- 

April 17, 1949 

832197 — 49 3 



able that Ethiopia should have adequate access 
to the sea. 

These considerations combine to suggest that 
the eastern portion of Eritrea, including the port 
of Massawa and the city of Asmara, might be in- 
corporated into Ethiopia, subject to appropriate 
protection of Italian and other minorities. 

In the case of the western province of Eritrea, 
the affinity of the people is closer with the peoples 
to the west of them, and it would seem that a sep- 
arate solution should be found for the future of 
the inhabitants of the western province. 

In the case of Italian Somaliland, it is apparent 
that the inhabitants are not, and in any predict- 
able period will not be, ready for self-government 
or independence. For a long time to come, out- 
side assistance and guidance will be required in 
order to develop the meager resources and to bring 
about a development of the sparse population so 
that they can stand by themselves. The area is 
without major strategic importance from the 
standpoint of international peace and security. 

In view of the revival of democratic government 
and institutions in Italy since the overthrow of 
Fascism and the demonstrated willingness and 
ability of the present government of Italy to 
assume the obligations of a peace-loving state in 
accordance with the Charter, we feel that Italy 
should be invited to undertake the responsibility 
of administering Italian Somaliland under the 
United Nations trusteeship system. 

In all of these matters we believe that the ar- 
rangements should be such as to afford the Italian 
people an opportunity to participate in the de- 
velopment of their former colonies so far as is 
consistent with the reasonable wishes of the people 
and the maintenance of harmonious order. The 
Italian nation has a surplus population of people 
who have demonstrated, in many parts of the 
world, their great capacity to develop waste places 
into productivity. "We believe that the material 
welfare of the Italian people and the inhabitants 
of Africa can be advanced by cooperation under 
sound administi'ation. We hope that this As- 
sembly will approach the matter in that spirit. 
Let us not allow wi-ongs of the past, however 
grievous, and emotions of the past, however justi- 
fiable, to dominate our debates and to prescribe 
permanent barriers to the fruitful intercourse of 
peoples who can help each other and who, in the 
words of our Charter should practice tolerance and 
live together in peace with one another as good 
neighbors. 

I offer the foregoing as an indication of the far- 
reaching imijortance of the problem with which 
we deal, and of the manj' factors which must be 
taken into account if we are to reach a just and 
equitable solution. We look forward to hearing 
the expression of views of other delegates. My 
Government has every confidence in the inherent 
wisdom of this body and in its ability to cope with 
this problem in a manner commensurate with the 
important issues involved. 



The Atlantic Community and the United Nations 

BY AMBASSADOR PHILIP C. JESSUPi 



There is nothing novel in the subject which has 
been given to me to talk about tliis evening. As a 
matter of fact, it would be difficult to find any 
novel point in connection with the North Atlantic 
pact.^ One of the gratifj-ing aspects of the devel- 
opment of the plans for this pact is the fact that 
it was made puolic even before it was signed and 
that there is therefore this present period before 
its ratification during which people can comment 
on it. They have commented freely on almost 
every aspect of it. I have tried to study as many 
of these comments as possible. Some of tliem 
have been made in the press, in news stories, and 
in editorials or columns, some in radio comments, 
some in the views or organizations, and some in 
correspondence and conversation with individuals. 

I have collected from all tliese sources the prin- 
cipal and most frequently recurring arguments 
and doubts which have been expressed concerning 
the ])act in so far as concerns its bearing on the 
United Nations. I am not now dealing with other 
aspects of the pact. I have tried to analyze the 
points, and I shall try to deal with them tonight. 

Before looking at these various views in detail, 
I should like to suggest that some of them reflect 
positions which were taken when the idea of the 
conclusion of such a treaty was known but liefore 
its text was made public or even agreed upon. 
The expression of many of these points of view 
during the period of negotiation was extremely 
helpful. It influenced the drafting of the text. I 
shall not try to be specific and name names or 
refer to particular points, but I have no doubt that 
there are many organizations and individuals who 
have taken satisfaction in seeing reflected in the 
pact ideas which they had discussed during the 
negotiating stage. 

The relation of the conclusion of the pact to the 
United Nations can be examined from several 
points of view. First, there is the text of the 
treaty itself, which can be analyzed in the light of 
the United Nations Charter; second, there are the 
authoritative declarations of the President and of 
the Secretary of State concerning our policy and 
our intentions; third, there is an area which is 
necessarily more speculative — it involves an analy- 
sis and appreciation of the world situation and of 

' An address delivered before the Academy of Political 
Science in New York, N.Y., on Apr. 7, 10-19, and released 
to the press on the same date. 

' For text of the treaty, see Bm.r.ETiN of aiar. 20, 1949, 
p. 339 ; also printed as Department of State publication 
3464. 

486 



the operations of the United Nations and of the 
way in which the North Atlantic pact will be 
utilized. Speculation, at least in public, is not 
generally considered to be good diplomatic prac- 
tice, but I shall venture a short distance into that 
field. 

One can deal briefly with the analysis of the 
text of the treaty, since the essential points have 
already been made abundantly clear in various 
official statements. 

In the first place, the preamble begins with a re- 
affirmation of faith in the purposes and principles 
of the Charter of the United Nations. 

In the second place, article 1 is a restatement of 
the specific principles stated in paragraphs 3 and 
■I of article 2 of the Charter. Using the language 
of the Charter, the parties agree to settle their in- 
ternational disputes by peaceful means. This 
statement is not confined to disputes among the 
parties to the treaty; it includes disputes between 
parties to the ti'eaty and states wliich are not 
parties. Even more important, this article 1 uses 
tlie language of paragraph 4 of article 2 to pledge 
the parties again to "refrain in their interna- 
tional relations from the threat or use of force . . . 
in any . . . manner inconsistent with the Purposes 
of tlie United Nations." Nothing could be more 
explicit in declaring the defensive and nonhostile 
purposes of this treat}-. 

In the third place, article 5, which might be de- 
scribed as tlie operative article, calling for joint 
action in self-defense in case of an armed attack, 
expressly cites and is based upon article 51 of the 
Charter. It includes that provision in 51 which 
requires states acting in self-defense to report 
immediately any measures which they may be 
forced to take to the Security Council. It states 
also the obligation under this same article to ter- 
minate any such measures when the Security Coun- 
cil has acted. 

In the fourth place, article 7 reaffirms the prin- 
ciple contained in article 10:3 of the Charter. That 
article of the Cliarter says that if there is a conflict 
between the obligations of members under the 
Charter and their obligations under any other in- 
ternational agreement, the Charter obligations 
shall prevail. This is what article 7 provides. 
Tliis provision is reinforced by article 8, wherein 
the parties declare that none of their existing in- 
ternational engagements — which include their en- 
gagements under the Charter — is in conflict with 
the provision of this treaty. 

Department of Slate Bulletin 



In the fifth place, article 12 of the pact, which 
provides for possible review of tlie treaty after 
ten years, specifically says that any such review 
shall take into account "the development of uni- 
versal as well as regional arrangements under the 
Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance 
of international peace and security." This is a 
recognition of the desire of the parties to look 
forward to tlie day when a universal security sys- 
tem as originally envisaged in the Cliarter will 
materialize and provide the sense of security which 
is essential to the maintenance of international 
peace. 

So far as official statements are concerned, there 
has been not one iota of quibbling or evasion. Let 
me remind you that in his inaugural address, on 
January 20, the President announced the plans 
for concluding this North Atlantic Treaty. He 
therefore had it in the forefront of his mind when 
he stated the first point of his four-point program, 
in which tlie objectives of the United States for 
tlie promotion of peace and freedom wei'e outlined. 
Tliat first point was : 

"We will continue to give unfaltering support 
to the United Nations and related agencies, and 
we will continue to search for ways to strengthen 
tlieir authority and increase their effectiveness." 

When the North Atlantic pact was signed in 
Washington on April 4, the President reiterated 
this policy. He said : 

The nations represented here have known the tragedy 
of those two wars. As a result, many of us took part in 
the founding of the United Nations. Each member of 
the United Nations is under a solemn obligation to main- 
tain international peace and security. Each is bound 
to settle international disputes by peaceful means, to 
refrain from the threat or use of force against the 
territory or independence of any country, and to support 
the United Nations in any action it takes to preserve the 
peace. 

That solemn pledge — that abiding obligation — we re- 
affirm here today. 

We rededicate ourselves to that obligation, and pro- 
pose this North Atlantic Treaty as one of the means 
to carry it out. 

Through this treaty we undertake to conduct our in- 
ternational affairs in accordance with the provisions of 
the United Nations Charter. We undertake to exercise 
our right of collective or individual self-defense against 
armed attack, in accordance with article .51 of the Charter, 
and subject to such measures as the Security Council 
may take to maintain and restore international peace 
and security. 

I think it would overweight the record to cite 
to you every other authoritative official pronounce- 
ment on this subject. I confine myself tlierefore 
to reminding you wliat the Secretary of State said 
on March IS over the radio, when the text of the 
pact had just been released : 

The Atlantic pact is a collective self-defense arrange- 
ment among the countries of the North Atlantic area. It 
is aimed at coordinating the exercise of the right of 
self-defense specifically recognized in article 51 of the 
United Nations Charter. It is designed to fit precisely 
into the framework of the United Nations and to assure 
practical measures for maintaining peace and security 
in liarmony with the Charter. 

April 17, J 949 



It is the firm Intention of the parties to carry out the 
pact in accordance with the provisions of the United 
Nations Charter and in a manner which will advance 
its purposes and principles. 

Now some say that while this record proves that 
the President and the Secretary of State intend 
to strengthen rather than weaken the United Na- 
tions by the conclusion of the North Atlantic pact, 
it does not prove that the pact will actually have 
that effect. That is a natural and proper com- 
ment. That is, fortunately, part of our demo- 
cratic process of popular discussion of great pub- 
lic issues. I think we should therefore analyze 
the probable results of the pact in the light of its 
possible influence upon the United Nations. We 
should do this, as I have said, even though it 
leads us into the field of speculation. 

The question whether the pact will weaken the 
United Nations cannot be separated from the 
question whether the pact contributes to the main- 
tenance of peace. Let us plumb this problem by 
asking the question : "Would any state not a party 
to the pact be justified in feeling that the conclu- 
sion of the North Atlantic Treaty constitutes a 
threat to its peace and security?" I believe it 
would not. It is clear from the text of articles 4, 
5, and 6 of the treaty that its provisions are not 
to be brought into play unless there is a threat 
to the territorial integrity or political independ- 
ence or security of one of the parties or unless 
there is an armed attack in the areas defined by 
article 6. In other words, the treaty does not come 
into play unless there is a violation of article 2, 
paragraph 4 of the Charter. These points em- 
phasize the fact which the Secretary of State has 
made abundantly clear ; namely, that the Atlantic 
pact is defensive and not offensive. 

Now article 51 of the Charter justifies action in 
self-defense only in the case of an armed attack. 
The whole theory of that article is that force can- 
not be used as an instrument of national policy on 
the individual determination by a single state 
that its interests would be advanced by the use 
of force. 

There is nothing in the pact to call for or justify 
the use of force against any other state which 
loyally complies with the Charter of the United 
Nations. It has been made abundantly clear that 
the treaty has not been concluded for the purpose 
of justifying or provoking war but rather for the 
purpose of making war much less likely. No gov- 
ernment of a state not a party to the treaty can 
say that this treaty is directed against it unless 
that government is prepared to put on the cap 
which marks it as having aggressive intentions 
against one or more parties to the treaty. 

For the very reason that the North Atlantic 
Treaty is subject to and in accordance with the 
Charter of the United Nations, it cannot constitute 
a threat to any other state wliose policies and 
actions are also in conformity with and subject to 
that same Charter. 



It would be less than frank, however, to avoid 
stating the fact that the conclusion of this treaty 
has resulted from the fears which the policy of 
the Soviet Union has created. This situation was 
made crystal clear by Mr. Spaak, the Belgian 
Prime Minister, at the Paris session of the General 
Assembly. He was replying to Mr. Vyshinsky, 
the chief Soviet spokesman, who had made it 
perfectly plain that his co\intry was not going 
to cooperate in solving any of the agenda problems 
before the Assembly. Mr, Spaak said : 

I must answer you. I think I am the one to do It, 
because no one could consider that Belgium is trying to 
be provocative asainst the Soviet Union. We are afraid 
because by your conduct you have rendered this organiza- 
tion ineffective. We are afraid because the probL^ras 
before this Assembly have remained unsolved; because 
even when a solution is proposed by a majority of the 
United Nations you have refused to adhere to this solu- 
tion. We are afraid because we have placed all our 
hopes and confidence in the defensive organization of the 
United Nations; and through the policy you have pur- 
sued, you are forbidding us to seek our security and our 
salvation within the framework of this organization, but 
making us seek it within the framework of a regional 
arrangement. We are afraid of you because, in every 
country represented here, you are maintaining a fifth 
column, beside which the Hitlerite fifth column is nothing 
but a boy scout organization, if I might say so. There 
is not a single spot in the world, whether in Asia, whether 
in Europe, or whether in Africa, where a government 
represented here fails to find difficulties and these diffi- 
culties are being still further aggravated by you . . . 

Since iMr. Spaak made this lucid statement, the 
recent series of declarations by Communist lead- 
ers in a number of countries to the effect that their 
first loyalty was to the Soviet Union and not the 
countries of their ostensible allegiance has done 
nothing to allay these fears. "While that sense of 
insecurity pervades the world, the United Nations 
cannot flourish and develop as it should. Here 
we go round the circle, because the United Nations 
itself cannot remove the sense of insecurity until 
it has reached a full stage of development based 
primarily on the cooperation of all the permanent 
members of the Security Council. 

At this present juncture of world affairs, there 
are two principal ways in which the sense of in- 
security can be removed, given the nature of those 
fears aiid the source from which they spring. One 
way, and the way most to be desired, is a change 
in the policy of the Soviet Government. 

I shall comment on only one of the changes in 
the policy of the Soviet (Jovernment which would 
contribute to a world-wide sense of security. I 
refer to the question which Mr. Spaak mentioned, 
tlie question of cooperation in the United Na- 
tions to strengtiien the United Nations. It some- 
times seems to be assumed that it is the Soviet 
Union which is cooperating with the United Na- 
tions and that it is the United States, which, in 
entering into this North Atlantic Treaty, is re- 
fusing to cooperate. As a great Governor of this 
State used to say, "Let's look at the record". 

There are thirteen specialized agencies of the 
United Nations. The Soviet Union belongs to 



only two of them. Recently it gave notice of 
withdrawal from the World Health Organization. 
The United States belongs to all thirteen special- 
ized agencies. 

The General Assembly established in 1947 an 
Interim Committee, frequently called the '"Little 
Assembly." It was alleged that this body was 
designed to bypass the Security Council. Its rec- 
ord reveals no such desire or intent. The Interim 
Committee is engaged in studying the improve- 
ment of methods for the pacific settlement of 
international disputes. Should not all members 
of the United Nations contribute to that task? 
The Interim Committee studied the problem of 
voting in tlie Security Council tlie use of the veto. 
There may well be differences of opinion concern- 
ing the desirability of limiting the use of the veto 
in particular cases. Surely the way, the United 
Nations way, to reconcile differences of opinion 
so far as possible, is through discussion in the 
organ of the United Nations, which has the matter 
under consideration. The Soviet Union has never 
taken its seat in the Interim Committee, but it can 
do so whenever it is willing to cooperate in this 
part of the joint endeavor for peace. The United 
States has actively cooperated in all phases of the 
work of this Committee. 

The Interim Committee also has the function of 
guiding certain United Nations commissions when 
the General Assembly is not in session, specifically 
the Korean and Balkan commissions. The Soviet 
Union has not cooperated in the work of those 
commissions. Tlie United States has cooperated. 

These are specific points. More could be listed. 
More could be said about the many other Soviet 
attitudes and positions which, as Mr. Spaak said, 
have brought about the conviction that the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics is not cooperating 
with and through the United Nations to make the 
peace secure. None but the Soviet Government 
can alter the existing impression. The Soviet 
Government can begin tomorrow to build up con- 
fidence where it has already built up fear. I 
do not deny that it will need to overcome great 
skepticism, but no one has closed, or is attempting 
to close, the door on an honest attempt. 

It is impossible to overlook the fundamental 
cleavage in the basic theory of the Soviet Union 
on the one hand and of the United States on the 
other. The Soviet Union officially stands on the 
proposition that war is inevitable. 

The Soviet Union is officially committed to a 
philosophy of conflict, which is alien to our think- 
ing and to our ideals. Premier Stalin likes to 
quote the following passage from Lenin : 

We live . . . not only in a state but In a system 
of states, and the existence of the Soviet Republic side by 
side with the imperialist states for a long time is un- 
thinkable. In the end either one or the other will 
conquer. And until that end comes, a series of the most 
terrible collisions between the Soviet Republic and the 
bourgeois states is inevitable. 

Department of State Bulletin 



We also believe that we live in a system of states, 
but from this premise is drawn the opposite con- 
clusion. Our conclusion is that it is unthinkable 
that the members of that system of states should 
not be able to find ways to live in peace with each 
other. 

As the President said in his speech at the signing 
of the North Atlantic pact on April 4 : 

For us, war is not inevitable. We do not believe that 
there are blind tides of history which sweep men one way 
or the other. In our own time we have seen brave men 
overcome obstacles that seemed insurmountable and forces 
that seemed overwhelming. Men with courage and vision 
can still determine their own destiny. They can choose 
slavery or freedom — war or peace. 

I have no doubt which they will choose. The Treaty 
we are signing here today is evidence of the path they will 
follow. 

We believe in the capacity of the human mind 
and spirit to bridge the deepest chasms, to over- 
come the most formidable obstacles. The conflict 
in the world today is the conflict between the 
Marxist dogma that we must have war and our 
Westei-n faith that we can have peace. Tlaat faith 
is an abiding faith, and it will triumph. 

Obviously, if the Soviet Union considers that 
war is inevitable, it prepares for war. So long as 
it is preparing for war other states must take de- 
fensive precautions. Since, however, we in the 
United States start from the proposition that war 
is not inevitable, we do not proceed on the theory 
that a preventive war must be initiated. 

Since the world has not yet received convincing 
evidence of a change in Soviet policy, the way in 
which the United States can help to eliminate or 
to lessen the sense of insecurity is by a firm and 
honest declaration of purpose, which the North 
Atlantic Treaty provides. I would remind you 
of the passage in the President's inaugural address 
in which he said : 

The primary purpose of these agreements is to provide 
unmistakable proof of the joint determination of the free 
countries to resist armed attack from any quarter. Each 
country participating in these arrangements must con- 
tribute all it can to the common defense. 

If we can make it sufficiently clear, in advance, that 
any armed attack affecting our national security would 
be met with overwhelming force, the armed attack might 
never occur. 

One also sees arguments against the North 
Atlantic pact which seem to reflect the fear that 
the conclusion of this treaty is a definitive and final 
espousal of the theory that the hope for a universal 
peace and security system which inspired the 
drafting of the Charter in 1945 is dead. This 
is not the case. The necessities of the present 
require the conclusion of this treaty, but it is by 
no means an abandonment of the aspiration for a 
universal system. This point was made clear by 
Assistant Secretary Rusk in a radio broadcast 
on March 20, when he said that we do not regard 
the North Atlantic pact "as a fully satisfactory 
or permanent solution." He went on to say "We 
have rejected national or regional isolationism." 

April 17, 7949 



He pointed to the fact, and it is a fact, that the 
best assurance we have on this point is to be found 
"in the intentions of the American people. They 
want a world-wide security system, and they won't 
be content with a regional system." The Govern- 
ment of the United States has not ceased, and will 
not cease, to direct its policy toward the develop- 
ment of a universal system for international peace 
and security. We have not created the tensions 
which make this defense pact necessary at this 
time. We devoutly hope that it will never be 
necessary to invoke the provisions of this pact. 
But we would not be discharging our responsi- 
bilities to the United Nations and to the peoples 
of the world if at this juncture we did not make 
this clear declaration concerning the steps we are 
prepared to take in conformity with the Charter, 
should the need arise. 

Now it is also argued that article 9 of the North 
Atlantic treaty contains a threat to the Security 
Council. Article 9 provides for the establishment 
of a council composed of representatives of all 
of the parties. People ask whether we intend 
to divert into this council the consideration of 
international problems which ought to be dealt 
with in the Security Council of the United Nations. 

We have no such intention. This council, es- 
tablished under article 9, is "to consider matters 
concerning the implementation of this Treaty." 
If it had been in existence during the past years, 
it would not have been used to settle the Palestine 
case, or the Indonesian case, or the Kashmir case. 
Since the Soviet blockade of Berlin was a threat 
to the peace and affected the area covered by the 
treaty, the coiuicil to be set up under article 9 
might have given preliminary consideration to 
that question from the point of view of the po- 
tential threat involved. Such consultations would 
not have affected the jurisdiction or the use of the 
Security Council. The Security Council remains 
the body to which we and all the other members 
of the United Nations have entrusted "primary re- 
sponsibility for the maintenance of international 
peace and security . . ." That is what is stated 
in article 24 of the Charter and article 7 of the 
North Atlantic pact says specifically that this 
treaty does not affect that responsibility. 

If the Soviet Union will join in making the 
Security Council an effective instrument for the 
discharge of its responsibilities, the Security 
Council and the United Nations itself will grow in 
stature and in influence. Meanwhile, its growth 
can be stimulated by the existence of such agree- 
ments as this peace pact for the North Atlantic 
community. 

It is worth noting that the criticisms of the 
North Atlantic pact as a rival to the United Na- 
tions were not addressed to the Rio pact of 1948. 
The Rio pact had a very similar basis in terms of 
a regional arrangement relying heavily on article 
51 of the Charter. Perhaps when the Rio pact 
was concluded those interested in the United Na- 
tions remembered particularly that the conclusion 



of some sucli regional arrangement for the Amer- 
icas was planned at the Ciuipultepec conference 
of 1945, just hefore the United Nations meeting in 
San P'rancisco. The probability of its conclusion 
was very much in the minds of those who framed 
the Charter. The Rio pact therefore seemed to 
many a reasonable development in no way in cim- 
flict witli the Charter. I suppose the reason why 
many people have not taken the same attitude in 
regard to the Atlantic pact is that they are in- 
fluenced more by the political than by basic legal 
argimients. They might well agree that techni- 
cally the Atlantic pact has a sound legal founda- 
tion but they are worried that, because of the vital 
political relationship of the North Atlantic states 
to tlie Soviet Union, this new pact may have seri- 
ous world-wide political repercussions which did 
not result from the Rio pact. Perhaps if the 
North Atlantic Treaty had been preceded by some 
other regional defense arrangements, it would 
have been less subject to this criticism. PerliajJS 
the very importance of this agreement among this 
particular group of states is what causes concern. 
It would be a mistake to underestimate the im- 
portance of the Rio treaty, just as it would be a 
mistake to minimize the importance of the North 
Atlantic pact. But it would also be a mistake to 
assume that this treaty dealing with the North 
Atlantic area endangers the United Nations any 
more than the Rio treaty endangered the organi- 
zation. 

The extremists among world-government advo- 
cates run greater risks of endangering the future 
of the United Nations. In their position is found 
the antithesis to the approach marked by the At- 
lantic pact. Those responsible for the pact take 
the first practical step for consolidating peace in 
a crucial area. By the conclusion of tlie treaty, 
they enhance a solidarity hitherto embryonic. In 
.so doing they avowedly and in fact support the 
United Nations. World-government extremists, 
unhappy over the defects of the United Nations, 
would scrap the progress which it marks and 
begin anew. They wish to buy a prefabricated 
home made all in one piece. They do not wish 
to bother with foundations or practical little de- 
tails like septic tanks and plumbing and water 
supply. Happily these persons are not represent- 
ative of all world-government advocates. Many 
of them advocate building on the existing founda- 
tions, that is on the United Nations. Many of 
them arc willing to take their coats off and to work 
on jnitting a roof — or at least a tarpaulin — over 
our heads. Wliile doing so, they look forward to 
the day when the palace of all our dreams will 
shelter us. 

Such an attitude is a worthy reflection of our 
early pioneering spirit. This country was settled 
by men and women who had their dreams of tlie 
future but did not let those dreams interfere with 
clearing the forest, planting the corn, and main- 
taining their necessary defenses. 



We may l>e at the crossroads of a process by 
which through such arrangements as these, tied 
securely into the Cliarter, a decisive and unag- 
gressive preponderance of power in the hands of 
states supporting the I'nited Nations can be es- 
tablished. It must be our hope that the circle of 
states supporting the United Nations will stead- 
ily broaden until it becomes universal. 



Resolution on Trade Union Rights: 
Freedom of Association 

I'.N. doc. E/1300 
Adopted Mar. 17, 1949 

The Economic and Social Council 

Takes xotk of General Assembly resolution 128 
(II) concerning trade union rights (freedom of 
a.ssociation) and international machinery for their 
safeguarding; 

Ri:cALi,s its resolutions 52 (IV) and 84 (V) ; and 

Having EXAsrixEo the note from the Interna- 
tional Labour Organisation recording the deci- 
sions concerning freedom of association taken by 
the International Labour Conference at its thirty- 
first session (document E/'8G3) ; 

OnsEn\'ES the action taken and proposed by the 
International Labour Organisation within its 
recognized competence, in particular the adoption, 
liy tiie International Labour Conference, of the 
Freedom of Association and the Protection of the 
Ri"ht to Organize Convention, 1948; 

FuKTiiER NOTES the resolution of the Interna- 
tional Labour Conference concerning international 
machinery for safeguarding freedom of associa- 
tion; 

/n.'ifnirfs the Secretary -General to enter into 
consultation with Director-General of the Ilo for 
exploration of the question of enforcement of trade 
union rights (freedom of association) as provided 
in resolution 84 (V) of the Council and to study 
jointly the control of the practical application of 
trade union rights and freedom of association as 
provided for in resolution 128 (II) of the General 
Assembly ; 

licque.sts the Secretary-General to report to the 
Council on the results of his consultations, with a 
view to enabling the Council to give the matter 
further consideration, including consideration of 
the (luestion of further co-operation with the Gov- 
erning Body of the Ilo; and 

Transmits the decisions concerning freedom of 
association taken by the International Labour Con- 
ference at its thirty-first session to the Commission 
on Human Rights in order that it may consider 
the contents of the Freedom of Association and the 
I*rotection of the Riglit to Organize Convention. 
1948, and the resolution concerning international 
machinery for safeguarding freedom of associa- 
tion, when drawing up for submission to the 
Council its (inal proposed text of the International 
Covenant on Ilunum Rights and draft articles of 
implementation. 



Department of State Bulletin 



The United States in the United Nations 



International Court of Justice 

The International Court of Justice has just 
handed down its decision that Governments may 
be sued for injuries caused to the United Nations 
or its agents in the execution of U.N. business. 

The question of reparations for injuries sus- 
tained in U.N. service was submitted to the Court 
in a General Assembly resolution prompted by 
the death of Count Bernadotte in Palestine and 
of eleven other persons on U.N. assignments. The 
Court's judgment was that the United Nations 
exercises and enjoys functions and rights ex- 
plained on the basis of its possession of a large 
measure of international personality and capacity 
to operate upon an international plane. The 
Court unanimously decided that, with this in- 
terpretation of the United Nations as having an 
international personality, it is entitled to main- 
tain its rights by bringing international claims. 

The United States was among those countries 
submitting written observations. 

U.N. Assistant Secretai-y-General Ivan Kerno 
and A. H. Feller, Director' of the U.N. Legal De- 
partment, termed the Court's decision an "historic 
landmark" that strengthens the legal status of the 
United Nations under international law. 

Corfu Channel Case 

The International Court of Justice has ruled by 
a vote of 11 to 5 that Albania is responsible under 
international law for the damage and loss of life 
which resulted when two British destroyers struck 
mines in the Albanian territorial water's of the 
Corfu Channel in October 1946. The Court will 
decide later on the amount for damages to be paid 
by Albania. 

The issues in this long-debated case were con- 
sidered by a committee of the Security Council, 
but were never resolved. The disputing nations 
then agreed last year to abide by whatever deci- 
sion the Court would give, though Albania is not 
a member of the United Nations. The Court con- 
cluded that the mines could not have been laid 
without the knowledge of Albania and that it was 
her duty to warn ships of the danger in passing 
through the channel. The Court also ruled thati 
Britain did not violate the sovereignty of Albania 
"by reason of the acts of the British Navy in Al- 
bania waters" in this case, but that such sovereignty 
was violated the next month when Britain sent 
minesweepers into the channel. The tribunal 
stated, however, that the declaration of the Court 
concerning this gives appropriate satisfaction for 
that offense. 



U.N. Guard 

The Ad Hoc Political Committee of the Gen- 
eral Assembly adopted a Philippine resolution on 
April 11 to refer the Secretary-General's proposal 
for the establishment of an initial U.N. guard force 
to a special committee for study. 

This proposal recommends a force of 800 men to 
protect U.N. missions in scattered parts of the 
world. In introducing the proposal on behalf of 
the Secretary-General, Mr. Feller of the U.N. 
Legal Department said that these men would be 
members of the Secretariat and recruited on an 
international basis, in accordance with articles 
100 and 101 of the Charter. They would not be a 
military force and their arms would be limited to 
personal emergency defense weapons. In every 
case the functions would be exercised in accord- 
ance with the Charter. 

The Soviet Delegate Malik expressed strong 
opposition, terming the proposal a "contribution 
to practical implementation of the expansionist 
policy of some powers" aimed at "using the U.N. 
for their own selfish purposes." Benjamin Cohen, 
U.S. Delegate, in supporting the Philij^pine reso- 
lution emphasized that the special committee 
should be free to consider the problem of creation 
of a U.N. guard in all its aspects. He rejected 
Soviet allegations of ulterior motives on the part 
of countries favoring the Secretary-General's 
plan. 

The report of the special committee on the U.N. 
guard force will be considered at the fourth regu- 
lar session of the General Assembly. 

Voting in the Security Council 

The General Assembly in ])lenary session on 
April li adopted a resolution which provides for a 
policy of gradual liberalization of the voting pro- 
cedures of the Security Council. Forty-six coun- 
tries supported the resolution, the six countries 
of the Slav bloc opposed it, and two countries 
abstained. 

The proposal drawn up last year by the Ad Hoc 
Political Committee of the General Assembly 
where it was sponsored by four permanent mem- 
bers of the Security Council — China, the United 
Kingdom, the United States, and France. It was 
based largely on a study of the question by the In- 
terim Committee. The resolution recommends 
restriction of the use of the veto on 34 types of deci- 
sions which are considei-ed procedural. It also 
recommends that the major powers agi-ee volun- 
tarily among themselves to restrict the veto on 
certain substantive matters, particularly those in- 
volving the admission of new members and the 
pacific settlement of disputes. 



April 17, 1949 



Warren R. Austin strongly recommended adop- 
tion of the resolution, stating that if the members 
of the United Nations would cooperate in carry- 
ing out the recommendations, he believed there 
would be substantial improvement in the effective- 
ness of the Security Council's operations. 

Korea 

A Chinese resolution to admit the Republic of 
Korea to the United Nations was defeated by the 
U.S.S.R. in the Security Council on April 8 when 
it cast its 30th veto. The Republic of Korea rep- 
resents the 8th country barred from the T'nited 
Nations by Soviet vetos. During the debate the 
Soviet and Ukrainian delegates renewed their 
previous charges that the Republic is a "puppet" 
regime. 

Ambassador Austin led the support for Korea's 
application, pointing out that Soviet claims and 
charges had Ix'en overwhelmingly rejected by the 
General Assembly last December in Paris. At 
that time, the Assembly recognized the govern- 
ment of tlie Republic as the only lawful govern- 
ment in Korea. 

Israeli Membership 

The application of Israel for membership in the 
United Nations was admitted to the General As- 
sembly agenda on April 13 and referred to the 
Political Committees. The United States favored 
immediate action by the Assembly as recom- 
mended by the 14-member Steering Committee, 
but 31 countries voted in favor of a Pakistani 
amendment which will delay final action until the 
matter is reviewed in committee. 

Freedom of Information 

A 12-membcr Subcommission of Fi'eedom of 
Information and of the Press has been appointed 
by the Commission on Human Rights from 27 
nominees at a special meeting on April 11. The 
Economic and Social Council voted in March to 
continue through 1952 this Subcommission of the 
Human Rights Commission which was set up to 
study, report, and make recommendations on 
means of promoting freedom of information and 
the reduction or elimination of barriere to free 
flow of information between countries with par- 
ticular reference to news. 

MeanVvhile, discussion is continuing in the So- 
cial, Humanitarian and Cultural Committe* of 
the General Assembly on three draft conventions 
concerning freedom of information relating to 
(1) the gathering and international transmission 
of news, (2) the institution of an international 
right of correction, and (3) freedom of informa- 
tion. The conventions are being considered ar- 
ticle by article and tluis far members have agi-eed 
on the first two articles of the convention on gath- 
ering and international transmission of news. In- 
cluded in the first article is an agreed definition of 
"information agency," "correspondent" and 
"news material." The second article provides 



that "in order to facilitate the freest possible 
movement of correspondents in the performance 
of their functions" the contracting states shall ex- 
pedite travel of correspondents within their terri- 
tories and shall not impose restrictions which 
discriminate against such correspondents. 

A Polish amenilment was rejected which would 
have added to the definition of "news material" a 
phrase designed to restrict news that might pro- 
voke threats to the peace. U. S. Delegate Erwin 
D. Canham told the committee that the Polish 
amendment would give governments a chance to 
impose news censorship and set in motion a new 
jjower "on the evil path of misunderstanding" be- 
tween nations and peoples. 

International Law Commission 

Tlie newly elected lo-member International 
Law Commission began its first session at Lake 
Success on April 11 and elected Judge Manley O. 
Hudson of the United States as Chairman. The 
members of this Commission were elected by the 
General Assembly in Paris, the Statute of the ILC 
having been approved by the Assembly in 1947. 

The Commission agreed without objection to 
begin discussion of the first agenda item, jjlanning 
for the codification of international law, with the 
understanding that this would include genei-al 
discussion of the Commission's terms and plan of 
work. Other items on the agenda concern the 
rights and duties of states, the desirability and 
feasibility of creating an international judicial or- 
gan for the punishment of genocide, ways and 
means for making the evidence of customary in- 
ternational law more readily available, and co- 
operation with other bodies of the United Nations 
and other national and international organiza- 
tions. 

Indonesia 

Discussions began April 14 in Batavia between 
representatives of the Netherlands and of the In- 
donesian Republic imder the auspices of the U.N. 
(Commission for Indonesia. These talks were pro- 
])osed by the Commission as a step in compliance 
with the Security Council communication of 
March 23 calling for such discussions. Republican 
agreement to participate was conditioned on the 
understanding that the initial discussions concern 
the restoration of the Republican Government at 
Jogjakarta, as called for earlier by the Security 
Council. 

U.S. representative Merle Cochran, has the 
rotating chairmanship this week. Dr. J. H. Van 
Royen heads the Netherlands delegation and Dr. 
Mdhainnu'd Roeni. the Republican. 

World Health Organization 

Honduras became the 61st member of the World 
Healtli Organization by depositing the instrument 
of ratification with the United Nations at Lake 
Success. Honduras is the 13th of the American 
republics belonging to the Who. 

Depatfment of State Bulletin 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



Request for Military Assistance From Atlantic Pact Countries ^ 



Statement by Secretary Acheson 

The Department of State on April 8 released 
copies of communications exchanged with the 
Brussels treaty powers and with Norway, Den- 
mark, and Italy concerning the provision by the 
United States of military assistance to those 
countries. Before I deal specifically with these 
requests, I should like to review briefly some of 
the considerations which have led the executive 
branch of the Government to decide that the pro- 
vision of arms and equipment to free and friendly 
nations is in the highest interests of the American 
people. 

It is now clear that in the world of today we can 
no longer rely on our geographic position to pre- 
serve our security and peace. Our security and 
peace necessarily rest in the combined security and 
peace of the democratic world. Thus, the single 
purpose of our foreign policy has been to make a 
free world possible and more secure. The foreign 
policy which this Government has actively pursued 
since the termination of World War II has had 
as its fundamental objective the improvement of 
the security of the American people, by assisting 
in bringing about conditions which will make for 
peace. Our policy has been directed towards 
preserving free institutions and nations, to enable 
them to pursue, through their own efforts, the 
democratic way of life, from which we have bene- 
fited so much. To this end we embarked upon the 
European Recovery Program, which is by all odds 
the most important and hopeful application of 
the foreign policy I have described : the policy of 
preserving and strengthening the environment of 
freedom. 

To the same end of preserving peace we have, 
in conjunction with certain Western European 
countries and Canada, signed the Atlantic pact. 
It is clear, however, that the restoration of politi- 
cal and economic health in Western Europe, so 
essential to our peace and security, requires on the 
part of the peoples of that area a confidence in the 
future, a sense of personal security, and a reason- 
able assurance of peace. If they do not have that 
confidence, their progress towards recovery and 
the establishment of self-supporting sound econ- 
omies for strengthening democratic institutions 
will be handicapped. 

It is against this background that we have for 
several montlis been developing a progi-am of 
foreign military assistance. That program is be- 
ing planned on the basis of information as to the 

April 17, 1949 



urgent military needs of certain of the Western 
European nations which we received from them 
informally some time ago. Substantially review 
of this information has already been undertaken 
by us. The formal requests do not, therefore, 
create a new need for military assistance ; rather, 
they serve to confirm a situation of which we 
have been aware and to establish the principles 
upon which the use of our assistance can be based. 
The requests for military assistance nov7 for- 
malized by this exchange of notes are predicated 
upon an urgent need for improvement in the de- 
fensive capabilities of the countries requiring such 
assistance, thereby discouraging aggression 
against them. The military assistance program, 
like the Atlantic pact, is part of a policy which 
is entirely defensive in its scope. It could not 
be otherwise. Aggression is contrary to the basic 
traditions, instincts, and fundamental policies of 
the nations involved. There can be no doubt that 
the Atlantic pact countries have much to lose and 
nothing to gain fi-om war. By the very fact of 
our democratic systems of govermnent, we can 
never conspire to undertake aggressive action. 
The public discussions in this country and abroad 
which will take place concerning the North At- 
lantic pact and the proposed military assistance 
program are clear guarantees that we are not pre- 
paring for an aggressive war. 

The requests come from certain of the nations 
who have this week joined with us in signing the 
North Atlantic pact. It is important to note, 
however, that the requests are not a produrt of 
the pact — an instrument which is not yet m effect. 
Thus, even without the existence of the North At- 
lantic pact, the need for assistance and the recom- 
mended response of this Government would be 
the same I need only refer to the address to 
Congi-ess on March 17, 1948, by the President of 
the United States, when he stated in referring to 
the conclusion of the Brussels treaty : "I am sure 
that the determination of the free countries of 
Europe to protect themselves will be matched by 
an equal determination on our part to help them 
to do so." In his inaugural address this year the 
President stated as a part of his program that 
". . . we will provide military advice and equip- 
ment to free nations which will cooperate with 
us in the maintenance of peace and security." 

These requests and our replies therefore in no 
sense represent a price tag to be placed upon the 

" Released to the press Apr. 8, 1949. 



pact. At the .same time, by stressing the willing- 
ness of each requesting nation to do what it can 
to help itself and each other in the common cau.se, 
they are consistent with the spirit of the pact. 
Our decision to provide assistance will represent 
a careful, honest judgment of an effective means 
by which we can contribute to the collective de- 
fense of the North Atlantic area. This progi'am 
will thus become a powerful factor in assuring 
success for the aims of the pact. As the countries 
of Western Europe develop their strength to resist 
aggression, they will become better able to con- 
tribute not only to the peace and security of the 
Xorth Atlantic area, but to the peace and security 
of the world. 

Let us now review briefly the terms of the re- 
quests. They all emphasize certain basic prin- 
ciples of vital importance in assuring the United 
States that our assistance will yield maximum 
benefits to us as well as to the recipients. They 
all recognize that economic recovery must be given 
first priority ; they all recognize in clear terms that 
each country must imdertake to do what it can 
to help itself and help the other parties of the pact ; 
they all recognize the importance of building up 
at this time a modest progi-am of arms product ion, 
over and above what had been contemplated in 
their budgets for this year, so undertaken as not 
to impede the progress of the Economic Recovery 
Progr-am. 

Of particular significance is the fact that these 
principles have been put into actual woi'king opera- 
tion by the five Western Union countries. Their 
coordinated request is the result of careful ex- 
amination, as a group, of what, as a group, they 
can do for themselves. Their coordinated answer 
augurs well for the future successful establishment 
of a cooperative common defense program for the 
Xorth Atlantic area. 

While the assistance to the North Atlantic pact 
countries will constitute the larger part of our as- 
sistance program, the proposed program does call 
for some assistance to other areas. This will in- 
clude assistance to areas to which we have already 
undertaken commitments, such as our military as- 
sistance program to Greece and Turkey. 

I cannot at this time give a figure, a range of 
figures, or an informed guess, of what the cost of 
the program will be for either the North Atlantic 
pact countries or for other areas. That matter is 
now being consideied jointly with the Bureau of 
the Budget and will be submitted to the President. 
When the President has made his review I will 
then be in a position to make the figure known to 
the Congress and the people of the United States. 



' Pre.sontcd to the Dep.irtment of State by the Liixeni- 
bouFK Minister, Hu?ues Le Gallais. as ropresontative of 
his Foreipn Mini.ster, Joseph I'ccli. Cliaiiiiian of llic Con- 
sultative ComniittPe of the Brussels Treaty Powers. The 
ComniittPe consists of the five Forcifin Ministers. 



Exchange of Communications Between the Brussels 
Treaty Powers and the United States 

Rtqutit from Brusaela Treaty Powers to the 
United States Government for Military Assist- 
ance ' 

April 5, 19 1(9 

1. Since the signature of the Brussels Treaty 
the five Governments [United Kingdom, France, 
Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg] have had 
under consideration a common defence pro- 
gi-amme. Convinced of the necessity for such a 
programme, they believe that its formulation and 
application must be based on entire solidarity be- 
tween them. They have reached the conclusion 
that if this defence programme is to be effective 
the material assistance of the United States Gov- 
ernment is essential. The principles on which the 
programme should be based are set out in the fol- 
lowing paragraphs. 

2. The main principles would be self-help, mu- 
tual aid, and common action in defence against an 
armed attack. The immediate objective is the 
achievement of arrangements for collective self- 
defence between the Brussels Treaty Powers 
within the terms of the Charter of the United 
Nations. The programme would be considered 
as a further step in the development of Western 
European security in the spirit of the statement 
made by President Truman to Congress on March 
17. 11)48, the day of the signature of the Brussels 
Treat}'. It would be in accordance with the gen- 
eral objective of Article Z of the North Atlantic 
Pact, and would result in each Party, consistent 
with its situation and resources, contributing in 
the most effective form such mutual aid as could 
reasonably be expected of it. It would also be in 
accordance with the principles expressed in the 
Resolution of the Senate of the United States of 
June 11,1948. 

3. The military strength of the participating 
Powers should be developed without endangering 
economic recovery and the attainment of economic 
viability, which should accordingly have priority. 

4. In apjilying these general principles of a 
common defence programme the signatories of the 
Brussels Treaty attach importance to the follow- 
ing points: 

A. The armed forces of the European partici- 
pating countries should be developed on a co- 
ordinated basis in order that in the event of aggres- 
sion they can operate in accordance with a common 
strategic plan. 

B. The)' should be integrated so as to give 
the maximum efficiency with the minimum neces- 
sary expenditure of manpower, money, and 
materials. 

C. Increased military effort, including in- 
creased arms production, should be consistent with 
economic objectives and the maintenance of 
economic viability. Additional local currency 



494 



Department of State Bulletin 



costs should be met from non-inflationary sources. 
D. Arrangements concerning the transfer of 
military equipment and supplies for such produc- 
tion among the European participating countries 
should permit transfer, in so far as possible, with- 
out regard to foreign exchange problems and with- 
out clisrupting the intra-European payment 
scheme. 

5. In order to carry out a common defence pro- 
gramme on the basis of the above principles, there 
IS urgent need for United States material and 
financial assistance. The Signatories of the Brus- 
sels Treaty will therefore be glad to learn whether 
the United States Government is prepared to pro- 
vide this assistance to them. 

6. In the event of a favourable reply in relation 
to tlie above request, a detailed statement of the 
specific needs of the signatories of the Brussels 
Treaty for the year 1949/1950 will be transmitted 
to the United States Government at the earliest 
possible date. 



Reply of the United States Government to the 
'•"Request from the Brussels Treaty Poioers to 
the United States Government for Military 
Assistance^'' dated April 5, 19^9 ^ 

April 6, 1949 

1. The Government of the United States refers 
to the memorandum dated April 5, 1919 from the 
Brussels Treaty Powers, which inquires whether 
the United States will provide military assistance 
in the form of military equipment and financial 
aid to tlie Brussels Treaty Powers and which sets 
forth the principles on which such request is made. 

2. The Executive Brancli of the United States 
Government is prepared to recommend to the 
United States Congress that the United States 
provide military assistance to countries signatory 
to the Brussels Treaty, in order to assist them to 
meet the materiel requirements of their defense 
program. Such assistance would be extended in 
recognition of the principle of self-help and mutual 
aid contained in the Atlantic Pact, under which 
Pact members will extend to each other such re- 
ciprocal assistance as each country can reasonably 
be expected to contribute, consistent with its geo- 
graphic location and resources, and in the form in 
which each can most effectively furnish such as- 
sistance. 

3. It will be requested of the Congress that such 
assistance be in the form of military equipment 
from the United States required by their common 
defense program and the provision of some finan- 
cial assistance for increased military efforts on 
their part required by such defense program. It 
will be understood that the allocation of this ma- 
teriel and financial assistance will be effected by 
common agreement between the Brussels Treaty 
Powers and the United States. 

4. The United States Government will accord- 



ingly appreciate receiving as soon as possible the 
detailed statement of the specific needs of the 
signatories of the Brussels Treaty for the year 
1949-50 as proposed in paragraph (6) of the re- 
quest from the Brussels Treaty Powers. 

Exchange of Communications Between the 
Governments of Denmark and the U. S. 

April 7, 19Jfi 

On March 14th. 1949, the Danish Foreign Minis- 
ter submitted to the Department of State lists of 
the items of military equipment which in the 
opinion of the Danish Government is urgently 
needed at the present time to strengthen its ability 
to defend the country against aggression. 

In requesting military assistance from the 
United States, the Danish Government realizes 
that such aid by the United States would be ex- 
tended in recognition of the principle of self-help 
and mutual aid contained in the North Atlantic 
Treaty, signed in Washington on April 4th, 1949, 
under which Treaty members will extend to each 
other such reciprocal assistance as each can reason- 
ably be expected to contribute, consistent with its 
geogi'aphic location and resources, and in the form 
in which each can most effectively render such 
assistance. On its side, the Danish Government 
is ready to provide to members of the North Atlan- 
tic Treaty, in recognition of the principle of self- 
help and mutual aid contained in the Treaty, such 
reciprocal assistance as Denmark can reasonably 
be expected to contribute, consistent with its geo- 
graphic location and resources and in the form in 
which it can most effectively render such assistance. 

Denmark is willing to increase its military effort 
including production insofar as this is possible 
without endangering its economic recoverj' and 
stability which shoidd have priority. It will, how- 
ever, need assistance from the United States to 
help it meet the dollar costs involved in increased 
production. 

The Danish Government hopes that the United 
States Government will be prepared to extend 
military aid to Denmark in accordance with the 
above principles and would greatly appreciate to 
learn the views of the United States Government 
with regard to the scope and character of the con- 
templated assistance. 



Ajml 7, 1949 

Keference is made to the Memorandum of the 
Danish Embassy of Api'il 7, 1949, requesting the 
views of the United States Government with re- 
spect to the provision, of militai'y assistance to the 
Danish Government. 

The Executive Branch of the United States Gov- 
ernment is prepared to recommend to the United 

■ Presented to the Luxembourg Minister, Hugues Le 
Gallais, on behalf of tlie United States Government. 



April 17, 7949 



States Conp^ress that the United States provide 
military assistance to the Government of Dennuirk 
in order to assist it to meet the materiel require- 
ments of its defense program. It will be requested 
of the Congress that such assistance be in the form 
of military equipment from the United States 
required by Denmark's defense program and the 
provision of some financial assistance for increased 
military production on Denmark's part required 
by its defense program. Such assistance would 
be extended in recognition of the principle of 
self-help and mutual aid contained in the Atlantic 
Pact. 

It is understood that the information previously 
made available to the United States Government 
by the Government of Denmark concerning its re- 
quirements for military assistance remains un- 
changed. 

Exchange of Notes Between the Governments 
of Italy and the U. S. 

April 6, 194.9 

The Italian Ambassador presents his compli- 
ments to the Honorable tlie Secretary of State and 
has the honor to refer to the steps previously taken 
by the Italian Government which emphasized to 
the United States Government the urgent need 
of some items of military equipment for the 
strengthening of the Italian Armed Forces. With 
reference thereto, the Italian Ambassador has the 
honor to stress that, following the signature by 
Italy of the Atlantic Pact, and in view of the 
obligations ensuing from the participation of Italy 
in such treaty, the need for military assistance 
continues to be very urgent at the present time if 
the Italian military establishment is to be put in 
a position to resist effectively aggi-ession. 

Upon entering into the North Atlantic Pact, 
the Italian Goverimient is aware that, in order 
fully to achieve the objectives of this treaty, Italy 
must separately and jointly with the other partici- 
pants maintain and develop its individual and col- 
lective capacity to resist armed attack by means 
of continuous and effective self-help and mutual 
aid. 

Wliile the Italian Ambassador reiterates the 
need for military assistance from the United 
States, he wishes to emphasize that the Italian 
Government realizes that any aid coming from 
the Government of the United States would be 
extended in recognition of the principle set up 
above, under which prospective Pact members will 
extend to each other such reciprocal assistance as 
each country can be expected to contribute, con- 
sistent with its geogi'aphic location and resources, 
and in the form in which each country can most 
effectively furnish such assistance. In relation 
thereto the Italian Ambassador wishes also to 
stress, under instructions from his Government, 



that in turn Italy is ready to provide to members 
of the Atlantic Pact such reciprocal assistance as 
it can reasonably be expected to contribute, con- 
sistent with its geographic location and resources 
and in the form in which it can most effectively 
furnish such assistance. 

Tlie Italian Ambassador has also been instructed 
to point out that the Italian Government realizes 
that, since Italy is engaged in the effort of achiev- 
ing economic i-ccovery through the assistance gen- 
erously granted by the American Government in 
the framework of the European Recovery Pro- 
gram, it would be harmful to increase military 
production to such an extent as to endanger the 
successful pursuance of economic recovery. 

An increase in militarj' production in Italy, 
wliich would derive from tlie program of self- 
help and mutual aid, and which Italy might plan 
for the furtherance of the aims of the North At- 
lantic Pact, must therefore be contained within 
such limits as to allow the successful prosecution 
of the progi'am of economic recovery and the 
maintenance of economic viability. Tlie Italian 
Government realizes in fact that economic recovery 
contributes strongly to the re-creation of confidence 
and hope in Europe and that a program of military 
aid must be pursued in such a manner as to facili- 
tate the achievement of the goals of the European 
Recovery Program adding another stone to the 
structure of European recovery. Therefore, 
while Italy will devote its energies to increasing 
its ability to I'esist armed attack and thus contrib- 
ute to European stability, the Italian Government 
will see that these programs will not affect the 
result of the European Recovery Program in Italy. 
In this respect the Italian Ambassador wishes 
also to stress that, in view of its shortage of dol- 
lars, the Italian Government, in planning said in- 
crease of military production in Italy, will need 
some assistance from the United States in order 
to help meet the dollar costs which will be involved 
in this new production. While the Italian Gov- 
ernment will deeply appreciate any aid of this 
kind that the United States Government will ex- 
tend, it will see to it that the cost of the new mili- 
tary production in local currency be met from 
non-inflationary sources. 

The Italian Ambassador expresses the hope 
that the United States, in view of the principles 
set up in the North Atlantic Pact, will be pre- 
pared to extend military aid in such a manner as 
to facilitate the participation of Italy in such 
a program. 

The Italian Ambassador will greatly appreciate 
receiving at the earliest convenience any informa- 
tion that the United States will kindly give on its 
views as to the assistance that it is prepared to 
extend, and has the honor to thank for the Hon- 
orable Secretary of State's interest in the matter. 

Department of State Bulletin 



April 7, 1949 
The Secretary of State presents his compliments 
to His Excellency the Ambassador of Italy and has 
the honor to refer to his note requesting this Gov- 
ernment's views concerning the provision of mili- 
tary assistance to the Government of Italy. 

The Executive Branch of the United States Gov- 
ernment is prepared to recommend to the United 
States Congress that the United States provide mil- 
itary assistance to the Government of Italy in order 
to assist it to meet the material requirements of its 
defense program. It will be requested of the Con- 
gress that such assistance be in the form of mili- 
tary equipment from the United States required 
by Italy's defense program and the provision of 
some financial assistance for increased military 
production on Italy's part required by its defense 
program. Such assistance would be extended in 
recognition of the principle of self-help and mu- 
tual aid contained in the Atlantic Pact. 

In connection with its recommendations to the 
Congress, the United States Government will avail 
itself of the information concerning items of_mil- 
itary equipment urgently needed for the strength- 
ening of the Italian armed forces which were ear- 
lier emphasized by the Italian Government, and 
is ready to continue its consultation with the Ital- 
ian Government in order to examine any relevant 
information in further detail. 

Exchange of Communications Between the 
Governments of Norway and the U. S. 

Ap-ril 7, 1949 
After the liberation in May, 1945, the Norwegian 
people actively concentrated its efforts upon the 
reconstruction of the country, and has taken upon 
itself substantial burdens and sacrifices to secure 
its future. 

The bitter experiences suffered by the people 
during the war, its urge to defend free democracy 
and its appreciation of the exposed geographical 
position of the country, have convinced the over- 
whelming majority of the people of the necessity 
to allocate an important share of the country's 
limited resources to the rehabilitation of Norwe- 
gian defense. During the three years from 1946- 
1949 Norway's Storting appropriated a total of 
1.100 million kroner for military purposes. 

The large investments in the economy of the 
country necessary to achieve a balanced foreign 
exchange position, and the large investments in 
defense establisliments inevitably caused a strain 
on the economic resources of the country, as well as 
on its finances. Norwegian economists unani- 
mously agi-ee that additional allocations for mili- 
tary purposes would with all probability impede 
economic recovery and endanger economic stabil- 
ity, which the country has hitherto been able to 
maintain. 



The Norwegian Government has arrived at the 
conclusion that it will not be possible to finance 
the establishment of an adequate defense by draw- 
ing solely upon domestic resources. The Norwe- 
gian Government has therefore submitted to the 
Government of the United States a list of require- 
ments for the Norwegian defense necessary for the 
implementation of plans for the period up to July 
1, 1950. It is also endeavoring to determine how 
Norwegian military production may be increased 
if financial assistance should be provided. 

The Norwegian request has been made in recog- 
nition of the principle of self-help and mutual aid 
contained in the North Atlantic Treaty in accord- 
ance with which the members will undertake to ex- 
tend such reciprocal assistance as each country can 
reasonably be expected to contribute consistent 
with its resources and geographical location, with 
due regard to the requirements of economic recov- 
ery, and in the form in which it can most effec- 
tively furnish it. 

The Norwegian Government recognizes its obli- 
gations in accordance with this principle, while 
noting that the principle of self-help and mutual 
aid is not inconsistent with the foreign policy pur- 
sued by the Norwegian Government. 

Wliile referring to what has been outlined above 
concerning defense steps being undertaken and 
recognizing that Norway must be prepared, in own 
and mutual interest, to increase her military 
capacity and production, the Norwegian Govern- 
ment assumes that first priority should be given 
to economic recovery and the maintenance of 
economic stability. 

The Norwegian Govermnent hopes that the 
United States will be prepared to extend to Nor- 
way military aid in accordance with the above 
principles. The views of the United States Gov- 
ernment as to the assistance it is prepared to ex- 
tend, will be welcomed. 



April 7, 1949 
Reference is made to the Aide-Memoire of the 
Norwegian Embassy, dated April 7, 1949 asking 
the views of the United States Government with 
respect to the provision of military assistance. 

The Executive Branch of the United States 
Government is prepared to recommend to the 
United States Congress that the United States 
provide military assistance to the Government of 
Norway in order to assist it to meet the materiel 
requirements of its defense program. It will be 
requested of the Congress that such assistance be 
in the form of military equipment from the United 
States required by Norway's defense program and 
the provision of some financial assistance for in- 
creased military production on Norway's part 
which may be required by its defense program. 
Such assistance would be extended in recognition 
of the principle of self-help and mutual aid con- 
tained in the Atlantic Pact. 



April 17, 1949 



It is understood that the information previously 
made available to the United States Government 
by the Government of Norway concerning its re- 
quirements for military assistance remains 
unchaiiiied. 



Rules for Emergency Aid Grants to 
Chinese Students 

[Released to the press April 7] 

Rules under which emergency aid will be ren- 
dered to certain Chinese students in the United 
States from the $500,000 fund recently made avail- 
able for this purpose by tlie State Department in 
cooperation with EGA, were announced on April 
2 by the Department of State. 

Grants will be made to Chinese students in ur- 
gent need wIk) are seniors or graduate students in 
accredited U.S. colleges or universities and who 
are specializing in certain technical and scientific 
fields. 

These grants, the Department announced, will 
cover tuition, maintenance, and certain other ex- 
penses. Amounts of the grants will be limited to 
the sum necessary to enable the recipient (a) to 
achieve an immediate and approved educational 
objective, (b) to return to China and make his 
knowledge and skill available in his own country'. 

The basic principles and objectives of this emer- 
gency program were reviewed and approved by the 
United States Advisory Commission on Educa- 
tional Exchange, a statutory Commission estab- 
lislied for the purpose of formulating and recom- 
mending educational exchange programs and 
policies to the Secretary of State. 

Qualifications 

1. The student must be a citizen of the Republic 
of China. 

2. The student must have been engaged in a 
course of study as of the fall semester 1948. 

3. (a) He must be engaged in certain technical 
fields of study. 

(b) He cannot be enrolled in such schools as 
fine arts; such courses as history, American law 
or literature, and similar courses. 

4. He must be enrolled in an accredited univer- 
sity or college. 

5. He must be in need of financial assistance. 

6. He must sign a pledge to return to China, 
where he can apply his skills when his education is 
finished. 

Procedures 

1. Tlie President of each Universitj- where eli- 
gible Cliinese students are enrolled will appoint an 
official representative. 

2. The Department of State will send this of- 
ficial the application blanks, and letter of refer- 
ence forms. 



3. The student fills in the form and hands it to 
the University official, who certifies to its accuracy, 
and returns it to the Department of State. 

4. The letters of reference will be sent by the 
authors directly to the Department of State. The 
references cannot be students, and must be ap- 
proved by the University representative. 

5. The Department determines the amount and 
conditions of the award and notifies the student 
and the University official. 

Re>^ponsihiUty of the University 

1. To appoint an official representative who 
will : 

(a) Issue application forms. 

(b) Advise the student. 

(c) Approve references. 

(d) Certify to accuracy of the application. 
{e) Receive notification of award. 

(/) Notify the Department immediately when 
tlie student severs his relationship with the 
University. 

(17) Notify the Department when the student 
is doing imsatisfactorj- work. 

(A.) Give a general report on all award students 
at the end of quarters and semesters, and 
at the end of the academic year. 

I-ntragovernmental Working Committee 

This Committee will consist of three persons, a 
representative of the Department of State, of the 
United States Office of Education, and of ECA, 
with the Chairman from the Department of State. 
This will be a focal point where ECA can estab- 
lish criteria consonant with its legislative author- 
ity, and the United States Office of Education will 
make available its specialized knowledge and re- 
sources in education. This Committee will meet 
at regular intervals and will advise concerning 
policy. 

The Advisoty Committee on Emergency Aid to 
Chinese Students 

This Committee will consist of representatives 
from interested private organizations, and two or 
three cul hoc members from private life who will 
.serve at the pleasure of the appointing officer. 
This Committee will be appointed by the Depart- 
ment of State, and will meet within 30 days of the 
formal inauguration of the program to review, 
comment, and advise. Subsequent meetings will 
be called at the pleasure of the appointing officer. 

Application 

1. Students who are in college must apply 
through the University official. 

2. College and University officials and others 
interested may direct correspondence to: Division 
of Exchange of Persons, Department of State, 
Washington 25, D.C. 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



U.S., U.K., and France Reach Agreement on All Questions 
Relating to Germany ^ 



COMMUNIQUE 



The Foreign Ministers of the United States, 
United Kingdom, and France have discussed in 
Washington the whole range of issues now pend- 
ing in connection with Germany and have arrived 
at complete agreement. 

The text of an occupation statute in a new and 
simpler form has been approved and is being trans- 
mitted to the German Parliamentary Council at 
Bonn. Agreement was reached on the basic prin- 
ciples to govern the exercise of Allied powers and 
responsibilities and also the tripartite Allied con- 
trol machinery. The Foreign Ministers confirmed 
and approved agreements on the subject of plant 
dismantling, prohibited and restricted industries, 
and the establishment of an International Ruhr 
Authority, all of which were recently negotiated 
in London. 

The occupation statute will define the powers 
to be retained by the occupation authorities upon 
the establishment of the German Federal Republic 
and set forth basic procedures for the operation of 
Allied supervision. Subject only to the limitations 
of the statute, the German Federal State and the 
participating Laender will have full legislative, 
executive, and judicial powers, in accordance with 
the basic law and with their respective constitu- 
tions. The statute aims to permit the German 
people to exercise democratic self-government. 
Provision is made for a review of the terms of the 
statute after a year in force. 

With the establishment of the German Federal 
Republic, there will be a marked change in the 
oi'ganization to carry out occupation responsi- 
bilities. Military Government as such will be ter- 
minated, and the functions of the Allied author- 
ities will become mainly supervisory. Each of the 
Allied establishments in Germany will come under 
the direction of a High Commissioner, aside from 
the occupation forces which will remain headed 
by military commanders. The three High Com- 
missioners together will constitute an Allied High 
Commission, which will be the supreme Allied 
agency of control. In order to permit the German 
Federal Republic to exercise increased respon- 
sibility for domestic affairs and to reduce the 
burden of occupation costs, staff personnel shall 
be kept to a minimum. 

The German Government authorities will be at 
liberty to take administrative and legislative ac- 
tion, and such action will have validity if not dis- 



approved by Allied authorities. There will be 
certain limited fields in which the Allies will re- 
serve the right to take direct action themselves or 
to direct German authorities to take action. How- 
ever, these fields will be limited, and aside from 
security matters, the exercise of direct powers by 
the Allies is regarded in many instances as self- 
liquidating in nature. 

It was agreed that a major objective of the three 
Allied Governments was to encourage and facili- 
tate the closest integration, on a mutually benefi- 
cial basis, of the German people under a demo- 
cratic federal state within the framework of a 
European association. In this connection it is 
understood that the German Federal Republic 
will negotiate a separate bilateral ECA agreement 
with the United States and should participate as 
a full member in the Organization for European 
Economic Cooperation, thus becoming a respon- 
sible partner in the European Recovery Program. 

STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ACHESON 

As the communique indicates, the three West- 
ern Governments reached complete agreement on 
all the questions relating to Germany which have 
been under negotiation between them in both 
London and Berlin during the past few months. 
On plant dismantling and on prohibited and re- 
stricted industries, Ambassador Douglas suc- 
ceeded in obtaining agreement in London a few 
days before the talks in Washington began. These 
were extremely difiicult and complicated matters, 
and the understanding reached in London con- 
tributed greatly to the success of the discussions 
held here. 

The three Ministers confirmed and approved 
the agreements on plant dismantling and pro- 
hibited and restricted industries. With respect to 
dismantling, publication will be withheld pending 
notification to the Inter-Allied Reparations 
Agency at Brussels, which will be made in a few 
days. "We are awaiting confirmation of a defini- 
tive text by the Military Governors in Germany 
before publishing the results of the agreement 
on prohibited and restricted industries. 

The Ministers also gave formal approval to 
the statute published in London at the end of 
December last year for the setting up of an Inter- 

' Released to the press Apr. 8, 1949. 



April 17, 7949 



national Authority for the Ruhr. Steps will be 
taken immediately for the organization of this 
Authority. 

You will recall that intergovernmental discus- 
sions were started in London in January on the 
occupation statute for Western (iermany and on 
the principles which would govern an agreement 
on trizonal fusion. While considerable progress 
was made in London on both these subjects, no 
agreement had been reached prior to the arrival 
here of the French and British Foreign Minis- 
ters. In our AVashington discussions, we were 
able to clear up all outstanding points and suc- 
ceeded in drafting a much simpler occupation 
statute, which will be shortly transmitted to the 
Parliamentary Council at Bonn for the latters 
information in the formulation of the basic law. 
We also agreed on basic provisions for tlie estab- 
lishment of an Allied High Commission and on 
the basic principles which will be embodied in 
trizonal fusion. A more detailed and technical 
trizonal fusion agreement will have to be con- 
cluded, as was done in the case of the bizonal 
fusion agreement with the British. The settle- 
ment of the princii)al points now clears the way 
for the drafting of tliis formal agreement. Com- 
plete trizonal fusion will follow^ with the estab- 
lishment of the German Federal Government. 

MESSAGE TO THE MILITARY GOVERNORS 

The Foreign Ministers of the United States, 
United Kingdom, and France take the occasion 
of their meeting in Washington for the discussion 
of German matters to extend jointly their sincere 
appreciation to their Military Governors for the 
outstanding manner in which they have per- 
formed their missions in the last trying yeai-s. 

The Ministers, speaking in behalf of their Gov- 
ernments, desire to express their admiration of 
the able and devoted manner in which the three 
Commanders-in-Chief have accomplished the im- 
mense task that has confronted them in Germany. 
The Commanders-in-Chief have assumed for their 
Governments the burden of bringing together the 
remnants of a Germany which war and chaos had 
reduced to a cauldron of misery and where all 
organized government had been destroyed. In 
these four j^ears the task of reconstruction and 
pacification has proceeded without a single inci- 
dent of serious import. This is an unparallelcil 
accomplishment. 

The firm foundation laid by the Military Gov- 
ernors has made possible the agreement reached 
in Washington by tlie Foreign IMinisters on mat- 
ters connected with Germany. They are confi- 
dent that the pioneer work of these soldier-states- 
men will now lead on to the evolution of a demo- 
cratic and peaceful Germany. 



TEXT OF OCCUPATION STATUTE 

In tlie exorcise of the supreuu' autliority which 
is retained by the Govei-iiments of France, the 
United States and the United Kingdom. 

AVe. Geneijal Pierre Koenig, Military Governor 
and Commander-in-Chief of the French Zone of 
Germany, 

General Lucius D. Clay, Military Governor 
and Commander-in-Chief of the United States 
Zone of Germany, and 

General Sir Brian Hubert Robertson, Mil- 
itary Governor and Conimander-in-Chief of the 
British Zone of Germany, 

Do HERI.BT JOINTLY PROCXu\IM THE FOLLOWING 

ocx"UP.\TioN statute: 

1. During the period in which it is necessary 
tliat the occupation continue, the Governments of 
France, the United States and the United King- 
dom desire and intend that the German people 
shall enjoy self-govermnent to the maximum pos- 
sible degree consistent with such occupation. The 
Federal State and the participating Laender shall 
have, subject only to the limitations in this Instru- 
ment, full legislative, executive and judicial pow- 
ers in accordance with the Basic Law and with 
their respective constitutions. 

2. In order to ensure the accomplishment of the 
basic purposes of the occupation, powers in the 
following fields are specifically reserved, includ- 
ing the right to request and verify information and 
statistics needed by the occupation authorities: 

(a) disarmament and demilitarization, includ- 
ing related fields of scientific research, prohibitions 
and restrictions on industry and civil aviation; 

(6) controls in regard to the Ruhr, restitution, 
reparations, decartelization, deconcentration, non- 
discriminaticm in trade mattei-s, foreign interests 
in Germany and claims against Germany; 

(c) foreign affairs, including international 
agreements made by or on behalf of Germany; 

(d) displaced pereons and the admission of 
refugees ; 

(e) protection, prestige, and security of Allied 
forces, dependents, employees, and representatives, 
their inimuiiities and satisfaction of occupation 
costs and their other requirements; 

(/) respect for the Basic Law and the Land 
constitutions; 

(fj) control over foreign trade and exchange; 

(/() control over internal action, only to the 
niiniinum extent necessary to ensure use of funds, 
food and oilier supplies in such manner as to re- 
duce to a minimum the need for external assistance 
to Germany; 

(/) control of the care and treatment in Ger- 
man prisons of persons charged before or sen- 
tenced by the courts or tribunals of the occupying 
powers or occupation authorities; over the carrj'- 
ing out of sentences imposed on them; and over 
questions of amnesty, pardon or release in relation 
to them. 

Department of State Bulletin 



3. It is the hope and expectation of the Gov- 
ernments of France, the United States and the 
United Kingdom that the occupation authorities 
will not have occasion to take action in fields other 
than those specifically reserved above. Tlie oc- 
cupation authorities, however, reserve the right, 
acting under instructions of their Governments, 
to resume, in whole or in part, the exercise of full 
authority if they consider that to do so is essen- 
tial to security or to preserve democratic govern- 
ment in Germany or in pursuance of the inter- 
national obligations of their governments. Before 
so doing, they will formally advise the appropri- 
ate German authorities of their decision and of 
the reasons therefor. 

4. The German Federal Government and the 
governments of the Laender shall have the power, 
after due notification to the occupation authorities, 
to legislate and act in the fields reserved to these 
authorities, except as the occupation authorities 
otherwise specifically direct, or as such legislation 
or action would be inconsistent with decisions or 
actions taken by the occupation authorities 
themselves. 

5. Any amendment of the Basic Law will re- 
quire the express approval of the occupation au- 
thorities before becoming effective. Land consti- 
tutions, amendments thereof, all other legislation, 
and any agreements made between the Federal 
State and foreign governments, will become ef- 
fective twenty-one days after official receipt by 
the occupation authorities unless previously dis- 
approved by them, provisionally or finally. The 
occupation authorities will not disapprove legis- 
lation unless in their opinion it is inconsistent 
with the Basic Law, a Land Constitution, legis- 
lation or other directives of the occupation author- 
ities tliemselves or the provisions of this Instru- 
ment, or unless it constitutes a grave threat to the 
basic purposes of the occupation. 

6. Subject only to the requirements of their se- 
curity, the occupation authorities guarantee that 
all agencies of the occupation will respect the civil 
rights of every person to be protected against 
arbitrary arrest, search or seizure; to be repre- 
sented by counsel; to be admitted to bail as cir- 
cumstances warrant; to communicate with rela- 
tives; and to have a fair and prompt trial. 

7. Legislation of the occupation authorities 
enacted before the effective date of the Basic Law 
shall remain in force until repealed or amended 
by the occupation authorities in accordance with 
the following provisions: 

(a) legislation inconsistent with the foregoing 
will be repealed or amended to make it consistent 
herewith ; 

(6) legislation based upon the reserved powers, 
referred to in paragraph 2 above, will be codified ; 

(c) legislation not referred to in (a) and (b) 
will be repealed by the occupation authorities on 
request fi-om appropriate German authorities. 



8. Any action shall be deemed to be the act of 
the occupation authorities under the powers herein 
reserved, and effective as such under this Instru- 
ment, when taken or evidenced in any manner 
provided by any agreement between them. The 
occupation authorities may in their discretion ef- 
fectuate their decisions either directly or through 
instructions to the appi'opriate German author- 
ities. 

9. After 12 months and in any event within 18 
months of the effective date of this Instrument 
the occupying powers will undertake a review of 
its provisions in the light of experience with its 
operation and with a view to extending the juris- 
diction of the German authorities in the legisla- 
tive, executive and judicial fields. 



Absentee-Owned Properties in U.S. Zone 
in Germany To Be Returned 

[Keleased to the press by OMGUS in Berlin March 26] 

Certain properties having an individual value of 
DM 10,000 or less, located in the U.S. area of con- 
trol of Germany which are presently under prop- 
erty control custody of Military Government and 
belong to absentee owners will be released after 
May 15, 1949, to the former custodians, who man- 
aged the property at the time it was taken into 
custody by Military Government, providing such 
custodians are able to give evidence that they 
presently retain the confidence of the alien owners. 
Property Division of OMGUS announced on 
March 26. The properties affected are further 
limited to those which were taken into control by 
Military Government solely by reason of absentee 
ownership. 

Nearly 8,000 pieces of property with a total 
value approximating RM 70,000,000 are involved. 
The absentee owners will be notified of the action 
to be taken relative to their property. If the 
property owner chooses, he may nominate his own 
agent to accept release of the property before May 
15, 1949. In the event, however, that the owner 
does not take this opportunity to name his own 
agent. Military Government will thereafter release 
the property to the former custodian, providing 
certain conditions are met, and that he produces 
evidence to show that he is still acceptable to the 
owner. 

Each agent or close relative of an absentee 
owner, in order to reassume responsibility for such 
properties he formerly administered in the U.S. 
area of control, will be required to sign a certificate 
acknowledging receipt of the property and agree- 
ing to notify his principal that the property will 
nevertheless remain subject to the provisions of 
Military Government Law No. 52, as well as all 
other applicable laws, ordinances, directives, 
orders, or regulations of Military Government. 
The properties will thus remain subject to the 



April 17, 1949 



Military Govornment policy concerning morato- 
rium oil foreign investments; and unless the owner 
or his agent is granted a special license, he may 
not make other than ordinaiy business expendi- 
tures in connection with the released property. 

The Property Division of OMGUS announced 
that this step is being taken in pursuance of the 
policy of Military Government to release as 
quickly as possible" the properties of all absentee 
owners, and to withdraw from the field of prop- 
erty control. It is anticipated that this step will 
result in the release of approximately 80 percent 
of the number of all absentee-ownecl properties 
still under Military Government property control 
custody in the U.S. area of control, altliough the 
value of tliesc ])r()i)erties constitutes only 10 per- 
cent of the value of controlled absentee-owned 
properties. 

U.S. Official Interviews American Soldiers 
Held Prisoners in Czechoslovakia 

[Released to the press April fi] 

Capt. Donald G. McNamara, assistant military 
attache, and Consul Carroll C. Parry, accom- 
panied by two representatives of the Czechoslovak 
Government yesterday afternoon visited the two 
soldiers, George R. Jones and Clarence R. Hill, 
at Bory prison near Pilsen. The two men were 
interviewed separately in the presence of the fore- 
going persons as well as the prison warden and an 
interpreter. 

The men admit having voluntarily entered 
Czechoslovakia about midnight on December 8, 
1948, in uniform and about .5 : 00 a. m. the follow- 
ing day were arrested while asleep in a switch 
hotise on the railway near tlie border. They weri' 
confined at several places and were tried by a court 
in Praha which sentenced them to twelve (Hill) 
and ten years (Jones). The men appeared to be 
in good health. They are now confined at Bory 
prison near Pilsen. In the light of the interview, 
the Embassy is asking the Foreign Office for fur- 
ther information. 



Time Extended for Patent Applications in 
Japan 

[Released to the press March 20] 

The Department of State announced on March 
29 the issuance by the United States Government 
of an interim directive to the Supreme Com- 
mander for the Allied Powers regarding the ex- 
tension of time for exorcising the right of priority 
for patent applications in Jajian. The Depart- 
ment pointed out that this interim directive is 
complementary to a recent policy decision of the 
Far Eastern Commission regarding patents, util- 



ity models, and designs in Japan. Because the 
Commission did not take action on the urgent mat- 
ter of extension of priority rights, this Govern- 
ment has acted in accordance with the authority 
granted it in paragraph III, 3 of the terms of 
reference of the Far Eastern Commission which 
provides : 

The Uiiiteil States Goveninieiit may issue Interim di- 
rectives to the Supreme Commander pending action by 
the Commission whenever urgent matters arise not covered 
by policies already formulated by the Ct)mmission: pro- 
vided that any directives dealing with fundamental 
changes in the Japanese constitutional structure or In 
the regime of control, or dealing with a change in the 
.Japanese Government as a whole will be issued only fol- 
lowing consultation and following the attainment of agree- 
ment in the Far Eastern Commission. 

The Department explained that the urgency for 
a policy on priority for patent applications in 
Japan is accentuated by the long period which has 
elapsed since it was last possible for nationals of 
countries at war with .Japan to file i)atent applica- 
tions in .Japan. Under normal circumstances, per- 
sons wjio had filed in any country a first applica- 
tion for a patent and wished to have comparable 
protection in Japan would have filed an applica- 
tion there within a year in order to take advantage 
of the priority right derived from the previous 
first filing. Bv extending the priority period, the 
interim directive affords protection to persons who 
have not been able to exercise their priority rights 
in Japan because of the war. The interim direc- 
tive also provides that third parties who have, 
before the filing of the application in Japan, hona 
fide manufactured, used, sold, or leased the sub- 
ject matter of any Japanese patent obtained with 
such priorities shall be given the usual protection 
from liability for infringement. 

The text of the interim directive, which has 
been issued to the Supreme Commander for the 
Allied Powers and will be filed with the Far 
Eastern Commission, is as follows: 

Nationals of countries at war with Japan who had duly 
filed in any country the first application for a patent not 
earlier than twelve months before the effective date of 
loss of right to file patent applications in Japan should be 
entitled, within twelve months after the date, as deter- 
mined by the Supreme Commander, on which such Govern- 
ments and nations are again p<^rmitted to apply for patents 
directly to the Japanese Patent Office and to obtain legal 
services necessary for this purpose, to apply for corre- 
spondini; rights in Japan with a right of priority based 
upon the previous first filing of the application. Third 
parties who have hona fide manufactured, used, sold or 
leased the subject matter of any Japanese patent obtained 
with this priority should not be liable fur infringement on 
a<'ciiunt of sucli use Init should be enabled to continue such 
use after the filing of the application only under the terms 
of ,'1 nonexclusive license which the patent owner should 
lie rcMpiired to grant on terms providing for reasonable 
royalties ;is fixed liy an agency to be authorized to malce 
such determinations. Payment of such royalties should 
he subject to applicable financial regulations in effect in 
Japan at the time they are paid. 



Department ot State Bulletin 



Termination of Foreign Liquidation 
Commission 

[Released to the press March 24] 

The Department of State announced on March 
24 that the Office of the Foreign Liquidation Com- 
missioner (FLC) has notified its remaining over- 
seas offices of closing dates and that the liquidation 
of the entire organization will be effected by June 
30, 1949. 

The agency has already disposed of approxi- 
mately $10,300,000,000 (at procurement cost) of 
war surplus located in foreign areas. Approxi- 
mately $2,000,000,000, or about 20 percent of pro- 
curement cost, was realized for the United States 
from these sales. A large percentage of the sur- 
plus consisted of used items or material which 
would require conversion from military to civilian 
use. Much of the surplus was located in out-of- 
the-way places far from a favorable market. The 
surplus consisted of about 4,000,000 types of items 
of almost eveiy conceivable type of material rang- 
ing from mules to entire naval yards. 

The FLC still has on hand approximately $13,- 
000,000 (at procurement cost) of noncombat war 
surplus consisting chiefly of returned lend-lease 
equipment, wrecked vessels, and related maritime 
items located at various Pacific islands. 

Field offices of the FLC were notified of their 
termination dates as follows : Central Field Com- 
missioner for Europe, at Paris, May 15, 1949 ; Cen- 
tral Field Commissioner for Pacific Islands, Asia, 
and Australia, located at Manila, May 15; field 
representative for Australia and Southern Pacific, 
at Sydney, March 31; Field Commissioner for 
Marianas, Marshall-Gilbert ai-ea, at Guam, May 
15; and special representative for Latin America 
and the Antilles, at Balboa, March 31. 

Already closed are FLC field offices at New 
Delhi, for India and Pakistan; Cairo, for the 
Middle East; London, for the British Isles; Rome, 
for southern Europe and North Africa; Eio de 
Janeiro, for South America ; Shanghai, for China; 
and Canada and the North Atlantic field offices 
located in the Washington, D. C, Central Office. 

With the liquidation of the FLC on June 30, 
its residual functions not absorbed by the Depart- 
ment's permanent establishment will be trans- 



ferred to other Government agencies. The actual 
disposal of any remaining overseas surplus will 
be handled by the owning agencies, principally 
the Departments of the Army Air Force, and 
Navy, under an amendment to FLC regulation 8, 
which governs the foreign disposal operations 
under the Surplus Propei'ty Act of 1944. 

The predecessor of the Office of the Foreign 
Liquidation Commissioner was the Office of the 
Army-Navy Liquidation Commissioner, which 
began its existence in February 1945, under the 
control of the Surplus Property Board, which had 
been established by the Surplus Property Act. 
The functions and staff of this organization were 
transferred, effective October 20, 1945, to the juris- 
diction of the Department of State by executive 
order, and the agency was renamed the Office of 
the Foreign Liquidation Commissioner. 

Maj. Gen. Clyde L. Hyssong is the present 
Foreign Liquidation Commissioner. He succeeded 
Fred W. Ramsey. 

Aid to Ciiinese Students in the U.S. 

[Released to the press jointly with ECA March 30] 

An agreement has been reached between the 
Department of State and the Economic Coopera- 
tion Administration whereby $500,000 is being 
turned over to the Department by ECA for tem- 
porary aid to Chinese students in the United 
States in certain scientific and technical fields. 
Details concerning the administration of the fund 
are being worked out between ECA and the De- 
partment and will be announced in the near 
future. In the meantime, no one is presently au- 
thorized to receive applications for assistance 
under tliis program, which is undertaken follow- 
ing a request by the Government of China to 
ECA. 

This is an emergency program designed to en- 
able qualified Chinese students to achieve immedi- 
ate professional objectives in certain scientific and 
technical fields and to enable them to return to 
China as soon as possible to make use of the 
knowledge and skill acquired in the United States. 
Funds for this program will be made available 
from the appropriation for assistance to China 
under the China Aid Act of 1948. 



April 17, 1949 



^€yrUen/6/ 



Treaty Information 

Signing Ceremony of the North Atlantic 

Treaty: Page 

Program 471 

Remarks by Dean Acheson 471 

Remarks by Paul-Henri Spaak 472 

Remarks by L. B. Pearson 473 

Remarks by Gustav Rasmussen 474 

Remarks by Robert Schuman 474 

Remarks by Bjarni Benediktsson .... 475 

Remarks by Carlo Sforza 476 

Remarks by Joseph Bech 476 

Remarks by Dirk U. Stikker 477 

Remarks by Halvard Lange 478 

Remarks by Jos6 Caeiro Da Malta . . . 479 

Remarks by Ernest Bevin 480 

Address of the President of the United 

States 481 

The Atlantic Community and the United 
Nations. By Ambassador Philip C. 

Jessup 486 

Request for Military Assistance From Atlan- 
tic Pact Countries: 
Statement by Secretary Acheson .... 493 
E.xchange of Communications Between the 
Brussels Treaty Powers and the United 

States 494 

Exchange of Communications Between the 

Governments of Denmark and the U.S. . 495 
Exchange of Notes Between the Govern- 
ments of Italy and the U.S 496 

Exchange of Communications Between the 

Governments of Norway and the U.S. . 497 

The United Nations and Specialized 
Agencies 

Reconvening of the Third Session of the 
General As.sembly: 
Statement by Secretary Acheson .... 483 
Agenda 483 



Tlie United Nations and Specialized 

Agencies — Continued 

U.S. Views on Former Italian Colonies. 

Statement by John Foster Dulles . . . 
The Atlantic Community and the United 

Nations. Statement by Ambassador 

Philip C. Jessup 

Resolution on Trade Union Rights. Freedom 

of Association 

The United States in the United Nations . . 



484 



490 
491 



Occupation Matters 

U.S., U.K., and France Reach Agreement on 
All Questions Relating to Germany: 

Communique 499 

Statement by Secretary Acheson .... 499 
Message to the Military Governors . . . 500 

Text of Occupation Statute 500 

Absentee-Owned Properties in U.S. Zone in 

Germany To Be Returned 501 

Time Extended for Patent Applications in 

Jajian 502 

International Information and Cultural 
Affairs 

Rules for Emergency Aid Grants to Chinese 

Students 498 

.4id to Chinese Students in the U.S 503 

The Department 

Termination of Foreign Liquidation Commis- 
sion 503 



General Policy 

U.S. Official Interviews American Soldiers 
Held Prisoners in Czechoslovakia . . . 



502 




" •" ' ■'■'■■.■■','>. '•- ■ ;'■' ,"","''■ "' '4'"','. ', '"m-,,; ^ ■'■' '■'. ^ ' . ','."''»'J*W '''V' ■' • ■' -i r ■ ' 



K!W^i:'^5---:.3'. 



e^v^e^ zl!eh€(/)f^t^e^ /O^ t/i€(^ 



.^.^^'Mmy:^ 




U.S., U.K., AND FRANCE REACH AGREE- 
MENT ON GERMAN REPARATION 
PROGRAM 524 

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE 
TO THE PRESIDENT ON NORTH 
ATLANTIC TREATY 532 

THE INTERNATIONAL WHEAT AGREE- 
MENT OF 1949 • An Article by Edward G. 
Cale 507 



For complete contents see back cover 



Vol. XX, No. 512 
April 24, 1949 




I^M^^y^^^lftV* 



MAY 3 1949 




x/Ae zlJe^ut/yl^eTit /)£ !jia,le V^ LI JL 1 Cy L J. 1 X 



Vol. XX, No. 512 • I'lblication 3493 
April 24, 1949 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U. S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D. C. 

P RICE: 

62 issues, domestic $5, (orcipn $7.25 

Single copy, 15 cents 

The printing ot this publication has 

been apiroved by the Director of tbe 

Bureau ot the Budget (February 18, 1941I- 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Dep.vktmf.nt 
o? State Bullet;n as the source will be 
appreciated. 



Ths Department of State BULLETIN, 
a tceekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Division oj Publicationt, 
Office of Public Affairs, provides thm 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government trith information on 
developments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the trork of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includeM 
press releases on foreign policy issued 
by the While 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 tcell as special 
articles on various phases of inter- 
ruitional affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to ichich the 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, a* 
tcell as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



The International Wheat Agreement of 1949 



By EDWARD G. CALE 
Associate Chief, International Resources Division 



For the second year in succession the negotia- 
tions pliase of formulating an international wheat 
agreement has been successfully concluded. The 
general structure of the agi-eement and its essential 
features are the same as those of the agreement 
which was negotiated at the special session of the 
International Wheat Council held in Washington 
from January 28 until March 6, 1948, but never 
2)laced in effect.' The new agreement, like the 
1948 agreement, is a multilateral contract under 
which member exporting countries agree to supply 
specified quantities of wheat to member importing 
countries, if called upon to do so, at the maximum 
prices provided for in the agi-eement. Member 
impoitmg countries agree, conversely, to purchase 
specified quantities of wheat from member export- 
ing countries, if called upon to do so, at the mini- 
mum prices provided for in the agreement. As 
will be indicated, however, many of the terms of 
the 1949 agreement are different from those of the 
1948 agreement. 

The 1948 wheat agreement provided for the con- 
vening, in Washington in July 1948, by the Gov- 
ernment of the United States of America, of the 
first meeting of the Wheat Council established 
under that agreement. It also provided that at 
the opening of the first session of the Wheat Coun- 
cil any government which had signed and ratified 
the agreement might effect its withdrawal there- 
from bj' notification to the Government of the 
United States if, in the opinion of any such gov- 
ernment, the guaranteed purchases or guaranteed 
sales of the countries whose governments had rati- 
fied the agreement were insufficient to insure its 
successful operation. Wlien a large number of the 
countries which had signed the 1948 agreement, 
including the United States, announced that their 
governments had not approved the agreement in 
time to put it into effect on August 1, 1948, as ex- 
pected. Great Britain, Australia, and several other 
countries which had ratified it withdrew, and the 
representatives of Canada and the other countries 
remaining in the agreement adopted a resolution 
recommending to their governments that the 
agreement be considered inoperative as among 
themselves. 

The representatives of the countries which had 
signed the agreement then adopted a resolution ap- 
pointing a Preparatory Committee to keep under 

April 24, 7949 



review the prospects of concluding a new agree- 
ment and invited the United States Government 
to arrange to convene a meeting of the Committee 
if at any time, after consultation with the Com- 
mittee's chairman, this meeting should appear to 
be desirable. The resolution further provided 
that should the Prepai'atory Committee recom- 
mend that an international conference be held to 
negotiate a new international wheat agreement, 
the United States Government should be invited 
to convene such a conference. 

An informal meeting of the Preparatory Com- 
mittee was convened at the request of the United 
States during the Fao Conference held in Wash- 
ington in the latter half of November. At this 
meeting the Committee was informed of the i^ro- 
posal by the United States Govez-nment to convene 
an International Wlieat Conference on or about 
January 25, 1949, and later on December 3, 1948, 
the Committee approved the convening of the Con- 
ference. Invitations to the Conference were ini- 
tially sent to all governments that were members 
either of the Fao of the United Nations or of the 
United Nations itself. The Government of Israel 
later expressed a desire to be represented and was 
invited to send an observer. Toward the end of 
the Conference the status of the representative of 
Israel was changed from that of observer to that 
of a plenipotentiary delegate by action of the Con- 
ference. 

In all, 56 countries were represented at the Con- 
ference, 48 by delegates and 8 by observers. In 
addition, observers of six international organiza- 
tions attended. The countries represented by del- 
egates were: Argentina, Austi'alia, Austria, Bel- 
gium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Ceylon, Chile, 
China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, 
Dominican Eepublic Ecuador, Egj'pt, El Salvador, 
France, Greece, Guatemala, India, Iran, Ireland, 
Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Liberia, Mexico, the 
Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, 
Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, 
Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, Switzerland, 
Union of South Africa, Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics, United Kingdom, United States, Uru- 
guaj', and Yugoslavia. The countries sending 

^Documents and State Papers, May 194S, p. 102. The 
1949 agreement will be printed in Documents and State 
Papers for May 1949. 



observers were: Afghanistan, Czeclioslovakia, 
Ethiopia, Finland, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, and 
Venezuela. 

The international organizations represented at 
the Conference by observers were : The Food and 
Agriculture Organization, the International 
Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the 
United Nations, the Interim Coordinating Com- 
mittee for International Commodity Arrange- 
ments, and the Interim Commission of the Inter- 
national Trade Organization. 

A large part of the work of the Conference was 
done in meetings of the full Conference sitting as 
a committee of the whole. Smaller committees 
and working parties were established, however, 
with specific assignments, which often involved 
problems requiring more detailed consideration 
than could advantageously be given in meetings 
of the full Conference. 

Although the Steering Committee was in a posi- 
tion to consider all problems of major importance 
to the Conference, most of its attention was de- 
voted to actions relating to the duration of the 
agreement and to the maximum and minimvmi 
prices that it should contain. 

The principal tasks of the Price Equivalents 
Committee were related to the development of 
formulae for determining in the currencies of the 
exporting countries that were expected to be in the 
agreement the maximum and minimum prices for 
various types of wheat in relation to the grade of 
Canadian wheat (No. 1 Manitoba Northern) which 
was taken as a basic grade for purposes of the 
agreement. Since France and Uruguay had indi- 
cated that they intended to participate in the 
agreement as exporters and since these countries 
had not been exporters under the agi'eement signed 
in 1948, one of the principal matters considered by 
the Committee was the price equivalents for these 
countries. 

The Working Party on Quantities was given 
the task of equating the total quantity of wheat 
which exporting countries wished to sell under the 
agreement with the total quantity of wheat which 
importing countries wished to purchase and of 
working out the relative shares of each country 
in the total quantity of its group. 

The Working Party on Flour directed its atten- 
tion to a number of problems relating to the p\ir- 
chase and sale of wheat flour, rather than wheat 
grain, as a part of the guaranteed quantities under 
the agreement. 

The Working Party on articles III and XVII 
dealt with questions regarding the recording of 
transactions under the wheat agreement by the 
Wlieat Council. The numbers of the articles re- 
ferred to were those of the 1!)4S draft, the 1048 
agreement having been adopted by the Conference 
as its annotated agenda. The article in the new 
agreement dealing with the recording of transac- 
tions against guaranteed quantities is article IV, 
rather than article III or XVII. 



Tlie Working Party on Voting Provisions 
studied all sections of the agreement where the 
question of voting would arise and made recom- 
mendations as to the size of the vote that should 
be required in each case. 

'J'he first meeting of the Conference was held on 
January '20 and the last meeting on March 23. 
During this period the Conference was in con- 
tinuous session. All meetings except tlie first, on 
January 26, and the last, on March 23, were in 
executive session. Arrangements were made, how- 
ever, for certain of the principal officers of the 
Conference to meet with the press from time to 
time and to issue releases regarding developments 
at the Conference so that the public might be kept 
advised of the progress of the negotiations. At the 
final session, on March 23, which was open to the 
public, copies of the agreement and a release de- 
scribing its principal features were distributed to 
the press. 

Tlie agreement consists of a preamble and 23 
articles. The preamble, which is somewhat shorter 
than that of the 1948 agreement, indicates the pur- 
pose of the agreement — the intention "to over- 
come the serious hardship caused to producers and 
consumers by burdensome surpluses and critical 
shortages of wheat." 

Tlie new agreement, as compared with the 1948 
agreement, is believed to embody a number of 
improvements in terminology. The agreement has 
also, in the interest of a more logical arrangement 
and sequence, been subdivided into five parts and 
the articles grouped under them in a somewhat 
different order from that observed in the 1948 
agreement. 

Part 1 (General) includes two articles, article I, 
in which the objectives of the agi'eement are stated, 
as they were in the 1948 agreement, as being "to 
assure supplies of wheat to importing countries 
and markets for Avheat to exporting countries at 
equitable and stable prices," and article II, giving 
definitions of numerous terms used in the 
agreement. 

Part 2 (Rights and Obligations) consists of 
articles III through VIII. This is the principal 
substantive part of the agi'eement. Annexes to 
article III show the quantities of wheat which the 
exporting countries are committed to sell at the 
maximum prices and those which the importing 
countries are committed to buy at the minimum 
prices. Article IV, as mentioned, deals with the 
recording of transactions against the guaranteed 
quantities. Article V relates to the enforcement 
of the rights of exporting countries and importing 
countries under the agreement. Article Vl con- 
tains the price provisions of the agreement. 
Article VII contains a general undertaking of 
both exporting and importing countries regard- 
ing the maintenance of stocks. Article VIII pro- 
vides that the exporting and importing countries 
shall report to the Council, within the time pre- 
scribed by it, such information as the Council may 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



request in connection with the administration of 
the agi-eement. 

Part 3 (Adjustment of Guaranteed Quantities) 
is made up of four articles. Article IX indicates 
the way in which the total export quantities and 
the total import quantities will be brought into 
equilibrium in the event that some countries fail 
to participate in the agreement or withdraw there- 
from. Article X deals with adjustments in the 
guaranteed quantities which may be made neces- 
sary by a short crop in an exporting country or 
by monetary difficulties in an importing country. 
Article XI provides a method whereby an in- 
crease might be made simidtaneously in the guar- 
anteed quantities of the exporting countries and 
the importing countries. Article XII provides 
a procedure whereby the guaranteed quantities 
of the importing countries might be reduced in 
order to provide wheat for the relief of a critical 
need that has arisen in another importing country 
which is a signatory to the agreement. 

Part 4 (Administration) contains seven articles. 
Article XIII establishes an International Wheat 
Council to administer the agreement, provides for 
its constitution, its power and functions, for vot- 
ing in the Council, and for other related matters. 
Article XIV provides for an Executive Committee 
which is to be responsible to and work under the 
general direction of the Council. Article XV 
provides for the establishment of an Advisory 
Committee on Price Equivalents, article XVI for 
the Secretariat of the Council, article XVII for the 
payment of annual contributions by the exporting 
and importing countries to meet the expenses in- 
cident to the administiation of the agreement, and 
article XVIII deals with cooperation between the 
Wlieat Council and other intergovernmental or- 
ganizations. Article XIX relates to the handling 
of disputes and complaints. 

Part 5 (Final Provisions) contains four arti- 
cles. Article XX deals with the signature, ac- 
ceptance, and entry into force of the agreement. 
Article XXI provides for accession to the agree- 
ment by countries other than those which are its 
initial signatories. Article XXII relates to such 
matters as duration, amendment, withdrawal 
from, and termination of the agreement. Article 
XXIII deals with the application of the agree- 
ment in respect of the overseas territories of the 
countries signing the agreement. 

Aside from the altered arrangement of articles 
and the changes that have been made in drafting, 
there are a number of important differences be- 
tween the terms of the present agreement and the 
terms of the 1948 draft. The principal changes 
relate to duration, maximum and minimum prices, 
and to the quantity of wheat covered by the agree- 
ment. These differences are summarized in the 
following tabulations. 

It will be observed that the minimum prices 
Ijrovided in the new agreement are 10 cents per 

April 24, J 949 



Duration of agreement 
and quantity covered 


1949 


1948 


Duration (years) 

Quantity (bushels) .... 


4 
456, 283, 389 


499, 


5 
997, 000 


Price and 

agreement 


1948- 
49 


1949- 
50 


1950- 

51 


1951- 
52 


1952- 
53 


Maximum: 
1949 .... 




$1. 80 
2.00 

1. .50 


$1. 80 
2.00 

1.40 
1. 30 


$1.80 
2.00 

1.30 


$1.80 


1948 .... 
Minimum: 

1949 .... 


$2. 00 


2.00 
1.20 


1948 .... 


1. 50 


1. 


40 




1. 20 


1. 10 



annum higher than those provided in the 1948 
agreement. As will also be observed, the maxi- 
mum price is 20 cents per bushel lower than under 
the 1948 agreement. The guaranteed export quan- 
tity in the 1949 agreement is not only less than 
that under the 1948 agreement but also has to be 
shared by five exporters instead of three, since 
France, which had a guaranteed import quantity 
of almost 36 million bushels under the 1948 agree- 
ment, has a guaranteed export quantity under the 
1949 agreement of slightly more than 3.3 million 
bushels, and since Uruguay, which would have 
been neither an exporter nor an importer under 
the 1948 agreement, has a guaranteed export quan- 
tity of slightly more than 1.8 million bushels. 

The export quantities of the other exporting 
countries have been reduced from 230 million 
bushels in the 1948 agreement to a little over 203 
million bushels in the 1949 agreement in the case of 
Canada, from 185 million bushels to a little over 
168 million bushels in the case of the United 
States, and from 85 million bushels to 80 million 
bushels in the case of Australia. 

There are other changes in the new agreement 
that are worthy of note. Greater attention is 
given to outlining the general philosophy of the 
agreement (article III) than was the case in the 

1948 agreement. This does not involve a change 
in concept so much as it does a change in presen- 
tation. For example, exporting and importing 
countries under either the 1948 agreement or the 

1949 agreement would have been free to fulfil their 
guaranteed quantities through private trade chan- 
nels or otherwise, but this was implied in the 1948 
agreement whereas it is specifically stated in the 
1949 agreement (paragraph 8 of article III). 

The 1949 agreement also provides in greater 
detail than did the 1948 agreement for the record- 
ing of transactions against guaranteed quantities. 
This matter is dealt with in article IV of the new 
agreement, in which certain principles are laid 
down for the Council to follow in prescribing rules 
of procedure for the recording of transactions. 



Tlie 1949 agreement also gives more attention to 
the way in wliicli wlieat Hour may be bouglit or 
sold as part of tlie guaranteed quantities under the 
agreement and of the criteria which the Council 
shall follow in settling disagreements which may 
arise between cxportincr and importing countries 
over this mutter (paragraphs 1 (c), 1 (e), 2 (c), 
and 2 (c) of article V). Wheat Hour can be substi- 
tuted for wheat grain in fulfilment of obligations 
under the^ agreement if agreed to by buyer and 
seller. Where countries cannot agree as to the 
relative amounts of wheat grain and wheat flour 
which tliey should buy or sell, the matter is to be 
settled by tlie Couiicii. In settlmg such matters, 
the Council will be expected to consider any 
circumstances which the interested countries wish 
to submit for consideration, such as industrial pro- 
gi-ams of any country that might have a bearing 
on the problem as well as the normal traditional 
volume and ratio of imports of wheat Hour and 
wheat gi'ain imported by the importing country 
concerned. 

The 1949 agreement also gives the Council more 
latitude in placing the agreement into operation 
than did the 194S agi-eement. The agi-eement will 
enter into force in respect of parts 1, 3, 4, and 5 on 
July 1, 1949, provided the governments of import- 
ing countries responsible for not less tlian 70 per- 
cent of the guaranteed purchases and the govern- 
ments of the exporting countries responsible for 
not less than 80 percent of the guaranteed sales 
have accepted the agreement by that date, and the 
Council may fix a date as late as September 1. 1949, 
on which part 2 (Rights and Obligations) shall 
enter into force between those governments wjiich 
have accepted it (paragraph 3 of article XX). 
The Council is therefore given a period of as nuich 
as two months (July 1 to September 1) to attempt 
to readjust the totals of the export and import 
quantities if difliculties should arise because of 
failure of some of the governments to sign or 
ratify the agreement. Under the 1948 agreement 
a country which felt that an insufficient number of 
countries had signed and ratified it to insure its 
successful operation was permitted to withdraw, 
but it had to exercise this right at the beginning of 
the first session of the Council in July. Tlie new 
agreement permits wtihdrawal up to September 1. 
1949, under such conditions (paragraph fi of 
article XXII). thereby permitting the Council 
and the various countries concerned additional 
time in which to attempt to make the adjustments 
that may be necessary to make the agreement an 
effective operating instrument if certain of the 
countries do not become participants. 

Two other changes of minor impoj-tance are the 
facts that the United States Government is to be 
the depository of amendments which may be made 
to the agreement as well as of the original agree- 
ment itself, whereas under the 1948 agreement the 
Wheat Council would have served as the deposi- 
tory of amendments, and that the article on terri- 
toi-ial application in the 1949 agreement is drafted 



in such a way as to obviate the necessity of par- 
ticipating countries listing their territories in re- 
spect of which the agreement is to apply, as was 
done in the 1948 agreement. 

There have been deletions from as well as ad- 
ditions to the new agi-eement. For example, 
there is no counterpart in the 1949 agi-eement to 
article VII of the 1948 agreement, which pro- 
vided that the Council might use its good offices 
in assisting an exporting or an importing country 
to make additional sales or purchases. There is 
also no counterpart to article VIII of the 1948 
agreement relating to sales for nutritional pro- 
grams. The first of these was deleted because of 
the belief that such an article would be of little 
importance in view of improvements in the supply 
position. As to the second, since the agreement 
applies only to the quantities covered by its terms, 
it appeared unnecessary to give the Council any 
responsibility in respect of sales made outside its 
terms. 

TJiere were 36 signatories of the 1948 agree- 
ment. 3 exporting countries and 33 importing 
countries. Of these, two of the three exporting 
countries — Canada and the United States — and 
13 of the 33 importing countries — China. Colom- 
bia. Denmark, Egypt, Greece. India. Ireland. 
Lebanon. Liberia, tiie Netherlands. Peru, Portu- 
gal, and the United Kingdom — signed the agree- 
ment at the final session of the Wlieat Council in 
which it was negotiated. The countries which 
signed at that time accounted for more than 80 
percent of the wheat covered on the export side 
and more than fiO percent on the import side. 

Forty-two governments have indicated their 
intention of signing the 1949 agreement, five as 
exjjorting countries and thirty-seven as importing 
countries. As indicated earlier, the five export- 
ing countries are Australia. Canada. France, the 
Ignited States, and Uruguay. Three countries 
which signed the 1948 agreement as importers 
have shown no intention of participating in the 
1949 agreement. These countries are Afghan- 
istan, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Eight coun- 
tries which did not sign the 1948 agreement have 
indicated an intention of signing the 1949 agree- 
ment as importers. These are Bolivia, Ceylon, El 
Salvador, Israel, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, 
and Saudi Arabia. 

The governments signing the agreement at the 
close of the Conference this year represented a 
higher proportion on both theexport and import 
sides than was the case last year. Representatives 
of all the exporting countries and representatives 
of 2.5 of the 37 importing countries which have 
indicated an Intention of participating in this 
year's agreement signed it on March 23 at the close 
of the Conference. The countries which signed at 
that time rejiresented 100 jjerccnt of the export 
quantities covered by tlie agreement and 87 percent 
of the import quantities covered. 

Both Argentina and the U.S.S.R. indicated dur- 
ing the Conference that they would not i)articipate 

Department of State Bulletin 



in the agreement. Neither was a signatory of last 
year's agreement. Argentina was represented in 
the negotiations botli last year and this. Its re- 
fusal to participate in either agi-eement was ap- 
parently the result of its dissatisfaction with the 
maximum price provisions. The U.S.S.R., which 
had not been represented in any of the postwar 
wheat negotiations, took an active part in the ne- 
gotiations this year. Its failure to become a signa- 
tory of the agreement appears to have been largely, 
if not altogether, attributable to a disagreement 
as to the guaranteed export quantity which the 
U.S.S.R. should have relative to the guaranteed 
export quantities of the other exporting countries. 

The following were the principal factors re- 
sponsible for the attitude of the other exporting 
countries concerning the appropriate size of the 
guaranteed expoi-t quantity of the U.S.S.R. : the 
share of the U.S.S.R. in world wheat trade since 
the time of the First World War, the quantity of 
wheat which the importing countries that had indi- 
cated an intention of participating in the agree- 
ment appeared to have included because of the 
anticipated participation of the U.S.S.R., and the 
current level of wheat exports from the U.S.S.R. 
in relation to exports from the other principal 
wheat exporting coimtries. 

Prior to the First World War Russia was one 
of the world's major exporters of wheat, its ex- 
ports in the period 1909-13, having averaged al- 
most 165 million bushels per year. Since that 
time, however, U.S.S.R. participation in the 
world wheat trade has been on a greatly reduced 
basis. Its annual exports averaged approxi- 
mately 9 million bushels for the j^eriod 1920-29, 
approximately 34 million bushels for the period 
1930-39, and, as was to have been expected in view 
of the Second World War, its exports have been 
much lower during the 1940's than during the 
1930's. Its exports to all countries are believed, at 
present, to be at the rate of 40 to 45 million bushels 
a year. From 15 to 20 million bushels of these 
exports are believed to be going to countries such 
as Czechoslovakia and Finland, which had indi- 
cated no intention of participating in the agree- 
ment. Accordingly, exports from the U.S.S.R. 
to the countries that were expected to participate 
in the agreement are running at an annual rate 
of from 20 to 30 million bushels. Furthermore, 
an analj'sis of the quantities of wheat which the 
importing countries had shown an intention to 
purchase under the agreement from all the ex- 
porting countries, including the U.S.S.R., indi- 
cated that not more than 40 million bushels was 
attributable to the anticipated participation of the 
U.S.S.R. Under tliese circumstances, the other 
exporting countries felt that a guaranteed ex- 
port quantity in excess of 40 million bushels would 
mean giving up to the U.S.S.R. markets which 
such countries had been accustomed to supply and 
which they could expect to supply under the agree- 
ment. Because of their desire to have the 
U.S.S.R. participate in the agreement, however, 

April 24, 7949 



the other exporting countries stated that they 
would be prepared to agree to a guaranteed ex- 
port quantity of 50 million bushels for the 
U.S.S.R. The U.S.S.R. Delegation at first pressed 
for a guaranteed export quantity equivalent to 20 
percent of the total quantity of wheat covered by 
the agreement. The delegation finally indicated 
that the U.S.S.R. was prepared to accept a quan- 
tity of 75 million bushels but refused to accept a 
smaller quantity, altliougli it was pointed out by 
representatives of some of the importing coun- 
tries that a figure this large would involve a 
change of sources of supply for some of the im- 
porting countries that might well cause them se- 
rious difficulties. Representatives of the export- 
ing countries as well as of the importing coun- 
tries expressed regret that the U.S.S.R. considered 
itself to be unable to participate in the agreement 
on terms which would have been acceptable to the 
other signatories. 

The Conference, ju.st as was the case last year, 
realized that it would be necessary, prior to July 
1, to make administrative and other arrangements 
for the operation of the agreement. It therefore 
established a Preparatory Committee for this pur- 
pose consisting of the following countries : Austra- 
lia, Benelux, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, France, India, 
Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. 

As indicated earlier, the governments have until 
July 1, 1949, to approve the agreement. If the 
agreement is to become effective, approval by July 
1, 1949, by governments responsible for at least 
80 percent of the exports under the agreement and 
at least 70 percent of the imports will be required. 
This means that the agreement cannot go into 
operation unless approved by Canada, the United 
Kingdom, and the United States, since the guar- 
anteed quantity of each of these countries is in 
excess of one third of the total guaranteed exports 
or imports, as the case may be. On the export 
side, tlie failure of France or Uruguay to approve 
the agreement need not seriously prejudice the 
chances of placing the agreement in effective oper- 
ation, but the failure of Australia to approve 
would confront the Council with very serious 
problems at its July meeting. Furthermore, if 
only a sufficient number of importing countries 
approve the agreement to make up the 70 percent 
which is needed to place parts of the agreement 
other than those relating to rights and obligations 
into effect on July 1, the Council, at its July meet- 
ing, would also be faced with serious problems of 
adjusting the guaranteed quantities of the export- 
ing countries to this total. 

On the basis of last year's experience, the period 
April 15 to July 1 would appear to be no more 
than adequate for obtaining approval by govern- 
ments resiionsible for the required percentages of 
the guaranteed export and import quantities. On 
the other hand, the fact that the agreement, in its 
essential features, is similar to the 1948 agi-eement, 
which has been previously considered by govern- 
ments, should be helpful. 



THE UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES 



The Problem of Voting in the Security Council 

By AMBASSADOR WARREN R. AUSTIN > 



The General Assembly has before it at this time 
a resolution relating to the voting procedures of 
the Security Council approved by the Ad Hoc Po- 
litical Committee on December lU, ll)4s, in Paris.- 

The exercise of the veto power on a number of 
occasions has seriously undermined the confidence 
of member states in the ability of the Security 
Council to maintain international peace and secur- 
ity. The chronic disagreement and deadlock in 
the United Nations is a matter of deepest concern 
to all tiiose who wish to see this organization func- 
tion as it was intended — as an effective instrument 
to safeguard our common interests in peace and 
security. The use of the veto and tlie threat of its 
use are symptoms of the prevailing disagreement. 

All members of the United Nations liave as- 
sumed definite obligations in the Charter. These 
obligations constitute the law of the Charter bind- 
ing upon all nations, large and small. The per- 
manent members of the Security Council cannot, 
through their special voting position, evade or nul- 
lify these obligations. They cannot use their 
privileged vote granted by the Charter, to defeat 
the Charter. Under article 2, for example, all 
members are bound to refrain from the threat or 
use of force against the territorial integrity or 
political inde])endence of any state, or in any 
other manner inconsistent with the purposes of 
the United Nations. If a permanent member at- 
tempts to destroy through force, the political inde- 
pendence of his neighbor contrarv to this obliga- 
tion, the responsibility for the violation cannot be 
avoided or obscured through the casting of a nega- 
tive vote wlien the victim takes the aggression be- 
fore the Council. The permanent member, 
through tlie exercise of the veto, cannot deprive 
members of the right to defend themselves, nor 
take away the legal right or moral duty of other 
members to come to the aid of the victim in de- 
fense of the Charter. 

The i)ractice of the veto is the very reverse of the 
unanimity principle in the Security Council. In- 
stead of leading to agreement, it aggravates differ- 
ences. It provokes ill will and undermines 
friendly relations among states upon which tlie 
peace of the world depends. We must reject the 
idea that if unanimity fails the will of one, however 

'Address made before the General Assembly in New 
York, N. Y., on Apr. i:5, ll)4!t, and rolcased to the press by 
the U.S. Mission to tlie United Xiiiioiis on the same date. 

' Bulletin of Jan. 23, liMit, p. 'M. 



arbitrary, prevails over the will of many, however 
reasonable. The unanimity principle cannot 
^york where agreement is offered only on condi- 
tion that the will of the. most intrans'igent mem- 
ber must prevail. 

To insist on the exercise of the veto regardless of 
its effects on the organized international commu- 
nity and to reject any efforts to regulate its appli- 
cation under the Charter, in the light of experi- 
ence, is to stand in the way of effective progress 
b}' the United Nations. 

Looking now to the immediate problem of im- 
proving the functioning of the Security Council, 
we have before us a resolution which was jointly 
.sponsored in the Ad Hoc Political Committee by 
four of the permanent members of the Security 
Council— all except the Soviet Union. Tlie reso- 
lution incorporates the substance of the recom- 
mendations of the Interim Committee of tlie Gen- 
eral Assembly. You will recall that the second 
session of the General Assembly in 1947 requested 
the Interim Committee to make a careful study of 
tliis problem of voting procedures and to report 
with its conclusions. Two sessions of the General 
Assembly hacl considered and debated this prob- 
lem. A majority of the member nations had 
reached the conclusion that the effectiveness of the 
Security Council to fulfil its proper function in 
the United Nations was being jeopardized by the 
abuse of the veto power by one of the permanent 
members of the Security Council. There was, 
however, little agreement on what measures could 
appropriately be taken to improve the situation. 
Under tlie circumstances it was considered desira- 
ble that the entire matter be thoroughly studied 
in a nonpolitical atmosphere with a viewto bring- 
ing about a better understanding on the part of 
all concerned as to the political and technical 
problems involved. It was hoped that such a 
study would throw more light on the problem with 
less generation of heat than would be iiossible 
in the General Assembly itself. It would also 
bring to liglit much more clearly the exact areas 
of agreement and disagreement among the various 
member niitions. 

The results of the study are now before us. 
Even a superficial perusal of the resolution of the 
Ad Hoc Committee must di.sclose that it is not 
designed to alter fundamentally the unanimity 
jM-inciple as it i.s embodied in the Charter. A very 
great majoi-ity of the members of the United Na- 
tions have expressed the view either explicitly or 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



implicitly that the unanimity principle is and 
should remain a fundamental principle of the 
Charter. A majority of the members of the 
United Nations are opposed to any eilort being 
made at this time to amend the Charter. 

On the other hand, there is a large majority of 
the members of the United Nations who are mak- 
ing an anxious effort to design ways and means 
of giving life to the unanimity principle and mak- 
ing it work so that the Security Council can carry 
out its function effectively. The working of this 
principle requires an effort on the part of all mem- 
bers of the United Nations and particularly the 
permanent members of the Security Council to 
reconcile their divergent views on the basis of 
tolerance and mutual understanding. 

The resolution before us sets us on the path 
toward this objective. It represents a policy of 
gradual liberalization of the voting procedures 
of the Security Council through processes of in- 
terpretation and application of the principles of 
the Charter and through agreement of the mem- 
bers of the Security Council. We rely on proc- 
esses of discussion, definition, regulation, and 
practice to move us forward toward our objective 
and not upon revolutionary change. We recom- 
mend restraint and self -discipline to member na- 
tions in accordance with the letter and spirit of 
the Charter as an appropriate means of giving life 
to the unanimity principle and keeping it within 
proper bounds. 

In our view the proposals now before us are most 
moderate. They are designed to be within the 
limits of what is practicable under prevailing 
world conditions. We firmly believe that if the 
members of the United Nations would cooperate 
in carrying out the program presented in these 
proposals we would quickly see substantial 
improvement in the effectiveness of the Security 
Council's operations. You will recall that efforts 
by the Assembly along similar lines in 1946 have 
resulted in a substantial improvement. I refer to 
the suggestions made by several members of the 
Assembly during the debates that abstention of a 
permanent member of the Security Comicil should 
not be considered a veto. That practice was adop- 
ted by common consent in the Security Council 
and has now become a well-accepted Security 
Council procedure. I believe all of you will agree 
that the adoption of this practice has substan- 
tially added to the effectiveness of the Security 
Council. A number of important decisions of the 
Council during the past two years has been ap- 
proved with one or more of the permanent mem- 
bers abstaining. At least one Security Council 
decision under chapter VII and one decision rec- 
ommending a state for membership has been 
approved with a permanent member abstaining. 
Let us now look at this resolution in more detail. 
The work of the Interim Committee ^ on which the 
resolution is based revealed the great potentiali- 



ties which can be progressively realized under the 
present Charter if there can be general agreement 
upon a moderate course. By adoption of this reso- 
lution, the Assembly would make an important 
decision to the effect that 34 specified and de- 
scribed decisions of the Security Council are pro- 
cedural. This effect would principally arise out 
of the first paragraph— "Recommends to the mem- 
bers of the Security Council that, without preju- 
dice to other decisions which the Security Council 
may deem procedural, the decisions set forth in the 
attached Annex be deemed procedural and that 
the members of the Security Council conduct their 
business accordingly :" 

The principal criteria for placing these 34 items 
in the category of decisions deemed procedural 
were — 

(a) Decisions under procedure provisions of the 
Charter ; 

( b ) Decisions relating to the internal procedure 
of the United Nations ; 

(c) Decisions relating to internal functioning 
of the Security Council ; 

(d) Decisions analogous to the foregoing; 

(e) Decisions which implement procedural 
decisons. 

In short, the Interim Committee, after a thorough 
study, concluded that these decisions are proce- 
dural in the light of the express language of the 
Charter, and of sound Charter interpretation. 

This first paragraph is concerned with the rever- 
sal of a tendency toward an unwarranted exten- 
sion of the veto to areas where its application was 
never contemplated by the Charter. Its purpose 
is, also, to eliminate undisciplined use of the veto 
contrary to the assumptions and understanding 
under which the privileged vote was accorded to 
the permanent members. This first paragraph is 
simply an interpretation of the Charter according 
to its letter and spirit. It amounts to saying to the 
Security Council : "The proper interpretation of 
the Charter forbids stultification of the Security 
Council in the cases described." In a w^ord, the 
effect of this paragraph of the resolution is to keep 
certain enumerated types of decision in the cate- 
gory of procedural. Its main objective, of course, 
fs to give life to the purposes and principles of the 
United Nations in accordance with which the Secu- 
rity Council must act in the discharge of its duties. 

This resolution, especially paragraph 1, would 
be affected by the structural relationship between 
the General Assembly and the Security Council. 
Article 24 provides : 

In order to ensure prompt and efEective action by the 
United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Coun- 
cil primary responsibility for the maintenance of interna- 
tional peace and security, and agree that in carrying out 
its duties under this responsibility the Security Council 
acts on their behalf. 

= Documents and State Papers, August 1948, p. 340. 



April 24, 1949 



Tliis preneral giiint of functions and powers, far 
beyond the specific frrants found in chapters VI, 
VII, VIII, and XII, is definitely characterized by 
tlie very next paragraph of the Charter: 

In lUschnrfring tlifse duties the Security Council shall 
net in nrconliiiice with the Purp<jses and Principles of the 
I'nitiHl Nations. . . . 

This is mandatory. Conversely, article 25 pro- 
vides : 

The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and 
carrj' out the decisions of the Security Council in accord- 
ance with the present Charter. 

In the light of the relationship between the 
Security Council and the General Assembly, by 
which all members are represented, a recommenda- 
tion of this nature coming from the General As- 
sembly will no doubt receive particular attention 
from the members sitting on the Security Council. 

This first paragraph does not al)ridge tlie luia- 
nimity rule of voting. On the contrary, it gives it 
life — vitality. As I have said, it would make the 
Sectirity Council efficient with respect to matters 
in which it is sometimes now stultified. It is pro- 
posed at this time because the three years of prac- 
tice in the Security Council has developed an 
unforeseen and willful use of the veto based on 
minority interpretation, contrary to majority 
decision. 

Now I shall advance to paragraph 2 of the 
resolution. It contains a recommendation to the 
permanent members of the Security Council that 
they .seek agreement among themselves upon what 
possible decisions of the Security Council they 
might forbear to exercise tlieir veto when seven 
affirmative votes are cast in the Council in supjiort 
of such decisions. In seeking agi-eement, the per- 
manent members are to give favorable consider- 
ation to the list of decisions compiled by tlie 
Interim Committee. The theory upon which the 
Interim Committee prepared this list was that if 
the permanent members could agree to refiaiii 
from using their veto with reference to such deci- 
sions, the Security Council would be able to per- 
form its responsibilities more promptly and ef- 
fectively. The types of decision dealt "with here 
thus differ from tho.se contained in the first recom- 
mendation because some of them are unquestion- 
ably of substance while as to others there may 
be differing views upon whether they are substan- 
tive or procedural. Indeed, the Interim Com- 
mittee has indicated clearly that the insertion of 
decisions in this list was not governed by the 
criterion of their procedural or nonprocedural 
character. Tlie most important decisions con- 
tained in this list are not procedural, such as, for 
example, the decision on the admission of a new 
member and certain pacific settlement nuitters 
under chapter VI of the Charter. In this con- 
nection, I would recall that the United States is on 
record as favoring a libei-alization of the voting 
procedure of the Security Council through elimina- 



tion by whatever means that may be appropriate 
of the unanimit}' requirement with respect to ap- 
plications for membership and to matters arising 
under chapter VI of the Charter. 

Neither the first nor the second recommenda- 
tion in the resolution before us violates the spirit 
of the statement of the four sponsoring powere 
at San Francisco. During the debate there upon 
the voting formula, a questionnaire was addressed 
to tlie sponsoring powers by the smaller powers. 
The sponsoring powers theieupon undertook to 
make a joint interpretation of the voting formula, 
insofar as such an interpretation of a basic con- 
stitutional provision could appropriately be made 
in advance of its adoption, and in the absence of 
any practical experience as to the operation of the 
Organization or of the Security Council. This 
statement is not a treaty, nor was it intended to 
be any part of the treaty which is the Charter. 
By its own words it is characterized as a "state- 
ment of their general attitude toward the whole 
question of unanimity of permanent members in 
the decisions of the Security Council." It was 
connected with the act of agreement upon the 
Charter and is therefore entitled to great weight 
in that connection. It is nevertheless inferior to 
the Charter and must be subservient to its prin- 
ciples and purposes. Certainly its natural mean- 
ing should not be extended by willful obstruction. 

The four-power statement contained an expres- 
sion of hope that there would not arise matters of 
great importance upon which a decision M-ould 
have to be made as to whether a procedural vote 
would apply. Experience since San Francisco 
has shown that this optimistic expectation has not 
been realized, and the first recommendation is 
based on a recognition of this fact. This recom- 
mendation should be of assistance to the Security 
Council in determining whether or not a questioii 
is procedural. The four-power statement made it 
clear that the enumeration of procedural questions 
which it contained was not exclusive. Further- 
more, it in no way foreclosed advance agreement 
as to what questions should be considered pro- 
cedural. It did not say that a question should be 
considered nonj)rocedural simply because one of 
the permanent members so regards it. The four- 
power statement cannot enjoy a position of 
supremacy over the Charter. 

The four-power statement contained another 
explicit assumption, which has proved contrary 
to fact : that the permanent members would not 
use their privileged vote "willfully to obstruct 
the operation of the Council." The powers par- 
ticipating in the statement thus recognized that 
self-restraint upon the part of the permanent 
members was necessaiy and to be expected if the 
Security Council was to function as intended. If 
this be true it would seem quite proper for the As- 
sembly in light of experience to recommend to the 
permanent members that if they are unable, after 
genuine effort, to achieve unanimity among them- 

Deparfment of Sfafe Bullefin 



selves on certain decisions not immediately con- 
cerning their vital interests they should agi"ee 
among themselves not to exercise the veto in those 
decisions. Such agreement among the permanent 
members is the objective of the second recommen- 
dation. 

For the reasons I have stated, the four-power 
statement in the view of my Government consti- 
tutes no barrier to such agreement. The parties to 
that statement are free to explore, as this resolu- 
tion attempts to do, how better voting procedures 
can be put into operation. 

The third recommendation of the draft resolu- 
tion suggests to the permanent members a "code of 
conduct" which they should observe in connection 
with their privileged vote. They are to consult to- 
gether wherever feasible and to exercise their veto 
only when they consider a question of vital im- 
portance, taking into account the interests of the 
United Nations as a whole, and to state upon what 
ground they consider this condition to be present. 



All permanent members are on record as favor- 
ing consultations. We believe that these consul- 
tations should take place whenever there is a pos- 
sibility of obtaining constructive results. These 
consultations should take place not only with ref- 
erence to specific matters before the Council; 
above all, the method of consultation should be 
applied as one of the means of implementing the 
recommendations contained in the di-aft resolu- 
tion. 

This resolution was sponsored by four perma- 
nent members and aroused the support of an im- 
pressive number of member states. The vote in 
the Ad Hoc Committee of the General Assembly 
was j'eas 33, nays 6, abstentions 4. 

It ought to gain strength in the vote of the Gen- 
eral Assembly. Its purpose and natural tendency 
is to make the United Nations more effective in 
its vital functions. 



U.S. Participation in Continued U.N. Appeal for Children 

LETTER FROM SECRETARY ACHESON TO SECRETARY-GENERAL LIE' 



April 4, mo 
ExcELLEXCY : I havc the honor to acknowledge 
the receipt of your note dated February 28, 1949 
in which you indicate a desire to be advised of the 
intention of the United States Government with 
regard to General Assembly Resolution No. 215 III 
in which it was decided to continue the United 
Nations Appeal for Children. You also request 
information as to whether the United Nations In- 
ternational Children's Emergency Fund should 
maintain contact with the Campaign organization 
which functioned in the United States in 1948 or 
whether other channels of communication are to 
be followed. 

The United States Government and the Ameri- 
can people have a deep concern for the plight of 
needy children of the world. They have shown 
this concern from the outbreak of World War II 
and continuously in the years since, through the 
provision of funds by the Congress and through 
voluntary private contributions. The United 
States Government has appropriated $75,000,000 
to be made available to the United Nations Inter- 
national Children's Emergency Fund under a 
matching formula of T2% from the United States 
Government and 28% from other governments. 
In addition it has provided funds for a free school 
lunch program for children in Germany and has 
made a number of other appropriations for for- 
eign relief, a large part of which has been of bene- 
fit to children. 

April 24, 1949 



In addition to Government appropriations, ex- 
tensive contributions have been made by the Amer- 
ican people thi'ough voluntary relief agencies 
largely for the welfare of children. These gifts 
are"^ estimated to approximate $1,000,000,000 in 
value since 1939 and in the current year will 
amount to over $150,000,000. 

In the light of the interest in the Fund already 
demonstrated by the United States and in view of 
the continuing needs of the children of the world 
plans are being developed for informing the Amer- 
ican people of these needs and of the work of the 
Fund and for giving them full opportunity to con- 
tribute to it. These plans are as follows : 

1. Responsibility for informing and enlisting 
the interest of the public in the work of the Fund 
will be vested in the United States Committee for 
the United Nations International Children's 
Emergency Fund under the Chairmanship of Mrs. 
Oswald Lord. The Committee will also maintain 
liaison with American voluntary agencies to assist 
in coordinating their child welfare programs in 
countries where the Fund operates, with progi-ams 
of the Fund. The activities of this Committee 
will be carried on under policies developed with 



' Reply to query from the United Nations Secretary 
General, Trygve Lie, about the intention of the United 
States with regard to General Assembly resolution in 
which it was decided to continue the United Nations Ap- 
peal for Children. Released to the press by the U.S. 
Mission to the United Nations Apr. 4, 1949. 

SIS 



the advice of the Department of State and the 
United States Representative on the Executive 
Board of the Fund. 

2. The United vStates Committee will direct its 
activities especially toward 

(a) keeping the American people informed 
through such media as the press, radio, magazines 
and public addresses, of the needs of children and 
of the operations of the Fund, 

(b) encouraging and coordinating efforts by 
groups and organizations which may undertake 
to make or obtain contributions for the work of 
the Fund, and 

(c) acting as the agency in the United States 
through which contributions from voluntary 
sources will be channeled to the Fund. 

8. In order to carry out its functions the United 
States Committee will form an advisory gi-oup 
which will include representatives of business, 
labor, farm, professional, religious, patriotic and 
men's and women's clubs and associations. It will 
also employ a small salaried staff. 

Official relationship between the Fund and this 
Government sliould continue to be carried on 
through normal governmental channels. How- 
ever, it would greatly facilitate the work of the 
United States Committee if advice and informa- 
tional material could be provided by the Fund to 
the Committee and it is hoped that the Fund will 
maintain close informal relationships with the 
Committee for this purpose. 

Accept [etc.] 

Dean Acheson 

Secretary of State of the United States of America 



Resolution Extending Through 1949 
the U.N. Appeal for Children 

tJ.N. res. 215, III 
Adopted Dec. 8, 1948 

The General Assembly, 

NoTiNc the widespread response to the United 
Nations Appeal for Children, the large number 
of countries which have co-operated in the conduct 
of national campaigns, and the co-operation and 
support for the Appeal provided by non-govern- 
mental organizations, 

Recognizing that the aftermath of devastation 
and dislocation resulting from Mar has revealed 
specific needs of children in many countries and 
that a moral responsibility falls on the peoples of 
all countries to act for the greater well-being of 
children throughout the world. 

Noting, with approval, the provisions of resolu- 
tion 162 (VII) ado])ted by the Economic and 
Social Council on 12 August 1948, 

1. Contiimes the United Nations Appeal for 
Children as a world-wide appeal for voluntary 
non-governmental contributions to be used for the 



benefit of children, adolescents, and expectant and 
nursing mothers without discrimination on ac- 
count of race, religion, nationality, or political 
belief; 

2. Invites the co-operation of peoples of all 
countries to assist and support national activities 
in favour of the Appeal; 

3. Decides that the proceeds of the collections 
in each country shall be for the benefit of the 
United Nations International Children's Emer- 
gency Fund, and that the name United Nations 
Appeal for Children shall be used only in national 
campaigns which are conducted for this purpose, 
subject to the provisions of resolution 92 (I) of 
the General Assembly governing the use of the 
United Nations name and abbreviations of that 
name: 

4. Requests the United Nations International 
Children's Emergency Fund, as the United Na- 
tions agency eiitru.sted with special responsibility 
for meeting emergency needs of children in many 
parts of the world : 

(a) To assist in the conduct of national cam- 
paigns for the benefit of the International Chil- 
dren's Emergency Fund, with a view to providing 
international co-ordination of voluntary govern- 
mental and non-governmental appeals for the 
benefit of children ; 

(h) To report concerning the appeals to the 
ninth session of the Economic and Social Council 
and to the fourth regular scs,<ion of the General 
Assembly. 



Opinions of International Court of Justice 
Announced 

Statement hy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press April 13] 

Two opinions which have just been announced 
by the International Court of Justice call atten- 
tion again to the effective functioning of the ju- 
dicial process in the United Nations. 

On Saturday, April 9, the International Court 
handed down its first judgment in a contentious 
case between two states. The United Kingdom 
had sued Albania for damages resulting from the 
mining of two British destroyers in the Corfu 
Channel on October 22, 194G. AVhile the opinion 
has not yet been received and read in the Depart- 
ment of State, the Court apparently held Albania 
responsible under international law for the dam- 
age caused. Eleven of the sixteen sitting judges 
concurred in the decision. The Court ditl not as- 
sess damages, but decided to hold further hearings 
if the two parties accept its competence to assess 
the amount. It held also that British vessels on 
one occasion had violated Albanian sovereignty 
but that the declaration to this effect by the Court 
constituted adequate satisfaction to Albania. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Yesterday tlie International Court handed 
down its second advisory opinion. The opinion 
was rendered at the request of the General Assem- 
bly on the question whether the United Nations 
could sue governments for injury caused to the 
organization or any of its agents in the discharge 
of United Nations functions. The Court held 
unanimously that the United Nations could claim 
compensation from any government, whether it is 
a member of the United Nations or not, for any 
damage incurred by the organization when the 
government is legally responsible for injury to an 
agent of the United Nations. 
Palestine Relief Contribution 

[Keleased to the press by the U.S. Mission to the 
U.N. April 11 

On April 11, Ambassador Warren E. Austin 
presented Secretary-General Trygve Lie with a 
check for 8 million dollars as the first pay- 
ment of the United States for the relief of Pales- 
tine refugees. A contribution of 16 million dol- 
lars was authorized by the Congress on March 16, 
after President Truman had recommended that 
the United States contribute 50 percent of the 
amount requested in the U.N. resolution for Pal- 
estine refugee relief.^ t^ i • 

This resolution, sponsored by Belgium, the 
Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States, and passed unanimously by the General 
Assembly on November 19, 1948, requests the Sec- 
retary-General to appoint a Director of United 
Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees, and urges 
the member states to make voluntary contribu- 
tions in kind or in funds to raise 32 million dollars 
for the program. 

Statement hy Ambassador Warren R. Austin 

The conscience of the world has been aroused by 
the desperate plight of the Palestine refugees, now 
scattered and homeless in the Middle East. The 
General Assembly, last November, considered this 
problem so urgent that all considerations of inter- 
national politics were dropped from the debate 
and a resolution to request the member nations to 
contribute to the aid of this mass of unfortimate 
people was passed unanimously. 

The Unite.d States and the other countries who 
have contributed to this fund act out of humani- 
tarian concern for the suffering of almost a mil- 
lion sorely tried human beings. But they also act 
in enlightened self-interest. 

I think that we are all learning that the plight 
of suffering people anywhere is a matter of con- 
cern to all of us. We now know that the peace 
of the whole world is threatened by unrest and 
instability in any part of the world. And unrest 
and political instability thrive in a land where so 
many are without the barest necessities of life, 
even without hope, unless we give it to them. 

AptW 24, 1949 



The Assembly resolution states clearly the gen- 
eral belief that alleviation of conditions of starva- 
tion and distress among the Palestine refugees is 
one of the minimum conditions for the success of 
the efforts of the United Nations to bring peace 
to that land. 

Therefore it is particularly gratifying, at this 
time when the prospect of a Palestine settlement is 
Isrighter than it has been in many months, to add 
this sum to the gifts of other peoples for the relief 
of the Palestine refugees. 

Current United Nations Documents: 
A Selected Bibliography ^ 

Security Council 

Official Records, Third Year 

390th. Meeting: 15 November 1948. No. 125. 29 

pp. printed. 30^;. 

381st Meeting: 16 November 1948. No. 126. 56 

pp. printed. 60^. 

3S2nd Meeting: 25 November 1948. No. 127. 29 

pp. printed. 30(i. 

3S3rd Meeting: 2 December 1948. No. 128. 25 

pp. printed. 30^. 
1949. S/1234. 4 pp. mimeo. 
Interim Report of the United Nations Commission for 
India and Paliistan. S/1100. 22 November 1948. 77 
pp. and 28 annexes, mimeo. 
Report of the Administration of tlie British/United 
States Zone of the Free Territory of Trieste. 1 July 
to 30 September 1948. S/1174, January 5, 1948. ii, 37 
pp. mimeo. 
Letter Dated 10 January 1949 from the Chairman and 
Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission for 
India and Palsiston Addressed to the President of the 
Security Council Transmitting the Second Interim 
Report of the Commission. S/1196, January 10, 1949. 
35 pp. mimeo. 
Letter, Dated 30 November 1948, from the Acting Mediator 
to the Secretary-General Transmitting a Report Con- 
cerning the Deaths of United Nations Observers. 
S/1099, 2 December 1948. 10 pp. mimeo. 

General Assembly 

Official Records of the Third Session 

. Second Part of the Report of the United Nations 

Temporary Commission on Korea. Volume II — An- 
nexes I-VII. Supplement No. 9 (A/575/Add.4). 38 
pp. Printed. 40«f. 

First Part of the Report of the United Nations 

Temporary Commission on Korea. Volume Ill- 
Annexes IX-XII. Supplement No. 9 (A/575/Add.2). 
304 pp. Printed. $3.00. 

Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on 

Palestine. Supplement No. 11 (A/648). 57 pp. 
Printed. 70^. 

Supplementary Report of the United Nations Special 

Committee on the Balkans, Covering the period from 
17 June to 10 September 1948. Supplement No. 8A 
(A/644), iv, 17 pp. Printed. 25^. 



' BOTJ^TiN of Feb. 20, 1949, p. 235. 

' Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 29G0 Broadway, New York 27, New 
York. Other materials (mimeographed or processed docu- 
ments) may be consulted at certain designated libraries 
in the United States. 

517 



The United States in the United Nations 



[April 11,-22] 

Human Rights in Bulgaria and Hungary 

The Ad Hoc Political Coniiuittee of the General 
Assembly on X\^v\\ 1!) bepaii consideration of the 
question of observance in Bulgaria and Hungary 
of human riji:hts and fundamental freedoms, in- 
cluding; relifjious and civil liberties, with special 
reference to recent trials of church leaders. Be- 
fore beginning general debate, the Committee 
agreed to invite rei)resentatives of Bulgaria and 
Hungary to participate in tiie debate, but witliout 
vote. Three principal draft resolutions on sug- 
ge.sted procedures for dealing with this question 
were submitted. 

A Cuban draft proposed the establishment of a 
special 15-member fact finding committee to eluci- 
date the acts alleged to have been committed in 
Bulgaria and Hungary against human rights and 
fundamental freedoms. 

, A second draft resolution, submitted by Bolivia, 
proposed that the General Assembly express its 
"deep concern," support the steps taken by the 
states signatories to the peace treaties regarding 
the accusations, and retain the matter on the agenda 
for the fourth session of the Assembly. 

A third draft resolution, submitted by Australia, 
proposes the establishment of a smaller committee 
of inquiry to investigate tlie matter. 

The U.S. Delegate Benjamin V. Cohen on April 
19 stated that the issues involved in this case weie 
of "intense interest" to the entire international 
community. There was no intention on the part of 
the United States, he added, to interfere in the na- 
tional affairs of Bulgaria or Hungary or to favor 
any i)articular political groups ; however, altlioiigli 
these states under the peace treaties had under- 
taken to safegiuird the civil and religious liberties 
of their people, they had violated human rights in 
a "deliberate, systematic and continuous" manner. 

The Soviet Deleofate Malik presented on AT)ri] 
21 a 70-minute defense of human rights in Hun- 
gary and Bulgaria and asserted tlie trial of the 
churchmen there was in accordance with that j^art 
of the two peace treaties calling for disbanding of 
all "fascist" organizations. Mr. Cohen repudiated 
as "baseless and absurd" charges that the United 
States had conspired with the accused clerg}-men. 
and remarked that those mIio i)rofess to want a 
friendly and peaceful world should act in this 
spirit. 

Freedom of Information 

Continuing on ait icle-by-article consideration of 
the draft convention on the gathering and inter- 



national transniission of news, the General As- 
sembly Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Com- 
mittee reached agreement on six additional 
articles. The Committee also voted to merge with 
the newsgathering convention the second draft 
convention providing for the establishment of an 
internati(mal right of official correction to provide 
])rotection against false or distorted reporting 
likely to injure friendly relations between nations. 
A Norwegian projjosal for referring disputes over 
the "right of correction" provisions to the Interna- 
tional Court of Justice for arbitration was also 
adopted. 

Full access to news, within the national security 
limits, would be provided to all foreign cor- 
respondents in states acceding to this convention, 
according to the approved article 3. 

Article 4 provides that governments should not 
censor peacetime news dispatches going abroad un- 
less they I'elate directly to national defense. The 
United States Delegate Erwin Canham said that 
the United States would have preferred no pro- 
visions at all validating i)eacetinie censorship since 
this Government opposes peactime censorship in 
any form. If the definition included in article -4 
were not included in the draft convention, how- 
ever, Mr. Canham said that other articles might be 
inter])reted as allowing even broader censor.ship. 
The Committee rejected an amendment proposed 
by Poland that would permit censorship "within 
tlie limits laid down by the laws and regulations 
providing for national security." 

Article h provides that a correspondent lawfully 
admitted by a contracting state cannot be expelled 
on account of any lawful exercise of his rights as 
a correspondent. 

Article (> gives to such correspondents or infor- 
mation agencies equal access to all transmission 
facilities used generally and publicly for news 
disjiatches, and at the general rates. 

The seventii article would give equal rights and 
o])portunity for dispatches of correspondents and 
information agencies outside a particular contract- 
ing state to be transmitted into that state. A 
limiting Polish proj^osal was rejected. 

Debate m\ the final article was delayed until the 
delegates could hear from tlieir countries concern- 
ing the U. S. proposal submitted by Mrs. Roosevelt 
that, in view of the apparent conflict between ]u-o- 
visions of this ai-ticle and the sweeping restrictions 
on telecommunication contained in the Interna- 
tional Telecommunication Union convention, sig- 
natories of the present convention waive their 
rights of restriction under the Itu convention. 



Depatimen^ of Sfafe Bulletin 



International Law Commission 

The Ilc in a topic-by-topic discussion of the U. 
N. Secretariat's survey of international law in re- 
lation to codification tentatively approved 14 
topics as suitable for codification. The first three 
were selected as "priority" items. The selected 
topics included law of treaties, diplomatic inter- 
course and immunities, consular intercourse and 
immunities, law of state responsibility, law of 
arbitral procedure, the regime of territoi'ial 
waters, the law of nationality, the treatment of 
aliens, right of asylum, recognition of states, suc- 
cession of states and governments, jurisdiction 
over foreign states, jurisdiction with regard to 
crimes committed outside national territory, and 
the regime of the high seas. The Chairman, Man- 
ley O. Hudson, of the U. S., in suggesting two of 
the three topics given priority, said that in view of 
past faihu-es, the Commission should choose sub- 
jects on which it has a good chance to arrive at a 
result. 

Among the rejected topics was the proposal to 
include the law of war, which was opposed vigor- 
ously by most of the members. In the discussion 
Mr. Hudson drew attention to the opinion as 
stated in the Secretariat report that the codifica- 
tion plan should not include the laws of war since 
the United Nations Charter excluded the concept 
of its legality. 

Italian Colonies 

The General Assembly 58-nation Political & 
Security Committee continued general discussion 
on disposal of Italy's former African colonies in 
seven lengthy meetings during the week without 
reaching agreement. The debate to date has de- 
veloped, in general terms, resulting in four princi- 
pal types of proposals, with variations Avithin the 
categories. The Soviet bloc reconnnended a 
United Nations trusteeship. India and Pakistan 
have supported this position with certain modifi- 
cations. Italian Foreign Minister Sforza has 
made a bid for Italian trusteeship. A large num- 
ber of South American states and some Western 
European states share this view. The Arabs have 
placed emphasis on independence for a unified 
Libya. The United States suggestions supported 
by the United Kingdom were that Eastern Eritrea 
be ceded to Ethiopia, that Italy administer Italian 
Somaliland under a United Nations trusteeship, 
and that Cyrenaica in Eastern Libya be placed 
under British administration regardless of the de- 
cision of whether to deal with Libya as a whole or 
in part, and that Libya should be placed under 
a United Nations trusteeship with ])rimary em- 
phasis on achieving eaidy independence. 



On April 20, the Australian Delegate suggested 
the establishment of a special commission with 
powers to visit the former colonies, and if neces- 
sary to investigate, analyze, and collate data and 
report recommendations foi' settlement of the 
question to the September session. 

General Assembly Procedure 

The Ad Hoc Political Committee of the Gen- 
eral Assembly approved April 18 a Scandinavian 
proposal to establish a 15-member committee to 
consider methods and procedures for expediting 
General Assembly functioning. By this proposal 
the special committee, of which the United States 
would be one of the members, would report to the 
Secretary General by August 15 and, if possible, 
to the present session of the General Assembly. 
The Soviet bloc abstained in the voting. 

Commission for India and Pakistan 

The UN Commission for India and Pakistan on 
April 15 presented both dominions with proposals 
for a truce agreement in the state of Jammu and 
Kashmir, pending a plebiscite to determine 
whether the state goes to India or Pakistan. The 
Commission said that the proposals represent an 
adjustment of viewpoints within the framework 
of commitments already entered into. 

IRO 

The Iro has announced plans for opening youth 
centers for teen-aged displaced persons in Austria, 
Italy, and the U.S. zone of Germany. The experi- 
mental center, which opened in August in the 
British zone, where about 60 adolescents of both 
sexes assembled in a community, was so successful 
that similar centers were planned. The stay of 
the young people in the center is expected to be 
short, but the aim is to give them in addition to a 
general knowledge of secondary education and 
language training a basis for good phy.sical and 
moral health and for vocational guidance. 

International Trade Organization 

More than 500 delegates and assistants have 
assembled in Annecy, France, for the largest trade 
meeting ever convened to discuss tariff barriers 
and other problems of international trade. These 
representatives from 34 countries have assembled 
under the auspices of the 23 countries comprising 
the original contracting parties to the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which resulted 
from tariff negotiations held at Geneva in 1947. 
It is expected that three months of continuous 
sessions will be necessary to complete the negotia- 
tions. The United States is one of the original 
contracting parties. 



AprW 24, 1949 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES 



Opening of Tariff Negotiations at Annecy, France 



Message From Secretary Acheson ' 

I wish to take this opportunity to extend my 
greetings to you who have gathered in Annecy to 
participate in tiie tliird session of tlie contracting 
parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade and the ensuing tariff negotiations. 

The United States Government believes that 
effective international cooperation in economic 
matters is essential to the success of any program 
for assuring a lasting peace and that it can and 
should take a variety of forms. Moreover, effec- 
tive international economic achievement requires 
the active participation of many countries on a 
cooperative democratic basis. 

We in the United States firmly support and par- 
ticipate in the economic activities of the United 
Nations and its specialized agencies. We are also 
giving special help to the countries which have 
chosen to participate in the European Recovery 
Program. In his inaugural address, President 
Truman recently stated that the United States 
stands ready to join with other countries to pro- 
mote economic development by facilitating the ex- 
change of technological information and stimulat- 
ing tlie flow of capital. In his Economic Report 
to the Congi-ess in January the President pointed 
out that the Havana Charter for an International 
Trade Organization lays the foundation for a re- 
turn to reasonable freedom of world trade. He 
is expected to send the charter shortly to the Con- 
gress for approval. 

On a par with these cooperative endeavors and 
of longer standing is the program to reduce trade 
barriers and eliminate discriminatory trade prac- 
tices through trade-agreement negotiations. This 
program is of great value in its own right and is 
essential to the permanent .success of other pro- 
grams of economic cooperation. The conclusion 
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
between 23 countries at Geneva in 1947 laid a firm 
foundation for the sound expansion of trade. The 
adherence of 11 additional countries to the General 
Agreement will mark another important milestone 
in our progress toward world recovery. I send 
you my sincere best wishes for a full measure of 
success in your important deliberations. 

U. S. Delegation 

The Department of State on April 5 announced 
that the President has approved the composition 
of the United States Delegation to the third ses- 
520 



sion of the contracting parties to the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the tariff 
negotiations with 11 countries desiring to accede 
to the General Agreement, which convened at 
Annecy, France, on April 8 and April 11, 1949, 
respectively. 

The chairman of the delegation was Wood- 
bury Willoughby, Chief. Division of Commercial 
Policy, Department of State, and the Vice Chair- 
man was John W. Evans, Director of the Com- 
modities Division of the Office of International 
Trade. Department of Commerce. The remain- 
ing delegates were the other members of the 
interdepartmental Trade Agreements Committee, 
of wliich Mr. Willougliby is chairman. 

The meeting of the contracting parties consid- 
ered various technical matters affecting the pres- 
ent operation of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade, concluded at Geneva in 1947, and fu- 
ture procedures with regard to it. 

The tariff negotiations between the 23 contract- 
ing parties to the General Agreement and the 11 
countries which desire to accede to it extended 
the area and volume of world trade covered by tliis 
unprecedented agreement for the reduction of ex- 
cessive trade barriers. 

The countries which negotiated for the pur- 
pose of acceding to the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade are Denmark, Finland, Swe- 
den. Italy, Greece, Liberia, Haiti, Dominican Re- 
public, Nicaragua, Colombia, and Uruguay. Peru 
and El Salvador, which originally planned to join 
in the negotiations, have indicatecl that they are 
not able to begin negotiations at this time. 

In preparation for the negotiations the United 
States has followed the customary trade-agree- 
ments procedures. Notice of intention to nego- 
tiate and lists of products on which possible United 
States tariff concessions may be considered were 
published on November 5 and December 17, 1948, 
and public hearings were held by the Committee 
for Reciprocity Information on December 7-14, 
1948, and on January 25-27, 1949. 

A list of the members of the United States Del- 
egation follows : 

Chairmfin 

Woodbur.y Willougliby, Chief, Division of Commercial 
Policy, Department of State, and Cliairman, Interde- 
partmental Trade Agreements Committee 

'Rend at the ses.sion by Woodbury Willoughby, Chair- 
man of the U.S. Delegation on Apr. 11, 1949, and" released 
to the press on the same date. 

Department of State Bulletin 



Vice Chairman 

John W. Evans, Director, Commodities Division, OfiBce of 
luteruational Trade, Department of Commerce 

Delegates 

Philip Arnow, Economist, Department of Labor 

Prentice N. Dean, Division of International Programs, 
National Military Establishment 

Iver Olsen, Assistant Chief, Commercial Policy and United 
Nations Division, Department of the Treasury 

Robert B. Schwenger, Chief, Regional Investigations 
Branch, Office of I-'oreign Agricultural Relations, De- 
partment of Agriculture 

Advisers 

Walter Hollis, Assistant to the Legal Adviser, Department 
of State 

Vernon L. Phelps, Adviser on European Commercial Af- 
fairs, Division of Commercial Policy, Department of 
State 

George Bronz, Special Assistant to the General Counsel, 
Depai'tment of the Treasury 

William R. Johnson, Deputy Commissioner of Customs, 
Bureau of Customs, Department of the Treasury 

Carl E. Christopherson, Foreign Service Officer, Office of 
International Trade, Department of Commerce 

H. P. MacGowan, Adviser on Trade Agreements Policy, 
Office of International Trade, Department of Com- 
merce 

Floyd E. Davis, Acting Head, Livestock and Wool Division, 
Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations, Department 
of Agriculture 

Lionel C. Holm, Executive Assistant to the Administrator, 
Production and Marketing Administration, Depart- 
ment of Agriculture 

F. A. Motz, Attach^, American Embassy, Paris 

George B. Rogers, Agricultural Economic Statistician, 
Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Department of Ag- 
riculture 

Tariff Negotiating Teams 

Denmark-Finland 

Prentice N. Dean, Head, Division of International Pro- 
grams, National Military Establishment 

Julean Arnold, Jr., Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

H. P. MacGowan, Adviser on Trade Agreements Policy, 
Office of International Trade, Department of Com- 
merce 

SVPEDEN 

Avery F. Peterson, Head, Counselor, American Embassy, 
Stockholm 

H. Arnold Quirin, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

Grant Olson, Analyst, Scandinavian Section, Office of In- 
ternational Trade, Department of Commerce 

Italy 

Homer S. Fox, Head, Counselor, American Embassy, 
Ottawa 

John M. Kennedy, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

Carl E. Christopherson, Foreign Service Officer, Office of 
International Trade, Department of Commerce 

Howard F. Shepston, Analyst, Italian Section, Office of 
International Trade, Department of Commerce 

Greece and Liberia 

Horace H. Smith Head, First Secretary, American Em- 
bassy, Athens 

C. Thayer White, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

Samuel Goldberg, Acting Chief, Near East-Africa Section, 
Office of International Trade, Department of Com- 
merce 

Dominican Republic-Haiti 

Daniel M. Braddock, Head, First Secretary, American 
Embassy, Madrid 

Amelia Hood, Country Specialist, Division of Commer- 
cial Policy, Department of State 

April 24, 7949 

833209—49 3 



Albert J. Powers, Chief, Caribbean Section, Office of In- 
ternational Trade, Department of Commerce 

Colombia, Uruguay, and Nicaragua 

Howard H. Tewksbury, Head, Chief, Division of River 
Plate Affairs, Department of State 

Elizabeth McGrory, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

William F. Gray, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

Anthony J. Poirier, Tariff and Trade Agreements Spe- 
cialist, Office of International Trade, Department of 
Commerce 

Frederick R. Mangold, Foreign Service Staff, Office of 
International Trade, Department of Commerce 

Consultants 

Ben Dorfman, Chief Economist, United States Tariff 

Commission 
G. Patrick Henry, Economist, United States Tariff 

Commission 
Willard W. Kane, Commodity Specialist, United States 

Tariff Commission 
Hyman Leikind, Commodity Specialist, United States 

Tariff Commission 
Allyn C. Loosley, Principal Economist, United States 

Tariff Commission 
David Lynch, Principal Economist, United States Tariff 

Commission 

Commodity Specialists 

Thomas C. Mason, Commodity Analyst, Forest Products 

Branch, Office of International Trade, Department of 

Commerce 
William H. Myer, Assistant Chief, Machinery and Motive 

Products Branch, Office of International Trade, De- 
partment of Commerce 
J. Joseph W. Palmer, Chief, Iron and Steel Section, Office 

of International Trade, Department of Commerce 
Nathan B. Salant, Chief, Economic Programs Section, 

Textile and Leather Branch, Office of International 

Ti-ade, Department of Commerce 
George A. Sallee, Chief, Dairy, Poultry and Fish Products 

Section, Office of International Trade, Department 

of Commerce 
Secretariat: Sijerial Assistant to the Chairman 
Arthur C. Nagle, Foreign Affairs Specialist, Division of 

International Conferences, Department of State 

Techiiical 

Technical Secretary 

James H. Lewis, Acting Assistant Chief, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 
Trade Agreements Committee Staff 

Robert W. Shaw, Foreign Affairs Analyst, Committee Sec- 
retariat Brancli, Department of State 

George C. Spiegel, Country Specialist, Division of Com- 
mercial Policy, Department of State 

M. Marguerite Dotye, International Trade Economist, De- 
partment of Commerce 

M. Margaret McCoy, Divisional Assistant, Division of 
Commercial Policy, Department of State 



Rubber Study Group: Sixth Meeting Ends 

Tlie Department of State received word on 
April 5 that the Sixth Meeting of the Rubber 
Study Group, held in London under the chairman- 
ship of Sir Gerard Clauson, K.C.M.G., O.B.E., 
Assistant Under Secretary of State, Colonial Of- 
fice, ended on April 1, 1949. The Vice Chairmen 
were A. Pirelli, of the Italian Delegation, and 
W. A. David, of the Liberian Delegation. 



The meeting was attended by delegations from 
Australia, Belgium, the British Colonies, Burma, 
Canada, Ceylon, Czechoslovakia, I)eiimark, 
France, Hungary, Italy, Liberia, the Netherlands 
and Indonesia, the United Kingdom, and the 
United States and by observers from the United 
Nations Interim Co-ordinating Committee for In- 
ternational Commodity Arrangements and from 
the International Rubber Development Com- 
mittee. A representative of Siam was also pres- 
ent. Donald D. Kennedy, Chief, International 
Resources Division, Department of State, was 
chairman of the United States Delegation. 

The principal objects of the meeting were: 

1. To examine the statistical position regarding 
the production and consumption of rubber 
throughout the world. 

2. To review the world rubber situation in the 
liglit of tlie changes in that position since the fifth 
Studv Group Meeting held in Washington in 
April, 1948. 

3. To consider measures designed to expand 
world consumption of rubber. 

The group examined the statistical position and 
made estimates for natural rubber production and 
consumption of natural and synthetic rubber dur- 
ing 1949. It was estimated tliat the world pro- 
duction of natural rubber would be in the neigli- 
borhood of l,r)7r),000 long tons and consumption 
of natural and syntlietic rubber miglit be in the 
neighborhood of 1,450,000 and 450,000 long tons, 
respectively. 

These figures make no allowance for govern- 
mental stockpiling. Tables 1 and 2 give the esti- 
mates made by the group. 

Much of the time of the meeting was devoted 
to national statements by the delegations present, 
and full opportunity was given to the delegations 
to question one another. Among the subjects to 
which attention was drawn were the present eco- 
nomic position of the producers of natural rubber 
and social conditions in their countries, recent ad- 
vances in the synthetic rubber industry, the grad- 
ing and packing of natural rubber, and the costs 
and prices of both types of rubber. 

The group continued its policy of examining all 
possible means for encouraging the expansion of 
the world consumption of rubber. The group 
recognized that a great deal of valuable develop- 
ment work on existing rubber products was being 
done throughout the world, and considered that 
the most immediate large-scale increase in the con- 
sumption of rubber would be achieved by an in- 
tensification of this work, particularly in certain 
fields. 

The group emphasized the great importance 
which it attached to the speedy application of the 
results of research into new uses of rubber. In 
this connection, the group paid a tribute to the 
work of the International Rubber Development 



Committee and invited the Committee to continue 
to send observers to its meetings. 

The group were informed of the intention of the 
French producers to grade and market their rub- 
ber on its intrinsic properties (to be known as 
specification rubber) as well as on external appear- 
ance. 

The Rubber Study Group will hold its next 
meeting some time during the second quarter of 
1950, the precise date and the place to be decided 
by the management committee. 

Tahle 1. — Estimated natural rubber production, 19^9 

Territory : i,ooo i,ooo 

long tona long tons 

Malaya 700 British Borneo . G2 

Indonesia .... 500 Biiima 12 

Ceylon 90 Liberia 27 

Indochina .... 45 Other countries . 139 



Total 



. 1,575 



Table 2. — Estimated natural and synthetic rubber consump- 
tion, 1949 



U.S. A 

U.K 

France .... 
Netherlands . 
Belgium . . . 
Czechoslovakia 

Italy 

Denmark. . . 
Hungary . . . 
.\ustralia . . . 
Canada. . . . 
Other countries 

Total . 



Natural Synthetic 



1,000 IrtT.Q 
tous 

600 

18.3 

97 

10 

15 

30 

33 

5 

3 

30 

40 

404 



1,450 



1,000 long 

tons 

410 

2 

8 



tow 

1,010 

185 

105 

10 

15 

30 

36 

5 

3 

30 

60 

411 



1,900 



' Excluding Russian-produced synthetic rubber. 
' A small amount is expected to be used. 

U. S. Delegation to Conference for Drawing Up 
Convention for Protection of War Victims 

The Department of State announced on April 
11 that the President has approved the desig- 
nation of Leiand Harrison, former American 
Minister to Switzerland and Raymund T. Tin- 
gling, Assistant Legal Adviser, Department of 
State, as Chairman and Vice Chairman, respec- 
tively, of the United States Delegation to the 
Diplomatic Conference for the Drawing Up of a 
New Convention Intended to Protect War Vic- 
tims. The conference is scheduled to convene at 
Geneva on April 21, 1949. Other members of the 
United States Delegation are as follows : 

Albert E. Clnttenburg, Jr., First Secretary, American 

Embassy, Lisbon 
Brig. Gen. Joseph V. Dillon, Provost Marshal General, 

Department of the Air Forces 



Department of Stale Bulletin 



Robert W. Glnnane, Special Assistant to the Attorney 
General, Department of Justice _ 

Commander Charles Hunsicker, Jr., Head, International 
Law Branch, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 
Department of the Navy 

William H. McCahon, Special Assistant to the Chief, 
Division of Protective Services, Department of 
State ,. 1, , „ 

Maj. Gen. Edwin P. Parker, Jr., Provost Marshal Gen- 
eral, Department of the Army 

Harold W. Starr, Associate Counselor, American National 
Red Cross 

The Conference will consider the revision of 
the two Geneva conventions of 1929 relative to the 
treatment of the sicli and wounded and prisoners 
of war, and the revision of The Hague convention 
of 1907 concerning naval warfare, which is com- 
monly referred to as the hospital ships convention. 
Also to be discussed will be the establishment of 
a new convention on the treatment of civilians 
in wartime. 

It is expected that the forthcoming Conference 
will be divided into two parts. The first four or 
five weeks will be devoted to a detailed review 
and final drafting of the proposed revisions of the 
conventions. After a short adjournment the sec- 
ond part of the Conference will be held for the 
formal signing of the new conventions. 

This Government participated in preliminary- 
informal discussions on this subject at a meeting 
of government experts convened at Geneva under 
the auspices of the International Committee of 
the Ked Cross in April 1947. At that meeting, 
14 countries were represented, and considerable 
progress was made in the formulation of revised 
and new draft conventions. These discussions 
were continued on a somewhat broader scale at the 
Seventeenth International Red Cross Conference 
held at Stockholm in August 1948, in which 49 
governments and 51 national Red Cross societies 
participated. 

American Educator To Visit Latin American 
Law Schools 

Philip W. Thayer, Dean of the School of Ad- 
vanced International Studies, Washington, D. C, 
has been awarded a grant-in-aid by the Depart- 
ment of State for a visit of approximately five 
weeks beginning March 31 to six of the other 
American republics to confer with university offi- 
cials and others on problems of mutual interest 
in the field of legal education. This trip is in 
continuation of a project initiated last year when 
Mr. Thayer made a similar visit to the Univer- 
sity of Habana. His present trip will include 
visits to the principal cities of Uruguay, Argen- 
tina, Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia, where 
he will confer with deans and faculty members 
of law schools and with other leaders in the field 
of law, concerning arrangements for a subsequent 
interchange of ideas on a continuing basis. 

April 24, 7949 



World Trade Week, 1949 

A PROCLAMATION' 

Whereas international trade provides the me- 
dium by which the nations of the world exchange 
the products of their resources and skills ; and 

Whereas the expansion of import and export 
trade improves standards of living, encourages 
full employment of labor and productive facili- 
ties, and speeds the development of human and 
natural resources throughout the world, thus lay- 
ing the foundation for lasting world prosperity 
and peace; and 

Whereas the United States advocates the re- 
moval of unnecessary restrictions and discrimina- 
tions in international trade and accordingly has 
initiated a reciprocal-trade-agreements program 
and has taken steps in concert with other nations 
toward the establishment of an International 
Trade Organization : 

Now, therefore, I, Harry S. Truman, Presi- 
dent of the United States of America, do hereby 
proclaim the week commencing May 22, 1949, as 
World Trade Week; and I urge the appropriate 
officials of the several States, Territories, and pos- 
sessions of the United States, as well as the munici- 
palities and other political subdivisions of the 
country, to cooperate in the observance of that 
week. . . 

I also invite business, educational, and civic 
groups, and the people of the United States gen- 
erally, to observe World Trade Week with cere- 
monies, exhibits, and other appropriate activi- 
ties. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my 
hand and caused the Seal of the United States 
of America to be affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this 5th day of 

April in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred 

and forty-nine, and of the Independence 

[seal] of the United States of America the one 

hundred and seventy-third. 



By the President: 

Dean Aciieson, 
Secretary of State. 

THE FOREIGN SERVICE 
Confirmation 

On April 6, 1049, the Senate confirmed the nomination of 
John J. Muccio to be American Ambassador Extraordinary 
and Plenipotentiary to the RepubUc of Korea. 




' Proc. 2834, 14 Fed. Reg. 1663. 



523 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



U.S., U.K., and France Reach Agreement on German Reparation Program 



[Released to the press April 13] 

The Department of State announced on April 
13 that agreement had been reached by the Gov- 
ernments of the United States, United Kingdom, 
and France, as the powers responsible for occupa- 
tion of the Western zones of Germany, for the re- 
vision of the lists of capital equipment to be 
removed from Western Germany as reparation. 
This revision was made in order to bring the 
reparation dismantling program into harmony 
■with the European Kecovery Program. Under it 
those plants which, if retained in Germany, can 
contribute most effectively to the coordinated eco- 
nomic revival of the countries participating in the 
European Recovery Program will be removed from 
the reparation dismantling H.st. 

In accordance with the agreement reached by 
the three governments, certain equipment from 15!) 
plants previously scheduled for removal as repara- 
tion will be retained in Germany. The amount 
of equipment which had previously been scheduled 
for removal from these plants varies from a single 
piece of equipment in a plant to the entire equip- 
ment of an operating factory. The removal of 
equipment not yet completely dismantled and re- 
moved will be completed as quickly as possible. 

This agreement, which constitutes a final de- 
cision with regard to the removal of those plants 
originally selected in AVestern Germany, should 
enable both the Allied recipients of reparation and 
responsible authorities in Western Germany to 
plan promptly for the effective use of the equip- 
ment to be removed and that to be retained. 

A revised list of plants subject to reparation has 
been communicated to the Inter-Allied Repara- 
tion Agency at Brussels by the three governments. 

The equipment which will be retained in Ger- 
many is located in 32 plants in the steel industry, 
88 metal working plants, 32 chemical plants, and 7 
plants in the nonferrous metal industries. 

Only 5 of the 32 affected plants in the steel in- 
dustry produce crude steel. The retention of 
equipment in this industry will result in a nomi- 
nal increase in the crude steel-making capacity of 
Western Germany of 165,000 tons per year beyond 
the present theoretical capacity of approximately 
13,300,000 tons per year. The limitation on crude 
steel production in the three Western zones of 
Germany of 11,100,000 tons per year (being a total 
of 10,700,000 tons per year in the Bizone and 
400,000 tons in the French zone) has not been 
changed. The difference between the actual pro- 
duction of steel under the limitation, and the 



theoretical capacity of about 13,500,000 tons per 
year to be left in W estern Germany is required for 
greater flexibility and economy of operation under 
conditions of changing demand for finished steel 
products. 

These same reasons underlie the decision to 
retain the equipment in the steel-finishing plants 
which constitute the remainder of the 32 affected 
plants or part plants in the steel industry. The 
steel-finishing capacity in these plants which per- 
mits the fabrication of plates, sheets, and tuoes, 
in addition to that previously permitted, is con- 
sidered necessary if Germany is to use her crude 
steel-making capacity most effectively and make 
as great a contribution to European recover}' as 
possible within the established limitation on pro- 
duction. 

The revision of the list of plants was made at 
the suggestion of the U.S. Government. In pro- 
posing such a revision, the United States believed 
it appropriate that account be taken in the repara- 
tion program of the European Recovery Program 
and the participation of Western Germany in that 
program. The reparation program was designed 
to bring about the removal of capital equipment 
to Allied countries, where it could be usefully em- 
ployed, when this equipment is in excess of Ger- 
man peaceful needs. The U.S. Government felt 
that, in view of the possibilit}' which the Euro- 
pean Recover}' Program offered for meeting the 
new investment requirements of the Allied coun- 
tries to an increased extent from new capital 
equipment, and of the possibility of more effec- 
tive use of German resources in the interest of 
the common good of the countries participating 
in the European Recovery Program, a reexami- 
nation of the reparation program would be ap- 
propriate. ERP also offered new possibilities of 
achieving one of the aims of the reparation pro- 
gram, namely the rehabilitation of the economies 
of the European countries which had been dis- 
located during the war. 

A preliminary examination of the list of plants 
scheduled for removal led the U.S. Government 
to select 381 for further study. This study was 
made by the Humphrey Committee (Industrial 
Advisory Committee), appointed by Paul Hoff- 
man, Economic Cooperation Administrator. Mr. 
Hoffman had been charged by the Congress with 
making .such a study in section 115 (f) of the Eco- 
nomic Cooperation Act, reading as follows: 

Thp .Vdministrator will request the Secretary of State 
to obtain agreement of those countries concernpfl that such 
capital equipment as is scheduled for removal from the 

Department of State Bulletin 



three western zones of Germany be retained in Germany if 
such retention will most effectively serve the purposes of 
the European recovery program. 

This Committee was headed by George M. Hum- 
phrey, President of M. A. Haiina Company, and 
included Frederick V. Geier, President of Cin- 
cinnati Milling Machine Company; John L. Mc- 
Caffrey, President of International Harvester 
Company; Gwilym A. Price, President of West- 
inghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company; 
and Charles E. Wilson, President of General 
Motors Corporation. 

The Committee in turn engaged the services of 
four leading engineering firms to make a factual 
review of the chemical, laonferrous metal, and me- 
chanical engineering plants. They also obtained 
the assistance of George Wolf, president of the 
United States Steel Export Corporation, and a 
group of his associates, to review the steel indus- 
try of A^'^estern Germany and to investigate the 
particular plants scheduled for reparation. 

After a careful examination of the plants and 
consultation with British and French experts, 
the Committee submitted a report to the ECA Ad- 
ministrator on January 12, 1949, recommending 
the retention in Germany of certain equipment in 
167 plants of the 381 which it has been requested 
to examine. The report of the Committee was ap- 
proved by the Administrator who requested the 
Secretary of State to seek the agreement of the 
British and French Governments, as powers in 
occupation in Western Germany, to the retention 
of these plants in Germanj^ The Humphrey 
Committee report is being made public on April 
13 by ECA. 

Discussion among the governments resulted in 
agreement to remove from Germany the equip- 
ment in eight plants and part of a ninth which 
the Humphrey Committee had recommended be 
retained in Germany. 

In addition to certain equipment in the 159 
plants to be retained under the present agreement, 
the French Government, before the Humphrey 
Committee recommendations had been formu- 
lated, decided to retain in the French zone equip- 
ment in 40 other plants or parts of plants which 
had been included in the list of 381 examined by 
the Humphrey Committee. 

The report of the Committee was discussed by 
the three Governments in conjunction with a re- 
port from the Military Governors of the Western 
zones of Germany on a revised list of prohibitions 
and restrictions which should be applied to Ger- 
man industry on security grounds. As a result 
of tliese discussions, coordinated agreements were 
reached by the three Governments on these sub- 



jects. The revised list of prohibited and re- 
stricted industries, which has been furnished to the 
three military governments for implementation, 
will be made public shortly. 

The Humphrey Committee recommended that 
the following plants be included among those re- 
tained in Germany. However, in the course of 
discussions among the Governments of France, 
the United Kingdom, and United States, it was 
agreed that these plants should be removed from 
Germany. The list follows: 

Bochumer Verein GusstaUfabrik, Bochum; 
Deutsche Edelstahlwerke (Tiegelstahl), Bochum; 
Klockner Werke A.G., Dusseldorf; August 
Thyssen Hiitte, A. G. ^Tiederrheinische, Duisburg ; 
Hoesch A. G., Hohenlimburg; I. G. Farben, buna 
plant, Ludwigshafen; I. G. Farben, synthetic am- 
monia plant, Oppau; and I. G. Farben, chlorine 
and caustic-soda plant, Ludwigshafen. The 
final decision on the August Thyssen Hiitte plant 
at Hamborn was to retain only the ore sintering 
and power generation equipment. 



Organization of Ruhr Autiiority 

Statement hy Secretary Acheson 

[Released to the press April 13] 

The organization of the International Author- 
ity for the Ruhr will commence as soon as the 
agreement of December 28, reached in London 
and recently approved by the three Foreign Min- 
isters at their meeting here in Washington, has 
been formally signed in London.^ 

Once the agreement has been signed, an organi- 
zation meeting will be summoned by the United 
Kingdom. This meeting will probably take 
place in London. At this meeting the organiza- 
tion of the Ruhr Authority will be worked out in 
detail. It is agreed that the Ruhr Authority will 
not begin exercising its functions until just before 
the German Federal Republic has been established. 
It was also difficult to do so until the Occupation 
Statute and the German Constitution had made 
further progress. There is therefore ample time 
for the organization of the Ruhr Authority to be 
perfected. 

The United States member on the Council of 
the International Authority for the Ruhr has not 
yet been selected. 



^ For related materials see Bulletin of June 20, 1948, 
p. 807 ; Jan. 9, 1949, p. 43 ; Apr. 3, 1949, p. 427 ; and Apr. 17, 
1949, p. 499. 



April 24, 1949 



Occupation Statute as a Practicable Basis of Cooperation 
With Future German Government 



STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ACHESON 



[Released to the press April 13] 

Our information indicates that the preliminary 
German reaction to the Occupation Statute lias 
not been unfav()ral)le. "We expect tliat there will 
be increased understanding as the German politi- 
cal leaders and public have a chance to examine 
the background against which the Washington 
agreements were made and the purpose thev are 
meant to serve. 

The Occupation Statute sets forth the maxi- 
mum powers which the Allied authorities mean 
to reserve.* The key issue for the future will be 
the manner and extent to which the Allied au- 
thorities will exercise their powers. In this con- 
nection, I .should like to point out that the three 
Governments had in mind establishing a practi- 
cable basis of cooperation with the future Federal 
German Government and declai-ed it to be a 
major objective to facilitate the closest integra- 
tion of the German people under their own gov- 
ernment within the framework of European as- 
sociation. 

I have noted the fears expressed that the occu- 
pying countries would use their powers to sup- 
jjress future German industrial competition. 



This is a baseless assumption, since it has always 
been our aim to make Germany self-sufficient to 
the greatest possible degree in order to reduce the 
need for outside assistance. 

The retention of control over research is a 
justifiable adjunct of continued German dcmili- 
laiization, and this is the context in which the 
pertinent ])rovision of the Occupation Statute 
was framed. 

As regards control over foreign trade, this is a 
protection of direct benefit to the German admin- 
istration itself, since we must assure ourselves 
that the funds we are supplying are properly 
used and are not squandered. In the meantime 
we will, of course, permit and encourage the Ger- 
mans to develop their own foreign trade resources 
so that they themselves may contribute as far as 
possible to their own support and to the produc- 
tion of goods for the benefit of Europe as a whole. 

With resjject to the Basic Law, certain features 
of which are still under discussion, our interest is 
that a solution will be found preserving the fed- 
eral character of tlie government which the Ger- 
mans have been authorized to set up, and we hope 
that earlj- agreement can be reached on this issue. 



U.S., U.K., and France Announce Agreement on Limitations 
on Certain Industries in Germany 



[Released to the press jointly with 
the Department of the Army April 13] 

The Departments of State and Army made 
public the text of an agreement which was an- 
nounced on A])ril 13 by the Military Governors of 
the United vStates, the United Kingdom, and 
France, in (Jermany, regarding limitations to be 
placed upon certain industries in (lermany in the 
interest of security. The agreement embodies 
recommendations recently formulated by repre- 
sentatives of the three Governments in London and 



'For text of statute see Bulleti.n of Apr. 17, li)49, p. 



500. 
526 



approved by the three Foreign Ministers on April 
8. 19-tO, in Washington, as part of the general 
agreement which they reached regarding Ger- 
many, in order to permit the establishment of a 
Cierman Federal (lovernment which could form 
a i)art of the European community. 

The question of prohibited and restricted in- 
dustries was considered by the three Governments 
in conjunction with the review of the reparation 
ilismantling program to bring that program into 
harmony with the European Recovery Program. 
In consequence, coordinated agreements were 
reached by the three Governments on both subjects. 

Department of State Bulletin 



A separate announcement was made with regard 
to reparations.^ 

Pursuant to instructions received from their 
respective governments to conchide the agreement 
hereinafter set forth, concerning proliibited and 
limited industries in tlie United States, United 
Kingdom and Frencli Occupied Areas of Germany 
(hereinafter referred to for the purposes of tliis 
Agreement as German}'), the United States, 
United Kingdom and French Military Governors 
and Commanders-in-Chief hereby promulgate the 
following agreement, effective forthwith: 

Article I 

The prohibitions laid down in this Agreement 
shall remain in force until the peace settlement. 

The limitations laid down in this Agreement 
shall remain in force until 1st January, 1953, or 
until the peace settlement, whichever is the earlier, 
and thereafter as may be agreed. 

Should no peace settlement have been concluded 
by 30th June, 1952, the Military Governors shall 
forthwith review these limitations in the light of 
the conditions then prevailing, taking into account 
the requirements of security of the Allied Powers, 
the state and effectiveness of the arrangements 
made to preserve security, and the requirements of 
European Recovery. Should the Militarj' Gov- 
ernors be unable within 90 days from 30th June, 
1952, to reach agreement on the limitations which 
in the absence of an earlier peace settlement shall 
be continued after 1st January, 1953, the matter 
shall be considered forthwith by the three 
Governments. 

Article II 

Action within the discretion of the Military 
Governors under the terms of the Agi-eement 
shall be taken by unanimous decision. 

Article III 

The production or manufacture of the follow- 
ing substances and war materials shall be pro- 
hibited, and all plants and equipment for tlieir 
production or manufacture not already removed 
or destroyed shall, as soon as possible, be re- 
moved from Germany or destroyed. 

(a) The items listed in Schedule A to Control 
Council Law No. -±3 (at Annex A) 

(6) Primary Magnesium 

(r) Beryllium 

Article IV 

The production, import, export, transijort, 
storage, use and i^ossession of radioactive mate- 
rials will be the subject of legislation by the Mili- 
tary Governors. 

Article V 

1. The production of synthetic rubber and bu- 
tadiene shall be prohibited. 

April 24, 1949 



2. In order to give effect to the foregoing pro- 
hibitions, facilities for copolymerization, facili- 
ties for research and testing of synthetic rubber, 
and facilities for the production of butadiene at the 
Huls, Ludwigshafen and Leverkusen plants shall 
be removed or destroyed. 

Article VI 

1. The production of petrol, oil and lubricants 
directly or indirectly from coal or brown coal 
by the Bergius hydrogenation process, the 
Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, or analogous proces- 
ses, shall be prohibited except, temporarily, to 
the extent inseparable from the production of 
hydrocarbon waxes for the manufacture of syn- 
thetic fatty acids for the production of washing 
materials. 

2. The synthesis of hydrocarbon waxes by the 
Fischer-Tropsch process shall be permitted only 
so long as the supply of fats and oils available in 
Germany is inadequate for the manufacture of 
sufficient washing materials without the use of 
syntlietic fatty acids, and in any event not beyond 
31st December, 1949. 

3. The Fischer-Tropsch plants not now engaged 
in the synthesis of hydrocarbon waxes shall, as 
soon as possible, be removed from Germany or 
destroyed. The two Fischer-Tropsch plants en- 
gaged in the synthesis of hydrocarbon waxes shall, 
as soon as possible after production ceases, be re- 
moved from Germany or destroyed. 

4. All Bergius plants except the Wesseling 
plant shall, as soon as possible, be removed from 
Germany or destroyed. The whole Wesseling 
plant shall be retained, and may be used for tlie 
refining of natural petroleum, for the hydrogen- 
ation of heavy residues from such refining and 
for the synthesis of ammonia and methanol. 

Article VII 

The manufacture of electronic valves shall 
be limited to a list to be drawn up by experts and 
published by the Military Governors of permitted 
types that shall not exceed either 10 watts dissi- 
pation or 250 megacycles frequency, subject to the 
authority of the Military Governors, acting upon 
the advice of the Military Security Board, to per- 
mit by licence the manufacture of types exceeding 
10 watts dissipation (but not exceeding 250 mega- 
cycles frequency) in case of necessity. 

Article VIII 

1. The capacity of the following industries 
shall be limited as stated below : 

(«) Steel, to that remaining after the removal 
of reparations ; 

(b) Electric arc and high frequency furnace 
steel furnace capacity, to that remaining after the 
removal of reparations; 

' See ante V. 524. 



(c) Primary Aluminium, to that sufficient to 
produce 85,000 tons of primary aluminium a year; 

(d) Shipbuilding, to that remaining!: after the 
removal as reparations of the followintf yards in 
addition to those four that have already been 
made available for reparations: 

CIXD 1200 Gerniania Werft. Kiel 

CIND 1235 Deutsche Werke, Kiel 

CIND 1287 Deutsche "Werft Reiherstieg. 
Hamburg ; 

(e) Ball and Roller Bearings, to that remain- 
ing after the removal as reparations of plant and 
equipment calculated to leave in Germany capac- 
ity sufficient to produce 33 million units a year on 
a one-shift basis, or pi'esent capacity, whichever 
is the less; 

(/) Synthetic Aminoina, to that remaining 
after the removal of reparations ; 

{g) Chlorine, to that remaining after the re- 
moval of reparations ; 

(A.) Styrene, to 20,000 tons annual working 
capacity. 

2. In order that the total authorised capacity 
of the industries limited in paragraph 1 above 
shall not be exceeded, no enterprise shall be per- 
mitted, (except under licence from the Military 
Governors, acting upon the advice of the Military 
Security Board) to increase the productive capac- 
ity of any of its plant or equipment that is en- 
gaged or partly engaged in any of the industries 
list in this article, whether it is proposed to effect 
the increase by the extension of existing facilities, 
the construction of new facilities, or the addition 
of new equipment. The construction of new plant 
and equipment, and the replacement or reconstruc- 
tion of that removed or destroj'ed shall likewise 
be prohibited except under licence from tlie ilili- 
tary Governors, acting upon the advice of the 
Military Security Board. The Militarj* Security 
Board will ensure that obsolete or wornout plant 
or equipment the replacement of which by new 
has been licensed is removed from Germany or 
destroyed. 

Article IX 

1. The production of steel shall be limited to 
11.1 million ingot tons a year. 

2. The production of primary aluminium shall 
be limited to 85.000 tons of primary aluminium 
a year. Xo specific limitation shall be placed on 
imports of bauxite and alumina ; they shall, how- 
ever, be controlled to prevent stock-piling in ex- 
cess of a number of months' supply, to be deter- 
mined by the Military Governors. 

3. The production of st3'rene shall be limited 
to 20,000 tons a year. 

Article X 

1. The manufacture of the following shall be 
prohibited : 



(a) Machine tools or other manufacturing 
equipment specifically designed for the produc- 
tion of weapons, ammunition or other implements 
of war. 

(b) Attachments, devices, tools or other ob- 
jects having no normal, peacetime use and spe- 
cifically designed to convert or adapt machine 
tools or other manufacturing equipment to the 
production of weapons, ammunition or other im- 
plements of war. 

2. The manufacture of the types of machine 
tools listed at Annex B shall be prohibited except 
under licence from the Military Governors, act- 
ing upon the advice of the Military Security 
Board, which licence will normally be granted un- 
less the Military Governoi-s have reason to think 
that the tools are not intended for peaceful pro- 
duction. 

Article XI 

1. The construction of ships whose size or 
speed does not exceed the limits contained in the 
following table shall be permitted in Germany, 
I)rovided that no ocean-going ships shall be con- 
structed until a German coastal fleet adequate for 
the requirements for European and German re- 
covery lias been reconstituted. (It has been esti- 
mated that Germanv will require for this purpose 
517.000 G. R. T., including 360,000 G. R. T. of dry 
cargo ships.) 

Dry cargo ships 12 knots 7,200 G. R. T. 
Tankers 12 knots 7,200 G. R. T. 

Small craft 12 knots 650 G. R. T. 

(including fishing vessels and ships other 

than cargo-carrying craft) 
Coastal vessels 12 knots 2,700 G. R. T. 

2. Notwithstanding the above provisions, Ger- 
manj' shall be permitted during the period of this 
Agreement to acquire abroad up to 100.000 G.R.T. 
of tankers of not more than 1-4 knots speed and 
10,700 G.R.T., being not less than 16,000 dwt; 
and up to 300,000 G.R.T. of dry cargo ships of not 
more than 12 knots speed and 7,200 G.R.T. 

3. In order to provide guidance for the Military 
Governors, a committee of experts is to be consti- 
tuted by the Governments of the United States, 
the United Kingdom and France with instructions 
to prepare, within three months, a report outlin- 
ing the types of ships, excluding ships primarily 
for passengers, which may be required by Ger- 
many, although they exceed in one respect or 
another the limits in paragraph 1 above. The 
committee shall also determine those features of 
design, construction, propulsion machinery, etc., 
which would facilitate use for or conversion for 
war purposes or Mhich do not conform to normal 
merchant marine practice and should therefore be 
prohibited. The recommendations of the commit- 
tee shall be transmitted to the Military Governors 
for action in accordance with the procedure out- 
lined in the following paragraph. 

Department of State Bulletin 



4. The Military Governors, acting upon the ad- 
vice of the Military Security Board, may permit 
by licence the construction or acquisition of ships 
exceeding in some respects the limitations on speed 
and tonnage shown in paragraph 1 above, in order 
to provide for ships having special purposes or 
functions. The Military Governors shall take 
into account the requirements of security and the 
necessity that ships shall be capable of operating 
economically in the trades or routes for which they 
are intended. 

5. Notwithstanding anything contained herein 
to the contrary, the Military Governors, acting 
upon the advice of the Military Security Board, 
may authorise under licence the construction of 
vessels having a greater speed than 12 knots that 
are shown to be essential for such purposes as the 
prevention of smuggling and illegal fishing, fron- 
tier control, fii-e fighting, or for the use of pilots or 
the civil police. 

6. The Military Governors shall promulgate the 
legislation necessary to give effect to the foregoing 
provisions ; and upon the coming into effect of such 
legislation the operation of the relevant provisions 
of Control Council Directives Nos. 33, 37, 44 and 
45 shall be suspended. Until the promulgation of 
such legislation, the building of any ships other 
than those permitted under the relevant provi- 
sions of Control Council Directives Nos. 33, 37, 44 
and 45 shall remain prohibited. 

Article XII 

Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted 
as impairing or reducing the powers with which 
the Military Security Board is vested. 



ANNEX A 
Schedule A to Control Council Law No. 43 

Grmip I 

(a) All weapons including atomic means of 
warfare or apparatus of all calibres and natures 
cajDable of projecting lethal or destructive pro- 
jectiles, liquids, gases or toxic substances, their 
carriages and mountings. 

(b) All projectiles for the above and their 
means of jDrojection or projjulsion. Examples of 
means of propulsion are cartridges, charges, etc. 

(c) All military means of destruction such as 
grenades, bombs, torpedoes, mines, depth mines, 
depth and demolition charges and self-propellecl 
charges. 

(d) All military cutting or piercing weapons 
(in French: white arms), (in Russian: cold 
arms), such as bayonets, swords, daggers and 
lances. 

Group II 

(a) All vehicles specially equipped or designed 
for military purposes such as tanks, armoured 

April 24, 1949 



cars, tank-carrying trailers, armoured railway 
rolling stock, etc. 

(b) Armour of all types for military purposes. 

(e) Harness specially designed for military 
purposes. 

Group III 

(a) (i) Range-finding apparatus of all kinds 
for militarj' pui'poses; 

(ii) Aiming, guiding, and computing devices 
for fire control ; 

(iii) Locating devices of all kinds (particu- 
larly all devices for radio direction finding and all 
devices for radio detection) ; 

(iv) Instruments for assisting observations 
of fire or for the remote control of all moving 
objects. 

(b) All signalling and inter-communication 
equipment and installations specially designed for 
war purposes ; all apparatus for radio interference. 

(c) Searchlights with mirror diameter of more 
than 45 cms. 

(d) Optical instruments of all kinds specially 
designed or intended for war purposes. 

(e) Survey and cartographic equipment and in- 
struments of all kinds specially designed for war 
purposes. Military maps and equipment for using 
them. 

(/) Military engineering tools, machinery and 
equipment such as special bridging materials. 

(g) Personal military equipment and uniforms, 
and military insignia and decorations. 

(h) Cryptographic machines and devices used 
for cipher purposes. 

(/) All camouflage and dazzle devices. 

Any of the materials listed in Group III, ex- 
cept for electronic devices such as radar, radio- 
goniometric and similar equipment, that have a 
normal peacetime use and are not specially de- 
signed for military use, are excluded from the pro- 
visions of paragraph 1, Article I of the Law. 

Group IV 

(a) Warships of all classes. All ships and 
floating equipment specially designed for servic- 
ing wai'ships. All ships with characteristics ex- 
ceeding those required for normal peacetime uses ; 
or designed or constructed for conversion into 
warships or for military use. 

(b) Special machinery, equipment and instal- 
lations which in time of peace are normally used 
solely in warships. 

(c) Submersible craft of all kinds; submersible 
devices of all kinds, designed for military pur- 
poses. Special equipment pertaining to these 
craft and devices. 

{d) All military and landing devices. 
(e) Material, equipment and installations for 
the military defense of coasts, harbours etc. 

Group V 

(a) Aircraft of all types, heavier or lighter 
than air; with or without means of propulsion, 



iiu'ludinf^ kites, captive balloons, gliders and 
model aircraft, and all auxiliary equipment, in- 
cluding aircraft engines and component parts, 
accessories, and spare parts specifically designed 
for aircraft use. 

(h) Ground equipment for servicing, testing 
or aiding the operation of aircraft, such as cata- 
pults, winclies and beacons; material for the 
rapid prenaration of airfields such as landing 
mats; special equipment used in conjunction 
with air photography: excluding however, 
from the provisions of paragraph 1, Article 
I of this Law any such (■(iui]mii'iit and ma- 
terials for landing fields and air beacons that 
have a normal peacetime use and are not spe- 
cifically designed for military use as listed in 
Schedule B. 

Groifp VI 

All drawings, specifications, designs, models 
and reproductions directly relating to the de- 
velopment, manufacture, testing, or inspection 
of the war materials, or to ex])eriments or re- 
search in connection with war material. 

Group VII 

Machinery and other manufacturing ecjuipment 
and tooling used for the development, manufac- 
ture, testing or inspection of the war material de- 
fined in tliis Schedule, and not capable of conver- 
sion to peacetime production. 

Group VIII 

(a) The following War Chemicals: 

High explosives with the exception of those 
listecl in Schedule B. Group Vllla.^ 

(Note: By "high explosives" is meant organic 
explosives used as fillings for shells, bombs, etc.) 

Double-base propellants (i. e. Nitrocellulose 
propellants containing nitroglycerine, diethj'l- 
eneglycol dinitrate or analogous substance). 

Single-base propellants for any weapons except 
sporting weapons. 

Nitroguanidine. 

Poison war gases (including liquids and solids 
customarily included in this term) with the ex- 
ception of those listed in Group Vlllb' of Schedule 
B. 

Rocket fuels : 

Hydrogen peroxide of above 37% concentration. 
Hydrazine hj'drate 
Methyl nitrate. 

Highly toxic products from bacteriological or 
plant sources (with the exception of those bac- 
teriological and plant products which are used for 
therapeutic purposes) . 

{h) All special means for individual and col- 
lective defense used in peace exclusively by the 
armed forces, such as protective masks against 

' This reference Is to Schechilp R nf Allied Control 
Council Law No. 43 signed Dec. 20. 1!I4(!. in Berlin. 



toxic or lethal devices used for war, detection ap- 
paratus etc. 

Group IX 

All apparatus, devices, and material specially 
designed ff)r training and instructing pereonnel 
in the use. handling, manufacture or maintenance 
of war material. 



Types of machine toots the manufacture of which 
shall be prohibited except under licence from the 
Military Security Board 

1. Spiral b( ccl gear cutters. 

•2. Brocwhhig mackineH of the following kinds: 

(a) Continuous surface type. 

{h) Reciprocating type (bar type cutter) with 
cutter diameter or equivalent cross section exceed- 
ing 2 inches (iA mm), or working stroke exceed- 
ing >5 feet (1524: mm) or pull capacity exceeding 
;35,()00 lbs ( 15,876 kgs) . 

3. General purpose lathes of the following 
kinds : 

{a) Lathes of work diameter capacity (swing 
over carriage) exceeding 56 inches ( 1,422 mm). 

(&) Lathes of work diameter capacity (swing 
over carriage) of from 36 inches (914 mm) to 56 
inches and with distance between centres (length 
of work piece) exceeding 14 feet (4,267 mm). 

(c) Lathes of work (lianieter capacity (swing 
over carriage) of from 18 inches (457 mm) to 36 
inches (914 mm) and with distance between cen- 
tres exceeding 18 feet (5,486 mm). 

4. Vertical turret lathes (turret type head, not 
rotating table) of work diameter capacity exceed- 
ing 39 inches (991 mm). 

5. Chucking and facing lathes of work diameter 
capacity exceeding 96 inches (2,438 mm) or with 
travel of carriage exceeding 7 feet (2,134 mm). 

6. Car and locomotive wheel lathes (machines 
designed specifically for this work) of work diam- 
eter capacity exceeding 96 inches (2,438 mm). 

7. Turret lathes of chuck capacity exceeding 24 
inches (610 mm) or of bar capacity exceeding 3 
inches (76 mm). 

8. MiUin-g machines of general purpose and 
univei-.sal types, horizontal and vertical, any of 
whose specifications exceed the following limits : 

(a) Maximum overall weight : 4 tons. 
(h) Following rectangular table dimensions: 
(i) Maximum length: 48 inches ( 1,219 mm), 
(ii) Maxinunn width : 14 inches (356 mm). 
(c) Following round table dimensions: 

(i) Maximum table diameter: 24 inches 
(610 mm). 

(ii) Maximum work diameter capacity: 32 
inches (813 mm). 

9. Planer milling machines of distance between 
housings exceeding 4 feet ( 1,219 mm) or of length 
of platen exceeding 12 feet (3,658 mm) or of 
number of heads exceeding 3. 

10. Grinding 7nachines of the following kinds: 

Depar/menf of Sfofe Bulletin 



(a) Cylindrical general purpose machines ^of 
work diameter capacity exceeding 30 inches (762 
mm) or of distance between centres exceeding 9 
feet (2,743 mm), but not including machines spe- 
cifically designed for and limited to finishing roll- 
ing mill, calencler, printing and other similar ma- 
chine parts. 

(b) Surface rectangular table machnies of 
platen width exceeding 24 inches (610 mm) or of 
platen length exceeding 72 inches (1,829 mm). 

(c) Surface round table machines of table 
diameter exceeding 36 inches (914 mm). 

11. Gear producing machines of all types whose 
work diameter capacity exceeds 60 inches (1,524 
mm). 



12. Forging hammers of all types of falling 
weight exceeding 31/2 tons (3.5.56 metric tons). 

13. Forging machiTies of bar stock diameter or 
equivalent cross section exceeding 3^2 inches (89 
mm). 

14. Mechanical presses of an effective operating 
pressure exceeding 1,000 tons (1,016 metric tons). 

15. Hydraulic presses of an effective operating 
pi-essure exceeding 1,000 tons (1,016 metric tons). 

16. Precision jig boring machines of a lateral 
displacement of cutter with reference to work (or 
displacement of work with reference to cutter) 
exceeding 24 inches (610 mm) . 



PLANT DISMANTLING AND PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED INDUSTRIES IN GERMANY 
A Chronology of Public Statements and Agreements 



1. August 1, 1945. Potsdam Protocol (Berlin agree- 
ment) siLcned. 

Among the agreements In the Protocol were a ban on 
German production of military materials ; a restriction of 
production of certain types of materials of high importance 
to a war effort but also important to a peacetime economy ; 
and arrangements for the removal from Germany of equip- 
ment surplus to the requirements of the peacetime economy 
In certain industries. 

Reference: Department of State press release 238 of 
March 24, 1947, for full text. 

2. December 12, 1945. The Department of State issued 
its interpretation of the Potsdam Protocol as it related to 
reparation and the peacetime German economy. 

In part this interpretation was : "The present determi- 
nation, however, is not designed to impose permanent lim- 
itations on the Germany economy. The volume of per- 
mitted industrial production of a peacetime character will 
be subject to constant review after February 2, 1946 ; and 
final Allied decisions regarding restrictions to be main- 
tained on German industrial capacity and production will 
not be made until the framing of the peace settlement 
with Germany." 
Reference : Department of State publication 2630, United 

States Economic Policy Toward Germany, 

Appendix g. 

3. March 28, 1946. The "Plan of the Allied Control Coun- 
cil for lieparatious and the Level of the Postwar German 
Economy" made public by the Military Governors of the 
Four Occupying Powers. 

This plan contained a list of prohibited and restricted 
industries and laid the basis for removal of plants for 
reparation in furtherance of the Potsdam Protocol. 
Reference : Department of State publication 2630, United 

States Economic Policy Toward Oermany, 

Appendix k. 

4. December 20, 1946. The Allied Control Council 
reached agreement on and signed Law No. 43, in Berlin. 

Schedule A of Law 43 spelled out the types of war 
materials whose production was wholly prohibited. The 
Schedule A list has not been changed, and there is three- 
power agreement that it should continue in effect. 

5. August 29, 1947. The "Revised Plan for Level of In- 
dustry in the U.S./U.K. Zones of Germany" was made 
public. 

After a year-and-a-half of experience it was found that 
the requirements of the German peacetime economy had 
been underestimated. When four-zone unity could not 
be achieved the Jlilitary Governors of the Bizonal area 
undertook a revision of the level-of-industry plan. This 

April 24, J 949 



increased the industrial capacity to be retained in certain 

German industries. A review of the prohibited industries 

and of the restrictions on certain types of production was 

deferred. 

Reference : Bulletin of Sept. 7, 1947, p. 468. 

6. June 2, 1948. Representatives of France, the United 
Kingdom, and the United States signed a report in Lon- 
don containing their recommendations on certain German 
problems. 

Among these recommendations was one for establish- 
ment of a Military Security Board that would enforce 
German disarmament and demilitarization, with appro- 
priate controls over the prohibited and restricted 
industries. 
Reference : Bulletin of June 20, 1948, pp. 807-10. 

7. April 3, 1948. Economic Cooperation Act of 1948, 
signed by the President. 

Section 115 (f ) of this act specified : 

"The Administrator (of the ECA) will request the Sec- 
retary of State to obtain the agreement of those countries 
concerned that such capital equipment as it scheduled for 
removal as reparations from the three western zones of 
Germany be retained in Germany if such retention will 
most effectively serve the purpose of the European re- 
covery program." ,, 4. -.an 
Reference : Public Law 472— 80th Congress ; chapter 169— 
2d Session. 

8 August 1948. The Industrial Advisory Committee of 
the ECA, under the chairmanship of George M. Humphrey, 
assembled a group of engineers to examine the plants 
that had been placed on removal lists in the Western 
zones. 

The engineers began their work abroad on October 13 
and ended it on December 16, 1948. The report of the In- 
dustrial Advisory Committee, containing recommenda- 
tions on the plants to be retained in Germany, is dated 
January 12, 1949. On January 25 the U.S. Secretary of 
State asked the British and French Governments to ac- 
cept the ECA recommendations. 

9 September 1948. The Military Governors of the three 
VVestern zones began a review of the prohibited and 
restricted industries. 

10 January 17, 1949. Formation of the Military Secu- 
rity Board for the Western zones of Germany was an- 
nounced. „ ^„>„ inr 
Reference : Bulletin of February 6, 1949, p. 195. 

11 March 1949. A Franco-U.K.-U.S. conference at the 
o-ovcrnmental level began in London to review the recom- 
mendations of the Military Governors on the revision of 
the prohibited and restricted industries and also to con- 
sider the recommendations of the Industrial Advisory 
Committee of the ECA. 

531 



Report of the Secretary of State to the President on North Atlantic Treaty 



[Released to the press April 12) 

April 7, 194s 

The PREsroENT: I have the honor to transmit 
to you the North Atlantic Treaty, signed at Wash- 
ington on April 4, 1949, with the recommendation 
that it be submitted to the Senate for its advice 
and consent to ratification. 

In accepting the obligations of the United Na- 
tions Charter in 1945, the United States Govern- 
ment committed itself for the first time to full 
participation in collective action to maintain in- 
ternational peace and security. The foreign pol- 
icy of the United States is based squarely upon the 
United Nations as the primary instrumentality 
of international peace and progi-ess. This Gov- 
ernment is determined to make the United Nations 
ever more effective in order ultimately to assure 
universal peace. 

Altlioiigli this Government's full participation 
in world cooperation dates only from 1945, this 
Government liad, for more than a century and a 
quarter, contributed to the peace of the Americas 
by making clear its determination to resist tiny at- 
tack upon our neighboring Republics to the South. 
The same determination and the obligations nec- 
essary to give it effect througli the collective action 
of all the American Republics was incorporated 
in the Treaty of Rio de Janeiro in 1947. This 
Treaty, like the North Atlantic Treaty, is a de- 
fense arrangement under the Charter of the United 
Nations. The essence of that Treaty is recogni- 
tion of the fact that an armed attack on any of 
the American States is in effect an attack upon 
them all. 

The North Atlantic Treaty is patterned on the 
Treaty of Rio de Janeiro. Its essence is recogni- 
tion of the fact tliat an armed attack on any of 
tlie North Atlantic nations is in effect an attack 
upon them all. An attack upon any of them would 
not be designed merely to gain territory or na- 
tionalistic ends. It would be directed squarely 
against our common democratic way of life. 

The essential purpose of the Treaty is to fortify 
and preserve this common way of life. It is de- 
signed to contribute to the maintenance of peace 
by making clear in advance the determination of 
the Parties resolutely and collectively to resist 
armed attack on any of them. It is further de- 
signed to contribute to the stability and well-being 
of the member nations by removing tlie haunting 
sense of insecurity and enabling them to plan and 
work with confidence in the future. Finally, it is 
designed to provide the basis for effective collec- 
tive action to restore and maintain the security of 
the North Atlantic area if an armed attack should 
occur. 



This Treaty and the Rio Treaty, committing the 
United States as they do to exert its great influence 
for peace, are, in my opinion, second only in im- 
I)ortance to our membership in the United Nations. 
For tliis reason every effort has been made to de- 
velop it on a wholly non-partisan basis and in 
cooperation between the Executive and Legisla- 
tive branches. 

In December 1947 you ratified the Treaty of 
Rio de Janeiro on the advice and consent of the 
Senate given with only one dissenting vote. 

On March 17, 1948. the Governments of Bel- 
gium, France. Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and 
the United Kingdom signed the Brussels Treaty, 
which was modelled to a consideral)le extent on 
the Rio Treaty and which established another col- 
lective defense arrangement within the frame- 
work of the Charter. That arrangement was es- 
tablished with the encouragement of this Govern- 
ment as a .step toward the closer integration of 
the free nations of Europe and as evidence of the 
determination of the five parties resolutely to de- 
fend themselves and each other against aggression. 
In establishing it, they repeatedly advised us that, 
despite their determination to do their utmost in 
self-defense, their collective strength might be in- 
adequate to preserve peace or insure their national 
survival unless the great power and influence of 
the United States and other free nations were also 
brought into association with them. 

On the day the Brussels Treaty was signed, you 
addressed the Congress in joint session and praised 
the conclusion of that Treaty as a notable step to- 
ward peace. You expressed confidence that the 
American people would extend the free countries 
the support which the situation might require and 
that their determination to defend themselves 
would be matched by an equal determination on 
our part to help them to do so. 

Shortly thereafter, my predecessor, General 
Marshall, and Mr. Robert Lovett undertook a se- 
ries of consultations with the leaders and members 
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the 
problems facing the free world and how they 
might best be met by bringing American influence 
to bear in the cause of peace, in association with 
other free nations, and within the framework of 
the United Nations Qiarter. 

On May 19, 1948, the Foreign Relations Com- 
mittee imanimously reported Senate Resolution 
No. 239. That Resolution declared : 

Whereas peace with justice and the defense of human 
rights and fundamental freedoms require international 
cooi)eration through more effective use of the United 

Nations : 



Department of State Bulletin 



Therefore be it 

Resolved, That the Senate reaffirm the policy of the 
United States to achieve international peace and secu- 
rity through the United Nations so tliat armed force shall 
not be used except in the conuiion interest, and that the 
President be advised of the sense of the Senate that this 
Government, by constitutional process, should particu- 
larly pursue the following objectives within the United 
Nations Charter : . . . 

(2) Progressive development of regional and other 
collective arrangements for individual and collective self- 
defense in accordance with the purposes, principles, and 
provisions of the Charter. 

(3) Association of the United States, by constitutional 
process, with such regional and other collective arrange- 
ments as are liased on continuous and effective self-help 
and mutual aid, and as affect its national security. 

(4) Contributing to the maintenance of peace by 
making clear its determination to exercise the right of 
individual or collective self-defen.se under Article 51 
should any armed attacli occur affecting its national 
security. 

On June 11, 1948, the Senate adopted that Eeso- 
lution by a non-partisan vote of 64 to 4. The 
Preamble of H. K.. 6802 which was unanimously 
reported by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the 
House of Representatives on June 9 but not voted 
upon prior to adjournment, contained language 
identical in substance with that quoted above. 

In July, on the basis of these expressions of 
the wishes of the Legislative branch, you author- 
ized Mr. Lovett to begin exploratory conversa- 
tions with the Ambassadors of Canada and of the 
Parties to the Brussels Treaty. These conversa- 
tions resulted in September in agreement by the 
representatives participating in them that an 
arrangement, established by Treaty, for the col- 
lective defense of the North Atlantic area was 
desirable and necessary. Agreement was also 
reached on the general nature of the Treaty. 
Following approval by the governments concerned 
of the recommendations of their representatives, 
negotiation of the Treaty was begun in December 
and finished on March 15, 1949. 

Throughout these conversations and negotia- 
tions Mr. Lovett and I have constantly made clear 
that, so far as the United States was concerned, 
the Treaty nuist conform to the expression of guid- 
ance contained in the Senate Resolution. I am 
glad to say that the principles stated in the Resolu- 
tion received the wholehearted concurrence of the 
other participating governments. From time to 
time during the negotiations first Mr. Lovett and, 
since January 20, I have consulted fully with the 
Chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Foreign Relations Committee. During the later 
stages of the negotiations I met twice with the 
Foreign Relations Committee as a whole. The 
Treaty in its final form reflects a number of con- 
structive suggestions made by members of the 
Committee. 

Early in March the Norwegian Government de- 
cided to join in negotiating the Treaty and since 
March 4 the Norwegian Ambassador has partici- 
pated fully in the discussions. 

April 24, 7949 



It is clear that a collective defense arrangement 
of this nature, in order to be fully effective, should 
be participated in by as many countries as are in 
a position to further the democratic principles 
upon which the Treaty is based and to contribute 
to the security of the North Atlantic area and as 
are prepared to undertake the necessary responsi- 
bilities. Accordingly, invitations to become orig- 
inal signatories of the Treaty were issued on be- 
half of the eight participating governments on 
March 17 to the Governments of Denmark, Ice- 
land, Italy, and Portugal. It is a source of grati- 
fication that those governments decided to partici- 
pate in this collective enterprise. 

Treaties are ordinarily negotiated in strict con- 
fidence and their contents made public only after 
signature. In this case, while it was necessary to 
conduct the negotiations in confidence until gen- 
eral agreement had been reached, the negotiating 
governments decided to make the text public as 
soon as it had been tentatively agreed upon. This 
was done in order to give public opinion in each of 
the participating countries and in all other coun- 
tries the maximum opportunity to study and dis- 
cuss its terms. I am exceedingly gratified by the 
popular reaction to the Treaty in the United States 
and abroad. 

The text of the Treaty is, I think, self-explana- 
tory. In drafting a document of such importance 
to millions of individuals every effort has been 
made to make it as clear, concise, and simple as 
possible. 

The Preamble expresses the spirit and purposes 
of the Treaty. In it the Parties reaffirm their 
faith in the purposes and principles of the United 
Nations Charter and their desire to live in peace 
with all peoples and all governments. They ex- 
press their determination to safeguard the free- 
dom and the common heritage and civilization of 
their peoples founded on the principles of democ- 
racy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They 
express their desire to promote stability and well- 
being in the North Atlantic area and their resolu- 
tion to unite their efforts for collective defense and 
for the preservation of peace and security. 

Article 1 reflects "their desire to live in peace 
with all peoples and all governments" by explicitly 
reaffirming the obligations, expressed in Article 2 
of the Charter and reflected throughout the Char- 
ter, to settle any international disputes in which 
they may be involved, with any nation, by peaceful 
means in such a manner that international peace 
and security, and justice, are not endangered and 
to refrain in their international relations from the 
threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent 
with the purposes of the United Nations. It is 
clear that any allegations that the Treaty conceals 
aggressive intentions are deliberate perversions of 
fact. 

Article 2 reflects the conviction of the Parties 
that true peace is more than the mere absence of 



war. In this Article the Parties indicate their 
desire to strenptlien the moral and material factors 
upon wliicli true peace depends. They will do so 
by stieiip(heniii>r their own free institutions, by 
hrinfrinp: about a better understanding of the prin- 
ciples upon which those institutions are founded, 
and by promoting conditions of stability and well- 
being. They will also seek to eliminate conflict in 
their international economic policies and will en- 
courage economic collaboration between any or all 
of them. 

Article 3 carried into the Treaty the concept con- 
tained in the Senate Kesolution that such collective 
arrangements should be based on continuous and 
effective self-help and mutual aid. This means 
that no Party can rely on others for its defense 
unless it does its utmost to defend itself and con- 
tribute toward the defense of the othei-s. The Ar- 
ticle does not itself obligate any Party to make any 
specific contribution to the defense capacity of any 
other Party, at any jiaiticular time or over any 
given period of time. It does contain the general 
obligations of determined self-defense and assist- 
ance in strengtliening the defense capacity of the 
group as a whole. Tlie concept of "mutual aid"' 
is that each Party shall contribute such mutual 
aid as it reasonably can, consistent with its geo- 
gra]ihic location and resources and with due re- 
gard to the requirements of basic economic health, 
in the form in which it can most effectively fur- 
nish it, whether in the form of facilities, man- 
power, productive capacity, military equipment, 
or other forms. 

Article 4 provides for consultation at the request 
of any Pai'ty whenever in its opinion the teri-i- 
torial integrity, political independence or security 
of any of the Parties is threatened. Any situation 
or event anywhere could be cause for consultation 
if it were deemed to threaten the integrity, inde- 
pendence or security of any Party, but it is not 
anticipated that consultation would be lightly 
sought or that it would be productive if it were. 
The Article contains no obligation beyond consul- 
tation. Any action taken as a result of consul- 
tation would be determined by each Party in the 
light of the seriousness of the situation and of its 
obligations under the United Nations Charter and 
in the spirit of the Treaty. 

There is no intention that such consultation 
should in any way duplicate the functions of tlie 
United Nations Security Council or the General 
Assembly. In particular, there is no intention of 
undertaking any enforcement action within the 
meaning of Article i\'^ of tlie Charter unless the 
Security Council should specifically call upon the 
Parties to take it. 

Article 5 is based squarely on the "inherent 
right", specifically recognized in Article 51 of the 
Charter, of "individual or collective self-defense 
if an armed attack occurs against a member of 
the United Nations". That right does not derive 
from Article 51 of the Charter: it is inherent, and 



recognized as such and preserved by that Article. 
The Article is also based upon the fact that in 
the world of today the security of the Parties to 
this Treaty is so interdependent that an armed at- 
tack on an)' one of them would be in effect an at- 
tack on all. 

This Article provides that, if such an armed 
attack occurs, each Party will take such action as 
it deems necessary, including the use of armed 
foice. to restore and maintain the security of the 
North Atlantic area. 

The basic purpose of the Treaty is to contribute 
to the maintenance of peace, as recommended in 
the Senate Resolution, by making clear the deter- 
mination of the Parties to exercise the right of self- 
defense should an armed attack occur against any 
of them. As you stated in your inaugural address, 
if it can be made sufficiently clear that such an 
attack would be met with overwhelming force, 
the attack may never occur. 

This Treaty is designed to prevent such an 
attack occurring by making clear the determina- 
tion of the signatory nations to take the neces- 
sary- action should it occur. Far more important 
than language in a treaty is the determination of 
the peoples bound b\' it. It is my hope and belief 
that the American people and the peoples of the 
other signatory nations will by their national con- 
duct make this unmistakably clear. 

The obligation upon each Party is to use its 
honest judgment as to the action it deems neces- 
sary to restore and maintain the security of the 
North Atlantic area and accordingly to take such 
action as it deems necessary. Such action might or 
might not include the use of armed force depend- 
ing upon the circumstances and gravity of the at- 
tack. If an attack were of a minor nature meas- 
ures short of force would certainly be utilized 
first and might suffice. Only in the clear case of 
a major armed attack would the use of force be 
necessary. Each Party retains for itself the 
right of determination as to whether an armed 
attack has in fact occurred and what action it 
deems necessary to take. If the situation were 
not clear there would presumably be consultation 
prior to action. If the facts were clear, action 
would not necessarily depend on consultation and 
it is hoped that the action would be as swift and 
decisive as the gravity of the situation was deemed 
to require. 

This does not mean that the United States would 
automatically be at war if we or one of the other 
Parties to the Treaty were attacked. Under our 
Constitution, the Congress alone has the power 
to declare war. The United States would be obli- 
gated by the Treaty to take promptly the action 
which it deemed necessary to restore and main- 
tain the security of the North Atlantic area. That 
decision as to what action was necessary would 
naturally be taken in accordance with our con- 
stitutional processes. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Article 51 of the Charter recognizes the inherent 
right of self-defense until the Security Council 
has taken the measures necessary to maintain inter- 
national peace and security. Article 5 of the 
Treaty jDrovides that any armed attack upon a 
Party and all measures taken as a result thereof 
shall immediately be reported to the Security 
Council and that such measures shall be termi- 
nated when the Security Council has taken the 
necessary action. 

Article 6 specifies certain areas within which an 
armed attack would give rise to the obligations of 
Article 5. The area covered by the Treaty is the 
general Xorth Atlantic area and is deliberately 
not defined by lines on a map. The purpose of the 
Treaty is to j^revent an armed attack by making 
clear that such an attack within that general area 
would meet the collective resistance of all the Par- 
ties. It would not be in keeping with the spirit 
of the Treaty to provide that an attack such as 
the sinking of a vessel at one point at sea would 
give rise to the obligations of Article 5, while a 
similar attack a few miles away would not. Fur- 
thermore, it is not contemplated that minor inci- 
dents would bring the provisions of Article 5 into 
effect. 

Article 7 makes clear that the obligations of the 
Parties under the Treaty are subordinated to their 
obligations under the Charter. Their obligations 
under the Charter are in no way affected by the 
Treaty and the provisions of the Charter are para- 
mount wherever applicable. In this Article the 
Parties also explicitly recognize the primary re- 
sponsibility of the Security Council for the main- 
tenance of international peace and security. 

In Article 8 each Party declares that none of its 
existing international engagements with any state 
is in conflict with the provisions of the Treaty and 
undertakes not to enter into any international en- 
gagement in conflict with it. 

By Article 9 the Treaty becomes not merely a 
static document but the basis for a continuing col- 
lective arrangement as envisaged in the Senate 
Resolution. That Article establishes a Council, 
on which each Party is to be represented, to facili- 
tate implementation of the Treaty. The Council 
is to be so organized as to be able to meet promptly 
at any time and shall set up such subsidiary bodies 
as may be necessary, in particular a defense com- 
mittee to recommend measures for the implementa- 
tion of Articles 3 and 5. The Council will have no 
powers other than to consider matters within the 
purview of the Treaty and to assist the Parties in 
reaching agi'eement upon them. Consequently, no 
voting procedure is needed or provided. Each 
government remains the judge of what actions it 
should take in fulfillment of the obligations of the 
Treaty. 

Article 10 recognizes that not all states in the 
North Atlantic area in a position to further the 
principles of the Treaty or to contribute to the 
security of the area may wish to become parties at 



this time. The Article accoi-dingly provides that 
the Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite 
any other European state in a position to further 
the principles of the Treaty and to contribute to 
the security of the North Atlantic area to become 
a party at a later date. 

Since Canada and the United States are orig- 
inal signatories and the other American Republics 
are actual or potential parties to the Rio Treaty, 
no accessions by other American states are con- 
templated. 

Since the accession of additional parties might 
alter the responsibilities of the original signa- 
tories, unanimous agreement is required to invite 
other states to join. 

Article 11 provides that the Treaty shall be rati- 
fied and its provisions carried out by the Parties 
in accordance with their respective constitutional 
processes. The Senate Resolution spoke of asso- 
ciation of the United States "by constitutional 
process" with such arrangement as that established 
by the present Treaty, and it is naturally under- 
stood, as this Article provides, that both ratifica- 
tion of the Treaty and the carrying out of all its 
provisions must be in accordance with the consti- 
tutional processes of the signatory nations. 

At the request of the other signatory govern- 
ments, the United States Government has agreed 
to act as the depositary of the Treaty. 

It was considered advisable that the Treaty en- 
ter into effect only when it had been ratified by 
each of the se\'en governments which originally 
participated in the negotiations, and a provision 
to this effect is contained in this Article. 

Article 12 provides for the review of the Treaty 
at the request of any Party after the Treaty has 
been in force for 10 years, or at any time there- 
after. This provision corresponds to the similar 
provision of Article 109 in the United Nations 
Charter providing for a review of the Charter 
after 10 years. Article 12 provides that the review 
of the Treaty shall take into account the factore 
that affect peace and security in the North At- 
lantic area, including the development of univer- 
sal as well as regional arrangements under the 
Charter for the maintenance of international 
peace and security. 

Article 13 provides that any Party may cease 
to be a Party, after the Treaty has been in force 
for 20 years, upon the expiration of one year's 
notice of denunciation. 

The common heritage of the signatory nations 
dates deep in history and the bonds between them 
are fundamental. It is hoped that their coopera- 
tion will be permanent and progressively closer. 
The Treaty must have a relatively long duration 
if it is to provide the necessary assurance of long- 
terra security and stability. On the other hand, 
the impossibility of foretelling what the interna- 
tional situation will be in the distant future makes 
rigidity for too long a term undesirable. It is 
believed that indefinite duration, with the possibil- 



April 24, 1949 



ity that any Party may withdraw from the Treaty 
after 20 years and that the Treaty as a whole might 
be reviewed at any time after it has been in effect 
for ten years, provides the best solution. 

Article 14 is a formal article concerninfif the 
equal authenticity of the English and French texts 
and the disposition of tiie original Treaty and 
certified copies thereof. 

I believe that this Treaty will prove to be an 
important milestone in realization of the desire 
of the American people to use their great influence 
for peace. It makes clear, in my opinion, their 
determination to do so. The Treaty has been 
formulated in accordance with the guidance given 
by the Senate in Resolution 239. In the Senate 
debate on tliat Kesolution it was made clear that 
the Senate, in advising you [larticularly to pursue 
certain objectives, in no way yielded its freedom 
of action to scrutinize and to give or withhold its 
consent to ratification of such treaty as might be 
negotiated. I know that the Senate will conscien- 
tiously exercise that pierogative and I trust that 
the Treaty will meet with its approval. 
Kespectfully submitted, 

Dean Achesox 

Encloscbe : North Atl.intic Treaty. 
[BULLETIN of Mar. 20, 1949, p. .3:i9] 



Head of American Relief for Czechoslovakia 
Arrested in Praha 

[Released to the press April 13] 

Vlasta Adele Vraz, head of the Praha office of 
American Relief for Czechoslovakia, was arrested 
April 9 about 1 p. m., and is now thought to be in 
Panrac Prison, Praha. 

American Relief for Czechoslovakia, sponsored 
by the Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign 
Aid, is the organization which sends gifts of food 
and clothing to the children of Czechoslovakia 
from Czechs and Czech-Americans in the United 
States. The head office of the organization is at 
9 East 10th Street, New York City, in charge of 
Dr. Kenneth D. Miller. The activities of the 
Praha office were to have been discontinued in 
June of this year. 

Miss Vraz was born in Chicago. Her current 
address is 2101 South Elmwood Street, Berwyn, 
Illinois. She is unmarried, tlie daughter of the 
late well-known explorer-historian, Enrique Vraz, 
and first came to Praha as a representative of the 
American Red Cross in October 1945. 

An American Embassy representative was per- 
mitted to visit Miss Vraz on April 12 in the pres- 

' Bulletin of Apr. 10, 1949, p. 4,'55. 



ence of a Foreign Office representative and two 
police officials. She appeared to be well and said 
she had been well treated to date and was being 
held for investigation in connection with alleged 
activities of a political nature. 

On December 7, 1946, Miss Vraz was awarded 
the Czechoslovak "Order of the White Lion" for 
services to the State of Czechoslovakia. The laU- 
■sfr-pmser issued to her bv the Czechoslovak Con- 
sulate General in New Vork on September 21, 
1945, includes a statement that she was coming to 
Czechoslovakia at the invitation of the Czechoslo- 
vak Government. She received a certificate dated 
October 22, 1945, from the late Foreign Minister, 
Jan Masaryk, confirming the aforementioned invi- 
tation and bespeaking tiie good oHices of all Czech- 
oslovak officials, civilian and military, on her be- 
half. In January of this year she received a letter 
from the Czechoslovak authorities thanking her 
for her care and the devotion with which she had 
conducted relief activities in Czechoslovakia for 
the past three years and for her understanding of 
the needs of the Czechoslovak children. 



The President's Reply to Prime Minister Attlee 
on First Anniversary of ECA 

[Released to the press by the White House April 7] 

The President has sent the following message to 
Clement Attlee, Prime Minuter of Great Brit- 
ain, in reply to the message from Mr. Attlee ^ on 
the occasion of the first anniversary of the sign- 
ing of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1948: 

I am confident that I speak not only for myself 
but for the people of the United States in express- 
ing appreciation for your message on this first 
anniversary of the signing of the Foreign Assist- 
ance Act of 1948. 

The record of the countries participating in the 
European Recovery Program during the jiast j'ear 
is one of great accomplishment in industry, in ag- 
riculture, in trade. It is a record of tireless hard 
work. It is also, I believe, a record of achieve- 
ment through cooperation. The Organization for 
European Economic Cooperation so recently es- 
tablished by the countries working together to- 
ward full recovei-y has demonstrated to us all the 
meaning of true international action. 

"We in the United States are proud that we have 
had a ]iart in tliis great mutual effort. We are 
confident that the progress toward true recovery 
which has been so mai'ked during this first year 
will continue and that the high goals which have 
been set will be fully realized. 



Department of Stale Bvlletin 



Joint U.S.-Canada Industrial IVSobilization Committee Established 

EXCHANGE OF NOTES BETWEEN THE TWO GOVERNMENTS 



[Released to the press April 12] 

A Joint United States— Canada Industrial Mo- 
bilization Committee was established on April 12 
by an exchange of notes between the two Govern- 
ments, in Ottawa, following a series of discussions 
that began last June. This Joint Committee will 
consist of the following : 
For the United States 

Dr. John R. Steelman, Acting Chairman, National Se- 
curity Resources Board 
Donald F. Carpenter, Chairman, Munitions Board 

For Canada 

Harry J. Carmichael, Chairman, Industrial Defence 
Board „ ^ t « 

S. D. Pierce, Associate Deputy Minister, Department ol 
Trade and Commerce 

The agreement recognizes the mutual interests 
and complementary characteristics of the resources 
of the two countries. It will be the function of the 
new Committee to exchange information and co- 
ordinate the views of the two Governments m 
connection with planning for industrial mobiliza- 
tion in the event of an emergency. The new Com- 
mittee is further charged with cooperation with 
the existing U.S.-Canadian Permanent Joint 
Board on Defense, established in 1940 by the late 
President Roosevelt and Mackenzie King, then 
Prime Minister of Canada. 

A meeting of the Joint U.S.-Canada Industrial 
Mobilization Committee is contemplated in the 
near future. 

The text of the notes follows : 

Ottawa, April 12, 1949 

No. 93 

Excellency : I have the honor to inform Your 
Excellency that the common interests of Canada 
and the United States in Defence, their proximity 
and the complementary characteristics of their re- 
sources clearly indicate the advantages of coordi- 
nating their plans for industrial mobilization, in 
order that the most effective use may be made of 
the productive facilities of the two countries. 

The functions of the Department of Trade and 
Commerce and the Industrial Defence Board in 
Canada and those of the National Security Ee- 
sources Board and the Munitions Board in the 
United States suggest that, for the present, it 
would be appropriate to use these Agencies to as- 
sist the two Governments in coordinating their 
Industrial Mobilization Plans. 

Therefore, my Government wishes to propose 
that the two Governments agree : 

(a) That a Joint Industrial Mobilization Com- 
April 24, 1949 



mittee be now constituted consisting, on the United 
States side, of the Chairman of the National Se- 
curity Resources Board and the Chairman of the 
Munitions Board and, on the Canadian side, of the 
Chairman of the Industrial Defence Board and a 
Senior Official of the Department of Trade and 
Commerce ; 

(b) That the Joint Committee: 

(i) Exchange information with a view to the 
coordination of the plans of the United States 
and Canada for Industrial Mobilization ; 

(ii) Consider what recommendations in the 
field of Industrial Mobilization planning, in areas 
of common concern, should be made to each Gov- 
ernment ; 

(iii) Be empowered to organize Joint Sub- 
Committees from time to time to facilitate the dis- 
charge of its functions ; 

(iv) Be responsible for cooperation with the 
Permanent Joint Board on Defence on matters of 
Industrial Mobilization. 

If your Government is agreeable to the above 
Proposals, it is understood that this Note, together 
with your Note in reply agreeing thereto, shall 
constitute an agreement between our two Govern- 
ments which shall enter in force on the date of 
your reply and shall remain in force indefinitely 
subject to termination by either Government at 
any time on giving six months' notice. 

Please accept [etc.] 

Laukence A. Steinhardt 
Ottawa, April 12, 194d 

No. 113 

Excellency : I have the honor to acknowledge 
the receipt of Your Excellency's note No. 93 of 
April 12, 1949 in which you informed me that the 
Government of the United States of America 
wishes to propose that our two Governments agree : 

[Here follow paragraphs (a) and (b) as printed 
above.] 

I have the honor to inform Your Excellency 
that the Government of Canada concurs in the 
foregoing proposals and agrees that Your Excel- 
lency's note and this reply shall constitute an 
agreement between our two Governments which 
shall enter into force on this day and shall remain 
in force indefinitely, subject to termination by 
either Government at any time on giving six 
months' notice. 

Accept [etc.] 

Lester B. Pearson 



Resumption of Diplomatic Relations 
With Paraguay 

[Released to the press April 13] 

On April 13 Fletcher Warren, United States 
Ambassador at Asuncion delivered a note to the 
Para-riiayan Foreijrn Minister in reply to a note 
of March 2, 1J)4!),' from the Minister in which he 
announced that Dr. P'clipe Molas Lopez had as- 
sumed tile Presidency of Parap;uay on February 
27, 1049. This action by the United States Am- 
bassador constituted the resumption of normal 
diplomatic relations between the Paraguayan and 
United States Governments, interrupted on Jan- 
uary 30, 1!)40, with the resi<rnation of President 
J. Xatalicio Gonzalez of Paraguay. 

The Paraguayan note of March 2, 1949, stated 
that the Government was in control of the entire 
country, furnishing security and guarantees to its 
people; that it proposes to achieve institutional 
normalization by means of free elections; and that 
it will continue to respect Paraguay's interna- 
tional commitments. 

The United States Ambassador's note in reply 
expressed confidence that the friendship wliich 
has always characterized relations between the 
two countries will continue unimpaired. 



Israeli Ambassador Presents Credentials 

[Released to the press April H] 

The remarks of the newly appointed Ambassa- 
dor of Israel, Eliahu Elath, upon the occasion of 
the presentation of his letters of credence, on 
April 11 follow: 

Mr. President : The President of Israel has in- 
structed me, in presenting to you the Letters of 
Credence accrediting me as Ambassador Extraor- 
dinary and Plenipotentiary of Israel to the LTnited 
States of America, to convey to you his warm 
greetings and to express his sincere hope for the 
continued well-being and prosperity of the United 
States and its President. 

The President and people of Israel are deeply 
grateful for tlie great contribution made by the 
Government of the United States and its people 
to the establishment of the State of Israel. 

The nolile tradition, instituted by President 
Woodrow Wilson and continued by' all his suc- 
cessors, of expressing sympatliy with the aims of 
Zionism has earned for the people of the United 
States and its Government the undying gratitude 
and admiration of Israel and the Jewish people. 

The synijjathy and concern shown by you, Mr. 
President, for the Jewish displaced persons of 

' Not printed. 



Europe, the constructive suggestions that you have 
made for their resettlement, your support of the 
establishment of the State of Israel, and your 
prompt recognition following the proclamation 
of Israel's independence on May 14, 1948, will for- 
ever be recorded in the hearts" of our people and 
preserved in the annals of our history. 

As a peace-loving nation, Israel' will seek to 
maintain and, by her actions, to express her own 
moral heritage, and to make yet another contribu- 
tion to civilization. It is her fervent hope that 
she will be allowed to do so, so that her progress 
may contribute to the development of the Mfddle 
East and be of benefit to the entire world. 

I deeply appreciate the honor of being the first 
representative of my country in the T'nited States. 
It will be my constant endeavor to advance and 
strengthen the ties of friendship and cooperation 
existing between Israel and this great democracy. 
I trust that in the discharge of this important 
task, Mr. President, I shall receive your under- 
standing and help, as well as th'at of your 
Government. 

The Presidents reply to Mr. Elath folloivs : 

Mr. Ambassador : It is a g^'eat pleasure for me to 
receive from the President of Israel the Letters 
accrediting you as the first Ambassador Extraor- 
dinary and Plenipotentiary of Israel to the 
United States of America. 

It is a matter of particular satisfaction to me to 
witness this important further step in the strength- 
ening and consolidation of relations between'^our 
two countries, relations which have reflected the 
sincere interest of the Government and people of 
the United States in the deep-rooted aspirations of 
your people to found an independent nation. I 
am gratified to receive Your Excellency's kind re- 
marks concerning the contribution of' the Amer- 
ican (iovemment and people to the establishment 
of the State of Israel. 

I am firmly convinced of the necessity for the 
speedy establishment of a true and equitable peace 
between Israel and its neighbors and for the reso- 
lution of all problems outstanding between them, 
in afcoidance with the solemn recommendations' 
of the United Nations with respect to Palestine. 
The Government of the United States is deeply 
desirous of assisting by all appropriate means in 
the tulnllment of these objectives. 

I wish to express to Your Excellency my per- 
sonal pleasure that as Ambassador of "Israel you 
will continue to represent your Government in 
Washington. I appreciate the wishes which you 
have expressed for the coiitimieil prosperity" of 
the United States and for my personal well-being, 
and I should be grateful if'you would convey to 
your distinguished President the best wishes of the 
(Jovernment and people of the United States for 
the jieace and prosperity of Israel, and for his per- 
sonal happiness and welfare. 



Department of State Bulletin 



THE CONGRESS 

Report on Progress of the Econonjic Cooperation Ad- 
ministration. Report of the Joint Committee on Foreign 
Economic Cooperation created pursuant to section 124 
of Public Law 472, Eightieth Congress. S. Rept. 13, 81st 
Cong., 1st sess. ix, 152 p. 

Jose Babace. Report (To accompany S. 26). S. Rept. 
8, Slst Cong., 1st sess. 2 pp. 

Certain Basque Aliens. Report (To accompany S. 27). 
S. Rept. 9, Slst Cong., 1st sess. 4 pp. 

Authorizing Payment of Claims Based on Loss of or 
Damage to Property Deposited by Alien Enemies. S. Rept. 
10, Slst Cong,, 1st sess. 2 pp. 

Amending Section 3 of the Act Entitled "An Act to Re- 
vise the Alaska Game Law," Approved July 1, 1943, as 
Amended (57 Stat. 301). H. Rept. 170, Slst Cong., 1st 
sess., to accompany H.R. 220. 3 pp. 

Authorizing Payment of Claims Based on Loss of or 
Damage to Property Deposited by Alien Enemies. H. 
Rept. 172, Slst Cong., 1st sess., to accompany S. 29. 3 pp. 

Certain Basque Aliens. H. Rept. 193, Slst Cong., 1st 
sess., to accompany S. 27. 3 pp. 

Authorizing Vessels of Canadian Registry to Transport 
Iron Ore Between United States Ports on the Great Lakes 
During the Period From March 15 to December 15, 1949, 
Inclusive. H. Rept. 209, Slst Cong., 1st sess., to accom- 
pany H.J. Res. 143. 4 pp. 

The United States Constitution. Text, Index, Chronol- 
ogy and Leading Quotations. S. Doc. 210, SOth Cong., 
2d sess. 42 pp. 

Estimate of Appropriations— Several Executive Depart- 
ments and Independent Offices. Communication from the 
President of the United States transmitting estimate of 
appropriations for the several executive departments and 
independent offices to pay claims for damages, audited 
claims, and judgments rendered against the United States, 
as provided by various laws, in the amount of $22,638,- 
857.65, together with an indefinite amount as may be 
necessary to pay interest and costs. S. Doc. 15, Slst 
Cong., 1st sess. 333 pp. 

Proposed Provision Pertaining to an Existing Appro- 
priation — United States Maritime Commission. Com- 
munication from the President of the United States 
transmitting proposed provision pertaining to an existing 
appropriation of the United States Maritime Commission, 
fiscal vear 1949. S. Doc. 19, Slst Cong., 1st sess. 2 pp. 



PUBLICATIONS 



Department of State 

For sale hij the Superintendent of Documents, O-overn- 
ment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Address re- 
quests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, except 
in the case of free pxiMications, which may he obtained 
from the Department of State. 

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Geneva, October 
30, 1947. Treaties and Other International Acts Series 
1700. Pub. 3188. 2044 pp. In two volumes, with the 
documents arranged in the order of the original compila- 
tion deposited with the United Nations. Vol. I, $3; Vol. 
II, $1.50. 

Volume I contains the Final Act ( in both English and 
French), the English authentic texts, and the revised 
translations by the Department of State of the parts 
of this agreement in which only the French texts are 
authentic. 

Volume II contains the French authentic texts and 
the Protocol of Provisional Application (in both Eng- 
lish and French). 



Education: Cooperative Program in Paraguay. Treaties 
and Other International Acts Series 1S15. Pub. 3333. 20 

pp. 10<i'. 

Agreement between the United States and Paraguay — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Asuncion 
Dec. 11, 1947 and Mar. 3, 1948; entered into force 
Mar. 3, 1948. And Agreement between Paraguay and 
the Institute of Inter-American Affairs — Signed at 
Asunci6n Mar. S, 1948 ; approved by exchange of notes 
signed at Asunci6n Mar. 10 and 12, 1948; entered 
into force Mar. 12, 1948. 

International Refugee Organization. Treaties and Other 
International Acts Series 1846. Pub. 3362. 119 pp. 30^. 

Constitution adopted by the United States and Other 
Governments — Opened for signature at New York 
Dec. 15, 1946; instrument of acceptance deposited by 
the United States, July 3, 1947; entered into force 
Aug. 20, 1948. 

Air Service: Facilities in French Territory. Treaties and 
Other International Acts Series 1852. Pub. 3390. S pp. 

Agreement between the United States and France — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Paris June 
18, 1946 ; entered into force June IS, 1946. 

Patents: Certain Rights of Priority in Filing Applications. 

Treaties and Other International Acts Series 1861. Pub. 
3405. 4 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States and the Repub- 
lic of the Philippines — Effected by exchange of notes 
dated at Wa.shington Feb. 12, Aug. 4 and 23, 1948; 
entered into force Aug. 23, 1948. 

Trade: Application of Most-Favored-Nation Treatment 
to Areas Under Occupation or Control. Treaties and 
Other International Acts Series 1834. Pub. 3406. 7 pp. 

Agreement between the United States and Turkey — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Ankara July 
4, 1948 ; entered into force July 13, 1918. 

Haitian Finances: Waiver of Certain Claims. Treaties 
and Other International Acts Series 1862. Pub. 3407. 
2 pp. 5^. 

Understanding between the United States and Haiti — 
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Port-au-Prince 
Oct. 1, 1947 ; entered into force Oct. 1, 1947. 

American Commission for Cultural Exchange With Italy. 

Treaties and Other International Acts Series 1864. Pub. 
3409. 9 pp. 54. 

Agreement between the United States and Italy — 
Signed at Rome Dec. 18, 1948 ; entered into force Dec. 
18, 1948. 

Claims: Hannevig against the United States; Jones 
against Norway. Treaties and Other International Acts 
Series 1865. Pub. 3410. S pp. 54. 

Convention between the United States and Norway — 
Signed at Washington Mar. 28, 1940; entered into 
force Nov. 9, 1948. 

The United Nations and the North Atlantic Pact. In- 
ternational Organization and Conference Series III, 30. 
Pub. 3463. 4 pp. 54. 

Partial text of an address by Ambassador Philip 
C. Jessup. 



April 24, 1949 



^{yyvCe/nl^/ 



Treaty Information Page 

The International Wheat Agreement of 1949. 

By Edward G. Cale 507 

Opening of Tariff Negotiations at Annecy, 
France: 
Message From Secretary Acheson .... 520 
U.S. Delegation 520 

U.S., U.K., and France Announce Agree- 
ment on Limitations on Certain Indus- 
tries in Germany: 

Text of Agreement 527 

Plant Dismantling and Prohibited and Re- 
stricted Industries in Germany .... 531 

Report of the Secretary of State to the Presi- 
dent on North Atlantic Treaty 532 

The President's Reply to Prime Minister 

Attlee on First Anniversary of EGA. . . 536 

Joint U.S. -Canada Industrial Mobilization 
Committee Established. Exchange of 
Notes Between the Two Governments. . 537 

The United Nations and Specialized 
Agencies 

The Problem of Voting in the Security Coun- 
cil. By Ambassador Warren R. Austin . 512 

U.S. Participation in Continued U.N. Ap- 
peal for Children. Letter From Secretary 
Acheson to Secretary-General Lie ... 515 

Opinions of International Court of Justice 
Announced. Statement by Secretary 
Acheson 516 

Resolution Extending Through 1949 the U.N. 

Appeal for Children 516 

Palestine Relief Contribution. Statement by 

Ambassador Warren R. Austin .... 517 

U.N. Documents: A Selected Bibliography. . 517 

The United States in the United Nations . . 518 



Occupation Matters page 

U.."^., I'.K., and France Reach Agreement on 

German Reparation Program 524 

Organization of Ruhr .\uthority. Statement 

by Secretary .\cheson 525 

Occupation Statute as a Practicable Basis of 
Cooperation With Future German Gov- 
ernment. Statement by Secretary Ache- 
son 526 

U.S., U.K., and France Announce Agreement 
on Limitations on Certain Industries in 
Germany: 

Text of agreement 527 

Plant Dismantling and Prohibited and 

Restricted Industries in Germany . . . 531 

General Policy 

U.S. Delegation to Conference for Drawing 
Up Convention for Protection of W^ar 
Victims 522 

Head of American Relief for Czechoslovakia 

Arrested in Praha 536 

Resumption of Diplomatic Relations With 

Paraguay 538 

Israeli Ambassador Presents Credentials. . . 538 

Economic Affairs 

Rubber Study CJroup: Sixth Meeting Ends . 521 

W' orld Trade Week, 1949. A Proclamation . 523 

The Foreign Service 

Confirmation 523 

International Information and Cultural 

Affairs 

American Educator To Visit Latin American 

Law Schools 523 

The Congress 539 

Publications 

Department of State 539 



^/oe/ ^e^a^tme/ni/ m tnat0 




U.S. ANSWERS SOVIET CHARGES AGAINST 
NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY • Statement 

by Ambassador Warren R. Austin 552 

SUPPRESSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN 

BULGARIA AND HUNGARY • Statement 

by Benjamin V. Cohen 556 

THE FREE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN • An 

Article 548 

THE RETURNED MASTERPIECES OF THE 
BERLIN MUSEUMS • Note by Ardelia R. 
Hall 543 



For complete contents see back cover 



Vol. XX, No, 513 
May 1, 1949 








^.^^y*. bulletin 



Vol. XX, No. 513 • Pubucation 3499 
May 1, 1949 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

' U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Prjce: 

62 Issues, domestic SS.OO, foreign $7.25 

Single copy, 15 cents 

The printing of this publication bas 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau of the Budget (February 18, 
1949). 

Note: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and Items contained herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Dkpahtment 
or State Bulletin as the source will.be 
appreciated. ^— .^— 



The Department of State BVLLETIJS, 
a iceekty publication compiled and 
edited in the Divixion of Publications, 
Office of Public Affairs, provides the 
public and interested agencies of 
the Government with information on 
devilopments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the work of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BVLLETliS includes 
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 tcell as special 
articles on various phases of inter- 
national affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to which the 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, aa 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



The Returned Masterpieces of the Berlin Museums 

INTRODUCTORY NOTE BY ARDELIA R. HALL 
Arts and Monuments Officer, Department of State 



The first two shipments of masterpieces from 
the collections of the Kaiser Friedrich Museum 
and the Nationalgalerie of Berlin, returned to Ger- 
many following a period of safekeeping in the 
United States, have been exhibited throughout the 
past winter at the Central Collecting Point in 
Wiesbaden, Germany. The final shipment of 
paintings, returned on April 23, 1949, will com- 
plete the collection of returned masterpieces in this 
exhibition. 

While the paintings were in the United States, 
the entire collection was displayed at the National 
Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., to approxi- 
mately one million people. A selection of the 
paintings was exhibited in a nation-wide tour of 
13 cities to an additional 1,439,599. From this 
tour, a total of $305,964 was received in admission 
fees. This fund for the relief of German children 
in the American zone is being administered, on be- 
half of Gen. Lucius D. Clay, by the Council of Ee- 
lief Agencies licensed for operation in Germany. 

The paintings have been retm-ned to the Ameri- 
can zone by the Department of the Army in accord- 
ance with the original plan announced from the 
White House that they would be restored to Ger- 
many as soon as favorable conditions for their 
proper care were assured. At the opening of the 
first showing in Germany at the Munich Central 
Collecting Point, General Clay said, "I am proud 
to be able to keep my pledge that they would be 
returned safely to the German people. I hope 
that our mutual appreciation of these works of art 
will help toward mutual understanding between 
our nations." 

The leading American officials in Hesse have 
also welcomed the German public in a foreword 
and an introduction to the catalogue of the re- 
turned masterpieces at the Central Collecting 
Point in Wiesbaden. Their comments here re- 
printed reveal something of the scope of the 

May I, 7949 



museum activities of American Military Govern- 
ment. These brief words are also an expression 
of the high ideals which have motivated the work 
of the American Monuments, Fine Arts, and 
Arcliives Section and are a token of the service 
which the American Fine Arts officers have gen- 
erously contributed to the cultural life of 
Germany. 

The exhibition was the culmination of an im- 
portant phase of these activities in connection 
with the reassembling and reopening of German 
national collections, which has been little publi- 
cized in the United States. Since 1946, a series 
of special exhibitions at the Wiesbaden Central 
Collecting Point have been presented to the Ger- 
man public under the joint auspices of the Mon- 
uments, Fine Arts, and Archives Sections of 
Greater Hesse, the Minister of Culture and Edu- 
cation of Hesse, and of the Stadtkreis, Wiesbaden. 

The Wiesbaden Collecting Point is the great 
center where German public collections have been 
assembled from the depositories throughout the 
American zone. Established by the Monmnents, 
Fine Arts, and Archives officers in July 1945, it 
is housed in one of the finest museums of Ger- 
many, the New Landesmuseum. The modern 
building was completed and formally opened in 
1920. Fortunately this museum had suffered 
little serious damage during the war. The glass 
of the windows and skylights had been shattered 
and the roof damaged. However, Capt. Walter 
I. Farmer, the first director of the newly estab- 
lished collecting point, was able to carry out the 
needed reconditioning of the building. Seventy- 
five galleries were made available through his ef- 
forts for the exhibition and safe storage of the 
great public collections of the German State. 
Until recently there were 4,450 paintings and 197,- 
200 objects of art, not including the collections 
of the Wiesbaden Landes Museum, in the custody 



of the American Military Government at this col- 
lecting point. 

The Oflice of Military Government for Germany 
(U.S.) has exerted every effort to protect and 
safeguard these German collections. Whenever 
possible, personnel of the German museums have 
assisted in inventorying, cataloging, storing, and 
reporting on the collections which had formerly 
been in their charge. Urgent repairs to works of 
art have been made. The collections have been 
returned, as rapidly as possible, to the German in- 
stitutions which owned them and to the city where 
they belong. The Department of the Army and 
the American Military Government have scrupu- 
lously and conscientiously discharged the obliga- 
tions of tliis Government under international law 
to respect cultural property. Once again, the 
United States has demonstrated its practical con- 
cern for the protection of these symbols of 
civilization. 

The final chapter of the long hegira of the "re- 
turned masterpieces" will not be written before 
they are restored once more to their rightful own- 
ers, the people of Berlin. The first of the Berlin 
museums was opened in 1830. Today, the modern 
buildings of the Staatliche Museum and the Kaiser 
Friedrich Museum stand roofless and unrepaired, 
Keconstruction may properly have to wait upon 
more urgent emergency housing and building. 
Although it may be some time before these home- 
less collections can be returned, it may confidently 
be expected that the integrity and unity of the 
great Berlin collections will always be recognized. 

From the great artistic wealth assembled at the 
Central Collecting Point, the notable series of nine 
exhibitions has been arranged by the distin- 
guished Fine Arts officers at Wiesbaden and in 
Greater Hesse, including Captain Farmer, Capt. 
Patrick Joseph Kelleher, Capt. Edith Standen 
(WAC), Capt. Everett P. Lesley, Jr., Frank 
Bilodeau, and Dr. Theodore Allen Heinrich. 

For the past two years, the Landes Museum 
has been under the administration of Dr. Hein- 
rich, of Berkeley, California, a graduate of Cam- 
bridge University, Land Chief for Hesse and 
Director of the Wiesbaden Collecting Point. The 
highest tribute should be paid to his endeavors. 
He has been responsible for the success of the re- 
cent exhibitions. He has discussed their great 
cultural value in his introduction to the catalogue. 



They have won the warm and appreciative re- 
sponse of the German people and of the Allied per- 
sonnel. The attendance has been drawn from all 
zones. The schools and universities have enthusi- 
astically participated in these educational oppor- 
tunities so long denied them. Furthermore, an 
important revenue has been received from admis- 
sion fees and the sale of catalogues. The first ex- 
hibit was officially opened by Col. James R. New- 
man, Director of the Office of Military Govern- 
ment for Hesse, who also welcomed the German 
public to the latest exhibit of the "returned mas- 
terpieces." 

The first exhibition, German-owned Old Mas- 
ters, was shown for 10 weeks, from February 10 
to April 23, 1946, with an attendance of 63,196 
and receipts of 77,051 reichsmarks. The exhibit 
was chosen from the German national treasures 
remaining at Wiesbaden, following the shipment 
of the 202 masterpieces to Washington. It in- 
cluded among other paintings, 2 by Fra Angelico, 
4 by Botticelli, 4 by Raphael, 6 by Van Dyck, and 
18 by Rembrandt, as well as the world-renowned 
head of Nefretiti, erroneously reported at one 
time to have been lost. At that exhibition the 
German public received for the first time the as- 
surance that while many of their historic build- 
ings had been destroyed, their art treasures had 
survived the war. 

The second exhibition, Masterworks of North- 
ern Painting before 1600, was exhibited for 13 
weeks, from May 12 to August 11, 1946, with an 
attendance of 23,116 and receipts of 20,928 reichs- 
marks; the third. Old Master Drawings of the 
15th to the 18th centuries, for 13 weeks, from 
September 1 to December 3, 1946, with an attend- 
ance of 13,591 and receipts of 19,513 reichsmarks; 
the fourth, Christmas Pictures of the Nativity 
Scenes, for 8 weeks, from December 15, 1946, to 
February 15, 1947, with an attendance of 13,394 
and an income of 17,439 reichsmarks; the fifth. 
Nineteenth Century German Painting, for 17 
weeks from March 30 to July 27, 1947, with an 
attendance of 35,380 and income of 72,807 reichs- 
marks; the sixth. Eighteenth Century Art, for 11 
weeks, from September 28 to December 14, 1947, 
with an attendance of 15,840; the seventh, the 
Haubrick Collection of Paintings and Drawings 
by German artists, for 8 weeks, from January 31 
to March 30, 1948, with an attendance of 9.259, 

Department of Stale Bulletin 



receipts of 21,210 reichsmarks; the eighth, the 
Kembrandt Exhibition, on display during the sum- 
mer of 1948, drew an attendance of as many as 
2,000 a day; and the ninth exhibition, Keturned 



Masterworks of the Berlin Collections, arranged 
for the winter of 1948^9, is still on view. The 
foreword and introduction to the illustrated cat- 
alogue of this exhibition follows. 



A FOREWORD BY JAMES R. NEWMAN 
Director, Office of Military Government for Hesse 



It is a very special pleasure for me to introduce 
the ninth exhibition at the Wiesbaden Central Col- 
lecting Point with these words of welcome, because 
it establishes a notable landmark in the relation 
between the German people and the American 
Military Government and is the symbol of a unique 
responsibility entrusted to the people of Hesse. 

The famous masterpieces on these walls, historic 
and proud possessions of the Kaiser Friedrich 
Museum and Nationalgalerie of Berlin, have now 
returned to Germany from the United States, 
where they were sent in 1945 for safekeeping be- 
cause it was then believed in Washington that no 
adequate facilities for their proper care survived 
in Germany. 

I remember very well the distress experienced 
at that time by our Monuments, Fine Arts and 
Archives officers, who feared that this gesture of 
generous concern for the safety of these paintings 
might be misinterpreted. To allay any fears felt 
by you and to answer uninformed criticism, the 
President of the United States issued a public 
statement concerning the transfer and gave his 
personal pledge that the paintings would be re- 
turned to Germany as soon as conditions should 
warrant.^ 

The civilized nations of the world agreed over 
forty years ago at The Hague that the custom of 
regarding works of art as booty of war a barbar- 
ous usage which should by solemn covenant be 
abandoned as a step toward the abolition of war 
itself. Although this agreement has since been 
violated and our MFA & A officers have had to 
devote much time and effort to recovering and 
restoring to their rightful owners cultural objects 
looted by the Nazi government, we still believe in 
its fundamental justice and have devoted great 
thought and effort to preserving the cultural heri- 
tage of the German people until they were in 
position to reassume its charge. 



That time has now come. During the past year 
and a half the properties of the museums in west- 
ern Germany have been returned to the custody of 
the owning institutions, but we were still caring in 
our Collecting Points at Wiesbaden, Offenbach 
and Munich for great quantities of cultural objects 
belonging to the German people but normally 
housed in Berlin. For practical purposes these 
must at present be considered as homeless. In 
July and August of this year we have transferred 
responsibility for the safekeeping of these na- 
tional treasures to the Ministers-President of 
Hesse and Bavaria. They are to act as custodians 
of this property in the name of the German people 
until the future German government is in position 
to decide on their ultimate disposition. 

Now the first half of the 202 paintings sent to 
Washington in 1945 for safekeeping have been re- 
turned to Wiesbaden in accordance with our Presi- 
dent's pledge, to be added to the many thousands 
of other works of art already placed in your cus- 
tody. Meanwhile these great works of art have 
been seen and enjoyed by over one and a half mil- 
lion American people. The other half of the 202 
paintings, sturdier than these, are making a longer 
tour in America and will return to Wiesbaden next 
spring. The proceeds of that exhibition tour are 
being used to buy food, medical supplies and cloth- 
ing for needy German children. 

It is our earnest hope that our act of faith in 
honoring our convenantal obligations to your 
works of art will not only have increased our im- 
derstanding and respect for each other, but that it 
will serve to establish as an active principle in the 
future conduct of international affairs the ideal so 
hopefully and unequivocally expressed in The 
Hague Convention. 



' BtTLLETiN Of Sept. 30, 1945, p. 499. 



May 1, 1949 



AN INTRODUCTION BY THEODORE ALLEN HEINRICH 

Director, Wiesbaden, Central Collecting Point, and 
Chief, MFA & A Section, OMGH 



The present exhibition, unlike all but the first 
of the eight previous Wiesbaden shows, has only 
the obvious link of quality between the paintings 
to explain why these particular masterpieces have 
been hung together in the galleries at the present 
moment. The first, opened on 10 February 1946, 
was arranged at a time when most of the German 
museums still lay in comatose inactivity as shat- 
tered ruins or grievously damaged, their contents 
scattered to obscure hiding places from the im- 
partial fury of bombs, tlieir survival or loss as 
sacrifice to the insatiable appetite of war known 
only to a few museum directors and to the Allied 
officers of the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives 
service. It was offered as visible token and joyful 
proof of the safety of certain of the most precious 
and widely beloved treasures of Germany's 
national patrimony, nearly all deriving from the 
collections of the Berlin museums and brought to 
Wiesbaden for safekeeping from a salt mine near 
Kassel to which they had been evacuated by Ger- 
man museum authorities after many adventures 
during the latter part of the war. 

During the past two years, as the museums of 
western Germany slowly succeeded in carrying out 
at least sufficient repairs to provide adequate stor- 
age conditions for their own property, it has been 
possible to return to their own homes an extremely 
large number of paintings, sculptures, drawings 
and other cultural materials which had found 
refuge in the Wiesbaden Central Collecting Point. 
During the life of the Collecting Point it has also 
been possible, in connection with its primary func- 
tion, to recover, identify, and restitute to their 
countries of origin very considerable quantities 
of cultural objects removed from those countries 
during the German occupation, items ranging from 
single paintings to the national stamp collection of 
Poland. This work is nearing completion, but 
we are now engaged in trying to perform a similar 
service for the shockingly large number of works 
of art expropriated from their German Jewish 
owners by the Nazis and which had found their 
nameless way into our custody. 

Of bona fide German public property gathered 
for safekeeping in Wiesbaden, the progress of re- 



building of western German museums has made 
it possible to reduce our holdings by returns to 
the owning institutions to the point that our one 
remaining custodial responsibility of real conse- 
quence in this category was for that deriving from 
the Berlin museums. It seemed to us that this re- 
sponsibility might well be transferred to the 
German people and so during the latter part of 
this summer the Minister-President of Hesse 
agreed to act in the name of the German people as 
bailee for these properties until such time as the 
future German government can undertake to make 
the proper disposition of them. 

Meanwhile, we felt under some obligation to 
make available in the form of changing exhibi- 
tions the more important objects from the immense 
collections sheltered here. We felt that the re- 
sponse to the first exhibition corroborated our as- 
sessment of the need to be able to see these things 
freely again and encouraged us to devote many 
hours of our private time to planning and ar- 
ranging the integrated series of shows which fol- 
lowed and which have been carried out with the 
active support of the Hessian Kultusministerium. 
Using always as basis the extraordinarily rich col- 
lections of the Berlin museums but with the fur- 
ther enrichments made possible by the extremely 
generous cooperation of other museums and pri- 
vate collectors, we have been able to explore various 
aspects of the principal developments and prob- 
lems of European art, to study its interrelations 
and divergencies, to admire its strength and pon- 
der its weakness, to enjoy and appreciate the in- 
dividual works which are the quintessential ex- 
pression of the highest moments and achievements 
of western civilization, our common heritage. 
Many, especially those who are now students, have 
come to know these things at first hand for the 
first time, and it has been our sufficient reward 
to lielp make this possible. 

Through these exhibitions we have had an in- 
tense look at the painting of the lands north of the 
Alps before 1600. We have traced the iconog- 
raphy of the story of the Nativity through all 
the schools of European art. We examined, as 
few people have ever had the opportunity to do 



Department of Slate Bulletin 



in public galleries, the development of drawing 
from the middle ages to the French Kevolution, 
an exliibition of perhaps unparalleled splendor in 
an absorbing field in which to know the hands 
of the greatest masters in their most intimate ex- 
pression. We took a good look at the best of 19th 
century German painting and drawing and asked 
some searching questions concerning their relative 
importance and meaning. We reexamined the 
sumptuous paintings, tapestries and drawings of 
the 18th century, where we found that not all was 
frivolity and that the voice of that too lightly 
dismissed era has still something of value to say 
in our own troubled times. We contrived to ap- 
proach with fresh understanding some of the more 
or less contemporary paintings which the Nazis 
had ignorantly labelled "degenerate" but which 
much of the non-German world has long accepted 
as the valid expression of our age. And finally we 
have had an extraordinary opportunity to study 
the work and mind of one of the greatest of all 
Europeans, Rembrandt. 

At each new exhibition, however, some favorite 
work was missing and we have often been asked 
why, for exam^jle, Eembrandt's "Man with the 
Golden Helmet," or van Eyck's "Man with a 
Pink" or Holbein's "George Gisze" was not in- 
cluded. They were not included because when 
these great treasures were discovered by Ameri- 
can troops deep in their salt mine refuge and 
were brought up to the light of day, some of 
them actually on 7 May 1945, prophetically on 
the day of armistice like the spirit of civilization 
resurrected from entombment, our governmentj 
felt grave concern for their future welfare. It 
was known in America that German museums 
were in ruins and disturbing rumors reached 
Washington that even the Wiesbaden Collecting 
Point, to which the paintings had been trans- 
ferred, did not offer ideal storage conditions for 
these often fragile embodiments of what we hold 
most precious in our mutual cultural history. For 
this reason the hospitality of our most modern 
and technically perfect museum building, the Na- 
tional Gallery of Art, was offered to provide the 



best possible conditions of safety for a portion 
of these irreplaceable treasures, and 202 paintings 
of the Berlin museum collections crossed the 
Atlantic. 

As Dr. Newman has pointed out, in order to 
avoid any misunderstanding of the motives for 
tliis transfer the President of the United States 
personally announced that the move was made in 
order to guarantee the greatest possible security 
for these immensely valuable works of art until 
such time as the German people might be able 
to make proper provisions for them. In the mean- 
time a vast number of Americans, most of whom 
would perhaps never have the opportunity to view 
them in Germany, have had the privilege and 
joy of seeing these masterworks and have gladly 
contributed their admission fees for the welfare 
of your children. 

Now slightly over half of these great paintings 
have returned to Wiesbaden and this exhibition 
is presented as proof of our pledge to return them. 
The other 97, less fragile than these, are making 
a wider tour in America to make it possible for 
several hundred thousand more people in the 
Middle and Far West of the United States to 
have their chance to enrich their understanding 
of Europe through the privilege of seeing at least 
this part of the celebrated Berlin collections. 
They will return to Wiesbaden in the late spring 
to join the paintings here exhibited. 

However long it may take to eliminate all the 
barbarities of war, and war itself, we would like 
to think that on this point at least we may have 
helped to establish the inviolability of works of 
art as pawns in the differences which have beset 
us. Art is a common language, a bridge we may 
freely cross and recross in our effort to find mu- 
tual respect and understanding. Therefore, 
while quality may be the only obvious link between 
these paintings, their true and deepest importance 
to us now lies in the reason for their being here 
together in Wiesbaden, as the hopeful symbol of 
a pledge made good, of a new and better era in 
human relations. 



May 1, 1949 



Free University of Berlin^ 



BY HOWARD W. JOHNSTON 
Chief, Higher Education, Education and Cultural Relations Branch, OMG Berlin Sector 



The Free University of Berlin (Freie Univer- 
sitaet Berlin) stands today as a symbol in the 
struggle for academic freedom and human dignity. 
As its 2,200 students walk through the streets of 
Dahlem in the U.S. Sector of Berlin to their 
classes, it would seem difficult to realize that eight 
months ago the Free University was no more than 
a hope in the minds of some forward-looking 
Berliners. 

The Free University has come to be known as a 
fighting university, for its professor's and students 
are aware, from personal experience, of the dan- 
gers of totalitarianism. However, it is primarily 
a growing educational institution, utilizing what 
would have been half-idle buildings, students and 
professors. It conserves the traditional values of 
European universities and at the same time serves 
as an instrument for realizing university reforms. 

The story of the development of the Free Uni- 
versity cannot be separated from the story of 
Soviet efforts to rebuild the old University of Ber- 
lin into a communist school. Berlin University 
on Unter den Linden — prior to 1933 one of the 
world's greatest universities — had a very special 
meaning for hundreds of Americans who studied 
in its famous halls. 

From the time of its founding in 1809 under the 
leadership of Wilhelm von Humboldt it had a de- 
cided influence on Germany and the world. 
Hegel, Mommsen, Hartmann and Meinecke were 
among its renowned teachers. In size it was im- 
pressive with 11,000 students and 120 scientific 
institutes. 

In 1933, its friends were grieved to see the Nazi 
hand fall on this center of academic freedom. 
With the coming of peace in 1945 these friends 
hoped that once again a great university could be 
rebuilt on Nazi ruins. 

Berlin fell to Soviet forces in April 1945. Dur- 
ing the three succeeding months before the French, 



'Reprinted from Information Bulletin of U.S. Military 
Government In Germany, Mar. 8, 1949. 



British and American occupation forces entered 
the city, Berlin institutions, including Berlin Uni- 
versity, were being organized according to eastern 
ideas. The education officers of the three western 
sector occupation authorities were, therefore, im- 
mediately confronted with a Soviet proposal to 
reopen Berlin University under the direct control 
of an occupation power. The Soviet area of re- 
sponsibility in Berlin included Stadt Mitte (Mid- 
dle borough) with its Unter den Linden university 
buildings. 

The American educational representative made 
a counterproposal in the Allied Kommandatura of 
Berlin to the effect that the university be placed 
under the Berlin city government where it had al- 
ways been so that each occupation power would 
have equal responsibility for the university's de- 
veloj^ment. The Soviet representative argued 
that the univei'sity had served a wider area than 
tlie city of Berlin and therefore should not be con- 
trolled merely by the city government, and that 
Berlin University had been a hotbed of Nazism 
and could not be entrusted to a German governing 
unit. The French and British backed the Ameri- 
can proposal for quadripartite control. 

Because the Soviets vetoed the measure, the mat- 
ter went to the deputy commandants and then to 
the commandants without agreement. Finally, in 
October 1945 the problem reached the Allied Con- 
trol Authority, the highest Military Government 
level in Germany, where the Russians used the 
same arguments and again vetoed the attempt of 
the throe western powers to place Berlin Univer- 
sity under quadripartite control. 

Russian-controlled newspapers announced that 
Berlin University would open in November 1945 
under Russian control. The opening date was 
postponed twice but finally in January 1946 the 
university resumed classes. 

Meanwhile, a gi'oup of professors under the 
leadership of Prof. Eduard Spranger appealed to 
the British and the U.S. Military Governments to 

Department of State Bulletin 



open a university in one of the west sectors. 
Neither Military Government could at that time 
comply, however, because to have helped the pro- 
fessors would have constituted a serious unilateral 
action which might have disrupted Allied relations 
at a time when the West was bending every effort 
to make fourpower relations work. 

As 1946 drew to a close it was apparent that the 
Soviet authorities were fitting the university into 
a definite plan. Extra food and coal were allot- 
ted to professors and special favors granted to 
students. The sons and daughters of workers 
were favored over those of professional men and 
"capitalists". A strongly communist preparatory 
school was established to provide the university 
with party-liners. A separate teachers faculty 
was formed and this was being filled with com- 
munist instructors. Communist professors were 
brought in to fill key positions on the legal, eco- 
nomics and philosophical faculties. By making 
some of these courses compulsory, by requiring 
special examinations and by making sure that 
ample brochures for instruction were printed, the 
new school soon felt the pressure of the Com- 
munist Party line. 

In spite of this, the majority of students tried 
to go quietly ahead with their studies as if nothing 
was happening. However when six student op- 
position leaders were kidnaped in the spring of 
1947 student opposition became more vocal. 

A student paper printed by opposition students 
came to life. This monthly magazine, Collo- 
quium, presented many thoughtful articles on the 
meaning of academic freedom and on the problems 
of university reconstruction. As the party line 
drew sharper and opposition became more articu- 
late. Colloquium become more and more the 
spokesman of student opposition throughout the 
Soviet Zone. In April 1948 three of the editors of 
Colloquium were expelled as students from Berlin 
University because of articles they had written. 
Their articles constituted a sharp attack on Soviet 
occupation methods of dealing with East Zone 
universities. 

The question raised by the sudden expulsion 
was not so much whether the articles deserved dis- 
ciplinary action but whether or not the students 
should have been dismissed by the occupation 
power without reference to the regularly consti- 
tuted system for student discipline. Two large 
student demonstrations against the Soviet action 

May I, 7949 



helped to focus public attention on conditions at 
Berlin University. 

On May 10 the city assembly, meeting in the 
Soviet Sector, voted 83-17 to try again to place 
the school on Unter den Linden under the 
Magistrat and, should this fail, to establish a Free 
University in the western sectors of Berlin. The 
Russian SED party and Soviet authorities were 
violently opposed to the proposal, and of course, 
refused to share control of their school which then 
enrolled 6,000 students. 

Berliners who wished to make a firm stand for 
academic freedom were therefore faced with the 
problem of developing a new university. Several 
suitable buildings were available in the American 
Sector, and teaching equipment and books were 
known to exist in scattered places throughout the 
western sectors. Moreover, scores of professors 
and thousands of students already lived in the 
American Sector. However, the Germans were 
promised nothing, therefore, except temporary as- 
sistance and whatever help might be possible 
through regular MG channels. 

Several committees had suddenly mushroomed, 
each conmaittee wishing to do something about 
the new university. A meeting of all interested 
persons was held June 19 and a German prepara- 
tory committee of 12 was formed. Prof. Ernst 
Eeuter, later elected mayor of Berlin, became 
chairman of the committee which evolved a work- 
able plan. Dozens of buildings had to be in- 
spected, prospective professors had to be inter- 
viewed and numerous problems had to be studied 
with great care. 

On July 23 the committee issued a proclamation 
stating the meaning of Berlin's struggle for aca- 
demic freedom and asking the world to assist in 
establishing a free university. On July 24 a 
newly organized Secretariat moved into an empty 
building in Dahlem. Dozens of willing students 
hustled in and out and within a few hours chairs 
and tables began to appear. That same day two 
telephones were installed. A tremendous cooper- 
ative effort was begun. 

Problems facing the secretariat were compli- 
cated by the Soviet blockade and by currency re- 
form. Securing equipment from the West, which 
had looked easy in June, appeared insurmountable 
after currency reform. Even the problem of con- 
tacting professors in the West proved difficult 
because the airlines over the Soviet blockade had 
to be reserved for food, coal and economic neces- 



sities. Money was scarce and as students brought 
in books and furniture it was still not clear how 
much money would be available. Dr. von Berg- 
mann and his student assistants in the secretariat 
volunteered their time. 

It was not until August that the preparatory 
committee learned that 2,000,000 Deutsche marks 
($600,000), from a fund which had accrued from 
the sale of U.S.-issued (jerman publications, would 
be available. Two million Deutsche marks was a 
lot of money, but only a small sum for starting a 
university. Development of a natural science 
faculty with its expensive laboratories had to be 
postponed, and effort had to be exerted to make 
each mark go as far as possible. 

By September students were busy furnishing 
the building across the street from the secretar- 
iat's office and repairing a wing of a large museum 
three blocks away. 

Special committees carefully drafted proposed 
statutes for the university. On Nov. 10 the stat- 
utes giving the new university a legal basis were 
approved by the city government, which was no 
longer subject to Soviet vetoes. 

During October and November, more than 5.000 
prospective students procured application blanks 
at the Secretariat. Because the standards were 
high and because the new university was in no 
position to offer every field of study, only 3,500 
applications were returned. The faculty commit- 
tee who interviewed and screened these 3,500 stu- 
dents found great difficulty in selecting only 2,200 
because the caliber of the applicants was excellent. 
Selection was based chiefly on the student's aca- 
demic record and on his promise of success. 

According to a definite system, extra points 
were given for resistance to Nazism. As a result, 
less than eight percent of the Free University stu- 
dents were officers in the army or held offices 
in Hitler organizations. This percentage is per- 
haps the lowest for any university in Germany. 
Twenty percent of the students are the sons and 
daughters of laborers, as compared with three per- 
cent for German universities before the war. 
Twenty-five percent are young women, a figure 
which is high for any German university, particu- 
larly in view of the fact that almost no women 
attended German universities prior to World 
War I. 

At present there is a waiting list of more than 
6,000 prospective students. Of those men and 



women now studying at the university, 30 percent 
are from the Soviet Zone, 20 percent transferred 
from the Berlin University and five percent from 
the west zones. From outside Germany are 30 
students of 17 different countries. 

During November, classes were organized under 
three faculties: philosophy, law-economics and 
medicine. By December, the organizational work 
was well in hand and students were thronging the 
university halls. A formal opening was planned 
for Dec. 4. 

This ceremony, held at Titania Palast, a large 
theater in the American Sector, was a memorable 
occasion. Professor Renter described the work 
of the preparatory committee to 2,000 students, 
parents, leading German civic leaders and Allied 
representatives present. Prof. Friedrich Mein- 
ecke, who had been elected rector, was ill ; never- 
theless he spoke through a recording. Prof. Ed- 
win Redslob, pro-rector, gave the main address. 

Col. Frank L. Howley, commandant of the U.S. 
Sector of Berlin, who had given the imiversity 
strong backing from the start, urged the Germans 
to follow the example of Diogenes, who was desti- 
tute materially but who asked Alexander the 
Great merely to step aside and let the sun shine 
through when Alexander came to him with offers 
of aid. 

Mrs. Louise Schroeder, then acting ma3'or, spoke 
in behalf of the Berlin population. Thornton 
Wilder, famous playwright, brought greetings 
from American universities. Representatives 
brought messages from the students and profes- 
sors of the universities of western Germany. 

Behind the professors, civic leaders and stu- 
dents who sat on the stage — it was new to have 
students share such honors — a huge university seal 
had been erected — Freie Universitaet Berlin, Veri- 
tas, Justitia, Libertas (truth, justice, liberty). 

After the flourishes of opening, the steady tasks 
of teaching and building have gone on. One hun- 
dred and thirty-four professors and assistants 
have already been selected for the three faculties 
and more are added each week as top-ranking pro- 
fessors seek refuge from eastern universities. On 
the philosophical faculty are teachers of philoso- 
phy, history, languages, art, psychology, litera- 
ture (including English and American), jour- 
nalism, dramatics, archaeology and musicology. 
The law-economics faculty has teachers in many 
aspects of these fields as well as in political science. 

Department of State Bulletin 



The medical faculty so far offers work in the clin- 
ical semesters of both medicine and dentistry and 
is in the process of developing pre-clinical courses. 

Gaps and weaknesses as still exist in the Free 
University's offerings can be remedied in part by 
exchange relations with Berlin's specialized col- 
leges — the Technical University (Technische Uni- 
versitaet) and the Academy of Political Science 
(Hochschule fuer Politik) in the British Sector 
and the Evangelical Seminary (Kirchliche Hoch- 
schule) and Teachers College (Paedagogische 
Hochschule) in the American Sector. 

Fifteen buildings are used by the university. 
Some of the hospitals used by the medical faculty 
are located in the British and French Sectors. 
The university is centered, however, around the 
buildings in Dahlem which offers an excellent site 
for study and for campus activities. 

Approximately 400,000 books are available to 
the university. This aid includes the nearby 
OMGUS Reference Library with more than 110,- 
000 volumes, a sociological library of 5,000 and an 
international law library of 40,000 books. 

The Free University is governed by a board of 
12 members — Berlin's mayor, the city finance min- 
ister, the city education minister and three others 
from the City Assembly, the rector, a representa- 



tive of the professors and another of the students. 
The three remaining places are filled by outstand- 
ing laymen — this year a judge, a labor leader and 
a Nobel Prize-winning chemist. For internal 
affairs there is a senate on which two students sit 
for all matters except those pertaining to pro- 
fessors. 

One student said that it is wonderful to be able 
to discuss problems freely without the feeling that 
the student sitting nearby is a spy. The emphasis 
at the Free University is definitely on studies, but 
there is also a sense of community responsibility 
that has been lacking in German universities. 

The Free University faces a serious problem of 
financial support; DM 1,800,000 ($540,000) will 
be needed before the end of the summer. The 
City Government stands ready to help, but is itself 
faced with the financial difficulties of the block- 
aded city. 

The Free University is providing a democratic 
experience for the hundreds of Germans taking 
part in its development and is fulfilling the moral 
obligation of the community to talented young 
people whose education was interrupted by the 
war. The Free University is an example of coop- 
erative democratic activity. 



Views of U.S., U.K., and France on German[^Basic Law 
Transmitted to Military Governors 



[Released to the press April 22] 

On April 8 the Foreign Secretaries of the 
United States, the United Kingdom, and France 
transmitted their views on the German Basic Law 
to the United States, British, and French Military 
Governors for the latter's guidance. It was left 
to the Military Governors to determine the time 
they considered it appropriate to communicate 
these views to the Parliamentary Council at Bonn. 
The Foreign Secretaries' views, cited below, were 
transmitted to the Parliamentary Council at Bonn 
on the afternoon of April 22. 

(a) The Foreign Ministers are not able to agree at this 
time that Berlin should be included as a Land in the 
initial organization of the German Federal Republic. 

(6) In the tinancial field any provisions put forward 
by the Parliamentary Council in the direction of securing 
financial independence and adequate strength for both 
the Laender and Federal Governments in operating in 
their respective fields will receive sympathetic considera- 
tion. 

May 1, 1949 



(c) On the question of Article 36 (Article 95 (c) ) they 
will also give sympathetic consideration to any formula 
which 

(i) eliminates from the federal powers those matters 
definitely excluded by the London agreement. 

(ii) assures to the Laender sufiicient powers to en- 
able them to be independent and vigorous governmental 
bodies. 

(iii) assures to the Federal Government suflBcient 
powers in the important fields of government to enable 
them to deal effectively with those fields in which the 
interests of more than one Land are substantially and 
necessarily involved. 

(d) Finally, the Foreign Ministers request that the 
Military Governors indicate to the Parliamentary Coun- 
cil, at an appropriate time, that they are ready to con- 
template a suggestion for a right of the Federal State to 
supplement, from its own revenues, appropriations made 
by the Laender from revenues from their own taxes 
levied and collected by them, by grants for education, 
health and welfare purjwses, subject in each case to 
specific approval of the Bundesrat. 

551 



THE UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES 
U.S. Answers Soviet Charges Against North Atlantic Treaty 

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR WARREN R. AUSTIN > 



The members of the General Assembly have 
heard charges by the delegation of the U.S.S.R. 
that the North Atlantic Treaty is a step toward 
undermining the United Nations and that the 
parties to the treaty, particularly the United 
States, have engineered the treaty for imperialistic 
purposes and with aggressive designs.^ There is 
and can be no rational basis for such assertions. 
Yet it comes as no surprise to my delegation that 
such charges are made. Almost every construc- 
tive step that the United States has taken of late 
to assist free nations to restore their economies, 
regain political stability, or preserve their inde- 
pendence when that is threatened, is slandered and 
distorted by a certain kind of propaganda. Such 
propaganda usually attacks, with now familiar 
phrases, any particular international program 
with which the United States is associated as some 
wicked monstrosity laden with dangers to peace. 
It demands that the sole test of the peaceful in- 
tentions of governments and peoples be that of 
unqualified, unquestioning agreement with the 
views of the Soviet Union. It thus seeks the 
adoption by international bodies of the approach 
and system of definitions employed internally by 
the political authorities in the Soviet system. 

Such propaganda itself is dangerous. It at- 
tempts on the one hand to confuse the minds and 
conscience of people in free societies in the face 
of present-day realities. On the other hand, it 
plants distrust and hostility toward the outside 
world in the minds of those whose information 
comes to them filtered through a tightly controlled 
censorship. The result is far from beneficial to 
the cause of peace. 

The text of the treaty was published over three 
■weeks ago, and its substance is now being dis- 
cussed by the free peoples of the world and is soon 
to be discussed by the parliamentary bodies of the 
several countries which have signed the treaty. 

The treaty represents a voluntary association of 
freedom and peace-loving countries to assure 
peace and security in the North Atlantic area, and 
so to contribute to the foundations of peace in the 
world generally. There is one thing and one 
thing only which the treaty is against — it is 

'Made before the plenary session of the Genernl As- 
sembly in New York, N.Y. on Apr. 14, 1949, and released 
to the press by the U.S. Mission to the United Nations on 
the same date. 

' For text of treaty, see Btjlletin of Mar. 20, 1949, p. 
339 ; also printed as Department of State publication 3464. 

552 



against aggression or the threat of aggression, 
however these may manifest themselves. But its 
positive emphasis is on peace and on the means 
of best assuring peace. It is not an aggressive 
instrument and cannot be used as such because it 
is rooted in the purposes and principles of the 
United Nations Charter. Its framers have kept 
actively in mind, throughout the negotiating pe- 
riod, the great measure of strength and support 
which this defense arrangement should bring to 
the United Nations, the paramount international 
organization for the maintenance of peace and se- 
curity. The treaty fits squarely within the frame- 
work of the Charter and is designed to coordinate 
the exercise of the ri^ht of self-defense specifically 
recognized in article 51 of the Charter. The 
United States has, as is well known, already en- 
tered into a similar collective defense arrangment 
with the other American republics as part of the 
reorganization of the Inter-American system to 
bring it within the framework of the United 
Nations Charter. 

The treaty has come into existence because there 
is a real need for it in the world today. It is a 
formal acknowledgement of the repeatedly dem- 
onstrated fact that the nations on both sides of the 
North Atlantic have a natural community of in- 
terest and of democratic ideals. The European 
part of this community is now engaged in a great 
cooperative effort to attain economic recovery and 
the blessings of political and social stability wliich 
depend so much on economic well-being. In that 
effort the United States is assisting on a very large 
scale because it knows that a sound and healthy 
Europe is a great force for peace, a vital element in 
a strong United Nations, and a friendly partner 
with the United States in its efforts for increased 
security for all. But Western European recovery 
is being retarded b}' a sense of insecurity and fear 
stemming from the increased pressures and threats 
which have their origin in the plans or fancies of 
international Communism. Already certain coun- 
tries have found themselves unable to resist such 
pressures and have become submerged. It is vital 
to peace that this process should not be continued. 
The nations of the North Atlantic area have 
learned the lesson that they must stand together 
and make it plain in advance that they will do so, 
since the preservation of the freedom and inde- 
pendence of any one of them is incontestably a mat- 
ter of vital concern to all. The treaty is intended 
to remove the feeling of insecurity which hinders 

Department of Slate Bulletin 



economic recovery in Europe and to reestablish a 
needed equilibrium under which East and West can 
cooperate in the United Nations and outside it, in 
mutual respect and forbearance. The American 
people and their Government consider these aims 
to be wholly consistent with our commitments to 
render steadfast support to the United Nations. 
They also consider them to be in the interest of 
the security of the United States. 

So far as the United States is concerned, the de- 
velopment of the treaty stems directly from the 
will of the people, as stated through their repre- 
sentatives in Congress. On June 11, 1948, the 
Senate of the United States, by overwhelming vote, 
resolved that the United States pursue three prin- 
cipal objectives within the United Nations : ^ 

1. Progressive development of regional and 
other collective arrangements for individual and 
collective self-defense ; 

2. association of the United States with such 
arrangements based on self-help and mutual aid ; 
and 

3. promoting peace by our determination to ex- 
ercise the right of individual and collective self- 
defense in the event of armed attack. 

The President of the United States in his inau- 
gural address declared that the unfaltering sup- 
port of the United Nations is one of the cardinal 
points of his four-point program.* 

It is our belief that the treaty fully expresses the 
common determination of its participants to sup- 
port the Charter, to prevent aggression, and to pre- 
serve the peace. In concluding this defense ar- 
rangement, the parties are not absolved from one 
iota of their responsibilities or obligations under 
the United Nations Charter. 

That fact alone should remove the fears which 
Mr. Gromyko has expressed here. His fears should 
be allayed further by a dispassionate reading of 
the treaty itself. The charges made here by him 
are the same as those made by his government be- 
fore a text of this treaty was even in existence. 
The prejudgment is not justified by the treaty 
itself. 

Article 1 of the treaty affirms as obligation to 
which those parties already members of the United 
Nations are already committed; namely, 

... to settle any international disputes in which they 
may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that 
international peace and security, and justice, are not en- 
dangered, and to refrain in their international relations 
from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent 
with the purposes of the United Nations. 

Article 7 is equally categorical on the inviolabil- 
ity of "rights and obligations under the Charter of 
the Parties which are members of the United Na- 
tions." 
May 1, 1949 



The paramount authority of the Security Coun- 
cil of the United Nations in enforcement action is 
clearly recognized. At the same time, the treaty 
is based on the inherent right, recognized in article 
51 of the Charter, of collective self-defense against 
armed attack pending the time when the Security 
Council has taken the measures necessary to main- 
tain international peace and security. Measures 
to be taken in the exercise of this right must be 
reported immediately to the Security Council and 
cannot in any way affect the authority and respon- 
sibility of that organ for the maintenance of 
peace. 

In articles 2 and 3 the parties pledge themselves 
to preserve and strengthen their free institutions; 
to promote better understanding of the principles 
on which free institutions are founded ; to promote 
conditions of stability and well-being ; and to de- 
velop economic cooperation among themselves 
They also agree to a program of self-help and mu- 
tual aid in order to carry out the objectives of the 
treaty. 

Article 4 provides for joint consultation when- 
ever, in the opinion of any participant, "the terri- 
torial integrity, political independence or security 
of any of the Parties is threatened." 

Article 5 establishes the principle that an armed 
attack against one or more of the parties in Eu- 
rope or North America will be considered as an 
attack against all. This would bring into play 
measures of collective self-defense under article 51 
of the Charter, each party to take such action as it 
deems necessary, including the use of armed force, 
in any given instance. Any such measures would 
be immediately reported to the Security Council 
and must be terminated when the Security Coun- 
cil has taken the measures necessary to restore and 
maintain international peace and security. 

It should be remembered that the principal ob- 
jective underlying article 51 was to express the 
right of states individually or collectively to take 
measures to meet an armed attack until the Secu- 
rity Council has taken the measures necessary to 
maintain international peace and security. 

The prominent characteristic of article 51 is the 
expression in it of a cause for action which is recog- 
nized the world over, and which commanded agree- 
ment at San Francisco, namely: "The inherent 
right of individual or collective self-defense." 
Great progress had already been made immediately 
before the meeting in San Francisco in implemen- 
tation of that inherent right. The states of the 
Western Hemisphere had, by treaties, developed 
a system of their own in the hemisphere for the 
operation of measures of self-defense. The 
Chapultepec conference had finished its work only 
two months before the meeting at San Francisco. 



' Bulletin of July 18, 1948, p. 79. 
' Bulletin of Jan. 30, 1949, p. 123. 



There it had crystallized the basic principles of 
this system of hemispheric self-defense in the Act 
of Chapultei)ec. At San Francisco, therefore, 
where the adoption of this act by the American 
rcpuljjics was brought to the attention of the nego- 
tiators of the Charter of the United Nations, the 
question arose how the legitimate operation of 
such a regional system was to be fitted into a gen- 
eral global system. 

At the same time, the American states supported 
the primacy of the universal system which the 
Charter sought to establish. The interest of the 
United Nations, then being formed, to avoid an 
isolationism of a regional nature which might con- 
Hict with the principles and purposes of this great 
voluntary association, were taken care of through 
other provisions than those of article 51. How- 
ever, this was done without impairing, in the least 
degree, the right of regional associations to act in 
self-defense by tlie categorical language of article 
51. This language is — "Nothing in the present 
Charter shall impair the inherent right of indi- 
vidual or collective self-defense if an armed attack 
occurs against a Member of the United Nations, 
until the Security (council has taken the measures 
necessary to maintain international peace and 
security. . . ." This comprehends anything in the 
Charter that might stand in the way of this special 
right of self-defense. Articles 52 and 53 deal with 
enforcement action and not action for self-defense. 
The former requires authorization from the 
Security Council; the latter does not. 

Therefore, this is not a new issue. Mr. Gromyko 
presents an old issue that was settled by the con- 
summation of the Charter of the United Nations 
with article 51 in it. 

Additional articles define the area directly 
covered by the defense provisions of the treaty, 
provide for effective bodies to coordinate imple- 
mentation, establish norms for the adherence of 
other states, and provide for the ratification and 
duration of the treaty. The treaty may, if any of 
the parties so request, be reviewed after ten years 
in the light of the factors then affecting peace and 
security in the North Atlantic area and of the 
further development of United Nations agencies 
and programs. 

As the depository, the Government of the United 
States expects to register the treaty with the 
United Nations, in accordance with article 102 of 
the Charter, when ratifications necessary to bring 
the treaty into force have been obtained. 

I have outlined the contents of the treaty in 
order to make plain the entire consistency of the 
treaty with the United Nations Charter on everj- 
point. It should not be thought that because the 



" Bulletin of Apr. .3, 1049, p. 403 ; also printed as De- 
partment of State publication 3480. 

° For text see Bulletin of May 9, 1948, p. 600. 



treaty applies to the North Atlantic area its ad- 
herents are, or, could be, indifferent to the welfare 
or independence of free countries in other areas. 
The United States has repeatedly made plain in 
thougiit and deed its interest in the maintenance of 
the integrity and independence of such countries 
as Gi-eece, Turkey, and Iran. Other parties to the 
North Atlantic Treaty have also indicated in vari- 
ous ways their similar interest and concern. To 
the extent that this new treaty can strengthen the 
security of the North Atlantic area, we are con- ■ 
viiiced that it can also contribute to a greater w 
measure of security in other areas as well. The ■ 
United States is also determined to continue to 
work through the United Nations by all available 
and — appropriate means to achieve the same basic 
objective. 

Mr. Gromyko has complained that the Soviet 
Union is being isolated from the peace-loving na- 
tions of the world. If this is so, it is pertinent to 
ask who is responsible for that isolation. 

Take, for example, economic relations. 

The Soviet Union in July 1947 was invited to 
participate in the program to rebuild Europe's 
shattered economy and to give a better standard 
of living to Europe's millions. But the Soviet 
Government refused to take part in this joint 
effort. Indeed, Andrei Zdhanov told the initial 
Cominform conference that the Soviet Union "will 
make every effort in order that this plan [the Mar- 
shall Plan] be doomed to failure." 

Take, for example, cultural relations. 

The United States believes that the cause of 
peace can be served by creating better under- 
standing among peoples. Toward this end the 
United States has sought repeatedly but unsuc- 
cessfully to establish with the U.S.S.R. the ex- 
change of students, professors, artists, books, and 
the products of scientific investigation. But it is 
an unfortunate fact that since the middle of 1947, 
the Soviet Government has embai'ked upon a cam- 
paign to place everj^ type of obstacle, supported by 
the threat of heavy punishment, in the way of 
contacts between the Russian people and the 
people of the non-Soviet world.^ 

Instead of seeking to lead the Russian people 
into closer and friendlier relationship with the 
l)eoplcs (if other countries, the Soviet Government 
has deliberately sought to block any free inter- 
change of ideas, and indeed through its controlled 
press, has systematically and deliberately sought 
to poison the minds of the Russian people against 
examining the ideas of other countries. 

Take, for example, political relations. 

Mr. Gromyko complains that the Soviet Union 
was excluded from the Brussels pact ° and from 
the North Atlantic Treaty. But how did the 
Soviet Government respond to earlier efforts for 
closer political relationship? Secretary of State 
Byrnes in 1946 offered to the Soviet Union a 

Department of State Bulletin 



mutual guarantee pact against any future German 
or Japanese aggression to remain in force for 25 
or even 40 years. But instead of accepting, the 
Soviet Government rejected that offer. 

We have heard the Western Union characterized 
as another means of isoLating the Soviet Union. 
I ask you to recall what event preceded the forma- 
tion of the Western Union ? Was it not the Com- 
munist seizure of Czechoslovakia? Coming as it 
did upon the heels of a series of acts of territorial 
aggrandizement, did not the capture of this state 
by the instruments of international Communism 
give the nations of Western Europe good reason to 
fear for their safety, and to join together in 
measures for their own defense? The Brussels 
treaty and the North Atlantic Treaty are continu- 
ations of the efforts of peace-loving nations to find 
ways of assuring themselves that aggressive totali- 
tarianism will be deterred from further adven- 
tures, and to give expression to the ideals of liberty 
and democracy which Communist ideology is at- 
tempting to destroy in Europe. 

It should be abundantly clear to all that these 
efforts have been directed against potential ag- 
gressors and no one else. What is the significance 
of the constant reiteration by the Soviet Union of 
the statement that the treaty is directed against 
it ? Is it possible that this could be the expressions 
of a guilty conscience? 

Take, still another example: the activities of 
the United Nations. The Soviet Union has been 
invited repeatedly to join the various specialized 
agencies of the world to participate in joint efforts 
to build a better world. But the Soviet Govern- 
ment preferred to isolate itself from most of these 
organizations. Now that it is withdrawing from 
the World Health Organization, the Soviet Union 
belongs to only 2 of the 13 specialized agencies. 
Just as this isolation of the Soviet Union is of its 
own making, so is it true that it can be ended 
whenever the Soviet Union decides to join whole- 
heartedly the peaceful family of nations. 

The lack of certainty that the Security Council 
will be able to function with full effectiveness, 
which has been high lighted by the abuse of the 
privilege of the veto, is one of the reasons which 
have made it necessary for members to find other 
means within the framework of the Charter to 
insure their own security and safeguai'd the pur- 
poses and principles of the Charter. The North 
Atlantic Treaty, which was signed in Washing- 
ton on April 4 of this year, is designed to serve 
as one of such means. This treaty gives concrete 
expression within the North Atlantic area to an 
obligation which is implicit in the Charter. The 

' Btilletin of Mar. 27, 1949, p. 38. 



North Atlantic Treaty is designed to support the 
purposes and principles of the United Nations and 
to strengthen the organization. 

May I revert for a moment to the item of the 
agenda which is now before us. The injection by 
the Soviet Union of the North Atlantic Treaty 
into this discussion gives a strong reason in addi- 
tion to those which I gave yesterday for the 
adoption of the pending four-power resolution 
aimed at cooperation in efforts at security and 
peace. 

These, then, are our intentions and purposes in 
joining with 11 other governments in the con- 
clusion of the North Atlantic Treaty. We believe 
that it will strengthen the United Nations and help 
to create conditions under which that organization 
cair better and more surely discharge its great re- 
sponsibilities. In conclusion, I should like to cite 
a passage from Secretary Acheson's recent radio 
address to the American people on the meaning of 
the Atlantic pact.' Secretary Acheson stated 
what every true Amei'ican will echo fervently and 
with conviction: 

". . . This country is not planning war 
against anyone. It js not seeking war. It abhors 
war. It does not hold war to be inevitable. Its 
policies are devised with the specific aim of bridg- 
ing by peaceful means the tremendous differences 
which beset international society at the present 
time." 

The members of this Assembly can be sure that 
these sentiments are based on the deepest convic- 
tions of the American people, and that the Govern- 
ment of the United States will continue its policy 
of firm support to the United Nations and defense 
of the cause of peace. 

Let US increase the power of the United Nations 
by giving the pending resolution decisive success. 



Documents and State Papers 
January 1949 contains: 

The Problem of Greece in the Third Session of the Gen- 
eral Assembly 

Activities of the Far Eastern Commission: Second Report 
by the Secretary-General 

Calendar of International Meetings with Annotations 

February 1949 contains: 

The Trusteeship Council: Third Session 

The German Press in the U.S.-Occupied Area 1945-48 

Three Years of Reparations 

Private Commercial Entrants to Japan 

Calendar of International Meetings with Annotations 

Copies of the publication are for sale by the Superintendent of 
Documents, Government Printing OtTice, Washington 25, D. C, at 
300 a copy; subscription price for 12 issues is $3.00 a year. 



May 7, 1949 



Suppression of Human Rights in Bulgaria and Hungary 



STATEMENT BY BENJAMIN V. COHEN > 
U.S. Delegate to the General Assembly 



The questions here raised concerning civil and 
religious liberties in two former enemy-controlled 
countries deserve our most serious consideration. 

In January 1942 in the first formal declaration 
of the United Nations, the nations engaged in the 
struggle with the forces of tyranny expressed their 
common intention to fight on to victory in defense 
of liberty, independence, religious freedom, and 
human rights for all peoples. 

In February 1945 at Yalta, the three war lead- 
ers of the United Nations — Stalin, Churchill, and 
Roosevelt — gave a solemn pledge on behalf of their 
respective countries to the peoples of Europe then 
on the threshold of liberation that freedom should 
be restored, not to their former rulers and not to a 
new set of rulers, but to those peoples themselves. 
To them we promised the right to create, through 
free elections, democratic institutions of their own 
choice. And under the peace treaties signed at 
Paris in February 1947, the states formerly allied 
with Germany undertook as an international ob- 
ligation to protect and safeguard the fundamental 
freedoms and human rights of their peoples. 

Under the Charter of the United Nations all 
the members of the United Nations also solemnly 
committed themselves to take joint and separate 
action in cooperation with the organization to 
promote universal respect for, and observance of, 
human rights and fundamental freedoms for all 
without distinction as to race, sex, language, or 
religion. In Paris last autumn, without a dissent- 
ing vote, the General Assembly adopted a Declara- 
tion of Human Rights and called upon all peoples 
and organs of society, by teaching and education 
and by progressive measures, to promote respect 
for these rights and to secure their effective 
recognition and observance.^ 

Under articles 55 and 56 the field of human 
rights is brought plainly and expressly within the 
scope of the Charter, and the Assembly's authority 
in this field may be exercised under articles 10 and 
14. Article 2 (7) of the Charter regarding non- 
intervention in matters of domestic jurisdiction 
was not intended to preclude, in appropriate cases, 

' Made in the Ad Hoc Political Committee on Apr. 18, 
1940, and released to the pres.s by the U.S. Mission to the 
United Nations on the same date. 

' For text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 
see Bulletin of Dec. 19, 194S, p. 752. 

"TIAS 1650 and 1651 (Department of State publica- 
tions 2973 and 2974). 

556 



discussion in the Assembly concerning the promo- 
tion of human rights and fundamental f reeaoms to 
which, individually and collectively, the members 
of the United Nations have committed themselves 
in the Charter. Nor is the Assembly barred under 
appropriate circumstances from expressing an 
opinion or making a recommendation when there 
is a persistent and willful disregard for human 
rights in any particular country. Moreover, in 
determining the applicability of article 2, para- 
graph 7, we must not lose sight of the important 
fact that in the case before us, Bulgaria and Hun- 
gary have assumed in the treaties of peace ^ spe- 
cial obligations under international law to secure 
human rights and fundamental freedoms to all 
persons under their jurisdiction. 

Generally speaking, however, no organ of the 
United Nations can compel corrective action in 
this field in the absence of a breach of or a threat 
to international peace or of a treaty providing for 
such action. 

A serious responsibility rests upon the members 
of the Assembly to refrain from making recom- 
mendations which may not only be ignored but 
may, in fact, in certain situations create greater in- 
transigence on the part of those criticized and ag- 
gravate the position of those most deserving of 
our sympathy and assistance. The task of the 
Assembly is to promote respect for and the observ- 
ance of human rights and fundamental freedoms 
and not to make recommendations which, in fact, 
defeat the practical realization of its objectives. 
Moreover, the General Assembly obviously cannot 
itself act as a court to review all the individual 
cases in which it may be alleged that human rights 
and freedoms have been infringed. But an ap- 
preciation of the practical difficulties in promoting 
respect for and observance of human rights should 
not and cannot be exploited as an easy excuse for 
not trying to do anything in any situation. 

It will require a great deal of time and concerted 
effort to establish adequate minimum .standards of 
respect for human rights and freedoms every- 
where in tlie world as envisaged in tlie Charter. 
The General Assembly rightly took as its first step 
the working out of a general Declaration of Hu- 
man Rights so that we may have some standards 
with which to start. In all our countries, includ- 
ing my own, much remains to be done, and none of 
us can afford to assume a self-righteous attitude. 

Department of Stale Bullelin 



But if we are serious in our quest for peace, we 
cannot fail to do our part and make every effort to- 
wards promoting minimum standards of human 
riglits. For as Secretary of State Marshall said 
at the opening of this Third Session of the Assem- 
bly/ "Governments which systematically disre- 
gard the rights of their own people are not likely to 
respect the rights of other nations and other 
peoples . . ." 

There are in this changing and diversified world 
varying concepts of the functions of the state and 
the status of the individual. We generally agree 
that within the widest limits the rights of the indi- 
vidual in relation to the state should be determined 
by the respective states. But there are limits. 

I think that we are all in agreement that, in the 
liglit of our pledges in the Charter, the functions 
of the state should be of a character to promote and 
not to destroy human rights and fundamental free- 
doms. Let us grant that in the absence of a treaty 
we must accept the judgment of the respective 
states as to what functions of the state promote 
the rights and freedoms of its citizens and what is 
the exact substantive content of these rights and 
freedoms ; there is nevertheless an obligation on the 
part of every civilized state to exercise its judg- 
ment in honesty and good faith. No state has the 
sovereign right claimed by Hitler's Third Reich 
to declare war on freedom and religion. State 
sovereignty does not mean state tyranny. In 
fields of thought and religion where men cannot 
agree, freedom is the only alternative to tyranny. 

Unless a state allows freedom for the peaceful 
expression of ideas, the road toward peaceful 
change and progress is blocked. Unrestrained 
political power, no less than unrestrained economic 
power, has a corroding effect upon those who ex- 
ercise it. This is particularly true when the wield- 
ers of power deny themselves the benefit of any 
views not meekly submissive and subservient to 
their will and caprice. Power which is unwilling 
to combat error with reason is not likely itself to 
be guided by reason. No state need fear the errors 
of dissenting opinion and nonconforming thought 
where reason is free to combat them. It is uneasy 
privilege, not confident progress, which prefers the 
arbitrament of force to the test of reason. Sup- 
pression of nonconforming opinion has alwaj^s 
characterized the police state which fears the free- 
dom of its own citizens. Tolerance of dissent is 
the most certain sign of a free state which cher- 
ishes and does not fear the freedoms of its citizens 
and uses force only to protect and not to suppress 
that freedom. 

As I have already indicated, the governments of 
the ex-enemy states undertook a solemn interna- 
tional obligation to safeguard the civil and re- 
ligious rights of their people. These governments 
have formally recognized that the observance of 
the human rights set forth in the peace treaties is 
not merely a matter of their own domestic concern. 
Three Allied Powers signatories to the treaties 

May J, 1949 



were given specific functions with respect to the 
execution of these treaties. Moreover the peace 
treaties provide definite procedures for the settle- 
ment of differences concerning their interpreta- 
tion and execution. Having in mind these pro- 
cedures, on April 2 my government took initial 
action in this regard in notes addressed to the Gov- 
ernments of Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania, 
formally charging them with violations of the 
human rights clauses of the respective treaties." 
Other signatory states have taken similar steps. 
The receipt of replies from Hungary rejecting the 
charges has confirmed the existence of disputes for 
which the appropriate settlement procedures are 
laid down in the peace treaties. Many delegates 
here, including those who argued that the General 
Assembly had no authority to discuss the question 
before us, have referred to these procedures. I 
hope that this is an augury that all the states con- 
cerned will cooperate in carrying out these pro- 
visions of the peace treaties. 

The issues involved in these charges have come 
recently into the focus of world opinion as a result 
of the prosecutions of church leaders in Hungary 
and Bulgaria. They are of intense concern to the 
entire international community organized in the 
United Nations and not only to the states parties 
to the treaties of peace. It seems to us only fitting 
and proper that the members of the General As- 
sembly who are deeply concerned and anxious 
about the charges of suppression of civil and re- 
ligious liberties in these countries should express 
that concern and anxiety. That should help the 
governments of these countries to understand that 
the resort to the treaty procedures and to the Gen- 
eral Assembly is supported not, as it has been 
charged, by a few powers for undisclosed imperial- 
istic reasons but by the world community of na- 
tions because of principles which are deeply and 
universally cherished. 

There is no intention whatever, on the part of 
the United States Government, to interfere in the 
internal affairs of these states or to favor this or 
that political group. Concern over violations of 
human rights cannot properly be pictured as a 
policy of intervention, of encouragement to reac- 
tion, or of opposition to social reform. On the 
contrary, it is our belief that sincere observance of 
the human rights and political liberties of indi- 
vidual citizens makes possible more genuine social 
reforms which emanate from the people themselves 
and may be enjoyed by them in an atmosphere free 
from fear. 

It is not our purpose here to develop and examine 
juridically the individual acts of the ex-enemy gov- 
ernments which have given rise to the charges 
against them. The United States is prepared to 
submit specific and detailed observations on such 
acts, with supporting dociunentation, in connection 

* Bulletin of Oct. 3, 1948, p. 432. 

• Bulletin of Apr. 10, 1949, p. 450. 



with the proceedings under the treaties of peace. 
Here, however, it is our intention to outline only 
the broad pattern of developments in these coun- 
tries. In each country it is a pattern of a minority 
group seizing the instrumentalities of government 
through force and intimidation and maintaining 
itself in power through suppression of every one 
of the liuman rights and fundamental freedoms 
which these states have solemnly undertaken to 
observe. It is a pattern disclosing a clear design 
to suppress first the leaders of political groups and 
parties and then the leaders of religious groups 
and organizations, because these leaders had re- 
fused to subordinate themselves, or to use their 
influence to subordinate their followers, to the 
dictates of the Cominform. 

In nearly all countries there are different con- 
cepts as to the exact and appropriate scope of civil 
and religious freedom. But making all due al- 
lowances for legitimate differences of opinion, we 
cannot see that any substantive civil or religious 
freedom can survive in these ex-enemy countries if 
the shabbiest sort of excuse suffices to liquidate 
political and religious leaders who refuse to accept 
and support the prevailing totalitarianism. 
These leaders have been driven from office or 
brought to trial on the pretext that they have 
violated national laws. Actually there is reason 
to believe that they are being persecuted and tried 
not for the offenses with which they have been 
charged, but because the governments had de- 
cided to liquidate them as sources of independent 
opinion. We cannot accept the proposition that 
under the guise of dissolving Fascist or subversive 
organizations a state may suppress the expression 
of views that are odious or even hostile to it. We 
do not question the right of the state to protect 
itself from those who endeavor to overthrow the 
state by force and violence, but that right does not 
justify the suppression of efforts to seek changes 
by peaceful means even though those efforts are 
displeasing to the ruling groups. Has there ever 
been a tyranny, however, ruthless, which did not 
regard its own authority as beneficently exercised 
in the interest of the people and its own objectives 
as a facile excuse for the suppression of freedom ? 

Let us now consider, more specifically, the situa- 
tion obtaining in Hungary. The second article 
of the treaty of peace with Hungary reads as 
follows : 

1. Hungary shall t.ike all measures necessary to .secure 
to all persons under Hungarian jurisdiction, without dis- 
tinction as to race, sex, language or religion, the enjoyment 
of human rights and of the fundamental freedoms, in- 
cluding freedom of expression, of press and publication, 
of religious worship, of political opinion and of public 
meeting. 

2. Hungary further undertakes that the laws in force 
In Hungary "shall not, either in their content or In their 
application, discriminate or entail any discrimination be- 
tween persons of Hungarian nationality on the ground of 
their race, sex, language or religion, whether in reference 



' Bulletin of Aug. 24, 1947, p. 392. 



to their persons, property, business, professional or finan- 
cial Interests, status, political or civil rights or any other 
matter. 

It is the view of my government that freedom 
of political opinion, one of the fundamental free- 
doms guaranteed under this provision, has vir- 
tually ceased to exist in Hungary. In the na- 
tional elections of 1945 the Communist Party ob- 
tained only 17 percent of the vote. But thi3 
minority party, having arrogated to itself key 
positions in the government, embarked upon a 
campaign of force and intimidation on a nation- 
wide scale in order to eliminate all actual and po- 
tential opposition and to nullify the popular 
mandate. 

The majority Small Holders Party, which had 
polled 57 percent of the national vote in 19-15, had 
its parliamentary majority greatly reduced 
through purges and arrests of its leaders; Com- 
munist-inspired action against its accepted leaders 
drove them from positions in the government and 
in the party, to be replaced by politicians subservi- 
ent to Communist dictates. 

In new elections held in August 1947, the in- 
ability of non-Communist parties to campaign 
freely because of Communist interference and 
governmental restrictions, the arbitrary disfran- 
chisement of many voters, and practices such as 
multi{)le voting, made impossible a fair expres- 
sion of the popular will, as the United States Gov- 
ernment had occasion to inform the Hungarian 
Government at the time." But not satisfied even 
with the results of these elections, the Communist- 
dominated Hungarian Government proceeded to 
silence and to destroy the non-Communist parties. 
By the forced dissolution of the Independence 
Party and the Democratic People's Party, whose 
leaders had to flee the country, over one and one- 
half million voters were deprived of their rep- 
resentation in Parliament. The historic Social 
Democratic Party was forced into a merger with 
the Communists following the arrest and im- 
prisonment of those leaders who opposed the 
merger and a purge of party members who voiced 
their opinions against it. The forced extinction, 
earlier this year, of the Christian Women's Camp, 
whose leader had the temerity to introduce into 
Parliament a motion requesting the United Na- 
tions to undertake an investigation of the state of 
religious freedom in Hungary, marked the dis- 
appearance of all organized opposition from the 
Hungarian legislature. 

Safeguards for an independent judiciary have 
been criticallv impaired. Under the provisions of 
Act XXIII of March 19, 1948, the Minister of 
Justice in the Hungarian Government was given 
authoritv to transfer or retire any judge. The 
exercise "of this authority and the establishment of 
a system of the politically controlled People's 
Courts, have together reduced the judiciary to 
political subservience to the regime. 

As for freedom of expression, another right 

Department of State Bulletin 



which Hungary had undertaken to respect, the 
plain fact is that people are afraid to express them- 
selves and a significant silence obtains throughout 
the land except for those vocal few who speak 
for the regime. 

Under the present Hungarian law the utterance 
of an untrue or even true statement which is con- 
sidered by the authorities to be detrimental to the 
Republic or disturbing to the existing order is an 
offense punishable by law. 

Freedom of press and publication has ceased to 
exist in Hungary. Governmental authority is 
used to prevent the publication of any views dis- 
tasteful to the ruling group, and journalists have 
been subjected to arrest and imprisonment for 
independent reporting. 

Freedom of public meeting has been denied reg- 
ularly since the middle of 1947 to all except the 
controlling minority group and its collaborators. 
Prior to that time meetings of democratic, non- 
Communist parties were broken up by organized 
mobs with the acquiescence of the police. 

Another fi'eedom of fundamental importance 
guaranteed in the peace treaty is the freedom of 
religious worship. Religious worship, of course, 
means more than mere formal participation in 
religious ritual. Religious freedom is not assured 
merely by a constitutional provision to that eflfect, 
or by the fact that churches remain open. Re- 
ligion as a creative force in a free society requires 
freedom to teach and voice views based on re- 
ligious tenets, freedom to associate with those of 
like belief. 

The Hungarian Government, however, in pur- 
suing its objective of bringing all aspects of Hun- 
garian life under a uniform totalitarian system, 
has sought by coercive measures to restrict the 
legitimate functions of the churches. A system- 
atic campaign has been conducted to dissolve 
church organizations or transform them into new 
organizations under "acceptable" leadership. In 
carrying out this program the Government has 
resorted to numerous repressive measures, arbi- 
trary arrests, trials of priests and nuns, inter- 
ference with religious processions, and restrictions 
on the opening of religious chapels. 

By threats and arbitrary proceedings against 
church leaders and by perversion of the judicial 
process, the Government has attempted to force 
the retirement or submission of independent 
church leaders and to bring about their replace- 
ment by those willing to adopt a subservient atti- 
tude. Those who refused, like Lutheran Bishop 
Ordass and Cardinal Mindszenty, were arrested 
and imprisoned. 

Bishop Ordass was informed by Government 
representatives that he would be in danger unless 
he resigned. He replied that he would not desert 
his flock. Thereupon he was taken into custody 
by the political police, held for several days, then 
freed. Wlien he still would not resign he was re- 
arrested on charges of embezzlement and black- 
May I, 1949 



marketeering, and sentenced to a prison term by 
a "People's Court." 

Because of his high ecclesiastical office and his 
criticism of the policies of the Government, Cardi- 
nal Mindszenty became the focal point of the at- 
tack upon the Catholic Church. Religious meet- 
ings at which he was present were disrupted or 
interfered with ; his associates and followers were 
subjected to threats and sometimes to physical 
violence on the part of the police. Finally, the 
decision was taken to silence the Cardinal, whose 
prestige among the people and whose open disap- 
proval of the repressive methods of the regime 
marked him for elimination. After the Govern- 
ment had been unable to induce or frighten him 
into submission, he was arrested and tried on 
charges that were mere pretexts for the Govern- 
ment's principal objectives of discrediting him 
and of destroying his influence. This, in our 
view, is the true significance of the action against 
Cardinal Mindszenty. 

I now turn to Bulgaria, article 2 of the treaty of 
peace with Bulgaria provides : 

Bulgaria .shall take all measures necessary to secure to 
all persons under Bulgarian jurisrtiction, without distinc- 
tion as to race, sex, language or religion, the enjoyment of 
human rights and of the fundamental freedoms, including 
freedom of expression, of press and putilication, of religious 
worship, of political opinion and of public meetings. 

The record of the Bulgarian Government also 
reveals a complete unwillingness to recognize the 
human rights and freedoms of those whose think- 
ing does not conform with the thinking of the self- 
constituted ruling group. The violations of hu- 
man rights by the Bulgarian Government has been 
deliberate, systematic, and continuous. Copious 
evidence of these violations appears in the official 
laws and regulations of that Government and in the 
record of repressive measures in every field of pub- 
lic activity designed to coerce the population into 
undissenting obedience. 

There is no freetlom for peaceful political dis- 
sent in Bulgaria, and the last vestiges of independ- 
ent political opinion have been suppressed. Even 
under the circumstances of intimidation and fraud 
which marked the last national elections, in Oc- 
tober 1946, the opposition received over one fourth 
of the total number of votes. However, since these 
elections the opposition deputies have been ex- 
pelled and their parties dissolved. 

The enforced liquidation of the National Agrar- 
ian Union, whose leader, Nikola Petkov, was exe- 
cuted, and of the Socialist Party whose leader was 
sentenced to imprisonment, deprived a major por- 
tion of the Bulgarian electorate of all participa- 
tion in public affairs. Petkov had an admirable 
record of resistance to Fascism and Nazi tyranny. 
In postwar Bulgaria, as a legally elected member of 
Parliament, he spoke out in defense of political and 
civil liberties. As a consequence he was deprived 
of his immunity, imprisoned, and executed by the 
Bulgarian Government after a trial to which the 



United States Government felt compelled to refer 
publicly as a travesty of justice. The real aim of 
these political trials was to liquidate all opposition 
to the Communist-dominated government and to 
make impossible any change by peaceful, demo- 
cratic means. 

Arbitrary arrests and imprisonment, deportation 
from one part of the country to another, and forced 
labor are now common practices in Bulgaria. The 
chief instrumentality for carrying out these depri- 
vations of human rights is the "people's militia," 
which is empowered oy law to detain and send to 
so-called "labor-educational communities" or new 
places of residence persons alleged to be of Fascist 
or antinational inclinations, dangerous to public 
order and state security, or who disseminate harm- 
ful or false rumors. Under this law, local militia 
chiefs exercise vaguely defined and extensive au- 
thority over individual citizens, many of whom are 
held under inhuman conditions in camps or in en- 
forced banishment in designated localities. 

Moreover, it is not merely that the individual 
may be deprived of his fundamental rights through 
a nonjudicial procedure lacking the basic safe- 
guards against arbitrary action, for even if so- 
called judicial processes were employed, it has be- 
come evident that the judiciary has been purged 
so as to make it an instrument of the regime. 

There is no freedom of expression, press, and 
publication in the Bulgarian police state. Persons 
are subjected to fines and imprisonment for speak- 
ing, writing, or printing what the Government 
chooses to regard as insulting or as "prone to cre- 
ate views dangerous to public order," to quote the 
press law. The State Secrets Law and regula- 
tions enacted thereunder define state secrets in a 
way which permits the application of this concept 
to any subject. The citizen therefore never knows 
when his mentioning any subject can, if the au- 
thorities choose, be employed as a club against him. 
The principal newspapers of the Agrarian and 
Socialist Parties were suppressed in 1947. No 
newspapers not conforming to the government 
"line" can be published. 

In the matter of freedom of religion, a clear 
attempt to intimidate religious bodies recently oc- 
curred in connection with the trial of a group of 
ministers of several Protestant sects. After being 
arrested and kept in custody for many months, 
these men were brought into court and tried on 
fantastic charges of using their churches as espio- 
nage adjuncts of the United States and of the 
United Kingdom. The charges of "espionage, 
treason and currency operations" involving United 
States ollicials were, as the United States Govern- 
ment pointed out in a note to the Bulgarian Gov- 
ernment, unfounded and ludicrous. As this note 
indicated, the accusation and trials were an obvioiis 
manifestation of an effort to intimidate the small, 
respected Protestant denominations in Bulgaria 
and discredit their leaders. It happened that 
these Protestant Churches had normal ties with re- 
ligious bodies of the same denomination outside of 



Bulgaria. Behind the persecutions of their 
pastors lies the unwillingness of the totalitarian 
regime to allow even such ties to be maintained. 

A similar state of affairs with respect to sup- 
pression of human rights prevails in Rumania. I 
wish to make it quite clear that the omission of 
developments in Rumania from my discussion re- 
sults only from the fact that our agenda item is 
confined to Hungary and Bulgaria, not from any 
desire to draw a distinction between their record 
and that of Rumania. As I indicated earlier, my 
government has taken steps to establish these 
charges in all tliree countries and to obtain 
remedies in accordance with the peace treaties. 

The question before us is — what would be the 
proper and practicable course of action for the 
Assembly under the circumstances? We believe 
that the General Assembly should give its encour- 
agement and support to action under the treaty 
procedures for inquiry and determination. It 
seems to us that such a course is preferable to any 
other that is available to the Assembly. It is the 
course that best accords with the spirit of article 33 
of the Charter which counsels the parties to a dis- 
pute to resort to means of their own choice prior to 
a recourse to the United Nations. "We hope there- 
fore that the General Assembly will take official 
note of the charges made and of the steps taken 
under the treaty of peace to insure that human 
rights and fundamental freedoms are safeguarded 
in accordance with the treaty provisions. The dis- 
cussion in the Assembly should impress the Gov- 
ernments of Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania 
with the importance of their compliance in good 
faitli witli their obligations to cooperate in the 
settlement of these issues. 

AVhatever action might be taken, we should not 
lose sight of our real purpose in the field of human 
rights and freedoms. It is not to set neighbor 
against neighbor or nation against nation but to 
unite the world on the bases of principles which 
recognize the freedom and dignity of all men and 
all nations. 

We are all of a common humanity. We have 
all, under the (^barter, expressed our determina- 
tion to respect the dignity and worth of the human 
person, to practice tolerance and to live together 
in peace with one another as good neighbors. 
Despite the various ways of life we may pursue 
and despite the different ideas we may cherish, let 
us learn to tolerate ways of life we cannot ourselves 
practice and ideas we cannot ourselves share. Let 
us strive then to find the strains of common 
humanity which can bind us together. Let us 
then, as members of a common humanity, agi-ee to 
reject all forms of tyranny over the mind and sotil 
of man. I^et ns approach these problems of human 
rights with the firm determination to find com- 
mon standards upon which we can build a world 
comnumity of free nations and of free men. En- 
during peace nuist rest upon the acceptance of 
common standards of human rights that can com- 
mand the willing allegiance of all humanity. 

Department of State Bulletin 



The United States in tlie United Nations 

[April 23-29] 

Soviet Wives 

The General Assembly in plenary session on 
April 25 approved a resolution condemning "meas- 
ures which prevent or coerce the wives of citizens 
of other nationalities from leaving their country 
of origin with their husbands or in order to join 
them abroad" and calling on the U. S. S. R. to 
withdraw "the measures of such a nature which 
have been adopted." The vote was 39 to 6, with 
11 abstentions. 

The Chilean representative introduced the com- 
plaint at the Paris session of the General Assembly 
last fall after the refusal of the Soviet Union to 
permit the Russian wife of the son of the former 
Chilean Ambassador to the U. S. S. R. to leave with 
her husband. Other similar cases were brought 
up, and the resolution was adopted by the Legal 
Committee. 

Mrs. Roosevelt, participating in the three-hour 
debate, expressed regret that there had been no 
change in the situation subsequent to the adop- 
tion of the resolution in Paris and added that tliis 
meant "unhappy young people" were forced to 
remain against their will in the U. S. S. R. "and 
under circumstances, we are informed, which have 
given them reason to fear for their personal 
security." 
Human Rights in Bulgaria and Hungary 

A Bolivian resolution which recommends re- 
course to peace-treaty arbitration procedures in 
connection with charges against Bulgaria and 
Hungary was approved by the Ad Hog Political 
Committee of the General Assembly on April 22 
by a vote 33 to 6, with 11 abstentions. The resolu- 
tion retains the question on the agenda for the 
fourth session of the General Assembly. After 
four days of debate, the Committee thus disposed 
of the agenda item concerning the observance in 
Bulgaria and Hungary of human rights and fun- 
damental freedoms, with special reference to 
recent trials of church leaders. 

A Cuban-Australian arnendment which would 
establish a committee of inquiry to investigate the 
charges was defeated. Two other amendments 
were withdrawn following an appeal by the U. S. 
Delegate, Benjamin Cohen, one providing for re- 
consideration of General Assembly recommenda- 
tions on membership of Hungary and Bulgaria in 
the United Nations and another "condemning" 
charter infringements. Mr. Cohen said that 
though he shared the sentiment prompting the 
several amendments, he could not support any of 
them. He felt that the Bolivian resolution best 
expressed the collective General Assembly opin- 
ion, but he thought the Committee should try to 
find a solution acceptable not only to those who 
were "convinced" but also to the minority. 

Both Bulgaria and Hungary declined the invi- 
tation to participate in the debate, again declar- 

May I, 7949 



ing that the clerical trials were an internal mat- 
ter and not within the competence of the United 
Nations. 

Pacific Settlement 

Four specific proposals resulting from a study 
made by the Interim Committee of methods for 
the promotion of international cooperation in the 
political field were approved by the General As- 
sembly by an overwhelming majority on April 28. 
The United States Delegate, "Warren R. Austin, 
supported all of these recommendations. 

One of the jji-oposals is for the establishment of 
a panel for inquiry or conciliation. Members of 
a commission of inquiry or conciliation could be 
drawn from this panel by the Security Council, 
the General Assembly, the Interim Committee or 
by any states taking steps for the settlement of 
their disputes outside United Nations organs. 
Ambassador Austin described the proposed panel 
as a flexible device which created no organ or 
procedure to complicate the present United Na- 
tions structure. 

Another recommendation relates to the appoint- 
ment of a rapporteur or conciliator at an early 
stage in the consideration of disputes brought to 
the attention of the Security Council. 

A third proposal is to restore the General Act 
of 1928 to full effect. Though the United States 
is not a party to this act, it supported this 
proposal. 

The final recommendation was to recommit to 
the Interim Committee for further study the 
amendments to the General Assembly's rules pro- 
posed by that Committee. 
International Law Commission 

The International Law Commission has de- 
cided on the substance of several articles to be in- 
cluded in the Draft Declaration on the Rights and 
Duties of States and agreed that this, like the, 
human-rights declaration, would take the form of 
a declaration to be adopted by the General As- 
sembly as a "common standard of conduct" to be 
applicable to all states, and not just United Nations 
members. Further agreement was reached that 
the text would not include all possible Charter pro- 
visions, but would be restricted to those rights and 
duties which were general to international law 
and that the declaration should conform as strictly 
as possible to the language of the Charter. 

Thus far the Commission has agreed to include 
articles declaring that every state has the right 
(1) to exist and to preserve its existence (2) to 
have its existence recognized by other states (3) to 
independence and (4) to legal equality. Another 
article will pertain to the duty of nonintervention 
of every state. 

Chairman Manley O. Hudson (U.S.) pomted 
out that the Commission is not at this stage at- 
tempting to arrive at the final wording but is try- 
ing to determine what to include in the declaration. 

561 



INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND MEETINGS 

Calendar of Meetings ' 



Adjourned during April 

Itu (InternaUorial Telecommunication Union): 

International Conference on High Frequency Broadcasting . 
United Nations: 

Trusteeship Council: Fourth Session 

Ecosoc (Kconomic and Social Council): 

Commission on the Status of Women: Third Session . . . 
Commission on Economic Development : Third Session . . 
Transport and Communications Commission: Third 

Session. 
Economic Commission for Europe: 

Committee on Electric Power 

Committee on Industry and Materials 

Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East: 

Committee of the Whole 

Population f'dniniission: Fourth Session 

Himian Rights ("oinniission: Special Session 

IcAO (International Civil Aviation Organization): 

African-Indian Ocean Air Navigation Meeting 

North Atlantic Meteorological Communications Meeting 

Special Meeting on Notices to Airmen 

Fag (Food and Agriculture Organization) : 

Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council 

Rubber Study Group 

Iro (International Refugee Organization) : 

General Council: Second Session 

Ilo (International Labor Organization): 

Conference of European Experts on Training of Supervisors 
within Industry. 

Coal Mines Committee: Third Session 

American Institute for the Protection of Childhood: 

Annual Meeting of the Directing Council 

Tin Study Group: Management Committee 

Geography, Sixteenth International Congress of 

Stomatology, XXIV Italian Congress of 

International Cotton Advisory Committee: Eighth Meeting . 

In Session as of May 1, 1949 

United Nations: 

Commission on Korea 



Commission on India and Pakistan 

Conciliation Commission for Palestine 

General Assembly: Second Part of Tliird Session 

International Law Commission 

Ecosoc (Economic and Social Council): 

Subcommission on Employment and Economic Stability: 
Third Session. 

Statistical Commission: Fourth Session 



Itu (International Telecommunication Union): 
Provisional Frequency Board 



Region II — Fourth Inter-American Radio Conference . . . 

Council of Foreign Ministers: Deputies for Austria 

Gatt (General A.ssembly on Tariffs and Trade) : 

Third Session of Contracting Parties 

ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization): 

Meeting on .Joint Support for Ocean Weather Ship Stations 
and Joint Support for Air Navigation Facilities in Dan- 
ish Territory and in Greek Territory. 

European Frequency Meeting: Second Session 

War Victims, Diplomatic Conference for the Drawing Up of 

a New Convention Intended to Protect. 
Fao (Food and Agriculture Organization): 

Preparatory Conference on World Wood Pulp Problems . 
Ilo (International Labor Organization): 

Fourth Regional Conference of American States Members . 
First International Congress on Civil Engineering 



Mexico City . 

Lake Success . 

Beirut .... 
I,ake Success . 
Lake Success . 



Geneva . . . 
Geneva . . . 

Bangkok . . 
Geneva . . . 
Lake Success . 



London . 
London . 
Montreal 

Singapore 
London . 



Geneva 
Geneva 



Pittsburgh , 



Montevideo 

London 

Lisbon 

Taormina and Catania, Italy . 
Brussels 



Seoul 



Lake Success 

Haifa, Jerusalem, and Rhodes 

Lake Success 

Lake Success 



Lake Success . 
Geneva . . . 



Geneva 



Washington 
London . . 



Annecy, France 
London . . . . 



Paris . 
Geneva 



Montreal 



Montevideo 
Mexico City 



' Prepared in the division of International Conferences, Department of State. 
• In recess from Apr. 6-29, 1949. 



1948 

Oct. 22-Apr. 10 

1949 
Jan. 24-Mar. 25 

Mar. 21-.\pr. 4 
Mar. 21-Apr. 11 
Mar. 21-30 



Mar. 21-23 
Apr. 4-8 

Mar. 28- Apr. 5 
Apr. 11-22 
Apr. 11 

Mar. 22-Apr. 12 
Apr. 11- 
Apr. 19- 



Mar. 24-31 
Mar. 28- Apr. 1 

Mar. 29-Apr. 9 

Mar. 30-Apr. 2 



Apr. 19-30 

Apr. 1-2 
Apr. 4 
Apr. 8-15 
Apr. 20-24 
Apr. 25-30 



Dec 

Jan. 
Jan. 
Apr. 
Apr. 



Apr. 
Apr. 



1948 

12- 
1949 

3- 

28- 
5- 
12- 

11- 



2.5- 
1948 



Jan. 



Apr. 
Feb. 



Apr. 
Apr. 



15- 
1949 

25- 
9-» 

11- 

20- 



Apr. 26- 
Apr. 21- 



Apr. 25- 

Apr. 25- 
Apr. 30- 



Departmenf of State Bulletin 



Calendar of Meetings — Continued 



Scheduled for May 

United Nations: 

Ecosoc (Economic and Social Council): 

Social Commission : Fourth Session 

Economic and Employment Commission: Fourth Session . 

Commission on Human Rights: Fourth Session 

Economic Commission for Europe: Fourth Session . . . 
Commission on Narcotic Drugs: Fourth Session . . . . 

Economic Commission for Latin America 

Subcommission on Freedom of Information and the Press: 
Third Session. 
Ilo (International Labor Organization): 

Advisory Committee Meeting of Experts on Cooperation . 

Inland Transport Committee: Third Session 

Correspondence Committee on Social Insurance 

Governing Body: 109th Session 

ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization): 

Council: Seventh Session 

Itu (International Telecommunication Union) : 

Administrative Conference to Revise the International 
Telegraph and Telephone Regulations. 

Region I and Region III Frequency Conferences 

Inter-American Bar Association, Sixth Meeting of the . . . . 

Health Congress of the Royal Sanitary Institute 

Pan American Sanitary Organization: 

Executive Committee: Seventh Session 

International Whaling Commission, First Meeting of the . . 
IcEF (International Children's Emergency Fund): Executive 
Board. 

South Pacific Commission: Third Meeting 

International Railway Congress 



Lake Success . . . 
Lake Success . . . 
Lake Success . . . 

Geneva 

Lake Success . . . 

Habana 

Lake Success . . . 

Geneva 

Brussels 

Montreal . . . . 
Geneva 

Montreal . . . . 

Paris 

Geneva 

Detroit 

Brighton, England 

Washington . . . 

London 

Lake Success . . 

Noumea 

Lisbon 



1949 

May 2- 
Mav 9- 
May »- 
May 9- 
May 9- 
May 29- 
May 31- 



May 5 
May 18- 
May 24- 
May 27- 

May 10 

May 18 

May 18 
May 22 
May 23 

May 23 
May 30- 
May 

May 10 
May 



U.S. Delegation to Cotton Advisory Meeting 



The Department of State announced on April 
19 the United States Delegation to the eighth 
meeting of the International Cotton Advisory 
Committee scheduled to convene at Brussels on 
April 25, 1949. The United States Delegation is 
as follows : 

Chairman 

Edwin D. White, Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture, 
Department of Agriculture 

Advisers 

Read Dunn, Director of Foreign Trade, National Cotton 
Council of America 

Jerome T. Gaspard, First Secretary and Consul, American 
Embas.sy, Brussels 

Charles J. Little, Commercial Attach^, American Embassy, 
Brussels 

Rene Lutz, Office of International Trade, Department of 
Commerce 

Arthur W. Palmer, Head, Division of Cotton and Other 
Vegetable Fibers, OfBce of Foreign Agricultural Re- 
lations, Department of Agriculture 

Horace G. Porter, Office of the Special Representative, 
Economic Cooperation Administration, Paris 

Robert B. Schwenger, Chief, Regional Investigations 
Branch, Office of Foreign Agriculture Relations, De- 
partment of Agriculture 



Clovis D. Walker, Director, Cotton Branch, Production 
and Marketing Administration, Department of 
Agriculture 

Adviser and Secretary 

James G. Evans, Chief, Fibers Section, Division of Inter- 
national Resources, Department of State 

At the forthcoming meeting the Committee will 
review the world cotton situation and exchange in- 
formation concerning the cotton policies of the 
member governments. The problem of increas- 
ing the usefulness of the secretariat of the Commit- 
tee in compiling statistical and other data on cot- 
ton throughout the world and the problem of in- 
creasing the effectiveness of the Committee wiU 
also be discussed at Brussels. 

The Committee was established in accordance 
with the recommendations of the International 
Cotton Conference, held at Washington in Septem- 
ber 1939, for the purpose of keeping the interested 
countries abreast of the developments in the world 
cotton situation and of suggesting practicable 
measures from time to time for international 
collaboration in the solution of world cotton 
problems. 



May 1, 7949 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



Pan American Day: A Symbol of Mutual Trust and Cooperation 
Among the Americas 

ADDRESS BY SECRETARY ACHESON > 



I appreciate the invitation of the Council to join 
with you in observing Pan American Day. iVl- 
though this occasion is the first opportunity I 
have had since my return to the Department of 
State to meet with the representatives of the 
American republics in the Pan American Union, 
I feel at home here, in the same way that all of 
us feel at home together in the inter-American 
community of good neighbors. 

Wholehearted support of the inter-American 
system has been a foundation stone of the foreign 
relations of my country for many years. None of 
the momentous international developments that 
have taken place during these years has lessened 
the importance of this policy for my country — 
sonie have increased it. This policy is not the 
policy of any one man or any one political party, 
nor is it the policy of any oiie moment. It is an 
established national policy, strongly and actively 
supported by the will of the people of my country. 

The Pan American Union, with its important 
place in the inter-American system, symbolizes a 
spirit, increasingly important to international 
affairs — a disposition on the part of governments 
to sit down together and work out their common 
problems in an atmosphere of concord and mutiial 
trust. This habit of cooperation is firmly estab- 
lished and deeply rooted in the Western Hemi- 
sphere. Perhaps to some extent we take it for 
granted and forget that many other nations have 
not accepted this principle so thoroughly or prac- 
ticed it so long as we have. But many states have 
now come to realize the great value of the example 
and pattern of friendship and cooperation set by 
the American republics in this hemisphere. 

It is apparent that two opposing forces are at 
work in the world of today. One is disruptive. 
It divides nations and peoples. It turns indi- 
viduals against each other even in the same coun- 
try and the same community. The other force 
draws peoples and nations together in common 
endeavor. It harmonizes the interests of indi- 
viduals. 

Observation of the operation of these contrasting 
influences reveals a paradox. Free people are 
willing to share their privileges and prerogatives 
with others— to entrust their vital interests to the 
decision of the community of which they are a 

' Made at the Special Session of the Connpil of Organi- 
zation of American States in Washington, D.C., on Apr. 14, 
1949, and released to the press on the same date. 



part. Repressed people hold aloof, suspect the 
motives of those who offer friendship and aid, 
and shrink from or oppose cooperative action. 

We can see clearly which of these attitudes is 
normal and healthy and which is abnormal and 
morbid. It is my conviction that the cohesive 
forces at work for unity and cooperation will pre- 
vail in time over the divisive forces working for 
disruption and disaster. I believe this because the 
desire for cohesion and cooperation is rooted in 
man's long search for security, peace, and spiritual 
advancement in a social order devised to further 
the realization of those aims. 

It is understandable that leadership for the at- 
tainment of those ends through cooperative action 
comes largely from the Western world, which be- 
lieves so firmly that the objective of individual 
liberty and well-being can best be realized through 
the exercise of tolerance and restraint by individ- 
uals toward the other members of the community. 
Fortunately, these principles are steadily gaining 
welcome support as the basis of the peaceful and 
orderly world community now being built by col- 
lective endeavor devoted to the common purpose of 
a better life for all peoples. 

Cooperation among nations on a world-wide 
scale is a comparatively recent development. A 
start was made scarcely three decades ago with the 
League of Nations. In the vision of Woodrow 
Wilson, the people of the world caught a glimpse 
of the family of nations moving forward in unison. 
But my country faltered and held back. It had 
not fully learned that its security was bound up in 
the security of a free world. Hindered by other 
adverse factors, the League proved unable to check 
the resurgent militarism that forced the world, in- 
cluding my own country, again into war. 

But war only confirmed that the compulsion to- 
ward international cooperation is too great to be 
ignored or defeated. Even while World War II 
was being fought, the Allied powers began organ- 
izing the United Nations. These efforts achieved 
success at San Francisco, where the American re- 
publics exerted a strong and constructive influ- 
ence in the drafting of the Charter. 

Once more men possessed an instrument for con- 
sultation and collective action. And once more 
they learned that form and organization are not 
enough, that the spirit which animates the mem- 
bers is all important. The attitude of one mem- 

Deparfment of Slate Bulletin 



ber can keep the United Nations — or any interna- 
tional organization — from working as it is in- 
tended to work and can seriously hamper the sin- 
cere efforts of the majority to achieve security and 
progress through collective action. 

But the will to attain the objectives of the United 
Nations through joint action in keeping with the 
spirit and principles of the Charter is as strong 
as ever. The nations and peoples dedicated to 
peace and security through international cooper- 
ation have refused to be defeated or dismayed by 
obstruction and threats. They have souglat and 
found ways to carry forward their purpose and, at 
the same time, to strengthen the United Nations as 
their primary choice of the means of collective 
action. 

Some of the means that have been developed 
within the spirit of the Charter are aid to free 
countries whose integrity and independence are 
tlireatened: the European Eecovei-y Program; 
the Treaty of Rio de Janeiro; the Brussels Pact; 
and the North Atlantic Treaty. All of these 
measures are of major importance to the American 
republics. Some originated in the community of 
American nations and directly concern the secu- 
rity of this hemisphere and relationships within 
the inter-American system. Others have been 
strongly influenced by principles evolved and in- 
stitutions developed by the American republics. 

The nations represented here today actively 
supported the inclusion in the United Nations 
Charter of the concept of regional arrangements — 
a need foreseen by the conference of American 
states held in Mexico City prior to the San Fran- 
cisco conference on organization of the United 
Nations. 

The mutual defense treaty for the Western 
Hemisphere concluded at Eio de Janeiro in 1947 
was based on the principle, recognized by article 
51 of the Charter, that an attack on one of the 
American nations would be considered an attack 
on all, and would be dealt with accordingly, by 
joint action. An immediate result of the conclu- 
sion of this treaty was the widespread recognition 
of the fact that the purposes of the Charter were 
strengthened and fuithered by ancillary arrange- 
ments in accordance with the principles of the 
Charter. 

The principle of the inherent right of individual 
and collective self-defense, embodied in article 51 
of the United Nations Charter, became the heart 
of the North Atlantic Treaty, which is designed 
to assure the maintenance of international peace 
and security for the North Atlantic community, 
just as the Treaty of Eio de Janeiro is designed 
to provide the same assurance for the American 
community. The American family of nations can 
justifiably take pride in the way their pioneering 
for peace has borne fruit for others who earnestly 
desire to achieve the same purpose. The prin- 
ciples of consultation on matters of mutual concern 
and of close cooperation in the economic as well as 
the security field likewise are incorporated in the 

May I, 1949 



North Atlantic Treaty, as they are in the formal 
agreements of the American republics. 

Another important element common to both 
treaties is that they are explicitly designed to fit 
into the universal system of the United Nations. 
Both are reinforcements and developments of the 
United Nations concept, not alternatives to it. 

The Organization of American States is an ele- 
ment of strength for the United Nations, and con- 
versely, the United Nations is an element of 
strength for the Organization of American States. 
All of us belong to and are active in both. There 
are no divided loyalties here. We can honestly 
and sincerely serve the same cause in both the 
regional and the universal system. 

In dealing with the instrumentalities and 
mechanisms for international cooperation, may I 
mention an additional development upon which 
intensive work is now proceeding. This is Presi- 
dent Truman's plan of technical cooperation 
among the peoples of the earth in improving their 
living conditions and strengthening their national 
economies. This effort also will be a practical 
demonstration in international cooperation, with 
many nations participating. 

The great hopes for this program are shared, I 
believe, by the people of the Western Hemisphere 
as well as the peoples of other areas. The pro- 
gram will be unique in many respects. It will re- 
quire full and continuing cooperation not only 
among governments, but also among the people 
who carry on the great work of producing for the 
needs of the world. Eeal understanding can de- 
velop out of the mingling, on a practical worka- 
day basis, of the technicians of many countries 
with the peoples of other lands. They cannot deal 
with each other at arms length, but must work 
shoulcler to shoulder, demonstrating and learning 
new ways of sowing and harvesting crops, con- 
trolling and eliminating disease, producing more 
goods with less effort and at less cost. Wlien 
international cooperation takes place on a wide 
enough scale on the farms and in the factories of 
the world, the tasks of statesmen will be easier. 

One reason I have such great hopes for this pro- 
gi-am is that already, in the republics of the West- 
ern Hemispliere, there is proof of how much can 
be accomplished by this method. The pioneering 
done by the members of the inter-American sys- 
tem will prove invaluable in the wider application 
of the processes arrived at by trial and error. 
The prototype of almost every kind of project 
contemplated in the world-wide program envi- 
sioned by President Truman has been developed 
and tested in cooperative programs carried on in 
recent years between the United States and its 
sister American countries. Present plans include 
a substantial expansion of these joint activities 
in this hemisphere even as they are extended to new 
areas. 

The experience of our countries in technical co- 
operation will also serve as a caution to other 
peoples that, promising as this technique is, too 



much cannot be expected too soon. Raising the 
living standards of large groups of people, over 
large areas, is a complex problem involving many 
diverse factors. It cannot he accomplished with- 
out intensive, continuous effort. 

Modern technology can make the earning of 
one's daily bread less exhausting. It can relieve 
man of much backbreaking drudgery and release 
his creative powers for things of the spirit. It is 
in this sense that President Trun>iin's "Point 4" 



opens up almost limitless vistas in the long future. 
The effective inter-American system which ex- 
ists today is the work of many men. As repre- 
sentatives of the American republics, we can be 
justly proud of those who contributed to this suc- 
cess. We can best pay tribute to them by main- 
taining and perfecting the system they initiated 
in the full knowledge that the welfare of the West- 
ern Hemisphere retjuires mutual trust and cooper- 
ation. 



Present Day International Economic Picture 



REMARKS BY WILLARD L. THORPi 
Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs 



At the end of the war, the economic problems 
faced by the various countries of the world were 
tremenclous. However, the immediate require- 
ments were obvious and the ininiediate objectives 
wei-e clear. The economies of the war-devastated 
countries were shattered, and reconstruction, reor- 
ganization, and a revival of production were the 
obvious requirements. The economies in the other 
countries of the world had been diverted and 
distorted to wartime production, and the problem 
for them was one of transformation to a peacetime 
basis. Most government budgets were necessarily 
far from balanced, and trade among countries was 
exceedingly limited. The basic over-all world 
problem was one of shortages, with starvation the 
greatest threat of all. These shortages were by 
no means evenly distributed among countries. 

It is dangerous to generalize when conditions 
vary so throughout the world, but certain underly- 
ing trends are generally evident. Althougli tre- 
mendous strides have been taken since V-J Day, 
no one can claim that world economic health has 
been achieved. However, the most promising re- 
sults have been in the very field of production 
where results were most needed. The processes of 
conversion in countries like the United States have 
taken place with the maintenance of production 
levels close to those achieved under war pressures. 
The war-devastated areas are in the process of a 
dynamic upward surge from their postwar lows 
with production tending to reach and even exceed 
prewar levels for many commodities. The short- 
age period is not yet over, but the softening of 
prices is one indication of reduced pressure of de- 
mand upon supply. 

In terms of the external relations of countries, 
if one uses the balance of payments as a test, we 

'Made at the Mississippi Valley World Trade Confer- 
ence In New Orleans, Apr. 22, 1949, and released to the 
press on the same date. 

566 



are still far from economic health. The excess of 
American exports over imports reached its maxi- 
mum in the second quarter of 1047, and is sub- 
stantially less today. The ga]) however is still in 
the neighborhood of five or six billion dollars per 
annum. On the other hand, most foreign coun- 
tries found themselves operating on a deficit basis 
and have had to bring their situation into balance 
either through loans or grants from the United 
States and other countries or through extensive 
controls over trade, or both. It is worthy of note 
that there is much more similarity today, at least 
superficially, among most of these deficit countries 
than was true immediately at the end of the war. 
Whereas the countries with extreme postwar defi- 
cits, such as the United Kingdom, Italy, and 
France, have succeeded in reducing their gaps, 
other countries which seemed to be in good condi- 
tion at the end of the war have more recently found 
themselves with threatened imbalances in trade. 
Countries such as Sweden, Canada, and Mexico al- 
lowed trade to continue with minimum restrictions 
to a point where the purchases of American goods 
outstripped the foreign exchange which they were 
earning and, after a substantial depletion of their 
reserves, were forced to take steps to protect their 
financial situation. 

The net lesult has been a great emphasis on the 
balancing of trade, the development of more and 
more agreements either on a barter or quasi-barter 
basis, and the widespread application of quotas 
and exchange controls as a method of conserving 
financial resources. Within this total picture, it 
is natural that the emphasis in most foreign coun- 
tries should have been to develo]:) sources of supply 
outside the United States as much as possible. 

It may be worth while to review briefly the 
character of our own record during the postwar 
period. So far as trade in goods and services has 
been concerned, our impoitshave been rising stead- 
ily since early in 194(), while our exports reached 

Department of State Bulletin 



their peak early in 1947. This high level in 1947 
was made possible because foreign countries 
financed about 4.5 billion dollars of their pur- 
chases in the United States in that year from their 
reserves of gold and dollar assets. In 1948, this 
source had largely run out so that purchases 
financed from these sources shrank to about 860 
million dollars, all of which were concentrated in 
the first half of the year. Government aid, both 
grants and loans, was about one billion dollars 
less in 1948 than in 1947. To meet this decline of 
the dollar supply abroad of about 5 billion dol- 
lars, when all sources are considered, foreign 
countries increased their exports to the United 
States by 2 billion dollars and reduced their pur- 
chases here by 3 billion dollars. It is worthy of 
note that while foreign countries were increasing 
their sales to the United States and reducing 
their purchases here, they were increasing their 
total imports from all sources. The reestablish- 
ment of foreign sources of supply, particularly of 
foodstuffs, fuels, and manufactured products, 
lessened the war-created need to rely upon the 
United States to an unusual degree for such 
products, although the United States still con- 
tinues to be a much greater source of goods moving 
in world trade than was the case before the war. 

Obviously, the comparison of 1948 and 1947 in- 
dicates a marked advance towards economic 
health, but it is also true that adjustments of this 
kind become increasingly difficult to make. Im- 
ports into the United States will not continue to 
increase at this rate year after year, and a further 
substantial cut in our exports might have im- 
portant domestic repercussions in particular in- 
dustries. Furthermore, it is important to realize 
that the European countries do face a problem of 
dimensions greater than merely returning to their 
prewar trading position, inasmuch as certain of 
their prewar sources of foreign exchange, notably 
earnings on foreign investments, cannot be easily 
recovered. One added factor is that there have 
been substantial population increases since the 
prewar period so that identical total quantities 
mean lower per capita consumption. 

The problem of the adjustment of the trade 
balance, which I have cited, is not entirely a new 
problem. The fact is that the United States has 
balanced its trade ever since the First World War 
by various transactions outside the commodity 
field. During the 20's, the floating of foreign 
securities in the United States went on at a very 
rapid pace. During the 30's, the balance was 
achieved largely through the flow of gold and other 
assets to the United States. During the 40's, the 
deficit has been met largely by government grants 
and loans. 

It may well be that in time, this basic problem 
will take care of itself through a greater rise of 
imports into the United States than of our exports 
abroad. This has been the usual experience of 
countries once they have reached a creditor posi- 

Mo/ I, 1949 



tion. It is probably true that our dependence on 
foreign sources of raw materials is increasing, al- 
though this must be offset in part by the develop- 
ment of synthetic products such as synthetic rub- 
ber. However, the shift in the situation relative 
to copper, lead, and zinc and the requirements for 
many less well-known metals would seem to indi- 
cate that outside sources will be increasingly used. 
Even iron ore promises to be imported into the 
United States in substantial quantities during the 
next decade. 

It is to be hoped, too, that the imbalance of ex- 
change can be cut down to some extent by increased 
American tourist expenditures abroad. 

There are other important elements in the pic- 
ture. The gap may be filled in part by the efforts 
to contribute to the process of economic develop- 
ment in underdeveloped areas. Wlien President 
Truman placed assistance to underdeveloped areas 
as "Point 4" in his inaugural address last January,^ 
it created great interest, not only in the United 
States but in other countries. He put it quite 
simply in the framework of the need of these coun- 
tries and of the political instabilities which are 
related to low standards of living. However, it is 
inevitable that any substantial progress in the 
process of economic development will require the 
flow of capital goods from the industrialized coun- 
tries to the backward areas. This may, of course, 
be accomplished as the result of an International 
Bank loan, some government programs or loan, or 
of the flow of private capital. In any event, the 
immediate effect would be to increase the capital 
flow item on the balance-of-payments account. 

If one looks further into the future, progress 
towards economic development has certain other 
imijlications. It is clear that trade is closely re- 
lated to standards of living. If the native popula- 
tion in an area must dedicate nearly its entire ef- 
forts to producing food, clothing, and shelter for 
its own use alone, it cannot participate in any 
larger market either as a supplier or as a purchaser. 
American goods have always moved in greatest 
quantity to the more developed countries such as 
Canada and the United Kingdom. The process of 
economic development therefore can lead toward 
a real expansion in world trade. If there is such 
expansion there is then greater room for adjust- 
ments as between countries, providing an oppor- 
tunity to achieve both internal and external 
balance. 

It is ea.sy to talk about economic developments, 
but there is a far distance between the general no- 
tion and the specific accomplishment. Economic 
development is a kind of growth or change which 
involves much more than the building of factories 
or the digging of mines. The requirements vary, 
of course, from country to country. In one area 
the immediate limitation may be a problem in the 
field of health, in another it may be basic education 
and vocational training, and in another transpor- 

» Bulletin of Jan. 30, 1949, p. 123. 



tation facilities. In many large areas the most 
important pressing proLk-m is that of making 
more food available, and this can be done both Vjy 
improved techniques and by large-scale projects, 
such as irrigation and reclamation. 

In many ways the effort to facilitate economic 
development is much more difficult than the effort 
to assist in European recovery. However, they 
both have one thing clearly in common; namely, 
that their success depends in large part on domes- 
tic action. The European Recovery Program was 
one in which the United States was able to pro- 
vide the last 5 percent which was necessary to make 
the European 95 percent come alive, but the princi- 
pal drive and dynamics had to come from the Eu- 
ropean countries themselves. Economic develop- 
ment depends primarily upon the attitude and de- 
termination of the country involved. 

There are many ways in which the process of 
economic development can be facilitated. The 
history of the United States is clearly a case where 
outside assistance played an important pail. Our 
early settlers brought with them the skills and the 
implements which had been developed over the 
centuries in Europe, so they started with a culture 
and a productivity far advanced over that of the 
native Indian inhabitants. Our railroads were 
built with European capital and largely with im- 
migrant labor. Our scientific knowledge has 
cumulated with major contributions acquired from 
scientists and laboratories all over the world. The 
flow has been both in and out. As the United 
States forged ahead in its own development, there 
was an increasing flow of knowledge and capital 
from its shores to other countries. 

It will always be true that much of the exchange 
among countries will be on a personal basis. One 
of the greatest forms of transfer has been and still 
is through migration and settlement. This is par- 
ticularly true of the basic skills and habits of work. 
At the higher technical level, the rate of transfer 
depends in large part upon the degree of inter- 
change of information and the extent to which 
scholars and research workers in various parts 
of the world are in touch with each other through 
direct contact, publications, organizations and so 
forth. Restrictions in the flow of information and 
knowledge are obviously restrictions on progress. 

The process of economic development can be fa- 
cilitated by many different types of activity, rang- 
ing from the encouragement of migration to the 
lowering of tariffs and elimination of quotas in in- 
ternational trade in books and periodicals. How- 
ever, interest in the United States at the present 
time is centering on two particular elements — tech- 
nical cooperation and the supply of capital. 
These were emphasized by President Truman in 
his inaugural address. 

Technical cooperation is used in a rather broad 
sense to range all the way from basic education 
and public health assistance to the study of the 
productivity of a particular industry. Con- 



siderable progress can be made in many areas by 
these means alone, without requiring much capital, 
particularly in fields such as education, public 
health, and increased food production. However, 
there can be no gainsaying the fact that the pro- 
vision of basic public services, such as roads, har- 
bors, dams for power and irrigation projects, and 
the like, require large quantities of capital. In 
the industrialization of a country, when it moves 
on from the small-scale household handicraft 
methods of production to the use of power machin- 
ery, capital again becomes a major requirement. 

The channels through which international as- 
sistance has flowed, other than those on the strictly 
personal level, have been private institutions, both 
philanthropic and profit-making, bilateral gov- 
ernmental arrangements, and more recently the 
United Nations. To increase the speed of eco- 
nomic development, the effectiveness and scale of 
utilization of each of these channels must be in- 
creased. 

There are various ways in which the United 
States Government can be of assistance, but here 
again the amount which it can do by itself is ex- 
ceedingly limited. It was for this reason that 
President Truman in his inaugural address em- 
phasized the fact that all elements in the country 
must work together in the search for means to 
assist the underdeveloped areas. Again I want to 
stress that those of us who are fortunate enough to 
be living in the United States should remember 
that our own achievement has not been entirely 
through our own resources. No modern country 
can take full credit for its own development. 
Human knowledge is cumulative and traces its 
origins to all parts of the globe. Even modern 
scientific and technical knowledge is the product 
of laboratories in many countries. Capital has 
always flowed in substantial quantities across 
national boundaries. But this modern technical 
knowledge and the productive contribution of 
capital have been utilized most unevenly 
throughout the world, with the result that stand- 
ards of living and productivity are likewise un- 
equal. It is still true that thousands of people 
starve to death each year, and half the plows in 
use today in the world are made of wood. Some- 
thing like 80 percent of the world's automobiles 
are in the United States. Only a small fraction of 
the world's population has ever heard a radio, 
and an infinitesimal fraction has ever seen a tele- 
vision set. The need for improved living stand- 
ards is obvious, but this is a long, slow process, 
requiring domestic effort and international co- 
operation of a high order. 

I have talked about the international economic 
problem of balancing trade among countries, the 
progress which has been made through the Eco- 
nomic Recovery Program, and the potentialities 
in the process of economic development. These 
are dynamic factors aimed at improving the basic 
situation, but their effectiveness is closely related 

Department of Stafe Bulletin 



to the principles which are generally accepted as 
underlying international economic relations. 
Here there are at least three basic elements in the 
American concept of a healthy world economy. 
The first two relates to the nature and extent of 
obstacles which individual governments may place 
in the way of the flow of goods. At the moment, 
the immediate circumstances have forced all kinds 
of arbitrary restrictions. As conditions improve, 
it should be possible to thaw out these situations 
and permit trade to flow more freely. 

These obstacles take the form of trade barriers 
and of exchange controls. In both these fields, 
the United States has taken a leading part in the 
effort to establish an agreed set of principles and 
international machinery for considering the ex- 
ceptions and adaptations which individual coun- 
tries may find necessary from time to time. Neither 
the International Trade Organization nor the In- 
ternational Monetary Fund was designed to deal 
with the immediate, critical postwar problems of 
imbalance and shortage. Rather, both represent 
devices for reducing obstacles to trade and main- 
taining financial stability by means of interna- 
tional cooperative action (after the immediate 
problems are solved). 

The third basic requirement is to establish a 
system of order relative to the many international 
economic matters which involve private citizens. 
Obviously, economic activity within any country 
is closely related to the existence of a system of law 
which establishes and defines the rights, privileges, 
and obligations of the individual. A similar basis 
of understanding is important when one passes 
across national boundaries. In February 1948, a 
treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation was 
signed between the United States and Italy, which 
is perhaps the most modern document of this type 
in existence.^ It defines on a reciprocal basis, the 
treatment which each will give to the citizens of 
the other. Treaties of this kind, which give assur- 
ances to foreigners as to their treatment within a 
country, are most important in providing not only 
a basis for travel and trade, but in defining more 
exactly the prospective treatment of foreign in- 
vestment. Economic progress is aided by reducing 
the number of uncertainties in the world, and we 



feel that such treaties provide important, fixed 
jjoints for economic navigation. 

The European Recovery Program and the "Point 
4" program are dynamic elements in our policy. 
The reduction of barriers and creation of rights 
and obligations establish the underlying basis for 
continuing expansion. The elements add up to a 
coherent whole. 

Our economic foreign policy is a living policy. 
It grows and develops and adapts itself to the ne- 
cessities of the moment. In such a brief survey 
as I have given, much has been omitted and no ele- 
ment has been developed in adequate detail. But 
it is important to have a sense of the over- all pat- 
tern — to see the broad framework into which the 
various parts must fit — to see where we came from, 
where we are, and where we hope to go. Nor can 
economic foreign policy be separated from over-all 
foreign policy as arbitrarily as I have done. In a 
world where some countries are more friendly than 
others, all elements in foreign policy must take that 
unhappy fact into account. Similarly, our strong 
support of the United Nations affects many other 
phases of foreign policy. 

The international economic scene of the mo- 
ment is full of currents and cross-currents. The 
area of economic policy choice, which was exceed- 
ingly limited for most countries in the immediate 
postwar period, when basic requirements were ab- 
solute necessities, is now broadening and choices 
can be made over a wider and wider area. In a 
very real sense, many countries are becoming more 
and more economically independent. This is one 
of the clearly recognized objectives of the Euro- 
pean Recovery Plan, and we should be happy to 
see the accomplishment. However, it makes it 
increasingly necessary for us to be so right in our 
policy that we can be strong on the basis of moral 
strength. The basis of our economic foreign 
policy must not lie solely in the interests of the 
United States, but in a sincere effort to develop 
and carry out policies and programs whose goal 
is the mutual benefit of the peoples of all the 
countries involved, including our own. The eco- 
nomic policies, which I have so briefly outlined, 
derive their fundamental justification and support 
from this basis of mutual benefit. 



Trial of Japanese War Criminals 



The Far Eastern Commission makes the follow- 
ing recommendations ^ to member governments of 
the Commission: 

If possible, investigations in connection with of- 
fenses falling under paragraph 1 h and 1 c of the 
policy decision of the Far Eastern Commission en- 
titled "Apprehension, Trial and Punishment of 
War Criminals in the Far East" (FEC-007/3), 

May 7, 7949 



passed by the Commission on April 3, 1946, includ- 
ing such offenses alleged to have been committed 
by persons suspected of offenses falling under 
paragraph 1 a of the said policy decision, should 

' For test see Department of State press release 77 of 
Feb. 2, 1948. 

' Recommenciations to member governments of the Far 
Eastern Commission approved by the Commission on Mar. 
31, 1949, and released to the press on Apr. 1, 1949. 

569 



be completed before June 30, 1949, and all trials 
thereof should be concluded, if possible, before 
September 30, 1949. 

[Released to tbe press by FEC April 11 

The Far Eastern Commission at its 147th meet- 
ing on March 31, 1949, recommended to its 11 
member governments that, if possible, investiga- 
tions of suspected Japanese war criminals, accused 
either of violations of the laws or customs of war, 
or of murder, extermination, enslavement, depor- 
tation, or other inhumane acts committed against 
any civilian population or prosecutions on politi- 
cal, racial, or religious grounds, should be com- 
pleted by June ;>0, and trials of such persons 
completed by September 30, 1949. 

It will be remembered that according to a pre- 
viously announced policy decision of the Far 
Eastern Commission adopted on February 24, 
1949, it was agreed that no further trials should 
be initiated of suspected criminals whose offenses 
fell within category of so-called "a" crimes, 
"Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a 
•war of aggression or a war in violation of inter- 
national treaties, agreements and assurances, or 
participation in a common plan or conspiracy for 
the accomplishment of any of the foregoing." 

Investigations and trials of Japanese for war 
crimes had been called for by the Far Eastern 
Commission policy decision of April 3, 1946, "Ap- 
prehension, Trial and Punishment of War Crimi- 
nals in the Far East." ' This policy had set up 
three categories of war crimes, commonly known 
as categories a, b, and c. It is the second and 
third categories which are referred to in the 
present recommendation of the Far Eastern Com- 
mission. The paragraphs in the original FEC 
policy decision on war criminals referred to in the 
present decision are as follows : 

1. The term "war crimes" as used herein, includes : 

a. Planning;, i>reparation, initiation or waging of a 
war of aggression or a war in violation of international 
treaties, agrcenients and assurances, or participation in 
a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of 
any of the foregoing. 

6. Violations of the laws or customs of war. Such 
violations shall include but not be limited to murder, ill 
treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other 
purpose of civilian population of, or in, occupied territory, 
murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war or persons on 
the seas or elsewhere, improper treatment of hostages, 
plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction 
of cities, towns or villages or devastation not justified by 
military necessity. 

c. Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and 
other inhumane acts committed against any civilian 
population, before or during the war or prosecutions on 
political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in 



' See Activitir.'f of Ihr Far Eastern Commission Report 
by the Secretary Ocniral, Appendix 39, p. 97, Department 
of State publication L'SS.S. 

' Policy decision approved by the Far Eastern Commis- 
sion Feb. 24, 1!)4!»; a directive based up(m this decision 
was forwarded by the U.S. Government to the Supreme 
Commander for the Allied Powers for implementation. 

570 



connection with any crime defined herein, whether or not 
In violation of the domestic law of the country where 
peri)et rated. 

The Far Eastern Commission decides as a 
matter of policy that:^ 

No further trials of Japanese war criminals 
should be initiated in respect of offenses classified 
under paragraph 1 a of the policy decision of the 
Far Eastern Commission entitled "Apprehension, 
Trial and Punishment of War Criminals in the 
Far East" passed by the Commission on April 
3, 1946. 

[Released to the press by FEC March 16] 

The Far Eastern Commission at its 142d meet- 
ing on February 24 adopted a policy deci- 
sion stating that no further trials should be 
initiated with respect to Japanese suspected of 
having planned, prepared, or conspired to wage a 
war of aggression — commonly referred to as "class 
a" crimes. 

This decision — the 55th policy approved by the 
Far Eastern Commission since its first meeting on 
February 26, 1946 — has been communicated 
to the Supreme Commander for the Allied 
Powers, General MacArthur, in a directive issued 
in the usual manner through the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff. The policy states that "no further trials 
of Japaitese war criminals should be initiated in 
respect of offenses classified under paragraph 1 a 
of the policy decision of the Far Eastern Com- 
mission entitled 'Apprehension, Trial and Punish- 
ment of AVar Criminals in the Far East' passed 
by the Commission on April 3, 1946." 

The present action of the Commission has no 
bearing on so-called "&" and "c" offenses : violation 
of the laws and customs of war and crimes against 
humanity, such as murder, extermination, enslave- 
ment, etc. 

It will be recalled that the Potsdam Declara- 
tion of July 26, 1945, announced that "stern 
justice shall be meted out to all war crimi- 
nals, including those who have visited cruelties 
upon our prisoners." Pursuant to this agreement 
the United States Government in October 1945, 
prior to the establishment of the Far Eastern 
Connnission, forwarded a directive to the Su- 
preme Commander with instructions regarding the 
prosecution of suspected Japanese war criminals 
and the establishment of an International Mili- 
tary Tribunal for the Far East. Subsequently, 
at the Moscow Conference of December 1945, the 
Far Eastern Commission was established. Five 
weeks after its initial meeting in Washington, the 
Commission approved the policy decision already 
mentioned above ("Apprehension, Trial and Pun- 
ishment of War Criminals in the Far East," April 
3, 1946). This decision was transmitted to 
the Supreme Commander through the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff, in accordance with the established proce- 
dure, and superseded the earlier United States 
directive. 

Department of State Bulletin 



On April 26, 1946, an indictment was 
lodged with the International Military Tribunal 
for the Far East charging 28 Japanese with hav- 
ing committed crimes falling into all three cate- 
gories referred to above, namely, classes "a", "J", 
and "c". The indictment charged offenses cov- 
ering a period of 17 years and committed through- 
out the greater part of Eastern Asia. Trial was 
formally begun on June 4, 1946. Evidence 
submitted was collected not only from sources in 
the Far East but also from sources in Europe and 
the United States. 

The trial lasted for nearly two and a half years. 
Of the twenty-eight men originally indicted, two 
died in the course of the trial and a third was 
adjudged mentally incompetent for trial. The 
remaining twenty-five were all convicted in a 
lengthy judgment read to the tribunal between 
November 4 and November 12, 1948. All 
but one were found guilty of the crime of 
waging or conspiring to wage aggressive war 
("class a" crimes). Eleven were also found 
guilty of "J" and "c" crimes. 

Sentences were passed on the 25 convicted war 
criminals on November 12, 1948. Seven were sen- 
tenced to death by hanging; sixteen received sen- 
tences of life imprisonment; and two were sen- 
tenced to 20 years and 7 years i-espectively. 

Between midnight and 12 : 33 a. m. on December 
24, 1948, following unsuccessful appeals to the 
United States Supreme Court to review their sen- 
tences, the seven men sentenced to death by the 
International Military Tribunal for the Far East, 
including former Premier Hideki Tojo, were 
hanged in Sugamo Prison in Tokyo. 



Procedure for Claiming Land in Japan 

[Released to the press April 18] 

The Department of State announced on April 
18 that it has received a communication from 
the Supreme Commander, Allied Headquarters, 
Japan, to the effect that the Japanese Government 
is seeking certain information from former Jap- 
anese nationals who own lands in Japan and who 
do not wish these lands to be sold in connection 
with the Japanese land reforms. 

The Japanese land-reform law provides that 
lands owned by Japanese nationals abroad will 
be purchased by the Government for resale to the 
farmers actually engaged in their cultivation but 
stipulates that any owner who relinquished his 
Japanese nationality prior to October 21, 1946, 
will be exempt from this provision. 

Persons whose lands are exempt, therefore, are 
requested to file applications immediately, to- 
gether with proof of their new nationality. 
Lands in this category inadvertently purchased 
by the Government will be returned to their for- 

May 1, 1949 



eign owners upon submission of satisfactory evi- 
dence within 12 months of the purchase. Writs 
of purchase of the lands will be sent directly to 
the former owners by the Government. Appli- 
cations to forestall purchase or secure a cancella- 
tion of purchase must be addressed to the Jap- 
anese Minister of Agriculture and Forestry, 
Tokyo. 



Notice to Americans in Naniting 

[Released to the press April 22] 

The American Embassy in Nanking on April 21, 
1949, made the following announcement to all 
American nationals residing in Nanking : 

"Until recently an American naval vessel has 
been stationed at Nanking. It is now stationed 
in Shanghai. Owing to a blockage of the Yangtze 
Eiver, interfering with the movement of all vessels, 
the presence of any United States naval vessel at 
Nanking at a given time cannot, in the future, be 
expected. 

"The Marine Guard at the Embassy, having 
been based upon ships stationed at Nanking, has 
accordingly been reduced to a guard sufficient only 
for the Chancery's internal security. It will not 
be available for any protective duties either gen- 
erally or in connection with evacuation. 

"American nationals, who may have regarded 
the presence of United States naval vessels and of 
the Marine Guard as implying that the United 
States will furnish either emergency protection or 
emergency evacuation, should therefore reconsider 
their position at Nanking. There is no assurance 
that Nanking will be spared either civil disturb- 
ance or military assault. The Embassy is com- 
pelled to warn everyone that those remaining must 
be prepared to stay through any emergencj'. 

"Therefore, those who do not so intend should 
leave Nanking now, while normal commercial 
means of travel still exist." 

As of April 4, 1949, official pei'sonnel in the 
American Embassy in Nanking, including wives 
and children, was 172. Other Americans residing 
in the Nanking area total 87. 



President's Message on Republic 
of Ireland Act 

[Released to the press April 18] 

President Truman sent the following message 
to President O'Kelley, Dublin, on April 18 : 

On the occasion of the entering into force of the 
Republic of Ireland Act, I send to you and to the 
Irish people, on behalf of the people of the United 
States of America, sincere good wishes for the 
continued welfare and prosperity of your country. 



'wnte^rU^' 



Occupation Matters Fase 

The Returned Masterpieces of the Berlin 
Museums: 
Introductory Note by Ardelia R. Hall . . 543 
A Foreword by James R. Newman . . . 545 
An Introduction by Theodore Allen Hein- 

rich 546 

Free University of Berlin. By Howard W. 

Johnston 548 

Views of U.S., U.K., and France on German 
Basic Law Transmitted to Military 

Governors 551 

Trial of Japanese War Criminals 569 

Procedure for Claiming Land in Japan ... 571 

The United Nations and 
Specialized Agencies 

U.S. Answers Soviet Charges Against North 
Atlantic Treaty. Statement by Ambas- 
sador Warren R. Austin 552 

Suppression of Human Rights in Bulgaria 
and Hungary. Statement by Benjamin 
V. Cohen 556 

The United States in the United Nations . . 561 



General Policy 

Pan American Day: A Symbol of Mutual 
Trust and Cooperation Among the 
Americas. Address by Secretary Ache- 
son 

Notice to Americans in Nanking 

President's Message on Repubhc of Ireland . 



Calendar of Meetings 



International Information and 
Cultural Affairs 

The Returned Masterpieces of the BerUn 

Museums: 

Introductory Note by Ardelia R. Hall . . 

A Foreword by James R. Newman . . . 

An Introduction by Theodore Allen Hein- 

rich 



564 
571 
571 



Economic Affairs 

U.S. Delegation to Cotton Advisory Meeting . 563 
Present Day International Economic Pic- 
ture. By Willard L. Thorp 566 



562 



543 

545 



546 



//v€/ zlJeha^meni/ /C^ Cftate^ 



g 


1 











THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY AND THE 
ROLE OF THE MILITARY ASS 
iivrF ppoCTf AJ\T 

THE CURRENT SIT( Allo\ Tn GKi ' 



' ':■■'» V:A s'lJO^ ,> .]-^ t, ■ INTERNA- 
Ml»NVL IRADL ORGANIZAT" 
TRVXSMITTED TO THE SENATE 



NbLLAK bLKVlCl 
NATIONALS • Anid. 








o^e z/^efho/rtm^e^ ^^ C/Ccite VJ Li i 1 w L 1 i X 



Vol. XX, No. 514 • Publication 3501 
Max 8, 1949 



For sale hy the Superintendent ot Documents 

U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 2fi, D.O. 

Peick: 

62 Issues, domestic $5, foreign $7.26 

Single copy. 15 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Director of the 
Bureau ot the Budget (February 18,1949). 

Note: Contents of this publloatlon are not 
copyrighted and Items contiilncd herein may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
OF State Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a weekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Division of Publications, 
Office 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 icork of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includea 
press releases on foreign policy issued 
by the White House and the Depart- 
ment, and statements and addresset 
made by the President and by the 
Secretary of State and other officers 
of the Department, as trell as special 
articles on various phases of inter- 
national affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to trhich the 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
national interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
well as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
currently. 



Consular Services for German Nationals 

by Walter J. Marx 



The Interim Office for German Affairs is a 
unique experiment for which there appears to be 
no precedent in the history of the United States. 
During World War II the interests of the German 
Government in the United States were protected 
by the Swiss Legation at Washington. Upon the 
defeat of Germany in May 1945, the Swiss Govern- 
ment turned over to the United States the German 
Embassy and other German diplomatic property. 
Since the Gennan Government no longer existed, 
the 300 thousand German nationals in the United 
States, and for that matter, those elsewhere in 
the world outside of Germany, found themselves 
without protection. There were no longer any 
consular officers who might issue travel docmnents 
to Germans or take measures to protect their prop- 
erty interests, to certify legal documents for use in 
Germany and to give other such services. Until 
they relinquished the protection of German inter- 
ests, the Swiss had even continued the payment of 
German pensions in this country. Many aged 
German people after May 1945, unable to obtain 
their pensions any longer, lost their only means 
of livelihood. 

The lack of valid travel documents proved to be 
increasingly embarrassing to German nationals. 
Immediately after the German collapse most Ger- 
mans outside of Germany remained very quiet and 
made little attempt to travel. But as time passed, 
and the Allied Powers began the economic rehabil- 
itation of the Western zones of Germany, German 
business men in the United States attempted to re- 
establish ties with German business firms and 
found it necessary to send their agents to Germany 
and to other countries. Germans in the United 
States and citizens of German heritage began to 
hear from their relatives in Germany from whom 
they had been cut off for five or more years. Aged 
mothers were dying, family affairs were badly 
snarled, estates had been inherited, relatives had 
become lost during the tremendous uprooting of 
populations started by Hitler and intensified by 
the Poles and the Soviets. 



Since there was no immediate prospect of sign- 
ing a definitive German peace treaty and of estab- 
lishing a new German government with full sov- 
ereign powers, the Department of State attempted 
to find some temporary solution to the problem 
caused by the collapse of consular protection for 
German nationals abroad. There was also some 
uneasiness in the Department at the thought of 
300 thousand Germans carrying on their af- 
fairs and possibly traveling abroad on makeshift 
travel documents. Travel-control aspects of the 
problem and the possibility of establishing interim 
offices to perform consular functions for German 
nationals in each country having a large German 
population were studied. 

The matter was presented to the Allied Control 
Council in Berlin, and after much discussion all 
Four Powers agreed in December 1946, that the In- 
terim Offices for German Affairs should be estab- 
lished. In order to implement the Allied decision. 
Congress authorized a bill for the Department of 
State to perform certain consular services for Ger- 
man nationals residing in the United States. The 
Soviet authorities, however, later changed their 
minds in regard to the establishment of interim 
offices, thus forcing a temporary abandonment of 
the world-wide plan. 

The Division of Protective Services took little 
further action in regard to the bill, and as the 80th 
Congress drew to a close it seemed apparent that 
the bill would be lost in the final rush of legislation. 
However, in the closing hours of the session. Public 
Law 798 was passed authorizing the Department to 
perform certain consular services for German na- 
tionals in the United States, "its Territories and 
possessions." Since a bill for funds had not been 
submitted to the Congi'ess, no money was available 
to the DeiJartment to carry out the purpose of the 
law. It was anticipated that the functions would 
pay for themselves out of the fees obtained from 
persons requesting consular services, but the law 
would not permit the Department of State to use 
this income directly for carrying out the consular 



May 8, 1949 



functions. The money would have to go to the 
U.S. Treasury. A siiecific appropriation from 
Congress would then be required to carry on the 
work. 

The original intention had been to use emergency 
funds temporarily to .set up an Interim Office for 
German AflFairs, but after the passage of Public 
Law 798 it was determined that these funds were 
not available. Nevertheless, the matter was press- 
ing because upon the publication of the bill inquir- 
ies began to pour into the Department regarding 
the new functions. An office would have had to be 
set up if only to reply to such inquiries. 

There was also the problem of coordination with 
the military authorities in Germany since the origi- 
nal plan had called for the establishment of a con- 
sular backstop in Germany, similar to the consular 
section of the former German Foreign Office. But 
at that time to hope to obtain Allied agreement for 
the reestablishment of even a shadow of the old 
German Foreign Office seemed futile. At best, 
many months of effort would be required. Since 
Congress had authorized the functions of the Office, 
it was decided to go ahead and begin the perform- 
ance of the functions. The military authorities 
were requested to make the necessary arrangements 
in the three Western zones of Germany for accept- 
ance of documents issued by the new office in 
Washington. 

The original plan for the Office had called for 
an initial registration of all German nationals in 
the United States and a questionnaire was devised 
in German and English designed to catch any po- 
tential troublemakers or former Nazis. To process 
this registration it was estimated that over a hun- 
dred employees would be necessary. Since refunds 
were available and because the security aspect of 
the Office gradually faded into the backgi-ound, 
particularly because the Department of Justice 
presumably already had on file complete records, 
it was decided to drop the registration idea. 

In the summer of 1948 the most pressing problem 
for Germans in this country was the pi-ocurcment 
of travel documents. So the Division of Protective 
Services, which would be directly responsible for 
the functioning of the new Office, with a skeleton 
staff began two essential functions: travel docu- 
mentation and the authentication of legal docu- 
ments for use in Germany. 

With this small staff, the Interim Office opened 
operations early in August 1948, by attempting to 
answer the large volume of mail that had been 



accumulating — a thousand pieces of mail a month 
were pouring in. 

The key items required for beginning the per- 
formance of consular functions were travel docu- 
ments, a great seal of office, wafers, and authenti- 
cation forms. An original travel document, 
written in English, French, and German, based 
roughly upon a similar document issued by the 
Military Government in Germany, was designed 
and was printed. A seal of office was also de- 
signed and then maimfactui-ed by the Bureau of 
Engraving and Printing. Inquiries in an ever 
increasing volume continued to pour into the De- 
partment. Early in August the Departmental 
regulation formally establishing the Interim Office 
was published in the Federal Register, and travel 
agents and lawyers began to call upon the Interim 
Office in person for more detailed information 
about its functions. 

It was not before September 13, 1948, that the 
travel documents were readj' for issuance and 
the seal of office delivered from the Bureau of 
Engi-aving and Printing. By the close of the 
month some $2,000 in fees had already been col- 
lected. During the first quarter of 1949 over 
$10,000 was received, and during the spring-travel 
rush, income is running about $4,000 each month. 
Consequently, the Interim Office is more than pay- 
ing its own way. 

It is surprising to note that about 70 percent of 
the travel-document business of the Office is con- 
cerned with the return to Germany of Germans 
who came recently to this country, mainly aged 
l)eople who came on immigi-ation visas to join sons 
and daughters. They become homesick, and many 
wish to return to Germany within a month after 
their arrival in America. Many husbands have 
even written frantic letters to the Interim Office 
stating that their mothers are breaking up their 
homes, and some American daughters-in-law re- 
sent an elderly German woman's taking possession 
of the kitchen, reorganizing the household along 
efficient German lines, and replacing American 
witli German cooking. 

The Interim Office is also patronized steadily by 
homesick or unhappy war brides, particularly by 
tliose who at one time had had a rather pleasant 
and easy life in Germany. Apparently, many an 
American soldier exaggerated his economic cir- 
cumstances at home. In a few cases, no matter 
how desperate the situation may be in Germany to 
which they are returning, German war brides in- 

Department of State Bulletin 



I 



sist upon returning, having given up all hope of 
making a success of their American mari-iage or 
of life in America. A surprising number of at- 
tractive and intelligent girls, after divorcing their 
American husbands, state they wish to return to 
Germany because of loneliness, even in our cities 
with large German populations. In keeping with 
German consular regulations the Interim Office 
has tried to be particularly helpful in aiding these 
war brides without, of course, overstepping the 
Departmental regulations which restrict sharply 
the amount of protection that the Interim Office 
may give German nationals. 

Most of the other clients of the Office are Ger- 
mans going home to visit aged relatives, to take 
care of inheritances, to look after their property, 
or for other business matters. Occasionally Ger- 
mans are going to India, South Africa, South 
America, and elsewhere on Interim Office docu- 
ments. Some German seamen find an Interim 
Office travel document indispensable in obtaining 
a job on American vessels and in obtaining the 
necessary Coast Guard clearance. Until the estab- 
lishment of the Interim Office, German seamen re- 
siding in the United States found themselves in 
a most difficult position, being unable to work 
without some soi't of documentation. Occasion- 
ally, the Visa Division of the Department of State 
granted a waiver of passport requirements to such 
men but these waivers had to be renewed at rather 
brief intervals and did not take the place of a valid 
travel document. 

It should be made clear that in authorizing the 
Department of State to perform consular services 
for Gennan nationals in this country. Congress did 
not authorize taking over the protection of these 
nationals in the fashion, for example, that the 
Swiss protected them during the war. Neither 
can Germans bearing Interim Office travel docu- 
ments appeal to American consuls abroad for pro- 
tection. The wording in three languages on the 
cover of the document makes this point clear. On 
the other hand, the travel document, in a passport- 
type booklet, is being generally accepted by all 
foreign consulates in the United States, and for- 
eign visas are being gi-anted to the holders 
enabling them to travel to other parts of the world. 
Certain nations refuse to accept improvised travel 
documents, such as affidavits of identity. One 
client of the Interim Office traveled all over Latin 
America on a United States reentry permit forti- 
fied with 20 pages of visas on blank sheets of paper. 



A security check is made in every case to make 
certain that the Department is not facilitating the 
travel of a German whose travel may be opposed 
to the interests of the United States. However, 
since the great majority of Germans in this coun- 
try entered on visas issued by American consular 
officers after thorough investigation, the Interim 
Office practically never finds information against 
an applicant that would preclude the issuance of a 
travel document. The Interim Office must, how- 
ever, be on the alert for some German who may be 
in this country illegally or might be wanted by the 
authorities. 

One of the curious requests that come to the In- 
terim Office came from a young German of mili- 
tary age who had no immediate travel plans but 
who feared that war was imminent and wanted a 
travel document so that he could escape the draft 
by departing hurriedly from the country in the 
event of war. 

One of the early problems consisted of keeping 
abreast of the current military regulations govena- 
ing travel to the zones of occupation in Germany. 
The rules changed from time to time, varied in 
each zone, and the interpretation of the rules by 
Allied military officials changed sometimes from 
day to day. With the adoption of uniform travel 
regulations to all three Western zones and the es- 
tablishment in Washington of a branch of the Ber- 
lin Combined Travel Board, the situation has im- 
proved. Liaison between the Military Permit Of- 
fice and the Interim Office is necessarily close. 
Both Offices realize the anomaly of having one of- 
fice issue travel documents to Gennan nationals 
with a separate office issuing what amounts to Ger- 
man visas on the same documents and on the pass- 
ports of other countries. 

The work of the Interim Office is facilitated by 
its having been authorized to function outside of 
the normal Departmental channels. Routine mail 
is signed in the Office and is sent out directly. By 
using form letters it has been possible to answer 
all mail in a single day after its arrival. 

Although original plans called for a legal sec- 
tion, there is at present no such section. The 
Interim Office makes no attempt to adjudicate 
questions of German citizenship. Its travel docu- 
ment states that the issuance of the document prej- 
udices in no way the bearer's nationality. Docu- 
ments are issued upon reasonable evidence of Ger- 
man nationality in the form of documents such as 
expired German passports. Military Government 



May 8, 7949 



travel documents, etc., and upon the oath of the 
applicant that lie or she is a German national. 

Unfortunately, Public Law 798 does not permit 
the Interim Oflice to document the worst victims of 
Hitler, persons who were deprived of their German 
citizenship by Nazi laws and who today under- 
standably are unwilling to take an oath that they 
are still German citizens. But the Interim Oflice 
can document the German who loyally registered 
at a German Consulate before the war for German 
military service under Hitler since his registration 
is excellent evidence of his claim to German na- 
tionality. 

When the Swiss relinquished the protection of 
German interests upon the collapse of Germany, 
the central German Interests Section continued to 
function at Bern but it is concerned more with wel- 
fare and relief in regard to the German popula- 
tion in Switzerland. Tlie Interim Office has taken 
on no relief functions. Although the protection 
function of the Office is strictly limited, the Interim 
Office does provide a travel document which is gen- 
erally recognized by other powers, and Germans 
in the United States have a governmental office to 
•which they can turn for advice and information 
and from which they can expect to get an answer by 
return mail. For persons almost defeated by gov- 
ernmental red tape and bureaucratic procrastina- 
tion these things mean a gi'eat deal. Particularly 
interesting is the fact that numerous Congressmen 
are actively interested in the work of the Office and 
call upon its facilities almost daily on behalf of the 
relatives of their constituents. 



Because of the lack of personnel the work of 
the Interim Office has been restricted to the is- 
suance of travel documents and the authentication 
of legal documents for use in Germanj'. A few 
"Lebensbescheinigungen" have also been issued, 
and these pieces of paper apparently have enabled 
certain Germans to obtain pension payments once 
more. An expansion of activities to include other 
consular functions depends not only on personnel 
but also upon the future of Germany, the forma- 
tion of the proposed government of the Western 
zones and any consequent resumption by Germany 
of representation abroad. 

The broad title of the Office causes some confu- 
sion for American citizens as well as for German 
nationals. Often people telephone or write to the 
Office regarding any matter that pertains to 
German affairs, protest the devaluation of their 
German bank accounts, request aid for relatives in 
Germany, or ask for help in solving complicated 
personal problems. With the recent establish- 
ment in the Department of the Office for German 
and Austrian Affairs, the title of the Interim 
Office was changed to the Interim Office for Ger- 
man Consular Affairs. 

The Interim Office will pass out of existence at 
such time as its functions are no longer required, 
presumably after Germany has representatives of 
her own in the United States. This Government 
in the meantime will carry out its obligations as 
custodian of a conquered people and will attempt 
to satisfy the personal needs of deserving German 
nationals for consular functions. 



Current United Nations Documents: A Selected Bibliography' 



Economic and Social Council 

Draft Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in 
Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution 
of Others. E/1072, December 23, 1948. 28 pp. 
mimeo. [Also, Annex I, 49 pp. miiueo, and Annex 
2, 51 pp. mimeo.] 

Tax Treatment of Foreign Nationals, Re.sources and 
Transactions. E/CN.8/4.5, December 20, 1948. 93 pp. 
mimeo. 

Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. Report 
of the Fao/Ecafe Joint Worlting Party on Agricul- 
tural Requisites. E/CN.ll/135/Add.l, November 13, 
1948. 125 pp. mimeo. 

United Nations Conference on Freedom of Information. 
Held at Geneva, Switzerland, from 23 March to 21 
April, 1948. E/Conf. 0/79, April 22, 1948. Final Act. 
iii, 41 pp. Printed. 40^. 

' Printed materials may be secured in the United States 
from the International Documents Service, Columbia 
University Press, 2!)()0 Broadway, New York, 27, N. Y. 
Other materials (mimeographed or processed documents) 
may be consulted at certain designated libraries in the 
United States. 



National and International Action to Achieve or Main- 
tain Full Employment and Economic Stability. Re- 
plies from Specialized Agencies. E/1111/Add.l. Feb. 
16, 1949. 30 pp. mimeo. 

Study on the Position of Stateless Persons. E/lllZ 
Feb. 1, 1949. 158 pp. mimeo. 

Technical Assistsince for Economic Development. E/1174. 
Feb. 19. 1949. 10 pp. mimeo. 

Trusteeship Council 

Official Records, Third Session. From the First Meeting 
(10 June 1948) to the Forty-third Meeting (5 August 
1948). XV, 509 pp. Printed. $5.50. 

Comments and Suggestions made at the Third Session 
of the General Assembly. Fourth session. T/230. 
Jan. 12, 1949. 5 pp. mimeo. 

Administrative Union : Comments and suggestions of the 
General Assembly. Fourth session. T/231. Jan. 24, 
1949. 7 pp. mimeo. 

Administrative Unions Affecting Trust Territories. In- 
terim Report of the Committee on Administrative 
Unions. T/203. JIar. 1, 1949. 26 pp. mimeo. 



578 



Departmenf of State Bulletin 



THE UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES 



Promotion of International Political Cooperation 

BY AMBASSADOR WARREN R. AUSTIN' 



The General Assembly has before it three speci- 
fic recommendations of the Interim Committee and 
the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Political Com- 
mittee that a fourth recommendation be returned 
to the Interim Committee for further study. 
These recommendations all relate in a very lim- 
ited way to that fundamental subject the promo- 
tion of international cooperation in the political 
field and. more particularly, to that area of the 
subject dealing with pacific settlement. 

The proposed panel for inquiry or conciliation - 
involves the establishment of a panel from which 
members of a commission of inquiry or concilia- 
tion could be drawn by the Security Council, the 
General Assembly, or the Interim Committee, or 
by any states taking steps for the settlement of 
their disputes outside of United Nations organs. 
Its simple purpose is to provide assistance to 
United Nations organs or to such states in select- 
ing members of commissions. There is no obliga- 
tion on the part of any state or any organ to use 
it. It is put forward simply as a quick method 
devised for the fast moving world of today. As 
such, we hope it may assist in the more fi-equent 
use of inquiry and conciliation. We feel that this 
device might also help the parties to settle a dis- 
pute pursuant to their obligation under article 33 
of the Charter before going to United Nations or- 
gans. If there exists a method for picking a com- 
mission before any particular dispute between the 
parties has built up tension between them, that 
makes it easier for those parties to agree upon the 
creation of a commission. The panel would be 
a means of having readily available a list of in- 
dividuals of known competence who would be 
available on short notice, and it provides that per- 
sons designated would be disposed in principle to 
serve. The individuals, members of such a panel, 
would in principle be sympathetic and receptive to 
a call to serve on a commission, but, of course, they 
would be under no legal obligation to do so. The 
plan is a flexible device because it creates no organ 
or procedure to complicate the structure of the 
United Nations. It would simply be a registry of 
available persons for use by the Security Council, 
the Assembly, or other United Nations organs and 
would be available at all times to states desiring 
to use it. The experience of United Nations bodies, 
even in the brief period since the adoption of the 
Charter, has shown the almost constant need for 
competent persons to serve. 

Another recommendation relates to the appoint- 

lAav 8, 7949 



ment of a rapporteur or conciliator at an early 
stage in the consideration of disputes brought to 
the attention of the Security Council. It recom- 
mends that the Council examine the utility and 
desirability of such a practice. It was successfully 
used in the Council of the League of Nations, and 
the Security Council has already found it useful 
in some cases. Here again, the recommendation is 
flexible and involves no new machinery. My dele- 
gation thinks this is a constructive suggestion, 
worthy of the attention of the Security Council. 

Finally, there is the recommendation to restore 
full effect to the General Act of Geneva of 1928. 
It was originally introduced in the Interim Com- 
mittee by Belgium, which is a party to that treaty, 
and the resolution provides a convenient means by 
which those states who have adhered to the treaty, 
or may wish to adhere to it, can accept a revised 
act replacing League of Nations references with 
references to United Nations organs. The Gen- 
eral Act provides appropriate means for the par- 
ties to it to fulfil their obligation under article 33 
of the Charter to attempt settlement of disputes 
before bringing them to the United Nations. The 
United States is not a party to the General Act 
but supports this proposal because it will aid other 
states who are members in rendering effective 
between themselves a multilateral pacific settle- 
ment treaty. 

The first purpose of the United Nations, as we 
find it stated in article 1 of the Charter, is the 
maintenance of international peace and security. 
Certain methods are indicated for the carrying 
out of this purpose and included among them are 
international political coopei-ation, including spe- 
cifically the peaceful settlement of disputes. 
Throughout the Charter the roles of United Na- 
tions organs and of the United Nations members 
themselves are defined with this first principle 
uppermost. With a view to preserving peace, the 
members and organs of the United Nations have 
their various responsibilities and duties. If force 
is to be eliminated in international relations, the 
Charter recognizes that we must (1) eliminate the 
causes of war and (2) substitute other means than 
force for dealing with these causes. The General 
Assembly, the Security Council, and the members 

' Statement made before the General Assembly in 
New York on Apr. 25, 1949, and released to the press 
by the U.S. Mission to the United Nations on the same 
date. 

' U.N. doc. A/833, Apr. 12, 1949. 

579 



themselves all have interlocking responsibilities 
as part of this single plan. 

The role of the General Assembly in its relation 
to international political cooperation is described 
in articles 10, 11 (1), 13 (la), 14, and 35 of the 
Charter. We see from such provisions as articles 
10 and 14 that the General Assembly has even 
greater flexibility and scope directed at removing 
the causes of war than has the Security Council. 

There are two principal ways in which the As- 
sembly is concenu'd with international political 
cooperation. There is the handling of actual dis- 
putes and related political problems under article 
14. The Assembly can discuss and subject to 
article 12 may lecommend measures for the peace- 
ful adjustment of any situation, regardless of its 
origin, which it considers likely to impair the 
general welfare of friendly relations among na- 
tions, including situations resulting from a viola- 
tion of the provisions of the Charter. Article 14 
is broad in scope and in the extent of authority it 
entrusts to the Assembly. It is reasonable and 
proper that tlie (leneral Assembly should use these 
powers. In situations where action by the Security 
Council is impossible by reason of the veto, it is 
all the more natural to expect that article 14 would 
be relied upon. 

Another area in which the Assembly has re- 
sponsibilities is in the broad study and formulation 
of recommendations in the field of international 
political coopei'ation. I understand that the In- 
terim Committee is planning, when this session ad- 
journs, to examine in some detail the role of the 
Assembly in pacific settlement, and I would expect 
that in this connection it would consider the.se 
principles which I have mentioned. Parentheti- 
cally, one of the specific recommendations before 
us is that two proposed amendments to the Rules 
of Procedure of the General Assembly be recom- 
mitted to the Interim Committee for further con- 
sideration in connection with this study. My gov- 
ernment made this reconunendation, feeling that 
it would be useful not to suggest one or two amend- 
ments to the Rules of Procedure at this time but 
to await the wider consideration of the Interim 
Committee. 

But these articles of the Charter describing the 
role of the General Assembly are not drafted in 
such a way that the responsibilities of the As- 
sembly are defined and set out in complete detail. 
That IS not the way in which constitutional docu- 
ments are drafted. There is a place for constru- 
ing our Charter to give it vitality and effectiveness 
in carrying out the purjjose for which the entire 
organization was created — and that is peace. 
There is only one answer to the claim that the 
General Assembly is violating either the letter or 
the spirit of the Ciiarter by acting in the pacific 
settlement of disputes or by studying, recommend- 
ing, and synthesizing the experience of the United 
Nations. These activities lay foundations for 
peace. 



We all recognize that the Security Council has 
the primary duty of maintaining international 
jjeace and security, but it would be misreading the 
Charter to conclude that it has the only such re- 
sponsibility. Article 35 indicates that this is not 
the fact. The Assembly has recently had occa- 
sion to consider the effectiveness of the Security 
Council to fulfil its proper function in the light of 
the study of the veto by the Interim Committee. 
It is certainly not the plan of the Charter that 
every dispute between members of the United Na- 
tions shall at the earliest possible moment find its 
wav before the Security Council. 

All members of the United Nations are obli- 
gated under article 2 to settle their international 
disputes by peaceful means and to refrain in their 
international relations from the threat or use of 
force. They are also under a duty under the 
language of article 33 when parties to any dispute 
the continuance of which is likely to endanger the 
maintenance of international peace and security, 
first of all, to seek a solution by one of the well 
understood methods of pacific settlement, such as 
negotiation, inquiry, conciliation, and the rest. 
There is, therefore, an obligation on the part of 
members not to take to the Security Council a dis- 
pute of this character unless and until they have 
made a previous effort to settle it. This is one of 
the great general principles of international co- 
operation, that all international disputes should 
j)r()inptly be settled by the parties by peaceful 
means in conformity with the principles of justice 
and international law. 

This is entirely consistent with the responsi- 
bility of the Security Council and of the General 
Assembly. It recognizes that many disputes may 
lend tliemselves to settlement in their early stages 
by methods agreed upon by the parties, often of 
an informal nature. Two of the three recommen- 
dations now before us relate to this obligation of 
members under article 33. 

The principle of article 33 that the parties shall 
fii-st of all try to help themselves simply under- 
lines tlic importance and seriousness of recourse to 
tlie Security Council or the General Assembly. 
Tiiis is an application of the principle of substi- 
tuting pacific settlement for force in the organiza- 
tion of tlie peace. No member of the Security 
Council, and certainly no permanent member, un- 
der the provisions of the Charter, should be heard 
to claim a voice in the settlement of a dispute 
which the parties can work out themselves before 
it may develop in seriousness so as to be a threat 
to tlie international community. A student of the 
Ciiarter would seek in vain for any such power in 
the Security Council. The demand of a member 
of the Security Council to have such a voice, and 
particularly a deciding voice, by virtue of the 
veto, as to the settlement of all disputes could 
only confirm the suspicion that a motive is present 
other than the seeking of a soimd organization of 
peace. 

Department of State Bulletin 



A true picture of how the United Nations 
operates in the pacific settlement of disputes can 
only be seen by looking at those interrelated func- 
tions of the General Assembly with its broad re- 
sponsibilities, the Security Council with its wide 
powers, and all the members of the United Nations 
with their duties assumed upon ratifying the 
Charter. 

Let us now consider the task which was en- 
trusted to the Interim Committee as a subsidiary 
organ of the General Assembly to undertake its 
duties under articles 11 (1) and 13 (la) of the 
Charter. An important function of the General 
Assembly which was so delegated is to initiate 
studies and to make recommendations to promote 
international cooperation in the political field. 
The Security Council and the Assembly are politi- 
cal organs and instruments of action. But there 
is the duty of the Assembly under article 13 (la) 
to reflect on this action, m the form of its ex- 
perience, and perhaps to synthesize it. An Ameri- 
can philosopher has observed that man's thoughts 
spring from his actions rather than his actions 
from his thoughts. A corollary of that might be 
that those of us who are immersed in action can 
guide it by taking thought. The function of the 
General Assembly to analyze the actions of United 
Nations organs is both proper and necessary. It 
is carrying out the role of the General Assembly. 
AVithin tlie last few daj'S we have seen the In- 
ternational Law Commission undertake its cor- 
responding duties under anotlier clause of this 
same article of the Charter. Where, I would ask, 
can any member of the United Nations find in 
this work a studied attempt to bypass the Security 
Council? "\^^lere can it find any more than a 
beginning, at a rather late date and on a very 
limited scale, of the duty of the General Assembly 
to initiate tliese studies and make recommenda- 
tions ? 

The work which the Interim Committee has 
thus far been able to accomplish has been of two 
kinds. In the first place it has planned a long- 
range study of this field, which will probably be 
before the General Assembly at its fourth session 



but which is not before us today. It has also pre- 
sented to the Assembly the four specific proposals, 
three of which are before us, with the recommen- 
dation that the fourth be returned for further con- 
sideration. One of them is a suggestion to the 
Security Council. Another suggests simply a 
means for picking members of commissions which 
the Security Council, the General Assembly, or 
any states outside of United Nations organs might 
in their discretion employ. The third would re- 
place references to League of Nations organs in 
the General Act of Geneva of 1928 with references 
to United Nations organs. They are three pro- 
cedural suggestions involving no substantive obli- 
gation upon members of the United Nations, and 
all intended simply as technical aids for pacific 
settlement procedures. 

I wish that the representative of the Soviet 
Union might have occupied his chair in the In- 
terim Committee so that he could sense the spirit 
in which proposals are made and debated with the 
intention of trying to improve United Nations pro- 
cedures by practical and objective study of their 
operation. He would have observed how in the 
Interim Committee the judgment of all the mem- 
bers who have seen fit to take their seats has been 
brought to bear on these questions, not with a view 
to bypassing the Security Council but with the idea 
of looking beyond the immediate dispute to ways 
and means of developing Charter potentialities 
and handling international political problems in 
all organs. In other words, he would have seen 
that vast resource of spiritual and intellectual 
power that exists in cooperation in a voluntary 
association by this great number of nations repre- 
senting the interests, the ideals and the aspirations 
of the world. 

The United States will vote in favor of the 
four specific recommendations of the Ad Hoc 
Political Committee. The Interim Committee, in 
undertaking the work of studying and making 
recommendations in the field of international 
political cooperation, is exercising a duty of the 
General Assembly to seek constantly for the real- 
ization of the Charter as an instrument for peace 
and justice. 



Reply to the U.S.S.R. Regarding the Italian Colonies 



STATEMENT BY JOHN FOSTER DULLES' 
U.S. Delegate to the General Assembly 



We are all here to try to find a constructive so- 
lution to a very difficult problem. Wlrether or 
not the prolongation of the general debate by the 
honorable delegate of the Soviet Union promotes 
that result may pei-haps be questionable, but I 
do feel that I should make some comment upon 
some of his remarks. 

In the first place, I would like to say that in my 

May 8, 7949 



opinion the fact that this problem is here before 
the United Nations Assembly in itself attests to a 
desire on the part of, particularly, the United 
Kingdom and of the United States and of the 



'Made in Committee I (Political and Security) of the 
General Assembly on Apr. 23, 1949, and released to the 
press by the U.S. Mission to the United Nations on the 
same date. 

581 



members of the British Commonwealth to seek an 
international solution, and it evidences that to a 
far greater dejn'ee than has been evidenced by any 
other of the victors in the World War. It was 
the forces of the United Kingdom and the Com- 
monwealth, and. latterly, United States forces in 
North Africa, which cleared the enemy from these 
areas in North Africa. If we had followed the ex- 
ample which was set by other of the victors, we 
would have settled this matter ourselves. There 
is no area tliat the Soviet Union conquered in the 
world which lias l)een brouglit in any aspect what- 
ever before the United Nations for decision. In 
ever}' such area the Soviet Union has taken the 
position that because it conquered the area, it, and 
it alone, is entitled to make the solution. And 
there is a certain contrast, Mr. Chairman, I be- 
lieve, between the conduct of those nations who 
conquered these areas and freed them from the 
enemy and liberated them and the conduct of cer- 
tain others who are now here criticizing us because 
this problem is here for an international solution, 
which under comparable situations they bitterly 
and utterly reject for themselves. 

When the Soviet Union comes here to get inter- 
national judgment upon the areas which it took 
over, say, in the Far East, the Kuriles Islands, 
Port Arthur, Dairen, etc., then we can hear it, with 

food grace perhaps, criticize those who have 
rought this problem, the fruit of their victory, to 
the United Nations for international solution. 
Until then, I would think it was better grace on 
their part to keep more silent. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, the honorable delegate 
of the Soviet Union made reference to two state- 
ments which I made in my opening presentation. 
One of them was that I recalled the fact that under 
the Charter of the United Nations it is provided 
that under the trusteeship system one of the ob- 
jectives and purposes to be served is tlaat the area 
should play its part in the maintenance of inter- 
national peace and security. I said in my speech, 
and I quote, "the relevancy of this area to inter- 
national peace and security cannot be ignored." 
The honorable delegate of the Soviet Union seems 
to resent that in regard to tliis area which we now 
have brought here to this United Nations for in- 
ternational solution we should even mention the 
fact that it historically has involved international 
peace and socui-ity, and those involve considera- 
tion which both under the Charter and historically 
are properly before us. It is quite true that the 
Soviet troops did not fight in this area. If they 
had — if they had undergone what some of their 
allies had to undergo in this area — I am quite con- 
fident that they would not have resented a refer- 
ence to international peace and security as being 
a factor which in this case properly is taken into 
account. 

It was also said, Mr. Chairman, that I had been 
eulogistic in my praise of the United Kingdom. I 
said this about the United Kingdom : "The United 
Kingdom has given ample evidence not merely 



by word but by deed that it genuinelv believes in 
the principle of developing non-self-governing 
areas so as to make them independent." It was 
tliat — and that alone — which I said in eulogy of 
the United Kingdom, although I think I might 
have said much more. 

"Wliat is the fact, Mr. Chairman? Tlie fact is 
that around this table today there sit ten member 
nations who can by their presence here attest to 
the reality of that fact. There would be two more, 
Eire and Ceylon, if it were not for the veto which 
was exercised against them by the Soviet Union. 
And there would be ten more, also membei-s, sit- 
ting around this table if they had not been swal- 
lowed up in the maw of the "Soviet Union. If in 
considering these areas the record of one country 
or another in actually bringing independence to 
(lejiendent peoples is to be taken into account, then 
again I say the record is such that I would have 
thought it was wiser for the honorable delegate of 
the Soviet Union to have kept silent. I said 
nothing, Mr. Chairman, about the actual condi- 
tions at present in these territories under military 
administration, and I am quite prepared to admit 
that a military administration which has no defi- 
nite term of existence, which does not permit a 
civil administration or long-term planning, is not 
a situation which is in the best interest of the 
populations concerned and ought to be ended be- 
ciuise only with the possibility of long-range plan- 
ning is it possible to improve the conditions of 
these people. To judge the possibilities of a long- 
range civil administration in terms of a military 
administration which is subject to being terminated 
at any time is, I submit, Mr. Chairman, to make 
a very unfair comparison. We are eager, and I 
am quite confident that the United Kingdom, 
which is in actual administration, is eager to bring 
about as quickly as possible conditions which wiU 
permit of long-range civilian planning for the 
benefit of the inhabitants of these areas. 

Now, the honorable delegate of the Soviet Union 
comes back to his suggestion for administration 
of this area by the Trusteeship Council and he 
says that there are not really any practical diffi- 
culties there involved and that he does not think 
that it will cost anything to operate these terri- 
tories. Well, again I can understand how he 
comes to that conclusion because I am quite sure 
that in the areas which are occupied by the Soviet 
Union it does not cost them anything. ' Tliat, how- 
ever, is not the way in which some countries op- 
erate and when they are in such ai-eas it is not their 
practice to try and squeeze out of these areas the 
last drop that is possible. It is our effort to try 
to build up these areas, and that is a costly opera- 
tion — although again I can understand that the 
honorable delegate of the Soviet Union does not 
have the experience to appreciate it. The United 
States has put some 6 billion dollars a year into 
the European Recovery Program. We had hoped 
that it would be possible under such administration 
as this organization decides upon to do something 

Deparlmenf of State Bulletin 



to build up the areas here in question. Even aside 
from tliat the cost of administration is bound to 
be very considerable. I do not have available 
the precise estimates which we have, but roughly 
speaking I can say that we figure that, even apart 
from what you might call constructive expendi- 
tures, just in terms of the administration of the 
government, that for the United Nations to take 
this on would involve at once a probable doubling 
of the present budget of the United Nations, a 
cost of somewhere around 40 million dollars. 

The United Nations, as I think we all appreciate 
or should appreciate, is not in a position to con- 
duct an economical administration. At the pres- 
ent time, we have no civil service in being. We are 
not in a position, as governinents are, to instruct 
their civil servants to take a tour of duty in these 
areas where conditions are not at the present time, 
I am prepared to admit, very attractive from the 
standpoint of climate and living conditions. For 
the United Nations to go out and bid for persons 
to take those jobs on, would be an extremely ex- 
pensive operation, and it would be foolish on our 
part to ignore that fact. In these matters, how- 
ever, I hesitate to put the primary emphasis on 
what it would cost. If it is the right thing to do, 
and if it would probably work, we should be will- 
ing to try it even if it does involve doubling or 
tripling the budget and the contributions of the 
members of the United Nations. 

We ourselves at the beginning, Mr. Chairman, 
had suggested a far greater international solution 
than we are now suggesting. The reason why we 
have felt compelled to drop our sights in that re- 
spect is not wholly or even primarily a matter of 
the cost. Since our original proposals were made 
in London in 1945, unfortunately the fact is that 
the different organs of the United Nations have 
become a battle ground between two different 
points of view. It has been demonstrated that 
at least one of the points of view is that of at- 
tempting to demonstrate that nothing constructive 
can be done under any form of society other than 
that of Communism, and the purpose, therefore, 
must be to cause a failure of efforts which are 
made other than under the auspices of a Com- 
munist government. And we have seen in many 
different areas of the world the effort to demon- 
strate that a non-Communist society is bound to 
fail, by disrupting it, by strikes, sabotage, threats 
of civil war or actual civil war ; and, on the other 
hand, in the effort which the United States initi- 
ated and which it has been carrying on now in 
conjunction with the participating European 
countries under the Marshall Plan. One of the 
great problems we have to face is the fact that it 
becomes a very costly operation because some na- 
tions are unwilling to participate in it — not only 
are unwilling to participate in it, but are posi- 
tively exerting themselves, at great expense and 
effort, to prevent that effort at European recovery. 
Is it right and is it proper, I wonder, Mr. Chair- 
man, to entrust these colonial peoples to an or- 

May 8, 7949 



ganization which is divided and in which there are 
powerful elements which want to see the failure 
of efforts such as are being made now in Western 
Europe and such as we hope can also be made in 
North Africa? If we want a constructive effort 
in North Africa, shouldn't it be entrusted to those 
who believe it can succeed ? Or should we bring 
into partnership in that effort those who are com- 
mitted to cause a failure of that particvilar kind 
of effort, as they have demonstrated in almost 
every quarter of the woi-ld ? 

And that, Mr. Chairman, is, above all, the reason 
why the United States now believes that it is im- 
practical to entrust the colonies to an international 
organization which would contain within it ele- 
ments wlrich are dedicated to proving that only 
a Communist form of society can succeed in the 
world. 

Now as to the responsibility for the delay in 
this matter. I was in London when this matter 
first came up in September 1945, with Secretary 
Byrnes, and at that meeting of the Foreign Minis- 
ters, Mr. Molotov represented the Soviet Union. 
The matter could have been settled at that time. 
Mr. Chairman, nearly four years ago, if it had 
not been for the attitude then taken by the honor- 
able Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet 
Union. The United States made a proposal which 
was accepted definitively by three of the five mem- 
bers of the Council, accepted in principle by a 
fourth, and rejected outright only by the fifth 
member, the Soviet Union, which then insisted 
that it must have Tripolitania for itself. And it 
was that action by the Soviet Union at the first 
meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers that 
made it impossible at that tune to get this matter 
settled. 

I reject, Mr. Chairman, the suggestion that it 
has been the United States and the United King- 
dom which have constantly tried to prevent a 
solution of this problem. On the contrary, we have 
sought it, and sought it earnestly, and, as I say, as 
a result of our efforts it would have been settled 
nearly four years ago if it had not been for the 
ambition of the Soviet Union to have a base in 
the Mediterranean. I recall that the Soviet Union, 
in anticipation of the elections in Italy last year, 
took a position in favor of Italy which, it it were 
maintained today, might be a constructive contri- 
bution toward a solution. But after that position 
had served the purposes of the election and the 
election had been lost, then a different position was 
taken which now makes it even more difficult to 
arrive at a solution. 

I am confident that the members of this Commit- 
tee, before deliberations are over, will realize that 
the United States Delegation at least — and I am 
sure others — are trying constructively, with an 
open mind toward the views of everybody aroimd 
this table, to arrive at a positive solution. I am 
confident of the verdict of this Committee as to 
who is trying to promote and who is trying to 
obstruct a solution to this question. 



The United States in the United Nations 



[April 30-May G] 

Spanish Question 

Dubate upL'iied May 5 in the Political Commit- 
tee of the General Assembly on the question of 
Franco Spain, with Poland denouncing the United 
States and Brazil submitting a proposal to leave 
members full freedom of action in their diplo- 
matic relations with Spain. The following day 
Poland introduced a lengthy resolution recalling 
earlier condemnations of tlie Franco Government 
and recommending that all U.N. members "cease 
to export to Spain" arms, ammunition, and all 
warlike and strategic material, as well as to re- 
frain from entering into any agreements either 
formally or (fe facto with Spain. Polish Repre- 
sentative Kat/.-Suchy described Franco's exist- 
ence as a threat to the peace. 

The United States has not participated in the 
general debate to date, but discussion on the ques- 
tion is continuing. 

Israeli Application for Membership 

The Ad Hoc Political Committee of the General 
Assembly opened discussion Maj' 3 on Israel's 
application for membership in the United Nations, 
the item having been transferred to it from the 
crowded agenda of the regular Political Com- 
mittee. 

A Lebanese proposal would postpone admission 
of Israel until the latter had accepted in principle 
the internationalization of Jerusalem and the res- 
toration of Arab refugees to their homes. Argen- 
tina proposed that the Vatican be invited to pre- 
sent a report on what it considered necessary 
guarantees for preservation of the holy places in 
.Jerusalem. An Iraqi resolution which questioned 
the legality of tlie Security Council vote recom- 
mending the admission of Israel, since the United 
Kingdom abstained, was later withdrawn. 

Following an invitation extended by the Com- 
mittee, Israeli Representative Eban in a 2-hour 
statement on May 5 described Israel's position on 
the internationalization of Jerusalem, resettlement 
of Arab refugees, and the Bernadotte assassina- 
tion. Israel would support "establishment by the 
United Nations of an international regime for 
Jerusalem concerned exclusively with control and 
protection of holy places," he emphasized. He 
stated that no solution to the problem of Arab 
refugees was possible before a "final and effective 
peace settlement" resulted from the Lausanne 
meetings now taking place between the Palestine 
Conciliation Commission and Arab and Israeli 
representatives. Mr. Eban, though admitting 



failure of the Israeli Government to find the 
mediator's assassins, felt the failure should be con- 
sidered against the background of a country forced 
to protect itself against aggression from without 
and an "intractable dissident military organiza- 
tion'' from within. 



Italian Colonies 

Witli general debate on the disposition of the 
former Italian colonies completed, four specific 
resolutions were submitted to the Political Com- 
mittee during the week. 

U.S. Delegate, John Foster Dulles, supported a 
resolution introduced by U.K. Delegate, Hector 
McNeil, calling for possible independence of Libya 
in 10 years and U.K. administration of an interim 
trusteeship over Cyrenaica. It also recommended 
tliat Egj'pt, France. Italy, United Kingdom, and 
United States submit proposals to the fourth ses- 
sion of the Assembly on interim trusteeships over 
the rest of Libj'a, incorporation of Eritrea into 
Ethiopia and the Sudan, and Italian trusteeship 
over Somaliland. Mr. Dulles stated that such a 
decision would not be perfect but would be the best 
solution of a colonial problem the world has yet 
seen. This U.K. formula met with considerable 
opposition. 

Eighteen Latin American states are supporting 
a resolution introduced by Mexico which would 
request Egypt, France, Italy, the United King- 
dom, and the United States "to consider the terms 
and conditions under which Libya might be placed 
under the international trusteeship system. 
Ethiopia. France, Italy, United Kingdom, and 
United States would be commissioned to perform 
the same task with respect to Somaliland, while 
the.se same countries would be asked to make 
studies and recommendations concerning the fu- 
ture of Eritrea." 

The Australian proposal called for the estab- 
lishment of a 7-member special committee to ex- 
amine unresolved aspects of the Italian colonies 
question and report to the Secretary-General not 
later than September 1, 1949. 

An Iranian resolution recommended placing 
Libya and Somaliland under the trusteeship sys- 
tem and provided for the appointment of a special 
commission to ascertain the wishes of the Eritrean 
people. 

At the request of U.S.S.R. Delegate, Andrei 
Gromyko, vote on the four I'esolutions was de- 
ferred until May 9. 

Department of Slate Bulletin 



The Current Situation In Germany 



THE RECORD OF THE WEEK 



ADDRESS BY SECRETARY ACHESON > 

In considering a suitable subject for this occa- 
sion, I naturally supposed that the newspaper 
publishers of the nation would expect me to choose 
a topic having some news value. I, therefore, 
decided that it might be timely for me to speak 
on United States policy with respect to Germany. 
But I must confess that I did not then foresee just 
how prominently Germany would figure in the 
news at this precise time. 

The conversations between Ambassador Jessup 
and Mr. Malik, which were reported in the state- 
ment issued a few days ago, constitute the latest 
development in a long and involved series of devel- 
opments affecting Germany since the beginning of 
the occupation. I think you may be interested 
in the relation of these developments to the broad 
aspects of the German problem and the efforts 
of the United States Government to deal with it. 

Early this month I met with the Foreign 
Ministers of France and the United Kingdom for 
talks on Germany, the outcome of which we all 
regarded as momentous. It was not by mere 
coincidence that these agreements were initialed 
during the week the North Atlantic Treaty was 
signed. That historic instrument marks a deci- 
sive step toward the creation of a community of 
democratic nations dedicated to the attainment 
of peace and determined to insure its preserva- 
tion by all the material and moral means at their 
disposal. 

The German problem cannot be disassociated 
from the general problem of assuring security for 
the free nations. No approach to German prob- 
lems can be adequate which deals only with Ger- 
many itself and ignores the question of its relation- 
ship to the other nations of Europe. The 
objectives of United States policy toward the 
German people are interwoven with our interest 
in, and our policies toward, the other peoples of 
Europe. Here the basic considerations are the 
same whether they can extend to all of Germany 
or must be limited to Western Germany. 

We have made clear our desire to aid the free 
peoples of Europe in their efforts toward re- 
covery and reconstruction. We have made clear 
our policy to aid them in their efforts to establish 
a common structure of new economic and political 
relationships. To these ends, we are providing 
temporary economic assistance through the Euro- 
pean Kecovery Program and are proposing to par- 
ticipate with them in our common defense through 
the North Atlantic pact. 

May 8, J 949 



In this setting, it is the ultimate objective of 
the United States that the German people, or as 
large a part of them as possible, be integrated into 
a new common structure of the free peoples of 
Europe. We hope that the Germans will share 
in due time as equals in the obligations, the eco- 
nomic benefits, and the security of the structure 
which has been begun by the free peoples of 
Europe. 

We recognize that the form and pace of this de- 
velopment are predominantly matters for deter- 
mination by the Europeans themselves. We also 
recognize that effective integration of the German 
people will depend upon reciprocal willingness 
and upon their belief in the long-range economic 
benefits and the greater security for all which will 
accrue from a joint effort. 

The maintenance of restrictions and controls 
over the Germany economy and a German state, 
even for a protracted period, cannot alone guar- 
antee the West against the possible revival of a 
German threat to the peace. In the long run, se- 
curity can be insured only if there are set in motion 
in Germany those forces which will create a gov- 
ernmental system dedicated to upholding the basic 
human freedoms through democratic procedures. 
These constructive forces can derive their 
strength only from the renewed vitality of the 
finer elements of the German cultural tradition. 
They can flourish only if the German economy can 
provide sustenance and hope for the German 
people. They can attain their greatest effective- 
ness only through a radically new reciprocal ap- 
proach by the German people and the other 
peoples of Europe. This approach must be based 
on common understanding of the mutual benefits 
to be derived from the voluntaiy cooperative ef- 
fort of the European community as a whole. 

Through all of this effort, our basic aim with 
respect to the Germans themselves has been to 
help them make the indispensable adjustments to 
which I have just referred. We have tried to help 
them to find the way toward a reorganization of 
their national life which would permit them to 
make the great contribution to world progress 
which they are unquestionably capable of making. 
But it is important for us all to remember that no 
one but the Germans themselves can make this ad- 



' Made before the American Society of Newspaper 
Publishers in New Yorii on Apr. 28, 1949, and released 
to the press on the same date. The address was broadcast 
over the major national networks. 

585 



justment. Even the wisest occupation policy 
could not make it for them. It must stem from 
them. It must be a product of their own will 
and their own s])irit. All that others can do is to 
help to provide the framework in which it may be 
made. 

These are the conditions we consider essential 
for the long-term solution of the German problem. 
The purpose of the Washington agreements, and 
of the other decisions taken by the Western 
Powers, is to bring about these required conditions 
at the earliest practicable time. This has been 
the consistent purpose of the United States 
Government. 

This Government made earnest efforts for two 
and a half years after the war to resolve the major 
issues arising from the defeat of German}' and 
to achieve a general settlement. During that 
period we participated in the four-power ma- 
chinery for control of Germany established by 
international agreement in 1945. 

By the end of 1947 it appeared that the Soviet 
Union was seeking to thwart any settlement 
which did not concede virtual Soviet control over 
German economic and political life. This was 
confirmed in two futile meetings of the Council of 
Foreign Ministers in Moscow and London. It 
was emphasized in the Allied Control Authority 
in Berlin, where the Soviet veto power was exer- 
cised three times as often as by the three Western 
Powers combined. 

The resultant paralysis of interallied policy and 
control created an intolerable situation. Germany 
became divided into disconnected administrative 
areas and was rapidly being reduced to a state 
of economic chaos, disti-ess, and despair. Disaster 
was averted prinuirily by American economic aid. 

The German stalemate heightened the general 
European crisis. The European Recovery Pro- 
gram could not succeed without the raw materials 
and finished products which only a revived Ger- 
man economy could contribute. 

By 1948 it became clear that the Western Pow- 
ers could no longer tolerate an impasse which 
made it impossible for them to discharge their 
responsibilities for the organization of German 
administration and for the degree of German eco- 
nomic recovery tliat was essential for the welfare 
of Europe as a whole. These powers determined 
to concert their policies for the area of Germanj' 
under their control, which embraced about two 
thirds of the territory and three fourths of the 
population of occupied Germany. 

These common policies were embodied in the 
London agreements, announced on June 1, 1948. 
This joint program, I wish to emphasize, is in no 
sense a repudiation of our international commit- 
ments on Germany, embodied in the Potsdam 
protocol and other agreements. It represents a 
sincere effort to deal with existing realities in the 
spirit of the original Allied covenants peitaining 
to Germany. 



The London agreements constitute a set of ar- 
rangements for the coordinated administration 
of Germany pending a definitive peace settlement. 
Tlie execution of this program, now in progress, 
should restore stability and confidence in Western 
Germany while protecting the vital interests of 
Germany's neighbors. It seeks to insure coopera- 
tion among the Western nations in the evolution 
of a policy which can and should lead to a peace- 
ful and fruitful association of Germany with 
Western Europe. It is a provisional settlement 
which in no way excludes the eventual achieve- 
ment of arrangements applicable to all of 
Germany. 

The London agreements established a basic pat- 
tern for future action in the West. The bizonal 
area, formed by economic merger of the American 
and British zones in 1947, and the French zone 
were to be coordinated and eventually merged. 
The Western zones wei'e to participate fully in 
the European Recovery Program. An Interna- 
tional Authority for the Ruhr was to be created 
to regulate the allocation of coal, coke, and steel 
between home and foreign consumption, to insure 
equitable international access to Ruhr resources, 
and safeguard against remilitarization of Ruhr 
industry. 

The Germans were authorized to establish a 
provisional government, democratic and federal in 
character, based upon a constitution of German 
inception. It would be subject, in accordance 
with an occupation statute, to minimum super- 
vision by the occupation authorities in the interest 
of the general security and of broad Allied pur- 
poses for Germany. Coordinated three-power 
control was to be established, with the virtual 
abolition of the zonal boundaries. 

Of exceptional importance were the guarantees 
of security against a German military revival, a 
point sometimes overlooked in present-day talk 
about the hazards inherent in rebuilding German 
economic and political life. The London agree- 
ments provide that there is to be consultation 
among the three occupying powei"s in the event of 
any threat of German military resurgence; that 
their armed forces are to remain in Germany until 
the peace of Europe is secure : that a joint Military 
Security Board should be created with powers of 
inspection to insure against both military and in- 
dustrial rearrangement; that all agreed disarma- 
ment and demilitarization measures should be 
maintained in force; and that long-term demili- 
tarization measures should be agreed upon prior 
to the end of the occupation. It should be ob- 
served that these far reaching safeguards are to 
accompany the more constructive aspects of the 
program and assure that the new powers and re- . 
sponsibilities assumed by the Germans may not ■ 
be abused. " 

During the last 10 months notable progress has 
been made in Western Germany, which is ap- 
parent to all the world. An entirely new atmos- 

Department of Sfate Bulletin 



phere of hope and creative activity has replaced 
the lethargy and despair of a year ago. Much of 
the London program is well on the way to real- 
ization. An agreement establishing the Interna- 
tional Authority for the Ruhr has been drafted 
and approved. The Military Security Board has 
been established. The bizone and French zone 
are participating fully in the European Recovery 
Program. Agreements have been reached with 
respect to such difficult and controverted issues as 
the protection of foreign property rights in Ger- 
many, the revision of lists of plants scheduled for 
dismantling on reparations account, and determi- 
nation of restricted and prohibited industries. 

A short time ago we all felt that we should have 
a fresh look at the German problem. This was 
done in Washington while Mr. Bevin and Mr. 
Schuman were there earlier this month. The 
genuine readiness of the participating govern- 
ments to sacrifice special points of view to the com- 
mon good has made it possible to reach a degree of 
accord far exceeding what could have been hoped 
for only a month or two ago. 

There were three particularly important fea- 
tures about the agreements on German policy 
which resulted from these conversations. The 
first, was the striking harmony in essential out- 
look. The second, was the removal of the obstacles 
to the fulfillment of the constructive London pro- 
gram which had developed through diverse Allied 
disagreements. Thirdly, the three Governments 
acknowledged the need for the termination of 
Military Government and its replacement by a 
civilian Allied Commission at the time of the estab- 
lishment of the German Federal Republic. This 
last is a great step forward toward peace, in my 
opinion. 

With respect to my first point, the harmony of 
view reached by the three Governments on a com- 
mon policy for Germany, you all know that 
matters of German policy have been, in the past, 
issues of great controversy. I suppose that it is 
a result of the depth of the historical backgi'ound, 
the emotions and passions that have been aroused 
as a result of Germany's aggressive wars, and the 
inevitable importance attached to the course of 
German developments. It is therefore not strange 
that there should be distinct American, British, 
and French views on Germany. 

But I see in the successful outcome of our recent 
Washington talks the prospect that France, Great 
Britain, and the United States are developing a 
common policy toward Germany based on mutual 
understanding and reasonableness. The continua- 
tion of this development of a common policy, which 
I am convinced will occur, and toward which I 
shall lend every effort, is an essential element in an 
enduring peace in Central Europe. 

The agreement in Washington on the text of an 
occupation statute has removed one of the major 
obstacles to the establishment of the German 
Federal Republic. The Parliamentary Coimcil met 

May 8, 7949 



at Bonn on September 1, and has been working 
diligently to draft a basic law or provisional con- 
stitution for a Federal German Government. 
Since last December its leaders have requested the 
text of the occupation statute which had been 
promised to the Parliamentary Council before 
completion of its work. 

The three occupying powers have been discuss- 
ing the occupation statute since last August. In 
the course of these many months the draft occupa- 
tion statute had become a very heavy, complicated, 
and legalistic document. The three Foreign 
Ministers approved the text of an occupation 
statute in a new and simpler form, which was then 
transmitted to the German Parliamentary Council 
at Bonn. According to latest reports, all the con- 
troversial issues with respect to the basic law have 
been settled, all differences between the occupying 
powers and the Germans and among the Germans 
themselves have been resolved, and a constitution 
is expected to be approved by the Parliamentary 
Council by May 15. 

The establishment of a German Government 
does not, and cannot at this time, mean the end 
of the occupation of Germany. If democratic 
self-goveriunent is to be introduced in Germany it 
must be given a chance to live. It cannot thrive if 
its powers are in question, or if it is subject to 
arbitrary intervention. The occupation statute 
defines the powers to be retained by the occupying 
authorities upon the establishment of the German 
Federal Republic and sets forth the basic pro- 
cedures for the operation of Allied supervision. 

The reserved powers have been retained in such 
fields as disarmament and demilitarization; con- 
trols in regard to the Ruhr, reparations, and de- 
cartelization ; foreign affairs; displaced persons; 
security of Allied forces and representatives ; con- 
trol over foreign trade. 

The key issue for the future will be the manner 
and extent to which the Allied authorities exer- 
cise their powers. A practicable basis for coopera- 
tion between the Western Allies and the future 
federrJ Western government will have to be 
sought, through which the German people may 
exercise democratic self-government under the 
statute. 

Provision is made in the occupation statute for 
a review of its terms after a year in force. 

In accordance with the statute, the action of the 
German Government authorities generally does 
not require affirmative Allied approval. This 
means that the day-to-day operations of the 
German Government cannot be thwarted by the 
veto of one occupying power or by Allied disagree- 
ment. German Government authorities will be at 
liberty to take administrative and legislative 
action, and such action will be valid if not dis- 
approved by Allied authorities. 

There is one important element in the Washing- 
ton agreements on the economic side that I want 
to stress because it is a good indication of our 



intent. As you know, this Government has ex- 
pended in Germany since the cessation of hos- 
tilities hir<;e sun* of appropriated funds in order 
to feed the (iennan i)eople and support the (ier- 
man economy. These sums were carried in the 
Army budfret. Since the commencement of eco- 
nomic cooperation aid, the bizonal area and the 
French zone have been receiving EGA funds and 
tlie Military Governors of the bizonal and the 
French zone concluded bilateral ECA agreements 
with t!ie United States Government. 

It has now been agreed that with the establish- 
ment of the German Federal Republic, funds pro- 
vided by the United States Government to the 
German economy will be made available through 
the Economic Cooperation Administration. The 
German Federal Republic would itself execute a 
bilateral ECA agreement with the United States 
Government, and would likewise become a party 
to the convention for European Economic Co- 
operation and participate as a full member in the 
Organization for European Economic Coopera- 
tion. 

Tlie German economy has responded energeti- 
cally to the currency reform of last June and to 
the recovery assistance already received. The 
Gei-man workshop is beginning again to produce, 
for itself, for its Western European neighbors, 
and for other cooperating countries. The Ger- 
mans now, under the foreseen arrangements, will 
have an opportunity through their own govern- 
ment to become a responsible partner in the 
European Recovery Program. 

The Washington agreements envisage at the 
time of the establishment of the German Federal 
Republic the termination of Military Government 
and its replacement by an Allied High Commis- 
sion of civilian character. Military functions will 
continue to be e.xercised by military commanders, 
but each of the Allied establishments in Germany, 
aside from occupation forces, will come under 
the direction of a High Conunissioner. The func- 
tions of the Allied authorities are to become 
mainly supervisory. 

The three Foreign Ministers on April 8 sent a 
joint message of appreciation to their Military 
Governors for the pioneer work they had done in 
Germany. This action was based upon moving 
tributes paid during our discussions to the devoted 
efforts of the Military Governors. We Americans 
take just and special pride in our own Military 
Governor, General Clay. I believe firmly that his- 
tory will record that the United States has been 
well served by him. It is in accordance with his 
views and the views of the National Military Es- 
tablishment that we are looking forward to the 
transfer of the control agencies in Germany to 
civilian hands. This change is an interim meas- 
ure, to be sure, but in the right direction, the di- 
rection of ])eace. 

I know that this thought nnist be arising in your 



minds, at this stage. How long must we be satis- 
fied with interim measures when the people of all 
countries desperately desire a genuine and lasting 
peace ? Will the moves we are making in Western 
Germany contribute to a permanent settlement of 
tiie German problem? Wliat are the possibilities 
of renewed four-power talks on Germany? Has 
the possibility of such talks or the success of their 
outcome been prejudiced? 

In the communique announcing the London 
agreements, released June 6, 1948, it was empha- 
sized that the agreed recommendations in no way 
precluded, and on the contraiy would facilitate, 
eventual four-power agreement on the German 
problem. They were designed, it was stated, to 
solve the urgent political and economic problems 
arising out of the present situation in Germany. 

When this Government embarked, together with 
its AVestern Allies, on the discussion of new ar- 
rangements for Western Germany, it did not mean 
that we had abandoned hope of a solution which 
would be applicable to Germany as a whole or 
that we were barring a resumption of discussions 
looking toward such a solution whenever it might 
appear that there was any chance of success. It 
did mean that this Government was not prepared 
to wait indefinitely for four-power agreement be- 
fore endeavoring to restore healthy and hopeful 
conditions in those areas of Germany in which its 
influence could be exerted. 

Should it prove possible to arrange for renewed 
four-power discussions, this Govermnent will do 
its utmost, as it has in the past, to arrive at a settle- 
ment of what is plainly one of the most crucial 
jiroblenis in world affairs. 

There are certain principles, however, the ob- 
servance of which is essential, in our view, to any 
sastisfactory solution of the German problem and 
which we shall have to keep firmly in mind in 
whatever the future may bring. 

The people of Western Germany may rest as- 
sui-ed that this Government will agree to no gen- 
eral solution for German^' into which the basic 
safeguards and benefits of the existing Western 
German arrangements would not be absorbed. 
They may rest assured that until such a solution 
can be achieved, this Govermnent will continue 
to lend vigorous support to the development of 
the Western (Jerman program. 

The people of Europe may rest assured that 
this Government will agree to no arrangements 
concerning Germany which do not protect the 
security interests of the European conununity. 

The people of the United States may rest as- 
sured that in any discussions relating to the future 
of Germany, this Government will have foremost 
in mind their deep desire for a peaceful and or- 
derly solution of these weighty problems which 
have been the heart of so many of our difficulties 
in the postwar period. 

Deparfmenf of Siafe Bulletin 



AGREEMENT ON TRIPARTITE CONTROLS 
FOR WESTERN GERMANY 

[Released to the press April 26] 

The Department of State on April 26 made pub- 
lic the text of the agreement reached in Washing- 
ton on April 8, 1949, between the Governments of 
France, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States on the basic principles for the merger of 
the three Western German zones of occupation. 
The purpose of this agreement is to define the or- 
ganization and procedures through which the 
powers of the occupying governments will be 
exercised after the establishment of a provisional 
German Government. The agreement provides 
for a High Commission, to be composed of a High 
Commissioner for each of the occupying govern- 
ments, and it outlines the manner in which the 
Commissioners will vote and reach their decisions. 
The nature and extent of the powers to be exer- 
cised by the occupying governments have been 
fully set out in the occupation statute.^ The text 
of the agreement follows : 

The Governments of the United Kingdom, 
France and the United States agree to enter into 
a trizonal fusion agreement prior to the entry into 
effect of the Occupation Statute. The representa- 
tives of the three occupying powers will make the 
necessary arrangements to establish tripartite con- 
trol machinery for the western zones of Germany, 
which will become effective at the time of the 
establishment of a provisional German govern- 
ment. The following provisions agreed by the 
Governments of the United Kingdom, France and 
the United States shall form the basis of those 
arrangements : 

1. An Allied High Commission composed of one 
High Commissioner of each occupying power or 
his representative shall be the supreme Allied 
agency of control. 

2. The nature and extent of controls exercised 
by the Allied High Commission shall be in har- 
mony with the Occupation Statute and interna- 
tional agreements. 

3. In order to permit the German Federal Re- 
public to exercise increased responsibilities over 
domestic affairs and to reduce the burden of occu- 
pation costs, staff personnel shall be kept to a 
minimum. 

4. In the exercise of the powers reserved to the 
Occupation Authorities to approve amendments to 
the Federal Constitution, the decisions of the 
Allied High Commission shall require unanimous 
agreement. 

5. In cases in which the exercise of, or failure 
to exercise, the powers reserved under paragraph 
2 (g) of the Occupation Statute would increase 
the need for assistance from United States Gov- 
ernment appropriated funds, there shall be a sys- 
tem of weighted voting. Under such system the 
representatives of the Occupation Authorities will 

May 8, 1949 

835031 — 49 -3 



have a voting strength proportionate to the funds 
made available to Germany by their respective 
governments. This provision shall not, however, 
reduce the present United States predominant 
voice in JEIA and JFEA while these organiza- 
tions, or any successor organization to them, con- 
tinue in existence and are charged with the 
performance of any of their present functions. 
No action taken hereunder shall be contrary to 
any inter-governmental agreement among the sig- 
natories or to the principles of non-discrimination. 

6. On all other matters action shall be by ma- 
jority vote. 

7. (a) If a majority decision alters or modifies 
any inter-governmental agreement which relates 
to any of the subjects listed in paragraph 2 (a) 
and 2 ( & ) of the Occupation Statute, any dissent- 
ing High Commissioner may appeal to his Gov- 
ernment. This appeal shall serve to suspend the 
decision pending agreement between the three 
governments. 

(i) If a High Commissioner considers that a 
majority decision conflicts with any inter-govern- 
mental agreement which relates to any of the sub- 
jects in paragraph 2 (cr) and 2 (h) of the Occupa- 
tion Statute or with the fundamental principles 
for the conduct of Germany's external relations 
or with matters essential to the security, prestige, 
and requirements of the occupying forces, he may 
appeal to his Government. Such an appeal shall 
serve to suspend action for 30 days, and thereafter 
unless two of the Governments indicate that the 
grounds do not justify further suspension. 

(c) If such appeal is from an action of the Al- 
lied High Commission either declining to disap- 
prove or deciding to disapprove German legisla- 
tion, such legislation shall be provisionally 
disapproved for the duration of the appeal period. 

8. A High Commissioner who considers that a 
decision made by less than unanimous vote involv- 
ing any other matter reserved by the Occupation 
Statute is not in conformity with basic tripartite 
policies regarding Germany or that a Land con- 
stitution, or an amendment thereto, violates the 
Basic Law, may appeal to his government. An 
appeal in this case shall serve to suspend action for 
a period not to exceed twenty-one days from the 
date of the decision unless all three governments 
agree otherwise. If such appeal is from an action 
of the Allied High Commission either declining 
to disapprove or deciding to disapprove German 
legislation, such legislation shall be provisionally 
disapproved for the duration of the appeal period. 

9. All powers of the Allied High Commission 
shall be uniformly exercised in accordance with 
tripartite policies and directives. To this end in 



' Recent agreements on Germany include the Occupation 
Statute, Bdixeten of Apr. 17, 1949, p. .500 ; International 
Authority for the Ruhr, Bulletin of .Tan. 9, 1949, p. 43; 
Agreement on German Reparation Program, Bulletin of 
Apr. 24, 1949, p. 524 : and Prohibited and Limited Indus- 
tries in Germany, Bulletin of Apr. 24, 1949, p. 526. 

589 



each Land the Allied Higli Commission sliall be 
represented by a single Land Conmiissioner who 
shall be solely responsible to it for all tripartite 
affairs. In each Land the Land Commissioner 
shall be a national of the Allied Power in whose 
zone the Land is situated. Outside his own zone 
each High Commissioner will delegate an observer 
to each of the Land Commissioners for purposes 
of consultation and information. Nothing in this 
paragraph shall be construed to limit the functions 
of bodies established pursuant to inter-govern- 
niental agreement. 

10. To the greatest extent possible, all directives 
and other instruments of control shall be addressed 
to the federal and/or Land authorities. 

IL The Trizonal Fusion Agreement will con- 
tinue in force until altered by agreement among 
the governments. 

UNDERSTANDING ON WURTTEMBERG-BADEN 
PLEBISCITE 

[Released to tbe press April 20) 

It was agreed that the status quo in Wiirttem- 
borg and Baden would be maintained for the time 
being and that the plebiscite I'ecommended by the 
German Minister Presidents would be postponed 
in tlie interest of avoiding any possible delay in 
the establisliment of the German Federal Govern- 
ment. 

It was further agreed that the question of the 
Wiirttemberg-Baden land boundaries would be 
reexamined after the establishment of the German 
Federal Government. 

AGREEMENT REGARDING PORT OF KEHL 

[Released to the press April 26] 

The French control authorities with the assis- 
tance of the Strasbourg French authorities will 
maintain under existing conditions jurisdiction 
over the Kehl port zone until establishment of the 
German Federal Government and conclusion of 
negotiations between the French and German 
Authorities with respect to a joint port adminis- 
trat ion for Kehl. 

It was agreed, on a proposal of the French Gov- 
ernment, that the city of Kehl would gradually be 
returned to German administration. It was fore- 
seen that the French temporarily domiciled in 
Kehl might remain during a four-year period re- 
quired for the preparation of additional housing 
in Strasbourg. Around one third of the French 
inhabitants will be able to leave Kehl within 
several months, and the remainder j)rogressively 
thereafter as housing becomes available. 

The final decision with respect to the Kehl port 
zone will be made in the peace settlement. It the 
port authority develops harmoniously, the United 
States and the United Kingdom will be willing 
at tlie time of the peace settlement to bring an 
attitude of good will toward the establishment of 
a permanent joint authorit}'. 



THREE POWER RESPONSIBILITIES ON 

ESTABLISHMENT OF GERMAN FEDERAL 

REPUBLIC 

(Released to the press April 26] 

The three Governments also agreed on and re- 
corded in their minutes the principles according 
to which their powers and responsibilities will be 
exercised after the establishment of a German 
Federal Republic. "Wliile the occupying govern- 
ments will retain supreme authority, it is intended 
that military government will be terminated and 
that the function of the occupation officials will 
be mainly supervisory. The German authorities 
will be free to take administrative or legislative 
action, and this action will be valid unless it is 
vetoed by Allied authority. The fields in which 
the occupation authorities reserve the right to take 
direct action themselves including the issuance of 
orders to German federal and local officials, will 
be restricted to a minimum, and it is expected 
that, with the exception of security questions, the 
exercise of direct powers will be of a temporary 
and self-liquidating nature. After the German 
Federal Republic has been established, the Eco- 
nomic Cooperation Administration will assume 
the responsibility for supervising the use of funds 
made available by the United States Government 
to the German economy for purposes of relief 
and recovery. It is envisaged that the German 
Federal Republic will become a party to the con- 
vention for European economic cooperation and 
will also conclude a bilateral agreement with the 
Government of the United States, ■\\nien the 
German Republic has been established and military 
government has been brought to an end. the 
strictly military functions of the occupation au- 
thorities will be exercised by a Commander-in- 
Chief and all other functions by a High Commis- 
sioner, who will direct each of the Allied 
establishments in Germany other than the occu- 
pation forces. It is intended that the size of 
the staffs to be maintained in Germany will be 
kept to a minimum. A major objective of the 
tliree Allied Governments is to bring about the 
closest integration, on a mutually beneficial basis, 
of the (jerman people under a democratic federal 
state within the framework of a European 
association. 

INFORMAL CONVERSATIONS ON BERLIN 
BLOCKADE 

[Released to the press April 26 J 

Since the imposition by the Soviet Government 
of the blockade of the city of Berlin the three 
Western Governments have consistently sought to 
bring about the lifting of that blockade on terms 
consistent with their rights, duties, and obligations 
as occupying powers in Germany. It was in con- 
formity with this policy that the Western Govern- 
ments initiated conversations in Moscow last sum- 
mer. Following their breakdown, the matter was 



Department of State Bulletin 



referred in September 1948 to the Security Coun- 
cil of the United Nations. 

All these efforts ended in failure, and the three 
Western Governments made it plain that they 
were not prepared to continue discussions in the 
light of the Soviet attitude. 

Since that time the Western Governments have 
looked consistently for any indication of a change 
in the position of the Soviet Goverinnent and have 
been anxious to explore any reasonable possibility 
in that direction through contacts with Soviet 
oiEcials. 

In tills connection the Department of State 
noted with jjarticular interest that on January 
30, 1949, Premier Stalin made no mention of the 
currency question in Berlin in his reply to ques- 
tions asked him by an American journalist. Since 
the currency question had hitherto been the an- 
nounced i-eason for the blockade, the omission of 
any reference to it by Premier Stalin seemed to 
the Department to indicate a development which 
should be explored. 

With these considerations in mind, Mr. Jessup, 
then the U.S. Deputy Representative on the Secu- 
rity Council, took occasion, in a conversation on 
February 15 with Mr. Malik, the Soviet Eepre- 
sentative on the Security Council, to comment on 
the omission by Premier Stalin of any reference 
to the currency question. Since this question had 
been the subject of much discussion in the Security 
Council and in the Experts Committee appointed 
under the ausjiices of the Council, Mr. Jessup in- 
quired whether the omission had any particular 
significance. 

One month later, on March 15, Mr. Malik in- 
formed Mr. Jessup that Premier Stalin's omission 
of any reference to the currency problem in regard 
to Berlin was "not accidental," that the Soviet 
Government regarded the currency question as 
important but felt that it could be discussed at 
a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers if 
a meeting of that body could be arranged to review 
the whole German problem. Mr. Jessup inquired 
whether tliis meant that the Soviet Government 
had in mind a Foreign Ministers' meeting while 
the blockade of Berlin was in progress or whether 
it indicated that the blockade would be lifted in 
order to permit the meeting to take place. 

The information as to the Soviet Government's 
attitude revealed in these informal contacts was 
immediately conveyed to the British and French 
Governments. 

On March 21 Mr. Malik again asked Mr. Jessup 
to visit him to inform him that if a definite datJe 
could be set for the meeting of the Council of 
Foreign Ministers, the restrictions on trade and 
transportation in Berlin could be lifted recipro- 
cally and that the lifting of the blockade could 
take place in advance of the meeting. 

Taking advantage of the presence of the For- 
eign ]\Iinisters of Great Britain and France in 



Washington, the recent developments in regard 
to the Soviet attitude were discussed with them. 
An agreed position was reached among the 
three Western Powers. In order that tliere should 
be no misunderstanding in the mind of the Soviet 
Government in regard to this position, a state- 
ment was read to Mr. Malik by Mr. Jessup on 
April 5. The purpose of this statement, which 
represented the agreed position of the three West- 
ern Powers, was to make clear that the points 
under discussion wei'e the following: 

1. Reciprocal and simultaneous lifting of the 
rastrictions imposed by the Soviet Union since 
March 1, 1948, on communications, transporta- 
tion, and trade between Berlin and the Western 
zones of Germany and the restrictions imposed by 
the Three Poweis on communications, transporta- 
tion, and trade to and from the Eastern zone of 
Germany. 

2. The fixing of a date to be determined for a 
meeting of the Council of Foreigii Ministers. 

The Western Powers wished to be sure that these 
two points were not conditioned in the understand- 
ing of the Soviet Government on any of the other 
points which in the past had prevented agreement 
upon the lifting of tne blockade. 

The statement summarized the understanding 
of the three Governments of the position which 
the Soviet Government took concerning the pro- 
posal of lifting the blockade and the meeting of 
the Council of Foreign Ministers. Its purpose 
was to make unmistakably clear that the position 
of the Soviet Government was as now stated in 
the release of the Tass Agency. 

On April 10 Mr. Malik again asked Mr. Jessup 
to call upon him at that time and again stated the 
position of the Soviet Government. From this 
statement it appeared that there were still certain 
points requiring clarification. 

As a result of this meeting, further discussions 
took place between the three Governments, which 
have resulted in a more detailed formulation of 
their position, which will be conveyed by Mr. 
Jessup to Mr. Malik. 

If the present position of the Soviet Government 
is as stated in the Tass Agency release as pub- 
lished in the American press, the way appears 
clear for a lifting of the blockade and a meeting 
of the Council of Foreign Ministers. No final con- 
clusion upon this can be reached until further ex- 
changes of view with Mr. Malik. 



[Released to the press April 27] 

In a statement to the press April 26, the De- 
partment of State noted that Mr. Jessup would 
have a further talk with Mr. Malik in continua- 
tion of the informal conversations which had taken 
place regarding the lifting of the Berlin blockade 
and a possible meeting of the Council of Foreign 
Ministers. 



May 8, 1949 



Mr. Jessup saw Mr. Malik on April 27 as 
planned and communicated to iiim informally the 
position of the three Governments. The Govern- 
ments of France and of the United Kingdom will, 
of course, be informed concerninj^ this conver- 
sation. 

INTERNATIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THE 
RUHR ESTABLISHED 

[Reloased to the press .\prll 28] 

In accordance with the decision reached by 
Foreign Ministers at their recent meeting in AVash- 
ington, the agreement for establishment of an 
International Authority for the Ruhr was signed 



on April 28 at the Foreign Office in London. 

Foreign Secretary Bevin signed for the United 
Kingdom, M. Massigli. French Ambassador on 
bclialf of France, and Julius Holmes, American 
Minister Plenipotentiary in London, on behalf of 
the United States. The Belgian Ambassador, the 
Netherlands Ambassador, and the Luxembourg 
Minister signed on behalf of their respective 
governments. 

In accordance with the terms of the agreement, 
which was published on December 29 last year, 
meetings of appropriate representatives will be 
held in near future to undertake work of organiz- 
ing and setting up authority itself. 



Jurisdiction of U.S. Courts Re Suits for Identifiable Property Involved 
in Nazi Forced Transfers 



[Released to the press April 27] 

As a matter of general interest, the Department 
of State publishes herewith a copy of a letter of 
April 13, 1949, from Jack B. Tate, Acting Legal 
Adviser, Department of State, to the attorneys tor 
the plaintiff in Civil Action No. 31-555 in the 
United States District Court for the Southern Dis- 
trict of New York. 

The letter repeats this Government's opposition 
to forcible acts of dispossession of a discriminatory 
and confiscatory nature practiced by the Germans 
on the countries or peoples subject to their con- 
trols; states that it is this Government's policy to 
undo the forced transfers and restitute identifiable 
property to the victims of Nazi persecution wrong- 
fully deprived of such property ; and sets forth 
that the policy of the Executive, with respect to 
claims asserted in the United States for restitution 
of such property, is to relieve American courts 
from any restraint upon the exercise of their juris- 
diction to pass upon the validity of the acts of 
Nazi officials. 

Copies of the letter were also sent to the court 
and to the attorneys for the other parties to the 
litigation. The letter is as follows : 

April 13, 19Jfi 
Bennett, House. & Cotrrs, 
Counselors at Law, 
U 'Wall Street, 
New York 6, New York. 
Sirs : You have brought to the attention of the 
Department Civil Action No. 31-555 now pending 
in the United States District Court for the South- 
ern District of New York between Arnold Bern- 
stein, plaintiff, and N. V. Nederlandsche-Ameri- 
kaanschc Stoomvaart-Maatschappij, also known 
as Holland-America Line, defendant, and Chemi- 
cal Bank and Trust Company, third-party 



defendant, which involves certain matters treated 
in the case of Bernstein v. Van Heyghen Freres 
Societe Anonyme, 1G3 F. 2d 246 (C. C. A. 2d 
1947), cert. den. 332 U.S. 772 (1947). 

You have pointed out that the Circuit Court of 
Appeals in the Van Heyghen case stated : 

"... a court of the forum will not undertake 
to pass upon the validity under the municipal law 
of another state of the acts of officials of that 
state, purporting to act as such." (page 250) 

". . . no court will exercise its jurisdiction to 
adjudicate the validity of the official acts of an- 
other state." (pages 249-250) 

The court held that the Executive had not "acted 
to relieve its courts of restraint upon the exercise 
of their jurisdiction" (page 250) or had not "indi- 
cated any positive intent to relax the doctrine that 
our courts shall not entertain actions of the kind at 
bar", (page 251) It was therefore concluded 
that in the circumstances the court was without 
power to inquire into the acts of spoliation alleged 
to have been perpetrated on Bernstein in Germany 
in 1937-1938 in which Nazi officials of Germany 
were claimed to have been participants. 

You have inquired whether the Department 
might care to express its view concerning the Ex- 
ecutive policy of this Government with respect 
to the exercise by courts of this country of juris- 
diction in sucli cases. The Department considers 
the matter an important one and is pleased to 
express its views as follows : 

1. This Government has consistently opposed 
the forcible acts of dispossession of a discrimina- 
tory and confiscatory nature practiced by the 
Germans on the countries or peoples subject to 
their controls. In this connection reference is 
made to the following : 

Departmont of State Bulletin 



a. Inter- Allied Declaration against Acts of Dis- 
possession of January 5, 1943, United States 
Economic Policy toward Germany (Dep't State 
Pub. 2630) 52; 

b. Gold Declaration of February 22, 1944, 9 
Fed. Reg. 2096 (1944); 

c. The Potsdam Agreement of August 2, 1945, 
13 Dep't State Bull. 153 (1945) ; 

d. Directive to the Commander-in-Chief of the 
United States Forces of Occupation Regarding 
the Military Government of Germany, April 1945, 
JCS 1067, paragraphs 4 (d), 48 (e) (2), 13 Dep't 
State Bull. 596 (1945); 

e. Directive to Commander-in-Chief of United 
States Forces of Occupation Regarding the Mili- 
tary Government of Germany, July 11, 1947, para- 
graph I7d, 17 Dep't State Bull. 186 (1947) ; 

f. Law No. 1 of the Allied Control Council (Off. 
Gaz. of the Control Council for Germ. No. 1, Oct. 
29, 1945) ; 

g. Military Government Law No. 1 (Mil. Gov. 
Gaz.-U.S. Zone June 1, 1946) ; 

h. Military Government Law No. 52, sees. 1(f), 
2 (Mil. Gov." Gaz.-U.S. Zone June 1, 1946) ; 

i. Military Government Law No. 59 on Restitu- 
tion of Identifiable Property (Mil. Gov. Gaz.- 
U.S. Zone Nov. 10, 1947) . 

2. Of special importance is Military Govern- 
ment Law No. 59 which shows this Government's 
policy of undoing forced transfers and restituting 
identifiable property to persons wrongfully de- 
prived of such property within the period from 
January 30, 1933 to May 8, 1945 for reasons of 
race, I'eligion, nationality, ideology or political 
opposition to National Socialism. Article 1 (1). 
It should be noted that this policy applies 
generally despite the existence of purchasers in 
good faith. Article 1 (2). 

3. The policy of the Executive, with respect to 
claims asserted in the United States for the resti- 
tution of identifiable property (or compensation in 
lieu thereof) lost through force, coercion, or 
duress as a result of Nazi persecution in Germany, 
is to relieve American courts from any restraint 
upon the exercise of their jurisdiction to pass upon 
the validity of the acts of Nazi officials. 

Copies of this letter are being transmitted to 
Judge Sylvester J. Ryan and to the attorneys for 
the other parties to the litigation. 
Very truly yours, 

Jack B. Tate 
Acting Legal Adviser 



Research and Teaching Opportunities 
in Italy 

[Released to the press April 30] 

More than 175 opportunities for Americans to 
undertake graduate study or advanced research, 

May 8, 1949 



or to serve as visiting professors in Italy under 
the Fulbright Act were announced on April 30 by 
the Department of State. The awards, which are 
the first offered for Italy under the provisions of 
the Fulbright program, are payable in Italian 
lire. Graduate scholarships under this program 
ordinarily cover the round-trip travel, mainte- 
nance, tuition, and necessary books and equipment 
of the grantee. Grants to visiting professors and 
research scholars ordinarily include round-trip 
transportations, a stipend, a living and quarters 
allowance, and an allowance for purchases of 
necessary books and equipment. 

One hundred and forty of these awards are of- 
fered to American students for graduate study in 
Italy. 

Eighteen grants are announced for Americans 
to serve as visiting professors in Italian universi- 
ties, and twenty awards for American research 
specialists to woi'k under the sponsorship of Ital- 
ian institutions. 

In addition, grants for round-trip travel are 
announced for more than 100 Italian citizens for 
study, teaching, or research in the United States. 
These awards do not cover expenses in the United 
States, which must be met from other sources. 

Candidates for all grants will be selected upon 
the basis of merit by the United States Board of 
Foreign Scholarships. Veterans will be given 
preference provided their other qualifications are 
approximately equal to those of other candidates. 
Final selection of visiting professors and research 
scholars and their assignment to Italian universi- 
ties and institutions will be made also upon the 
basis of the appropriateness of their fields of 
teaching or study to Italian needs and the facili- 
ties available in Italy for their research. 

The awards are offered under Public Law 584 
(79th Congi-ess), the Fulbright Act, which au- 
thorizes the Department of State to use foreign 
currencies and credits acquired through the sale 
of surplus property abroad for programs of edu- 
cational exchanges with other nations. Agree- 
ments have been signed with the following 
countries which are now participating in the pro- 
gram : China, Burma, Greece, the Republic of the 
Philippines, New Zealand, Belgium and Luxem- 
bourg, United Kingdom, France, and Italy. 

Graduate students interested in the possibilities 
for study in Italy should make application to the 
Institute of International Education, 2 West 
Forty-fifth Street, New York 19, New York, before 
June 15. 

Persons interested in the opportunities listed 
above for visiting professors and research scholars 
should write to the Conference Board of Asso- 
ciated Research Councils, 2101 Constitution Ave- 
nue, Washington 25, D.C., for application forms 
and additional information concerning fields of 
teaching and research, sponsoring institutions, and 
conditions of award. 



The North Atlantic Treaty and the Role of the Military Assistance Program 

STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ACHESON' 



I welcome this opportunity to discuss with you 
the Xorth Atlantic Treaty signed on April 4. 
That treaty is no new document to you. It has 
been developed, to an extent without parallel in 
my knowledge, as a cooperative enterprise between 
the executive and legislative branches of the Gov- 
ernment and particularly between the Department 
of State and this Conmiittee. Without the vision 
and assistance of your chairman, of your former 
chairman, and the members of this Committee, this 
treaty could never have been concluded. The text 
embodies many constructive suggestions from 
members of the Committee. 

The President has spoken on the treaty in re- 
cent weeks, and the Department of State has made 
available a considerable amount of source material 
regarding it. Since you already have in your pos- 
session some of what t shall say today, I shall make 
my statement as short as possible and will then 
be at your disposal for questions. 

I should like briefly to review with you the rea- 
son for this treaty, and its purposes. 

It has been well said that "Everyone wants 
peace, but not everyone is prepared to work for it." 
No people in this world want peace more than the 
American people. They have always wanted it, 
they have sought it in various ways, but they have 
not always been ready to work for it. If we wish 
peace we must be prepared to wage peace, with all 
our thought, energy, and courage. That is the 
purpose of this treaty. 

When the United States was a small and weak 
country, isolated by many weeks from other con- 
tinents, our forefathers wisely based our foreign 
policy upon the realities of those times, and we 
managed to stay ajiart, to a large extent, from 
developments in other lands. 

However, our responsibility for assisting in the 
maintenance of peace beyond our borders has been 
long recognized and assumed. For more than a 
century and a quarter this Government has con- 
tributed to the peace of the Americas by making 
clear that it would regard an attack on any Amer- 
ican state as an attack on itself. We gave our 
unilateral declaration to this elfect. As the years 
passed and our neighbors to the south grew in 
stature, they accepted a similar responsibility. 

But beyond this responsibility, we did not see 
clearly the impact of an unstable world on our 



' Made at the hearings before the Senate Committee on 
Foreign Relations on Apr. 27, 1949, and released to the 
press on the same date. 



securit}'. In 1920 many nations of the world 
joined in an attempt to maintain international 
peace and security through the League of Na- 
tions. Although the President of the United 
States had played a leading part in drafting the 
League Covenant, the United States was not pre- 
pared to enter the League, and we withdrew from 
the participation with other nations in their first 
effort to wage peace on a world-wide basis. ^Vs a 
consequence, we had no eflfective means to prevent 
the Second World War. 

But by 1945 after the tragedy of involvement 
in a second world war, we realized fully that 
times had changed, drastically and irrevocably. 
It is the responsibility of this generation to base 
the conduct of foreign affairs upon the realities of 
today. Today no place on earth is more than a 
few hours distant from any other place. Today 
neither distance nor ocean nor air affords security. 
Security today and henceforward can only be as- 
sured, in the President's words, by stopping war 
before it can start. 

In 1945 a new and greater effort for the mainte- 
nance of international peace and security was un- 
dertaken in the establishment of the United Na- 
tions. In the preamble of the Charter the peoples 
of the United Nations expressed their determina- 
tion — 

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, 
which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to 
mankind . . . 

And for these ends 

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with 
one another as good neighbors, and 

to unite our strength to maintain international peace 
and security, and 

to ensure, b.v the acceptance of principles and the institu- 
tion of methods, that armed force shall not he used, 
save in the common interest . . . 

The first purpose of the United Nations, as stated 
in article 1 of the Charter is — 

to maintain international peace and security, and to that 
end : to take effective collective measures for the pre- 
vention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the 
suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the 
peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in con- 
formity with the principles of justice and international 
law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes 
or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace; 

The American people overwhelmingly accepted 
this commitment and the other commitments laid 
down in the Charter. They showed not merely 
their desire for peace, but their determination to 

Department of Slate Bulletin 



work for peace through full participation in 
"effective collective measures for the prevention 
and removal of threats to the peace and for the 
suppression of acts of aggression." The hopes of 
the American people for peace with freedom and 
justice are based on the United Nations. 

The Charter not only spells out, as did the Kel- 
log Pact, the essential principle of settling dis- 
putes by peaceful means instead of by war, it goes 
much further. The Charter commits all members 
of the United Nations to certain principles in the 
conduct of their foreign affairs which would, if 
carried out, do a number of things. First, they 
would secure peace and do away with the use of 
force as an instrument of national policy. Sec- 
ond, they would establish the right of nations to 
indepenclence and self-determination. Third, they 
would establish that economic, social, and other 
problems can and should be worked out by inter- 
national agreement and for the benefit of the 
peoples of all countries. Fourth, they would 
recognize and further hiunan rights and funda- 
mental freedoms. Here is more than a vague ex- 
pression. These are the foundations of a world 
system, based on law, which would do far more 
than merely prevent war. 

Still, the Charter goes further. It establishes 
machinery and procedures for furthering these 
purposes. The fundamental fact of the Charter 
is that these mechanisms and procedures are the 
institutions and procedures of free peoples, based 
on solving difficulties and making progress through 
investigation of facts, free discussion, and deci- 
sions by adjustment among representatives of the 
member nations, all of whom accept and are at- 
tempting to achieve the purposes of the world or- 
ganization. 

Now, any organization of free individuals or 
free peoples whether it is a private one, or a na- 
tional one, or an international one, must proceed 
upon the basis that the vast bulk of those within it 
are firmly attached to the basic principles of the 
organization and are trying to carry them out. 
If this is so, adjustments are made within the area 
of common purposes; and, no matter how sharp 
disagreements may be, there are common princi- 
ples to which appeal may be made and which basi- 
cally govern the conscience and behavior of the 
members. Whenever a powerful minority repu- 
diates the basic principles and uses the proceduz'es 
to accomplish directly contrary purposes or to 
frustrate the organization, then it obviously will 
not work as intended. 

Here lies the basic difficulty which the United 
Nations has faced — a difficulty which would pro- 
duce serious problems in any international organ- 
ization, however perfectly devised. This diffi- 
culty is that a powerful group, even though a 
minority, has not genuinely accepted the purposes 
and principles of the organization and has used its 
institutions and procedures to frustrate them. 

May 8, 1949 



This is not a defect of machinery. It is a defect 
in the basic attitude of some of the members which 
no change of machinery or procedure can cure. 

One of the principal problems which has grown 
out of this situation which I have described is that 
a sense of insecurity and a fear of aggression have 
grown up in an important section of the world 
which is struggling to recover economically, poli- 
tically, and socially from the drains of the last 
war. The recovery of this area is of vital con- 
cern to the whole world. 

To attain a sense of security and to be free from 
the constant fear of armed attack is certainly one 
of the prime objectives of the United Nations. 
How, then, is this objective to be obtained when a 
few of the members of the United Nations frus- 
trate the attempt to attain it through the machin- 
ery provided in the Charter? It is certainly not 
to be obtained by doing nothing about it. It is 
certainly not hostile to the United Nations or con- 
trary to the Charter to attempt to attain this ob- 
jective by methods wholly consistent with the 
Charter. 

The United Nations is not a thing in itself. It 
is not an end in itself. It is a means to an end. 
The end is pi-ogressive development of a peace- 
ful and stable world order where law rather than 
force and anarchy will govern the conduct of na- 
tions in their foreign relations. It was never in 
the minds of the f ramers of the Charter that the 
organization set up under it should be so distorted 
as to become an international instrument wliich 
paralyzed the pacific nations of the world, the pos- 
sible victims of aggression, while leaving a 
would-be aggressor with completely free hands 
to deal with them one by one. In order that there 
should be no misunderstanding on this point, 
article 51 was inserted in the Charter. 

If I may use an understatement, the sense of 
insecurity prevalent in Western Europe is not a 
figment of the imagination. It has come about 
through the conduct of the Soviet Union. West- 
ern European countries have seen the basic pur- 
poses and principles of the Charter cynically vio- 
lated by the conduct of the Soviet Union with the 
countries of Eastern Europe. Their right to self- 
determination has been extinguished by force or 
threats of force. The human freedoms as the rest 
of the world understands them have been ex- 
tinguished throughout that whole area. Economic 
problems have not been solved by international 
cooperation but dealt with by dictation. These 
same methods have been attempted in other areas — 
penetration by propaganda and the Communist 
Party, attempts to block cooperative international 
efforts in the economic field, wars of nerves, and 
in some cases thinly veiled use of force itself. 

By the end of 1947 it had become abundantly 
clear that this Soviet pressure and penetration 
was being exerted progressively further to the 
west. In January 1948, the British Foreign Sec- 



retary, Ernest Bevin, said that if any one power 
attempted to dominate Europe by wliatever means, 
direct or indirect, it would inevitably lead to 
another world war unless this policy could be 
checked by peaceful means. He declared that if 
peace and security were to be preserved it could 
be done only "by mobilization of such a moral and 
material foi'ce as will create confidence and energy 
in the West and inspire respect elsewhere." 

With encouraf^ement from the United States 
the Lirussels treaty was signed on March 17, 1948.= 
The Brussels treaty system took the form, not of 
a network of bilateral alliances, as had originally 
been considered, but of a collective defense ar- 
rangement within the framework of the United 
Nations Charter similar in many respects to the 
Rio treaty. On the day the Brussels treaty was 
signed, the President, in addressing both Houses 
of Congress, called the treaty a notable step toward 
peace and expressed confidence that the determina- 
tion of the free peoples of Europe to protect them- 
selves would be matched by equal determination 
on our part to help them do so and that the United 
States would extend to the free countries the sup- 
port which the situation might require.^ 

At that time the Congress had before it a num- 
ber of proposals for strengthening the United 
Nations and making it a more effective instrument 
for the maintenance of international peace and 
security. My predecessor. General Marshall, and 
former Under Secretary of State Robert Lovett 
entered into consultation with the Committee on 
how the great influence of the United States might 
best be brought to bear in association with other 
free nations in strengthening the United Nations 
and furthering the cause of world peace. 

On May 1'.), 1948, this Committee unanimously 
reported Senate Resolution No. 239.* That reso- 
lution declared : 

Whereas peace with justice and the defense of human 
rights and fundamental freedoms require international 
cooperation through more effective u.se of the United Na- 
tions: Tlierefore be it 

Resolved, That the Senate reaffirm the policy of the 
United States to acliieve international peace and security 
through tlie United Nations so that armed force shall not 
be used except in the common interest, and that the Pres- 
ident be advised of the sense of tlie Senate that this Gov- 
ernment, by constitutional process, should particularly pur- 
sue the following objectives within the United Nations 
Charter : 

(1) Voluntary agreement to remove the veto from 
all questions involving pacific settlements of international 
disputes and situations, and from the admission of new 
members. 

(2) Progressive development of regional and other col- 
lective arrangements for individual and collective self- 
defense in accordance with the purixjses, principles, and 
provisions of the Charter. 



' Bulletin of May 9, 1948, p. 000. 
'BtJi.T.F.TiN of Mur. 2.S, 194S, p. 418. 
* PiTLLETiN (if .July 18, 1948, p. 79. 



(3) Association of the United States, by constitutional 
process, with such regional and other collective arrange- 
ments as are based on continuous and effective, self-help 
and mutual aid. and as affect its national security. 

(4) Contributing to the maintenance of peace by mak- 
ing clear its determination to exercise the right of indi- 
vidual or collective self-defense under article 51 should 
any armed attack occur affecting its national security. 

(7,) .Maximum efforts to obtain agreements to provide 
the United Nations with armed forces as provided by the 
Charter, and to obtain agreement among member nations 
ui>on universal regulation and reduction of armaments 
under adequate and dependable guaranty against violation. 

(0) If necessary, after adequate effort toward strength- 
ening the United Nations, review of the Charter at an 
appropriate time by a General Conference called under ar- 
ticle 109 or by the General Assembly. 

It will be noted that of the six objectives recom- 
mended, numbers 1, 5, and 6 were designed to 
strengthen the United Nations on a universal basis. 
This requires the agreement of all the major pow- 
ers. Our efforts to achieve these objectives are be- 
ing steadily pursued but it has not yet been pos- 
sible, and I am not able to say when it may be pos- 
sible, to achieve them. 

The second, third, and fourth objectives are de- 
signed to promote peace and stability by ancillary 
methods witliin the principles of the Charter. In 
its report on that resolution, the Committee de- 
clared that these relatively unexplored resources 
of the Charter should be further explored and de- 
veloped as rapidly as possible. 

For more than a year the members of the Com- 
mittee and ofiicers of the Department of State 
have been in consultation as to the nature of the 
problems involved, how they might best be met, 
and how the influence of the United States might 
best be brought to bear in the cause of peace. 
Throughout the negotiation of this treaty the 
United States negotiators have been guided by the 
wishes of the Senate as expressed in resolution 239. 
It is highly gratifying that the views of the Senate, 
as expressed in the unanimous report of this Com- 
mittee on the resolution and the passage by the 
Senate of that resolution by a vote of 64 to 4, and 
in subsequent consultation on the text of the treaty, 
have been absolutely free of partisan spirit and 
have been moved solely by the interests of the 
United States, of the United Nations, and of world 
peace. 

Following the resolution of the Senate, Mr. 
Lovett undertook to explore the matter with the 
Ambassadors of Canada, the United Kingdom, 
France, Bclgimn, the Netherlands, and Luxem- 
bourg. The objective of this Government and of 
the other Governments participating in these dis- 
cussions was to establish an arrangement which 
would : 

1. Increase the determination of the parties 
to resist aggression and their confidence that they 
could successfully do so; 

2. promote full economic recovery through re- 
moving the drag of a sense of insecurity ; 

3. stimulate the efforts of the parties to help 

Deparfment of Stafe Bulletin 



themselves and each other and, through coordi- 
nation, to achieve maximum effectiveness for de- 
fense; and 

4. contribute to the maintenance of peace and 
reduce the possibility of war by making clear the 
determination of the parties jointly to resist armed 
attack from any quarter. 

I have explained the text of the treaty, article by 
article, in my report to the President, vrhich is be- 
fore you, and I will not repeat that explanation at 
this point. I wish merely to stress certain essen- 
tial points of the treaty. 

The treaty is carefully and conscientiously de- 
signed to conform in every particular with the 
Charter of the United Nations and to contribute to 
the accomplishments of its purposes. This is 
made clear in article I, which reiterates and re- 
affirms the basic principle of the Charter, namely, 
that the participating countries will settle all their 
international disputes, not only among themselves 
but with any nation, by peaceful means in accord- 
ance with the provisions of the Charter. This 
declaration sets the whole tone and spirit of the 
treaty and provides unmistakable proof that any 
allegations that the treaty conceals aggressive in- 
tentions are obvious perversions of the truth. 
Democracies, by their very nature, must conduct 
their atfairs openly. They could not, even if they 
wished, conspire against anyone, individually or 
collectively. Such allegations are belied both by 
the terms of the treaty and by the very nature of 
the free institutions upon which the signatory 
governments are founded. 

Article II demonstrates the conviction of the 
parties that real peace is a positive and dynamic 
thing, that it is much more than the mere absence 
of war. In this article the signatory governments 
assert that they will strengthen their free institu- 
tions and see to it that the fundamental purposes 
upon which these institutions are founded are bet- 
ter understood everywhere. They also agree to 
seek to eliminate conflicts in their economic life 
and to promote economic cooperation among them- 
selves. Here is the ethical essence of the treaty — 
the common resolve to preserve, strengthen, and 
make better understood the very basis of tolerance, 
restraint, freedom, and well-being, the really vital 
things with which we are concerned. 

Article III, of which I will speak further later 
this morning, embodies in the treaty the concept 
contained in the Senate resolution of "continuous 
and elfective self-help and mutual aid." This 
means that no party can rely on others for its de- 
fense unless it does its utmost to defend itself and 
contribute toward the defense of the others. 

Tlie basic purpose of the treaty is, as recom- 
mended in the Senate resolution, to contribute to 
the maintenance of peace by making clear the 
determination of the parties to exercise the right 
of self-defense under article 51, should armed at- 
tack upon any party occur. This provision is 

May a, 1949 



contained in article V. If the treaty accomplishes 
its purpose, such an armed attack will not occur. 
In order to accomplish that purpose, however, the 
parties must state clearly what they would be pre- 
pared to do if an armed attack should occur. 

Article V recognizes the basic fact that an armed 
attack upon any party would so threaten the na- 
tional security of the other parties as to be in effect 
an armed attack upon all. It further provides 
that in the event of such an attack each of them 
will take, individually and in concert with the 
other parties, whatever action it deems necessary 
to restore and maintain the security of the North 
Atlantic area, including the use of armed force. 

This naturally does not mean that the United 
States would automatically be at war if one of 
the other signatory nations were the victim of an 
armed attack. Under our Constitution, the Con- 
gress alone has the power to declare war. The 
obligation of this Government under article V 
would be to take promptly the action it deemed 
necessary to restore and maintain the security of 
the North Atlantic area. That decision would, 
of course, be taken in accordance with our Con- 
stitutional procedures. The factors which would 
have to be considered would be the gravity of the 
attack and the nature of the action which this 
Government considered necessary to restore and 
maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. 
That would be the end to be achieved. Under the 
treaty we would be bound to make an honest judg- 
ment as to what action was necessary to attain 
that end and consequently to take such action. 
That action might or might not include the use 
of armed force. If we should be confronted again 
with an all out armed attack such as has twice 
occurred in this century and caused world wars, 
I do not believe that any action other than the use 
of armed force could be effective. The decision, 
however, would naturally rest where the Constitu- 
tion has placed it. 

I believe it appropriate to outline briefly the 
role of the proposed military assistance program 
in our over-all foreign policy and its relationship 
to the Atlantic pact. As you know, the President 
will shortly recommend to the Congress the en- 
actment of legislation authorizing the transfer 
of military equipment and assistance to other na- 
tions. As you also know, the proposed program 
will request authorization and appropriation of 
$1,130,000,000 for Atlantic pact countries and ap- 
proximately $320,000,000 for other countries, in- 
cluding Greece and Turkey, making a total of 
$1,450,000,000 for the fiscal year 1950. 

The furnishing of military assistance to the 
Atlantic pact countries is designed to assist us 
in attaining the fundamental goal of our foreign 
policy : the preservation of international peace and 
the preservation of the security of the United 
States. Our aid to Greece and Turkey, the Euro- 
pean Recovery Program — the greatest of all 
measures to date in our foreign policy — Senate 



Resolution 239, the Atlantic pact, which we are 
now considerinf;:, and the proposed military as- 
sistance program, are all designed to this end. 

You may ask why it is not enough to have the 
Atlantic pact alone since it accepts the principle 
that an attack on one is an attack on all. Wliy 
does the Executive believe that it will be neces- 
sary to have a militar}' assistance program in ad- 
dition to the commitments contained in the pact? 

The answer is found in tlie insecurity and the 
fears of Western Europe and of many of tlie other 
freedom-loving nations of the world. Basic to 
the purposes of the military assistance program is 
the necessity of promoting economic recovery and 
political stability by providing a basis for confi- 
dence, a sense of security, and a reasonable assur- 
ance of peace among European peoples. The 
military assistance program will improve the de- 
fenses and military capabilities of these nations, 
and thus increase their will to resist aggression 
and tlieir ability to maintain internal security. 

It is undei-standable that the free nations of 
Western Europe cannot look forward with equa- 
nimity to invasion and occupation in the event 
of war, even if we guarantee subsequently to lib- 
erate them. Nor is it in our own interest to per- 
mit them to be occupied with the consequent 
necessity of the costly liberation of these areas. 
Our active foreign policy has given rise in Europe 
to a great momentum of recovery and a great in- 
crease in the will to resist. The hope for peace 
lies in maintaining this momentum. The free 
countries of Western Europe must be encouraged 
to continue their efforts towards recoverj'. Their 
will to resist and their ability mutually "to defend 
themselves must be strengthened. They must be 
encouraged and assisted to build up their defense 
forces, through self-help and mutual aid, to a 
point where aggression cannot take place through 
internal disorders growing from the seeds sown 
by a potential aggressor, or under the guise of 
border incidents. In short, they must regain, 
individually and collectively, their ability to 
maintain their independence and national security. 
This in itself is an additional deterrent to any 
would-be aggressor. Thus, even without the ex- 
istence of the North Atlantic Treaty, the need for 
assistance for defense of these countries would be 
the same. With the pact, the assistance, once 
given, will be infinitely more effective. 

It is important, however, to view the objectives 
of the proposed military assistance progi-am in 
light of the objectives of article 3, the self-help 
and mutual aid article, of the North Atlantic 
Treaty, for the objectives of each are comple- 
mentary. The objectives of both are to maintain 
and develop individual and collective capacity to 
resist by self-help and mutual aid. That is what 
article 3 is going to do; that is what the proposed 
military assistance program is going to do. Arti- 
cle 3 does not bind the United States to the pro- 
posed military assistance program, nor indeed to 



any program. It does bind the United States 
to the principle of self-help and mutual aid. 
Within this principle each party to the pact must 
exercise its own honest judgment as to what it 
can and should do, to develop and maintain its 
own capacity to resist and to help others. The 
judgment of the executive branch of this Govern- 
ment is that the United States can and should pro- 
vide military assistance to assist the other coun- 
tries in tlie pact to maintain their collective secu- 
rity. The pact does not bind the Congress to 
reach that same conclusion, for it does not dictate 
the conclusion of honest judgment. It does 
preclude repudiation of the principle or of the 
obligation of making that honest judgment. Thus, 
if you ratify the pact, it cannot be said that there 
is no obligation to help. There is an obligation to 
help, but the extent, the manner, and the timing is 
up to the honest judgment of the parties. 

I therefore earnestly trust that the Congress will 
see fit to enable this (government to carry out that 
aspect of its foreign policy represented by the 
proposed military assistance program. At the 
same time, I urge that both the treaty and the 
proposed military assistance program should be 
considered separately and on their own merits. 

For my own part I believe that both the North 
Atlantic Treaty and the military assistance pro- 
gram will contribute to world-wide security. 

The treaty is wholly consistent with the Charter 
and designed to strengthen the system of inter- 
national law of which the Charter is the basis. It 
will give security and confidence to the signatory 
nations, whose common institutions and moral and 
ethical beliefs draw them naturally together and 
whose well-being is vital to world recovery. 

The added security of these nations does not 
threaten or weaken any other nation or portion of 
the world. Tlie principles which draw these na- 
tions into natural affinity and which they seek 
to defend — freedom of the individual, tolerance 
and restraint, and the rule of law, are the prin- 
ciples which unite free peoples throughout the 
world. 

The determination to provide defense for these 
principles by the 12 nations joining in this treaty — 
added to the other steps taken bj- these and other 
nations to wage peace — must be an encouragement 
to all peojjles who wish peace based on these 
principles. 

The treaty is the practical expression of the de- 
termination that an aggressor cannot divide these 
nations and pick them off one by one. History has 
taught us that the absence of such determination 
and of its clear statement in advance is gravely 
dangerous. The knowledge that armed attack 
will be mot by collective defense, prompt and ef- 
fective, will surely have a steadying effect on any- 
one from whom that transgression might come. 

The political and moral strength which this 
treaty adds to the accumulating economic strength 
of a vital portion of the world will strengthen 

Department of State Bulletin 



our ability to build a world in which freedom is 
maintained and expanded and in which the prob- 
lems remaining and growing out of the war can 
be solved in an atmosphere free of the fear of 
aggression. 

In conclusion I should like to repeat to you 
words which the President used at the signing of 
the treaty : 

It is a simple document, but if it had existed in 
1914 and in 1939, supported by the nations which 
are represented here today, I believe it would have 
prevented the acts of aggression which led to two 
World Wars. . . . 



For us, war is not inevitable. We do not be- 
lieve that there are blind tides of history which 
sweep men one way or the other. In our own 
times we have seen brave men overcome obstacles 
that seemed insurmountable and forces that 
seemed overwhelming. Men with courage and 
vision can still determine their own destiny. They 
can choose slavery or freedom — war or peace. 

I have no doubt which they will choose. The 
treaty we are signing here today is evidence of 
the path they will follow. 

If there is anything certain today, if there is 
anything inevitable in the future, it is the will of 
the people of the world for freedom and peace. 



President Truman Transmits tiie Nortii Atlantic Treaty to the Senate 



The Whi,te House, April 12, 19Jf9. 
To the Senate of the United States: 

I transmit herewith for the consideration of the 
Senate a copy of the North Atlantic Treaty, 
signed at Washington on April 4, 1949, together 
with a report of the Secretary of State.^ 

This treaty is an expression of the desire of the 
people of the United States for peace and security, 
for the continuing opportunity to live and work 
in freedom. 

Events of this century have taught us that we 
cannot achieve peace independently. The world 
ha.s grown too small. The oceans to our east and 
west no longer protect us from the reach of bru- 
tality and aggression. 

We have also learned — learned in blood and con- 
flict — that if we are to achieve peace we must work 
for peace. 

This knowledge has made us determined to do 
everything we can to insure that peace is main- 
tained. We have not arrived at this decision 
lightly, or without recognition of the effort it en- 
tails. But we cannot escape the great responsi- 
bility that goes with our great stature in the world. 
Every action of this Nation in recent years has 
demonstrated the overwhelming will of our people 
that the strength and influence of the United 
States shall be used in the cause of peace, justice, 
and freedom. 

In this determination, our people wholeheart- 
edly accepted the Charter of the United Nations 
in 1945. Since then, we have worked unceasingly 
to reach international agreement through the 
United Nations and to make the United Nations 
a more effective instrument for its mighty task. 

In the last year we have embarked on a great 
cooperative enterprise with the free nations of 
Europe to restore the vitality of the European 
economy — ^so important to the prosperity and 
peace of our country and the world. 

May 8, J 949 



The North Atlantic Treaty is further evidence 
of our determination to work for a peaceful world. 
It is in accord with the action of the Senate last 
June when it signified its approval of our country's 
associating itself in peacetime with countries out- 
side the Western Hemisphere in collective arrange- 
ments, within the framework of the United 
Nations Charter, designed to safeguard peace and 
security. 

The 12 nations which have signed this treaty 
undertake to exercise their right of collective or 
individual self-defense against armed attack, in 
accordance with article 51 of the United Nations 
Charter, and subject to such measures as the Se- 
curity Council may take to maintain and restore 
international peace and security. The treaty 
makes clear the determination of the people of 
the United States and of our neighbors in the 
North Atlantic community to do their utmost to 
maintain peace with justice and to take such action 
as they may deem necessary if the peace is broken. 

The people of the North Atlantic community 
have seen solemn agreements, designed to assure 
peace and the rights of small nations, broken one 
by one and the people of those nations deprived of 
freedom by terror and oppression. They are re- 
solved that their nations shall not, one by one, 
suffer the same fate. 

The nations signing this treaty share a common 
heritage of democracy, individual liberty, and the 
rule of law. The American members of the North 
Atlantic community stem directly from the Euro- 
pean members in tradition and in love of freedom. 
We have joined together in the progressive de- 
velopment of free institutions, and we have shared 
our moral and material strength in the present 
task of rebuilding from the devastation of war. 

The security and welfare of each member of this 
community depend upon the security and welfare 
of all. None of us alone can achieve economic 



' Bulletin of Apr. 24, 1949, p. 532. 



prosperity or military security. None of us alone 
can assure the continuance of freedom. 

Together, our joint strength is of tremendous 
significance to the future of freemen in ever\' 
part of the world. For this treaty is clear evidence 
that differences in language and in economic and 
political systems are no real bar to the effective 
association of nations devoted to the great prin- 
ciples of human freedom and justice. 

This treaty is only one step — although a long 
one — on the road to peace. Xo single action, no 
matter how significant, will achieve peace. We 
must continue to work patiently and carefully, ad- 
vancing with practical, realistic steps in the liglit 
of circumstances and events as they occur, build- 
ing the structure of peace soundly and .solidly. 

I believe that the North Atlantic Treaty is such 
a step, based on the realities of the situation we 
face today and framed within the terms of the 
United Nations Charter and the Constitution of 
the United States. 

In the conviction that the North Atlantic Treaty 
is a great advance toward fulfillment of the un- 
conquerable will of the people of the United 
States to achieve a just and enduring peace, I 
request the advice and consent of the Senate to its 
ratification. 

Harry S. Trum.vn. 



are printed the Dunkirk treaty between Great 
Britain and France, and the Brussels treaty with 
pertinent documents. Foreign assistance and mil- 
itary aid furnished by the Lnited States is traced 
through excerpts from the President's message to 
Congress on Greek-Turkish aid, the act providing 
that a.ssistance, parts of the President's Message to 
Congress in March 1948, the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1948, and the convention for European eco- 
nomic recovery with related documents. Steps 
leading to the North Atlantic Treaty are outlined, 
beginning with the Vandenberg resolution, quota- 
tions from President Truman's inaugural address, 
and concluding with the white paper on the pact 
issued by the Department of State. 

Part 3 reviews the Soviet System of treaties and 
the Soviet official position on the North Atlantic 
Treaty. The Soviet mutual assistance treaties 
with illustrative texts are printed and also the 
communique on the establishment of the Comin- 
form, a Tass statement on the Soviet Council for 
■Economic Mutual Assistance, a statement of the 
Soviet Ministry of Foreign AflFairs on the North 
Atlantic Treaty, Soviet protest on the treaty, and 
the statement of the foreign ministere in reply to 
the protest. 

Part 4 is a chronology of major developments 
relating to the treaty. 



THE CONGRESS 

Senate Document on North Atlantic 
Treaty Issued 

Senate Document No. 48, 81st Congi-ess, entitled 
the A' orth Atlantic Treaty, which was prepared by 
the staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Commit- 
tee, contains documents relating to the North 
Atlantic Treaty. 

In the document are maps showing areas de- 
fined by tlie North Atlantic Treaty as well as by 
the Kio treaty. Part 1 contains the text of the 
North Atlantic Treaty, the President's message 
transmitting it to the Senate, and the Secretary's 
report. 

Part 2 relates to the development of the treaty, 
in which excerpts from the United States Consti- 
tution are quoted. Tlie Inter-American defense 
and United Nations security documents such as the 
Monroe Doctrine, the Act of Chapulte]iec. the Rio 
treaty of reciprocal assistance, the Fulbright and 
Connally resolutions, and excerpts from the U.N. 
Charter are i)rinted. Agreements toward the set- 
tlement of World War II have been included — the 
Yalta agreement, the Potsdam agreement, and the 
draft treaty on the disarmament and demilitariza- 
tion of Germany offei-ed by the United States at 
Paris. Under defense treaties of Western Europe 



Legislation 

Suspension of Import Taxes on Copper. Hearings 
before the Coniuiittee on Finance, United States Senate, 
81st Cong., 1st sess. on H. R. 2313, an act to suspend 
certain import taxes on copper. Feb. 17 and 24, 1949. 
iii. 24 pp. 

Extension of European Recovery Program. Hearings 
before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Repre- 
sentatives, 81st Cong., 1st .sess., on H. R. 23(!2, a bill to 
amend tlie Economic Cooperation Act of IJMS. Part 1. 
Feb. 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, and 18, 1049. ii, 489 pp. 

Revised Supplemental Estimate — Payment of Claims 
for Damages, Audited Claims, and Judgments. Communi- 
cation from the President of the United States trans- 
mitting revised su|)plemental estimate of appropriation 
involving an increase of .$61,713.42 for payment of claims 
for damages, audited claims, and judgments. S. Doc. 24, 
81st Cong., 1st sess. 8 pp. 

Extending the .Vuthority for the Investigation of the 
Immigration System, and Increasing the Limit of Ex- 
penditudes Therefor. S. Kept. 65, 81st Cong., 1st sess., to 
accompany S. Ues. 40. 3 pp. 

Relating to the Immigration Status of the Lawful Wives 
and Children of Chinese Treaty Merchants. S. Rept. 67, 
81st Cong., 1st sess., to accompany S. 206. 2 pp. 

Providing for the Payment of Certain Swiss Claims. 
S. Rept. 77, 81st Cong., 1st sess., to accompany S. 612. 
5 pp. 

Relating to an Investigation of the Immigration Laws 
and the Administration Thereof. S. Rept. 86, 81st Cong., 
1st sess., to accompany S. Res. 40. 1 p. 

Promoting the Progress of Science. S. Rept. 90, 81st 
Cong.. 1st sess.. to accompany S. 247. 7 pp. 

Copper Import-Tax Suspension. S. Rept. 91, 81st Cong., 
1st sess., to accompany H.R. 2313. 3 pp. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Charter Proposing an International Trade Organization 
Transmitted to the Senate 



PRESIDENT TRUMAN'S MESSAGE TO THE CONGRESS 



To the Congress of the United States : 

I submit herewith, for the consideration of the 
Congress, the Charter for an International Trade 
Organization, prepared by a conference of the 
United Nations which met in Havana in 1948, 
together with a memorandum from the Secretary 
of State. 

Tlie Charter is designed to do two things: to 
establish a code of international conduct to guide 
nations in dealing with the fundamental problems 
of world trade, and to create an agency, within 
the framework of the United Nations, to help im- 
plement this code. 

We have learned through bitter experience how 
necessary it is for nations to approach jointly the 
task of improving the conditions of world trade. 

During the 1930's many nations acted indepen- 
dently, each attempting to gain advantage at the 
expense of others. The result was a vicious 
circle — with restrictions by one nation provoking 
more serious restrictions by other nations in re- 
taliation. The end result was a tremendous drop 
in the volume of international trade which made 
the general depression worse and injured all 
countries. 

Since the recent war, though some nations have 
again acted unilaterally, there has been a general 
resolve to prevent the vicious circle of restrictions 
and to acliieve progressively freer trade. To gain 
this objective, action by many nations is necessary. 
No one nation alone, and no small group of nations, 
can have enough impact on the network of ob- 
structions that has been built up. 

The United States program of reciprocal trade 
agreements has been a shining beacon of coopera- 
tive action to reduce tariff barriers, and it is vitally 
necessary that the Reciprocal Trade Agreements 
Act be extended in full force. 

But it is clear that trade agreements alone are 
not enough.. These agreements do not touch cer- 
tain important obstacles to the expansion of world 
trade. Subsidies, cartels, and many other devices 
have important effects in limiting trade or creating 
disadvantages for one country as compared with 
another. What is needed is cooperative action to 
attack the whole range of obstacles that stand in 
the way of broadening international trade. 

The Havana Charter is a major step toward 
achieving tliat objective. It was agreed upon by 
the representatives of fifty-four nations after more 
than two years of preparatory study and negotia- 
tion. 



The Charter establishes an international or- 
ganization, which is essential to continuous and 
effective international cooperation in the field of 
trade. The nations accepting membership in the 
International Trade Organization commit them- 
selves to abide by fair and liberal principles of 
trade. They agree to take no action which may 
injure another nation without first making a 
genuine effort to reach a constructive solution 
through consultation either directly between them- 
selves or through the Organization. They agree 
to work together continuously to achieve progi'es- 
sively greater trade and to settle differences with 
respect to national policies that affect the flow of 
international commerce. 

The Charter is the most comprehensive interna- 
tional economic agreement in history. It goes 
beyond vague generalities and deals with the real 
nature of the problems confronting us in the pres- 
ent world situation. Wliile it does not include 
every detail desired by this Nation's representa- 
tives, it does provide a practical, realistic method 
for progressive action toward the goal of expand- 
ing world trade. 

The United States can be proud of its leadership 
in this constructive action to help the nations of 
the world work their way out of the morass of 
restriction and discrimination that has gripped 
international trade ever since the fii-st world war. 
The alternative to the Charter is economic conflict 
and shrinking international trade. 

This Charter is an integi-al part of the larger 
program of international economic reconstruction 
and development. The great objectives of the 
European recovei-y program will be only partially 
realized unless we achieve a vigorous world trad- 
ing system. The economic advancement of under- 
developed areas likewise depends very largely upon 
increasing the international exchange of goods 
and services. Thus the Charter is an effective 
step toward improved standards of living through- 
out the world, toward the growth of production, 
and toward the maintenance of employment and 
economic stability. It is fundamental to the 
progressive, expanding world economy so vital to 
the increasing welfare and prosperity of the peo- 
ple of the United States. 

The great structure of international cooperation 
that is being erected through the United Nations 
must rest upon a solid foundation of continuous 
cooperation in economic affairs. The Charter for 
an International Trade Organization is a neces- 



Moy 8, 1949 



sary part of that foundation, along with the spe- 
cial arrangements that have been made in the 
fields of money and credit, transportation and 
communications, food and agriculture, labor and 
health. 
As an essential forward step in our foreign pol- 



icy, I recommend that the Congress authorize the 
United States to accept membership in the Inter- 
national Trade Organization. 

Harrt S. Trumax 
Th£ White House, 
ApHl £8, 194s. 



MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE 



[Released tu tLe press Aiiril LIS) 

On March 24, 1948, after more than two years 
of public discussion and international negotiation, 
the representatives of 54 nations, assembled at 
Habana, completed a charter for an International 
Trade Organization for submission to their re- 
spective governments. This charter establishes a 
code of principles to be accepted in the conduct of 
international trade and an organization to help 
make them work. The organization would take 
its place with the International Bank, the Inter- 
national Monetary Fund, and the Food and Agri- 
cultural Organization as a specialized agency of 
the United Nations. 

The Economic World Today 

Tlic world economy is still seriously out of joint. 
Tlie aftermath of six years of struggle, with its 
depletion of financial and material resources and 
its distortion of the apparatus for the production 
and distribution of goods, is still with us. There 
are pronounced imbalances of trade not only be- 
tween the United States and most of the rest of 
tlie world but between other countries. 

Despite constructive efforts to cope with these 
problems, there is still a widespread feeling in the 
world of economic and political insecurity. Na- 
tions face the problems of increasing production 
and distribution of goods, of finding ways and 
means to bring the industrialized nations of the 
world back into full productivity and stability, 
and of developing and bringing into the area of 
productive trade the underdeveloped nations of 
the world. 

In such a situation there is a clear need for a 
body in which policies in the field of trade can be 
continually discussed, questioned, explained, ad- 
justed, and harmonious agreement reached. The 
Ito charter provides such a body. 

Origins of the Charter 

Even while liostilities were still going on, many 
persons in tlie United States began to think of 
how we could reach international agreement after 
the war which would avoid the mistakes and eco- 
nomic conflict of the inter-war period and set the 
course of international trade along expanding and 
liberal lines. The Atlantic Charter enunciated 
the principle of equal access for all to the markets 
and the raw materials of the world. Article VII 
of the mutual aid agreements laid down the prin- 



ciple of negotiation for the reduction of tariffs, 
for the elimination of preferences, and for the 
removal of discriminatory practices in interna- 
tional trade. As early as 1943, consultation began 
with representatives of the British and Canadian 
Governments to develop agreement on principles 
which ultimately emerged refined and sharpened 
in the Ito charter. 

When the Bretton Woods conference completed 
its labors in establishing the charters of the Inter- 
national Bank and the International Monetary 
Fund, the delegates recognized that their work 
was not complete. They realized that action by 
nations in the field of the international exchanges 
and in the field of international investment re- 
quired complementary action in the field of trade. 
In the final act of that conference, therefore, they 
called upon the member nations to continue to 
work to — 

(1) reduce obstacles to international trade and in other 
ways promote mutually advantageous international com- 
mercial relations; 

(2) bring about the orderly marketing of stable com- 
modities at prices fair to the producer and consumer 
alike : 

(.3) deal with thp special problems of international con- 
cern wliich will arise from the cessation of production 
for war purposes ; and 

(4) facilitate by cooperative efifort the harmonization 
of national policies of Member States designed to pro- 
mote and maintain high levels of employment and pro- 
gressively rising standards of living. 

Wlien the Congress accepted membership for 
the United States in the Bretton Woods organiza- 
tions, it said — 

"In the realization that additional measures of 
international economic cooperation are necessary 
to facilitate the expansion and balanced growth of 
international trade and render most effective the 
operations of the Fund and the Bank, it is hereby 
declared to be the policy of the United States to 
seek to bring about further agreement and coop- 
eration among nations and international bodies, 
as soon as possible, on ways and means which 
will best reduce obstacles to and restrictions upon 
international trade, eliminate unfair trade prac- 
tices, promote mutually advantageous commercial 
i-elations, and otherwise facilitate the expansion 
and balanced growth of international trade and 
promote the stability of international economic 
relations." 

Further agreement has now been reached in the 
Ito charter. 

Department of State Bulletin 



The basic ideas of the charter were set forth in 
the United States "Proposals for the Expansion 
of World Trade and Employment," placed before 
the peoples of the world for their consideration 
in December 1945. It was at the suggestion of the 
United States that the Economic and Social Coun- 
cil of the United Nations, at its first meeting in 
February 1946, appointed a committee to prepare 
the agenda for an international conference on 
trade and employment, the conference which took 
place at Habana in 1948 and produced the Ito 
charter. When that preparatory committee met 
for the first time in London in October 1946, it 
had before it and adopted as its basic working 
document a "Suggested Charter for an Interna- 
tional Trade Organization" proposed and pre- 
pared by the United States. A second meeting of 
the Committee was held in Geneva in 1947. 
■ After the London meeting, the resulting draft 
charter was published. Public hearings were held 
upon it in seven cities in the United States. Ex- 
tensive hearings were also conducted by the 
Finance Committee of the United States Senate. 
Most of the suggestions which were developed at 
those hearings ultimately found their way into 
the charter. 

Scope of the Charter 

The charter is comprehensive and detailed.. It 
is a code of principles designed to guide action. It 
contains commitments covering a wide range of 
trade relations. It stands in contrast to the reso- 
lutions and recommendations of international 
economic conferences between the two World 
Wars, which were uniformly in such general terms 
and so lacking in substantive content as to have 
little or no practical effect upon the activities of 
nations. The charter leaves the world of pious 
generalities and addresses itself to the more thorny 
task of providing a guide for action in dealing 
with specific problems in international trade. 

Equally important, the charter provides a 
mechanism for continuous consultation between 
nations on policies affecting world trade. It es- 
tablishes the obligation and the mechanism of 
consultation and adjustment before action, rather 
than retaliation after it. 

We are pledged to unfaltering support of the 
United Nations in the conviction that interna- 
tional differences of opinion can best be composed 
around the conference table. The International 
Trade Organization will provide the conference 
room for discussion of problems of international 
trade. Its rules for action, its means for consulta- 
tion will together provide a method of meeting 
world trade problems as they arise and of helping 
to maintain economic peace. 

Objective of the Charter 

The objective of the charter can be simply stated. 
It is to contribute to higher standards of living, 
to greater production and wider distribution and 

May 8, 1949 



consumption of goods and services, and thus to 
economic and political stability throughout the 
world. It seeks to do this, first, by reducing public 
and private barriers which restrict and divert 
trade; second, by establishing the objective of 
multilateralism and nondiscrimination in inter- 
national trade and by providing means and foster- 
ing conditions under which this objective can be 
achieved as rapidly as possible ; third, by provid- 
ing a means for dealing with problems arising 
out of surpluses of primary commodities ; fourth, 
by promoting the economic stability and the 
maintenance of employment so essential to liberal- 
ization of trade policy; and, fifth, by advancing 
the economic development of underdeveloped 
areas, which have so great a contribution to make 
to their own welfare and that of the world. 

The Substantive Commitments of the Charter 

Many of the substantive commitments of the 
charter are based on familiar principles of United 
States policy. Others are of a pioneering char- 
acter. In the first group are : 

(a) The commitment that member nations will 
stand ready to negotiate for the reduction of 
tariffs and the elimination of tariff preferences. 
This is simply international acceptance of a policy 
long followed by the United States under the Hull 
reciprocal-trade-agreements program. So far as 
the United States is concerned, this commitment 
will be carried out under the authority and pro- 
cedures of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. 

(b) Commitments desigiied to limit the use of 
indirect forms of protectionism, such as discrimi- 
natory internal taxes, mixing regulations, and 
arbitrary and concealed barriers in the guise of 
customs regulations. The principal effect of these 
commitments will be to concentrate charges upon 
imports at the customs frontier, to make it widely 
and definitely known exactly what these charges 
are, to simplify as much as possible the binding 
red tape of customs administration, and to secure a 
wider degree of uniformity in such administration. 
The provisions of the charter dealing with this 
subject represent the widest area of detailed agi'ee- 
ment yet reached internationally in this compli- 
cated and highly important field. 

(c) A condemnation in principle of the use of 
quantitative restrictions, a limitation of their use 
in practice to specified situations in which all na- 
tions are agreed that their use is permissible, and 
a commitment to keep their use subject to inter- 
national scrutiny and control. 

(d) Acceptance of the basic principle of non- 
discrimination and equal opportunity in inter- 
national trade; the principle of unconditional 
most-favored-nation treatment. 

These principles are familiar in the United 
States. They have long been incorporated in our 
trade agreements and commercial treaties. In the 
charter they are reaffirmed as objectives in all 



cases and as rules of immediate and present be- 
havior in cases wliere that is now possible. Wliere 
deviation is required by the exif^encies of particu- 
lar situations, the deo^ree of deviation from the 
principle, and the conditions under which such 
deviation will be recognized as legitimate, are 
specifically laid down. 

Some changes in present United States law will 
be necessary for full compliance with the charter. 
These changes, however, are relatively few in 
number and scope. They will be pointed out in 
detail to the Congress during the presentation of 
the charter, and necessary legislation will be pre- 
sented later. 

The charter, however, recognizes that govern- 
mental trade barriers and discriminations repre- 
sent only part of the obstacles to increased trade 
in today's economic world. It therefore goes on 
to attack problems not hitherto dealt with in 
broad-scale international agreement. 

The charter contains the first set of interna- 
tioni',1 commitments with respect to the restrictive 
pnulices of private and public international car- 
tels. In many cases such practices can be as 
effective and as harmful to the development of in- 
ternational trade as the more familiar restrictions 
imposed by governments. The charter defines 
these harmful practices, and contains commit- 
ments by the member nations to take necessary 
action according to their own constitutional and 
legal systems to secure the abandonment of prac- 
tices found to be injurious. 

The charter contains the first set of commit- 
ments by governments to guide the operation of 
their state-trading enterprises. The development 
of state trading has been a phenomenon of increas- 
ing inii)ortance in the field of international trade. 
The purpose of the charter commitments is to sub- 
ject the conduct of such enterprises, as much as 
possible, to the same criteria as those which nor- 
mally govern the operation of private enterprises. 

The charter contains the first set of interna- 
tional rules with respect to the formulation and 
opei-ation of intergovernmental commodity agree- 
ments. Many special problems arise in the field 
of primary commodities. These are often pro- 
duced by large numbers of small ])ioducers and 
surpluses cause widespread hardship. Price fluc- 
tuations can be and often are violent. 

Intergovernmental action is frequently required 
to assist in dealing with such problems. In the 
past such action has normally been by agreement 
only of the producing countries. The charter, 
among other things, M-ould require that in any 
such agreement consuming countries will have an 
equal voice with producing countries, a new re- 
quirement for commodity agreements. 

The charter contains provisions for consultation 
between members with respect to their use of sub- 
sidies, with a view to limitation of such u.se when 
it proves to be harmful to otiier nations* interests. 



The charter recognizes the importance to inter- 
national trade of a high and stable level of de- 
mand in the member countries. The reduction of 
barriers to international trade will be of little 
avail if there is no demand for the products of 
international trade. The full realization of de- 
mand for the products of international trade can- 
not be achieved if there are unnecessary barriers to 
the exchange of such products. These are two 
sides of the same coin. In the charter, member 
countries would commit themselves to use their 
best efforts according to their own constitutional 
procedures, such as our Employment Act of 1946, 
to achieve and maintain within their borders full 
and productive employment. 

Finally, the charter recognizes the fundamental 
importance of the economic development of under- 
developed countries. Vast areas of the world are 
in very early stages of economic and industrial de- 
velopment, resources are not fully utilized, poverty 
is widespread, starvation and disease are ever 
present. Such conditions provide no basis for 
economic progi-ess or political stability. They are 
fertile breeding grounds for discontent and un- 
rest. 

It is to the common interest of all nations to see 
such areas brought to a higher stage of economic 
development. This can be done by the efforts of 
the people and governments of the areas them- 
selves, by the efforts of private industry, agi'icul- 
ture, and labor in other countries, by the help of 
other governments, and by the help of interna- 
tional agencies. Therefore, the charter contains 
provisions designed to facilitate the flow of tech- 
nological information and private capital into 
areas which need and can use them and. at the 
same time, to safeguard those areas against abuses 
of foreign investment which have unhappily taken 
place in the past. 

These provisions of the charter were of deep 
and primary concern to a large number of the 
countries represented at Habana. They are of 
concern to the United States also. For it is in this 
area that the United States and other highly in- 
dustrialized and developed countries can make a 
great contribution to the sound development of 
other nations and, at the same time, to our own 
prosperity. 

The Exceptions in the Charter 

Tiie cliarter is designed as a set of princii)les to 
be observed in action. It is not just a set of tempo- 
rary rules to meet the present abnormal and emer- 
gency economic situation. It is designed also for 
the longer term. It will represent agreement as to 
future objectives as well as to the rules for today's 
action. 

Many of the commitments, such as those dealing 
with negotiations for the reduction of tariffs and 
elimination of preferences, the abolition of dis- 
criminatory internal taxes and regulations, the 

Department of State Bulletin 



simplification and publication of customs regula- 
tions, the negotiation and operation of commodity 
agreements, the limitation of the restrictive prac- 
tices of cartels, and others, can be, and must be, 
immediately and fully lived up to. 

Other commitments cannot, in the postwar eco- 
nomic world, be fully lived up to by all countries 
immediately. 

For example, the members of the Ito will com- 
mit themselves to abandon the use of quantitative 
restrictions. But during the postwar transition 
period, it is inescapably necessary for many, if 
not most, countries to budget their foreign pur- 
chases. Therefore, the charter provides that when 
countries are in real balance-oi-payments difficul- 
ties thej' may use quantitative restrictions to limit 
their expenditures of foreign exchange. When the 
circumstances which the charter recognizes as 
justifying the use of such restrictions have been 
corrected, members are committed to abandon 
them. 

Under certain circumstances, countries in the 
process of economic development may have legiti- 
mate need to use restrictive measures, which would 
otherwise be prevented by the charter, for the de- 
velopment of new industry. Hence, the charter 
provides certain cases in which this may be done, 
provided the organization is satisfied that care- 
fully specified conditions, agreed to by all the 
members, have been met. 

Under certain circumstances, a tariif rate ne- 
gotiated under the commitment of members to ne- 
gotiate for the reduction of their tariffs may cause 
or threaten unexpected injury to a domestic 
industry. The charter provides that under such 
circumstances the country granting that conces- 
sion may withdraw or modify it to the extent 
necessary to prevent such injury. This provision 
is patterned on the escape clause which the United 
States includes in trade agreements negotiated 
under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act. 

Under certain circumstances, it has been neces- 
sary for governments to intervene to prevent the 
disastrous effects of surpluses of agricultural 
products by programs restricting domestic pro- 
duction or marketing. In such cases it would be 
unfair for imports to be exempt from control, and 
they could be limited. 

Considerations of national security at times re- 
quire measures which would not conform to the 
general principles which would normally be ap- 
plied under the charter. An exception is, there- 
fore, provided to permit action to be taken by 
member countries necessary for their national 
security. 

Without exceptions of this kind, members of 
the organization, ourselves included, could not ac- 
cept the commitments of the charter. The excep- 
tions are carefully defined and are agreed to by all. 
Their use is subject to scrutiny by the organiza- 
tion. Their abuse is subject to complaint by the 
members. 

May 8, 7949 



Structure and Functions of the Organization 

The International Trade Organization would 
be a specialized agency of the United Nations. 
As such, it would enter into relationship with the 
Economic and Social Council of the United Na- 
tions and with the other specialized agencies in 
order to insure coordinated action and to avoid 
duplication of activities and functions. 

The structure of the organization itself is simple. 
It will have a Conference composed of all the mem- 
ber nations which will be its fundamental govern- 
ing body. The Conference will meet periodically, 
but at least once a year. 

The executive functions of the organization will 
be vested in an Executive Board of eighteen 
countries, of which eight must be nations of chief 
economic importance as determined by the Con- 
ference. This {provision insures a permanent seat 
for the United States on the Executive Board. 
Other nations likely to have permanent seats under 
this test will be the United Kingdom, France, 
the Benelux Customs Union, and Canada. 

Each member country will have one vote in the 
Conference and on the Executive Board. De- 
cisions of the Conference and of the Executive 
Board will be by majority vote, except in certain 
cases where a two-thirds vote is required. 

The organization will have a Director General, 
to be appointed by the Conference on recommen- 
dation of the Executive Board, who will be re- 
sponsible for its day-to-day activities under the 
direction and supervision of the Executive Board. 

With one exception relating to the discrimina- 
tory application of i-estrictions for balance-of- 
payments reasons the organization will have no 
power to require any member to take any specific 
action. It will have the power to decide whether 
a member has lived up to its commitments under 
the charter. If it finds that the member has not 
lived up to a given commitment, it Jiiay release 
other members from certain of their charter obli- 
gations to that member, which, if not satisfied 
with this decision, maj' in most cases withdraw 
from the organization on sixty days' notice. 

Decisions of the conference of the organization 
may be referred to the International Court of 
Justice for legal opinion. 

The organization will provide a forum where 
problems may be discussed and conflicting in- 
terests reconciled. It provides a means of bring- 
ing to bear upon a given problem the force of 
international public opinion. It provides a means 
of developing, on a case-by-case basis, interna- 
tional precedents in the field of economic and 
commei'cial relations. 

The organization will provide a means for the 
accumulation and dissemination of trade statistics 
and information about trade practices of govern- 
ment, e. g., customs regulations, etc., which can 
be of great service to businessmen. 

The organization will be empowered to make 
studies in various fields, for example, standardiza- 



tion, uniformity, and simplification of customs 
regulations. It can be a means for the collection 
and dissemination of technological information. 
The expenditures of the organization are to be 
met by contributions from the members. These 
contributions are to be apportioned among the 
members in accordance with a scale fixed by the 
Conference following such principles as may be 
applied by the United Nations. Should the United 
Nations place a maximum limit on the propor- 
tionate contribution to its budget by any one 
member, the same limit is to be applied to con- 
tributions to the organization. 

Place of the ITO in the Structure of International 
Cooperation 

It is ujipiirent that the economic problems fac- 
ing us today cannot be solved by any one nation, 
or any few "nations, but must be tackled by many 
nations working together. 

We arc committed to unfaltering support of the 
United Nations. We have participated in the 
building and ostablishmcnt of the International 
Monetary Fund to deal with the problems of inter- 
national exchange. The purpose of the Fund is 
to promote by international action reasonable 
stability and convertibility of currencies. Clearly, 
trade must be brought into balance if currencies 
are ever to be and remain stable. Kegulation of 
exchange controls is futile if nations are free to 
use quantitative restrictions instead. To solve the 
problems of international trade, international 
cooperation with respect to exchange controls and 
currency valuation must go hand in hand with 
international cooperation with respect to other 
forms of trade barriei-s and the expansion of 
demand in international trade. 

We have participated in the building and opera- 
tion of the International Bank for Reconstruction 
and Development. AVe are interested in foreign 
private investment. Clearly, loans cannot be re- 
paid or earnings on investments received if inter- 
national trade is not fostered and freed. 
International cooperation in provision of capital 
must go hand in hand with international coopera- 
tion in the development of the kind of conditions 
in which capital can exercise its catalytic and 
constructive influence. 

We are playing a tremendous part in the great 
work of European recovery. In the development 
of the European Recovery Program there has been 
consistent recognition of the vital importance of 
increased trade. The participating countries have 
pledged themselves to cooperate to reduce trade 
barriers and expand trade in accord with the 



principles of the draft charter for an International 
Trade Organization. Similar pledges are re- 
peated in the Convention for European Economic 
Cooperation. 

Section 115 (b) (3) of the Economic Coopera- 
tion Act requires the inclusion in the bilateral aid 
agreements between each of the participating 
countries and the United States a general under- 
taking to cooperate in facilitating and stimulating 
an increasing interchange of goods and services 
and in reducing barriers to trade. In accord with 
this Congressional mandate a provision to this 
effect was included in the bilateral aid agreements 
witli the participating countries. 

The European Recovery Program is designed to 
help put the European countries on their feet. 
The Ito charter provides principles and rules of 
trade which if followed over the long term will 
give them the best chance of staying on their feet, 
riie problem is one of markets as much at it is 
one of production. Our investment in the Euro- 
pean Recovery Program can be fully realized only 
if the participating countries are able and willing 
to adopt trade policies which will foster multi- 
lateral, nondiscriminatorj-, and expanding inter- 
national trade, rather than policies of bilateralism, 
discrimination, limitation, and control. Wide ac- 
ceptance of the charter throughout the world 
would mean that many other nations besides those 
in Western Europe would be marching in the same 
direction and with the same purpose. 

AVe are deeply interested in assisting in the de- 
velopment of underdeveloped areas of the world. 
We hope to see these areas develop under political 
and economic institutions in which human dignity 
and freedom can be preserved. In particular, we 
hope to increase the international flow of technical 
knowledge. This is not something which we can, 
or would wish, to do alone. Other nations have 
great reservoirs of knowledge and experience 
which they too can, and will be glad to, share. 
The International Trade Organization will be one 
means whereby resources of knowledge may be 
pooled and directed to the areas and projects 
where they can be most constructive. 

Conclusion 

Thus, the International Trade Organization, 
like the other specialized agencies of the United 
Nations, is part of a pattern — the pattern of the 
groat majority of a community of nations co- 
ojierating together in various fields of the com- 
munity's life to provide the services which the 
community needs. 



Department of State Bulletin 



Steps Taken for Safety of Americans in Lower Yangtze Valley 



NOTICE BY U.S. CONSULATE GENERAL 

[Released to the press April 26] 

The following announcement to American citi- 
zens was issued by the U.S. Consulate General in 
Shanghai on April 25, pursuant to the Department 
of State authorization and consultation with 
Achiiiral Badger: 

As pointed out in the statement issued by the 
Consultate General on April 23, the recent inci- 
dents on the Yangtze require a reappraisal of the 
plans which have been made for the evacuation of 
Americans to points of safety in the event that 
conditions in Slianghai should become so hazard- 
ous as to make this appear to be desirable. The 
commanding officer of the American naval forces 
stationed at Shanghai, pursuant to this reappraisal 
and to his instructions not to become involved in 
China's fratricidal civil war, is shortly moving 
his heavy units from close anchorages in the 
Wliangpoo to the lower Yangtze. 

Contact will be maintained by small craft 
between Shanghai and the naval units in the lower 
Yangtze as long as this proves feasible. 

American citizens desiring safe haven aboard 
American naval units will be processed at the 
American Consulate General starting immediately 
and will then be received at the U.S. Naval Annex, 
627 Yangtzepoo Road. The evacuation unit of 
the American Consulate General is being re- 
activated today. Citizens taking advantage of 
this facility will appreciate that no guarantee can 
be given that they will be permitted to land again 



by the local authorities. The Consulate General 
will of course continue to function. 

Citizens taking advantage of these facilities will 
realize that accommodations although adequate 
may not be comfortable. Those not desiring or 
not able to return to Shanghai will be routed on- 
ward by commercial shipping or to Hong Kong 
or Japan for further routing. Amei-ican citizens 
will appreciate that when these facilities are no 
longer available no further facilities of any kind 
can be provided by the American authorities for 
the protection of American citizens in Shanghai 
and they must be prepared to remain here. 

Citizens may wish to check whether commercial 
facilities are available either on ships or planes. 
The Consulate General will have the latest in- 
formation available regarding such facilities. 
Attention is invited to the fact that additional 
space has been made available in the President 
Wilson due to depart April 27. 

AMBASSADOR STUART INSTRUCTED TO RE- 
PORT TO WASHINGTON 

[Released to the press April 25] 

Ambassador J. Leighton Stuart has remained 
in Nanking during the take-over of the city by 
Chinese Communists, as have the chiefs of most 
other diplomatic missions. Before the Chinese 
Communist army occupied the city. Ambassador 
Stuart received instructions that when he con- 
siders it advisable, after assuring himself regard- 
ing the safety and welfare of the American com- 
munity in the lower Yangtze Valley area, he is 
to come to Washington for consultations. 



PUBLICATIONS 



Department of State 

For sale hy the Superintendent of Documents, Oovemment 
Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Address requests 
direct to the Superintendent of Documents, except in the 
case of free publications, which may he obtained from the 
Department of State. 

European Unity. European and Britisli Commonwealtli 
Series 4. Pub. 3364. 14 pp. Free. 

Address by John Foster Dulles, U.S. Delegate to the 
Third Session of the General Assembly, Paris, Nov 
18, 1948. 

Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance. Trea- 
ties and Other International Acts Series 1838. Pub. 3380. 
40 pp. 15^. 

Between the United States and Other American Re- 
publics—Opened for signature at Rio de Janeiro Sept. 
2, 1947 ; entered into force Dec. 3, 1948. 

May 8, 1949 



Foreign Service List, January 1, 1949. Pub. 3388. 151 
pp. 400 a copy. Subscription price $1.50 a year; $2.00 
foreign. 

The January issues of the List will include the sec- 
tions showing the posts of assignment, retirements 
in the Foreign Service, the consular districts, the 
tariff of Foreign Service fees, the index of persons, 
and the geographic index. The April, July, and 
October issues will include only the posts of assign- 
ment and the two indexes. 

Air Service: Facilities in French Territory. Treaties 
and Other International Acts Series 1853. Pub. 3391 
2 pp. 5^. 

Agreement between the United States and France 
Amending Agreement of June 18, 1946 — Effected by 
exchange of notes signed at Paris May 8 and 17, 1947 ; 
entered into force May 17, 1947. 

Double Taxation: Taxes on Income. Treaties and Other 
International Acts Series 1854. Pub. 3396. 30 pp. 100. 
Convention between the United States and Den- 
mark—Signed at Washington May 6, 1948 ; proclaimed 
by the President of the United States Dec. 8, 1948. 

607 



Occupation Matters Paee 

Consular Services for German Nationals. 

By Walter J. Marx 575 

The Current Situtation in Germany: 

• Address by Secretary Acheson 585 

Agreement on Tripartite Controls for 

Western Germany 689 

Understanding on Wilrttemberg-Baden 

Plebiscite 590 

Agreement Regarding Port of Kehl . . . 590 
Three Power Responsibilities on Estab- 
lishment of Gorman Federal Republic . 590 
Informal Conversations on* Berlin Block- 
ade 590 

International Authority for the Ruhr 

Established . . . ■ 592 

Jurisdiction of U.S. Courts re Suits for 
Identifiable Property Involved in Nazi 
Forced Transfers 592 

The United Nations and 
Specialized Agencies 

U.N. Documents: A Selected Bibliography . 578 

Promotion of International Political Co- 
operation. By Ambassador Warren R. 
Austin 579 

Reply to the U.S.S.R. Regarding the Italian 
Colonies. Statement by John Foster 
Dulles 581 

The United States in the United Nations . . 684 



Treaty Information Paee 

The North Atlantic Treaty and the Role of 
the Military Assistance Program. State- 
ment by Secretary Acheson 594 

President Truman Transmits North Atlantic 

Treaty to the Senate 599 

Charter Proposing an International Trade 
Organization Transmitted to the Senate: 
President Truman's Mes.sage to the Con- 
gress 601 

Memorandum for the President From the 

Secretary of State 602 

General Policy 

Steps Taken for Safety of Americans in 

Lower Yangtze Valley: 
Notice by U.S. Consulate General .... 607 
Ambassador Stuart Instructed To Report 

to Washington 603 

international information and 
Cultural Affairs 

Research and Teaching Opportunities in 

Italy 593 

Tlie Congress 

Senate Document on North Atlantic Treaty 

Issued 600 

I^egislation 600 

Publications 

Department of State 607 



%mit)itmdo7^ 



Walter J. Marx, nnthor of the article on Consular Services 
for German Nationals, is Officer in Charge of the Interim Office 
for German Consular Affairs, Division of Protective Services, 
Office of Controls in the Department of State. 



^^m^s^mm^m^m^ 



^ne/ zl)eAa>^^i^nie/rit /w tfv^ 




rOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN BUL- 
GARIA, HUNGARY, AND RUIVIANIA: 

Statements by Secretary Acheson and 

Benjamin V. Cohen 611 

ECONOMIC POLICY AND THE ITO 

CHARTER • Address by Secretary Acheson . 623 

INTERNATIONAL RECLAMATIONS AND 
THE PEACE SETTLEMENTS • By Jack 

Tate 627 

RESTRICTIONS BETWEEN ZONES OF 
OCCUPATION IN GERMANY AND 
BERLIN LIFTED 631 



Vol. XX, No. 515 
May 15, 1949 



For complete contents see back cover 




11. S. SUPERII.TtNDENr bf t/wtuMtCli 

JUN 9 1949 




*.a/^^y^. bulletin 



Vou XX, No. 515 • Publication 3503 
May 15, 1949 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents 

U.S. Oovernraent Printing Office 

Washington 25, D.C. 

Price: 

62 Issues, domestic $.">, foreign $7.25 
Single copy, 16 cents 

The printing of this publication has 
been approved by the Dircclor of the 
Bureau of the Budget (February 18, 
1U49). 

iVotc: Contents of this publication are not 
copyrighted and Items contained heroin may 
be reprinted. Citation of the Department 
OF Statk Bulletin as the source will be 
appreciated. 



The Department of State BULLETIN, 
a treekly publication compiled and 
edited in the Divisiott of Publications, 
Office of Public Affairs, provides the 
public and interestcil Ufiencies of 
the Government tiith information on 
devilopments in the field of foreign 
relations and on the u'ork of the De- 
partment of State and the Foreign 
Service. The BULLETIN includes 
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 phases of inter- 
national affairs and the functions of 
the Department. Information is in- 
cluded concerning treaties and in- 
ternational agreements to uhich tlie 
United States is or may become a 
party and treaties of general inter- 
ruitional interest. 

Publications of the Department, as 
uell as legislative material in the field 
of international relations, are listed 
curren I ly. 



Violation of Human Riglits in Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania 



STATEMENT BY SECRETARY ACHESON 

[Released to the press May 4] 

This Government has now received replies from 
Bulgarici, Hungary, and Rumania rejecting the 
charges, made in our notes of April 2, that these 
three Governments were violating the articles of 
the respective peace treaties concerning human 
rights and fundamental freedoms. In their re- 
plies, they accuse the United States, in making 
these charges, of attempting to interfere in their 
affairs. This argument is clearly not valid, since 
the protection of human rights is an international 
obligation assumed by these Governments when 
they signed the peace treaties and not a matter 
of purely domestic jurisdiction. The Bulgarian, 
Hungarian, and Rumanian notes make other ac- 
cusations against the United States which are both 
false and not germane to the issue of violation of 
human rights ; for example, all three Governments 
accuse the United States of supporting Fascist 
elements in those countries. 

Receipt of these three notes confirms the exist- 
ence of "disputes" concerning the execution and 
interpretation of the treaties. The treaties them- 
selves (article 36 of the Bulgarian treaty, 40 of 
the Hungarian treaty, and 38 of the Rumanian 
treaty) provide specific procedures for the settle- 
ment of disputes. The Department is consulting 
with interested signatory governments with a view 
to proceeding under the provisions of these arti- 
cles (United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and 
New Zealand with respect to Hungary and Ru- 
mania; United Kingdom, Australia, and New 
Zealand with respect to Hungary, Rumania, and 
Bulgaria ; Canada was not a signatory of the Bul- 
garian treaty). The procedure calls for, first, re- 
sort to the three heads of mission (American, 
British, and Soviet) in each capital. If they do 
not reach agreement within two months, each dis- 
pute shall be referred to a commission composed 
of one representative of each party and a third 
member selected by mutual agreement of the two 
parties ; should they fail to agree within a period 
of one month on the appointment of a third mem- 
ber, the Secretary-General of the United Nations 
may be requested by either party to make the ap- 
pointment. These commissions, according to the 
treaty, can take binding decisions by majority 
vote. 

The United Nations General Assembly ap- 
proved last Saturday, by a vote of 34 to 6, a reso- 

May 15, 1949 



lution expressing serious concern over the charges 
made against Hungary and Bulgaria and express- 
ing the hope that measures taken under the peace 
treaties would be diligently applied in order to 
insure respect for human rights and fimdamental 
freedoms. This resolution is an indication of gen- 
eral support througliout the world for the action 
we have initiated under the peace treaties. The 
six votes cast against the resolution were those of 
the Soviet bloc. 

Benjamin V. Cohen's speech made at Lake Suc- 
cess during the Assembly discussion on this sub- 
ject on April 18 clearly sets forth our views on the 
possibilities and benefits of international action 
in this field and of the American concept of a free 
society tolerant of dissent in contrast to the police 
state which suppresses all independent opinion.^ 

STATEMENT BY BENJAMIN V. COHEN' 

The resolution now before the Assembly deals 
with the important question of human rights and 
fundamental freedoms in Bulgaria and in 
Hungary. Before putting this question on the 
agenda, the Assembly debated and decided its 
own competence to discuss it. The Ad Hoc 
Political Committee, to which the Assembly re- 
ferred the item, also gave the issue of competence 
full attention. There is, therefore, no need to 
reargue this issue now. 

In the Ad Hoc Political Committee, the dele- 
gates expressed the views and sentiments of their 
respective governments and peoples in regard to 
this question of human rights in Bulgaria and 
Hungary, with special reference to the recent 
trials of the church leaders in these countries. 
The views and sentiments expressed reveal tha 
widespread anxiety, profound concern, and in- 
tense feeling that the recent trials have aroused 
throughout the world. 

A number of delegations, including my own, 
made serious charges of systematic suppression of 
civil rights in Bulgaria and Hungary. In the 
treaties of peace, the Governments of these two 
former enemy states undertook a solemn interna- 
tional obligation to safeguard the human rights 
and fundamental freedoms of all persons within 
their jurisdiction. In the view of the Government 

• Bulletin of Apr. 10, 1949, p. 450, and May 1, 1949, 
p. 556. 

' Made before the General Assembly on Apr. 28, 1949, 
and released to the press by the U.S. Mission to the United 
Nations on the same date. 



611 



of the United States, as our delegation pointed out 
in the Committee, in eacli of these countries a 
similar pattern of action lias been followed. A 
minority group has seized the instrumentalities of 
government through force and intimidation and 
maintained itself in power througli suppression of 
every one of the human rights and fundamental 
freedoms which these states have solemnly under- 
taken to observe in the treaties of peace. There 
is evidence of a clear design on the part of these 
governments to eliminate the leaders of political 
parties and the leaders of religious groups who 
have refused to subordinate themselves and to use 
their influence to subordinate their followers to 
the dictates of the Communist Party. Making 
all due allowances for legitimate differences of 
ojiinion as to the appropriate scope of civil and 
religious fi'eedoms, wo cannot see that any sub- 
stantive civil or religious freedom can survive in 
these countries, if the shabbiest sort of excuse suf- 
fices to liquidate political and religious leaders 
who refuse to accept and support the prevailing 
totalitarianism. These leaders have been driven 
from office and brought to trial on the pretext that 
they have violated national laws. Actually there 
is good reason to believe that they are being perse- 
cuted and imprisoned not for the offenses with 
which they have been charged, but because their 
governments have decided to liquidate them as 
sources of independent opinion. 

We cannot accept the proposition that under the 
guise of dissolving Fascist or subversive organiza- 
tions the Governments of Bulgaria and Huncary 
are entitled to suppress the expression of views 
that are displeasing to the ruling groups. While 
we do not question the right of a state to protect 
itself from those who endeavor to overthrow the 
state by force and violence, this right does not 
justify the suppression of all efforts to seek changes 
by peaceful means. It is not enough for a state 
to keep the outward forms of religious worship 
intact while absorbing the churches into the state 
and using them for its own political purposes. 

The United States Delegation reiterates its 
denial of the charges made that the United States 
in some way conspired with the persons accused in 
Bulgaria and Hungary. We repudiate these 
charges as baseless and absurd. The United 
States has endeavored to maintain friendly rela- 
tions with these countries and their people but 
has not attempted to interfere in their internal 
affairs or to disturb friendly relations between 
these countries and other powers. Moreover, as 
a signatory to the treaties of peace, the United 
States has assumed definite responsibilities in rela- 
tion to Bulgaria and Hungary. 

The United States believes in an open world 
and repudiates the idea that any country or people 
who are friendly to us must be hostile to any other 
country. It is strange that those who profess to 
bo opposed to the division of the world into hostile 
blocs insist upon regarding any interest on our 



part, however legitimate, towards countries 
friendly to them as hostile and conspiratorial. 
Those who profess to want a friendly, peaceful 
world should act in a peaceful, friendly spirit. 
They should not seek refuge in an artificial and 
self-imposed isolation which makes them see a 
plot in every effort to maintain friendly inter- 
coui-se with them. 

In preparing a I'esolution for the consideration 
by the Assembly, the Ad Hoc Political Committee 
made a special and, I think, a commendable effort 
to obtain an agi'eement on the collective expres- 
sion of concern regarding the events in Bulgaria 
and Hungary in such a way as to avoid aggravat- 
ing differences and making more difficult construc- 
tive, remedial action. The Committee has en- 
deavored to facilitate and encourage clarification 
of the issues and the safeguarding of human rights 
and fundamental freedoms under the available 
treaty procedures. In its proposed resolution, 
the Committee has not only shown great self-re- 
straint but has acted in conformity with the 
Charter concept of the United Nations as a center 
for harmonizing the actions of nations in the at- 
tainment of common ends. 

The proposed resolution takes into account that 
on entering into the highly important but delicate 
field of human rights and fundamental freedoms, 
even when the question, as the one before us, in- 
volves clear international obligations under a 
treaty, the task of the Assembly is not only to make 
recommendations correct in principle, but to make 
recommendations that will, in fact, further and 
not retard the i)ractical realization of its objective. 

Let us therefore consider just what the pending 
resolution proposes. First, it declares that one ot 
the purposes of the Charter is to achieve inter- 
national cooperation in promoting and encourag- 
ing respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, 
sex, language, or religion. Surely there can or 
should be no difference among us as to this objec- 
tive, which is clearly and expressly stated in the 
Charter. 

Second, the pending resolution takes note of the 
serious charges that have been made regarding the 
violation of human rights and fundamental free- 
doms in Bulgaria and Hungary and expresses the 
deep concern of the Assembly therein. Certainly 
it cannot be denied that some countries, including 
my own, have made serious charges in respect to 
the violation of the human rights clauses of the 
peace treaties, or that there is deep and profound 
concern throughout the world in these charges 
that civil liberties and fundamental freedoms have 
been suppressed in Central and Eastern Europe. 
There are a few states which have denied that there 
is sound reason for this concern, but they have 
scarcely tried to deny that this concern does exist. 

Third, the resolution takes note of the steps ■ 
taken to invoke the treaty procedures and ex- ■ 
presses the hope that measures will be taken under ■ 

Deparfment of State Bulletin 



the treaty to insure respect for human rights and 
fundamental freedoms. Here again it is not sub- 
ject to dispute that steps have been taken to in- 
voke the treaty procedures. And even the states 
which have most strongly opposed any action by 
the Assembly in this matter have themselves 
pointed to the treaty procedures as providing the 
proper and appropriate measures for determining 
the facts and securing compliance with the 
human rights provisions under the peace treaties. 

Fourth, the resolution draws the attention of 
the Governments of Bulgaria and Hungary to 
their obligations under the treaties, including the 
obligation to cooperate in the settlement of these 
questions. Certainly there should be no objection 
to the Assembly urging a settlement of issues of 
world-wide concern through means already as- 
sented to by these countries. 

Fifth, and finally, the resolution reserves the 
right of the Assembly to consider this subject 
further at its next session, a right which the As- 
sembly clearly has in any event and a right for the 
exercise of which there should be no occasion if 
all parties concerned cooperate in carrying out 
the procedures in the treaties as they have obli- 
gated themselves to do. 

The resolution before us proposed by Bolivia, 
and supported by a large majority of the Ad Hoc 
Political Committee in the hope of encouraging 
an honest effort on the part of all concerned to 
secure respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms in these countries, deserves wholehearted 
acceptance by the Assembly. The United States 
Delegation believes and hopes that the serious and 
painstaking efforts of the Committee to avoid any 
prejudgment on the outcome of the procedures to 
be followed under the peace treaties should not 
only facilitate the can-ying out of the treaty pro- 
cedures but should go far to secure the greatest 
possible support for the resolution in the Assembly. 

So far as the United States Government is con- 
cerned, we shall regard it as a duty to carry 
through the procedures set forth in the peace 
treaties. AVe are prepared to do everything within 
our power to establish the facts and responsibili- 
ties, to secure a full and fair hearing of the charges 
which have been made, and to achieve some real 
guarantee of respect for human rights and funda- 
mental freedoms in these former enemy countries. 

To these and other European nations, four years 
ago, the three war leaders of the United Nations — 
Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt, solemnly pledged 
that freedom would be restored; not to their 
former rulers and not to a new set of rulers but 
to these peoples themselves. The human rights 
clauses were inserted in the peace treaties in ac- 
cordance with the recommendation previously 
made by the Economic and Social Council of the 
United Nations. Under the Charter we have all 
committed ourselves to promote respect for and 
observance of human rights and fundamental 
freedoms. 

May IS, J949 



In carrying out these pledges, we can do much 
to regain in peace the unity that bound us together 
in war. We united in war to preserve freedom 
from tyranny. Unity in peace can be maintained 
only on the basis of freedom. In this diversified 
woi'ld, where men and nations cherish difl'erent 
ideas and different ways of life, men and nations 
can find unity and peace only in learning tolerance 
for ideas and ways of life which they cannot and 
will not share. Men may be imprisoned and put 
to death, but force and suppression cannot crush 
men's faiths and ideas. Deviation and error need 
not be feared where faith and reason are free to 
combat them. 

We cannot build a friendly, peaceful world 
simply by calling those with whom we differ war- 
mongers, imperialists, traitors, spies, or Fascists. 
Name calling and abuse are not effective instru- 
ments of wise statesmanship. 

If we wish a friendly, peaceful world, we must 
establish conditions which make for a friendly, 
peaceful world. There cannot be a friendly, peace- 
ful world when individuals are not free peacefully 
to communicate their own thoughts and freely to 
practice their own religion under the guidance of 
their chosen spiritual leaders. If we wish to pre- 
serve the common interest of all people in peace, 
we must safeguard the human rights and funda- 
mental freedoms which are cherished by all men 
in all nations. Let us find peace, unity, and free- 
dom for all in our common humanity, in the uni- 
versal brotherhood of man. 

TEXTS OF RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE 
GENERAL ASSEMBLY 

U.N. doc. A/851 
Adopted Apr. 30, 1949 

The General Assembly, 

Considering that one of the purposes of the 
United Nations is to achieve international co-oper- 
ation in promoting and encouraging respect for 
human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, 
without distinction as to race, sex, language or 
religion. 

Considering that the Governments of Bulgaria 
and Hungary have been accused, before the Gen- 
eral Assembly, of acts contrary to the purposes of 
the United Nations and to their obligations under 
the Peace Treaties to ensure to all persons within 
their respective jurisdictions the enjoyment of 
human rights and fundamental freedoms, 

1. Expresses its deep concern at the gi'ave accusa- 
tions made against the Governments of Bulgaria 
and Hungary regarding the suppression of human 
rights and fundamental freedoms in those 
countries ; 

2. Notes with satisfaction that steps have been 
taken by several States signatories to the Peace 
Treaties with Bulgaria and Hungary regarding 
these accusations, and expresses the hope that 
measures will be diligently applied, in accordance 
with the Treaties, in order to ensure respect for 



human rights and fundamental freedoms; 

3. Most ukokntly draws tlie attention of the Gov- 
ernments of Bulgaria and Hungary to their obli- 
gations under the Peace Treaties, including the 
obligation to co-operate in the settlement of all 
these questions; 

4. DecklPH to retain the question on the agenda of 
the fourth regular session of the General Assembly 
of the United Nations. 

U.N. doc. A/842 
Adopted Apr. 25, 1949 

The General Assembly, 

CoNSiDEHiNT. the item pro])osed by Chile on 
"violation by the Union of Soviet Socialist Re- 
publics of fundamental human rights, traditional 
diplomatic practices and other principles of the 
Charter", which violation has consisted in prevent- 
ing the Soviet wives of citizens of other nationali- 
ties from leaving tlieir country with their hus- 
bands or in order to join them abroad, even when 
they are married to persons belonging to foreign 
diplomatic missions, or to members of their fami- 
lies or retinue, 

Ct>NsiDERiNG that in the iiieamble to the Charter 
of the United Nations all the signatory countries 
resolved "to re-affirm faith in fundamental human 
rights, in the dignity and worth of tlie human per- 
son, in the equal rights of men and women . . .", 

Considering that Article 1, paragraph 3, of the 
Charter binds all Memlters to encourage "respect 
for human rights and for fundamental freedoms 
for all without distinction as to race, sex, language 
or religion", and that in Article 55 (c) of the 



Charter the Members undertook to promote "uni- 
versal respect for, and observance of, human rights 
and fundamental freedoms for all without dis- 
tinction as to race, sex, language, or religion", 

Considering, lastly, that the Economic and So- 
cial Council, in pursuance of the powers conferred 
upon it by Article 62, paragraph 2, of the Charter, 
in its resolution 154 (VII), D, dated 23 August 
1948, deplored the "legislative or administrative 
provisions which deny to a woman the right to 
leave her country of origin and reside with her 
husband in any other" and that the Universal 
Declaration of Human Rights formulated by the 
United Nations General Assembly, in its Articles 
13 and 16, provides that everyone has the right to 
leave any country including his own and that men 
and women of full age have the right to marry 
without any limitation due to race, nationality or 
religion. 

Declares that the measures which prevent or 
coerce the wives of citizens of other nationalities 
from leaving their country of origin with their 
husbands or in order to join them abroad, are not 
in conformity with the Charter; and that when 
tliose measures refer to the wives of persons be- 
longing to foreign diplomatic missions, or of 
members of their families or retinue, they are con- 
trary to courtesy, to diplomatic practices and to 
the principle of reciprocity, and are likely to im- 
pair friendly relations among nations; 

Recommends the Government of the Union of 
Soviet Socialist Republics to withdraw the meas- 
ures of such a nature which have been adopted. 



Resolutions Adopted by the Trusteeship Council, 
Fourth Session, 24 January to 25 March 1949 



U.N. doc. TINF/O 
Dated April 12 1949. 



45 (IV). 

46 (IV) . 

47 (IV). 

48 (IV) . 

49 (IV). 

50 (IV). 

51 (IV). 

614 



Comments and suggestions arising 
out of the di.sciussion in the Gen- 
eral Assembly on the Report of 
the Trusteeship Council cover- 
ing its second and third sessions 
(5th meetinK, 28 January 1949). 

Relations with the Security Coun- 
cil (46th mooting, 24" March 
1919). 

Collaboration with the specialized 
agencies (29th meeting, 1 March 
1949). 

Requests for additional informa- 
tion (48th meeting, 25 March 
1949). 

Question of racial discrimination 
in Ruanda-Urundi (38th meet- 
ing, 14 March 1