Charter is only one step in the whole field of our world policy for peace with justice and freedom. The entire address, 30 years ago, was realistic in its analysis of the plusses and minuses, and the potential of where we were. The late distinguished Senators Tom Connally and Arthur Vandenberg, both former chairmen of this committee, and both also signers of the United Nations Charter, had similar realistic views, and expressed them at the time. Permit me as the youngest then, and the only survivor now, to pay a word of tribute to all of those men and women who worked at San Francisco to draft and then sign the Charter, on behalf of the United States. OVERALL PERSPECTIVE Before proceeding to give my views on the needed improvement of the Charter, may I make a few concise points of overall perspective? There will be a continuing need for the United States to be militarily very powerful and very alert. The United Nations organization, as now established, is inadequate, but it nevertheless represents humanity's best hope for future world peace. With the many far-reaching events of the past three decades, it is probable that if there had not been any United Nations organization, there would have been a catastrophic third world war before this date. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UPDATING AND IMPROVING U.N. CHARTER May I now give a summary of my recommendations for modernizing, improving, and strengthening the United Nations Charter for the decades ahead? A few years ago I drafted a complete proposed charter for study purposes. It has now been updated, and I will provide a copy to the committee for review by its staff. [The material referred to is on file with the committee.] The major recommended revisions from the present Charter in outline are as follows: 1. Change the concept of the organization to universal inclusion of all humanity, and toward that end, revise the preamble, and open the membership. We must, in our advocacy, get in line with the aspirations and hopes of all mankind. There is a national tendency to think that the relationship between the three super powers is the main key to the future. It is not. It is important, but the main key to the future are the hopes and aspirations of all the peoples on this Earth, and that is the alinement that should control U.S. policy. 2. Set up a new Central Council of Ministers with weighted voting to effectively reflect and act for the world situation, and to stand between the veto power in the Security Council and the one-state, onevote assembly. Weighted voting is very important for the future, in my judgment. It cannot be attacked by trying to change the Assembly to weighted vote. We must leave that as one vote, the town hall of the world. But by bringing, in effect, the sort of cabinet approach with the Secretary General, and introducing weighted voting in the functions of that new entity, we can achieve weighted voting in the future. 3. Create a new World Court of Equity, as an additional court, with broader and special jurisdiction to add to the functioning of the judicial decision side of world affairs. 4. Add two additional organized methods for reaching settlements of international disputes, through the establishment of a World Board of Arbitration and a World Panel of Mediators, and provide for a notification of the Secretary General of all pending disputes. 5. Require the ratification of three-fourths of an expanded list of major permanent members to become effective. The expanded list includes Japan, India, Brazil, and the two German governments, as well as France, the United Kingdom, China, the U.S.S.R., and the United States of America. 6. Formally take sovereignty over those areas of the sea bed, and of outer space which are outside of national sovereign jurisdiction. Unless there is a movement in this direction, there is a great danger of a clash and confrontation in the decades ahead. 7. Initiate affirmative objectives and methods for the safeguarding of the environment against pollution, and for the fuller enjoyment of life by all humanity of all races. 8. Establish a new substantial regular method of financing the organization through a 1-percent duty on all international movement of tangible goods, materials, and machinery. Other methods may be suggested, but the great flow of goods depends upon a viable United Nations, if that is just taxed 1 percent, one-half to the seller and onehalf to the buyer, you would have an adequate financing for the longterm future. 9. Provide for a United Nations peace force which is distinct, wellprepared, elite, and not composed of national units. It will, of course, take several years to make such changes in the Charter, but even the beginning of the process will have a constructive effect. U.S. LEADERSHIP ROLE IN STRENGTHENING, UPDATING U.N. URGED It is urged, respect fully, that this committee take a leading role in bringing about a new U.S. leadership toward strengthening and modernizing the United Nations, and toward a larger use of multilateral methods and principles in the conduct of the foreign policy and foreign relations of the United States. This committee, at other times in history, has taken a lead toward such a change and approach in American foreign policy. May I also suggest that there should not be too deep a feeling of gloom about the present situation. In a very real sense, our country is continuing to suffer from the traumatic consequences of the tragic assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Such an event has a penetrating and pervasive effect upon our country. We will come through this period, but it takes time and understanding. Our founding principles of individual freedom and of the worth and dignity of each person, are as valid today as they were two centuries ago, and their application with intelligence and integrity to all humanity on this Earth, under God, continues to be the best road to world peace with justice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Governor Stassen. Next, I will ask Senator Lodge for his statement. BIOGRAPHICAL SUMMARY OF HENRY CABOT LODGE Henry Cabot Lodge, former U.S. Senator, U.S. Representative to U.N., Ambassador (Vietnam, Germany, at large), reserve Major General, Harvard overseer, and Republican nominee for Vice President (1960). Member, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 1947-1953. Served in U.S. Army in World War II. Managed campaign in 1951 and 1952 to win Republican nomination for General Eisenhower. Awarded Thayer Medal, West Point; 20 hon. degrees; military and foreign decorations. Author (1973, The Storm Has Many Eyes, W. W. Norton); lecturer; since 1970 special envoy to visit the Vatican from time to time. STATEMENT OF THE HON. HENRY CABOT LODGE Mr. LODGE. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I appreciate the honor of appearing before this distinguished committee which plays such a vital role in the foreign policy of our country. or One self-evident fact about the world is that its most difficult and dangerous problems-be they of health, or economics, or energy, pollution, or, of course, of war and peace-can only be solved on an international basis. Individual nation-states-even as big as the United States and the Soviet Union-cannot successfully cope with these problems alone. U.S. PUBLIC OPINION WARY OF U.N. EFFECTIVENESS Yet, one self-evident paradox about the world is that the United Nations the international organization created precisely for the purpose of finding international solutions-often receives a massive vote of no confidence in various American opinion polls, even though a majority does not want to abandon it. Consider these figures: In 1951, only 43 percent of the American people, according to the Gallup poll, were satisfied with the progress of the United Nations. In 1959, the Gallup poll showed that an alltime high of 87 percent thought the United Nations was doing a good job. But in 1971, this had fallen to a low of 35 percent. Ambassador Scali, in 1973, spoke of a poll indicating that only 34 percent of the American people thought the United Nations was doing an effective job. At United Nations headquarters in New York, the number of visitors fell from 1,116,000 in 1967 to 765,000 in 1972-a record low. And in 1973, the number was 13 percent lower. A recent poll of the new 94th Congress by the United Nations Association shows that only 15 percent of our Congressmen thought that the United Nations was helpful to our international relations. Senator CASE. Does that include Members of the Senate? Mr. LODGE. It was Members of the House, I think. This critical attitude of people in the world's biggest and most powerful country is a deadly serious threat to the United Nationsand to our hope for peace. And it amply justifies the sagacious decision of your committee to conduct this investigation. It is, therefore, pertinent to consider the successes, failures, and future prospects of the United Nations. Herewith my list of the United Nations plusses and minuses: In the past 25 years, the United Nations has given important help in these situations: the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Iran in 1947; the communist withdrawal from Greece in 1949; resisting the aggression in Korea in 1950; the cease-fires and withdrawals in the Middle East in 1949, 1956, and 1957, and again in 1973; cease-fire or truces in Indonesia in 1949, Kashmir in 1965, and Cyprus; ending outside interference in Lebanon's internal affairs in 1958; preventing the Congo from becoming a cause of confrontation between the great powers in 1960; ushering the erstwhile colonies of Africa into the family of nations; and creating a new United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) on October 25, 1973, which was followed on October 27, by Egyptian-Israeli meetings for the first time in 17 years. The new UNEF differs from the one created in 1956 in that it can only be removed by a vote of the Security Council and that Poland, a communist power, is to be a member. These are improvements, even though the road is still full of boulders I add four major U.N. conferences in 1972-75, each of which made a start on four major world problems: environment, law of the sea, population, and food. Now for another big plus: The first priority at the United Nations is peace and security. The second, far ahead of any other, should be economic and social development. Along these lines, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), by preinvestment surveys and technical education, has advanced the fundamentals of a good life: food, shelter, health, and education. Because it is done "multilaterally"-many nations working together-rather than "bilaterally"the United States working with one country alone-$1 of input by the United States generates more than $6 worth of actual development work. Thus, our proportion gets smaller and the recipient nations' proportion gets greater because the United Nations Development Program-which includes such worthwhile "specialized agencies" as the World Health Organization and the Children's Fundgets more and more people "into the act." Much, but not all, of our own bilateral AID program for economic and social development abroad could, I believe, be channelled through the United Nations agencies, with advantage to us and to the recipient nation. That, Mr. Chairman, concludes my summary of the plusses. And I ask how many of these plusses would have happened without the United Nations? And these are all things which have made the world a better place. How many of these "plusses" would have happened without the U.N.? UNFAVORABLE ASPECTS OF U.N. Here are some undeniable minuses: With the advantage of hindsight, one can now say that much trouble would have been avoided if, before the French left Indochina, we had used the United Nations in the early 1950's, somewhat as the United Nations acted in the Congo in 1960-as an international pres ence to prevent the area from becoming the cause of big power involvement. The United Nations later did nothing about Vietnam: because it lacked the tools and the will. Also, the communist powers, notably North Vietnam and the Soviet Union, opposed bringing the Vietnam question into the United Nations. To go on with the minuses, in 1956 the Soviet aggression against Hungary could not be stopped by any method short of war. In 1968 Czechoslovakia could not be protected against a Soviet takeover. In 1971, the United Nations did not make a determined effort to persuade the Government of Pakistan to cease its brutal behavior toward East Pakistanis. Nor did the United Nations prevent-or try to prevent-India from invading East Pakistan. These are all United Nations failures. In all candor, can we doubt that these failures would have occurred even if there had been no United Nations? There are other defects: voting does not correspond with the ability to carry out the things which are voted; there is an alarming tendency not to consider questions on their merits, but to vote as blocs; the lateness in starting the meetings; the windiness of the oratory; the lack of germaneness and the much too lengthy so-called debates all make a bad impression. There can today in our United Nations of 138 members be little. confidence that even if a clear and unambiguous case of aggression came before the Security Council or General Assembly, a majority of the members would treat it as such and would come to the aid of the victim. To me, that is a terribly serious thing. Finally, I cite the vote (105 to 4 with 20 abstentions) at the last session which recognized the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) as the sole representative of the Palestine people, and gave Mr. Arafat honors proper to a chief of state-an outrageous event which, understandably, infuriated so many people that some are talking about the United States withdrawing from the United Nations. I do not think it would be wise to withdraw. This suggestion reminds me of the man who stuck his head out of the window, found the weather was insufferably hot, and proceeded to break the thermometer. The cure for the United Nations' troubles is not to leave it, but to reform it. PRESIDENT'S U.N. 25TH ANNIVERSARY COMMISSION REPORT PROPOSALS In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I submit that members of the United Nations should wholeheartedly work for a rapid growth in its effectiveness. They should change the United Nations so that voting more nearly corresponds with the ability to carry out the things which are voted. Many detailed changes are proposed in the report of the President's Commission on the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the United Nations, published in 1971. I cite a few: Small states should renounce their right to vote and become associate members; if any state pays less than one-tenth of 1 Ipercent of the United Nation's budget, it would become an associate member; the United Nations would submit itself in electing members of the Security Council to place primary emphasis on the contributions which the candidate can make; half of the 10 elected seats in the Se |