« ПретходнаНастави »
TABLE 6.-Showing how, even in recent years, craban entirely new marine food re There being no objection, the articles tax payments are falling short of funding
source—has become a nationally known were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, benefit payments (by fiscal year)
and prized delicacy. It is increasingly as follows:
[From the New York Times, Nov. 5, 1963]
king crab fishing grounds, have de AUTOBAHN-AMERICAN TRUCKS ATTEMPT TO ments payments
stroyed the traps of our American fish BREAK THROUGH, BUT ARE HELD AT THIRD ermen, and the United States is ap
BARRIER-WASHINGTON WATCHFUL_SAYS 1958 7, 267 7,875 608
DETENTION OF FORCE ON ROAD TO BERLIN IS 1959 7,565 9, 049 1,484 parently doing nothing about it.
OF "SERIOUS DIMENSIONS” 1960. 9, 843 10, 270
427 It is true that many of these traps are 1961 11, 293 11, 185 (+108)
BERLIN, Tuesday, November 5.-A U.S. 1962 11, 455 12, 658
outside the 3-mile limit and therefore troop convoy was blocked by three Soviet
1, 203 1963. 13, 328 13, 845
517 in international waters. Two remedies, armored personnel carriers late last night
of course, are immediately available: when it attempted to break through a block
The first would be to extend the fishing ade at the Marienborn checkpoint on the EXAMPLES OF TAX PAYMENTS VERSUS RETIRE
limits for all fisheries to 12 miles, and autobahn to West Berlin. MENT BENEFITS
the second-and even more pertinent Soviet guards had held up the convoy of 1. Worker retired in 1940, wife same age.
would be to extend the limits for the tak 12 vehicles and 44 men since early yesterday. Before retirement, worker and employer had ing of crustacea and shellfish to the
An official American announcement said paid social security taxes for 3 years. Total Continental Shelf, which would be a
the Russian action was a "flagrant violation tax combined-$180. Since retirement, this
of the Western allies unrestricted rights of man and wife have been drawing benefits wholly proper procedure since crab and
access to Berlin.” for 2242 years, totaling $24,973.
shellfish exist on the bottom of the sea. The statement warned the Soviet Union 2. Worker who retired last January 1 after And thereafter a little display of strength
And thereafter a little display of strength that it must bear “the full responsibility for paying maximum social security tax since and energy by our Federal Government any consequences.” 1937, total combined with his employer to enforce our rights would be most help (In Washington, State Department offl$2,868. Add interest at 3 percent and this ful.
cials said that the blockade had “assumed contribution to the trust fund would come to $3,714. Pension from now on will bring
quite serious dimensions.” Earlier, adminisIn recent weeks, in addition to the
tration officials had appeared confident that him and his wife (same age) $32,074. taking of the crab traps, Russian ves
the incident resulted from a misunderstand3. College graduate started working in sels have penetrated within the 3-mile ing by Soviet troops of American procedures 1962, paying maximum social security tax limit, have taken whales there, and have and would be settled shortly.) until retirement in year 2005. Total com apparently been indifferent to the fact
TRIED TO END DEADLOCK bined tax with employer-$18,564. Add in
that they were violating our waters. terest at 3 percent and this contribution to
The confrontation came after the U.S. the fund would come to $36,226. Pension
I have urged, and repeat my request, convoy attempted to break the 15-hour deadfor him and his wife (same age) would bring that the President station some faster lock at the East-West German border point total of $33,664.
vessels in Alaskan waters in order to and continue its trip to Berlin. 4. Young man gets job in 1968 and pays indicate to these Russians that they can
The Army said that the Russians moved maximum tax from then until retirement not continue these illegal practices with
three armored personnel carriers and three in year 2011. Total combined tax with emimmunity. Our Coast Guard vessels are
Army sedans across the autobahn shortly ployer-$19,092. Add interest at 3 percent not sufficiently fast to overtake some of
before midnight “to block any further moveand this contribution to the trust fund
ment of the U.S. convoy." would come to $37,954. Assuming this man
the Russian ships, which are modern, up "An unknown number of Soviet personnel is widower, with no dependents, and lives to date and, of course, subsidized by the carriers have also been stationed on the right only 2 years after retirement, benefits would Russian Government. I hope the Presi flank of the U.S. convoy” the Army statetotal $3,048. dent and Secretary of State will realize
ment added. how bitter the feeling among Alaskan
The convoy was delayed at about 9 a.m. fishermen is becoming and that he will
yesterday after the Americans refused to
submit to a Soviet demand that 15 soldierTHE RUSSIAN RAIDS ON ALASKAN send one or two destroyers up there passengers in 3 of the trucks get down for FISHERMEN SHOULD BE STOPPED
which will help protect these resources a head count.
which have been so painstakingly devel The convoy commander said that the deMr. GRUENING. Mr. President, a oped under conservation practices which mand conflicted with Allied procedures. U.S. great many Americans nourished the the Russians do not follow. One of our Army spokesmen said that the Soviet comhope that the signing of the test ban fishermen, the victim of the Russian
mand in Berlin had been informed of these treaty with Russia and its ratification raid upon his traps, come alongside a
procedures, involving conditions under which by the U.S. Senate would usher in a Russian trawler recently and saw what
troops submit to a count, and that there period of diminishing tensions in the he estimated to be about 10,000 crabs on
was no chance of a misunderstanding.
The American, British, and French comcold war. It was hoped that other steps its deck. It included female and im manders in Berlin met this afternoon to indicating a departure from Premier mature crabs which are not taken under discuss the Soviet move. A statement said Khrushchev's announced purpose to American conservation practices. Our
that the three generals had decided "on how “bury us” would follow. Unfortunately, crab fishermen, when they find either
to deal with the situation." this seems not to have been the case. female or immature crabs in their traps
The U.S. Army later postponed for 24 We now have the shocking situation or pots throw them back overboard alive.
hours a 3-day field exercise that was to have of another blocking of a U.S. troop con- The Russians do not do that. They take
taken the entire American garrison to the voy in Berlin, actions which could not everything.
Grunewald Forest tomorrow morning. All
Allied troops in Berlin were placed on an have taken place without the knowledge
I hope there will be vigor, initiative, alert. and approval of the Kremlin, and indeed and energy enough in our administra
It was reported that the U.S. Army inmust have been by its orders. At the At the tion to meet this issue head on. Such
tended to send a convoy to stand by at same time we have another situation action is now overdue.
Marienborn near the East-West German which concerns the people of Alaska
I ask unanimous consent that two greatly, and indeed should concern all
The delayed convoy consists of 12 vehicles
with 44 men, of whom 20 are passengers. Americans, and that is the ruthless in- articles from the New York Times of to
day, one entitled
entitled "Russians' vasion of Alaska's crab fishing grounds
The Russians demanded that seven men rid
ing in the back of one truck and four each by Russian fishing vessels and the pull- Balks U.S. Convoy on the Autobahn" to
in two others should get down to be counted. ing up and destruction of American fish- gether with a subsequent dispatch from
The convey commander, 1st Lt. John Washington headed “United States Files Lamb, refused. Then the Soviet officer in ermen's crab traps.
The development of the Alaska king Protest,” as well as an article by Law charge, Lieutenant Colonel Spiridonov, said crab industry was a great pioneering rence E. Davies, the west coast corre that it was “the Soviet and not the Allied
authorities who determine convoy processachievement, attributable almost wholly spondent of the New York Times, ento the initiative and determination of titled
“Soviet Crab Raid Haunts
This position was disputed by the Ameritwo Alaskan brothers, Howard and Alaskans: Future Russian Action Is
cans. Lowell Wakefield. Since that time, in Subject of Deep Concern,” be printed at The troops detained at Marienborn con the last decade and a half, Alaska king the conclusion of my remarks.
sisted of men from Company C of the 2d
Battalion, 6th Infantry. They were return- the Soviets of procedures jointly agreed on His comment was made against the backing to Berlin from a training exercise in after Soviet forces delayed the American ground of reports that some Kodiak fisherWest Germany. convoy for 52 hours last month.
men were trying to obtain war surplus weapLieutenant Lamb, 25 years old, the con The Western allies notified the Soviet com ons for their vessels. voy commander, is from North Augusta, s.c. manders in Berlin on October 29 that a new
NO WEAPONS FOUND At nightfall the American vehicles re procedure had been established under which mained parked at the roadside.
troops in large convoys would be dismounted The law empowers the Coast Guard to The Army rejected as untrue an East Ger- for inspection.
board ships for enforcement of Federal maman charge that the convoy was obstructing It was stressed that this was for the “in- rine laws. A number of the crab fishing civilian traffic on the East-West highway. formation and convenience” of the Soviet boats have been boarded, but no illegal weapguards and that the dismounting was a mat
ons have been found. [From the New York Times, Nov. 5, 1963] ter of "courtesy" and not of Soviet rights.
Ronald C. Naab, the Federal Government's UNITED STATES FILES PROTEST
fisheries management supervisor for the
Alaskan region, said the Russian fleet moved WASHINGTON, November 4.—The United [From the New York Times, Nov. 5, 1963] through the Unimak Pass in the Aleutians States formally protested today against the SOVIET CRAB RAID HAUNTS ALASKANS—FUTURE and fished for Pacific perch at Portlock Bank, delay by Soviet troops of an American mili RUSSIAN ACTION IS SUBJECT OF DEEP CON directly east of Kodiak, in late July. Then, tary convoy attempting to enter West Berlin
in reduced numbers, it headed for Albatross early in the day.
(By Lawrence E. Davies)
Bank to the southwest about mid-August, The convoy of 12 vehicles, carrying 20 pas
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA, November 3,—The So he said. sengers, was held up at 3 a.m. Washington viet Union's future policy toward Alaska's Finally, Mr. Naab continued, seven trawltime at the Marienborn checkpoint of the rich crab fishery is a subject of deep concern
ers moved into a favorite Kodiak fishing autobahn leading into Berlin through East in the 49th State.
ground, Alitok Bay, "apparently for crab.” Germany. It was still blocked at nightfall.
State and Federal officials, the Coast Guard, Alitok Bay is an area where Americans Administration officials nevertheless ap
crab fishermen and communities dependent have been fishing for crabs for 15 years, carepeared confident that the incident resulted from a misunderstanding by Soviet troops of
for jobs on this $12-million-a-year industry fully nurturing the fishery, officials say, unAmerican procedures. They believed the
are watching every development in a delicate der protective statutes. The law requires and potentially explosive situation.
them to use crab pots and prohibits the issue would be settled soon without damaging East-West efforts to ease cold war ten
A segment of a big Soviet fishing fleet irked dragging of nets along the ocean floor. Alaskan crabbers late last summer with a
As a further conservation measure, Alaskan sions.
fishermen are required to throw back all [Ranking American officials in Berlin said damaging sortie into the Kodiak area. Seven Russian trawlers, using a type of drag
female crabs and those male crabs that measthat there was no question of a misunder
net outlawed for Alaska crab fishermen, in ure less than 7 inches across the body. standing since the Russians had been noti
cluded in their "catch" Alaskan crab pots fied in writing of Allied procedures. The
DAMAGE TO CRABS CITED valued at from $20,000 to $25,000. harassment was viewed there as a deliberate
According to testimony at an official hear
The incident brought threats of retaliaattempt by the Soviet command to whittle
ing conducted at Kodiak afterward, the Rustion from Kodiak crabmen, along with proaway Western rights on traffic between Bertests to the State Department.
sians kept everything they swept up with lin and West Germany.]
The crab fishermen, however, realize that
nets, leaving many injured crab on the
bottom. EARLIER CONVOY BLOCKED
under existing laws the Federal Government A 2-day blockade of an American convoy is unable to terminate fishing by foreign to 110 feet long. The large boats are in the
Alaska crabmen use fishing vessels from 35 last month was viewed at first as indicating craft, Russian or Japanese, in the crab-rich
minority. a hardening of Soviet policy. Later, how- waters.
The vessels set out at 1 or 2 a.m. the year ever, it was acknowledged to be the result of
PRESIDENTIAL ACTION SOUGHT
round, carrying crews of two to four men independent action by Russian commanders Nevertheless, a campaign continues to try depending on the size of the vessel and the unfamiliar with regulations governing auto- to persuade the Kennedy administration to distance offshore to be fished. bahn traffic.
declare the Alaskan king crab a resource of Then, as today, the Soviet officials insisted the continental shelf. The shelf and many right out 3 or 4 days,” Mayor Deveau said.
“Real large vessels—100 feet or more-stay that American troops leave their vehicles to other fishing sites extend far beyond the
“They lay out there till they get a load. be counted before entering the city.
3-mile limit, where the Soviet fishing has Small boats fix their pots and gear, come American commanders have instructions been done.
back into port and go back maybe the next not to allow their men to dismount if the State officials, including Gov. William A.
day.” convoys carry fewer than 31 passengers, not Egan and Attorney General George N. Hayes,
In the Kodiak area each boat is limited counting drivers and assistant drivers. contend that all governments would respect
to 30 crab pots, steel frames with webbing Secretary of State Dean Rusk expressed the a simple declaration by the President to that
around them. The pots measure about 10 administration's concern over the blocking effect.
feet long, 4 to 5 feet wide and 3 to 4 feet of the convoy at a 10-minute mid-morning Mr. Hayes recently noted at Juneau that
deep. They cost, complete with plastic meeting with Georgi M. Korniyenko, coun a 1958 Geneva convention, which provides buoys that float on the surface, $150 to $300 selor at the Soviet Embassy. that a nation may declare what is found on
each. The buoys are attached by lines to Mr. Rusk had previously discussed the in the floor of the continental shelf to be a cident with President Kennedy and Llewellyn
the pots on the ocean floor, sometimes at resource of the contiguous nation, now has depths of 900 feet. E. Thompson, Jr., Ambassador at Large and 21 of 22 signatures necessary to make it "We use frozen herring as bait,” Mayor former U.S. Ambassador to Moscow. international law.
Deveau continued. “The crabs smell it in It was understood that a mild representa The bulk of the Soviet fleet of large trawl- plastic containers inside the pot and they tion was agreed on as the first step and that ers and fish-processing vessels has now reit would become firmer the longer the block- tired beyond the
crawl toward it through a tunnel. I've seen tired beyond the Aleutians. The total
some big pots come up with 125 to 150 crabs ade remained effective.
strength of both Russian and Japanese fleets in them.” ENVOYS MAY MEET
in Alaskan waters is now estimated to be A record crab, he said, weighed 26 pounds In contrast to Washington's reaction to the about 50 vessels. However, the Russians
and measured more than 6 feet from the tip last blockade October 11, the administration alone are believed to have had 180 fishing
of one leg to another. It takes a male crab did not call for an emergency session of the vessels in the eastern Bering Sea and North
7 or 8 years to grow to acceptable size. Pacific last summer. four-power ambassadorial steering committee
The Russian trawlers, on the other hand, on Berlin affairs.
Crab fishing is done the year-round, and
are equipped to stay on the fishing grounds A high State Department source said to
the winter months are often among the most months at a time. night that the group, composed of repreproductive. Mayor Pete Deveau of Kodiak,
The incident in which the seven Soviet à fisherman who operated a crab cannery sentatives of Britain, France, the Soviet
vessels invaded an area where Kodiak crab Union and the United States, would probably for 9 years, says the crabmeat taken from
fishers were numerous occurred not far in be convened tomorrow if the blockade conDecember through March is prime.
advance of North Pacific Treaty renegotiatinued.
There is speculation, therefore, that the tion talks held by the United States, Canada, The first protests against the blockade Soviet fleet has retired only temporarily. and Japan in Tokyo. were made this morning by U.S. officials to The Coast Guard, under the supervision of Lowell Wakefield, who operates a processSoviet commanders at the Marienborn check- Rear Adm. G. D. Synon, commandant of the ing plant at Port Wakefield 40 miles northpoint.
17th District with headquarters at Juneau, west of Kodiak, and who was an American adU.S. military commanders in Berlin were is maintaining an aerial and surface sur viser at the Tokyo sessions, said the Soviet also ordered to protest the incident at the veillance.
fishermen might have acted “to force us to Soviet Army headquarters in Potsdam.
“We regard the Alaska fishermen as people invite Russia to join in.”
who are entitled to our help and protection He suggested that in most cases where REAFFIRM WEST'S RIGHTS
rather than as objects of our law enforce crab pots had been lost, the Soviet actions The American representations were pri- ment,” the admiral said in an interview. had not been deliberate. However, he told a marily intended to reaffirm Western rights of “But we still require that the law be ob- recent meeting of the State chamber of comaccess to Berlin. They also were to remind served under all conditions."
merce at Juneau that the situation was one
in which "all hell could break loose" unless
There being no objection, the article and damage the American Continent were the problem was solved.
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, few in number and vulnerable to neutralizaAlthough Mr. Wakefield urged more inter
tion by the enormously superior and diversias follows: national conferences, he declared:
fied nuclear weapons system which we had "Foreign fishing activity in Alaska waters, THE ATLANTIC FUTURE: EUROPE'S CHOICE
by then developed. While the risks to the at or even above present levels, is something
(By Senator FRANK CHURCH)
United States had been greatly increased, we will have to learn to live with.”
(NOTE.-FRANK CHURCH, the guest in the
there was room to suppose that we could, if Attorney General Hayes said the testimony easy chair this month, has been U.S. Senator
necessary, obliterate Soviet power without from 16 witnesses, including 14 fishermen, all from Idaho since 1957 and is a member of
suffering mortal damage in return. Now in of whom had lost gear to Russian trawlers, the Foreign Relations Committee. He was
the third and present phase, this assumption had convinced him that the incident "was keynoter of the Democratic National Conven
can no longer be made. Each nuclear giant not accidental." tion in 1960, and a military intelligence of
possesses weapons sufficient in number, in “By destroying some of the gear the Rusficer in World War II.)
diversification, in concealment, or in invulsians apparently felt the Americans would
nerability, to insure that it could withstand
If the partial test ban treaty is the first pack up and go home," he declared. crack in the glacier we call the cold war, it
a first strike by its adversary and thereafter Mr. Hayes and other officials asserted, howshould serve to remind us of how massive and
inflict nearly total destruction upon him. ever, that they did not think the maneuvers prolonged a thaw is yet required before the
The consequence of this third phase is were "necessarily directed by Moscow." danger of nuclear disaster finally melts away.
that Europeans must ask themselves for Oscar Dyson, one of the witnesses, testiIn the years immediately ahead, the treaty
the first time-if it is really believable that fied that he and his fishing partner were in no sense diminishes the importance of
the American nation would suffer immola"going to find some means—what it is I don't our defensive alliances, chief among which
tion in their defense. And the question is know-of taking care of our own property in is NATO.
not whether we, the Americans, believe that our own way."
Yet NATO is now drifting into a deepen
we would do this, or whether the Europeans Mr. Dyson indicated he had nothing spe
believe we would do it. For it is evident cific in mind beyond such steps as “urging ing crisis that our European allies seem either unwilling or unable to counteract.
that a deterrent has failed if it has to be our Government to give some protection for Everyone agrees, on both sides of the Atlan
used, and it follows from this that it is our gear." tic, as to the fact that a crisis exists. Para
only the Russian belief about the conditions "Most American fishermen feel our Gov
doxically, it is the very success of NATO in under which it would be used-not our beernment in the last 10 years has taken a more
lief or that of our allies, or even the objective or less weakened position in the fishery ques
accomplishing its original objectives which
fact itself—which is ultimately determination," he said.
tive. NATO was originally established to prevent Western Europe, the heartland of our com
I know of no way to remove, absolutely, mon civilization, from falling under Russian
the doubts which some Europeans have THE ATLANTIC'S FUTURE: rule. For over 14 years, NATO's shield has
raised about the answer to this question. included large numbers of American troops,
The cornerstone of American policy has been, EUROPE'S CHOICE whose presence in Europe has been proof of
and remains, that the defense of the West Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I invite the the American commitment to invoke her nu
is indivisible. Our President has recently attention of my colleagues to a singularly clear power, as NATO's sword, in the event reaffirmed, in Germany, that our forces will
remain so long as they are wanted and interesting and provocative article en- of a Communist attack. American arms of
needed; that we will put our cities to the titled “The Atlantic's Future: Europe's both conventional and nuclear character were
hazard in defense of theirs. He spoke with Choice” by the able and thoughtful required to make NATO work; that is, to keep
absolute sincerity and conviction, and with the Russians at bay while the countries of senior Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH) Western Europe, battered and broken in the
the support of the American people. Still, which appears in the current November aftermath of the war, were regaining their
the proposition itself is without precedent issue of Harper's magazine. health and strength.
in human history. It cannot be tested or Senator CHURCH has always been a I do not believe that either the American
proved in advance. While it may be conman with a fine and far-reaching intel- people or the Senate of the United States,
vincing to the Soviets, it evidently is no lect. More important, he has never been which ratified the treaty establishing NATO,
longer convincing to all Europeans, for, if
it were, there would clearly be no need for afraid to use it. In the changing and regarded our entry as an arrangement for
France to pursue the effort now in progress fast-moving world in which we live, this stationing American forces permanently in ability to explore and probe for openings, household threatened by fire, but they are Europe. Firemen are welcomed into a
to create, at great difficulty and expense, a
separate national nuclear capability. to seek out new policies which might be not expected to remain inside indefinitely
This brings me to the second fundamental more effective and advantageous to the as residents. So it ought not to be surpris
change in circumstances which accounts for United States, is an excellent quality. ing-in view of the remarkable recovery in
the crisis in NATO. It is that Europe now Our national policies must be the serv Western Europe which has occurred—that
has, for the first time, the capacity to create ants of our national interests. When some Europeans should begin to ask, "How for itself an alternative to reliance upon policies become stultified by a changing much longer are the Americans to stay?" or American power. I make a distinction here
between nuclear capability of modest dimenworld, then the policies must change, be- that some Americans should begin to in
sions, useful chiefly as a means of augmentcause we certainly cannot roll back the quire,,"How much longer will we be welcome?"
ing the prestige or bargaining power of its tide of world events, nor should we want
We have come to the end of the era for possessor-perhaps having the potential of to do so. Too often our adherence to out- which NATO was created. The circum
invoking, under some conditions, the use dated policies remind me of the man who, stances have changed. We must remold the of American power-and a genuine nuclear with considerable effort, has lost a great alliance to fit present conditions, or the crisis deterrent, capable of massive or controlled deal of weight. He then finds his suits within it will grow. NATO cannot remain response in a variety of strategic situations. do not fit him, so what does he do? In- static and stay relevant; it must be trans It is the latter which free Europe now has
the population, the economic base, the techstead of buying new suits, or cutting the formed or abandoned; it will adapt to the
nological resources, and the developing poold suits down to his present size, he feels new era as a useful instrument to serve the objectives we hold in common with our al
litical institutions to create and command, he must immediately regain weight in lies, or it will come apart from the stress of if it chooses. In most of these categories, order to fill out his old suits.
mounting internal pressures. So we must Western Europe now surpasses the Soviet Senator CHURCH points out that two clearly identify those changes in circum Union itself. If Europe determines that the sensible alternatives face Western Eu- stances which have rendered NATO, as origi effort is necessary or desirable, it can in due rope today. The European can either de- nally conceived, obsolete.
course equip itself to match the Soviet velop an all European multilateral nu
To begin with, there has been a change in Union, bomb for bomb, rocket for rocket. clear deterrent, in which case there is no bility, of the American nuclear deterrent. the relative strength and hence in the credi
It would then, of course, be free from dependmore need for us to remain in Europe. This change has taken place in three phases.
ence upon a nuclear deterrent provided and
controlled by the United States. Or they can rely on the American nu
In the first phase, only the United States The present drift in free Europe points clear deterrent, in which case they must possessed massive strike capability with nu toward the eventual development of sepacarry more of the financial burdens, clear weapons. The Soviet Union could op rate national nuclear systems, even though leadership and manpower responsibilities pose us with conventional land power alone. this course represents the most unstable, in the free world. But the Europeans
Our deterrent was believable and, there costly, and inefficient method for achieving must make one choice or the other.
fore, effective, so long as the Soviets in fact nuclear self-sufficiency. Perhaps this is inI ask unanimous consent to insert this vent, or to punish intolerably, a march by understood that it would be used to pre evitable, as long as Western Europe remains
a loose association of wholly sovereign states. remarkably thoughtful article, and an them on the West. In the second phase, the The possession of nuclear weapons cannot article with which I find myself in gen- Soviets, too, possessed weapons of mass de be separated from the sovereign power to eral agreement, in the RECORD.
struction. But the ones which could reach command them, for they represent in today's
world the instruments of life or death--for partnership across the Atlantic until Europe ing Chancellor Adenauer and Berlin Mayor the country which has them, for its ad has achieved cohesion to match and balance Brandt. versaries, and quite probably for its allies. the unified power of the United States.
Although I spoke only my personal views What I have thus far said carries the im In addition to this advantage, there would at Tutzing, the reaction to my speech caused plication that there is an inherent incom- be others incidental to Europe's assuming me to feel that the United States ought to patibility in this new state of affairs between full responsibility for its own defense. The acknowledge openly that Europeans have sovereignty, if that sovereignty involves pos American adverse balance-of-payments prob their choices to make. session and control of nuclear weapons, and lem would then lend itself to ready solution. If nuclear parity for Western Europe bealliance. I think this is the case, and that It is entirely possible, also, that the vexing comes their chosen course, then it can be this single concept summarizes and explains problems resulting from the artificial diyi realized only through the creation of a genthe reasons for the crisis in NATO.
sion of Europe between East and West, which uine European deterrent. This would be a The continued expansion in Europe of do not seem amenable to negotiations be great step toward European union, even if nuclear capability under national control tween Washington and the Kremlin, could it had to be undertaken initially without will expose the United States to intolerable be approached from new perspectives by De Gaulle. An empty chair could always be risks, so long as our troops are there, and so Europeans negotiating with Europeans. left for France to occupy eventually. long as we are committed to regard any at If the problem of attaining a sovereign, We must never forget that the most crititack upon our European allies as an attack integrated European Nuclear Defense Com cal test of a deterrent is its credibility. A upon ourselves, In these circumstances, mand proves to be insuperable, and this substantial nuclear retaliatory force, able to every additional national finger upon the further step toward a more perfect union survive and strike back lethally at an agnuclear trigger means one more country among the countries of Western Europe is gressor-commanded by Europeans-is the other than the United States with power to not taken, there is the other alternative: most believable deterrent that can be posed decide what Americans will die for. While Let Europe forgo nuclear armament and con against any future threat to attack Europe. the risks involved in sharing this fateful tinue, so long as the cold war makes it neces Its existence would minimize the risk that power with a single independent European sary, to rely upon the United States to fur the Soviets might someday mistake our instate, or with a suitable command structure nish the nuclear deterrent against a So tention or our will to defend Europe as our representing all of Western Europe, might viet attack upon the Continent.
own homeland, and thus reduce the chance be acceptable, it is too much to ask that we From our national point of view, this
of war. share it with every European country stock alternative is to be preferred; but I think Further, the establishment of such a force ing a nuclear arsenal of its own, each with that if we Americans are to be Europe's
in Europe would enable us to restore norits own sense of destiny and order of priori- nuclear sentinels, stationed there for indefi
malcy to our relationship with the contities. nite duty, then we have a right to ask our
nent. History has a way of abhorring anomIn short, the present drift toward proliferallies for fairer arrangements.
alies. It is as unnatural for American troops ation in the control of nuclear weapons
Let it be understood that we are there
and weapons to be stationed indefinitely unless it is checked, will eventually force the as invited guests, not as intruders; that
on European soil, as it would be for French, United States to withdraw from Europe. our presence in Europe is no longer a res British, or German soldiers to be permaTime is running out on the NATO alliance. cue mission, extended by the strong to the
nently billeted here in the United States. The 1960's will tell the tale. weak, but simply a division of responsibil
Finally, the deliberate substitution of a What then of the future? How are we to ity, as between rich equals, for mutual ad
European nuclear force would permit the orreconcile the conflicting positions on control vantage. If we furnish our nuclear de
derly withdrawal of American power from terrent for the defense of Europe, as well as of nuclear weapons which now plague the
Western Europe, under conditions of our alliance? I think we must begin by recog
our physical presence to make this deter-
own choosing, without impairment of Eunizing that no device or technical arrangement designed to gloss over the differences, must make fair exchanges, including at least
I must report, however, that German rewithout really changing anything, will suffice. two elements:
action seemed heavily to favor the second of
1. No further diffusion of nuclear arms, As strongly as De Gaulle feels that France
the alternatives I suggested-a confining remust have its own deterrent, we feel just for this will involve intolerable risks, both to us and to Europe itself. If we are to European opinion bears out the apparent
liance on the U.S. nuclear deterrent. If other as strongly that we must retain control over
have the responsibility for holding at bay the risks to which we are exposed-so long
German belief that Europe is not yet preas American forces are committed in Europe the weapons of mass destruction which
pared to form a single nuclear command, it and we supply the nuclear means for meetmight otherwise be used to smash or black
seems all the more important to me to conmail our NATO allies, we must ask that they ing or preventing an attack against it. It is
front the Europeans with the fact that they rely on us to honor that trust in our compossible to share a master plan for program
do have such an alternative within their mon interest, come what may. ing and targeting, but the core decisions
reach and that this choice is theirs. about the use of American nuclear weapons
2. Equitable financial and economic ar
Our failure to do just this is helping to must be made by Americans. rangements to assist us in solving our ad
widen the gulf between the developing atI think there are, however, alternative
verse balance-of-payments problem. In this
connection, it is notable that our military titudes in Washington and the capitals of solutions to the problem. The first is for
Western Europe. As James Reston recently disbursements abroad contribute five times Europe—not France or Germany or even
observed in his column in the New York as much to the drain on our dollar resources Great Britain, but Western Europe—to un
Times: as do all of our foreign-aid programs. There dertake a unified effort to arm itself with
“The leaders in London and Bonn increasis no good reason why the force levels of a genuine nuclear-deterrent capability. To
American troops quartered in Europe should ingly talk as if they were spectators rather do this would require an integrated pronot be reduced, and the difference made up
than participants in the conflict between gram, not merely because of the expense, by an added commitment of European troops
the giant nations. but chiefly because it would be necessary to the NATO command. It is essential, too,
"Britons see nothing odd in the fact that to create a unified command structure with that European trade barriers against Amer
America should conscript its men to defend the sovereign power to invoke the use of its
ican agricultural and industrial products be Europe while Britain has not only abannuclear weapons in the defense of Western
reduced or removed as speedily as possible. doned conscription but is hoping to bring Europe. It seems to me that it would be
Finally, we have a right to ask that Eu its army back from Germany. in the interest of the United States to en
rope assume an increased share of the cost “The widely held assumption in West Eucourage and assist Europeans to make this
of aiding the underdeveloped countries of the rope is that Europe can be both proteceffort. We could then withdraw our forces
world in those needy regions of Africa, Asia, tionist and prosperous, self-sufficient ecofrom the Continent in an orderly fashion,
and Latin America where the struggle with nomically and dependent on the United leaving Europe with its own defense, and communism is yet to be won.
States militarily, and that Washington will both Europe and America could thus mini
There are heavy burdens and responsibili go on putting 11 percent of its gross namize the risks inherent in the proliferation ties, for Europeans as well as for Americans,
tional product into defense and foreign aid of separate national defenses.
whichever alternative is chosen. And the while some of the allies are doing less than This course need not involve, as might be choice, after all, is Europe's. Either course
half as much proportionately. first supposed, a return to isolationism on
would seem acceptable to the United States. “How this attitude of mind developed in the part of the United States. On the con What is not acceptable is a continuation of Europe is clear enough. In the early posttrary, the creation of a European entity ca
present trends which point toward the dis war years of poverty and reconstruction, pable of assembling and commanding a uni integration of the Atlantic alliance, leaving Western Europe not only came to rely on the fied European nuclear deterrent could con a vacuum of policy and power, with dimin- United States but gradually accepted the tribute to a stronger partnership, spanning ished security for all.
idea that power in the modern world had the Atlantic, for the defense and develop These thoughts were largely the substance become proportional to mass, and therefore ment of our common civilization. I say it of an address I delivered this June at the that only gross material size (population, could contribute, because partnership is illu Evangelical Academy in Tutzing, Bavaria, area, and raw materials) could be effective in sory if one partner is in a position to domi before a gathering of lay leaders represent world politics. There is now less evidence nate the others. Just as there can be no ing various professional, business, and labor of poverty and unemployment anywhere in authentic European entity under the hegem- groups. The conference was attended by Western Europe than in many parts of the ony of France, so there can be no equal numerous German political leaders, includ- United States but this attitude persists and,
what is more disturbing, seems to be grow The same suggestion was made last came from the State and Agriculture Deing.”
week in Lincoln, Nebr., by Dr. Galen Say- partments. Speaking in the Senate on Once the Europeans realize that we are lor, chairman of the University of Ne- October 2, Senator COOPER told of the not imposing our presence upon them for
braska's Department of Secondary Edu- joint meeting which the Senate Foreign purposes of our own defense, and that their
cation. continued reliance upon our nuclear power
Relations Committee and the Senate is the result of their own decision, then
Dr. Saylor, who has spent considerable Agriculture Committee held on Septemthey will see the justice in assuming an in time in Finland, reminded the Lincoln ber 30. Present in addition to the memcreased burden in conventional arms, as Kiwanis Club that Russia insists on po- bers of the committees were the Under their share of the common effort, and in litical guarantees from Finland in order Secretary of State George Ball, Secrehelping us to solve some of our financial
that the Finns may gain trade agree- tary of Agriculture Orville Freeman, and problems which are directly related to the ments with the Soviets.
Secretary of Commerce Luther Hodges. cost of our presence in Europe. Moreover, for Europeans to make this
Why not turn the tables on Russia now Senator COOPER attended the meeting. choice consciously will reduce the appeal of that she needs the wheat? If she balks at He told this body: de Gaulle's resistance to American leader- our conditions, let her go elsewhere for
If the proposal were to relieve hunger in ship on the Continent, and render more wheat. The sale of a mere fraction of our
Russia, I have no doubt that there would acceptable our insistence that other Eurosurplus wheat is not so important as to
be no great objection by the Congress and pean nations must forgo separate nuclear justify a compromising, timid attitude
the people generally, because the relief of armaments of their own.
towards international relations on our part. hunger wherever it may occur has been the After I had spoken at Tutzing, one of the It is interesting, Mr. President, that Dr. traditional policy of our country * Germans in the audience said to me, "SenSaylor used the word "compromising,"
But it is not claimed by the executive branch ator, you have made a hard speech, but an because that is exactly
the word Sunday's of our Government that the wheat is needed honest one. To us, this is the best evidence
New York Times used in its headline over of real friendship."
And at another point in his thoughtAnother said, "As I see it, you have told a story by William M. Blair which relates us we will have to pay more. I think you
that the administration is backing away ful remarks, Senator COOPER declared: are right."
from its initial insistence that the wheat I conclude by saying that the proposed be shipped to Russia in American vessels. sale of wheat may not be a major transac
Mr. Blair reports that the United tion. On the other hand, it would not reTHE WHEAT DEAL-WHO IS States has proposed to lower the rates lieve hunger in the Soviet Union. It would CONCEDING TO WHOM? paid to American shipowners and that enable the Soviet Union to meet its trade
commitments. the cargoes will be divided between Mr. HRUSKA. Mr. President, since United States and foreign-flag shipping.
These conclusions were reached by the President Kennedy's announcement of
Thus, Mr. President, instead of win- Senator from Kentucky after listening to this Nation's willingness to sell wheat to Russia, there has been a great deal of ning concessions from the Soviets, the the discussions of the Under Secretary of discussion as to whether the United administration is eagerly seeking to State, the Secretary of Agriculture, and
accommodate to Russian demands. It is the Secretary of Commerce. If the adStates should not demand appropriate we, not they, who are making the ministration
ministration were not so
were not so averse to political concessions in return. concessions.
Cabinet meetings, perhaps the White A thoughtful discussion of this matter
Last week, speaking to a Nebraska House spokesman to whom I have reappeared in this Sunday's edition of the audience about the wheat sale, I stated ferred would have learned what is genWashington Post in an article by Mr. that Russia's principal purpose in mak- erally known and
accepted in the Capital Zbigniew Brzezinski, director of the Re- ing the purchase was to resell the wheat and which Mr. Brzezinski put in these search Institute on Communist Affairs to other nations for a profit. Her con- words in his Washington Post article: and professor of public law and govern- cern, in other words, was not to relieve First of all, there is no famine in Russia. ment at Columbia University.
any hunger within her own borders, but The Soviet people are not starving, and the Professor Brzezinski points out that to fulfill wheat export obligations to the Government has not lost all of its ability to the sale of wheat to the Soviets cannot Eastern Europe satellites, to Latin
meet a food crisis. be justified on humanitarian grounds:
Second, the importation of wheat is necAmerican nations and elsewhere. In
essary to the Soviet Union in order for it to First of all, there is no famine in Russia. this fashion Russia clearly intends not meet its grain export commitments. These The Soviet people are not starving, and the only to get back the $250 million she commitments are important to the Soviet government has not lost all of its ability to would pay to the United States for the leadership primarily for political reasons. meet a food crisis. It could certainly divert some of its resources from heavy industry to wheat, but also to reap a profit by the
Mr. President, I ask unanimous conbetter agricultural management and it is transaction.
sent to have printed in the RECORD Prostill capable of providing the basic staples Is it not curious that with our own fessor Brzezinski's article from the Noto meet Russian needs.
commodities and cooperation, the same vember 3 edition of the Washington Post, The wheat deal, says this expert on nation which has boasted she will bury
an account of Dr. Saylor's speech which Russian affairs, is vital to the Kremlin us and which therefore
compels us to appeared in the November
1 edition of expend a $1 billion a week, every week the Lincoln Journal, and Mr. Blair's arfor two reasons:
in the year, to maintain an invincible ticle from the November 3 New York The first is the stability of the collective defense posture—is assured of getting a Times. agricultural system itself. Over many years, profitmaking $250 million wheat sale that system has failed to deliver the goods, without giving any concessions on her were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
There being no objection, the articles at least so far as the Soviet consumer is concerned. Yet to the political leadership, the own part? One could say this is a as follows: collective system is essential. mighty poor showing for well-known
[From the Washington (D.C.) Post, Secondly, the importation of wheat is Yankee shrewdness. I only hope that
Nov. 3, 1963) necessary to the Soviet Union in order for the Kennedy round elsewhere is more POLICIES OF WHEAT DEAL GIVES UNITED STATES it to meet its grain export commitments. successful.
UPPER HAND These commitments are important to the Last Friday night in my home city of
(By Zbigniew Brzezinski) Soviet leadership primarily for political Omaha, a White House spokesman at
It has been argued that the wheat deal reasons.
tempted to reply to the portion of my with the Soviet Union is desirable on huThus, Mr. President, since the wheat remarks about Russia's use of the wheat manitarian grounds. If Russian people are deal is so clearly in the interests of sup- purchased for resale to other nations. starving, the United States should not stand
back, said former President Truman on the porting and maintaining the present In part, he stated: Communist system, it seems particularly
Possibly Senator HRUSKA has information
radio, and he has been echoed by some the Central Intelligence Agency, the Depart
clergymen and by various people of good will. strange that the administration appears ment of State, and the Department of Agri
Others have suggested that the wheat completely unwilling to follow the course culture do not have. From the best infor
deal is purely a matter of economics. The suggested by Professor Brzezinski: mation that could be gathered, the
Russians need our wheat; we can use their
gold. Their food needs will be met; our This wheat deal ought to be viewed in a Russians do need wheat for internal commitments.
food surpluses will be diminished. We both political perspective and U.S. negotiators
gain equally. ought to seek political concessions from the Mr. President, the information upon The humanitarian argument can be disSoviets in return.
which this Senator based his statement missed quickly. First of all, there is no CIX-1327