Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Mr. President, the RECORD ought also to include a statement from which I shall read. I have received instructions that the passages indicated by brackets are classified, so I shall not read the bracketed provisions. But I am so desirous of having the American people get all the facts they can get, that this Government of ours, which has traveled so far down the road toward government by secrecy, is willing to let them have, that I do not want the official record to deny the information to them.

The document is dated November 6, 1963, and is entitled "Current Status of U.S. Aid Program in Indonesia. It reads:

GENERAL STATUS

No new commitments have been made since September, when the Indonesian Government rejected formation of Malaysia, embargoed trade with Malaysia and indicated it would continue aiding insurgents in Sara

wak and Subah.

AID at that time suspended consideration of a loan to support the Indonesian-IMF stabilization program and canceled plans to organize through SAC a free world package of assistance to that program.

AID at that time also suspended consideration of a development project loan.

Let us not be fooled. That is the "slap on the wrist" stage, the calling of calling of "naughty, naughty," to Sukarno. But Sukarno is a trickster; he is invidious and clever, and it will not be long before he will make more false promises and unreliable statements; and the State Department will say, "But we have no

alternative; things will be worse if we do not help him." But, Mr. President, what "will be worse if we do not help" will be a lot of scarcecrow fears that will be dragged up, and therefore he will receive more of our aid, and away we will go again with false starts and stops and

stops and starts in connection with our

foreign aid, instead of cutting off our aid at the pockets, and no longer dealing

with Indonesia.

I read further from the memorandum:

Ongoing programs, under previous agreements, in technical assistance and training of civil and military leaders and professional people, in malaria eradication and in military civic action have been continued.

Public Law 480 food-for-peace deliveries have continued, but no new commitments have been made.

Composition of the continuing program (showing current annual costs for fiscal year 1964 program as revised):

Technical assistance and training, approximately $10 million from development grants. These programs are our means of improving the prospects for better and more responsible management of Indonesian affairs—

Mr. President, what wishful thinking. We have a remarkable State Department, composed in considerable part of the most hopeful daydreamers imaginable. So we are informed by the memorandum that:

These programs are our means of improving the prospects for better and more responsible management of Indonesian affairs

By whom? Who in the Sukarno government justifies any such pious hopes? Sukarno is no good, and he should not be receiving any American aid.

The memorandum continues:

They are in direct competition with the Communist campaign to gain control of elite groups and the government.

So we still have the old scarecrow argument, "If we do not do something for them, the 'Commies' will come in."

That argument, which I call the "Commie" blackmail argument, has cost the U.S. taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars; and it is about time the American people say, in answer to it, "Why can people say, in answer to it, "Why should we care? We have offered to support stability in Indonesia; we have offered to support a government which would recognize and respect human dignity and human rights, instead of tyranny and police-state methods."

Mr. President, I yield to no one in my hatred of communism; but I do not know that those people would be any worse off under one kind of police state than under another. However, the argument now presented to us is the same sort of argument of expediency that the State Department uses over and over again. I have sat in the Foreign Relations Committee for years and have heard that argument used under both Republican administrations and Democratic administrations; and I do not "buy" it any more.

Then the memorandum states:

Present and future Indonesian leaders in

key fields are trained in the United States and by U.S. university contract teams and other specialists in Indonesia.

At this point I omit some classified material that is in the memorandum; and now I read unclassified material from it: AID supporting assistance is providing

training, technical advisers, communications and transportation equipment to the mobile (police) brigade, a national constabulary, which, with the army, is the principal deterrent to a potential Communist insurrection.

ment-the same old pattern; we are constantly told they are doing something to stop a supposed defeat or a Communist insurrection, because they have found that when that argument is used, found that when that argument is used, some will take the position, "If that is So, we had better do something." But, Mr. President, that is the fear argument, not a fact argument.

They always have to include that argu

I read further from the memorandum: MAP is providing civic action equipment supporting the Army's program of constructive works in areas where it is competing with the PKI (Communist Party) for popular support

That is supposedly the Communist Party.

Then the memorandum states:

It also provides training of military officers and maintenance.

Malaria eradication assistance, approximately $3 to $4 million, in cooperation with the World Health Organization, provides DDT, sprayers, drugs, other equipment and technical advice in a scientifically scheduled program designed to eradicate malaria by 1970 in the central islands where 65 million Indonesians live.

So there is one humanitarian, Christian item for which a case can be made; but in such situations, that work should be done through the Red Cross or through the agencies of the United Nations.

I read further from the memorandum: Public Law 480 sales for rupiahs of U.S. rice, cotton, tobacco and other agricultural

surpluses under previous commitments, approximately $35 million in the pipe line.

Mr. President, that is the current status. I repeat that we should stop it.

I always try to be fair and to place in the RECORD anything I have which represents the position of the executive branch. I used to teach my students, "Remember that you have no right, in behalf of your client, to deny to a court of justice the facts the court is entitled to know in order to be able to render a just decision."

So I have before me a statement of an executive branch position on the subject of prohibition of assistance to Indonesia.

The State Department would have us know that

PROHIBITION OF ASSISTANCE TO INDONESIA

The following points may be made in opposition to an amendment to prohibit all assistance to the Republic of Indonesia.

1. Geography and population place Indonesia in so important a strategic position that its continued independence of Communist bloc domination must be a primary objective of U.S. policy toward Indonesia, whether or not the Indonesian Government always acts as we consider proper. Indonesia lies between southeast Asia and our SEATO Allies, Australia and New Zealand, and controls the entrance to the Indian Ocean.

It would be very interesting to learn what our great allies, Australia and New Zealand, are doing in this regard. I should like to know how many of their taxpayers dollars are being sunk in this rathole. But, of course, we know what their position generally is. What are they doing in South Vietnam? They are not there.

Continuing to read from the memoran

dum:

Were Indonesia to fall into Communist hands, it would be a catastrophe to the free world and would place the entire U.S. military effort in Southeast Asia in grave jeopardy.

That is the old domino theory. It always has been false. It never has had any sense connected with it. Does any Senator think that Indonesia protects us in southeast Asia?

Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield at that point? Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. TALMADGE. Is that not the Sukarno and the same Indonesia that we witnessed in a naked act of aggression in going into New Guinea and taking territory that, by no stretch of the imagination, had ever belonged to Indonesia? In the final analysis, our State Department supported that naked act of aggression against our ally, the Dutch. Mr. MORSE. The Senator is correct. It is the same Sukarno.

Mr. TALMADGE. Is that not the Sukarno and the same Indonesia who are threatening a war now against a new state which has just been created out of a former British possession?

Mr. MORSE. The same tyrant. Mr. GRUENING. And the same State Department.

Mr. MORSE. I really never find any significant change in the policies of the State Department from one party administration to another.

What defends America in that part of the world? Not any of the countries into which we are asked to pour money on the basis of the domino theory. America is defended in that part of the world by the 7th Fleet, American airpower, and American troops in the Pacific. That is what defends America's security.

I say that we ought to keep American boys out of areas such as that. They are not worth the life of a single American boy.

I took a great deal of criticism because I once said on the floor of the Senateand I repeat today-that all of South Vietnam is not worth a single American boy. Neither is Indonesia.

We do not need those parts of the world to defend American security in the Pacific. It is about time that we stopped pouring the American taxpayers' money into one rat hole after another in that area of the world. If they want to go Communist, let them boil in Communist juices. Perhaps one of the greatest disservices that we could perform for Khrushchev would be to let him take over some of those countries.

I say to the State Department that I am doing the Department a favor by putting the memorandum into the RECORD. In my judgment, it is not worth the paper it is written on.

I continue reading from the memorandum:

2. Faced with the inescapable fact of Indonesia's strategic importance, the Executive proposes this year a very modest military assistance program, carefully designed to strengthen the Indonesian Army, one of the strongest anti-Communist elements within the Indonesian military.

The Senator from Alaska is correct. That surely is news.

That program emphasizes training in the United States, civic action and internal communications. The record of the Indonesian military commends it for U.S. support.

It was the army which suppressed

the last Communist uprising in 1948. The army has continued to maintain a strongly anti-Communist posture. Even while Indonesia was receiving upward of $1 billion of military aid from the Soviet Union, the army steadfastly held to its anti-Communist posture. It would be utter folly for us to now abandon Indonesian military. The fact is that Indonesia is not now a Communist nation. To treat it as such would be to drive it in that direction and would undermine the anti-Communist elements in that country.

Who is Sukarno sending or proposing to send into Malaysia, which was referred to by the Senator from Georgia? A bunch of Indonesian Boy Scouts? It is the Indonesian Army, which is highly touted by the U.S. State Department in this so-called position paper. It is a position paper, all right, but it is not a position paper that is in the interest of the American people.

To continue reading from the memorandum:

3. Again, in view of the primary strategic importance of Indonesia, the President must be free to provide economic aid to Indonesia if and to the extent such assistance will further our objectives. Our objective is

clear

And I am glad the State Department knows how clear it is. I am waiting for

them to let us in on the big dark secret. If there was ever a fuzzy, befuddled, muddled, confused policy, it is the U.S. policy toward Indonesia and toward a good many other places in the world where we ought to get out and stop wasting the American taxpayers' dollars.

To continue reading from the memorandum:

Our objective is clear: to focus Indonesia's energy and great potential on the development of an independent, responsible nation whose policies do not clash dangerously with those of the United States. The timing and content of our economic assistance to Indonesia will relate directly to this objective. The AID program will consist primarily of training of present and potential Indonesian leaders, in the United States and through U.S. university contractors and others in Indonesia. If Indonesian policies and performances are to be changed for the better, such training assistance is surely an essential investment.

Of course, it is a false assumption. To continue reading from the memorandum:

AID also is equipping and training the mobile (police) brigade, a constabulary whose chief is outspokenly anti-Communist and whose senior staff now is largely U.S. trained.

We have had a great deal of experience with U.S. trained constabulary and military. We have had experience with U.S.-trained military in the Dominican Republic. They are so well trained that they seized and overthrew a constitutionally elected government. We have had experience with American military trained personnel in Honduras. They were so well trained that they overthrew a constitutionally elected government only a few days before an election in which the major issue in the election propounded by the leading candidate for the Presidency-and he was generally admitted to be the one who was going to win the election-was that he was run

ning on a platform that there ought to be a change in the Constitution so that the Honduras military would be subject to the control of the President as commander in chief. We think that is pretty good American doctrine, do we not? We think that is pretty good constitutionalism, do we not?

We think that one of the great protections of the freedom of the American people; namely, that the American military shall be subject to the control of a civilian commander in chief in the person of the President of the United States. We have been training under the American military program military officers in various countries around the world who have been so well trained by us that, following the course of training, they organize themselves into military juntas to overturn constitutional governments.

I wish to say to the State Department, "You do not make any impression on me by pleading for aid to Indonesia on the ground that they are training Indonesian military officers."

I am not so sure that that is not one of the greatest disservices we could perform for the Indonesian people.

This remarkable document continues: The malaria-eradication campaign in the central Indonesian islands, part of a world

wide program in cooperation with the World Health Organization, is the other major AID project in Indonesia.

Moreover, it should be noted that when Indonesia resumed its its policy of "confrontation" and embargoed trade with Malaysia in September, we immediately suspended plans to help organize free world support for the Indonesian economic stabilization program; work on a pending AID stabilization loan and consideration of a development loan were halted. However, an absolute bar on any economic aid to Indonesia, primarily training, which is designed to strengthen non-Communist forces and institutions in that country would be clearly contrary to U.S. interests and a boon to the Communists.

My reaction is that it is nonsense. believe the whole foregoing part of the position paper as an argument shows why it is hopeless to expect Indonesia to be a proper place for us to continue spending millions of American taxpayers' dollars. That is the record of what we have been doing.

Let me say to the Senator from Wisconsin that I am perplexed. I know the parliamentary position he is in and the parliamentary position he puts me in. He apparently has an agreement that the amendment will be adopted. I do not believe it will amount to much. I believe, for the most part, it is an expression of a pious hope. I do not believe it has any teeth in it, or any handcuffs in it, that will have any deterrent effect upon any President. He will go ahead and use the unchecked discretion which is his. He will send a report to the Foreign Relations Committee, and to the Appropriations Committee of the Senate, and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which will not call for any action. Those committees and the Speaker will be the receptacles for the communications, which will be nicely filed. If there is anything we need in Government it is more filing cabinets to

hold papers that do not require affirmative action.

The amendment will have the advantage, at least, for those who wish the knowledge to be placed on notice of what the President is doing. That is an argument in favor of the amendment.

It will have some educational value, but it does not amount to much.

That is no reflection on the Senator from Wisconsin. I congratulate him, because he has focused attention on the problem. I believe I will vote for the amendment. I hope that next week, when I offer an amendment to cut off Indonesia completely, the Senator from Wisconsin will give the same careful consideration-as I am sure he will-to my amendment as I am giving to his. I hope that when the roll is called he will be with me, as he has been on several rollcalls, which I deeply appreciate.

I thank the Senator for giving me the opportunity to make this record on Indonesia.

The President of the United States needs to take note of the rising tide of opposition and criticism from across the country, in all walks of life, to exactly this kind of waste of the American taxpayers' money in Indonesia. I hope that the President, on some of his trips that he will be making across the country,

will be able to get away from his partisan admirers, away from the parades and the grandstands, and, in some way, somehow, take a sounding of the feelings of the American people and listen to the heartbeat of American public opinion. I am satisfied that public opinion is not with him on this issue.

But I am sure that public opinion overwhelmingly shares my opinion that

we need his continued services; that even though we criticize certain parts of his record, we love him, and we believe, over all, he is a great President, and that he must be continued in office.

I want to keep him as strong as possible for reelection. I know that when we seek to modify the foreign aid bill, we will strengthen his hand to the extent that we modify it.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

question is on agreeing to the amendment, as modified, offered by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. PROXMIRE], for himself and other Senators, to the committee amendment, as amended.

The amendment, as modified, to the committee amendment, as amended, was agreed to.

Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President. I

move that the vote by which the amendment was agreed to be reconsidered.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I move that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The OFFICER. The question is on agreeing on the motion to

lay on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was

agreed to.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Hackney, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House had passed the bill (S. 933) to amend the District of Columbia Practical Nurses' Licensing Act, and for other purposes, with amendments, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate.

The message also announced that the House had agreed to the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2073) to place certain submerged lands within the jurisdiction of the governments of Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, and for other purposes.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED The message further announced that the Speaker had affixed his signature to the enrolled bill (H.R. 1989) to authorize the Government of the Virgin Islands to issue general obligation bonds, and it was signed by the President pro tempore.

AMENDMENT OF FOREIGN ASSIST-
ANCE ACT OF 1961

The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (H.R. 7885) to amend further the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, and for other purposes.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 271, and I ask unanimous consent that the amendment may be printed in the RECORD without being read.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Yugoslavia, when it is not a democratic objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment, ordered to be printed in the RECORD, is as follows:

On page 47, between lines 12 and 13 insert the following:

"(3) Subsection (f), which provides restrictions on assistance to Communist countries, is amended by inserting before the thereof a comma and the following: 'but in

period at the end of the second sentence

no event shall such restriction be waived in

the case of the Federal Peoples Republic of
Yugoslavia"."

On page 47, line 13, strike out "(3)" and
insert in lieu thereof "(4)".

On page 54, after line 4 insert the following:

"(d) Section 107 is amended by inserting before the period at the end thereof a comma and the following: 'or (3) the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia"."

Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I

discussed this amendment with the

chairman of the committee, and he has

government? It is a dictatorship, and a Communist dictatorship. It is true that we give aid to dictatorships. But when we give aid to dictatorships, we do it on the basis of a military quid pro quo-for a base in Spain, or military defense against Communist Russia in Turkey, which has one of the bravest armies in the world, and is standing up to com

munism on its border. We get some kind of advantage in South Korea and other areas. But what advantage is there to be received from Yugoslavia? Yugoslavia is not on our side. It is against us. The suppression of freedom in Yugoslavia has been increased substantially in recent years. I quote from an article written last year by Paul Underwood, in the New York Times. He was recently the New York Times' correspondent in Belgrade:

President Tito's regime is cutting down still further the tiny area in which private business is permitted to function in Communist Yugoslavia's economy.

agreed that if I will modify the amend-
ment he will accept it. I hope, therefore,
that the amendment can be disposed of be eliminated within a year.
rather quickly.

I modify my amendment by deleting
all the language after line 10 on page 1,
including lines 1 and 2 on page 2.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has a right to modify his amendment.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, this amendment would eliminate aid to Yugoslavia, with no "ifs," "ands," or "buts." No aid is to be permitted. No aid for Yugoslavia would be possible to be granted by the President of the United States from the contingency fund, or from any other fund. Aid to Yugoslavia, under the AID program, would be ended by this amendment.

I believe that the argument which the Senator from Oregon has just made is persuasive and eloquent. I believe that the Indonesian amendment could have been strengthened if it had had this provision in it. Certainly it should apply to Yugoslavia.

I shall try to be as concise as I can, and I believe I can complete the discussion of the amendment rather quickly.

We have been trying to follow a policy of having certain conditions complied with for countries to receive aid from the United States. Under the Alliance for Progress, for instance, we insist, before we give any aid to a South American country, that the country match our aid. I engaged in a colloquy with the Senator from Minnesota to establish whether we are living up to these conditions, and he documented the facts to prove that we are.

Before we give aid under the Alliance for Progress, we require matching funds. Before we give aid under the Alliance for Progress, we require tax reforms. Before we give aid under the Alliance for Before we give aid under the Alliance for Progress, we require land reforms. These requirements are not merely stated as language in the bill. These are insisted on in administering the program the Senator from Minnesota has documented.

In view of the fact that we do not give aid to a democratic government in South aid to a democratic government in South America unless it meets those conditions, why in the world should be give aid to

Under new regulations, private taxis will Private trucking and hauling will also be banned within 12 months.

in general production, but will be limited to

Craftsmen will not be permitted to engage

performing services. Private craftsmen, will, moreover, be barred from working on building projects financed with public funds.

A later Underwood article points out: factory harvest, the Tito regime has decided In the midst of its third straight unsatis

to take direct action to enlarge the "socialist

sector" of the Yugoslav agriculture.

The specific target will be the thousands of

peasants who work at other jobs in addition to taking care of small landholdings.

On the basis of what spokesmen have said,

it is evident that the regime plans to use

taxation to force the peasants to choose between being workers or farmers. There appears to be an assumption by the Government that those choosing farming would have to join agricultural cooperatives to maintain their living standards.

The regime's long-range goal is the complete socialization of the countryside. But it also has a short-term aim of quickly increasing the size of the Socialist sector.

Not only is there a situation in Yugoslavia in which the Communist dictator Tito is suppressing economic freedom, but he is trying to rivet the economy of his country closer to that of the Communist bloc.

I quote from Hans Benedict, of the Associated Press:

A gorge of torrential Danube waters between Yugoslavia and Rumania will be turned into a giant lake to help shipping and give the two countries the second biggest powerplant in Europe.

Under an agreement expected to be concluded next month, Yugoslavian and Rumanian experts will start a joint $300 million project in the Iron Gate Strait within 7 years. It calls for a dam and power station with an annual output of 10.7 billion killowatt-hours, nearly as much as Russia's Volga River plant. In other words, it is very nearly the biggest powerplant in all Europe. I continue:

Details of the financing have not been disclosed. The Soviet Union may be a silent partner in the project. Russian ships transport 37 percent of tonnage in the RumanianYugloslav section of the Danube.

Regardless of the argument that Yugoslavia is independent of the Soviet

Union-one which I shall dispute in a moment we all agree that Rumania is behind the Iron Curtain. Rumania's economy is tied tightly to the Soviet Union's economy. Rumania's economy is limited by the Soviet Union's economy. Rumania's economy serves the Soviet Union's economy and military. There is no question that this huge power dam built by Yugoslavia and Rumania is going to serve our biggest Communist adver

sary.

Let me quote once more from Paul Underwood, from the New York Times, because some argument is made that there is growing freedom of expression under Tito. I read from an article of July 23, 1963:

President Tito said today that the new retreat from liberalism in Yugoslavia would affect cultural life as well as politics.

Speaking at the close of a 2-day meeting of the Yugoslav Communist Party's Central

Committee, Marshal Tito declared that his

regime had gone too far in allowing writers freedom of expression.

Although observers generally agree that Yugoslav writers actually have had less freedom of expression than for instance Polish authors, the Yugoslav President asserted:

"We have a very liberal attitude. We shrugged our shoulders thinking nobody would be harmed if we allowed people to say and write what they wanted.

"In this we have gone too far. We certainly do not want to teach writers and tell them what they must write, but we will not allow anyone to write nonsense and caricature and distort our social life."

This means that Tito is increasing not

reducing, increasing suppression of freedom of speech in Yugoslavia. Djilas has been jailed because he wrote "Conversations With Stalin," a book which embarrassed Khrushchev and Tito. Why

did it? Because Djilas showed masterfully that Stalin was not an accident; that he was not simply a brutal psychopath, but that he was a product of communism; that any Communist dictator, whether Stalin or Tito or Khrushchev, who has absolute power and is guided by Communist dogma, will use such power brutally, cruelly, ruthlessly. The truth of what Djilas wrote was illustrated in the Hungarian revolution of 1956, where the cruelty and repression took place not under Stalin, but under Khrushchev.

Who was the apologist for Khrushchev in that instance? Tito. Tito. Tito agreed that he supported what Khrushchev did in Hungary.

Up until 1955 apologists defended Tito on the ground that he was following a national communism for Yugoslavia alone and was committed to it. But in 1955 Tito completely retracted that position and stressed a program of "proletarian internationalism." He said he was opposed to any idea of national communism. He repeated that statement in 1958, and persuaded the Yugoslav Communist Party to formally reject national communism.

He called NATO an instrument of world domination. He said that Yugoslavia stands ready to lend a militant hand to encourage the world communizing process.

Nobody denies that in June 1956 Tito but I believe it is important to get that said at Leningrad:

Yugoslavia in time of war as well as peace marches shoulder to shoulder with the Soviet people toward the same goal-victory of socialism.

Where will Tito and Yugoslavia, which have been aided with American help, be in time of war? Tito said, as I have just avowed him, they will be on the side of the Soviet Union. This is not merely academic. It is a matter of positive fact.

The fact is that he has his own foreign aid program for Asia and Africa. He has loaned millions of dollars to countries so that they may be induced to follow communism.

He supported Ulbrecht against West Germany.

In 1961 he praised the "unanimous resistance of the Cuban people against the aggressive intervention of the U.S. supported freedom fighters."

Tito has made his stand on the side of Castro's Communist government in Cuba, and against us.

In 1963-this year-a few months ago, after Khrushchev's visit with Tito, Tito said, "We agree on every major issue."

It has been said by some able Senators that Tito is a "bone" in Khrushchev's throat. That is the kind of bone we would all like to have. He agrees with Khrushchev and defends him.

He has done something Khrushchev could not do. Tito is the advance guard for communism in Latin America, as well as in Asia and Africa, because he can pose as an independent. But he follows a policy of international proletarianism, international communism, and defends the international position of the Soviet Union, and does it over and over again,

and attacks us.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. PROXMIRE. Before I yield to the Senator from Oregon-which I shall do in a moment I wish to make two more remarks about my amendment. The

amendment would not end the most-fa

vored-nation treatment of Yugoslavia in trade. trade. It takes no position thereon. That will be decided later, by the offering of a later amendment.

I point out that this amendment would not affect the favored-nation position of Yugoslavia. It is a very modest amendment. It merely provides that we shall not take the American taxpayers' dollars and give aid to this country which has a Communist dictatorship and which has alined itself on the side of the Soviet Union.

Also we have given over $2 billion worth of aid to Tito-more than we have given to any other neutral country except India. It seems to me it is time something were done to end it, and abruptly. I promised to yield, and I do yield, to the Senator from Oregon.

statement in the record, so that when people read the RECORD they will know whereof the Senator speaks.

Mr. PROXMIRE. It was made in 1961. I have the quotation, but I do not at the moment recall precisely the place or the time at which Tito made that statement. However, I shall be delighted to secure it from my staff and will see to it that it gets into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. I am happy that the Senator from Oregon called attention to it. It certainly should be documented.

Mr. MORSE. Some detail needs to be put into the record in that connection. Will the Senator tell us what the amendment denies Tito by way of aid? Does it have anything to do with the mostfavored-nation clause? Does it affect military aid?

Mr. PROXMIRE. May I say to the Senator that I now recall the Tito statement on Castro was September 3 or 4, 1961, at the Belgrade Conference. This amendment would deny the following: It would delay all military aid. It would deny all economic aid. It would deny all economic loan funds. It would deny any prospect of getting anything from the contingency fund. That would not be discretionary with the President; Tito would not get it.

Tito would be able to get Public Law 480 assistance. He would get agricultural products from this country if there were a famine in Yugoslavia; in that way we could give assistance for the Yugoslav people. Of course, Tito could not get economic aid or military aid.

Mr. MORSE. It provides Public Law 480 funds to meet such contingencies as the Senator has mentioned-famine or food shortage. Of course, that would

be in keeping with our humanitarianism. Would it deny him needed medicines?

Mr. PROXMIRE. I cannot answer that question categorically. I would have to check it. Certainly it is not the intention that the amendment should be construed in that way. However, I

would have to rely on what the chairman of the committee can state on this point.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. It would, because I know of no source of funds that would pay for it.

Mr. PROXMIRE. I am sure the Senator from Arkansas, the chairman of the committee, is correct. I point out, however, that there is nothing to prevent medicines being provided by the Red Cross or by any other private organization.

Mr. MORSE. That is what I was about to say. The amendment denies him such supplies. However, it is not necessary to have a foreign aid bill in order for the United States to act as a great humanitarian to meet humanitarian crises that may develop anywhere in the world.

Also, under such circumstances, we Mr. MORSE. I have a few questions would be in a position to decide, indeto ask the Senator. pendent of any foreign aid, whatever Earlier in his speech he said that Tito humanitarian assistance the facts might had taken the side of Castro.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Yes.

Mr. MORSE. Can the Senator document that statement? I know it is true,

call for.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Exactly. This is exactly the kind of humanitarian assistance that could be given under such cir

cumstances to a country which is dominated by a dictator; in other words, a people-to-people program, through religious groups, or other voluntary groups like the American Red Cross.

We could, however, use Red Cross facilities, or the facilities of other organizations.

The amendment might cause some difficulties, but I believe the benefits outweigh any disadvantage, and makes it clear to the people of Yugoslavia that we draw the line on Tito.

Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, will weigh any disadvantage, and makes it the Senator yield?

Mr. PROXMIRE. I yield.

Mr. MONRONEY. I am sure the Senator is aware of the great work our Government did in putting field hospitals into the earthquake-wrecked city of Skopje. Would the Senator's amendment allow the President to direct the military to fly in a field hospital, as he did in the Skopje disaster, which was a miracle in the eyes of the people over there? It showed the people in this whole area what Uncle Sam was able to do with equipment flown in by the military. Great as the Red Cross is, it would not have the facilities or the ability to transport them to take care of catastrophes of this kind.

I was in Yugoslavia at the Interparliamentary Union Conference, and everywhere I heard about the miracle of the United States getting there, in less than 2 days, the field hospitals that were set up and treating badly crippled and injured people.

I do not believe such an activity should be prohibited. It is important that such activity be permitted. There are other things we should be doing. While we have given several billion dollars of aid under our Public Law 480 agricultural assistance programs, we have received local currencies for it. The currency is worth practically nothing to us, because we cannot spend it on diplomatic uses, and therefore it piles up, and in time we lend it back to the Yugoslav Government.

Am I correct in saying that the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin would prohibit business deals which this country would enter into in Export-Import Bank operations and in selling diesel engines to the Yugoslav transport system, particularly their railway system?

I have seen some of the railway engines. The sale of such engines was made by American companies, private industry, in order to help rehabilitate the Yugoslav railway system. The money is due to be paid back to us in dollars, not in local currency. I gathered from what the Senator has said, in his exchange with the Senator from Oregon, that we could give the food away but we could not sell American products and get payment for those goods in dollars.

Mr. PROXMIRE. In the first place, the amendment does not affect the mostfavored-nation section.

Mr. MONRONEY. This is trade.

Mr. PROXMIRE. It is trade. Trade is not affected by the amendment. The amendment is clear on that point. It permits famine aid. Public Law 480, or Food for Peace, is still permitted.

It is true that there may be a price that we will have to pay. The Senator from Oklahoma probably has put his finger on the least defensible part of the amendment. It may be that in giving assistance we would not be able to use further military efforts, as efficiently as we have.

I honestly believe that the vast majority of people in Yugoslavia do not approve of this dictator. Certainly the people who have come to Wisconsin from Yugoslavia have nothing good to say about him. The people in my State who were born in Yugoslavia are not behind Tito. The people I have talked with, who have lived under him, know that when we give aid to Yugoslavia, it benefits Tito.

Mr. MONRONEY. I remember that in Eisenhower days we gave them some obsolete American aircraft equipment. Our manufacturers are selling equipment to Tito, and the transaction is being fiTito, and the transaction is being financed through the Export-Import Bank and through the World Bank. As the Senator knows, Tito's government is a member of the World Bank, and we too are members of it. I am sure the amendment would have no affect on the World Bank.

Mr. PROXMIRE. That is correct.

Mr. MONRONEY. It would eliminate the sale of American equipment, which has been moving very rapidly, and probably will continue to move, if we do not prohibit a business deal with repayment in dollars.

The Senator would permit donations under Public Law 480, for which we could not get anything but local currency, but he would not allow commercial financing which presumably was used in the sale of American railroad equipment to help Yugoslavia rehabilitate its railway system.

I do not understand the Senator's amendment to prohibit the sale of goods to Yugoslavia.

I understood it would prohibit anything that was not paid for in cash, or under the Public Law 480 program. The railroad manufacturers have provided American equipment. The Yugoslavs could have bought English, German, or other equipment, but they have chosen to use American diesel engines on their railroads.

Mr. PROXMIRE. Is the Senator saying that this amendment would prohibit that kind of business transaction?

Mr. MONRONEY. I am merely asking if it would. I understood the Senator from Wisconsin to say that it would prohibit that kind of business deal.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. PROXMIRE. That is correct. I said the amendment does not strike out the most-favored-nation provision. It would affect trade with Yugoslavia, to all intents and purposes, because of what it would do to the tariffs. Higher tariffs would have to be paid on the trade with Yugoslavia and would probably end that trade. But that is a separate amendment, to be considered later. It would eliminate the assistance proposed in 1962, which the amendment of the Senator from Ohio and my amendment would have eliminated, and which eventually was amended. In 1962, a development loan program was proposed for Yugoslavia. It was a modest program, but it was a development loan program. It is not included in the bill this time, but contingency aid could be given, unless my amendment were adopted.

Mr. MONRONEY. When the interparliamentary delegation was in Yugoslavia, it was invited to attend a Cabinet meeting. We were told that Yugoslavia did not want any Public Law 480 assistance, because Yugoslavia was selfsufficient in agriculture. We were told their crops were good, and they were able to export agricultural products. But they were interested in manufactured products.

Mr. PROXMIRE. That will come up later. I understand that the Senator from South Carolina intends to offer an amendment to deal with that section. That will come up later.

Mr. MONRONEY. As I understand, this amendment would not prohibit trade financing.

Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator from Oklahoma is completely correct. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, it is my understanding that the amendment of the Senator from Wisconsin contemplates dealing with subparagraph (f) of section 620. The language of subparagraph (f) at present reads:

No assistance shall be furnished under this Act, as amended, (except under section 214(b)) to any Communist country. This restriction may not be waived pursuant to any authority contained in this Act unless the President finds and promptly reports to Congress that: (1) such assistance is vital to the security of the United States; (2) the recipient country is not controlled by the international Communist conspiracy; and (3) such assistance will further promote the independence of the recipient country from international Communism.

The section continues:

For the purposes of this subsection, the phrase "Communist country" shall include specifically, but not be limited to, the following countries:

Under the act, specifically, the following countries are declared to be Communist and not entitled to any aid under the act, unless the President makes a finding of the existence of the three conditions I have just enumerated. It is interesting to note the countries which, by act, have been declared to be Communist and not entitled to aid, except when the President makes special findings. They are: Peoples Republic of Albania, Peoples Republic of Bulgaria, Peoples Republic of China, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, German Democratic

« ПретходнаНастави »