Mr. KEATING. Supplementing what the Senator from Oregon has said, I asked this question of the Director of the AID Agency:

Well, now, why do we continue aid to Egypt, for instance, which has shown its aggressive tendencies in Yemen and in threats against Israel?

That could complicate our foreign policy no end.

Well, the Egyptian case, as you know better than most, Senator, is a very-indeed the whole Middle East situation-is a very tense and uncertain one. The philosophy of U.S. assistance to those Middle Eastern countries for the last several years has been that if we work with them to achieve some reasonable tries, we would be contributing to the possibilities of peaceful progress in the Middle East and we would be working against the possibility of additional military flareups. We've had, I think, some considerable success. We certainly haven't had uniform success in that. The action of the Egyptians in

economic and social progress in those coun

Yemen is a complicated one. As you know, the Egyptians have been supporting one side in that revolt and the Saudi Arabian Government has been supporting the other side. It's a tangled situation but it is certainly different from and distinguished from an outright aggression.

there was an internal revolt in Yemen and

That is exactly the type of reasoning that has allowed the aid to continue, and it is the type of reasoning which I am sure the Senator and I are likely to face, even if the amendment is adopted.

Mr. GRUENING. That is precisely the type of sophistry the Senators from New York, the Senator from Oregon, and I fear. There is a sharp distinction between such military activity and the aid which Saudi Arabia gave to Yemen for a time. Saudi Arabia gave financial aid, not military aid as did Nasser. But when that financial aid was withdrawn by Saudi Arabia, Nasser did not withdraw his troops. He violated his pledges and his promises to withdraw his troops if Saudi Arabia ceased its financial aid. Mr. KEATING. He increased the number of his troops.

Mr. GRUENING. The regime which he is supporting would collapse the day his troops were withdrawn. In addition, he has continued to make preparations for war against others; and as I said in reply to the Senator from Oregon, Nasser has never ceased to proclaim his determination to conquer Israel, to wipe it out, to eradicate it. He is proud of that. He continues to prepare for it.

If the State Department, following the Senator's fear that they will, as they have, take the position that the war in Yemen is a highly complicated situation, and that there are two sides to it, that nobody is really an aggressor, the next session of Congress will write the law in such a way that there will be no discretion and no argument.

pared to vote for this amendment on the basis of our knowledge of the country that we know to be guilty.

I am entirely prepared to vote for this amendment on the basis of the actions of the nations that are guilty of such conduct; but I do not want us to say to the President, "You are to name the ones who are responsible for such international crises, and then, after naming them, you are to cut off our aid to them."

There appears to be little doubt that Nasser was responsible for the attack on Yemen, and I favor cutting off our aid to Egypt. From the available evidence it would appear that Nasser is guilty, and let us say that he is. Let us not force the President to make decisions which might very well precipitate a crisis which we would not want. We know what Nasser has been doing; there is little doubt about that.

Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, I am delighted to join in the view the Senator from Minnesota has expressed; and after my amendment is adopted, I shall be glad to have him submit an amend ment carrying out his ideas; and if that amendment then is adopted, we can withdraw mine, leaving his which will unqualifiedly declare: "No aid for Nasunqualifiedly declare: "No aid for Nasser's United Arab Republic."

Mr. HUMPHREY. However, we are dealing with delicate foreign relations matters which involve the security of the United States and our Nation's national policy. So we should not force the President to make such decisions prematurely. We do not have all the facts; but we have ample information in regard to the conduct of Egypt, and there is no doubt about what Egypt has been doing.

By the way, Mr. President, let me state that I offered the Senator's amendment in the committee.

Mr. GRUENING. And what happened there?

Mr. HUMPHREY. We did not have enough votes to adopt it there. I offered the amendment there at the Senator's request, and I spoke for the amendment on the basis of the same argument the Senator from Alaska is making about Egypt and Nasser's operations. We know perfectly well what he has been doing in Yemen and in Algeria, and we know perfectly well about his constant meddling in the Middle East governments in many, many instances, which include Iraq and Syria;

Mr. GRUENING. That is correct. Mr. HUMPHREY. But I want them named in the bill, not interpreted in some way at a Foreign Relations Committee meeting.

There have been numerous comments about India. I have heard those questions argued in executive session in the committee. It was said there that we should reduce our aid to India because

Pakistan is afraid that India will, after we have aided her, be strong enough to attack Pakistan. However, I do not think India will attack Pakistan; but I do not want President Kennedy or any other President of the United States to be required by Congress to state that it looks as if India is a potential aggressor and that U.S. aid had better be cut off.

A few minutes ago the Senate adopted the Proxmire amendment in regard to aid to Indonesia. I thought it was a good amendment, although I believed it could well have been tougher, for I want to crack down on the open aggression and the poison propaganda that come out of Cairo. So I favor including such an amendment in the bill, but not a statement instructing the President to find that someone-unnamed by us—is preparing for aggression.

Mr. GRUENING. I agree, and I hope the Senator from Minnesota will submit an amendment in which Nasser in particular will be named; and if that amendment is adopted, if the Senate has previously adopted my amendment, its weaker provision can be withdrawn.

Mr. HUMPHREY. But the Proxmire amendment approach in regard to India might well cover this situation.

His amendment provided:

No assistance under this Act shall be furnished to Indonesia—

At that point we could well substitute the name "the United Arab Republic❞— unless the President determines that the furnishing of such assistance is essential to the

national interest of the United States. The President shall keep the Foreign Relations Committee and the Appropriations Committee of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives fully and currently informed of any assistance furnished to Indonesia

Again I would substitute the words "the United Arab Republic”— under this Act.

Mr. GRUENING. That would be an ideal amendment; but we do not want to act in accordance with the fable about the dog that was carrying a bone in his mouth. When he reached a bridge over a stream, he looked into the water and saw his reflection, and the bone's reflection and then opened his mouth to seize the reflection, and dropped the real bone into the water, and could not get it again. Let us adopt my amendment; and if thereafter the thereafter the other amendment is adopted, mine can then be withdrawn. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the Senator from Alaska yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. WALTERS in the chair). Does the Senator from Alaska yield to the Senator from Oregon?

Mr. GRUENING. I yield.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I wish to submit certain figures in regard to the United Arab Republic. I do not share the interpretation of this amendment by the Senator from Minnesota, for the amendment does not require the President, before extending aid, to make an investigation of all countries aided under the foreign aid program, to determine whether they are engaged in aggression or are preparing to engage in aggression. The amendment simply requires that when it is charged that a country is an