their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. It is clear that any allegations that the Treaty conceals aggressive intentions are deliberate perversions of fact.

Article 2 reflects the conviction of the Parties that true peace is more than the mere absence of war. In this Article the Parties indicate their desire to strengthen the moral and material factors upon which true peace depends. They will do so by strengthening their own free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which those institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being. They will also seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.

Article 3 carried into the Treaty the concept contained in the Senate Resolution that such collective arrangements should be based on continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid. This means that no Party can rely on others for its defense unless it does its utmost to defend itself and contribute toward the defense of the others. The Article does not itself obligate any Party to make any specific contribution to the defense capacity of any other Party, at any particular time or over any given period of time. It does contain the general obligations of determined self-defense and assistance in strengthening the defense capacity of the group as a whole. The concept of "mutual aid" is that each Party shall contribute such mutual aid as it reasonably can, consistent with its geographic location and resources and with due regard to the requirements of basic economic health, in the form in which it can most effectively furnish it, whether in the form of facilities, manpower, productive capacity, military equipment, or other forms.

Article 4 provides for consultation at the request of any Party whenever in its opinion the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened. Any situation or event anywhere could be cause for consultation if it were deemed to threaten the integrity, independence or security of any Party, but it is not anticipated that consultation would be lightly sought or that it would be productive if it were. The Article contains no obligation beyond consultation. Any action taken as a result of consultation would be determined by each Party in the light of the seriousness of the situation and of its obligations under the United Nations Charter and in the spirit of the Treaty.

There is no intention that such consultation should in any way duplicate the functions of the United Nations Security Council or the General Assembly. In particular, there is no intention of undertaking any enforcement action within the meaning of Article 53 of the Charter unless the Security Council should specifically call upon the Parties to take it.

Article 5 is based squarely on the "inherent right", specifically recognized in Article 51 of the Charter, of "individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations". That right does not derive from Article 51 of the Charter; it is inherent, and recognized as such and preserved by that Article. The Article is also based upon the fact that in the world of today the security of the Parties to this Treaty is so interdependent that an armed attack on any one of them would be in effect an attack on all.

This Article provides that, if such an armed attack occurs, each Party will take such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic

area.

The basic purpose of the Treaty is to contribute to the maintenance of peace, as recommended in the Senate Resolution, by making clear the determination of the Parties to exercise the right of self-defense should an armed attack occur against any of them. As you stated in your inaugural address, if it can be made sufficiently clear that such an attack would be met with overwhelming force, the attack may never

occur.

This Treaty is designed to prevent such an attack occurring by making clear the determination of the signatory nations to take the necessary action should it occur. Far more important than language in a treaty is the determination of the peoples bound by it. It is my hope and belief that the American people and the peoples of the other signatory nations will by their national conduct make this unmistakably clear.

The obligation upon each Party is to use its honest judgment as to the action it deems necessary to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area and accordingly to take such action as it deems necessary. Such action might or might not include the use of armed force depending upon the circumstances and gravity of the attack. If an attack were of a minor nature measures short of force would certainly be utilized first and might suffice. Only in the clear case of a major armed attack would the use of force be necessary. Each Party retains for itself the right of determination as to whether an armed attack has in fact occurred and what action it deems necessary to take. If the situation were not clear there would presumably be consultation prior to action. If the facts were clear, action would not necessarily depend on consultation and it is hoped that the action would be as swift and decisive as the gravity of the situation was deemed to require.

war.

This does not mean that the United States would automatically be at war if we or one of the other Parties to the Treaty were attacked. Under our Constitution, the Congress alone has the power to declare The United States would be obligated by the Treaty to take promptly the action which it deemed necessary to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. That decision as to what action was necessary would naturally be taken in accordance with our constitutional processes.

Article 51 of the Charter recognizes the inherent right of self-defense until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Article 5 of the Treaty provides that any armed attack upon a Party and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council and that such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the necessary action.

Article 6 specifies certain areas within which an armed attack would give rise to the obligations of Article 5. The area covered by the Treaty is the general North Atlantic area and is deliberately not defined by lines on a map. The purpose of the Treaty is to prevent an armed attack by making clear that such an attack within that general area would meet the collective resistance of all the Parties. It would

not be in keeping with the spirit of the Treaty to provide that an attack such as the sinking of a vessel at one point at sea would give rise to the obligations of Article 5, while a similar attack a few miles away would not. Furthermore, it is not contemplated that minor incidents would bring the provisions of Article 5 into effect.

Article 7 makes clear that the obligations of the Parties under the Treaty are subordinated to their obligations under the Charter. Their obligations under the Charter are in no way affected by the Treaty and the provisions of the Charter are paramount wherever applicable. In this Article the Parties also explicitly recognize the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.

In Article 8 each Party declares that none of its existing international engagements with any state is in conflict with the provisions of the Treaty and undertakes not to enter into any international engagement in conflict with it.

By Article 9 the Treaty becomes not merely a static document but the basis for a continuing collective arrangement as envisaged in the Senate Resolution. That Article establishes a Council, on which each Party is to be represented, to facilitate implementation of the Treaty. The Council is to be so organized as to be able to meet promptly at any time and shall set up such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, in particular a defense committee to recommend measures for the implementation of Articles 3 and 5. The Council will have no powers other than to consider matters within the purview of the Treaty and to assist the Parties in reaching agreement upon them. Consequently, no voting procedure is needed or provided. Each government remains the judge of what actions it should take in fulfillment of the obligations of the Treaty.

Article 10 recognizes that not all states in the North Atlantic area in a position to further the principles of the Treaty or to contribute to the security of the area may wish to become parties at this time. The Article accordingly provides that the Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European state in a position to further the principles of the Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to become a party at a later date.

Since Canada and the United States are original signatories and the other American Republics are actual or potential parties to the Rio Treaty, no accessions by other American states are contemplated. Since the accession of additional parties might alter the responsibilities of the original signatories, unanimous agreement is required to invite other states to join.

Article 11 provides that the Treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The Senate Resolution spoke of association of the United States "by constitutional process" with such arrangement as that established by the present Treaty, and it is naturally understood, as this Article provides, that both ratification of the Treaty and the carrying out of all its provisions must be in accordance with the constitutional processes of the signatory nations.

At the request of the other signatory governments, the United States Government has agreed to act as the depositary of the Treaty. It was considered advisable that the Treaty enter into effect only when it had been ratified by each of the seven governments which

originally participated in the negotiations, and a provision to this effect is contained in this Article.

Article 12 provides for the review of the Treaty at the request of any Party after the Treaty has been in force for 10 years, or at any time thereafter. This provision corresponds to the similar provision of Article 109 in the United Nations Charter providing for a review of the Charter after 10 years. Article 12 provides that the review of the Treaty shall take into account the factors that affect peace and security in the North Atlantic area, including the development of universal as well as regional arrangements under the Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Article 13 provides that any Party may cease to be a Party, after the Treaty has been in force for 20 years, upon the expiration of one year's notice of denunciation.

The common heritage of the signatory nations dates deep in history and the bonds between them are fundamental. It is hoped that their cooperation will be permanent and progressively closer. The Treaty must have a relatively long duration if it is to provide the necessary assurance of long-term security and stability. On the other hand, the impossibility of foretelling what the international situation will be in the distant future makes rigidity for too long a term undesirable. It is believed that indefinite duration, with the possibility that any Party may withdraw from the Treaty after 20 years and that the Treaty as a whole might be reviewed at any time after it has been in effect for ten years, provides the best solution.

Article 14 is a formal article concerning the equal authenticity of the English and French texts and the disposition of the original Treaty and certified copies thereof.

I believe that this Treaty will prove to be an important milestone in realization of the desire of the American people to use their great influence for peace. It makes clear, in my opinion, their determination to do so. The Treaty has been formulated in accordance with the guidance given by the Senate in Resolution 239. In the Senate debate on that Resolution it was made clear that the Senate, in advising you particularly to pursue certain objectives, in no way yielded its freedom of action to scrutinize and to give or withhold its consent to ratification of such treaty as might be negotiated. I know that the Senate will conscientiously exercise that prerogative and I trust that the Treaty will meet with its approval.

Respectfully submitted,

DEAN ACHESON

308. NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY

Report of the Committee on Foreign Relations, June 6, 1949 1

1

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the North Atlantic Treaty (Executive L, 81st Cong., 1st sess.), signed at Washington on April 4, 1949, unanimously report the treaty to the Senate and recommend that its advice and consent to ratification be given at an early date.

1 Senate Executive Report No. 8, 81st Congress, 1st session.

PART I. BACKGROUND

1. MAIN PURPOSE OF THE TREATY

The basic objective of the treaty is to assist in achieving the primary purpose of the United Nations-the maintenance of peace and security. It is designed to do so by making clear the determination of the members of the North Atlantic community to safeguard their common heritage of freedom by exercising collectively their inherent right of self-defense in the event of an armed attack upon any of them, while making clear at the same time their determination to live in peace with all governments and all peoples.

The paramount desire of the American people is and always has been for peace and freedom. Since 1776 they have constantly striven, and sometimes fought, to maintain their own freedom and to further the development of freedom elsewhere. They have always sought to live in peace with all men.

Since 1823, when the Monroe Doctrine was promulgated, this Government has contributed to the peace and freedom of the Americas by making clear that it would regard an armed attack upon any part of the Americas as an attack upon the United States. No other doctrine has become more deeply imbedded in American foreign policy. In 1947 all the American Republics joined in signing the Treaty of Rio de Janeiro, which provided that each would regard an attack on any one of them as an attack upon all.

Since World War II

In 1945 the United States Government and the American people wholeheartedly accepted the obligations of the Charter of the United Nations. In doing so they undertook the obligation not to use force except in conformity with the Charter and the responsibility, not only of living up to that obligation but of using their influence to see that other powers live up to it. No government has labored harder or more unceasingly to reach international understanding through the United Nations and to make the United Nations a more effective instrument.

Unfortunately one great power and a small group of nations under its domination have not only refused to cooperate in the establishment of a just and lasting peace, but have sought to prevent it, both within and without the United Nations. That power and its fifth columns in other countries have sought to prevent the establishment of such a peace. It has sought to obstruct efforts for the promotion of human welfare and stability in order to profit from human misery and hunger in propagating its own system and advancing its own imperialistic ends.

This threat to free institutions everywhere has caused free nations to draw together in increased cooperation for both defense and economic recovery, as reflected in the Brussels Treaty and the Convention for European Economic Cooperation. The United States Government, in giving effect to the desire of the American people to assist in promoting peace and freedom, has taken far-reaching steps