United States. Dept. of State. Office of Public Co.

Department of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) online

. (page 43 of 101)
Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 43 of 101)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


agenda of the conference at Punta del Este, but
I have no doubt that there will be conversations
among foreign ministers about it, whether or not
it is taken up in any formal way.

Q. Mr. Secretar)/, is there anything you can re-
port at this time on the status of or prospects for
resumption of nuclear testing in the atmosphere?

A. No. I have nothing to add to what the
President has said in his recent press conferences
on that subject.

Q. Mr. Secretary, in that connection, sometime
ago at Bermuda we had the idea that Britain
would make a decision very shortly on xchether
or not we could use Christmas Island. My under-
standing is that they have not yet given that per-
m,ission. Can you give us any reason as to why
that is being held up or what the problem is?

A. No, I can only say that that is a matter that
has been discussed but that there is nothing that I
can add on that at this time.

Q. Mr. Secretary/, could you give us an evalua-
tion of the actual possibilities of pushing the most
vigorous action possible against Castro''s Cuba, in
the conference at Punta del Este toithout reaching
the breaking point of inter- American solidarity?



A. I would not wish to try today to cast up a
toll of the attitudes of various governments. We
are talking with each of them on almost a daily
basis, and of course this is one of the key points on
which the ministers themselves are meeting. I
doubt very much that there will be any congealing
of a consensus on a number of these points until
the ministers actually meet with each other and
talk it over among themselves.

Revised Passport Regulations

Q. Mr. Secretary, I have a question al>out pass-
ports. As I understand it, the present Into states
that a passport issuing officer cannot, without
breaking the la,w, issue a passport to anyone he
knows or has reason to believe is a member of the
Communist Party. That is the substance of it.
These passport officers now, as I understand, it, do
see classifi,ed information. If they are not able to
make their decision on the basis of classified infor-
ma.tion, does this put them in the position of vio-
lating the law, or are you going to withhold
classified information from them?

A. We have just issued, as you know, new regu-
lations on that subject.* The purpose of these
new regulations is to give effect to the new statu-
tory requirements and also to take into account the
application of basic constitutional law as inter-
preted in recent Supreme Court decisions.

As you know, there is a lot of law on this sub-
ject. In the case of Rockwell Kent against Dulles
a few years ago, it was held, broadly speaking,
that a citizen has the right to travel. And we are
attempting to apply the statute in the intent of the
statute but with, also, recognition of the possible
constitutional problems that might be involved.
We and the Department of Justice are working
very closely together on this matter, and our pres-
ent procedures represent the combined view of the
two Departments.

Q. To pursue that, do you have any intention of
restricting the classifed material now made avail-
able to the passport issuing officers?

A. The basic point on this particular issue in the
new regulations is that a person who is denied a
passport under this particular statute, we believe,
has a right to a hearing, and in such a hearing he
would have a right to be confronted with the evi-



' For a Department announcement, see ihid., Jan. 29,
1962, p. 179.



202



Depattmeni of Sfafe Bulletin



dence for the withholding of a passport. Under
these circumstances a decision would hav^e to be
based upon the materials which could be produced
in such a hearing and tested by court action. If
I have not answered your question, I am fully
aware of it. (Laughter.)

Q. Mr. Secretary^ this may be a tidier question.
Has the Government is-sved an invitation to Con-
golese Prime Minister [Cynlle] Adoula to visit
the United States?

A. It has been our understanding for some time
that Prime Minister Adouhi has been hoping to
come to New York to visit the United Nations and
to visit this country. If he comes, we certainly
would welcome him in Washington and would
hope very much to have a chance to have some
talks with him.

Q. Mr. Secretary, do you foresee any specif/;
accomfUshments by the Attorney General at his
various ports of call on his trip around the
world? '

A. Yes, we are very happy indeed that the At-
torney General is able to make this trip to visit
a number of countries. We have urged him to
go — we in tlie State Department — and we, of
course, will be working with him closely on his
visit. It is a matter of considerable importance
to us that a distinguished member of our Cabinet
has a chance to meet his opposite numbers in other
governments and to have this contact with leaders
in other countries around the world.

Problem of West New Guinea

Q. Mr. Secretary., on the decision of Secretary-
General U Thant to take a hand in the Indonesian-
Dutch disp^ite, do you see that he has tacMed a
problem that has long defied settlement, or is there
an agreement already far enough along to make
sure that he can succeed in this endeavor?

A. Well, this particular problem of West New
Guinea has been a very stubborn problem since
1949. It is not one that is simple or easy, but it
is one which has become very much inflamed in the
last several weeks and months. The Secretary-
General of the United Nations has a basic re-
sponsibility to do what he can to maintain the



U.S. Supports U.N. Secretary-General
in Efforts on West New Guinea

Department Statement of January 17

Press release 42 dated .January 18

The Secretary-General has addressed an appeal to
the President of Indonesia and the Prime Minister
of the Netherlands urging the two parties to agree
to iuiiuediate discussion with him on the possihili-
ties of a peaceful settlement of the West New
Guinea problem in conformity with the United Na-
tions Charter. The United States welcomes this
commendable initiative of the Secretary-General.

We consider that a peaceful solution is essen-
tial and strongly support his efforts to get I he
parties together. The ingredients for a peaceful
settlement of this problem clearly exist. There-
fore, we hope that U Thant's appeal will meet with
a speedy and positive response.



' For background, see iM4., Jan. 8, 1962, p. 50, and Jan.
15, 1962, p. 99.



peace, and his initiative in this matter is most
welcomed by the United States Government. We
hope that the two Governments concerned will
give heed to his appeal to them to avoid further
incidents and to establish contact with him to
explore the possibilities of negotiation and a pos-
sible peaceful settlement of this situation. We
think this is entirely in accord with not only his
privileges but his obligations under the charter.
We would support him fully in this peacemaking
effort which he has undertaken.

Q. Mr. Secretary, you said that the situation in
the Dominican Republic might change from hour
to hour. Beyond that, hoio soon do you think the
United States may maTce a decision on whether to
recognize the group which apparently is already
in power?

A. Well, since this is a matter, Mr. Hightower
[Jolm Hightower of the Associated Press], of an
hour-to-hour problem, I don't really want to
speculate on a particular time at which that de-
cision would be reached. Our representatives
there are in contact and discussion with the leaders
of the different groups in the Dominican Repub-
lic, and we shall just have to see today and to-
morrow how these discussions come out.

Q. Can you say, sir, whether any of them have
succeeded in getting into contact with the leaders
of the National Civic Union, which is an outfit
we have been interested in?



February 5, 7962



203



A. I think that you can assume that we are
in touch with the principal groups there in this
situation.

Q. Even while they are in jail?

A. I think my statement stands; yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Secretary, what action would you pro-
pose through the United Nations or otherwise if
the United Arab Refublic should close the Suez
to the Dutch, as they have indicated they may?

A. Well, quite frankly I would not wish to
speculate on that one. I have not given that the
study wliich it obviously deserves before I com-
ment on it.



U.S.-U.K. Talks on U.N. Affairs

Q. Mr. Secretary, as a result of the talks here
hetween the United States and Great Britain,^
are there any particular proposals on improving
tJie peacekeeping Tnachinery of the United Nations
which the United States contemplates putting
forward?

A. There have been no specific proposals worked
out in these particular conversations. I might
say that we are in touch with a number of gov-
ernments from time to time about the general
situation — the health and the vitality and the im-
portance of the United Nations — and we send our
representatives to different capitals in the course
of a year to talk about matters on the agenda of
the United Nations. I do think that it might
well be time, as has been indicated by the Presi-
dent and also by Ambassador Stevenson at the
United Nations, for the United Nations to give
some very thoughtful and sober attention to the
peacekeeping procedures and processes of the
United Nations and the obligations of members to
attempt to adjust their problems with their
neighbors.

There is a long list of problems now, right
around the globe, in which countries are having
problems witli their neighbors. Many of them
might yield to a persistent and sustained effort to
bring about some settlement and some solution.
We suspect that it would not be bad for the United
Nations to have a rather general discussion of the
processes of peaceful settlement and tlie position
of the United Nations and its opportmiities for

• See p. 205.



assisting in these processes of peaceful settlement.
But we did not frame specific proposals in these
discussions to which you referred.
There was a question back there.

Q. Mr. Secretary, I was wondering, without
speculating on the situation inside Russia, as to
whether you think there is a relation hetween that
and the current position on Berlin?

A. If I were to be truthful, I would simply
have to say that I don't know — I don't know.

Q. Thank you, sir.



United States and United Kingdom
Reaffirm Faitli in United Nations

Folloioing is a Department statement released
at the close of consultations on United Nations af-
fairs which took place hetween U.S. and U.K.
officials at Washington, D.C., January 11-13}

Press release 28 dated January 13

It has been congenial, stimulating, and useful
to get together with our colleagues of the United
Kingdom for the past 3 days to discuss fully and
frankly the future of our respective relationships
with the United Nations.

We face a common opportunity and a common
dilemma. The opportimity is to make peace opera-
tional by making the United Nations a more and
more effective instrument. We have fully ex-
plored the United Nations' peacekeeping role, the
strengthening of the peaceful settlement proce-
dures which are basic to the charter, the progress
toward self-government and independence, the
opportunity for international cooperation in outer
space, the financing of the Organization, and the
worldwide programs of economic and social bet-
terment which are one of the important bridges
of cooperation between the Atlantic nations and
tlie developing nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin
America.

Tlie dilemma is that the United Nations is what
its members, all of them, make of it. Therefore,
we cannot do more of the peacekeeping and peace-
making job through the United Nations than will
be supported by the great bulk of the members.



' For an aiinouiu'ement of the meetings and names of
the tJ.S. and U.K. participants, see Bxjli.etin of Jan. 22,
19C2, p. 140.



204



Oeparfmenf of Sfafe Bu//efi'n



And so we have reviewed together how far and
how fast the necessary peacekeeping and peace-
making organizations of the United Nations, and
the specialized agencies for economic and social
development, can be expected to achieve the de-
gree of effectiveness that merits support of their
continuing growth by the major contributing
comitries. Without losing sight of the ideals to
which the charter gives expression, our common
aim is to be very realistic in making sure that this
operational peace agency, the United Nations, is
subject to effective policy direction from its mem-
bers and effectively and economically adminis-
tered by a truly international staff under the Sec-
retary-General.

The world organization has begun to grow.
This gi'owth raises problems which it is the obli-
gation of the members, and the special obligation
of the large contributors, to watch very carefiilly.
And in this process of growth the United Nations
has no stronger or more faithful members tlian
the United States and the United Kingdom.



treaty. Instead, it reaffirmed its proposal of No-
vember 28, 1961, as the only basis for a continua-
tion of the current Geneva conference. That pro-
posal called for a halt to nuclear weapons tests on
the basis of an unverifiable paper pledge. It is not
acceptable to the United States and the United
Kingdom. Such a declaration of intent is wholly
impractical for it could be violated at will as re-
cent Soviet actions have amply demonstrated.

The United States and the United Kingdom
continue to view the conclusion of a test ban treaty
as a matter of the highest priority ; they have ex-
pressed their willingness to pursue a test ban
treaty under effective international safegiiards in
the context of general disarmament negotiations
because the Soviet Union's repudiation of the con-
ference's objectives leaves this as the only alterna-
tive for the attainment of that goal.^



Letters of Credence



U.S. and U.K. Willing To Discuss
Test Ban in Disarmament Negotiations

Department Statement

Press release 36 dated January 16

The United States and the United Kingdom to-
day at the Geneva test ban conference reluctantly
expressed their willingness to examine the issue
of a controlled test ban in the context of general
disarmament negotiations.'

They did so in view of the Soviet Government's
categorical rejection of the objective of reaching
agreement on a separate nuclear test ban treaty
under effective international safeguards and its
insistence that it will only discuss such an arrange-
ment in the context of general disarmament ne-
gotiations.

At today's conference session, the Soviet Union
flatly rejected a renewed U.S.-U.K. appeal that
serious negotiations be resumed at the conference
toward the establishment of a controlled test ban



China

The newly appointed Ambassador of the Re-
public of China, Tingfu F. Tsiang, presented his
credentials to President Kennedy on January 12.
For texts of the Ambassador's remarks and the
President's reply, see Department of State press
release 25 dated January 12.



' For text of a U.S.-U.K. report submitted on Dec. 19,
1961, to the U.N. Disarmament Commission regarding the
Geneva Conference on the Discontinuance of Nuclear
Weapon Tests, see Bulletin of Jan. 8, 1962, p. 63.



- Following is the text of a letter transmitted on Jan. 17
(U.S./U.N. press release 3911) by the United States and
the U.S.S.R. to U Thant, Acting Secretary-General of the
United Nations :

January 17, 1962

Excellency : We have the honor to refer to Resolution
No. 1722 (XVI) of the General Assembly, adopted on
December 20, 1961, and to inform you that, as a result
of consultations undertaken between our two Govern-
ments and the other Members of the Disarmament Com-
mittee whose establishment was endorsed by that Resolu-
tion, the Committee will meet on March 14, 1962, at the
Palais des Nations in Geneva.

Accordingly it would be appreciated If you could ar-
range to furnish the necessary assistance and services,
as requested by the General Assembly in the resolution
under reference. In this connection we are grateful for
the preliminary ob.servations contained in .your aide-
memoire of 9 January [U.N. doc. DC/200] and on our part
find them generally acceptable.

V. ZoRiN Adlai E. Stevenson

Permanent Representative Permanent Representative

of the Union of Soviet So- of the United States of

cialist Republics to the Ameriea to the United

United Nations Nations



February 5, 1962



205



Education for World Responsibility



hy Chester Bowles ^



The next 10 years, I venture to say, will be the
decisive years of our century. Indeed this decade
may determine whether we are to have a future or
only a past. In this decade of decision it is our
task to prepare our young men and women for
the utterly new kind of world in which they will
be living and whose destinies they will help to
guide.

I am sanguine enough to believe that somehow
a new world of hope and opportunity can and
will emerge from the troubled years that lie ahead.
Yet such a world will become possible only if we
have the wisdom to understand the forces shaping
our times and the courage and resiliency to cope
with the crises and conflicts which these forces
will bring into being.

This evening I would like to discuss the nature
of these forces, to examine the failure of so many
well-educated and presumably well-informed
Americans to understand them, and finally, with
considerable hesitation, to offer some personal ob-
servations on the responsibility of our educational
system in preparing our young people for the role
they must play in the years ahead.

Observers never grow weary of pointing out
that we face greater and more complex problems
than any people in history. It should be added
that we also have far more ideas, skills, and re-
sources to contribute to a solution of these
problems.

Our effectiveness will depend on our ability to
bring those assets to bear on the challenge at hand.
This will require not only a deeper understanding
but also vastly greater personal efforts on the part
of each one of us.

Each morning we are faced with a fresh set of
headlines telling us of unrest or open hostilities
in one remote comer of the world after another.
Tliese incidents, many of them acutely dangerous



to our interests, are the surface phenomena
churned up by a number of revolutionary wliirl-
winds sweeping the face of the earth.

Revolutionary Forces in Today's World

One such revolutionary convulsion has been
described as "tlie revolution of rising expecta-
tions" — the political, social, economic, and cul-
tural movement that is now lighting the hopes of
hundreds of millions of people in Asia, Africa,
and Latin America.

In these great continents people for generations
have been accustomed to exist in need of food,
shelter, medical care, essential education and skills,
and even individual dignity and the barest jus-
tice. What is new is the sudden awareness,
spreading like a prairie fire into the most remote
rural areas, that their plight need no longer be
accepted as part of God's plan for the unfoitunate.
They now laiow that the means exist vastly to
improve their lives, and they are determined to
do so either with our help and understanding or
without it.

A second major force in our new world is the
hard reality of Soviet power. In four decades
the Soviet Union has risen from a second-class
nation to an industrial and military giant. In-
evitably many frustrated Asian and African lead-
ers look to Moscow with a mixture of awe, fear,
and expectation.

A third convulsion is taking place on the main-
land of China, where another Communist state has
emerged as the potentially greatest force in the
Eastern world.



' Address made before the American Association of Col-
leges at Cleveland, Ohio, on Jan. 10 (press release 21).
Mr. Bowles is the President's Special Representative and
Adviser on African, Asian, and Latin American Affairs.



206



Department of State Bulletin



Above and beyond these geographic areas of
revolutionary change is a whole new world of
scientific and tecluiological change that staggers
the imagination. Discoveries are coming thick
and fast, many of them involving a destructive
potential that is diflicult for ordinary minds to
comprehend.

Gap Between Realities and Public Understanding

The speed and impact with which these four
revolutionary forces have thrust themselves upon
us have led to a dangerous imbalance between the
hard realities with which our Government must
contend and public understanding of those
realities.

This gap in understanding is due partly to the
tremendous complexity of the forces themselves
and partly to our lack of experience in world af-
fairs. We are living in an age in which the sit-
uations we face are rarely black and white and
where clear-cut choices between right and wrong
approaches are rarely available to our policy-
makers. Over and over again we are forced to
choose the least undesirable of a number of dis-
tasteful courses of action. Because each choice
inevitably involves risks, we must judge where
the least risk and greatest opportunity may lie.

Now anyone who is familiar with American
history knows that we are an impatient people ac-
customed to looking for simple, clear-cut answers
to whatever problems may confront us. Inevi-
tably we are impatient with the seemingly tor-
tuous ways of diplomacy and negotiation in our
infinitely complex new world.

The resulting fears and frustrations brought on
by problems that refuse t-o disappear have led
some of our most impatient fellow citizens to as-
simie that war eventually is inevitable. Others,
appalled at the complexity of international affairs,
seek release from reality in a hunt for culprits in
their own neighborhoods who fail to conform with
their own views. Thus we read of presumably
thoughtful citizens demanding that our Govern-
ment abandon its allies, withdraw from the U.N.,
undermine our overseas trade by raising our
tariffs, cut our national budget, while simulta-
neously threatening war against any nation which
earns our displeasure.

How can this dangerous gap between the prac-
tical realities and public understanding be
bridged? With our intricate and farflung com-



munications system of TV, radio, and newspapers,
how did the gap develop in the first phice?

Three factors contribute to this gap in public
understanding.

■Many News Outlets Oversimplify

There are many responsible communications
outlets working passionately to give people a true
picture of the world today. Yet the inability of
many of our newspapers, radio and television sta-
tions, and magazines to communicate the true
depth of today's problems is clearly up])ai'ent.

The current tendency to dramatize nonessen-
tials, to oversimplify complex questions, and to
imply U.S. impotence one day and omnipotence
the next has helped foster a nat ional mood of con-
fusion and frustration. Some segments of our
daily press appear to have abandoned any serious
effort to contribute to the public understanding
upon which wise and thoughtful action in a demo-
cratic society must depend. And we are all famil-
iar with those television "newsmen" reading the
day's soberest headlines with the reckless abandon
of sports announcers. To add to tlie confusion,
there is the tendency of some news outlets to color
much of what they choose to report with a par-
tisan hostility to whatever government may be in
office.

As an example let us briefly consider the recent
crisis in regard to Katanga, in which public mis-
information and confusion have been dramatically
apparent.

Some interpretations of the U.S.-supported
United Nations action in the Congo would lead
li.steners and readers to believe that the Kennedy
administration had released the hordes of Gen-
ghis Khan against some helpless, peace-loving,
Communist-opposing Katangese wlio courageously
refused to be swallowed up by a central govern-
ment directed by Moscow. The sad fact is that
only a fraction of the American people under-
stand that we are supporting the United Nations
action to prevent a disastrous splintering of the
Congo that might lead to much of the country's
falling under Communist control.

The Soviet Union has consistently opposed the
U.N. operations in the Congo. Although Katanga
is not and never has been an independent province
or state, a stubborn band of foreign mercenaries
led it in revolt against the duly authorized central



February 5, 7962



207



Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 43 of 101)