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

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

. (page 57 of 101)
Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 57 of 101)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Whekeas :

The Inter-American Defense Board was established
pursuant to Resolution 39 of the Third Meeting of Con-
sultation of Foreign Ministers, held in Rio de Janeiro in
1942, recommending the immediate meeting of a commis-
sion composed of military and naval technicians appointed
by each of the governments to study and to suggest to
them measures necessary for the defense of the
hemisphere ;

The Inter-American Defense Board, on April 26, 1961,
resolved that the participation of the Cuban regime in
defense planning is highly prejudicial to the work of the
Board and to the security of the hemisphere ; and

The present Government of Cuba is identified with the
aims and policies of the Sino-Soviet bloc.



"Adopted by a vote of 14 to 1 (Cuba), with 6 absten-
tions (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico).

February 19, 7962

62T860— 62 3



"^ Adopted by a vote of 20 to 1 (Cuba).



281



The Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of
Foreign Affairs, Serving as Organ of Consultation in Aj)-
plication of the Inter- American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance,
Resolves :

To exclude immediately the present Government of
Cuba from the Inter-American Defense Board until the
Council of the Organization of American States shall de-
termine by a vote of two thirds of its members that
membership of the Government of Cuba is not prejudicial
to the work of the Board or to the security of the
hemisphere.

VIII. Economic Relations'^

Whekeas:

The Report of the Inter-American Peace Committee to
the Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of For-
eign Affairs states, with regard to the intense subversive
activity in which the countries of the Sino-Soviet bloc
and the Cuban Government are engaged in America, that
such activity constitutes "a serious violation of fimda-
mental principles of the inter-American system" ; and

During the past three years 13 American states have
found it necessary to break diplomatic relations with the
present Government of Cuba,

The Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of
Foreign Affairs, Serving as Organ of Consultation in Ap-
plication of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance
Resolves :

1. To suspend immediately trade with Cuba in arms
and implements of war of every kind.

2. To charge the Council of the Organization of Ameri-
can States, in accordance with the circumstances and with
due consideration for the constitutional or legal limita-
tions of each and every one of the member states, with
studying the feasibility and desirability of extending the
suspension of trade to other items, with special attention
to items of strategic importance.

3. To authorize the Council of the Organization of
American States to discontinue, by an affirmative vote
of two-thirds of its members, the measure or measures
adopted pursuant to the preceding paragraphs, at such
time as the Government of Cuba demonstrates its com-
patibility with the purposes and principles of the system.

IX. Revision of the Statute of the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights"

WnEitEAS :

The Fifth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of
Foreign Affairs, by Resolution VIII, created the Inter-
American Commission on Human Rights, and charged it
with furthering respect for human rights in the American
states ;

Notwithstanding the noble and persevering effort car-



" Adopted by a vote of Ifi to 1 (Cuba), with 4 absten-
tions (Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico).

" Adopted by a vote of 19 to 1 (Cuba), with 1 abstention
(Uruguay).



rled on by that Commission in the exercise of its man-
date, the inadequacy of the faculties and attributions
conferred upon it by its statute have made it difficult
for the Commission to fulfill its assigned mission;

There is a pressing need for accelerating development
in the hemisphere of the collective defense of human
rights, so that this development may result in interna-
tional legal protection of these rights ; and

There is an obvious relation between violations of
human rights and the international tensions that work
against the harmony, peace, and unity of the hemLsphere ;

The Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of
Foreign Affairs, Serving as Organ of Consultation in
Application of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance
Resolves :

To recommend to the Council of the Organization of
American States that it revise the Statute of the Inter-
American Commission on Human Rights, broadening
and strengthening the Commission's attributes and facul-
ties to such an extent as to permit it effectively to further
respect for these rights in the countries of the hemisphere.



EXPLANATORY STATEMENTS

Statement of Honduras

Honduras wishes to have the explanation of the posi-
tion it adopted in voting for Resolution VI, Exclusion of
the Present Government of Cuba from Participation in the
Inter-American System, recorded in the Final Act.

With regard to the observations of a juridical nature
made by several distinguished foreign minister.s, Hon-
duras maintains the existence of sufficient bases in the
letter and in the spirit of the treaties and conventions of
the regional system.

In the last analysis, however, in view of the threat to
the peace and security of the hemisphere, in view of the
threat to the dignity and freedom of the inhabitants of
the Americas, and in view of the political presence of the
Soviet Union in America, the Delegation of Honduras,
aware of the juridical doubt that might arise, has not
hesitated to give the benefit of the doubt to the defense
of democracy in America.

Statement of Argentina

In view of the statement made by the Representative
of Uruguay at the second plenary session, held on January
31, 1962, the Delegation of Argentina wishes to record
that it reiterates the juridical views expressed by Dr.
Miguel Angel CArcano, Minister of Foreign xVffairs and
Worship, at the ninth session of the General Committee,
In explanation of his vote on Resolution VI of this Final
Act.



Statement of Colombia

The position of Colombia has been defined in the two
statoments that will be shown in the minutes of the second
plenary session of this Eighth Meeting of Consultation,
and tliat refer to general policy and to Resolution VI.



282



Department of State Bulletin



statement of Mexico

The Delegation of Mexico wishes to make it a matter
of record in the Final Act of the Eighth Meeting of Con-
sultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, that, in its
opinion, the exclusion of a member state is not juridically
possible unless the Charter of the Organization of Ameri-
can States is first amended pursuant to the procedure
established in Article III.

Statement of Haiti

My country is proud to have participated in these dis-
cussions, which have taken place in an atmosphere of
calm, of courtesy, and of mutual respect.

Haiti came to Punta del Este with the firm intention
of defending the principles of nonintervention and self-
determination of peoples, with all that they imply. Haiti
remains firmly attached to these intangible principles,
which guarantee an order of mutual respect in relations
among peoples of different languages and cultures.

Here Haiti has become persuaded that "the fallacies of
communist propaganda cannot and should not obscure or
hide the difference in philosophy which these principles
represent when they are expressed by a democratic Ameri-
can country, and when communist governments and their
agents attempt to utilize them for their own benefit."

This is the sole reason for the change in the position
and attitude of my country, which is honored to have had
a modest part in resolving a problem which jeopardized
the peace, the solidarity, and the unity of the hemisphere.

Statement of Ecuador

The Delegation of Ecuador wishes to state in the
record that the exclusion of a member state from the
inter-American system could only be accomplished through
the prior amendment of the Charter of the Organization
of American States to grant the power to exclude a state.

The Charter is the constitutional juridical statute that
prevails over any other inter-American instrument.

Statement of Ecuador on Resolution VIII

Ecuador abstained from voting. Inasmuch as sanctions
are being applied, by invoking the Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance, sanctions that begin with the suspension of
traffic in arms with the possibility of being extended to
other items, with special attention to items of strategic
importance, a concept that might include basic necessities
of which the Cuban people should not be deprived and
thus make the present situation more critical.

Of course. Ecuador, as a peace-loving country, reaffirms
its faith in peaceful methods to settle controversies be-
tween states and condemns illegal traffic in arms.

Statement of Brazil

In view of the statement made by the Representative of
Uruguay at the plenary session held on January 31,
1962. the Delegation of Brazil reaffirms the validity of the
juridical bases of the position taken by its country with
respect to Resolution VI of the Eighth Meeting of Con-
sultation, which position was explained at length by the

February J 9, 1962



Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil in statements made
at the sessions of the General Committee held on January
24 and 30, 1962.

Statement of Uruguay

The Delegation of Uruguay wishes to state in the record
that, in adopting its position in the Eighth Meeting of
Consultation, far from violating or forgetting the juridical
standards applicable to the Cuban case, it adhered strictly
to them, as befits its old and honorable tradition of being
a defender of legality. The bases for this position were
explained at the plenary session held on January 31, as
will be shown in the minutes of that session.



President Proclaims Embargo
on Trade With Cuba



WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT

White House press release dated February 3

The President announced on Febinicary 3 an em-
bargo upon trade between the United States and
Cuba. He said that on humanitarian grounds ex-
ports of certain foodstuffs, medicines, and medical
supplies from the United States to Cuba would be
excepted from this embargo.

The President acted under the authority of sec-
tion 620 (a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
He stated in his proclamation that the embargo
was being imposed in accordance with the deci-
sions of the recent meeting of foreign ministers of
the inter-American system at Punta del Este,
Urugua}^^

The President pointed out that the embargo will
deprive the government of Cuba of the dollar ex-
change it has been deriving from sales of its prod-
ucts in the United States. The loss of this income
will reduce the capacity of the Castro regime, inti-
mately linked with the Sino-Soviet bloc, to engage
in acts of aggi-ession, subversion, or other activi-
ties endangering the security of the United States
and other nations of the hemisphere.



PROCLAMATION 3447^

Embakgo on All Trade With Citba

Whekeas the Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Min-
isters of Foreign Affairs, Serving as Organ of Consulta-
tion in Application of the Inter-American Treaty of Re-



' See p. 2T0.

' 27 Fed. Reg. 1085.



283



ciprocal Assistance, in its Final Act resolved that the
present Government of Cuba is incompatible with the
principles and objectives of the Inter-American system ;
and, in light of the subversive offensive of Sino-Soviet
communism with which the Government of Cuba is pub-
licly alined, urged the member states to take those steps
that they may consider appropriate for their individual
and collective self-defense ;

Whebeas the Congress of the United States, in section
620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (75 Stat.
445), as amended, has authorized the President to estab-
lish and maintain an embargo upon all trade between the
United States and Cuba ; and

Whereas the United States, in accordance with its in-
ternational obligations, is prepared to take all necessary
actions to promote national and hemispheric security by
isolating the present Government of Cuba and thereby re-
ducing the threat posed by its alinement with the Com-
munist powers :

Now, THEREFOHE, I, JoHN F. KENNEDY, President of the
United States of America, acting under the authority of
section e20(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (75
Stat. 445) , as amended, do

1. Hereby proclaim an embargo upon trade between the
United States and Cuba in accordance with paragraphs 2
and 3 of this proclamation ;

2. Hereby prohibit, effective 12 :01 a.m.. Eastern Stand-
ard Time, February 7, 1962, the importation into the
United States of all goods of Cuban origin and all goods
imported from or through Cuba ; and I hereby authorize
and direct the Secretary of the Treasury to carry out
such prohibition, to make such exceptions thereto, by li-
cense or otherwise, as he determines to be consistent with
the effective operation of the embargo hereby proclaimed,
and to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to perform such functions ;

3. And further, I do hereby direct the Secretary of
Commerce, under the provisions of the Export Control
Act of 1949, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2021-2032), to
continue to carry out the prohibition of aU exports from
the United States to Cuba, and I hereby authorize him,
under that Act, to continue, make, modify or revoke ex-
ceptions from such prohibition.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and

caused the Seal of the United States of America to be

affixed.

Done at the City of Washington this third day of

February In the year of our Lord nineteen hun-

[seal] dred and sixty-two, and of the Independence of

the United States of America the one hundred and

eighty-sixth.



By the President :
Dean Rusk,
Becretarp of State.



ffLJ L^



Secretary Rusk's News Conference
of February 1

Presa release 69 dated February 2

Secretary Rush: I have just returned this after-
noon from a meeting of the foreign ministers of
the Organization of American States at Punta del
Este in Uruguay.^ I do not have a formal and
prepared statement, but I should like to make a
few comments before we begin our questions.

The general subject of that meeting was the
problem of Communist penetration in this hemi-
sphere, with particular attention to the situation
of Castro Cuba. Although we were very much
preoccupied by the problem of Conmiunist pene-
tration, there was no question whatever that the
foreign ministers appreciated the fact that the
great tasks of the hemisphere lay not in these de-
fensive questions but rather in the great creative
effort in front of us in building in this hemisphere
vital democracies which will make such penetra-
tions impossible.

I came away from that meetmg with a profound
sense of the unity of the hemisphere on this prob-
lem, and of the enormous movement which has
occurred in the last, say, 18 months in recognizing
the nature of the problem and the importance of
moving as a hemisphere to try to deal with it
more adequately.

Questions Considered at Punta del Este

We had before us a number of questions. If
one were to ask what the United States hoped
might come out of that meeting, I might just re-
mind you briefly of the four points that I men-
tioned in my opening address to the ministers of
foreign affairs of the inter-American Republics.
I urged first that we must recognize that the aline-
ment of the government of Cuba with the coun-
tries of the Sino-Soviet bloc and its commitment
to extend Communist power in this hemisphere are
incompatible with the purposes and principles of
the inter- American system and that its current ac-
tivities are an ever-present and common danger
to the peace and security of the continent.

Second, we urged that we sliould now make the
policy decision to exclude the Castro regime from
participation in the organs and bodies of the inter-
Amei'ican system. Third, that we must interrupt



' See p. 270.



284



Department of State Bulletin



the limited but significant flow of trade between
Cuba and the rest of the hemisphere, especially in
the traffic in arms. And with respect to the traffic
ill arms, although we know that none of the mem-
bers of the hemisphere are selling arms to Cuba,
traffic — illicit traffic — in arms from Cuba to other
countries is going on, and we intend to interrupt
that traffic. Aiid fourth, that we should establish
some cooperative machinery to make it possible for
us to work together to meet political and indirect
aggression mounted against the hemisphere, and
in that connection we urged the establishment of
a special security committee to recommend indi-
vidual and collective measures to the governments
of the American states.

Accomplishments of Conference

Xow, from the point of view of what we hoped
to accomplish, I think that these were matters
which were in the minds of a great many govern-
ments, and we can report that those elements were
effectively accomplished at Punta del Este. It
might be of some interest to you to know what,
in fact, did happen there because I am not certain
that that information has been fully reported.

There was, for example, a unanimous resolution
on the nature of the Communist offensive in Latin
America. I think you would find that a more
interesting document than most intergovernmen-
tal documents, a thoughtful and imaginative state-
ment of the problem which makes it, I think, quite
clear that Castroism is not the answer for the
political or the economic development of this
hemisphere of free societies.

Then, by 19 votes, we established a Special Con-
sultative Committee on Security, working under
the Council of the Organization of American
States.

There was a reaffirmation of the holding of free
elections. I might say that, although that might
sound as though it were simply a routine reaffirma-
tion of well-known doctrines, it was impressive to
see the warmth which the conference gave to the
new Foreign Minister of the Dominican Republic
because of the democracy in that country.

There was a unanimous reaffirmation of and
stimulation to the Alliance for Progress, as free
men's answer to the problem of economic and so-
cial development, rather than a Castro Communist
kind of intervention.

We had some difficulty of a juridical and tech-



nical nature on the point of the exclusion of the
present government of Cuba from participation
in the organs and bodies of the inter-American
system. I should like to comment on that just
a bit because it is, I think, understandable that
attention is focused on points of disagreement
rather than on major points of agreement.

There was unanimity, as recorded by votes, with
two general ideas. That is that Marxist-Leninism
is incompatible with the inter-American system
and that the present government of Cuba is in-
compatible with that system. In our talks, dis-
cussions, and negotiations it was entirely clear that
there was unanimity on the broad notion that this
incompatibility was inconsistent with or contrary
to the participation of the present government of
Cuba in the organs and bodies of the inter-Ameri-
can system.

How to give effect to that general conclusion did
lead to a discussion of some very important but
highly complex and highly teclinical juridical
questions. There were moments when the remarks
seemed to be well taken that there seemed to be
a discourse between Sir Francis Bacon and St.
Thomas Aquinas.

There were some who felt that, since there was
an adequate legal base already existing, indeed, a
variety of legal remedies available, there was no
impairment to a policy decision that Cuba is ex-
cluded from the inter- American system or that
the present government of Cuba is so excluded.
There were some others who felt that there ought
to be additional juridical means provided before
that political decision should be taken.

There were 17 votes for the proposition that, as
a consequence of repeated acts, the present gov-
ernment of Cuba has voluntarily placed itself out-
side the inter- American system. There was ima-
nimity on the point of incompatibility. There
were six abstentions on the point of the present
exclusion of the present government of Cuba from
participation in the inter-American system. This
was not so much a question of policy as it was a
question of procedure and the juridical base. But
it was obvious that all those who took part recog-
nized, fundamentally, the contradictions between
Marxist-Leninism and the basic principles of our
hemispheric system.

In a case where the legal problem did not seem
to appear to anyone — for example, in the case of
the Inter-American Defense Board, which had
been created by the foreign ministers and there-



February 19, 1962



285



fore was at the disposal of the foreign ministers —
there was unanimity that the present government
of Cuba should be ousted from that Board.

In the case of economic relations we used pri-
marily the formula which had been used in the
case of the Dominican Republic. We immedi-
ately suspended trade in arms and implements
of war and then charged the Council of the Or-
ganization of American States to study the matter
further and to make recommendations as to the
possibility of extending this ban to other items,
with special attention to items of strategic im-
portance. That resolution got 16 votes. There
were 4 abstentions, and it is my impression that
the abstentions were based upon the hope that
the priority given to items of strategic impor-
tance would be made effective and that trade rela-
tions which had to do with the health or the
basic situation of the Cuban people themselves
would not be unduly affected.

There is no question that the present govern-
ment of Cuba was and is isolated in this hem-
isphere. They were not joined by any other
government on the negative votes which they cast
against all of these resolutions. It is also useful
to recall that, on the last day of the conference,
they themselves demonstrated the notion of with-
drawal, self-exclusion, by taking themselves out
of the conference. I do believe that this meeting
represented a considerable milestone in the devel-
opment of the OAS system and the recognition
of the nature of the threat to the hemisphere.

Differences on How To Solve Problem

Now, we had some differences on which consid-
erable time was spent, but there was no effort to
impose solutions. This was a negotiation among
independent governments and independent na-
tions — each foreign minister doing liis duty as
he saw it from the point of view of his own
people.

I think we might recall that the nations of the
hemisphere were in somewhat different positions
during this meeting. Many in and around the
Caribbean area — and remember that the United
States is a Caribbean country — felt especially con-
cerned, interested, and, some of them, directly
threatened by the Castro regime, and they felt
very strongly that the Organization should move
promptly under the Rio Treaty itself to take such
actions as may be necessary to limit the impact



of this threat. There were othei-s, somewhat more
remote from that situation, who were not as di-
rectly and immediately concerned.

From the point of view of the United States,
looking at the purposes of the OAS system, the
important countries were those who felt tl^em-
selves threatened. Even though some of them
might have been the smaller covmtries, we felt
that it was important for the OAS to give sup-
port to those smaller coimtries who were threat-
ened by this development. Even while we met at
Punta del Este reports came in, some of which
have been made public, about incidents or acts of
violence which demonstrated the very threat that
we were talking about.

So that I think it is also important to bear in
mind that this question is very much involved in
the internal political situation in each country.
We did not feel that it was up to us to tiy to insist
that governments cast votes without regard to the
pressing and important situations which they had
in their own homelands.

I think that, under the circumstances and the
spirit of unanimity wliich was acliieved on all of
the underlying points, the meeting was a great
success for the OAS as a whole.

Now I will be glad to take your questions.

Juridical and Political Views

Q. Mr. Secretary, you have explained earlier in
your discourse that these six votes were based pri-
marily on juridical and technical difficulties and



Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 57 of 101)