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

Department of State bulletin (Volume v. 56, Jan- Mar 1967) online

. (page 67 of 90)
Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 56, Jan- Mar 1967) → online text (page 67 of 90)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


The fundamentals of a decent life are suffi-
cient food, freedom from disease, and an op-
portunity to absorb as much knowledge as
individual capacities permit.

These are the first goals of all societies.
They must be the first objects of our aid.

/ -propose that the act establish agriculture,
health, and education as our primary con-
cerns and that investment in these areas be
substantially expanded.

I propose that our investment in —

Agriculture rise from $504 million last year
to $668 million in 1968.

Education rise from $166 million to $228
million.

Health rise from $192 million to $202
million.

In particular, we will wage war on hunger.
Together, the world must find ways to bring
food production and population growth into
balance. My proposals make clear our deter-
mination to help expand food supplies. We
must be equally ready to assist countries
which decide to undertake voluntarily popu-
lation programs.

5. Balance of payments

Our foreign assistance programs rest on
the basic strength of the dollar and our bal-
ance of payments. This administration will
continue to see that our aid programs have
the least possible adverse effect on our balance
of payments.



A New Course for Foreign Aid

Remarks by President Johnson *

I have today asked the Congress to help
chart a new course for American foreign aid.
We know that aid is indispensable to our quest
for world order. We know that poverty is the
enemy of peace and hopelessness is the mother
of violence. But the world is changed since our
aid began, some 20 years ago. And our think-
ing should change with it.

Our primary objective must be to help those
nations which are willing to help themselves.

I will not ask a single American citizen to
contribute his tax dollars to support any coun-
try which does not meet this test. Because no
sustained progress is possible without the spirit
of self-help.

Aid provided as a substitute is aid that is
wasted. And waste is a luxury that none of us
can afford.



' Recorded for radio and television on Feb. 9.



Almost 90 percent of our economic assist-
ance and over 95 percent of our military as-
sistance is now spent in the United States.
These programs serve to expand U.S. trade
abroad. They help develop new trading pat-
terns.

6. Efficient administration

The Agency for International Development
is a sound, well-run instrument of public
policy. But, like all arms of government, AID
can be improved. It can add further to its
economy record — a record which includes $33
million in cost reduction last year alone, and a
20-percent cut in personnel, apart from south-
east Asia, since 1963.

I am establishing two new offices in AID:

An Office of the War on Hunger to con-
solidate all AID activities relating to hunger,
population problems, and nutrition.

An Office of Private Resources to concen-
trate on marshaling private investment and
the expansion of private sectors in the less-
developed world — the best long-term route to
rapid growth.



MARCH 6, 1967



381



Both of these steps are consolidations —
they will require no new appropriations or
personnel. They will focus the attention and
energy of the Agency directly upon two pri-
ority aroas. They are significant steps for-
ward.

Economic Assistance

Latin America

For Latin America, I recommend an eco-
nomic aid program of $624 million.

This amount is clearly justified by our own
interests and the recent performance of our
Latin American partners. The program I pro-
pose is lean and concentrated. Nearly 70 per-
cent of it will be committed in four countries
—Brazil, Colombia, Peru, and Chile. In each
case, we will make certain that the amount
actually spent is in accord with clear needs
and meets the strict self-help criteria of the
act.

The outlook for a solid return from these
expenditures is promising:

Brazil shows greater economic dynamism
than at any time in her recent history. She
has forced inflation down from the 1964 high
of 140 percent to 40 percent — still far too
high, but an enormous improvement. Her
balance-of-payments situation is well under
control. Agricultural production has been in-
creased. Per capita income is up. In general,
the economic situation is more hopeful than
the most favorable predictions of 3 years

ago.

Peru continues its steady economic climb.
Per capita income last year was $378, com-
pared to $325 5 years before. The critical
job now is to bring more people into the eco-
nomic mainstream, while further stimulating
the developed coastal areas. U.S. contribu-
tions will be heavy in the areas of agricul-
ture and education.

In Chile, the favorable copper market will
make possible a reduction in our aid. We will
concentrate our help in the crucial rural area
to increase agricultural production and ex-
ports.

In Colombia, economic trends are also en-
couraging. Our contributions will be made



through a group of donors led by the World
Bank. We will concentrate on agriculture and
education.

Our program for Central America — Nica-
ragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Costa Rica, "^
and Honduras — is tailored to support the
Central American Common Market. This
market is one of the most promising inno-
vations in the developing world. The spirit it
reflects has already increased trade within
the Central America region by 400 percent
over the past 5 years. We will make modest
contributions to the Central American Inte-
gration Fund to continue and accelerate this
pace.

The balance of my request is largely for
the Dominican Republic and Panama. It is
essential that we maintain strong programs
in these countries, although they will cost
slightly less than in the past.

The vision and hard work of 450 million
people in this hemisphere have made the Alli-
ance for Progress into one of the great tools
for human betterment. Its success is by no
means assured. There will be disappointments
as well as achievements along the way. But it
is a vehicle for the hopes and energies of a
continent. The program I propose will carry
it forward.

Meetings among the governments of the
Western Hemisphere during the year may
produce further proposals, such as replenish-
ment of the resources of the Inter- American
Development Bank. Where these proposals
merit our consideration and support and
require action by the Congress, I will submit
my recommendations to you at the appropri-
ate time.

Near East-South Asia

For the Near East^south Asia, I recom-
mend a program of $758 million.

This region provides the harshest test of
free institutions:

Nowhere else in the free world are there
so many people — as many as the combined
populations of North and South America
and Western Europe.

Nowhere else do so many people live in



382



DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN



such dire poverty — per capita income for
nine out of every 10 persons is under $100
per year.

Nowhere else are divisive forces so poised
to take advantage of any misstep.

Several advanced nations have banded to-
gether, under the leadership of the World
Bank, to form an Aid Consortia for India
and Pakistan. A similar group has been
formed for Turkey, chaired by the Organiza-
tion for Economic Cooperation and Develop-
ment. These groups determine the share each
member will contribute and provide a forum
for continuing discussions with recipient
countries. They have served the interests of
all parties.

In my message on food for India,^ I pro-
posed that food and related aid be added to
the agenda of the consortium for India as
an additional area of assistance in which all
donors should join. We will exert the full
extent of our influence to insure that this con-
sortium becomes the primary vehicle for all
aspects of development aid to India — from
grants of funds to evaluation of performance.

Despite the shadow of famine and the
ever-present danger of renewed frictions, the
situation in the three countries — India, Paki-
stan, and Turkey— which will receive 91 per-
cent of our aid to the Near East^south Asia
gives reason for hope:

India is trying to regain the lead in the
race between her expanding population and
her food supply. She plans to double her out-
lays for agriculture in the next 5 years and
to quadruple her voluntary population pro-
gram. India has increased fertilizer purchases
by 85 percent and has started crash programs
in fai-mland development. She has begun cam-
paigns to increase supplies of better seeds and
pesticides. But Indian performance is not
confined to agriculture. In early 1966 she
liberalized her system of import controls and
devalued her currency. All advanced nations
must come to her aid if these hard-won op-
portunities are to be realized.

Pakistan has an outstanding economic



For text, see Bulletin of Feb. 20, 1967, p. 295.



record. Her future is brighter still. From
1960 to 1965, her gross national product grew
at an average annual rate of 5.8 percent
compared to 2.5 percent previously, agricul-
tural production grew at an average annual
rate of 3.5 percent compared to 1.6 percent
previously, local private investment grew by
54 percent, and total private investment was
63 percent over planned targets.

Turkey also has a remarkable record. We
and other Western nations are determined to
help Turkey meet its goal of self-sustaining
economic growth by 1973. She is already well
on her way. In 1966, her gross national prod-
uct grew by 8.3 percent, industry by 9.5 per-
cent, agricultural production by 11 percent,
and the use of fertilizer by 40 percent. The
percentage of children of school age enrolled
in primary schools increased to almost 80
percent.

If it cannot be demonstrated that hard
work, coupled with relatively modest amounts
of our aid, will produce better lives for the
countless millions of this region, our cause
will surely fail. The programs I propose will
enable us to continue meeting this challenge.

Africa

For Africa, I recommend a program of
$195 million.

Africa is undergoing the historic growing
pains of attaining stable independence; 35 of
her 39 nations have gained their freedom
since World War II, many in the past 5
years. The inevitable strains are evident in
the headlines of the world's newspapers.

The most hopeful sign of growing African
maturity is the increased support for co-
operative economic enterprises. With 14 coun-
tries of less than 5 million people each, this
attitude is essential for progress.

Our AID policy toward Africa will —

Encourage the African activities of the
World Bank and its affiliates.

Direct a greater part of our resources into
projects and programs which involve more
than one African country.

Seek new breakthroughs in private invest-
ment in Africa, particularly the current



MARCH 6, 1967



883



efforts by private American banks and other
financial institutions.

East Asia

For east Asia, I recommend a program of
$812 million.

Nearly 85 percent of our assistance to this
region is directly or indirectly related to our
effort to block Communist aggression.

My recent visit to Asia confirmed my deep
conviction that foreign assistance funds for
Vietnam and surrounding countries are just
as important as military appropriations.
They are vital to a successful war effort. They
permit us to build for the future.

Most of these funds — about $650 million —
will be used in Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand.
The $550 million planned for Vietnam is in-
dispensable to military success, economic sta-
bility, and continued political progress. It
will stimulate and support measures to bind
the people and Government of South Viet-
nam together in a common cause. It will help
to begin the task of reconstruction and de-
velopment. It will relieve wartime suffering
for millions of Vietnamese.

In Laos and Thailand, these funds will
finance economic development and security
which will assure that armed conflict will not
engulf all of southeast Asia.

Our assistance to Thailand will be chan-
neled through a new consultative group of 13
donors, chaired by the World Bank. In Laos,
five other countries will join the United
States with significant contributions.

Elsewhere in free Asia, the tide of history
clearly favors progress:

In Korea, the economy is now growing at
the rapid annual rate of 8 percent. Indus-
trial production is rising at a 14-percent rate
annually, agricultural production at a 6-per-
cent rate. In the few short years since the
Korean war, the Republic of South Korea has
become strong enough not only to maintain
its internal advance, but to help in the de-
fense of freedom in Vietnam.

In Indonesia, the new Government has com-
mitted itself to a program of economic re-
habilitation and recovery. We are joining



with other European and Asian nations to
provide urgently needed help to the stricken i
Indonesian economy. We are also partici-
pating in arrangements with other nations to
reschedule Indonesian debts.

The road ahead in east Asia is long and
dangerous. But these accomplishments are
hopeful signs. We will encourage the vital
and progressive spirit that has stimulated
them.

Military Assistance

For military assistance, I recommend ap-
propriations of $596 million.

This is the smallest request since the pro-
gram began in 1950. In part, this fact re-
flects transfer of appropriations for military
assistance for Laos, Thailand, NATO infra-
structure and international military head-
quarters to the budget of the Department of
Defense.

But this request also represents a substan-
tial reduction. Military assistance outside
southeast Asia is now only 45 percent of what
it was in 1960.

For the Near East-south Asia, I recom-
mend $234 million, down 50 percent from
1963. Virtually all this will be used in Greece,
Turkey, and Iran, three countries which have
shared the burden of mutual security for 20
years.

For east Asia, I recommend $282 million,
almost entirely for Korea and Taiwan. We
will use these funds to strengthen these out-
posts against further Communist expansion
in Asia.

For Latin America, I recommend $45.5
million, largely for internal security and
training.

For Africa, I recommend $31 million,
heavily concentrated in countries where we
have major interests and where there are
problems of internal security.

It is not the policy of the United States to
provide sophisticated arms to countries which
could better use their resources for more pro-
ductive purposes.

It is the policy of the United States to
help —



384



DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN



Where we are asked.

Where the threat of invasion or subversion
is real.

Where the proposal is militarily and eco-
nomically sound.

Where it is consistent with our interests
and our limited means.

This will continue to be our policy.

The Challenge Ahead

The programs I propose represent the
minimum contribution to mutual security and
international development which we can
safely make.

There are some who say that even this
request should be foregone in view of needs
at home and the costs of the struggle in
Vietnam.

Nothing could be more shortsighted and
self-defeating. This country — the wealthiest
in human history — can well afford to devote
less than seven-tenths of 1 percent of its
national income to reduce the chances of
future Vietnams.

Some would have us renege on our com-
mitments to the developing countries on the
ground that "charity begins at home."

To them, let me emphasize that I have
recommended no charity, nor have I sug-
gested that we stray from home. The ines-
capable lesson of our century, inscribed in
blood on a hundred beaches from Normandy
to Vietnam, is that our home is this planet
and our neighbors 3 billion strong.

Still others have grown weary of the long.



hard struggle to bring the majority of the
world's population out of the shadows of
poverty and ignorance.

To them, let me say that we are dealing in
decades with the residue of centuries. There
is no shortcut. There is no easy way around.
The only effective tools are ingenuity, capital,
and, above all, the will to succeed.

All of us sometimes find ourselves sympa-
thizing with these complaints. All of us are
subject to the frustrations, disappointments,
and shattered hopes which accompany a sup-
porting role in a task which must funda-
mentally be performed by others. But, in the
cold light of reason, our responsibility to our-
selves and our children reasserts itself and
we return to the task with renewed vigor.

I am confident that the American people
have not lost the will and the dedication
which have made them the most powerful
and responsible nation on earth.

I am confident that they will go forward
into the new era of world progress for which
their past efforts have prepared the way.

I am confident that their vision will tran-
scend the narrow horizons of those who
yearn for a simpler age.

The proposals I offer today are the prac-
tical requirements of that vision. To do less
would endanger all we have accomplished in
the past two decades.

I know that this test shall not find us
wanting.

Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House, February 9, 1967.



MARCH 6, 1967



385



President Calls for Senate Ratification
of Treaty on Outer Space



Message From President Johnson to the Senate



White House press release dated February 7

To the Senate of the United States:



I am today transmitting to the Senate, for
your advice and consent, the first Treaty on
Outer Space.i

The provisions of this Treaty reflect the
will and desire of the signatory states,
already numbering more than half the
nations of the world, that the realms of space
should forever remain realms of peace.

The privilege of transmitting this mile-
stone agreement to you before the end of the
first decade of space exploration is especially
gratifying for me.

Only ten years ago, as a Senator, I chaired
the first Congressional hearings called to
determine what response our national policy
should make to the challenges of the explora-
tion of outer space. The hearings and the
events of those times seem now a world away
for us all. Yet I remember — and I know you
do— the climate of great awe and greater
anxiety in which Senators addressed them-
selves to their responsibilities. At that time:

— No American satellite had yet been
orbited.

— The readiness of our rockets was much
in question.

— There was no NASA [National Aero-



' S. Ex. D, 90th Cong., 1st sess.; for text, see Bul-
letin of Dec. 26, 1966, p. 953.



nautics and Space Administration], no vast
complex at what is now Cape Kennedy, no
Manned Spaceflight Center at Houston. The
very word, "astronaut," was not in our
vocabulary.

— Men questioned the capacity of our edu-
cational system to yield up the incalculably
valuable resource of minds trained for the
great tasks of the space age.

— The stature of our advanced technology
and our ability to participate as leaders in the
explorations of the universe was far from
being established with certainty.

In that uncertain climate, our concerns
about space were quite different from now.
We were rightly concerned for the safety of
our nation and for the survival of human-
kind. We directed our concern to the orga-
nization of our society and to the priority of
our values as free men.

In November 1958, President Dwight D.
Eisenhower asked me to appear before the
United Nations to present the United States
resolution urging that the exploration of
outer space be undertaken for peaceful pur-
poses, as an enterprise of international
cooperation among all member nations.

On that occasion, speaking for the United
States, I said:

Today, outer space is free. It is unscarred by con-
flict. No nation holds a concession there. It must
remain this way. We of the United States do not
acknowledge that there are landlords of outer space
who can presume to bargain with the nations of



386



DEPARTMENT OF STATE BULLETIN



e Earth on the price of access to this domain.

e must not — and we need not — corrupt this great
opportunity by bringing to it the very antagonisms

hich we may, by courage, overcome and leave
t)ehind forever if we proceed with this joint adven-
nire into this new realm.

We know the gains of cooperation. We know the
losses of the failure to cooperate. If we fail now
to apply the lessons we have learned, or even if we
ielay their application, we know that the advances
into space may only mean adding a new dimension
to warfare. If, however, we proceed along the or-
derly course of full cooperation we shall, by the
very fact of cooperation, make the most substantial
contribution toward perfecting peace.

Men who have worked together to reach the stars
are not likely to descend together into the depths of
war and desolation.

I believe those words remain valid today.

The "very fact of cooperation" in the evo-
lution of this Treaty is to be taken as a
"substantial contribution toward perfecting
peace." As long ago as 1958, President Eisen-
hower initiated an exchange of letters with
the leadership of the Soviet Union, seeking
agreements binding the uses of outer space to
peaceful purposes. President Kennedy repeat-
edly reaffirmed our willingness to cooperate
toward these ends.

In October 1963, the General Assembly of
the United Nations called on nations of the
world not to station nuclear or other weapons
of mass destruction in outer space. Two
months later the Assembly adopted a Declara-
tion of Legal Principles to govern activities
in space. On May 7, last year, I repeated, and
Ambassador Goldberg reiterated many times
thereafter, our view of the urgency of doing
all that we could to assure that exploration of
outer space would take place in peace, for
peaceful ends.

In July 1966, negotiations on the Treaty
were formally begun at Geneva in the 28-
member United Nations Outer Space Com-
mittee. Accord was subsequently reached at
renewed negotiations in New York. The
Treaty was unanimously endorsed by the
Twenty-first Session of the General Assembly
just over a month ago.^



' For background, see ibid., Jan. 9, 1967, p. 78.



MARCH 6, 1967



On January 27, the Treaty on Principles
Governing the Activities of States in the Ex-
ploration and Use of Outer Space, including
the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies was
opened for signature in Washington, London
and Moscow. The United States, United King-
dom and Soviet Union were among the sixty
countries signing the Treaty in Washington.
Other nations are expected to add their signa-
tures in the near future.

The climate in which such accord has been
reached is clearly an encouraging omen for
continuing in other realms our constant quest
for understandings that will strengthen the
chances for peace.

II

In the diplomacy of space, as in the tech-
nology of space, it is essential always that
interim achievements not be mistaken for
final success. This Treaty I transmit to the
Senate today is such an interim achievement
— a significant, but not a final step forward.

It carries forward the thrust of the past
decade to enlarge the perimeters of peace by
shrinking the arenas of potential conflict.
This is a thi ust to which the Senate has given
its support by ratifying the four Geneva
Conventions on the Law of the Sea in 1958,
the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 and the Limited
Test Ban Treaty of 1963.

As we have dealt with the sea, the atmos-
phere and the vast unpopulated continent of
Antarctica, now in this Treaty we extend
reason to the activities of nations in the end-
less realm of outer space.

The Treaty lays down fundamental prin-
ciples:

— No nation can claim sovereignty to outer
space, to the moon or to other celestial bodies.

— All nations have the right to conduct
space activities.

— No one may use outer space or celestial
bodies to begin a war. The rules of the United
Nations Charter apply to space activities.

— No country may station in space or orbit
around the Earth nuclear or other weapons
of mass destruction.



387



— No country may install such weapons on
a celestial body.

— No nation may establish military bases,
installations or fortifications, on a celestial
body. Nor may any weapons be tested or mili-
tary maneuvers be conducted there. The right
to visit another country's installations and
space vehicles on a celestial body is guaran-
teed.

— Astronauts are "envoys of mankind." If
an astronaut lands on another country's soil,



Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 56, Jan- Mar 1967) → online text (page 67 of 90)