Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir. Since the late 1940's, three U.S. administrations have felt that it was important to assist Yugoslavia to maintain its independence of the Communist bloc. It is quite true that Yugoslavia is a Communist country, but we do not believe Yugoslavia is working hand in glove with the rest of the Communist bloc in a conspiratorial design aimed at the overthrow of governments all over the world. It was the defection of Yugoslavia from the Soviet bloc which opened the way for the settlement of the Greek guerrilla problem at the end of the decade of the 1940's.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Can you be specific about that?

Secretary RUSK. Yes. The guerrillas in Greece were being supplied, trained, and reequipped in Yugoslavia. It was in the middle of our Greek aid program that the split occurred between Belgrade and Moscow. Following that the Greek problem was wound up very rapidly.

Now at the present time we are engaging in some trade with Yugoslavia. Our aid to Yugoslavia has been reduced over the years because the growing economy of that country has made it less important for them to rely upon outside assistance. But we do think that it is important politically as well as economically to the Yugoslav people that a very substantial part of their trade is now with the West and less than 30 percent with the Soviet bloc.

I recognize, sir, that this is a matter of some controversy, but I think it is fundamental to the question to consider whether or not Yugoslavia is pursuing an independent course. Even though at times they may not say things or do things that we like or that we find helpful, the fact that they are independent is a matter of some concern to us. Our judgment is that they are.

We believe that the principal alternative to this policy of keeping open the possibilities of normal relations between Yugoslavia and the West, the principal alternative of this policy would be to close those opportunities and drive Yugoslavia toward the bloc. We do not believe that that would be to the interest of the free world. It would not be helpful for a member of the bloc to be once again on the borders of Austria, Italy, and Greece. We feel that here is a situation where there is a good base for what might be called reasonable, normal relations.

Mr. MAGNUSON. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CEDERBERG. Mr. Secretary, I was interested in your response to Congressman Magnuson regarding the Yugoslav situation. I recognize there is a difference of opinion here but I recall a statement by Mr. Tito right after the end of World War II where he said that they may again be willing to accept aid from the West but always, I think in his words "with the sole aim of accelerating their final ruin." That is the basis of the quote.

I find it very difficult to understand how we can fail to recognize that Tito, along with many others, is anything but opposed to our free system of government.

Secretary RUSK. There have been important matters on which Yugoslavia has departed from the attitude of Moscow. They were the first, for example, to resist and in their own case destroy the idea. that Moscow was supreme within the Communist Parties. They have resisted Moscow's proposals for troika arrangements which would have destroyed the office of the Secretary General of the United Nations

and indeed the organization itself. They have worked with the great majority of the U.N. members on the difficult questions of financing the U.N.—again, contrary to the Soviet position-and on questions of nuclear testing they have indicated that they have not agreed with the Soviet Union.

I think despite the voting record, which shows a high degree of agreement between them and the Afro-Asian bloc and upon many occasions with the Soviet Union, that they are capable of an independent policy and are pursuing one.

On a question like Germany, there is enough I think in the historical background to explain Yugoslavia's attitude as quite apart from the question as to whether or not they are Communists. I recognize these are matters which can only be proved out in history, Mr. Congressman. However, I would propose at this point that our interest in the independence of Yugoslavia is very great and that a policy which would tend to drive that country back toward the East would work greatly to our disadvantage.

CONCERN OVER U.S. SHARE OF U.N. COSTS

Mr. CEDERBERG. I find among my own constituency and from mail I receive from other areas and also as a result of my going to various places in the country that there are many people dissatisfied with the fact that the United States seems to be bearing too much of its share of the United Nations and that many of the other countries, not only in the Soviet bloc but in the free world, who are not measuring up to their responsibilities financially in this organization. They are becoming a little unhappy about the attitude of the neutrals, many of whom have been receiving our aid for many years. They have been willing to accept our aid and yet are unwilling to stand with us in our battle for freemen. While we recognize that you, Mr. Secretary, as well as others have been trying to get the European nations who are making such great economic progress at the present time to share more of the burden in regard to the assistance to the underdeveloped world we are disappointed in the results. I hope as you develop policies and contact these foreign countries, that you will bear in mind that the patience of the American taxpayer sometimes reaches a point of exhaustion.

Secretary RUSK. Thank you, Mr. Congressman. Let me assure you we agree that the question of sharing the burdens, not only in the United Nations but in these other international undertakings is not now at the moment in a satisfactory position.

We are making most strenuous efforts to see that arrearages in the United Nations are corrected. Through the bond issue we hope to move our percentage of the contributions to the Congo operation substantially downward.

In our aid programs on the one side we are trying to emphasize to the maximum that economic development cannot be imported into a country from the outside but depends upon the effort made in the country itself by its own government and people and that outside aid can be only the critical increment which might help generate and maintain a certain momentum. And we are also stressing that other industrialized countries of the free world have a major obligation to do everything they can to take a full share in this development effort.

We will continue to press them in that direction and have been somewhat encouraged by the results to date, but we have still a long distance to go. I appreciate your comment. Mr. CEDERBERG. That is all I have.

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Secretary, we have been here almost 3 hours On behalf of the committee I should like to thank you for a highly interesting and informative session.

now.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1962.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

WITNESSES

ROGER W. JONES, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

WILLIAM J. CROCKETT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

VERNE B. LEWIS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND FINANCE

FRANK G. MEYER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF BUDGET

Mr. ROONEY. Gentlemen, the committee will please come to order. The first item in the Department of State's budget is entitled "Salaries and expenses." This appears at page 1 of the committee print and beginning at page 6 of the justifications.

We shall insert at this point in the record pages 6 through 33 of these justifications.

(The pages follow:)

EXPLANATION OF LANGUAGE CHANGES

1. Purchase of automobiles

Delete "five" and insert in lieu thereof "twenty, of which four are for replacement only".

The four passenger cars to be replaced are for use in Washington. In fiscal year 1963 all of these vehicles will be eligible for replacement under the GSA standards of 6 years or 60,000 miles. The vehicles to be replaced include one 1955 and three 1956 Ford sedans. The purchase of the other 16 automobiles is to increase the oversea vehicle fleet.

2. Purchase of foreign currencies

Delete "$15,000,000" and insert in lieu thereof "$9,000,000".

The reduction in the amount of foreign currencies required to be purchased from the Treasury is necessary because of the reduced availability of certain currencies to the Treasury. While currencies may be available to the Treasury in a specific country, the basic agreement under which they were generated may have restricted the purposes for which they may be used to the extent that the Treasury is unable to supply sufficient currencies to meet the Department's requirements.

EXPLANATION OF BUDGET FORMAT (FOREIGN SERVICE SUBMISSION)

The following summary "blue sheet" table on page 8 provides a breakdown of increases by major program or functional item of expense for the appropriation in total. This same functional distribution is shown on the increase-decrease statement for each organizational unit. For example, the major functional increase for the item "Elevation of consular posts to diplomatic status" is shown on the blue sheet summary as $279,281. The amounts which make up this total are shown on page 71 for the Bureau of African Affairs ($213,100), on page 262 for the Bureau of European Affairs ($15,281) and the balance of supporting costs is shown on page 334 for the Bureau of Administration ($50,900).

The committee has, however, always displayed an interest in examining the requested increases both by major program, such as elevation of consular posts and by category of expense such as travel, supplies, equipment, etc. Therefore, the submission for each regional bureau contains a summary page which shows the increases distributed both ways (e.g., p. 72 for the Bureau of African Affairs).

Increases are then justified separately on subsequent pages in terms of program increases and in terms of items of expense. For example, the total figure ($213,100) at the bottom of the column headed "Elevation of consular posts to diplomatic status," on page 72 is explained and justified in narrative on page 79 on the basis of program only. In addition, the increases requested for allowances, differentials, and other operating expenses, without regard to the program involved, are justified by type of expense on pages 89 et seq.