calls for much more than we are doing now. Had you been in Bogota, as I was, during the terrible uprising which almost sabotaged the conference, you would not be thinking of reducing this program but would be multiplying the amount to be invested tenfold. The CHAIRMAN. What were you doing down there? Mr. EWING. I was visiting in a fraternal way, going to my post in Lima. The CHAIRMAN. What was your post in Lima? Mr. EWING. Director of the Peruvian-American Cultural Institute during the years 1948-49. The CHAIRMAN. Were you working with the State Department then? Mr. EWING. I mentioned that in my opening statement, Mr. Chairman. I was there in the Division of Libraries and Institutes of the Department of State as an educator, an interchange educator, not as a diplomatic representative. The CHAIRMAN. How long did you stay at Bogotá after the fight started, or did you stay there? Mr. EWING. I was there from the opening of the Inter-American Conference, visiting the cultural center in Bogotá, until I was evacuated in an army plane to Panama and taken on to Lima. The CHAIRMAN. I see. You got out as soon as you could. Mr. EWING. In closing, these are not times for hesitancy, for turning back on our good will and good neighbor policy. It should, however, be bipartisan. Personal contact and I speak advisedly-and careful study through 25 years of residence and work in these countries, through the reading of unsolicited editorials in Spanish newspapers, convince me that right-minded peoples south of the Rio Grande are ready to cooperate and furnish leadership and funds to the maximum of their ability in this titantic struggle to save humanity. Thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. Have you any questions, Senator Green? RELATIONSHIP OF OTHER PROGRAMS TO POINT 4 Senator GREEN. You cited these examples of the work in Lima and Bogotá. Do I understand you use those illustrations to show what might be done under the point 4 program? Mr. EWING. No, I beg your pardon. They are under the Institute of Inter-American Affairs, and I don't understand whether there is money involved in the point 4 program. I think it is, yes, indeed. Senator GREEN. You think it is? Mr. EWING. I am not sure. I am referring to two things here. The Food and Agricultural Organization, of which I have observed a beginning in the Latin-American countries, has a small budget, I understand, of about $5,000,000, which is too modest for what is ahead of it. I have also referred to the Institute of Inter-American Affairs in this program of cooperation and educational services. Senator GREEN. That is something quite apart from the point 4 program; is it not? Mr. EWING. Yes. Senator GREEN. Well, what do you think? You must have an opinion. Mr. EWING. It is interrelated. Senator GREEN. That is something qiute apart from the point 4 Mr. EWING. It surely does, as a major program. Senator GREEN. Will you kindly explain how. It isn't clear. Mr. EWING. Well, you invest the technical leadership and the educational enterprises and develop these resources through that. For example, the Institute of Inter-American Affairs in its educational missions, as I understand it, operates only in countries under agreement with local governments, whereby they provide leadership and a certain amount of funds. A certain amount of funds and leadership are provided from the United States. Senator GREEN. I am just asking your opinion. I don't see that this is meant to set up schools and universities. Mr. EWING. It is for cooperation with the Latin-American countries. It is for putting up technical leadership and providing some funds for local development only, in agreement with local agencies and governments. COST OF THE PROGRAM Senator GREEN. Let me ask you another question. I didn't know whether you meant to make it clear that you were for $40,000,000. Mr. EWING. Forty-five million, the original amount recommended, rather than the reduced amount. Senator GREEN. Didn't you say a maximum amount of $45,000,000? Mr. EWING. Forty-five million. Senator GREEN. You meant not more than that when you said the maximum amount; did you not? Mr. EWING. I am not in a position, Mr. Senator, to indicate the amount. If amounts are to be increased, they would certainly be in a unit of not more than $10,000,000, as justified by the experts. Senator GREEN. I am just asking you whether you mean to imply that $45,000,000 was the maximum we might be willing to appropriate. Mr. EWING. Forty-five million; yes, sir. COOPERATION WITH UNITED NATIONS Senator GREEN. And should that be by the United States alone or through the United Nations? Mr. EWING. As I am familiar with the general situation in the LatinAmerican areas, I would say that the Food and Agriculture Organization should certainly operate through the United Nations, and the other funds available for the Institute of Inter-American Affairs should operate under present conditions as they are and as they have been, because we have an accumulated experience. They operate under our embassies. Senator GREEN. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Have you any questions, Senator Hickenlooper? Senator HICKENLOOPER. No; thank you. you The CHAIRMAN. All right, the next witness is Mr. George P. Delaney of the American Federation of Labor. He sent us word that he cannot be present but that he will file a statement, which we will publish. (The statement to be filed by Mr. Delaney is as follows:) STATEMENT BY GEORGE P. DELANEY, INTERNATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE, POINT 4 Seldom has a proposal been made which has had a more universal appeal than point 4. It appeals to the American Federation of Labor, for basic in our philosophy is the right of every individual to opportunity to raise his standards of living. It appeals to statesmen responsible for national security, for it is a key in the cold war waged by the Kremlin because it refuses to live as neighbors to a country benefiting by free enterprise which it labels "capitalism." It is essential to increased volume of world trade on a multilateral basis which facilitate national specialization. It would facilitate access of all countries to needed supplies. It proposes a way to satisfy the physical and intellectual needs of millions whose hard daily struggle against hunger and want is the result of underdevelopment of large areas. Point 4 is no simple cure-all, for it at once poses the alternatives: exploitation after the old colonial patterns or providing peoples with opportunities for self-development and material progress. Those nations which now lead in technical progress did not achieve their progress without the discipline and educative experiences that achieved present high standards of living. Only intellectual and spiritual reserves can lift and sustain social goals of the future. The American Federation of Labor believes that point 4 plans should be developed in cooperation with representatives of the area to be helped, so that people may acquire the tools and capacity for producing wealth and for sharing the benefit from it. We can send teachers and technicians, but more and better food and a more productive economy must be the result of the efforts of the people concerned. Not only is this true but each functional group must know how to make its contribution and how to secure compensation for work done. These are safeguards against exploitation, foreign or native. Point 4 plans have the additional responsibility of making obvious the interdependence of the economies of countries. Thus interpreted, point 4 will not seek to impose on backward areas our machines with mass production, our economy or institutions, but will seek to aid these peoples to find their way forward. For example, as factories expand, workers should learn their duties, rights, and responsibilities as members of free trade-unions and should unite with the international free trade-union organization. Plans must vary from what is needed by tribal illiterate groups to those whose sophistication in politics leads them into administrative corruption in order to acquire wealth. The kind of assistance point 4 should give has nothing in common with relief plans but foreshadows the organic development of a people to full use of their productive as well as their social and cultural resources. It includes conservation and utilization of natural resources with sizable production and service industries. To assure administration of point 4, in accord with these ends, personnel must be carefully screened to keep out propagandists and those incapable of respecting the right of a people to self-development. Any program will be facilitated by existing basic education, health information, natural resources, and ability to utilize water reserves. As the economy expands, indigenous capital formation should be encouraged at the earliest stages possible in order that the people may be freed from dependency on outside capital. Foreign investments should be on mutually advantageous conditions guaranteed by reciprocal trade treaties. Coordinating transportation systems are essential to developing and integrating economies, but all these things should not be in advance of the ability of the native peoples to manage and utilize their own resources. Stability and efficiency in political government must parallel progress in economic development. The legislation which government enacts may facilitate or hinder industrial progress. I am authorized on behalf of the American Federation of Labor to urge legislation to initiate the point 4 program and to urge adequate appropriation. In order to get the maximum benefit from this program in the "cold war" emergency, action should be quick and expeditious. We stand ready to help to the fullest extent of our ability, as we have done in ECA. The CHAIRMAN. The next witness, then, is Mr. Norman Littell. Mr. LITTELL. I have three points that are important, I think, Mr. Chairman. I will take 15 or 20 minutes, or I can make it as short as you wish. The CHAIRMAN. You are not with the Department of Justice now are you? Mr. LITTELL. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You were at one time; were you not? Mr. LITTELL. I was from 1939 to the end of 1944. I am in private law practice in Washington, D. C. The CHAIRMAN. Have you got a written statement? Mr. LITTELL. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. All right. We hope you will be as brief as possible and bring out your points. Go ahead. STATEMENT OF NORMAN M. LITTELL, CHAIRMAN, FOREIGN ECONOMIC COOPERATION COMMITTEE, INTERNATIONAL- AND COMPARATIVE-LAW SECTION, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, AND CHAIRMAN, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC COOPERATION COMMITTEE, INTERNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION Mr. LITTELL. For such modest qualifications as I possess, I am chairman of the committee on foreign economic cooperation of the international- and comparative-law section of the American Bar Association, and I am also chairman of the international economic cooperation committee of the International Bar Association, the latter committee having concentrated its attention upon the road blocks to private investment and participation of private enterprise in the foreign field. Because it is pertinent to this bill which is pending before you, I would like to submit for the record, in lieu of a written statement, an address which I made to the Inter-American Bar Association, entitled "Private Enterprise and American Foreign Policy; Essentials of Truman's 'Bold New Program," delivered to the Inter-American Bar Association in Detroit at its last meeting and to the Detroit Board of Commerce foreign-trade dinner. (The document above-referred, submitted by Mr. Littell, is as follows:) PRIVATE ENTERPRISE AND AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY; ESSENTIALS OF TRUMAN'S "BOLD NEW PROGRAM" President Truman has brought us to the threshold of a new era in goodneighbor relations on a world-wide basis. In the now famous "point 4" of his inaugural address of January 20, 1949, the President said: * * "We must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas. I believe that we should make available to peace-loving peoples the benefits of our store of technical knowledge in order to help them realize their aspirations for a better life. And, in cooperation with other nations, we should foster capital investment in areas needing development." Nowhere does this program hold out great promise for widening areas of prosperity, greater production and distribution of goods, increasing stabilization of employment, improved standards of living, and the opening of new markets, than here in the Western Hemisphere-but only if the countries of the Americas join in a common effort toward these ends. The point 4 policy is not self-operating. No amount of money alone can make it succeed. But with adherence to certain principles and the adoption of realistic legal implementation it can become the keystone in the arch of prosperous inter-American and world relations for generations to come. What are these requirements for the success? I. SECURITY FROM INTERVENTION First, there must be among the people of our neighboring countries of the Americas a complete sense of security and freedom from any fear of intervention in their affairs. It is scarcely necessary to review before this body the sweeping changes which have taken place in American policy toward our Latin-American neighbors.1 It must be frankly admitted that the Hague Convention of 1907, which followed the intervention in Venezuela in 1901 by the principal European countries to take possession of customs houses and effect collection of debts, was about as ineffectual as the Kellogg Pact of 1929 outlawing war. Many acts of intervention followed that declaration, though it remained in force among all of the principal powers, including the United States. The confused thinking that touched even high places in the United States in the 1920's is well epitomized in a statement made by President Calvin Coolidge on May 30, 1927: "The person and property of a citizen are part of the general domain of a nation, even when abroad. On the other hand there is a distinct and binding obligation on the part of self-respecting governments to afford protection to the persons and property of their citizens wherever they may be. These rights go with the citizen. Wherever he goes, these duties of our Government must follow him." * ** American troops were in Cuba when that statement was made, and our 10year occupation of Haiti had not long since been concluded. The United States would not subscribe to a nonintervention convention adopted by the other states of the Western Hemisphere in Habana, Cuba, in 1928. However, after the election of President Roosevelt, when the Seventh International Conference of the American States met at Montevideo, Uruguay, in December 1933, Secretary Hull strongly supported a provision there adopted that "No state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another." President Roosevelt sought to dispel all doubts as to delays in American ratification of this convention, or any other qualification, by announcing to the conference that the policy of the United States "from now on is one opposed to armed intervention." This policy was reaffirmed in December 1936, at Buenos Aires in a further unreserved condemnation of intervention for any reason, directly or indirectly, in the internal or external affairs of another country. The United States signed with other states. In the meantime the Platt amendment, written into the Constitution of Cuba and embraced in a 1903 treaty between the United States and Cuba, permitting United States military intervention in Cuba in order to sustain a stable government, was revoked by an agreement signed on May 29, 1934. And American troops had been withdrawn from the other points in the Caribbean where earlier administrations had sent them. Without tracing in detail the further acts of the United States consolidating and confirming this policy, it is sufficient to say that even the mildest forms of intervention have been abandoned. By agreement of September 13, 1941, all supervision of the United States over Haitian finances and the surrender of these functions to the National Bank of Haiti was accomplished. The abolition of the general receivership of the Dominican customs, which had been established in 1905, was effected by agreement with the Dominican Republic on September 24, 1940, effective March 31, 1941, so the Republic could resume collection of its own revenues. I think it is safe to state, without adding other evidence of American good will which I shall refer to later in connection with the concrete avenues of collabora 1 See excellent summary of these changes in a Survey of Recent Changes in the Relations Between United States and Other American Republics, by William Manger, counselor of the Pan American Union, published by the Pan American Union, Washington, D. C., 1946. 2 "Article I. The contracting powers agree not to have recourse to armed force for the recovery of contract debts claimed from the government of one country by the government of another country as being due to its nationals *." (Approved October 18, 1907; ratification deposited November 27, 1909; proclaimed February 28, 1910, 36 Stat. 2241.) * * |