Page images
PDF
EPUB

(The matter referred to follows:)

Since December 1944 we have signed bilateral air transport agreements with Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia, United Kingdom, Turkey, and Canada. All of these provide for fifth-freedom traffic except Canada, which is for four freedoms. Pending the conclusion of a formal bilateral agreement, we have also obtained interim or temporary landing rights with Egypt, Greece, Italy, France, Belgium, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.

Status of civil aviation documents concluded at Chicago, Dec. 7, 1944

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

4 Reservation excluding Newfoundland, withdrawn by Great Britain Feb. 7, 1945.

[blocks in formation]

Source: Treaty Branch, Division of Research and Publication, Department of State, Nov. 30, 1945.

The CHAIRMAN. We promulgated a multilateral proposition in Chicago?

Mr. BAKER. Yes. As I understand it, very few major traffic countries signed the multilateral air transport agreement.

Mr. POGUE. Very few accepted it.

The CHAIRMAN. There was only one who signed up for the fifth freedom, isn't that right?

Mr. BAKER. I do know the Dutch did that. Many of them signed up for the so-called two freedoms which gives the right to fly through

the air space over a country and to land for technical stops, gasoline, repairs, et cetera.

However, the so-called multilateral air transport agreement embodies the third, fourth, and fifth freedoms; the right to carry passengers from one country to a second country, and from that country back to your own country; and then the fifth freedom to pick passengers up in a second country and carry them to the third country and from the third country to a fourth.

That was signed by a very few of the major traffic countries.
Senator BREWSTER. Was there probably four or five?

Mr. BAKER. I will get those figures for you. The country of most importance to us who signed that was the Dutch. However, for the most part the rights we have obtained to operate through other countries over this last year have been obtained by means of bilateral agreements, the working out of bilateral air transport agreements with these various countries.

(The information requested is as follows:)

Twenty-five countries, so far have accepted the two-freedoms agreement; 13 countries have accepted the five-freedoms agreement. A sizable number of countries have also signed these two multilateral agreements, but have net yet accepted them. A tabulation is attached, showing action taken by each country on the Chicago documents (printed above).

The CHAIRMAN. Bilateral, do you mean?

Mr. BAKER. Yes, individual ones between us and those countries, giving us the right to the third, fourth and fifth freedoms.

In the case of the Dutch, they elected not to work out a bilateral agreement with us, but to sign the Chicago mutilateral air transport agreement, which automatically gave us those same rights as far as Holland was concerned, which we obtained by bilaterals with other countries.

Senator CORDON. Will there also be submitted for the record the complete list of those with whom we have the bilateral agreements? Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead, please.

Mr. BAKER. Speaking of the North Atlantic business, which is naturally the most important and heaviest trade; the most important countries for us to get into from the point of view of our operators would be France and England. There we are having great difficulty in getting bilateral agreements, primarily with the British, because of a different philosophy.

The CHAIRMAN. That was brought out, as Senator Brewster well knows, brought out at Chicago where the two leading nations of that discussion were unable to come together on philosophy.

Senator BREWSTER. May I ask a question? Under those Chicago agreements, there had to be so many agree in order to make them effective before a certain date?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Senator BREWSTER. What happened on that?

Mr. POGUE. I think you are referring to the interim agreements. Senator BREWSTER. Yes.

Mr. POGUE. There were 26 nations that had to ratify that. I think that was to be before June 1, 1945.

Senator BREWSTER. Six months after signing.

Mr. POGUE. Yes. Considerably more than 26 did accept the interim agreement before that date, so it came into existence.

Senator BREWSTER. With the two freedoms?

Mr. POGUE. No. The interim agreement established the world organization and had nothing to do with the freedoms.

The two freedoms came into effect as it was accepted by the different nations and it was the same way with the transport agreements. Of course, the Convention itself is a treaty pending before the Senate now.

Senator BREWSTER. Did you understand that Senator Bailey?

The CHAIRMAN. That the interim agreement might become effective independently of whether or not we got the freedoms or not, to last 3 years?

Mr. POGUE. There was another refinement of the thing that has now become academic. I think there is a good reason to say that the transport agreement, that the five freedoms, and the transit agreement was so drawn that you could argue that it was valid only when members of the International Organization had accepted the transit agreement or the transport agreement, as the case may be. So, you could have argued that maybe it wouldn't come into effect until the interim agreement did, but it did so. It is all academic now. Senator BREWSTER. Then our policy has been proceeding on the bilateral agreements, which was alien to the spirit and intent of the Chicago agreement. The Government did hope for a multilateral solution which has not proved practical.

Mr. POGUE. Yes. When we proposed the transport agreement, very few accepted it. There are quite a few, as I recall it, quite a few who signed it.

Senator BREWSTER. Will you have that information?

Mr. BAKER. We will have that for you.

We were able to work out bilateral agreements with numerous nations, but the all-important nations were the British and the French. The British had a strong philosophy which was quite different from ours on these three major issues that you hear talk about. The British believed that there should be a strict control of rates, governmental control of rates. They believed there should be a strict control of the frequency of operation; that is, the number of flights to be allowed the operators of each country to fly. Also, they were in general against the principle of the so-called fifth freedom, the right of a company to pick up passengers in a foreign country, passengers to be carried to still another foreign country.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it proposed to have an American transport stop in Great Britain and pick up passengers for the Continent?

Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir, or from any of the colonies to do the same thing.

Our general position in Chicago was the exact opposite of that; namely, that we stood out for complete freedom of the operator to set his rates, to operate as many frequencies as he wanted, and also we urged the fifth freedom; at least, to the extent of picking up and setting down fifth-freedom passengers on through routes.

There were various discussions with the British in an informal way during the past 6 months. I think Mr. Clayton talked with them in midsummer, along with Mr. Morgan from our Aviation Division. There was a lot of discussion between the embassy and the Air Ministry people in London during the fall, and also between the British Embassy here and our people. However, it was without success, so far as getting any agreements.

We felt very strongly that if we could get them to sit down with us and talk the thing over that there probably would be some way in which we could get things worked out so that air transport development would not be blocked by this conflict of policies, which was going to act as a barrier to the normal and swift development of international air transport when the companies were technically ready. Our companies were getting ready with equipment and personnel as soon as the war with Japan was over.

The British, about January 6 or January 7, did finally agree that it was desirable to have a conference, and invited the delegation from the United States to meet with them at Bermuda on the 12th. That was changed to the 15th. A delegation was chosen and went to Bermuda on the 15th, and an executive agreement was reached last Monday night in Bermuda.

The CHAIRMAN. Before you go into the details of the executive agreement, I want Senator Brewster to be back here. He is just answering a phone call. We want a full description of the agreement. Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator CORDON. May I ask a question?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Senator CORDON. You view is that the executive agreement has been reached, signed, and is a fait accompli so far as this country is concerned now?

Mr. BAKER. It is my understanding.

Senator CORDON. As far as the presentation to this committee is concerned, you are simply presenting a history of something that is done.

Mr. BAKER. As far as the executive agreement, the air transport agreement, which is considered to be an executive agreement-that would be true, Senator. It gets a little complicated because part of the agreement is that the executive branch of the Government would urge upon the Congress certain future action, which would be solely within the province of the Congress.

Now, I am fairly new with this. I only came in the State Department the 1st of September, and I was not at Chicago and not at the discussions after Chicago. Mr. Pogue and Senator Brewster know more about that. I understand there was a question after the Chicago meetings as to whether these matters should be handled as executive agreements or as treaties. I understand that the State Department took a position that they should be handled as executive agreements.

Senator BREWSTER. A portion of the interim agreement was construed as an executive agreement. They proceeded under that, although I think Senator Bailey and I pondered as to constitutional and legal questions.

The CHAIRMAN. The question was present at Chicago. I think I presented the question.

Senator BREWSTER. At Chicago and subsequently.

The CHAIRMAN. I stated the principle of law that you can make an executive agreement where it is authorized by a treaty, or authorized by statute, but you can't go beyond a treaty or statute without running into a new treaty.

« PreviousContinue »