will help to assure our friends safe passage through this period of transition and development.

"The sums I am requesting in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973 represent the absolute minimum prudent investment which the United States can afford to make if we wish to help create a peaceful and prosperous world. Altogether, authorizations under this bill amount to $2.9 billion for economic and military assistance in the coming fiscal year. During the current fiscal year, some $2.6 billion has been appropriated for such purposes under the strictures of a continuing resolution passed by the Congress.

"In providing assistance, however, we should not mislead ourselves into thinking that we act out of pure altruism. Successful development by friendly nations is important to us both economically and politically. Economically, many of the developing countries have energy resources and raw materials which the world will need to share in coming years. They also could represent larger markets for our exports. Politically, we cannot achieve some of our goals without their support. Moreover, if essential needs of any people go entirely unsatisfied, their frustrations only breed violence and international instability. Thus we should recognize that we assist them out of self-interest as well as humanitarian motives.

"While development progress as a result of our aid has been less visible than some would like, I believe it is essential for us to persevere in this effort. I am therefore asking the Congress to authorize some $1 billion for development assistance programs during fiscal year 1974 and approximately the same amount for fiscal year 1975.

"Security assistance has been a cornerstone of U. S. foreign policy throughout the last quarter century. Countries whose security we consider important to our own national interest frequently face military challenges, often prompted by third countries. In order to maintain a stable international order, it is important that these threatened countries not only be economically developed but also be able to defend themselves, primarily through their own resources.

"It is unrealistic to think we can provide all of the money or manpower that might be needed for the security of friendly nations. Nor do our allies want such aid; they prefer to rely on their own resources.

"We can and should, however, share our experience, counsel and technical resources to help them develop adequate strength of their own. It is for this reason that I ask the Congress to authorize $652 million in grant military assistance, $525 million in foreign military sales credits, and $100 million in supporting assistance funds for fiscal year 1974.

"The signing of cease-fire agreements in Vietnam and Laos marks the beginning of a trend toward a peaceful environment in Indochina. This change will permit us to turn our attention to the considerable post-war needs of Southeast Asia. To ignore these needs would be to risk the enormous investment we have made in the freedom and independence of the countries of Southeast Asia.

"The legislation I am presenting today would authorize the continuation of our economic assistance to South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia and would provide for a sound beginning in the process of rehabilitiation and reconstruction there. I anticipate other nations will join in this effort, as they have elsewhere, to solidify the foundations for a new era of reconciliation and progress in Southeast Asia.

"Relief assistance for refugees of the war in Southeast Asia is vital to this effort. These refugees number in the hundreds of thousands. In addition to their resettlement, this Administration proposes a major effort to help restore essential community services. in areas which have suffered because of the war.

"In this bill, I ask the Congress to authorize $632 million for the reconstruction effort in Indochina in fiscal year 1974.

"My present request does not include any assistance for North Vietnam. It is my hope that all parties will soon adhere fully to the Paris agreements. If and when that occurs, I believe that American assistance for reconstruction and development of both

South and North Vietnam would represent a sound investment in confirming the peace.

"Representatives of the United States have recently been holding discussions with representatives of the Government of North Vietnam to assess economic conditions there and to consider possible forms of United States economic assistance. This assessment has now been suspended, pending clarification of North Vietnam's intentions regarding implementation of the cease-fire. Once Hanoi abandons its military efforts and the assessment is complete, the question of aid for North Vietnam will receive my personal review and will be a subject for Congressional approval.

Reading List

1. Agency for International Development. FY 1974 Program Presentation to the Congress by AID. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.

2. Asher, Robert E. A Forward Look at Foreign Aid. (Brookings Research Report #105.) Washington, D. C.: Brookings Inst., 1970.

3. Bhagwat, Jagdish N. Amount and Sharing Aid. Washington, D. C.: Overseas Development Council, 1970.

4. Gardner, Richard N. and Millikan, Max F., eds. The Global Partnership: International Agencies and Economic Development. New York: Praeger, 1968.

5. Hyson, Charles D. and Stout, Allan M. "Impact on Foreign Aid on U.S. Exports. Harvard Business Review (JanuaryFebruary 1968), pp. 10-25.

6. Millikan, Max F. American Foreign Aid: Strategy for the 1970's. New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1969.

7. Pearson, Lester B. The Crises of Development. New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1970.

8. Peterson Task Force on International Development. U.S.

Foreign Aid in the 1970's: A New Approach. Report to the
President. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1970.

9. Richardson, Elliot L. Foreign Aid and U.S. National Interests. Department of State. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1969.

10. U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants and Assistance for International Organizations, July 1, 1945 - June 30, 1971. Washington, D. C. Agency for International Development, 1973.

11. Walters, Robert S. American and Soviet Aid: A Comparative Analysis. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press,

1970.

FOUNDATIONS OF NATIONAL POWER

Any evaluation of the dynamics of global power and national power should give prominent attention to geopolitical considerations-yesterday's and today's. The old geopoliticians have faded into the past and no new leaders in the field have appeared to take their place. Kjellan, Mahan, MacKinder, Haushofer, and others, rightly or wrongly, gave us strong theories with which we could work in evaluating the broad global power struggle in relation to the physical, economic and social environments at hand. Power centers on their way up, brash government policies on their way out, or military strategies in their cycles of popular acceptance could all, to a point, be explained as geographic responses. Also, limitations of power surges could be conjectured.

Now, in a world of 147 sovereign states or regimes in de facto control of specific territory; some 300 international boundaries compartmentizing national aspirations; and an indeterminate number of political ideologies tearing nations into different camps, there is need greater than ever for geopolitical guidance. Those individuals most remote from the physical make-up of the world-on which in the last analaysis we must depend--are quite often the ones that make the most momentous decisions. An appreciation of geopolitics in many instances provides the rationale for major policies and through this medium one may stabilize his own viewpoint with respect to environmental controls over government action.

Geopolitics was described in 1948 by Colonel S. F. Clabaugh, of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, as a "science which combines geography, history and politics for the purpose of explaining and predicting the behavior of nations. The name, "geopolitics" was coined by Rudolph Kjellen, a Swedish political scientist, around the turn of the century.

However, the subject matter is not that new. Some historians point to Napoleon's disaster in Russia in 1812 as the result of overlooking geopolitical factors. And twentieth century German