JOURNAL - OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00957A000100040070-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 14, 2005
• Sequence Number: 70
• Publication Date: July 18, 1974
• Content Type: NOTES

25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2005/07/20 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100040070-9
Journal - Office of Legislative Counsel Page 4
Thursday - 18 July 1974
CONFIDENTIAI:
12. Talked to Jim Oliver, International. Affairs
Division, OMB, who told me that he had cleared the Director's letter on
H.R. 15845 to Chairman Lucien N. Nedzi (D., Mich.) Intelligence Subcommittee,
House Armed Services Committee, with Ed Strait in. OMB and had reviewed it
with George Gilbert, Legislative Reference Division in OMB. Gilbert feels
that it is necessary for further review with the NSC staff and Justice Department.
Oliver will call as soon as the necessary circuits are closed. Mr. Warner, CCC,
has been advised.
25X1 13. and I met
with Mr. Jack Goin and Mr. John Manopoli, Director and Deputy Director
respectively, of the Office of Public Safety, AID, to discuss Senator
Abourezk' s a _?_?,41-, No. 1151 to S.33 which amends the Foreign Assistance
See IVIemora.ndum for the Record.
25X1
25X1
25X1
ct
of 1961.
CC:
0/DDCI
Ex. Sec.
DDI
DDM&S
DDS&T
Mr. Warner
Mr. Lehman
Mr. Thuermer
EA/DDO
Compt
EC) GE L. CAR
Legislative Counsel
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2005/07/20 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100040070-9
25X1
Wir10100040 70-9 S 12367
it/ 15, 49 pproved For R40464 Steri(241:? ilikAitiM9=06?HA
Jurisdiction by IndianVibes and by theAM/Ailill.bri*' ei'rtrs ?on STAMP
ACT OF 964-AMENDMENT
tes over crithinal offenses and
n3atterS in ndian country. AM.? DMENT NO. 1! bl
- rtera, T., be Printeti Ind referred
Miuiiit o Mr, AV1Th, th
r 'Tog, _Vetnitifit alr:SrAfrosiD, porestry..)
Senator ffont?Minnesota (Mr. Mr'. DOMLNICI. Mr. President on
'Et) -dna the -Seiattor- from May 14, 1974. introduced 13. 3498, a bill
Maine Were added as: to amend sec Lion 5 of the Food Stamp
'4"005iisbi's 'itt /43:the RaTI-Pabseuger Act of 1964 t.. broaden the authority of
ee AIrendrnents of I974-. thefieeretap .af Agriculture to provide
e to the Comm' -tee on Agriculture and
r' ? ?
tieSt-al .HANSEN, the disasters.
alier Yinro -7Tortii Carolina (Mr, Today f_arr .atroducing this bill in the
'ilie-7Seriatak- Train thI?h4r. orm of ana 4fidinent to 15. 3726. I am
6-n4 :the Senator TiOni teller-6de pleased to be iabied in int:r.nduting this
)oMnq1clt) were 'added as CosPOn7 aniendrrierit 1,- the distinguished Sena-
. - _ - ? ,
Aors, "S. ,:$04:i hill to amend the Con- tors from le ,siSSippl (Mr. EASTLAND),
flio1i4ate4Wrgi and Rural Development _ 'Tennessee (Mr /2Arciat) ,Ohio (Mr. TAFT),
:AO 'to prescribe Certain safeguards for and North D4'.,?ota- (Mr. BURDICK).
the processing of anpflteatiaris for as Irnder erisi I -g law, an individual must
Snell at. go through M lengthy certification pro-
' ;Offi,tettire fetid stfinalib. In the
- - _ - ,
ameggency Satistance to victirriS,of:
wti of r.TO A,
1,1* yq y the event by nal
atter s aI3 the floods
'ator from Rhode _Island (Mr. Pss7 and torrradrr r, we experienced earlier
,
the Senator from 1161Ah Dakota -this year, thof , individuals involved must
aVIr, Yourra) thc Senator Train Califor- obtain hellI mediately.
. Nagy , e ato Irani
tile Mr Under prescr-t law, an immediate tem-
'finva" r.-diask5 thOtenator Irani iffa= Porarg ernerf (-icy issue of food stamps
Jiiciaii), -the Senator Trona lett' net be fertbecolIng because the for'
(lkirr 'lister-610 the Senator Thal applicattlii process may take longer
i2o9, (Mr. lisarfts) ?the Senator than the temporary need of the appli-
Wycaning (111r. MeGlej; the Seri:- cant.
torfrom cildo(Mr.the Senator The amenerients we suggest will pro-
the vide the Ser:ritary of Agriculture the
ermat14!?n1- '(11.14/1.:1?t-- Tc6F'sti,in; and authority, ir emexaency situations, to
...41fifeSenatOrirlintra5taS11-efifr. lz.714-1C1-Tnsa-i 'NV-ere'7wiliniteahltit needi,te tIuTeIltsly delay tt:egprouircerssenofts
24, to aiithniii7e"andrequess!lertr:3"1tr
,
e Pres "t to 'faint inintially a proela=
440,tion designating January laf each year
as "March Of DM:tea-Birth D:efeds Pre-
. ,antion
dad as gers,:giolidera ol 'Senate Joint -
_-A:84_e
AMENDM EN r OF THE FOREIGN
ASSIST/ N ACT AM
OESORS OF
tN COO
ega
VW Rimy,
onsor_ of :Senate
the partiCipa-
s an inter-
e risk of
ering
of 44r. Acerda C -BTR4,
?frai4,44Pirkg. _;(*, F'AFAT),
=tor, from Tms (IVIr BE;yregic)
OrligOrJr-411.,NoMi70?PY(Mr.
_ASE
e00,1:? 4ti-OilXP1144 U41:
TA** CPIWOI9,
PA-OW-kW S,Trilt-
Y74:..) Th Senator from
. t,
, aviator from
PJoLs),, the Senator from
Alsr4.4),, the Senator
Asaajticfc,), the
Oar-
orwoinWyorehis
7.AISPAR9.115er6
rf.11114914.-J2 . to authorize
ImunAke .141- -POPMierf4- to; stklAT
the policy and role ?A_ the Federal Gov-
- vat Lt6tatei.
-
the
*
referred
'Idr.'Aft(YrrrEZIC. 'Mr. President, for
thellitt tine lait, Year, to Irdirwledge,
the_Congreas :-2..nacted a provision which
.afirled_ a ,nev. section to the law that.
expressed it:- concern for the human
zights of pt,cple who an citizens in
countries_ wh:,Ji receive U.S. foreign aid.
The Cengres4_, L:stahlisheci that it was the
sense of ?VoLnress that no funds shall
guy, country which holds the
furIlofes.-111atpro-
vision as b'incorporated- hi Sieben
32 of the ASsittance Act.
understands that
sente -on ,;ress resolutions suc'h as
thia dd,,e the force or autharr
ah-Outi be dear to every:0k That
Stii lie 'Ignored either:
- If was- th somewhat alarming fo
learn 'that o 'State Degartment -and,
AtI liaie us Tar almost entirely
gnord neettm '32- of the :law. In hear-
ingS before noise Foreign Affairs
questioning fromeeitigee,Smad 'Ora- len A SiR, Assistant sec-
retary of S.,Ae Tor East Asian and
-Paalffe Affef -s Robert S. Ingersoll,
admitted th th- section of the law
has- not had, Ply impact, gp Our policies
in (ingresionan Fusg?
jr-
asked Mr. Ingersoll to What extent there
has been an implementation of that pro-
-vision in the law, the Assistant Secre-
tary _simply stated, "I know of none."
When asked specifically by FRASER about
the application of this section to the
situation in South Korea, Ingersoll
kdroitted that some kind of inquiry had
been sent out a mere 6 weeks ago but
neither he nor his aides had any idea
whatsoever what the inquiry entailed or
why it only went out less than 2 months
ago.
I understand that in subsequent letters
to the committee, Assistant Secretary
Ingersoll has indicated a more positive
attitude in this regard and has now
described the somewhat half-hearted
effort on the part of the State Depart-
ment and AID in taking into considera-
tion section 32.
Although this Information is dis-
concerting, it is not suprising. There
_seems to be little doubt that until the
Congress requires them to do so, the
officials in executive branch will con-
tinue to disregard its responsibility
which is clearly defined in the State-
ment of Policy of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961.
Under section 102, the act states that:
It is the policy of the United States to sup-
port the principles of freedom of the press,
Information, and religion, and ...recognition
of the right of all private persons to travel
and pursue their lawful activities without
discrimination as to race or religion.
Yet, while this is the law, it has been
extremely difficult to determine what if
any support the United States has given
to such commendable and high-minded
statements of policy. It would be a safe
bet to say that there has been none at all.
Opponents to the implementation of
this policy continue to insist that the
consideration of human rights is a do-
mestic matter and that the overriding
economic, military, and political consid-
erations leave little room for human
zig,hts. Yet, various State Department of-
ficials and other leaders in our Govern-
ment are Quick to criticize the govern-
ments of those countries with whom we
have unfriendly or distant relations
when the rights of their citizens are being
Infringed upon-
, _ llkkr..Efeddt.3 strongly disagree with
Vala -ratinnale And??Isonnot think of a
poorer argument than that of "meddling
in domestic rdfairs" for such a gross
negligence of responsibility. If this coun-
try is concerned about whether or not
thelieenle in foreign _countries are ob-
taining limper medical treatment and a
satisfactory nntritional intake, then cer-
tainly they, should be as equally con-
cerned about whether they are being tor-
tured or not?or more fundamentally,
whether their most basic human rights
are being Insure.
Wit* in?mind, I am submitting an
amendment to the Foreign Assistance
AO of 1974, S. 3394, which would ask the
agencies which compile the report re-
smired by section 657 of the Foreign As-
sistance Act to include a section in the
?report whfeh Would inform the Congress
'
5/07120 : aIA-RDP79-06957A
S 12368
Approved turlitimssigiNN271fficablaDMITROM7A0001000Lloontp 15, 1914
of what considerations have been made
and what measures have been taken to
implement section 32 of the act dealing
with political prisoners. Until we require
such a written report, I am convinced
that we will continue to receive the testi-
mony like Mr. Ingersoll's and others who
freely admit that the question of human
rights is hardly a consideration in the
determination of U.S. foreign policy.
It is significant to note that the Sub-
committee on International Organiza-
tions and Movements of the House For-
eign Affairs Committee in its report of
March 27, 1974, listed as one of its rec-
ommendations that the Department of
State treat human rights factors as a
regular part of the U.S. foreign policy de-
cisionmaking. They also recommended
that the Department prepare human
rights impact statements for all policies
which have significant human rights MI-
N/cations. There is little doubt that U.S.
foreign aid would certainly meet that
criterion.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that part 1 of the committee report,
entitled "The Human Rights Factor in
U.S. Foreign Policy," be printed in the
RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the excerpt
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as followb:
PART I?THIS ROMAN RIGHTS FACTOR IN US.
FOREIGN POLICY
The human rights factor is not accorded
the high priority it deserves in our coun-
try's foreign policy. Too often it becomes
Invisible on the vast foreign policy horizon
of political, economic, and military atfalrs.
Proponents of pure power politics too often
dismiss It as a factor in diplomacy. Un-
fortunately, the prevailing attitude has led
the United States into embracing govern-
ments which practice torture ante un-
abashedly violate almost every human right-5
guarantee pronounced by the world com-
munity. Through foreign aid and occasional
Intervention?both covert and overt?the
United States supports those governments.
Our relations with the present Governments
of South Vietnam, Spain. Portugal, the
Soviet Union, Brasil, Indonesia. Greece, the
Philippines, and Chile exemplify how we
have disregarded human rights for the sake
of other assumed Interests.
Many human rights practices in other
countries are not and should not be of ma-
terial concern to our Government In deter-
mining bilateral relations of our policy in
international organizations. Moreover, hu-
man rights should not be the only factor, or
even always the major factor, in foreign
policy decision-making. But a higher priority
is urgently needed If future American lead-
ership In the world is to mean what It has
traditionally meant?enoouragement to matt
and women everywhere who Cherish In-
dividual freedom. Describing the high exam-
ple the world expects of the United States,
Congressman John Buchanan quoted
Chaucer; "If gold doth rust, what will iron
do?",
Respect for human rights is fundamental
to our own national tradition. It is expressed
unequivocally in our Constitution. Respect
for human rights in other countries is a
Testitmcny by Representative John
Buchanan of Alabama at a joint hearing of
the Subcommittee on International Or-
ganitettions and Movements and the Sub-
committee on Africa, Oct. 17, 1973.
rightful oreacern of Americans not because
Of any essurned minion on our part to Im-
pale our own etandards on others; rather,
it Is that not only have many other coun-
tries used our Bill of Rights as a model for
their uortatItutions, but International stand-
ards have been established. by the U.N.
Ohio Lot and oiher tresteles -which obligate
governnientri to uphold meet of the same
rigles wheel are basic in cur own ;astern.
Furthermore, run increasingly interde-
pendent world _means that disregard for
htuneu rights le one country can have reper-
cussioas in others. The hornets atrocities of
Ni Gerrr.any and the track IllitILSItare in
Banelieleali are examples of Low gross viola-
tione of human rights precipitated bloody
wars The situations in southern Africa of
racism end colonialism have the potential
for internationel conflagration. Thus, con-
sideration for human rights in foreign policy
ts both morally Imperative and practically
nece y.
USIA SMITS 11',1 VISALIA to1.1CY
The subcommittee's inquiry into U.S. bi-
lateral policy was limited to aituateous abrood
wire cn represented the most serious violations
of lemman rights, such as nue:sacra, torture,
and reeled, ethnic, or religious discrimination.
The hearings undertook several case studies:
numsescre in iseargiadesti in Mi, massacre in
Buruedi en 1971; widespread torture In Brazil
and Chile; and racial discrimination in
southern Africa.' In these awes the subcom-
mittee found the response of the Uzi Gov-
ernment to be lacking in view of the magni-
tude of the violations committed.
The State Department too often bas taken
the position that human rights is a domestic
matter and not a relevant factor in determin-
ing bilateral relations. When charges of seri-
ous violations of human rights do occur, the
moat that the Department is likely to do is
make private inquiries and low-keyed appeals
to the government concerned. It is rarely
known whether these acts of "quiet diplo-
macy" have desirable effects.
However, the effectiveness of quiet diplo-
ma.) would obviously be enhanced were the
government concerned to realise that other
actioait with awte sesious; effects would take
place 11 quiet diplomacy failed to bring re-
sults Stich actions could Include public con-
delta:salon of the violations, raising the mat-
ter before an appropriate organ or agency of
the Untied Natems, suspension of military
assist ante or sake, and suspension of eco-
non 11.1.41.8
It is easeutiel that a policy of "even
luandednees" be applied in reviewing the
practiceii of atesee. We must not Impose
litglite etenclard on those eountries with
whom we have unfriendly or distant rele-
teems 'foo often we criticiite them but remain
anew. sieout equally serious vkletlons In
frieselly countries. Au the importance of
ideol ,g1* in International relations oentinues
to were. our Government should adhere to
objec eve human rights standaeds?Usate that
have been articulated by the InteruatIonal
comnewity. Uertalnly proteceon of human
ripe. Is clam a 'better measure ol the per-
form:eke of government than is ideology.
During the hearings Mrs. Rita Heuser,
neneisr U.S. Itepreeentative_to the U.N. Com-
setae on on Human Rights, eriticked this
donine standard in U.S. foreign policy as fel-
IOWa
elNs sleak ote against violations of coun-
tries .se arc eet earticularly close to us where
we f(ci se can do so with scene meesure of
1 Hearings, Suiscommittee on International
Organizations and Movements, enternationed
Proteetton of Haman Rights. The Work of
Internotion& Organizations and the Role of
U.S. Par.-nun Policy, Sept. 19, 27; Oct. 3, 18:
and Dec. 7, 1173.
safety pc ',ideally, and we are largely silent,
as are other countries, when human rights
violation: occur and on the pert of our allies
or friend)? countries we do not wish to offend.
"I trunk myself that has been the funda-
mental tailing in the whole approach Ls
basic violations of human rights. If you as-
autne, aS we do, substantive standards by
which we can judge countries and their be-
havior, it seems to me imperative that we be
objective to the maximum of our ability and
Judge ire ndly. neutral and unfriendly coun-
tries equelly."3
Mrs. Hauser cited the case of Northern Ire-
land as au example. She reported that while
serving a; U.S. Representative to the U.N.
Commiaal nit on Human Rights, she urged
the State Department to take a position
against ? Mations in Northern Ireland, but
was told that our Government would not
take a petition offensive to the government
involved, the United Kingdom, because of
out tradl .lousily friendly relations with it.
Traditk nally, the United States has not
hesitated to criticize violations of human
rights in the Soviet Union and other Com-
munist states. Current U.S. policy, however,
has made it clear that Soviet violations of
human tights will not deter efforts to pro-
mote dee nte with the Soviet Union. Indic-
ative of ibis policy Is a cautious statement
made by Secretary of State Kissinger after
the expultion of Nobel Laureate Alexander
Solzhenie yn from the Soviet Union: "The
necessity for detente?does not reflect ap-
probation of the Soviet domestic structure."
Certain y it is in the interest of national
security ii Sod areas of cooperation with the
Soviet Union. But cooperation must not ex-
tend to the point of collaboration in main-
taining a police state. U.S. policy, therefore,
must be ever mindful of the clear evidence
that the Soviet Government is intensifying
efforts to ierpetuate the closed society as of-
/fetal con -acts with the West are widened.
Soviet leiders are not insensitive to inter-
national pressures on human rights, as can
be seen Li the commutation of death sen-
tence', tot the Leningrad hijackers and in-
creased et ligration of Soviet Jews, for exem-
Recommendations
1. The Department of State should treat
human rights factors as a regular part of
U.S. foreign policy decision-making. It should
prepare It mien rights Impact statements for
all polices which have significant human
rights implications.
2. The Lepartnieut of State should discour-
age gover intents which are committing se-
rious viola tions of human rights through va-
rious mesitues such as: private consultation
with the government concerned; public in-
terventlots in U.N. organs and agencies;
withdrael I of military assistance and sales;
withdrawal of certain economic assistance
programs. Normal diplomatic relations with
the goveniment concerned should be main-
tained.
3. The L epartment of State should respond
to human rights practices of nations in an
objective .nanner without regard to whether
the government is considered friendly, neu-
tral, or un
4. The Department of State should up-
grade the consideration given to human
rights in determining Soviet-American rela-
tions. WIS Is pursuing the objectives of de-
tente. the United States should be forthright
in denom zing Soviet violations of human
rights ant should raise the priority of the
human debts factor particularly with regard
to policy- decisions not directly related to
national security.
1
Teeth m my by Mrs. Rita Hauser before the
Subcomm ttee on IntematIonal Organize-
Mons and etovements, Oct 9,1078.
Approved For Release 2005/07/20 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100040070-9