THE CAPTIVE NATIONS-KEY TO PEACE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 5, 2003
• Sequence Number: 65
• Publication Date: January 1, 1960
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
1960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
BEEF AND PORK IMPORTS
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent that additional remarks
be included in the permanent RECORD
along with those which I made in the
House on August 29, 1960, page 16986.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Iowa?
There was no objection.
(Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin asked and
was given permission to extend his re-
ntarks at this point in the RECORD.)
[Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin addressed
the House. His remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
DEMOCRATS KILL CONSERVATION
RESERVE
(Mr. SCHWENGEL asked and was
given permission to extend his remarks
at this point in the RECORD.)
Mr. SCHWENGEL. Mr. Speaker, one
of our most valuable and effective farm
programs is about to expire without con-
gressional action. I am referring to the
conservation reserve program, On De-
cember 31, 1960,.the Department of Agri-
culture will no longer have the authority
to enter into new contracts for the re-
tirement and conservation of productive
farmland. For all practical purposes,
this authority has now ended because
contracts for next spring's crops should
be made this fall.
The conservation reserve is the long-
range program under which farmers
voluntarily contract to take general
cropland out of production and devote it
to the conservation of soil, water, and
wildlife for periods of from 3 to 10 years.
The national average payment for these
conservation practices is $13.50 per acre
per year.
We all know that during World War
II farmers were urged to step up pro-
duction. They responded magnificently.
After the war, the wartime supports were
continued and surpluses began to build
up. Government controls for the main
part have failed to balance supply and
demand. Surpluses continue to mount.
After. the war, farmers were caught in a
vicious cost-price squeeze which still con-
tinues to plague them and makes the
transition to a prosperous market econ-
omy even more difficult. The conserva-
tion reserve program, though no cureall
or magic answer,.. has been a sound and
constructive attempt to improve the
farm surplus and income problems.
This is one farm program that makes
sense. It has proved itself in operation.
It has reduced surpluses, thus helping
the taxpayer. It has benefited the gen-
eral public by preserving for future gen-
erations the productive capacity of our
soil, by conserving our water resources,
and by establishing favorable conditions
for our wildlife and game. The farmer
has found this program extremely bene-
ficial. Since it is completely voluntary,
the farmer is not burdened with com-
pulsory bureaucratic controls. Individ-
ual farmers can scale down their own
particular operations to fit their own
labor and cost needs. Farm income has
been improved not only by rental pay-
ments, but by improved market prices.
Soil erosion isa,being checked, farm
ponds and waterways are being erected
and better hunting and fishing are being
provided. All these advantages make
the program attractive.
, If it were not for the Conservation
Reserve program we would have right
now another 183 million bushels of corn,
another 61 million bushels of wheat and
another 490,000 bales of cotton. On the
basis of data from contracts, perform-
ance reports, and applications, the De-
partment of Agriculture has computed
the former cropping use of the total
1960 acreage and the production that
would be expected at average yields ap-
propriate for the quality and location
of the land. The following table shows
these acreage and production estimates
for the leading crops:
Former cropland
Estimated
Estimated normal
use
former
acreage
production
Corn----------------
4,600,000
183,200,000 bushels,
Wheat-------------
3,100,000
61,600,000 bushels.
Cotton --------------
660,000
490,000 bales.
Peanuts -------------
148,000
132, 000, 000 pounds.
Tobacco -------------
15, 000
23,300,000 pounds.
Oats ..----?......--
4,100, 000
139,600,000 bushels.
Barle y--------------
1,000, 000
42,500,000 bushels.
Soybeans ... : -------
1,10o,000
21,200,000 bushels.
Sorghum grain ----.-
3,800,000
109,000,000 bushels.
Flaxseed---..------.
NO, 000
4,400,000 bushels.
Cropland hay and
5,000, 000
7,600,000 tons (hay
pasture.
equivalent).
There are now nearly 281/2 million
acres of crop land in the conservation
reserve. Some 75,432 farm families
throughout the Nation participate in the
program. In my home State of Iowa
alone there are 7,690 such families who
are retiring and conserving 656,221
acres. Total rental payments in Iowa
since the beginning of the program
through the 1959 crop year have been
$11,342,737.14.
Payments to Iowa's sister-States in
the Midwest have been as follows: Kan-
sas, $30 million; Michigan, $10.8 million;
Minnesota, $39.8 million; Wisconsin,
$11.3 million; Illinois, $8.1 million; Indi-
ana, $9.6 million; Ohio, $8.1 million;
Nebraska, $13.6 million; Kentucky, $8.9
million; North Dakota, $37.9 million;
and South Dakota, $28.7 million.
Early this year I introduced legislation
which would have extended and ex-
panded this valuable program. In addi-
tion, my bill would have allowed the De-
partment of Agriculture to use our sur-
plus grain for Federal rental payments.
To date, there has been no action to ex-
tend the program. The Democratic-con-
trolled Committee on Agriculture has re-
fused to act and the Democratic-con-
trolled House of Representatives de-
feated a conservation reserve amend-
ment to the ill-fated wheat-feed grains
bill on June 22, 1960, by a voice vote.
This Republican supported amendment
would have extended and expanded the
program along with authorizing pay-
ments-in-kind, limiting payments to
$7,500 per year and limiting to 25 per-
cent the amount of land any county or
community could retire.
The record then speaks for itself. In
spite of their two-to-one majority in the
Committee on Agriculture and in the
House and the Senate, the Democrats
17405
have refused to act. In spite of their
own 1960 platform which pledges "an
orderly land retirement and conservation
program" congressional Democrats have
declined to act. In spite of the fact
that the administration has repeatedly
asked for action, and in spite of 11 bills
to extend this program that have been
introduced by Members from both sides
of the aisle, and in spite of many moans,
groans, and crocodile tears about the
farm problem, this Delllocratic-control-
led 86th Congress has failed to act.
The outright failure and the down-
right refusal of this Democratic-con-
trolled Congress is just one more exam-
ple of the Democrat Party's fundamen-
tal attitude toward agriculture during
the last 6 years: There was no action,
there is no action, there will be no ac-
tion.
WILDLIFE, FISH, AND GAME CON-
SERVATION IN MILITARY RESER-
VATIONS
Mr. BONNER submitted the following
conference report and statement on the
bill (H.R. 2565) to promote effectual
planning, development, maintenance,
and coordination of wildlife, fish, and
game conservation and rehabilitation in
military reservations:
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 2222)
The committee of conference on the dis-
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the
amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R.
2565) to promote effectual planning, devel-
opment, maintenance, and coordination of
wildlife, fish, and game conservation and
rehabilitation in military reservations, hav-
ing met, after full and free conference, have
agreed to recommend and do recommend to
their respective Houses as follows:
That the Senate recede from its amend-
ments numbered 1, 2, 3, and 4.
That the House recede from its disagree-
ment to the amendments of the Senate num-
bered 5 and 6 and agree to the same.
HERBERT C. BONNER,
FRANK W. BOYKIN.
GEORGE P. MILLER,
THOR G. ToLLEFSON,
WrLLIM K. VAN PELT,
Managers on the Part of the House.
CLAIR ENGLE,
E. L. BARTLETT,
NORRIS COTTON,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House at
the conference on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses on the amendments of the
Senate to the bill (H.R. 2565) to promote
effectual planning, development, mainte-
nance, and coordination of wildlife, fish, and
game conservation and rehabilitation in
military reservations, submit the following
statement in explanation of the effect of the
action agreed upon by the conferees and rec-
ommended in the accompanying conference
report:
Section 1 of the House bill provided for
issuance of special State hunting and fishing
permits and authorized the Commanding
Officer of each reservation to administer such
permits as agent for the State if the partic-
ular cooperative plan so provided. The
Senate amendment struck out reference to
the State. The conference accepted the
House provision.
Section 3 of the bill as passed the House
directed the Secretary of Defense to expend
funds collected or transferred in accordance
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 17406
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 31
with agreed cooperative plans. The Senate
amendment omitted the authority to trans-
fer these funds. This provision referred to
funds that already might be in the hands
of local Commanding Officers under existing
plans. It was the sense of the conference
that the transfer of such funds could best
be handled through provisions in the in-
dividual cooperative plans.
The Senate amendments to section 5 ex-
cluded application of the law to national
forest lands and Taylor Grazing Act lands.
The action of the conference accepted these
exclusions from the operation of the act.
HERBERT C. BONNER,
FRANK W. BOYBIN,
GEORGE P. MILLER,
THoR C. TOLLEFSON,
WILLIAM K. VAN PELT,
Managers on the Part of the House.
THE CAPTIVE NATIONS-KEY TO
PEACE
(Mr. DULSKI (at the request of Mr.
FEIGI;AN) was given permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD, and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, during the
official observance of Captive Nations
Week in the third week of July, a num-
ber of significant addresses were made
throughout the country. I should like
to bring to the attention of Members of
? the House the address given by my friend
and colleague, Mr. FEIGHAN, on July 20
in Buffalo, N.Y. This address was given
before a civic luncheon in the Golden
Ballroom of the Hotel Statler-Hilton,
sponsored by the Kiwanis Club of Buf-
falo in cooperation with the Buffalo
Citizens Committee to Observe Captive
Nations Week.
The title of my colleague's address
Is a very fitting one, "The Captive Na-
tions-Key to Peace." Congressman
FEIGHAN, as one of the sponsors of the
congressional resolution which estab-
lished Captive Nations Week, presented a
realistic analysis of the human elements
involved in the cold war. He points out
that the overwhelming majority of the
people in the captive nations behind the
Iron Curtain have not and will not sup-
port the men in the Kremlin in times
of peace or war. This opposition by the
common man behind the Iron Curtain is
a powerful deterrent to war because no
dictator will start a war in face of the
prospect that his empire will rise in re-
volt and' defeat him from within.
Congressman FEIGHAN calls for a hard-
hitting political action program in sup-
port of the people of the captive non-
Russian nations, and suggests six major
guideposts as the outlines of his pro-
gram. These suggestions are timely for
all who understand that the cold war
is fundamentally a political conflict and
that political action is necessary if we
are to regain our position of leadership'
in the free world community.
Under unanimous consent, I insert in
the RECORD the address of my colleague,
Mr. FEIGHAN:
THE CAPTIVE NATIONS-KEY TO PEACE
(Address of Hon. MICHAEL A. FEIGHAN, U.S.
Representative, 20th Ohio District)'
The great issue of our times is foreign
policy and the conduct of our foreign af-
fairs. This opinion is made self-evident by
the realization that the question of a hot
war or a just peace will be resolved by the
kind of foreign policy we support and the
manner in which we carp it out. There
are, of course, other important national is-
sues and grave domestic problems such as
an ever expanding free economy, full em-
ployment, civil rights, health protection for
the elderly, the strengthening of our educa-
tional systems, urban renewal, and the hu-
man upsets of automation. Important as
all these problems are they stand in the
shadow of the challenge to our survival as
a nation, and as a civilization, presented by
the determined forces of international com-
munism. If we fail to face up to this chal-
lenge and thus lose the struggle with the
Russian Communists, these domestic prob-
lems will have no importance or relevance
whatever. They will be disposed of sum-
marily by the ruthless dictatorship which
awaits any free nation falling under the rule
or domination of imperial communism.
The history of some 40 years of Commu-
nist aggression warns us that we are in a
life or death struggle with the highly or-
ganized forces of tyranny. We did not cre-
ate this contest. We were forced into it in
1947 when it became crystal clear that we
had no other alternative-except gradual and
peaceful surrender. It was then, you will
recall, the Russian Communists were at-
tempting the take-over of Greece and Tur-
key by armed aggression, when the subver-
sive task forces of communism were gnawing
away at the democratic governments of
Western Europe, when Moscow was direct-
ing the Chinese Reds in the take-over of
mainland China and when the Red Army
stood guard over the ruthless imposition of
alien regimes upon the nations of Central
and North Europe. The Presidential deci-
sion to stand firmly in support of the free-
dom-loving people of Greece and Turkey was
a far-reaching one. It went far beyond the
immediate requirements of these two coun-
tries. That decision signaled a determina-
tion to hold back the Red wave of Russian
aggression on all fronts. Hindsight gives
perspective to the magnitude and the wis-
dom of that decision and the courage re-
quired to make it.
As a Nation we were ill prepared for this
sudden shift to a wartime footing. We had
dismantled the greatest military striking
force in history within 12 months after the
Japanese surrender. We had "brought the
boys back home." Our defense industries
had reverted to the all out production of
consumer commodities and other non-
military products. We had gone back to
doing business as usual, in both our domes-
tic and international affairs. We had but
recently won a world wide victory for free-
doms cause, a war to end all wars. This
victory promised our people a long and
happy era of peace in which justice was as-
sured for all nations and all people. All
these promises were written into the Charter
of the United Nations. These were the war
aims of the United States. These were the
war aims of all the allied nations except
one-Soviet Russia. The strange alliance
which admitted imperial Russia into the
camp of free men was exposed as a massive
deception of the hopes, the rights, and the
aspirations of the common man the world
over. In the stark reality of this awakening
we, as a Nation, entered what the Honorable
Winston Churchill so aptly termed "the
cold war."
Many chapters of sacrifice and heroic ac-
tion have been written since, by men and
women and indeed by children who know
the blessings of freedom. All Americans
sense the importance and accomplishments
of the Marshall plan, the stand on Greece
and Turkey, the Berlin airlift, and the refu-
gee assistance programs just as they honor
the resolute Presidential actions taken in
Korea, the Formosa Straits and in the
Middle East crisis. The hard lessons of the
past have brought home to us the impera-
tive of the military shields against further
Communist armed aggression which NATO,
CENTO, and SEATO provide for ourselves
and for all free people. Yes, we have learned
a great deal in the days and years of the
cold war. But I say we have not learned
enough about the nature of the enemy who
openly boasts that they will bury us, that
they will communize the world and thus
cast upon our children-if not ourselves-a
mode of life which makes death a welcome
visitor.
In our national efforts to build a defensive
shield against Communist aggression, a mat-
ter of first priority, we gave more attention
to armaments and alliances than we did to
the basic human values and aspirations in-
volved in the struggle. When we awakened
to this shortcoming, we then limited our con-
cern for the rights and the hopes of the com-
mon man to the free world community, thus
neglecting in large measure the almost one-
third of humanity behind the Russian Iron
and Bamboo Curtains. By overly friendly
relations and dealings with the Russian lead-
ers and the various Communist regimes they
have imposed upon once free people, we
have cast serious doubts upon our willing-
ness, our ability and our determination to
weather the ideological storm which grips
the world. The common man behind the
Iron and Bamboo Curtains has been shaken
in his confidence in the United States as the
citadel of human freedom. All too many
leaders in the free world community have
become convinced that the destiny of their
nation requires a flexible position somewhere
between the United States and Imperial Rus-
sia, a position which will permit them to
shift gears gracefully when the winner be-
comes reasonably apparent. The newly
emerging nations on the African Continent,
the newly independent nations of North,
South, and Southeast Asia, and the Middle
East demonstrate a restless uncertainty in
setting their course toward maturity and
secure sovereignty. It is this uncertainty in
the camp of free men which emboldens the
Russian Dictator Khrushchev to taunt, to
insult, to threaten, and to pour infamy upon
the United States of America.
The time has come for a deep and realistic
revision of our foreign policy. The hour is
late, but I believe we still have time not, a
moment of which can be wasted on such
meaningless catch phrases as "agonizing re-
appraisal," "realinement of relationships,"
and "flexible adjustments." What we need is
a simple recognition of the fact that those
who seek to wipe out civilization as we know
it, are anchored with a vulnerability which
they cannot overcome and which haunts the
inner sanctum of the Kremlin. The Russian
vulnerability is a deeply human one. It is
caused by the aspirations of hundreds of mil-
lions of non-Russian people in the captive
nations for freedom and national independ-
ence. No less than 20 once free and inde-
pendent nations have been overrun and oc-
cupied by the Russian Communists during
the past 40-odd years. The regimes im-
posed upon these nations do not and cannot
represent the freely expressed will of the
people. Representative government has been
denied these people and the mode of life im-
posed upon them generates a revolutionary
spirit which can burst forth with devastat-
ing violence and retribution against the op-
pressor. This vulnerability is compounded
by the fact that the number of people who
support the Communist empire falls far short
of a margin of safety. There are no more
than 70 to 80 million Russians in the empire,
together with some 5 million non-Russians
who are reliable members of the Commu-
nist Party. This is the mortar of the em-
pire, just as it is a most realistic evaluation
of the human resources at the command of
the dictatorship which threatens to bury us.
While we may and should regret the tragedy
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
1960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
of history which has denied the Russian peo-
ple a chapter of individual liberty and free-
dom, we must not allow our pity to cloud the
honest judgment of history. Having had no
experience with liberty and freedom, we must
not expect the Russian people to rally to
freedom's cause. Nor should we condemn
them for their support of a regime which has
brought greater glory to the concepts of a
Russian empire than the wildest dreams of
Czar Peter. Forgive them for they know no
better. Political realism in this hour of ter-
rible trial requires that we know the truth
and face it with a feeling of compassion, ac-
cepting the duty of saving the Russian people
from the evil leaders who see in them a tool
to accomplish their selfish ends.
It was in this spirit that the Congress of
the United States enacted Public Law 86-90,
and made possible this national observance
of Captive Nations Week. As sponsor of this
law in the House of Representatives, I assure
you that a long, deliberate, and careful study
of all the evidence available, covering a span
of 40 years, stands behind the language
and spirit of this Federal law. The unani-
mous enactment of this law by Congress is
eloquent testimony of its nonpartisan char-
acter and urgency. More than anything else,
it carries a message of decision and the prom-
ise to enter a new phase of the cold war by
carrying the political war into the heart-
land of the enemy.
Permit me to examine with you the lan-
guage and Intent of this law.
To begin with, this law takes official reog-
nition of the fact that Communist aggres-
sion against free and independent nations
began in the period of 1917-18 rather than in
1945, as all too many of our people have been
led to believe. For it was during this period
that a series of national independence move-
ments, very much like that of our Founding
Fathers, brought about the disintegration
of the Russian czarist empire. Many na-
tions long oppressed and exploited by the
Russian aristocracy dissolved their political
bonds with the empire and declared their
national independence. The only nation of
the empire failing to take such action was
.the Russian nation. In these circumstances
the Bolsheviks seized control of the Russian
nation and quickly consolidated their power.
With the Russian nation as a base of opera-
tions and support, the Bolsheviks launched
campaign of subversion, terror and armed
aggression against the newly independent
nations. Between the years 1918 and 1921,
the Russian Bolsheviks destroyed the na-
tional independence of White Ruthenia,
Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Turkestan, Cos-
sackia, and Idel-Ural .
The second wave of Russian communist
aggression took place in 1939. Soviet Russia
then an ally of Hitler, destroyed the national
independence of Estonia. Latvia, and
Lithuania.
17407
small world in which we live. This is a real- his superiors in the Kremlin. All the world
ity of the life or death struggle in which we knows the terrible consequences of that go
are engaged. ahead signal. This act of infamy was buried
The spirit of this law recognizes that while in the noise of the 1956 presidential cam-
these nations are now deprived of their in- paign and the moral revulsion which fol-
dependence, the hopes of their peoples have lowed in the wake of our failure to respond
not been broken. The common man in these to freedoms call in captive Hungary. As we
captive nations aspires for a return of his approach the promised new era in the con-
liberties, his freedoms, and the blessings of duct of our international affairs. I suggest
national independence. These aspirations the time is opportune for a full scale, bi-
stand as a powerful deterrent to war and the partisan congressional investigation of this
best hope for a just and lasting peace. The Infamy. This would provide an appropriate
scheming despots in the Kremlin will not answer to Khrushchev's rejection of the
dare to launch world war III so long as these Monroe Doctrine.
embers of freedom burn. We dare not fail No doubt you are asking yourself what.
to kindle this human fire because such fail- specifically, can be done to support and ad-
ure is an invitation to the Russian tyrants vance the cause of the captive nations with-
to launch a hot war. out plunging the world Into a hot war. This
These are the outlines of a new and real- is a fair question that requires a straight-
istic foreign policy toward the Russian Com- forward answer.
munists. These are the outlines of a foreign I will take the last part of this question
policy of free people, who, knowing the power first because it rates the highest priority. Of
of their moral and political ideals, are con- one thing I am certain. That is the Russian
fident of the future and fearless In defense Communists will launch a hot war when
of justice. Public Law 86-90 is a mandate they believe they have a 50-50 chance of
from the American people to engage the en- winning. They will not start 1 minute
emy on his home grounds, to carry the polit- sooner or hesitate 1 second longer. There
ical fight to the heartland of the Russian is nothing we can do to alter this basis of
Communist empire and to exploit the human judgment while the Russian leaders adhere
vulnerability of that empire as a positive to what they call the doctrines of Lenin.
action in support of world peace. While the Russians now appear to claim that
For all too long we have been on the de- wax between communism and capitalism Is
fensive. Our Nation has grown weary of not inevitable they have not abandoned war
simply reacting to Communist actions. We as an instrument of imperial policy. They
have too often been second best in inter- are simply saying they now believe they can
national political situations which de- conquer the world without a hot war. Their
manded nothing short of unquestioned belief is based upon a supposition that the
victory. free world, particularly the United States,
The summit conferences were initiated by is crumbling from within thus making a hot
the Russians. They needed a world propa- war unnecessary. Since I believe we are not
ganda platform and rigged the agenda to breaking up from within, though we have
advance their evil purposes. We reacted to slipped from a position of unquestioned
their Initiatives, accepted the substance of military superiority, and I do not believe we
their agenda rigging and ended up on the can convert the Russian leaders from their
short and rather ditry end of the stick. belief In Marxism-Leninism, I propose the
Personal diplomacy was initiated by following courses of action as necessary to
Khrushchev as a means of securing a cloak our survival.
of badly needed respectability. He arranged The first is a high-speed rebuilding of our
official visits to free countries and world military defense capabilities. We must re-
tours for himself in order to demonstrate gain and hold a large margin of superiority
his contempt for the leaders of the free over the Russians in all fields of defense
world. The State Department harangued preparations. This Includes the Immediate
and maneuvered President Eisenhower into strengthening of our international treaty
this Russian bear-trap which, when sprung, alliances. The 50-50 chance factor must
found the subversive agents of Khrushchev never be attained by the Russian leaders.
showing contempt for President Eisenhower The second is a hard hitting political ac-
in Japan. tion ro am in support proclaims that the Monroe the captive, non-Russian nations. Iesuggest
Doctrine no longer exists because the new the following specific actions be undertaken.
Russian ruling class refuses to recognize Its 1. That the Voice of America be regarded
claims. By this he means that the entire as a political Instrument, a mass media
world is his bowl of cherries and he will pick means of strengthening our alliance with all
the cherry he feels is ripe repardless of In the captive peoples. Today it is nothing
whose orchard it grows. What a contrast more than a nonpolitical news service, lack-
this is to the action taken by our State De- ing color, imagination, and sympathy for
partment "Soviet Experts" at the time of the the oppressed. The present overweighted un~arlan
laork.
You The third wave of Russian Communist ag- recall the revolution brokeuout on Octobwill er broadcasting in the Russian language should
gression took place in the 1945 and there- 23, 1956, and that by October 28, the Hun- languages corrected, with major emphasis on the
after, when in violation of the Atlantic Char- garian patriots had rid their country of the 2. of
the captive nations. hange ter and the Charter of the United Nations, Russian oppressors. A revolutionary ? Our g e programs f persons and cultural
the national independence of Poland, Czecho- gime took over and there was a re- exchange programmust be revised and a
Slovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Al- hiatus for 5 days. Then the State Depart- tion note othe ca the capt iv e natio inter nationns. . In Inep appu ar,
bania, and Yugoslavia was destroyed. ment, allegedly concerned about the delicate the exchange with The fourth wave of Russian Communist feelings of the Communist dictator Tito, Soviet hange should persons program because the
SovUnion sy allow abolished bet ha i-
aggression took place in 1948 when the Red sent him the following cabled assurance of is a fraud. They
regime was imposed by military force upon our national intentions in the late after- core oram w no one but hard-
the people of mainland China. noon of Friday, November 2, 1956. "The most Communists to visit the United States,
The fifth wave of Communist aggression Government of the United States does not rather than students, ost of whom are propaganda
instigated by Moscow covers the enslavement look with favor upon governments un- rabteachers, engineers,
engineers,
of East Germany, North Korea, North Viet- friendly to the Soviet Union on the borders these labor lse so so-called eled spe i . The public report
nam, and Tibet. of the Soviet Union." their the Soviet Union issued upon
Public Law 86-90 thus recognizes that all It was no accident or misjudgment of formly incorrect, incmplete, and generally
the once free and independent, non-Russian consequences which led the imperial Rus- slanderous of our free way of life. The peo-
nations of this vastly expanded Russian em- scan Army to reinvade Hungary at 4 am. on ple we send to the Soviet Union are no
pire have suffered a common fate. Time, in the morning of November 4, 1956. The doubt well intended, but they tend to pose
terms of the date of their captivity, no longer cabled message to Tito was the go ahead as experts on conditions of life under com-
has any practical point. They all suffer a signal to the Russians because any Ameri- munism upon their return to the United
common captivity. None will be free until can school boy knows that Tito Is Moscow's States. Many of these 8-day or 6-week au.
all are free. And all must be free if freedom Trojan Horse. It took less than 48 hours thorities have perpetrated dangerous mis-
is to be secure anywhere in this relatively for him to relay this message of treason to judgments and illusions upon the American
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 17408
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 31
people. We need a rapid step-up in our ex-
change-of-persons program with the coun-
tries of the free world. I have observed
these programs at work in the United States
and in many countries of the free world and
I am convinced of their merit. More funds
are needed to expand these free-world pro-
grams and the money saved by abolishing
the exchange programs with the Soviet
Union could be used for this purpose.
3. The United Nations should be regarded
as a sounding board to expose and espouse
the legitimate aspirations of all the captive
nations. The Security Council, the General
Assembly, and all organs of this body should
be regarded as tools to advance the cause of
free men, including the emancipation of the
captive nations.
4. The United States should test the power
of sanctions held by the United Nations, the
expulsion of nonconforming member na-
tions, by causing the Russians to abide by
the United Nations resolution on Hungary or
be expelled from membership in the United
Nations. The United Nations resolution on
Hungary condemns the Russian aggression
against Hungary and calls upon the Russians
to evacuate their military, political, and eco-
nomlo forces' from that country. To date
the Russians have demonstrated a studied
contempt for that resolution. It is time they
were made to conform or be expelled from
membership. The survival of the United
Nations must never be regarded as more im-
portant than human rights and justice.
5. The next President of the United States
should reverse the international road posts
pointing away from Washington by con-
-vening a meeting of the leaders of all free
nations there to discuss our common prob-
lems and to hammer out a program of ac-
tion to save the world from a third war and
to win a just peace. The formula of invita-
tion should be simple. Only those who be-
lieve in and will support the aspirations of
the common man for self-government and
democratic institutions should be welcomed
at the conference table. This would be free-
dom's summit conference. The next Presi-
dent of the United States would go a great
distance toward recapturing the political
Initiative by swift action in this direction
upon assuming responsibilities of leadership.
6. We must prepare the American people
psychologically for the prospect of more free-
dom revolutions, like that launched by the
Hungarians. This does not suggest that we
can or should stimulate them. It merely
recognizes that such total political revolu-
tions are a natural outcome of the oppression
and human exploitation going on behind the
Iron and Bamboo Curtains. We may not
know when or where the next will occur, but
we must know that the destiny of free men
demands that we be prepared to associate our
Nation and other free countries with this
healthy wave of the future. We must not be
caught unprepared or stupefied by the power
of revolt against tyranny, as we were in the
case of Hungary. We are a nation born in the
revolutionary spirit-we will live or the by
the measure of our devotion to our political
heritage.
As we face the challenge to our survival as
free men, I leave you with this thought. In
our daily lives we have learned that time and
tide wait for no man. This same law of na-
ture born with the divine order of the world,
exercises a compelling influences upon the
affairs of all nations. There are problems
which will not wait for determination, and
there are situations which demand imme-
diate and resolute decisions. We may
not, we must not fail to keep our appoint-
ment with destiny. We are destined to lead
the peoples of the earth out of the darkness
which has fallen upon so many nations-to
that golden era of peace with justice for all
nations and all peoples.
THE CRUSADE FOR PEACE WITH
JUSTICE
(Mr. FEIGHAN asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD, and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, in the
official observance of Captive Nations
Week throughout our country, from
July 17 through 23, many fine programs
were arranged by public-spirited citi-
zens. These programs served to alert
the American people to the importance
of the aspirations of the people in the
captive nations for freedom and na-
tional independence toward the winning
of a just peace. All these activities were
in accordance with the spirit of Public
Law 86-90, more popularly known as
the Captive Nations Week observance
law.
It was my privilege to take part in
the weeklong program of activities
planned by the Buffalo Citizens Com-
mittee to observe Captive Nations Week.
While in Buffalo I had the opportunity
to see firsthand the outstanding work
accomplished by the Buffalo committee.
All the religious faiths conducted prayers
and religious ceremonies in the respec-
tive churches and synagogues on the
opening day of the week's program. A
civic ceremony was held on Sunday, July
17, the highlights of which were the
reading of Mayor Sedita's proclamation,
the placing of the flags of 14 of the cap-
tive nations in a colorful array around
two large American flags at McKinley
Monument, and talks by several leading
citizens of Buffalo. On the following
Tuesday the Erie County Bar Associa-
tion conducted a ceremony on the mean-
ing of justice to freemen in a special
term of supreme court. On Wednes-
day the Kiwanis Club of Buffalo spon-
sored a civic luncheon in the ballroom
of the Statler Hilton Hotel, where I was
privileged to be the speaker. During the
week public displays on the captive na-
tions, the cultures of the peoples of those
nations, and the true face of Russian
communism were shown in several
banks, department stores, the lobby of
the city hall, and at the Ukrainian
Home.
This fine program was climaxed by a
freedom rally in Kleinhans Music Hall
on Saturday evening, July 23. Mayor
Frank A. Sedita was the speaker at this
rally which also featured the native
songs and dances of the captive nations.
Mayor Sedita has established himself
as a real leader in the just cause of the
people of the captive nations. He was
the first mayor to establish an official city
committee to observe Captive Nations
Week. He urged similar action upon the
mayors of some 18 metropolitan centers
of the United States. The committee he
appointed was chaired by Dr. Edward M.
O'Connor, director of special projects at
Canislus College, who is known well for
his many years of leadership in govern-
ment programs to assist the victims of
Nazi and Communist tyranny, and to
emancipate the captive nations from the
yoke of imperial Russian communism.
The address delivered by Mayor Sedita
at the freedom rally was a forceful call
to the American people to launch a cru-
sade for peace with justice. It set forth
the basic causes of war and marked out
the guideposts to peace. This address
stands as a challenge to the American
people to demand that our National
Government be rid of those appeasers
who seek a status quo with the Russians
and that our foreign policy, together
with its execution, be returned to a
moral foundation which befits our na-
tional heritage.
Under unanimous consent I include
the address of Mayor Frank A. Sedita
in my remarks:
Tux CRu&ADE FOR PEACE WrTH Jusrics
(Address of Hon. Frank A. Sedita, mayor of
Buffalo, delivered during Captive Nations
Week observance at the freedom rally,
Kleinhans Music Hall, Buffalo, N.Y., July
23, 1960)
What a fitting close this is to our week-
long observance of Captive Nations Week.
How better could we end our program than
with a freedom rally? The pleas to be made
by individual spokesmen for many of the
captive nations will give true voice to the
feelings, the hopes, and the - aspirations of
our proven allies behind the Iron Curtain.
The dances and songs of the captive people
we will see and hear this evening will speak
-eloquently for cultures and a way of life
which no tyrant, no dictator can remove
from the hearts and minds of those op-
pressed by imperial Russian communism.
And we, who enjoy the full blessings of hu-
man freedom, shall be reminded of our high
moral obligation to those who look to us
for emancipation from their present state of
human bondage. I believe that we, as a
nation, shall respond to this call, convinced
of the obligations we carry as freemen and
confident of the victory which awaits our
common cause.
The members of the Buffalo Citizens Com-
mittee to Observe Captive Nations Week
which I had the honor to appoint have
brought great credit to our city and have
won well-dserved acclaim for themselves.
I am proud of what Buffalo has done to
observe Captive Nations Week and to serve
as honorary chairman of this great com-
mittee. I say that what we have done to
carry out the spirit and purpose of Public
Law 86-90 is a solid and practical work of
peace.
We cannot be satisfied with works which
seek only the prevention of war. We must
work with all the energy and ingenuity at
our command to win a just peace. For
only in the winning of a just peace can we
prevent the outbreak of a hot war. Twice
in the generation of many of those gathered
here tonight, including myself, we have seen
two world wars result from the limited and
negative objective of simply preventing the
outbreak of armed conflict.
Prior to World War I the prevention of
war was governed by what I prefer to call
the "peace of empires." This was the handi-
work of the Conferences of The Hague.
While the imperial powers attending those
Conferences failed to reach full treaty
agreements as to how this peace would be
maintained, they did, nevertheless, arrive
at an understanding of status quo.
This understanding of status quo held
that the territories of the then existing
empires,. without regard to the freely ex-
pressed will of the people concerned, were
inviolate-they were not subject to change.
This understanding among the imperial
powers lasted but a few years. Kaiser Wil-
helm found this loose understanding un-
comfortable and the world was thereby
plunged into its first global war. It is in-
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
teresting to note, in this connection, that
the then Czar of Russia first proposed the
concept of a "peace of empires" at the
Hague Conference.
World War I brought about the demise of
the German, Austro-Hungarian, czarist Rus-
sian and Ottoman Empires. The British,
French, and Dutch Empires suffered mortal
blows from which they have never recovered,
nor can they expect to recover at this mid-
point of the 20th century.
The Russian czarist empire, meanwhile,
was reconstructed under the reactionary ban-
ner of communism. This was done at the
expense of the national independence of
Ukraine, White Ruthenia, Georgia, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Turkestan, Idel-Ural, and Cos-
sackia.
In 1934 a new dictator arose who promised
the people of Germany a new and vast em-
pire which he claimed was destined to last a
thousand years. When he set about creat-
ing this promised empire the cry was heard,
"We must prevent war." The voices of mo-
rality in the affairs of nations cried out then
for a just peace, a just settlement of dis-
putes which accorded with the freely ex-
pressed will of the peoples involved. But
these voices went unheeded. The Munich
Conference followed-a black mark in his-
tory when the demands of the tyrant on the
march were met by appeasement. Prime
Minister Chamberlain returned to London,
an umbrella in one hand and a useless piece
of paper in the other hand-calling out to
the British people "Peace in our times." The
Munich appeasement of the Dictator Hitler
prevented war-but for how long? A few
short years thereafter all humanity was
plunged into the most devastating war in
all history.
Now what are the political results of World
War II. The empire of Hitler is nothing
more than a black mark in history. The
British, French and Dutch Empires are dis-
membered for all times. But the empire of
Russian communism is vastly expanded,
stretching like an octopus over the newly oc-
cupied territories of Estonia, Latvia, Lithu-
ania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
Rumania, Bulgaria, Albania, mainland China,
Tibet, East Germany, North Korea, North
Vietnam, Croatia, Slovenia, and Serbia.. The
tentacles of the Russian octopus now reach
out to seize and strangle every free nation in
the world, including the United States. Here
in the Western Hemisphere one of those
tentacles hangs heavy over Cuba.
Faced with the full realities of this dismal
record of mankind's failure to prevent war,
who can deny that the relentless quest of a
just peace must be our only goal? Who can
say that the present Russian demand for
the recognition of a status quo is nothing
but the demand of Tzar Nicholas II for a
"Peace of Empires," dressed up in 20th
century stalking clothes? Who believes that
a just peace can be won by appeasing dicta-
tors on the march-in this case Khrushchev?
We must put.an end to the last remaining
empire in the world. This we can do by
working with all the power and skill at our
command to bring about its peaceful dis-
memberment. This we must do or suffer the
same fate as has befallen the score of once
free and independent nations now jailed in
the Russian prison of nations. The leaders
in the Kremlin have made it clear they leave
us no other alternative.
It is these beliefs which find me shocked
at the revelation made by Congressman
FEIGHAN on Hungary. I do not doubt for
one moment the accuracy of the astounding
charge he has placed on the doorstep of the
State Department. He is a recognized au-
thority on world communism and a keen
student of the internal workings of the Fed-
eral Government. All who know him respect
his courage and admire his fearless honesty.
But I ask you, what has happened to us
as a. people, as a great Nation, under God,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
to permit such an immoral action by our
State Department to go unnoticed and un-
punished? My heart aches when I think
about those gallant people of Hungary,
with little more than their bare hands,
rising up against the Russia oppressor
end in 5 heroic days driving the Red
army from their beloved homeland. No one
who loves liberty will ever forget those who
paid the supreme sacrifice in winning that
historic victory over the Russians. Think of
the women, from aged grandmothers to
school girls not yet in their teens, who
fought side by side with the manhood of
Hungary. I hang my head in shame to think
that our Government would be a party to
putting the Hungarian nation back in Rus-
sian chains. Only yesterday our friend, Dr.
John Juhasz, reminded me that at this very
hour there are hundreds of Hungarian youth
who took part in that freedom revolution
now languishing in the Communist jails of
Hungary. There they await death by execu-
tion upon reaching their 21st birthday. Al-
most 4 years have passed since their incar-
ceration so the whole world knows the ten-
der age of all when they rose in support of
freedom's cause.
No doubt you have thought of the full
meaning of that message sent by the State
Department to the Red dictator Tito for
relay to Moscow. That cruel message said,
and I quote Congressman Feighan, "The
Government of the United States does not
look with favor upon governments unfriendly
to the Soviet Union on the borders of the
Soviet Union." Permit me to analyze the
full political meaning of that message.
First, it accords a finality to the geog-
raphy of the U.S.S.R. It admits of no
change in the status on the captive, non-
Russian nations of the Soviet Union. Such
great nations as Ukraine, Armenia, White-
Ruthenia, Georgia, Turkestan, and Cossackia
are condemned to permanent slavery.
Second, it accords de facto recognition to
the Communist regime imposed by Moscow
on Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Our
Government has said over and over again
that we will never recognize the forced in-
corporation of the Baltic States into the
Soviet Union. Yet the Government of the
United States has done exactly that by this
declaration of foreign policy cabled to Tito.
Could anyone imagine a legally constituted
government in any of the Baltic States, a
government which represents the freely ex-
pressed will of the people, being friendly to-
ward the Soviet Union? Of course not.
Only a rump Communist regime such as ex-
ists today in all three of the Baltic States
could hold out such friendship. Let us not
forget that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
are on the borders of the Soviet Union. The
State Department's declaration to Tito con-
demns the Baltic States to a permanent life
under an alien Communist regime, despite
promises to the contrary.
Next, what about Poland, Czecho-Slovakia,
Rumania, Bulgaria, and mainland China?
All these captive nations are on the borders
of the Soviet Union. I do not mention Hun-
gary here because the State Department's
cable to Tito had clear and specific applica-
tion to that captive country. All these na-
tions were thus sentenced to a miserable life
under Communist regimes which defy the
will of the people involved and would not
remain in power 1 hour without the Red
Army standing guard over their reign of
terror. No freely elected government in cap-
tive Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Ru-
mania, Bulgaria, or mainland China would
have feelings less than utter contempt for
those who rule over the Russian prison of
nations nor would they stand idly by once
enslavement of any nation by the Russians.
Now what about East Germany, North
Korea, North Vietnam, Albania, Yugo-
slavia, and Tibet? They do not have
17409
common borders with the Soviet Union
but they are part of the Russian Com-
munist empire. Are they alone entitled
to be free and independent? I think not,
not by the language of the State Depart-
ment policy cabled to Tito. Rather, I
would read that cable to Tito to mean
that our State Department had accepted
a status quo with the Russian Empire,
with Titoland remaining under the pro-
tection of Moscow.
Congressman FEIGHAN in his address
before the civic luncheon last Wednes-
day, called for a full-scale bipartisan
congressional investigation of our Gov-
ernment's response to the Hungarian
freedom revolution, including the cable
sent to the Red dictator Tito. I am con-
vinced this must be done to clear away
the dark clouds of doubt which hang
heavy over our national honor. I hope
you will agree with me and that you will
raise your voices with the responsible
leaders of Congress, urging them to take
immediate action.
What we have done together this week
to defend the human rights of the peo-
ple of the captive nations is only a be-
ginning. It is a significant beginning
but our crusade does not end with this
freedom rally tonight. Our fight for
peace with justice for all nations and
people must be maintained every hour
of each day until we win through to vic-
tory. We are joined in our work by mil-
lions of Americans who have taken part
in similar programs throughout our
country during this week. We must
spread this spirit of duty and dedication
to freedom's cause, to every country of
the free world. To this end I pledge to
you my unwavering support.
I pray God's blessings upon our work,
that we may have the strength, the wis-
dom, and the courage to continue the
fight for true freedom and full justice
for all men, for all nations, for all time.
PUBLIC LAW 86-90-FACT AND
FICTION
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, one of
the most important and timely actions of
the 86th Congress was enactment of
Public Law 86-90, more popularly known
as the Captive Nations Week Resolution.
This past July hundreds of committees
made up of public spirited citizens ob-
served Captive Nations Week in accord-
ance with the provisions of this law.
The response of the American people to
the high purposes of this law have been
most gratifying, and harbor well for the
future of freedom's cause.
It was to be expected that the leaders
of the Kremlin and their agents every-
where in the world would level a blister-
ing attack against the high purposes of
this law. Khrushchev and company have
not disappointed us in this respect. It
will be recalled that Khrushchev opened
the attack the day after the President
signed the bill into law, which was the
same day Vice President NIXON arrived
in Moscow. These attacks by the Com-
munist leaders have not ceased and we
can expect them to continue.
It was my privilege to cosponsor Pub-
lic Law 86-90 with our distinguished ma-
jority leader, the Honorable JOHN
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 17410
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 31
W. McCoi i&ACi. I have therefore fol-
lowed the actions in support of this law
throughout the United States as well as
the Russian Communists' attacks against
it.
A timely and highly informative ar-
ticle on Captive Nations Week appeared
in the summer edition of the Ukrainian
Quarterly, titled, "Public Law 86-90-
Fact and Fiction." The author of this
article is Dr. Edward M. O'Connor, di-
rector of special projects at Canisius
College in Buffalo, N.Y., and a realistic
student of the Russian problem. This
article analyzes the reaction to Public
Law 86-90 by Russians on both sides of
the Iron Curtain. Attacks by Russians
on the other side of the Iron Curtain
were expected, but attacks by Russians
living on this side of the Iron Curtain
is another matter. Dr. O'Connor points
out that the lines of Russian attack on
both sides of the Iron Curtain have
dangerous parallels which have raised a
number of basic questions among well-
informed observers of the Communist
conspiracy. To correct these dangerous
trends, he proposes the formation of an
American Committee for the National
Independence of Russia to provide a
haven for political action by those Rus-
sian emigrees who are convinced of the
inalienable right of all nations and peo-
ple to liberty, freedom, and national
Independence.
Among the features of this article is
an analysis of Vice President NIxoN's
reactions to the challenge made by
Khrushchev on Public Law 86-90. As a
highly skilled observer of international
political events, his examination rises
above the much publicized "kitchen de-
bate" to analyze the broad implications
of Khrushchev's challenge and the Vice
President's response. This feature alone
would qualify this article as a must
reading for those millions of Americans
who have been asking, Why is our policy
toward the Russian Communists such
a failure?
The article to which I have referred,
written by Dr. O'Connor, is as follows:
PUBLIC.LAW 86-90-FACT AND FICTION
(By Edward M. O'Connor)
Russians on both sides of the Iron Cur-
tain are engaged in a concerted effort to dis-
credit the Captive Nations Week resolution
(Public Law 86-90), enacted last year by
Congress. This assault against a Federal
law, which does nothing more than officially
recognize the importance of the national
independence movements within the pres-
ent-day Russian Empire as a deterrent to
war and the key to peace with justice, was
launched by none other than Nikita Khru-
shchev himself. Within a matter of hours
after President Eisenhower signed the reso-
lution into law, Khrushchev was confronting
Vice President Nixox with the question:
"How could you do this to us?" The Vice
President had just arrived in Moscow, os-
tensibly to open the American Exhibition, to
find the Kremlin leaders in a state of shock
as a result of the political bombshell
launched by Congress. Time and time again,
in the days which immediately followed,
Khrushchev would call upon groups of Rus-
sians to bear testimony for the Vice Presi-
dent as to whether they considered them-
selves as captive. The response was always
the same: "No. No. Peaceful coexistence."
This proved nothing new because Public
Law 86-90 does not define the Russian na-
tion as a captive nation. The spontaneous
response Khrushchev got from the Russians
did, however, con$rm the commonsense of
not defining them by law as "captives."
The results would have been radically dif-
ferent if the Vice President had visited any
of the captive, non-Russian nations of the
Soviet Union and there had Khrushchev
raise the- same question among the native
population. It was poor political judgment
in the first place for the Vice President to re-
strict his visiting time in the Soviet Union
to the Russian nation. In reality he did not
tour the Soviet Union as claimed because
Russia is not the Soviet Union, it is but
one of the nations of the Soviet Union. This
neglect of the majority peoples of the So-
viet Union reduced the political impact of
Public Law 86-90 and compounded the seri-
ous error of equating Russia with the So-
viet Union. On the other hand it would
have been an act of political wisdom and
statesmanship if the Vice President had
under these circumstances demanded a re-
vision of his itinerary to allow for visits
to several captive, non-Russian nations. The
Khrushchev reaction to the Captive Nations
Week resolution should have made this
course of action self-evident. Here was a
golden opportunity for the Vice President
to publicly reject the Russian demands for
status quo by officially assuring our proven
allies in the captive non-Russian nations
that the United States would never recog-
nize the finality of their captivity. Lost op-
portunities such as this, where a logical fol-
lowthrough was called for, are characteristic
of the failure to understand the nature
of the threat we face and a timid reluctance
to use power of our political ideals in win-
ning a just peace.
Nevertheless, the noisy and frantic efforts
by Khrushchev to discredit Public Law 86-90
were helpful in making all the people of the
Russian empire aware of its contents and
purposes. The controlled press and other
mass media of the empire featured the Khru-
shchev statements but in so doing gave ex-
cellent publicity to the fact that, at long
last, we Americans had officially recognized
the national independence movements as
the most powerful political dynamic behind
the Iron Curtain. In a very real sense the
deep-rooted fears of the ruling class in Mos-
cow were so aroused that they inadvertently
violated their first rule of propaganda, which
is, never to publicize the explosive political
Ideals of free men. Communist organs in
the free world took the line from Moscow
and gave additional propagation to the
"Captive Nations" concepts of the public
law. It is no exaggeration to estimate that
Russian Imperial Communism suffered a se-
vere net loss as a consequence of these ini-
tial reactions, based upon deep-rooted fears
.that the United States was about to stimu-
late the explosive dynamics of the national
independence movements within the empire.
The new aristocracy, the new elite class can
never forget it was the national indepen-
dence movements which contributed to the
collapse of the Russian Empire of the Czars
in 1917, that the national independence
movements would have disintegrated the
U.S.S.R. during World War II but for the
racial policies and imperial intentions of the
Nazis. Freedom riots, in East Germany in
1953, in Poland during 1956, and the all-out
efforts by the Hungarians to regain their na-
tional independence In 1956 serve to remind
the Russians that they are sitting on a hu-
man powder keg many times more powerful
than intercontinental missiles and hydrogen
bombs.
The initial reaction of the Russian leaders
to Public Law 86-90 was too useful to the
cause of free men to expect them to continue
it for very long. Their tactics have now
shifted to a reliance on polemics as a means
of propagating "Russian truths" with re-
spect to the captive, non-Russian nations.
Khrushchev laid down the new line in his
propaganda article which appeared in the
October 1959 issue of Foreign Affairs under
the title of "On Peacefu} Coexistence." Here
Khrushchev introduces the techniques of
confusion, false comparison and distortion
of the language of the law. For example, he
charges the law contemplates "rolling back
communism" which language is not included
in the law, nor does the language of the
law express this intent. In fact, the law ex-
presses the opposite conviction. Rather than
the concept of "roll back" which carries
overtones of a hot war the law recognizes
the practical prospects of spontaneous, in-
ternal political explosions on a scale which
can end the cold war and bring peace with
justice to all humanity. Political realism
dictates that we recognize the possibilities
of a chain reaction should another full
blown revolution break out anywhere within
the empire. This almost happened during
the Hungarian revolution as the Poles,
Ukrainians and Slovaks demonstrated a res-
tiveness which alarmed the Russians. Had
the U.S. Government and other free world
nations given any support, even political, to
the Hungarians it is entirely possible the
chain reaction of revolutions would have
resulted. Once this chain reaction gets un-
derway there will be no stopping it. The
Red army will be of little use in these cir-
cumstances, it is multinational and as such
will prove unreliable. The Hungarian revo-
lution proved this basic Red army vulner-
ability as the non-Russians In it, particu-
larly the Ukrainians, quickly went over to
the side of the Hungarians, taking tanks,
guns and ammunition with them.
There are not enough Russians in the Em-
pire to hold it together in the face of in-
ternal revolutions reaching from the Baltic
to the Caspian Seas. Dependable estimates
on the number of Russians in the Empire
range from 70 to 90 million but the more
realistic figure Is in the neighborhood of 70
million. World War II losses among the
Russians were exceedingly heavy due to the
fact the non-Russians refused to fight in
support of communism. The latest popula-
tion figure on the Soviet Union is 207 million,
which means the non-Russians number not
less than 117 and more likely 137 million.
Added to this are some 90 million non-
Russians in the more recently occupied na-
tions of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
Rumania, Bulgaria, and East Germany. One
can readily understand how unpleasant it
must be for the Russian aristocracy to con-
template the prospects of over 200 million
non-Russians rising up in revolt, demanding
their national independence. It is this
haunting specter which causes Khrushchev
and company to demand that the free world
recognize a status quo, that is, to cause the
people of the free world to join with the
Russians in an all-out effort to preserve their
prison of non-Russian nations.
Khrushchev resorted to the old trick of
false comparison in his article which ap-
peared in Foreign Affairs when he asked how
Congress would react if the Mexican Parlia-
ment called for the "liberation" of Texas,
Arizona, and California. Obviously he
sought to compare favorably the status of
the non-Russian nations of the U.S.S.R.,
with these States. There are absolutely no
grounds for valid comparison. To begin with
the people of Texas, Arizona, and California
consider themselves as free, self-governing
and loyal Americans. The people of Ukraine,
Latvia and Armenia, for example, do not
consider themselves as free or self-governing
and to call them Russians, loyal or disloyal,
would be a grave insult to their national
heritage. If there is a national independence
movement underway in Texas, California, or
Arizona this is the best kept secret of the
century. On the other hand it is a matter
of common knowledge that the national in-
dependence movement is gaining momentum
in every non-Russian nation behind the Iron
Curtain. No one can deny that the people
of Texas, Arizona, and California have full,
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
popular representation in the Federal Gov-
ernment, unless they have never heard that
a rugged Texan named Senator LYNDON B.
JOHNSON is the majority leader of the Sen-
ate, and another son of Texas, SAM RAYRURN,
Speaker of the House, that a revered Sen-
ator named CART" HAYDEN from Arizona, has
long been a powerful voice in our national
affairs or for that matter that Vice President
NixoN is a native of California. No rational
Individual may claim that the people of
Lithuania, Byelorussia, Estonia, Cossackia,
and Idea-Ural, for example, have a repre-
sentative voice in the affairs of the Russian
Presidium or the Communist Party. There
are but a few of the many pertinent com-
parisons which could be made if space
permitted.
Khrushchev also claims that the Soviet
People consider the passage of the Captive
Nations Week Resolution by Congress as an
act of provocation. Now, just who are the
"Soviet People?" If such people do exist it
is pertinent to ask, how and when did Khru-
shchev test public opinion on this vital
Issue? The fact is, however, that the false
concept of "Soviet People" was created by
the new ruling class as a means of disguising
the realities of life within their empire.
Khrushchev and company would like the peo-
ple of the free world to believe that com-
munism had purged the 207 million peoples
of the Soviet Union of their ethnic diversity,
of their respective native languages, of their
individuality, of their centuries-long cus-
toms. traditions and aspirations. Such a dis-
tortion of reality would create the mirage of
a homogeneous people, a united people work-
ing harmoniously and enthusiastically for the
goals of communism. What communism has
in reality failed to accomplish during forty
some years of organized terror and oppres-
sion Khrushchev now seeks to hide under a
propaganda rug labeled "Soviet People." The
people of the captive, non-Russian nations
of the Soviet Union would consider it an act
of grave hostility if we referred to them as
"Soviet People." So too would the Russian
people because their national characteristics
and aspirations have not changed during the
course of the past two centuries and they are
proud to be called Russians. At the time of
Stalin's death in 1953 the triumvirate of
Malenkov, Beria and Molotov took great pains
in the funeral orations to distinguish the
Russian people as the "superior people" of
the Soviet Union, the people upon whom the
government and Communist Party could al-
ways count for loyal support. The so-called
Council of Nationalities which is part of the
Government apparatus but which exercises
no power is additional proof that the Kremlin
is compelled to recognize the multinational
character of the empire. So it is clear that
Khrushchev seeks to create confusion when
he makes reference to the existence of a
"Soviet People." _
The Captive Nations Week Resolution has
also provoked a negative reaction from some
Russian activists living in the United States.
This was to be expected because then' are
covert individuals and organizations at work
In our country for the preservation of the
Russian empire no matter what form of gov-
ernment is in control of it. Some have no
quarrel whatever with the present regime,
some would prefer a monarchy to the Com-
munist Party, some would prefer more in-
dividual freedom for all the peoples of the
Soviet Union but all have one thing in com-
mon-a determination to preserve the Rus-
sian empire no matter what the consequences
may be.
The most articulate Russians living abroad
who pose as spokesmen for the Russian emi-
gration consider the national independence
movement behind the Iron Curtain as a
frightful heresy, as an invention of Hitler
and the antithesis of everything Russian. It
Is a well-known fact that a harsh ideological
discipline Is exercised over many Russians
living abroad which explains this unnatural
state of affairs. This discipline is by no
means exclusively Communist because doc-
trinaire groups of non-Communist Russians
follow the same line as Khrushchev with
respect to the non-Russian nations of the
Soviet Union. Where Khrushchev regards
the population of the U.S.S.R. as Soviet
people, the doctrinaire Russians in the free
world consider everyone in the U.S.S.R. as a
Russian, more or less. Both points of view
are imperialistic, seeking to conceal the true
identity of the peoples of the submerged na-
tions who are no more Russian than was
Patrick Henry.
it is a startling fact that there is not one
organization or committee in the United
States or elsewhere in the free world work-
ing for the national independence of the
Russian nation. On the other hand every
captive non-Russian nation of the Soviet
Union has at least one national organiza-
tion or committee in the United States work-
ing In support of its national independence.
Similar committees are established In Can-
ada, Great Britain, France, Italy, Germany,
Turkey, Indonesia, and other free countries.
The obvious conclusion is that Russians on
both sides of the Iron Curtain are unmoved
at a time in history when the powerful
human appeal of the national independence
movement has changed the political com-
plexion of South and Southeast Asia, the
Middle-East and Africa. Subjugated people
everywhere are demanding their national in-
dependence, viewing this course as the road
to Individual liberty, progress and human
dignity. Great empires have collapsed be-
fore the tidal wave impact of this movement.
Nor has the dynamics of this movement
spent its full power against the resistance to
change in the non-self-governing areas of
the free world. Hard won victories have
strengthened its forward motion to the point
where cold logic requires us to recognize it
as the wave of the future. It is only a mat-
ter of time before the remaining remnants
of imperialism in the free world will give
way to the popular demands for self-govern-
ment. One fact of mid-twentieth century
life must be clear to all responsible states-
men. That is, the alternative to granting
genuine self-government to non-self-govern-
ing people is the use of armed force. Those
who resort to this alternative have found
that the results do more to strengthen the
solidarity of the non-self-governing people
than anything their leaders could possibly
do in this direction. For every martyr in the
cause there are hundreds of new political ac-
tivists created. In these circumstances
armed force is a weapon of tyranny and the
answer of mankind to tyranny has invari-
ably been revolt.
It would be a grave error to assume that
the non-self-governing people behind the
Iron Curtain, that is the people of the cap-
tive non-Russian nations, have been hn-
munized from these rapidly moving politi-
cal developments in the free world. No
Iron Curtain, no power of the police state
is able to seal out or filter great ideals or
political movements, particularly those
which now grip two-thirds of the population
of the earth. These ideals find a fertile
ground in all the captive, non-Russian na-
tions behind the Iron and Bamboo Curtains
because historical developments in all these
nations have been moving steadily in the
same direction. This historical process has
been slowed down by czars and commissars
but it can not be disrupted or diverted from
its course.
Articulate Russians in the free world, par-
ticularly in the United States, seem un-
willing or unable to grasp the significance
of these worldwide trends. They see the
Russian Empire, whether it be the Soviet
Union or some other forced and unnatural
political arrangement of the Eurasian Con-
tinent, as divorced from the rest of the
world, perhaps another world, and certainly
not subject to the deep political reforma-
tion taking place in our world. Herein lies
a great human tragedy for Russians on both
sides of the Iron Curtain. It has been the
ages-long role of emigres from tyranny and
oppression to work and sacrifice, in the
countries of their adoption, for the eman-
cipation of the people in the homeland, for
the removal of both persons and systems
which nourish tyranny, human degradation
and suffering.
The Polish, Lithuanian, Armenian, and
other emigres living in the free world dur-
ing the course of World War I played a ma-
jor role in securing support for the national
Independence movements In their home-
lands, resulting in the national emancipa-
tion of these nations from the yoke of the
old imperialism. Meanwhile Russians in the
free world, that Is, White Russians, were
working and fighting for the restoration of
the Czarist Russian Empire, thus preparing
the way for the new imperialism of the Rus-
sian Bolsheviks. Now some 40 years later
we find this same peculiar state of mind
exists among the emigre Russians, even
those who recently came to our shores,
based upon the statements, charges, and
writings of the articulate among them. The
real victims of this political sterility
among the emigre Russians are the Russian
people behind the Iron Curtain. It is little
wonder then that the Russian nation has
failed to produce a national patriot, that
Imperial-minded tyrants have been able to
employ the Russian people as tools in their
schemes and that the Russian people have
failed to undertake one, single uprising
against the Communist regime during the
past 40 years. In the absence of political
stimulation from their compatriots in the
free world, stimulation which is compatible
with the hopes and aspirations of free peo-
ple, it would be both unfair and unrealis-
tic to expect the Russian people to oppose
the Red imperial regime. Having had no
experience with freedom and self-govern-
ment as we know it, the Russian people
should not be condemned for failure to
demonstrate a strong yearning for their na-
tional independence. The Russian emigres
who have lived in and enjoyed the benefits
of our free, open society, who have seen
first-hand the full meaning of national in-
dependence, can not be excused lightly for
their failure to advocate national independ-
ence for the Russian people. Prudence re-
quires a careful examination of the causes
which impel the Russian emigres to pursue
a course of action which spells certain dis-
aster for the Russian nation and grave con-
sequences for the rest of humanity.
Turning to the reaction by Russian emi-
gres to Public Law 86-90 we find an abun-
dance of evidence reflecting the political
sterility of their thinking. The views made
public in both the English and Russian
languages can be broken down into these
main categories:
(1) That Public Law 86-90 is the handi-
work of skilled Nazi agents operating in the
United States and holding a powerful in-
fluence over the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives. To support this charge it is
claimed that many of the captive nations
named in the law were nothing more than
creations of Hitler's propaganda machine.
Cossackia and Idel-Ural were singled out for
special treatment as nonexisting nations.
The facts: All the nations named in the
law as captives established their national
independence during the period of 1917-18
or before. Concerning those nations which
established their national independence dur-
ing the period 1917-18, which seem to be
more at issue than the others, documentary
evidence on all may be found in two official
sources: (a) the Reports of the Select Com-
mittee To Investigate Communist Aggression,
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
 17412
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 31, 1960
83d Congress, and, (b) Papers Relating to the
Foreign Relations of the United States with
Russia (1918), three volumes published by
the Government in 1931.
Comment: Hitler and nazism were un-
heard of until the 1930's, making it difficult
to understand how his propaganda machine
could have been responsible for events of
the 1917-18 period. It is understandable
why official Russian history seeks to con-
ceal the true identity of these submerged na-
tions but we are not Russians nor are we
subject to control by Russians. The official
records of the U.S. Government are a far
more reliable source on political questions
relating to the Russian Empire. Such charges
as Nazi agent influence on Congress are also
a good example of "Russian truths." so well
known to the natives of central-east Eu-
rope.
(2) That Congress Indulged In racism by
enacting Public Law 86-90. To support this
charge it is claimed that some of the nations
included in the law are primitive, tribal
groups who lack national identity and hav-
ing been under Russian domination so long
must now be considered as Russians. The
racism angle is developed in the context
of inciting primitive, tribal groups to think
they are not Russians.
The facts: In no manner, directly or in-
directly, is racism referred to in the law.
On the contrary the law is a sharp indict-
ment of racism and those who attempt to
impose their racial superiority theories and
beliefs upon others. All the law does Is
Identify clearly established nations which are
held captive by Russian Communist Impe-
rialism.
Comment: It appears that on the basis of
"Russian truths," to recognize the true
identity and aspirations of any submerged
people is to engage in racism. This is typ-
ical of the upside-down thinking which is
so characteristic of Communist propaganda.
It will be a sad day when free Americans
hesitate to see oppressed people in their true
lights for fear of being charged with racism.
(3) That Public Law 86-DO has for its ob-
jective the dismemberment of Russia and as
such is an unfriendly act toward' all Rus-
sians. To support this charge two claims are
made. The first is that many non-Russian
people do not want to be separated from
"Mother Russia." The second is that any
suggestion that the present geography of the
U.S.S.R. is subject to revision will stiffen the
support of the Russian people behind the
Communist regime.
The facts: The law expresses no Intent to
dismember Russia. On the contrary the
Russian nation as such is not even men-
tioned in the law. There is no reliable evi-
dence to support a contention that it is
"captive" and it could not in truth be so
recognized. The logical assumption in-
volved in this omission is that Congress
studiously avoided any action which could
be construed as interference in the internal
affairs of the Russian nation.
Comment: In examining this charge a dis-
tinction between the Russian nation and the
Russian Empire Is imperative. Whereas the
law recognizes the right of the non-Russian
people to freely choose a national life to their
own liking, it provides likewise for the Rus-
sian people. Here the basic question of the
national independence movements in the
captive, non-Russian nations comes Into
proper focus. It is clear that the very na-
ture of these independence movements
herald the dismemberment of the Russian
Empire. The political concept of national
independence is the antithesis of the po-
litical concepts of empire and all forms of
imperialism. Moreover, this historical
process will eventually bring a form of na-
tional independence to the Russian nation.
As the captive non-Russian nations emerge
into national Independence and freedom,
separating their destines from the present
forced relationships with Moscow, the na-
tional frontiers of the Russian nation will be
secured and the Russian people can live as
they please behind those frontiers.
As to the claim that many non-Russian
people do not want to be separated from
"Mother Russia," it is pertinent to raise the
question: "Why get so inflamed about Public
Law 86-90 if this claim is true?" History
teaches us that national independence move-
ments are based upon the will of the people
involved-if they don't want their political
independence they won't fight for it. In
this connection it should be toted that a po-
litical smokescreen has been organized by
Russian activists and their collaborators
called the "Federalists." This is a group
of alleged non-Russians who want to pre-
serve the Russian Empire through a vague
system of federal union. Investigation has
revealed that most of the members of this
group are Russians, along with a handful
of non-Russian opportunists, concerning
whom a strong suspicion exists that they
receive financial rewards for use of their
names. This enterprise serves as a reliable
barometer of the strength behind the na-
tional independence movements as the
emigre Russians would not go to the trouble
and expense involved in the "federalist" ad-
venture unless a disruptive counteraction
was sorely needed.
As to the second claim, the effect of which
is that unless we accept the present geo-
graphy of the U.S.S.R. as unchangeable the
Russian people will stiffen their support of
the Communist regime, a number of timely
questions must be raised. The first is,
should the American people desert their po-
litical and moral ideals in exchange for a
dubious hope that the Russian people will
be too strong in their support of the regime?
What about the majority peoples of the
Soviet Union, the non-Russians-how will
they feel toward us if we turn our backs on
their legitimate aspirations for national in-
dependence? Will bowing to the imperial
sensitivities of the Russian people, which the
emigres now claim they have, drive the
captive non-Russian people into the hands
of the enemy? In truth, can anyone claim
that the ordinary Russian people would ob-
ject to actions taken by the people of the
captive, non-Russian nations which would
lift from their backs the twin burdens of
communism and imperialism?
(4) That Public Law 86-90 Is essentially
an anti-Russian law, an act intended to in-
flame the American people against the Rus-
sian people. This charge is based upon a
claim that the United States has no right
to blame the Russian people for the many
Communist crimes against humanity, or for
Communist aggressive policies of world
conquest.
The facts: In no manner does the law
blame the Russian people, as such, for
either Communist crimes against humanity
or Communist schemes directed toward world
conquest. The law simply recognizes that the
struggle of the peoples of the captive non-
Russian nations of the U.S.S.R. central
Europe and Asia for their national independ.
ence, liberties, and freedoms constitutes a
powerful deterrent to war and one of the
best hopes for a just peace. Commonsense
dictates that so long as these captive peo-
ples are pulling in the opposite direction to
that pursued by the Russian Communist
leadership the dangers of war are reduced
and the hopes for a just peace increased.
No dictator, Communist or otherwise, can
launch a successful war under conditions
wherein the vast majority of the peoples
under his control will seize upon the internal
conditions war creates to destroy the very
system which supports the dictator. This
is as true today as it was 20 years ago, de-
spite intercontinental missiles and hydro-
gen warheads, because in the final analysis
wars are won or lost by people.
Comment: There Is a tendency among the
Russian emigration to give credit to the Rus-
sian people for everything behind the Iron
Curtain which does not offend the con-
science of civilized people and to disclaim
Russian responsibility for all that is evil or
offensive to free people. Frequently an ef-
fort is made to put all the blame of com-
munism on the non-Russian peoples of the
empire. They remind you Stalin and Beria
were Georgians and Mikoyan is an Armenian.
They forget that Lenin, Molotov, Malenkov,
Suslov, Bulganin, Zhukov, Gromyko, and
I(hrushchev, just to name a few of the real
leaders, are all solid Russian products.
Over a century ago a French visitor to the
Russian Empire, Marquis de Custine, was
warned as he was about to depart for home
that he should speak no evil about the Rus-
sians regardless of the truth of this state-
ment else great calamities would befall
him. We in our times are passing through
the same experience, unless we praise the
Russians, regardless of how untrue such
praise may be, we are charged with being
anti-Russian. A great loss to the current
body of Western knowledge and thought on
the Russian character would have occurred
if Custine had been driven from the path
of truth by threats of dire consequences.
No American could display less courage or
dedication to truth under the circumstances
which prevail today. If being truthful makes
us anti-Russian then let us accept the
charge as a compliment to our heritage.
These are the reactions, in summary form,
of the most articulate among the Russian
emigres to enactment of Public Law 86-90.
No claim is or can be made that these re-
actions reflect the thinking of all the Rus-
sian emgres or for that matter a majority
of them. In the absence of any positive
public reactions to Public Law 8690, or pub-
lic objection to the position taken by the
articulate Russian emigres, the entire Rus-
sian emigration stands in the shadow of
doubt created by those who represent them-
selves as the leaders. This is a situation
which should bring forth the enlightened
and realistic elements in the emigration,
those who have grown weary of the constant
embarrassments caused by the reactionary
but articulate elements. Those among us
who wish only the best for the Russian
nation and people in the future would wel-
come the support of responsible individuals
and groups in the Russian emigration.
Meanwhile, thought should be given to
steps which could be taken to fill the gap
in the ranks of the national independence
movement by the failure of the Russian
emigration to produce such leadership.
Solidarity of purpose is the keynote of this
movement and this solidarity could be
strengthened by the cooperation of our Rus-
sian friends in the emigration. Therefore,
consideration should be given to the estab-
lishment of an "American Committee for,
the National Independence of Russia."
This would undoubtedly require initiative
by well Informed Americans to get the com-
mittee organized and functioning. With
time, enlightened and responsible emigre
Russians would gravitate to the committee
and become active in its work. Eventually
this committee would emerge as the true
voice of the Russian people, working hand
In hand with the national committees sup-
porting the independence movements in the
non-Russian nations behind the Iron and
Bamboo Curtains. Thus a vital unity of
purposes would be welded in a critical area
of international political affairs which is
now beset by confusion, uncertainty, and im-
perial mischiefmakers. The attainment of
this goal of unity presents a real challenge
to all thinking Americans. An American
Committee for the National Independence
of Russia therefore merits serious consider-
ation.
(The proceedings of the House of Rep-
resentatives will be continued in the
next issue of the RECORD.)
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000300110065-5